determining its own aspect and history, and not receiving them from us—an appearance which the all-regulating providence of God will impart to it.

Sufficient for the day. The personification seems to be continued. Each day has enough to do in caring " for the things of itself." The adjective rendered sufficient is neuter, while the noun rendered evil is feminine. The cause of this difference of gender is to be found in the conception which the adjective is used to express,-the conception, not that its own evil is sufficient for the day as an evil, but that it is sufficient for it as a thing with which it is burdened, or for which it has to take thought. The literal rendering, therefore, is, Its own evil is a thing sufficient for the day.

Evil. The word employed denotes more properly moral evil; here, however, it denotes physical evil, but physical evil, probably, viewed as a consequence of moral evil.

PART IV.—(C.) VII. 1–20.

SECTION I.-RESUMED DISCRIMINATION OF RIGHTEOUSNESS AS

REGARDS ABSTINENCE FROM WHAT IS FORBIDDEN.—(C. c.)

VII. 1-6.

1. WHILE the illustrations employed by our Lord in discriminating righteousness are admirably fitted to serve the immediate purpose for which they are adduced, they serve, and designedly, we may safely conclude, the further but kindred purpose of exposing and correcting the most serious deviations of the prevailing practice and casuistry. The deviations of this kind, that involved a direct corruption or violation of the great and fundamental law of love, evidently claimed, and accordingly receive, special attention. Both the first and the last illustration, which our Lord adduces in discriminating righteousness as realised in conformity to prohibitions, bear upon this class of deviations.—(See Part III., sect. i., par. 7, 12-15.) In accordance with the estimate of their claim to attention which is thus indicated, his injunctions, reasoning, and remonstrance in our passage, in which he resumes the discrimination of that branch of righteousness (see Intro., sect. ii., par. 10, 11), are wholly confined to

them.

2. From the fundamental character of the law of love (Matt. xxii. 37-40; Rom. xiii. 10), corruptions and violations of it demand the attention which is here given to them, and there was not a little in the case with which our Lord had to deal that imparted to this demand increased em

phasis and urgency. Pharisaical externalism abolished the exercise, and would even cancel the requirement of love; and, while it thus indirectly promoted the prevalence of the opposite affections, it also excited and fostered them by its direct influence. Hence, in its bearing upon human life and intercourse, it would first substitute a counterfeit for the truly loving and brotherly, and then, failing or declining to maintain this semblance beyond certain limits, it would to a great extent either resort or give rise to the openly unloving and unbrotherly.

3. And there is no form of the unloving and unbrotherly to which it would more naturally or more certainly resort and give rise, taan the form of it dealt with in our passage,uncharitable and censorious judging. He who places his religion in mere external proprieties and observances, in which he deals with man and not with God, will easily attain to what he will regard as high and distinguished excellence, the contemplation of which will greatly inflame his unmortified pride. Occupying in his own estimation a very lofty eminence, he will look down upon others; and, guided in his judgment by his extravagant appreciation of himself, and influenced, perhaps unconsciously, by a desire to justify that appreciation, and by an unloving spirit, he will magnify and misinterpret their faults, and disparage, if not deny, their good deeds and qualities.

And, besides, our Lord's illustration and enforcement of the necessity of a searching scrutiny and careful discrimination of our abstinence from sin and performance of positive duty might, under the influence of a pharisaical bias, be so misunderstood and misapplied, that they should be made to authorise or countenance censorious judging.

4. When there is an outstanding visible blemish in our neighbour's character or conduct, we observe it as we observe anything else that is presented to our notice. The nonobservance of it would indicate blindness, or want of discern

Р

But when we observe it, we

ment, and not charitableness. may proceed variously with respect to it; and one mode of procedure with respect to it is, to found upon it a sweeping judgment condemnatory of our neighbour. We do not judge in observing the blemish itself and pronouncing it a blemish, nor until we proceed further, and draw an inference from it unfavourable to the entire character of our neighbour. And it is when, under the influence of an unbrotherly spirit, we found such an inference on an insufficient induction, that we violate the prohibition of our passage.

When Peter denied his Master, he committed a most grievous sin; and, if any of those who had heard his denial had regarded it as a grievous sin, they should not in doing so have been guilty of the judging here forbidden. But if, on the evidence afforded by that sin, they had pronounced him who had committed it an unregenerate, ungodly person, they should then have been guilty of such judging.

5. And, as is evident from this illustrative case, such judging may lead to totally erroneous results, and must therefore proceed upon an unsound principle; and, when it leads to erroneous results, it inflicts great injustice on those towards whom it is exercised. It is thus in its own nature wrong. It was unnecessary, however, to urge this consideration; it would present itself unurged. Christ, accordingly, presupposes the recognition of it, and proceeds at once to warn those whom he addresses, that by subjecting others in the manner forbidden, they exposed themselves, to condemnatory judgment "Judge not, that ye be not judged; for with what judgment ye judge, ye shall be judged."

6. Those whom God accepts, he accepts as being invested with the righteousness of Christ which is by faith, notwithstanding that there is much in their character and conduct that he condemns. He condemns their sins and their sinfulness; and yet he does not condemn themselves, but views and treats them as made accepted in the beloved. This

is a glorious arrangement, at once righteous and gracious, bringing glory to God and salvation to man. It is in every way such an arrangement, that all should not only acquiesce in it and avail themselves of it, but should regard it with the highest admiration, and, when any regard it thus, and desire aright that God may proceed according to it in dealing with them, they will themselves study to proceed according to it in dealing with their fellow-men. We can never, indeed, with earnestness of spirit, expect that God in dealing with us will exercise attributes which we do not admire, and which we do not endeavour, because we admire them, as also on other grounds, to transfer into our own dealings with our neighbour. If we do not, as regards judging, therefore, proceed towards our neighbour, so far as this may be done by us and in our sphere, as God proceeds towards those whom he accepts in Christ, we do not really desire that he may proceed thus towards ourselves. If we pronounce an unfavourable judgment upon our neighbour, because we can discover sins in his life and blemishes in his character, our spirit and our attitude are such, that we do not and cannot really desire that God may accept us for the sake of Christ, notwithstanding our own unworthiness; and, therefore, he will not accept us thus, but will judge us according to our deeds. When we pronounce such judgment on our neighbour, we take our stand, by our spirit and procedure, on the deeds of the law; and God will, therefore, judge us and deal with us according to the deeds of the law. This we should deprecate, for, if the Lord mark iniquity, who shall stand? We should raise our souls to the cordial admiration of the gospel arrangement as regards judging, and we should mould our spirits into entire accordance with it." Judge not, that ye be not judged." If we proceed otherwise, and found judgment rigidly on the deeds of the law, we subject ourselves, to the same mode of judgment—" For with what judgment ye judge, ye shall be judged.”