being unacceptable to the Deity. Bodily Deformities in many Cafes were a Bar against ferving in the Office of the Priesthood: And the acceptable Sacrifice was to be without Spot or Blemish. Moreover the Cafe of the Man born blind, intimates very strongly, that the Jews did not conceive fuch a Perfon to be upon a Level with others, as to the Favour of God: Who hath finned; this Man, or his Parents, that he is born blind? plainly implying, that they looked upon fuch an Affair, as a divine Judgment, for fome Cause or other, executed upon him. The previous State of the Cafe will be completed after we have observed,

4. That the Feasts of the Antients, whether Jews or Gentiles, were not, as ours are, merely of a civil, or a focial Nature; but had a Reference to the Religion of the Country, where they were, which was, as I may fay, interwoven with them. The Jewish Feafts were generally at the End of their Sacrifices; and at the Conclufion of the whole, there was a religious Ceremony of eating Bread and drinking Wine, together with a folemn Prayer and Benediction. This Cuftom, as it was in itself both innocent and commendable, was applied by our Lord to usher in an Inftitution of his own, of a more facred Nature; viz. the Holy Supper. For the Scripture is very exprefs in observing, that after Supper he took the Cup...

As

As to the Gentiles, it is well known, that they held most of their Feafts in Honour of one or other of their Idol Gods. And their

very Sports, Plays, and Diverfions were dedicated to the Purposes of their false Religion. Hence therefore appears the Propriety, as well as Neceffity of St. Paul's Advice to the Corinthians, not to partake of thofe Feasts, which were of a religious Concern; because this amounted, in Conftruction, to a tacit Approbation of the Superftitions and Idolatries of the Gentiles.

Enough, I think, has been faid, to prove, that the Feasts of the Antients, whether Jews or Gentiles, had a Reference to the Principles of Religion of the Country where they were; and therefore, in this Refpect, were greatly different from ours. Perhaps it may be further expected, that I fhould attempt to prove, that the Feafts of the Jews, particularly this, at which our Lord was prefent, were defignedly and avowedly made typical of the Nature of the Meffiah's Kingdom, according to the Conceptions and Prejudices of the Perfons then at the Entertainment. But this I will not take upon me to do. One Thing may be very expreffive of another, and yet not defignedly typical of it. The Conceptions and Notions of Men may have a very great Influence over their Actions and Modes of living, and may determine them to do this rather than that; and yet fuch Actions or Modes

of

of living may not be intended by them as fymbolical Reprefentations of their inward Notions and Principles. Indeed they become in Effect what is equivalent thereto; and a Spectator might eafily obferve, that their Actions and Behaviour were correspondent to, and explanatory of their Opinions. For when Men are prepoffeffed by one Mafter Principle, or leading Idea, this gives a peculiar Turn to their whole Converfation and Behaviour, and greatly diftinguishes them from others.

The Jews of old, were a remarkable Inftance of this: What filled their Heads, and poffeffed their Affections, was the Expectation of a temporal Meffiah, and the fecular Pomp and Pleasures of his Court and Kingdom. And as the Time, when he was to come, was just expiring, they were every Moment looking out for his Appearance. And may we not reasonably suppose, that they were making Preparations to receive him? Is it not highly probable, that they had begun to cabal, and to project their Schemes of Intereft and Ambition one among another? If there was a Difpute among the Apostles, which of them should be accounted the gretaeft, why should we think, that they were fingu lar in fuch a Contest; feeing that all others had the fame Motives, the fame Prejudices of Ambition and Self-Intereft to fpur them on, that the Apoftles had? Nay we find in

See Mr. Blair's Paraphrafe and Serm. on Mat.v.y.17.

Fact,

Fact, a general Notion prevailed, that the Meffiab would difpenfe with the Rigour of the moral Part both of the Law and the Prophets, in order to give the greater Scope to his Subjects and Favourites to profecute their Conquefts, and enjoy their Pleasures. And furely fuch Hints as thefe are the properest Guides for tracing the Nature of an Entertainment in a Pharifee's Houfe, and at a Pharifee's Table. What have we therefore more to do, but only to suppose, that these Perfons were fteddy to, and confiftent with their dar ling Principle? And furely then we need not be at a Loss to know, what was the Nature of a Pharifee's Entertainment at that JunEture of Time; efpecially as it was upon the Sabbath Day, and most probably during the Feast of the Dedication. (Compare 22a Verfe of the preceding Chapter with John

X. 22.

I hope therefore by this Time, a common English Reader is better able to judge of the Merits of the Caufe, than when he firft fet out. He now may be fuppofed to have got over his Prejudices arifing from the Ideas of modern Cuftoms, and to fee the Subject in its original and true Light. Long Custom had renderd the Nature of the Jewifh Feafting, in many Refpects, very different from ours; the Sentiments of this People concerning Great Men and Court-Favourites under the Reign of their Meffiab

were

were very fingular and extraordinary; they had entertained most difadvantageous Notions of the Poor, the Maimed, the Lame, and the Blind; a Set of Wretches, in their Opinion, never to be introduced into the Favour of their Prince: And if fo, I would ask, what more feasonable and proper, all Things fo circumftanced, than this Injunction of our Lord, to invite the Poor, the Maimed, the Lame, and the Blind, RATHER than Friends,

Mr.Chubb was mistaken in saying, that Friends and Equals were abfolutely excluded by this Injunction. And his Miftake muft arise from not knowing, or not attending to the Idiom of the Old and New Testament, where negative Particles, many Times, do not fignify the Exclufion of one Thing, but only the Preference of another. Thus, I will have Mercy, and not Sacrifice, only implies, that I will have Mercy rather than Sacrifice. And here, the Poor, &c. are to be invited RATHER than others; as' plainly appears from the Context in the preceding Verses, where Directions are given for choofing the lowest Room, left a more honourable Man be bidden. A clear Indication this, that our Lord did not intend, that honourable Men fhould not be bidden, nor even that they should be placed below the Poor and Neceffitous at fuch Entertainments. He did not propose to reverfe the Order of Society, but only to combat a particular wrong Notion by a particular Method at a Seafon, when fuch fymbolical Kinds of Reprefentations were established by long Use and Custom.

This appears to me a fatisfactory Account. Thofe who think otherwife, would do well in obliging the Chriftian World with a better. For certainly the Credit of the Chriftian Morals is very deeply concerned in this Affair. And let us turn the Conftruction how we pleafe, ftill it will amount to this, that the Poor &c. ought

Bre