convictions we may conceive as being independent of those fundamental dispositions of the xagdia, which we have before indicated as the receptivity of the mind and of the whole being for heavenly things, and in this state of separation they would represent no conditional grounds for the miraculous cure.' The narratives of all the histories of cures effected by Jesus lead to this conclusion. He nowhere asks for established doctrines as the object of faith; he nowhere mentions such as the necessarily required proof of it; the Redeemer allows the mere confession of faith to avouch for its character, inasmuch as the nature and the word (Wesen und Wort) at once revealed the entire disposition of the inward man as one open to, or closed against, Divine influences. Hereby, then, it appears clear that the external corporeal healing was only to be received as a symbol of the internal spiritual healing therein aimed at (comp. on John vii. 23). For the same life-giving powers, through the communication of which corporeal disorganisation is abrogated, affected in accordance with their nature, the spiritual world of the person healed; they placed him in a real bond of communion with the world of righteousness, and established him on the ground which he now occupied, in order to lead him further on. Ver. 3. At the request of the sick person, our Lord put forth his hand, touched him, and made him whole. Such actual touching is set forth in most cases of the cures worked by Jesus, and to perceive, in this laying on of his hand (as in the act of blessing by the solemn éíðis vergav, “laying on of hands"), a medium (though not a necessary one) for conducting the healing powers need arouse no scruple. The analogy of animal magnetism here intrudes itself upon the mind, and there can be no doubt that it is not the result of mere accident, only we must never forget, as has been already observed above, that the power of Jesus Christ was a Divine power, and hence that magnetism can in every instance be used only in order to indicate a power which produces in the lower region of existence phenomena of a somewhat similar character. (Kadagi," to make clean, "to = to cleanse," may signify: to declare or pronounce a person to be clean, that is, in so far as the priest who pronounced the sick 1 In a very admirable manner does the spiritually-minded mystics Gerhard Tersteegen (Weg der Wahrheit, p. 366), designate faith as "the inwardly-hungering spiritual desire which embraces not only the form, but likewise the essential nature (das Wesen) of Divine things.” person clean, restored him to uninterrupted communion. [Comp. Levit. xiii. 13, 17, according to the Septuagint.] But that it is the actual and instantaneous removal of the disease which here is in question, is evident from the passage is àπñλDev ʼn Kéπga, which signifies literally: "the leprosy went away immediately," [Mark i. 42], which gives the explanation of ixadagion, cleansed." The combination of ixadagion, “he was cleansed," with Xénga auroũ, "his leprosy," according to St Matthew, requires the verb to involve the sense of removal.) was Ver. 4. To this cure was joined, according to the unanimous records thereof, the command of our Lord to tell no man anything respecting this occurrence. Similar interdictions are frequently found in the Gospel history. (Comp. Matth. ix. 30; xii. 16; xvi. 20; xvii. 9; Mark iii. 12; v. 43; vii. 36; viii. 26, 30; ix. 9; Luke viii. 56; ix. 21.) The reasons which induced our Redeemer to give such commands were, no doubt, of various kinds. Sometimes he no doubt wished to prevent thereby popular tumults, with a view to make him the Messianic king; at another time he might wish to withdraw the minds of the people from these events, and to prevent them from showing him external honours, or, as Luther says, in order to set an example of humility. But the healing Saviour may have likewise frequently forbidden such communication for the sake of those that were healed. Namely, whenever these persons were tempted to divert their minds by application to external affairs, the design of Jesus might have been to induce them thereby to a serious self-examination and internal reflection. That such was the motive which guided him from time to time, appears particularly probable from the circumstance that we meet likewise with opposite cases, wherein our Lord encourages to an open declaration of those things which God had performed by him. (Comp. Mark v. 19). Such, namely, appears to have been the case with all those persons who, shut in by nature, and lost in a state of false self-contemplation, required to be led into the sphere of external activity, in order that their internal life might thrive and improve therein. The last reference here brought forward affords an insight into the profound nature and wisdom of our Lord's teaching, who knew how to treat every one according to his necessities. Hence, it would suit this case, according to St Matthew, very well to look to the person restored for the reason of this prohibition, because the act of healing was performed in the presence of many persons, and yet the command to say nothing about it was addressed to the leper only. St Mark, it is true, has related nothing of the assembled multitudes, and, according to his representation, it is more probable that the object of this prohibition was to prevent popular tumult. For he records (i. 45) that the leper, notwithstanding the command of our Lord, busily (St Mark frequently uses the term λά in the sense of strong, zealous, warm; comp. iii. 12, v. 23, xv. 3) spread abroad the miracle, and that thereby such commotions were produced: ὥστε μηκέτι αὐτὸν δύνασθαι φανερῶς εἰς Tóív sio, the literal meaning of which is, "so that he was no πόλιν εἰσελθεῖν, longer able to enter into the city openly," that is to say, without offering some food for the carnal expectations of the multitude concerning the Messiah. St Mark has perhaps added (i. 43) και ἐμβριμησάμενος αὐτῷ εὐθέως ἐξέβαλεν αὐτόν, “ and strictly charging him, he immediately dismissed him," in order to heighten the power of this prohibition. ('Eußguáqua here signifies, as in Matth. xi. 30, "to charge with earnestness and energy." 'ExßáλAww, "to send away,","to cause to depart or go away," comp. Matth. ix. 25. No less important than this prohibition is likewise the injunction to go to the priests and to offer the gift commanded by Moses (comp. Levit. xiv. 2 sqq.) In this command is partly expressed a wise carefulness in no way to interfere with the theocratic institutions, so as to produce a disturbance; and partly a delicate circumspection not to remove the person cured from his position or status, but, on the contrary, ever to keep him to a faithful fulfilment of his obligations. We nowhere find that Jesus endeavours to introduce every single individual of those healed, through the awakening of a higher consciousness by means of regeneration, into the life of the New Testament; he frequently leaves individual persons, as was, indeed, the case with St John the Baptist, in their undisturbed position, under the law, whenever they were called upon to perfect themselves therein, and endeavours only to bring them to a sense of the true dixavn, "righteousness," which, from the position assumed by the Old Testament, involved the stáva, repentance." An especial addition is made, moreover, by all the three Evangelists in the words eis pagrúgiov aurois, "for a testimony unto them." This addition denotes that the injunction had likewise its reference to the priests. For, by their pronouncing the leper cleansed, they would bear testimony to his healing powers, and thereby, at the same time, pass sentence on their own unbelief. (The term iege, "to the priest," which precedes it, must be viewed collectively, on account of the expression aurois, “unto them," which immediately follows. rozwgew, "to go back, retire, recoil,” is only found once besides in St Luke ix. 10 as signifying clam me subduco, "to withdraw one's self privately, without noise or notice." § 5. THE HEALING of the CENTURION'S SERVANT. (Matth. viii. 5-13; Luke vii. 1-10.) This narrative is one of the many little gems which form in themselves a united whole, and which adorn the Gospel history. It presents to us a religious soul in the most lovely, the most child-like form, which reveals freely its life of faith without any dogmatical colouring whatever. The centurion, probably one of the Roman garrison of Capernaum, brought up in the element of Pagan life, but living among the Jews, had become inclined to the Old Testament way of life. The miracles of the patriarchal period, with which he had been made acquainted, he might frequently have longed to have witnessed, without being aware that he was destined to see infinitely greater than they ever saw. But fervent as was his faith, equally profound and pure was his humility; he considered himself unworthy of the honour that the wielder of heavenly powers should enter his house. As such he acknowledged Jesus, but as regards his more particular views of Christ, it would not be easy to define them, inasmuch as they were probably not fully developed, as is usually the case with child-like minds, though at the same time essentially correct. An active endeavour on the part of our Lord to enlarge his ideas does not take place; his longing only is appeased, whereby his belief in the friendly manifestation of the Divine agency that came in contact with him became strengthened, and his perfection prepared, from the position in which he then stood. As regards the two narratives of St Matthew and of St Luke, the latter has, no doubt, the advantage over the former, in so far as a more full and accurate exhibition of outward events is concerned. In the words of Jesus (ver. 11, 12), St Matthew only puts forward, in a more clear and distinct manner, that which related to the Jews, of whom he takes everywhere an especial notice. But the circumstance that the centurion, according to St Luke, sends his friends to Jesus, whereas, according to St Matthew, he himself goes to Jesus, cannot be regarded as a contradiction, inasmuch as the latter representation is nothing but a more brief manner of expressing the matter, seeing that it was his own faith which was made manifest to our Lord, even in the discourse of his friends. Semler and others are inclined to regard this occurrence as identical with the one narrated by St John iv. 46-53; but Lücke and Tholuck have proved the reverse in a convincing manner. As the history of a cure effected by our Saviour, this occurrence is remarkable, in so far as Christ here, without personal contact, merely by the magic of his will (if I may be permitted to use this expression), appears to act, as it were, at a distance, which also finds its analogy in magnetism. (Concerning the circumstance of the centurion's belief, on account of which his servant is restored, comp. on St Matth. xvii. 14 sqq.) Ver. 5, 6. The locale of this occurrence is pointed out with sufficient accuracy by both the sacred writers referred to; the occurrence took place on Jesus entering Capernaum. The centurion, according to St Matthew, applied in his own person to our Lord, praying for relief for his sick servant; but, according to St Luke, this occurred through mediators, viz. through the elders of the synagogue, to the construction of which he had been a contributor. This circumstance indicates that the Roman warrior had been overcome by the power of truth contained in the Old Testament rule of life, and that he had joined the synagogue as σeßóμεvos Tòv Osóν, “a worshipper of God" (probably only as a proselyte of the gate). The centurion, impressed by the circumstance of his being a Gentile, dared not venture on approaching the Messiah in his own person, wherefore he sought the intercession of the representatives of the old covenant, with whom he was closely connected. (Hais, “boy, lad" =bouλos, “servant,” St Luke vii. 2, like, "boy, lad"=TAY "servant."-He was suffering from a zagáλus, "palsy," by which term is generally understood only a partial paralysis; but inasmuch as this had brought the invalid near to the grave [äμeλλE TEλEUTậν, “was about to expire"]; hence, it is probable [ἤμελλε τελευτᾷν, that the expression here stands for apoplexy. The Jewish geoBurgo, "elders," made use of the innate affection of the centurion |