of life or a manual of devotion, we want no other commentator than itself, or at least we can find none so good. If we analyze the contents of the practical commentaries extant, we shall find that they are for the most part made up of the following particulars:a repetition of the ideas of the text, in other words; the particular application of general principles; comparisons of one passage of Scripture with another; and pious reflections or devotional aspirations, in accordance with the language of the text, or in some way or other suggested by it. Now, to each and all of these purposes the language of inspired penmen may be very well applied, and, if judiciously employed, will be found abundantly adequate. It is obvious that, if the remarks of commentators are not scriptural, that is to say, in accordance with the sense of Scripture, they are good for nothing, or rather, are worse than useless; and at the same time it is plain that, if they are really sound, we can find some words of Scripture whereby they may be either distinctly expressed or sufficiently implied. Nor will the supply of phrases from the Sacred Volume be found to be inadequate. As to the quantity of matter to be derived from this source, a single attempt, such as the present, may show that a commentary quite long enough can be in this way composed. Amplification is desirable, for some minds especially, with a view to deepen an impression conveyed by the original idea; but this may be had, to a sufficient extent, without using any other than the language of Scrip

ture.

Additional ideas, variety of reflection, and practical application, may also be introduced by pursuing the same method; and a text may be made not only to receive light from the juxtaposition of other passages of Scripture, but also in its turn to shed light upon the passages so introduced. The very words of inspiration, it should also be remembered, are not only the most appropriate and unexceptionable that can be employed, but likewise the most striking and emphatic; and the effect of their inherent aptness and sublimity is capable of being greatly augmented by apposite, and often unexpected, citation. In short, whether we desire that the mind should dwell upon the idea presented to it in the sacred text, or that it should be directed to other reflections arising from that idea or adapted to impress it on the mind, there is no language whereby our meditations may be guided with such unerring certainty, and little by which it may be assisted with such powerful effect, as that which the Sacred Volume itself presents for our acceptance. Some verbal explanations, some few emendations of the common version, and occasional allusions to circumstances which give force to the original expressions, require, it is true, even in a commentary that may be strictly of a practical or devotional character, some other notice than such as may be supplied by the words of an inspired penman; but these matters are not of constant occur

rence, and they may usually be cleared up in very

few words.

Let it therefore be regarded as a truth which well deserves attention, that, for practical or devotional purposes, Scripture is, in general, its own best interpreter. It is incredible to any one who has not made the experiment,' says Bishop Horsley, what a proficiency may be made in that knowledge which maketh wise unto salvation by studying the Scriptures in this manner, without other commentary or exposition than what the different parts of the Sacred Volume mutually furnish for each other. Let the most illiterate Christian study them in this manner, and let him never cease to pray for the illumination of the Spirit by which these books were dictated.' To assist in reducing this theory to practice, with regard to one small portion of the Sacred Writings, is the design of the present undertaking.

The use of a Bible with marginal references is the ready and obvious mode of acting in accordance with this view of the self-interpreting quality of Scripture. Such a practice is indeed very much to be recommended, and better information or instruction may be obtained in this way than by the reading of any human notes or observations whatever. But, perhaps, it is not enough merely to point out and advise this course of proceeding. In matter of fact, the time and labour which it costs will always be an effectual hinderance to its extensive adoption; and although this time and labour would, it is contended, be very advantageously bestowed, yet the practice, even if begun, is likely, in most cases,

to be superseded by the perusal of some straightforward commentary requiring less frequent reference to distant portions of the volume, and a lower degree of attention. It is easy to say that things ought not to be so, but at the same time it is wise to consider things as they are. And there is yet another consideration, perhaps of still greater importance, to be taken into the account. It is this. The plan of reading with marginal references, while it certainly falls in with the view that has been stated, does also at the same time fall short of it. These references are almost entirely confined to parallel passages; and although an adequate collection of such parallels may constitute a good practical exposition of a verse of Scripture, yet it will not answer all the purposes which have been enumerated as comprised within the design of a commentary. Besides this, not a few of these references will be found on inspection to point out merely a verbal parallelism, or some other trifling accordances; and an attention to these may be not only devoid of a practical or devotional effect, but may serve, by a kind of intrusion, to divert the reflections of the reader, and to diminish the impressions which more apposite or important passages of Scripture may have previously

I conceive, therefore, and I hope the following pages will corroborate the idea,-that a considerable improvement upon the mere use of marginal references is practicable. It remains that I explain in

what respects, and how far, I have attempted such improvement.

1. A selection has been made from the parallel passages, properly so called. Many references which are just and useful in the margin of the Bible, and ought undoubtedly to stand where they do, are yet not adapted to the present design, and have therefore been omitted. Let it be observed, once for all, that nothing here said or done is intended to imply that any alteration is wanted in the state of the marginal references to which allusion has been made. These serve their purpose, and are therefore to be thankfully accepted: the purpose of this work is in some respects different, and generally more wide, and accordingly the track to be pursued is not uniformly the same. Among the parallels rejected may be reckoned such as are merely verbal, such as present a repetition of the same idea as that of the text without any additional emphasis or point, and, in general, those which, especially on common subjects, are very nearly identical with the passage under review. Those, on the other hand, have been chosen which contain some accessory idea, or represent the same truth under some new aspect, or with some peculiar or additional emphasis. Thus, for instance, the passage from the sixth chapter of St. Matthew, 'Lay not up for yourselves treasures upon earth, &c., quoted as the commentary on those words in the fourth verse of the first chapter of the epistle to an inheritance incorruptible, and undefiled, and that