perhaps eccentric manners, and full of their own idea exclusively. But it is well to consider in the first place, whether it is probable that any high enterprise is reserved for us; and in the second place, whether the changes and reformations in which those men labored, would not have been more satisfactorily effected, and for a wider good, if the movers had exhibited less violence, less prejudice, and less singularity. And we are bound, instead of looking to those among men, who, though great in some things, have been little in others, to look unto Jesus, the author and finisher of our faith, so devoted, yet so moderate to the end; and to learn from him how much better than any partial or fitful distinction it is, to seek a Christian excellence, and to do all things well. SERMON XIV. THE SAVIOUR'S ACTIVE BENEVOLENCE. WHO WENT ABOUT DOING GOOD. Acts x. 38. - In these few words, which are from the address of Peter to the centurion Cornelius and his friends, the ministry of his and our Lord is well characterized. They represent it as marked by the two qualities of activity and benevolence. The apostle states that his Master went about, and that he went about doing good. Although the description is conceived in simple terms, it conveys the true idea of moral perfection; for though our thoughts may be misled in their estimate of character, they can in reality reach nothing greater or better than active benevolence. When to this idea of the moral perfection of the Saviour's ministry is added that of its divinity, that is to say, the aid and communion which he received, in the course of it, from the power and spirit of God-as is done by the apostle in the concluding words of the verse, "for God was with him" we have a summary of his mission which is complete, though it furnishes matter for constant reflection and endless illustration. Let us devote some serious thoughts at present to the leading circumstances of that active benevolence which characterized our Saviour's ministry, and of which no one could be a more appropriate witness than his fervent and energetic disciple Peter. I. First, he went about doing good by his miracles. With regard to these it is to be remarked, that they not only compelled attention to his instructions, and demanded assent to his claim of being divinely sent, but that they were all deeds of mercy; not only wonderful works, but charitable works, both in their immediate and more remote effects. Not one of them was a useless display of power. Not one of them was a severe or vengeful display of power. He did not afflict his enemies with famine, calling down blight and mildew from the angry heavens, but he fed multitudes with abundance of bread. He did not strike those who lay in wait for him with blindness, but he restored to the blind their sight. He did not arrest with palsy the arm which was raised to smite him; nor wither the limbs which were swift to pur sue him; but he caused the palsied hand to be stretched forth whole, and the lame to walk, and bless and praise God. He made the dumb to speak, but he never made those who reviled and falsely accused him dumb, except by their own confusion and inability to answer him. His first miracle contributed to the social, and no doubt innocent enjoyment of a festive occasion; and his last, was the healing of a man whom one of his own disciples, ignorantly zealous, had wounded; that very disciple who afterwards testified before the centurion, that his Master went about doing good. Objection has, indeed, been made to two of our Lord's miracles, on the ground that they were not of the merciful and useful character which has been asserted to belong to them all. One of them is the miracle by which the demons who were cast out of the furious lunatics of Gadara, were sent into the herd of swine; or in other words, by which the madness of the former was transferred to the latter. Here, it is said, an injury was inflicted on the owners of the swine, which might have been avoided. But it may be answered, that the first and main object even of this miracle, was unquestionably merciful, that is, the restoration of the lunatics to their right mind. Secondly, the injury inflicted was not done revengefully, but punitively. It was not the return of any wrong done to himself, but the retribution which was demanded by violated law. To keep swine was contrary to the Jewish law; and it is probable that our Saviour was not unwilling to show, by this example, that though his dispensation was eminently a dispensation of love, it was also one of justice, which would not countenance the infringement of legal restrictions. In this light, the miracle is of the same aspect with that exercise of his authority, by which he overthrew the tables of the moneychangers in the temple, thereby no doubt injuring their property. Both acts were vindications of outraged law, by him who came not to destroy the law, but to fulfil it. The other miracle, at which exception has been taken, is the withering of the barren fig-tree. But it will be hard to make out a case of injury here. The tree probably stood in the highway, and was therefore no one's property; and if it had been, its destruction could not have been called a loss. On the other hand, the occurrence was one of great profit to the disciples. It was a visible sign which expressed to them more strikingly than words could have done, the necessity of diligence in their peculiar work, the obligation of bringing forth good |