6

that on the occasion of their feasting on the peace-offering, they had been intoxicated with wine, which led them into this iniquity. But the text by no means hints at any such cause. It was customary for the priests of the nations to drink wine while officiating, and this, as we have attempted to shew, in the case of Noah, as connected with the inspiration of the Holy Spirit; but this is forbidden when entering into the tabernacle. We find the same thing enjoined again, Ezek. xliv. 21. Neither shall any priest drink wine, when they enter into the inner court.' Besides the ordinary offices of the priesthood, the 10th and 11th verses point out two remarkable parts of the priests' duty; they were to point out the difference between holy and unholy, clean and unclean; and they were to teach the children of Israel all the statutes which the Lord hath spoken unto them by the hand of Moses. Each of these were very important. The first is strongly expressed in Ezek. xliv. 23. And they shall teach my people the difference between the holy and profane, and cause them to discern between the clean and the unclean.' We see it is one of the heaviest charges brought against the old testament church, Her priests have violated my law, and have profaned my holy things; they have put no difference between the holy and profane, neither ⚫ have they shewed the difference between the unclean and clean,' Ezek. xxii. 26. The law respecting clean and unclean, we shall have occasion to consider fully in the following chapter; we have only noticed it here, to enforce the importance of the subject before we enter upon it. In teaching the statutes, we apprehend, they were chiefly employed in teaching the spiritual meaning of these statutes. It is in this sense that the priest's lips should not only keep, or be the repository of knowledge, but they should seek the law at his mouth, Matt. ii. 7. Now, the people were not left to seek the words of the law from the priest, for they had them in the book of the covenant; but they sought the meaning or expounding of the law. And it was in this way that they took away ultimately the key of knowledge, neither entering in themselves, nor suffering them who would to enter in. The circumstance of eating in a clean place, mentioned verse 14. and so frequently repeated throughout the law, appears to be of important signification. We have seen in what sense Christ was buried in a clean place when he was laid in the new tomb; but the royal priesthood, the church of Christ, eat the wave breast and heave shoulder, in a clean place, when they eat it in the Christian church; when they eat it, attending to the end of the commandment, which is charity, out of a pure heart, and a good conscience, and faith unfeigned. In the 17th verse, the expression, • God hath given it you to bear the iniquity of the congregation,' should be read, that ye should take away the iniquity.' To bear iniquity, sometimes signifies punishment without forgiveness, as in Exod. xxviii. 43.; but here, and more frequently, it means, to bear asway, and thus forgive the sinner, see Exod. xxviii. 38. So the priests took away the people's sins by eating their sin-offerings, wherein they prefigured Christ, John i. 19. In verse 19. Aaron ex

cuseth himself from eating on account of what had befallen him; his sorrow and grief unfitting him for so doing; for the law requi red, that when eating the holy things they should rejoice, Deut. xii. 7. And when they brought these holy things they were to say, I have not eaten of it in my mourning,' Deut. xxvi. 14. Whea God would refuse the sacrifices of sinners, he says, they shall be unto them as the bread of mourners,' Hos. ix. 4.

CHAP. XI. In this chapter we enter upon the consideration of a subject, which makes a distinguished appearance throughout all revelation, the law of clean and unclean, particularly as to beasts. This doctrine was not new, nor unknown till the law of Moses; we have seen Noah sacrificing clean beasts, and as he had before been taught to distinguish them in taking them with him into the ark. Nor is it even then mentioned as any thing new, but Noah is commanded to attend to the distinction, as a subject with which he was familiar. The doctrine to which these laws pointed, is very plain from the revelation made to Peter respecting Cornelius, Acts x. the object of which vision was, to teach him to call no man common nor unclean; or, in other words, to point out that the line of separa tion between Jew and Gentile was now to be broken down. It is obvious, that with respect to these animals, none was unclean of itself; nor was there any natural line of distinction between them. The difference was entirely of divine revelation; and thus was it, in the first place, calculated to point forth that sovereignty, which puts a difference among the human race. When the grand difference is made at last by the Judge of all the earth, and the filthy are to be filthy still, while the holy are to be holy still, there is no natural cause for this, but, as was said to Pharaoh, that ye may know that I the Lord do put a difference.' The subject resolves itself into that most humbling doctrine to human pride : Hath not the

potter power over the clay, to make one vessel to honour, and another to dishonour?' This distinction then of clean and unclean, pointed out the great distinction which has ever subsisted among the human race,a distinction which is much lost sight of in this world, though it is partially visible, but which will be made obviously plain, when the Chief Shepherd shall divide the sheep from the goats. This distinction appeared in 'Adam's family; Abel was clean, because his heart was purified by faith; Cain was unclean, from his unbelief, and he was a persecutor and murderer of his brother. The grand source of the distinction between clean and unclean, we have seen to be divine sovereignty; the line by which it is directed, or the channel in which it runs, is the faith. Thus, among the antediluvians, we see the clean and unclean plainly distinguished, in the line of Seth, Enoch, and Noah, and that of Cain and his posterity. But it was in the days of Abraham that the remarkable line of distinction was drawn, because that in him and his seed all the families of the carth were to be blessed. Jesus Christ was in all ages the sanctifier; and Abraham's seed were called

clean, because of the holy sced running in their loins. Thus, Abra ham's household, his family, children and posterity, were reckoned clean, while the surrounding nations were all held to be unclean. Pointing to this, our Lord says, it is not meet to take the children's bread, and cast it to dogs. The children of Abraham were not unclean, but holy; the Gentiles were unclean dogs. When our Lord's death brake down the middle wall of partition, a new line was drawn ; and his church was the clean place, where his clean, viz. all who were washed, sanctified and justified in the name of the Lord Jesus, and by the Spirit of our God, were to be collected together, in distinction from the world, which, says John, lieth under the • wicked one.' Faith in the blood of Jesus is the cleanser now, as it was under the Old Testament; and although many of his clean are now mingled with the unclean, yet his church is the visible place of cleanness; and none can enter there, but by a profession of cleansing in the fountain opened in the house of David for all manner of sin and uncleanness. There is no doubt much uncleanness now in his house on earth, as he said to his disciples, Ye are clean, but not all;' but when the great day of the Lord comes, he shall sit as a refiner's fire to purify the sons of Levi. All uncleanness will be then at an end, for the Lord shall wash away the filth of the daughters of Zion, and gather out of his kingdom all that offends or does the iniquity.

We were instructed in the last chapter, that it was a most important part of the priest's duty to point out the difference between clean and unclean; and it is the great object of Christian doctrine

Fashionable Christianity, which professes to delight in sound morality, when carried to its utmost length, only makes clean the outside of the cup or platter, but inwardly it leaves it full of uncleanness. The Christianity of the apostles and prophets made the distinction between clean and unclean most manifest; it pointed out a righteousness, a cleansing, infinitely beyond that of Scribes and Pharisees, let them make their philacteries ever so broad! The world are grossly ignorant of the scriptural difference between clean and unclean; if they see a man strictly moral in his outward conduct, they will point to this as a clean man; while they will point the finger at a publican and harlot, as truly unclean. But God who knoweth the hearts, judges very differently, and, according to his word, there are none farther from cleansing than those whom men call clean. This cleanness is merely external, and it is useful in this world, where it verily has its reward. But if we wish to see a clear person in the eye of heaven, let us observe that guilty sinner, who has rendered himself abominable before God, by all that uncleanness which comes from the heart and defiles the man, but who has tasted that the Lord is gracious, whose heart is gladdened with the hope of mercy, and who enjoys the answer of a good conscience through the resurrection of Christ from the dead, the peace of God ruling on his heart and mind by Christ Jesus. A clean man, then,

in the eye of man, is a man of decent outward behaviour; a clean man in the eye of heaven, is the chief of sinners, purged and cleansed in the blood of Jesus. It may be proper to add, that though we speak of the clean person in the eye of heaven as utterly vile before God, it is no less evident, that the grace of God which cleanses him teaches him to deny all ungodliness and worldly lusts. Our readers will excuse our prolixity on this subject; we know not a more im. portant one; and we much doubt, that many who may have glanced at some of these pages, perhaps with some satisfaction, will startle at this doctrine, and say, This is a hard saying, who can • bear it?'

Some have attempted to discover in the line of distinction, and the marks of it, among animals, figures of the grounds of distinction among men. Thus, we are told, that parting the hoof, denotes separation from the world; chewing the cud, revolving and meditating on the nourishment of the word of God. Now, we will freely ac knowledge here, first, that we are convinced the word of God, which lays down these lines of distinction, has in each of them a distinct appropriate meaning; but we will also acknowledge secondly, that we by no means see them in that clear point of view, which would warrant us in laying them before our readers. We recom mend the subject to the attention of such as find comfort and instruction in searching the scriptures daily, and exploring in them the hidden and veiled treasures of truth.

We may proceed to observe, that the prohibition to eat these animals had a direct reference to purity of communion. In like manner, touching them respects any kind of outward fellowship: to this Paul evidently refers, when he says, and touch not the unclean thing, and ye shall be my sons and daughters, saith God Almighty.

6

It is generally believed, that the nature and qualities of animals were much more attended to formerly than now. When the Lord God brought all the animals of creation to be named by Adam, he was eminently endowed with the knowledge of their characters and different qualities, to which his giving them names seems directly to apply. Among ancient nations, animals were used as hieroglyphics, to express different dispositions and characters; and we see this frequently introduced in scripture. Judah is compared to a lion; Naphtali to a hind; and so in many other cases. The song of Solomon, and indeed all the writings of the prophets, abound in figures of this kind. Our Lord introduces similar language in his doctrine, Be ye wise as serpents, and harmless as doves. He speaks of wolves in sheep's clothing; and Paul forewarns the Ephesian elders of grievous wolves not sparing the flock.' He mentions being delivered from the lion and the bear. We are therefore persuaded, that there are abundant materials to guide any who will examine into this subject minutely; and we have no manner of doubt, that there is not an animal, spoken of as unclean, or not to be eaten, or

touched, but it will be found to possess some characteristic quality, destructive of the purity of Christian communion. We think, that a number of them are very plain and prominent; but as we could not do the subject the justice which it deserves, we have rather forborne. This law of clean and unclean is now abolished, but the spirit of it remains, and is equally binding now on the church and Israel of God. If we are careful as to the door of the church, opening it and shutting it agreeably to his word; admitting only those who appear to our consciences to be cleansed by the blood of Jesus; and putting away every unclean person, as they turn out; then will the church be a proper figure of the holy city, into which nothing that defileth shall enter; but if this is not attended to, the church of God will soon become a cage of every unclean and hateful bird. We see the false church often described in this way. We may farther add, that this doctrine is peculiarly unsavoury to the ears of the world at present. To judge charitably, or, in other words, to abolish the difference between clean and unclean, is the grand order of the day in modern religion; and thus to call evil good, and good evil, is the extensive language of worldly charity. The charity of the scriptures is a stranger to this doctrine; her character is, She rejoices not with iniquity, but rejoices with the truth.' Indeed, this law of clean and unclean will pretty plainly distinguish the undefiled of the lamb, the choice one of her mother, from all her rivals. There is a loud and popular cry abroad at present in the world. Lo, here is Christ, lo, there, is resounding in every quarter; let us not believe every spirit, but try the spirits whether they are of God. We can bring them to no better test than to the law of clean and unclean; or, in other words, let us inquire, what is the nature of their communion? If, like old Aholibamah, they are lying down to every lover, if their charity embraces all classes and descriptions, who take the name of Jesus in their mouth, whether they part the hoof, or chew the cud, we may rest assured this is not the congregation of the Lord: For I am the • Lord your God; ye shall therefore sanctify yourselves, and ye shall be holy, for I am holy; neither shall ye defile yourselves with any ⚫ manner of creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth.'

CHAP. XII. Commences the 27th section of the law, and contains the law of a woman's uncleanness by child-birth, and afterwards the law of her purification. The leading object of this part of the ceremonial law appears plainly to be, to impress upon the mind that important truth, taught in Psalm li. Behold I was shapen in iniquity, and in sin did my mother conceive me.' The uncleanness for a male child continued seven days, and on the eight the child was circumcised; so shall the spiritual seed of the woman, the body of Christ, lie under the uncleanness of sin seven periods. It is true, that on the seventh, the iniquity of Jacob shall be sought for, and there shall be none; but it is on the eight that the kingdom shall be delivered up perfect to God, even the Father, that God may be all.