ready thy way before thee f-He shall be mighty before the Lord, and many of the children of Israel shall he turn to the Lord their God. And he himself shall go before him in the spirit and power of Elias, to turn the hearts of the fathers to the children, and the disobedient to the wisdom of righteous: to prepare for the Lord a duly provided people 8. And thou, child, shalt be called a Prophet of the Highest for thou shalt go before the face of the Lord to prepare his ways; for the sake of giving knowledge of salvation to his people, by the remission of their sins through the tender mercies of our God; wherewith the dayspring from on high hath visited us, to shine unto those who were sitting in the darkness and shadow of death, whereby to direct our feet safely into the way of peace h. To which, we may add the testimony of St. Paul also, as quoted above, that John proclaimed, before the entrance of Christ, baptism of repentance unto all the people. That John was really the predecessor of Christ—that the business of bearing witness to the Messias was part of his commission originally-that the fact of such witness, as delivered by him in more ways, and on more occasions, than one, is actually on record—and, consequently, that even those descriptions, which speak of him as personally the herald of Christ, become strictly applicable to him, and are literally fulfilled in his history--no one can pretend to dispute. There was a man, says the last of the Evangelists, sent from God; his name was John. This man came for a testimony, that he might bear testimony concerning the light, that all might believe through him. I was sent before the Christ-says the Baptist of himself; and, That the Christ might be manifested to Israel, for that purpose came I, baptizing in water. And again; He who sent me to baptize in water, the same said unto me, On whomsoever thou shalt see the Spirit descending, and abiding upon him, this it is who baptizeth in the Holy Ghost m. f Mal. iii. I. k John i. 6. 7. 8 Luke i. 15-17. b Ib. 76-79. i Acts xiii. 24. ון Ib. i. 33. The duty, however, of bearing personal testimony to Jesus Christ was so far from being incompatible with the duty of an Evangelist of the kingdom, that, in the case at least of John, the former would necessarily be a consequence of the latter. For, if John knew that, though not himself the Messias, he was shortly to be succeeded by the Messias, and his own part in their common ministry was sometime to be superseded by his, he could not fail to attest this truth, and to bid the people prepare for the coming of another, after himself, but greater than himself. And this seems, indeed, to be the exact description of John's personal relation to Christ; that he had to point him out as his successor in a common office, and, however greater, or more dignified, than himself, yet still as only his successor. In comparison, then, with his proper and primary commission, as a preacher of the kingdom, or ambassador of the gospel-tidings, this duty of bearing personal testimony to Jesus Christ would be a kind of wάpepyov, or secondary purpose; perfectly compatible with that, yet entirely subordinate to it and this conclusion may be further supported by the following arguments. I. If the authority of John, in his original capacity as a Prophet of the kingdom, had not been already acknowledged, his personal testimony to the Messias must, clearly, have failed of its effect: for what weight or sanction could have been given to the character, or the claims, of another, by one, who was still in want of confirmation for his own? II. To suppose, for argument's sake, that this business was the great business of his ministry: the testimony of John to Christ before, and after, his baptism must necessarily have been widely different. Before that baptism, he could bear witness, if to any thing, only to the future approach of the Messias; after it, to his actual coming; before, only to some Messias in general; after, to the person of this Messias in particular. Both these kinds and modes of testimony, it may be said, would be suitable to the office of one, commissioned expressly to bear witness to the Christ; the former or general, while he was still unknown, the latter or particular, when he had once been ascertained. But the latter, every one must admit, would be much the more effectual of the two, and much the more in unison with the character of a personal witness, and of one who had no other duty to perform, than that of bearing such witness to the Christ. Is it, then, upon this hypothesis, no difficulty, that out of the four Evangelists, who have all given some account of the ministry of John, one only makes mention of his personal testimonies to Christ? Is it no proof, on the other hand, that this duty was subordinate to his duty as a herald of the kingdom, that all four record both his preaching and his baptizing? From the time of the baptism of Christ, when only the person of the Messias became known to John, and from which time forward, but not before it, personal attestations in favour of Christ might be delivered by him, the three first Gospels are totally silent on the subject of the ministry of John: so that had not the last Gospel, though written so long posterior to the first, and expressly to supply their omissions, placed the fact of some such attestations on record, we should have remained for ever in ignorance that John had borne any personal testimony to Christ; that is, that he had ever performed the great, if not the sole, business of his ministry in general. And what are these attestations, recorded by St. John himself? They are three in number, two of them delivered on consecutive days, the third, about a month later; the former confined to the disciples of the Baptist, and the latter, as far as we can judge of it, not purposely, nor primarily, addressed to the rest of the people t. III. If we take the Baptist's own account of his original commission ", as implicitly to be trusted, it will follow that, though given before the commencement of his ministry, it could not be discharged until that ministry was far advanced; and, when so discharged, it would prove to be a commission to bear not a general testimony to the future advent, but a particular testimony to the actual person, of the Christ. It was given before the commencement of his ministry; for it was given when he was first sent to baptize; it was a commission to bear witness to the person of the Messias, because it was accompanied by a promise how that person should be recognised. It was, consequently, a commission which neither could, nor was intended to, be executed, until his recognition had taken place—that is, until the baptism, at least, of Christ-when only the promised sign was vouchsafed. But the ministry of John had been going on some considerable time before the baptism of Christ; for this baptism is the last thing which three of the Evangelists record of his ministry at all. The ministry of John, then, had some proper object, distinct from the commission to bear personal testimony to Jesus Christ, which must have been going on before the baptism of our Lord; and, consequently, had been discharged from the first. There is reason, indeed, to believe that even the first general testimony to Christ was much posterior to the commencement of his ministry: at least, if that instance is the instance recorded by St. Luke'. And that it is so, may be inferred, I think, from the cause which produced the testimony itself: When the people were in expectation, and all men were reasoning in their own hearts, concerning John, whether he might be the Christ, John answered, saying unto all. The declaration which follows, affirming that he was not the Christ, but only his predecessor, was designed to set them right: whence, it seems hardly to admit of a question, that this must have been the first declaration to any such effect, which had yet taken place. It was very natural that the men of the time should, at first, have considered it possible that John might prove to be the Messias, whom they had all so long been expecting; it was not less natural, or rather it was peremptorily incumbent upon him, that John should disclaim the title, which they would willingly have awarded to him. But he could neither rectify this misconstruction of his real character, until it had begun to prevail, nor yet delay to rectify it, after it had. The ▾ iii. 15—18. authoritative denial, therefore, with which, in the present instance, he does rectify it, must, on every account, be considered the first of its kind; and if one such denial, and so expressed, was likely to set the mistake at rest, it would also be the last. St. Mark's account, then, of a similar declaration will belong to the same occasion as this in St. Luke; and be only more concise; while St. Matthew's*, which is identically the same in terms with St. Luke's, will be this very occasion itself, joined to the account of another passage, and of a corresponding discourse, in the previous history of John. Now, that the time of this testimony was considerably later than the commencement of his ministry I infer, first, from the reason of the thing; because the error which produced it, and so widely spread, could not have arisen all at once. Secondly, because St. Luke has detached this single declaration from the longer discourse in St. Matthew; obviously as belonging to a later period than the rest. Thirdly, and chiefly, because it is this testimony of the Baptist's, and as so produced, as well as so directed, to which I believe St. Paul also to have alluded, in the synagogue of Pisidian Antiochy. Now, as John was accomplishing his course, he said, Whom do ye suppose me to be? I am not He: but, lo! he is coming after me; the shoes of whose feet I am not worthy to unloose. These words of John are manifestly addressed to the people, and as manifestly are intended to rectify some possible mistake, with respect to the truth of his own character. They agree, therefore, so far, in substance, with the same declaration in St. Luke, that both must have belonged to the same occasion in the history of John; and since the former is said to have taken place, ὡς ἐπλήρου Ἰωάννης τὸν Epóμov, the latter must have done so too; that is, they must each be supposed to have happened, when the ministry of John was far advanced; for that could on no principle be |