ass, as well as of an horse; yet when used by itself, as in this passage, it would be more naturally applied to the latter. St. Matthew's narrative however leaves no room to doubt which it was, and the only inquiry suggested is, why St. Mark should have been thus ambiguous; why using the word " foal," or "colt," he did not, like St. Matthew, give the quotation from Zecharias, which would have prevented all ambiguity. The question seems to admit of a very plausible solution. St. Mark was writing for the Christians of Rome; St. Matthew for those of Judæa. With the latter, not only the eastern habits, but the record of the simple manners of their early rulers, who rode on asses, made these animals appear any thing but mean in their eyes; but in the minds of the Romans, the mention of them was associated with ludicrous and degrading ideas. Had St. Mark then used the word ass, he might to the great mass of the Christians, for whom he wrote, have given the whole scene an air of ridicule, to which he of course would avoid exposing it. At the same time he would have been false in his account, and would have destroyed the main circumstance in the incident, had he called the animal a horse. He therefore, no doubt, designedly used an ambiguous expression, which those versed in the Jewish Scriptures would understand aright, because they remembered the words of Zecharias; while to a new Christian convert from heathenism, or to a heathen then first reading his narrative, his description would convey nothing ludicrous. Afterwards too, when the same disciple was more fully instructed, and became acquainted with the Old Testament Scriptures, they would direct him to the true import of the word; and thus he would understand all the character of the incident, just when he was prepared for profiting by it. THE WITHERING OF THE FIG TREE. Ver. 12-14. 20-26. And on the morrow, when they were come from Bethany, he was hungry and seeing a fig tree afar off having leaves, he came, if haply he might find any thing thereon: and when he came to it, he found nothing but leaves; for the time of figs was not yet. And Jesus answered and said unto it, No man eat fruit of thee hereafter for ever. And his disciples heard it. And in the morning, as they passed by, they saw the fig tree dried up from the roots. And Peter calling to remembrance saith unto him, Master, behold, the fig tree And Jesus answering which thou cursedst is withered away. saith unto them, Have faith in God. you, That whosoever shall say unto this mountain, Be thou removed, and be thou cast into the sea; and shall not doubt in his heart, but shall believe that those things which he saith shall come to pass; he shall have whatsoever he saith. Therefore I say unto you, What things soever ye desire, when ye pray, believe that ye receive them, and ye shall have them. And when ye stand praying, forgive, if ye have ought against any that your Father also which is in heaven may forgive you your trespasses. But if ye do not forgive, neither will your Father which is in heaven forgive your trespasses. As a miracle, performed for the purpose of confirming the faith of the disciples in Christ, the withering of the fig tree could scarcely have been needed, after so splendid a series as they had by this time witnessed. The action was more probably a symbol, made miraculous in order to fix the attention more strongly on it. And this it was the more likely to do, because, although as an exercise of power, it exhibited less that was striking than most of his miracles on record; yet it must have attracted their especial notice, because it differed in character from all— or rather from all but one; and this very difference connected it the more strongly with the event which it was meant obviously to typifythe fate of his barren hearers. All Christ's miracles which are recorded had a benevolent object, except this and the sending the devils into the herd of swine. All the rest were not merely indifferent in their results on the welfare of mankind, but positively beneficial. Whilst he proved by them his power, and typified his doctrines, he at the same time proclaimed the benevolent character of that mission which he was thus attesting and explaining. But in the display of mercy towards mankind, there were two traits of severity which made part of the scheme, and which, as they had been pointedly taught in all the other modes of instruction adopted by him, could not suitably perhaps have been omitted in his symbolic method. The first of these points was his destruction of the works of Satan-the second, his exclusion of unrepentant man also from his scheme of grace. The former of these awful truths was communicated by the miracle which exhibited the devils, and together with the devils, those impure animals possessed by them, as urged headlong and hopeless down a precipice, and cast into the sea to perish. In the present symbol the latter act of severity is, no doubt, prefigured, by the curse on the barren fig tree. Immediately and primarily it declared the fate of Jerusalem; but it was a lesson more extensive, and doubtless applicable to all God's creatures, who then or hereafter should be visited by the Saviour or his Comforter, and yet fail to repent and to bring forth fruits meet for repentance. From the natural expressiveness of the image, it would seem to have been intelligible without further comment. Indeed, if it had formed the terms of a metaphor, and that metaphor had been used by our Lord, under any marked circumstances, it would probably have been afterwards called to mind and applied by the hearers to the fate of the Jewish nation. But if we look back on the gradual progress of his instruction, this miracle had been long provided with a comment and exposition in those frequent metaphors derived from the productiveness of the earth and its plants, with which he had from time to time familiarized their minds. Sometimes it was a parable made up of these images; sometimes an allusion to the parable already expounded; some |