We have here an account of three several persons that offered themselves to follow Christ, and the answers that Christ gave to each of them. The two former we had an account of in Mat 19:21.

I.Here is one that is extremely forward to follow Christ immediately, but seems to have been too rash, hasty, and inconsiderate, and not to have set down and counted the cost.

1.He makes Christ a very large promise (Luk 9:57): As they went in the way, going up to Jerusalem, where it was expected Christ would first appear in his glory, one said to him, Lord, I will follow thee withersoever thou goest. This must be the resolution of all that will be found Christ's disciples indeed; they follow the Lamb whithersoever he goes (Rev 14:4), though it be through fire and water, to prisons and deaths.

2.Christ gives him a necessary caution, not to promise himself great things in the world, in following him, but, on the contrary, to count upon poverty and meanness; for the Son of man has not where to lay his head.

We may look upon this, (1.) As setting forth the very low condition that our Lord Jesus was in, in this world. He not only wanted the delights and ornaments that great princes usually have, but even such accommodations for mere necessity as the foxes have, and the birds of the air. See what a depth of poverty our Lord Jesus submitted to for us, to increase the worth and merit of his satisfaction, and to purchase for us a larger allowance of grace, that we through his poverty might be rich, Co2 8:9. He that made all did not make a dwelling-place for himself, not a house of his own to put his head in, but what he was beholden to others for. He here calls himself the Son of man, a Son of Adam, partaker of flesh and blood. He glories in his condescension towards us, not only to the meanness of our nature, but to the meanest condition in that nature, to testify his love to us, and to teach us a holy contempt of the world and of great things in it, and a continual regard to another world. Christ was thus poor, to sanctify and sweeten poverty to his people; the apostles had not certain dwelling-place (Co1 4:11), which they might the better bear when they knew their Master had not; see Sa2 11:11. We may well be content to fare as Christ did. (2.) As proposing this to the consideration of those who intend to be his disciples. If we mean to follow Christ, we must lay aside the thoughts of great things in the world, and not reckon upon making any thing more than heaven of our religion, as we must resolve not to take up with any thing less. Let us not go about to compound the profession of Christianity with secular advantages; Christ has put them asunder, let us not think of joining them together; on the contrary, we must expect to enter into the kingdom of heaven through many tribulations, must deny ourselves, and take up our cross. Christ tells this man what he must count upon if he followed him, to lie cold and uneasy, to fare hard, and live in contempt; if he could not submit to this, let him not pretend to follow Christ. This word sent him back, for aught that appears; but it will be no discouragement to any that know what there is in Christ and heaven to set in the scale against this.

II.Here is another, that seems resolved to follow Christ, but he begs a day, Luk 9:59. To this man Christ first gave the call; he said to him, Follow me. He that proposed the thing of himself fled off when he heard of the difficulties that attended it; but this man to whom Christ gave a call, though he hesitated at first, yet, as it should seem, afterwards yielded; so true was that of Christ, You have not chosen me, but I have chosen you, Joh 15:16. It is not of him that willeth, nor of him that runneth (as that forward spark in the foregoing verses), but of God that showeth mercy, that gives the call, and makes it effectual, as to this man here. Observe,

1.The excuse he made: "Lord, suffer me first to go and bury my father. I have an aged father at home, who cannot live long, and will need me while he does live; let me go and attend on him until he is dead, and I have performed my last office of love to him, and then I will do any thing." We may here see three temptations, by which we are in danger of being drawn and kept from following Christ, which therefore we should guard against: - (1.) We are tempted to rest in a discipleship at large, in which we may be at a loose end, and not to come close, and give up ourselves to be strict and constant. (2.) We are tempted to defer the doing of that which we know to be our duty, and to put if off to some other time. When we have got clear of such a care and difficulty, when we have despatched such a business, raised an estate to such a pitch, then we will begin to think of being religious; and so we are cozened out of all our time, by being cozened out of the present time. (3.) We are tempted to think that our duty to our relations will excuse us from our duty to Christ. It is a plausible excuse indeed: "Let me go and bury my father, - let me take care of my family, and provide for my children, and then I will think of serving Christ;" whereas the kingdom of God and the righteousness thereof must be sought ad minded in the first place.

2.Christ's answer to it (Luk 9:60): "Let the dead bury their dead. Suppose (which is not likely) that there are none but the dead to bury their dead, or none but those who are themselves aged and dying, who are as good as dead, and fit for no other service, yet thou hast other work to do; go thou, and preach the kingdom of God." Not that Christ would have his followers or his ministers to be unnatural; our religion teaches us to be kind and good in every relation, to show piety at home, and to requite our parents. But we must not make these offices an excuse from our duty to God. If the nearest and dearest relation we have in the world stand in our way to keep us from Christ, it is necessary that we have a zeal that will make us forget father and mother, as Levi did, Deu 33:9. This disciple was called to be a minister, and therefore must not entangle himself with the affairs of this world, Ti2 2:4. And it is a rule that, whenever Christ calls to any duty, we must not consult with flesh and blood, Gal 1:15, Gal 1:16. No excuses must be admitted against a present obedience to the call of Christ.

III.Here is another that is willing to follow Christ, but he must have a little time to talk with his friends about it.

Observe, 1. His request for a dispensation, Luk 9:61. He said, "Lord, I will follow thee; I design no other, I am determined to do it: but let me first go bid them farewell that are at home." This seemed reasonable; it was what Elisha desired when Elijah called him,Let me kiss my father and my mother; and it was allowed him: but the ministry of the gospel is preferable, and the service of it more urgent than that of the prophets; and therefore here it would not be allowed. Suffer me apotaxasthai tois eis ton oikon mou - Let me go and set in order my household affairs, and give direction concerning them; so some understand it. Now that which was amiss in this is, (1.) That he looked upon his following Christ as a melancholy, troublesome, dangerous thing; it was to him as if he were going to die and therefore he must take leave of all his friends, never to see them again, or never with any comfort; whereas, in following Christ, he might be more a comfort and blessing to them than if he had continued with them. (2.) That he seemed to have his worldly concerns more upon his heart than he ought to have, and than would consist with a close attendance to his duty as a follower of Christ. He seemed to hanker after his relations and family concerns, and he could not part easily and suitably from them, but they stuck to him. It may be he had bidden them farewell once, but Loth to depart bids oft farewell, and therefore he must bid them farewell once more, for they are at home at his house. (3.) That he was willing to enter into a temptation from his purpose of following Christ. To go and bid them farewell that were at home at his house would be to expose himself to the strongest solicitations imaginable to alter his resolution; for they would all be against it, and would beg and pray that he would not leave them. Now it was presumption in him to thrust himself into such a temptation. Those that resolve to walk with their Maker, and follow their Redeemer, must resolve that they will not so much as parley with their tempter.

2.The rebuke which Christ gave him for this request (Luk 9:62): "No man, having put his hand to the plough, and designing to make good work of his ploughing, will look back, or look behind him, for then he makes balks with his plough, and the ground he ploughs is not fit to be sown; so thou, if thou hast a design to follow me and to reap the advantages of those that do so, yet if thou lookest back to a worldly life again and hankerest after that, if thou lookest back as Lot's wife did to Sodom, which seems to be alluded to here, thou art not fit for the kingdom of God." (1.) "Thou art not soil fit to receive the good seed of the kingdom of God if thou art thus ploughed by the halves, and not gone through with." (2.) "Thou art not a sower fit to scatter the good seed of the kingdom if thou canst hold the plough no better." Ploughing is in order to sowing. As those are not fit to be sown with divine comforts whose fallow ground is not first broken up, so those are not fit to be employed in sowing who know not how to break up the fallow ground, but, when they have laid their hand to the plough, upon every occasion look back and think of quitting it. Note, Those who begin with the work of God must resolve to go on with it, or they will make nothing of it. Looking back inclines to drawing back, and drawing back is to perdition. Those are not fit for heaven who, having set their faces heavenward, face about. But he, and he only, that endures to the end, shall be saved.

Put his hand to the plough - Can any person properly discharge the work of the ministry who is engaged in secular employments? A farmer and a minister of the Gospel are incompatible characters. As a person who holds the plough cannot keep on a straight furrow if he look behind him; so he who is employed in the work of the ministry cannot do the work of an evangelist, if he turn his desires to worldly profits. A good man has said: "He who thinks it necessary to cultivate the favor of the world is not far from betraying the interests of God and his Church." Such a person is not fit, ευθετος, properly disposed, has not his mind properly directed towards the heavenly inheritance, and is not fit to show the way to others. In both these verses there is a plain reference to the call of Elisha. See Kg1 19:19, etc.

1.Considering the life of mortification and self-denial which Christ and his disciples led, it is surprising to find that any one should voluntarily offer to be his disciple. But there is such an attractive influence in truth, and such a persuasive eloquence in the consistent steady conduct of a righteous man, that the first must have admirers, and the latter, imitators. Christianity, as it is generally exhibited, has little attractive in it; and it is no wonder that the cross of Christ is not prized, as the blessings of it are not known; and they can be known and exhibited by him only who follows Christ fully.

2.It is natural for man to wish to do the work of God in his own spirit; hence he is ready to call down fire and brimstone from heaven against those who do not conform to his own views of things. A spirit of persecution is abominable. Had man the government of the world, in a short time, not only sects and parties, but even true religion itself, would be banished from the face of the earth. Meekness, long-suffering, and benevolence, become the followers of Christ; and his followers should ever consider that his work can never be done but in his own spirit.

Since the notes on Matthew were published, I have received from Granville Sharp, Esq., a short Treatise, entitled, Remarks on an important Text, (viz. Mat 16:18), which has long been perverted by the Church of Rome, In Support Of Her Vain And Baneful Pretensions To A Superiority Or Supreme Dominion Over All Other Episcopal Churches.

As I should feel it an honor to introduce the name of such a veteran in the cause of religion, liberty, and learning, into my work, so it gives me pleasure to insert the substance of his tract here, as forming a strong argument against a most Anti-christian doctrine.

"And I also say unto thee, That thou art Peter; and upon this Rock I will build my Church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it." Mat 16:18.

"The Greek word πετρος (Petros or Peter) does not mean a rock, though it has, indeed, a relative meaning to the word πετρα, a rock; for it signifies only a little piece of a rock, or a stone, that has been dug out of a rock; whereby the dignity of the real foundation intended by our Lord, which he expressed by the prophetical figure of Petra, (a rock), must necessarily be understood to bear a proportionable superiority of dignity and importance above the other preceding word, Petros; as petra, a real rock, is, comparatively, superior to a mere stone, or particle from the rock; because a rock is the regular figurative expression in Holy Scripture for a Divine Protector: יהוה סלעי Jehovah (is) my rock, (Sa2 22:2, and Psa 18:2). Again, אלהי צורי, my God (is) my rock; (Sa2 22:2, and Psa 18:2); and again, ומי צור מבלעדי אלהינו, and who (is) a rock except our God? Sa2 22:32.

"Many other examples may be found throughout the Holy Scriptures; but these six alone are surely sufficient to establish the true meaning of the figurative expression used by our Lord on this occasion; as they demonstrate that nothing of less importance was to be understood than that of our Lord's own Divine divinity, as declared by St. Peter in the preceding context - 'Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God!'

"That our Lord really referred to this declaration of Peter, relating to his own Divine dignity, as being the true rock, on which he would build his Church, is established beyond contradiction by our Lord himself, in the clear distinction which he maintained between the stone (πετρος, petros) and the rock, (πετρα, petra), by the accurate grammatical terms in which both these words are expressly recorded. (For whatsoever may have been the language in which they were really spoken, perhaps in Chaldee or Syriac, yet in this point the Greek record is our only authoritative instructer). The first word, πετρος, being a masculine noun, signifies merely a stone; and the second word, πετρα, though it is a feminine noun, cannot signify any thing of less magnitude and importance than a rock, or strong mountain of defense. The true meaning of the name was at first declared by our Lord to be Cephas, a stone; and a learned commentator, Edward Leigh, Esq., asserts that πετρος, doth always signify a Stone, never a rock. Critica Sacra, p. 325.

"With respect to the first. - The word πετρος, petros, in its highest figurative sense of a stone, when applied to Peter, can represent only one true believer, or faithful member of Christ's Church, that is, one out of the great multitude of true believers in Christ, who, as figurative stones, form altogether the glorious spiritual building of Christ's Church, and not the foundation on which that Church is built; because that figurative character cannot, consistently with truth, be applied to any other person than to God, or to Christ alone, as I have already demonstrated by several undeniable texts of Holy Scripture. And though even Christ himself is sometimes, in Holy Scripture, called a stone, (λιθος, but not πετρος), yet, whenever this figurative expression is applied to him, it is always with such a clear distinction of superiority over all other figurative stones as will not admit the least idea of any vicarial stone to be substituted in his place; as, for instance: He is called 'the head stone of the corner,' (Psa 118:22), 'in Zion a precious corner stone,' (Isa 28:16), by whom alone the other living stones of the spiritual house are rendered 'acceptable to God;' as St. Peter himself (previous to his citation of that text of Isaiah) has clearly declared in his address to the Churches dispersed throughout Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia, and Bithynia; wherein he manifestly explains that very text of Isaiah, as follows: - 'Ye also,' (says the apostle), 'as living stones, are built up a spiritual house, a holy priesthood, to offer up spiritual sacrifices Acceptable To God, By' (or through) 'Jesus Christ.' (Pe1 2:5). Thus plainly acknowledging the true foundation, on which the other living stones of the primitive catholic Church were built, in order to render them 'acceptable to God,' as 'a holy priesthood.'

And the apostle then proceeds (in the very next verse) to his citation of the above-mentioned text from Isaiah: - 'Wherefore also,' (says he, Pe1 2:6), 'it is contained in the Scripture, Behold, I lay in Sion a Chief Corner Stone, elect, precious; and he that believeth on him' (επ' αυτῳ, on him, that is, on Jesus Christ, the only Chief Corner Stone) 'shall not be confounded. Unto you, therefore, which believe' (he) 'Is Precious,' (or, an honor; as rendered in the margin), 'but unto them which be disobedient' (he is, δε, also) 'the stone which the builders disallowed, the same' (οὑτος, for there is no other person that can be entitled to this supreme distinction in the Church) 'is made the Head Of The Corner.'

"From this whole argument of St. Peter, it is manifest that there cannot be any other true head of the Church than Christ himself; so that the pretense for setting up a vicarial head on earth, is not only contrary to St. Peter's instruction to the eastern Churches, long after Christ's ascent into heaven; but also (with respect to the inexpediency and impropriety of acknowledging such a vicar on earth as the Roman pretender) is equally contrary to our Lord's own instruction to his disciples (and, of course, also contrary to the faith of the true primitive catholic Church throughout the whole world) when he promised them, that, 'Where two or three are gathered together in my name' (said our Lord Jesus, the true rock of the Church) 'there am I in the midst of them,' Mat 18:20.

"So that the appointment of any 'vicar on earth,' to represent that rock or eternal head of the Church whose continual presence, even with the smallest congregations on earth, is so expressly promised, would be not only superfluous and vain, but must also be deemed a most ungrateful affront to the benevolent Promiser of his continual presence; such as must have been suggested by our spiritual enemies to promote an apostasy from the only sure foundation, on which the faith, hope, and confidence of the true catholic Church can be built and supported!

"Thus, I trust that the true sense of the first noun, πετρος, a stone, is here fairly stated; and also, its relative meaning to the second noun, πετρα, a rock, as far as it can reasonably be deemed applicable to the Apostle Peter.

"And a due consideration also of the second noun, πετρα, a rock, will produce exactly the same effect; that is, it will demonstrate that the supreme title of the rock, which, in other texts of Holy Scripture, is applied to Jehovah, or God, alone, (as I have already shown), most certainly was not intended by our Lord to be understood as applicable to his disciple Peter; but only to that true testimony which St. Peter had just before declared, concerning the Divine dignity of the Messiah - 'Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God.'

"I have already remarked that πετρα (a rock) is a feminine noun; and a clear distinction is maintained between πετρος, the masculine noun, in this text, and the said feminine noun πετρα, the rock, by the grammatical terms in which the latter, in its relatives and articles, is expressed, which are all regularly feminine throughout the whole sentence; and thereby they demonstrate that our Lord did not intend that the new appellation, or nominal distinction, which he had just before given to Simon, (viz. πετρος, the masculine noun in the beginning of the sentence), should be construed as the character of which he spoke in the next part of the sentence; for, if he had really intended that construction, the same masculine noun, πετρος, must necessarily have been repeated in the next part of the sentence with a masculine pronoun, viz. επι τουτῳ τῳ πετρῳ, instead of επι ταυτῃ τῃ πετρᾳ, the present text; wherein, on the contrary; not only the gender is changed from the masculine to the feminine, but also the figurative character itself, which is as much superior, in dignity, to the Apostle Simon, and also to his new appellative πετρος, as a rock is superior to a mere stone. For the word πετρος cannot signify any thing more than a stone; so that the popish application to Peter, (or πετρος), as the foundation of Christ's Church, is not only inconsistent with the real meaning of the appellative which Christ, at that very time, conferred upon him, and with the necessary grammatical construction of it, but also with the figurative importance of the other word, πετρα, the rock; επι ταυτῃ τῃ πετρᾳ, 'upon this rock;' the declared foundation of the Church, a title of dignity, which (as I have already shown by several texts of Scripture) is applicable only to God or to Christ.

"And be pleased to observe farther, that the application of this supreme title (the rock) to Peter, is inconsistent (above all) with the plain reference to the preceding Context; made by our Lord in the beginning of this very verse - 'And I Also say unto thee' - which manifestly points out (both by the copulative 'and,' and the connective adverb 'also') the inseparable connection of this verse with the previous declaration of Peter, concerning our Lord's Divine dignity in the preceding sentence - 'Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God;' and thereby demonstrates that our Lord's immediate reply ('And I Also Say unto thee, etc). did necessarily include this declaration of Peter, as being the principal object of the sentence - the true foundation, or rock, on which alone the catholic Church can be properly built; because our faith in Christ (that he is truly 'the Son of the living God') is unquestionably the only security or rock of our salvation.

"And Christ was also the rock even of the primitive Church of Israel; for St. Paul testifies, that 'they' (i.e. the hosts of Israel) 'did all drink of that spiritual drink: for they drank of that spiritual Rock that followed them, and that Rock was Christ,' Co1 10:4. And the apostle, in a preceding chapter, (Co1 3:11), says, 'Other foundation can no man lay than that is laid, which is Jesus Christ.'

"In the margin of our English version of Co1 10:4, instead of 'followed them,' we find, 'went with them;' which is not only the literal meaning of the Greek, 'followed them,' but it is also unquestionably true that Christ was, in a more particular manner, the Rock of their defense, when he 'followed them,' than when he 'went before them,' as related in Exo 13:21, 'And the Lord' (in the Hebrew, expressly, Jehovah) 'Went Before Them by day in a pillar of a cloud to Lead Them the way, and by night in a pillar of fire,' etc. Yet, afterwards, a necessary change was made by the Protector of the hosts of Israel, in his military manoeuvres with the two marching armies, as we are informed in the next chapter, Exo 14:19. For though, at first, 'he went Before the camp of Israel,' yet he afterwards 'removed, and went Behind them; and the pillar of the cloud removed from before them, and stood' (or rather, was stationed in the order of marching) 'behind them.' Which is properly expressed by St. Paul (in the above-cited text, Co1 10:4) as 'the rock that followed them.' For Christ was more particularly 'a rock of defense to Israel,' by this changed manoeuvre in following them; because he thereby prevented the pursuit of their cruel enemies, the standing armies of the Egyptian tyrant.

"I must remark, however, that in the text, which is parallel to St. Paul's testimony that Christ was the Rock which followed, viz. Exo 14:19, Exo 14:20, Christ is not mentioned under the supreme title of Jehovah, (as in the preceding chapter, Exo 13:21), but only as 'an angel of God.' But the angel appointed to this most gracious and merciful purpose of the Almighty was really of a supreme Divine dignity, infinitely superior to all other angels, For (in another parallel text on the same subject, wherein the title of angel is also given, viz. Exo 23:20-23), God declared, saying, 'My name is in him,' (viz. the name Jehovah, signifying all time, past, present, and future, or the eternal Being). 'Behold,' (said God to the hosts of Israel), 'I send An Angel' (or a messenger) 'before thee, to keep thee in the way,' (the object of intention before described), 'and to bring thee into the place which I have prepared. Beware of him,' [or rather, watch, (thyself), or be respectful before him, לפניך or in his presence], 'and obey his Voice,' (i.e. the Word of God, the true character of Christ, even before the creation); 'provoke him not,' (or rather, murmur not, against him), 'for he will not pardon your transgressions, for My Name Is In Him,' (not placed upon him, as the outward tokens of mere temporary authority are given, to be exhibited like the insignia of nobility, or robes of magistrates, but really 'in him,' בקרבו 'within him,' i.e. thoroughly included in his personal existence). 'But if thou shalt indeed obey His Voice,' (i.e. 'the word of God,' the true figurative character of the Son of God), 'and shalt do all that I Speak,' (for it is Jehovah, the Lord God, that speaketh in Christ), 'then I will be an enemy to thine enemies,' etc. It is therefore unquestionably evident, from the examination of all these texts, that Christ, whom St. Paul has declared to be 'the rock that followed' the Israelites, was also the Lord, or Jehovah, (as he is expressly called in the first text here cited, Exo 13:21), that 'went before' the Israelites 'by day,' in a pillar of a cloud, to lead them in 'the way, and by night in a pillar of fire,' etc., as expressly declared in the first text cited in this note; and, therefore, an attempt to set up any mere mortal man, as the rock or foundation of the true catholic Church, must be attributed either to extreme ignorance of the Holy Scriptures, or to extreme wickedness; but certainly, also, to the delusions of spiritual enemies."

That the power of the keys, or of binding and loosing, belonged equally to all the apostles, the author goes on to prove.

"But there is a testimony of high authority, which renders it unquestionable that this declaration of our Lord respecting the power of 'binding and loosing,' related 'to them,' (the other disciples), 'as well as to him:' - even another declaration, made by our Lord himself, 'to his disciples,' respecting the same identical power, which our Lord attributed equally to all the disciples then present.

"The particular discourse of our Lord to which I now refer seems to have been made at Capernaum, after the miracle of the fish (bearing the tribute money in his mouth) which Peter was sent to catch; as related in the 17th chapter of St. Matthew. And in the beginning of the very next chapter we are informed as follows: - 'At the Same Time came the disciples unto Jesus, saying, Who is the greatest in the kingdom of heaven?' Our Lord's answer to this question (wherein he urges the necessity of a humiliation like that of little children, as the proper disposition to qualify mankind for the kingdom of heaven) is continued from the 2d verse to the 14th verse of this chapter; which shows that the disciples, in general, were still present, as they would certainly wait for the desired answer to their own question; and then our Lord immediately afterwards proceeded to instruct them (from the 15th to the 17th verse) in the general duty of behavior towards a brother that has trespassed against us. After which our Lord added, (in the 18th verse), 'Verily I say unto You, (ὑμιν, a plural pronoun, which must refer unto all the disciples that were then assembled), 'Whatsoever Ye Shall Bind on earth,' (δησητε, a verb in the second person plural, plainly including all the disciples that were then present), 'shall be bound in heaven; and whatsoever Ye Shall Loose on earth,' (λυσητε, another plural verb), 'shall be loosed in heaven.'

"This is exactly the power of the keys, which the Church of Rome has, most absurdly, attributed to St. Peter alone, in order to invest the bishops of Rome (on the vain pretense of their being St. Peter's successors) with an exclusive claim to all these ecclesiastical privileges of binding and loosing, which our Lord manifestly, in this parallel text, attributed to all his faithful apostles, without any partial distinction.

"But the importance of examining, not only parallel texts, but also more particularly the context, of any difficult sentence in Holy Scripture, for a more easy comprehension of the true meaning, is clearly exemplified in the examination of the first text in question, viz. Mat 16:18, Mat 16:19; for we are informed in the very next verse, the 20th, that our Lord 'Then charged his disciples,' (τοτε, then, that is, immediately after his discourse about the rock and keys), 'that they should tell no man that he was Jesus the Christ;' manifestly referring to the first circumstance of the context concerning himself, viz. the declaration of Peter, 'Thou art the Christ,' etc., in answer to his own question to all the disciples - 'Whom say ye that I am?'

"That this question was not addressed to Peter alone is manifest by the plural pronoun and verb, (ὑμεις λεγετε), 'Whom say Ye that I am?' And therefore St. Peter's answer must be considered as intended not merely for himself, but also for his brethren, the other faithful witnesses of Christ's miracles and doctrines; so that the substance of this answer - 'Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God' - must necessarily be understood as the true foundation or rock of the Catholic Church, revealed to Peter by our heavenly Father, as stated in the 17th and 18th verses.

"This declaration, therefore, that he was the Christ, was manifestly the subject of our Lord's charge to the disciples, that 'they should tell no man;' that is, not until after the time of his sufferings and death, which were the next topics in the continuation of his discourse. The declaration of Peter, therefore, demonstrated the true foundation, or rock, of the Church, which (as Christ himself testified) our heavenly Father had revealed to Peter. And it is also remarkable, that the very next discourse of our Lord to his disciples, recorded in the context, (Mat 16:21), should produce that severe censure against Peter, which still farther demonstrated that Peter could not be the rock on which Christ's Church was to be built. (Mat 16:21). 'From that time forth' (απο τοτε) 'began Jesus to show unto his disciples how that he must go unto Jerusalem, and Suffer many things of the elders, and chief priests, and scribes, and Be Killed,' (all the predicted consequences of his being the Christ, the character which Peter himself had declared), 'and' (that he should) 'be raised again the third day. Then Peter took him,' (Mat 16:22), 'and began to rebuke him, saying, Be it far from thee, Lord,' (or, rather, according to the Greek original, as rendered in the margin - 'Pity thyself, Lord') - 'this shall not be unto thee. But he' (Christ, Mat 16:23) 'turned and said unto Peter,' [τῳ πετρῳ, the same appellative (signifying a stone, or a small part of a rock) which was given to Peter by our Lord, in the 18th verse] - 'Get thee behind me, Satan, (said our Lord), thou art an offense unto me; for thou savourest not the things that be of God; but those that be of men.'

"Thus a fair examination and comparison of the whole context, completely sets aside the vain supposition of the Romish Church, that Peter was the rock of Christ's Church. And I sincerely hope that a similar attention to this whole context may prevent any future attempts, that might otherwise be prompted by the prejudices of Roman Catholics, to bring forward again this long-disputed question, on which they have vainly set up the pretended supremacy of the Romish Church above all other episcopal Churches; and that it may be silenced, and set at rest, for ever hereafter."

And Jesus said unto him,.... The copulative "and", is left out in the Vulgate Latin, Syriac, Arabic, and Persic versions:

no man having put his hand to the plough; or "ploughshare", as reads the Syriac version; or "plough handle", as the Persic; referring, as Beza thinks, to the business of Elisha, in Kg1 19:19

And looking back; behind him; for the ploughman ought to look before him, on his plough, and the ground he is ploughing, or he is not fit to be a ploughman; nor will he make proper furrows, or do his work well; and so he that enters upon the ministerial work, and looks back, and engages himself in the affairs of the world, sets his heart on them, and spends his time in them,

is not fit for the kingdom of God: that is, to preach the kingdom of God, as in Luk 9:60. He cannot serve God and mammon, his own interest, and the interest of Christ; he cannot rightly perform the work of the ministry, whilst his thoughts and time are taken up in the affairs of the world.

Next: Luke Chapter 10

No man, &c.--As ploughing requires an eye intent on the furrow to be made, and is marred the instant one turns about, so will they come short of salvation who prosecute the work of God with a distracted attention, a divided heart. Though the reference seems chiefly to ministers, the application is general. The expression "looking back" has a manifest reference to "Lot's wife" (Gen 19:26; and see on Luk 17:32). It is not actual return to the world, but a reluctance to break with it. (Also see on Mat 8:21.)

Next: Luke Chapter 10