Thoughts, I can only suggest that they have an easy reme- dy in their own hands. They have only to leave out one or two divisions in each exposition, and they will find it as short as they please.
In preparing for publication this volume on St. Mark, I have looked through all those Commentaries mentioned in my preface to the volume on St. Matthew, which throw any light on St. Mark.* After careful examination, I feel obliged to say, that, in my humble judgment, very few com- mentators, whether ancient or modern, seem to give this Gospel the attention it deserves. It has been too often treated as a mere abridgment of St. Matthew. This view of it I believe to be an entire mistake.
The only large separate Commentary on St. Mark, that I have been able to meet wTith, is a remarkable work consist- ing of 1666 folio pages, by George Petter, Vicar of Brede, in the county of Sussex, published in the year 1661. It is a work which from its scarcity, price, and size, is much less known than it deserves. The greater part of the impression is said to have perished in the great fire of London. Some account of this book may not be uninteresting' to some readers.
Petter's Commentary was originally preached by him in
the form of expository lectures to his own congregation.
He began to preach on it, June 7th, 1618, and continued
preaching on it most Sundays with very little intermission
* It is needless to repeat their names.