us get a love to him in our hearts as deeply rooted as their enmity against him was, and we shall account nothing too much to do or suffer for him ; nor will the whole world be sufficient to suspend or lessen our fidelity in his service.]
THE HEALING OF MALCHUs' EAR.
Luke xxii. 50, 51. And one of them smote the servant of the high-priest, and cut off his right ear. And Jesus ansioered and said, Suffer ye thus far. And he touched his ear, and healed him.
IT is but too common for even good persons, who are of a sanguine temper, to ask instruction or advice, while by their conduct they evince that they have very little disposition to receive and follow it. We do not wonder that Pilate should ask, " What is truth?" and go away before an answer could be given him : but it is grievous to see one of Peter's eminence, who had been favoured with so many opportunities of divine instruction, affecting to seek direction from his Lord, and instantly prosecuting his own unhallowed will. In considering the instance recorded, it will be proper to notice,
I. The indiscretion of Peter —
Peter, in striking Malchus with the sword, was evidently actuated by a love to his Master, and a zeal for his service ; yet his mode of discovering his affec- tion was certainly deserving of blame. It argued,
1. A want of Christian temper —
[Christianity does not preclude men from taking the sword in defence of their country, when called to it by imperious necessity, and authorized by the civil magistrates : but it en- joins individuals rather to suffer patiently the persecutions with which they are assaulted, and gladly to endure the loss of all things, even of life itself, for the Gospel's sake. As for taking up arms against the civil power, it is an extremity which per- haps not any thing can justify. Yet this is the very thing that Peter did ; and as he did it without any express command, he was rebuked by our Lord, and told that " all, who should take
1579.] THE HEALING OF MALCHUs' EAR. 119
the sword in that manner, however they might think they were fighting the Lord's battles, should perish with the sword3."]
2. An ignorance of the prophetic writings —
[It had been foretold that " one, who had eaten bread with our Lord, should lift up his heel against him ;" and that, in consequence of his treachery, he should be " led like a lamb to the slaughter," and " be numbered with transgressors." Had Peter fully understood those prophecies he would not so rudely have contradicted our Lord on a former occasion b, or so impe- tuously defended him on this ; but would have submitted to the will of God, saying, " The cup which his Father hath given him shall he not drink it?"]
3. A forgetfulness of our Lord's character —
[Often, yea, but a few minutes before, had Peter seen his Lord performing the most stupendous miracles0. If these had been wrought by the Father's power, could not Christ call upon him now, and have more than seventy thousand angels sent for his defence ? If Christ wrought them by his own power, could he not deliver himself out of their hands without Peter's interposition ? But if Christ were abandoned by his Father, and reduced to a state of impotence himself, could Peter protect him against a band of armed men? Was not his furious assault rather calculated to increase their rage, and to make them destroy Jesus and all his Disciples upon the spot ? In every view his conduct was wrong ; for if aid was needed, his was insufficient ; and if it was not needed, it was officiously and imprudently obtruded.]
The contrast between Christ's conduct and Peter's will appear by considering,
II. The remedy which our Lord applied —
Jesus would give no just occasion of offence to the civil magistrate, and therefore set himself instantly to remedy the evil that had been committed —