tente<l with the best they crm get in substitution for the injury thnt bns been ,lone. The regn!ntion of course wns never mennt to be interpreted litera.lly, any more than our Lord's counsel thnt he who hnd been smitten on the right cheek, should tum the other to the smiter. Whnt good would it do liternlly to render an eye for an eye? That would be great loss to the person injming nod not the slightest gain to the person injured. Persis- tent requirement of compensntion is to be distinguished from a passionate seeking for revenge. And be it noted that this requirement of compensation is not to be omitted under nny erroneous notions of what weakness and self-denial may compel from us as Christi11ns. 'vVe must keep to the principle underlying the regulation here, as well as to that other glorious and beautiful principle which our Lord laid <lown in quoting this regulation (Ma.tt. v. 39). He spoke to stop revenge. But surely be would have been the first to sa.y, on needful occasion, that reckless men must not be suffered to inflict injury on the supposition that Christians would not resent it. Certainly we are not to seek compensation for injuries or punishment of those who injure simply to gratify private feelings, or get a private a.clvantage. But if conscience is clear as to its being for the public good, we must be very urgent and pertinacious in demanding compensation. We may be sure our Master would ever have us contend with all meekness and gentle- ness, but also with all bravery and stedJastness fur all thai is right. But the thing of most importance to be learnt from this regulation is, that the most precious things attain- able by us are beyond human malice or carelessness to spoil in the slightest degree. The treasures God loves to make the peculiar possession of his children are such as eye has not seen. The eye may be lost, and yet the enjoyment of these treasures remain-nay more, the very loss of the naturai may increase the susceptibility of the spiritual in u~. The very crippling of the body may he1p us to make wonderful advances towards the- perfect man in Christ Jesus.-Y. Vers. 5, 6.-" Mine ears hast thou opened."-Sla.very not usually considered a desir- able condition. The Israelites as a people were just casting the slough of it, and God helps them in their social ordinances by emphasising the value of freedom. None th& less, even here, a higher state than mere freedom is suggested; voluntary servitude may be preferred to liberty, and is very near a.kin to sonship. Consider:- I. 'l'HI!: PREFERENCE. Naturally, to a slave freedom is an object. Slavery was a misfortune or a. punishment resulting from deb, or misconduct (cf. Lev. xxv. 39; Ex. xxii. 3). 'l'hus viewed God only permitted it to continue at most for six years. Every Hebrew had been redeemed by him; and therefore permanent slavery to man would have been a.n infringement of his rights of ownership. Temporary serfdom under the conditions which he imposed secured his rights imd the privileges of those whom he bad redeemed [cf. ihe right of a tenant to sublet a. house by arrangement with the actual owner]. 'l'he relation between a serf and his employer was thus carefully defined and limited; in so far as they were linked together by a purely external bond, that bond ceased to exist at the close of six years' servitude. During six years, however, a firmer bond might have been formed and strengthened. Possession of the slave's body does not carry with it the possession of his affections; they cannot be bought and sold, but they may be won. If the owner during six years could find bands to bind the heart (Hos. xi. 4); in such case, the serf desiring it, a permanent relation might be established. It is not the abnegation of freeuom, it is the exercise of freedom to choose for oneself; if a man was so bound to his employer that he preferred continuing in his service, God was willing to endorse such a preierence with his con:;ent. Nowadays, the relation of servant and employer is still more temporary than of old. At the same time, now as ever, love can prevail to win the affections and so weave by means of them a permanent and enduring bond. Love transmubes the conditions of servitude. I~ changes them into something which is preferable to freedom. The cords of a man bina more firmly than any other cords; but they do not con.fine or fetter. II. THE SIGN OF THE PREFERENCE. The servant who wished to remain a servan~ was to be brought before the judges (Elohim), the representatives of God. As God's minis- ters they were empowered to permit the satisfaction of his desire. 'l'he ear pierceu against the door post was the outward sign of this sacrament of servitude. Henceforth the man by his own desire was permanently united to the family of his employer. Th11 1>ierced ear testified to the pierced heart. The sign of slavery was the badge of love. THE BOOK OF EX.ODUS.
111. :'-i-:11v ANTS (ll' Gon. The relt1Lion of the kl1we to his employer is 1malogo11~ tot.he relation between the naturRI man and God. All men are his eervants---<lebtors who Cllnnot pa,· their debts. 'l'he relation however may be of a tempor&ry character; Grnl tieeh to make it permanent by winning our hearts and our afl'cctions. Work for him in this world we must, '1•,illingly or unwillingly. He would have us willing servants; compulRory service bas no moral value. " The ears opened" (Ps. xl. 6), in token of the heart won, are of more value than s&crifice and offering. Are we such willing fl'llrYant~?o~. I. 5). He is willing to" open our eara," to ta.ke us M his own for ever, but we mu~t also oul'801Yes be willing:-" He hath opened mine Clll'tl a.nd 1 was not rebellious." Slavery is IL state of imperfection; but so also is the miSCRJ.led liberty of independence; the only perfect state for nmn is ,ha, " service which is perfect fniedom. •·-G.