of the history. St. Mark, by the strnoture of his narrative, helps us more readily to grasp the whole of the sublime and impressive record. Take, for example, St. Mark's account of our Lord's ministry in Galilee. How it revolves around the familiar Lake of Gennesaret I A series of striking miracles at Oa.pernaum and in that neighbourhood, commencing with the casting out of the "unclean spirit," excites the attention of the whole Jewish population, and exalts the fame of Jesus even amongst the heathen beyond the Jewish borders, so that they flock to him from every quarter. But the miracles were only intended to challenge attention to the words of Jesus; and therefore we find him continually preaching to the dense masses on the sea.shore, until they thronged him so that he was obliged to direct a boat to be always in attendance upon him, into which he might retreat, and which he might use as his pulpit when the pressure of the crowd became inconveniently great. 'fhen there is the frequent crossing over the lake to and fro, from west to east, and back from east to west-the sea. itself ministering to him, gathering into a storm at his bidding, and at his bidding becoming still. Then there are the miracles and the preaching on this side and on that, amongst a Jewish popula- tion here and a Gentile population there. And then there is the jealousy of the chief priests and scribes, sent purposely from Jerusalem to watch him, and to find grounds for accusation against him, while the mass of the people recognize him as the great Prophet that should come into the world. A few short chapters suffice to exhibit all this to us, and to present us with a striking and vivid illustration of the fulfilment of the prophecy quoted by St. Matthew (iv. 15, 16): "The land of Zabulon, and the land of Nephthali, by the way of the sea, beyond Jordan, Galilee of the Gentiles; the people which sat in darkness saw great light; and to them which sat in the region and shadow of death light is sprung up." The connection of St. Peter with this Gospel has already been noticed; and, assuming the correctness of the supposition that St. Mark, in writing his Gospel, was to a great extent the "interpreter" of St. Peter, it is interesting to observe how the internal evidence supplied by this Gospel tends to confirm this view, Instead of being put prominently forward, as in the other Gospels, in this the Apostle Peter falls as much as possible into the background. When his name first occurs, it appears as Simon. It is not until the third chapter that he is spoken of as Peter, and then only in the simplest terms: " Simon he surnamed Peter" ( eh. iii. 16 ). In the eighth chapter, while our Lord's severe rebuke of him is recorded, there is no mention of the noble confession which he had made just before. In the fourteenth chapter, while we are informed that our Lord sent two of his disoiples to prepare the Passover, the names of the two are not given, although we know from another evangelist that they were Peter and John. In the same chapter, when they were in the Garden of Gethsemane, we read that our Lord singles out Peter as one who was heavy with sleep, and applies his remoJUltrance specially to him, addressing him as Simon, Iv INTRODUCTION TO
and sa.ying, " Simon, sleepest thou ? " The particulars of this apostle's denial of Christ are, as we might expect, given also with great minuteness. The only other notice that we find of him is that message sent to him by the angel after our Lord's resurrection," Go tell his disciples and Peter, He goeth before you into Galilee "-a message which, while it would recall to him his sin, would also assure him of his forgiveness. Now, all this manifestly confirms the ancient traditions that St. Peter influenced the compilation of this Gospel. He had said (2 Pet. i. 15), "Moreover I will endeavour that ye may be able after my decease to have these things always in remembrance "-a sentence which shows his great anxiety that there should he a trustworthy record preserved for all future ages from the lips and pens of those who were eye-witnesses of Christ's majesty. Thus all that we read leads us to the conclusion that we have in St. Mark a faithful exponent of what St. Peter heard and saw and communicated to him; so that if we wanted another title for this Gospel, we might call it "The Gospel according to St. Peter." • I. THE LIFE OF ST. MARK THE Ev.A.NGELIST. The na.me of Mark is by some supposed to be derived from the La.tin "ma.rcus," a hammer; not "marcellus," a little hammer, but "marcus," a strong hammer, able to crush the flinty rock, and thus indicative of the spiritual power wielded by the evangelist, and enabling him to break the stony hearts of the Gentiles, and to rouse them to penitence and faith and a holy life. The prm-nomen Marcus was in frequent use amongst the Romans, and often given to those who were the firstbom. Cicero was called Ma.rCllS Tullius Cicero, because he was the firstbom of his family. So St. Mark was in a spiritual sense the firstbom and well-beloved of St. Peter. "The Church that is at Babylon [literally, -:, lv Baf3v>..wv,, • she that is in Babylon'], elected together with you, saluteth you; and so doth Marcus my son" (1 Pet. v. 13). St. Mark drew his spirit and his ardour from St. Peter. St. Peter, as his father in Christ Jesus, impressed his wisdom and holiness upon him. Who, then, was St. Mark? He appears to have been a Hebrew by nation and of the tribe of Levi. Bede says that he was a priest after the order of Aaron. There is very good reason to believe (although Grotius, Cornelius & Lapide, and others, think differently) that he is the same person who is mentioned in the Acts (xii. 12, 25) as "John whose surname is Mark." John was his original Jewish name; and Mark, his Roman prefix, was added afterwards, and gradually superseded the other name. We can trace the process of the change very clearly in the Acts and in the Epistles. We find John and John Mark in the earlier pa.rt of the Acts; but in Acts xv. 39 John disappeµs a.I together, and in the Epistles he is always called Mark. His surname appears to have gradually taken the place of his other name, just as Paul takes the place of Saul. Then further we find him /J.Bsociated with St. Peter; which furnishes another evidence of his identity, THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO ST. MARK. V