SERMON X.

THE TIMES OF VISITATION.

ST. LUKE xix. 44.

"Because thou knewest not the time of thy visitation."

THESE well-known words are the conclusion of the awful denunciation of judgment and ruin which our Lord uttered on His last coming into Jerusalem. By that time the unhappy city and people were beyond all hope of repentance or pardon. It was then only left for them to fill up the measure of their fathers, by shedding the sacred blood, out of which life and restoration of the world should spring. These sad words were said with sadder tears; when the Lord, who often, in past days of sin and rebuke, would have gathered the children of Sion together, even as a hen gathereth her chickens under her wings, and they would not, now beheld the city, and

P

wept over it, saying, "If thou hadst known, EVEN THOU, at least in this thy day, the things which belong unto thy peace: but now they are hid from thine eyes

ײ!

Well-known, however, as these words are, there is in them something, when we think of it, unexpected; something different, apparently, from what we should have looked for. The condemnation of the people seems to be put upon a cause somewhat unlike what we might have thought. The Lord does not say, it is because ye are about to crucify the Lord of Glory; or, because ye have been a sinful and stiff-necked people; or, because by your traditions ye have made the word of God of none effect; or, because ye are hypocrites, or impenitent: though all these things, and many more, were not only true against the people, but had often been alleged by Himself to their condemnation. He does not, I say, allege any of these broad, overt, intelligible sins in this, the last most solemn, irreversible denunciation of their judgment: but He says, "Because thou knewest not the time of thy visitation!" God had visited His people, and they knew it not! He had come unto His own, and His own had known Him not. He does not even say, that they had pretended not to know Him; but, literally and plainly, that

they knew Him not. They might have known Him; they ought to have known Him: but He came, and they knew Him not. And that we do not over-interpret our Lord's words in so speaking, is clear from the language of St. Peter to the people immediately after the descent of the Holy Ghost on the day of Pentecost; “And now, brethren, I wot that through ignorance ye did it, as did also your rulers 1" and of St. Paul; "Which none of the rulers of this world knew for if they had known it, they would not have crucified the Lord of glory".

:

Let us learn, then, at once, as the first practical conclusion from this subject, that men may really be quite ignorant of what they are doing, and yet very guilty. They may know nothing at all either of the nature or greatness of their deed, and yet they may be involved in the heaviest condemnation for doing it. Nor is this only on the ground, that they would equally have done the deed if they had known it: for our Lord and His Apostles seem to say expressly, that if they had known what they were doing, they would not have done it nor, indeed, is it conceivable for a moment that they should have done so.

1 Acts iii. 17; xiii. 27.

2 1 Cor. ii. 8.

They were, then, guilty for their ignorance; but their ignorance was real.

But, again, are we to suppose that they did not choose to know: that they might, then and there, by a stronger exercise of will, by some more forcible or candid purpose, have known what they thus wilfully were ignorant of?

It is possible that they might; but it is by no means certain: that is, it is by no means certain that much disobedience, much inattention to the constant indications of God's will vouchsafed to them, much neglect of opportunities, had not set them so much out of the way of forming right judgments on such things, as to make it morally impossible, or, at least, in the highest degree unlikely, that they should come to a right knowledge of the nature of our Lord and the sacredness of His mission.

No doubt they had, if we may so speak, a great deal to say for themselves, in their firm and persevering rejection of our Lord and His doctrine not, indeed, a word of real weight or truth, but a great deal, which, urged by men in their state of mind, and addressed to men of their state of mind, would appear to be full of force and cogency. Would they not, feeling no doubt of the sacred validity of their own traditions, look upon Him, and describe Him as

one who made light of the authority of God, and of Moses, and the ancients? Would they not cling to the misreported words which they treasured up against Him, and accuse Him of blasphemy against the temple, of profaning the Sabbath, or of other such sins; and so neutralize to their own minds, and that of their followers, the unquestionable weight of His many miracles? Would they not find a strong argument for their own comfort in the fact, that none of the rulers, or Pharisees, no rich, nor learned, nor noble, ventured to confess their faith in Him? May we not easily suppose with what immense effect they would urge the impolicy of giving any heed to our Lord's teaching: the impolicy in respect of the Romans; the impolicy in respect of the great impediment which would, by our Lord's partial success, be thrown in the way of the true, temporal Messias, so long expected? Would they not feel very strongly the unlikeness between the lowly Son of Mary and the Prince, who, as they read the prophecies, they are so anxiously looking for?

I say, without hesitation, that any person who throws himself into their position, and tries to feel with their feelings, and see with their eyes, may easily understand that they had a great deal to say for themselves :-a great deal of specious,