Notes

“None op the disciples durst ask him, Who

ART THOU?”

“In order to give them a farther proof that He was a real man and no phantom, although they had already seen His body with their eyes, and heard it with their ears, and touched it with their hands, He now chose to join them in taking food. Accordingly He invited them to a prepared repast [and bade them add fishes which they themselves had caught]. The disciples took their places, but they were silent; for the immortal majesty of His form deprived them of their wonted confidence. Still, the more glorious appearance notwithstanding, they recognised their Master.” — JErasmi Paraphrasis. In this we fancy that Erasmus is nearer the mark than Calvin, who explains — “The disciples dared not to ask Christ; that is, they -were afraid of doing Him wrong: so clear and conspicuous were the signs by which He had revealed Himself.” The evangelist plainly indiesates that, on the one hand, there was no need to ask,

Q 3

“Who art thou?” for Hi3 identity was obvious: already, and before the conversation with Peter begam they “knew that it was the Lord j” but, on the other hand, if they had felt the same freedom and familiarity as in days of old, they might have satisfied their curiosity by asking many questions. As it was, awed and overpowered by His majesty, they did not venture to ask so much as “Who art thou?” but sate down to “dine” in happy and reverential silence.

“I take these words to imply that they sat down to the meal in silence, wondering at, while at the same time they well knew, Him who was their Host.” — Alford’s Greek Testament.

NOTE B, p. 7.

“Feed my Lambs.”

c< The main object of the Lord in His rejoinder, € Feed my sheep, feed my lambs,’ is not to say, ‘ Show then thy love in act,’ but rather, -I restore to thee thy apostolic function; this grace is thine, that thou shalt yet be a chief shepherd of. my flock.’ It implies, therefore, the fullest forgiveness of the past, since none but the forgiven could rightly declare the forgiveness of Ood.” — Trench on the Miracles, 5th edit., p. 465. “That the Lord, looking at the commencement and first state of His flock, should first commit His tender lambs to be cared for, is very natural. They still are liable to fall, like Peter; and need first to be fed with love by him whom love had cared foi

1?6

and lifted up. He who had so much reason to humble himself, should even on that account condescend to the little ones and the feeble; this is obviously the first point of connection.” — Slier’ $ “Words of the Lord Jesus f vol. viii., p. 243.

NOTE C, p. 7.

The Theice-eepeated Question.

“O Apostle, be not grieved! Answer once, answer again, answer the third time. Now that you love, let the good confession gain a threefold triumph, even as presumption was thrice vanquished through fear. That which was three times ‘ bound,’ should be three times c loosed.* Let love untie what timidity bound.” — Augustini Sermones, ccxcv. 4. Not leas to the purpose is the annotation of Grotius: — “Wonderful is the wisdom of Christ, who in these few words contrives that Peter shall render satisfaction both to Himself, whom he had thrice denied, and to those colleagues to whom he had preferred himself: showing how the Church should exercise its discipline (exemplum dans discipline ecclesiastics).” “With the threefold denial corresponds the triple hammer- stroke of this question on the heart of Peter.” — TholucJc on John, p. 424. And with characteristic sagacity it is remarked by the elder Dr. McCrie: The question

wa9, in itself, highly appropriate, and calculated to draw forth various emotions besides that of grief. We might have supposed that it would have been, ‘ Art tnou sorry tor navmg denied me” — but it was proposed by Him who knows how to touch the chord which makes the whole soul to vibrate: ‘ Simon, son of Jonas, Iovest thou me? ’ Had Peter been irritated or displeased by this close examination, he would either have repeated his former offence, and broken for ever with his Master, or he would have preserved a sullen silence, or he would have given (as we say) a short answer. But he replies as before, only with somewhat more fervour and earnestness. His grief, instead of preventing, prompted him to this further profession. He was anxious to remove every shadow of suspicion, and his generous, breast would have burst had he not relieved it by avouching attachment, for the third time, to Him whom he had thrice denied.” — Works of T. M’Crie, D.D., vol. iv., p. 321.

Perhaps it is wrell to mention that in the original there is a variation of phraseology which our translation does not indicate. If we may accept Tregelles’s reading tz po&and in verse 17, the dialogue would be somewhat to this effect, as far as we can distinguish the force of ayan,Q and cpiXelg: —

Jesus. “Simon, son of Jonas, Iovest thou me more than these [others]?”

Jeter. “Yea, Lord, thou knowest that thou art dear to me.”

Jesus. “Feed my lambs.” — “Simon, son of Jonas, Iovest thou me?”

Peter. “Yea, Lord, thou knowest that thou art dear to me.”

Jesus. “Peed mv sheep.” — “Simon, son of Jonas am I dear to thee?”

Peter. “Lord, thou knowest ail things: thou knowest that thou art dear to me.”

Jesus. “Feed my dear flock.”

NOTE D, p. 40.

Galilean Fishes.

Although the press continues to pour forth works on Palestine with a profusion only surpassed by the books on prophecy, it is curious how many points still need elucidation. One of these is the ichthyology of the Sea of Tiberias, and of the Jordan with its tributaries, a subject which from the singular conditions of that system of lakes and streams should be very interesting to the naturalist, and which ought not to be without its interest to the reader of the Bible. But we really know more about the productions of the newly-discovered lakes in Africa than about the inhabitants of waters in themselves and their history so wonderful, and which multitudes of British and American tourists are visiting every year. In the private residences of England there must be gallons ot water from the Jordan; but even in the British Museum there are not, as far as we know, any specimens of fish from the Lake of Galilee.* From analogy, and on the autho-

* The only one we know of is one which we have not seen — a specimen lately added to the Biblical Museum of our friend William Dickson, Esq., Edinburgh. rity of writers as old as Bellonius and Cotovicus (quoted by Lampe, tom. iii., p. 7y, we have no doubt that carp are to be found, and from the description in Hasselquist we are sure of the Spams Galilceus. Our friend Mr. Carruthers writes: — 44 It belongs to the modern genus Chromis. There is no specimen of the C. Galilceus in the Museum; indeed, it is unknown, except from Hasselquist’s very imperfect description. Dr. Gunther says, judging from the Nile species of the same genus, it is likely to grow to the size of a foot and a half. Though very different from, it comes nearest to, our perch; and, like it, it is gregarious.” The United States’ Expedition mentions five kinds of fish, 44 all good; viz., the 4 Musht,’ c Abu But,* * Huffafah,’ 4 Abu Kisher,’ and 4 Bqrbut. The musht, about one foot long, and four or five inches wide, resembles the sole.”

NOTE E, p. 52.

“Thott didst them ttnto me.”

44 In John Ealk’s Refuge at Weimar, when one of the boys had said the pious grace, 4 Come, Lord J esus, be our guest, and bless what thou hast provided,1 a little fellow looked up and’ said, 4 Do tell me why the Lord Jesus never comes? 1 4 Dear child, only

believe, and you may be sure He will come, for He does not despise our invitation. 4 1 shall set him a seat,1 said the little fellow; and just then there was a knock at the door. A poor frozen apprentice entered, begging a night’s lodging. He was made welcome; the chair stood empty for him; every child wanted him to have his plate; and one was lamenting that his bed was too small for the stranger, who was quite touched by swell uncommon attentions. The at tie one had been thinking hard all the time. 4 Jesus could not come, and so He sent this poor man in His place; is that it? 5 4 Yes, dear child,

that is just it. Every piece of bread, and every drink of water that we give to the poor or the sick, or the prisoners, for Jesus* sake, we give to Him. “Inasmuch as ye have done it unto one of the least of these my brethren, ye have done it unto me.” 5” — Stevenson’s Praying and Working, p. 48.

NOTE E, p. 125.

Aspirations.

Of a life similarly lofty and ardent we have the aspirations embodied in the following prayer of Norris of Bemerton, who mused and sang on the same plains of Salisbury where Greorge Herbert passed his years of cheertul piety: “My Q-od! my happiness! who art as well the End as the Author of my being — who hast more perfection than I have desire, and art also seriously willing to quench my great thirst in the ocean of thy perfection — I beseech thee show me thy glory. Withdraw thy hand from the cleft of the rock, and remove the bounds from the mount of thy presence, that I may see thee as thou art, and ever dwell in the light of thy beauty. I have long dwelt with vanity and emptiness, and have made myself Weary in the pursuit of rest. Oh, let me not fail at last, after my many wanderings and disappointment*, to be taken up into this true and only ark of repose and security, where I may for ever rest, and for ever bless the Author of my happiness. In the meantime, strike, I beseech thee, my soul with such lively apprehension of thy excellencies, such bright irradiations of thy Divine light, that I may see enough to love thee infinitely, to depend on thee for my happiness entirely, and to bear up my spirit under the greatest aridities and dejections with the delightful prospect of thy glories. Oh, let me sit down under this thy shadow with great delight, till the fruit of the tree of life shall b§ sweet to my taste. Let me stay and entertain my longing soul with the contemplation of thy beauty, till thou shall bring me into thy banqueting-house, where vision shall be the support of my spirit, and thy banner over me shall be love. Grant this, oh my God, my happiness, for the sake of thy great love, and of the Son of thy love, Christ Jesus* Amen.” — Norris’s Miscellanies, 1710, p.226. In the same spirit, but with a more impatient eagerness, writes Samuel Rutherford: “Oh, that time would post faster, and hasten, our communion with that Fairest among the sons of men! But, a few years will do our turn, and the soldier’s hour-glass will soon run out. I am sure the saints, at their best, are but strangers to the weight and worth of the incomparable excellency of Immanuel. We know not the half of what we love when we love Christ.”