XI.

THE HEALING OF THE CENTURION'S SERVANT.

Matt. viii, 5-13. Luke vii. 1-10.

THE narrative which is now to be considered has by some been regarded as descriptive of the same incidents as those which are recorded in the concluding section of the fourth chapter of the Gospel by John. In other words, they would identify the healing of the centurion's slave at Capernaum, with the cure of the nobleman's son. But, as we saw in our exposition of the latter, there are no valid grounds for such an opinion; and it is to be feared that those who have advanced it, have done so rather with the view of disparaging the gospel narratives than with that of interpreting them. Because the two accounts agree in representing Christ as performing a cure from a distance and in the absence of the sick man, by a word, they argue that they must refer to the same miracle; and then, they go on to reason that because they refer to the same miracle, but differ from each other in many important particulars, therefore the narratives are entirely unreliable. Thus they first insist, in spite of all the differences between the two accounts, that they describe the same thing; and then they set forth these discrepancies to prove that no miracle whatever was performed. That is a fair specimen of the manner in which

some rationalistic writers deal with the sacred records, and, as such, it may serve to show how little weight is due to their objections.

But while we expose this manufacture of discrepancies where none exists, we must not shut our eyes to such as really appear in the case before us between Matthew and Luke. The first Evangelist tells us that the centurion came to Jesus himself; while the third affirms that he sent elders of the Jews to plead with Jesus on his behalf. But, no serious difficulty is thereby cre ated, except to those who are such slaves to the letter as to be unable to perceive the harmony of spirit existing between the two writers. If the narratives had been verbatim et literatim identical, it would have been said that the one was taken from the other. But such a difference as we find between them establishes the independence of both; while the substantial agreement of the two is at once apparent when we remember the old Latin saying, "Qui facit per alium, facit per se." As Dr. James Morison has said, "Matthew is not aiming at giving scientific descriptions of unessential details. He is giving us a succession of vivid tableaux, in which Jesus is represented as at work. And to his eye, while engaged in painting the tableau of the scene before us, the centu rion was really present with the Lord, by means of his deputies. The presence of the deputies, is shaded off for the moment by a particular fold of the drapery of the painting." At any rate, such differences in representing one and the same application are common in all historical writings, and both ways of putting the case are substantially true; while perhaps even in Matthew there is an indication of the presence of the Jewish elders, in

* Commentary on Matthew, p. 118.

the warning which, founded on the centurion's faith, the Saviour addresses to the Jews "that followed him."

But, leaving this microscopic matter, let us proceed to the exposition of the two narratives themselves. They tell us of the application made by an officer of the Roman garrison then stationed at Capernaum, in behalf of his slave, who was "dear unto him and ready to die." The Roman army, as it then was, would hardly be considered a promising school for the education of men into 'preparation for the reception of Christ, and yet it is not a little remarkable that all the centurions mentioned in the New Testament were, in a very real sense, "not far from the Kingdom of God." In addition to the officer referred to in this narrative, there were the centurion at the crucifixion, who said concerning Jesus, "Truly this was a righteous man, truly this was the son of God;" Cornelius, who is described by Luke as "a devout man, and one that feared God with all his house, who gave much alms to the people, and prayed to God alway;" and Julius, who at Sidon, "courteously entreated Paul and gave him liberty to go unto his friends and refresh himself," and who at the time of the shipwreck exerted himself, for Paul's sake, to prevent the prisoners from being put to death. Perhaps the most interesting of them all was he with whom we have now especially to do, and the better we become acquainted with him, the more are we drawn toward him. We are impressed in his favor at the very first by the fact that through the Jewish elders he makes application to Jesus on behalf of his slave, "who was dear unto him." It was not common for the Romans to care much for their slaves. Rather they were proverbial for their cruelty to those whom they thus held in bondage, and instances were frequent in which the slave was put to death by his master,

without any judicial investigation being made, or indeed any imputation of crime having been committed. It was therefore equally creditable to the slave and to the master when the one was "dear unto the other." The servant must have been kind, loving, faithful, attentive, else he would not have been so dear to the master; and the master must have been considerate, affectionate, and largely indifferent to public opinion, else he would not have been so anxious for the welfare of the slave. As Bishop Hall has said, "Great variety of suitors resorted to Christ. One comes to him for a son, another for a daughter, a third for himself. I see none come for his servant, but this one centurion. Neither was he a better man than a master. His servant is sick, he doth not drive him out of doors, but lays him at home; neither doth he stand gazing at his bed-side, but seeks forth, and he seeks forth not to witches or charmers, but to Christ. . . Had the master been sick, the faithfulest servant could have done no more. He is unworthy to be well served that will not sometimes wait upon his followers."

Our appreciation of this soldier grows, when we hear what the Jewish elders say concerning him. For he did not come to Christ in person. He had heard such things regarding Jesus as convinced him that he was more than man; and with a true modesty, he shrank from drawing near to him. This was not simply because he was a Gentile, and Jesus was a Jew, though that may have had some influence in keeping him back, knowing as he did how particular the Jews were, in general, in the matter of their intercourse with Gentiles; but it was principally and especially because of his consciousness of the spiritual distance at which he stood from Jesus. He considered that it would be taking too great a liberty to go to the Saviour himself, and therefore he sent elders of the Jews

to beseech him that he would come and heal his servant. And when they came to do his errand, they bore this testimony concerning him: "He is worthy for whom thou shouldst do this. For he loveth our nation, and himself built us a synagogue." Now that was a very striking certificate which these elders gave to this soldier. It would have been a great thing for a Jew to receive such a testimonial from Jews. But that one belonging to the army of their oppressors should have earned from official Jews such a commendation as that which here they gave, was something altogether unprecedented, and showed that he to whom it was given was a man of more than ordinary worth. He had not only lived down the prejudice, with which Romans were regarded by the Jews, but he had also gained the confidence, and, indeed, the affection of the community.

Then, again, this was the testimonial of neighbors. They had enjoyed the best opportunities for forming a correct judgment regarding him. They had seen him, not merely on review days and on great occasions, but also when he was in undress and off his guard. They were not so likely, therefore, to be imposed upon by appearances as those would have been who had met him simply on formal or routine business. Moreover, they saw him in a position which invested him with large authority, and there is no test of character so severe and searching as is the possession of power. Hazael was not the only man who has had his head turned and his heart hardened by exaltation to a place of authority. The great dramatist was right when he exclaimed:

"How oft the sight of means to do ill deeds

Makes ill deeds done. "

But this man's rank did not affect his intercourse with