But this offer, from some motive or other, he had rejected. He perhaps undervalued the honour conferred on him in being asked to the feast: he had low conceptions of the dignity and majesty of the King, who had invited him so long as he obtained admission to the entertainment, he cared little whether his appearance was such, as in fact, it ought to have been: or, perhaps he was too proud to be seen in cloaths which did not belong to him: or, possibly, he thought his own sufficiently good for the occasion, and it may be even better, than those which were offered to him : and it is not improbable, that while greatly inferiour in quality and value, they might bear some little resemblance to them in form and colour; for we do not find that his fellow-guests took any particular notice of him, or observed the difference between his garment and theirs. However when the King came in to see the guests, he instantly perceived the difference. His eye glancing over the numerous visiters assembled, at once detected the offender, and brought his offence to light.

In this parable, by the feast provided is intended to be set forth, the rich provision made for our souls in the gospel of Christ, whom God has given to be the Bridegroom of the Church. The servants of the King are the ministers of the word, who are directed to publish abroad the glad tidings of Salvation in the name of Jesus Christ, and to invite sinners of every description, to forsake the high-way of destruction, and to feast on the glorious blessings laid up for them in Christ. Roused by the gracious invitation, many professedly accept The wedding is furnished with guests." Num

bers call themselves the disciples of Christ, and outwardly embrace his religion. But as St. Paul tells us, was the case with the Jews, "they were not all Israel, which are of Israel ;"a so it is in the Christian Church : they are not all true Christians who profess to be so. Not all who appear desirous of sharing the feast, have on the Wedding Garment. The parable indeed, describes but one offender among all the company assembled. In this respect however we are not to consider it as intending to convey an exact representation of the truth. The reason why one only is mentioned in the parable, may perhaps be this: not to denote that the characters of the kind described are few in number, and rarely to be found, but to intimate, that though they should be few, they will not, on that account escape detection. Though there should be only one professor in the whole Church of Christ, who has not on a Wedding Garment, yet that one will surely be discovered by the piercing eye of God, which penetrates through every covering, and sees distinctly every heart. One thief, in the whole camp of Israel, was not concealed from God nor was one righteous man in Sodom overlooked by him. Let no one think then that he shall escape detection, because he may stand single in iniquity. As numbers cannot protect, so neither can they hide him. Be he the only one among all the guests, that has not on a Wedding Garment, the Lord now surely marks him, and will eventually expose him.

But what then is the Wedding Garment? This is a most important question, to which I will endeavour

a Rom. ix. 6.

plainly and satisfactorily to reply. It is clear that the Wedding Garment is something, which distinguishes the true Christian from the false one. It is equally clear that it cannot be the outward conduct, which is meant by this expression: for then it would be discerned by the guests, as plainly as by the King. Should any one who professes to be a Christian, live in the allowed practice of any known and open sin, in visible habits of injustice, of impurity, of intemperance, of profane conversation, in the indulgence of malicious and uncharitable tempers, in the neglect of relative duties or of religious ordinances, we should at once clear!y know, that his profession of Christianity must be vain. There would be no difficulty in detecting such a man, for he would carry the marks of his hypocrisy on his forehead. But the Wedding Garment is something hidden and retired; something which escapes human observation, and is seen only by God. And what can this be, but the inward state and disposition of the heart? To have on the Wedding Garment is to have the heart right with God. And when is the heart right with God, but when it is humbled under a deep sense of its own unworthiness; when it rests with a believing trust on the merits of Christ alone for forgiveness and acceptance; when it hates and avoids all sin, and desires to love and please God? This state of heart is the true Wedding Garment. This state of heart is what distinguishes the real Christian from the pretended one. And let it also be remarked, that this Wedding Garinent, like the one spoken of in the parable, is freely offered to all, to whom the Gospel invitation is

sent.

The Holy Spirit of God is ever ready to work in them faith and holiness, and for these ends he is promised to their earnest prayers.

The professor of Christianity, who from whatever motive rejects these offers, remains like the man in the parable, without a Wedding Garment. His heart is not right with God. He is not humbled for sin, but is secretly lifted up with pride. He does not really lay hold on Christ for pardon, but depends on his own merits. He does not hate sin and desire to love God; but in truth, loves sin and hates God: for the carnal mind is enmity against God. Now such a man, while his outward conduct is moral and specious, may pass in the world for a disciple of Christ; for "man seeth not as God seeth." But the Lord sees him to be, what he really is, a whited sepulchre, a painted hypocrite. He sees bim destitute of faith and holiness, and consequently not having on the Wedding Garment.

We proceed to consider,

II. The Trial of the man who was thus detected. Undiscovered, unsuspected by his Companions at the Feast, he was doubtless promising to himself much pleasure and enjoyment; when his hopes suddenly experienced the most bitter disappointment. He was awakened from his presumptuous security, by a question of a kind, and from a quarter, which he did not expect. "The King said unto him, Friend, how comest thou in hither, not having on a Wedding Garinent?" We may conceive his surprize and terror at this alarming question, a question which at once charged him with his guilt, and called upon him to defend it. The very

title indeed, by which he was addressed, conveyed the most severe and cutting reproof, "Friend!" He pretended to be a Friend; but was he really such? Did he deserve the name and character which he assumed? Was he not an Enemy in disguise? What excuse could he urge in extenuation of his guilt?"How camest thou in hither, not having on a Wedding Garment ?" What 'canst thou say in thy defence? Didst thou not know 'that it was required of thee, to have on a Wedding 'Garment, and that to come to the Marriage without one was the greatest affront to the Master of the Feast? How couldest thou dare to act in so offensive a manner? Didst thou presume to hope that thou shouldest escape detection? Didst thou suppose that thy conduct would not be resented by the king, or 'would not be punished by Him?' Such was the import of the question. What answer did he make? None. A consciousness of guilt stopped his mouth. "He was speechless." And this circumstance clearly confirms the statement already made, that this man might have had on a Wedding Garment, if he had not wilfully rejected it. For had not this been the case, he would have had something to urge in his behalf. He might and doubtless would have pleaded the impossibility of obtaining a suitable garment for the occasion. But he knew that such a plea would be of no avail. He knew that pride, and obstinacy, and a criminal disrespect for the king, had been the secret causes of his not appearing in the dress required. His own conscience condemned him. "He was speechless.”. Such will be the confusion of the hypocrite, when