Expositions of Holy Scripture: St. LukeMaclaren, Alexander
Religion
Expositions of Holy Scripture: St. Luke
Maclaren, Alexander
Bible. Luke -- Commentaries
II. Now, secondly, notice the flimsy excuses.
'They all, with one consent, began.' I do not suppose that they had
laid their heads together, or that our Lord intends us to suppose
that there was a conspiracy and concert of refusal, but only that
without any previous consultation, all had the same sentiments, and
offered substantially the same answer. All the reasons that are
given come to one and the same thing--viz. occupation with present
interests, duties, possessions, or affections. There are differences
in the excuses which are not only helps to the vividness of the
narrative, but also express differences in the speakers. One man is
a shade politer than the others. He puts his refusal on the ground
of necessity. He 'must,' and so he courteously prays that he may be
held excused. The second one is not quite so polite; but still there
is a touch of courtesy about him too. He does not pretend necessity
as his friend had done, but he simply says, 'I _am_ going'; and
that is not quite so courteous as the former answer, but still he
begs to be excused. The last man thinks that he has such an
undeniable reason that he may be as brusque as he likes, and so he
says, 'I have married a wife, and therefore I cannot come' and I do
not make any apologies. So with varying degrees of apparent
recognition of the claims of host and feast, the ground of refusal
is set forth as possessions in two cases, and as affections in the
third; and these so fill the men's hearts and minds that they have
no time to attend to the call that summons them to the feast.
Now it is obvious to note that the alleged necessity in one of these
excuses was no necessity at all. Who made the 'must'? The man himself.
The field would not run away though he waited till to-morrow. The
bargain was finished, for he had bought it. There was no necessity
for his going, and the next day would have done quite as well as
to-day; so the 'must' was entirely in his own mind. That is to say,
a great many of us mask inclinations under the garb of imperative
duties and say, 'We are so pressed by necessary obligations and
engagements that we really have not got any time to attend to these
higher questions which you are trying to press upon us.' You remember
the old story. 'I must live,' said the thief. 'I do not see the
necessity,' said the judge. A man says, 'I _must_ be at business
to-morrow morning at half-past eight. How can I think about religion?'
Well, if you really _must_, you _can_ think about it. But if you
are only juggling and deceiving yourself with inclinations that pose as
necessities, the sooner the veil is off the better, and you understand
whereabouts you are, and what is your true position in reference to the
Gospel of Jesus Christ.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Expositions of Holy Scripture: St. Luke — John Shaqi
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account