Men of the New Testament : Matthew to Timothy

<NT:

IMOTHY

LIBRARY

3%rlift> (Enlipgp

TORONTO

Register No.

/ ) #

MEN OF THE NEW TESTAMENT

MATTHEW TO TIMOTHY

MEN OF THE NEW
TESTAMENT

MATTHEW TO TIMOTHY

BY

GEORGE MILLIGAN, D.D.
PRINCIPAL WALTER F. ADENEY, D.D.
J. G. GREENHOUGH, M.A.
ALFRED ROWLAND, D.D., LL.B.
T. RHONDDA WILLIAMS.
J. MORGAN GIBBON.
PRINCIPAL D. ROWLANDS, B.A.
P. CARNEGIE SIMPSON, M.A.

MANCHESTER
JAMES ROBINSON, 24 BRIDGE STREET

1905

U T

CONTENTS

PACK

THE FOUR EVANGELISTS —

1. ST MATTHEW i

By GEORGE MILLIGAN, D.D.

2. ST_MARK 15

By GEORGE MILLIGAN, D.D.

3. ST LUKE 29

By GEORGE MILLIGAN, D.D.

4. ST JOHN 43

By GEORGE MILLIGAN, D.D.

5. HEROD THE GREAT 57

By T. RHONDDA WILLIAMS

6. JOHN THE BAPTIST 69

By J. G. GREENHOUGH, M.A.

7. ANDREW 81

By J. G. GREENHOUGH, M.A.

8. NATHANAEL 93

By ALFRED ROWLAND, D.D., LL.B.

9. ST PETER . 107

By Principal WALTER F. ADENEY, D.D.

IO. NlCODEMUS 129

By J. G. GREENHOUGH, M.A.

vii

viii CONTENTS

PAGK

11. ST JAMES THE SON OF ZEBEDEE . . 141

By Principal WALTER F. ADENEY, D.D.

12. BARTIIVLEUS 163

By Principal DAVID ROWLANDS, B.A.

13. ZACCHEUS . 181

By J. G, GREENHOUGH, M.A.

14. LAZARUS ... ... 193

By T. RHONDDA WILLIAMS

15. JUDAS ISCARIOT ... . . 205

By P. CARNEGIE SIMPSON, M.A.

1 6. ST THOMAS 219

By Principal WALTER F. ADENEY, D.D.

17. JAMES THE BROTHER OF THE LORD . . 239

By Principal WALTER F. ADENEY, D.D.

18. STEPHEN .... ... 259

By ALFRED ROWLAND, D.D., LL.B.

19. CORNELIUS 275

By GEORGE MILLIGAN, D.D.

20. ST PAUL 287

By GEORGE MILLIGAN, D.D.

21. BARNABAS 301

By Principal WALTER F. ADENEY, D.D.

22. ONESIMUS 323

By J. MORGAN GIBBON

23. TIMOTHY 337

By GEORGE MILLIGAN, D.D.

THE FOUR EVANGELISTS

I.

ST MATTHEW
BY REV. GEORGE MILLIGAN, D.D.

ST MATTHEW

IT is impossible to over-estimate the gain that it is
to the Church to possess four Gospels instead of one,
for not only is the testimony to the trustworthiness
of the facts narrated thereby greatly strengthened,
but we are enabled to view these facts from four
separate, and largely independent, points of view.
From very early times this has been recognised.
Thus we find the Gospels compared to the river
which, flowing out of Eden to water the garden, was
parted, and became four heads, compassing different
lands. And still commoner is the practice of ascrib
ing to each of the evangelists a symbol derived from
the four living creatures of Ezekiel's vision. The
order of application varies ; but, as a rule, St Matthew
is compared with the man, because his Gospel brings
out specially the human and kingly character of
Christ; St Mark with the lion, because his is the
Gospel of divine power and strength ; St Luke with
the ox, from the prominence he gives to Christ's
sacrificial work ; and St John with the eagle, because,
as St Augustine says, " he soars to heaven above the

3

4 ST MATTHEW

clouds of human infirmity, and reveals to us the
mysteries of the Godhead."

This must not, of course, be understood as implying
that these symbols are completely descriptive, or that
in any one Gospel the characteristics of the other
three are not also to be found. But they are at least
a convenient method of reminding us that no one of
the evangelists set to work to record his impressions
in exactly the same way, and that our knowledge of
the Saviour's person and work is, in consequence, far
fuller and deeper.

Of this we shall find frequent examples in the course
of the following papers. In the meantime let us turn
without further introduction to the man who has
given his name to our First Gospel.

The Life of St Matthew.

The few facts that are all that we know regarding
the outward events of his life are quickly told. He
was the son of a certain Alphaeus who is not, however,
to be identified with the father of James the Less,
and, while his early name was Levi, he received from
Jesus, at the time of his call, the new name of
Matthew, that is, " the gift of Jehovah" by which
he continued afterwards to be generally known. By
profession he was a " publican " or tax-gatherer,

ST MATTHEW 5

though he was not, as is often thought, in the direct
service of the Roman Government, but of Herod
Antipas, who was allowed by Rome to levy the taxes
within his own tetrarchy. On any other footing,
indeed, it is impossible to imagine a man of Matthew's
keen national sentiments engaging in such a work at
all. And even as it was, his position could hardly
fail to carry with it a certain stigma in the eyes of
his fellow-countrymen, which in turn would tend to
have a hardening effect on his own character. It is
all the more significant, therefore, of the soul of
goodness in Matthew, and of the eagerness of his
desire to rise above his immediate surroundings, that
when Christ's call came to him he obeyed it at once,
and that, too, notwithstanding the completeness of the
earthly sacrifice that was required of him. For if
some of the earlier disciples had been able to return
for a time, at least, to their old homes and work, even
after Christ's first call was addressed to them, for the
tax-gatherer any such course was impossible. He
literally "left all" to follow Christ, exchanging, in
the quaint words of an old writer, " wealth for poverty,
a custom-house for a prison, gainful masters for a
naked and despised Saviour."

Not, indeed, that we are to imagine that this was
the first occasion on which Matthew had heard of the
claims of Jesus. Capernaum where he lived had
already been the scene of many of the Saviour's
mighty works (Mark i. 25, ii. 12 ; Luke v. 24 f.), and

6 ST MATTHEW

at his place of toll he must often have heard the new
Teacher's gracious words and deeds eagerly discussed.
Loftier and purer thoughts and longings had, in
consequence, been awakened within him : gradually
he had become dissatisfied with his ordinary mode
of life, and the atmosphere of distortion and fraud
with which it was apt to be accompanied : and it
needed only one direct word from Jesus Himself to
induce him to follow Him, as His humble disciple.

How faithful too that discipleship proved itself
from the first is shown by the farewell feast which,
as St Luke tells us, Matthew gave in Jesus' honour,
and to which he invited many of his old associates
and friends. He was evidently anxious that others
should share with him the higher blessings he now
enjoyed. And he certainly had his wish, so far at
least as the free offer of these blessings to them was
concerned. For when the Pharisees and scribes
taunted Jesus with the nature of the company in
which He now found Himself, they were at once
met with the rejoinder that it was just because He
was needed so much that He was there. Were any
sick ? He had come as a physician to heal. Were
any sinners ? He had come to call them to repent
ance.

The whole story of Matthew indeed is an emphatic
witness to the truth that the gospel is no respecter
of persons, and that even in the selection of His more
immediate followers Jesus thought not of anything

ST MATTHEW 7

in their outward surroundings, but simply and solely
of their spiritual fitness for their new task.
" Confident in the power of truth," says Professor
Bruce, " He chose the base things of the world in
preference to things held in esteem, assured that
they would conquer at the last. Aware that both
He and His disciples would be despised and rejected
of men for a season, He went calmly on his way . . .
like one who knew that His work concerned all nations
and all time " ( The Training of tlie Twelve, p. 20).

Matthew's first call to discipleship was in due
time followed by his inclusion in the inner band of
the Twelve, where we find him occupying a place in
the second circle of four, into which the apostolic
company naturally divides itself. From the fact
that he is generally mentioned next to Thomas, and
that Thomas is the Aramaic for Didymus or Twin,
it has sometimes been conjectured that the two
were twin-brethren ; but for this there is no warrant.
We know indeed of no single incident specially
connected with Matthew's name in the whole gospel
story, nor has any word of his addressed to Christ
been recorded. The same silence regarding him
distinguishes both the Acts and the Epistles, while
the notices of him in early Christian tradition are
very fragmentary. After his Lord's ascension he
seems to have remained for some years in Jerusalem,
and then to have gone as a missionary to Egypt
and Ethiopia. According to Clement of Alexandria,

8 ST MATTHEW

he lived the life of an ascetic, subsisting on "seeds
and fruits, and herbs without flesh." His death is
usually attributed to natural causes ; but in Western
works of art he is frequently represented as a martyr,
in the act of being slain by the executioner's sword.

Such then is practically all that we know regarding
the personal life of Matthew, and it is in keeping
with its quiet and uneventful tenor that his name
has never occupied a very prominent place in the
outward history of Christendom. None of the great
cathedrals of the world have been called after him,
and it is only in very recent times that we find him
adopted as the patron-saint of any church or social
guild. And yet Matthew has claims upon our
gratitude that can hardly be over-estimated. For
is it not to him that we owe the First Gospel, the
book which Renan has described as " the most
important book of Christendom — the most important
book that has ever been written " ?

In saying this we cannot, of course, forget that
scholars are now generally agreed that this Gospel
in the form in which we have it now cannot have
proceeded directly from Matthew's pen : it bears too
evident traces of being a composite work. At the
same time there can be equally little doubt that one
of the principal documents underlying it is the series
of Logia, or Oracles of the Lord, which Papias tells us
that the Apostle Matthew " compiled in Hebrew
speech ; while they were interpreted by each man

ST MATTHEW 9

according to his ability" (Eus., H.E., iii. 39). And
as it is just these discourses that give the Gospel its
most distinctive character, we can hardly be wrong in
continuing to associate it with the man whose name
it bears.

II.

The Gospel according to St Matthew.

The most interesting question for our present pur
pose is, What is the aim of the First Gospel as a whole ?
What object had Matthew specially in view in writing
it? That question is usually answered by saying
that Matthew as a Hebrew, writing for Hebrews,
endeavoured to present the life of Christ in such
a way as most to commend it to his fellow-country
men. And in the main that answer may be accepted,
though we must be careful not to lose sight of the
evident traces of a wider than a merely Jewish
horizon that meet us in his pages. Not to dwell
upon these, however, further at present, let us proceed
to notice one or two particulars that illustrate his
principal thesis — the development of Christianity out
of Judaism, the fulfilment in Jesus of Nazareth of the
long-cherished hopes of God's ancient people.

(i) The Title which the writer gives to his work is
in itself an indication of this. It is " The Book of the
Generation of Jesus Christ, the Son of David, the Son

io ST MATTHEW

of Abraham" (i. i). The Saviour is not introduced
as " the Son of God " as by St Mark, nor as " the Son
of Man" as by St Luke, nor as "the Word" as by
St John, but as one who has been " born King of the
Jews" (ii. 2). And the emphasis thus laid upon
Christ's kingly dignity is continued throughout the
whole Gospel. The Saviour is publicly set apart by
baptism for His Messianic mission (iii. 13-17). He
gathers round Him the men who are to be His am
bassadors in the furtherance of His work (iv. 18-22,
etc.) He is described as the Son of David with a
frequency which we find in none of the other Gospels
(ix. 27, xii. 23, xv. 22, xx. 30, xxi. 9). And it is as a
King again that He is represented as judging both
the Jewish people and the Gentile nations in the hour
of His future glory (xxv. 14-46).

(2) We are not surprised, therefore, to find the
prominence given by Matthew to the thought of
"the kingdom of heaven" in Christ's teaching — a
phrase which could hardly fail to suggest to His
Jewish hearers the utmost realisation of all their
hopes. Thus it is with the proclamation of "the
gospel of the kingdom " that the Saviour's earthly
ministry is represented as commencing (iv. 23), and
nowhere else in the Gospels is the great sermon
which has been described as " the Magna Charta of
the new kingdom " given at such length.

Hence, too, the parables of our Lord which St
Matthew selects for narration are especially those

ST MATTHEW 11

which deal with the nature of the kingdom and of
its subjects. Examine them, and you will see that
they almost always begin with the words, " The
kingdom of heaven is like unto . . . " ; whereas St
Luke shows a preference for what we may call the
parables of human life : " A certain man had two
sons . . ."; "What man of you, haying an hundred
sheep ...";" There was a certain rich man which
had a steward. ..."

(3) Even more significant as bringing out the con
nection of the First Gospel with the past history of the
Jews, is the frequent reference in it to Old Testament
prophecy. In chap. ii. alone, for example, no fewer
than four facts are mentioned as the fulfilment of
events long since foretold ; while altogether in the
Gospel there are said to be sixty-five quotations from
the Old Testament, nearly three times more than in
any other Gospel.

It may be quite true that in some of these
instances the application of the prophecy is, from our
point of view, rather remote, and that we cannot help
feeling that it was the fact that suggested the
prophecy, rather than the prophecy that created the
fact (see e.g. ii. 15, 17, 23; iv. 14); while, in other
instances, there is even observable a disposition to
alter the prophecy in order to make it correspond
more exactly with some event in the life of Jesus (see
e.g. iii. 3, xxi. 4, xxvii. 9). But this only brings out
more clearly the general attitude of the writer's own

12 ST MATTHEW

mind to link the whole course of his Lord's earthly
history with that older Dispensation, which, as Jesus
Himself had said, He " came not to destroy ', but to fulfil"
(v. 17).

(4) The point is so important for a proper under
standing of the whole conception of Christ as He is
here presented to us, that it may be well to illustrate
it further in one particular instance.

No one can read the second part of the prophecies
of Isaiah attentively, without being struck by the
prominence there given to a figure who is described
as the servant of Jehovah, or the servant of the
Lord, whose career, generally speaking, falls into
three stages. In the first stage the prophetic aspect
of his office is prominent ; in the second, he is
rather the martyr servant, face to face with suffering
and death ; while, in the third, an atoning significance
is added to the thought of his sufferings.' And
without entering just now on the vexed question
as to who in the first instance is thus thought of,
the interesting point for us is that these same
three stages meet us in the Matthsean account of
the mission of Jesus. Thus in chap. xii. 18-21, we
find the evangelist falling back on the very words of
Isaiah xlii. 1-4, to bring the Saviour before us as
the true Prophet, the divinely appointed Messenger
of God, making known the justice and righteousness
of God. And then how clearly, in common with the
other Synoptists, does he indicate the beginning of

ST MATTHEW

the martyr stage in Christ's ministry, when he tells
us that "from that time began Jesus to shew unto
His disciples, hoiv that He must go unto Jerusalem,
and suffer many things of the elders and chief priests
and scribes, and be killed, and the third day be raised
up" (St Matt. xvi. 21 and parallels). While once
more it is to St Matthew alone that we owe the
preservation of the two words in which our Lord
Himself declared the atoning value of these sufferings :
" The Son of man came not to be ministered unto, but
to minister, and to give His life a ransom for many "
(xx. 28) ; " For this is My blood of the covenant, which
is shed for many unto remission of sins" (xxvi. 28) —
words which, however they may be interpreted, find
their closest parallel in the prophetic announcement
of the suffering and yet triumphant servant of the
Lord.

(5) There are many other points which might be
mentioned as establishing the organic connection
which, in St Matthew's mind, existed between the
old covenant and the new ; but space forbids, and
we can only conclude by repeating that, notwith
standing the generally Jewish atmosphere that colours
his work, the first evangelist never lost sight of
the wider aspects of the Saviour's mission. Thus
if he alone has preserved the charge to the Apostles,
" Go not into any way of the Gentiles, and enter not
into any city of the Samaritans : but go rather to the
lost sheep of the house of Israel" (x. 5), it is to him

14 ST MATTHEW

again we owe such evident proofs of the universal
character of Christ's work as are afforded by the
visit of the Magi (ii. 1-12), the healing of the
Syrophcenician woman's daughter (xv. 21-28), and
the great parting commission, " Go ye therefore^ and
make disciples of all the nations" (xxviii. 19).

Nor must we forget that if Matthew, in accordance
with his immediate purpose, embodies the blessings
of Christ's rule under figures derived from the older
theocracy, he emphasises as strongly as any of the
other evangelists the essentially spiritual character
of that rule. If it was a "kingdom" that Jesus had
come to set up, it was a kingdom " of heaven" and
only those whose dispositions were in keeping with
such a kingdom could hope to find a place in it
(v. 3-12) : while from those who had proved them
selves unworthy the kingdom would be taken away,
and "given to a nation bringing forth the fruits
thereof" (xxi. 43 ; cf. viii. 11, 12).

NOTE. — It is not possible to assign an exact date
to the First Gospel, but it probably reached its
present form about 68-69 A.D. If so, the "detach
ment " with which the writer regards the troublous
times through which the Jewish nation was then
passing, makes it unlikely that he was actually
located in Palestine at the time. He may, perhaps,
have been living in S. Syria (see Hastings' Dictionary
of the Bible: Art. " Matthew, Gospel of").

THE FOUR EVANGELISTS

II.

ST MARK
BY REV. GEORGE MILLIGAN, D.D.

ST MARK

I.
The Life of St Mark.

THERE can be no doubt that the second evangelist is
to be identified with the John Mark of whom we read
in the Book of Acts (xii. 12, 25; xv. 37, 39), his
ordinary name John being accompanied, as was
frequent among the Jews, by a surname, Mark, for
use among the Gentiles. His mother, Mary, was a
member of the Christian community at Jerusalem,
and was evidently a woman of some importance
there. It has even been conjectured that it was
the " upper room " in her house that witnessed the
celebration of the Last Supper, and the descent of
the Holy Ghost at Pentecost. If so, Mark may have
been the man bearing the pitcher of water, whom
our Lord bade His disciples follow when they went
to prepare for the Passover-feast (Luke xxii. 10 fT.) ;
and there is an even greater probability that we are to
see in him the young man who followed Jesus at the
17 B

i8 ST MARK

time of His betrayal with hasty zeal, and afterwards
fled with equal precipitancy (Mark xiv. 5 1 f.). The
incident at least is in entire keeping with all that we
learn elsewhere regarding the character of the future
evangelist, and it is interesting to notice that he alone
records it, as if he were drawing from his own recol
lections, and not from the tradition common to all the
Gospels.

We are, however, on surer ground when we pass to
notice Mark's connection with Paul and Barnabas.
As the cousin of the latter (Col. iv. 10), he was early
associated with the ministry of both (Acts xii. 25),
and on the occasion of their first missionary journey
was chosen to accompany them " as their attendant "
(Acts xiii. 5). It was evidently personal service
rather than official assistance in the work that was
specially intended. And the point is not without
importance as helping to explain Mark's desertion
at Perga (xiii. 13), or at any rate to place it in a less
reprehensible light. For he " was not," as Professor
Ramsay has shown, "essential to the mission," nor
had he been "selected" for it by the Spirit. He
was only a kind of "extra hand," and when he
found the Apostles departing from their original
scheme, and carrying the work into a new and
different region than had been contemplated by
the Church, he might well think himself entitled
to leave them and return to Jerusalem.* Barnabas
* St Paul the Traveller, pp. 71, 90.

ST MARK 19

at least seems to have found no serious fault with
his young relative's conduct, for on the occasion
of the second missionary journey he again pro
posed to Paul to take Mark with them as their
companion (Acts xv. 37). And though Paul would
not at the time agree to this, with the immediate
result of a serious breach with Barnabas, he too
learned to forget and forgive.

It was during the apostle's Roman imprison
ment that this occurred, and the completeness
of the sympathy then established between the
two men is shown by Paul's grateful recollection of
Mark's loyalty at a time when he had few friends left,
and his emphatic description of his former attendant
as now a " fellow -worker unto the kingdom of God"
(Col. iv. 10 f. ; cf. Philemon 24). After Paul's release
Mark would seem to have returned to the East ; but
how much Paul had learned to cling to him, is proved
by the fact that when again imprisoned he sent a
special message to Timothy, bidding him "pick up"
Mark and bring him with him to Rome, adding as a
reason "for he is useful to me for ministering" (2 Tim.
iv. 1 1 ), words which, as Dr Swete observes, " assign
to Mark his precise place in the history of the
Apostolic age." *

* The Gospel according to St Markt p. xv.

20 ST MARK

II.
St Mark and St Peter.

Only once again is Mark mentioned in the New
Testament. In his first epistle Peter sent to the
churches in Asia the salutation of "Mark my son"
(v. 13), and the last two words have been under
stood as proving that Mark along with his mother
actually owed his conversion to the Christian faith to
Peter. But the phrase used points rather to a
relationship of a more general kind, and may be
simply "the affectionate designation of a former
pupil . . . who had come to look upon his mother's
old friend and teacher as a second father, and to
render to him the offices of filial piety" (Swete). In
any case there can be no doubt that for a consider
able period Mark was associated with Peter in active
Christian work, and further, that it was largely from
information supplied by him that he afterwards
compiled the Second Gospel.

On this latter point the testimony of tradition is
singularly constant and trustworthy. Thus we find
Papias stating on the authority of one John the
Elder : " Mark having become the interpreter of
Peter, wrote down what he remembered, accurately,
though not in order, of the things said and done by
Christ. For he neither heard the Lord nor had he
been in His company, but at a later date, as I said,

ST MARK 21

in the company of Peter, who adapted his teaching
to the occasion, and not as though he were putting
together a record of the sayings of the Lord : so that
Mark did no wrong in setting down some things as
he remembered them ; for he was careful of one
thing, not to omit anything of what he had heard, or
falsify it in any particular " (Eus., H.E., iii. 39).

With this description, it will be at once admitted,
our present Gospel in the main agrees. For it is
evidently not an exhaustive biography of the Lord,
but a collection of incidents loosely strung together.
And even though there are undoubted traces that
the evangelist did follow a well-considered order of
his own — an order which was subsequently adopted
by the other evangelists — that need not have
necessarily corresponded with the particular standard
or order which the informant of Papias had set up.

Apart, moreover, from these general considerations,
there are not a few points that may be gathered
from the Gospel itself that go to substantiate the
closeness of its dependence upon Peter. Thus we
may notice that it embraces exactly that period of
Christ's history which, as we learn from other sources,
Peter thought important — "beginning from the
baptism of John, tmto the day that he was received up
from us" (Acts i. 22 ; cf. x. 37-41). Nor is it without
significance that it is to Mark alone that we are
indebted for the express mention of Peter's name
on certain interesting occasions in the Lord's history

22 ST MARK

(see e.g. L 36, xi. 21, xiii. 3, xvi. /); while other
incidents, which might be thought to redound
specially to the apostle's honour, are modestly
passed over ; as, for example, the designation of him
as the rock-apostle (Matt xvi. 17 f.), the miracle of
the coin in the fish's mouth (Matt. xvii. 24 ff.), and
the special prayer that his faith might not fail (Luke
xxii. 31 f).

Taken separately, indeed, such incidental facts may
not seem to amount to much, but when combined,
and considered in the light of what we have seen to
be the ancient Church tradition, they are surely
sufficient to show that in the writing of his Gospel
Mark had, at least, the benefit of Peter's knowledge
and advice. Himself not an apostle, nor even an
immediate follower of Jesus while He was upon
earth, Mark naturally fell back on the help of one
who, from his place in the inmost circle of the chosen
band, could supply him with that first-hand informa
tion, which could alone lend authority and trust
worthiness to his narrative, and which afterwards
made it so invaluable to the other evangelists in
the preparation of their Gospels.

For there is now general agreement amongst
scholars that St Mark's was the earliest Gospel. It
would take us altogether beyond our present limits
to give the proof of this at length, but one point may
be mentioned. Mark supplies the common outline
or order of events both for Matthew and Luke.

ST MARK 23

Not, indeed, that either of them follows his lead
rigidly; but where the one deserts it, the other, as
a rule, will be found to be following it, so that " on
the whole it may be said, that while, by assuming
the order of St Mark, we can explain the order of St
Matthew and St Luke, we cannot, in like manner,
take either St Matthew or St Luke as a key to the
two remaining narratives"*

III

Date, Place of Writing, and Characteristics of
St Mark's Gospel.

As to the exact date of Mark's Gospel, all that
need be said is that it can hardly be placed later than
the Destruction of Jerusalem in A.D. 70, in view of
the general nature of the eschatological references in
chap, xiii., while in accordance with tradition it must
have been written after Peter's arrival in Rome, and
in all probability after his death in A.D. 67 or 68.

The same tradition fixes Rome as the place of
writing. And there are not a few traces in the
Gospel itself that it was intended primarily for
Gentiles, perhaps Roman Christians. Thus Jewish
customs and usages, with which Gentiles might not
be familiar, are carefully explained (see e.g. ii. 18 ; vii.
3 ; xiv. 1 2 ; xv. 6, 42), and Hebrew words and phrases
* Sanday, Book by Book, p. 387.

24 ST MARK

translated (e.g. iii. 17, v. 41, vii. 11); while a
tendency on the part of the writer to use Latin words
and idioms, such as denarius, centurion, legion, has
often been remarked upon. It is, too, at least an
interesting indirect corroboration of the Roman
origin of the Gospel to find mention in chap. xv. 21 of
"Alexander and Rufus" if, as is often held, the latter
is to be identified with the person who is saluted in
Rom. xvi. 13.

It is time, however, that we were turning from these
general considerations to notice one or two of the
more special characteristics of the Gospel.

(i) In doing so, we remark, in the first place, that
it is the gospel of action. St Matthew's Gospel is
largely occupied, as we have seen, with the record of
the teaching of Jesus : St Mark, on the other hand,
records His works rather than His words. With the
exception of the eschatological discourse in chap, xiii.,
he narrates no long discourses, and only four parables ;
whereas he describes no fewer than eighteen miracles,
one half, that is, of the whole number recorded in the
Gospels. Or, to put it in another way, the calculation
has been made that of St Matthew's narrative one-
fourth is occupied with action, of St Luke's one-third,
and of St Mark's one-half.

Equally characteristic too of the Second Gospel is
the rapid, forcible manner in which this action is
represented as taking place, as shown, for example,
by the frequent occurrence of the Greek word that

ST MARK 25

is variously translated " straightway," " immediately,"
"forthwith," and the evangelist's studied preference
for the present tense in his narrative, as if the whole
scene in its living reality were rising up before him
(e.g. ii. 3-10; xv. 20-24).

(2) Closely related to this is the vivid, pictorial char
acter of the Gospel. In sharp clear outline, by a few
vigorous touches, Mark depicts for us the varied
scenes through which Christ passes, supplying us with
not a few graphic details which but for him would
have been lost. Thus he alone tells us that during
the storm Jesus "was in the stern, asleep on the
cushion " (iv. 38) ; that at the feeding of the five
thousand He commanded all to sit down "by com
panies upon the green grass " (vi. 39) ; that when
walking on the sea Jesus " ivould have passed by" His
disciples (vi. 48) ; that at the Transfiguration " His
garments became glistering, exceeding white" (ix. 3);
that at the healing of Bartimaeus, the blind man
" casting away his garment, sprang up" and came to
Jesus (x. 50) ; and that it was " over against the
temple" in full view therefore of the doomed buildings,
that Jesus delivered His great prophecy (xiii. 3).

Characteristic too of Mark is the manner in which
he draws attention to the effect that the Saviour's acts
had upon those who witnessed them, as in that
graphic verse in the first chapter, "And they were all
amazed, insomuch that they questioned among them
selves, saying, What is this? a new teaching! with

26 ST MARK

authority He commandetk even the unclean spirits^ and
they obey Him" (ver. 27), and the still more striking
description of the awe excited in the minds of the
Twelve, as the Saviour set His face for the last time
towards Jerusalem, " And Jesus was going before them :
and they were amazed ; and they that followed were
afraid" (x. 32). It was as if already some premoni
tion of the impending disaster had come home to
their minds, and a glimpse had been vouchsafed
to them into the Saviour's awful " majesty of
sorrow."

(3) All this too is in entire keeping with what we
have already seen to be the leading conception of
Christ in Mark's Gospel. It is as " the lion of the
tribe of Judah " that He is here brought before us, and
on every page we find traces of His Divine power
and wisdom. " He knows precisely what is passing in
men's minds and hearts, and the circumstances of
their lives (ii. 5, 8 ; viii. 17; ix. 3 f. ; xii. 15, 44) ; He
foresees and foretells the future, whether His own
(viii. 31, 38) or that of individual men (x. 39, xiv. 27)
and communities (xiii. I ff.) ; in the most trying
situations He manifests absolute wisdom and self-
adaptation ; even in His death He extorts from a
Roman centurion the acknowledgment that He was a
supernatural person (xv. 39) " (Swete).

And yet along with this the Saviour's real humanity
is never lost sight of, as when we read of His being
"grieved" (iii. 5), or " moved with indignation " (x. 14),

ST MARK 27

or when we discover that He required sleep (iv. 38),
or could hunger (xi. 12).

But it is impossible to go on multiplying instances.
Enough that throughout the whole of his vivid narra
tive St Mark brings before us One who is at once
man and more than man, " the supreme Son of man
and the only Son of God," so that, as has been well
pointed out, the feeling which fills our minds, as we
close the last page of his Gospel, finds fitting ex
pression in the familiar lines —

" Strong Son of God, immortal Love,

Whom we, that have not seen thy face,
By faith, and faith alone, embrace,
Believing where we cannot prove.

" Thou seemest human and divine,

The highest, holiest manhood, thou :
Our wills are ours, we know not how ;
Our wills are ours, to make them thine."

THE FOUR EVANGELISTS

III.

ST LUKE
BY REV. GEORGE MILLIGAN, D.D.

ST LUKE

I.

The Life of St Luke.

THERE can be little or no doubt that the evangelist
Luke is to be identified with Luke, the beloved
physician, and one of the companions of St Paul, and
equally little doubt as to the identity of the author of
the Third Gospel with the author of the Acts. In
neither, however, of his works does the writer name
himself, and all the knowledge regarding Luke that
we can gather comes from three passages in the
Pauline Epistles (Col. iv. 14; Philemon 24; 2 Tim.
iv. n), and from what are generally known as the
" we " sections of the Acts. The first of these passages
by distinguishing between the greetings of Luke and
certain others, and the greetings of those " who are of
the circumcision" (Col. iv. n), makes it clear that,
unlike all the other writers of the New Testament,
Luke was a Gentile by birth — according to tradition
he was a Syrian of Antioch — and further that he had
at one time followed the profession of a physician.

31

32 ST LUKE

It is not impossible, indeed, that it was owing to his
medical knowledge that Luke first attached himself
to Paul, on the eve of the latter's departure from
Troas to Europe (Acts xvi. 10). For without going
the length of recognising in him the real man of
Macedonia, whom the apostle saw in vision summon
ing him to this new enterprise,* what more
natural than that Luke on finding that he could
minister to Paul's bodily relief, should determine to
accompany him on a journey which to him, as a
Gentile, must have seemed fraught with such momen
tous consequences? In any case, a bond of inter
course was at this time formed between the two men,
which was henceforth to be of the closest and most
enduring kind. For though on Paul's departure from
Philippi, Luke was left behind, perhaps to establish
and confirm the work that had been begun (Acts
xvii. i), he rejoined Paul upon his return there
on the Third Missionary Journey (Acts xx. 5), and,
so far as we know, did not again leave him. He
certainly shared with the apostle his first and second
imprisonments at Rome, for it is during the first of
these that we find Paul sending the greeting from
him already referred to (Col. iv. 14; cf. Philemon 24),
and it is during the second that his constancy is
rewarded with the noble tribute : " Only Luke is with
me" (2 Tim. iv. n).

It is impossible to discuss at length here the influ-
* See Ramsay, St Paul the Traveller, p. 203.

ST LUKE 33

ence which in consequence Paul must have exerted
over his faithful companion. But when we think of
what it must have meant to Luke to have been with
Paul at Philippi, at Miletus, at Jerusalem, at Caesarea :
to have stood with him before Felix and Festus and
Agrippa : to have braved with him the perils of the
voyage to Rome, the tedium of a Roman imprison
ment, and the uncertainty of a Roman trial : and
finally, can we doubt, to have been a sorrowing
spectator when on the Roman Campagna the great
Apostle of the Gentiles gave up his life to the
executioner's sword — can we wonder that this long
friendship should have borne fruit, not only in the
historical sections of the Acts, but in the whole spirit
and conception of the Third Gospel ? For his material
Luke might be dependent on eye-witnesses, and on
previously written narratives, but the whole tone of
his writing, the stress which in a more marked degree
than his predecessors he laid on the gracious and
universal aspects of Christianity — all that he owed to
the man who in the fine phrase of an old Latin father
was his true " illuminator." *

Regarding the outward details of Luke's life after
Paul's death nothing is known with certainty, and
little reliance can be placed on the traditions that
have gathered round him. The most interesting of
these is the old legend that represents him as a
painter, and which has led to his being chosen as the

* Tertullian, Adv. Marc., iv. 2.

C

34 ST LUKE

patron-saint of so many academies of art. Certain
very ancient pictures, notably a Madonna in the
Church of S. Maria Maggiore at Rome, are actually
claimed as his workmanship. But his influence over
Christian art is placed on a surer footing, when we
remember how readily painters, both in early and
mediaeval times, selected their subjects from the
scenes depicted in the pages both of his Gospel and
of the Acts. As a modern poet has sung :

" Give honour unto Luke, evangelist,
For he it was (the ancient legends say)
Who first taught Art to fold her hands and pray." *

II.

The Place of Writing and Date of St Luke's
Gospel.

Many places have been claimed as the possible
scene of the writing of the Third Gospel, but there is
no evidence for or against any one of them. While,
as regards date, we must be content with assigning it
to some year between 75 and 80 A.D. It cannot well
have been much earlier, for, unlike the Gospels of
Matthew and Mark, it bears traces of having been
written after, rather than before, the great catastrophe
of 70 A.D. Nor, on the other hand, does there seem
* Rossetti.

ST LUKE 35

to be any justification for placing it later than 80 A.D.
Luke, as a careful historian, would desire to write
while the impressions he had derived from eye
witnesses and others were still fresh in his mind.
And there is further a general agreement among
scholars, that if his Gospel had not appeared until the
close of the first century, it would have shown marked
differences both in form and in the use of certain
theological terms.

III.
The General Character of the Gospel.

Passing now to the Gospel itself, we are in the
fortunate position of finding a Preface attached to it,
which states very clearly why and how it was written.
The evangelist, so he tells us, had found in existence
a number of narratives, embracing the main facts of
Christ's life, as these had been handed down by oral
tradition. With these narratives in themselves, he
had no fault to find ; but they were manifestly
inadequate for those who desired a full and detailed
account of the Saviour's ministry. That account he
found himself in a position to give, having first care
fully investigated all the facts from the very begin
ning, and so he wrote his Gospel setting forth in order
the evangelic tradition.

This Gospel he addressed, as the Preface further

36 ST LUKE

tells us, to a certain " most excellent Theophilus."
Who this Theophilus was, we do not know. From
the fact that his name means literally "dear to
God," some have thought that it is an ideal or
imaginary name, and that Luke intended it simply
as a designation for all lovers of God. But it is
more probable that Theophilus was a real person,
as we find the epithet assigned to him used
elsewhere in addressing high Roman officials (see
Acts xxiii. 26, xxiv. 3, xxvi. 25). This does
not, however, preclude the possibility of Luke's
having had also a wider circle of readers in view,
and especially, we may say, of Gentile readers.
For while, Matthew wrote principally from a Jewish
standpoint, and consequently his Gospel would find
most favour amongst the Jews ; and Mark was
thinking apparently, in the first instance, of the
Christians of the West ; Luke, as a Gentile, presented
the story of the Saviour's life in the way most
likely to commend it to Gentiles.

Of this there are many proofs. Thus, not to
dwell upon his explanations of Jewish customs, and
of the geography of Palestine which would be
necessary for readers who were not themselves Jews,
how often do we find him recording words and
deeds which would be of special interest to the
Gentile nations of the world. He alone preserves
the prophecy of Simeon regarding the infant Christ,
that He was come " a light for revelation to the

ST LUKE 37

Gentiles" as well as "the glory of God's people Israel"
(ii. 32): he alone adds to the Baptist's warning
message the words, " and all flesh shall see the
salvation of God" (iii. 6) : he alone introduces the
Saviour's references to Elijah dwelling with the widow
in the heathen city of Zarephath, and to Elisha
cleansing the Syrian Naaman (iv. 26, 27) : and he
alone, in recording Christ's parable of the fig tree,
represents Him as saying not only "Behold the fig
tree" (cf. Matt. xxiv. 32; Mark xiii. 28), a favourite
emblem of the Jewish people, but " Behold the fig
tree, and all the trees" (xxi. 29). Everywhere, in
short, it is Christ as the desire of all nations, the
Saviour of the world, who is brought before us, and
it is upon the universal character of His mission,
as the gracious and pitiful Son of man, that the
main stress is laid.

IV.

St Luke's Conception of the Person and Work
of Christ.

(i) In none of the other Gospels is the human side
of our Lord's Person so prominent. Thus it is to
Luke that we owe many of the most interesting
details regarding the birth and infancy of Jesus,
such as the annunciation, the meeting of Mary
and Elizabeth, the message to the shepherds, and

38 ST LUKE

the presentation in the Temple. He again it is
who alone breaks the silence of the first thirty
years by the description of the Boy Christ's visit
to Jerusalem and His meeting with the doctors
(ii. 41-51), nor does he even hesitate to ascribe to
Jesus a perfect human development, as he tells us
that He "advanced in wisdom and stature, and in
favour with God and men" (ii. 52).

There is, too, throughout the whole Gospel more
frequent reference than elsewhere to the human
feelings of our Lord. The often repeated mention
of the prayers of Jesus is in itself evidence of this.
On at least nine separate occasions, apart from the
giving of the Lord's Prayer, which was intended
rather for the disciples' use, we are told how our
Lord prayed — the most important of these being
at His Baptism, before the calling of the twelve
Apostles at His Transfiguration ; on the Cross for
His murderers ; and with His last breath. So real
was the earthly Redeemer's dependence upon God :
so complete His resignation to His heavenly Father's
will.

(2) Nor is the humanity of our Lord less prominent
in the character of the mission that Luke ascribes to
Him. That is above all else a mission of grace, a
coming "to seek and to save that which was lost"
(xix. 10). Thus it is very significant that the
evangelist who, in the early part of his Gospel at
any rate, follows closely the order of Mark, in one

ST LUKE 39

signal instance departs from it, and antedates Christ's
preaching in the synagogue at Nazareth, that in
"the words of grace" there spoken, he may have a
fitting frontispiece for his whole Gospel (Luke iv. 16 ff. ;
cf. Mark vi. i ff.) And it is to the same cause that
we may ascribe the preservation by Luke of such
stories as those of the woman that was a sinner
(vii. 36-50), of Zaccheus (xix. i-io), and of the
penitent thief (xxiii. 39-43) ; of such parables as
the good Samaritan (x. 25-37), the Pharisee and
the publican (xviii. 9-14), and the lost son (xv.
11-32); and the further fact that of the six miracles
which are peculiar to him, no fewer than five are
miracles of healing (vii. 11-17; xll{- II~17> *iv. 1-6;
xvii. 12-19; xxn- 5°) 51)- N°r can we fail to notice
the tender touches with which his account of Christ's
miracles as a whole abound, as when to the descrip
tion of the healing of Jai'rus's daughter which he
shares with the other Synoptists, he adds the
significant remark that she was "an only daughter,
about twelve years of age " (viii. 42).

(3) There are various other particulars regarding
Luke's Gospel that have often been noticed as illus
trating still further its large-heartedness and width
of human sympathy, (a) Thus it is peculiarly the
gospel of womanhood. Here alone do we read of
the humble band of women from Galilee who
ministered to the Lord (viii. 1-3), or of the Saviour
consoling " the daughters of Jerusalem " who followed

40 ST LUKE

Him on the way to Calvary (xxiii. 28). Widows, in
particular, are remembered by Luke. Had it not
been for him, we would not have heard of Anna in
the Temple, " a widow, even for fourscore and four
years " (ii. 37), or of the widow of Nain, following her
only son's body to the grave (vii. 11-15), or of the
importunate widow in the parable (xviii. i-S). (b)
The poor, in like manner, have a large place in Luke's
interest, as is shown, for example, by the slight but
significant change in his record of the first beatitude.
" Blessed are the poor in spirit " is Matthew's version
(v. 3) : " Blessed are ye poor " is the version according
to Luke (vi. 20). While, in like manner, it is to him
alone that we owe the parables of the Great Supper,
with its invitation to " the poor, and maimed, and
blind, and lame " (xiv. 7-24), and of Dives and Lazarus,
in which it was " the beggar " who was carried away
by the angels into Abraham's bosom (xvi. 19-31). (c]
It is, however, needless to say, the spiritually needy, the
sinful, and the outcast, whom Luke specially represents
as the objects of the Saviour's compassion. We have
had evidence of this already, and it is unnecessary to
dwell upon it further, beyond remarking how com
pletely it corresponds with the emblem of the ox
which the early Church ascribed to Luke. For what
emblem could bring out better the priestly and
mediatorial office of the Saviour as He is here
depicted ? It is as " good tidings of great joy, which
shall be to all the people " that His coming is heralded

ST LUKE 41

(ii. 10) : it is with the charge that " repentance and
remission of sins should be preached in His name
unto all the nations, beginning from Jerusalem,"
that the story of His earthly ministry is closed
(xxiv. 47).

(4) It is impossible to carry this inquiry further.
Had space permitted, it might not have been without
interest to comment on some of the more outward
features of Luke's Gospel, such as its historical
accuracy, the purity of the evangelist's own style,
and the literary skill displayed in the arrangement
of the materials. But these points, after all, are of
little account as compared with its loving, gracious,
sympathetic heart. Luke is the most evangelic of all
the evangelists. He it is, as Dante remarked long
ago, who describes most fully " the meekness and
gentleness of Christ " ; * or, in the words of the poet
of the Christian Year —

"Whose joy is, to the wandering sheep

To tell of the great Shepherd's love ;
To learn of mourners while they weep
The music that makes mirth above ;

" Who makes the Saviour all his theme,
The Gospel all his pride and praise."

* De Monarchia, i. 16.

THE FOUR EVANGELISTS

IV.

ST JOHN
BY REV. GEORGE MILLIGAN, D.D.

ST JOHN

The Life of St John.

THE fourth evangelist was the son, apparently the
younger son, as (with one or two exceptions in the
Lucan writings) he is always mentioned after his
brother James, of Zebedee and Salome. Of his
father Zebedee we know very little. He was a
fisherman on the Sea of Galilee, but evidently in
easy circumstances, for we read of his "hired
servants " (Mark i. 20), and John himself, in later
days, seems to have possessed property of his own
in Jerusalem (John xix. 27). Of Salome we know
more. There is every reason to believe that she was
a sister of Mary, the mother of the Lord (cf. John
xix. 25, with Matt, xxvii. 56; Mark xv. 40), so that
/ between the Master and His loved disciple there was
I the bond of human kinship as well as of spiritual
V fellowship. St Mark mentions Salome as one of the
women who, when Jesus was in Galilee, "followed
Him, and ministered unto Him" (Mark xv. 40, 41),

45

46 ST JOHN

and we hear of her again as one of the little band
who came to the sepulchre to anoint the Saviour's
body (Mark xvi. i). But the incident in her life by
which she will always be principally remembered is
her request to Jesus, that her two sons should sit,
one on His right hand, and one on His left hand, in
His kingdom (Matt. xx. 20 ff.). It is usually regarded
as the request of a grasping ambition, but is it not
rather the request of an earnest, though mistaken,
faith ? Salome was evidently a woman of force and
determination, and, notwithstanding the sufferings
and death He had just spoken of, was so assured o
the Saviour's future triumph, that with a mother's
natural instinct, she resolved to lose no chance of
s seeking to advance her sons' interests. Had it been
otherwise, how could Jesus have replied in words
which, while condemning her error, recognised the
good mingled with it?

When first we hear of John, it is as the disciple of
the Baptist (John i. 35), and we can easily understand
how the Baptist's glowing message would leave a
powerful impression upon the warm, impulsive
temperament of his young disciple. But there was
One greater than the Baptist, who was to call forth
all the deepest love of John's heart. Listen to his
own simple account of how he first met Jesus : "Again
on the morrow John [the Baptist] was standing^ and
two of his disciples ; and he looked upon Jesus as He
walked^ and saith^ Behold^ the Lamb of God ! And

^

\

ST JOHN 47

the two disciples heard him speak, and they followed

Jesus" (John i. 35-37). One of these two disciples,

/we know, was John, and from that moment he was

Vthe devoted follower and friend of Christ. He was

(one of the chosen three who were present with Him
at the raising of Jai'rus's daughter, at the Transfigur
ation, and at the Agony in the Garden. And even
amongst them he was specially favoured — "more
elect than the elect." He stood with Christ in the
judgment-hall : he was present at the Cross, and
there received from Jesus, as His dying charge, the
care of His mother, Mary : on the Resurrection
morning he outran even his eager associate, Peter,
and " came first to the sepulchre " : and later, at the
Sea of Tiberias, he was the first, with the quick eye
of love, to recognise his Lord upon the shore, though
to Peter it was given to be the first to rejoin Jesus.

After the Ascension, John remained at Jerusalem,
later he was sent to Samaria with Peter, and then
again we find him at Jerusalem, where St Paul
describes him as one of the " pillars " of the Church
(Gal. ii. 9). From Jerusalem, probably shortly before
/ its destruction, he went to Ephesus, where, according
I to tradition, he became bishop of the Church. From
.Ephesus he was banished to Patmos "for the word
of God, and the testimony of Jesus" (Rev. i. 9);
but apparently was permitted to return to Ephesus,
( where he died in extreme old age, about the close
X of the first century.

48 ST JOHN

Every one knows the beautiful story of his farewell
to the Ephesian brethren ; how, too old to walk, he
was borne in the arms of his disciples into the midst
of their assembly, and repeated again and again the
same saying, " Little children, love one another."
And when asked why he said this, and nothing else,
he replied, " Because this is our Lord's command, and
if you fulfil this, nothing else is needed."

There could hardly have been a more fitting close

to the beloved Apostle's life, or one that reveals to us

more clearly his inmost spirit. The disciple " whom

/Jesus loved" was the disciple who loved his Master

> with the most perfect simplicity and trust, and in

V Him loved his fellow-men. There was a great deal

r sLJS^^fe^lili ^e w^°

* penetrated more deeply than any other of Christ's

> followers into the mysteries of the Divine kingdom,

^* did so through the child-heart and the child-spirit

And yet receptive and clinging as John was, he had

all the intensity of a deep and strong nature. He

was a true "son of thunder" (Mark iii. 17; cf. Mark

ix. 38 ; Luke ix. 54). And of him we might say, as

has been said of Dante, that he

" loved well because he hated,
Hated wickedness that hinders loving." *

R. Browning, One Word More.

ST JOHN 49

II.
The Authorship of the Fourth Gospel.

When, then, we turn to the Fourth Gospel, we do so
under the assurance, that if the other evangelists have
given us memoirs, accounts of the outward events in
the life of Jesus, we shall find here the deepest
insight into His inmost character and being. But
then, at the very outset, we are met with the inquiry,
Is the Fourth Gospel after all the work of the Apostle
John ? There are few questions of biblical criticism,
as is well known, which have been more keenly
debated, and even yet, notwithstanding all the labour
that has been bestowed upon it, there is very far from
being general agreement on the point. At the same
time, the general trend of more positive scholarship
may all be said to be in the direction of confirming
the Johannine authorship ; while, it is reassuring to
find so independent a writer as Dr Drummond, after
the most careful and exhaustive inquiry, coming to
the conclusion that the arguments against the
reputed authorship have been found wanting, even
though he does not admit the historical character of
the narrative.* But these, after all, are points which
it is impossible to discuss here with any hope of
profit for the general reader. And I must be

* The Character and Authorship of the Fourth Gospel
(London, 1903).

D

50 ST JOHN

content with merely indicating a line of argument
in support of the traditional view, which any one
interested in these questions can easily work out in
detail for himself.

Thus it can be proved from the Gospel itself, that
whoever wrote it was unquestionably a Jew — then
that he was a Jew of Palestine — then that he was an
eye-witness of what he describes — and then, if an
eye-witness and a disciple of Jesus, that he must
have been either Peter, or James, or John. He was
not Peter, for Peter is expressly mentioned in the
Gospel, and clearly distinguished from " the disciple
whom Jesus loved," who claims to have written the
book. He was not James, for James was put to
death by Herod long before the date when the
Gospel can have been written. He must, therefore,
have been JoJin*

III.
The Object of St John's Gospel.

Assuming then on these and other grounds which
cannot be further specified at present, that in the
Fourth Gospel we have the authentic work of the
Apostle John, we proceed next to ask, What was
his object in writing it? Here fortunately we are

* See this worked out in detail by Drs Milligan and Moulton
in their Introduction to the Fourth Gospel, in Schaffs Popular
Commentary*

ST JOHN 51

left in no doubt. John has stated it for us himself:
" Many other signs therefore did Jesus in the presence
of tJie disciples, which are not written in this book : but
these are written , that ye may believe that Jesus is the
Christ, the Son of God ; and that believing ye may
have life in His name" (xx. 30, 31). Or in other
words, out of the many " signs " in the life of Jesus
the Apostle has made a selection with a twofold
purpose — (i) to show that Jesus is the Christ, the
Messiah, the fulfiller of Israel's hopes, and also the
Son of God, the fulfiller of the destiny of mankind ;
and (2) to lead His disciples to a stronger faith, and
consequently a deeper and more spiritual life in Him.
The book is thus not so much a biography as a
gospel, written to illustrate and enforce certain
truths which the Apostle had realised in his own
experience, and which he felt to be all-essential for
the future life of the Church.

IV.
The Plan of St John's Gospel.

We are not astonished therefore to find in the
Fourth Gospel clear traces of a distinct Plan carefully
worked out, the main outlines of which may serve as
a key to the general character of its contents.

(a) It begins with a PROLOGUE (i. 1-18), which
contains a summary of the whole Gospel, as it

52 ST JOHN

carries us back to the thought of the Word in His
absolute, uncreated Being.

(b) This is immediately followed by the PRESENTA
TION OF JESUS ON THE FIELD OF HUMAN HISTORY
(i. 19-ii. u) — a presentation accompanied by the
threefold witness of the Baptist — of the Disciples —
and of Signs.

(c) Passing now beyond the circle of the disciples
we find JESUS ENTERING ON His WORK IN THE
WORLD (ii. 12-iv. 54). He appears first of all in
Jerusalem, but having been rejected there by the
religious heads of the nation, He turns in consequence
to individuals. Three pictures follow of the manner
in which this work is accomplished — the first in
Judcea, in the case of Nicodemus : the second in
Samaria, in the case of the woman of Samaria : the
third in Galilee, in the case of the believing noble
man.

(d) Jesus then returns to Jerusalem, and the main
part of the Gospel— THE CONFLICT WITH THE
WORLD begins (v. i-xii. 50). Jesus appears as the
Son of God, the Son of man, the Light and the Life
of man. Those who believe are drawn ever closer to
Him : the unbelieving are repelled, until at the end
of chap. xii. the condemnation of the Jews is sealed :
" He that rejecteth Me, and receiveth not My sayings,
hath one that judgeth him : the word that I spake, the
same shall judge him in the last day " (v. 48).

(e) The next division shows to us THE SELF-

ST JOHN 53

REVELATION OF JESUS TO HlS DISCIPLES. The

world is for the time shut out, and the Master pours
out His inmost soul to His own in those wonderful
discourses of love, and peace, and joy, which St John
alone has preserved (xiii.-xvii.).

(/) They are followed by the STORY OF THE
PASSION (xviii.-xx.). The world appears now to
be victorious, but it is in appearance only. The
Resurrection follows upon the Crucifixion, and the
Redeemer, who has passed through death to life, is
shown in the act of drawing all men to Himself.

(g) It is with a note of triumph therefore that the
Gospel closes. In chap. xxi. — THE EPILOGUE — we
have a glimpse given us of the spread of the Church,
and of the success of all true labour in the Lord ;
while in the typical cases of St Peter and St John the
duty of witness-bearing, alike through active work
and through patient waiting, is laid upon Christ's
disciples for all time to come.*

V.
Characteristics of the St John's Gospel.

i. Its STYLE. Nothing can exceed the simplicity

with which the Gospel is written. The sentences are

as a rule very short, and one often grows out of the

other by the repetition of some leading word. Thus

* See further Milligan and Moulton, ut supra.

54 ST JOHN

in the Prologue we read : " In Him was life ; and the
life was the light of men. And the light shineth in
the darkness ; and the darkness apprehended it not "
(i. 4, 5). How direct too and emphatic the narrative
is ! Take a single instance : " Some of the multitude
therefore, when they heard these words, said, This is
of a truth the prophet. Others said, This is the
Christ. But some said, What, doth the Christ come
out of Galilee?" (vii. 40, 41). And yet with all this
simplicity and directness, the Gospel as a whole
leaves upon the mind of the reader the impression of an
inexhaustible depth of truth, which, however obvious
it may sound to the ear, has ever new treasures to
reveal to those who " ivill" to obey it in the path
of Christian experience (vii. 17).

2. Its SYMBOLISM. The miracles of Christ, for
example, are to the evangelist far more than mere
works of power or of wonder : they are, according to
his own designation, "signs" manifesting forth the
glory of Jesus, revealing some particular aspect of
His character or mission. Thus in the inaugural
sign (ii. i-ii) we are shown the transforming and
ennobling influence of Christ's power, as it is exerted
amidst the joys and the difficulties of life. Two
signs of healing follow, the first wrought in response
to mediative (iv. 43-54), the second in response to
personal faith (v. 1-18). And these again are
succeeded by other two signs in which the Lord
shows Himself as the Giver of sustenance (vi. 1-14)

ST JOHN 55

and of protection (vi. 15-21) to His people. While
the mystical number of seven signs is made up by
the revelation of the Saviour as the Light (ix. 1-7)
and as the Life (xi.) of the world. A concluding and
eighth sign follows in the Epilogue, in which the
Risen Redeemer appears in the joy of successful and
accomplished work (xxi. 1-14).

3. Its CHARACTERS. " The gradual self-revelation
of Christ," says Dr Westcott, " which is recorded in
St John's Gospel, carries with it of necessity the
revelation of the characters of the men among whom
He moved. This Gospel is therefore far richer in
distinct personal types of unbelief and faith than the
others."* And then he proceeds to illustrate this
from the events of the Passion. Three chief actors
meet us there displaying the three chief sources of
hostility to Christ. " Blindness — the blindness which
will not see — is consummated in the high-priest :
weakness in the irresolute governor : selfishness in
the traitor apostle." Nor, again, are the types of
faith less distinct, as when we are shown faith
overcoming the prejudice of learning in Nicodemus,
and the prejudice of ignorance in the woman of
Samaria. While, once more, how instructive is the
contrast drawn between the two apostles, whose
full faith was only reached through doubt — Philip
who "believed without confidence"; Thomas who
" believed without hope."

* 7 he Gospel of St John, p. Ixxi. ff.

56 ST JOHN

4. There are many other features of St John's
Gospel which might be mentioned, but want of space
forbids. And I must simply close by reiterating
that in this Gospel we have the most complete
portraiture of the DIVINE CHARACTER OF THE
LORD. St Matthew may present Him in relation
to the past as the long-expected Messiah ; St Mark
in relation to the present in all the fulness of His
living power; St Luke in relation to the future as
the universal Son of Man ; but to St John it was left
to rise above all hum n relationships and to exhibit
the Lord in His eternal being, the everlasting Son
of God. Like the eagle, his appointed emblem, the
evangelist is always soaring above earth and gazing
upon the mysteries of heaven. His Gospel is an
"echo of the older gospels in the upper choirs."

"Is it for nothing"

— so the dying John has been finely depicted as
saying-

" we grow old and weak,

We whom God loves ? When pain ends, gain ends too.
To me, that story — ay, that Life and Death
Of which I wrote ' it was ' — to me, it is ;
— Is, here and now : I apprehend nought else."*

* R. Browning, A Death in the Desert.

HEROD THE GREAT
BY REV. T. RHONDDA WILLIAMS

HEROD THE GREAT

HEROD I., known as Herod the Great, is scarcely a
biblical character. His historical career lies between
the two testaments, and in the New Testament the
part he plays is legendary. A legend, however, has
a historical value of its own. Why did legends of
kindness grow round the name of Francis of Assisi ?
Because kindness was a great trait in his character.
The after-growth of legend in the case of Jesus
could not have portrayed Him as cruel. Why?
Because history would not allow it. A legend might
perhaps be described as history running wild. The
wildness destroys the sobriety of fact, but the history
determines the direction of the run. It was so with
Herod. If we knew nothing of him but what is
contained in Matt, ii., what sort of character would
we take him to be?

1. Very jealous of any possible rivalry. He is
portrayed as " troubled" because certain men inquired
of the birthplace of an infant whom, they believed,
was destined to be King of the Jews.

2. Very diplomatic upon occasion, diplomatic to

6o HEROD THE GREAT

the point of hypocrisy. He professed he too would
go and worship the "young child" !

3. Very cruel if thwarted in diplomacy. " Then
Herod, when he saw that he was mocked of the wise
men, was exceeding wroth, and sent forth, and slew all
the children that were in Bethlehem and in all the
coasts thereof, from two years old and under, according
to the time when he had diligently enquired of the wise
men'' The story cannot be taken as true in the
ordinary sense. There is no evidence elsewhere of
a massacre of infants by Herod. There is no
certainty that Jesus was born in his reign. Herod
died in the year 4 B.C., and we cannot be sure that
our chronology is wrong to the extent necessary to
bring the birth of Jesus within the reign, nor
indeed is it likely that Jesus was born in Bethlehem.
Everything points to Nazareth as his home, and
most likely his birthplace. Luke's narrative has not
a word about the flight to Egypt, and allows no time
for it. Jesus is presented publicly in the Temple, and
the parents remain forty days where Herod could
have easily caught them. When they have fulfilled
the obligations of the Jewish law they go back to
their own city, Nazareth. There is no possibility of
harmonising the accounts of Matthew and Luke.
And there is but one way of accounting for Matthew's
story, and that is by the theory that it arose after
the establishment of the belief that Jesus was the
Messiah, when it was felt necessary to find in his

HEROD THE GREAT 61

history a fulfilment of texts which were at the time
regarded as Messianic.

He must be born in Bethlehem to satisfy Micah v. 2,
though in reality Micah v., if read through, will be
found of impossible application to Jesus. He must
come out of Egypt, because Hosea had said, " Out of
Egypt have I called my son " (and, therefore, he must
be got into Egypt), though the prophet really was
speaking of the nation, not;of any individual ; and of
a past not of a future event. We may be shocked
at this way of writing history, but we must not apply
our standards to the Jews of the first and second
centuries. Our sense of historic veracity is com
paratively modern ; the ancient world did not know
it. To give an effective presentation of an idea or
a theory was the purpose — the historic sense was not
violated because it was not there, and there was,
therefore, no conscious deception or fraud. The
writer of Matt. ii. believed that those Old Testament
texts were Messianic, he believed that Jesus was the
Messiah, and that, therefore, he must have been born
in Bethlehem, and also called out of Egypt, and he
quite sincerely imagined how it took place. He did
not find it easy. When the angel in Egypt told
Joseph that Herod was dead, and requested him to
return to the land of Israel, there was the difficulty
that Jesus was known at the time of writing as
" Jesus of Nazareth," and if his parents settled down in
the old home, that could not be accounted for. So

62 HEROD THE GREAT

before reaching home, Joseph hears that Herod's son
is reigning in his stead, and he fears ; and in a dream
he is warned of God to go to Galilee, and thus he
came " to a city called Nazareth'' It is curious that
the angel in Egypt was not sufficiently well-informed,
that Joseph did not find it practicable to act upon
his advice, because Herod the son was no improve
ment upon the father, and that God improved upon
the first counsel by a second. It is evident we are
not in the realm of history. In a story of this kind,
therefore, it would be impossible, without other
evidence, to attribute to Herod the massacre of the
innocents.

Nevertheless, it is singularly striking that the
main traits in his character are faithfully given in
the legend. It is only just to Herod to say that
the portrait is not adequate ; but it must be conceded
after making all allowance for his good works, and
deducting something which may be due to Jewish
hatred in the records we have of him, that he was
very jealous, diplomatic sometimes to the point of
dishonest profession, and ruthless in cruelty — just the
kind of man about whom such a legend as Matt. ii.
might naturally grow. Herod became Governor
of Galilee in 47 B.C., and ten years later King of
Judea. He had a very troubled time as Governor of
Galilee ; he had to fight for the throne of Judea ; and
it took him twelve years after that before his power
was triumphant over his enemies. He was a strong

HEROD THE GREAT 63

Roman Imperialist. His jealousy and unscrupulous
cruelty are manifest in his policy. He put to death
all the members of the Jewish Council except two :
he murdered all who survived of the old Hasmonean
dynasty, never suffering possible rivals : to this
policy his own wife was surrendered, and even her
sons were strangled. There are many domestic
tragedies in the history of kings of olden time, but
there is no more bloodstained story than Herod's.
Mommsen gives the house of Herod the sorry pre
eminence for bloody feuds. He had many foes
within and without his own household, but he was a
man of determined will, and of no scruples as to the
means of attaining it.

As to his governmental policy, one of the best
authorities says : " He was governing for the Romans
a part of the empire, and he was bound to spread
Western customs and language and civilisation among
his subjects, and fit them for their position in the
Roman world. Above all, the prime requirement
was that he must maintain peace and order; the
Romans knew well that no civilising process could
go on so long as disorder and disturbance and
insecurity remained in the country. Herod's duty
was to keep the peace and naturalise the Graeco-
Roman civilisation in Palestine" — (Ramsay, quoted
by Usener). It must be admitted that this was no
easy task, and that only a man of very strong will
could have any chance of accomplishing it. The

64 HEROD THE GREAT

intense nationality of the Jews, as manifested in the
Maccabean movement, the story of which was now
enshrined in the stirring Book of Daniel, was by no
means dead, and a ruler of imperialist policy would
have to count with it, sometimes at great cost.
Herod had some Jewish blood in his veins, and
could, no doubt, understand Jewish prejudices. In
many respects he seems to have dealt with much
consideration towards the Jews, and to have shown a
conciliatory spirit. Whether that was for the sake
of the Jews, or for the sake of his position in the
Roman Government, whose policy was tolerant
towards nationalities, it is impossible to say. But
he did secure the Jews exemption from military
service, and he built them their great temple. No
doubt at first many of them would look upon such
a scheme by such a man as sacrilege, but Herod
tactfully let the priests build the actual sanctuary,
and he himself never defiled it with his own presence.
He began the building in 19 B.C., and the work
brought the main buildings to completion in ten
years, though the whole was not quite finished until
63 A.D. — a few years before its total destruction.
Herod built a temple, the most magnificent temple
in the world ! Because he worshipped the God of
the Jews ? No. Because he wished to help the
Jews in their worship, and to develop their own
religion ? We fear not. Some would unhesitatingly
say Herod built the Temple for his own glorification.

HEROD THE GREAT 65

But the judgment might be too severe. Character is
never simple, motive is never single, and it would be
easy to be unjust.

We may admit that Herod had a love for beautiful
buildings, which in itself is a good thing. He not
only built fortresses for defence, and harbours for
trade — doing the useful ; but he built temples, not
only a temple for the Jews but temples for the
emperor and many palaces, and he made them beauti
ful. He also rebuilt ruined towers and cities. A love
of beautiful architecture must be conceded as an
element of good in Herod, and if this was mixed up
with the love of fame, let him that is without sin
amongst us cast the first stone. In our cities to-day,
we should be glad to replace the jerry-builder who
sacrifices soundness and beauty to money by a few
Herods, who would give us substantial and beautiful
buildings because they loved to have them so, even
if personal fame were an element in their motive.
Herod showed some care for the public health too,
in the provision of public baths.

He also developed the amusement side of life.
He was a lover of games, and he liked to see the
people interested in games, as well as celebrating
the honour of the emperor. Accordingly, he built
places of amusement, even in Jerusalem ! No doubt
a certain type of Jewish character would denounce
this as badness, but we cannot consider it altogether
bad. In the Maccabean revolt all the right was not

E

66 HEROD THE GREAT

on the side of the Maccabees, nor all the wrong on
the side of the Greeks. There was value in Greek
ideas and customs, and in the Greek sense of beauty
and joy, which the narrowest Jewish party did not
appreciate. That same type would no doubt carry
their condemnation of Herod for developing games
and other amusements farther than we can.

Another element of good in Herod was his liberality.
We read of his remitting taxes on more than one
occasion. And, if Josephus can be trusted, he cele
brated the year in which his throne became secure,
the year 25 B.C., by converting his own plate into
coin, in order to be able to buy corn from Egypt
to relieve people who were suffering from famine !
In the year of his success, in the time of his triumph,
this looks like generous self-denial. It is difficult
to fit it into our conception of Herod, yet we must
not forget the subliminal self! In a character
normally bad, sometimes there is a rush of some
thing totally different, as if a flood had burst in
the depths. No man entirely belongs to badness.

Again, Herod was capable of remorse, if not of
repentance. It is said that he became almost mad
with sorrow after the execution of his wife. And
though this did not prevent him from afterwards
strangling her sons, still it did show a man who
had a better nature, and whose better nature at times
asserted itself.

All men are mixtures, but most men, perhaps all

HEROD THE GREAT 67

men, have a predominant line of character. Herod
was certainly a great mixture. Generosity and
jealousy; munificence and selfishness; conciliation
and relentless cruelty, strangely commingle. He was
not as bad as he was painted ; but he was bad.
Nature had her revenge upon her indulgent undis
ciplined son. Herod died of a loathsome disease
brought on by his manner of life.

He is a picture of a sad actuality, with a brilliant
might-have-been for a background. If only the good
impulses had been taken as revelation-points of the
possible ! as flashlights of God upon the potentialities
of the man ! as moments in which God was saying,
" That is thy way, go thou in it ! " In the good
points we catch a glimpse of the Herod that was
in the mind of God. Many a Christian impulse
came to the birth in Herod's soul, but we fear the
forces of evil conspired to kill the holy babe. If
Herod had nursed, and cherished, and fed it, it
would have grown to be a saviour in his life, and
he might have come down to posterity laden with
honour instead of dishonour, to brighten instead of
darkening the pages of history.

JOHN THE BAPTIST
BY REV. J. G. GREENHOUGH, M.A.

JOHN THE BAPTIST

"There was a man sent from God, whose name was John.
The same came for a witness, to bear witness of the light, that
all men thorugh him might believe." — ST JOHN i. 6, 7.

WE have been told by one whose authority is beyond
question, that there has never been a greater prophet
than John the Baptist. And yet there is hardly a
prominent prophet of the Bible who does not occupy
a larger place in our religious thoughts. He is
rarely mentioned in our Christian teaching. The
preacher hardly ever selects him as a subject of
discourse. He is just dismissed into the shady
background of the gospel story, and virtually
forgotten. And perhaps it is right that it should
be so, and it was certainly inevitable. He himself
expected it — declared it. He came for the very
purpose of calling the world's attention to another,
and when he had done that, his work was finished,
and he disappeared from the stage. The herald who
comes to announce the king, passes out of sight
when the king appears. The star of first magnitude
is lost to view when the morning dawns, and even

71

72 JOHN THE BAPTIST

the splendour of the moon pales out and vanishes
as soon as the sun has risen in his strength. John
was too near to Jesus, in point of time, to take a
prominent place in religious history. The Divine
One over-shadowed and eclipsed him, and he was
well content to have it so.

And yet when I think of this man and the various
things which are said of him, I almost fall in love
with him, and feel that he hardly deserved to be so
generally forgotten. His ministry and teachings, so\
far as they are recorded, lacked the tender notes I
which make the ministry of Jesus inimitably lovely.
We miss the pathetic pleadings, the compassionate
warnings, the forgiving pities, and the yearning sighs
and love tears, which are so abounding in the gospel
story. John is nearer akin to the fire and whirlwind \
of Elijah, than to the gentleness and the motherly j
touches of the Son of Man. There was more of
I Sinai than of Calvary in his preaching, too much of
{ denunciation and pictures of a wrath to come, and
perhaps too little sympathy with the brighter and
happier side of human life, and such preaching as
that could never have made a lasting impression on
the world. It appealed chiefly to the lower motives
of fear ; and fear, though it restrains and sobers a
man for the moment, effects no radical and lasting
change. The nation was aroused, agitated, violently
moved for a little while, and then fell back into its
former state of indifference and godlessness.

JOHN THE BAPTIST 73

Yet the man himself is always worth looking at.

f He was of heroic build, with a certain rude and

rugged splendour, and his life was a short brilliant

\ romance, ending in pathetic tragedy. His ministry

/ can hardly have lasted more than twelve months —

/ twelve months of thrilling passion, fervour, and

* intensity, in which his words swept through the

land like a whirlwind, in which he swayed the

multitude like a reed shaken with the wind. Twelve

months and then it was all over. The great heart

was chained down in a lonely prison, and the soul

of fire quenched in martyrdom.

I think of John, first, as the Master saw him ; and
then as he saw himself; and finally, as the people
testified of him ; these are three views of the man
which may have some suggestion for us.

I.
The Witness of Jesus.

Jesus spoke of John as " a burning and a shining

• light" : shining because burning. A great many

people shine, or try to shine, in whom there is little

or no inward burning. It is all polish, plausibility,

; outward show, superficial cleverness, bidding for

admiration, intellectual craft and cunning, laying

itself out to catch applause, and to win that ephemeral,

74 JOHN THE BAPTIST

fickle thing called popularity. We have plenty of
men to-day who shine with the short, vivid shining
which comes of cleverness without convictions. Men
who write, and speak, and preach, with an eye on the
gallery and the crowd, always making a stage show
of themselves, tuning their voices and shaping their
attitudes to suit the tastes and fashions of the
multitude, and speaking the thing that will pay,
sell, please, and command the rapturous support
of the market. There is shining enough of a showy
sort, and a readiness to sacrifice every higher thing
for the sake of the shining. But the fire within is
wanting. The fire of intense belief. The fire of a
mighty faith. The fire of a noble purpose. The fire
of a fearless spirit. The fire which God only can
kindle.

That was what our Lord saw in this prophet. He
was " a burning and a shining light''1 The soul of the
man was a furnace, hot with zeal for God, with zeal
for justice and right, with stern hatred of sin and
all sin's doings. The word of God was like a fire
burning in his bones, and it flamed out in clear
piercing lightning, like words telling men what they
were and what God would have them be. There
was a tremendous honesty in the man, and a sublime
fearlessness, which marched straight forward regard-
less of consequences. He respected no persons;'
wherever he saw wrong-doing, he lashed it. The
pharisees and hypocrites writhed under his stinging

JOHN THE BAPTIST 75

wrath. Kings trembled under his rebukes. Soldiers
and publicans, great people and lowly people, were
sternly reminded of their misdoings. Wealth was
solemnly warned of its responsibilities, and the poor
found in him no flatterer. Not a sinner in the land
heard smooth words. It was a voice that called for
justice and mercy, and the fear of a sin-hating God,
and the voice of one, who, because he feared God
himself, feared nothing else.

It could not last long. A burning of this kind
provoked too much fury, and made too many
V enemies. A voice so cutting and so unsparing was
^ sure to be silenced in martyrdom. And it was too
m- fierce a burning. It needed much the softer light
which came from Jesus' face. Yet if we had a little
more of this burning to-day, it might be better for
/ all of us. We have half-forgotten that there was
V some of it in Jesus Himself. We have hidden His
wrath behind His gentleness, and lost sight of it.
Yet in Him also, underneath the fountain of tears
/and pity, there was the furnace fire that raged >
V against sin, and the terrible honesty which flattered
no men, but told them all the grim, unlovely truth:
There is a call for that side of His message to-day.
There is room for prophets of the Baptist kind who
will not sell their pens and voices to gain favour and
a brief shining, but will speak to all men whatever
it costs, the thing that is right and just and true.
He was " a burning and a shining light"

76 JOHN THE BAPTIST

II.
The Testimony of John concerning Himself.

John spoke of himself not perhaps with bated
breath and whispered humbleness as Shakespeare
puts it, for no good man has any excuse for doing
that, but he spoke of himself with a profound humility/
He was the most self-retiring of all the prophets, and
his greatness was in the fact that he disclaimed all
title to greatness. What art thou, the people asked
of him, and he answered : nothing at all, but a voice
— the voice of one crying in the wilderness ; nothing
at all but a finger-post to point men to the way of
repentance ; nothing at all but a messenger to
prepare you for the coming of the King. He was
almost eager to efface himself as soon as the greater
One appeared. I am no light at all, He is the light.
He is preferred before me, for He was before me. I
am not worthy to loose the latchet of His shoes. I
have need to be baptized of Thee, and comest Thou
to me. " He must increase, but I must decrease"

Of course, it was all perfectly true. We who now
see the full glory and majesty of our Lord's divinity,
read all these self-depreciatory words as if they were
just, proper, and becoming. Yet there was a beautiful
magnanimity in the utterance at that time. John
had occupied the whole stage. He had been the idol
of the crowd ; the great hero ; the man with the

JOHN THE BAPTIST 77

name to conjure with ; followed, and for the time
almost worshipped as God-sent, and as the possible
Messiah. And lo ! Jesus came and pushed him out
of all that. His very disciples forsook him to follow '*
the new prophet, the multitude deserted him to hear x
another voice and enjoy a new excitement. And his
day was over. He knew it was the right thing, and
quietly accepted it without a murmur or a thought of
envy, content to fill a little place — to fill no place at
all — that the greater One might be glorified. "He
must increase, but I must decrease"

But it was only a great, true, noble spirit that could
have been capable of such self-effacement It is good
to behold such a man in these days when we are all
tempted by little and great ambitions, when most of
us are anxious to be first if it be any way possible,
and take with an ill grace the second, third, and lower
places. It is so hard to confess without envy that
others are cleverer than ourselves and worthier than
ourselves — so hard to see them preferred before us,
and acknowledge without the least grudge that they
deserve the preference. So hard to lose ourselves in
. a cause greater than ourselves, and to sacrifice all our
! egotism and our love of praise on the altar of a pure
^•and self- forgetting devotion. It is hard even to
worship God unless we can be somehow of import
ance in doing it, and hard for some of us to preach
Christ without calling a little flattering attention to
ourselves. And perhaps the hardest thing of all is

78 JOHN THE BAPTIST

to bear with sweet patience what comes to all of us
more or less in time. We get a little superseded as
we grow older. We get put on the shelf to make
place for younger men. The favour which we
enjoyed is transferred to others. The crowns of
honour which we won are laid on other heads. The
fashion which worshipped us turns round and pays
its vows at other shrines, and sometimes the very love
we gained is given to people who deserve it more or
may be not quite so much. Yet these things are
inevitable. For every one has his day, and then the
evening comes, and other lights appear.

And we all need some of that grace which made
this prophet great — that noble self-forgetting which
rejoiced in the exaltation of another, which did its
appointed work and then modestly stepped aside, that
a mightier and diviner worker might be all in all.
" He must increase, but I must decrease" What does
it matter about the insignificant I, so long as God's
work is carried on by worthier hands.

III.
The Testimony of the People concerning John.

This was what they said when his course was
finished and they looked back upon his work and
words : "John did no miracle : but all things that John

JOHN THE BAPTIST 79

spake of this Man were true." Perhaps there was the
least trace of disparagement in the first part He
did no miracle ; they had asked him for miracles, and
he had disappointed them. He was simply a voice,\
and had never pretended to be a wonder-worker./
But now as they thought of the voice that was silent,
the real weight and meaning of the message and the
purpose of his life were unfolded to them. "John did
no miracle : but all things that John spake of 'this Man
were true'' And, I think, the prophet himself could
not have asked for any other or better testimony than
that. It was what he came for and what he lived for ;
not to show himself, but to glorify another ; not to be\
a light, but to bear witness of the light that all men'
through him might believe, and it was enough if he
had so spoken and so lived as to turn men's eyes and\
thoughts to the Son of God and Saviour. All that/
he said of this Man was true.

I wish that we might all have that witness given of
our lives. Far better that than to have wrought
miracles and created sensations. Far better that than
to dazzle the world by cleverness and genius, by intel
lectual displays, flights of oratory, or prodigious
successes in business. There are not many of us
who give any promise of these things. We are not
likely to make the world come running after us by
anything of the startling and miraculous kind. We
are far too much on the average level to set a town
on fire or have our names shouted from the house-

8o JOHN THE BAPTIST

tops, but by the Spirit of God and the might of
patient prayer we may so live and speak that all our
work will be showing Christ to men. We may be
witnesses of Him whose every word goes home, and
rings with the very music of His tones, and I would
rather have this said than find my name enrolled in
the biggest book of fame :

" He did no great work ; but all that he said of
Jesus was true."

ANDREW
BY REV. J. G. GREENHOUGH, M.A.

ANDREW

" He first findeth his own brother Simon." — ST JOHN i. 41.

THE disciple Andrew does not play a conspicuous
part in the gospel drama. We know him better than
some of the other disciples, better than Bartholomew
and Jude, but not nearly so well as Peter and John.
He is one of the subordinate characters stepping on
the stage here and there to do a bit of modest work,
and then vanishing into the background. He does
not appear to have had any particular gifts. He was
not an eloquent preacher. He wrote no epistles,
wrought no miracles, and founded no churches, so far
as we know. He had none of the holy audacity of
Peter, or the literary skill of Matthew, or the lofty
genius of John. He was never in the foreground or
regarded as a leader. We know him chiefly as the
brother of Simon Peter. He is almost overshadowed
and hidden by the superior energy and ability of
James and John. These were the pillars of the
early Church, while he was but one of its humbler
stones, and yet the few things which are recorded of

83

84 ANDREW

him are invested with a fadeless beauty, and they
speak to ordinary Christians with almost more force
in the way of example than the inimitable doings of
his greater fellow-apostles.

Most Christians feel that St Paul and St Peter are
above their reach in heroic proportions and the vast-
ness of their works/but men like Andrew are the one-
talented men who use their one talent sweetly and
nobly, and show us all the way we ought to go and
the work which we can do.

According to the fourth Evangelist, Andrew and
John were the first men who heard and responded to
the Master's call, the first whom He enlisted in His
little cohort of disciples. They had previously been
followers of John the Baptist, but one day as Christ
passed by they heard that stern prophet speak of Him
as the Lamb of God, and they looked into His face
and felt some wonderful attraction drawing them to
Him, and all uninvited they followed and abode with
Him one day. What Christ did with them and what
He said on that day we know not, but it removed
every doubt from their minds if any doubt had
lingered there. It was a day of revelation, a day of
grace, the most wonderful and the happiest day that
these men had yet known, for they had found the
Saviour of the world who was to make all the world
new to them.

And then we have the simple and affecting incident
recorded. Andrew had no sooner made his great

ANDREW 85

discovery, than he burned to impart the secret to
others. And what better place to begin than at home.
Simon and he had grown up together, shared each
other's thoughts, talked together often about the
coming of the Messiah, and it was right that this
brother should be first made partaker of the joy.
Quickly therefore he sought him and passed on the
glad tidings — " Brother, I have found the Christ, come
with me and let us follow Him together," and he
brought him to Jesus, and from that hour they trod
the higher path together. And now, taking the
thoughts suggested here, let me say first —

I.

The Church was built and the Kingdom of Christ
extended mainly by men like Andrew.

The real powers of the Church were not men who
could harangue crowds or arouse congregations by
their fervid appeals, but ' ho could talk to a brother, a
friend, a companion, a neighbour about the wonderful
love and .beauty of Jesus Christ, and out of the
fulness of their own joys testify to those nearest them
of the new life which they had found. It was in that
way chiefly, and not by the orators of the Church that
Christianity was spread in the early days. A man
who had realised the blessedness of it passed it on to

86 ANDREW

the one next to him. It went like a forest fire, each
tree kindled set fire to another. Each convert was as
good as two, for each one made a second. The
Christian plant, like every other, propagated itself; the
flower of its joy dropped seed as it ripened into fruit.
Prisoners whispered the glad secret to their gaolers,
soldiers to their comrades, servants to their masters,
women to every one who would listen. Each saved
soul was eager to save another, eager to pluck a
brand from the burning and win a jewel for Christ.
So the work went on, so the army of the Lord grew,
so the great Roman Empire was slowly subdued
under the Cross, and Christianity made the ruling
faith of the world.

Inspired Apostles had their part in it, great
preachers like St Paul and Apollos, Bishops like
Polycarp and Ignatius ; but the bulk of the work was
done by men and women of the Andrew type, who
simply laid hold of the nearest friend or stranger and
pulled them by gentle persuasion to the Saviour.
And if the whole army of Christians were earnest
enough to do that to-day, there are some standing
here who would not taste of death until they saw a
mighty coming of the Kingdom of God.

ANDREW 87

II.

When a man is truly and wholly converted to
Christ, he shows it by bearing witness.

The day after Andrew's conversion was the day on
which he became a soul-winner. The new-found life
in Christ always longs to impart itself. The wonder
ful things which Christ whispers to a man in secret
burn within him until he can tell them to other ears.
When the pilgrim in Bunyan's story had been
relieved of his burden as he knelt before the Cross his
joy was so great that he wanted to tell it to the trees,
and stars, and water-brooks, and birds ; to breathe it
out to everything and every one.

We are all like that when Christ's revelation
first awakens us. We feel as if it were robbery to
keep the joy to ourselves — we want to share it. It is
a sort of wealth that increases by free distribution —
the more we give the more we have. All the purest
joys indeed are of this kind. They are not like the
miser's sordid greed, or the ambitious man's delight in
power which become less for them if others have part
in them. All the highest joys we want to share with
our fellow-men as soon as we find them. He who
discovers a new truth wants at once to proclaim it to
the world, the more people he can get to see and
believe it the greater his joy. So when you are listen
ing to some exquisite song, drinking in heavenly

SS ANDREW

harmonies you are glad to know that other ears
are taking in the melody, and other hearts feeling
the rapture. And when you are looking on some
choice work of art, or gazing on a fair scene of
nature, or reading some book of a master mind,
you want others to have a share in your delight
And this is above all things true of Christian

. • \V- are impatient be make others fed i:. I:
cannot be hoarded If we keep it all to ourselves
it disappears, as if robbers had filched it away. A
man hardly knows what it is to be forgiven of God
and loved of Jesus Christ, unless his heart beats
with desire to have the forgiveness and love brought
within the reach of others. He wants the whole
world to taste the riches of this grace. And not
until all our Christian fervour cools down, and the
name of Jesus has lost most of its charm, does
this desire lose its intensity. We are always more
or less like Andrew, anxious to bear our witness
so long as Christ's power in us retains its vitality,
strength, and blessedness.

III.

An earnest man finds his field of work close to
him, waiting at his feet.

Andrew did not wait until the Master had given
him full equipment and training, until the Master

ANDREW 89

had ordained him to be a preacher and apostle, and
sent him out into the broad fields of Judea and Gali
lee missionising — that came afterwards — but before
that came he first found his own brother Simon.

I meet with young men and young women who
are ambitious to engage in missionary work or to
enter the ministry. They are all on fire with the
romance of missions ; they want to go to those
vast mysterious regions where multitudes sit in
darkness, or to prove their preaching gifts before
great audiences at home ; and, meanwhile, they almost
despise the humbler evangelical work which is waiting
at their own doors. But the first proof that they
are fit for the larger call is found in their willingness
to answer the smaller and immediate call If a man
has not a passion for souls, the Lord will not send
him anywhere, and if he has this passion it will
glow and burn everywhere. Men who will not work
for Christ until some great occasion comes, never
really begin to work for Him at all If your hearts
are right, service will beckon to you at every step ;
you will not wait for some great thing to do, you
will do what you can now with your friends and
fellow- work men — ay, and your own home.

Andrew commenced there in the family circle
with the brother whom he loved. He did it almost
instinctively — affection impelled him. He knew this
brother, understood his nature, felt that there was
the making in him of a brave disciple, and especially

go ANDREW

could not bear to think that a deep, wide gulf should
come between them ; that he should walk with Christ,
and his brother be far off on the other side ; that
he should be enriched with this new divine treasure,
and his brother remain poor. His heart went after
Peter, and he brought him to Jesus.

Every zealous Christian wants to begin there. He
wants to make his light shine as a witness there among
his own kinsfolk. For these are, and must be more
to us than others — the children, brethren, parents,
husband, and wife. No one, whether young or old,
can rejoice in the light and love of God without
anxiety and intense desire to make every member
of the home circle partner with him in these things.
It is always painful to think that they are separated
from us by a barrier of unbelief; that they who have
so many dear things in common with us have no
communion with us in the best and dearest thing
of all. And every Christian who thinks seriously of
this, finds it such a trouble to him that he cannot
help bearing some sort of witness for Christ in the
home. Never does he kneel in prayer without
supplicating for the near and dear ones. He longs
to have them persuaded. Oh, yes, and he will
endeavour, God helping him, to make his whole life
in the home a speaking witness for Christ — a gospel
that utters itself either in words or without words —
a gospel that shows itself in sympathy, forbearance,
kindly actions, gentleness, cheerfulness, unselfishness.

ANDREW 91

Let us ask ourselves if we are doing this work for
the Master at home. Are we praying for those
about us, and proving the reality of our prayers by
corresponding conduct? Are we in our daily life
commending the grace of the Lord Jesus and proving
that His power can control temper, and keep the
tongue well governed, and infuse a spirit of service
and self-forgetfulness into the very routine of common
actions ?

Alas, there are some Christians whose ordinary
lives rather drive their kindred away from Christ than
draw them. And they are so conscious, moreover,
of the inconsistency between their professions and
practice that it makes them dumb. They cannot
say to their brother, sister, or child, Be Christian as
we are. May God give us all the magnetic power
of sweet Christian living, that we may draw those
we love to Christ.

And whilst doing that work at home let us try
to remember that the sphere about us is always a
workshop for God's true workman. In a world where
there is so much evil, so much religious indifference,
so many who do not love God, one can hardly take
a step, but he hears a call and finds some Christlike
service inviting him. Wherever there is someone
to pray for, someone to help, someone to teach, there
is a field and place in which to gather grain for the
Master, to realise the blessedness of well-doing, and to
prepare for the Master's well-done in the evening time.

NATHANAEL
BY REV. ALFRED ROWLAND, D.D., LL.B.

NATHANAEL

NATHANAEL was one of the least distinguished of
our Lord's apostles. Good and faithful servant
though he doubtless was, he is little more than a
name in the Church's history. Yet he was a beloved
friend of Jesus Christ, who commended him for the
simplicity and gentleness of his character. This
should be an encouragement to those of us who are
not endowed with exceptional gifts, and have no
opportunities for brilliant service. The great Captain
of our Salvation watches us constantly, and will
reward as generously the most obscure private in
the ranks of His army as the field-officer whose
generalship is the admiration of the world.

This is suggested, not only by the comparative
obscurity of Nathanael, but by the method of his
calling to discipleship, which was the result of a quiet
talk with his friend, Philip of Bethsaida. Indeed, all
the first enlistments in the Church were due to
private conversations rather than to public appeals
from eloquent and learned men. Andrew, the village
fisherman, having discovered the Messiah, at once

96 NATHANAEL

made the fact known to his own brother, Simon, and
brought him to Jesus, little thinking that he was thus
winning for the Christian Church one of its most
distinguished leaders. Similarly, Philip, who had
just been called by Jesus Himself, immediately went
to Nathanael, who was like-minded in his expecta
tion, and said, "we have found Him, come and see
Him for yourself." Such work as that is not outside
the range of any one's powers. There are none to
whom it is impossible to speak of Christ to a comrade
at school, or in the home, or in the business ; and we
must never neglect opportunities for doing this in our
eager desire to discover occasions for more brilliant
and effective service. Fidelity in this may have
more far-reaching effect than we imagine. As the
rough hand of a poor Kaffir picked up the first
diamond discovered in South Africa, so the poorest
and most illiterate may find and win those who shall
be as a diadem in the hand of the Lord, in the day
when He makes up His jewels.

In the New Testament Nathanael is never
mentioned except in the Gospel of John, and there
only on the occasions of his call, and of his comrade
ship with other apostles, as they went out fishing
on the Sea of Tiberias, after our Lord's resur
rection. But we may confidently identify him with
Bartholomew, whose name is never mentioned by
John, while that of Nathanael is omitted by
Matthew, Mark, and Luke. Possibly his full name

NATHANAEL 97

was " Nathanael Bartholomew," the son of Tholmai,
just as Simon was called Bar-Jona, and Joses
Barnabas. This conjecture is confirmed by the fact
that as Nathanael is associated by John with Philip,
so in each of the other Gospels Bartholomew is
mentioned immediately after Philip, just as Andrew
was associated with his brother Simon, and James
with his brother John.

But quite independently of this conjectural identi
fication of the two names, we may learn a good deal
of Nathanael's character from the striking interview
described so graphically in the first chapter of John's
Gospel. In it this disciple appears as a noble
example to all seekers after truth.

Most intelligent men are eager to assume that e
in some sphere of thought. They spare no pains to
discover the truth about disputed incidents in history,
or to determine abstruse problems in natural science.
If any country is unknown, men are ready to explore
it, whether it lies among hostile tribes or in the most
inhospitable climes. And to gain accurate or inter
esting information about passing events, newspaper
editors will send out their correspondents regardless
of cost.

No doubt all this is right and good, but the best of
these discoveries pales in glory when compared with
the truths of a Divine Revelation such as we have in
Jesus Christ. It is possible for men to live happy
and noble lives, as many of our forefathers didr

G

98 NATHANAEL

without any conception of those facts in science or in
geography which we regard as among the triumphs
of human research. But it profoundly affects char
acter and destiny to know what we ourselves are, and
may yet become ; to learn the nature and results of
sin, and how it may be pardoned and conquered ; and
above all to know God, whom to know is life ever
lasting, and to understand His disposition towards
us, and His purposes concerning us. It was such
knowledge as this which Nathanael had been seeking
in the Old Testament Scriptures, in Rabbinical lore,
and in his own consciousness, and it was this which
he found in Christ Jesus, the teacher who came
from God, the revealer and representative of the
unseen Father, so that it was with exultant adoration
he fell at His feet, exclaiming, " Rabbi , Thou art the
Son of God ; Thou art the King of Israel !"

It may be well to discover the characteristics of this
successful seeker after the highest truth. The most
fundamental of these, which gave stability to all the
others, was his absolute SINCERITY. This is an
essential to every truth-seeker, whatever his sphere
of research may be. Unhappily, students of Scripture
are often surpassed by other investigators in the
influence they allow to it. A scientific man would
lose his reputation if he was so dominated by a
preconceived theory as to ignore, or refuse to publish,
facts which seemed in conflict with it. But above
all others, Christ, the King of Truth, who said, " he

NATHANAEL 99

that is of the truth heareth My voice," demands
openness of mind and transparency of character, for
surely this is what He meant by saying, " If thine eye
be single thy whole body shall be full of light."

Nathanael was commended by the Lord because he
was an " Israelite indeed, in whom is no guile" He
was not a guiltless man, but he was genuine, open-
minded, straightforward, ready to acknowledge and
embrace truth directly he saw it. His unflinching
frankness was apparent throughout that memorable
interview. It appeared in the bold question which
honestly set forth his surprise, " Whence knowest thou
me?" and it asserted itself equally in the absence of
false modesty which led him tacitly to accept the
Lord's commendation ; for he knew himself to be
honest and sincere, utterly free from guile.

Such ingenuousness is too rare, and amid the
artificial conditions created by modern society, it is
not easily maintained. It is natural to very little
children, though far too quickly it becomes less
manifest in them, for they are early tempted to
pretend to be what they are not. But while it lasts
(and it does happily remain for many years with
some) it is singularly beautiful and divinely approved.
Probably our Lord was thinking of it when He
said, "Except ye be converted and become as little
children, ye shall not enter into the kingdom of
heaven" In other words, we must abjure guile,
self-deception, and unreality. We should constantly

ioo NATHANAEL

pray for an honest and good heart, which affords the
kindly soil into which the seed of the Kingdom may
fall, not only with the hope but with the certainty of
harvest.

The incident we are considering reveals Nathanael's
EARNESTNESS as well as his sincerity. This had
already asserted itself in his diligent study of the
Jewish Scriptures. Philip only needed to speak
about "Him of whom Moses in the law, and the
prophets did write" for Nathanael to understand
whom he had discovered. They were both so
familiar with Scripture, and had so often talked
over the nature of Messiah's worth and His personal
characteristics, that they were ready to recognise
Him directly He appeared.

The reverence felt by the Jews for their sacred
writings verged on superstition, for they saw mysteries
even in the positions and relations of the Hebrew
words ; but their knowledge puts to shame our
ignorance of the Bible, especially in these days of
general education and widespread reading. Some
of our grandparents were wont to rise early enough
to spend at least one hour each morning in medita
tion, prayer, and study of the Word ; but now,
magazines and newspapers absorb all the reading
hours of multitudes of professing Christians, who live
on the relics of what they once learned of the Bible
at school, or as teachers when they prepared to teach
their classes. But our morning prayer, "Give us this

NATHANAEL 101

day our daily bread" embraces the supply of spiritual
nourishment, and this must be found largely in Holy
Scripture ; yet instead of turning to it daily for fresh
supply, many are content with the mouldy crusts
which were laid by in the storehouse of memory, in
the days of a half-forgotten youth. No wonder
spiritual strength decays in these modern Christians
who have no idea of what Moses in the law and the
prophets did write, nor even of the utterances of
the Divine Master Himself.

It was the earnestness of Nathanael which impelled
him to search the Scriptures, and it was this which
also inspired him to renounce his former prejudices.
His first exclamation on hearing that Jesus of
Nazareth was the Christ, was this, " Can any good
thing come out of Nazareth ?" It was a village which
had never been distinguished in Hebrew literature
or Jewish history. The prophets had alluded to
Bethlehem, in which some striking incidents had
occurred ; but never a word had they uttered about
Nazareth. Indeed it was a place of ill-repute, and
the treatment which our Lord met with there, when
He was cast out of the synagogue by the brutal men
who meant to kill Him, shows that its bad name was
not undeserved. But Nathanael was taught, what we
are slow to learn, that national prejudice is often in
the wrong. It proceeds on the common fallacy that
because some people are bad, all must be. Thus we
condemn Roman Catholics, as if they were all

102 NATHANAEL

outside the kingdom of God, though there have
been, and still are, saints among them, because we
justly repudiate the ecclesiastical system which has
been proved by centuries of history to be contrary
to the true welfare of men. Similarly we denounce
scepticism, and the blatant blasphemy, the cynical
sneers, sometimes directed against our adorable
Master ought to arouse intense moral indignation ;
but this must not blind us to the fact that there
are honest doubters whom our Lord regards lovingly,
as He did Thomas Didymus. The Spirit of our
Divine Master will endow us with broader sympathy
and with the moral bravery which will fling aside our
prejudices even when truth comes to us from an
unexpected quarter ; and those thus ruled will be
ready to learn from preachers and books they once
despised ; and to see their Lord, as Nathanael did,
where they least anticipated.

All earnest truth-seekers will gladly use whatever
means are open to them ; like this disciple who
studied the Old Testament, listened to the pleading
of Philip, and willingly went to see One against
whom at first his prejudice was up in arms — with
this result, that he found in the Man of Nazareth
the Son of God and the King of Israel. Too many
wait for extraordinary manifestations of what is
divine, and meanwhile they fail to benefit by what
is already within reach. They seem to expect a
radiant angel to assure them of forgiveness, while

NATHANAEL 103

they neglect what God has already provided for
their help, some friend of Jesus to whom they
might open their heart, a church in which they
might find inspiration, a Bible long unread, prayer
seldom offered though God waits to answer it. We
must not neglect such helps as these, nor shall we
if with real earnestness we are seeking for wisdom
as for hid treasure, like the gold-digger or the
pearl-diver, who dares not shrink from toil and
sacrifice.

Nathanael had been among the Lord's hidden ones.
He was beloved and chosen before he was clearly
conscious of it. Very significant and very solemn
were the words of greeting which fell from the lips
of Jesus: "Before tJiat Philip called tliee, ivhen thou
was under the fig tree, I saw thee" That declaration
has had different explanations. There is an ecclesi
astical tradition to the effect that when Nathanael
was a tiny child his mother hid him under a fig tree,
and he thus escaped Herod's massacre of the babes
of Bethlehem. But even if that tradition is true, it
was not of an incident long since passed, of which
Nathanael must have been unconscious, that our
Lord spake. He evidently alluded to something
which had occurred under the fig tree, which justified
Him in uttering, and Nathanael in understanding
the exclamation — "Behold an Israelite indeed" ; and
an " Israelite " would mean a spiritual descendant of
Jacob, who was called Israel, because in prayer he

104 NATHANAEL

was as a Prince having power with God. It was as
if Jesus said — " I judge thee from what I saw of thee
under the fig tree just before Philip called thee " ;
and anyone familiar with Eastern customs, and with
Scripture incidents will at once conjecture that
Nathanael had resorted to the shade and quiet of
the fig tree as Jesus did to the garden of Gethsemane,
that he might meditate and pray. It was there that
our Lord saw him, and was most glad to see him.
He has ever been looking for such hidden ones ;
sending his angels to comfort Jacob at Bethel, and
Elijah at Horeb, rejoicing over the seven thousand
loyal to Him, though they were unnoticed by the
world ; and rewarding the half-informed devotion of
Cornelius the Centurion, before the Christian Church
was ready to recognise him. Many since those
days have prayed to the Father who seeth in secret,
and He has rewarded them openly ; or they have
wrestled with the angel till they have been able to

sing—

" I know Thee Saviour, who Thou art ;

Jesus, the feeble sinner's Friend !
Nor wilt Thou with the night depart,

But stay and love me to the end !
Thy mercies never shall remove
Thy Nature, and Thy Name, is Love ! "

Nathanael was not the last to whom, in his secret
hour of worship, the Lord has said : " Before that
Philip called thee, before others understood thee,
or thou didst understand thyself, I saw thee." From

NATHANAEL 105

the eyes of our fellows the beginnings of a new life
are generally hidden. They are a secret even to
ourselves ; not because, like the source of the Nile
before its discovery, they are inaccessible; but
because they resemble the source of the Severn,
which is lost in many little rills on the oozy slopes
of Plinlimmon. Yearnings after God, sighs over
one's sins, longings for a better life, hopes drawn
heavenward by those who have passed within the
veil ; these, which are often the beginnings of a
noble Christian life, may be unrecognised and un-
remembered by the one who experiences them, but
they are all known to God.

The consciousness that all things are naked and
open before Him will help to guard us against the
beginnings of wrong, which are often subtle and secret.
Occasionally a moral tragedy happens. A noble and
well-sustained reputation suddenly collapses. But
though reputation has fallen suddenly, as a cliff in
the storm, character may have been long ago under
mined by the wash and wear of evil imaginations
unnoticed at the time. Therefore we must guard
prayerfully the integrity of the inner life, watching
constantly against the subtle dangers which God
can reveal, because He sees them all. Well may
minister and people unite in the brief, familiar
prayer, " O God, make clean our hearts within us,
and take not Thy Holy Spirit from us."

The experience of Nathanael has one other

106 NATHANAEL

suggestion for us. Personal religion is not always
to be kept as a sacred secret between the soul and
God. There is a time for praying under the fig
tree ; but there is also a time for the open and brave
confession, " Rabbi} Thou art the Son of God. Thou
art the King of Israel!" When a battle is raging,
and victory still indeterminate hovers between the
contending hosts, when men are falling fast, and
the survivors can scarcely hold the ground already
gained, a nation would cry " shame " on any cowards
who skulked in the woods, and withheld from their
comrades the aid sorely needed. And in these days
when loyal comrades in the Church are dropping
in the ranks ; while impurity and drunkenness
and religious indifference are defying the armies of
God, there must be no shirking of responsibility on
the part of any one who can add any strength to
the cause of God. He who has secretly prayed under
the fig tree is called upon openly to accept Christ
as leader, like him who exclaimed, " Rabbi, Thou art
the Son of God. Thou art the King of Israel ! "

ST PETER

BY REV. PRINCIPAL WALTER F. ADENEY, D.D.

ST PETER

"Tu ea Petrus et super hanc petram sediflcabo
ecclesiam meam."

THE visitor to Rome sees this sentence in gigantic
golden letters written round the interior circuit of
the dome of St Peter's. Below, in the nave, he
observes a bronze statue, originally an image of
Jupiter, now christened Peter, whither a stream
of pilgrims is continually coming to kiss the pro
jecting foot, which has been polished bright, and
worn to a deformity by the lips of generations of
devotees. The vast cathedral itself is said to stand
on the spot where the prince of apostles was
martyred. Its bishop, the Pope, claims to sit in
Peter's chair as Peter's successor, from which he
affects to rule all Christendom in virtue of the
right conferred on the fisherman by Jesus Christ.
While it has taken ages for this Petrine legend to
grow up to its present monstrous proportions, in
quite ancient times, as early as the second century
of the Christian era, a considerable factitious import-

109

f

i io ST PETER

ance was attached to the name of the apostle, and
a mass of literature was growing up on the pretence
that he was its author or the hero of the achieve
ments it celebrated. Thus we have the recently
recovered fragments of the so-called Gospel and
Apocalypse of Peter and references to " the Preach
ing of Peter " as another work ascribed to the apostle.
Then those popular fictions of the early Church, the
Clementine Recognitions and Homilies, have Peter
for their hero, as a great travelling teacher direct
ing the churches, and confuting the errors of false
teachers. A Jewish Christian fancy was that Peter
thus answered and humiliated Simon Magus, who
followed him from place to place to hamper his
work ; but it is commonly supposed that the
Samaritan magician is here meant to represent St
Paul.

In the reaction, not from this old-world, long-
forgotten popular use of the name of Peter, but
from the Roman Catholic pretension, Protestants
have been shy of giving much honour to Simon
Peter, and thus this apostle has not had his due.
For really he was the most prominent and important
of all the Twelve. He took the lead among the
disciples from the first ; and he maintained it
throughout in the older circle, though, owing to his
unique relationship with Jesus, James the brother
of the Lord was honoured with a higher formal
status. In the outer region of missionary activity

ST PETER in

(he was only over-shadowed by the more potent
personality of Paul. If it had not been for the
marvellous genius and devotion of the apostle to the

> Gentiles — one of the half-dozen men of all history
who have attained to the very pinnacle of human
greatness — Peter would have to be recognised
V throughout as the chief follower and servant of
y\ Christ in the early Church. At the same time he
is the apostle who most wins our sympathy in the
way of human interest. He is so very human. We

feel that he is

" not too good
For human nature's daily food."

x

V/

v|

(

Like Christian in Pilgrim's Progress he comes
near to us in his failings. The immaculate person is
like the holy place — taboo to the .common mortal.
We shrink from the frost of perfection. That icy
peak is inaccessible, and the chill of its rare atmo
sphere distresses us. The man on the plain with us
is our brother. To be as great as Peter was, and yet
to have such glaring faults as his story reveals,
attracts at once admiration and sympathy. This
man is not merely a saint for a niche in the sanctuary ;
blunders ; he commits himself egregiously ; yet
he has a generous heart, a heroic soul, a noble .
enthusiasm. We recognise him as one of ourselves ^
and yet, in many respects, far beyond us. — *

The portrait of St Peter is vividly represented in
the New Testament, although it is nowhere painted

.

U2 ST PETER

of set purpose. It comes out in the course of the
story in the Gospels and Acts, bit by bit, with many a
touch of human nature, but also many a flash of
heaven-sent inspiration. It is a very individual
character. There is none like it. There is no
mistaking it. We know Simon Peter as we know
scarcely any other Bible character. His nature is
simple, unreserved, transparent. He is too impulsive
to disguise his true self. We see the best in him—
and the worst in him. This self-revelation of his
worst qualities by an impetuous person leads to
injustice. Secretive souls judging by their own
habits assume that there must be more evil behind.
Besides, what is flung upon the surface attracts
attention. One or two faults thus glaringly exposed
are remembered against a person for life ; yet they
may be by no means specimens of his normal
character. At all events, the censor has no right to
assume that other faults of a graver character lie
behind or these would not be displayed so recklessly.
There is no reason for that assumption. In the case
of a frank, open nature, such as we see in St Peter, it
is plainly false.

Simon Peter is the apostle who appears most often
in the gospel story. It is generally taken for .
granted that this is owing to his irrepressible natures
But another reason may be found to account to some
extent for this fact. Scholars are now fairly agreed
in regarding Mark as the primary Gospel on which

ST PETER 113

the two other synoptics were based, and in accepting
the statement of Papias that he derived his information
from our apostle, being "the companion and interpreter
of Peter." Thus we are brought to the conclusion that
our synoptic Gospel record consists in the main of
incidents and sayings that were remembered and
repeated by Simon Peter. It is natural to suppose
that he would remember best those scenes in which
he took some part. Thus without any conscious
egoism he would be bound to appear fairly often in
the dialogue. He never lends an excuse for a charge
that he made the boast " quorum magna pars fuz."
He is as frank and open with stories to his own
discredit as with those that do him honour. This
proves him to be an honest reporter. Certain facts
cannot be disguised. Peter was one of the earliest"^
to attach themselves to Jesus ; one of the earliest to be
^ called and to leave all in order to follow Him. Not
only was he one of the chosen Twelve ; he was one of

inner group of the three most intimate friends

^

who were permitted to accompany their Lord on

certain occasions of singular interest, when even the

'x remaining nine apostles were left behind — in the

v house of Jai'rus, on the Mount of Transfiguration, in

Y the Garden of Agony. If a man so privileged

X undertook to give an account of the life of Christ, he
could not help appearing fairly often in it. Neverthe
less this does not entirely explain Peter's prominence
in the Gospels. Evidently he was quite ready to come

H

ii4 ST PETER

forward as the spokesman of his companions, as well
as eager to express himself and take his full share on
„ whatever was going on.

Peter was one of the four fishermen who were our
*J Lord's first diciples. Before he became a follower
of the new Teacher he had been drawn out to the
wilderness by the fame of John the Baptist. There he
/ had joined the band of the penitents, and there his
brother Andrew, guided by the Baptist, had brought
x him to Jesus. This is only recorded in the Fourth
Gospel ; but it so far falls in with the accounts in the
earlier Gospels as to supplement them, by explaining
how it was the fishermen were so ready to leave all
and follow Jesus at a word from Him. Their
previous acquaintance with Him down by the Jordan,
would have prepared them in some measure for His
call. At the same time it did not mean that there
and then they would have attached themselves to
Him. Thevjiad taken a holiday in order to attend
, |he revival-jmeetings. There they had been directed to
.." a Man of a mysterious, marvellous destiny. They had
I visited Him and had some most interesting conversa-
\ tion with Him. But He was not then engaged on
any mission Himself. Apparently He was a disciple,
not a teacher — one of John's followers. The
introduction was very impressive ; but it did not
immediately lead to anything. Some time passed,
several months, at least. Then Jesus in the course
of His early ministry came down to Capernaum by

ST PETER 115

the shore of the Lake of Gennesaret. According to
/ St John the fishers hailed from Bethsaida, a small
* town a few miles farther east. Perhaps this was their
native place. But Jesus found them at Capernaum,
the town which He made the centre of His work,
^-the headquarters of His preaching-tours. It is not
quite easy to piece together the accounts of the call
of the four fishermen in the Synoptics. Was it after
or before the cure of Peter's wife's mother? Was
Peter called while casting his net, or after the
wonderful draught of fishes? It is really impossible
to settle these details. The important points,
however, are clear enough. Peter was at his work
when Jesus called him : that is plain. And he left
it at once on a word from the Master ; this also is
clear. The prompt action would come more easily
from fop impetuous Peter than from a man of slow,
brooding temper — Thomas, for instance. The
j brothers, James and John, seem to have been in some
| respect of a similar disposition — fiery souls, named
\ " Sons of Thunder," they too were seized in a
moment by the sudden spell of the great Teacher.
We know less of the fourth fisherman, Peter's brother
Andrew. But he was as ready as the others to go at a
word. It was an amazing moment of high elation,
one of those rare moments that do the work of years.
Still, if we are to take the order of the narrative as it
is given in St Luke's carefully prepared and more
detailed account, we shall see that there had been a

n6 ST PETER

special preparation. The great draught of fishes \
after a night of thankless waiting, secured when
Jesus bid the tired toilers of sea let down their net —
only recorded by St Luke — produced a tremendous
impression on one of them. Peter was startled — even
terrified. There was something eerie about it. How
could this landsman, this carpenter from the high
lands, know where the shoals of fish were to be found
better than men who spent all their lives at the craft?
Jesus had reached the man along the line of his own
experience. It touched him to the quick. Who
this strange Person was he could not say ; but there
seemed to be something superhuman about Him. He
appeared to be a visitor from some higher, some
holier sphere. The thought filled the poor fisherman
with shame and confusion. He shrank from that
holy Presence.

" Depart front me" he exclaimed, "for I am a sinful
man, O Lord" Do not let us set this exclamation
down either to lack of faith or to the secret conscious
ness of exceptional guilt. It is more just to attribute
it to exceptional keenness of consciousness in one
of the most sensitive disciples of the wilderness-
prophet of repentance. Publicans and sinners,
persons of a confessedly low moral type, welcomed
Jesus to their table without the least feeling of
awkwardness. Their coarser conscience was not
quick to perceive the enormous gulf that separated
them from their new Friend. Is it not the case

ST PETER 117

to-day that the most self-humiliating penitents are
not the greatest sinners? Augustine's conduct,
previous to his conversion, would not have been
reckoned outrageously wicked by contemporary
fashion ; and nothing in the early career of John
Bunyan indicates that he had lived a downright
vicious life. The later Caesars and the later Stuarts
were men of incomparably worse character than either
of them. Nevertheless, Augustine's Confessions and 'x
Bunyan's Grace Abounding contain heart-broken >
utterances of penitence. It is not every man that, \
after denying his Master with oaths and curses, at \
a look would be so turned as to go out and weep/
bitterly. The apostle who was so suddenly awakened
to a sorrowful consciousness of his unfaithfulness at
the end of his companionship with Jesus on earth
may well have been confounded at his first perception
of the wonderful nature of the great Teacher.

Jesus does not take the humble man at his word. X
There is a way of driving Christ's presence from us ;
we can keep the door closed against Him ; there are
times when He makes as though He would go further,
unless we constrain Him to abide with us. But on
the present occasion the modesty that felt unworthy
to be in the presence of Christ was taken- by Him as
a winsome grace drawing Him the closer to the
fisherman. In course of time Peter would discover \
that Jesus was not in the habit of departing from )
sinful men, that He was their peculiar Friend, that He /

n8 ST PETER

came expressly to call such, and not the righteous.

Peter's sudden confession did not horrify Jesus. He

took the very opposite course to that which the

f trembling man had begged of Him. Instead of

\f departing from Peter, Jesus bade Peter follow Him ;
and He offered the fisherman promotion in his craft.
No longer casting his net for the finny creatures of
the sea, he should become a fisher of men. So Peter
became a constant attendant of the great Teacher,
first as a disciple, then as an apostle, one of the
twelve messengers sent out two and two, among the
villages of Galilee, in preparation for that larger
mission, begun also with a companion, John, but
afterwards carried out independently over a wide
field. In the two years of discipleship Peter was
close by his Master's side, one of the inner group.
He heard the wonderful words that dropped from the
lips of Christ, saw His wonderful deeds, witnessed His
/ more wonderful life. What impression did all this

N make on Peter?

XThe answer to that question appears in the crisis
at Caesarea Philippi. Jesus had then retired with
/ a faithful remnant to the northern borders of Palestine,
[ to what was in fact a pagan centre of fashion, by the
temple of Pan, at one of the sources of the Jordan.
|The early popularity had vanished ; the religious
pleaders had taken offence ; and the general public was
(perplexed and disappointed. Then, after questioning
the disciples as to what they have heard of popular

.xpo
X^ th(

ST PETER 119

opinion about Him, Jesus suddenly asks them
int-blank, " Who do you say tJiat I aui ? " At once
the answer leaps to Peter's lips. He was always the

^ most ready to speech. Perhaps seniority gave him

\i a recognised primacy among his companions. Or it
may be that in this case, as later when first entering
/ the empty tomb, he was the disciple who earliest dared
^ to take a novel step. We cannot tell whether in any
sense he was authorised to speak for the Twelve on
this occasion, whether they had been conferring
together, and had come to the conclusion that was
expressed in Peter's confession, or whether he spoke
altogether of his own initiative. Our Lord's answer
would seem to imply the latter alternative. The
great truth had not been revealed to this disciple by
/ flesh and blood, not by any human agency. It had

\J come as a revelation. God had opened his eyes to
see it. Therefore, whether as yet Peter was the only
one on earth to perceive this truth, or whether some
at least of his fellow-disciples had also been led to
see it, John for instance ; he at least had his Master's
assurance that it was a truth. This confession is
given with some amplification in Luke, and more in
Matthew ; but in both these Gospels, as well as in
Mark, our primitive Gospel, it has the essential state-

jk ment, " Thou art the Christ'' What more Peter saw
at this moment we can scarcely say. This, at least,

/he saw clearly, and declared unhesitatingly. Jesus,
the Nazarene carpenter, the humble peasant, the lowly

120 ST PETER

I man who accepts simple fare in simple homes, is the

f long-expected Messiah, the Redeemer and King of

v Israel. He had not yet claimed to be such. He had

left His disciples to grow into the perception of the

fact. And now one of them at least shows that he

has grasped it and has no question about admitting

it.

V Jesus was delighted with the confession. In
Matthew, though in this Gospel only, we have a
remarkable saying, the saying which adorns the
interior of the dome of St Peter's. " Thou art Peter,
and on this rock will I build my Church" with more
words, indicating the right to open the door of the
kingdom, and to tell, like an authoritative rabbi,
what is lawful and what is to be forbidden. This is
not the place at which to enter on the discussion that
has raged between Protestants and Romanists round
these words. It must be admitted, however, that
some of the arguments on both sides have not been
valid. Thus it will not do to draw a distinction from
the difference between Petros for Peter and petra a
rock, as though the rock were not the same as Peter,
but Christ; or Peter's confession, or the faith Peter
displayed, or the truth which he had just uttered ; for
the simple reason that in Aramaic, the language
used by Jesus Christ, one and the same term stands +
for each of these Greek words. Peter is the rock.

Now, it is a historic fact that at Pentecost Peter was
the originator of the missionary movement out

/as
of ;

ST PETER 121

which the Church came, and later in the house of
Cornelius it was he who opened the door of the
kingdom to the Gentile world. These simple facts
may be admitted without conceding the immensely
greater claims which have been put forward by the
papacy on the authority of our Lord's words to
Peter.

The sequel to the incident in which Peter was so
greatly honoured, or rather the continuance of it, was
about equally dishonouring to him. Immediately
after being described as the rock on which the Church
was to be built, Peter is addressed by his Master as
Satan, and sternly told to betake himself out of sight.
Elaborate attempts have been made to explain away
the significance of the startling words. If we escape
from the refinements of theology and consider them
as they were struck out hot in the dramatic situation
of the moment, they should not seem so difficult to
understand. Jesus had followed His acceptance of
the Messiahship by the first announcement of His
approachingjgjpction and death. This was totally
unexpected; it seemed to contradict and nullify*
what had just gone before. If Jesus was the Christ,
He must be going to come out of His disguise of
obscurity, lead Israel on to liberty, and sit on the
throne of His father David. So Jews such as His
disciples, who had been bred in the popular Messianic
expectations of their race, would be certain to feel.
What then is the meaning of these words about rejec-

122 ST PETER

tion, contempt, insult, death ? To Peter they seem to

(come from an ultra self-renouncing spirit, the spirit he
has often seen in his Master and hitherto always
admired, now pushed to an extravagance which would
undo all. So the ardent friend exclaims against it/
V Now the natural man shrinks from suffering and death.
When Peter protested, he was appealing to our Lord's
human nature, to the human dread of pain, to the
natural horror of death. But such an appeal when it
\( traverses the path of duty, is a temptation. Thus,

Awhile passing as his Lord's best friend, Peter was
really acting as a tempter. Jesus perceived this
at once ; He felt the full force of the temptation ; but
He recognised its evil origin. In the voice of Peter
He perceived the spirit of His arch-enemy. Tr#s
was a satanic suggestion. For the moment Peter
was to Christ the representative, the embodiment of
Satan. This was no time for nice discrimination.
We must not take refuge in the idea that in the first
part of the speech Jesus is addressing the devil as one
person, and in the second his disciple as another dis
tinct personality. He addresses the man Peter whom
He sees before Him ; but in this man He discovers
Satan, and therefore it is Satan whom He rebukes —
m Peter as Satan. That is indeed a humbling experi-
\ ence for the highly-honoured disciple. His hour of
greatest elation is suddenly turned to deepest
humiliation. Just after winning from his Master the
most flattering words of commendation he has ever

(

ST PETER 123

received, he is lashed by the severest rebuke from the
same source. It is a transition not unfrequently met
with in experience. The descent from the pinnacle of
spiritual exaltation to the very abyss, is swift and
sharp ; and elated souls would do well to
prepared for it.

The next important scene in the apostle's life is
one of even sadder shame. But before we come to it
we must glance at the feet-washing, only recorded by
St John, but full of suggestive light on the characters
of St Peter and his Master. Peter could not bear to
think of Christ stooping to wash his feet. It is
another instance of his too confident readiness to
interfere with his Lord's plans. He is told that if he
A|iJl not submit he can have no part in Christ. Thus
even the acceptance of an honour, which one would
wish to decline as beyond desert, is treated as an act
of dutiful obedience. As soon as Peter sees this he
rushes to the opposite extreme. If to have a share in
Christ is conditioned by being washed by Christ, let
this be complete. Peter is still conscious that he is a
sinful man. He thinks he needs washing all over to
be fit for the holy Presence. Our Lord's answer is,
according to His custom, somewhat enigmatic, " He
that is bathed needeth not save to wash his feet, but 2 's
clean every whit'' This seems to mean that the
Christian's penitence should not need to go to the
root of the matter in everyday life. He often fails,
he is never adequate. Not a day passes without its

124 ST PETER

weakness, its deject, its positive sin. Still, if the main
course of the life is tending right, although these evils
are not to be minimised, we need not regard them as
signs of a total fall from grace. Cleansing is needed,
daily cleansing — to our sorrow, we must admit it —
but not repeated regeneration. The life conse
crated to God and resting on Christ is directed
heavenward in the main, notwithstanding these
deplorable and quite inexcusable relapses. Such a
life is Peter's. This should be remembered when we
come to the next scene.

And now we have that most sad scene of the denial >

to estimate. Jesus warned His disciple. He told *

him that Satan desired to sift him as wheat, but that

> He had prayed for him ; He even definitely predicted/

* three successive acts of denial. This was all in vain^

The poor, weak, foolish man rejected the warnings

with indignation. He seemed to imagine that the

vigour of his repudiation was an assurance of his

security. He could not have made a greater mistake.

^ His self-confidence was his undoing. It is easy to be

wise after the event We can see how dangerous it

was for a man of Peter's disposition to venture into

the High Priest's palace, and thus throw himself in

the way of temptation. But it is plain that when he

did so no thought of this temptation was in his mind.

/He simply could not have remembered his Lord's
warning. The whole story plainly shows that he had
clean forgotten it. Here was his initial mistake. It

Ukv^x

ST PETER 125

was unbecoming not to have given more heed to
the kind admonition. Unhappily people rarely will
acknowledge the kindness of such an admonition. So
they fling it off as an unpleasant suggestion, if not an
impertinence. This being the case, when Peter
followed close behind Jesus after His arrest in the
garden, it was with no idea of bravado. The motive
was simple affection, pure devotion. The others —
except John — all forsook Him and fled. Peter did"
not share in his comrades' miserable panic. To blame
his rashness is to commend their cowardice. Unless
we can say that their conduct was the part of a just
and reasonable prudence, we cannot blame Peter for
not having followed it. It will not do to complain of
this one apostle for doing the very thing, the failure to
do which leads us to regard the other apostles as weak
and selfish.

When Peter was in the palace court he was com
pletely off his guard. Here was his second error. He
even ventured to stand round the charcoal brazier
where the attendants were gathered in the chill of
night It was the glow of the fire that revealed him
to one who had seen him with Jesus. Thus it has
f been said, it was while Peter was warming himself that
A he denied his Master. At that moment, too much at
ease, he was not so intent on the trial he had come to
watch. Then he fell. Step by step he was led into
deeper complications. He must have been simply
frantic when he broke out in oaths and curses.

126 ST PETER

Assuredly he must have exposed himself by the very

vehemence of his lying. He protested too much.

XBut he was too unimportant a person for anybody to

A take him seriously one way or the other. The serious

part of the whole sad business was his own conduct.

. This he saw in a moment when he caught the eye of

*^ Jesus. That moment the forgotten warning came

back — too late. The cock-crow of which Jesus had

spoken did not remind him. It was the look of Jesus ^

that awoke the slumbering memory. It all came over

S him like an avalanche of penitence, and he went out

\ and wept bitterly.

This pitiable experience prepares us to understand

Xwhy Jesus appeared first to Peter after His resurrec
tion. Next to the remorse of Judas, who could not
endure to live any longer, must have been the sorrow/
^ of Peter. The worst of it was that it would seem too/
late to make any amends. The most bitter sorrow\
is the thought that we have been unkind to the dead./
/ Peter must have been racked with torment as he
thought of what that last mournful look of his Master
^ meant. By an unspeakably wonderful mercy Peterx
obtained a release from this sorrow, which, with most 1
who experience it, can never be fully removed. The
^ first of the Twelve to see their risen Lord was Peter,
in a private interview, no account of which has been
preserved. It was the private reconciliation of they
penitent servant with his Master.

After this, and after receiving the great gift at

ST PETER 127

Pentecost, Peter is another man. He preaches to
*** the multitudes fearlessly. He defies the Council,^

though at the risk of his life. He carries the gospel
/ into the region round about as the leading early
V missionary. He breaks with Jewish exclusiveness \
under the influence of his strange vision at Joppa. )
/At Csesarea he uses his key of the kingdom to open
( the door to the Roman centurion Cornelius, and so
anticipates the work of Paul. Baur treated all this
as unhistorical, as a mere imitation of Paul's mission,
invented to suggest an agreement in ideas and
methods between the two apostles, which the critic
believed never existed. But the narrative in
Galatians, which Baur allowed to be genuine, justly
interpreted, is now seen to show that they were really
Y friendly together. At Antioch Peter proved his
liberality of sentiment by eating with Gentiles.
When emissaries of the strict party at Jerusalem^"
appeared he shrank back and followed this exclusive. -"
habit. This made Paul indignant, and the apostle to\
the Gentiles openly rebuked his temporising brother^
apostle. Some have thought Paul too harsh and
censorious. Possibly Peter did seriously hesitate,
did fear that he had gone too far in the warmth of
his sympathy with the Greek Christians. Still it is
impossible to exonerate him from some kind of
V weakness in this incident. He seems to have been
+ of an impressionable nature to the end — always more
^ or less moulded by the circumstances in which he

128 ST PETER

found himself. The compensating advantage enjoyed
by such a nature is that it is saved from bigotry and

xis susceptible of growth. Peter shows this in three
distinct stages of his view of the death of Christ.

/ When Jesus first announced it as a coming event, he
rejected it with horror ; after our Lord's resurrection,
in his preaching at Jerusalem he repeatedly referred
X to it as a necessity predicted by the prophets, deter
mined in the counsels of God, and though a deep

* mystery, no hindrance to the Messiahship, since it

V issued in the Resurrection ; finally, in his epistle (our
/ " i Peter ") he treats it as an atoning sacrifice after
M the manner of Paul, of whose teaching and influence
that document bears remarkable traces. But though
thus plastic and sometimes weak, Peter could be true
to his name, at least in his riper years. He stood
like a rock before the High Priest and Council, when
he said, " Whether it be right in the sight of God to
hearken unto you rather than unto God, judge ye ; for
we cannot but speak the things which we saw and
heard'' There seems good reason for accepting the
very ancient and widespread tradition that he
suffered martyrdom at Rome.

NICODEMUS
BY REV. J. G. GREENHOUGH, M.A.

NICODEMUS

I DO not think that the common estimate of this man
Nicodemus is altogether correct or just. He is almost
always set forth in somewhat harsh and even con
demnatory words, as the type of secret disciple, as
a warning example of those who, through fear of
man's censure or through some other kind of moral
cowardice, hide their real religious convictions, and
believe on Christ without confessing Him. But
surely to view him in that light only is to leave half
his story unread, and to miss, perhaps, the best
features of his character. And one cannot help
feeling that the Apostle John, who tells us all about
the man that we know, regarded him with far more
respect and affection than the majority of preachers
and Christians have shown.

He was one of those men who are cautious rather
than timid and cowardly, who move slowly but surely,
who measure every step before they take it, but are
not to be driven back when they have once decided —
Christians whom it takes a long time to make, but
who are true as gold and faithful unto death when

131

132 NICODEMUS

they are made. There are not a few in the Church of
Christ to-day, and there have been not a few in the
Church of every age, sternly honest and brave
disciples at last, who have come to the Master's
service in much the same way that Nicodemus
trod.

Let us glance at three stages of the man's disciple-
ship as we have them recorded. We shall find a
life-story there which is true of many another.

I.

We see him as the anxious inquirer, groping
his "way, seeking light.

He had been impressed by Christ's words and
works, thought that they displayed unusual wisdom
and power, but knew not yet quite what to make of
Him. He was puzzled, uncertain, and not willing to
commit himself until the ground was made more
sure. He came to Jesus by night — it would certainly
have been a braver thing if he had come by day — the
evangelist seems to hint as much by twice recording
this incident.

Yet what more natural ! When religious conviction
was slowly shaping itself in you, when you felt your
first half-undecided movements towards Christ service,
you did not advertise it to the crowd, you did not

NICODEMUS 133

want to tell the world of it until you were sure of it
yourself. There was many an hour of night-thought
and secret prayer before you gave yourself openly to
the blessed service. This man knew not yet what to
believe. He did not understand his own heart.
There was a certain charm in Christ which drew him.
He seemed to be a teacher sent from God — perhaps
He was the promised Saviour ; but there was a doubt,
and he was afraid of going too far until that doubt
was settled.

He was a comparatively old man, and age is more
cautious than youth. Old men do not so easily
embrace new ideas or follow new masters. Among
the first disciples of Christ we read of few or none
who were advanced in years. It was youth that felt
the first impulse of that Divine life — youth responds
to it more readily now than age.

And this man too was a ruler of the people, a master
in Israel, a member of the Jewish aristocracy, a
learned and a rich man. It is always hard for such
men to change their profession, to take up a new
cause and adopt a new life. They are the observed
of all eyes — what they do cannot be done in a corner.
Their responsibility is greater, as the consequences of
their action are greater. The higher up in social life
men are the more is the difficulty of winning them to
an open confession of Christian discipleship. The
rich have so much to give up ; the wise do not like to
acknowledge that they have been in ignorance. The

134 NICODEMUS

honoured and flattered and much courted shrink
from the possible obloquy that an open conversion
may bring. There are all manner of silken fetters or
golden chains hanging on their feet and making their
steps reluctant. This man moved slowly, and no
wonder. It was a terrible responsibility for a man
in his position to take sides with One whom all the
rich and honourable despised, to accept as Master
and Saviour One whom all the learning of the
nation rejected. He wanted to know more and
weigh the whole matter well before he burnt his
ships behind him or staked his whole life on that
one throw.

There are some men and women who come into
the Church, especially the young, on one strong
resistless wave of fervour and enthusiasm. Their
convictions mature suddenly ; their decision is
prompt ; Christ calls them, charms them, kindles in
them an ardent zeal ; their feet make haste to do His
bidding ; they do not stop to count the cost ; they
fling themselves almost impetuously into His service,
and let the whole world know at once that they are
His. There are others whose very nature is to look
carefully both before and behind before they move.
They do nothing without deliberation. The Christian
profession is with them an intensely solemn and
awfully momentous thing. The responsibilities of it
are immense. They dare not take it up without
carefully counting the cost. Peter is the type of

NICODEMUS 135

one, Nicodemus is the type of the other, and Christ
welcomes both alike.

Ah ! if a man has made up his mind to be and
remain a secret disciple, one hardly knows what to
make of him. If a man really believes in Christ as
his spiritual Master and Saviour, as the foundation of
his hope for this world and the next, and yet declines
to acknowledge it ; if he seeks to enjoy Christ's gifts
and have part in the Divine promises, and yet refuses
to avow his faith lest some additional burdens and
responsibilities be put upon him — we cannot say
much for that man's courage, manliness, and fidelity,
or even for the strength and depth of his convictions.
It is too much like climbing up some other way
instead of going straight through the door into the
sheepfold. It is like the woman stealing virtue from
Him in the press and hoping that it might not be
known. No, if you profoundly believe in Christ and
sincerely love, you will not be ashamed to avow His
name.

But I believe that there are still many like
Nicodemus, who keep their faith unavowed because
they are not yet sure of it themselves. They are
moving slowly towards the kingdom, possibly they
are in it, but think themselves outside. They are
half but not wholly convinced, seeking more light,
requiring clearer evidences of their calling ; believing,
yet doubting ; loving, yet distrusting their love ; drawn,
but not irresistibly drawn ; and unwilling to take the

136 NICODEMUS

burden of the Christian profession upon them until
they have weighed it yet more carefully. By-and-
bye they will come, for Christ has a hold upon them
and will not easily let them slip.

II.

The inquirer has become almost a confessor.
He is standing up for Jesus, defending Him,
and bearing distinct, though rather timid,
•witness for His name and cause.

It was in the great Council of the Jewish nation ;
the parliament of which he was a member. They
were discussing Jesus ; they had just made a vain
attempt to get Him arrested ; they were denouncing
Him as a disturber, as a deceiver of the people ; they
were blaspheming Him, and saying all manner of
evil against Him, demanding that He should be put to
death, got rid of; they were mad with hatred, And
one of their number got up and raised his solitary
voice in protest, and they were too furious to listen.
It was like a child's cry flung out against the storm,
and they drowned it in an uproar of clamour,
denouncing him there as a traitor to his party and
religion.

That one man was Nicodemus. It is surprising
how, in face of this incident, it could ever have been

NICODEMUS 137

supposed that this man was a fearful, weak-kneed
and cowardly disciple. One can hardly imagine a
braver thing. Truly the light had been growing
clearer in him. His convictions were gathering
strength, he was not yet quite decided, but the
decision was not far off. He had made up his
mind that Jesus was true and good, that there was
something of God in him, that God had sent him ;
and he could not stand by in silence and hear the
name slandered and maligned. The name was
becoming very dear to him, and he would defend
it though the defence cost him much. Another
step and Christ would have him altogether.

You are not far from the kingdom of God when
you begin to take your stand by His side ; when you
cannot hear Him or His truth ill spoken of without a
feeling of pain, without just a little flash of indigna
tion ; when anything that savours of irreverence or
contempt for His word and person provokes you ;
when you want to have Him honoured and His
name lifted up. If it be so, you are more a disciple
than you think. He has lodged Himself in your
hearts, you are growing into the love of Him, and
by-and-bye you will give yourself up to Him in a
full surrender. And, in the closing scene of this
little drama, in the scene where we get the last
sight of Nicodemus, this is just what happens.

138 NICODEMUS

III.

The undecided man — the cautious inquirer gets
a flood of light and conviction at the Cross.

All his hesitancy seems to vanish at the Cross.
There Nicodemus comes to the front when others
who had been foremost have fallen back ; the hour
of darkness and trial which shakes and for the time
paralyses the faith of others, strengthens his faith
and brings it out into the open. He and Joseph of
Arimathea are the two men who come to take up
Christ's wounded and broken body, and anoint it
for the burial. He is one of the very few who
remain faithful when disaster has come, and shame,
and ruin, and the cause seems lost.

Ah ! it might have been intended as a satire upon
the disciples, that this man who had made no
distinct avowal of his faith, who had been slowly
groping his way towards a place in the kingdom,
should show in that critical hour a strong, loyal,
fearless devotion ; while Peter and the rest, who had
professed unlimited allegiance, who had promised
that they would rather die than forsake Him, fell
into a fit of cowardice, and left him to die alone,
and to be buried anyhow or not at all.

God sometimes rebukes and shames us in the same
way. There are men and women who have never
made themselves known as His avowed servants,

NICODEMUS 139

never taken their place publicly in His Church, who
are more faithful to Him, who suffer more for Him,
who show more of His spirit when they are called
than those who have claimed His name and confessed
themselves His own for years.

There may be some who read this who have never
sat down at the Lord's table ; they are not sure that
they are converted and regenerate men ; not sure
that they have a real part in Christ's Church ; yet
if their faith were sorely tried, if they were required
under threat of some great penalty, or by force of
some great bribe to deny Christ's name they would
show more fidelity, more heroic courage than many
of those who gather round the Lord's table — they are
Christ's indeed. Oh, that they could have a little more
confidence in their heavenly calling.

Nicodemus found full conviction at the Cross.
The sight of that patient sufferer — that victim of
the wrath and cruelty of men — dying so calmly and
beautifully without a word of complaint, with a
prayer on His lips for those who crucified Him —
that was what did it. He had seen Christ's sinless
life and heard His lovely teachings, and witnessed
some of His miracles, but all this had left him still
doubting. It was Calvary with all its pathetic
beauty and melting tenderness, that broke down
the last barrier and removed the last doubt, and
made him a disciple indeed.

Yes, and so it ever is. It is the uplifted Christ

140 NICODEMUS

that draws men. It is the Cross that overpowers
reluctances. You may admire Him for His wisdom
and love Him in a way for the beauty of His person,
and still draw back from the full avowal of your
faith in Him. But as soon as you are brought
face to face with those awful sorrows of His, that
Divine love which bore so much, which forgot itself
so utterly for the sake of sinners and for your sake ;
then you want to give Him your heart and life, you
want to kneel before Him confessing; you are willing
then that the world should know how much you love
Him.

ST JAMES THE SON OF ZEBEDEE
BY REV. PRINCIPAL WALTER F. ADENEY, D.D.

ST JAMES THE SON OF ZEBEDEE

CONSIDERING the prominent position which James
held among the Apostles as one of the inner group
of three, and so important a personage that Herod
selected him for execution and he became the first
martyr of the Twelve, it is remarkable that we
know very little about him. The meagreness of
our information has led to an undue neglect of one
who was evidently held in high esteem during his
lifetime. Perhaps a further cause of this neglect
is due to the fact that he was over-shadowed by his
wonderful brother, as Frederick Tennyson, though
a poet of considerable gifts, was over- shadowed by
Alfred. One consequence is that the meagre field
has not been gleaned so persistently as the more
productive acres, where copious information is obtain
able. Very little has been written about James in
comparison of what has been said about John, Peter,
or Paul, the well-known apostles. We may there
fore betake ourselves to the study of this apostle
with some sense of freshness in the enterprise.
James and John are the only apostles both of

143

144 ST JAMES THE SON OF ZEBEDEE

whose parents are referred to in the Gospels. We
learn that their father Zebedee was with them in
the boat when Jesus called them to follow Him.
This points to the probability that they were young
men. Their father was strong and active. To
leave him did not mean to desert a feeble old man
dependent on the care and support of his children.
He was a hardy fisherman, well able to carry on
his work without them. The hired servants who
were also assisting would make the loss of the two
young men the less embarrassing to their father.
That there should have been these assistants while
Zebedee had two adult sons also engaged in the
fishing, shows that between them they must have
had a fairly good business. Though working for
their daily bread, they did not belong to the poorer
classes. They came from that vigorous lower middle
class which has furnished so many effective workers
for the cause of God and humanity in all ages — a
class not so far removed from the danger of want
as to be able to relax its energies and sink into
self-indulgence, but yet not so bound down to
drudgery as to lose heart and inspiration for
subjects beyond the daily routine of toil. Among
the Jews, who prized education, such a household
as that of the prosperous master fisherman, Zebedee,
would not be illiterate. We think of the disciples
of Jesus as peasants. The word is ambiguous.
Certainly they were not courtiers, nor were they

ST JAMES THE SON OF ZEBEDEE 14$

rich men clothed in fine linen and faring sumptu
ously every day. But neither were they mere
boors. They were unlearned and ignorant men
according to the pedantic notions of the Jewish
literati ; that is to say, they had not received the
technical training of scribes ; they were simple lay
men, and without a university education. But they
were not ignorant or undisciplined in mind. The
Jewish school attached to every synagogue gave
an education that was considered adequate at the
time, and a household in the comfortable circum
stances Zebedee could command would not be likely
to miss its opportunities.

It is a significant fact that, after James and John
had left their father at the call of Jesus, we never
hear of Zebedee again. Their mother became one
of the ministering women. Thus, unless there were
other children, the home would have been quite
broken up, and the head of the household left alone.
This is not a pleasant position to contemplate. We
can scarcely think that Zebedee himself joined the
travelling discipleship, for in that case it is almost
certain that the evangelists would have said so.
Their silence implies that he was not met with
again in the gospel story. Did he sulk? Was he
hurt at his sons' desertion of him ? Did he consider
this a wrong, resent it, and set his face against the
new movement that played such havoc with families
and broke so roughly into the settled course of

K

146 ST JAMES THE SON OF ZEBEDEE

life? If so, woman-like, did the mother side with
her boys, and leave the poor man alone with his
grumbling? All this is too much to conjecture on
the ground of such barely negative evidence as we
possess. On the other hand, it is too much to
suggest, as in Hastings' Dictionary of the Bible, that
probably Zebedee was a disciple of John the Baptist,
since he consented to his sons joining themselves
to Jesus. There is no evidence that he consented,
although it seems clear that he did not forbid them.
He appears simply to have stood aloof. This new
movement won its followers chiefly among young
men. The older generation was not so quick to
welcome it, and Zebedee did not come under the
spell of its novel enthusiasm. Still, his wife's conduct
in deserting him may not appear to be altogether
defensible. Perhaps it was not ; perhaps she was to
blame. After all, a woman's first duty is to her
husband and her home. Of course, there is the
conceivable possibility that Zebedee himself broke
up the home, that after their two sons had left, he
so resented their action that their mother, who
would be sure to take their part, was really driven
away. This idea, again, is not to be entertained
without a particle of evidence in support of it. We
must be content to leave the domestic riddle un
solved, satisfied with the sure conviction that Jesus
would not have sanctioned undutiful or unkind conduct
on the part of any of His disciples. There is the

ST JAMES THE SON OF ZEBEDEE 147

possibility that poor Zebedee did not long survive
the break-up of his domestic and business establish
ments. The cloud of mystery that hangs over the
situation indicates at least the rigour, the strenuous-
ness, the pain of the wrench from old ways that was
inevitable in the execution of our Lord's programme.
He saw it with distress, and spoke of having come
to send a sword and to break up families. This
was one of the necessities that saddened the soul
of the " Man of Sorrows." There is a sternness in
the gospel call which too many people seek to
evade in the present day, when every effort is made
to attract people by making religion what is called
" bright."

The problem of James's mother is of another
character. Her name was Salome. Though this
is not directly stated, it may be inferred from a
comparison of parallel passages in two of the Gospels.
In Matt, xxvii. 55, 56, we have our first evangelist's
account of the women at the Cross: " And many ivomen
were there beholding from afar, which Jiad followed
Jesus from Galilee, ministering unto Him : among
ivhom ^vas Mary Magdalene, and Mary the mother
of James and Joses, and the mother of the sons of
Zebedee'' Now turn to Mark xv. 40: "And there
were also women beholding from afar : among whom
were both Mary Magdalene, Mary the mother of James
the Less and Joses, and Salome " — Salome taking the
place of " the mother of the sons of Zebedee." And

M8 ST JAMES THE SON OF ZEBEDEE

now, having thus obtained the name of the mother
of the two disciples, we are able to advance to a
-further point, though on less sure ground. The
account of the women at the Cross in the Fourth
Gospel is as follows : " But there were standing by the
cross of Jesus his mother ^ and his mother's sister, Mary
the wife of Clopas, and Mary Magdalene " (John xix.
25). Who was this sister of the mother of Jesus ?

Some have said " Mary of Clopas," taking the two
phrases in apposition as applying to the same person.
But this is not the most natural interpretation ; since
the evangelist is giving a list of names, each clause
would seem to indicate a separate person. Besides,
is it likely that two sisters would have the same
name, Mary? Then Salome, or the mother of
Zebedee's children, if, she be not Mary's sister, is
not, mentioned by John, while, on the other hand,
there is no reference in the Synoptic Gospels to " the
sister of Mary." Is it not the reasonable explana
tion that the several evangelists mean one and the
same person by their various designations? But if
so, see what this involves. If Salome was the sister
of Mary, James and John were the cousins of Jesus.
Thus our Lord's most intimate disciples were His
own relations. His brethren did not believe in Him
during His earthly life ; but after His resurrection
James the brother of the Lord became the head of
the Church at Jerusalem, and he was succeeded by
Simeon a cousin. As late as the reign of Hadrian two

ST JAMES THE SON OF ZEBEDEE 149

members of the family were arrested on suspicion
owing to their relation to Christ. Thus we see our
Lord's family connection was always of some account.
Jesus would not sanction mere family privileges
apart from merit. His own action led to the break
up of families. We must conclude that the
opportunities of meeting Jesus afforded by their
relationship brought these men under His influence,
after which it was their spiritual affinity and faith that
drew them to Him. There is some probability that,
like Peter and Andrew, the two sons of Zebedee
had been disciples of John the Baptist, who, by the
way, was also a more or less distant relation, since
his mother, Elizabeth, and Mary were kinswomen.
Therefore, probably, they had met Jesus down by
the Jordan. During the greater part of their early
life, however, they would not have seen much of
Him. He was living His quiet life at work in the
carpenter's workshop at the highland town of
Nazareth, which great hills, crossed only by rough
steep paths, separated from the inland lake where
they sailed their craft with their father.

Capernaum, the town in which the two brothers
lived, was by no means so secluded as Nazareth.
One of the high roads from the Mediterranean to
the east passed through it. Then their industry
involved some travel in hawking the fish about.
While the teeming population round about Gen-
nesaret consumed a great quantity, for fish from

150 ST JAMES THE SON OF ZEBEDEE

their lake, with barley bread from the corn grown on
the plain, was their staple food, so considerable an
amount of the fish caught here was sent up to
Jerusalem that one of the northern gates of the city
was named the " Fish Gate." It is not unlikely that
the sons of Zebedee took turns in carrying the salt
fish to market. One of them, John, was known in
the High Priest's household, a fact which indicates
that he was a not infrequent visitor at Jerusalem.
Perhaps he undertook this work and left James to
more continuous companionship with their father.
It was natural that the younger son should go forth
and the elder stay more at home.

This remark brings us to another point. In all
probability James was the elder of the two brothers.
In the majority of instances where both are
mentioned James comes first. This is invariably
the case in Matthew and Mark, our two oldest
Gospels. The secondary position is made especially
emphatic by the way that John is repeatedly
mentioned. We read, not "James and John the
sons of Zebedee," but "James the son of Zebedee and
John his brother'' It is curious to see how James
gradually loses ground with respect to his brother.
In Luke, our Third Gospel, they are mentioned five
times, three times in the same order as in Matthew
and Mark, and twice as " John and James " (Luke
viii. 51, ix. 28).

In Acts, James never precedes John. The two

ST JAMES THE SON OF ZEBEDEE 151

names occur thrice together in this book — first in
the list of the Apostles, where the order in all three
Synoptics (Luke included), "James and John," is
deliberately or unintentionally reversed, and we have
"John and James" (Acts i. 13).

The second instance is more striking. In the
account of the martyrdom of James, where, for the
time being, he must be reckoned the most important
person in the story, we read " James the brother of
John " (Acts xii. 2). This is the last occasion on
which James is mentioned in the New Testament.
Neither Paul, nor John, nor any other writer outside
the Synoptics and Acts, ever refer to him. The
change of order is the more significant when we
observe it in comparison with parallel passages.
The first case occurs in the account of the raising
of the daughter of Jai'rus, where Mark has, " And He
suffered no man to follow with Him save Peter^ and
James, and John the brother of James" (Mark v. 37).
Luke changes the order of the names so as to
read "Peter, and John, and James." Matthew has
no parallel to this verse. The other case is at the
Transfiguration, with a reference to the brothers by
all three synoptic writers. There both Matthew
(xvii. i) and Mark (ix. 2) have Peter, and James,
and John ; but Luke (ix. 28) has " Peter and John and
James." In the incident of the Samaritan village
Luke reverts to the order of his predecessors (Luke
ix. 54) ; and this is curious, since the paragraph has

152 ST JAMES THE SON OF ZEBEDEE

no parallel in the other Gospels. While it is only
Luke who reverses the order of the names, a step
towards it may be seen in Matthew's last reference
to them. In mentioning the three chosen friends
whom Jesus took with Him, Mark had given them as
"Peter and James and John" (Mark xiv. 33).
Matthew gives them as " Peter and the two sons of
Zebedee " (Matt. xxvi. 37).

Here, then, John has just come up with James.
In Luke he twice passes before his brother ; and in
Acts he takes the first place definitely and without
challenge. The narrative in Acts assigns to John an
altogether more prominent position. He becomes
the colleague of Peter. It is these two who go up
to the Temple together, are associated with the cure
of the lame man there, and are arrested and
summoned before the Council. Here John is dis
sociated from his brother, with whom he appears
invariably in the synoptic Gospels, and brought before
us as in a peculiarly prominent position together
with the leading apostle. For the time being James
is entirely lost sight of.

The recession of James is only relative. We
have no reason to say that this apostle actually lost
ground. What he was at the first, that, for all we
can tell, he may have remained to the end. But
meanwhile John grew in importance, and as this
came to be recognised the mere claim of seniority
fell into the background. Then, especially in the

ST JAMES THE SON OF ZEBEDEE 153

Gentile churches, for which Luke wrote, the more
prominent apostle naturally took the first place,
and his elder brother who was so much less con
spicuous, was only known to the wider circle by his
relation to John. Thus the first became last and the
last first.

James's position in the gospel story cannot be
dissociated from that of John. On three occasions
— at the raising of the daughter of Jai'rus, at the
Transfiguration, and in Gethsemane, the two brothers
are especially chosen together with Peter, who takes
precedence over both of them, to an especial privilege
of companionship with Jesus. We know so little of
James directly that this fact must serve as one source
of information. Our Lord must have found in him
something very congenial, or He would not have
chosen him thus. The mere tie of consanguinity
would not suffice for this. But now we have three
occasions on which the two brothers are more or less
prominent in conjunction and apart from Peter — at
the naming of them, in the incident of the Samaritan
village, and in the incident of the request for
positions of high honour at the right hand and left
hand of Jesus. What does this suggest? Surely
that they were much alike in disposition. John
must have had the more gifted intellect ; and in the
end this was bound to tell. Perhaps James had the
greater energy, and that may account for his being
selected as the first apostle to suffer martyrdom.

154 ST JAMES THE SON OF ZEBEDEE

Possibly, then, John was the deeper thinker and
James the more strenuous worker. But we have
more indication of resemblances between them than
of differences. John was a man of lofty genius ;
there is no proof that James had any genius at all.
James, then, would be the smaller copy of that type
of character which reached sublimity in the eagle
vision and soaring of his great brother.

Let us look at these three incidents. The first is
the naming. Jesus gave to each of His three select
friends a new name — and as far as we know He did
this with no others. In each case the name was
significant. Simon He renamed Peter. To James
and John He gave the same new name, surely
significant of common characteristics which He
discerned in the two brothers — Boanerges — Sons of
Thunder. Their nature was tempestuous. Their
disposition passionate, vehement, explosive. Jesus
thought of them as storm clouds. Yet He not only
selected them as apostles, but chose them as two of
His three most intimate friends. Did He do so
on account of this dangerous characteristic, or only
in spite of it, viewing it as a disadvantage more than
outweighed by their excellences ? If we accept the
latter view, we must conclude that Jesus named them
after an objectionable trait of their character. Is
that like His graciousness ? We may think that He
wished to guard them against their peculiar danger,
by keeping the weak point in their nature always

ST JAMES THE SON OF ZEBEDEE 155

in evidence. But is it likely that He would do this
in a way that would be continually humiliating them
in the eyes of their comrades ? Besides, if this had
been the intention, it must have been the exact
opposite of the purpose of the surname Christ gave
to Simon. Peter, the Rock, is not indicative of a
defect of the apostle to whom the name was given.
His fault was that he was not sufficiently rock-like,
that he was too impressionable and unstable. Thus
his name might serve as a stimulus, suggesting the
ideal he was to endeavour to realise.* It is most
improbable that Jesus would give the other two, one
of them being His especially beloved disciple, a
surname of exactly the opposite character, a sort
of nickname, labelling them with the designation
of their besetting failing. Boanerges then must be
a title of honour. It indicates a character charged
with peril, but also capable of mighty achievement.
Anything is better than lethargy, torpor, inert
indifference. Peter is rashly impulsive ; James and
John contain latent fires beneath their more calm
exterior, fires which may flash out at times with
terrific effect. The three choice friends represent
mercurial and the electrical temperaments. To such
Jesus seemed to be especially drawn. The mincing

* Unless we are to think of it as merely indicating the fact
that he was in a way to be the foundation of the Church, an idea
which might be suggested by Matt. xvi. 18, but which has no
countenance in the other Gospels.

156 ST JAMES THE SON OF ZEBEDEE

ways of our little modern world make us shrink from
the Sons of Thunder. They deafen us ; we think
them rude. But they are needed. A slumbrous
age wants thunder to arouse it.

Yet Jesus was fully awake to the dangers
that peculiarly threaten people with such tempera
ments. He warned Peter of the temptation which
would assail his impressionable nature, and He had
to rebuke the Sons of Thunder for an unseemly
explosion of wrath. It was when travelling south
in the last journey up to Jerusalem they found them
selves on the borders of Samaria. Jesus had
courteously sent messengers in advance to a
Samaritan village requesting hospitality, and this
had been churlishly refused. According to Luke, the
only evangelist who records the incident, it was
because " His face was as though He were going to
Jerusalem" (Luke ix. 53). This indicates that it
was simply as Jews that Jesus and his friends were
repulsed, as Jews interested in a Jewish feast at their
temple of which the Samaritans, with their rival
temple on Mount Gerizim, were jealous. Had they
known Jesus as He had shown Himself on an earlier
occasion in their own territory, by Jacob's well, they
would have seen how unfortunately inappropriate
their resentment was. This particular travelling
party, though it consisted of Jews, was the least
bigoted of all the companies of pilgrims going up to
the feast. Had it been bigoted, it would have

ST JAMES THE SON OF ZEBEDEE 157

followed the custom of some northern Jews and
crossed the Jordan into Persea, so as to travel south
on the left bank of the stream and thus avoid the
polluted district of Samaria. But the villagers knew
nothing of this. As usual, their sectarian bitterness
was proportionate to their ignorance. It was a very
painful exhibition of narrowness. James and John
were indignant. Observe, it is at this point in Luke's
narrative that an arrest is put on John's advance
beyond his brother in prominence, and the evangelist
falls back on the old order which has the elder brother
first. It would seem that in this case James may have
taken the lead. At all events, they were acting in
the way of their original natures, rather than in
accordance with their Christian graces. In this region
John had no claim to superiority. While all the
other apostles are silent, these two burst out with
their hasty proposal. It is that Christ would bid fire
fall from heaven on the offending villagers. We are
horrified at the idea. It is likely that the recent
references to Elijah, and the appearance of the spirit
of the prophet at the Transfiguration, had led these
disciples to think of the scene in which the terrible
man had called down fire from heaven on a company
of Israelite troops.* But to expect Jesus to imitate

* 2 Kings i. 10. The reference to this incident disappears in
the Revised Version. But though it cannot be ascribed to the
original text of Luke, it seems to be a note introduced by
some later hand giving a right explanation of the startling words
of the two apostles.

158 ST JAMES THE SON OF ZEBEDEE

the most ferocious action ascribed to one of the most
primitive prophets indicates how little even His
intimate friends understood Him. The only excuse
for such a proposal was that they were beside them
selves with anger, as another explanation suggested
by some later hand, but removed from the text of
Luke by the Revisers, suggests. They did not know
what manner of spirit they were of. Still Jesus
rebuked them ; and this is all the original text tells
us, adding no word of excuse.

The third of these gospel scenes also reveals the
two brothers in no very amiable light. We have two
accounts of it. In Mark, our earliest Gospel, we read
how the sons of Zebedee came to Jesus with a
singularly ambitious request (Mark x. 35-40); in
Matthew the presumption of the request is somewhat
softened by coming from their mother (Matt. xx. 20),
still even here it is said that they accompanied her ;
and they were not children ; so they cannot be
liberated from responsibility. The demand was that
they should sit the one on the right hand of Jesus in
His glory and the other on His left hand. There is
no escape from the obvious conclusion that this
demand was selfish and foolishly ambitious. Still it
was not so outrageously unreasonable as might
appear at the first blush of it. It is highly probable
that these two disciples already occupied the relative
places at table, in their ordinary meals, that they now
coveted for the future condition. They were of the

ST JAMES THE SON OF ZEBEDEE 159

inner group of the three intimates. John as the friend
who " leaned o n the bosom of Jesus" reclined immedi
ately on his right hand, each right-hand person at
table always leaning on the bosom of the person to
his left, if he leant back when reclining on his own left
elbow. Either Peter or James would occupy the left-
hand place. But it was not Peter, because at the Last
Supper he had to beckon to John to put a private ques
tion to Jesus (John xiii. 24). Then in all probability
it was James. So it comes to this, that these two
brothers were encouraged by their mother to seek for
the future state of glory a continuance of their
present privileges. May we go a step further in
conjecture? In the recession of James we see John
passing him ; but Peter is already more prominent.
May it be then a question whether Peter is to be
preferred to James in the new condition of affairs ?
In Acts we see that the two leading apostles are
Peter and John. Does this strange request deprecate
that inevitable condition ? Further, the time of the
request confers a solemn dignity of faith on it. The
significance of it would have been very different if it
had been proffered in the heyday of our Lord's
popularity. But it was made on the eve of His
death. Darkest clouds then hung over his earthly
prospects. At this most dismal period when a less
heroic faith would have quailed, the sure trust of the
two brothers and their mother that Jesus will triumph
in the end, is almost sublime. We may illustrate it

160 ST JAMES THE SON OF ZEBEDEE

by comparison with Jeremiah's redemption of his
family's inheritance at the very time when the
invading host of Babylon was encamped upon it.

Still, when all is said, the request was selfish and
ambitious, and Jesus rebuked it by implication. They
who would share Christ's glory must go by His way
to it. The disciples seem too hasty in their request.
Certainly this must be the case with their mother, or
she would not be so bold to urge it. None of them
know what it involves. Can they drink of His cup —
that bitter cup of woe? Dare they submit to His
baptism — that initiation to His new state by blood ?
Yes ! They say they can. This is no vain boast.
Awful as the consent is in its possible consequences,
they will face them all in order to be near their Lord
in His glory. Jesus perceives the deep seriousness
of their resolve, and He acquiesces in it. This they
shall do — though as to the privilege of the future,
that must be left in other hands. It does not lie in
His province. Only His Father is the Arbiter of
future destiny. Jesus does not mean that the
decision will be arbitrary or that the predestination
is unconditional. The point is that it is wholly in
God's hand. No favouritism can affect it.

James was the first of the two brothers to drink
his Master's cup, the first apostle to suffer martyrdom.
This was in the year A.D. 44, five years after the
death of Christ. Herod Agrippa, the brother of John
the Baptist's arch-enemy Herodias, "killed James

ST JAMES THE SON OF ZEBEDEE 161

with the sword" and then went a step further
and imprisoned Peter. Luke intimates that this was
done to please the Jews (Acts xii. 1-3). It was an
action of the civil authority, for once, and quite as an
exception to the rule, adopting the policy of the
Jewish religious leaders. We do not know why
James was selected in preference to Peter and John,
and treated more severely than Peter, the leader of
Christians in Jerusalem. Was it that this " Son of
Thunder " had been exceptionally provocative in the
vehemence of his action ? A little more than a
century later, Clement of Alexandria mentioned a
tradition, that James's accuser was so moved by the
martyr's confession that he declared himself converted
to Christianity, and was there and then carried off
with him to execution. On the way, as Clement
says, he asked forgiveness of James, who hesitated
for a moment, and then kissed him, saying^ " Peace be
unto you^ Idle legends make out that this apostle
preached in Spain — a quite impossible supposition ;
and again, that his dead body was put on board ship
at Joppa and conveyed to Iria, in the north-west of
Spain, where the heathen were converted by the
miracles it worked. It was believed that the saint
" appeared on many occasions mounted on a white
horse, leading the Spanish armies to victory against
their infidel foes."*

* See Hastings' Dictionary of the Bible, Article " James."

BARTIMvEUS
BY REV. PRINCIPAL DAVID ROWLANDS, B.A.

BARTI1VLEUS

THERE was great commotion at the gates of Jericho.
People rushed from all directions, to see a small
band of wayfarers who were approaching the city.
The rumour had spread abroad some time before
that they were on their way thither, so that every
body was watching for their arrival. At their head
was Jesus, the mighty prophet of Nazareth, whose
fame filled the land. The wonderful works which
He performed, and the profound doctrines which He
taught, attracted universal attention. The common
people heard Him gladly, while the priests, the
scribes, and the elders denounced Him as a heretic ;
but there was a consensus of opinion on all sides that
He possessed superhuman powers. The difference
between the reception given Him by the classes and
that given Him by the masses, was easily accounted
for; for the latter found in Him a friend who
defended their rights, who sympathised with their
sufferings, who helped them to overcome the
difficulties of their lot ; but the former knew that He
was an uncompromising enemy of privilege, injustice,

165

1 66 BARTIM^US

and sham — things which made up, so to speak, their
entire existence. Be this as it may, both friends and
foes were equally interested in His movements,
wherever He went.

By the highway side, in view of the bustling
throng, there sat a blind man begging. Of this man
we know nothing more than his name and his
parentage ; we are simply told that he was
" Bartimaeus, the son of Timaeus," a designation,
which doubtless suggested to his fellow-citizens a
number of facts of which we are ignorant. Still his
name is familiar throughout Christendom, and will
become more and more familiar as time goes on. It
happens, now and then, that a man acquires renown
merely through coming in contact with a personality
greater than himself. It is not likely, for example,
that we should have heard much of Boswell had he
not been so intimately associated with Johnson.
However, it is not who this man was that is really
important, but what he did and what was done for
him on this memorable occasion.

The blind man is generally an object of compassion.
You cannot behold him, if you are possessed of
human feelings, without pitying his forlorn condition.
There he stands, in the midst of a world full of
beautiful forms and delightful hues, and yet he cannot
for a moment enjoy them. He is, in a manner, shut
up in total darkness ; immured in a dismal dungeon,
which neither sun, moon, nor stars illumine with

BARTIM^US 167

their radiance — which neither lovely flowers nor
pleasant landscapes gladden with their smiles. Still
this is the condition of thousands of the human race ;
the first ray of light they can hope to see is that
which will burst upon their view after they have
passed through the valley of death. What depths
of woe Samson's lament reveals : —

" O dark, dark, dark, amid the blaze of noon
Irrecoverably dark, total eclipse
Without all hope of day ! "

Such was the condition of Bartimaeus — he was blind.
Besides all this, he was also poor ; for he " sat by
the highway side begging'' It is bad enough to be
blind even in affluence, when a man has sufficient
means to procure every comfort his heart may desire ;
when he has plenty of friends, who anticipate his
every wish and minister to his every want. But
when in addition to being blind, he is poor, friendless,
and uncared-for ; when at the close of the day he
knows not where the supplies of the morrow are to
come from, surely his plight is unspeakably wretched.
Probably Bartimaeus's poverty was due to his blind
ness. Having been born of lowly parents, who had
been unable to provide for his maintenance, and
being incapable of earning his own livelihood, poverty
must have been his inevitable lot. So he took to
begging, which, in an age when the poor were
supported by individual benevolence, was the only

i68 BARTIM^US

course open to him. He was a genuine object of
charity ; the passer-by need not have troubled
himself as to the propriety of giving him alms ; for
he was truly poor — poor through no fault of his own,
poor through the manifest visitation of God.

" The prophet ! the prophet ! " the people cried, as
they hustled one another in their eagerness to catch
a glimpse of Him. " What prophet ? " asked
Bartimaeus of those near him. " Don't you know ? "
said they, " It is Jesus of Nazareth, who is going to
stay this night in the city, on his way to Jerusalem."
At the name, " Jesus of Nazareth," the blind man was
startled. He had heard no end of reports of this
great prophet, of the marvellous skill He possessed
in dealing with incurable diseases, of His readiness to
succour the poor, the maimed, and the suffering.
And he thought within himself, " Here is a chance
for me. Who knows but He will have compassion
on my miserable state ? " Without further considera
tion he called out at the top of his voice, "Jesus, thou
Son of David, have mercy on me." But he was too
late this time. Jesus was already at some distance,
and the hubbub caused by the crowd drowned his
pleading voice. But he was nothing daunted by this
check ; on the contrary, it seemed to inspire him with
greater determination. He left his seat at once, and
directed his steps towards the city, for the purpose of
finding a friend of his, a brother in tribulation, a
blind man like himself with whom he often consorted.

BARTIM^EUS 169

What was the motive which prompted him to adopt
this course? Was it a purely disinterested affection ;
or was there in it a tinge of selfishness ? It is difficult
to say. Most likely he desired the same priceless
boon for his friend as he did for himself, and he was
probably convinced also that a united appeal — made
by two of them — would be more likely to prove
successful. Early next morning he was again at his
customary seat — with his friend at his side — listening
eagerly for the procession that was sure to accompany
Jesus on his way out of the city. Nor had he to
wait long. A huge company of all sorts and
conditions of men filled the road ; scribes and
Pharisees, priests and Levites, mingled with the
ignorant populace, and for the moment forgot the
distinctions which separated them in ordinary life.
Poor, shallow, excitement-loving humanity was just
the same then as it is now, ever ready to be carried
away by the latest sensation. Bartimaeus was not
going to be foiled a second time, and so before Jesus
had quite reached the place where he sat, he cried
out for himself and his companion, in a voice that
silenced the babblings of the mob, and made every
eye turn towards him with amazement, " Have mercy
on us, O Lord, thou Son of David'' Here we have a
man laying hold on a precious and rare opportunity,
and fully resolved not to let it slip. Jesus was near
him ; He might never come so near again ; now,
then, or never, was his time to seek mercy. What

1 70 BARTIM^EUS

did it matter to him what others thought of his
conduct ? What though the lookers-on thought him
half crazy, and treated him as a disturber of the
peace? The object on which he had set his heart
was worth braving everything for its sake. We see
in the behaviour of this man a lesson for us — a lesson
which we have all need to be taught. Opportunities
so valuable, so great, so glorious — opportunities to
do good to ourselves and to others — opportunities to
save our own souls and to facilitate the salvation of
our fellows — these grand opportunities present them
selves to us continually, and many of them are
neither recognised nor appreciated until they are
gone for ever. Not a week, nor perhaps a day,
passes, in which we have not cause to sorrow for our
negligence in this respect.

Crowds are proverbially callous; consideration for
the individual is generally the last thing they think
of showing. Is it because they feel that the
individual has no right to interfere with the pleasure
of the many ? It may be so. One thing is certain ;
an act which a man would recoil with horror from
doing on his own responsibility, he will do without
compunction when joined by a great number. How
many of those Jews who raised the frantic shout,
" Away with Him ! crucify Him ! " would have done
so by themselves ? Justice to human nature, with
all its shortcomings, compels us to suppose that
very few of them could have been so steeped in

BARTIIVLEUS 171

cruelty. The crowd on this occasion was in no wise
different from others similarly constituted. It is
probable that many of them knew Bartimaeus
personally — knew him to be poor, blind, and helpless
— and they may have frequently expressed their
commiseration for him as they responded to his
appeal for alms. They must have known, moreover,
that Jesus possessed miraculous powers, and could,
if He wished, cure this man of his blindness, as He
had cured many others. Still, rather than that they
should be annoyed with his cries, or (shall we say ?)
rather than that Jesus should be detained on His
journey, they charged the man to hold his peace.
" What do you mean ? " said they, " by making this
unseemly noise? Do you think the prophet has
time to attend to every suppliant that has the
assurance to trouble Him in this rude fashion ? You
ought to be ashamed of yourself." Don't you see
how miserably selfish they were, and how utterly
they had mistaken the disposition of our Lord ?
Suppose they themselves had been blind instead of
Bartimaeus, do you think they would have adopted
similar language ? do you think they would have
desired our Lord to pass heedlessly on ? It is not
likely. They were therefore far from being animated
by the spirit of love, which prompts men to do to
others as they would have others do to them. This
kind of selfishness is very prevalent in the world ;
we meet it on every hand ; and great is the mischief

BARTIftLEUS

wrought by it. It is, in most cases, the result of
thoughtlessness rather than of malice. Men don't
care to enter into the sorrows of others ; hence they
treat them with indifference, and any attempt to
alleviate them, which involves the least inconvenience
to themselves, provokes their opposition. A great
calamity happens ; but it does not touch them ; so
they think no more about it, and justify themselves
by saying that it is quite enough for them to bear
their own burdens. But this glaring thoughtlessness
is most culpable. It betokens a sad misapprehension
of man's position as a social being. This world will
never be set right until men learn the evil of self-
concentration — until men learn to regard the welfare
of others equally important with their own. Let no
man dream of shifting his responsibility to the society,
the community, or the country to which he belongs ;
let no man take shelter behind the multitude who
" do evil " ; before God every man stands or falls
by himself.

Bartimaeus, however, was not to be silenced by the
senseless exhortations of the crowd. He knew the
value of sight too well, through long deprivation, to
throw away this unique chance of obtaining it. Had
he been seeking something to which he did not
attach much value, it is likely that he would have
immediately held his peace ; he would not have
run the risk of incurring the displeasure of those
who commanded him, as it might have made them

BARTIM^US 173

withhold the alms upon which he was dependent.
But since he sought to recover his sight, the greatest
in his estimation of all earthly blessings, nothing could
prevail upon him to desist. Indeed, opposition only
made him cry the more, " Thou Son of David^ have
mercy on me!" His conduct remains for all time a
conspicuous example of indomitable importunity. Can
any one wonder at his conduct? Is it not the very
conduct we might have expected from one thoroughly
in earnest? And we may say that it has been
repeated times without number in the cases of men
who, having been awakened to the reality of their
spiritual blindness, have sought the illumination of
God's Spirit. We need not refer to martyrs and
confessors of past ages, who in spite of the penalties
inflicted upon them, in spite of spoliation, imprison
ment, torture, and death, persisted in calling upon
the name of the Lord. We rejoice to know that
there are men now, scattered all over the earth,
whom no conceivable consideration could induce to
cease praying for God's mercy. Worldly men may
mock them, laugh them to scorn, and call them
enthusiasts, fanatics, and madmen ; it matters not,
for the surpassing excellence of the prize for which
they strive has made them determined to obtain
it.

Evidently Jesus' true character was not yet
generally known. It is indeed doubtful whether
His own disciples had any idea of the intense joy

1/4 BARTI1VLEUS

He felt in relieving the distressed. His boundless
compassion was such, that neither friend nor foe
could appreciate or comprehend it. No music was
sweeter to His ears than the cry of the helpless
seeking help. Imagine the astonishment of those
who charged Bartimaeus and his companion to be
quiet, when they found that Jesus called them, and
was ready to attend to their case. After all, what
they had ignorantly thought would annoy Him, only
gave Him pleasure. On this occasion, as on many
others, He manifested the most glorious feature in
His character — the feature which pre-eminently
qualifies Him to be the Saviour of the lost — His
sympathy with the lowly and wretched. What if,
like the priest and the Levite in the parable, He
had passed by on the other side, never pretending
to hear these poor men's supplication ! What a
different impression we should have had of His
character and disposition ! What a gloom it would
have cast over the hearts of those who need His
aid ! But He did nothing of the kind ; on the
contrary, His demeanour on this occasion is calculated
to inspire with confidence the most despised and
miserable of men who may cry to Him for mercy.
Let it be known everywhere ; let it be proclaimed
wherever there is sin and woe, that the love of
Christ is unbounded, and that no man coming to
Him need fear to be cast out.

The question which our Lord puts to Bartimaeus

BARTIM^US 175

strikes us as being somewhat strange. He who
knew all things asks, " What wilt thou that I should
do unto thee?" We are inclined to ask, Why
should He put him this question? Did He not
know well enough what he wanted ? nay, did not
every man in the crowd know it ? Yet this fact
serves to illustrate what seems remarkable in con
nection with prayer at all times. Why should God
require us to pray for the things that we need ?
Does He not know our wants even better than we
do ourselves? We are told, "Ask, and it shall be
given you ; seek, and ye shall find ; knock, and it
shall be opened unto you : for every one that asketh
receiveth ; and he that seeketh findeth ; and to him
that knocketh it shall be opened" And again, " What
soever ye shall ask in My name, that will I do" And
again, "If any of you lack wisdom, let him ask of
God, that giveth to all men liberally, and upbraideth
not ; and it shall be given him" Thus for some
wise purpose, which we are not at present able to
fathom, God imparts spiritual gifts only to those
that ask for them. The sinner who feels a load of
guilt lying upon his conscience, must ask God to
remove it ; the Christian beset by the trials and
temptations of life, must ask God for strength to
overcome them. Whenever, therefore, we draw nigh
to God in prayer, we must have a definite request
to make ; for this is an indispensable condition of
success.

176 BARTIM/EUS

Observe the words with which our Lord accom
panies the exercise of His great power, " Go thy way ;
thy faith Jiath made thee whole? In these words
our Lord appears to affirm by implication that
Bartimaeus received only what was his by a sort
of right ; something which He himself could not
well withhold ; something which the man's faith
fairly claimed. " Thy faith hath made thee whole"
He takes no credit to Himself; but wishes to impress
upon Bartimaeus, and upon all who witnessed the
transaction, the mighty power of faith. And this
instance is not alone in this respect. On other
occasions when conferring miraculous gifts, He
employed similar words. He regarded such cases
as so many confirmations of the truth of His own
doctrine ; for He taught that faith could do all things,
that faith could remove mountains into the midst of the
sea. The age of miracles is past ; the blind no longer
receive their sight in answer to prayer ; still the
power of faith is no less in the spiritual realm than
it was of old. Though salvation — the healing of the
diseased soul — is altogether of God ; though we have,
in one sense, no right to the least spiritual gift ; we
are taught in the gospel that eternal life — the gift
of gifts — is ours if we only believe. " He that believeth
on the Son hath eternal life " / it is his lawful
inheritance ; there is no power imaginable that can
deprive him of it. How great then the privilege of
all who hear the gospel ! They are freely invited

BARTIMLEUS 17;

to believe ; and when they believe " all things are
tJicirs ; whether Paul, or Apollos, or Cephas ', or the
world, or life, or death, or things present, or things to
come ; all are theirs, and they are Christ's, and Christ
is God's."

Two questions present themselves to the reflecting
mind which are not difficult to answer.

In the first place, why has the story of Bartimaeus
— and others of a similar character — been so minutely
recorded? It is because Jesus, the mighty Healer,
still walks the earth. These were the words with
which He took leave of His disciples on the Mount
of Olives, " Lo, I am with you alway, even to the
end of the world'' When we read the records of the
evangelists, when we ponder over the marvellous
incidents by which the life of Christ was distinguished,
we seem to be contemplating a state of things which
no longer exists, we seem to be tracing the footsteps
of One, who, for a brief period, appeared among men,
and then disappeared for ever. The impression is
a true one in a superficial sense ; but then there is a
sense in which it is not true. The fact is, that Jesus
Christ is a living presence in our midst to-day, as
truly as when He was seen and heard in the land of
Judea nineteen hundred years ago. He went about
doing good then, He comforted the broken-hearted,
healed the sick, and raised the dead then ; and He
goes about doing good now, He comforts the sorrow
ful, heals the afflicted, and raises up those who are

M

i;8 BARTIM^US

" dead in trespasses and sins " now. He very often
passes by every one of us, He gives us a thousand
opportunities of seeking His aid, and of crying for His
mercy. Every time we hear the gospel, every time
we read His words, every time our thoughts are
directed to eternal realities, He is near to us ; and,
were our spiritual perceptions not so woefully blunted,
we should always feel His presence. His treatment
of Bartimseus has been detailed in order that we
may surely know what we can expect at His hands
when we invoke His aid.

In the second place, what became of Bartimaeus
after this wonderful event ? His subsequent history
is almost altogether a matter of conjecture. We
have but a few words to guide us, but those words
are so full of significance that volumes might be based
upon them. One evangelist says, "And immediately
he received his sight \ and followed Jesus in the way"
Another evangelist, referring to his companion as
well as himself, says, "And immediately their eyes
received sight, and they followed Him" We may
reasonably suppose that his companion was only a
commonplace man, who never distinguished himself
in holy service, and whose name, for that reason, has
perished. Bartimseus, on the contrary, became an
active worker in the cause of truth. He joined
himself to that noble army of witnesses who devoted
their lives to proclaim the glory of their Saviour-
King. For many years to come — so we infer — he

BARTIM^US 179

was a conspicuous adherent of the new faith, and
foremost among its confessors. He was not learned,
but he knew one thing ; that Christ had given him
sight, both physical and spiritual ; and that knowledge
made him steadfast in the face of hardships, perse
cution, and even death. And so his name has been
enrolled among the immortals, whose heroism, fidelity
to principle, and unquenchable love to God and man,
helped to establish Christianity on an immovable
foundation.

ZACCHEUS
BY REV. J. G. GREENHOUGH, M.A.

ZACCHEUS

"A man that is a sinner. . . . A son of Abraham." — ST LUKE
xix. 7, 9-

IT was like Jesus to single out Zaccheus from a
whole cityful of people as the man to entertain Him.
Jesus never did things as He was expected to do
them, but always as no other man would have done
them.

Zaccheus had never been so astonished before in
his life as when he heard Jesus say : " Come down ; for
to-day I must abide at thy house" If the sycamore
tree had talked to him, he would not have been more
surprised. And the people around were indignantly
and angrily surprised. Going to stay with a publican,
what does He mean ? The modern publican is not
much loved by religious people, but his name and
trade are not in half such bad repute as were those
publicans of old to the average Jew.

All know what their business was. Tax-gatherers
for the Roman Government — paid servants of a
government which the Jews hated, and not over
honest withal, as a rule. They paid the government

1 84 ZACCHEUS

a fixed sum, and kept all that was over for them
selves. That system was just the one to make rogues,
and hearts as hard as grindstones, and it usually did.
The publicans bled the poor taxpayers to the last
drop, and grew rich on extortion. Some of them
tried to be just, but it was difficult, and they got
little credit for it. They were loathed as a class —
good, bad, and indifferent among them grouped
together as sinners, and coupled with harlots, as
outside human charity and beyond the reach of God's
mercy.

Zaccheus had probably been a little above the
average, with a few soft places in his heart. Not
quite like the nether millstone. But he had grown
rich in the business. His hands had not always been
clean. He doubtless deserved some of the evil
notoriety in which he stood ; and when Jesus singled
him out for a sort of special honour, a shudder went
through the crowd as they murmured, " That He was
gone to be a giiest with a man that is a sinner" They
were right ; he was a sinner. He had been unmistak
ably a sinner, that was what they saw in him, and it
was all they saw and all they wished to see. Jesus
looked deeper. He always looked deeper than other
people. If there was the least spark of grace or
remnant of goodness in a man, Jesus never over
looked that. There was another side to this man
Zaccheus which Jesus at once discovered. He had
a conscience that was uneasy at the remembrance of

ZACCHEUS 185

wrong-doing. He had the beginning of repentance
and faith, and longing for a better life. He was eager
to make restitution of all that he had got unjustly.
He was anxious to begin again on fairer, straighter
lines. He was ashamed of his past life, and probably
very miserable because no one believed in him. He
just wanted some strong tender hand to help him up,
and when Jesus spoke to him in that kindly way, it
was almost as if heaven had opened. Jesus saw all
this, the other, better side of the man. To the people,
he was only Zaccheus the sinner ; to the clearer eyes
of Jesus, he was a son of Abraham, with a little of
Abraham's faith. Read the story in that way, and it
suggests various thoughts to us.

I.

Zaccheus was not one man but two, and in this
respect he is a type of humanity.

He is a mirror in which every one of us can see his
own face if he will. If there is no other resemblance
between you and this publican, you are like him in
that. There are two men in every man, two women
in every woman. There are sometimes four or five,
or even twenty, but there are always at least two.
And the two have often very little in common. They
are inconsistent, out of harmony, antagonistic ; they

1 86 ZACCHEUS

rarely agree ; they are engaged in perpetual quarrel ;
they are yoked together like two creatures that hate
each other ; they are like two married people whose
union is burdensome to each, and who would like to
be separated but cannot : and each of them gets the
upper hand in turns.

It is as if you had two masters, each one having
his day when he controls and orders you about. One
is the sinner, and the other the son of Abraham ; one
does all the wrong things, and the other repents of
them ; one prays or would like to pray, the other
either forgets to pray or flouts prayer ; one is hard,
unfeeling, ungenerous, keeps as tight a hold upon the
purse as Judas did, the other is tender, sympathetic,
tearful ; one is envious, jealous, unforgiving, the other
is pitiful, forbearing, easy to be entreated ; one is
sensual, animal, with its eyes fixed earthwards, and
its affections set on coarse delights and material
good, the other has the face of an angel or a child,
its eyes look upward, its thoughts are pure and
spiritual; one is forgetful of everything except the
enjoyments of the present time and the passing day,
the other is conscious of immortality, it has visions of
a future life, it hears voices from the eternal world.

We all have these two men in us, not in the same
degree, but in some degree. The best of you have
a little of the publican mixed with the nobler
Abraham. The ripest saint is weighed down with
the burden of another and coarser self; and the whole

ZACCHEUS 187

endeavour of the Christian man and the Christian
life is a battle between these two : the ceaseless effort
of the higher to subdue the lower, of the divine to
overpower and cast out its hated yoke-fellow. We
know that this is true of Christ's people ; we feel it.
The sinner and the son of Abraham — every godly
man holds these antagonisms.

But it is no less true in a minor degree of those
who make no religious profession. The double
Zaccheus is in them also, the sinner and the tiny bit
of Abraham. Just a spark of Abraham's faith and
goodness in the pitchy darkness of sin. It is not
the sinner, it is the bit of Abraham, that brings
some of you to God's house. One man in you
proposes to spend the evening in the streets or
parks ; the other man said, No, I should like to be in
the place where they talk about God, Jesus, and
eternity. The publican in you drew one way, and
the Abraham in you another. You have often a little
tug and wrestle of that kind ; you have all the
fluttering, feeble wings of aspiration in you, though
they are often folded down unused, and you even
forget that you have them. Underneath that coarser
nature of yours there is a soul with gleams of divinity
shining about it, though for the most part it is like a
thing stowed away and forgotten. But at times God
brings it out and shows it to you, and then you are
ashamed of your other and baser self. There is some
giddy, giggling, frivolous girl of whom I am told that

188 ZACCHEUS

she thinks of nothing but dress, gaiety, silly books,
and flirting. I know better. She has serious
moments ; there are times when something stirs the
deeper waters ; she has dreams of goodness. And
the young man whose life is spent with fast com
panions, whose thoughts seem never to get above
sports, betting, and low indulgences, even he has his
solemn moments, when visions of better things float
past, and he despises and hates the poor vile thing he
is. There are always these two men in every man :
the sinner and the son of Abraham.

II.

It is always the Abraham in a man, the truer
and diviner man, that Jesus sees, lays hold
of, and appeals to.

Of course Jesus sees the sinner as well, all the
foulness and ungodliness of him, but He never fails
to see the Abraham and to work upon that. He saw
at once that Zaccheus was something more and
better than the people took him for. It was as if
our Lord had said, you judge this man entirely from
his outside features ; you find nothing in him but the
hard, greedy, grinding tax-gatherer, the unfeeling
money-maker, the soulless machine, the vampire
sucking your blood. You treat him from that point

ZACCHEUS 189

of view, and in so doing you help to make him what
he is on his worst side ; you strengthen the evil part
of him, you crush and extinguish the good in him by
refusing to believe in it.

For that was precisely what they were doing.
What was the use of a publican trying to be an
honest man, when no matter how he tried, everybody
was still of opinion that he was a rogue. He gave up
trying to be generous, when he found that no one
expected him to be generous or believed in his
generosity. He gradually lost self-respect, because
he saw nothing but contempt and dislike in the faces
that met him. He came at last to feel : It is of no
use — better things are not for me. I cannot gain
friendship, affections, and the trust of my fellow-men ;
there is nothing left for me except to make as much
money as I can, and not be particular about the
means. They call me a sinner, and that must be my
line. There is many a man who goes down like that,
because people see nothing but his worst, and do not
believe that there is any better in him.

But when Jesus spoke to Zaccheus, and called him
down, and treated him as if he was not quite dead in
sin, not wholly abandoned to the devil, a change came
over the man's thoughts. It made him believe in
himself again. What ! this holy prophet thinks I am
worth speaking to. This man of God does not utterly
despise me ; He is not ashamed to be my guest ; He
sees that I am not all that the people deem me ; He

190 ZACCHEUS

believes in me. That came like a reviving breath.
The self-respect of the man sprang up again in a
moment. He saw his own truer self in a swift vision.
He began to repent, to hope, to long for better things.
The Abraham in him came up as from its grave.
Lord, he said, I am ready to do anything that will
undo the past and set my feet upon a higher way.
Jesus had brought salvation to him, because Jesus
had taken him by the better side, begun by recog
nising the better side, and treating him as one who
could be and ought to be saved.

And that surely is the only way in which we can
help and save men now. However bad, vile, unclean
they are, we must approach them on the assumption
that even in them there is some trace of God's image
left — something that is not animal. We must start by
recognising the Abraham in them. We must lay
hold of the bit of good in them before we can make
that bit of good more. Men have a tendency to
become what we are determined to believe they are.
They show us what we expect to see. If we regard
them simply as coarse, sensual, grovelling creatures,
we help to make them that, at least we never help
them to be more than that, and that is all they ever
will be if all other people regard them as we do. If
we would lay hold of the worst men to do them good,
we must credit them, at least, with some desire for
good ; we must credit them with just a little right,
true, and honest feeling ; we must credit them with

ZACCHEUS 191

just a faint glimmer of religiousness ; we must believe
that they have occasional stirrings of pure conscience,
and spasmodic movements of the soul towards higher
things. We cannot save them so long as we see
nothing but the sinner in them. It is through the
bit of Abraham in them that they must be saved. It
is the bit of Abraham in the worst men that Jesus
uses as a lever to raise them into sons of God.

If I were appealing to the most confirmed and
hardened sinner, there would be two ways of address
ing him. I might say, You are as bad as bad can be ;
and you know it : you are full of uncleanness, your
heart and life are just the hold of every foul spirit,
and there is an awful hell in reserve for you. I
might talk to him in that way ; or I might take the
other line, and say, You had a mother who prayed
for you, and you have not forgotten it : you were in
the Sunday-school, and some of its lessons remain :
you have heard that Jesus died for you, and you have
more than once been touched by the thought there is
something in you which God loves, and He would not
love nothing but a lump of vileness : you many a
time wish that you could be a better man, and that
proves there is still something good left. Which of
these two ways would be more effective? I know,
and every one here knows.

If Jesus were to come among us, and go from one
to another, the best and the worst, making His tender
appeal, there is not one, however seemingly irreligious,

192 ZACCHEUS

whom He would not address as a religious creature.
He would say you are not just what men think you
are, you are not exactly what you seem to yourselves,
you are something more. There are times when
prayer stirs in you, or at least something very much
like prayer. There are times when you wish to turn
away from the evil that you are doing, when you are
a little sick or weary of your sinful life, when you are
ashamed of your past and anxious about your future,
when you feel that you have souls worth saving.
Jesus would say, in the name of these things, I plead
with you ; let Me come into your hearts that I may
strengthen, perfect, and multiply these things. So
Christ would speak, appealing to the son of Abraham
in you ; and so in Christ's name would I speak to you
now and always.

LAZARUS
BY RKV. T. RHONDDA WILLIAMS

LAZARUS

THE story of the raising of Lazarus from the grave
requires, to many readers, some sort of explanation
other than that which lies on the surface. They
cannot believe, on the amount of available evidence,
that a man who had been really dead for four days
came back to live again among his fellows on the
earth. They are met at once by the fact that none of
the first three Gospels records this miracle. No other
miracle so extraordinary is recorded of Jesus. If He
performed this, it was His greatest. The daughter of
Jairus had only just died ; the son of the widow of
Nain was on the way to burial ; but Lazarus had
been dead four days.

Upon the most conservative computation the Fourth
Gospel was not written until about fifty years after
the death of Jesus. Is it conceivable that such an
extraordinary fact as the raising of Lazarus would
remain so long unrecorded, and that three Gospels
should be made to tell the story of Jesus, and leave
this crowning miracle out of the record ? If it took

195

196 LAZARUS

place, its very nature would make it well known, and
much talked of; how could it be ignored?

Moreover, there are difficulties in the story itself.
"Jesus wept" Wendt pertinently suggests the
question : why ? If Jesus, as He looked upon the
weeping women, knew, that in a few minutes, He
would give them back their brother alive, why should
He " groan in spirit " ? Would He not say at once :
" Be comforted, I will restore him to you immediately " ?
Is it thinkable that one who was immediately going
to reanimate the dead should weep over his death ?
How could tears be real in such a case ? Then again,
the place of the story in the general scheme and in
relation to the evident purport of the Gospel must be
considered. This is the seventh great miracle of an
ascending series, beginning with the miracle of Cana,
all designed to form an impressive demonstration
that Jesus was the Messiah. The evangelist leaves
us in no doubt that this was the purpose of his Gospel.
" These things are written that ye may believe that
Jesus is the Christ \ the Son of God" And this is
known from the outset of His career. Here John
differs from the Synoptics irreconcilably. According
to the first three Gospels, Jesus is with the disciples
for a considerable time before He gets from them the
confession that He is the Messiah. His own desire
is to conceal the fact from the public until His hour
is come. In the Fourth Gospel, He is recognised as
Messiah at His baptism by John the Baptist, and His

LAZARUS 197

first miracle was done in order to proclaim His
Messiahship — the very first was the beginning of signs.
This writer sets out, then, with the definite purpose
of demonstrating the Messiahship, and he arranges
his material accordingly. While he again and again
asserts that Jesus did many signs, it is significant that
he selects seven — the perfect number to be a perfect
proof — the seven are in an ascending scale, with the
raising of Lazarus as the crowning miracle. And
where these belong to the same class as the miracles
of the Synoptics, they are more wonderful. If Jesus
cures a lame man, it is a man who has been lame
thirty-eight years ; if He gives sight to the blind, it is
to one who had been blind from birth; if He raises
the dead, it is one who has been four days in the
grave ! If this is not the record of a literal fact, why
is the time set at four days? Schmiedel quotes
Lightfoot and Wettstein on the Jewish belief that " the
soul of the departed lingers about the body for three
days, ready to return into it if possible; on the
fourth day it definitely takes its departure, because
it sees that the countenance is wholly changed. For
the same reason, the identification of the body of a
person whom one has known in life, is held to be
possible only for the first three days ; after that the
change is too great to admit it." Schmiedel quotes
further testimony to the same view from The Rest
of the Words of Baruch^ a work near the time of
Jesus. This belief would give the author the material

198 LAZARUS

for his story of wonder, the wonder put into the mouth
of Martha : " Lord, by this time he stinketh, for he
hath been dead four days " / The wonder of re-
animation on the second or third day would not
have been so great. There is no necessity to regard
the raising of Lazarus as a literal fact in order to
account for the existence of the story — the story
could very well have come without the fact.

That, however, does not disprove the fact, it only
destroys the evidential value of the story as regards
the fact. There was the story of Elisha raising a
corpse to life, and the belief recorded in Matthew
that when Jesus died many saints rose from their
graves and went into the city !

It is possible for some minds to believe to-day that
the raising of Lazarus was a literal fact, and a miracle
in the ordinary sense of the word, though they could
not satisfactorily explain its omission from the other
Gospels, nor the fact that Jesus wept while He knew
that He was about to turn mourning into joy. There
are others who believe it was a fact, but not a miracle ;
that it was one of many cases of trance. It is pos
sible that the undoubted fact of resuscitation which
had often occurred, and which occurs yet, may have
had something to do with the Jewish belief previously
referred to, that the soul lingers for three days about
the body. Another possible explanation of the story
of Lazarus is that it is the materialisation of a
spiritual fact. That is undoubtedly the way in which

LAZARUS 199

some miracle stories arose. Dr Percy Gardner quotes
the striking case of Mohammed's saying, "God
opened my heart," which was meant in a spiritual
sense, coming at length to a material interpretation,
and working out into a detailed story of a physical
miracle. We can easily imagine that the presence
and words of Jesus would be such a lifting help to
sorrowing sisters, that they would almost feel as if
their brother had been given back to them. The
present writer can very vividly recall the day of his
mother's funeral, when, in a little chapel between the
Welsh hills, he bowed his head to touch her coffin
while the minister prayed. The world was dark, and
to the youth of fifteen the realms of life were songless.
He was about to leave home for school in a distant
town : he had hoped to anchor his soul in a cor
respondence with his mother ; but, alas, she was dead,
dead ! He was desolate and despairing. But there
was an old patriarch in the pulpit whom he regarded
as a great saint of God, who had often touched his
youthful spirit to mystic wonder and adoration. The
old man prayed, and it was like a high priest enter
ing the Holy of Holies ; he so played upon the words
of a verse — "fled to lay hold on the hope set before
them " — that the boy felt as if he saw his mother in
the other life laying hold of its treasures, and still
somehow remaining his real mother all the time.
The feeling was so strong, that when the bowed head
was raised, death itself had been transfigured, and

200 LAZARUS

hope shone again upon the world. Even to this day,
that experience is often recalled, and the great fact of
resurrection sings in triumph over death.

What must Jesus have been to people in such
sorrow ? He to whom life not death, beauty not
desolation, were the great facts, and to whom God
was so real. Could He not put Mary and Martha
in the hold of life so richly, that they would feel to
have triumphed over death. The story of such a
spiritual experience, like the spiritual saying of
Mohammed, might in the after-time become the
story of a physical miracle. If that were accepted
as the explanation, would anything vital be lost?
Nothing. Should we not miss one great proof of
Jesus Christ's Divinity ? Not so. The raising of
the body of Lazarus from the grave would not prove
Him to be God. The old Unitarians believed in
all the miracles, while they denied the Deity. That
contention claims more than it intends. Elisha
also, on that ground, might be proved to be God.
Miracles are no argument for Christ or Christian
ity. The Divinity of Jesus was in His Spirit — where
else can Divinity be? The power to heal the
broken-hearted and to raise up those who are bowed
down is the Divine power, wherever we find it ; and
it is the extraordinary measure of it in Jesus that
gave Him His hold upon the world, and that will
keep us at His feet in prayer and adoration, as long
as we know the struggling heart and the aspiring

LAZARUS 201

spirit. Nor are we without some indication in the
story itself that this was what happened.

Wendt seems to the present writer to be the most
illuminating commentator of the Fourth Gospel. It
seems impossible to understand it as a unit. There
is the remarkable fact that the evangelist relies
upon signs as proofs, and represents Jesus as
beginning the signs at the wedding-feast of Cana
for the sake of demonstrating His Messiahship,
while, at the same time, he records words of Jesus
which depreciate and discourage signs! In the
Synoptics, Jesus refuses signs as proofs, and says
that only " a crooked and stubborn generation " would
ask for them. Many a point in the discourses in
the Fourth Gospel endorses that attitude, and yet
the evangelist is marshalling signs as proofs !

Nicodemus introduces himself to Jesus as a
believer in the miracles, but Jesus insists that he
must be born from above ! Suppose, then, that the
evangelist succeeded in his aim — viz., to get men to
believe on the evidence of miracles that Jesus was
the Messiah — would not Jesus turn to them as to
Nicodemus and say, " Ye must be born from above "
— new birth, regenerated character, admits to the
kingdom, not belief in miracles ? The point is that
in the Fourth Gospel itself, the point of view of the
discourses is different from that of the evangelist.
To account for this, Wendt maintains that the
evangelist was making use of an older document,

202 LAZARUS

which he calls the Source. The Source included
historical sayings of Jesus, and some compositions.
Wendt undertakes to separate the Source from
the work of the evangelist, and it throws a most
helpful light on many difficult passages. The parts
of chapter xi., which belong to the Source, or have
their basis in the Source, are these: verses I, 3, 5,
6-10, 16-35, 38. If the reader will mark these
off from the rest in his New Testament, he will find
a story consistent in itself, not including the physical
miracle of raising the dead, but showing how Jesus
gave Mary and Martha this deep genuine human
sympathy, and this Divine helpful truth in such a
way as could in the after-time work out into the
other story of physical miracle. The most important
words in the narrative are those of verses 25, 26 :
"Jesus said unto her, I am the resurrection and tJie
life : lie that believeth on Me, though he die, yet shall
Jie live : and whosoever liveth and believeth on Me shall
never die'' These words do not refer to physical life,
nor to one special case. Jesus had told Martha,
" Thy brother shall rise again? Martha thought He
referred to physical resurrection, and said she
knew he would rise in the last day. If Jesus had
meant physical resurrection, He would have re
plied, " I will raise him now " ; or He would have
endorsed Martha's faith in the resurrection of the
last day. He did neither ; He pointed her to a
different sort of fact altogether for her comfort. " /

LAZARUS 203

am the resurrection " — the resurrection is not an
event, not something that is to happen ; nor is it a
doctrine ; the resurrection is spiritual personality
and character ! " / am the resurrection and the life,
and whosoever believeth in Me" shareth Me, My
nature, My character : " though he die, yet shall he
liver

The word "whosoever" shows that Jesus is not
speaking of the one special case of Lazarus which
is going to be an exception; the resurrection he
speaks of is the fact in the case of all believers ; He
could not have been thinking of a miracle that was
going to be done, but the contrary. He was
referring her to a great spiritual truth which held
good for all. What was to be Martha's comfort
regarding Lazarus? The hope that he, the friend
and lover of Jesus had shared that spiritual life to
which death was not a reality. It was in the hold
of this mighty spiritual fact which regards death as
a mere episode in the onward march of the soul,
that Jesus sought to put those sorrowing women.
And He was so human with it all. He could go
with them to the grave, and weep with them in the
anguish of a temporary separation.

The spiritual truth is a lift and a comfort, and
it is the only real victory, but it does not take away
all pain, nor dry the tears at once.

If Jesus gave them back their brother alive, it
would be a great wonder ; but the sorrow would

204 LAZARUS

have to be faced again, for death would come back.
Nor would the fact be of any use to us in similar
circumstances : we could not hope for like comfort.
But if Jesus by giving them a rich triumphant
spiritual faith lifted them through pain and tears
into victory at length, He did them the greatest
good ; and the fact remains a source of inspiration
and help for ever to the children of faith in the
places of fear, and shines a lamp of everlasting
hope for them as they enter the valley of the
Shadow of Death.

JUDAS ISCARIOT
BY REV. P. CARNEGIE SIMPSON, M.A.

JUDAS ISCARIOT

(Sx MARK iii. 19.)

WE speak of the twelve disciples, but there were
not twelve disciples. A disciple is one who learns
the mind of his Master. Judas Iscariot was "one of
the twelve" but he was never a disciple of Jesus
Christ. In this single and simple fact is the key
to the tragic story of the traitor.

A great deal has been written about Judas, and
various very intricate and subtle theories have been
spun of his character. The idea in some people's
mind seems to be that the life of the most in
famous man in history must be explained only by
extraordinary considerations. But this is a mistaken
assumption. The way to death is a broad way.
The lost soul — even if he be a Judas — needs no
subtle theories to explain how he was lost. There
is something artificial and untrue to life in elaborate
and ingenious accounts of the tragedy of Judas :
his own account of it, if he had confessed it, would
have been something much simpler. And it may
be added, that a true account of Judas must be

207

208 JUDAS ISCARIOT

stern and solemn. There are theories of his character
which would whitewash his guilt, and make him
rather a merely mistaken than a lost man. No
picture of Judas is true, the effect of which is to
minimise the terrible words about him that " it were
A better for that man if he had never been born''

Let us, then, glance over his story, and try to
read it as it is written, at once plainly, so as to
need no artificial light to make it intelligible, and
yet also darkly, with an awful doom.

The first distinctive fact we know about Judas is
that he joined Christ's company. It is not con
ceivable that he would have done this without some
elements of good in his motives, possibly even pre
ponderating in them. But we are only too clearly
told of at least one thing in his character, which
developed even in his discipleship, and proved a
canker in it. Judas was mercenary. This was a
characteristic, not only of his nationality, but of the
particular district of Jewism to which he belonged.
He was of Kerioth — a Judean, therefore, and not,
as were the other disciples, Galilean. The two
districts have marked physical and geographical
differences, and their inhabitants also differed in
character. "The Galileans," said a verse in the
Talmud, "were more anxious for honour than for
money; but the reverse was true of the Judeans."
It would be unjust to stigmatise Judas as mercenary
merely on the strength of a generalisation such as

JUDAS ISCARIOT 209

this, but the definite facts and statements in the
gospel narrative make it clear, that only too well
did he sustain this evil reputation of the district of
his birth. His niggardliness appears from the way
in which he grudged the box of spikenard which a
grateful love lavished on Jesus ; while his actual
dishonesty is affirmed in the statement, that he
stole from the common funds of the apostolic
company, of which he had become the treasurer.

It may he asked : How did such a man — a man
both ungenerous and even unprincipled — ever think
of joining the fortunes of Jesus ? I have said that
doubtless there were some good motives in his
doing so, but it is not difficult to see that there
was that about the call of the new Messiah which
would appeal to the unworthy side of Judas's nature.
We must never allow ourselves to forget that every
Jew imagined that the Messiah's kingdom would be
a political kingdom. To the more spiritually minded
it was a moral kingdom too, but to them as well
as to others it was " a restoring again of the kingdom
to Israel" out of the usurping hands of Rome.
All the disciples looked for this — almost to the
very end. And among them, Judas thought of it,
and therefore the prospect of what we might call
"the sweets of office" rose before his mind. One
need not make too much of this. And there was
in it nothing morally wrong. It was in what
followed that this, which Judas had in his mind in

O

210 JUDAS ISCARIOT

common with all the disciples, became in his case
his ruin. As I have already said, he was never a
disciple. Let me explain.

All the disciples had this material expectation
regarding the Messiah. Now, we know that Jesus
utterly disappointed this. He refused to be made
King. He set up no political propaganda. He
declared that His kingdom was not of this world.
And — though reluctantly and very slowly — eleven
of the disciples learned this new programme, their
old ideas clung to their minds, but still they too
learned the Master's mind. They had a personal
devotion to Him which was stronger than any
political disappointment. It was hard for Peter
and John to give up the idea of thrones on the
Messiah's right hand and left, but at any rate one
thing was sure — they never could give Him up !

But with Judas it was otherwise. His loyalty
received a shock when he found that Jesus would
not follow paths that led to material success and
political power. His disappointment proved greater
than his devotion. When he joined the following
of Jesus, this Judean may very well have had some
personal attachment and attraction towards Him ;
but if so, this was only one tie among others which
were more selfish and material. And now, when
Jesus deliberately broke all ties to Himself which
were of the lower kind, and made a personal love
to Him, and a learning of His mind, the one reason

JUDAS ISCARIOT 211

why His followers should hold on to Him, Judas
reconsidered his position. He began to realise that
to cast in his lot with Jesus was turning out to be
something different from what he had expected.
When the popular prophet, round whom multitudes
were thronging, and who seemed to be the Man of
the day and of the future, said, "Follow Me," Judas
obeyed. The acceptance involved no great sacrifice,
and contained the prospect of real gain. But when
the Master, the crowds now growingly hostile, and
the future uncertain and even ominous, said " Learn
of Me" — learn to seek first the kingdom of God
in My sense of that word, a sense that does not mean
earthly honour and power and riches, Judas hesitated.
He felt he had made a mistake in ever becoming
one of this Man's following. They had different
ideas of things. And so Judas refused to learn of
Jesus — to be really His disciple.

Probably matters remained in this state for some
time. He remained with the company of Jesus.
No definite reason emerged to precipitate his
departure. But he did not remain the same man.
Constant intercourse must result either in an increase
or a diminution of intimacy. During this time,
while the others were getting to know Jesus better,
learning His thoughts and accepting His aims, Judas
was drifting away and getting more and more out
of sympathy with it all. He was still of the Twelve,
but he was the outsider among the disciples.

212 JUDAS ISCARIOT

At last, things developed so as to bring matters
between Jesus and him to a crisis. It was at
Bethany. Jesus persisted in setting His face to go to
Jerusalem. The city was now bitterly hostile, and to
go there meant for Him and for His company danger,
and perhaps death. The disciples knew this.
Thomas did not disguise it when he said, " Let us go
to Jerusalem that we may die with Him." Judas
heard Thomas say that. He made no remark, but
that night he did not sleep. He had a question to
answer. How long he was going to keep up this
farce of discipleship with Jesus — a farce that now
threatened to develop into a tragedy ?

Why should he go to Jerusalem and die with
Jesus? Why should he? What had Jesus given
him that in return he should imperil his life ? Jesus
had brought him nothing but disillusionment. By
this time, they should have been the favourite
ministers of a popular monarch : instead of that, they
were involved in a discredited faction which was now
in imminent peril of bringing down on its leader and
His associates death itself. Judas made up his mind
that certainly he for one was not going to put his
head in a trap for Jesus' sake — of all men.

Why did he not simply desert that night ? Ah,
why indeed did he not ? But Judas was not merely
disappointed : he was bitter. Desertion might have
been enough if he had only been the former, but to
the bitter " revenge is sweet" Now, why was Judas

JUDAS ISCARIOT 213

thus bitter against Jesus? There was a moral
reason for that For days, and weeks, and months,
he had been living a false life in the very presence of
the searching purity of Jesus. He was therefore
constantly resisting good — good in its most powerful,
most convincing, most unanswerable expression.
Therefore he came to hate it. Appeals of the good
which are weak and ineffective, a bad man may resist
only with a kind of contempt. But appeals of good
which your conscience cannot answer and yet cannot
evade, a bad man comes to hate. Judas could
neither evade the purity of Jesus nor answer it, and
he came to hate Him. All that most devilish kind
of hate revived in his heart that night, and he went
forth, slipped through the dark olives, entered the
city early in the morning, not a deserter merely, but
the betrayer. He made his bargain with the priests.
He took any price. He could have named any
figure for the betrayal of Jesus, and, if it had been
the ordinary mercenary man of Kerioth who was
doing it, he would not have lost his chance of making
a good bargain. But it was a man whose heart was
flamed with satanic bitterness against the Holy One
of God. It was not the money he wanted, it was the
blood. He took, without bargain, the price of a mere
slave, when he might have held out for a ransom. It
was not, I say again, the money he wanted, it was
the blood of the Holy One.

This was the Judas to whom before the Supper,

2i4 JUDAS ISCARIOT

Jesus said : " Do it — quickly ! " Could any words
more terribly show how utterly and hopelessly he
was alienated from Jesus. What a word of despair
to come from the Saviour— that He should hurry this
lost man to his sin.

And this was the Judas — bitter and now hardened
— who betrayed Jesus with a kiss. The perfidy of
the act, the shocking callousness of it, the shameless
cynicism of it make that deed one of the most
graphic instances on record of the hardening power
of deliberate sinning in the face of light. As one
says, who had only too sad reason to know the truth
of his words,

"It hardens all within
And petrifies the feeling."

I shall refer in only two or three sentences to the
tragic sequel of this — the traitor's remorse and death.
The accounts of this in the gospel narrative and in
the Book of Acts are somewhat divergent, but the
facts of the revulsion of feeling in the mind of Judas
and of his violent end stand out clearly. His
distress of mind is sometimes taken to show that
Judas did not really mean to betray Jesus to death,
but only, as it had been said, to force His hand and
compel him to come out as a political Messiah, strong
enough to meet His enemies, and so on. The
remorse of Judas needs no such explanation. For
one thing, a bad deed looks to its doer very different

JUDAS ISCARIOT 215

when it is done, compared with what it looked merely
in proposal. Of Nero's murder of his mother,
Tacitus says that after the crime was carried out the
enormity of it was understood. So was it with the
crime of Judas. He had hit out at Jesus in his
bitterness and hatred, considering the awfulness of
what he was doing as little as he calculated its
market value, and when he saw the thing he had
actually done, even his soul shuddered. And there
was more than this in his remorse. His words to
the High Priest show a sickening sense of failure in
his heart. He had thought of this blow to get his
triumph over Jesus. But in the very moment of
what should have been his triumph, the unassailable
innocence of Jesus rose up before him, and he felt all
his cleverness and bitterness could never even touch
that. He had not triumphed over Jesus. Even
captive, bound, reviled, Jesus was utterly out of his
power to harm. Judas had struck only at himself.
The sense of the sublime heavenly superiority of
Jesus to anything that could be done to Him, and
the sense of the unutterable and infernal degradation
of himself, filled Judas with a helpless despair, and he
rushed forth to a dark and dreadful death.

Many warning lessons rise out of this tragic story,
but I shall take only one on the line of the view of
Judas, as a man who was one of the Twelve, but was
never a disciple.

216 JUDAS ISCARIOT

The way Judas was lost was by a daily falseness
and disloyalty to Christ. To the outward eye, his
betrayal of his Master seemed a sudden fall.
Doubtless, it stunned the other disciples when they
saw it. But it was not sudden. It was prepared for,
not merely by the repeated pilferings of the bag, but
also by his far oftener repeated secret refusals to
obey the voice of his Master, who would have led
him daily to higher things. Is there ever a sudden
fall? Now and then, we are scandalised by the
unexpected news that some one, prominent in
Church or State, has fallen into some great sin. We
call it a sudden fall, but, I ask, Is there ever a sudden
fall ? Is it not sudden only as a dynamite outrage is
sudden — unlocked for by us, but the result of long,
secret, underground preparation? It is by daily
private refusals of Christ and yieldings to sin that we
pave the way for, when circumstances are ripe for it,
some great and awful act of sin like that of Judas.

And, further, all this went on in Judas in the very
presence of Jesus Himself, went on in a man who
had to do with Jesus every day. With a meaning
deeper than the old Latin poet dreamed of, we may
say of the man that he saw goodness, and pined
away because he turned from it. Surely there is a
warning here which none of us can afford to neglect.
We are with Christ and the things of Christ con
stantly — in Church life and work, and in all the con
cerns of the evangel. In this very place, in the very

JUDAS ISCARIOT 217

holiest circle on earth, this man Judas sank into hell.
It is often said, and truly, that there is a way from
the darkest sin to Christ ; but it is also true that the
false soul finds a way even from the very presence of
the gospel to his ruin. You remember Bunyan's
remark at the close of the Pilgrims' Progress about
the end of poor Ignorance : " Then I saw that there
was a way to Hell even from the gates of Heaven."

The only thing that would have saved Judas was
that he should really have become the disciple of
Jesus. We are " of the twelve " — that is, of Christ's
company, of the Church. Are we disciples of Jesus ?
A man who comes to learn Christ's mind — about life,
about sin, about salvation, about God, about himself,
about everything — is His disciple. The disciple may /
fall like Peter, but he cannot be lost like Judas.

ST THOMAS
BY RRV. PRINCIPAL WALTER F. ADENEY, D.D.

ST THOMAS

THE word " Thomas " is the Aramaic for " twin," as
" Didymus " is the Greek. Therefore it is not a proper
name, and we do not know the actual name of the
apostle to whom it is attached as a descriptive title in
the New Testament. All sorts of quaint legends
have sprung up out of this simple title. Strangely
enough there was a wide-spread tradition that
Thomas was a twin brother of Jesus Christ. Then
there was a tradition that he had a twin sister
named Lysia. Dr Rendel Harris has combined his
great learning with much ingenuity, in tracing these
legends through successive ages and over widespread
areas, showing how they came to blend with ancient
indigenous pagan myths, especially the story of
Castor and Pollux. The twinship runs in various
channels. Again and again appear " Florus and
Laurus the patron saints of the horse, the great twin
brothers to whom the Dorians pray." Then the
martyrs Protasius and Gervasius are sucked into the
stream, the assonance of names indicating that they

221

222 ST THOMAS

are regarded as twins. Fascinating as this pursuit of
Church tradition over the region of ancient folk-lore
may be, it does not help us to understand much
about the apostle as he really lived. For this
knowledge we must go to the Gospels, and to the
Gospels only, nor are they very prolific of information
on the subject. Apart from the Fourth Gospel we
should know next to nothing about Thomas. But
that Gospel, in which he figures as a prominent
apostle, throws a series of flashes of light on his
character, so that he lives to us to-day with as
distinct an individuality as any of his companions.

Thomas appears in all the lists of the Apostles.
But we have no account of his call. In Matthew's
arrangement of the Twelve as couples he is associated
with Matthew — " Thomas and Matthew the publican'
(Matt. x. 3) ; and this fact has led to the suggestion
that possibly the two were twins. But that is not
likely, because in the case of two earlier instances the
relationship of brotherhood is stated — " Simon, who
is called Peter, and Andrew his brother" — "James
the son of Zebedee, and John his brother'' If there
were another pair of brothers it would be natural to
go on and read, " Thomas and Matthew his brother''
It must suffice, therefore, to know that Thomas
happened to be a twin ; his title — " nickname " we
might call it — got attached to him probably because
he had a very common name, such as Jude, as it
appears in his Apocryphal Acts. Then the designation

ST THOMAS 223

" twin " would distinguish him from other men named
Jude, of whom there were many.

But now, for our study of this apostle we must turn
to the Fourth Gospel. There he appears on four
occasions, each of intense interest. Great injustice
has been done to Thomas by neglecting the two
earlier scenes, and giving attention solely to the later-
Thus he is thought of simply as the doubter, and the
phrase " a doubting Thomas " has become pro
verbial. Thomas was much more than a doubter ;
and certainly his was not that chill spirit commonly
associated with the title " sceptic." The first scene in
which he becomes prominent is in the narrative of the
raising of Lazarus from the dead. Jesus is in Peraeaj
on the further side of the Jordan, out of the reach of
the Jewish Council at Jerusalem now bent on effecting
His destruction. It is the scene of John the Baptists'
activity, when he was baptizing multitudes in the
river. Here Jesus Himself had submitted to the rite ;
here, therefore, He had consecrated Himself to His
ministry. And now that ministry is drawing to a
close — a premature close, as it must appear to all His
friends, for it has lasted little more than two years,
and Jesus is still a young man, just in His prime.
But the career that had opened full of promise,
joyous, exultant, most welcome to the people, is now
darkened with disappointment, almost to despair.
There, at a safe distance, in the season of quiet
waiting, the lull before the storm, Jesus is carrying

224 ST THOMAS

on a ministry in comparative seclusion, chiefly
devoted to the training of His intimate disciples. In
the midst of this work a messenger arrives with
distressing news from His friends at Bethany.
Lazarus is ill, in imminent danger. The sisters do
not ask Jesus to come over to their aid. They know
how perilous that would be. But we can read
between the lines, and see that they are cherishing a
fond hope that He will come as soon as He hears of
their trouble. We can scarcely call this selfish on
their part, except as all keen domestic anxiety tends
to be selfish, seeing for the moment only its own
circle of agony. Love torn by grief cannot stay to
look beyond the one object of both emotions. But,
whether expected or not, Jesus determines to go.
With Him the cry of need is an imperative. It
always is such to unselfish love.

The disciples expostulate. The last time He was
at Jerusalem the Jews were trying to stone Him.
Bethany is but two miles from the city, a suburban
village. Will He venture into this neighbourhood
again ? As well go to meet a howling pack of
wolves. Jesus is not to be moved. His friends have
never succeeded in moving Him from any determina
tion of duty. Peter tried it once — when He first
announced that He would be rejected and killed ;
and Peter brought down on his own head one of the
most scathing rebukes that ever fell from his Lord's
lips. The lesson was not forgotten ; nobody ventures

ST THOMAS 225

to try to hinder Him now in the tone of Peter at
Caesarea. But they all see the gravity of Christ's
decision. It staggers them ; those usually foremost
among them are dumbfounded. Then an unwonted
voice is heard. It does not come from any one
in the inner group, the three who usually take the
lead and speak as representatives of their brethren.
It is Thomas who breaks the painful silence saying to
his fellow-disciples, " Let us also go, that we may die
witli Him"

It has been customary to point to this utterance as
an indication of despondency. On the strength of it,
when Thomas is not called " the doubting disciple,"
he is singled out as " the despondent disciple." Is
this quite fair? Is there any evidence that the other
disciples were a particle more hopeful ? Nay, as
regards the matter of his saying, was Jesus Himself
more hopeful ? Jesus had told His friends before this
that He would have to die when He went up to
Jerusalem. Thomas takes no more gloomy a view of
the situation than his Master had taken. Indeed, he
simply accepts Christ's own prediction, and bases his
proposal upon it. And he was right in his anticipa
tion. It is true Jesus did not die immediately He
went up to Judea on this errand of mercy. There
was another brief respite. But Jerusalem meant
death sooner or later, and it was not long before the
net was drawn round the Victim, and His own
forecast verified. Jesus did die in Jerusalem only

p

226 ST THOMAS

two or three months after Thomas had spoken of the
coming event. We may even say that his words
showed his faith and insight. Thomas had now
accepted what Peter had previously rejected. The
notion that Jesus should suffer and die had been
repudiated by the leading apostle with indignation ;
it was accepted by his humbler companion with
settled resignation. Much had happened in the
interval ; the signs of malignant opposition had come
thicker and surer ; all could now see the brooding
thunder-cloud, mounting up from the horizon, and
fast spreading overhead.

But now there is another side to Thomas's utter
ance that gives it an entirely different character.
Instead of taking it as a confession of despondency
we may treat it as a note of heroism. It is a bugle
call to his shrinking comrades. They are terror-
stricken at their Master's determination, frozen into
silence by fear. Thomas breaks the cowardly
silence. There is no denying it, Jerusalem spells
death. But Jesus will face this fate that awaits
Him there. Then He must not go alone. His little
remnant of followers, the few faithful disciples still
left when so many have forsaken Him and fled,
must not desert Him in this desperate extremity.
To follow Him still would seem to involve sharing
His fate. Be it so, thinks Thomas. Is He to die ?
Then let us die with Him. Christ's courage is
infectious, and Thomas is the first to catch the

ST THOMAS 227

infection. From him it spreads through all the
circle of disciples. Braced by this one man's
example they too follow Jesus, making straight for
the centre of peril, for the goal of doom. That is
heroic. For the moment, at least, Thomas is a hero,
and his heroism passes into the whole band. Under
his inspiring influence they all feel ready to leap into
the jaws of death.

It would have been happier for the reputation of
Thomas and his friends if we did not know the
sequel, for that proved to be a miserable anti-climax.
When the Shepherd was smitten, the sheep were
scattered ; and for all his bold words Thomas was
caught in the sheep-like panic. When " they all
forsook Him and fled" Thomas took part in the
ignominious flight. Did he think then of his bold
resolve made when far away in safe Peraea?
Probably not. In panics, people think of nothing
but how to save their own lives. But shameful as
this failure is when the testing moment comes, we
must not let the shadow of it obliterate all that
was good and even glorious in Thomas's proposal.
That was honestly meant, and faithfully adhered to.
The solemn resolve was taken and acted on. The
disciples, Thomas, of course, included, went up with
Jesus to Bethany. There was real courage in that ;
though later on this courage gave way, and then the
issue was very ignominious.

The next appearance of Thomas is near the

228 ST THOMAS

opening of our Lord's last discourse with His
disciples; we meet with it early in the wonderful
fourteenth chapter of John, one of the choicest
gems of Scripture. Jesus, being a true Teacher,
never objected to the interruption of His discourses
by listeners who were anxious to have a clear
understanding of His meaning. This chapter con
tains three such interruptions on the part of three
of the less prominent disciples — Thomas, Philip, and
Jude. John seems to have made a point of select
ing incidents bringing into notice comparatively
obscure disciples, of whom otherwise we should
hear little or nothing. The first of the three here
introduced is Thomas. As this disciple had taken
the lead in the heroic proposal to go up to Jerusalem
and die with Christ, so it was he who raised the
question as to whither Christ was going. The plain
course before Him seemed to be the road to death.
That Thomas had seen clearly, and he was ready, as
he supposed, to tread its grim track with his Master.
But now Jesus seems to be speaking in mysterious
language. In the correct text His words are,
" Whither I go ye know the way''' The disciples
cannot see the goal. The grand consummation is
beyond the vail. But the journey thither is apparent
This is puzzling to Thomas. How can you know
which road to take if you do not know where you
are going ? Here is part of the difference between
walking by faith and walking by sight. If you do

ST THOMAS 229

not know whither a road leads, if you cannot see
what you are going to, the ordinary method of
seeking an end in what you do is not available.
Then what can be the rule for the choice of the
route? We must not make life a mere ramble,
subject only to the caprice of the moment. But
there is a way between the definite aim at a visible
end and the purposeless meandering, the butterfly-like
flitting hither and thither, that knows no law but idle
fancy. This is the course of obedience. It is the way
of a higher will. The end is with God who knows
all, plans the route, and orders the goal. If He is
the Guide, the life that follows His leading must be
right. To trust Him and go His way, is neither to
walk with a clear vision of the end nor to drift
aimlessly. Now Jesus is speaking of His own course.
The final issue of it was beyond the grasp of His
disciples. Most, if not all, could see the first stage
— death. But death was not the end. Some may
have caught a dim vision of a resurrection, when
Jesus spoke of this ; but the despair that followed
the Crucifixion shows that it did not mean anything
very real to them. Then the Ascension, the glory,
the reign, the world-wide grace and power of the
ever-living Christ, were all beyond them. These
we know were some of the things to which Jesus
was going. Others are as much beyond the range
of our perception as they were out of the reach of
the thoughts of the disciples. The end is too great,

230 ST THOMAS

too wonderful, too mysterious, to be comprehended.
But the way should be understood. Such seems to
be our Lord's meaning. To Thomas, however, as
perhaps to some of us to-day, it was by no means
obvious.

Can we see any indication of character in this
disciple's perplexity? Why was it just Thomas, of
all men, who raised the difficulty? Taking this
scene in conjunction with its predecessor, and also
with that more significant occasion when we next
meet him, we may perhaps infer that Thomas had,
what we in England call, a matter-of-fact mind. He
seems to have been the apostle who approached most
nearly to the English type of character. Slow to see
a truth, but frank to confess it when once it is
admitted, blunt, outspoken, courageous, loyal, he
illustrates at once the merits and the limitations of
our insular disposition. New ideas dawn slowly on
such a mind, especially if they are not in the region
of the. visible and tangible. On the other hand, a man
like Thomas is not content with vagueness, nor will
he be put off with words. Too many people view all
things through a mental haze. They cannot tell what
they see and what they do not see. It would be
impossible for them to make a clear confession of
faith, for they do not know what they believe,
although they honestly think they believe all that it
is right and proper to believe. Such faith is nearly
worthless. At all events it is blind. But worse than

ST THOMAS 231

this, there are people who are content with mere
phrases that convey no meaning whatever to their
minds. It is enough for them that the words sound
pious, or are familiar in religious associations, or
come with the sanction of venerated authority.
Thomas would never sink down to the mental
indolence of such torpid minds. He would welcome
Dr Johnson's famous choice to clear our minds of
cant. Even if the words we hear are quite sincere
and full of meaning, such as the words of Christ, if
we cannot see the drift of them, and yet settle down
in lazy satisfaction, we degrade them to the level of
the unreal, and our use of them is no better than
what Dr Johnson so justly stigmatised. There is a
sickly state of mind which disgusts all healthy
natures. To Thomas this would be an abomination.
He may not be able to see far ; but what he does
see, he must see clearly. Within the area of clear
vision, this is excellent ; the honesty and mental energy
it involves are wholly commendable. Its defect is in
its reluctance to admit the existence of those objects
that lie wrapped in the fog that it detests. After all,
that is a very narrow mind which will not allow the
being of truth to which it has not attained. But we
must not accuse Thomas of this narrowness. He
does not deny ; he questions. Now to question is to
seek for more light, even if, as in the case before us,
the inquirer does not seem to have thought a satis
factory answer possible.

232 ST THOMAS

The two resurrection incidents, with which the

name of Thomas is most frequently associated,

further illustrate these characteristics of his nature.

On the first occasion when Jesus appeared to the

Apostles after His resurrection, Thomas was not with

them. His failure to see his Lord and be convinced

like the others was due to his absenting himself from

the meetings of the brotherhood. This absence may

have been accidental or unavoidable. If it was due

to sheer despondency, he had himself to blame for

missing a great privilege. We can well understand

that the disciple who had been bold to offer to go

up to Jerusalem to die with Jesus would have been

in the depths of gloom and humiliation, when reflecting

on his weakness in joining the general panic. Had

Jesus been seized as Thomas expected, when He

went up to Bethany to rescue Lazarus, it is likely

that His disciple would have been true to his loyal

proposal. But some time had elapsed, and it is

difficult to keep the martyr spirit long on the strain.

Time wore down the fidelity of Cranmer. Time may

have weakened Thomas's heroism. So he joined his

comrades in their ignominious flight. After that,

next to Peter, the second and more violent boaster,

who had had a more shameful fall, Thomas must

have been most ashamed in the after-reflection.

Down-hearted, disconsolate, quite hopeless, he may

have seen no use in keeping up the meetings of the

brotherhood. Perhaps he felt some contempt for

ST THOMAS 233

what he would regard as a mere slavery to habit on
the part of men of weaker intelligence. Most people
run in grooves, and keep up old customs when they
have outlived their justification. Thomas would
have no patience with this brainless course. In his
despondency he may have credited the assembling
of the Apostles with no better reason. If so, he
would have done it an injustice. Mutual affection
would draw the brotherhood together for a time,
even if no spark of the old hopes lingered during
that desolate interval.

Whatever was the cause of Thomas's absence, it
cost him the loss of the first interview with the risen
Lord. But apart from this, had not Jesus promised
a spiritual presence in the assembly of His people,
assuring them that wherever two or three of them
were met together in His name, He would be in the
midst of them ? Thomas missed that. All Christians
who neglect the assembly of the Church, carelessly
or wilfully, may expect to miss many blessings which
can only be enjoyed in fellowship. Christianity is a
social religion ; it attains its perfection in brotherhood.
With the solitary it shrinks and withers.

Although Jesus favoured Peter and James with
private interviews, each for some special reason, He
did not grant Thomas that rare privilege. His
discipline required another process. If his fault
were a lack of social sympathy, that fault must not
be encouraged by a special favour in solitude. Per-

234 ST THOMAS

haps it may be added that the spiritual condition
in which it would be even possible to see the risen
Christ at all was not possible for Thomas while he
held aloof from the brotherhood, possibly in sullen
despair.

When he heard of what the other disciples had
seen in his absence, Thomas could not believe it. He
repudiated the notion as absurd. The vehemence of
his language shows us how gladly he would have
welcomed the news, if only he had been able to
accept it as true. But to him it is too good to be
true. He cannot submit to a delusion simply
because it would be very delightful. He must have
truth — truth at any price. For this, however, he
declares that he will be satisfied with nothing less
than the most convincing sense perception, the sense
of touch. Excited people may be deluded by
hallucinations, visions conjured by their own imagina
tions. So great a wonder as a resurrection is not to
be believed because some people feel sure that they
have seen an apparition of the dead man. They may
have seen this. Thomas does not dispute the fact.
For all that, he takes the vision to be no proof that
the dead had actually returned from the grave. To
be assured of this he must handle the body, put his
finger in the nail-prints, his hand in the spear-thrust.
The coarseness of these particulars seem to point to
another requirement. It is not enough to be sure
that there is a real body ; Thomas wants proof that

ST THOMAS 235

this is the very body of Jesus. Otherwise some
" medium " may be personating the dead. The
words of Thomas read too harshly in our English
versions, owing to the ambiguity of our use of the
word "will," either for volition or for mere futurity.
The Greek original has a simple future. Therefore,
we must not put the emphasis on " will," and read,
1 1 will not believe," as though Thomas intimated
an obstinate intention. The simple future, apart
from purpose and intention, is all he suggests. He
thinks that belief will not come to him till certain
conditions are fulfilled.

Injustice is done to Thomas in many ways, but
nowhere more flagrantly than at this point. He is
called the doubter because he alone of the eleven
apostles questioned the fact of his Lord's resurrection.
But he was the only one who had not seen the risen
Christ. For anything we know to the contrary, if he
had been present, he would have been convinced ;
and for anything we know to the contrary, if any one
of the others had been absent, that disciple would
have been equally sceptical. As it is, none of them
had believed the reports of previous appearances.
What the women said appeared to them all but idle
tales, and the appearance to Peter had only filled the
rest with perplexity. It was Christ's appearance to
them that convinced the eleven ; on the next occasion,
Thomas being present, he too was convinced. In all
this, then, they seem to have been on a level as to

236 ST THOMAS

previous unbelief and the belief that came with the
first sight of Christ. It may be that Thomas's
different position was only due to the accident of
circumstance. He was exceptional in not being
present. Therefore he was also exceptional in not
believing. How much scepticism and even unbelief
on which the Church has looked so sternly, is really
due to some misfortune of environment ! how much
peaceable acquiescence in established convictions has
no merit, because it has been nursed in favourable
circumstances, that have made it seem quite natural
and simple and without any difficulties !

Thomas learns his lesson. The next time when
the Apostles are met together, his place is not vacant.
Thomas takes good care to be present now. That
looks as though he were beginning to be expectant,
or, at least, as though he had an open mind. Indeed,
nothing would please him better than to be convinced.
Then Jesus appears and immediately invites Thomas
to make his experiment. The amazed disciple does
nothing of the kind. The sight of Jesus is enough
for him. All his doubt vanishes in a moment. In
an ecstasy of joy he cries, " My Lord and my God?'
No other disciple had ever made that great confession
— not the most intimate : not Peter, who was the first
to own Jesus as Christ ; not John, who leaned
on His bosom. Thomas " the doubter " is the first
to pronounce the great word " God," the first to
confess the full divinity of Christ. This rebound

ST THOMAS 237

from despair to faith carries the soul farther at one
leap than the position reached by more placid minds
after long experience. Here is the compensation of
the questioning mind. The restlessness of dissatis
faction in the conventional or traditional is very
painful. Doubt is always distressing, and when it is
carried far into regions of vital importance, agonising.
But when it is dispelled and sure conviction takes its
place, that conviction is more clear and more assured
than the faith of unquestioning minds. There is
no faith so strong as that of a man who has fought
his doubts and conquered them by honest means.
Jesus says that there is a better faith than that to
which Thomas had attained. It is the faith which
dispenses with visible evidences. But here Thomas
is in the same place as his ten fellow-apostles.
They had all waited for ocular demonstration.

Clearness, certitude — these are the two conditions
without which Thomas cannot be satisfied. They
have their limitations. Life is encircled by mystery.
Still, to aim at attaining them is manly and honest.
In so far as that was his aim, Thomas is worthy of
emulation as well as admiration. "Whatever the
impression," says Marcus Aurelius, " make sure of
certitude." Unfortunately, this is not always possible
to us, and when it is not, a humble confession of
ignorance is better than an impatient cry of doubt
or unbelief, flung off in a tone that implies contempt
for the easier faith of more docile minds.

238 ST THOMAS

Apocryphal literature has been busy with legends
of Thomas that have little or no historical value.
The so-called Acts of Thomas tell how he went as a
missionary to India, was seized and sold as a slave, rose
to a position of trust, received money for building a
royal palace, spent this in alms for the poor, and told
his astonished master that he had built him a palace
in heaven. The " Christians of St Thomas " at
Malabar claim the apostle as the evangelist of their
country who died there as a martyr. Some of these
stories are due to a confusion of names. The real
Thomas of the Gospels does not reappear in the
history. He would have been with his brethren at
Jerusalem, as recorded in Acts, and have gone, we
know not where, in the general scattering that
occurred later. For us he remains only the apostle so
vividly portrayed by a few touches in the Gospel of
John, and our lessons of his life and character must
be wholly drawn from that book.

JAMES THE BROTHER OF THE
LORD

BY REV. PRINCIPAL WALTER F. ADENEY, D.D.

JAMES THE BROTHER OF THE
LORD

Two perplexing questions have been discussed
concerning the personality of this James — first, as to
the nature of his relationship to Jesus Christ ; second,
as to the identification of him with the author of the
New Testament book that appears in our Bibles as
The General Epistle of James. The former of these
questions would have seemed very simple, if it had
not been complicated with awkward theological con
siderations. The meaning of the title brother, when
not employed in a secondary, metaphorical sense for
a member of a confraternity, is birth from the same
parents, or, at least, from one common parent.
Therefore that is the meaning we should attach to
it in the present case, unless some good reason to
the contrary appeared, as when we read of " John the
brother of James," " Simon, who is called Peter, and
Andrew his brother." If this is not the meaning in
the case before us, the burden of proof rests on those

Q

242 JAMES, BROTHER OF THE LORD

who deny it. Why, then, should the usual sense of
the expression be deemed inappropriate here ? Two
reasons are offered. The first is the doctrine of the
perpetual virginity of Mary. Here we are landed
in the region of Church dogma. Of course, if
the gospel history is to be judged from that stand
point, cadit qucestio. The Church has spoken, and
there is an end of all controversy. But for those of
us who feel free to look at it in the way of unbiassed
historical investigation, this sort of reasoning is out
of court. It begs the question ; for if Jesus had a
brother, or as the Gospels seem to imply, both brothers
and sisters, there is no ground for the doctrine of the
perpetual virginity of His mother. The other reason
proposed is the unseemliness of the idea that she,
who had been honoured with the motherhood of the
Son of God, should ever have had any other children,
that after Jesus any one else should be born of the
same mother. A feeling of reverence for Christ,
rather than a desire to honour the Virgin, is the
ground of this plea. Still it may have no bearing on
actual facts. He who humbled Himself to become a
man, and who shared the lowly lot of human life on
earth, as the most brotherly of men, would not have
felt dishonoured by having natural brothers and
sisters. At all events, again it must be said, if we
are prepared for a genuine study of the facts of
history, this consideration must not be allowed to
bias our judgment.

JAMES, BROTHER OF THE LORD 243

But now let us see what alternatives are proposed.
Two, in the main, have received the greatest support
among those who reject the simple theory of natural
brotherhood.

i. According to Jerome and others who have
followed on similar lines, James and the other
" brothers " of Jesus referred to in the Gospels were
His cousins, sons of a sister of the Virgin Mary.
It is stated that among the women witnessing the
Crucifixion was Mary the mother of James the Less
and Joses (Mark xv. 40). But we read in another
place that there were by the Cross, " His mother, and
His mother's sister, Mary the wife of Clopas, and Mary
Magdalene" (John xix. 25). This has been taken to
mean that " his mother's sister " was the same person as
" Mary the zuife of Clopas" Then, owing to similarity
in the Aramaic forms, Clopas has been identified with
Alphaeus. Now in the list of apostles we meet with
a certain "James the son of Alphceus" This man,
therefore, is claimed to be the nephew of the Virgin
Mary. Again, James, Joses, Judas, and Simon are
the names of the four brothers of Jesus (Mark vi. 3).
The first two of these names are the same as the
names of the sons of the Mary who is taken on this
hypothesis to be the sister of the Virgin. Other
curious coincidences in the lists of names have been
pointed to as confirming the argument. But we
need not follow the intricate discussion, since there
are three strong objections to the conclusion indi-

244 JAMES, BROTHER OF THE LORD

cated by it, viz.: — (i) There is no evidence of the
word " brother " ever being used for a cousin. (2) The
theory has the improbability of two sisters being
named Mary. (3) It represents one, at least, of the
brothers of Jesus as included in the number of the
Twelve, while we have the express statement that
His brothers did not believe in Him during His
earthly ministry (John vii. 5). For these reasons
Jerome's theory does not appear to be at all
probable.

2. Next, we have a theory maintained by Epiphanius
and many others in the Church of the Fathers, and
advocated in our own day by Lightfoot, according to
which the brothers of Jesus were the sons of Joseph
by a former marriage, and, therefore, the nominal
half-brothers of Jesus, though really not related to
Him at all, since it accepts the Gospel statement of
the virgin birth of our Lord. This theory avoids all
three objections to Jerome's hypothesis. But still
the burden of proof rests with those who urge it.
What have they to say for it in preference to the
more natural reading of the history ? Dr Lightfoot
accepts it because of what he thinks a fatal objection
to the idea that Mary had other sons besides Jesus.
This is that our Lord on the Cross committed His
mother to the charge of John. He thinks that could
not have occurred if she had had sons in whose care
she might have lived. But we do not know all
the circumstances of that sad and desolate home.

JAMES, BROTHER OF THE LORD 245

Previous to this Mary had been accompanied with
" the brothers of the Lord," however they may have
been related to Him or her. This seems to imply
that she lived with them as one family. Therefore,
explain it how we may, we are here confronted with
the fact that the arrangement is broken up, and Jesus
sees His mother left unprotected, unless He entrusts
her to one of His disciples. May we not suppose
that the unbelief of the brothers lay at the root of
the difficulty ? Could this have been seen by Mary,
and yet all have gone on smoothly in the home?
Overwhelmed with grief, she would scarcely find the
household that rejected her first-born a haven of rest
at this dreadful crisis. It would be better that she
should be with a true sympathiser, even if he were
only a nephew, as John appears to have been. But
if some such explanation as this might obviate the
difficulty which Dr Lightfoot felt to be inevitable,
why should we resist the natural interpretation of the
narrative ? The whole course of the story points in
this direction. Jesus is called Mary's "first-born."
Now, it is true that the term among the Jews pointed
to the special honour of the eldest son, quite apart
from the question of other children following, that it
was a sort of title, the word first, here not necessarily
suggesting that there must be a second, at least, as
it would suggest in our language. Still the word is
used in view of a succession. For instance, in regard
to the larger family of God, Jesus is called " the first-

246 JAMES, BROTHER OF THE LORD

born among many brethren" Besides, if it were
understood that Mary had no other children, and
that a certain sanctity of the situation required this,
as the Church dogma maintained, is it likely that so
ambiguous a term, one so likely to be taken with its
natural implication, would have been used? And
then, if, after meeting this expression with re
gard to Jesus, we read of His brothers and sisters,
and find them repeatedly in association with His
mother, is it not the reasonable conclusion — apart
from the logical prepossessions — that Mary was their
mother also ? Finally, why should we surrender to the
theological prepossessions in which, after all that is
said, the only grounds for giving up the natural inter
pretation are found ? They seem to be relics of the
age of asceticism. They dishonour marriage. They
unduly separate Christ from other men. Their trend
is monkish. But there was nothing monkish in
Christ. He honoured marriage. He associated
Himself freely with mankind. It was not in Him
to stand aloof, in His Divine dignity, from a natural
family relationship.

Concluding then that, when we read of James as
the brother of the Lord, we are to take this in the
natural sense of the words, and understand, at all
events, that he was a half-brother of Jesus, that Mary
was his mother, let us see where this idea leads us.
The first conclusion may be a little disappointing.
We might expect every member of that Nazareth

JAMES, BROTHER OF THE LORD 247

household to exhibit certain rare qualities. But
there does not appear to have been anything very
remarkable about James. He was given a position
of unique honour in the Jerusalem Church ; but
evidently this was on the ground of his relationship
to the Master, not because of his own merits. We
should not be surprised at this. Sometimes we meet
with gifted families ; but not less frequently the
whole genius of a family is concentrated in one
member, and there is nothing whatever remarkable
about the brothers and sisters of the great man.
Who knows anything of brothers and sisters of
Dante, or Shakespeare, or Milton ? Napoleon
made the most of his relations ; but none of them
developed genius. Charles Wesley was a useful
ally to his great brother ; the Tennyson family con
tained two poets besides the laureate. And yet
these more or less conspicuous brothers are quite
of the second rank. Experience does not show that,
if we looked on Jesus merely as a man of rare
religious genius, we should have a right to expect
to see scintillations of the same genius in the Nazareth
family from which He came. But Jesus was more
than a man of rare religious genius. If we believe
in the Incarnation, we cut the line of heredity. There
is something so transcendently superhuman in this
fact, that the nearest relations who did not share in
it are as separated from it as all the rest of mankind.
The brothers of Jesus, equally with the most insignifi-

248 JAMES, BROTHER OF THE LORD

cant persons among ourselves, could have exclaimed,
had they truly known Him —

" Lord, Thou in all things like wast made

To us, yet free from sin ;
Then how unlike to us, O Lord,
Replies the voice within."

We cannot but think it an unspeakably great
privilege for James and the other brothers and sisters
to have been brought up in the same home from
their infancy, and in closest family relationship with
Mary's " Holy Child Jesus." That it was a beautiful
household, well governed, happily trained, we may well
believe. She who was honoured above all women
by being privileged to be the mother of Jesus, and
to train Him in His childhood, must have been a
good mother to all her children. The presence of
her sons, on more than one occasion with her, seems
to indicate that the domestic ties were close and
warm, that it was a happy, united household till an
awful tragedy temporarily scattered it. But more
we cannot say. That the influence of the Perfect
Child shed a radiance of unseen joy and an atmo
sphere of purity all around Him wherever He went,
is what we should all have expected. And yet the
family may have been slow to perceive its rare
significance. Evidently there was nothing outwardly
abnormal about His life and action. The foolish
legends of apocryphal gospels are quite out of
harmony with the probability suggested by the

JAMES, BROTHER OF THE LORD 249

silence of the authentic records of Christ's life.
Therefore that other hymn is wrong when it says :

" That simple, lovely, wondrous life

Betrayed itself from heaven ;
He was the child that should be born,
The Son that should be given.

" He grew in stature and in praise,

By honest hearts adored,
Till in that home where He was born,
His brothers called Him Lord."

The secret did not "betray itself"; His brothers
did not call Him Lord.

Commenting on the proverb that " nobody is a
hero to his valet," Carlyle explains it on the ground
that the valet is a valet, not that he knows the
hero intimately, but that he looks at the hero from
a valet's point of view. Familiarity with the good
and great should not breed contempt. Familiarity
with Jesus did not breed contempt in John. The
most intimate disciple of Christ was the man who
ultimately attained to the loftiest conception of his
Master's nature. Still this came late. For a long
time the everyday life of Jesus, as a man among men,
must have acted rather as a veil than as a revelation
with regard to His Divine nature. Ultimately people
saw that the mystery of the Godhead had been made
manifest to them in the flesh ; but not at first.
Certainly this was not to be seen in the days of
childhood, or during any part of the thirty years of

250 JAMES, BROTHER OF THE LORD

obscurity. Therefore we need not regret so greatly
that we live far down the ages from the time
when Jesus was on earth. His contemporaries, His
intimates, His brothers and sisters had difficulties to
overcome, before they could perceive who He really
was, that have been largely removed from before our
eyes.

In the Nazareth home, then, James did not come
to have any very abnormal idea of his elder Brother.
Even after He had emerged from privacy, and right
through His public ministry, when many hailed Him
as a Prophet, and some few secretly acknowledged
Him as the Messiah, James with the other brothers
stood aloof. It is not simply that they did not
believe in His divinity. Nobody, not even Peter
or John, did that during His lifetime ; they did not
believe in Him; did not believe that He was the
Christ, or even that He was a prophet, a teacher sent
from God. They must have known Him too well
to have shared the theory of the Jewish authorities —
in which they could scarcely have honestly believed —
that He was an impostor. But they thought He was
a self-deluded dreamer, needlessly courting danger,
who ought to be saved from Himself. So once they
said that He was "beside Himself!' either actually
imagining that He must have been out of His mind,
or wishing to shield Him from the consequences of
His dangerous utterances by intimating that He was
not responsible for them ; and, on another occasion, they

JAMES, BROTHER OF THE LORD 251

sent a message through the crowd from His mother,
as well as from themselves, asking Him to come to
them, with the evident intention of rescuing Him.
They failed in this act of well-meant but really
impertinent interference; and the result was that
apparently He disowned them, claiming all who did
God's will as His brethren, His very nearest relations.
The reply was more than a rebuke for the moment.
It flashed out a new far-reaching principle of the
kingdom of heaven. There are ties even closer than
blood-relationship. We see it in the friendship of
a David and Jonathan ; we see it in the love of man
and woman ; we see it in common enthusiasm for a
great cause. Jesus recognises it in the union of
souls for the high pursuit of obedience to God's will.
Nepotism under the Papacy was the blight of the
Church, and wherever it is found it degrades the
family relationship, as well as the public duty into
which it indecently obtrudes that relationship. Family
affections and their claims are for the sanctity of the
home. They are coarsened and life is narrowed when
they are dragged into the glare of the outer world,
and strained to cover the large demands of public
service. Jesus never took any sleps to advance His
family on the ground of His own unique position,
because He knew that He was not there for any
personal ends, but solely for doing God's will, and
thereby bringing blessing to mankind. For the
same reason He could not permit the most intimate

252 JAMES, BROTHER OF THE LORD

domestic relationship to interfere with His high call
and its fulfilment. This may help to explain the
coldness of His brethren towards Him. A mother's
love and faith could bear the painful rebuff which
brothers and sisters would be likely to resent with
a feeling of wounded affection.

The Resurrection, which meant so much to the
disciples, was even more to one of the brothers of
Jesus who was not a disciple. Only this one now
comes before us in a new light. We hear no more of
the other brothers and the sisters. There is no
evidence that these near relations of Jesus ever
changed their attitude of sceptical aloofness, although
they were no longer able to attempt any interference
with their strange Elder Brother. But this one
brother, James, was won over to faith. It is commonly
supposed that the great change was a direct result of
the appearance of Christ to him. That appearance
must have had the most profound significance for
James, as it had for the disciples. But to suppose
that James was an unbeliever until he saw his
Brother risen from the dead, and that the miracle by
itself convinced him, is contrary to the Divine method
of inspiring faith, and also contrary to the character
of all the other manifestations of the risen Lord. It
is not the teaching of the New Testament that faith
is to be got by signs. Jesus refused signs when asked
to produce them in order to convince the unbelieving,
and He taught that this very sign, a return from the

JAMES, BROTHER OF THE LORD 253

dead, would not convince. In the parable of the rich
man and Lazarus, Abraham says of the five brethren,
" If they hear not Moses and the prophets, neither will
they be persuaded, if one rise from the dead" (Luke
xvi. 31). It would exactly conflict with this principle
for James to be persuaded by the mere wonder of
the Resurrection. Then it would be contrary to the
character of all the other manifestations of Jesus after
His death. In every other case the appearance was
only witnessed by His own believing disciples. Jesus
did not present Himself risen from the dead before
Caiaphas and Pilate to confound them, before the
Jews to their amazement, before any people to open
their eyes to His true nature. If the sight of His
presence would convince and convert, why was it not
flashed over the world, that all the world might be
brought to conviction and conversion? Evidently
this is not the method of Providence. There must
be a spiritual sympathy for the truth to be effectively
received, and it would seem that this spiritual
sympathy was necessary for the perception of the
risen Christ. At all events, the privilege of seeing
Him was only given to those who possessed it. Then
this mysterious sight worked its wonders on the soul
of the beholder, restoring his faith and joy, and
opening his eyes to new reaches in the revelation of
the Gospel.

Now it is in accordance with these principles, so
invariably followed in all other cases, and so inherently

254 JAMES. BROTHER OF THE LORD

harmonious with the spirit of Christ and His method,
that we must understand Jesus to have appeared to
James. There must have been something in James
that made it possible for him to see the great wonder,
as this was not possible for any of his brothers and
sisters. They were left in the dark, because they
were still blinded by essential unbelief. James was
not ; for if it had been the case with him He would
never have been able to see the vision. At the end
of Christ's life, he and he alone of the family stepped
out of the chill circle of scepticism that had enclosed
them all, in the direction of sympathy, if not of faith.
If the Roman centurion was profoundly moved by
what he saw in the death of Jesus, is it too much to
suppose that those last dark hours may have stirred
strange thoughts in the mind of His brother ? James's
name comes first in the list of the brethren. This
indicates that he was the oldest of them. He came
nearest to the great First-born in age. It is natural
to suppose that he would have been the closest in
sympathy, all along the least antipathetic of them,
and, after the last scene, moved to genuine appreci
ation. Still this was not faith ; much less was it
confidence. None of the disciples had that in the
dismal day or two of bewilderment and desolation
that followed the death of their Lord, before they
learnt the overwhelmingly marvellous fact that He
had risen from the dead. That fact, or rather their
own sight of it, did more than restore their drooping

JAMES, BROTHER OF THE LORD 255

faith in Him ; it carried this on to new heights of
assurance and comprehension. For James it was the
birth of the real, satisfying faith. This view of
James's position with regard to the Resurrection is
confirmed by an extract from the Gospel according to the
Hebrews, the most valuable of all our extra canonical
sources for the life of Christ, which, unfortunately,
has been lost and not yet recovered, but some
fragments of which have been preserved by later
writers. The fragment here referred to, is given
by Jerome as follows : " The Lord after His resurrec
tion appeared to James, who had sworn that he
would not eat bread from the hour in which he had
drunk the cup of the Lord till he saw Him risen from
the dead. Jesus therefore took bread and blessed and
brake it, and gave it to James the Just, and said to
him, ' My brother, eat thy bread, for the Son of Man
is risen from the dead ' " (De Viris ILlustribus, 2). The
story strikes us as apocryphal. If the identification of
James the Lord's brother with James the son of
Alphaeus, one of the twelve apostles, is abandoned
— and we saw a little earlier that it must be — then it
is unhistorical to represent the Lord's brother as
having been present at the Supper. Still the very
existence of the legend points to the probability that
there is some grain of truth in it ; and if this be the
case, the likelihood is that James felt drawn towards
Jesus before the Resurrection, and was just in that
wistful, sympathetic mood after the event which made

256 JAMES, BROTHER OF THE LORD

it possible for Jesus to manifest Himself to Him.
From this time onward James seems to have cast in
his lot with the company of the Christians at
Jerusalem. In course of time he came to be the
recognised head of the Church in that city, the head of
the Mother Church, and therefore the man in the most
honourable position among all the Christians. We
have no information as to when or how he was placed
in this position. No title is given to the office he
held. There were elders in the Jerusalem Church ;
but James is never called an elder ; nor is the title
"bishop" given to him. Still we must not be slaves
of words. In point of fact, James held at Jerusalem a
position very similar to that of the several town
bishops, or pastors, early in the second century, the
position of the one pastor of a congregation.
Although no reason is assigned why he should have
been so placed at Jerusalem, his near relationship to
Jesus seems to have been the cause. There is
something pathetic in this ; it is so hopelessly
inadequate. Jesus has vanished ; then the first place
shall be held by His nearest relation. This is quite
contrary to the tenor of what He said as to who
were His brothers. It is difficult to resist the con
clusion that the narrow notion which led to the
appointment of James was a mistake. He did not
administer in the spirit of his Brother. He clung
to Judaism more than any other leader of the Church.
It is an error to suppose that he opposed Paul.

JAMES, BROTHER OF THE LORD 257

The apostle himself speaks of his personal friendli
ness of intercourse with James (Gal. i. 19). Still
James never understood Paul, and he was used by
narrower men, who went further and tried to hinder
Paul's liberalising movement, in welcoming the
heathen as on a common footing with Jews when
once converted to Christ — first at Antioch, then in
Galatia. It has been asserted that his more generous
attitude in the Jerusalem Church discussion, when he
advised admission of the Gentiles to the Church
without keeping the law, is unhistorical, because not
agreeing with St Paul's statements. But Lightfoot
showed the error of this criticism. The narrative in
Acts saying nothing about eating with Gentiles or
putting them on a level with Jews. If we may accept
his epistle as genuine — and this is not the place to
enter on any discussion of it — we find there that
James never once refers to the pre-existence of
Christ, to the Atonement, to our Lord's death, or
to His resurrection. Imagine such omissions in an
epistle of Paul ! On the other hand, this epistle
contains more echoes of the teaching of Jesus than
any other New Testament book, except the
Gospels, that actually record this teaching. James
seems to have imbibed and assimilated his
Brother's ethical ideas, rather than the more
profound theological teachings. A simple, true,
strenuous, earnest soul, with no depth or breadth
of thought, but a high aim to maintain in the

258 JAMES, BROTHER OF THE LORD

morale of the Church. Such seems to have been
James the Lord's brother.

James, like his namesake the son of Zebedee, died
as a martyr.

We have two accounts of the last scene, one by
by Hegesippus, written about A.D. 160, the other in
Josephus, the simpler and probably the more
authentic. It happened during the interregnum
between the death of Festus and the arrival of the
new governor, Albinus. Here was an opportunity for
the high priest to take action against the hated sect
of the Nazarenes, with a severity that the Roman
authorities would have prevented if they had been
effectively officered. He seized James as the head of
the Church at Jerusalem, and had him executed in the
Jewish method, by stoning. Thus did the brother who
was late in coming to faith finally prove his loyalty
by martyrdom, and the teacher who seemed to be so
deficient in his theology show himself in the hour of
trial to be faithful unto death.

STEPHEN
BY REV. ALFRED ROWLAND, D.D., LL.B.

STEPHEN

PENTECOST was spring-time in the history of the
Church. It was then that Christian life appeared
in vigour and beauty, to the amazement of the
onlookers, who imagined that every germ of it had
perished in the cruel winter of persecution. But
when seeds are sown thickly in fertile soil, they
are not prevented from appearing at their appointed
time because the frost has assailed the clods in
which they are embedded ; and the life Jesus Christ
brought into the world had its resurrection in spite
of all hindrances. The little group of men and
women who believed in their risen Lord met for
prayer, and while they were yet speaking, He heard
and answered them. In gracious yet resistless power
the Holy Spirit descended on them, and the effect
was like that of warm showers in spring-time, for
suddenly in fresh forms religious life asserted itself.
The disciples began to preach with new power.
Their hearers felt their consciences stirred by the
same quickening Spirit, and at once they boldly

201

262 STEPHEN

avowed themselves to be followers of Jesus Christ ;
so that the band of believers, a hundred and twenty
strong, became an enthusiastic Church, numbering
no less than five thousand members in Jerusalem
alone.

The first practical difficulty which confronted these
early Christians concerned the wise and just distribu
tion of charity among the poor ; and the Apostles,
recognising the impossibility of attending to it
personally — unless they neglected the ministry of
the Word, for which they had been specially set
apart — advised the Church to select "seven men of
honest report, full of the Holy Ghost, and wisdom"
who should undertake this business, and among
these Stephen became the most prominent. It is
clear that these men were not " in deacons' orders,"
according to the Episcopalian idea, nor were they
"deacons" in the sense denoted by that term in
Congregational churches. Indeed they are not called
deacons at all by the writer of the Acts, and their
function was special and temporary; which is one
of many signs that the Church, under the guidance
of the Divine Spirit, is perfectly free to adapt its
offices to its needs. Hence we find in the New
Testament no mention of any accurately defined
offices. If men were set apart, as they were on
this occasion, for the distribution of money, they
were not debarred thereby from giving public ex
hortation ; while, even an apostle did not think it

STEPHEN 263

beneath his dignity to earn a meal by fishing, or
to make his livelihood for a time by weaving
cilicium for tents. In that living and growing
community there was flexibility and freedom, such
as the Church would be the better for in our own
day. But although offices in the Church, and
methods of service, varied with time and place, the
qualifications for filling any recognised position
were the same for all. Nor can these qualifications
ever be disregarded with impunity. When men
were wanted simply to manage the distribution of
money, it was required that they should be filled
not only with wisdom, but with the Holy Spirit.
And this principle still holds good, and must be
applied all round. Therefore, one who is flippant
and worldly, however clever, is not fitted to teach
even an infant class. Another whose social and
financial standing is all that can be desired, is not
by that alone qualified to control the financial affairs
of a church. And a popular, effective speaker, who
may have the gift of drawing a vast audience, is
not fitted to hold a pastorate if his character and
reputation do not stand well. Disregard of these
fundamental Christian principles, which are far more
important than questions which divide Christians,
such as the mode of baptism, or the institution of
conference, Presbytery or Union, has wrecked
many a church. Character is the base on which
the Church rests, and weakness there involves weak-

264 STEPHEN

ness all through. The early Christians were not
forgetful of this. Under apostolic direction they
selected " men of good repute," whose names stood
high in business and in the congregation ; honest
and fearless, justice-loving men, clad in the panoply
of righteousness, from whose polished surface the
fiery darts of calumny glanced harmlessly aside.
They chose men "full of the Holy Ghost'' devout,
unworldly, inspired men, who lived in such true
communion with God that they heard His voice,
and knew His will ; and thus were enabled to
speak and act with spiritual authority. And added
to this, the chosen men were endued with " wisdom"
with practical sagacity, and far-seeing statesmanship.
They kept their tongues and tempers under control ;
they had capacity for managing difficult affairs ; they
could deal effectively with foolish men, and even
with angry women ; and they never deified their
own prejudices or preferences, as if they infallibly
represented the changeless truth of God. The elect
of the Church should ever be the elect of God ; those
who are rich in that inspired wisdom which is first
pure, then peaceable, and easy to be entreated. If
only the Church had always chosen such men as its
leaders, it would long ere this have conquered the
world.

Little is told us of the history of "the seven,"
but Stephen is portrayed in some detail, and he
was a type, as well as a leader, of his comrades.

STEPHEN 265

It is Stephen's faith which is insisted upon as
his chief characteristic. The word denotes generally
the faculty which apprehends the unseen ; but in
the Acts of the Apostles it specially indicates the
faculty which realised the nearness of Jesus Christ
the risen and ascended Lord. He who possessed
this gift was able to say, not only in death but in
life, "Behold I see the heavens opened and the Son
of Man standing on the right hand of God" Such
faith is more than belief, and more than trust It
is a vivid realisation of what is unseen by the senses,
and unproved by the intellect, but revealed to the
spirit of a man by the Holy Ghost. Stephen would
not have been described as a man full of faith, or
full of the Holy Ghost, if he had merely believed
that Jesus lived, and suffered, and wrought miracles,
and taught important truths, and died on the cross.
There was not a man or woman in Jerusalem who
had the slightest doubt about such facts ; but this
belief of theirs was by no means saving faith, nor
is it now. Indeed, a man's belief may be so broad
as to embrace the facts of our Lord's resurrection,
ascension, atonement, and future judgment of the
world, and yet may fall far short of the "faith"
Stephen had. Faith realises with intensity the
nearness and the authority of our living Lord, who
is fulfilling His promise, u Lo ! I am with you alway."
And it is this which lightens our cares, inspires our
work, sweetens our joys, and gives us victory over

266 STEPHEN

sin ; as it will give us, in God's good time, victory
over death also.

It was this faith of his which enabled Stephen
to understand, as few, if any, at that time did
understand, the spirituality of Christ's kingdom.
The marvellous address which he gave before the
Sanhedrim in self-defence, reveals very fully the
characteristics of his teaching ; and it is impossible
to study it carefully without seeing that, so far as
the doctrine of the Church was concerned, his
teaching constituted a new departure. He was un
questionably ahead of all the Apostles at that period
in the breadth of his views, and in the far-reaching
range of his outlook. They had confined their witness-
bearing to Jerusalem and Judea, and it is emphatically
said that it was the persecution which arose about
Stephen which first scattered abroad the preachers
of the gospel. Until then the seed-corn of the
kingdom had remained on the threshing-floor, but
that incident, in the mighty hand of Providence,
flung it broadcast over other countries, fulfilling
thus the Master's words, " The field is the world"
for " they that were scattered abroad, went everywhere
preaching the word'' Stephen's martyrdom was the
cause of the scattering, and his doctrine was the
cause of the preaching.

It is probable that Stephen startled his brethren
as much as he angered the Sanhedrim. The substance
of his teaching was this : " The worship of God is

STEPHEN 267

not local, it never was ; and now in Christ Jesus He
intends to reveal Himself to the whole world, more
fully than before." With the utmost boldness he
appealed to the Old Testament Scriptures for evidence,
that throughout Jewish history Jehovah had never
failed to reveal Himself to some who lived beyond
the limits of the so-called " holy land." He urged
that God called Abram, the father of all the faithful,
when he was living in Mesopotamia among heathen
people ; that Moses the great law-giver was trained
in Midian, where there was no temple, though God
Himself called it holy ground ; that, in later times,
although Solomon did build the Temple, the people
were emphatically taught by inspired prophets that
the Most High dwelleth not in temples made with
hands. In short, all through his address Stephen
brought into the light the real spirituality which
underlay the former economy; and in doing this
he used Scripture with a freedom and boldness
which must have amazed his hearers, speaking as
he did with such confidence about essential truth
that he was careless about the exact phraseology in
which it had been embedded. And this was the
result of his " faith," which was to him the evidence
of things not seen, and the substance of things
hoped for.

Such men are constantly needed by the Church.
The age in which we live is crying out for teachers
who have faith to lay hold of the essentials of religion,

268 STEPHEN

and present them in their attractiveness to the world ;
caring little for the forms in which it has sometimes
been clothed, and too often disguised. No doubt
men will always need, as the Jews did, creeds and
rites ; but a truly inspired teacher, such as Stephen,
will see in the heart of them the living Christ, the
Eternal Word. Too often the germ of Divine truth
has been so encrusted and congealed that it has
proved powerless. It has been like a handful of
seed frozen in, surrounded by ice which, though
clear, is hard and cold. We can see the seed through
the translucent substance. We know enough of its
nature to believe that it has life in it. We may be
able to count its atoms, and discuss its possibilities ;
but for all that the seed is not fulfilling the Divine
purpose, which is that it should be flung broadcast
over the soil, and produce a harvest. The only
way to bring that about would be to break up its
icy environment. How ? Not by the rough hammer
of a cynical criticism, which may injure the seed.
What it really needs is warmth, sunshine which
heaven can originate and pour forth. In other words,
we need the baptism of the Holy Ghost and of fire,
which will melt the ice and free the seed, that it
may bring forth a harvest in honest hearts and
noble lives.

Stephen became what he was, because he was "filled
with the Holy Ghost " ; and unless a religious teacher
has similar spiritual life, with outgoing of heart

STEPHEN 269

towards God, and inflowing of holy thought and
impulse from God, he will never be fit to undertake
such work as Stephen did. If he tries to discriminate
between what is accidental and what is essential in
Christian doctrine, merely by intellectual acuteness,
he may do more harm than good, by weakening in
others the convictions which the world needs for its
uplifting. But let him as a man of prayer realise the
nearness of Christ, and the spiritual meaning of
His mission, and teaching, and sacrifice, till he can
speak of what he earnestly believes ; then, though
like Stephen he be stoned for heresy by the orthodox,
he will revive and broaden the true Church of God.
It is the man full of faith and of the Holy Ghost,
who alone can do "great wonders and miracles among
the people"

These wonders and miracles wrought by Stephen
were only the consummation of far less conspicuous
services which he had previously done, and these, at
least, are not beyond our reach. Stephen's readiness
to do the lowly work first assigned to him, is worthy
of more than a passing reference. He was a man of
culture, a keen disputant, a persuasive speaker ; but
he was elected by the Church to look after the
distribution of money, the counting of collections,
and the settlement of quarrels between some poor
old widows. He did not regard this as beneath him,
but undertook it readily, and discharged the duty
with unfailing cheerfulness and efficiency. The

2;o STEPHEN

nobility of the man made the work noble. He
accepted and accomplished it as part of the Lord's
work.

Much depends upon the light in which we regard
our duties, as to their pleasantness or winsomeness.
Some which appear menial to outsiders may seem
lofty and noble to ourselves. Refined Christians,
rich in musical culture, will gladly lead God's praises
in a little assembly where every tune sung jars their
nerves. Gentlemen of good social standing will
sacrifice their personal comfort, and lose the pleasant
ness of a reposeful service, in order to welcome
strangers to their seats in God's house, though the
strangers may be their own workpeople or servants ;
and they will pay as much attention to a poor old
woman as to the richest of their neighbours. Others
will look after the finances of the Church, or its
ventilation, or its comfort, and will do for years,
without recognition or thanks, menial work which
they would not dream of doing in their own business ;
for they feel it is the Lord's work, in the Lord's
house ; and because they do it as unto Him, dignity
is infused into the drudgery. Willingness to do any
sort of work which needs to be done in connection
with Christ's Church, is one evidence now, as in early
days, of the presence of the Divine Spirit.

But a man so inspired will be sure to find oppor
tunity for doing more than he first sets out to do.
Stephen was not an apostle, nor even an evangelist

STEPHEN 271

but he felt constrained to go and talk with those who
thought of Jesus Christ as he had done before his
conversion. He made his way to the synagogue of
the Grecians, the Greek-speaking Jews, and there
spoke of Jesus, urging his hearers to accept Him as
the promised Messiah. We can imagine the excite
ment caused by his bold witness-bearing. The
general opinion in Jerusalem was that the Nazarenes
were heretical Jews, who had credulously accepted a
pernicious superstition, started by a false prophet,
who had been crucified as a malefactor at the previous
Passover ; and such people might consider themselves
fortunate if they were simply left alone. Yet here
was a man who was not content to be left alone or
even to stand on the defensive. Single-handed he
carried the holy war into the midst of the " Grecians,"
boldly declaring that now the Christ had come the
Temple had served its purpose, and that the sacrifices
had had their day.

Foremost among his antagonists was young Saul
of Tarsus. Clever, well-read, skilled in rhetoric,
versed in rabbinical lore, he flung himself into the
fray with passionate vehemence. But Saul found his
match in this earnest-souled man, and even he could
not withstand the wisdom and the power with which
he spoke. Thus, from serving tables, Stephen
became a powerful preacher in the synagogue ; and
he who began by settling a small dispute, ended by
making Jerusalem ring with his trumpet-tongued

272 STEPHEN

words. Faithful with few things, he was made ruler
over many.

God's true servants must never pass by oppor
tunities for service, even though they may lie off the
beaten track. They will not plead that, having
undertaken one kind of work they ought to be
excused from attempting another, if for it also they
have time and strength — for God's work lies anywhere
and everywhere.

Stephen's noble and consecrated life ended in a
tragedy. The men who could not answer his
arguments resolved to crush him. He was dragged
before the Sanhedrim, and in the presence of that
august tribunal he stood undaunted, though alone.
As he spoke in defence of the cause he loved, his face
seemed lit up by unearthly radiance. It was the
glory of sunset at the close of life's day ; or rather it
was the brightness of dawn, because it ushered in for
that illumined soul the day on which the sun would
go down no more. " All beheld his face ', as it had been
the face of an angel'' He found no difficulty in
marshalling his arguments, for it was given him in
that hour what he should speak. With startling
boldness he rebuked the learned judges themselves,
and his keen, strong words cut them to the heart, till,
in a paroxysm of fury, they sprang to their feet
rushed upon him, hustled him out through the city
gate, and there stoned him to death, while like his
Divine Master he was prayiner for his enemies.

STEPHEN 273

Was the life wasted? Was the noble testimony
borne in vain ? Not so. " Saul was there, consenting
to his death" but unconsciously drinking in the spirit
of his life and teaching ; and, in a few weeks, to his
own amazement, and to the wonder of the Jewish
world, he stepped boldly into the vacant place, and
the Church owed Paul to the prayers of Stephen. As
Augustine beautifully put it : " Si Stephanus non
orasset ; ecclesia Paulum non haberet."

We need never fear about the future of the Church.
Though God's servants pass away till our hearts are
saddened, and we fear that we shall never see their
places filled, God will fill them in His own time and
way. Joshua shall follow Moses. Elisha shall wear
the mantle of Elijah. Paul shall take the place of
Stephen, and to the world's end every generation
shall have its own witnesses, for God and His truth,
in men and women filled with faith and power.

CORNELIUS

BY REV. GEORGE MILLIGAN, D.D.

CORNELIUS

CORNELIUS will always be of special interest to us as
almost the first, if not actually the first, Gentile
convert admitted into the Church of Christ. And
though we are not told a great deal regarding him
in the sacred record, the facts mentioned are of such
a character as to leave on our minds a wonderfully
clear impression of the manner of man he was.

I.

Cornelius is introduced to us as " a centurion of the
band called the Italian band" (Acts x. i), that is, a
band composed of native-born Italians, and not of
provincials, and there can be little doubt therefore
that he himself was a Roman by birth and upbring
ing. Wearied, however, by the degrading super
stitions of his country's faith, he had, like that other
centurion of the gospel-story (Luke vii. I ff.), turned
sympathetically to the Jewish religion. And though
he had not gone the length of being circumcised, he
evidently belonged to the wider class of proselytes,
known as proselytes of the Gate, to judge from the

278 CORNELIUS

almost technical expression, "one that feared God"
used by the sacred historian in describing him
(cf. Acts xiii. 1 6, 26). It is, too, in keeping with this
that Cornelius should have been distinguished by
his observance of the three great laws of Jewish
piety, alms, prayers, and fasts (cf. Matt. vi. 1-18).
And it is highly significant that it was to him while
thus faithful to the best light within his reach, that
the vision which was to be the means of leading him
into higher truth was granted. For to the devout
centurion as he prayed about the ninth hour of the
day, one of the customary Jewish hours for prayer
(cf. Acts iii. i), there appeared an angelic messenger
with the assurance that his prayers and alms had
gone up as a memorial before God, and that he
would receive an answer to the doubts and question
ings that were filling his heart, if he sent to Joppa
for one Simon, surnamed Peter, who was lodging
with a certain Simon, a tanner, by the sea-side.
Strange though the command must have seemed to
Cornelius he did not hesitate, but immediately
dispatched two of his household servants, and a
trusted soldier, who was in constant attendance upon
him, upon the appointed quest.

II.

Meanwhile, as the messengers were still upon their
journey, Peter himself had been undergoing a special

CORNELIUS 279

Divine preparation to qualify him for the new work
to which he was to be called. For it must not be
forgotten that not yet had the Apostle risen above
his strict Jewish instincts and scruples, and that the
very idea of admitting any Gentile into the Church
without his first have become by circumcision a Jew,
must have seemed impossible to him. And it
required the vision of the great sheet, with its
strangely assorted occupants of " all manner of
four-footed beasts and creeping things of the earth and
fowls of the heaven" accompanied by the express
intimation, " What God hath cleansed^ make not thou
common" to open his eyes to the fact that the old
distinctions and limitations had now been done away
(Acts x. 9- 1 6).

It was not an easy lesson for Peter to learn, and
he was still " much perplexed in himself" as to what
he had seen might mean, when close upon the vision
came the task for which the vision had been the
preparation. " Behold" so he was informed through
the Divine prompting of the Spirit, " three men seek
thee" And no sooner had he gone down and
learned from the messengers of Cornelius the
cause of their coming, than he intimated his
readiness to return with them to Csesarea on the
following day (Acts x. 17-23).

28o CORNELIUS

III.

The description of the meeting of Peter and Cornelius,
which forms the third act in this interesting drama,
is very graphic. Fully alive to the importance of the
occasion, the centurion had gathered round him his
kinsmen and near friends. And as the Apostle
approached the outer gate of his quarters, he at once
hastened to meet him, and falling down at his feet
"worshipped" him. The word used does not
necessarily point to religious worship, and may
indicate only an act of profound homage; but
that Peter felt the respect thus shown to him
excessive, is proved by his vigorous protest : " Stand
up ; I myself also am a man" And then in opposi
tion to the traditional interpretation of the law
forbidding intercourse with Gentiles, the Apostle
entered the house along with Cornelius, and in
answer to the inquiry why he had been sent for,
learned from the centurion's own lips the story of the
Divine answer to his prayers, in accordance with
which he had dispatched his messengers to Joppa.
" And thou hast well done" so Cornelius courteously
continued, " that thou art come. Now, therefore, we
are all here present in the sight of God, to hear all
things that have been commanded thee of the Lord"
(Acts x. 24-33).

No longer could Peter be in any doubt as to what

CORNELIUS 281

was required of him. But — and it shows how power
fully the surroundings in which he found himself
were affecting him — before he began to preach the
gospel, he gave emphatic expression to the great
truth he himself had just been taught : " Of a truth
I perceive that God is no respecter of persons: but in
every nation lie that feareth Him, and worketh
righteousness, is acceptable to Him" (Acts x. 34).

In one sense, indeed, this was to Peter no new
truth. It was directly implied in various injunctions
of the Law (see e.g. Deut. x. 17), and the Apostle
could hardly have forgotten that his Master Himself
had taught that a willingness to do God's will,
wherever found, was a direct step towards the
knowledge of Divine truth (see John vii. 17). At
the same time it was only now that he had really
come to understand- all that was involved in this,
and to realise how vain were all outward privileges
of race or nation as compared with the inward state
of the mind and heart. That this essential condition
for receiving a higher blessedness existed, in the case
of Cornelius and his friends, could not be doubted,
and to them, therefore, the gospel might be preached
with the best possible hope of success.

It would take us beyond our present subject to
analyse in detail the sermon that followed. It must
be sufficient to notice that it fell into three main
divisions. In the first, the Apostle gave a brief
historical review of the earthly life of Jesus, summing

282 CORNELIUS

it up in a single phrase which would appeal peculiarly
to his Gentile hearers : " Who went about doing good"
Then he passed to the great outstanding facts of
which he and his fellow-apostles had been appointed
witnesses — the death and the resurrection of their
Lord, and His return as Judge to judge the quick and
the dead. And then, finally, having thus prepared
the way by showing who Christ was, and the true
nature of His work, he concluded by pressing home
on his hearers the great evangelical message of
forgiveness : " To Him bear all the prophets witness,
that through His name everyone that believeth on
Him shall receive remission of sins" (Acts x.

34-43)-

It is tempting to see in these last words an antici
pation of the Pauline Gospel of free grace for all,
Jews and Gentiles alike ; but that would be to put
more into the words than the context justifies. For
we are told immediately afterwards that, when in
response to their believing acceptance of the truth
the Holy Spirit fell on them which heard, Peter and
those who had come with him were "amazed" : while
there is much in the Apostle's after-history to show
that he must have regarded the relaxation of the
old Jewish limitations, in the present case, as "excep
tional — a temporary concession to specially worthy
souls." And yet even this was an advance, which
to Peter before would have seemed practically impos
sible, but which he now showed his readiness to seal,

CORNELIUS 283

by suggesting that the men to whose acceptance with
God the Spirit Himself had thus publicly testified,
should receive the outward mark of entrance into the
Church of Christ. "And He commanded them to be
baptized in the name of Jesus Christ " (Acts x. 44-48).

IV.

We have followed in detail this passage in the
Book of Acts, in so far as it bears upon the history of
Cornelius. But before parting from him, it may be
well to gather up in one or two simple lessons the
outstanding features of his character.

I. We see in Cornelius a man who was faithful to
the best light he had.

In this time of unrest and doubt, when so many of
the old truths are being attacked, and it is often so
hard to know what we are really to believe, there is
something inspiriting in the attitude of this Roman
soldier, reaching out conscientiously to the highest
truth within his reach, and keeping fast hold of it
until more was revealed. We cannot suppose that
Judaism, with its exclusiveness and particularism,
could have satisfied Cornelius for long ; but until he
found something better he was content to abide by
it. So ready was his acceptance of the Psalmist's
trust, " The secret of the Lord is with them that fear
Him ; and He will shew them His covenant " (Ps. xxv.

284 CORNELIUS

14) : so firm his confidence in the prophet's promise,
" Then shall we know, if we follow on to know the
Lord" (Hos. vi. 3).

2. We see in Cornelius a man who, when the oppor
tunity of further knowledge was presented to him, at
once availed himself of it.

The idea of his receiving help from one Simon,
lodging at a tanner's house, might have seemed to
him so very unlikely as to be hardly worth consider
ing. But no ! he did not hesitate. He was a seeker
after the truth, and an earnest seeker ; and, like all
earnest seekers, was ready to embrace every oppor
tunity by which the truth might be discovered,
especially when that opportunity was offered to him
by God. Already he had made God's will, and not
his own will, the rule of his life, and he had his
reward. For

3. We see in Cornelius a man wJio, because he heard
and obeyed, received the crowning blessing.

We have learned already what that blessing was, and
how to the devout and God-fearing centurion there
was finally granted a full entrance into the Church of
Christ, with all its accompanying privileges. But, as
still further bringing out the greatness of these
privileges, it may be noted that Cornelius affords the
only instance in the New Testament of the special
gift of the Holy Spirit preceding the baptism of a
convert. It was as if God wished, on this epoch-
making occasion, to distinguish in the clearest possible

CORNELIUS 285

manner, His work of inward grace from the outward
act by which it was afterwards ratified ; and to show
that it was by the highest right, actual participation
in the living Spirit, that the Roman centurion was
recognised as a true disciple of Christ.

ST PAUL
BY REV. GEORGE MILLIGAN, D.D.

ST PAUL

"Not disobedient unto the heavenly vision." — ACTS xxvi. 19.

THOMAS Carlyle has said that "Biography is by
nature the most universally profitable, universally
pleasant of all things : especially Biography of distin
guished individuals." And if this is true of biography
as a whole, it is certainly true in a very special sense
of the biographies of the Bible. Nowhere else do we
find such a gallery of distinguished portraits, or, which
is far better, are we shown the lives of so many good
as well as great men. And amongst the men who
are thus held up to us as our spiritual leaders and

/guides, there is none who occupies a more honoured

A place than St Paul.

On the outward events of the apostle's life it is
unnecessary to dwell. They are narrated with a ful-

\| ness of detail in the sacred pages, which belongs,
perhaps, to only one other Bible biography, the

V biography of David, the psalmist-king of Israel : and,
at least in their main outlines, they are perfectly
familiar to all. What we are rather concerned with,
in the meantime, is the character of St Paul — the

289 a.

29o ST PAUL

manner of man he was — as he stands revealed to us
in the Book of the Acts of the Apostles, and especially
in these great Epistles of his, in which he lays bare
to us the inmost workings of his mind and heart. We
cannot read the words of St Paul attentively — words
which Luther in his graphic way described as " not
dead words " but " living creatures " with " hands and
feet" — without, at least, getting to know the man
himself, and without seeing how, amidst all the
changed circumstances of our modern life, he is still
/ so admirably fitted to be our example, an example
\ second only to that of the Master Himself.

For, to make only one other preliminary remark,
there is one important particular, apart from every
thing else, in which the example of St Paul means
more for us than the example of any of the other
y apostles. Like ourselves, he was not a personal
\ disciple of Christ. With the single exception of the

(Damascus vision, he never, so far as we know, saw
Christ : never talked with him, like St Peter, nor
lay on His breast, like St John. And just because of
Xthis, because like ourselves he had not the oppor
tunity of knowing Christ after the flesh, he can tell
\ us — as none other can — how Christ may dwell in our
V hearts by faith, and how gradually we too may be
\f formed after His heavenly image.

What, then, to turn to our subject, are some of the
leading features in St Paul's character ; what some of
the traits in that example which he still holds out

ST PAUL 291

fore us, as he calls upon us to be followers

imitators — of him, even as he also was of Christ
(i Cor. xi. i)? We must content ourselves with
noticing briefly four points. .

i. The first is, St Paul's strong sense of the unseen?
or, in a single word, his faith. His whole life was

(lived in the closest dependence upon God, and the
most earnest striving to make God's will his will.
I say advisedly, his whole life : for there can be no
greater mistake than to regard the period of St Paul's
life preceding his conversion as a deliberately wicked
or irreligious period. Was it not rather the very
/ depth of his religious zeal which led him, in accord-
x ance with his Hebrew birth and Pharisaic training, to
strive so earnestly after the righteousness which is by
the law ? " After the straitest sect of our religion " he
himself tells King Agrippa, " / lived a Pharisee " (Acts
xxvi. 5) ; and elsewhere he speaks of the "good con-
science " in which throughout all his life he had sought
to serve God (Acts xxiii. i). And was it not further
this same sense of fidelity to God, as he then knew
/rlim, that led to his persecution of the saints at ""

Jerusalem ? To St Paul in the Jewish stage of his
/'career, the assertion that God's Messiah had been
I crucified on a tree could sound nothing but the
^rankest blasphemy; and, so far from fighting against
God, he thought that he was doing God a service in \
ridding the earth of all such (to him) false followers /
of the Christ.

292 ST PAUL

I have emphasised this point, because it is of the

utmost importance that we should keep before us this

essentially j^eligious^ side _pf St Paul's, nature — this

^determination to be true at all costs to the highest

\ light he had — if we would understand that sudden

and overwhelming change in his whole life which we

commonly call his conversion ; an event which literally,

(to adopt a well-known expression, " cut his life in two
with a hatchet " ; altered the whole current of his
being ; and transformed, not as often by a long and
gradual process, but as it were in a lightning-flash;

(Saul the persecutor into Paul the slave of the Lord
Jesus Christ.

Nor had St Paul himself any doubt as to how this

/change was worked. It came, so he is never tired of
telling us, from a real vision of the risen Lord. In
M that awful moment in the Damascus road, Paul
\ believed that he had actually seen the glorified Jesus.
And henceforth, all that hitherto the proud Pharisee
had counted "gain" — his Jewish descent, his Phari
saic training, his strict obedience to the law — all these
(he counted but "loss" for the excellency of the
knowledge of Christ Jesus his Lord. He knew now
but one thing — to "gain Christ ', and be found in Him,
not having a righteousness of mine own, even that which
is of the law, but that which is through faith in Christ,
the righteousness which is of God by faith " (PhiL iii.

8, 9>

2. For — and here we pass to a second point — this

ST PAUL 293

vision of the risen Lord which was granted to St
Paul did not remain outside of him only as an outward,
historical event, it passed into him as a transforming,
energising power.

It was on this aspect of his conversion that in later

years the apostle himself principally dwelt Thus, in

recalling it in his first chapter in the Epistle to the

Galatians, he says expressly, " // ivas the good pleasure

of God to reveal His Son in me " (verse 1 6) : "in me n

mark ! and not merely " to me" And again and

again, as has been often pointed out, he takes up this

"/ idea of being Christ's representative with startling

V boldness. " He says the heart of Christ is beating in

his bosom towards his converts ; he says the mind of

Christ is thinking in his brain ; he says that he is

/ continuing the work of Christ and filling up that

\ which is lacking in His sufferings ; he says the

wounds of Christ are reproduced in the scars upon

his body ; he says that he is dying that others may

live, as Christ died for the life of the world" * It is

not that St Paul is arrogant ; but simply that the

y power of Christ has taken such a hold of him — he is so

I conscious of the new bond that has been formed

I between him and his Lord — that in a very deep and

I real sense he can say, " / live, yet not /, but Christ
liveth in me" (GaL ii. 20).

And yet with all his marvellous self-consecration
we are never allowed as we read his Epistles to
* Stalker, The Life of St Paul, p. 96 L

294 ST PAUL

forget, as St Chrysostom has reminded us, that "if

he was Paul, he was also a man." Read, for example,

I his description of inward struggle — of the will to do

4 good in the continual presence of evil — in Rom. vii.,

(and who is there who is not reminded of his own sad
experience ; the Adam and the Christ who is in
every man ; u the angel " who " has us by the hand,
and the serpent by the heart " ? Or listen, as, in what
is perhaps the most autobiographical of all his
Epistles, the Second Epistle to the Corinthians, he
thus lays bare his inmost heart to his converts :
/ " We are troubled on every side, yet not distressed ; ive
\ are perplexed, but not in despair ; persecuted, but not
^ forsaken ; cast down, but not destroyed " (2 Cor. iv.
8, 9). And is there any one, however hardly he
may be beset now, who can fail to recognise in St
Paul a fellow-sufferer, and consequently to believe
that as the apostle overcame, so may he ?

Or, to look at this same truth from another side,
was it not just because he himself had sounded all
\ the depths of the human heart, that the apostle
enumerates often at such length the moral duties
that are to be avoided or followed.* What a terrible
> list that is of " the works of the flesh " against which
he warns us in the fifth chapter of the Epistle to the
Galatians ! How lovingly he lingers over " the fruit
of the Spirit " in the description that follows : " Love,

* See M. Arnold, St Paul and Protestantism, popular edition,
p. 24 f.

ST PAUL 295

joy, peace, longsuffering, kindness, goodness, faithful
ness, meekness, temperance: against such there is no
law. A nd they that are of Christ Jesus have crucified
the flesh with the passions and the lusts thereof"
(Gal. v. 22-24). It seems almost as if he were afraid
to leave anything out, lest in any particular he, or
those to whom he was writing, should come short of
" the measure of the stature of the fulness of Christ "
(Eph. iv. 13). So humble was the great apostle!
So conscious that he had not already attained, or
was already made perfect ! And at the same time
so sure of, " Christ in him, the hope of glory " (Col.
i. 27). As his experience has been summed up for
us by a modern poet in well-known lines : * —

"Yea, through life, death, through sorrow and through

sinning,

He shall suffice me, for He hath sufficed :
Christ is the end, for Christ was the beginning,
Christ the beginning, for the end is Christ."

3. We have been thinking hitherto of the life of
St Paul principally in its individual aspect. But we
cannot forget that it was not for his own sake only or
even principally that he was called, but for the sake
of others, and that no sooner had the scales fallen
from his own eyes, than he was sent to open the eyes
of those who were still in darkness, that with him
they might rejoice in God's marvellous light. The
vision was but the prelude to the task.
* F. W. H. Myers, St Paul.

296 ST PAUL

And that here again St Paul did not show himself
" disobedient" is proved by the whole history of the
Christian Church. For it is no exaggeration to say
that it is to St Paul — always, of course, as the agent,
the instrument of his heavenly Lord — that we owe
the Christian Church as we find it in the world
to-day. He first transformed it from being a mere
/ Jewish sect into a world-embracing society ; he first
grasped and boldly proclaimed the universality of the
V gospel, and the freedom of the faith ; he first broke
down the barriers between Jew and Greek, between
bond and free, and taught that all are " one man in I
Christ Jesus" (Gal. iii. 28). /

It would have been pleasant, had space permitted,
to have lingered over some of the features of St
Paul's character, as they appear in this, his missionary/
work ; but after all they can hardly escape even the
most careless reader of his life. The true Paul cannot
be hid. His was evidently one of those commanding
personalities which make their presence and power
felt in whatever company they find themselves. His
hearers might agree with him, or they might oppose
him ; but, at least, they could not ignore him, as he
passed from one sphere of work to another, never at *
rest, bearing on his frail shoulders "the care of all the\(
churches" and yet ever seeking new fields to conquer
in his Master's name.

And then how sympathetic, how tactful St Paul *
was ! How ready to become " all things to all men"'

X

ST PAUL 297

^ that he might " by all means save some " (i Cor. ix. 22) !

^V^Can we wonder that his converts loved him ; that the

'/enthusiastic Galatians were ready even, if it were

( necessary, to pluck out their eyes and give them to

him (Gal. iv. 15)?

Or what shall we say of St Paul's friendships?
They meet us on every page — Barnabas and Silas '
and Mark and Timothy, who went with him on his
missionary journeys: Luke, "the beloved physician" <*
to whose companionship with the apostle we owe, so
much of the narrative in the Acts, and the spirit that
inspired the Third Gospel ; or, to pass to less-known
names, Urbanus, " our fellow-worker in_£hrist " ;
Stachys, " my^Jzeloved" ; Tryphaena and Tryphosa,
" who_ labour in the Lord" ; and Rufus, " the chosen in
the Lord, and his mother and_ mine" How real the
mere mention of these names in the Epistles makes
> St Paul to us ! How our hearts warm to him, as
\ theirs once warmed ! How clearly we understand
that it was out of his own livingjexperience that the
apostle wrote the greatjiymn in praise of Love in
i Cor. xiii. ; and bowed his knee to "the Father, from
whom every family in heaven and on earth is named"
that his " little children " might be " strong to apprehend
f with all the saints what is the breadth and length and
I height and depth, and to know the love of Christ which
\ passeth knowledge" (Eph. iii. 14, 18, 19).

4. All this, lastly, St Paul was able to do,r_l>ecause
the vision in which his true earthly work c om

298 ST PAUL

pointed him ever forward to the perfect vision with
which one day that work would be crowned.

If in the more formal aspect of his teaching St
Paul was the Apostle of Faith ; if in his relations to
others he was the Apostle of Love; in his now
personal religious experience he constantly reveals
himself as the Apostle of Hope. "By hope were we
saved" he expressly says in a well-known passage
(Rom. viii. 24) ; and his earnest prayer for his
Roman brethren is that " the God of hope " would so
"fill them with all joy and peace in believing, that they
might abound in hope, in the power of the Holy Ghost"
(Rom. xv. 13).

How indeed could it have been otherwise ? What
could have sustained St Paul amidst the trials of his
own lot, and the discouragements and disappoint
ments of his work, but the firm assurance that God
would yet make all things work together for good to
them that love Him, and the earnest looking forward
to the day when " in the name of Jesus every knee
should bow!' and " every tongue should confess that Jesus
Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father " (Phil.
ii. 10, n).

I The whole of the apostle's earthly life, in fact, was

\ lived in the light of immortality — as he looked away

Vfrom the seen trial to the unseen support ; from the

fashion of this world that passeth away, to the

eternal realities ; from the praise or blame of men

to the judgment-seat of God.

ST PAUL 299

" / know Him whom I have believed" this was his
own triumphant assurance when the end was drawing
very near, " and I am persuaded that He is able to guard
that which I have committed unto Him against that
day" And again, <c / have fought the good fight, I have
finished the course, I have kept the faith : henceforth
there is laid up for me the crown of righteousness, which
tlie Lord, the righteous judge, shall give me at that
day ; and not only to me, but also to all them that have
loved His appearing" (2 Tim. i. 12 ; iv. 7, 8).

Such, then, are some of the elements in St Paul's
character. I have not tried to point the lessons they
may teach us in recalling them ; nor can I do so now.
And, indeed, I should be sorry if it should be thought
to be necessary. Surely the mere contemplation of
such a life in its singleness of aim, in its untiring
zeal, in its world-wide charity, and in its inextinguish
able hope, is lesson enough for us all. And the more
we try to enter into the mind of the great apostle,
and to make his rule our rule, the more completely
with him shall we learn that " to live is Christ, and to
die is gain " (Phil. i. 21).

BARNABAS
BY REV. PRINCIPAL WALTER F. ADENEY, D.D.

BARNABAS

THE beauty of the character of Barnabas is seen in
the gracious spirit with which he allowed himself to
be eclipsed by a younger luminary. Paul and
Barnabas may be compared to a conjunction of
binary stars which so revolve round one another,
that though Barnabas at first shines with the
brighter radiance, gradually his light wanes, while
the brilliance of Paul comes to dazzle all eyes as
immeasurably greater. Like John the Baptist, as
the forerunner of Jesus, Barnabas, who introduced
Paul to public notice, might have said, " He must
increase, but I must decrease" There is a resemblance
to the case of the two sons of Zebedee in the change
that is made with the order of their names during
the course of the history. At first the Gospels give
us "James and John his brother"; but in the
account of the martyrdom of the former we find
him described as "James the brother of John."
Similarly at first we read of " Barnabas and Paul,"
and this order of the names is kept up till after
what we commonly call "the first missionary

303

304 BARNABAS

journey," the preaching tour of these two in
Cyprus and Asia Minor. During the course of this
tour the genius and force of character revealed
in Paul inevitably brought him to the front, and,
consequently, afterwards we find the order reversed,
and read "Paul and Barnabas," though for once in
describing a visit of the two companions to Jerusalem,
where Barnabas was so well known and so highly
honoured, St Luke reverts to the older arrangement.
This recession of Barnabas, like the recession of
James that was noticed in the study of that
disciple, cannot be accidental. But in both cases
the transposition is purely relative. There is no
reason to think that Barnabas lost ground absolutely ;
it is only that he ceased to take precedence of Paul,
owing to the unique position to which the apostle to
the Gentiles attained. As far as Barnabas himself
is concerned, this is not only not derogatory to him,
it helps to bring out that graciousness of spirit which
is his crowning virtue.

We first meet with Barnabas as a member of the
primitive Jewish Church, noted as worthy of special
honour for his exceptional generosity in that early
glow of enthusiasm, when the brotherhood seemed
tending towards a communistic social condition
(Acts iv. 36, 37). Traditions preserved by Clement
of Alexandria and Eusebius assign him a place
among the seventy evangelists whom Jesus sent
out to the towns and villages of Galilee. But these

BARNABAS 305

traditions cannot be proved or tested ; and seeing
that Barnabas was neither a Galilean, like most of
our Lord's personal followers, nor even a Palestinian
Jew of Jerusalem, but a Hellenist, it is quite likely
that he had been brought in among the converts at
or after Pentecost. The manner in which he is first
introduced suggests that he was not previously
known. It is his act of generosity in selling his
field and giving the proceeds to the church poor
fund that brings him into notice, and even that
seems to be mentioned mainly to serve as a foil
for the story of Ananias and Sapphira. St Luke
illustrates his account of the action of the brother
hood in raising a common fund for the relief of
the needy by giving two incidents, one showing
great generosity, the other meanness and deceit.
First he tells of Barnabas, briefly, and then he
plunges into the longer story of the two deceivers,
as an instance of the opposite kind of conduct, saying,
to mark the antithesis, " But a certain man named
Ananias" etc. Still Barnabas is brought before us
with an unusual amplitude of description, no doubt
in view of his subsequent importance in the Church.
He was a Levite, and, therefore, it might be supposed
in sympathy with the Temple authorities, who had
brought about the death of Christ, and to whom
later Stephen gave mortal offence. But he was not
one of the Jerusalem officials ; at all events, he was
not of a Jerusalem family, for he came from the

U

306 BARNABAS

Cyprus Jews. A Hellenist by birth, he would have
wider sympathies than the Hebraistic Jews. But
this fact will not account for the very attractive
character he presents to us in the history of the
Church. Generosity is his great trait, generosity of
various forms, seen in various ways, always ready
to flow out wherever an opportunity presents itself.
Accordingly there is more reason than usual in
calling attention to the meaning of his name. The
English phrase, "son of consolation" is too narrow
for St Luke's original expression. For the word
rendered " consolation " — paraklesis^ cognate to which
is paraklete — means also encouragement, exhortation,
cheering helpfulness. Barnabas was recognised as a
man who brought cheer and gladness wherever he
went, one of those men whose very presence is like
sunshine.

The first instance of this appears in a very
concrete form. A superficial reading of "Acts"
has led some to the conclusion that a system of
pure socialism prevailed in the primitive Church at
Jerusalem, that the members literally had all things
in common. But though one or two expressions
might seem to fall in with this notion, we must
understand them to mean that the brethren held
all they possessed with a view to the common good,
never grudging to give any amount of it away as
need required, holding their property, but holding
it for the service of the community ; so that the

BARNABAS 307

poor fund to which they contributed freely never
fell short of its requirements. This view is necessi
tated by the fact that a short time after there was
trouble in the distribution among the widows, the
Hellenistic widows appearing to have less than their
share. If all the people had denuded themselves of
every shred of private property, the widows would
have been no worse off than other people ; the whole
brotherhood would have had to share in the general
distribution. This reference to widows shows that
they were the especially needy folk, and, therefore,
implies that the rest of the community were in
more comfortable circumstances. The two illustra
tions point in the same direction. If it was the rule
that every member of the Church put the whole of
his property into the common stock, there would be
no reason to select the case of Barnabas, it would be
in no way exceptional. Besides, St Peter's words to
Ananias imply the very opposite, when he says,
" While it remained^ did it not remain in thy power ?
A nd after it was sold, was it not in thy power ? . . .
thou has not lied unto men, but unto God" The lie
was the sin, not the retention of part of the money,
to which Ananias would have been perfectly free.
We are to think of Barnabas, therefore, as especially
generous in selling his field for the benefit of the
community. It is using rather big words to say
that he was a landowner who made over his estate
to the Church — like a baron turning monk and

308 BARNABAS

endowing a monastery. The field may not have
been very large. Still, among those simple peasants,
the fishermen and other working-folk who constituted
the early Church, Barnabas was a man of property,
and, in this respect, socially above the majority of the
brotherhood. But this he ceased to be, putting
himself on a level with the rest, and henceforth,
losing the use or rent of his field, having to maintain
himself entirely by the labour of his hands. He may
not have been a rich man ; but he had to face the
rich man's difficulty, which Jesus held to be an
insuperable hindrance to entrance into the kingdom
of heaven without the special aid of God, with whom
all things are possible. It may be as hard for the
small freeholder to give up his little plot as for the
great landowner to abandon his wide acres. To him
it is the whole wealth he possesses.

Of course it is possible to make too much of this
one act of generosity on the part of Barnabas. He
will do greater things afterwards. We need not
exalt him to the skies simply because this deed is
recorded in the Bible, and ignore the fact that more
remarkable sacrifices are told us of men in later days.
Church history abounds with instances of people who
gave up everything and took poverty as their bride.
St Francis not only abandoned his home and all he
possessed ; he took off his clothes and only dressed
himself in the old garments tossed to him as a beggar.
Less fantastic and vastly more self-sacrificing was his

BARNABAS 309

devotion of his whole life to follow in the footsteps of
Christ as exactly as possible. Not less noble is the
life of such a man as Francis Crossley — " the modern
St Francis " — who though a most prosperous manu
facturer, who might have amassed a fortune and
lived like a prince, chose to spend a simple life
among his own workpeople, devoting himself and
his large business profits to the good of his fellow-
men.

But while there is no reason to exaggerate the
importance of this one act of Barnabas, it is interest
ing as exhibiting at the very first the leading trait of
his character, his abounding generosity. We may
find it the more valuable in this way because it is a
concrete action. There is a pseudo-kindliness which
evaporates in idle sentiments. It is very genial in
manner, but it has no real generosity in matter. This
mere pleasantness stops short at the point of self-
sacrifice. As far as it goes it is agreeable enough.
It oils the wheels of life for people to behave cheer
fully and beam upon us with kindly smiles. The
danger is that we should expect more from this than
it really guarantees. When it comes to the pinch,
when some trying service is needed, or some actual
sacrifice is called for, your " pleasant fellow " is found
wanting. While all is well he will greet you with a
hearty hand-shake, and when you are in hopeless
distress he may condole with you in feeling terms,
seemingly a very "son of consolation." But in that

3io BARNABAS

intermediate state of affairs when true friendship
would be of practical use, but at the cost of some
trouble, you find him most unsatisfactory. Then you
discover to your disappointment that a ton of senti
ment is not worth an ounce of service. It is well,
therefore, on the threshold of the story of Barnabas,
to find this agreeable man giving tangible proof that
his kindness of heart is real and solid, and productive
of material results.

The deeper qualities in the character of Barnabas
first emerge when he comes into contact with Paul.
This was soon after the wonderful transformation on
the road to Damascus. When the converted persecutor
went up to Jerusalem, he was at first coldly received.
People could not believe that he was genuine. They
thought his action a ruse, like a detective's confidence
trick, and they fought shy of him. Considering the
extraordinary circumstances of the case, this is not at
all remarkable. Paul had been the fiercest of the
antagonists of the Christians, " breathing threatening
and slaughter against the disciples of the Lord" Had
he not gone on a self-chosen mission to Damascus, in
order to kindle the fires of persecution in that city ?
To hear that such a man had suddenly become a
follower of the faith he had been hitherto living to
destroy, was the most unlikely news. People could not
believe it. Then Barnabas came forward and took
him by the hand, introducing him to the Apostles,
warmly commending him for the good work he

BARNABAS 311

had already done in Damascus (Acts ix. 26, 27).
This was a doubly generous act, an act by the side of
which the sale of the field looks commonplace. It
was generous in its appreciation of Paul. Barnabas,
as a Hellenist, may be reckoned a member of that
section of the Church to which St Stephen had
belonged. It does not appear that the martyrdom
of Stephen was a part of a general policy of persecu
tion, although that policy was a direct outcome of
it. The provocation was found in Stephen's liberal
theology. The Apostles were assiduous in their
attendance at the Temple. But Stephen was thought
to have spoken disrespectfully of the Temple and the
ancient customs it represented. If, then, Barnabas
was known to sympathise with the more liberal views,
he might have been seized any day as a special object
of aversion to the Jewish authorities. Paul had been
consenting to the death of Stephen and taking some
part in the scene. In the eyes of Barnabas, therefore,
Paul would have appeared to be a very dangerous
man. Yet Barnabas is the first Jerusalem Christian
to welcome him. It is possible that he had known
Paul in those early days before the troubles arose.
Cyprus is not far from Tarsus, and there was con
stant communication between the island and that
part of Asia Minor where Paul had resided in his
youth. Then they were both Hellenists, both Greek-
speaking Jews, natives of Greek provinces. Previous
acquaintance and local sympathies and similarities

312 BARNABAS

may have rendered Barnabas more ready than others
to welcome Paul; but they are not sufficient to
account for his courageous action. This sprang from
his own noble nature. Barnabas has faith not only
in God, but also in man, because he is sure that God
can do great things for man. The one faith leads
on by direct inference to the other. Barnabas can
believe in the possibility of so great a wonder as the
conversion of Paul by the grace and power of God ;
therefore he can believe in the genuineness of Paul's
new profession of faith. The little, mean soul, narrow
in its conception of God, cold in its own relations
to the unseen, cannot believe in more than petty
movements in religion. A vast volcanic upheaval,
such as had taken place in the heart of the
notorious persecutor, is wholly beyond its imagina
tion, because it is quite out of the range of its experi
ence. It is the large-hearted Barnabas who can
believe in so tremendous a spiritual convulsion as
the conversion of Paul. It is just such a man who
can believe in goodness at all in an unexpected
quarter. Small men are suspicious. It takes a large
heart to judge generously. We are all tempted too
much on the side of caution in dealing with our
fellow-men. If our confidence has been abused in
the past, we resent the deception and feel humiliated
at having been over-reached. But it is better to
cultivate wide sympathies and form generous judg
ments, even if sometimes we are taken in, than to

BARNABAS 313

safeguard ourselves so completely against impostors
that we also exclude worthy men from our recog
nition. It is worse to be unjust to one good man
than to be swindled by half a dozen rogues. We are
ourselves responsible for the injustice ; but it is not
we, but the rogues, who are responsible for the
swindling.

Barnabas soon saw that he had not made a
mistake in his generous judgment of the former
persecutor. His true heart found, by genuine sym
pathy, that it had met one of kindred nature. This
was the beginning of a true friendship between
the two men, a friendship that united them in
more than one partnership of service, though it
was more than once disturbed by differences of
opinion.

We next meet with Barnabas on an important
mission which is entrusted to him, without any
colleague. Some unknown Christians from Cyprus
and Greece had gone to Antioch and preached the
gospel to the Greeks in that great city, the capital of
the Province of Syria. An important textual
emendation here gives us " Greeks " in place of
" Grecians" i.e., Greek-speaking Jews, which was the
reading of the " Authorised Version " (Acts xi. 20).
This indicates a fact of primary significance. Antioch
was destined to become the most important Christian
centre after Jerusalem ; it was to be the Gentile
centre, while Jerusalem was the Jewish centre. True

314 BARNABAS

to the wider sympathies of the larger life in associa
tion with the Greeks, but, better, true to the heart and
essence of the gospel, Antioch was to be the head
quarters of early Christian missionary work among
the heathen. The founding of such a Church as that
at Antioch was of supreme importance in regard to
the spread of the gospel through the world, and that
in a form suitable to all sorts of people, because
free from the fetters of Jewish prejudices. This
Church appears to have been mainly Gentile from
the first. Now the founding of a Greek Church
was brought about by the missionary zeal of a band
of anonymous Greek-speaking Christians. These
men had courage to attempt a novel enterprise,
one fraught with world-wide and permanent effects,
far beyond anything they could have imagined. It
was not the official propaganda at Jerusalem, it
was the unorganised activity of private Christians,
that undertook and carried through this great
work.

When the Jerusalem Church heard the startling
news, it acted wisely ; it sent one of its members to
inquire into the case. This was more sensible and
more Christian than its action in the case of one or
two subsequent delegations. The man chosen for
this delicate and responsible task was Barnabas.
Great confidence was reposed in him, for it was
deemed sufficient to entrust the whole business tc
him alone. Then he had not lost ground through

BARNABAS 315

his boldness in introducing Paul to the Church. The
fact that some of the evangelists at Antioch came
from Cyprus, where Barnabas had been born, may
have been in some degree a reason for the selection
of him. He was to examine the work of his fellow-
countrymen, perhaps men whom he knew personally.
But a deeper reason is to be found in his known
character. That character came out more clearly,
and with delightful results, in the course of his
mission. When he saw " the grace of God" among
these Greeks and Syrians, " he was glad" (Acts xi. 23).
No suspicion of Jewish jealousy found any lodgment
in this generous man's heart. Not only was he glad
sympathetically, for the sake of the Church at Antioch ;
a deeper joy was occasioned by an enlarged perception
of the grace of God now brought home to him. He
saw, with delight, that the gospel was working its
wonders among the heathen. Like Columbus's dis
covery of the Western World, this was the discovery
of a new, unsuspected continent — a fresh continent
of Divine grace. The sense of enlargement, the
widened horizon ; and the uplifting with more exalted
thoughts of the goodness of God — these two percep
tions going together filled Barnabas with a rare, new
gladness. He proceeded to encourage the new
Church, exercising the talent which Luke thought
he saw suggested by his name. The reason for all
this is given us by the historian in a threefold
characterisation of Barnabas. First, he was " a good

3i6 BARNABAS

man" — "good" in the sense of kind, benevolent,
generous ; secondly, he was "full of the Holy Ghost "
— one richly endowed with the new gift of the Spirit,
inspiring his goodness and filling him with enthusiasm ;
thirdly, he was "a man of faith" Here, as in the
case of his introduction of Paul to the Church at
Jerusalem, his faith in God and Christ led Barnabas
to believe in the power of the gospel to save these
Greeks at Antioch, and then to believe in them as
genuine Christians.

The visit of Barnabas to Antioch resulted in a
great enlargement of the Church. We must not
think of him as a mere inspector, sent to investigate
and report. The Church, which was small when he
arrived, grew under his efforts till the work had
surpassed the powers of one man, and Barnabas felt
the need of an assistant. Then he went to Tarsus,
where Paul was at the time among his own people,
and fetched the apostle away to Antioch, and there
the two laboured together for a twelvemonth. Thus,
a second time, Barnabas serves as the introducer of
the Apostle of the Gentiles.

It does not appear that Barnabas ever intended to
live in Jerusalem again. He was now settled, full of
fruitful work, in the Church at Antioch, when a famine
at Jerusalem brought the Mother Church into a
condition of want. Hearing of this, the Christians
at Antioch made a contribution for the Jerusalem
poor, and sent it up in charge of Paul and Barnabas.

BARNABAS 317

Professor Ramsay has suggested that since what was
needed was food, not money, it must have been a
caravan of provisions that the two friends conducted.
Is it too much to suggest that Barnabas may have
made the proposal for this action of Christian love,
which he was the chief person to carry out. It is
always in some act of sympathy or kindness that he
crosses our path.

After the return from Jerusalem, Antioch con
tinued to be the scene where Barnabas and Paul
lived and laboured, till a new move with vast conse
quences was made. A group of prophets and teachers
at Antioch, among whom Barnabas is named first
and Paul (" Saul ") last, fasted and prayed in order to
learn God's will for their future work. The answer
to their prayer was that the Spirit of God — probably
by the words of one of the prophets — indicated that
Barnabas and Paul should be separated from the
other evangelists and sent on a special mission tour.
In this Barnabas takes the lead. After their solemn
ordination the two missionaries first visit Cyprus, the
home-country of Barnabas, and then, passing over to
Asia and crossing the Taurus mountains, preach in
the towns of South Galatia. In one of the most
heathenish of these towns Barnabas is taken for
Zeus, the king of the gods, and Paul for Hermes, the
messenger god. This curious scene may afford us a
hint as to the appearance of Barnabas. Statues of
Zeus represent the Olympian god as a majestic,

318 BARNABAS

bearded figure, while Hermes appears as a slender
youth. But the more imposing appearance of
Barnabas did not give him permanent pre-eminence.
Before this tour is over the order of the two names
is reversed. Henceforth— except once at Jerusalem,
where Barnabas naturally retained a position of high
honour — we read no more of Barnabas and Paul, but
we have Paul and Barnabas.

It is regrettable that after this we have to face two
incidents, which do not present Barnabas in so
favourable a light. The first is when Barnabas
would have taken his nephew, Mark, on a visit to the
scene of the missionary tour, but was opposed by
Paul. We cannot enter into the merits of the quarrel
between the two friends to which this unhappy
difference of opinion gave rise, as we do not know all
the circumstances. Evidently Paul blamed Mark for
giving up the previous enterprise when it involved
crossing the mountains into the heart of Asia Minor.
Barnabas's share in the affair shows him to be true to
his nature. We must not dismiss this as a mere
piece of nepotism. Have we not seen Barnabas all
along to be a man of kindly disposition, generous,
appreciative, not prone to suspicion, ready to see
thr jMMid in people, willing t«> trust those- whom
others doubt? It is just like him that he should take
the most favourable view of Mark's conduct, and stand
by his nephew when he was being judged unfavour
ably by the more vehement apostle. The unhappy

BARNABAS 319

consequence was, that the union of the two evangelists
in common missionary work ceased from this time.
Possibly, if the sharp contention had not occurred, it
would not have been easy for them to continue in
close co-operation. Paul was bound to be the leader ;
more and more, as time went on, his powerful
personality dominated the Churches he had founded.
And yet deference was always felt to be due to
Barnabas, as the senior. It was easier for both to
work apart. Of these two, it may be said, as
Coleridge wrote of Roland and Sir Leoline, but
really meaning Wordsworth and himself:

"They stood aloof, the scars remaining,
Like clifTs which had been rent asunder,
A dreary sea now (lows between ;
Hut neither heat, nor frost, nor thunder,
Shall wholly do away, I wean,
The marks of that which once hath been."

The last scene in which Paul and Barnabas are
brought together is also painful. Krnissaries of the
narrow party who sheltered under the name of James
at Jerusalem, having come to Antioch whik- Peter
was holding familiar intercourse with the Greek
Christians, that impressionable apostle drew back and
ceased to associate at table with the uncircumcised.
This was bad enough in the eyes of Paul ; but what
most annoyed him was that Peter's example was
infectious. The mischievous leaven from Jerusalem
was spreading, and " even Barnabas was carried away "

320 BARNABAS

with what Paul calls " their dissimulation " (Gal.
ii. 13). The point of this remark is in the word
" even" There is a world of meaning in that
expression — "even Barnabas!" Paul's old patron
and travelling companion, the man who had first
sanctioned the Gentile Church at Antioch, the leader
of the first great missionary tour in the Greek-
speaking world, and a champion of the Gentiles at
the Jerusalem Council — such a man caught in the
current of reaction ! It is too bad. Paul lays all
the blame of it on Peter. Of Barnabas he seems to
think only with sorrowful surprise. If he should be
blamed, the fault may be found in a perversion of his
chief merit — his kindliness of heart. He could not
bear to differ from his old friend, Peter. Still, this
meant unkindness to the Greeks, and, what is worse,
injustice and an error in principle. It is an indication
of the danger that threatens men of the genial type.
In unguarded moments their sympathies may betray
such men into wrong action, the immediate object of
which is kindly meant.

We cannot go beyond Luke and Paul for sure
light on the character of Barnabas. The harsh
anti-Judaism of the epistle that bears his name
in the Church is quite unworthy of him, and for
bids us to accept that document as genuine. If
Tertullian was right in ascribing our Epistle to the
Hebrews to Barnabas, we have there a rich mine
from which to draw information as to his mind and

BARNABAS 321

character. But the question is too uncertain to
permit of this with any degree of assurance. It is
enough to note that the encouraging tone of the
epistle is true to the nature of the large-hearted
evangelist.

ONESIMUS
BY REV. J. MORGAN GIBBON

ONESIMUS

WHAT can the religion of Jesus do for a young man ?
Well, let me try to show you by means of an illus
tration. The Epistle to Philemon, the least of the
little flowers of St Paul, was intended to illustrate
this very question. Perhaps, the instance selected
may astonish some and offend others. But the
rich young ruler, though he makes a charming and
suggestive figure in the gospel, is not a good illustra
tion. He is not typical. Nor is Timothy, the young
man we meet so often in the Epistles. He also is
interesting but not representative. The typical youth
must not be too clever, or fortunate, or good. He
must have his difficulties, his mistakes, his full dose
of original sin — and such was Onesimus. Neither
heredity nor fortune had been kind to him. He
belonged to the working-class of his age. He had
no political rights. He was born into a servitude
which gave no scope for ambition. He had nothing
to live for except the few pleasures he could snatch
from the table of life.

No wonder that, having a mind alive to the misery

325

326 ONESIMUS

of his lot, the spirit of revolt was aroused ; and that
seeing no hope of freedom from any other source,
he became his own deliverer. That he stole money,
is a baseless conjecture. But theft of money would
would have been a small crime in the eyes of the
law compared to what he had dared to do. A few
lashes might have expiated the theft ; but for a slave
to call himself his own man, was a crime for which
only the cross or the lamprey's pool could atone.

Of course he did right ; but neither law nor
gospel was ready for such a measure of right.
Justice to all oppressed classes and races lay among
the seeds Jesus had cast into the earth ; but it was
the least of the seeds, and as yet had not sprouted.
Having made an enemy of the world and its hard
law, he came to Rome. He made his appeal not
to Caesar, but to Christ in the person of Paul, the
most eminent Christian then living ; and Christianity
did for him exceeding abundantly above all he could
ask or think.

I.

Christianity gave him — himself; freely conceded
his humanity, his moral -worth -with all the
rights, and privileges, and duties of a man
created in the image of God.

The world made many and wide distinctions.
The world of freemen denied human rights to the

ONESIMUS 327

slave world. The world of the rich despised the
world of the poor. The little world of genius looked
down with contempt on the world of mediocrity.
But in Christ's world there was no cynicism, nor
disdain, nor arrogance, nor hate. Christianity knew
no more of rich and poor, bond and free, than the
sun which shines as kindly on the beggar as on the
king. Nature had never reproached Onesimus with
his servile condition. Birds had sung to him as he
plodded his weary way to Rome ; dogs had licked
his hand and frolicked round him, delighting in his
favour. Theirs was the love that knew nothing.
But Christ's was the love that knew everything, and
yety and therefore, loved on. Christianity was
scarcely prepared to go Christ's length, for the
disciples are ever far in the rear of their Master.
Nevertheless, when this youth challenged her in
Christ's name she stammered forth Christ's own
answer.

Might such an one as Onesimus take all that
Jesus had said home to himself? Yes, all! Was a
slave's soul of infinite value ? Yes ! Might he pray,
saying " Our Father " ? Yes ! Might he believe that
the Son of God loved him and gave Himself for
him? Yes! Bit by bit, word by word, he drew
it out of Paul. He took to himself the whole armour
of God. The fabric of the world's social system lay
shivered at his feet. Every yoke was broken.
Onesimus was a man in Christ, a forgiven, redeemed

328 ONESIMUS

man. Let the world do its worst. He was in
wardly free. He had found a basis for self-respect.
He had found himself.

But how does this apply to present conditions?
Is it not entirely to the point? Social forms have
changed, but the spirit, the animus of the world, is
the same ; it despises poverty, it worships wealth
and flatters genius. The infinite value of the soul
is ignored. The transparent fictions of rank and
position, birth and fortune, are placed above the
supreme fact. The world judges by the adjective,
not the noun. Men are robbed of their sense of
dignity ; defrauded of self-respect. And the appeal
that ought to lie in a man's humanity is drowned by
the clamour of lying oracles.

" Greatest among the solid gains of the Reforma
tion," says J. R. Green, "was the new conception of
social equality. Their common calling, their common
brotherhood in Christ, annihilated in the minds of
the Puritans that overpowering sense of social dis
tinction which characterised the age of Elizabeth.
The meanest peasant felt himself ennobled as is a
child of God"

Ennobled as a child of God! What a tremendous
phrase ! A man is, by virtue of God's grace, greater
than anything he can become by work or genius. A
soul's inheritance exceeds its gains. Will any one
deny that this is not a great need of to-day, and
that Harnack was right when he declared that

ONESIMUS 329

what the mass of men ask for is not bread but
recognition, the recognition of their moral worth and
human status ?

But of whom do they ask this ? Of the world ?
The world must cease to be itself before it can
grant their petition. Its towering pagodas of rank
and caste are founded on the worthlessness of men.
Materialism gives us our tyrannies, our war of
peoples and war of classes, our thinly-veiled slaveries,
and the whole progeny of parasites that live and
move and have their being, at the expense of human
nature.

But the kingdom of God is a kingdom of kings;
it is righteousness, peace, and joy in the Holy Spirit.
Come boldly to the throne of grace. You whom
men call insignificant, whom genius ignores, and
power despises, come boldly to the people of Christ.
And if they halt in their reply, lift your gaze and
interrogate the Three in One. " Whom say YE that
I am ? " And the Father shall answer, " Thou art
a man whom I made in My likeness, in My own
image created I thee " ; and the Son shall answer,
" Thou art one for whom I died, thou art My brother,
My sister " ; and the Holy Spirit shall answer,
" Thou art a living temple built by Me, for My own
habitation ! "

Let a youth reverently, humbly, freely take the
Christian view of himself, and he will be saved from
all sorrows of spirit, all bitterness of soul, from

330 ONESIMUS

sensuality and cowardice, from avarice and arrogance.
His standing will be assured him. He can never
rise above what he is by grace. That is a code of
honour, a protection, a consolation, a joy that cannot
be taken from him.

II.

Christianity gave Onesimus admission into a
unique Community.

That community of forgiveness and love supplied
all that was lacking on his own part. It gave him a
noble ancestry. It furnished him with ideas, and
kindled sublime ambitions within him. It gave him a
new heredity. He shared in all that good men had
gained. He reaped where others had sown. He had
a portion in all the goodness that lay treasured in
Christian souls. He was Paul's son, the son of his
old age. He was Paul's self, and as such he was sent
back to Philemon to be formally set free. He who
on his outward journey saw the world clothed with
frowns and threats, now looked on a smiling world in
which all manner of delightful friendships grew and
bore fruits.

Best of all, he was no pauper, nor a mere dependent
in this new world of kindness. He had his place
among Christian men as a man capable of service.

ONESIMUS 331

He was proclaimed by Paul as one whose absence
from the apostle's side would mean a great loss to
him, and whose welcome was assured if he ever came
again.

The religion of Jesus gave his soul scope. It set
free the pent-up energies of a lifetime. It gave the
man to himself, and gave him also a world worthy of
a man's love and activity.

What but Christianity could do such things at that
time? What but Christianity can do such things
now?

Our great cities swarm with educated youth for
whose energies life has no adequate scope. With
all their high spirits, their ambitions, their visions
and dreams, they foresee a lifetime of common
place drudgery in office, warehouse, and yard.
Their work has no savour of soul, no taste of mind
in it. As birds that reconnoitre the heavens
through the bars of a cage, hundreds of thou
sands of young men catch glimpses of life through
dingy windows, and feel as they look that they
are chained to the dull and the small all their
days.

Many plunge into pleasure, but " the bed is shorter
than that a man can stretch himself on it, and the
covering narrower than that he can wrap himself
in it."

Even love itself loses its sweetness, and becomes
soured like milk in sultry weather. We were created

332 ONESIMUS

for union and co-operation, for great and lasting
things.

Hence the attraction which Pantheism has for
many :

" He is made one with nature : there is heard
His voice in all her music, from the moan
Of thunder to the song of night's sweet bird ! "

No real mourner was ever comforted with such
thoughts ; but they show the soul's desire for union
with the permanent and the great, the craving of the
part for the whole.

Now the religion of Jesus meets this desire. He is
the true Vine, the Tree of Life, and through union
with Him we are made one with all good and holy
souls. Humanity, as the subject of redemption,
becomes the object of our love. Scattered as yet on
the face of time and place, blown about by many
winds, men are gathered in Christ's love into a Rose
of Souls, and we are petals of the heavenly Flower.
Our place is assured. Our task is set. To every man
in Christ is given a share in work that is immortal.
The labour by which he wins his bread may be dull,
mechanical, and painful. He may work out of sight,
and dying leave nothing behind him to keep his
memory alive. But Christ gives every man scope,
allots to every man interesting and important work
that cannot fail, for it is in very deed the work of
God.

ONESIMUS 333

Mr George Meredith has said lately that conscrip
tion is unpopular in England, because Englishmen
are afraid of being shot at, But may this not be due
rather to a conviction which is gradually dawning
upon us, that we were created for something better
than to go forth to shoot and be shot at by men with
whom we have no quarrel? May not the ancient
superstition of war be passing away ? We have
fought and hated each other long enough. It is time
to make peace. It is time we lived human lives. It
is time we loved one another. It is time we turned
to One that says, " Come unto Me all ye that labour and
are heavy laden. . . . Take My yoke upon you, and
you shall find rest unto your souls"

III.

But was Onesimus to sail henceforth only in
smooth waters ? Were all the waves to be charmed
for him ? Ah, no ! It was in a prison and from a
prisoner's lips he heard Christ speak. His reception
in his old home might not be favourable. Philemon's
Christianity might lag far behind Paul's, for in the
good ground some bring forth only thirtyfold. But
this brief epistle contained one phrase that changed
the perspective of life, and showed all its troubles in
diminished proportion : " Thou shouldest receive him

334 ONESIMUS

FOR EVER." Life was life for ever. Love was love
for evermore. Beyond the ridges of ice and snow a
blue sky was shining that betokened blue water and
fair winds. What if the cross awaited him
in Colossae, or even the crueler death of the
lamprey's pond ? " For ever " made amends. " For
ever " paid for all. " For ever " made him invulner
able. He was a " for ever " man ; of whom or what
should he be afraid ?

Can a youth have that assurance to-day? Why
not? He may have it. But not by dint of sheer
thinking. Not by picking God's lock and bribing
gossiping spirits to tell their worthless secrets. Not
as an amulet or charm. He can have it only in its
place among the great truths in Christ's revelation.
He cannot pick it out of its context. He must take
it where it comes in the sentence. It is not a truth
for the intellect only, nor for the emotions only, but
for the whole man and for every phase of man's life.
Its use is for inspiration and action, as well as for
comfort, to enable a man to live nobly even more
than to die peacefully. Let the youth of our day
bend his will to Christ's yoke, and he shall verify this
doctrine of the great " for ever " in his daily experi
ence. The truth shall make free from every fear.
The Christianity of many Christians is a sorry affair.
The Christianity of the Churches lags far behind the
New Testament. But meanwhile there is the New
Testament. It holds out Christ's incomparable offer

ONESIMUS 335

to us all. Let us fall in with it ! What if Philemon
and Apphia and Archippus, and their Church
fail us? We have the mind of Christ. Let us
rejoice in our Lord and follow Him whithersoever
He goeth.

TIMOTHY
BY REV. GEORGE MILLIGAN, D.D.

TIMOTHY

AMONGST the friends of St Paul there is no one who
appeals more to our interest and sympathies than
Timothy. For not only was he associated with the
apostle during a longer period than any of his other
companions, but he was evidently regarded with an
altogether peculiar affection and esteem. He was
St Paul's "true child in faith" (i Tim. i. 2), of one
mind with himself (Phil. ii. 20), and working the
work of the Lord even as he did (i Cor. xvi. 10).
All, therefore, that we can learn regarding Timothy
is significant for the light it throws upon the character
alike of the pupil and of the master.

The early home of Timothy was at Lystra, and
owing to the general Grecising tendency of the district,
we are not surprised to learn that while his mother
was a Jewess, his father was a Greek (Acts xvi. i).
We do not, however, even know the latter's name ;
and as there is no further reference to him in the
Acts or the Epistles, it is probable that he died
during his son's infancy. In any(case, the upbringing
of Timothy would appear to have devolved upon his

339

340 TIMOTHY

mother Eunice, and his grandmother Lois, and by
these two pious women he was carefully instructed
in the Holy Scriptures (2 Tim. iii. 15). It was, of
course, only the books of the Old Testament which
were then available ; but it is not improbable that
some tidings, at least, of the new doctrines which
were agitating the Jewish party at Jerusalem had
already reached Lystra, and that when St Paul on
his First Missionary Journey arrived there, he found
a ready welcome at the house of Eunice. If so, can
we doubt that the young Timothy would be a
witness of the apostle's sufferings at the hands of his
fellow-townsmen (cf. Acts xiv. 19 ff. ; 2 Tim. iii.
10, 11), and may even have been amongst those who
supported the stunned and bruised man back into
the city ? It is, at any rate, to this visit of St Paul
that Timothy's conversion to Christianity was due
(i Cor. iv. 14-17); and during the time that elapsed
before he again met the apostle, we can think of him
as preparing himself by prayer and careful study of
the Scriptures, for the work to which he was to be
called.

The circumstances of that call are fully narrated
in the Book of Acts. St Paul was again in Lystra,
and on all hands he heard good accounts of one
whom, from the circumstances of his first visit, he
had never ceased to regard with tender affection
(Acts xvi. I ff). Why, then, should not Timothy, so
the apostle asked himself, become his travelling-corn-

TIMOTHY 341

panion and fellow-worker in place of Mark, or even
of Barnabas, over whose sudden departure he was
still grieving ? And no sooner had he been confirmed
in this decision by certain prophetic utterances
(i Tim. i. 18; iv. 14), than the necessary steps were
taken for giving effect to it. Solemnly the young
man was set apart for this new ministry by the laying
on of hands of the local presbytery (2 Tim. i. 6).
And as, moreover, owing to his half Jewish birth, he
had not yet been circumcised, St Paul had the long-
deferred rite performed, in order that no needless
offence should be caused in the Jewish circles,
amongst whom, in the future, so much of his work
would lie (Acts xvi. 3).

The parting with her son would be a sore trial to
the widowed Eunice. He had been so much to her :
she, stronger tie of love still, had done so much for
him. Nor could she shut her eyes to the hardships
and perils which now lay before him. The mother in
the American war " who kissed her only son on the
doorstep, and through her tears said, ' Go, my child,
your country needs you/ and then turned round to
find all the light gone out of her humble home," was
not more self-sacrificing than she. Like Hannah of
old, she recognised an even higher call than that of
earthly affection : " / have lent him to the Lord, as
long as he liveth he shall be lent to the Lord" (i Sam.
i. 28).

Nor was this confidence misplaced. From this

342 TIMOTHY

time onwards Timothy was one of St Paul's most
devoted followers, slaving for him as a son for a
father (Phil. ii. 22). Thus there can be little doubt,
though the fact is not expressly mentioned, that he
was with St Paul and Silas both at Philippi and at
Thessalonica, escaping, perhaps, the persecution that
befell them in these places from his comparative
youth and insignificance. And at Bercea we are
expressly told that he was left behind to carry on
those discussions and reasonings with the Jews on
the Old Testament Scriptures, for which his early
training had so admirably equipped him (Acts xvii.
10-14). At Athens he again rejoined the apostle,
only, however, to be dispatched as St Paul's " brother
and God's minister in the gospel of Christ" to the
young Church at Thessalonica, in order to establish
and comfort the brethren there in the sufferings that
were falling upon them (i Thess. iii. I ff.). Mean
while, apparently Silas was dispatched on a similar
errand elsewhere, and St Paul went on alone
to Athens. But how much the apostle missed his
two trusted associates, and the inspiring power of
their companionship, is shown by the emphatic
statement, that no sooner were they again with him
than he was " constrained by the word" (Acts xviii. 5) —
carried on, as it were, irresistibly into new departures
of activity and zeal.

Timothy is not again mentioned by name until we
find him with St Paul at Ephesus on the Third

TIMOTHY

343

Missionary Journey, though he may well have been
with the apostle during the whole intervening period
(Acts xix. 22). And how completely, by this time,
he had become St Paul's right hand and helper, is
shown by his dispatch first to Macedonia along with
Erastus (Acts xix. 22), and afterwards to Corinth.

His mission to the latter place was evidently a very
delicate one, and fearful of the result St Paul bespoke
for his envoy a kindly welcome, in a letter in which
he explained the object of his coming. "/ have
sent unto you" so he writes to the Corinthians,
" Timothy, who is my beloved and faithful child in the
Lord, who shall put you in remembrance of my ways
which be in Christ, even as I teach everywhere in every
church" (i Cor. iv. 17). And in a later passage
in the same epistle he earnestly calls upon the
Corinthians to respect Timothy's timidity, and to set
him forward again on his journey in peace (i Cor.
xvi. 10). Timothy was evidently of a shy and
sensitive disposition, and St Paul, whom "the care
of all the churches" never made forgetful of the
courtesies of everyday life, desired that nothing
should be done to wound or annoy him. But the
appeal, so kindly meant, would seem to have been
in vain, if, as many scholars hold, we are to identify
Timothy with the wronged sufferer of 2 Cor. vii. 12.
In any case, the news which he brought back to St
Paul from Corinth were evidently of such a disquiet
ing nature as to call forth from the apostle a

344 TIMOTHY

severe epistle, now lost (unless, as is sometimes held,
the greater part of it is embodied in 2 Cor. x.-xiii.),
in which he demanded the severe punishment of the
offender. This epistle was followed by yet another
epistle to the Corinthian Church — our so-called
Second Epistle to the Corinthians — which was
dispatched from Macedonia by Titus and two brothers
(2 Cor. viii. 16-23), and in the writing of which Timothy
was associated with St Paul (2 Cor. i. i). And shortly
afterwards he visited Corinth itself along with the
apostle, to judge from the occurrence of his name in
the salutations of Rom. xvi. 21 ff., a chapter which is
believed to have been written at this time from
Corinth.

From Corinth Timothy crossed over to Troas,
where, along with other brethren, he awaited the
arrival of St Paul, who had been making the longer
circuit through Macedonia (Acts xx. 4, 5). But we
are left uncertain whether from thence he accom
panied the apostle on his last visit to Jerusalem, or
was again dispatched on a mission to some of the
new European Churches. In any case he was
certainly with St Paul in Rome during the two years'
imprisonment, for three of the Epistles of the captivity
— those to the Philippians, Colossians, and Philemon —
are written in their joint names, and in the first of
these St Paul expresses his hope of sending Timothy
shortly to Philippi that he may 'know the state of
his converts there (Phil. ii. 19 ff.). Whether this

TIMOTHY 345

visit was ever carried out, we have no means of
determining ; but shortly after St Paul's release from
his first imprisonment, we find Timothy with him at
Ephesus, and on the apostle's passing on into
Macedonia, perhaps in consequence of his second
arrest, Timothy remained behind to check as far as
he could the heresy and licentiousness of the great
Eastern city (i Tim. i. 3) — a hard task, for which the
youthful overseer or bishop would require all the
encouragement which St Paul's loving letters to him
contained (i Tim. iv. 12; 2 Tim. ii. 15, 22-26;
iv. i ff.).*

Whether Timothy ever again saw his master — his
spiritual father and friend— is uncertain. We know,
indeed, that St Paul wrote to him from Rome during
his second imprisonment, begging him to come and
join him, for he was almost alone (2 Tim. iv. 9 fT.).
And we may be sure that if it was possible Timothy
would go. One would like to think of him as
cheering St Paul's last hours on earth, and as
standing by — his last office of sympathetic friend
ship — when, on the Roman Campagna, the great
apostle's head fell before the executioner's sword.

No one, at any rate, would more truly mourn St
Paul's death, for none was bound to him by ties of

* Throughout this paper I have made free use of the two
Epistles to Timothy, because even supposing that in their
present forms they are not the work of St Paul, it is now
generally admitted that, particularly in their more personal
parts, they embody genuine Pauline materials.

346 TIMOTHY

closer affection. St Luke may have been the apostle's
physician during his lifetime, and his biographer
after his death : Barnabas and Silas and Apollos,
among his companions, may have been more pro
minent in the eyes of the Church at large ; but to the
gentle, loving Timothy it was given in a special
degree to be the apostle's friend — the disciple whom
Paul loved — and one who was so thoroughly imbued
with his master's spirit (Phil. ii. 20), that he proved a
worthy successor to him in the great work to which
both were called.

From this time Timothy disappears from the
Bible narrative ; but, if we are to believe tradition, he
still continued, after St Paul's death, to act as Bishop
of Ephesus, and eventually died a martyr's death
there, protesting against the license which accom
panied one of the city's festivals.

PRINTED BY OLIVER AND BOYD, EDINBURGH

A LIST

OF

THEOLOGICAL BOOKS

PUBLISHED AND IMPORTED BY

JAflES ROBINSON

24 BRIDGE STREET, MANCHESTER

MEN OP THE OLD TESTAMENT, CAIN TO DAVID. By
GEORGE MILLIGAN, D.D. ; J. G. GREENHOUGH, M.A. ; H. ELVET
LEWIS; P. CARNEGIE SIMPSON, M.A. ; ALFRED ROWLAND, D.D.,
LL.B. ; W. J. TOWNSEND, D.D. ; Principal D. ROWLANDS, B.A. ;
J. MORGAN GIBBON ; and T. RHONDDA WILLIAMS. Crown 8vo,
cloth gilt, 8s. 6d. net.

MEN OP THE OLD TESTAMENT, SOLOMON TO JONAH. By
Principal WALTER F. ADENEY, D.D. ; J. G. GREENHOUGH, M.A. ;
GEORGE MILLIGAN, D.D. ; T. RHONDDA WILLIAMS; Principal D.
ROWLANDS, B.A. ; H. ELVET LEWIS ; ALFRED ROWLAND, D.D.,
LL.B. ; and W. J. TOWNSEND, D.D. Crown 8vo, cloth gilt, 3s. 6d.
net,

MEN OP THE BIBLE, SOME LESSER-KNOWN CHARACTERS.
By J. G. GREENHOUGH, M.A. ; H. ELVET LEWIS ; Principal WALTER
F. ADENEY, D.D. ; GEORGE MILLIGAN, D.D. ; ALFRED ROWLAND,
D.D., LL.B.; Principal D. ROWLANDS, B.A. ; W. J. TOWNSEND, D.D.;
and J. MORGAN GIBBON. Crown 8vo, cloth gilt, 3s. 6d. net.

MEN OP THE NEW TESTAMENT, MATTHEW TO TIMOTHY.
By GEO-RGE MILLIGAN, D.D. ; Principal WALTER F. ADENEY, D.D. ;
ALFRED ROWLAND, D.D., LL.B. ; J. G. GREENHOUGH, M.A. ; Prin
cipal D. ROWLANDS, B.A. ; T. RHONDDA WILLIAMS ; J. MORGAN
GIBBON ; and P. CARNEGIE SIMPSON, M.A. Crown 8vo, cloth gilt,
3s. 6d. net.

WOMEN OP THE BIBLE, REBEKAH TO PRISCILLA. By H.
ELVET LEWIS ; J. G. GREENHOUGH, M.A. ; Principal WALTER F.
ADENEY, D.D. ; GEORGE MILLIGAN, D.D. ; P. CARNEGIE SIMPSON,
M.A. ; and Principal D. ROWLANDS, B.A. Crown 8vo, cloth gilt,
3s. 6d. net.

THE ALIENATED CROWN. A Volume of Sermons. By THOMAS
G. SELBY, Author of " The Imperfect Angel," " The Unheeding God,"
etc. Thick crown 8vo, cloth, 4s. 6d. net.

1 ' We giye a hearty welcome to Mr Selby's new volume of sermons, which has all the
characteristics of the preceding volumes, the strong reasonableness, the earnest religious
tone, and the freedom in the use of illustrations, ... for the clergy they are excel
lent models of elevating and inspiring teaching." — Guardian.

" In some respects it will take rank as the best of all his books. This is a book
worthy of the most careful reading, because entirely worthy of its writer's reputation."
— Weekly Leader.

". . . His pen has not lost its cunning . . . more likely to meet the taste
of intelligent lay readers than former volumes." — Preacher's Magazine.

COMRADESHIP AND CHARACTER. Sermons and Addresses to
Young Men. By GEORGE JACKSON, B.A. ; E. GRIFFITH-JONES,
B.A. ; THOMAS G. SELBY; J. G. GREENHOUGH, M.A. ; THOMAS
WAUGH ; Dr CHARLES LEACH ; BERNARD J. SNELL, M.A., B.Sc. ;
W. B. SELBIE, M.A. ; GEORGE H. MORRISON, M.A. ; J. A. CLAP-

PERTON, M.A.; GEORGE MlLLIGAN, D.D.; T. RHONDDA WlLLIAMS ;

Principal D. ROWLANDS; and FRANK BALLARD, M.A., B.Sc.
Crown 8vo, cloth gilt, 3s. 6d. net.

"They are just straight, manly talks, as from one brother to another— plain,
practical, commonsense counsel and helpful sympathy and encouragement." — Christian
Commonwealth.

" It is some time since we read a volume so admirably adapted to the needs of
young men." — Primitive Methodist.

THE CROSS AND THE DICE-BOX. Sermons and Addresses to
Working Men. By Dr CHARLES LEACH ; THOS. G. SELBY ; E.
GRIFFITH-JONES, B.A. ; J. G. GREENHOUGH, M.A. ; C. H. SHAVE ;
THOS. WAUGH ; GEORGE MILLIGAN, D.D. ; Principal D. ROWLANDS,
B.A. ; GEORGE JACKSON, B.A. ; BERNARD J. SNELL, M.A., B.Sc.
Crown 8vo, cloth gilt, 3s. 6d. net.

"Clergymen and others who have occasion to address the masses may find here
material suggestive of thoughts which may be usefully woven into their own spoken
discourses." — Church of Ireland Gazette.

1 ' So striking are these sermons that we can strongly advise the clergy to obtain a
copy." — Church of England Pulpit.

" Will interest men of all classes. They are excellent specimens of varied styles for
Sunday afternoon meetings." — Preacher's Magazine.

"They have a freedom, directness, and brevity the ordinary sermon can seldom
claim." — Primitive Methodist.

" We have nothing but commendation to offer this series of addresses."— Y.M.C.A.
Guide (Glasgow).

EDEN AND GETHSEMANE. Addresses for Communion Services.
By Principal ALEX. STEWART, D.D. ; J. MORGAN GIBBON ; ALBERT
GOODRICH, D.D. ; THOS. G. SELBY ; J. G. GREENHOUGH, M.A. ;
GEORGE MILLIGAN, D.D. ; BERNARD J. SNELL, M.A. ; GEORGE H.
MORRISON, M.A. ; and others. Crown 8vo, cloth gilt, 3s. 6d. net.

"Stimulating and suggestive. They are rich in thought." — London Quarterly
Review.

"The addresses are reverent in tone and deeply devotional, and are valuable alike
for private reading in preparation for the Communion or as suggestions to ministers to
give Communion Addresses."— Preacher's Magazine.

" Exquisitely beautiful are the three sermons by the Very Rev. Principal Stewart.
Where all is so excellent it is almost invidious to particularise."— Christian Common
wealth.

2

THE DIVINE ARTIST. Sermons of Consolation. By HUGH MAC-
MILLAN, D.D., LL.D. ; J. H. JowETT, M.A. ; Principal ALEX.
STEWART, D.D. ; J. G. GREENHOUGH, M.A. ; THOS. G. SELBY ;
GEORGE MILLIGAN, D.D. ; Principal D. ROWLANDS, B.A, ; and others,
Crown 8vo, cloth gilt, 3s. 6d. net.

" The prevalent tone is aidful and stimulating."— Outlook.

" They are all evangelical and of high merit."— Christian Commonwealth.

JESUS IN THE CORNFIELD. Sermons for Harvest and Flower
Festivals. By ALFRED ROWLAND, D.D. ; J. MORGAN GIBBON ;
HUGH MACMILLAN, D.D. ; FRANK BALLARD, M.A., B.D. ; THOMAS
G. SELBY ; GEORGE H. MORRISON, M.A. ; GEORGE MILLIGAN, D.D. ;
E. GRIFFITH-JONES, B.A. ; BERNARD J. SNELL, M.A. ; J. G. GREEN-
HOUGH, M.A. ; and others. Crown 8vo, cloth gilt, 3s. 6d. net.

" Homiletic masterpieces." — Christian Commonwealth.

" A wealth of fresh material."— Christian.

"May be sure of securing a wide welcome." — Guardian.

THE PARABLES OP JESUS. A Series of Expositions. By J. G.
GREENHOUGH, M.A. ; Principal ALEX. STEWART, D.D.; J. MORGAN
GIBBON ; W. J. TOWNSEND, D.D. ; ALBERT GOODRICH, D.D. ;
E. GRIFFITH-JONES, B.A.; ALFRED ROWLAND, D.D., LL.B.; GEORGE
H. MORRISON, M.A. ; GEORGE MILLIGAN, D.D. ; THOS. G. SELBY ;
Principal D. ROWLANDS, B.A. ; FRANK BALLARD, M.A., B.D., B.Sc.
Crown 8vo, cloth gilt, 6s. net.

"... Clear in exposition and of much practical value."— Record.
" . . . Deserves to have a place on every preacher's shelves." — Methodist
Recorder.

THE MIRACLES OP JESUS. A Series of Expositions. By HUGH
MACMILLAN, D.D., LL.D.; GEORGE MILLIGAN, D.D. ; THOS. G.
SELBY ; W. J. TOWNSEND, D.D. ; ALFRED ROWLAND, D.D., LL.B. ;
J. G. GREENHOUGH, M.A. ; J. MORGAN GIBBON ; E. GRIFFITH-
JONES, B.A. ; Principal ALEX. STEWART, D.D. ; GEORGE H. MOR-
RISON, M.A. ; ALBERT GOODRICH, D.D. Crown 8vo, cloth gilt,
6s. net.

" To the literature of the Miracles this volume is an important contribution . . .
it may be commended as most valuable, helpful, and suggestive."— Christian Common
wealth.

" . . . Marked by good sense both in the interpretation and the application of
miracles . . . thoughtful and suggestive, and a wise preacher can turn them to
good account." — The Record.

" . . . Full of excellent preaching and exposition . . . will be found most
helpful."— Weekly Leader.

"It is bright, interesting, and suggestive. Preachers will find it an acceptable
addition to their libraries." — Saint Andrew.

THE SERMON ON THE MOUNT. Vol. I. A Practical Exposition of
St Matthew v.-vi. 8 (including the Beatitudes). By E. GRIFFITH-
JONES, B.A. ; W. J. TOWNSEND, D.D. ; J. G. GREENHOUGH, M.A. ;
ALFRED ROWLAND, D.D.,iLL.B.; THOS. G. SELBY; W. B. SELBIE,
M.A. ; FRANK BALLARD, M.A., B.D. ; and GEORGE MILLIGAN,
D.D. Thick crown 8vo, cloth gilt, 4s. 6d. net.

"... Abounds hi good illustrations and quotable passages." — Preacher's
Magazine.

"... Highly instructive, and throws light from many directions on the passage
treated. ... A useful and helpful commentary."— Christian.

" Accurate in exegesis, luminous in exposition, and eminently suggestive." —
Primitive Methodist.

3

THE SERMON ON THE MOUNT. Vol. II. A Practical Exposition
of the Lord's Prayer, Matthew vi. 9-13. By E. GRIFFITH-JONES,
B.A. ; Principal P. T. FORSYTH, M.A., D.D. ; J. G. GREENHOUGH,
M.A. ; FRANK BALLARD, M.A., B.D., B.Sc. ; Principal ALEX.
STEWART, D.D. ; and W. B. SELBIE, M.A. Crown 8vo, cloth gilt,
4s. 6d. net.

" . . . Will be welcome in every preacher's library." — Preacher's Magazine.

" Many books have appeared dealing with the Lord's Prayer ; but this is the best
we have seen. The treatment is thorough and sympathetic." — Christian Common
wealth.

" Will supply useful material to any one who is giving a course of addresses on the
Sermon on the Mount."— Guardian.

" Thoughtful and suggestive." — Record.

THE SERMON ON THE MOUNT. Vol. III. A Practical Exposition
of Matthew vi. 16 — vii. 27. By J. G. GREENHOUGH, M.A. ; THOMAS
G. SELBY ; ALBERT GOODRICH, D.D. ; Principal ALEX. STEWART,
D.D. ; GEORGE MILLIGAN, D.D. ; J. MORGAN GIBBON ; ALFRED
ROWLAND, D.D., LL.B. ; and others. Crown 8vo, cloth gilt, 4s. 6d.
net.

" These expositions will take high rank in homiletic literature."— Baptist Magazine.

" The book is chokeful of suggestions." — Saint Andrew.

" Thoughtful contributions to the elucidation of the inexhaustible subject with
which they deal." — Guardian.

" The set of volumes may be truthfully described as a treasury of priceless gems
for the enrichment and beautifying of the Church."— Methodist Recorder.

" Always practical, and often very suggestive." — Record.

ADDRESSES TO BOYS, GIRLS, AND YOUNG PEOPLE. By

T. RHONDDA WILLIAMS. Crown 8vo, cloth gilt, 3s. 6d. net.

". . . Should prove helpful and stimulating. . . . There is neverthe
less in them a ring of true manliness, and an earnest desire to know God's will, and do
it, which many Churchmen might well imitate." — Church of Ireland Gazette.

". . . Short attractive sermons." — Record.

" Its teaching is healthy, manly, and beautiful."— Christian Life.

11 We have not seen for a long time a better volume of children's sermons." — Weekly
Leader.

" They are bright, fresh, breezy, and thoroughly up-to-date appeals."— Free Church
Chronicle.

"They are bright, full of illustrations, and catch the attention readily. The
subjects are well chosen." — Preacher's Magazine.

THE CHILDREN'S YEAR. Fifty-two Short Addresses to Boys and
Girls. By J. MORGAN GIBBON. Crown 8vo, cloth gilt, 3s. 6d. net.

" These short addresses display the special genius of the author. Mr Gibbon's
addresses will prove a precious boon." — Saint Andrew.

" They are very readable, full of bright anecdotes, and thoroughly suited to their
purpose."— British Weekly.

"Mr Gibbon has the genuine art, without which children's sermons have little
attraction. . . . It is one of the best books of children's sermons that I have
come across for years, and should be full of suggestion, as it is full of illustrations." —
Christian Endeavour Times.

". . . Crammed full of illustrations of the kind most calculated to arrest the
attention of the young, they are exceedingly bright and cheery."— A berdeen Daily
Journal.

4

BANKS (Dr LOUIS ALBERT)

THE KING'S STEWARDS. Thirty Revival Addresses. Portrait.
Crown 8vo, cloth, 3s. 6d. net.

A choice collection of sermons by one of America's most famous preachers. These
discourses breathe the spirit of the living Christ ; they teem with original and attrac
tive illustrations; they will be found interesting and helpful among all classes of
readers.

SOUL-WINNING STORIES. Crown 8vo, cloth, 2s. 6d. net.

" The stories in this book are my own. They are culled here and there from a great
storehouse of such incidents with which God has blessed me in the course of my
ministry." — Author's Preface.

BURRELL (Dr DAVID JAMES), of New York

THE VERILIES OP JESUS. A Volume of Sermons. Crown 8vo,
cloth, 8s. 6d. net.

THE WONDERFUL TEACHER. A Volume of Twenty-six Sermons.
Crown 8vo, cloth, 3s. 6d. net.

THE CHURCH IN THE FORT, and Twenty-seven other Sermons.
Crown 8vo, cloth, 3s. 6d. net.

GOD AND THE PEOPLE, and Thirty-one other Sermons. Crown 8vo,
cloth, 3s. 6d. net.

THE GOLDEN PASSIONAL, and Thirty other Sermons. Crown 8vo,
cloth, 3s. 6d. net.

THE SPIRIT OF THE AGE, and Thirty-six other Sermons. Crown
8vo, cloth, 3s. 6d. net.

THE WONDROUS CROSS, and Thirty-one other Sermons. Crown
8vo, cloth, 3s. 6d. net.

FOR CHRIST'S CROWN, and Thirty-three other Sermons. Crown 8vo,
cloth, 8s. 6d. net.

GOSPEL OF GLADNESS, and Thirty-five other Sermons. Crown 8vo,
cloth, 3s. 6d. net.

THE MORNING COMETH; Talks for the Times. A Volume of
Thirty-five Sermons. Crown 8vo, cloth, 3s. 6d. net.

THE RELIGION OF THE FUTURE. A Volume of Thirty-six
Sermons. Crown 8vo, cloth, 3s. 6d. net.

BURRELL (J. D.), and Dr DAVID J. BURRELL

THE EARLY CHURCH. Studies in the Acts of the Apostles. Crown
8vo. cloth, 3s. 6d. net.

TALLING (M. P.), of Toronto

EXTEMPORE PRAYER : Its Principles, Preparation, and Practice.
Crown 8vo, cloth, 3s. 6d. net.

" There is no book of the month that has seemed more timely or that has given us
more to think about than Dr Tailing's " Extempore Prayer."— Expository. Times.

CONLEY (Dr JOHN WESLEY)

EVOLUTION AND MAN: Here and Hereafter. Crown 8vo, cloth,
2s. 6d. net.

" It is a right reasonable book. Those whom it appeals to should certainly seek it
out and read it carefully." — Expository Times.

LYMAN (Dr A. J.), of Brooklyn
PREACHING IN THE NEW AGE: An Art and an Incarnation.

Crown 8vo, cloth, 2s. 6d. net.
" A great fresh conception of preaching."— Expository Times.

McLEOD (MALCOLM J.)

HEAVENLY HARMONIES FOR EARTHLY LIVING. Crown
8vo, cloth, 2s. net.

" The illustrations are exceptionally beautiful and arresting."— Primitive Methoditt.

NOBLE (FBEDK. A., D.D.)

TYPICAL NEW TESTAMENT CONVERSIONS. Sixteen Dis
courses. Crown 8vo, cloth, 3s. 6d. net.

" Sixteen addresses of unusual merit . . . lucid and incisive manner."— Dundee
Advertiser.

PARKHURST (Dr CHARLES H.), of New York

THE SUNNY SIDE OP CHRISTIANITY. Crown 8vo, cloth,
2s. net.

" It would be impossible in the same number of pages to say what is more to the
point on this subject, or to commend it more ,efifectually to the reader." — Hritish
Weekly.

TAYLOR (Dr WM. M.)

THE BOY JESUS, and Twenty-two other Sermons. New Edition.
8vo, cloth, 3s. 6d. net.

CONTRARY WINDS, and Twenty-three other Sermons. New Edition.
8vo, 3s. 6d. net.

LIMITATIONS OP LIFE, and other Sermons. New Edition. 8vo,
cloth, 8s. 6d. net.

DATF DUE