{"collection":"scripture-revelation","full_text_available":true,"graph_url":"https://unchartedknowledge.5gfusion.net/v2/api/page/gutenberg_41850/graph","html_url":"https://unchartedknowledge.5gfusion.net/v2/page/gutenberg_41850","id":"gutenberg_41850","license":"Public Domain (US)","rights_basis":"gutenberg_metadata_copyright_false","source":"gutenberg","source_url":"https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/41850","summary":null,"tags":["Bible. Corinthians, 2nd -- Criticism, interpretation, etc.","Category: Religion/Spirituality"],"text":"THE EXPOSITOR'S BIBLE\n\n\n\n EDITED BY THE REV.\n\n W. ROBERTSON NICOLL, M.A., LL.D.\n _Editor of \"The Expositor\"_\n\n\n\n THE SECOND EPISTLE TO THE\n CORINTHIANS\n\n BY\n\n JAMES DENNEY, B.D.\n\n\n\n\n\n\n =London=\n\n HODDER AND STOUGHTON\n 27, PATERNOSTER ROW\n\n MDCCCXCIV\n\n\n\n\n THE EXPOSITOR'S BIBLE.\n\n _Crown 8vo, cloth, price 7s. 6d. each vol._\n\n\n FIRST SERIES, 1887-8.\n\n Colossians.\n By A. MACLAREN, D.D.\n\n St. Mark.\n By Very Rev. the Dean of Armagh.\n\n Genesis.\n By Prof. MARCUS DODS, D.D.\n\n 1 Samuel.\n By Prof. W. G. BLAIKIE, D.D.\n\n 2 Samuel.\n By the same Author.\n\n Hebrews.\n By Principal T.C. EDWARDS, D.D.\n\n\n SECOND SERIES, 1888-9.\n\n Galatians.\n By Prof. G. G. FINDLAY, B.A.\n\n The Pastoral Epistles.\n By Rev. A. PLUMMER, D.D.\n\n Isaiah I.-XXXIX.\n By G. A. SMITH, M.A. Vol. I\n\n The Book of Revelation.\n By Prof. W. MILLIGAN, D.D.\n\n 1 Corinthians.\n By Prof. MARCUS DODS, D.D.\n\n The Epistles of St. John.\n By Rt. Rev. W. ALEXANDER, D.D.\n\n\n THIRD SERIES, 1889-90.\n\n Judges and Ruth.\n By Rev. R. A. WATSON, D.D.\n\n Jeremiah.\n By Rev. C. J. BALL, M.A.\n\n Isaiah XL.-LXVI.\n By G. A. SMITH, M.A. Vol. II.\n\n St. Matthew.\n By Rev. J. MONRO GIBSON, D.D.\n\n Exodus.\n By Very Rev. the Dean of Armagh.\n\n St. Luke.\n By Rev. H. BURTON, M.A.\n\n\n FOURTH SERIES, 1890-1.\n\n Ecclesiastes.\n By Rev. SAMUEL COX, D.D.\n\n St. James and St. Jude.\n By Rev. A. PLUMMER, D.D.\n\n Proverbs.\n By Rev. R. F. HORTON, M.A.\n\n Leviticus.\n By Rev. S. H. KELLOGG, D.D.\n\n The Gospel of St. John.\n By Prof. M. DODS, D.D. Vol. I.\n\n The Acts of the Apostles.\n By Prof. STOKES, D.D. Vol. I.\n\n\n FIFTH SERIES, 1891-2.\n\n The Psalms.\n By A. MACLAREN, D.D. Vol. I.\n\n 1 and 2 Thessalonians.\n By JAMES DENNEY, D.D.\n\n The Book of Job.\n By R. A. WATSON, D.D.\n\n Ephesians.\n By Prof. G. G. FINDLAY, B.A.\n\n The Gospel of St. John.\n By Prof. M. DODS, D.D. Vol. II.\n\n The Acts of the Apostles.\n By Prof. STOKES, D.D. Vol. II.\n\n\n SIXTH SERIES, 1892-3.\n\n 1 Kings.\n By Ven. Archdeacon FARRAR.\n\n Philippians.\n By Principal RAINY, D.D.\n\n Ezra, Nehemiah, Esther.\n By Prof. W. F. ADENEY, M.A.\n\n Joshua.\n By Prof. W. G. BLAIKIE, D.D.\n\n The Psalms.\n By A. MACLAREN, D.D. Vol. II.\n\n The Epistles of St. Peter.\n By Prof. RAWSON LUMBY, D.D.\n\n\n SEVENTH SERIES, 1893-4.\n\n 2 Kings.\n By Ven. Archdeacon FARRAR.\n\n Romans.\n By H. C. G. MOULE, M.A.\n\n The Books of Chronicles.\n By Prof. W. H. BENNETT, M.A.\n\n 2 Corinthians.\n By JAMES DENNEY, B.D.\n\n Numbers.\n By R. A. WATSON, D.D.\n\n The Psalms.\n By A. MACLAREN, D.D. Vol. III.\n\n\n\n\n THE SECOND EPISTLE TO THE\n CORINTHIANS\n\n\n\n\n BY\n\n JAMES DENNEY, B.D.\n\n\n\n\n =London=\n HODDER AND STOUGHTON\n 27, PATERNOSTER ROW\n\n MDCCCXCIV\n\n\n\n\n _Printed by Hazell, Watson, & Viney, Ld., London and Aylesbury._\n\n\n\n\n CONTENTS\n\n PAGE\n INTRODUCTION 1\n\n I\n\n SUFFERING AND CONSOLATION 10\n\n II\n\n FAITH BORN OF DESPAIR 23\n\n III\n\n THE CHURCH'S ONE FOUNDATION 35\n\n IV\n\n CHRISTIAN MYSTERIES 47\n\n V\n\n A PASTOR'S HEART 59\n\n VI\n\n CHURCH DISCIPLINE 72\n\n VII\n\n CHRIST'S CAPTIVE 84\n\n VIII\n\n LIVING EPISTLES 99\n\n IX\n\n THE TWO COVENANTS 112\n\n X\n\n THE TRANSFIGURING SPIRIT 127\n\n XI\n\n THE GOSPEL DEFINED 144\n\n XII\n\n THE VICTORY OF FAITH 157\n\n XIII\n\n THE CHRISTIAN HOPE 173\n\n XIV\n\n THE MEASURE OF CHRIST'S LOVE 186\n\n XV\n\n THE NEW WORLD 198\n\n XVI\n\n RECONCILIATION 210\n\n XVII\n\n THE SIGNS OF AN APOSTLE 224\n\n XVIII\n\n NEW TESTAMENT PURITANISM 237\n\n XIX\n\n REPENTANCE UNTO LIFE 248\n\n XX\n\n THE GRACE OF LIBERALITY 262\n\n XXI\n\n THE FRUITS OF LIBERALITY 274\n\n XXII\n\n WAR 289\n\n XXIII\n\n COMPARISONS 300\n\n XXIV\n\n GODLY JEALOUSY 312\n\n XXV\n\n FOOLISH BOASTING 325\n\n XXVI\n\n STRENGTH AND WEAKNESS 342\n\n XXVII\n\n NOT YOURS, BUT YOU 359\n\n XXVIII\n\n CONCLUSION 372\n\n\n\n\n INTRODUCTION\n\n\nIntroduction, in the scientific sense, is not part of the expositor's\ntask; but it is convenient, especially when introduction and\nexposition have important bearings on each other, that the expositor\nshould indicate his opinion on the questions common to both\ndepartments. This is the purpose of the statement which follows.\n\n(1) The starting-point for every inquiry into the relations between\nSt. Paul and the Corinthians, so far as they concern us here, is to be\nfound in the close connexion between the two Epistles to the\nCorinthians which we possess. This close connexion is not a\nhypothesis, of greater or less probability, like so much that figures\nin Introductions to the Second Epistle; it is a large and solid fact,\nwhich is worth more for our guidance than the most ingenious\nconjectural combination. Stress has been justly laid on this by\nHoltzmann,[1] who illustrates the general fact by details. Thus 2 Cor.\ni. 8-10, ii. 12, 13, attach themselves immediately to the situation\ndescribed in 1 Cor. xvi. 8, 9. Similarly in 2 Cor. i. 12 there seems\nto be a distinct echo of 1 Cor. ii. 4-14. More important is the\nunquestionable reference in 2 Cor. i. 13-17, 23, to 1 Cor. xvi. 5.\nFrom a comparison of these two passages it is plain that before Paul\nwrote either he had had an intention, of which the Corinthians were\naware, to visit Corinth in a certain way. He was to leave Ephesus,\nsail straight across the sea to Corinth, go from Corinth to Macedonia,\nand then return, _vi\u00e2_ Corinth, to Asia again. In other words, on this\ntour he was to visit Corinth twice. In the last chapter of the First\nEpistle, he announces a change of plan: he is _not_ going to Corinth\ndirect, but _vi\u00e2_ Macedonia, and the Corinthians are only to see him\nonce. He does not say, in the First Epistle, why he has changed his\nplan, but the announcement caused great dissatisfaction in Corinth.\nSome said he was a fickle creature; some said he was afraid to show\nface. This is the situation to which the Second Epistle directly\naddresses itself; the very first thing Paul does in it is to explain\nand justify the change of plan announced in the First. It was not\nfickleness, he says, nor cowardice, that made him change his mind, but\nthe desire to spare the Corinthians and himself the pain which a visit\npaid at the moment would certainly inflict. The close connexion\nbetween our two Epistles, which on this point is unquestionable, may\nbe further illustrated. Thus, not to point to general resemblances in\nfeeling or temper, the correspondence is at least suggestive between\n\u1f01\u03b3\u03bd\u1f78\u03c2 \u1f10\u03bd \u03c4\u1ff7 \u03c0\u03c1\u03ac\u03b3\u03bc\u03b1\u03c4\u03b9, 2 Cor. vii. 11 (cf. the use of \u03c0\u03c1\u1fb6\u03b3\u03bc\u03b1 in 1\nThess. iv. 6), and \u03c4\u03bf\u03b9\u03b1\u03cd\u03c4\u03b7 \u03c0\u03bf\u03c1\u03bd\u03b5\u03af\u03b1 in 1 Cor. v. 1; between \u1f10\u03bd \u03c0\u03c1\u03bf\u03c2\u03ce\u03c0\u1ff3\n\u03a7\u03c1\u03b9\u03c3\u03c4\u1fe6, 2 Cor. ii. 10, and \u1f10\u03bd \u03c4\u1ff7 \u1f40\u03bd\u03cc\u03bc\u03b1\u03c4\u03b9 \u03c4\u1fe6 \u039a. \u1f21\u03bc\u1ff6\u03bd \u1f38. \u03a7., 1 Cor. v.\n4; between the mention of Satan in 2 Cor. ii. 11 and 1 Cor. v. 5;\nbetween \u03c0\u03b5\u03bd\u03b8\u03b5\u1fd6\u03bd in 2 Cor. xii. 21 and 1 Cor. v. 2; between \u03c4\u03bf\u03b9\u03bf\u1fe6\u03c4\u03bf\u03c2\nand \u03c4\u03b9\u03c2 in 2 Cor. ii. 6 f., 2 Cor. ii. 5, and the same words in 1 Cor.\nv. 5 and 1 Cor. v. 1. If all these are carefully examined and\ncompared, I think it becomes extremely difficult to believe that in 2\nCor. ii. 5 ff. and in 2 Cor. vii. 8 ff. the Apostle is dealing with\nanything else than the case of the sinner treated in 1 Cor. v. The\ncoincidences in detail would be very striking under any circumstances;\nbut in combination with the fact that the two Epistles, as has just\nbeen shown by the explanation of the change of purpose about the\njourney, are in the closest connexion with each other, they seem to me\nto come as nearly as possible to demonstration.\n\n(2) If this view is accepted, it is natural and justifiable to explain\nthe Second Epistle as far as possible out of the First. Thus the letter\nto which St. Paul refers in 2 Cor. ii. 4 and in 2 Cor. vii. 8, 12, will\nbe our First Epistle to the Corinthians; the persons referred to in 2\nCor. vii. 12 as \"he who did the wrong\" and \"he to whom the wrong was\ndone\" will be the son and the father in 1 Cor. v. 1. There are, indeed,\nmany who think that it is absurd to speak of the First Epistle to the\nCorinthians as written \"out of much affliction and anguish of heart and\nwith many tears\"; and who cannot imagine that Paul would speak of a\ngreat sin and crime, like that of the incestuous person, in such\nlanguage as he employs in 2 Cor. ii. 5 ff. and 2 Cor. vii. 12. Such\nlanguage, they argue, suits far better the case of a personal injury, an\ninsult or outrage of which Paul--either in person or in one of his\ndeputies--had been the victim at Corinth. Hence they argue for an\nintermediate visit of a very painful character, and for an intermediate\nletter, now lost, dealing with this painful incident. Paul, we are to\nsuppose, visited Corinth on the business of 1 Cor. v. (among other\nthings), and there suffered a great humiliation. He was defied by the\nguilty man and his friends, and had to leave the Church without\neffecting anything. Then he wrote the extremely severe letter to which\nii. 4 refers--a letter which was carried by Titus, and which produced\nthe change on which he congratulates himself in ii. 5 ff. and vii. 8 ff.\nIt is obvious that this whole combination is hypothetical; and hence,\nthough many have been attracted by it, it appears with an infinite\nvariety of detail. It is obvious also that the grounds on which it rests\nare subjective; it is a question on which men will differ to the end of\ntime, whether the language in 2 Cor. ii. 4 is an apt description of the\nmood in which Paul wrote (at least certain parts of) the First Epistle\nto the Corinthians, or whether the language in 2 Cor. ii. 5 ff., vii. 8\nff. is becoming language in which to close proceedings like those opened\nin 1 Cor. v. If many have believed that it is not, many, on the other\nhand, have no difficulty in believing that it is; and those who take the\nnegative not only fail to explain the series of verbal correspondences\ndetailed above, but dissolve the connexion between our two Epistles\naltogether. Thus Godet allows more than a year, crowded with events, to\ncome between them. In view of the palpable fact with which we started, I\ncannot but think this quite incredible: it is far easier to suppose that\nthe proceedings about the incestuous person took a complexion which made\nPaul's language in the second and seventh chapters natural than to come\nto any confident conviction about this hypothetical visit and letter.\n\n(3) But the visit, it may be said, at all events, is not hypothetical.\nIt is distinctly alluded to in 2 Cor. ii. 1, xii. 14, xiii. 1. These\npassages are discussed in the exposition. The two last are certainly\nnot decisive; there are good scholars who hold the same opinion of\nthe first. Heinrici, for instance, maintains that Paul had only been\nonce in Corinth when he wrote the Second Epistle; it was the _third_\ntime he was _starting_, but once his intention had been frustrated or\ndeferred, so that when he reached Corinth it would only be his second\nvisit. A case can be stated for this, but in view of chap. ii. 1 and\nchap. xiii. 2, I do not see that it can be easily maintained. These\npassages practically compel us to assume that Paul had already visited\nCorinth a second time, and had had very painful experiences there. But\nthe close connexion of our Epistles equally compels us to assume that\nthis second visit belongs to an earlier date than our first canonical\nEpistle. We know nothing of it except that it was not pleasant, and\nthat Paul was very willing to save both himself and the Corinthians\nthe repetition of such an experience. It is nothing against this view\nthat the visit in question is not referred to in Acts or in the fist\nletter. Hardly anything in chap. xi. 24 ff. is known to us from Acts,\nand probably we should never have known of this journey unless in\nexplaining the change of purpose which the first letter announced it\nhad occurred to Paul to say: \"I did not wish to come when it could\nonly vex you; I had enough of that before.\"\n\n(4) As for the letter, which is supposed to be referred to in 2 Cor. ii.\n4, it also has been relieved of its hypothetical character by being\nidentified with chaps. x. 1-xiii. 10 of our present Second Epistle. In\nthe absence of the faintest external indication that the Epistle ever\nexisted in any other than its present form, it is perhaps superfluous to\ntreat this seriously; but the comment of Godet seems to me sufficiently\nto dispose of it. The hypothetical letter in question--in which Godet\nhimself believes--must have had two main objects: first, to accredit\nTitus, who is assumed to have carried it, as the representative of Paul;\nand, second, to insist on reparation for the assumed personal outrage of\nwhich Paul had been the victim on his recent visit. This second object,\nat an events, is indisputable. But chaps. x. 1-xiii. 10 have no\nreference whatever to either of these things, and are wholly taken up\nwith what the Apostle means to do, when he comes to Corinth the third\ntime; they refer not to this (imaginary) insolent person, but to the\nmisbelieving and the immoral in general.\n\n(5) Except in the points specified, the interpretation of the Epistle\nis little affected by the questions raised in _Introduction_. Even in\nthe points specified it is the historical reference, not the ethical\nimport, which is affected. Whichever view we take of them, we get on\nthe whole substantially the same impression of the spirit of Christ as\nit lives and works in the soul of the Apostle. It is part of the man's\ngreatness, it is the seal of his inspiration, that in his hands the\ntemporal becomes eternal, the incidental loses its purely incidental\ncharacter, and has significance for all time. It is the expositor's\ntask to deal with the spiritual rather than the historical side, and\nit will be sufficient here to indicate in outline what I conceive the\nseries of Paul's relations with the Corinthians to have been.\n\n(6) His first visit to Corinth was that which is recorded in Acts\nxviii.; according to the statement of ver. 11 it extended over a\nperiod of eighteen months. In all probability he had many\ncommunications with the Church, through deputies whom he commissioned,\nin the years during which he was absent; the form of the question in 2\nCor. xii. 17 (\u03bc\u03ae \u03c4\u03b9\u03bd\u03b1 \u1f67\u03bd \u1f00\u03c0\u03ad\u03c3\u03c4\u03b1\u03bb\u03ba\u03b1 \u03c0\u03c1\u1f78\u03c2 \u1f51\u03bc\u1fb6\u03c2 \u03ba.\u03c4.\u03bb.) implies as much.\nBut it is only after his coming to Ephesus, in the course of his\nthird missionary journey, that personal intercourse with Corinth can\nhave been resumed. To this period I should refer the visit which we\nare bound to assume on the ground of 2 Cor. ii. 1, xiii. 2. What the\noccasion was, or what the circumstances, we cannot tell; all we know\nis that it was painful, and perhaps disappointing. Paul had used grave\nand threatening language on this occasion (2 Cor. xiii. 2), but he had\nbeen obliged to tolerate some things which he would rather have seen\notherwise. This visit was probably made toward the close of the three\nyears' stay in Ephesus, and the letter referred to in 1 Cor. v. 9--the\none in which he warned the Corinthians not to associate with\nfornicators--would most likely be written on his return from it. In\nthis letter he may very naturally have announced that purpose of\nvisiting Corinth twice--once on his way to Macedonia, and again on his\nway back--to which reference has already been made. This letter,\nplainly, did not serve its purpose, and not long afterwards Paul\nreceived at Ephesus deputies from the Corinthian Church (1 Cor. xvi.\n17), who apparently brought written instructions with them, in which\nPaul's judgment was sought more minutely on a variety of ethical\nquestions (1 Cor. vii. 1). Before these deputies arrived, or at all\nevents before Paul wrote the letter (our First Epistle) in which he\naddressed himself to the state of affairs in Corinth which their\nreports had disclosed, Timothy had left Ephesus on a journey of some\ninterest. Paul meant Corinth to be his destination (1 Cor. iv. 17),\nbut he had to go _vi\u00e2_ Macedonia, and the Apostle was not certain that\nhe would get so far (1 Cor. xvi. 10: \"But _if_ Timothy come,\" etc.).\nIn point of fact, he does not seem to have gone farther than\nMacedonia; and Luke in Acts xix. 22 mentions Macedonia as the place to\nwhich he had been sent. That he got no farther is suggested also by\nthe fact that Paul joins his name with his own in the salutation of\nthe Second Epistle, which was written in Macedonia, but never hints\nthat he owed to _him_ any information whatever on the state of the\nCorinthian Church. All that he knew of this, and of the effect of his\nfirst letter, he learned from Titus (2 Cor. ii. 13, vii. 13 f.). But\nhow did Titus happen to be in Corinth representing Paul? By far the\nhappiest suggestion here is that which makes Titus and the brother of\n2 Cor. xii. 18 the same as \"the brethren\" of 1 Cor. xvi. 12, whose\nreturn from Corinth Paul expected in company of Timothy. Timothy, as\nwe have seen, did not get so far. Paul's departure from Ephesus was\napparently hastened by a great peril; his anxiety, too, to hear the\neffect produced by that letter which had cost him so much--our First\nEpistle--was very great; he pressed on, past Troas, where a fair field\nof labour waited for workers, and finally encountered Titus in\nMacedonia, and heard his report.\n\n(7) This is the point at which the Second Epistle to the Corinthians\nbegins. It falls of itself into three clearly marked divisions. The\nfirst extends over chaps. i.-vii. In this the Apostle makes his peace,\nso to speak, with the Corinthians, and does everything in his power to\nremove any feeling of \"soreness\" which might linger in their minds\nover his rigorous treatment of one particular offender. But embedded\nin this there is a magnificent vindication of the spiritual apostolic\nministry, especially in contrast with that of the legalists, and an\nappeal for love and confidence such as he had always bestowed on the\nChurch. Chaps. viii. and ix. form the second part, and are devoted to\nthe collection which was being made in the Gentile Churches for poor\nChristians in Jerusalem. The third part consists of chaps. x. to xiii.\nIn this Paul confronts the disorders which still assert themselves in\nthe Church; the pretensions of certain Judaists, \"superlative\napostles\" as he calls them, who were assailing his apostolic vocation\nand subverting his gospel; and the immoral licence of others,\npresumably once pagans, who used liberty for a cloak to the flesh. He\nwrites of both with unsparing severity, yet he does not wish to be\nsevere. He parts from the Church with words of unaffected love, and\nincludes them all in his benediction.\n\nFOOTNOTE:\n\n[1] _Einleitung_, 2nd ed., p. 255 f.\n\n\n\n\n I\n\n _SUFFERING AND CONSOLATION_\n\n \"Paul, an apostle of Christ Jesus through the will of God, and\n Timothy our brother, unto the Church of God which is at Corinth,\n with all the saints which are in the whole of Achaia: Grace to you\n and peace from God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ.\n\n \"Blessed _be_ the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, the\n Father of mercies and God of all comfort; who comforteth us in all\n our affliction, that we may be able to comfort them that are in\n any affliction, through the comfort wherewith we ourselves are\n comforted of God. For as the sufferings of Christ abound unto us,\n even so our comfort also aboundeth through Christ. But whether we\n be afflicted, it is for your comfort and salvation; or whether we\n be comforted, it is for your comfort, which worketh in the patient\n enduring of the same sufferings which we also suffer: and our hope\n for you is stedfast; knowing that, as ye are partakers of the\n sufferings, so also are ye of the comfort.\"--2 COR. i. 1-7 (R.V.).\n\n\nThe greeting with which St. Paul introduces his Epistles is much alike\nin them all, but it never becomes a mere formality, and ought not to\npass unregarded as such. It describes, as a rule, the character in\nwhich he writes, and the character in which his correspondents are\naddressed. Here he is an apostle of Jesus Christ, divinely\ncommissioned; and he addresses a Christian community at Corinth,\nincluding in it, for the purposes of his letter, the scattered\nChristians to be found in the other quarters of Achaia. His letters\nare occasional, in the sense that some special incident or situation\ncalled them forth; but this occasional character does not lessen\ntheir value. He addresses himself to the incident or situation in the\nconsciousness of his apostolic vocation; he writes to a Church\nconstituted for permanence, or at least for such duration as this\ntransitory world can have; and what we have in his Epistles is not a\nseries of _obiter dicta_, the casual utterances of an irresponsible\nperson; it is the mind of Christ authoritatively given upon the\nquestions raised. When he includes any other person in the\nsalutation--as in this place \"Timothy our brother\"--it is rather as a\nmark of courtesy, than as adding to the Epistle another authority\nbesides his own. Timothy had helped to found the Church at Corinth;\nPaul had shown great anxiety about his reception by the Corinthians,\nwhen he started to visit that turbulent Church alone (1 Cor. xvi. 10\nf.); and in this new letter he honours him in their eyes by uniting\nhis name with his own in the superscription. The Apostle and his\naffectionate fellow-worker wish the Corinthians, as they wished all\nthe Churches, grace and peace from God our Father and the Lord Jesus\nChrist. It is not necessary to expound afresh the meaning and\nconnexion of these two New Testament ideas: grace is the first and\nlast word of the Gospel; and peace--perfect spiritual soundness--is\nthe finished work of grace in the soul.\n\nThe Apostle's greeting is usually followed by a thanksgiving, in which\nhe recalls the conversion of those to whom he is writing, or surveys\ntheir progress in the new life, and the improvement of their gifts,\ngratefully acknowledging God as the author of all. Thus in the First\nEpistle to the Corinthians he thanks God for the grace given to them\nin Christ Jesus, and especially for their Christian enrichment in all\nutterance and in all knowledge. So, too, but with deeper gratitude,\nhe dwells on the virtues of the Thessalonians, remembering their work\nof faith, and labour of love, and patience of hope. Here also there is\na thanksgiving, but at the first glance of a totally different\ncharacter. The Apostle blesses God, not for what He has done for the\nCorinthians, but for what He has done for himself. \"Blessed be the God\nand Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Father of mercies and God of\nall comfort, who comforteth us in all our tribulation.\" This departure\nfrom the Apostle's usual custom is probably not so selfish as it\nlooks. When his mind travelled down from Philippi to Corinth, it\nrested on the spiritual aspects of the Church there with anything but\nunrelieved satisfaction. There was much for which he could not\npossibly be thankful; and just as the momentary apostasy of the\nGalatians led to his omitting the thanksgiving altogether, so the\nunsettled mood in which he wrote to the Corinthians gave it this\npeculiar turn. Nevertheless, when he thanked God for comforting him in\nall his afflictions, he thanked Him on their behalf. It was they who\nwere eventually to have the profit both of his sorrows and his\nconsolations. Probably, too, there is something here which is meant to\nappeal, even to those who disliked him in Corinth. There had been a\ngood deal of friction between the Apostle and some who had once owned\nhim as their father in Christ; they were blaming him, at this very\nmoment, for not coming to visit them; and in this thanksgiving, which\ndilates on the afflictions he has endured, and on the divine\nconsolation he has experienced in them, there is a tacit appeal to the\nsympathy even of hostile spirits. Do not, he seems to say, deal\nungenerously with one who has passed through such terrible\nexperiences, and lays the fruit of them at your feet. Chrysostom\npresses this view, as if St. Paul had written his thanksgiving in the\ncharacter of a subtle diplomatist: to judge by one's feeling, it is\ntrue enough to deserve mention.[2]\n\nThe subject of the thanksgiving is the Apostle's sufferings, and his\nexperience of God's mercies under them. He expressly calls them the\nsufferings of Christ. These sufferings, he says, abound toward us.\nChrist was the greatest of sufferers: the flood of pain and sorrow\nwent over His head; all its waves and billows broke upon Him. The\nApostle was caught and overwhelmed by the same stream; the waters came\ninto his soul. That is the meaning of \u03c4\u1f70 \u03c0\u03b1\u03b8\u03ae\u03bc\u03b1\u03c4\u03b1 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03a7\u03c1\u03b9\u03c3\u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6\n\u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u03b9\u03c3\u03c3\u03b5\u03cd\u03b5\u03b9 \u03b5\u1f30\u03c2 \u1f21\u03bc\u1fb6\u03c2. In abundant measure the disciple was initiated\ninto his Master's stern experience; he learned, what he prayed to\nlearn, the fellowship of His sufferings. The boldness of the language\nin which a mortal man calls his own afflictions the sufferings of\nChrist is far from unexampled in the New Testament. It is repeated by\nSt. Paul in Col. i. 24: \"I now rejoice in my sufferings on your\nbehalf, and fill up that which is lacking of the afflictions of Christ\nin my flesh for His body's sake, which is the Church.\" It is varied in\nHeb. xiii. 13, where the sacred writer exhorts us to go out to Jesus,\nwithout the camp, bearing _His_ reproach. It is anticipated and\njustified by the words of the Lord Himself: \"Ye shall indeed drink of\nMy cup; and with the baptism with which I am baptised shall ye be\nbaptised withal.\" One lot, and that a cross, awaits all the children\nof God in this world, from the Only-begotten who came from the bosom\nof the Father, to the latest-born among His brethren. But let us\nbeware of the hasty assertion that, because the Christian's sufferings\ncan thus be described as of a piece with Christ's, the key to the\nmystery of Gethsemane and Calvary is to be found in the\nself-consciousness of martyrs and confessors. The very man who speaks\nof filling up that which is lacking of the afflictions of Christ for\nthe Church's sake, and who says that the sufferings of Christ came on\nhim in their fulness, would have been the first to protest against\nsuch an idea. \"Was Paul crucified for you?\" Christ suffered alone;\nthere is, in spite of our fellowship with His sufferings, a solitary,\nincommunicable greatness in His Cross, which the Apostle will expound\nin another place (chap. v.). Even when Christ's sufferings come upon\nus there is a difference. At the very lowest, as Vinet has it, we do\nfrom gratitude what he did from pure love. We suffer in His company,\nsustained by His comfort; He suffered uncomforted and unsustained. We\nare afflicted, when it so happens, \"under the auspices of the divine\nmercy\"; He was afflicted that there might be mercy for us.\n\nFew parts of Bible teaching are more recklessly applied than those\nabout suffering and consolation. If all that men endured was of the\ncharacter here described, if all their sufferings were sufferings of\nChrist, which came on them because they were walking in His steps and\nassailed by the forces which buffeted Him, consolation would be an\neasy task. The presence of God with the soul would make it almost\nunnecessary. The answer of a good conscience would take all the\nbitterness out of pain; and then, however it tortured, it could not\npoison the soul. The mere sense that our sufferings _are_ the\nsufferings of Christ--that we are drinking of His cup--is itself a\ncomfort and an inspiration beyond words. But much of our suffering, we\nknow very well, is of a different character. It does not come on us\nbecause we are united to Christ, but because we are estranged from\nHim; it is the proof and the fruit, not of our righteousness, but of\nour guilt. It is our sin finding us out, and avenging itself upon us,\nand in no sense the suffering of Christ. Such suffering, no doubt, has\nits use and its purpose. It is meant to drive the soul in upon itself,\nto compel it to reflection, to give it no rest till it awakes to\npenitence, to urge it through despair to God. Those who suffer thus\nwill have cause to thank God afterwards if His discipline leads to\ntheir amendment, but they have no title to take to themselves the\nconsolation prepared for those who are partners in the sufferings of\nChrist. Nor is the minister of Christ at liberty to apply a passage\nlike this to any case of affliction which he encounters in his work.\nThere are sufferings and sufferings; there is a divine intention in\nthem all, if we could only discover it; but the divine intention and\nthe divinely wrought result are only explained here for one particular\nkind--those sufferings, namely, which come upon men in virtue of their\nfollowing Jesus Christ. What, then does the Apostle's experience\nenable him to say on this hard question?\n\n(1) His sufferings have brought him a new revelation of God, which is\nexpressed in the new name, \"The Father of mercies and God of all\ncomfort.\" The name is wonderful in its tenderness; we feel as we\npronounce it that a new conception of what love can be has been\nimparted to the Apostle's soul. It is in the sufferings and sorrows of\nlife that we discover what we possess in our human friends. Perhaps\none abandons us in our extremity, and another betrays us; but most of\nus find ourselves unexpectedly and astonishingly rich. People of whom\nwe have hardly ever had a kind thought show us kindness; the\nunsuspected, unmerited goodness which comes to our relief makes us\nashamed. This is the rule which is illustrated here by the example of\nGod Himself. It is as if the Apostle said: \"I never knew, till the\nsufferings of Christ abounded in me, how near God could come to man; I\nnever knew how rich His mercies could be, how intimate His sympathy,\nhow inspiriting His comfort.\" This is an utterance well worth\nconsidering. The sufferings of men, and especially the sufferings of\nthe innocent and the good, are often made the ground of hasty charges\nagainst God; nay, they are often turned into arguments for Atheism.\nBut who are they who make such charges? Not the righteous sufferers,\nat least in New Testament times. The Apostle here is their\nrepresentative and spokesman, and he assures us that God never was so\nmuch to him as when he was in the sorest straits. The divine love was\nso far from being doubtful to him that it shone out then in\nunanticipated brightness; the very heart of the Father was\nrevealed--all mercy, all encouragement and comfort. If the martyrs\nhave no doubts of their own, is it not very gratuitous for the\nspectators to become sceptics on their account? \"The sufferings of\nChrist\" in His people may be an insoluble problem to the disinterested\nonlooker, but they are no problem to the sufferers. What is a mystery,\nwhen viewed from without, a mystery in which God seems to be\nconspicuous by His absence, is, when viewed from within, a new and\npriceless revelation of God Himself. \"The Father of mercies and God of\nall comfort\" is making Himself known now as for want of opportunity He\ncould not be known before.\n\nNotice especially that the consolation is said to abound \"through\nChrist.\" He is the mediator through whom it comes. To partake in His\nsufferings is to be united to _Him_; and to be united to Him is to\npartake in His _life_. The Apostle anticipates here a thought on which\nhe enlarges in the fourth chapter: \"Always bearing about in the body\nthe dying of Jesus, that the life also of Jesus may be manifested in\nour body.\" In our eagerness to emphasise the nearness and the sympathy\nof Jesus, it is to be feared that we do less than justice to the New\nTestament revelation of His glory. He does not suffer now. He is\nenthroned on high, far above all principality and power and might and\ndominion. The Spirit which brings His presence to our hearts is the\nSpirit of the Prince of Life; its function is not to be weak with our\nweakness, but to help our infirmity, and to strengthen us with all\nmight in the inner man. The Christ who dwells in us through His Spirit\nis not the Man of Sorrows, wearing the crown of thorns; it is the King\nof kings and Lord of lords, making us partakers of His triumph. There\nis a weak tone in much of the religious literature which deals with\nsuffering, utterly unlike that of the New Testament. It is a\ndegradation of Christ to our level which it teaches, instead of an\nexaltation of man toward Christ's. But the last is the apostolic\nideal: \"More than conquerors through Him that loved us.\" The comfort\nof which St. Paul makes so much here is not necessarily deliverance\nfrom suffering for Christ's sake, still less exemption from it; it is\nthe strength and courage and immortal hope which rise up, even in the\nmidst of suffering, in the heart in which the Lord of glory dwells.\nThrough Him such comfort abounds; it wells up to match and more than\nmatch the rising tide of suffering.\n\n(2) But Paul's sufferings have done more than give him a new knowledge\nof God; they have given him at the same time a new power to comfort\nothers. He is bold enough to make this ministry of consolation the key\nto his recent experiences. \"He comforteth us in all our affliction, that\nwe may be able to comfort them that are in any affliction, through the\ncomfort wherewith we ourselves are comforted of God.\" His sufferings and\nhis consolation together had a purpose that went beyond himself. How\nsignificant that is for some perplexing aspects of man's life! We are\nselfish, and instinctively regard ourselves as the centre of all\nprovidences; we naturally seek to explain everything by its bearing on\nourselves alone. But God has not made us for selfishness and isolation,\nand some mysteries would be cleared up if we had love enough to see the\nties by which our life is indissolubly linked to others. This, however,\nis less definite than the Apostle's thought; what he tells us is that he\nhas gained a new power at a great price. It is a power which almost\nevery Christian man will covet; but how many are willing to pass through\nthe fire to obtain it? We must ourselves have needed and have found\ncomfort, before we know what it is; we must ourselves have learned the\nart of consoling in the school of suffering, before we can practise it\nfor the benefit of others. The most painfully tried, the most proved in\nsuffering, the souls that are best acquainted with grief, provided\ntheir consolation has abounded through Christ, are specially called to\nthis ministry. Their experience is their preparation for it. Nature is\nsomething, and age is something; but far more than nature and age is\nthat discipline of God to which they have been submitted, that\ninitiation into the sufferings of Christ which has made them acquainted\nwith His consolations also, and has taught them to know the Father of\nmercies and the God of all comfort. Are they not among His best gifts to\nthe Church, those whom He has qualified to console, by consoling them in\nthe fire?\n\nIn the sixth verse the Apostle dwells on the interest of the Corinthians\nin his sufferings and his consolation. It is a practical illustration of\nthe communion of the saints in Christ. \"All that befalls _me_,\" says St.\nPaul, \"has _your_ interest in view. If I am afflicted, it is in the\ninterest of your comfort: when you look at me, and see how I bear myself\nin the sufferings of Christ, you will be encouraged to become imitators\nof me, even as I am of Him. If, again, I am comforted, this also is in\nthe interest of _your_ comfort; God enables me to impart to you what He\nhas imparted to me; and the comfort in question is no impotent thing; it\nproves its power in this--that when you have received it, you endure\nwith brave patience the same sufferings which we also suffer.\" This last\nis a favourite thought with the Apostle, and connects itself readily\nwith the idea, which may or may not have a right to be expressed in the\ntext, that all this is in furtherance of the salvation of the\nCorinthians.[3] For if there is one note of the saved more certain than\nanother, it is the brave patience with which they take upon them the\nsufferings of Christ. \u1f41 \u03b4\u1f72 \u1f51\u03c0\u03bf\u03bc\u03b5\u03af\u03bd\u03b1\u03c2 \u03b5\u1f30\u03c2 \u03c4\u03ad\u03bb\u03bf\u03c2, \u03bf\u1f57\u03c4\u03bf\u03c2 \u03c3\u03c9\u03b8\u03ae\u03c3\u03b5\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9 (Matt.\nx. 22). All that helps men to endure to the end, helps them to\nsalvation. All that tends to break the spirit and to sink men\ndespondency, or hurry them into impatience or fear, leads in the\nopposite direction. The great service that a true comforter does is to\nput the strength and courage into us which enable us to take up our\ncross, however sharp and heavy, and to bear it to the last step and the\nlast breath. No comfort is worth the name--none is taught of God--which\nhas another efficacy than this. The saved are those whose souls rise to\nthis description, and who recognise their spiritual kindred in such\nbrave and patient sufferers as Paul.\n\nThe thanksgiving ends appropriately with a cheerful word about the\nCorinthians. \"Our hope for you is stedfast; knowing that, as ye are\npartakers of the sufferings, so are ye also of the comfort.\" These two\nthings go together; it is the appointed lot of the children of God to\nbecome acquainted with both. If the sufferings could come alone, if\n_they_ could be assigned as the portion of the Church apart from the\nconsolation, Paul could have no hope that the Corinthians would endure\nto the end; but as it is, he is not afraid. The force of his words is\nperhaps best felt by us, if instead of saying that the sufferings and\nthe consolation are inseparable, we say that the consolation depends\nupon the sufferings. And what is the consolation? It is the presence\nof the exalted Saviour in the heart through His Spirit. It is a clear\nperception, and a firm hold, of the things which are unseen and\neternal. It is a conviction of the divine love which cannot be shaken,\nand of its sovereignty and omnipotence in the Risen Christ. This\ninfinite comfort is contingent upon our partaking of the sufferings of\nChrist. There is a point, the Apostle seems to say, at which the\ninvisible world and its glories intersect this world in which we live,\nand become visible, real, and inspiring to men. It is the point at\nwhich we suffer with Christ's sufferings. At any other point the\nvision of this glory is unneeded, and therefore withheld. The worldly,\nthe selfish, the cowardly; those who shrink from self-denial; those\nwho evade pain; those who root themselves in the world that lies\naround us, and when they move at all move in the line of least\nresistance; those who have never carried Christ's Cross,--none of\nthese can ever have the triumphant conviction of things unseen and\neternal which throbs in every page of the New Testament. None of these\ncan have what the Apostle elsewhere calls \"eternal consolation.\" It is\neasy for unbelievers, and for Christians lapsing into unbelief, to\nmock this faith as faith in \"the transcendent\"; but would a single\nline of the New Testament have been written without it? When we weigh\nwhat is here asserted about its connexion with the sufferings of\nChrist, could a graver charge be brought against any Church than that\nits faith in this \"transcendent\" languished or was extinct? Do not let\nus hearken to the sceptical insinuations which would rob us of all\nthat has been revealed in Christ's resurrection; and do not let us\nimagine, on the other hand, that we can retain a living faith in this\nrevelation if we decline to take up our cross. It was only when the\nsufferings of Christ abounded in him that Paul's consolation was\nabundant through Christ; it was only when he laid down his life for\nHis sake that Stephen saw the heavens opened and the Son of Man\nstanding at the right hand of God.\n\nFOOTNOTES:\n\n[2] The same view is strongly held by Schmiedel. He infers from chap.\nvi. 9 that Paul's sufferings had been interpreted at Corinth as a divine\nchastisement; in opposition to this the Apostle shows that they are\ndivinely intended to profit the Corinthians. Hence the opening of the\nletter is not a simple outpouring of his heart, but is delicately\ncalculated to set aside a reproach without naming it. The same purpose\nrules in the assumption that the Corinthians will intercede and give\nthanks on his behalf; it takes for granted their reconciliation to him.\n\n[3] The text is incurably perplexed. The variations can be seen in any\ncritical edition. The MS. authority does not justify any confident\ndecision, and the happiest suggestion yet made seems to be that of\nProfessor Warfield, who would omit altogether the words \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c3\u03c9\u03c4\u03b7\u03c1\u03af\u03b1\u03c2\n(_and salvation_). The MSS. vary most in regard to these words,\ninserting, omitting, and transposing them. Hence they are very\nprobably an old gloss, and their omission simplifies both the grammar\nand the sense.\n\n\n\n\n II\n\n _FAITH BORN OF DESPAIR_\n\n \"For we would not have you ignorant, brethren, concerning our\n affliction which befell us in Asia, that we were weighed down\n exceedingly, beyond our power, insomuch that we despaired even of\n life: yea, we ourselves have had the answer of death within\n ourselves, that we should not trust in ourselves, but in God which\n raiseth the dead: who delivered us out of so great a death, and\n will deliver: on whom we have set our hope that He will also still\n deliver us; ye also helping together on our behalf by your\n supplication; that, for the gift bestowed upon us by means of\n many, thanks may be given by many persons on our behalf.\n\n \"For our glorying is this, the testimony of our conscience, that\n in holiness and sincerity of God, not in fleshly wisdom but in the\n grace of God, we behaved ourselves in the world, and more\n abundantly to you-ward. For we write none other things unto you,\n than what ye read or even acknowledge, and I hope ye will\n acknowledge unto the end: as also ye did acknowledge us in part,\n that we are your glorying, even as ye also are ours, in the day of\n our Lord Jesus.\"--2 COR. i. 8-14 (R.V.).\n\n\nPaul seems to have felt that the thanksgiving with which he opens this\nletter to the Corinthians was so peculiar as to require explanation. It\nwas not his way to burst upon his readers thus with his private\nexperiences either of joy or sorrow; and though he had good reason for\nwhat he did--in that abundance of the heart out of which the mouth\nspeaks, in his desire to conciliate the good-will of the Corinthians for\na much-tried man, and in his faith in the real communion of the\nsaints--he instinctively stops here a moment to vindicate what he has\ndone. He does not wish them to be ignorant of an experience which has\nbeen so much to him, and ought to have the liveliest interest for them.\n\nEvidently they knew that he had been in trouble, but they had no\nsufficient idea of the extremity to which he had been reduced. We were\nweighed down, he writes, in excess, beyond our power; the trial that\ncame upon us was one not measured to man's strength. We despaired even\nof life. Nay, we have had[4] the answer of death in ourselves. When we\nlooked about us, when we faced our circumstances, and asked ourselves\nwhether death or life was to be the end of this, we could only answer,\nDeath. We were like men under sentence; it was only a question of a\nlittle sooner or a little later, when the fatal stroke should fall.\n\nThe Apostle, who has a divine gift for interpreting experience and\nreading its lessons, tells us why he and his friends had to pass such a\nterrible time. It was that they might trust, not in themselves, but in\nGod who raises the dead. It is natural, he implies, for us to trust in\nourselves. It is so natural, and so confirmed by the habits of a\nlifetime, that no ordinary difficulties or perplexities avail to break\nus of it. It takes all God can do to root up our self-confidence. He\nmust reduce us to despair; He must bring us to such an extremity that\nthe one voice we have in our hearts, the one voice that cries to us\nwherever we look round for help, is Death, death, death. It is out of\nthis despair that the superhuman hope is born. It is out of this abject\nhelplessness that the soul learns to look up with new trust to God.\n\nIt is a melancholy reflection upon human nature that we have, as the\nApostle expresses it elsewhere, to be \"shut up\" to all the mercies of\nGod. If we could evade them, notwithstanding their freeness and their\nworth, we would. How do most of us attain to any faith in Providence?\nIs it not by proving, through numberless experiments, that it is not\nin man that walketh to direct his steps? Is it not by coming, again\nand again, to the limit of our resources, and being compelled to feel\nthat unless there is a wisdom and a love at work on our behalf,\nimmeasurably wiser and more benignant than our own, life is a moral\nchaos? How, above all, do we come to any faith in redemption? to any\nabiding trust in Jesus Christ as the Saviour of our souls? Is it not\nby this same way of despair? Is it not by the profound consciousness\nthat in ourselves there is _no_ answer to the question, How shall man\nbe just with God? and that the answer must be sought in Him? Is it not\nby failure, by defeat, by deep disappointments, by ominous forebodings\nhardening into the awful certainty that we cannot with our own\nresources make ourselves good men--is it not by experiences like these\nthat we are led to the Cross? This principle has many other\nillustrations in human life, and every one of them is something to our\ndiscredit. They all mean that only desperation opens our eyes to God's\nlove. We do not heartily own Him as the author of life and health,\nunless He has raised us from sickness after the doctor had given us\nup. We do not acknowledge His paternal guidance of our life, unless in\nsome sudden peril, or some impending disaster, He provides an\nunexpected deliverance. We do not confess that salvation is of the\nLord, till our very soul has been convinced that in it there dwells no\ngood thing. Happy are those who are taught, even by despair, to set\ntheir hope in God; and who, when they learn this lesson once, learn\nit, like St. Paul, once for all (see note on \u1f10\u03c3\u03c7\u03ae\u03ba\u03b1\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd above). Faith\nand hope like those which burn through this Epistle were well worth\npurchasing, even at such a price; they were blessings so valuable that\nthe love of God did not shrink from reducing Paul to despair that he\nmight be compelled to grasp them. Let us believe when such trials come\ninto our lives--when we are weighed down exceedingly, beyond our\nstrength, and are in darkness without light, in a valley of the shadow\nof death with no outlet--that God is not dealing with us cruelly or at\nrandom, but shutting us up to an experience of His love which we have\nhitherto declined. \"After two days will He revive us; on the third day\nHe will raise us up, and we shall live before Him.\"\n\nThe Apostle describes the God on whom he learned to hope as \"God who\nraises the dead.\" He himself had been as good as dead, and his\ndeliverance was as good as a resurrection. The phrase, however, seems\nto be the Apostle's equivalent for omnipotence: when he thinks of the\nutmost that God can do, he expresses it thus. Sometimes the\napplication of it is merely physical (_e.g._, Rom. iv. 17); sometimes\nit is spiritual as well. Thus in Eph. i. 19 ff. the possibilities of\nthe Christian life are measured by this--that that power is at work in\nbelievers with which God wrought in Christ when _He raised Him from\nthe dead_, and set Him at His own right hand in the heavenly places.\nIs not that power sufficient to do for the weakest and most desperate\nof men far more than all he needs? Yet it is his need, somehow, when\nbrought home to him in despair, that opens his eyes to this omnipotent\nsaving power.\n\nThe text of the words in which Paul tells of his deliverance can\nhardly be said to be quite certain, but the general meaning is plain.\nGod delivered him from the awful death which was impending over him;\nhe had his hope now firmly set on Him; he was sure that He would\ndeliver him in the future also.[5] What the danger had been, which had\nmade so powerful an impression on this hardy soul, we cannot now tell.\nIt must have been something which happened after the First Epistle was\nwritten, and therefore was not the fighting with wild beasts at\nEphesus, whatever that may have been (1 Cor. xv. 32). It may have been\na serious bodily illness, which had brought him to death's door, and\nleft him so weak, that still, at every step, he felt it was God's\nmercy that was holding him up. It may have been a plot to make away\nwith him on the part of the many adversaries mentioned in the First\nEpistle (xvi. 9)--a plot which had failed, as it were, by a miracle,\nbut the malignity of which still dogged his steps, and was only\nwarded off by the constant presence of God. Both these suggestions\nrequire, and would satisfy, the reading, \"who delivered us from so\ngreat a death, and _doth deliver_.\" If, however, we take the reading\nof the R.V.--\"who delivered us from so great a death, and _will\ndeliver_; on whom we have set our hope that He will also still deliver\nus\"--the existence of the danger, at the moment at which Paul writes,\nis not necessarily involved; and the danger itself may have been more\nof what we might call an accidental character. The imminent peril of\ndrowning referred to in chap. xi. 25 would meet the case; and the\nconfidence expressed by Paul with such emphatic reference to the\nfuture will not seem without motive when we consider that he had\nseveral sea voyages in prospect--as those from Corinth to Syria, from\nSyria to Rome, and probably from Rome to Spain. So Hofmann interprets\nthe whole passage: but whether the interpretation be good or bad, it\nis elsewhere than in its accidental circumstances that the interest of\nthe transaction lies for the writer and for us. To Paul it was not\nmerely a historical but a spiritual experience; not an incident\nwithout meaning, but a divinely ordered discipline; and it is thus\nthat we must learn to read our own lives if the purpose of God is to\nbe wrought out in them.\n\nNotice in this connexion, in the eleventh verse, how simply Paul\nassumes the spiritual participation of the Corinthians in his\nfortunes. It is God indeed who delivers him, but the deliverance is\nwrought while they, as well as other Churches, co-operate in\nsupplication on his behalf. In the strained relations existing between\nhimself and the Corinthians, the assumption here made so graciously\nprobably did them more than justice; if there were unsympathetic souls\namong them, they must have felt in it a delicate rebuke. What\nfollows--\"that, for the gift bestowed upon us by the means of many,\nthanks may be given by many persons on our behalf\" (R.V.)--simple and\nintelligible as it looks in English, is one of the passages which\njustify M. Sabatier's remark that Paul is difficult to understand and\nimpossible to translate. The Revisers seem to have construed \u03c4\u1f78 \u1f10\u03b9\u03c2\n\u1f21\u03bc\u1fb6\u03c2 \u03c7\u03ac\u03c1\u03b9\u03c3\u03bc\u03b1 \u03b4\u03b9\u1f70 \u03c0\u03bf\u03bb\u03bb\u1ff6\u03bd together, as if it had been \u03c4\u1f78 \u03b4\u03b9\u1f70 \u03c0. \u03b5. \u1f21.\n\u03c7\u03ac\u03c1\u03b9\u03c3\u03bc\u03b1, the meaning being that the favour bestowed on Paul in his\ndeliverance from this peril had been bestowed at the intercession of\nmany. Others get virtually the same meaning by construing \u03c4\u1f78 \u03b5\u1f30\u03c2 \u1f21\u03bc\u1fb6\u03c2\n\u03c7\u03ac\u03c1\u03b9\u03c3\u03bc\u03b1 with \u1f10\u03ba \u03c0\u03bf\u03bb\u03bb\u1ff6\u03bd \u03c0\u03c1\u03bf\u03c2\u03ce\u03c0\u03c9\u03bd: the inversion is supposed to\nemphasise these last words; and as it was, on this view, prayer on the\npart of many persons that procured his deliverance, Paul is anxious\nthat the deliverance itself should be acknowledged by the thanksgiving\nof many. It cannot be denied that both these renderings are\ngrammatically violent, and it seems to me preferable to keep \u03c4\u1f78 \u1f10\u03b9\u03c2\n\u1f21\u03bc\u1fb6\u03c2 \u03c7\u03ac\u03c1\u03b9\u03c3\u03bc\u03b1 by itself, even though \u1f10\u03ba \u03c0\u03bf\u03bb\u03bb\u1ff6\u03bd \u03c0\u03c1\u03bf\u03c2\u03ce\u03c0\u03c9\u03bd and \u03b4\u03b9\u1f70 \u03c0\u03bf\u03bb\u03bb\u1ff6\u03bd\nshould then reduplicate the same idea with only a slight variation. We\nshould then render: \"in order that, on the part of many persons, the\nfavour shown to us may be gratefully acknowledged by many on our\nbehalf.\" The pleonasm thus resulting strikes one rather as\ncharacteristic of St. Paul's mood in such passages, than as a thing\nopen to objection.[6] But grammar apart, what really has to be\nemphasised here is again the communion of the saints. All the\nChurches pray for St. Paul--at least he takes it for granted that they\ndo; and when he is rescued from danger, his own thanksgiving is\nmultiplied a thousandfold by the thanksgivings of others on his\nbehalf. This is the ideal of an evangelist's life; in all its\nincidents and emergencies, in all its perils and salvations, it ought\nto float in an atmosphere of prayer. Every interposition of God on the\nmissionary's behalf is then recognised by him as a gift of grace\n(\u03c7\u03ac\u03c1\u03b9\u03c3\u03bc\u03b1)--not, be it understood, a private favour, but a blessing and\na power capacitating him for further service to the Church. Those who\nhave lived through his straits and his triumphs with him in their\nprayers know how true that is.\n\nAt this point (ver. 12) the key in which Paul writes begins to change.\nWe are conscious of a slight discord the instant he speaks about the\ntestimony of his conscience. Yet the transition is as unforced as any\nsuch transition can be. I may well take for granted, seems to be the\nthought in his mind, that you pray for me; I may well ask you to unite\nwith me in thanks to God for my deliverance; for if there is one thing\nI am sure of, and proud of, it is that I have been a loyal minister of\nGod in the world, and especially to you. Fleshly wisdom has not been\nmy guide. I have used no worldly policy; I have sought no selfish\nends. In a holiness and sincerity which God bestows, in an element of\ncrystal transparency, I have led my apostolic life. The world has\nnever convicted me of anything dark or underhand; and in all the world\nnone know better than you, among whom I lived longer than elsewhere,\nworking with my hands, and preaching the Gospel as freely as God\noffers it, that I have walked in the light as He is in the light.\n\nThis general defence, which is not without its note of defiance,\nbecomes defined in ver. 13. Plainly charges of insincerity had been\nmade against Paul, particularly affecting his correspondence, and it\nis to these he addresses himself. It is not easy to be outspoken and\nconciliatory in the same sentence, to show your indignation to the man\nwho charges you with double-dealing, and at the same time take him to\nyour heart; and the Apostle's effort to do all these things at once\nhas proved embarrassing to himself, and more than embarrassing to his\ninterpreters. He begins, indeed, lucidly enough. \"We write nothing\nelse to you than what you read.\" He does not mean that he had no\ncorrespondence with members of the Church except in his public\nepistles; but that in these public epistles his meaning was obvious\nand on the surface. His style was not, as some had hinted, obscure,\ntortuous, elaborately ambiguous, full of loop-holes; he wrote like a\nplain man to plain men; he said what he meant, and meant what he said.\nThen he qualifies this slightly. \"We write nothing to you but what you\nread--or in point of fact acknowledge,\" even apart from our writing.\nThis seems to me the simplest interpretation of the words \u1f22 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76\n\u1f10\u03c0\u03b9\u03b3\u03b9\u03bd\u03ce\u03c3\u03ba\u03b5\u03c4\u03b5; and the simplest construction is then that of Hofmann,\nwho puts a colon at \u1f10\u03c0\u03b9\u03b3\u03b9\u03bd\u03ce\u03c3\u03ba\u03b5\u03c4\u03b5, and with \u1f10\u03bb\u03c0\u03af\u03b6\u03c9 \u03b4\u1f72 begins what is\nvirtually a separate sentence. \"And I hope that to the end ye will\nacknowledge, as in fact you acknowledged us in part, that we are your\nboast, as you also are ours, in the day of the Lord Jesus.\" Other\npossibilities of punctuation and construction are so numerous that it\nwould be endless to exhibit them; and in the long-run they do not much\naffect the sense. What the reader has to seize is that Paul has been\naccused of insincerity, especially in his correspondence, and that he\nindignantly denies the charge; that, in spite of such accusations, he\ncan point to at least a partial recognition among the Corinthians of\nwhat he and his fellow-workers really are; and that he hopes their\nconfidence in him will increase and continue to the end. Should this\nbright hope be gratified, then in the day of the Lord Jesus it will be\nthe boast of the Corinthians that they had the great Apostle Paul as\ntheir spiritual father, and the boast of the Apostle that the\nCorinthians were his spiritual children.\n\nA passage like this--and there are many like it in St. Paul--has\nsomething in it humiliating. Is it not a disgrace to human nature that\na man so open, so truthful, so brave, should be put to his defence on\na charge of underhand dealing? Ought not somebody to have been deeply\nashamed, for bringing this shame on the Apostle? Let us be very\ncareful how we lend motives, especially to men whom we know to be\nbetter than ourselves. There is that in all our hearts which is\nhostile to them, and would not be grieved to see them degraded a\nlittle; and it is that, and nothing else, which supplies bad motives\nfor their good actions, and puts an ambiguous face on their simplest\nbehaviour. \"Deceit,\" says Solomon, \"is in the heart of them that\nimagine evil\"; it is our own selves that we condemn most surely when\nwe pass our bad sentence upon others.\n\nThe immediate result of imputing motives, and putting a sinister\ninterpretation on actions, is that mutual confidence is destroyed; and\nmutual confidence is the very element and atmosphere in which any\nspiritual good can be done. Unless a minister and his congregation\nrecognise each other as in the main what they profess to be, their\nrelation is destitute of spiritual reality; it may be an infinite\nweariness, or an infinite torment; it can never be a comfort or a\ndelight on one side or the other. What would a family be, without the\nmutual confidence of husband and wife, of parents and children? What\nis a state worth, for any of the ideal ends for which a state exists,\nif those who represent it to the world have no instinctive sympathy\nwith the general life, and if the collective conscience regards the\nleaders from a distance with dislike or distrust? And what is the\npastoral relation worth, if, instead of mutual cordiality, openness,\nreadiness to believe and to hope the best, instead of mutual\nintercession and thanksgiving, of mutual rejoicing in each other,\nthere is suspicion, reserve, insinuation, coldness, a grudging\nrecognition of what it is impossible to deny, a willingness to shake\nthe head and to make mischief? What an experience of life we see, what\na final appreciation of the best thing, in that utterance of St. John\nin extreme age: \"Beloved, let us love one another.\" All that is good\nfor us, all glory and joy, is summarily comprehended in that.\n\nThe last words of the text--\"the day of the Lord Jesus\"--recall a very\nsimilar passage in 1 Thess. ii. 19: \"What is our hope, or joy, or crown\nof rejoicing--is it not even ye--before our Lord Jesus at His coming?\"\nIn both cases our minds are lifted to that great presence in which St.\nPaul habitually lived; and as we stand there our disagreements sink into\ntheir true proportions; our judgments of each other are seen in their\ntrue colours. No one will rejoice then that he has made evil out of\ngood, that he has cunningly perverted simple actions, that he has\ndiscovered the infirmities of preachers, or set the saints at variance;\nthe joy will be for those who have loved and trusted each other, who\nhave borne each other's faults and laboured for their healing, who have\nbelieved all things, hoped all things, endured all things, rather than\nbe parted from each other by any failure of love. The mutual confidence\nof Christian ministers and Christian people will then, after all its\ntrials, have its exceeding great reward.\n\nFOOTNOTES:\n\n[4] Notice the perfect \u1f10\u03c3\u03c7\u03ae\u03ba\u03b1\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd. We _had_ this experience, and in its\nfruit--a newer and deeper faith in God--we _have_ it still. It is a\npermanent possession in this happy form. The same idea is expressed in\nthe pft. \u1f20\u03bb\u03c0\u03af\u03ba\u03b1\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd, ver. 10.\n\n[5] The doubtful words here are \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1fe5\u03cd\u03b5\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9 in ver. 10 of the Received\nText, from D^C, E, F, G, K, etc. (\"_and doth deliver_,\" in the\nAuthorised Version). They are not found in A, D, Syr., Chrys., while the\nmost authoritative MSS., \u05d0, B, C, P, have \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1fe5\u03cd\u03c3\u03b5\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9 (\"and _will_\ndeliver,\" of the Revised Version). Most editors take the last reading,\nas best attested; but on internal grounds two of the most recent and\nacute interpreters, Schmiedel and Heinrici, prefer the Received Text.\nThe present tense (\"_doth_ deliver\") presupposes that the danger to\nwhich Paul had been exposed in some form or in some sense continued. If\nthis were the case, of course it could not have been, as Hofmann\nsupposes, the shipwreck in which the Apostle spent a night and a day in\nthe deep. Otherwise this would be a plausible and tempting supposition.\n\n[6] To render \u03b4\u03b9\u1f70 \u03c0\u03bf\u03bb\u03bb\u1ff6\u03bd _prolixe_, copiously, is at least precarious;\nand to take \u03c0\u03c1\u03cc\u03c3\u03c9\u03c0\u03b1 as \"faces\" (\"that from many faces upturned in\nprayer to God\"), though lexically admissible, seems on all other\ngrounds out of place.\n\n\n\n\n III\n\n _THE CHURCH'S ONE FOUNDATION_\n\n \"And in this confidence I was minded to come before unto you, that\n ye might have a second benefit; and by you to pass into Macedonia,\n and again from Macedonia to come unto you, and of you to be set\n forward on my journey unto Jud\u00e6a. When I therefore was thus minded,\n did I show fickleness? or the things that I purpose, do I purpose\n according to the flesh, that with me there should be the yea yea and\n the nay nay? But as God is faithful, our word toward you is not yea\n and nay. For the Son of God, Jesus Christ, who was preached among\n you by us, _even_ by me and Silvanus and Timothy, was not yea and\n nay, but in Him is yea. For how many soever be the promises of God,\n in Him is the yea: wherefore also through Him is the Amen, unto the\n glory of God through us.\"--2 COR. i. 15-20 (R.V.).\n\n\nThe emphatic words in the first sentence are \"in this confidence.\" All\nthe Apostle's plans for visiting Corinth, both in general and in their\ndetails, depended upon the maintenance of a good understanding between\nhimself and the Church; and the very prominence here given to this\ncondition is a tacit accusation of those whose conduct had destroyed\nhis confidence. When he intimated his intention of visiting them,\naccording to the programme of vv. 15 and 16, he had felt sure of a\nfriendly welcome, and of the cordial recognition of his apostolic\nauthority; it was only when that assurance was taken away from him by\nnews of what was being said and done at Corinth, that he had changed\nhis plan. He had originally intended to go from Ephesus to Corinth,\nthen from Corinth north into Macedonia, then back to Corinth again,\nand thence, with the assistance of the Corinthians, or their convoy\nfor part of the way, to Jerusalem. Had this purpose been carried out,\nhe would of course have been twice in Corinth, and it is to this that\nmost scholars refer the words \"a second benefit,\"[7] or rather\n\"grace.\" This reference, indeed, is not quite certain; and it cannot\nbe proved, though it is made more probable, by using \u03c0\u03c1\u03cc\u03c4\u03b5\u03c1\u03bf\u03bd and\n\u03b4\u03b5\u03c5\u03c4\u03ad\u03c1\u03b1\u03bd to interpret each other. It remains possible that when Paul\nsaid, \"I was minded to come before unto you, that ye might have a\nsecond benefit,\" he was thinking of his original visit as the first,\nand of this purposed one as the second, \"grace.\" This reading of his\nwords has commended itself to scholars like Calvin, Bengel, and\nHeinrici. Whichever of these interpretations be correct, the Apostle\nhad abandoned his purpose of going from Ephesus to Macedonia _vi\u00e2_\nCorinth, and had intimated in the First Epistle (chap. xvi. 5) his\nintention of reaching Corinth _vi\u00e2_ Macedonia. This change of purpose\nis not sufficient to explain what follows. Unless there had been at\nCorinth a great deal of bad feeling, it would have passed without\nremark, as a thing which had no doubt good reasons, though the\nCorinthians were ignorant of them; at the very most, it would have\ncalled forth expressions of disappointment and regret. They would have\nbeen sorry that the benefit (\u03c7\u03ac\u03c1\u03b9\u03c2), the token of Divine favour which\nwas always bestowed when the Apostle came \"in the fulness of the\nblessing of Christ,\" and \"longing to impart some spiritual gift,\" had\nbeen delayed; but they would have acquiesced as in any other natural\ndisappointment. But this was not what took place. They used the\nApostle's change of purpose to assail his character. They charged him\nwith \"lightness,\" with worthless levity. They called him a\nweathercock, a Yes and No man, who said now one thing and now the\nopposite, who said both at once and with equal emphasis, who had his\nown interests in view in his fickleness, and whose word, to speak\nplainly, could never be depended upon.\n\nThe responsibility for the change of plan has already, in the emphatic\n\u03c4\u03b1\u03cd\u03c4\u1fc3 \u03c4\u1fc7 \u03c0\u03b5\u03c0\u03bf\u03b9\u03b8\u03ae\u03c3\u03b5\u03b9, been indirectly transferred to his accusers; but\nthe Apostle stoops to answer them quite straightforwardly. His answer is\nindeed a challenge: \"When I cherished that first wish to visit you,\n_was_ I--dare you say I was--guilty of the levity with which you charge\nme? Or--to enlarge the question, and, seeing that my whole character is\nattacked, to bring my character as a whole into the discussion--the\nthings that I purpose, do I purpose according to the flesh, that with me\nthere should be the yea yea and the nay nay?\" Am I, he seems to say, in\nmy character and conduct, like a shifty, unprincipled politician--a man\nwho has no convictions, or no conscience about his convictions--a man\nwho is guided, not by any higher spirit dwelling in him, but solely by\nconsiderations of selfish interest? Do I say things out of mere\ncompliment, not meaning them? When I make promises, or announce\nintentions, is it always with the tacit reservation that they may be\ncancelled if they turn out inconvenient? Do you suppose that I\n_purposely_ represent myself (\u1f35\u03bd\u03b1 \u1f96 \u03c0\u03b1\u03c1' \u1f10\u03bc\u03bf\u03af) as a man who affirms and\ndenies, makes promises and breaks them, has Yes yes and No no dwelling\nside by side in his soul?[8] You know me far better than to suppose any\nsuch thing. All my communications with you have been inconsistent with\nsuch a view of my character. As God is faithful, our word to you is not\nYes and No. It is not incoherent, or equivocal, or self-contradictory.\nIt is entirely truthful and self-consistent.\n\nIn this eighteenth verse the Apostle's mind is reaching out already to\nwhat he is going to make his real defence, and \u1f41 \u03bb\u03cc\u03b3\u03bf\u03c2 \u1f21\u03bc\u1ff6\u03bd (\"our word\")\ntherefore carries a double weight. It covers at once whatever he had\nsaid to them about the proposed journey, and whatever he had said in his\nevangelistic ministry at Corinth. It is this latter sense of it that is\ncontinued in ver. 19: \"For the Son of God, Christ Jesus, who was\npreached among you by us, by me and Silvanus and Timotheus, was not Yes\nand No, but in him Yes has found place. For how many soever are the\npromises of God, in Him is the Yes.\" Let us notice first the\nargumentative force of this. Paul is engaged in vindicating his\ncharacter, and especially in maintaining his truthfulness and sincerity.\nHow does he do so here? His unspoken assumption is, that character is\ndetermined by the main interest of life; that the work to which a man\ngives his soul will react upon the soul, changing it into its own\nlikeness. As the dyer's hand is subdued to the element it works in, so\nwas the whole being of Paul--such is the argument--subdued to the\nelement in which he wrought, conformed to it, impregnated by it. And\nwhat was that element? It was the Gospel concerning God's Son, Jesus\nChrist. Was there any dubiety about what that was? any equivocal mixture\nof Yes and No there? Far from it. Paul was so certain of what it was\nthat he repeatedly and solemnly anathematised man or angel who should\nventure to qualify, let alone deny it. There is no mixture of Yes and No\nin Christ. As the Apostle says elsewhere (Rom. xv. 8), Jesus Christ was\na minister of the circumcision \"_in the interest of the truth of God,\nwith a view to the confirmation of the promises_.\" However many the\npromises might be, in Him a mighty affirmation, a mighty fulfilment, was\ngiven of every one. The ministry of the Gospel has this, then, as its\nvery subject, its constant preoccupation, its highest glory--the\nabsolute faithfulness of God. Who would venture to assert that Paul, or\nthat anybody,[9] could catch the trick of equivocation in such a\nservice? Who does not see that such a service must needs create true\nmen?\n\nTo this argument there is, for the natural man, a ready answer. It by\nno means follows, he will say, that because the Gospel is devoid of\nambiguity or inconsistency, equivocation and insincerity must be\nunknown to its preachers. A man may proclaim the true Gospel and in\nhis other dealings be far from a true man. Experience justifies this\nreply; and yet it does not invalidate Paul's argument. That argument\nis good for the case in which it is applied. It might be _repeated_ by\na hypocrite, but no hypocrite could ever have _invented_ it. It bears,\nindeed, a striking because an unintentional testimony to the height at\nwhich Paul habitually lived, and to his unqualified identification of\nhimself with his apostolic calling. If a man has ten interests in\nlife, more or less divergent, he may have as many inconsistencies in\nhis behaviour; but if he has said with St. Paul, \"This one thing I\ndo,\" and if the one thing which absorbs his very soul is an unceasing\ntestimony to the truth and faithfulness of God, then it is utterly\nincredible that he should be a false and faithless man. The work which\nclaims him for its own with this absolute authority will seal him with\nits own greatness, its own simplicity and truth. He will not use\nlevity. The things which he purposes, he will not purpose according to\nthe flesh. He will not be guided by considerations perpetually\nvarying, except in the point of being all alike selfish. He will not\nbe a Yes and No man, whom nobody can trust.\n\nThe argumentative force of the passage being admitted, its doctrinal\nimport deserves attention. The Gospel--which is identified with God's\nSon, Jesus Christ--is here described as a mighty affirmation. It is\nnot Yes and No, a message full of inconsistencies, or ambiguities, a\nproclamation the sense of which no one can ever be sure he has\ngrasped. In it (\u1f10\u03bd \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u1ff7 means \"in Christ\") the everlasting Yea has\nfound place. The perfect tense (\u03b3\u03ad\u03b3\u03bf\u03bd\u03b5\u03bd) means that this grand\naffirmation has come to us, and is with us, for good and all. What it\nwas and continued to be in Paul's time, it is to this day. It is in\nthis positive, definite, unmistakable character that the strength of\nthe Gospel lies. What a man cannot know, cannot seize, cannot tell, he\ncannot preach. The refutation of popular errors, even in theology, is\nnot gospel; the criticism of traditional theories, even about\nScripture, is not gospel; the intellectual \"economy,\" with which a\nclever man in a dubious position uses language about the Bible or its\ndoctrines which to the simple means Yes, and to the subtle qualifies\nthe Yes enormously, is not gospel. There is no strength in any of\nthese things. Dealing in them does not make character simple, sincere,\nmassive, Christian. When they stamp themselves on the soul, the result\nis not one to which we could make the appeal which Paul makes here. If\nwe have any gospel at all, it is because there are things which stand\nfor us above all doubts, truths so sure that we cannot question them,\nso absolute that we cannot qualify them, so much our life that to\ntamper with them is to touch our very heart. Nobody has any right to\npreach who has not mighty affirmations to make concerning God's Son,\nJesus Christ--affirmations in which there is no ambiguity, and which\nno questioning can reach.\n\nIn the Apostle's mind a particular turn is given to this thought by\nits connexion with the Old Testament. In Christ, he says, the Yes has\nbeen realised; for how many soever are the promises of God, in Him is\nthe Yes. The mode of expression is rather peculiar, but the meaning is\nquite plain. Is there a single word of good, Paul asks, that God has\never spoken concerning man? Then that word is reaffirmed, it is\nconfirmed, it is fulfilled in Jesus Christ. It is no longer a word,\nbut an actual gift to men, which they may take hold of and possess. Of\ncourse when Paul says \"how many soever are the promises,\" he is\nthinking of the Old Testament. It was there the promises stood in\nGod's name; and hence he tells us in this passage that Christ is the\nfulfilment of the Old Testament; in Him God has kept His word given to\nthe fathers. All that the holy men of old were bidden to hope for, as\nthe Spirit spoke through them in many parts and in many ways, is given\nto the world at last: he who has God's Son, Jesus Christ, has all God\nhas promised, and all He can give.\n\nThere are two opposite ways of looking at the Old Testament with which\nthis apostolic teaching is inconsistent, and which, by anticipation,\nit condemns.\n\nThere is the opinion of those who say that God's promises to His\npeople in the Old Testament have not been fulfilled, and never will\nbe. That is the opinion held by many among the modern Jews, who have\nrenounced all that was most characteristic in the religion of their\nfathers, and attenuated it into the merest deistical film of a creed.\nIt is the opinion also of many who study the Bible as a piece of\nliterary antiquity, but get to no perception of the life which is in\nit, or of the organic connexion between the Old Testament and the New.\nWhat the Apostle says of his countrymen in his own time is true of\nboth these classes--when they read the Scriptures, there is a veil\nupon their hearts. The Old Testament promises have been fulfilled,\nevery one of them. Let a man be taught what they mean, not as dead\nletters in an ancient scroll, but as present words of the living God;\nand then let him look to Jesus Christ, the Son of God, and see whether\nthere is not in Him the mighty, the perpetual confirmation of them\nall. We smile sometimes at what seems the whimsical way in which the\nearly Christians, who had not yet a New Testament, found Christ\neverywhere in the Old; but though it may be possible to err in detail\nin this pursuit, it is not possible to err on the whole. The Old\nTestament is gathered up, every living word of it, in Him; we are\nmisunderstanding it if we take it otherwise.\n\nThe opinion just described is a species of rationalism. There is another\nopinion, which, while agreeing with the rationalistic one that many of\nGod's promises in the Old Testament have not yet been fulfilled,\nbelieves that their fulfilment is still to be awaited. If one might do\nso without offence, I should call this a species of fanaticism. It is\nthe error of those who take the Jewish nation as such to be the subject\nof prophecy, and hope for its restoration to Palestine, for a revived\nJerusalem, a new Davidic monarchy, even a reign of Christ over such an\nearthly kingdom. All this, if we may take the Apostle's word for it, is\nbeside the mark. Equally with rationalism it loses the spirit of God's\nword in the letter. The promises have been fulfilled already, and we are\nnot to look for another fulfilment. Those who have seen Christ have seen\nall that God is going to do--and it is quite adequate--to make His word\ngood. He who has welcomed Christ knows that not one good word of all\nthat God has spoken has failed. God has never, by the promises of the\nOld Testament, or by the instincts of human nature, put a hope or a\nprayer into man's heart that is not answered and satisfied abundantly in\nHis Son.\n\nBut leaving the reference to the Old Testament on one side, it is well\nworth while for us to consider the practical meaning of the truth, that\n_all_ God's promises are Yea in Christ. God's promises are His\ndeclarations of what He is willing to do for men; and in the very nature\nof the case they are at once the inspiration and the limit of our\nprayers. We are encouraged to ask all that God promises, and we must\nstop there. Christ Himself then is the measure of prayer to man; we can\nask all that is in Him; we dare not ask anything that lies outside of\nHim. How the consideration of this should expand our prayers in some\ndirections, and contract them in others! We can ask God to give us\nChrist's purity, Christ's simplicity, Christ's meekness and gentleness,\nChrist's faithfulness and obedience, Christ's victory over the world.\nHave we ever measured these things? Have we ever put them into our\nprayers with any glimmering consciousness of their dimensions, any sense\nof the vastness of our request? Nay, we can ask Christ's glory, His\nResurrection Life of splendour and incorruption--the image of the\nheavenly. God has promised us all these things, and far more: but has He\nalways promised what we ask? Can we fix our eyes on His Son, as He lived\nour life in this world, and remembering that this, so far as this world\nis concerned, is the measure of promise, ask without any qualification\nthat our course here may be free from every trouble? Had Christ no\nsorrow? Did He never meet with ingratitude? Was He never misunderstood?\nWas He never hungry, thirsty, weary? If all God's promises are summed up\nin Him--if He is everything that God has to give--can we go boldly to\nthe throne of grace, and pray to be exempted from what He had to bear,\nor to be richly provided with indulgences which He never knew? What if\nall unanswered prayers might be defined as prayers for things not\nincluded in the promises--prayers that we might get what Christ did not\nget, or be spared what He was not spared? The spirit of this passage,\nhowever, does not urge so much the definiteness as the compass and the\ncertainty of the promises of God. They are so many that Paul could never\nenumerate them, and all of them are sure in Christ. And when our eyes\nare once opened on Him, does not He Himself become as it were inevitably\nthe substance of our prayers? Is not our whole heart's desire, Oh that I\nmight win _Him_! Oh that _He_ might live in me, and make me what He is!\nOh that _that_ Man might arise in me, that the man I am may cease to be!\nDo we not feel that if God would give us His Son, all would be ours that\nwe could take or He could give?\n\nIt is in this mood--with the consciousness, I mean, that in Jesus\nChrist the sure promises of God are inconceivably rich and good--that\nthe Apostle adds: \"wherefore also through Him is the Amen.\" It is not\neasy to put a prayer into words, whether of petition or thanksgiving,\nfor men are not much in the habit of speaking to God; but it is easy\nto say Amen. That is the part of the Church when God's Son, Jesus\nChrist, is proclaimed, clothed in His Gospel. Apart from the Gospel,\nwe do not know God, or what He will do, or will not do, for sinful\nmen; but as we listen to the proclamation of His mercy and His\nfaithfulness, as our eyes are opened to see in His Son all He has\npromised to do for us, nay, in a sense, all He has already done, our\ngrateful hearts break forth in one grand responsive Amen! So let it\nbe! we cry. Unless God had first prompted us by sending His Son, we\ncould never have found it in our hearts to present such requests to\nHim; but through Christ we are enabled to present them, though it\nshould be at first with only a look at Him, and an appropriating Amen.\nIt is the very nature of prayer, indeed, to be the answer to promise.\nAmen is all, at bottom, that God leaves for us to say.\n\nThe solemn acceptance of a mercy so great--an acceptance as joyful as\nit is solemn, since the Amen is one rising out of thankful\nhearts--redounds to the glory of God. This is the final cause of\nredemption, and however it may be lost sight of in theologies which\nmake man their centre, it is always magnified in the New Testament.\nThe Apostle rejoices that his ministry and that of his friends (\u03b4\u03b9'\n\u1f21\u03bc\u1ff6\u03bd) contributes to this glory; and the whole connexion of thought in\nthe passage throws a light on a great Bible word. God's glory is\nidentified here with the recognition and appropriation by men of His\ngoodness and faithfulness in Jesus Christ. He is glorified when it\ndawns on human souls that He has spoken good concerning them beyond\ntheir utmost imaginings, and when that good is seen to be indubitably\nsafe and sure in His Son. The Amen in which such souls welcome His\nmercy is the equivalent of the Old Testament word, \"Salvation is of\nthe Lord.\" It is expanded in an apostolic doxology: \"Of Him, and\nthrough Him, and to Him are all things: to Him be glory for ever.\"\n\nFOOTNOTES:\n\n[7] For \u03c7\u03ac\u03c1\u03b9\u03bd, (benefit) \u05d0^C, B, L, P, have \u03c7\u03b1\u03c1\u03ac\u03bd (joy.) Though\nWestcott and Hort put this in the text, and \u03c7\u03ac\u03c1\u03b9\u03bd in the margin, most\nscholars are agreed that \u03c7\u03ac\u03c1\u03b9\u03bd is the Apostle's word, and \u03c7\u03b1\u03c1\u03ac\u03bd a slip\nor a correction.\n\n[8] Mention may be made here of another interpretation of ver. 17,\nmodifications of which recur from Chrysostom to Hofmann. In substance\nit is this: \"The things that I purpose, do I purpose according to the\nflesh (_i.e._, with the stubborn consistency of a proud man, who\ndisposes as well as proposes), that with _me_ (\u1f10\u03bc\u03bf\u03af emphatic: _me_, as\nif _I_ were God, always to do what I would like to do) the Yes should\nbe yes, and the No, no--_i.e._, every promise inviolably kept?\" This\nis grammatically quite good, but contextually impossible.\n\n[9] According to Schmiedel, in the words \u03b4\u03b9' \u1f21\u03bc\u1ff6\u03bd ... \u03b4\u03b9' \u1f10\u03bc\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76\n\u03a3\u03b9\u03bb\u03bf\u03c5\u03b1\u03bd\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03a4\u03b9\u03bc\u03bf\u03b8\u03ad\u03bf\u03c5 we ought to discover an emphatic reference, by\nway of contrast, to Judaising opponents of Paul in Corinth. These are\nsaid to have brought _another_ Jesus (xi. 4), who was _not\u00ec_ God's\n\u1f34\u03b4\u03b9\u03bf\u03c2 \u03c5\u1f31\u1f78\u03c2 in Paul's sense (Rom. viii. 32), and in whom there _was_\nYea and Nay--namely, the confirmation of the promises to the Jews or\nthose who became Jews to receive them, and the refusal of the promises\nto the Gentiles as such. It needs a keen scent to discover this, and\nas the Corinthians read without a commentator it would probably be\nthrown away upon them.\n\n\n\n\n IV\n\n _CHRISTIAN MYSTERIES_\n\n \"Now He that stablisheth us with you in Christ, and anointed us,\n is God; who also sealed us, and gave _us_ the earnest of the\n Spirit in our hearts.\"--2 COR. i. 21, 22 (R.V.).\n\n\nIt is not easy to show the precise connexion between these words and\nthose which immediately precede. Possibly it is emotional, rather than\nlogical. The Apostle's heart swells as he contemplates in the Gospel\nthe goodness and faithfulness of God; and though his argument is\ncomplete when he has exhibited the Gospel in that light, his mind\ndwells upon it involuntarily, past the mere point of proof; he lingers\nover the wonderful experience which Christians have of the rich and\nsure mercies. Those who try to make out a more precise sequence of\nthought than this are not very successful. Of course it is apparent\nthat the keynote of the passage is in harmony with that of the\nprevious verses. The ideas of \"stablishing,\" of \"sealing,\" and of an\n\"earnest,\" are all of one family; they are all, as it were, variations\nof the one mighty _affirmation_ which has been made of God's promises\nin Christ. From this point of view they have an argumentative value.\nThey suggest that God, in all sorts of ways, makes believers as sure\nof the Gospel, and as constant to it, as He has made it sure and\ncertain to them; and thus they exclude more decisively than ever the\nidea that the minister of the Gospel can be a man of Yes and No. But\nthough this is true, it fails to do justice to the word on which the\nemphasis falls--namely, God. This, according to some interpreters, is\ndone, if we suppose the whole passage to be, in the first instance, a\ndisclaimer of any false inference which might be drawn from the words,\n\"to the glory of God _by us_.\" \"By us,\" Paul writes; for it was\nthrough the apostolic preaching that men were led to receive the\nGospel, to look at God's promises, confirmed in Christ, with an\nappropriating Amen to His glory; but he hastens to add that it was God\nhimself whose grace in its various workings was the beginning, middle,\nand end both of their faith and of their preaching. This seems to me\nrather artificial, and I do not think more than a connexion in\nsentiment, rather than in argument, can be insisted upon.\n\nBut setting this question aside, the interpretation of the two verses\nis of much interest. They contain some of the most peculiar and\ncharacteristic words of the New Testament--words to which, it is to be\nfeared, many readers attach no very distinct idea. The simplest plan\nis to take the assertions one by one, as if God were the subject.\nGrammatically this is incorrect, for \u0398\u03b5\u03cc\u03c2 is certainly the predicate;\nbut for the elucidation of the meaning this may be disregarded.\n\n(1) First of all, then, God confirms us into Christ. \"Us,\" of course,\nmeans St. Paul and the preachers whom he associates with\nhimself,--Silas and Timothy. But when he adds \"with you,\" he includes\nthe Corinthians also, and all believers. He does not claim for himself\nany stedfastness in Christ, or any trustworthiness as dependent upon\nit, which he would on principle refuse to others. God, who makes His\npromises sure to those who receive them, gives those who receive them\na firm grasp of the promises. Christ is here, with all the wealth of\ngrace in Him, indubitable, unmistakable; and what God has done on that\nside, He does on the other also. He confirms believers into Christ. He\nmakes their attachment to Christ, their possession of Him, a thing\nindubitable and irreversible. Salvation, to use the words of St. John,\nis true _in Him and in them_; in them, so far as God's purpose and\nwork go, as much as in Him. He who is confirmed into Christ is in\nprinciple as trustworthy, as absolutely to be depended upon, as Christ\nHimself. The same character of pure truth is common to them both.\nChrist's existence as the Saviour, in whom all God's promises are\nguaranteed, and Paul's existence as a saved man with a sure grasp on\nall these promises, are alike proofs that God is faithful; the truth\nof God stands behind them both. It is to this that the appeal of vv.\n15-20 is virtually made; it is this in the long-run which is called in\nquestion when the trustworthiness of Paul is impeached.\n\nAll this, it may be said, is ideal; but in what sense is it so? Not in\nthe sense that it is fanciful or unreal; but in the sense that the\ndivine law of our life, and the divine action upon our life, are\nrepresented in it. It is our calling as Christian people to be\nstedfast in Christ. Such stedfastness God is ever seeking to impart,\nand in striving to attain to it we can always appeal to Him for help.\nIt is the opposite of instability; in a special sense it is the\nopposite of untrustworthiness. If we are letting God have His way with\nus in this respect, we are persons who can always be depended upon,\nand depended upon for conduct in keeping with the goodness and\nfaithfulness of God, into which we have been confirmed by Him.\n\n(2) From this general truth, with its application to all believers, the\nApostle passes to another of more limited range. By including the\nCorinthians with himself in the first clause, he virtually excludes them\nin the second--\"God anointed us.\" It is true that the New Testament\nspeaks of an anointing which is common to all believers--\"_Ye_ have an\nanointing from the Holy One; ye all know\" (1 John ii. 20): but here, on\nthe contrary, something special is meant. This can only be the\nconsecration of Paul, and of those for whom he speaks, to the apostolic\nor evangelistic ministry. It is worth noticing that in the New Testament\nthe act of anointing is never ascribed to any one but God. The only\nunction which qualifies for service in the Christian dispensation, or\nwhich confers dignity in the Christian community, is the unction from on\nhigh. \"God anointed Jesus of Nazareth with the Holy Ghost and with\npower,\" and it is the participation in this great anointing which\ncapacitates any one to work in the Gospel.[10] Paul undoubtedly claimed,\nin virtue of his divine call to apostleship, a peculiar authority in the\nChurch; but we cannot define any peculiarity in his possession of the\nSpirit. The great gift which must be held in some sense by all\nChristians--\"for if any man have not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of\nHis\"--was in him intensified, or specialised, for the work he had to do.\nBut it is one Spirit in him and in us, and that is why we do not find\nthe exercise of his authority alien or galling. It is authority\ndivorced from \"unction\"--authority without this divine\nqualification--against which the Christian spirit rebels. And though\n\"unction\" cannot be defined; though no material guarantee can be given\nor taken for the possession of the Spirit; though a merely historical\nsuccession is, so far as this spiritual competence and dignity are\nconcerned, a mere irrelevance; though, as Vinet said, we think of\nunction rather when it is absent than when it is present,--still, the\nthing itself is recognisable enough. It bears witness to itself, as\nlight does; it carries its own authority, its own dignity, with it; it\nis the _ultima ratio_, the last court of appeal, in the Christian\ncommunity. It may be that Paul is preparing already, by this reference\nto his commission, for the bolder assertion of his authority at a later\nstage.\n\n(3) These two actions of God, however--the establishing of believers\nin Christ, which goes on continually (\u03b2\u03b5\u03b2\u03b1\u03b9\u1ff6\u03bd), and the consecration\nof Paul to the apostleship, which was accomplished once for all\n(\u03c7\u03c1\u03af\u03c3\u03b1\u03c2)--go back to prior actions, in which, again, all believers\nhave an interest. They have a common basis in the great deeds of grace\nin which the Christian life began. God, he says, is He who also sealed\nus, and gave the earnest of the Spirit in our hearts.\n\n\"He also sealed us.\" It seems strange that so figurative a word should\nbe used without a hint of explanation, and we must assume that it was\nso familiar in the Church that the right application could be taken\nfor granted. The middle voice (\u03c3\u03c6\u03c1\u03b1\u03b3\u03b9\u03c3\u03ac\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd\u03bf\u03c2) makes it certain that\nthe main idea is, \"He marked us as His own.\" This is the sense in\nwhich the word is frequently used in the Book of Revelation: the\nservants of God are sealed on their foreheads, that they may be\nrecognised as His. But what is the seal? Under the Old Testament, the\nmark which God set upon His people--the covenant sign by which they\nwere identified as His--was circumcision. Under the New Testament,\nwhere everything carnal has passed away, and religious materialism is\nabolished, the sign is no longer in the body; we are sealed with the\nHoly Spirit of promise (Eph. i. 13 f.). But the past tense (\"He\n_sealed_ us\"), and its recurrence in Eph. i. 13 (\"ye _were_ sealed\"),\nsuggest a very definite reference of this word, and beyond doubt it\nalludes to baptism. In the New Testament, baptism and the giving of\nthe Holy Spirit are regularly connected with each other. Christians\nare born of water and of the Spirit. \"Repent,\" is the earliest\npreaching of the Gospel (Acts ii. 38), \"and be baptised every one of\nyou, ... and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost.\" In early\nChristian writers the use of the word \"seal\" (\u03c3\u03c6\u03c1\u03b1\u03b3\u03af\u03c2) as a technical\nterm for baptism is practically universal; and when we combine this\npractice with the New Testament usage in question, the inference is\ninevitable. God puts His _seal_ upon us, He _marks_ us as His own,\nwhen we are baptised.[11]\n\nBut the seal is not baptism as a ceremonial act. It is neither\nimmersion nor sprinkling nor any other mode of lustration which marks\nus out as God's. The seal by which \"the Lord knoweth them that are\nHis\" is His Spirit; it is the impress of His Spirit upon them. When\nthat impress can be traced upon our souls, by Him, or by us, or by\nothers, then we have the witness in ourselves; the Spirit bears\nwitness with our spirits that we are children of God.\n\nBut of all words \"spirit\" is the vaguest; and if we had nothing but\nthe word itself to guide us, we should either lapse into superstitious\nideas about the virtue of the sacrament, or into fanatical ideas about\nincommunicable inward experiences in which God marked us for His own.\nThe New Testament provides us with a more excellent way than either;\nit gives the word \"spirit\" a rich but definite moral content; it\ncompels us, if we say we have been sealed with the Spirit, and claimed\nby God as His, to exhibit the distinguishing features of those who are\nHis. \"The Lord is the Spirit\" (2 Cor. iii. 17). To be sealed with the\nSpirit is to bear, in however imperfect a degree, in however\ninconspicuous a style, the image of the heavenly man, the likeness of\nJesus Christ. There are many passages in his Epistles in which St.\nPaul enlarges on the work of the Spirit in the soul; all the various\ndispositions which it creates, all the fruits of the Spirit, may be\nconceived as different parts of the impression made by the seal. We\nmust think of these in detail, if we wish to give the word its\nmeaning; we must think of them in contrast with the unspiritual\nnature, if we wish to give it any edge. Once, say, we walked in the\nlusts of the flesh: has Christ redeemed us, and set on our souls and\nour bodies the seal of His purity? Once we were hot and passionate,\ngiven to angry words and hasty, intemperate deeds: are we sealed now\nwith the meekness and gentleness of Jesus? Once we were grasping and\ncovetous, even to the verge of dishonesty; we could not let money pass\nus, and we could not part with it: have we been sealed with the\nliberality of Him who says, \"It is more blessed to give than to\nreceive\"? Once a wrong rankled in our hearts; the sun went down upon\nour wrath, not once or twice, but a thousand times, and found it as\nimplacable as ever: is that deep brand of vindictiveness effaced now,\nand in its stead imprinted deep the Cross of Christ, where He loved\nus, and gave Himself for us, and prayed, \"Father, forgive them\"? Once\nour conversation was corrupt; it had a taint in it; it startled and\nbetrayed the innocent; it was vile and foolish and unseemly: are these\nthings of the past now? and has Christ set upon our lips the seal of\nHis own grace and truth, of His own purity and love, so that every\nword we speak is good, and brings blessing to those who hear us? These\nthings, and such as these, are the seal of the Spirit. They are Christ\nin us. They are the stamp which God sets upon men when He exhibits\nthem as His own.\n\nThe seal, however, has another use than that of marking and identifying\nproperty. It is a symbol of assurance. It is the answer to a challenge.\nIt is in this sense that it is easiest to apply the figure to baptism.\nBaptism does not, indeed, carry with it the actual possession of all\nthese spiritual features; it is not even, as an _opus operatum_, the\nimplanting of them in the soul; but it is a divine pledge that they are\nwithin our reach; we can appeal to it as an assurance that God has come\nto us in His grace, has claimed us as His own, and is willing to\nconform us to the image of His Son. In this sense, it is legitimate and\nnatural to call it God's seal upon His people.\n\n(4) Side by side with \"He sealed us,\" the Apostle writes, \"He gave the\nearnest of the Spirit in our hearts.\" After what has been said, it is\nobvious that this is another aspect of the same thing. We are sealed\nwith the Spirit, and we get the earnest of the Spirit. In other words,\nthe Spirit is viewed in two characters: first, as a seal; and then as\nan earnest. This last word has a very ancient history. It is found in\nthe Book of Genesis (xxxviii. 18: \u05e2\u05b5\u05e8\u05b8\u05d1\u05d5\u05c4\u05df), and was carried, no\ndoubt, by Ph\u0153nician traders, who had much occasion to use it, both to\nGreece and Italy. From the classical peoples it has come more or less\ndirectly to us. It means properly a small sum of money paid to clench\na bargain, or to ratify an engagement. Where there is an earnest,\nthere is more to follow, and more of essentially the same kind--that\nis what it signifies. Let us apply this now to the expression of St.\nPaul, \"the earnest of the Spirit.\" It means, we must see, that in the\ngift of this Spirit, in that measure in which we now possess it, God\nhas not given all He has to give. On the contrary, He has come under\nan obligation to give more: what we have now is but \"the firstfruits\nof the Spirit\" (Rom. viii. 23). It is an indication and a pledge of\nwhat is yet to be, but bears no proportion to it. All we can say on\nthe basis of this text is, that between the present and the future\ngift--between the earnest and that which it guarantees--there must be\nsome kind of congruity, some affinity which makes the one a natural\nand not an arbitrary reason for believing in the other.\n\nBut the Corinthians were not limited to this text. They had St. Paul's\ngeneral teaching in their minds to interpret it by; and if we wish to\nknow what it meant even for them, we must fill out this vague idea with\nwhat the Apostle tells us elsewhere. Thus in the great text in Ephesians\n(i. 13 f.), so often referred to, he speaks of the Holy Spirit with\nwhich we were sealed as the earnest _of our inheritance_. God has an\n\"inheritance\" in store for us. His Spirit makes us sons; and if sons,\nthen heirs; heirs of God, joint-heirs with Christ. This connexion of the\nSpirit, sonship, and inheritance, is constant in St. Paul; it is one of\nhis most characteristic combinations. What then _is_ the inheritance of\nwhich the Spirit is the earnest? That no one can tell. \"Eye hath not\nseen, nor ear heard, neither have entered into the heart of man, the\nthings that God hath prepared for them that love Him.\" But though we\ncannot tell more precisely, we can say that if the Spirit is the earnest\nof it, it must be in some sense a development of the Spirit; life in an\norder of being which matches the Spirit, and for which the Spirit\nqualifies. If we say it is \"glory,\" then we must remember that only\nChrist in us (the seal of the Spirit) can be _the hope_ of glory.\n\nThe application of this can be made very plain. Our whole life in this\nworld looks to some future, however near or bounded it may be; and\nevery power we perfect, every capacity we acquire, every disposition\nand spirit we foster, is an earnest of something in that future. Here\nis a man who gives himself to the mastery of a trade. He acquires all\nits skill, all its methods, all its resources. There is nothing any\ntradesman can do that he cannot do as well or better. What is that the\nearnest of? What does it ensure, and as it were put into his hand by\nanticipation? It is the earnest of constant employment, of good\nwages, of respect from fellow-workmen, perhaps of wealth. Here, again,\nis a man with the scientific spirit. He is keenly inquisitive about\nthe facts and laws of the world in which we live. Everything is\ninteresting to him--astronomy, physics, chemistry, biology, history.\nWhat is this the earnest of? It is the earnest, probably, of\nscientific achievements of some kind, of intellectual toils and\nintellectual victories. This man will enter into the inheritance of\nscience; he will walk through the kingdoms of knowledge in the length\nof them and the breadth of them, and will claim them as his own. And\nso it is wherever we choose to take our illustrations. Every spirit\nthat dwells in us, and is cultivated and cherished by us, is an\n_earnest_, because it fits and furnishes us for some particular thing.\n_God's_ Spirit also is an earnest of an inheritance which is\nincorruptible, undefiled, imperishable: can we assure ourselves that\nwe have anything in our souls which promises, because it matches with,\nan inheritance like this? When we come to die, this will be a serious\nquestion. The faculties of accumulation, of mechanical skill, of\nscientific research, of trade on a great or a small scale, of\nagreeable social intercourse, of comfortable domestic life, may have\nbeen brought to perfection in us; but can we console ourselves with\nthe thought that _these_ have the earnest of immortality? Do they\nqualify us for, and by qualifying assure us of, the incorruptible\nkingdom? Or do we not see at once that a totally different equipment\nis needed to make men at home there, and that nothing can be the\nearnest of an eternal life of blessedness with God except that Holy\nSpirit with which He seals His own, and through which He makes them,\neven here, partakers of the divine nature?\n\nWe cannot study these words without becoming conscious of the immense\nenlargement which the Christian religion has brought to the human\nmind, of the vast expansion of hope which is due to the Gospel, and at\nthe same time of the moral soundness and sobriety with which that hope\nis conceived. The promises of God were first really apprehended in\nJesus Christ; in Him as He lived and died and rose again from the\ndead, in Him especially as He lives in immortal glory, men first saw\nwhat God was able and willing to do for them, and they saw this in its\ntrue relations. They saw it under its moral and spiritual conditions.\nIt was not a future unconnected with the present, or connected with it\nin an arbitrary or incalculable way. It was a future which had its\nearnest in the present, a guarantee not alien to it, but akin--the\nSpirit of Christ implanted in the heart, the likeness of Christ sealed\nupon the nature. The glorious inheritance was the inheritance, not of\nstrangers, but of sons; and it still becomes sure as the Spirit of\nsonship is received, and fades into incredibility when that Spirit is\nextinguished or depressed. If we could live in the Spirit with the\ncompleteness of Christ, or even of St. Paul, we should feel that we\nreally had an earnest of immortality; the glory of heaven would be as\ncertain to us as the faithfulness of God to His promise.\n\nFOOTNOTES:\n\n[10] Observe the play on the words in \u03b2\u03b5\u03b2\u03b1\u03b9\u1ff6\u03bd \u03b5\u1f30\u03c2 \u03a7 \u03c1 \u03b9 \u03c3 \u03c4 \u03cc \u03bd and\n\u03a7 \u03c1 \u03af \u03c3 \u03b1 \u03c2.\n\n[11] When we consider the New Testament use of this idea (cf. Rom. iv.\n11; Rev. vii. 2 ff.; Eph. i. 13 f., and this passage), and remember\nthat Paul and John can have had nothing to do with the Greek\nmysteries, it will be apparent that to adduce the ecclesiastical use\nof \u03c3\u03c6\u03c1\u03b1\u03b3\u03af\u03c2 as a proof that the conceptions current in these mysteries\nhad a powerful influence from the earliest times on the Christian\nconception of baptism is beside the mark. One of the earliest examples\noutside the New Testament is in the Shepherd of Hermas, _Simil._,\nviii. 6: \u03bf\u1f31 \u03c0\u03b9\u03c3\u03c4\u03b5\u03cd\u03c3\u03b1\u03bd\u03c4\u03b5\u03c2 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03b5\u1f30\u03bb\u03b7\u03c6\u03cc\u03c4\u03b5\u03c2 \u03c4\u1f74\u03bd \u03c3\u03c6\u03c1\u03b1\u03b3\u1fd6\u03b4\u03b1 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c4\u03b5\u03b8\u03bb\u03b1\u03ba\u03cc\u03c4\u03b5\u03c2\n\u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u1f74\u03bd \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03bc\u1f74 \u03c4\u03b7\u03c1\u03ae\u03c3\u03b1\u03bd\u03c4\u03b5\u03c2 \u1f51\u03b3\u03b9\u1fc6. This figure of _breaking the seal_, by\nfalling into sin and losing what baptism confers, is common. Sometimes\nit is varied: \"Keep the flesh pure, \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c4\u1f74\u03bd \u03c3\u03c6\u03c1\u03b1\u03b3\u1fd6\u03b4\u03b1 \u1f04\u03c3\u03c0\u03b9\u03bb\u03bf\u03bd,\" in 2\nClem. viii. 6. This may be made to carry superstition, but there is\nnothing superstitious or unscriptural in it to begin with.\n\n\n\n\n V\n\n _A PASTOR'S HEART_\n\n \"But I call God for a witness upon my soul, that to spare you I\n forbare to come unto Corinth. Not that we have lordship over your\n faith, but are helpers of your joy: for by faith ye stand. But I\n determined this for myself, that I would not come again to you\n with sorrow. For if I make you sorry, who then is he that maketh\n me glad, but he that is made sorry by me? And I wrote this very\n thing, lest, when I came, I should have sorrow from them of whom I\n ought to rejoice; having confidence in you all, that my joy is\n _the joy_ of you all. For out of much affliction and anguish of\n heart I wrote unto you with many tears; not that ye should be made\n sorry, but that ye might know the love which I have more\n abundantly unto you.\"--2 COR. i. 23-ii. 4 (R.V.).\n\n\nWhen Paul came to the end of the paragraph in which he defends himself\nfrom the charge of levity and untrustworthiness by appealing to the\nnature of the Gospel which he preached, he seems to have felt that it\nwas hardly sufficient for his purpose. It might be perfectly true that\nthe Gospel was one mighty affirmation, with no dubiety or\ninconsistency about it; it might be as true that it was a supreme\ntestimony to the faithfulness of God; but bad men, or suspicious men,\nwould not admit that its character covered his. Their own\ninsincerities would keep them from understanding its power to change\nits loyal ministers into its own likeness, and to stamp them with its\nown simplicity and truth. The mere invention of the argument in vv.\n18-20 is of itself the highest possible testimony to the ideal height\nat which the Apostle lived; no man conscious of duplicity could ever\nhave had it occur to him. But it had the defect of being too good for\nhis purpose; the foolish and the false could see a triumphant reply to\nit; and he leaves it for a solemn asseveration of the reason which\nactually kept him from carrying out his first intention. \"I call God\nto witness against my soul, that sparing you I forbore to come[12] to\nCorinth.\" The soul is the seat of life; he stakes his life, as it\nwere, in God's sight, upon the truth of his words. It was not\nconsideration for himself, in any selfish spirit, but consideration\nfor them, which explained his change of purpose. If he had carried out\nhis intention, and gone to Corinth, he would have had to do so, as he\nsays in 1 Cor. iv. 21, with a rod, and this would not have been\npleasant either for him or for them.\n\nThis is very plain--plain even to the dullest; the Apostle has no\nsooner set it down than he feels it is too plain. \"To spare us,\" he\nhears the Corinthians say to themselves as they read: \"who is he that\nhe should take this tone in speaking to us?\" And so he hastens to\nanticipate and deprecate their touchy criticism: \"Not that we lord it\nover your faith, but we are helpers of your joy; as far as faith is\nconcerned, your position, of course, is secure.\"\n\nThis is a very interesting aside; the digressions in St. Paul, as in\nPlato, are sometimes more attractive than the arguments. It shows us,\nfor one thing, the freedom of the Christian faith. Those who have\nreceived the Gospel have all the responsibilities of mature men; they\nhave come to their majority as spiritual beings; they are not, in\ntheir character and standing as Christians, subject to arbitrary and\nirresponsible interference on the part of others. Paul himself was the\ngreat preacher of this spiritual emancipation: he gloried in the\nliberty with which Christ made men free. For him the days of bondage\nwere over; there was no subjection for the Christian to any custom or\ntradition of men, no enslavement of his conscience to the judgment or\nthe will of others, no coercion of the spirit except by itself. He had\ngreat confidence in this Gospel and in its power to produce generous\nand beautiful characters. That it was capable of perversion also he\nknew very well. It was open to the infusion of self-will; in the\nintoxication of freedom from arbitrary and unspiritual restraint, men\nmight forget that the believer was bound to be a law to himself, that\nhe was free, not in lawless self-will, but only in the Lord.\nNevertheless, the principle of freedom was too sacred to be tampered\nwith; it was necessary both for the education of the conscience and\nfor the enrichment of spiritual life with the most various and\nindependent types of goodness; and the Apostle took all the risks, and\nall the inconveniences even, rather than limit it in the least.\n\nThis passage shows us one of the inconveniences. The newly\nenfranchised are mightily sensible of their freedom, and it is\nextremely difficult to tell them of their faults. At the very mention\nof authority all that is bad in them, as well as all that is good, is\non the alert; and spiritual independence and the liberty of the\nChristian people have been represented and defended again and again,\nnot only by an awful sense of responsibility to Christ, which lifts\nthe lowliest lives into supreme greatness, but by pride, bigotry,\nmoral insolence, and every bad passion. What is to be done in such\ncases as these, where liberty has forgotten the law of Christ? It is\ncertainly not to be denied in principle: Paul, even with the peculiar\nposition of an apostle, and of the spiritual father of those to whom\nhe writes (1 Cor. iv. 15), does not claim such an authority over their\nfaith--that is, over the people themselves in their character of\nbelievers--as a master has over his slaves. Their position as\nChristians is secure; it is taken for granted by him as by them; and\nthis being so, no arbitrary _ipse dixit_ can settle anything in\ndispute between them; he can issue no orders to the Church such as the\nRoman Emperor could issue to his soldiers. He may appeal to them on\nspiritual grounds; he may enlighten their consciences by interpreting\nto them the law of Christ; he may try to reach them by praise or\nblame; but simple compulsion is not one of his resources. If St. Paul\nsays this, occupying as he does a position which contains in itself a\nnatural authority which most ministers can never have, ought not all\nofficial persons and classes in the Church to beware of the claims\nthey make for themselves? A clerical hierarchy, such as has been\ndeveloped and perfected in the Church of Rome, does lord it over\nfaith; it _legislates_ for the laity, both in faith and practice,\nwithout their co-operation, or even their consent; it keeps the _c\u0153tus\nfidelium_, the mass of believing men, which _is_ the Church, in a\nperpetual minority. All this, in a so-called apostolic succession, is\nnot only anti-apostolic, but anti-Christian. It is the confiscation of\nChristian freedom; the keeping of believers in leading-strings all\ntheir days, lest in their liberty they should go astray. In the\nProtestant Churches, on the other hand, the danger on the whole is of\nthe opposite kind. We are too jealous of authority. We are too proud\nof our own competence. We are too unwilling, individually, to be\ntaught and corrected. We resent, I will not say criticism, but the\nmost serious and loving voice which speaks to us to disapprove. Now\nliberty, when it does not deepen the sense of responsibility to God\nand to the brotherhood--and it does not always do so--is an anarchic\nand disintegrating force. In all the Churches it exists, to some\nextent, in this degraded form; and it is this which makes Christian\neducation difficult, and Church discipline often impossible. These are\nserious evils, and we can only overcome them if we cultivate the sense\nof responsibility at the same time that we maintain the principle of\nliberty, remembering that it is those only of whom he says, \"Ye were\nbought with a price\" (and are therefore Christ's slaves), to whom St.\nPaul also gives the charge: \"Be not ye slaves of men.\"\n\nThis passage not only illustrates the freedom of Christian faith, it\npresents us with an ideal of the Christian ministry. \"We are not lords\nover your faith,\" says St. Paul, \"but we are helpers of your joy.\" It\nis implied in this that joy is the very end and element of the\nChristian life, and that it is the minister's duty to be at war with\nall that restrains it, and to co-operate in all that leads to it.\nHere, one would say, is something in which all can agree: all human\nsouls long for joy, however much they may differ about the spheres of\nlaw and liberty. But have not most Christian people, and most\nChristian congregations, something here to accuse themselves of? Do\nnot many of us bear false witness against the Gospel on this very\npoint? Who that came into most churches, and looked at the\nuninterested faces, and hearkened to the listless singing, would feel\nthat the soul of the religion, so languidly honoured, was mere\njoy--joy unspeakable, if we trust the Apostles, and full of glory? It\nis ingratitude which makes us forget this. We begin to grow blind to\nthe great things which lie at the basis of our faith; the love of God\nin Jesus Christ--that love in which He died for us upon the\ntree--begins to lose its newness and its wonder; we speak of it\nwithout apprehension and without feeling; it does not make our hearts\nburn within us any more; we have no joy in it. Yet we may be sure of\nthis--that we can have no joy without it. And he is our best friend,\nthe truest minister of God to us, who helps us to the place where the\nlove of God is poured out in our hearts in its omnipotence, and we\nrenew our joy in it. In doing so, it may be necessary for the minister\nto cause pain by the way. There is no joy, nor any possibility of it,\nwhere evil is tolerated. There is no joy where sin has been taken\nunder the patronage of those who call themselves by Christ's name.\nThere is no joy where pride is in arms in the soul, and is reinforced\nby suspicion, by obstinacy, even by jealousy and hate, all waiting to\ndispute the authority of the preacher of repentance. When these evil\nspirits are overcome, and cast out, which may only be after a painful\nconflict, joy will have its opportunity again,--joy, whose right it is\nto reign in the Christian soul and the Christian community. Of all\nevangelistic forces, this joy is the most potent; and for that, above\nall other reasons, it should be cherished wherever Christian people\nwish to work the work of their Lord.\n\nAfter this little digression on the freedom of the faith, and on joy as\nthe element of the Christian life, Paul returns to his defence. \"To\nspare you I forbore to come; for I made up my own mind on this, not to\ncome to you a second time in sorrow.\" Why was he so determined about\nthis? He explains in the second verse. It is because all his joy is\nbound up in the Corinthians, so that if he grieves them he has no one\nleft to gladden him except those whom he has grieved--in other words, he\nhas no joy at all. And he not only made up his mind definitely on this;\nhe wrote also in exactly this sense: he did not wish, when he came, to\nhave sorrow from those from whom he ought to have joy. In that desire to\nspare himself, as well as them, he counted on their sympathy; he was\nsure that his own joy was the joy of every one of them, and that they\nwould appreciate his motives in not fulfilling a promise, the fulfilment\nof which in the circumstances would only have brought grief both to them\nand him. The delay has given them time to put right what was amiss in\ntheir Church, and has ensured a joyful time to them all when his visit\nis actually accomplished.\n\nThere are some grammatical and historical difficulties here which claim\nattention. The most discussed is that of the first verse: what is the\nprecise meaning of \u03c4\u1f78 \u03bc\u1f74 \u03c0\u03ac\u03bb\u03b9\u03bd \u1f10\u03bd \u03bb\u03cd\u03c0\u1fc3 \u03c0\u03c1\u1f78\u03c2 \u1f51\u03bc\u1fb6\u03c2 \u1f10\u03bb\u03b8\u03b5\u1fd6\u03bd? There is no\ndoubt that this is the correct order of the words, and just as little, I\nthink, that the natural meaning is that Paul had once visited Corinth in\ngrief, and was resolved not to repeat such a visit. So the words are\ntaken by Meyer, Hofmann, Schmiedel, and others. The visit in question\ncannot have been that on occasion of which the Church was founded; and\nas the connexion between this passage and the last chapter of the First\nEpistle is as close as can be conceived (see the Introduction), it\ncannot have fallen between the two: the only other supposition is, that\nit took place before the First Epistle was written. This is the opinion\nof Lightfoot, Meyer, and Weiss; and it is not fatal to it that no such\nvisit is mentioned elsewhere--_e.g._, in the book of Acts. Still, the\ninterpretation is not essential; and if we can get over chap. xiii. 2,\nit is quite possible to agree with Heinrici that Paul had only been in\nCorinth once, and that what he means in ver. 1 here is: \"I determined\nnot to carry out my purpose of revisiting you, in sorrow.\"\n\nThere is a difficulty of another sort in ver. 2. One's first thought\nis to read \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c4\u03af\u03c2 \u1f41 \u03b5\u1f50\u03c6\u03c1\u03b1\u03af\u03bd\u03c9\u03bd \u03bc\u03b5 \u03ba.\u03c4.\u03bb., as a real singular, with a\nreference, intelligible though indefinite, to the notorious but\npenitent sinner of Corinth. \"I vex you, I grant it; but where does my\njoy come from--the joy without which I am resolved not to visit\nyou--except from one who is vexed by me?\" The bad man's repentance had\nmade Paul glad, and there is a worthy considerateness in this\nindefinite way of designating him. This interpretation has commended\nitself to so sound a judge as Bengel, and though more recent scholars\nreject it with practical unanimity, it is difficult to be sure that it\nis wrong. The alternative is to generalise the \u03c4\u03af\u03c2, and make the\nquestion mean: \"If I vex you, where can I find joy? All my joy is in\nyou, and to see you grieved leaves me absolutely joyless.\"\n\nA third difficulty is the reference of \u1f14\u03b3\u03c1\u03b1\u03c8\u03b1 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03c4\u03bf \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u1f78 in ver. 3.\nLanguage very similar is found in ver. 9 (\u03b5\u1f30\u03c2 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03c4\u03bf \u03b3\u1f70\u03c1 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f14\u03b3\u03c1\u03b1\u03c8\u03b1),\nand again in chap. vii. 8-12 (\u1f10\u03bb\u03cd\u03c0\u03b7\u03c3\u03b1 \u1f51\u03bc\u1fb6\u03c2 \u1f10\u03bd \u03c4\u1fc7 \u1f10\u03c0\u03b9\u03c3\u03c4\u03bf\u03bb\u1fc7). It is very\nnatural to think here of our First Epistle. It served the purpose\ncontemplated by the letter here described; it told of Paul's change\nof purpose; it warned the Corinthians to rectify what was amiss, and\nso to order their affairs that he might come, not with a rod, but in\nlove and in the spirit of meekness; or, as he says here, not to have\nsorrow, but, what he was entitled to, joy from his visit. All that is\nalleged against this is that our First Epistle does not suit the\ndescription given of the writing in ver. 4: \"out of much affliction\nand anguish of heart I wrote unto you with many tears.\" But when those\nparts of the First Epistle are read, in which St. Paul is not\nanswering questions submitted to him by the Church, but writing out of\nhis heart upon its spiritual condition, this will appear a dubious\nassertion. What a pain must have been at his heart, when such\npassionate words broke from him as these: \"Is Christ divided? Was Paul\ncrucified for you?--What is Apollos, and what is Paul?--With me it is\na very little thing to be judged by you.--Though ye have ten thousand\ninstructors in Christ, yet have ye not many fathers: for in Christ\nJesus I begot you through the Gospel.--I will know, not the speech of\nthem that are puffed up, but the power.\" Not to speak of the fifth and\nsixth chapters, words like these justify us in supposing that the\nFirst Epistle may be, and in all probability is, meant.[13]\n\nPutting these details aside, as of mainly historical interest, let us\nlook rather at the spirit of this passage. It reveals, more clearly\nperhaps than any passage in the New Testament, the essential\nqualification of the Christian minister--a heart pledged to his\nbrethren in the love of Christ. That is the only possible basis of an\nauthority which can plead its own and its Master's cause against the\naberrations of spiritual liberty, and there is always both room and\nneed for it in the Church. Certainly it is the hardest of all\nauthorities to win, and the costliest to maintain, and therefore\nsubstitutes for it are innumerable. The poorest are those that are\nmerely official, where a minister appeals to his standing as a member\nof a separate order, and expects men to reverence that. If this was\nonce possible in Christendom, if it is still possible where men\nsecretly wish to shunt their spiritual responsibilities upon others,\nit is not possible where emancipation has been grasped either in an\nanarchic or in a Christian spirit. Let the great idea of liberty, and\nof all that is cognate with liberty, once dawn upon their souls, and\nmen will never sink again to the recognition of anything as an\nauthority that does not attest itself in a purely spiritual way.\n\"Orders\" will mean nothing to them but an arrogant unreality, which in\nthe name of all that is free and Christian they are bound to contemn.\nIt will be the same, too, with any authority which has merely an\nintellectual basis. A professional education, even in theology, gives\nno man authority to meddle with another in his character as a\nChristian. The University and the Divinity Schools can confer no\ncompetence here. Nothing that distinguishes a man from his fellows,\nnothing in virtue of which he takes a place of superiority apart: on\nthe contrary, that love only which makes him entirely one with them in\nJesus Christ, can ever entitle him to interpose. If their joy is his\njoy; if to grieve them, even for their good, is his grief; if the\ncloud and sunshine of their lives cast their darkness and their light\nimmediately upon him; if he shrinks from the faintest approach to\nself-assertion, yet would sacrifice anything to perfect their joy in\nthe Lord,--then he is in the true apostolical succession; and whatever\nauthority may rightly be exercised, where the freedom of the spirit is\nthe law, may rightly be exercised by him. What is required of\nChristian workers in every degree--of ministers and teachers, of\nparents and friends, of all Christian people with the cause of Christ\nat heart--is a greater expenditure of soul on their work. Here is a\nwhole paragraph of St. Paul, made up almost entirely of \"grief\" and\n\"joy\"; what depth of feeling lies behind it! If this is alien to us in\nour work for Christ, we need not wonder that our work does not tell.\n\nAnd if this is true generally, it is especially true when the work we\nhave to do is that of rebuking sin. There are few things which try\nmen, and show what spirit they are of, more searchingly than this. We\nlike to be on God's side, and to show our zeal for Him, and we are far\ntoo ready to put all our bad passions at His service. But these are a\ngift which He declines. Our wrath does not work His righteousness--a\nlesson that even good men, of a kind, are very slow to learn. To\ndenounce sin, and to declaim about it, is the easiest and cheapest\nthing in the world: one could not do less where sin is concerned,\nunless he did nothing at all. Yet how common denunciation is. It seems\nalmost to be taken for granted as the natural and praiseworthy mode of\ndealing with evil. People assail the faults of the community, or even\nof their brethren in the Church, with violence, with temper, with the\ntone, often, of injured innocence. They think that when they do so\nthey are doing God service; but surely we should have learned by this\ntime that nothing could be so unlike God, so unfaithful and\npreposterous as a testimony for Him. God Himself overcomes evil with\ngood; Christ vanquishes the sin of the world by taking the burden of\nit on Himself; and if we wish to have part in the same work, there is\nonly the same method open to us. Depend upon it, we shall not make\nothers weep for that for which we have not wept; we shall not make\nthat touch the hearts of others which has not first touched our own.\nThat is the law which God has established in the world; He submitted\nto it Himself in the person of His Son, and He requires us to submit\nto it. Paul was certainly a very fiery man; he could explode, or flame\nup, with far more effect than most people; yet it was not there that\nhis great strength lay. It was in the passionate tenderness that\nchecked that vehement temper, and made the once haughty spirit say\nwhat he says here: \"Out of much affliction and anguish of heart, I\nwrote unto you with many tears, not that you might be grieved, but\nthat you might know the love which I have more abundantly toward you.\"\nIn words like these the very spirit speaks which is God's power to\nsubdue and save the sinful.\n\nIt is worth dwelling upon this, because it is so fundamental, and yet so\nslowly learned. Even Christian ministers, who ought to know the mind of\nChrist, almost universally, at least in the beginning of their work,\nwhen they preach about evil, lapse into the scolding tone. It is of no\nuse whatever in the pulpit, and of just as little in the Sunday-school\nclass, in the home, or in any relation in which we seek to exercise\nmoral authority. The one basis for that authority is love; and the\ncharacteristic of love in the presence of evil is not that it becomes\nangry, or insolent, or disdainful, but that it takes the burden and the\nshame of the evil to itself. The hard, proud heart is impotent; the mere\nofficial is impotent, whether he call himself priest or pastor; all hope\nand help lie in those who have learned of the Lamb of God who bore the\nsin of the world. It is soul-travail like His, attesting love like His;\nthat wins all the victories in which He can rejoice.\n\nFOOTNOTES:\n\n[12] The R.V. \"forbare to come\" has the same vagueness as \u03bf\u1f50\u03ba\u03ad\u03c4\u03b9\n\u1f26\u03bb\u03b8\u03bf\u03bd, which may mean (1) \"I came not as yet\"--so A.V.; or (2) \"I came\nnot again\"; or (3) \"I came no more.\"\n\n[13] To suppose the reference to be to an epistle carried by Titus and\nnow lost, is to suppose what is incapable of proof or disproof. To\ntake \u1f14\u03b3\u03c1\u03b1\u03c8\u03b1 as \"epistolary\" aorist, and translate \"I write,\" is\ngrammatically, but only grammatically, possible. The supposed\nreference to chaps, x. i-xiii. 10 as a separate epistle is noticed in\nthe Introduction.\n\n\n\n\n VI\n\n _CHURCH DISCIPLINE_\n\n \"But if any hath caused sorrow, he hath caused sorrow, not to me,\n but in part (that I press not too heavily) to you all. Sufficient\n to such a one is this punishment which was _inflicted_ by the\n many; so that contrariwise ye should rather forgive him and\n comfort him, lest by any means such a one should be swallowed up\n with his overmuch sorrow. Wherefore I beseech you to confirm your\n love toward him. For to this end also did I write, that I might\n know the proof of you, whether ye are obedient in all things. But\n to whom ye forgive anything, I _forgive_ also: for what I also\n have forgiven, if I have forgiven anything, for your sakes _have I\n forgiven it_ in the person of Christ; that no advantage may be\n gained over us by Satan: for we are not ignorant of his\n devices.\"--2 COR. ii. 5-11 (R.V.).\n\n\nThe foregoing paragraph of the Epistle has said a great deal about\nsorrow, the sorrow felt by St. Paul on the one hand, and the sorrow he\nwas reluctant to cause the Corinthians on the other. In the passage\nbefore us reference is evidently made to the person who was ultimately\nresponsible for all this trouble. If much in it is indefinite to us,\nand only leaves a doubtful impression, it was clear enough for those\nto whom it was originally addressed; and that very indefiniteness has\nits lesson. There are some things to which it is sufficient, and more\nthan sufficient, to allude; least said is best said. And even when\nplain-speaking has been indispensable, a stage arrives at which there\nis no more to be gained by it; if the subject _must_ be referred to,\nthe utmost generality of reference is best. Here the Apostle\ndiscusses the case of a person who had done something extremely bad;\nbut with the sinner's repentance assured, it is both characteristic\nand worthy of him that neither here nor in chap. vii. does he mention\nthe name either of offender or offence. It is perhaps too much to\nexpect students of his writings, who wish to trace out in detail all\nthe events of his life, and to give the utmost possible definiteness\nto all its situations, to be content with this obscurity; but students\nof his spirit--Christian people reading the Bible for practical\nprofit--do not need to perplex themselves as to this penitent man's\nidentity. He may have been the person mentioned in 1 Cor. v. who had\nmarried his stepmother; he may have been some one who had been guilty\nof a personal insult to the Apostle: the main point is that he was a\nsinner whom the discipline of the Church had saved.[14]\n\nThe Apostle had been expressing himself about his sorrow with great\nvehemence, and he is careful in his very first words to make it plain\nthat the offence which had caused such sorrow was no personal matter.\nIt concerned the Church as well as him. \"If any one hath caused\nsorrow, he hath not caused sorrow to me, but in part to you all.\" To\nsay more than this would be to exaggerate (\u1f10\u03c0\u03b9\u03b2\u03b1\u03c1\u03b5\u1fd6\u03bd).[15] The Church,\nin point of fact, had not been moved either as universally or as\nprofoundly as it should have been by the offence of this wicked man.\nThe penalty imposed upon him, whatever it may have been, had not been\nimposed by a unanimous vote, but only by a majority; there were some\nwho sympathised with him, and would have been less severe.[16] Still,\nit had brought conviction of his sin to the offender; he could not\nbrazen it out against such consenting condemnation as there was; he\nwas overwhelmed with penitential grief. This is why the Apostle says,\n\"Sufficient to such a one is this punishment which was inflicted by\nthe majority.\" It has served the purpose of all disciplinary\ntreatment; and having done so, must now be superseded by an opposite\nline of action. \"Contrariwise ye should rather forgive him and comfort\nhim, lest by any means such a one should be swallowed up with his\novermuch sorrow.\" In St. Paul's sentence \"such a one\" comes last, with\nthe emphasis of compassion upon it. He had been \"such a one,\" to begin\nwith, as it was a pain and a shame even to think about; he is \"such a\none,\" now, as the angels in heaven are rejoicing over; \"such a one\" as\nthe Apostle, having the spirit of Him who received sinners, regards\nwith profoundest pity and yearning; \"such a one\" as the Church ought\nto meet with pardoning and restoring love, lest grief sink into\ndespair, and the sinner cut himself off from hope. To prevent such a\ndeplorable result, the Corinthians are by some formal action (\u03ba\u03c5\u03c1\u1ff6\u03c3\u03b1\u03b9:\ncf. Gal. iii. 15) to forgive him, and receive him again as a brother;\nand in their forgiveness and welcome he is to find the pledge of the\ngreat love of God.\n\nThis whole passage is of interest from the light which it throws upon\nthe discipline of the Church; or, to use less technical and more\ncorrect language, the Christian treatment of the erring.\n\nIt shows us, for one thing, the aim of all discipline: it is, in the\nlast resort, the restoration of the fallen. The Church has, of course,\nan interest of its own to guard; it is bound to protest against all\nthat is inconsistent with its character; it is bound to expel\nscandals. But the Church's protest, its condemnation, its\nexcommunication even, are not ends in themselves; they are means to\nthat which is really an end in itself, a priceless good which\njustifies every extreme of moral severity, the winning again of the\nsinner through repentance. The judgment of the Church is the\ninstrument of God's love, and the moment it is accepted in the sinful\nsoul it begins to work as a redemptive force. The humiliation it\ninflicts is that which God exalts; the sorrow, that which He comforts.\nBut when a scandal comes to light in a Christian congregation--when\none of its members is discovered in a fault gross, palpable, and\noffensive--what is the significance of that movement of feeling which\ninevitably takes place? In how many has it the character of goodness\nand of severity, of condemnation and of compassion, of love and fear,\nof pity and shame, the only character that has any virtue in it to\ntell for the sinner's recovery? If you ask nine people out of ten what\na scandal is, they will tell you it is something which makes talk; and\nthe talk in nine cases out of ten will be malignant, affected, more\ninteresting to the talkers than any story of virtue or piety--scandal\nitself, in short, far more truly than its theme. Does anybody imagine\nthat gossip is one of the forces that waken conscience, and work for\nthe redemption of our fallen brethren? If this is all we can do, in\nthe name of all that is Christian let us keep silence. Every word\nspoken about a brother's sin, that is not prompted by a Christian\nconscience, that does not vibrate with the love of a Christian heart,\nis itself a sin against the mercy and the judgment of Christ.\n\nWe see here not only the end of Church discipline, but the force of\nwhich it disposes for the attainment of its end. That force is neither\nmore nor less than the conscience of the Christian people who\nconstitute the Church: discipline is, in principle, the reaction of\nthat force against all immorality. In special cases, forms may be\nnecessary for its exercise, and in the forms in which it is exercised\nvariations may be found expedient, according to time, place, or degree\nof moral progress; the congregation as a body, or a representative\ncommittee of it, or its ordained ministers, may be its most suitable\nexecutors; but that on which all alike have to depend for making their\nproceedings effective to any Christian intent is the vigour of\nChristian conscience, and the intensity of Christian love, in the\ncommunity as a whole. Where these are wanting, or exist only in an\ninsignificant degree, disciplinary proceedings are reduced to a mere\nform; they are legal, not evangelical; and to be legal in such matters\nis not only hypocritical, but insolent. Instead of rendering a real\nChristian service to offenders, which by awakening conscience will\nlead to penitence and restoration, discipline under such conditions is\nequally cruel and unjust.\n\nIt is plain also, from the nature of the force which it employs, that\ndiscipline is a function of the Church which is in incessant exercise,\nand is not called into action only on special occasions. To limit it\nto what are technically known as cases of discipline--the formal\ntreatment of offenders by a Church court, or by any person or persons\nacting in an official character--is to ignore its real nature, and to\ngive its exercise in these cases a significance to which it has no\nclaim. The offences against the Christian standard which can be\nlegally impeached even in Church courts are not one in ten thousand of\nthose against which the Christian conscience ought energetically to\nprotest; and it is the vigour with which the ceaseless reaction\nagainst evil in every shape is instinctively maintained which measures\nthe effectiveness of all formal proceedings, and makes them means of\ngrace to the guilty. The officials of a Church may deal in their\nofficial place with offences against soberness, purity, or honesty;\nthey are bound to deal with them, whether they like it or not; but\ntheir success will depend upon the completeness with which they, and\nthose whom they represent, have renounced not only the vices which\nthey are judging, but all that is out of keeping with the mind and\nspirit of Christ. The drunkard, the sensualist, the thief, know\nperfectly well that drunkenness, sensuality, and theft are not the\nonly sins which mar the soul. They know that there are other vices,\njust as real if not so glaring, which are equally fatal to the life of\nChrist in man, and as completely disqualify men for acting in Christ's\nname. They are conscious that it is not a _bona fide_ transaction when\ntheir sins are impeached by men whose consciences endure with\nequanimity the reign of meanness, duplicity, pride, hypocrisy,\nself-complacency. They are aware that God is not present where these\nare dominant, and that God's power to judge and save can never come\nthrough such channels. Hence the exercise of discipline in these legal\nforms is often resented, and often ineffective; and instead of\ncomplaining about what is obviously inevitable, the one thing at which\nall should aim who wish to protect the Church from scandals is to\ncultivate the common conscience, and bring it to such a degree of\npurity and vigour, that its spontaneous resentment of evil will enable\nthe Church practically to dispense with legal forms. This Christian\ncommunity at Corinth had a thousand faults; in many points we are\ntempted to find in it rather a warning than an example; but I think we\nmay take this as a signal proof that it was really sound at heart: its\ncondemnation of this guilty man fell upon his conscience as the\nsentence of God, and brought him in tears to the feet of Christ. No\nlegal proceedings could have done that: nothing could have done it but\na real and passionate sympathy with the holiness and the love of\nChrist. Such sympathy is the one subduing, reconciling, redeeming\npower in our hands; and Paul might well rejoice, after all his\naffliction and anguish of heart, when he found it so unmistakably at\nwork in Corinth. Not so much formal as instinctive, though not\nshrinking on occasion from formal proceedings; not malignant, yet\nclosing itself inexorably against evil; not indulgent to badness, but\nwith goodness like Christ's, waiting to be gracious,--this Christian\nvirtue really holds the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and opens and\nshuts with the authority of Christ Himself. We need it in all our\nChurches to-day, as much as it was needed in Corinth; we need it that\nspecial acts of discipline may be effective; we need it still more\nthat they may be unnecessary. Pray for it as for a gift that\ncomprehends every other--the power to represent Christ, and work His\nwork, in the recovery and restoration of the fallen.\n\nIn vv. 9-11, the same subject is continued, but with a slightly\ndifferent aspect exposed. Paul had obviously taken the initiative in\nthis matter, though the bulk of the Church, at his prompting, had\nacted in a right spirit. Their conduct was in harmony with his motive\nin writing to them,[17] which had really been to make proof of their\nobedience in all points. But he has already disclaimed either the\nright or the wish to lord it over them in their liberty as believers;\nand here, again, he represents himself rather as following them in\ntheir treatment of the offender, than as pointing out the way. \"Now to\nwhom ye forgive anything, I also forgive\"--so great is my confidence\nin you: \"for what I also have forgiven, if I have forgiven anything,\nfor your sakes have I forgiven it in the presence of Christ.\" When he\nsays \"if I _have_ forgiven anything,\" he does not mean that his\nforgiveness is dubious, or in suspense; what he does is to deprecate\nthe thought that his forgiveness is the main thing, or that he had\nbeen the person principally offended. When he says \"_for your sakes_\nhave I forgiven it,\" the words are explained by what follows: to have\nrefused his forgiveness in the circumstances would have been to\nperpetuate a state of matters which could only have injured the\nChurch. When he adds that his forgiveness is bestowed \"in the presence\nof Christ,\" he gives the assurance that it is no complaisance or\nformality, but a real acceptance of the offender to peace and\nfriendship again.[18] And we should not overlook the fact that in this\nassociation of Christ, of the Corinthians, and of himself, in the work\nof forgiveness and restoration, Paul is really encompassing a\ndesponding soul with all the grace of earth and heaven. Surely he will\nnot let his grief become despair, when all around him and above him\nthere is a present and convincing witness that, though God is\nintolerant of sin, He is the refuge of the penitent.\n\nThe gracious and conciliatory tone of these verses seems to me worthy of\nspecial admiration; and I can only express my astonishment that to some\nthey have appeared insincere, a vain attempt to cover a defeat with the\nsemblance of victory, a surrender to the opposition at Corinth, the\npainfulness of which is ill-disguised by the pretence of agreement with\nthem. The exposition just given renders the refutation of such a view\nunnecessary. We ought rather to regard with reverence and affection the\nman who knew how to combine, so strikingly, unflinching principle and\nthe deepest tenderness and consideration for others; we ought to propose\nhis modesty, his sensitiveness to the feelings even of opponents, his\nsympathy with those who had no sympathy with him, as examples for our\nimitation. Paul had been deeply moved by what had taken place at\nCorinth, possibly he had been deeply injured; but even so his personal\ninterest is kept in the background; for the obedient loyalty which he\nwishes to prove is not so much _his_ interest as theirs to whom he\nwrites. He cares only for others. He cares for the poor soul who has\nforfeited his place in the community; he cares for the good name of the\nChurch; he cares for the honour of Jesus Christ; and he exerts all his\npower with these interests in view. If it needs rigour, he can be\nrigorous; if it needs passion, he can be passionate; if it needs\nconsideration, graciousness, a conciliatory temper, a willingness to\nkeep out of sight, he can be depended upon for all these virtues. If\nthey were only affected, Paul would deserve the praise of a great\ndiplomatist; but it is far easier to believe them real, and see in them\nthe signs of a great minister of Christ.\n\nThe last verse puts the aim of his proceedings in another light: all\nthis, he says, I do, \"that no advantage may be gained over us by\nSatan: for we are not ignorant of his devices.\" The important words in\nthe last clause are of the same root; it is as if Paul had said:\n\"Satan is very knowing, and is always on the alert to get the better\nof us; but we are not without knowledge of his knowing ways.\" It was\nthe Apostle's acquaintance with the wiles of the devil which made him\neager to see the restoration of the penitent sinner duly carried\nthrough. This implies one or two practical truths, with which, by way\nof application, this exposition may close.\n\n(1) A scandal in the Church gives the devil an opportunity. When one\nwho has named the name of Jesus, and vowed loyal obedience to Him,\nfalls into open sin, it is a chance offered to the enemy which he is\nnot slow to improve. He uses it to discredit the very name of Christ:\nto turn that which ought to be to the world the symbol of the purest\ngoodness into a synonym of hypocrisy. Christ has committed His honour,\nif not His character, to our keeping; and every lapse into vice gives\nSatan an advantage over Him.\n\n(2) The devil finds his gain in the incompetence of the Church to deal\nwith evil in the Spirit of Christ. It is a fine thing for him if he\ncan drive the convicted sinner to despair, and persuade him that there\nis no more forgiveness with God. It is a fine thing if he can prompt\nthose who love little, because they know little of God's love, to show\nthemselves rigid, implacable, irreconcilable, even to the penitent. If\nhe can deform the likeness of Christ into a morose Pharisaism, what an\nincalculable gain it is! If the disciples of Him who received sinners\nlook askance on those who have lapsed, and chill the hope of\nrestoration with cold suspicion and reserve, there will be joy over\nit, not in heaven, but in hell. And not only this, but the opposite is\na device of the devil, of which we ought not to be ignorant. There is\nhardly a sin that some one has not an interest in extenuating. Even\nthe incestuous person in Corinth had his defenders: there were some\nwho were puffed up, and gloried in what he had done as an assertion of\nChristian liberty. The devil takes advantage of the scandals that\noccur in the Church to bribe and debauch men's consciences; indulgent\nwords are spoken, which are not the voice of Christ's awful mercy, but\nof a miserable self-pity; the strongest and holiest thing in the\nworld, the redeeming love of God, is adulterated and even confounded\nwith the weakest and basest thing, the bad man's immoral forgiveness\nof himself. And not to mention anything else under this head, could\nany one imagine what would please and suit the devil better than the\nabsolutely unfeeling but extremely interesting gossip which resounds\nover every exposure of sin?\n\n(3) But, lastly, the devil finds his advantage in the dissensions of\nChristians. What an opportunity he would have had in Corinth, had\nstrained relations continued between the Apostle and the Church! What\nopportunities he has everywhere, when tempers are on edge, and every\nmovement means friction, and every proposal rouses suspicion! The last\nprayer Christ prayed for His Church was that they might all be one: to\nbe one in Him is the final security against the devices of Satan. What\na frightful commentary the history of the Church is on this prayer!\nWhat frightful illustrations it furnishes of the devil's gain out of\nthe saints' quarrels! There are plenty of subjects, of course, even in\nChurch life, on which we may naturally and legitimately differ; but we\nought to know better than to let the differences enter into our souls.\nAt bottom, we should be all one; it is giving ourselves away to the\nenemy, if we do not, at all costs, \"keep the unity of the Spirit in\nthe bond of peace.\"\n\nFOOTNOTES:\n\n[14] On the identity of the person referred to, see Introduction, p. 2\nf.\n\n[15] This meaning of \u1f10\u03c0\u03b9\u03b2\u03b1\u03c1\u03b5\u1fd6\u03bd, taken as intransitive, is rather\nvague, but I believe substantially correct. If the word is to be taken\nas virtually transitive, the object must be the partisans of the\noffender. It would \"bear hardly\" on them, to assume that _they_ had\nbeen grieved by what Paul considered an offence. They had not been\ngrieved. That is why he excludes them from \u03c0\u03ac\u03bd\u03c4\u03b1\u03c2 \u1f51\u03bc\u1fb6\u03c2 by \u1f00\u03c0\u1f78 \u03bc\u03ad\u03c1\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2.\n\n[16] This suits with either idea as to the identity of the man. (1) If\nhe were the incestuous person of 1 Cor. v., the minority would consist\nof those who abused the Christian idea of liberty, and were \"puffed\nup\" (1 Cor. v. 2) over this sin as an illustration of it. (2) If he\nwere one who had personally insulted Paul, the minority would probably\nconsist of the Judaistic opponents of the Apostle.\n\n[17] This is the force of the \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 before \u1f14\u03b3\u03c1\u03b1\u03c8\u03b1 in ver. 9.\n\n[18] In spite of the Vulgate, which has _in persona Christi_; of\nLuther, who gives _an Christi Statt_; and of the English versions,\nAuthorised and Revised, which both give \"in the person of Christ\"\n(though the R.V. puts _presence_ in the margin), there seems no room\nto doubt that \"in the presence of Christ\" is the true meaning. The\nsame words in chap. iv, 6 are admittedly different in import; and in\nthe only passages where \u1f10\u03bd \u03c0\u03c1\u03bf\u03c3\u03ce\u03c0\u1ff3 occurs with a genitive, it means\n\"in presence of.\" These are Prov. viii. 30, where \u1f10\u03bd \u03c0\u03c1\u03bf\u03c3\u03ce\u03c0\u1ff3 \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 is\n= \u05dc\u05e4\u05e0\u05d9\u05d5; and Sir. xxxii. 6, where \"Thou shalt not appear _before the\nLord_ empty\" is \u1f10\u03bd \u03c0. \u039a\u03c5\u03c1\u03af\u03bf\u03c5.\n\n\n\n\n VII\n\n _CHRIST'S CAPTIVE_\n\n \"Now when I came to Troas for the Gospel of Christ, and when a\n door was opened unto me in the Lord, I had no relief for my\n spirit, because I found not Titus my brother: but taking my leave\n of them, I went forth into Macedonia. But thanks be unto God,\n which always leadeth us in triumph in Christ, and maketh manifest\n through us the savour of His knowledge in every place. For we are\n a sweet savour of Christ unto God, in them that are being saved,\n and in them that are perishing; to the one a savour from death\n unto death; to the other a savour from life unto life. And who is\n sufficient for these things? For we are not as the many,\n corrupting the Word of God: but as of sincerity, but as of God, in\n the sight of God, speak we in Christ.\"--2 COR. ii. 12-17 (R.V.).\n\n\nIn this passage the Apostle returns from what is virtually, if not\nformally, a digression, to the narrative which begins in chap. i. 8\nf., and is continued in i. 15 f. At the same time he makes a\ntransition to a new subject, really though not very explicitly\nconnected with what goes before--namely, his independent and divinely\ngranted authority as an apostle. In the last verses of chap, ii., and\nin chap. iii. 1-4, this is treated generally, but with reference in\nparticular to the success of his ministry. He then goes on to contrast\nthe older and the Christian dispensation, and the character of their\nrespective ministries, and terminates the section with a noble\nstatement of the spirit and principles with which he fulfilled his\napostolic calling (chap. iv. 1-6).\n\nBefore leaving Ephesus, Paul had apparently made an appointment to meet\nTitus, on his return from Corinth, at Troas. He went thither himself to\npreach the Gospel, and found an excellent opportunity for doing so; but\nthe non-arrival of his brother kept him in such a state of unrest[19]\nthat he was unable to make that use of it which he would otherwise have\ndone. This seems a singular confession, but there is no reason to\nsuppose that it was made with a bad conscience. Paul was probably\ngrieved that he had not the heart to go in at the door which had been\nopened to him in the Lord, but he did not feel guilty. It was not\nselfishness which made him turn away, but the anxiety of a true pastor\nabout other souls which God had committed to his care. \"I had no relief\n_for my spirit_,\" he says; and the spirit, in his language, even though\nit be a constituent of man's nature, is that in him which is akin to the\ndivine, and receptive of it. That very element in the Apostle, in virtue\nof which he could act for God at all, was already preoccupied, and\nthough the people were there, ready to be evangelised, it was beyond his\npower to evangelise them. His spirit was absorbed and possessed by hopes\nand fears and prayers for the Corinthians; and as the human spirit, even\nwhen in contact with the divine, is finite, and only capable of so much\nand no more, he was obliged to let slip an occasion which he would\notherwise have gladly seized. He probably felt with all missionaries\nthat it is as important to secure as to win converts; and if the\nCorinthians were capable of reflection, they might reflect with shame on\nthe loss which their sin had entailed on the people of Troas. The\ndisorders of their wilful community had engrossed the Apostle's spirit,\nand robbed their fellow-men across the sea of an apostolic ministry.\nThey could not but feel how genuine was the Apostle's love, when he had\nmade such a sacrifice to it; but such a sacrifice ought never to have\nbeen required.\n\nWhen Paul could bear the suspense no longer, he said good-bye to the\npeople of Troas, crossed the Thracian Sea, and advanced into Macedonia\nto meet Titus. He did meet him, and heard from him a full report of\nthe state of matters at Corinth (chap. vii. 5 ff.); but here he does\nnot take time to say so. He breaks out into a jubilant thanksgiving,\noccasioned primarily no doubt by the joyful tidings he had just\nreceived, but widening characteristically, and instantaneously, to\ncover all his apostolic work. It is as though he felt God's goodness\nto him to be all of a piece, and could not be sensitive to it in any\nparticular instance without having the consciousness rise within him\nthat he lived and moved and had his being in it. \"Now to God be\nthanks, who always leadeth us in triumph in Christ.\"\n\nThe peculiar and difficult word in this thanksgiving is \u03b8\u03c1\u03b9\u03b1\u03bc\u03b2\u03b5\u03cd\u03bf\u03bd\u03c4\u03b9.\nThe sense which first strikes one as suitable is that which is given\nin the Authorised Version: \"God which always _causeth us to triumph_.\"\nPractically Paul had been engaged in a conflict with the Corinthians,\nand for a time it had seemed not improbable that he might be beaten;\nbut God had caused him to triumph in Christ--that is, acting in\nChrist's interests, in matters in which Christ's name and honour were\nat stake, the victory (as always) had remained with him; and for this\nhe thanks God. This interpretation is still maintained by so excellent\na scholar as Schmiedel, and the use of \u03b8\u03c1\u03b9\u03b1\u03bc\u03b2\u03b5\u03cd\u03b5\u03b9\u03bd in this transitive\nsense is defended by the analogy of \u03bc\u03b1\u03b8\u03b7\u03c4\u03b5\u03cd\u03b5\u03b9\u03bd in Matt. xxviii. 19.\n\nBut appropriate as this interpretation is, there is one apparently fatal\nobjection to it. There is no doubt that \u03b8\u03c1\u03b9\u03b1\u03bc\u03b2\u03b5\u03cd\u03b5\u03b9\u03bd is here used\ntransitively, but we have not to guess, by analogy, what it must mean\nwhen so used; there are other examples which fix this unambiguously. One\nis found elsewhere in St. Paul himself (Col. ii. 15), where \u03b8\u03c1\u03b9\u03b1\u03bc\u03b2\u03b5\u03cd\u03c3\u03b1\u03c2\n\u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u03bf\u1f7a\u03c2 indubitably means \"having triumphed over them.\" In accordance\nwith this, which is only one out of many instances,[20] the Revisers\nhave displaced the old rendering here, and substituted for it, \"Thanks\nbe to God, which always _leadeth us in triumph_.\" The triumph here is\nGod's, not the Apostle's; Paul is not the soldier who wins the battle,\nand shouts for victory, as he marches in the triumphal procession; he is\nthe captive who is led in the Conqueror's train, and in whom men see the\ntrophy of the Conqueror's power. When he says that God always leads him\nin triumph _in Christ_, the meaning is not perfectly obvious. He may\nintend to define, as it were, the area over which God's victory extends.\nIn everything which is covered by the name and authority of Christ, God\ntriumphantly asserts His power over the Apostle. Or, again, the words\nmay signify that it is through Christ that God's victorious power is put\nforth. These two meanings, of course, are not inconsistent; and\npractically they coincide.\n\nIt cannot be denied, I think, if this is taken quite rigorously, that\nthere is a certain air of irrelevance about it. It does not seem to be\nto the purpose of the passage to say that God always triumphs over Paul\nand those for whom He speaks, or even that He always leads them in\ntriumph. It is this feeling, indeed, which mainly influences those who\nkeep to the rendering of the Authorised Version, and regard Paul as the\nvictor. But the meaning of \u03b8\u03c1\u03b9\u03b1\u03bc\u03b2\u03b5\u03cd\u03bf\u03bd\u03c4\u03b9 is not really open to doubt, and\nthe semblance of irrelevance disappears if we remember that we are\ndealing with a figure, and a figure which the Apostle himself does not\npress. Of course in an ordinary triumph, such as the triumph of Claudius\nover Caractacus, of which St. Paul may easily have heard, the captives\nhad no share in the victory; it was not only a victory over them, but a\nvictory against them. But when God wins a victory over man, and leads\nhis captive in triumph, the captive too has an interest in what happens;\nit is the beginning of all triumphs, in any true sense, for him. If we\napply this to the case before us, we shall see that the true meaning is\nnot irrelevant. Paul had once been the enemy of God in Christ; he had\nfought against Him in his own soul, and in the Church which he\npersecuted and wasted. The battle had been long and strong; but not far\nfrom Damascus it had terminated in a decisive victory for God. There the\nmighty man fell, and the weapons of his warfare perished. His pride, his\nself-righteousness, his sense of superiority to others and of competence\nto attain to the righteousness of God, collapsed for ever, and he rose\nfrom the earth to be the slave of Jesus Christ. That was the beginning\nof God's triumph over him; from that hour God led him in triumph in\nChrist. But it was the beginning also of all that made the Apostle's\nlife itself a triumph, not a career of hopeless internal strife, such as\nit had been, but of unbroken Christian victory. This, indeed, is not\ninvolved _in the mere word_ \u03b8\u03c1\u03b9\u03b1\u03bc\u03b2\u03b5\u03cd\u03bf\u03bd\u03c4\u03b9, but it is the real _thing_\nwhich was present to the Apostle's mind when he used the word. When we\nrecognise this, we see that the charge of irrelevance does not really\napply; while nothing could be more characteristic of the Apostle than to\nhide himself and his success in this way behind God's triumph over him\nand through him.\n\nFurther, the true meaning of the word, and the true connexion of ideas\njust explained, remind us that the only triumphs we can ever have,\ndeserving the name, must begin with God's triumph over us. This is the\none possible source of joy untroubled. We may be as selfish as we\nplease, and as successful in our selfishness; we may distance all our\nrivals in the race for the world's prizes; we may appropriate and\nengross pleasure, wealth, knowledge, influence; and after all there\nwill be one thing we must do without--the power and the happiness of\nthanking God. No one will ever be able to thank God because he has\nsucceeded in pleasing himself, be the mode of his self-pleasing as\nrespectable as you will; and he who has not thanked God with a whole\nheart, without misgiving and without reserve, does not know what joy\nis. Such thanksgiving and its joy have one condition: they rise up\nspontaneously in the soul when it allows God to triumph over it. When\nGod appears to us in Jesus Christ, when in the omnipotence of His love\nand purity and truth He makes war upon our pride and falsehood and\nlusts, and prevails against them, and brings us low, then we are\nadmitted to the secret of this apparently perplexing passage; we know\nhow natural it is to cry, \"Thanks be unto God who in His victory over\nus giveth us the victory! Thanks be to Him who always leadeth us in\ntriumph!\" It is out of an experience like this that Paul speaks; it is\nthe key to his whole life, and it has been illustrated anew by what\nhas just happened at Corinth.\n\nBut to return to the Epistle. God is described by the Apostle not only\nas triumphing over them (_i.e._, himself and his colleagues) in\nChrist, but as making manifest through them the savour of His\nknowledge in every place. It has been questioned whether \"His\"\nknowledge is the knowledge of God or of Christ. Grammatically, the\nquestion can hardly be answered; but, as we see from chap. iv. 6, the\ntwo things which it proposes to distinguish are really one; what is\nmanifested in the apostolic ministry is the knowledge of God as He is\nrevealed in Christ. But why does Paul use the expression \"_the savour_\nof His knowledge\"? It was suggested probably by the figure of the\ntriumph, which was present to his mind in all the detail of its\ncircumstances. Incense smoked on every altar as the victor passed\nthrough the streets of Rome; the fragrant steam floated over the\nprocession, a silent proclamation of victory and joy. But Paul would\nnot have appropriated this feature of the triumph, and applied it to\nhis ministry, unless he had felt that there was a real point of\ncomparison, that the knowledge of Christ which he diffused among men,\nwherever he went, was in very truth a fragrant thing.[21] True, he was\nnot a free man; he had been subdued by God, and made the slave of\nJesus Christ; as the Lord of glory went forth conquering and to\nconquer, over Syria and Asia and Macedonia and Greece, He led him as a\ncaptive in the triumphal march of His grace; he was the trophy of\nChrist's victory; every one who saw him saw that necessity was laid\nupon Him; but what a gracious necessity it was! \"The _love_ of Christ\nconstraineth us.\" The captives who were dragged in chains behind a\nRoman chariot also made manifest the knowledge of their conqueror;\nthey declared to all the spectators his power and his pitilessness;\nthere was nothing in that knowledge to suggest the idea of a fragrance\nlike incense. But as Paul moved through the world, all who had eyes to\nsee saw in him not only the power but the sweetness of God's redeeming\nlove. The mighty Victor made manifest through Him, not only His might,\nbut His charm, not only His greatness, but His grace. It was a good\nthing, men felt, to be subdued and led in triumph like Paul; it was to\nmove in an atmosphere perfumed by the love of Christ, as the air\naround the Roman triumph was perfumed with incense. The Apostle is so\nsensible of this that he weaves it into his sentence as an\nindispensable part of his thought; it is not merely the knowledge of\nGod which is made manifest through him as he is led in triumph, but\nthat knowledge as a fragrant, gracious thing, speaking to every one of\nvictory and goodness and joy.\n\nThe very word \"savour,\" in connexion with the \"knowledge\" of God in\nChrist, is full of meaning. It has its most direct application, of\ncourse, to preaching. When we proclaim the Gospel, do we always succeed\nin manifesting it as a savour? Or is not the savour--the sweetness, the\nwinsomeness, the charm and attractiveness of it--the very thing that is\nmost easily left out? Do we not catch it sometimes in the words of\nothers, and wonder that it eludes our own? We miss what is most\ncharacteristic in the knowledge of God if we miss this. We leave out\nthat very element in the Evangel which makes it evangelic, and gives it\nits power to subdue and enchain the souls of men. But it is not to\npreachers only that the word \"savour\" speaks; it is of the widest\npossible application. Whereever Christ is leading a single soul in\ntriumph, the fragrance of the Gospel should go forth; rather, it does go\nforth, in proportion as His triumph is complete. There is sure to be\nthat in the life which will reveal the graciousness as well as the\nomnipotence of the Saviour. And it is this virtue which God uses as His\nmain witness, as His chief instrument, to evangelise the world. In every\nrelation of life it should tell. Nothing is so insuppressible, nothing\nso pervasive, as a fragrance. The lowliest life which Christ is really\nleading in triumph will speak infallibly and persuasively for Him. In a\nChristian brother or sister, brothers and sisters will find a new\nstrength and tenderness, something that goes deeper than natural\naffection, and can stand severer shocks; they will catch the fragrance\nwhich declares that the Lord in His triumphant grace is there. And so in\nall situations, or, as the Apostle has it, \"in every place.\" And if we\nare conscious that we fall in this matter, and that the fragrance of the\nknowledge of Christ is something to which our life gives no testimony,\nlet us be sure that the explanation of it is to be found in self-will.\nThere is something in us which has not yet made complete surrender to\nHim, and not till He leads us unresistingly in triumph will the sweet\nsavour go forth.\n\nAt this point the Apostle's thought is arrested by the issues of his\nministry, though he carries the figure of the fragrance, with a little\npressure, through to the end. In God's sight, he says, or so far as\nGod is concerned, we are a sweet savour of Christ, a perfume redolent\nof Christ, in which He cannot but take pleasure. In other words,\nChrist proclaimed in the Gospel, and the ministries and lives which\nproclaim Him, are always a joy to God. They are a joy to Him, whatever\nmen may think of them, alike in them that are being saved and in them\nthat are perishing. To those who are being saved, they are a savour\n\"from life to life\"; to those who are perishing, a savour \"from death\nto death.\" Here, as everywhere, St. Paul contemplates these exclusive\nopposites as the sole issues of man's life, and of the Gospel\nministry. He makes no attempt to subordinate one to the other, no\nsuggestion that the way of death may ultimately lead to life, much\nless that it must do so. The whole solemnity of the situation, which\nis faced in the cry \"And who is sufficient for these things?\" depends\non the finality of the contrast between life and death. These are the\ngoals set before men, and those who are being saved and those who are\nperishing are respectively on their way to one or the other. Who _is_\nsufficient for the calling of the Gospel ministry, when such are the\nalternatives involved in it? Who is sufficient, in love, in wisdom, in\nhumility, in awful earnestness, for the duties of a calling the issues\nof which are life or death for ever?\n\nThere is considerable difficulty in the sixteenth verse, partly\ndogmatic, partly textual. Commentators so opposite in their bias as\nChrysostom and Calvin have pondered and remarked upon the opposite\neffects here ascribed to the Gospel. It is easy to find analogies to\nthese in nature. The same heat which hardens clay melts iron. The same\nsunlight which gladdens the healthy eye tortures that which is\ndiseased. The same honey which is sweet to the sound palate is\nnauseous to the sick; and so on. But such analogies do not explain\nanything, and one can hardly see what is meant by calling them\nillustrations. It remains finally inexplicable that the Gospel, which\nappeals to some with winning irresistible power, subduing and leading\nthem in triumph, should excite in others a passion of antipathy which\nnothing else could provoke. This remains inexplicable, because it is\nirrational. Nothing that can be pointed to in the universe is the\nleast like a bad heart closing itself against the love of Christ, like\na bad man's will stiffening into absolute rigidity against the will of\nGod. The preaching of the Gospel may be the occasion of such awful\nresults, but it is not their cause. The God whom it proclaims is the\nGod of grace; it is never His will that any should perish--always that\nall should be saved. But He can save only by subduing; His grace must\nexercise a sovereign power in us, which through righteousness will\nlead to life everlasting (Rom. v. 21). And when this exercise of power\nis resisted, when we match our self-will against the gracious saving\nwill of God, our pride, our passions, our mere sloth, against the\nsoul-constraining love of Christ; when we prevail in the war which\nGod's mercy wages with our wickedness,--then the Gospel itself may be\nsaid to have ministered to our ruin; it was ordained to life, and we\nhave made it a sentence of death. Yet even so, it is the joy and glory\nof God; it is a sweet savour to Him, fragrant of Christ and His love.\n\nThe textual difficulty is in the words \u1f10\u03ba \u03b8\u03b1\u03bd\u03ac\u03c4\u03bf\u03c5 \u03b5\u1f30\u03c2 \u03b8\u03ac\u03bd\u03b1\u03c4\u03bf\u03bd, and \u1f10\u03ba\n\u03b6\u03c9\u1fc6\u03c2 \u03b5\u1f30\u03c2 \u03b6\u03c9\u03ae\u03bd. These words are rendered in the Revised Version \"_from_\ndeath to death,\" and \"_from_ life to life.\" The Authorised Version,\nfollowing the _Textus Receptus_, which omits \u1f10\u03ba in both clauses,\nrenders \"a savour _of_ death unto death,\" and \"_of_ life unto life.\" In\nspite of the inferior MS. support, the _Textus Receptus_ is preferred by\nmany modern scholars--_e.g._, Heinrici, Schmiedel, and Hofmann. They\nfind it impossible to give any precise interpretation to the better\nattested reading, and an examination of any exposition which accepts it\ngoes far to justify them. Thus Professor Beet comments: \"_From death for\ndeath_ (comp. Rom. i. 17): a scent proceeding _from_, and thus revealing\nthe presence of, _death_; and, like malaria from a putrefying corpse,\ncausing _death_. Paul's labours among some men revealed the eternal\ndeath which day by day cast an ever-deepening shadow upon them [this\nanswers to \u1f40\u03c3\u03bc\u1f74 \u1f10\u03ba \u03b8\u03b1\u03bd\u03ac\u03c4\u03bf\u03c5]; and by arousing in them increased\nopposition to God, promoted the spiritual mortification which had\nalready begun\" [this answers to \u03b5\u1f30\u03c2 \u03b8\u03ac\u03bd\u03b1\u03c4\u03bf\u03bd]. Surely it is safe to say\nthat nobody in Corinth could ever have guessed this from the words. Yet\nthis is a favourable specimen of the interpretations given. If it were\npossible to take \u1f10\u03ba \u03b8\u03b1\u03bd\u03ac\u03c4\u03bf\u03c5 \u03b5\u1f30\u03c2 \u03b8\u03ac\u03bd\u03b1\u03c4\u03bf\u03bd, and \u1f10\u03ba \u03b6\u03c9\u1fc6\u03c2 \u03b5\u1f30\u03c2 \u03b6\u03c9\u03ae\u03bd, as Baur\ntook \u1f10\u03ba \u03c0\u03af\u03c3\u03c4\u03b5\u03c9\u03c2 \u03b5\u1f30\u03c2 \u03c0\u03af\u03c3\u03c4\u03b9\u03bd in Rom. i. 17, that would be the simplest way\nout of the difficulty, and quite satisfactory. What the Apostle said\nwould then be this: that the Gospel which he preached, ever good as it\nwas to God, had the most opposite characters and effects among men,--in\nsome it was death _from beginning to end_, absolutely and unmitigatedly\ndeadly in its nature and workings; in others, again, it was life from\nbeginning to end--life was the uniform sign of its presence, and its\ninvariable issue. This also is the meaning which we get by omitting \u1f10\u03ba:\nthe genitives \u03b6\u03c9\u1fc6\u03c2 and \u03b8\u03b1\u03bd\u03ac\u03c4\u03bf\u03c5 are then adjectival,--a vital fragrance,\nwith life as its element and end; a fatal fragrance, the end of which\nis death. This has the advantage of being the meaning which occurs to an\nordinary reader; and if the critically approved text, with the repeated\n\u1f10\u03ba, cannot bear this interpretation, I think there is a fair case for\ndefending the received text on exegetical grounds. Certainly nothing but\nthe broad impression of the received text will ever enter the general\nmind.\n\nThe question that rises to the Apostle's lips as he confronts the\nsolemn situation created by the Gospel is not directly answered. \"Who\nis sufficient for these things? Who? I say. For we are not as the\nmany,[22] who corrupt the Word of God: but as of sincerity, but as of\nGod, in the sight of God, we speak in Christ.\" Paul is conscious as he\nwrites that his awful sense of responsibility as a preacher of the\nGospel is not shared by all who exercise the same vocation. To be the\nbearer and the representative of a power with issues so tremendous\nought surely to annihilate every thought of self; to let personal\ninterest intrude is to declare oneself faithless and unworthy. We are\nstartled to hear from Paul's lips what at first sight seems to be a\ncharge of just such base self-seeking laid against the majority of\npreachers. \"We are not as the many, corrupting the Word of God.\" The\nexpressive word rendered here \"corrupting\" has the idea of\nself-interest, and especially of petty gain, at its basis. It means\nliterally to sell in small quantities, to retail for profit. But it\nwas specially applied to tavern-keeping, and extended to cover all the\ndevices by which the wine-sellers in ancient times deceived their\ncustomers. Then it was used figuratively, as here; and Lucian, _e.g._,\nspeaks of philosophers as selling the sciences, and in most cases (\u1f41\u03b9\n\u03c0\u03bf\u03bb\u03bb\u03bf\u03af: a curious parallel to St. Paul), like tavern keepers,\n\"blending, adulterating, and giving bad measure.\" It is plain that\nthere are two separable ideas here. One is that of men qualifying the\nGospel, infiltrating their own ideas into the Word of God, tempering\nits severity, or perhaps its goodness, veiling its inexorableness,\ndealing in compromise. The other is that all such proceedings are\nfaithless and dishonest, because some private interest underlies them.\nIt need not be avarice, though it is as likely to be this as anything\nelse. A man corrupts the Word of God, makes it the stock-in-trade of a\npaltry business of his own, in many other ways than by subordinating\nit to the need of a livelihood. When he exercises his calling as a\nminister for the gratification of his vanity, he does so. When he\npreaches not that awful message in which life and death are bound up,\nbut himself, his cleverness, his learning, his humour, his fine voice\neven or fine gestures, he does so. He makes the Word minister to him,\ninstead of being a minister of the Word; and that is the essence of\nthe sin. It is the same if ambition be his motive, if he preaches to\nwin disciples to himself, to gain an ascendency over souls, to become\nthe head of a party which will bear the impress of his mind. There was\nsomething of this at Corinth; and not only there, but wherever it is\nfound, such a spirit and such interests will change the character of\nthe Gospel. It will not be preserved in that integrity, in that\nsimple, uncompromising, absolute character which it has as revealed in\nChrist. Have another interest in it than that of God, and that\ninterest will inevitably colour it. You will make it what it was not,\nand the virtue will depart from it.\n\nIn contrast with all such dishonest ministers, the Apostle represents\nhimself and his friends speaking \"as of sincerity.\" They have no\nmixture of motives in their work as evangelists; they have indeed no\nindependent motives at all: God is leading them in triumph, and\nproclaiming His grace through them. It is He who prompts every word\n(\u1f61\u03c2 \u1f10\u03ba \u0398\u03b5\u03bf\u1fe6). Yet their responsibility and their freedom are intact.\nThey feel themselves in His presence as they speak, and in that\npresence they speak \"in Christ.\" \"In Christ\" is the Apostle's mark.\nNot in himself apart from Christ, where any mixture of motives, any\nprocess of adulteration, would have been possible, but only in that\nunion with Christ which was the very life of his life, did he carry on\nhis evangelistic work. This was his final security, and it is still\nthe only security, that the Gospel can have fair play in the world.\n\nFOOTNOTES:\n\n[19] The perfect \u1f14\u03c3\u03c7\u03b7\u03ba\u03b1 seems at first sight out of place, but it is\nmore expressive than the aorist. It suggests the _continuous_\nexpectation of relief which was always anew disappointed.\n\n[20] See Grimm's Lexicon _s.v._, or Lightfoot on Col. ii. 15.\n\n[21] In \u03c4\u1f74\u03bd \u1f40\u03c3\u03bc\u1f74\u03bd \u03c4\u1fc6\u03c2 \u03b3\u03bd\u03ce\u03c3\u03b5\u03c9\u03c2, \u03b3\u03bd\u03ce\u03c3\u03b5\u03c9\u03c2 is gen. of apposition: the \u1f40\u03c3\u03bc\u1f74\nand the \u03b3\u03bd\u1ff6\u03c3\u03b9\u03c2 are one.\n\n[22] \"The many\" (\u1f41\u03b9 \u03c0\u03bf\u03bb\u03bb\u03bf\u03af) seems to be the true reading. \"The rest\" (\u1f41\u03b9\n\u03bb\u03bf\u03b9\u03c0\u03bf\u03af) would be stronger still in its condemnation. But probably Paul\nis not thinking of the Church in general, but of the teachers as a body\nwho crossed and thwarted him in his chosen field. The transition which\nis immediately made to the case of his opponents (\u03c4\u03b9\u03bd\u1f72\u03c2, iii. 1), and to\nthe comparison of the old and new covenants, suggests that his Judaistic\nadversaries in Corinth (see chap. xi.) are in view.\n\n\n\n\n VIII\n\n _LIVING EPISTLES_\n\n \"Are we beginning again to commend ourselves? or need we, as do\n some, epistles of commendation to you or from you? Ye are our\n epistle, written in our hearts, known and read of all men; being\n made manifest that ye are an epistle of Christ, ministered by us,\n written not with ink, but with the Spirit of the living God; not\n in tables of stone, but in tables _that are_ hearts of flesh.\"--2\n COR. iii. 1-3 (R.V.).\n\n\n\"Are we beginning again to commend ourselves?\" Paul does not mean by\nthese words to admit that he had been commending himself before: he\nmeans that he has been accused already of doing so, and that there are\nthose at Corinth who, when they hear such passages of this letter as\nthat which has just preceded, will be ready to repeat the accusation. In\nthe First Epistle he had found it necessary to vindicate his apostolic\nauthority, and especially his interest in the Corinthian Church as its\nspiritual father (1 Cor. ix. 1-27, iv. 6-21), and obviously his enemies\nat Corinth had tried to turn these personal passages against him. They\ndid so on the principle _Qui s'excuse s'accuse_. \"He is commending\nhimself,\" they said, \"and self-commendation is an argument which\ndiscredits, instead of supporting, a cause.\" The Apostle had heard of\nthese malicious speeches, and in this Epistle makes repeated reference\nto them (see chaps, v. 12, x. 18, xiii. 6). He entirely agreed with his\nopponents that self-praise was no honour. \"Not he who commendeth\nhimself is approved, but he whom the Lord commendeth.\" But he denied\npoint-blank that he was commending himself. In distinguishing as he had\ndone in chap. ii. 14-17 between himself and his colleagues, who spoke\nthe Word \"as of sincerity, as of God, in the sight of God,\" and \"the\nmany\" who corrupted it, nothing was further from his mind than to plead\nhis cause, as a suspected person, with the Corinthians. Only malignity\ncould suppose any such thing, and the indignant question with which the\nchapter opens tacitly accuses his adversaries of this hateful vice. It\nis pitiful to see a great and generous spirit like Paul compelled thus\nto stand upon guard, and watch against the possible misconstruction of\nevery lightest word. What needless pain it inflicts upon him, what\nneedless humiliation! How it checks all effusion of feeling, and robs\nwhat should be brotherly intercourse of everything that can make it free\nand glad! Further on in the Epistle there will be abundant opportunity\nof speaking on this subject at greater length; but it is proper to\nremark here that a minister's character is the whole capital he has for\ncarrying on his business, and that nothing can be more cruel and wicked\nthan to cast suspicion on it without cause. In most other callings a man\nmay go on, no matter what his character, provided his balance at the\nbank is on the right side; but an evangelist or a pastor who has lost\nhis character has lost everything. It is humiliating to be subject to\nsuspicion, painful to be silent under it, degrading to speak. At a later\nstage Paul was compelled to go further than he goes here; but let the\nindignant emotion of this abrupt question remind us that candour is to\nbe met with candour, and that the suspicious temper which would fain\nmalign the good eats like a canker the very heart of those who cherish\nit.\n\nFrom the serious tone the Apostle passes suddenly to the ironical. \"Or\nneed we, as do some, epistles of commendation to you or from you?\" The\n\"some\" of this verse are probably the same as \"the many\" of chap. ii.\n17. Persons had come to Corinth in the character of Christian\nteachers, bringing with them recommendatory letters which secured\ntheir standing when they arrived. An example of what is meant can be\nseen in Acts xvii. 27. There we are told that when Apollos, who had\nbeen working in Ephesus, was minded to pass over into Achaia, the\nEphesian brethren encouraged him, and wrote to the disciples to\nreceive him--that is, they gave him an epistle of commendation, which\nsecured him recognition and welcome in Corinth. A similar case is\nfound in Rom. xvi. 1, where the Apostle uses the very word which we\nhave here: \"I commend unto you Ph\u0153be our sister, who is a servant of\nthe Church that is at Cenchre\u00e6: that ye receive her in the Lord,\nworthily of the saints, and that ye assist her in whatsoever matter\nshe may have need of you: for she herself also hath been a succourer\nof many, and of mine own self.\" This was Ph\u0153be's introduction, or\nepistle of commendation, to the Church of Rome. The Corinthians were\nevidently in the habit both of receiving such letters from other\nChurches, and of granting them on their own account; and Paul asks\nthem ironically if they think he ought to bring one, or when he leaves\nthem to apply for one. Is _that_ the relation which ought to obtain\nbetween him and them? The \"some,\" to whom he refers, had no doubt come\nfrom Jerusalem: it is they who are referred to in chap. xi. 22 ff. But\nit does not follow that their recommendatory letters had been signed\nby Peter, James, and John; and just as little that those letters\njustified them in their hostility to Paul. No doubt there were\nmany--many myriads, the Book of Acts says--at Jerusalem, whose\nconception of the Gospel was very different from his, and who were\nglad to counteract him whenever they could; but there were many also,\nincluding the three who seemed to be pillars, who had a thoroughly\ngood understanding with him, and who had no responsibility for the\n\"some\" and their doings. The epistles which the \"some\" brought were\nplainly such as the Corinthians themselves could grant, and it is a\ncomplete misinterpretation to suppose that they were a commission\ngranted by the Twelve for the persecution of Paul.\n\nThe giving of recommendatory letters is a subject of considerable\npractical interest. When they are merely formal, as in our\ncertificates of Church membership, they come to mean very little. It\nis an unhappy state of affairs perhaps, but no one would take a\ncertificate of Church membership by itself as a satisfactory\nrecommendation. And when we go past the merely formal, difficult\nquestions arise. Many people have an estimate of their own character\nand competence, in which it is impossible for others to share, and yet\nthey apply without misgiving to their friends, and especially to their\nminister or their employer, to grant them \"epistles of commendation.\"\nWe are bound to be generous in these things, but we are bound also to\nbe honest. The rule which ought to guide us, especially in all that\nbelongs to the Church and its work, is the interest of the cause, and\nnot of the worker. To flatter is to do a wrong, not only to the person\nflattered, but to the cause in which you are trying to employ him.\nThere is no more ludicrous reading in the world than a bundle of\ncertificates, or testimonials, as they are called. As a rule, they\ncertify nothing but the total absence of judgment and conscience in\nthe people who have granted them. If you do not know whether a person\nis qualified for any given situation or not, you do not need to say\nanything about it. If you know he is not, and he asks you to say that\nhe is, no personal consideration must keep you from kindly but firmly\ndeclining. I am not preaching suspicion, or reserve, or anything\nungenerous, but justice and truth. It is wicked to betray a great\ninterest by bespeaking it for incompetent hands; it is cruel to put\nany one into a place for which he is unfit. Where you are confident\nthat the man and the work will be well matched, be as generous as you\nplease; but never forget that the work is to be considered in the\nfirst place, and the man only in the second.\n\nPaul has been serious, and ironical, in the first verse; in ver. 2 he\nbecomes serious again, and remains so. \"_You_,\" he says, answering his\nironical question, \"_you_ are our epistle.\" Epistle, of course, is to\nbe taken in the sense of the preceding verse. \"_You_ are the\ncommendatory letter which _I_ show, when I am asked for my\ncredentials.\" But to whom does he show it? In the first instance, to\nthe captious Corinthians themselves. The tone of chap. ix. in the\nFirst Epistle is struck here again: \"Wherever I may need\nrecommendations, it is certainly not at Corinth.\" \"If I be not an\napostle to others, yet doubtless I am to you: the seal of mine\napostleship are ye in the Lord.\" Had they been a Christian community\nwhen he first visited them, they might have asked who he was; but they\nowed their Christianity to him; he was their father in Christ; to put\nhim to the question in this superior, suspicious style was unnatural,\nunfilial ingratitude. They themselves were the living evidence of the\nvery thing which they threw doubt upon--the apostleship of Paul.\n\nThis bold utterance may well excite misgivings in those who preach\nconstantly, yet see no result of their work. It is common to disparage\nsuccess, the success of visible acknowledged conversions, of bad men\nopenly renouncing badness, bearing witness against themselves, and\nembracing a new life. It is common to glorify the ministry which works\non, patient and uncomplaining, in one monotonous round, ever sowing, but\nnever reaping, ever casting the net, but never drawing in the fish, ever\nmarking time, but never advancing. Paul frankly and repeatedly appeals\nto his success in evangelistic work as the final and sufficient proof\nthat God had called him, and had given him authority as an apostle; and\nsearch as we will, we shall not find any test so good and unequivocal as\nthis success. Paul had seen the Lord; he was qualified to be a witness\nof the Resurrection; but these, at the very most, were his own affair,\ntill the witness he bore had proved its power in the hearts and\nconsciences of others. How to provide, to train, and to test the men who\nare to be the ministers of the Christian Church is a matter of the very\nutmost consequence, to which sufficient attention has not yet been\ngiven. Congregations which choose their own pastor are often compelled\nto take a man quite untried, and to judge him more or less on\nsuperficial grounds. They can easily find out whether he is a competent\nscholar; they can see for themselves what are his gifts of speech, his\nvirtues or defects of manner; they can get such an impression as\nsensible people always get, by seeing and hearing a man, of the general\nearnestness or lack of earnestness in his character. But often they feel\nthat more is wanted. It is not exactly more in the way of character; the\nmembers of a Church have no right to expect that their minister will be\na truer Christian than they themselves are. A special inquisition into\nhis conversion, or his religious experience, is mere hypocrisy; if the\nChurch is not sufficiently in earnest to guard herself against insincere\nmembers, she must take the risk of insincere ministers. What is wanted\nis what the Apostle indicates here--that intimation of God's concurrence\nwhich is given through success in evangelistic work. No other intimation\nof God's concurrence is infallible--no call by a congregation, no\nordination by a presbytery or by a bishop. Theological education is\neasily provided, and easily tested; but it will not be so easy to\nintroduce the reforms which are needed in this direction. Great masses\nof Christian people, however, are becoming alive to the necessity for\nthem; and when the pressure is more strongly felt, the way for action\nwill be discovered. Only those who can appeal to what they have done in\nthe Gospel can be known to have the qualifications of Gospel ministers;\nand in due time the fact will be frankly recognised.\n\nThe conversion and new life of the Corinthians were Paul's certificate\nas an apostle. They were a certificate known, he says, and read by all\nmen. Often there is a certain awkwardness in the presenting of\ncredentials. It embarrasses a man when he has to put his hand into his\nbreast pocket, and take out his character, and submit it for\ninspection. Paul was saved this embarrassment. There was a fine\nunsought publicity about his testimonials. Everybody knew what the\nCorinthians had been, everybody knew what they were; and the man to\nwhom the change was due needed no other recommendation to a Christian\nsociety. Whoever looked at them saw plainly that they were an epistle\nof Christ; the mind of Christ could be read upon them, and it had been\nwritten by the intervention of Paul's hand. This is an interesting\nthough a well-worn conception of the Christian character. Every life\nhas a meaning, we say; every face is a record; but the text goes\nfurther. The life of the Christian is an epistle; it has not only a\nmeaning, but an address; it is a message from Christ to the world. Is\nChrist's message to men legible on our lives? When those who are\nwithout look at us, do they see the hand of Christ quite unmistakably?\nDoes it ever occur to anybody that there is something in our life\nwhich is not of the world, but which is a message to the world from\nChrist? Did you ever, startled by the unusual brightness of a true\nChristian's life, ask as it were involuntarily, \"Whose image and\nsuperscription is this?\" and feel as you asked it that these features,\nthese characters, could only have been traced by one hand, and that\nthey proclaimed to all the grace and power of Jesus Christ? Christ\nwishes so to write upon us that men may see what He does for man. He\nwishes to engrave His image on our nature, that all spectators may\nfeel that it has a message for them, and may crave the same favour. A\ncongregation which is not in its very existence and in all its works\nand ways a legible epistle, an unmistakable message from Christ to\nman, does not answer to this New Testament ideal.\n\nPaul claims no part here but that of Christ's instrument. The Lord, so\nto speak, dictated the letter, and he wrote it. The contents of it\nwere prescribed by Christ, and through the Apostle's ministry became\nvisible and legible in the Corinthians. More important is it to notice\nwith what the writing was done: \"not with ink,\" says St. Paul, \"but\nwith the Spirit of the living God.\" At first sight this contrast seems\nformal and fantastic; nobody, we think, could ever dream of making\neither of these things do the work of the other, so that it seems\nperfectly gratuitous in Paul to say, \"not with ink, but with the\nSpirit.\" Yet ink is sometimes made to bear a great deal of\nresponsibility. The characters of the \u03c4\u03b9\u03bd\u1f72\u03c2 (\"some\") in ver. i, were\nonly written in ink; they had nothing, Paul implies, to recommend them\nbut these documents in black and white. That was hardly sufficient to\nguarantee their authority, or their competence as ministers in the\nChristian dispensation. But do not Churches yet accept their ministers\nwith the same inadequate testimonials? A distinguished career at the\nUniversity, or in the Divinity Schools, proves that a man can write\nwith ink, under favourable circumstances; it does not prove more than\nthat; it does not prove that he will be spiritually effective, and\neverything else is irrelevant. I do not say this to disparage the\nprofessional training of ministers; on the contrary, the standard of\ntraining ought to be higher than it is in all the Churches: I only\nwish to insist that nothing which can be represented in ink, no\nlearning, no literary gifts, no critical acquaintance with the\nScriptures even, can write upon human nature the Epistle of Christ. To\ndo that needs \"the Spirit of the living God.\" We feel, the moment we\ncome upon those words, that the Apostle is anticipating; he has in\nview already the contrast he is going to develop between the old\ndispensation and the new, and the irresistible inward power by which\nthe new is characterised. Others might boast of qualifications to\npreach which could be certified in due documentary form, but he\ncarried in him wherever he went a power which was its own witness, and\nwhich overruled and dispensed with every other. Let all of us who\nteach or preach concentrate our interest here. It is in \"the Spirit of\nthe living God,\" not in any acquirements of our own, still less in any\nrecommendations of others, that our serviceableness as ministers of\nChrist lies. We cannot write His epistle without it. We cannot see,\nlet us be as diligent and indefatigable in our work as we please, the\nimage of Christ gradually come out in those to whom we minister.\nParents, teachers, preachers, this is the one thing needful for us\nall. \"Tarry,\" said Jesus to the first evangelists, \"tarry in the city\nof Jerusalem, until ye be endued with power from on high\"; it is of no\nuse to begin without that.\n\nThis idea of the \"epistle\" has taken such a hold of the Apostle's\nmind, and he finds it so suggestive whichever way he turns it, that he\nreally tries to say too much about it in one sentence. The crowding of\nhis ideas is confusing. One learned critic enumerates three points in\nwhich the figure becomes inconsistent with itself, and another can\nonly defend the Apostle by saying that this figurative letter might\nwell have qualities which would be self-contradictory in a real one.\nThis kind of criticism smells a little of ink, and the only real\ndifficulty in the sentence has never misled any one who read it with\nsympathy. It is this--that St. Paul speaks of the letter as written in\ntwo different places. \"Ye are our epistle,\" he says at the beginning,\n\"written _in our hearts_\"; but at the end he says, \"written not on\ntables of stone, but on tables that are hearts of flesh\"--meaning\nevidently _on the hearts of the Corinthians_. Of course this last is\nthe sense which coheres with the figure. Paul's ministry wrote the\nEpistle of Christ upon the Corinthians, or, if we prefer it, wrought\nsuch a change in their hearts that they became an epistle of Christ,\nan epistle to which he appealed in proof of his apostolic calling. In\nexpressing himself as he does about this, he is again anticipating the\ncoming contrast of Law and Gospel. Nobody would think of writing a\n_letter_ on tables of stone, and he only says \"not on stone tables\"\nbecause he has in his mind the difference between the Mosaic and the\nChristian dispensation. It is quite out of place to refer to Ezek. xi.\n19, xxxvi. 26, and to drag in the contrast between hard and tender\nhearts. What Paul means is that the Epistle of Christ is not written\non dead matter, but on human nature, and that too at its finest and\ndeepest. When we remember the sense of depth and inwardness which\nattaches to the heart in Scripture, it is not forcing the words to\nfind in them the suggestion that the Gospel works no merely outward\nchange. It is not written on the surface, but in the soul. The Spirit\nof the living God finds access for itself to the secret places of the\nhuman spirit; the most hidden recesses of our nature are open to it,\nand the very heart is made new. To be able to write _there_ for\nChrist, to point not to anything dead, but to living men and women,\nnot to anything superficial, but to a change that has reached the very\ncore of man's being, and works its way out from thence, is the\ntestimonial which guarantees the evangelist; it is the divine\nattestation that he is in the true apostolical succession.[23]\n\nWhat, then, does Paul mean by the other clause, \"ye are our epistle,\nwritten on _our_ hearts?\" I do not think we can get much more than an\nemotional certainty about this expression. When a man has been an\nintensely interested spectator, still more an intensely interested\nactor, in any great affair, he might say afterwards that the whole\nthing and all its circumstances were engraved upon his heart. I\nimagine that is what St. Paul means here. The conversion of the\nCorinthians made them an epistle of Christ; in making them believers\nthrough St. Paul's ministry, Christ wrote on _their_ hearts what was\nreally an epistle to the world; and the whole transaction, in which\nPaul's feelings had been deeply engaged, stood written on _his_ heart\nfor ever. Interpretations that go beyond this do not seem to me to be\njustified by the words. Thus Heinrici and Meyer say, \"We have in our\nown consciousness the certainty of being recommended to you by\nyourselves and to others by you\"; and they elucidate this by saying,\n\"The Apostle's _own good consciousness_ was, as it were, _the tablet_\non which this living epistle of the Corinthians stood, and _that_ had\nto be left unassailed even by the most malevolent.\" A sense so\npragmatical and pedantic, even if one can grasp it at all, is surely\nout of place, and many readers will fail to discover it in the text.\nWhat the words do convey is the warm love of the Apostle, who had\nexercised his ministry among the Corinthians with all the passion of\nhis nature, and who still bore on his ardent heart the fresh\nimpression of his work and its results.\n\nAmid all these details let us take care not to lose the one great\nlesson of the passage. Christian people owe a testimony to Christ. His\nname has been pronounced over them, and all who look at them ought to\nsee His nature. We should discern in the heart and in the behaviour of\nChristians the handwriting, let us say the characters, not of avarice,\nof suspicion, of envy, of lust, of falsehood, of pride, but of Christ.\nIt is to us He has committed Himself; we are the certification to men\nof what He does for man; His character is in our care. The true\nepistles of Christ to the world are not those which are expounded in\npulpits; they are not even the gospels in which Christ Himself lives\nand moves before us; they are living men and women, on the tables of\nwhose hearts the Spirit of the living God, ministered by a true\nevangelist, has engraved the likeness of Christ Himself. It is not the\nwritten Word on which Christianity ultimately depends; it is not the\nsacraments, nor so-called necessary institutions: it is this inward,\nspiritual, Divine writing which is the guarantee of all else.\n\nFOOTNOTE:\n\n[23] The true reading of the last words in ver. 3 is doubtful. The\nReceived Text has \u1f10\u03bd \u03c0\u03bb\u03b1\u03be\u1f76 \u03ba\u03b1\u03c1\u03b4\u03af\u03b1\u03c2 \u03c3\u03b1\u03c1\u03ba\u03af\u03bd\u03b1\u03b9\u03c2. This is as old as\nIren\u00e6us and Origen, and is found in many versions. Almost all MSS.\ngive the reading which is translated in the Revised Version: \u1f10\u03bd \u03c0\u03bb\u03b1\u03be\u1f76\n\u03ba\u03b1\u03c1\u03b4\u03af\u03b1\u03b9\u03c2 \u03c3\u03b1\u03c1\u03ba\u03af\u03bd\u03b1\u03b9\u03c2(\u05d0, A, B, C, D, etc.); and this is adopted by most\nof the purely critical editors. Some, however, and many exegetes,\nsuspect a primitive error, affecting all MSS. and versions. Schmiedel\nwould omit \u03ba\u03b1\u03c1\u03b4\u03af\u03b1\u03b9\u03c2 or \u03ba\u03b1\u03c1\u03b4\u03af\u03b1\u03c2, as a marginal note, suggested by Prov.\nvii. 3, Jer. xvii. 1; Westcott and Hort, on the other hand, think that\n\u03c0\u03bb\u03b1\u03be\u1f76 may be a primitive interpolation. No certainty is possible; but\nconsidering Old Testament usage, one would expect Paul to write \u1f10\u03bd\n\u03c0\u03bb\u03b1\u03be\u1f76 \u03ba\u03b1\u03c1\u03b4\u03af\u03b1\u03c2 almost unconsciously.\n\n\n\n\n IX\n\n _THE TWO COVENANTS_\n\n \"And such confidence have we through Christ to God-ward: not that\n we are sufficient of ourselves, to account anything as from\n ourselves; but our sufficiency is from God; who also made us\n sufficient as ministers of a new covenant; not of the letter, but\n of the spirit: for the letter killeth, but the spirit giveth life.\n But if the ministration of death, written, _and_ engraven on\n stones, came with glory, so that the children of Israel could not\n look stedfastly upon the face of Moses for the glory of his face;\n which _glory_ was passing away: how shall not rather the\n ministration of the spirit be with glory? For if the ministration\n of condemnation is glory, much rather doth the ministration of\n righteousness exceed in glory. For verily that which hath been\n made glorious hath not been made glorious in this respect, by\n reason of the glory that surpasseth. For if that which passeth\n away _was_ with glory, much more that which remaineth _is_ in\n glory.\"--2 COR. iii. 4-11 (R.V.).\n\n\nThe confidence referred to in the opening of this passage is that\nwhich underlies the triumphant sentences at the end of the second\nchapter. The tone of those sentences was open to misinterpretation,\nand Paul guards himself against this on two sides. To begin with, his\nmotive in so expressing himself was quite pure: he had no thought of\ncommending himself to the Corinthians. And, again, the ground of his\nconfidence was not in himself. The courage which he had to speak as he\ndid he had through Jesus Christ, and that, too, in relation to God. It\nwas virtually confidence in God, and therefore inspired by God.\n\nIt is this last aspect of his confidence which is expanded in the fifth\nverse: \"not that we are sufficient of ourselves, to account anything as\nfrom ourselves; but our sufficiency is from God.\" This vehement\ndisclaimer of any self-sufficiency has naturally been taken in the\nwidest sense, and theologians from Augustine downward have found in it\none of the most decisive proofs of the inability of man for any\nspiritual good accompanying salvation. No one, we may be sure, would\nhave ascribed salvation, and all spiritual good accompanying it,\nentirely to God with more hearty sincerity than the Apostle; but it does\nseem better here to give his words a narrower and more relevant\ninterpretation. The \"sufficiency to account anything,\" of which he\nspeaks, must have a definite meaning for the context; and this meaning\nis suggested by the words of chap. ii. 14-17. Paul would never have\ndared, he tells us--indeed, he would never have been able--on his own\nmotion, and out of his own resources, either to form conclusions, or to\nexpress them, on the subjects there in view. It is not for any man at\nrandom to say what the true Gospel is, what are its issues, what the\nresponsibilities of its hearers or preachers, what is the spirit\nrequisite in the evangelist, or what are the methods legitimate for him.\nThe Gospel is God's concern, and only those who have been capacitated by\nHim are entitled to speak as Paul has spoken. If this is a narrower\nsense than that which is expounded so vigorously by Calvin, it is more\npertinent, and some will find it quite as pungent. Of all things that\nare done hastily and inconsiderately, by people calling themselves\nChristian, the criticism of evangelists is one of the most conspicuous.\nAt his own prompting, out of his own wise head, any man almost will both\nmake up his mind and speak his mind about any preacher with no sense of\nresponsibility whatever. Paul certainly did form opinions about\npreachers, opinions which were anything but flattering; but he did it\nthrough Jesus Christ and in relation to God; he did it because, as he\nwrites, God had made him sufficient, _i.e._ had given him capacity to\nbe, and the capacity of, a true evangelist, so that he knew both what\nthe Gospel was, and how it ought to be proclaimed. It would silence much\nincompetent, because self-sufficient, criticism, if no one \"thought\nanything\" who had not this qualification.\n\nThe qualification having been mentioned, the Apostle proceeds, as\nusual, to enlarge upon it. \"Our sufficiency is of God; who also made\nus sufficient as ministers of a new covenant; not of letter, but of\nspirit: for the letter killeth, but the spirit giveth life.\" At the\nfirst glance, we see no reason why his thought should take this\ndirection, and it can only be because those whom he is opposing, and\nwith whom he has contrasted himself in chap. ii. 17, are in some sense\nrepresentatives of the old covenant, ministers of the letter in spite\nof their claim to be evangelists, and appealing not to a competency\nwhich came from God, but to one which rested on \"the flesh.\" They\nbased their title to preach on certain advantages of birth, or on\nhaving known Jesus when He lived in the world, or perhaps on\ncertification by others who had known Him; at all events, not on that\nspiritual competence which Paul's ministry at Corinth had shown him to\npossess. That this was really the case will be seen more fully at a\nlater stage (especially in chaps. x. ff.).\n\nWith the words \"ministers of a new covenant\" we enter upon one of the\ngreat passages in St. Paul's writings, and are allowed to see one of\nthe inspiring and governing ideas in his mind. \"Covenant,\" even to\npeople familiar with the Bible, is beginning to be a remote and\ntechnical term; it needs to be translated or explained. If no more\nthan another word is to be used, perhaps \"dispensation\" or\n\"constitution\" would suggest something. God's covenant with Israel was\nthe whole constitution under which God was the God of Israel, and\nIsrael the people of God. The new covenant of which Paul speaks\nnecessarily implies an old one; and the old one is this covenant with\nIsrael. It was a national covenant, and for that, among other reasons,\nit was represented and embodied in legal forms. There was a legal\nconstitution under which the nation lived, and according to which all\nGod's dealings with it, and all its dealings with God, were regulated.\nWithout entering more deeply, in the meantime, into the nature of this\nconstitution, or the religious experiences which were possible to\nthose who lived under it, it is sufficient to notice that the best\nspirits in the nation became conscious of its inadequacy, and\neventually of its failure. Jeremiah, who lived through the long agony\nof his country's dissolution, and saw the final collapse of the\nancient order, felt this failure most deeply, and was consoled by the\nvision of a brighter future. That future rested for him on a more\nintimate relation of God to His people, on a constitution, as we may\nfairly paraphrase his words, less legal and more spiritual. \"Behold,\nthe days come, saith the Lord, that I will make a new covenant with\nthe house of Israel, and with the house of Judah: not according to the\ncovenant that I made with their fathers in the day that I took them by\nthe hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt; which My covenant\nthey brake, although I was an husband unto them, saith the Lord. But\nthis is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after\nthose days, saith the Lord; I will put my law in their inward parts,\nand in their heart will I write it; and I will be their God, and they\nshall be My people: and they shall teach no more every man his\nneighbour, and every man his brother, saying, Know the Lord: for they\nshall all know Me, from the least of them unto the greatest of them,\nsaith the Lord: for I will forgive their iniquity, and their sin will\nI remember no more.\" This wonderful passage, so profound, so\nspiritual, so evangelical, is the utmost reach of prophecy; it is a\nsort of stepping-stone between the Old Testament and the New. Jeremiah\nhas cried to God out of the depths, and God has heard his cry, and\nraised him to a spiritual height from which his eye ranges over the\nland of promise, and rests with yearning on all its grandest features.\nWe do not know whether many of his contemporaries or successors were\nable to climb the mount which offered this glorious prospect; but we\nknow that the promise remained a promise--a rainbow light across the\ndark cloud of national disaster--till Christ claimed its fulfilment as\nHis work. It was His to make good all that the prophets had spoken;\nand when in the last hours of His life He said to His disciples, \"This\nis My blood of the covenant,[24] which is shed for many, for the\nremission of sins,\" it was exactly as if He had laid His hand on that\npassage of Jeremiah, and said, \"This day is this scripture fulfilled\nbefore your eyes.\" By the death of Jesus a new spiritual order was\nestablished; it rested on the forgiveness of sins, it made God\naccessible to all, it made obedience an instinct and a joy; all the\nintercourse of God and man was carried on upon a new footing, under a\nnew constitution; to use the words of the prophet and the apostle, God\nmade a new covenant with His people.\n\nAmong the Christians of the first age, no one so thoroughly\nappreciated the newness of Christianity, or was so immensely impressed\nby it, as St. Paul. The difference between the earlier dispensation\nand the later, between the religion of Moses' disciples and the\nreligion of believers in Jesus Christ, was one that could hardly be\nexaggerated; he himself had been a zealot of the old, he was now a\nzealot of the new; and the gulf between his former and his present\nself was one that no geometry could measure. He had lived, after the\nstraitest sect of the old religion, a Pharisee; touching the\nrighteousness which is in the law he could call himself blameless; he\nhad tasted the whole bitterness of the legalism, the formality, the\nbondage, in which the old covenant entangled those who were devoted to\nit in his days. It is with this in his memory that he here sets the\nold and the new in unrelieved opposition to each other. His feeling is\nlike that of a man who has just been liberated from prison, and whose\nwhole mind is possessed and filled up with the single sensation that\nit is one thing to be chained, and another thing to be free. In the\npassage before us, this is all the Apostle has in view. He speaks as\nif the old covenant and the new had nothing in common, as if the new,\nto borrow Baur's expression, had merely a negative relation to the\nold, as if it could only be contrasted with it, and not compared to\nit, or illustrated by it. And with this restricted view he\ncharacterises the old dispensation as one of letter, and the new as\none of spirit.[25] Speaking out of his own experience, which was not\nsolitary, but typical, he could truly speak thus. The essence of the\nold, to a Pharisee born and bred, was its documentary, statutory\ncharacter: the law, written in letters, on stone tablets or parchment\nsheets, simply confronted men with its uninspiring imperative; it had\nnever yet given any one a good conscience or enabled him to attain to\nthe righteousness of God. The essence of the new, on the other hand,\nwas spirit; the Christian was one in whom, through Christ, the Holy\nSpirit of God dwelt, putting the righteousness of God within his\nreach, enabling him to perfect holiness in God's fear. The contrast is\nmade absolute, _pro tem_. There is no \"spirit\" in the old at all;\nthere is no \"letter\" in the new. This last assertion was more natural\nthen than now; for at the time when Paul wrote this Epistle, there was\nno \"New Testament of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ\" consigned in\ndocuments and collected for the use of the Church. The Gospel existed\nin the world, not at all in books, but only in men; all the epistles\nwere living epistles; there was literally no letter, but only spirit.\n\nThis, doubtless, is the explanation of the blank antithesis of the old\ncovenant and the new in the passage before us. But it is obvious, when\nwe think of it, that this antithesis does not exhaust the relations of\nthe two. It is not the whole truth about the earlier dispensation to\nsay that, while the new is spiritual, it is not. The religion of the\nOld Testament was not mere legalism; if it had been, the Old Testament\nwould be for us an unprofitable and almost an unintelligible book.\nThat religion had its spiritual side, as all but utterly corrupt\nreligions always have; God administered His grace to His people\nthrough it, and in psalms and prophecies we have records of their\nexperiences, which are not legal, but spiritual, and priceless even to\nChristian men. Nor would Paul, under other circumstances, have refused\nto admit this; on the contrary, it is a prominent element in his\nteaching. He knows that the old bears in its bosom the promise of the\nnew, a sum of promises that has been confirmed and made good in Jesus\nChrist (chap. i. 20). He knows that the righteousness of God, which is\nproclaimed in the Gospel, is witnessed to by the law and the prophets\n(Rom. iii. 21). He knows that \"the law,\" even, is \"spiritual\" (Rom.\nvii. 14). He knows that the righteousness of faith was a secret\nrevealed to David (Rom. iv. 6 f.). He would probably have agreed with\nStephen that the oracles received and delivered by Moses in the\nwilderness were \"living\" oracles; and his profound mind would have\nthrilled to hear that great word of Jesus, \"I am not come to destroy,\nbut to fulfil.\" Had he lived to a time like ours, when the Gospel also\nhas been embodied in a book, instead of using \"letter\" and \"spirit\" as\nmutually exclusive, he would have admitted, as we do, that both ideas\napply, in some sense, to both dispensations, and that it is possible\nto take the old and the new alike either in the letter or in the\nspirit. Nevertheless, he would have been entitled to say that, if they\nwere to be characterised in their differences, they must be\ncharacterised as he has done it: the mark of the old, as opposed to\nthe new, is literalism, or legalism; the mark of the new, as opposed\nto the old, is spirituality, or freedom. They differ as law differs\nfrom life, as compulsion from inspiration. Taken thus, no one can\nhave any difficulty in agreeing with him.\n\nBut the Apostle does not rest in generalities: he goes on to a more\nparticular comparison of the old and the new dispensations, and\nespecially to a demonstration that the new is the more glorious. He\nstarts with a statement of their working, as dependent on their nature\njust described. One is letter; the other, spirit. Well, the letter\nkills, but the spirit gives life. A sentence so pregnant as this, and\nso capable of various applications, must have been very perplexing to\nthe Corinthians, had they not been fairly acquainted beforehand with\nthe Apostle's \"form of doctrine\" (Rom. vi. 17). It condenses in itself\na whole cycle of his characteristic thoughts. All that he says in the\nEpistles to the Romans and the Galatians about the working of the law,\nin its relation to the flesh, is represented in \"the letter killeth.\"\nThe power of the law to create the consciousness of sin and to\nintensify it; to stimulate transgression, and so make sin exceeding\nsinful, and shut men up in despair; to pass sentence upon the guilty,\nthe hopeless sentence of death,--all this is involved in the words.\nThe fulness of meaning is as ample in \"the spirit giveth life.\" The\nSpirit of Christ, given to those who receive Christ in the Gospel, is\nan infinite power and an infinite promise. It includes the reversal of\nall that the letter has wrought. The sentence of death is reversed;\nthe impotence to good is counteracted and overcome; the soul looks out\nto, and anticipates, not the blackness of darkness for ever, but the\neverlasting glory of Christ.[26] When the Apostle has written these\ntwo little sentences--when he has supplied \"letter\" and \"spirit\" with\nthe predicates \"kill\" and \"make alive,\" in the sense which they bear\nin the Christian revelation--he has gone as far as the mind of man can\ngo in stating an effective contrast. But he works it out with\nreference to some special points in which the superiority of the new\nto the old is to be observed.\n\n(1) In the first place, the ministry of the old was a ministry of death.\nEven as such it had a glory, or splendour, of its own. The face of\nMoses, its great minister, shone after he had been in the presence of\nGod; and though that brightness was passing away even as men caught\nsight of it (\u03c4\u1f74\u03bd \u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u03b1\u03c1\u03b3\u03bf\u03c5\u03bc\u03ad\u03bd\u03b7\u03bd is partic. impf.), it was so resplendent\nas to dazzle the beholders. But the ministry of the new is a ministry of\nspirit: and who would not argue _a fortiori_ that it should appear in\nglory greater still? Both the \u03bc\u1fb6\u03bb\u03bb\u03bf\u03bd (\"rather\"), and the future (\u1f14\u03c3\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9),\nin ver. 8, are logical. Paul speaks, to use Bengel's expression, looking\nforward as it were from the Old Testament into the New. He does not say\nin what the glory of the new consists. He does not say that it is\nveiled at present, and will be manifested when Christ comes to\ntransfigure His own. Even the use of \"hope\" in ver. 12 does not prove\nthis. He leaves it quite indefinite; and arguing from the nature of the\ntwo ministries, which has just been explained, simply concludes that in\nglory the new must far transcend the old.\n\n(2) In vv. 9 and 10 he puts a new point upon this. \"Death\" and \"life\"\nare here replaced by \"condemnation\" and \"righteousness.\" It is through\ncondemnation that man becomes the prey of death; and the grace which\nreigns in him to eternal life reigns through righteousness (Rom. v.\n21). The contrast of these two words is very significant for Paul's\nconception of the Gospel: it shows how essential to his idea of\nrighteousness, how fundamental in it, is the thought of acquittal or\nacceptance with God. Men are bad men, sinful men, under God's\ncondemnation; and he cannot conceive a Gospel at all which does not\nannounce, at the very outset, the removal of that condemnation, and a\ndeclaration in the sinner's favour. Perhaps there are other ways of\nconceiving men, and other aspects in which God can come to them as\ntheir Saviour; but the Pauline Gospel has proved itself, and will\nalways prove itself anew, the Gospel for the sinful, who know the\nmisery of condemnation and despair. Mere pardon, as it has been\ncalled, may be a meagre conception, but it is that without which no\nother Christian conception can exist for a moment. That which lies at\nthe bottom of the new covenant, and supports all its magnificent\npromises and hopes, is this: \"I will forgive their iniquities, and I\nwill remember their sins no more.\" If we could imagine this taken\naway, what were left? Of course the righteousness which the Gospel\nproclaims _is_ more than pardon; it is not exhausted when we say it is\nthe opposite of condemnation; but unless we feel that the very nerve\nof it lies in the removal of condemnation, we shall never understand\nthe New Testament tone in speaking of it. It is this which explains\nthe joyous rebound of the Apostle's spirit whenever he encounters the\nsubject; he remembers the black cloud, and now there is clear shining;\nhe was under sentence then, but now he is justified by faith, and has\npeace with God. He cannot exaggerate the contrast, nor the greater\nglory of the new state. Granting that the ministry of condemnation had\nits glory--that the revelation of law \"had an austere majesty of its\nown\"--does not the ministry of righteousness, the Gospel which\nannulled the condemnation and restored man to peace with God, overflow\nwith glory? When he thinks of it, he is tempted to withdraw the\nconcession he has made. We may call the old dispensation and its\nministry glorious if we like; they are glorious when they stand alone;\nbut when comparison is made with the new,[27] they are not glorious at\nall. The stars are bright till the moon rises; the moon herself reigns\nin heaven till her splendour pales before the sun; but when the sun\nshines in his strength, there is no other glory in the sky. All the\nglories of the old covenant have vanished for Paul in the light which\nshines from the Cross and from the Throne of Christ.\n\n(3) A final superiority belongs to the new dispensation and its\nministry as compared with the old--the superiority of permanence to\ntransiency. \"If that which passeth away _was_ with glory, much more\nthat which remaineth _is_ in glory.\" The verbs here are supplied by\nthe translators, but one may question whether the contrast of past and\npresent was so definite in the Apostle's mind. I think not, and the\nreference to Moses' face does not prove that it was. All through these\ncomparisons St. Paul expresses himself with the utmost generality;\nlogical and ideal, not temporal, relations, dominate his thoughts. The\nlaw _was_ given in glory (\u1f10\u03b3\u03b5\u03bd\u03ae\u03b8\u03b7 \u1f10\u03bd \u03b4\u03cc\u03be\u1fc3, ver. 7)--there is no\ndispute about that; but what the eleventh verse makes prominent is\nthat while glory is the attendant or accompaniment of the transient,\nit is the element of the permanent. The law is indeed of God; it has a\nfunction in the economy of God; it is at the very lowest a negative\npreparation for the Gospel; it shuts men up to the acceptance of God's\nmercy. In this respect the glory on Moses' face represents the real\ngreatness which belongs to the law as a power used by God in the\nworking out of His loving purpose. But at the best the law only shuts\nmen up to Christ, and then its work is done. The true greatness of God\nis revealed, and with it His true glory, once for all, in the Gospel.\nThere is nothing beyond the righteousness of God, manifested in Christ\nJesus, for the acceptance of faith. That is God's last word to the\nworld: it has absorbed in it even the glory of the law; and it is\nbright for ever with a glory above all other. It is God's chief end to\nreveal this glory in the Gospel, and to make men partakers of it; it\nhas been so always, is so still, and ever shall be; and in the\nconsciousness that he has seen and been saved by the eternal love of\nGod, and is now a minister of it, the Apostle claims this finality of\nthe new covenant as its crowning glory. The law, like the lower gifts\nof the Christian life, passes away; but the new covenant abides, for\nit is the revelation of love--that love which is the being and the\nglory of God Himself.\n\nThese qualities of the Christian dispensation, which constitute its\nnewness, are too readily lost sight of. It is hard to appreciate and\nto live up to them, and hence they are always lapsing out of view, and\nrequiring to be rediscovered. In the first age of Christianity there\nwere many myriads of Jews, the Book of Acts tells us, who had very\nlittle sense of the newness of the Gospel; they were exceedingly\nzealous for the law, even for the letter of all its ritual\nprescriptions: Paul and his spiritual conception of Christianity were\ntheir bugbear. In the first half of the second century the religion\neven of the Gentile Churches had already become more legal than\nevangelical; there was wanting any sufficient apprehension of the\nspirituality, the freedom, and the newness of Christianity as opposed\nto Judaism; and though the reaction of Marcion, who denied that there\nwas any connexion whatever between the Old Testament and the New, went\nto a false and perverse extreme, it was the natural, and in its\nmotives the legitimate, protest of spirit and life against letter and\nlaw. The Reformation in the sixteenth century was essentially a\nmovement of similar character: it was the rediscovery of the Pauline\nGospel, or of the Gospel in those characteristics of it which made\nPaul's heart leap for joy--its justifying righteousness, its\nspirituality, its liberty. In a Protestant scholasticism this glorious\nGospel has again been lost oftener than once; it is lost when \"a\nlearned ministry\" deals with the New Testament writings as the scribes\ndealt with the Old; it is lost also--for extremes meet--when an\nunlearned piety swears by verbal, even by literal, inspiration, and\ntakes up to mere documents an attitude which in principle is fatal to\nChristianity. It is in the life of the Church--especially in that life\nwhich communicates itself, and makes the Christian community what the\nJewish never was, essential a missionary community--that the safeguard\nof all these high characteristics lies. A Church devoted to learning,\nor to the maintenance of a social or political position, or even\nmerely to the cultivation of a type of character among its own\nmembers, may easily cease to be spiritual, and lapse into legal\nreligion: a Church actively engaged propagating itself never can. It\nis not with the \"letter\" one can hopefully address unbelieving men; it\nis only with the power of the Holy Spirit at work in the heart; and\nwhere the Spirit is, there is liberty. None are so \"sound\" on the\nessentials of the faith as men with the truly missionary spirit; but\nat the same time none are so completely emancipated, and that by the\nself-same Spirit, from all that is not itself spiritual.\n\nFOOTNOTES:\n\n[24] The true reading in Matt. xxvi. 28 omits \"new,\" but the reference\nis unmistakable.\n\n[25] Grammatically, it is probable that \u03b3\u03c1\u03ac\u03bc\u03bc\u03b1\u03c4\u03bf\u03c2 and \u03c0\u03bd\u03b5\u03cd\u03bc\u03b1\u03c4\u03bf\u03c2 in ver.\n6 depend, not on \u03b4\u03b9\u03b1\u03b8\u03ae\u03ba\u03b7\u03c2, but on \u03b4\u03b9\u03b1\u03ba\u03cc\u03bd\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2; but the sense is all one.\n\n[26] The contrast of \"letter\" and \"spirit\" has, as is well known, been\ntaken in various ways. That which is given above undoubtedly\nrepresents St. Paul's mind, and may be called the historical\ninterpretation. An interpretation so common in early times that it\nmight fairly be called the patristic, would explain the words as\nmeaning that the _literal_ sense of the Scriptures, especially of the\nOld Testament, is fatally misleading, and that we must find what that\nliteral sense represents to the laws of allegory, if we would make it\na word of life (cf. in Rev. xi. 8, \"the great city, which\n_spiritually_ is called Sodom and Egypt, where also our Lord was\ncrucified\"). There is another interpretation still, which may be\ncalled the literary or practical one. According to this, the Apostle\nmeans that the spiritual life, whether of intelligence or conscience,\nis strangled by literalism; we must regard not words as such, but the\nspirit and purpose of their author, if we are to have life and\nprogress. This is perfectly true, but perfectly irrelevant, and is a\ngood example of the free-and-easy way in which the Bible is quoted by\nthose who do not study it.\n\n[27] Chrysostom explains \u1f11\u03bd \u03c4\u03bf\u03cd\u03c4\u1ff3 \u03c4\u1ff7 \u03bc\u03ad\u03c1\u03b5\u03b9 by \u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u1f70 \u03c4\u1f78\u03bd \u03c4\u1fc6\u03c2 \u03c3\u03c5\u03b3\u03ba\u03c1\u03af\u03c3\u03b5\u03c9\u03c2\n\u03bb\u03cc\u03b3\u03bf\u03bd, and this is substantially right. But I think the words merely\nanticipate \u1f11\u03af\u03bd\u03b5\u03ba\u03b5\u03bd \u03c4\u1fc6\u03c2 \u1f51\u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u03b2\u03b1\u03bb\u03bb\u03bf\u03cd\u03c3\u03b7\u03c2 \u03b4\u03cc\u03be\u03b7\u03c2.\n\n\n\n\n X\n\n _THE TRANSFIGURING SPIRIT_\n\n \"Having therefore such a hope, we use great boldness of speech,\n and _are_ not as Moses, _who_ put a veil upon his face, that the\n children of Israel should not look stedfastly on the end of that\n which was passing away: but their minds were hardened: for until\n this very day at the reading of the old covenant the same veil\n remaineth unlifted; which veil is done away in Christ. But unto\n this day, whensoever Moses is read, a veil lieth upon their heart.\n But whensoever it shall turn to the Lord, the veil is taken away.\n Now the Lord is the Spirit: and where the Spirit of the Lord is,\n _there_ is liberty. But we all, with unveiled face reflecting as a\n mirror the glory of the Lord, are transformed into the same image\n from glory to glory, even as from the Lord the Spirit.\"--2 COR.\n iii. 12-18 (R.V.).\n\n\nThe \"hope\" which here explains the Apostle's freedom of speech is to all\nintents and purposes the same as the \"confidence\" in ver. 4.[28] It is\nmuch easier to suppose that the word is thus used, with a certain\nlatitude, as it might be in English, than to force upon it a reference\nto the glory to be revealed when Christ comes again, and to give the\nsame future reference to \"glory\" all through this passage. The new\ncovenant is present, and present in its glory; and though it has a\nfuture, with which the Apostle's hope is bound up, it is not in view of\nits future only, it is because of what it is even now, that he is so\ngrandly confident, and uses such boldness of speech. It is quite fair to\ninfer from chap. iv. 3--\"if our Gospel is veiled, it is veiled in those\nthat are perishing\"--that Paul's opponents at Corinth had charged him\nwith behaviour of another kind. They had accused him of making a mystery\nof his Gospel--preaching it in such a fashion that no one could really\nsee it, or understand what he meant. If there is any charge which the\ntrue preacher will feel keenly, and resent vehemently, it is this. It is\nhis first duty to deliver his message with a plainness that defies\nmisunderstanding. He is sent to all men on an errand of life or death;\nand to leave any man wondering, after the message has been delivered,\nwhat it is about, is the worst sort of treachery. It belies the Gospel,\nand God who is its author. It may be due to pride, or to a misguided\nintention to commend the Gospel to the wisdom or the prejudices of men;\nbut it is never anything else than a fatal mistake.\n\nPaul not only resents the charge; he feels it so acutely that he finds\nan ingenious way of retorting it. \"We,\" he says, \"the ministers of the\nnew covenant, we who preach life, righteousness, and everlasting\nglory, have nothing to hide; we wish every one to know everything\nabout the dispensation which we serve. It is the representatives of\nthe old who are really open to the charge of using concealment; the\nfirst and the greatest of them all, Moses himself, put a veil on his\nface, that[29] the children of Israel should not look stedfastly on\nthe end of that which was passing away. The glory on his face was a\nfading glory, because it was the glory of a temporary dispensation;\nbut he did not wish the Israelites to see clearly that it was destined\nto disappear; so he veiled his face, and left them to think the law a\npermanent divine institution.\"\n\nPerhaps the best thing to do with this singular interpretation is not\nto take it too seriously. Even sober expositors like Chrysostom and\nCalvin have thought it necessary to argue gravely that the Apostle is\nnot accusing the law, or saying anything insulting of Moses; while\nSchmiedel, on the other hand, insists that a grave moral charge _is_\nmade against Moses, and that Paul most unjustly uses the Old\nTestament, in its own despite, to prove its own transitoriness. I\nbelieve it would be far truer to say that the character of Moses never\ncrossed Paul's mind in the whole passage, for better or worse; he only\nremembered, as he smarted under the accusation of veiling his Gospel\nof the new covenant, a certain transaction under the old covenant in\nwhich a veil did figure--a transaction which a Rabbinical\ninterpretation, whimsical indeed to us, but provoking if not\nconvincing to his adversaries, enabled him to turn against them. As\nfor proving the transitoriness of the Old Testament by a forced and\nillegitimate argument, that transitoriness was abundantly established\nto Paul, as it is to us, on real grounds; nothing whatever depends on\nwhat is here said of Moses and the veil. It is not necessary, if we\ntake this view, to go into the historical interpretation of the\npassage in Exod. xxxiv. 29-35. The comparison of the Apostle with the\nOld Testament writer has been made more difficult for the English\nreader by the serious error in the Authorised Version of Exod. xxxiv.\n33. Instead of \"_till_ Moses had done speaking with them,\" we ought to\nread, as in the Revised Version, \"_when_ Moses had done speaking.\"\nThis exactly reverses the meaning. Moses spoke to the people with face\nbare and radiant; the glory was to be visible at least in his official\nintercourse with them, or _whenever he spoke for God_. At other times\nhe wore the veil, putting it off, however, when he went into the\ntabernacle--that is, _whenever he spoke with God_. In all divine\nrelations, then, we should naturally infer, there was to be the open\nand shining face; in other words, so far as he acted as mediator of\nthe old covenant, Moses really acted in the spirit of Paul. It would\ntherefore have been unjust in the Apostle to charge him with hiding\nanything, if the charge had really meant more than this--that Paul saw\nin his use of the veil a symbol of the fact that the children of\nIsrael did not see that the old covenant was transitory, and that its\nglory was to be lost in that of the new. No one can deny that this\n_was_ the fact, and no one therefore need be exercised if Paul\npictured it in the manner of his own time and race, and not in the\nmanner of ours. To suppose that he means to charge Moses with a\ndeliberate act of dishonesty is to suppose what no sensible person\nwill ever credit; and we may return, without more ado, to the painful\nsituation which he contemplates.\n\n_Their minds were hardened._ This is stated historically, and seems to\nrefer in the first instance to those who watched Moses put on the\nveil, and became insensible, as he did so, to the nature of the old\ncovenant. But it is applicable to the Jewish race at all periods of\ntheir history; they never discovered the secret which Moses hid from\ntheir forefathers beneath the veil. The only result that followed the\nlabours even of great prophets like Isaiah had been the deepening of\nthe darkness; having eyes the people saw not, having ears they heard\nnot; their heart was fat and heavy, so that they did not apprehend the\nways of God nor turn to Him. All around him the Apostle saw the\nmelancholy evidence that there had been no change for the better.\nUntil this day the same veil remains, when the Old Testament is\nread,[30] not taken away; for it is only undone in Christ, and of\nChrist they will know nothing. He repeats the sad statement, varying\nit slightly to indicate that the responsibility for a condition so\nblind and dreary rests not with the old covenant itself, but with\nthose who live under it. \"Until this day, I say, whensoever Moses is\nread, a veil lies upon their heart.\"\n\nThis witness, we must acknowledge, is almost as true in the nineteenth\ncentury as in the first. The Jews still exist as a race and a sect,\nacknowledging the Old Testament as a revelation from God, basing their\nreligion upon it, keeping their ancient law so far as circumstances\nenable them to keep it, not convinced that as a religious constitution\nit has been superseded by a new one. Many of them, indeed, have\nabandoned it without becoming Christians. But in so doing they have\nbecome secularists; they have not appreciated the old covenant to the\nfull, and then outgrown it; they have been led for various reasons to\ndeny that there ever was anything divine in it, and have renounced\ntogether its discipline and its hopes. Only where the knowledge of the\nChrist has been received is the veil which lies upon their hearts\ntaken away; they can then appreciate both all the virtues of the\nancient dispensation and all its defects; they can glorify God for\nwhat it was and for what it shut them up to; they can see that in all\nits parts it had a reference to something lying beyond itself--to a\n\"new thing\" that God would do for His people; and in welcoming the new\ncovenant, and its Mediator Jesus Christ, they can feel that they are\nnot making void, but establishing, the law.\n\nThis is their hope, and to this the Apostle looks in ver. 16: \"But\nwhensoever it shall turn to the Lord, the veil is taken away.\" The\nGreek expression of this passage is so closely modelled on that of\nExod. xxxiv. 34, that Westcott and Hort print it as a quotation. Moses\nevidently is still in the Apostle's mind. The veiling of his face\nsymbolised the nation's blindness; the nation's hope is to be seen in\nthat action in which Moses was unveiled. He uncovered his face when he\nturned from the people to speak to God. \"Even so,\" says the Apostle,\n\"when _they_ turn to the Lord, the veil of which we have been speaking\nis taken away,[31] and they see clearly.\"[32] One can hardly avoid\nfeeling in this a reminiscence of the Apostle's own conversion. He is\nthinking not only of the unveiling of Moses, but of the scales which\nfell from his own eyes when he was baptised in the name of Jesus, and\nwas filled with the Holy Ghost, and saw the old covenant and its glory\nlost and fulfilled in the new. He knew how stupendous was the change\ninvolved here; it meant a revolution in the whole constitution of the\nJews' spiritual world as vast as that which was wrought in the natural\nworld when the sun supplanted the earth as the centre of our system.\nBut the gain was corresponding. The soul was delivered from an\n_impasse_. Under the old covenant, as bitter experience had shown him,\nthe religious life had come to a dead-lock; the conscience was\nconfronted with a torturing, and in its very nature insoluble,\nproblem: man, burdened and enslaved by sin, was required to attain to\na righteousness which should please God. The contradictions of this\nposition were solved, its mystery was abolished, when the soul turned\nto the Lord, and appropriated by faith the righteousness and life of\nGod in him. The old covenant found its place, an intelligible and\nworthy though subordinate place, in the grand programme of redemption;\nthe strife between the soul and God, between the soul and the\nconditions of existence, ceased; life opened out again; there was a\nlarge room to move in, an inspiring power within; in one word, there\nwas spiritual life and liberty, and Christ was the author of it all.\n\nThis is the force of the seventeenth verse: \"Now the Lord is the\nSpirit: and where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is liberty.\" The\nLord, of course, is Christ, and the Spirit is that of which Paul has\nalready spoken in the sixth verse. It is the Holy Spirit, the Lord\nand Giver of life under the new covenant. He who turns to Christ\nreceives this Spirit; it is through it that Christ dwells in His\npeople; what are called \"fruits of the Spirit\" are traits of Christ's\nown character which the Spirit produces in the saints; practically,\ntherefore, the two may be identified, and hence the expression \"the\nLord is the Spirit,\" though startling at first sight, is not improper,\nand ought not to mislead.[33] It is a mistake to connect it with such\npassages as Rom. i. 4, and to draw inferences from it as to Paul's\nconception of the person of Christ. He does not say \"the Lord is\nspirit,\" but \"the Lord is the Spirit\"; what is in view is not the\nperson of Christ so much as His power. To identify the Lord and the\nSpirit without qualification, in the face of the benediction in chap.\nxiii. 14, is out of the question. The truth of the passage is the same\nas that of Rom. viii. 9 ff.: \"If any man have not _the Spirit of\nChrist_, he is none of His. And if _Christ is in you_,\" etc. Here, so\nfar as the practical experience of Christians goes, no distinction is\nmade between the Spirit of Christ and Christ Himself; Christ dwells in\nChristians through His Spirit. The very same truth, as is well known,\npervades the chapters in the Fourth Gospel in which Christ consoles\nHis disciples for His departure from this world; He will not leave\nthem orphans--He will come to them, and remain with them in the other\nComforter. To turn to Christ, the Apostle wishes to assert with the\nutmost emphasis, is not to do a thing which has no virtue and no\nconsequences; it is to turn to one who has received of the Father the\ngift of the Holy Ghost, and who immediately sets up the new spiritual\nlife, which is nothing less than His own life, by that Spirit, in the\nbelieving soul. And summing up in one word the grand characteristic\nand distinction of the new covenant, as realised by this indwelling of\nChrist through His Spirit, he concludes: \"And where the Spirit of the\nLord is, there is liberty.\"\n\nIn the interpretation of the last word, we must have respect to the\ncontext; liberty has its meaning in contrast with that state to which\nthe old covenant had reduced those who adhered to it. It means freedom\nfrom the law; freedom, fundamentally, from its condemnation, thanks to\nthe gift of righteousness in Christ; freedom, also, from its letter,\nas something simply without us and over against us. No written word,\nas such, can ever be pleaded against the voice of the Spirit within.\nEven the words we call in an eminent sense \"inspired,\" words of the\nSpirit, are subject to this law: they do not put a limit to the\nliberty of the spiritual man. He can overrule the letter of them when\nthe literal interpretation or application would contravene the spirit\nwhich is common both to them and him. This principle is capable of\nbeing abused, no doubt, and by bad men and fanatics has been abused;\nbut its worst abuses can hardly have done more harm than the pedantic\nword-worship which has often lost the soul even of the New Testament,\nand read the words of the Lord and His Apostles with a veil upon its\nface through which nothing could be seen. There is such a thing as an\nunspiritual scrupulosity in dealing with the New Testament, now that\nwe have it in documentary form, just as there used to be in dealing\nwith the Old; and we ought to remind ourselves continually that the\ndocumentary form is an accident, not an essential, of the new\ncovenant. That covenant existed, and men lived under it and enjoyed\nits blessings, before it had any written documents at all; and we\nshall not appreciate its characteristics, and especially this one of\nits spiritual freedom, unless we put ourselves occasionally, in\nimagination, in their place. It is far easier to make Paul mean too\nlittle than too much; and the liberty of the Spirit in which he exults\nhere covers, we may be sure, not only liberty from condemnation, and\nliberty from the unspiritual yoke of the ritual law, but liberty from\nall that is in its nature statutory, liberty to organise the new life,\nand to legislate for it, from within.\n\nThe bearing of this passage on the religious blindness of the Jews\nought not to hide from us its permanent application. The religious\ninsensibility of his countrymen will cease, Paul says; their religious\nperplexities will be solved, when they turn to Christ. This is the\nbeginning of all intelligence, of all freedom, of all hope, in things\nspiritual. Much of the religious doubt and confusion of our own times\nis due to the preoccupation of men's minds with religion at points\nfrom which Christ is invisible. But it is He who is the key to _all_\nhuman experiences as well as to the Old Testament; it is He who\nanswers the questions of the world as well as the questions of the\nJews; it is He who takes _our_ feet out of the net, opens the gate of\nrighteousness before us, and gives us spiritual freedom. It is like\nfinding a pearl of great price when the soul discovers this, and to\npoint it out to others is to do them a priceless service. Disregard\neverything else in the meantime, if you are bewildered, baffled, in\nbonds which you cannot break; turn to Jesus Christ, as Moses turned to\nGod, with face uncovered; put down prejudice, preconceptions, pride,\nthe disposition to make demands; only look stedfastly till you see\nwhat He is, and all that perplexes you will pass away, or appear in a\nnew light, and serve a new and spiritual purpose.\n\nSomething like this larger application of his words passed, we may\nsuppose, before the Apostle's mind when he wrote the eighteenth verse.\nIn the grandeur of the truth which rises upon him he forgets his\ncontroversy and becomes a poet. We breathe the ampler ether, the diviner\nair, as we read: \"But we all, with unveiled face beholding as in a glass\nthe glory of the Lord, are transformed into the same image from glory to\nglory, even as from the Lord the Spirit.\" I have kept here for\n\u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u03bf\u03c0\u03c4\u03c1\u03b9\u03b6\u03cc\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd\u03bf\u03b9 the rendering of the Authorised Version, which in the\nRevised has been relegated to the margin, and replaced by \"reflecting as\na mirror.\" There do not seem to be sufficient grounds for the change,\nand the old translation is defended in Grimm's Lexicon, in Winer's\nGrammar, and by Meyer, Heinrici, and Beet. The active voice of the verb\n\u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u03bf\u03c0\u03c4\u03c1\u03af\u03b6\u03c9 means \"to exhibit in a mirror\"; and the middle, \"to mirror\noneself\"--_i.e._, \"to look at oneself in a mirror.\" This, at least, is\nthe sense of most of the examples of the middle which are found in Greek\nwriters; but as it is quite inapplicable here, the question of\ninterpretation becomes rather difficult. It is, however, in accordance\nwith analogy to say that if the active means \"to show in a mirror,\" the\nmiddle means \"to get shown to one in a mirror,\" or, as the Authorised\nVersion puts it, \"to behold in a mirror.\" I cannot make out that any\nanalogy favours the new rendering, \"reflecting as a mirror\"; and the\nauthority of Chrysostom, which would otherwise be considerable on this\nside, is lessened by the fact that he seems never to have raised the\nquestion, and in point of fact combines both renderings.[34] His\nillustration of the polished silver lying in the sunshine, and sending\nback the rays which strike it, is in favour of the change; but when he\nwrites, \"We not only _look upon_ the glory of God, but also catch thence\na kind of radiance,\" he may fairly be claimed for the other side. There\nare two reasons also which seem to me to have great weight in favour of\nthe old rendering: first, the expression \"with unveiled face,\" which, as\nMeyer remarks, is naturally of a piece with \"beholding\"; and, second, an\nunequivocal example of the middle voice of \u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u03bf\u03c0\u03c4\u03c1\u03af\u03b6\u03bf\u03bc\u03b1\u03b9 in the sense of\n\"seeing,\" while no unequivocal example can be produced for \"reflecting.\"\nThis example is found in Philo i. 107 (_Leg. Alleg._, iii. 33), where\nMoses prays to God: \"Show not Thyself to me through heaven or earth, or\nwater or air, or anything at all that comes into being; nor let me see\nThy form mirrored in any other thing than in Thee, even in God\" (\u039c\u03b7\u03b4\u1f72\n\u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u03bf\u03c0\u03c4\u03c1\u03b9\u03c3\u03b1\u03af\u03bc\u03b7\u03bd \u1f10\u03bd \u1f04\u03bb\u03bb\u1ff3 \u03c4\u03b9\u03bd\u1f76 \u03c4\u1f74\u03bd \u03c3\u1f74\u03bd \u1f30\u03b4\u03ad\u03b1\u03bd \u1f22 \u1f10\u03bd \u03c3\u03bf\u1f76 \u03c4\u1ff7 \u0398\u03b5\u1ff7). This seems\nto me decisive, and there is the less reason to reject it on other than\nlinguistic grounds, when we consider that the idea of \"reflecting,\" if\nit is given up in \u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u03bf\u03c0\u03c4\u03c1\u03b9\u03b6\u03cc\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd\u03bf\u03b9, is conserved in \u03bc\u03b5\u03c4\u03b1\u03bc\u03bf\u03c1\u03c6\u03bf\u03cd\u03bc\u03b5\u03b8\u03b1. The\ntransformation has the reflection of Christ's glory for its effect, not\nfor its cause; but the reflection, eventually, is there.\n\nAssuming, then, that \"beholding as in a glass\" is the right\ninterpretation of this hard word, let us go on to what the Apostle\nsays. \"We all\" probably means \"all Christians,\" and not only \"all\nChristian teachers.\" If there is a comparison implied, it is between\nthe two dispensations, and the experiences open to those who lived\nunder them, not between the mediator of the old and the heralds of the\nnew. Under the old covenant one only saw the glory; now the beatific\nvision is open to all. We all behold it \"with unveiled face.\" There is\nnothing on Christ's part that leads to disguise, and nothing on ours\nthat comes between us and Him. The darkness is past, the true light\nalready shines, and Christian souls cannot look on it too fixedly, or\ndrink it in to excess. But what is meant by \"the glory of the Lord\" on\nwhich we gaze with face unveiled?\n\nIt will not be questioned, by those who are at home in St. Paul's\nthoughts, that \"the Lord\" means the exalted Saviour, and that the\nglory must be something which belongs to Him. Indeed, if we remember\nthat in the First Epistle, chap. ii. 8, He is characteristically\ndescribed by the Apostle as \"the Lord of glory,\" we shall not feel it\ntoo much to say that the glory is _everything_ which belongs to Him.\nThere is not any aspect of the exalted Christ, there is not any\nrepresentation of Him in the Gospel, there is not any function which\nHe exercises, that does not come under this head. \"In His temple\neverything saith Glory!\" There is a glory even in the mode of His\nexistence: St. Paul's conception of Him is dominated always by that\nappearance on the way to Damascus, when he saw the Christ through a\nlight above the brightness of the sun. It is His glory that He shares\nthe Father's throne,[35] that He is head of the Church, possessor and\nbestower of all the fulness of divine grace, the coming Judge of the\nworld, conqueror of every hostile power, intercessor for His own,\nand, in short, bearer of all the majesty which belongs to His kingly\noffice. The essential thing in all this--essential to the\nunderstanding of the Apostle, and to the existence of the apostolic\n\"_Gospel of the glory of Christ_\" (chap. iv. 4)--is that the glory in\nquestion is the glory of a Living Person. When Paul thinks of it, he\ndoes not look back, he looks up; he does not remember, he beholds in a\nglass; the glory of the Lord has no meaning for him apart from the\npresent exaltation of the Risen Christ. \"The Lord reigneth; He is\napparelled with majesty\"--that is the anthem of His praise.\n\nI have insisted on this, because, in a certain reaction from what was\nperhaps an exaggerated Paulinism, there is a tendency to misapply even\nthe most characteristic and vital passages in St. Paul's Gospel, and\npre-eminently to misapply passages like this. Nothing could be more\nmisleading than to substitute here for the glory of the exalted Christ\nas mirrored in the apostolic Gospel that moral beauty which was seen\nin Jesus of Nazareth. Of course I do not mean to deny that the moral\nloveliness of Jesus is glorious; nor do I question that in the\ncontemplation of it in the pages of our Gospels--_subject to one grand\ncondition_--a transforming power is exercised through it; but I do\ndeny that any such thing was in the mind of St. Paul. The subject of\nthe Apostle's Gospel was not Jesus the carpenter of Nazareth, but\nChrist the Lord of glory; men, as he understood the matter, were\nsaved, not by dwelling on the wonderful words and deeds of One who had\nlived some time ago, and reviving these in their imagination, but by\nreceiving the almighty, emancipating, quickening Spirit of One who\nlived and reigned for evermore. The transformation here spoken of is\nnot the work of a powerful imagination, which can make the figure in\nthe pages of the Gospels live again, and suffuse the soul with feeling\nas it gazes upon it; preach this as gospel who will, it was never\npreached by an apostle of Jesus Christ. It is the work of the Spirit,\nand the Spirit is given, not to the memory or imagination which can\nvivify the past, but to the faith which sees Christ upon His throne.\n_And it is subject to the condition of faith in the living Christ that\ncontemplation of Jesus in the Gospels changes us into the same image._\nThere can be no doubt that at the present time many are falling back\nupon this contemplation in a despairing rather than a believing mood;\nwhat they seek and find in it is rather a poetic consolation than\nreligious inspiration; their faith in the living Christ is gone, or is\nso uncertain as to be practically of no saving power, and they have\nrecourse to the memory of what Jesus was as at least something to\ncling to. \"We thought that it had been He which should have delivered\nIsrael.\" But surely it is as clear as day that in religion--in the\nmatter of redemption--we must deal, not with the dead, but with the\nliving. Paul may have known less or more of the contents of our first\nthree Gospels; he may have valued them more or less adequately; but\njust because he had been saved by Christ, and was preaching Christ as\na Saviour, the centre of his thoughts and affections was not Galilee,\nbut \"the heavenlies.\" _There_ the Lord of glory reigned; and from that\nworld He sent the Spirit which changed His people into His image. And\nso it must always be, if Christianity is to be a living religion.\nLeave out this, and not only is the Pauline Gospel lost, but\neverything is lost which could be called Gospel in the New Testament.\n\nThe Lord of glory, Paul teaches here, is the pattern and prophecy of\na glory to be revealed in us; and as we contemplate Him in the mirror\nof the Gospel,[36] we are gradually transformed into the same image,\neven as by the Lord the Spirit. The transformation, these last words\nagain teach, is not accomplished by beholding, but while we behold; it\ndoes not depend on the vividness with which we can imagine the past,\nbut on the present power of Christ working in us. The result is such\nas befits the operation of such a power. We are changed into the image\nof Him from whom it proceeds. We are made like Himself. It may seem\nfar more natural to say that the believer is made like Jesus of\nNazareth, than that he is made like the Lord of glory; but that does\nnot entitle us to shift the centre of gravity in the Apostle's\nteaching, and it only tempts us to ignore one of the most prominent\nand enviable characteristics of the New Testament religious life.\nChrist is on His throne, and His people are _exalted and victorious_\nin Him. When we forget Christ's exaltation in our study of His earthly\nlife--when we are so preoccupied, it may even be so fascinated, with\nwhat He was, that we forget what He is--when, in other words, a pious\nhistorical imagination takes the place of a living religious\nfaith--_that victorious consciousness is lost_, and in a most\nessential point the image of the Lord is not reproduced in the\nbeliever. This is why the Pauline point of view--if indeed it is to be\ncalled Pauline, and not simply Christian--is essential. Christianity\nis a religion, not merely a history, though it should be the history\ntold by Matthew, Mark, and Luke; and the chance of having the history\nitself appreciated for religion is that He who is its subject shall\nbe contemplated, not in the dim distance of the past, but in the glory\nof His heavenly reign, and that He shall be recognised, not merely as\none who lived a perfect life in His own generation, but as the Giver\nof life eternal by His Spirit to all who turn to Him. The Church will\nalways be justified, while recognising that Christianity is a\nhistorical religion, in giving prominence, not to its historicity, but\nto what makes it a religion at all--namely, the present exaltation of\nChrist. This involves everything, and determines, as St. Paul tells us\nhere, the very form and spirit of her own life.\n\nFOOTNOTES:\n\n[28] In the LXX. \u1f11\u03bb\u03c0\u03af\u03b6\u03c9 is often used as the rendering of \u05d1\u05b8\u05bc\u05d8\u05b7\u05d4\n_confidere_.\n\n[29] Attempts have been made to render \u03c0\u03c1\u1f78\u03c2 \u03c4\u1f78 \u03bc\u1f74 \u1f00\u03c4\u03b5\u03bd\u03af\u03c3\u03b1\u03b9 otherwise:\n_e.g._, \u03c0\u03c1\u1f78\u03c2 has been taken as in Matt. xix. 8, which would give the\nmeaning, \"considering that the children of Israel did not look on,\"\netc. Moses would thus veil himself in view of the fact that they did\nnot see: the veil would be the symbol of the judicial blindness which\nwas henceforth to fall on them.\n\n[30] I cannot suppose that \u1f10\u03c0\u1f76 \u03c4\u1fc7 \u1f00\u03bd\u03b1\u03b3\u03bd\u03ce\u03c3\u03b5\u03b9 \u03c4\u1fc6\u03c2 \u03c0. \u03b4\u03b9\u03b1\u03b8\u03ae\u03ba\u03b7\u03c2 means\nanything different from \u1f21\u03bd\u03af\u03ba\u03b1 \u1f04\u03bd \u1f00\u03bd\u03b1\u03b3\u03b9\u03bd\u03ce\u03c3\u03ba\u03b7\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9 \u039c\u03c9\u03cb\u03c3\u1fc6\u03c2. It conveys no\nsense, that I can see, to say that there are _two veils_, one upon the\nreading, and another upon the heart. Yet many take it so.\n\n[31] The present, where we might expect the future, conveys the\ncertainty and decisiveness of the result.\n\n[32] The subject of the verb \u1f10\u03c0\u03b9\u03c3\u03c4\u03c1\u03ad\u03c8\u1fc3 (\"turn\") is not in point of\ngrammar very clear. It may be Israel, or the heart on which a veil\nlies, or any one, taken indefinitely. Practically, the application is\nlimited to those who live under the old covenant, and yet have its\nnature hidden from them. Hence it is fair to render, as I have done,\n\"when _they_ turn to the Lord.\"\n\n[33] The peculiarity of the passage has given occasion to conjectures,\nof which by far the most ingenious is Baljon's: \u1f49\u1fe6 \u03b4\u1f72 \u1f41 \u039a\u03cd\u03c1\u03b9\u03bf\u03c2, \u03c4\u1f78\n\u03a0\u03bd\u03b5\u1fe6\u03bc\u03ac \u1f10\u03c3\u03c4\u03b9\u03bd, \u03bf\u1f57 \u03b4\u1f72 \u03c4\u1f78 \u03a0\u03bd\u03b5\u1fe6\u03bc\u03b1 \u039a\u03c5\u03c1\u03af\u03bf\u03c5, \u1f10\u03bb\u03b5\u03c5\u03b8\u03b5\u03c1\u03af\u03b1: \"Where the Lord is,\nthe Spirit is; and where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is liberty.\"\n\n[34] _Hom._ vii. on 2 Cor., p. 486, E.: \u039f\u1f50 \u03bc\u03cc\u03bd\u03bf\u03bd \u1f41\u03c1\u1ff6\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd \u03b5\u1f30\u03c2 \u03c4\u1f74\u03bd \u03b4\u03cc\u03be\u03b1\u03bd\n\u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u0398\u03b5\u03bf\u1fe6, \u1f00\u03bb\u03bb\u1f70 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u1f10\u03ba\u03b5\u1fd6\u03b8\u03b5\u03bd \u03b4\u03b5\u03c7\u03cc\u03bc\u03b5\u03b8\u03ac \u03c4\u03b9\u03bd\u03b1 \u03b1\u1f34\u03b3\u03bb\u03b7\u03bd.\n\n[35] So Meyer, from whom the particulars in this sentence are taken.\n\n[36] The idea of the mirror is not to be omitted, as of no consequence.\nIt is essential to the figure: \"we see not yet face to face.\"\n\n\n\n\n XI\n\n _THE GOSPEL DEFINED_\n\n \"Therefore seeing we have this ministry, even as we obtained\n mercy, we faint not: but we have renounced the hidden things of\n shame, not walking in craftiness, nor handling the Word of God\n deceitfully; but by the manifestation of the truth commending\n ourselves to every man's conscience in the sight of God. But and\n if our Gospel is veiled, it is veiled in them that are perishing:\n in whom the god of this world hath blinded the minds of the\n unbelieving, that the light of the Gospel of the glory of Christ,\n who is the image of God, should not dawn _upon them_. For we\n preach not ourselves, but Christ Jesus as Lord, and ourselves as\n your servants for Jesus' sake. Seeing it is God, that said, Light\n shall shine out of darkness, who shined in our hearts, to give the\n light of the knowledge of the glory of God in the face of Jesus\n Christ.\"--2 COR. iv. 1-6 (R.V.).\n\n\nIn this paragraph Paul resumes for the last time the line of thought\non which he had set out at chap. iii. 4, and again at chap. iii. 12.\nTwice he has allowed himself to be carried away into digressions, not\nless interesting than his argument; but now he proceeds without\nfurther interruption. His subject is the New Testament ministry, and\nhis own conduct as a minister.\n\n\"Seeing we have this ministry,\" he writes, \"even as we obtained mercy,\nwe faint not.\" The whole tone of the passage is to be triumphant;\nabove the common joy of the New Testament it rises, at the close (ver.\n16 ff.), into a kind of solemn rapture; and it is characteristic of\nthe Apostle that before he abandons himself to the swelling tide of\nexultation, he guards it all with the words, \"even as we obtained\nmercy.\" There was nothing so deep down in Paul's soul, nothing so\nconstantly present to his thoughts, as this great experience. No flood\nof emotion, no pressure of trial, no necessity of conflict, ever drove\nhim from his moorings here. The mercy of God underlay his whole being;\nit kept him humble even when he boasted; even when engaged in\ndefending his character against false accusations--a peculiarly trying\nsituation--it kept him truly Christian in spirit.\n\nThe words may be connected equally well, so far as either meaning or\ngrammar is concerned, with what precedes, or with what follows. It was\na signal proof of God's mercy that He had entrusted Paul with the\nministry of the Gospel; and it was only what we should expect, when\none who had obtained such mercy turned out a good soldier of Jesus\nChrist, able to endure hardship and not faint. Those to whom little is\nforgiven, Jesus Himself tells us, love little; it is not in them for\nJesus' sake to bear all things, believe all things, hope all things,\nendure all things. They faint easily, and are overborne by petty\ntrials, because they have not in them that fountain of brave\npatience--a deep abiding sense of what they owe to Christ, and can\nnever, by any length or ardour of service, repay. It accuses us, not\nso much of human weakness, as of ingratitude, and insensibility to the\nmercy of God, when we faint in the exercise of our ministry.\n\n\"We faint not,\" says Paul: \"we show no weakness. On the contrary, we\nhave renounced the hidden things of shame, not walking in craftiness,\nnor handling the Word of God deceitfully.\" The contrast marked by \u1f00\u03bb\u03bb\u1f70\nis very instructive: it shows, in the things which Paul had\nrenounced, whither weakness leads. It betrays men. It compels them to\nhave recourse to arts which shame bids them conceal; they become\ndiplomatists and strategists, rather than heralds; they manipulate\ntheir message; they adapt it to the spirit of the time, or the\nprejudices of their auditors; they make liberal use of the principle\nof accommodation. When these arts are looked at closely, they come to\nthis: the minister has contrived to put something of his own between\nhis hearers and the Gospel; the message has really not been declared.\nHis intention, of course, with all this artifice, is to recommend\nhimself to men; but the method is radically vicious. The Apostle shows\nus a more excellent way. \"We have renounced,\" he says, \"all these weak\ningenuities; and by manifestation of the truth commend ourselves to\nevery man's conscience in the sight of God.\"[37]\n\nThis is probably the simplest and most complete directory for the\npreaching of the Gospel. The preacher is to make the truth manifest.\nIt is implied in what has just been said, that one great hindrance to\nits manifestation may easily be its treatment by the preacher himself.\nIf he wishes to do anything else at the same time, the manifestation\nwill not take effect. If he wishes, in the very act of preaching, to\nconciliate a class, or an interest; to create an opinion in favour of\nhis own learning, ability, or eloquence; to enlist sympathy for a\ncause or an institution which is only accidentally connected with the\nGospel,--the truth will not be seen, and it will not tell. The truth,\nwe are further taught here, makes its appeal to the conscience; it is\nthere that God's witness in its favour resides. Now, the conscience is\nthe moral nature of man, or the moral element in his nature; it is\nthis, therefore, which the preacher has to address. Does not this\ninvolve a certain directness and simplicity of method, a certain\nplainness and urgency also, which it is far easier to miss than to\nfind? Conscience is not the abstract logical faculty in man, and the\npreacher's business is therefore not to prove, but to proclaim, the\nGospel. All he has to do is to let it be seen, and the more nakedly\nvisible it is the better. His object is not to frame an irrefragable\nargument, but to produce an irresistible impression. There is no such\nthing as an argument to which it is impossible for a wilful man to\nmake objections; at least there is no such thing in the sphere of\nChristian truth. Even if there were, men would object to it on that\nvery ground. They would say that, in matters of this description, when\nlogic went too far, it amounted to moral intimidation, and that in the\ninterests of liberty they were entitled to protest against it.\nPractically, this is what Voltaire said of Pascal.[38] But there is\nsuch a thing as an irresistible impression,--an impression made upon\nthe moral nature against which it is vain to attempt any protest; an\nimpression, which subdues and holds the soul for ever. When the truth\nis manifested, and men see it, this is the effect to be looked for;\nthis, consequently, is the preacher's aim. In the sight of God--that\nis, acting with absolute sincerity--Paul trusted to this simple method\nto recommend himself to men. He brought no letters of introduction\nfrom others; he had no artifices of his own; he held up the truth in\nits unadorned integrity till it told upon the conscience of his\nhearers; and after that, he needed no other witness. The same\nconversions which accredited the power of the message accredited the\ncharacter of him who bore it.\n\nTo this line of argument there is a very obvious reply. What, it may\nbe asked, of those on whom \"the manifestation of the truth\" produces\nno effect? What of those who in spite of all this plain appeal to\nconscience neither see nor feel anything? It is sadly obvious that\nthis is no mere supposition; the Gospel remains a secret, an impotent\nineffective secret, to many who hear it again and again. Paul faces\nthe difficulty without flinching, though the answer is appalling. \"If\nour Gospel _is_ veiled (and the melancholy fact cannot be denied), it\nis veiled in the case of the perishing.\" The fact that it remains\nhidden from some men is their condemnation; it marks them out as\npersons on the way to destruction. The Apostle proceeds to explain\nhimself further. As far as the rationale can be given of what is\nfinally irrational, he interprets the moral situation for us. The\nperishing people in question are unbelievers, whose thoughts, or\nminds, the god of this world has blinded.[39] The intention of this\nblinding is conveyed in the last words of ver. 4: \"that the\nillumination which proceeds from the Gospel, the Gospel of the glory\nof Christ, who is the image of God, may not dawn upon them.\"\n\nLet these solemn words appeal to our hearts and consciences, before we\nattempt to criticise them. Let us have a due impression of the\nstupendous facts to which they refer, before we raise difficulties\nabout them, or say rashly that the expression is disproportioned to\nthe truth. To St. Paul the Gospel was a very great thing. A light\nissued from it so dazzling, so overwhelming, in its splendour and\nilluminative power, that it might well appear incredible that men\nshould not see it. The powers counteracting it, \"the world-rulers of\nthis darkness,\" must surely, to judge by their success, have an\nimmense influence. Even more than an immense influence, they must have\nan immense malignity. For what a blessedness it meant for men, that\nthat light should dawn upon them! What a deprivation and loss, that\nits brightness should be obscured! Paul's whole sense of the might and\nmalignity of the powers of darkness is condensed in the title which he\nhere gives to their head--\"_the god_ of this world.\" It is literally\n\"of this age,\" the period of time which extends to Christ's coming\nagain. The dominion of evil is not unlimited, in duration; but while\nit lasts it is awful in its intensity and range. It does not seem an\nextravagance to the Apostle to describe Satan as the god of the\npresent \u00e6on; and if it seems extravagant to us, we may remind\nourselves that our Saviour also twice speaks of him as \"_the prince_\nof this world.\" Who but Christ Himself, or a soul like St. Paul in\ncomplete sympathy with the mind and work of Christ, is capable of\nseeing and feeling the incalculable mass of the forces which are at\nwork in the world to defeat the Gospel? What sleepy conscience, what\nmoral mediocrity, itself purblind, only dimly conscious of the height\nof the Christian calling, and vexed by no aspirations toward it, has\nany right to say that it is too much to call Satan \"the god of this\nworld\"? Such sleepy consciences have no idea of the omnipresence, the\nsteady persistent pressure, the sleepless malignity, of the evil\nforces which beset man's life. They have no idea of the extent to\nwhich these forces frustrate the love of God in the Gospel, and rob\nmen of their inheritance in Christ. To ask why men _should_ be exposed\nto such forces is another, and here an irrelevant, question. What St.\nPaul saw, and what becomes apparent to every one in proportion as his\ninterest in evangelising becomes intense, is that evil has a power and\ndominion in the world, which are betrayed, by their counteracting of\nthe Gospel, to be purely malignant--in other words, Satanic--and the\ndimensions of which no description can exaggerate. Call such powers\nSatan, or what you please, but do not imagine that they are\ninconsiderable. During this age they _reign_; they have virtually\ntaken what should be God's place in the world.\n\nIt is the necessary complement of this assertion of the malign\ndominion of evil, when St. Paul tells us that it is exercised in the\ncase of unbelievers. It is their minds which the god of this world has\nblinded. We need not try to investigate more narrowly the relations of\nthese two aspects of the facts. We need not say that the dominion of\nevil produces unbelief, though this is true (John iii. 18, 19); or\nthat unbelief gives Satan his opportunity; or even that unbelief and\nthe blindness here referred to are reciprocally cause and effect of\neach other. The moral interests involved are protected by the fact\nthat blindness is only predicated in the case in which the Gospel has\nbeen rejected by individual unbelief; and the mere individualism,\nwhich is the source of so many heresies, doctrinal and practical, is\nexcluded by the recognition of spiritual forces as operative among men\nwhich are far more wide-reaching than any individual knows. Nor ought\nwe to overlook the suggestion of pity, and even of hope, for the\nperishing, in the contrast between their darkness and the illumination\nwhich the Gospel of the glory of Christ lights up. The perishing are\nnot the lost; the unbelievers may yet believe: \"in our deepest\ndarkness, we know the direction of the light\" (Beet). Final unbelief\nwould mean final ruin; but we are not entitled to make sense the\nmeasure of spiritual things, and to argue that because we see men\nblind and unbelieving now they are bound for ever to remain so. In\npreaching the Gospel we must preach with hope that the light is\nstronger than the darkness, and able, even at the deepest, to drive it\naway. Only, when we see, as we sometimes will, how dense and\nimpenetrable the darkness is, we cannot but cry with the Apostle, \"Who\nis sufficient for these things?\"\n\nThis passage is one of those in which the subject of the Gospel is\ndistinctly enunciated: it is the Gospel of the glory of Christ, who\nis the image of God. The glory of Christ, or, which is the same thing,\nChrist in His glory, is the sum and substance of it, that which gives\nit both its contents and its character. Paul's conception of the\nGospel is inspired and controlled from beginning to end by the\nappearance of the Lord which resulted in his conversion. In the First\nEpistle to the Corinthians (i. 18, 23), and in the Epistle to the\nGalatians (vi. 14), he seems to find what is essential and\ndistinguishing in the Cross rather than the Throne; but this is\nprobably due to the fact that the significance of the Cross had been\nvirtually denied by those for whom His words are meant. The Christ\nwhom he preached had died, and died, as the next chapter will make\nvery prominent, to reconcile the world to God; but Paul preached Him\nas he had seen Him on that ever-memorable day; with all the virtue of\nHis atoning death in it, the Gospel was yet the Gospel of _His glory_.\nIt is in the combination of these two that the supreme power of the\nGospel lies. In the distaste for the supernatural which has prevailed\nso widely, many have tried to ignore this, and to get out of the Cross\nalone an inspiration which it cannot yield if severed from the Throne.\nHad the story of Jesus ended with the words \"suffered under Pontius\nPilate, was crucified, dead, and buried,\" it is very certain that\nthese words would never have formed part of a Creed--there would never\nhave been such a thing as the Christian religion. But when these words\nare combined with what follows--\"He rose again from the dead on the\nthird day, He ascended into heaven, and sitteth at the right hand of\nGod the Father\"--we have the basis which religion requires; we have a\nliving Lord, in whom all the redemptive virtue of a sinless life and\ndeath is treasured up, and who is able to save to the uttermost all\nthat trust Him. It is not the emotions excited by the spectacle of the\nPassion, any more than the admiration evoked by the contemplation of\nChrist's life, that save; it is the Lord of glory, who lived that life\nof love, and in love endured that agony, and who is now enthroned at\nGod's right hand. The life and death in one sense form part of His\nglory, in another they are a foil to it; He could not have been our\nSaviour but for them; He would not be our Saviour unless He had\ntriumphed over them, and entered into a glory beyond.\n\nWhen the Apostle speaks of Christ as the image of God, we must not let\nextraneous associations with this title deflect us from the true line\nof his thought. It is still the Exalted One of whom he is speaking:\nthere is no other Christ for him. In that face which flashed upon him\nby Damascus twenty years before, he had seen, and always saw, all that\nman could see of the invisible God. It represented for him, and for\nall to whom he preached, the Sovereignty and the Redeeming Love of\nGod, as completely as man could understand them. It evoked those\nascriptions of praise which a Jew was accustomed to offer to God\nalone. It inspired doxologies. When it passed before the inward eye of\nthe Apostle, he worshipped: \"to Him,\" he said, \"be the glory and the\ndominion for ever and ever.\" Whether the pre-incarnate Son was also\nthe image of God, and whether the same title is applicable to Jesus of\nNazareth, are separate questions. If they are raised, they must be\nanswered in the affirmative, with the necessary qualifications; but\nthey are quite irrelevant here. Much misunderstanding of the Pauline\nGospel would have been prevented if men could have remembered that\nwhat was only of secondary importance to them, and even of doubtful\ncertainty--namely, the exaltation of Christ--was itself the foundation\nof the Apostle's Christianity, the one indubitable fact from which his\nwhole knowledge of Christ, and his whole conception of the Gospel, set\nforth. Christ on the throne was, if one may say so, a more immediate\ncertainty to Paul, than Jesus on the banks of the lake, or even Jesus\non the cross. It may not be natural or easy for _us_ to start thus;\nbut if we do not make the effort, we shall involuntarily dislocate and\ndistort the whole system of his thoughts.\n\nIn the fourth verse the stress is logically, if not grammatically, on\nChrist. \"The Gospel of the glory of _Christ_,\" I say. \"For we preach\nnot ourselves, but Christ Jesus as Lord, and ourselves as your\nservants for Jesus' sake.\" Perhaps ambition had been laid to Paul's\ncharge; \"the necessity of being first\" is one of the last infirmities\nof noble minds. But the Gospel is too magnificent to have any room for\nthoughts of self. A proud man may make a nation, or even a Church, the\ninstrument or the arena of his pride; he may find in it the field of\nhis ambition, and make it subservient to his own exaltation. But the\ndefence which Paul has offered of his truthfulness in chap. i. is as\ncapable of application here. No one whom Christ has seized, subdued,\nand made wholly His own for ever, can practise the arts of\nself-advancement in Christ's service. The two are mutually exclusive.\nPaul preaches Christ Jesus as Lord--the absolute character in which he\nknows Him; as for himself, he is every man's servant for Jesus' sake.\nHe obtained mercy, that he might be found faithful in service: the\nvery name of Jesus kills pride in his heart, and makes him ready to\nminister even to the unthankful and evil.\n\nThis is the force of the \"for\" with which the sixth verse begins. It is\nas if he had written, \"With our experience, no other course is possible\nto us; for it is God, who said, Light shall shine out of darkness, who\nshined in our hearts to give the light of the knowledge of the glory of\nGod in the face of Jesus Christ.\" But the connexion here is of little\nimportance in comparison with the grandeur of the contents. In this\nverse we have the first glimpse of the Pauline doctrine, explicitly\nstated in the next chapter--\"that if any man be in Christ, he is a new\ncreature.\" The Apostle finds the only adequate parallel to his own\nconversion in that grand creative act in which God brought light, by a\nword, out of the darkness of chaos. It is not forcing the figure unduly,\nnor losing its poetic virtue, to think of gloom and disorder as the\ncondition of the soul on which the Sun of Righteousness has not risen.\nNeither is it putting any strain upon it to make it suggest that only\nthe creative word of God can dispel the darkness, and give the beauty of\nlife and order to what was waste and void. There is one point, indeed,\nin which the miracle of grace is more wonderful than that of creation.\nGod only commanded the light to shine out of darkness when time began;\nbut He shone Himself in the Apostle's heart: _Ipse lux nostra_ (Bengel).\nHe shone \"to give the light of the knowledge of the glory of God in the\nface of Jesus Christ.\" In that light which God flashed into his heart,\nhe saw the face of Jesus Christ, and knew that the glory which shone\nthere was the glory of God. What these words mean has already been\nexplained. In the face of Jesus Christ, the Lord of Glory, Paul saw\nGod's Redeeming Love upon the throne of the universe; it had descended\ndeeper than sin and death; it was exalted now above all heavens; it\nfilled all things. That sight he carried with him everywhere; it was his\nsalvation and his Gospel, the inspiration of his inmost life, and the\nmotive of all his labours. One who owed all this to Christ was not\nlikely to make Christ's service the theatre of his own ambitions; he\ncould not do anything but take the servant's place, and proclaim Jesus\nChrist as Lord.\n\n * * * * *\n\nThere is a difficulty in the last half of ver. 6: it is not clear what\nprecisely meant by \u03c0\u03c1\u1f78\u03c2 \u03c6\u03c9\u03c4\u03b9\u03c3\u03bc\u1f78\u03bd \u03c4\u1fc6\u03c2 \u03b3\u03bd\u03ce\u03c3\u03b5\u03c9\u03c2 \u03c4\u1fc6\u03c2 \u03b4\u03cc\u03be\u03b7\u03c2 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u0398\u03b5\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03ba.\u03c4.\u03bb.\nBy some the passage is rendered: God shined in our hearts, \"that _He_\nmight bring into the light (for _us_ to see it) the knowledge of His\nglory,\" etc. This is certainly legitimate, and strikes me as the most\nnatural interpretation. It would answer then to what Paul says in Gal.\ni. 15 f., referring to the same event: \"It pleased God to reveal His Son\nin me.\" But others think all this is covered by the words \"God shined in\nour hearts,\" and they take \u03c0\u03c1\u1f78\u03c2 \u03c6\u03c9\u03c4\u03b9\u03c3\u03bc\u1f78\u03bd \u03ba.\u03c4.\u03bb., as a description of the\napostolic vocation: God shined in our hearts, \"that _we_ might bring\ninto the light (for _others_ to see) the knowledge of His glory,\" etc.\nThe words would then answer to what follows in Gal. i. 16: God revealed\nHis Son in me, \"that I might preach Him among the heathen.\" This\nconstruction is possible, but I think forced. In Paul's experience his\nconversion and vocation were indissolubly connected; but \u03c0\u03c1\u1f78\u03c2 \u03c6\u03c9\u03c4\u03b9\u03c3\u03bc\u1f78\u03bd\n\u03ba.\u03c4.\u03bb., can only mean one, and the conversion is the likelier.\n\nFOOTNOTES:\n\n[37] Expositors seem to be agreed that in this passage there is a\nreference, more or less definite and particular, to the Judaising\nopponents of St. Paul at Corinth. This may be admitted, but is not to\nbe forced. It is forced, _e.g._, by Schmiedel, who habitually reads\nSt. Paul as if (1) he had been expressly accused of everything which\nhe says he does not do, and (2) as if he deliberately retorted on his\nopponents every charge he denied. Press this as he does, and whole\npassages of the Epistles become a series of covert insinuations--a\nkind of calumnious conundrums--instead of frank and _bona fide_\nstatements of Christian principle. The result condemns the process.\n\n[38] \"Il voulut se servir de la sup\u00e9riorit\u00e9 de ce g\u00e9nie, comme les\nrois de leur puissance; il crut tout soumettre, et tout abaisser par\nla force.\"\n\n[39] Grammarians differ much as to the relation of \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u1f00\u03c0\u03af\u03c3\u03c4\u03c9\u03bd (\"which\nbelieve not\") to \u1f10\u03bd \u03bf\u1f36\u03c2 (\"in whom\"). I have no doubt they are the\nsame. The natural way for the Apostle to express himself would have\nbeen: \"it is veiled in them that are perishing, whose minds the god of\nthis world blinded.\" But he wished to include the moral aspect of the\ncase, the side of the personal responsibility of the perishing, as of\nequal significance with the agency of Satan; and this is what he does\nby adding \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u1f00\u03c0\u03af\u03c3\u03c4\u03c9\u03bd. Hence, though the expression is capable of\nbeing grammatically tortured into something different (the perishing\nbecoming only _a part_ of the unbelieving--so Meyer), it is, by its\nsheer grammatical awkwardness, exempted from liability to such\nrigorous treatment, and brought under the rules, not of grammar, but\nof common sense.\n\n\n\n\n XII\n\n _THE VICTORY OF FAITH_\n\n \"But we have this treasure in earthen vessels, that the exceeding\n greatness of the power may be of God, and not from ourselves; _we\n are_ pressed on every side, yet not straitened; perplexed, yet not\n unto despair; pursued, yet not forsaken; smitten down, yet not\n destroyed; always bearing about in the body the dying of Jesus, that\n the life also of Jesus may be manifested in our body. For we which\n live are alway delivered unto death for Jesus' sake, that the life\n also of Jesus may be manifested in our mortal flesh. So then death\n worketh in us, but life in you. But having the same spirit of faith,\n according to that which is written, I believed, and therefore did I\n speak; we also believe, and therefore also we speak; knowing that He\n which raised up the Lord Jesus shall raise up us also with Jesus,\n and shall present us with you. For all things _are_ for your sakes,\n that the grace, being multiplied through the many, may cause the\n thanksgiving to abound unto the glory of God.\n\n \"Wherefore we faint not; but though our outward man is decaying, yet\n our inward man is renewed day by day. For our light affliction,\n which is for the moment, worketh for us more and more exceedingly an\n eternal weight of glory; while we look not at the things which are\n seen, but at the things which are not seen: for the things which are\n seen are temporal; but the things which are not seen are\n eternal.\"--2 COR. iv. 7-18 (R.V.).\n\n\nIn the opening verses of this chapter Paul has magnified his office,\nand his equipment for it. He has risen to a great height, poetic and\nspiritual, in speaking of the Lord of glory, and of the light which\nshines from His face for the illumining and redemption of men. The\ndisproportion between his own nature and powers, and the high calling\nto which he has been called, flashes across his mind. It is quite\npossible that this disproportion, viewed with a malignant eye, had\nbeen made matter of reproach by his adversaries. \"Who,\" they may have\nsaid, \"is this man, who soars to such heights, and makes such\nextraordinary claims? The part does not suit him; he is quite unequal\nto it; his bodily presence is weak, and his speech contemptible.\" It\nis possible, further, though I hardly think it probable, that the very\nsufferings Paul endured in his apostolic work were cast in his teeth\nby Jewish teachers at Corinth; they were read by these spiteful\ninterpreters as signs of God's wrath, the judgment of the Almighty on\na wanton subverter of His law. But surely it is not too much to\nsuppose that Paul could sometimes think unchallenged. A soul as great\nand as sensitive as his might well be struck by the contrast which\npervades this passage without requiring to have it suggested by the\nmalice of his foes. The interpretation which he puts upon the contrast\nis not merely a happy artifice (so Calvin), and still less a _tour de\nforce_; it is a profound truth, a favourite, if one may say so, in the\nNew Testament, and of universal application.\n\n\"We have this treasure,\" he writes--the treasure of the knowledge of the\nglory of God in the face of Jesus Christ, including the apostolic\nvocation to diffuse that knowledge--\"we have this treasure in earthen\nvessels, that the exceeding greatness of the power [which it exercises,\nand which is exhibited in sustaining us in our function] may be seen to\nbe God's, and not from us.\" Earthen vessels are fragile, and what the\nword immediately suggests is no doubt bodily weakness, and especially\nmortality; but the nature of some of the trials referred to in vv. 8 and\n9 (\u1f00\u03c0\u03bf\u03c1\u03bf\u03cd\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd\u03bf\u03b9, \u1f00\u03bb\u03bb' \u03bf\u1f50\u03ba \u1f10\u03be\u03b1\u03c0\u03bf\u03c1\u03cd\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd\u03bf\u03b9) shows that it would be a mistake\nto confine the meaning to the body. The earthen vessel which holds the\npriceless treasure of the knowledge of God--the lamp of frail ware in\nwhich the light of Christ's glory shines for the illumination of the\nworld--is human nature as it is; man's body in its weakness, and\nliability to death; his mind with its limitations and confusions; his\nmoral nature with its distortions and misconceptions, and its insight\nnot yet half restored. It was not merely in his physique that Paul felt\nthe disparity between himself and his calling to preach the Gospel of\nthe glory of Christ; it was in his whole being. But instead of finding\nin this disparity reason to doubt his vocation, he saw in it an\nillustration of a great law of God. It served to protect the truth that\n_salvation is of the Lord_. No one who saw the exceeding greatness of\nthe power which the Gospel exercised--not only in sustaining its\npreachers under persecution, but in transforming human nature, and\nmaking bad men good--no one who saw this, and looked at a preacher like\nPaul, could dream that the explanation lay in _him_. Not in an ugly\nlittle Jew, without presence, without eloquence, without the means to\nbribe or to compel, could the source of such courage, the cause of such\ntransformations, be found; it must be sought, not in him, but in God.\n\"God hath chosen the foolish things of the world to confound the wise;\nand God hath chosen the weak things of the world to confound the things\nwhich are mighty; and base things of the world, and things which are\ndespised, hath God chosen, yea, and things which are not, to bring to\nnought things which are.\" And the end of it all is that he which\nglorieth should glory _in the Lord_.\n\nThis verse is never without its application; and though the contempt\nof the world did not suggest it to St. Paul, it may naturally enough\nrecall it to us. One would sometimes think, from the tone of current\nliterature, that no person with gifts above contempt is any longer\nidentified with the Gospel. Clever men, we are told, do not become\npreachers now--still less do they go to church. They find it\nimpossible to have real or sincere intellectual intercourse with\nChristian ministers. Perhaps this is not so alarming as the clever\npeople think. There always have been men in the world so clever that\nGod could make no use of them; they could never do His work, because\nthey were so lost in admiration of their own. But God's work never\ndepended on them, and it does not depend on them now. It depends on\nthose who, when they see Jesus Christ, become unconscious, once and\nfor ever, of all that they have been used to call their wisdom and\ntheir strength--on those who are but earthen vessels in which\nanother's jewel is kept, lamps of clay in which another's light\nshines. The kingdom of God has not changed its administration since\nthe first century; its supreme law is still the glory of God, and not\nthe glory of the clever men; and we may be quite sure it will not\nchange. God will always have his work done by instruments who are\nwilling to have it clear that the exceeding greatness of the power is\nHis, and not theirs.\n\nThe eighth and ninth verses illustrate the contrast between Paul's\nweakness and God's power. In the series of participles which the Apostle\nuses, the earthen vessel is represented by the first in each pair, the\ndivine power by the second. \"We are pressed on every side, but not\nstraitened\"--_i.e._, not brought into a narrow place from which there is\nno escape. \"We are perplexed, but not unto despair,\" or, preserving the\nrelation between the words of the original, \"put to it, but not utterly\nput out.\" This distinctly suggests inward rather than merely bodily\ntrials, or at least the inward aspect of these: constantly at a loss,\nthe Apostle nevertheless constantly finds the solution of his problems.\n\"Pursued, but not abandoned\"--_i.e._, not left in the enemy's hands.\n\"Smitten down, but not destroyed\": even when trouble has done its worst,\nwhen the persecuted man has been overtaken and struck to the ground, the\nblow is not fatal, and he rises again. All these partial contrasts of\nhuman weakness and Divine power are condensed and concentrated in the\ntenth verse in one great contrast, the two sides of which are presented\nin their divinely intended relation to each other: \"always bearing about\nin the body the dying of Jesus, that the life also of Jesus may be\nmanifested in our body.\" And this again, with its mystical poetic\naspect, especially in the first clause, is reaffirmed and rendered into\nprose in ver. 11: \"For we, alive as we are, are ever being delivered\nunto death for Jesus' sake, that the life also of Jesus may be\nmanifested in our mortal flesh.\"\n\nPaul does not say that he bears about in his body the death of Jesus\n(\u03b8\u03ac\u03bd\u03b1\u03c4\u03bf\u03c2), but his dying (\u03bd\u03ad\u03ba\u03c1\u03c9\u03c3\u03b9\u03c2, _mortificatio_), the process which\nproduces death. The sufferings which come upon him daily in his work for\nJesus are gradually killing him; the pains, the perils, the spiritual\npressure, the excitement of danger and the excitement of deliverance,\nare wearing out his strength, and soon he must die. In the very same way\nJesus Himself had spent His strength and died, and in that life of\nweakness and suffering which was always bringing him nearer the grave,\nPaul felt himself in intimate sympathetic communion with his Master: it\nwas \"the dying _of Jesus_\" that he carried about in his body. But that\nwas not all. In spite of the dying, he was not dead. Perpetually in\nperil, he had a perpetual series of escapes; perpetually at his wits\nend, his way perpetually opened before him. What was the explanation of\nthat? It was _the life of Jesus_ manifesting itself in his body. The\nlife of Jesus can only mean the life which Jesus lives now at God's\nright hand; and these repeated escapes of the Apostle, these\nrestorations of his courage, are manifestations of that life; they are,\nso to speak, a series of resurrections. Paul's communion with Jesus is\nnot only in His dying, but in His rising again; he has the evidence of\nthe Resurrection, because he has its power, present with him, in these\nconstant deliverances and renewals. Nay, the very purpose of his\nsufferings and perils is to provide occasion for the manifestation of\nthis resurrection life. Unless he were exposed to death, God could not\ndeliver him from it; unless he were pressed in the spirit, God could not\ngive him relief; there could be no setting off of the exceeding\ngreatness of His power in contrast with the exceeding frailty of the\nearthen vessel. The use of body and of mortal flesh in these verses has\nbeen appealed to in support of an interpretation which would limit the\nmeaning to what is merely physical: \"I am in daily danger of death, God\ndaily delivers me from it, and thus the life of Jesus is manifested in\nme.\" This is of course included in the interpretation given above; but I\ncannot suppose it is all the Apostle meant. The truth is, there is no\nsuch thing in the passage, or indeed in human life, as a merely physical\nexperience. To be delivered to death _for Jesus' sake_ is an experience\nwhich is at once and indissolubly physical and spiritual; it could not\nbe, unless the soul had its part, and that the chief part, in it. To be\ndelivered _from_ such death is also an experience as much spiritual as\nphysical. And in both aspects, and not least in the first, is the life\nof Jesus manifested. Nor can I see that it is in the least degree\nunnatural for one who feels this to speak of that life as being\nmanifested in his \"body,\" or in his \"mortal flesh\"; it is a way which\nall men understand of describing the human nature, which is the scene of\nthe manifestation, as a frail and powerless thing.\n\nThe moral of the passage is similar to that of chap. i. 3-11.\nSuffering, for the Christian, is not an accident; it is a divine\nappointment and a divine opportunity. To wear life out in the service\nof Jesus is to open it to the entrance of Jesus' life; it is to\nreceive, in all its alleviations, in all its renewals, in all its\ndeliverances, a witness to His resurrection. Perhaps it is only by\naccepting this service, with the daily dying it demands, that that\nwitness can be given to us; and \"the life of Jesus\" on His throne may\nbecome inapprehensible and unreal in proportion as we decline to bear\nabout in our bodies His dying. All who have commented on this passage\nhave noticed the iteration of the name of Jesus. _Singulariter sensit\nPaulus dulcedinem ejus._ Schmiedel explains the repetition as partly\naccidental, and partly indicative of the fact that Christ's death is\nhere regarded as a purely human occurrence, and not as a redemptive\ndeed of the Messiah. This points in the right direction, though it may\nfairly be doubted whether Paul would have drawn this distinction, or\ncould even have been made to understand it. The analytic tendency of\nthe modern mind often disintegrates what depends for its virtue on\nbeing kept whole and entire, and this seems to me a case in point. The\nuse of the name Jesus rather indicates that, in recalling the actual\nevents of his own career, Paul saw them run continually parallel to\nevents in the career of Another; they were one in kind with that\npainful series of incidents which ended in the death of the historical\nSaviour. People have often sought in the Epistles of Paul for traces\nof a knowledge of Christ like that which is conserved in the first\nthree Gospels; in this expression, \u03c4\u1f74\u03bd \u03bd\u03ad\u03ba\u03c1\u03c9\u03c3\u03b9\u03bd \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u1f38\u03b7\u03c3\u03bf\u1fe6, and in the\nrepetition of the historical proper name, there is an indirect but\nquite convincing proof that the general character of Christ's life was\nknown to the Apostle. And though he does not dwell on Christ's\nsympathy with the fulness and power of the writer to the Hebrews, it\nis evident from this passage that he was in sympathetic fellowship\nwith One who had suffered as he suffered, and that even to name His\nhuman name was consolation.\n\nIn ver. 12 an abrupt conclusion is drawn from all that precedes: \"So\nthen death worketh in us, but life in you.\" _Ironice dictum_, is\nCalvin's comment, and the words are at least intelligible if so taken.\nThe stinging passage beginning at chap. iv. 8 of the First Epistle is\nironical in precisely this sense--\"We are fools for Christ's sake, but\nye are wise in Christ; we are weak, but ye are strong; ye have glory,\nbut we have dishonour\": this is as it were a variation on the theme\n\"death worketh in us, but life in you.\" Still, the irony does not seem\nin place here: Paul writes in all seriousness that the sufferings\nwhich he endures as a preacher of the Gospel, and which eventually\nbring death to him--which are the approaches of death, or death itself\nat work--are the means by which life, in the most unqualified sense,\ncomes to be at work in the Corinthians. If the death and life which\nare in view wherever the Gospel appears are to be distributed among\nthem, the death is his, and the life theirs; the dying of Jesus is\nborne about by the Evangelist, while those who accept the message he\nbrings at this cost are made partakers in Jesus' life.\n\nNot indeed that the contrast can be thus absolute: the thirteenth\nverse corrects this hasty inference. If death alone were at work in\nSt. Paul, it would frustrate his vocation; he would not be able to\npreach at all. But he is able to preach. In spite of all the\ndiscouragement which his sufferings might beget, his faith remains\nvigorous; he is conscious of possessing that same confidence toward\nGod which animated the ancient Psalmist to sing, \"I believed,\ntherefore I spoke.\" \"We also,\" he says, \"believe, and therefore also\nwe speak.\" What he believes, and what prompts his utterance, we read\nin the thirteenth verse: \"We speak; knowing that He who raised Jesus\nshall raise us also like[40] Jesus, and shall present us with you.\nWith you, I say: for the whole thing is for your sakes, that the\ngrace, having become abundant, may by means of many[41] cause the\nthanksgiving to abound to the glory of God.\"\n\nWhat an interesting illustration this is of the communion of the saints!\nPaul recognises a spiritual kinsman in the writer of the Psalm;[42]\nfaith in God, the power which faith confers, the obligations which\nfaith imposes, are the same in all ages. He recognises spiritual kinsmen\nin the Corinthians also. All his sufferings have their interest in view,\nand it is part of his joy, as he looks on to the future, that when God\nraises him from the dead, as He raised His own Son, He will present him\n_along with them_. Their unity will not be dissolved by death. The word\nhere rendered \"present\" has often a technical sense in Paul's Epistles;\nit is almost appropriated to the presenting of men before the\njudgment-seat of Christ. Good scholars insist on that meaning here; but\neven with the proviso that acceptance in the judgment is taken for\ngranted, I cannot feel that it is quite congruous. There is such a thing\nas presentation to a sovereign as well as to a judge--the presenting of\nthe bride to the bridegroom on the wedding day as well as of the\ncriminal to the justice--and it is the great and glad occasion which\nanswers to the feeling in the Apostle's mind. The communion of the\nsaints, in virtue of which his sufferings bring blessing to the\nCorinthians, has its issue in the joyful union of all before the throne.\nAs Paul thinks of that, he sees an end in the Gospel lying beyond the\nblessing it brings to men. That end is God's glory. The more he toils\nand suffers, the more God's grace is made known and received; and the\nmore it is received, the more does it cause thanksgiving to abound to\nthe glory of God.\n\nTwo practical reflections present themselves here, nearly related to\neach other. The first is that faith naturally speaks; the second, that\ngrace merits thanksgiving. Put the two into one, and we may say that\ngrace received by faith merits articulate thanksgiving. Much modern\nfaith is inarticulate, and it is far too soothing to be true if we\nsay, Better so. Of course the utterance of faith is not prescribed to\nit; to be of any value it must be spontaneous. Not all the believing\nare to be teachers and preachers, but all are to be confessors. Every\none who has faith has a witness to bear to God. Every one who has\naccepted God's grace by faith has a thankful acknowledgment of it to\nmake, and at some time or other to make in words. It is not the\nfaculty of speech that is wanting where this is not done; it is\ncourage and gratitude; it is the same Spirit of faith which prompted\nthe Psalmist and St. Paul. It is true that hypocrites sometimes speak,\nand that testimonies and thanksgivings are apt to be discredited on\ntheir account; but bad money would never be put in circulation unless\ngood money was indisputably valuable. It is not the dumb, but the\nconfessing Christian, not the taciturn, but the outspokenly thankful,\nwho glorifies God, and helps on the Gospel. Calvin is properly severe\non our \"pseudo-nicodemi,\" who make a merit of their silence, and boast\nthat they have never by a syllable betrayed their faith. Faith is\nbetrayed in another and more serious sense when it is kept secret.\n\nBut to return to the Apostle, who himself, at ver. 16, returns to the\nbeginning of the chapter, and resumes the \u03bf\u1f50\u03ba \u1f10\u03b3\u03ba\u03b1\u03ba\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd of ver. 1:\n\"Wherefore we faint not.\" \"Wherefore\" means \"With all that has been said\nin view\"; not only the glorious future in which Paul and his disciples\nare to be raised and presented together to Christ, but his daily\nexperience of the life of Jesus manifested in his mortal flesh. This\nkept him brave and strong. \"We faint not; but though our outward man is\ndecaying, yet our inward man is renewed day by day.\" The outward man\ncovers the same area as \"our body,\" or \"our mortal flesh.\" It is human\nnature as it is constituted in this world--a weak, fragile, perishable\nthing. Paul could not mistake, and did not hide from himself, the effect\nwhich his apostolic work had upon him. He saw it was killing him. He was\nold long before the time. He was a sorely broken man at an age when many\nare in the fulness of their strength. The earthen vessel was visibly\ncrumbling. Still, that was not the _whole_ of his experience. \"The\ninward man is renewed day by day.\" The meaning of these words must be\nfixed mainly by the opposition in which they stand to \u03bf\u1f50\u03ba \u1f10\u03b3\u03ba\u03b1\u03ba\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd\n(\"we faint not\"). The same word (\u1f00\u03bd\u03b1\u03ba\u03b1\u03b9\u03bd\u03bf\u1fe6\u03c3\u03b8\u03b1\u03b9) is used of the renewal\nof the soul in the Creator's image (Col. iii. 10)--_i.e._, of the work\nof sanctification; but the opposition in question proves that this is\nnot contemplated here. We must rather think of the daily supply of\nspiritual power for apostolic service--of the new strength and joy which\nwere given to St. Paul every morning, in spite of the toils and\nsufferings which every day exhausted him. Of course we can say of all\npeople, bad as well as good, \"The outward man is decaying.\" Time tires\nthe stoutest runner, crumbles the compactest wall. But we cannot say of\nall, \"The inward man is renewed day by day.\" That is not the\ncompensation of every one; it is the compensation of those whose outward\nman has decayed in Jesus' service, who have been worn out in labours for\nHis sake. It is they, and they only, who have a life within which is\nindependent of outward conditions, which sufferings and deaths cannot\ncrush, and which never grows old. The decay of the outward man in the\ngodless is a melancholy spectacle, for it is the decay of everything; in\nthe Christian it does not touch that life which is hid with Christ in\nGod, and which is in the soul itself a well of water springing up to\nlife eternal.\n\nBut who shall speak of the two great verses in which the Apostle,\nleaving controversy out of sight, solemnly weighs against each other\ntime and eternity, the seen and the unseen, and claims his inheritance\nbeyond? \"Our light affliction, which is for the moment, worketh for us\nmore and more exceedingly an eternal weight of glory; while we look\nnot at the things which are seen, but at the things which are not\nseen: for the things which are seen are temporal; but the things which\nare not seen are eternal.\" One can imagine that he was dictating quick\nand eagerly as he began the sentence; he \"crowds and hurries and\nprecipitates\" the grand contrasts of which his mind is full.\nAffliction in any case is outweighed by glory, but the affliction in\nquestion is a light matter, the glory a great weight: the light\naffliction is but momentary--it ends with death at the latest, it may\nend in the coming of Jesus to anticipate death; the weight of glory is\neternal; and as if this were not enough, the light affliction which is\nbut for a moment works out for us the weight of glory which endures\nfor ever, \"in excess and to excess,\" in a way above conception, to a\ndegree above conception: it works out for us the things which eye hath\nnot seen, nor ear heard, nor man's heart conceived, \"all that God has\nprepared for them that love Him\" (1 Cor. ii. 9). If Paul spoke fast\nand with beating heart as he crowded all this into two brief lines, we\ncan well believe that the pressure was relaxed, and that the pen moved\nmore steadily and slowly over the contemplative words that follow:\n\"while we look not to the things which are seen, but to the things\nwhich are not seen: for the things which are seen are temporal, but\nthe things which are not seen are eternal.\" This sentence is sometimes\ntranslated conditionally: \"provided we look,\" etc. This is legitimate,\nbut unnecessary. The Apostle is speaking, in the first instance, of\nhimself, and the looking is taken for granted. The look is not merely\nequivalent to vision; it means that the unseen is the goal of him who\nlooks. The eye is to be directed to it, not as an indifferent object,\nbut as a mark to aim at, an end to attain. This observation goes some\nway to limit the application of the whole passage. The contrast of\nthings seen and things unseen is sometimes taken in a latitude which\ndeprives it of much of its force: psychology and metaphysics are\ndragged in to define and to confuse the Apostle's thought. But\neverything here is practical. The things seen are to all intents and\npurposes that tempest-tossed life of which St. Paul has been speaking,\nthat daily dying, that pressure, perplexity, persecution, and\ndowncasting, which are for the present his lot. To these he does not\nlook: in comparison with that to which he does look, these are a light\nand momentary affliction which is not worth a thought. Similarly, the\nthings unseen are not everything, indefinitely, which is invisible; to\nall intents and purposes they are the glory of Christ. It is on this\nthe Apostle's eye is fixed, this which is his goal. The stormy life,\neven when most is made of its storms, passes; but Christ's glory can\nnever pass. It is infinite, inconceivable, eternal. There is an\ninheritance in it for all who keep their eyes upon it, and, sustained\nby a hope so high, bear the daily death of a life like Paul's as a\nlight and momentary affliction. The connexion between the two is so\nclose that the one is said to work for us the other. By divine\nappointment they are united; fellowship with Jesus is fellowship all\nthrough--in the daily dying, which soon has done its worst, and then\nin the endless life. We may say, if we please, that the glory is the\nreward of the suffering; it would be truer to say that it was its\ncompensation, truer still that it was its fruit. There is a vital\nconnexion between them, but no one can imagine he is reading Paul's\nthought who should find here the idea that the trivial service of man\ncan make God his debtor for so vast a sum. The excellency of the power\nwhich raises the earthen vessel to this height of faith, hope, and\ninspiration is itself God's, and God's alone.\n\nDistrust of the supernatural, insistence on the present and the\npractical, and the pride of a self-styled common sense, have done much\nto rob modern Christianity of this vast horizon, to blind it to this\nheavenly vision. But wherever the life of Jesus is being manifested in\nmortal flesh--wherever in His service and for His sake men and women\ndie daily, wearing out nature, but with spirit ceaselessly\nrenewed--there the unseen becomes real again. Such people know that\nwhat they do is not for one dead, but for One who lives; they know\nthat the daily inspirations they receive, the hopes, the deliverances,\nare wrought in them, not by themselves, but by One who has all power\nin heaven and on earth. The things that are unseen and eternal stand\nout as what they are in relation to lives like these; to other lives,\nthey have no relation at all. A worldly and selfish career does not\nwork out an exceeding and eternal weight of glory, and therefore to\nthe worldly and selfish man heaven is for ever an unpractical,\nincredible thing. But it not only comes out in its brightness, it\ncomes out as a mighty inspiration and support, to every one who bears\nabout in his body the dying of Jesus; as he fastens his eye upon it,\nhe takes heart anew, and in spite of daily dying \"faints not.\"\n\nFOOTNOTES:\n\n[40] \u03a3\u1f7a\u03bd \u1f38\u03b7\u03c3\u03bf\u1fe6 is the true reading: sameness of kind is meant, not of\ntime.\n\n[41] \u0394\u03b9\u1f70 \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u03c0\u03bb\u03b5\u03b9\u03cc\u03bd\u03c9\u03bd is construed in the R.V. with \u03c0\u03bb\u03b5\u03bf\u03bd\u03ac\u03c3\u03b1\u03c3\u03b1 (so\nMeyer): De Wette takes it as above; in the A.V. the \u03b4\u03b9\u1f70 is made to\ngovern \u03c4\u1f74\u03bd \u03b5\u1f50\u03c7\u03b1\u03c1\u03b9\u03c3\u03c4\u03af\u03b1\u03bd. There is no grammatical decision certain here.\n\n[42] The Hebrew Psalm cxvi. 10 is at this precise point practically\nunintelligible, but that does not justify any one in saying that the\nfine thought of the Apostle is utterly foreign to the original text.\nThe open confession of God, as a duty of faith, pervades the psalm\nfrom this point to the end (the verses beginning \u1f18\u03c0\u03af\u03c3\u03c4\u03b5\u03c5\u03c3\u03b1 \u03b4\u03b9\u1f78 \u1f10\u03bb\u03ac\u03bb\u03b7\u03c3\u03b1\nmake a psalm by themselves in the LXX.).\n\n\n\n\n XIII\n\n _THE CHRISTIAN HOPE_\n\n \"For we know that if the earthly house of our tabernacle be\n dissolved, we have a building from God, a house not made with hands,\n eternal, in the heavens. For verily in this we groan, longing to be\n clothed upon with our habitation which is from heaven: if so be that\n being clothed we shall not be found naked. For indeed we that are in\n this tabernacle do groan, being burdened; not for that we would be\n unclothed, but that we would be clothed upon, that what is mortal\n may be swallowed up of life. Now He that wrought us for this very\n thing is God, who gave unto us the earnest of the Spirit. Being\n therefore always of good courage, and knowing that, whilst we are at\n home in the body, we are absent from the Lord (for we walk by faith,\n not by sight); we are of good courage, I say, and are willing rather\n to be absent from the body, and to be at home with the Lord.\n Wherefore also we make it our aim, whether at home or absent, to be\n well-pleasing unto Him. For we must all be made manifest before the\n judgment-seat of Christ; that each one may receive the things _done_\n in the body, according to what he hath done, whether _it be_ good or\n bad.\"--2 COR. v. 1-10 (R.V.).\n\n\nThat outlook on the future, which at the close of chap. iv. is presented\nin the most general terms, is here carried out by the Apostle into more\ndefinite detail. The passage is one of the most difficult in his\nwritings, and has received the most various interpretations; yet the\nfirst impression it leaves on a simple reader is probably as near the\ntruth as the subtlest ingenuity of exegesis. It is indeed to such first\nimpressions that one often returns when the mind has ceased to sway this\nway and that under the impact of conflicting arguments.\n\nThe Apostle has been speaking about his life as a daily dying, and in\nthe first verse of this chapter he looks at the possibility that this\ndying may be consummated in death. It is only a possibility, for to\nthe end of his life it was always conceivable that Christ might come,\nand forestall the last enemy. Still, it _is_ a possibility; the\nearthly house of our tabernacle may be dissolved; the tent in which we\nlive may be taken down. With what hope does the Apostle confront such\na contingency? \"If this befall us,\" he says, \"we have a building from\nGod, a house not made with hands, eternal, in the heavens.\" Every word\nhere points the contrast between this new house and the old one, and\npoints it in favour of the new. The old was a tent; the new is a\nbuilding: the old, though not literally made with hands, had many of\nthe qualities and defects of manufactured articles; the new is God's\nwork and God's gift: the old was perishable; the new is eternal. When\nPaul says we have this house _in the heavens_, it is plain that it is\nnot heaven itself; it is a new body which replaces and surpasses the\nold. It is in the heavens in the sense that it is God's gift; it is\nsomething which He has for us where He is, and which we shall wear\nthere. \"We have it\" means \"it is ours\"; any more precise definition\nmust be justified on grounds extraneous to the text.\n\nThe second verse brings us to one of the ambiguities of the passage.\n\"For verily,\" our R.V. reads, \"in this we groan, longing to be clothed\nupon with our habitation which is from heaven.\" The meaning which the\nEnglish reader finds in the words \"in this we groan\" is in all\nprobability \"in our present body we groan.\" This is also the meaning\ndefended by Meyer, and by many scholars. But it cannot be denied that\n\u1f10\u03bd \u03c4\u03bf\u03cd\u03c4\u1ff3 does not naturally refer to \u1f21 \u1f10\u03c0\u03af\u03b3\u03b5\u03b9\u03bf\u03c2 \u1f21\u03bc\u1ff6\u03bd \u03bf\u1f30\u03ba\u03af\u03b1 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6\n\u03c3\u03ba\u03ae\u03bd\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2. If it means \"in this body,\" it must be attached specially to\n\u03c3\u03ba\u03ae\u03bd\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2, and \u03c3\u03ba\u03ae\u03bd\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2 is only a subordinate word in the clause.\nElsewhere in the New Testament \u1f10\u03bd \u03c4\u03bf\u03cd\u03c4\u1ff3 means \"on this account,\" or\n\"for this reason\" (see 1 Cor. iv. 4; John xvi. 30: \u1f18\u03bd \u03c4\u03bf\u03cd\u03c4\u1ff3 \u03c0\u03b9\u03c3\u03c4\u03b5\u03cd\u03bf\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd\n\u1f45\u03c4\u03b9 \u1f00\u03c0\u1f78 \u0398\u03b5\u03bf\u1fe6 \u1f10\u03be\u1fc6\u03bb\u03b8\u03b5\u03c2), and I prefer to take it in this sense here:\n\"For this cause--_i.e._, because we are the heirs of such a hope--we\ngroan, longing to be clothed upon with our habitation which is from\nheaven.\" If Paul had no hope, he would not sigh for the future; but\nthe very longing which pressed the sighs from his bosom became itself\na witness to the glory which awaited him. The same argument, it has\noften been pointed out, is found in Rom. viii. 19 ff. The earnest\nexpectation of the creation, waiting for the manifestation of the sons\nof God, is evidence that this manifestation will in due time take\nplace. The spiritual instincts are prophetic. They have not been\nimplanted in the soul by God only to be disappointed. It is of the\nlonging hope of immortality--that very hope which is in question\nhere--that Jesus says: \"If it were not so, I would have told you.\"\n\nThe third verse states the great gain which lies in the fulfilment of\nthis hope: \"Since, of course, being clothed [with this new body], we\nshall not be found naked [_i.e._, without any body].\" I cannot think,\nespecially looking on to ver. 4, that these two verses (2 and 3) mean\nanything else than that Paul longs for Christ to come before death. If\nChrist comes first, the Apostle will receive the new body by the\ntransformation, instead of the putting off, of the old; he will, so to\nspeak, put it on _above_ the old \u1f10\u03c0\u03b5\u03bd\u03b4\u03cd\u03c3\u03b1\u03c3\u03b8\u03b1\u03b9; he will be spared the\nshuddering fear of dying; he will not know what it is to have the old\ntent taken down, and to be left houseless and naked. We do not need to\ninvestigate the opinions of the Hebrews or the Greeks about the\ncondition of souls in Hades in order to understand these words; the\nconception, figurative as it is, carries its own meaning and\nimpression to every one. It is reiterated, rather than proved, in the\nfourth verse:[43] \"For we who are in the tabernacle groan also, being\nburdened, in that our will is not to be unclothed, but to be clothed\nupon, that what is mortal may be swallowed up of life.\" It is natural\nto take \u03b2\u03b1\u03c1\u03bf\u03cd\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd\u03bf\u03b9 (\"being burdened\") as referring to the weight of\ncare and suffering by which men are oppressed while in the body; but\nhere also, as in the similar case of ver. 2, the proper reference of\nthe word is forward. What oppresses Paul, and makes him sigh, is the\nintensity of his desire to escape \"being unclothed,\" his immense\nlonging to see Jesus come, and, instead of passing through the\nterrific experience of death, to have the corruptible put on\nincorruption, and the mortal put on immortality, without that trial.\n\nThis seems plain enough, but we must remember that the confidence\nwhich Paul has been expressing in the first verse is meant to meet the\nvery case in which this desire is _not_ gratified, the case in which\ndeath _has_ to be encountered, and the tabernacle taken down. \"_If_\nthis should befall us,\" he says, \"we have another body awaiting us,\nfar better than that which we leave, and hence we are confident.\" The\nconfidence which this hope inspires would naturally, we think, be most\nperfect, if in the very act of dissolution the new body were assumed;\nif death were the initial stage in the transformation scene in which\nan that is mortal is swallowed up by life; if it were, not the\nushering of the Christian into a condition of \"nakedness,\" which,\ntemporary though it be, is a mere blank to the mind and imagination,\nbut his admission to celestial life; if \"to be absent from the body\"\nwere immediately, and in the fullest sense of the words, the same\nthing as \"to be at home with the Lord.\" This is, in point of fact, the\nsense in which the passage is understood by a good many scholars, and\nthose who read it so find in it a decisive turning-point in the\nApostle's teaching on the last things. In the First Epistle to the\nThessalonians, they say, and indeed in the First to the Corinthians\nalso, Paul's eschatology was still essentially Jewish. The Christian\ndead are \u1f41\u03b9 \u03ba\u03bf\u03b9\u03bc\u03ce\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd\u03bf\u03b9, or \u1f41\u03b9 \u03ba\u03bf\u03b9\u03bc\u03b7\u03b8\u03ad\u03bd\u03c4\u03b5\u03c2 (\"those that sleep\");\nnothing definite is said of their condition; only it is implied that\nthey do not get the incorruptible body till Jesus comes again and\nraises them from the dead. In other words, those who die before the\nParousia have the soul-chilling prospect of an unknown term of\n\"nakedness.\" Here this terror is dispelled by the new revelation made\nto the Apostle, or the new insight to which he has attained: there is\nno longer any such interval between death and glory; the heavenly body\nis assumed at once; the state called \u03ba\u03bf\u03b9\u03bc\u1fb6\u03c3\u03b8\u03b1\u03b9 (\"being asleep\")\nvanishes from the future. Sabatier and Schmiedel, who adopt this view,\ndraw extreme consequences from it. It marks an advance, according to\nSchmiedel, of the highest importance. The religious postulate of an\nuninterrupted communion of life with Christ, violated by the\nconception of a \u03ba\u03bf\u03b9\u03bc\u1fb6\u03c3\u03b8\u03b1\u03b9, or falling asleep, is satisfied; Christ's\ndescent from heaven, and a simultaneous resurrection and judgment,\nbecome superfluous; judgment is transferred to the moment of death,\nor rather to the process of development during life on earth; and,\nfinally, the place of eternal blessedness passes from earth (the\nJewish and early Christian opinion, probably shared by Paul, as he\ngives no indication of the contrary) to heaven. All this, it is\nfurther pointed out, is an approximation, more or less close, to the\nGreek doctrine of the immortality of the soul, and may even have been\nexcogitated in part under its influence; and it is at the same time a\nhalf-way house between the Pharisaic eschatology of First\nThessalonians and the perfected Christian doctrine of a passage like\nJohn v. 24: \"Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that heareth My word,\nand believeth Him that sent Me, hath eternal life, and cometh not into\njudgment, but hath passed out of death into life.\"\n\nThere is no objection to be made in principle to the idea that the\nApostle's outlook on the future was subject to modification--that he\nwas capable of attaining, or even did attain, a deeper insight, with\nexperience, into the connexion between that which is and that which is\nto come. But it is surely somewhat against the above estimate of the\nalleged change here that Paul himself seems to have been quite\nunconscious of it. He was not a man whose mind wrought at unawares,\nand who passed unwittingly from one standpoint to another. He was\nnothing if not reflective. According to Sabatier and Schmiedel, he had\nmade a revolutionary change in his opinions--a change so vast that on\naccount of it Sabatier reckons this Epistle, and especially this\npassage, the most important in all his writings for the comprehension\nof his theological development; and yet, side by side with the new\nrevolutionary ideas, uttered literally in the same breath with them,\nwe find the old standing undisturbed. The simultaneous resurrection\nand judgment, according to Schmiedel, should be impossible now; but in\nchap. iv. 14 the resurrection appears precisely as in Thessalonians\nand in chap. v. 10 the judgment, precisely as in all his Epistles from\nthe first to the last. As for the inconsistency between going to be at\nhome with the Lord and the Lord's coming, it also recurs in later\nyears: Paul writes to the Philippians that he has a desire to depart\nand to be with Christ; and in the same letter, that the Lord is at\nhand, and that we wait for the Saviour from heaven. Probably the\nmisleading idea in the study of the whole subject has been the\nassumption that the \u03ba\u03bf\u03b9\u03bc\u03ce\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd\u03bf\u03b9--the dead _in Christ_--were in some\ndismal, dreary condition which could fairly be described as\n\"nakedness.\" There is not a word in the New Testament which favours\nthis idea. Where we see men die in faith, we see something quite\ndifferent. \"_To-day_ shalt thou be with Me in Paradise.\" \"Lord Jesus,\nreceive my spirit.\" \"I saw the souls of them which had been slain for\nthe Word of God ... and there was given them, to each one, a white\nrobe.\" When Paul speaks of those who have fallen asleep, in First\nThessalonians, it is with the express intention of showing that those\nwho survive to the Parousia have no advantage over them. \"Jesus Christ\ndied for us,\" he writes (1 Thess. v. 10), \"that, whether we wake or\nsleep, we may live together with Him.\" And he uses one most expressive\nword in a similar connexion (1 Thess. iv. 14): \"Them also that sleep\nin Jesus will God _bring_ [\u1f04\u03be\u03b5\u03b9] with Him.\" _Suave verbum_, says\nBengel: _dicitur de viventibus_. May we not say with equal cogency,\nnot only \"de viventibus,\" but \"de viventibus _cum Iesu_\"? Those who\nare asleep are with Him; they are in blessedness with Him; what their\nmode of existence is it may be impossible for us to conceive, but it\nis certainly not a thing to shrink from with horror. The taking down\nof the old tent in which we live here _is_ a thing from which one\ncannot but shrink, and that is why Paul would rather have Christ come,\nand be saved the pain and fear of dying. With death in view he\nmentions the new body as the ground of his confidence, because it is\nthe final realisation of the Christian hope, the crown of redemption\n(Rom. viii. 23). But he does not mean to say that, unless the new body\nwere granted in the very instant of dying, death would usher him into\nan appalling void, and separate him from Christ. This assumption, on\nwhich the interpretation of Sabatier and Schmiedel rests, is entirely\ngroundless, and therefore that interpretation, in spite of a\nsuperficial plausibility, is to be decidedly rejected. It is to be\nrejected all the more when we are invited to see the occasion which\nproduced Paul's supposed change of opinion in the danger which he had\nlately incurred in Asia (chap. i. 8-10). Paul, we are to imagine, who\nhad always been confident that he would live to see the Parousia, had\ncome to very close quarters with death, and this experience\nconstrained him to seek in his religion a hope and consolation more\nadequate to the terribleness of death than any he had yet conceived.\nHence the mighty advance explained above. But is it not absurd to say\nthat a man, whose life was constantly in peril, had never thought of\ndeath till this time? Can any one seriously believe that, as Sabatier\nputs it, \"the image of death, with which the Apostle had not hitherto\nconcerned himself, [here] enters for the first time within the scope\nof his doctrine\"? Can any one who knows the kind of man Paul was\ndeliberately suggest that fear and self-pity conferred on him an\nenlargement of spiritual vision which no sympathy for bereaved\ndisciples, and no sense of fellowship with those who had fallen asleep\nin Jesus, availed to bestow? Believe this who will, it seems utterly\nincredible to me. The passage says nothing inconsistent with\nThessalonians, or First Corinthians, or Philippians, or Second\nTimothy, about the last things: it expresses in a special situation\nthe constant Christian faith and hope--\"the redemption of the body\";\n_that_ is the possession of the believer \u1f14\u03c7\u03bf\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd; it is ours; and the\nApostle is not concerned to fix the moment of time at which hope\nbecomes sight. \"Come what will,\" he says, \"come death itself, _this_\nis ours; and because it is ours, though we dread the possible\nnecessity of having to strip off the old body, and would fain escape\nit, we do not allow it to dismay us.\"\n\nThe Apostle cannot look to the end of the Christian hope without\nreferring to its condition and guarantee. \"He that wrought us for this\nvery thing is God, who gave us the earnest of the Spirit.\" The future\nis never considered in the New Testament in a speculative fashion;\nnothing could be less like an apostle than to discuss the immortality\nof the soul. The question of life beyond death is for Paul not a\nmetaphysical but a Christian question; the pledge of anything worth\nthe name of life is not the inherent constitution of human nature, but\nthe possession of the Divine Spirit. Without the Spirit, Paul could\nhave had no such certainty, no such triumphant hope, as he had;\nwithout the Spirit there can be no such certainty yet. Hence it is\nidle to criticise the Christian hope on purely speculative grounds,\nand as idle to try on such grounds to establish it. That hope is of a\npiece with the experience which comes when the Spirit of Him who\nraised up Christ from the dead dwells in us, and apart from this\nexperience it cannot even be understood. But to say that there is no\neternal life except in Christ is not to accept what is called\n\"conditional immortality\"; it is only to accept conditional glory.\n\nThe fifth verse marks a pause: in the three which follow Paul\ndescribes the mood in which, possessed of the Christian hope, he\nconfronts all the conditions of the present and the alternatives of\nthe future. \"We are of good courage at all times,\" he says. \"We know\nthat while we are at home in the body we are away from home as far as\nthe Lord is concerned--at a distance from Him.\" This does not mean\nthat fellowship is broken, or that the soul is separated from the love\nof Christ; it only means that earth is not heaven, and that Paul is\npainfully conscious of the fact. This is what is proved by ver. 7: We\nare absent from the Lord, our true home, \"for in this world we are\nwalking through the realm of faith, not through that of actual\nappearance.\"[44] There _is_ a world, a mode of existence, to which\nPaul looks forward, which is one of actual appearance; he will be in\nChrist's presence there, and see Him face to face (1 Cor. xiii. 12).\nBut the world through which his course lies meanwhile is _not_ that\nworld of immediate presence and manifestation; on the contrary, it is\na world of faith, which realises that future world of manifestation\nonly by a strong spiritual conviction; it is through a faith-land that\nPaul's journey leads him. All along the way his faith keeps him in\ngood heart; nay, when he thinks of all that it ensures, of all that\nis guaranteed by the Spirit, he is willing rather to be absent from\nthe body, and to be at home with the Lord.\n\n \"For, ah! the Master is so fair,\n His smile so sweet on banished men,\n That they who meet it unaware\n Can never turn to earth again;\n And they who see Him risen afar,\n At God's right hand to welcome them,\n Forgetful stand of home and land,\n Desiring fair Jerusalem.\"\n\nIf he had to make his choice, it would incline this way, rather than the\nother; but it is not his to make a choice, and so he does not express\nhimself unconditionally. The whole tone of the passage anticipates that\nof Phil. i. 21 ff.: \"For to me to live is Christ, and to die is gain.\nBut if to live in the flesh,--_if_ this is the fruit of my work, then\nwhat I shall choose I wot not. But I am in a strait betwixt the two,\nhaving the desire to depart and to be with Christ; for it is very far\nbetter: yet to abide in the flesh is more needful for your sake.\"\nNothing could be less like the Apostle than a monkish, unmanly wish to\ndie. He exulted in his calling. It was a joy to him above all joys to\nspeak to men of the love of God in Jesus Christ. But nothing, on the\nother hand, could be less like him than to lose sight of the future in\nthe present, and to forget amid the service of men the glory which is to\nbe revealed. He stood between two worlds; he felt the whole attraction\nof both; in the earnest of the Spirit he knew that he had an inheritance\nthere as well as here. It is this consciousness of the dimensions of\nlife that makes him so immensely interesting; he never wrote a dull\nword; his soul was stirred incessantly by impulses from earth and from\nheaven, swept by breezes from the dark and troubled sea of man's life,\ntouched by inspirations from the radiant heights where Christ dwelt. We\ndo not need to be afraid of the reproach of \"other worldliness\" if we\nseek to live in this same spirit; the reproach is as false as it is\nthreadbare. It would be an incalculable gain if we could recover the\nprimitive hope in something like its primitive strength. It would not\nmake us false to our duties in the world, but it would give us the\nvictory over the world.\n\nIn bringing this subject to a close, the Apostle strikes a graver\nnote. A certain moral, as well as a certain emotional temper, is\nevoked by the Christian hope. It fills men with courage, and with\nspiritual yearnings; it braces them also to moral earnestness and\nvigour. \"Wherefore also we make it our aim\"--literally, we are\nambitious, the only lawful ambition--\"whether at home or absent, to be\nwell-pleasing unto Him.\" Modes of being are not of so much\nconsequence. It may agree with a man's feelings better to live till\nChrist comes, or to die before He comes, and go at once to be with\nHim; but the main thing is, in whatever mode of being, to be accepted\nin His sight. \"For we must all be manifested before the judgment-seat\nof Christ, that each one may receive the things done in the body,\naccording to what he hath done, whether it be good or bad.\" The\nChristian hope is not clouded by the judgment-seat of Christ; it is\nsustained at the holy height which befits it. We are forbidden to\ncount upon it lightly. \"Every man,\" we are reminded, \"that hath this\nhope set on Him purifieth himself even as He is pure.\" It is not\nnecessary for us to seek a formal reconciliation of this verse with\nPaul's teaching that the faithful are accepted in Christ Jesus; we can\nfeel that both must be true. And if the doctrine of justification\nfreely, by God's grace, is that which has to be preached to sinful\nmen, the doctrine of exact retribution, taught in this passage, has\nits main interest and importance for Christians. It is Christians only\nwho are in view here, and the law of requital is so exact that every\none is said to get back, to carry on for himself, the very things done\nin the body. In this world, we have not seen the last of anything. We\nshall all be manifested before the judgment-seat of Christ; all that\nwe have hidden shall be revealed. The books are shut now, but they\nwill be opened then. The things we have done in the body will come\nback to us, whether good or bad. Every pious thought, and every\nthought of sin; every secret prayer, and every secret curse; every\nunknown deed of charity, and every hidden deed of selfishness: we will\nsee them all again, and though we have not remembered them for years,\nand perhaps have forgotten them altogether, we shall have to\nacknowledge that they are our own, and take them to ourselves. Is not\nthat a solemn thing to stand at the end of life? Is it not a true\nthing? Even those who can say with the Apostle, \"Being justified by\nfaith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ, and\nrejoice in hope of His glory,\" know how true it is. Nay, they most of\nall know, for they understand better than others the holiness of God,\nand they are especially addressed here. The moral consciousness is not\nmaintained in its vigour and integrity if this doctrine of retribution\ndisappears; and if we are called by a passage like this to encourage\nourselves in the Lord, and in the hope which He has revealed, we are\nwarned also that evil cannot dwell with God, and that He will by no\nmeans clear the guilty.\n\nFOOTNOTES:\n\n[43] The true rendering here is that in the margin of the R.V.\n\n[44] This translation is Schmiedel's. For the use of \u03b4\u03b9\u1f70 cf. Rev. xxi.\n24: \u039a\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u03b9\u03c0\u03b1\u03c4\u03ae\u03c3\u03bf\u03c5\u03c3\u03b9\u03bd \u03c4\u1f70 \u1f14\u03b8\u03bd\u03b7 \u03b4\u03b9\u1f70 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03c6\u03c9\u03c4\u1f78\u03c2 \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u03b7\u03c2. It cannot mean\n\"by\" faith, in the sense of \"according to\" faith, or as faith directs.\nNor can it be proved that \u03b5\u1fd6\u03b4\u03bf\u03c2 ever means \"sight.\"\n\n\n\n\n XIV\n\n _THE MEASURE OF CHRIST'S LOVE_\n\n \"Knowing therefore the fear of the Lord, we persuade men, but we are\n made manifest unto God; and I hope that we are made manliest also in\n your consciences. We are not again commending ourselves unto you,\n but _speak_ as giving you occasion of glorying on our behalf, that\n ye may have wherewith to answer them that glory in appearance and\n not in heart. For whether we are beside ourselves, it is unto God;\n or whether we are of sober mind, it is unto you. For the love of\n Christ constraineth us; because we thus judge, that One died for\n all, therefore all died; and He died for all, that they which live\n should no longer live unto themselves, but unto Him who for their\n sakes died and rose again.\"--2 COR. v. 11-15 (R.V.).\n\n\nThe Christian hope of immortality is elevated and solemnised by the\nthought of the judgment-seat of Christ. This is no strange thought to\nSt. Paul; many a time he has set himself in imagination in that great\npresence, and let the awe of it descend upon his heart. This is what\nhe means when he writes, \"Knowing the fear of the Lord.\" Like the\npastors addressed in the Epistle to the Hebrews, he exercises his\noffice as one who must render an account. In this spirit, he says, he\npersuades men. A motive so high, and so stern in its purifying power,\nno minister of Christ can afford to dispense with. We need something\nto suppress self-seeking, to keep conscience vigorous, to preserve the\nmessage of reconciliation itself from degenerating into good-natured\nindifference, to prohibit immoral compromises and superficial healing\nof the soul's hurts. Let us familiarise our minds, by meditation, with\nthe fear due to Christ the judge, and a new element of power will\nenter into our service, making it at once more urgent and more\nwholesome than it could otherwise be.\n\nThe meaning of the words \"we persuade men\" is not at once clear.\nInterpreters generally find in them a combination of two ideas--we try\nto win men for the Gospel, and we try to convince them of our own\npurity of motive in our evangelistic work. The word is suitable enough\nto express either idea; and though it is straining it to make it carry\nboth, the first is suggested by the general tenor of the passage, and\nthe second seems to be demanded by what follows. \"We try to convince\nmen of our disinterestedness, but we do not need to try to convince\nGod; we have been manifested to Him already;[45] and we trust also\nthat we have been manifested in your consciences.\" Paul was well aware\nof the hostility with which he was regarded by some of the\nCorinthians, but he is confident that, when his appeal is tried in the\nproper court, decision must be given in his favour, and he hopes that\nthis has really been done at Corinth. Often we do not give people in\nhis position the benefit of a fair trial. It is not in our consciences\nthey are arraigned--_i.e._, in God's sight, and according to God's\nlaw--but at the bar of our prejudices, our likes and dislikes,\nsometimes even our whims and caprices. It is not their _character_\nwhich is taken into account, but something quite irrelevant to\ncharacter. Paul did not care for such estimates as these. It was\nnothing to him whether his appearance made a favourable impression on\nthose who heard him--whether they liked his voice, his gestures, his\nmanners, or even his message. What he did care for was to be able to\nappeal to their consciences, as he could appeal to God, to whom all\nthings were naked and opened, that in the discharge of his functions\nas an evangelist he had been absolutely simple and sincere. In\nspeaking thus, he has no intention of again recommending himself.\nRather, as he says with a touch of irony, it is for their convenience\nhe writes; he is giving them occasion to boast on his behalf, that\nwhen they encounter people who boast in face and not in heart they may\nnot be speechless, but may have something to say for themselves--and\nfor him. It is easy to read between the lines here. The Corinthians\nhad persons among them--Jewish and Judaising teachers evidently--who\nboasted \"in face\"; in other words, who prided themselves on outward\nand visible distinctions, though as Paul asserts, they had nothing\nwithin to be proud of. There are suggestions of these distinctions\nelsewhere, and we can imagine the claims men made, the airs they gave\nthemselves, or at least the recognition they consented to accept, on\nthe ground of them. Their eloquence, their knowledge of the\nScriptures, their Jewish descent, their acquaintance with the Twelve,\nabove all acquaintance with Jesus Himself--these were their\ncredentials, and of these their followers made much. Perhaps even on\ntheir own ground Paul could have met and routed most of them, but\nmeanwhile he leaves them in undisturbed possession of their\nadvantages, such as they are. He only sums up these advantages in the\ndisparaging word \"face,\" or \"appearance\"; they are all on the outside;\nthey amount to \"a fair show in the flesh,\" but no more. He would not\nlike if _his_ disciples could make no better boast of their master,\nand all the high things he has written, from chap. ii. 14 on to chap.\nv. 10, especially his vindication of the absolute purity of his\nmotives, furnish them, if they choose to take it so, with grounds of\ncounter-boasting, far deeper and more spiritual than those of his\nadversaries. For _he_ boasts, not \"in appearance, but in heart.\" The\nironical tone in this is unmistakable, yet it is not merely ironical.\nFrom the beginning of Christianity to this day, Churches have gathered\nround men, and made their boast in them. Too often it has been a boast\n\"in face,\" and not \"in heart\"--in gifts, accomplishments, and\ndistinctions, which may have given an outward splendour to the\nindividual, but which were entirely irrelevant to the possession of\nthe Christian spirit. Often even the imperfections of the natural man\nhave been gloried in, simply because they were his; and the Lutheran\nand Calvinistic Churches, for example, owe some of their most\ndistinctive features to an exaggerated appreciation of those very\ncharacteristics of Luther and Calvin which had no Christian value. The\nsame thing is seen every day, on a smaller scale, in congregations.\nPeople are proud of their minister, not for what he is in heart, but\nbecause he is more learned, more eloquent, more naturally capable,\nthan other preachers in the same town. It is a pity when ministers\nthemselves, like the Judaists in Corinth, are content to have it so.\nThe true evangelist or pastor will choose rather, with St. Paul, to be\ntaken for what he is as a Christian, and for nothing else; and if he\n_must_ be spoken about, he will be spoken of in this character, and in\nno other. Nay, if it really comes to glorying \"in face,\" he will glory\nin his weaknesses and incapacities; he will magnify the very\nearthenness of the earthen vessel, the very coarseness of the clay, as\na foil to the power and life of Christ which dwell in it.\n\nThe connexion of ver. 13 with what precedes is very obscure. Perhaps\nas fair a paraphrase as any would run thus: \"And well may you boast of\nour complete sincerity; for whether we are beside ourselves, it is to\nGod; or whether we are of sober mind, it is unto you; that is, in no\ncase is self-interest the motive or rule of our conduct.\" Connexion\napart, there is a further difficulty about \u03b5\u1f34\u03c4\u03b5 \u1f10\u03be\u03ad\u03c3\u03c4\u03b7\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd. The Revised\nVersion renders it \"whether we _are_ beside ourselves,\" but in the\nmargin gives \"_were_\" for \"are.\" It makes a very great difference\nwhich tense we accept. If the proper meaning is given by \"are,\" the\napplication must be to some constant characteristic of the Apostle s\nministry. His enthusiasm, his absolute superiority to common selfish\nconsiderations such as are ordinarily supreme in human life, his\nresolute assertion of truths lying beyond the reach of sense, the\nunearthly flame which burned unceasingly in his bosom, and never more\nbrightly than when he wrote the fourth and fifth chapters of the\nSecond Epistle to the Corinthians--all these constitute the temper\nwhich is described as being \"beside oneself,\" a kind of sacred\nmadness. It was in this sense that the accusation of being beside\nhimself was brought on a memorable occasion against Jesus (Mark iii.\n21, \u1f10\u03be\u03ad\u03c3\u03c4\u03b7). The disciple and the Master alike seemed to those who did\nnot understand them to be in an overstrained, too highly wrought\ncondition of spirit; in the ardour of their devotion they allowed\nthemselves to be carried beyond all natural limits, and it was not\nimproper to speak of applying some kindly restraint. At first sight\nthis interpretation seems very appropriate, and I do not think that\nthe tense of \u1f10\u03be\u03ad\u03c3\u03c4\u03b7\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd is decisive against it.[46] Those who think it\nis point to the change to the present tense in the next clause, \u03b5\u1f34\u03c4\u03b5\n\u03c3\u03c9\u03c6\u03c1\u03bf\u03bd\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd, and allege that this would have no motive unless\n\u1f10\u03be\u03ad\u03c3\u03c4\u03b7\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd were a true past. But this may be doubted. On the one hand,\n\u1f10\u03be\u03ad\u03c3\u03c4\u03b7 in Mark iii. 21 can hardly mean anything but \"He is beside\nHimself\"--_i.e._, it is virtually a present; on the other, the\ngrammatical present \u1f10\u03be\u03b9\u03c3\u03c4\u03ac\u03bc\u03b5\u03b8\u03b1 would not unambiguously convey the idea\nof madness, and would therefore be inappropriate here. But assuming\nthat the change of tense has the effect of making \u1f10\u03be\u03ad\u03c3\u03c4\u03b7\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd a real\npast, and that the proper rendering is \"whether we _were_ beside\nourselves,\" what is the application then? We must suppose that some\ndefinite occasion is before the Apostle and his readers, on which he\nhad been in an ecstasy (cf. \u1f10\u03bd \u1f10\u03ba\u03c3\u03c4\u03ac\u03c3\u03b5\u03b9, Acts xi. 5; \u1f10\u03b3\u03ad\u03bd\u03b5\u03c4\u03bf \u1f10\u03c0' \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u1f78\u03bd\n\u1f14\u03ba\u03c3\u03c4\u03b1\u03c3\u03b9\u03c2, Acts X. 10), and that his opponents availed themselves of\nthis experience, in which he had passed, for a time, out of his own\ncontrol, to whisper the malicious accusation that he had once not been\nquite right in his mind, and that this explained much. The Apostle, we\nshould have to assume, admits the fact alleged, but protests against\nthe inference drawn from it, and the use made of the inference. \"I\n_was_ beside myself,\" he says; \"but it was an experience which had\nnothing to do with my ministry; it was between God and my solitary\nself; and to drag it into my relations with you is a mere\nimpertinence.\" That the \"ecstasis\" in question was his vision of Jesus\non the way to Damascus, and that his adversaries sought to discredit\nthat, and the apostleship of Paul as grounded on that, is one of the\nextravagances of an irresponsible criticism. Of all experiences that\never befell him, his conversion is the very one which was _not_ solely\nhis own affair and God's, but the affair of the whole Church; and\nwhereas he speaks of his ecstasies and visions with evident reluctance\nand embarrassment, as in chap. xii. 1 ff., or refuses to speak of them\nat all, as here (assuming this interpretation to be the true one), he\nmakes his conversion and the appearance of the Lord the very\nfoundation of his preaching, and treats of both with the utmost\nfrankness. It must be something quite different from this--something\nanalogous perhaps to me speaking with tongues, in which \"the\nunderstanding was unfruitful,\" but for which Paul was distinguished (1\nCor. xiv. 14-18)--that is intended here. Such rapt conditions are\ncertainly open to misinterpretation; and as their spiritual value is\nmerely personal, Paul declines to discuss any allusion to them, as if\nit affected his relation to the Corinthians.\n\nThe strongest point in favour of this interpretation seems to me not\nthe tense of \u1f10\u03be\u03ad\u03c3\u03c4\u03b7\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd, but the use of \u0398\u03b5\u1ff7: \"it is unto God.\" If the\nmeaning were the one first suggested, and the madness were the holy\nenthusiasm of the Evangelist, that would be distinctly a thing which\ndid concern the Corinthians, and it would not be natural to withdraw\nit from their censure as God's affair. Nevertheless, one can conceive\nPaul saying that he was answerable for his extravagances, not to them,\nbut to his Master; and that his sober-mindedness, at all events, had\ntheir interests in view. On a survey of the whole case, and especially\nwith Mark iii. 21, and the New Testament use of the verb \u1f10\u03be\u03af\u03c3\u03c4\u03b1\u03bc\u03b1\u03b9\nbefore us, I incline to think that the text of the Revised Version is\nto be preferred to the margin. The \"being beside himself\" with which\nPaul was charged will not, then, be an isolated incident in his\ncareer--an incident which Jewish teachers, remembering the ecstasies\nof Peter and John, could hardly object to--but the spiritual tension\nin which he habitually lived and wrought. The language, so far as I\ncan judge, admits of this interpretation, and it brings the Apostle's\nexperience into line, not only with that of his Master, but with that\nof many who have succeeded him. But how great and rare is the\nself-conquest of the man who can say that in his enthusiasm and his\nsobriety alike--when he is beside himself, and when his spirit is\nwholly subject to him--the one thing which never intrudes, or troubles\nhis singleness of mind, is the thought of his own private ends.\n\nIn the verses which follow, Paul lets us into the secret of this\nunselfishness, this freedom from by-ends and ambition: \"For the love of\nChrist constraineth us; because we thus judge, that One died for all,\ntherefore all [of them] died.\" \"Constraineth\" is one of the most\nexpressive words in the New Testament; the love of Christ has hold of\nthe Apostle on both sides, as it were, and urges him on in a course\nwhich he cannot avoid. It has him in its grasp, and he has no choice,\nunder its irresistible constraint, but to be what he is, and to do what\nhe does, whether men think him in his mind or out of his mind. That the\nlove of Christ means Christ's love to us, and not our love to Him, is\nshown by the fact that Paul goes on at once to describe in what it\nconsists. \"It constrains us,\" he says, \"because we have come to this\nmind about it: One died for all; so then all died.\" Here, we may say, is\nthe content of Christ's love, the essence of it, that which gives it\nits soul-subduing and constraining power: He loved us, _and gave Himself\nfor us_; He died for all, _and in that death of His all died_.\n\nIt may seem a hazardous thing to give a definition of love, and\nespecially to shut up within the boundaries of a human conception that\nlove of Christ which passes knowledge. But the intelligence must get\nhold somehow even of things inconceivably great, and the New Testament\nwriters, with all their diversity of spiritual gifts, are at one as to\nwhat is essential here. They all find Christ's love concentrated and\nfocussed in His death. They all find it there inasmuch as that death\nwas a death _for us_. Perhaps St. Paul and St. John penetrated\nfurther, intellectually, than any of the others into the mystery of\nthis \"for\"; but if we cannot give it a natural interpretation, and an\ninterpretation in which an absolutely irresistible constraint is\nhidden for heart and will, we do not know what the Apostles meant when\nthey spoke of Christ's love. There has been much discussion about the\n\"for\" in this place. It is \u1f51\u03c0\u03ad\u03c1, not \u1f00\u03bd\u03c4\u03af, and many render it simply\n\"on our behalf,\" or \"for our advantage.\" That Christ did die for our\nadvantage is not to be questioned. Neither is it to be questioned that\nthis is a fair rendering of \u1f51\u03c0\u03ad\u03c1. But what _does_ raise question is\nwhether this interpretation of the \"for\" supplies sufficient ground\nfor the immediate inference of the Apostle \"so then all died.\" Is it\nlogical to say, \"One died for the benefit of all: _hence_ all died\"?\nFrom that premiss is not the only legitimate conclusion \"hence all\nremained alive\"? Plainly, if _Paul's_ conclusion is to be drawn, the\n\"for\" must reach deeper than this mere suggestion of our advantage: if\nwe all _died_, in that Christ died _for_ us, there must be a sense in\nwhich that death of His is _ours_; He must be identified with _us_ in\nit: there, on the cross, while we stand and gaze at Him, He is not\nsimply a person doing us a service; He is a person doing us a service\n_by filling our place and dying our death_. It is out of this deeper\nrelation that all services, benefits, and advantages flow; and that\ndeeper sense of \"for,\" to which Christ in His death is at once the\nrepresentative and the substitute of man, is essential to do justice\nto the Apostle's thought. Without the ideas involved in these words we\ncannot conceive, as he conceived it, the love of Christ. We cannot\nunderstand how that force, which exercised such absolute authority\nover his whole life, appealed to his intelligence. We do not mean what\nhe meant even when we use his words; we gain currency, under cover of\nthem, for ideas utterly inadequate to the spiritual depth of his.\n\nIf this were an exposition of St. Paul's theology, and not of the\nSecond Epistle to the Corinthians, I should be bound to consider the\nconnexion between that outward death of Christ in which the death of\nall is involved, and the appropriation of that death to themselves by\nindividual men. But the Apostle does not directly raise this question\nhere; he only adds in the fifteenth verse a statement of the purpose\nfor which Christ died, and in doing so suggests that the connecting\nlink is to be sought, in part at least, in the feeling of gratitude.\n\"He died for all, that they which live should no longer live unto\nthemselves, but unto Him who died for them and rose again.\" In dying\nour death Christ has done something for us so immense in love that we\nought to be His, and only His, for ever. To make us His is the very\nobject of His death. Before we know Him we are naturally selfish; we\nare an end to ourselves, in the bad sense; we are our own. Even the\nsacrifices which men make for their families, their country, or their\norder, are but qualifications of selfishness; it is not eradicated and\nexterminated till we see and feel what is meant by this--that _Christ\ndied our death_. The life we have after we have apprehended this can\nnever be our own; nay, we ourselves are not our own; we are bought\nwith a price; life has been given a ransom for us, and our life is due\nto him \"who died for us and rose again.\" I believe the Authorised\nVersion is right in this rendering, and that it is a mistake to say,\n\"who for our sakes died and rose again.\" The Resurrection has\ncertainly significance in the work of Christ, but not in precisely the\nsame way as His death; and Paul mentions it here, not to define its\nsignificance, but simply because he could not think of living except\nfor One who was Himself alive.\n\nOne point deserves especial emphasis here--the universality of the\nexpressions. Paul has been speaking of himself, and of the constraint\nwhich the love of Christ, as he apprehends it, exercises upon him. But\nhe no sooner begins to define his thought of Christ's love than he\npasses over from the first person to the third. The love of Christ was\nnot to be limited; what it is to the Apostle it is to the world: He\ndied for all, and so all died. Whatever blessing Christ's death\ncontained, it contains for all. Whatever doom it exhausts and removes,\nit exhausts and removes for all. Whatever power it breaks, it breaks\nfor all. Whatever ideal it creates, whatever obligation it imposes, it\ncreates and imposes for all. There is not a soul in the world which is\nexcluded from an interest in that knowledge-surpassing love which made\nour death its own. There is not one which ought not to feel that\nomnipotent constraint which enchained and swayed the strong, proud\nspirit of Paul. There is not one which ought not to be pouring out its\nlife for Him who died in its place, and rose to receive its service.\n\nFOOTNOTES:\n\n[45] The \u03c6\u03b1\u03bd\u03b5\u03c1\u03c9\u03b8\u1fc6\u03bd\u03b1\u03b9 of the last judgment, ver. 10, has as good as\ntaken place--for God.\n\n[46] According to Winer \u1f10\u03be\u03ad\u03c3\u03c4\u03b7 in Mark iii. 21 has the present sense =\n_insanity_; and so it might be with \u1f10\u03be\u03ad\u03c3\u03c4\u03b7\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd here. The verb occurs\nfifteen times in the New Testament, and except in these two passages\nhas always the sense of being amazed or astonished beyond measure.\n\n\n\n\n XV\n\n _THE NEW WORLD_\n\n \"Wherefore we henceforth know no man after the flesh: even though\n we have known Christ after the flesh, yet now we know _Him so_ no\n more. Wherefore if any man _is_ in Christ, _he_ is a new creature\n [or, _there is_ a new creation]: the old things are passed away;\n behold, they are become new.\"--2 COR. v. 16, 17 (R.V.).\n\n\nThe inferences which are here drawn depend upon what has just been\nsaid of Christ's death for all and the death of all in that death of\nHis. In that death, as inclusive of ours, the old life died, and with\nit died all its distinctions. All that men were, apart from Christ,\nall that constituted the \"appearance\" (\u03c0\u03c1\u03cc\u03c3\u03c9\u03c0\u03bf\u03bd, ver. 12) of their\nlife, all that marked them off from each other as such and such\noutwardly, ceased to have significance the moment Christ's death was\nunderstood as Paul here understands it. He dates his inference with\n\u1f00\u03c0\u1f78 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03bd\u1fe6\u03bd (\"henceforth\"). This does not mean from the time at which\nhe writes, but from the time at which he saw that One had died for\nall, and so all died. Here, as in other places, he divides his life\ninto \"now\" and \"then,\" the Christian and the pre-Christian stage (Rom.\nv. 9; Eph. ii. 11-13). The transition from one to the other was\nrevolutionary, and one of its most startling results is that which he\nhere describes. \"Then,\" the distinctions between men, the\n\"appearances\" in which they boasted, had been important in his eyes;\n\"now,\" they have ceased to be, _He_[47] never asks whether a man is\nJew or Greek, rich or poor, bond or free, learned or unlearned; these\nare classifications \"after the flesh,\" and have died in Christ's death\n_for all_. To recognise them any longer, to admit the legitimacy of\nclaims based upon them--such claims as his opponents in Corinth seem\nto have been putting forth--would be to make Christ's death, in a\nsense, of no effect. It would be to deny that when He died for all,\nall died in Him; it would be to reanimate distinctions that should\nhave been annihilated in His death.\n\nTo this rule of knowing no one after the flesh Paul can admit no\nexception. Not even Christ is excepted. \"Even though we have known\nChrist after the flesh, yet now we know Him so no more.\" This is a\ndifficult saying, and has been very variously interpreted. The English\nreader inevitably supposes that Paul _had_ known Christ \"after the\nflesh,\" but had outgrown that kind of knowledge; and that he is\nintimating these two facts. But it is quite possible to take the\nwords[48] as purely hypothetical: \"Supposing us to have known even\nChrist after the flesh--a case which in point of fact was never\nours--yet now we know Him so no more.\" Grammar does not favour this\nlast rendering, though it does not preclude it; and however the matter\nmay be settled, the bare supposition, as much as the fact, requires us\nto give a definite meaning to the words about knowing Christ after the\nflesh, and ceasing so to know Him.\n\nSome have inferred from them that when Paul became a Christian, and\nfor some time after, his conception of Christ had resembled that of\nthe persons whom he is here controverting: his Christ had been to all\nintents and purposes a Jewish Messiah, and he had only been able by\ndegrees to overcome, though he had at last overcome, the narrowness\nand nationalism of his early years as a disciple. To know Christ after\nthe flesh would be to know Him in the character of a deliverer of the\nJews: His Jewish descent, His circumcision, His observance of the\nTemple worship, His limitation of His ministry to the Holy Land, would\nbe matters of great significance; and Jewish descent might naturally\nbe supposed to establish a prerogative in relation to the Messiah for\nJews as opposed to Gentiles. Probably there were Christians whose\noriginal conception of the Saviour was of this kind, and it is a fair\nenough description to say that this amounts only to a knowing of\nChrist after the flesh; but Paul can hardly have been one of them. His\nChristian knowledge of Christ dates from his vision of the Risen Lord\non the way to Damascus, and in that appearance there was no room for\nanything that could be called \"flesh.\" It was an appearance of the\nLord of Glory. It determined all Paul's thoughts thenceforth. Nothing\nis more remarkable in his Epistles than the strong sense that what he\ncalls his Gospel is one, unchanged, and unchangeable. It is not Yes\nand No. Neither man nor angel may modify it by preaching another Jesus\nthan he preaches. He is quite unconscious of any such transformation\nof his Christology as is indicated above; and in the absence of any\ntrace elsewhere of a change so important, it is impossible to read it\ninto the verse before us.\n\nAnother interpretation of the words would make \"knowing Christ after the\nflesh\" refer to a knowledge at first hand of the facts and outward\nconditions of Christ's life in this world: a knowledge which Paul had\nin his early Christian days valued highly, but for which he no longer\ncared. There were numbers of men alive then who had known Christ in this\nsense. They had seen and heard Him in Galilee and Jerusalem; they had\nmuch to tell about Him which would no doubt be very interesting to\nbelievers; and more than likely some of them emphasised this distinction\nof theirs, and were disposed to be pretentious on the strength of it.\nWhether Paul had ever known Christ in this sense, it is impossible to\nsay. But it is certain that to such knowledge he would have assigned no\nChristian importance whatever. And in doing so, he would have been\nfollowing the example of Christ Himself. \"Then shall ye begin to say, We\nhave eaten and drunk in Thy presence, and Thou hast taught in our\nstreets. And He shall say, I tell you, I know you not whence ye are.\"\nBut it is impossible to suppose that this is a matter on which Paul as a\nChristian had ever needed to change his mind.\n\nIt is an interpretation in part akin to this which makes St. Paul here\ndecry all knowledge of the historical Christ in comparison with the\nunderstanding of His death and resurrection. To know Christ after the\nflesh is in this case to know Him as He is represented in Matthew,\nMark, and Luke; and Paul is supposed to say that, though narratives\nlike these once had an interest and value for him, they really have it\nno longer: they are not essential to his Gospel, which is constituted\nby the death and resurrection alone. These great events and their\nconsequences are all he is concerned with; to know Christ after the\nEvangelists is merely to know Him after the flesh; and flesh, even\n_His_ flesh, ought to have no significance since His death.\n\nIt is a little difficult to take this quite seriously, though it has a\nserious side. St. Paul, no doubt, makes very few references to incidents\nin the life of our Lord, or even to words which He spoke.[49] But he is\nnot singular in this. The Epistles of Peter and John are historically as\nbarren as his. They do not add a word to the Gospel story; there is no\nnew incident, no new trait in the picture of Jesus, no new oracle.\nIndeed, the only genuine addition to the record is that one made by Paul\nhimself--\"the word of the Lord Jesus, how He said, It is more blessed to\ngive than to receive.\" The truth seems to be that it is not natural for\nan apostle, nor for any inspired man, to fall back on quotations, like a\npreacher gravelled for lack of matter, or conscious of wanting\nauthority. Paul and his colleagues in apostleship had Christ living in\nthem, and recognised the spirit by which they spoke as the spirit of\ntheir Master. So far as this was the case, it was certainly a matter of\nindifference to them whether they were acquainted with this or that\nincident in His life, with this or that syllable that He spoke on such\nand such an occasion. One casual occurrence, one scene in Christ's\nsufferings, one discourse which He delivered, would inevitably be known\nwith more exact and literal precision to one person than to another; and\nthere is no difficulty in believing that the casual advantage which any\nindividual might thus possess was regarded by St. Paul as a thing of no\nChristian consequence. Similar differences exist still, and in principle\nare to be disregarded. But it is another thing to say that all knowledge\nof the historical Christ is irrelevant to Christianity, and yet another\nto father such an opinion on St. Paul. The attempt to do so is due in\npart, I believe, to a misinterpretation of \u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u1f70 \u03c3\u03ac\u03c1\u03ba\u03b1. Paul has been\nread as if what he disclaimed and decried were knowledge of Christ \u1f10\u03bd\n\u03c3\u03b1\u03c1\u03ba\u03af. But the two things are quite distinct. Christ lived _in the\nflesh_; but the life that He lived in the flesh He lived _after the\nspirit_, and when its spiritual import is regarded, it is safe to say\nthat no one ever knew Christ as He was _in the flesh_--the Christ of\nMatthew, Mark, and Luke--better than Paul. No one had been initiated\ninto Christ's character, as that character is revealed in the story of\nthe Evangelists, more fully than he. No one ever knew the mind, the\ntemper, the new moral ideal of Christianity, better than Paul, and there\nis no ultimate source for this knowledge but the historical Christ. Paul\ncould not in his work as an evangelist preach salvation through the\ndeath and resurrection of an unknown person; the story which was the\ncommon property of the Church, and with which her catechists everywhere\nindoctrinated the new disciples, must have been as familiar to him, in\nsubstance, as it is to us; and his evident knowledge and appreciation of\nthe character embodied in it forbids us to think of this acquaintance\nwith Christ as what he means by knowing Him after the flesh. He might\nhave had the Gospel narratives by heart, and counted them inestimably\nprecious, and yet have spoken exactly as he speaks here.\n\nNevertheless, this interpretation, though mistaken, has a certain truth\nin it. There _is_ a historical knowledge of Christ which is a mere\nirrelevance to Christianity, and it has sometimes a stress laid upon it\nby its possessors which tempts one to speak of it in St. Paul's\nscornful tone. Many so-called \"Lives\" of Christ abound in it. They aim\nat a historical realism which, to speak the plain truth, has simply no\nreligious value. Knowledge of localities, customs, costumes, and so\nforth, is interesting enough; but if it should be ever so full and ever\nso exact, it is not the knowledge of Jesus Christ in any sense which\nmakes a Gospel. It is quite possible, nay it is more than possible, that\nsuch knowledge may come between the soul and the Lord. It was so when\nJesus lived. There were people who knew so well what He was like that\nthey were blind to what He was. In St. Paul's phrase we may say that\nthey knew Him \"after the flesh,\" and it kept them from knowing Him\ntruly. They asked, \"Is not this the carpenter?\" as if that were a piece\nof undeniable insight; and they were not conscious that only men blind\nto what He really was could ever have asked a question so absurd. It was\n_not_ the carpenter who spoke with authority in the synagogues, and cast\nout devils, and brought in the kingdom; it was the Son of Man, the Son\nof God; and whether Paul meant it so or not, we may use his language in\nthis passage to express the conviction, that one may really know Christ,\nto whom the whole outward aspect of His life, represented by \"the\ncarpenter of Nazareth,\" is indifferent; nay, that one cannot know Him in\nany real sense until these external things _are_ indifferent. Or to put\nthe same thing in other words, we may say that the knowledge of Christ\nwhich constitutes the Christian is not the knowledge of what He was, but\nof what he is; and if we know what He is, then all that is merely\noutward in the history may pass away.\n\nBut if none of these interpretations answers exactly to the Apostle's\nthought, where are we to seek the meaning of his words? All these, it\nwill be observed, assume that Paul knew Christ \"after the flesh,\"\nsubsequent to his conversion; that he shared, as a Christian, views\nabout Christ which he is now combating. As these interpretations,\nhowever, are untenable, we must assume that the time when he thus knew\nChrist was _before_ his conversion. He could look back to days when\nhis Messianic conceptions were carnal; when the Christ was to be\nidentified, for him, by tokens in the domain of \"appearance,\" or\n\"flesh\"; when He was to be a national, perhaps merely a political\ndeliverer, and the Saviour of the Jews in a sense which gave them an\nadvantage over the Gentiles. But these days were gone for ever.\n\"Henceforth\"--from the very instant that the truth flashed on him, One\ndied _for all_, and so _all_ died--they belonged to a past which could\nnever be revived or recalled. One died for all: that means that Christ\nis Universal Redeemer. That same One rose again: that means He is\nUniversal Lord. He has done the same infinite service for all, He\nmakes the same infinite claim upon all; there are no prerogatives for\nany race, for any caste, for any individual men, in relation to Him.\nIn presence of His cross, there is no difference: in His death, and in\nour death in Him, all carnal distinctions die; \"henceforth we know no\nman after the flesh.\" Even kinship to Jesus \"after the flesh\" does not\nbase any prerogative in the kingdom of God; even to have eaten and\ndrunk in His presence, and listened to His living voice, confers no\ndistinction there; He has not done more for His brethren and His\ncompanions than He has done for us all. And not only the carnal\ndistinctions of men have vanished away; the carnal Jewish conception\nof Christ has vanished with them.\n\nThe seventeenth verse seems a new inference from the same ground as\nthe fifteenth. Indeed, it connects so naturally with ver. 15 that one\ncritic has suggested that ver. 16 is spurious, and another that it was\na later insertion by the Apostle. Perhaps we may assume that St. Paul,\nwho had no fear of such critics before his eyes, was capable of\nsetting his sentences down just as they occurred to him, and did not\nmind an occasional awkwardness. When he writes \"Wherefore if any man\nis in Christ, he is a new creature,\" he is indeed drawing an inference\nfrom ver. 15, but he is at the same time generalising and carrying on\nthe thought of ver. 16. The idea of the new creature occurs in other\nplaces in his writings (_e.g._, Eph. ii. 10; Gal. vi. 15), but both\nhere and in Gal. vi. 15 I prefer the rendering in the margin of the\nRevised Version--\"If any man is in Christ, there is a new creation:\nthe things passed away (when he died in Christ);[50] behold, they have\nbecome new.\" We may say, if we please, that it is the new creature\nwhich makes the new creation; the change in the soul which\nrevolutionises the world. Still, it is this universal change which the\nApostle, apparently, wishes to describe; and in the sudden note of\ntriumph with which he concludes--\"Behold! all is become new\"--we feel,\nas it were, one throb of that glad surprise with which he had looked\nout on the world after God had reconciled him to Himself by His Son.\nThe past was dead to him, as dead as Christ on His cross; all its\nideas, all its hopes, all its ambitions, were dead; _in Christ_, he\nwas another man in another universe.\n\nThis is the first passage in 2 Corinthians in which this Pauline\nformula for a Christian--a man in Christ--is used.[51] It denotes the\nmost intimate possible union, a union in which the believer's faith\nidentifies him with Jesus in His death and resurrection, so that he\ncan say, \"I live no longer, but Christ liveth in me.\" It is the\nApostle's profoundest word, not on the Gospel, but on the\nappropriation of the Gospel; not on Christ, but on the Christian\nreligion.[52] It is mystical, as every true word must be which speaks\nof the relation of the soul to the Saviour; but it is intelligible to\nevery one who knows what it is to trust and to love, and through trust\nand love to lose self in another whose life is greater and better than\nhis own. And when we have seen, even for a moment, what it is to live\nin self or in the world, and what to live in Christ, we can easily\nbelieve that this union is equivalent to a re-creating and\ntransfiguring of all things.\n\nIt is impossible to point to all the applications of this truth: \"all\nthings\" is too wide a text. Every reader knows the things which bulked\nmost largely in his life before he knew Christ, and it is easy for him\nto tell the difference due to being in the Lord. In a sense the new\ncreation is in process as long as we live; it is ideally that faith in\nChrist means death in His death; ideally that with faith the old\npasses and the new is there; the actual putting away of the old, the\nactual production of the new, are the daily task of faith as it unites\nthe soul to Christ. We are _in_ Him the moment faith touches Him, but\nwe have to grow up _into_ Him in all things. Only as we do so does\nthe world change all around us, till the promise is fulfilled of new\nheavens and a new earth.\n\nBut there is one application of these words, directly suggested by the\ncontext, which we ought not to overlook: I mean their application to\nmen, and the old ways of estimating men. Those who are in Christ have\ndied to the whole order of life in which men are judged \"after the\nflesh.\" Perhaps the Christian Church has almost as much need as any\nother society to lay this to heart. We are still too ready to put\nstress upon distinctions which are quite in place in the world, but\nare without ground in Christ. Even in a Christian congregation there\nis a recognition of wealth, of learning, of social position, in some\ncountries of race, which is not Christian. I do not say these\ndistinctions are not real, but they are meaningless in relation to\nChrist, and ought not to be made. To make them narrows and\nimpoverishes the soul. If we associate only with people of a certain\nstation, and because of their station, all our thoughts and feelings\nare limited to a very small area of human life; but if distinctions of\nstation, of intelligence, of manners, are lost in the common relation\nto Christ, then life is open to us in all its length and breadth; all\nthings are ours, because we are His. To be guided by worldly\ndistinctions is to know only a few people, and to know them by what is\nsuperficial in their nature; but to see that such distinctions died in\nChrist's death, and to look at men in relation to Him who is Redeemer\nand Lord of all, is to know all our brethren, and to know them not on\nthe surface, but to the heart. People lament everywhere the want of a\ntruly social and brotherly feeling in the Church, and try all sorts of\nwell-meant devices to stimulate it, but nothing short of this goes to\nthe root of the matter. The social, in this universal sense, is\ndependent upon the religious. Those who have died in Christ to the\nworld in which these separative distinctions reign will have no\ndifficulty in recognising each other as one in Him. Society is\ntransfigured for each of us when this union is accomplished; the old\nthings have passed, and all has become new.\n\nFOOTNOTES:\n\n[47] The \"we\" in the first clause of ver. 16 is emphatic.\n\n[48] As Heinrici does.\n\n[49] See the excellent section on Paul and the Historical Christ in\nSabatier's _The Apostle Paul_ (English Translation, pp. 76-85).\n\n[50] Observe the aorist \u03c0\u03b1\u03c1\u1fc6\u03bb\u03b8\u03b5\u03bd.\n\n[51] Chap. ii. 14, 17, and chap. iii. 14, are more limited.\n\n[52] Perhaps the use of \u1f10\u03bd \u03a7\u03c1\u03b9\u03c3\u03c4\u1ff7 here may be determined by the wish\nto express tacitly his opposition to those who claimed to be in a\nspecial sense \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03a7\u03c1\u03b9\u03c3\u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6. Paul's formula really asserts a much more\nintimate relation to Christ than theirs.\n\n\n\n\n XVI\n\n _RECONCILIATION_\n\n \"But all things are of God, who reconciled us to Himself through\n Christ, and gave unto us the ministry of reconciliation; to wit,\n that God was in Christ reconciling the world unto Himself, not\n reckoning unto them their trespasses, and having committed unto us\n the word of reconciliation. We are ambassadors therefore on behalf\n of Christ, as though God were intreating by us: we beseech _you_\n on behalf of Christ, be ye reconciled to God. Him who knew no sin\n He made _to be_ sin on our behalf; that we might become the\n righteousness of God in Him.\"--2 COR. v. 18-21 (R.V.).\n\n \"Est hic insignis locus, si quis alius est in toto Paulo: proinde\n diligenter excutere singulas particulas convenit.\"--CALVIN.\n\n\n\"If any man be in Christ,\" Paul has said, \"there is a new creation; he\nis another man and lives in another world. But the new creation has the\nsame Author as the original one: it is all of God, who reconciled us to\nHimself by Jesus Christ, and gave to us the ministry of reconciliation.\"\nIt is plain from these last words that \"us\" does not mean Christians in\ngeneral, but in the first instance Paul himself. He is a typical example\nof what it is to be in Christ; he understands what his own words\nmean--\"the old things passed away; behold, they have become new\"; he\nunderstands also how this stupendous change has been brought about. \"It\nis due to God,\" he says, \"who reconciled us to Himself through Christ.\"\n\nThe great interest of this passage is its bearing upon the Christian\ndoctrine of reconciliation, and before we go further it is necessary\nto explain precisely what this word means. It presupposes a state of\nestrangement. Now, a state of estrangement may be of two kinds: the\nfeeling of alienation and hostility may exist upon one side only, or\nit may exist upon both. What, then, is the character of that state of\nestrangement which subsists between God and man independently of the\nGospel, and which the Gospel, as a ministry of reconciliation, is\ndesigned to overcome? Is it one-sided, or two-sided? Is there\nsomething to be put away in man only, or something to be put away in\nGod as well, before reconciliation is effected?\n\nThese questions have been answered very confidently in different ways.\nMany, especially in modern times, assert with passionate eagerness that\nthe estrangement is merely one-sided. Man is alienated from God by sin,\nfear, and unbelief, and God reconciles him to Himself when He prevails\nwith him to lay aside these evil dispositions, and trust Him as his\nFather and his Friend. \"All things are of God, who reconciled us to\nHimself through Christ,\" would mean in this case, \"All things are of\nGod, who has won our friendship through His Son.\" That this describes in\npart the effect of the Gospel, no one will deny. It is one of its\nblessed results that fear and distrust of God are taken away, and that\nwe learn to trust and love Him. Nevertheless, this is not what the New\nTestament means by reconciliation, though it is one of its fruits.\n\nTo St. Paul the estrangement which the Christian reconciliation has to\novercome is indubitably two-sided; there is something in God as well\nas something in man which has to be dealt with before there can be\npeace. Nay, the something on God's side is so incomparably more\nserious that in comparison with it the something on man's side simply\npasses out of view. It is God's earnest dealing with the obstacle on\nHis own side to peace with man which prevails on man to believe in the\nseriousness of His love, and to lay aside distrust. It is God's\nearnest dealing with the obstacle on His own side which constitutes\nthe reconciliation; the story of it is \"the word of reconciliation\";\nwhen men receive it, they _receive_ (Rom. v. 10) the reconciliation.\n\"Reconciliation\" in the New Testament sense is not something which _we\naccomplish_ when we lay aside our enmity to God; it is something which\n_God accomplished_ when in the death of Christ He put away everything\nthat on His side meant estrangement, so that He might come and preach\npeace. To deny this is to take St. Paul's Gospel away root and branch.\nHe always conceives the Gospel as the revelation of God's wisdom and\nlove in view of a certain state of affairs as subsisting between God\nand man. Now, what is the really serious element in this situation?\nWhat is it that makes a Gospel necessary? What is it that the wisdom\nand love of God undertake to deal with, and do deal with, in that\nmarvellous way which constitutes the Gospel? Is it man's distrust of\nGod? is it man's dislike, fear, antipathy, spiritual alienation? Not\nif we accept the Apostle's teaching. The serious thing which makes the\nGospel necessary, and the putting away of which constitutes the\nGospel, is God's condemnation of the world and its sin; it is God's\nwrath, \"revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and\nunrighteousness of men\" (Rom. i. 16-18). The putting away of this is\n\"reconciliation\": the preaching of _this_ reconciliation is the\npreaching of the Gospel.\n\nMuch impatience has been shown in the criticism of this conception.\nClever men have exhibited their talent and courage by calling it\n\"heathenish\"; and others have undertaken to apologise for St. Paul by\ndescribing this objection as \"modern.\" I cannot understand how any one\nshould feel entitled either to flout the Apostle on this matter, or to\ntake him under his patronage. If any one ever had the sense to\ndistinguish between what is real and unreal in regard to God, between\nwhat is true and false spiritually, it was he; even with Ritschl on\none side and Schmiedel on the other he is not dwarfed, and may be\npermitted to speak for himself. The wrath of God, the condemnation of\nGod resting on the sinful world, are not, whatever speculative\ntheologians may think, unreal things: neither do they belong only to\nancient times. They are the most real things of which human nature has\nany knowledge till it receives the reconciliation. They are as real as\na bad conscience; as real as misery, impotence, and despair. And it is\nthe glory of the Gospel, as St. Paul understood it, that it deals with\nthem as real. It does not tell men that they are illusions, and that\nonly their own groundless fear and distrust have ever stood between\nthem and God. It tells them that God has dealt seriously with these\nserious things for their removal, that awful as they are He has put\nthem away by an awful demonstration of His love; it tells them that\nGod has made peace at an infinite cost, and that the priceless peace\nis now freely offered to them.\n\nWhen St. Paul says that God has given him the ministry of\nreconciliation, he means that he is a preacher of this peace. He\nministers reconciliation to the world. His work has no doubt a\nhortatory side, as we shall see, but that side is secondary. It is not\nthe main part of his vocation to tell men to make their peace with\nGod, but to tell them that God has made peace with the world. At\nbottom, the Gospel is not good advice, but good news. All the good\nadvice it gives is summed up in this--Receive the good news. But if\nthe good news be taken away; if we cannot say, God has made peace, God\nhas dealt seriously with His condemnation of sin, so that it no longer\nstands in the way of your return to Him; if we cannot say, Here _is_\nthe reconciliation, receive it,--then for man's actual state we have\nno Gospel at all.\n\nIn the nineteenth verse St. Paul explains more fully the way in which\nhe is looking at the subject:[53] \"to wit, that God was in Christ\nreconciling the world to Himself, not reckoning unto them their\ntrespasses, and having committed unto us the word of reconciliation.\"\nThe English Authorised Version puts a comma at Christ: \"God was in\nChrist, reconciling the world to Himself.\" It is safe to say that \"God\nwas in Christ\" is a sentence which neither St. Paul nor any other New\nTestament writer could have conceived; the \"was\" and the \"reconciling\"\nmust be taken together, and \"in Christ\" is practically equivalent to\n\"through Christ\" in the previous verse--God was by means of Christ\nreconciling the world to Himself. \"Reconciling,\" of course, must be\ntaken in the sense already explained. The sentence does not mean that\nGod was trying to convert men, or to prevail with them to lay aside\ntheir enmity, but that He was disposing of everything that on His part\nmade peace impossible. When Christ's work was done, the reconciliation\nof the world was accomplished. When men were called to receive it,\nthey were called to a relation to God; not in which they would no more\nbe against Him--though that is included--but in which they would no\nmore have Him against them (Hofmann). There would be no condemnation\nthenceforth to those who were in Christ Jesus.\n\nThe connexion of the words \"not reckoning unto them their trespasses,\nand having committed unto us the word of reconciliation,\" is rather\ndifficult. The last clause certainly refers to something which took\nplace after the work of reconciliation had been wrought; Paul was\ncommissioned to tell the story of it. It seems most probable that the\nother is co-ordinate with this, so that both are in a sense the\nevidence for the main proposition. It is as if he had said: \"God was\nby means of Christ establishing friendly relations between the world\nand Himself, as appears from this, that He does not reckon their\ntrespasses unto them,[54] and has made us preachers of His grace.\" The\nvery universality of the expression--reconciling a world to\nHimself--is consistent only with an objective reconciliation. It\ncannot mean that God was overcoming the world's enmity (though that is\nthe ulterior object) it means that God was putting away His own\ncondemnation and wrath. When this was done, He could send, and did\nsend, men to declare that it was done; and among these men, none had a\nprofounder appreciation of what God had wrought, and what he himself\nhad to declare as God's glad tidings, than the Apostle Paul.\n\nThis is the point we reach in ver. 20: \"We are ambassadors therefore\non behalf of Christ, as though God were intreating you by us; we\nbeseech you, on behalf of Christ, be ye reconciled to God.\" The\nApostle has just told us that all is of God, but all is at the same\ntime \"in Christ,\" or \"through Christ.\" Hence it is on Christ's behalf\nhe comes forward; it is the furtherance of Christ's interests he has\nat heart. Nay, it is that same interest which is at the heart of the\nFather, who desires now to glorify the Son; so that when Paul appeals\nto men on Christ's behalf it is as though God Himself entreated them.\nMost expositors notice the amazing contrast between \u03c0\u03c1\u03b5\u03c3\u03b2\u03b5\u03cd\u03bf\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd (\"we\nare ambassadors\") and \u03b4\u03b5\u03cc\u03bc\u03b5\u03b8\u03b1 (\"we beseech you\"). The ambassador, as a\nrule, stands upon his dignity; he maintains the greatness of the\nperson whom he represents. But Paul in this lowly passionate entreaty\nis not false to his Master; he is preaching the Gospel in the spirit\nof the Gospel; he shows that he has really learned of Christ; the very\nconception of the ambassador descending to entreaty is, as Calvin\nsays, an incomparable commendation of the grace of Christ. One can\nimagine how Saul the Pharisee would have spoken on God's behalf; with\nwhat rigour, what austerity, what unbending, uncompromising assurance.\nBut old things have passed away; behold, they have become new. This\nsingle verse illumines, as by a lightning flash, the new world into\nwhich the Gospel has translated Paul, the new man it has made of him.\nThe fire that burned in Christ's heart has caught hold in his; his\nsoul is tremulous with passion; he is conscious of the grandeur of his\ncalling, yet there is nothing that he would not do to win men for his\nmessage. It would go to his heart like a sword if he had to take up\nthe old lament, \"Who hath believed our report?\" In his dignity as\nChrist's ambassador and as the mouthpiece of God, in his humility, in\nhis passionate earnestness, in the urgency and directness of his\nappeal, St. Paul is the supreme type and example of the Christian\nminister. In the passage before us he presents the appeal of the\nGospel in its simplest form: wherever he stands before men on Christ's\nbehalf his prayer is, \"Be ye reconciled unto God.\" And once more we\nmust insist on the apostolic import of these words. It is the\nmisleading _nuance_ of \"reconcile\" in English that makes so many take\nthem as if they meant, \"Lay aside your enmity to God; cease to regard\nHim with distrust, hatred, and fear\"; in other words, \"Show yourselves\nHis friends.\" In St. Paul's lips they cannot possibly mean anything\nbut, \"Accept _His_ offered friendship; enter into that peace which He\nhas made for the world through the death of His Son; believe that He\nhas at infinite cost put away all that on His part stood between you\nand peace; _receive_ the reconciliation.\"\n\nThe Received Text and the Authorised Version attach the twenty-first\nverse to this exhortation by \u03b3\u1f70\u03c1 (\"for\"): \"For Him who knew no sin He\nmade _to be_ sin on our behalf.\" The \"for\" is spurious, and though it\nis not inept the sentence gains greatly in impressiveness by its\nomission. The Apostle does not point out the connexion for us: in\nsimply declaring the manner in which God reconciled the world to\nHimself--the process by which, the cost at which, He made peace--he\nleaves us to feel how vast is the boon which is offered to us in the\nGospel, how tremendous the responsibility of rejecting it. To refuse\n\"the reconciliation\" is to contemn the death in which the Sinless One\nwas made sin on our behalf.\n\nThis wonderful sentence is the inspired commentary on the statement\nof ver. 15--\"One died for all.\" It takes us into the very heart of the\nApostolic Gospel. Just because it does so, it has always been felt to\nbe of critical importance, alike by those who welcome and by those who\nreject it; it condenses and concentrates in itself the attraction of\nChrist and the offence of Christ. It is a counsel of despair to evade\nit. It is not the puzzle of the New Testament, but the ultimate\nsolution of all puzzles; it is not an irrational quantity that has to\nbe eliminated or explained away, but the key-stone of the whole system\nof apostolic thought. It is not a blank obscurity in revelation, a\nspot of impenetrable blackness; it is the focus in which the\nreconciling love of God burns with the purest and intensest flame; it\nis the fountain light of all day, the master light of all seeing, in\nthe Christian revelation. Let us look at it more closely.\n\nGod, we must observe in the first place, is the subject. \"All\" is of\nhim in the work of reconciliation, and this above all, that He made\nthe Sinless One to be sin. I have read a book on the Atonement which\nquoted this sentence three times, or rather misquoted it, never once\nrecognising that an action of God is involved. But without this, there\nis no coherence in the Apostle's thoughts at all. Without this, there\nwould be no explanation of reconciliation as God's work. God\nreconciled the world to Himself--made peace into which the world might\nenter--in making Christ sin on its behalf. What precisely this means\nwe shall inquire further on; but it is essential to remember, whatever\nit mean, that God is the doer of it.\n\nObserve next the description of Christ--\"Him that knew no sin.\" The\nGreek negative (\u03bc\u1f74), as Schmiedel remarks, implies that this is\nregarded as the verdict of some one else than the writer. It was\nChrist's own verdict upon Himself. He whose words search our very\nhearts, and bring to light unsuspected seeds of badness, never Himself\nbetrays the faintest consciousness of guilt. He challenges His enemies\ndirectly: \"Which of you convinceth Me of sin?\" It is the verdict of\nall sincere human souls, as uttered by the soldier who watched His\ncross--\"Truly this was a righteous man.\" It is the verdict even of the\ngreat enemy who assailed Him again and again, and found nothing in\nHim, and whose agents recognised Him as the Holy One of God. Above\nall, it is the verdict of God. He was the beloved Son, in whom the\nFather was well pleased. For three-and-thirty years, in daily contact\nwith the world and its sins, Christ lived and yet knew no sin. To His\nwill and conscience it was a foreign thing. What infinite worth that\nsinless life possessed in God's sight! When He looked down to earth it\nwas the one absolutely precious thing. Filled full of righteousness,\nabsolutely well-pleasing in His eyes, it was worth more to God than\nall the world beside.\n\nNow, God reconciled the world to Himself--He made a peace which could\nbe proclaimed and offered to the world--when, all sinless as Christ\nwas, He made Him to be sin on our behalf. What does this mean? Not,\nexactly, that He made Him a sin-offering on our behalf. The expression\nfor a sin-offering is distinct (\u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u1f76 \u1f01\u03bc\u03b1\u03c1\u03c4\u03af\u03b1\u03c2), and the parallelism\nwith \u03b4\u03b9\u03ba\u03b1\u03b9\u03bf\u03c3\u03cd\u03bd\u03b7 in the next clause forbids that reference here. The\nsin-offering of the Old Testament can at most have pointed towards and\ndimly suggested so tremendous an utterance as this; and the\nprofoundest word of the New Testament cannot be adequately interpreted\nby anything in the Old. When St. Paul says, \"Him that knew no sin God\nmade sin,\" he must mean that in Christ on His cross, by divine\nappointment, the extremest opposites met and became one--incarnate\nrighteousness and the sin of the world. The sin is laid by God on the\nSinless One; its doom is laid on Him; His death is the execution of\nthe divine sentence upon it. When He dies, He has put away sin; it no\nlonger stands, as it once stood, between God and the world. On the\ncontrary, God has made peace by this great transaction; He has wrought\nout reconciliation; and its ministers can go everywhere with this\nawful appeal: \"Receive the reconciliation; Him who knew no sin God\nhath made sin on our behalf, and there is henceforth no condemnation\nto them that are in Christ.\"\n\nNo one who has felt the power of this appeal will be very anxious to\ndefend the Apostolic Gospel from the charges which are sometimes made\nagainst it. When he is told that it is impossible for the doom of sin\nto fall on the Sinless One, and that even if it were conceivable it\nwould be frightfully immoral, he is not disquieted. He recognises in\nthe moral contradictions of this text the surest sign that the secret\nof the Atonement is revealed in it: he feels that God's work of\nreconciliation necessarily involves such an identification of\nsinlessness and sin. He knows that there is an appalling side to sin,\nand he is ready to believe that there is an appalling side to\nredemption also--a side the most distant sight of which makes the\nproudest heart quail, and stops every mouth before God. He knows that\nthe salvation which he needs must be one in which God's mercy comes\n_through_, and not _over_, His judgment; and this is the redemption\nwhich is in Christ Jesus. But without becoming controversial on a\nsubject on which more than on any other the temper of controversy is\nunseemly, reference may be made to the commonest form of objection to\nthe apostolic doctrine, in the sincere hope that some one who has\nstumbled at that doctrine may see it more truly. The objection I refer\nto discredits propitiation in the alleged interest of the love of God.\n\"We do not need,\" the objectors say, \"to propitiate an angry God. This\nis a piece of heathenism, of which a Christian ought to be ashamed. It\nis a libel on the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, whose name\nis love, and who waits to be gracious.\" What are we to say to such\nwords, which are uttered as boldly as if there were no possible reply,\nor rather as if the Apostles had never written, or had been\nnarrow-minded unreceptive souls, who had not only failed to understand\ntheir Master, but had taught with amazing perversity the very opposite\nof what He taught on the most essential of all points--the nature of\nGod and His relation to sinful men? We must say this. It is quite true\nthat we have not to propitiate an offended God: the very fact upon\nwhich the Gospel proceeds is that we _cannot_ do any such thing. But\nit is not true that no propitiation is needed. As truly as guilt is a\nreal thing, as truly as God's condemnation of sin is a real thing, a\npropitiation is needed. And it is here, I think, that those who make\nthe objection referred to part company, not only with St. Paul, but\nwith all the Apostles. God is love, they say, and therefore He does\nnot require a propitiation. God is love, say the Apostles, and\ntherefore He provides a propitiation. Which of these doctrines appeals\nbest to the conscience? Which of them gives reality, and contents, and\nsubstance, to the love of God? Is it not the apostolic doctrine? Does\nnot the other cut out and cast away that very thing which made the\nsoul of God's love to Paul and John? \"Herein is love, not that we\nloved God, but that _He loved us, and sent His Son to be the\npropitiation for our sins.\" \"God commendeth His love toward us, in\nthat, while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us.... Him that knew\nno sin He made to be sin on our behalf.\"_ That is how they spoke in\nthe beginning of the Gospel, and so let us speak. Nobody has any right\nto borrow the words \"God is love\" from an apostle, and then to put\nthem in circulation after carefully emptying them of their apostolic\nimport. Still less has any one a right to use them as an argument\nagainst the very thing in which the Apostles placed their meaning. But\nthis is what they do who appeal to love against propitiation. To take\nthe condemnation out of the Cross is to take the nerve out of the\nGospel; it will cease to hold men's hearts with its original power\nwhen the reconciliation which is preached through it contains the\nmercy, but not the judgment of God. Its whole virtue, its consistency\nwith God's character, its aptness to man's need, its real dimensions\nas a revelation of love, depend ultimately on this, that mercy comes\nto us in it through judgment.\n\nIn the last words of the passage the Apostle tells us the object of\nthis great interposition of God: \"He made Christ to be sin on our\nbehalf, that we might become the righteousness of God in Him.\" Our\ncondemnation is made His; it is accepted, exhausted, annihilated, on\nHis cross; and when we receive the reconciliation--when we humble\nourselves to be forgiven and restored at this infinite cost--there is\nno longer condemnation for us: we are justified by our faith, and have\npeace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ. This is what is meant\nby becoming the righteousness of God in Him. It is not, as the very\nnext sentence suggests, all that is included in the Christian\nsalvation, but it is all that the words themselves contain. \"_In Him_\"\nhas all promise in it, as well as the present possession of\nreconciliation, with which the Christian life begins; but it is this\npresent possession, and not the promise involved in it, which St. Paul\ndescribes as the righteousness of God. In Christ, that Christ who died\nfor us, and in Him in virtue of that death which by exhausting\ncondemnation put away sin, we are accepted in God's sight.\n\nFOOTNOTES:\n\n[53] This seems to be the force of \u1f61\u03c2: it is a violent supposition\nthat it means \"since,\" or \"for,\" and that \u1f45\u03c4\u03b9 is a marginal\ninterpretation of it which has crept into the text.\n\n[54] This makes \u03bb\u03bf\u03b3\u03b9\u03b6\u03cc\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd\u03bf\u03c2 a true present, not an imperfect\nparticiple. It quite dislocates the sentence if it is co-ordinated\nwith \u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u03b1\u03bb\u03bb\u03ac\u03c3\u03c3\u03c9\u03bd, and not with \u03b8\u03ad\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd\u03bf\u03c2.\n\n\n\n\n XVII\n\n _THE SIGNS OF AN APOSTLE_\n\n \"And working together _with Him_ we intreat also that ye receive\n not the grace of God in vain (for He saith,\n\n At an acceptable time I hearkened unto thee,\n And in a day of salvation did I succour thee:\n\n behold, now is the acceptable time; behold, now is the day of\n salvation): giving no occasion of stumbling in anything, that our\n ministration be not blamed; but in everything commending\n ourselves, as ministers of God, in much patience, in afflictions,\n in necessities, in distresses, in stripes, in imprisonments, in\n tumults, in labours, in watchings, in fastings; in pureness, in\n knowledge, in long-suffering, in kindness, in the Holy Ghost, in\n love unfeigned, in the word of truth, in the power of God; by the\n armour of righteousness on the right hand and on the left, by\n glory and dishonour, by evil report and good report; as deceivers,\n and _yet_ true; as unknown, and yet well known; as dying, and\n behold, we live; as chastened, and not killed; as sorrowful, yet\n alway rejoicing; as poor, yet making many rich; as having nothing,\n and _yet_ possessing all things.\n\n \"Our mouth is open unto you, O Corinthians, our heart is enlarged.\n Ye are not straitened in us, but ye are straitened in your own\n affections. Now for a recompense in like kind (I speak as unto\n _my_ children), be ye also enlarged.\"--2 COR. vi. 1-13 (R.V.).\n\n\nThe ministry of the Gospel is a ministry of reconciliation; the preacher\nof the Gospel is primarily an evangelist. He has to proclaim that\nwonderful grace of God which made peace between heaven and earth through\nthe blood of the Cross, and he has to urge men to receive it. Until this\nis done, there is nothing else that he can do. But when sinful men have\nwelcomed the glad tidings, when they have consented to accept the peace\nbought for them with so great a price, when they have endured to be\nforgiven and restored to God's favour, not for what they are, nor for\nwhat they are going to be, but solely for what Christ did for them on\nthe cross, then a new situation is created, and the minister of the\nGospel has a new task. It is to that situation St. Paul addresses\nhimself here. Recognising the Corinthians as people reconciled to God by\nthe death of His Son, he entreats them not to receive the grace of God\nin vain. He does so, according to our Bibles, as a fellow-worker with\nGod. This is probably right, though some would take the word as in chap.\ni. 24, and make it mean \"as fellow-workers with you.\" But it is more\nnatural, when we look to what precedes, to think that St. Paul is here\nidentifying himself with God's interest in the world, and that he speaks\nout of the proud consciousness of doing so. \"All is of God,\" in the\ngreat work of redemption; but God does not disdain the sympathetic\nco-operation of men whose hearts He has touched.\n\nBut what is meant by receiving the grace of God in vain, or to no\npurpose? That might be done in an infinite variety of ways, and in\nreading the words for edification we naturally grasp at any clue\nsuggested by our circumstances. An expositor is bound to seek his clue\nrather in the circumstances of the Corinthians; and if we have regard\nto the general tenor of this Epistle, and especially to such a passage\nas chap. xi. 4, we shall find the true interpretation without\ndifficulty. Paul has explained his Gospel--his proclamation of Jesus\nas Universal Redeemer in virtue of His dying the sinner's death, and\nas Universal Lord in virtue of His resurrection from the dead--so\nexplicitly, because he fears lest through the influence of some false\nteacher the minds of the Corinthians should be corrupted from the\nsimplicity that is toward Christ. It would be receiving the grace of\nGod in vain, if, after receiving those truths concerning Christ which\nhe had taught them, they were to give up his Gospel for another in\nwhich these truths had no place. This is what he dreads and\ndeprecates, both in Corinth and Galatia: the precipitate removal from\nthe grace of Christ to another Gospel which is no Gospel at all, but a\nsubversion of the truth. This is what he means by receiving the grace\nof God in vain.\n\nThere are some minds to which this will not be impressive, some to which\nit will only be provoking. It will seem irrelevant and pithless to those\nwho take for granted the finality of the distinction between religion\nand theology, or between the theory, as it is called, and the fact of\nthe Atonement. But for St. Paul, as for all sufficiently earnest and\nvigorous minds, there is a point at which these distinctions disappear.\nA certain theory is seen to be essential to the fact, a certain theology\nto be the constitutive force in the religion. The death of Christ was\nwhat it was to him only because it was capable of a certain\ninterpretation: his theory of it, if we choose to put it so, gave it its\npower over him. The love of Christ constrained him \"because he thus\njudged\"--_i.e._, because he construed it to his intelligence in a way\nwhich showed it to be irresistible. If these interpretations and\nconstructions are rejected, it must not be in the name of \"fact\" as\nopposed to \"theory,\" but in the name of other interpretations more\nadequate and constraining. A fact of which there is absolutely _no_\ntheory is a fact which is without relation to anything in the\nuniverse--a mere irrelevance in man's mind--a blank incredibility--a\nrock in the sky. Paul's \"theory\" about Christ's death for sin was not to\nhim an excrescence on the Gospel, or a superfluous appendage to it: it\nwas itself the Gospel; it was the thing in which the very soul of God's\nredeeming love was brought to light; it was the condition under which\nthe love of Christ became to him a constraining power; to receive it and\nthen reject it was to receive the grace of God in vain.\n\nThis does not preclude us from the edifying application of these words\nwhich a modern reader almost instinctively makes. Peace with God is the\nfirst and deepest need of the sinful soul, but it is not the sum-total\nof salvation. It would, indeed, be received in vain, if the soul did not\non the basis of it proceed to build up the new life in new purity and\npower. The failure to do this is, unhappily, only too common. There is\nno mechanical guarantee for the fruits of the Spirit; no assurance, such\nas would make this appeal unnecessary, that every man who has received\nthe word of reconciliation will also walk in newness of life. But if an\nevangelical profession, and an immoral life, are the ugliest combination\nof which human nature is capable, the force of this appeal ought to be\nfelt by the weakest and the worst. \"The Son of God loved me, and gave\nHimself for me\": can any of us hide that word in his heart, and live on\nas if it meant nothing at all?\n\nPaul emphasises his appeal to the Corinthians by a striking quotation\nfrom an ancient prophet (Isa. xlix. 8): \"At an acceptable time did I\nhearken unto thee, And in a day of salvation did I succour thee\"; and\nhe points it by the joyful exclamation: \"Behold, now is the\nacceptable time; behold, now is the day of salvation.\" The passage in\nIsaiah refers to the servant of Jehovah, and some scholars would\ninsist that even in the quotation a primary application must be made\nto Christ. The ambassadors of the Gospel represent _His_ interest\n(chap. v. 20); this verse is, as it were, the answer to _His_ prayer:\n\"Father, the hour is come: glorify Thy Son.\" In answering the Son, the\nFather introduces the era of grace for all who are, or shall be,\nChrist's: behold, now is the time in which God shows us favour; now is\nthe day on which He saves us. This is rather scholastic than\napostolic, and it is far more probable that St. Paul borrows the\nprophet's words, as he often does, because they suit him, without\nthinking of their original application. What is striking in the\npassage, and characteristic both of the writer and of the New\nTestament, is the union of urgency and triumph in the tone. \"Now\" does\ncertainly mean \"now or never\"; but more prominently still it means \"in\na time so favoured as this: in a time so graced with opportunity.\" The\nbest illustration of it is the saying of Jesus to the Apostles:\n\"Blessed are your eyes, for they see; and your ears, for they hear.\nFor verily I say unto you, That many prophets and righteous men have\ndesired to see those things which ye see, and have not seen them; and\nto hear those things which ye hear, and have not heard them.\" _Now_,\nthat we live under the reign of grace; _now_, when God's redeeming\nlove, omnipotent to save, shines on us from the Cross; _now_, that the\nlast days have come, and the Judge is at the door, let us with all\nseriousness, and all joy, work out our own salvation, lest we make the\ngrace of God of no effect.\n\nSt. Paul is as careful himself as he would have the Corinthians to\nbe. He does not wish them to receive the Gospel in vain, and he takes\npains that it shall not be frustrated through any fault of his:\n\"working together with God we intreat you ... giving no occasion of\nstumbling in anything, that our ministration be not blamed.\" It is\nalmost implied in a sentence like this that there are people who will\nbe glad of an excuse not to listen to the Gospel, or not to take it\nseriously, and that they will look for such an excuse in the conduct\nof its ministers. Anything in the minister to which objection can be\nraised will be used as a shield against the Gospel. It does not matter\nthat in nine cases out of ten this plea for declining the grace of God\nis impudent hypocrisy; it is one which the non-Christian should never\nhave. If it is not the chief end of the evangelist to give no occasion\nof stumbling, it is one of his chief rules. This is a matter on which\nJesus lays great stress. The severest words He ever spoke were spoken\nagainst those whose conduct made faith hard and unbelief easy. Of\ncourse they were spoken to all, but they have special application to\nthose who are so directly identified with the Gospel as its ministers.\nIt is to them men naturally look for the proof of what grace does. If\nits reception has been in vain in them; if they have not learned the\nspirit of their message; if their pride, or indolence, or avarice, or\nill-nature, provoke the anger or contempt of those to whom they\npreach,--then their ministration is blamed, and the shadow of that\ncensure falls upon their message. The grace of God which has to be\nproclaimed through human lips, and to attest itself by its power over\nhuman lives, might seem to be put in this way to too great hazard in\nthe world; but it has God behind it, or rather it is itself God at\nwork in His ministers as their humility and fidelity allow Him; and\nin spite of the occasions of stumbling for which there is no excuse,\nGod is always able to make grace prevail. Through the faults of its\nministers, nay, sometimes even with those faults as a foil, men see\nhow good and how strong that grace is.\n\nIt is not easy to comment on the glowing passage (vv. 4-10) in which\nSt. Paul expands this sober habit of giving no occasion of stumbling\nin anything into a description of his apostolic ministry. Logically,\nits value is obvious enough. He means the Corinthians to feel that if\nthey turn away from the Gospel which he has preached to them they are\npassing censure lightly on a life of unparalleled devotion and power.\nHe commends himself to them, as God's servants ought always to do,[55]\nby the life which he leads in the exercise of his ministry; and to\nreject his Gospel is to condemn his life as worthless or misspent.\nWill they venture to do that when they are reminded of what it is, and\nwhen they feel that it is all this for them? No right-minded man will,\nwithout provocation, speak about himself, but Paul is doubly\nprotected. He is challenged, by the threatened desertion from the\nGospel of some, at least, of the Corinthians; and it is not so much of\nhimself he speaks, as of the ministers of Christ; not so much on his\nown behalf, as on behalf of the Gospel. The fountains of the great\ndeep are broken up within him as he thinks of what is at issue; he is\nin all straits, as he begins, and can speak only in unconnected words,\none at a time; but before he stops he has won his liberty, and pours\nout his soul without restraint.\n\nIt is needless to comment on each of the eight-and-twenty separate\nphrases in which St. Paul characterises his life as a minister of the\nGospel. But there are what might be called breathing-places, if not\nlogical pauses, in the outburst of feeling, and these, as it happens,\ncoincide with the introduction of new aspects of his work. (1) At\nfirst he depicts exclusively, and in single words, its passive side.\nChrist had shown him at his conversion how great things he must suffer\nfor His name's sake (Acts ix. 16), and here is his own confirmation of\nthe Lord's word: he has ministered \"in much patience--in afflictions,\nin necessities, in distresses; in stripes, in imprisonments, in\ntumults\"--where the enmity of men was conspicuous; \"in labours, in\nwatchings, in fastings\"--freely exacted by his own devotion. These\nnine words are all, in a manner, subordinated to \"much patience\"; his\nbrave endurance was abundantly shown in every variety of pain and\ndistress. (2) At ver. 6 he makes a new start, and now it is not the\npassive and physical aspect of his work that is in view, but the\nactive and spiritual. All that weight of suffering did not extinguish\nin him the virtues of the new life, or the special gifts of the\nChristian minister. He wrought, he reminds them, \"in purity, in\nknowledge, in long-suffering, in kindness, in the Holy Spirit, in love\nunfeigned, in the word of truth, in the power of God.\" The precise\nimport of some of these expressions may be doubtful, but this is of\nless consequence than the general tenor of the whole, which is\nunmistakable. Probably some of the terms, strictly taken, would cross\neach other. Thus the Holy Spirit and the power of God, if we compare\nsuch passages as 1 Cor. ii. 4, 1 Thess. i. 5, are very nearly akin.\nThe same remark would apply to \"knowledge,\" and to \"the word of\ntruth,\" if the latter refers, as I cannot but think it does,[56] to\nthe Gospel. \"Purity\" is naturally taken in the widest sense, and\n\"undissembled love\" is peculiarly appropriate when we think of the\nfeelings with which some of the Corinthians regarded Paul. But the\nmain thing to notice is how the \"much endurance,\" which, to a\nsuperficial observer, is the most conspicuous characteristic of the\nApostle's ministry, is balanced by a great manifestation of spiritual\nforce from within. Of all men in the world he was the weakest to look\nat, the most battered, burdened, and depressed, yet no one else had in\nhim such a fountain as he of the most powerful and gracious life. And\nthen (3) after another pause, marked this time by a slight change in\nthe construction (from \u1f10\u03bd to \u03b4\u03b9\u1f70), he goes on to enlarge upon the\nwhole conditions under which his ministry is fulfilled, and especially\non the extraordinary contrasts which are reconciled in it. We commend\nourselves in our work he says, \"by the armour of righteousness on the\nright hand and the left, by glory and dishonour, by evil report and\ngood report: as deceivers, and yet true; as unknown, and yet coming to\nbe well known; as dying, and behold, we live; as chastened, and not\nkilled; as sorrowing, yet ever rejoicing; as poor, yet making many\nrich; as having nothing, and yet possessing all things.\" Here again it\nis not the details that are important, but the whole, and yet the\ndetails require notice. The armour of righteousness is that which\nrighteousness supplies, or it may even be that which righteousness is:\nPaul's character equips him right and left; it is both spear and\nshield, and makes him competent either for attack or defence. Without\nrighteousness, in this sense of integrity, he could not commend\nhimself in his work as a minister of God.[57] But not only does his\nreal character commend him; his reputation does the same service,\nhowever various that reputation may be. Through honour and dishonour,\nthrough evil report and good report--through the truth that is told\nabout him, and through the lies--through the esteem of his friends,\nthe malignity of his enemies, the contempt of strangers--the same man\ncomes out, in the same character, devoted always in the same spirit to\nthe same calling. It is indeed his very devotion which produces these\nopposite estimates, and hence, inconsistent as they are, they agree in\nrecommending him as a servant of God. Some said \"He is beside\nhimself,\" and others would have plucked out their eyes for his sake,\nyet both these extremely opposite attitudes were produced by the very\nsame thing--the passionate earnestness with which he served Christ in\nthe Gospel. There are good scholars who think that the clauses\nbeginning \"as deceivers, and true,\" are the Apostle's own commentary\non \"through evil report and good report\"; in other words, that in\nthese clauses he is giving samples of the way in which he was spoken\nof, to his honour or dishonour, and glorying that honour and dishonour\nalike only guaranteed more thoroughly his claim to be a minister of\nGod. This might suit the first two pairs of contrasts (\"as deceivers,\nand true; as unknown, and gaining recognition\"), but it does not suit\nthe next (\"as dying, and behold we live\"), in which, as in those that\nfollow, the Apostle is not repeating what was said by others, but\nspeaking for himself, and stating truth equally on both sides of the\naccount. After the first pair, there is no \"dishonour,\" or \"evil\nreport,\" in any of the states which he contrasts with each other:\nthough opposites, they have each their truth, and the power and beauty\nof the passage, and of the life which it describes, lie simply in\nthis, that both _are_ true, and that through all such contrasts St.\nPaul can prove himself the same loyal minister of the reconciliation.\n\nEach pair of opposites might furnish by itself a subject for\ndiscourse, but what we are rather concerned with is the impression\nproduced by the whole. In their variety they give us a vivid idea of\nthe range of St. Paul's experiences; in the regularity with which he\nputs the higher last, and in the climax with which he concludes, they\nshow the victorious spirit with which he confronted all that various\nlife. An ordinary Christian--an ordinary minister of the Gospel--may\nwell feel, as he reads, that his own life is by comparison empty and\ncommonplace. There is not that terrible pressure on him from without;\nthere is not that irrepressible fountain of grace within; there is not\nthat triumphant spirit which can subdue all the world contains--honour\nand dishonour, evil report and good report--and make it pay tribute to\nthe Gospel, and to himself as a Gospel minister. Yet the world has\nstill all possible experiences ready for those who give themselves to\nthe service of God with the wholeheartedness of Paul: it will show\nthem its best and its worst; its reverence, affection, and praise; its\nhatred, its indifference, its scorn. And it is in the facing of all\nsuch experiences by God's ministers that the ministry receives its\nhighest attestation: they are enabled to turn all to profit; in\nignominy and in honour alike they are made more than conquerors\nthrough Him who loved them. St. Paul's plea rises involuntarily into\na p\u00e6an; he begins, as we saw, with the embarrassed tone of a man who\nwishes to persuade others that he has taken sincere pains not to\nfrustrate his work by faults he could have avoided--\"giving no\noccasion of stumbling in anything, that the ministry be not blamed\";\nbut he is carried higher and higher, as the tide of feeling rises\nwithin him, till it sets him beyond the reach of blame or praise--at\nChrist's right hand, where all things are his. Here is a signal\nfulfilment of that word of the Lord: \"I am come that they might have\nlife, and might have it more abundantly.\" Who could have it more\nabundantly, more triumphantly strong through all its vicissitudes,\nthan the man who dictated these lines?\n\nThe passage closes with an appeal in which Paul descends from this\nsupreme height to the most direct and affectionate address. He names his\nreaders by name: \"Our mouth is open unto you, O Corinthians;[58] our\nheart is enlarged.\" He means that he has treated them with the utmost\nfrankness and cordiality. With strangers we use reserve; we do not let\nourselves go, nor indulge in any effusion of heart. But he has not made\nstrangers of them; he has relieved his overcharged heart before them,\nand he has established a new claim on their confidence in doing so. \"Ye\nare not straitened in us,\" he writes; that is, \"The awkwardness and\nconstraint of which you are conscious in your relations with me are not\ndue to anything on my side; my heart has been made wide, and you have\nplenty of room in it. But you are straitened in your own affections. It\nis _your_ hearts that are narrow: cramped and confined with unworthy\nsuspicions, and with the feeling that you have done me a wrong which you\nare not quite prepared to rectify. Overcome these ungenerous thoughts at\nonce. Give me a recompense in kind for my treatment of you. I have\nopened my heart wide, to you and for you; open your hearts as freely, to\nme and for me. I am your father in Christ, and I have a right to this\nfrom my children.\"\n\nWhen we take this passage as a whole, in its original bearings, one\nthing is plain: that want of love and confidence between the minister\nof the Gospel and those to whom he ministers has great power to\nfrustrate the grace of God. There may have been a real revival under\nthe minister's preaching--a real reception of the grace which he\nproclaims--but all will be in vain if mutual confidence fails. If he\ngives occasion of stumbling in something, and the ministry is blamed;\nor if malice and falsehood sow the seeds of dissension between him and\nhis brethren, the grand condition of an effective ministry is gone.\n\"Beloved, let us love one another,\" if we do not wish the virtue of\nthe Cross to be of no effect in us.\n\nFOOTNOTES:\n\n[55] Observe that it is \u1f61\u03c2 \u0398\u03b5\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03b4\u03b9\u03ac\u03ba\u03bf\u03bd\u03bf\u03b9, not \u03b4\u03b9\u03b1\u03ba\u03cc\u03bd\u03bf\u03c5\u03c2.\n\n[56] Some, because of the want of the article, make it equivalent to\n\"veracity.\"\n\n[57] Beet, however, takes it in the technical sense: justification by\nfaith is the preacher's sword and shield.\n\n[58] _Rara et pr\u00e6sentissima appellatio_ (Bengel).\n\n\n\n\n XVIII\n\n _NEW TESTAMENT PURITANISM_\n\n \"Be not unequally yoked with unbelievers: for what fellowship have\n righteousness and iniquity? or what communion hath light with\n darkness? And what concord hath Christ with Belial? or what portion\n hath a believer with an unbeliever? And what agreement hath a temple\n of God with idols? for we are a temple of the living God; even as\n God said, I will dwell in them, and walk in them; and I will be\n their God, and they shall be My people. Wherefore\n\n Come ye out from among them, and be ye separate, saith the Lord,\n And touch no unclean thing;\n And I will receive you,\n And will be to you a Father,\n And ye shall be to Me sons and daughters,\n\n saith the Lord Almighty. Having therefore these promises, beloved,\n let us cleanse ourselves from all defilement of flesh and spirit,\n perfecting holiness in the fear of God.\"--2 COR. vi. 14-vii. 1\n (R.V.).\n\n\nThis is one of the most peculiar passages in the New Testament. Even a\ncareless reader must feel that there is something abrupt and unexpected\nin it; it jolts the mind as a stone on the road does a carriage wheel.\nPaul has been begging the Corinthians to treat him with the same love\nand confidence which he has always shown to them, and he urges this\nclaim upon them up to ver. 13. Then comes this passage about the\nrelation of Christians to the world. Then again, at chap. vii. 2--\"Open\nyour hearts to us; we wronged no man, we corrupted no man, we took\nadvantage of no man\"--he returns to the old subject without the least\nmark of transition. If everything were omitted from chap. vi. 14 to\nchap. vii. 1 inclusive, the continuity both of thought and feeling would\nbe much more striking. This consideration alone has induced many\nscholars to believe that these verses do not occupy their original\nplace. The ingenious suggestion has been made that they are a fragment\nof the letter to which the Apostle refers in the First Epistle (chap. v.\n9): the sentiment, and to some extent even the words, favour this\nconjecture. But as there is no external authority for any conjecture\nwhatever, and no variation in the text, such suggestions can never\nbecome conclusive. It is always possible that, on reading over his\nletter, the Apostle himself may have inserted a paragraph breaking to\nsome extent the closeness of the original connexion. If there is nothing\nin the contents of the section inconsistent with his mind, the breach of\ncontinuity is not enough to discredit it.\n\nSome, however, have gone further than this. They have pointed to the\nstrange formul\u00e6 of quotation--\"as God said,\" \"saith the Lord,\" \"saith\nthe Lord Almighty\"--as unlike Paul. Even the main idea of the\npassage--\"touch not any unclean thing\"--is asserted to be at variance\nwith his principles. A narrow Jewish Christian might, it is said, have\nexpressed this shrinking from what is unclean, in the sense of being\nassociated with idolatry, but not the great Apostle of liberty. At all\nevents he would have taken care, in giving such an advice under\nspecial circumstances, to safeguard the principle of freedom. And,\nfinally, an argument is drawn from language. The only point at which\nit is even plausible is that which touches upon the use of the terms\n\"flesh\" and \"spirit\" in chap. vii. 1. Schmiedel, who has an admirable\nexcursus on the whole question, decides that this, and this only, is\ncertainly un-Pauline. It is certainly unusual in Paul, but I do not\nthink we can say more. The \"rigour and vigour\" with which Paul's use\nof these terms is investigated seems to me largely misplaced. They did\nundoubtedly tend to become technical in his mind, but words so\nuniversally and so vaguely used could never become simply technical.\nIf any contemporary of Paul could have written, \"Let us cleanse\nourselves from all defilement of flesh and spirit,\" then Paul himself\ncould have written it. Language offers the same latitudes and\nliberties to everybody, and one could not imagine a subject which\ntempted less to technicality than the one urged in these verses.\nWhatever the explanation of their apparently irrelevant insertion\nhere, I can see nothing in them alien to Paul. Puritanism is certainly\nmore akin to the Old Testament than to the New, and that may explain\nthe instinctiveness with which the writer seems to turn to the law and\nthe prophets, and the abundance of his quotations; but though \"all\nthings are lawful\" to the Christian, Puritanism has a place in the New\nTestament too. There is no conception of \"holiness\" into which the\nidea of \"separation\" does not enter; and though the balance of\nelements may vary in the New Testament as compared with the Old, none\ncan be wanting. From this point of view we can best examine the\nmeaning and application of the passage. If a connexion is craved, the\nbest, I think, is that furnished by a combination of Calvin and Meyer.\n_Quasi recuperata auctoritate_, says Calvin, _liberius jam eos\nobjurgat_: this supplies a link of feeling between vv. 13 and 14. A\nlink of thought is supplied if we consider with Meyer that\ninattention to the rule of life here laid down was a notable cause of\nreceiving the grace of God in vain (ver. 1).[59] Let us notice (1) the\nmoral demand of the passage; (2) the assumption on which it rests; (3)\nthe Divine promise which inspires its observance.\n\n(1) The moral demand is first put in the negative form: \"Be not\nunequally yoked with unbelievers.\" The peculiar word \u1f11\u03c4\u03b5\u03c1\u03bf\u03b6\u03c5\u03b3\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bd\u03c4\u03b5\u03c2\n(\"unequally yoked\") has a cognate form in Lev. xix. 19, in the law\nwhich forbids the breeding of hybrid animals. God has established a\ngood physical order in the world, and it is not to be confounded and\ndisfigured by the mixing of species. It is that law (or perhaps\nanother form of it in Deut. xxii. 10, forbidding an Israelite to\nplough with an ox and an ass under the same yoke) that is applied in\nan ethical sense in this passage. There is a wholesome moral order in\nthe world also, and it is not to be confused by the association of its\ndifferent kinds. The common application of this text to the marriage\nof Christians and non-Christians is legitimate, but too narrow. The\ntext prohibits every kind of union in which the separate character and\ninterest of the Christian lose anything of their distinctiveness and\nintegrity. This is brought out more strongly in the free quotation\nfrom Isa. lii. 11 in ver. 17: \"Come out from among them, and be\nseparate, saith the Lord, and touch not anything unclean.\" These words\nwere originally addressed to the priests who, on the redemption of\nIsrael from Babylon, were to carry the sacred temple vessels back to\nJerusalem. But we must remember that, though they are Old Testament\nwords, they are quoted by a New Testament writer, who inevitably puts\nhis own meaning into them. \"The unclean thing\" which no Christian is\nto touch is not to be taken in a precise Levitical sense; it covers,\nand I have no doubt was intended by the writer to cover, all that it\nsuggests to any simple Christian mind now. We are to have no\ncompromising connexion with anything in the world which is alien to\nGod. Let us be as loving and conciliatory as we please, but as long as\nthe world is what it is, the Christian life can only maintain itself\nin it in an attitude of protest. There always will be things and\npeople to whom the Christian has to say No!\n\nBut the moral demand of the passage is put in a more positive form in\nthe last verse: \"Let us cleanse ourselves from all defilement of flesh\nand spirit, perfecting holiness in the fear of God.\" That is the ideal\nof the Christian life. There is something to be overcome and put away;\nthere is something to be wrought out and completed; there is a\nspiritual element or atmosphere--the fear of God--in which alone these\ntasks can be accomplished. The fear of God is an Old Testament name\nfor true religion, and even under the New Testament it holds its\nplace. The Seraphim still veil their faces while they cry \"Holy, holy,\nholy is the Lord of Hosts,\" and still we must feel that great awe\ndescend upon our hearts if we would be partakers of His holiness. It\nis this which withers up sin to the root, and enables us to cleanse\nourselves from all defilement of flesh and spirit. St. Paul includes\nhimself in his exhortation here: it is one duty, one ideal, which is\nset before all. The prompt decisive side of it is represented in\n\u03ba\u03b1\u03b8\u03b1\u03c1\u03af\u03c3\u03c9\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd (\"let us cleanse\": observe the aorist); its patient\nlaborious side in \u1f10\u03c0\u03b9\u03c4\u03b5\u03bb\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bd\u03c4\u03b5\u03c2 \u1f01\u03b3\u03b9\u03c9\u03c3\u03cd\u03bd\u03b7\u03bd (\"carrying holiness to\ncompletion).\" Almost everybody in a Christian Church makes a beginning\nwith this task: we cleanse ourselves from obvious and superficial\ndefilements; but how few carry the work on into the spirit, how few\ncarry it on ceaselessly towards perfection. As year after year rolls\nby, as the various experiences of his come to us with their lessons\nand their discipline from God, as we see the lives of others, here\nsinking ever deeper and deeper into the corruptions of the world,\nthere rising daily nearer and nearer to the perfect holiness which is\ntheir goal, does not this demand assert its power over us? Is it not a\ngreat thing, a worthy thing, that we should set ourselves to purge\naway from our whole nature, outward and inward, whatever cannot abide\nthe holy eye of God; and that we should regard Christian holiness, not\nas a subject for casual thoughts once a week, but as the task to be\ntaken up anew, with unwearying diligence, every day we live? Let us be\nin earnest with this, for surely God is in earnest.\n\n(2) Observe now the assumption on which the demand not to be unequally\nyoked with unbelievers is based. It is that there are _two_ ethical or\nspiritual interests in the world, and that these are fundamentally\ninconsistent with each other. This implies that in choosing the one,\nthe other has to be rejected. But it implies more: it implies that at\nbottom there are only two kinds of people in the world--those who\nidentify themselves with the one of these interests, and those who\nidentify themselves with the other.\n\nNow, as long as this is kept in an abstract form people do not quarrel\nwith it. They have no objection to admit that good and evil are the only\nspiritual forces in the world, and that they are mutually exclusive. But\nmany will not admit that there are only two kinds of persons in the\nworld, answering to these two forces. They would rather say there is\nonly _one_ kind of persons, in whom these forces are with infinite\nvarieties and modifications combined. This seems more tolerant, more\nhumane, more capable of explaining the amazing mixtures and\ninconsistencies we see in human lives. But it is not more true. It is a\nmore penetrating insight which judges that every man--despite his range\nof neutrality--would in the last resort choose his side; would, in\nshort, in a crisis of the proper kind, prove finally that he was not\ngood _and_ bad, but good _or_ bad. We cannot pretend to judge others,\nbut sometimes men judge themselves, and always God can judge. And there\nis an instinct in those who are perfecting holiness in the fear of God\nwhich tells them, without in the least making them Pharisaical, not only\nwhat things, but what persons--not only what ideas and practices, but\nwhat individual characters--are not to be made friends of. It is no\npride, or scorn, or censoriousness, which speaks thus, but the voice of\nall Christian experience. It is recognised at once where the young are\nconcerned: people are careful of the friends their children make, and a\nschoolmaster will dismiss inexorably, not only a bad habit, but a bad\nboy, from the school. It ought to be recognised just as easily in\nmaturity as in childhood: there are men and women, as well as boys and\ngirls, who distinctly represent evil, and whose society is to be\ndeclined. To protest against them, to repel them, to resent their life\nand conduct as morally offensive, is a Christian duty; it is the first\nstep towards evangelising them.\n\nIt is worth noticing in the passage before us how the Apostle, starting\nfrom abstract ideas, descends, as he becomes more urgent, into personal\nrelations. What fellowship have righteousness and lawlessness? None.\nWhat communion has light with darkness? None. What concord has Christ\nwith Belial? Here the persons come in who are the heads, or\nrepresentatives, of the opposing moral interests, and it is only now\nthat we feel the completeness of the antagonism. The interest of\nholiness is gathered up in Christ; the interest of evil in the great\nadversary; and they have nothing in common. And so with the believer and\nthe unbeliever. Of course there is ground on which they can meet: the\nsame sun shines on them, the same soil supports them, they breathe the\nsame air. But in all that is indicated by those two names--believer and\nunbeliever--they stand quite apart; and the distinction thus indicated\nreaches deeper than any bond of union. It is not denied that the\nunbeliever may have much that is admirable about him; but for the\nbeliever the one supremely important thing in the world is that which\nthe unbeliever denies, and therefore the more he is in earnest the less\ncan he afford the unbeliever's friendship. We need all the help we can\nget to fight the good fight of faith, and to perfect holiness in the\nfear of God; and a friend whose silence numbs faith, or whose words\ntrouble it, is a friend no earnest Christian dare keep. Words like these\nwould not seem so hard if the common faith of Christians were felt to\nbe a real bond of union among them, and if the recoil from the\nunbelieving world were seen to be the action of the whole Christian\nsociety, the instinct of self-preservation in the new Christian life.\nBut, at whatever risk of seeming harsh, it must be repeated that there\nhas never been a state of affairs in the world in which the commandment\nhad no meaning, \"Come out from among them, and be ye separate\"; nor an\nobedience to this commandment which did not involve separation from\npersons as well as from principles.\n\n(3) But what bulks most largely in the passage is the series of divine\npromises which are to inspire and sustain obedience. The separations\nwhich an earnest Christian life requires are not without their\ncompensation; to leave the world is to be welcomed by God. It is\nprobable that the pernicious association which the writer had\nimmediately in view was association with the heathen in their worship,\nor at least in their sacrificial feasts. At all events it is the\ninconsistency of this with the worship of the true God that forms the\nclimax of his expostulation--What agreement hath a temple of God with\nidols? and it is to this, again, that the encouraging promises are\nattached. \"_We_,\" says the Apostle, \"are a temple of the living God.\"\nThis carries with it all that he has claimed: for a temple means a house\nin which God dwells, and God can only dwell in a holy place. Pagans and\nJews alike recognised the sanctity of their temples: nothing was guarded\nmore jealously; nothing, if violated, was more promptly and terribly\navenged. Paul had seen the day when he gave his vote to shed the blood\nof a man who had spoken disrespectfully of the Temple at Jerusalem, and\nthe day was coming when he himself was to run the risk of his life on\nthe mere suspicion that he had taken a pagan into the holy place. He\nexpects Christians to be as much in earnest as Jews to keep the sanctity\nof God's house inviolate; and now, he says, that house are we: it is\nourselves we have to keep unspotted from the world.\n\nWe are God's temple in accordance with the central promise of the old\ncovenant: as God said, \"I will dwell in them and walk in them, and I\nwill be their God, and they shall be My people.\" The original of this\nis Lev. xxvi. 11, 12. The Apostle, as has been observed already, takes\nthe Old Testament words in a New Testament sense: as they stand here\nin Second Corinthians they mean something much more intimate and\nprofound than in their old place in Leviticus. But even there, he\ntells us, they are a promise to us. What God speaks, He speaks to His\npeople, and speaks once for all. And if the divine presence in the\ncamp of Israel--a presence represented by the Ark and its tent--was to\nconsecrate that nation to Jehovah, and inspire them with zeal to keep\nthe camp clean, that nothing might offend the eyes of His glory, how\nmuch more ought those whom God has visited in His Son, those in whom\nHe dwells through His Spirit, to cleanse themselves from every\ndefilement, and make their souls fit for His habitation? After\nrepeating the charge to come out and be separate, the writer heaps up\nnew promises, in which the letter and the spirit of various Old\nTestament passages are freely combined.[60] The principal one seems to\nbe 2 Sam. vii., which contains the promises originally made to\nSolomon. At ver. 14 of that chapter we have the idea of the paternal\nand filial relation, and at ver. 8 the speaker is described in the\nLXX., as here, as the Lord Almighty. But passages like Jer. xxxi. 1,\n9, also doubtless floated through the writer's mind, and it is the\nsubstance, not the form, which is the main thing. The very freedom\nwith which they are reproduced shows us how thoroughly the writer is\nat home, and how confident he is that he is making the right and\nnatural application of these ancient promises.\n\nSeparate yourselves, for you are God's temple: separate yourselves,\nand you will be sons and daughters of the Lord Almighty, and He will\nbe your Father. _H\u00e6c una ratio instar mille esse debet._ The\nfriendship of the world, as James reminds us, is enmity with God; it\nis the consoling side of the same truth that separation from the world\nmeans friendship with God. It does not mean solitude, but a more\nblessed society; not renunciation of love, but admission to the only\nlove which satisfies the soul, because that for which the soul was\nmade. The Puritanism of the New Testament is no harsh, repellent\nthing, which eradicates the affections, and makes life bleak and\nbarren; it is the condition under which the heart is opened to the\nlove of God, and filled with all comfort and joy in obedience. With\nHim on our side--with the promise of His indwelling Spirit to sanctify\nus, of His fatherly kindness to enrich and protect us--shall we not\nobey the exhortation to come out and be separate, to cleanse ourselves\nfrom all that defiles, to perfect holiness in His fear?\n\nFOOTNOTES:\n\n[59] An ingenious defence of the place of these verses has been made\nby Godet in his Introduction to St. Paul's Epistles. At chap. vi. 10\nthe Apostle suddenly stops, amazed, as it were, at himself and at what\nthe Spirit has just dictated to him. His heart swells, and he longs to\nembrace the thankless Church to which he writes. What _can_ be the\ncause of its ingratitude? It is this. He has inexorably exacted from\nthem a sacrifice claimed by their Christian profession--abstinence\nfrom banquets, etc., in idol temples (1 Cor. x.). But he has had no\nchoice; the promises God makes to His sons and daughters are made on\ncondition of such separation. Hence the entreaty in vii. 2 f., \"Make\nroom for me in your hearts: I have not deserved ill of any one by what\nI have done.\"--_Introduction_, p. 381.\n\n[60] So freely that Ewald thinks the words from \u03ba\u1f00\u03b3\u1f7c \u03b5\u1f30\u03c3\u03b4\u03ad\u03be\u03bf\u03bc\u03b1\u03b9 onward\nare a quotation from some unknown source: as, _e.g._, Eph. v. 14.\n\n\n\n\n XIX\n\n _REPENTANCE UNTO LIFE_\n\n \"Open your hearts to us: we wronged no man, we corrupted no man, we\n took advantage of no man. I say it not to condemn _you_: for I have\n said before, that ye are in our hearts to die together and live\n together. Great is my boldness of speech toward you, great is my\n glorying on your behalf: I am filled with comfort, I overflow with\n joy in an our affliction.\n\n \"For even when we were come into Macedonia, our flesh had no relief,\n but _we were_ afflicted on every side; without _were_ fightings,\n within _were_ fears. Nevertheless He that comforteth the lowly,\n _even_ God, comforted us by the coming of Titus; and not by his\n coming only, but also by the comfort wherewith he was comforted in\n you, while he told us your longing, your mourning, your zeal for me;\n so that I rejoiced yet more. For though I made you sorry with my\n epistle, I do not regret it, though I did regret; for I see that\n that epistle made you sorry, though but for a season. Now I rejoice,\n not that ye were made sorry, but that ye were made sorry unto\n repentance: for ye were made sorry after a godly sort, that ye might\n suffer loss by us in nothing. For godly sorrow worketh repentance\n unto salvation, _a repentance_ which bringeth no regret: but the\n sorrow of the world worketh death. For behold, this selfsame thing,\n that ye were made sorry after a godly sort, what earnest care it\n wrought in you, yea, what clearing of yourselves, yea, what\n indignation, yea, what fear, yea, what longing, yea, what zeal, yea,\n what avenging! In everything ye approved yourselves to be pure in\n the matter. So although I wrote unto you, _I wrote_ not for his\n cause that did the wrong, nor for his cause that suffered the wrong,\n but that your earnest care for us might be made manifest unto you in\n the sight of God. Therefore we have been comforted: and in our\n comfort we joyed the more exceedingly for the joy of Titus, because\n his spirit hath been refreshed by you all. For if in anything I have\n gloried to him on your behalf, I was not put to shame; but as we\n spake all things to you in truth, so our glorying also, which I made\n before Titus, was found to be truth. And his inward affection is\n more abundantly toward you, whilst he remembereth the obedience of\n you all, how with fear and trembling ye received him. I rejoice that\n in everything I am of good courage concerning you.\"--2 COR. vii.\n 2-16 (R.V.).\n\n\nIn this fine passage St. Paul completes, as far as it lay upon his\nside to do so, his reconciliation with the Corinthians. It concludes\nthe first great division of his Second Epistle, and henceforth we hear\nno more of the sinner censured so severely in the First (chap.\nv.),[61] or of the troubles which arose in the Church over the\ndisciplinary treatment of his sin. The end of a quarrel between\nfriends is like the passing away of a storm; the elements are meant to\nbe at peace with each other, and nature never looks so lovely as in\nthe clear shining after rain. The effusion of feeling in this passage,\nso affectionate and unreserved; the sense that the storm-clouds have\nno more than left the sky, yet that fair weather has begun, make it\nconspicuously beautiful even in the writings of St. Paul.\n\nHe begins by resuming the appeal interrupted at chap. vi. 13. He has\ncharged the Corinthians with being straitened in their own affections:\ndistrust and calumny have narrowed their souls, nay, shut them against\nhim altogether. \"Receive us,\" he exclaims here--_i.e._, open your\nhearts to us. \"You have no cause to be reserved: we wronged no man,\nruined no man, took advantage of no man.\" Such charges had doubtless\nbeen made against him. The point of the last is clear from chap. xii.\n16-18: he had been accused of making money out of his apostolic work\namong them. The other words are less precise, especially the one\nrendered \"corrupted\" (\u1f10\u03c6\u03b8\u03b5\u03af\u03c1\u03b1\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd), which should perhaps be rather\nexplained, as in 1 Cor. iii. 17, \"destroyed.\" Paul has not wronged or\nruined any one in Corinth. Of course, his Gospel made serious demands\nupon people: it insisted on readiness to make sacrifices, and on\nactual sacrifice besides; it proceeded with extreme severity against\nsinners like the incestuous man; it entailed obligations, as we shall\npresently hear, to help the poor even of distant lands; and then, as\nstill, such claims might easily be resented as ruinous or unjust. St.\nPaul simply denies the charge. He does not retort it; it is not his\nobject to condemn those whom he loves so utterly. He has told them\nalready that they are in his heart to die together and to live\ntogether (vi. 11); and when this is so, there is no place for\nrecrimination or bandying of reproaches. He is full of confidence in\nthem;[62] he can freely make his boast of them. He has had affliction\nenough, but over it all he has been filled with consolation; even as\nhe writes, his joy overflows (observe the present: \u1f51\u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u03b9\u03c3\u03c3\u03b5\u03cd\u03bf\u03bc\u03b1\u03b9).\n\nThat word--\"ye are in our hearts to die together and to live\ntogether\"--is the key to all that follows. It has suffered much at the\nhands of grammarians, for whom it has undeniable perplexities; but\nvehement emotion may be permitted to be in some degree inarticulate, and\nwe can always feel, even if we cannot demonstrate, what it means. \"Your\nimage in my heart accompanies me in death and life,\"[63] is as nearly as\npossible what the Apostle says; and if the order of the words is\nunusual--for \"life\" would naturally stand first--that may be due to the\nfact, so largely represented in chap. iv., that his life was a series of\ndeadly perils, and of ever-renewed deliverances from them, a daily dying\nand a daily resurrection, through all the vicissitudes of which the\nCorinthians never lost their place in his heart. More artificial\ninterpretations only obscure the intensity of that love which united the\nApostle to his converts. It is levelled here, unconsciously no doubt,\nbut all the more impressively, with the love which God in Christ Jesus\nour Lord bears to His redeemed. \"I am persuaded,\" St. Paul writes to the\nRomans, \"that neither death nor life can separate us from that.\" \"You\nmay be assured,\" he writes here to the Corinthians, \"that neither death\nnor life can separate you from my love.\" The reference of death and life\nis of course different, but the strength of conviction and of emotion is\nthe same in both cases. St. Paul's heart is pledged irrevocably and\nirreversibly to the Church. In the deep feeling that he is theirs, he\nhas an assurance that they also are his. The love with which he loves\nthem is bound to prevail; nay, it has prevailed, and he can hardly find\nwords to express his joy. _En qualiter affectos esse omnes Pastores\nconveniat_ (Calvin).\n\nThe next three verses carry us back to chap. ii. 12 ff., and resume\nthe story which was interrupted there at ver. 14. The sudden\nthanksgiving of that passage--so eager and impetuous that it left the\nwriter no time to tell what he was thankful for--is explained here.\nTitus, whom he had expected to see in Troas, arrived at length,\nprobably at Philippi, and brought with him the most cheering news.\nPaul was sadly in need of it. His flesh had no rest: the use of the\nperfect (\u1f14\u03c3\u03c7\u03b7\u03ba\u03b5\u03bd) almost conveys the feeling that he began to write\nwhenever he got the news, so that up to this moment the strain had\ncontinued. The fights without were probably assaults upon himself, or\nthe Churches, of the nature of persecution; the fears within, his\nanxieties about the state of morals, or of Gospel truth, in the\nChristian communities. Outworn and depressed, burdened both in body\nand mind (cf. the expressions in ii. 13 and vii. 5), he was suddenly\nlifted on high by the arrival and the news of Titus. Here again, as in\nii. 14, he ascribes all to God. It was He whose very nature it is to\ncomfort the lowly who so graciously comforted him. Titus apparently\nhad gone himself with a sad and apprehensive heart to Corinth; he had\nbeen away longer than he had anticipated, and in the interval St.\nPaul's anxiety had risen to anguish; but in Corinth his reception had\nbeen unexpectedly favourable, and when he returned he was able to\nconsole his master with a consolation which had already gladdened his\nown heart. Paul was not only comforted, his sorrow was turned into\njoy, as he listened to Titus telling of the longing of the Corinthians\nto see him, of their mourning over the pain they had given him by\ntheir tolerance for such irregularities as that of the incestuous man\nor the unknown insulter of the Apostle, and of their eagerness to\nsatisfy him and maintain his authority. The word \"your\" (\u1f51\u03bc\u1ff6\u03bd) in ver.\n7 has a certain emphasis which suggests a contrast. Before Titus went\nto Corinth, it was Paul who had been anxious to see _them_, who had\nmourned over their immoral laxity, who had been passionately\ninterested in vindicating the character of the Church he had founded;\nnow it is _they_ who are full of longing to see _him_, of grief, and\nof moral earnestness; and it is this which explains his joy. The\nconflict between the powers of good in one great and passionate soul,\nand the powers of evil in a lax and fickle community, has ended in\nfavour of the good; Paul's vehemence has prevailed against Corinthian\nindifference, and made it vehement also in all good affections, and he\nrejoices now in the joy of his Lord.\n\nThen comes the most delicate part of this reconciliation (vv. 8-12).\nIt is a good rule in making up disputes to let bygones be bygones, as\nfar as possible; there may be a little spark hidden here and there\nunder what seem dead ashes, and there is no gain in raking up the\nashes, and giving the spark a chance to blaze again. But this is a\ngood rule only because we are bad men, and because reconciliation is\nseldom allowed to have its perfect work. We feel, and say, after we\nhave quarrelled with a person and been reconciled, that it can never\nbe the same again. But this ought not to be so; and if we were perfect\nin love, or ardent in love at all, it would not be so. If we were in\none another's hearts, to die together and to live together, we should\nretrace the past together in the very act of being reconciled; and all\nits misunderstandings and bitterness and badness, instead of lying\nhidden in us as matter of recrimination for some other day when we are\ntempted, would add to the sincerity, the tenderness, and the\nspirituality of our love. The Apostle sets us an example here, of the\nrarest and most difficult virtue, when he goes back upon the story of\nhis relations with the Corinthians, and makes the bitter stock yield\nsweet and wholesome fruit.[64]\n\nThe whole result is in his mind when he writes, \"Although I made you\nsorry with the letter, I do not regret it.\" The letter is, on the\nsimplest hypothesis, the First Epistle; and though no one would\nwillingly speak to his friends as Paul in some parts of that Epistle\nspeaks to the Corinthians, he cannot pretend that he wishes it\nunwritten. \"Although I did regret it,\" he goes on, \"now I rejoice.\" He\nregretted it, we must understand, before Titus came back from Corinth.\nIn that melancholy interval, all he saw was that the letter made them\nsorry; it was bound to do so, even if it should only be temporarily;\nbut his heart smote him for making them sorry at all. It vexed him to\nvex them. No doubt this is the plain truth he is telling them, and it\nis hard to see why it should have been regarded as inconsistent with\nhis apostolic inspiration. He did not cease to have a living soul\nbecause he was inspired; and if in his despondency it crossed his mind\nto say, \"That letter will only grieve them,\" he must have said in the\nsame instant, \"I wish I had never written it.\" But both impulses were\nmomentary only; he has heard now the whole effect of his letter, and\nrejoices that he wrote it. Not, of course, that they were made\nsorry--no one could rejoice for that--but that they were made sorry to\nrepentance. \"For ye were made sorry according to God, that in nothing\nye might suffer loss on our part. For sorrow according to God worketh\nrepentance unto salvation, a repentance which bringeth no regret. But\nthe sorrow of the world worketh death.\"\n\nMost people define repentance as a kind of sorrow, but this is not\nexactly St. Paul's view here. There is a kind of sorrow, he intimates,\nwhich issues in repentance, but repentance itself is not so much an\nemotional as a spiritual change. The sorrow which ends in it is a\nblessed experience; the sorrow which does not end in it is the most\ntragical waste of which human nature is capable. The Corinthians, we\nare told, were made sorry, or grieved, according to God. Their sorrow\nhad respect to Him: when the Apostle's letter pricked their hearts,\nthey became conscious of that which they had forgotten--God's relation\nto them, and His judgment on their conduct. It is this element which\nmakes any sorrow \"godly,\" and without this, sorrow does not look\ntowards repentance at all. All sins sooner or later bring the sense of\nloss with them; but the sense of loss is not repentance. It is not\nrepentance when we discover that our sin has found us out, and has put\nthe things we most coveted beyond our reach. It is not repentance when\nthe man who has sown his wild oats is compelled in bitterness of soul\nto reap what he has sown. It is not a sorrow according to God when our\nsin is summed up for us in the pain it inflicts upon ourselves--in our\nown loss, our own defeat, our own humiliation, our own exposure, our\nown unavailing regret. These are not healing, but embittering. The\nsorrow according to God is that in which the sinner is conscious of\nhis sin in relation to the Holy One, and feels that its inmost soul of\npain and guilt is this, that he has fallen away from the grace and\nfriendship of God. He has wounded a love to which he is dearer than he\nis to himself: to know this is really to grieve, and that not with a\nself-consuming, but with a healing, hopeful sorrow. It was such a\nsorrow to which Paul's letter gave rise at Corinth: it is such a\nsorrow which issues in repentance, that complete change of spiritual\nattitude which ends in salvation, and need never be regretted.\nAnything else--the sorrow, _e.g._, which is bounded by the selfish\ninterests of the sinner, and is not due to his sinful act, but only to\nits painful consequences--is the sorrow of the world. It is such as\nmen feel in that realm of life in which no account is taken of God; it\nis such as weakens and breaks the spirit, or embitters and hardens it,\nturning it now to defiance and now to despair, but never to God, and\npenitent hope in Him. It is in this way that it works death. If death\nis to be defined at all, it must be by contrast with salvation: the\ngrief which has not God as its rule can only exhaust the soul, wither\nup its faculties, blight its hopes, extinguish and deaden all.\n\nSt. Paul can point to the experience of the Corinthians themselves as\nfurnishing a demonstration of these truths. \"Consider your own godly\nsorrow,\" he seems to say, \"and what blessed fruits it bore. What\nearnest care it wrought in you! how eager became your interest in a\nsituation to which you had once been sinfully indifferent!\" But\n\"earnest care\" is not all. On the contrary (\u1f00\u03bb\u03bb\u1f70), Paul expands it\ninto a whole series of acts or dispositions, all of which are inspired\nby that sorrow according to God. When they thought of the infamy which\nsin had brought upon the Church, they were eager to clear themselves\nof complicity in it (\u1f00\u03c0\u03bf\u03bb\u03bf\u03b3\u03af\u03b1\u03bd), and angry with themselves that they\nhad ever allowed such a thing to be (\u1f00\u03b3\u03b1\u03bd\u03ac\u03ba\u03c4\u03b7\u03c3\u03b9\u03bd); when they thought\nof the Apostle, they feared lest he should come to them with a rod\n(\u03c6\u03cc\u03b2\u03bf\u03bd), and yet their hearts went out in longing desires to see him\n(\u1f10\u03c0\u03b9\u03c0\u03cc\u03b8\u03b7\u03c3\u03b9\u03bd); when they thought of the man whose sin was at the bottom\nof all this trouble, they were full of moral earnestness, which made\nlax dealing with him impossible (\u03b6\u1fc6\u03bb\u03bf\u03bd), and compelled them to punish\nhis offence (\u1f10\u03ba\u03b4\u03af\u03ba\u03b7\u03c3\u03b9\u03bd). In every way they made it evident that, in\nspite of early appearances, they were really pure in the matter. They\nwere not, after all, making themselves partakers, by condoning it, of\nthe bad man's offence.\n\nA popular criticism disparages repentance, and especially the sorrow\nwhich leads to repentance, as a mere waste of moral force. We have\nnothing to throw away, the severely practical moralist tells us, in\nsighs and tears and feelings: let us be up and doing, to rectify the\nwrongs for which we are responsible; that is the only repentance which\nis worth the name. This passage, and the experience which it depicts,\nare the answer to such precipitate criticism. The descent into our own\nhearts, the painful self-scrutiny and self-condemnation, the sorrowing\naccording to God, are not waste of moral force. Rather are they the only\npossible way to accumulate moral force; they apply to the soul the\npressure under which it manifests those potent virtues which St. Paul\nhere ascribes to the Corinthians. All sorrow, indeed, as he is careful\nto tell us, is not repentance; but he who has no sorrow for his sin has\nnot the force in him to produce earnest care, fear, longing, zeal,\navenging. The fruit, of course, is that for which the tree is\ncultivated; but who would magnify the fruit by disparaging the sap? That\nis what they do who decry \"godly sorrow\" to exalt practical amendment.\n\nWith this reference to the effect of his letter upon them, the Apostle\nvirtually completes his reconciliation to the Corinthians. He chooses to\nconsider the effect of his letter as the purpose for which it was\nwritten, and this enables him to dismiss what had been a very painful\nsubject with a turn as felicitous as it is affectionate. \"So then,\nthough I did write to you, it was not for his sake who did the wrong\n[the sinner of 1 Cor. v.], nor for his who had it done to him [his\nfather][65]; but that you yourselves might become conscious of your\nearnest care of our interests in the sight of God.\" Awkward as some of\nthe situations had been, all that remained, so far as the Apostle and\nthe Corinthians were concerned, was this: they knew better than before\nhow deeply they were attached to him, and how much they would do for his\nsake. He chooses, as I have said, to regard this last result of his\nwriting as the purpose for which he wrote; and when he ends the twelfth\nverse with the words, \"For this cause, we have been comforted,\"[66] it\nis as if he said, \"I have got what I wanted now, and am content.\"\n\nBut content is far too weak a word. Paul had heard all this good news\nfrom Titus, and the comfort which it gave him was exalted into abounding\njoy when he saw how the visit to Corinth had gladdened and refreshed the\nspirit of his friend. Evidently Titus had accepted Paul's commission\nwith misgivings: possibly Timothy, who had been earlier enlisted for the\nsame service (1 Cor. xvi. 10), had found his courage fail him, and\nwithdrawn. At all events, Paul had spoken encouragingly to Titus of the\nCorinthians before he started; as he puts it in ver. 14, he had boasted\nsomewhat to him on their account; and he is delighted that their\nreception of Titus has shown that his confidence was justified. He\ncannot refrain here from a passing allusion to the charges of\nprevarication discussed in the first chapter; he not only tells the\ntruth _about_ them (as Titus has seen), but he has always told the truth\n_to_ them. These verses present the character of Paul in an admirable\nlight: not only his sympathy with Titus, but his attitude to the\nCorinthians, is beautifully Christian. What in most cases of\nestrangement makes reconciliation hard is that the estranged have\nallowed themselves to speak of each other to outsiders in a way that\ncannot be forgotten or got over. But even when the tension between Paul\nand the Corinthians was at its height, he boasted of them to Titus. His\nlove to them was so real that nothing could blind him to their good\nqualities. He could say severe things to them, but he would never\ndisparage or malign them to other people; and if we wish friendships to\nlast, and to stand the strains to which all human ties are occasionally\nsubject, we must never forget this rule. \"Boast somewhat,\" even of the\nman who has wronged you, if you possibly can. If you have ever loved\nhim, you certainly can, and it makes reconciliation easy.\n\nThe last results of the painful friction between Paul and the\nCorinthians were peculiarly happy. The Apostle's confidence in them\nwas completely restored, and they had completely won the heart of\nTitus. \"His affections are more abundantly toward you, as he remembers\nthe obedience of you all, how with fear and trembling ye received\nhim.\" \"Fear and trembling\" is an expression which St. Paul uses\nelsewhere, and which is liable to be misunderstood. It does not\nsuggest panic, but an anxious scrupulous desire not to be wanting to\none's duty, or to do less than one ought to do. \"Work out your\nsalvation with fear and trembling, for it is God that worketh in you,\"\ndoes not mean \"Do it in a constant state of agitation or alarm,\" but\n\"Work on with this resource behind you, in the same spirit with which\na young man of character would work, who was starting in business on\ncapital advanced by a friend.\" He would proceed, or ought to proceed,\nwith fear and trembling, not of the sort which paralyse intelligence\nand energy, but of the sort which peremptorily preclude slackness or\nfailure in duty. This is the meaning here also. The Corinthians were\nnot frightened for Paul's deputy, but they welcomed him with an\nanxious conscientious desire to do the very utmost that duty and love\ncould require. This, says Calvin, is the true way to receive ministers\nof Christ: and it is this only which will gladden a true minister's\nheart. Sometimes, with the most innocent intention, the whole\nsituation is changed, and the minister, though received with the\nutmost courtesy and kindness, is not received with fear and trembling\nat all. Partly through his own fault, and partly through the fault of\nothers, he ceases to be the representative of anything that inspires\nreverence, or excites to conscientious earnestness of conduct. If,\nunder these circumstances, he continues to be kindly treated, he is\napt to end in being, not the pastor, but the pet lamb of his flock. In\napostolic times there was no danger of this, but modern ministers and\nmodern congregations have sometimes thrown away all the possibilities\nof good in their mutual relations by disregarding it. The affection\nwhich they ought to have to each other is Christian, not merely\nnatural; controlled by spiritual ideas and purposes, and not a matter\nof ordinary good feeling; and where this is forgotten, all is lost.\n\nFOOTNOTES:\n\n[61] But see on chap. ii. 5-11.\n\n[62] This is, I think, the only possible meaning of \u03c0\u03bf\u03bb\u03bb\u03ae \u03bc\u03bf\u03b9 \u03c0\u03b1\u1fe4\u1fe5\u03b7\u03c3\u03af\u03b1\n\u03c0\u03c1\u1f78\u03c2 \u1f51\u03bc\u1fb6\u03c2.\n\n[63] So Schmiedel.\n\n[64] It is difficult to fix either the text or the punctuation in ver.\n8, and agreement among critics is quite hopeless. Practically they are\nat one in omitting the \u03b3\u1f70\u03c1 of the Received Text after \u03b2\u03bb\u03ad\u03c0\u03c9: and\nSchmiedel agrees with Lachmann and Westcott and Hort that the original\nreading was probably \u03b2\u03bb\u03ad\u03c0\u03c9\u03bd. The R.V. has the same punctuation as the\nA.V., which probably means that the Revisers could not get a\nsufficient majority to change it, not that it is quite satisfactory as\nit stands. It certainly seems better to connect \u03b5\u1f30 \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03bc\u03b5\u03c4\u03b5\u03bc\u03b5\u03bb\u03cc\u03bc\u03b7\u03bd\nwith what follows (\u03bd\u1fe6\u03bd \u03c7\u03b1\u03af\u03c1\u03c9) than with what precedes; but the sense\nis not affected.\n\n[65] But see on chap. ii. 5-11.\n\n[66] This is the true text. Instead of \u1f10\u03c0\u1f76 \u03c4\u1fc7 \u03c0\u03b1\u03c1\u03b1\u03ba\u03bb\u03ae\u03c3\u03b5\u03b9 in ver. 13\nall critical editions read \u1f10\u03c0\u1f76 \u03b4\u1f72 \u03c4\u1fc7 \u03c0., and make these words begin a\nnew paragraph.\n\n\n\n\n XX\n\n _THE GRACE OF LIBERALITY_\n\n \"Moreover, brethren, we make known to you the grace of God which\n hath been given in the Churches of Macedonia; how that in much\n proof of affliction the abundance of their joy and their deep\n poverty abounded unto the riches of their liberality. For\n according to their power, I bear witness, yea and beyond their\n power, _they gave_ of their own accord, beseeching us with much\n intreaty in regard of this grace and the fellowship in the\n ministering to the saints: and _this_, not as we had hoped, but\n first they gave their own selves to the Lord, and to us by the\n will of God. Insomuch that we exhorted Titus, that as he had made\n a beginning before, so he would also complete in you this grace\n also. But as ye abound in everything, _in_ faith, and utterance,\n and knowledge, and _in_ all earnestness, and _in_ your love to us,\n _see_ that ye abound in this grace also. I speak not by the way of\n commandment, but as proving through the earnestness of others the\n sincerity also of your love. For ye know the grace of our Lord\n Jesus Christ, that, though He was rich, yet for your sakes He\n became poor, that ye through His poverty might become rich. And\n herein I give _my_ judgment: for this is expedient for you, who\n were the first to make a beginning a year ago, not only to do, but\n also to will. But now complete the doing also; that as _there was_\n the readiness to will, so _there may be_ the completion also out\n of your ability. For if the readiness is there, _it is_ acceptable\n according as _a man_ hath, not according as _he_ hath not. For _I\n say_ not _this_, that others may be eased, _and_ ye distressed:\n but by equality; your abundance _being a supply_ at this present\n time for their want, that their abundance also may become _a\n supply_ for your want; that there may be equality: as it is\n written, He that _gathered_ much had nothing over; and he that\n _gathered_ little had no lack.\"--2 COR. viii. 1-15 (R.V.).\n\n\nWith the eighth chapter begins the second of the three great divisions\nof this Epistle. It is concerned exclusively with the collection which\nthe Apostle was raising in all the Gentile Christian communities for\nthe poor of the Mother Church at Jerusalem. This collection had great\nimportance in his eyes, for various reasons: it was the fulfilment of\nhis undertaking, to the original Apostles, to remember the poor (Gal.\nii. 10); and it was a testimony to the saints in Palestine of the love\nof the Gentile brethren in Christ. The fact that Paul interested\nhimself so much in this collection, destined as it was for Jerusalem,\nproves that he distinguished broadly between the primitive Church and\nits authorities on the one hand, and the Jewish emissaries whom he\ntreats so unsparingly in chaps. x. and xi. on the other.\n\nMoney is usually a delicate topic to handle in the Church, and we may\ncount ourselves happy in having two chapters from the pen of St. Paul\nin which he treats at large of a collection. We see the mind of Christ\napplied in them to a subject which is always with us, and sometimes\nembarrassing; and if there are traces here and there that\nembarrassment was felt even by the Apostle, they only show more\nclearly the wonderful wealth of thought and feeling which he could\nbring to bear on an ungrateful theme. Consider only the variety of\nlights in which he puts it, and all of them ideal. \"Money,\" as such,\nhas no character, and so he never mentions it. But he calls the thing\nwhich he wants a grace (\u03c7\u03ac\u03c1\u03b9\u03c2), a service (\u03b4\u03b9\u03b1\u03ba\u03bf\u03bd\u03af\u03b1), a communion in\nservice (\u03ba\u03bf\u03b9\u03bd\u03c9\u03bd\u03af\u03b1), a munificence (\u1f01\u03b4\u03c1\u03cc\u03c4\u03b7\u03c2), a blessing (\u03b5\u1f50\u03bb\u03bf\u03b3\u03af\u03b1), a\nmanifestation of love. The whole resources of Christian imagination\nare spent in transfiguring, and lifting into a spiritual atmosphere, a\nsubject on which even Christian men are apt to be materialistic. We do\nnot need to be hypocritical when we speak about money in the Church;\nbut both the charity and the business of the Church must be\ntransacted as Christian, and not as secular, affairs.\n\nPaul introduces the new topic with his usual felicity. He has got\nthrough some rough water in the first seven chapters, but ends with\nexpressions of joy and satisfaction. When he goes on in the eighth\nchapter, it is in the same cheerful key. It is as though he said to\nthe Corinthians: \"You have made me very happy, and now I must tell you\nwhat a happy experience I have had in Macedonia. The grace of God has\nbeen poured out on the Churches, and they have given with incredible\nliberality to the collection for the Jewish poor. It so moved me that\nI begged Titus, who had already made some arrangements in connexion\nwith this matter among you, to return and complete the work.\"\n\nSpeaking broadly, the Apostle invites the Corinthians to look at the\nsubject through three media: (1) the example of the Macedonians; (2) the\nexample of the Lord; and (3) the laws by which God estimates liberality.\n\n(1) The liberality of the Macedonians is described as \"the grace of\nGod given in the Churches.\" This is the aspect of it which conditions\nevery other; it is not the native growth of the soul, but a divine\ngift for which God is to be thanked. Praise Him when hearts are\nopened, and generosity shown; for it is His work. In Macedonia this\ngrace was set off by the circumstances of the people. Their Christian\ncharacter was put to the severe proof of a great affliction (see 1\nThess. ii. 14 f.); they were themselves in deep poverty; but their joy\nabounded nevertheless (1 Thess. i. 6), and joy and poverty together\npoured out a rich stream of liberality.[67] This may sound\nparadoxical, but paradox is normal here. Strange to say, it is not\nthose to whom the Gospel comes easily, and on whom it imposes little,\nwho are most generous in its cause. On the contrary, it is those who\nhave suffered for it, those who have lost by it, who are as a rule\nmost open-handed. Comfort makes men selfish, even though they are\nChristian; but if they are Christian, affliction, even to the spoiling\nof their goods, teaches them generosity. The first generation of\nMethodists in England--the men who in 1843 fought the good fight of\nthe faith in Scotland--illustrate this law; in much proof of\naffliction, it might be said of them also, the abundance of their joy,\nand their deep poverty, abounded unto the riches of their liberality.\nPaul was almost embarrassed with the liberality of the Macedonians.\nWhen he looked at their poverty, he did not hope for much (ver. 5). He\nwould not have felt justified in urging people who were themselves in\nsuch distress to do much for the relief of others. But they did not\nneed urging: it was they who urged him. The Apostle's sentence breaks\ndown as he tries to convey an adequate impression of their eagerness\n(ver. 4), and he has to leave off and begin again (ver. 5). To their\npower, he bears witness, yes and beyond their power, they gave of\ntheir own accord. They importuned him to bestow on them also the\nfavour of sharing in this service to the saints. And when their\nrequest was granted, it was no paltry contribution that they made;\nthey gave _themselves_ to the Lord, to begin with, and to the\nApostle, as His agent in the transaction, by the will of God. The\nlast words resume, in effect, those with which St. Paul introduced\nthis topic: it was God's doing, the working of His will on their\nwills, that the Macedonians behaved as they did. I cannot think the\nEnglish version is right in the rendering: \"And this, not as we had\nhoped, but first they gave their own selves to the Lord.\" This\ninevitably suggests that afterwards they gave something else--viz.,\ntheir subscriptions. But this is a false contrast, and gives the word\n\"first\" (\u03c0\u03c1\u1ff6\u03c4\u03bf\u03bd) a false emphasis, which it has not in the original.\nWhat St. Paul says is virtually this: \"We expected little from people\nso poor, but by God's will they literally put _themselves_ at the\nservice of the Lord, in the first instance, and of us as His\nadministrators. They said to us, to our amazement and joy, 'We are\nChrist's, and yours after Him, to command in this matter.'\" This is\none of the finest and most inspiring experiences that a Christian\nminister can have, and, God be thanked, it is none of the rarest. Many\na man besides Paul has been startled and ashamed by the liberality of\nthose from whom he would not have ventured to beg. Many a man has been\nimportuned to take what he could not have dared to ask. It is a\nmistake to refuse such generosity, to decline it as too much; it\ngladdens God, and revives the heart of man. It is a mistake to deprive\nthe poorest of the opportunity of offering this sacrifice of praise;\nit is the poorest in whom it has most munificence, and to whom it\nbrings the deepest joy. Rather ought we to open our hearts to the\nimpression of it, as to the working of God's grace, and rouse our own\nselfishness to do something not less worthy of Christ's love.\n\nThis was the application which St. Paul made of the generosity of the\nMacedonians. Under the impression of it he exhorted Titus, who on a\nprevious occasion[68] had made some preliminary arrangements about the\nmatter in Corinth, to return thither and complete the work. He had\nother things also to complete, but \"this grace\" was to be specially\nincluded (\u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c4\u1f74\u03bd \u03c7\u03ac\u03c1\u03b9\u03bd \u03c4\u03b1\u03cd\u03c4\u03b7\u03bd). Perhaps one may see a gentle irony in\nthe tone of ver. 7. \"Enough of argument,\" the Apostle says:[69] \"let\nChristians distinguished as you are in every respect--in faith and\neloquence and knowledge and all sorts of zeal, and in the love that\ncomes from you and abides in us--see that they are distinguished in\nthis grace also.\" It is a real character that is suggested here by way\nof contrast, but not exactly a lovely one: the man who abounds in\nspiritual interests, who is fervent, prayerful, affectionate, able to\nspeak in the Church, but unable to part with money.\n\n(2) This brings the Apostle to his second point, the example of the\nLord. \"I do not speak by way of commandment,\" he says, \"in urging you\nto be liberal; I am only taking occasion, through the earnestness of\nothers, to put the sincerity of your love to the proof. If you truly\nlove the brethren you will not grudge to help them in their distress.\nThe Macedonians, of course, are no law for you; and though it was from\nthem I started, I do not need to urge their example; 'for ye know the\ngrace of our Lord Jesus Christ, that, though He was rich, yet for your\nsakes He became poor, that ye through His poverty might become rich.'\"\nThis is the one pattern that stands for ever before the eyes of\nChristian men, the fountain of an inspiration as strong and pure\nto-day as when Paul wrote these words.\n\nRead simply, and by one who has the Christian creed in his mind, the\nwords do not appear ambiguous. Christ was rich, they tell us; He\nbecame poor for our sakes, and by His poverty we become rich. If a\ncommentary is needed, it is surely to be sought in the parallel\npassage Phil. ii. 5 ff. The rich Christ is the pre-existent One, in\nthe form of God, in the glory which He had with the Father before the\nworld was; He became poor when He became man. The poor men are those\nwhose lot Christ came to share, and in consequence of that\nself-impoverishment of His they become heirs of a kingdom. It is not\nnecessary, indeed it is utterly misleading, to ask curiously _how_\nChrist became poor, or what kind of experience it was for Him when He\nexchanged heaven for earth, and the form of God for the form of a\nservant. As Mr. Gore has well said, it is not the metaphysics of the\nIncarnation that St. Paul is concerned with, either here or in\nPhilippians, but its ethics. We may never have a scientific key to it,\nbut we have a moral key. If we do not comprehend its method, at least\nwe comprehend its motive, and it is in its motive that the inspiration\nof it lies. We know _the grace_ of our Lord Jesus Christ; and it comes\nhome to our hearts when the Apostle says, \"Let that _mind_--that moral\ntemper--be in you which was also in Him.\" Ordinary charity is but the\ncrumbs from the rich man's table; but if we catch Christ's spirit, it\nwill carry us far beyond that. He was rich, and gave up all for our\nsakes; it is no less than poverty on His part which enriches us.\n\nThe older theologians, especially of the Lutheran Church, read this\ngreat text differently, and their opinion is not yet quite extinct.\nThey referred \u1f10\u03c0\u03c4\u03ce\u03c7\u03b5\u03c5\u03c3\u03b5\u03bd, not to Christ's entrance on the incarnate\nstate, but to His existence in it;[70] they puzzled themselves to\nconceive of Him as rich and poor at the same time; and they quite took\nthe point from St. Paul's exhortation by making \u1f10\u03c0\u03c4\u03ce\u03c7\u03b5\u03c5\u03c3\u03b5\u03bd \u03c0\u03bb\u03bf\u03cd\u03c3\u03b9\u03bf\u03c2 \u1f62\u03bd\ndescribe a combination, instead of an interchange, of states. It is a\ncounsel of despair when a recent commentator (Heinrici), sympathising\nwith this view, but yielding to the comparison of Phil. ii. 5 ff.,\ntries to unite the two interpretations, and to make \u1f10\u03c0\u03c4\u03ce\u03c7\u03b5\u03c5\u03c3\u03b5\u03bd cover\nboth the coming to earth from heaven and the life in poverty on earth.\nNo word can mean two different things at the same time: and in this\ndaring attempt we may fairly see a final surrender of the orthodox\nLutheran interpretation.\n\nSome strange criticisms have been passed on this appeal to the\nIncarnation as a motive to liberality. It shows, Schmiedel says,\nPaul's contempt for the knowledge of Christ after the flesh, when the\nIncarnation is all he can adduce as a pattern for such a simply human\nthing as a charitable gift. The same contempt, then, we must presume,\nis shown in Philippians, when the same great pattern is held up to\ninspire Christians with lowly thoughts of themselves, and with\nconsideration for others. It is shown, perhaps, again at the close of\nthat magnificent chapter--the fifteenth in First Corinthians--where\nall the glory to be revealed when Christ transfigures His people is\nmade a reason for the sober virtues of stedfastness and patience. The\ntruth is rather that Paul knew from experience that the supreme\nmotives are needed on the most ordinary occasions. He never appeals\nto incidents, not because he does not know them, or because he\ndespises them, but because it is far more potent and effectual to\nappeal to Christ. His mind gravitates to the Incarnation, or the\nCross, or the Heavenly Throne, because the power and virtue of the\nRedeemer are concentrated there. The spirit that wrought redemption,\nand that changes men into the image of the Lord--the spirit without\nwhich _no_ Christian disposition, not even the most \"simply human,\"\ncan be produced--is felt there, if one may say so, in gathered\nintensity; and it is not the want of a concrete vision of Jesus such\nas Peter and John had, nor a scholastic insensibility to such living\nand love-compelling details as our first three Gospels furnish, that\nmakes Paul have recourse thither; it is the instinct of the evangelist\nand pastor who knows that the hope of souls is to live in the presence\nof the very highest things. Of course Paul believed in the\npre-existence and in the Incarnation. The writer quoted above does\nnot, and naturally the appeal of the text is artificial and\nunimpressive to him. But may we not ask, in view of the simplicity,\nthe unaffectedness, and the urgency with which St. Paul uses this\nappeal both here and in Philippians, whether _his_ faith in the\npre-existence can have had no more than the precarious speculative\nfoundation which is given to it by so many who reconstruct his\ntheology? \"Christ, the perfect reconciler, must be the perfect\nrevealer of God; God's purpose--that for which He made all\nthings--must be seen in Him; but that for which God made all things\nmust have existed (in the mind of God) before all things; therefore\nChrist is (ideally) from everlasting.\" This is the substance of many\nexplanations of how St. Paul came by his Christology; but if this had\nbeen all, _could_ St. Paul by any possibility have appealed thus\nna\u00efvely to the Incarnation _as a fact_, and a fact which was one of\nthe mainsprings of Christian morality?\n\n(3) The Apostle pauses for a moment to urge his plea in the interest\nof the Corinthians themselves. He is not commanding, but giving his\njudgment: \"this,\" he says, \"is profitable for you, who began[71] a\nyear ago, not only to do, but also to will.[72] But now complete the\ndoing also.\" Every one knows this situation, and its evils. A good\nwork which has been set on foot with interest and spontaneity enough,\nbut which has begun to drag, and is in danger of coming to nothing, is\nvery demoralising. It enfeebles the conscience, and spoils the temper.\nIt develops irresolution and incapacity, and it stands perpetually in\nthe way of anything else that has to be done. Many a bright idea\nstumbles over it, and can get no further. It is not only worldly\nwisdom, but divine wisdom, which says: \"Whatsoever thy hand findeth to\ndo, do it with thy might.\" If it is the giving of money, the building\nof a church, the insuring of a life, complete the doing. To be always\nthinking about it, and always in an ineffective way busy about it, is\nnot profitable for you.\n\nIt is in this connexion that the Apostle lays down the laws of\nChristian liberality. In these verses (11 to 15) there are three.\n(_a_) First, there must be readiness, or, as the Authorised Version\nputs it, a willing mind. What is given must be given freely; it must\nbe a gracious offering, not a tax. This is fundamental. The law of the\nOld Testament is re-enacted in the New: \"Of every man _whose heart\nmaketh him willing_ shall ye take the Lord's offering.\" What we spend\nin piety and charity is not tribute paid to a tyrant, but the response\nof gratitude to our Redeemer: and if it has not this character He does\nnot want it. If there be _first_ a willing mind, the rest is easy; if\nnot, there is no need to go on. (_b_) The second law is, \"according as\na man has.\" _Readiness_ is the acceptable thing, not this or that\nproof of it. If we cannot give much, then a ready mind makes even a\nlittle acceptable. Only let us remember this, that readiness always\ngives all that is in its power. The readiness of the poor widow in the\nTemple could only give two mites, but two mites were all her living;\nthe readiness of the Macedonians was in the depths of poverty, but\nthey gave _themselves_ to the Lord. The widow's mites are an\nillustrious example of sacrifice, and this word of the Apostle\ncontains a moving appeal for generosity; yet the two together have\nbeen profaned times innumerable to cloak the meanest selfishness.\n(_c_) The third law is reciprocity. Paul does not write that the Jews\nmay be relieved and the Corinthians burdened, but on the principle of\nequality: at this crisis the superfluity of the Corinthians is to make\nup what is wanting to the Jews, and at some other the situation will\nbe exactly reversed. Brotherhood cannot be one-sided; it must be\nmutual, and in the interchange of services equality is the result.\nThis, as the quotation hints, answers to God's design in regard to\nworldly goods, as that design is indicated in the story of the manna:\nHe that gathered much had no more than his neighbours, and he that\ngathered little had no less. To be selfish is not an infallible way of\ngetting more than your share; you may cheat your neighbour by that\npolicy, but you will not get the better of God. In all probability men\nare far more nearly on an equality, in respect of what their worldly\npossessions yield, than the rich in their pride, or the poor in their\nenvious discontent, would readily believe; but where inequality is\npatent and painful--a glaring violation of the divine intention here\nsuggested--there is a call for charity to redress the balance. Those\nwho give to the poor are co-operating with God, and the more a\ncommunity is Christianised, the more will that state be realised in\nwhich each has what he needs.\n\nFOOTNOTES:\n\n[67] \u1f09\u03c0\u03bb\u03cc\u03c4\u03b7\u03c2 is literally simplicity or singleness of heart, the\ndisposition which, when it gives, does so without _arri\u00e8re-pens\u00e9e_: in\npoint of fact this is identical with the liberal or generous\ndisposition. Cf. chap. ix. 11, 13; Rom. xii. 8; James i. 5.\n\n[68] Previous to his recent visit? So Schmiedel. Or simply = formerly?\n\n[69] This, according to Hermann (quoted by Meyer), is often the force\nof \u1f00\u03bb\u03bb\u03ac, which is certainly a surprising word here.\n\n[70] Translating it, of course, \"_was_ poor,\" or \"lived poor\": which\nis not impossible in itself.\n\n[71] The \u03c0\u03c1\u03bf in \u03c0\u03c1\u03bf\u03b5\u03bd\u03ae\u03c1\u03be\u03b1\u03c3\u03b8\u03b5 seems to mean \"before the Macedonians.\"\n\n[72] The order of \"do\" and \"will\" is peculiar and has not been clearly\nexplained.\n\n\n\n\n XXI\n\n _THE FRUITS OF LIBERALITY_\n\n \"But thanks be to God, which putteth the same earnest care for you\n into the heart of Titus. For indeed he accepted our exhortation;\n but being himself very earnest, he went forth unto you of his own\n accord. And we have sent together with him the brother whose\n praise in the Gospel _is spread_ through all the Churches; and not\n only so, but who was also appointed by the Churches to travel with\n us in _the matter of_ this grace, which is ministered by us to the\n glory of the Lord, and _to show_ our readiness: avoiding this,\n that any man should blame us in _the matter of_ this bounty which\n is ministered by us: for we take thought for things honourable,\n not only in the sight of the Lord but also in the sight of men.\n And we have sent with them our brother, whom we have many times\n proved earnest in many things, but now much more earnest by reason\n of the great confidence which _he hath_ in you. Whether _any\n inquire_ about Titus, _he is_ my partner, and _my_ fellow-worker\n to you-ward; or our brethren, _they are_ the messengers of the\n Churches, _they are_ the glory of Christ. Show ye therefore unto\n them in the face of the Churches the proof of your love, and of\n our glorying on your behalf.\n\n \"For as touching the ministering to the saints, it is superfluous\n for me to write to you: for I know your readiness, of which I\n glory on your behalf to them of Macedonia, that Achaia hath been\n prepared for a year past; and your zeal hath stirred up very many\n of them. But I have sent the brethren, that our glorying on your\n behalf may not be made void in this respect; that, even as I said,\n ye may be prepared: lest by any means, if there come with me any\n of Macedonia, and find you unprepared, we (that we say not, ye)\n should be put to shame in this confidence. I thought it necessary\n therefore to intreat the brethren, that they would go before unto\n you, and make up beforehand your afore-promised bounty, that the\n same might be ready, as a matter of bounty, and not of extortion.\n\n \"But this _I say_, He that soweth sparingly shall reap also\n sparingly; and he that soweth bountifully shall reap also\n bountifully. _Let_ each man _do_ according as he hath purposed in\n his heart; not grudgingly, or of necessity: for God loveth a\n cheerful giver. And God is able to make all grace abound unto you;\n that ye, having always all sufficiency in everything, may abound\n unto every good work: as it is written,\n\n He hath scattered abroad, he hath given to the poor;\n His righteousness abideth for ever.\n\n And He that supplieth seed to the sower and bread for food, shall\n supply and multiply your seed for sowing, and increase the fruits\n of your righteousness: ye being enriched in everything unto all\n liberality, which worketh through us thanksgiving to God. For the\n ministration of this service not only filleth up the measure of\n the wants of the saints, but aboundeth also through many\n thanksgivings unto God; seeing that through the proving _of you_\n by this ministration they glorify God for the obedience of your\n confession unto the Gospel of Christ, and for the liberality of\n your contribution unto them and unto all; while they themselves\n also, with supplication on your behalf, long after you by reason\n of the exceeding grace of God in you. Thanks be to God for His\n unspeakable gift.\"--2 COR. viii. 16-ix. 15 (R.V.).\n\n\nThis long passage has a good many difficulties of detail, for the\ngrammarian and the textual critic. Where it seems necessary, these\nwill be referred to in the notes; but as the large meaning of the\nwriter is hardly affected by them, they need not interrupt the course\nof exposition. It falls into three parts, which are clearly marked as\nsuch in the Revised Version: (1) Chap. viii. 16-24, commending to the\nCorinthians the three brethren who were to precede Paul and prepare\nthe collection; (2) Chap. ix. 1-5, appealing to the motives of\nemulation and shame to reinforce love in the matter; and (3) Chap. ix.\n6-15, urging liberality, and enlarging on the blessed fruits it\nyields. The first of these divisions begins, and the last ends, with\nan exclamatory ascription of thanks to God.\n\n(1) Chap. viii. 16-24. Of the three men who acted as commissioners in\nthis delicate undertaking, only one, Titus, is known to us by name. He\nhad just returned from Corinth; he knew all the critical points in the\nsituation; and no doubt the Apostle was glad to have such a man at the\nhead of the little party. He was thankful to God that on the occasion of\nthat previous visit the Corinthians had completely won the heart of\nTitus, and that his loyal fellow-worker needed no compulsion to return.\nHe was leaving[73] Paul of his own accord, full of earnest care for his\nAchaian friends. Along with him went a second--the brother whose praise\nin the Gospel was through all the Churches. It is useless to ask who the\nbrother was. A very early opinion, alluded to by Origen, and represented\napparently in the traditional subscription to this Epistle, identified\nhim with Luke. Probably the ground for this identification was the idea\nthat his \"praise in the Gospel\" referred to Luke's work as an\nevangelist. But this cannot be: first, because Luke's Gospel cannot have\nbeen written so early; and, secondly, because \"the Gospel\" at this date\ndoes not mean a written thing at all. This man's praise in the Gospel\nmust mean the credit he had acquired by his services to the Christian\nfaith; it might be by some bold confession, or by activity as an\nevangelist, or by notable hospitality to missionaries, or by such\nhelpful ministries as the one he was now engaged in. The real point of\ninterest for us in the expression is the glimpse it gives us of the\nunity of the Church, and the unimpeded circulation of one life through\nall its members. Its early divisions, theological and racial, have been\nsufficiently emphasised; it is well worth while to observe the unity of\nthe spirit. It was this, eventually, which gave the Church its power in\nthe decline of the Empire. It was the only institution which extended\nover the area of civilisation with a common spirit, common sympathies,\nand a common standard of praise. It was a compliment to the Corinthians\nto include in this embassy one whose good name was honoured wherever men\nmet in the name of Jesus. This brother was at the same time a deputy in\na special sense. He had been elected by the Churches who were\ncontributing to the collection, that he might accompany the Apostle when\nit was taken to Jerusalem. This, in itself, is natural enough, and it\nwould not call for comment but for the remark to which the Apostle\nproceeds--\"avoiding this, that any man should blame us in the matter of\nthis bounty which is ministered by us to the glory of the Lord, and _to\nshow_ our[74] readiness: for we take thought for things honourable, not\nonly in the sight of the Lord, but also in the sight of men.\"\n\nThere was evidently an unpleasant side to this transaction. Paul's\ninterest in the collection, his enemies had plainly said (chap. xii.\n17, 18), was not quite disinterested. He was capable of putting his\nown hand into the bag. What ought a Christian man to do in such a\ncase? We shall see in a later chapter how keenly Paul felt this\nunworthy imputation, and with what generous passion he resented it;\nbut here he betrays no indignation; he joins with the Churches who\nare making the collection in so ordering matters as to preclude\nsuspicion. Wherever the money is concerned, his responsibility is to\nbe shared with another. It is a pity that Christ should not be\nglorified, and the Apostle's zeal to help the poor saints made known,\nwithout the accompaniment of these base suspicions and precautionary\nmeasures; but in all things human, evil will mingle with good, and the\nhumble course is best, which does not only what God knows to be\nhonourable, but what men must see to be so too. In handling money\nespecially, it is best to err on the safe side. If most men are too\nreadily suspected by others, it only answers to the fact that most men\nare too ready to trust themselves. We have an infinite faith in our\nown honesty; and when auditors are appointed to examine their books,\nthe inexperienced are apt to think it needless, and even impertinent.\nIf they were wise, they would welcome it as a protection against\nsuspicion and even against themselves. Many a man has ruined\nhimself--not to speak of those who trusted him--by too blind a belief\nin his own integrity. The third brother who accompanied Titus seems to\nhave been more closely associated with Paul than the second. He had\nproved him often, in many things, and found him uniformly earnest; and\nat this juncture the confidence he had in the Corinthians made him\nmore earnest than ever. Paul extols the three in the highest terms\nbefore he sends them off; if anybody in Corinth wishes to know what\nthey are, he is proud to tell. Titus is his partner in the apostolic\ncalling, and has shared his work among them; the other brethren are\ndeputies (apostles) of Churches, a glory of Christ. What an idealist\nPaul was! What an appreciation of Christian character he had when he\ndescribed these nameless believers as reflections of the splendour of\nChrist! To common eyes they might be commonplace men; but when Paul\nlooked at them he saw the dawning of that brightness in which the Lord\nappeared to him by the way. Contact with the grimy side of human\nnature did not blind him to this radiance; rather did this glory of\nChrist in men's souls strengthen him to believe all things, to hope\nall things, to endure all things. In showing before these honoured\nmessengers the proof of their love, and of his boasting on their\nbehalf, the Corinthians will show it,[75] he says, before the face of\nthe Churches. It will be officially reported throughout Christendom.\n\n(2) Chap. ix. 1-5. This section strikes one at first as greatly\nwanting in connexion with what precedes. It looks like a new\nbeginning, an independent writing on the same or a similar subject.\nThis has led some scholars to argue that either chap. viii. or chap.\nix. belongs to a different occasion, and that only resemblance in\nsubject has led to one of them being erroneously inserted here beside\nthe other. This, in the absence of any external indication, is an\nextremely violent supposition; and closer examination goes to\ndissipate that first impression. The statements, _e.g._, in vv. 3-5\nwould be quite unintelligible if we had not chap. viii. 16-24 to\nexplain them; and instead of saying there is no connexion between ix.\n1 and what precedes, we should rather say that the connexion is\nsomewhat involved and circuitous--as will happen when one is handling\na topic of unusual difficulty. It is to be explained thus. The Apostle\nfeels that he has said a good deal now about the collection, and that\nthere is a danger in being too urgent. He uses what he has just said\nabout the reception of the brethren as a stepping-stone to another\nview of the subject, more flattering to the Corinthians, to begin\nwith, and less importunate. \"Maintain your character before them,\" he\nsays in effect; \"for as for the ministering to the saints, it is\nsuperfluous for me to be writing to you as I do.\"[76] Instead of\nfinding it necessary to urge their duty upon them, he has been able to\nhold up their readiness as an example to the Macedonians. \"Achaia has\nbeen prepared for a year past,\" he said to his fond disciples in\nThessalonica and Philippi; and the zeal of the Achaians, or rivalry of\nthem, roused the majority of the Macedonians. This is one way of\nlooking at what happened; another, and surely Paul would have been the\nfirst to say a more profound, is that of chap. viii. 1--the grace of\nGod was given in the Churches of Macedonia. But the grace of God takes\noccasions, and uses means; and here its opportunity and its instrument\nfor working in Macedonia was the ready generosity of the Corinthians.\nIt has wrought, indeed, so effectively that the tables are turned, and\nnow it is the liberality of Macedonia which is to provoke Corinth.\nPaul is sending on these brethren beforehand, lest, if any of the\nMacedonians should accompany him when he starts for Corinth himself,\nthey should find matters not so flourishing as he had led them to\nbelieve. \"That would put me to shame,\" he says to the Corinthians,\n\"not to speak of you. I have been very confident in speaking of you as\nI have done in Macedonia: do keep up my credit and your own. Let this\nblessing, which you are going to bestow on the poor, be ready _as_ a\nblessing--_i.e._, as something which one gives willingly, and as\nliberally as he can; and not as a matter of avarice,[77] in which one\ngives reluctantly, keeping as much as he can.\"\n\nThe legitimacy of such motives as are appealed to in this paragraph will\nalways be more or less questioned among Christian men, but as long as\nhuman nature is what it is they will always be appealed to. \u0396\u03b7\u03bb\u03cc\u03c4\u03c5\u03c0\u03bf\u03bd\n\u03b3\u1f70\u03c1 \u03c4\u1f78 \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u1f00\u03bd\u03b8\u03c1\u03ce\u03c0\u03c9\u03bd \u03b3\u03ad\u03bd\u03bf\u03c2 (Chrys.). A great man of action like St. Paul\nwill of course find his temptations along this line. He is so eager to\nget men to act, and the inertness of human nature is so great, that it\nis hard to decline anything which will set it in motion. It is not the\nhighest motive, certainly, when the forwardness of one stimulates\nanother; but in a good cause, it is better than none. A good cause, too,\nhas a wonderful power of its own when men begin to attend to it; it\nasserts itself, and takes possession of souls on its own account.\nRivalry becomes generous then, even if it remains; it is a race in love\nthat is being run, and all who run obtain the prize. Competitions for\nprizes which only one can gain have a great deal in them that is selfish\nand bad; but rivalry in the service of others--rivalry in\nunselfishness--will not easily degenerate in this direction. Paul does\nnot need to be excused because he stimulates the Macedonians by the\npromptitude of the Corinthians--though he had his misgivings about this\nlast--and the Corinthians by the liberality of the Macedonians. The real\nmotive in both cases was \"the grace of our Lord Jesus Christ, who,\nthough He was rich, yet for our sakes became poor.\" It is this which\nunderlies everything in the Christian heart, and nothing can do harm\nwhich works as its auxiliary.\n\n(3) Chap. ix. 6-15. In the third and last section the Apostle resumes\nhis direct and urgent tone. \"I do not need to write to you,\" he seems\nto say, \"but one thing I cannot but set down: He that soweth sparingly\nshall reap also sparingly; and he that soweth bountifully[78] shall\nreap also bountifully.\" That is the law of God, and the nature of\nthings, whether men regard or disregard it. Charity is in a real sense\nan investment, not a casting away of money; it is not fruitless, but\nbears fruit in the measure in which it is sown. Of course it cannot be\nenforced--that would be to deny its very nature. Each is to give what\nhe has purposed in his heart, where he is free and true: he is not to\ngive out of grief, mourning over what he gives and regretting he could\nnot keep it; neither is he to give out of necessity, because his\nposition, or the usages of his society, or the comments of his\nneighbours, put a practical compulsion upon him. God loves a cheerful\ngiver. Money is nothing to Him but as an index to the soul; unless the\nsoul gives it, and gives itself with it, He takes no account. But He\ndoes take account of true charity, and because He does, the charitable\nmay be of good cheer: He will not allow them to be without the means\nof manifesting a spirit so grateful to Him. If we really wish to be\ngenerous, He will not withhold from us the power of being so. This is\nwhat the Apostle says in ver. 8: \"God is able to make all grace abound\ntoward you, that ye, having always all sufficiency in everything, may\nabound unto every good work.\" There is, indeed, another way of\nrendering \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u03ac\u03c1\u03ba\u03b5\u03b9\u03b1 (sufficiency). Some take it subjectively, not\nobjectively, and make it mean, not sufficiency, but contentment. But\nthough a contented spirit disposes people wonderfully to be generous,\nand the discontented, who have never enough for themselves, can never,\nof course, spare anything for anybody else, this meaning is decidedly\nto be rejected. The sufficiency, as ver. 10 also shows, is outward: we\nshall always, if we are charitable, have by God's grace the means of\nbeing more so. He is able to bless us abundantly, that we may be able\nfor every good work. Observe the purpose of God's blessing. This is\nthe import of the quotation from the 112th Psalm, in which we have the\nportrait of the good man: \"He hath dispersed\"--what uncalculating\nliberality there is in the very word--\"he hath given to the poor: his\nrighteousness abideth for ever.\" The approximation, in the Jewish\nmorals of later times, of the ideas of righteousness and almsgiving,\nhas led some to limit \u03b4\u03b9\u03ba\u03b1\u03b9\u03bf\u03c3\u03cd\u03bd\u03b7 in this passage (as in Matt. vi. 1)\nto the latter sense. This is extremely improbable--I think impossible.\nIn the Psalm, both in ver. 3 and ver. 10 (LXX.), the expression \"his\nrighteousness abideth for ever\" reflects God's verdict on the\ncharacter as a whole. The character there described, and here\nreferred to by the relevant trait of generosity, is one which need\nfear no chances of the future. He who supplies seed to the sower and\nbread for food will supply and multiply the seed sown by the generous\nCorinthians (that they may ever be in a position to be generous), and\nwill cause also the fruits of their righteousness to grow. Their\nrighteousness, as it figures in this last phrase, is of course\nrepresented, for the time being, by their generosity; and the poetic\nexpression \"fruits of righteousness,\" which is borrowed from Hosea,\ndesignates the results which that generosity produces. It is not only\nan investment which guarantees to them the generous care of God for\ntheir own welfare; it is a seed which bears another and more spiritual\nharvest. With some expansion of heart on this the Apostle concludes.\n\n(_a_) It yields a rich harvest of thanksgiving to God. This is\nexpressed in ver. 12, and is the principal point. It is something to\nfill up further the measure of a brother's needs by a timely gift, but\nhow much more it is to change the tune of his spirit, and whereas we\nfound him cheerless or weak in faith, to leave him gratefully praising\nGod. True thankfulness to the Heavenly Father is an atmosphere in\nwhich all virtues flourish: and those whose charity bears fruit in\nthis grateful spirit are benefactors of mankind to an extent which no\nmoney can estimate. It is probably forcing the Apostle's language to\ninsist that \u03bb\u03b5\u03b9\u03c4\u03bf\u03c5\u03c1\u03b3\u03af\u03b1, as a name for the collection, has any priestly\nor sacrificial reference;[79] but unfeigned charity is in its very\nnature a sacrifice of praise to God--the answer of our love to His;\nand it has its best effect when it evokes the thanksgivings to God of\nthose who receive it. Wherever love is, He must be first and last.\n\n(_b_) The charity of the Corinthians bore another spiritual fruit: in\nconsequence of it the saints at Jerusalem were won to recognise more\nunreservedly the Christian standing of the Gentile brethren. This is\nwhat we read in ver. 13. Taking occasion from the proof of what you are,\nwhich this ministration of yours has given them, they glorify God \"for\nthe obedience of your confession unto the Gospel of Christ, and for the\nliberality of your contribution unto them and unto all.\" The verbal\ncombinations possible here give free scope to the ingenuity and the\ncaprice of grammarians; but the kind of thing meant remains plain. Once\nthe Christians of Jerusalem had had their doubts about the Corinthians,\nand the other pagans who were said to have received the Gospel; they had\nheard marvellous reports about them certainly, but it remained to be\nseen on what these reports rested. They would not commit themselves\nhastily to any compromising relation to such outsiders. Now all their\ndoubts have been swept away; the Gentiles have actually come to the\nrelief of their poverty, and there is no mistaking what that means. The\nlanguage of love is intelligible everywhere, and there is only One who\nteaches it in such relations as are involved here--Jesus Christ. Yes,\nonce they had their doubts of you; but now they will praise God that you\nhave obediently confessed the Gospel, and frankly owned a fellowship\nwith them and with all. The last words mean, in effect, that the\nCorinthians had liberally shared what they had with them and with all;\nbut the terms are so chosen as to obliterate, as far as possible, all\nbut the highest associations. This, then, is another fruit of charity:\nit widens the thoughts--it often improves the theology--of those who\nreceive it. All goodness, men feel instinctively, is of God; and they\ncannot condemn as godless, or even as beyond the covenant, those through\nwhom goodness comes to them.\n\n(_c_) Finally, among the fruits of charity is to be reckoned the\ndirect response of brotherly love, expressed especially in\nintercessory prayer, and in a longing to see those on whom God's grace\nrests so abundantly. An unknown and distant benefactor is sometimes\nbetter than one near at hand. He is regarded simply in his character\nas a benefactor; we know nothing of him that can possibly discount his\nkindness; our mind is compelled to rest upon his virtues and remember\nthem gratefully before God. One of the meanest experiences of human\nnature that we can have--and it is not an imaginary one--is to see\npeople paying the debt of gratitude, or at least mitigating the sense\nof obligation, by thinking over the deficiencies in their benefactor's\ncharacter. \"He is better off than we are; it is nothing to him; and if\nhe _is_ kind to the poor, he has need to be. It will take a lot of\ncharity to cover all he would like to hide.\" This revolting spirit is\nthe extreme opposite of the intercessory prayer and brotherly yearning\nwhich St. Paul sees in his mind's eye among the saints at Jerusalem.\nPerhaps he saw almost more than was really to be seen. The union of\nhearts he aimed at was never more than imperfectly attained. But to\nhave aimed at it was a great and generous action, and to have brought\nso many Gentile Churches to co-operate to this end was a magnificent\nservice to the kingdom of God.\n\nThese \"fruits\" are not as yet actually borne, but to the Apostle's\nloving anticipation they are as good as real. They are the fruits of\n\"the righteousness\" of the Corinthians, the harvest that God has\ncaused to grow out of their liberality. From the very beginning there\nhave been two opinions as to what St. Paul means by the exclamation\nwith which he closes--\"Thanks be unto God for His unspeakable gift.\"\nOn the one hand, it is read as if it were a part of what precedes, the\nunspeakable gift of God being the numberless blessings that charity\nyields, by God's goodness, both to those who give and to those who\nreceive it. Paul in this case would be thinking, when he wrote, of the\njoy with which the Gentiles gave, and of the gratitude, the willing\nrecognition, and the brotherly prayers and longing, with which the\nJews received, help in the hour of need. These would be the\nunspeakable gift. On the other hand, the sentence is read as if it\nstood apart, not the continuation of what immediately precedes, but\nthe overflow of the Apostle's heart in view of the whole situation. It\nbecomes possible, then, to regard \"God's unspeakable gift\" as the gift\nof redemption in His Son--the great, original, unsearchable gift, in\nwhich everything else is included, and especially all such\nmanifestations of brotherly love as have just been in view. Sound\nfeeling, I think, unequivocally supports the last interpretation. The\nvery word \"unspeakable\" is one of a class that Paul reserves for this\nparticular object; the wisdom and love of God as displayed in man's\nsalvation are unspeakable, unsearchable, passing knowledge; but\nnothing else is. It is to this his mind goes back, instinctively, as\nhe contemplates what has flowed from it in the particular case before\nus; but it is the great divine gift, and not its fruits in men's\nlives, however rich and various, that it passes the power of words to\ncharacterise. It is for it, and not for its results in Jew or Gentile,\nthat the Apostle so devoutly thanks God.\n\nFOOTNOTES:\n\n[73] \u0391\u1f50\u03b8\u03b1\u03af\u03c1\u03b5\u03c4\u03bf\u03c2 \u1f10\u03be\u1fc6\u03bb\u03b8\u03b5\u03bd: the aorists all through this passage are\nvirtually epistolary--\u1f10\u03be\u1fc6\u03bb\u03b8\u03b5\u03bd = he is going; \u03c3\u03c5\u03bd\u03b5\u03c0\u03ad\u03bc\u03c8\u03b1\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd = I am\nsending with him.\n\n[74] _Our_ (\u1f21\u03bc\u1ff6\u03bd), not _your_ (\u1f51\u03bc\u1ff6\u03bd), is the true reading. The precise\nsense is doubtful. It may be as the R.V. gives it, though this\ncompletely upsets the balance of the clauses \u03c0\u03c1\u1f78\u03c2 \u03c4\u1f74\u03bd \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u039a\u03c5\u03c1\u03af\u03bf\u03c5 \u03b4\u03cc\u03be\u03b1\u03bd\nand \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c0\u03c1\u03bf\u03b8\u03c5\u03bc\u03af\u03b1\u03bd \u1f21\u03bc\u1ff6\u03bd. The meaning should rather be: \"which is\nministered by us, that the Lord may be glorified, and that we may be\nmade of good heart\"; only Paul's spirits seem a small thing side by side\nwith the Lord's glory. There is something to say for the conjecture that\nthe \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 before \u03c0\u03c1\u03bf\u03b8\u03c5\u03bc\u03af\u03b1\u03bd should be \u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u03ac, even though this could only be\nconnected with \u03c7\u03b5\u03b9\u03c1\u03bf\u03c4\u03bf\u03bd\u03b7\u03b8\u03b5\u03af\u03c2: \"elected as we earnestly desired.\"\n\n[75] The T.R. has \u1f10\u03bd\u03b4\u03b5\u03af\u03be\u03b1\u03c3\u03b8\u03b5 here, and so Westcott and Hort read in\ntext, with \u05d0, C, D**, etc. Most editors read with B, D*, E, F, G,\netc., \u1f10\u03bd\u03b4\u03b5\u03b9\u03ba\u03bd\u03cd\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd\u03bf\u03b9. The imperative certainly seems to be a change\nmade to facilitate the construction. Reading the participle, we must\nsupply \u1f10\u03bd\u03b4\u03b5\u03af\u03be\u03b5\u03c3\u03b8\u03b5, and put a comma after \u1f10\u03bd\u03b4\u03b5\u03b9\u03ba\u03bd\u03cd\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd\u03bf\u03b9: \"in showing it\nto them, [you will show it] before the Churches.\" This is the same\nkind of ellipsis as in ver. 23.\n\n[76] This is the force of \u03c4\u1f78 \u03b3\u03c1\u03ac\u03c6\u03b5\u03b9\u03bd.\n\n[77] The R.V. renders \u03c0\u03bb\u03b5\u03bf\u03bd\u03b5\u03be\u03af\u03b1 \"extortion\"--the \u03c0\u03bb\u03b5\u03bf\u03bd\u03ad\u03ba\u03c4\u03b1\u03b9 being\nthose who _get_ the money; but it seems to me more natural to render\n\"avarice,\" in which case both \u03b5\u1f50\u03bb\u03bf\u03b3\u03af\u03b1 and \u03c0\u03bb\u03b5\u03bf\u03bd\u03b5\u03be\u03af\u03b1 apply to the\nCorinthians.\n\n[78] \u1f18\u03c0' \u03b5\u1f50\u03bb\u03bf\u03b3\u03af\u03b1\u03b9\u03c2: \"so that blessings are associated therewith\"\n(Winer): the full hand in sowing makes a full hand in reaping.\n\n[79] \u039b\u03b5\u03b9\u03c4\u03bf\u03c5\u03c1\u03b3\u03af\u03b1: for the general sense of \"service,\" especially\ncharitable service, quite apart from priestly associations, see Phil.\nii. 25, 30: and Grimm's Lexicon.\n\n\n\n\n XXII\n\n _WAR_\n\n \"Now I Paul myself intreat you by the meekness and gentleness of\n Christ, I who in your presence am lowly among you, but being\n absent am of good courage toward you: yea, I beseech you, that I\n may not when present show courage with the confidence wherewith I\n count to be bold against some, which count of us as if we walked\n according to the flesh. For though we walk in the flesh, we do not\n war according to the flesh (for the weapons of our warfare are not\n of the flesh, but mighty before God to the casting down of strong\n holds); casting down imaginations, and every high thing that is\n exalted against the knowledge of God, and bringing every thought\n into captivity to the obedience of Christ; and being in readiness\n to avenge all disobedience, when your obedience shall be\n fulfilled.\"--2 COR. x. 1-6 (R.V.).\n\n\nThe last four chapters of the Second Epistle to the Corinthians stand\nas manifestly apart as the two about the collection. A great deal too\nmuch has been made of this undeniable fact. If a man has a long letter\nto write, in which he wishes to speak of a variety of subjects, we may\nexpect variations of tone, and more or less looseness of connexion. If\nhe has something on his mind which it is difficult to speak about, but\nwhich cannot be suppressed, we may expect him to keep it to the end,\nand to introduce it, perhaps, with awkward emphasis. The scholars who\nhave argued, on the ground of the extreme difference of tone, and want\nof connexion, that chaps. x.-xiii. of this Epistle were originally a\nseparate letter, either earlier (Weisse) or later (Semler) than the\nfirst seven chapters, seem to have overlooked these obvious\nconsiderations.[80] If Paul stopped dictating for the day at the end\nof chap. ix.--if he even stopped a few moments in doubt how to proceed\nto the critical subject he had still to handle--the want of connexion\nis sufficiently explained; the tone in which he writes, when we\nconsider the subject, needs no justification. The mission of Titus had\nresulted very satisfactorily, so far as one special incident was\nconcerned--the treatment of a guilty person by the Church; the tension\nof feeling over that case had passed by. But in the general situation\nof affairs at Corinth there was much to make the Apostle anxious and\nangry. There were Judaists at work, impugning his authority and\ncorrupting his Gospel; there was at least a minority of the Church\nunder their influence; there were large numbers living, apparently, in\nthe grossest sins (chap. xii. 20 f.); there was something, we cannot\nbut think, approaching spiritual anarchy. The one resource the Apostle\nhas with which to encounter this situation--his one standing ground\nalike against the Church and those who were corrupting it--is his\napostolic authority; and to the vindication of this he first addresses\nhimself. This, I believe, explains the peculiar emphasis with which he\nbegins: \"Now I myself, I Paul intreat you.\" \u0391\u1f50\u03c4\u1f78\u03c2 \u1f10\u03b3\u1f7c \u03a0\u03b1\u1fe6\u03bb\u03bf\u03c2 is not\nonly the grammatical subject of the sentence, but if one may say so,\nthe subject under consideration; it is the very person whose authority\nis in dispute who puts himself forward deliberately in this\nauthoritative way. The \u03b4\u1f72 (\"now\") is merely transitional; the writer\nmoves on, without indicating any connexion, to another matter.\n\nIn the long sentence which makes up the first and second verses,\neverything comes out at once--the Apostle's indignation, in that extreme\npersonal emphasis; his restraint of it, in the appeal to the meekness\nand gentleness of Christ; his resentment at the misconstruction of his\nconduct by enemies, who called him a coward at hand, and a brave man\nonly at a safe distance; and his resolve, if the painful necessity is\nnot spared him, to come with a rod and not spare. It is as if all this\nhad been dammed up in his heart for long, and to say a single word was\nto say everything. The appeal to the meekness and gentleness of Christ\nis peculiarly affecting in such a connexion; it is intended to move the\nCorinthians, but what we feel is how it has moved Paul. It may be\nneedful, on occasion, to assert oneself, or at least one's authority;\nbut it is difficult to do it without sin. It is an exhilarating\nsensation to human nature to be in the right, and when we enjoy it we\nare apt to enlist our temper in the divine service, forgetting that the\nwrath of man does not work the righteousness of God. Paul felt this\ndanger, and in the very sentence in which he puts himself and his\ndignity forward with uncompromising firmness, he recalls to his own and\nhis readers' hearts the characteristic temper of the Lord. How far He\nwas, under the most hateful provocation, from violence and passion! How\nfar from that sinful self-assertion, which cannot consider the case and\nclaims of others! It is when we are in the right that we must watch our\ntemper, and, instead of letting anger carry us away, make our appeal for\nthe right by the meekness and gentleness of Jesus. This, when right is\nwon, makes it twice blessed. The words, \"who in your presence am lowly\namong you, but being absent am of good courage toward you,\" are one of\nthe sneers current in Corinth at Paul's expense. When he was there, his\nenemies said, face to face with them, he was humble enough;[81] it was\nonly when he left them he became so brave. This mean slander must have\nstung the proud soul of the Apostle--the mere quotation of it shows\nthis; but the meekness and gentleness of Christ have entered into him,\nand instead of resenting it he continues in a still milder tone. He\ndescends from urging or entreating (\u03c0\u03b1\u03c1\u03b1\u03ba\u03b1\u03bb\u1ff6) to beseeching (\u03b4\u03ad\u03bf\u03bc\u03b1\u03b9).\nThe thought of Christ has told already on his heart and on his pen. He\nbegs them so to order their conduct that he may be spared the pain of\ndemonstrating the falsehood of that charge. He counts on taking daring\naction against some at Corinth who count of him as though he walked\nafter the flesh; but they can make this face-to-face hardihood needless,\nand in the name, not of his own cowardice, but of his Lord's meekness\nand considerateness, he appeals to them to do so. \u0394\u03c5\u03c3\u03c6\u03b7\u03bc\u03bf\u03cd\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd\u03bf\u03b9\n\u03c0\u03b1\u03c1\u03b1\u03ba\u03b1\u03bb\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd.\n\nThe charge of walking after the flesh is one that needs interpretation.\nIn a general way it means that Paul was a worldly, and not a spiritual,\nman; and that the key to his character and conduct--even in his\nrelations with Churches--was to be sought in his private and personal\ninterests. What this would mean in any particular case would depend upon\nthe circumstances. It might mean that he was actuated by avarice, and,\nin spite of pretences to be disinterested, was ruled at bottom by the\nidea of what would pay; or it might mean--and in this place probably\ndoes mean--that he had an undue regard for the opinion of others, and\nacted with feeble inconsistency in his efforts to please them. A man of\nwhom either of these things could be truly said would be without\nspiritual authority, and it was to discredit the Apostle in the Church\nthat the vague and damaging charge was made.\n\nHe certainly shows no want of courage in meeting it. That he walks\n_in_ the flesh, he cannot deny. He is a human being, wearing the weak\nnature, and all its maladies are incident to him. As far as that\nnature goes, it is as possible that he, as that any man, should be\nruled by its love of ease or popularity; or, on the other hand, should\nbe overcome by timidity, and shrink from difficult duties. But he\ndenies that this is his case. He spends his life _in_ this nature,\nwith all its capacity for unworthy conduct; but in his Christian\nwarfare he is not ruled by it--he has conquered it, and it has no\npower over him at all. \"I was with you,\" he wrote in the First\nEpistle, \"with weakness and fear and much trembling\"; but \"my speech\nand my preaching were ... with demonstration of the Spirit and of\npower.\" This is practically what he says here, and what must be said\nby every _man_ who undertakes to do anything for _God_. No one can be\nhalf so well aware as he, if he is sincere at all, of the immense\ncontrast between the nature in which he lives and the service to which\nhe is called. None of his enemies can know so well as he the utter\nearthenness of the vessel in which the heavenly treasure is deposited.\nBut the very meaning of a divine call is that a man is made master of\nthis weakness, and through whatever pain and self-repression can\ndisregard it for his work's sake. With some men timidity _is_ the\ngreat trial: for them, it is the flesh. They are afraid to declare\nthe whole counsel of God; or they are afraid of some class, or of some\nparticular person: they are brave with a pen perhaps, or in a pulpit,\nor surrounded by sympathising spectators; but it is not in them to be\nbrave alone, and to find in the Spirit a courage and authority which\noverbear the weakness of the flesh. From all such timidity, as an\ninfluence affecting his apostolic work, Paul can pronounce himself\nfree. Like Jeremiah (Jer. i. 6-8) and Ezekiel (Ezek. ii. 6-8), he is\nnaturally capable, but spiritually incapable of it. He is full of\nmight by the Spirit of the Lord: and when he takes the field in the\nLord's service, the flesh is as though it were not. Since the\nexpression \u1f10\u03bd \u03c3\u03b1\u03c1\u03ba\u1f76 \u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u03b9\u03c0\u03b1\u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bd\u03c4\u03b5\u03c2 refers to the whole of the Apostle's\nlife, it seems natural to take \u03c3\u03c4\u03c1\u03b1\u03c4\u03b5\u03c5\u03cc\u03bc\u03b5\u03b8\u03b1 as referring to the whole\nof his ministry, and not solely to his present campaign against the\nCorinthians. It is of his apostolic labours in general--of course\nincluding that which lay immediately before him--that he says: \"The\nweapons of our warfare are not of the flesh, but mighty before God[82]\nto the casting down of strong holds.\"\n\nNobody but an evangelist could have written this sentence. Paul knew\nfrom experience that men fortify themselves against God: they try to\nfind impregnable positions in which they may defy Him, and live their\nown life. Human nature, when God is announced to speak, instinctively\nputs itself on its guard; and you cannot pass that guard, as Paul was\nwell aware, with weapons furnished by the flesh. The weapons need to\nbe divinely strong; mighty in God's sight, for God's service, with\nGod's own might. There is an answer in this to many of the questions\nthat are being asked at present about methods of evangelising; where\nthe divinely powerful weapons are found, such questions give no\ntrouble. No man who has ever had a direct and unmistakable blessing on\nhis work as an evangelist has ever enlisted \"the flesh\" in God's\nservice. No such man has ever seen, or said, that learning, eloquence,\nor art in the preacher; or bribes of any sort to the hearer; or\napproaches to the \"strong holds,\" constructed of amusements, lectures,\nconcerts, and so forth, were of the very slightest value. He who knows\nanything about the matter knows that it is a life-and-death interest\nwhich is at stake when the soul comes face to face with the claims and\nthe mercy of God; and that the preacher who has not the hardihood to\nrepresent it as such will not be listened to, and should not be. Paul\nwas armed with this tremendous sense of what the Gospel was--the\nimmensity of grace in it, the awfulness of judgment; and it was this\nwhich gave him his power, and lifted him above the arts, the wisdom,\nand the timidity of the flesh. A man will hold his own against\nanything but this. He will parley with any weapon flesh can fashion or\nwield; this is the only one to which he surrenders.\n\nPerhaps in the fifth verse, which is an expansion of \"the casting down\nof strong holds,\" a special reference to the Corinthians begins to be\nfelt: at all events they might easily apply it to themselves. \"Casting\ndown imaginations,\" the Apostle says, \"and every high thing that is\nexalted against the knowledge of God.\" \"Imaginations\" is probably a\nfair enough rendering of \u03bb\u03bf\u03b3\u03b9\u03c3\u03bc\u03bf\u03cd\u03c2, though the margin has\n\"reasonings,\" and the same word in Rom. ii. 15 is rendered\n\"thoughts.\" To what it applies is not very obvious. Men do certainly\nfortify themselves against the Gospel in their thoughts. The proud\nwisdom of the Greek was familiar to the Apostle, and even the obvious\nfact that it had not brought the world salvation was not sufficient to\nlower its pride. The expression has sometimes been censured as\njustifying the _sacrificium intellectus_, or as taking away freedom of\nthought in religion. To think of Paul censuring the free exercise of\nintelligence in religion is too absurd; but there is no doubt that,\nwith his firm hold of the great facts on which the Christian faith\ndepends, he would have dealt very summarily with theories, ancient or\nmodern, which serve no purpose but to fortify men against the pressure\nof these facts. He would not have taken excessive pains to put himself\nin the speculator's place, and see the world as he sees it, with the\nmost stupendous realities left out; he would not have flattered with\nany affected admiration that most self-complacent of mortals--the wise\nof this world. He would have struck straight at the heart and\nconscience with the spiritual weapons of the Gospel; he would have\nspoken of sin and judgment, of reconciliation and life in Christ, till\nthese great realities had asserted their greatness in the mind, and in\ndoing so had shattered the proud intellectual structures which had\nbeen reared in ignorance or contempt of them. \"Thoughts\" and\n\"imaginations\" must yield to things, and make room for them: it was on\nthis principle Paul wrought. And to \"thoughts\" or \"imaginations\" he\nadds \"every high thing [\u1f55\u03c8\u03c9\u03bc\u03b1] that exalts itself against the\nknowledge of God.\" The emphasis is on \"every\"; the Apostle generalises\nthe opposition which he has to encounter. It may not be so much in the\n\"thoughts\" of men, as in their tempers, that they fortify themselves.\nPride, which by the instinct of self-preservation sees at once to the\nheart of the Gospel, and closes itself against it; which hates equally\nthe thought of absolute indebtedness to God and the thought of\nstanding on the same level with others in God's sight,--this pride\nraises in every part of our nature its protest against the great\nsurrender. It is implied in the whole structure of this passage that\n\"the knowledge of God\" against which every high thing in man rises\ndefiantly is a humbling knowledge. In other words, it is not\nspeculative merely, but has an ethical significance, which the human\nheart is conscious of even at a distance, and makes ready to\nacknowledge or to resist. No high thing lifts itself up in us against\na mere theorem--a doctrine of God which is as a doctrine in algebra;\nit is the practical import of knowing God which excites the rebellion\nof the soul. No doubt, for the Apostle, the knowledge of God was\nsynonymous with the Gospel: it was the knowledge of His glory in the\nface of Jesus Christ; it was concentrated in the Cross and the Throne\nof His Son, in the Atonement and the Sovereignty of Christ. The\nApostle had to beat down all the barriers by which men closed their\nminds against this supreme revelation; he had to win for these\nstupendous facts a place in the consciousness of humanity answering to\ntheir grandeur. _Their_ greatness made _him_ great: he was lifted up\non them; and though he walked in the flesh, in weakness and fear and\nmuch trembling, he could confront undaunted the pride and the wisdom\nof the world, and compel them to acknowledge his Lord.\n\nThis meaning is brought out more precisely in the words with which he\ncontinues--\"bringing every thought into captivity to the obedience of\nChrist.\" If we suppose a special reference here to the Corinthians, it\nwill be natural to take \u03bd\u03cc\u03b7\u03bc\u03b1 (\"thought\") in a practical sense--as,\n_e.g._, in chap. ii. 11, where it is rendered \"devices.\" The Corinthians\nhad notions of their own, apparently, about how a Church should be\nregulated--wild, undisciplined, disorderly notions; and in the absence\nof the Apostle they were experimenting with them freely. It is part of\nhis work to catch these runaway thoughts, and make them obedient to\nChrist again. It seems, however, much more natural to allow the wider\nreference of \u03b1\u1f30\u03c7\u03bc\u03b1\u03bb\u03c9\u03c4\u03af\u03b6\u03bf\u03bd\u03c4\u03b5\u03c2 to the whole of Paul's apostolic work; and\nthen \u03bd\u03cc\u03b7\u03bc\u03b1 also will be taken in a less restricted sense. Men's minds,\nand all that goes on in their minds (\u03bd\u03bf\u03ae\u03bc\u03b1\u03c4\u03b1 covers both: see chaps, ii.\n11, iii. 14, iv. 4), are by nature lawless: they are without the sense\nof responsibility to guard and consecrate the sense of freedom. When the\nGospel makes them captive, this lawless liberty comes to an end. The\nmind, in all its operations, comes under law to Christ: in its every\nthought it is obedient to Him. The supremacy which Christ claims and\nexercises is over the whole nature: the Christian man feels that\nnothing--not even a thought--lies beyond the range in which obedience is\ndue to Him. This practical conviction will not paralyse thinking in the\nvery least, but it will extinguish many useless and bad thoughts, and\ngive their due value to all.\n\nThe Apostle descends unmistakably from the general to the particular in\nver. 6: \"Being in readiness to avenge all disobedience, when your\nobedience is fulfilled.\" Apparently what he contemplates in Corinth is a\ndisobedience which in part at least will refuse to surrender to Christ.\nThere is a spirit abroad there, in the Judaists especially, and in\nthose whom they have influenced, which will not bend, and must be\nbroken. How Paul means to take vengeance on it, he does not say. He is\nconfident himself that the divinely powerful weapons which he wields\nwill enable him to master it, and that is enough. Whatever the shape the\ndisobedience may assume,--hostility to the Gospel of Paul, as subversive\nof the law; hostility to his apostolic claims, as unequal to those of\nthe Twelve; hostility to the practical authority he asserted in Churches\nof his founding, and to the moral ideals he established there,--whatever\nthe face which opposition may present, he declares himself ready to\nhumble it. One limitation only he imposes on himself--he will do this,\n\"when the obedience of the Corinthians is fulfilled.\" He expressly\ndistinguishes the Church as a whole from those who represent or\nconstitute the disobedient party. There have been misunderstandings\nbetween the Church and himself; but as chaps. i. to vii. show, these\nhave been so far overcome: the body of the Church has reconciled itself\nto its founder; it has returned, so to speak, to its allegiance to Paul,\nand has busied itself in carrying out his will. When this process, at\npresent only in course, is completed, his way will be clear. He will be\nable to act with severity and decision against those who have troubled\nthe Church, without running any risk of hurting the Church itself. This\nleads again to the reflection that, with all his high consciousness of\nspiritual power, with all his sense of personal wrong, the most\nremarkable characteristic of Paul is love. He waits to the last moment\nbefore he resorts to severer measures; and he begs those who may suffer\nfrom them, begs them by the meekness and gentleness of Christ, to spare\nhim such pain.\n\nFOOTNOTES:\n\n[80] On Hausrath's view that this was a letter between our Ep. I. and\nEp. II. see the Introduction.\n\n[81] This is the only place in the New Testament where \u03c4\u03b1\u03c0\u03b5\u03b9\u03bd\u1f78\u03c2\n(\"lowly\") is used in a bad (contemptuous) sense: in Christian lips it\nis a term of praise (Matt. xi. 29); the speakers here had not learned\nits Christian meaning.\n\n[82] The dative in \u03b4\u03c5\u03bd\u03b1\u03c4\u1f70 \u03c4\u1ff7 \u0398\u03b5\u1ff7 is the same as in Jonah iii. 3, Acts\nvii. 20. A vague rendering like \"divinely powerful\" is probably\nnearest the meaning.\n\n\n\n\n XXIII\n\n _COMPARISONS_\n\n \"Ye look at the things that are before your face. If any man\n trusteth in himself that he is Christ's, let him consider this again\n with himself, that, even as he is Christ's, so also are we. For\n though I should glory somewhat abundantly concerning our authority\n (which the Lord gave for building you up, and not for casting you\n down), I shall not be put to shame: that I may not seem as if I\n would terrify you by my letters. For, His letters, they say, are\n weighty and strong; but his bodily presence is weak, and his speech\n of no account. Let such a one reckon this, that, what we are in word\n by letters when we are absent, such _are we_ also in deed when we\n are present. For we are not bold to number or compare ourselves with\n certain of them that commend themselves: but they themselves,\n measuring themselves by themselves, and comparing themselves with\n themselves, are without understanding. But we will not glory beyond\n _our_ measure, but according to the measure of the province which\n God apportioned to us as a measure, to reach even unto you. For we\n stretch not ourselves overmuch, as though we reached not unto you:\n for we came even as far as unto you in the Gospel of Christ: not\n glorying beyond _our_ measure, _that is_, in other men's labours;\n but having hope that, as your faith groweth, we shall be magnified\n in you according to our province unto _further_ abundance, so as to\n preach the Gospel even unto the parts beyond you, _and_ not to glory\n in another's province in regard of things ready to our hand. But he\n that glorieth, let him glory in the Lord. For not he that commendeth\n himself is approved, but whom the Lord commendeth.\"--2 COR. x. 7-18\n (R.V.).\n\n\nThis passage abounds with grammatical and textual difficulties, but\nthe general import and the purpose of it are plain. The self-assertion\nof \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u1f78\u03c2 \u1f10\u03b3\u1f7c \u03a0\u03b1\u1fe6\u03bb\u03bf\u03c2 (ver. 1) receives its first interpretation and\nexpansion here: we see what it is that Paul claims, and we begin to\nsee the nature of the opposition against which his claim has to be\nmade good. Leaving questions of grammatical construction aside, vv. 7\nand 8 define the situation; and it is convenient to take them as if\nthey stood alone.\n\nThere was a person in Corinth--more than one indeed, but one in\nparticular, as the \u03c4\u03b9\u03c2 in ver. 7 and the singular \u03c6\u03b7\u03c3\u1f76\u03bd[83] in ver. 10\nsuggest--who claimed to be Christ's, or of Christ, in a sense which\ndisparaged and was meant to disparage Paul. If we use the plural, to\ninclude them all, we must not suppose that they are identical with the\nparty in the Church who are censured in the First Epistle for saying, \"I\nam of Christ,\" just as others said, \"I am of Paul,\" \"I am of Apollos,\"\n\"I am of Cephas.\" That party may have been dependent upon them, but the\nindividuals here referred to are taxed with an exclusiveness and\narrogance, and in the close of the chapter with a wanton trespassing on\nPaul's province, which show that they were not native to the Church, but\nintruders into it. They were confident that they were Christ's in a\nsense which discredited Paul's apostleship, and entitled them, so to\nspeak, to legitimate a Church which his labours had called into being.\nEverything compels us to recognise in them Jewish Christians, who had\nbeen connected with Christ in a way in which Paul had not; who had known\nHim in the flesh, or had brought recommendatory letters from the Mother\nChurch at Jerusalem; and who, on the strength of these accidents, gave\nthemselves airs of superiority in Pauline Churches, and corrupted the\nsimplicity of the Pauline Gospel.\n\nThe first words in ver. 7--\u03c4\u1f70 \u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u1f70 \u03c0\u03c1\u03cc\u03c3\u03c9\u03c0\u03bf\u03bd \u03b2\u03bb\u03ad\u03c0\u03b5\u03c4\u03b5--are no doubt\ndirected to this situation, but they have been very variously\nrendered. Our Authorised Version has, \"Do ye look on things after the\noutward appearance?\" That is, \"Are you really imposed upon by the\npretensions of these men, by their national and carnal distinctions,\nas if these had anything to do with the Gospel?\" This is a good\nPauline idea, but it is doubtful whether \u03c4\u1f70 \u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u1f70 \u03c0\u03c1\u03cc\u03c3\u03c9\u03c0\u03bf\u03bd can yield\nit. The natural sense of these words is, \"What is before your face.\"\nThe Revised Version accordingly renders, \"Ye look at the things that\nare before your face\": meaning, apparently, \"You allow yourselves to\nbe carried away by whatever is nearest to you--at present, by these\ninterloping Jews, and the claims they flaunt before your eyes.\" It\nseems to me more natural, with many good scholars, to take \u03b2\u03bb\u03ad\u03c0\u03b5\u03c4\u03b5, in\nspite of its unemphatic position, as imperative: \"Look at the things\nwhich are before your faces! The most obvious and palpable facts\ndiscredit these Judaists and accredit me. A claim to be Christ's is\nnot to be made out _\u00e0 priori_ by any carnal prerogatives, or any human\nrecommendations; it is only made out by this--that Christ Himself\nattests it by giving him who makes it success as an evangelist. Look\nat what confronts you! There is not a single Christian thing you see\nwhich is not Christ's own testimony that I am His; unless you are\nsenseless and blind, my position and authority as an apostle can never\nbe impugned among you.\" The argument is thus the same as that which he\nuses in chap. iii. 1-3, and in the First Epistle, chap. ix. 2.\n\nAt first Paul asserts only a bare equivalence to his Jewish opponent:\n\"Let him consider this with himself, that, _even as_ he is Christ's,\n_so also_ are we.\" The historical, outward connexion with Christ,\nwhatever it may have been, amounted in this relation to exactly\nnothing at all. Not what Christ was, but what He is, is the life and\nreality of the Christian religion. Not an accidental acquaintance with\nHim as He lived in Galilee or Jerusalem, but a spiritual fellowship\nwith Him as He reigns in the heavenly places, makes a Christian. Not a\nletter written by human hands--though they should be the hands of\nPeter or James or John--legitimates a man in the apostolic career; but\nonly the sovereign voice which says, \"He is a chosen vessel unto Me,\nto bear My Name.\" Neither as Christian nor as apostle can one\nestablish a monopoly by making his appeal to \"the flesh.\" The\napplication of this Christian truth has constantly to be made anew,\nfor human nature loves a monopoly; it does not seem really to have a\nthing, unless its possession of it is exclusive. We are all too ready\nto unchurch, or unchristianise, others; to say, \"_We_ are Christ's,\"\nwith an emphasis which means that others are not. Churches with a\nstrong organisation are especially tempted to this unchristian\nnarrowness and pride. Their members think almost instinctively of\nother Christians as outsiders and inferiors; they would like to take\nthem in, to reordain their ministers, to reform their constitution, to\ngive validity to their sacraments--in one word, to legitimate them as\nChristians and as Christian societies. All this is mere unintelligence\nand arrogance. Legitimacy is a convenient and respectable political\nfiction; but to make the constitution of any Christian body, which has\ndeveloped under the pressure of historical exigences, the law for the\nlegitimation of Christian life, ministry, and worship everywhere, is\nto deny the essential character of the Christian religion. It is to\nplay toward men whom Christ has legitimated by His Spirit, and by His\nblessing on their work, precisely the part which the Judaisers played\ntoward Paul; and to compromise with it is to betray Christ, and to\nrenounce the freedom of the Spirit.\n\nBut the Apostle does not stop short with claiming a bare equality with\nhis rivals. \"For though[84] I should boast somewhat more abundantly\nconcerning our authority ... I shall not be put to shame\"--_i.e._,\n\"The facts I have invited you to look at will bear me out.\" The key to\nthis passage is to be found in 1 Cor. xv. 15, where he boasts that,\nthough the least of the apostles, and not worthy to be called an\napostle, he had, through the grace of God given to him, laboured more\nabundantly than all the rest. If it came to comparison, then, of the\nattestation which Christ gave to their several labours, and so to\ntheir authority, by success in evangelising, it would not be Paul who\nwould have to hide his head. But he does not choose to boast any more\nof his authority at this point. He has no desire to clothe himself in\nterrors; on the contrary, he wishes to avoid[85] the very appearance\nof scaring them out of their wits by his letters (for \u1f10\u03ba\u03c6\u03bf\u03b2\u03b5\u1fd6\u03bd compare\nMark ix. 6; Heb. xii. 21). His authority has been given him, not for\nthe pulling down, but for the building up, of the Church; it is not\nlordly (chap. i. 24), but ministerial; and he would wish, not only to\nshow it in kindly service, but also in a kindly aspect. \"Not for\ncasting down,\" in ver. 8, is no contradiction of \"mighty for casting\ndown\" in ver. 4: the object in the two cases is quite different. Many\n_things_ in man must be cast down--many high thoughts, much pride,\nmuch wilfulness, much presumption and sufficiency--but the casting\ndown of these is the building up of souls.\n\nAt this point comes what is logically a parenthesis, and we hear in it\nthe criticisms passed at Corinth on Paul, and his own reply to them.\n\"His letters,\" they say (or, he says), \"are weighty and strong; but\nhis bodily presence weak, and his speech of no account.\" The last part\nof this criticism has been much misunderstood; it is really of moral\nimport, but has been read in a physical sense. It does not say\nanything at all about the Apostle's physique, or about his eloquence\nor want of eloquence; it tells us that (according to these critics),\nwhen he was actually present at Corinth, he was somehow or other\nineffective; and when he spoke there, people simply disregarded him.\nAn uncertain tradition no doubt represents Paul as an infirm and\nmeagre person, and it is easy to believe that to Greeks he must\nsometimes have seemed embarrassed and incoherent in speech to the last\ndegree (what, for instance, could have seemed more formless to a Greek\nthan vv. 12-18 of this chapter?): nevertheless, it is nothing like\nthis which is in view here. The criticism is not of his physique, nor\nof his style, but of his personality--what is described is not his\nappearance nor his eloquence, but the effect which the man produced\nwhen he went to Corinth and spoke. It was nothing. As a man, bodily\npresent, he could get nothing done: he talked, and nobody listened. It\nis implied that this criticism is false; and Paul bids any one who\nmakes it consider that what he is in word by letters when he is\nabsent, that he will also be in deed when he is present. The double\n_r\u00f4le_ of potent pamphleteer and ineffective pastor is not for him.\n\nThe kind of criticism which was here passed on St. Paul is one to which\nevery preacher is obnoxious. An epistle is, so to speak, the man's words\nwithout the man; and such is human weakness, that they are often\nstronger than the man speaking in bodily presence, that is, than the man\nand his words together. The character of the speaker, as it were,\ndiscounts all he says; and when he is there, and delivers his message in\nperson, the message itself suffers an immense depreciation. This ought\nnot so to be, and with a man who cultivates sincerity will not so be. He\nwill be, himself, as good as his words; his effectiveness will be the\nsame whether he writes or speaks. Nothing ultimately counts in the work\nof a Christian minister but what he can say and do and get done when in\ndirect contact, with living men. In many cases the modern sermon really\nanswers to the epistle as it is referred to in this sarcastic comment;\nin the pulpit, people say, the minister is impressive and memorable; but\nin the ordinary intercourse of life, and even in the pastoral relation,\nwhere he has to meet people on an equal footing, his power quite\ndisappears. He is an ineffective person, and his words have no weight.\nWhere this is true, there is something very far wrong; and though it was\nnot true in the case of Paul, there are cases in which it is. To bring\nthe pastoral up to the level of the pulpit work--the care of individual\nsouls and characters to the intensity and earnestness of study and\npreaching--would be the saving of many a minister and many a\ncongregation.[86]\n\nBut to return to the text. The Apostle is disinclined to pursue this\nline further: in defending himself against these obscure detractors,\nhe can hardly avoid the appearance of self-commendation, which of all\nthings he abhors. An acute observer has remarked that when war lasts\nlong the opposing combatants borrow each other's weapons and tactics:\nand it was this uninviting weapon that the policy of his opponents\nlaid to the Apostle's hand. With ironical recognition of their\nhardihood, he declines it: \"We are not bold--have not the courage--to\nnumber ourselves among, or compare ourselves with, certain of them\nthat commend themselves\"--_i.e._, the Judaists who had introduced\nthemselves to the Church. \"Far be it from me,\" says the Apostle\ngrimly, \"to claim a place among, or near, such a distinguished\ncompany.\" But he is too much in earnest to prolong the ironical\nstrain, and in the verses which follow, from 12 to 16, he states in\ngood set terms the differences between himself and them. (1) They\nmeasure themselves by themselves, and compare themselves among\nthemselves, and in so doing are without understanding.[87] They\nconstitute a religious coterie, a sort of clique or ring in the\nChurch, ignoring all but themselves, making themselves the only\nstandard of what is Christian, and betraying, by that very\nproceeding, their want of sense. There is a fine liberality about this\nsharp saying, and it is as necessary now as in the first century. Men\ncoalesce, within the limits of the Christian community, from\naffinities of various kinds--sympathy for a type or an aspect of\ndoctrine, or liking for a form of polity; and as it is easy, so is it\ncommon, for those who have united like to like, to set up their own\nassociations and preferences as the only law and model for all. They\ntake the air of superior persons, and the penalty of the superior\nperson is to be unintelligent. They are without understanding. The\nstandard of the coterie--be it \"evangelical,\" \"high church,\" \"broad\nchurch,\" or what you please--is not the standard of God; and to\nmeasure all things by it is not only sinful but stupid. In contrast to\nthis Judaistic clique, who saw no Christianity except under their own\ncolours, Paul's standard is to be found in the actual working of God\nthrough the Gospel. He would have said with Ignatius, only with a\ndeeper insight into every word, \"Where Jesus Christ is, there is the\nCatholic Church.\" (2) Another point of difference is this: Paul works\nindependently as an evangelist; it has always been his rule to break\nnew ground. God has assigned him a province to labour in, large enough\nto gratify the highest ambition; he is not going beyond it, nor\nexaggerating his authority, when he asserts his apostolic dignity in\nCorinth; the Corinthians know as well as he that he came all the way\nto them, and was the first to come, ministering the Gospel of Christ.\nNay, it is only the weakness of their faith that keeps him from going\nfarther: and he has hope that as their faith grows it will set him\nfree to carry the Gospel beyond them to Italy and Spain; this would be\nthe crown of his greatness as an evangelist, and it depends _on them_\n(\u1f10\u03bd \u1f51\u03bc\u1fd6\u03bd \u03bc\u03b5\u03b3\u03b1\u03bb\u03c5\u03bd\u03b8\u1fc6\u03bd\u03b1\u03b9) whether he is to win it; in any case, the\nwinning of it would be in harmony with his vocation, the carrying of\nit out in glorious fulness (\u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u1f70 \u03c4\u1f78\u03bd \u03ba\u03b1\u03bd\u03cc\u03bd\u03b1 \u03b5\u1f30\u03c2 \u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u03b9\u03c3\u03c3\u03b5\u03af\u03b1\u03bd); for, like\nJohn Wesley, he could say the whole world was his parish. If he boasts\nat all, it is not immeasurably; it is on the basis of the gift and\ncalling of God, within the limits of what God has wrought by him and\nby no other; he never intrudes into another's province and boasts of\nwhat he finds done to his hand. But this was what the Jews did. They\ndid not propagate the Gospel with apostolic enthusiasm among the\nheathen; they waited till Paul had done the hard preliminary work, and\nformed Christian congregations everywhere, and then they slunk into\nthem--in Galatia, in Macedonia, in Achaia--talking as if these\nChurches were _their_ work, disparaging their real father in Christ,\nand claiming to complete and legitimate--which meant, in effect, to\nsubvert---his work. No wonder Paul was scornful, and did not venture\nto put himself in a line with such heroes.\n\nTwo feelings are compounded all through this passage: an intense\nsympathy with the purpose of God that the Gospel should be preached to\nevery creature--Paul's very soul melts into that; and an intense scorn\nfor the spirit that sneaks and poaches on another's ground, and is more\nanxious that some men should be good sectarians than that all men should\nbe good disciples. This evil spirit Paul loathes, just as Christ loathed\nit; the temper of these verses is that in which the Master cried, \"Woe\nunto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye compass sea and land\nto make one proselyte; and when he is become so, ye make him twofold\nmore a son of hell than yourselves.\" Of course the evil spirit must\nalways be disguised, both from others and from itself: the proselytiser\nassumes the garb of the evangelist; but the proselytiser turned\nevangelist is the purest example in the world of Satan disguised as an\nangel of light. The show is divine, but the reality is diabolical. It\ndoes not matter what the special sectarianism is: the proselytising of a\nhierarchical Church, and the proselytising of the Plymouth Brethren, are\nalike dishonourable and alike condemned. And the safeguard of the soul\nagainst this base spirit is an interest like Paul's in the\nChristianising of those who do not know Christ at all. Why should\nChurches compete? why should their agencies overlap? why should they\nsteal from each other's folds? why should they be anxious to seal all\nbelievers with their private seal, when the whole world lies in\nwickedness? That field is large enough for all the efforts of all\nevangelists, and till it has been sown with the good seed from end to\nend there can be nothing but reprobation for those who trespass on the\nprovince of others, and boast that they have made their own what they\ncertainly did not make Christ's.\n\nAt the close, to borrow Bengel's expression, Paul sounds a retreat. He\nhas liberated his mind about his adversaries--always a more or less\ndangerous process; and after the excitement and self-assertion are over,\nhe composes it again in the presence of God. He checks himself, we feel,\nwith that Old Testament word, \"Now he that glorieth, let him glory in\nthe Lord. I _have_ always broken new ground; I _have_ come as far as\nyou, and wish to go farther, evangelising; I never _have_ boasted of\nanother man's labours as if they were mine, or claimed the credit of\nwhat he had done; but all this is mine only as God's gift. It is His\ngrace bestowed on me, and not in vain. I would not boast except in Him;\nfor not he who commends himself is approved, but only he whom the Lord\ncommends.\" No character which is only self-certificated can stand the\ntest: no claim to apostolic dignity and authority can be maintained\nwhich the Lord does not attest by granting apostolic success.\n\n\n NOTE ON VV. 12 AND 13.--In some MSS. (D*, F, G, 109, It., and some\n Latins) the last two words of ver. 12 and the first two of ver. 13\n (\u03bf\u1f50 \u03c3\u03c5\u03bd\u03b9\u1fb6\u03c3\u03b9\u03bd\u00b7 \u1f21\u03bc\u03b5\u1fd6\u03c2 \u03b4\u03ad) are omitted. Most editors of the text\n (Tischdf. vii., Tregelles, Westcott and Hort) seem to think the\n omission accidental; among exegetes, the fact that it yields an\n easy and natural, though of course a quite different, sense, has\n caused some hesitation. Thus Bengel, and recently Schmiedel,\n reject the words. The latter renders the whole passage: \"We do not\n venture to put ourselves on a level, or to compare ourselves, with\n certain of those who commend themselves; but in measuring\n ourselves by ourselves, and comparing ourselves with ourselves, we\n shall not boast beyond measure, but according to the measure of\n the rule,\" etc. This is no doubt intelligible and appropriate\n enough, and certainly one's first impression is that \u1f00\u03bb\u03bb' \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u03bf\u03af in\n ver. 12 ought to refer to Paul; but as the meaning yielded by the\n passage with the four words included is equally appropriate, and\n their insertion immeasurably harder to understand than their\n omission, it seems preferable to let them stand, in the sense\n explained above. They are found (with the variation of \u03c3\u03c5\u03bd\u03af\u03c3\u03b1\u03c3\u03b9\u03bd\n for \u03c3\u03c5\u03bd\u03b9\u1fb6\u03c3\u03b9\u03bd in \u05d0*) in \u05d0**, B, minusc. Theodoret: in E, K, L, P,\n the form is \u03c3\u03c5\u03bd\u03b9\u03bf\u1fe6\u03c3\u03b9\u03bd. Apparently it is only by an accident that\n their omission leaves good sense.\n\nFOOTNOTES:\n\n[83] This is the reading adopted by Westcott and Hort with most MSS.\nexcept B.\n\n[84] The difficult \u03c4\u03b5 in \u1f10\u03ac\u03bd \u03c4\u03b5 \u03b3\u1f70\u03c1 is most easily explained by the\nellipse of a corresponding \u03ba\u03b1\u03af: of several reasons he might adduce,\nPaul adduces only one (Schmiedel).\n\n[85] The ninth verse, \u1f3b\u03bd\u03b1 \u03bc\u1f74 \u03b4\u03cc\u03be\u03c9 \u03ba.\u03c4.\u03bb. is most naturally taken with\nwhat precedes, and most simply explained by supplying something like,\n\"but I say no more about it, _i.e._ about my authority, that I may not\nseem,\" etc. To say more would look like trying to frighten them.\nOthers make it protasis to ver. 11, ver. 10 being then a parenthesis.\n\n[86] The following sentence from a letter of H. E. M. (a sister of\nJames Mozley's) is an interesting illustration of this truth: \"I\nconsider Mr. Rickards as the type and model of a country parish and\ndomestic priest. _All_ his powers and energies are expended on and\nexerted for teaching, preaching, and talking. _Bodily presence is his\nvocation_: unlike some, writers and others, he must be seen to be\nfelt; and unlike others again, writers and others, the more he is\nseen, the more he is felt.\"\n\n[87] See note, p. 311.\n\n\n\n\n XXIV\n\n _GODLY JEALOUSY_\n\n \"Would that ye could bear with me in a little foolishness: nay\n indeed bear with me. For I am jealous over you with a godly\n jealousy: for I espoused you to one husband, that I might present\n you _as_ a pure virgin to Christ. But I fear, lest by any means,\n as the serpent beguiled Eve in his craftiness, your minds should\n be corrupted from the simplicity and the purity that is toward\n Christ. For if he that cometh preacheth another Jesus, whom we did\n not preach, or _if_ ye receive a different spirit, which ye did\n not receive, or a different gospel, which ye did not accept, ye do\n well to bear with _him_. For I reckon that I am not a whit behind\n the very chiefest apostles. But though _I be_ rude in speech, yet\n _am I_ not in knowledge; nay, in everything we have made _it_\n manifest among all men to you-ward.\"--2 COR. xi. 1-6 (R.V.).\n\n\nAll through the tenth chapter there is a conflict in the Apostle's mind.\nHe is repeatedly, as it were, on the verge of doing something, from\nwhich he as often draws back. He does not like to boast--he does not\nlike to speak of himself at all--but the tactics of his enemies, and the\nfaithlessness of the Corinthians, are making it inevitable. In chap. xi.\nhe takes the plunge. He adopts the policy of his adversaries, and\nproceeds to enlarge on his services to the Church; but with magnificent\nirony, he first assumes the mask of a fool. It is not the genuine Paul\nwho figures here; it is Paul playing a part to which he has been\ncompelled against his will, acting in a character which is as remote as\npossible from his own. It is the character native and proper to the\nother side; and when Paul, with due deprecation, assumes it for the\nnonce, he not only preserves his modesty and his self-respect, but lets\nhis opponents see what he thinks of them. He plays the fool for the\noccasion, and of set purpose; they do it always, and without knowing it,\nlike men to the manner born.\n\nBut it is the Corinthians who are directly addressed. \"Would that ye\ncould bear with me in a little foolishness: nay indeed bear with me.\"\nIn the last clause, \u1f00\u03bd\u03ad\u03c7\u03b5\u03c3\u03b8\u03b5 may be either imperative (as the Revised\nVersion gives it in the text), or indicative (as in the margin: \"but\nindeed ye do bear with me\"). The use of \u1f00\u03bb\u03bb\u1f70 rather favours the last;\nand it would be quite in keeping with the extremely ironical tone of\nthe passage to render it so. Even in the First Epistle, Paul had\nreflected on the self-conceit of the Corinthians: \"We are fools for\nChrist's sake, but ye are wise in Christ.\" That self-conceit led them\nto think lightly of him, but not just to cast him off; they still\ntolerated him as a feeble sort of person: \"Ye do indeed bear with me.\"\nBut whichever alternative be preferred, the irony passes swiftly into\nthe dead earnest of the second verse: \"For I am jealous over you with\na godly jealousy: for I espoused you to one husband, that I might\npresent you _as_ a pure virgin to Christ.\"\n\nThis is the ground on which Paul claims their forbearance, even when\nhe indulges in a little \"folly.\" If he is guilty of what seems to them\nextravagance, it is the extravagance of jealousy--_i.e._, of love\ntormented by fear. Nor is it any selfish jealousy, of which he ought\nto be ashamed. He is not anxious about his private or personal\ninterests in the Church. He is not humiliated and provoked because\nhis former pupils have come to their spiritual majority, and asserted\ntheir independence of their master. These are common dangers and\ncommon sins; and every minister needs to be on his guard against them.\nPaul's jealousy over the Corinthians was \"a jealousy of God\"; God had\nput it into his heart, and what it had in view was God's interest in\nthem. It distressed him to think, not that his personal influence at\nCorinth was on the wane, but that the work which God had done in their\nsouls was in danger of being frustrated, the inheritance He had\nacquired in them of being lost. Nothing but God's interest had been in\nthe Apostle's mind from the beginning. \"I betrothed you,\" he says, \"to\n_one_ husband\"--the emphasis lies on _one_--\"that I might present you\nas a pure virgin to Christ.\"[88]\n\nIt is the Church collectively which is represented by the pure virgin,\nand it ought to be observed that this is the constant use in Scripture,\nalike in the Old Testament and the New. It is Israel as a whole which is\nmarried to the Lord; it is the Christian Church as a whole (or a Church\ncollectively, as here) which is the Bride, the Lamb's wife. To\nindividualise the figure, and speak of Christ as the Bridegroom of the\nsoul, is not Scriptural, and almost always misleads. It introduces the\nlanguage and the associations of natural affection into a region where\nthey are entirely out of place; we have no terms of endearment here, and\nshould have none, but high thoughts of the simplicity, the purity, and\nthe glory of the Church. Glory is especially suggested by the idea of\n\"_presenting_\" the Church to Christ. The presentation takes place when\nChrist comes again to be glorified in His saints; that great day shines\nunceasingly in the Apostle's heart, and all he does is done in its\nlight. The infinite issues of fidelity and infidelity to the Lord, as\nthat day makes them manifest, are ever present to his spirit; and it is\nthis which gives such divine intensity to his feelings wherever the\nconduct of Christians is concerned. He sees everything, not as dull eyes\nsee it now, but as Christ in His glory will show it then. And it takes\nnothing less than this to keep the soul absolutely pure and loyal to the\nLord.\n\nThe Apostle explains in the third verse the nature of his alarm. \"I\nfear,\" he says, \"lest by any means, as the serpent beguiled Eve in his\ncraftiness, your minds should be corrupted from the simplicity [and\nthe purity][89] which is toward Christ.\" The whole figure is very\nexpressive. \"Simplicity\" means singleness of mind; the heart of the\n\"pure virgin\" is undivided; she ought not to have, and will not have,\na thought for any but the \"one man\" to whom she is betrothed. \"Purity\"\nagain is, as it were, one species of \"simplicity\"; it is \"simplicity\"\nas shown in the keeping of the whole nature unspotted for the Lord.\nWhat Paul dreads is the spiritual seduction of the Church, the winning\naway of her heart from absolute loyalty to Christ. The serpent\nbeguiled Eve by his craftiness; he took advantage of her unsuspecting\ninnocence to wile her away from her simple belief in God and\nobedience to Him. When she took into her mind the suspicions he\nraised, her \"simplicity\" was gone, and her \"purity\" followed. The\nserpent's agents--the servants of Satan, as Paul calls them in ver.\n15--are at work in Corinth; and he fears that their craftiness may\nseduce the Church from its first simple loyalty to Christ. It is\nnatural for us to take \u1f01\u03c0\u03bb\u03cc\u03c4\u03b7\u03c2 and \u1f01\u03b3\u03bd\u03cc\u03c4\u03b7\u03c2 in a purely ethical sense,\nbut it is by no means certain that this is all that is meant; indeed,\nif \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c4\u1fc6\u03c2 \u1f01\u03b3\u03bd\u03cc\u03c4\u03b7\u03c4\u03bf\u03c2 be a gloss, as seems not improbable, \u1f01\u03c0\u03bb\u03cc\u03c4\u03b7\u03c2 may\nwell have a different application. \"The simplicity which is toward\nChrist,\" from which he fears lest by any means \"their _minds_\" or\n\"_thoughts_\" be corrupted, will rather be their whole-hearted\nacceptance of Christ as Paul conceived of Him and preached Him, their\nunreserved, unquestioning surrender to that form of doctrine (\u03c4\u03cd\u03c0\u03bf\u03bd\n\u03b4\u03b9\u03b4\u03b1\u03c7\u1fc6\u03c2, Rom. vi. 17) to which they had been delivered. This, of\ncourse, in Paul's mind, involved the other--there is no separation of\ndoctrine and practice for him; but it makes a theological rather than\nan ethical interest the predominant one; and this interpretation, it\nseems to me, coheres best with what follows, and with the whole\npreoccupation of the Apostle in this passage. The people whose\ninfluence he feared were not unbelievers, nor were they immoral; they\nprofessed to be Christians, and indeed better Christians than Paul;\nbut their whole conception of the Gospel was at variance with his; if\nthey made way at Corinth, his work would be undone. The Gospel which\nhe preached would no longer have that unsuspicious acceptance; the\nChrist whom he proclaimed would no longer have that unwavering\nloyalty; instead of simplicity and purity, the heart of the \"pure\nvirgin\" would be possessed by misgivings, hesitations, perhaps by\nout-right infidelity; his hope of presenting her to Christ on the\ngreat day would be gone.\n\nThis is what we are led to by ver. 4, one of the most vexed passages\nin the New Testament. The text of the last word is uncertain: some\nread the imperfect \u1f00\u03bd\u03b5\u03af\u03c7\u03b5\u03c3\u03b8\u03b5; others, including our Revisers, the\npresent \u1f00\u03bd\u03ad\u03c7\u03b5\u03c3\u03b8\u03b5. The last is the better attested, and suits best the\nconnexion of thought. The interpretations may be divided into two\nclasses. First, there are those which assume that the suppositions\nmade in this verse are not true. This is evidently the intention in\nour Authorised Version. It renders, \"For if he that cometh preacheth\nanother Jesus, whom we have not preached, or if ye receive another\nspirit, which ye have not received, or another gospel, which ye have\nnot accepted, _ye might well bear with him_.\" But--we must\ninterpolate--nothing of this sort has really taken place; for Paul\ncounts himself not a whit inferior to the very chiefest Apostles. No\none--not even Peter or James or John--could have imparted anything to\nthe Corinthians which Paul had failed to impart; and hence their\nspiritual seduction, no matter how or by whom accomplished, was\nperfectly unreasonable and gratuitous. This interpretation, with\nvariations in detail which need not be pursued, is represented by many\nof the best expositors, from Chrysostom to Meyer. \"If,\" says\nChrysostom in his paraphrase, \"if we had omitted anything that should\nhave been said, and they had made up the omission, we do not forbid\nyou to attend to them. But if everything has been perfectly done on\nour part, and no blank left, how did they [the Apostle's adversaries]\nget hold of you?\" This is the broad result of many discussions; and it\nis usual--though not invariable--for those who read the passage thus\nto take \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u1f51\u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u03bb\u03af\u03b1\u03bd \u1f00\u03c0\u03bf\u03c3\u03c4\u03cc\u03bb\u03c9\u03bd in a complimentary, not a\ncontemptuous, sense, and to refer it, as Chrysostom expressly does, to\nthe three pillars of the primitive Church.\n\nThe objections to this interpretation are obvious enough. There is\nfirst the grammatical objection, that a hypothetical sentence, with\nthe present indicative in the protasis (\u03b5\u1f30 ... \u03ba\u03b7\u03c1\u03cd\u03c3\u03c3\u03b5\u03b9, \u03b5\u1f30 ...\n\u03bb\u03b1\u03bc\u03b2\u03ac\u03bd\u03b5\u03c4\u03b5), and the present indicative in the apodosis (\u1f00\u03bd\u03ad\u03c7\u03b5\u03c3\u03b8\u03b5), can\nby no plausibility of argument be made to mean, \"If the interloper\n_were_ preaching another Jesus ... you _would_ be right to bear with\nhim.\" Even if the imperfect is the true reading, which is improbable,\nthis translation is unjustified.[90] But there is a logical as well as\na grammatical objection. The use of \u03b3\u1f70\u03c1 (\"for\") surely implies that in\nthe sentence which it introduces we are to find the reason for what\nprecedes. Paul is afraid, he has told us, lest the Church should be\nseduced from the one husband to whom he has betrothed her. But he can\nnever mean to explain a _real_ fear by making a number of _imaginary_\nsuppositions; and so we must find in the hypothetical clauses here the\n_real_ grounds of his alarm. People had come to Corinth--\u1f41 \u1f10\u03c1\u03c7\u03cc\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd\u03bf\u03c2\nis no doubt collective, and characterises the troublers of the Church\nas intruders, not native to it, but separable from it--doing all the\nthings here supposed. Paul has espoused the Church to _One_ Husband;\nthey preach _another_ Jesus. Not, of course, a distinct Person, but\ncertainly a distinct conception of the same Person. Paul's Christ was\nthe Son of God, the Lord of Glory, He who by His death on the cross\nbecame Universal Redeemer, and by His ascension Universal Lord--the\nend of the law, the giver of the Spirit; it would be another Jesus if\nthe intruders preached only the Son of David, or the Carpenter of\nNazareth, or the King of Israel. According to the conception of\nChrist, too, would be \"the spirit\" which accompanied this preaching,\nthe characteristic temper and power of the religion it proclaimed. The\nspirit ministered by Paul in his apostolic work was one of power, and\nlove, and, above all things, liberty; it emancipated the soul from\nweakness, from scruples, from moral inability, from slavery to sin and\nlaw; but the spirit generated by the Judaising ministry, the\ncharacteristic temper of the religion it proclaimed, was servile and\ncowardly. It was a spirit of bondage tending always to fear (Rom.\nviii. 15). Their whole gospel--to give their preaching a name it did\nnot deserve (Gal. i. 6-9)--was something entirely unlike Paul's both\nin its ideas and in its spiritual fruits. Unlike--yes, and\nimmeasurably inferior, and yet in spite of this the Corinthians put up\nwith it well enough. This is the plain fact (\u1f00\u03bd\u03ad\u03c7\u03b5\u03c3\u03b8\u03b5) which the\nApostle plainly states. _He_ had to plead for their toleration, but\nthey had no difficulty in tolerating men who by a spurious gospel, an\nunspiritual conception of Christ, and an unworthy incapacity for\nunderstanding freedom, were undermining his work, and seducing their\nsouls. No wonder he was jealous, and angry, and scornful, when he saw\nthe true Christian religion, which has all time and all nations for\nits inheritance, in danger of being degraded into a narrow Jewish\nsectarianism; the kingdom of the Spirit lost in a society in which\nrace gave a prerogative, and carnal ordinances were revived; and,\nworse still, Christ the Son of God, the Universal Reconciler, known\nonly \"after the flesh,\" and appropriated to a race, instead of being\nexalted as Lord of all, in whom there is no room for Greek or Jew,\nbarbarian or Scythian, bond or free. The Corinthians bore with this\nnobly (\u03ba\u03b1\u03bb\u1ff6\u03c2); but he who had begotten them in the true Gospel had to\nbeg them to bear with him.\n\nThere is only one difficulty in this interpretation, and that is not a\nserious one: it is the connexion of ver. 5 with what precedes. Those\nwho connect it immediately with ver. 4 are obliged to supply\nsomething: for example, \"But you _ought_ not to bear with them, for I\nconsider that I am in nothing behind the very chiefest apostles.\" I\nhave no doubt at all that \u1f41\u03b9 \u1f51\u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u03bb\u03af\u03b1\u03bd \u1f00\u03c0\u03cc\u03c3\u03c4\u03bf\u03bb\u03bf\u03b9--the superlative\napostles--are _not_ Peter, James, and John, but the teachers aimed at\nin ver. 4, the \u03c8\u03b5\u03c5\u03b4\u03b1\u03c0\u03cc\u03c3\u03c4\u03bf\u03bb\u03bf\u03b9 of ver. 13; it is with them, and not with\nthe Twelve or the eminent Three, that Paul is comparing himself.[91]\nBut even so, I agree with Weizs\u00e4cker that the connexion for the \u03b3\u1f70\u03c1 in\nver. 5 must be sought further back--as far back, indeed, as ver. 1.\n\"You bear well enough with them, and so you may well bear with me, as\nI beg you to do; for I consider,\" etc. This is effective enough, and\nbrings us back again to the main subject. If there is a point in which\nPaul is willing to his inferiority to these superlative apostles, it\nis the non-essential one of utterance. He grants that he is rude in\nspeech--not rhetorically gifted or trained--a plain, blunt man who\nspeaks right on. But he is not rude in knowledge: in every respect he\nhas made _that_ manifest, among all men, toward them. The last clause\nis hardly intelligible, and the text is insecure.[92] The reading\n\u03c6\u03b1\u03bd\u03b5\u03c1\u03ce\u03c3\u03b1\u03bd\u03c4\u03b5\u03c2 is that of all the critical editors; the object may\neither be indefinite (his competence in point of knowledge), or, more\nprecisely, \u03c4\u1f74\u03bd \u03b3\u03bd\u1ff6\u03c3\u03b9\u03bd itself, supplied from the previous clause. In no\npoint whatever, under no circumstances, has Paul ever failed to\nexhibit to the Corinthians the whole truth of God in the Gospel. This\nit is which makes him scornful even when he thinks of the men whom the\nCorinthians are preferring to himself.\n\nWhen we look from the details of this passage to its scope, some\nreflections are suggested, which have their application still.\n\n(1) Our conception of the Person of Christ determines our conception\nof the whole Christian religion. What we have to proclaim to men as\ngospel--what we have to offer to them as the characteristic temper and\nvirtue of the life which the Gospel originates--depends on the answer\nwe give to Jesus' own question, \"Whom say ye that I am?\" A Christ who\nis simply human cannot be to men what a Christ is who is truly\ndivine. The Gospel identified with Him cannot be the same; the spirit\nof the society which gathers round Him cannot be the same. It is\nfutile to ask whether such a gospel and such a spirit can fairly be\ncalled Christian; they are in point of fact quite other things from\nthe Gospel and the Spirit which are historically associated with the\nname. It is plain from this passage that the Apostle attached the\nutmost importance to his conceptions of the Person and Work of the\nLord: ought not this to give pause to those who evacuate his theology\nof many of its distinctive ideas--especially that of the Pre-existence\nof Christ--on the plea that they are merely theologoumena of an\nindividual Christian, and that to discard them leaves the Gospel\nunaffected? Certainly this was not what he thought. Another Jesus\nmeant another spirit, another gospel--to use modern words, another\nreligion and another religious consciousness; and _any_ other, the\nApostle was perfectly sure, came short of the grandeur of the truth.\nThe spirit of the passage is the same with that in Gal. i. 6 ff.,\nwhere he erects the Gospel he has preached as the standard of absolute\nreligious truth. \"Though we, or an angel from heaven, should preach\nunto you any gospel other than that which we preached unto you, let\nhim be anathema. As we have said before, so say I now again, If any\nman preacheth unto you any gospel other than that which ye received,\nlet him be anathema.\"\n\n(2) \"The simplicity that is toward Christ\"--the simple acceptance of the\ntruth about Him, and undivided loyalty of heart to Him--may be corrupted\nby influences originating within, as well as without, the Church. The\ninfidelity which is subtlest, and most to be dreaded, is not the gross\nmaterialism or atheism which will not so much as hear the name of God\nor Christ; but that which uses all sacred names, speaking readily of\nJesus, the Spirit, and the Gospel, but meaning something else, and\nsomething less, than these words meant in apostolic lips. This it was\nwhich alarmed the jealous love of Paul; this it is, in its insidious\ninfluence, which constitutes one of the most real perils of Christianity\nat the present time. The Jew in the first century, who reduced the\nPerson and Work of Christ to the scale of his national prejudices, and\nthe theologian in the nineteenth, who discounts apostolic ideas when\nthey do not suit the presuppositions of his philosophy, are open to the\nsame suspicion, if they do not fall under the same condemnation. True\nthoughts about Christ--in spite of all the smart sayings about\ntheological subtleties which have nothing to do with piety--are\nessential to the very existence of the Christian religion.\n\n(3) There is no comparison between the Gospel of God in Jesus Christ\nHis Son and any other religion. The science of comparative religion is\ninteresting as a science; but a Christian may be excused for finding\nthe religious use of it tiresome. There is nothing true in any of the\nreligions which is not already in his possession. He never finds a\nmoral idea, a law of the spiritual life, a word of God, in any of\nthem, to which he cannot immediately offer a parallel, far more simple\nand penetrating, from the revelation of Christ. He has no interest in\ndisparaging the light by which millions of his fellow-creatures have\nwalked, generation after generation, in the mysterious providence of\nGod; but he sees no reason for pretending that that light--which\nScripture calls darkness and the shadow of death--can bear comparison\nwith the radiance in which he lives. \"If,\" he might say, misapplying\nthe fourth verse--\"if they brought us another saviour, another\nspirit, another gospel, we might be religiously interested in them;\nbut, as it is, we have everything already, and they, in comparison,\nhave nothing.\" The same remark applies to \"theosophy,\" \"spiritualism,\"\nand other \"gospels.\" It will be time to take them seriously when they\nutter one wise or true word on God or the soul which is not an echo of\nsomething in the old familiar Scriptures.\n\nFOOTNOTES:\n\n[88] \"Woods, trees, meadows, and hills are my witnesses that I drew on\na fair match betwixt Christ and Anwoth.\"--S. RUTHERFORD.\n\n[89] The words \u03ba\u03b1\u1f76 \u03c4\u1fc6\u03c2 \u1f01\u03b3\u03bd\u03cc\u03c4\u03b7\u03c4\u03bf\u03c2 are bracketed by Westcott and Hort.\nThey are very strongly attested (by \u05d0, B, F, gr., G, etc.); but as\nthey are found in some authorities _before_, instead of _after_, \u03c4\u1fc6\u03c2\n\u1f01\u03c0\u03bb\u03cc\u03c4\u03b7\u03c4\u03bf\u03c2, it is not improbable that they may be a gloss on these last\nwords, suggested by \u1f01\u03b3\u03bd\u1f74\u03bd in ver. 2, and incorporated in the text.\nThey rather blur than emphasise the thought.\n\n[90] It is worth appending two ingenious notes on this. Bengel, who\nholds that the suppositions are untrue, says: \"Ponit conditionem, ex\nparte rei, impossibilem; ideo dicit in imperfecto _toleraretis_: sed\npro conatu pseudo-apostolorum, non modo possibilem, sed plane\npr\u00e6sentem; ideo dicit in pr\u00e6senti, _pr\u00e6dicat_.\" Schmiedel, who holds\nthat the suppositions are true, explains the impft. by saying that\nPaul resolved, while dictating, to add the apodosis _in the historical\ntense_ to the timeless protasis, because the fact which it described\nactually lay before him. They _were tolerating_ the other teachers:\nthat is why Paul says \u1f00\u03bd\u03b5\u03af\u03c7\u03b5\u03c3\u03b8\u03b5. He happily compares Plato, _Apol._,\n33 A.: \u0395\u1f30 \u03b4\u03ad \u03c4\u03af\u03c2 \u03bc\u03bf\u03c5 \u03bb\u03ad\u03b3\u03bf\u03bd\u03c4\u03bf\u03c2 ... \u1f10\u03c0\u03b9\u03b8\u03c5\u03bc\u03b5\u1fd6 \u1f00\u03ba\u03bf\u03cd\u03b5\u03b9\u03bd ... \u03bf\u1f50\u03b4\u03b5v\u1f76 \u03c0\u03ce\u03c0\u03bf\u03c4\u03b5\n\u1f10\u03c6\u03b8\u03cc\u03bd\u03b7\u03c3\u03b1. Still, he prefers the present.\n\n[91] It is gratuitous to drag in a reference to the first Apostles,\nand then to suppose the Corinthians drawing the inference--\"if he is\nnot inferior to them, still less is he inferior to our new teachers.\"\nSuch an inference depends on a traditional conception of apostleship\nwhich the Corinthians were not likely to share, and it is equally\nunnecessary and improbable.\n\n[92] Probably either \u1f10\u03bd \u03c0\u03b1\u03bd\u03c4\u1f76 or \u1f10\u03bd \u03c0\u1fb6\u03c3\u03b9\u03bd, the latter of which is\nomitted in some authorities, is a gloss.\n\n\n\n\n XXV\n\n _FOOLISH BOASTING_\n\n \"Or did I commit a sin in abasing myself that ye might be exalted,\n because I preached to you the Gospel of God for nought? I robbed\n other Churches, taking wages _of them_ that I might minister unto\n you; and when I was present with you and was in want, I was not a\n burden on any man; for the brethren, when they came from\n Macedonia, supplied the measure of my want; and in everything I\n kept myself from being burdensome unto you, and _so_ will I keep\n _myself_. As the truth of Christ is in me, no man shall stop me of\n this glorying in the regions of Achaia. Wherefore? because I love\n you not? God knoweth. But what I do, that I will do, that I may\n cut off occasion from them which desire an occasion; that wherein\n they glory, they may be found even as we. For such men are false\n apostles, deceitful workers, fashioning themselves into apostles\n of Christ. And no marvel; for even Satan fashioneth himself into\n an angel of light. It is no great thing therefore if his ministers\n also fashion themselves as ministers of righteousness; whose end\n shall be according to their works.\n\n \"I say again, Let no man think me foolish; but if _ye do_, yet as\n foolish receive me, that I also may glory a little. That which I\n speak, I speak not after the Lord, but as in foolishness, in this\n confidence of glorying. Seeing that many glory after the flesh, I\n will glory also. For ye bear with the foolish gladly, being wise\n _yourselves_. For ye bear with a man, if he bringeth you into\n bondage, if he devoureth you, if he taketh you _captive_, if he\n exalteth himself, if he smiteth you on the face. I speak by way of\n disparagement, as though we had been weak. Yet whereinsoever any\n is bold (I speak in foolishness), I am bold also. Are they\n Hebrews? so am I. Are they Israelites? so am I. Are they the seed\n of Abraham? so am I. Are they ministers of Christ? (I speak as one\n beside himself) I more; in labours more abundantly, in prisons\n more abundantly, in stripes above measure, in deaths oft. Of the\n Jews five times received I forty _stripes_ save one. Thrice was I\n beaten with rods, once was I stoned, thrice I suffered shipwreck,\n a night and a day have I been in the deep; _in_ journeyings\n often, _in_ perils of rivers, _in_ perils of robbers, _in_ perils\n from _my_ countrymen, _in_ perils from the Gentiles, _in_ perils\n in the city, _in_ perils in the wilderness, _in_ perils in the\n sea, _in_ perils among false brethren; _in_ labour and travail, in\n watchings often, in hunger and thirst, in fastings often, in cold\n and nakedness. Beside those things that are without, there is that\n which presseth upon me daily, anxiety for all the Churches. Who is\n weak, and I am not weak? who is made to stumble, and I burn\n not?\"--2 COR. xi. 7-29 (R.V.).\n\n\nThe connexion of ver. 7 with what precedes is not at once clear. The\nApostle has expressed his conviction that he is in nothing inferior to\n\"the superlative apostles\" so greatly honoured by the Corinthians.\nWhy, then, is he so differently treated? A rudeness in speech he is\nwilling to concede, but that can hardly be the explanation,\nconsidering his fulness of knowledge. Then another idea strikes him,\nand he puts it, interrogatively, as an alternative. Can it be that he\ndid wrong--humbling himself that they might be exalted--in preaching\nto them the Gospel of God for nought, _i.e._ in declining to accept\nsupport from them while he evangelised in Corinth? Do they appreciate\nthe interlopers more highly than Paul, because they exact a price for\ntheir gospel, while he preached his for nothing? This, of course, is\nbitterly ironical; but it is not gratuitous. The background of fact\nwhich prompted the Apostle's question was no doubt this--that his\nadversaries had misinterpreted his conduct. A true apostle, they said,\nhas a right to be maintained by the Church; the Lord Himself has\nordained that they who preach the Gospel should live by the Gospel;\nbut he claims no maintenance, and by that very fact betrays a bad\nconscience. He dare not make the claim which every true apostle makes\nwithout the least misgiving.\n\nIt would be hard to imagine anything more malignant in its wickedness\nthan this. Paul's refusal to claim support from those to whom he\npreached is one of the most purely and characteristically Christian of\nall his actions. He felt himself, by the grace of Christ, a debtor to\nall men; he owed them the Gospel; it was as if he were defrauding them\nif he did not tell them of the love of God in His Son. He felt himself\nin immense sympathy with the spirit of the Gospel; it was the free\ngift of God to the world, and as far as it depended on him its\nabsolute freeness would not be obscured by the merest suspicion of a\nprice to be paid. He knew that in foregoing his maintenance he was\nresigning a right secured to him by Christ (1 Cor. ix. 14), humbling\nhimself, as he puts it here, that others might be spiritually exalted;\nbut he had the joy of preaching the Gospel in the spirit of the\nGospel--of entering, in Christ's service, into the self-sacrificing\njoy of his Lord; and he valued this above all earthly reward. To\naccuse such a man, on such grounds, of having a bad conscience, and of\nbeing afraid to live by his work, because he knew it was not what it\npretended to be, was to sound the depths of baseness. It gave Paul in\nsome measure the Master's experience, when the Pharisees said, \"He\ncasteth out devils by Beelzebub, the prince of the devils.\" It is\nreally the prince of the devils, the accuser of the brethren, who\nspeaks in all such malignant insinuations; it is the most diabolical\nthing any one can do--the nearest approach to sinning against the Holy\nGhost--when he sets himself to find out bad motives for good actions.\n\nAs we shall see further on, Paul's enemies made more specific charges:\nthey hinted that he made his own out of the Corinthians indirectly, and\nthat he could indemnify himself, for this abstinence, from the\ncollection (chaps. xii. 16-18, chap. viii. and ix.). Perhaps this is why\nhe describes his actual conduct at Corinth in such vigorous language\n(vv. 7-11), before saying anything at all of his motives. \"I preached to\nyou the Gospel of God,\" he says, \"for nothing.\" He calls it \"the Gospel\nof God\" with intentional fulness and solemnity; the genuine Gospel, he\nmeans--not another, which is no gospel at all, but a subversion of the\ntruth. He robbed other Churches, and took wages from them, in order to\nminister to the Corinthians. There is a mingling of ideas in the strong\nwords here used. The English reader thinks of Paul's doing less than\njustice to other Churches that he might do more than justice to the\nCorinthians; but though this is true, it is not all. Both \"robbed\"\n(\u1f10\u03c3\u03cd\u03bb\u03b7\u03c3\u03b1) and \"wages\" (\u1f40\u03c8\u03ce\u03bd\u03b9\u03bf\u03bd), as Bengel has pointed out, are military\nwords, and it is difficult to resist the impression that Paul used them\nas such; he did not come to Corinth to be dependent on any one, but in\nthe course of a triumphant progress, in which he devoted the spoils of\nhis earlier victories for Christ to a new campaign in Achaia.[93] Nay,\neven when he was with them and was \"in want\" (what a ray of light that\none word \u1f51\u03c3\u03c4\u03b5\u03c1\u03b7\u03b8\u03b5\u03af\u03c2 lets into his circumstances!), he did not throw\nhimself like a benumbing weight on any one; what his own labours failed\nto supply, the brethren (perhaps Silas and Timothy) made good when they\ncame from Macedonia. This has been his practice, and will continue to be\nso. He swears by the truth of Christ that is in him, that no man shall\never stop his mouth, so far as boasting of this independence is\nconcerned, in the regions of Achaia. Why? His tender heart dismisses the\none painful supposition which could possibly arise. \"Because I love you\nnot? God knoweth.\" Love is wounded when its proffered gifts are rejected\nwith scorn, and when _their_ rejection means that _it_ is rejected; but\nthat was not the situation here. Paul can appeal to Him who knows the\nheart in proof of the sincerity with which he loves the Corinthians.\n\nHis fixed purpose to be indebted to no one in Achaia has another\nobject in view. What that is he explains in the twelfth verse. Strange\nto say, this verse, like ver. 4, has received two precisely opposite\ninterpretations. (1) Some start with the idea that Paul's adversaries\nat Corinth were persons who took no support from the Church, and\nboasted of their disinterestedness in this respect. The \"occasion\"\nwhich they desired was an occasion of any sort for disparaging and\ndiscrediting Paul; and they felt they would have such an occasion if\nPaul accepted support from the Church, and so put himself in a\nposition of inferiority to them. But Paul persists in his self-denying\npolicy, with the object of depriving them of the opportunity they\nseek, and at the same time of proving them--in this very point of\ndisinterestedness--to be in exactly the same position as himself. But\nsurely, throughout both Epistles, a contrast is implied, in this very\npoint, between Paul and his opponents: the tacit assumption is always\nthat his line of conduct is singular, and is not to be made a rule.\nAnd in the face of ver. 20 it is too much to assume that it was the\nrule of his Judaising opponents in Corinth. (2) Others start with the\nidea, which seems to me indubitably right, that these opponents did\naccept support from the Church. But even on this assumption opinions\ndiverge. (_a_) Some argue that Paul pursued his policy of abstinence\npartly to deprive them of any opportunity of disparaging him, and\npartly to compel them to adopt it themselves (\"that they may be found\neven as we\").[94] I can hardly imagine this being taken seriously. Why\nshould Paul have wanted to lift these preachers of a false gospel to a\nlevel with himself in point of generosity? To coerce them into a\nreluctant self-denial could be no possible object to him either of\nwish or hope. Hence there seems only (_b_) the other alternative open,\nwhich makes the last clause--\"that wherein they boast, they may be\nfound even as we\"--depend, not upon \"what I do, that I will do,\" but\nupon \"them that desire occasion.\"[95] What the adversaries desired\nwas, not occasion to disparage Paul in general, but occasion of being\non an equality with him in the matter in which they gloried--viz.,\ntheir apostolic claims. They felt the advantage which Paul's\ndisinterestedness gave him with the Corinthians; they had not\nthemselves the generosity needed to imitate it; it was not enough to\nassail it with covert slanders (chap. xii. 16-18), or to say that he\nwas afraid to claim an apostle's due; it would have been all they\nwanted had he resigned it. Then they could have said that in that in\nwhich they boasted--apostolic dignity--they were precisely on a level\nwith him. But not to mention the spiritual motives for his conduct,\nwhich have been already explained, and were independent of all\nrelation to his opponents, Paul was too capable a strategist to\nsurrender such a position to the enemy. It would never be by action\nof his that he and they found themselves on the same ground.\n\nAt the very mention of such an equality his heart rises within him.\n\"Found even as we! Why, such men are false apostles, deceitful workers,\nfashioning themselves into apostles of Christ.\" Here, at last, the irony\nis cast aside, and Paul calls a spade a spade. The conception of\napostleship in the New Testament is not that dogmatic traditional one,\nwhich limits the name to the Twelve, or to the Twelve and the Apostle of\nthe Gentiles; as we see from passages like chap. viii. 23, Acts xiv. 4,\n14, it had a much larger application. What Paul means when he calls his\nopponents false apostles is not that persons _in their position_ could\nhave no right to the name; but that persons _with their character_,\ntheir aims, and their methods, would only deceive others when they used\nit. It ought to cover something quite different from what it actually\ndid cover in them. He explains himself further when he calls them\n\"deceitful workers.\" That they were active he does not deny; but the\ntrue end of their activity was not declared. As far as the word itself\ngoes, the \"deceit\" which they used may have been intended to cloak\neither their personal or their proselytising views. After what we have\nread in chap. x. 12-18, the latter seems preferable. The Judaising\npreachers had shown their hand in Galatia, demanding openly that Paul's\nconverts should be circumcised, and keep the law of Moses as a whole;\nbut their experience there had made them cautious, and when they came to\nCorinth they proceeded more diplomatically. They tried to sap the\nPauline Gospel, partly by preaching \"another Jesus,\" partly by calling\nin question the legitimacy of Paul's vocation. They said nothing openly\nof what was the inevitable and intended issue of all this--the bringing\nof spiritual Gentile Christendom under the old Jewish yoke. But it is\nthis which goes to the Apostle's soul; he can be nothing but\nirreconcilably hostile to men who have assumed the guise of apostles of\nChrist, in order that they may with greater security subvert Christ's\ncharacteristic work. Paul dwells on the deceitfulness of their conduct\nas its most offensive feature; yet he does not wonder at it, for even\nSatan, he says, fashions himself into an angel of light. It is no great\nthing, then, if his servants also fashion themselves as servants of\nrighteousness.\n\nWe can only tell in a general way what Paul meant when he spoke of\nSatan, the prince of darkness, transfiguring himself so as to appear a\nheavenly angel. He may have had some Jewish legend in his mind, some\nstory of a famous temptation, unknown to us, or he may only have\nintended to represent to the imagination, with the utmost possible\nvividness, one of the familiar laws in our moral experience, a law\nwhich was strikingly illustrated by the conduct of his adversaries at\nCorinth. Evil, we all know, could never tempt us if we saw it simply\nas it is; disguise is essential to its power; it appeals to man\nthrough ideas and hopes which he cannot but regard as good. So it was\nin the very first temptation. An act which in its essential character\nwas neither more nor less than one of direct disobedience to God was\nrepresented by the tempter, not in that character, but as the means by\nwhich man was to obtain possession of a tree good for food (sensual\nsatisfaction), and pleasant to the eyes (\u00e6sthetic satisfaction), and\ndesirable to make one wise (intellectual satisfaction). All these\nsatisfactions, which in themselves are undeniably good, were the\ncloak under which the tempter hid his true features. He was a murderer\nfrom the beginning, and entered Eden to ruin man, but he presented\nhimself as one offering to man a vast enlargement of life and joy.\nThis is the nature of all temptations; to disguise himself, to look as\nlike a good angel as he can, is the first necessity, and therefore the\nfirst invention, of the devil. And all who do his work, the Apostle\nsays, naturally imitate his devices. The soul of man is born for good,\nand will not listen at all to any voice which does not profess at\nleast to speak for good: this is why the devil is a liar from the\nbeginning, and the father of lies. Lying in word and deed is the one\nweapon with which he can assail the simplicity of man.\n\nBut how does this apply to the Judaisers in Corinth? To Paul, we must\nunderstand, they were men affecting to serve Christ, but really\nimpelled by personal, or at the utmost by partisan, feelings. Their\ntrue object was to win an ascendency for themselves, or for their\nparty, in the Church; but they made their way into it as evangelists\nand apostles. Nominally, they were ministers of Christ; really, they\nministered to their own vanity, and to the bigotry and prejudices of\ntheir race. They professed to be furthering the cause of\nrighteousness,[96] but in sober truth the only cause which was the\nbetter for them was that of their own private importance; the result\nof their ministry was, not that bad men became good, but that they\nthemselves felt entitled to give themselves airs. Over against all\nthis unreality Paul remembers the righteous judgment of God. \"Whose\nend,\" he concludes abruptly, \"shall be according to their works.\"\n\nThe most serious aspect of such a situation as this is seen when we\nconsider that men may fill it unconsciously: they may devote\nthemselves to a cause which looks like the cause of Christ, or the\ncause of righteousness; and at bottom it may not be Christ or\nrighteousness at all which is the animating principle in their hearts.\nIt is some hidden regard to themselves, or to a party with which they\nare identified. Even when they labour, and possibly suffer, it is\nthis, and not loyalty to Christ, which sustains them. It may be in\ndefence of orthodoxy, or in furtherance of liberalism, that a man puts\nhimself forward in the Church, and in either case he will figure to\nthose who agree with him as a servant of righteousness; but equally in\neither case the secret spring of his action may be pride, the desire\nto assert a superiority, to consolidate a party which is his larger\nself, to secure an area in which he may rule. He may spend energy and\ntalent on the work; but if this is the ultimate motive of it, it is\nthe work of the devil, and not of God. Even if the doctrine he defends\nis the true one--even if the policy he maintains is the right one--the\nservices he may accidentally render are far outweighed by the\ndomestication in the Church of a spirit so alien to the Lord's. It is\ndiabolical, not divine; the Gospel is profaned by contact with it; the\nChurch is prostituted when it serves as an arena for its exercise;\nwhen it comes forward in the interest of righteousness, it is Satan\nfashioning himself into an angel of light.\n\nAt this point Paul returns to the idea which has been in his mind\nsince chap. x. 7--the idea of boasting, or rather glorying. He does\nnot like the thing itself, and just as little does he like the mask of\na fool, under which he is to play the part: he is conscious that\nneither suits him. Hence he clears the ground once more, before he\ncommits himself. \"Again, I say, let no man think that I _am_ foolish;\nbut if that favour cannot be granted, then even as a foolish person\nreceive me, that I also may boast a little.\" There is a fine satirical\nreflection in the \"also.\" If he does make a fool of himself by\nboasting, he is only doing what the others do, whom the Corinthians\nreceive with open arms. But it strikes his conscience suddenly that\nthere is a higher rule for the conduct of a Christian man than the\nexample of his rivals, or the patience of his friends. The tenderness\nof Paul's spirit comes out in the next words: \"What I speak, I speak\n_not after the Lord_, but as in foolishness, in this confidence of\nglorying.\" The Lord never boasted; nothing could be conceived less\nlike Him, less after His mind; and Paul will have it distinctly\nunderstood that _His_ character is not compromised by any extravagance\nof which His servant may here make himself guilty. As a rule, the\nApostle did speak \"after the Lord\"; his habitual consciousness was\nthat of one who had \"the mind of Christ,\" and who felt that Christ's\ncharacter was, in a sense, in his keeping. That ought to be the rule\nfor all Christians; we should never find ourselves in situations in\nwhich the Christian character, with all its responsibilities,\naffecting both ourselves and Him, cannot be maintained. With Christ\nand His interests removed from the scene, Paul at length feels\nhimself free to measure himself against his rivals. \"Since many glory\nafter the flesh, I also will glory.\" The flesh means everything except\nthe spirit. Where Christ and the Gospel are concerned, it is,\naccording to Paul, an absolute irrelevance, a thing to be simply left\nout of account; but since they persist in dragging it in, he will meet\nthem on their own ground. What that is, first comes out clearly in\nver. 22: but the Apostle delays again to urge his plea for tolerance.\n\"Ye suffer the foolish gladly, being wise yourselves.\" It answers best\nto the vehemence of the whole passage to take the first clause\nhere--\"Ye suffer the foolish gladly\"--as grim earnest, the reference\nbeing to the other boasters, Paul's rivals; and only the second clause\nironically. Then ver. 20 would give the proof of this: \"Ye bear with\nthe foolish gladly ... for ye bear with a man if he enslaves you, if\nhe devours you, if he takes you captive, if he exalts himself over\nyou, if he strikes you on the face.\" We must suppose that this strong\nlanguage describes the overbearing and violent behaviour of the\nJudaists in Corinth. We do not need to take it literally, but neither\nmay we suppose that Paul spoke at random: he is virtually contrasting\nhis own conduct and that of the people in question, and the nature of\nthe contrast must be on the whole correctly indicated. He himself had\nbeen accused of weakness; and he frankly admits that, if comparison\nhas to be made with a line of action like this, the accusation is\njust. \"I speak by way of disparagement, as though we had been weak.\"\nThis rendering of the Revised Version fairly conveys the meaning. It\nmight be expressed in a paraphrase, as follows: \"In saying what I have\nsaid of the behaviour of my rivals, I have been speaking to my own\ndisparagement, the idea involved[97] being that _I_\" (notice the\nemphatic \u1f21\u03bc\u03b5\u1fd6\u03c2) \"have been weak. Weak, no doubt, I was, if violent\naction like theirs is the true measure of strength: nevertheless,\nwhereinsoever any is bold (I speak in foolishness), I am bold also. On\nwhatever ground they claim to exercise such extraordinary powers, that\nground I can maintain as well as they.\"\n\nHere, finally, the boasting does begin. \"Are they Hebrews? so am I.\nAre they Israelites? so am I. Are they the seed of Abraham? so am I.\"\nThis is the sum and substance of what is meant by their glorying after\nthe flesh: they prided themselves on their birth, and claimed\nauthority on the strength of it. They may have appealed, not only to\nthe election of Israel as the Old Testament represents it, but to\nwords of Jesus, like \"Salvation is of the Jews.\" The three names for\nwhat is in reality one thing convey the impression of the immense\nimportance which was assigned to it. \"Hebrews\" seems the least\nsignificant; it is merely the _national_ name, with whatever\nhistorical glories attached to it in Hebrew minds. \"Israelites\" is a\n_sacred_ name; it is identified with the prerogatives of the\ntheocratic people: Paul himself, when his heart swells with patriotic\nemotion, begins the enumeration of the privileges belonging to his\nkinsmen after the flesh--\"they, who are Israelites.\" \"Seed of\nAbraham,\" again, is for the Apostle, and probably for these rivals of\nhis, equivalent to \"heirs of the promises\"; it describes the Jewish\npeople as more directly and immediately interested--nay, as alone\ndirectly and immediately interested--in the salvation of God. No one\ncould read Rom. ix. 4 f. without feeling that pride of race--pride in\nhis people, and in their special relation to God and special place in\nthe history of redemption--was among the strongest passions in the\nApostle's heart; and we can understand the indignation and scorn with\nwhich he regarded men who tracked him over Asia and Europe, assailed\nhis authority, and sought to undermine his work, on the ground that he\nwas faithless to the lawful prerogatives of Israel. There was not an\nIsraelite in the world prouder of his birth, with a more magnificent\nsense of his country's glories, than the Apostle of the Gentiles: and\nit provoked him beyond endurance to see the things in which he gloried\ndebased, as they were debased, by his rivals--made the symbols of a\npaltry vanity which he despised, made barriers to the universal love\nof God by which all the families of the earth were to be blessed.\nDriven to extremity, he could only outlaw such opponents from the\nChristian community, and transfer the prerogatives of Israel to the\nChurch. \"_We_,\" he taught his Gentile converts to say--\"_we are the\ncircumcision_, who worship by the Spirit of God, and rejoice in Christ\nJesus, _and have no confidence in the flesh_\" (Phil. iii. 3).\n\nHere he does not linger long over what is merely external. It is a\ndeeper question that he asks in ver. 23, \"Are they ministers of\nChrist?\" and he feels like a man beside himself, clean out of his\nsenses (\u03c0\u03b1\u03c1\u03b1\u03c6\u03c1\u03bf\u03bd\u1ff6\u03bd)--so unsuitable is the subject for boasting--as he\nanswers, \"I more.\" Many interpret this as if it meant, \"I am more than\na servant of Christ,\" and then ask wonderingly, \"What more?\" but\nsurely the natural meaning is, \"I am a servant too, in a higher\ndegree.\" The proof of this is given in that tale of sufferings which\nbursts irrepressibly from the Apostle's heart, and sweeps us in its\ncourse like a torrent. If he thought of his rivals when he began, and\nwas instituting a serious comparison when he wrote \"in labours _more\nabundantly_ [than they],\" they must soon have escaped from his mind.\nIt is his own life as a minister of Christ on which he dwells; and\nafter the first words, if a comparison is to be made, he leaves the\nmaking of it to others. But comparison, in fact, was out of the\nquestion: the sufferings of the Apostle in doing service to Christ\nwere unparalleled and alone. The few lines which he devotes to them\nare the most vivid light we have on the apostolic age and the\napostolic career. They show how fragmentary, or at all events how\nselect, is the narrative in the Book of Acts. Thus of the incidents\nmentioned in ver. 25 we learn but little from St. Luke. Of the five\ntimes nine-and-thirty stripes, he mentions none; of the three beatings\nwith rods, only one; of the three shipwrecks, none (for Acts xxvii. is\nlater), and nothing of the twenty-four hours in the deep. It is not\nnecessary to comment on details, but one cannot resist the impression\nof triumph with which Paul recounts the \"perils\" he had faced; so many\nthey were, so various, and so terrible, yet in the Lord's service he\nhas come safely through them all. It is a commentary from his own hand\non his own word--\"as dying, and, behold, we live!\" In the retrospect\nall these perils show, not only that he is a true servant of Christ,\nentering into the fellowship of his Master's sufferings to bring\nblessing to men, but that he is owned by Christ as such: the Lord has\ndelivered him from deaths so great; yes, and will deliver him; and his\nhope is set on Him for every deliverance he may need (chap. i. 10).\n\nBut, after all, these perils are but outward, and the very\nenumeration of them shows that they are things of the past. In all\ntheir kinds and degrees--violence, privation, exposure, fear--they are\na historical testimony to the devotion with which Paul has served\nChrist. He bore in his body the marks which they had left, and to him\nthey were the marks of Jesus; they identified him as Christ's slave.\nBut not to mention incidental matters,[98] there is another testimony\nto his ministry which is ever with him--a burden as crushing as these\nbodily sufferings, and far more constant in its pressure: \"that which\ncometh upon me daily, anxiety for all the Churches.\" Short of this,\nanything of which man can boast may be, at least in a qualified sense,\n\"after the flesh\"; but in this identification of himself with Christ's\ncause in the world--this bearing of others' burdens on his\nspirit--there is that fulfilment of Christ's law which alone and\nfinally legitimates a Christian ministry. Nor was it merely in an\nofficial sense that Paul was interested in the affairs of the Church.\nWhen the Church is once planted in the world, it has a side which is\nof the world, a side which may be administered without a very heavy\nexpenditure of Christian feeling: this, it is safe to say, is simply\nout of sight. Paul's anxiety for the Churches is defined in all its\nscope and intensity in the passionate words of the twenty-ninth verse:\n\"Who is weak, and I am not weak? Who is made to stumble, and I burn\nnot?\" His love individualised Christian people, and made him one with\nthem. There was no trembling timorous soul, no scrupulous conscience,\nin all the communities he had founded, whose timidity and weakness did\nnot put a limit to his strength: he condescended to their\nintelligence, feeding them with milk, and not with meat; he measured\nhis liberty, not in principle but in practice, by their bondage; his\nheart thrilled with their fears; in the fulness of his Christ-like\nstrength he lived a hundred feeble lives. And when spiritual harm came\nto one of them--when the very least was made to stumble, and was\ncaught in the snare of falsehood or sin--the pain in his heart was\nlike burning fire. The sorrow that pierced the soul of Christ pierced\nhis soul also; the indignation that glowed in the Master's breast, as\nHe pronounced woe on the man by whom occasions of stumbling come,\nglowed again in him. This is the fire that Christ came to cast on the\nearth, and that He longed to see kindled--this prompt intense sympathy\nwith all that is of God in men's souls, this readiness to be weak with\nthe weak, this pain and indignation when the selfishness or pride of\nmen leads the weak astray, and imperils the work for which Christ\ndied. And this is indeed the Apostle's last line of defence. Nowhere\ncould boasting be less in place than when a man speaks of the lessons\nhe has learned at the Cross: yet these only give him a title to glory\nas \"a minister of Christ.\" If glorying _here_ is inadmissible, it is\nbecause glorying in every sense is \"folly.\"\n\nFOOTNOTES:\n\n[93] This (observe the aorist \u03bb\u03b1\u03b2\u03ce\u03bd) implies that he brought some\nmoney with him from Macedonia to Corinth.\n\n[94] That is, the two \u1f35\u03bd\u03b1 are co-ordinate.\n\n[95] That is, the \u1f35\u03bd\u03b1 are not co-ordinate, but the second is\nsubordinate to \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u03b8\u03b5\u03bb\u03cc\u03bd\u03c4\u03c9\u03bd \u1f00\u03c6\u03bf\u03c1\u03bc\u03ae\u03bd.\n\n[96] There has been some discussion as to the precise force of\n\u03b4\u03b9\u03ba\u03b1\u03b9\u03bf\u03c3\u03cd\u03bd\u03b7 (\"righteousness\") in this place. It seems to me most\nnatural to take it, without suspicion, in a perfectly simple sense: a\nminister of righteousness is the truly good character which these bad\nmen affect. To suppose a covert sneer at their \"legalism,\" or that\nthey had pointed to such matters as are discussed in 1 Cor. v., viii.,\nand x., as indicating the need of a gospel which would pay more\nattention to righteousness than Paul's, is surely too clever.\n\n[97] This is the force of the \u1f61\u03c2: it leaves it open whether the idea\nhas reality answering to it or not.\n\n[98] This, which is the second alternative given in the margin of the\nRevised Version, seems to me the true meaning of \u03c7\u03c9\u03c1\u1f76\u03c2 \u03c4\u1ff6\u03bd \u03c0\u03b1\u03c1\u03b5\u03ba\u03c4\u03cc\u03c2.\n\n\n\n\n XXVI\n\n _STRENGTH AND WEAKNESS_\n\n \"If I must needs glory, I will glory of the things that concern my\n weakness. The God and Father of the Lord Jesus, He who is blessed\n for evermore, knoweth that I lie not. In Damascus the governor under\n Aretas the king guarded the city of the Damascenes, in order to take\n me: and through a window was I let down in a basket by the wall, and\n escaped his hands.\n\n \"I must needs glory, though it is not expedient; but I will come to\n visions and revelations of the Lord. I know a man in Christ,\n fourteen years ago (whether in the body, I know not; or whether out\n of the body, I know not; God knoweth), such a one caught up even to\n the third heaven. And I know such a man (whether in the body, or\n apart from the body, I know not; God knoweth), how that he was\n caught up into Paradise, and heard unspeakable words, which it is\n not lawful for a man to utter. On behalf of such a one will I glory:\n but on mine own behalf I will not glory, save in _my_ weaknesses.\n For if I should desire to glory, I shall not be foolish; for I shall\n speak the truth: but I forbear, lest any man should account of me\n above that which he seeth me _to be_, or heareth from me. And by\n reason of the exceeding greatness of the revelations--wherefore,\n that I should not be exalted overmuch, there was given to me a thorn\n in the flesh, a messenger of Satan to buffet me, that I should not\n be exalted overmuch. Concerning this thing I besought the Lord\n thrice, that it might depart from me. And He hath said unto me, My\n grace is sufficient for thee: for _My_ power is made perfect in\n weakness. Most gladly therefore will I rather glory in my\n weaknesses, that the strength of Christ may rest upon me. Wherefore\n I take pleasure in weaknesses, in injuries, in necessities, in\n persecutions, in distresses, for Christ's sake: for when I am weak,\n then am I strong.\"--2 COR. xi. 30-xii. 10 (R.V.).\n\n\nThe difficulties of exposition in this passage are partly connected\nwith its form, partly with its substance: it will be convenient to\ndispose of the formal side first. The thirtieth verse of the eleventh\nchapter--\"If I must needs glory, I will glory of the things that\nconcern my weakness\"--seems to serve two purposes. On the one hand, it\nis a natural and effective climax to all that precedes; it defines the\nprinciple on which Paul has acted in the glorying of vv. 23-29. It is\nnot of exploits that he is proud, but of perils and sufferings; not of\nwhat he has achieved, but of what he has endured, for Christ's sake;\nin a word, not of strength, but of weakness. On the other hand, this\nsame thirtieth verse indubitably points forward; it defines the\nprinciple on which Paul will always act where boasting is in view; and\nit is expressly resumed in chap. xii., ver. 5 and ver. 9. For this\nreason, it seems better to treat it as a text than as a peroration; it\nis the key to the interpretation of what follows, put into our hands\nby the Apostle himself. In the full consciousness of its dangers and\ninconveniences, he means to go a little further in this foolish\nboasting; but he takes security, as far as possible, against its moral\nperils, by choosing as the ground of boasting things which in the\ncommon judgment of men would only bring him shame.\n\nAt this point we are startled by a sudden appeal to God, the solemnity\nand fulness of which strike us, on a first reading, as almost\npainfully gratuitous. \"The God and Father of the Lord Jesus, He who is\nblessed for ever, knoweth that I lie not.\" What is the explanation of\nthis extraordinary earnestness? There is a similar passage in Gal. i.\n19--\"Now touching the things which I write unto you, behold, before\nGod, I lie not\"--where Lightfoot says the strength of the Apostle's\nlanguage is to be explained by the unscrupulous calumnies cast upon\nhim by his enemies. This _may_ be the clue to his vehemence here; and\nin point of fact it falls in with by far the most ingenious\nexplanation that has been given of the two subjects introduced in this\nparagraph. The explanation I refer to is that of Heinrici. He supposes\nthat Paul's escape from Damascus, and his visions and revelations, had\nbeen turned to account against him by his rivals. They had used the\nescape to accuse him of ignominious cowardice: the indignity of it is\nobvious enough. His visions and revelations were as capable of\nmisconstruction: it was easy to call them mere illusions, signs of a\ndisordered brain; it was not too much for malice to hint that his call\nto apostleship rested on nothing better than one of these ecstatic\nhallucinations. It is because things so dear to him are attacked--his\nreputation for personal courage, which is the mainstay of all the\nvirtues; his actual vision of Christ, and divinely authorised\nmission--that he makes the vehement appeal that startles us at first.\nHe calls God to witness that in regard to both these subjects he is\ngoing to tell the exact truth: the truth will be his sufficient\ndefence. Ingenious as it is, I do not think this theory can be\nmaintained. There is no hint in the passage that Paul is defending\nhimself; he is glorying, and glorying in the things that concern his\nweakness. It seems more probable that, when he dictated the strong\nwords of ver. 31, the outline of all he was going to say was in his\nmind; and as the main part of it--all about the visions and\nrevelations--was absolutely uncontrollable by any witness but his own,\nhe felt moved to attest it thus in advance. The names and attributes\nof God fall in well with this. As the visions and revelations were\nspecially connected with Christ, and were counted by the Apostle among\nthe things for which he had the deepest reason to praise God, it is\nbut the reflection of this state of mind when he appeals to \"the God\nand _Father of the Lord Jesus_, He who is _blessed for evermore_.\"\nThis is not a random adjuration, but an appeal which takes shape\ninvoluntarily in a grateful and pious heart, on which the memory of a\nsignal grace and honour still rests. Of course the verses about\nDamascus stand rather out of relation to it. But it is a violence\nwhich nothing can justify to strike them out of the text on this\nground, and along with them part or the whole of ver. 1 in chap.\nxii.[99] For many reasons unknown to us the danger in Damascus, and\nthe escape from it, may have had a peculiar interest for the Apostle;\n_h\u00e6c persequutio_, says Calvin, _erat quasi primum tirocinium Pauli_;\nit was his \"matriculation in the school of persecution.\" He may have\nintended, as Meyer thinks, to make it the beginning of a new catalogue\nof sufferings for Christ's sake, all of which were to be covered by\nthe appeal to God, and have abruptly repented, and gone off on another\nsubject; but whether or not, to expunge the lines is pure wilfulness.\nThe Apostle glories in what he endured at Damascus--in the imminent\nperil and in the undignified escape alike--as in things belonging to\nhis weakness. Another might choose to hide such things, but they are\nprecisely what he tells. In Christ's service scorn is glory, ignominy\nis honour; and it is the mark of loyalty when men rejoice that they\nare counted worthy to suffer shame for the Name.[100]\n\nWhen we go on to chap. xii., and the second of the two subjects with\nwhich boasting is to be associated, we meet in the first verse with\nserious textual difficulties. Our Authorised Version gives the\nrendering: \"_It is not expedient for me doubtless to glory. I will come\nto visions and revelations of the Lord._\" This follows the Textus\nReceptus: \u039a\u03b1\u03c5\u03c7\u1fb6\u03c3\u03b8\u03b1\u03b9 \u03b4\u1f74 \u03bf\u1f50 \u03c3\u03c5\u03bc\u03c6\u03ad\u03c1\u03b5\u03b9 \u03bc\u03bf\u03b9\u00b7 \u1f10\u03bb\u03b5\u03cd\u03c3\u03bf\u03bc\u03b1\u03b9 \u03b3\u1f70\u03c1 \u03ba.\u03c4.\u03bb., only\nomitting the \u03b3\u1f70\u03c1 (_for_ I will come). The MSS. are almost chaotic, but\nthe most authoritative editors--Tregelles, Tischendorf in his last\nedition, and Westcott and Hort--agree in reading \u039a\u03b1\u03c5\u03c7\u1fb6\u03c3\u03b8\u03b1\u03b9 \u03b4\u03b5\u1fd6 \u03bf\u1f50[101\n\u03c3\u03c5\u03bc\u03c6\u03ad\u03c1\u03bf\u03bd \u03bc\u1f72\u03bd \u1f10\u03bb\u03b5\u03cd\u03c3\u03bf\u03bc\u03b1\u03b9 \u03b4\u1f72 \u03ba.\u03c4.\u03bb.] This is the text which our Revisers\nrender: \"_I must needs glory, though it is not expedient; but I will\ncome to visions and revelations of the Lord_.\" Practically, the\ndifference is not so great after all. According to the best authorities,\nPaul repeats that he is being forced to speak as he does; the\nconsciousness of the disadvantages attendant on this course does not\nleave him, it is rather deepened, as he approaches the highest and most\nsacred of all subjects--visions and revelations he has received from\nChrist. Of these two words, revelations is the wider in import: visions\nwere only one of the ways in which revelations could be made. Paul, of\ncourse, is not going to boast directly of the visions and revelations\nthemselves. All through the experiences to which he alludes under this\nname he was to himself as a third person; he was purely passive; and to\nclaim credit, to glory as if he had done or originated anything, would\nbe transparently absurd. But there are \"things of his weakness\"\nassociated with, if not dependent on, these high experiences; and it is\nin them, after due explanation, that he purposes to exult.\n\nHe begins abruptly. \"I know a man in Christ, fourteen years ago\n(whether in the body, I know not; or whether out of the body, I know\nnot; God knoweth), such a one caught up even to the third heaven.\" A\nman in Christ means a Christian man, a man in his character _as_ a\nChristian. To St. Paul's consciousness the wonderful experience he is\nabout to describe was not natural, still less pathological, but\nunequivocally religious. It did not befall him as a man simply, still\nless as an epileptic patient; it was an unmistakably Christian\nexperience. He only existed for himself, during it, as \"a man in\nChrist.\" \"I know such a man,\" he says, \"fourteen years ago caught up\neven to the third heaven.\" The date of this \"rapture\" (the same word\nis used in Acts viii. 39; 1 Thess. iv. 17; Rev. xii. 5: all\nsignificant examples) would be about A.D. 44. This forbids us to\nconnect it in any way with Paul's conversion, which must have been\ntwenty years earlier than this letter; and indeed there is no reason\nfor identifying it with anything else we know of the Apostle. At the\ndate in question, as far as can be made out from the Book of Acts, he\nmust have been in Tarsus or in Antioch. The rapture itself is\ndescribed as perfectly incomprehensible. He may have been carried up\nbodily to the heavenly places; his spirit may have been carried up,\nwhile his body remained unconscious upon earth: he can express no\nopinion about this; the truth is only known to God. It is idle to\nexploit a passage like this in the interest of apostolic psychology;\nPaul is only taking elaborate pains to tell us that of the mode of his\nrapture he was absolutely ignorant. It is fairer to infer that the\nevent was unique in his experience, and that when it happened he was\nalone; had such things recurred, or had there been spectators, he\ncould not have been in doubt as to whether he was caught up \"in the\nbody\" or \"out of the body.\" The mere fact that the date is given\nindividualises the event in his life; and it is going beyond the facts\naltogether to generalise it, and take it as the type of such an\nexperience as accompanied his conversion, or of the visions in Acts\nxvi. 9, xxii. 17 f., xviii. 9. It was one, solitary, incomparable\nexperience, including in it a complex of visions and revelations\ngranted by Christ: it was this, at all events, to the Apostle; and if\nwe do not believe what he tells us about it, we can have no knowledge\nof it at all.\n\n\"Caught up even to the third heaven.\" The Jews usually counted seven\nheavens; sometimes, perhaps because of the dual form of the Hebrew word\nfor heaven, two; but the distinctions between the various heavens were\nas fanciful as the numbers were arbitrary. It adds nothing, even to the\nimagination, to speak of an aerial, a sidereal, and a spiritual heaven,\nand to suppose that these are meant by Paul; we can only think vaguely\nof the \"man in Christ\" rising through one celestial region after another\ntill he came even to the third. The word chosen to define the distance\n(\u1f15\u03c9\u03c2) suggests that an impression of vast spaces traversed remained on\nthe Apostle's mind; and that the third heaven, on which his sentence\npauses, and which is a resting-place for his memory, was also a station,\nso to speak, in his rapture. This is the only supposition which does\njustice to the resumption in ver. 3 of the deliberate and circumstantial\nlanguage of ver. 2. \"And I know such a man--whether in the body or apart\nfrom the body (I know not) God knoweth--how that he was caught up into\nParadise, and heard unspeakable words that it is not lawful for a man to\nutter.\" This is a resumption, not a repetition. Paul is not elaborately\ntelling the same story over again, but he is carrying it on, with the\nsame full circumstance, the same grave asseveration, from the point at\nwhich he halted. The rapture had a second stage, under the same\nincomprehensible conditions, and in it the Christian man passed out and\nup from the third heaven into Paradise. Many of the Jews believed in a\nParadise beneath the earth, the abode of the souls of the good while\nthey awaited their perfecting at the Resurrection (cf. Luke xvi. 23 ff.,\nxxiii. 43); but obviously this cannot be the idea here. We must think\nrather of what the Apocalypse calls \"the Paradise of God\" (ii. 7), where\nthe tree of life grows, and where those who overcome have their reward.\nIt is an abode of unimaginable blessedness, \"far above all heavens,\" to\nuse the Apostle's own words elsewhere (Eph. iv. 10). What visions he\nhad, or what revelations, during that pause in the third heaven, Paul\ndoes not say; and at this supreme point of his rapture, in Paradise, the\nwords he heard were words unspeakable, which it is not lawful for man to\nutter. Mortal ears might hear, but mortal lips might not repeat, sounds\nso mysterious and divine: it was not for _man_ (\u1f00\u03bd\u03b8\u03c1\u03ce\u03c0\u1ff3 is qualitative)\nto utter them.\n\nBut why, we may ask, if this rapture has its meaning and value solely\nfor the Apostle, should he refer to it here at all? Why should he make\nsuch solemn statements about an experience, the historical conditions\nof which, as he is careful to assure us, are incomprehensible, while\nits spiritual content is a secret? Is not such an experience literally\n_nothing_ to us? No, unless Paul himself is nothing; for this\nexperience was evidently a great thing to him. It was the most sacred\nprivilege and honour he had ever known; it was among his strongest\nsources of inspiration; it had a powerful tendency to generate\nspiritual pride; and it had its accompaniment, and its counter-weight,\nin his sharpest trial. The world knows little of its greatest men;\nperhaps we very rarely know what are the great things in the lives\neven of the people who are round about us. Paul had kept silence about\nthis sublime experience for fourteen years, and no man had ever\nguessed it; it had been a secret between the Lord and His disciple;\nand they only, who were in the secret, could rightly interpret all\nthat depended upon it. There is a kind of profanity in forcing the\nheart to show itself too far, in compelling a man to speak about, even\nthough he does not divulge, the things that it is not lawful to utter.\nThe Corinthians had put this profane compulsion on the Apostle; but\nthough he yields to it, it is in a way which keeps clear of the\nprofanity. He tells what he dare tell in the third person, and then\ngoes on: \"On behalf of such a one will I glory, but on behalf of\nmyself will I not glory, save in my infirmities.\" _Removere debemus_\n\u03c4\u1f78 _ego a rebus magnis_ (Bengel): there are things too great to allow\nthe intrusion of self. Paul does not choose to identify the poor\nApostle whom the Corinthians and their misleading teachers used so\nbadly with the man in Christ who had such inconceivable honour put on\nhim by the Lord; if he does boast on behalf of such a one, and magnify\nhis sublime experiences, at all events he does not transfer his\nprerogatives to _himself_; he does not say, \"_I_ am that incomparably\nhonoured man; reverence in me a special favourite of Christ.\" On the\ncontrary, where _his own_ interest has to be forwarded, he will glory\nin nothing but his weaknesses. The one thing about which he is anxious\nis that men should not think too highly of him, nor go in their\nappreciation beyond what their experience of him as a man and a\nteacher justifies (ver. 6). He might, indeed, boast, reasonably\nenough; for the truth would suffice, without any foolish exaggeration;\nbut he forbears, for the reason just stated. We are familiar with the\ndanger of thinking too highly of ourselves; it is as real a danger,\nthough probably a less considered one, to be too highly thought of by\nothers. Paul dreaded it; so does every wise man. To be highly thought\nof, where the character is sincere and unpretentious, may be a\nprotection, and even an inspiration; but to have a reputation,\nmorally, that one does not deserve--to be counted good in respects in\nwhich one is really bad--is to have a frightful difficulty added to\npenitence and amendment. It puts one in a radically false position; it\ngenerates and fosters hypocrisy; it explains a vast mass of spiritual\nineffectiveness. The man who is insincere enough to be puffed up by it\nis not far from judgment.\n\nBut to return to the text. Paul wishes to be humble; he is content\nthat men should take him as they find him, infirmities and all. He has\nthat about him, too, and not unconnected with these high experiences,\nthe very purpose of which is to keep him humble. If the text is\ncorrect,[102] he expresses himself with some embarrassment. \"And by\nreason of the exceeding greatness of the revelations--wherefore, that\nI should not be exalted overmuch, there was given to me a thorn in\nthe flesh, a messenger of Satan to buffet me, that I should not be\nexalted overmuch.\" The repetition of the last word shows where the\nemphasis lies: Paul has a deep and constant sense of the danger of\nspiritual pride, and he knows that he would fall into it unless a\nstrong counter-pressure were kept up upon him.\n\nI do not feel called on to add another to the numberless disquisitions\non Paul's thorn in the flesh. The resources of imagination having been\nexhausted, people are returning to the obvious. The thorn in the\nflesh[103] was something painful, which affected the Apostle's body; it\nwas something in its nature purely physical, not a solicitation to any\nkind of sin, such as sensuality or pride, else he would not have ceased\nto pray for its removal; it was something terribly humbling, if not\nhumiliating--an affection which might well have excited the contempt and\nloathing of those who beheld it (Gal. iv. 14, which probably refers to\nthis subject); it had begun after, if not in consequence of, the rapture\njust described, and stood in a spiritual, if not a physical, relation to\nit; it was, if not chronic or periodic, at least recurrent; the Apostle\nknew that it would never leave him. What known malady, incident to human\nnature, fulfils all these conditions, it is not possible with perfect\ncertainty to say. A considerable mass of competent opinion supports the\nidea that it must have been liability to epileptic seizures.[104] Such\nan infirmity Paul might have suffered under in common with men so great\nas Julius C\u00e6sar and the first Napoleon, as Mahomet, King Alfred, and\nPeter the Great. But it does not quite satisfy the conditions. Epileptic\nattacks, if they occur with any frequency at all, invariably cause\nmental deterioration. Now, Paul distinctly suggests that the thorn was a\nvery steady companion; and as his mind, in spite of it, grew year after\nyear in the apprehension of the Christian revelation, so that his last\nthoughts are always his largest and best, the epileptic hypothesis has\nits difficulties like every other. Is it likely that a man who suffered\npretty constantly from nervous convulsions of this kind wrote the Second\nEpistle to the Corinthians after fourteen years of them, or the Epistles\nto the Romans, Philippians, Colossians, and Ephesians later still? There\nis, of course, no religious interest in affirming or denying any\nphysical explanation of the matter whatever; but with our present data I\ndo not think a certain explanation is within our reach.\n\nThe Apostle himself is not interested in it as a physical affection.\nHe speaks of it because of its spiritual significance, and because of\nthe wonderful spiritual experiences he has had in connexion with it.\nIt was given him, he says: but by whom? When we think of the\npurpose--to save him from spiritual pride--we instinctively answer,\n\"God.\" And that, it can hardly be doubted, would have been the\nApostle's own answer. Yet he does not hesitate to call it in the same\nbreath a messenger of Satan. The name is dictated by the inborn,\nineradicable shrinking of the soul from pain; that agonising,\nhumiliating, annihilating thing, we feel at the bottom of our hearts,\nis not really of God, even when it does His work. In His perfect\nworld pain shall be no more. It does not need science, but experience,\nto put these things together, and to understand at once the evil and\nthe good of suffering. Paul, at first, like all men, found the evil\noverpowering. The pain, the weakness, the degradation of his malady,\nwere intolerable. He could not understand that only a pressure so\npitiless and humbling could preserve him from spiritual pride and a\nspiritual fall. We are all slow to learn anything like this. We think\nwe can take warning, that a word will be enough, that at most the\nmemory of a single pang will suffice to keep us safe. But pains remain\nwith us, and the pressure is continuous and unrelieved, because the\nneed of constraint and of discipline is ceaseless. The crooked branch\nwill not bend in a new curve if it is only tied to it for half an\nhour. The sinful bias in our natures--to pride, to sensuality, to\nfalsehood, or whatever else---will not be cured by one sharp lesson.\nThe commonest experience in human life is that the man whom sickness\nand pain have humbled for the moment, the very moment their constraint\nis lifted, resumes his old habit. He does not think so, but it is\nreally the thorn that has been keeping him right; and when its\nsharpness is blunted, the edge is taken from his conscience too.\n\nPaul besought the Lord, that is Christ, thrice, that this thing might\ndepart from him. The Lord, we may be sure, had full sympathy with that\nprayer. He Himself had had His agony, and prayed the Father thrice\nthat if it were possible the cup of pain might pass from Him. He\nprayed, indeed, in express submission to the Father's will; the voice\nof nature was not allowed in Him to urge an unconditional peremptory\nrequest. Perhaps in Paul on this occasion--certainly often in most\nmen--it is nature, the flesh and not the spirit, which prompts the\nprayer. But God is all the while guarding the spirit's interest as the\nhigher, and this explains the many real answers to prayer which seem\nto be refusals. A refusal _is_ an answer, if it is so given that God\nand the soul thenceforth understand one another. It was thus that Paul\nwas answered by Christ: \"He hath said to me, My grace is sufficient\nfor thee: for [My] strength is made perfect in weakness.\"\n\nThe first point to notice in this answer is the tense of the verb: \"He\nhath said.\" The A.V. with \"He said\" misses the point. The sentence is\npresent as well as past; it is Christ's continuous, as well as final,\nanswer to Paul's prayer. The Apostle has been made to understand that\nthe thorn must remain in his flesh, but along with this he has\nreceived the assurance of an abiding love and help from the Lord. We\nremember, even by contrast, the stern answer made to Moses when he\nprayed that he might be permitted to cross Jordan and see the goodly\nland--\"Let it suffice thee: speak no more unto Me of this matter.\"\nPaul also could no more ask for the removal of the thorn: it was the\nLord's will that he should submit to it for high spiritual ends, and\nto pray against it would now have been a kind of impiety. But it is no\nlonger an unrelieved pain and humiliation; the Apostle is supported\nunder it by that grace of Christ which finds in the need and\nabjectness of men the opportunity of showing in all perfection its own\ncondescending strength. The collocation of \"grace\" and \"strength\" in\nthe ninth verse is characteristic of the New Testament, and very\nsignificant. There are many to whom \"grace\" is a holy word with no\nparticular meaning; \"the grace of God,\" or \"the grace of the Lord\nJesus Christ,\" is only a vague benignity, which may fairly enough be\nspoken of as a \"smile.\" But grace, in the New Testament, is force: it\nis a heavenly strength bestowed on men for timely succour; it finds\nits opportunity in our extremity; when our weakness makes us incapable\nof doing anything, it gets full scope _to work_. This is the meaning\nof the last words--\"strength is made perfect in weakness.\" The truth\nis quite general; it is an application of it to the case in hand if we\ntranslate as in the A.V. (with some MSS.): \"_My_ strength is made\nperfect in [thy] weakness.\" It is enough, the Lord tells Paul, that he\nhas this heavenly strength unceasingly bestowed upon him; the weakness\nwhich he has found so hard to bear--that distressing malady which\nhumbled him and took his vigour away--is but the foil to it: it serves\nto magnify it, and to set it off; with that Paul should be content.\n\nAnd he is content. That answer to his thrice-repeated prayer works a\nrevolution in his heart; he looks at all that had troubled him--at all\nthat he had deprecated--with new eyes. \"Most gladly therefore will I\nrather glory in my infirmities--that is, glory rather than bemoan them\nor pray for their removal--that the power of Christ may spread its\ntabernacle over me.\" This compensation far outweighed the trial. He\nhas ceased to speak now of the visions and revelations, perhaps he has\nceased already to think of them; he is conscious only of the weakness\nand suffering from which he is never to escape, and of the grace of\nChrist which hovers over him, and out of weakness and suffering makes\nhim strong. His very infirmities redound to the glory of the Lord, and\nso he chooses them, rather than his rapture into Paradise, as matter\nfor boasting. \"For this cause I am well content, on Christ's\nbehalf,[105] in infirmities, in insults, in necessities, in\npersecutions and distresses; for when I am weak, then am I strong.\"\n\nWith this noble word Paul concludes his enforced \"glorying.\" He was\nnot happy in it; it was not like him; and it is a triumph of the\nSpirit of Christ in him that he gives it such a noble turn, and comes\nout of it so well. There is a tinge of irony in the first passage\n(chap. xi. 21) in which he speaks of weakness, and fears that in\ncomparison with his high-handed rivals at Corinth he will only have\nthis to boast about; but as he enters into his real experience, and\ntells us what he had borne for Christ, and what he had learned in pain\nand prayer about the laws of the spiritual life, all irony passes\naway; the pure heroic heart opens before us to its depths. The\npractical lessons of the last paragraphs are as obvious as they are\nimportant. That the greatest spiritual experiences are incommunicable;\nthat even the best men are in danger of elation and pride; that the\ntendency of these sins is immensely strong, and can only be restrained\nby constant pressure; that pain, though one day to be abolished, is a\nmeans of discipline actually used by God; that it may be a plain duty\nto accept some suffering, or sickness, even a humbling and distressing\none, as God's will for our good, and not to pray more for its removal;\nthat God's grace is given to those who so accept His will, as a real\nreinforcement of their strength, nay, as a substitute, and far more,\nfor the strength which they have not; that weakness, therefore, and\nhelplessness, as foils to the present help of God, may actually be\noccasions of glorying to the Christian,--all these, and many more, are\ngathered up in this passionate Apologia of Paul.\n\nFOOTNOTES:\n\n[99] This is done by a number of critics, including Holsten and\nSchmiedel.\n\n[100] Godet gives the incident a peculiar turn, more ingenious than\nconvincing. \"No doubt the list I have given is one of mere infirmities.\nI might well boast of things apparently more glorious--as when the whole\nof that great city, Damascus, was raised against me, and I could only\nescape secretly.\"--_Introduction au Nouv. Test._, p. 393.\n\n[101] In their margin Westcott and Hort read \u03b4\u1f72 \u03bf\u1f50.\n\n[102] The editors vary greatly in punctuation, especially as they do\nor do not insert \u03b4\u03b9\u1f78 before the first \u1f35\u03bd\u03b1 \u03bc\u1f74 \u1f51\u03c0\u03b5\u03c1\u03b1\u03af\u03c1\u03c9\u03bc\u03b1\u03b9. Westcott and\nHort suspect some primitive error.\n\n[103] For the meaning \"thorn,\" not \"stake\" or \"cross,\" see Ezek.\nxxviii. 24; Hosea ii. 8 (6); Num. xxxiii. 55.\n\n[104] I should lay no stress here on what some so much insist\nupon--the use of \u1f10\u03be\u03b5\u03c0\u03c4\u03cd\u03c3\u03b1\u03c4\u03b5 in Gal. iv. 14, and the fact that _morbus\ndespui suctus_ is a name for epilepsy: \u1f10\u03ba\u03c0\u03c4\u03cd\u03b5\u03b9\u03bd does not mean\n_despuere_, and after \u1f10\u03be\u03bf\u03c5\u03b8\u03b5\u03bd\u03b5\u1fd6\u03bd it is necessarily metaphorical.\n\n[105] Construe \u1f51\u03c0\u1f72\u03c1 \u03a7\u03c1\u03b9\u03c3\u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 with \u03b5\u1f50\u03b4\u03bf\u03ba\u1ff6.\n\n\n\n\n XXVII\n\n _NOT YOURS, BUT YOU_\n\n \"I am become foolish: ye compelled me; for I ought to have been\n commended of you: for in nothing was I behind the very chiefest\n apostles, though I am nothing. Truly the signs of an apostle were\n wrought among you in all patience, by signs and wonders and mighty\n works. For what is there wherein ye were made inferior to the rest\n of the Churches, except _it be_ that I myself was not a burden to\n you? forgive me this wrong.\n\n \"Behold, this is the third time I am ready to come to you; and I\n will not be a burden to you: for I seek not yours, but you: for the\n children ought not to lay up for the parents, but the parents for\n the children. And I will most gladly spend and be spent for your\n souls. If I love you more abundantly, am I loved the less? But be it\n so, I did not myself burden you; but, being crafty, I caught you\n with guile. Did I take advantage of you by any one of them whom I\n have sent unto you? I exhorted Titus, and I sent the brother with\n him. Did Titus take any advantage of you? walked we not by the same\n Spirit? _walked we_ not in the same steps?\n\n \"Ye think all this time that we are excusing ourselves unto you. In\n the sight of God speak we in Christ. But all things, beloved, _are_\n for your edifying. For I fear, lest by any means, when I come, I\n should find you not such as I would, and should myself be found of\n you such as ye would not; lest by any means _there should be_\n strife, jealousy, wraths, factions, backbitings, whisperings,\n swellings, tumults; lest when I come again, my God should humble me\n before you, and I should mourn for many of them that have sinned\n heretofore, and repented not of the uncleanness and fornication and\n lasciviousness which they committed.\"--2 COR. xii. 11-21 (R.V.).\n\n\nExpositors differ widely in characterising the three or four brief\nparagraphs into which this passage may be divided: (1) vv. 11-13; (2)\nvv. 14, 15, and vv. 16-18; (3) vv. 19-21. What is clear is, that we\nfeel in it the ground-swell of the storm that has raged through the last\ntwo chapters, and that it is not till the beginning of chap. xiii. that\nthe Apostle finally escapes from this, and takes up an authoritative and\ndecisive attitude to the Corinthians. When he does reach Corinth, it\nwill not be to explain and justify his own conduct, either against\nrivals or those whom rivals have misled, but to take prompt and vigorous\naction against disorders in the life of the Church.\n\n(1) A review of what he has just written leads to a burst of indignant\nremonstrance. \"I _have_ become foolish.\" The emphasis is on the verb,\nnot on the adjective; it is the painful fact that the eleventh chapter\nof Second Corinthians is a thing that no wise man would have written\nif he had been left to himself and his wisdom. Paul, who was a wise\nman, felt this, and it stung him. He resented the compulsion which was\nput upon him by the ingratitude and faithlessness of the Corinthians.\nThe situation ought to have been exactly reversed. When he was defamed\nby strangers, then they, who knew him, instead of hearkening to the\ncalumniators, ought to have stood up in his defence. But they basely\nleft him to defend himself, to plead his own cause, to become a fool\nby \"glorying.\" This kind of compulsion should never be put upon a good\nman, especially a man to whom, under God, we ourselves have been\ndeeply indebted. The services he has rendered constitute a claim on\nour loyalty, and it is a duty of affection to guard his character\nagainst disparagement and malice.\n\nPaul, in his deep consciousness of being wronged, presses home the\ncharge against the Corinthians. They had every reason, he tells them,\nto act as his advocates. When he was among them, he was in nothing\ninferior to the \"superlative\" Apostles--this is his last flout at the\nJudaist interlopers--nothing though he was. The signs that prove a man\nto be an apostle were wrought among them (the passive expression keeps\n_his_ agency in the background) in all patience, by signs and wonders\nand mighty deeds. Their suspicions of him, their willingness to listen\nto insinuations against him, after such an experience, were\nunpardonable. He can only think of one \"sign of the apostle\" which was\nnot wrought among them by his means, of one point in which he had made\nthem inferior to the other Churches: he had not burdened them with his\nsupport. They were the spoilt children of the apostolic family; and he\nbegs them, with bitter irony, to forgive him this wrong. If they had\nonly been converted by a man who stood upon his rights![106]\n\n\"The signs of an apostle\" are frequently referred to in Paul's\nEpistles, and are of various kinds. By far the most important, and the\nmost frequently insisted on, is success in evangelistic work. He who\nconverts men and founds Churches has the supreme and final attestation\nof apostleship, as Paul conceives it. It is to this he appeals in 1\nCor. ix. 2; 2 Cor. iii. 1-3. In the passage before us Calvin makes\n\"patience\" a sign--_primum signum nominat patientiam_. Patience is\ncertainly a characteristic Christian virtue, and it is magnificently\nexercised in the apostolic life; but it is not peculiarly apostolic.\nPatience in the passage before us, \"every kind of patience,\" rather\nbrings before our minds the conditions under which Paul did his\napostolic work. Discouragements of every description, bad health,\nsuspicion, dislike, contempt, moral apathy and moral licence--the\nweight of all these pressed upon him heavily, but he bore up under\nthem, and did not suffer them to break his spirit or to arrest his\nlabours. His endurance was a match for them all, and the power of\nChrist that was in him broke forth in spite of them in apostolic\nsigns. There were conversions, in the first place; but there were also\nwhat he calls here \"signs [in a narrower sense], and wonders, and\nmighty deeds.\" This is an express claim, like that made in Acts xv.\n12, Rom. xv. 19, to have wrought what we call miracles. The three\nwords represent miracles under three different aspects: they are\n\"signs\" (\u03c3\u03b7\u03bc\u03b5\u1fd6\u03b1), as addressed to man's intelligence, and conveying a\nspiritual meaning; they are \"wonders\" (\u03c4\u03ad\u03c1\u03b1\u03c4\u03b1), as giving a shock to\nfeeling, and moving nature in those depths which sleep through common\nexperience; and they are \"mighty works\" or \"powers\" (\u03b4\u03c5\u03bd\u03ac\u03bc\u03b5\u03b9\u03c2), as\narguing in him who works them a more than human efficiency. But no\ndoubt the main character they bore in the Apostle's mind was that of\n\u03c7\u03b1\u03c1\u03af\u03c3\u03bc\u03b1\u03c4\u03b1, or gifts of grace, which God ministered to the Church by\nHis Spirit. It is natural for an unbeliever to misunderstand even New\nTestament miracles, because he wishes to conceive them, as it were,\n_in vacuo_, or in relation to the laws of nature; in the New Testament\nitself they are conceived in relation to the Holy Ghost. Even Jesus is\nsaid in the Gospels to have cast out devils by the Spirit of God; and\nwhen Paul wrought \"signs and wonders and powers,\" it was in carrying\nout his apostolic work graced by the same Spirit. What things he had\ndone in Corinth we have no means of knowing, but the Corinthians knew;\nand they knew that these things had no arbitrary or accidental\ncharacter, but were the tokens of a Christian and an apostle.\n\n(2) In the second paragraph Paul turns abruptly (\u1f30\u03b4\u03bf\u1f7a, \"behold!\") from\nthe past to the future. \"This is the third time I am ready to come to\nyou, and I will not burden you.\" The first clause has the same ambiguity\nin Greek as in English; it is impossible to tell from the words alone\nwhether he had been already twice, or only once, in Corinth. Other\nconsiderations decide, I think, that he had been twice; but of course\nthese cannot affect the construction of this verse: for the third time\nhe is in a state of readiness--this is all the words will yield. But\nwhen he makes the new visit, whether it be his third or only his second,\none thing he has decided: he will act on the same principle as before,\nand decline to be a burden to them. He does not speak of it boastfully\nnow, as in chap. xi. 10, for his adversaries have passed out of view,\nbut in one of the most movingly tender passages in the whole Bible. \"I\nwill not lie on you like a benumbing weight, for I seek, not yours, but\nyou.\" It is not his own interest which brings him to Corinth again, but\ntheirs; it is not avarice which impels him, but love. In a sense,\nindeed, love makes the greater claim of the two; it is far more to\ndemand the heart than to ask for money. Yet the greater claim is the\nless selfish, indeed is the purely unselfish one; for it can only be\nreally made by one who gives all that he demands. Paul's own heart was\npledged to the Corinthians; and when he said \"I seek _you_,\" he did not\nmean that he sought to make a party of them, or a faction, in the\ninterest of his own ambition, but that the one thing he cared for was\nthe good of their souls. Nor in saying so does he claim to be doing\nanything unusual or extraordinary. It is only what becomes him as their\nfather in Christ (1 Cor. iv. 15). \"I seek _you_; for the children ought\nnot to lay up for the parents, but the parents for the children.\" Filial\nduty, of course, is not denied here; Paul is simply bringing himself as\nthe spiritual father of the Corinthians under the general rule of nature\nthat \"love descends rather than ascends.\" If this seems a hard saying to\na child's heart, it is at least true that it descends _before_ it\nascends. It all begins from God: in a family, it all begins from the\nparents. The primary duty of love is parental care; and nothing is more\nunnatural, though at a certain level it is common enough, than the\ndesire of parents to make money out of their children as quickly and as\nplentifully as possible, without considering the ulterior interests of\nthe children themselves. This kind of selfishness is very transparent,\nand is very naturally avenged by ingratitude, and the Apostle for his\npart renounces it. \"_I_,\" he exclaims, with all the emphasis in his\npower--\"_I_ have more than a natural father's love for you. I will with\nall gladness spend, yes, and be spent to the uttermost, for your souls!\nI will give what I have, yes, and all that I am, that you may be\nprofited.\" And then he checks that rush of affection, and dams up the\noverflowing passion of his heart in the abrupt poignant question: \"If I\nlove you more abundantly, am I loved less?\"[107]\n\nThis is not the first passage in the Epistle, nor, near as we are to\nthe end, is it the last, in which Paul shows us the true spirit of the\nChristian pastor. \"Not yours, but you,\" is the motto of every minister\nwho has learned of Christ; and the noble words of ver. 15, \"I will\nvery gladly spend and be spent to the last for your souls,\" recall\nmore nearly than any other words in Scripture the law by which our\nLord Himself lived--not to be ministered unto, but to minister, and to\ngive life a ransom for many. Here, surely, is a sign of\napostleship--an unmistakable mark of the man who is specially called\nto continue Christ's work. That work cannot be done at all except in\nthe spirit of Him who inaugurated it, and though love like Paul's, and\nlove like Christ's, may be mocked and trampled on, it is the only\npower which has the right to speak in Christ's name. The joy of\nsacrifice thrills through the Apostle's words, and it is joy in the\nHoly Ghost; it is a fellowship with Christ in the very life of His\nlife that lifts Paul, for the moment, to the heavenly places. This is\nthe spirit in which wrong is to be met, and suspicion, calumny, and\ncontempt; it is in this, if at all, that we can be more than\nconquerors. Nature says, \"Stand upon your rights; vindicate your\nposition; insist on having all that you conceive to be your due\"; but\nlove says, \"Spend and be spent, and spare not till all is gone; life\nitself is not too much to give that love may triumph over wrong.\"\n\nIt is not possible to write long as Paul writes in these two verses (14\nand 15). The tension is too great both for him and for his readers. With\n\u1f14\u03c3\u03c4\u03c9 \u03b4\u03ad--\"But be it so\"--he descends from this height. He writes in the\nfirst person, but he is plainly repeating what he assumes others will\nsay. \"Very well, then, let that pass,\" is the answer of his enemies to\nhis friends when that passionate protestation is read. \"He did not\n_himself_ prove burdensome to us, but being crafty he brought us into\nhis net by guile. He exploited the Church in his own interest by means\nof his agents.\" This charge the Apostle meets with a downright denial;\nhe can appeal to the knowledge which the Corinthians themselves possess\nof the manner in which his agents have conducted themselves. He had no\ndoubt had occasion, far oftener than we know, to communicate with so\nimportant and so restless a Church; and he challenges the Corinthians to\nsay that a single one of those whom he had sent had taken advantage of\nthem. He instances--perhaps as the last of his deputies, who had but\njust returned from Corinth when he wrote this letter; perhaps as the one\non whom scandal had chosen to fasten--his \"partner\" and \"fellow-labourer\ntoward them,\" Titus; and he refers to an unknown brother who had\naccompanied him. They cannot mean to say (\u03bc\u03ae\u03c4\u03b9) that Titus took\nadvantage of them? \"Walked we not in the same Spirit?\" A modern reader\nnaturally makes \"spirit\" subjective, and takes it as equivalent to \"the\nsame moral temper or principle\"; an early Christian reader would more\nprobably think of the Holy Spirit as that which ruled in Paul and Titus\nalike. In any case the same Spirit led to the same conduct; they walked\nin the same self-denying path, and scrupulously abstained from burdening\nthe Corinthians for their support.\n\n(3) We feel the meanness of all this, and are glad when the Apostle\nfinally turns his back on it. It is an indignity to be compelled even\nto allude to such things. And the worst is, that no care a man can\ntake will prevent people from misunderstanding his indignant protest,\nand from assuming that he is really on his trial before them, and not\nimprobably compromised. Paul's mind is made up to leave the\nCorinthians no excuse for such misunderstanding and presumption. In\nver. 19 he reads their ignoble thought: \"Ye have long[108] been\nthinking\"--_i.e._, all through the last two chapters, and, indeed,\nmore or less all through the Epistle; see chap. iii. 1--\"that we are\nmaking our defence at your bar. Far from it: at God's bar we speak in\nChrist.\" He will not endure, with his visit to Corinth close at hand,\nthat there should be any misapprehension as to their relations. His\nresponsibility as a Christian man is not to them, but to God; He is\nthe Master to whom he stands or falls; it is He alone to whom he has\nto vindicate his life. The Corinthians had been seating themselves in\nimagination on the tribunal, and they are summarily set on the floor.\nBut Paul does not wish to be rude or unkind. \"You are not my judges,\ncertainly,\" he seems to say, \"but all I have said and done, beloved,\nall I say and do, is for your building up in Christian life. My heart\nis with you in it all, and I sincerely intend your good.\" We cannot\nsufficiently admire the combination in the Apostle, or rather the\nswift alternation, of all those intellectual and emotional qualities\nthat balance each other in a strong living character. He can be at\nonce trenchant and tender; inexorable in the maintenance of a\nprinciple, and infinitely sympathetic and considerate in his treatment\nof persons. We see all his qualities illustrated here.\n\nTheir edification is the governing thought on which the last verses of\nthe chapter turn, and on which eventually the whole Epistle rests (see\nchap. xiii. 10). It is because he is interested in their edification\nthat he thinks with misgiving of the journey in prospect. \"I fear lest\nby any means when I come I find you not such as I would, and on my part\nbe found of you not such as ye would.\" What these two fears imply is\nunfolded in due order in the remainder of the letter. The Corinthians,\nsuch as Paul would not have them, are depicted in vv. 20 and 21; Paul,\nin a character in which the Corinthians would prefer not to see him,\ncomes forward in chap, xiii., vv. 1-10. It is with the first only of\nthese two fears, the bad condition of the Corinthian Church, that we are\nhere concerned. This first fear has two grounds. The first is the\nprevalence of sins which may perhaps be summarised as sins of self-will.\nStrife, jealousy, passions, factions and low factious arts, backbitings,\nwhisperings, swellings, tumults: such is the catalogue. It illustrates\nwhat has been well described as \"the carnality of religious contention.\"\nAlmost all the sins here enumerated are directly connected with the\nexistence of parties and party feeling in the Church. They are of a kind\nwhich has disgraced the Church all through its history, and the\nexceeding sinfulness of which is not yet recognised by the great mass\nof professing Christians. People do not consider that the Church, as a\nvisible society, more or less naturalised in the world, is as capable as\nany other society of offering a career to ambition, or of furnishing a\ntheatre for the talents and the energies of self-seeking men; and they\nhave a vague idea that the wilfulness, the intriguing and factious arts,\nthe jealousy and conceit of men, are better things when put to the\nservice of the Church than when employed in mere selfishness. But they\nare not. They are the very same, and they are peculiarly odious when\nenlisted in His service who was meek and lowly in heart, and who gave\nHimself for men. Paul's first list of sins is only too life-like, and\nthe fear grounded on it is one which many a modern minister can share.\nThe second list is made up of what might be called, in contrast with\nsins of self-will, sins of self-indulgence--\"uncleanness, fornication,\nand lasciviousness that they wrought.\" Both together make up what the\nApostle calls the works of the flesh. Both together are the direct\nopposite of those fruits of the spirit in which the true life of the\nChurch consists. Paul writes as if he were more alarmed about the sins\nof the latter class. He puts \u03bc\u1f74 (\"lest\") instead of \u03bc\u03ae\u03c0\u03c9\u03c2 (\"lest by any\nmeans\": ver. 20), marking thus the climax, and something like the\ncertainty,[109] of his sad apprehension. \"I fear,\" he says, \"lest when I\ncome again my God should humble me before you\"--or, perhaps \"in\nconnexion with you.\" Nothing could more bow down a true and loving heart\nlike Paul's than to see a Church that he had regarded as the seal of\nhis apostleship--a congregation of men \"washed, sanctified, and\njustified\"--wallowing again in the mire of sensual sins. He had been\nproud of them, had boasted of them, had given thanks to God on their\nbehalf: how it must have crushed him to think that his labour on them\nhad come to this! Yet he writes instinctively \"my God.\" This humiliation\ndoes not come to him without his Father; there is a divine dispensation\nin it, as far as he is concerned, and he submits to it as such. He dare\nnot think of it as a personal insult; he dare not think of the sinners\nas if they had offended against _him_. He fears he will have to _mourn\nover_ numbers of those who have before sinned, and who will not have\nrepented[110] of these sensualities before he reaches Corinth. In chap.\nv. 2 of the First Epistle he sums up his condemnation of the moral\nlaxity of the Church in the presence of such evils in the words: _Ye did\nnot mourn_. He himself will not be able to avoid mourning: his heart\ngrows heavy within him as he thinks of what he must see before long.\nThis, again, is the spirit of the true pastor. Selfish anger has nothing\nhealing in it, nor has wounded pride; it is not for any man, however\ngood or devoted, to feel that he is entitled to resent it, as a personal\nwrong, when men fall into sin. He is not entitled to resent it, no\nmatter how much he may have spent, or how freely he may have spent\nhimself, upon them; but he is bound to bewail it. He is bound to\nrecognise in it, so far as he himself is free from responsibility, a\ndispensation of God intended to make him humble; and in all humility and\nlove he is bound to plead with the lapsed, not his own cause, but\nGod's. This is the spirit in which Paul confronts the sad duties\nawaiting him at Corinth, and in this again we see \"the signs of the\napostle.\"\n\nThe two catalogues of sins with which this chapter closes remind us, by\nway of contrast, of the two characteristic graces of Christianity:\nself-will or party spirit, in all its forms, is opposed to brotherly\nlove, and self-indulgence, in all its forms, to personal purity. There\nis much in this Epistle which would be called by some people theological\nand transcendent; but no one knew better than Paul that, though\nChristianity must be capable of an intellectual construction, it is not\nan intellectual system in essence, but a new moral life. He was deeply\nconcerned, as we have repeatedly seen, that the Corinthians should think\nright thoughts about Christ and the Gospel; but he was more than\nconcerned, he was filled with grief, fear, and shame, when he thought of\nthe vices of temper and of sensuality that prevailed among them. These\nwent to the root of Christianity, and if they could not be destroyed it\nmust perish. Let us turn our eyes from them to the purity and love that\nthey obscure, and lift up our hearts to these as the best things to\nwhich God has called us in the fellowship of His Son.\n\nFOOTNOTES:\n\n[106] \u0391\u1f50\u03c4\u1f78\u03c2 \u1f10\u03b3\u03ce in ver. 13 has a peculiar emphasis, not easily\nexplained. It cannot mean \"_I_ did not, though my assistants did,\" for\nthis is denied in ver. 18. Neither can it mean \"_I_ did not, though\nthe Judaists did,\" for whatever is opposed to \u03b1\u1f50\u03c4\u1f78\u03c2 \u1f10\u03b3\u03ce must\nnevertheless be conceived here as belonging to the same category,\nwhich the Judaists did not. Possibly it only separates the _person_\nexpressly from his _works_, just recited, and has the same sort of\nvalue as in Rom. ix. 3, where it emphasises the person as opposed to\nthe heart and conscience.\n\n[107] This is the reading of our Revisers, and of Westcott and Hort's\ntext. In their margin they read: \"I will very gladly spend, etc., if\nloving you [\u1f00\u03b3\u03b1\u03c0\u1ff6\u03bd instead of \u1f00\u03b3\u03b1\u03c0\u1ff6] more abundantly I am loved the\nless.\" This reading and punctuation are adopted by a number of\nscholars, but explained in two ways:--(1) As in the Authorised\nVersion, \"_though_ the more abundantly,\" etc. But \u03b5\u1f30 (\"if\"), which is\nthe true reading (not \u03b5\u1f30 \u03ba\u03b1\u03af), cannot be translated \"though.\" (2) By\nothers it is rendered, \"I will very gladly spend, etc., if the more\nabundantly I love you the less I am loved\": that is, \"if things have\ncome to such a pass between us that the natural relations are utterly\ninverted, I will make any sacrifice to restore them to a better\nfooting.\" This is insipid and flat to the last degree: textual and\npsychological considerations combine to support the Revisers text.\n\n[108] \u03a0\u03ac\u03bb\u03b1\u03b9 is the true reading, not \u03c0\u03ac\u03bb\u03b9\u03bd. Westcott and Hort retain\nthe interrogation.\n\n[109] This is also suggested by the reading \u03c4\u03b1\u03c0\u03b5\u03b9\u03bd\u03ce\u03c3\u03b5\u03b9, which\nTischendorf adopts in ver. 21, with B, D, E, F, etc. \u05d0, A, K, followed\nby Westcott and Hort, have \u03c4\u03b1\u03c0\u03b5\u03b9\u03bd\u03ce\u03c3\u1fc3.\n\n[110] It is more natural to construe \u1f10\u03c0\u1f76 \u03c4\u1fc7 \u1f00\u03ba\u03b1\u03b8\u03b1\u03c1\u03c3\u03b9\u1fb3 \u03ba.\u03c4.\u03bb. with\n\u03bc\u03b5\u03c4\u03b1\u03bd\u03bf\u03b7\u03c3\u03ac\u03bd\u03c4\u03c9\u03bd than with \u03c0\u03b5\u03bd\u03b8\u03ae\u03c3\u03c9.\n\n\n\n\n XXVIII\n\n _CONCLUSION_\n\n \"This is the third time I am coming to you. At the mouth of two\n witnesses or three shall every word be established. I have said\n beforehand, and I do say beforehand, as when I was present the\n second time, so now, being absent, to them that have sinned\n heretofore, and to all the rest, that, if I come again, I will not\n spare; seeing that ye seek a proof of Christ that speaketh in me;\n who to you-ward is not weak, but is powerful in you: for He was\n crucified through weakness, yet He liveth through the power of God.\n For we also are weak in Him, but we shall live with Him through the\n power of God toward you. Try your own selves, whether ye be in the\n faith; prove your own selves. Or know ye not as to your own selves,\n that Jesus Christ is in you? unless indeed ye be reprobate. But I\n hope that ye shall know that we are not reprobate. Now we pray to\n God that ye do no evil; not that we may appear approved, but that ye\n may do that which is honourable, though we be as reprobate. For we\n can do nothing against the truth, but for the truth. For we rejoice,\n when we are weak, and ye are strong: this we also pray for, even\n your perfecting. For this cause I write these things while absent,\n that I may not when present deal sharply, according to the authority\n which the Lord gave me for building up, and not for casting down.\n\n \"Finally, brethren, farewell. Be perfected; be comforted; be of the\n same mind; live in peace: and the God of love and peace shall be\n with you. Salute one another with a holy kiss.\n\n \"All the saints salute you.\n\n \"The grace of the Lord Jesus Christ, and the love of God, and the\n communion of the Holy Ghost, be with you all.\"--2 COR. xiii. (R.V.).\n\n\nThe first part of this chapter is in close connexion with what precedes;\nit is, so to speak, the explanation of St. Paul's fear (xii. 20) that\nwhen he came to Corinth he would be found of the Corinthians \"not such\nas they would.\" He expresses himself with great severity; and the\nabruptness of the first three sentences, which are not linked to each\nother by any conjunctions, contributes to the general sense of rigour.\n\"This is the third time I am coming to you\" is a resumption of chap.\nxii. 14, \"This is the third time I am ready to come to you,\" and labours\nunder the same ambiguity; it is perhaps more natural to suppose that\nPaul had actually been twice in Corinth (and there are independent\nreasons for this opinion), but the words here used are quite consistent\nwith the idea that this was the third time he had definitely purposed\nand tried to visit them, whether his purpose had been carried out or\nnot. When he arrives, he will proceed at once to hold a judicial\ninvestigation into the condition of the Church, and will carry it\nthrough with legal stringency. \"At the mouth of two and (where\navailable) three witnesses shall every question be brought to decision.\"\nThis principle of the Jewish law (Deut. xix. 15), to which reference is\nmade in other New Testament passages connected with Church discipline\n(Matt. xviii. 16; 1 Tim. v. 19), is announced as that on which he will\nact. There will be no informality and no injustice, but neither will\nthere be any more forbearance. All cases requiring disciplinary\ntreatment will be brought to an issue at once, and the decision will be\ngiven rigorously as the matter of fact, attested by evidence,\nrequires.[111] He feels justified in proceeding thus after the\nreiterated warnings he has given them. To these reference is made in the\nsolemn words of ver. 2. English readers can see, by comparing the\nRevised Version with the Authorised, the difficulties of translation\nwhich still divide scholars. The words which the Authorised Version\nrenders \"_as if I were_ present\" (\u1f61\u03c2 \u03c0\u03b1\u03c1\u03ce\u03bd) are rendered by the Revisers\n\"_as when I was present_.\" All scholars connect this ambiguous clause\nwith \u03c4\u1f78 \u03b4\u03b5\u03cd\u03c4\u03b5\u03c1\u03bf\u03bd: \"the second time.\" Hence there are two main ways in\nwhich the whole passage can be rendered. The one is that which stands in\nthe Revised Version, and which is defended by scholars like Meyer,\nLightfoot,[112] and Schmiedel: it is in effect this--\"I have already\nforewarned, and do now forewarn, as I did on the occasion of my second\nvisit, so also now in my absence, those who have sinned heretofore, and\nall the rest, that if I come again I will not spare.\" This is certainly\nrather cumbrous; but assuming that chap. ii. 1 gives strong ground for\nbelieving in a second visit already paid to Corinth--a visit in which\nPaul had been grieved and humbled by disorders in the Church, but had\nnot been in a position to do more than warn against their\ncontinuance--it seems the only available interpretation. Those who evade\nthe force of chap. ii. 1 render here in the line of the Authorised\nVersion: \"I have forewarned [viz., in the first letter, _e.g._ iv. 21],\nand do now forewarn, as though I were present the second time, although\nI am now absent, those who have sinned,\" etc. So Heinrici. This, on\ngrammatical grounds, seems quite legitimate; but the contrast between\npresence and absence, which is real and effective in the other\nrendering, is here quite inept. We can understand a man saying, \"I tell\nyou in my absence, just as I did when I was with you that second time\":\nbut who would ever say, \"I tell you as if I were present with you a\nsecond time, although in point of fact I am absent\"? The absence here\ncomes in with a grotesque effect, and there seems hardly room to doubt\nthat the rendering in our Revised Version is correct. Paul had, when he\nvisited Corinth a second time, warned those who had sinned before that\nvisit; he now warns them again, and all others with them who anticipated\nhis coming with an evil conscience, that the hour of decision is at\nhand. It is not easy to say what he means by the threat not to spare.\nMany point to judgments like that on Ananias and Sapphira, or on Elymas\nthe sorcerer; others to the delivering of the incestuous person to\nSatan, \"for the destruction of the flesh\"; the supposition being that\nPaul came to Corinth armed with a supernatural power of inflicting\nphysical sufferings on the disobedient. This uncanny idea has really no\nsupport in the New Testament, in spite of the passages quoted; and\nprobably what his words aim at is an exercise of spiritual authority\nwhich might go so far as totally to exclude an offender from the\nChristian community.\n\nThe third verse is to be taken closely with the second: \"I will not\nspare, since ye seek a proof of Christ that speaketh in me, who to\nyou-ward is not weak, but is powerful in you.\" The friction between\nthe Corinthians and the Apostle involved a higher interest than his.\nIn putting Paul to the proof, they were really putting to the proof\nthe Christ who spoke in him. In challenging Paul to come and exert\nhis authority, in defying him to come with a rod, in presuming on what\nthey called his weakness, they were really challenging Christ. The\ndescription of Christ in the last clause--\"who towards you is not\nweak, but is powerful in you, or among you\"--must be interpreted by\nthe context. It can hardly mean that in their conversion, and in their\nexperience as Christian people, they had evidence that Christ was not\nweak, but strong: such a reference, though supported by Calvin, is\nsurely beside the mark. The meaning must rather be that for the\npurpose in hand--the restoration of order and discipline in the\nCorinthian Church--the Christ who spoke in Paul was not weak, but\nmighty. Certainly any one who looked at Christ in Himself might see\nproofs, in abundance, of weakness; going directly to the crowning one,\n\"He was _crucified_,\" the Apostle says, \"_in virtue of weakness_.\" Sin\nwas so much stronger than He, in the days of His flesh, that it did\nwhat it liked with Him. Sin mocked Him, buffeted Him, scourged Him,\nspit upon Him, nailed Him to the tree--so utter was His weakness, so\ncomplete the triumph of sin over Him. But that is not the whole story:\n\"He liveth in virtue of the power of God.\" He has been raised from the\ndead by the glory of the Father; sin cannot touch Him any more: He has\nall power in heaven and on earth, and all things are under His feet.\nThis double relation of Christ to sin is exemplified in His Apostle.\n\"For we also are weak in Him; but we shall live with Him, in virtue of\nGod's power, toward you.\" The sin of the Corinthians had had its\nvictory over Paul on the occasion of his second visit; God had humbled\nhim then, even as Christ was humbled on the cross; he had seen the\nevil, but it had been too strong for him; in spite of his warnings,\nit had rolled over his head. That \"weakness,\" as the Corinthians\ncalled it, remained; to them he was still as weak as ever--hence the\npresent \u1f00\u03c3\u03b8\u03b5\u03bd\u03bf\u1fe6\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd: but to the Apostle it was no discreditable thing;\nit was a weakness \"in Christ,\" or perhaps, as some authorities read,\n\"with Christ.\" In being overpowered by sin for the moment, he entered\ninto the fellowship of his Lord's sufferings; he drank out of the cup\nhis Master drank upon the cross. But the cross does not represent\nChrist's whole attitude to sin, nor does that incapacity to deal with\nthe turbulence, disloyalty, and immorality of the Corinthians\nrepresent the whole attitude of the Apostle to these disorders. Paul\nis not only crucified with Christ, he has been made to sit with Him in\nthe heavenly places; and when he comes to Corinth this time, it will\nnot be in the weakness of Christ, but in the victorious strength of\nHis new life. He will come clothed with power from on high to execute\nthe Lord's sentence on the disobedient.\n\nThis passage has great practical interest. There are many whose whole\nconception of the Christian attitude toward evil is summed up in the\nwords: \"He was crucified through weakness.\" They seem to think that\nthe whole function of love in presence of evil, its whole experience,\nits whole method and all its resources, are comprehended in bearing\nwhat evil chooses, or is able, to inflict. There are even bad people,\nlike the Corinthians, who imagine that this exhausts the Christian\nideal, and that they are wronged if they are not allowed by Christians\nto do what they like to them with impunity. And if it is not so easy\nto act on this principle in our dealings with one another--though\nthere are people mean enough to try it--there are plenty of\nhypocrites who presume on it in their dealings with God. \"He was\ncrucified through weakness,\" they say in their hearts; the cross\nexhausts His relation to sin; that infinite patience can never pass\nover to severity. But the assumption is false: the cross does _not_\nexhaust Christ's relation to sin; He passed from the cross to the\nthrone, and when He comes again it is as Judge. It is the sin of sins\nto presume upon the cross; it is a mistake that cannot be remedied to\npersist in that presumption to the end. When Christ comes again, _He_\nwill not spare. The two things go together in Him: the infinite\npatience of the cross, the inexorable righteousness of the throne. The\nsame two things go together in men: the depth with which they feel\nevil, the completeness with which they suffer it to work its will\nagainst them, and the power with which they vindicate the good. It is\nthe worst blindness, as well as the basest guilt, which, because it\nhas seen the one, refuses to believe in the other.\n\nThe Corinthians, by their rebellious spirit, were putting Paul to the\nproof; in ver. 5 he reminds them sharply that it is their own standing\nas Christians which is in question, and not his. \"Try _yourselves_,\"\nhe says, with abrupt emphasis, \"_not me_; try _yourselves_, if ye are\nin the faith; put _yourselves_ to the proof; or know ye not as to\n_your own selves_, that Jesus Christ is in you?--unless, indeed, ye be\nreprobate.\" The meaning here is hardly open to doubt:[113] the Apostle\nurges his readers individually to examine their Christian standing.\n\"Let each,\" he virtually says, \"put himself to the proof, and see\nwhether he is in the faith.\" There is, indeed, a difficulty in the\nclause, \"Or know ye not as to your own selves, that Jesus Christ is in\nyou?--unless, indeed, ye be reprobate.\" This may be read either as a\ntest, put into their hands to direct them in their self-scrutiny; or\nas an appeal to them after--or even before--the scrutiny has been\nmade. The manner in which the alternative is introduced--\"unless,\nindeed, ye are reprobates\"--a manner plainly suggesting that the\nalternative in question is _not_ to be assumed, is in favour of taking\nit in the sense of an appeal. After all, they are a Christian Church\nwith Christ among them, and they cannot but know it. Paul, again, on\nhis side cannot think that they are reprobate, and he hopes they will\nrecognise that _he_ is not, but on the contrary a genuine Apostle,\nattested by God, and to be acknowledged and obeyed by the Church. Very\noften that temper which judges others, and calls legitimate spiritual\nauthority in question, is due, as in part it was among the\nCorinthians, to inward misgivings. It is when people ought to be\nputting themselves to the proof, and are with cause afraid to begin,\nthat they are most ready to challenge others. It was a kind of\nself-defence--the self-defence of a bad conscience--when the\nCorinthians required Paul to demonstrate his apostolic claims before\nhe meddled with their affairs. It was a plea, the sole purpose of\nwhich was to enable them to live on as they were, immoral and\nimpenitent. It is properly retorted when he says, \"Try _yourselves_ if\nye are in the faith; it is in every sense of the word an impertinence\nto drag in anybody else.\"\n\nIn both cases Paul hopes the result of the trial will be satisfactory.\nHe would not like to think the Corinthians \u1f00\u03b4\u03cc\u03ba\u03b9\u03bc\u03bf\u03b9 (\"reprobate\"), and\nno more would he like them to regard him in that light. Still, the two\nthings are not on exactly the same footing in his mind; _their_\ncharacter is much dearer to him than his own reputation, provided they\nare what they ought to be, he does not care what is thought of himself.\nThis is the general sense of vv. 7 to 9, and except in ver. 8 the\ndetails are clear enough. He prays to God that the Corinthians may do no\nevil. His object in this is not that he himself may appear approved;\nindeed, if his prayer is granted, he will have no opportunity of\nexercising the disciplinary authority of which he has said so much. It\nwill be open to any one then to say that he is \u1f00\u03b4\u03cc\u03ba\u03b9\u03bc\u03bf\u03c2, reprobate, a\nperson to be rejected because he has not demonstrated his claim to\napostolic authority by apostolic action. But as long as they act well,\nwhich is the real object of his prayer, he does not care, though he\n_has_ to pass as \u1f00\u03b4\u03cc\u03ba\u03b9\u03bc\u03bf\u03c2. He can bear evil report as well as good\nreport, and rejoice to fulfil his vocation under the one condition as\nwell as the other. This is only one aspect of that sacrifice of self to\nthe interest of the flock which is indispensable in the good shepherd.\nAs compared with any single member of his congregation, a minister may\nbe more in the eye of the world, more still in the eye of the Church;\nand it is natural for him to think that some self-assertion, some\nrecognition and reputation, are due to his position. It is a mistake: no\nman who understands the position at all will dream of asserting his own\nimportance against that of the community. The Church, the congregation\neven, no matter how much it may be indebted to him, no matter if it owes\nto him, as the Corinthian Church to Paul, its very existence in Christ,\nis always greater than he; it will outlive him; and, however tender he\nmay naturally be of his own position and reputation, if the Church\nprosper in Christian character, he must be as willing to let these dear\npossessions go, and to count them worthless, as to part with money or\nany material thing.\n\nThe real difficulty here lies in the eighth verse, where the Apostle\nexplains, apparently, why he acts on the principle just stated. \"I pray\nthis prayer for you,\" he seems to say, \"and I am content to pass as a\nreprobate, while you do that which is honourable; for I can do nothing\nagainst the truth, but for the truth.\" What is the connexion of ideas\nalluded to by this \"for\"? Some of the commentators give up the question\nin despair; others only remind one of the French pastor who said to some\none who preached on Romans: \"Saint Paul est d\u00e9j\u00e0 fort difficile et ...\nvous veniez apr\u00e8s.\" As far as one can make out, he seems to say: \"I act\non this principle because it is the one which furthers the truth, and\ntherefore is obligatory upon me; I am not able to act on one which would\ninjure or prejudice the truth.\" The truth, in this interpretation, would\nbe synonymous, as it often is in the New Testament, with the Gospel.\nPaul is incapable of acting in a way that would check the Gospel, and\nits influence over men; he has no choice but to act in its interest; and\ntherefore he is content to let the Corinthians think what they please of\nhim, provided his prayer is answered, and they do no evil, but rather\nthat which is good before God. For this is what the Gospel requires.\n\"Content,\" indeed, is not a strong enough word. \"We _rejoice_,\" he says\nin ver. 9, \"when we are weak, and you are strong: this we also pray for,\neven your perfecting.\" \"Perfecting\" is perhaps as good a word as can be\ngot for \u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u03ac\u03c1\u03c4\u03b9\u03c3\u03b9\u03c2: it denotes the putting right of all that is\ndefective or amiss.\n\nIt is in favour of this interpretation of the eighth verse that the\nreason seems at first out of proportion to the conclusion. With an\nidealist like Paul it is always so. He appeals to the loftiest motives\nto influence the lowliest actions,--to faith in the Incarnation, as a\nmotive to generosity--to faith in the Resurrection Life, as a motive\nto patient continuance in well-doing--to faith in the heavenly\ncitizenship of believers, as a motive to separation from the\nlicentious. In the same way he appeals here to a universal moral rule\nto explain his conduct in a particular case. His principle everywhere\nis, not to act in prejudice of (\u03ba\u03b1\u03c4\u03ac) the Gospel, but in furtherance\nof it (\u1f51\u03c0\u03ad\u03c1); he has strength available for this last purpose, but\nnone at all for the former. It is the rule on which every minister of\nChrist should always act; and if the line of conduct which it pointed\nout sometimes led men to disregard their own reputation, provided the\nGospel was having free course, the very strangeness of such a result\nmight turn to the furtherance of the truth. It is by-ends that explain\nnine-tenths of spiritual inefficiency; singleness of mind like this\nwould save us our perplexities and our failures alike.\n\nIt is because he has an interest like this in the Corinthians that\nPaul writes as he has done while absent from Corinth. He does not\nwish, when he comes among them, to proceed with severity. The power\nthe Lord gave him would entitle him to do so; yet he remembers that\nthis power was given him, as he has remarked already (x. 8), for\nbuilding up, and not for casting down. Even casting down with a view\nto building up on a better basis was a less natural, if sometimes a\nnecessary, exercise of it; and he hopes that the severity of his words\nwill lead, even before his coming, to such voluntary action on the\npart of the Church as will spare him severity in deed.\n\nThis is practically the end of the letter, and the mind involuntarily\ngoes back to the beginning. We see now the three great divisions of it\nplainly before our eyes. In _the first seven chapters_ Paul writes\nunder the general impression of the good news Titus has brought from\nCorinth. It has made him glad, and he writes gladly. The one case that\nhe had been concerned about has been disposed of in a way that he can\nconsider satisfactory; the Church, in the majority of its members, has\nacted well in the matter. _The eighth and ninth chapters_ are a\ndigression: they are concerned solely with the collection for the poor\nat Jerusalem, and Paul inserts them where they stand perhaps because\nthe transition was easy from his joy over the change at Corinth to his\njoy over the liberality of the Macedonians. In _chaps, x. 1-xiii._ 10\nhe evidently writes in a very different strain. The Church, as a\nwhole, has returned to its allegiance, especially on the moral\nquestion at issue; but there are Jewish interlopers in it, subverting\nthe Gospel, and reconverting Paul's converts to their own illiberal\nfaith; and there are also, as it would appear, numbers of sensual\npeople who have not yet renounced the vilest sins. It is these two\nsets of persons who are in view in the last four chapters; and it is\nthe utter inconsistency of Judaic nationalism on the one hand, and\nCorinthian licence on the other, with the spiritual Gospel of the Son\nof God, that explains the seventy of his tone. \"The truth\" is at\nstake--the truth for which he has suffered all that he recounts in\nchap. xi.--and no vehemence is too passionate for the occasion. Yet\nlove controls it all, and he speaks severely that he may not have to\nact severely; he writes these things that, if possible, he may be\nspared the pain of saying them.\n\nAnd then the letter, like almost every letter, hastens in disconnected\nsentences to its close. \"Finally, brethren, farewell.\" He cannot but\naddress them affectionately at parting; when the heart recovers from the\nheat of indignation, its unchanging love speaks again as before. Some\nwould render \u03c7\u03b1\u03af\u03c1\u03b5\u03c4\u03b5 \"rejoice,\" instead of \"farewell\"; to Paul's\nreaders, no doubt, it had a friendly sound, but \"rejoice\" is far too\nstrong. In all the imperatives that follow there is a reminiscence of\ntheir faults as well as a desire for their good: \"be perfected, be\ncomforted, be of the same mind, live in peace.\" There was much among\nthem to rectify, much that was inevitably disheartening to overcome,\nmuch dissension to compose, much friction to allay; but as he prays them\nto face these duties he can assure them that the God of love and peace\nwill be with them. God can be characterised by love and peace; they are\nHis essential attributes, and He is an inexhaustible source of them, so\nthat all who make peace and love their aim can count confidently to be\nhelped by Him. It is, as it were, the first step of obedience to these\nprecepts--the first condition of obtaining the presence of God which has\njust been promised--when the Apostle writes, \"Greet one another with a\nholy kiss.\" The kiss was the symbol of Christian brotherhood; in\nexchanging it Christians recognised each other as members of one\nfamily. To do this even in form, to do it with solemnity in a public\nassembly of the whole Church, was to commit themselves to the\nobligations of peace and love which had been so set at naught in their\nreligious contentions. It is a generous encouragement to them to\nrecognise each other as children of God when he adds that all the\nChristians about him recognise them in that character. \"All the saints\nsalute you.\" They do so because they are Christians and because you are;\nacknowledge each other, as you are all acknowledged from without.\n\nThe letter is closed, like all that the Apostle wrote, with a brief\nprayer. \"The grace of the Lord Jesus [Christ], and the love of God,\nand the communion of the Holy Spirit, be with you all.\" Of all such\nprayers it is the fullest in expression, and this has gained for it\npre-eminently the name of the apostolic benediction. It would be too\nmuch to say that the doctrine of the Trinity, as it has been defined\nin the creeds, is explicitly to be found here; there is no statement\nat all in this place of the relations of Christ, God, and the Holy\nSpirit. Still, it is on passages like this that the Trinitarian\ndoctrine of God is based; or rather it is in passages like this that\nwe see it beginning to take shape: it is based on the historical fact\nof the revelation of God in Christ, and on the experience of the new\ndivine life which the Church possesses through the Spirit. It is\nextraordinary to find men with the New Testament in their hands giving\nexplanations, speculative or popular, of this doctrine, which stand in\nno relation either to the historical Christ or to the experience of\nthe Church. But these things hang together; and whatever the worth may\nbe of a Trinitarian doctrine which is not essentially dependent on the\nPerson of Christ and on the life of His Church, it is certainly not\nChristian. The historical original of the doctrine, and the impulse of\nexperience under which Paul wrote, are suggested even by the order of\nthe words. A speculative theologian may try to deduce the Triune\nnature of God from the borrowed assumption that God is love, or\nknowledge, or spirit; but the Apostle has only come to know God as\nlove through the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ. It is this which\nreveals God's love and assures us of it; it is this by which God\ncommends His own love to us. \"No man cometh unto _the Father_ but by\n_Me_,\" Jesus said; and this truth, pre-announced by the Lord, is\ncertified here by the very order in which the Apostle instinctively\nputs the sacred names. \"The communion of the Holy Spirit\" stands last;\nit is in this that \"the grace of the Lord Jesus and the love of God\"\nbecome the realised possessions of Christian men. The precise force of\n\"the communion\" is open to doubt. If we take the genitive in the same\nsense as it bears in the previous clauses, the word will mean \"the\nfellowship or unity of feeling which is produced by the Spirit.\" This\nis a good sense, but not the only one: what Paul wishes may rather be\nthe joint participation of them all _in_ the Spirit, and in the gifts\nwhich it confers. But practically the two meanings coincide, and our\nminds rest on the comprehensiveness of the blessing invoked on a\nChurch so mixed, and in many of its members so unworthy. Surely \"the\ngrace of the Lord Jesus Christ, and the love of God, and the communion\nof the Holy Ghost\" were with the man who rises so easily, so\nunconstrainedly, after all the tempest and passion of this letter, to\nsuch a height of love and peace. Heaven is open over his head; he is\nconscious, as he writes, of the immensities of that love whose breadth\nand length and depth and height pass knowledge. In the Son who\nrevealed it--in God who is its eternal source--in the Spirit through\nwhom it lives in men--he is conscious of that love and of its\nworkings; and he prays that in all its aspects, and in all its\nvirtues, it may be with them all.\n\n _Printed by Hazell, Watson, & Viney, Ld., London and Aylesbury._\n\nFOOTNOTES:\n\n[111] Although it is supported by commentators like Chrysostom and\nCalvin, it is difficult to treat otherwise than as a whim the idea\nthat Paul's two or three visits to Corinth make _him_ equal to the two\nor three witnesses required by the law. So also Godet, who counts the\nthree thus: (1) a warning by word of mouth during his second visit;\n(2) this letter; (3) his actual arrival for the third time.\n\n[112] See _Biblical Essays_, p. 274.\n\n[113] Another interpretation is worth mentioning. \"Try _yourselves_, I\nsay; put _yourselves_ to the proof; _do not leave it for me to do_ when\nI come. Why, do you not recognise as to your own selves that Jesus\nChrist is among you, so that you have spiritual competence to proceed in\ncorrecting the disorders of the Church?--unless, indeed, ye are\nreprobates: which is an impossible supposition. But \u1f11\u03b1\u03c5\u03c4\u03bf\u1f7a\u03c2 certainly\nsuggests that in the implied contrast Paul is _object_, not _subject_.\"\n\n\n\n\n _WORKS BY THE REV. PRINCIPAL FAIRBAIRN, D.D._\n\n _Fifth Edition. 8vo, cloth, 12s._\n\n =CHRIST IN MODERN THEOLOGY.=\n\n By A. M. FAIRBAIRN, D.D.\n\n Principal of Mansfield College, Oxford.\n\n \"His work is, without doubt, one of the most valuable and\n comprehensive contributions to theology that has been made during\n this generation.\"--_The Spectator._\n\n \"A more vivid summary of Church history has never been given. With\n its swift characterisation of schools and politics, with its\n subtle tracings of the development of various tendencies through\n the influence of their environment, of reaction, and of polemic;\n with its contrasts of different systems, philosophies, and races;\n with its portraits of men; with its sense of progress and\n revolt,--this part of Dr. Fairbairn's book is no mere annal, but\n drama, vivid and full of motion, representative of the volume and\n sweep of Christianity through the centuries.\"--_Speaker._\n\n\n _Crown 8vo, cloth, 3s. 6d._\n\n =RELIGION IN HISTORY AND IN\n MODERN LIFE:=\n\n Together with an Essay on the Church and the\n Working Classes.\n\nCONTENTS: What is Religion?--The Place and Significance of the Old\nTestament in Religion--The Place and Significance of the New Testament\nin Religion--The Christian Religion in the First Fifteen Centuries of\nits Existence--The Christian Religion in Modern Europe--The Christian\nReligion in Modern Life.\n\n\n _Fourth Edition. 8vo, cloth, 7s. 6d._\n\n =THE CITY OF GOD:=\n\n A Series of Discussions in Religion.\n\n \"We find in the discourses which form this volume much able\n statement and much vigorous thought, and an admirable\n comprehension of the great questions which are being discussed in\n our day with eagerness and bated breath.\"--_Scotsman._\n\n\n _Seventh Edition. Demy 8vo, 9s._\n\n =STUDIES IN THE LIFE OF CHRIST.=\n\n \"There is ample room for Professor Fairbairn's thoughtful and\n brilliant sketches. Dr. Fairbairn's is not the base rhetoric often\n employed to hide want of thought or poverty of thought, but the\n noble rhetoric which is alive with thought and imagination to its\n utmost and finest extremities.\"--_Expositor._\n\n LONDON: HODDER & STOUGHTON, 27, PATERNOSTER ROW, E.C.\n\n\n _PROFESSOR W. M. RAMSAY'S NEW WORK._\n\n _Second Edition. With Maps and Illustrations, 8vo, cloth, 21s._\n\n =THE CHURCH IN THE ROMAN EMPIRE\n BEFORE A.D. 170.=\n\n By W. M. RAMSAY, M.A.,\n\n Professor of Humanity in the University of Aberdeen.\n\n \"The whole volume is full of freshness and originality.... I lay\n down his book with warm and sincere admiration. He has succeeded\n in investing a number of critical discussions with extraordinary\n vividness and reality. He has done so because he writes always\n 'with his eye upon the object,' and that an object seen in the\n light of knowledge which, in its own special sphere (the geography\n of Asia Minor and Roman administration), is unrivalled.\"--Prof. W.\n SANDAY, _in the Expositor_.\n\n \"This volume is the most important contribution to the study of\n early Church history which has been published in this country\n since the great work of Bishop Lightfoot on the Apostolic fathers.\n It is, too, unless our memory fails us, without a rival in any\n foreign country.\"--_Guardian._\n\n\n _WORKS BY DR. JAMES STALKER._\n\n _Twenty-Third Thousand. Crown 8vo, cloth, 5s._\n\n =IMAGO CHRISTI:=\n\n The Example of Jesus Christ.\n\n \"An immortal book.\"--_Mr. Spurgeon._\n\n \"The execution is full of ingenuity, and the book can be\n recommended as a devout and thoughtful commentary on practical\n Christian life in many phases. Mr. Stalker has broad sympathies\n and a watchful eye, and speaks in a tone that will commend itself\n to all his readers.\"--_Saturday Review._\n\n\n _BY THE SAME AUTHOR._\n\n _Seventh Thousand. Crown 8vo, cloth, 5s._\n\n =THE PREACHER AND HIS MODELS:=\n\n The Yale Lectures on Preaching, 1891.\n\n \"Dr. Stalker sets Isaiah and Paul before the preacher as models for\n his imitation, and descants on this and kindred parts of ministerial\n work with much force and earnestness, and at the same time with\n careful sobriety. He happily avails himself of a considerable\n personal experience and a wide range of reading, and treats his\n subject in an interesting as well as stimulating manner. The volume\n is one of great excellence, and will be very helpful to the class\n for whose benefit it has been published.\"--_Scotsman._\n\n LONDON: HODDER & STOUGHTON, 27, PATERNOSTER ROW, E.C.\n\n\n THE THEOLOGICAL EDUCATOR.\n\n A Valuable Series of Text-Books.\n\n Edited by Rev. W. ROBERTSON NICOLL, M.A., LL.D.\n\n _Fcap. 8vo, cloth, 2s. 6d. each volume._\n\n _THREE NEW VOLUMES._\n\n =CHRISTIANITY AND EVOLUTION=. By the Rev. Prof. J. IVERACH, D.D.\n [_Shortly._\n\n =THE THEOLOGY OF THE NEW TESTAMENT=. By the Rev. Prof. W. F. ADENEY,\n M.A.\n\n =THE THEOLOGY OF THE OLD TESTAMENT=. By the Rev. Prof. W. H. BENNETT,\n M.A. [_Shortly._\n\n * * * * *\n\n =OUTLINES OF CHRISTIAN DOCTRINE=. By the Rev. H. C. G. MOULE, M.A.,\n Principal of Ridley Hall, Cambridge. Tenth Thousand.\n\n =A MANUAL OF CHURCH HISTORY=. By the Rev. A. C. JENNINGS, M.A. Two\n Volumes.\n\n Vol. I.--FROM THE FIRST TO THE TENTH CENTURY.\n Vol. II.--FROM THE ELEVENTH TO THE NINETEENTH CENTURY.\n\n =A MANUAL OF CHRISTIAN EVIDENCES=. By the Rev. C. A. ROW, M.A.,\n Prebendary of St. Paul's. Seventh Thousand.\n\n =AN INTRODUCTION TO THE NEW TESTAMENT=. By the Rev Prof. MARCUS DODS,\n D.D. Twelfth Thousand.\n\n =AN INTRODUCTION TO THE TEXTUAL CRITICISM OF THE NEW TESTAMENT=. By\n the Rev. Prof. B. B. WARFIELD, D.D. Fifth Thousand.\n\n =THE EXPOSITION OF THE APOSTLES' CREED=. By the Rev. J. E. YONGE,\n M.A., late Fellow of King's College, Cambridge.\n\n =A HEBREW GRAMMAR=. By the Rev. W. H. LOWE, M.A., Joint Author of \"A\n Commentary on the Psalms,\" etc., etc. Second Thousand.\n\n =A MANUAL OF THE BOOK OF COMMON PRAYER=. By the Rev. C. HOLE, B.A.,\n King's College, London. Third Thousand.\n\n =AN INTRODUCTION TO THE OLD TESTAMENT=. By the Rev. C. H. H. WRIGHT,\n D.D. Third Edition.\n\n =THE WRITERS OF THE NEW TESTAMENT; THEIR STYLE AND CHARACTERISTICS=.\n By the Rev. WILLIAM HENRY SIMCOX, M.A.\n\n =THE LANGUAGE OF THE NEW TESTAMENT=. By the SAME AUTHOR. Second\n Edition.\n\n LONDON: HODDER & STOUGHTON, 27, PATERNOSTER ROW, E.C.\n\n _REV. DR. ROBERTSON NICOLL'S NEW WORK._\n\n _Second Edition. Handsomely printed and bound, gilt top, 3s. 6d._\n\n THE KEY OF THE GRAVE:\n\n A Book for the Bereaved.\n\n By W. ROBERTSON NICOLL, M.A., LL.D.\n\n \"Dr. Robertson Nicoll has produced an unique, exquisite, and most\n edifying book. We are much impressed by the delicate and profound\n spiritual insight manifested on every page of this beautiful\n little volume. Many a familiar passage in the Bible shines with a\n new, unexpected, and immortal light. It is difficult to know what\n to quote from a volume so full of delightful and memorable\n passages. It is pre-eminently a book to put into the hands of the\n refined, sensitive, scholarly, and devout when they feel the awful\n pressure of the greatest bereavement.\"--_Methodist Times._\n\n\n _WORKS BY REV. PROF. A. B. BRUCE, D.D._\n\n _Third Edition. 8vo, cloth, 12s._\n\n THE MIRACULOUS ELEMENT IN THE\n GOSPELS.\n\n \"It displays minute acquaintance with the modern literature of the\n subject, and all forms of attack to which Christian belief in the\n supernatural has been subjected. The defence is able all round; and\n the closing chapters--in which the miracle implied in the character\n of Jesus is dwelt on, and where the defence is for a moment changed\n into attack--are full of spirit and fire.\"--_Methodist Recorder._\n\n _Fourth Edition. Crown 8vo, cloth, 6s._\n\n THE CHIEF END OF REVELATION.\n\n \"Dr. Bruce has given us a contribution of very great value. Like\n everything else that has come from his pen, this series of\n lectures has the conspicuous excellence of boldness, vigour,\n breadth, and moral elevation.\"--_Professor Salmond._\n\n _Fifth Edition. 8vo, cloth, 12s._\n\n THE PARABOLIC TEACHING OF CHRIST:\n\n A Systematic and Critical Study of the Parables\n of our Lord.\n\n \"Professor Bruce brings to his task the learning and the liberal\n and finely sympathetic spirit which are the best gifts of an\n expositor of Scripture. His treatment of his subject is vigorous\n and original.\"--_Spectator._\n\n _Fourth Edition. 3s. 6d._\n\n THE GALILEAN GOSPEL.\n\n \"The product of a rich, imaginative mind, marked by scholarly\n analysis, subtle insight, and the suggestiveness of an original\n and unconventional thinker.\"--_Glasgow Herald._\n\n \"We heartily commend this little volume.\"--_Spectator._\n\n LONDON: HODDER & STOUGHTON, 27, PATERNOSTER ROW, E.C.\n\n\n\n\nTranscriber's Notes:\n\n\nObvious punctuation and spelling errors have been fixed throughout.\n\nInconsistent hyphenation left as in the original text.","title":"The Expositor's Bible: The Second Epistle to the Corinthians","tradition":"scripture-revelation","translated_text":null,"word_count":121452}