the hope of the gospel by george macdonald contents salvation from sin the remission of sins jesus in the world jesus and his fellow townsmen the heirs of heaven and earth sorrow the pledge of joy god's family the reward of obedience the yoke of jesus the salt and the light of the world the right hand and the left the hope of the universe _salvation from sin_. --and thou shalt call his name jesus; for he shall save his people from their sins.--_matthew_ i. . i would help some to understand what jesus came from the home of our father to be to us and do for us. everything in the world is more or less misunderstood at first: we have to learn what it is, and come at length to see that it must be so, that it could not be otherwise. then we know it; and we never know a thing _really_ until we know it thus. i presume there is scarce a human being who, resolved to speak openly, would not confess to having something that plagued him, something from which he would gladly be free, something rendering it impossible for him, at the moment, to regard life as an altogether good thing. most men, i presume, imagine that, free of such and such things antagonistic, life would be an unmingled satisfaction, worthy of being prolonged indefinitely. the causes of their discomfort are of all kinds, and the degrees of it reach from simple uneasiness to a misery such as makes annihilation the highest hope of the sufferer who can persuade himself of its possibility. perhaps the greater part of the energy of this world's life goes forth in the endeavour to rid itself of discomfort. some, to escape it, leave their natural surroundings behind them, and with strong and continuous effort keep rising in the social scale, to discover at every new ascent fresh trouble, as they think, awaiting them, whereas in truth they have brought the trouble with them. others, making haste to be rich, are slow to find out that the poverty of their souls, none the less that their purses are filling, will yet keep them unhappy. some court endless change, nor know that on themselves the change must pass that will set them free. others expand their souls with knowledge, only to find that content will not dwell in the great house they have built. to number the varieties of human endeavour to escape discomfort would be to enumerate all the modes of such life as does not know how to live. all seek the thing whose defect appears the _cause_ of their misery, and is but the variable _occasion_ of it, the cause of the shape it takes, not of the misery itself; for, when one apparent cause is removed, another at once succeeds. the real cause of his trouble is a something the man has not perhaps recognized as even existent; in any case he is not yet acquainted with its true nature. however absurd the statement may appear to one who has not yet discovered the fact for himself, the cause of every man's discomfort is evil, moral evil--first of all, evil in himself, his own sin, his own wrongness, his own unrightness; and then, evil in those he loves: with this latter i have not now to deal; the only way to get rid of it, is for the man to get rid of his own sin. no special sin may be recognizable as having caused this or that special physical discomfort--which may indeed have originated with some ancestor; but evil in ourselves is the cause of its continuance, the source of its necessity, and the preventive of that patience which would soon take from it, or at least blunt its sting. the evil is _essentially_ unnecessary, and passes with the attainment of the object for which it is permitted--namely, the development of pure will in man; the suffering also is essentially unnecessary, but while the evil lasts, the suffering, whether consequent or merely concomitant, is absolutely necessary. foolish is the man, and there are many such men, who would rid himself or his fellows of discomfort by setting the world right, by waging war on the evils around him, while he neglects that integral part of the world where lies his business, his first business--namely, his own character and conduct. were it possible--an absurd supposition--that the world should thus be righted from the outside, it would yet be impossible for the man who had contributed to the work, remaining what he was, ever to enjoy the perfection of the result; himself not in tune with the organ he had tuned, he must imagine it still a distracted, jarring instrument. the philanthropist who regards the wrong as in the race, forgetting that the race is made up of conscious and wrong individuals, forgets also that wrong is always generated in and done by an individual; that the wrongness exists in the individual, and by him is passed over, as tendency, to the race; and that no evil can be cured in the race, except by its being cured in its individuals: tendency is not absolute evil; it is there that it may be resisted, not yielded to. there is no way of making three men right but by making right each one of the three; but a cure in one man who repents and turns, is a beginning of the cure of the whole human race. even if a man's suffering be a far inheritance, for the curing of which by faith and obedience this life would not be sufficiently long, faith and obedience will yet render it endurable to the man, and overflow in help to his fellow-sufferers. the groaning body, wrapt in the garment of hope, will, with outstretched neck, look for its redemption, and endure. the one cure for any organism, is to be set right--to have all its parts brought into harmony with each other; the one comfort is to know this cure in process. rightness alone is cure. the return of the organism to its true self, is its only possible ease. to free a man from suffering, he must be set right, put in health; and the health at the root of man's being, his rightness, is to be free from wrongness, that is, from sin. a man is right when there is no wrong in him. the wrong, the evil is in him; he must be set free from it. i do not mean set free from the sins he has done: that will follow; i mean the sins he is doing, or is capable of doing; the sins in his being which spoil his nature--the wrongness in him--the evil he consents to; the sin he is, which makes him do the sin he does. to save a man from his sins, is to say to him, in sense perfect and eternal, 'rise up and walk. be at liberty in thy essential being. be free as the son of god is free.' to do this for us, jesus was born, and remains born to all the ages. when misery drives a man to call out to the source of his life,--and i take the increasing outcry against existence as a sign of the growth of the race toward a sense of the need of regeneration--the answer, i think, will come in a quickening of his conscience. this earnest of the promised deliverance may not, in all probability will not be what the man desires; he will want only to be rid of his suffering; but that he cannot have, save in being delivered from its essential root, a thing infinitely worse than any suffering it can produce. if he will not have that deliverance, he must keep his suffering. through chastisement he will take at last the only way that leads into the liberty of that which is and must be. there can be no deliverance but to come out of his evil dream into the glory of god. it is true that jesus came, in delivering us from our sins, to deliver us also from the painful consequences of our sins. but these consequences exist by the one law of the universe, the true will of the perfect. that broken, that disobeyed by the creature, disorganization renders suffering inevitable; it is the natural consequence of the unnatural--and, in the perfection of god's creation, the result is curative of the cause; the pain at least tends to the healing of the breach. the lord never came to deliver men from the consequences of their sins while yet those sins remained: that would be to cast out of window the medicine of cure while yet the man lay sick; to go dead against the very laws of being. yet men, loving their sins, and feeling nothing of their dread hatefulness, have, consistently with their low condition, constantly taken this word concerning the lord to mean that he came to save them from the punishment of their sins. the idea--the miserable fancy rather--has terribly corrupted the preaching of the gospel. the message of the good news has not been truly delivered. unable to believe in the forgiveness of their father in heaven, imagining him not at liberty to forgive, or incapable of forgiving forthright; not really believing him god our saviour, but a god bound, either in his own nature or by a law above him and compulsory upon him, to exact some recompense or satisfaction for sin, a multitude of teaching men have taught their fellows that jesus came to bear our punishment and save us from hell. they have represented a result as the object of his mission--the said result nowise to be desired by true man save as consequent on the gain of his object. the mission of jesus was from the same source and with the same object as the punishment of our sins. he came to work along with our punishment. he came to side with it, and set us free from our sins. no man is safe from hell until he is free from his sins; but a man to whom his sins, that is the evil things in him, are a burden, while he may indeed sometimes feel as if he were in hell, will soon have forgotten that ever he had any other hell to think of than that of his sinful condition. for to him his sins are hell; he would go to the other hell to be free of them; free of them, hell itself would be endurable to him. for hell is god's and not the devil's. hell is on the side of god and man, to free the child of god from the corruption of death. not one soul will ever be redeemed from hell but by being saved from his sins, from the evil in him. if hell be needful to save him, hell will blaze, and the worm will writhe and bite, until he takes refuge in the will of the father. 'salvation from hell, is salvation as conceived by such to whom hell and not evil is the terror.' but if even for dread of hell a poor soul seek the father, he will be heard of him in his terror, and, taught of him to seek the immeasurably greater gift, will in the greater receive the less. there is another important misapprehension of the words of the messengers of the good tidings--that they threaten us with punishment because of the sins we have committed, whereas their message is of forgiveness, not of vengeance; of deliverance, not of evil to come. not for anything he has committed do they threaten a man with the outer darkness. not for any or all of his sins that are past shall a man be condemned; not for the worst of them needs he dread remaining unforgiven. the sin he dwells in, the sin he will not come out of, is the sole ruin of a man. his present, his live sins--those pervading his thoughts and ruling his conduct; the sins he keeps doing, and will not give up; the sins he is called to abandon, and clings to; the same sins which are the cause of his misery, though he may not know it--these are they for which he is even now condemned. it is true the memory of the wrongs we have done is, or will become very bitter; but not for those is condemnation; and if that in our character which made them possible were abolished, remorse would lose its worst bitterness in the hope of future amends. 'this is the condemnation, that light is come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil.' it is the indwelling badness, ready to produce bad actions, that we need to be delivered from. against this badness if a man will not strive, he is left to commit evil and reap the consequences. to be saved from these consequences, would be no deliverance; it would be an immediate, ever deepening damnation. it is the evil in our being--no essential part of it, thank god!--the miserable fact that the very child of god does not care for his father and will not obey him, causing us to desire wrongly, act wrongly, or, where we try not to act wrongly, yet making it impossible for us not to feel wrongly--this is what he came to deliver us from;--not the things we have done, but the possibility of doing such things any more. with the departure of this possibility, and with the hope of confession hereafter to those we have wronged, will depart also the power over us of the evil things we have done, and so we shall be saved from them also. the bad that lives in us, our evil judgments, our unjust desires, our hate and pride and envy and greed and self-satisfaction--these are the souls of our sins, our live sins, more terrible than the bodies of our sins, namely the deeds we do, inasmuch as they not only produce these loathsome things, but make us loathsome as they. our wrong deeds are our dead works; our evil thoughts are our live sins. these, the essential opposites of faith and love, the sins that dwell and work in us, are the sins from which jesus came to deliver us. when we turn against them and refuse to obey them, they rise in fierce insistence, but the same moment begin to die. we are then on the lord's side, as he has always been on ours, and he begins to deliver us from them. anything in you, which, in your own child, would make you feel him not so pleasant as you would have him, is something wrong. this may mean much to one, little or nothing to another. things in a child which to one parent would not seem worth minding, would fill another with horror. after his moral development, where the one parent would smile, the other would look aghast, perceiving both the present evil, and the serpent-brood to follow. but as the love of him who is love, transcends ours as the heavens are higher than the earth, so must he desire in his child infinitely more than the most jealous love of the best mother can desire in hers. he would have him rid of all discontent, all fear, all grudging, all bitterness in word or thought, all gauging and measuring of his own with a different rod from that he would apply to another's. he will have no curling of the lip; no indifference in him to the man whose service in any form he uses; no desire to excel another, no contentment at gaining by his loss. he will not have him receive the smallest service without gratitude; would not hear from him a tone to jar the heart of another, a word to make it ache, be the ache ever so transient. from such, as from all other sins, jesus was born to deliver us; not, primarily, or by itself, from the punishment of any of them. when all are gone, the holy punishment will have departed also. he came to make us good, and therein blessed children. one master-sin is at the root of all the rest. it is no individual action, or anything that comes of mood, or passion; it is the non-recognition by the man, and consequent inactivity in him, of the highest of all relations, that relation which is the root and first essential condition of every other true relation of or in the human soul. it is the absence in the man of harmony with the being whose thought is the man's existence, whose word is the man's power of thought. it is true that, being thus his offspring, god, as st paul affirms, cannot be far from any one of us: were we not in closest contact of creating and created, we could not exist; as we have in us no power to be, so have we none to continue being; but there is a closer contact still, as absolutely necessary to our well-being and highest existence, as the other to our being at all, to the mere capacity of faring well or ill. for the highest creation of god in man is his will, and until the highest in man meets the highest in god, their true relation is not yet a spiritual fact. the flower lies in the root, but the root is not the flower. the relation exists, but while one of the parties neither knows, loves, nor acts upon it, the relation is, as it were, yet unborn. the highest in man is neither his intellect nor his imagination nor his reason; all are inferior to his will, and indeed, in a grand way, dependent upon it: his will must meet god's--a will _distinct_ from god's, else were no _harmony_ possible between them. not the less, therefore, but the more, is all god's. for god creates in the man the power to will his will. it may cost god a suffering man can never know, to bring the man to the point at which he will will his will; but when he is brought to that point, and declares for the truth, that is, for the will of god, he becomes one with god, and the end of god in the man's creation, the end for which jesus was born and died, is gained. the man is saved from his sins, and the universe flowers yet again in his redemption. but i would not be supposed, from what i have said, to imagine the lord without sympathy for the sorrows and pains which reveal what sin is, and by means of which he would make men sick of sin. with everything human he sympathizes. evil is not human; it is the defect and opposite of the human; but the suffering that follows it is human, belonging of necessity to the human that has sinned: while it is by cause of sin, suffering is _for_ the sinner, that he may be delivered from his sin. jesus is in himself aware of every human pain. he feels it also. in him too it is pain. with the energy of tenderest love he wills his brothers and sisters free, that he may fill them to overflowing with that essential thing, joy. for that they were indeed created. but the moment they exist, truth becomes the first thing, not happiness; and he must make them true. were it possible, however, for pain to continue after evil was gone, he would never rest while one ache was yet in the world. perfect in sympathy, he feels in himself, i say, the tortured presence of every nerve that lacks its repose. the man may recognize the evil in him only as pain; he may know little and care nothing about his sins; yet is the lord sorry for his pain. he cries aloud, 'come unto me, all ye that labour and are heavy laden, and i will give you rest.' he does not say, 'come unto me, all ye that feel the burden of your sins;' he opens his arms to all weary enough to come to him in the poorest hope of rest. right gladly would he free them from their misery--but he knows only one way: he will teach them to be like himself, meek and lowly, bearing with gladness the yoke of his father's will. this is the one, the only right, the only possible way of freeing them from their sins, the cause of their unrest. with them the weariness comes first; with him the sins: there is but one cure for both--the will of the father. that which is his joy will be their deliverance! he might indeed, it may be, take from them the human, send them down to some lower stage of being, and so free them from suffering--but that must be either a descent toward annihilation, or a fresh beginning to grow up again toward the region of suffering they have left; for that which is not growing must at length die out of creation. the disobedient and selfish would fain in the hell of their hearts possess the liberty and gladness that belong to purity and love, but they cannot have them; they are weary and heavy-laden, both with what they are, and because of what they were made for but are not. the lord knows what they need; they know only what they want. they want ease; he knows they need purity. their very existence is an evil, of which, but for his resolve to purify them, their maker must rid his universe. how can he keep in his sight a foul presence? must the creator send forth his virtue to hold alive a thing that will be evil--a thing that ought not to be, that has no claim but to cease? the lord himself would not live save with an existence absolutely good. it may be my reader will desire me to say _how_ the lord will deliver him from his sins. that is like the lawyer's 'who is my neighbour?' the spirit of such a mode of receiving the offer of the lord's deliverance, is the root of all the horrors of a corrupt theology, so acceptable to those who love weak and beggarly hornbooks of religion. such questions spring from the passion for the fruit of the tree of knowledge, not the fruit of the tree of life. men would understand: they do not care to _obey_,--understand where it is impossible they should understand save by obeying. they would search into the work of the lord instead of doing their part in it--thus making it impossible both for the lord to go on with his work, and for themselves to become capable of seeing and understanding what he does. instead of immediately obeying the lord of life, the one condition upon which he can help them, and in itself the beginning of their deliverance, they set themselves to question their unenlightened intellects as to his plans for their deliverance--and not merely how he means to effect it, but how he can be able to effect it. they would bind their samson until they have scanned his limbs and thews. incapable of understanding the first motions of freedom in themselves, they proceed to interpret the riches of his divine soul in terms of their own beggarly notions, to paraphrase his glorious verse into their own paltry commercial prose; and then, in the growing presumption of imagined success, to insist upon their neighbours' acceptance of their distorted shadows of 'the plan of salvation' as the truth of him in whom is no darkness, and the one condition of their acceptance with him. they delay setting their foot on the stair which alone can lead them to the house of wisdom, until they shall have determined the material and mode of its construction. for the sake of knowing, they postpone that which alone can enable them to know, and substitute for the true understanding which lies beyond, a false persuasion that they already understand. they will not accept, that is, act upon, their highest privilege, that of obeying the son of god. it is on them that do his will, that the day dawns; to them the day-star arises in their hearts. obedience is the soul of knowledge. by obedience, i intend no kind of obedience to man, or submission to authority claimed by man or community of men. i mean obedience to the will of the father, however revealed in our conscience. god forbid i should seem to despise understanding. the new testament is full of urgings to understand. our whole life, to be life at all, must be a growth in understanding. what i cry out upon is the misunderstanding that comes of man's endeavour to understand while not obeying. upon obedience our energy must be spent; understanding will follow. not anxious to know our duty, or knowing it and not doing it, how shall we understand that which only a true heart and a clean soul can ever understand? the power in us that would understand were it free, lies in the bonds of imperfection and impurity, and is therefore incapable of judging the divine. it cannot see the truth. if it could see it, it would not know it, and would not have it. until a man begins to obey, the light that is in him is darkness. any honest soul may understand this much, however--for it is a thing we may of ourselves judge to be right--that the lord cannot save a man from his sins while he holds to his sins. an omnipotence that could do and not do the same thing at the same moment, were an idea too absurd for mockery; an omnipotence that could at once make a man a free man, and leave him a self-degraded slave--make him the very likeness of god, and good only because he could not help being good, would be an idea of the same character--equally absurd, equally self-contradictory. but the lord is not unreasonable; he requires no high motives where such could not yet exist. he does not say, 'you must be sorry for your sins, or you need not come to me:' to be sorry for his sins a man must love god and man, and love is the very thing that has to be developed in him. it is but common sense that a man, longing to be freed from suffering, or made able to bear it, should betake himself to the power by whom he is. equally is it common sense that, if a man would be delivered from the evil in him, he must himself begin to cast it out, himself begin to disobey it, and work righteousness. as much as either is it common sense that a man should look for and expect the help of his father in the endeavour. alone, he might labour to all eternity and not succeed. he who has not made himself, cannot set himself right without him who made him. but his maker is in him, and is his strength. the man, however, who, instead of doing what he is told, broods speculating on the metaphysics of him who calls him to his work, stands leaning his back against the door by which the lord would enter to help him. the moment he sets about putting straight the thing that is crooked--i mean doing right where he has been doing wrong, he withdraws from the entrance, gives way for the master to come in. he cannot make himself pure, but he can leave that which is impure; he can spread out the 'defiled, discoloured web' of his life before the bleaching sun of righteousness; he cannot save himself, but he can let the lord save him. the struggle of his weakness is as essential to the coming victory as the strength of him who resisted unto death, striving against sin. the sum of the whole matter is this:--the son has come from the father to set the children free from their sins; the children must hear and obey him, that he may send forth judgment unto victory. son of our father, help us to do what thou sayest, and so with thee die unto sin, that we may rise to the sonship for which we were created. help us to repent even to the sending away of our sins. _the remission of sins._ john did baptize in the wilderness, and preach the baptism of repentance for the remission of sins.--_mark_ i. . god and man must combine for salvation from sin, and the same word, here and elsewhere translated _remission_, seems to be employed in the new testament for the share of either in the great deliverance. but first let me say something concerning the word here and everywhere translated _repentance_. i would not even suggest a mistranslation; but the idea intended by the word has been so misunderstood and therefore mistaught, that it requires some consideration of the word itself to get at a right recognition of the moral fact it represents. the greek word then, of which the word _repentance_ is the accepted synonym and fundamentally the accurate rendering, is made up of two words, the conjoint meaning of which is, _a change of mind_ or _thought_. there is in it no intent of, or hint at _sorrow_ or _shame_, or any other of the mental conditions that, not unfrequently accompanying repentance, have been taken for essential parts of it, sometimes for its very essence. here, the last of the prophets, or the evangelist who records his doings, qualifies the word, as if he held it insufficient in itself to convey the baptist's meaning, with the three words that follow it--_[greek: eis aphesin amartiôn:--kaerussôn baptisma metauoias eis aphesin amartiôn]_--'preaching a baptism of repentance--_unto a sending away of sins'._ i do not say the phrase _[greek: aphesis amartiôn]_ never means _forgiveness,_ one form at least of _god's_ sending away of sins; neither do i say that the taking of the phrase to mean _repentance for the remission of sins_, namely, repentance in order to obtain the pardon of god, involves any inconsistency; but i say that the word _[greek: eis]_ rather _unto_ than _for;_ that the word _[greek: aphesis],_ translated _remission_, means, fundamentally, a _sending away,_ a _dismissal;_ and that the writer seems to use the added phrase to make certain what he means by _repentance;_ a repentance, namely, that reaches to the sending away, or abjurement of sins. i do not think _a change of mind unto the remission or pardon of sin_ would be nearly so logical a phrase as _a change of mind unto the dismission of sinning._ the revised version refuses the word _for_ and chooses _unto,_ though it retains _remission,_ which word, now, conveys no meaning except the forgiveness of god. i think that here the same word is used for man's dismission of his sins, as is elsewhere used for god's dismission or remission of them. in both uses, it is a sending away of sins, with the difference of meaning that comes from the differing sources of the action. both god and man send away sins, but in the one case god sends away the sins of the man, and in the other the man sends away his own sins. i do not enter into the question whether god's aphesis may or may not mean as well the sending of his sins out of a man, as the pardon of them; whether it may not sometimes mean _dismission,_ and sometimes _remission_: i am sure the one deed cannot be separated from the other. that the phrase here intends repentance unto the ceasing from sin, the giving up of what is wrong, i will try to show at least probable. in the first place, the user of the phrase either defines the change of mind he means as one that has for its object the pardon of god, or as one that reaches to a new life: the latter seems to me the more natural interpretation by far. the kind and scope of the repentance or change, and not any end to be gained by it, appears intended. the change must be one of will and conduct--a radical change of life on the part of the man: he must repent--that is, change his mind--not to a different opinion, not even to a mere betterment of his conduct--not to anything less than a sending away of his sins. this interpretation of the preaching of the baptist seems to me, i repeat, the more direct, the fuller of meaning, the more logical. next, in st matthew's gospel, the baptist's buttressing argument, or imminent motive for the change he is pressing upon the people is, that the kingdom of heaven is at hand: 'because the king of heaven is coming, you must give up your sinning.' the same argument for immediate action lies in his quotation from isaiah,--'prepare ye the way of the lord; make straight in the desert a highway for our god.' the only true, the only possible preparation for the coming lord, is to cease from doing evil, and begin to do well--to send away sin. they must cleanse, not the streets of their cities, not their houses or their garments or even their persons, but their hearts and their doings. it is true the baptist did not see that the kingdom coming was not of this world, but of the higher world in the hearts of men; it is true that his faith failed him in his imprisonment, because he heard of no martial movement on the part of the lord, no assertion of his sovereignty, no convincing show of his power; but he did see plainly that righteousness was essential to the kingdom of heaven. that he did not yet perceive that righteousness _is_ the kingdom of heaven; that he did not see that the lord was already initiating his kingdom by sending away sin out of the hearts of his people, is not wonderful. the lord's answer to his fore-runner's message of doubt, was to send his messenger back an eye-witness of what he was doing, so to wake or clarify in him the perception that his kingdom was not of this world--that he dealt with other means to another end than john had yet recognized as his mission or object; for obedient love in the heart of the poorest he healed or persuaded, was his kingdom come. again, observe that, when the pharisees came to john, he said to them, 'bring forth therefore fruits meet for repentance:' is not this the same as, 'repent unto the sending away of your sins'? note also, that, when the multitudes came to the prophet, and all, with the classes most obnoxious to the rest, the publicans and the soldiers, asked what he would have them do--thus plainly recognizing that something was required of them--his instruction was throughout in the same direction: they must send away their sins; and each must begin with the fault that lay next him. the kingdom of heaven was at hand: they must prepare the way of the lord by beginning to do as must be done in his kingdom. they could not rid themselves of their sins, but they could set about sending them away; they could quarrel with them, and proceed to turn them out of the house: the lord was on his way to do his part in their final banishment. those who had repented to the sending away of their sins, he would baptize with a holy power to send them away indeed. the operant will to get rid of them would be baptized with a fire that should burn them up. when a man breaks with his sins, then the wind of the lord's fan will blow them away, the fire of the lord's heart will consume them. i think, then, that the part of the repentant man, and not the part of god, in the sending away of sins, is intended here. it is the man's one preparation for receiving the power to overcome them, the baptism of fire. not seldom, what comes in the name of the gospel of jesus christ, must seem, even to one not far from the kingdom of heaven, no good news at all. it does not draw him; it wakes in him not a single hope. he has no desire after what it offers him as redemption. the god it gives him news of, is not one to whom he would draw nearer. but when such a man comes to see that the very god must be his life, the heart of his consciousness; when he perceives that, rousing himself to put from him what is evil, and do the duty that lies at his door, he may fearlessly claim the help of him who 'loved him into being,' then his will immediately sides with his conscience; he begins to try to _be_; and--first thing toward being--to rid himself of what is antagonistic to all being, namely _wrong_. multitudes will not even approach the appalling task, the labour and pain of _being_. god is doing his part, is undergoing the mighty toil of an age-long creation, endowing men with power to be; but few as yet are those who take up their part, who respond to the call of god, who will to be, who put forth a divine effort after real existence. to the many, the spirit of the prophet cries, 'turn ye, and change your way! the kingdom of heaven is near you. let your king possess his own. let god throne himself in you, that his liberty be your life, and you free men. that he may enter, clear the house for him. send away the bad things out of it. depart from evil, and do good. the duty that lieth at thy door, do it, be it great or small.' for indeed in this region there is no great or small. 'be content with your wages,' said the baptist to the soldiers. to many people now, the word would be, 'rule your temper;' or, 'be courteous to all;' or, 'let each hold the other better than himself;' or, 'be just to your neighbour that you may love him.' to make straight in the desert a highway for our god, we must bestir ourselves in the very spot of the desert on which we stand; we must cast far from us our evil thing that blocks the way of his chariot-wheels. if we do not, never will those wheels roll through our streets; never will our desert blossom with his roses. the message of john to his countrymen, was then, and is yet, the one message to the world:--'send away your sins, for the kingdom of heaven is near.' some of us--i cannot say _all_, for i do not know--who have already repented, who have long ago begun to send away our sins, need fresh repentance every day--how many times a day, god only knows. we are so ready to get upon some path that seems to run parallel with the narrow way, and then take no note of its divergence! what is there for us when we discover that we are out of the way, but to bethink ourselves and turn? by those 'who need no repentance,' the lord may have meant such as had repented perfectly, had sent away all their sins, and were now with him in his father's house; also such as have never sinned, and such as no longer turn aside for any temptation. we shall now, perhaps, be able to understand the relation of the lord himself to the baptism of john. he came to john to be baptized; and most would say john's baptism was of repentance for the remission or pardon of sins. but the lord could not be baptized for the remission of sins, for he had never done a selfish, an untrue, or an unfair thing. he had never wronged his father, any more than ever his father had wronged him. happy, happy son and father, who had never either done the other wrong, in thought, word, or deed! as little had he wronged brother or sister. he needed no forgiveness; there was nothing to forgive. no more could he be baptized for repentance: in him repentance would have been to turn to evil! where then was the propriety of his coming to be baptized by john, and insisting on being by him baptized? it must lie elsewhere. if we take the words of john to mean 'the baptism of repentance unto the sending away of sins;' and if we bear in mind that in his case repentance could not be, inasmuch as what repentance is necessary to bring about in man, was already existent in jesus; then, altering the words to fit the case, and saying, 'the baptism of willed devotion to the sending away of sin,' we shall see at once how the baptism of jesus was a thing right and fit. that he had no sin to repent of, was not because he was so constituted that he could not sin if he would; it was because, of his own will and judgment, he sent sin away from him--sent it from him with the full choice and energy of his nature. god knows good and evil, and, blessed be his name, chooses good. never will his righteous anger make him unfair to us, make him forget that we are dust. like him, his son also chose good, and in that choice resisted all temptation to help his fellows otherwise than as their and his father would. instead of crushing the power of evil by divine force; instead of compelling justice and destroying the wicked; instead of making peace on the earth by the rule of a perfect prince; instead of gathering the children of jerusalem under his wings whether they would or not, and saving them from the horrors that anguished his prophetic soul--he let evil work its will while it lived; he contented himself with the slow unencouraging ways of help essential; making men good; casting out, not merely controlling satan; carrying to their perfect issue on earth the old primeval principles because of which the father honoured him: 'thou hast loved righteousness and hated iniquity; therefore god, even thy god, hath anointed thee with the oil of gladness above thy fellows.' to love righteousness is to make it grow, not to avenge it; and to win for righteousness the true victory, he, as well as his brethren, had to send away evil. throughout his life on earth, he resisted every impulse to work more rapidly for a lower good,--strong perhaps when he saw old age and innocence and righteousness trodden under foot. what but this gives any worth of reality to the temptation in the wilderness, to the devil's departing from him for a season, to his coming again to experience a like failure? ever and ever, in the whole attitude of his being, in his heart always lifted up, in his unfailing readiness to pull with the father's yoke, he was repelling, driving away sin--away from himself, and, as lord of men, and their saviour, away from others also, bringing them to abjure it like himself. no man, least of all any lord of men, can be good without willing to be good, without setting himself against evil, without sending away sin. other men have to send it away out of them; the lord had to send it away from before him, that it should not enter into him. therefore is the stand against sin common to the captain of salvation and the soldiers under him. what did jesus come into the world to do? the will of god in saving his people from their sins--not from the punishment of their sins, that blessed aid to repentance, but from their sins themselves, the paltry as well as the heinous, the venial as well as the loathsome. his whole work was and is to send away sin--to banish it from the earth, yea, to cast it into the abyss of non-existence behind the back of god. his was the holy war; he came carrying it into our world; he resisted unto blood; the soldiers that followed him he taught and trained to resist also unto blood, striving against sin; so he became the captain of their salvation, and they, freed themselves, fought and suffered for others. this was the task to which he was baptized; this is yet his enduring labour. 'this is my blood of the new covenant which is shed for many unto the sending away of sins.' what was the new covenant? 'i will make a new covenant with the house of israel and with the house of judah; not according to the covenant which they brake, but this: i will put my law in their inward parts, and write it in their hearts, and will be their god, and they shall be my people.' john baptized unto repentance because those to whom he was sent had to repent. they must bethink themselves, and send away the sin that was in them. but had there been a man, aware of no sin in him, but aware that life would be no life were not sin kept out of him, that man would have been right in receiving the baptism of john unto the continuous dismission of the sin ever wanting to enter in at his door. the object of the baptism was the sending away of sin; its object was repentance only where necessary to, only as introducing, as resulting in that. he to whom john was not sent, he whom he did not call, he who needed no repentance, was baptized for the same object, to the same conflict for the same end--the banishment of sin from the dominions of his father--and that first by his own sternest repudiation of it in himself. thence came his victory in the wilderness: he would have his fathers way, not his own. could he be less fitted to receive the baptism of john, that the object of it was no new thing with him, who had been about it from the beginning, yea, from all eternity? we shall be about it, i presume, to all eternity. such, then, as were baptized by john, were initiated into the company of those whose work was to send sin out of the world, and first, by sending it out of themselves, by having done with it. their earliest endeavour in this direction would, as i have said, open the door for that help to enter without which a man could never succeed in the divinely arduous task--could not, because the region in which the work has to be wrought lies in the very roots of his own being, where, knowing nothing of the secrets of his essential existence, he can immediately do nothing, where the maker of him alone is potent, alone is consciously present. the change that must pass in him more than equals a new creation, inasmuch as it is a higher creation. but its necessity is involved in the former creation; and thence we have a right to ask help of our creator, for he requires of us what he has created us unable to effect without him. nay, nay!--could we do anything without him, it were a thing to leave undone. blessed fact that he hath made us so near him! that the scale of our being is so large, that we are completed only by his presence in it! that we are not men without him! that we can be one with our self-existent creator! that we are not cut off from the original infinite! that in him we must share infinitude, or be enslaved by the finite! the very patent of our royalty is, that not for a moment can we live our true life without the eternal life present in and with our spirits. without him at our unknown root, we cease to be. true, a dog cannot live without the presence of god; but i presume a dog may live a good dog-life without knowing the presence of his origin: man is dead if he know not the power which is his cause, his deepest selfing self; the presence which is not himself, and is nearer to him than himself; which is infinitely more himself, more his very being, than he is himself. the being of which we are conscious, is not our full self; the extent of our consciousness of our self is no measure of our self; our consciousness is infinitely less than we; while god is more necessary even to that poor consciousness of self than our self-consciousness is necessary to our humanity. until a man become the power of his own existence, become his own god, the sole thing necessary to his existing is the will of god; for the well-being and perfecting of that existence, the sole thing necessary is, that the man should know his maker present in him. all that the children want is their father. the one true end of all speech concerning holy things is--the persuading of the individual man to cease to do evil, to set himself to do well, to look to the lord of his life to be on his side in the new struggle. supposing the suggestions i have made correct, i do not care that my reader should understand them, except it be to turn against the evil in him, and begin to cast it out. if this be not the result, it is of no smallest consequence whether he agree with my interpretation or not. if he do thus repent, it is of equally little consequence; for, setting himself to do the truth, he is on the way to know all things. real knowledge has begun to grow possible for him. i am not sure what the lord means in the words, 'thus it becometh us to fulfil all righteousness.' baptism could not be the fulfilling of all righteousness! perhaps he means, 'we must, by a full act of the will, give ourselves altogether to righteousness. we must make it the business of our lives to send away sin, and do the will of the father. that is my work as much as the work of any man who must repent ere he can begin. i will not be left out when you call men to be pure as our father is pure.' to be certain whom he intends by _us_ might perhaps help us to see his meaning. does he intend _all of us men_? does he intend 'my father and me'? or does he intend 'you and me, john'? if the saying mean what i have suggested, then the _us_ would apply to all that have the knowledge of good and evil. 'every being that can, must devote himself to righteousness. to be right is no adjunct of completeness; it is the ground and foundation of existence.' but perhaps it was a lesson for john himself, who, mighty preacher of righteousness as he was, did not yet count it the all of life. i cannot tell. note that when the lord began his teaching, he employed, neither using nor inculcating any rite, the same words as john,--'repent, for the kingdom of heaven is at hand.' that kingdom had been at hand all his infancy, boyhood, and young manhood: he was in the world with his father in his heart: that was the kingdom of heaven. lonely man on the hillside, or boy the cynosure of doctor-eyes, his father was everything to him:--'wist ye not that i must be in my father's things?' _jesus in the world._ 'son, why hast thou thus dealt with us? behold, thy father and i have sought thee sorrowing.' and he said unto them, 'how is it that ye sought me? wist ye not that i must be about my father's business?' and they understood not the saying which he spake unto them.--_luke_ ii. - . was that his saying? why did they not understand it? do we understand it? what did his saying mean? the greek is not absolutely clear. whether the syriac words he used were more precise, who in this world can tell? but had we heard his very words, we too, with his father and mother, would have failed to understand them. must we fail still? it will show at once where our initial difficulty lies, if i give the latter half of the saying as presented in the revised english version: its departure from the authorized reveals the point of obscurity:--'wist ye not that i must be in my father's house?' his parents had his exact words, yet did not understand. we have not his exact words, and are in doubt as to what the greek translation of them means. if the authorized translation be true to the intent of the greek, and therefore to that of the syriac, how could his parents, knowing him as they did from all that had been spoken before concerning him, from all they had seen in him, from the ponderings in mary's own heart, and from the precious thoughts she and joseph cherished concerning him, have failed to understand him when he said that wherever he was, he must be about his father's business? on the other hand, supposing them to know and feel that he must be about his father's business, would that have been reason sufficient, in view of the degree of spiritual development to which they had attained, for the lord's expecting them not to be anxious about him when they had lost him? thousands on thousands who trust god for their friends in things spiritual, do not trust him for them in regard of their mere health or material well-being. his parents knew how prophets had always been treated in the land; or if they did not think in that direction, there were many dangers to which a boy like him would seem exposed, to rouse an anxiety that could be met only by a faith equal to saying, 'whatever has happened to him, death itself, it can be no evil to one who is about his father's business;' and such a faith i think the lord could not yet have expected of them. that what the world counts misfortune might befall him on his father's business, would have been recognized by him, i think, as reason for their parental anxiety--so long as they had not learned god--that he is what he is--the thing the lord had come to teach his father's men and women. his words seem rather to imply that there was no need to be anxious about his personal safety. fear of some accident to him seems to have been the cause of their trouble; and he did not mean, i think, that they ought not to mind if he died doing his father's will, but that he was in no danger as regarded accident or misfortune. this will appear more plainly as we proceed. so much for the authorized version. let us now take the translation given us by the revisers:--'wist ye not that i must be in my father's house?' are they authorized in translating the greek thus? i know no justification for it, but am not learned enough to say they have none. that the syriac has it so, is of little weight; seeing it is no original syriac, but retranslation. if he did say '_my father's house_', could he have meant the temple and his parents not have known what he meant? and why should he have taken it for granted they would know, or judge that they ought to have known, that he was there? so little did the temple suggest itself to them, that either it was the last place in which they sought him, or they had been there before, and had _not_ found him. if he meant that they might have known this without being told, why was it that, even when he set the thing before them, they did not understand him? i do not believe he meant the temple; i do not think he said or meant '_in my fathers house'_. what then makes those who give us this translation, prefer it to the phrase in the authorized version, '_about my father's business_'? one or other of two causes--most likely both together: an ecclesiastical fancy, and the mere fact that he was found in the temple. a mind ecclesiastical will presume the temple the fittest, therefore most likely place, for the son of god to betake himself to, but such a mind would not be the first to reflect that the temple was a place where the father was worshipped neither in spirit nor in truth--a place built by one of the vilest rulers of this world, less fit than many another spot for the special presence of him of whom the prophet bears witness: 'thus saith the high and lofty one that inhabiteth eternity, whose name is holy; i dwell in the high and holy place, with him also that is of a contrite and humble spirit, to revive the spirit of the humble, and to revive the heart of the contrite ones.' jesus himself, with the same breath in which once he called it his father's house, called it a den of thieves. his expulsion from it of the buyers and sellers, was the first waft of the fan with which he was come to purge his father's dominions. nothing could ever cleanse that house; his fanning rose to a tempest, and swept it out of his father's world. for the second possible cause of the change from _business_ to _temple_--the mere fact that he was found in the temple, can hardly be a reason for his expecting his parents to know that he was there; and if it witnessed to some way of thought or habit of his with which they were acquainted, it is, i repeat, difficult to see why the parents should fail to perceive what the interpreters have found so easily. but the parents looked for a larger meaning in the words of such a son--whose meaning at the same time was too large for them to find. when, according to the greek, the lord, on the occasion already alluded to, says 'my father's house,' he says it plainly; he uses the word _house_: here he does not. let us see what lies in the greek to guide us to the thought in the mind of the lord when he thus reasoned with the apprehensions of his father and mother. the greek, taken literally, says, 'wist ye not that i must be in the----of my father?' the authorized version supplies _business_; the revised, _house_. there is no noun in the greek, and the article 'the' is in the plural. to translate it as literally as it can be translated, making of it an english sentence, the saying stands, 'wist ye not that i must be in the things of my father?' the plural article implies the english _things_; and the question is then, what _things_ does he mean? the word might mean _affairs_ or _business_; but why the plural article should be contracted to mean _house_, _i_ do not know. in a great wide sense, no doubt, the word _house_ might be used, as i am about to show, but surely not as meaning the temple. he was arguing for confidence in god on the part of his parents, not for a knowledge of his whereabout. the same thing that made them anxious concerning him, prevented them from understanding his words--lack, namely, of faith in the father. this, the one thing he came into the world to teach men, those words were meant to teach his parents. they are spirit and life, involving the one principle by which men shall live. they hold the same core as his words to his disciples in the storm, 'oh ye of little faith!' let us look more closely at them. 'why did you look for me? did you not know that i must be among my father's things?' what are we to understand by 'my father's things'? the translation given in the authorized version is, i think, as to the words themselves, a thoroughly justifiable one: 'i must be about my father's business,' or 'my father's affairs'; i refuse it for no other reason than that it does not fit the logic of the narrative, as does the word _things_, which besides opens to us a door of large and joyous prospect. of course he was about his father's business, and they might know it and yet be anxious about him, not having a perfect faith in that father. but, as i have said already, it was not anxiety as to what might befall him because of doing the will of the father; he might well seem to them as yet too young for danger from that source; it was but the vague perils of life beyond their sight that appalled them; theirs was just the uneasiness that possesses every parent whose child is missing; and if they, like him, had trusted in their father, they would have known what their son now meant when he said that he was in the midst of his father's things--namely, that the very things from which they dreaded evil accident, were his own home-surroundings; that he was not doing the father's business in a foreign country, but in the father's own house. understood as meaning the world, or the universe, the phrase, 'my father's house,' would be a better translation than the authorized; understood as meaning the poor, miserable, god-forsaken temple--no more the house of god than a dead body is the house of a man--it is immeasurably inferior. it seems to me, i say, that the lord meant to remind them, or rather to make them feel, for they had not yet learned the fact, that he was never away from home, could not be lost, as they had thought him; that he was in his father's house all the time, where no hurt could come to him. 'the things' about him were the furniture and utensils of his home; he knew them all and how to use them. 'i must be among my father's belongings.' the world was his home because his father's house. he was not a stranger who did not know his way about in it. he was no lost child, but with his father all the time. here we find one main thing wherein the lord differs from us: we are not at home in this great universe, our father's house. we ought to be, and one day we shall be, but we are not yet. this reveals jesus more than man, by revealing him more man than we. we are not complete men, we are not anything near it, and are therefore out of harmony, more or less, with everything in the house of our birth and habitation. always struggling to make our home in the world, we have not yet succeeded. we are not at home in it, because we are not at home with the lord of the house, the father of the family, not one with our elder brother who is his right hand. it is only the son, the daughter, that abideth ever in the house. when we are true children, if not the world, then the universe will be our home, felt and known as such, the house we are satisfied with, and would not change. hence, until then, the hard struggle, the constant strife we hold with _nature_--as we call the things of our father; a strife invaluable for our development, at the same time manifesting us not yet men enough to be lords of the house built for us to live in. we cannot govern or command in it as did the lord, because we are not at one with his father, therefore neither in harmony with his things, nor rulers over them. our best power in regard to them is but to find out wonderful facts concerning them and their relations, and turn these facts to our uses on systems of our own. for we discover what we seem to discover, by working inward from without, while he works outward from within; and we shall never understand the world, until we see it in the direction in which he works making it--namely from within outward. this of course we cannot do until we are one with him. in the meantime, so much are both we and his things his, that we can err concerning them only as he has made it possible for us to err; we can wander only in the direction of the truth--if but to find that we can find nothing. think for a moment how jesus was at home among the things of his father. it seems to me, i repeat, a spiritless explanation of his words--that the temple was the place where naturally he was at home. does he make the least lamentation over the temple? it is jerusalem he weeps over--the men of jerusalem, the killers, the stoners. what was his place of prayer? not the temple, but the mountain-top. where does he find symbols whereby to speak of what goes on in the mind and before the face of his father in heaven? not in the temple; not in its rites; not on its altars; not in its holy of holies; he finds them in the world and its lovely-lowly facts; on the roadside, in the field, in the vineyard, in the garden, in the house; in the family, and the commonest of its affairs--the lighting of the lamp, the leavening of the meal, the neighbour's borrowing, the losing of the coin, the straying of the sheep. even in the unlovely facts also of the world which he turns to holy use, such as the unjust judge, the false steward, the faithless labourers, he ignores the temple. see how he drives the devils from the souls and bodies of men, as we the wolves from our sheepfolds! how before him the diseases, scaly and spotted, hurry and flee! the world has for him no chamber of terror. he walks to the door of the sepulchre, the sealed cellar of his father's house, and calls forth its four days dead. he rebukes the mourners, he stays the funeral, and gives back the departed children to their parents' arms. the roughest of its servants do not make him wince; none of them are so arrogant as to disobey his word; he falls asleep in the midst of the storm that threatens to swallow his boat. hear how, on that same occasion, he rebukes his disciples! the children to tremble at a gust of wind in the house! god's little ones afraid of a storm! hear him tell the watery floor to be still, and no longer toss his brothers! see the watery floor obey him and grow still! see how the wandering creatures under it come at his call! see him leave his mountain-closet, and go walking over its heaving surface to the help of his men of little faith! see how the world's water turns to wine! how its bread grows more bread at his word! see how he goes from the house for a while, and returning with fresh power, takes what shape he pleases, walks through its closed doors, and goes up and down its invisible stairs! all his life he was among his father's things, either in heaven or in the world--not then only when they found him in the temple at jerusalem. he is still among his father's things, everywhere about in the world, everywhere throughout the wide universe. whatever he laid aside to come to us, to whatever limitations, for our sake, he stooped his regal head, he dealt with the things about him in such lordly, childlike manner as made it clear they were not strange to him, but the things of his father. he claimed none of them as his own, would not have had one of them his except through his father. only as his father's could he enjoy them;--only as coming forth from the father, and full of the father's thought and nature, had they to him any existence. that the things were his fathers, made them precious things to him. he had no care for having, as men count having. all his having was in the father. i wonder if he ever put anything in his pocket: i doubt if he had one. did he ever say, 'this is mine, not yours'? did he not say, 'all things are mine, therefore they are yours'? oh for his liberty among the things of the father! only by knowing them the things of our father, can we escape enslaving ourselves to them. through the false, the infernal idea of _having_, of _possessing_ them, we make them our tyrants, make the relation between them and us an evil thing. the world was a blessed place to jesus, because everything in it was his father's. what pain must it not have been to him, to see his brothers so vilely misuse the father's house by grasping, each for himself, at the family things! if the knowledge that a spot in the landscape retains in it some pollution, suffices to disturb our pleasure in the whole, how must it not have been with him, how must it not be with him now, in regard to the disfigurements and defilements caused by the greed of men, by their haste to be rich, in his father's lovely house! whoever is able to understand wordsworth, or henry vaughan, when either speaks of the glorious insights of his childhood, will be able to imagine a little how jesus must, in his eternal childhood, regard the world. hear what wordsworth says:-- our birth is but a sleep and a forgetting: the soul that rises with us, our life's star, hath had elsewhere its setting, and cometh from afar: not in entire forgetfulness, and not in utter nakedness, but trailing clouds of glory do we come from god, who is our home: heaven lies about us in our infancy! shades of the prison-house begin to close upon the growing boy, but he beholds the light, and whence it flows, he sees it in his joy; the youth, who daily farther from the east must travel, still is nature's priest, and by the vision splendid is on his way attended; at length the man perceives it die away, and fade into the light of common day. hear what henry vaughan says:-- happy those early dayes, when i shin'd in my angell-infancy! before i understood this place appointed for my second race, or taught my soul to fancy ought but a white, celestiall thought; when yet i had not walkt above a mile or two, from my first love, and looking back--at that short space-- could see a glimpse of his bright-face; when on some gilded cloud, or flowre my gazing soul would dwell an houre, and in those weaker glories spy some shadows of eternity; before i taught my tongue to wound my conscience with a sinfull sound, or had the black art to dispence a sev'rall sinne to ev'ry sence, but felt through all this fleshly dresse bright shootes of everlastingnesse. o how i long to travell back, and tread again that ancient track! that i might once more reach that plaine, where first i left my glorious traine; from whence th' inlightned spirit sees that shady city of palme trees. whoever has thus gazed on flower or cloud; whoever can recall poorest memory of the trail of glory that hung about his childhood, must have some faint idea how his father's house and the things in it always looked, and must still look to the lord. with him there is no fading into the light of common day. he has never lost his childhood, the very essence of childhood being nearness to the father and the outgoing of his creative love; whence, with that insight of his eternal childhood of which the insight of the little ones here is a fainter repetition, he must see everything as the father means it. the child sees things as the father means him to see them, as he thought of them when he uttered them. for god is not only the father of the child, but of the childhood that constitutes him a child, therefore the childness is of the divine nature. the child may not indeed be capable of looking into the father's method, but he can in a measure understand his work, has therefore free entrance to his study and workshop both, and is welcome to find out what he can, with fullest liberty to ask him questions. there are men too, who, at their best, see, in their lower measure, things as they are--as god sees them always. jesus saw things just as his father saw them in his creative imagination, when willing them out to the eyes of his children. but if he could always see the things of his father even as some men and more children see them at times, he might well feel _almost_ at home among them. he could not cease to admire, cease to love them. i say _love_, because the life in them, the presence of the creative one, would ever be plain to him. in the perfect, would familiarity ever destroy wonder at things essentially wonderful because essentially divine? to cease to wonder is to fall plumb-down from the childlike to the commonplace--the most undivine of all moods intellectual. our nature can never be at home among things that are not wonderful to us. could we see things always as we have sometimes seen them--and as one day we must always see them, only far better--should we ever know dullness? greatly as we might enjoy all forms of art, much as we might learn through the eyes and thoughts of other men, should we fly to these for deliverance from _ennui_, from any haunting discomfort? should we not just open our own child-eyes, look upon the things themselves, and be consoled? jesus, then, would have his parents understand that he was in his father's world among his father's things, where was nothing to hurt him; he knew them all, was in the secret of them all, could use and order them as did his father. to this same i think all we humans are destined to rise. though so many of us now are ignorant what kind of home we need, what a home we are capable of having, we too shall inherit the earth with the son eternal, doing with it as we would--willing with the will of the father. to such a home as we now inhabit, only perfected, and perfectly beheld, we are travelling--never to reach it save by the obedience that makes us the children, therefore the heirs of god. and, thank god! there the father does not die that the children may inherit; for, bliss of heaven! we inherit with the father. all the dangers of jesus came from the priests, and the learned in the traditional law, whom his parents had not yet begun to fear on his behalf. they feared the dangers of the rugged way, the thieves and robbers of the hill-road. for the scribes and the pharisees, the priests and the rulers--they would be the first to acknowledge their messiah, their king! little they imagined, when they found him where he ought to have been safest had it been indeed his father's house, that there he sat amid lions--the great doctors of the temple! he could rule all the _things_ in his father's house, but not the men of religion, the men of the temple, who called his father their father. true, he might have compelled them with a word, withered them by a glance, with a finger-touch made them grovel at his feet; but such supremacy over his brothers the lord of life despised. he must rule them as his father ruled himself; he would have them know themselves of the same family with himself; have them at home among the things of god, caring for the things he cared for, loving and hating as he and his father loved and hated, ruling themselves by the essential laws of being. because they would not be such, he let them do to him as they would, that he might get at their hearts by some unknown unguarded door in their diviner part. 'i will be god among you; i will be myself to you.--you will not have me? then do to me as you will. the created shall have power over him through whom they were created, that they may be compelled to know him and his father. they shall look on him whom they have pierced.' his parents found him in the temple; they never really found him until he entered the true temple--their own adoring hearts. the temple that knows not its builder, is no temple; in it dwells no divinity. but at length he comes to his own, and his own receive him;--comes to them in the might of his mission to preach good tidings to the poor, to heal the broken-hearted, to preach deliverance, and sight, and liberty, and the lord's own good time. _jesus and his fellow townsmen._ and he came to nazareth, where he had been brought up: and, as his custom was, he went into the synagogue on the sabbath day, and stood up for to read. and there was delivered unto him the book of the prophet esaias. and when he had opened the book, he found the place where it was written, 'the spirit of the lord is upon me, because he hath anointed me to preach the gospel to the poor; he hath sent me to heal the brokenhearted, to preach deliverance to the captives, and recovering of sight to the blind, to set at liberty them that are bruised, to preach the acceptable year of the lord.' and he closed the book, and he gave it again to the minister, and sat down. and the eyes of all them that were in the synagogue were fastened on him. and he began to say unto them, 'this day is this scripture fulfilled in your ears.'--_luke_ iv. - . the lord's sermon upon the mount seems such an enlargement of these words of the prophet as might, but for the refusal of the men of nazareth to listen to him, have followed his reading of them here recorded. that, as given by the evangelist, they correspond to neither of the differing originals of the english and greek versions, ought to be enough in itself to do away with the spiritually vulgar notion of the verbal inspiration of the scriptures. the point at which the lord stops in his reading, is suggestive: he closes the book, leaving the words 'and the day of vengeance of our god,' or, as in the septuagint, 'the day of recompense,' unread: god's vengeance is as holy a thing as his love, yea, is love, for god is love and god is not vengeance; but, apparently, the lord would not give the word a place in his announcement of his mission: his hearers would not recognize it as a form of the father's love, but as vengeance on their enemies, not vengeance on the selfishness of those who would not be their brother's keeper. he had not begun with nazareth, neither with galilee. 'a prophet has no honour in his own country,' he said, and began to teach where it was more likely he would be heard. it is true that he wrought his first miracle in cana, but that was at his mother's request, not of his own intent, and he did not begin his teaching there. he went first to jerusalem, there cast out the buyers and sellers from the temple, and did other notable things alluded to by st john; then went back to galilee, where, having seen the things he did in jerusalem, his former neighbours were now prepared to listen to him. of these the nazarenes, to whom the sight of him was more familiar, retained the most prejudice against him: he belonged to their very city! they had known him from a child!--and low indeed are they in whom familiarity with the high and true breeds contempt! they are judged already. yet such was the fame of the new prophet, that even they were willing to hear in the synagogue what he had to say to them--thence to determine for themselves what claim he had to an honourable reception. but the eye of their judgment was not single, therefore was their body full of darkness. should nazareth indeed prove, to their self-glorifying satisfaction, the city of the great prophet, they were more than ready to grasp at the renown of having produced him: he was indeed the great prophet, and within a few minutes they would have slain him for the honour of israel. in the ignoble even the love of their country partakes largely of the ignoble. there was a shadow of the hateless vengeance of god in the expulsion of the dishonest dealers from the temple with which the lord initiated his mission: that was his first parable to jerusalem; to nazareth he comes with the sweetest words of the prophet of hope in his mouth--good tidings of great joy--of healing and sight and liberty; followed by the godlike announcement, that what the prophet had promised he was come to fulfil. his heart, his eyes, his lips, his hands--his whole body is full of gifts for men, and that day was that scripture fulfilled in their ears. the prophecy had gone before that he should save his people from their sins; he brings an announcement they will better understand: he is come, he says, to deliver men from sorrow and pain, ignorance and oppression, everything that makes life hard and unfriendly. what a gracious speech, what a daring pledge to a world whelmed in tyranny and wrong! to the women of it, i imagine, it sounded the sweetest, in them woke the highest hopes. they had scarce had a hearing when the lord came; and thereupon things began to mend with them, and are mending still, for the lord is at work, and will be. he is the refuge of the oppressed. by its very woes, as by bitterest medicine, he is setting the world free from sin and woe. this very hour he is curing its disease, the symptoms of which are so varied and so painful; working none the less faithfully that the sick, taking the symptoms for the disease, cry out against the incompetence of their physician. 'what power can heal the broken-hearted?' they cry. and indeed it takes a god to do it, but the god is here! in yet better words than those of the prophet, spoken straight from his own heart, he cries: 'come unto me, all ye that labour and are heavy laden, and i will give you rest.' he calls to him every heart knowing its own bitterness, speaks to the troubled consciousness of every child of the father. he is come to free us from everything that makes life less than bliss essential. no other could be a gospel worthy of the god of men. every one will, i presume, confess to more or less misery. its apparent source may be this or that; its real source is, to use a poor figure, a dislocation of the juncture between the created and the creating life. this primal evil is the parent of evils unnumbered, hence of miseries multitudinous, under the weight of which the arrogant man cries out against life, and goes on to misuse it, while the child looks around for help--and who shall help him but his father! the father is with him all the time, but it may be long ere the child knows himself in his arms. his heart may be long troubled as well as his outer life. the dank mists of doubtful thought may close around his way, and hide from him the light of the world! cold winds from the desert of foiled endeavour may sorely buffet and for a time baffle his hope; but every now and then the blue pledge of a great sky will break through the clouds over his head; and a faint aurora will walk his darkest east. gradually he grows more capable of imagining a world in which every good thing thinkable may be a fact. best of all, the story of him who is himself the good news, the gospel of god, becomes not only more and more believable to his heart, but more and more ministrant to his life of conflict, and his assurance of a living father who hears when his children cry. the gospel according to this or that expounder of it, may repel him unspeakably; the gospel according to jesus christ, attracts him supremely, and ever holds where it has drawn him. to the priest, the scribe, the elder, exclaiming against his self-sufficiency in refusing what they teach, he answers, 'it is life or death to me. your gospel i cannot take. to believe as you would have me believe, would be to lose my god. your god is no god to me. i do not desire him. i would rather die the death than believe in such a god. in the name of the true god, i cast your gospel from me; it is no gospel, and to believe it would be to wrong him in whom alone lies my hope.' 'but to believe in such a man,' he might go on to say, 'with such a message, as i read of in the new testament, is life from the dead. i have yielded myself, to live no more in the idea of self, but with the life of god. to him i commit the creature he has made, that he may live in it, and work out its life--develop it according to the idea of it in his own creating mind. i fall in with his ways for me. i believe in him. i trust him. i try to obey him. i look to be rendered capable of and receive a pure vision of his will, freedom from the prison-house of my limitation, from the bondage of a finite existence. for the finite that dwells in the infinite and in which the infinite dwells, is finite no longer. those who are thus children indeed, are little gods, the divine brood of the infinite father. no mere promise of deliverance from the consequences of sin, would be any gospel to me. less than the liberty of a holy heart, less than the freedom of the lord himself, will never satisfy one human soul. father, set me free in the glory of thy will, so that i will only as thou willest. thy will be at once thy perfection and mine. thou alone art deliverance--absolute safety from every cause and kind of trouble that ever existed, anywhere now exists, or ever can exist in thy universe.' but the people of the lord's town, to whom he read, appropriating them, the gracious words of the prophet, were of the wise and prudent of their day. with one and the same breath, they seem to cry, 'these things are good, it is true, but they must come after our way. we must have the promise to our fathers fulfilled--that we shall rule the world, the chosen of god, the children of abraham and israel. we want to be a free people, manage our own affairs, live in plenty, and do as we please. liberty alone can ever cure the woes of which you speak. we do not need to be better; we are well enough. give us riches and honour, and keep us content with ourselves, that we may be satisfied with our own likeness, and thou shalt be the messiah.' never, perhaps, would such be men's spoken words, but the prevailing condition of their minds might often well take form in such speech. whereon will they ground their complaint should god give them their hearts' desire? when that desire given closes in upon them with a torturing sense of slavery; when they find that what they have imagined their own will, was but a suggestion they knew not whence; when they discover that life is not good, yet they cannot die; will they not then turn and entreat their maker to save them after his own fashion? let us try to understand the brief, elliptical narrative of what took place in the synagogue of nazareth on the occasion of our lord's announcement of his mission. 'this day,' said jesus, 'is this scripture fulfilled in your ears;' and went on with his divine talk. we shall yet know, i trust, what 'the gracious words' were 'which proceeded out of his mouth': surely some who heard them, still remember them, for 'all bare him witness, and wondered at' them! how did they bear him witness? surely not alone by the intensity of their wondering gaze! must not the narrator mean that their hearts bore witness to the power of his presence, that they felt the appeal of his soul to theirs, that they said in themselves, 'never man spake like this man'? must not the light of truth in his face, beheld of such even as knew not the truth, have lifted their souls up truthward? was it not the something true, common to all hearts, that bore the wondering witness to the graciousness of his words? had not those words found a way to the pure human, that is, the divine in the men? was it not therefore that they were drawn to him--all but ready to accept him?--on their own terms, alas, not his! for a moment he seemed to them a true messenger, but truth in him was not truth to them: had he been what they took him for, he would have been no saviour. they were, however, though partly by mistake, well disposed toward him, and it was with a growing sense of being honoured by his relation to them, and the property they had in him, that they said, 'is not this joseph's son?' but the lord knew what was in their hearts; he knew the false notion with which they were almost ready to declare for him; he knew also the final proof to which they were in their wisdom and prudence about to subject him. he did not look likely to be a prophet, seeing he had grown up among them, and had never shown any credentials: they had a right to proof positive! they had heard of wonderful things he had done in other places: why had they not first of all been done in _their_ sight? who had a claim equal to theirs? who so capable as they to pronounce judgment on his mission whether false or true: had they not known him from childhood? his words were gracious, but words were nothing: he must _do_ something--something wonderful! without such conclusive, satisfying proof, nazareth at least would never acknowledge him! they were quite ready for the honour of having any true prophet, such as it seemed not impossible the son of joseph might turn out to be, recognized as their towns-man, one of their own people: if he were such, theirs was the credit of having produced him! then indeed they were ready to bear witness to him, take his part, adopt his cause, and before the world stand up for him! as to his being the messiah, that was merest absurdity: did they not all know his father, the carpenter? he might, however, be the prophet whom so many of the best in the nation were at the moment expecting! let him do something wonderful! they were not a gracious people, or a good. the lord saw their thought, and it was far from being to his mind. he desired no such reception as they were at present equal to giving a prophet. his mighty works were not meant for such as they--to convince them of what they were incapable of understanding or welcoming! those who would not believe without signs and wonders, could never believe worthily with any number of them, and none should be given them! his mighty works were to rouse the love, and strengthen the faith of the meek and lowly in heart, of such as were ready to come to the light, and show that they were of the light. he knew how poor the meaning the nazarenes put on the words he had read; what low expectations they had of the messiah when most they longed for his coming. they did not hear the prophet while he read the prophet! at sight of a few poor little wonders, nothing to him, to them sufficient to prove him such a messiah as _they_ looked for, they would burst into loud acclaim, and rush to their arms, eager, his officers and soldiers, to open the one triumphant campaign against the accursed romans, and sweep them beyond the borders of their sacred country. their messiah would make of their nation the redeemed of the lord, themselves the favourites of his court, and the tyrants of the world! salvation from their sins was not in their hearts, not in their imaginations, not at all in their thoughts. they had heard him read his commission to heal the broken-hearted; they would rush to break hearts in his name. the lord knew them, and their vain expectations. he would have no such followers--no followers on false conceptions--no followers whom wonders would delight but nowise better! the nazarenes were not yet of the sort that needed but one change to be his people. he had come to give them help; until they accepted his, they could have none to give him. the lord never did mighty work in proof of his mission; to help a growing faith in himself and his father, he would do anything! he healed those whom healing would deeper heal--those in whom suffering had so far done its work, that its removal also would carry it on. to the nazarenes he would not manifest his power; they were not in a condition to get good from such manifestation: it would but confirm their present arrogance and ambition. wonderful works can only nourish a faith already existent; to him who believes without it, a miracle _may_ be granted. it was the israelite indeed, whom the lord met with miracle: 'because i said unto thee, i saw thee under the fig-tree, believest thou? thou shalt see the angels of god ascending and descending on the son of man.' those who laughed him to scorn were not allowed to look on the resurrection of the daughter of jairus. peter, when he would walk on the water, had both permission and power given him to do so. the widow received the prophet, and was fed; the syrian went to the prophet, and was cured. in nazareth, because of unbelief, the lord could only lay his hands on a few sick folk; in the rest was none of that leaning toward the truth, which alone can make room for the help of a miracle. this they soon made manifest. the lord saw them on the point of challenging a display of his power, and anticipated the challenge with a refusal. for the better understanding of his words, let me presume to paraphrase them: 'i know you will apply to me the proverb, physician, heal thyself, requiring me to prove what is said of me in capernaum, by doing the same here; but there is another proverb, no prophet is accepted in his own country. unaccepted i do nothing wonderful. in the great famine, elijah was sent to no widow of the many in israel, but to a sidonian; and elisha cured no leper of the many in israel, but naaman the syrian. there are those fit to see signs and wonders; they are not always the kin of the prophet.' the nazarenes heard with indignation. their wonder at his gracious words was changed to bitterest wrath. the very beams of their ugly religion were party-spirit, exclusiveness, and pride in the fancied favour of god for them only of all the nations: to hint at the possibility of a revelation of the glory of god to a stranger; far more, to hint that a stranger might be fitter to receive such a revelation than a jew, was an offence reaching to the worst insult; and it was cast in their teeth by a common man of their own city! 'thou art but a well-known carpenter's son, and dost thou teach _us_! darest thou imply a divine preference for capernaum over nazareth?' in bad odour with the rest of their countrymen, they were the prouder of themselves. the _whole_ synagogue, observe, rose in a fury. such a fellow a prophet! he was worse than the worst of gentiles! he was a false jew! a traitor to his god! a friend of the idol-worshipping romans! away with him! his townsmen led the van in his rejection by his own. the men of nazareth would have forestalled his crucifixion by them of jerusalem. what! a sidonian woman fitter to receive the prophet than any jewess! a heathen worthier to be kept alive by miracle in time of famine, than a worshipper of the true god! a leper of damascus less displeasing to god than the lepers of his chosen race! it was no longer condescending approval that shone in their eyes. he a prophet! they had seen through him! soon had they found him out! the moment he perceived it useless to pose for a prophet with them, who had all along known the breed of him, he had turned to insult them! he dared not attempt in his own city the deceptions with which, by the help of satan, he had made such a grand show, and fooled the idiots of capernaum! he saw they knew him too well, were too wide-awake to be cozened by him, and to avoid their expected challenge, fell to reviling the holy nation. let him take the consequences! to the brow of the hill with him! how could there be any miracle for such! they were well satisfied with themselves, and nothing almost sees miracles but misery. need and the upward look, the mood ready to believe when and where it can, the embryonic faith, is dear to him whose love would have us trust him. let any man seek him--not in curious inquiry whether the story of him may be true or cannot be true--in humble readiness to accept him altogether if only he can, and he shall find him; we shall not fail of help to believe because we doubt. but if the questioner be such that the dispersion of his doubt would but leave him in disobedience, the power of truth has no care to effect his conviction. why cast out a devil that the man may the better do the work of the devil? the childlike doubt will, as it softens and yields, minister nourishment with all that was good in it to the faith-germ at its heart; the wise and prudent unbelief will be left to develop its own misery. the lord could easily have satisfied the nazarenes that he was the messiah: they would but have hardened into the nucleus of an army for the subjugation of the world. to a warfare with their own sins, to the subjugation of their doing and desiring to the will of the great father, all the miracles in his power would never have persuaded them. a true convincement is not possible to hearts and minds like theirs. not only is it impossible for a low man to believe a thousandth part of what a noble man can, but a low man cannot believe anything as a noble man believes it. the men of nazareth could have believed in jesus as their saviour from the romans; as their saviour from their sins they could not believe in him, for they loved their sins. the king of heaven came to offer them a share in his kingdom; but they were not poor in spirit, and the kingdom of heaven was not for them. gladly would they have inherited the earth; but they were not meek, and the earth was for the lowly children of the perfect father. _the heirs of heaven and earth._ and he opened his mouth and taught them, saying, 'blessed are the poor in spirit; for theirs is the kingdom of heaven.' ...'blessed are the meek; for they shall inherit the earth.'--_matthew_ v. , , . the words of the lord are the seed sown by the sower. into our hearts they must fall that they may grow. meditation and prayer must water them, and obedience keep them in the sunlight. thus will they bear fruit for the lord's gathering. those of his disciples, that is, obedient hearers, who had any experience in trying to live, would, in part, at once understand them; but as they obeyed and pondered, the meaning of them would keep growing. this we see in the writings of the apostles. it will be so with us also, who need to understand everything he said neither more nor less than they to whom first he spoke; while our obligation to understand is far greater than theirs at the time, inasmuch as we have had nearly two thousand years' experience of the continued coming of the kingdom he then preached: it is not yet come; it has been all the time, and is now, drawing slowly nearer. the sermon on the mount, as it is commonly called, seems the lord's first free utterance, in the presence of any large assembly, of the good news of the kingdom. he had been teaching his disciples and messengers; and had already brought the glad tidings that his father was their father, to many besides--to nathanael for one, to nicodemus, to the woman of samaria, to every one he had cured, every one whose cry for help he had heard: his epiphany was a gradual thing, beginning, where it continues, with the individual. it is impossible even to guess at what number may have heard him on this occasion: he seems to have gone up the mount because of the crowd--to secure a somewhat opener position whence he could better speak; and thither followed him those who desired to be taught of him, accompanied doubtless by not a few in whom curiosity was the chief motive. disciple or gazer, he addressed the individuality of every one that had ears to hear. peter and andrew, james and john, are all we know as his recognized disciples, followers, and companions, at the time; but, while his words were addressed to such as had come to him desiring to learn of him, the things he uttered were eternal truths, life in which was essential for every one of his father's children, therefore they were for all: he who heard to obey, was his disciple. how different, at the first sound of it, must the good news have been from the news anxiously expected by those who waited for the messiah! even the baptist in prison lay listening after something of quite another sort. the lord had to send him a message, by eye-witnesses of his doings, to remind him that god's thoughts are not as our thoughts, or his ways as our ways--that the design of god is other and better than the expectation of men. his summary of the gifts he was giving to men, culminated with the preaching of the good news to the poor. if john had known these his doings before, he had not recognized them as belonging to the lord's special mission: the lord tells him it is not enough to have accepted him as the messiah; he must recognize his doings as the work he had come into the world to do, and as in their nature so divine as to be the very business of the son of god in whom the father was well pleased. wherein then consisted the goodness of the news which he opened his mouth to give them? what was in the news to make the poor glad? why was his arrival with such words in his heart and mouth, the coming of the kingdom? all good news from heaven, is of _truth_--essential truth, involving duty, and giving and promising help to the performance of it. there can be no good news for us men, except of uplifting love, and no one can be lifted up who will not rise. if god himself sought to raise his little ones without their consenting effort, they would drop from his foiled endeavour. he will carry us in his arms till we are able to walk; he will carry us in his arms when we are weary with walking; he will not carry us if we will not walk. very different are the good news jesus brings us from certain prevalent representations of the gospel, founded on the pagan notion that suffering is an offset for sin, and culminating in the vile assertion that the suffering of an innocent man, just because he is innocent, yea perfect, is a satisfaction to the holy father for the evil deeds of his children. as a theory concerning the atonement nothing could be worse, either intellectually, morally, or spiritually; announced as the gospel itself, as the good news of the kingdom of heaven, the idea is monstrous as any chinese dragon. such a so-called gospel is no gospel, however accepted as god sent by good men of a certain development. it is evil news, dwarfing, enslaving, maddening--news to the child-heart of the dreariest damnation. doubtless some elements of the gospel are mixed up with it on most occasions of its announcement; none the more is it the message received from him. it can be good news only to such as are prudently willing to be delivered from a god they fear, but unable to accept the gospel of a perfect god, in whom to trust perfectly. the good news of jesus was just the news of the thoughts and ways of the father in the midst of his family. he told them that the way men thought for themselves and their children was not the way god thought for himself and his children; that the kingdom of heaven was founded, and must at length show itself founded on very different principles from those of the kingdoms and families of the world, meaning by the world that part of the father's family which will not be ordered by him, will not even try to obey him. the world's man, its great, its successful, its honorable man, is he who may have and do what he pleases, whose strength lies in money and the praise of men; the greatest in the kingdom of heaven is the man who is humblest and serves his fellows the most. multitudes of men, in no degree notable as ambitious or proud, hold the ambitious, the proud man in honour, and, for all deliverance, hope after some shadow of his prosperity. how many even of those who look for the world to come, seek to the powers of this world for deliverance from its evils, as if god were the god of the world to come only! the oppressed of the lord's time looked for a messiah to set their nation free, and make it rich and strong; the oppressed of our time believe in money, knowledge, and the will of a people which needs but power to be in its turn the oppressor. the first words of the lord on this occasion were:--'blessed are the poor in spirit, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven,' it is not the proud, it is not the greedy of distinction, it is not those who gather and hoard, not those who lay down the law to their neighbours, not those that condescend, any more than those that shrug the shoulder and shoot out the lip, that have any share in the kingdom of the father. that kingdom has no relation with or resemblance to the kingdoms of this world, deals with no one thing that distinguishes their rulers, except to repudiate it. the son of god will favour no smallest ambition, be it in the heart of him who leans on his bosom. the kingdom of god, the refuge of the oppressed, the golden age of the new world, the real utopia, the newest yet oldest atlantis, the home of the children, will not open its gates to the most miserable who would rise above his equal in misery, who looks down on any one more miserable than himself. it is the home of perfect brotherhood. the poor, the beggars in spirit, the humble men of heart, the unambitious, the unselfish; those who never despise men, and never seek their praises; the lowly, who see nothing to admire in themselves, therefore cannot seek to be admired of others; the men who give themselves away--these are the freemen of the kingdom, these are the citizens of the new jerusalem. the men who are aware of their own essential poverty; not the men who are poor in friends, poor in influence, poor in acquirements, poor in money, but those who are poor in spirit, who _feel themselves poor creatures_; who know nothing to be pleased with themselves for, and desire nothing to make them think well of themselves; who know that they need much to make their life worth living, to make their existence a good thing, to make them fit to live; these humble ones are the poor whom the lord calls blessed. when a man says, i am low and worthless, then the gate of the kingdom begins to open to him, for there enter the true, and this man has begun to know the truth concerning himself. whatever such a man has attained to, he straightway forgets; it is part of him and behind him; his business is with what he has not, with the things that lie above and before him. the man who is proud of anything he thinks he has reached, has not reached it. he is but proud of himself, and imagining a cause for his pride. if he had reached, he would already have begun to forget. he who delights in contemplating whereto he has attained, is not merely sliding back; he is already in the dirt of self-satisfaction. the gate of the kingdom is closed, and he outside. the child who, clinging to his father, dares not think he has in any sense attained while as yet he is not as his father--his father's heart, his father's heaven is his natural home. to find himself thinking of himself as above his fellows, would be to that child a shuddering terror; his universe would contract around him, his ideal wither on its throne. the least motion of self-satisfaction, the first thought of placing himself in the forefront of estimation, would be to him a flash from the nether abyss. god is his life and his lord. that his father should be content with him must be all his care. among his relations with his neighbour, infinitely precious, comparison with his neighbour has no place. which is the greater is of no account. he would not choose to be less than his neighbour; he would choose his neighbour to be greater than he. he looks up to every man. otherwise gifted than he, his neighbour is more than he. all come from the one mighty father: shall he judge the live thoughts of god, which is greater and which is less? in thus denying, thus turning his back on himself, he has no thought of saintliness, no thought but of his father and his brethren. to such a child heaven's best secrets are open. he clambers about the throne of the father unrebuked; his back is ready for the smallest heavenly playmate; his arms are an open refuge for any blackest little lost kid of the father's flock; he will toil with it up the heavenly stair, up the very steps of the great white throne, to lay it on the father's knees. for the glory of that father is not in knowing himself god, but in giving himself away--in creating and redeeming and glorifying his children. the man who does not house self, has room to be his real self--god's eternal idea of him. he lives eternally; in virtue of the creative power present in him with momently, unimpeded creation, he _is_. how should there be in him one thought of ruling or commanding or surpassing! he can imagine no bliss, no good in being greater than some one else. he is unable to wish himself other than he is, except more what god made him for, which is indeed the highest willing of the will of god. his brother's wellbeing is essential to his bliss. the thought of standing higher in the favour of god than his brother, would make him miserable. he would lift every brother to the embrace of the father. blessed are the poor in spirit, for they are of the same spirit as god, and of nature the kingdom of heaven is theirs. 'blessed are the meek, for they shall inherit the earth,' expresses the same principle: the same law holds in the earth as in the kingdom of heaven. how should it be otherwise? has the creator of the ends of the earth ceased to rule it after his fashion, because his rebellious children have so long, to their own hurt, vainly endeavoured to rule it after theirs? the kingdom of heaven belongs to the poor; the meek shall inherit the earth. the earth as god sees it, as those to whom the kingdom of heaven belongs also see it, is good, all good, very good, fit for the meek to inherit; and one day they shall inherit it--not indeed as men of the world count inheritance, but as the maker and owner of the world has from the first counted it. so different are the two ways of inheriting, that one of the meek may be heartily enjoying his possession, while one of the proud is selfishly walling him out from the spot in it he loves best. the meek are those that do not assert themselves, do not defend themselves, never dream of avenging themselves, or of returning aught but good for evil. they do not imagine it their business to take care of themselves. the meek man may indeed take much thought, but it will not be for himself. he never builds an exclusive wall, shuts any honest neighbour out. he will not always serve the wish, but always the good of his neighbour. his service must be true service. self shall be no umpire in affair of his. man's consciousness of himself is but a shadow: the meek man's self always vanishes in the light of a real presence. his nature lies open to the father of men, and to every good impulse is as it were empty. no bristling importance, no vain attendance of fancied rights and wrongs, guards his door, or crowds the passages of his house; they are for the angels to come and go. abandoned thus to the truth, as the sparks from the gleaming river dip into the flowers of dante's unperfected vision, so the many souls of the visible world, lights from the father of lights, enter his heart freely; and by them he inherits the earth he was created to inherit--possesses it as his father made him capable of possessing, and the earth of being possessed. because the man is meek, his eye is single; he sees things as god sees them, as he would have his child see them: to confront creation with pure eyes is to possess it. how little is the man able to make his own, who would ravish all! the man who, by the exclusion of others from the space he calls his, would grasp any portion of the earth as his own, befools himself in the attempt. the very bread he has swallowed cannot so in any real sense be his. there does not exist such a power of possessing as he would arrogate. there is not such a sense of having as that of which he has conceived the shadow in his degenerate and lapsing imagination. the real owner of his demesne is that pedlar passing his gate, into a divine soul receiving the sweetnesses which not all the greed of the so-counted possessor can keep within his walls: they overflow the cup-lip of the coping, to give themselves to the footfarer. the motions aerial, the sounds, the odours of those imprisoned spaces, are the earnest of a possession for which is ever growing his power of possessing. in no wise will such inheritance interfere with the claim of the man who calls them his. each possessor has them his, as much as each in his own way is capable of possessing them. for possession is determined by the kind and the scope of the power of possessing; and the earth has a fourth dimension of which the mere owner of its soil knows nothing. the child of the maker is naturally the inheritor. but if the child try to possess as a house the thing his father made an organ, will he succeed in so possessing it? or if he do nestle in a corner of its case, will he oust thereby the lord of its multiplex harmony, sitting regnant on the seat of sway, and drawing with 'volant touch' from the house of the child the liege homage of its rendered wealth? to the poverty of such a child are all those left, who think to have and to hold after the corrupt fancies of a greedy self. we cannot see the world as god means it, save in proportion as our souls are meek. in meekness only are we its inheritors. meekness alone makes the spiritual retina pure to receive god's things as they are, mingling with them neither imperfection nor impurity of its own. a thing so beheld that it conveys to me the divine thought issuing in its form, is mine; by nothing but its mediation between god and my life, can anything be mine. the man so dull as to insist that a thing is his because he has bought it and paid for it, had better bethink himself that not all the combined forces of law, justice, and goodwill, can keep it his; while even death cannot take the world from the man who possesses it as alone the maker of him and it cares that he should possess it. this man leaves it, but carries it with him; that man carries with him only its loss. he passes, unable to close hand or mouth upon any portion of it. its _ownness_ to him was but the changes he could make in it, and the nearness into which he could bring it to the body he lived in. that body the earth in its turn possesses now, and it lies very still, changing nothing, but being changed. is this the fine of the great buyer of land, to have his fine pate full of fine dirt? in the soul of the meek, the earth remains an endless possession--his because he who made it is his--his as nothing but his maker could ever be the creature's. he has the earth by his divine relation to him who sent it forth from him as a tree sends out its leaves. to inherit the earth is to grow ever more alive to the presence, in it and in all its parts, of him who is the life of men. how far one may advance in such inheritance while yet in the body, will simply depend on the meekness he attains while yet in the body; but it may be, as frederick denison maurice, the servant of god, thought while yet he was with us, that the new heavens and the new earth are the same in which we now live, righteously inhabited by the meek, with their deeper-opened eyes. what if the meek of the dead be thus possessing it even now! but i do not care to speculate. it is enough that the man who refuses to assert himself, seeking no recognition by men, leaving the care of his life to the father, and occupying himself with the will of the father, shall find himself, by and by, at home in the father's house, with all the father's property his. which is more the possessor of the world--he who has a thousand houses, or he who, without one house to call his own, has ten in which his knock at the door would rouse instant jubilation? which is the richer--the man who, his large money spent, would have no refuge; or he for whose necessity a hundred would sacrifice comfort? which of the two possessed the earth--king agrippa or tent-maker paul? which is the real possessor of a book--the man who has its original and every following edition, and shows, to many an admiring and envying visitor, now this, now that, in binding characteristic, with possessor-pride; yea, from secret shrine is able to draw forth and display the author's manuscript, with the very shapes in which his thoughts came forth to the light of day,--or the man who cherishes one little, hollow-backed, coverless, untitled, bethumbed copy, which he takes with him in his solitary walks and broods over in his silent chamber, always finding in it some beauty or excellence or aid he had not found before--which is to him in truth as a live companion? for what makes the thing a book? is it not that it has a soul--the mind in it of him who wrote the book? therefore only can the book be possessed, for life alone can be the possession of life. the dead possess their dead only to bury them. does not he then, who loves and understands his book, possess it with such possession as is impossible to the other? just so may the world itself be possessed--either as a volume unread, or as the wine of a soul, 'the precious life-blood of a master-spirit, embalmed and treasured up on purpose to a life beyond life.' it may be possessed as a book filled with words from the mouth of god, or but as the golden-clasped covers of that book; as an embodiment or incarnation of god himself; or but as a house built to sell. the lord loved the world and the things of the world, not as the men of the world love them, but finding his father in everything that came from his father's heart. the same spirit, then, is required for possessing the kingdom of heaven, and for inheriting the earth. how should it not be so, when the one power is the informing life of both? if we are the lord's, we possess the kingdom of heaven, and so inherit the earth. how many who call themselves by his name, would have it otherwise: they would possess the earth and inherit the kingdom! such fill churches and chapels on sundays: anywhere suits for the worship of mammon. yet verily, earth as well as heaven may be largely possessed even now. two men are walking abroad together; to the one, the world yields thought after thought of delight; he sees heaven and earth embrace one another; he feels an indescribable presence over and in them; his joy will afterward, in the solitude of his chamber, break forth in song;--to the other, oppressed with the thought of his poverty, or ruminating how to make much into more, the glory of the lord is but a warm summer day; it enters in at no window of his soul; it offers him no gift; for, in the very temple of god, he looks for no god in it. nor must there needs be two men to think and feel thus differently. in what diverse fashion will any one _subject_ to ever-changing mood see the same world of the same glad creator! alas for men, if it changed as we change, if it grew meaningless when we grow faithless! thought for a morrow that may never come, dread of the dividing death which works for endless companionship, anger with one we love, will cloud the radiant morning, and make the day dark with night. at evening, having bethought ourselves, and returned to him that feeds the ravens, and watches the dying sparrow, and says to his children 'love one another,' the sunset splendour is glad over us, the western sky is refulgent as the court of the father when the glad news is spread abroad that a sinner has repented. we have mourned in the twilight of our little faith, but, having sent away our sin, the glory of god's heaven over his darkening earth has comforted us. _sorrow the pledge of joy._ 'blessed are they that mourn, for they shall be comforted.'--_matthew_ v. . grief, then, sorrow, pain of heart, mourning, is no partition-wall between man and god. so far is it from opposing any obstacle to the passage of god's light into man's soul, that the lord congratulates them that mourn. there is no evil in sorrow. true, it is not an essential good, a good in itself, like love; but it will mingle with any good thing, and is even so allied to good that it will open the door of the heart for any good. more of sorrowful than of joyful men are always standing about the everlasting doors that open into the presence of the most high. it is true also that joy is in its nature more divine than sorrow; for, although man must sorrow, and god share in his sorrow, yet in himself god is not sorrowful, and the 'glad creator' never made man for sorrow: it is but a stormy strait through which he must pass to his ocean of peace. he 'makes the joy the last in every song.' still, i repeat, a man in sorrow is in general far nearer god than a man in joy. gladness may make a man forget his thanksgiving; misery drives him to his prayers. for we _are_ not yet, we are only _becoming_. the endless day will at length dawn whose every throbbing moment will heave our hearts godward; we shall scarce need to lift them up: now, there are two door-keepers to the house of prayer, and sorrow is more on the alert to open than her grandson joy. the gladsome child runs farther afield; the wounded child turns to go home. the weeper sits down close to the gate; the lord of life draws nigh to him from within. god loves not sorrow, yet rejoices to see a man sorrowful, for in his sorrow man leaves his heavenward door on the latch, and god can enter to help him. he loves, i say, to see him sorrowful, for then he can come near to part him from that which makes his sorrow a welcome sight. when ephraim bemoans himself, he is a pleasant child. so good a medicine is sorrow, so powerful to slay the moths that infest and devour the human heart, that the lord is glad to see a man weep. he congratulates him on his sadness. grief is an ill-favoured thing, but she is love's own child, and her mother loves her. the promise to them that mourn, is not _the kingdom of heaven_, but that their mourning shall be ended, that they shall be comforted. to mourn is not to fight with evil; it is only to miss that which is good. it is not an essential heavenly condition, like poorness of spirit or meekness. no man will carry his mourning with him into heaven--or, if he does, it will speedily be turned either into joy, or into what will result in joy, namely, redemptive action. mourning is a canker-bitten blossom on the rose-tree of love. is there any mourning worthy the name that has not love for its root? men mourn because they love. love is the life out of which are fashioned all the natural feelings, every emotion of man. love modelled by faith, is hope; love shaped by wrong, is anger--verily anger, though pure of sin; love invaded by loss, is grief. the garment of mourning is oftenest a winding-sheet; the loss of the loved by death is the main cause of the mourning of the world. the greek word here used to describe the blessed of the lord, generally means _those that mourn for the dead_. it is not in the new testament employed exclusively in this sense, neither do i imagine it stands here for such only: there are griefs than death sorer far, and harder far to comfort--harder even for god himself, with whom all things are possible; but it may give pleasure to know that the promise of comfort to those that mourn, may specially apply to those that mourn because their loved have gone out of their sight, and beyond the reach of their cry. their sorrow, indeed, to the love divine, involves no difficulty; it is a small matter, easily met. the father, whose elder son is ever with him, but whose younger is in a far country, wasting his substance with riotous living, is unspeakably more to be pitied, and is harder to help, than that father both of whose sons lie in the sleep of death. much of what goes by the name of comfort, is merely worthless; and such as could be comforted by it, i should not care to comfort. let time do what it may to bring the ease of oblivion; let change of scene do what in it lies to lead thought away from the vanished; let new loves bury grief in the grave of the old love: consolation of such sort could never have crossed the mind of jesus. would the truth call a man blessed because his pain would sooner or later depart, leaving him at best no better than before, and certainly poorer--not only the beloved gone, but the sorrow for him too, and with the sorrow the love that had caused the sorrow? blessed of god because restored to an absence of sorrow? such a god were fitly adored only where not one heart worshipped in spirit and in truth. 'the lord means of course,' some one may say, 'that the comfort of the mourners will be the restoration of that which they have lost. he means, "blessed are ye although ye mourn, for your sorrow will be turned into joy."' happy are they whom nothing less than such restoration will comfort! but would such restoration be comfort enough for the heart of jesus to give? was ever love so deep, so pure, so perfect, as to be good enough for him? and suppose the love between the parted two had been such, would the mere restoration in the future of that which once he had, be ground enough for so emphatically proclaiming the man blessed now, blessed while yet in the midnight of his loss, and knowing nothing of the hour of his deliverance? to call a man _blessed_ in his sorrow because of something to be given him, surely implies a something better than what he had before! true, the joy that is past may have been so great that the man might well feel blessed in the merest hope of its restoration; but would that be meaning enough for the word in the mouth of the lord? that the interruption of his blessedness was but temporary, would hardly be fit ground for calling the man _blessed_ in that interruption. _blessed_ is a strong word, and in the mouth of jesus means all it can mean. can his saying here mean less than--'blessed are they that mourn, for they shall be comforted with a bliss well worth all the pain of the medicinal sorrow'? besides, the benediction surely means that the man is blessed _because_ of his condition of mourning, not in spite of it. his mourning is surely a part at least of the lord's ground for congratulating him: is it not the present operative means whereby the consolation is growing possible? in a word, i do not think the lord would be content to call a man blessed on the mere ground of his going to be restored to a former bliss by no means perfect; i think he congratulated the mourners upon the grief they were enduring, because he saw the excellent glory of the comfort that was drawing nigh; because he knew the immeasurably greater joy to which the sorrow was at once clearing the way and conducting the mourner. when i say _greater_, god forbid i should mean _other!_ i mean the same bliss, divinely enlarged and divinely purified--passed again through the hands of the creative perfection. the lord knew all the history of love and loss; beheld throughout the universe the winged love discrowning the skeleton fear. god's comfort must ever be larger than man's grief, else were there gaps in his godhood. mere restoration would leave a hiatus, barren and growthless, in the development of his children. but, alas, what a pinched hope, what miserable expectations, most who call themselves the lord's disciples derive from their notions of his teaching! well may they think of death as the one thing to be right zealously avoided, and for ever lamented! who would forsake even the window-less hut of his sorrow for the poor mean place they imagine the father's house! why, many of them do not even expect to know their friends there! do not expect to distinguish one from another of all the holy assembly! they will look in many faces, but never to recognize old friends and lovers! a fine saviour of men is their jesus! glorious lights they shine in the world of our sorrow, holding forth a word of darkness, of dismallest death! is the lord such as they believe him? 'good-bye, then, good master!' cries the human heart. 'i thought thou couldst save me, but, alas, thou canst not. if thou savest the part of our being which can sin, thou lettest the part that can love sink into hopeless perdition: thou art not he that should come; i look for another! thou wouldst destroy and not save me! thy father is not my father; thy god is not my god! ah, to whom shall we go? he has not the words of eternal life, this jesus, and the universe is dark as chaos! o father, this thy son is good, but we need a greater son than he. never will thy children love thee under the shadow of this new law, that they are not to love one another as thou lovest them!' how does that man love god--of what kind is the love he bears him--who is unable to believe that god loves every throb of every human heart toward another? did not the lord die that we should love one another, and be one with him and the father, and is not the knowledge of difference essential to the deepest love? can there be oneness without difference? harmony without distinction? are all to have the same face? then why faces at all? if the plains of heaven are to be crowded with the same one face over and over for ever, but one moment will pass ere by monotony bliss shall have grown ghastly. why not perfect spheres of featureless ivory rather than those multitudinous heads with one face! or are we to start afresh with countenances all new, each beautiful, each lovable, each a revelation of the infinite father, each distinct from every other, and therefore all blending toward a full revealing--but never more the dear old precious faces, with its whole story in each, which seem, at the very thought of them, to draw our hearts out of our bosoms? were they created only to become dear, and be destroyed? is it in wine only that the old is better? would such a new heaven be a thing to thank god for? would this be a prospect on which the son of man would congratulate the mourner, or at which the mourner for the dead would count himself blessed? it is a shame that such a preposterous, monstrous unbelief should call for argument. a heaven without human love it were inhuman, and yet more undivine to desire; it ought not to be desired by any being made in the image of god. the lord of life died that his father's children might grow perfect in love--might love their brothers and sisters as he loved them: is it to this end that they must cease to know one another? to annihilate the past of our earthly embodiment, would be to crush under the heel of an iron fate the very idea of tenderness, human or divine. we shall all doubtless be changed, but in what direction?--to something less, or to something greater?--to something that is less we, which means degradation? to something that is not we, which means annihilation? or to something that is more we, which means a farther development of the original idea of us, the divine germ of us, holding in it all we ever were, all we ever can and must become? what is it constitutes this or that man? is it what he himself thinks he is? assuredly not. is it what his friends at any given moment think him? far from it. in which of his changing moods is he more himself? loves any lover so little as to desire _no_ change in the person loved--no something different to bring him or her closer to the indwelling ideal? in the loveliest is there not something not like her--something less lovely than she--some little thing in which a change would make her, not less, but more herself? is it not of the very essence of the christian hope, that we shall be changed from much bad to all good? if a wife so love that she would keep every opposition, every inconsistency in her husband's as yet but partially harmonious character, she does not love well enough for the kingdom of heaven. if its imperfections be essential to the individuality she loves, and to the repossession of her joy in it, she may be sure that, if he were restored to her as she would have him, she would soon come to love him less--perhaps to love him not at all; for no one who does not love perfection, will ever keep constant in loving. fault is not lovable; it is only the good in which the alien fault dwells that causes it to seem capable of being loved. neither is it any man's peculiarities that make him beloved; it is the essential humanity underlying those peculiarities. they may make him interesting, and, where not offensive, they may come to be loved for the sake of the man; but in themselves they are of smallest account. we must not however confound peculiarity with diversity. diversity is in and from god; peculiarity in and from man. the real man is the divine idea of him; the man god had in view when he began to send him forth out of thought into thinking; the man he is now working to perfect by casting out what is not he, and developing what is he. but in god's real men, that is, his ideal men, the diversity is infinite; he does not repeat his creations; every one of his children differs from every other, and in every one the diversity is lovable. god gives in his children an analysis of himself, an analysis that will never be exhausted. it is the original god-idea of the individual man that will at length be given, without spot or blemish, into the arms of love. such, surely, is the heart of the comfort the lord will give those whose love is now making them mourn; and their present blessedness must be the expectation of the time when the true lover shall find the restored the same as the lost--with precious differences: the things that were not like the true self, gone or going; the things that were loveliest, lovelier still; the restored not merely more than the lost, but more the person lost than he or she that was lost. for the things which made him or her what he or she was, the things that rendered lovable, the things essential to the person, will be more present, because more developed. whether or not the lord was here thinking specially of the mourners for the dead, as i think he was, he surely does not limit the word of comfort to them, or wish us to believe less than that his father has perfect comfort for every human grief. out upon such miserable theologians as, instead of receiving them into the good soil of a generous heart, to bring forth truth an hundred fold, so cut and pare the words of the lord as to take the very life from them, quenching all their glory and colour in their own inability to believe, and still would have the dead letter of them accepted as the comfort of a creator to the sore hearts he made in his own image! here, 'as if they were god's spies,' some such would tell us that the lord proclaims the blessedness of those that mourn for their sins, and of them only. what mere honest man would make a promise which was all a reservation, except in one unmentioned point! assuredly they who mourn for their sins will be gloriously comforted, but certainly such also as are bowed down with any grief. the lord would have us know that sorrow is not a part of life; that it is but a wind blowing throughout it, to winnow and cleanse. where shall the woman go whose child is at the point of death, or whom the husband of her youth has forsaken, but to her father in heaven? must she keep away until she knows herself sorry for her sins? how should that woman care to be delivered from her sins, how could she accept any comfort, who believed the child of her bosom lost to her for ever? would the lord have such a one be of good cheer, of merry heart, because her sins were forgiven her? would such a mother be a woman of whom the saviour of men might have been born? if a woman forget the child she has borne and nourished, how shall she remember the father from whom she has herself come? the lord came to heal the broken-hearted; therefore he said, 'blessed are the mourners.' hope in god, mother, for the deadest of thy children, even for him who died in his sins. thou mayest have long to wait for him--but he will be found. it may be, thou thyself wilt one day be sent to seek him and find him. rest thy hope on no excuse thy love would make for him, neither upon any quibble theological or sacerdotal; hope on in him who created him, and who loves him more than thou. god will excuse him better than thou, and his uncovenanted mercy is larger than that of his ministers. shall not _the_ father do _his_ best to find his prodigal? the good shepherd to find his lost sheep? the angels in his presence know the father, and watch for the prodigal. thou shalt be comforted. there is one phase of our mourning for the dead which i must not leave unconsidered, seeing it is the pain within pain of all our mourning--the sorrow, namely, with its keen recurrent pangs because of things we have said or done, or omitted to say or do, while we companied with the departed. the very life that would give itself to the other, aches with the sense of having, this time and that, not given what it might. we cast ourselves at their feet, crying, forgive me, my heart's own! but they are pale with distance, and do not seem to hear. it may be that they are longing in like agony of love after us, but know better, or perhaps only are more assured than we, that we shall be comforted together by and by. bethink thee, brother, sister, i say; bethink thee of the splendour of god, and answer--would he be perfect if in his restitution of all things there were no opportunity for declaring our bitter grief and shame for the past? no moment in which to sob--sister, brother, i am thy slave? no room for making amends? at the same time, when the desired moment comes, one look in the eyes may be enough, and we shall know one another even as god knows us. like the purposed words of the prodigal in the parable, it may be that the words of our confession will hardly find place. heart may so speak to heart as to forget there were such things. mourner, hope in god, and comfort where thou canst, and the lord of mourners will be able to comfort thee the sooner. it may be thy very severity with thyself, has already moved the lord to take thy part. such as mourn the loss of love, such from whom the friend, the brother, the lover, has turned away--what shall i cry to them?--you too shall be comforted--only hearken: whatever selfishness clouds the love that mourns the loss of love, that selfishness must be taken out of it--burned out of it even by pain extreme, if such be needful. by cause of that in thy love which was not love, it may be thy loss has come; anyhow, because of thy love's defect, thou must suffer that it may be supplied. god will not, like the unjust judge, avenge thee to escape the cry that troubles him. no crying will make him comfort thy selfishness. he will not render thee incapable of loving truly. he despises neither thy love though mingled with selfishness, nor thy suffering that springs from both; he will disentangle thy selfishness from thy love, and cast it into the fire. his cure for thy selfishness at once and thy suffering, is to make thee love more--and more truly; not with the love of love, but with the love of the person whose lost love thou bemoanest. for the love of love is the love of thyself. begin to love as god loves, and thy grief will assuage; but for comfort wait his time. what he will do for thee, he only knows. it may be thou wilt never know what he will do, but only what he has done: it was too good for thee to know save by receiving it. the moment thou art capable of it, thine it will be. one thing is clear in regard to every trouble--that the natural way with it is straight to the father's knee. the father is father _for_ his children, else why did he make himself their father? wouldst thou not, mourner, be comforted rather after the one eternal fashion--the child by the father--than in such poor temporary way as would but leave thee the more exposed to thy worst enemy, thine own unreclaimed self?--an enemy who has but this one good thing in him--that he will always bring thee to sorrow! the lord has come to wipe away our tears. he is doing it; he will have it done as soon as he can; and until he can, he would have them flow without bitterness; to which end he tells us it is a blessed thing to mourn, because of the comfort on its way. accept his comfort now, and so prepare for the comfort at hand. he is getting you ready for it, but you must be a fellow worker with him, or he will never have done. he _must_ have you pure in heart, eager after righteousness, a very child of his father in heaven. _god's family._ 'blessed are the pure in heart, for they shall see god.' 'blessed are they which do hunger and thirst after righteousness, for they shall be filled.' 'blessed are the peace-makers, for they shall be called the children of god.'--_matthew_ v. , , . the cry of the deepest in man has always been, to see god. it was the cry of moses and the cry of job, the cry of psalmist and of prophet; and to the cry, there has ever been faintly heard a far approach of coming answer. in the fullness of time the son appears with the proclamation that a certain class of men shall behold the father: 'blessed are the pure in heart,' he cries, 'for they shall see god.' he who saw god, who sees him now, who always did and always will see him, says, 'be pure, and you also shall see him.' to see god was the lord's own, eternal, one happiness; therefore he knew that the essential bliss of the creature is to behold the face of the creator. in that face lies the mystery of a man's own nature, the history of a man's own being. he who can read no line of it, can know neither himself nor his fellow; he only who knows god a little, can at all understand man. the blessed in dante's paradise ever and always read each other's thoughts in god. looking to him, they find their neighbour. all that the creature needs to see or know, all that the creature can see or know, is the face of him from whom he came. not seeing and knowing it, he will never be at rest; seeing and knowing it, his existence will yet indeed be a mystery to him and an awe, but no more a dismay. to know that it is, and that it has power neither to continue nor to cease, must to any soul alive enough to appreciate the fact, be merest terror, save also it knows one with it the power by which it exists. from the man who comes to know and feel that power in him and one with him, loneliness, anxiety, and fear vanish; he is no more an orphan without a home, a little one astray on the cold waste of a helpless consciousness. 'father,' he cries, 'hold me fast to thy creating will, that i may know myself one with it, know myself its outcome, its willed embodiment, and rejoice without trembling. be this the delight of my being, that thou hast willed, hast loved me forth; let me know that i am thy child, born to obey thee. dost thou not justify thy deed to thyself by thy tenderness toward me? dost thou not justify it to thy child by revealing to him his claim on thee because of thy disparture of him from thyself, because of his utter dependence on thee? father, thou art in me, else i could not be in thee, could have no house for my soul to dwell in, or any world in which to walk abroad,' these truths are, i believe, the very necessities of fact, but a man does not therefore, at a given moment, necessarily know them. it is absolutely necessary, none the less, to his real being, that he should know these spiritual relations in which he stands to his origin; yea, that they should be always present and potent with him, and become the heart and sphere and all-pervading substance of his consciousness, of which they are the ground and foundation. once to have seen them, is not always to see them. there are times, and those times many, when the cares of this world--with no right to any part in our thought, seeing either they are unreasonable or god imperfect--so blind the eyes of the soul to the radiance of the eternally true, that they see it only as if it ought to be true, not as if it must be true; as if it might be true in the region of thought, but could not be true in the region of fact. our very senses, filled with the things of our passing sojourn, combine to cast discredit upon the existence of any world for the sake of which we are furnished with an inner eye, an eternal ear. but had we once seen god face to face, should we not be always and for ever sure of him? we have had but glimpses of the father. yet, if we had seen god face to face, but had again become impure of heart--if such a fearful thought be a possible idea--we should then no more believe that we had ever beheld him. a sin-beclouded soul could never recall the vision whose essential verity was its only possible proof. none but the pure in heart see god; only the growing-pure hope to see him. even those who saw the lord, the express image of his person, did not see god. they only saw jesus--and then but the outside jesus, or a little more. they were not pure in heart; they saw him and did not see him. they saw him with their eyes, but not with those eyes which alone can see god. those were not born in them yet. neither the eyes of the resurrection-body, nor the eyes of unembodied spirits can see god; only the eyes of that eternal something that is of the very essence of god, the thought-eyes, the truth-eyes, the love-eyes, can see him. it is not because we are created and he uncreated, it is not because of any difference involved in that difference of all differences, that we cannot see him. if he pleased to take a shape, and that shape were presented to us, and we saw that shape, we should not therefore be seeing god. even if we knew it was a shape of god--call it even god himself our eyes rested upon; if we had been told the fact and believed the report; yet, if we did not see the _godness_, were not capable of recognizing him, so as without the report to know the vision him, we should not be seeing god, we should only be seeing the tabernacle in which for the moment he dwelt. in other words, not seeing what in the form made it a form fit for him to take, we should not be seeing a presence which could only be god. to see god is to stand on the highest point of created being. not until we see god--no partial and passing embodiment of him, but the abiding presence--do we stand upon our own mountain-top, the height of the existence god has given us, and up to which he is leading us. that there we should stand, is the end of our creation. this truth is at the heart of everything, means all kinds of completions, may be uttered in many ways; but language will never compass it, for form will never contain it. nor shall we ever see, that is know god perfectly. we shall indeed never absolutely know man or woman or child; but we may know god as we never can know human being--as we never can know ourselves. we not only may, but we must so know him, and it can never be until we are pure in heart. then shall we know him with the infinitude of an ever-growing knowledge. 'what is it, then, to be pure in heart?' i answer, it is not necessary to define this purity, or to have in the mind any clear form of it. for even to know perfectly, were that possible, what purity of heart is, would not be to be pure in heart. 'how then am i to try after it? can i do so without knowing what it is?' though you do not know any definition of purity, you know enough to begin to be pure. you do not know what a man is, but you know how to make his acquaintance--perhaps even how to gain his friendship. your brain does not know what purity is; your heart has some acquaintance with purity itself. your brain in seeking to know what it is, may even obstruct your heart in bettering its friendship with it. to know what purity is, a man must already be pure; but he who can put the question, already knows enough of purity, i repeat, to begin to become pure. if this moment you determine to start for purity, your conscience will at once tell you where to begin. if you reply, 'my conscience says nothing definite'; i answer, 'you are but playing with your conscience. determine, and it will speak.' if you care to see god, be pure. if you will not be pure, you will grow more and more impure; and instead of seeing god, will at length find yourself face to face with a vast inane--a vast inane, yet filled full of one inhabitant, that devouring monster, your own false self. if for this neither do you care, i tell you there is a power that will not have it so; a love that will make you care by the consequences of not caring. you who seek purity, and would have your fellow-men also seek it, spend not your labour on the stony ground of their intellect, endeavouring to explain what purity is; give their imagination the one pure man; call up their conscience to witness against their own deeds; urge upon them the grand resolve to be pure. with the first endeavour of a soul toward her, purity will begin to draw nigh, calling for admittance; and never will a man have to pause in the divine toil, asking what next is required of him; the demands of the indwelling purity will ever be in front of his slow-labouring obedience. if one should say, 'alas, i am shut out from this blessing! i am not pure in heart: never shall i see god!' here is another word from the same eternal heart to comfort him, making his grief its own consolation. for this man also there is blessing with the messenger of the father. unhappy men were we, if god were the god of the perfected only, and not of the growing, the becoming! 'blessed are they,' says the lord, concerning the not yet pure, 'which do hunger and thirst after righteousness, for they shall be filled.' filled with righteousness, they are pure; pure, they shall see god. long ere the lord appeared, ever since man was on the earth, nay, surely, from the very beginning, was his spirit at work in it for righteousness; in the fullness of time he came in his own human person, to fulfil all righteousness. he came to his own of the same mind with himself, who hungered and thirsted after righteousness. they should be fulfilled of righteousness! to hunger and thirst after anything, implies a sore personal need, a strong desire, a passion for that thing. those that hunger and thirst after righteousness, seek with their whole nature the design of that nature. nothing less will give them satisfaction; that alone will set them at ease. they long to be delivered from their sins, to send them away, to be clean and blessed by their absence--in a word to become men, god's men; for, sin gone, all the rest is good. it was not in such hearts, it was not in any heart that the revolting legal fiction of imputed righteousness arose. righteousness itself, god's righteousness, rightness in their own being, in heart and brain and hands, is what they desire. of such men was nathanael, in whom was no guile; such, perhaps, was nicodemus too, although he did come to jesus by night; such was zacchaeus. the temple could do nothing to deliver them; but, by their very futility, its observances had done their work, developing the desires they could not meet, making the men hunger and thirst the more after genuine righteousness: the lord must bring them this bread from heaven. with him, the live, original rightness, in their hearts, they must speedily become righteous. with that love their friend, who is at once both the root and the flower of things, they would strive vigorously as well as hunger eagerly after righteousness. love is the father of righteousness. it could not be, and could not be hungered after, but for love. the lord of righteousness himself could not live without love, without the father in him. every heart was created for, and can live no otherwise than in and upon love eternal, perfect, pure, unchanging; and love necessitates righteousness. in how many souls has not the very thought of a real god waked a longing to be different, to be pure, to be right! the fact that this feeling is possible, that a soul can become dissatisfied with itself, and desire a change in itself, reveals god as an essential part of its being; for in itself the soul is aware that it cannot be what it would, what it ought--that it cannot set itself right: a need has been generated in the soul for which the soul can generate no supply; a presence higher than itself must have caused that need; a power greater than itself must supply it, for the soul knows its very need, its very lack, is of something greater than itself. but the primal need of the human soul is yet greater than this; the longing after righteousness is only one of the manifestations of it; the need itself is that of _existence not self-existent_ for the consciousness of the presence of the causing self-existent. it is the man's need of god. a moral, that is, a human, a spiritual being, must either be god, or one with god. this truth begins to reveal itself when the man begins to feel that he cannot cast out the thing he hates, cannot be the thing he loves. that he hates thus, that he loves thus, is because god is in him, but he finds he has not enough of god. his awaking strength manifests itself in his sense of weakness, for only strength can know itself weak. the negative cannot know itself at all. weakness cannot know itself weak. it is a little strength that longs for more; it is infant righteousness that hungers after righteousness. to every soul dissatisfied with itself, comes this word, at once rousing and consoling, from the power that lives and makes him live--that in his hungering and thirsting he is blessed, for he shall be filled. his hungering and thirsting is the divine pledge of the divine meal. the more he hungers and thirsts the more blessed is he; the more room is there in him to receive that which god is yet more eager to give than he to have. it is the miserable emptiness that makes a man hunger and thirst; and, as the body, so the soul hungers after what belongs to its nature. a man hungers and thirsts after righteousness because his nature needs it--needs it because it was made for it; his soul desires its own. his nature is good, and desires more good. therefore, that he is empty of good, needs discourage no one; for what is emptiness but room to be filled? emptiness is need of good; the emptiness that desires good, is itself good. even if the hunger after righteousness should in part spring from a desire after self-respect, it is not therefore _all_ false. a man could not even be ashamed of himself, without some 'feeling sense' of the beauty of rightness. by divine degrees the man will at length grow sick of himself, and desire righteousness with a pure hunger--just as a man longs to eat that which is good, nor thinks of the strength it will restore. to be filled with righteousness, will be to forget even righteousness itself in the bliss of being righteous, that is, a child of god. the thought of righteousness will vanish in the fact of righteousness. when a creature is just what he is meant to be, what only he is fit to be; when, therefore, he is truly himself, he never thinks what he is. he _is_ that thing; why think about it? it is no longer outside of him that he should contemplate or desire it. god made man, and woke in him the hunger for righteousness; the lord came to enlarge and rouse this hunger. the first and lasting effect of his words must be to make the hungering and thirsting long yet more. if their passion grow to a despairing sense of the unattainable, a hopelessness of ever gaining that without which life were worthless, let them remember that the lord congratulates the hungry and thirsty, so sure does he know them of being one day satisfied. their hunger is a precious thing to have, none the less that it were a bad thing to retain unappeased. it springs from the lack but also from the love of good, and its presence makes it possible to supply the lack. happy, then, ye pining souls! the food you would have, is the one thing the lord would have you have, the very thing he came to bring you! fear not, ye hungering and thirsting; you shall have righteousness enough, though none to spare--none to spare, yet enough to overflow upon every man. see how the lord goes on filling his disciples, john and peter and james and paul, with righteousness from within! what honest soul, interpreting the servant by the master, and unbiassed by the tradition of them that would shut the kingdom of heaven against men, can doubt what paul means by 'the righteousness which is of god by faith'? he was taught of jesus christ through the words he had spoken; and the man who does not understand jesus christ, will never understand his apostles. what righteousness could st paul have meant but the same the lord would have men hunger and thirst after--the very righteousness wherewith god is righteous! they that hunger and thirst after such only righteousness, shall become pure in heart, and shall see god. if your hunger seems long in being filled, it is well it should seem long. but what if your righteousness tarry, because your hunger after it is not eager? there are who sit long at the table because their desire is slow; they eat as who should say, we need no food. in things spiritual, increasing desire is the sign that satisfaction is drawing nearer. but it were better to hunger after righteousness for ever than to dull the sense of lack with the husks of the christian scribes and lawyers: he who trusts in the atonement instead of in the father of jesus christ, fills his fancy with the chimeras of a vulgar legalism, not his heart with the righteousness of god. hear another like word of the lord. he assures us that the father hears the cries of his elect--of those whom he seeks to worship him because they worship in spirit and in truth. 'shall not god avenge his own elect,' he says, 'which cry day and night unto him?' now what can god's elect have to keep on crying for, night and day, but righteousness? he allows that god seems to put off answering them, but assures us he will answer them speedily. even now he must be busy answering their prayers; increasing hunger is the best possible indication that he is doing so. for some divine reason it is well they should not yet know in themselves that he is answering their prayers; but the day must come when we shall be righteous even as he is righteous; when no word of his will miss being understood because of our lack of righteousness; when no unrighteousness shall hide from our eyes the face of the father. these two promises, of seeing god, and being filled with righteousness, have place between the individual man and his father in heaven directly; the promise i now come to, has place between a man and his god as the god of other men also, as the father of the whole family in heaven and earth: 'blessed are the peace-makers, for they shall be called the children of god.' those that are on their way to see god, those who are growing pure in heart through hunger and thirst after righteousness, are indeed the children of god; but specially the lord calls those his children who, on their way home, are peace-makers in the travelling company; for, surely, those in any family are specially the children, who make peace with and among the rest. the true idea of the universe is the whole family in heaven and earth. all the children in this part of it, the earth, at least, are not good children; but however far, therefore, the earth is from being a true portion of a real family, the life-germ at the root of the world, that by and for which it exists, is its relation to god the father of men. for the development of this germ in the consciousness of the children, the church--whose idea is the purer family within the more mixed, ever growing as leaven within the meal by absorption, but which itself is, alas! not easily distinguishable from the world it would change--is one of the passing means. for the same purpose, the whole divine family is made up of numberless human families, that in these, men may learn and begin to love one another. god, then, would make of the world a true, divine family. now the primary necessity to the very existence of a family is peace. many a human family is no family, and the world is no family yet, for the lack of peace. wherever peace is growing, there of course is the live peace, counteracting disruption and disintegration, and helping the development of the true essential family. the one question, therefore, as to any family is, whether peace or strife be on the increase in it; for peace alone makes it possible for the binding grass-roots of life--love, namely, and justice--to spread throughout what were else but a wind-blown heap of still drifting sand. the peace-makers quiet the winds of the world ever ready to be up and blowing; they tend and cherish the interlacing roots of the ministering grass; they spin and twist many uniting cords, and they weave many supporting bands; they are the servants, for the truth's sake, of the individual, of the family, of the world, of the great universal family of heaven and earth. they are the true children of that family, the allies and ministers of every clasping and consolidating force in it; fellow-workers they are with god in the creation of the family; they help him to get it to his mind, to perfect his father-idea. ever radiating peace, they welcome love, but do not seek it; they provoke no jealousy. they are the children of god, for like him they would be one with his creatures. his eldest son, his very likeness, was the first of the family-peace-makers. preaching peace to them that were afar off and them that were nigh, he stood undefended in the turbulent crowd of his fellows, and it was only over his dead body that his brothers began to come together in the peace that will not be broken. he rose again from the dead; his peace-making brothers, like himself, are dying unto sin; and not yet have the evil children made their father hate, or their elder brother flinch. on the other hand, those whose influence is to divide and separate, causing the hearts of men to lean away from each other, make themselves the children of the evil one: born of god and not of the devil, they turn from god, and adopt the devil their father. they set their god-born life against god, against the whole creative, redemptive purpose of his unifying will, ever obstructing the one prayer of the first-born--that the children may be one with him in the father. against the heart-end of creation, against that for which the son yielded himself utterly, the sowers of strife, the fomenters of discord, contend ceaseless. they do their part with all the other powers of evil to make the world which the love of god holds together--a world at least, though not yet a family--one heaving mass of dissolution. but they labour in vain. through the mass and through it, that it may cohere, this way and that, guided in dance inexplicable of prophetic harmony, move the children of god, the lights of the world, the lovers of men, the fellow-workers with god, the peace-makers--ever weaving, after a pattern devised by, and known only to him who orders their ways, the web of the world's history. but for them the world would have no history; it would vanish, a cloud of windborne dust. as in his labour, so shall these share in the joy of god, in the divine fruition of victorious endeavour. blessed are the peace-makers, for they shall be called the children of god--_the_ children because they set the father on the throne of the family. the main practical difficulty, with some at least of the peace-makers, is, how to carry themselves toward the undoers of peace, the disuniters of souls. perhaps the most potent of these are not those powers of the church visible who care for canon and dogma more than for truth, and for the church more than for christ; who take uniformity for unity; who strain at a gnat and swallow a camel, nor knowing what spirit they are of; such men, i say, are perhaps neither the most active nor the most potent force working for the disintegration of the body of christ. i imagine also that neither are the party-liars of politics the worst foes to divine unity, ungenerous, and often knowingly false as they are to their opponents, to whom they seem to have no desire to be honest and fair. i think, rather, they must be the babbling liars of the social circle, and the faithless brothers and unloving sisters of disunited human families. but why inquire? every self-assertion, every form of self-seeking however small or poor, world-noble or grotesque, is a separating and scattering force. and these forces are multitudinous, these points of radial repulsion are innumerable, because of the prevailing passion of mean souls to seem great, and feel important. if such cannot hope to attract the attention of the great-little world, if they cannot even become 'the cynosure of neighbouring eyes,' they will, in what sphere they may call their own, however small it be, try to make a party for themselves; each, revolving on his or her own axis, will attempt to self-centre a private whirlpool of human monads. to draw such a surrounding, the partisan of self will sometimes gnaw asunder the most precious of bonds, poison whole broods of infant loves. such real schismatics go about, where not inventing evil, yet rejoicing in iniquity; mishearing; misrepresenting; paralyzing affection; separating hearts. their chosen calling is that of the strife-maker, the child of the dividing devil. they belong to the class of _the perfidious_, whom dante places in the lowest infernal gulf as their proper home. many a woman who now imagines herself standing well in morals and religion, will find herself at last just such a child of the devil; and her misery will be the hope of her redemption. but it is not for her sake that i write these things: would such a woman recognize her own likeness, were i to set it down as close as words could draw it? i am rather as one groping after some light on the true behaviour toward her kind. are we to treat persons known for liars and strife-makers as the children of the devil or not? are we to turn away from them, and refuse to acknowledge them, rousing an ignorant strife of tongues concerning our conduct? are we guilty of connivance, when silent as to the ambush whence we know the wicked arrow privily shot? are we to call the traitor to account? or are we to give warning of any sort? i have no answer. each must carry the question that perplexes to the light of the world. to what purpose is the spirit of god promised to them that ask it, if not to help them order their way aright? one thing is plain--that we must love the strife-maker; another is nearly as plain--that, if we do not love him, we must leave him alone; for without love there can be no peace-making, and words will but occasion more strife. to be kind neither hurts nor compromises. kindness has many phases, and the fitting form of it may avoid offence, and must avoid untruth. we must not fear what man can do to us, but commit our way to the father of the family. we must be nowise anxious to defend ourselves; and if not ourselves because god is our defence, then why our friends? is he not their defence as much as ours? commit thy friend's cause also to him who judgeth righteously. be ready to bear testimony for thy friend, as thou wouldst to receive the blow struck at him; but do not plunge into a nest of scorpions to rescue his handkerchief. be true to him thyself, nor spare to show thou lovest and honourest him; but defence may dishonour: men may say, what! is thy friend's esteem then so small? he is unwise who drags a rich veil from a cactus-bush. whatever our relation, then, with any peace-breaker, our mercy must ever be within call; and it may help us against an indignation too strong to be pure, to remember that when any man is reviled for righteousness-sake, then is he blessed. _the reward of obedience._ 'blessed are the merciful, for they shall obtain mercy.' 'blessed are they which are persecuted for righteousness' sake, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven. blessed are ye when men shall revile you and persecute you, and shall say all manner of evil against you falsely, for my sake. rejoice and be exceeding glad, for great is your reward in heaven; for so persecuted they the prophets which were before you.'--_matthew_, v. , , . mercy cannot get in where mercy goes not out. the outgoing makes way for the incoming. god takes the part of humanity against the man. the man must treat men as he would have god treat him. 'if ye forgive men their trespasses,' the lord says, 'your heavenly father will also forgive you; but if ye forgive not men their trespasses, neither will your father forgive your trespasses. and in the prophecy of the judgment of the son of man, he represents himself as saying, 'inasmuch as ye have done it unto one of the least of these my brethren, ye have done it unto me.' but the demand for mercy is far from being for the sake only of the man who needs his neighbour's mercy; it is greatly more for the sake of the man who must show the mercy. it is a small thing to a man whether or not his neighbour be merciful to him; it is life or death to him whether or not he be merciful to his neighbour. the greatest mercy that can be shown to man, is to make him merciful; therefore, if he will not be merciful, the mercy of god must compel him thereto. in the parable of the king taking account of his servants, he delivers the unmerciful debtor to the tormentors, 'till he should pay all that was due unto him.' the king had forgiven his debtor, but as the debtor refuses to pass on the forgiveness to his neighbour--the only way to make a return in kind--the king withdraws his forgiveness. if we forgive not men their trespasses, our trespasses remain. for how can god in any sense forgive, remit, or send away the sin which a man insists on retaining? unmerciful, we must be given up to the tormentors until we learn to be merciful. god is merciful: we must be merciful. there is no blessedness except in being such as god; it would be altogether unmerciful to leave us unmerciful. the reward of the merciful is, that by their mercy they are rendered capable of receiving the mercy of god--yea, god himself, who is mercy. that men may be drawn to taste and see and understand, the lord associates reward with righteousness. the lord would have men love righteousness, but how are they to love it without being acquainted with it? how are they to go on loving it without a growing knowledge of it? to draw them toward it that they may begin to know it, and to encourage them when assailed by the disappointments that accompany endeavour, he tells them simply a truth concerning it--that in the doing of it, there is great reward. let no one start with dismay at the idea of a reward of righteousness, saying virtue is its own reward. is not virtue then a reward? is any other imaginable reward worth mentioning beside it? true, the man may, after this mode or that, mistake the reward promised; not the less must he have it, or perish. who will count himself deceived by overfulfilment? would a parent be deceiving his child in saying, 'my boy, you will have a great reward if you learn greek,' foreseeing his son's delight in homer and plato--now but a valueless waste in his eyes? when his reward comes, will the youth feel aggrieved that it is greek, and not bank-notes? the nature indeed of the lord's promised rewards is hardly to be mistaken; yet the foolish remarks one sometimes hears, make me wish to point out that neither is the lord proclaiming an ethical system, nor does he make the blunder of representing as righteousness the doing of a good thing because of some advantage to be thereby gained. when he promises, he only states some fact that will encourage his disciples--that is, all who learn of him--to meet the difficulties in the way of doing right and so learning righteousness, his object being to make men righteous, not to teach them philosophy. i doubt if those who would, on the ground of mentioned reward, set aside the teaching of the lord, are as anxious to be righteous as they are to prove him unrighteous. if they were, they would, i think, take more care to represent him truly; they would make farther search into the thing, nor be willing that he whom the world confesses its best man, and whom they themselves, perhaps, confess their superior in conduct, should be found less pure in theory than they. must the lord hide from his friends that they will have cause to rejoice that they have been obedient? must he give them no help to counterbalance the load with which they start on their race? is he to tell them the horrors of the persecutions that await them, and not the sweet sympathies that will help them through? was it wrong to assure them that where he was going they should go also? the lord could not demand of them more righteousness than he does: 'be ye therefore perfect as your father in heaven is perfect;' but not to help them by word of love, deed of power, and promise of good, would have shown him far less of a brother and a saviour. it is the part of the enemy of righteousness to increase the difficulties in the way of becoming righteous, and to diminish those in the way of seeming righteous. jesus desires no righteousness for the pride of being righteous, any more than for advantage to be gained by it; therefore, while requiring such purity as the man, beforehand, is unable to imagine, he gives him all the encouragement he can. he will not enhance his victory by difficulties--of them there are enough--but by completeness. he will not demand the loftiest motives in the yet far from loftiest soul: to those the soul must grow. he will hearten the child with promises, and fulfil them to the contentment of the man. men cannot be righteous without love; to love a righteous man is the best, the only way to learn righteousness: the lord gives us himself to love, and promises his closest friendship to them that overcome. god's rewards are always in kind. 'i am your father; be my children, and i will be your father.' every obedience is the opening of another door into the boundless universe of life. so long as the constitution of that universe remains, so long as the world continues to be made by god, righteousness can never fail of perfect reward. before it could be otherwise, the government must have passed into other hands. the idea of merit is nowise essential to that of reward. jesus tells us that the lord who finds his servant faithful, will make him sit down to meat, and come forth and serve him; he says likewise, 'when ye have done all, say we are unprofitable servants; we have done only that which it was our duty to do.' reward is the rebound of virtue's well-served ball from the hand of love; a sense of merit is the most sneaking shape that self-satisfaction can assume. god's reward lies closed in all well-doing: the doer of right grows better and humbler, and comes nearer to god's heart as nearer to his likeness; grows more capable of god's own blessedness, and of inheriting the kingdoms of heaven and earth. to be made greater than one's fellows is the offered reward of hell, and involves no greatness; to be made greater than one's self, is the divine reward, and involves a real greatness. a man might be set above all his fellows, to be but so much less than he was before; a man cannot be raised a hair's-breadth above himself, without rising nearer to god. the reward itself, then, is righteousness; and the man who was righteous for the sake of such reward, knowing what it was, would be righteous for the sake of righteousness,--which yet, however, would not be perfection. but i must distinguish and divide no farther now. the reward of mercy is not often of this world; the merciful do not often receive mercy in return from their fellows; perhaps they do not often receive much gratitude. none the less, being the children of their father in heaven, will they go on to show mercy, even to their enemies. they must give like god, and like god be blessed in giving. there is a mercy that lies in the endeavour to share with others the best things god has given: they who do so will be persecuted, and reviled, and slandered, as well as thanked and loved and befriended. the lord not only promises the greatest possible reward; he tells his disciples the worst they have to expect. he not only shows them the fair countries to which they are bound; he tells them the truth of the rough weather and the hardships of the way. he will not have them choose in ignorance. at the same time he strengthens them to meet coming difficulty, by instructing them in its real nature. all this is part of his preparation of them for his work, for taking his yoke upon them, and becoming fellow-labourers with him in his father's vineyard. they must not imagine, because they are the servants of his father, that therefore they shall find their work easy; they shall only find the reward great. neither will he have them fancy, when evil comes upon them, that something unforeseen, unprovided for, has befallen them. it is just then, on the contrary, that their reward comes nigh: when men revile them and persecute them, then they may know that they are blessed. their suffering is ground for rejoicing, for exceeding gladness. the ignominy cast upon them leaves the name of the lord's father written upon their foreheads, the mark of the true among the false, of the children among the slaves. with all who suffer for the world, persecution is the seal of their patent, a sign that they were sent: they fill up that which is behind of the afflictions of christ for his body's sake. let us look at the similar words the lord spoke in a later address to his disciples, in the presence of thousands, on the plain,--supplemented with lamentation over such as have what they desire: st luke vi. -- . _'blessed be ye poor, for yours is the kingdom of god. blessed are ye that hunger now, for ye shall be filled. blessed are ye that weep now, for ye shall laugh. blessed are ye when men shall hate you, and when they shall separate you from their company, and shall reproach you, and cast out your name as evil, for the son of man's sake. rejoice ye in that day, and leap for joy, for behold your reward is great in heaven; for in the like manner did their fathers unto the prophets._ _'but woe unto you that are rich! for ye have received your consolation. woe unto you that are full, for ye shall hunger. woe unto you that laugh now, for ye shall mourn and weep. woe unto you when all men shall speak well of you; for so did their fathers to the false prophets.'_ on this occasion he uses the word _hunger_ without limitation. every true want, every genuine need, every god-created hunger, is a thing provided for in the idea of the universe; but no attempt to fill a void otherwise than the heart of the universe intended and intends, is or can be anything but a woe. god forgets none of his children--the naughty ones any more than the good. love and reward is for the good: love and correction for the bad. the bad ones will trouble the good, but shall do them no hurt. the evil a man does to his neighbour, shall do his neighbour no harm, shall work indeed for his good; but he himself will have to mourn for his doing. a sore injury to himself, it is to his neighbour a cause of jubilation--not for the evil the man does to himself--over that there is sorrow in heaven--but for the good it occasions his neighbour. the poor, the hungry, the weeping, the hated, may lament their lot as if god had forgotten them; but god is all the time caring for them. blessed in his sight now, they shall soon know themselves blessed. 'blessed are ye that weep now, for ye shall laugh.'--welcome words from the glad heart of the saviour! do they not make our hearts burn within us?--they shall be comforted even to laughter! the poor, the hungry, the weeping, the hated, the persecuted, are the powerful, the opulent, the merry, the loved, the victorious of god's kingdom,--to be filled with good things, to laugh for very delight, to be honoured and sought and cherished! but such as have their poor consolation in this life--alas for them!--for those who have yet to learn what hunger is! for those whose laughter is as the crackling of thorns! for those who have loved and gathered the praises of men! for the rich, the jocund, the full-fed! silent-footed evil is on its way to seize them. dives must go without; lazarus must have. god's education makes use of terrible extremes. there are last that shall be first, and first that shall be last. the lord knew what trials, what tortures even awaited his disciples after his death; he knew they would need every encouragement he could give them to keep their hearts strong, lest in some moment of dismay they should deny him. if they had denied him, where would our gospel be? if there are none able and ready to be crucified for him now, alas for the age to come! what a poor travesty of the good news of god will arrive at their doors! those whom our lord felicitates are all the children of one family; and everything that can be called blessed or blessing comes of the same righteousness. if a disciple be blessed because of any one thing, every other blessing is either his, or on the way to become his; for he is on the way to receive the very righteousness of god. each good thing opens the door to the one next it, so to all the rest. but as if these his assurances and promises and comfortings were not large enough; as if the mention of any condition whatever might discourage some humble man of heart with a sense of unfitness, with the fear, perhaps conviction that the promise was not for him; as if some one might say, 'alas, i am proud, and neither poor in spirit nor meek; i am at times not at all hungry after righteousness; i am not half merciful, and am very ready to feel hurt and indignant: i am shut out from every blessing!' the lord, knowing the multitudes that can urge nothing in their own favour, and sorely feel they are not blessed, looks abroad over the wide world of his brothers and sisters, and calls aloud, including in the boundless invitation every living soul with but the one qualification of unrest or discomfort, 'come unto me all ye that labour and are heavy laden, and i will give you rest.' _the yoke of jesus._ at that time jesus answered and said,--according to luke, in that hour jesus rejoiced in spirit, and said,--'i thank thee, o father, lord of heaven and earth, because thou hast hid these things from the wise and prudent, and hast revealed them unto babes. even so, father, for so it seemed good in thy sight. 'all things are delivered unto me of my father; and no man knoweth the son,'--according to luke, 'who the son is,'--'but the father; neither knoweth any man the father,'--according to luke, 'who the father is,'--'save the son, and he to whomsoever the son will reveal him.'--_matthew_ xi. -- ; _luke_ x. , . 'come unto me, all ye that labour, and are heavy laden, and i will give you rest. take my yoke upon you, and learn of me, for i am meek and lowly in heart; and ye shall find rest unto your souls. for my yoke is easy, and my burden is light.' _matthew_ xi. -- . the words of the lord in the former two of these paragraphs, are represented, both by matthew and by luke, as spoken after the denunciation of the cities of chorazin, bethsaida, and capernaum; only in luke's narrative, the return of the seventy is mentioned between; and there the rejoicing of the lord over the father's revelation of himself to babes, appears to have reference to the seventy. the fact that the return of the seventy is not mentioned elsewhere, leaves us free to suppose that the words were indeed spoken on that occasion. the circumstances, however, as circumstances, are to us of little importance, not being necessary to the understanding of the words. the lord makes no complaint against the wise and prudent; he but recognizes that they are not those to whom his father reveals his best things; for which fact and the reasons of it, he thanks, or praises his father. 'i bless thy will: i see that thou art right: i am of one mind with thee:' something of each of these phases of meaning seems to belong to the greek word. 'but why not reveal true things first to the wise? are they not the fittest to receive them?' yes, if these things and their wisdom lie in the same region--not otherwise. no amount of knowledge or skill in physical science, will make a man the fitter to argue a metaphysical question; and the wisdom of this world, meaning by the term, the philosophy of prudence, self-protection, precaution, specially unfits a man for receiving what the father has to reveal: in proportion to our care about our own well being, is our incapability of understanding and welcoming the care of the father. the wise and the prudent, with all their energy of thought, could never see the things of the father sufficiently to recognize them as true. their sagacity labours in earthly things, and so fills their minds with their own questions and conclusions, that they cannot see the eternal foundations god has laid in man, or the consequent necessities of their own nature. they are proud of finding out things, but the things they find out are all less than themselves. because, however, they have discovered them, they imagine such things the goal of the human intellect. if they grant there may be things beyond those, they either count them beyond their reach, or declare themselves uninterested in them: for the wise and prudent, they do not exist. they work only to gather by the senses, and deduce from what they have so gathered, the prudential, the probable, the expedient, the protective. they never think of the essential, of what in itself must be. they are cautious, wary, discreet, judicious, circumspect, provident, temporizing. they have no enthusiasm, and are shy of all forms of it--a clever, hard, thin people, who take _things_ for the universe, and love of facts for love of truth. they know nothing deeper in man than mere surface mental facts and their relations. they do not perceive, or they turn away from any truth which the intellect cannot formulate. zeal for god will never eat them up: why should it? he is not interesting to them: theology may be; to such men religion means theology. how should the treasure of the father be open to such? in their hands his rubies would draw in their fire, and cease to glow. the roses of paradise in their gardens would blow withered. they never go beyond the porch of the temple; they are not sure whether there be any _adytum_, and they do not care to go in and see: why indeed should they? it would but be to turn and come out again. even when they know their duty, they must take it to pieces, and consider the grounds of its claim before they will render it obedience. all those evil doctrines about god that work misery and madness, have their origin in the brains of the wise and prudent, not in the hearts of the children. these wise and prudent, careful to make the words of his messengers rime with their conclusions, interpret the great heart of god, not by their own hearts, but by their miserable intellects; and, postponing the obedience which alone can give power to the understanding, press upon men's minds their wretched interpretations of the will of the father, instead of the doing of that will upon their hearts. they call their philosophy the truth of god, and say men must hold it, or stand outside. they are the slaves of the letter in all its weakness and imperfection,--and will be until the spirit of the word, the spirit of obedience shall set them free. the babes must beware lest the wise and prudent come between them and the father. they must yield no claim to authority over their belief, made by man or community, by church any more than by synagogue. that alone is for them to believe which the lord reveals to their souls as true; that alone is it possible for them to believe with what he counts belief. the divine object for which teacher or church exists, is the persuasion of the individual heart to come to jesus, the spirit, to be taught what he alone can teach. terribly has his gospel suffered in the mouths of the wise and prudent: how would it be faring now, had its first messages been committed to persons of repute, instead of those simple fishermen? it would be nowhere, or, if anywhere, unrecognizable. from the first we should have had a system founded on a human interpretation of the divine gospel, instead of the gospel itself, which would have disappeared. as it is, we have had one dull miserable human system after another usurping its place; but, thank god, the gospel remains! the little child, heedless of his trailing cloud of glory, and looking about him aghast in an unknown world, may yet see and run to the arms open to the children. how often has not some symbol employed in the new testament been forced into the service of argument for one or another contemptible scheme of redemption, which were no redemption; while the truth for the sake of which the symbol was used, the thing meant to be conveyed by it, has lain unregarded beside the heap of rubbish! had the wise and prudent been the confidants of god, i repeat, the letter would at once have usurped the place of the spirit; the ministering slave would have been set over the household; a system of religion, with its rickety, malodorous plan of salvation, would not only have at once been put in the place of a living christ, but would yet have held that place. the great brother, the human god, the eternal son, the living one, would have been as utterly hidden from the tearful eyes and aching hearts of the weary and heavy-laden, as if he had never come from the deeps of love to call the children home out of the shadows of a self-haunted universe. but the father revealed the father's things to his babes; the babes loved, and began to do them, therewith began to understand them, and went on growing in the knowledge of them and in the power of communicating them; while to the wise and prudent, the deepest words of the most babe-like of them all, john boanerges, even now appear but a finger-worn rosary of platitudes. the babe understands the wise and prudent, but is understood only by the babe. the father, then, revealed his things to babes, because the babes were his own little ones, uncorrupted by the wisdom or the care of this world, and therefore able to receive them. the others, though his children, had not begun to be like him, therefore could not receive them. the father's things could not have got anyhow into their minds without leaving all their value, all their spirit, outside the unchildlike place. the babes are near enough whence they come, to understand a little how things go in the presence of their father in heaven, and thereby to interpret the words of the son. the child who has not yet 'walked above a mile or two from' his 'first love,' is not out of touch with the mind of his father. quickly will he seal the old bond when the son himself, the first of the babes, the one perfect babe of god, comes to lead the children out of the lovely 'shadows of eternity' into the land of the 'white celestial thought.' as god is the one only real father, so is it only to god that any one can be a perfect child. in his garden only can childhood blossom. the leader of the great array of little ones, himself, in virtue of his firstborn childhood, the first recipient of the revelations of his father, having thus given thanks, and said why he gave thanks, breaks out afresh, renewing expression of delight that god had willed it thus: 'even so, father, for so it seemed good in thy sight!' i venture to translate, 'yea, o father, for thus came forth satisfaction before thee!' and think he meant, 'yea, father, for thereat were all thy angels filled with satisfaction,' the babes were the prophets in heaven, and the angels were glad to find it was to be so upon the earth also; they rejoiced to see that what was bound in heaven, was bound on earth; that the same principle held in each. compare matt, xviii. and ; also luke xv. . 'see that ye despise not one of these little ones; for i say unto you that their angels in heaven do always behold the face of my father which is in heaven.... thus it is not the will before your father which is in heaven,'--_among the angels who stand before him_, i think he means,--'that one of these little ones should perish.' 'even so, i say unto you, there is joy in the presence of the angels of god over one sinner that repenteth.' having thus thanked his father that he has done after his own 'good and acceptable and perfect will', he turns to his disciples, and tells them that he knows the father, being his son, and that he only can reveal the father to the rest of his children: 'all things are delivered unto me of my father; and no one knoweth the son but the father; neither knoweth any one the father save the son, and he to whomsoever the son willeth to reveal him.' it is almost as if his mention of the babes brought his thoughts back to himself and his father, between whom lay the secret of all life and all sending--yea, all loving. the relation of the father and the son contains the idea of the universe. jesus tells his disciples that his father had no secrets from him; that he knew the father as the father knew him. the son must know the father; he only could know him--and knowing, he could reveal him; the son could make the other, the imperfect children, know the father, and so become such as he. all things were given unto him by the father, because he was the son of the father: for the same reason he could reveal the things of the father to the child of the father. the child-relation is the one eternal, ever enduring, never changing relation. note that, while the lord here represents the knowledge his father and he have each of the other as limited to themselves, the statement is one of fact only, not of design or intention: his presence in the world is for the removal of that limitation. the father knows the son and sends him to us that we may know him; the son knows the father, and dies to reveal him. the glory of god's mysteries is--that they are for his children to look into. when the lord took the little child in the presence of his disciples, and declared him his representative, he made him the representative of his father also; but the eternal child alone can reveal him. to reveal is immeasurably more than to represent; it is to present to the eyes that know the true when they see it. jesus represented god; the spirit of jesus reveals god. the represented god a man may refuse; many refused the lord; the revealed god no one can refuse; to see god and to love him are one. he can be revealed only to the child; perfectly, to the pure child only. all the discipline of the world is to make men children, that god may be revealed to them. no man, when first he comes to himself, can have any true knowledge of god; he can only have a desire after such knowledge. but while he does not know him at all, he cannot become in his heart god's child; so the father must draw nearer to him. he sends therefore his first born, who does know him, is exactly like him, and can represent him perfectly. drawn to him, the children receive him, and then he is able to reveal the father to them. no wisdom of the wise can find out god; no words of the god-loving can reveal him. the simplicity of the whole natural relation is too deep for the philosopher. the son alone can reveal god; the child alone understand him. the elder brother companies with the younger, and makes him yet more a child like himself. he interpenetrates his willing companion with his obedient glory. he lets him see how he delights in his father, and lets him know that god is his father too. he rouses in his little brother the sense of their father's will; and the younger, as he hears and obeys, begins to see that his elder brother must be the very image of their father. he becomes more and more of a child, and more and more the son reveals to him the father. for he knows that to know the father is the one thing needful to every child of the father, the one thing to fill the divine gulf of his necessity. to see the father is the cry of every child-heart in the universe of the father--is the need, where not the cry, of every living soul. comfort yourselves then, brothers and sisters; he to whom the son will reveal him shall know the father; and the son came to us that he might reveal him. 'eternal brother,' we cry, 'show us the father. be thyself to us, that in thee we may know him. we too are his children: let the other children share with thee in the things of the father.' having spoken to his father first, and now to his disciples, the lord turns to the whole world, and lets his heart overflow:--st matthew alone has saved for us the eternal cry:--'come unto me all ye that labour and are heavy laden, and i will give you rest.'--'i know the father; come then to me, all ye that labour and are heavy laden.' he does not here call those who want to know the father; his cry goes far beyond them; it reaches to the ends of the earth. he calls those who are weary; those who do not know that ignorance of the father is the cause of all their labour and the heaviness of their burden. 'come unto me,' he says, 'and i will give you rest.' this is the lord's own form of his gospel, more intensely personal and direct, at the same time of yet wider inclusion, than that which, at nazareth, he appropriated from isaiah; differing from it also in this, that it is interfused with strongest persuasion to the troubled to enter into and share his own eternal rest. i will turn his argument a little. 'i have rest because i know the father. be meek and lowly of heart toward him as i am; let him lay his yoke upon you as he lays it on me. i do his will, not my own. take on you the yoke that i wear; be his child like me; become a babe to whom he can reveal his wonders. then shall you too find rest to your souls; you shall have the same peace i have; you will be weary and heavy laden no more. i find my yoke easy, my burden light.' we must not imagine that, when the lord says, 'take my yoke upon you,' he means a yoke which he lays on those that come to him; 'my yoke' is the yoke he wears himself, the yoke his father lays upon him, the yoke out of which, that same moment, he speaks, bearing it with glad patience. 'you must take on you the yoke i have taken: the father lays it upon us.' the best of the good wine remains; i have kept it to the last. a friend pointed out to me that the master does not mean we must take on us a yoke like his; we must take on us the very yoke he is carrying. dante, describing how, on the first terrace of purgatory, he walked stooping, to be on a level with oderisi, who went bowed to the ground by the ponderous burden of the pride he had cherished on earth, says--'i went walking with this heavy-laden soul, just as oxen walk in the yoke': this picture almost always comes to me with the words of the lord, 'take my yoke upon you, and learn of me.' their intent is, 'take the other end of my yoke, doing as i do, being as i am.' think of it a moment:--to walk in the same yoke with the son of man, doing the same labour with him, and having the same feeling common to him and us! this, and nothing else, is offered the man who would have rest to his soul; is required of the man who would know the father; is by the lord pressed upon him to whom he would give the same peace which pervades and sustains his own eternal heart. but a yoke is for drawing withal: what load is it the lord is drawing? wherewith is the cart laden which he would have us help him draw? with what but the will of the eternal, the perfect father? how should the father honour the son, but by giving him his will to embody in deed, by making him hand to his father's heart!--and hardest of all, in bringing home his children! specially in drawing this load must his yoke-fellow share. how to draw it, he must learn of him who draws by his side. whoever, in the commonest duties that fall to him, does as the father would have him do, bears his yoke along with jesus; and the father takes his help for the redemption of the world--for the deliverance of men from the slavery of their own rubbish-laden waggons, into the liberty of god's husbandmen. bearing the same yoke with jesus, the man learns to walk step for step with him, drawing, drawing the cart laden with the will of the father of both, and rejoicing with the joy of jesus. the glory of existence is to take up its burden, and exist for existence eternal and supreme--for the father who does his divine and perfect best to impart his glad life to us, making us sharers of that nature which is bliss, and that labour which is peace. he lives for us; we must live for him. the little ones must take their full share in the great father's work: his work is the business of the family. starts thy soul, trembles thy brain at the thought of such a burden as the will of the eternally creating, eternally saving god? 'how shall mortal man walk in such a yoke,' sayest thou, 'even with the son of god bearing it also?' why, brother, sister, it is the only burden bearable--the only burden that can be borne of mortal! under any other, the lightest, he must at last sink outworn, his very soul gray with sickness! he on whom lay the other half of the burden of god, the weight of his creation to redeem, says, 'the yoke i bear is easy; the burden i draw is light'; and this he said, knowing the death he was to die. the yoke did not gall his neck, the burden did not overstrain his sinews, neither did the goal on calvary fright him from the straight way thither. he had the will of the father to work out, and that will was his strength as well as his joy. he had the same will as his father. to him the one thing worth living for, was the share the love of his father gave him in his work. he loved his father even to the death of the cross, and eternally beyond it. when we give ourselves up to the father as the son gave himself, we shall not only find our yoke easy and our burden light, but that they communicate ease and lightness; not only will they not make us weary, but they will give us rest from all other weariness. let us not waste a moment in asking how this can be; the only way to know that, is to take the yoke on us. that rest is a secret for every heart to know, for never a tongue to tell. only by having it can we know it. if it seem impossible to take the yoke on us, let us attempt the impossible; let us lay hold of the yoke, and bow our heads, and try to get our necks under it. giving our father the opportunity, he will help and not fail us. he is helping us every moment, when least we think we need his help; when most we think we do, then may we most boldly, as most earnestly we must, cry for it. what or how much his creatures can do or bear, god only understands; but when most it seems impossible to do or bear, we must be most confident that he will neither demand too much, nor fail with the vital creator-help. that help will be there when wanted--that is, the moment it can be help. to be able beforehand to imagine ourselves doing or bearing, we have neither claim nor need. it is vain to think that any weariness, however caused, any burden, however slight, may be got rid of otherwise than by bowing the neck to the yoke of the father's will. there can be no other rest for heart and soul that he has created. from every burden, from every anxiety, from all dread of shame or loss, even loss of love itself, that yoke will set us free. these words of the lord--so many as are reported in common by st matthew and st luke, namely his thanksgiving, and his statement concerning the mutual knowledge of his father and himself, meet me like a well known face unexpectedly encountered: they come to me like a piece of heavenly bread cut from the gospel of st john. the words are not in that gospel, and in st matthew's and st luke's there is nothing more of the kind--in st mark's nothing like them. the passage seems to me just one solitary flower testifying to the presence in the gospels of matthew and luke of the same root of thought and feeling which everywhere blossoms in that of john. it looks as if it had crept out of the fourth gospel into the first and third, and seems a true sign, though no proof, that, however much the fourth be unlike the other gospels, they have all the same origin. some disciple was able to remember one such word of which the promised comforter brought many to the remembrance of john. i do not see how the more phenomenal gospels are ever to be understood, save through a right perception of the relation in which the lord stands to his father, which relation is the main subject of the gospel according to st john. as to the loving cry of the great brother to the whole weary world which matthew alone has set down, i seem aware of a certain indescribable individuality in its tone, distinguishing it from all his other sayings on record. those who come at the call of the lord, and take the rest he offers them, learning of him, and bearing the yoke of the father, are the salt of the earth, the light of the world. _the salt and the light of the world._ 'ye are the salt of the earth; but if the salt have lost his savour, wherewith shall it be salted? it is thenceforth good for nothing, but to be cast out, and to be trodden under foot of men. ye are the light of the world. a city that is set on an hill, cannot be hid. neither do men light a candle, and put it under a bushel, but on a candlestick, and it giveth light unto all that are in the house. let your light so shine before men, that they may see your good works, and glorify your father which is in heaven.'--_matthew_ v. -- . the lord knew these men, and had their hearts in his hand; else would he have told them they were the salt of the earth and the light of the world? they were in danger, it is true, of pluming themselves on what he had said of them, of taking their importance to their own credit, and seeing themselves other than god saw them. yet the lord does not hesitate to call his few humble disciples the salt of the earth; and every century since has borne witness that such indeed they were--that he spoke of them but the simple fact. where would the world be now but for their salt and their light! the world that knows neither their salt nor their light may imagine itself now at least greatly retarded by the long-drawn survival of their influences; but such as have chosen aspiration and not ambition, will cry, but for those men, whither should we at this moment be bound! their master set them to be salt against corruption, and light against darkness; and our souls answer and say, lord, they have been the salt, they have been the light of the world! no sooner has he used the symbol of the salt, than the lord proceeds to supplement its incompleteness. they were salt which must remember that it is salt; which must live salt, and choose salt, and be salt. for the whole worth of salt lies in its being salt; and all the saltness of the moral salt lies in the will to be salt. to lose its saltness, then, is to cease to exist, save as a vile thing whose very being is unjustifiable. what is to be done with saltless salt!--with such as would teach religion, and know not god! having thus carried the figure as far as it will serve him, the master changes it for another, which he can carry farther. for salt only preserves from growing bad; it does not cause anything to grow better. his disciples are the salt of the world, but they are more. therefore, having warned the human salt to look to itself that it be indeed salt, he proceeds: 'ye are the light of the world, a city, a candle,' and so resumes his former path of persuasion and enforcement: 'it is so, therefore make it so.'--'ye are the salt of the earth; therefore be salt.'--'ye are the light of the world; therefore shine.'--'ye are a city; be seen upon your hill.'--'ye are the lord's candles; let no bushels cover you. let your light shine.' every disciple of the lord must be a preacher of righteousness. cities are the best lighted portions of the world; and perhaps the lord meant, 'you are a live city, therefore light up your city.' some connection of the city with light seems probably in his thought, seeing the allusion to the city on the hill comes in the midst of what he says about light in relation to his disciples as the light of the world. anyhow the city is the best circle in which, and the best centre from which to diffuse moral light. a man brooding in the desert may find the very light of light, but he must go to the city to let it shine. from the general idea of light, however, associated with the city as visible to all the country around, the lord turns at once, in this probably fragmentary representation of his words, to the homelier, the more individual and personally applicable figure of the lamp: 'neither do men light a lamp, and put it under a bushel, but on a lampstand, and it giveth light to all that are in the house,' here let us meditate a moment. for what is a lamp or a man lighted? for them that need light, therefore for all. a candle is not lighted for itself; neither is a man. the light that serves self only, is no true light; its one virtue is that it will soon go out. the bushel needs to be lighted, but not by being put over the lamp. the man's own soul needs to be lighted, but light for itself only, light covered by the bushel, is darkness whether to soul or bushel. light unshared is darkness. to be light indeed, it must shine out. it is of the very essence of light, that it is for others. the thing is true of the spiritual as of the physical light--of the truth as of its type. the lights of the world are live lights. the lamp that the lord kindles is a lamp that can will to shine, a soul that must shine. its true relation to the spirits around it--to god and its fellows, is its light. then only does it fully shine, when its love, which is its light, shows it to all the souls within its scope, and all those souls to each other, and so does its part to bring all together toward one. in the darkness each soul is alone; in the light the souls are a family. men do not light a lamp to kill it with a bushel, but to set it on a stand, that it may give light to all that are in the house. the lord seems to say, 'so have i lighted you, not that you may shine for yourselves, but that you may give light unto all. i have set you like a city on a hill, that the whole earth may see and share in your light. shine therefore; so shine before men, that they may see your good things and glorify your father for the light with which he has lighted you. take heed to your light that it be such, that it so shine, that in you men may see the father--may see your works so good, so plainly his, that they recognize his presence in you, and thank him for you.' there was the danger always of the shadow of the self-bushel clouding the lamp the father had lighted; and the moment they ceased to show the father, the light that was in them was darkness. god alone is the light, and our light is the shining of his will in our lives. if our light shine at all, it must be, it can be only in showing the father; nothing is light that does not bear him witness. the man that sees the glory of god, would turn sick at the thought of glorifying his own self, whose one only possible glory is to shine with the glory of god. when a man tries to shine from the self that is not one with god and filled with his light, he is but making ready for his own gathering contempt. the man who, like his lord, seeks not his own, but the will of him who sent him, he alone shines. he who would shine in the praises of men, will, sooner or later, find himself but a gideon's-pitcher left broken on the field. let us bestir ourselves then to keep this word of the lord; and to this end inquire how we are to let our light shine. to the man who does not try to order his thoughts and feelings and judgments after the will of the father, i have nothing to say; he can have no light to let shine. for to let our light shine is to see that in every, even the smallest thing, our lives and actions correspond to what we know of god; that, as the true children of our father in heaven, we do everything as he would have us do it. need i say that to let our light shine is to be just, honourable, true, courteous, more careful over the claim of our neighbour than our own, as knowing ourselves in danger of overlooking it, and not bound to insist on every claim of our own! the man who takes no count of what is fair, friendly, pure, unselfish, lovely, gracious,--where is his claim to call jesus his master? where his claim to christianity? what saves his claim from being merest mockery? the outshining of any human light must be obedience to truth recognized as such; our first show of light as the lord's disciples must be in doing the things he tells us. naturally thus we declare him our master, the ruler of our conduct, the enlightener of our souls; and while in the doing of his will a man is learning the loveliness of righteousness, he can hardly fail to let some light shine across the dust of his failures, the exhalations from his faults. thus will his disciples shine as lights in the world, holding forth the word of life. to shine, we must keep in his light, sunning our souls in it by thinking of what he said and did, and would have us think and do. so shall we drink the light like some diamonds, keep it, and shine in the dark. doing his will, men will see in us that we count the world his, hold that his will and not ours must be done in it. our very faces will then shine with the hope of seeing him, and being taken home where he is. only let us remember that trying to look what we ought to be, is the beginning of hypocrisy. if we do indeed expect better things to come, we must let our hope appear. a christian who looks gloomy at the mention of death, still more, one who talks of his friends as if he had lost them, turns the bushel of his little-faith over the lamp of the lord's light. death is but our visible horizon, and our look ought always to be focussed beyond it. we should never talk as if death were the end of anything. to let our light shine, we must take care that we have no respect for riches: if we have none, there is no fear of our showing any. to treat the poor man with less attention or cordiality than the rich, is to show ourselves the servants of mammon. in like manner we must lay no value on the praise of men, or in any way seek it. we must honour no man because of intellect, fame, or success. we must not shrink, in fear of the judgment of men, from doing openly what we hold right; or at all acknowledge as a law-giver what calls itself society, or harbour the least anxiety for its approval. in business, the custom of the trade must be understood by both contracting parties, else it can have no place, either as law or excuse, with the disciple of jesus. the man to whom business is one thing and religion another, is not a disciple. if he refuses to harmonize them by making his business religion, he has already chosen mammon; if he thinks not to settle the question, it is settled. the most futile of all human endeavours is, to serve god and mammon. the man who makes the endeavour, betrays his master in the temple and kisses him in the garden; takes advantage of him in the shop, and offers him 'divine service!' on sunday. his very church-going is but a further service of mammon! but let us waste no strength in despising such men; let us rather turn the light upon ourselves: are we not in some way denying him? is our light bearing witness? is it shining before men so that they glorify god for it? if it does not shine, it is darkness. in the darkness which a man takes for light, he will thrust at the heart of the lord himself. he who goes about his everyday duty as the work the father has given him to do, is he who lets his light shine. but such a man will not be content with this: he must yet let his light shine. whatever makes his heart glad, he will have his neighbour share. the body is a lantern; it must not be a dark lantern; the glowing heart must show in the shining face. his glad thought may not be one to impart to his neighbour, but he must not quench the vibration of its gladness ere it reach him. what shall we say of him who comes from his closet, his mountain-top, with such a veil over his face as masks his very humanity? is it with the father that man has had communion, whose every movement is self-hampered, and in whose eyes dwell no smiles for the people of his house? the man who receives the quiet attentions, the divine ministrations, of wife or son or daughter, without token of pleasure, without sign of gratitude, can hardly have been with jesus. or can he have been with him, and have left him behind in his closet? if his faith in god take from a man his cheerfulness, how shall the face of a man ever shine? and why are they always glad before the face of the father in heaven? it is true that pain or inward grief may blameless banish all smiling, but even heaviness of heart has no right so to tumble the bushel over the lamp that no ray can get out to tell that love is yet burning within. the man must at least let his dear ones know that something else than displeasure with them is the cause of his clouded countenance. what a sweet colour the divine light takes to itself in courtesy, whose perfection is the recognition of every man as a temple of the living god. sorely ruined, sadly defiled the temple may be, but if god had left it, it would be a heap and not a house. next to love, specially will the light shine out in fairness. what light can he have in him who is always on his own side, and will never descry reason or right on that of his adversary? and certainly, if he that showeth mercy, as well he that showeth justice, ought to do it with cheerfulness. but if all our light shine out, and none of our darkness, shall we not be in utmost danger of hypocrisy? yes, if we but hide our darkness, and do not strive to slay it with our light: what way have we to show it, while struggling to destroy it? only when we cherish evil, is there hypocrisy in hiding it. a man who is honestly fighting it and showing it no quarter, is already conqueror in christ, or will soon be--and more than innocent. but our good feelings, those that make for righteousness and unity, we ought to let shine; they claim to commune with the light in others. many parents hold words unsaid which would lift hundred-weights from the hearts of their children, yea, make them leap for joy. a stern father and a silent mother make mournful, or, which is far worse, hard children. need i add that, if any one, hearing the injunction to let his light shine, makes himself shine instead, it is because the light is not in him! but what shall i say of such as, in the name of religion, let only their darkness out--the darkness of worshipped opinion, the darkness of lip-honour and disobedience! such are those who tear asunder the body of christ with the explosives of dispute, on the plea of such a unity as alone they can understand, namely a paltry uniformity. what have not the 'good church-man' and the 'strong dissenter' to answer for, who, hiding what true light they have, if indeed they have any, each under the bushel of his party-spirit, radiate only repulsion! there is no schism, none whatever, in using diverse forms of thought or worship: true honesty is never schismatic. the real schismatic is the man who turns away love and justice from the neighbour who holds theories in religious philosophy, or as to church-constitution, different from his own; who denies or avoids his brother because he follows not with him; who calls him a schismatic because he prefers this or that mode of public worship not his. the other _may_ be schismatic; he himself certainly _is_. he walks in the darkness of opinion, not in the light of life, not in the faith which worketh by love. worst of all is division in the name of christ who came to make one. neither paul nor apollos nor cephas would--least of all will christ be the leader of any party save that of his own elect, the party of love--of love which suffereth long and is kind; which envieth not, is not puffed up, doth not behave itself unseemly, seeketh not its own, is not easily provoked, thinketh no evil, rejoiceth not in iniquity, but rejoiceth in the truth, beareth all things, believeth all things, hopeth all things, endureth all things. 'let your light shine,' says the lord:--if i have none, the call cannot apply to me; but i must bethink me, lest, in the night i am cherishing about me, the lord come upon me like a thief. there may be those, however, and i think they are numerous, who, having some, or imagining they have much light, yet have not enough to know the duty of letting it shine on their neighbours. the lord would have his men so alive with his light, that it should for ever go flashing from each to all, and all, with eternal response, keep glorifying the father. dost thou look for a good time coming, friend, when thou shalt know as thou art known? let the joy of thy hope stream forth upon thy neighbours. fold them round in that which maketh thyself glad. let thy nature grow more expansive and communicative. look like the man thou art--a man who knows something very good. thou believest thyself on the way to the heart of things: walk so, shine so, that all that see thee shall want to go with thee. what light issues from such as make their faces long at the very name of death, and look and speak as if it were the end of all things and the worst of evils? jesus told his men not to fear death; told them his friends should go to be with him; told them they should live in the house of his father and their father; and since then he has risen himself from the tomb, and gone to prepare a place for them: who, what are these miserable refusers of comfort? not christians, surely! oh, yes, they are christians! 'they are gone,' they say, 'to be for ever with the lord;' and then they weep and lament, and seem more afraid of starting to join them than of aught else under the sun! to the last attainable moment they cling to what they call life. they are children--were there ever any other such children?--who hang crying to the skirts of their mother, and will not be lifted to her bosom. they are not of paul's mind: to be with him is not better! they worship their physician; and their prayer to the god of their life is to spare them from more life. what sort of christians are they? where shines their light? alas for thee, poor world, hadst thou no better lights than these! you who have light, show yourselves the sons and daughters of light, of god, of hope--the heirs of a great completeness. freely let your light shine. only take heed that ye do not your righteousness before men, to be seen of them. _the right hand and the left._ take heed that ye do not your righteousness before men to be seen of them; otherwise ye have no reward of your father which is in heaven.... but when thou doest alms, let not thy left hand know what thy right hand doeth; that thine alms may be in secret; and thy father which seeth in secret, himself shall reward thee.--_matthew_ vi. i, . let your light out freely, that men may see it, but not that men may see you. if i do anything, not because it has to be done, not because god would have it so, not that i may do right, not because it is honest, not that i love the thing, not that i may be true to my lord, not that the truth may be recognized as truth and as his, but that i may be seen as the doer, that i may be praised of men, that i may gain repute or fame; be the thing itself ever so good, i may look to men for my reward, for there is none for me with the father. if, that light being my pleasure, i do it that the light may shine, and that men may know _the_ light, the father of lights, i do well; but if i do it that i may be seen shining, that the light may be noted as emanating from me and not from another, then am i of those that seek glory of men, and worship satan; the light that through me may possibly illuminate others, will, in me and for me, be darkness. _but when thou doest alms, let not thy left hand know what thy right hand doeth_. how, then, am i to let my light shine, if i take pains to hide what i do? the injunction is not to hide what you do from others, but to hide it from yourself. the master would have you not plume yourself upon it, not cherish the thought that you have done it, or confer with yourself in satisfaction over it. you must not count it to your praise. a man must not desire to be satisfied with himself. his right hand must not seek the praise of his left hand. his doing must not invite his after-thinking. the right hand must let the thing done go, as a thing done-with. we must meditate nothing either as a fine thing for us to do, or a fine thing for us to have done. we must not imagine any merit in us: it would be to love a lie, for we can have none; there is no such thing possible. is there anything to be proud of in refusing to worship the devil? is it a grand thing, is it a meritorious thing, not to be vile? when we have done all, we are unprofitable servants. our very best is but decent. what more could it be? why then think of it as anything more? what things could we or any one do, worthy of being brooded over as possessions. good to do, they were; bad to pride ourselves upon, they are. why should a man meditate with satisfaction on having denied himself some selfish indulgence, any more than on having washed his hands? may we roll the rejection of a villainy as a sweet morsel under our tongues? they were the worst villains of all who could be proud of not having committed a villainy; and their pride would but render them the more capable of the villainy, when next the temptation to it came. even if our supposed merit were of the positive order, and we did every duty perfectly, the moment we began to pride ourselves upon the fact, we should drop into a hell of worthlessness. what are we for but to do our duty? we must do it, and think nothing of ourselves for that, neither care what men think of us for anything. with the praise or blame of men we have nought to do. their blame may be a good thing, their praise cannot be. but the worst sort of the praise of men is the praise we give ourselves. we must do nothing to be seen of ourselves. we must seek no approbation even, but that of god, else we shut the door of the kingdom from the outside. his approbation will but quicken our sense of unworthiness. what! seek the praise of men for being fair to our own brothers and sisters? what! seek the praise of god for laying our hearts at the feet of him to whom we utterly belong? there is no pride so mean--and all pride is absolutely, essentially mean--as the pride of being holier than our fellow, except the pride of being holy. such imagined holiness is foulness. religion itself in the hearts of the unreal, is a dead thing; what seems life in it, is the vermiculate life of a corpse. there is one word in the context, as we have it in the authorized version, that used to trouble me, seeming to make its publicity a portion of the reward for doing certain right things in secret: i mean the word _openly_, at the ends of the fourth, the sixth, and the eighteenth verses, making the lord seem to say, 'avoid the praise of men, and thou shalt at length have the praise of men.'--'thy father, which seeth in secret, shall reward thee openly.' _thy reward shall be seen of men! and thou seen as the receiver of the reward!_ in what other way could the word, then or now, be fairly understood? it must be the interpolation of some jew scribe, who, even after learning a little of the christ, continued unable to conceive as reward anything that did not draw part at least of its sweetness from the gazing eyes of the multitude. glad was i to find that the word is not in the best manuscripts; and god be thanked that it is left out in the revised version. what shall we think of the daring that could interpolate it! but of like sort is the daring of much exposition of the master's words. what men have not faith enough to receive, they will still dilute to the standard of their own faculty of reception. if any one say, 'why did the lord let the word remain there so long, if he never said it?' i answer: perhaps that the minds of his disciples might be troubled at its presence, arise against it, and do him right by casting it out--and so wisdom be justified of her children. but there are some who, if the notion of reward is not naturally a trouble to them, yet have come to feel it such, because of the words of certain objectors who think to take a higher stand than the christian, saying the idea of reward for doing right is a low, an unworthy idea. now, verily, it would be a low thing for any child to do his father's will in the hope that his father would reward him for it; but it is quite another thing for a father whose child endeavours to please him, to let him know that he recognizes his childness toward him, and will be fatherly good to him. what kind of a father were the man who, because there could be no merit or desert in doing well, would not give his child a smile or a pleased word when he saw him trying his best? would not such acknowledgment from the father be the natural correlate of the child's behaviour? and what would the father's smile be but the perfect reward of the child? suppose the father to love the child so that he wants to give him everything, but dares not until his character is developed: must he not be glad, and show his gladness, at every shade of a progress that will at length set him free to throne his son over all that he has? 'i am an unprofitable servant,' says the man who has done his duty; but his lord, coming unexpectedly, and finding him at his post, girds himself, and makes him sit down to meat, and comes forth and serves him. how could the divine order of things, founded for growth and gradual betterment, hold and proceed without the notion of return for a thing done? must there be only current and no tide? how can we be workers with god at his work, and he never say 'thank you, my child'? will he take joy in his success and give none? is he the husbandman to take all the profit, and muzzle the mouth of his ox? when a man does work for another, he has his wages for it, and society exists by the dependence of man upon man through work and wages. the devil is not the inventor of this society; he has invented the notion of a certain degradation in work, a still greater in wages; and following this up, has constituted a society after his own likeness, which despises work, leaves it undone, and so can claim its wages without disgrace. if you say, 'no one ought to do right for the sake of reward,' i go farther and say, 'no man _can_ do right for the sake of reward. a man may do a thing indifferent, he may do a thing wrong, for the sake of reward; but a thing in itself right, done for reward, would, in the very doing, cease to be right.' at the same time, if a man does right, he cannot escape being rewarded for it; and to refuse the reward, would be to refuse life, and foil the creative love. the whole question is of the kind of reward expected. what first reward for doing well, may i look for? to grow purer in heart, and stronger in the hope of at length seeing god. if a man be not after this fashion rewarded, he must perish. as to happiness or any lower rewards that naturally follow the first--is god to destroy the law of his universe, the divine sequence of cause and effect in order to say: 'you must do well, but you shall gain no good by it; you must lead a dull joyless existence to all eternity, that lack of delight may show you pure'? could love create with such end in view? righteousness does not demand creation; it is love, not righteousness, that cannot live alone. the creature must already be, ere righteousness can put in a claim. but, hearts and souls there, love itself, which created for love and joy, presses the demand of righteousness first. a righteousness that created misery in order to up-hold itself, would be a righteousness that was unrighteous. god will die for righteousness, but never create for a joyless righteousness. to call into being the necessarily and hopelessly incomplete, would be to wrong creation in its very essence. to create for the knowledge of himself, and then not give himself, would be injustice even to cruelty; and if god give himself, what other reward--there can be no _further_--is not included, seeing he is life and all her children--the all in all? it will take the utmost joy god can give, to let men know him; and what man, knowing him, would mind losing every other joy? only what other joy could keep from entering, where the god of joy already dwelt? the law of the universe holds, and will hold, the name of the father be praised:--'whatsoever a man soweth, that shall he also reap.' 'they have sown the wind, and they shall reap the whirlwind.' 'he that soweth to his flesh, shall of the flesh reap corruption; but he that soweth to the spirit, shall of the spirit reap life everlasting.' 'whosoever hath, to him shall be given, and he shall have more abundance; but whosoever hath not, from him shall be taken away even that he hath.' to object to christianity as selfish, is utter foolishness; christianity alone gives any hope of deliverance from selfishness. is it selfish to desire to love? is it selfish to hope for purity and the sight of god? what better can we do for our neighbour than to become altogether righteous toward him? will he not be the nearer sharing in the exceeding great reward of a return to the divine idea? where is the evil toward god, where the wrong to my neighbour, if i think sometimes of the joys to follow in the train of perfect loving? is not the atmosphere of god, love itself, the very breath of the father, wherein can float no thinnest pollution of selfishness, the only material wherewithal to build the airy castles of heaven? 'creator,' the childlike heart might cry, 'give me all the wages, all the reward thy perfect father-heart can give thy unmeriting child. my fit wages may be pain, sorrow, humiliation of soul: i stretch out my hands to receive them. thy reward will be to lift me out of the mire of self-love, and bring me nearer to thyself and thy children: welcome, divinest of good things! thy highest reward is thy purest gift; thou didst make me for it from the first; thou, the eternal life, hast been labouring still to fit me for receiving it--the vision, the knowledge, the possession of thyself. i can seek but what thou waitest and watchest to give: i would be such into whom thy love can flow.' it seems to me that the only merit that could live before god, is the merit of jesus--who of himself, at once, untaught, unimplored, laid himself aside, and turned to the father, refusing his life save in the father. like god, of himself he chose righteousness, and so merited to sit on the throne of god. in the same spirit he gave himself afterward to his father's children, and merited the power to transfuse the life-redeeming energy of his spirit into theirs: made perfect, he became the author of eternal salvation unto all them that obey him. but it is a word of little daring, that jesus had no thought of merit in what he did--that he saw only what he had to be, what he must do.--i speak after the poor fashion of a man lost in what is too great for him, yet is his very life.--where can be a man's merit in refusing to go down to an abyss of loss--loss of the right to be, loss of his father, loss of himself? would satan, with all the instincts and impulses of his origin in him, have _merited_ eternal life by refusing to be a devil? not the less would he have had eternal life; not the less would he have been wrapt in the love and confidence of the father. he would have had his reward. i cannot imagine thing created meriting aught save by divine courtesy. i suspect the notion of merit belongs to a low development, and the higher a man rises, the less will he find it worth a thought. perhaps we shall come to see that it owes what being it has, to man, that it is a thing thinkable only by man. i suspect it is not a thought of the eternal mind, and has in itself no existence, being to god merely a thing thought by man. for merit lives from man to man, and not from man, o lord, to thee. the man, then, who does right, and seeks no praise from men, while he merits nothing, shall be rewarded by his father, and his reward will be right precious to him. we must let our light shine, make our faith, our hope, our love, manifest--that men may praise, not us for shining, but the father for creating the light. no man with faith, hope, love, alive in his soul, could make the divine possessions a show to gain for himself the admiration of men: not the less must they appear in our words, in our looks, in our carriage--above all, in honourable, unselfish, hospitable, helpful deeds. our light must shine in cheerfulness, in joy, yea, where a man has the gift, in merriment; in freedom from care save for one another, in interest in the things of others, in fearlessness and tenderness, in courtesy and graciousness. in our anger and indignation, specially, must our light shine. but we must give no quarter to the most shadowy thought of how this or that will look. from the faintest thought of the praise of men, we must turn away. no man can be the disciple of christ and desire fame. to desire fame is ignoble; it is a beggarly greed. in the noble mind, it is the more of an infirmity. there is no aspiration in it--nothing but ambition. it is simply selfishness that would be proud if it could. fame is the applause of the many, and the judgment of the many is foolish; therefore the greater the fame, the more is the foolishness that swells it, and the worse is the foolishness that longs after it. aspiration is the sole escape from ambition. he who aspires--that is, does his endeavour to rise above himself--neither lusts to be higher than his neighbour, nor seeks to mount in his opinion. what light there is in him shines the more that he does nothing to be seen of men. he stands in the mist between the gulf and the glory, and looks upward. he loves not his own soul, but longs to be clean. out of the gulf into the glory, father, my soul cries out to be lifted. dark is the woof of my dismal story, thorough thy sun-warp stormily drifted!-- out of the gulf into the glory, lift me, and save my story. i have done many things merely shameful; i am a man ashamed, my father! my life is ashamed and broken and blameful-- the broken and blameful, oh, cleanse and gather! heartily shame me, lord, of the shameful! to my judge i flee with my blameful. saviour, at peace in thy perfect purity, think what it is, not to be pure! strong in thy love's essential security, think upon those who are never secure. full fill my soul with the light of thy purity; fold me in love's security. o father, o brother, my heart is sore aching help it to ache as much as is needful; is it you cleansing me, mending, remaking, dear potter-hands, so tender and heedful? sick of my past, of my own self aching-- hurt on, dear hands, with your making. proud of the form thou hadst given thy vessel, proud of myself, i forgot my donor; down in the dust i began to nestle, poured thee no wine, and drank deep of dishonour! lord, thou hast broken, thou mendest thy vessel! in the dust of thy glory i nestle. o lord, the earnest expectation of thy creature waiteth for the manifestation of the sons of god. _the hope of the universe._ for the earnest expectation of the creature waiteth for the manifestation of the sons of god.--_romans_ viii. . let us try, through these words, to get at the idea in st paul's mind for which they stand, and have so long stood. it can be no worthless idea they represent--no mere platitude, which a man, failing to understand it at once, may without loss leave behind him. the words mean something which paul believes vitally associated with the life and death of his master. he had seen jesus with his bodily eyes, i think, but he had not seen him with those alone; he had seen and saw him with the real eyes, the eyes that do not see except they understand; and the sight of him had uplifted his whole nature--first his pure will for righteousness, and then his hoping imagination; and out of these, in the knowledge of jesus, he spoke. the letters he has left behind him, written in the power of this uplifting, have waked but poor ideas in poor minds; for words, if they seem to mean anything, must always seem to mean something within the scope of the mind hearing them. words cannot convey the thought of a thinker to a no-thinker; of a largely aspiring and self-discontented soul, to a creature satisfied with his poverty, and counting his meagre faculty the human standard. neither will they readily reveal the mind of one old in thought, to one who has but lately begun to think. the higher the reader's notion of what st paul intends--the higher the idea, that is, which his words wake in him, the more likely is it to be the same which moved the man who had seen jesus, and was his own no more. if a man err in his interpretation, it will hardly be by attributing to his words an intent too high. first then, what does paul, the slave of christ, intend by 'the creature' or 'the creation'? if he means the _visible world_, he did not surely, and without saying so, mean to exclude the noblest part of it--the sentient! if he did, it is doubly strange that he should immediately attribute not merely sense, but conscious sense, to that part, the insentient, namely, which remained. if you say he does so but by a figure of speech, i answer that a figure that meant less than it said--and how much less would not this?--would be one altogether unworthy of the lord's messenger. first, i repeat, to exclude the sentient from the term common to both in the word _creation_ or _creature_--and then to attribute the capabilities of the sentient to the insentient, as a mere figure to express the hopes of men with regard to the perfecting of the insentient for the comfort of men, were a violence as unfit in rhetoric as in its own nature. take another part of the same utterance: 'for we know that the whole creation groaneth and travaileth in pain together until now:' is it not manifest that to interpret such words as referring to the mere imperfections of the insensate material world, would be to make of the phrase a worthless hyperbole? i am inclined to believe the apostle regarded the whole visible creation as, in far differing degrees of consciousness, a live outcome from the heart of the living one, who is all and in all: such view, at the same time, i do not care to insist upon; i only care to argue that the word _creature_ or _creation_ must include everything in creation that has sentient life. that i should in the class include a greater number of phenomena than a reader may be prepared to admit, will nowise affect the force of what i have to say, seeing my point is simply this: that in the term _creation_, paul comprises all creatures capable of suffering; the condition of which sentient, therefore superior portion, gives him occasion to speak of the whole creation as suffering in the process of its divine evolution or development, groaning and travailing as in the pangs of giving birth to a better self, a nobler world. it is not necessary to the idea that the creation should know what it is groaning after, or wherein the higher condition constituting its deliverance must consist. the human race groans for deliverance: how much does the race know that its redemption lies in becoming one with the father, and partaking of his glory? here and there one of the race knows it--which is indeed a pledge for the race--but the race cannot be said to know its own lack, or to have even a far-off notion of what alone can stay its groaning. in like manner the whole creation is groaning after an unforeseen yet essential birth--groans with the necessity of being freed from a state that is but a transitional and not a true one, from a condition that nowise answers to the intent in which existence began. in both the lower creation and the higher, this same groaning of the fettered idea after a freer life, seems the first enforced decree of a holy fate, and itself the first movement of the hampered thing toward the liberty of another birth. to believe that god made many of the lower creatures merely for prey, or to be the slaves of a slave, and writhe under the tyrannies of a cruel master who will not serve his own master; that he created and is creating an endless succession of them to reap little or no good of life but its cessation--a doctrine held by some, and practically accepted by multitudes--is to believe in a god who, so far as one portion at least of his creation is concerned, is a demon. but a creative demon is an absurdity; and were such a creator possible, he would not be god, but must one day be found and destroyed by the real god. not the less the fact remains, that miserable suffering abounds among them, and that, even supposing god did not foresee how creation would turn out for them, the thing lies at his door. he has besides made them so far dumb that they cannot move the hearts of the oppressors into whose hands he has given them, telling how hard they find the world, how sore their life in it. the apostle takes up their case, and gives us material for an answer to such as blame god for their sad condition. there are many, i suspect, who from the eighth chapter of st paul's epistle to the romans, gather this much and no more:--that the lower animals alive at the coming of the lord, whensoever that may be, will thenceforward, with such as thereafter may come into existence, lead a happy life for the time allotted them! strong champions of god, these profound believers! what lovers of life, what disciples of st paul, nay, what disciples of jesus, to whom such a gloss is consolation for the moans of a universe! truly, the furnace of affliction they would extinguish thus, casts out the more an evil odour! for all the creatures who through ages of misery have groaned and travailed and died, to these mild christians it is enough that they are dead, therefore, as they would argue, out of it now! 'it is well with them,' i seem to hear such say; 'they are mercifully dealt with; their sufferings are over; they had not to live on for ever in oppression. the god of their life has taken from them their past, and troubles them with no future!' it is true this were no small consolation concerning such as are gone away! surely rest is better than ceaseless toil and pain! but what shall we say of such a heedless god as those christians are content to worship! is he a merciful god? is he a loving god? how shall he die to escape the remorse of the authorship of so much misery? our pity turns from the dead creature to the live creator who could live and know himself the maker of so many extinguished hearts, whose friend was--not he, but death. blessed be the name of the father of jesus, there is no such creator! be we have not to do with the dead only; there are those which live and suffer: is there no comfort concerning them, but that they too shall at length die and leave their misery? and what shall we say of those coming, and yet to come and pass--evermore issuing from the fountain of life, daily born into evil things? will the consolation that they will soon die, suffice for the heart of the child who laments over his dead bird or rabbit, and would fain love that father in heaven who keeps on making the creatures? alas, they are crowding in; they cannot help themselves; their misery is awaiting them! would those christians have me believe in a god who differentiates creatures from himself, only that they may be the prey of other creatures, or spend a few hours or years, helpless and lonely, speechless and without appeal, in merciless hands, then pass away into nothingness? i will not; in the name of jesus, i will not. had he not known something better, would he have said what he did about the father of men and the sparrows? what many men call their beliefs, are but the prejudices they happen to have picked up: why should such believers waste a thought as to how their paltry fellow-inhabitants of the planet fare? many indeed have all their lives been too busy making their human fellows groan and sweat for their own fancied well-being, to spare a thought for the fate of the yet more helpless. but there are not a few, who would be indignant at having their belief in god questioned, who yet seem greatly to fear imagining him better than he is: whether is it he or themselves they dread injuring by expecting too much of him? 'you see the plain facts of the case!' they say. 'there is no questioning them! what can be done for the poor things--except indeed you take the absurd notion into your head, that they too have a life beyond the grave?' why should such a notion seem to you absurd? i answer. the teachers of the nation have unwittingly, it seems to me through unbelief, wronged the animals deeply by their silence anent the thoughtless popular presumption that they have no hereafter; thus leaving them deprived of a great advantage to their position among men. but i suppose they too have taken it for granted that the preserver of man and beast never had a thought of keeping one beast alive beyond a certain time; in which case heartless men might well argue he did not care how they wronged them, for he meant them no redress. their immortality is no new faith with me, but as old as my childhood. do you believe in immortality for yourself? i would ask any reader who is not in sympathy with my hope for the animals. if not, i have no argument with you. but if you do, why not believe in it for them? verily, were immortality no greater a thing for the animals than it seems for men to some who yet profess to expect it, i should scarce care to insist upon their share in it. but if the thought be anywise precious to you, is it essential to your enjoyment in it, that nothing less than yourself should share its realization? are you the lowest kind of creature that _could_ be permitted to live? had god been of like heart with you, would he have given life and immortality to creatures so much less than himself as we? are these not worth making immortal? how, then, were they worth calling out of the depth of no-being? it is a greater deed, to make be that which was not, than to seal it with an infinite immortality: did god do that which was not worth doing? what he thought worth making, you think not worth continuing made! you would have him go on for ever creating new things with one hand, and annihilating those he had made with the other--for i presume you would not prefer the earth to be without animals! if it were harder for god to make the former go on living, than to send forth new, then his creatures were no better than the toys which a child makes, and destroys as he makes them. for what good, for what divine purpose is the maker of the sparrow present at its death, if he does not care what becomes of it? what is he there for, i repeat, if he have no care that it go well with his bird in its dying, that it be neither comfortless nor lost in the abyss? if his presence be no good to the sparrow, are you very sure what good it will be to you when your hour comes? believe it is not by a little only that the heart of the universe is tenderer, more loving, more just and fair, than yours or mine. if you did not believe you were yourself to out-live death, i could not blame you for thinking all was over with the sparrow; but to believe in immortality for yourself, and not care to believe in it for the sparrow, would be simply hard-hearted and selfish. if it would make you happy to think there was life beyond death for the sparrow as well as for yourself, i would gladly help you at least to hope that there may be. i know of no reason why i should not look for the animals to rise again, in the same sense in which i hope myself to rise again--which is, to reappear, clothed with another and better form of life than before. if the father will raise his children, why should he not also raise those whom he has taught his little ones to love? love is the one bond of the universe, the heart of god, the life of his children: if animals can be loved, they are loveable; if they can love, they are yet more plainly loveable: love is eternal; how then should its object perish? must the very immortality of love divide the bond of love? must the love live on for ever without its object? or worse still, must the love die with its object, and be eternal no more than it? what a mis-invented correlation in which the one side was eternal, the other, where not yet annihilated, constantly perishing! is not our love to the animals a precious variety of love? and if god gave the creatures to us, that a new phase of love might be born in us toward another kind of life from the same fountain, why should the new life be more perishing than the new love? can you imagine that, if, here-after, one of god's little ones were to ask him to give again one of the earth's old loves--kitten, or pony, or squirrel, or dog, which he had taken from him, the father would say no? if the thing was so good that god made it for and gave it to the child at first who never asked for it, why should he not give it again to the child who prays for it because the father had made him love it? what a child may ask for, the father will keep ready. that there are difficulties in the way of believing thus, i grant; that there are impossibilities, i deny. perhaps the first difficulty that occurs is, the many forms of life which we cannot desire again to see. but while we would gladly keep the perfected forms of the higher animals, we may hope that those of many other kinds are as transitory as their bodies, belonging but to a stage of development. all animal forms tend to higher: why should not the individual, as well as the race, pass through stages of ascent. if i have myself gone through each of the typical forms of lower life on my way to the human--a supposition by antenatal history rendered probable--and therefore may have passed through any number of individual forms of life, i do not see why each of the lower animals should not as well pass upward through a succession of bettering embodiments. i grant that the theory requires another to complement it; namely, that those men and women, who do not even approximately fulfil the conditions of their elevated rank, who will not endeavour after the great human-divine idea, striving to ascend, are sent away back down to that stage of development, say of fish or insect or reptile, beyond which their moral nature has refused to advance. who has not seen or known men who _appeared_ not to have passed, or indeed in some things to have approached the development of the more human of the lower animals! let those take care who look contemptuously upon the animals, lest, in misusing one of them, they misuse some ancestor of their own, sent back, as the one mercy for him, to reassume far past forms and conditions--far past in physical, that is, but not in moral development--and so have another opportunity of passing the self-constituted barrier. the suggestion may appear very ridiculous, and no doubt lends itself to humorous comment; but what if it should be true! what if the amused reader should himself be getting ready to follow the remanded ancestor! upon it, however, i do not care to spend thought or time, least of all argument; what i care to press is the question--if we believe in the progress of creation as hitherto manifested, also in the marvellous changes of form that take place in every individual of certain classes, why should there be any difficulty in hoping that old lives may reappear in new forms? the typical soul reappears in higher formal type; why may not also the individual soul reappear in higher form? multitudes evidently count it safest to hold by a dull scheme of things: can it be because, like david in browning's poem _saul_, they dread lest they should worst the giver by inventing better gifts than his? that we do not know, is the best reason for hoping to the full extent god has made possible to us. if then we go wrong, it will be in the direction of the right, and with such aberration as will be easier to correct than what must come of refusing to imagine, and leaving the dullest traditional prepossessions to rule our hearts and minds, with no claim but the poverty of their expectation from the paternal riches. those that hope little cannot grow much. to them the very glory of god must be a small thing, for their hope of it is so small as not to be worth rejoicing in. that he is a faithful creator means nothing to them for far the larger portion of the creatures he has made! truly their notion of faithfulness is poor enough; how then can their faith be strong! in the very nature of divine things, the common-place must be false. the stupid, self-satisfied soul, which cannot know its own stupidity, and will not trouble itself either to understand or to imagine, is the farthest behind of all the backward children in god's nursery. as i say, then, i know no cause of reasonable difficulty in regard to the continued existence of the lower animals, except the present nature of some of them. but what christian will dare to say that god does not care about them?--and he knows them as we cannot know them. great or small, they are his. great are all his results; small are all his beginnings. that we have to send many of his creatures out of this phase of their life because of their hurtfulness in this phase of ours, is to me no stumbling-block. the very fact that this has always had to be done, the long protracted combat of the race with such, and the constantly repeated though not invariable victory of the man, has had an essential and incalculable share in the development of humanity, which is the rendering of man capable of knowing god; and when their part to that end is no longer necessary, changed conditions may speedily so operate that the wolf shall dwell with the lamb, and the leopard lie down with the kid. the difficulty may go for nothing in view of the forces of that future with which this loving speculation concerns itself. i would now lead my companion a little closer to what the apostle says in the nineteenth verse; to come closer, if we may, to the idea that burned in his heart when he wrote what we call the eighth chapter of his epistle to the romans. oh, how far ahead he seems, in his hope for the creation, of the footsore and halting brigade of christians at present crossing the world! he knew christ, and could therefore look into the will of the father. _for the earnest expectation of the creature waiteth for the manifestation of the sons of god_! at the head of one of his poems, henry vaughan has this latin translation of the verse: i do not know whether he found or made it, but it is closer to its sense than ours:-- 'etenim res creatae exerto capite observantes expectant revelationem filiorum dei.'--'for the things created, watching with head thrust out, await the revelation of the sons of god.' why? because god has subjected the creation to vanity, in the hope that the creation itself shall be delivered from the bondage of corruption into the glorious liberty of the children of god. for this double deliverance--from corruption and the consequent subjection to vanity, the creation is eagerly watching. the bondage of corruption god encounters and counteracts by subjection to vanity. corruption is the breaking up of the essential idea; the falling away from the original indwelling and life-causing thought. it is met by the suffering which itself causes. that suffering is for redemption, for deliverance. it is the life in the corrupting thing that makes the suffering possible; it is the live part, not the corrupted part that suffers; it is the redeemable, not the doomed thing, that is subjected to vanity. the race in which evil--that is, corruption, is at work, needs, as the one means for its rescue, subjection to vanity; it is the one hope against the supremacy of corruption; and the whole encircling, harboring, and helping creation must, for the sake of man, its head, and for its own further sake too, share in this subjection to vanity with its hope of deliverance. corruption brings in vanity, causes empty aching gaps in vitality. this aching is what most people regard as evil: it is the unpleasant cure of evil. it takes all shapes of suffering--of the body, of the mind, of the heart, of the spirit. it is altogether beneficent: without this ever invading vanity, what hope would there be for the rich and powerful, accustomed to, and set upon their own way? what hope for the self-indulgent, the conceited, the greedy, the miserly? the more things men seek, the more varied the things they imagine they need, the more are they subject to vanity--all the forms of which may be summed in the word disappointment. he who would not house with disappointment, must seek the incorruptible, the true. he must break the bondage of havings and shows; of rumours, and praises, and pretences, and selfish pleasures. he must come out of the false into the real; out of the darkness into the light; out of the bondage of corruption into the glorious liberty of the children of god. to bring men to break with corruption, the gulf of the inane yawns before them. aghast in soul, they cry, 'vanity of vanities! all is vanity!' and beyond the abyss begin to espy the eternal world of truth. note now 'the hope that the creation itself also,' as something besides and other than god's men and women, 'shall be delivered from the bondage of corruption, into the liberty of the glory of the children of god.' the creation then is to share in the deliverance and liberty and glory of the children of god. deliverance from corruption, liberty from bondage, must include escape from the very home and goal of corruption, namely death,--and that in all its kinds and degrees. when you say then that for the children of god there is no more death, remember that the deliverance of the creature is from the bondage of corruption into the glorious liberty of the children of god. dead, in bondage to corruption, how can they share in the liberty of the children of life? where is their deliverance? if such then be the words of the apostle, does he, or does he not, i ask, hold the idea of the immortality of the animals? if you say all he means is, that the creatures alive at the coming of the lord will be set free from the tyranny of corrupt man, i refer you to what i have already said of the poverty of such an interpretation, accepting the failure of justice and love toward those that have passed away, are passing, and must yet, ere that coming, be born to pass away for ever. for the man whose heart aches to adore a faithful creator, what comfort lies in such good news! he must perish for lack of a true god! oh lame conclusion to the grand prophecy! is god a mocker, who will not be mocked? is there a past to god with which he has done? is time too much for him? is he god enough to care for those that happen to live at one present time, but not god enough to care for those that happened to live at another present time? or did he care for them, but could not help them? shall we not rather believe that the vessels of less honour, the misused, the maltreated, shall be filled full with creative wine at last? shall not the children have little dogs under the father's table, to which to let fall plenty of crumbs? if there was such provision for the sparrows of our lord's time of sojourn, and he will bring yet better with him when he comes again, how should the dead sparrows and their sorrows be passed over of him with whom is no variableness, neither shadow of turning? or would the deliverance of the creatures into the groaned-for liberty have been much worth mentioning, if within a few years their share in the glory of the sons of god was to die away in death? but the gifts of god are without repentance. how st paul longs for and loves liberty! only true lover of liberty is he, who will die to give it to his neighbour! st paul loved liberty more than his own liberty. but then see how different his notion of the liberty on its way to the children of god, from the dull modern fancies of heaven still set forth in the popular hymn-books! the new heaven and the new earth will at least be a heaven and an earth! what would the newest earth be to the old children without its animals? barer than the heavens emptied of the constellations that are called by their names. then, if the earth must have its animals, why not the old ones, already dear? the sons of god are not a new race of sons of god, but the old race glorified:--why a new race of animals, and not the old ones glorified? the apostle says they are to share in the liberty of the sons of god: will it not then be a liberty like ours, a liberty always ready to be offered on the altar of love? what sweet service will not that of the animals be, thus offered! how sweet also to minister to them in their turns of need! for to us doubtless will they then flee for help in any difficulty, as now they flee from us in dread of our tyranny. what lovelier feature in the newness of the new earth, than the old animals glorified with us, in their home with us--our common home, the house of our father--each kind an unfailing pleasure to the other! ah, what horses! ah, what dogs! ah, what wild beasts, and what birds in the air! the whole redeemed creation goes to make up st paul's heaven. he had learned of him who would leave no one out; who made the excuse for his murderers that they did not know what they were doing. is not the prophecy on the groaning creation to have its fulfilment in the new heavens and the new earth, wherein dwelleth righteousness? does not this involve its existence beyond what we call this world? why should it not then involve immortality? would it not be more like the king eternal, immortal, invisible, to know no life but the immortal? to create nothing that could die; to slay nothing but evil? 'for he is not a god of the dead, but of the living; for all live unto him.' but what is this liberty of the children of god, for which the whole creation is waiting? the children themselves are waiting for it: when they have it, then will their house and retinue, the creation, whose fate hangs on that of the children, share it with them: what is this liberty? all liberty must of course consist in the realization of the ideal harmony between the creative will and the created life; in the correspondence of the creature's active being to the creator's idea, which is his substantial soul. in other words the creature's liberty is what his obedience to the law of his existence, the will of his maker, effects for him. the instant a soul moves counter to the will of its prime cause, the universe is its prison; it dashes against the walls of it, and the sweetest of its uplifting and sustaining forces at once become its manacles and fetters. but st paul is not at the moment thinking either of the metaphysical notion of liberty, or of its religious realization; he has in his thought the birth of the soul's consciousness of freedom. 'and not only so'--that the creation groaneth and travaileth--'but ourselves also, which have the first fruits of the spirit, even we ourselves groan within ourselves, waiting for.... the redemption of our body.'--we are not free, he implies, until our body is redeemed; then all the creation will be free with us. he regards the creation as part of our embodiment. the whole creation is waiting for the manifestation of the sons of god--that is, the redemption of their body, the idea of which extends to their whole material envelopment, with all the life that belongs to it. for this as for them, the bonds of corruption must fall away; it must enter into the same liberty with them, and be that for which it was created--a vital temple, perfected by the unbroken indwelling of its divinity. the liberty here intended, it may be unnecessary to say, is not that essential liberty--freedom from sin, but the completing of the redemption of the spirit by the redemption of the body, the perfecting of the greater by its necessary complement of the less. evil has been constantly at work, turning our house of the body into a prison; rendering it more opaque and heavy and insensible; casting about it bands and cerements, and filling it with aches and pains. the freest soul, the purest of lovers, the man most incapable of anything mean, would not, for all his mighty liberty, yet feel absolutely at large while chained to a dying body--nor the less hampered, but the more, that that dying body was his own. the redemption of the body, therefore, the making of it for the man a genuine, perfected, responsive house-alive, is essential to the apostle's notion of a man's deliverance. the new man must have a new body with a new heaven and earth. st paul never thinks of himself as released from body; he desires a perfect one, and of a nobler sort; he would inhabit a heaven-made house, and give up the earth-made one, suitable only to this lower stage of life, infected and unsafe from the first, and now much dilapidated in the service of the master who could so easily give him a better. he wants a spiritual body--a body that will not thwart but second the needs and aspirations of the spirit. he had in his mind, i presume, such a body as the lord died with, changed by the interpenetrating of the creative indwelling will, to a heavenly body, the body with which he rose. a body like the lord's is, i imagine, necessary to bring us into true and perfect contact with the creation, of which there must be multitudinous phases whereof we cannot now be even aware. the way in which both good and indifferent people alike lay the blame on their bodies, and look to death rather than god-aided struggle to set them at liberty, appears to me low and cowardly: it is the master fleeing from the slave, despising at once and fearing him. we must hold the supremacy over our bodies, but we must not despise body; it is a divine thing. body and soul are in the image of god; and the lord of life was last seen in the glorified body of his death. i believe that he still wears that body. but we shall do better without these bodies that suffer and grow old--which may indeed, as some think, be but the outer cases, the husks of our real bodies. endlessly helpful as they have been to us, and that, in a measure incalculable, through their very subjection to vanity, we are yet surely not in altogether and only helpful company, so long as the houses wherein we live have so many spots and stains in them which friendly death, it may be, can alone wash out--so many weather-eaten and self-engendered sores which the builder's hand, pulling down and rebuilding of fresh and nobler material, alone can banish. when the sons, then, are free, when their bodies are redeemed, they will lift up with them the lower creation into their liberty. st paul seems to believe that perfection in their kind awaits also the humbler inhabitants of our world, its advent to follow immediately on the manifestation of the sons of god: for our sakes and their own they have been made subject to vanity; for our sakes and their own they shall be restored and glorified, that is, raised higher with us. has the question no interest for you? it would have much, had you now what you must one day have--a heart big enough to love any life god has thought fit to create. had the lord cared no more for what of his father's was lower than himself, than you do for what of your father's is lower than you, you would not now be looking for any sort of redemption. i have omitted in my quotations the word _adoption_ used in both english versions: it is no translation of the greek word for which it stands. it is used by st paul as meaning the same thing with the phrase, 'the redemption of the body'--a fact to bring the interpretation given it at once into question. falser translation, if we look at the importance of the thing signified, and its utter loss in the word used to represent it, not to mention the substitution for that of the apostle, of an idea not only untrue but actively mischievous, was never made. the thing st paul means in the word he uses, has simply nothing to do with adoption--nothing whatever. in the beginning of the fourth chapter of his epistle to the galatians, he makes perfectly clear what he intends by it. his unusual word means the father's recognition, when he comes of age, of the child's relation to him, by giving him his fitting place of dignity in the house; and here the deliverance of the body is the act of this recognition by the great father, completing and crowning and declaring the freedom of the man, the perfecting of the last lingering remnant of his deliverance. st paul's word, i repeat, has nothing to do with _adoption_; it means the manifestation of the grown-up sons of god; the showing of those as sons, who have always been his children; the bringing of them out before the universe in such suitable attire and with such fit attendance, that to look at them is to see what they are, the sons of the house--such to whom their elder brother applied the words: 'i said ye are gods.' if then the sons groan within themselves, looking to be lifted up, and the other inhabitants of the same world groan with them and cry, shall they not also be lifted up? have they not also a faithful creator? he must be a selfish man indeed who does not desire that it should be so. it appears then, that, in the expectation of the apostle, the new heavens and the new earth in which dwell the sons of god, are to be inhabited by blessed animals also--inferior, but risen--and i think, yet to rise in continuous development. here let me revert a moment, and say a little more clearly and strongly a thing i have already said:-- when the apostle speaks of the whole creation, is it possible he should have dismissed the animals from his thoughts, to regard the trees and flowers bearing their part in the groaning and travailing of the sore burdened world? or could he, animals and trees and flowers forgotten, have intended by the creation that groaned and travailed, only the bulk of the earth, its mountains and valleys, plains and seas and rivers, its agglomeration of hard and soft, of hot and cold, of moist and dry? if he could, then the portion that least can be supposed to feel or know, is regarded by the apostle of love as immeasurably more important than the portion that loves and moans and cries. nor is this all; for thereupon he attributes the suffering-faculty of the excluded, far more sentient portion at least, to the altogether inferior and less sentient, and upon the ground of that faculty builds the vision of its redemption! if it could be so, then how should the seeming apostle's affected rhapsody of hope be to us other than a mere puff-ball of falsest rhetoric, a special-pleading for nothing, as degrading to art as objectless in nature? much would i like to know clearly what animals the apostle saw on his travels, or around his home when he had one--their conditions, and their relations to their superiors. anyhow they were often suffering creatures; and paul was a man growing hourly in likeness to his maker and theirs, therefore overflowing with sympathy. perhaps as he wrote, there passed through his mind a throb of pity for the beasts he had to kill at ephesus. if the lord said very little about animals, could he have done more for them than tell men that his father cared for them? he has thereby wakened and is wakening in the hearts of men a seed his father planted. it grows but slowly, yet has already borne a little precious fruit. his loving friend st francis has helped him, and many others have tried, and are now trying to help him: whoever sows the seed of that seed the father planted is helping the son. our behaviour to the animals, our words concerning them, are seed, either good or bad, in the hearts of our children. no one can tell to what the animals might not grow, even here on the old earth under the old heaven, if they were but dealt with according to their true position in regard to us. they are, in sense very real and divine, our kindred. if i call them our poor relations, it is to suggest that poor relations are often ill used. relatives, poor or rich, may be such ill behaved, self-assertive, disagreeable persons, that we cannot treat them as we gladly would; but our endeavour should be to develop every true relation. he who is prejudiced against a relative because he is poor, is himself an ill-bred relative, and to be ill-bred is an excluding fault with the court of the high countries. there, poverty is welcome, vulgarity inadmissible. those who love certain animals selfishly, pampering them, as so many mothers do their children with worse results, that they may be loved of them in return, betray them to their enemies. they are not lovers of animals, but only of favourites, and do their part to make the rest of the world dislike animals. theirs are the dogs that inhospitably growl and bark and snap, moving the indifferent to dislike, and confirming the unfriendly in their antagonism. any dog-parliament, met in the interests of their kind, would condemn such dogs to be discreetly bitten, and their mistresses to be avoided. and certainly, if animals are intended to live and grow, she is the enemy of any individual animal, who stunts his moral and intellectual development by unwise indulgence. of whatever nature be the heaven of the animals, that animal is not in the fair way to enter it. the education of the lower lies at the door of the higher, and in true education is truest kindness. but what shall i say of such as for any kind of end subject animals to torture? i dare hardly trust myself to the expression of my judgment of their conduct in this regard. 'we are investigators; we are not doing it for our own sakes, but for the sake of others, our fellow-men.' the higher your motive for it, the greater is the blame of your unrighteousness. must we congratulate you on such a love for your fellows as inspires you to wrong the weaker than they, those that are without helper against you? shall we count the man worthy who, for the sake of his friend, robbed another man too feeble to protect himself, and too poor to punish his assailant? for the sake of your children, would you waylay a beggar? no real good can grow in the soil of injustice. i cannot help suspecting, however, that the desire to know has a greater share in the enormity than the desire to help. alas for the science that will sacrifice the law of righteousness but to behold a law of sequence! the tree of knowledge will never prove to man the tree of life. there is no law says, thou shalt know; a thousand laws cry out, thou shalt do right. these men are a law unto themselves--and what a law! it is the old story: the greed of knowing casts out righteousness, and mercy, and faith. whatever believed a benefit may or may not thus be wrought for higher creatures, the injustice to the lower is nowise affected. justice has no respect of persons, but they are surely the weaker that stand more in need of justice! labour is a law of the universe, and is not an evil. death is a law of this world at least, and is not an evil. torture is the law of no world but the hell of human invention. labour and death are for the best good of those that labour and die; they are laws of life. torture is doubtless over-ruled for the good of the tortured, but it will one day burn a very hell in the hearts of the torturers. torture can be inflicted only by the superior. the divine idea of a superior, is one who requires duty, and protects, helps, delivers: our relation to the animals is that of their superiors in the family, who require labour, it may be, but are just, helpful, protective. can they know anything of the father who neither love nor rule their inferiors, but use them as a child his insensate toys, pulling them to pieces to know what is inside them? such men, so-called of science--let them have the dignity to the fullness of its worth--lust to know as if a man's life lay in knowing, as if it were a vile thing to be ignorant--so vile that, for the sake of his secret hoard of facts, they do right in breaking with torture into the house of the innocent! surely they shall not thus find the way of understanding! surely there is a maniac thirst for knowledge, as a maniac thirst for wine or for blood! he who loves knowledge the most genuinely, will with the most patience wait for it until it can be had righteously. need i argue the injustice? can a sentient creature come forth without rights, without claim to well-being, or to consideration from the other creatures whom they find, equally without action of their own, present in space? if one answer, 'for aught i know, it may be so,'--where then are thy own rights? i ask. if another have none, thine must lie in thy superior power; and will there not one day come a stronger than thou? mayst thou not one day be in naboth's place, with an ahab getting up to go into thy vineyard to possess it? the rich man may come prowling after thy little ewe lamb, and what wilt thou have to say? he may be the stronger, and thou the weaker! that the rights of the animals are so much less than ours, does not surely argue them the less rights! they have little, and we have much; ought they therefore to have less and we more? must we not rather be the more honourably anxious that they have their little to the full. every gain of injustice is a loss to the world; for life consists neither in length of days nor in ease of body. greed of life and wrong done to secure it, will never work anything but direst loss. as to knowledge, let justice guide thy search and thou wilt know the sooner. do the will of god, and thou shalt know god, and he will open thine eyes to look into the very heart of knowledge. force thy violent way, and gain knowledge, to miss truth. thou mayest wound the heart of god, but thou canst not rend it asunder to find the truth that sits there enthroned. what man would he be who accepted the offer to be healed and kept alive by means which necessitated the torture of certain animals? would he feel himself a gentleman--walking the earth with the sense that his life and conscious well-being were informed and upheld by the agonies of other lives? 'i hope, sir, your health is better than it has been?' 'thank you, i am wonderfully restored--have entered in truth upon a fresh lease of life. my organism has been nourished with the agonies of several dogs, and the pangs of a multitude of rabbits and guinea-pigs, and i am aware of a marvellous change for the better. they gave me their lives, and i gave them in return worse pains than mine. the bargain has proved a quite satisfactory one! true, their lives were theirs, not mine; but then their sufferings were theirs, not mine! they could not defend themselves; they had not a word to say, so reasonable was the exchange. poor fools! they were neither so wise, nor so strong, nor such lovers of comfort as i! if they could not take care of themselves, that was their look-out, not mine! every animal for himself!' there was a certain patriotic priest who thought it better to put a just man to death than that a whole nation should perish. precious salvation that might be wrought by injustice! but then the just man taught that the rich man and the beggar must one day change places. 'to set the life of a dog against the life of a human being!' no, but the torture of a dog against the prolonged life of a being capable of torturing him. priceless gain, the lengthening of such a life, to the man and his friends and his country! that the animals do not suffer so much as we should under like inflictions, i hope true, and think true. but is toothache nothing, because there are yet worse pains for head and face? not a few who now regard themselves as benefactors of mankind, will one day be looked upon with a disapprobation which no argument will now convince them they deserve. but yet another day is coming, when they will themselves right sorrowfully pour out disapprobation upon their own deeds; for they are not stones but men, and must repent. let them, in the interests of humanity, give their own entrails to the knife, their own silver cord to be laid bare, their own golden bowl to be watched throbbing, and i will worship at their feet. but shall i admire their discoveries at the expense of the stranger--nay, no stranger--the poor brother within their gates? your conscience does not trouble you? take heed that the light that is in you be not darkness. whatever judgment mean, will it suffice you in that hour to say, 'my burning desire to know how life wrought in him, drove me through the gates and bars of his living house'? i doubt if you will add, in your heart any more than with your tongue, 'and i did well.' to those who expect a world to come, i say then, let us take heed how we carry ourselves to the creation which is to occupy with us the world to come. to those whose hearts are sore for that creation, i say, the lord is mindful of his own, and will save both man and beast. the end. proofreading team. boethius the theological tractates with an english translation by h.f. stewart, d.d. fellow of trinity college, cambridge and e.k. rand, ph.d. professor of latin in harvard university the consolation of philosophy with the english translation of "i.t." ( ) revised by h.f. stewart [transcriber's note: the paper edition of this book has latin and english pages facing each other. this version of the text uses alternating latin and english sections, with the english text slightly indented.] contents note on the text introduction bibliography the theological tractates the consolation of philosophy symmachi versus index note on the text in preparing the text of the _consolatio_ i have used the apparatus in peiper's edition (teubner, ), since his reports, as i know in the case of the tegernseensis, are generally accurate and complete; i have depended also on my own collations or excerpts from various of the important manuscripts, nearly all of which i have at least examined, and i have also followed, not always but usually, the opinions of engelbrecht in his admirable article, _die consolatio philosophiae des boethius_ in the _sitzungsberichte_ of the vienna academy, cxliv. ( ) - . the present text, then, has been constructed from only part of the material with which an editor should reckon, though the reader may at least assume that every reading in the text has, unless otherwise stated, the authority of some manuscript of the ninth or tenth century; in certain orthographical details, evidence from the text of the _opuscula sacra_ has been used without special mention of this fact. we look to august engelbrecht for the first critical edition of the _consolatio_ at, we hope, no distant date. the text of the _opuscula sacra_ is based on my own collations of all the important manuscripts of these works. an edition with complete _apparatus criticus_ will be ready before long for the vienna _corpus scriptorum ecclesiasticorum latinorum_. the history of the text of the _opuscula sacra_, as i shall attempt to show elsewhere, is intimately connected with that of the _consolatio_. e.k.r. introduction anicius manlius severinus boethius, of the famous praenestine family of the anicii, was born about a.d. in rome. his father was an ex-consul; he himself was consul under theodoric the ostrogoth in , and his two sons, children of a great grand-daughter of the renowned q. aurelius symmachus, were joint consuls in . his public career was splendid and honourable, as befitted a man of his race, attainments, and character. but he fell under the displeasure of theodoric, and was charged with conspiring to deliver rome from his rule, and with corresponding treasonably to this end with justin, emperor of the east. he was thrown into prison at pavia, where he wrote the _consolation of philosophy_, and he was brutally put to death in . his brief and busy life was marked by great literary achievement. his learning was vast, his industry untiring, his object unattainable-- nothing less than the transmission to his countrymen of all the works of plato and aristotle, and the reconciliation of their apparently divergent views. to form the idea was a silent judgment on the learning of his day; to realize it was more than one man could accomplish; but boethius accomplished much. he translated the [greek: eisagogae] of porphyry, and the whole of aristotle's _organon_. he wrote a double commentary on the [greek: eisagogae] and commentaries on the _categories_ and the _de interpretatione_ of aristotle, and on the _topica_ of cicero. he also composed original treatises on the categorical and hypothetical syllogism, on division and on topical differences. he adapted the arithmetic of nicomachus, and his textbook on music, founded on various greek authorities, was in use at oxford and cambridge until modern times. his five theological _tractates_ are here, together with the _consolation of philosophy_, to speak for themselves. boethius was the last of the roman philosophers, and the first of the scholastic theologians. the present volume serves to prove the truth of both these assertions. the _consolation of philosophy_ is indeed, as gibbon called it, "a golden volume, not unworthy of the leisure of plato or of tully." to belittle its originality and sincerity, as is sometimes done, with a view to saving the christianity of the writer, is to misunderstand his mind and his method. the _consolatio_ is not, as has been maintained, a mere patchwork of translations from aristotle and the neoplatonists. rather it is the supreme essay of one who throughout his life had found his highest solace in the dry light of reason. his chief source of refreshment, in the dungeon to which his beloved library had not accompanied him, was a memory well stocked with the poetry and thought of former days. the development of the argument is anything but neoplatonic; it is all his own. and if the _consolation of philosophy_ admits boethius to the company of cicero or even of plato, the theological _tractates_ mark him as the forerunner of st. thomas. it was the habit of a former generation to regard boethius as an eclectic, the transmitter of a distorted aristotelianism, a pagan, or at best a luke-warm christian, who at the end cast off the faith which he had worn in times of peace, and wrapped himself in the philosophic cloak which properly belonged to him. the authenticity of the _tractates_ was freely denied. we know better now. the discovery by alfred holder, and the illuminating discussion by hermann usener,[ ] of a fragment of cassiodorus are sufficient confirmation of the manuscript tradition, apart from the work of scholars who have sought to justify that tradition from internal evidence. in that fragment cassiodorus definitely ascribes to his friend boethius "a book on the trinity, some dogmatic chapters, and a book against nestorius."[ ] boethius was without doubt a christian, a doctor and perhaps a martyr. nor is it necessary to think that, when in prison, he put away his faith. if it is asked why the _consolation of philosophy_ contains no conscious or direct reference to the doctrines which are traced in the _tractates_ with so sure a hand, and is, at most, not out of harmony with christianity, the answer is simple. in the _consolation_ he is writing philosophy; in the _tractates_ he is writing theology. he observes what pascal calls the orders of things. philosophy belongs to one order, theology to another. they have different objects. the object of philosophy is to understand and explain the nature of the world around us; the object of theology is to understand and explain doctrines delivered by divine revelation. the scholastics recognized the distinction,[ ] and the corresponding difference in the function of faith and reason. their final aim was to co-ordinate the two, but this was not possible before the thirteenth century. meanwhile boethius helps to prepare the way. in the _consolation_ he gives reason her range, and suffers her, unaided, to vindicate the ways of providence. in the _tractates_ reason is called in to give to the claims of faith the support which it does not really lack.[ ] reason, however, has still a right to be heard. the distinction between _fides_ and _ratio_ is proclaimed in the first two _tractates_. in the second especially it is drawn with a clearness worthy of st. thomas himself; and there is, of course, the implication that the higher authority resides with _fides_. but the treatment is philosophical and extremely bold. boethius comes back to the question of the substantiality of the divine persons which he has discussed in tr. i. from a fresh point of view. once more he decides that the persons are predicated relatively; even trinity, he concludes, is not predicated substantially of deity. does this square with catholic doctrine? it is possible to hear a note of challenge in his words to john the deacon, _fidem si poterit rationemque coniunge_. philosophy states the problem in unequivocal terms. theology is required to say whether they commend themselves. one object of the scholastics, anterior to the final co-ordination of the two sciences, was to harmonize and codify all the answers to all the questions that philosophy raises. the ambition of boethius was not so soaring, but it was sufficiently bold. he set out, first to translate, and then to reconcile, plato and aristotle; to go behind all the other systems, even the latest and the most in vogue, back to the two great masters, and to show that they have the truth, and are in substantial accord. so st. thomas himself, if he cannot reconcile the teaching of plato and aristotle, at least desires to correct the one by the other, to discover what truth is common to both, and to show its correspondence with christian doctrine. it is reasonable to conjecture that boethius, if he had lived, might have attempted something of the kind. were he alive to-day, he might feel more in tune with the best of the pagans than with most contemporary philosophic thought. in yet one more respect boethius belongs to the company of the schoolmen. he not only put into circulation many precious philosophical notions, served as channel through which various works of aristotle passed into the schools, and handed down to them a definite aristotelian method for approaching the problem of faith; he also supplied material for that classification of the various sciences which is an essential accompaniment of every philosophical movement, and of which the middle ages felt the value.[ ] the uniform distribution into natural sciences, mathematics and theology which he recommends may be traced in the work of various teachers up to the thirteenth century, when it is finally accepted and defended by st. thomas in his commentary on the _de trinitate_. a seventeenth-century translation of the _consolatio philosophiae_ is here presented with such alterations as are demanded by a better text, and the requirements of modern scholarship. there was, indeed, not much to do, for the rendering is most exact. this in a translation of that date is not a little remarkable. we look for fine english and poetry in an elizabethan; but we do not often get from him such loyalty to the original as is here displayed. of the author "i.t." nothing is known. he may have been john thorie, a fleming born in london in , and a b.a. of christ church, . thorie "was a person well skilled in certain tongues, and a noted poet of his times" (wood, _athenae oxon._ ed. bliss, i. ), but his known translations are apparently all from the spanish.[ ] our translator dedicates his "five books of philosophical comfort" to the dowager countess of dorset, widow of thomas sackville, who was part author of _a mirror for magistrates_ and _gorboduc_, and who, we learn from i.t.'s preface, meditated a similar work. i.t. does not unduly flatter his patroness, and he tells her plainly that she will not understand the philosophy of the book, though the theological and practical parts may be within her scope. the _opuscula sacra_ have never before, to our knowledge, been translated. in reading and rendering them we have been greatly helped by two mediaeval commentaries: one by john the scot (edited by e.k. rand in traube's _quellen und untersuchungen_, vol. i. pt. , munich, ); the other by gilbert de la porrée (printed in migne, _p.l._ lxiv.). we also desire to record our indebtedness in many points of scholarship and philosophy to mr. e.j. thomas of emmanuel college. finally, thanks are due to mr. dolson for the suggestion in the footnote on the preceding page, and also to professor lane cooper of cornell university for many valuable corrections as this reprint was passing through the press. h.f.s. e.k.r. _october, ._ [ ] _anecdoton holderi_, leipzig, . [ ] _scripsit librum de sancta trinitate et capita quaedam dogmatica et librum contra nestorium._ on the question of the genuineness of tr. iv. _de fide catholica_ see note _ad loc_. [ ] cp. h. de wulf, _histoire de la philosophie médiévale_ (louvain and paris ), p. . [ ] see below, _de trin_. vi. _ad fin_. [ ] cp. l. baur, _gundissalinus: de divisione_, münster, . [ ] mr. g. bayley dolson suggests with greater probability that i.t. was john thorpe (fl. - ), architect to thomas sackville, earl of dorset. cf. _american journal of philology_, vol. xlii. ( ), p. . bibliography _editio princeps_: collected works (except _de fide catholica_). joh. et greg. de gregoriis. venice, - . _de consolatione philosophiae_. coburger. nürnberg, . _de fide catholica_. ed. ren. vallinus. leyden, . _latest critical edition_: _de consolatione philosophiae_ and theological tractates. r. peiper. teubner, . _translations_: _de consolatione philosophiae_. alfred the great. ed. w.j. sedgefield. oxford, and . chaucer. ed. w.w. skeat in chaucer's complete works. vol. ii. oxford, . h.r. james. _the consolation of philosophy of boethius_. london, ; reprinted . judicis de mirandol. _la consolation philosophique de boëce_. paris, . _illustrative works_: a. engelbrecht. _die consolatio phil. der b._ sitzungsberichte der kön. akad. vienna, . bardenhewer, _patrologie_ (boethius und cassiodor, pp. sqq.). freiburg im breslau, . hauréan. _hist. de la philosophie scolastique._ vol. i. paris, . hildebrand. _boethius und seine stellung zum christentum._ regensburg, . hodgkin. _italy and her invaders._ vols. iii. and iv. oxford, . ch. jourdain. ( ) _de l'origine des traditions sur le christianisme de boëce_; ( ) _des commentaires inédits sur la consolation de la philosophie_. (excursions historiques et philosophiques à travers le moyen àge.) paris, . fritz klingner. _de boethii consolatione_, philol. unters. xxvii. berlin, . f.d. maurice. _moral and metaphysical philosophy._ vol. i. london, . f. nitzsch. _das system des b._ berlin, . e.k. rand. _der dem b. zugeschriebene traktat de fide catholica_ (jahrbuch für kl. phil. xxvi.). . semeria. _il cristianesimo di sev. boezio rivendicato_, rome, . m. schanz. _gesch. der röm. litteratur._ teil iv. boethius. berlin, . h.f. stewart. _boethius: an essay._ edinburgh, . usener. _anecdoton holderi._ leipsic, . boethius the theological tractates and the consolation of philosophy anicii manlii severini boethii v.c. et inl. excons. ord. patricii incipit liber qvomodo trinitas vnvs devs ac non tres dii ad q. avrelivm memmivm symmachvm v.c. et inl. excons. ord. atqve patricivm socervm investigatam diutissime quaestionem, quantum nostrae mentis igniculum lux diuina dignata est, formatam rationibus litterisque mandatam offerendam uobis communicandamque curaui tam uestri cupidus iudicii quam nostri studiosus inuenti. qua in re quid mihi sit animi quotiens stilo cogitata commendo, tum ex ipsa materiae difficultate tum ex eo quod raris id est uobis tantum conloquor, intellegi potest. neque enim famae iactatione et inanibus uulgi clamoribus excitamur; sed si quis est fructus exterior, hic non potest aliam nisi materiae similem sperare sententiam. quocumque igitur a uobis deieci oculos, partim ignaua segnities partim callidus liuor occurrit, ut contumeliam uideatur diuinis tractatibus inrogare qui talibus hominum monstris non agnoscenda haec potius quam proculcanda proiecerit. idcirco stilum breuitate contraho et ex intimis sumpta philosophiae disciplinis nouorum uerborum significationibus uelo, ut haec mihi tantum uobisque, si quando ad ea conuertitis oculos, conloquantur; ceteros uero ita submouimus, ut qui capere intellectu nequiuerint ad ea etiam legenda uideantur indigni. sane[ ] tantum a nobis quaeri oportet quantum humanae rationis intuitus ad diuinitatis ualet celsa conscendere. nam ceteris quoque artibus idem quasi quidam finis est constitutus, quousque potest uia rationis accedere. neque enim medicina aegris semper affert salutem; sed nulla erit culpa medentis, si nihil eorum quae fieri oportebat omiserit. idemque in ceteris. at quantum haec difficilior quaestio est, tam facilior esse debet ad ueniam. vobis tamen etiam illud inspiciendum est, an ex beati augustini scriptis semina rationum aliquos in nos uenientia fructus extulerint. ac de proposita quaestione hinc sumamus initium. [ ] sed ne _codices optimi_. the trinity is one god not three gods a treatise by anicius manlius severinus boethius most honourable, of the illustrious order of ex-consuls, patrician to his father-in-law, quintus aurelius memmius symmachus most honourable, of the illustrious order of ex-consuls, patrician i have long pondered this problem with such mind as i have and all the light that god has lent me. now, having set it forth in logical order and cast it into literary form, i venture to submit it to your judgment, for which i care as much as for the results of my own research. you will readily understand what i feel whenever i try to write down what i think if you consider the difficulty of the topic and the fact that i discuss it only with the few--i may say with no one but yourself. it is indeed no desire for fame or empty popular applause that prompts my pen; if there be any external reward, we may not look for more warmth in the verdict than the subject itself arouses. for, apart from yourself, wherever i turn my eyes, they fall on either the apathy of the dullard or the jealousy of the shrewd, and a man who casts his thoughts before the common herd--i will not say to consider but to trample under foot, would seem to bring discredit on the study of divinity. so i purposely use brevity and wrap up the ideas i draw from the deep questionings of philosophy in new and unaccustomed words which speak only to you and to myself, that is, if you deign to look at them. the rest of the world i simply disregard: they cannot understand, and therefore do not deserve to read. we should not of course press our inquiry further than man's wit and reason are allowed to climb the height of heavenly knowledge.[ ] in all the liberal arts we see the same limit set beyond which reason may not reach. medicine, for instance, does not always bring health to the sick, though the doctor will not be to blame if he has left nothing undone which he ought to do. so with the other arts. in the present case the very difficulty of the quest claims a lenient judgment. you must however examine whether the seeds sown in my mind by st. augustine's writings[ ] have borne fruit. and now let us begin our inquiry. [ ] cf. the discussion of human _ratio_ and divine _intellegentia_ in _cons. v._ pr. and . [ ] e.g. aug. _de trin._ i. christianae religionis reuerentiam plures usurpant, sed ea fides pollet maxime ac solitarie quae cum propter uniuersalium praecepta regularum, quibus eiusdem religionis intellegatur auctoritas, tum propterea, quod eius cultus per omnes paene mundi terminos emanauit, catholica uel uniuersalis uocatur. cuius haec de trinitatis unitate sententia est: "pater," inquiunt, "deus filius deus spiritus sanctus deus." igitur pater filius spiritus sanctus unus non tres dii. cuius coniunctionis ratio est indifferentia. eos enim differentia comitatur qui uel augent uel minuunt, ut arriani qui gradibus meritorum trinitatem uariantes distrahunt atque in pluralitatem diducunt. principium enim pluralitatis alteritas est; praeter alteritatem enim nec pluralitas quid sit intellegi potest. trium namque rerum uel quotlibet tum genere tum specie tum numero diuersitas constat; quotiens enim idem dicitur, totiens diuersum etiam praedicatur. idem uero dicitur tribus modis: aut genere ut idem homo quod equus, quia his idem genus ut animal; uel specie ut idem cato quod cicero, quia eadem species ut homo; uel numero ut tullius et cicero, quia unus est numero. quare diuersum etiam uel genere uel specie uel numero dicitur. sed numero differentiam accidentium uarietas facit. nam tres homines neque genere neque specie sed suis accidentibus distant; nam uel si animo cuncta ab his accidentia separemus, tamen locus cunctis diuersus est quem unum fingere nullo modo possumus; duo enim corpora unum locum non obtinebunt, qui est accidens. atque ideo sunt numero plures, quoniam accidentibus plures fiunt. i. there are many who claim as theirs the dignity of the christian religion; but that form of faith is valid and only valid which, both on account of the universal character of the rules and doctrines affirming its authority, and because the worship in which they are expressed has spread throughout the world, is called catholic or universal. the belief of this religion concerning the unity of the trinity is as follows: the father is god, the son is god, the holy spirit is god. therefore father, son, and holy spirit are one god, not three gods. the principle of this union is absence of difference[ ]: difference cannot be avoided by those who add to or take from the unity, as for instance the arians, who, by graduating the trinity according to merit, break it up and convert it to plurality. for the essence of plurality is otherness; apart from otherness plurality is unintelligible. in fact, the difference between three or more things lies in genus or species or number. difference is the necessary correlative of sameness. sameness is predicated in three ways: by genus; e.g. a man and a horse, because of their common genus, animal. by species; e.g. cato and cicero, because of their common species, man. by number; e.g. tully and cicero, because they are numerically one. similarly difference is expressed by genus, species, and number. now numerical difference is caused by variety of accidents; three men differ neither by genus nor species but by their accidents, for if we mentally remove from them all other accidents,[ ] still each one occupies a different place which cannot possibly be regarded as the same for each, since two bodies cannot occupy the same place, and place is an accident. wherefore it is because men are plural by their accidents that they are plural in number. [ ] the terms _differentia, numerus, species,_ are used expertly, as would be expected of the author of the _in isag. porph. commenta._ see s. brandt's edition of that work (in the vienna _corpus_, ), s.v. _differentia,_ etc. [ ] this method of mental abstraction is employed more elaborately in _tr._ iii. (_vide infra_, p. ) and in _cons._ v. pr. , where the notion of divine foreknowledge is abstracted in imagination. ii. age igitur ingrediamur et unumquodque ut intellegi atque capi potest dispiciamus; nam, sicut optime dictum uidetur, eruditi est hominis unum quodque ut ipsum est ita de eo fidem capere temptare. nam cum tres sint speculatiuae partes, _naturalis_, in motu inabstracta [greek: anupexairetos] (considerat enim corporum formas cum materia, quae a corporibus actu separari non possunt, quae corpora in motu sunt ut cum terra deorsum ignis sursum fertur, habetque motum forma materiae coniuncta), _mathematica_, sine motu inabstracta (haec enim formas corporum speculatur sine materia ac per hoc sine motu, quae formae cum in materia sint, ab his separari non possunt), _theologica_, sine motu abstracta atque separabilis (nam dei substantia et materia et motu caret), in naturalibus igitur rationabiliter, in mathematicis disciplinaliter, in diuinis intellectualiter uersari oportebit neque diduci ad imaginationes, sed potius ipsam inspicere formam quae uere forma neque imago est et quae esse ipsum est et ex qua esse est. omne namque esse ex forma est. statua enim non secundum aes quod est materia, sed secundum formam qua in eo insignita est effigies animalis dicitur, ipsumque aes non secundum terram quod est eius materia, sed dicitur secundum aeris figuram. terra quoque ipsa non secundum [greek: apoion hulaen] dicitur, sed secundum siccitatem grauitatemque quae sunt formae. nihil igitur secundum materiam esse dicitur sed secundum propriam formam. sed diuina substantia sine materia forma est atque ideo unum et est id quod est. reliqua enim non sunt id quod sunt. vnum quodque enim habet esse suum ex his ex quibus est, id est ex partibus suis, et est hoc atque hoc, id est partes suae coniunctae, sed non hoc uel hoc singulariter, ut cum homo terrenus constet ex anima corporeque, corpus et anima est, non uel corpus uel anima in partem; igitur non est id quod est. quod uero non est ex hoc atque hoc, sed tantum est hoc, illud uere est id quod est; et est pulcherrimum fortissimumque quia nullo nititur. quocirca hoc uere unum in quo nullus numerus, nullum in eo aliud praeterquam id quod est. neque enim subiectum fieri potest; forma enim est, formae uero subiectae esse non possunt. nam quod ceterae formae subiectae accidentibus sunt ut humanitas, non ita accidentia suscipit eo quod ipsa est, sed eo quod materia ei subiecta est; dum enim materia subiecta humanitati suscipit quodlibet accidens, ipsa hoc suscipere uidetur humanitas. forma uero quae est sine materia non poterit esse subiectum nec uero inesse materiae, neque enim esset forma sed imago. ex his enim formis quae praeter materiam sunt, istae formae uenerunt quae sunt in materia et corpus efficiunt. nam ceteras quae in corporibus sunt abutimur formas uocantes, dum imagines sint. adsimulantur enim formis his quae non sunt in materia constitutae. nulla igitur in eo diuersitas, nulla ex diuersitate pluralitas, nulla ex accidentibus multitudo atque idcirco nec numerus. ii. we will now begin a careful consideration of each several point, as far as they can be grasped and understood; for it has been wisely said,[ ] in my opinion, that it is a scholar's duty to formulate his belief about anything according to its real nature. speculative science may be divided into three kinds[ ]: physics, mathematics, and theology. physics deals with motion and is not abstract or separable (i.e. [greek: anupexairetos]); for it is concerned with the forms of bodies together with their constituent matter, which forms cannot be separated in reality from their bodies.[ ] as the bodies are in motion--the earth, for instance, tending downwards, and fire tending upwards, form takes on the movement of the particular thing to which it is annexed. mathematics does not deal with motion and is not abstract, for it investigates forms of bodies apart from matter, and therefore apart from movement, which forms, however, being connected with matter cannot be really separated from bodies. theology does not deal with motion and is abstract and separable, for the divine substance is without either matter or motion. in physics, then, we are bound to use scientific, in mathematics, systematical, in theology, intellectual concepts; and in theology we will not let ourselves be diverted to play with imaginations, but will simply apprehend that form which is pure form and no image, which is very being and the source of being. for everything owes its being to form. thus a statue is not a statue on account of the brass which is its matter, but on account of the form whereby the likeness of a living thing is impressed upon it: the brass itself is not brass because of the earth which is its matter, but because of its form. likewise earth is not earth by reason of unqualified matter,[ ] but by reason of dryness and weight, which are forms. so nothing is said to be because it has matter, but because it has a distinctive form. but the divine substance is form without matter, and is therefore one, and is its own essence. but other things are not simply their own essences, for each thing has its being from the things of which it is composed, that is, from its parts. it is this _and_ that, i.e. it is the totality of its parts in conjunction; it is not this _or_ that taken apart. earthly man, for instance, since he consists of soul and body, is soul _and_ body, not soul _or_ body, separately; therefore he is not his own essence. that on the other hand which does not consist of this and that, but is only this, is really its own essence, and is altogether beautiful and stable because it is not grounded in anything. wherefore that is truly one in which is no number, in which nothing is present except its own essence. nor can it become the substrate of anything, for it is pure form, and pure forms cannot be substrates.[ ] for if humanity, like other forms, is a substrate for accidents, it does not receive accidents through the fact that it exists, but through the fact that matter is subjected to it. humanity appears indeed to appropriate the accident which in reality belongs to the matter underlying the conception humanity. but form which is without matter cannot be a substrate, and cannot have its essence in matter, else it would not be form but a reflexion. for from those forms which are outside matter come the forms which are in matter and produce bodies. we misname the entities that reside in bodies when we call them forms; they are mere images; they only resemble those forms which are not incorporate in matter. in him, then, is no difference, no plurality arising out of difference, no multiplicity arising out of accidents, and accordingly no number. [ ] by cicero (_tusc_. v. . ). [ ] cf. the similar division of philosophy in _isag. porph_. ed. brandt, pp. ff. [ ] _sb_. though they may be separated in thought. [ ] [greek: apoios hulae] = [greek: to amorphon, to aeides] of aristotle. cf. [greek: oute gar hulae to eidos (hae men apoios, to de poiotaes tis) oute ex hulaes] (alexander aphrod. _de anima_, . ); [greek: ei de touto, apoios de hae hulae, apoion an eiae soma] (id. _de anima libri mantissa_, . ). [ ] this is realism. cf. "sed si rerum ueritatem atque integritatem perpendas, non est dubium quin uerae sint. nam cum res omnes quae uerae sunt sine his quinque (i.e. genus species differentia propria accidentia) esse non possint, has ipsas quinque res uere intellectas esse non dubites." _isag., porph. ed, pr._ i. (m. _p.l._ lxiv. col. , brandt, pp. ff.). the two passages show that boethius is definitely committed to the realistic position, although in his _comment. in porphyr. a se translatum_ he holds the scales between plato and aristotle, "quorum diiudicare sententias aptum esse non duxi" (cp. hauréau, _hist. de la philosophie scolastique_, i. ). as a fact in the _comment. in porph._ he merely postpones the question, which in the _de trin._ he settles. boethius was ridiculed in the middle ages for his caution. iii. deus uero a deo nullo differt, ne uel accidentibus uel substantialibus differentiis in subiecto positis distent. vbi uero nulla est differentia, nulla est omnino pluralitas, quare nec numerus; igitur unitas tantum. nam quod tertio repetitur deus, cum pater ac filius et spiritus sanctus nuncupatur, tres unitates non faciunt pluralitatem numeri in eo quod ipsae sunt, si aduertamus ad res numerabiles ac non ad ipsum numerum. illic enim unitatum repetitio numerum facit. in eo autem numero qui in rebus numerabilibus constat, repetitio unitatum atque pluralitas minime facit numerabilium rerum numerosam diuersitatem. numerus enim duplex est, unus quidem quo numeramus, alter uero qui in rebus numerabilibus constat. etenim unum res est; unitas, quo unum dicimus. duo rursus in rebus sunt ut homines uel lapides; dualitas nihil, sed tantum dualitas qua duo homines uel duo lapides fiunt. et in ceteris eodem modo. ergo in numero quo numeramus repetitio unitatum facit pluralitatem; in rerum uero numero non facit pluralitatem unitatum repetitio, uel si de eodem dicam "gladius unus mucro unus ensis unus." potest enim unus tot uocabulis gladius agnosci; haec enim unitatum iteratio potius est non numeratio, uelut si ita dicamus "ensis mucro gladius," repetitio quaedam est eiusdem non numeratio diuersorum, uelut si dicam "sol sol sol," non tres soles effecerim, sed de uno totiens praedicauerim. non igitur si de patre ac filio et spiritu sancto tertio praedicatur deus, idcirco trina praedicatio numerum facit. hoc enim illis ut dictum est imminet qui inter eos distantiam faciunt meritorum. catholicis uero nihil in differentia constituentibus ipsamque formam ut est esse ponentibus neque aliud esse quam est ipsum quod est opinantibus recte repetitio de eodem quam enumeratio diuersi uidetur esse cum dicitur "deus pater deus filius deus spiritus sanctus atque haec trinitas unus deus," uelut "ensis atque mucro unus gladius," uelut "sol sol sol unus sol." sed hoc interim ad eam dictum sit significationem demonstrationemque qua ostenditur non omnem unitatum repetitionem numerum pluralitatemque perficere. non uero ita dicitur "pater ac filius et spiritus sanctus" quasi multiuocum quiddam; nam mucro et ensis et ipse est et idem, pater uero ac filius et spiritus sanctus idem equidem est, non uero ipse. in qua re paulisper considerandum est. requirentibus enim: "ipse est pater qui filius?" "minime," inquiunt. rursus: "idem alter qui alter?" negatur. non est igitur inter eos in re omni indifferentia; quare subintrat numerus quem ex subiectorum diuersitate confici superius explanatum est. de qua re breuite*r considerabimus, si prius illud, quem ad modum de deo unum quodque praedicatur, praemiserimus. iii. now god differs from god in no respect, for there cannot be divine essences distinguished either by accidents or by substantial differences belonging to a substrate. but where there is no difference, there is no sort of plurality and accordingly no number; here, therefore, is unity alone. for whereas we say god thrice when we name the father, son, and holy spirit, these three unities do not produce a plurality of number in their own essences, if we think of what we count instead of what we count with. for in the case of abstract number a repetition of single items does produce plurality; but in the case of concrete number the repetition and plural use of single items does not by any means produce numerical difference in the objects counted. there are as a fact two kinds of number. there is the number with which we count (abstract) and the number inherent in the things counted (concrete). "one" is a thing-- the thing counted. unity is that by which oneness is denoted. again "two" belongs to the class of things as men or stones; but not so duality; duality is merely that whereby two men or two stones are denoted; and so on. therefore a repetition of unities[ ] produces plurality when it is a question of abstract, but not when it is a question of concrete things, as, for example, if i say of one and the same thing, "one sword, one brand, one blade."[ ] it is easy to see that each of these names denotes a sword; i am not numbering unities but simply repeating one thing, and in saying "sword, brand, blade," i reiterate the one thing and do not enumerate several different things any more than i produce three suns instead of merely mentioning one thing thrice when i say "sun, sun, sun." so then if god be predicated thrice of father, son, and holy spirit, the threefold predication does not result in plural number. the risk of that, as has been said, attends only on those who distinguish them according to merit. but catholic christians, allowing no difference of merit in god, assuming him to be pure form and believing him to be nothing else than his own essence, rightly regard the statement "the father is god, the son is god, the holy spirit is god, and this trinity is one god," not as an enumeration of different things but as a reiteration of one and the same thing, like the statement, "blade and brand are one sword" or "sun, sun, and sun are one sun." let this be enough for the present to establish my meaning and to show that not every repetition of units produces number and plurality. still in saying "father, son, and holy spirit," we are not using synonymous terms. "brand and blade" are the same and identical, but "father, son, and holy spirit," though the same, are not identical. this point deserves a moment's consideration. when they ask "is the father the same as the son?" catholics answer "no." "is the one the same as the other?" the answer is in the negative. there is not, therefore, complete indifference between them; and so number does come in--number which we explained was the result of diversity of substrates. we will briefly debate this point when we have done examining how particular predicates can be applied to god. [ ] e.g. if i say "one, one, one," i enounce three unities. [ ] the same words are used to illustrate the same matter in the _comment. in arist._ [greek: peri hermaeneias], nd ed. (meiser) . . iv. decem omnino praedicamenta traduntur quae de rebus omnibus uniuersaliter praedicantur, id est substantia, qualitas, quantitas, ad aliquid, ubi, quando, habere, situm esse, facere, pati. haec igitur talis sunt qualia subiecta permiserint; nam pars eorum in reliquarum rerum praedicatione substantia est, pa*rs in accidentium numero est. at haec cum quis i*n diuinam uerterit praedicationem, cuncta mutantu*r quae praedicari possunt. ad aliquid uero omnino non potest praedicari, nam substantia in illo non est uere substantia sed ultra substantiam; item qualitas et cetera quae uenire queunt. quorum ut amplior fiat intellectus exempla subdenda sunt. nam cum dicimus "deus," substantiam quidem significare uidemur, sed eam quae sit ultra substantiam; cum uero "iustus," qualitatem quidem sed non accidentem, sed eam quae sit substantia sed ultra substantiam. neque enim aliud est quod est, aliud est quod iustus est, sed idem est esse deo quod iusto. item cum dicitur "magnus uel maximus," quantitatem quidem significare uidemur, sed eam quae sit ipsa substantia, talis qualem esse diximus ultra substantiam; idem est enim esse deo quod magno. de forma enim eius superius monstratum est quoniam is sit forma et unum uere nec ulla pluralitas. sed haec praedicamenta talia sunt, ut in quo sint ipsum esse faciant quod dicitur, diuise quidem in ceteris, in deo uero coniuncte atque copulate hoc modo: nam cum dicimus "substantia" (ut homo uel deus), ita dicitur quasi illud de quo praedicatur ipsum sit substantia, ut substantia homo uel deus. sed distat, quoniam homo non integre ipsum homo est ac per hoc nec substantia; quod enim est, aliis debet quae non sunt homo. deus uero hoc ipsum deus est; nihil enim aliud est nisi quod est, ac per hoc ipsum deus est. rursus "iustus," quod est qualitas, ita dicitur quasi ipse hoc sit de quo praedicatur, id est si dicamus "homo iustus uel deus iustus," ipsum hominem uel deum iustos esse proponimus; sed differt, quod homo alter alter iustus, deus uero idem ipsum est quod est iustum. "magnus" etiam homo uel deus dicitur atque ita quasi ipse sit homo magnus uel deus magnus; sed homo tantum magnus, deus uero ipsum magnus exsistit. reliqua uero neque de deo neque de ceteris praedicantur. nam ubi uel de homine uel de deo praedicari potest, de homine ut in foro, de deo ut ubique, sed ita ut non quasi ipsa sit res id quod praedicatur de qua dicitur. non enim ita homo dicitur esse in foro quem ad modum esse albus uel longus nec quasi circumfusus et determinatus proprietate aliqua qua designari secundum se possit, sed tantum quo sit illud aliis informatum rebus per hanc praedicationem ostenditur. de deo uero non ita, nam quod ubique est ita dici uidetur non quod in omni sit loco (omnino enim in loco esse non potest) sed quod omnis ei locus adsit ad eum capiendum, cum ipse non suscipiatur in loco; atque ideo nusquam in loco esse dicitur, quoniam ubique est sed non in loco. "quando" uero eodem praedicatur modo, ut de homine heri uenit, de deo semper est. hic quoque non quasi esse aliquid dicitur illud ipsum de quo hesternus dicitur aduentus, sed quid ei secundum tempus accesserit praedicatur. quod uero de deo dicitur "semper est," unum quidem significat, quasi omni praeterito fuerit, omni quoquo modo sit praesenti est, omni futuro erit. quod de caelo et de ceteris inmortalibus corporibus secundum philosophos dici potest, at de deo non ita. semper enim est, quoniam "semper" praesentis est in eo temporis tantumque inter nostrarum rerum praesens, quod est nunc, interest ac diuinarum, quod nostrum "nunc" quasi currens tempus facit et sempiternitatem, diuinum uero "nunc" permanens neque mouens sese atque consistens aeternitatem facit; cui nomini si adicias "semper," facies eius quod est nunc iugem indefessumque ac per hoc perpetuum cursum quod est sempiternitas. rursus habere uel facere eodem modo; dicimus enim "uestitus currit" de homine, de deo "cuncta possidens regit." rursus de eo nihil quod est esse de utrisque dictum est, sed haec omnis praedicatio exterioribus datur omniaque haec quodam modo referuntur ad aliud. cuius praedicationis differentiam sic facilius internoscimus: qui homo est uel deus refertur ad substantiam qua est aliquid, id est homo uel deus; qui iustus est refertur ad qualitatem qua scilicet est aliquid, id est iustus, qui magnus ad quantitatem qua est aliquid, id est magnus. nam in ceteris praedicationibus nihil tale est. qui enim dicit esse aliquem in foro uel ubique, refert quidem ad praedicamentum quod est ubi, sed non quo aliquid est uelut iustitia iustus. item cum dico "currit" uel "regit" uel "nunc est" uel "semper est," refertur quidem uel ad facere uel ad tempus--si tamen interim diuinum illud semper tempus dici potest--sed non quo aliquo aliquid est uelut magnitudine magnum. nam situm passionemque requiri in deo non oportet, neque enim sunt. iamne patet quae sit differentia praedicationum? quod aliae quidem quasi rem monstrant aliae uero quasi circumstantias rei quodque illa quidem[ ] ita praedicantur, ut esse aliquid rem ostendant, illa uero ut non esse, sed potius extrinsecus aliquid quodam modo affigant. illa igitur, quae aliquid esse designant, secundum rem praedicationes uocentur. quae cum de rebus subiectis dicuntur, uocantur accidentia secundum rem; cum uero de deo qui subiectus non est, secundum substantiam rei praedicatio nuncupatur. [ ] quidem _vulg._; quae _codd. opt._ iv. there are in all ten categories which can be universally predicated of things, namely, substance, quality, quantity, relation, place, time, condition, situation, activity, passivity. their meaning is determined by the contingent subject; for some of them denote substance in making predication of other things, others belong to the class of accidents. but when these categories are applied to god they change their meaning entirely. relation, for instance, cannot be predicated at all of god; for substance in him is not really substantial but supersubstantial. so with quality and the other possible attributes, of which we must add examples for the sake of clearness. when we say god, we seem to denote a substance; but it is a substance that is supersubstantial. when we say of him, "he is just," we mention a quality, not an accidental quality--rather a substantial and, in fact, a supersubstantial quality.[ ] for god is not one thing because he is, and another thing because he is just; with him to be just and to be god are one and the same. so when we say, "he is great or the greatest," we seem to predicate quantity, but it is a quantity similar to this substance which we have declared to be supersubstantial; for with him to be great and to be god are all one. again, concerning his form, we have already shown that he is form, and truly one without plurality. the categories we have mentioned are such that they give to the thing to which they are applied the character which they express; in created things they express divided being, in god, conjoined and united being-- in the following manner. when we name a substance, as man or god, it seems as though that of which the predication is made were substance itself, as man or god is substance. but there is a difference: since a man is not simply and entirely man, and in virtue of this he is not substance. for what man is he owes to other things which are not man. but god is simply and entirely god, for he is nothing else than what he is, and therefore is, through simple existence, god. again we apply just, a quality, as though it were that of which it is predicated; that is, if we say "a just man or just god," we assert that man or god is just. but there is a difference, for man is one thing, and a just man is another thing. but god is justice itself. so a man or god is said to be great, and it would appear that man is substantially great or that god is substantially great. but man is merely great; god is greatness. the remaining categories are not predicable of god nor yet of created things.[ ] for place is predicated of man or of god--a man is in the market-place; god is everywhere--but in neither case is the predicate identical with the object of predication. to say "a man is in the market" is quite a different thing from saying "he is white or long," or, so to speak, encompassed and determined by some property which enables him to be described in terms of his substance; this predicate of place simply declares how far his substance is given a particular setting amid other things. it is otherwise, of course, with god. "he is everywhere" does not mean that he is in every place, for he cannot be in any place at all--but that every place is present to him for him to occupy, although he himself can be received by no place, and therefore he cannot anywhere be in a place, since he is everywhere but in no place. it is the same with the category of time, as, "a man came yesterday; god is ever." here again the predicate of "coming yesterday" denotes not something substantial, but something happening in terms of time. but the expression "god is ever" denotes a single present, summing up his continual presence in all the past, in all the present--however that term be used--and in all the future. philosophers say that "ever" may be applied to the life of the heavens and other immortal bodies. but as applied to god it has a different meaning. he is ever, because "ever" is with him a term of present time, and there is this great difference between "now," which is our present, and the divine present. our present connotes changing time and sempiternity; god's present, abiding, unmoved, and immoveable, connotes eternity. add _semper_ to _eternity_ and you get the constant, incessant and thereby perpetual course of our present time, that is to say, sempiternity.[ ] it is just the same with the categories of condition and activity. for example, we say "a man runs, clothed," "god rules, possessing all things." here again nothing substantial is asserted of either subject; in fact all the categories we have hitherto named arise from what lies outside substance, and all of them, so to speak, refer to something other than substance. the difference between the categories is easily seen by an example. thus, the terms "man" and "god" refer to the substance in virtue of which the subject is--man or god. the term "just" refers to the quality in virtue of which the subject is something, viz. just; the term "great" to the quantity in virtue of which he is something, viz. great. no other category save substance, quality, and quantity refer to the substance of the subject. if i say of one "he is in the market" or "everywhere," i am applying the category of place, which is not a category of the substance, like "just" in virtue of justice. so if i say, "he runs, he rules, he is now, he is ever," i make reference to activity or time--if indeed god's "ever" can be described as time--but not to a category of substance, like "great" in virtue of greatness. finally, we must not look for the categories of situation and passivity in god, for they simply are not to be found in him. have i now made clear the difference between the categories? some denote the reality of a thing; others its accidental circumstances; the former declare that a thing is something; the latter say nothing about its being anything, but simply attach to it, so to speak, something external. those categories which describe a thing in terms of its substance may be called substantial categories; when they apply to things as subjects they are called accidents. in reference to god, who is not a subject at all, it is only possible to employ the category of substance. [ ] gilbert de la porrée in his commentary on the _de trin._ makes boethius's meaning clear. "quod igitur in illo substantiam nominamus, non est subiectionis ratione quod dicitur, sed ultra omnem quae accidentibus est subiecta substantiam est essentia, absque omnibus quae possunt accidere solitaria omnino." (migne, _p.l._ lxiv. ). cf. aug. _de trin._ vii. . [ ] i.e. according to their substance. [ ] the doctrine is augustine's, cf. _de ciu. dei_, xi. , xii. ; but boethius's use of _sempiternitas_, as well as his word-building, seem to be peculiar to himself. claudianus mamertus, speaking of applying the categories to god, uses _sempiternitas_ as boethius uses _aeternitas_. cf. _de statu animae_ i. . apuleius seems to use both terms interchangeably, e.g. _asclep._ - . on boethius's distinction between time and eternity see _cons._ v. pr. , and rand, _i er dem b. zugeschr. trakt. de fide_, pp. ff, and brandt in _theol. littzg._, , p. . v. age nunc de relatiuis speculemur pro quibus omne quod dictum est sumpsimus ad disputationem; maxime enim haec non uidentur secundum se facere praedicationem quae perspicue ex alieno aduentu constare perspiciuntur. age enim, quoniam dominus ac seruus relatiua sunt, uideamus utrumne ita sit ut secundum se sit praedicatio an minime. atqui si auferas seruum, abstuleris et dominum; at non etiam si auferas albedinem, abstuleris quoque album, sed interest, quod albedo accidit albo, qua sublata perit nimirum album. at in domino, si seruum auferas, perit uocabulum quo dominus uocabatur; sed non accidit seruus domino ut albedo albo, sed potestas quaedam qua seruus coercetur. quae quoniam sublato deperit seruo, constat non eam per se domino accidere sed per seruorum quodam modo extrinsecus accessum. non igitur dici potest praedicationem relatiuam quidquam rei de qua dicitur secundum se uel addere uel minuere uel mutare. quae tota non in eo quod est esse consistit, sed in eo quod est in comparatione aliquo modo se habere, nec semper ad aliud sed aliquotiens ad idem. age enim stet quisquam. ei igitur si accedam dexter, erit ille sinister ad me comparatus, non quod ille ipse sinister sit, sed quod ego dexter accesserim. rursus ego sinister accedo, item ille fit dexter, non quod ita sit per se dexter uelut albus ac longus, sed quod me accedente fit dexter atque id quod est a me et ex me est minime uero ex sese. quare quae secundum rei alicuius in eo quod ipsa est proprietatem non faciunt praedicationem, nihil alternare uel mutare queunt nullamque omnino uariare essentiam. quocirca si pater ac filius ad aliquid dicuntur nihilque aliud ut dictum est differunt nisi sola relatione, relatio uero non praedicatur ad id de quo praedicatur quasi ipsa sit et secundum rem de qua dicitur, non faciet alteritatem rerum de qua dicitur, sed, si dici potest, quo quidem modo id quod uix intellegi potuit interpretatum est, personarum. omnino enim magna regulae est ueritas in rebus incorporalibus distantias effici differentiis non locis. neque accessisse dici potest aliquid deo, ut pater fieret; non enim coepit esse umquam pater eo quod substantialis quidem ei est productio filii, relatiua uero praedicatio patris. ac si meminimus omnium in prioribus de deo sententiarum, ita cogitemus processisse quidem ex deo patre filium deum et ex utrisque spiritum sanctum; hos, quoniam incorporales sint, minime locis distare. quoniam uero pater deus et filius deus et spiritus sanctus deus, deus uero nullas habet differentias quibus differat ab deo, a nullo eorum differt. differentiae uero ubi absunt, abest pluralitas; ubi abest pluralitas, adest unitas. nihil autem aliud gigni potuit ex deo nisi deus; et in rebus numerabilibus repetitio unitatum non facit modis omnibus pluralitatem. trium igitur idonee constituta est unitas. v. let us now consider the category of relation, to which all the foregoing remarks have been preliminary; for qualities which obviously arise from the association of another term do not appear to predicate anything concerning the substance of a subject. for instance, master and slave[ ] are relative terms; let us see whether either of them are predicates of substance. if you suppress the term slave,[ ] you simultaneously suppress the term master. on the other hand, though you suppress the term whiteness, you do not suppress some white thing,[ ] though, of course, if the particular whiteness inhere as an accident in the thing, the thing disappears as soon as you suppress the accidental quality whiteness. but in the case of master, if you suppress the term slave, the term master disappears. but slave is not an accidental quality of master, as whiteness is of a white thing; it denotes the power which the master has over the slave. now since the power goes when the slave is removed, it is plain that power is no accident to the substance of master, but is an adventitious augmentation arising from the possession of slaves. it cannot therefore be affirmed that a category of relation increases, decreases, or alters in any way the substance of the thing to which it is applied. the category of relation, then, has nothing to do with the essence of the subject; it simply denotes a condition of relativity, and that not necessarily to something else, but sometimes to the subject itself. for suppose a man standing. if i go up to him on my right and stand beside him, he will be left, in relation to me, not because he is left in himself, but because i have come up to him on my right. again, if i come up to him on my left, he becomes right in relation to me, not because he is right in himself, as he may be white or long, but because he is right in virtue of my approach. what he is depends entirely on me, and not in the least on the essence of his being. accordingly those predicates which do not denote the essential nature of a thing cannot alter, change, or disturb its nature in any way. wherefore if father and son are predicates of relation, and, as we have said, have no other difference but that of relation, and if relation is not asserted of its subject as though it were the subject itself and its substantial quality, it will effect no real difference in its subject, but, in a phrase which aims at interpreting what we can hardly understand, a difference of persons. for it is a canon of absolute truth that distinctions in incorporeal things are established by differences and not by spatial separation. it cannot be said that god became father by the addition to his substance of some accident; for he never began to be father, since the begetting of the son belongs to his very substance; however, the predicate father, as such, is relative. and if we bear in mind all the propositions made concerning god in the previous discussion, we shall admit that god the son proceeded from god the father, and the holy ghost from both, and that they cannot possibly be spatially different, since they are incorporeal. but since the father is god, the son is god, and the holy spirit is god, and since there are in god no points of difference distinguishing him from god, he differs from none of the others. but where there are no differences there is no plurality; where is no plurality there is unity. again, nothing but god can be begotten of god, and lastly, in concrete enumerations the repetition of units does not produce plurality. thus the unity of the three is suitably established. [ ] _dominus_ and _seruus_ are similarly used as illustration, _in cat._ (migne, _p.l._ lxiv. ). [ ] i.e. which is external to the master. [ ] i.e. which is external to the whitened thing. vi. sed quoniam nulla relatio ad se ipsum referri potest, idcirco quod ea secundum se ipsum est praedicatio quae relatione caret, facta quidem est trinitatis numerositas in eo quod est praedicatio relationis, seruata uero unitas in eo quod est indifferentia uel substantiae uel operationis uel omnino eius quae secundum se dicitur praedicationis. ita igitur substantia continet unitatem, relatio multiplicat trinitatem; atque ideo sola singillatim proferuntur atque separatim quae relationis sunt. nam idem pater qui filius non est nec idem uterque qui spiritus sanctus. idem tamen deus est pater et filius et spiritus sanctus, idem iustus idem bonus idem magnus idem omnia quae secundum se poterunt praedicari. sane sciendum est non semper talem esse relatiuam praedicationem, ut semper ad differens praedicetur, ut est seruus ad dominum; differunt enim. nam omne aequale aequali aequale est et simile simili simile est et idem ei quod est idem idem est; et similis est relatio in trinitate patris ad filium et utriusque ad spiritum sanctum ut eius quod est idem ad id quod est idem. quod si id in cunctis aliis rebus non potest inueniri, facit hoc cognata caducis rebus alteritas. nos uero nulla imaginatione diduci sed simplici intellectu erigi et ut quidque intellegi potest ita aggredi etiam intellectu oportet. sed de proposita quaestione satis dictum est. nunc uestri normam iudicii exspectat subtilitas quaestionis; quae utrum recte decursa sit an minime, uestrae statuet pronuntiationis auctoritas. quod si sententiae fidei fundamentis sponte firmissimae opitulante gratia diuina idonea argumentorum adiumenta praestitimus, illuc perfecti operis laetitia remeabit unde uenit effectus. quod si ultra se humanitas nequiuit ascendere, quantum inbecillitas subtrahit uota supplebunt. vi. but since no relation can be affirmed of one subject alone, since a predication referring to one substance is a predication without relation, the manifoldness of the trinity is secured through the category of relation, and the unity is maintained through the fact that there is no difference of substance, or operation, or generally of any substantial predicate. so then, the category of substance preserves the unity, that of relation brings about the trinity. hence only terms belonging to relation may be applied singly to each. for the father is not the same as the son, nor is either of them the same as the holy spirit. yet father, son, and holy spirit are each the same god, the same in justice, in goodness, in greatness, and in everything that can be predicated of substance. one must not forget that predicates of relativity do not always involve relation to something other than the subject, as slave involves master, where the two terms are different. for equals are equal, like are like, identicals are identical, each with other, and the relation of father to son, and of both to holy spirit is a relation of identicals. a relation of this kind is not to be found in created things, but that is because of the difference which we know attaches to transient objects. we must not in speaking of god let imagination lead us astray; we must let the faculty of pure knowledge lift us up and teach us to know all things as far as they may be known.[ ] i have now finished the investigation which i proposed. the exactness of my reasoning awaits the standard of your judgment; your authority will pronounce whether i have seen a straight path to the goal. if, god helping me, i have furnished some support in argument to an article which stands by itself on the firm foundation of faith, i shall render joyous praise for the finished work to him from whom the invitation comes. but if human nature has failed to reach beyond its limits, whatever is lost through my infirmity must be made good by my intention. [ ] cf. _cons._ v. pr. and , especially in pr. the passage "quare in illius summae intellegentiae acumen si possumus erigamur." anicii manlii severini boethii v.c. et inl. excons. ord. patricii ad iohannem diaconvm vtrvm pater et filivs et spiritvs sanctvs de divinitate svbstantialiter praedicentvr quaero an pater et filius ac spiritus sanctus de diuinitate substantialiter praedicentur an alio quolibet modo; uiamque indaginis hinc arbitror esse sumendam, unde rerum omnium manifestum constat exordium, id est ab ipsis catholicae fidei fundamentis. si igitur interrogem, an qui dicitur pater substantia sit, respondetur esse substantia. quod si quaeram, an filius substantia sit, idem dicitur. spiritum quoque sanctum substantiam esse nemo dubitauerit. sed cum rursus colligo patrem filium spiritum sanctum, non plures sed una occurrit esse substantia. vna igitur substantia trium nec separari ullo modo aut disiungi potest nec uelut partibus in unum coniuncta est, sed est una simpliciter. quaecumque igitur de diuina substantia praedicantur, ea tribus oportet esse communia; idque signi erit quae sint quae de diuinitatis substantia praedicentur, quod quaecumque hoc modo dicuntur, de singulis in unum collectis tribus singulariter praedicabuntur. hoc modo si dicimus: "pater deus est, filius deus est, spiritus sanctus deus est," pater filius ac spiritus sanctus unus deus. si igitur eorum una deitas una substantia est, licet dei nomen de diuinitate substantialiter praedicari. ita pater ueritas est, filius ueritas est, spiritus sanctus ueritas est; pater filius et spiritus sanctus non tres ueritates sed una ueritas est. si igitur una in his substantia una est ueritas, necesse est ueritatem substantialiter praedicari. de bonitate de incommutabilitate de iustitia de omnipotentia ac de ceteris omnibus quae tam de singulis quam de omnibus singulariter praedicamus manifestum est substantialiter dici. vnde apparet ea quae cum in singulis separatim dici conuenit nec tamen in omnibus dici queunt, non substantialiter praedicari sed alio modo; qui uero iste sit, posterius quaeram. nam qui pater est, hoc uocabulum non transmittit ad filium neque ad spiritum sanctum. quo fit ut non sit substantiale nomen hoc inditum; nam si substantiale esset, ut deus ut ueritas ut iustitia ut ipsa quoque substantia, de ceteris diceretur. item filius solus hoc recipit nomen neque cum aliis iungit sicut in deo, sicut in ueritate, sicut in ceteris quae superius dixi. spiritus quoque non est idem qui pater ac filius. ex his igitur intellegimus patrem ac filium ac spiritum sanctum non de ipsa diuinitate substantialiter dici sed alio quodam modo; si enim substantialiter praedicaretur, et de singulis et de omnibus singulariter diceretur. haec uero ad aliquid dici manifestum est; nam et pater alicuius pater est et filius alicuius filius est, spiritus alicuius spiritus. quo fit, ut ne trinitas quidem substantialiter de deo praedicetur; non enim pater trinitas (qui enim pater est, filius ac spiritus sanctus non est) nec trinitas filius nec trinitas spiritus sanctus secundum eundem modum, sed trinitas quidem in personarum pluralitate consistit, unitas uero in substantiae simplicitate. quod si personae diuisae sunt, substantia uero indiuisa sit, necesse est quod uocabulum ex personis originem capit id ad substantiam non pertinere; at trinitatem personarum diuersitas fecit, trinitas igitur non pertinet ad substantiam. quo fit ut neque pater neque filius neque spiritus sanctus neque trinitas de deo substantialiter praedicetur, sed ut dictum est ad aliquid. deus uero ueritas iustitia bonitas omnipotentia substantia inmutabilitas uirtus sapientia et quicquid huiusmodi excogitari potest substantialiter de diuinitate dicuntur. haec si se recte et ex fide habent, ut me instruas peto; aut si aliqua re forte diuersus es, diligentius intuere quae dicta sunt et fidem si poterit rationemque coniunge. anicius manlius severinus boethius most honourable, of the illustrious order of ex-consuls, patrician to john the deacon whether father, son, and holy spirit may be substantially predicated of the divinity the question before us is whether father, son, and holy spirit may be predicated of the divinity substantially or otherwise. and i think that the method of our inquiry must be borrowed from what is admittedly the surest source of all truth, namely, the fundamental doctrines of the catholic faith. if, then, i ask whether he who is called father is a substance, the answer will be yes. if i ask whether the son is a substance, the reply will be the same. so, too, no one will hesitate to affirm that the holy spirit is also a substance. but when, on the other hand, i take together all three, father, son, and holy spirit, the result is not three substances but one substance. the one substance of the three, then, cannot be separated or divided, nor is it made up of various parts, combined into one: it is simply one. everything, therefore, that is affirmed of the divine substance must be common to the three, and we can recognize what predicates may be affirmed of the substance of the godhead by this sign, that all those which are affirmed of it may also be affirmed severally of each of the three combined into one. for instance if we say "the father is god, the son is god, and the holy spirit is god," then father, son, and holy spirit are one god. if then their one godhead is one substance, the name of god may with right be predicated substantially of the divinity. similarly the father is truth, the son is truth, and the holy spirit is truth; father, son, and holy spirit are not three truths, but one truth. if, then, they are one substance and one truth, truth must of necessity be a substantial predicate. so goodness, immutability, justice, omnipotence and all the other predicates which we apply to the persons singly and collectively are plainly substantial predicates. hence it appears that what may be predicated of each single one but not of all three is not a substantial predicate, but of another kind--of what kind i will examine presently. for he who is father does not transmit this name to the son nor to the holy spirit. hence it follows that this name is not attached to him as something substantial; for if it were a substantial predicate, as god, truth, justice, or substance itself, it would be affirmed of the other persons. similarly the son alone receives this name; nor does he associate it with the other persons, as in the case of the titles god, truth, and the other predicates which i have already mentioned. the spirit too is not the same as the father and the son. hence we gather that father, son, and holy spirit are not predicated of the divinity in a substantial manner, but otherwise.[ ] for if each term were predicated substantially it would be affirmed of the three persons both separately and collectively. it is evident that these terms are relative, for the father is some one's father, the son is some one's son, the spirit is some one's spirit. hence not even trinity may be substantially[ ] predicated of god; for the father is not trinity--since he who is father is not son and holy spirit--nor yet, by parity of reasoning, is the son trinity nor the holy spirit trinity, but the trinity consists in diversity of persons, the unity in simplicity of substance. now if the persons are separate, while the substance is undivided, it must needs be that that term which is derived from persons does not belong to substance. but the trinity is effected by diversity of persons, wherefore trinity does not belong to substance. hence neither father, nor son, nor holy spirit, nor trinity can be substantially predicated of god, but only relatively, as we have said. but god, truth, justice, goodness, omnipotence, substance, immutability, virtue, wisdom and all other conceivable predicates of the kind are applicable substantially to divinity. if i am right and speak in accordance with the faith, i pray you confirm me. but if you are in any point of another opinion, examine carefully what i have said, and if possible, reconcile faith and reason.[ ] [ ] i.e. _personaliter_ (ioh. scottus _ad loc._). [ ] i.e. _sed personaliter_ (ioh. scottus _ad loc._). [ ] _vide supra_, introduction, p. xii. item eivsdem ad evndem qvomodo svbstantiae in eo qvod sint bonae sint cvm non sint svbstantialia bona postulas, ut ex hebdomadibus nostris eius quaestionis obscuritatem quae continet modum quo substantiae in eo quod sint bonae sint, cum non sint substantialia bona, digeram et paulo euidentius monstrem; idque eo dicis esse faciendum, quod non sit omnibus notum iter huiusmodi scriptionum. tuus uero testis ipse sum quam haec uiuaciter fueris ante complexus. hebdomadas uero ego mihi ipse commentor potiusque ad memoriam meam speculata conseruo quam cuiquam participo quorum lasciuia ac petulantia nihil a ioco risuque patitur esse seiunctum.[ ] prohinc tu ne sis obscuritatibus breuitatis aduersus, quae cum sint arcani fida custodia tum id habent commodi, quod cum his solis qui digni sunt conloquuntur. vt igitur in mathematica fieri solet ceterisque etiam disciplinis, praeposui terminos regulasque quibus cuncta quae sequuntur efficiam. i. communis animi conceptio est enuntiatio quam quisque probat auditam. harum duplex modus est. nam una ita communis est, ut omnium sit hominum, ueluti si hanc proponas: "si duobus aequalibus aequalia auferas, quae relinquantur aequalia esse," nullus id intellegens neget. alia uero est doctorum tantum, quae tamen ex talibus communis animi conceptionibus uenit, ut est: "quae incorporalia sunt, in loco non esse," et cetera; quae non uulgus sed docti comprobant. ii. diuersum est esse et id quod est; ipsum enim esse nondum est, at uero quod est accepta essendi forma est atque consistit. iii. quod est participare aliquo potest, sed ipsum esse nullo modo aliquo participat. fit enim participatio cum aliquid iam est; est autem aliquid, cum esse susceperit. iv. id quod est habere aliquid praeterquam quod ipsum est potest; ipsum uero esse nihil aliud praeter se habet admixtum. v. diuersum est tantum esse aliquid et esse aliquid in eo quod est; illic enim accidens hic substantia significatur. vi. omne quod est[ ] participat eo quod est esse ut sit; alio uero participat ut aliquid sit. ac per hoc id quod est participat eo quod est esse ut sit; est uero ut participet alio quolibet. vii. omne simplex esse suum et id quod est unum habet. viii. omni composito aliud est esse, aliud ipsum est. ix. omnis diuersitas discors, similitudo uero appetenda est; et quod appetit aliud, tale ipsum esse naturaliter ostenditur quale est illud hoc ipsum quod appetit. sufficiunt igitur quae praemisimus; a prudente uero rationis interprete suis unumquodque aptabitur argumentis. quaestio uero huiusmodi est. ea quae sunt bona sunt; tenet enim communis sententia doctorum omne quod est ad bonum tendere, omne autem tendit ad simile. quae igitur ad bonum tendunt bona ipsa sunt. sed quemadmodum bona sint, inquirendum est, utrumne participatione an substantia? si participatione, per se ipsa nullo modo bona sunt; nam quod participatione album est, per se in eo quod ipsum est album non est. et de ceteris qualitatibus eodem modo. si igitur participatione sunt bona, ipsa per se nullo modo bona sunt: non igitur ad bonum tendunt. sed concessum est. non igitur participatione sunt bona sed substantia. quorum uero substantia bona est, id quod sunt bona sunt; id quod sunt autem habent ex eo quod est esse. esse igitur ipsorum bonum est; omnium igitur rerum ipsum esse bonum est. sed si esse bonum est, ea quae sunt in eo quod sunt bona sunt idemque illis est esse quod boni esse; substantialia igitur bona sunt, quoniam non participant bonitatem. quod si ipsum esse in eis bonum est, non est dubium quin substantialia cum sint bona, primo sint bono similia ac per hoc hoc ipsum bonum erunt; nihil enim illi praeter se ipsum simile est. ex quo fit ut omnia quae sunt deus sint, quod dictu nefas est. non sunt igitur substantialia bona ac per hoc non in his est esse bonum; non sunt igitur in eo quod sunt bona. sed nec participant bonitatem; nullo enim modo ad bonum tenderent. nullo modo igitur sunt bona. huic quaestioni talis poterit adhiberi solutio. multa sunt quae cum separari actu non possunt, animo tamen et cogitatione separantur; ut cum triangulum uel cetera a subiecta materia nullus actu separat, mente tamen segregans ipsum triangulum proprietatemque eius praeter materiam speculatur. amoueamus igitur primi boni praesentiam paulisper ex animo, quod esse quidem constat idque ex omnium doctorum indoctorumque sententia barbararumque gentium religionibus cognosci potest. hoc igitur paulisper amoto ponamus omnia esse quae sunt bona atque ea consideremus quemadmodum bona esse possent, si a primo bono minime defluxissent. hinc intueor aliud in eis esse quod bona sunt, aliud quod sunt. ponatur enim una eademque substantia bona esse alba, grauis, rotunda. tunc aliud esset ipsa illa substantia, aliud eius rotunditas, aliud color, aliud bonitas; nam si haec singula idem essent quod ipsa substantia, idem esset grauitas quod color, quod bonum et bonum quod grauitas--quod fieri natura non sinit. aliud igitur tunc in eis esset esse, aliud aliquid esse, ac tunc bona quidem essent, esse tamen ipsum minime haberent bonum. igitur si ullo modo essent, non a bono ac bona essent ac non idem essent quod bona, sed eis aliud esset esse aliud bonis esse. quod si nihil omnino aliud essent nisi bona neque grauia neque colorata neque spatii dimensione distenta nec ulla in eis qualitas esset, nisi tantum bona essent, tunc non res sed rerum uideretur esse principium nec potius uiderentur, sed uideretur; unum enim solumque est huiusmodi, quod tantum bonum aliudque nihil sit. quae quoniam non sunt simplicia, nec esse omnino poterant, nisi ea id quod solum bonum est esse uoluisset. idcirco quoniam esse eorum a boni uoluntate defluxit, bona esse dicuntur. primum enim bonum, quoniam est, in eo quod est bonum est; secundum uero bonum, quoniam ex eo fluxit cuius ipsum esse bonum est, ipsum quoque bonum est. sed ipsum esse omnium rerum ex eo fluxit quod est primum bonum et quod bonum tale est ut recte dicatur in eo quod est esse bonum. ipsum igitur eorum esse bonum est; tunc enim in eo. qua in re soluta quaestio est. idcirco enim licet in eo quod sint bona sint, non sunt tamen similia primo bono, quoniam non quoquo modo sint res ipsum esse earum bonum est, sed quoniam non potest esse ipsum esse rerum, nisi a primo esse defluxerit, id est bono; idcirco ipsum esse bonum est nec est simile ei a quo est. illud enim quoquo modo sit bonum est in eo quod est; non enim aliud est praeterquam bonum. hoc autem nisi ab illo esset, bonum fortasse esse posset, sed bonum in eo quod est esse non posset. tunc enim participaret forsitan bono; ipsum uero esse quod non haberent a bono, bonum habere non possent. igitur sublato ab his bono primo mente et cogitatione, ista licet essent bona, tamen in eo quod essent bona esse non possent, et quoniam actu non potuere exsistere, nisi illud ea quod uere bonum est produxisset, idcirco et esse eorum bonum est et non est simile substantiali bono id quod ab eo fluxit; et nisi ab eo fluxissent, licet essent bona, tamen in eo quod sunt bona esse non possent, quoniam et praeter bonum et non ex bono essent, cum illud ipsum bonum primum est et ipsum esse sit et ipsum bonum et ipsum esse bonum. at non etiam alba in eo quod sunt alba esse oportebit ea quae alba sunt, quoniam ex uoluntate dei fluxerunt ut essent, alba minime. aliud est enim esse, aliud albis esse; hoc ideo, quoniam qui ea ut essent effecit bonus quidem est, minime uero albus. voluntatem igitur boni comitatum est ut essent bona in eo quod sunt; uoluntatem uero non albi non est comitata talis eius quod est proprietas ut esset album in eo quod est; neque enim ex albi uoluntate defluxerunt. itaque quia uoluit esse ea alba qui erat non albus, sunt alba tantum; quia uero uoluit ea esse bona qui erat bonus, sunt bona in eo quod sunt. secundum hanc igitur rationem cuncta oportet esse iusta, quoniam ipse iustus est qui ea esse uoluit? ne hoc quidem. nam bonum esse essentiam, iustum uero esse actum respicit. idem autem est in eo esse quod agere; idem igitur bonum esse quod iustum. nobis uero non est idem esse quod agere; non enim simplices sumus. non est igitur nobis idem bonis esse quod iustis, sed idem nobis est esse omnibus in eo quod sumus. bona igitur omnia sunt, non etiam iusta. amplius bonum quidem generale est, iustum uero speciale nec species descendit in omnia. idcirco alia quidem iusta alia aliud omnia bona. [ ] seiunct. _rand_; coniunct. _codd. opt._; disiunct. _vulg. vallinus_. [ ] est _codd. inferiores; om. codd. opt._ from the same to the same how substances can be good in virtue of their existence without being absolute goods you ask me to state and explain somewhat more clearly that obscure question in my _hebdomads_[ ] concerning the manner in which substances can be good in virtue of existence without being absolute goods.[ ] you urge that this demonstration is necessary because the method of this kind of treatise is not clear to all. i can bear witness with what eagerness you have already attacked the subject. but i confess i like to expound my _hebdomads_ to myself, and would rather bury my speculations in my own memory than share them with any of those pert and frivolous persons who will not tolerate an argument unless it is made amusing. wherefore do not you take objection to the obscurity that waits on brevity; for obscurity is the sure treasure-house of secret doctrine and has the further advantage that it speaks a language understood only of those who deserve to understand. i have therefore followed the example of the mathematical[ ] and cognate sciences and laid down bounds and rules according to which i shall develop all that follows. i. a common conception is a statement generally accepted as soon as it is made. of these there are two kinds. one is universally intelligible; as, for instance, "if equals be taken from equals the remainders are equal." nobody who grasps that proposition will deny it. the other kind is intelligible only to the learned, but it is derived from the same class of common conceptions; as "incorporeals cannot occupy space," and the like. this is obvious to the learned but not to the common herd. ii. being and a concrete thing[ ] are different. simple being awaits manifestation, but a thing is and exists[ ] as soon as it has received the form which gives it being. iii. a concrete thing can participate in something else; but absolute being can in no wise participate in anything. for participation is effected when a thing already is; but it is something after it has acquired being. iv. that which exists can possess something besides itself. but absolute being has no admixture of aught besides itself. v. merely to be something and to be something absolutely are different; the former implies accidents, the latter connotes a substance. vi. everything that is participates in absolute being[ ] through the fact that it exists. in order to be something it participates in something else. hence that which exists participates in absolute being through the fact that it exists, but it exists in order to participate in something else. vii. every simple thing possesses as a unity its absolute and its particular being. viii. in every composite thing absolute and individual being are not one and the same. ix. diversity repels; likeness attracts. that which seeks something outside itself is demonstrably of the same nature as that which it seeks. these preliminaries are enough then for our purpose. the intelligent interpreter of the discussion will supply the arguments appropriate to each point. now the problem is this. things which are, are good. for all the learned are agreed that every existing thing tends to good and everything tends to its like. therefore things which tend to good are good. we must, however, inquire how they are good--by participation or by substance. if by participation, they are in no wise good in themselves; for a thing which is white by participation in whiteness is not white in itself by virtue of absolute being. so with all other qualities. if then they are good by participation, they are not good in themselves; therefore they do not tend to good. but we have agreed that they do. therefore they are good not by participation but by substance. but those things whose substance is good are substantially good. but they owe their actual being to absolute being. their absolute being therefore is good; therefore the absolute being of all things is good. but if their being is good, things which exist are good through the fact that they exist and their absolute being is the same as that of the good. therefore they are substantial goods, since they do not merely participate in goodness. but if their absolute being is good, there is no doubt but that, since they are substantial goods, they are like the first good and therefore they will have to be that good. for nothing is like it save itself. hence all things that are, are god--an impious assertion. wherefore things are not substantial goods, and so the essence of the good does not reside in them. therefore they are not good through the fact that they exist. but neither do they receive good by participation, for they would in no wise tend to good. therefore they are in no wise good.[ ] this problem admits of the following solution.[ ] there are many things which can be separated by a mental process, though they cannot be separated in fact. no one, for instance, can actually separate a triangle or other mathematical figure from the underlying matter; but mentally one can consider a triangle and its properties apart from matter. let us, therefore, remove from our minds for a moment the presence of the prime good, whose being is admitted by the universal consensus of learned and unlearned opinion and can be deduced from the religious beliefs of savage races. the prime good having been thus for a moment put aside, let us postulate as good all things that are, and let us consider how they could possibly be good if they did not derive from the prime good. this process leads me to perceive that their goodness and their existence are two different things. for let me suppose that one and the same substance is good, white, heavy, and round. then it must be admitted that its substance, roundness, colour, and goodness are all different things. for if each of these qualities were the same as its substance, weight would be the same thing as colour or goodness, and goodness would be the same as colour; which is contrary to nature. their being then in that case would be one thing, their quality another, and they would be good, but they would not have their absolute being good. therefore if they really existed at all, they would not be from good nor good, they would not be the same as good, but being and goodness would be for them two different things. but if they were nothing else but good substances, and were neither heavy, nor coloured, and possessed neither spatial dimension nor quality, beyond that of goodness, they (or rather it) would seem to be not things but the principle of things. for there is one thing alone that is by nature good to the exclusion of every other quality. but since they are not simple, they could not even exist at all unless that which is the one sole good willed them to be. they are called good simply because their being is derived from the will of the good. for the prime good is essentially good in virtue of being; the secondary good is in its turn good because it derives from the good whose absolute being is good. but the absolute being of all things derives from the prime good which is such that of it being and goodness are rightly predicated as identical. their absolute being therefore is good; for thereby it resides in him. thereby the problem is solved. for though things be good through the fact that they exist, they are not like the prime good, for the simple reason that their absolute being is not good under all circumstances, but that things can have no absolute being unless it derive from the prime being, that is, the prime good; their substance, therefore, is good, and yet it is not like that from which it comes. for the prime good is good through the fact that it exists, irrespective of all conditions, for it is nothing else than good; but the second good if it derived from any other source might be good, but could not be good through the fact that it exists. for in that case it might possibly participate in good, but their substantial being, not deriving from the prime good, could not have the element of good. therefore when we have put out of mind the prime good, these things, though they might be good, would not be good through the fact that they exist, and since they could not actually exist unless the true good had produced them, therefore their being is good, and yet that which springs from the substantial good is not like its source which produces it. and unless they had derived from it, though they were good yet they could not be good through the fact that they exist because they were apart from good and not derived from good, since that very good is the prime good and is substantial being and substantial good and essential goodness. but we need not say that white things are white through the fact that they exist; for they drew their existence from the will of god, but not their whiteness. for to be is one thing; to be white is another; and that because he who gave them being is good, but not white. it is therefore in accordance with the will of the good that they should be good through the fact that they exist; but it is not in accordance with the will of one who is not white that a thing have a certain property making it white in virtue of its being; for it was not the will of one who is white that gave them being. and so they are white simply because one who was not white willed them to be white; but they are good through the fact that they exist because one who was good willed them to be good. ought, then, by parity of reason, all things to be just because he is just who willed them to be? that is not so either. for to be good involves being, to be just involves an act. for him being and action are identical; to be good and to be just are one and the same for him. but being and action are not identical for us, for we are not simple. for us, then, goodness is not the same thing as justice, but we all have the same sort of being in virtue of our existence. therefore all things are good, but all things are not just. finally, good is a general, but just is a species, and this species does not apply to all. wherefore some things are just, others are something else, but all things are good. [ ] similarly porphyry divided the works of plotinus into six _enneades_ or groups of nine. [ ] cf. discussion on the nature of good in _cons._ iii. m. and pr. (_infra_, pp. ff.). [ ] on this mathematical method of exposition cf. _cons._ iii. pr. (_infra_, p. ). [ ] _esse_ = aristotle's [greek: to ti esti]; _id quod est_ = [greek: tode ti]. [ ] _consistere_ = [greek: hypostaenai]. [ ] _id quod est esse_ = [greek: to ti aen einai]. [ ] cf. the similar _reductio ad absurdum_ in _tr._ (_infra_, p. ) and in _cons._ v. pr. (_infra_, p. ). [ ] _vide supra_, p. , n. _b_. de fide catholica christianam fidem noui ac ueteris testamenti pandit auctoritas; et quamuis nomen ipsum christi uetus intra semet continuerit instrumentum eumque semper signauerit affuturum quem credimus per partum uirginis iam uenisse, tamen in orbem terrarum ab ipsius nostri saluatoris mirabili manasse probatur aduentu. haec autem religio nostra, quae uocatur christiana atque catholica, his fundamentis principaliter nititur asserens: ex aeterno, id est ante mundi constitutionem, ante omne uidelicet quod temporis potest retinere uocabulum, diuinam patris et filii ac spiritus sancti exstitisse substantiam, ita ut deum dicat patrem, deum filium, deum spiritum sanctum, nec tamen tres deos sed unum: patrem itaque habere filium ex sua substantia genitum et sibi nota ratione coaeternum, quem filium eatenus confitetur, ut non sit idem qui pater est: neque patrem aliquando fuisse filium, ne rursus in infinitum humanus animus diuinam progeniem cogitaret, neque filium in eadem natura qua patri coaeternus est aliquando fieri patrem, ne rursus in infinitum diuina progenies tenderetur: sanctum uero spiritum neque patrem esse neque filium atque ideo in illa natura nec genitum nec generantem sed a patre quoque procedentem uel filio; qui sit tamen processionis istius modus ita non possumus euidenter dicere, quemadmodum generationem filii ex paterna substantia non potest humanus animus aestimare. haec autem ut credantur uetus ac noua informat instructio. de qua uelut arce religionis nostrae multi diuersa et humaniter atque ut ita dicam carnaliter sentientes aduersa locuti sunt, ut arrius qui licet deum dicat filium, minorem tamen patre multipliciter et extra patris substantiam confitetur. sabelliani quoque non tres exsistentes personas sed unam ausi sunt affirmare, eundem dicentes patrem esse qui filius est eundemque filium qui pater est atque spiritum sanctum eundem esse qui pater et filius est; ac per hoc unam dicunt esse personam sub uocabulorum diuersitate signatam. manichaei quoque qui duo principia sibi coaeterna et aduersa profitentur, unigenitum dei esse non credunt. indignum enim iudicant, si deus habere filium uideatur, nihil aliud cogitantes nisi carnaliter, ut quia haec generatio duorum corporum commixtione procedit, illic quoque indignum esse intellectum huiusmodi applicare; quae res eos nec uetus facit recipere testamentum neque in integro nouum. nam sicut illud omnino error eorum non recipit ita ex uirgine generationem filii non uult admittere, ne humano corpore polluta uideatur dei fuisse natura. sed de his hactenus; suo enim loco ponentur sicut ordo necessarius postularit. ergo diuina ex aeterno natura et in aeternum sine aliqua mutabilitate perdurans sibi tantum conscia uoluntate sponte mundum uoluit fabricare eumque cum omnino non esset fecit ut esset, nec ex sua substantia protulit, ne diuinus natura crederetur, neque aliunde molitus est, ne iam exstitisse aliquid quod eius uoluntatem exsistentia propriae naturae iuuaret atque esset quod neque ab ipso factum esset et tamen esset; sed uerbo produxit caelos, terram creauit, ita ut caelesti habitatione dignas caelo naturas efficeret ac terrae terrena componeret. de caelestibus autem naturis, quae uniuersaliter uocatur angelica, quamuis illic distinctis ordinibus pulchra sint omnia, pars tamen quaedam plus appetens quam ei natura atque ipsius auctor naturae tribuerat de caelesti sede proiecta est; et quoniam angelorum numerum, id est supernae illius ciuitatis cuius ciues angeli sunt, imminutum noluit conditor permanere, formauit ex terra hominem atque spiritu uitae animauit, ratione composuit, arbitrii libertate decorauit eumque praefixa lege paradisi deliciis constituit, ut, si sine peccato manere uellet, tam ipsum quam eius progeniem angelicis coetibus sociaret, ut quia superior natura per superbiae malum ima petierat, inferior substantia per humilitatis bonum ad superna conscenderet. sed ille auctor inuidiae non ferens hominem illuc ascendere ubi ipse non meruit permanere, temptatione adhibita fecit etiam ipsum eiusque comparem, quam de eius latere generandi causa formator produxerat, inoboedientiae suppliciis subiacere, ei quoque diuinitatem affuturam promittens, quam sibi dum arroganter usurpat elisus est. haec autem reuelante deo moysi famulo suo comperta sunt, cui etiam humani generis conditionem atque originem uoluit innotescere, sicut ab eo libri prolati testantur. omnis enim diuina auctoritas his modis constare uidetur, ut aut historialis modus sit, qui nihil aliud nisi res gestas enuntiet, aut allegoricus, ut non illic possit historiae ordo consistere, aut certe ex utrisque compositus, ut et secundum historiam et secundum allegoriam manere uideatur. haec autem pie intelligentibus et ueraci corde tenentibus satis abundeque relucent. sed ad ordinem redeamus. primus itaque homo ante peccatum cum sua coniuge incola paradisi fuit. at ubi aurem praebuit suasori et conditoris praeceptum neglexit attendere, exul effectus, terram iussus excolere atque a paradisi sinu seclusus in ignotis partibus sui generis posteritatem transposuit atque poenam quam ipse primus homo praeuaricationis reus exceperat generando transmisit in posteros. hinc factum est ut et corporum atque animarum corruptio et mortis proueniret interitus primusque mortem in abel filio suo meruit experiri, ut quanta esset poena quam ipse exceperit probaret in subole. quod si ipse primus moreretur, nesciret quodam modo ac, si dici fas est, nec sentiret poenam suam, sed ideo expertus in altero est, ut quid sibi iure deberetur contemptor agnosceret et dum poenam mortis sustinet, ipsa exspectatione fortius torqueretur. hoc autem praeuaricationis malum, quod in posteros naturaliter primus homo transfuderat, quidam pelagius non admittens proprii nominis haeresim dedicauit, quam catholica fides a consortio sui mox reppulisse probatur. ab ipso itaque primo homine procedens humanum genus ac multiplici numerositate succrescens erupit in lites, commouit bella, occupauit terrenam miseriam quia[ ] felicitatem paradisi in primo patre perdiderat. nec tamen ex his defuerunt quos sibi conditor gratiae sequestraret eiusque placitis inseruirent; quos licet meritum naturae damnaret, futuri tamen sacramenti et longe postmodum proferendi faciendo participes perditam uoluit reparare naturam. impletus est ergo mundus humano genere atque ingressus est homo uias suas qui malitia propriae contumaciae despexerat conditorem. hinc uolens deus per iustum potius hominem reparare genus humanum quam manere proteruum, poenalem multitudinem effusa diluuii inundatione excepto noe iusto homine cum suis liberis atque his quae secum in arcam introduxerat interire permisit. cur autem per arcae lignum uoluerit iustos eripere, notum est diuinarum scripturarum mentibus eruditis. et quasi prima quaedam mundi aetas diluuio ultore transacta est. reparatur itaque humanum genus atque propriae naturae uitium, quod praeuaricationis primus auctor infuderat, amplecti non destitit. creuitque contumacia quam dudum diluuii unda puniuerat et qui numerosam annorum seriem permissus fuerat uiuere, in breuitate annorum humana aetas addicta est. maluitque deus non iam diluuio punire genus humanum, sed eodem permanente eligere uiros per quorum seriem aliqua generatio commearet, ex qua nobis filium proprium uestitum humano corpore mundi in fine concederet. quorum primus est abraham, qui cum esset aetate confectus eiusque uxor decrepita, in senectute sua repromissionis largitione habere filium meruerunt. hic uocatus est isaac atque ipse genuit iacob. idem quoque duodecim patriarchas non reputante deo in eorum numero quos more suo natura produxerat. hic ergo iacob cum filiis ac domo sua transigendi causa aegyptum uoluit habitare atque illic per annorum seriem multitudo concrescens coeperunt suspicioni esse[ ] aegyptiacis imperiis eosque pharao magna ponderum mole premi decreuerat et grauibus oneribus affligebat. tandem deus aegyptii regis dominationem despiciens diuiso mari rubro, quod numquam antea natura ulla cognouerat, suum transduxit exercitum auctore moyse et aaron. postea igitur pro eorum egressione altis aegyptus plagis uastata est, cum nollet dimittere populum. transmisso itaque ut dictum est mari rubro uenit per deserta eremi ad montem qui uocatur sinai, ibique uniuersorum conditor deus uolens sacramenti futuri gratia populos erudire per moysen data lege constituit, quemadmodum et sacrificiorum ritus et populorum mores instruerentur. et cum multis annis multas quoque gentes per uiam debellassent, uenerunt tandem ad fluuium qui uocatur iordanis duce iam iesu naue filio atque ad eorum transitum quemadmodum aquae maris rubri ita quoque iordanis fluenta siccata sunt; peruentumque est ad eam ciuitatem quae nunc hierosolyma uocatur. atque dum ibi dei populus moraretur, post iudices et prophetas reges instituti leguntur, quorum post saulem primatum dauid de tribu iuda legitur adeptus fuisse. descendit itaque ab eo per singulas successiones regium stemma perductumque est usque ad herodis tempora, qui primus ex gentilibus memoratis populis legitur imperasse. sub quo exstitit beata uirgo maria quae de dauidica stirpe prouenerat, quae humani generis genuit conditorem. hoc autem ideo quia multis infectus criminibus mundus iacebat in morte, electa est una gens in qua dei mandata clarescerent, ibique missi prophetae sunt et alii sancti uiri per quorum admonitionem ipse certe populus a tumore peruicaciae reuocaretur. illi uero eosdem occidentes in suae nequitiae peruersitate manere uoluerunt. atque iam in ultimis temporibus non prophetas neque alios sibi placitos sed ipsum unigenitum suum deus per uirginem nasci constituit, ut humana salus quae per primi hominis inoboedientiam deperierat per hominem deum rursus repararetur et quia exstiterat mulier quae causam mortis prima uiro suaserat, esset haec secunda mulier quae uitae causam humanis uisceribus apportaret. nec uile uideatur quod dei filius ex uirgine natus est, quoniam praeter naturae modum conceptus et editus est. virgo itaque de spiritu sancto incarnatum dei filium concepit, uirgo peperit, post eius editionem uirgo permansit; atque hominis factus est idemque dei filius, ita ut in eo et diuinae naturae radiaret splendor et humanae fragilitatis appareret assumptio. sed huic tam sanae atque ueracissimae fidei exstiterant multi qui diuersa garrirent et praeter alios nestorius et eutyches repertores haereseos exstiterunt, quorum unus hominem solum, alter deum solum putauit asserere nec humanum corpus quod christus induerat de humanae substantiae participatione uenisse. sed haec hactenus. creuit itaque secundum carnem christus, baptizatus est, ut qui baptizandi formam erat ceteris tributurus, ipse primus quod docebat exciperet. post baptismum uero elegit duodecim discipulos, quorum unus traditor eius fuit. et quia sanam doctrinam iudaeorum populus non ferebat, eum inlata manu crucis supplicio peremerunt. occiditur ergo christus, iacet tribus diebus ac noctibus in sepulcro, resurgit a mortuis, sicut ante constitutionem mundi ipse cum patre decreuerat, ascendit in caelos ubi, in eo quod dei filius est, numquam defuisse cognoscitur, ut assumptum hominem, quem diabolus non permiserat ad superna conscendere, secum dei filius caelesti habitationi sustolleret. dat ergo formam discipulis suis baptizandi, docendi salutaria, efficientiam quoque miraculorum atque in uniuersum mundum ad uitam praecipit introire, ut praedicatio salutaris non iam in una tantum gente sed orbi terrarum praedicaretur. et quoniam humanum genus naturae merito, quam ex primo praeuaricatore contraxerat, aeternae poenae iaculis fuerat uulneratum nec salutis suae erat idoneum, quod eam in parente perdiderat, medicinalia quaedam tribuit sacramenta, ut agnosceret aliud sibi deberi per naturae meritum, aliud per gratiae donum, ut natura nihil aliud nisi poenae summitteret, gratia uero, quae nullis meritis attributa est, quia nec gratia diceretur si meritis tribueretur, totum quod est salutis afferret. diffunditur ergo per mundum caelestis illa doctrina, adunantur populi, instituuntur ecclesiae, fit unum corpus quod mundi latitudinem occuparet, cuius caput christus ascendit in caelos, ut necessario caput suum membra sequerentur. haec itaque doctrina et praesentem uitam bonis informat operibus et post consummationem saeculi resurrectura corpora nostra praeter corruptionem ad regna caelestia pollicetur, ita ut qui hic bene ipso donante uixerit, esset in illa resurrectione beatissimus, qui uero male, miser post munus resurrectionis adesset. et hoc est principale religionis nostrae, ut credat non solum animas non perire, sed ipsa quoque corpora, quae mortis aduentus resoluerat, in statum pristinum futura de beatitudine reparari. haec ergo ecclesia catholica per orbem diffusa tribus modis probatur exsistere: quidquid in ea tenetur, aut auctoritas est scripturarum aut traditio uniuersalis aut certe propria et particularis instructio. sed auctoritate tota constringitur, uniuersali traditione maiorum nihilominus tota, priuatis uero constitutionibus et propriis informationibus unaquaeque uel pro locorum uarietate uel prout cuique bene uisum est subsistit et regitur. sola ergo nunc est fidelium exspectatio qua credimus affuturum finem mundi, omnia corruptibilia transitura, resurrecturos homines ad examen futuri iudicii, recepturos pro meritis singulos et in perpetuum atque in aeternum debitis finibus permansuros; solumque est[ ] praemium beatitudinis contemplatio conditoris--tanta dumtaxat, quanta a creatura ad creatorem fieri potest,--ut ex eis reparato angelico numero superna illa ciuitas impleatur, ubi rex est uirginis filius eritque gaudium sempiternum, delectatio, cibus, opus, laus perpetua creatoris. [ ] qui _uel_ quod _codd._ [ ] suspiciones _uel_ suspicione _uel_ suspicio _uel_ subici _codd. meliores._ [ ] esse _codd_. on the catholic faith[ ] the christian faith is proclaimed by the authority of the new testament and of the old; but although the old scripture[ ] contains within its pages the name of christ and constantly gives token that he will come who we believe has already come by the birth of the virgin, yet the diffusion of that faith throughout the world dates from the actual miraculous coming of our saviour. now this our religion which is called christian and catholic is founded chiefly on the following assertions. from all eternity, that is, before the world was established, and so before all that is meant by time began, there has existed one divine substance of father, son, and holy spirit in such wise that we confess the father god, the son god, and the holy spirit god, and yet not three gods but one god. thus the father hath the son, begotten of his substance and coeternal with himself after a manner that he alone knoweth. him we confess to be son in the sense that he is not the same as the father. nor has the father ever been son, for the human mind must not imagine a divine lineage stretching back into infinity; nor can the son, being of the same nature in virtue of which he is coeternal with the father, ever become father, for the divine lineage must not stretch forward into infinity. but the holy spirit is neither father nor son, and therefore, albeit of the same divine nature, neither begotten, nor begetting, but proceeding as well from the father as the son.[ ] yet what the manner of that procession is we are no more able to state clearly than is the human mind able to understand the generation of the son from the substance of the father. but these articles are laid down for our belief by old and new testament. concerning which fortress and citadel[ ] of our religion many men have spoken otherwise and have even impugned it, being moved by human, nay rather by carnal feeling. arius, for instance, who, while calling the son god, declares him to be vastly inferior to the father and of another substance. the sabellians also have dared to affirm that there are not three separate persons but only one, saying that the father is the same as the son and the son the same as the father and the holy spirit the same as the father and the son; and so declaring that there is but one divine person expressed by different names. the manichaeans, too, who allow two coeternal and contrary principles, do not believe in the only-begotten son of god. for they consider it a thought unworthy of god that he should have a son, since they entertain the very carnal reflection that inasmuch as[ ] human generation arises from the mingling of two bodies, it is unworthy to hold a notion of this sort in respect of the divine nature; whereas such a view finds no sanction in the old testament and absolutely[ ] none in the new. yea, their error which refuses this notion also refuses the virgin birth of the son, because they would not have the god's nature defiled by the man's body. but enough of this for the present; the points will be presented in the proper place as the proper arrangement demands. the divine nature then, abiding from all eternity and unto all eternity without any change, by the exercise of a will known only to himself, determined of himself to form the world, and brought it into being when it was absolutely naught, nor did he produce it from his own substance, lest it should be thought divine by nature, nor did he form it after any model, lest it should be thought that anything had already come into being which helped his will by the existence of an independent nature, and that there should exist something that had not been made by him and yet existed; but by his word he brought forth the heavens, and created the earth[ ] that so he might make natures worthy of a place in heaven, and also fit earthly things to earth. but although in heaven all things are beautiful and arranged in due order, yet one part of the heavenly creation which is universally termed angelic,[ ] seeking more than nature and the author of nature had granted them, was cast forth from its heavenly habitation; and because the creator did not wish the roll of the angels, that is of the heavenly city whose citizens the angels are, to be diminished, he formed man out of the earth and breathed into him the breath of life; he endowed him with reason, he adorned him with freedom of choice and established him in the joys of paradise, making covenant aforehand that if he would remain without sin he would add him and his offspring to the angelic hosts; so that as the higher nature had fallen low through the curse of pride, the lower substance might ascend on high through the blessing of humility. but the father of envy, loath that man should climb to the place where he himself deserved not to remain, put temptation before him and the consort whom the creator had brought forth out of his side for the continuance of the race, and laid them open to punishment for disobedience, promising man also the gift of godhead, the arrogant attempt to seize which had caused his own fall. all this was revealed by god to his servant moses, whom he vouchsafed to teach the creation and origin of man, as the books written by him declare. for the divine authority is always conveyed in one of the following ways--the historical, which simply announces facts; the allegorical, whence historical matter is excluded; or else the two combined, history and allegory conspiring to establish it. all this is abundantly evident to pious hearers and steadfast believers. but to return to the order of our discourse; the first man, before sin came, dwelt with his consort in the garden. but when he hearkened to the voice of his wife and failed to keep the commandment of his creator, he was banished, bidden to till the ground, and being shut out from the sheltering garden he carried abroad into unknown regions the children of his loins; by begetting whom he transmitted to those that came after, the punishment which he, the first man, had incurred by the sin of disobedience. hence it came to pass that corruption both of body and soul ensued, and death; and this he was to taste first in his own son abel, in order that he might learn through his child the greatness of the punishment that was laid upon him. for if he had died first he would in some sense not have known, and if one may so say not have felt, his punishment; but he tasted it in another in order that he might perceive the due reward of his contempt, and, doomed to death himself, might be the more sensibly touched by the apprehension of it. but this curse that came of transgression which the first man had by natural propagation transmitted to posterity, was denied by one pelagius who so set up the heresy which goes by his name and which the catholic faith, as is known, at once banished from its bosom. so the human race that sprang from the first man and mightily increased and multiplied, broke into strife, stirred up wars, and became the heir of earthly misery, because it had lost the joys of paradise in its first parent. yet were there not a few of mankind whom the giver of grace set apart for himself and who were obedient to his will; and though by desert of nature they were condemned, yet god by making them partakers in the hidden mystery, long afterwards to be revealed, vouchsafed to recover fallen nature. so the earth was filled by the human race and man who by his own wanton wilfulness had despised his creator began to walk in his own ways. hence god willing rather to recover mankind through one just man than that it should remain for ever contumacious, suffered all the guilty multitude to perish by the wide waters of a flood, save only noah, the just one, with his children and all that he had brought with him into the ark. the reason why he wished to save the just by an ark of wood is known to all hearts learned in the holy scriptures. thus what we may call the first age of the world was ended by the avenging flood. thus the human race was restored, and yet it hastened to make its own the vice of nature with which the first author of transgression had infected it. and the wickedness increased which had once been punished by the waters of the flood, and man who had been suffered to live for a long series of years was reduced to the brief span of ordinary human life. yet would not god again visit the race by a flood, but rather, letting it continue, he chose from it men of whose line a generation should arise out of which he might in the last days grant us his own son to come to us, clothed in human form. of these men abraham is the first, and although he was stricken in years and his wife past bearing, they had in their old age the reward of a son in fulfilment of promise unconditional. this son was named isaac and he begat jacob, who in his turn begat the twelve patriarchs, god not reckoning in their number those whom nature in its ordinary course produced.[ ] this jacob, then, together with his sons and his household determined to dwell in egypt for the purpose of trafficking; and the multitude of them increasing there in the course of many years began to be a cause of suspicion to the egyptian rulers, and pharaoh ordered them to be oppressed by exceeding heavy tasks[ ] and afflicted them with grievous burdens. at length god, minded to set at naught the tyranny of the king of egypt, divided the red sea--a marvel such as nature had never known before--and brought forth his host by the hands of moses and aaron. thereafter on account of their departure egypt was vexed with sore plagues, because they would not let the people go. so, after crossing the red sea, as i have told, they passed through the desert of the wilderness and came to the mount which is called sinai, where god the creator of all, wishing to prepare the nations for the knowledge of the sacrament to come, laid down by a law given through moses how both the rites of sacrifices and the national customs should be ordered. and after fighting down many tribes in many years amidst their journeyings they came at last to the river called jordan, with joshua the son of nun now as their captain, and, for their crossing, the streams of jordan were dried up as the waters of the red sea had been; so they finished their course to that city which is now called jerusalem. and while the people of god abode there we read that there were set up first judges and prophets and then kings, of whom we read that after saul, david of the tribe of judah ascended the throne. so from him the royal race descended from father to son and lasted till the days of herod who, we read, was the first taken out of the peoples called gentile to bear sway. in whose days rose up the blessed virgin mary, sprung from the stock of david, she who bore the maker of the human race. but it was just because the whole world lay dead, stained with its many sins, that god chose out one race in which his commands might shine clear; sending it prophets and other holy men, to the end that by their warnings that people at least might be cured of their swollen pride. but they slew these holy men and chose rather to abide in their wanton wickedness. and now at the last days of time, in place of prophets and other men well-pleasing to him, god willed that his only-begotten son should be born of a virgin that so the salvation of mankind which had been lost through the disobedience of the first man might be recovered by the god- man, and that inasmuch as it was a woman who had first persuaded man to that which wrought death there should be this second woman who should bring forth from a human womb him who gives life. nor let it be deemed a thing unworthy that the son of god was born of a virgin, for it was out of the course of nature that he was conceived and brought to birth. virgin then she conceived, by the holy spirit, the son of god made flesh, virgin she bore him, virgin she continued after his birth; and he became the son of man and likewise the son of god that in him the glory of the divine nature might shine forth and at the same time the human weakness be declared which he took upon him. yet against this article of faith so wholesome and altogether true there rose up many who babbled other doctrine, and especially nestorius and eutyches, inventors of heresy, of whom the one thought fit to say that he was man alone, the other that he was god alone and that the human body put on by christ had not come by participation in human substance. but enough on this point. so christ grew after the flesh, and was baptized in order that he who was to give the form of baptism to others should first himself receive what he taught. but after his baptism he chose twelve disciples, one of whom betrayed him. and because the people of the jews would not bear sound doctrine they laid hands upon him and slew and crucified him. christ, then, was slain; he lay three days and three nights in the tomb; he rose again from the dead as he had predetermined with his father before the foundation of the world; he ascended into heaven whence we know that he was never absent, because he is son of god, in order that as son of god he might raise together with him to the heavenly habitation man whose flesh he had assumed, whom the devil had hindered from ascending to the places on high. therefore he bestowed on his disciples the form of baptizing, the saving truth of the teaching, and the mighty power of miracles, and bade them go throughout the whole world to give it life, in order that the message of salvation might be preached no longer in one nation only but among all the dwellers upon earth. and because the human race was wounded by the weapon of eternal punishment by reason of the nature which they had inherited from the first transgressor and could not win a full meed of salvation because they had lost it in its first parent, god instituted certain health- giving sacraments to teach the difference between what grace bestowed and human nature deserved, nature simply subjecting to punishment, but grace, which is won by no merit, since it would not be grace if it were due to merit, conferring all that belongs to salvation. therefore is that heavenly instruction spread throughout the world, the peoples are knit together, churches are founded, and, filling the broad earth, one body formed, whose head, even christ, ascended into heaven in order that the members might of necessity follow where the head was gone. thus this teaching both inspires this present life unto good works, and promises that in the end of the age our bodies shall rise incorruptible to the kingdom of heaven, to the end that he who has lived well on earth by god's gift should be altogether blessed in that resurrection, but he who has lived amiss should, with the gift of resurrection, enter upon misery. and this is a firm principle of our religion, to believe not only that men's souls do not perish, but that their very bodies, which the coming of death had destroyed, recover their first state by the bliss that is to be. this catholic church, then, spread throughout the world, is known by three particular marks: whatever is believed and taught in it has the authority of the scriptures, or of universal tradition, or at least of its own and proper usage. and this authority is binding on the whole church as is also the universal tradition of the fathers, while each separate church exists and is governed by its private constitution and its proper rites according to difference of locality and the good judgment of each. all, therefore, that the faithful now expect is that the end of the world will come, that all corruptible things shall pass away, that men shall rise for future judgement, that each shall receive reward according to his deserts and abide in the lot assigned to him for ever and for aye; and the sole reward of bliss will be the contemplation of the almighty, so far, that is, as the creature may look on the creator, to the end that the number of the angels may be made up from these and the heavenly city filled where the virgin's son is king and where will be everlasting joy, delight, food, labour, and unending praise of the creator. [ ] the conclusions adverse to the genuineness of this tractate, reached in the dissertation _der dem boethius zugeschriebene traktat de fide catholica (jahrbücher für kl. phil._ xxvi. ( ) supplementband) by one of the editors, now seem to both unsound. the writer of that dissertation intends to return to the subject elsewhere. this fourth tractate, though lacking, in the best mss., either an ascription to boethius or a title, is firmly imbedded in two distinct recensions of boethius's theological works. there is no reason to disturb it. indeed the _capita dogmatica_ mentioned by cassiodorus can hardly refer to any of the tractates except the fourth. [ ] for _instrumentum_=holy scripture cf. tertull. _apol._ , , _adv. hermog._ , etc.; for _instrumentum_=any historical writing cf. tert. _de spect._ . [ ] boethius is no heretic. by the sixth century _uel_ had lost its strong separative force. cp. "noe cum sua uel trium natorum coniugibus," greg. tur. _h.f._ i. . other examples in bonnet, _la latinité de grég. de tours_, p. , and in brandt's edition of the _isag._ index, s.v. _uel_. [ ] _vide cons._ i. pr. (_infra_, p. ), and cf. dante, _de mon._ iii. , . [ ] _ut quia_. a very rare use. cf. baehrens, _beiträge zur lat. syntaxis_ (_philologus_, supplementband xii. ). it perhaps=aristotle's [greek: oion epei]. cf. mckinlay, _harvard studies in cl. philol._ xviii. . [ ] _in integro_=_prorsus_; cf. brandt, _op. cit._ index, s.v. _integer_. [ ] the doctrine is orthodox, but note that boethius does not say _ex nihilo creauit_. _vide infra_, p. ll. ff. [ ] _vide infra, cons._ iv. pr. , p. l. . [ ] e.g. ishmael also [greek: kata sarka gegennaetai] gal. iv. . [ ] cf. "populus dei mirabiliter crescens ... quia ... erant suspecta... laboribus premebatur," aug. _de ciu. dei_, . . for other coincidences see rand, _op. cit._ pp. ff. anicii manlii severini boethii v.c. et inl. excons. ord. patricii incipit liber contra evtychen et nestorivm domino sancto ac venerabili patri iohanni diacono boethivs filivs anxie te quidem diuque sustinui, ut de ea quae in conuentu mota est quaestione loqueremur. sed quoniam et tu quominus uenires occupatione distractus es et ego in crastinum constitutis negotiis implicabor, mando litteris quae coram loquenda seruaueram. meministi enim, cum in concilio legeretur epistola, recitatum eutychianos ex duabus naturis christum consistere confiteri, in duabus negare: catholicos uero utrique dicto fidem praebere, nam et ex duabus eum naturis consistere et in duabus apud uerae fidei sectatores aequaliter credi. cuius dicti nouitate percussus harum coniunctionum quae ex duabus naturis uel in duabus consisterent differentias inquirebam, multum scilicet referre ratus nec inerti neglegentia praetereundum, quod episcopus scriptor epistolae tamquam ualde necessarium praeterire noluisset. hic omnes apertam esse differentiam nec quicquam in eo esse caliginis inconditum confusumque strepere nec ullus in tanto tumultu qui leuiter attingeret quaestionem, nedum qui expediret inuentus est. adsederam ego ab eo quem maxime intueri cupiebam longius atque adeo, si situm sedentium recorderis, auersus pluribusque oppositis, ne si aegerrime quidem cuperem, uultum nutumque eius aspicere poteram ex quo mihi aliqua eius darentur signa iudicii. atqui ego quidem nihil ceteris amplius afferebam, immo uero aliquid etiam minus. nam de re proposita aeque nihil ceteris sentiebam; minus uero quam ceteri ipse afferebam, falsae scilicet scientiae praesumptionem. tuli aegerrime, fateor, compressusque indoctorum grege conticui metuens ne iure uiderer insanus, si sanus inter furiosos haberi contenderem. meditabar igitur dehinc omnes animo quaestiones nec deglutiebam quod acceperam, sed frequentis consilii iteratione ruminabam. tandem igitur patuere pulsanti animo fores et ueritas inuenta quaerenti omnes nebulas eutychiani reclusit erroris. vnde mihi maxime subiit admirari, quaenam haec indoctorum hominum esset audacia qui inscientiae uitium praesumptionis atque inpudentiae nube conentur obducere, cum non modo saepe id quod proponatur ignorent, uerum in huiusmodi contentionibus ne id quidem quod ipsi loquantur intellegant, quasi non deterior fiat inscientiae causa, dum tegitur. sed ab illis ad te transeo, cui hoc quantulumcumque est examinandum prius perpendendumque transmitto. quod si recte se habere pronuntiaueris, peto ut mei nominis hoc quoque inseras chartis; sin uero uel minuendum aliquid uel addendum uel aliqua mutatione uariandum est, id quoque postulo remitti, meis exemplaribus ita ut a te reuertitur transcribendum. quae ubi ad calcem ducta constiterint, tum demum eius cuius soleo iudicio censenda transmittam. sed quoniam semel res a conlocutione transfertur ad stilum, prius extremi sibique contrarii nestorii atque eutychis summoueantur errores; post uero adiuuante deo, christianae medietatem fidei temperabo. quoniam uero in tota quaestione contrariarum sibimet [greek: haireseon] de personis dubitatur atque naturis, haec primitus definienda sunt et propriis differentiis segreganda. a treatise against eutyches and nestorius by anicius manlius severinus boethius most honourable, of the illustrious order of ex-consuls, patrician to his saintly master and reverend father john the deacon his son boethius i have been long and anxiously waiting for you to discuss with me the problem which was raised at the meeting. but since your duties have prevented your coming and i shall be for some time involved in my business engagements, i am setting down in writing what i had been keeping to say by word of mouth. you no doubt remember how, when the letter[ ] was read in the assembly, it was asserted that the eutychians confess that christ is formed from two natures but does not consist of them--whereas catholics admit both propositions, for among followers of the true faith he is equally believed to be of two natures and in two natures. struck by the novelty of this assertion i began to inquire what difference there can be between unions formed from two natures and unions which consist in two natures, for the point which the bishop who wrote the letter refused to pass over because of its gravity, seemed to me of importance and not one to be idly and carelessly slurred over. on that occasion all loudly protested that the difference was evident, that there was no obscurity, confusion or perplexity, and in the general storm and tumult there was no one who really touched the edge of the problem, much less anyone who solved it. i was sitting a long way from the man whom i especially wished to watch,[ ] and if you recall the arrangement of the seats, i was turned away from him, with so many between us, that however much i desired it i could not see his face and expression and glean therefrom any sign of his opinion. personally, indeed, i had nothing more to contribute than the rest, in fact rather less than more. i, no more than the others, had any view about the question at issue, while my possible contribution was less by one thing, namely, the false assumption of a knowledge that i had not got. i was, i admit, much put out, and being overwhelmed by the mob of ignorant speakers, i held my peace, fearing lest i should be rightly set down as insane if i held out for being sane among those madmen.[ ] so i continued to ponder all the questions in my mind, not swallowing what i had heard, but rather chewing the cud of constant meditation. at last the door opened to my insistent knocking, and the truth which i found cleared out of my way all the clouds of the eutychian error. and with this discovery a great wonder came upon me at the vast temerity of unlearned men who use the cloak of impudent presumption to cover up the vice of ignorance, for not only do they often fail to grasp the point at issue, but in a debate of this kind they do not even understand their own statements, forgetting that the case of ignorance is all the worse if it is not honestly admitted.[ ] i turn from them to you, and to you i submit this little essay for your first judgment and consideration. if you pronounce it to be sound i beg you to place it among the other writings of mine which you possess; but if there is anything to be struck out or added or changed in any way, i would ask you to let me have your suggestions, in order that i may enter them in my copies just as they leave your hands. when this revision has been duly accomplished, then i will send the work on to be judged by the man to whom i always submit everything.[ ] but since the pen is now to take the place of the living voice, let me first clear away the extreme and self-contradictory errors of nestorius and eutyches; after that, by god's help, i will temperately set forth the middle way of the christian faith. but since in this whole question of self-contradictory heresies the matter of debate is persons and natures, these terms must first be defined and distinguished by their proper differences. [ ] evidently the letter addressed to pope symmachus by the oriental bishops (_vide_ mansi, _concil_. viii. ff.), in which they inquire concerning the safe middle way between the heresies of eutyches and nestorius. the date of the bishops' letter, and consequently, in all probability, of boethius's tractate was . [ ] obviously his father-in-law symmachus. _vide_ p. , _eius cuius soleo iudiclo_, etc. [ ] cf. hor. _serm_. i. . ; ii. . . [ ] cf. _infra, de cons._ i. pr. (p. ) _oportet uulnus detegas. [ ] _vide supra_, p. , and _de trin._ p. . i. natura igitur aut de solis corporibus dici potest aut de solis substantiis, id est corporeis atque incorporeis, aut de omnibus rebus quae quocumque modo esse dicuntur. cum igitur tribus modis natura dici possit, tribus modis sine dubio definienda est. nam si de omnibus rebus naturam dici placet, talis definitio dabitur quae res omnes quae sunt possit includere. erit ergo huiusmodi: "natura est earum rerum quae, cum sint, quoquo modo intellectu capi possunt." in hac igitur definitione et accidentia et substantiae definiuntur; haec enim omnia intellectu capi possunt. additum uero est "quoquo modo," quoniam deus et materia integro perfectoque intellectu intellegi non possunt, sed aliquo tamen modo ceterarum rerum priuatione capiuntur. idcirco uero adiunximus "quae cum sint," quoniam etiam ipsum nihil significat aliquid sed non naturam. neque enim quod sit aliquid sed potius non esse significat; omnis uero natura est. et si de omnibus quidem rebus naturam dici placet, haec sit naturae definitio quam superius proposuimus. sin uero de solis substantiis natura dicitur, quoniam substantiae omnes aut corporeae sunt aut incorporeae, dabimus definitionem naturae substantias significanti huiusmodi: "natura est uel quod facere uel quod pati possit." "pati" quidem ac "facere," ut omnia corporea atque corporeorum anima; haec enim in corpore et a corpore et facit et patitur. "facere" uero tantum ut deus ceteraque diuina. habes igitur definitionem eius quoque significationis naturae quae tantum substantiis applicatur. qua in re substantiae quoque est reddita definitio. nam si nomen naturae substantiam monstrat, cum naturam descripsimus substantiae quoque est assignata descriptio. quod si naturae nomen relictis incorporeis substantiis ad corporales usque contrahitur, ut corporeae tantum substantiae naturam habere uideantur, sicut aristoteles ceterique et eiusmodi et multimodae philosophiae sectatores putant, definiemus eam, ut hi etiam qui naturam non nisi in corporibus esse posuerunt. est autem eius definitio hoc modo: "natura est motus principium per se non per accidens." quod "motus principium" dixi hoc est, quoniam corpus omne habet proprium motum, ut ignis sursum, terra deorsum. item quod "per se principium motus" naturam esse proposui et non "per accidens," tale est, quoniam lectum quoque ligneum deorsum ferri necesse est, sed non deorsum per accidens fertur. idcirco enim quia lignum est, quod est terra, pondere et grauitate deducitur. non enim quia lectus est, deorsum cadit, sed quia terra est, id est quia terrae contigit, ut lectus esset; unde fit ut lignum naturaliter esse dicamus, lectum uero artificialiter. est etiam alia significatio naturae per quam dicimus diuersam esse naturam auri atque argenti in hoc proprietatem rerum monstrare cupientes, quae significatio naturae definietur hoc modo: "natura est unam quamque rem informans specifica differentia." cum igitur tot modis uel dicatur uel definiatur natura, tam catholici quam nestorius secundum ultimam definitionem duas in christo naturas esse constituunt; neque enim easdem in deum atque hominem differentias conuenire. i. nature, then, may be affirmed either of bodies alone or of substances alone, that is, of corporeals or incorporeals, or of everything that is in any way capable of affirmation. since, then, nature can be affirmed in three ways, it must obviously be defined in three ways. for if you choose to affirm nature of the totality of things, the definition will be of such a kind as to include all things that are. it will accordingly be something of this kind: "nature belongs to those things which, since they exist, can in some measure be apprehended by the mind." this definition, then, includes both accidents and substances, for they all can be apprehended by the mind. but i add "in some measure" because god and matter cannot be apprehended by mind, be it never so whole and perfect, but still they are apprehended in a measure through the removal of accidents. the reason for adding the words, "since they exist," is that the mere word "nothing" denotes something, though it does not denote nature. for it denotes, indeed, not that anything is, but rather non-existence; but every nature exists. and if we choose to affirm "nature" of the totality of things, the definition will be as we have given it above. but if "nature" is affirmed of substances alone, we shall, since all substances are either corporeal or incorporeal, give to nature denoting substances a definition of the following kind: "nature is either that which can act or that which can be acted upon." now the power to act and to suffer belongs to all corporeals and the soul of corporeals; for it both acts in the body and suffers by the body. but only to act belongs to god and other divine substances. here, then, you have a further definition of what nature is as applied to substances alone. this definition comprises also the definition of substance. for if the word nature signifies substance, when once we have defined nature we have also settled the definition of substance. but if we neglect incorporeal substances and confine the name nature to corporeal substances so that they alone appear to possess the nature of substance--which is the view of aristotle and the adherents both of his and various other schools--we shall define nature as those do who have only allowed the word to be applied to bodies. now, in accordance with this view, the definition is as follows: "nature is the principle of movement properly inherent in and not accidentally attached to bodies." i say "principle of movement" because every body has its proper movement, fire moving upwards, the earth moving downwards. and what i mean by "movement properly inherent and not accidentally attached" is seen by the example of a wooden bed which is necessarily borne downward and is not carried downward by accident. for it is drawn downward by weight and heaviness because it is of wood, i.e. an earthly material. for it falls down not because it is a bed, but because it is earth, that is, because it is an accident of earth that it is a bed; hence we call it wood in virtue of its nature, but bed in virtue of the art that shaped it. nature has, further, another meaning according to which we speak of the different nature of gold and silver, wishing thereby to point the special property of things; this meaning of nature will be defined as follows: "nature is the specific difference that gives form to anything." thus, although nature is described or defined in all these different ways, both catholics and nestorians firmly hold that there are in christ two natures of the kind laid down in our last definition, for the same specific differences cannot apply to god and man. ii. sed de persona maxime dubitari potest, quaenam ei definitio possit aptari. si enim omnis habet natura personam, indissolubilis nodus est, quaenam inter naturam personamque possit esse discretio; aut si non aequatur persona naturae, sed infra terminum spatiumque naturae persona subsistit, difficile dictu est ad quas usque naturas persona perueniat, id est quas naturas conueniat habere personam, quas a personae uocabulo segregari. nam illud quidem manifestum est personae subiectam esse naturam nec praeter naturam personam posse praedicari. vestiganda sunt igitur haec inquirentibus hoc modo. quoniam praeter naturam non potest esse persona quoniamque naturae aliae sunt substantiae, aliae accidentes et uidemus personam in accidentibus non posse constitui (quis enim dicat ullam albedinis uel nigredinis uel magnitudinis esse personam?), relinquitur ergo ut personam in substantiis dici conueniat. sed substantiarum aliae sunt corporeae, aliae incorporeae. corporearum uero aliae sunt uiuentes, aliae minime; uiuentium aliae sunt sensibiles, aliae minime; sensibilium aliae rationales, aliae inrationales. item incorporearum aliae sunt rationales, aliae minime, ut pecudum uitae; rationalium uero alia est inmutabilis atque inpassibilis per naturam ut deus, alia per creationem mutabilis atque passibilis, nisi inpassibilis gratia substantiae ad inpassibilitatis firmitudinem permutetur ut angelorum atque animae. ex quibus omnibus neque in non uiuentibus corporibus personam posse dici manifestum est (nullus enim lapidis ullam dicit esse personam), neque rursus eorum uiuentium quae sensu carent (neque enim ulla persona est arboris), nec uero eius quae intellectu ac ratione deseritur (nulla est enim persona equi uel bouis ceterorumque animalium quae muta ac sine ratione uitam solis sensibus degunt), at hominis dicimus esse personam, dicimus dei, dicimus angeli. rursus substantiarum aliae sunt uniuersales, aliae particulares. vniuersales sunt quae de singulis praedicantur ut homo, animal, lapis, lignum ceteraque huiusmodi quae uel genera uel species sunt; nam et homo de singulis hominibus et animal de singulis animalibus lapisque ac lignum de singulis lapidibus ac lignis dicuntur. particularia uero sunt quae de aliis minime praedicantur ut cicero, plato, lapis hic unde haec achillis statua facta est, lignum hoc unde haec mensa composita est. sed in his omnibus nusquam in uniuersalibus persona dici potest, sed in singularibus tantum atque in indiuiduis; animalis enim uel generalis hominis nulla persona est, sed uel ciceronis uel platonis uel singulorum indiuiduorum personae singulae nuncupantur. ii. but the proper definition of person is a matter of very great perplexity. for if every nature has person, the difference between nature and person is a hard knot to unravel; or if person is not taken as the equivalent of nature but is a term of less scope and range, it is difficult to say to what natures it may be extended, that is, to what natures the term person may be applied and what natures are dissociate from it. for one thing is clear, namely that nature is a substrate of person, and that person cannot be predicated apart from nature. we must, therefore, conduct our inquiry into these points as follows. since person cannot exist apart from a nature and since natures are either substances or accidents and we see that a person cannot come into being among accidents (for who can say there is any person of white or black or size?), it therefore remains that person is properly applied to substances. but of substances, some are corporeal and others incorporeal. and of corporeals, some are living and others the reverse; of living substances, some are sensitive and others insensitive; of sensitive substances, some are rational and others irrational.[ ] similarly of incorporeal substances, some are rational, others the reverse (for instance the animating spirits of beasts); but of rational substances there is one which is immutable and impassible by nature, namely god, another which in virtue of its creation is mutable and passible except in that case where the grace of the impassible substance has transformed it to the unshaken impassibility which belongs to angels and to the soul. now from all the definitions we have given it is clear that person cannot be affirmed of bodies which have no life (for no one ever said that a stone had a person), nor yet of living things which lack sense (for neither is there any person of a tree), nor finally of that which is bereft of mind and reason (for there is no person of a horse or ox or any other of the animals which dumb and unreasoning live a life of sense alone), but we say there is a person of a man, of god, of an angel. again, some substances are universal, others are particular. universal terms are those which are predicated of individuals, as man, animal, stone, stock and other things of this kind which are either genera or species; for the term man is applied to individual men just as animal is to individual animals, and stone and stock to individual stones and stocks. but particulars are terms which are never predicated of other things, as cicero, plato, this stone from which this statue of achilles was hewn, this piece of wood out of which this table was made. but in all these things person cannot in any case be applied to universals, but only to particulars and individuals; for there is no person of a man if animal or general; only the single persons of cicero, plato, or other single individuals are termed persons. [ ] for a similar example of the method of _diuisio_ cf. cic. _de off._ ii. . . cf. also _isag. porph. edit. prima_, i. (ed. brandt, p. ). iii. quocirca si persona in solis substantiis est atque in his rationabilibus substantiaque omnis natura est nec in uniuersalibus sed in indiuiduis constat, reperta personae est definitio: "naturae rationabilis indiuidua substantia." sed nos hac definitione eam quam graeci [greek: hupostasin] dicunt terminauimus. nomen enim personae uidetur aliunde traductum, ex his scilicet personis quae in comoediis tragoediisque eos quorum interest homines repraesentabant. persona uero dicta est a personando circumflexa paenultima. quod si acuatur antepaenultima, apertissime a sono dicta uidebitur; idcirco autem a sono, quia concauitate ipsa maior necesse est uoluatur sonus. graeci quoque has personas [greek: prosopa] uocant ab eo quod ponantur in facie atque ante oculos obtegant uultum: [greek: para tou pros tous opas tithesthai.] sed quoniam personis inductis histriones indiuiduos homines quorum intererat in tragoedia uel in comoedia ut dictum est repraesentabant, id est hecubam uel medeam uel simonem uel chremetem, idcirco ceteros quoque homines, quorum certa pro sui forma esset agnitio, et latini personam et graeci [greek: prosopa] nuncupauerunt. longe uero illi signatius naturae rationabilis indiuiduam subsistentiam [greek: hupostaseos] nomine uocauerunt, nos uero per inopiam significantium uocum translaticiam retinuimus nuncupationem, eam quam illi [greek: hupostasin] dicunt personam uocantes; sed peritior graecia sermonum [greek: hupostasin] uocat indiuiduam subsistentiam. atque, uti graeca utar oratione in rebus quae a graecis agitata latina interpretatione translata sunt: [greek: hai ousiai en men tois katholou einai dunantai. en de tois atomois kai kata meros monois huphistantai], id est: essentiae in uniuersalibus quidem esse possunt, in solis uero indiuiduis et particularibus substant. intellectus enim uniuersalium rerum ex particularibus sumptus est. quocirca cum ipsae subsistentiae in uniuersalibus quidem sint, in particularibus uero capiant substantiam, iure subsistentias particulariter substantes [greek: hupostaseis] appellauerunt. neque enim pensius subtiliusque intuenti idem uidebitur esse subsistentia quod substantia. nam quod graeci [greek: ousiosin] uel [greek: ousiosthai] dicunt, id nos subsistentiam uel subsistere appellamus; quod uero illi [greek: hupostasin] uel [greek: huphistasthai], id nos substantiam uel substare interpretamur. subsistit enim quod ipsum accidentibus, ut possit esse, non indiget. substat autem id quod aliis accidentibus subiectum quoddam, ut esse ualeant, subministrat; sub illis enim stat, dum subiectum est accidentibus. itaque genera uel species subsistunt tantum; neque enim accidentia generibus speciebus*ue contingunt. indiuidua uero non modo subsistunt uerum etiam substant, nam neque ipsa indigent accidentibus ut sint; informata enim sunt iam propriis et specificis differentiis et accidentibus ut esse possint ministrant, dum sunt scilicet subiecta. quocirca [greek: einai] atque [greek: ousiosthai] esse atque subsistere, [greek: huphistasthai] uero substare intellegitur. neque enim uerborum inops graecia est, ut marcus tullius alludit, sed essentiam, subsistentiam, substantiam, personam totidem nominibus reddit, essentiam quidem [greek: ousian], subsistentiam uero [greek: ousiosin], substantiam [greek: hupostasin], personam [greek: prosopon] appellans. ideo autem [greek: hupostaseis] graeci indiuiduas substantias uocauerunt, quoniam ceteris subsunt et quibusdam quasi accidentibus subpositae subiectaeque sunt; atque idcirco nos quoque eas substantias nuncupamus quasi subpositas, quas illi[ ] [greek: hupostaseis], cumque etiam [greek: prosopa] nuncupent easdem substantias, possumus nos quoque nuncupare personas. idem est igitur [greek: ousian] esse quod essentiam, idem [greek: ousiosin] quod subsistentiam, idem [greek: hupostasin] quod substantiam, idem [greek: prosopon] quod personam. quare autem de inrationabilibus animalibus graecus [greek: hupostasin] non dicat, sicut nos de eisdem nomen substantiae praedicamus, haec ratio est, quoniam nomen hoc melioribus applicatum est, ut aliqua id quod est excellentius, tametsi non descriptione naturae secundum id quod [greek: huphistasthai] atque substare est, at certe [greek: hupostaseos] uel substantiae uocabulis discerneretur. est igitur et hominis quidem essentia, id est [greek: ousia], et subsistentia, id est [greek: ousiosis], et [greek: hupostasis], id est substantia, et [greek: prosopon], id est persona; [greek: ousia], quidem atque essentia quoniam est, [greek: ousiosis] uero atque subsistentia quoniam in nullo subiecto est, [greek: hupostasis] uero atque substantia, quoniam subest ceteris quae subsistentiae non sunt, id est [greek: ousioseis]; est [greek: prosopon] atque persona, quoniam est rationabile indiuiduum. deus quoque et [greek: ousia] est et essentia, est enim et maxime ipse est a quo omnium esse proficiscitur. est [greek: ousiosis], id est subsistentia (subsistit enim nullo indigens), et [greek: huphistasthai]; substat enim. vnde etiam dicimus unam esse [greek: ousian] uel [greek: ousiosin], id est essentiam uel subsistentiam deitatis, sed tres [greek: hupostaseis], id est tres substantias. et quidem secundum hunc modum dixere unam trinitatis essentiam, tres substantias tresque personas. nisi enim tres in deo substantias ecclesiasticus loquendi usus excluderet, uideretur idcirco de deo dici substantia, non quod ipse ceteris rebus quasi subiectum supponeretur, sed quod idem omnibus uti praeesset ita etiam quasi principium subesset rebus, dum eis omnibus [greek: ousiosthai] uel subsistere subministrat. [ ] quas illi _vallinus_; quasi _uel_ quas _codd. meliores_. iii. wherefore if person belongs to substances alone, and these rational, and if every nature is a substance, existing not in universals but in individuals, we have found the definition of person, viz.: "the individual substance of a rational nature."[ ] now by this definition we latins have described what the greeks call [greek: hupostasis]. for the word person seems to be borrowed from a different source, namely from the masks which in comedies and tragedies used to signify the different subjects of representation. now _persona_ "mask" is derived from _personare_, with a circumflex on the penultimate. but if the accent is put on the antepenultimate[ ] the word will clearly be seen to come from _sonus_ "sound," and for this reason, that the hollow mask necessarily produces a larger sound. the greeks, too, call these masks [greek: prosopa] from the fact that they are placed over the face and conceal the countenance from the spectator: [greek: para tou pros tous opas tithesthai]. but since, as we have said, it was by the masks they put on that actors played the different characters represented in a tragedy or comedy--hecuba or medea or simon or chremes,--so also all other men who could be recognized by their several characteristics were designated by the latins with the term _persona_ and by the greeks with [greek: prosopa]. but the greeks far more clearly gave to the individual subsistence of a rational nature the name [greek: hupostasis] while we through want of appropriate words have kept a borrowed term, calling that _persona_ which they call [greek: hupostasis]; but greece with its richer vocabulary gives the name [greek: hupostasis] to the individual subsistence. and, if i may use greek in dealing with matters which were first mooted by greeks before they came to be interpreted in latin: [greek: hai ousiai en men tois katholou einai dunantai. en de tois atomois kai kata meros monois huphistantai], that is: essences indeed can have potential existence in universals, but they have particular substantial existence in particulars alone. for it is from particulars that all our comprehension of universals is taken. wherefore since subsistences are present in universals but acquire substance in particulars they rightly gave the name [greek: hupostasis] to subsistences which acquired substance through the medium of particulars. for to no one using his eyes with any care or penetration will subsistence and substance appear identical. for our equivalents of the greek terms [greek: ousiosis ousiosthai] are respectively _subsistentia_ and _subsistere_, while their [greek: hupostasis huphistasthai] are represented by our _substantia_ and _substare_. for a thing has subsistence when it does not require accidents in order to be, but that thing has substance which supplies to other things, accidents to wit, a substrate enabling them to be; for it "substands" those things so long as it is subjected to accidents. thus genera and species have only subsistence, for accidents do not attach to genera and species. but particulars have not only subsistence but substance, for they, no more than generals, depend on accidents for their being; for they are already provided with their proper and specific differences and they enable accidents to be by supplying them with a substrate. wherefore _esse_ and _subsistere_ represent [greek: einai] and [greek: ousiosthai], while _substare_ represents [greek: huphistasthai]. for greece is not, as marcus tullius[ ] playfully says, short of words, but provides exact equivalents for _essentia, subsistentia, substantia_ and _persona_--[greek: ousia] for _essentia_, [greek: ousiosis] for _subsistentia_, [greek: hupostasis] for _substantia_, [greek: prosopon] for _persona_. but the greeks called individual substances [greek: hupostaseis] because they underlie the rest and offer support and substrate to what are called accidents; and we in our term call them substances as being substrate--[greek: hupostaseis], and since they also term the same substances [greek: prosopa], we too may call them persons. so [greek: ousia] is identical with essence, [greek: ousiosis] with subsistence, [greek: hupostasis] with substance, [greek: prosopon] with person. but the reason why the greek does not use [greek: hupostasis] of irrational animals while we apply the term substance to them is this: this term was applied to things of higher value, in order that what is more excellent might be distinguished, if not by a definition of nature answering to the literal meaning of [greek: huphistasthai]=_substare_, at any rate by the words [greek: hupostasis]=_substantia_. to begin with, then, man is essence, i.e. [greek: ousia], subsistence, i.e. [greek: ousiosis, hupostasis], i.e. substance, [greek: prosopon], i.e. person: [greek: ousia] or _essentia_ because he is, [greek: ousiosis], or subsistence because he is not accidental to any subject, [greek: hupostusis] or substance because he is subject to all the things which are not subsistences or [greek: ousioseis], while he is [greek: prosopon] or person because he is a rational individual. next, god is [greek: ousia], or essence, for he is and is especially that from which proceeds the being of all things. to him belong [greek: ousiosis], i.e. subsistence, for he subsists in absolute independence, and [greek: huphistasthai], for he is substantial being. whence we go on to say that there is one [greek: ousia] or [greek: ousiosis], i.e. one essence or subsistence of the godhead, but three [greek: hupostaseis] or substances. and indeed, following this use, men have spoken of one essence, three substances and three persons of the godhead. for did not the language of the church forbid us to say three substances in speaking of god,[ ] substance might seem a right term to apply to him, not because he underlies all other things like a substrate, but because, just as he excels above all things, so he is the foundation and support of things, supplying them all with [greek: ousiosthai] or subsistence. [ ] boethius's definition of _persona_ was adopted by st. thomas (s. i. . ), was regarded as classical by the schoolmen, and has the approval of modern theologians. cf. dorner, _doctrine of christ_, iii. p. . [ ] implying a short penultimate. [ ] _tusc._ ii. . . [ ] for a similar submission of his own opinion to the usage of the church cf. the end of _tr._ i. and of _tr._ ii. iv. sed haec omnia idcirco sint dicta, ut differentiam naturae atque personae id est [greek: ousias] atque [greek: hupostaseos] monstraremus. quo uero nomine unumquodque oporteat appellari, ecclesiasticae sit locutionis arbitrium. hoc interim constet quod inter naturam personamque differre praediximus, quoniam natura est cuiuslibet substantiae specificata proprietas, persona uero rationabilis naturae indiuidua substantia. hanc in christo nestorius duplicem esse constituit eo scilicet traductus errore, quod putauerit in omnibus naturis dici posse personam. hoc enim praesumpto, quoniam in christo duplicem naturam esse censebat, duplicem quoque personam esse confessus est. qua in re eum falsum esse cum definitio superius dicta conuincat, tum haec argumentatio euidenter eius declarabit errorem. si enim non est christi una persona duasque naturas esse manifestum est, hominis scilicet atque dei (nec tam erit insipiens quisquam, utqui utramque earum a ratione seiungat), sequitur ut duae uideantur esse personae; est enim persona ut dictum est naturae rationabilis indiuidua substantia. quae est igitur facta hominis deique coniunctio? num ita quasi cum duo corpora sibimet apponuntur, ut tantum locis iuncta sint et nihil in alterum ex alterius qualitate perueniat? quem coniunctionis graeci modum [greek: kata parathesin] uocant. sed si ita humanitas diuinitati coniuncta est, nihil horum ex utrisque confectum est ac per hoc nihil est christus. nomen quippe ipsum unum quiddam significat singularitate uocabuli. at si duabus personis manentibus ea coniunctio qualem superius diximus facta est naturarum, unum ex duobus effici nihil potuit; omnino enim ex duabus personis nihil umquam fieri potest. nihil igitur unum secundum nestorium christus est ac per hoc omnino nihil. quod enim non est unum, nec esse omnino potest; esse enim atque unum conuertitur et quodcumque unum est est. etiam ea quae ex pluribus coniunguntur ut aceruus, chorus, unum tamen sunt. sed esse christum manifeste ac ueraciter confitemur; unum igitur esse dicimus christum. quod si ita est, unam quoque christi sine dubitatione personam esse necesse est. nam si duae personae essent, unus esse non posset; duos uero esse dicere christos nihil est aliud nisi praecipitatae mentis insania. cur enim omnino duos audeat christos uocare, unum hominem alium deum? vel cur eum qui deus est christum uocat, si eum quoque qui homo est christum est appellaturus, cum nihil simile, nihil habeant ex copulatione coniunctum? cur simili nomine diuersissimis abutatur naturis, cum, si christum definire cogitur, utrisque ut ipse dicit christis non possit unam definitionis adhibere substantiam? si enim dei atque hominis diuersa substantia est unumque in utrisque christi nomen nec diuersarum coniunctio substantiarum unam creditur fecisse personam, aequiuocum nomen est christi et nulla potest definitione concludi. quibus autem umquam scripturis nomen christi geminatur? quid uero noui per aduentum saluatoris effectum est? nam catholicis et fidei ueritas et raritas miraculi constat. quam enim magnum est quamque nouum, quam quod semel nec ullo alio saeculo possit euenire, ut eius qui solus est deus natura cum humana quae ab eo erat diuersissima conueniret atque ita ex distantibus naturis una fieret copulatione persona! secundum nestorii uero sententiam quid contingit noui? "seruant," inquit, "proprias humanitas diuinitasque personas." quando enim non fuit diuinitatis propria humanitatisque persona? quando uero non erit? vel quid amplius in iesu generatione contingit quam in cuiuslibet alterius, si discretis utrisque personis discretae etiam fuere naturae? ita enim personis manentibus illic nulla naturarum potuit esse coniunctio, ut in quolibet homine, cuius cum propria persona subsistat, nulla est ei excellentissimae substantiae coniuncta diuinitas. sed fortasse iesum, id est personam hominis, idcirco christum uocet, quoniam per eam mira quaedam sit operata diuinitas. esto. deum uero ipsum christi appellatione cur uocet? cur uero non elementa quoque ipsa simili audeat appellare uocabulo per quae deus mira quaedam cotidianis motibus operatur? an quia inrationabiles substantiae non possunt habere personam qua[ ] christi uocabulum excipere possint[ ]? nonne in sanctis hominibus ac pietate conspicuis apertus diuinitatis actus agnoscitur? nihil enim intererit, cur non sanctos quoque uiros eadem appellatione dignetur, si in adsumptione humanitatis non est una ex coniunctione persona. sed dicat forsitan, "illos quoque christos uocari fateor, sed ad imaginem ueri christi." quod si nulla ex homine atque deo una persona coniuncta est, omnes ita ueros christos arbitrabimur ut hunc qui ex uirgine genitus creditur. nulla quippe in hoc adunata persona est ex dei atque hominis copulatione sicut nec in eis, qui dei spiritu de uenturo christo praedicebant, propter quod etiam ipsi quoque appellati sunt christi. iam uero sequitur, ut personis manentibus nullo modo a diuinitate humanitas credatur adsumpta. omnino enim disiuncta sunt quae aeque personis naturisque separantur, prorsus inquam disiuncta sunt nec magis inter se homines bouesque disiuncti quam diuinitas in christo humanitasque discreta est, si mansere personae. homines quippe ac boues una animalis communitate iunguntur; est enim illis secundum genus communis substantia eademque in uniuersalitatis collectione natura. deo uero atque homini quid non erit diuersa ratione disiunctum, si sub diuersitate naturae personarum quoque credatur mansisse discretio? non est igitur saluatum genus humanum, nulla in nos salus christi generatione processit, tot prophetarum scripturae populum inlusere credentem, omnis ueteris testamenti spernatur auctoritas per quam salus mundo christi generatione promittitur. non autem prouenisse manifestum est, si eadem in persona est quae in natura diuersitas. eundem quippe saluum fecit quem creditur adsumpsisse; nulla uero intellegi adsumptio potest, si manet aeque naturae personaeque discretio. igitur qui adsumi manente persona non potuit, iure non uidebitur per christi generationem potuisse saluari. non est igitur per generationem christi hominum saluata natura,--quod credi nefas est. sed quamquam permulta sint quae hunc sensum inpugnare ualeant atque perfringere, de argumentorum copia tamen haec interim libasse sufficiat. [ ] quae _codd._ [ ] possit _vallinus_. iv. you must consider that all i have said so far has been for the purpose of marking the difference between nature and person, that is, [greek: ousia] and [greek: hupostasis]. the exact terms which should be applied in each case must be left to the decision of ecclesiastical usage. for the time being let that distinction between nature and person hold which i have affirmed, viz. that nature is the specific property of any substance, and person the individual substance of a rational nature. nestorius affirmed that in christ person was twofold, being led astray by the false notion that person may be applied to every nature. for on this assumption, understanding that there were in christ two natures, he declared that there were likewise two persons. and although the definition which we have already given is enough to prove nestorius wrong, his error shall be further declared by the following argument. if the person of christ is not single, and if it is clear that there are in him two natures, to wit, divine and human (and no one will be so foolish as to fail to include either in the definition), it follows that there must apparently be two persons; for person, as has been said, is the individual substance of a rational nature. what kind of union, then, between god and man has been effected? is it as when two bodies are laid the one against the other, so that they are only joined locally, and no touch of the quality of the one reaches the other--the kind of union which the greeks term [greek: kata parathesin] "by juxtaposition"? but if humanity has been united to divinity in this way no one thing has been formed out of the two, and hence christ is nothing. the very name of christ, indeed, denotes by its singular number a unity. but if the two persons continued and such a union of natures as we have above described took place, there could be no unity formed from two things, for nothing could ever possibly be formed out of two persons. therefore christ is, according to nestorius, in no respect one, and therefore he is absolutely nothing. for what is not one cannot exist either; because being and unity are convertible terms, and whatever is one is. even things which are made up of many items, such as a heap or chorus, are nevertheless a unity. now we openly and honestly confess that christ is; therefore we say that christ is a unity. and if this is so, then without controversy the person of christ is one also. for if the persons were two he could not be one; but to say that there are two christs is nothing else than the madness of a distraught brain. could nestorius, i ask, dare to call the one man and the one god in christ two christs? or why does he call him christ who is god, if he is also going to call him christ who is man, when his combination gives the two no common factor, no coherence? why does he wrongly use the same name for two utterly different natures, when, if he is compelled to define christ, he cannot, as he himself admits, apply the substance of one definition to both his christs? for if the substance of god is different from that of man, and the one name of christ applies to both, and the combination of different substances is not believed to have formed one person, the name of christ is equivocal[ ] and cannot be comprised in one definition. but in what scriptures is the name of christ ever made double? or what new thing has been wrought by the coming of the saviour? for the truth of the faith and the unwontedness of the miracle alike remain, for catholics, unshaken. for how great and unprecedented a thing it is--unique and incapable of repetition in any other age--that the nature of him who is god alone should come together with human nature which was entirely different from god to form from different natures by conjunction a single person! but now, if we follow nestorius, what happens that is new? "humanity and divinity," quoth he, "keep their proper persons." well, when had not divinity and humanity each its proper person? and when, we answer, will this not be so? or wherein is the birth of jesus more significant than that of any other child, if, the two persons remaining distinct, the natures also were distinct? for while the persons remained so there could no more be a union of natures in christ than there could be in any other man with whose substance, be it never so perfect, no divinity was ever united because of the subsistence of his proper person. but for the sake of argument let him call jesus, i.e. the human person, christ, because through that person god wrought certain wonders. agreed. but why should he call god himself by the name of christ? why should he not go on to call the very elements by that name? for through them in their daily movements god works certain wonders. is it because irrational substances cannot possess a person enabling them to receive the name of christ? is not the operation of god seen plainly in men of holy life and notable piety? there will surely be no reason not to call the saints also by that name, if christ taking humanity on him is not one person through conjunction. but perhaps he will say, "i allow that such men are called christs, but it is because they are in the image of the true christ." but if no one person has been formed of the union of god and man, we shall consider all of them just as true christs as him who, we believe, was born of a virgin. for no person has been made one by the union of god and man either in him or in them who by the spirit of god foretold the coming christ, for which cause they too were called christs. so now it follows that so long as the persons remain, we cannot in any wise believe that humanity has been assumed by divinity. for things which differ alike in persons and natures are certainly separate, nay absolutely separate; man and oxen are not further separate than are divinity and humanity in christ, if the persons have remained. men indeed and oxen are united in one animal nature, for by genus they have a common substance and the same nature in the collection which forms the universal.[ ] but god and man will be at all points fundamentally different if we are to believe that distinction of persons continues under difference of nature. then the human race has not been saved, the birth of christ has brought us no salvation, the writings of all the prophets have but beguiled the people that believed in them, contempt is poured upon the authority of the whole old testament which promised to the world salvation by the birth of christ. it is plain that salvation has not been brought us, if there is the same difference in person that there is in nature. no doubt he saved that humanity which we believe he assumed; but no assumption can be conceived, if the separation abides alike of nature and of person. hence that human nature which could not be assumed as long as the person continued, will certainly and rightly appear incapable of salvation by the birth of christ. wherefore man's nature has not been saved by the birth of christ--an impious conclusion.[ ] but although there are many weapons strong enough to wound and demolish the nestorian view, let us for the moment be content with this small selection from the store of arguments available. [ ] cf. the discussion of _aequiuoca_=[greek: homonumos] in _isag. porph. vide_ brandt's index. [ ] vniuersalitas=[greek: to katholou]. [ ] for a similar _reductio ad absurdum_ ending in _quod nefas est_ see _tr._ iii. (_supra_, p. ) and _cons._ v. (_infra_, p. ). v. transeundum quippe est ad eutychen qui cum a ueterum orbitis esset euagatus, in contrarium cucurrit errorem asserens tantum abesse, ut in christo gemina persona credatur, ut ne naturam quidem in eo duplicem oporteat confiteri; ita quippe esse adsumptum hominem, ut ea sit adunatio facta cum deo, ut natura humana non manserit. huius error ex eodem quo nestorii fonte prolabitur. nam sicut nestorius arbitratur non posse esse naturam duplicem quin persona fieret duplex, atque ideo, cum in christo naturam duplicem confiteretur, duplicem credidit esse personam, ita quoque eutyches non putauit naturam duplicem esse sine duplicatione personae et cum non confiteretur duplicem esse personam, arbitratus est consequens, ut una uideretur esse natura. itaque nestorius recte tenens duplicem in christo esse naturam sacrilege confitetur duas esse personas; eutyches uero recte credens unam esse personam impie credit unam quoque esse naturam. qui conuictus euidentia rerum, quandoquidem manifestum est aliam naturam esse hominis aliam dei, ait duas se confiteri in christo naturas ante adunationem, unam uero post adunationem. quae sententia non aperte quod uult eloquitur. vt tamen eius dementiam perscrutemur, adunatio haec aut tempore generationis facta est aut tempore resurrectionis. sed si tempore generationis facta est, uidetur putare et ante generationem fuisse humanam carnem non a maria sumptam sed aliquo modo alio praeparatam, mariam uero uirginem appositam ex qua caro nasceretur quae ab ea sumpta non esset, illam uero carnem quae antea fuerit esse et diuisam atque a diuinitatis substantia separatam; cum ex uirgine natus est, adunatum esse deo, ut una uideretur facta esse natura. vel si haec eius sententia non est, illa esse poterit dicentis duas ante adunationem, unam post adunationem, si adunatio generatione perfecta est, ut corpus quidem a maria sumpserit, sed, antequam sumeret, diuersam deitatis humanitatisque fuisse naturam; sumptam uero unam factam atque in diuinitatis cessisse substantiam. quod si hanc adunationem non putat generatione sed resurrectione factam, rursus id duobus fieri arbitrabitur modis; aut enim genito christo et non adsumente de maria corpus aut adsumente ab eadem carnem, usque dum resurgeret quidem, duas fuisse naturas, post resurrectionem unam factam. de quibus illud disiunctum nascitur, quod interrogabimus hoc modo: natus ex maria christus aut ab ea carnem humanam traxit aut minime. si non confitetur ex ea traxisse, dicat quo homine indutus aduenerit, utrumne eo qui deciderat praeuaricatione peccati an alio? si eo de cuius semine ductus est homo, quem uestita diuinitas est? nam si ex semine abrahae atque dauid et postremo mariae non fuit caro illa qua natus est, ostendat ex cuius hominis sit carne deriuatus, quoniam post primum hominem caro omnis humana ex humana carne deducitur. sed si quem dixerit hominem a quo generatio sumpta sit saluatoris praeter mariam uirginem, et ipse errore confundetur et adscribere mendacii notam summae diuinitati inlusus ipse uidebitur, quando quod abrahae atque dauid promittitur in sanctis diuinationibus, ut ex eorum semine toti mundo salus oriatur, aliis distribuit, cum praesertim, si humana caro sumpta est, non ab alio sumi potuerit nisi unde etiam procreabatur. si igitur a maria non est sumptum corpus humanum sed a quolibet alio, per mariam tamen est procreatum quod fuerat praeuaricatione corruptum, superius dicto repellitur argumento. quod si non eo homine christus indutus est qui pro peccati poena sustinuerat mortem, illud eueniet ex nullius hominis semine talem potuisse nasci qui fuerit sine originalis poena peccati. ex nullo igitur talis sumpta est caro; unde fit ut nouiter uideatur esse formata. sed haec aut ita hominum uisa est oculis, ut humanum putaretur corpus quod reuera non esset humanum, quippe quod nulli originali subiaceret poenae, aut noua quaedam uera nec poenae peccati subiacens originalis ad tempus hominis natura formata est? si uerum hominis corpus non fuit, aperte arguitur mentita diuinitas, quae ostenderet hominibus corpus, quod cum uerum non esset, tum fallerentur ii[ ] qui uerum esse arbitrarentur. at si noua ueraque non ex homine sumpta caro formata est, quo tanta tragoedia generationis? vbi ambitus passionis? ego quippe ne in homine quidem non stulte fieri puto quod inutiliter factum est. ad quam uero utilitatem facta probabitur tanta humilitas diuinitatis, si homo qui periit generatione ac passione christi saluatus non est, quoniam negatur adsumptus? rursus igitur sicut ab eodem nestorii fonte eutychis error principium sumpsit, ita ad eundem finem relabitur, ut secundum eutychen quoque non sit saluatum genus humanum, quoniam non is qui aeger esset et saluatione curaque egeret, adsumptus est. traxisse autem hanc sententiam uidetur, si tamen huius erroris fuit ut crederet non fuisse corpus christi uere ex homine sed extra atque adeo in caelo formatum, quoniam cum eo in caelum creditur ascendisse. quod exemplum continet tale: "non ascendit in caelum, nisi qui de caelo descendit." [ ] hii _uel_ hi _codd._ v. i must now pass to eutyches who, wandering from the path of primitive doctrine, has rushed into the opposite error[ ] and asserts that so far from our having to believe in a twofold person in christ, we must not even confess a double nature; humanity, he maintains, was so assumed that the union with godhead involved the disappearance of the human nature. his error springs from the same source as that of nestorius. for just as nestorius deems there could not be a double nature unless the person were doubled, and therefore, confessing the double nature in christ, has perforce believed the person to be double, so also eutyches deemed that the nature was not double unless the person was double, and since he did not confess a double person, he thought it a necessary consequence that the nature should be regarded as single. thus nestorius, rightly holding christ's nature to be double, sacrilegiously professes the persons to be two; whereas eutyches, rightly believing the person to be single, impiously believes that the nature also is single. and being confuted by the plain evidence of facts, since it is clear that the nature of god is different from that of man, he declares his belief to be: two natures in christ before the union and only one after the union. now this statement does not express clearly what he means. however, let us scrutinize his extravagance. it is plain that this union took place either at the moment of conception or at the moment of resurrection. but if it happened at the moment of conception, eutyches seems to think that even before conception he had human flesh, not taken from mary but prepared in some other way, while the virgin mary was brought in to give birth to flesh that was not taken from her; that this flesh, which already existed, was apart and separate from the substance of divinity, but that when he was born of the virgin it was united to god, so that the nature seemed to be made one. or if this be not his opinion, since he says that there were two natures before the union and one after, supposing the union to be established by conception, an alternative view may be that christ indeed took a body from mary but that before he took it the natures of godhead and manhood were different: but the nature assumed became one with that of godhead into which it passed. but if he thinks that this union was effected not by conception but by resurrection, we shall have to assume that this too happened in one of two ways; either christ was conceived and did _not_ assume a body from mary or he _did_ assume flesh from her, and there were (until indeed he rose) two natures which became one after the resurrection. from these alternatives a dilemma arises which we will examine as follows: christ who was born of mary either did or did not take human flesh from her. if eutyches does not admit that he took it from her, then let him say what manhood he put on to come among us--that which had fallen through sinful disobedience or another? if it was the manhood of that man from whom all men descend, what manhood did divinity invest? for if that flesh in which he was born came not of the seed of abraham and of david and finally of mary, let eutyches show from what man's flesh he descended, since, after the first man, all human flesh is derived from human flesh. but if he shall name any child of man beside mary the virgin as the cause of the conception of the saviour, he will both be confounded by his own error, and, himself a dupe, will stand accused of stamping with falsehood the very godhead for thus transferring to others the promise of the sacred oracles made to abraham and david[ ] that of their seed salvation should arise for all the world, especially since if human flesh was taken it could not be taken from any other but him of whom it was begotten. if, therefore, his human body was not taken from mary but from any other, yet that was engendered through mary which had been corrupted by disobedience, eutyches is confuted by the argument already stated. but if christ did not put on that manhood which had endured death in punishment for sin, it will result that of no man's seed could ever one have been born who should be, like him, without punishment for original sin. therefore flesh like his was taken from no man, whence it would appear to have been new- formed for the purpose. but did this flesh then either so appear to human eyes that the body was deemed human which was not really human, because it was not subject to any primal penalty, or was some new true human flesh formed as a makeshift, not subject to the penalty for original sin? if it was not a truly human body, the godhead is plainly convicted of falsehood for displaying to men a body which was not real and thus deceived those who thought it real. but if flesh had been formed new and real and not taken from man, to what purpose was the tremendous tragedy of the conception? where the value of his long passion? i cannot but consider foolish even a human action that is useless. and to what useful end shall we say this great humiliation of divinity was wrought if ruined man has not been saved by the conception and the passion of christ--for they denied that he was taken into godhead? once more then, just as the error of eutyches took its rise from the same source as that of nestorius, so it hastens to the same goal inasmuch as according to eutyches also the human race has not been saved,[ ] since man who was sick and needed health and salvation was not taken into godhead. yet this is the conclusion he seems to have drawn, if he erred so deeply as to believe that christ's body was not taken really from man but from a source outside him and prepared for the purpose in heaven, for he is believed to have ascended with it up into heaven. which is the meaning of the text: none hath ascended into heaven save him who came down from heaven. [ ] the ecclesiastical _uia media_, with the relegation of opposing theories to the extremes, which meet in a common fount of falsity, owes something to aristotle and to our author. _vide infra_, p. . [ ] the use of this kind of argument by boethius allays any suspicion as to the genuineness of _tr_. iv. which might be caused by the use of allegorical interpretation therein. note also that in the _consolatio_ the framework is allegory, which is also freely applied in the details. [ ] another _reductio ad absurdum_ or _ad impietatem_, cf. _supra_, p. , note b. vi. sed satis de ea parte dictum uidetur, si corpus quod christus excepit ex maria non credatur adsumptum. si uero adsumptum est ex maria neque permansit perfecta humana diuinaque natura, id tribus effici potuit modis: aut enim diuinitas in humanitatem translata est aut humanitas in diuinitatem aut utraeque in se ita temperatae sunt atque commixtae, ut neutra substantia propriam formam teneret. sed si diuinitas in humanitatem translata est, factum est, quod credi nefas est, ut humanitate inmutabili substantia permanente diuinitas uerteretur et quod passibile atque mutabile naturaliter exsisteret, id inmutabile permaneret, quod uero inmutabile atque inpassibile naturaliter creditur, id in rem mutabilem uerteretur. hoc igitur fieri nulla ratione contingit. sed humana forsitan natura in deitatem uideatur esse conuersa. hoc uero qui fieri potest, si diuinitas in generatione christi et humanam animam suscepit et corpus? non enim omnis res in rem omnem uerti ac transmutari potest. nam cum substantiarum aliae sint corporeae, aliae incorporeae, neque corporea in incorpoream neque incorporea in eam quae corpus est mutari potest, nec uero incorporea in se inuicem formas proprias mutant; sola enim mutari transformarique in se possunt quae habent unius materiae commune subiectum, nec haec omnia, sed ea quae in se et facere et pati possunt. id uero probatur hoc modo: neque enim potest aes in lapidem permutari nec uero idem aes in herbam nec quodlibet aliud corpus in quodlibet aliud transfigurari potest, nisi et eadem sit materia rerum in se transeuntium et a se et facere et pati possint, ut, cum uinum atque aqua miscentur, utraque sunt talia quae actum sibi passionemque communicent. potest enim aquae qualitas a uini qualitate aliquid pati; potest item uini ab aquae qualitate aliquid pati. atque idcirco si multum quidem fuerit aquae, uini uero paululum, non dicuntur inmixta, sed alterum alterius qualitate corrumpitur. si quis enim uinum fundat in mare, non mixtum est mari uinum sed in mare corruptum, idcirco quoniam qualitas aquae multitudine sui corporis nihil passa est a qualitate uini, sed potius in se ipsam uini qualitatem propria multitudine commutauit. si uero sint mediocres sibique aequales uel paulo inaequales naturae quae a se facere et pati possunt, illae miscentur et mediocribus inter se qualitatibus temperantur. atque haec quidem in corporibus neque his omnibus, sed tantum quae a se, ut dictum est, et facere et pati possunt communi atque eadem materia subiecta. omne enim corpus quod in generatione et corruptione subsistit communem uidetur habere materiam, sed non omne ab omni uel in omni uel facere aliquid uel pati potest. corpora uero in incorporea nulla ratione poterunt permutari, quoniam nulla communi materia subiecta participant quae susceptis qualitatibus in alterutram permutetur. omnis enim natura incorporeae substantiae nullo materiae nititur fundamento; nullum uero corpus est cui non sit materia subiecta. quod cum ita sit cumque ne ea quidem quae communem materiam naturaliter habent in se transeant, nisi illis adsit potestas in se et a se faciendi ac patiendi, multo magis in se non permutabuntur quibus non modo communis materia non est, sed cum alia res materiae fundamento nititur ut corpus, alia omnino materiae subiecto non egeat ut incorporeum. non igitur fieri potest, ut corpus in incorporalem speciem permutetur, nec uero fieri potest, ut incorporalia in sese commixtione aliqua permutentur. quorum enim communis nulla materia est, nec in se uerti ac permutari queunt. nulla autem est incorporalibus materia rebus; non poterunt igitur in se inuicem permutari. sed anima et deus incorporeae substantiae recte creduntur; non est igitur humana anima in diuinitatem a qua adsumpta est permutata. quod si neque corpus neque anima in diuinitatem potuit uerti, nullo modo fieri potuit, ut humanitas conuerteretur in deum. multo minus uero credi potest, ut utraque in sese confunderentur, quoniam neque incorporalitas transire ad corpus potest neque rursus e conuerso corpus ad incorporalitatem, quando quidem nulla his materia subiecta communis est quae alterutris substantiarum qualitatibus permutetur. at hi ita aiunt ex duabus quidem naturis christum consistere, in duabus uero minime, hoc scilicet intendentes, quoniam quod ex duabus consistit ita unum fieri potest, ut illa ex quibus dicitur constare non maneant; ueluti cum mel aquae confunditur neutrum manet, sed alterum alterius copulatione corruptum quiddam tertium fecit, ita illud quidem quod ex melle atque aqua tertium fit constare ex utrisque dicitur, in utrisque uero negatur. non enim poterit in utrisque constare, quando utrorumque natura non permanet. ex utrisque enim constare potest, licet ea ex quibus coniungitur alterutra qualitate corrupta sint; in utrisque uero huiusmodi constare non poterit, quoniam ea quae in se transfusa sunt non manent ac non sunt utraque in quibus constare uideatur, cum ex utrisque constet in se inuicem qualitatum mutatione transfusis. catholici uero utrumque rationabiliter confitentur, nam et ex utrisque naturis christum et in utrisque consistere. sed id qua ratione dicatur, paulo posterius explicabo. nunc illud est manifestum conuictam esse eutychis sententiam eo nomine, quod cum tribus modis fieri possit, ut ex duabus naturis una subsistat, ut aut diuinitas in humanitatem translata sit aut humanitas in diuinitatem aut utraque permixta sint, nullum horum modum fieri potuisse superius dicta argumentatione declaratur. vi. i think enough has been said on the supposition that we should believe that the body which christ received was not taken from mary. but if it was taken from mary and the human and divine natures did not continue, each in its perfection, this may have happened in one of three ways. either godhead was translated into manhood, or manhood into godhead, or both were so modified and mingled that neither substance kept its proper form. but if godhead was translated into manhood, that has happened which piety forbids us to believe, viz. while the manhood continued in unchangeable substance godhead was changed, and that which was by nature passible and mutable remained immutable, while that which we believe to be by nature immutable and impassible was changed into a mutable thing. this cannot happen on any show of reasoning. but perchance the human nature may seem to be changed into godhead. yet how can this be if godhead in the conception of christ received both human soul and body? things cannot be promiscuously changed and interchanged. for since some substances are corporeal and others incorporeal, neither can a corporeal substance be changed into an incorporeal, nor can an incorporeal be changed into that which is body, nor yet incorporeals interchange their proper forms; for only those things can be interchanged and transformed which possess the common substrate of the same matter, nor can all of these so behave, but only those which can act upon and be acted on by each other. now this is proved as follows: bronze can no more be converted into stone than it can be into grass, and generally no body can be transformed into any other body unless the things which pass into each other have a common matter and can act upon and be acted on by each other, as when wine and water are mingled both are of such a nature as to allow reciprocal action and influence. for the quality of water can be influenced in some degree by that of wine, similarly the quality of wine can be influenced by that of water. and therefore if there be a great deal of water but very little wine, they are not said to be mingled, but the one is ruined by the quality of the other. for if you pour wine into the sea the wine is not mingled with the sea but is lost in the sea, simply because the quality of the water owing to its bulk has been in no way affected by the quality of the wine, but rather by its own bulk has changed the quality of the wine into water. but if the natures which are capable of reciprocal action and influence are in moderate proportion and equal or only slightly unequal, they are really mingled and tempered by the qualities which are in moderate relation to each other. this indeed takes place in bodies but not in all bodies, but only in those, as has been said, which are capable of reciprocal action and influence and have the same matter subject to their qualities. for all bodies which subsist in conditions of birth and decay seem to possess a common matter, but all bodies are not capable of reciprocal action and influence. but corporeals cannot in any way be changed into incorporeals because they do not share in any common underlying matter which can be changed into this or that thing by taking on its qualities. for the nature of no incorporeal substance rests upon a material basis; but there is no body that has not matter as a substrate. since this is so, and since not even those things which naturally have a common matter can pass over into each other unless they have the power of acting on each other and being acted upon by each other, far more will those things not suffer interchange which not only have no common matter but are different in substance, since one of them, being body, rests on a basis of matter, while the other, being incorporeal, cannot possibly stand in need of a material substrate. it is therefore impossible for a body to be changed into an incorporeal species, nor will it ever be possible for incorporeals to be changed into each other by any process of mingling. for things which have no common matter cannot be changed and converted one into another. but incorporeal things have no matter; they can never, therefore, be changed about among themselves. but the soul and god are rightly believed to be incorporeal substances; therefore the human soul has not been converted into the godhead by which it was assumed. but if neither body nor soul can be turned into godhead, it could not possibly happen that manhood should be transformed into god. but it is much less credible that the two should be confounded together since neither can incorporality pass over to body, nor again, contrariwise, can body pass over into incorporality when these have no common matter underlying them which can be converted by the qualities of one of two substances. but the eutychians say that christ consists indeed of two natures, but not in two natures, meaning, no doubt, thereby, that a thing which consists of two elements can so far become one, that the elements of which it is said to be made up disappear; just as, for example, when honey is mixed with water neither remains, but the one thing being spoilt by conjunction with the other produces a certain third thing, so that third thing which is produced by the combination of honey and water is said to consist of both, but not in both. for it can never consist in both so long as the nature of both does not continue. for it can consist of both even though each element of which it is compounded has been spoiled by the quality of the other; but it can never consist in both natures of this kind since the elements which have been transmuted into each other do not continue, and both the elements in which it seems to consist cease to be, since it consists of two things translated into each other by change of qualities. but catholics in accordance with reason confess both, for they say that christ consists both of and in two natures. how this can be affirmed i will explain a little later. one thing is now clear; the opinion of eutyches has been confuted on the ground that, although there are three ways by which the one nature can subsist of the two, viz. either the translation of divinity into humanity or of humanity into divinity or the compounding of both together, the foregoing train of reasoning proves that no one of the three ways is a possibility. vii. restat ut, quemadmodum catholica fides dicat, et in utrisque naturis christum et ex utrisque consistere doceamus. ex utrisque naturis aliquid consistere duo significat: unum quidem, cum ita dicimus aliquid ex duabus naturis iungi sicut ex melle atque aqua, id autem est ut ex quolibet modo confusis, uel si una uertatur in alteram uel si utraeque in se inuicem misceantur, nullo modo tamen utraeque permaneant; secundum hunc modum eutyches ait ex utrisque naturis christum consistere. alter uero modus est ex utrisque consistendi quod ita ex duabus iunctum est, ut illa tamen ex quibus iunctum esse dicitur maneant nec in alterutra uertantur, ut cum dicimus coronam ex auro gemmisque compositam. hic neque aurum in gemmas translatum est neque in aurum gemma conuersa, sed utraque permanent nec formam propriam derelinquunt. talia ergo ex aliquibus constantia et in his constare dicimus ex quibus consistere praedicantur. tunc enim possumus dicere coronam gemmis auroque consistere; sunt enim gemmae atque aurum in quibus corona consistat. nam in priore modo non est mel atque aqua in quibus illud quod ex utrisque iungitur constet. cum igitur utrasque manere naturas in christo fides catholica confiteatur perfectasque easdem persistere nec alteram in alteram transmutari, iure dicit et in utrisque naturis christum et ex utrisque consistere: in utrisque quidem, quia manent utraeque, ex utrisque uero, quia utrarumque adunatione manentium una persona fit christi. non autem secundum eam significationem ex utrisque naturis christum iunctum esse fides catholica tenet, secundum quam eutyches pronuntiat. nam ille talem significationem coniunctionis ex utraque natura sumit, ut non confiteatur in utrisque consistere, neque enim utrasque manere; catholicus uero eam significationem ex utrisque consistendi sumit quae illi sit proxima eamque conseruet quae in utrisque consistere confitetur. aequiuocum igitur est "ex utrisque consistere" ac potius amphibolum et gemina significatione diuersa designans: una quidem significatione non manere substantias ex quibus illud quod copulatum est dicatur esse coniunctum, alio modo significans ita ex utrisque coniunctum, ut utraque permaneant. hoc igitur expedito aequiuocationis atque ambiguitatis nodo nihil est ultra quod possit opponi, quin id sit quod firma ueraque fides catholica continet; eundem christum hominem esse perfectum, eundem deum eundemque qui homo sit perfectus atque deus unum esse deum ac dei filium, nec quaternitatem trinitati adstrui, dum homo additur supra perfectum deum, sed unam eandemque personam numerum trinitatis explere, ut cum humanitas passa sit, deus tamen passus esse dicatur, non quo ipsa deitas humanitas facta sit, sed quod a deitate fuerit adsumpta. item qui homo est, dei filius appellatur non substantia diuinitatis sed humanitatis, quae tamen diuinitati naturali unitate coniuncta est. et cum haec ita intellegentia discernantur permisceanturque, tamen unus idemque et homo sit perfectus et deus: deus quidem, quod ipse sit ex patris substantia genitus, homo uero, quod ex maria sit uirgine procreatus. itemque qui homo, deus eo quod a deo fuerit adsumptus, et qui deus, homo, quoniam uestitus homine sit. cumque in eadem persona aliud sit diuinitas quae suscepit, aliud quam suscepit humanitas, idem tamen deus atque homo est. nam si hominem intellegas, idem homo est atque deus, quoniam homo ex natura, deus adsumptione. si uero deum intellegas, idem deus est atque homo, quoniam natura deus est, homo adsumptione. fitque in eo gemina natura geminaque substantia, quoniam homo- deus unaque persona, quoniam idem homo atque deus. mediaque est haec inter duas haereses uia sicut uirtutes quoque medium tenent. omnis enim uirtus in medio rerum decore locata consistit. siquid enim uel ultra uel infra quam oportuerit fiat, a uirtute disceditur. medietatem igitur uirtus tenet. quocirca si quattuor haec neque ultra neque infra esse possunt, ut in christo aut duae naturae sint duaeque personae ut nestorius ait, aut una persona unaque natura ut eutyches ait, aut duae naturae sed una persona ut catholica fides credit, aut una natura duaeque personae,[ ] cumque duas quidem naturas duasque personas in ea quae contra nestorium dicta est responsione conuicerimus (unam uero personam unamque naturam esse non posse eutyche proponente monstrauimus neque tamen tam amens quisquam huc usque exstitit, ut unam in eo naturam crederet sed geminas esse personas), restat ut ea sit uera quam fides catholica pronuntiat geminam substantiam sed unam esse personam. quia uero paulo ante diximus eutychen confiteri duas quidem in christo ante adunationem naturas, unam uero post adunationem, cumque hunc errorem duplicem interpretaremur celare sententiam, ut haec adunatio aut generatione fieret, cum ex maria corpus hominis minime sumeretur aut ad sumptum[ ] quidem ex maria per resurrectionem fieret adunatio, de utrisque quidem partibus idonee ut arbitror disputatum est. nunc quaerendum est quomodo fieri potuerit ut duae naturae in unam substantiam miscerentur. [ ] quod nullus haereticus adhuc attigit _addunt codices quidam_. [ ] sumptum _codd._; adsumptum _preli diabolus_, ad sumptum _nos_. vii. it remains for us to show how in accordance with the affirmation of catholic belief christ consists at once in and of both natures. the statement that a thing consists of two natures bears two meanings; one, when we say that anything is a union of two natures, as e.g. honey and water, where the union is such that in the combination, however the elements be confounded, whether by one nature changing into the other, or by both mingling with each other, the two entirely disappear. this is the way in which according to eutyches christ consists of two natures. the other way in which a thing can consist of two natures is when it is so combined of two that the elements of which it is said to be combined continue without changing into each other, as when we say that a crown is composed of gold and gems. here neither is the gold converted into gems nor is the gem turned into gold, but both continue without surrendering their proper form. things then like this, composed of various elements, we say consist also in the elements of which they are composed. for in this case we can say that a crown is composed of gems and gold, for gems and gold are that in which the crown consists. for in the former mode of composition honey and water is not that in which the resulting union of both consists. since then the catholic faith confesses that both natures continue in christ and that they both remain perfect, neither being transformed into the other, it says with right that christ consists both in and of the two natures; _in_ the two because both continue, _of_ the two because the one person of christ is formed by the union of the two continuing natures. but the catholic faith does not hold the union of christ out of two natures according to that sense which eutyches puts upon it. for the interpretation of the conjunction out of two natures which he adopts forbids him to confess consistence in two or the continuance of the two either; but the catholic adopts an interpretation of the consistence out of two which comes near to that of eutyches, yet keeps the interpretation which confesses consistence in two. "to consist of two natures" is therefore an equivocal or rather a doubtful term of double meaning denoting different things; according to one of its interpretations the substances out of which the union is said to have been composed do not continue, according to another the union effected of the two is such that both natures continue. when once this knot of doubt or ambiguity has been untied, nothing further can be advanced to shake the true and solid content of the catholic faith, which is that the same christ is perfect man and god, and that he who is perfect man and god is one god and son of man, that, however, quaternity is not added to the trinity by the addition of human nature to perfect godhead, but that one and the same person completes the number of the trinity, so that, although it was the manhood which suffered, yet god can be said to have suffered, not by manhood becoming godhead but by manhood being assumed by godhead. further, he who is man is called son of god not in virtue of divine but of human substance, which latter none the less was conjoined to godhead in a unity of natures. and although thought is able to distinguish and combine the manhood and the godhead, yet one and the same is perfect man and god, god because he was begotten of the substance of the father, but man because he was engendered of the virgin mary. and further he who is man is god in that manhood was assumed by god, and he who is god is man in that god was clothed with manhood. and although in the same person the godhead which took manhood is different from the manhood which it took, yet the same is god and man. for if you think of man, the same is man and god, being man by nature, god by assumption. but if you think of god, the same is god and man, being god by nature, man by assumption. and in him nature becomes double and substance double because he is god- man, and one person since the same is man and god. this is the middle way between two heresies, just as virtues also hold a middle place.[ ] for every virtue has a place of honour midway between extremes. for if it stands beyond or below where it should it ceases to be virtue. and so virtue holds a middle place. wherefore if the following four assertions can be said to be neither beyond or below reason, viz. that in christ are either two natures and two persons as nestorius says, or one person and one nature as eutyches says, or two natures but one person as the catholic faith believes, or one nature and two persons, and inasmuch as we have refuted the doctrine of two natures and two persons in our argument against nestorius and incidentally have shown that the one person and one nature suggested by eutyches is impossible--since there has never been anyone so mad as to believe that his nature was single but his person double--it remains that the article of belief must be true which the catholic faith affirms, viz. that the nature is double, but the person one. but as i have just now remarked that eutyches confesses two natures in christ before the union, but only one after the union, and since i proved that under this error lurked two opposite opinions, one, that the union was brought about by conception although the human body was certainly not taken from mary; the other, that the body taken from mary formed part of the union by means of the resurrection, i have, it seems to me, argued the twofold aspect of the case as completely as it deserves. what we have now to inquire is how it came to pass that two natures were combined into one substance. [ ] _vide supra_, p. note. viii. verumtamen est etiam nunc et alia quaestio quae ab his inferri potest qui corpus humanum ex maria sumptum esse non credunt, sed alias fuisse sequestratum praeparatumque quod in adunatione ex mariae utero gigni ac proferri uideretur. aiunt enim: si ex homine sumptum est corpus, homo uero omnis ex prima praeuaricatione non solum peccato et morte tenebatur, uerum etiam affectibus peccatorum erat implicitus, eaque illi fuit poena peccati, ut, cum morte teneretur obstrictus, tamen esset reus etiam uoluntate peccandi, cur in christo neque peccatum fuit neque uoluntas ulla peccandi? et omnino habet animaduertendam dubitationem talis quaestio. si enim ex carne humana christi corpus adsumptum est, dubitari potest, quaenam caro haec quae adsumpta sit esse uideatur. eum quippe saluauit quem etiam adsumpsit; sin uero talem hominem adsumpsit qualis adam fuit ante peccatum, integram quidem uidetur humanam adsumpsisse naturam, sed tamen quae medicina penitus non egebat. quomodo autem fieri potest, ut talem adsumpserit hominem qualis adam fuit, cum in adam potuerit esse peccandi uoluntas atque affectio, unde factum est ut etiam praetergressis diuinis praeceptis inoboedientiae delictis teneretur adstrictus? in christo uero ne uoluntas quidem ulla creditur fuisse peccandi, cum praesertim si tale corpus hominis adsumpsit quale adae ante peccatum fuit, non debuerit esse mortalis, quoniam adam, si non peccasset, mortem nulla ratione sensisset. cum igitur christus non peccauerit, quaerendum est cur senserit mortem, si adae corpus ante quam peccaret adsumpsit. quod si talem statum suscepit hominis qualis adae post peccatum fuit, uidetur etiam christo non defuisse necessitas, ut et delictis subiceretur et passionibus confunderetur obductisque iudicii regulis bonum a malo non sincera integritate discerneret, quoniam has omnes poenas adam delicti praeuaricatione suscepit. contra quos respondendum est tres intellegi hominum posse status: unum quidem adae ante delictum in quo, tametsi ab eo mors aberat nec adhuc ullo se delicto polluerat, poterat tamen in eo uoluntas esse peccandi: alter in quo mutari potuisset, si firmiter in dei praeceptis manere uoluisset, tunc enim id addendum foret ut non modo non peccaret aut peccare uellet sed ne posset quidem aut peccare aut uelle delinquere. tertius status est post delictum in quo mors illum necessario subsecuta est et peccatum ipsum uoluntasque peccati. quorum summitatum atque contrariorum haec loca sunt: is status qui praemium esset, si in praeceptis dei adam manere uoluisset et is qui poenae fuit, quoniam manere noluit; in illo enim nec mors esset nec peccatum nec uoluntas ulla peccati, in hoc uero et mors et peccatum et delinquendi omnis affectio omniaque in perniciem prona nec quicquam in se opis habentia, ut post lapsum posset adsurgere. ille uero medius status in quo praesentia quidem mortis uel peccati aberat, potestas uero utriusque constabat, inter utrumque statum est conlocatus. ex his igitur tribus statibus christus corporeae naturae singulas quodam modo indidit causas; nam quod mortale corpus adsumpsit ut mortem a genere humano fugaret, in eo statu ponendum est quod post adae praeuaricationem poenaliter inflictum est. quod uero non fuit in eo uoluntas ulla peccati, ex eo sumptum est statu qui esse potuisset, nisi uoluntatem insidiantis fraudibus applicasset. restat igitur tertius status id est medius, ille scilicet qui eo tempore fuit, cum nec mors aderat et adesse poterat delinquendi uoluntas. in hoc igitur adam talis fuit ut manducaret ac biberet, ut accepta digereret, ut laberetur in somnum et alia quae ei non defuerunt humana quidem sed concessa et quae nullam poenam mortis inferrent. quae omnia habuisse christum dubium non est; nam et manducauit et bibit et humani corporis officio functus est. neque enim tanta indigentia in adam fuisse credenda est ut nisi manducasset uiuere non potuisset, sed, si ex omni quidem ligno escam sumeret, semper uiuere potuisset hisque non mori; idcirco paradisi fructibus indigentiam explebat. quam indigentiam fuisse in christo nullus ignorat, sed potestate non necessitate; et ipsa indigentia ante resurrectionem in eo fuit, post resurrectionem uero talis exstitit ut ita illud corpus inmutaretur humanum, sicut adae praeter praeuaricationis uinculum mutari potuisset. quodque nos ipse dominus iesus christus uotis docuit optare, ut fiat uoluntas eius sicut in caelo et in terra et ut adueniat eius regnum et nos liberet a malo. haec enim omnia illa beatissima humani generis fideliter credentium inmutatio deprecatur. haec sunt quae ad te de fidei meae credulitate scripsi. qua in re si quid perperam dictum est, non ita sum amator mei, ut ea quae semel effuderim meliori sententiae anteferre contendam. si enim nihil est ex nobis boni, nihil est quod in nostris sententiis amare debeamus. quod si ex illo cuncta sunt bona qui solus est bonus, illud potius bonum esse credendum est quod illa incommutabilis bonitas atque omnium bonorum causa perscribit. viii. nevertheless there remains yet another question which can be advanced by those who do not believe that the human body was taken from mary, but that the body was in some other way set apart and prepared, which in the moment of union appeared to be conceived and born of mary's womb. for they say: if the body was taken from man while every man was, from the time of the first disobedience, not only enslaved by sin and death but also involved in sinful desires, and if his punishment for sin was that, although he was held in chains of death, yet at the same time he should be guilty because of the will to sin, why was there in christ neither sin nor any will to sin? and certainly such a question is attended by a difficulty which deserves attention. for if the body of christ was assumed from human flesh, it is open to doubt of what kind we must consider that flesh to be which was assumed. in truth, the manhood which he assumed he likewise saved; but if he assumed such manhood as adam had before sin, he appears to have assumed a human nature complete indeed, but one which was in no need of healing. but how can it be that he assumed such manhood as adam had when there could be in adam both the will and the desire to sin, whence it came to pass that even after the divine commands had been broken, he was still held captive to sins of disobedience? but we believe that in christ there was never any will to sin, because especially if he assumed such a human body as adam had before his sin, he could not be mortal, since adam, had he not sinned, would in no wise have suffered death. since, then, christ never sinned, it must be asked why he suffered death if he assumed the body of adam before sin. but if he accepted human conditions such as adam's were after sin, it seems that christ could not avoid being subject to sin, perplexed by passions, and, since the canons of judgment were obscured, prevented from distinguishing with unclouded reason between good and evil, since adam by his disobedience incurred all these penalties of crime. to whom we must reply[ ] that there are three states of man to envisage: one, that of adam before his sin, in which, though free from death and still unstained by any sin, he could yet have within him the will to sin; the second, that in which he might have suffered change had he chosen to abide steadfastly in the commands of god, for then it could have been further granted him not only not to sin or wish to sin, but to be incapable of sinning or of the will to transgress. the third state is the state after sin, into which man needs must be pursued by death and sin and the sinful will. now the points of extreme divergence between these states are the following: one state would have been for adam a reward if he had chosen to abide in god's laws; the other was his punishment because he would not abide in them; for in the former state there would have been no death nor sin nor sinful will, in the latter there was both death and sin and every desire to transgress, and a general tendency to ruin and a condition helpless to render possible a rise after the fall. but that middle state from which actual death or sin was absent, but the power for both remained, is situate between the other two. each one, then, of these three states somehow supplied to christ a cause for his corporeal nature; thus his assumption of a mortal body in order to drive death far from the human race belongs properly to that state which was laid on man by way of punishment after adam's sin, whereas the fact that there was in christ no sinful will is borrowed from that state which might have been if adam had not surrendered his will to the frauds of the tempter. there remains, then, the third or middle state, to wit, that which was before death had come and while the will to sin might yet be present. in this state, therefore, adam was able to eat and drink, digest the food he took, fall asleep, and perform all the other functions which always belonged to him as man, though they were allowed and brought with them no pain of death. there is no doubt that christ was in all points thus conditioned; for he ate and drank and discharged the bodily function of the human body. for we must not think that adam was at the first subject to such need that unless he ate he could not have lived, but rather that, if he had taken food from every tree, he could have lived for ever, and by that food have escaped death; and so by the fruits of the garden he satisfied a need.[ ] and all know that in christ the same need dwelt, but lying in his own power and not laid upon him. and this need was in him before the resurrection, but after the resurrection he became such that his human body was changed as adam's might have been but for the bands of disobedience. which state, moreover, our lord jesus christ himself taught us to desire in our prayers, asking that his will be done as in heaven so on earth, and that his kingdom come, and that he may deliver us from evil. for all these things are sought in prayer by those members of the human family who rightly believe and who are destined to undergo that most blessed change of all.[ ] so much have i written to you concerning what i believe should be believed. in which matter if i have said aught amiss, i am not so well pleased with myself as to try to press my effusions in the face of wiser judgment. for if there is no good thing in us there is nothing we should fancy in our opinions. but if all things are good as coming from him who alone is good, that rather must be thought good which the unchangeable good and cause of all good indites. [ ] this _respondendum_ has the true thomist ring. [ ] adam did not need to eat in order to live, but if he had not eaten he would have suffered hunger, etc. [ ] the whole of this passage might be set in _tr._ iv. without altering the tone. anicii manlii severini boethii v.c. et inl. excons. ord. ex mag. off. patricii philosophiae consolationis liber i. i. carmina qui quondam studio florente peregi, flebilis heu maestos cogor inire modos. ecce mihi lacerae dictant scribenda camenae et ueris elegi fletibus ora rigant. has saltem nullus potuit peruincere terror, ne nostrum comites prosequerentur iter. gloria felicis olim uiridisque iuuentae solantur maesti nunc mea fata senis. venit enim properata malis inopina senectus et dolor aetatem iussit inesse suam. intempestiui funduntur uertice cani et tremit effeto corpore laxa cutis. mors hominum felix quae se nec dulcibus annis inserit et maestis saepe uocata uenit. eheu quam surda miseros auertitur aure et flentes oculos claudere saeua negat. dum leuibus male fida bonis fortuna faueret, paene caput tristis merserat hora meum. nunc quia fallacem mutauit nubila uultum, protrahit ingratas impia uita moras. quid me felicem totiens iactastis amici? qui cecidit, stabili non erat ille gradu. the first book of boethius containing his complaint and miseries i. i that with youthful heat did verses write, must now my woes in doleful tunes indite. my work is framed by muses torn and rude, and my sad cheeks are with true tears bedewed: for these alone no terror could affray from being partners of my weary way. the art that was my young life's joy and glory becomes my solace now i'm old and sorry; sorrow has filched my youth from me, the thief! my days are numbered not by time but grief.[ ] untimely hoary hairs cover my head, and my loose skin quakes on my flesh half dead. o happy death, that spareth sweetest years, and comes in sorrow often called with tears. alas, how deaf is he to wretch's cries; and loath he is to close up weeping eyes; while trustless chance me with vain favours crowned, that saddest hour my life had almost drowned: now she hath clouded her deceitful face, my spiteful days prolong their weary race. my friends, why did you count me fortunate? he that is fallen, ne'er stood in settled state. [ ] literally "for old age, unlooked for, sped by evils, has come, and grief has bidden her years lie on me." i. haec dum mecum tacitus ipse reputarem querimoniamque lacrimabilem stili officio signarem, adstitisse mihi supra uerticem uisa est mulier reuerendi admodum uultus, oculis ardentibus et ultra communem hominum ualentiam perspicacibus colore uiuido atque inexhausti uigoris, quamuis ita aeui plena foret ut nullo modo nostrae crederetur aetatis, statura discretionis ambiguae. nam nunc quidem ad communem sese hominum mensuram cohibebat, nunc uero pulsare caelum summi uerticis cacumine uidebatur; quae cum altius caput extulisset, ipsum etiam caelum penetrabat respicientiumque hominum frustrabatur intuitum. vestes erant tenuissimis filis subtili artificio, indissolubili materia perfectae quas, uti post eadem prodente cognoui, suis manibus ipsa texuerat. quarum speciem, ueluti fumosas imagines solet, caligo quaedam neglectae uetustatis obduxerat. harum in extrema margine [greek: pi] graecum, in supremo uero [greek: theta], legebatur intextum. atque inter utrasque litteras in scalarum modum gradus quidam insigniti uidebantur quibus ab inferiore ad superius elementum esset ascensus. eandem tamen uestem uiolentorum quorundam sciderant manus et particulas quas quisque potuit abstulerant. et dextera quidem eius libellos, sceptrum uero sinistra gestabat. quae ubi poeticas musas uidit nostro adsistentes toro fletibusque meis uerba dictantes, commota paulisper ac toruis inflammata luminibus: "quis," inquit, "has scenicas meretriculas ad hunc aegrum permisit accedere quae dolores eius non modo nullis remediis fouerent, uerum dulcibus insuper alerent uenenis? hae sunt enim quae infructuosis affectuum spinis uberem fructibus rationis segetem necant hominumque mentes assuefaciunt morbo, non liberant. at si quem profanum, uti uulgo solitum uobis, blanditiae uestrae detraherent, minus moleste ferendum putarem; nihil quippe in eo nostrae operae laederentur. hunc uero eleaticis atque academicis studiis innutritum? sed abite potius sirenes usque in exitium dulces meisque eum musis curandum sanandumque relinquite." his ille chorus increpitus deiecit humi maestior uultum confessusque rubore uerecundiam limen tristis excessit. at ego cuius acies lacrimis mersa caligaret nec dinoscere possem, quaenam haec esset mulier tam imperiosae auctoritatis, obstipui uisuque in terram defixo quidnam deinceps esset actura, exspectare tacitus coepi. tum illa propius accedens in extrema lectuli mei parte consedit meumque intuens uultum luctu grauem atque in humum maerore deiectum his uersibus de nostrae mentis perturbatione conquesta est. i. while i ruminated these things with myself, and determined to set forth my woful complaint in writing, methought i saw a woman stand above my head, having a grave countenance, glistening clear eye, and of quicker sight than commonly nature doth afford; her colour fresh and bespeaking unabated vigour, and yet discovering so many years, that she could not at all be thought to belong to our times; her stature uncertain and doubtful, for sometime she exceeded not the common height of men, and sometime she seemed to touch the heavens with her head, and if she lifted it up to the highest, she pierced the very heavens, so that she could not be seen by the beholders; her garments were made of most fine threads with cunning workmanship into an ever-during stuff, which (as i knew afterward by her own report) she had woven with her own hands. a certain duskishness caused by negligence and time had darkened their colour, as it is wont to happen when pictures stand in a smoky room. in the lower part of them was placed the greek letter [greek: pi], and in the upper [greek: theta],[ ] and betwixt the two letters, in the manner of stairs, there were certain degrees made, by which there was a passage from the lower to the higher letter: this her garment had been cut by the violence of some, who had taken away such pieces as they could get. in her right hand she had certain books, and in her left hand she held a sceptre. this woman, seeing the poetical muses standing about my bed, and suggesting words to my tears, being moved for a little space, and inflamed with angry looks: "who," saith she, "hath permitted these tragical harlots to have access to this sick man, which will not only not comfort his grief with wholesome remedies, but also nourish them with sugared poison? for these be they which with the fruitless thorns of affections do kill the fruitful crop of reason, and do accustom men's minds to sickness, instead of curing them. but if your flattery did deprive us of some profane fellow,[ ] as commonly it happeneth, i should think that it were not so grievously to be taken, for in him our labours should receive no harm. but now have you laid hold of him who hath been brought up in eleatical and academical studies?[ ] rather get you gone, you sirens pleasant even to destruction, and leave him to my muses to be cured and healed." that company being thus checked, overcome with grief, casting their eyes upon the ground, and betraying their bashfulness with blushing, went sadly away. but i, whose sight was dimmed with tears, so that i could not discern what this woman might be, so imperious, and of such authority, was astonished, and, fixing my countenance upon the earth, began to expect with silence what she would do afterward. then she coming nigher, sat down at my bed's feet, and beholding my countenance sad with mourning, and cast upon the ground with grief, complained of the perturbation of my mind with these verses. [ ] cf. "est enim philosophia genus, species uero eius duae, una quae [greek: theoraetikae] dicitur, altera quae [greek: praktikae], id est speculatiua et actiua." boeth. _in porph. dial._ i. [ ] this scorn of the _profanum vulgus_ appears again and again in the theological tractates, e.g. _tr._ iii. (_supra_, p. ), _tr._ v. (_supra_, p. ). [ ] zeno of elea invented dialectic: plato was the first to lecture on philosophy in the gymnasium of the academia. ii. heu quam praecipiti mersa profundo mens hebet et propria luce relicta tendit in externas ire tenebras, terrenis quotiens flatibus aucta crescit in inmensum noxia cura. hic quondam caelo liber aperto suetus in aetherios ire meatus cernebat rosei lumina solis, visebat gelidae sidera lunae et quaecumque uagos stella recursus exercet uarios flexa per orbes, comprensam numeris uictor habebat. quin etiam causas unde sonora flamina sollicitent aequora ponti, quis uoluat stabilem spiritus orbem vel cur hesperias sidus in undas casurum rutilo surgat ab ortu, quid ueris placidas temperet horas, vt terram roseis floribus ornet, quis dedit ut pleno fertilis anno autumnus grauidis influat uuis rimari solitus atque latentis naturae uarias reddere causas, nunc iacet effeto lumine mentis et pressus grauibus colla catenis decliuemque gerens pondere uultum cogitur, heu, stolidam cernere terram. ii. alas, how thy dull mind is headlong cast in depths of woe, where, all her light once lost, she doth to walk in utter darkness haste, while cares grow great with earthly tempests tost. he that through the opened heavens did freely run, and used to travel the celestial ways, marking the rosy splendour of the sun, and noting cynthia's cold and watery rays; he that did bravely comprehend in verse the different spheres and wandering course of stars, he that was wont the causes to rehearse why sounding winds do with the seas make wars, what spirit moves the world's well-settled frame, and why the sun, whom forth the east doth bring, in western waves doth hide his falling flame, searching what power tempers the pleasing spring which makes the earth her rosy flowers to bear, whose gift it is that autumn's fruitful season should with full grapes flow in a plenteous year, telling of secret nature every reason, now having lost the beauty of his mind lies with his neck compassed in ponderous chains; his countenance with heavy weight declined, him to behold the sullen earth constrains. ii. "sed medicinae," inquit, "tempus est quam querelae." tum uero totis in me intenta luminibus: "tune ille es," ait, "qui nostro quondam lacte nutritus nostris educatus alimentis in uirilis animi robur euaseras? atqui talia contuleramus arma quae nisi prior abiecisses, inuicta te firmitate tuerentur. agnoscisne me? quid taces? pudore an stupore siluisti? mallem pudore, sed te, ut uideo, stupor oppressit." cumque me non modo tacitum sed elinguem prorsus mutumque uidisset, admouit pectori meo leniter manum et: "nihil," inquit, "pericli est; lethargum patitur communem inlusarum mentium morbum. sui paulisper oblitus est; recordabitur facile, si quidem nos ante cognouerit. quod ut possit, paulisper lumina eius mortalium rerum nube caligantia tergamus." haec dixit oculosque meos fletibus undantes contracta in rugam ueste siccauit. ii. "but it is rather time," saith she, "to apply remedies, than to make complaints." and then looking wistfully upon me: "art thou he," saith she, "which, being long since nursed with our milk, and brought up with our nourishments, wert come to man's estate? but we had given thee such weapons as, if thou hadst not cast them away, would have made thee invincible. dost thou not know me? why dost thou not speak? is it shamefastness or insensibleness that makes thee silent? i had rather it were shamefastness, but i perceive thou art become insensible." and seeing me not only silent but altogether mute and dumb, fair and easily she laid her hand upon my breast saying: "there is no danger; he is in a lethargy, the common disease of deceived minds; he hath a little forgot himself, but he will easily remember himself again, if he be brought to know us first. to which end, let us a little wipe his eyes, dimmed with the cloud of mortal things." and having thus said, with a corner of her garment she dried my eyes which were wet with tears. iii. tunc me discussa liquerunt nocte tenebrae luminibusque prior rediit uigor, vt, cum praecipiti glomerantur sidera coro nimbosisque polus stetit imbribus, sol latet ac nondum caelo uenientibus astris, desuper in terram nox funditur; hanc si threicio boreas emissus ab antro verberet et clausam reseret diem, emicat ac subito uibratus lumine phoebus mirantes oculos radiis ferit. iii. then fled the night and darkness did me leave. mine eyes their wonted strength receive, as when swift corus spreads the stars with clouds and the clear sky a veil of tempest shrouds the sun doth lurk, the earth receiveth night. lacking the boon of starry light; but if fierce boreas, sent from thrace, make way for the restoring of the day, phoebus with fresh and sudden beams doth rise, striking with light our wondering eyes. iii. haud aliter tristitiae nebulis dissolutis hausi caelum et ad cognoscendam medicantis faciem mentem recepi. itaque ubi in eam deduxi oculos intuitumque defixi, respicio nutricem meam cuius ab adulescentia laribus obuersatus fueram philosophiam. "et quid," inquam, "tu in has exilii nostri solitudines o omnium magistra uirtutum supero cardine delapsa uenisti? an ut tu quoque mecum rea falsis criminationibus agiteris? "an," inquit illa, "te alumne desererem nec sarcinam quam mei nominis inuidia sustulisti, communicato tecum labore partirer? atqui philosophiae fas non erat incomitatum relinquere iter innocentis; meam scilicet criminationem uererer et quasi nouum aliquid acciderit, perhorrescerem? nunc enim primum censes apud inprobos mores lacessitam periculis esse sapientiam? nonne apud ueteres quoque ante nostri platonis aetatem magnum saepe certamen cum stultitiae temeritate certauimus eodemque superstite praeceptor eius socrates iniustae uictoriam mortis me adstante promeruit? cuius hereditatem cum deinceps epicureum uulgus ac stoicum ceterique pro sua quisque parte raptum ire molirentur meque reclamantem renitentemque uelut in partem praedae traherent, uestem quam meis texueram manibus, disciderunt abreptisque ab ea panniculis totam me sibi cessisse credentes abiere. in quibus quoniam quaedam nostri habitus uestigia uidebantur, meos esse familiares inprudentia rata nonnullos eorum profanae multitudinis errore peruertit. quod si nec anaxagorae fugam nec socratis uenenum nec zenonis tormenta quoniam sunt peregrina nouisti, at canios, at senecas, at soranos quorum nec peruetusta nec incelebris memoria est, scire potuisti. quos nihil aliud in cladem detraxit nisi quod nostris moribus instituti studiis improborum dissimillimi uidebantur. itaque nihil est quod admirere, si in hoc uitae salo circumflantibus agitemur procellis, quibus hoc maxime propositum est pessimis displicere. quorum quidem tametsi est numerosus exercitus, spernendus tamen est, quoniam nullo duce regitur, sed errore tantum temere ac passim lymphante raptatur. qui si quando contra nos aciem struens ualentior incubuerit, nostra quidem dux copias suas in arcem contrahit, illi uero circa diripiendas inutiles sarcinulas occupantur. at nos desuper inridemus uilissima rerum quaeque rapientes securi totius furiosi tumultus eoque uallo muniti quo grassanti stultitiae adspirare fas non sit. iii. in like manner, the mists of sadness dissolved, i came to myself and recovered my judgment, so that i knew my physician's face; wherefore casting mine eyes upon her somewhat stedfastly, i beheld my nurse philosophy, in whose house i had remained from my youth, and i said: "o mistress of all virtues, for what cause art thou come from heaven into this our solitary banishment? art thou come to bear me company in being falsely accused?" "should i," saith she, "forsake thee, my disciple, and not divide the burden, which thou bearest through hatred of my name, by partaking of thy labour? but philosophy never thought it lawful to forsake the innocent in his trouble. should i fear any accusations, as though this were any new matter? for dost thou think that this is the first time that wisdom hath been exposed to danger by wicked men? have we not in ancient times before our plato's age had oftentimes great conflicts with the rashness of folly? and while he lived, had not his master socrates the victory of an unjust death in my presence, whose inheritance, when afterward the mob of epicures, stoics, and others (every one for his own sect) endeavoured to usurp, and as it were in part of their prey, sought to draw me to them, exclaiming and striving against them; they tore the garment which i had woven with my own hands, and having gotten some little pieces of it, thinking me to be wholly in their possession, departed. some of whom, because certain signs of my apparel appeared upon them, were rashly supposed to be my familiar friends, and condemned accordingly through the error of the profane multitude. but if thou hast not heard of the flight of anaxagoras, the poison of socrates, nor the torments of zeno, because they are foreign examples; yet thou mayst have heard of canius, of seneca, of soranus,[ ] whose memory is both fresh and famous, whom nothing else brought to their overthrow but that they had been instructed in our school and were altogether disliking to the humours of wicked men; wherefore thou hast no cause to marvel, if in the sea of this life we be tossed with boisterous storms, whose chiefest purpose is to displease the wicked; of which though there be an huge army, yet it is to be despised, because it is not governed by any captain, but is carried up and down by fantastical error without any order at all. and if at any time they assail us with great force, our captain retireth her band into a castle,[ ] leaving them occupied in sacking unprofitable baggage. and from above we laugh them to scorn for seeking so greedily after most vile things, being safe from all their furious assault, and fortified with that defence which aspiring folly cannot prevail against. [ ] on julius kanius or canius the stoic cf. seneca, _de tranq._ xiv. - ; on soranus cf. tac. _annal._ i. . [ ] cf. _arce religionis nostrae, tr._ iv. (_supra_, p. ). iv. quisquis composito serenus aeuo fatum sub pedibus egit[ ] superbum fortunamque tuens utramque rectus inuictum potuit tenere uultum, non illum rabies minaeque ponti versum funditus exagitantis aestum nec ruptis quotiens uagus caminis torquet fumificos vesaeuus ignes aut celsas soliti ferire turres ardentis uia fulminis mouebit. quid tantum miseri saeuos tyrannos mirantur sine uiribus furentes? nec speres aliquid nec extimescas, exarmaueris impotentis iram. at quisquis trepidus pauet uel optat, quod non sit stabilis suique iuris, abiecit clipeum locoque motus nectit qua ualeat trahi catenam. [ ] _fortasse_ iecit; cf. verg. _georg._ ii. _sq._ iv. who mildly can his age dispose, and at his feet proud destiny throws: who stoutly doth each chance behold, keeping his countenance uncontrolled: not him the ocean's rage and threat, stirring the waves with angry heat, nor hot vesuvius when he casts from broken hills enflaméd blasts, nor fiery thunder can dismay, which takes the tops of towers away. why do fierce tyrants us affright, whose rage is far beyond their might? for nothing hope, nor fear thou harm, so their weak wrath thou shalt disarm. but he whom hope or terror takes, being a slave, his shield forsakes, and leaves his place, and doth provide a chain wherewith his hands are tied. iv. "sentisne," inquit, "haec atque animo inlabuntur tuo, an [greek: onos luras]? quid fles, quid lacrimis manas? [greek: exauda, mae keuthe nooi.] si operam medicantis exspectas, oportet uulnus detegas." tum ego collecto in uires animo: "anne adhuc eget admonitione nec per se satis eminet fortunae in nos saeuientis asperitas? nihilne te ipsa loci facies mouet? haecine est bibliotheca, quam certissimam tibi sedem nostris in laribus ipsa delegeras? in qua mecum saepe residens de humanarum diuinarumque rerum scientia disserebas? talis habitus talisque uultus erat, *cum tecum naturae secreta rimarer, cum mihi siderum uias radio describeres, cum mores nostros totiusque uitae rationem ad caelestis ordinis exempla formares? haecine praemia referimus tibi obsequentes? atqui tu hanc sententiam platonis ore sanxisti: beatas fore res publicas, si eas uel studiosi sapientiae regerent uel earum rectores studere sapientiae contigisset. tu eiusdem uiri ore hanc sapientibus capessendae rei publicae necessariam causam esse monuisti, ne improbis flagitiosisque ciuibus urbium relicta gubernacula pestem bonis ac perniciem ferrent. hanc igitur auctoritatem secutus quod a te inter secreta otia didiceram transferre in actum publicae administrationis optaui. tu mihi et qui te sapientium mentibus inseruit deus conscii nullum me ad magistratum nisi commune bonorum omnium studium detulisse. inde cum inprobis graues inexorabilesque discordiae et quod conscientiae libertas habet, pro tuendo iure spreta potentiorum semper offensio. quotiens ego conigastum in inbecilli cuiusque fortunas impetum facientem obuius excepi, quotiens triguillam regiae praepositum domus ab incepta, perpetrata iam prorsus iniuria deieci, quotiens miseros quos infinitis calumniis inpunita barbarorum semper auaritia uexabat, obiecta periculis auctoritate protexi! numquam me ab iure ad iniuriam quisquam detraxit. prouincialium fortunas tum priuatis rapinis tum publicis uectigalibus pessumdari non aliter quam qui patiebantur indolui. cum acerbae famis tempore grauis atque inexplicabilis indicta coemptio profligatura inopia campaniam prouinciam uideretur, certamen aduersum praefectum praetorii communis commodi ratione suscepi, rege cognoscente contendi et ne coemptio exigeretur, euici. paulinum consularem uirum cuius opes palatinae canes iam spe atque ambitione deuorassent, ab ipsis hiantium faucibus traxi. ne albinum consularem uirum praeiudicatae accusationis poena corriperet, odiis me cypriani delatoris opposui. satisne in me magnas uideor exaceruasse discordias? sed esse apud ceteros tutior debui qui mihi amore iustitiae nihil apud aulicos quo magis essem tutior reseruaui. quibus autem deferentibus perculsi sumus? quorum basilius olim regio ministerio depulsus in delationem nostri nominis alieni aeris necessitate compulsus est. opilionem uero atque gaudentium cum ob innumeras multiplicesque fraudes ire in exilium regia censura decreuisset cumque illi parere nolentes sacrarum sese aedium defensione tuerentur compertumque id regi foret, edixit: uti ni intra praescriptum diem rauenna urbe decederent, notas insigniti frontibus pellerentur. quid huic seueritati posse astrui uidetur? atqui in eo die deferentibus eisdem nominis nostri delatio suscepta est. quid igitur? nostraene artes ita meruerunt? an illos accusatores iustos fecit praemissa damnatio? itane nihil fortunam puduit si minus accusatae innocentiae, at accusantium uilitatis?[ ] at cuius criminis arguimur summam quaeris? senatum dicimur saluum esse uoluisse. modum desideras? delatorem ne documenta deferret quibus senatum maiestatis reum faceret impedisse criminamur. quid igitur o magistra censes? infitiabimur crimen, ne tibi pudor simus? at uolui nec umquam uelle desistam. fatebimur? sed impediendi delatoris opera cessauit. an optasse illius ordinis salutem nefas uocabo? ille quidem suis de me decretis, uti hoc nefas esset, effecerat. sed sibi semper mentiens inprudentia rerum merita non potest inmutare nec mihi socratico decreto fas esse arbitror uel occuluisse ueritatem uel concessisse mendacium. verum id quoquo modo sit, tuo sapientiumque iudicio aestimandum relinquo. cuius rei seriem atque ueritatem, ne latere posteros queat, stilo etiam memoriaeque mandaui. nam de compositis falso litteris quibus libertatem arguor sperasse romanam quid attinet dicere? quarum fraus aperta patuisset, si nobis ipsorum confessione delatorum, quod in omnibus negotiis maximas uires habet, uti licuisset. nam quae sperari reliqua libertas potest? atque utinam posset ulla! respondissem canii uerbo, qui cum a gaio caesare germanici filio conscius contra se factae coniurationis fuisse diceretur: 'si ego,' inquit, 'scissem, tu nescisses.' qua in re non ita sensus nostros maeror hebetauit ut impios scelerata contra uirtutem querar molitos, sed quae sperauerint effecisse uehementer admiror. nam deteriora uelle nostri fuerit fortasse defectus, posse contra innocentiam, quae sceleratus quisque conceperit inspectante deo, monstri simile est. vnde haud iniuria tuorum quidam familiarium quaesiuit: 'si quidem deus,' inquit, 'est, unde mala? bona uero unde, si non est?' sed fas fuerit nefarios homines qui bonorum omnium totiusque senatus sanguinem petunt, nos etiam quos propugnare bonis senatuique uiderant, perditum ire uoluisse. sed num idem de patribus quoque merebamur? meministi, ut opinor, quoniam me dicturum quid facturumue praesens semper ipsa dirigebas, meministi, inquam, veronae cum rex auidus exitii communis maiestatis crimen in albinum delatae ad cunctum senatus ordinem transferre moliretur, uniuersi innocentiam senatus quanta mei periculi securitate defenderim. scis me haec et uera proferre et in nulla umquam mei laude iactasse. minuit enim quodam modo se probantis conscientiae secretum, quotiens ostentando quis factum recipit famae pretium. sed innocentiam nostram quis exceperit euentus uides; pro uerae uirtutis praemiis falsi sceleris poenas subimus. et cuius umquam facinoris manifesta confessio ita iudices habuit in seueritate concordes ut non aliquos uel ipse ingenii error humani uel fortunae condicio cunctis mortalibus incerta submitteret? si inflammare sacras aedes uoluisse, si sacerdotes impio iugulare gladio, si bonis omnibus necem struxisse diceremur, praesentem tamen sententia, confessum tamen conuictumue punisset. nunc quingentis fere passuum milibus procul muti atque indefensi ob studium propensius in senatum morti proscriptionique damnamur. o meritos de simili crimine neminem posse conuinci! cuius dignitatem reatus ipsi etiam qui detulere uiderunt, quam uti alicuius sceleris admixtione fuscarent, ob ambitum dignitatis sacrilegio me conscientiam polluisse mentiti sunt. atqui et tu insita nobis omnem rerum mortalium cupidinem de nostri animi sede pellebas et sub tuis oculis sacrilegio locum esse fas non erat. instillabas enim auribus cogitationibusque cotidie meis pythagoricum illud [greek: hepou theoi].[ ] nec conueniebat uilissimorum me spirituum praesidia captare quem tu in hanc excellentiam componebas ut consimilem deo faceres. praeterea penetral innocens domus, honestissimorum coetus amicorum, socer etiam sanctus et aeque ac tu ipsa[ ] reuerendus ab omni nos huius criminis suspitione defendunt. sed, o nefas, illi uero de te tanti criminis fidem capiunt atque hoc ipso uidebimur affines fuisse maleficio, quod tuis inbuti disciplinis, tuis instituti moribus sumus. ita non est satis nihil mihi tuam profuisse reuerentiam, nisi ultro tu mea potius offensione lacereris. at uero hic etiam nostris malis cumulus accedit, quod existimatio plurimorum non rerum merita sed fortunae spectat euentum eaque tantum iudicat esse prouisa quae felicitas commendauerit. quo fit ut existimatio bona prima omnium deserat infelices. qui nunc populi rumores, quam dissonae multiplicesque sententiae, piget reminisci. hoc tantum dixerim ultimam esse aduersae fortunae sarcinam, quod dum miseris aliquod crimen affingitur, quae perferunt meruisse creduntur. et ego quidem bonis omnibus pulsus, dignitatibus exutus, existimatione foedatus ob beneficium supplicium tuli. videre autem uideor nefarias sceleratorum officinas gaudio laetitiaque fluitantes, perditissimum quemque nouis delationum fraudibus imminentem, iacere bonos nostri discriminis terrore prostratos, flagitiosum quemque ad audendum quidem facinus impunitate, ad efficiendum uero praemiis incitari, insontes autem non modo securitate, uerum ipsa etiam defensione priuatos. itaque libet exclamare: [ ] uilitatis _glareanus_; uilitas _codd._ [ ] [greek: theon] _codd._ [ ] ipsa _sitzmannus_; ipso _codd._ iv. "understandest thou these things," saith she, "and do they make impression in thy mind? art thou 'like the ass, deaf to the lyre'? why weepest thou? why sheddest thou so many tears? speak out; hide not thy thoughts.[ ] if thou expectest to be cured, thou must discover thy wound.[ ]" then i, collecting the forces of my mind together, made her answer in these words: "doth the cruelty of fortune's rage need further declaration, or doth it not sufficiently appear of itself? doth not the very countenance of this place move thee? is this the library which thou thyself hadst chosen to sit in at my house, in which thou hast oftentimes discoursed with me of the knowledge of divine and human things? had i this attire or countenance when i searched the secrets of nature with thee, when thou describedst unto me the course of the stars with thy geometrical rod, when thou didst frame my conversation and the manner of my whole life according to the pattern of the celestial order? are these the rewards which thy obedient servants have? but thou didst decree that sentence by the mouth of plato: that commonwealths should be happy, if either the students of wisdom did govern them, or those which were appointed to govern them would give themselves to the study of wisdom.[ ] thou by the same philosopher didst admonish us that it is a sufficient cause for wise men to take upon themselves the government of the commonwealth, lest, if the rule of cities were left in the hands of lewd and wicked citizens, they should work the subversion and overthrow of the good. wherefore, following this authority, i desired to practise that by public administration which i had learnt of thee in private conference. thou and god himself who had inserted thee in the minds of the wise, are my witnesses that nothing but the common desire of all good men brought me to be a magistrate. this hath been the cause of my grievous and irreconcilable disagreements with wicked men, and that which freedom of conscience carrieth with it, of ever contemning the indignation of potentates for the defence of justice. how often have i encountered with conigastus, violently possessing himself with poor men's goods? how often have i put back triguilla, provost of the king's house, from injuries which he had begun, yea, and finished also? how often have i protected, by putting my authority in danger, such poor wretches as the unpunished covetousness of the barbarous did vex with infinite reproaches? never did any man draw me from right to wrong. it grieved me no less than them which suffered it, to see the wealth of our subjects wasted, partly by private pillage, and partly by public tributes. when in the time of a great dearth things were set at so excessive and unreasonable a rate that the province of campania was like to be altogether impoverished, for the common good i stuck not to contend with the chief praetor himself, and the matter was discussed before the king, and i prevailed so far that it went not forward. i drew paulinus, who had been consul, out of the very mouth of the gaping courtiers, who like ravenous curs had already in hope and ambition devoured his riches. that albinus who had likewise been consul might not be punished upon presumptuous[ ] and false accusation, i exposed myself to the hatred of cyprian his accuser. may i seem to have provoked enmity enough against myself? but others should so much the more have procured my safety, since that for the love i bear to justice i left myself no way by the means of courtiers to be safe. but by whose accusations did i receive this blow? by theirs who, long since having put basil out of the king's service, compelled him now to accuse me, by the necessity which he was driven to by debt. opilio likewise and gaudentius being banished by the king's decree, for the injuries and manifold deceits which they had committed, because they would not obey, defended themselves by taking sanctuary, of which the king hearing, gave sentence, that unless they departed out of the city of ravenna within certain days, they should be branded in the foreheads, and put out by force. what could be added to this severity? and yet that very day their accusations against me went for current. what might be the reason of this? did my dealing deserve it? or did the condemnation, which went before, make them just accusers? was not fortune ashamed, if not that innocency was accused, yet at least that it had so vile and base accusers? but what crime was laid to my charge? wilt thou have it in one word? i am said to have desired the senate's safety. wilt thou know the manner how? i am blamed for having hindered their accuser to bring forth evidence by which he should prove the senate guilty of treason. what thinkest thou, o mistress? shall i deny this charge, that i may not shame thee? but it is true, i desired it, neither will i ever cease from having that desire. shall i confess it? but i have already left hindering their accuser. shall i call it an offence to have wished the safety of that order? indeed the senate with their decrees concerning me had made it an offence. but folly, always deceiving herself, cannot change the deserts of things, nor, according to the decree of socrates,[ ] do i think it is lawful either to conceal the truth or grant a lie. but how this may be, i leave to thine and wisdom's censure. and that posterity may not be ignorant of the course and truth of the matter, i have put it down in writing. for why should i speak of those feigned letters, in which i am charged to have hoped for roman liberty? the deceit of which would manifestly have appeared, if it might have been lawful for me to have used the confession of my very accusers, which in all business is of greatest force. for what liberty remaineth there to be hoped for? i would to god there were any! i would have answered as canius did, who being charged by gaius caesar, son to germanicus, that he was privy to the conspiracy made against him, answered: 'if i had been made acquainted with it, thou shouldest never have known of it.'[ ] neither hath sorrow so dulled my wits in this matter that i complain of the wicked endeavours of sinful men against virtue, but i exceedingly marvel to see that they have brought to pass the things they hoped to do. for the desire of doing evil may be attributed to our weakness, but that in the sight of god the wicked should be able to compass whatsoever they contrive against the innocent, is altogether monstrous. whence not without cause one of thy familiar friends[ ] demanded: 'if,' saith he, 'there be a god, from whence proceed so many evils? and if there be no god, from whence cometh any good?' but let that pass that wicked men, which seek the blood of all good men, and of the whole senate, would also have overthrown me, whom they saw to stand in defence of good men and of the senate. but did i deserve the same of the senators themselves? i suppose thou rememberest how thou being present didst alway direct me when i went about to say or do anything. thou rememberest, i say, when at verona the king, being desirous of a common overthrow, endeavoured to lay the treason, whereof only albinus was accused, upon the whole order of the senate, with how great security of my own danger i defended the innocency of the whole senate. thou knowest that these things which i say are true, and that i was never delighted in my own praise, for the secret of a good conscience is in some sort diminished when by declaring what he hath done a man receiveth the reward of fame. but thou seest to what pass my innocency is come; instead of the rewards of true virtue, i undergo the punishment of wickedness, wherewith i am falsely charged. was it ever yet seen that the manifest confession of any crime made the judges so at one in severity, that either the error of man's judgment or the condition of fortune, which is certain to none, did not incline some of them to favour? if i had been accused that i would have burnt the churches, or wickedly have killed the priests, or have sought the death of all good men, yet sentence should have been pronounced against me present, having confessed, and being convicted. now being conveyed five hundred miles off, dumb and defenceless, i am condemned to death and proscription for bearing the senate too much good will. o senate, which deserves that never any may be convicted of the like crime! the dignity of which accusation even the very accusers themselves saw, which that they might obscure by adding some sort of fault, they belied me that i defiled my conscience with sacrilege, for an ambitious desire of preferment. but thou, which hadst seated thyself in me, didst repel from the seat of my mind all desire of mortal things, and within thy sight there was no place for sacrilege to harbour; for thou didst instil into my ears and thoughts daily that saying of pythagoras, 'follow god.'[ ] neither was it fitting for me to use the aid of most vile spirits when thou wast shaping me into that excellency to make me like to god. besides the innocency which appeared in the most retired rooms of my house, the assembly of my most honourable friends, my holy father- in-law symmachus, who is as worthy of reverence as thou thyself art, do clear me from all suspicion of this crime. but o detestable wickedness! they the rather credit thee with so great a crime, and think me the nigher to such mischievous dealing, because i am endued with thy knowledge, and adorned with thy virtues, so that it is not enough that i reap no commodity for thy respect, unless thou beest also dishonoured for the hatred conceived against me. and that my miseries may increase the more, the greatest part do not so much respect the value of things as the event of fortune, and they esteem only that to be providently done which the happy success commends. by which means it cometh to pass that the first loss which miserable men have is their estimation and the good opinion which was had of them. what rumours go now among the people, what dissonant and diverse opinions! i cannot abide to think of them; only this will i say, the last burden of adversity is that when they which are in misery are accused of any crime, they are thought to deserve whatsoever they suffer. and i, spoiled of all my goods, bereaved of my dignities, blemished in my good name, for benefits receive punishments. and methinks i see the cursed crews of the wicked abounding with joy and gladness, and every lost companion devising with himself how to accuse others falsely, good men lie prostrate with the terror of my danger, and every lewd fellow is provoked by impunity to attempt any wickedness, and by rewards to bring it to effect; but the innocent are not only deprived of all security, but also of any manner of defence. wherefore i may well exclaim: [ ] homer, _il._ i. . [ ] cf. _tr._ v. (_supra_, p. ), _quasi non deterior fiat inscientiae causa dum tegitur._ [ ] plato, _rep._ v. . [ ] presumptuous=founded on presumption. [ ] cp. plato, _rep._ vi. ; the [greek: philosophos] cannot be [greek: philopseudaes.] [ ] _vide supra_, p. . this seems to be the only record of canius's retort to caligula. [ ] i.e. epicurus, cp. lact. _de ira dei_ xiii. [ ] cf. [greek: ho bios apas suntetaktai pros to akolouthein toi theoi], iambl. _de vita pyth._ xviii., and seneca, _de vita beata_ xv. v. o stelliferi conditor orbis qui perpetuo nixus solio rapido caelum turbine uersas legemque pati sidera cogis, vt nunc pleno lucida cornu totis fratris obuia flammis condat stellas luna minores, nunc obscuro pallida cornu phoebo propior lumina perdat, et qui primae tempore noctis agit algentes hesperos ortus, solitas iterum mutet habenas phoebi pallens lucifer ortu. tu frondifluae frigore brumae stringis lucem breuiore mora: tu, cum feruida uenerit aestas, agiles nocti diuidis horas. tua uis uarium temperat annum vt quas boreae spiritus aufert reuehat mites zephyrus frondes quaeque arcturus semina uidit sirius altas urat segetes. nihil antiqua lege solutum linquit propriae stationis opus. omnia certo fine gubernans hominum solos respuis actus merito rector cohibere modo. nam cur tantas lubrica uersat fortuna uices? premit insontes debita sceleri noxia poena, at peruersi resident celso mores solio sanctaque calcant iniusta uice colla nocentes. latet obscuris condita uirtus clara tenebris iustusque tulit crimen iniqui. nil periuria, nil nocet ipsis fraus mendaci compta colore. sed cum libuit uiribus uti, quos innumeri metuunt populi summos gaudent subdere reges. o iam miseras respice terras quisquis rerum foedera nectis. operis tanti pars non uilis homines quatimur fortunae salo. rapidos rector comprime fluctus et quo caelum regis immensum firma stabiles foedere terras." v. creator of the sky, who sittest on thine eternal throne on high, who dost quick motions cause in all the heavens, and givest stars their laws, that the pale queen of night, sometimes receiving all her brother's light, should shine in her full pride, and with her beams the lesser stars should hide; sometimes she wants her grace, when the sun's rays are in less distant place; and hesperus that flies, driving the cold, before the night doth rise, and oft with sudden change before the sun as lucifer doth range.[ ] thou short the days dost make, when winter from the trees the leaves doth take; thou, when the fiery sun doth summer cause, makest the nights swiftly run. thy might doth rule the year, as northern winds the leaves away do bear, so zephyrus from west the plants in all their freshness doth revest; and syrius burns that corn with which arcturus did the earth adorn. none from thy laws are free, nor can forsake their place ordained by thee. thou to that certain end governest all things; deniest thou to intend the acts of men alone, directing them in measure from thy throne? for why should slippery chance rule all things with such doubtful governance? or why should punishments, due to the guilty, light on innocents? but now the highest place giveth to naughty manners greatest grace, and wicked people vex good men, and tread unjustly on their necks; virtue in darkness lurks, and righteous souls are charged with impious works, deceits nor perjuries disgrace not those who colour them with lies, for, when it doth them please to show their force, they to their will with ease the hearts of kings can steer, to whom so many crouch with trembling fear. o thou that joinest with love all worldly things, look from thy seat above on the earth's wretched state; we men, not the least work thou didst create, with fortune's blasts do shake; thou careful ruler, these fierce tempests slake, and for the earth provide those laws by which thou heaven in peace dost guide." [ ] literally, "and that he who as hesperus, in the early hours of the night, drives the cold stars before him, should change chariot (lit. his accustomed reins) and become lucifer, growing pale in the first rays of the sun." v. haec ubi continuato dolore delatraui, illa uultu placido nihilque meis questibus mota: "cum te," inquit, "maestum lacrimantemque uidissem, ilico miserum exsulemque cognoui. sed quam id longinquum esset exilium, nisi tua prodidisset oratio, nesciebam. sed tu quam procul a patria non quidem pulsus es sed aberrasti; ac si te pulsum existimari mauis, te potius ipse pepulisti. nam id quidem de te numquam cuiquam fas fuisset. si enim cuius oriundo sis patriae reminiscare, non uti atheniensium quondam multitudinis imperio regitur, sed [greek: heis koiranos estin, heis basileus] qui frequentia ciuium non depulsione laetetur; cuius agi frenis atque obtemperare iustitiae summa libertas est. an ignoras illam tuae ciuitatis antiquissimam legem, qua sanctum est ei ius exulare non esse quisquis in ea sedem fundare maluerit? nam qui uallo eius ac munimine continetur, nullus metus est ne exul esse mereatur. at quisquis eam inhabitare uelle desierit, pariter desinit etiam mereri. itaque non tam me loci huius quam tua facies mouet nec bibliothecae potius comptos ebore ac uitro parietes quam tuae mentis sedem requiro, in qua non libros sed id quod libris pretium facit, librorum quondam meorum sententias, collocaui. et tu quidem de tuis in commune bonum meritis uera quidem, sed pro multitudine gestorum tibi pauca dixisti. de obiectorum tibi uel honestate uel falsitate cunctis nota memorasti. de sceleribus fraudibusque delatorum recte tu quidem strictim attingendum putasti, quod ea melius uberiusque recognoscentis omnia uulgi ore celebrentur. increpuisti etiam uehementer iniusti factum senatus. de nostra etiam criminatione doluisti, laesae quoque opinionis damna fleuisti. postremus aduersum fortunam dolor incanduit conquestusque non aequa meritis praemia pensari. in extremo musae saeuientis, uti quae caelum terras quoque pax regeret, uota posuisti. sed quoniam plurimus tibi affectuum tumultus incubuit diuersumque te dolor, ira, maeror distrahunt, uti nunc mentis es, nondum te ualidiora remedia contingunt. itaque lenioribus paulisper utemur, ut quae in tumorem perturbationibus influentibus induruerunt, ad acrioris uim medicaminis recipiendum tactu blandiore mollescant. v. when i had uttered these speeches with continued grief, she, with an amiable countenance and nothing moved with my complaints, said: "when i first saw thee sad and weeping, i forthwith knew thee to be in misery and banishment. but i had not known how far off thou wert banished, if thy speech had not bewrayed it. o how far art thou gone from thy country, not being driven away, but wandering of thine own accord! or if thou hadst rather be thought to have been driven out, it hath been only by thyself; for never could any other but thyself have done it; for if thou rememberest of what country thou art, it is not governed as athens was wont to be, by the multitude, but 'one is its ruler, one its king,'[ ] who desires to have abundance of citizens, and not to have them driven away. to be governed by whose authority, and to be subject to her laws, is the greatest freedom that can be. art thou ignorant of that most ancient law of thy city, by which it is decreed that he may not be banished that hath made choice of it for his dwelling-place;[ ] for he that is within her fort or hold need not fear lest he deserve to be banished? but whosoever ceaseth to desire to dwell in it, ceaseth likewise to deserve so great a benefit. wherefore the countenance of this place moveth me not so much as thy countenance doth. neither do i much require thy library adorned with ivory adornments, and its crystal walls, as the seat of thy mind, in which i have not placed books, but that which makes books to be esteemed of, i mean the sentences of my books, which were written long since. and that which thou hast said of thy deserts to the common good, is true indeed, but little in respect of the many things which thou hast done. that which thou hast reported, either of the honesty or of the falseness of those things which are objected against thee, is known to all men. thou didst well to touch but briefly the wickedness and deceit of thy accusers, for that the common people to whose notice they are come do more fitly and largely speak of them. thou hast also sharply rebuked the unjust senate's deed. thou hast also grieved at our accusation, and hast bewailed the loss or diminishing of our good name; and lastly, thy sorrow raged against fortune, and thou complainedst that deserts were not equally rewarded. in the end of thy bitter verse, thou desiredst that the earth might be governed by that peace which heaven enjoyeth. but because thou art turmoiled with the multitude of affections, grief and anger drawing thee to divers parts, in the plight thou art now, the more forcible remedies cannot be applied unto thee; wherefore, for a while, we will use the more easy, that thy affections, which are, as it were, hardened and swollen with perturbations, may by gentle handling be mollified and disposed to receive the force of sharper medicines. [ ] hom. _il._ ii. . [ ] cf. cicero, _pro domo sua_. . . vi. cum phoebi radiis graue cancri sidus inaestuat, tum qui larga negantibus sulcis semina credidit, elusus cereris fide quernas pergat ad arbores. numquam purpureum nemus lecturus uiolas petas cum saeuis aquilonibus stridens campus inhorruit, nec quaeras auida manu vernos stringere palmites, vuis si libeat frui; autumno potius sua bacchus munera contulit. signat tempora propriis aptans officiis deus nec quas ipse coercuit misceri patitur uices. sic quod praecipiti uia certum deserit ordinem laetos non habet exitus. vi. when hot with phoebus' beams the crab casts fiery gleams, he that doth then with seed th'unwilling furrows feed, deceivéd of his bread must be with acorns fed. seek not the flowery woods for violets' sweet buds, when fields are overcast with the fierce northern blast, nor hope thou home to bring vine-clusters in the spring if thou in grapes delight: in autumn bacchus' might with them doth deck our clime. god every several time with proper grace hath crowned nor will those laws confound which he once settled hath. he that with headlong path this certain order leaves, an hapless end receives. vi. primum igitur paterisne me pauculis rogationibus statum tuae mentis attingere atque temptare, ut qui modus sit tuae curationis intellegam?" "tu uero arbitratu," inquam, "tuo quae uoles ut responsurum rogato." tum illa: "huncine," inquit, "mundum temerariis agi fortuitisque casibus putas, an ullum credis ei regimen inesse rationis?" "atqui," inquam, "nullo existimauerim modo ut fortuita temeritate tam certa moueantur, uerum operi suo conditorem praesidere deum scio nec umquam fuerit dies qui me ab hac sententiae ueritate depellat." "ita est," inquit. "nam id etiam paulo ante cecinisti, hominesque tantum diuinae exortes curae esse deplorasti. nam de ceteris quin ratione regerentur, nihil mouebare. papae autem! vehementer admiror cur in tam salubri sententia locatus aegrotes. verum altius perscrutemur; nescio quid abesse coniecto. "sed dic mihi, quoniam deo mundum regi non ambigis, quibus etiam gubernaculis regatur aduertis?" "vix," inquam, "rogationis tuae sententiam nosco, nedum ad inquisita respondere queam." "num me," inquit, "fefellit abesse aliquid, per quod, uelut hiante ualli robore, in animum tuum perturbationum morbus inrepserit? sed dic mihi, meministine, quis sit rerum finis, quoue totius naturae tendat intentio?" "audieram," inquam, "sed memoriam maeror hebetauit." "atqui scis unde cuncta processerint?" "noui," inquam, deumque esse respondi. "et qui fieri potest, ut principio cognito quis sit rerum finis ignores? verum hi perturbationum mores, ea ualentia est, ut mouere quidem loco hominem possint, conuellere autem sibique totum exstirpare non possint. sed hoc quoque respondeas uelim, hominemne te esse meministi?" "quidni," inquam, "meminerim?" "quid igitur homo sit, poterisne proferre?" "hocine interrogas an esse me sciam rationale animal atque mortale? scio et id me esse confiteor." et illa: "nihilne aliud te esse nouisti?" "nihil." "iam scio," inquit, "morbi tui aliam uel maximam causam; quid ipse sis, nosse desisti. quare plenissime uel aegritudinis tuae rationem uel aditum reconciliandae sospitatis inueni. nam quoniam tui obliuione confunderis, et exsulem te et exspoliatum propriis bonis esse doluisti. quoniam uero quis sit rerum finis ignoras, nequam homines atque nefarios potentes felicesque arbitraris. quoniam uero quibus gubernaculis mundus regatur oblitus es, has fortunarum uices aestimas sine rectore fluitare--magnae non ad morbum modo uerum ad interitum quoque causae. sed sospitatis auctori grates, quod te nondum totum natura destituit. habemus maximum tuae fomitem salutis ueram de mundi gubernatione sententiam, quod eam non casuum temeritati sed diuinae rationi subditam credis. nihil igitur pertimescas; iam tibi ex hac minima scintillula uitalis calor inluxerit. sed quoniam firmioribus remediis nondum tempus est et eam mentium constat esse naturam, ut quotiens abiecerint ueras falsis opinionibus induantur ex quibus orta perturbationum caligo uerum illum confundit intuitum, hanc paulisper lenibus mediocribusque fomentis attenuare temptabo, ut dimotis fallacium affectionum tenebris splendorem uerae lucis possis agnoscere. vi. first, therefore, wilt thou let me touch and try the state of thy mind by asking thee a few questions, that i may understand how thou art to be cured?" to which i answered: "ask me what questions thou wilt, and i will answer thee." and then she said: "thinkest thou that this world is governed by haphazard and chance? or rather dost thou believe that it is ruled by reason?" "i can," quoth i, "in no manner imagine that such certain motions are caused by rash chance. and i know that god the creator doth govern his work, nor shall the day ever come to draw me from the truth of that judgment." "it is so," saith she, "for so thou saidst in thy verse a little before, and bewailedst that only men were void of god's care; for as for the rest, thou didst not doubt but that they were governed by reason. and surely i cannot choose but exceedingly admire how thou canst be ill affected, holding so wholesome an opinion. but let us search further; i guess thou wantest something, but i know not what. tell me, since thou doubtest not that the world is governed by god, canst thou tell me also by what means it is governed?" "i do scarcely," quoth i, "understand what thou askest, and much less am i able to make thee a sufficient answer." "was i," quoth she, "deceived in thinking that thou wantedst something by which, as by the breach of a fortress, the sickness of perturbations hath entered into thy mind? but tell me, dost thou remember what is the end of things? or to what the whole intention of nature tendeth?" "i have heard it," quoth i, "but grief hath dulled my memory." "but knowest thou from whence all things had their beginning?" "i know," quoth i, and answered, that from god. "and how can it be that, knowing the beginning, thou canst be ignorant of the end? but this is the condition and force of perturbations, that they may alter a man, but wholly destroy, and as it were root him out of himself, they cannot. but i would have thee answer me to this also; dost thou remember that thou art a man?" "why should i not remember it?" quoth i. "well then, canst thou explicate what man is?" "dost thou ask me if i know that i am a reasonable and mortal living creature? i know and confess myself to be so." to which she replied: "dost thou not know thyself to be anything else?" "not anything." "now i know," quoth she, "another, and that perhaps the greatest, cause of thy sickness: thou hast forgotten what thou art. wherefore i have fully found out both the manner of thy disease and the means of thy recovery; for the confusion which thou art in, by the forgetfulness of thyself, is the cause why thou art so much grieved at thy exile and the loss of thy goods. and because thou art ignorant what is the end of things, thou thinkest that lewd and wicked men be powerful and happy; likewise, because thou hast forgotten by what means the world is governed, thou imaginest that these alternations of fortune do fall out without any guide, sufficient causes not only of sickness, but also of death itself. but thanks be to the author of thy health, that nature hath not altogether forsaken thee. we have the greatest nourisher of thy health, the true opinion of the government of the world, in that thou believest that it is not subject to the events of chance, but to divine reason. wherefore fear nothing; out of this little sparkle will be enkindled thy vital heat. but because it is not yet time to use more solid remedies, and it is manifest that the nature of minds is such that as often as they cast away true opinions they are possessed with false, out of which the darkness of perturbations arising doth make them that they cannot discern things aright, i will endeavour to dissolve this cloud with gentle and moderate fomentations; that having removed the obscurity of deceitful affections, thou mayest behold the splendour of true light. vii. nubibus atris condita nullum fundere possunt sidera lumen. si mare uoluens turbidus auster misceat aestum, vitrea dudum parque serenis vnda diebus mox resoluto sordida caeno visibus obstat. quique uagatur montibus altis defluus amnis, saepe resistit rupe soluti obice saxi. tu quoque si uis lumine claro cernere uerum, tramite recto carpere callem, gaudia pelle, pelle timorem spemque fugato nec dolor adsit. nubila mens est vinctaque frenis, haec ubi regnant." vii. when stars are shrouded with dusky night, they yield no light being so clouded. when the wind moveth and churneth the sea, the flood, clear as day, foul and dark proveth. and rivers creeping down a high hill stand often still, rocks them back keeping. if thou wouldst brightly see truth's clear rays, or walk those ways which lead most rightly, all joy forsaking fear must thou fly, and hopes defy, no sorrow taking. for where these terrors reign in the mind, they it do bind in cloudy errors." anicii manlii severini boethii v.c. et inl. excons. ord. patricii philosophiae consolationis liber primvs explicit incipit liber ii i. post haec paulisper obticuit atque ubi attentionem meam modesta taciturnitate collegit, sic exorsa est: "si penitus aegritudinis tuae causas habitumque cognovi, fortunae prioris affectu desiderioque tabescis. ea tantum animi tui sicuti tu tibi fingis mutata peruertit. intellego multiformes illius prodigii fucos et eo usque cum his quos eludere nititur blandissimam familiaritatem, dum intolerabili dolore confundat quos insperata reliquerit. cuius si naturam mores ac meritum reminiscare, nec habuisse te in ea pulchrum aliquid nec amisisse cognosces, sed ut arbitror haud multum tibi haec in memoriam reuocare laborauerim. solebas enim praesentem quoque blandientemque uirilibus incessere uerbis eamque de nostro adyto prolatis insectabare sententiis. verum omnis subita mutatio rerum non sine quodam quasi fluctu contingit animorum; sic factum est ut tu quoque paulisper a tua tranquillitate descisceres. sed tempus est haurire te aliquid ac degustare molle atque iucundum quod ad interiora transmissum ualidioribus haustibus uiam fecerit. adsit igitur rhetoricae suadela dulcedinis quae tum tantum recto calle procedit, cum nostra instituta non deserit cumque hac musica laris nostri uernacula nunc leuiores nunc grauiores modos succinat. quid est igitur o homo quod te in maestitiam luctumque deiecit? nouum, credo, aliquid inusitatumque uidisti. tu fortunam putas erga te esse mutatam; erras. hi semper eius mores sunt ista natura. seruauit circa te propriam potius in ipsa sui mutabilitate constantiam. talis erat cum blandiebatur, cum tibi falsae inlecebris felicitatis alluderet. deprehendisti caeci numinis ambiguos uultus. quae sese adhuc uelat aliis, tota tibi prorsus innotuit. si probas, utere moribus; ne queraris. si perfidiam perhorrescis, sperne atque abice perniciosa ludentem. nam quae nunc tibi est tanti causa maeroris, haec eadem tranquillitatis esse debuisset, reliquit enim te quam non relicturam nemo umquam poterit esse securus. an uero tu pretiosam aestimas abituram felicitatem? et cara tibi est fortuna praesens nec manendi fida et cum discesserit adlatura maerorem. quod si nec ex arbitrio retineri potest et calamitosos fugiens facit, quid est aliud fugax quam futurae quoddam calamitatis indicium? neque enim quod ante oculos situm est, suffecerit intueri; rerum exitus prudentia metitur eademque in alterutro mutabilitas nec formidandas fortunae minas nec exoptandas facit esse blanditias. postremo aequo animo toleres oportet quidquid intra fortunae aream geritur, cum semel iugo eius colla submiseris. quod si manendi abeundique scribere legem uelis ei quam tu tibi dominam sponte legisti, nonne iniurius fueris et inpatientia sortem exacerbes quam permutare non possis? si uentis uela committeres, non quo uoluntas peteret sed quo flatus impellerent, promoueres; si aruis semina crederes, feraces inter se annos sterilesque pensares. fortunae te regendum dedisti; dominae moribus oportet obtemperes. tu uero uoluentis rotae impetum retinere conaris? at, omnium mortalium stolidissime, si manere incipit, fors esse desistit. the second book of boethius i. after this she remained silent for a while; and, having by that her modesty made me attentive, began in this wise: "if i be rightly informed of the causes and condition of thy disease, thou languishest with the affection of thy former fortune, and the change of that alone, as thou imaginest, hath overthrown so much of thy mind. i know the manifold illusions of that monster, exercising most alluring familiarity with them whom she meaneth to deceive, to the end she may confound them with intolerable grief, by forsaking them upon the sudden, whose nature, customs, and desert, if thou rememberest, thou shalt know that thou neither didst possess nor hast lost anything of estimation in it; and, as i hope, i shall not need to labour much to bring these things to thy remembrance, for thou wert wont, when she was present, and flattered thee most, to assail her with manful words, and pursue her with sentences taken forth of our most hidden knowledge. but every sudden change of things happeneth not without a certain wavering and disquietness of mind. and this is the cause that thou also for a while hast lost thy former tranquillity and peace. but it is time for thee to take and taste some gentle and pleasant thing which being received may prepare thee for stronger potions. wherefore let us use the sweetness of rhetoric's persuasions, which then only is well employed when it forsaketh not our ordinances; and with this, let music, a little slave belonging to our house, chant sometime lighter and sometime sadder notes. wherefore, o man, what is it that hath cast thee into sorrow and grief? thou hast, methinks, seen something new and unwonted. if thou thinkest that fortune hath altered her manner of proceeding toward thee, thou art in an error. this was alway her fashion; this is her nature. she hath kept that constancy in thy affairs which is proper to her, in being mutable; such was her condition when she fawned upon thee and allured thee with enticements of feigned happiness. thou hast discovered the doubtful looks of this blind goddess. she, which concealeth herself from others, is wholly known to thee. if thou likest her, frame thyself to her conditions, and make no complaint. if thou detestest her treachery, despise and cast her off, with her pernicious flattery. for that which hath caused thee so much sorrow should have brought thee to great tranquillity. for she hath forsaken thee, of whom no man can be secure. dost thou esteem that happiness precious which thou art to lose? and is the present fortune dear unto thee, of whose stay thou art not sure, and whose departure will breed thy grief? and if she can neither be kept at our will, and maketh them miserable whom she at last leaveth, what else is fickle fortune but a token of future calamity? for it is not sufficient to behold that which we have before our eyes; wisdom pondereth the event of things, and this mutability on both sides maketh the threats of fortune not to be feared, nor her flatterings to be desired. finally, thou must take in good part whatsoever happeneth unto thee within the reach of fortune, when once thou hast submitted thy neck to her yoke. and if to her whom, of thine own accord, thou hast chosen for thy mistress, thou wouldest prescribe a law how long she were to stay, and when to depart, shouldst thou not do her mighty wrong, and with thy impatience make thy estate more intolerable, which thou canst not better? if thou settest up thy sails to the wind, thou shalt be carried not whither thy will desirest, but whither the gale driveth. if thou sowest thy seed, thou considerest that there are as well barren as fertile years. thou hast yielded thyself to fortune's sway; thou must be content with the conditions of thy mistress. endeavourest thou to stay the force of the turning wheel? but thou foolishest man that ever was, if it beginneth to stay, it ceaseth to be fortune. i. haec cum superba uerterit uices dextra et aestuantis more fertur euripi, dudum tremendos saeua proterit reges humilemque uicti subleuat fallax uultum. non illa miseros audit aut curat fletus vltroque gemitus dura quos fecit ridet. sic illa ludit, sic suas probat uires magnumque suis demonstrat [ ] ostentum, si quis visatur una stratus ac felix hora. [ ] monstrat _codd_. i the pride of fickle fortune spareth none, and, like the floods of swift euripus borne, [ ] oft casteth mighty princes from their throne, and oft the abject captive doth adorn. she cares not for the wretch's tears and moan, and the sad groans, which she hath caused, doth scorn. thus doth she play, to make her power more known, showing her slaves a marvel, when man's state is in one hour both downcast and fortunate. [ ] literally, "when fortune with proud right hand plies her changes and ebbs and flows like foaming euripus." euripus was proverbial for irregular tides. ii. vellem autem pauca tecum fortunae ipsius uerbis agitare. tu igitur an ius postulet, animaduerte. 'quid tu homo ream me cotidianis agis querelis? quam tibi fecimus iniuriam? quae tua tibi detraximus bona? quouis iudice de opum dignitatumque mecum possessione contende. et si cuiusquam mortalium proprium quid horum esse monstraueris, ego iam tua fuisse quae repetis, sponte concedam. cum te matris utero natura produxit, nudum rebus omnibus inopemque suscepi, meis opibus foui et quod te nunc inpatientem nostri facit, fauore prona indulgentius educaui, omnium quae mei iuris sunt affluentia et splendore circumdedi. nunc mihi retrahere manum libet. habes gratiam uelut usus alienis, non habes ius querelae tamquam prorsus tua perdideris. quid igitur ingemiscis? nulla tibi a nobis est allata uiolentia. opes honores ceteraque talium mei sunt iuris. dominam famulae cognoscunt; mecum ueniunt, me abeunte discedunt. audacter adfirmem, si tua forent quae amissa conquereris nullo modo perdidisses. an ego sola meum ius exercere prohibebor? licet caelo proferre lucidos dies eosdemque tenebrosis noctibus condere. licet anno terrae uultum nunc floribus frugibusque redimire, nunc nimbis frigoribusque confundere. ius est mari nunc strato aequore blandiri, nunc procellis ac fluctibus inhorrescere. nos ad constantiam nostris moribus alienam inexpleta hominum cupiditas alligabit? haec nostra uis est, hunc continuum ludum ludimus; rotam uolubili orbe uersamus, infima summis summa infimis mutare gaudemus. ascende si placet, sed ea lege ne utique[ ] cum ludicri mei ratio poscet, descendere iniuriam putes. an tu mores ignorabas meos? nesciebas croesum regem lydorum cyro paulo ante formidabilem mox deinde miserandum rogi flammis traditum misso caelitus imbre defensum? num te praeterit paulum persi regis a se capti calamitatibus pias inpendisse lacrimas? quid tragoediarum clamor aliud deflet nisi indiscreto ictu fortunam felicia regna uertentem? nonne adulescentulus [greek: doious pithous ton men hena kakon ton d'heteron eaon] in iouis limine iacere didicisti? quid si uberius de bonorum parte sumpsisti? quid si a te non tota discessi? quid si haec ipsa mei mutabilitas iusta tibi causa est sperandi meliora? tamen ne animo contabescas et intra commune omnibus regnum locatus proprio uiuere iure desideres. [ ] utique _klussmann_; uti _codd._ ii but i would urge thee a little with fortune's own speeches. wherefore consider thou if she asketh not reason. 'for what cause, o man, chargest thou me with daily complaints? what injury have i done thee? what goods of thine have i taken from thee? contend with me before any judge about the possession of riches and dignities; and if thou canst show that the propriety of any of these things belong to any mortal wight, i will forthwith willingly grant that those things which thou demandest were thine. when nature produced thee out of thy mother's womb, i received thee naked and poor in all respects, cherished thee with my wealth, and (which maketh thee now to fall out with me) being forward to favour thee, i had most tender care for thy education, and adorned thee with the abundance and splendour of all things which are in my power. now it pleaseth me to withdraw my hand, yield thanks, as one that hath had the use of that which was not his own. thou hast no just cause to complain, as though thou hadst lost that which was fully thine own. wherefore lamentest thou? i have offered thee no violence. riches, honours, and the rest of that sort belong to me. they acknowledge me for their mistress, and themselves for my servants, they come with me, and when i go away they likewise depart. i may boldly affirm, if those things which thou complainest to be taken from thee had been thine own, thou shouldst never have lost them. must i only be forbidden to use my right? it is lawful for the heaven to bring forth fair days, and to hide them again in darksome nights. it is lawful for the year sometime to compass the face of the earth with flowers and fruits, and sometime to cover it with clouds and cold. the sea hath right sometime to fawn with calms, and sometime to frown with storms and waves. and shall the insatiable desire of men tie me to constancy, so contrary to my custom? this is my force, this is the sport which i continually use. i turn about my wheel with speed, and take a pleasure to turn things upside down. ascend, if thou wilt, but with this condition, that thou thinkest it not an injury to descend when the course of my sport so requireth. didst thou not know my fashion? wert thou ignorant how croesus, king of the lydians, not long before a terror to cyrus, within a while after came to such misery that he should have been burnt had he not been saved by a shower sent from heaven?[ ] hast thou forgotten how paul piously bewailed the calamities of king perses his prisoner?[ ] what other thing doth the outcry of tragedies lament, but that fortune, having no respect, overturneth happy states? didst thou not learn in thy youth that there lay two barrels, the one of good things and the other of bad,[ ] at jupiter's threshold? but what if thou hast tasted more abundantly of the good? what if i be not wholly gone from thee? what if this mutability of mine be a just cause for thee to hope for better? notwithstanding, lose not thy courage, and, living in a kingdom which is common to all men, desire not to be governed by peculiar laws proper only to thyself. [ ] cf. herod, i. . [ ] cf. livy xlv. . paul=aemilius paulus surnamed macedonius for his defeat of perses last king of macedonia in b.c. [ ] _il._ xxiv. . ii. si quantas rapidis flatibus incitus pontus uersat harenas aut quot stelliferis edita noctibus caelo sidera fulgent tantas fundat opes nec retrahat manum pleno copia cornu, humanum miseras haud ideo genus cesset flere querellas. quamuis uota libens excipiat deus multi prodigus auri et claris auidos ornet honoribus, nil iam parta uidentur, sed quaesita uorans saeua rapacitas altos[ ] pandit hiatus. quae iam praecipitem frena cupidinem certo fine retentent, largis cum potius muneribus fluens sitis ardescit habendi? numquam diues agit qui trepidus gemens sese credit egentem.' [ ] altos _vulg._; alios _codd. opt._ ii. if plenty as much wealth should give, ne'er holding back her hand, as the swift winds in troubled seas do toss up heaps of sand, or as the stars in lightsome nights shine forth on heaven's face, yet wretched men would still accuse their miserable case. should god, too liberal of his gold, their greedy wishes hear, and with bright honour them adorn; yet all that nothing were, since ravenous minds, devouring all, for more are ready still. what bridle can contain in bounds this their contentless will, when filled with riches they retain the thirst of having more? he is not rich that fears and grieves, and counts himself but poor.' iii. his igitur si pro se tecum fortuna loqueretur, quid profecto contra hisceres non haberes, aut si quid est quo querelam tuam iure tuearis, proferas oportet. dabimus dicendi locum." tum ego: "speciosa quidem ista sunt," inquam, "oblitaque rhetoricae ac musicae melle dulcedinis; tum tantum, cum audiuntur, oblectant. sed miseris malorum altior sensus est. itaque cum haec auribus insonare desierint, insitus animum maeror praegrauat." et illa: "ita est," inquit. "haec enim nondum morbi tui remedia sed adhuc contumacis aduersum curationem doloris fomenta quaedam sunt. nam quae in profundum sese penetrent, cum tempestiuum fuerit admouebo. verumtamen ne te existimari miserum uelis, an numerum modumque tuae felicitatis oblitus es? taceo quod desolatum parente summorum te uirorum cura suscepit delectusque in affinitatem principum ciuitatis, quod pretiosissimum propinquitatis genus est, prius carus quam proximus esse coepisti. quis non te felicissimum cum tanto splendore socerorum, cum coniugis pudore, cum masculae quoque prolis opportunitate praedicauit? praetereo, libet enim praeterire communia, sumptas in adulescentia negatas senibus dignitates; ad singularem felicitatis tuae cumulum uenire delectat. si quis rerum mortalium fructus ullum beatitudinis pondus habet, poteritne illius memoria lucis quantalibet ingruentium malorum mole deleri, cum duos pariter consules liberos tuos domo prouehi sub frequentia patrum, sub plebis alacritate uidisti, cum eisdem in curia curules insidentibus tu regiae laudis orator ingenii gloriam facundiaeque meruisti, cum in circo duorum medius consulum circumfusae multitudinis expectationem triumphali largitione satiasti? dedisti ut opinor uerba fortunae, dum te illa demulcet, dum te ut delicias suas fouet. munus quod nulli umquam priuato commodauerat abstulisti. visne igitur cum fortuna calculum ponere? nunc te primum liuenti oculo praestrinxit. si numerum modumque laetorum tristiumue consideres, adhuc te felicem negare non possis. quod si idcirco te fortunatum esse non aestimas, quoniam quae tunc laeta uidebantur abierunt, non est quod te miserum putes, quoniam quae nunc creduntur maesta praetereunt. an tu in hanc uitae scaenam nunc primum subitus hospesque uenisti? vllamne humanis rebus inesse constantiam reris, cum ipsum saepe hominem uelox hora dissoluat? nam etsi rara est fortuitis manendi fides, ultimus tamen uitae dies mors quaedam fortunae est etiam manentis. quid igitur referre putas, tune illam moriendo deseras an te illa fugiendo? iii. wherefore if fortune should plead with thee thus in her own defence, doubtless thou wouldst not have a word to answer her. but if there be anything which thou canst allege in thy own defence, thou must utter it. we will give thee full liberty to speak." then i said: "these things make a fair show and, being set out with pleasant rhetoric and music, delight only so long as they are heard. but those which are miserable have a deeper feeling of their miseries. therefore, when the sound of these things is past, hidden sorrow oppresseth the mind." "it is so indeed," quoth she, "for these be not the remedies of thy disease, but certain fomentations to assuage thy grief, which as yet resisteth all cure. but when it shall be time, i will apply that which shall pierce to the quick. and yet there is no cause why thou shouldst think thyself miserable. hast thou forgotten how many ways, and in what degree thou art happy? i pass over with silence that, having lost thy father, thou wert provided for by men of the best sort, and, being chosen to have affinity with the chiefest of the city, thou begannest sooner to be dear unto them than to be akin, which is the most excellent kind of kindred. who esteemed thee not most happy, having so noble a father-in-law, so chaste a wife, and so noble sons? i say nothing (for i will not speak of ordinary matters) of the dignities denied to others in their age, and granted to thee in thy youth. i desire to come to the singular top of thy felicity. if any fruit of mortal things hath any weight of happiness, can the remembrance of that light be destroyed with any cloud of miseries that can overcast thee? when thou sawst thy two sons being both consuls together carried from their house, the senators accompanying them, and the people rejoicing with them; when, they sitting in the senate in their chairs of state, thou making an oration in the king's praise deservedst the glory of wit and eloquence. when in public assembly, thou, standing betwixt thy two sons, didst satisfy with thy triumphant liberality the expectation of the multitudes gathered together, i suppose thou flatteredst fortune, while she fawned thus upon thee, as her dearest friend. thou obtainedst more at her hands than ever private man had before thee. wilt thou then reckon with fortune? this is the first time that ever she frowned upon thee. if thou considerest the number and measure of thy joyful and sad accidents, thou canst not choose but think thyself fortunate hitherto; and if thou esteemest not thyself fortunate because those things which seemed joyful are past, there is no cause why thou shouldst think thyself miserable, since those things which thou now takest to be sorrowful do pass. comest thou now first as a pilgrim and stranger into the theatre of this life? supposest thou to find any constancy in human affairs, since that man himself is soon gone? for although things subject to fortune seldom keep touch in staying, yet the end of life is a certain death, even of that fortune which remaineth. wherefore, what matter is it whether thou by dying leavest it, or it forsaketh thee by flying? iii. cum polo phoebus roseis quadrigis lucem spargere coeperit, pallet albentes hebetata uultus flammis stella prementibus. cum nemus flatu zephyri tepentis vernis inrubuit rosis, spiret insanum nebulosus auster: iam spinis abeat decus. saepe tranquillo radiat sereno immotis mare fluctibus, saepe feruentes aquilo procellas verso concitat aequore. rara si constat sua forma mundo, si tantas uariat uices, crede fortunis hominum caducis, bonis crede fugacibus. constat aeterna positumque lege est vt constet genitum nihil." iii. when phoebus with his rosy team showeth his lightsome beam, the dull and darkened stars retire yielding to greater fire. when zephyrus his warmth doth bring, sweet roses deck the spring; let noisome auster blow apace, plants soon will lose their grace. the sea hath often quiet stood with an unmoved flood, and often is turmoiled with waves, when boisterous boreas raves. if thus the world never long tarry the same, but often vary, on fading fortunes then rely, trust to those goods that fly. an everlasting law is made, that all things born shall fade." iv. tum ego: "vera," inquam, "commemoras, o uirtutum omnium nutrix, nec infitiari possum prosperitatis meae uelocissimum cursum. sed hoc est quod recolentem uehementius coquit. nam in omni aduersitate fortunae infelicissimum est genus infortunii fuisse felicem." "sed quod tu," inquit, "falsae opinionis supplicium luas, id rebus iure imputare non possis. nam si te hoc inane nomen fortuitae felicitatis mouet, quam pluribus maximisque abundes mecum reputes licet. igitur si quod in omni fortunae tuae censu pretiosissimum possidebas, id tibi diuinitus inlaesum adhuc inuiolatumque seruatur, poterisne meliora quaeque retinens de infortunio iure causari? atqui uiget incolumis illud pretiosissimum generis humani decus symmachus socer et quod uitae pretio non segnis emeres, uir totus ex sapientia uirtutibusque factus suarum securus tuis ingemiscit iniuriis. viuit uxor ingenio modesta, pudicitia pudore praecellens et, ut omnes eius dotes breuiter includam, patri similis. viuit inquam tibique tantum uitae huius exosa spiritum seruat quoque uno felicitatem minui tuam uel ipsa concesserim, tui desiderio lacrimis ac dolore tabescit. quid dicam liberos consulares quorum iam, ut in id aetatis pueris, uel paterni uel auiti specimen elucet ingenii? cum igitur praecipua sit mortalibus uitae cura retinendae, o te si tua bona cognoscas felicem, cui suppetunt etiam nunc quae uita nemo dubitat esse cariora! quare sicca iam lacrimas. nondum est ad unum omnes exosa fortuna nec tibi nimium ualida tempestas incubuit, quando tenaces haerent ancorae quae nec praesentis solamen nec futuri spem temporis abesse patiantur." "et haereant," inquam, "precor; illis namque manentibus, utcumque se res habeant, enatabimus. sed quantum ornamentis nostris decesserit, uides." et illa: "promouimus," inquit, "aliquantum, si te nondum totius tuae sortis piget. sed delicias tuas ferre non possum qui abesse aliquid tuae beatitudini tam luctuosus atque anxius conqueraris. quis est enim tam conpositae felicitatis ut non aliqua ex parte cum status sui qualitate rixetur? anxia enim res est humanorum condicio bonorum et quae uel numquam tota proueniat uel numquam perpetua subsistat. huic census exuberat, sed est pudori degener sanguis; hunc nobilitas notum facit, sed angustia rei familiaris inclusus esse mallet ignotus. ille utroque circumfluus uitam caelibem deflet; ille nuptiis felix orbus liberis alieno censum nutrit heredi. alius prole laetatus filii filiaeue delictis maestus inlacrimat. idcirco nemo facile cum fortunae suae condicione concordat; inest enim singulis quod inexpertus ignoret, expertus exhorreat. adde quod felicissimi cuiusque delicatissimus sensus est et nisi ad nutum cuncta suppetant, omnis aduersitatis insolens minimis quibusque prosternitur; adeo perexigua sunt quae fortunatissimis beatitudinis summam detrahunt. quam multos esse coniectas qui sese caelo proximos arbitrentur, si de fortunae tuae reliquiis pars eis minima contingat? hic ipse locus quem tu exilium uocas, incolentibus patria est; adeo nihil est miserum nisi cum putes contraque beata sors omnis est aequanimitate tolerantis. quis est ille tam felix qui cum dederit inpatientiae manus, statum suum mutare non optet? quam multis amaritudinibus humanae felicitatis dulcedo respersa est! quae si etiam fruenti iucunda esse uideatur, tamen quo minus cum uelit abeat retineri non possit. liquet igitur quam sit mortalium rerum misera beatitudo quae nec apud aequanimos perpetua perdurat necanxios tota delectat. quid igitur o mortales extra petitis intra uos positam felicitatem? error uos inscitiaque confundit. ostendam breuiter tibi summae cardinem felicitatis. estne aliquid tibi te ipso pretiosius? nihil inquies. igitur si tui compos fueris, possidebis quod nec tu amittere umquam uelis nec fortuna possit auferre. atque ut agnoscas in his fortuitis rebus beatitudinem constare non posse, sic collige. si beatitudo est summum naturae bonum ratione degentis nec est summum bonum quod eripi ullo modo potest, quoniam praecellit id quod nequeat auferri, manifestum est quoniam[ ] ad beatitudinem percipiendam fortunae instabilitas adspirare non possit. ad haec quem caduca ista felicitas uehit uel scit eam uel nescit esse mutabilem. si nescit, quaenam beata sors esse potest ignorantiae caecitate? si scit, metuat necesse est, ne amittat quod amitti posse non dubitat; quare continuus timor non sinit esse felicem. an uel si amiserit, neglegendum putat? sic quoque perexile bonum est quod aequo animo feratur amissum. et quoniam tu idem es cui persuasum atque insitum permultis demonstrationibus scio mentes hominum nullo modo esse mortales cumque clarum sit fortuitam felicitatem corporis morte finiri, dubitari nequit, si haec afferre beatitudinem potest, quin omne mortalium genus in miseriam mortis fine labatur. quod si multos scimus beatitudinis fructum non morte solum uerum etiam doloribus suppliciisque quaesisse, quonam modo praesens facere beatos potest quae miseros transacta non efficit? [ ] quin _codices_. iv. to which i answered: "the things which thou reportest are true, o nurse of all virtues, and i cannot deny the most speedy course of my prosperity. but this is that which vexeth me most, when i remember it. for in all adversity of fortune it is the most unhappy kind of misfortune to have been happy." "but," quoth she, "thou canst not justly impute to the things themselves that thou art punished for thy false opinion. for if this vain name of casual felicity moveth thee, let us make accompt with how many and how great things thou aboundest. wherefore, if that which in all thy revenues of fortune thou esteemest most precious doth still by god's providence remain safe and untouched, canst thou, retaining the best, justly complain of misfortune? but thy father-in-law, symmachus (that most excellent ornament of mankind) liveth in safety, and for the obtaining of which thou wouldst willingly spend thy life, that man wholly framed to wisdom and virtues, being secure of his own, mourneth for thy injuries. thy wife liveth, modest in disposition, eminent in chastity, and, to rehearse briefly all her excellent gifts, like her father. she liveth, i say, and weary of her life reserveth her breath only for thee. in which alone even i must grant that thy felicity is diminished, she consumeth herself with tears and grief for thy sake. what should i speak of thy children, which have been consuls, in whom already, as in children of that age, their father's or grandfather's good disposition appeareth? wherefore, since the greatest care that mortal men have is to save their lives, o happy man that thou art, if thou knowest thine own wealth, who still hast remaining those things which no man doubteth to be dearer than life itself? and therefore cease weeping. fortune hath not hitherto showed her hatred against you all, neither art thou assailed with too boisterous a storm, since those anchors hold fast which permit neither the comfort of the time present nor the hope of the time to come to be wanting." "and i pray god," quoth i, "that they may hold fast, for so long as they remain, howsoever the world goeth we shall escape drowning. but thou seest how great a part of our ornaments is lost." "we have gotten a little ground," quoth she, "if thy whole estate be not irksome unto thee. but i cannot suffer thy daintiness, who with such lamentation and anxiety complaineth that something is wanting to thy happiness. for who hath so entire happiness that he is not in some part offended with the condition of his estate? the nature of human felicity is doubtful and uncertain, and is neither ever wholly obtained, or never lasteth always. one man hath great revenues, but is contemned for his base lineage. another's nobility maketh him known, but, oppressed with penury, had rather be unknown. some, abounding with both, bewail their life without marriage. some other, well married but wanting children, provideth riches for strangers to inherit. others, finally, having children, mournfully bewail the vices which their sons or daughters are given to. so that scarce any man is pleased with the condition of his fortune. for there is something in every estate, which without experience is not known, and being experienced doth molest and trouble. besides that, those which are most happy are most sensible,[ ] and unless all things fall out to their liking, impatient of all adversity, every little cross overthrows them, so small are the occasions which take from the most fortunate the height of their happiness. how many are there, thinkest thou, which would think themselves almost in heaven if they had but the least part of the remains of thy fortune? this very place, which thou callest banishment, is to the inhabitants thereof their native land. so true it is that nothing is miserable but what is thought so, and contrariwise, every estate is happy if he that bears it be content. who is so happy that if he yieldeth to discontent, desireth not to change his estate? how much bitterness is mingled with the sweetness of man's felicity, which, though it seemeth so pleasant while it is enjoyed, yet can it not be retained from going away when it will. and by this it appeareth how miserable is the blessedness of mortal things, which neither endureth alway with the contented, nor wholly delighteth the pensive. wherefore, o mortal men, why seek you for your felicity abroad, which is placed within yourselves? error and ignorance do confound you. i will briefly show thee the centre of thy chiefest happiness. is there anything more precious to thee than thyself? i am sure thou wilt say, nothing. wherefore, if thou enjoyest thyself, thou shalt possess that which neither thou wilt ever wish to lose nor fortune can take away. and that thou mayst acknowledge that blessedness cannot consist in these casual things, gather it thus. if blessedness be the chiefest good of nature endued with reason, and that is not the chiefest good which may by any means be taken away, because that which cannot be taken away is better, it is manifest that the instability of fortune cannot aspire to the obtaining of blessedness. moreover, he that now enjoyeth this brittle felicity, either knoweth it to be mutable or no. if not, what estate can be blessed by ignorant blindness? and if he knoweth it, he must needs fear lest he lose that which he doubteth not may be lost, wherefore continual fear permitteth him not to be happy. or though he should lose it, doth he think that a thing of no moment? but so it were a very small good which he would be content to lose. and because thou art one whom i know to be fully persuaded and convinced by innumerable demonstrations that the souls of men are in no wise mortal, and since it is clear that casual felicity is ended by the body's death, there is no doubt, if this can cause blessedness, but that all mankind falleth into misery by death. but if we know many who have sought to reap the fruit of blessedness, not only by death, but also by affliction and torments, how can present happiness make men happy, the loss of which causeth not misery? [ ] _i.e._ sensitive. iv. quisquis uolet perennem cautus ponere sedem stabilisque nec sonori sterni flatibus euri et fluctibus minantem curat spernere pontum, montis cacumen alti, bibulas uitet harenas. illud proteruus auster totis uiribus urget, hae pendulum solutae pondus ferre recusant. fugiens periculosam sortem sedis amoenae humili domum memento certus figere saxo. quamuis tonet ruinis miscens aequora uentus, tu conditus quieti felix robore ualli duces serenus aeuum ridens aetheris iras. iv. who with an heedful care will an eternal seat prepare, which cannot be down cast by force of windy blast, and will the floods despise, when threatening billows do arise, he not on hills must stand, nor on the dangerous sinking sand. for there the winds will threat, and him with furious tempests beat, and here the ground too weak will with the heavy burden break.[ ] fly then the dangerous case of an untried delightful place, and thy poor house bestow in stony places firm and low. for though the winds do sound, and waves of troubled seas confound: yet thou to rest disposed in thy safe lowly vale inclosed, mayst live a quiet age, scorning the air's distempered rage. [ ] literally, "these shifting sands refuse to bear the weight laid upon them." v. sed quoniam rationum iam in te mearum fomenta descendunt, paulo ualidioribus utendum puto. age enim si iam caduca et momentaria fortunae dona non essent, quid in eis est quod aut uestrum umquam fieri queat aut non perspectum consideratumque uilescat? diuitiaene uel uestra uel sui natura pretiosae sunt? quid earum potius, aurumne an uis congesta pecuniae? atqui haec effundendo magis quam coaceruando melius nitent, si quidem auaritia semper odiosos, claros largitas facit. quod si manere apud quemque non potest quod transfertur in alterum, tunc est pretiosa pecunia cum translata in alios largiendi usu desinit possideri. at eadem si apud unum quanta est ubique gentium congeratur, ceteros sui inopes fecerit. et uox quidem tota pariter multorum replet auditum; uestrae uero diuitiae nisi comminutae in plures transire non possunt. quod cum factum est, pauperes necesse est faciant quos relinquunt. o igitur angustas inopesque diuitias quas nec habere totas pluribus licet et ad quemlibet sine ceterorum paupertate non ueniunt! an gemmarum fulgor oculos trahit? sed si quid est in hoc splendore praecipui, gemmarum est lux illa non hominum, quas quidem mirari homines uehementer admiror. quid est enim carens animae motu atque compage quod animatae rationabilique naturae pulchrum esse iure uideatur? quae tametsi conditoris opera suique distinctione postremae aliquid pulchritudinis trahunt, infra uestram tamen excellentiam conlocatae admirationem uestram nullo modo merebantur. an uos agrorum pulchritudo delectat? quidni? est enim pulcherrimi operis pulchra portio. sic quondam sereni maris facie gaudemus; sic caelum sidera lunam solemque miramur. num te horum aliquid attingit? num audes alicuius talium splendore gloriari? an uernis floribus ipse distingueris aut tua in aestiuos fructus intumescit ubertas? quid inanibus gaudiis raperis? quid externa bona pro tuis amplexaris? numquam tua faciet esse fortuna quae a te natura rerum fecit aliena. terrarum quidem fructus animantium procul dubio debentur alimentis. sed si, quod naturae satis est, replere indigentiam uelis, nihil est quod fortunae affluentiam petas. paucis enim minimisque natura contenta est, cuius satietatem si superfluis urgere uelis, aut iniucundum quod infuderis fiet aut noxium. iam uero pulchrum uariis fulgere uestibus putas, quarum si grata intuitu species est, aut materiae naturam aut ingenium mirabor artificis. an uero te longus ordo famulorum facit esse felicem? qui si uitiosi moribus sint, perniciosa domus sarcina et ipsi domino uehementer inimica; sin uero probi, quonam modo in tuis opibus aliena probitas numerabitur? ex quibus omnibus nihil horum quae tu in tuis conputas bonis tuum esse bonum liquido monstratur. quibus si nihil inest appetendae pulchritudinis, quid est quod uel amissis doleas uel laeteris retentis? quod si natura pulchra sunt, quid id tua refert? nam haec per se a tuis quoque opibus sequestrata placuissent. neque enim idcirco sunt pretiosa quod in tuas uenere diuitias, sed quoniam pretiosa uidebantur, tuis ea diuitiis adnumerare maluisti. quid autem tanto fortunae strepitu desideratis? fugare credo indigentiam copia quaeritis. atqui hoc uobis in contrarium cedit. pluribus quippe adminiculis opus est ad tuendam pretiosae supellectilis uarietatem, uerumque illud est permultis eos indigere qui permulta possideant contraque minimum qui abundantiam suam naturae necessitate non ambitus superfluitate metiantur. itane autem nullum est proprium uobis atque insitum bonum ut in externis ac sepositis rebus bona uestra quaeratis? sic rerum uersa condicio est ut diuinum merito rationis animal non aliter sibi splendere nisi inanimatae supellectilis possessione uideatur? et alia quidem suis contenta sunt; uos autem deo mente consimiles ab rebus infimis excellentis naturae ornamenta captatis nec intellegitis quantam conditori uestro faciatis iniuriam. ille genus humanum terrenis omnibus praestare uoluit; uos dignitatem uestram infra infima quaeque detruditis. nam si omne cuiusque bonum eo cuius est constat esse pretiosius, cum uilissima rerum uestra bona esse iudicatis, eisdem uosmet ipsos uestra existimatione submittitis; quod quidem haud inmerito cadit. humanae quippe naturae ista condicio est ut tum tantum ceteris rebus cum se cognoscit excellat, eadem tamen infra bestias redigatur, si se nosse desierit. nam ceteris animantibus sese ignorare naturae est; hominibus uitio uenit. quam uero late patet uester hic error qui ornari posse aliquid ornamentis existimatis alienis? at id fieri nequit. nam si quid ex appositis luceat, ipsa quidem quae sunt apposita laudantur; illud uero his tectum atque uelatum in sua nihilo minus foeditate perdurat. ego uero nego ullum esse bonum quod noceat habenti. num id mentior? 'minime,' inquis. atqui diuitiae possidentibus persaepe nocuerunt, cum pessimus quisque eoque alieni magis auidus quidquid usquam auri gemmarumque est se solum qui habeat dignissimum putat. tu igitur qui nunc contum gladiumque sollicitus pertimescis, si uitae huius callem uacuus uiator intrasses, coram latrone cantares. o praeclara opum mortalium beatitudo quam cum adeptus fueris securus esse desistis! v. but since the soothing of my reasons begins to sink into thee, i will use those which are somewhat more forcible. go to the*n, if the gifts of fortune were not brittle and momentary, what is there in them which can either ever be made your own, or, well weighed and considered, seemeth not vile and of no accompt? are riches precious in virtue either of their own nature or of yours? what part of them can be so esteemed of? the gold or the heaps of money? but these make a fairer show when they are spent than when they are kept. for covetousness alway maketh men odious, as liberality famous. and if a man cannot have that which is given to another, then money is precious when, bestowed upon others, by the use of liberality it is not possessed any longer. but if all the money in the whole world were gathered into one man's custody, all other men should be poor. the voice at the same time wholly filleth the ears of many, but your riches cannot pass to many, except they be diminished, which being done, they must needs make them poor whom they leave. o scant and poor riches, which neither can be wholly possessed of many, and come to none without the impoverishment of others! doth the glittering of jewels draw thy eyes after them? but if there be any great matter in this show, not men but the jewels shine, which i exceedingly marvel that men admire. for what is there wanting life and members that may justly seem beautiful to a nature not only endued with life but also with reason? which, though by their maker's workmanship and their own variety they have some part of basest beauty, yet it is so far inferior to your excellency that it did in no sort deserve your admiration. doth the pleasant prospect of the fields delight you? why not? for it is a fair portion of a most fair work. so we are delighted with a calm sea, so we admire the sky, the stars, the sun, and the moon. do any of these belong to thee? darest thou boast of the beauty which any of them have? art thou thyself adorned with may flowers? or doth thy fertility teem with the fruits of summer? why rejoicest thou vainly? why embracest thou outward goods as if they were thine own? fortune will never make those things thine which by the appointment of nature belong not to thee. the fruits of the earth are doubtless appointed for the sustenance of living creatures. but if thou wilt only satisfy want, which sufficeth nature, there is no cause to require the superfluities of fortune. for nature is contented with little and with the smallest things, and, if, being satisfied, thou wilt overlay it with more than needs, that which thou addest will either become unpleasant or hurtful. but perhaps thou thinkest it a fine thing to go decked in gay apparel, which, if they make a fair show, i will admire either the goodness of the stuff or the invention of the workman. or doth the multitude of servants make thee happy? who, if they be vicious, they are a pernicious burden to thy house, and exceedingly troublesome to their master; and if they be honest, how shall other men's honesty be counted amongst thy treasures? by all which is manifestly proved that none of these goods which thou accountest thine, are thine indeed. and if there is nothing in these worthy to be desired, why art thou either glad when thou hast them or sorry when thou losest them? or what is it to thee, if they be precious by nature? for in this respect they would have pleased thee, though they had belonged to others. for they are not precious because they are come to be thine, but because they seemed precious thou wert desirous to have them. now, what desire you with such loud praise of fortune? perhaps you seek to drive away penury with plenty. but this falleth out quite contrary, for you stand in need of many supplies, to protect all this variety of precious ornaments. and it is true that they which have much, need much; and contrariwise, that they need little which measure not their wealth by the superfluity of ambition, but by the necessity of nature. have you no proper and inward good, that you seek your goods in those things which are outward and separated from you? is the condition of things so changed that a living creature, deservedly accounted divine for the gift of reason, seemeth to have no other excellency than the possession of a little household stuff without life? all other creatures are content with that they have of their own; and you, who in your mind carry the likeness of god, are content to take the ornaments of your excellent nature from the most base and vile things, neither understand you what injury you do your creator. he would have mankind to excel all earthly things; you debase your dignity under every meanest creature. for if it be manifest that the good of everything is more precious than that whose good it is, since you judge the vilest things that can be to be your goods, you deject yourselves under them in your own estimation, which questionless cometh not undeservedly to pass; for this is the condition of man's nature, that then only it surpasseth other things when it knoweth itself, and it is worse than beasts when it is without that knowledge. for in other living creatures the ignorance of themselves is nature, but in men it is vice. and how far doth this error of yours extend, who think that any can be adorned with the ornaments of another? which can in no wise be. for if any adjoined thing seem precious, it is that which is praised, but that which is covered and enwrapped in it remaineth, notwithstanding, with the foul baseness which it hath of itself. moreover, i deny that to be good which hurteth the possessor. am i deceived in this? i am sure thou wilt say no. but riches have often hurt their possessors, since every lewdest companion, who are consequently most desirous of that which is not their own, think themselves most worthy to possess alone all the gold and jewels in the world. wherefore thou, who with much perturbation fearest now to be assailed and slain, if thou hadst entered the path of this life like a poor passenger, needest not be afraid, but mightest rejoice and sing even in the sight of most ravenous thieves.[ ] o excellent happiness of mortal riches, which, when thou hast gotten, thou hast lost thy safety! [ ] cf. juvenal, _sat._ x. - . v. felix nimium prior aetas contenta fidelibus aruis nec inerti perdita luxu, facili quae sera solebat ieiunia soluere glande. non bacchica munera norant liquido confundere melle nec lucida uellera serum tyrio miscere ueneno. somnos dabat herba salubres, potum quoque lubricus amnis, vmbras altissima pinus. nondum maris alta secabat nec mercibus undique lectis noua litora uiderat hospes. tunc classica saeua tacebant, odiis neque fusus acerbis cruor horrida tinxerat arua. quid enim furor hosticus ulla vellet prior arma mouere, cum uulnera saeua uiderent nec praemia sanguinis ulla? vtinam modo nostra redirent in mores tempora priscos! sed saeuior ignibus aetnae feruens amor ardet habendi. heu primus quis fuit ille auri qui pondera tecti gemmasque latere uolentes pretiosa pericula fodit? v. too much the former age was blest, when fields their pleaséd owners failéd not, who, with no slothful lust opprest, broke their long fasts with acorns eas'ly got. no wine with honey mixéd was, nor did they silk in purple colours steep; they slept upon the wholesome grass, and their cool drink did fetch from rivers deep. the pines did hide them with their shade, no merchants through the dangerous billows went, nor with desire of gainful trade their traffic into foreign countries sent. then no shrill trumpets did amate the minds of soldiers with their daunting sounds, nor weapons were with deadly hate dyed with the dreadful blood of gaping wounds. for how could any fury draw the mind of man to stir up war in vain, when nothing but fierce wounds he saw, and for his blood no recompense should gain? o that the ancient manners would in these our latter hapless times return! now the desire of having gold doth like the flaming fires of aetna burn. ah, who was he that first did show the heaps of treasure which the earth did hide, and jewels which lay close below, by which he costly dangers did provide? vi. quid autem de dignitatibus potentiaque disseram quae uos uerae dignitatis ac potestatis inscii caelo exaequatis? quae si in improbissimum quemque ceciderunt, quae flammis aetnae eructuantibus, quod diluuium tantas strages dederint? certe, uti meminisse te arbitror, consulare imperium, quod libertatis principium fuerat, ob superbiam consulum uestri ueteres abolere cupiuerunt, qui ob eandem superbiam prius regium de ciuitate nomen abstulerant. at si quando, quod perrarum est, probis deferantur, quid in eis aliud quam probitas utentium placet? ita fit ut non uirtutibus ex dignitate sed ex uirtute dignitatibus honor accedat. quae uero est ista uestra expetibilis ac praeclara potentia? nonne, o terrena animalia, consideratis quibus qui praesidere uideamini? nunc si inter mures uideres unum aliquem ius sibi ac potestatem prae ceteris uindicantem, quanto mouereris cachinno! quid uero, si corpus spectes, inbecillius homine reperire queas quos saepe muscularum quoque uel morsus uel in secreta quaeque reptantium necat introitus? quo uero quisquam ius aliquod in quempiam nisi in solum corpus et quod infra corpus est, fortunam loquor, possit exserere? num quidquam libero imperabis animo? num mentem firma sibi ratione cohaerentem de statu propriae quietis amouebis? cum liberum quendam uirum suppliciis se tyrannus adacturum putaret, ut aduersum se factae coniurationis conscios proderet, linguam ille momordit atque abscidit et in os tyranni saeuientis abiecit; ita cruciatus, quos putabat tyrannus materiam crudelitatis, uir sapiens fecit esse uirtutis. quid autem est quod in alium facere quisquam[ ] possit, quod sustinere ab alio ipse non possit? busiridem accipimus necare hospites solitum ab hercule hospite fuisse mactatum. regulus plures poenorum bello captos in uincla coniecerat, sed mox ipse uictorum catenis manus praebuit. vllamne igitur eius hominis potentiam putas, qui quod ipse in alio potest, ne id in se alter ualeat efficere non possit? ad haec si ipsis dignitatibus ac potestatibus inesset aliquid naturalis ac proprii boni, numquam pessimis prouenirent. neque enim sibi solent aduersa sociari; natura respuit ut contraria quaeque iungantur. ita cum pessimos plerumque dignitatibus fungi dubium non sit, illud etiam liquet natura sui bona non esse quae se pessimis haerere patiantur. quod quidem de cunctis fortunae muneribus dignius existimari potest, quae ad improbissimum quemque uberiora perueniunt. de quibus illud etiam considerandum puto, quod nemo dubitat esse fortem, cui fortitudinem inesse conspexerit, et cuicumque uelocitas adest manifestum est esse uelocem. sic musica quidem musicos medicina medicos rhetorice rhetores facit. agit enim cuiusque rei natura quod proprium est nec contrariarum rerum miscetur effectibus et ultro quae sunt auersa depellit. atqui nec opes inexpletam restinguere auaritiam queunt nec potestas sui compotem fecerit quem uitiosae libidines insolubilibus adstrictum retinent catenis, et collata improbis dignitas non modo non efficit dignos, sed prodit potius et ostentat indignos. cur ita prouenit? gaudetis enim res sese aliter habentes falsis compellare nominibus quae facile ipsarum rerum redarguuntur effectu; itaque nec illae diuitiae nec illa potentia nec haec dignitas iure appellari potest. postremo idem de tota concludere fortuna licet in qua nihil expetendum, nihil natiuae bonitatis inesse manifestum est, quae nec se bonis semper adiungit et bonos quibus fuerit adiuncta non efficit. [ ] quisque _codd. optimi_. vi. now, why should i discourse of dignities and power which you, not knowing what true dignity and power meaneth, exalt to the skies? and if they light upon wicked men, what aetnas, belching flames, or what deluge can cause so great harms? i suppose thou rememberest how your ancestors, by reason of the consuls' arrogancy, desired to abolish that government which had been the beginning of their freedom, who before, for the same cause, had removed the government of kings from their city. and if sometime, which is very seldom, good men be preferred to honours,[ ] what other thing can give contentment in them but the honesty of those which have them? so that virtues are not honoured by dignities, but dignities by virtue. but what is this excellent power which you esteemed so desirable? consider you not, o earthly wights, whom you seem to excel? for if among mice thou shouldst see one claim jurisdiction and power to himself over the rest, to what a laughter it would move thee! and what, if thou respectest the body, canst thou find more weak than man, whom even the biting of little flies or the entering of creeping worms doth often kill? now, how can any man exercise jurisdiction upon anybody except upon their bodies, and that which is inferior to their bodies, i mean their fortunes? canst thou ever imperiously impose anything upon a free mind? canst thou remove a soul settled in firm reason from the quiet state which it possesseth? when a tyrant thought to compel a certain free man by torments to bewray his confederates of a conspiracy attempted against him, he bit off his tongue, and spit it out upon the cruel tyrant's face,[ ] by that means wisely making those tortures, which the tyrant thought matter of cruelty, to be to him occasion of virtue. now, what is there that any can enforce upon another which he may not himself be enforced to sustain by another? we read that busiris, wont to kill his guests, was himself slain by his guest hercules.[ ] regulus had laid fetters upon many africans taken in war, but ere long he found his own hands environed with his conqueror's chains.[ ] wherefore thinkest thou the power of that man to be anything worth, who cannot hinder another from doing that to him which he can do to another? moreover, if dignities and power had any natural and proper good in them, they would never be bestowed upon the worst men, for one opposite useth not to accompany another; nature refuseth to have contraries joined. so that, since there is no doubt but that men of the worst sort often enjoy dignities, it is also manifest that they are not naturally good which may follow most naughty men. which may more worthily be thought of all fortune's gifts which are more plentifully bestowed upon every lewd companion. concerning which, i take that also to be worthy consideration, that no man doubteth him to be a valiant man in whom he seeth valour, and it is manifest that he which hath swiftness is swift. so, likewise, music maketh musicians, physic physicians, and rhetoric rhetoricians. for the nature of everything doth that which is proper unto it, and is not mixed with contrary effects but repelleth all opposites. but neither can riches extinguish unsatiable avarice, nor power make him master of himself whom vicious lusts keep chained in strongest fetters. and dignity bestowed upon wicked men doth not only not make them worthy but rather bewrayeth and discovereth their unworthiness. how cometh this to pass? because in miscalling things that are otherwise, you take a pleasure which is easily refuted by the effect of the things themselves. wherefore, by right, these things are not to be called riches, this is not to be called power, that is not to be called dignity. lastly, we may conclude the same of all fortunes in which it is manifest there is nothing to be desired, nothing naturally good, which neither are always bestowed upon good men, nor do make them good whom they are bestowed upon. [ ] the subject of _deferantur_ is _dignitates potentiaque_. [ ] the free man was the philosopher anaxarchus: the tyrant, nicocreon the cypriote. for the story see diogenes laertius ix. . [ ] cf. apollod. ii. . ; claudian xviii. ; virg. _georg._ iii. . [ ] cf. cicero, _de off._ iii. . vi. nouimus quantas dederit ruinas vrbe flammata patribusque caesis fratre qui quondam ferus interempto matris effuso maduit cruore corpus et uisu gelidum pererrans ora non tinxit lacrimis, sed esse censor extincti potuit decoris. hic tamen sceptro populos regebat quos uidet condens radios sub undas phoebus extremo ueniens ab ortu, quos premunt septem gelidi triones, quos notus sicco uiolentus aestu torret ardentes recoquens harenas. celsa num tandem ualuit potestas vertere praui rabiem neronis? heu grauem sortem, quotiens iniquus additur saeuo gladius ueneno!" vi. we know what stirs he made who did the senate slay and rome with fire invade, who did his brother kill, and with his mother's blood his moistened hand did fill; who looked on that cold face tearless, and nicely marked her members' several grace.[ ] yet his dread power controlled those people whom the sun doth in the east behold, and those who do remain in western lands or dwell under boötes' wain and those whose skins are tanned with southern winds, which roast and burn the parched sand. what? could this glorious might restrain the furious rage of wicked nero's spite? but oh! mishap most bad, which doth the wicked sword to cruel poison add!" [ ] literally, "but could be the critic of her dead beauty." cf. suet. _nero_ ; tac. _ann._ xiv. . vii. tum ego: "scis," inquam, "ipsa minimum nobis ambitionem mortalium rerum fuisse dominatam. sed materiam gerendis rebus optauimus quo ne uirtus tacita consenesceret." et illa: "atqui hoc unum est quod praestantes quidem natura mentes sed nondum ad extremam manum uirtutum perfectione perductas allicere possit, gloriae scilicet cupido et optimorum in rem publicam fama meritorum; quae quam sit exilis et totius uacua ponderis, sic considera. omnem terrae ambitum, sicuti astrologicis demonstrationibus accepisti, ad caeli spatium puncti constat obtinere rationem, id est ut, si ad caelestis globi magnitudinem conferatur, nihil spatii prorsus habere iudicetur. huius igitur tam exiguae in mundo regionis quarta fere portio est, sicut ptolomaeo probante didicisti, quae nobis cognitis animantibus incolatur. huic quartae, si quantum maria paludesque premunt quantumque siti uasta regio distenditur cogitatione subtraxeris, uix angustissima inhabitandi hominibus area relinquetur. in hoc igitur minimo puncti quodam puncto circumsaepti atque conclusi de peruulganda fama, de proferendo nomine cogitatis? aut quid habeat amplum magnificumque gloria tam angustis exiguisque limitibus artata? adde quod hoc ipsum breuis habitaculi saeptum plures incolunt nationes lingua, moribus, totius uitae ratione distantes, ad quas tum difficultate itinerum tum loquendi diuersitate tum commercii insolentia non modo fama hominum singulorum sed ne urbium quidem peruenire queat. aetate denique marci tullii, sicut ipse quodam loco significat, nondum caucasum montem romanae rei publicae fama transcenderat, et erat tunc adulta parthis etiam ceterisque id locorum gentibus formidolosa. videsne igitur quam sit angusta, quam compressa gloria quam dilatare ac propagare laboratis? an ubi romani nominis transire fama nequit, romani hominis gloria progredietur? quid quod diuersarum gentium mores inter se atque instituta discordant, ut quod apud alios laude apud alios supplicio dignum iudicetur. quo fit ut si quem famae praedicatio delectat, huic in plurimos populos nomen proferre nullo modo conducat. erit igitur peruagata inter suos gloria quisque contentus et intra unius gentis terminos praeclara illa famae inmortalitas coartabitur. sed quam multos clarissimos suis temporibus uiros scriptorum inops deleuit obliuio! quamquam quid ipsa scripta proficiant, quae cum suis auctoribus premit longior atque obscura uetustas? vos uero inmortalitatem uobis propagare uidemini, cum futuri famam temporis cogitatis. quod si aeternitatis infinita spatia pertractes, quid habes quod de nominis tui diuturnitate laeteris? vnius etenim mora momenti, si decem milibus conferatur annis, quoniam utrumque spatium definitum est, minimam, licet, habet tamen aliquam portionem. at hic ipse numerus annorum eiusque quamlibet multiplex ad interminabilem diuturnitatem ne comparari quidem potest. etenim finitis ad se inuicem fuerit quaedam, infiniti uero atque finiti nulla umquam poterit esse collatio. ita fit ut quamlibet prolixi temporis fama, si cum inexhausta aeternitate cogitetur, non parua sed plane nulla esse uideatur. vos autem nisi ad populares auras inanesque rumores recte facere nescitis et relicta conscientiae uirtutisque praestantia de alienis praemia sermunculis postulatis. accipe in huiusmodi arrogantiae leuitate quam festiue aliquis inluserit. nam cum quidam adortus esset hominem contumeliis, qui non ad uerae uirtutis usum sed ad superbam gloriam falsum sibi philosophi nomen induerat, adiecissetque iam se sciturum, an ille philosophus esset, si quidem illatas iniurias leniter patienterque tolerasset, ille patientiam paulisper adsumpsit acceptaque contumelia uelut insultans: 'iam tandem,' inquit, 'intellegis me esse philosophum?' tum ille nimium mordaciter: 'intellexeram,' inquit, 'si tacuisses.' quid autem est quod ad praecipuos uiros, de his enim sermo est, qui uirtute gloriam petunt, quid, inquam, est quod ad hos de fama post resolutum morte suprema corpus attineat? nam si, quod nostrae rationes credi uetant, toti moriuntur homines, nulla est omnino gloria, cum is cuius ea esse dicitur non exstet omnino. sin uero bene sibi mens conscia terreno carcere resoluta caelum libera petit, nonne omne terrenum negotium spernat quae se caelo fruens terrenis gaudet exemptam? vii. then i said: "thou thyself knowest that the ambition of mortal things hath borne as little sway with me as with any, but i desired matter of action, lest old age should come upon me ere i had done anything." to which she answered: "this is the only thing which is able to entice such minds as, being well qualified by nature, are not yet fully brought to full excellence by the perfecting of virtues, i mean desire of glory, and fame of best deserts towards their commonwealth, which how slender it is, and void of all weight, consider this: thou hast learnt by astronomical demonstrations that the compass of the whole earth compared to the scope of heaven is no bigger than a pin's point, which is as much as to say that, if it be conferred with the greatness of the celestial sphere, it hath no bigness at all. and of this so small a region in the world only the fourth part is known to be inhabited by living creatures known to us, as ptolemy[ ] proveth. from which fourth part, if thou takest away in imagination the seas, the marsh grounds, and all other desert places, there will scarcely be left any room at all for men to inhabit. wherefore, enclosed and shut up in this smallest point of that other point, do you think of extending your fame and enlarging your name? but what great or heroical matter can that glory have, which is pent up in so small and narrow bounds? besides that the little compass of this small habitation is inhabited by many nations, different in language, fashions, and conversation, to which by reason of the difficulties in travelling, the diversity of speech, and the scarcity of traffic, not only the fame of particular men but even of cities can hardly come. finally, in the age of marcus tullius, as he himself writeth,[ ] the fame of the roman commonwealth had not passed the mountain caucasus, and yet it was then in the most flourishing estate, fearful even to the parthians and to the rest of the nations about. seest thou therefore how strait and narrow that glory is which you labour to enlarge and increase? where the fame of the roman name could not pass, can the glory of a roman man penetrate? moreover, the customs and laws of diverse nations do so much differ the one from the other, that the same thing which some commend as laudable, others condemn as deserving punishment. so that if a man be delighted with the praise of fame, it is no way convenient for him to be named in many countries. wherefore, every man must be content with that glory which he may have at home, and that noble immortality of fame must be comprehended within the compass of one nation. now, how many, most famous while they lived, are altogether forgotten for want of writers! though what do writings themselves avail which perish, as well as their authors, by continuance and obscurity of time? but you imagine that you make yourselves immortal when you cast your eyes upon future fame. whereas, if thou weighest attentively the infinite spaces of eternity, what cause hast thou to rejoice at the prolonging of thy name? for if we compare the stay of one moment with ten thousand years, since both be limited, they have some proportion, though it be but very small. but this number of years, how oft so ever it be multiplied, is no way comparable to endless eternity. for limited things may in some sort be compared among themselves, but that which is infinite admitteth no comparison at all with the limited. so that the fame of never so long time, if it be compared with everlasting eternity, seemeth not little but none at all. but without popular blasts and vain rumours you know not how to do well, and, rejecting the excellency of a good conscience and of virtue, you choose to be rewarded with others' tattling. hear how pleasantly one jested at this vain and contemptible arrogancy. for having assaulted with reproachful speeches a certain fellow who had falsely taken upon him the name of a philosopher, not for the use of virtue but for vainglory, and having added that now he would know whether he were a philosopher or no by his gentle and patient bearing of injuries, the other took all patiently for a while, and having borne his contumely, as it were, triumphing, said: 'dost thou now at length think me a philosopher?' to which he bitingly replied: 'i would have thought thee one if thou hadst holden thy peace.' but what have excellent men (for of these i speak) who seek for glory by virtue, what have we, i say, to expect for these by fame after final death hath dissolved the body? for if, contrary to our belief, men wholly perish, there is no glory at all, since he to whom it is said to belong is nowhere extant. but if a guiltless mind freed from earthly imprisonment goeth forthwith to heaven, will she not despise all earthly traffic who, enjoying heaven, rejoiceth to see herself exempted from earthly affairs? [ ] claudius ptolemaeus, mathematician, astronomer, geographer, fl. a.d. - . [ ] cf. _somn. scip._ . ap. macr. _comment._ ii. . vii. quicumque solam mente praecipiti petit summumque credit gloriam, late patentes aetheris cernat plagas artumque terrarum situm. breuem replere non ualentis ambitum pudebit aucti nominis. quid o superbi colla mortali iugo frustra leuare gestiunt? licet remotos fama per populos means diffusa linguas explicet et magna titulis fulgeat claris domus, mors spernit altam gloriam, inuoluit humile pariter et celsum caput aequatque summis infima. vbi nunc fidelis ossa fabricii manent, quid brutus aut rigidus cato? signat superstes fama tenuis pauculis inane nomen litteris. sed quod decora nouimus uocabula, num scire consumptos datur? iacetis ergo prorsus ignorabiles nec fama notos efficit. quod si putatis longius uitam trahi mortalis aura nominis, cum sera uobis rapiet hoc etiam dies, iam uos secunda mors manet. vii. he that to honour only seeks to mount and that his chiefest end doth count, let him behold the largeness of the skies and on the strait earth cast his eyes; he will despise the glory of his name, which cannot fill so small a frame. why do proud men scorn that their necks should bear that yoke which every man must wear? though fame through many nations fly along and should be blazed by every tongue, and houses shine with our forefathers' stories, yet death contemns these stately glories, and, summoning both rich and poor to die, makes the low equal with the high. who knows where faithful fabrice' bones are pressed, where brutus and strict cato rest?[ ] a slender fame consigns their titles vain in some few letters to remain. because their famous names in books we read, come we by them to know the dead? you dying, then, remembered are by none, nor any fame can make you known. but if you think that life outstrippeth death, your names borne up with mortal breath, when length of time takes this away likewise, a second death shall you surprise. [ ] caius luscinus fabricius, consul b.c., opponent of pyrrhus; lucius iunius brutus, consul b.c., founder of the republic; marcus porcius cato (cato maior). consul b.c., great-grandfather of m. porcius cato (uticensis). viii. sed ne me inexorabile contra fortunam gerere bellum putes, est aliquando cum de hominibus illa, fallax illa nihil, bene mereatur, tum scilicet cum se aperit, cum frontem detegit moresque profitetur. nondum forte quid loquar intellegis. mirum est quod dicere gestio, eoque sententiam uerbis explicare uix queo. etenim plus hominibus reor aduersam quam prosperam prodesse fortunam. illa enim semper specie felicitatis cum uidetur blanda, mentitur; haec semper uera est, cum se instabilem mutatione demonstrat. illa fallit, haec instruit, illa mendacium specie bonorum mentes fruentium ligat, haec cognitione fragilis felicitatis absoluit. itaque illam uideas uentosam, fluentem suique semper ignaram, hanc sobriam succinctamque et ipsius aduersitatis exercitatione prudentem. postremo felix a uero bono deuios blanditiis trahit, aduersa plerumque ad uera bona reduces unco retrahit. an hoc inter minima aestimandum putas quod amicorum tibi fidelium mentes haec aspera, haec horribilis fortuna detexit, haec tibi certos sodalium uultus ambiguosque secreuit, discedens suos abstulit, tuos reliquit? quanti hoc integer, ut uidebaris tibi fortunatus, emisses! nunc et amissas opes querere; quod pretiosissimum diuitiarum genus est amicos inuenisti. viii. but lest thou shouldst think that i am at implacable war with fortune, there is a time when this thy goddess ceasing to deceive deserveth of men, to wit, when she declareth herself, when she discovereth her face and showeth herself in her own colours. perhaps thou understandest not yet what i say. i would utter a wonderful thing, insomuch as i can scarcely explicate my mind in words. for i think that fortune, when she is opposite, is more profitable to men than when she is favourable. for in prosperity, by a show of happiness and seeming to caress, she is ever false, but in adversity when she showeth herself inconstant by changing, she is ever true. in that she deceiveth, in this she instructeth; in that she imprisoneth the minds of men with falsely seeming goods, which they enjoy, in this she setteth them at liberty by discovering the uncertainty of them. wherefore, in that thou shalt alway see her puffed up, and wavering, and blinded with a self-conceit of herself, in this thou shalt find her sober, settled, and, with the very exercise of adversity, wise. finally, prosperity with her flatterings withdraweth men from true goodness, adversity recalleth and reclaimeth them many times by force[ ] to true happiness. dost thou esteem it a small benefit that this rough and harsh fortune hath made known unto thee the minds of thy faithful friends? she hath severed thy assured from thy doubtful friends; prosperity at her departure took away with her those which were hers, and left thee thine. how dearly wouldst thou have bought this before thy fall, and when thou seemedst to thyself fortunate! now thou dost even lament thy lost riches; thou hast found friends, the most precious treasure in the world. [ ] literally, "pulleth them back with a hook." viii. quod mundus stabili fide concordes uariat uices, quod pugnantia semina foedus perpetuum tenent, quod phoebus roseum diem curru prouehit aureo, vt quas duxerit hesperos phoebe noctibus imperet, vt fluctus auidum mare certo fine coerceat, ne terris liceat uagis latos tendere terminos, hanc rerum seriem ligat terras ac pelagus regens et caelo imperitans amor. hic si frena remiserit, quidquid nunc amat inuicem bellum continuo geret et quam nunc socia fide pulchris motibus incitant*, certent soluere machinam. hic sancto populos quoque iunctos foedere continet, hic et coniugii sacrum castis nectit amoribus, hic fidis etiam sua dictat iura sodalibus. o felix hominum genus, si uestros animos amor quo caelum regitur regat." viii. that this fair world in settled course her several forms should vary, that a perpetual law should tame the fighting seeds of things, that phoebus should the rosy day in his bright chariot carry, that phoebe should govern the nights which hesperus forth brings, that to the floods of greedy seas are certain bounds assigned, which them, lest they usurp too much upon the earth, debar, love ruling heaven, and earth, and seas, them in this course doth bind. and if it once let loose their reins, their friendship turns to war, tearing the world whose ordered form their quiet motions bear. by it all holy laws are made and marriage rites are tied, by it is faithful friendship joined. how happy mortals were, if that pure love did guide their minds, which heavenly spheres doth guide!" anicii manlii severini boethii v.c. et inl. excons. ord. patricii philosophiae consolationis liber secvndvs explicit incipit liber iii. i. iam cantum illa finiuerat, cum me audiendi auidum stupentemque arrectis adhuc auribus carminis mulcedo defixerat. itaque paulo post: "o," inquam, "summum lassorum solamen animorum quam tu me uel sententiarum pondere uel canendi etiam iucunditate refouisti! adeo ut iam me post haec inparem fortunae ictibus esse non arbitrer. itaque remedia quae paulo acriora esse dicebas, non modo non perhorresco, sed audiendi auidus uehementer efflagito." tum illa "sensi," inquit, "cum uerba nostra tacitus attentusque rapiebas, eumque tuae mentis habitum uel exspectaui uel, quod est uerius, ipsa perfeci. talia sunt quippe quae restant, ut degustata quidem mordeant, interius autem recepta dulcescant. sed quod tu te audiendi cupidum dicis, quanto ardore flagrares, si quonam te ducere aggrediamur agnosceres!" "quonam?" inquam. "ad ueram," inquit, "felicitatem, quam tuus quoque somniat animus, sed occupato ad imagines uisu ipsam illam non potest intueri." tum ego: "fac obsecro et quae illa uera sit, sine cunctatione demonstra." "faciam," inquit illa, "tui causa libenter. sed quae tibi causa notior est, eam prius designare uerbis atque informare conabor ut ea perspecta cum in contrariam partem flexeris oculos, uerae beatitudinis speciem possis agnoscere. the third book of boethius i. though she had ended her verse, yet the sweetness of it made me remain astonished, attentive, and desirous to hear her longer. wherefore, after a while, i said: "o most effectual refreshment of wearied minds, how have i been comforted with thy weighty sentences and pleasing music! insomuch that i begin to think myself not unable to encounter the assaults of fortune. wherefore, i am not now afraid, but rather earnestly desire to know those remedies, which before thou toldest me were too sharp." to which she answered: "i perceived as much as thou sayest, when i saw thee hearken to my speeches with so great silence and attention, and i expected this disposition of thy mind, or rather more truly caused it myself. for the remedies which remain are of that sort that they are bitter to the taste, but being inwardly received wax sweet. and whereas thou sayest that thou art desirous to hear; how much would this desire increase if thou knewest whither we go about to bring thee!" "whither?" quoth i. "to true felicity," quoth she, "which thy mind also dreameth of, but thy sight is so dimmed with phantasies that thou canst not behold it as it is." then i beseeched her to explicate without delay wherein true happiness consisteth. to which she answered: "i will willingly do so for thy sake, but first i will endeavour to declare in words and to give shape to that which is better known unto thee, that, having thoroughly understood it, by reflecting of the contrary thou mayest discover the type of perfect blessedness. i. qui serere ingenuum uolet agrum, liberat arua prius fruticibus, falce rubos filicemque resecat, vt noua fruge grauis ceres eat. dulcior est apium mage labor, si malus ora prius sapor edat. gratius astra nitent ubi notus desinit imbriferos dare sonos. lucifer ut tenebras pepulerit pulchra dies roseos agit equos. tu quoque falsa tuens bona prius incipe colla iugo retrahere. vera dehinc animum subierint." i. he that a fruitful field will sow, doth first the ground from bushes free, all fern and briars likewise mow, that he his harvest great may see. honey seems sweeter to our taste, if cloyed with noisome food it be. stars clearer shine when notus' blast hath ceased the rainy storms to breed. when lucifer hath night defaced, the day's bright horses then succeed. so thou, whom seeming goods do feed, first shake off yokes which so thee press that truth may then thy mind possess." ii. tum defixo paululum uisu et uelut in augustam suae mentis sedem recepta sic coepit: "omnis mortalium cura quam multiplicium studiorum labor exercet, diuerso quidem calle procedit, sed ad unum tamen beatitudinis finem nititur peruenire. id autem est bonum quo quis adepto nihil ulterius desiderare queat. quod quidem est omnium summum bonorum cunctaque intra se bona continens, cui si quid aforet summum esse non posset, quoniam relinqueretur extrinsecus quod posset optari. liquet igitur esse beatitudinem statum bonorum omnium congregatione perfectum. hunc, uti diximus, diuerso tramite mortales omnes conantur adipisci. est enim mentibus hominum ueri boni naturaliter inserta cupiditas, sed ad falsa deuius error abducit. quorum quidem alii summum bonum esse nihilo indigere credentes ut diuitiis affluant elaborant; alii uero bonum quod sit dignissimum ueneratione iudicantes adeptis honoribus reuerendi ciuibus suis esse nituntur. sunt qui summum bonum in summa potentia esse constituant; hi uel regnare ipsi uolunt uel regnantibus adhaerere conantur. at quibus optimum quiddam claritas uidetur, hi uel belli uel pacis artibus gloriosum nomen propagare festinant. plurimi uero boni fructum gaudio laetitiaque metiuntur; hi felicissimum putant uoluptate diffluere. sunt etiam qui horum fines causasque alterutro permutent, ut qui diuitias ob potentiam uoluptatesque desiderant uel qui potentiam seu pecuniae causa seu proferendi nominis appetunt. in his igitur ceterisque talibus humanorum actuum uotorumque uersatur intentio, ueluti nobilitas fauorque popularis quae uidentur quandam claritudinem comparare, uxor ac liberi quae iucunditatis gratia petuntur; amicorum uero quod sanctissimum quidem genus est, non in fortuna sed in uirtute numeratur, reliquum uero uel potentiae causa uel delectationis assumitur. iam uero corporis bona promptum est ut ad superiora referantur. robur enim magnitudoque uidetur praestare ualentiam, pulchritudo atque uelocitas celebritatem, salubritas uoluptatem; quibus omnibus solam beatitudinem desiderari liquet. nam quod quisque prae ceteris petit, id summum esse iudicat bonum. sed summum bonum beatitudinem esse definiuimus; quare beatum esse iudicat statum quem prae ceteris quisque desiderat. habes igitur ante oculos propositam fere formam felicitatis humanae--opes, honores, potentiam, gloriam, uoluptates. quae quidem sola considerans epicurus consequenter sibi summum bonum uoluptatem esse constituit, quod cetera omnia iucunditatem animo uideantur afferre. sed ad hominum studia reuertor, quorum animus etsi caligante memoria tamen bonum suum repetit, sed uelut ebrius domum quo tramite reuertatur ignorat. num enim uidentur errare hi qui nihilo indigere nituntur? atqui non est aliud quod aeque perficere beatitudinem possit quam copiosus bonorum omnium status nec alieni egens sed sibi ipse sufficiens. num uero labuntur hi qui quod sit optimum, id etiam reuerentiae cultu dignissimum putent? minime. neque enim uile quiddam contemnendumque est quod adipisci omnium fere mortalium laborat intentio. an in bonis non est numeranda potentia? quid igitur? num imbecillum ac sine uiribus aestimandum est, quod omnibus rebus constat esse praestantius? an claritudo nihili pendenda est? sed sequestrari nequit quin omne quod excellentissimum sit id etiam uideatur esse clarissimum. nam non esse anxiam tristemque beatitudinem nec doloribus molestiisque subiectam quid attinet dicere, quando in minimis quoque rebus id appetitur quod habere fruique delectet? atqui haec sunt quae adipisci homines uolunt eaque de causa diuitias, dignitates, regna, gloriam uoluptatesque desiderant quod per haec sibi sufficientiam, reuerentiam, potentiam, celebritatem, laetitiam credunt esse uenturam. bonum est igitur quod tam diuersis studiis homines petunt; in quo quanta sit naturae uis facile monstratur, cum licet uariae dissidentesque sententiae tamen in diligendo boni fine consentiunt. ii. then, for a while looking steadfastly upon the ground, and, as it were, retiring herself to the most secret seat of her soul, she began in this manner: "all men's thoughts, which are turmoiled with manifold cares, take indeed divers courses, but yet endeavour to attain the same end of happiness, which is that good which, being once obtained, nothing can be further desired. which is the chiefest of all goods, and containeth in itself whatsoever is good, and if it wanted anything it could not be the chiefest, because there would something remain besides it which might be wished for. wherefore, it is manifest that blessedness is an estate replenished with all that is good. this, as we said, all men endeavour to obtain by divers ways. for there is naturally ingrafted in men's minds an earnest desire of that which is truly good; but deceitful error withdraweth it to that which falsely seemeth such. so that some, esteeming it their greatest good to want nothing, labour by all means to abound with riches; others, deeming that to be good which is most deserving of honour, hunt after preferments, to be respected by their fellow-citizens. others think it the greatest felicity to have great power and authority, and these will either reign themselves or at least procure to be great with princes. but they who think fame better than all these, make all speed possible to spread their names far and near, by achieving some worthy enterprise either in war or peace. many measure good by joy and mirth, and their chiefest care is how they may abound with pleasure. some interchange the ends and means of these things one with the other, wanting now riches for the sake of power and pleasure, now power for the sake of wealth and fame. at these and such other do men's actions and desires aim, as nobility and popularity, which make men esteemed; wife and children, which bring pleasure and delight. but friendship, that most sacred thing, is rather to be attributed to virtue than to fortune. other things for the most part are desired either for power or pleasure. and it is an easy matter to reduce all corporal goods to the former heads. for strength and greatness give ability; beauty and swiftness, fame; and health yieldeth pleasure. by all which we manifestly seek for nothing else but happiness. for that which every man seeketh most after, is by him esteemed his greatest good. which is all one with happiness. wherefore he esteemeth that estate happy which he preferreth before all other. and thus thou hast in a manner seen the form of human felicity--riches, honour, power, glory, pleasure. which epicurus only considering, consequently took pleasure for his chiefest good, because all the rest seemed to delight the mind. but i return to the careful thoughts of men, whose minds, though obscured, yet seek after the greatest good, but like a drunken man know not the way home. for seem they to err who endeavour to want nothing? but nothing can cause happiness so much as the plentiful possession of all that is good, needing the help of none, but is sufficient of itself. or do they err who take that which is best to be likewise most worthy of respect? no. for it is no vile or contemptible thing which almost all men labour to obtain. or is not power to be esteemed good? why, then, is that to be accounted feeble and of no force, which manifestly surpasses all other things? or is fame to be contemned? but it cannot be ignored that the most excellent is also most famous. for to what purpose should i say that happiness is not sad or melancholy, or subject to grief and trouble, when even in smallest matters we desire that which we delight to have and enjoy? and these be the things which men desire to obtain, and to this end procure riches, dignities, kingdoms, glory, and pleasures, because by them they think to have sufficiency, respect, power, fame, delight, and joy. wherefore, that is good which men seek after by divers desires, in which the force of nature is easily descried, since though there be many and different opinions, yet they agree in choosing for their end that which is good. ii. quantas rerum flectat habenas natura potens, quibus inmensum legibus orbem prouida seruet stringatque ligans inresoluto singula nexu, placet arguto fidibus lentis promere cantu. quamuis poeni pulchra leones vincula gestent manibusque datas captent escas metuantque trucem soliti uerbera ferre magistrum, si cruor horrida tinxerit ora, resides olim redeunt animi fremituque graui meminere sui; laxant nodis colla solutis primusque lacer dente cruento domitor rabidas imbuit iras. quae canit altis garrula ramis ales caueae clauditur antro; huic licet inlita pocula melle largasque dapes dulci studio ludens hominum cura ministret, si tamen arto saliens texto nemorum gratas uiderit umbras, sparsas pedibus proterit escas, siluas tantum maesta requirit, siluas dulci uoce susurrat. validis quondam uiribus acta pronum flectit uirga cacumen; hanc si curuans dextra remisit, recto spectat uertice caelum. cadit hesperias phoebus in undas, sed secreto tramite rursus currum solitos uertit ad ortus. repetunt proprios quaeque recursus redituque suo singula gaudent nec manet ulli traditus ordo nisi quod fini iunxerit ortum stabilemque sui fecerit orbem. ii. how the first reins of all things guided are by powerful nature as the chiefest cause, and how she keeps, with a foreseeing care, the spacious world in order by her laws, and to sure knots which nothing can untie, by her strong hand all earthly motions draws-- to show all this we purpose now to try our pliant string, our musick's thrilling sound. although the libyan lions often lie gentle and tame in splendid fetters bound,[ ] and fearing their incensed master's wrath, with patient looks endure each blow and wound, yet if their jaws they once in blood do bathe, they, gaining courage,[ ] with fierce noise awake the force which nature in them seated hath, and from their necks the broken chains do shake; then he that tamed them first doth feel their rage, and torn in pieces doth their fury slake. the bird shut up in an unpleasing cage, which on the lofty trees did lately sing, though men, her want of freedom to assuage, should unto her with careful labour bring the sweetest meats which they can best devise, yet when within her prison fluttering the pleasing shadows of the groves she spies, her hated food she scatters with her feet, in yearning spirit to the woods she flies, the woods' delights do tune her accents sweet. when some strong hand doth tender plant constrain with his debased top the ground to meet, if it let go, the crooked twig again up toward heaven itself it straight doth raise. phoebus doth fall into the western main, yet doth he back return by secret ways, and to the earth doth guide his chariot's race. each thing a certain course and laws obeys, striving to turn back to his proper place; nor any settled order can be found, but that which doth within itself embrace the births and ends of all things in a round. [ ] literally, "and take food offered by the hand." [ ] literally, "their spirits, hitherto sluggish, return." iii. vos quoque, o terrena animalia, tenui licet imagine uestrum tamen principium somniatis uerumque illum beatitudinis finem licet minime perspicaci qualicumque tamen cogitatione prospicitis eoque uos et ad uerum bonum naturalis ducit intentio et ab eodem multiplex error abducit. considera namque an per ea quibus se homines adepturos beatitudinem putant ad destinatum finem ualeant peruenire. si enim uel pecuniae uel honores ceteraque tale quid afferunt cui nihil bonorum abesse uideatur, nos quoque fateamur fieri aliquos horum adeptione felices. quod si neque id ualent efficere quod promittunt bonisque pluribus carent, nonne liquido falsa in eis beatitudinis species deprehenditur? primum igitur te ipsum qui paulo ante diuitiis affluebas, interrogo: inter illas abundantissimas opes numquamne animum tuum concepta ex qualibet iniuria confudit anxietas?" "atqui," inquam, "libero me fuisse animo quin aliquid semper angerer reminisci non queo." "nonne quia uel aberat quod abesse non uelles uel aderat quod adesse noluisses?" "ita est," inquam. "illius igitur praesentiam huius absentiam desiderabas?" "confiteor," inquam. "eget uero," inquit, "eo quod quisque desiderat?" "eget," inquam. "qui uero eget aliquo, non est usquequaque sibi ipse sufficiens?" "minime," inquam. "tu itaque hanc insufficientiam plenus," inquit, "opibus sustinebas?" "quidni?" inquam. "opes igitur nihilo indigentem sufficientemque sibi facere nequeunt et hoc erat quod promittere uidebantur. atqui hoc quoque maxime considerandum puto quod nihil habeat suapte natura pecunia ut his a quibus possidetur inuitis nequeat auferri." "fateor," inquam. "quidni fateare, cum eam cotidie ualentior aliquis eripiat inuito? vnde enim forenses querimoniae nisi quod uel ui uel fraude nolentibus pecuniae repetuntur ereptae?" "ita est," inquam. "egebit igitur," inquit, "extrinsecus petito praesidio quo suam pecuniam quisque tueatur?" "quis id," inquam, "neget?" "atqui non egeret eo, nisi possideret pecuniam quam posset amittere?" "dubitari," inquam, "nequit." "in contrarium igitur relapsa res est; nam quae sufficientes sibi facere putabantur opes, alieno potius praesidio faciunt indigentes. quis autem modus est quo pellatur diuitiis indigentia? num enim diuites esurire nequeunt? num sitire non possunt? num frigus hibernum pecuniosorum membra non sentiunt? sed adest, inquies, opulentis quo famem satient, quo sitim frigusque depellant. sed hoc modo consolari quidem diuitiis indigentia potest, auferri penitus non potest. nam si haec hians semper atque aliquid poscens opibus expletur, maneat necesse est quae possit expleri. taceo quod naturae minimum, quod auaritiae nihil satis est. quare si opes nec submouere possunt indigentiam et ipsae suam faciunt, quid est quod eas sufficientiam praestare credatis? iii. you also, o earthly creatures, though slightly and as it were in a dream acknowledge your beginning, and though not perspicuously yet in some sort behold that true end of happiness, so that the intention of nature leadeth you to the true good, and manifold error withdraweth you from it. for consider whether those things, by which men think to obtain happiness, can bring them to their desired end. for if either money, or honour, or any of the rest be of that quality that they want nothing which is good, we will also confess that they are able to make men happy. but if they neither be able to perform that they promise, and want many things which are good, are they not manifestly discovered to have a false appearance of happiness? first then, i ask thee thyself, who not long since didst abound with wealth; in that plenty of riches, was thy mind never troubled with any injuries?" "i cannot remember," quoth i, "that ever my mind was so free from trouble but that something or other still vexed me." "was it not because thou either wantedst something which thou wouldst have had, or else hadst something which thou wouldst have wanted?" "it is true," quoth i. "then thou desiredst the presence of that, and the absence of this?" "i confess i did," quoth i. "and doth not a man want that," quoth she, "which he desireth?" "he doth," quoth i. "but he that wanteth anything is not altogether sufficient of himself?" "he is not," quoth i. "so that thou feltest this insufficiency, even the height of thy wealth?" "why not?" quoth i. "then riches cannot make a man wanting nothing nor sufficient of himself, and this was that they seemed to promise. but this is most of all to be considered, that money hath nothing of itself which can keep it from being taken from them which possess it, against their will." "i grant it," quoth i. "why shouldst thou not grant it, since that every day those which are more potent take it from others perforce? for from whence proceed so many complaints in law, but that money gotten either by violence or deceit is sought to be recovered by that means?" "it is so indeed," quoth i. "so that every man needeth some other help to defend his money?" "who denies that?" quoth i. "but he should not need that help, unless he had money which he might lose?" "there is no doubt of that," quoth i. "now then the matter is fallen out quite contrary; for riches, which are thought to suffice of themselves, rather make men stand in need of other helps. and after what manner do riches expel penury? for are not rich men hungry? are they not thirsty? or doth much money make the owners senseless of cold in winter? but thou wilt say, wealthy men have wherewithal to satisfy their hunger, slake their thirst, and defend themselves from cold. but in this sort, though want may be somewhat relieved by wealth, yet it cannot altogether be taken away. for if ever gaping and craving it be satiated by riches, there must needs always remain something to be satiated. i omit, that to nature very little, to covetousness nothing is sufficient. wherefore if riches can neither remove wants, and cause some themselves, why imagine you that they can cause sufficiency? iii. quamuis fluente diues auri gurgite non expleturas cogat auarus opes oneretque bacis colla rubri litoris ruraque centeno scindat opima boue, nec cura mordax deseret superstitem, defunctumque leues non comitantur opes. iii. although the rich man from his mines of gold dig treasure which his mind can never fill, and lofty neck with precious pearls enfold, and his fat fields with many oxen till, yet biting cares will never leave his head, nor will his wealth attend him being dead. iv. sed dignitates honorabilem reuerendumque cui prouenerint reddunt. num uis ea est magistratibus ut utentium mentibus uirtutes inserant uitia depellant? atqui non fugare sed illustrare potius nequitiam solent; quo fit ut indignemur eas saepe nequissimis hominibus contigisse, unde catullus licet in curuli nonium sedentem strumam tamen appellat. videsne quantum malis dedecus adiciant dignitates? atqui minus eorum patebit indignitas, si nullis honoribus inclarescant. tu quoque num tandem tot periculis adduci potuisti ut cum decorato gerere magistratum putares, cum in eo mentem nequissimi scurrae delatorisque respiceres? non enim possumus ob honores reuerentia dignos iudicare quos ipsis honoribus iudicamus indignos. at si quem sapientia praeditum uideres, num posses eum uel reuerentia uel ea qua est praeditus sapientia non dignum putare? minime. inest enim dignitas propria uirtuti, quam protinus in eos quibus fuerit adiuncta transfundit. quod quia populares facere nequeunt honores, liquet eos propriam dignitatis pulchritudinem non habere. in quo illud est animaduertendum magis. nam si eo abiectior est quo magis a pluribus quisque contemnitur, cum reuerendos facere nequeat quos pluribus ostentat, despectiores potius improbos dignitas facit. verum non impune; reddunt namque improbi parem dignitatibus uicem quas sua contagione commaculant. atque ut agnoscas ueram illam reuerentiam per has umbratiles dignitates non posse contingere; si qui multiplici consulatu functus in barbaras nationes forte deuenerit, uenerandumne barbaris honor faciet? atqui si hoc naturale munus dignitatibus foret, ab officio suo quoquo gentium nullo modo cessarent, sicut ignis ubique terrarum numquam tamen calere desistit, sed quoniam id eis non propria uis sed hominum fallax adnectit opinio, uanescunt ilico, cum ad eos uenerint qui dignitates eas esse non aestimant. sed hoc apud exteras nationes. inter eos uero apud quos ortae sunt, num perpetuo perdurant? atqui praetura magna olim potestas nunc inane nomen et senatorii census grauis sarcina; si quis populi quondam curasset annonam, magnus habebatur, nunc ea praefectura quid abiectius? vt enim paulo ante diximus, quod nihil habet proprii decoris, opinione utentium nunc splendorem accipit nunc amittit. si igitur reuerendos facere nequeunt dignitates, si ultro improborum contagione sordescunt, si mutatione temporum splendere desinunt, si gentium aestimatione uilescunt, quid est quod in se expetendae pulchritudinis habeant, nedum aliis praestent? iv. but dignities make him honourable and reverend on whom they light. have offices that force to plant virtues and expel vices in the minds of those who have them? but they are not wont to banish, but rather to make wickedness splendid. so that we many times complain because most wicked men obtain them. whereupon catullus called nonius a scab or impostume though he sat in his chair of estate.[ ] seest thou what great ignominy dignities heap upon evil men? for their unworthiness would less appear if they were never advanced to any honours. could so many dangers ever make thee think to bear office with decoratus,[ ] having discovered him to be a very varlet and spy? for we cannot for their honours account them worthy of respect whom we judge unworthy of the honours themselves. but if thou seest any man endued with wisdom, canst thou esteem him unworthy of that respect or wisdom which he hath? no, truly. for virtue hath a proper dignity of her own, which she presently endueth her possessors withal. which since popular preferments cannot do, it is manifest that they have not the beauty which is proper to true dignity. in which we are farther to consider that, if to be contemned of many make men abject, dignities make the wicked to be despised the more by laying them open to the view of the world. but the dignities go not scot-free, for wicked men do as much for them, defiling them with their own infection. and that thou mayst plainly see that true respect cannot be gotten by these painted dignities, let one that hath been often consul go among barbarous nations; will that honour make those barbarous people respect him? and yet, if this were natural to dignities, they would never forsake their function in any nation whatsoever; as fire, wheresoever it be, always remaineth hot. but because not their own nature, but the deceitful opinion of men attributeth that to them, they forthwith come to nothing, being brought to them who esteem them not to be dignities. and this for foreign nations. but do they always last among them where they had their beginning? the praetorship, a great dignity in time past, is now an idle name, and an heavy burden of the senate's fortune. if heretofore one had care of the people's provision, he was accounted a great man; now what is more abject than that office? for as we said before, that which hath no proper dignity belonging unto it sometime receiveth and sometime loseth his value at the users' discretion. wherefore if dignities cannot make us respected, if they be easily defiled with the infection of the wicked, if their worth decays by change of times, if diversities of nations make them contemptible, what beauty have they in themselves, or can they afford to others, worth the desiring? [ ] cf. catull. lii. [ ] decoratus was quaestor _circa_ ; cf. cassiod. _ep_. v. and . iv. quamuis se tyrio superbus ostro comeret et niueis lapillis, inuisus tamen omnibus uigebat luxuriae nero saeuientis. sed quondam dabat improbus uerendis patribus indecores curules. quis illos igitur putet beatos quos miseri tribuunt honores? iv. though fierce and lustful nero did adorn himself with purple robes, which pearls did grace, he did but gain a general hate and scorn. yet wickedly he officers most base over the reverend senators did place. who would esteem of fading honours then which may be given thus by the wickedest men? v. an uero regna regumque familiaritas efficere potentem ualet? quidni, quando eorum felicitas perpetuo perdurat? atqui plena est exemplorum uetustas, plena etiam praesens aetas, qui reges felicitatem calamitate mutauerint. o praeclara potentia quae ne ad conseruationem quidem sui satis efficax inuenitur! quod si haec regnorum potestas beatitudinis auctor est, nonne si qua parte defuerit, felicitatem minuat, miseriam inportet? sed quamuis late humana tendantur imperia, plures necesse est gentes relinqui quibus regum quisque non imperet. qua uero parte beatos faciens desinit potestas, hac inpotentia subintrat quae miseros facit; hoc igitur modo maiorem regibus inesse necesse est miseriae portionem. expertus sortis suae periculorum tyrannus regni metus pendentis supra uerticem gladii terrore simulauit. quae est igitur haec potestas quae sollicitudinum morsus expellere, quae formidinum aculeos uitare nequit? atqui uellent ipsi uixisse securi, sed nequeunt; dehinc de potestate gloriantur. an tu potentem censes quem uideas uelle quod non possit efficere? potentem censes qui satellite latus ambit, qui quos terret ipse plus metuit, qui ut potens esse uideatur, in seruientium manu situm est? nam quid ego de regum familiaribus disseram, cum regna ipsa tantae inbecillitatis plena demonstrem? quos quidem regia potestas saepe incolumis saepe autem lapsa prosternit. nero senecam familiarem praeceptoremque suum ad eligendae mortis coegit arbitrium. papinianum diu inter aulicos potentem militum gladiis antoninus obiecit. atqui uterque potentiae suae renuntiare uoluerunt, quorum seneca opes etiam suas tradere neroni seque in otium conferre conatus est; sed dum ruituros moles ipsa trahit, neuter quod uoluit effecit. quae est igitur ista potentia quam pertimescunt habentes, quam nec cum habere uelis tutus sis et cum deponere cupias uitare non possis? an praesidio sunt amici quos non uirtus sed fortuna conciliat? sed quem felicitas amicum fecit, infortunium faciet inimicum. quae uero pestis efficacior ad nocendum quam familiaris inimicus? v. but can kingdoms and the familiarity of kings make a man mighty? why not, when their felicity lasteth always? but both former and present times are full of examples that many kings have changed their happiness with misery. o excellent power, which is not sufficient to uphold itself! and if this strength of kingdoms be the author of blessedness, doth it not diminish happiness and bring misery, when it is in any way defective? but though some empires extend themselves far, there will still remain many nations out of their dominions. now, where the power endeth which maketh them happy, there entereth the contrary which maketh them miserable, so that all kings must needs have less happiness than misery. that tyrant, knowing by experience the dangers of his estate, signified the fears incident to a kingdom, by the hanging of a drawn sword over a man's head.[ ] what power is this, then, which cannot expel nor avoid biting cares and pricking fears? they would willingly have lived securely, but could not, and yet they brag of their power. thinkest thou him mighty whom thou seest desire that which he cannot do? thinkest thou him mighty who dareth not go without his guard; who feareth others more than they fear him; who cannot seem mighty, except his servants please? for what should i speak of kings' followers, since i show that kingdoms themselves are so full of weakness? whom the power of kings often standing, but many times falling, doth overthrow. nero compelled seneca, his familiar friend and master, to make choice of his own death.[ ] antoninus called papinianus, who had been long a gallant courtier, to be cut in pieces with his soldiers' swords.[ ] yet they would both have renounced their power, yea seneca endeavoured to deliver up his riches also to nero, and to give himself to a contemplative life. but their very greatness drawing them to their destruction, neither of them could compass that which they desired. wherefore what power is this that the possessors fear, which when thou wilt have, thou art not secure, and when thou wilt leave, thou canst not avoid? are we the better for those friends which love us not for our virtue but for our prosperity? but whom prosperity maketh our friend, adversity will make our enemy. and what plague is able to hurt us more than a familiar enemy? [ ] cic. _tusc. disp._ v. . . [ ] cf. tac. _ann._ xiv. , . [ ] cf. spartian. _caracallus_ . v. qui se uolet esse potentem animos domet ille feroces nec uicta libidine colla foedis submittat habenis. etenim licet indica longe tellus tua iura tremescat et seruiat ultima thyle, tamen atras pellere curas miserasque fugare querelas non posse potentia non est. v. who would be powerful, must his own affections check, nor let foul reins of lust subdue his conquered neck. for though the indian land should tremble at thy beck, and though thy dread command far thule's isle obey, unless thou canst withstand and boldly drive away black care and wretched moan, thy might is small or none. vi. gloria uero quam fallax saepe, quam turpis est! vnde non iniuria tragicus exclamat: [greek: o doxa doxa murioisi dae broton ouden gegosi bioton onkosas megan.] plures enim magnum saepe nomen falsis uulgi opinionibus abstulerunt; quo quid turpius excogitari potest? nam qui falso praedicantur, suis ipsi necesse est laudibus erubescant. quae si etiam meritis conquisita sit, quid tamen sapientis adiecerit conscientiae qui bonum suum non populari rumore, sed conscientiae ueritate metitur? quod si hoc ipsum propagasse nomen pulchrum uidetur, consequens est ut foedum non extendisse iudicetur. sed cum, uti paulo ante disserui, plures gentes esse necesse sit ad quas unius fama hominis nequeat peruenire, fit ut quem tu aestimas esse gloriosum, pro maxima parte terrarum uideatur inglorius. inter haec uero popularem gratiam ne commemoratione quidem dignam puto, quae nec iudicio prouenit nec umquam firma perdurat. iam uero quam sit inane quam futtile nobilitatis nomen, quis non uideat? quae si ad claritudinem refertur, aliena est. videtur namque esse nobilitas quaedam de meritis ueniens laus parentum. quod si claritudinem praedicatio facit, illi sint clari necesse est qui praedicantur. quare splendidum te, si tuam non habes, aliena claritudo non efficit. quod si quid est in nobilitate bonum, id esse arbitror solum, ut inposita nobilibus necessitudo uideatur ne a maiorum uirtute degeneret. vi. as for glory, how deceitful it is oftentimes, and dishonest! for which cause the tragical poet deservedly exclaimeth: "o glory, glory, thou hast raised to honour and dignity myriads of worthless mortals!"[ ] for many have often been much spoken of through the false opinions of the common people. than which what can be imagined more vile? for those who are falsely commended must needs blush at their own praises. which glory though it be gotten by deserts, yet what adds it to a wise man's conscience who measureth his own good, not by popular rumours, but by his own certain knowledge? and if it seemeth a fair thing to have dilated our fame, consequently we must judge it a foul thing not to have it extended. but since, as i showed a little before, there must needs be many nations to which the fame of one man cannot arrive, it cometh to pass that he whom thou esteemeth glorious, in the greater part of the world seemeth to have no glory at all. and here now i think popular glory not worth the speaking of, which neither proceedeth from judgment, nor ever hath any firmness. likewise, who seeth not what a vain and idle thing it is to be called noble? which insofar as it concerneth fame, is not our own. for nobility seemeth to be a certain praise proceeding from our parents' deserts. but if praising causeth fame, they must necessarily be famous who are praised. wherefore the fame of others, if thou hast none of thine own, maketh not thee renowned. but if there be anything good in nobility, i judge it only to be this, that it imposeth a necessity upon those which are noble, not to suffer their nobility to degenerate from the virtue of their ancestors. [ ] eurip. _androm._ . vi. omne hominum genus in terris simili surgit ab ortu. vnus enim rerum pater est, unus cuncta ministrat. ille dedit phoebo radios dedit et cornua lunae, ille homines etiam terris dedit ut sidera caelo, hic clausit membris animos celsa sede petitos. mortales igitur cunctos edit nobile germen. quid genus et proauos strepitis? si primordia uestra auctoremque deum spectes, nullus degener exstat, ni uitiis peiora fouens proprium deserat ortum. vi. the general race of men from a like birth is born. all things one father have, who doth them all adorn, who gave the sun his rays, and the pale moon her horn, the lofty heaven for stars, low earth for mortals chose; he souls fetched down from high in bodies did enclose; and thus from noble seed all men did first compose. why brag you of your stock? since none is counted base, if you consider god the author of your race, but he that with foul vice doth his own birth deface. vii. quid autem de corporis uoluptatibus loquar, quarum appetentia quidem plena est anxietatis; satietas uero poenitentiae? quantos illae morbos, quam intolerabiles dolores quasi quendam fructum nequitiae fruentium solent referre corporibus! quarum motus quid habeat iucunditatis, ignoro. tristes uero esse uoluptatum exitus, quisquis reminisci libidinum suarum uolet, intelleget. quae si beatos explicare possunt, nihil causae est quin pecudes quoque beatae esse dicantur quarum omnis ad explendam corporalem lacunam festinat intentio. honestissima quidem coniugis foret liberorumque iucunditas, sed nimis e natura dictum est nescio quem filios inuenisse tortorem; quorum quam sit mordax quaecumque condicio, neque alias expertum te neque nunc anxium necesse est admonere. in quo euripidis mei sententiam probo, qui carentem liberis infortunio dixit esse felicem. vii. now what should i speak of bodily pleasures, the desire of which is full of anxiety, and the enjoying of them breeds repentance? how many diseases, how intolerable griefs bring they forth in the bodies of their possessors, as it were the fruits of their own wickedness! i know not what sweetness their beginnings have, but whosoever will remember his lusts shall understand that the end of pleasure is sadness. which if it be able to cause happiness, there is no reason why beasts should not be thought blessed, whose whole intention is bent to supply their corporal wants. that pleasure which proceedeth from wife and children should be most honest; but it was too naturally spoken, that some tormentor invented children, whose condition, whatsoever it be, how biting it is, i need not tell thee, who hast had experience heretofore, and art not now free from care. in which i approve the opinion of euripides, who said that they which had no children are happy by being unfortunate.[ ] [ ] cf. _androm._ . vii. habet hoc uoluptas omnis, stimulis agit fruentes apiumque par uolantum vbi grata mella fudit, fugit et nimis tenaci ferit icta corda morsu. vii. all pleasure hath this property, she woundeth those who have her most. and, like unto the angry bee who hath her pleasant honey lost, she flies away with nimble wing and in our hearts doth leave her sting. viii. nihil igitur dubium est quin hae ad beatitudinem uiae deuia quaedam sint nec perducere quemquam eo ualeant ad quod se perducturas esse promittunt. quantis uero implicitae malis sint, breuissime monstrabo. quid enim? pecuniamne congregare conaberis? sed eripies habenti. dignitatibus fulgere uelis? danti supplicabis et qui praeire ceteros honore cupis, poscendi humilitate uilesces. potentiamne desideras? subiectorum insidiis obnoxius periculis subiacebis. gloriam petas? sed per aspera quaeque distractus securus esse desistis. voluptariam uitam degas? sed quis non spernat atque abiciat uilissimae fragilissimaeque rei corporis seruum? iam uero qui bona prae se corporis ferunt, quam exigua, quam fragili possessione nituntur! num enim elephantos mole, tauros robore superare poteritis, num tigres uelocitate praeibitis? respicite caeli spatium, firmitudinem, celeritatem et aliquando desinite uilia mirari. quod quidem caelum non his potius est quam sua qua regitur ratione mirandum. formae uero nitor ut rapidus est, ut uelox et uernalium florum mutabilitate fugacior! quod si, ut aristoteles[ ] ait, lynceis oculis homines uterentur, ut eorum uisus obstantia penetraret, nonne introspectis uisceribus illud alcibiadis superficie pulcherrimum corpus turpissimum uideretur? igitur te pulchrum uideri non tua natura sed oculorum spectantium reddit infirmitas. sed aestimate quam uultis nimio corporis bona, dum sciatis hoc quodcumque miramini triduanae febris igniculo posse dissolui! ex quibus omnibus illud redigere in summam licet, quod haec quae nec praestare quae pollicentur bona possunt nec omnium bonorum congregatione perfecta sunt, ea nec ad beatitudinem quasi quidam calles ferunt nec beatos ipsa perficiunt. [ ] probably from the lost _protrepticus_ of aristotle. see bywater, _journal of philology_, ii. ( ), , and hartlich, _leipz. stud._ xi. ( ), . viii. wherefore there is no doubt but that these ways to happiness are only certain by-paths, which can never bring any man thither whither they promise to lead him. and with how great evils they are beset, i will briefly show. for what? wilt thou endeavour to gather money? but thou shalt take it away from him who hath it. wilt thou excel in dignities? thou shalt crouch to the giver, and thou who desirest to surpass others in honour shalt become vile by thy baseness in begging. wishest thou for power? thou shalt be in danger of thy subjects' treacheries. seekest thou for glory? but, drawn into many dangers, thou shalt lose thy safety. wilt thou live a voluptuous life? but who would not despise and neglect the service of so vile and frail a thing as his body? now they who boast of the habilities of their body, upon how unsteadfast a possession do they ground themselves! for can you be bigger than elephants, or stronger than bulls? or swifter than tigers? look upon the space, firmness, and speedy motion of the heavens, and cease at length to have in admiration these base things. which heavens are not more to be admired for these qualities than for the manner of their government. as for the glittering of beauty, how soon and swiftly doth it vanish away! as suddenly decaying and changing as the frail flowers in the spring. and if, as aristotle saith, men had lynceus's eyes, that they could see through stone walls, would not they judge that body of alcibiades, seeming outwardly most fair, to be most foul and ugly by discovering his entrails? wherefore not thy nature but the weakness of the beholders' eyes maketh thee seem fair. but esteem the goods of the body as much as you will, so that you acknowledge this, that whatsoever you admire may be dissolved with the burning of an ague of three days. out of which we may briefly collect this sum; that these goods, which can neither perform that they promise, nor are perfect by having all that is good, do neither, as so many paths, lead men to happiness, nor make men happy of themselves. viii. eheu quae miseros tramite deuios abducit ignorantia! non aurum in uiridi quaeritis arbore nec uite gemmas carpitis, non altis laqueos montibus abditis vt pisce ditetis dapes nec uobis capreas si libeat sequi, tyrrhena captatis uada. ipsos quin etiam fluctibus abditos norunt recessus aequoris, quae gemmis niueis unda feracior vel quae rubentis purpurae nec non quae tenero pisce uel asperis praestent echinis litora. sed quonam lateat quod cupiunt bonum, nescire caeci sustinent, et quod stelliferum trans abiit polum, tellure demersi petunt. quid dignum stolidis mentibus inprecer? opes honores ambiant; et cum falsa graui mole parauerint, tum uera cognoscant bona. viii. alas, how ignorance makes wretches stray out of the way! you from green trees expect no golden mines nor pearls from vines, nor use you on mountains to lay your net fishes to get, nor, if the pleasant sport of hunting please, run you to seas. men will be skilful in the hidden caves of the ocean waves, and in what coasts the orient pearls are bred, or purple red, also, what different sorts of fishes store each several shore. but when they come their chiefest good to find, then are they blind, and search for that under the earth, which lies above the skies. how should i curse these fools? let thirst them hold of fame and gold, that, having got false goods with pain, they learn true to discern. ix. "hactenus mendacis formam felicitatis ostendisse suffecerit, quam si perspicaciter intueris, ordo est deinceps quae sit uera monstrare." "atqui uideo," inquam, "nec opibus sufficientiam nec regnis potentiam nec reuerentiam dignitatibus nec celebritatem gloria nec laetitiam uoluptatibus posse contingere." "an etiam causas, cur id ita sit, deprehendisti?" "tenui quidem ueluti rimula mihi uideor intueri, sed ex te apertius cognoscere malim." "atqui promptissima ratio est. quod enim simplex est indiuisumque natura, id error humanus separat et a uero atque perfecto ad falsum imperfectumque traducit. an tu arbitraris quod nihilo indigeat egere potentia?" "minime," inquam. "recte tu quidem. nam si quid est quod in ulla re inbecillioris ualentiae sit, in hac praesidio necesse est egeat alieno." "ita est," inquam. "igitur sufficientiae potentiaeque una est eademque natura." "sic uidetur." "quod uero huiusmodi sit, spernendumne esse censes an contra rerum omnium ueneratione dignissimum?" "at hoc," inquam, "ne dubitari quidem potest." "addamus igitur sufficientiae potentiaeque reuerentiam, ut haec tria unum esse iudicemus." "addamus, si quidem uera uolumus confiteri." "quid uero," inquit, "obscurumne hoc atque ignobile censes esse an omni celebritate clarissimum? considera uero, ne quod nihilo indigere, quod potentissimum, quod honore dignissimum esse concessum est, egere claritudine quam sibi praestare non possit atque ob id aliqua ex parte uideatur abiectius." "non possum," inquam, "quin hoc uti est ita etiam celeberrimum esse confitear." "consequens igitur est ut claritudinem superioribus tribus nihil differre fateamur." "consequitur," inquam. "quod igitur nullius egeat alieni, quod suis cuncta uiribus possit, quod sit clarum atque reuerendum, nonne hoc etiam constat esse laetissimum?" "sed unde huic," inquam, "tali maeror ullus obrepat ne cogitare quidem possum; quare plenum esse laetitiae, si quidem superiora manebunt, necesse est confiteri." "atqui illud quoque per eadem necessarium est sufficientiae, potentiae, claritudinis, reuerentiae, iucunditatis nomina quidem esse diuersa, nullo modo uero discrepare substantiam." "necesse est," inquam. "hoc igitur quod est unum simplexque natura, prauitas humana dispertit et dum rei quae partibus caret partem conatur adipisci, nec portionem quae nulla est nec ipsam quam minime affectat assequitur." "quonam," inquam, "modo?" "qui diuitias," inquit, "petit penuriae fuga, de potentia nihil laborat, uilis obscurusque esse mauult, multas etiam sibi naturales quoque subtrahit uoluptates, ne pecuniam quam parauit amittat. sed hoc modo ne sufficientia quidem contingit ei quem ualentia deserit, quem molestia pungit, quem uilitas abicit, quem recondit obscuritas. qui uero solum posse desiderat, profligat opes, despicit uoluptates honoremque potentia carentem gloriam quoque nihili pendit. sed hunc quoque quam multa deficiant uides. fit enim ut aliquando necessariis egeat, ut anxietatibus mordeatur cumque haec depellere nequeat, etiam id quod maxime petebat potens esse desistat. similiter ratiocinari de honoribus, gloria, uoluptatibus licet. nam cum unumquodque horum idem quod cetera sit, quisquis horum aliquid sine ceteris petit, ne illud quidem quod desiderat apprehendit." "quid igitur?" inquam. "si qui cuncta simul cupiat adipisci, summam quidem ille beatitudinis uelit. sed num in his eam reperiet, quae demonstrauimus id quod pollicentur non posse conferre?" "minime," inquam. "in his igitur quae singula quaedam expetendorum praestare creduntur, beatitudo nullo modo uestiganda est." "fateor," inquam, "et hoc nihil dici uerius potest." "habes igitur," inquit, "et formam falsae felicitatis et causas. deflecte nunc in aduersum mentis intuitum; ibi enim ueram quam promisimus statim uidebis." "atqui haec," inquam, "uel caeco perspicua est eamque tu paulo ante monstrasti, dum falsae causas aperire conaris. nam nisi fallor ea uera est et perfecta felicitas quae sufficientem, potentem, reuerendum, celebrem laetumque perficiat. atque ut me interius animaduertisse cognoscas, quae unum horum, quoniam idem cuncta sunt, ueraciter praestare potest hanc esse plenam beatitudinem sine ambiguitate cognosco." "o te alumne hac opinione felicem, si quidem hoc," inquit, "adieceris...." "quidnam?" inquam. "essene aliquid in his mortalibus caducisque rebus putas quod huiusmodi statum possit afferre?" "minime," inquam, "puto idque a te, nihil ut amplius desideretur, ostensum est." "haec igitur uel imagines ueri boni uel inperfecta quaedam bona dare mortalibus uidentur, uerum autem atque perfectum bonum conferre non possunt." "assentior," inquam. "quoniam igitur agnouisti quae uera illa sit, quae autem beatitudinem mentiantur, nunc superest ut unde ueram hanc petere possis agnoscas." "id quidem," inquam, "iam dudum uehementer exspecto." "sed cum, ut in timaeo[ ] platoni," inquit, "nostro placet, in minimis quoque rebus diuinum praesidium debeat implorari, quid nunc faciendum censes, ut illius summi boni sedem reperire mereamur?" "inuocandum," inquam, "rerum omnium patrem, quo praetermisso nullum rite fundatur exordium." "recte," inquit, ac simul ita modulata est. [ ] uti timaeo _codd. optimi._ ix. "let it suffice that we have hitherto discovered the form of false felicity, which if thou hast plainly seen, order now requireth that we show thee in what true happiness consisteth." "i see," quoth i, "that neither sufficiency by riches, nor power by kingdoms, nor respect by dignities, nor renown by glory, nor joy can be gotten by pleasures." "hast thou also understood the causes why it is so?" "methink i have a little glimpse of them, but i had rather thou wouldst declare them more plainly." "the reason is manifest, for that which is simple and undivided of itself, is divided by men's error, and is translated from true and perfect to false and unperfect. thinkest thou that which needeth nothing, to stand in need of power?" "no," quoth i. "thou sayest well, for if any power in any respect be weak, in this it must necessarily stand in need of the help of others." "it is true," quoth i. "wherefore sufficiency and power have one and the same nature." "so it seemeth." "now thinkest thou, that which is of this sort ought to be despised, or rather that it is worthy to be respected above all other things?" "there can be no doubt of this," quoth i. "let us add respect then to sufficiency and power, so that we judge these three to be one." "we must add it if we confess the truth." "what now," quoth she, "thinkest thou this to be obscure and base, or rather most excellent and famous? consider whether that which thou hast granted to want nothing, to be most potent, and most worthy of honour, may seem to want fame, which it cannot yield itself, and for that cause be in some respect more abject." "i must needs confess," quoth i, "that, being what it is, this is also most famous." "consequently then we must acknowledge that fame differeth nothing from the former three." "we must so," quoth i. "wherefore that which wanteth nothing, which can perform all things by its own power, which is famous and respected, is it not manifest that it is also most pleasant?" to which i answered: "how such a man should fall into any grief, i can by no means imagine. wherefore if that which we have said hitherto be true, we must needs confess that he is most joyful and content." "and by the same reason it followeth that sufficiency, power, fame, respect, pleasure have indeed divers names, but differ not in substance." "it followeth indeed," quoth i. "this then, which is one and simple by nature, man's wickedness divideth, and while he endeavoureth to obtain part of that which hath no parts, he neither getteth a part, which is none, nor the whole, which he seeketh not after." "how is this?" quoth i. "he who seeketh after riches," quoth she, "to avoid want, taketh no thought for power, he had rather be base and obscure, he depriveth himself even of many natural pleasures that he may not lose the money which he hath gotten. but by this means he attaineth not to sufficiency, whom power forsaketh, whom trouble molesteth, whom baseness maketh abject, whom obscurity overwhelmeth. again, he that only desireth power, consumeth wealth, despiseth pleasures, and setteth light by honour or glory, which is not potent. but thou seest how many things are wanting to this man also. for sometimes he wanteth necessaries, and is perplexed with anxieties, and being not able to rid himself, ceaseth to be powerful, which was the only thing he aimed at. the like discourse may be made of honours, glory, pleasures. for since every one of these things is the same with the rest, whosoever seeketh for any of them without the rest obtaineth not that which he desireth." "what then?" quoth i. "if one should desire to have them all together, he should wish for the sum of happiness, but shall he find it in these things which we have showed cannot perform what they promise?" "no," quoth i. "wherefore we must by no means seek for happiness in these things which are thought to afford the several portions of that which is to be desired." "i confess it," quoth i, "and nothing can be more true than this." "now then," quoth she, "thou hast both the form and causes of false felicity; cast but the eyes of thy mind on the contrary, and thou shalt presently espy true happiness, which we promised to show thee." "this," quoth i, "is evident, even to him that is blind, and thou showedst it a little before, while thou endeavouredst to lay open the causes of the false. for, if i be not deceived, that is true and perfect happiness which maketh a man sufficient, potent, respected, famous, joyful. and that thou mayest know that i understood thee aright, that which can truly perform any one of these because they are all one, i acknowledge to be full and perfect happiness." "o my scholar, i think thee happy by having this opinion, if thou addest this also." "what?" quoth i. "dost thou imagine that there is any mortal or frail thing which can cause this happy estate?" "i do not," quoth i, "and that hath been so proved by thee, that more cannot be desired." "wherefore these things seem to afford men the images of the true good, or certain unperfect goods, but they cannot give them the true and perfect good itself." "i am of the same mind," quoth i. "now then, since thou knowest wherein true happiness consisteth, and what have only a false show of it, it remaineth that thou shouldst learn where thou mayest seek for this which is true." "this is that," quoth i, "which i have long earnestly expected." "but since, as plato teacheth (in timaeus),[ ] we must implore god's assistance even in our least affairs, what, thinkest thou, must we do now, that we may deserve to find the seat of that sovereign good?" "we must," quoth i, "invocate the father of all things, without whose remembrance no beginning hath a good foundation." "thou sayest rightly," quoth she, and withal sung in this sort. [ ] cf. _tim._ . ix. "o qui perpetua mundum ratione gubernas terrarum caelique sator qui tempus ab aeuo ire iubes stabilisque manens das cuncta moueri. quem non externae pepulerunt fingere causae materiae fluitantis opus, uerum insita summi forma boni liuore carens, tu cuncta superno ducis ab exemplo, pulchrum pulcherrimus ipse mundum mente gerens similique in imagine formans perfectasque iubens perfectum absoluere partes. tu numeris elementa ligas ut frigora flammis arida conueniant liquidis, ne purior ignis euolet aut mersas deducant pondera terras. tu triplicis mediam naturae cuncta mouentem conectens animam per consona membra resoluis. quae cum secta duos motum glomerauit in orbes, in semet reditura meat mentemque profundam circuit et simili conuertit imagine caelum. tu causis animas paribus uitasque minores prouehis et leuibus sublimes curribus aptans in caelum terramque seris quas lege benigna ad te conuersas reduci facis igne reuerti. da pater augustam menti conscendere sedem, da fontem lustrare boni, da luce reperta in te conspicuos animi defigere uisus. dissice terrenae nebulas et pondera molis atque tuo splendore mica! tu namque serenum, tu requies tranquilla piis, te cernere finis, principium, uector, dux, semita, terminus idem. ix.[ ] "o thou, that dost the world in lasting order guide, father of heaven and earth, who makest time swiftly slide, and, standing still thyself, yet fram'st all moving laws, who to thy work wert moved by no external cause: but by a sweet desire, where envy hath no place, thy goodness moving thee to give each thing his grace, thou dost all creatures' forms from highest patterns take, from thy fair mind the world fair like thyself doth make. thus thou perfect the whole perfect each part dost frame. thou temp'rest elements, making cold mixed with flame and dry things join with moist, lest fire away should fly, or earth, opprest with weight, buried too low should lie. thou in consenting parts fitly disposed hast th'all-moving soul in midst of threefold nature placed, which, cut in several parts that run a different race, into itself returns, and circling doth embrace the highest mind, and heaven with like proportion drives. thou with like cause dost make the souls and lesser lives, fix them in chariots swift, and widely scatterest o'er heaven and earth; then at thy fatherly behest they stream, like fire returning, back to thee, their god. dear father, let my mind thy hallowed seat ascend, let me behold the spring of grace and find thy light, that i on thee may fix my soul's well clearéd sight. cast off the earthly weight wherewith i am opprest, shine as thou art most bright, thou only calm and rest to pious men whose end is to behold thy ray, who their beginning art, their guide, their bound, and way.[ ] [ ] this poem is a masterly abridgment of the first part of the _timaeus_, and was eagerly fastened on by commentators of the early middle ages whose direct knowledge of plato was confined to the translation of that dialogue by chalcidius. [ ] cf. the string of nouns in _tr._ iv. (_supra_, p. _ad fin._). x. quoniam igitur quae sit imperfecti, quae etiam perfecti boni forma uidisti, nunc demonstrandum reor quonam haec felicitatis perfectio constituta sit. in quo illud primum arbitror inquirendum, an aliquod huiusmodi bonum quale paulo ante definisti in rerum natura possit exsistere, ne nos praeter rei subiectae ueritatem cassa cogitationis imago decipiat. sed quin exsistat sitque hoc ueluti quidam omnium fons bonorum negari nequit. omne enim quod inperfectum esse dicitur, id inminutione perfecti inperfectum esse perhibetur. quo fit, ut si in quolibet genere inperfectum quid esse uideatur, in eo perfectum quoque aliquid esse necesse sit. etenim perfectione sublata, unde illud quod inperfectum perhibetur exstiterit ne fingi quidem potest. neque enim ab deminutis inconsummatisque natura rerum coepit exordium, sed ab integris absolutisque procedens in haec extrema atque effeta dilabitur. quod si, uti paulo ante monstrauimus, est quaedam boni fragilis inperfecta felicitas, esse aliquam solidam perfectamque non potest dubitari." "firmissime," inquam, "uerissimeque conclusum est." "quo uero," inquit, "habitet, ita considera. deum rerum omnium principem bonum esse communis humanorum conceptio probat animorum. nam cum nihil deo melius excogitari queat, id quo melius nihil est bonum esse quis dubitet? ita uero bonum esse deum ratio demonstrat, ut perfectum quoque in eo bonum esse conuincat. nam ni tale sit, rerum omnium princeps esse non poterit. erit enim eo praestantius aliquid perfectum possidens bonum, quod hoc prius atque antiquius esse uideatur; omnia namque perfecta minus integris priora esse claruerunt. quare ne in infinitum ratio prodeat, confitendum est summum deum summi perfectique boni esse plenissimum. sed perfectum bonum ueram esse beatitudinem constituimus; ueram igitur beatitudinem in summo deo sitam esse necesse est." "accipio," inquam, "nec est quod contradici ullo modo queat." "sed quaeso," inquit, "te uide quam id sancte atque inuiolabiliter probes quod boni summi summum deum diximus esse plenissimum." "quonam," inquam, "modo?" "ne hunc rerum omnium patrem illud summum bonum quo plenus esse perhibetur uel extrinsecus accepisse uel ita naturaliter habere praesumas, quasi habentis dei habitaeque beatitudinis diuersam cogites esse substantiam. nam si extrinsecus acceptum putes, praestantius id quod dederit ab eo quod acceperit existimare possis. sed hunc esse rerum omnium praecellentissimum dignissime confitemur. quod si natura quidem inest, sed est ratione diuersum, cum de rerum principe loquamur deo, fingat qui potest: quis haec diuersa coniunxerit? postremo quod a qualibet re diuersum est, id non est illud a quo intellegitur esse diuersum. quare quod a summo bono diuersum est sui natura, id summum bonum non est--quod nefas est de eo cogitare quo nihil constat esse praestantius. omnino enim nullius rei natura suo principio melior poterit exsistere, quare quod omnium principium sit, id etiam sui substantia summum esse bonum uerissima ratione concluserim." "rectissime," inquam. "sed summum bonum beatitudinem esse concessum est." "ita est," inquam. "igitur," inquit, "deum esse ipsam beatitudinem necesse est confiteri." "nec propositis," inquam, "prioribus refragari queo et illis hoc inlatum consequens esse perspicio." "respice," inquit, "an hinc quoque idem firmius approbetur, quod duo summa bona quae a se diuersa sint esse non possunt. etenim quae discrepant bona, non esse alterum quod sit alterum liquet; quare neutrum poterit esse perfectum, cum alterutri alterum deest. sed quod perfectum non sit, id summum non esse manifestum est; nullo modo igitur quae summa sunt bona ea possunt esse diuersa. atqui et beatitudinem et deum summum bonum esse collegimus; quare ipsam necesse est summam esse beatitudinem quae sit summa diuinitas." "nihil," inquam, "nec reapse uerius[ ] nec ratiocinatione firmius nec deo dignius concludi potest." "super haec," inquit, "igitur ueluti geometrae solent demonstratis propositis aliquid inferre quae porismata ipsi uocant, ita ego quoque tibi ueluti corollarium dabo. nam quoniam beatitudinis adeptione fiunt homines beati, beatitudo uero est ipsa diuinitas, diuinitatis adeptione beatos fieri manifestum est: sed uti iustitiae adeptione iusti, sapientiae sapientes fiunt, ita diuinitatem adeptos deos fieri simili ratione necesse est. omnis igitur beatus deus, sed natura quidem unus; participatione uero nihil prohibet esse quam plurimos." "et pulchrum," inquam, "hoc atque pretiosum, siue porisma siue corollarium uocari mauis." "atqui hoc quoque pulchrius nihil est, quod his annectendum esse ratio persuadet." "quid?" inquam. "cum multa," inquit, "beatitudo continere uideatur, utrumne haec omnia unum ueluti corpus beatitudinis quadam partium uarietate coniungant an sit eorum aliquid quod beatitudinis substantiam compleat, ad hoc uero cetera referantur?" "vellem," inquam, "id ipsarum rerum commemoratione patefaceres." "nonne," inquit, "beatitudinem bonum esse censemus?" "ac summum quidem," inquam. "addas," inquit, "hoc omnibus licet. nam eadem sufficientia summa est, eadem summa potentia, reuerentia quoque, claritas ac uoluptas beatitudo esse iudicatur. quid igitur? haecine omnia bonum--sufficientia potentia ceteraque--ueluti quaedam beatitudinis membra sunt an ad bonum ueluti ad uerticem cuncta referuntur?" "intellego," inquam, "quid inuestigandum proponas, sed quid constituas audire desidero." "cuius discretionem rei sic accipe. si haec omnia beatitudinis membra forent, a se quoque inuicem discreparent. haec est enim partium natura ut unum corpus diuersa componant. atqui haec omnia idem esse monstrata sunt; minime igitur membra sunt. alioquin ex uno membro beatitudo uidebitur esse coniuncta--quod fieri nequit." "id quidem," inquam, "dubium non est, sed id quod restat exspecto." "ad bonum uero cetera referri palam est. idcirco enim sufficientia petitur quoniam bonum esse iudicatur, idcirco potentia quoniam id quoque esse creditur bonum; idem de reuerentia, claritudine, iucunditate coniectare licet. omnium igitur expetendorum summa atque causa bonum est. quod enim neque re neque similitudine ullum in se retinet bonum, id expeti nullo modo potest. contraque etiam quae natura bona non sunt, tamen si esse uideantur, quasi uere bona sint appetuntur. quo fit uti summa, cardo atque causa expetendorum omnium bonitas esse iure credatur. cuius uero causa quid expetitur, id maxime uidetur optari, ueluti si salutis causa quispiam uelit equitare, non tam equitandi motum desiderat quam salutis effectum. cum igitur omnia boni gratia petantur, non illa potius quam bonum ipsum desideratur ab omnibus. sed propter quod cetera optantur, beatitudinem esse concessimus; quare sic quoque sola quaeritur beatitudo. ex quo liquido apparet ipsius boni et beatitudinis unam atque eandem esse substantiam." "nihil uideo cur dissentire quispiam possit." "sed deum ueramque beatitudinem unum atque idem esse monstrauimus." "ita," inquam. "securo igitur concludere licet dei quoque in ipso bono nec usquam alio sitam esse substantiam. [ ] reapse uerius _schepss_: re ab seuerius _uel_ re ipsa uerius _codd. opt._ x. wherefore since thou hast seen what is the form of perfect and imperfect good, now i think we must show in what this perfection of happiness is placed. and inquire first whether there can be any such good extant in the world, as thou hast defined; lest, contrary to truth, we be deceived with an empty show of thought. but it cannot be denied that there is some such thing extant which is as it were the fountain of all goodness. for all that is said to be imperfect is so termed for the want it hath of perfection. whence it followeth that if in any kind we find something imperfect, there must needs be something perfect also in the same kind. for if we take away perfection we cannot so much as devise how there should be any imperfection. for the nature of things began not from that which is defective and not complete, but, proceeding from entire and absolute, falleth into that which is extreme and enfeebled. but if, as we showed before, there be a certain imperfect felicity of frail goods, it cannot be doubted but that there is some solid and perfect happiness also." "thou hast," quoth i, "concluded most firmly and most truly." "now where this good dwelleth," quoth she, "consider this. the common conceit of men's minds proveth that god the prince of all things is good. for, since nothing can be imagined better than god, who doubteth but that is good than which is nothing better? and reason doth in such sort demonstrate god to be good that it convinceth him to be perfectly good. for unless he were so, he could not be the chief of all things. for there would be something better than he, having perfect goodness, which could seem to be of greater antiquity and eminence than he. for it is already manifest that perfect things were before the imperfect. wherefore, lest our reasoning should have no end, we must confess that the sovereign god is most full of sovereign and perfect goodness. but we have concluded that perfect goodness is true happiness, wherefore true blessedness must necessarily be placed in the most high god." "i agree," quoth i, "neither can this be any way contradicted." "but i pray thee," quoth she, "see how boldly and inviolably thou approvest that which we said, that the sovereign god is most full of sovereign goodness." "how?" quoth i. "that thou presumest not that this father of all things hath either received from others that sovereign good with which he is said to be replenished, or hath it naturally in such sort that thou shouldst think that the substance of the blessedness which is had, and of god who hath it, were diverse. for if thou thinkest that he had it from others, thou mayest also infer that he who gave it was better than the receiver. but we most worthily confess that he is the most excellent of all things. and if he hath it by nature, but as a diverse thing, since we speak of god the prince of all things, let him that can, invent who united these diverse things. finally, that which is different from anything, is not that from which it is understood to differ. wherefore that which is naturally different from the sovereign good, is not the sovereign good itself. which it were impious to think of god, than whom, we know certainly, nothing is better. for doubtless the nature of nothing can be better than the beginning of it. wherefore i may most truly conclude that which is the beginning of all things to be also in his own substance the chiefest good." "most rightly," quoth i. "but it is granted that the chiefest good is blessedness?" "it is," quoth i. "wherefore," quoth she, "we must needs confess that blessedness itself is god." "i can neither contradict," quoth i, "thy former propositions, and i see this illation followeth from them." "consider," saith she, "if the same be not more firmly proved hence, because there cannot be two chief goods, the one different from the other. for it is manifest that of those goods which differ, the one is not the other, wherefore neither of them can be perfect, wanting the other. but manifestly that which is not perfect, is not the chiefest, wherefore the chief goods cannot be diverse. now we have proved that both blessedness and god are the chiefest good, wherefore that must needs be the highest blessedness which is the highest divinity." "there can be nothing," quoth i, "concluded more truly than this, nor more firmly in arguing, nor more worthy god himself." "upon this then," quoth she, "as the geometricians[ ] are wont, out of their propositions which they have demonstrated, to infer something which they call _porismata_ (deductions) so will i give thee as it were a _corollarium_. for since that men are made blessed by the obtaining of blessedness, and blessedness is nothing else but divinity, it is manifest that men are made blessed by the obtaining of divinity. and as men are made just by the obtaining of justice, and wise by the obtaining of wisdom, so they who obtain divinity must needs in like manner become gods. wherefore everyone that is blessed is a god, but by nature there is only one god; but there may be many by participation." "this is," quoth i, "an excellent and precious _porisma_ or _corollarium_." "but there is nothing more excellent than that which reason persuadeth us to add." "what?" quoth i. "since," quoth she, "blessedness seemeth to contain many things, whether do they all concur as divers parts to the composition of one entire body of blessedness, or doth some one of them form the substance of blessedness to which the rest are to be referred?" "i desire," quoth i, "that thou wouldst declare this point, by the enumeration of the particulars." "do we not think," quoth she, "that blessedness is good?" "yea, the chiefest good," quoth i. "thou mayest," quoth she, "add this to them all. for blessedness is accounted the chiefest sufficiency, the chiefest power, respect, fame, and pleasure. what then? are all these-- sufficiency, power, and the rest--the good, in the sense that they are members of it, or rather are they referred to good as to the head?" "i understand," quoth i, "what thou proposest, but i desire to hear what thou concludest." "this is the decision of this matter. if all these were members of blessedness, they should differ one from another. for this is the nature of parts, that being divers they compose one body. but we have proved that all these are one and the same thing. wherefore they are no members, otherwise blessedness should be compacted of one member, which cannot be." "there is no doubt of this," quoth i, "but i expect that which is behind." "it is manifest that the rest are to be referred to goodness; for sufficiency is desired, because it is esteemed good, and likewise power, because that likewise is thought to be good. and we may conjecture the same of respect, fame, and pleasure. wherefore goodness is the sum and cause of all that is desired. for that which is neither good indeed, nor beareth any show of goodness, can by no means be sought after. and contrariwise those things which are not good of their own nature, yet, if they seem such, are desired as if they were truly good. so that the sum, origin, and cause of all that is sought after is rightly thought to be goodness. and that on account of which a thing is sought, seemeth to be the chief object of desire. as if one would ride for his health, he doth not so much desire the motion of riding, as the effect of health. wherefore, since all things are desired in respect of goodness, they are not so much wished for as goodness itself. but we granted that to be blessedness for which other things are desired, wherefore in like manner only blessedness is sought after; by which it plainly appeareth, that goodness and blessedness have one and the self-same substance." "i see not how any man can dissent." "but we have showed that god and true blessedness are one and the self-same thing." "it is so," quoth i. "we may then securely conclude that the substance of god consisteth in nothing else but in goodness. [ ] _vide supra_, _tr_. iii. p. . x. huc omnes pariter uenite capti quos fallax ligat improbis catenis terrenas habitans libido mentes, haec erit uobis requies laborum, hic portus placida manens quiete, hoc patens unum miseris asylum, non quidquid tagus aureis harenis donat aut hermus rutilante ripa aut indus calido propinquus orbi candidis miscens uirides lapillos, inlustrent aciem magisque caecos in suas condunt animos tenebras. hoc quidquid placet excitatque mentes, infimis tellus aluit cauernis; splendor quo regitur uigetque caelum, vitat obscuras animae ruinas. hanc quisquis poterit notare lucem, candidos phoebi radios negabit." x.[ ] come hither, all you that are bound, whose base and earthly minds are drowned by lust which doth them tie in cruel chains: here is a seat for men opprest, here is a port of pleasant rest; here may a wretch have refuge from his pains. no gold, which tagus' sands bestow, nor which on hermus' banks doth flow, nor precious stones which scorched indians get[ ], can clear the sharpness of the mind, but rather make it far more blind, and in the farther depth of darkness set. for this that sets our souls on work buried in caves of earth doth lurk. but heaven is guided by another light, which causeth us to shun the dark[ ], and who this light doth truly mark, must needs deny that phoebus' beams are bright." [ ] for the discussion on the nature of good in this poem and the next piece of prose cf. _supra_, pp. ff. [ ] literally, "nor indus, neighbour of the torrid zone, blending its green and white pebbles." [ ] literally, "the light which gives guidance and vigour to the sky shuns the darkness of ruined minds." xi. "assentior," inquam, "cuncta enim firmissimis nexa rationibus constant." tum illa, "quanti," inquit, "aestimabis, si bonum ipsum quid sit agnoueris?" "infinito," inquam, "si quidem mihi pariter deum quoque qui bonum est continget agnoscere." "atqui hoc uerissima," inquit, "ratione patefaciam, maneant modo quae paulo ante conclusa sunt." "manebunt." "nonne," inquit, "monstrauimus ea quae appetuntur pluribus idcirco uera perfectaque bona non esse quoniam a se inuicem discreparent cumque alteri abesset alterum, plenum absolutumque bonum afferre non posse? tum autem uerum bonum fieri cum in unam ueluti formam atque efficientiam colliguntur, ut quae sufficientia est, eadem sit potentia, reuerentia, claritas atque iucunditas, nisi uero unum atque idem omnia sint, nihil habere quo inter expetenda numerentur?" "demonstratum," inquam, "nec dubitari ullo modo potest." "quae igitur cum discrepant minime bona sunt, cum uero unum esse coeperint, bona fiunt; nonne haec ut bona sint, unitatis fieri adeptione contingit?" "ita," inquam, "uidetur." "sed omne quod bonum est boni participatione bonum esse concedis an minime?" "ita est." "oportet igitur idem esse unum atque bonum simili ratione concedas; eadem namque substantia est eorum quorum naturaliter non est diuersus effectus." "negare," inquam, "nequeo." "nostine igitur," inquit, "omne quod est tam diu manere atque subsistere quam diu sit unum, sed interire atque dissolui pariter atque unum destiterit?" "quonam modo?" "vt in animalibus," inquit, "cum in unum coeunt ac permanent anima corpusque, id animal uocatur; cum uero haec unitas utriusque separatione dissoluitur, interire nec iam esse animal liquet. ipsum quoque corpus cum in una forma membrorum coniunctione permanet, humana uisitur species; at si distributae segregataeque partes corporis distraxerint unitatem, desinit esse quod fuerat. eoque modo percurrenti cetera procul dubio patebit subsistere unumquodque, dum unum est, cum uero unum esse desinit, interire." "consideranti," inquam, "mihi plura minime aliud uidetur." "estne igitur," inquit, "quod in quantum naturaliter agat relicta subsistendi appetentia uenire ad interitum corruptionemque desideret?" "si animalia," inquam, "considerem quae habent aliquam uolendi nolendique naturam, nihil inuenio quod nullis extra cogentibus abiciant manendi intentionem et ad interitum sponte festinent. omne namque animal tueri salutem laborat, mortem uero perniciemque deuitat. sed quid de herbis arboribusque, quid de inanimatis omnino consentiam rebus prorsus dubito." "atqui non est quod de hoc quoque possis ambigere, cum herbas atque arbores intuearis primum sibi conuenientibus innasci locis, ubi quantum earum natura queat cito exarescere atque interire non possint. nam aliae quidem campis aliae montibus oriuntur, alias ferunt paludes, aliae saxis haerent, aliarum fecundae sunt steriles harenae, quas si in alia quispiam loca transferre conetur, arescant. sed dat cuique natura quod conuenit et ne, dum manere possunt, intereant, elaborat. quid quod omnes uelut in terras ore demerso trahunt alimenta radicibus ac per medullas robur corticemque diffundunt? quid quod mollissimum quidque, sicuti medulla est, interiore semper sede reconditur, extra uero quadam ligni firmitate, ultimus autem cortex aduersum caeli intemperiem quasi mali patiens defensor opponitur? iam uero quanta est naturae diligentia, ut cuncta semine multiplicato propagentur! quae omnia non modo ad tempus manendi uerum generatim quoque quasi in perpetuum permanendi ueluti quasdam machinas esse quis nesciat? ea etiam quae inanimata esse creduntur nonne quod suum est quaeque simili ratione desiderant? cur enim flammas quidem sursum leuitas uehit, terras uero deorsum pondus deprimit, nisi quod haec singulis loca motionesque conueniunt? porro autem quod cuique consentaneum est, id unumquodque conseruat, sicuti ea quae sunt inimica corrumpunt. iam uero quae dura sunt ut lapides, adhaerent tenacissime partibus suis et ne facile dissoluantur resistunt. quae uero liquentia ut aer atque aqua, facile quidem diuidentibus cedunt, sed cito in ea rursus a quibus sunt abscisa relabuntur, ignis uero omnem refugit sectionem. neque nunc nos de uoluntariis animae cognoscentis motibus, sed de naturali intentione tractamus, sicuti est quod acceptas escas sine cogitatione transigimus, quod in somno spiritum ducimus nescientes; nam ne in animalibus quidem manendi amor ex animae uoluntatibus, uerum ex naturae principiis uenit. nam saepe mortem cogentibus causis quam natura reformidat uoluntas amplectitur, contraque illud quo solo mortalium rerum durat diuturnitas gignendi opus, quod natura semper appetit, interdum coercet uoluntas. adeo haec sui caritas non ex animali motione sed ex naturali intentione procedit. dedit enim prouidentia creatis a se rebus hanc uel maximam manendi causam ut quoad possunt naturaliter manere desiderent; quare nihil est quod ullo modo queas dubitare cuncta quae sunt appetere naturaliter constantiam permanendi, deuitare perniciem." "confiteor," inquam, "nunc me indubitato cernere quae dudum incerta uidebantur." "quod autem," inquit, "subsistere ac permanere petit, id unum esse desiderat; hoc enim sublato ne esse quidem cuiquam permanebit." "verum est," inquam. "omnia igitur," inquit, "unum desiderant." consensi. "sed unum id ipsum monstrauimus esse quod bonum." "ita quidem." "cuncta igitur bonum petunt, quod quidem ita describas licet: ipsum bonum esse quod desideretur ab omnibus." "nihil," inquam, "uerius excogitari potest. nam uel ad nihil unum cuncta referuntur et uno ueluti uertice destituta sine rectore fluitabunt, aut si quid est ad quod uniuersa festinent, id erit omnium summum bonorum." et illa: "nimium," inquit, "o alumne laetor, ipsam enim mediae ueritatis notam mente fixisti. sed in hoc patuit tibi quod ignorare te paulo ante dicebas." "quid?" inquam. "quis esset," inquit, "rerum omnium finis. is est enim profecto, quod desideratur ab omnibus, quod quia bonum esse collegimus, oportet rerum omnium finem bonum esse fateamur. xi. "i consent," quoth i, "for all is grounded upon most firm reasons." "but what account wilt thou make," quoth she, "to know what goodness itself is?" "i will esteem it infinitely," quoth i, "because by this means i shall come to know god also, who is nothing else but goodness." "i will conclude this," quoth she, "most certainly, if those things be not denied which i have already proved." "they shall not," quoth i. "have we not proved," quoth she, "that those things which are desired of many, are not true and perfect goods, because they differ one from another and, being separated, cannot cause complete and absolute goodness, which is only found when they are united as it were into one form and causality, that the same may be sufficiency, power, respect, fame, and pleasure? and except they be all one and the same thing, that they have nothing worth the desiring?" "it hath been proved," quoth i, "neither can it be any way doubted of." "those things, then, which, when they differ, are not good and when they are one, become good, are they not made good by obtaining unity?" "so methink," quoth i. "but dost thou grant that all that is good is good by partaking goodness?" "it is so." "thou must grant then likewise that unity and goodness are the same. for those things have the same substance, which naturally have not diverse effects." "i cannot deny it," quoth i. "knowest thou then," quoth she, "that everything that is doth so long remain and subsist as it is one, and perisheth and is dissolved so soon as it ceaseth to be one?" "how?" "as in living creatures," quoth she, "so long as the body and soul remain united, the living creature remaineth. but when this unity is dissolved by their separation, it is manifest that it perisheth, and is no longer a living creature. the body also itself, so long as it remaineth in one form by the conjunction of the parts, appeareth the likeness of a man. but if the members of the body, being separated and sundered, have lost their unity, it is no longer the same. and in like manner it will be manifest to him that will descend to other particulars, that everything continueth so long as it is one, and perisheth when it loseth unity." "considering more particulars, i find it to be no otherwise." "is there anything," quoth she, "that in the course of nature, leaving the desire of being, seeketh to come to destruction and corruption?" "if," quoth i, "i consider living creatures which have any nature to will and nill, i find nothing that without extern compulsion forsake the intention to remain, and of their own accord hasten to destruction. for every living creature laboureth to preserve his health, and escheweth death and detriment. but what i should think of herbs, and trees, and of all things without life, i am altogether doubtful." "but there is no cause why thou shouldst doubt of this, if thou considerest first that herbs and trees grow in places agreeable to their nature, where, so much as their constitution permitteth, they cannot soon wither and perish. for some grow in fields, other upon hills, some in fenny, other in stony places, and the barren sands are fertile for some, which if thou wouldst transplant into other places they die. but nature giveth every one that which is fitting, and striveth to keep them from decaying so long as they can remain. what should i tell thee, if all of them, thrusting as it were their lips into the ground, draw nourishment by their roots, and convey substance and bark by the inward pith? what, that always the softest, as the pith, is placed within, and is covered without by the strength of the wood, and last of all the bark is exposed to the weather, as being best able to bear it off? and how great is the diligence of nature that all things may continue by the multiplication of seed; all which who knoweth not to be, as it were, certain engines, not only to remain for a time, but successively in a manner to endure for ever? those things also which are thought to be without all life, doth not every one in like manner desire that which appertaineth to their own good? for why doth levity lift up flames, or heaviness weigh down the earth, but because these places and motions are convenient for them? and that which is agreeable to everything conserveth it, as that which is opposite causeth corruption. likewise those things which are hard, as stones, stick most firmly to their parts, and make great resistance to any dissolution. and liquid things, as air and water, are indeed easily divided, but do easily also join again. and fire flieth all division. neither do we now treat of the voluntary motions of the understanding soul, but only of natural operations. of which sort is, to digest that which we have eaten, without thinking of it, to breathe in our sleep not thinking what we do. for even in living creatures the love of life proceedeth not from the will of the soul, but from the principles of nature. for the will many times embraceth death upon urgent occasions, which nature abhorreth; and contrariwise the act of generation, by which alone the continuance of mortal things is maintained, is sometimes bridled by the will, though nature doth always desire it. so true it is that this self-love proceedeth not from any voluntary motion, but from natural intention. for providence gave to her creatures this as the greatest cause of continuance, that they naturally desire to continue so long as they may, wherefore there is no cause why thou shouldst any way doubt that all things which are desire naturally stability of remaining, and eschew corruption." "i confess," quoth i, "that i now see undoubtedly that which before seemed very doubtful." "now that," quoth she, "which desireth to continue and remain seeketh to have unity. for if this be taken away, being itself cannot remain." "it is true," quoth i. "all things then," quoth she, "desire unity." i granted it to be so. "but we have showed that unity is the same as goodness." "you have indeed." "all things then desire goodness, which thou mayest define thus: goodness is that which is desired of all things." "there can be nothing imagined more true. for either all things have reference to no one principle and, being destitute as it were of one head, shall be in confusion without any ruler: or if there be anything to which all things hasten, that must be the chiefest of all goods." "i rejoice greatly o scholar," quoth she, "for thou hast fixed in thy mind the very mark of verity. but in this thou hast discovered that which a little before thou saidest thou wert ignorant of." "what is that?" quoth i. "what the end of all things is," quoth she. "for certainly it is that which is desired of all things, which since we have concluded to be goodness, we must also confess that goodness is the end of all things. xi. quisquis profunda mente uestigat uerum cupitque nullis ille deuiis falli, in se reuoluat intimi lucem uisus longosque in orbem cogat inflectens motus animumque doceat quidquid extra molitur suis retrusum possidere thesauris. dudum quod atra texit erroris nubes lucebit ipso perspicacius phoebo. non omne namque mente depulit lumen obliuiosam corpus inuehens molem. haeret profecto semen introrsum ueri quod excitatur uentilante doctrina. nam cur rogati sponte recta censetis, ni mersus alto uiueret fomes corde? quod si platonis musa personat uerum, quod quisque discit immemor recordatur." xi. he that would seek the truth with thoughts profound and would not stray in ways that are not right, he to himself must turn his inward sight, and guide his motions in a circled round, teaching his mind that ever she design herself in her own treasures to possess: so that which late lay hidden in cloudiness more bright and clear than phoebus' beams shall shine. flesh hath not quenched all the spirit's light, though this oblivion's lump holds her opprest. some seed of truth remaineth in our breast, which skilful learning eas'ly doth excite. for being askt how can we answer true unless that grace within our hearts did dwell? if plato's heavenly muse the truth us tell, we learning things remember them anew."[ ] [ ] for plato's doctrine of reminiscence cf. _meno_ - , and _phaedo_ - . xii. tum ego: "platoni," inquam, "uehementer assentior, nam me horum iam secundo commemoras, primum quod memoriam corporea contagione, dehinc cum maeroris mole pressus amisi." tum illa: "si priora," inquit, "concessa respicias, ne illud quidem longius aberit quin recorderis quod te dudum nescire confessus es." "quid?" inquam. "quibus," ait illa, "gubernaculis mundus regatur." "memini," inquam, "me inscitiam meam fuisse confessum, sed quid afferas, licet iam prospiciam, planius tamen ex te audire desidero." "mundum," inquit, "hunc deo regi paulo ante minime dubitandum putabas." "ne nunc quidem arbitror," inquam, "nec umquam dubitandum putabo quibusque in hoc rationibus accedam breuiter exponam. mundus hic ex tam diuersis contrariisque partibus in unam formam minime conuenisset, nisi unus esset qui tam diuersa coniungeret. coniuncta uero naturarum ipsa diuersitas inuicem discors dissociaret atque diuelleret, nisi unus esset qui quod nexuit contineret. non tam uero certus naturae ordo procederet nec tam dispositos motus locis, temporibus, efficientia, spatiis, qualitatibus explicarent, nisi unus esset qui has mutationum uarietates manens ipse disponeret. hoc quidquid est quo condita manent atque agitantur, usitato cunctis uocabulo deum nomino." tum illa: "cum haec," inquit, "ita sentias, paruam mihi restare operam puto ut felicitatis compos patriam sospes reuisas. sed quae proposuimus intueamur. nonne in beatitudine sufficientiam numerauimus deumque beatitudinem ipsam esse consensimus?" "ita quidem." "et ad mundum igitur," inquit, "regendum nullis extrinsecus adminiculis indigebit; alioquin si quo egeat, plenam sufficientiam non habebit." "id," inquam, "ita est necessarium." "per se igitur solum cuncta disponit." "negari," inquam, "nequit." "atqui deus ipsum bonum esse monstratus est." "memini," inquam. "per bonum igitur cuncta disponit, si quidem per se regit omnia quem bonum esse consensimus et hic est ueluti quidam clauus atque gubernaculum quo mundana machina stabilis atque incorrupta seruatur." "vehementer assentior," inquam, "et id te paulo ante dicturam tenui licet suspicione prospexi." "credo;" inquit, "iam enim ut arbitror uigilantius ad cernenda uera oculos deducis. sed quod dicam non minus ad contuendum patet." "quid?" inquam. "cum deus," inquit, "omnia bonitatis clauo gubernare iure credatur eademque omnia sicuti docui ad bonum naturali intentione festinent, num dubitari potest quin uoluntaria regantur seque ad disponentis nutum ueluti conuenientia contemperataque rectori sponte conuertant?" "ita," inquam, "necesse est; nec beatum regimen esse uideretur, si quidem detrectantium iugum foret, non obtemperantium salus." "nihil est igitur quod naturam seruans deo contraire conetur." "nihil," inquam. "quod si conetur," ait, "num tandem proficiet quidquam aduersus eum quem iure beatitudinis potentissimum esse concessimus?" "prorsus," inquam, "nihil ualeret." "non est igitur aliquid quod summo huic bono uel uelit uel possit obsistere." "non," inquam, "arbitror." "est igitur summum," inquit, "bonum quod regit cuncta fortiter suauiterque disponit." tum ego: "quam," inquam, "me non modo ea quae conclusa est summa rationum, uerum multo magis haec ipsa quibus uteris uerba delectant, ut tandem aliquando stultitiam magna lacerantem sui pudeat." "accepisti," inquit, "in fabulis lacessentes caelum gigantas; sed illos quoque, uti condignum fuit, benigna fortitudo disposuit. sed uisne rationes ipsas inuicem collidamus? forsitan ex huiusmodi conflictatione pulchra quaedam ueritatis scintilla dissiliat." "tuo," inquam, "arbitratu." "deum," inquit, "esse omnium potentem nemo dubitauerit." "qui quidem," inquam, "mente consistat, nullus prorsus ambigat." "qui uero est," inquit, "omnium potens, nihil est quod ille non possit." "nihil," inquam. "num igitur deus facere malum potest?" "minime," inquam. "malum igitur," inquit, "nihil est, cum id facere ille non possit, qui nihil non potest." "ludisne," inquam, "me inextricabilem labyrinthum rationibus texens, quae nunc quidem qua egrediaris introeas, nunc uero quo introieris egrediare, an mirabilem quendam diuinae simplicitatis orbem complicas? etenim paulo ante beatitudine incipiens eam summum bonum esse dicebas quam in summo deo sitam loquebare. ipsum quoque deum summum esse bonum plenamque beatitudinem disserebas; ex quo neminem beatum fore nisi qui pariter deus esset quasi munusculum dabas. rursus ipsam boni formam dei ac beatitudinis loquebaris esse substantiam ipsumque unum id ipsum esse bonum docebas quod ab omni rerum natura peteretur. deum quoque bonitatis gubernaculis uniuersitatem regere disputabas uolentiaque cuncta parere nec ullam mali esse naturam. atque haec nullis extrinsecus sumptis sed ex altero altero fidem trahente insitis domesticisque probationibus explicabas." tum illa: "minime," inquit, "ludimus remque omnium maximam dei munere quem dudum deprecabamur exegimus. ea est enim diuinae forma substantiae ut neque in externa dilabatur nec in se externum aliquid ipsa suscipiat, sed, sicut de ea parmenides ait: [greek: pantothen eukuklou sphairaes enalinkion onkoi], rerum orbem mobilem rotat, dum se immobilem ipsa conseruat. quod si rationes quoque non extra petitas sed intra rei quam tractabamus ambitum collocatas agitauimus, nihil est quod admirere, cum platone sanciente didiceris cognatos de quibus loquuntur rebus oportere esse sermones. xii. then i said that i did very well like of plato's doctrine, for thou dost bring these things to my remembrance now the second time, first, because i lost their memory by the contagion of my body, and after when i was oppressed with the burden of grief. "if," quoth she, "thou reflectest upon that which heretofore hath been granted, thou wilt not be far from remembering that which in the beginning thou confessedst thyself to be ignorant of." "what?" quoth i. "by what government," quoth she, "the world is ruled." "i remember," quoth i, "that i did confess my ignorance, but though i foresee what thou wilt say, yet i desire to hear it more plainly from thyself." "thou thoughtest a little before that it was not to be doubted that this world is governed by god." "neither do i think now," quoth i, "neither will i ever think, that it is to be doubted of, and i will briefly explicate the reasons which move me to think so. this world could never have been compacted of so many divers and contrary parts, unless there were one that doth unite these so different things; and this disagreeing diversity of natures being united would separate and divide this concord, unless there were one that holdeth together that which he united. neither would the course of nature continue so certain, nor would the different parts hold so well- ordered motions in due places, times, causality, spaces and qualities, unless there were one who, himself remaining quiet, disposeth and ordereth this variety of motions. this, whatsoever it be, by which things created continue and are moved, i call god, a name which all men use."[ ] "since," quoth she, "thou art of this mind, i think with little labour thou mayest be capable of felicity, and return to thy country in safety. but let us consider what we proposed. have we not placed sufficiency in happiness, and granted that god is blessedness itself?" "yes truly." "wherefore," quoth she, "he will need no outward helps to govern the world, otherwise, if he needed anything, he had not full sufficiency." "that," quoth i, "must necessarily be so." "wherefore he disposeth all things by himself." "no doubt he doth," quoth i. "but it hath been proved that god is goodness itself." "i remember it very well," quoth i. "then he disposeth all things by goodness: since he governeth all things by himself, whom we have granted to be goodness. and this is as it were the helm and rudder by which the frame of the world is kept steadfast and uncorrupted." "i most willingly agree," quoth i, "and i foresaw a little before, though only with a slender guess, that thou wouldst conclude this." "i believe thee," quoth she, "for now i suppose thou lookest more watchfully about thee to discern the truth. but that which i shall say is no less manifest." "what?" quoth i. "since that god is deservedly thought to govern all things with the helm of goodness, and all these things likewise, as i have showed, hasten to goodness with their natural contention, can there be any doubt made but that they are governed willingly, and that they frame themselves of their own accord to their disposer's beck, as agreeable and conformable to their ruler?" "it must needs be so," quoth i, "neither would it seem an happy government, if it were an imposed yoke, not a desired health." "there is nothing then which, following nature, endeavoureth to resist god." "nothing," quoth i. "what if anything doth endeavour," quoth she, "can anything prevail against him, whom we have granted to be most powerful by reason of his blessedness?" "no doubt," quoth i, "nothing could prevail." "wherefore there is nothing which either will or can resist this sovereign goodness." "i think not," quoth i. "it is then the sovereign goodness which governeth all things strongly, and disposeth them sweetly." "how much," quoth i, "doth not only the reason which thou allegest, but much more the very words which thou usest, delight me, that folly which so much vexed me may at length be ashamed of herself." "thou hast heard in the poets' fables," quoth she, "how the giants provoked heaven, but this benign fortitude put them also down, as they deserved. but wilt thou have our arguments contend together? perhaps by this clash there will fly out some beautiful spark of truth." "as it pleaseth thee," quoth i. "no man can doubt," quoth she, "but that god is almighty." "no man," quoth i, "that is well in his wits." "but," quoth she, "there is nothing that he who is almighty cannot do." "nothing," quoth i. "can god do evil?" "no," quoth i, "wherefore," quoth she, "evil is nothing, since he cannot do it who can do anything." "dost thou mock me," quoth i, "making with thy reasons an inextricable labyrinth, because thou dost now go in where thou meanest to go out again, and after go out, where thou camest in, or dost thou frame a wonderful circle of the simplicity of god? for a little before taking thy beginning from blessedness, thou affirmedst that to be the chiefest good which thou saidst was placed in god, and likewise thou provedst, that god himself is the chiefest good and full happiness, out of which thou madest me a present of that inference, that no man shall be happy unless he be also a god. again thou toldest me that the form of goodness is the substance of god and of blessedness, and that unity is the same with goodness, because it is desired by the nature of all things; thou didst also dispute that god governeth the whole world with the helm of goodness, and that all things obey willingly, and that there is no nature of evil, and thou didst explicate all these things with no foreign or far-fetched proofs, but with those which were proper and drawn from inward principles, the one confirming the other." "we neither play nor mock," quoth she, "and we have finished the greatest matter that can be by the assistance of god, whose aid we implored in the beginning. for such is the form of the divine substance that it is neither divided into outward things, nor receiveth any such into itself, but as parmenides saith of it: in body like a sphere well-rounded on all sides,[ ] it doth roll about the moving orb of things, while it keepeth itself unmovable. and if we have used no far-fetched reasons, but such as were placed within the compass of the matter we handled, thou hast no cause to marvel, since thou hast learned in plato's school that our speeches must be like and as it were akin to the things we speak of. [ ] _vide supra, tr._ iv. (pp. ff.). [ ] cf. _frag._ . (diels, _vorsokratiker_, i. p. ). xii. felix qui potuit boni fontem uisere lucidum, felix qui potuit grauis terrae soluere uincula. quondam funera coniugis vates threicius gemens postquam flebilibus modis siluas currere mobiles, amnes stare coegerat, iunxitque intrepidum latus saeuis cerua leonibus, nec uisum timuit lepus iam cantu placidum canem, cum flagrantior intima feruor pectoris ureret, nec qui cuncta subegerant mulcerent dominum modi, inmites superos querens infernas adiit domos. illic blanda sonantibus chordis carmina temperans quidquid praecipuis deae matris fontibus hauserat, quod luctus dabat impotens, quod luctum geminans amor, deflet taenara commouens et dulci ueniam prece vmbrarum dominos rogat. stupet tergeminus nouo captus carmine ianitor, quae sontes agitant metu vltrices scelerum deae iam maestae lacrimis madent. non ixionium caput velox praecipitat rota et longa site perditus spernit flumina tantalus. vultur dum satur est modis, non traxit tityi iecur. tandem, 'vincimur,' arbiter vmbrarum miserans ait, 'donamus comitem uiro emptam carmine coniugem. sed lex dona coerceat, ne, dum tartara liquerit, fas sit lumina flectere.' quis legem det amantibus? maior lex amor est sibi. heu, noctis prope terminos orpheus eurydicen suam vidit, perdidit, occidit. vos haec fabula respicit quicumque in superum diem mentem ducere quaeritis. nam qui tartareum in specus victus lumina flexerit, quidquid praecipuum trahit perdit, dum uidet inferos." xii. happy is he that can behold the well-spring whence all good doth rise, happy is he that can unfold the bands with which the earth him ties. the thracian poet whose sweet song performed his wife's sad obsequies, and forced the woods to run along when he his mournful tunes did play, whose powerful music was so strong that it could make the rivers stay; the fearful hinds not daunted were, but with the lions took their way, nor did the hare behold with fear the dog whom these sweet notes appease. when force of grief drew yet more near, and on his heart did burning seize, nor tunes which all in quiet bound could any jot their master ease, the gods above too hard he found, and pluto's palace visiting. he mixed sweet verses with the sound of his loud harp's delightful string, all that he drank with thirsty draught from his high mother's chiefest spring, all that his restless grief him taught, and love which gives grief double aid, with this even hell itself was caught, whither he went, and pardon prayed for his dear spouse (unheard request). the three-head porter was dismayed, ravished with his unwonted guest, the furies, which in tortures keep the guilty souls with pains opprest, moved with his song began to weep. ixion's wheel now standing still turns not his head with motions steep. though tantalus might drink at will, to quench his thirst he would forbear. the vulture full with music shrill doth not poor tityus' liver tear. 'we by his verses conquered are,' saith the great king whom spirits fear. 'let us not then from him debar his wife whom he with songs doth gain. yet lest our gift should stretch too far, we will it with this law restrain, that when from hell he takes his flight, he shall from looking back refrain.' who can for lovers laws indite? love hath no law but her own will. orpheus, seeing on the verge of night eurydice, doth lose and kill her and himself with foolish love. but you this feigned tale fulfil, who think unto the day above to bring with speed your darksome mind. for if, your eye conquered, you move backward to pluto left behind, all the rich prey which thence you took, you lose while back to hell you look." anicii manlii severini boethii v.c. et inl. excons. ord. patricii philosophiae consolationis liber tertivs explicit incipit liber iv i. haec cum philosophia dignitate uultus et oris grauitate seruata leniter suauiterque cecinisset, tum ego nondum penitus insiti maeroris oblitus intentionem dicere adhuc aliquid parantis abrupi. et: "o," inquam, "ueri praeuia luminis quae usque adhuc tua fudit oratio, cum sui speculatione diuina tum tuis rationibus inuicta patuerunt, eaque mihi etsi ob iniuriae dolorem nuper oblita non tamen antehac prorsus ignorata dixisti. sed ea ipsa est uel maxima nostri causa maeroris, quod, cum rerum bonus rector exsistat, uel esse omnino mala possint uel impunita praetereant; quod solum quanta dignum sit admiratione profecto consideras. at huic aliud maius adiungitur. nam imperante florenteque nequitia uirtus non solum praemiis caret, uerum etiam sceleratorum pedibus subiecta calcatur et in locum facinorum supplicia luit. quae fieri in regno scientis omnia, potentis omnia sed bona tantummodo uolentis dei nemo satis potest nec admirari nec conqueri." tum illa: "et esset," inquit, "infiniti stuporis omnibusque horribilius monstris, si, uti tu aestimas, in tanti uelut patrisfamilias dispositissima domo uilia uasa colerentur, pretiosa sordescerent. sed non ita est. nam si ea quae paulo ante conclusa sunt inconuulsa seruantur, ipso de cuius nunc regno loquimur auctore cognosces semper quidem potentes esse bonos, malos uero abiectos semper atque inbecillos nec sine poena umquam esse uitia nec sine praemio uirtutes, bonis felicia, malis semper infortunata contingere multaque id genus quae sopitis querelis firma te soliditate corroborent. et quoniam uerae formam beatitudinis me dudum monstrante uidisti, quo etiam sita sit agnouisti, decursis omnibus quae praemittere necessarium puto, uiam tibi quae te domum reuehat ostendam. pennas etiam tuae menti quibus se in altum tollere possit adfigam, ut perturbatione depulsa sospes in patriam meo ductu, mea semita, meis etiam uehiculis reuertaris. the fourth book of boethius i. when philosophy had sung these verses with a soft and sweet voice, observing due dignity and gravity in her countenance and gesture, i, not having altogether forgotten my inward grief, interrupted her speech which she was about to continue, and said: "o thou who bringest us to see true light, those things which hitherto thou hast treated of have manifestly appeared both to be divine when contemplated apart, and invincible when supported by thy reasons, and what thou hast uttered, though the force of grief had made me forget it of late, yet heretofore i was not altogether ignorant of it. but this is the chiefest cause of my sorrow, that since the governor of all things is so good, there can either be any evil at all, or that it pass unpunished. which alone i beseech thee consider, how much admiration it deserveth. but there is another greater than this; for wickedness bearing rule and sway, virtue is not only without reward, but lieth also trodden under the wicked's feet, and is punished instead of vice. that which things should be done in the kingdom of god, who knoweth all things, can do all things, but will do only that which is good, no man can sufficiently admire nor complain." to which she answered: "it were indeed infinitely strange, and surpassing all monsters, if, as thou conceivest, in the best-ordered house of so great an householder the vilest vessels were made account of and the precious neglected; but it is not so. for if those things which were a little before concluded be kept unviolated, thou shalt by his help, of whose kingdom we speak, know that the good are always powerful, and the evil always abject and weak, and that vices are never without punishment, nor virtue without reward, and that the good are always prosperous, and the evil unfortunate, and many things of that sort, which will take away all cause of complaint, and give thee firm and solid strength. and since by my means thou hast already seen the form of true blessedness, and known where it is placed, running over all those things which i think necessary to rehearse, i will show thee the way which will carry thee home. and i will also fasten wings upon thy mind, with which she may rouse herself, that, all perturbation being driven away, thou mayest return safely into thy country by my direction, by my path, and with my wings. i. sunt etenim pennae uolucres mihi quae celsa conscendant poli. quas sibi cum uelox mens induit, terras perosa despicit, aeris inmensi superat globum, nubesque postergum uidet, quique agili motu calet aetheris, transcendit ignis uerticem, donec in astriferas surgat domos phoeboque coniungat uias aut comitetur iter gelidi senis miles corusci sideris, vel quocumque micans nox pingitur, recurrat astri circulum atque ubi iam exhausti fuerit satis, polum relinquat extimum dorsaque uelocis premat aetheris compos uerendi luminis. hic regum sceptrum dominus tenet orbisque habenas temperat et uolucrem currum stabilis regit rerum coruscus arbiter. huc te si reducem referat uia, quam nunc requiris immemor: 'haec,' dices, 'memini, patria est mihi, hinc ortus; hic sistam gradum." quod si terrarum placeat tibi noctem relictam uisere, quos miseri toruos populi timent cernes tyrannos exules." i. for i have swift and nimble wings which will ascend the lofty skies, with which when thy quick mind is clad, it will the loathéd earth despise, and go beyond the airy globe, and watery clouds behind thee leave, passing the fire which scorching heat doth from the heavens' swift course receive, until it reach the starry house, and get to tread bright phoebus' ways, following the chilly sire's path,[ ] companion of his flashing rays, and trace the circle of the stars which in the night to us appear, and having stayed there long enough go on beyond the farthest sphere, sitting upon the highest orb partaker of the glorious light, where the great king his sceptre holds, and the world's reins doth guide aright, and, firm in his swift chariot, doth everything in order set. unto this seat when thou art brought, thy country, which thou didst forget, thou then wilt challenge to thyself, saying: 'this is the glorious land where i was born, and in this soil my feet for evermore shall stand. whence if thou pleasest to behold the earthly night which thou hast left, those tyrants which the people fear will seem of their true home bereft.'" [ ] cf. "frigida saturni sese quo stella receptet," virg. _georg._ i. . ii. tum ego: "papae," inquam, "ut magna promittis! nec dubito quin possis efficere; tu modo quem excitaueris ne moreris." "primum igitur," inquit, "bonis semper adesse potentiam, malos cunctis uiribus esse desertos agnoscas licebit, quorum quidem alterum demonstratur ex altero. nam cum bonum malumque contraria sint, si bonum potens esse constiterit, liquet inbecillitas mali; at si fragilitas clarescat mali, boni firmitas nota est. sed uti nostrae sententiae fides abundantior sit, alterutro calle procedam nunc hinc nunc inde proposita confirmans. duo sunt quibus omnis humanorum actuum constat effectus, uoluntas scilicet ac potestas, quorum si alterutrum desit, nihil est quod explicari queat. deficiente etenim uoluntate ne aggreditur quidem quisque quod non uult; at si potestas absit, uoluntas frustra sit. quo fit ut si quem uideas adipisci uelle quod minime adipiscatur, huic obtinendi quod uoluerit defuisse ualentiam dubitare non possis." "perspicuum est," inquam, "nec ullo modo negari potest." "quem uero effecisse quod uoluerit uideas, num etiam potuisse dubitabis?" "minime." "quod uero quisque potest, in eo ualidus, quod uero non potest, in hoc imbecillis esse censendus est." "fateor," inquam. "meministine igitur," inquit, "superioribus rationibus esse collectum intentionem omnem uoluntatis humanae quae diuersis studiis agitur ad beatitudinem festinare?" "memini," inquam, "illud quoque esse demonstratum." "num recordaris beatitudinem ipsum esse bonum eoque modo, cum beatitudo petitur, ab omnibus desiderari bonum?" "minime," inquam, "recordor, quoniam id memoriae fixum teneo." "omnes igitur homines boni pariter ac mali indiscreta intentione ad bonum peruenire nituntur?" "ita," inquam, "consequens est." "sed certum est adeptione boni bonos fieri." "certum." "adipiscuntur igitur boni quod appetunt?" "sic uidetur." "mali uero si adipiscerentur quod appetunt bonum, mali esse non possent." "ita est." "cum igitur utrique bonum petant, sed hi quidem adipiscantur, illi uero minime, num dubium est bonos quidem potentes esse, qui uero mali sunt imbecillos?" "quisquis," inquam, "dubitat, nec rerum naturam nec consequentiam potest considerare rationum." "rursus," inquit, "si duo sint quibus idem secundum naturam propositum sit eorumque unus naturali officio id ipsum agat atque perficiat, alter uero naturale illud officium minime administrare queat, alio uero modo quam naturae conuenit non quidem impleat propositum suum sed imitetur implentem, quemnam horum ualentiorem esse decernis?" "etsi coniecto," inquam, "quid uelis, planius tamen audire desidero." "ambulandi," inquit, "motum secundum naturam esse hominibus num negabis?" "minime," inquam. "eiusque rei pedum officium esse naturale num dubitas?" "ne hoc quidem," inquam. "si quis igitur pedibus incedere ualens ambulet aliusque cui hoc naturale pedum desit officium, manibus nitens ambulare conetur, quis horum iure ualentior existimari potest?" "contexe," inquam, "cetera; nam quin naturalis officii potens eo qui idem nequeat ualentior sit, nullus ambigat." "sed summum bonum, quod aeque malis bonisque propositum, boni quidem naturali officio uirtutum petunt, mali uero uariam per cupiditatem, quod adipiscendi boni naturale officium non est, idem ipsum conantur adipisci. an tu aliter existimas?" "minime," inquam, "nam etiam quod est consequens patet. ex his enim quae concesserim, bonos quidem potentes, malos uero esse necesse est imbecillos." "recte," inquit, "praecurris idque, uti medici sperare solent, indicium est erectae iam resistentisque naturae. sed quoniam te ad intellegendum promptissimum esse conspicio, crebras coaceruabo rationes. vide enim quanta uitiosorum hominum pateat infirmitas qui ne ad hoc quidem peruenire queunt ad quod eos naturalis ducit ac paene compellit intentio. et quid si hoc tam magno ac paene inuicto praeeuntis naturae desererentur auxilio? considera uero quanta sceleratos homines habeat impotentia. neque enim leuia aut ludicra praemia petunt, quae consequi atque obtinere non possunt, sed circa ipsam rerum summam uerticemque deficiunt nec in eo miseris contingit effectus quod solum dies noctesque moliuntur; in qua re bonorum uires eminent. sicut enim eum qui pedibus incedens ad eum locum usque peruenire potuisset, quo nihil ulterius peruium iaceret incessui, ambulandi potentissimum esse censeres, ita eum qui expetendorum finem quo nihil ultra est apprehendit, potentissimum necesse est iudices. ex quo fit quod huic obiacet, ut idem scelesti, idem uiribus omnibus uideantur esse deserti. cur enim relicta uirtute uitia sectantur? inscitiane bonorum? sed quid eneruatius ignorantiae caecitate? an sectanda nouerunt? sed transuersos eos libido praecipitat. sic quoque intemperantia fragiles qui obluctari uitio nequeunt. an scientes uolentesque bonum deserunt, ad uitia deflectunt? sed hoc modo non solum potentes esse sed omnino esse desinunt. nam qui communem omnium quae sunt finem relinquunt, pariter quoque esse desistunt. quod quidem cuipiam mirum forte uideatur, ut malos, qui plures hominum sunt, eosdem non esse dicamus; sed ita sese res habet. nam qui mali sunt eos malos esse non abnuo; sed eosdem esse pure atque simpliciter nego. nam uti cadauer hominem mortuum dixeris, simpliciter uero hominem appellare non possis, ita uitiosos malos quidem esse concesserim, sed esse absolute nequeam confiteri. est enim quod ordinem retinet seruatque naturam; quod uero ab hac deficit, esse etiam quod in sua natura situm est derelinquit. 'sed possunt,' inquies, 'mali.' ne ego quidem negauerim, sed haec eorum potentia non a uiribus sed ab imbecillitate descendit. possunt enim mala quae minime ualerent, si in bonorum efficientia manere potuissent. quae possibilitas eos euidentius nihil posse demonstrat. nam si, uti paulo ante collegimus, malum nihil est, cum mala tantummodo possint, nihil posse improbos liquet." "perspicuum est." "atque ut intellegas quaenam sit huius potentiae uis, summo bono nihil potentius esse paulo ante definiuimus." "ita est," inquam. "sed idem," inquit, "facere malum nequit." "minime." "est igitur," inquit, "aliquis qui omnia posse homines putet?" "nisi quis insaniat, nemo." "atqui idem possunt mala." "vtinam quidem," inquam, "non possent." "cum igitur bonorum tantummodo potens possit omnia, non uero queant omnia potentes etiam malorum, eosdem qui mala possunt minus posse manifestum est. huc accedit quod omnem potentiam inter expetenda numerandam omniaque expetenda referri ad bonum uelut ad quoddam naturae suae cacumen ostendimus. sed patrandi sceleris possibilitas referri ad bonum non potest; expetenda igitur non est. atqui omnis potentia expetenda est; liquet igitur malorum possibilitatem non esse potentiam. ex quibus omnibus bonorum quidem potentia, malorum uero minime dubitabilis apparet infirmitas ueramque illam platonis esse sententiam liquet solos quod desiderent facere posse sapientes, improbos uero exercere quidem quod libeat, quod uero desiderent explere non posse. faciunt enim quaelibet, dum per ea quibus delectantur id bonum quod desiderant se adepturos putant; sed minime adipiscuntur, quoniam ad beatitudinem probra non ueniunt. ii.[ ] "oh!" quoth i. "how great things dost thou promise! and i doubt not but thou canst perform them, wherefore stay me not now that thou hast stirred up my desires." "first then," quoth she, "that good men are always powerful, and evil men of no strength, thou mayest easily know, the one is proved by the other. for since that good and evil are contraries, if it be convinced that goodness is potent, the weakness of evil will be also manifest; and contrariwise if we discern the frailty of evil, we must needs acknowledge the firmness of goodness. but that our opinions may be more certainly embraced, i will take both ways, confirming my propositions, sometime from one part, sometime from another. there be two things by which all human actions are effected, will and power, of which if either be wanting, there can nothing be performed. for if there want will, no man taketh anything in hand against his will, and if there be not power, the will is in vain. so that, if thou seest any willing to obtain that which he doth not obtain, thou canst not doubt but that he wanted power to obtain what he would." "it is manifest," quoth i, "and can by no means be denied." "and wilt thou doubt that he could, whom thou seest bring to pass what he desired?" "no." "but every man is mighty in that which he can do, and weak in that which he cannot do." "i confess it," quoth i. "dost thou remember then," quoth she, "that it was inferred by our former discourses that all the intentions of man's will doth hasten to happiness, though their courses be divers?" "i remember," quoth i, "that that also was proved." "dost thou also call to mind that blessedness is goodness itself, and consequently when blessedness is sought after, goodness must of course be desired?" "i call it not to mind, for i have it already fixed in my memory." "wherefore all men both good and bad without difference of intentions endeavour to obtain goodness." "it followeth," quoth i. "but it is certain that men are made good by the obtaining of goodness." "it is so." "wherefore good men obtain what they desire." "so it seemeth." "and if evil men did obtain the goodness they desire, they could not be evil." "it is true." "wherefore since they both desire goodness, but the one obtaineth it and the other not, there is no doubt but that good men are powerful, and the evil weak." "whosoever doubteth of this," quoth i, "he neither considereth the nature of things, nor the consequence of thy reasons." "again," quoth she, "if there be two to whom the same thing is proposed according to nature, and the one of them bringeth it perfectly to pass with his natural function, but the other cannot exercise that natural function but after another manner than is agreeable to nature, and doth not perform that which he had proposed, but imitateth the other who performeth it: which of these two wilt thou judge to be more powerful?" "though i conjecture," quoth i, "at thy meaning, yet i desire to hear it more plainly." "wilt thou deny," quoth she, "that the motion of walking is agreeable to the nature of men?" "no," quoth i. "and makest thou any doubt that the function of it doth naturally belong to the feet?" "there is no doubt of this neither," quoth i. "wherefore if one that can go upon his feet doth walk, and another who hath not this natural function of his feet endeavoureth to walk by creeping upon his hands, which of these two is deservedly to be esteemed the stronger?" "infer the rest," quoth i, "for no man doubteth but that he which can use that natural function is stronger than he which cannot." "but," quoth she, "the good seek to obtain the chiefest good, which is equally proposed to bad and good, by the natural function of virtues, but the evil endeavour to obtain the same by divers concupiscences, which are not the natural function of obtaining goodness. thinkest thou otherwise?" "no," quoth i, "for it is manifest what followeth. for by the force of that which i have already granted, it is necessary that good men are powerful and evil men weak." "thou runnest before rightly," quoth she, "and it is (as physicians are wont to hope) a token of an erected and resisting nature. wherefore, since i see thee most apt and willing to comprehend, i will therefore heap up many reasons together. for consider the great weakness of vicious men, who cannot come so far as their natural intention leadeth and almost compelleth them. and what if they were destitute of this so great and almost invincible help of the direction of nature? ponder likewise the immense impotency of wicked men. for they are no light or trifling rewards[ ] which they desire, and cannot obtain: but they fail in the very sum and top of things: neither can the poor wretches compass that which they only labour for nights and days: in which thing the forces of the good eminently appear. for as thou wouldst judge him to be most able to walk who going on foot could come as far as there were any place to go in: so must thou of force judge him most powerful who obtaineth the end of all that can be desired, beyond which there is nothing. hence that which is opposite also followeth, that the same men are wicked and destitute of all forces. for why do they follow vices, forsaking virtues? by ignorance of that which is good? but what is more devoid of strength than blind ignorance? or do they know what they should embrace, but passion driveth them headlong the contrary way? so also intemperance makes them frail, since they cannot strive against vice. or do they wittingly and willingly forsake goodness, and decline to vices? but in this sort they leave not only to be powerful, but even to be at all. for they which leave the common end of all things which are, leave also being. which may perhaps seem strange to some, that we should say that evil men are not at all, who are the greatest part of men: but yet it is so. for i deny not that evil men are evil, but withal i say that purely and simply they are not. for as thou mayest call a carcase a dead man, but not simply a man, so i confess that the vicious are evil, but i cannot grant that they are absolutely. for that is which retaineth order, and keepeth nature, but that which faileth from this leaveth also to be that which is in his own nature. but thou wilt say that evil men can do many things, neither will i deny it, but this their power proceedeth not from forces but from weakness. for they can do evil, which they could not do if they could have remained in the performance of that which is good. which possibility declareth more evidently that they can do nothing. for if, as we concluded a little before, evil is nothing, since they can only do evil, it is manifest that the wicked can do nothing." "it is most manifest." "and that thou mayest understand what the force of this power is; we determined a little before that there is nothing more powerful than the sovereign goodness." "it is true," quoth i. "but he cannot do evil." "no." "is there any then," quoth she, "that think that men can do all things?" "no man, except he be mad, thinketh so." "but yet men can do evil." "i would to god they could not," quoth i. "since therefore he that can only do good, can do all things, and they who can do evil, cannot do all things, it is manifest that they which can do evil are less potent. moreover, we have proved that all power is to be accounted among those things which are to be wished for, and that all such things have reference to goodness, as to the very height of their nature. but the possibility of committing wickedness cannot have reference to goodness. wherefore it is not to be wished for. yet all power is to be wished for; and consequently it is manifest, possibility of evil is no power. by all which the power of the good and the undoubted infirmity of evil appeareth. and it is manifest that the sentence of plato is true: that only wise men can do that which they desire, and that the wicked men practise indeed what they list, but cannot perform what they would. for they do what they list, thinking to obtain the good which they desire by those things which cause them delight; but they obtain it not, because shameful action cannot arrive to happiness.[ ] [ ] the whole of this and of the following chapter is a paraphrase of plato's _gorgias_. [ ] cf. virgil, _aen._ xii. . [ ] cf. plato, _gorgias_, , ; _alcibiades i._ c. ii. quos uides sedere celsos solii culmine reges purpura claros nitente saeptos tristibus armis ore toruo comminantes rabie cordis anhelos, detrahat si quis superbis uani tegmina cultus, iam uidebit intus artas dominos ferre catenas. hinc enim libido uersat auidis corda uenenis, hinc flagellat ira mentem fluctus turbida tollens maeror aut captos fatigat aut spes lubrica torquet ergo cum caput tot unum cernas ferre tyrannos, non facit quod optat ipse dominis pressus iniquis. ii. the kings whom we behold in highest glory placed, and with rich purple graced, compassed with soldiers bold; whose countenance shows fierce threats, who with rash fury chide, if any strip the pride from their vainglorious feats; he'll see them close oppressed within by galling chains for filthy lust there reigns and poisoneth their breast, wrath often them perplexeth raising their minds like waves, sorrow their power enslaves and sliding hope them vexeth. so many tyrants still dwelling in one poor heart, except they first depart she cannot have her will. iii. videsne igitur quanto in caeno probra uoluantur, qua probitas luce resplendeat? in quo perspicuum est numquam bonis praemia numquam sua sceleribus deesse supplicia. rerum etenim quae geruntur illud propter quod unaquaeque res geritur, eiusdem rei praemium esse non iniuria uideri potest, uti currendi in stadio propter quam curritur iacet praemium corona. sed beatitudinem esse idem ipsum bonum propter quod omnia geruntur ostendimus. est igitur humanis actibus ipsum bonum ueluti praemium commune propositum. atqui hoc a bonis non potest separari neque enim bonus ultra iure uocabitur qui careat bono; quare probos mores sua praemia non relinquunt. quantumlibet igitur saeuiant mali, sapienti tamen corona non decidet, non arescet. neque enim probis animis proprium decus aliena decerpit improbitas. quod si extrinsecus accepto laetaretur, poterat hoc uel alius quispiam uel ipse etiam qui contulisset auferre; sed quoniam id sua cuique probitas confert, tum suo praemio carebit, cum probus esse desierit. postremo cum omne praemium idcirco appetatur quoniam bonum esse creditur, quis boni compotem praemii iudicet expertem? at cuius praemii? omnium pulcherrimi maximique. memento etenim corollarii illius quod paulo ante praecipuum dedi ac sic collige: cum ipsum bonum beatitudo sit, bonos omnes eo ipso quod boni sint fieri beatos liquet. sed qui beati sint deos esse conuenit. est igitur praemium bonorum quod nullus. deterat dies, nullius minuat potestas, nullius fuscet improbitas, deos fieri. quae cum ita sint, de malorum quoque inseparabili poena dubitare sapiens nequeat. nam cum bonum malumque item poenae atque praemium aduersa fronte dissideant, quae in boni praemio uidemus accedere eadem necesse est in mali poena contraria parte respondeant. sicut igitur probis probitas ipsa fit praemium, ita improbis nequitia ipsa supplicium est. iam uero quisquis afficitur poena, malo se affectum esse non dubitat. si igitur sese ipsi aestimare uelint, possuntne sibi supplicii expertes uideri quos omnium malorum extrema nequitia non affecit modo uerum etiam uehementer infecit? vide autem ex aduersa parte bonorum, quae improbos poena comitetur. omne namque quod sit unum esse ipsumque unum bonum esse paulo ante didicisti, cui consequens est ut omne quod sit id etiam bonum esse uideatur. hoc igitur modo quidquid a bono deficit esse desistit; quo fit ut mali desinant esse quod fuerant, sed fuisse homines adhuc ipsa humani corporis reliqua species ostentat. quare uersi in malitiam humanam quoque amisere naturam. sed cum ultra homines quemque prouehere sola probitas possit, necesse est ut quos ab humana condicione deiecit, infra hominis meritum detrudat improbitas. euenit igitur, ut quem transformatum uitiis uideas hominem aestimare non possis. auaritia feruet alienarum opum uiolentus ereptor? lupi similem dixeris. ferox atque inquies linguam litigiis exercet? cani comparabis. insidiator occultus subripuisse fraudibus gaudet? vulpeculis exaequetur. irae intemperans fremit? leonis animum gestare credatur. pauidus ac fugax non metuenda formidat? ceruis similis habeatur. segnis ac stupidus torpit? asinum uiuit. leuis atque inconstans studia permutat? nihil auibus differt. foedis inmundisque libidinibus immergitur? sordidae suis uoluptate detinetur. ita fit ut qui probitate deserta homo esse desierit, cum in diuinam condicionem transire non possit, uertatur in beluam. iii. seest thou then in what mire wickedness wallows, and how clearly honesty shineth? by which it is manifest that the good are never without rewards, nor the evil without punishments. for in all things that are done that for which anything is done may deservedly seem the reward of that action, as to him that runneth a race, the crown for which he runneth is proposed as a reward. but we have showed that blessedness is the selfsame goodness for which all things are done. wherefore this goodness is proposed as a common reward for all human actions, and this cannot be separated from those who are good. for he shall not rightly be any longer called good, who wanteth goodness; wherefore virtuous manners are not left without their due rewards. and how much so ever the evil do rage, yet the wise man's crown will not fade nor wither. for others' wickedness depriveth not virtuous minds of their proper glory. but if he should rejoice at anything which he hath from others, either he who gave it, or any other might take it away. but because every man's virtue is the cause of it, then only he shall want his reward when he leaveth to be virtuous. lastly, since every reward is therefore desired because it is thought to be good, who can judge him to be devoid of reward, which hath goodness for his possession? but what reward hath he? the most beautiful and the greatest that can be. for remember that _corollarium_ [ ] which i presented thee with a little before, as with a rare and precious jewel, and infer thus: since that goodness itself is happiness, it is manifest that all good men even by being good are made happy. but we agreed that happy men are gods. wherefore the reward of good men, which no time can waste, no man's power diminish, no man's wickedness obscure, is to become gods. which things being so, no wise man can any way doubt of the inseparable punishment of the evil. for since goodness and evil, punishment and reward, are opposite the one to the other, those things which we see fall out in the reward of goodness must needs be answerable in a contrary manner in the punishment of evil. wherefore as to honest men honesty itself is a reward, so to the wicked their very wickedness is a punishment. and he that is punished doubteth not but that he is afflicted with the evil. wherefore if they would truly consider their own estate, can they think themselves free from punishment, whom wickedness, the worst of all evils, doth not only touch but strongly infect? but weigh the punishment which accompanieth the wicked, by comparing it to the reward of the virtuous. for thou learnedst not long before that whatsoever is at all is one, and that unity is goodness, by which it followeth that whatsoever is must also be good. and in this manner, whatsoever falleth from goodness ceaseth to be, by which it followeth that evil men leave to be that which they were, but the shape of men, which they still retain, showeth them to have been men: wherefore by embracing wickedness they have lost the nature of men. but since virtue alone can exalt us above men, wickedness must needs cast those under the desert of men, which it hath bereaved of that condition. wherefore thou canst not account him a man whom thou seest transformed by vices. is the violent extorter of other men's goods carried away with his covetous desire? thou mayest liken him to a wolf. is the angry and unquiet man always contending and brawling? thou mayest compare him to a dog. doth the treacherous fellow rejoice that he hath deceived others with his hidden frauds? let him be accounted no better than a fox. doth the outrageous fret and fume? let him be thought to have a lion's mind. is the fearful and timorous afraid without cause? let him be esteemed like to hares and deer. is the slow and stupid always idle? he liveth an ass's life. doth the light and unconstant change his courses? he is nothing different from the birds. is he drowned in filthy and unclean lusts? he is entangled in the pleasure of a stinking sow. so that he who, leaving virtue, ceaseth to be a man, since he cannot be partaker of the divine condition, is turned into a beast. [ ] _vide supra, p. ._ iii. vela neritii ducis et uagas pelago rates eurus appulit insulae, pulchra qua residens dea solis edita semine miscet hospitibus nouis tacta carmine pocula. quos ut in uarios modos vertit herbipotens manus, hunc apri facies tegit, ille marmaricus leo dente crescit et unguibus. hic lupis nuper additus, flere dum parat, ululat. ille tigris ut indica tecta mitis obambulat. sed licet uariis malis numen arcadis alitis obsitum miserans ducem peste soluerit hospitis, iam tamen mala remiges ore pocula traxerant, iam sues cerealia glande pabula uerterant et nihil manet integrum voce corpore perditis. sola mens stabilis super monstra quae patitur gemit. o leuem nimium manum nec potentia gramina, membra quae ualeant licet, corda uertere non ualent! intus est hominum uigor arce conditus abdita. haec uenena potentius detrahunt hominem sibi dira quae penitus meant nec nocentia corpori mentis uulnere saeuiunt." iii. the sails which wise ulysses bore, and ships which in the seas long time did stray the eastern wind drave to that shore where the fair goddess lady circe lay, daughter by birth to phoebus bright, who with enchanted cups and charms did stay her guests, deceived with their delight and into sundry figures them did change, being most skilful in the might and secret force of herbs and simples strange; some like to savage boars, and some like lions fierce, which daily use to range through libya,[ ] in tooth and claw become. others are changed to the shape and guise of ravenous wolves, and waxing dumb use howling in the stead of manly cries. others like to the tiger rove[ ] which in the scorched indian desert lies. and though the winged son of jove[ ] from these bewitchéd cups' delightful taste to keep the famous captain strove, yet them the greedy mariners embraced with much desire, till turned to swine instead of bread they fed on oaken mast. ruined in voice and form, no sign remains to them of any human grace; only their minds unchanged repine to see their bodies in such ugly case. o feeble hand and idle art which, though it could the outward limbs deface, yet had no force to change the heart. for all the force of men given by god's arm lies hidden in their inmost part. the poisons therefore which within them swarm more deeply pierce, and with more might, for to the body though they do no harm, yet on the soul they work their spite." [ ] literally "marmaric," i.e. properly, the region between egypt and the great syrtis; generally, african, cf. lucan iii. . [ ] literally, "rove tame round the house." [ ] i.e. mercury who was born in arcadia; cf. virg. _aen._ viii. - . iv. tum ego: "fateor," inquam, "nec iniuria dici uideo uitiosos, tametsi humani corporis speciem seruent, in beluas tamen animorum qualitate mutari; sed quorum atrox scelerataque mens bonorum pernicie saeuit, id ipsum eis licere noluissem." "nec licet," inquit, "uti conuenienti monstrabitur loco. sed tamen si id ipsum quod eis licere creditur auferatur, magna ex parte sceleratorum hominum poena releuetur. etenim quod incredibile cuiquam forte uideatur, infeliciores esse necesse est malos, cum cupita perfecerint, quam si ea quae cupiunt implere non possint. nam si miserum est uoluisse praua, potuisse miserius est, sine quo uoluntatis miserae langueret effectus. itaque cum sua singulis miseria sit, triplici infortunio necesse est urgeantur quos uideas scelus uelle, posse, perficere." "accedo," inquam, "sed uti hoc infortunio cito careant patrandi sceleris possibilitate deserti uehementer exopto." "carebunt," inquit, "ocius quam uel tu forsitan uelis uel illi sese aestiment esse carituros. neque enim est aliquid in tam breuibus uitae metis ita serum quod exspectare longum immortalis praesertim animus putet: quorum magna spes et excelsa facinorum machina repentino atque insperato saepe fine destruitur, quod quidem illis miseriae modum statuit. nam si nequitia miseros facit, miserior sit necesse est diuturnior nequam; quos infelicissimos esse iudicarem, si non eorum malitiam saltem mors extrema finiret. etenim si de prauitatis infortunio uera conclusimus, infinitam liquet esse miseriam quam esse constat aeternam." tum ego: "mira quidem," inquam, "et concessu difficilis inlatio, sed his eam quae prius concessa sunt nimium conuenire cognosco." "recte," inquit, "aestimas. sed qui conclusioni accedere durum putat, aequum est uel falsum aliquid praecessisse demonstret uel collocationem propositionum non esse efficacem necessariae conclusionis ostendat; alioquin concessis praecedentibus nihil prorsus est quod de inlatione causetur. nam hoc quoque quod dicam non minus mirum uideatur, sed ex his quae sumpta sunt aeque est necessarium." "quidnam?" inquam. "feliciores," inquit, "esse improbos supplicia luentes quam si eos nulla iustitiae poena coerceat. neque id nunc molior quod cuiuis ueniat in mentem, corrigi ultione prauos mores et ad rectum supplicii terrore deduci, ceteris quoque exemplum esse culpanda fugiendi, sed alio quodam modo infeliciores esse improbos arbitror impunitos, tametsi nulla ratio correctionis, nullus respectus habeatur exempli." "et quis erit," inquam, "praeter hos alius modus?" et illa: "bonos," inquit, "esse felices, malos uero miseros nonne concessimus?" "ita est," inquam. "si igitur," inquit, "miseriae cuiuspiam bonum aliquid addatur, nonne felicior est eo cuius pura ac solitaria sine cuiusquam boni admixtione miseria est?" "sic," inquam, "uidetur." "quid si eidem misero qui cunctis careat bonis, praeter ea quibus miser est malum aliud fuerit adnexum, nonne multo infelicior eo censendus est cuius infortunium boni participatione releuatur?" "quidni?" inquam. "sed puniri improbos iustum, impunitos uero elabi iniquum esse manifestum est." "quis id neget?" "sed ne illud quidem," ait, "quisquam negabit bonum esse omne quod iustum est contraque quod iniustum est malum." liquere, respondi.[ ] "habent igitur improbi, cum puniuntur, quidem boni aliquid adnexum poenam ipsam scilicet quae ratione iustitiae bona est, idemque cum supplicio carent, inest eis aliquid ulterius mali ipsa impunitas quam iniquitatis merito malum esse confessus es." "negare non possum." "multo igitur infeliciores improbi sunt iniusta impunitate donati quam iusta ultione puniti." tum ego: "ista quidem consequentia sunt eis quae paulo ante conclusa sunt. sed quaeso," inquam, "te, nullane animarum supplicia post defunctum morte corpus relinquis?" "et magna quidem," inquit, "quorum alia poenali acerbitate, alia uero purgatoria clementia exerceri puto. sed nunc de his disserere consilium non est. id uero hactenus egimus, ut quae indignissima tibi uidebatur malorum potestas eam nullam esse cognosceres quosque impunitos querebare, uideres numquam improbitatis suae carere suppliciis, licentiam quam cito finiri precabaris nec longam esse disceres infelicioremque fore, si diuturnior, infelicissimam uero, si esset aeterna; post haec miseriores esse improbos iniusta impunitate dimissos quam iusta ultione punitos. cui sententiae consequens est ut tum demum grauioribus suppliciis urgeantur, cum impuniti esse creduntur." tum ego: "cum tuas," inquam, "rationes considero, nihil dici uerius puto. at si ad hominum iudicia reuertar, quis ille est cui haec non credenda modo sed saltem audienda uideantur?" "ita est," inquit illa. "nequeunt enim oculos tenebris assuetos ad lucem perspicuae ueritatis attollere, similesque auibus sunt quarum intuitum nox inluminat dies caecat. dum enim non rerum ordinem, sed suos intuentur affectus, uel licentiam uel impunitatem scelerum putant esse felicem. vide autem quid aeterna lex sanciat. melioribus animum conformaueris, nihil opus est iudice praemium deferente tu te ipse excellentioribus addidisti. studium ad peiora deflexeris, extra ne quaesieris ultorem. tu te ipse in deteriora trusisti, ueluti si uicibus sordidam humum caelumque respicias, cunctis extra cessantibus ipsa cernendi ratione nunc caeno nunc sideribus interesse uidearis. at uulgus ista non respicit. quid igitur? hisne accedamus quos beluis similes esse monstrauimus? quid si quis amisso penitus uisu ipsum etiam se habuisse obliuisceretur intuitum nihilque sibi ad humanam perfectionem deesse arbitraretur, num uidentes eadem caecos putaremus? nam ne illud quidem adquiescent quod aeque ualidis rationum nititur firmamentis: infeliciores eos esse qui faciant quam qui patiantur iniuriam." "vellem," inquam, "has ipsas audire rationes." "omnem," inquit, "improbum num supplicio dignum negas?" "minime." "infelices uero esse qui sint improbi multipliciter liquet." "ita," inquam. "qui igitur supplicio digni sunt miseros esse non dubitas?" "conuenit," inquam. "si igitur cognitor," ait, "resideres, cui supplicium inferendum putares, eine qui fecisset an qui pertulisset iniuriam?" "nec ambigo," inquam, "quin perpesso satisfacerem dolore facientis." "miserior igitur tibi iniuriae inlator quam acceptor esse uideretur." "consequitur," inquam. "hinc igitur aliis de causis ea radice nitentibus, quod turpitudo suapte natura miseros faciat, apparet inlatam cuilibet iniuriam non accipientis sed inferentis esse miseriam." "atqui nunc," ait, "contra faciunt oratores. pro his enim qui graue quid acerbumque perpessi sunt miserationem iudicum excitare conantur, cum magis admittentibus iustior miseratio debeatur; quos non ab iratis sed a propitiis potius miserantibusque accusatoribus ad iudicium ueluti aegros ad medicum duci oportebat, ut culpae morbos supplicio resecarent. quo pacto defensorum opera uel tota frigeret, uel si prodesse hominibus mallet, in accusationis habitum uerteretur, ipsi quoque improbi, si eis aliqua rimula uirtutem relictam fas esset aspicere uitiorumque sordes poenarum cruciatibus se deposituros uiderent compensatione adipiscendae probitatis, nec hos cruciatus esse ducerent defensorumque operam repudiarent ac se totos accusatoribus iudicibusque permitterent. quo fit ut apud sapientes nullus prorsus odio locus relinquatur. nam bonos quis nisi stultissimus oderit? malos uero odisse ratione caret. nam si, uti corporum languor, ita uitiositas quidam est quasi morbus animorum, cum aegros corpore minime dignos odio sed potius miseratione iudicemus, multo magis non insequendi sed miserandi sunt quorum mentes omni languore atrocior urget improbitas. [ ] sed puniri ... respondi _quae infra_ (_in pag. l. _) _post_ ultioni puniti _in codicibus habentur huc transponenda esse censuit p. langenus, demonstrauit a. engelbrecht._ iv. then said i, "i confess and perceive that thou affirmest not without cause that the vicious, though they keep the outward shape of men, are in their inward state of mind changed into brute beasts. but i would have had them whose cruel and wicked heart rageth to the harm of the good, restrained from executing their malice." "they are restrained," quoth she, "as shall be proved in convenient place. but yet if this liberty which they seem to have be taken away, their punishment also is in great part released. for (which perhaps to some may seem incredible) evil men must necessarily be more unhappy when they have brought to pass their purposes than if they could not obtain what they desire. for if it be a miserable thing to desire that which is evil, it is more miserable to be able to perform it, without which the miserable will could not have any effect. wherefore since everyone of these hath their peculiar misery, they must of force be oppressed with a threefold wretchedness, whom thou seest desire, be able, and perform wickedness." "i grant it," quoth i, "but earnestly wish that they may soon be delivered from this misery, having lost the power to perform their malice." "they will lose it," quoth she, "sooner than perhaps either thou wouldst, or they themselves suppose. for in the short compass of this life there is nothing so late that any one, least of all an immortal soul, should think it long in coming; so that the great hope and highest attempts of the wicked are many times made frustrate with a sudden and unexpected end, which in truth setteth some end to their misery. for if wickedness make men miserable, the longer one is wicked, the more miserable he must needs be; and i should judge them the most unhappy men that may be, if death at least did not end their malice. for if we have concluded truly of the misery of wickedness, it is manifest that the wretchedness which is everlasting must of force be infinite." "a strange illation," quoth i, "and hard to be granted; but i see that those things which were granted before agree very well with these." "thou thinkest aright," quoth she, "but he that findeth difficulty to yield to the conclusion must either show that something which is presupposed is false, or that the combination of the propositions makes not a necessary conclusion; otherwise, granting that which went before, he hath no reason to doubt of the inference. for this also which i will conclude now will seem no less strange, and yet followeth as necessarily out of those things which are already assumed." "what?" quoth i. "that wicked men," quoth she, "are more happy being punished than if they escaped the hands of justice. neither do i now go about to show that which may come into every man's mind, that evil customs are corrected by chastisement, and are reduced to virtue by the terror of punishment, and that others may take example to avoid evil, but in another manner also i think vicious men that go unpunished to be more miserable, although we take no account of correction and pay no regard to example." "and what other manner shall this be," quoth i, "besides these?" "have we not granted," quoth she, "that the good are happy, and the evil miserable?" "we have," quoth i. "if then," quoth she, "something that is good be added to one's misery, is he not happier than another whose misery is desolate and solitary, without any participation of goodness?" "so it seemeth," quoth i. "what if there be some other evil annexed to this miserable man who is deprived of all goodness, besides those which make him miserable, is he not to be accounted much more unhappy than he whose misery is lightened by partaking of goodness?" "why not?" quoth i. "but it is manifest that it is just that the wicked be punished, and unjust that they should go unpunished." "who can deny that?" "but neither will any man deny this," quoth she, "that whatsoever is just, is good, and contrariwise, that whatsoever is unjust, is evil." "certainly," i answered. "then the wicked have some good annexed when they are punished, to wit, the punishment itself, which by reason of justice is good, and when they are not punished, they have a further evil, the very impunity which thou hast deservedly granted to be an evil because of its injustice." "i cannot deny it." "wherefore the vicious are far more unhappy by escaping punishment unjustly, than by being justly punished." "this followeth," quoth i, "out of that which hath been concluded before. but i pray thee, leavest thou no punishments for the souls after the death of the body?" "and those great too," quoth she. "some of which i think to be executed as sharp punishments, and others as merciful purgations.[ ] but i purpose not now to treat of those. but we have hitherto laboured that thou shouldest perceive the power of the wicked, which to thee seemed intolerable, to be none at all, and that thou shouldest see, that those whom thou complainedst went unpunished, do never escape without punishment for their wickedness. and that thou shouldest learn that the licence which thou wishedst might soon end, is not long, and yet the longer the more miserable, and most unhappy if it were everlasting. besides, that the wicked are more wretched being permitted to escape with unjust impunity, than being punished with just severity. out of which it followeth that they are then more grievously punished, when they are thought to go scot-free." "when i consider thy reasons," quoth i, "i think nothing can be said more truly. but if i return to the judgments of men, who is there that will think them worthy to be believed or so much as heard?" "it is true," quoth she, "for they cannot lift up their eyes accustomed to darkness, to behold the light of manifest truth, and they are like those birds whose sight is quickened by the night, and dimmed by the day. for while they look upon, not the order of things, but their own affections, they think that licence and impunity to sin is happy. but see what the eternal law establisheth. if thou apply thy mind to the better, thou needest no judge to reward thee: thou hast joined thyself to the more excellent things. if thou declinest to that which is worse, never expect any other to punish thee: thou hast put thyself in a miserable estate; as if by turns thou lookest down to the miry ground, and up to heaven, setting aside all outward causes, by the very law of sight thou seemest sometime to be in the dirt, and sometime present to the stars. but the common sort considereth not these things. what then? shall we join ourselves to them whom we have proved to be like beasts? what if one having altogether lost his sight should likewise forget that he ever had any, and should think that he wanted nothing which belongeth to human perfection: should we likewise think them blind, that see as well as they saw before? for they will not grant that neither, which may be proved by as forcible reasons, that they are more unhappy that do injury than they which suffer it." "i would," quoth i, "hear these reasons." "deniest thou," quoth she, "that every wicked man deserveth punishment?" "no." "and it is many ways clear that the vicious are miserable?" "yes," quoth i. "then you do not doubt that those who deserve punishment are wretched?" "it is true," quoth i. "if then," quoth she, "thou wert to examine this cause, whom wouldest thou appoint to be punished, him that did or that suffered wrong?" "i doubt not," quoth i, "but that i would satisfy him that suffered with the sorrow of him that did it." "the offerer of the injury then would seem to thee more miserable than the receiver?" "it followeth," quoth i. "hence therefore, and for other causes grounded upon that principle that dishonesty of itself maketh men miserable, it appeareth that the injury which is offered any man is not the receiver's but the doer's misery." "but now-a-days," quoth she, "orators take the contrary course. for they endeavour to draw the judges to commiseration of them who have suffered any grievous afflictions; whereas pity is more justly due to the causers thereof, who should be brought, not by angry, but rather by favourable and compassionate accusers to judgment, as it were sick men to a physician, that their diseases and faults might be taken away by punishments; by which means the defenders' labour would either wholly cease, or if they had rather do their clients some good, they would change their defence into accusations. and the wicked themselves, if they could behold virtue abandoned by them, through some little rift, and perceive that they might be delivered from the filth of sin by the affliction of punishments, obtaining virtue in exchange, they would not esteem of torments, and would refuse the assistance of their defenders, and wholly resign themselves to their accusers and judges. by which means it cometh to pass, that in wise men there is no place for hatred. for who but a very fool would hate the good? and to hate the wicked were against reason. for as faintness is a disease of the body, so is vice a sickness of the mind. wherefore, since we judge those that have corporal infirmities to be rather worthy of compassion than of hatred, much more are they to be pitied, and not abhorred, whose minds are oppressed with wickedness, the greatest malady that may be. [ ] see discussion of this passage in _boethius, an essay,_ h. f. stewart ( ), pp. ff. iv. quod tantos iuuat excitare motus et propria fatum sollicitare manu? si mortem petitis, propinquat ipsa sponte sua uolucres nec remoratur equos. quos serpens leo tigris ursus aper dente petunt, idem se tamen ense petunt. an distant quia dissidentque mores, iniustas acies et fera bella mouent alternisque uolunt perire telis? non est iusta satis saeuitiae ratio. vis aptam meritis uicem referre? dilige iure bonos et miseresce malis." iv. why should we strive to die so many ways, and slay ourselves with our own hands? if we seek death, she ready stands, she willing comes, her chariot never stays. those against whom the wild beasts arméd be, against themselves with weapons rage.[ ] do they such wars unjustly wage, because their lives and manners disagree, and so themselves with mutual weapons kill? alas, but this revenge is small. wouldst thou give due desert to all? love then the good, and pity thou the ill." [ ] literally, "men whom serpent, lion, tiger, bear, and boar attack with tooth, yet attack each other with the sword." v. hic ego: "video," inquam, "quae sit uel felicitas uel miseria in ipsis proborum atque improborum meritis constituta. sed in hac ipsa fortuna populari non nihil boni maliue inesse perpendo. neque enim sapientum quisquam exul inops ignominiosusque esse malit, potius quam pollens opibus, honore reuerendus, potentia ualidus, in sua permanens urbe florere. sic enim clarius testatiusque sapientiae tractatur officium, cum in contingentes populos regentium quodam modo beatitudo transfunditur, cum praesertim carcer, nex[ ] ceteraque legalium tormenta poenarum perniciosis potius ciuibus propter quos etiam constituta sunt debeantur. cur haec igitur uersa uice mutentur scelerumque supplicia bonos premant, praemia uirtutum mali rapiant, uehementer admiror, quaeque tam iniustae confusionis ratio uideatur ex te scire desidero. minus etenim mirarer, si misceri omnia fortuitis casibus crederem. nunc stuporem meum deus rector exaggerat. qui cum saepe bonis iucunda, malis aspera contraque bonis dura tribuat, malis optata concedat, nisi causa deprehenditur, quid est quod a fortuitis casibus differre uideatur?" "nec mirum," inquit, "si quid ordinis ignorata ratione temerarium confusumque credatur. sed tu quamuis causam tantae dispositionis ignores, tamen quoniam bonus mundum rector temperat, recte fieri cuncta ne dubites. [ ] lex _plerique codd._ v. "i see," quoth i, "what felicity or misery is placed in the deserts of honest and dishonest men. but i consider that there is somewhat good or evil even in this popular fortune. for no wise man had rather live in banishment, poverty, and ignominy, than prosper in his own country, being rich, respected, and powerful. for in this manner is the office of wisdom performed with more credit and renown, when the governors' happiness is participated by the people about them; so chiefly because prisons, death, and other torments of legal punishments are rather due to pernicious subjects, for whom they were also ordained. wherefore i much marvel why these things are thus turned upside down, and the punishments of wickedness oppress the good, while evil men obtain the rewards of the good. and i desire to know of thee what may seem to be the reason of so unjust confusion. for i would marvel less if i thought that all things were disordered by casual events. now god being the governor, my astonishment is increased. for since that he distributeth oftentimes that which is pleasant to the good, and that which is distasteful to the bad, and contrariwise adversity to the good, and prosperity to the evil, unless we find out the cause hereof, what difference may there seem to be betwixt this and accidental chances?" "it is no marvel," quoth she, "if anything be thought temerarious and confused, when we know not the order it hath. but although thou beest ignorant of the causes why things be so disposed, yet because the world hath a governor, doubt not but all things are well done. v. si quis arcturi sidera nescit propinqua summo cardine labi, cur legat tardus plaustra bootes mergatque seras aequore flammas, cum nimis celeres explicet ortus, legem stupebit aetheris alti. palleant plenae cornua lunae infecta metis noctis opacae quaeque fulgenti texerat ore confusa phoebe detegat astra, commouet gentes publicus error lassantque crebris pulsibus aera. nemo miratur flamina cori litus frementi tundere fluctu nec niuis duram frigore molem feruente phoebi soluier aestu. hic enim causas cernere promptum est, illic latentes pectora turbant. cuncta quae rara prouehit aetas stupetque subitis mobile uulgus, cedat inscitiae nubilus error, cessent profecto mira uideri." v. who knows not how the stars near to the poles do slide, and how boötes his slow wain doth guide, and why he sets so late, and doth so early rise, may wonder at the courses of the skies. if when the moon is full her horns seem pale to sight, infested with the darkness of the night, and stars from which all grace she with her brightness took, now show themselves, while she doth dimly look, a public error straight through vulgar minds doth pass, and they with many strokes beat upon brass.[ ] none wonders why the winds upon the waters blow. nor why hot phoebus' beams dissolve the snow. these easy are to know, the other hidden lie, and therefore more our hearts they terrify. all strange events which time to light more seldom brings, and the vain people count as sudden things, if we our clouded minds from ignorance could free, no longer would by us admired be." [ ] see tylor's _primitive culture_, pp. ff. cf "carmina uel caelo possunt deducere lunam," virg. _ecl._ viii. , and juvenal, _sat._ vi. sq. vi "ita est," inquam; "sed cum tui muneris sit latentium rerum causas euoluere uelatasque caligine explicare rationes, quaeso uti quae hinc decernas. quoniam hoc me miraculum maxime perturbat, edisseras." tum illa paulisper arridens: "ad rem me," inquit, "omnium quaesitu maximam uocas, cui uix exhausti quicquam satis sit. talis namque materia est ut una dubitatione succisa innumerabiles aliae uelut hydrae capita succrescant, nec ullus fuerit modus, nisi quis eas uiuacissimo mentis igne coerceat. in hac enim de prouidentiae simplicitate, de fati serie, de repentinis casibus, de cognitione ac praedestinatione diuina, de arbitrii libertate quaeri solet, quae quanti oneris sint ipse perpendis. sed quoniam haec quoque te nosse quaedam medicinae tuae portio est, quamquam angusto limite temporis saepti tamen aliquid delibare[ ] conabimur. quod si te musici carminis oblectamenta delectant, hanc oportet paulisper differas uoluptatem, dum nexas sibi ordine contexo rationes." "vt libet," inquam. tunc uelut ab alio orsa principio ita disseruit: "omnium generatio rerum cunctusque mutabilium naturarum progressus et quidquid aliquo mouetur modo, causas, ordinem, formas ex diuinae mentis stabilitate sortitur. haec in suae simplicitatis arce composita multiplicem rebus regendis modum statuit. qui modus cum in ipsa diuinae intellegentiae puritate conspicitur, prouidentia nominatur; cum uero ad ea quae mouet atque disponit refertur, fatum a ueteribus appellatum est. quae diuersa esse facile liquebit, si quis utriusque uim mente conspexerit. nam prouidentia est ipsa illa diuina ratio in summo omnium principe constituta quae cuncta disponit; fatum uero inhaerens rebus mobilibus dispositio per quam prouidentia suis quaeque nectit ordinibus. prouidentia namque cuncta pariter quamuis diuersa quamuis infinita complectitur; fatum uero singula digerit in motum locis formis ac temporibus distributa, ut haec temporalis ordinis explicatio in diuinae mentis adunata prospectum prouidentia sit, eadem uero adunatio digesta atque explicata temporibus fatum uocetur. quae licet diuersa sint, alterum tamen pendet ex altero. ordo namque fatalis ex prouidentiae simplicitate procedit. sicut enim artifex faciendae rei formam mente praecipiens mouet operis effectum, et quod simpliciter praesentarieque prospexerat, per temporales ordines ducit, ita deus prouidentia quidem singulariter stabiliterque facienda disponit, fato uero haec ipsa quae disposuit multipliciter ac temporaliter administrat. siue igitur famulantibus quibusdam prouidentiae diuinis spiritibus fatum exercetur seu anima seu tota inseruiente natura seu caelestibus siderum motibus seu angelica uirtute seu daemonum uaria sollertia seu aliquibus horum seu omnibus fatalis series texitur, illud certe manifestum est immobilem simplicemque gerendarum formam rerum esse prouidentiam, fatum uero eorum quae diuina simplicitas gerenda disposuit mobilem nexum atque ordinem temporalem. quo fit ut omnia quae fato subsunt prouidentiae quoque subiecta sint cui ipsum etiam subiacet fatum, quaedam uero quae sub prouidentia locata sunt fati seriem superent. ea uero sunt quae primae propinqua diuinitati stabiliter fixa fatalis ordinem mobilitatis excedunt. nam ut orbium circa eundem cardinem sese uertentium qui est intimus ad simplicitatem medietatis accedit ceterorumque extra locatorum ueluti cardo quidam circa quem uersentur exsistit, extimus uero maiore ambitu rotatus quanto a puncti media indiuiduitate discedit tanto amplioribus spatiis explicatur, si quid uero illi se medio conectat et societ, in simplicitatem cogitur diffundique ac diffluere cessat, simili ratione quod longius a prima mente discedit maioribus fati nexibus implicatur ac tanto aliquid fato liberum est quanto illum rerum cardinem uicinius petit. quod si supernae mentis haeserit firmitati, motu carens fati quoque supergreditur necessitatem. igitur uti est ad intellectum ratiocinatio, ad id quod est id quod gignitur, ad aeternitatem tempus, ad punctum medium circulus, ita est fati series mobilis ad prouidentiae stabilem simplicitatem. ea series caelum ac sidera mouet, elementa in se inuicem temperat et alterna commutatione transformat; eadem nascentia occidentiaque omnia per similes fetuum seminumque renouat progressus. haec actus etiam fortunasque hominum indissolubili causarum conexione constringit, quae cum ab immobilis prouidentiae proficiscatur exordiis, ipsas quoque immutabiles esse necesse est. ita enim res optime reguntur, si manens in diuina mente simplicitas indeclinabilem causarum ordinem promat. hic uero ordo res mutabiles et alioquin temere fluituras propria incommutabilitate coerceat. quo fit ut tametsi uobis hunc ordinem minime considerare ualentibus confusa omnia perturbataque uideantur, nihilo minus tamen suus modus ad bonum dirigens cuncta disponat. nihil est enim quod mali causa ne ab ipsis quidem improbis fiat; quos, ut uberrime demonstratum est, bonum quaerentes prauus error auertit, nedum ordo de summi boni cardine proficiscens a suo quoquam deflectat exordio. quae uero, inquies, potest ulla iniquior esse confusio, quam ut bonis tum aduersa tum prospera, malis etiam tum optata tum odiosa contingant? num igitur ea mentis integritate homines degunt, ut quos probos improbosue censuerunt eos quoque uti existimant esse necesse sit? atqui in hoc hominum iudicia depugnant, et quos alii praemio alii supplicio dignos arbitrantur. sed concedamus ut aliquis possit bonos malosque discernere; num igitur potent intueri illam intimam temperiem, uelut in corporibus dici solet, animorum? non enim dissimile est miraculum nescienti cur sanis corporibus his quidem dulcia illis uero amara conueniant, cur aegri etiam quidam lenibus quidam uero acribus adiuuentur? at hoc medicus, qui sanitatis ipsius atque aegritudinis modum temperamentumque dinoscit, minime miratur. quid uero aliud animorum salus uidetur esse quam probitas? quid aegritudo quam uitia? quis autem alius uel seruator bonorum uel malorum depulsor quam rector ac medicator mentium deus? qui cum ex alta prouidentiae specula respexit, quid unicuique conueniat agnoscit et quod conuenire nouit accommodat. hic iam fit illud fatalis ordinis insigne miraculum, cum ab sciente geritur quod stupeant ignorantes. nam ut pauca quae ratio ualet humana de diuina profunditate perstringam, de hoc quem tu iustissimum et aequi seruantissimum putas omnia scienti prouidentiae diuersum uidetur; et uictricem quidem causam dis, uictam uero catoni placuisse familiaris noster lucanus admonuit. hic igitur quidquid citra spem uideas geri, rebus quidem rectus ordo est, opinioni uero tuae peruersa confusio. sed sit aliquis ita bene moratus ut de eo diuinum iudicium pariter et humanum consentiat, sed est animi uiribus infirmus; cui si quid eueniat aduersi, desinet colere forsitan innocentiam per quam non potuit retinere fortunam. parcit itaque sapiens dispensatio ei quem deteriorem facere possit aduersitas, ne cui non conuenit laborare patiatur. est alius cunctis uirtutibus absolutus sanctusque ac deo proximus; hunc contingi quibuslibet aduersis nefas prouidentia iudicat adeo ut ne corporeis quidem morbis agitari sinat. nam ut quidam me quoque excellentior: [greek: andros dae ierou demas aitheres oikodomaesan.] fit autem saepe, uti bonis summa rerum regenda deferatur, ut exuberans retundatur improbitas. aliis mixta quaedam pro animorum qualitate distribuit; quosdam remordet ne longa felicitate luxurient, alios duris[ ] agitari ut uirtutes animi patientiae usu atque exercitatione confirment. alii plus aequo metuunt quod ferre possunt, alii plus aequo despiciunt quod ferre non possunt; hos in experimentum sui tristibus ducit. nonnulli uenerandum saeculi nomen gloriosae pretio mortis emerunt: quidam suppliciis inexpugnabiles exemplum ceteris praetulerunt inuictam malis esse uirtutem. quae quam recte atque disposite et ex eorum bono quibus accedere uidentur fiant, nulla dubitatio est. nam illud quoque, quod improbis nunc tristia nunc optata proueniunt, ex eisdem ducitur causis; ac de tristibus quidem nemo miratur, quod eos male meritos omnes existimant. quorum quidem supplicia tum ceteros ab sceleribus deterrent, tum ipsos quibus inuehuntur emendant; laeta uero magnum bonis argumentum loquuntur, quid de huiusmodi felicitate debeant iudicare quam famulari saepe improbis cernant. in qua re illud etiam dispensari credo, quod est forsitan alicuius tam praeceps atque inportuna natura ut eum in scelera potius exacerbare possit rei familiaris inopia; huius morbo prouidentia collatae pecuniae remedio medetur. hic foedatam probris conscientiam exspectans et se cum fortuna sua comparans, forsitan pertimescit ne cuius ei iucundus usus est, sit tristis amissio. mutabit igitur mores ac dum fortunam metuit amittere; nequitiam derelinquit. alios in cladem meritam praecipitauit indigne acta felicitas; quibusdam permissum puniendi ius, ut exercitii bonis et malis esset causa supplicii. nam ut probis atque improbis nullum foedus est, ita ipsi inter se improbi nequeunt conuenire. quidni, cum a semet ipsis discerpentibus conscientiam uitiis quisque dissentiat faciantque saepe, quae cum gesserint non fuisse gerenda decernant? ex quo saepe summa illa prouidentia protulit insigne miraculum, ut malos mali bonos facerent. nam dum iniqua sibi a pessimis quidam perpeti uidentur, noxiorum odio flagrantes ad uirtutis frugem rediere, dum se eis dissimiles student esse quos oderant. sola est enim diuina uis cui mala quoque bona sint, cum eis competenter utendo alicuius boni elicit effectum. ordo enim quidam cuncta complectitur, ut quod adsignata ordinis ratione decesserit, hoc licet in alium, tamen ordinem relabatur, ne quid in regno prouidentiae liceat temeritati. [greek: argaleon de me tauta theon hos pant agoreuein.] neque enim fas est homini cunctas diuinae operae machinas uel ingenio comprehendere uel explicare sermone. hoc tantum perspexisse sufficiat, quod naturarum omnium proditor deus idem ad bonum dirigens cuncta disponat, dumque ea quae protulit in sui similitudinem retinere festinat, malum omne de reipublicae suae terminis per fatalis seriem necessitatis eliminet. quo fit ut quae in terris abundare creduntur, si disponentem prouidentiam spectes, nihil usquam mali esse perpendas. sed uideo te iam dudum et pondere quaestionis oneratum et rationis prolixitate fatigatum aliquam carminis exspectare dulcedinem. accipe igitur haustum quo refectus firmior in ulteriora contendas. [ ] deliberare _codd._; delibare _coni._ pulmannus. [ ] _fortasse_ sinit _post_ duris _addendum est_. vi. "it is true," quoth i, "but since it is thy profession to explicate the causes of hidden things, and to unfold the reasons which are covered with darkness, i beseech thee vouchsafe to declare what conclusion thou drawest from these things, for this miracle troubleth me above all others." then she smiling a little said: "thou invitest me to a matter which is most hardly found out, and can scarcely be sufficiently declared; for it is such that, one doubt being taken away, innumerable others, like the heads of hydra, succeed, neither will they have any end unless a man repress them with the most lively fire of his mind. for in this matter are wont to be handled these questions: of the simplicity of providence; of the course of fate; of sudden chances; of god's knowledge and predestination, and of free will; which how weighty they are, thou thyself discerneth. but because it is part of thy cure to know these things also, though the time be short, yet we will endeavour to touch them briefly. but if the sweetness of verse delight thee, thou must forbear this pleasure for a while, until i propose unto thee some few arguments." "as it pleaseth thee," quoth i. then taking as it were a new beginning, she discoursed in this manner: "the generation of all things, and all the proceedings of mutable natures, and whatsoever is moved in any sort, take their causes, order, and forms from the stability of the divine mind. this, placed in the castle of its own simplicity, hath determined manifold ways for doing things; which ways being considered in the purity of god's understanding, are named providence, but being referred to those things which he moveth and disposeth, they are by the ancients called fate. the diversity of which will easily appear if we weigh the force of both. for providence is the very divine reason itself, seated in the highest prince, which disposeth all things. but fate is a disposition inherent in changeable things, by which providence connecteth all things in their due order. for providence embraceth all things together, though diverse, though infinite; but fate putteth every particular thing into motion being distributed by places, forms, and time; so that this unfolding of temporal order being united into the foresight of god's mind is providence, and the same uniting, being digested and unfolded in time, is called fate. which although they be diverse yet the one dependeth on the other. for fatal order proceedeth from the simplicity of providence. for as a workman conceiving the form of anything in his mind taketh his work in hand, and executeth by order of time that which he had simply and in a moment foreseen, so god by his providence disposeth whatsoever is to be done with simplicity and stability, and by fate effecteth by manifold ways and in the order of time those very things which he disposeth. wherefore, whether fate be exercised by the subordination of certain divine spirits to providence, or this fatal web be woven by a soul or by the service of all nature, or by the heavenly motions of the stars, by angelical virtue, or by diabolical industry, or by some or all of these, that certainly is manifest that providence is an immoveable and simple form of those things which are to be done, and fate a moveable connexion and temporal order of those things which the divine simplicity hath disposed to be done. so that all that is under fate is also subject to providence, to which also fate itself obeyeth. but some things which are placed under providence are above the course of fate. and they are those things which nigh to the first divinity, being stable and fixed, exceed the order of fatal mobility. for as of orbs which turn about the same centre, the inmost draweth nigh to the simplicity of the midst, and is as it were the hinge of the rest, which are placed without it, about which they are turned, and the outmost, wheeled with a greater compass, by how much it departeth from the middle indivisibility of the centre, is so much the more extended into larger spaces, but that which is joined and coupled to that middle approacheth to simplicity, and ceaseth to spread and flow abroad, in like manner that which departeth farthest from the first mind is involved more deeply in the meshes of fate, and everything is so much the freer from fate, by how much it draweth nigh to the hinge of all things. and if it sticketh to the stability of the sovereign mind, free from motion, it surpasseth also the necessity of fate. wherefore in what sort discourse of reason is compared to pure understanding, that which is produced to that which is, time to eternity, a circle to the centre, such is the course of moveable fate to the stable simplicity of providence. that course moveth the heaven and stars, tempereth the elements one with another, and transformeth them by mutual changing. the same reneweth all rising and dying things by like proceeding of fruits and seeds. this comprehendeth also the actions and fortunes of men by an unloosable connexion of causes, which since it proceeds from the principles of unmovable providence, the causes also must needs be immutable. for in this manner things are best governed, if the simplicity which remaineth in the divine mind produceth an inflexible order of causes, and this order restraineth with its own immutability things otherwise mutable, and which would have a confused course. whereof it ensueth that though all things seem confused and disordered to you, who are not able to consider this order, notwithstanding all things are disposed by their own proper measure directing them to good. for there is nothing which is done for the love of evil, even by the wicked themselves: whom, as hath been abundantly proved, lewd error carrieth away while they are seeking after that which is good, so far is it that order proceeding from the hinge of the sovereign goodness should avert any from his first beginning. but, thou wilt say, what more unjust confusion can there be than that both adversity and prosperity should happen to the good, and in like manner both desired and hateful things to the wicked? but are men so completely wise that whomsoever they judge wicked or honest must needs be so? how then are their censures contrary one to another, so that to divers the same men seem worthy of reward and punishment! but let us grant that some are able to discern the good from the evil. can they therefore behold, as is wont to be said of bodies, that inward complexion of souls? for he that knoweth not the cause may marvel in like manner why some sound bodies agree better with sweet things and other with tart; and why some sick men are healed with gentle and some with sharper physic. but to a physician who knoweth the manner and temper both of health and sickness this is nothing strange. now, what is the health of souls but virtue? what sickness have they but vices? and who either conserveth goodness or expelleth evils, but god the ruler and governor of men's minds? who beholding from his high turret of providence seeth what is fitting for everyone, and applieth that which he knoweth to be most convenient. here ariseth that strange wonder of fatal order, to wit that he that knoweth what is best, doth that which the ignorant admire. for to touch briefly some few things of the divine depth, which human reason is able to attain, he whom thou thinketh most just and most observant of equity, seemeth otherwise in the eyes of providence which knoweth all. and our disciple lucan noteth that the cause of conquerers pleased the gods, and that of the conquered, cato.[ ] wherefore whatsoever thou seest done here against thy expectation is right order in the things themselves, but a perverse confusion in thy opinion. but let there be one so well conditioned that god and men approve and praise him; yet perhaps he is so weak a minded man, that if he falleth into adversity, he will forsake his innocency, which was not able to keep him in prosperity. wherefore god's wise dispensation spareth him that adversity might make worse, lest he should suffer to whom difficulties are dangerous. there is another complete in all virtues, a saint and high to god; providence judgeth it a sacrilege to lay affliction on him, insomuch that she permitteth him not to be troubled so much as with corporal sickness. for as one that excelleth me saith 'the body of an holy man is builded of pure ether.'[ ] it happeneth often also that the chief command is given to good men, that wickedness, which otherwise would overflow all, may be kept down. she mixeth for others sour and sweet according to the disposition of their souls; she troubles some lest they should fall to dissolution by long prosperity, others are vexed with hardships, that they may confirm the forces of their mind with the use and exercise of patience. some are too much afraid of that which they are able to bear. others make less account than there is cause of that which they cannot endure. all these she affrayeth with afflictions that they make trial of themselves. many have bought the renown of this world with a glorious death. some, overcoming all torments, have showed by their example that virtues cannot be conquered by miseries, which things how well and orderly they are done, and how much to their good upon whom they are seen to fall, there can be no doubt. for that sometime grievous, sometime pleasant things befall in like manner the wicked, proceedeth from the same causes. and as for adversity no man marvelleth because all think they deserve ill. whose punishments do both terrify others from the like courses, and move them to amend themselves. and their prosperity is a great argument to the good, what they ought to judge of this happiness which they see oftentimes bestowed upon the wicked. in which thing also is to be considered that peradventure some have so headlong and untoward a disposition, that poverty would rather make him worse; whose disease is cured by providence, with giving him store of money. another, knowing his own guilty conscience, and comparing his character with his own estate, is afraid lest the loss of that should be grievous unto him, the use of which is pleasant. wherefore he resolveth to change his customs, and whiles he feareth to lose his prosperity, he forsaketh wickedness. the increase of honour undeservedly obtained hath thrown some headlong into their deserved destruction. others are permitted to have authority to punish others, that they may exercise the good and punish the bad. for as there is no league between virtuous and wicked men, so neither can the wicked agree among themselves. why not? since they disagree within themselves by reason of their vices which tear their conscience, so that they many times do that which afterwards they wish undone. from whence that highest providence often worketh that wonderful miracle, that evil men make those which are evil good. for some, considering the injustice done them by most wicked men, inflamed with hatred of evildoers have returned to the practice of virtue, procuring to be contrary to them whom they hate. for it is only a divine strength to which even evil things are good, when, by using them in due sort, it draweth some good effect out of them. for a certain order embraceth all things, so that even that which departeth from the order appointed to it, though it falleth into another, yet that is order also, lest confused rashness should bear any sway in the kingdom of providence. 'but it is hard for me to rehearse all this as if i were a god.'[ ] for it is impossible for any man either to comprehend by his wit or to explicate in speech all the frame of god's work. be it sufficient that we have seen thus much, that god, the author of all natures, directeth and disposeth all things to goodness, and while he endeavoureth to retain in his own likeness those things which he hath produced, he banisheth all evil from the bounds of his commonwealth, by the course of fatal necessity. so that if thou considerest the disposition of providence, thou wilt perceive that evil, which is thought so to abound upon earth, hath no place left for it at all. but i see that long since burdened with so weighty a question, and wearied with my long discourse, thou expectest the delight of verses; wherefore take a draught, that, being refreshed, thou mayest be able to go forward. [ ] _pharsal_. i. . [ ] source unknown. [ ] homer, _il._ xii. . vi. si uis celsi iura tonantis pura sollers cernere mente, aspice summi culmina caeli. illic iusto foedere rerum veterem seruant sidera pacem. non sol rutilo concitus igne gelidum phoebes impedit axem nec quae summo uertice mundi flectit rapidos vrsa meatus. numquam occiduo lota profundo cetera cernens sidera mergi cupit oceano tingere flammas. semper uicibus temporis aequis vesper seras nuntiat umbras reuehitque diem lucifer almum. sic aeternos reficit cursus alternus amor, sic astrigeris bellum discors exulat oris. haec concordia temperat aequis elementa modis, ut pugnantia vicibus cedant umida siccis iungantque fidem frigora flammis pendulus ignis surgat in altum terraeque graues pondere sidant. isdem causis uere tepenti spirat florifer annus odores, aestas cererem feruida siccat, remeat pomis grauis autumnus, hiemem defluus inrigat imber. haec temperies alit ac profert quidquid uitam spirat in orbe. eadem rapiens condit et aufert obitu mergens orta supremo. sedet interea conditor altus rerumque regens flectit habenas rex et dominus fons et origo lex et sapiens arbiter aequi et quae motu concitat ire, sistit retrahens ac uaga firmat. nam nisi rectos reuocans itus flexos iterum cogat in orbes, quae nunc stabilis continet ordo dissaepta suo fonte fatiscant. hic est cunctis communis amor repetuntque boni fine teneri, quia non aliter durare queant, nisi conuerso rursus amore refluant causae quae dedit esse. vi. if thou would'st see god's laws with purest mind, thy sight on heaven must fixéd be, whose settled course the stars in peace doth bind. the sun's bright fire stops not his sister's team, nor doth the northern bear desire within the ocean's wave to hide her beam. though she behold the other stars there couching, yet she uncessantly is rolled about high heaven, the ocean never touching. the evening light with certain course doth show the coming of the shady night, and lucifer before the day doth go. this mutual love courses eternal makes, and from the starry spheres above all cause of war and dangerous discord takes. this sweet consent in equal bands doth tie the nature of each element, so that the moist things yield unto the dry, the piercing cold with flames doth friendship keep, the trembling fire the highest place doth hold, and the gross earth sinks down into the deep. the flowery year breathes odours in the spring the scorching summer corn doth bear, the autumn fruit from laden trees doth bring. the falling rain doth winter's moisture give. these rules thus nourish and maintain all creatures which we see on earth to live. and when they die, these bring them to their end, while their creator sits on high, whose hand the reins of the whole world doth bend. he as their king rules them with lordly might. from him they rise, flourish, and spring, he as their law and judge decides their right. those things whose course most swiftly glides away his might doth often backward force, and suddenly their wandering motion stay. unless his strength their violence should bound, and them which else would run at length, should bring within the compass of a round, that firm decree which now doth all adorn would soon destroyed and broken be, things being far from their beginning borne. this powerful love is common unto all, which for desire of good do move back to the springs from whence they first did fall. no worldly thing can a continuance have unless love back again it bring unto the cause which first the essence gave. vii. iamne igitur uides quid haec omnia quae diximus consequatur?" "quidnam?" inquam. "omnem," inquit, "bonam prorsus esse fortunam." "et qui id," inquam, "fieri potest?" "attende," inquit. "cum omnis fortuna uel iucunda uel aspera tum remunerandi exercendiue bonos tum puniendi corrigendiue improbos causa deferatur, omnis bona quam uel iustam constat esse uel utilem." "nimis quidem," inquam, "uera ratio et si quam paulo ante docuisti prouidentiam fatumue considerem, firmis uiribus nixa sententia. sed eam si placet inter eas quas inopinabiles paulo ante posuisti numeremus." "qui?" inquit. "quia id hominum sermo communis usurpat et quidem crebro quorundam malam esse fortunam." "visne igitur," inquit, "paulisper uulgi sermonibus accedamus, ne nimium uelut ab humanitatis usu recessisse uideamur?" "vt placet," inquam. "nonne igitur bonum censes esse quod prodest?" "ita est," inquam, "quae uero aut exercet aut corrigit, prodest?" "fateor," inquam. "bona igitur?" "quidni?" "sed haec eorum est qui uel in uirtute positi contra aspera bellum gerunt, uel a uitiis declinantes uirtutis iter arripiunt." "negare," inquam, "nequeo." "quid uero iucunda, quae in praemium tribuitur bonis, num uulgus malam esse decernit?" "nequaquam; uerum uti est ita quoque esse optimam censet." "quid reliqua, quae cum sit aspera, iusto supplicio malos coercet, num bonam populus putat?" "immo omnium," inquam, "quae excogitari possunt, iudicat esse miserrimam." "vide igitur ne opinionem populi sequentes quiddam ualde inopinabile confecerimus." "quid?" inquam. "ex his enim," ait, "quae concessa sunt, euenit eorum quidem qui uel sunt uel in possessione uel in prouectu uel in adeptione uirtutis, omnem quaecumque sit bonam, in improbitate uero manentibus omnem pessimam esse fortunam." "hoc," inquam, "uerum est, tametsi nemo audeat confiteri." "quare," inquit, "ita uir sapiens moleste ferre non debet, quotiens in fortunae certamen adducitur, ut uirum fortem non decet indignari, quotiens increpuit bellicus tumultus; utrique enim, huic quidem gloriae propagandae illi uero conformandae sapientiae, difficultas ipsa materia est. ex quo etiam uirtus uocatur quod suis uiribus nitens non superetur aduersis. neque enim uos in prouectu positi uirtutis diffluere deliciis et emarcescere uoluptate uenistis. proelium cum omni fortuna nimis[ ] acre conseritis, ne uos aut tristis opprimat aut iucunda corrumpat. firmis medium uiribus occupate! quidquid aut infra subsistit aut ultra progreditur, habet contemptum felicitatis, non habet praemium laboris. in uestra enim situm manu qualem uobis fortunam formare malitis; omnis enim quae uidetur aspera nisi aut exercet aut corrigit punit. [ ] animis _codd. meliores._ vii. perceivest thou now what followeth of all that we have hitherto said?" "what?" quoth i. "that," quoth she, "all manner of fortune is good." "how can that be?" quoth i. "be attentive," quoth she; "since that all fortune, be it pleasing or unpleasing, is directed to the reward or exercise of the good, and to the punishment and direction of the wicked, it is manifest it is all good, since all is just or profitable." "thy reason is very true," quoth i, "and if i consider providence and fate, which thou didst explicate a little before, thy opinion is well grounded. but if thou pleasest let us account it among those which thou not long since supposest incredible." "why?" quoth she. "because men commonly use to say and repeat that some have ill fortune." "shall we," quoth she, "frame our speech to the vulgar phrase, lest we seem to have as it were forsaken the use of human conversation?" "as it pleaseth thee," quoth i. "dost thou not think then that that is good which is profitable?" "yes," quoth i. "but that fortune which either exerciseth or correcteth is profitable?" "it is true," quoth i. "it is good then?" "why not?" "but this is the estate of them who being either virtuous strive with adversity, or forsaking vices betake themselves to the way of virtue." "i cannot deny it," quoth i. "now, what sayest thou to that pleasing fortune which is given in reward to the good, doth the common people account it bad?" "no, but judgeth it exceeding good, as it is indeed." "and what of the other which, being unpleasing, restraineth the evil with just punishment, doth not the people think it good?" "nay," quoth i, "they think it the most miserable that can be." "look then," quoth she, "how, following the people's opinion, we have concluded a very incredible matter." "what?" quoth i. "for it followeth," quoth she, "out of that which is granted, that all their fortune, whatsoever it be, who are either in the possession or increase or entrance of virtue, is good: and theirs, which remain in vices, the worst that may be." "this," quoth i, "is true, though none dare say so." "wherefore," quoth she, "a wise man must be no more troubled when he is assaulted with adversity, than a valiant captain dismayed at the sound of an alarum. for difficulties are the matter by which the one must extend his glory, and the other increase his wisdom. for which cause virtue is so called, because it hath sufficient strength to overcome adversity.[ ] for you, that are proficients in virtue, are not come hither to be dissolute with dainties or to languish in pleasures. you skirmish fiercely with any fortune, lest either affliction oppress you or prosperity corrupt you. stay yourselves strongly in the mean! for whatsoever cometh either short, or goeth beyond, may well contemn felicity, but will never obtain any reward of labour. for it is placed in your power to frame to yourselves what fortune you please. for all that seemeth unsavoury either exerciseth or correcteth or punisheth. [ ] boethius shows his independence in adopting for _uirtus_ a different etymology from that given by cicero, viz. _uir_ (of. _tusoul._ xviii.). vii. bella bis quinis operatus annis vltor atrides phrygiae ruinis fratris amissos thalamos piauit; ille dum graiae dare uela classi optat et uentos redimit cruore, exuit patrem miserumque tristis foederat natae iugulum sacerdos. fleuit amissos ithacus sodales quos ferus uasto recubans in antro mersit inmani polyphemus aluo; sed tamen caeco furibundus ore gaudium maestis lacrimis rependit. herculem duri celebrant labores. ille centauros domuit superbos, abstulit saeuo spolium leoni fixit et certis uolucres sagittis, poma cernenti rapuit draconi aureo laeuam grauior metallo, cerberum traxit triplici catena. victor immitem posuisse fertur pabulum saeuis dominum quadrigis. hydra combusto periit ueneno, fronte turpatus achelous amnis ora demersit pudibunda ripis. strauit antaeum libycis harenis, cacus euandri satiauit iras quosque pressurus foret altus orbis saetiger spumis umeros notauit. vltimus caelum[ ] labor inreflexo sustulit collo pretiumque rursus vltimi caelum meruit laboris. ite nunc fortes ubi celsa magni ducit exempli uia! cur inertes terga nudatis? superata tellus sidera donat." [ ] caelo _codd. mellores._ vii. revengeful atreus' son did ten whole years employ in wars, till he his brother's loss repaid with ransacked troy. he setting forth the fleet of greece upon the seas, and knowing well that only blood the angry winds would please, forgot a father's part, and with his cruel knife unto the gods did sacrifice his dearest daughter's life. ulysses wailed the loss of his most faithful men, whom polyphemus did devour enclosed in his den but when his hands by sleight had made the cyclops blind, most pleasant joy instead of former tears possessed his mind. hercules famous is for his laborious toil, who tamed the centaurs and did take the dreadful lion's spoil. he the stymphalian birds with piercing arrows strook, and from the watchful dragon's care the golden apples took.[ ] he in a threefold chain the hellish porter led, and with their cruel master's flesh the savage horses fed. he did th' increasing heads of poisonous hydra burn, and breaking achelous' horns, did make him back return.[ ]* he on the libyan sands did proud antaeus kill, and with the mighty cacus' blood euander's wrath fulfil. that world-uplifting back the boar's white foam did fleck. to hold on high the sphere of heaven with never bending neck of all his many toils the last was, and most hard, and for this last and greatest toil the heaven was his reward. you gallant men pursue this way of high renown, why yield you? overcome the earth, and you the stars shall crown," [ ] literally, "his left hand weighted with the golden metal." [ ] lit. "the river achelous dishonoured in his brow (by the loss of his horns) buried his shame-stricken face in his banks." anicii manlii severini boethii v.c. et inl. excons. ord. ex mag. off. patricii philosophiae consolationis liber qvartvs explicit incipit liber v. i. dixerat orationisque cursum ad alia quaedam tractanda atque expedienda uertebat. tum ego: "recta quidem," inquam, "exhortatio tuaque prorsus auctoritate dignissima, sed quod tu dudum de prouidentia quaestionem pluribus aliis implicitam esse dixisti, re experior. quaero enim an esse aliquid omnino et quidnam esse casum arbitrere." tum illa: "festino," inquit; "debitum promissionis absoluere uiamque tibi qua patriam reueharis aperire. haec autem etsi perutilia cognitu tamen a propositi nostri tramite paulisper auersa sunt, uerendumque est ne deuiis fatigatus ad emetiendum rectum iter sufficere non possis." "ne id," inquam, "prorsus uereare. nam quietis mihi loco fuerit ea quibus maxime delector agnoscere, simul cum omne disputationis tuae latus indubitata fide constiterit, nihil de sequentibus ambigatur." tum illa: "morem," inquit, "geram tibi," simulque sic orsa est: "si quidem," inquit, "aliquis euentum temerario motu nullaque causarum conexione productum casum esse definiat, nihil omnino casum esse confirmo et praeter subiectae rei significationem inanem prorsus uocem esse decerno. quis enim coercente in ordinem cuncta deo locus esse ullus temeritati reliquus potest? nam nihil ex nihilo exsistere uera sententia est cui nemo umquam ueterum refragatus est, quamquam id illi non de operante principio, sed de materiali subiecto hoc omnium de natura rationum quasi quoddam iecerint fundamentum. at si nullis ex causis aliquid oriatur, id de nihilo ortum esse uidebitur. quod si hoc fieri nequit, ne casum quidem huiusmodi esse possibile est qualem paulo ante definiuimus." "quid igitur," inquam, "nihilne est quod uel casus uel fortuitum iure appellari queat? an est aliquid, tametsi uulgus lateat, cui uocabula ista conueniant?" "aristoteles meus id," inquit, "in physicis et breui et ueri propinqua ratione definiuit." "quonam," inquam "modo?" "quotiens," ait, "aliquid cuiuspiam rei gratia geritur aliudque quibusdam de causis quam quod intendebatur obtingit, casus uocatur, ut si quis colendi agri causa fodiens humum defossi auri pondus inueniat. hoc igitur fortuito quidem creditur accidisse, uerum non de nihilo est; nam proprias causas habet quarum inprouisus inopinatusque concursus casum uidetur operatus. nam nisi cultor agri humum foderet, nisi eo loci pecuniam suam depositor obruisset, aurum non esset inuentum. haec sunt igitur fortuiti causa compendii, quod ex obuiis sibi et confluentibus causis, non ex gerentis intentione prouenit. neque enim uel qui aurum obruit uel qui agrum exercuit ut ea pecunia reperiretur intendit; sed uti dixi, quo ille obruit hunc fodisse conuenit atque concurrit. licet igitur definire casum esse inopinatum ex confluentibus causis in his quae ob aliquid geruntur euentum; concurrere uero atque confluere causas facit ordo ille ineuitabili conexione procedens; qui de prouidentiae fonte descendens cuncta suis locis temporibusque disponit. the fifth book of boethius i. having said thus, she began to turn her speech to treat and explicate certain other questions, when i interrupted her, saying: "thy exhortation is very good, and well-seeming thy authority. but i find it true by experience, as thou affirmedst, that the question of providence is entangled with many other. for i desire to know whether thou thinkest chance to be anything at all, and what it is." "i make haste," quoth she, "to perform my promise, and to show thee the way by which thou mayest return to thy country. but these other questions, though they be very profitable, yet they are somewhat from our purpose, and it is to be feared lest being wearied with digressions thou beest not able to finish thy direct journey." "there is no fear of that," quoth i, "for it will be a great ease to me to understand those things in which i take great delight, and withal, when thy disputation is fenced in on every side with sure conviction, there can be no doubt made of anything thou shalt infer." "i will," quoth she, "do as thou wouldst me have," and withal began in this manner. "if any shall define chance to be an event produced by a confused motion, and without connexion of causes, i affirm that there is no such thing, and that chance is only an empty voice that hath beneath it no real signification. for what place can confusion have, since god disposeth all things in due order? for it is a true sentence that of nothing cometh nothing, which none of the ancients denied, though they held not that principle of the efficient cause, but of the material subject, laying it down as in a manner the ground of all their reasonings concerning nature. but if anything proceedeth from no causes, that will seem to have come from nothing, which if it cannot be, neither is it possible there should be any such chance as is defined a little before." "what then," quoth i, "is there nothing that can rightly be called chance or fortune? or is there something, though unknown to the common sort, to which these names agree?" "my aristotle," quoth she, "in his _books of nature_[ ] declared this point briefly and very near the truth." "how?" quoth i. "when," quoth she, "anything is done for some certain cause, and some other thing happeneth for other reasons than that which was intended, this is called chance; as if one digging his ground with intention to till it, findeth an hidden treasure. this is thought to have fallen thus out by fortune, but it is not of nothing, for it hath peculiar causes whose unexpected and not foreseen concourse seemeth to have brought forth a chance. for unless the husbandman had digged up his ground, and unless the other had hidden his money in that place, the treasure had not been found. these are therefore the causes of this fortunate accident, which proceedeth from the meeting and concourse of causes, and not from the intention of the doer. for neither he that hid the gold nor he that tilled his ground had any intention that the money should be found, but, as i said, it followed and concurred that this man should dig up in the place where the other hid. wherefore, we may define chance thus: that it is an unexpected event of concurring causes in those things which are done to some end and purpose. now the cause why causes so concur and meet so together, is that order proceeding with inevitable connexion, which, descending from the fountain of providence, disposeth all things in their places and times. [ ] _phys._ ii. . i. rupis achaemeniae scopulis ubi uersa sequentum pectoribus figit spicula pugna fugax, tigris et euphrates uno se fonte resoluunt et mox abiunctis dissociantur aquis. si coeant cursumque iterum reuocentur in unum, confluat alterni quod trahit unda uadi; conuenient puppes et uulsi flumine trunci mixtaque fortuitos implicet unda modos, quos tamen ipsa uagos terrae decliuia casus gurgitis et lapsi defluus ordo regit. sic quae permissis fluitare uidetur habenis fors patitur frenos ipsaque lege meat." i. in the achaemenian rocks, where parthians with their darts in their dissembled flight do wound their enemies, tigris from the same head doth with euphrates rise, and forthwith they themselves divide in several parts; but if they join again, and them one channel bound, bringing together all that both their waves do bear; the ships and trees, whose roots they from the bank do tear, will meet, and they their floods will mingle and confound, yet run this wandering course in places which are low, and in these sliding streams a settled law remains.[ ] so fortune, though it seems to run with careless reins, yet hath it certain rule, and doth in order flow." [ ] lit. "yet all these (apparently) random happenings are governed by the shelving ground and the flowing course of the stream as it runs." ii. "animaduerto," inquam, "idque, uti tu dicis, ita esse consentio. sed in hac haerentium sibi serie causarum estne ulla nostri arbitrii libertas an ipsos quoque humanorum motus animorum fatalis catena constringit?" "est," inquit, "neque enim fuerit ulla rationalis natura quin eidem libertas adsit arbitrii. nam quod ratione uti naturaliter potest id habet iudicium quo quidque discernat; per se igitur fugienda optandaue dinoscit. quod uero quis optandum esse iudicat petit; refugit uero quod aestimat esse fugiendum. quare quibus in ipsis inest ratio, inest etiam uolendi nolendique libertas. sed hanc non in omnibus aequam esse constituo. nam supernis diuinisque substantiis et perspicax iudicium et incorrupta uoluntas et efficax optatorum praesto est potestas. humanas uero animas liberiores quidem esse necesse est cum se in mentis diuinae speculatione conseruant, minus uero cum dilabuntur ad corpora, minusque etiam, cum terrenis artubus colligantur. extrema uero est seruitus, cum uitiis deditae rationis propriae possessione ceciderunt. nam ubi oculos a summae luce ueritatis ad inferiora et tenebrosa deiecerint, mox inscitiae nube caligant, perniciosis turbantur affectibus quibus accedendo consentiendoque quam inuexere sibi adiuuant seruitutem et sunt quodam modo propria libertate captiuae. quae tamen ille ab aeterno cuncta prospiciens prouidentiae cernit intuitus et suis quaeque meritis praedestinata disponit. ii. "i observe it," quoth i, "and i acknowledge it to be as thou sayest. but in this rank of coherent causes, have we any free-will, or doth the fatal chain fasten also the motions of men's minds?" "we have," quoth she, "for there can be no reasonable nature, unless it be endued with free-will. for that which naturally hath the use of reason hath also judgment by which it can discern of everything by itself, wherefore of itself it distinguished betwixt those things which are to be avoided, and those which are to be desired. now every one seeketh for that which he thinketh is to be desired, and escheweth that which in his judgment is to be avoided. wherefore, they which have reason in themselves have freedom to will and nill. but yet i consider not this equal in all. for the supreme and divine substances have both a perspicuous judgment and an uncorrupted will, and an effectual power to obtain their desires. but the minds of men must needs be more free when they conserve themselves in the contemplation of god, and less when they come to their bodies, and yet less when they are bound with earthly fetters. but their greatest bondage is when, giving themselves to vices, they lose possession of their own reason. for, having cast their eyes from the light of the sovereign truth to inferior obscurities, forthwith they are blinded with the cloud of ignorance, molested with hurtful affections, by yielding and consenting to which they increase the bondage which they laid upon themselves, and are, after a certain manner, captives by their own freedom. which notwithstanding that foresight of providence which beholdeth all things from eternity, foreseeth, and by predestination disposeth of everything by their merits. ii. [greek: pant' ephoran kai pant' epakouein][ ] puro clarum lumine phoebum melliflui canit oris homerus: qui tamen intima uiscera terrae non ualet aut pelagi radiorum infirma perrumpere luce. haud sic magni conditor orbis; huic ex alto cuncta tuenti nulla terrae mole resistunt, non nox atris nubibus obstat. quae sint, quae fuerint ueniantque vno mentis cernit in ictu; quem, quia respicit omnia solus, verum possis dicere solem." [ ] disponit [greek: pant' ephoron kai pant' epakogon] _sic peiper et similiter editores priores. versum in rectum locum engelbrecht restituit, quam quidem emendationem noster interpres uidetur praesensisse._ ii. sweet homer[ ] sings the praise of phoebus clear and bright, and yet his strongest rays cannot with feeble light cast through the secret ways of earth and seas his sight, though 'all lies open to his eyes.'[ ] but he who did this world devise-- the earth's vast depths unseen from his sight are not free, no clouds can stand between, he at one time doth see what are, and what have been, and what shall after be. whom, since he only vieweth all, you rightly the true sun may call." [ ] cf. _il._ iv. , _od._ xii. . [ ] this line renders the greek with which boethius begins the poem, adapting homer's phrase "all surveying, all o'erhearing." see the critical note on p. . iii. tum ego: "en," inquam, "difficiliore rursus ambiguitate confundor." "quaenam," inquit, "ista est? iam enim quibus perturbere coniecto." "nimium," inquam, "aduersari ac repugnare uidetur praenoscere uniuersa deum et esse ullum libertatis arbitrium. nam si cuncta prospicit deus neque falli ullo modo potest, euenire necesse est quod prouidentia futurum esse praeuiderit. quare si ab aeterno non facta hominum modo sed etiam consilia uoluntatesque praenoscit, nulla erit arbitrii libertas; neque enim uel factum aliud ullum uel quaelibet exsistere poterit uoluntas nisi quam nescia falli prouidentia diuina praesenserit. nam si aliorsum quam prouisae sunt detorqueri ualent, non iam erit futuri firma praescientia, sed opinio potius incerta, quod de deo credere nefas iudico. neque enim illam probo rationem qua se quidam credunt hunc quaestionis nodum posse dissoluere. aiunt enim non ideo quid esse euenturum, quoniam id prouidentia futurum esse prospexerit, sed e contrario potius, quoniam quid futurum est, id diuinam prouidentiam latere non posse eoque modo necessarium hoc in contrariam relabi partem, neque enim necesse esse contingere quae prouidentur, sed necesse esse quae futura sunt prouideri--quasi uero quae cuius rei causa sit praescientiane futurorum necessitatis an futurorum necessitas prouidentiae laboretur, ac non illud demonstrare nitamur, quoquo modo sese habeat ordo causarum, necessarium esse euentum praescitarum rerum, etiam si praescientia futuris rebus eueniendi necessitatem non uideatur inferre. etenim si quispiam sedeat, opinionem quae eum sedere coniectat ueram esse necesse est; atque e conuerso rursus, si de quopiam uera sit opinio quoniam sedet, eum sedere necesse est. in utroque igitur necessitas inest, in hoc quidem sedendi, at uero in altero ueritatis. sed non idcirco quisque sedet quoniam uera est opinio, sed haec potius uera est quoniam quempiam sedere praecessit. ita cum causa ueritatis ex altera parte procedat, inest tamen communis in utraque necessitas. similia de prouidentia futurisque rebus ratiocinari patet. nam etiam si idcirco quoniam futura sunt, prouidentur, non uero ideo quoniam prouidentur eueniunt, nihilo minus tamen ab deo uel uentura prouideri uel prouisa necesse est euenire,[ ] quod ad perimendam arbitrii libertatem solum satis est. iam uero quam praeposterum est ut aeternae praescientiae temporalium rerum euentus causa esse dicatur! quid est autem aliud arbitrari ideo deum futura quoniam sunt euentura prouidere, quam putare quae olim acciderunt causam summae illius esse prouidentiae? ad haec sicuti cum quid esse scio, id ipsum esse necesse est, ita cum quid futurum noui, id ipsum futurum esse necesse est. sic fit igitur ut euentus praescitae rei nequeat euitari. postremo si quid aliquis aliorsum atque sese res habet existimet, id non modo scientia non est, sed est opinio fallax ab scientiae ueritate longe diuersa. quare si quid ita futurum est ut eius certus ac necessarius non sit euentus, id euenturum esse praesciri qui poterit? sicut enim scientia ipsa impermixta est falsitati, ita id quod ab ea concipitur esse aliter atque concipitur nequit. ea namque causa est cur mendacio scientia careat, quod se ita rem quamque habere necesse est uti eam sese habere scientia comprehendit. quid igitur? quonam modo deus haec incerta futura praenoscit? nam si ineuitabiliter euentura censet quae etiam non euenire possibile est, fallitur; quod non sentire modo nefas est, sed etiam uoce proferre. at si ita uti sunt, ita ea futura esse decernit, ut aeque uel fieri ea uel non fieri posse cognoscat, quae est haec praescientia quae nihil certum nihil stabile comprehendit? aut quid hoc refert uaticinio illo ridiculo tiresiae? quidquid dicam, aut erit aut non. quid etiam diuina prouidentia humana opinione praestiterit; si uti homines incerta iudicat quorum est incertus euentus? quod si apud illum rerum omnium certissimum fontem nihil incerti esse potest, certus eorum est euentus quae futura firmiter ille praescierit. quare nulla est humanis consiliis actionibusque libertas quas diuina mens sine falsitatis errore cuncta prospiciens ad unum alligat et constringit euentum. quo semel recepto quantus occasus humanarum rerum consequatur liquet. frustra enim bonis malisque praemia poenaeue proponuntur quae nullus meruit liber ac uoluntarius motus animorum. idque omnium uidebitur iniquissimum quod nunc aequissimum iudicatur uel puniri improbos uel remunerari probos quos ad alterutrum non propria mittit uoluntas, sed futuri cogit certa necessitas. nec uitia igitur nec uirtutes quidquam fuerint, sed omnium meritorum potius mixta atque indiscreta confusio. quoque nihil sceleratius excogitari potest, cum ex prouidentia rerum omnis ordo ducatur nihilque consiliis liceat humanis, fit ut uitia quoque nostra ad bonorum omnium referantur auctorem. igitur nec sperandi aliquid nec deprecandi ulla ratio est. quid enim uel speret quisque uel etiam deprecetur, quando optanda omnia series indeflexa conectit? auferetur igitur unicum illud inter homines deumque commercium sperandi scilicet ac deprecandi. si quidem iustae humilitatis pretio inaestimabilem uicem diuinae gratiae promeremur, qui solus modus est quo cum deo colloqui homines posse uideantur illique inaccessae luci prius quoque quam impetrent ipsa supplicandi ratione coniungi. quae si recepta futurorum necessitate nihil uirium habere credantur, quid erit quo summo illi rerum principi conecti atque adhaerere possimus? quare necesse erit humanum genus, uti paulo ante cantabas, dissaeptum atque disiunctum suo fonte fatiscere. [ ] euenire prouisa _codd. meliores._ iii. then i complained that i was now in a greater confusion and more doubtful difficulty than before. "what is that?" quoth she, "for i already conjecture what it is that troubleth thee." "it seemeth," quoth i, "to be altogether impossible and repugnant that god foreseeth all things, and that there should be any free-will. for if god beholdeth all things and cannot be deceived, that must of necessity follow which his providence foreseeth to be to come. wherefore, if from eternity he doth not only foreknow the deeds of men, but also their counsels and wills, there can be no free-will; for there is not any other deed or will, but those which the divine providence, that cannot be deceived, hath foreseen. for if things can be drawn aside to any other end than was foreknown, there will not be any firm knowledge of that which is to come, but rather an uncertain opinion, which in my opinion were impious to believe of god. neither do i allow of that reason with which some suppose that they can dissolve the difficulty of this question. for they say that nothing is therefore to come to pass because providence did foresee it, but rather contrariwise, because it shall be, it could not be unknown to providence, and in this manner the necessity passes over to the other side. for it is not necessary, they argue, that those things should happen which are foreseen, but it is necessary that those things should be foreseen that are to come--as though our problem were this, which of them is the cause of a thing, the foreknowledge of the necessity of things to come, or the necessity of the foreknowledge of things to come, and we were not trying to prove that, howsoever these causes be ordered, the event of the things which are foreknown is necessary, even though the foreknowledge seemeth not to confer necessity of being upon the things themselves. for if any man sitteth the opinion which thinketh so must needs be true, and again on the other side, if the opinion that one sitteth be true, he must needs sit. wherefore, there is necessity in both, in the one of sitting and in the other of truth. but one sitteth not because the opinion is true, but rather this is true because one hath taken his seat. so that though the cause of truth proceedeth from one part, yet there is a common necessity in both. and the like is to be inferred of providence and future things. for even though they be foreseen because they shall be, yet they do not come to pass because they are foreseen, notwithstanding it is necessary that either things to come be foreseen by god, or that things foreseen do fall out, which alone is sufficient to overthrow free-will. but see how preposterous it is that the event of temporal things should be said to be the cause of the everlasting foreknowledge! and what else is it to think that god doth therefore foresee future things, because they are to happen, than to affirm that those things which happened long since, are the cause of that sovereign providence? furthermore, as when i know anything to be, it must needs be; so when i know that anything shall be, it must needs be to come. and so it followeth that the event of a thing foreknown cannot be avoided. finally, if any man thinketh otherwise than the thing is, that is not only no knowledge, but it is a deceitful opinion far from the truth of knowledge; wherefore, if anything is to be in such sort that the event of it is not certain or necessary, how can that be foreknown that it shall happen? for as knowledge is without mixture of falsity, so that which is conceived by it cannot be otherwise than it is conceived. for this is the cause why knowledge is without deceit, because everything must needs be so as the knowledge apprehendeth it to be. what then? how doth god foreknow that these uncertain things shall be? for if he judgeth that those things shall happen inevitably, which it is possible shall not happen, he is deceived, which is not only impious to think, but also to speak. but if he supposeth that they shall happen in such sort as they are, so that he knoweth that they may equally be done and not be done, what foreknowledge is this which comprehendeth no certain or stable thing? or in what is this better than that ridiculous prophecy of tiresias "whatsoever i say shall either be or not be"[ ]? or in what shall the divine providence exceed human opinion, if, as men, god judgeth those things to be uncertain the event of which is doubtful? but if nothing can be uncertain to that most certain fountain of all things, the occurrence of those things is certain, which he doth certainly know shall be. wherefore there is no freedom in human counsels and actions, which the divine mind, foreseeing all things without error or falsehood, tieth and bindeth to one event. which once admitted, it is evident what ruin of human affairs will ensue. for in vain are rewards and punishments proposed to good and evil, which no free and voluntary motion of their minds hath deserved. and that will seem most unjust which is now judged most just, that either the wicked should be punished or the good rewarded, since their own will leadeth them to neither, but they are compelled by the certain necessity of that which is to come. by which means virtues and vices shall be nothing, but rather there will follow a mixed confusion of all deserts. and--than which there can be nothing invented more impious--since that all order of things proceedeth from providence, and human counsels can do nothing, it followeth that our vices also shall be referred to the author of goodness. wherefore there is no means left to hope or pray for anything, since an unflexible course connecteth all things that can be desired! wherefore that only traffic betwixt god and men of hope and prayer shall be taken away: if indeed by the price of just humility we deserve the unestimable benefit of god's grace; for this is the only manner by which it seemeth that men may talk with god, and by the very manner of supplication be joined to that inaccessible light before they obtain anything; which if by the admitting the necessity of future things, they be thought to have no force, by what shall we be united and cleave to that sovereign prince of all things? wherefore mankind must needs (as thou saidest in thy verse a little before), being separated and severed from its source, fail and fall away. [ ] hor. _sat._ ii. . . iii. quaenam discors foedera rerum causa resoluit? quis tanta deus veris statuit bella duobus, vt quae carptim singula constent eadem nolint mixta iugari? an nulla est discordia ueris semperque sibi certa cohaerent? sed mens caecis obruta membris nequit oppressi luminis igne rerum tenues noscere nexus. sed cur tanto flagrat amore veri tectas reperire notas? scitne quod appetit anxia nosse? sed quis nota scire laborat? at si nescit, quid caeca petit? quis enim quidquam nescius optet aut quis ualeat nescita sequi? quoue inueniat, quisque[ ] repertam queat ignarus noscere formam? an cum mentem cerneret altam, pariter summam et singula norat? nunc membrorum condita nube non in totum est oblita sui summamque tenet singula perdens. igitur quisquis uera requirit, neutro est habitu; nam neque nouit nec penitus tamen omnia nescit, sed quam retinens meminit summam consulit alte uisa retractans, vt seruatis queat oblitas addere partes." [ ] quisque _codex bambergensis_ s. xi.: quis _codd. meliores._ iii. what cause of discord breaks the bands of love? what god between two truths such wars doth move? that things which severally well settled be yet joined in one will never friendly prove? or in true things can we no discord see, because all certainties do still agree? but our dull soul, covered with members blind, knows not the secret laws which things do bind, by the drowned light of her oppressed fire. why then, the hidden notes of things to find, doth she with such a love of truth desire? if she knows that which she doth so require, why wisheth she known things to know again? if she knows not, why strives she with blind pain? who after things unknown will strive to go? or will such ignorant pursuit maintain? how shall she find them out? or having so, how shall she then their forms and natures know? because this soul the highest mind did view, must we needs say that it all nature knew? now she, though clouds of flesh do her debar, forgets not all that was her ancient due, but in her mind some general motions are, though not the skill of things particular. he that seeks truth in neither course doth fall; not knowing all, nor ignorant of all, he marketh general things which he retains, and matters seen on high doth back recall, and things forgotten to his mind regains, and joins them to that part which there remains." iv. tum illa: "vetus," inquit, "haec est de prouidentia querela marcoque tullio, cum diuinationem distribuit, uehementer agitata tibique ipsi res diu prorsus multumque quaesita, sed haud quaquam ab ullo uestrum hactenus satis diligenter ac firmiter expedita. cuius caliginis causa est, quod humanae ratiocinationis motus ad diuinae praescientiae simplicitatem non potest admoueri, quae si ullo modo cogitari queat, nihil prorsus relinquetur ambigui. quod ita demum patefacere atque expedire temptabo, si prius ea quibus moueris expendero. quaero enim, cur illam soluentium rationem minus efficacem putes, quae quia praescientiam non esse futuris rebus causam necessitatis existimat, nihil impediri praescientia arbitrii libertatem putat. num enim tu aliunde argumentum futurorum necessitatis trahis, nisi quod ea quae praesciuntur non euenire non possunt? si igitur praenotio nullam futuris rebus adicit necessitatem, quod tu etiam paulo ante fatebare, quid est quod uoluntarii exitus rerum ad certum cogantur euentum? etenim positionis gratia, ut quid consequatur aduertas, statuamus nullam esse praescientiam. num igitur quantum ad hoc attinet, quae ex arbitrio eueniunt ad necessitatem cogantur?" "minime." "statuamus iterum esse, sed nihil rebus necessitatis iniungere; manebit ut opinor eadem uoluntatis integra atque absoluta libertas. sed praescientia, inquies, tametsi futuris eueniendi necessitas non est, signum tamen est necessario ea esse uentura. hoc igitur modo, etiam si praecognitio non fuisset, necessarios futurorum exitus esse constaret. omne etenim signum tantum quid sit ostendit, non uero efficit quod designat. quare demonstrandum prius est nihil non ex necessitate contingere, ut praenotionem signum esse huius necessitatis appareat. alioquin si haec nulla est, ne illa quidem eius rei signum poterit esse quae non est. iam uero probationem firma ratione subnixam constat non ex signis neque petitis extrinsecus argumentis sed ex conuenientibus necessariisque causis esse ducendam. sed qui fieri potest ut ea non proueniant quae futura esse prouidentur? quasi uero nos ea quae prouidentia futura esse praenoscit non esse euentura credamus ac non illud potius arbitremur, licet eueniant, nihil tamen ut euenirent sui natura necessitatis habuisse; quod hinc facile perpendas licebit. plura etenim dum fiunt subiecta oculis intuemur, ut ea quae in quadrigis moderandis atque flectendis facere spectantur aurigae atque ad hunc modum cetera. num igitur quidquam illorum ita fieri necessitas ulla compellit?" "minime. frustra enim esset artis effectus, si omnia coacta mouerentur." "quae igitur cum fiunt carent exsistendi necessitate, eadem prius quam fiant sine necessitate futura sunt. quare sunt quaedam euentura quorum exitus ab omni necessitate sit absolutus. nam illud quidem nullum arbitror esse dicturum, quod quae nunc fiunt, prius quam fierent, euentura non fuerint. haec igitur etiam praecognita liberos habent euentus. nam sicut scientia praesentium rerum nihil his quae fiunt, ita praescientia futurorum nihil his quae uentura sunt necessitatis importat. sed hoc, inquis, ipsum dubitatur, an earum rerum quae necessarios exitus non habent ulla possit esse praenotio. dissonare etenim uidentur putasque si praeuideantur consequi necessitatem, si necessitas desit minime praesciri nihilque scientia comprehendi posse nisi certum; quod si quae incerti sunt exitus ea quasi certa prouidentur, opinionis id esse caliginem non scientiae ueritatem. aliter enim ac sese res habeat arbitrari ab integritate scientiae credis esse diuersum. cuius erroris causa est, quod omnia quae quisque nouit ex ipsorum tantum ui atque natura cognosci aestimat quae sciuntur; quod totum contra est omne enim quod cognoscitur non secundum sui uim sed secundum cognoscentium potius comprehenditur facultatem. nam ut hoc breui liqueat exemplo, eandem corporis rotunditatem aliter uisus aliter tactus agnoscit. ille eminus manens totum simul iactis radiis intuetur; hic uero cohaerens orbi atque coniunctus circa ipsum motus ambitum rotunditatem partibus comprehendit. ipsum quoque hominem aliter sensus, aliter imaginatio, aliter ratio, aliter intellegentia contuetur. sensus enim figuram in subiecta materia constitutam, imaginatio uero solam sine materia iudicat figuram. ratio uero hanc quoque transcendit speciemque ipsam quae singularibus inest uniuersali consideratione perpendit. intellegentiae uero celsior oculus exsistit; supergressa namque uniuersitatis ambitum ipsam illam simplicem formam pura mentis acie contuetur. in quo illud maxime considerandum est: nam superior comprehendendi uis amplectitur inferiorem, inferior uero ad superiorem nullo modo consurgit. neque enim sensus aliquid extra materiam ualet uel uniuersales species imaginatio contuetur uel ratio capit simplicem formam, sed intellegentia quasi desuper spectans concepta forma quae subsunt etiam cuncta diiudicat, sed eo modo quo formam ipsam, quae nulli alii nota esse poterat, comprehendit. nam et rationis uniuersum et imaginationis figuram et materiale sensibile cognoscit nec ratione utens nec imaginatione nec sensibus, sed illo uno ictu mentis formaliter, ut ita dicam, cuncta prospiciens. ratio quoque cum quid uniuersale respicit, nec imaginatione nec sensibus utens imaginabilia uel sensibilia comprehendit. haec est enim quae conceptionis suae uniuersale ita definiuit: homo est animal bipes rationale. quae cum uniuersalis notio sit, tum imaginabilem sensibilemque esse rem nullus ignorat, quod illa non imaginatione uel sensu sed in rationali conceptione considerat. imaginatio quoque tametsi ex sensibus uisendi formandique figuras sumpsit exordium, sensu tamen absente sensibilia quaeque conlustrat non sensibili sed imaginaria ratione iudicandi. videsne igitur ut in cognoscendo cuncta sua potius facultate quam eorum quae cognoscuntur utantur? neque id iniuria; nam cum omne iudicium iudicantis actus exsistat, necesse est ut suam quisque operam non ex aliena sed ex propria potestate perficiat. iv. "this," quoth she, "is an ancient complaint of providence, vehemently pursued by marcus tullius in his _distribution of divination_,[ ] and a thing which thou thyself hast made great and long search after. but hitherto none of you have used sufficient diligence and vigour in the explication thereof. the cause of which obscurity is for that the motion of human discourse cannot attain to the simplicity of the divine knowledge, which if by any means we could conceive, there would not remain any doubt at all; which i will endeavour to make manifest and plain when i have first explicated that which moveth thee. for i demand why thou thinkest their solution unsufficient, who think that free-will is not hindered by foreknowledge, because they suppose that foreknowledge is not the cause of any necessity in things to come. for fetchest thou any proof for the necessity of future things from any other principle, but only from this, that those things which are foreknown cannot choose but happen? wherefore if foreknowledge imposeth no necessity upon future events, which thou didst grant not long before, why should voluntary actions be tied to any certain success? for example's sake, that thou mayest see what will follow, let us suppose that there were no providence or foresight at all. would those things which proceed from free-will be compelled to any necessity by this means?" "no." "again, let us grant it to be, but that it imposeth no necessity upon anything; no doubt the same freedom of will will remain whole and absolute. but thou wilt say, even though foreknowledge be not a necessity for things to happen, yet it is a sign that they shall necessarily come to pass. wherefore now, even if there had been no foreknowledge, the events of future things would have been necessary. for all signs only show what is, but cause not that which they design. and consequently it must first be proved that all things fall out by necessity, that it may appear that foreknowledge is a sign of this necessity. for otherwise, if there be no necessity, neither can foreknowledge be the sign of that which is not. besides it is manifest that every firm proof must be drawn from intrinsical and necessary causes and not from signs and other farfetched arguments. but how is it possible those things should not happen which are foreseen to be to come? as though we did believe that those things will not be which providence hath foreknown and do not rather judge that although they happen, yet by their own nature they had no necessity of being, which thou mayest easily gather hence. for we see many things with our eyes while they are in doing, as those things which the coachmen do while they drive and turn their coaches and in like manner other things. now doth necessity compel any of these things to be done in this sort?" "no. for in vain should art labour if all things were moved by compulsion." "wherefore, as these things are without necessity when they are in doing, so likewise they are to come without necessity before they be done. and consequently there are some things to come whose event is free from all necessity. for i suppose no man will say that those things which are done now were not to come before they were done. wherefore these things even being foreseen come freely to effect. for as the knowledge of things present causeth no necessity in things which are in doing, so neither the foreknowledge in things to come. but thou wilt say: this is the question, whether there can be any foreknowledge of those things whose events are not necessary. for these things seem opposite, and thou thinkest that, if future things be foreseen, there followeth necessity, if there be no necessity, that they that are not foreknown, and that nothing can be perfectly known unless it be certain. but if uncertain events be foreseen as certain, it is manifest that this is the obscurity of opinion and not the truth of knowledge. for thou thinkest it to be far from the integrity of knowledge to judge otherwise than the thing is. the cause of which error is because thou thinkest that all that is known is known only by the force and nature of the things themselves, which is altogether otherwise. for all that is known is not comprehended according to the force which it hath in itself, but rather according to the faculty of them which know it. for to explicate it with a brief example: the sight and the feeling do diversely discern the same roundness of a die. the sight standing aloof beholdeth it altogether by his beams; but the feeling united and joined to the orb, being moved about the compass of it, comprehendeth the roundness by parts. likewise sense, imagination, reason and understanding do diversely behold a man. for sense looketh upon his form as it is placed in matter or subject, the imagination discerneth it alone without matter, reason passeth beyond this also and considereth universally the species or kind which is in particulars. the eye of the understanding is higher yet. for surpassing the compass of the whole world it beholdeth with the clear eye of the mind that simple form in itself. in which that is chiefly to be considered, that the superior force of comprehending embraceth the inferior; but the inferior can by no means attain to the superior; for the sense hath no force out of matter, neither doth the imagination conceive universal species, nor is reason capable of the simple form, but the understanding, as it were looking downward, having conceived that form, discerneth of all things which are under it, but in that sort in which it apprehendeth that form which can be known by none of the other. for it knoweth the universality of reason, and the figure of imagination, and the materiality of sense, neither using reason, nor imagination, nor senses, but as it were formally beholding all things with that one twinkling of the mind. likewise reason, when it considereth any universality, comprehendeth both imagination and sensible things without the use of either imagination or senses. for she defineth the universality of her conceit thus: man is a reasonable, two-footed, living creature, which being an universal knowledge, no man is ignorant that it is an imaginable and sensible thing, which she considereth by a reasonable conceiving and not by imagination or sense. imagination also, although it began by the senses of seeing and forming figures, yet when sense is absent it beholdeth sensible things, not after a sensible, but after an imaginary manner of knowledge. seest thou now how all these in knowing do rather use their own force and faculty than the force of those things which are known? nor undeservedly; for since all judgment is the act of him who judgeth, it is necessary that every one should perfect his operation by his own power and not by the force of any other. [ ] _de diuin_, ii. iv. quondam porticus attulit obscuros nimium senes qui sensus et imagines e corporibus extimis credant mentibus imprimi, vt quondam celeri stilo mos est aequore paginae, quae nullas habeat notas, pressas figere litteras. sed mens si propriis uigens nihil motibus explicat, sed tantum patiens iacet notis subdita corporum cassasque in speculi uicem rerum reddit imagines, vnde haec sic animis uiget cernens omnia notio? quae uis singula perspicit aut quae cognita diuidit? quae diuisa recolligit alternumque legens iter nunc summis caput inserit, nunc decedit in infima, tum sese referens sibi veris falsa redarguit? haec est efficiens magis longe causa potentior quam quae materiae modo impressas patitur notas. praecedit tamen excitans ac uires animi mouens viuo in corpore passio. cum uel lux oculos ferit vel uox auribus instrepit, tum mentis uigor excitus quas intus species tenet ad motus similes uocans notis applicat exteris introrsumque reconditis formis miscet imagines. iv. cloudy old prophets of the porch[ ] once taught that sense and shape presented to the thought from outward objects their impression take, as when upon a paper smooth and plain on which as yet no marks of ink have lain we with a nimble pen do letters make. but if our minds to nothing can apply their proper motions, but do patient lie subject to forms which do from bodies flow, as a glass renders empty[ ] shapes of things, who then can show from whence that motion springs by force of which the mind all things doth know? or by what skill are several things espied? and being known what power doth them divide, and thus divided doth again unite, and with a various journey oft aspires to highest things, and oft again retires to basest, nothing being out of sight, and when she back unto herself doth move, doth all the falsehoods by the truth reprove? this vigour needs must be an active cause, and with more powerful forces must be deckt, than that which from those forms, that do reflect from outward matter, all her virtue draws. and yet in living bodies passion's might doth go before, whose office is to incite, and the first motions in the mind to make. as when the light unto our eyes appears, or some loud voice is sounded in our ears, then doth the strength of the dull mind awake those phantasies which she retains within; she stirreth up such notions to begin, whose objects with their natures best agree, and thus applying them to outward things, she joins the external shapes which thence she brings with forms which in herself included be. [ ] the porch, _i.e._ the painted porch ([greek: stoa poikilae]) at athens, the great hall adorned with frescoes of the battle of marathon, which served as lecture-room to zeno, the founder of the stoic sect. [ ] cf. quin potius noscas rerum simulacra uagari multa modis multis nulla ui cassaque sensu. "but rather you are to know that idols or things wander about many in number in many ways, of no force, powerless to excite sense."--lucr. iv. , (trans. munro). v. quod si in corporibus sentiendis, quamuis afficiant instrumenta sensuum forinsecus obiectae qualitates animique agentis uigorem passio corporis antecedat quae in se actum mentis prouocet excitetque interim quiescentes intrinsecus formas, si in sentiendis, inquam, corporibus animus non passione insignitur, sed ex sua ui subiectam corpori iudicat passionem, quanto magis ea quae cunctis corporum affectionibus absoluta sunt, in discernendo non obiecta extrinsecus sequuntur, sed actum suae mentis expediunt? hac itaque ratione multiplices cognitiones diuersis ac differentibus cessere substantiis. sensus enim solus cunctis aliis cognitionibus destitutus immobilibus animantibus cessit quales sunt conchae maris quaeque alia saxis haerentia nutriuntur, imaginatio uero mobilibus beluis quibus iam inesse fugiendi appetendiue aliquis uidetur affectus, ratio uero humani tantum generis est sicut intellegentia sola diuini. quo fit ut ea notitia ceteris praestet quae suapte natura non modo proprium sed ceterarum quoque notitiarum subiecta cognoscit. quid igitur, si ratiocinationi sensus imaginatioque refragentur, nihil esse illud uniuersale dicentes quod sese intueri ratio putet? quod enim sensibile uel imaginabile est, id uniuersum esse non posse; aut igitur rationis uerum esse iudicium nec quidquam esse sensibile, aut quoniam sibi notum sit plura sensibus et imaginationi esse subiecta, inanem conceptionem esse rationis quae quod sensibile sit ac singulare quasi quiddam uniuersale consideret. ad haec, si ratio contra respondeat se quidem et quod sensibile et quod imaginabile sit in uniuersitatis ratione conspicere, illa uero ad uniuersitatis cognitionem adspirare non posse, quoniam eorum notio corporales figuras non possit excedere, de rerum uero cognitione firmiori potius perfectiorique iudicio esse credendum, in huiusmodi igitur lite nos quibus tam ratiocinandi quam imaginandi etiam sentiendique uis inest nonne rationis potius causam probaremus? simile est quod humana ratio diuinam intellegentiam futura, nisi ut ipsa cognoscit, non putat intueri. nam ita disseris: si qua certos ac necessarios habere non uideantur euentus, ea certo euentura praesciri nequeunt. harum igitur rerum nulla est praescientia, quam si etiam in his esse credamus, nihil erit quod non ex necessitate proueniat. si igitur uti rationis participes sumus ita diuinae iudicium mentis habere possemus, sicut imaginationem sensumque rationi cedere oportere iudicauimus, sic diuinae sese menti humanam submittere rationem iustissimum censeremus. quare in illius summae intellegentiae cacumen, si possumus, erigamur; illic enim ratio uidebit quod in se non potest intueri, id autem est, quonam modo etiam quae certos exitus non habent, certa tamen uideat ac definita praenotio neque id sit opinio sed summae potius scientiae nullis terminis inclusa simplicitas. v. and if in sentient bodies, although the qualities of outward objects do move the organs of sense, and the passion of the body goeth before the vigour of the active mind, provoking her action to itself and exciting the inward forms which before lay quiet; if, i say, in perceiving these corporal objects the mind taketh not her impression from passion, but by her own force judgeth of the passion itself, which is objected to the body; how much more do those powers exercise the action of their mind and not only follow the outward objects in their judgment, which are free from all affections of the body? wherefore in this sort have diverse and different substances knowledges of many kinds. for only sense destitute of all other means of knowledge is in those living creatures which are unmovable, as some shell-fish and other which stick to stones and so are nourished; and imagination in movable beasts who seem to have some power to covet and fly. but reason belongeth only to mankind, as understanding to things divine. so that that knowledge is most excellent which of itself doth not only know her own object, but also those which belong to others. what then, if sense and imagination repugn to discourse and reason, affirming that universality to be nothing which reason thinketh herself to see? for that cannot be universal, they argue, which is either sensible or imaginable; wherefore either the judgment of reason must be true and nothing at all sensible, or because they know that many things are subject to the senses and imagination, the conceit of reason is vain, which considereth that which is sensible and singular as if it were universal. moreover if reason should answer that she beholdeth in her universality all that which is sensible or imaginable, but they cannot aspire to the knowledge of universality, because their knowledge cannot surpass corporal figures and shapes, and that we must give more credit to the firmer and more perfect judgment about the knowledge of things, in this contention should not we, who have the power of discoursing as well as of imagination and sense, rather take reason's part? the very like happeneth when human reason doth not think that the divine understanding doth behold future things otherwise than she herself doth. for thus thou arguest: if any things seem not to have certain and necessary events, they cannot be certainly foreknown to be to come. wherefore there is no foreknowledge of these things, and if we think that there is any, there shall be nothing which happeneth not of necessity. if, therefore, as we are endued with reason, we could likewise have the judgment proper to the divine mind, as we have judged that imagination and sense must yield to reason, so likewise we would think it most reasonable and just that human reason should submit herself to the divine mind. wherefore let us be lifted up as much as we can to that height of the highest mind; for there reason shall see that which she cannot behold in herself. and that is, how a certain and definite foreknowledge seeth even those things which have no certain issue, and that this is no opinion, but rather the simplicity of the highest knowledge enclosed within no bounds. v. quam uariis terras animalia permeant figuris! namque alia extento sunt corpore pulueremque uerrunt continuumque trahunt ui pectoris incitata sulcum sunt quibus alarum leuitas uaga uerberetque uentos et liquido longi spatia aetheris enatet uolatu, haec pressisse solo uestigia gressibusque gaudent vel uirides campos transmittere uel subire siluas. quae uariis uideas licet omnia discrepare formis, prona tamen facies hebetes ualet ingrauare sensus. vnica gens hominum celsum leuat altius cacumen atque leuis recto stat corpore despicitque terras. haec nisi terrenus male desipis, admonet figura, qui recto caelum uultu petis exserisque frontem, in sublime feras animum quoque, ne grauata pessum inferior sidat mens corpore celsius leuata. v. what several figures things that live upon the earth do keep! some have their bodies stretched in length by which the dust they sweep and do continual furrows make while on their breasts they creep. some lightly soaring up on high with wings the wind do smite and through the longest airy space pass with an easy flight. some by their paces to imprint the ground with steps delight, which through the pleasant fields do pass or to the woods do go, whose several forms though to our eyes they do a difference show, yet by their looks cast down on earth their senses heavy grow. men only with more stately shape to higher objects rise, who with erected bodies stand and do the earth despise. these figures warn (if baser thoughts blind not thine earthly eyes) that thou who with an upright face dost look upon the sky, shouldst also raise thy mind aloft, lest while thou bearest high thine earthly head, thy soul opprest beneath thy body lie. vi. quoniam igitur, uti paulo ante monstratum est, omne quod scitur non ex sua sed ex conprehendentium natura cognoscitur, intueamur nunc quantum fas est, quis sit diuinae substantiae status, ut quaenam etiam scientia eius sit, possimus agnoscere. deum igitur aeternum esse cunctorum ratione degentium commune iudicium est. quid sit igitur aeternitas consideremus; haec enim nobis naturam pariter diuinam scientiamque patefacit. aeternitas igitur est interminabilis uitae tota simul et perfecta possessio, quod ex collatione temporalium clarius liquet. nam quidquid uiuit in tempore id praesens a praeteritis in futura procedit nihilque est in tempore constitutum quod totum uitae suae spatium pariter possit amplecti. sed crastinum quidem nondum adprehendit; hesternum uero iam perdidit; in hodierna quoque uita non amplius uiuitis quam in illo mobili transitorioque momento. quod igitur temporis patitur condicionem, licet illud, sicuti de mundo censuit aristoteles, nec coeperit umquam esse nec desinat uitaque eius cum temporis infinitate tendatur, nondum tamen tale est ut aeternum esse iure credatur. non enim totum simul infinitae licet uitae spatium comprehendit atque complectitur, sed futura nondum transacta iam non habet. quod igitur interminabilis uitae plenitudinem totam pariter comprehendit ac possidet, cui neque futuri quidquam absit nec praeteriti fluxerit, id aeternum esse iure perhibetur, idque necesse est et sui compos praesens sibi semper adsistere et infinitatem mobilis temporis habere praesentem. vnde non recte quidam, qui cum audiunt uisum platoni mundum hunc nec habuisse initium temporis nec habiturum esse defectum, hoc modo conditori conditum mundum fieri coaeternum putant. aliud est enim per interminabilem duci uitam, quod mundo plato tribuit, aliud interminabilis uitae totam pariter complexum esse praesentiam, quod diuinae mentis proprium esse manifestum est. neque deus conditis rebus antiquior uideri debet temporis quantitate sed simplicis potius proprietate naturae. hunc enim uitae immobilis praesentarium statum infinitus ille temporalium rerum motus imitatur cumque eum effingere atque aequare non possit, ex immobilitate deficit in motum, ex simplicitate praesentiae decrescit in infinitam futuri ac praeteriti quantitatem; et cum totam pariter uitae suae plenitudinem nequeat possidere, hoc ipso quod aliquo modo numquam esse desinit; illud quod implere atque exprimere non potest, aliquatenus uidetur aemulari alligans se ad qualemcumque praesentiam huius exigui uolucrisque momenti, quae, quoniam manentis illius praesentiae quandam gestat imaginem, quibuscumque contigerit id praestat ut esse uideantur. quoniam uero manere non potuit, infinitum temporis iter arripuit eoque modo factum est ut continuaret eundo uitam cuius plenitudinem complecti non ualuit permanendo. itaque si digna rebus nomina uelimus imponere, platonem sequentes deum quidem aeternum, mundum uero dicamus esse perpetuum. quoniam igitur omne iudicium secundum sui naturam quae sibi subiecta sunt comprehendit, est autem deo semper aeternus ac praesentarius status; scientia quoque eius omnem temporis supergressa motionem in suae manet simplicitate praesentiae infinitaque praeteriti ac futuri spatia complectens omnia quasi iam gerantur in sua simplici cognitione considerat. itaque si praesentiam pensare uelis qua cuncta dinoscit, non esse praescientiam quasi futuri sed scientiam numquam deficientis instantiae rectius aestimabis; unde non praeuidentia sed prouidentia potius dicitur, quod porro ab rebus infimis constituta quasi ab excelso rerum cacumine cuncta prospiciat. quid igitur postulas ut necessaria fiant quae diuino lumine lustrentur, cum ne homines quidem necessaria faciant esse quae uideant? num enim quae praesentia cernis, aliquam eis necessitatem tuus addit intuitus?" "minime." "atqui si est diuini humanique praesentis digna collatio, uti uos uestro hoc temporario praesenti quaedam uidetis, ita ille omnia suo cernit aeterno. quare haec diuina praenotio naturam rerum proprietatemque non mutat taliaque apud se praesentia spectat qualia in tempore olim futura prouenient. nec rerum iudicia confundit unoque suae mentis intuitu tam necessarie quam non necessarie uentura dinoscit; sicuti uos cum pariter ambulare in terra hominem et oriri in caelo solem uidetis, quamquam simul utrumque conspectum tamen discernitis et hoc uoluntarium illud esse necessarium iudicatis, ita igitur cuncta despiciens diuinus intuitus qualitatem rerum minime perturbat apud se quidem praesentium, ad condicionem uero temporis futurarum. quo fit ut hoc non sit opinio sed ueritate potius nixa cognitio, cum exstaturum quid esse cognoscit quod idem exsistendi necessitate carere non nesciat. hic si dicas quod euenturum deus uidet id non euenire non posse, quod autem non potest non euenire id ex necessitate contingere, meque ad hoc nomen necessitatis adstringas; fatebor rem quidem solidissimae ueritatis sed cui uix aliquis nisi diuini speculator accesserit. respondebo namque idem futurum, cum ad diuinam notionem refertur, necessarium, cum uero in sua natura perpenditur, liberum prorsus atque absolutum uideri. duae sunt etenim necessitates, simplex una, ueluti quod necesse est omnes homines esse mortales, altera condicionis, ut si aliquem ambulare scias, eum ambulare necesse est; quod enim quisque nouit, id esse aliter ac notum est nequit, sed haec condicio minime secum illam simplicem trahit. hanc enim necessitatem non propria facit natura sed condicionis adiectio; nulla enim necessitas cogit incedere uoluntate gradientem, quamuis eum tum cum graditur incedere necessarium sit. eodem igitur modo, si quid prouidentia praesens uidet, id esse necesse est, tametsi nullam naturae habeat necessitatem. atqui deus ea futura quae ex arbitrii libertate proueniunt praesentia contuetur. haec igitur ad intuitum relata diuinum necessaria fiant per condicionem diuinae notionis; per se uero considerata ab absoluta naturae suae libertate non desinunt. fient igitur procul dubio cuncta quae futura deus esse praenoscit, sed eorum quaedam de libero proficiscuntur arbitrio; quae quamuis eueniant, exsistendo tamen naturam propriam non amittunt, qua priusquam fierent etiam non euenire potuissent. quid igitur refert non esse necessaria, cum propter diuinae scientiae condicionem modis omnibus necessitatis instar eueniet? hoc scilicet quod ea quae paulo ante proposui, sol oriens et gradiens homo. quae dum fiunt, non fieri non possunt; eorum tamen unum prius quoque quam fieret, necesse erat exsistere, alterum uero minime. ita etiam quae praesentia deus habet, dubio procul exsistent, sed eorum hoc quidem de rerum necessitate descendit, illud uero de potestate facientium. haud igitur iniuria diximus haec si ad diuinam notitiam referantur necessaria, si per se considerentur necessitatis esse nexibus absoluta; sicuti omne quod sensibus patet, si ad rationem referas, uniuersale est, si ad se ipsa respicias, singulare. 'sed si in mea,' inquies, 'potestate situm est mutare propositum, euacuabo prouidentiam, cum quae illa praenoscit forte mutauero.' respondebo: propositum te quidem tuum posse deflectere, sed quoniam et id te posse et an facias quoue conuertas praesens prouidentiae ueritas intuetur, diuinam te praescientiam non posse uitare, sicuti praesentis oculi effugere non possis intuitum, quamuis te in uarias actiones libera uoluntate conuerteris. quid igitur inquies? ex meane dispositione scientia diuina mutabitur, ut cum ego nunc hoc nunc aliud uelim, illa quoque noscendi uices alternare uideatur? minime. omne namque futurum diuinus praecurrit intuitus et ad praesentiam propriae cognitionis retorquet ac reuocat nec alternat, ut aestimas, nunc hoc nunc illud praenoscendi uice, sed uno ictu mutationes tuas manens praeuenit atque complectitur. quam comprehendendi omnia uisendique praesentiam non ex futurarum prouentu rerum, sed ex propria deus simplicitate sortitus est. ex quo illud quoque resoluitur quod paulo ante posuisti indignum esse, si scientiae dei causam futura nostra praestare dicantur. haec enim scientiae uis praesentaria notione cuncta complectens rebus modum omnibus ipsa constituit, nihil uero posterioribus debet. quae cum ita sint, manet intemerata mortalibus arbitrii libertas nec iniquae leges solutis omni necessitate uoluntatibus praemia poenasque proponunt. manet etiam spectator desuper cunctorum praescius deus uisionisque eius praesens semper aeternitas cum nostrorum actuum futura qualitate concurrit bonis praemia malis supplicia dispensans. nec frustra sunt in deo positae spes precesque; quae cum rectae sunt, inefficaces esse non possunt. auersamini igitur uitia, colite uirtutes, ad rectas spes animum subleuate, humiles preces in excelsa porrigite. magna uobis est, si dissimulare non uultis, necessitas indicta probitatis, cum ante oculos agitis iudicis cuncta cernentis." vi. seeing, therefore, as hath been showed, all that is known is not comprehended by its own nature but by the power of him which comprehendeth it, let us see now, as much as we may, what is the state of the divine substance that we may also know what his knowledge is. wherefore it is the common judgment of all that live by reason that god is everlasting, and therefore let us consider what eternity is. for this declareth unto us both the divine nature and knowledge. eternity therefore is a perfect possession altogether of an endless life, which is more manifest by the comparison of temporal things, for whatsoever liveth in time, that being present proceedeth from times past to times to come, and there is nothing placed in time which can embrace all the space of its life at once. but it hath not yet attained to-morrow and hath lost yesterday. and you live no more in this day's life than in that movable and transitory moment. wherefore, whatsoever suffereth the condition of time, although, as aristotle thought of the world, it never began nor were ever to end, and its life did endure with infinite time, yet it is not such that it ought to be called everlasting. for it doth not comprehend and embrace all the space of its life together, though that life be infinite, but it hath not the future time which is yet to come. that then which comprehendeth and possesseth the whole fulness of an endless life together, to which neither any part to come is absent, nor of that which is past hath escaped, is worthy to be accounted everlasting, and this is necessary, that being no possession in itself, it may always be present to itself, and have an infinity of movable time present to it. wherefore they are deceived who, hearing that plato thought that this world had neither beginning of time nor should ever have any end, think that by this means the created world should be coeternal with the creator. for it is one thing to be carried through an endless life, which plato attributed to the world, another thing to embrace the whole presence of an endless life together, which is manifestly proper to the divine mind. neither ought god to seem more ancient than the things created, by the quantity of time, but rather by the simplicity of his divine nature. for that infinite motion of temporal things imitateth the present state of the unmovable life, and since it cannot express nor equal it, it falleth from immobility to motion, and from the simplicity of presence, it decreaseth to an infinite quantity of future and past, and since it cannot possess together all the fulness of its life, by never leaving to be in some sort, it seemeth to emulate in part that which it cannot fully obtain and express, tying itself to this small presence of this short and swift moment, which because it carrieth a certain image of that abiding presence, whosoever hath it, seemeth to be. but because it could not stay it undertook an infinite journey of time, and so it came to pass that it continued that life by going whose plenitude it could not comprehend by staying. wherefore, if we will give things their right names, following plato, let us say that god is everlasting and the world perpetual. wherefore, since every judgment comprehendeth those things which are subject unto it, according to its own nature, and god hath always an everlasting and present state, his knowledge also surpassing all motions of time, remaineth in the simplicity of his presence, and comprehending the infinite spaces of that which is past and to come, considereth all things in his simple knowledge as though they were now in doing. so that, if thou wilt weigh his foreknowledge with which he discerneth all things, thou wilt more rightly esteem it to be the knowledge of a never fading instant than a foreknowledge as of a thing to come. for which cause it is not called praevidence or foresight, but rather providence, because, placed far from inferior things, it overlooketh all things, as it were, from the highest top of things. why, therefore, wilt thou have those things necessary which are illustrated by the divine light, since that not even men make not those things necessary which they see? for doth thy sight impose any necessity upon those things which thou seest present?" "no." "but the present instant of men may well be compared to that of god in this: that as you see some things in your temporal instant, so he beholdeth all things in his eternal present. wherefore this divine foreknowledge doth not change the nature and propriety of things, and it beholdeth them such in his presence as they will after come to be, neither doth he confound the judgment of things, and with one sight of his mind he discerneth as well those things which shall happen necessarily as otherwise. as you, when at one time you see a man walking upon the earth and the sun rising in heaven, although they be both seen at once, yet you discern and judge that the one is voluntary, and the other necessary, so likewise the divine sight beholding all things disturbeth not the quality of things which to him are present, but in respect of time are yet to come. and so this is not an opinion but rather a knowledge grounded upon truth, when he knoweth that such a thing shall be, which likewise he is not ignorant that it hath no necessity of being. here if thou sayest that cannot choose but happen which god seeth shall happen, and that which cannot choose but happen, must be of necessity, and so tiest me to this name of necessity, i will grant that it is a most solid truth, but whereof scarce any but a contemplator of divinity is capable. for i will answer that the same thing is necessary when it is referred to the divine knowledge; but when it is weighed in its own nature that it seemeth altogether free and absolute. for there be two necessities: the one simple, as that it is necessary for all men to be mortal; the other conditional, as if thou knowest that any man walketh, he must needs walk. for what a man knoweth cannot be otherwise than it is known. but this conditional draweth not with it that simple or absolute necessity. for this is not caused by the nature of the thing, but by the adding a condition. for no necessity maketh him to go that goeth of his own accord, although it be necessary that he goeth while he goeth. in like manner, if providence seeth anything present, that must needs be, although it hath no necessity of nature. but god beholdeth those future things, which proceed from free-will, present. these things, therefore, being referred to the divine sight are necessary by the condition of the divine knowledge, and, considered by themselves, they lose not absolute freedom of their own nature. wherefore doubtless all those things come to pass which god foreknoweth shall come, but some of them proceed from free-will, which though they come to pass, yet do not, by coining into being, lose, since before they came to pass, they might also not have happened. but what importeth it that they are not necessary, since that by reason of the condition of the divine knowledge they come to pass in all respects as if they were necessary? it hath the same import as those things which i proposed a little before--the sun rising and the man going. while they are in doing, they cannot choose but be in doing; yet one of them was necessarily to be before it was, and the other not. likewise those things which god hath present, will have doubtless a being, but some of them proceed from the necessity of things, other from the power of the doers. and therefore we said not without cause that these, if they be referred to god's knowledge, are necessary; and if they be considered by themselves, they are free from the bonds of necessity. as whatsoever is manifest to senses, if thou referrest it to reason, is universal; if thou considerest the things themselves, it is singular or particular. but thou wilt say, 'if it is in my power to change my purpose, shall i frustrate providence if i chance to alter those things which she foreknoweth?' i answer that thou mayest indeed change thy purpose, but because the truth of providence, being present, seeth that thou canst do so, and whether thou wilt do so or no, and what thou purposest anew, thou canst not avoid the divine foreknowledge, even as thou canst not avoid the sight of an eye which is present, although thou turnest thyself to divers actions by thy free-will. but yet thou wilt inquire whether god's knowledge shall be changed by thy disposition, so that when thou wilt now one thing, and now another, it should also seem to have divers knowledges. no. for god's sight preventeth all that is to come and recalleth and draweth it to the presence of his own knowledge; neither doth he vary, as thou imaginest, now knowing one thing and now another, but in one instant without moving preventeth and comprehendeth thy mutations. which presence of comprehending and seeing all things, god hath not by the event of future things but by his own simplicity. by which that doubt is also resolved which thou didst put a little before, that it is an unworthy thing that our future actions should be said to cause the knowledge of god. for this force of the divine knowledge comprehending all things with a present notion appointeth to everything its measure and receiveth nothing from ensuing accidents. all which being so, the free-will of mortal men remaineth unviolated, neither are the laws unjust which propose punishments and rewards to our wills, which are free from all necessity. there remaineth also a beholder of all things which is god, who foreseeth all things, and the eternity of his vision, which is always present, concurreth with the future quality of our actions, distributing rewards to the good and punishments to the evil. neither do we in vain put our hope in god or pray to him; for if we do this well and as we ought, we shall not lose our labour or be without effect. wherefore fly vices, embrace virtues, possess your minds with worthy hopes, offer up humble prayers to your highest prince. there is, if you will not dissemble, a great necessity of doing well imposed upon you, since you live in the sight of your judge, who beholdeth all things." symmachi versvs fortunae et uirtutis opus, seuerine boethi, e patria pulsus non tua per scelera, tandem ignotus habes qui te colat, ut tua uirtus vt tua fortuna promeruitque [greek: sophos]. post obitum dant fata locum, post fata superstes vxoris propriae te quoque fama colit. epigram by symmachus[ ] boethius! model of all weal and worth, unjustly from thy country driven forth, thy fame, unfamed at last, yet one shall praise, one voice the cry of approbation raise; what life denied, through death kind heaven giveth; thine honour in thy wife's for ever liveth. [ ] this epigram was found by barth in a merseburg codex, and first printed in his _adversaria_ ( ). if genuine (and the faithful reproduction the error symmachivs for symmachi vs or vr, i.e. versvs, is in its favour), the author may be either the son or the father-in-law of boethius. some readers may prefer to rank this poem with the epitaph on elpis, the supposititious first wife of boethius, on whom see obbarius, _de cons._ p. xii. at any rate it is as old as the times of hrabanus maurus, who imitated it in a poem also first published by barth. see peiper, _cons._ p. xxxviiii. index aaron. abel. abraham. abstraction. academical studies. achaemenian rocks. achelous. achilles, statue of. adam. [greek: aeides, to]. aemilius paulus. _aequiuocus_. _aeternitas_. agamemnon, _see_ atrides. age, the former. agrippina. albinus. alcibiades. alexander aphrod.. allegorical method. anaxagoras. anaxarchus. angels. antaeus. antoninus (caracalla). apollodorus. apuleius. arcturus. arians aristotle, on nature; _de physicis_; _protrepticus_; arius. atrides. augustine, st. auster. bacchus. baptism. basil, informer. being. boethius, life; the first scholastic; an independent philosopher; his philosophic ambition; his achievement; a christian; perhaps a martyr; son-in-law of symmachus; his wife; his sons; early training; youthful poetry; premature old age; his learning; his library; his lofty position; his principles; the champion of the oppressed; of the senate; his accusers; his accusation; sentence. boötes. boreas. brutus. busiris. cacus. caesar, _see_ gaius. campania. canius. cassiodorus. categories, the ten. catholic church, faith; religion. catholics. cato. catullus. caucasus. centaurs. cerberus. ceres. chremes. christ, advent of; baptism; life and death; resurrection and ascension; nature; person; divinity; humanity; perfect man and perfect god. christian faith, religion. cicero, _de diuinatione_; _tusc_. circe. claudian. claudianus, mamertus, _coemptio_. conigastus, _consistere_, _consolation of philosophy_, method and object. consulate. corollary, see _porisma_. corus. crab. croesus. cyclops. cynthia. cyprian, informer. cyrus. dante. david. decoratus. demons. devil. dialectic. difference. diogenes laertius. dionysius. divine nature, eternal, substance. divinity of christ, _see_ christ, _diuisio_. dorset, countess of. [greek: eisagogae], porphyry's. eleatic studies. elements. elpis. _enneades_. epicureans. epicurus. _esse_. _essentia_. eternity. etna. euphrates. euripides. euripus. eurus. eutyches. eutychian error. eutychians. evander. eve. evil is nothing. fabricius. fame. fatal order. fate. fire, nature of. flood. form. fortune. free-will. furies. gaius caesar (caligula). gaudentius. geometricians. germanicus. giants. gilbert de la porrée. glory. god, categories applied to, without difference; is what he is; is pure form; is [greek: ousia, ousiosis, huphistasthai]; one; triune; is good; goodness; happiness; everlasting; omnipresent; just; omnipotent; incomprehensible; one father; true sun; creator; ruler; mover; judge; sees all things; foresees all things; his knowledge; his providence; cannot do evil; wills only good; prayer to him not vain. good, the prime. good, all seek. goodness is happiness, is god. grace. greek. happiness is god. hauréau. _hebdomads_. hecuba. hercules. heresy, see arius, eutyches, nestorius, sabellians. hermus. herodotus. hesperus. holder. homer. horace. human nature, humanity of christ, _see_ christ. humanity. iamblichus. _id quod est_. _id quod est esse_. indus. _instrumentum_. isaac. ishmael. ixion. jacob. jerusalem. jesus. jews. iohannes scottus. john the deacon. jordan. joshua. judah. kanius, _see_ canius. [greek: kata parathesin]. latin. lethargy. livy. lucan. lucifer. lucretius. lybia. lybian lions. lydians. lynceus. macedonius. _see_ aemilius paulus. macrobius. mary, the blessed virgin,. mathematical method. mathematics. matter. medea. mercury. moses. muses. music, boethius on. nature, phenomenal; nature; nature of plants. neoplatonism. neritius, son of, _see_ ulysses. nero. nestorius. nicocreon. nicomachus. _nihilo, ex_.. noah. nonius. notus. number. [greek: oion epei]. [greek: onos luras]. opilio. orpheus. [greek: ousia]. [greek: ousiosis]. [greek: ousiosthai]. [greek: pi]. _palatini canes_. papinianus. parmenides. parthiaus. paulinus. paulus, see aemilius paulus. pelagius. perses. _persona_. person defined. pharaoh. philosophy, appearance of; character; function; power. phoebe. phoebus. physics. plato, and boethius; and s. thomas; and the academy; his muse; reminiscence; quoted or referred to, _gorg._; _tim_; _meno_; _phaedo_; _rep_. plotinus. plurality. pluto. polyphemus. porch. _porisma_. porphyry. praetorship. praevidence. predicaments, _see_ categories. providence. ptolemy. purgation. pythagoras. ravenna. realism. red sea. _reductio ad absurdum_. regulus. relation, category of. religion, the christian. resurrection. rhetoric. roman liberty, republic. rusticiana. sabellians. sackville, thomas. _sacrilegium_. saints. saturn. saul. scripture. _sempiternitas_. senate. seneca. simon. sinai. sirius. socrates. son, the, _see_ trinity. soranus. spartianus. spirit, holy, _see_ trinity, procession of; a substance. statue of achilles. stoics. stymphalian birds. _subsisistentia, subsistere_. substance, divine. _substantia, substare_. suetonius. sun, _see_ phoebus. symmachus, q. aurel., q. aur. memmius; boethius; pope. syrtes. tacitus. tantalus. tertullian. testament, old and new. [greek: theta]. theodoric. theology. thomas, st. thorie, j. thrace. thule. tigris. _timaeus_, see plato. tiresias. tityus. triangie. triguilla. trinity, the unity of; cannot be substantially predicated of god. [greek: ulae, apoios]. ulysses. unity. unity of trinity. [greek: upostasis]. [greek: upostaenai]. usener. _ut quia_. [greek: uphistasthai]. _uel = et_. verona. vesuvius. _uia media_. virgil. _uirtus_. will, _see_ free-will. wulf, h. de. zeno. zephyrus. the end this ebook was produced by charles aldarondo, charles franks and the online distributed proofreading team. the great doctrines of the bible by rev. william evans, ph.d., d.d. dedicated to my wife contents the doctrine of god the doctrine of jesus christ the doctrine of the holy spirit the doctrine of man the doctrines of salvation repentance--faith--regeneration--justification--adoption-- sanctification--prayer the doctrine of the church the doctrine of the scriptures the doctrine of angels the doctrine of satan the doctrine of the last things the second coming of christ--the resurrection--the judgment--the destiny of the wicked--the reward of the righteous foreword. the demand for this book has come from the students in the class room who have listened to these lectures on the great doctrines of the bible, and have desired and requested that they be put into permanent form for the purpose of further study and reference. this volume is prepared, therefore, primarily, but not exclusively, for the student, and with his needs in mind. the doctrines herein treated are dealt with from the standpoint of biblical rather than dogmatic theology. this is evident from the plan which is followed in the work, namely, to gather together all the scripture passages dealing with the subject under consideration, and from them choose a required number that may be called representative; then seek to understand the meaning of these references by the study of the text itself as well as its context and parallel passages; and finally, from the selected proof-texts, formulate the doctrinal teaching, and place such results under appropriate headings. the doctrines of god, jesus christ, and the holy spirit are more fully dealt with than the doctrines which follow. this is especially true of the doctrine of god. the reason for this is to set forth the method pursued in these studies, and to give a pattern for the study of the doctrines to follow. it is intended that the doctrines of this book should be studied side by side with the open bible. it is for this reason that many of the scripture references are indicated by chapter and verse only. there must be constant reference to the scriptures themselves. this volume is in such form as to be of great service in the instruction given in bible classes. there is probably no greater need in the christian church today than that its membership should be made acquainted with the fundamental facts and doctrines of the christian faith. the christian layman, therefore, who desires a deeper knowledge of the doctrines of the christian faith may find all the help he needs in this book. it is hoped that while it is prepared for the student, it is nevertheless not too deep for the average layman. the special indebtedness of the writer is hereby expressed to the following works: "what the bible teaches," by r. a. torrey, d. d. to this work the writer owes much with regard to the method and plan of this book. "systematic theology," by a. h. strong, d. d., has provided some rich expositions of the sacred text. "christian doctrine," by dr. f. l. patton, has been found very helpful, especially in connection with the subject of the "proofs for the existence of god." further recognition of indebtedness is also due to the following: "the problem of the old testament," and "the christian view of god and the world," by dr. james orr; "studies in christian doctrine," by george knapp; "jesus and the gospel," and "the death of christ," by prof. james denny; "the person and work of jesus," by nathan e. wood, d. d. there are doubtless others to whom credit is due of whom the author is not at this time conscious, for, after all, we are "part of all that we have seen, and met, and read." to those unknown authors, therefore, our indebtedness is hereby acknowledged. _chicago._ william evans. the doctrine of god i. the existence of god: (vs. atheism). . assumed by the scriptures. . proofs of the existence of god. a) universal belief in the existence of god. b) cosmological:--argument from cause. c) teleological:--argument from design. d) ontological:--argument from being. e) anthropological:--moral argument. f) argument from congruity. g) argument from scripture. ii. the nature of god: (vs. agnosticism) . the spirituality of god: (vs. materialism). . the personality of god: (vs. pantheism). . the unity of god: (vs. polytheism). . the trinity: (vs. unitarianism). iii. the attributes of god. . the natural attributes: a) omniscience. b) omnipotence. c) omnipresence. d) eternity. . the moral attributes: a) holiness. b) righteousness. c) faithfulness. d) mercy and loving-kindness. e) love. i. his existence. . taken for granted by the scripture writers: it does not seem to have occurred to any of the writers of either the old or the new testaments to attempt to prove or to argue for the existence of god. everywhere and at all times it is a fact taken for granted. "a god capable of proof would be no god at all" (jacobi). he is the self-existent one (exod. : ) and the source of all life (john : ). the sublime opening of the scriptures announces the fact of god and his existence: "in the beginning god" (gen. : ). nor is the rise or dawn of the idea of god in the mind of man depicted. psa. : : "the fool hath said in his heart. there is no god," indicates not a disbelief in the existence, but rather in the active interest of god in the affairs of men--he seemed to hide himself from the affairs of men (see job : - ). the scriptures further recognize that men not only know of the existence of god, but have also a certain circle of ideas as to who and what he is (rom. : - ). no one but a "fool" will deny the fact of god. "what! no god? a watch, and no key for it? a watch with a main-spring broken, and no jeweler to fix it? a watch, and no repair shop? a time-card and a train, and nobody to run it? a star lit, and nobody to pour oil in to keep the wick burning? a garden, and no gardener? flowers, and no florist? conditions, and no conditioner?" he that sitteth in the heavens shall laugh at such absurd atheism. . the arguments for the existence of god. [footnote: a fuller and complete presentation of these arguments for the existence of god may be found in the works of dr. augustus h. strong and dr. francis l. patten, to whom the author is here indebted.] these arguments may not prove conclusively that god is, but they do show that in order to the existence of any knowledge, thought, reason, conscience in man, we must assume that god is (strong). it is said of the beautiful, "it may be shown, but not proved." so we say of the existence of god. these arguments are probable, not demonstrative. for this reason they supplement each other, and constitute a series of evidences which is cumulative in its nature. though taken singly, none of them can be considered absolutely decisive, they together furnish a corroboration of our primitive conviction of god's existence, which is of great practical value, and is in itself sufficient to bind the moral actions of men. a bundle of rods may not be broken even though each one separately may; the strength of the bundle is the strength of the whole. if in practical affairs we were to hesitate to act until we have absolute and demonstrable certainty, we should never begin to move at all. instead of doubting everything that can be doubted, let us rather doubt nothing until we are compelled to doubt. dr. orr, of glasgow, says: what we mean by the proof of god's existence is simply that there are necessary acts of thought by which we rise from the finite to the infinite, from the caused to the uncaused, from the contingent to the necessary, from the reason involved in the structure of the universe to a universal and eternal reason, which is the ground of all, from morality in conscience to a moral lawgiver and judge. in this connection the theoretical proofs constitute an inseparable unity--'constitute together,' as dr. stirling declares, "but the undulations of a single wave, which wave is but a natural rise and ascent to god, on the part of man's own thought, with man's own experience and consciousness as the object before him." religion was not produced by proofs of god's existence, and will not be destroyed by its insufficiency to some minds. religion existed before argument; in fact, it is the preciousness of religion that leads to the seeking for all possible confirmations of the reality of god. a) universality of belief in the existence of god. ( ) the fact stated and proven: man everywhere believes in the existence of a supreme being or beings to whom he is morally responsible and to whom propitiation needs to be made. such belief may be crudely, even grotesquely stated and manifested, but the reality of the fact is no more invalidated by such crudeness than the existence of a father is invalidated by the crude attempts of a child to draw a picture of its father. it has been claimed by some that there are or were tribes in inland africa that possessed no idea or conception of god. moffat, livingstone's father-in-law, made such a claim, but livingstone, after a thorough study of the customs and languages of such tribes, conclusively showed that moffat was wrong. nor should the existence of such few tribes, even if granted, violate the fact we are here considering, any more than the existence of some few men who are blind, lame, deaf, and dumb would make untrue the statement and fact that man is a seeing, hearing, speaking, and walking creature. the fact that some nations do not have the multiplication table does no violence to arithmetic. concerning so-called atheists in christian lands: it may be questioned if there are really any such beings. hume, known as a famous sceptic, is reported to have said to ferguson, as together they looked up into the starry sky: "adam, there is a god." voltaire, the atheist, prayed to god in a thunderstorm. ingersoll, when charged with being an atheist, indignantly refuted the charge, saying: "i am not an atheist; i do not say that there is no god; i am an agnostic; i do not know that there is a god." "i thank god that i am an atheist," were the opening words of an argument to disprove the existence of god. a new convert to atheism was once heard to say to a coterie of unbelievers: "i have gotten rid of the idea of a supreme being, and i thank god for it." ( ) whence comes this universal belief in the existence of god? aa) _not from outside sources_, such as reason, tradition, or even the scriptures. _not from reason or argument_, for many who believe in god have not given any time to reasoning and arguing the question; some, indeed, intellectually, could not. others who have great powers of intellect, and who have reasoned and argued on the subject are professed disbelievers in god. belief in god is not the result of logical arguments, else the bible would have given us proofs. _nor did this universal belief come from tradition_, for "tradition," says dr. patton, "can perpetuate only what has been originated." _nor can it be said that this belief came from the scriptures even_, for, as has been well said, unless a man had a knowledge of the god from whom the scriptures came, the revelation itself could have no authority for him. the very idea of scripture as a revelation, presupposes belief in a god who can make it.--_newman smith_. revelation must assume the existence of god. bb) _this universal belief comes from within man._ all the evidence points to the conclusive fact that this universal faith in the existence of god is innate in man, and comes from rational intuition. ( ) the weight and force of this argument. the fact that all men everywhere believe in the existence of a supreme being or beings to whom they are morally responsible, is a strong argument in favor of its truth. so universal an effect must have a cause as universal, otherwise we have an effect without any assignable cause. certain is it that this argument makes the burden of proof to rest upon those who deny the existence of god. b) the argument from cause: cosmological. when we see a thing we naturally ask for the cause of that thing. we see this world in which we live, and ask how it came to be. is it self-originating, or is the cause of its being outside of itself? is its cause finite or infinite? that it could not come into being of itself seems obvious; no more than nails, brick, mortar, wood, paints, colors, form into a house or building of themselves; no more than the type composing a book came into order of itself. when liebig was asked if he believed that the grass and flowers which he saw around him grew by mere chemical forces, he replied: "no; no more than i could believe that the books on botany describing them could grow by mere chemical forces." no theory of an "eternal series" can account for this created universe. no matter how long a chain you may have, you must have a staple somewhere from which it depends. an endless perpendicular chain is an impossibility. "every house is builded by some man," says the bible; so this world in which we live was built by a designing mind of infinite power and wisdom. so is it when we consider man. man exists; but he owes his existence to some cause. is this cause within or without himself, finite or infinite? trace our origin back, if you will, to our first parent, adam; then you must ask, how did he come into being? the doctrine of the eternity of man cannot be supported. fossil remains extend back but , years. man is an effect; he has not always existed. geology proves this. that the first cause must have been an intelligent being is proven by the fact that we are intelligent beings ourselves. c) the argument from design: teleological. a watch proves not only a maker, an artificer, but also a designer; a watch is made for a purpose. this is evident in its structure. a thoughtful, designing mind was back of the watch. so is it with the world in which we live. these "ends" in nature are not to he attributed to "natural results," or "natural selection," results which are produced without intelligence, nor are they "the survival of the fittest," instances in which "accident and fortuity have done the work of mind." no, they are the results of a superintending and originating intelligence and will. d) the argument from being: ontological. man has an idea of an infinite and perfect being. from whence this idea? from finite and imperfect beings like ourselves? certainly not. therefore this idea argues for the existence of an infinite and perfect being: such a being must exist, as a person, and not a mere thought. e) the moral argument; anthropological. man has an intellectual and a moral nature, hence his creator must be an intellectual and moral being, a judge, and lawgiver. man has an emotional nature; only a being of goodness, power, love, wisdom and holiness could satisfy such a nature, and these things denote the existence of a personal god. conscience in man says: "thou shalt," and "thou shalt not," "i ought," and "i ought not." these mandates are not self-imposed. they imply the existence of a moral governor to whom we are responsible. conscience,--there it is in the breast of man, an ideal moses thundering from an invisible sinai the law of a holy judge. said cardinal newman: "were it not for the voice speaking so clearly in my conscience and my heart, i should be an atheist, or a pantheist, when i looked into the world." some things are wrong, others right: love is right, hatred is wrong. nor is a thing right because it pleases, or wrong because it displeases. where did we get this standard of right and wrong? morality is obligatory, not optional. who made is obligatory? who has a right to command my life? we must believe that there is a god, or believe that the very root of our nature is a lie. f) the argument from congruity. if we have a key which fits all the wards of the lock, we know that it is the right key. if we have a theory which fits all the facts in the case, we know then that we have the right theory. "belief in a self-existent, personal god is in harmony with all the facts of our mental and moral nature, as well as with all the phenomena of the natural world. if god exists, a universal belief in his existence is natural enough; the irresistible impulse to ask for a first cause is accounted for; or religious nature has an object; the uniformity of natural law finds an adequate explanation, and human history is vindlcated from the charge of being a vast imposture. atheism leaves all these matters without an explanation, and makes, not history alone, but our moral and intellectual nature itself, an imposture and a lie."--_patton_. g) the argument from scripture. a great deal of our knowledge rests upon the testimony of others. now the bible is competent testimony. if the testimony of travelers is enough to satisfy us as to the habits, customs, and manners of the peoples of the countries they visit, and which we have never seen, why is not the bible, if it is authentic history, be enough to satisfy us with its evidence as to the existence of god? some facts need more evidence than others, we know. this is true of the fact of the existence of god. but the bible history is sufficient to satisfy every reasonable demand. the history of the jews, prophecy, is not explainable minus god. if we cannot believe in the existence of god on the testimony of the bible we might as well burn our books of history. a man cannot deny the truth of the testimony of the bible unless he says plainly: "no amount of testimony will convince me of the supernatural." scripture does not attempt to prove the existence of god; it asserts, assumes, and declares that the knowledge of god is universal, rom. : - , , ; : . it asserts that god has wrought this great truth in the very warp and woof of every man's being, so that nowhere is he without this witness. the preacher may, therefore, safely follow the example of the scripture in assuming that there is a god. indeed he must unhesitatingly and explicitly assert it as the scripture does, believing that "his eternal power and divinity" are things that are clearly seen and perceived through the evidences of his handiwork which abound on every hand. ii. the nature of god: (vs. agnosticism). . the spirituality of god: (vs. materialism). "god is spirit." a) statement of the fact, john : : "god is spirit." meaning: the samaritan woman's question, "where is god to be found?" etc. on mt. zion or gerizim? christ's answer: god is not to be confined to any one place (cf. acts : ; : , kings : ). god must be worshipped _in spirit_ as distinguished from place, form, or other sensual limitations ( : ); and _in truth_ as distinguished from false conceptions resulting from imperfect knowledge ( : ). b) light on "god is spirit," from other scriptures. luke : : "a spirit hath not flesh and bones," i. e., has not body, or parts like human beings; incorporeal; not subject to human limitations. col. : : "the image of the invisible god." tim. : (r. v.): "now unto the king incorruptible, invisible." these passages teach that god has nothing of a material or bodily nature. sight sees only objects of the material world, but god is not of the nature of the material world, hence he cannot be seen with the material eye--at least not now. c) light derived from cautions against representing god by graven images: deut. : - ; isa. : ; exod. : . study these passages carefully and note that the reason why images were forbidden was because no one had ever seen god, and consequently could not picture how he looked, and, further, there was nothing on the earth that could resemble him. d) definition of "god is spirit" in the light of all this: god is invisible, incorporeal, without parts, without body, without passions, and therefore free from all limitations; he is apprehended not by the senses, but by the soul; hence god is above sensuous perceptions. cor. : - intimates that without the teaching of god's spirit we cannot know god. he is not a material being. "laplace swept the heavens with his telescope, but could not find anywhere a god. he might just as well have swept a kitchen with his broom." since god is not a material being, he cannot be apprehended by physical means. e) questions and problems with reference to the statement that "god is spirit." ( ) 'what is meant by statement that man was made "in the image of god"? col : ; eph. : declare that this "image" consists in "righteousness, knowledge, and holiness of truth." by that is meant that the image of god in man consisted in intellectual and moral likeness rather than physical resemblance. some think that thess. : indicates that the "trinity of man"--body, soul, and spirit--constitutes that image and likeness. ( ) what is meant by the anthropomorphic expressions used of god? for example: god is said to have hands, feet, arms, eyes, ears he sees, feels, hears, walks, etc. such expressions are to be understood only in the sense of being human expressions used in order to bring the infinite within the comprehension of the finite. how otherwise could we understand god saving by means of human expressions, in figures that we all can understand! ( ) how are such passages as exod. : and : - in which it is distinctly stated that men saw the god of israel, to be reconciled with such passages as john : ; "no man hath seen god at any time," and exod. : : "there shall no man see me and live"? answer: _aa) spirit can be manifested in visible form:_ john : : "i saw tho spirit descending from heaven like a dove (or in the form of a dove)." so throughout the ages the invisible god has manifested himself in visible form. (see judges : : the spirit of the lord clothed himself with gideon.) _bb) on this truth is based the doctrine of "the angel of the lord"_ in the old testament: gen : , , . note here how the angel of the lord is identified with jehovah himself, cf. vv. , . also gen. : --"the angel of the lord.... not withheld from _me_." in : - , one of the three angels clearly and definitely identifies himself with jehovah. compare chapter , where it is seen that only two of the angels have come to sodom; the other has remained behind. "who was this one, this remaining angel? gen. : , answers the question; v. reads: "and abraham stood yet before the lord. in exod. : it is _jehovah_, while in : it is the angel that went before israel. thus was the way prepared for the incarnation, for the angel of the lord in the old testament is undoubtedly the second person of the trinity. this seems evident from judges : compared with isa. : , in both of which passages, clearly referring to christ, the name "wonderful" occurs. also the omission of the definite article "the" from before the expression "the angel of the lord," and the substitution of "an" points to the same truth. this change is made in the revised version. cc) _what was it then that the elders of israel saw when it is said they saw the "god of israel"?_ certainly it was not god in his real essence, god as he is in himself, for no man can have that vision and live. john : is clear on that point: "no man hath seen god at any time." the emphasis in this verse is on the word "god," and may read, "god no one has seen at any time." in : jesus says: "ye have neither heard his voice at any time, nor seen his shape." from this it seems clear that the "seeing" here, the which has been the privilege of no man, refers to the essence rather than to the person of god, if such a distinction can really be made. this is apparent also from the omission of the definite article before god, as well as from the position of god in the sentence. none but the son has really seen god as god, as he really is. what, then, did these men see? evidently an _appearance_ of god in some form to their outward senses; perhaps the form of a man, seeing mention is made of his "feet." the vision may have been too bright for human eyes to gaze upon fully, but it was _a_ vision of god. yet it was only a manifestation of god, for, although moses was conversing with god, he yet said: "if i have found grace in thy sight, show me thy face." moses had been granted exceeding great and precious privileges in that he had been admitted into close communion with god, more so than any other member of the human race. but still unsatisfied he longed for more; so in v. he asks to see the unveiled glory of god, that very thing which no man in the flesh can ever see and live; but, no, this cannot be. by referring to exod. : - we find god's answer: "thou canst not see my face.... thou shalt see my back parts, but my face shall not be seen." (num. : throws light upon the subject, if compared with exod. : .) "the secret remained unseen; the longing unsatisfied; and the nearest approach to the beatific vision reached by him with whom god spake face to face, as friend with friend, was to be hidden in the cleft of the rock, to be made aware of an awful shadow, and to hear the voice of the unseen." . the personality of god: (vs. pantheism). pantheism maintains that this universe in its ever changing conditions is but the manifestation of the one ever changing universal substance which is god; thus all, everything is god, and god is everything; god is all, all is god. thus god is identified with nature and not held to be independent of and separate from it. god is, therefore, a necessary but an unconscious force working in the world. the bearing of the personality of god on the idea of religion. true religion may be defined as the communion between two persons: god and man. religion is a personal relationship between god in heaven, and man on the earth. if god were not a person there could be no communion; if both god and man were one there could be no communion, and, consequently, no religion. an independent personal relationship on both sides is absolutely necessary to communion. man can have no communion with an influence, a force, an impersonal something; nor can an influence have any moving or affection towards man. it is absolutely necessary to the true definition of religion that both god and man be persons. god is person, not force or influence. a) definition of personality. personality exists where there is intelligence, mind, will, reason, individuality, self-consciousness, and self-determination. there must be not mere consciousness--for the beast has that--but _self_-consciousness. nor is personality determination--for the beast has this, too, even though this determination be the result of influences from without--but _self_-determination, the power by which man from an act of his own free will determines his acts from within. neither corporeity nor substance, as we understand these words, are necessarily, if at all, involved in personality. there may be true personality without either or both of these. b) scripture teaching on the personality of god. (in this connection it will be well to refer to the ontological argument for the existence of god, for which see p. .) ( ) exod : ;--"i am that i am." this name is wonderfully significant. its central idea is that of existence and personality. the words signify "i am, i was, i shall be," so suggestively corresponding with the new testament statement concerning god: "who wast, and art, and art to come." all the names given to god in the scripture denote personality. here are some of them: jehovah--jireh: the lord will provide (gen. : , ). jehovah-rapha: the lord that healeth (exod. : ). jehovah-nissi: the lord our banner (exod. : - ). jehovah-shalom: the lord our peace (judges : ). jehovah-ra-ah: the lord my shepherd (psa. : ). jehovah-tsidkenu: the lord our righteousness (jer. : ). jehovah-shammah: the lord is present (ezek. : ). moreover, the personal pronouns ascribed to god prove personality: john : , et al. "to know thee"--we cannot know an influence in the sense in which the word know is here used. _statement:_ all through the scriptures names and personal pronouns are ascribed to god which undeniably prove that god is a person. ( ) a sharp distinction is drawn in the scriptures between the gods of heathen and the lord god of israel (see jer. : - ). note the context: vv. - : idols are things, not persons; they cannot walk, speak, do good or evil. god is wiser than the men who made these idols; if the idol-makers are persons, much more is god. see the sharp contrast drawn between dead idols and the living, personal, true and only god: acts : ; thess. : ; psa. : , . _statement:_ god is to be clearly distinguished from things which have no life; he is a living person. ( ) attributes of personality are ascribed to god in the scriptures. god repents (gen. : }; grieves {gen : }; is angry { kings : ); is jealous (deut. : ); loves (rev. : ); hates (prov. : ). _statement_: god possesses the attributes of personality, and therefore is a person. ( ) the relation which god bears to the universe and to men, as set forth in the scriptures, can be explained only on the basis that god is a person. deism maintains that god, while the creator of the world, yet sustains no further relations to it. he made it just as the clock-maker makes a self-winding clock: makes it and then leaves it to run itself without any interference on his part. such teaching as this finds no sanction in the bible. what are god's relations to the universe and to men? _aa) he is the creator of the universe and man._ gen. : , ; john. : - . these verses contain vital truths. the universe did not exist from eternity, nor was it made from existing matter. it did not proceed as an emanation from the infinite, but was summoned into being by the decree of god. science, by disclosing to us the marvellous power and accuracy of natural law, compels us to believe in a superintending intelligence who is infinite. tyndall said: "i have noticed that it is not during the hours of my clearness and vigor that the doctrine of material atheism commends itself to my mind." (in this connection the arguments from cause and design, pp. and , may be properly considered.) _statement_: the creation of the universe and man proves the personality of the creator--god. _bb) god sustains certain relations to the universe and man which he has made._ heb : --"uphold all things." col. : - --"by him all things hold together." psa. : - --all creatures wait upon him for "their meat in due season." psa. : , --"promotion" among men, the putting down of one man and the setting up of another, is from the hand of god. what do we learn from these scriptures regarding the relation of god to this universe, to man, and to all god's creatures? _first_. that all things are held together by him; if not, this old world would go to pieces quickly. the uniformity and accuracy of natural law compels us to believe in a personal god who intelligently guides and governs the universe. disbelief in this fact would mean utter confusion. not blind chance, but a personal god is at the helm. _second._ that the physical supplies for all god's creatures are in his hand: he feeds them all. what god gives we gather. if he withholds provision we die. _third._ that god has his hand in history, guiding and shaping the affairs of nations. victor hugo said: "waterloo was god." _fourth._ consider with what detail god's care is described: the sparrows, the lilies, the hairs of the head, the tears of his children, etc. see how these facts are clearly portrayed in the following scriptures: matt. : - ; : , ; gen. : , with : ; dan. : ; job : . _statement:_ the personality of god is shown by his active, interest and participation all things, even the smallest things, in the universe, the experience of man, and in the life of all his creatures. the unity of god: (vs. polytheism). there are three monotheistic religions in the world: judaism, christianity, and mahommedanism. the second is a development of the first; the third is an outgrowth of both. the doctrine of the unity of god is held in contradistinction to _polytheism_, which is belief in a multiplicity of gods; _tri-theism_, which teaches that there are three gods--that is, that the father, the son, and the holy ghost are, specifically, three distinct gods; and to _dualism_, which teaches that there are two independent divine beings or eternal principles, the one good, and the other evil, as set forth especially in gnostic systems, such as parseeism. a) the scriptures assert the unity of god. deut. : --"hear, o israel; the lord our god is one lord"; or, "the lord our god, the lord is one." isa. : - --"first.... last.... beside me there is no god." isa. : --"there is none else, there is no god beside me." tim. : "there is one god." cor. : --"there is none other god but one." that god is one, that there is no other, that he has no equal is the forceful testimony of above fifty passages in the scriptures. the fundamental duty of life, namely, the devotion of the entire being to the lord, is based upon the unity of god: "the lord....is one .... therefore thou shalt love the lord thy god with _all_ thy heart," etc. no other truth of the scripture, particularly of the old testament, receives more prominence than that of the unity of god. this truth is clearly pronounced also in the material universe; it is the introduction and conclusion of all scientific researches. any other representation contradicts both creation and revelation. its denial is a proper object for the ridicule of every thinking man, and of the disbelief of every orthodox christian. let this, then, be our first and necessary conclusion--that deity, whether creating, inspiring, or otherwise manifesting itself, is one god; one, and no more.--_cerdo._ a multiplication of gods is a contradiction; there can be but one god. there can be but one absolutely perfect, supreme, and almighty being. such a being cannot be multiplied, nor pluralized. there can be but one ultimate, but one all-inclusive, but one god. monotheism, then, not tri-theism, is the doctrine set forth in the scriptures. "if the thought that wishes to be orthodox had less tendency to become tri-theistic, the thought that claims to be free would be less unitarian."--_moberly._ b) the nature of the divine unity. the doctrine of the unity of god does not exclude the idea of a plurality of persons in the godhead. not that there are three persons in each person of the godhead, if we use in both cases the term _person_ in one and the same sense. we believe, therefore, that there are three persons in the godhead, but one god. anti-trinitarians represent the evangelical church as believing in three gods, but this is not true; it believes in one god, but three persons in the godhead. ( ) the scriptural use of the word "one." gen. : --"and they two (husband and wife) shall be one flesh." gen. : --"the people is one." i cor. : - --"he that planteth and he that watereth are one." : --"all baptized into one body." john : , --"that they may be one, even as we are one ... that they may be made perfect in one." the word "one" in these scriptures is used in a collective sense; the unity here spoken of is a compound one, like unto that used in such expressions as "a cluster of grapes," or "all the people rose as one man." the unity of the godhead is not simple but compound. the hebrew word for "one" (yacheed) in the absolute sense, and which is used in such expressions as "the only one," is _never_ used to express the unity of the godhead. on the contrary, the hebrew word "echad," meaning "one" in the sense of a compound unity, as seen in the above quoted scriptures, is the one used always to describe the divine unity. ( ) the divine name "god" is a plural word; plural pronouns are used of god. the hebrew word for god (elohim) is used most frequently in the plural form. god often uses plural pronouns in speaking of himself, e. g., gen. : --"let _us_ make man." isa. : -"who will go for _us_?" gen. : --behold, man is become as "one of _us_." some would say that the "us" in gen. : --"let us make man," refers to god's consultation with the angels with whom he takes counsel before he does anything of importance; but isa. : --"but of whom took he counsel," shows that such is not the case; and gen. : contradicts this idea, for it repeats the statement "in the image of god," not in the image of angels; also that "god created man in his own image, in the image of god (not angels) created he him." the "us" of gen. : , therefore, is properly understood of plural majesty, as indicating the dignity and majesty of the speaker. the proper translation of this verse should be not "let us make," but "we will make," indicating the language of resolve rather than that of consultation. . the doctrine of the trinity: (vs. unitarianism). the doctrine of the trinity is, in its last analysis, a deep mystery that cannot be fathomed by the finite mind. that it is taught in the scripture, however, there can be no reasonable doubt. it is a doctrine to be believed even though it cannot be thoroughly understood. a) the doctrine of the trinity in the old testament. this doctrine is not so much declared as intimated in the old testament. the burden of the old testament message seems to be the unity of god. yet the doctrine of the trinity is clearly intimated in a four-fold way: first: in the plural names of the deity; e. g., elohim. second: personal pronouns used of the deity. gen. : ; : ; isa. : . third: the theophanies, especially the "angel of the lord." gen. and . fourth: the work of the holy spirit. gen. : ; judges : . b) the doctrine of the trinity in the new testament. the doctrine of the trinity is clearly taught in the new testament; it is not merely intimated, as in the old testament, but explicitly declared. this is evident from the following: first: the baptism of christ: matt : , . here the father speaks from heaven; the son is being baptized in the jordan; and the spirit descends in the form of a dove. second: in the baptismal formula: matt. : --"baptizing them in the name (sing.) of the father, and of the son, and of the holy ghost." third: the apostolic benediction: cor. : --"the grace of our lord jesus christ....love of god.....communion of the holy ghost." fourth: christ himself teaches it in john : --"_i_ will pray the _father_... he will give you another _comforter_." fifth: the new testaffignt sets forth: a father who is god, rom. : . a son who is god, heb. : . a holy spirit who is god, acts : , . the whole is summed up in the words of boardman: the father is all the fulness of the godhead invisible, john : ; the son is all the fulness of godhead manifested, john : - ; the spirit is all the fulness of the godhead acting immediately upon the creature, cor. : , . iii. the attributes of god: it is difficult to clearly distinguish between the attributes and the nature of god. it is maintained by some that such a division ought not to be made; that these qualities of god which we call attributes are in reality part of his nature and essence. whether this be exactly so or not, our purpose in speaking of the attributes of god is for convenience in the study of the doctrine of god. it has been customary to divide the attributes of god into two classes: the natural, and the moral. the natural attributes are omniscience, omnipotence, omnipresence, eternity; the moral attributes: holiness, righteousness, faithfulness, mercy and loving-kindness, and love. . the natural attributes: a) the omniscience of god. god is a spirit, and as such has knowledge. he is a perfect spirit, and as such has perfect knowledge. by omniscience is meant that god knows all things and is absolutely perfect in knowledge. ( ) scriptures setting forth the fact of god's omniscience. _in general:_ job : , --"canst thou by searching find out god? canst thou find out the almighty unto perfection?" job's friends professed to have discovered the reason for his affliction, for, forsooth, had they not found out the secrets of the divine wisdom unto perfection. no, such is beyond their human, finite ken. isa. : --"there is no searching of his understanding." jacob's captive condition might lead him to lose trust and faith in god. but jacob has not seen all god's plans--no man has. job, : --"the wondrous works of him which is perfect in knowledge." could job explain the wonders of the natural phenomena around him? much less the purposes and judgments of god. psa. : --"his understanding is infinite." of his understanding there is no number, no computation. israel is not lost sight of. he who can number and name and call the stars is able also to call each of them by name even out of their captivity. his knowledge is not to be measured by ours. john : --"god knoweth all things." our hearts may pass over certain things, and fail to see some things that should be confessed. god, however, sees all things. rom. : --"how unsearchable are his judgments and his ways past finding out." the mysterious purposes and decrees of god touching man and his salvation are beyond all human comprehension. _in detail, and by way of illustration:_ _aa) his knowledge is absolutely comprehensive:_ prov. : --"the eyes of the lord are in every place, keeping watch upon the evil and the good." how could he reward and punish otherwise? not one single thing occurring in any place escapes his knowledge. : --"for the ways of man are before the eyes of the lord, and he pondereth all his goings." we may have habits hidden from our fellow creatures, but not from god. _ bb) god has a perfect knowledge of all that is in nature:_ psa. : --"he telleth the number of the stars; he calleth them all by their names." man cannot (gen. : ). how, then, can israel say, "my way is hid from the lord?" cf. isa. : , . matt. : --"one ... sparrow shall not fall to the ground without your father." much less would one of his children who perchance might be killed for his name's sake, fall without his knowledge. _cc) god has a perfect knowledge of all that transpires in human experience:_ prov. : --"for the ways of man are before the eyes of the lord, and he pondereth all his goings." all a man's doings are weighed by god. how this should affect his conduct! psa. : , --"thou knowest my downsitting and mine uprising, thou understandest my thought afar off. thou compassest my path and my lying down, and art acquainted with all my ways." before our thoughts are fully developed, our unspoken sentences, the rising feeling in our hearts, our activity, our resting, all that we do from day to day is known and sifted by god. v. --"there is not a word in my tongue, but lo, o lord, thou knowest it altogether." not only thoughts and purposes, but words spoken, idle, good, or bad. exod. : --"i have seen the affliction....heard the cry: know the sorrows of my people which are in egypt." the tears and grief which they dared not show to their taskmasters, god saw and noted. did god know of their trouble in egypt? it seemed to them as though he did not. but he did. matt. : , --"but the very hairs of your head are all numbered." what minute knowledge is this! exod : --"and i am sure that the king of egypt will not let you go, no, not by a mighty hand." here is intimate knowledge as to what a single individual will do. isa. : --"o that thou hadst harkened to my commandments! then had thy peace have been as a river," etc. god knows what our lives would have been if only we had acted and decided differently. _dd) god has a perfect knowledge of all that transpires in human history._ with what precision are national changes and destinies foretold and depicted in dan. and ! acts : --"known unto god are all his works from the beginning of the world (ages)." in the context surrounding this verse are clearly set forth the religious changes that were to characterize the generations to come, the which have been so far literally, though not fully, fulfilled. _ee) god knows--from, all eternity to all eternity what will take place._ the ominiscience of god is abduced as the proof that he alone is god, especially as contrasted with the gods (idols) of the heathen: isa. : - --"i have even from the beinning declared it unto thee; before it came to pass i showed it thee.....i have showed thee new things from this time, even hidden things," etc. : , --"i am god....declaring the end from the beginning, and from ancient times the things that are not yet done, saying, my counsel shall stand, and i will do all my pleasure." here god is announcing to his prophets things that are to occur in the future which it is impossible for the human understanding to know or reach. there is no past, present, future with god. everything is one great living present. we are like a man standing by a river in a low place, and who, consequently, can see that part of the river only that passes by him; but he who is aloof in the air may see the whole course of the river, how it rises, and how it runs. thus is it with god. ( ) certain problems in connection with the doctrine of the omniscienc of god. how the divine intelligence can comprehend so vast and multitudinous and exhaustless a number of things must forever surpass our comprehension. "o the depth of the riches both of the wisdom and knowledge of god! how unsearchable are his judgments, and his ways past finding out!" (rom. : ). "there is no searching of his understanding; it is beyond human computation." we must expect, therefore, to stand amazed in the presence of such matchless wisdom, and find problems in connection therewith which must for the time, at least, remain unsolved. again, we must not confound the foreknowledge of god with his foreordination. the two things are, in a sense, distinct. the fact that god foreknows a thing makes that thing certain but not necessary. his foreordination is based upon his foreknowledge. pharaoh was responsible for the hardening of his heart even though that hardening process was foreknown and foretold by god. the actions of men are considered certain but not necessary by reason of the divine foreknowledge. b) the omnipotence of god. the omnipotence of god is that attribute by which he can bring to pass everything which he wills. god's power admits of no bounds or limitations. god's declaration of his intention is the pledge of the thing intended being carried out. "hath he said, and shall he not do it?" ( ) scriptural declarations of the fact; in general: job : .(r. v.)--"i know that thou canst do everything (all things), and that no purpose of thine can be restrained." the mighty review of all god's works as it passes before job (context) brings forth this confession: "there is no resisting thy might, and there is no purpose thou canst not carry out." gen. : --"is anything too hard for the lord?" what had ceased to be possible by natural means comes to pass by supernatural means. ( ) scriptural declaration of the fact; in detail: _aa) in the world of nature:_ gen. : - --"god created the heaven and the earth. and god said, let there be light, and there was light." thus "he spake and it was done. he commanded and it stood fast." he does not need even to give his hand to the work; his word is sufficient. psa. : - --"he raiseth the stormy wind ... he maketh the storm calm." "even the winds and the sea obey him." god's slightest word, once uttered, is a standing law to which all nature must absolutely conform. nahum : , --"the mountains quake at him ... the hills melt ... the earth is burned at his presence ... the rocks are thrown down by him." if such is his power how shall assyria withstand it? this is god's comforting message to israel. everything in the sky, in sea, on earth is absolutely subject to his control. _bb) in the experience of mankind:_ how wonderfully this is illustrated in the experience of nebuchadnezzar, dan. ; and in the conversion of saul, acts ; as well as in the case of pharaoh, exod. : . james : - --" ... for that ye ought to say, if the lord will, we shall live and do this or that." all human actions, whether present or future, are dependent upon the will and power of god. these things are in god's, not in man's, power. see also the parable of the rich fool, luke : - . _cc) the heavenly inhabitants are subject to his will and word:_ dan. : (r. v.)--"he doeth according to his will in the army of heaven." heb. : --"are they (angels) not all ministering spirits, sent forth to minister for them who shall be heirs of salvation?" it has been said that angels are beings created by the power of god for some specific act of service, and that after that act of service is rendered they pass out of existence. _dd) even satan is under the control of god_ satan has no power over any of god's children saving as god permits him to have. this fact is clearly established in the case of job ( : and : ). and peter (luke : , ), in which we are told that satan had petitioned god that he might sift the self-righteous patriarch and the impulsive apostle. finally satan is to be forever bound with a great chain (rev. : ). god can set a bar to the malignity of satan just as he can set a bar to the waves of the sea. c) the omnipresence of god. by the omnipresence of god is meant that god is everywhere present. this attribute is closely connected with the omniscience and omnipotence of god, for if god is everywhere present he is everywhere active and possesses full knowledge of all that transpires in every place. this does not mean that god is everywhere present in a bodily sense, nor even in the same sense; for there is a sense in which he may be in heaven, his dwelling place, in which he cannot be said to be elsewhere. we must guard against the pantheistic idea which claims that god _is_ everything, while maintaining the scriptural doctrine that he is everywhere present in all things. pantheism emphasizes the omnipresent activity of god, but denies his personality. those holding the doctrine of pantheism make loud claims to philosophic ability and high intellectual training, but is it not remarkable that it is in connection with this very phase of the doctrine of god that the apostle paul says "they became fools"? (rom. .) god is everywhere and in every place; his center is everywhere; his circumference nowhere. but this presence is a spiritual and not a material presence; yet it is a real presence. ( ) scriptural statement of the fact. jer. : , -"am i a god at hand, saith the lord, and not a god afar off? can any hide himself in secret places that i shall not see him? saith the lord. do not i fill heaven and earth? saith the lord." did the false prophets think that they could hide their secret crimes from god? or that he could not pursue them into foreign countries? or that he knew what was transpiring in heaven only and not upon the earth, and even in its most distant corners? it was false for them to thus delude themselves--their sins would be detected and punished (psa. : - ). psa. : - --"whither shall i go from thy spirit, or whither shall i flee from thy presence," etc. how wondrously the attributes of god are grouped in this psalm. in vv. - the psalmist speaks of the omniscience of god: god knows him through and through. in vv. - it is the omnipotence of god which overwhelms the psalmist. the omnipresence of god is set forth in vv. - . the psalmist realizes that he is never out of the sight of god any more than he is outside of the range of his knowledge and power. god is in heaven; "hell is naked before him"; souls in the intermediate state are fully known to him (cf. job : ; jonah : ); the darkness is as the light to him. job : - --"is not god in the height of heaven? . . . . can he judge through the dark cloud? thick clouds are a covering to him that he seeth not," etc. all agreed that god displayed his presence in the heaven, but job had inferred from this that god could not know and did not take notice of such actions of men as were hidden behind the intervening clouds. not that job was atheistic; no, but probably denied to god the attribute of omnipresence and omniscience. acts : - --"for in him we live, and move, and have our being." without his upholding hand we must perish; god is our nearest environment. from these and many other scriptures we are clearly taught that god is everywhere present and acting; there is no place where god is not. this does not mean that god is everywhere present in the same sense. for we are told that he is in heaven, his dwelling-place ( kings : ); that christ is at his right hand in heaven (eph. : ); that god's throne is in heaven (rev. : ; isa. : ). we may summarize the doctrine of the trinity thus: god the father is specially manifested in heaven; god the son has been specially manifested on the earth; god the spirit is manifested everywhere. just as the soul is present in every part of the body so god is present in every part of the world. ( ) some practical inferences from this doctrine. first, _of comfort:_ the nearness of god to the believer. "speak to him then for he listens. and spirit with spirit can meet; closer is he than breathing, and nearer than hands or feet." "god is never so far off, as even to be near; he is within. our spirit is the home he holds most dear. to think of him as by our side is almost as untrue, as to remove his shrine beyond those skies of starry blue."--_faber._ the omnipresence is not only a detective truth--it is protective also. after dwelling on this great and awful attribute in psalm , the psalmist, in vv. , , exclaims: "how precious are thy thoughts to me..... when i awake i am still with thee." by this is meant that god stands by our side to help, and as one who loves and understands us (matt. : ). second, _of warning:_ "as in the roman empire the whole world was one great prison to a malefactor, and in his flight to the most distant lands the emperor could track him, so under the government of god no sinner can escape the eye of the judge." thus the omnipresence of god is detective as well as protective. "thou god seest me," should serve as warning to keep us from sin. d) the eternity and immutability of god. the word _eternal_ is used in two senses in the bible: figuratively, as denoting existence which may have a beginning, but will have no end, e. g., angels, the human soul; literally, denoting an existence which has neither beginning nor ending, like that of god. time has past, present, future; eternity has not. eternity is infinite duration without any beginning, end, or limit--an ever abiding present. we can conceive of it only as duration indefinitely extended from the present moment in two directions--as to the past and as to the future. "one of the deaf and dumb pupils in the institution of paris, being desired to express his idea of the eternity of the deity, replied: 'it is duration, without beginning or end; existence, without bounds or dimension; present, without past or future. his eternity is youth, without infancy or old age; life, without birth or death; today, without yesterday or tomorrow.'" by the immutability of god is meant that god's nature is absolute|y unchangeable. it is not possible that he should possess one attribute at one time that he does not possess at another. nor can there be any change in the deity for better or for worse. god remains forever the same. he is without beginning and without end; the self-existent "i am"; he remains forever the same, and unchangeable. ( ) scriptural statement of the fact: the eternity of god hab. : --"art thou not from everlasting, o lord my god, mine holy one?" chaldea had threatened to annihilate israel. the prophet cannot believe it possible, for has not god _eternal_ purposes for israel? is he not holy? how, then, can evil triumph? psa. : --"before the mountains were brought forth, or ever thou hadst formed the earth and the world, even from everlasting to everlasting, thou art god." short and transitory is the life of man; with god it is otherwise. the perishable nature of man is here compared with the imperishable nature of god. psa. : - --"i said, o my god, take me not away in the midst of my days: thy years are throughout all generations. of old thou hast laid the foundations of the earth: and the heavens are the work of thy hands. they shall perish, but thou shalt endure; yea, all of them shall wax old like a garment; as a vesture shalt thou change them, and they shall be changed. but thou art the same, and thy years shall have no end." with the perishable nature of the whole material creation the psalmist contrasts the imperishable nature of god. exod. : --"and god said unto moses, i am that i am." the past, present and future lies in these words for the name of jehovah. rev. : --"i am alpha and omega, the beginning and the ending, saith the lord, which is, and which was, and which is to come, the almighty." ( ) scriptural statement of the immutability of god: mal : --" am the lord, i change not." man's hope lies in that fact, as the context here shows man had changed in his life and purpose toward god, and if god, like man, had changed, man would have been destroyed. james : --"the father of lights, with whom is no variableness, neither shadow of turning." there is no change--in the sense of the degree or intensity of light such as is manifested in the heavenly bodies. such lights are constantly varying and changing; not so with god. there is no inherent, indwelling, possible change in god. sam. : .--"and also the strength of israel will not lie nor repent: for he is not a man, that he should repent." from these scriptures we assert that god, in his nature and character, is absolutely without change. does god repent? what, then, shall we say with regard to such scriptures as jonah : and gen. : --"and god repented of the evil, that he said he would do unto them." "and it repented the lord that he had made man on the earth, and it grieved him at his heart." in reply we may say that god does not change, but threatens that men may change. "the repentent attitude in god does not involve any real change in the character and purposes of god. he ever hates the sin and ever pities and loves the sinner; that is so both before and after the sinner's repentance. divine repentance is therefore the same principle acting differently in altered circumstances. if the prospect of punishment answers the same purpose as that intended by the punishment itself, then there is no inconsistency in its remission, for punishment is not an end, it is only a means to goodness, to the reign of the law of righteousness." when god appears to be displeased with anything, or orders it differently from what we expected, we say, after the manner of men, that he repents. god's attitude towards the ninevites had not changed, but they had changed; and because they had changed from sin unto righteousness, god's attitude towards them and his intended dealings with them as sinners must of necessity change, while, of course, god's character had in no wise changed with respect to these people, although his dealings with them had. so that we may say that god's _character_ never changes, but his _dealings_ with men change as they change from ungodliness to godliness and from disobedience unto obedience. "god's immutability is not that of the stone, that has no internal experience, but rather that of the column of mercury that rises and falls with every change in the temperature of the surrounding atmosphere. when a man bicycling against the wind turns about and goes with the wind instead of going against it, the wind seems to change, although it is blowing just as it was before." --_strong_. . the moral attributes. a) the holiness of god. if there is any difference in importance in the attributes of god, that of his holiness seems to occupy the first place. it is, to say the least, the one attribute which god would have his people remember him by more than any other. in the visions of himself which god granted men in the scriptures the thing that stood out most prominent was the divine holiness. this is clearly seen by referring to the visions of moses, job, and isaiah. some thirty times does the prophet isaiah speak of jehovah as "the holy one," thus indicating what feature of those beatific visions had most impressed him. the holiness of god is the message of the entire old testament. to the prophets god was the absolutely holy one; the one with eyes too pure to behold evil; the one swift to punish iniquity. in taking a photograph, the part of the body which we desire most to see is not the hands or feet, but the face. so is it with our vision of god. he desires us to see not his hand and finger, denoting his power and skill, nor even his throne as indicating his majesty. it is his holiness by which he desires to be remembered as that is the attribute which most glorifies him. let us bear this fact in mind as we study this attribute of the divine nature. it is just this vision of god that we need today when the tendency to deny the reality or the awfulness of sin is so prevalent. our view of the necessity of the atonement will depend very largely upon our view of the holiness of god. light views of god and his holiness will produce light views of sin and the atonement. ( ) scriptural statements setting forth the fact of god's holiness. isa. : --"thus saith the high and lofty one that inhabiteth eternity, whose name is holy; i dwell in the high and holy place." psa. : --"exalt the lord our god, and worship at his holy hill: for the lord our god is holy." hab. : --"thou art of purer eyes than to behold evil, and canst not look on iniquity." pet. : , --"but as he which hath called you is holy, so be ye holy in all manner of conversation. because it is written, be ye holy: for i am holy." god's personal name is holy. john : --"holy father, keep through thine own name those whom thou hast given me." christ here contemplates the father as the holy one, as the source and agent of that which he desires for his disciples, namely, holiness of heart and life, being kept from the evil of this world. is it not remarkable that this attribute of holiness is ascribed to each of the three persons of the trinity: god the father, is the holy one of israel (isa. : ); god the son is the holy one (acts : ); god the spirit is called the holy spirit (eph. : ). ( ) the scriptural meaning of holiness as applied to god. job : --"be it far from god, that he should do wickedness; and from the almighty that he should commit iniquity." an evil god, one that could commit evil would be a contradiction in terms, an impossible, inconceivable idea. job seemed to doubt that the principle on which the universe was conducted was one of absolute equity. he must know that god is free from all evil-doing. however hidden the meaning of his dealings, he is always just. god never did, never will do wrong to any of his creatures; he will never punish wrongly. men may, yea, often do; god never does. lev. : - --"ye shall not make yourselves abominable with any creeping thing that creepeth, neither shall ye make yourselves unclean with them, that ye should be defiled thereby. for i am the lord your god; ye shall therefore sanctify yourselves, and ye shall be holy; for i am holy: neither shall ye defile yourselves with any manner of creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth.... ye shall therefore be holy, for i am holy." this means that god is absolutely clean and pure and free from all defilement. the construction of the tabernacle, with its holy and most holy place into which the high priest alone entered once a year; the ten commandments, with their moral categories; the laws of clean and unclean animals and things--all these speak to us in unmistakable terms as to what is meant by holiness as applied to god. two things, by way of definition, may be inferred from these scriptures: first, negatively, that god is entirely apart from all that is evil and from all that defiles both in himself and in relation to all his creatures; second and positively, by the holiness of god is meant the consummate holiness, perfection, purity, and absolute sanctity of his nature. there is absolutely nothing unholy in him. so the apostle john declares: "god is light, and in him is no darkness at all." ( ) the manifestation of god's holiness. prov. : , --"the way of the wicked is an abomination unto the lord. the thoughts of the wicked are an abomination unto the lord." god hates sin, and is its uncompromising foe. sin is a vile and detestable thing to god. isa. : , --"behold, the lord's hand is not shortened, that it cannot save; neither his ear heavy, that it cannot hear. but your iniquities have separated between you and your god, and your sins have hid his face from you, that he will not hear." israel's sin had raised a partition wall. the infinite distance between the sinner and god is because of sin. the sinner and god are at opposite poles of the moral universe. this in answer to israel's charge of god's inability. from these two scriptures it is clear that god's holiness manifests itself in the hatred of sin and the separation of the sinner from himself. herein lies the need of the atonement, whereby this awful distance is bridged over. this is the lesson taught by the construction of the tabernacle as to the division into the holy place and the most holy place. prov. : --"but he loveth him that followeth after righteousness." john : --"for god so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten son," etc. here god's holiness is seen in that he loves righteousness in the life of his children to such a degree that he gave his only begotten son to secure it. the cross shows how much god loves holiness. the cross stands for god's holiness before even his love. for christ died not merely for our sins, but in order that he might provide us with that righteousness of life which god loves. "he died that we might be forgiven; he died to make us good." do we love holiness to the extent of sacrificing for it? for other manifestations see under righteousness and justice of god. ( ) practical deductions from the doctrine of god's holiness. first, we should approach god with "reverence and godly fear" (heb. : ). in the story of moses' approach to the burning bush, the smiting of the men at bethshemesh, the boundary set about mt. sinai, we are taught to feel our own unworthiness. there is too much hilarity in our approach unto god. eccl. : - inculcates great care in our address to god. second, we shall have right views of sin when we get right views of god's holiness. isaiah, the holiest man in all israel, was cast down at the sight of his own sin after he had seen the vision of god's holiness. the same thing is true of job ( : - ; : - ). we confess sin in such easy and familiar terms that it has almost lost its terror for us. third, that approach to a holy god must be through the merits of christ, and on the ground of a righteousness which is christ's and which naturally we do not possess. herein lies the need of the atonement. b) the righteousness and justice of god. in a certain sense these attributes are but the manifestation of god's holiness. it is holiness as manifested in dealing with the sons of men. holiness has to do more particularly with the character of god in itself, while in righteousness and justice that character is expressed in the dealings of god with men. three things may be said in the consideration of the righteousness and justice of god: first, there is the imposing of righteousness laws and demands, which may he called legislative holiness, and may he known as the righteousness of god; second, there is the executing of the penalties attached to those laws, which may be called judicial holiness; third, there is the sense in which the attributes of the righteousness and justice of god may be regarded as the actual carrying out of the holy nature of god in the government of the world. so that in the righteousness of god we have his love of holiness, and in the justice of god, his hatred of sin. again righteousness, as here used, has reference to the very nature of god as he is in himself--that attribute which leads god always to do right. justice, as an attribute of god, is devoid of all passion or caprice; it is vindicative not vindictive. and so the righteousness and justice of the god of israel was made to stand out prominently as contrasted with the caprice of the heathen gods. ( ) scriptural statement of the fact. psalm : --"gracious is the lord, and righteous; yea, our god is merciful." the context here shows that it is because of this fact that god listens to men, and because having promised to hear he is bound to keep his promises. ezra : --" lord god of israel, thou art righteous." here the righteousness of jehovah is acknowledged in the punishment of israel's sins. thou art just, and thou hast brought us into the state in which we are today. psa. : --"the lord is righteous in all his ways, and holy in all his works." this is evident in the rewards he gives to the upright, in lifting up the lowly, and in abundantly blessing the good, pure, and true. jer. : --"righteous art thou, o lord, when i plead with thee." that is to say, "if i were to bring a charge against thee i should not be able to convict thee of injustice, even though i be painfully exercised over the mysteries of thy providence." these scriptures clearly set forth not only the fact that god is righteous and just, but also define these attributes. here we are told that god, in his government of the world, does always that which is suitable, straight, and right. ( ) how the righteousness and justice of god is revealed. in two ways: first, in punishing the wicked: retributive justice, second, in rewarding the righteous: remunerative justice. _aa) in the punishment of the wicked._ psa. : - --"the lord is in his holy temple, the lord's throne is in heaven: his eyes behold, his eyelids try, the children of men. the lord trieth the righteous; but the wicked and him that loveth violence his soul hateth. upon the wicked he shall rain snares, fire and brimstone and an horrible tempest. this shall be the portion of their cup." this is david's reply to his timid advisers. saul may reign upon the earth and do wickedly, but god reigns from heaven and will do right. he sees who does right and who does wrong. and there is that in his nature which recoils from the evil that he sees, and will lead him ultimately to punish it. there is such a thing as the wrath of god. it is here described. whatever awful thing the description in this verse may mean for the wicked, god grant that we may never know. in exod. : - we have the account of the plague of hail, following which are these words: "and pharaoh sent...for moses and aaron, and said unto them, i have sinned this time: the lord is righteous, and i and my people are wicked." pharaoh here acknowledges the perfect justice of god in punishing him for his sin and rebellion. he knew that he had deserved it all, even though cavillers today say there was injustice with god in his treatment of pharaoh. pharaoh himself certainly did not think so. dan. : - and rev. : , bring out the same thought. how careful sinners ought to be not to fall into the hands of the righteous judge! no sinner at last will be able to say, "i did not deserve this punishment." _bb) in forgiving the sins of the penitent._ john : (r. v.)--"if we confess our sins, he is faithful and righteous to forgive us our sins, and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness." ordinarily, the forgiveness of sin is associated with the mercy, love, and compassion of god, and not with his righteousness and justice. this verse assures us that if we confess our sins, the righteousness and justice of god is our guarantee for forgiveness--god cannot but forgive and cleanse us from all sin. _cc) in keeping his word and promise to his children._ neh. : , --"thou art the lord the god, who didst choose abram...and madest a covenant with him to give the land of the canaanites...to his seed, and hast performed thy words; for thou art righteous." we need to recall the tremendous obstacles which stood in the way of the fulfillment of this promise, and yet we should remember the eleventh chapter of hebrews. when god gives his word, and makes a promise, naught in heaven, on earth, or in hell can make that promise void. his righteousness is the guarantee of its fulfillment. _dd) in showing himself to be the vindicator of his people from all their enemies._ psa. : - --"many a time have they afflicted me...yet they have not prevailed against me. the lord is righteous: he hath cut asunder the cords of the wicked." sooner or later, god's people will triumph gloriously as david triumphed over saul. even in this life god will give us rest from our enemies; and there shall assuredly come a day when we shall be "where the wicked cease from troubling, and the weary are at rest." _ee) in the rewarding of the righteous._ heb. : --"for god is not unrighteous to forget your work and labor of love, which ye have showed towards his name, in that ye have ministered unto the saints, and do minister." those who had shown their faith by their works would not now be allowed to lose that faith. the very idea of divine justice implies that the use of this grace, thus evidenced, will be rewarded, not only by continuance in grace, but their final perseverance and reward. tim. : --"henceforth there is laid up for me a crown of righteousness, which the lord, the righteous judge, will give me at that day: and not to me only, but unto all them that love hiss appearing." the righteous judge will not allow the faithful believer to go unrewarded. he is not like the unrighteous judges of rome and the athenian games. here we are not always rewarded, but some time we shall receive full reward for all the good that we have done. the righteousness of god is the guarantee of all this. c) the mercy and loving-kindness of god. by these attributes is meant, in general, the kindness, goodness, and compassion of god, the love of god in its relation to both the obedient and the disobedient sons of men. the dew drops on the thistle as well as on the rose. more specifically: mercy is usually exercised in connection with guilt; it is that attribute of god which leads him to seek the welfare, both temporal and spiritual, of sinners, even though at the cost of great sacrifice on his part. "but god, who is rich in mercy, for his great love wherewith he loved us...god commendeth his love towards us, in that, while we were yet sinners, christ died for us." (eph. : ; rom. : .) loving-kindness is that attribute of god which leads him to bestow upon his obedient children his constant and choice blessing. "he that spared not his own son, but freely delivered him up for us all, how shall he not with him freely give us all things?" (rom. : .) (i) scriptural statement of the fact. psa. : --"the lord is merciful and gracious, slow to anger, and plenteous in mercy." for, instead of inflicting pain, poverty, death--which are the wages of sin--god has spared our lives, given us health, increased our blessings and comforts, and given us the life of the ages. deut. : --"(for the lord thy god is a merciful god); he will not forsake thee, neither destroy thee, nor forget the covenant of thy fathers." god is ready to accept the penitence of israel, even now, if only it be sincere. israel will return and find god only because he is merciful and does not let go of her. it is his mercy that forbids his permanently forsaking his people. psa. : --"but thou, o lord, art a god full of compassion, and gracious, long-suffering, and plenteous in mercy and truth." it was because god had so declared himself to be of this nature that david felt justified in feeling that god would not utterly forsake him in his time of great stress and need. the most striking illustration of the mercy and loving-kindness of god is set forth in the parable of the prodigal son (luke : - ). here we have not only the welcome awaiting the wanderer, but also the longing for his return on the part of the anxious and loving father. ( ) how the mercy and loving-kindness of god are manifested. in general: we must not forget that god is absolutely sovereign in the bestowal of his blessings--"therefore hath he mercy on whom he will have mercy" (rom. : ). we should also remember that god wills to have mercy on all his creatures--"for thou, lord, art good, and ready to forgive, and plenteous in mercy to all them that call upon thee" (psa. : ). _aa) mercy--towards sinners in particular._ luke : --"be ye therefore merciful, as your father also is merciful." matt. : --"that ye may be the children, of your father which is in heaven: for he maketh his sun to rise on the evil and the good, and sendeth rain on the just and the unjust." here even the impenitent and hard-hearted are the recipients of god's mercy; all sinners, even the impenitent are included in the sweep of his mercy. isa. : --"let the wicked forsake his way, and the unrighteous man his thoughts, and let him return unto the lord: and he will have mercy upon him; and to our god, for he will abundantly pardon." god's mercy is a holy mercy; it will by no means protect sin, but anxiously awaits to pardon it. god's mercy is a city of refuge for the penitent, but by no means a sanctuary for the presumptuous. see prov. : , and psa. : . god's mercy is here seen in pardoning the sin of those who do truly repent. we speak about "trusting in the mercy of the lord." let us forsake sin and then trust in the mercy of the lord and we shall find pardon. pet. : --"the lord...is longsuffering to us-ward, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance." neh. : --"nevertheless for thy great mercies' sake thou didst not utterly consume them; for thou art a gracious and merciful god." here is mercy manifested in forbearance with sinners. if god should have dealt with them in justice they would have been cut off long before. think of the evil, the impurity, the sin that god must see. how it must disgust him. then remember that he could crush it all in a moment. yet he does not. he pleads; he sacrifices to show his love for sinners. surely it is because of the lord's mercies that we are not consumed, and because his compassions fail not. yet, beware lest we abuse this goodness, for our god is also a consuming fire. "behold, the goodness and the severity of god." the mercy of god is here shown in his loving forbearance with sinners. _bb) loving-kindness towards the saints, in particular._ psa. : --"but he that trusteth in the lord, mercy shall compass him about." the very act of trust on the part of the believer moves the heart of god to protect him just as in the case of a parent and his child. the moment i throw myself on god i am enveloped in his mercy--mercy is my environment, like a fiery wall it surrounds me, without a break through which an evil can creep. besistance surrounds us with "sorrow"; but trust surrounds us with "mercy." in the center of that circle of mercy sits and rests the trusting soul. phil. : --"for indeed he was sick nigh unto death; but god had mercy on him; and not on him only, but on me also, lest i should have sorrow upon sorrow." here god's loving-kindness is seen in healing up his sick children. yet remember that "he hath mercy on whom he will have mercy." not every sick child of god is raised. psa. : --"have mercy upon me, o lord, for i am weak: o lord, heal me...deliver my soul for thy mercies' sake (v. )." the psalmist asks god to illustrate his mercy in restoring to him his spiritual health. from these scriptures we see that the mercy of god is revealed in healing his children of bodily and spiritual sickness. psa. : --"for the king trusteth in the lord, and through the mercy of the most high he shall not be moved." david feels that, because he trusts in the mercy of the lord, his throne, whatever may dash against it, is perfectly secure. is not this true also of the believer's eternal security? more to the mercy of god than to the perseverance of the saints is to be attributed the eternal security of the believer. "he will hold me fast." d) the love of god. christianity is really the only religion that sets forth the supreme being as love. the gods of the heathen are angry, hateful beings, and are in constant need of appeasing. ( ) scriptural statements of the fact. john : - --"god is love." "god is light"; "god is spirit"; "god is love." spirit and light are expressions of god's essential nature. love is the expression of his personality corresponding to his nature. it is the nature of god to love. he dwells always in the atmosphere of love. just how to define or describe the love of god may be difficult if not impossible. it appears from certain scriptures ( john : ; john : ) that the love of god is of such a nature that it betokens a constant interest in the physical and spiritual welfare of his creatures as to lead him to make sacrifices beyond human conception to reveal that love. ( ) the objects of god's love. _aa) jesus christ, god's only-begotten son, is the special object of his love._ matt. : --"this is my beloved son, in whom i am well pleased." also matt. : ; luke : . jesus christ shares the love of the father in a unique sense, just as he is his son in a unique sense. he is especially "my chosen." "the one in whom my soul delighteth," "my beloved son,"--literally: the son of mine, the beloved. and we can readily understand how that he who did the will of god perfectly should thus become the special object of the father's love. of course, if the love of god is eternal, as is the nature of god, which must be the case, then, that love must have had an eternal object to love. so christ, in addressing the father, says: "thou lovedst me before the foundation of the world." _bb) believers in his son, jesus christ, are special objects of god's love._ john : --"for the father himself loveth you, because ye have loved me, and have believed that i came out from god." : - --"he that loveth me shall be loved of my father. ...if a man love me...my father will love him." : --"and hast loved them, as thou hast loved me." do we really believe these words? we are not on the outskirts of god's love, but in its very midst. there stands christ right in the very midst of that circle of the father's love; then he draws us to that spot, and, as it were, disappears, leaving us standing there bathed in the same loving-kindness of the father in which he himself had basked. _cc) god loves the world of sinners and ungodly men._ john : --"for god so loved the world" was a startling truth to nicodemus in his narrow exclusivism. god loved not the jew only, but also the gentile; not a part of the world of men, but every man in it, irrespective of his moral character. for "god commendeth his love towards us, in that, while we were yet sinners, christ died for us" (rom. : ). this is wonderful when we begin to realize what a world in sin is. the love of god is broader than the measure of man's mind. god desires the salvation of all men ( tim. : ). ( ) how the love of god reveals itself. _aa) in making infinite sacrifice for the salvation of men._ john : , --"in this was manifested the love of god towards us, because that god sent his only-begotten son into the world, that we might live through him. herein is love, not that we loved god, but that god loved us, and sent his son to be the propitiation for our sins." love is more than compassion; it hides not itself as compassion may do, but displays itself actively in behalf of its object. the cross of calvary is the highest expression of the love of god for sinful man. he gave not only a son, but his only son, his well-beloved. _bb) in bestowing full and complete pardon on the penitent._ isa. : --"thou hast in love to my soul delivered it from the pit of corruption: for thou hast cast all my sins behind thy back." literally, "thou hast loved my soul back from the pit of destruction." god had taken the bitterness out of his life and given him the gracious forgiveness of his sins, by putting them far away from him. eph. : , --"but god, who is rich in mercy, for his great love wherewith he loved us, even when we were dead in sins, hath quickened us together with christ," etc. verses - of this chapter show the race rushing headlong to inevitable ruin. "but" reverses the picture; when all help for man fails, then god steps in, and by his mercy, which springs from "his great love," redeems fallen man, and gives him not only pardon, but a position in his heavenly kingdom by the side of jesus christ. all this was "for," or, perhaps better, "in order to satisfy his great love." love led him to do it. _cc) in remembering his children in all the varying circumstances of life._ isa. : --"in all their affliction he was afflicted, and the angel of his presence saved them: in his love and in his pity he redeemed them; and he bare them, and carried them all the days of old." here is retrospection on the part of the prophet. he thinks of all the oppressions of israel, and recalls how god's interests have been bound up with theirs. he was not their adversary; he was their sympathetic, loving friend. he suffered with them. isa. : , --"can a woman forget her sucking child? yea, they may forget, yet will i not forget thee. behold, i have graven thee on the palms of my hands; thy walls are continually before me." it was the custom those days to trace upon the palms of the hands the outlines of any object of affection; hence a man engraved the name of his god. so god could not act without being reminded of israel. god is always mindful of his own. saul of tarsus learned this truth on the way to damascus. the doctrine of jesus christ. a. the person of christ. i. the humanity of jesus christ. . he had a human parentage. . he grew as other human beings do. . he had the appearance of a man. . he was possessed of a body, soul, and spirit. . he was subject to the sinless infirmities of humanity. . human names are given to him. ii. the deity of jesus christ. . divine names are given to him. . divine worship is ascribed to him. . divine qualities and properties are possessed by him. . divine offices are ascribed to him. . divine attributes are possessed by him. . christ's name is coupled with that of the father. . the self-consciousness of jesus christas manifested: a) in his visit to the temple. b) in his baptism. c) in his temptation. d) in the calling of the twelve and the seventy. e) in the sermon on the mount. b. the work of christ. . his death. . his resurrection. . his ascension and exaltation. the doctrine of jesus christ. a. the person of christ. the close kinship of christ with christianity is one of the distinctive features of the christian religion. if you take away the name of buddha from buddhism and remove the personal revealer entirely from his system; if you take away the personality of mahomet from mahommedanism, or the personality of zoroaster from the religion of the parsees, the entire doctrine of these religions would still be left intact. their practical value, such as it is, would not be imperilled or lessened. but take away from christianity the name and person of jesus christ and what have you left? nothing! the whole substance and strength of the christian faith centres in jesus christ. without him there is absolutely nothing.--_sinclair patterson._ from beginning to end, in all its various phases and aspects and elements, the christian faith and life is determined by the person and the work of jesus christ. it owes its life and character at every point to him. its convictions are convictions about him. its hopes are hopes which he has inspired and which it is for him to fulfill. its ideals are born of his teaching and his life. its strength is the strength of his spirit.--_james denney._ i. the humanity of jesus christ. . the scriptures distinctly teach that he had a human parentage: that he was born of a woman--the virgin mary. matt. : --"mary ... was found with child of the holy ghost." - --"the young child with mary his mother." : --"behold, thy mother and thy brethren." : --"is not his mother called mary?" john : --"the word was made flesh, and dwelt among us." : --"the mother of jesus was there." acts : --"of this man's seed hath god ... raised ... ..jesus." rom. : --"of the seed of david according to the flesh." gal. : --"made of a woman." in thus being born of a woman jesus christ submitted to the conditions of a human life and a human body; became humanity's son by a human birth. of the "seed of the woman," of the "seed of abraham," and of line and lineage of david, jesus christ is undeniably human. we must not lose sight of the fact that there was something supernatural surrounding the birth of the christ. matt. : --"on this wise," and luke : --"the holy ghost shall come upon thee, and the power of the highest shall overshadow thee; therefore also that holy thing which shall be born of thee shall be called the son of god." "on this wise" indicates that this birth was different from those recorded before it. luke : is explicit about the matter. to assail the virgin birth is to assail the virgin's life. he was of "the seed of the woman," not of the man. (see luke : --"how shall this be, seeing i know not a man?") no laws of heredity are sufficient to account for his generation. by a creative act god broke through the chain of human generation and brought into the world a supernatural being. the narrative of the virgin birth need not stagger us. the abundance of historical evidence in its favor should lead to its acceptance. all the manuscripts in all the ancient versions contain the record of it. all the traditions of the early church recognize it. mention of it is made in the earliest of all the creeds: the apostles' creed. if the doctrine of the virgin birth is rejected it must be on purely subjective grounds. if one denies the possibility of the supernatural in the experience of human life, it is, of course, easy for him to deny this doctrine. to one who believes that jesus was human only it would seem comparatively easy to deny the supernatural birth on purely subjective grounds. the preconceptions of thinkers to a great degree determine their views. it would seem that such a wonderful life as that lived by christ, having as it did such a wonderful finish in the resurrection and ascension, might, indeed should, have a wonderful and extraordinary entrance into the world. the fact that the virgin birth is attested by the scriptures, by tradition, by creeds, and that it is in perfect harmony with all the other facts of that wonderful life should be sufficient attestation of its truth. [footnote: _"the virgin birth,"_ by james orr, d.d., deals fully and most ably with this subject.] it has been thought strange that if, as is claimed, the virgin birth is so essential to the right understanding of the christian religion, that mark, john, and paul should say nothing about it. but does such silence really exist? john says "the word became flesh"; while paul speaks of "god manifest in the flesh." says l. f. anderson: "this argument from silence is sufficiently met by the considerations that mark passes over thirty years of our lord's life in silence; that john presupposes the narratives of matthew and luke; that paul does not deal with the story of jesus' life. the facts were known at first only to mary and joseph; their very nature involved reticence until jesus was demonstrated to be the son of god with power by the resurrection from the dead; meantime the natural development of jesus and his refusal to set up an earthly kingdom have made the miraculous events of thirty years ago seem to mary like a wonderful dream; so only gradually the marvelous tale of the mother of the lord found its way into the gospel tradition and the creeds of the church, and into the innermost hearts of the christians of all countries." . he grew in wisdom and stature as other human beings do. he was subject to the ordinary laws of human development in body and soul. luke : , , --"and the child grew, and waxed strong in spirit, filled with wisdom: and the grace of god was upon him. and jesus increased in wisdom and stature, and in favor with god and man. and....they found him in the temple, sitting in the midst of the doctors, both hearing them, and asking them questions." just to what extent his sinless nature influenced his growth we may not be able to say. it seems clear, however, from the scriptures, that we are to attribute jesus' growth and advancement to the training he received in a godly home; to the instruction given at the synagogue and the temple; from his own personal study of the scriptures, and from his fellowship and communion with his father. both the human and divine element entered into his training and development, which were as real in the experience of jesus as in that of any other human being. we are told that "jesus grew, and increased in wisdom and stature." he "increased," i.e., he kept advancing; he "grew," and the reflective form of the verb would seem to indicate that his growth was due to his own efforts. from all this it seems clear that jesus received his training along the lines of ordinary human progress--instruction, study, thought. nor should the fact that christ possessed divine attributes, such as omniscience and omnipotence, militate against a perfectly human development. could he not have possessed them and yet not have used them? self-emptying is not self-extinction. is it incredible to think that, although possessing these divine attributes, he should have held them in subjection in order that the holy spirit might have his part to play in that truly human, and yet divine, life? . he had the appearance of a man. john : --"how is it that thou, being a jew." luke : --the two disciples on the way to emmaus took him to be an ordinary man. john : --"she, supposing him to be the gardener." : , --"jesus stood on the shore; but the disciples knew not that it was jesus." the woman of samaria evidently recognized jesus as a jaw by his features or speech. to her he was just an ordinary jew, at least to begin with. there is no biblical warrant for surrounding the head of christ with a halo, as the artists do. his pure life no doubt gave him a distinguished look, just as good character similarly distinguishes men today. of course we know nothing definite as to the appearance of jesus, for no picture or photograph of him do we possess. the apostles draw attention only to the tone of his voice (mark : ; : ). after the resurrection and ascension jesus seems still to have retained the form of a man (acts : ; tim. : ). . he was possessed of a human physical nature: body, soul and spirit. john : --"and the word was made flesh." heb. : --"for asmuch then as the children are partakers of flesh and blood, he also himself likewise took part of the same." matt. : --"she hath poured this ointment on my body." v. --"my soul is exceeding sorrowful." luke : --"father, into thy hands i commend my spirit." : --"behold my hands and my feet, that it is i myself: handle me, and see; for a spirit hath not flesh and bones, as ye see me have." by his incarnation christ came into possession of a real human nature; he came not only unto his own, but came unto them in the likeness of their own flesh. of course we must distinguish between a human nature and a carnal nature. a carnal nature is really not an integral part of man as god made him in the beginning. christ's human nature was truly human, yet sinless: "yet without sin" (heb. : ). . he was subject to the sinless infirmities of human nature. matt. : --"he was afterward an hungred." john : --"jesus....saith, i thirst." : --"jesus....being wearied with his journey." matt. : --"but he was asleep." john : --"he bowed his head, and gave up the ghost." he mourns over jerusalem (matt. : ); weeps over his dead friend lazarus, (john : ); craves for human sympathy in the garden (matt. : , ); tempted in all points like as we are (heb. : ). there is not a note in the great organ of our humanity which, when touched, does not find a sympathetic vibration in the mighty range and scope of our lord's being, saving, of course, the jarring discord of sin. but sin is not a necessary and integral part of unfallen human nature. we speak of natural depravity, but, in reality, depravity is _un_natural. god made adam upright and perfect; sin is an accident; it is not necessary to a true human being. . human names are given to him by himself and others. luke : --"son of man." matt. : --"thou shalt call his name jesus." acts : --"jesus of nazareth." tim. : --"the man christ jesus." no less than eighty times in the gospels does jesus call himself the son of man. even when acquiescing in the title son of god as addressed to himself he sometimes immediately after substitutes the title son of man (john : - ; matt : , ). while we recognize the fact that there is something official in the title son of man, something connected with his relation to the kingdom of god, it is nevertheless true that in using this title he assuredly identifies himself with the sons of men. while he is rightly called _the_ son of man, because, by his sinless nature and life he is unique among the sons of men, he is nevertheless _a_ son of man in that he is bone of our bone and flesh of our flesh. ii. the deity of jesus cheist. . divine names are given to him. a) he is called god. john : --"the word was god." heb. : --"but unto the son he saith, thy throne, o god, is for ever." john : --"the only begotten son (or better "only begotten god")." absolute deity is here ascribed to christ. : -"my lord and my god." not an expression of amazement, but a confession of faith. this confession accepted by christ, hence equivalent to the acceptance of deity, and an assertion of it on christ's part. rom. : --"god blessed forever." tit. : --"the great god and our saviour jesus christ." john, : --"his son jesus christ. this is the true god." in all these passages christ is called god. it may be argued that while christ is here called god, yet that does not argue for nor prove his deity, for human judges are also called "gods" in john : --"if he called them gods unto whom the word of god came." true, but it is then used in a secondary and relative sense, and not in the absolute sense as when used of the son. b) he is called the son of god. the references containing this title are numerous. among others see matt. : , ; : ; : ; mark : ; : ; luke : ; : . while it may be true that in the synoptic gospels jesus may not be said to have claimed this title for himself, yet he unhesitatingly accepted it when used of him and addressed to him by others. further, it seems clear from the charges made against him that he did claim such an honor for himself. matt. : , --"for he said, i am the son of god." mark : , --"art thou the christ, the son of the blessed" (luke : --"art thou then the son of god? and jesus said, i am." in john's gospel, however, jesus plainly calls himself "the son of god" ( : ; : : ). indeed, john's gospel begins with christ as god: "the word was god," and ends with the same thought: "my lord and my god" ( : ). (chapter is an epilogue.) dr. james orr says, in speaking of the title son of god as ascribed to christ: "this title is one to which there can be no finite comparison or analogy. the oneness with god which it designates is not such reflex influence of the divine thought and character such as man and angels may attain, but identity of essence constituting him not god-like alone, but god. others may be children of god in a moral sense; but by this right of elemental nature, none but he; he is herein, the _only_ son; so little separate, so close to the inner divine life which he expresses, that he is in the bosom of the father. this language denotes two natures homogeneous, entirely one, and both so essential to the godhead that neither can be omitted from any truth you speak of it." if when he called himself "the son of god" he did not mean more than that he was _a_ son of god, why then did the high priest accuse him of blasphemy when he claimed this title (matt. : - )? does not mark : --"having yet therefore one son, his well-beloved, he sent him also last unto them, saying, they will reverence my son," indicate a special sonship? the sonship of christ is human and historical, it is true; but it is more: it is transcendent, unique, solitary. that something unique and solitary lay in this title seems clear from john : --"the jews sought the more to kill him....because he....said....also that god was his father, making himself equal with god." the use of the word "only begotten" also indicates the uniqueness of this sonship. for use of the word see luke : --"the only son of his mother." : --"for he is mine only child." this word is used of christ by john in : , ; : , ; john : , and distinguishes between christ as the only son, and the "many....children of god" (john : , ). in one sense christ has no brethren: he stands absolutely alone. this contrast is clearly emphasized in john : , --"only begotten son," and : (r. v.)--"many....children." he is the son from eternity: they "become" sons in time. he is one; they are many. he is son by nature; they are sons by adoption and grace. he is son of the same essence with the father; they are of different substance from the father. c) he is called the lord. acte : ; : ; luke : ; acts : ; matt. : - . it is true that this term is used of men, e.g., acts : --"sirs (lords), what must i do to be saved?" john : --"sir (lord), we would see jesus." it is not used, however, in this unique sense, as the connection will clearly show. in our lord's day, the title "lord" as used of christ was applicable only to the deity, to god. "the ptolemies and the roman emperors would allow the name to be applied to them only when they permitted themselves to be deified. the archaeological discoveries at oxyrhyncus put this fact beyond a doubt. so when the new testament writers speak of jesus as lord, there can be no question as to what they mean." --_wood._ d) other divine names are ascribed to him: "the first and the last" (rev. : ). this title used of jehovah in isa. : ; : ; : . "the alpha and omega" (rev. : , ); cf. : where it is used of god. . divine worship is ascribed to jesus christ. the scriptures recognize worship as being due to god, to deity alone: matt. : --"worship the lord thy god, and him only." rev. : , --"i fell down to worship before the feet of the angel...then saith he unto me, see thou do it not:.... worship god." john was not allowed even to worship god at the feet of the angel. acts : , ; : , --cornelius fell down at the feet of peter, and worshipped him. "but peter took him up, saying, stand up; i myself also am a man." see what an awful fate was meted out to herod because he dared to accept worship that belonged to god only (acts : - ). yet jesus christ unhesitatingly accepted such worsnip, indeed, called for it (john : ). see john : ; matt. : ; luke : ; : . the homage given to christ in these scriptures would be nothing short of sacrilegious idolatry if christ were not god. there seemed to be not the slightest reluctance on the part of christ in the acceptance of such worship. therefore either christ was god or he was an imposter. but his whole life refutes the idea of imposture. it was he who said, "worship god only"; and he had no right to take the place of god if he were not god. god himself commands all men to render worship to the son, even as they do to him. john : , --"that all men should honor the son, even as they honor the father." even the angels are commanded to render worship to the son. heb. : --"and let all the angels of god worship him." phil. : --"that at the name of jesus every knee should bow." it was the practice of the apostles and the early church to render worship to christ: cor. : - --"i besought the lord." acts : --"and they stoned stephen, calling upon god, and saying, lord jesus, receive my spirit." cor. : --"them that...call upon the name of jesus christ our lord." the christians of all ages have not been satisfied with admiring christ, they have adored and worshipped him. they have approached his person in the attitude of self-sacrifice and worship as in the presence of and to a god. robert browning quoted, in a letter to a lady in her last illness, the words of charles lamb, when in a gay fancy with some friends as to how he and they would feel if the greatest of the dead were to appear suddenly in flesh and blood once more--on the first suggestion, and "if christ entered this room?" changed his tone at once, and stuttered out as his manner was when moved: "you see --if shakespeare entered, we should all rise; if christ appeared, we must kneel." . he possesses the qualities and properties of deity. a) pre-existence. john : --"in the beginning"; cf. gen : john : --"before abraham was, i am." that is to say: "abraham's existence presupposes mine, not mine his. he was dependent upon me, not i upon him for existence. abraham came into being at a certain point of time, but i am." here is simple being without beginning or end. see also john : ; phil. : ; col. : , . b) self-existence and life-giving power: john : , --"for as the father raiseth up the dead and quickeneth them, even so the son quickeneth whom he will." "for as the father hath life in himself, so hath he given to the son to have life in himself." : --"in him was life." see also : ; heb. : ; john : - ; : , . these scriptures teach that all life--physical, moral, spiritual, eternal--has its source in christ. c) immutability: heb. : --"jesus christ the same yesterday, and today, and for ever." see also : . all nature, which like a garment he throws around him is subject to change and decay; jesus christ is the same always, he never changes. human teachers, such as are spoken of in the context, may change, but he, the christ, never. d) all the fulness of the godhead dwelt in him: col. : --not merely the divine perfections and attributes of deity, but _(theotes)_ the very essence and nature of the godhead. he was not merely god-like; he was god. . divine offices abe ascribed to him. a) he is the creator: john : --"all things were made by him." in the creation he was the acting power and personal instrument. creation is the revelation of his mind and might. heb. : shows the dignity of the creator as contrasted with the creature. col. : contradicts the gnostic theory of emanations, and shows christ to be the creator of all created things and beings. rev. : --"the beginning of the creation of god," means "beginning" in the active sense, _the origin,_ that by which a thing begins to be. col. : --"first-born," not made; compare with col. : , where the "for" of v. shows him to be not included in the "created things," but the origin of and superior to them all. he is the creator of the universe (v. ), just as he is the head of the church (v. ). b) he is the upholder of all things: col. : ; heb. : . the universe is neither self-sustaining nor is it forsaken by god (deism). christ's power causes all things to hold together. the pulses of universal life are regulated and controlled by the throbbings of the mighty heart of christ. c) he has the right to forgive sins. mark : - . luke : --"and he said unto her, thy sins are forgiven." certain it is that the pharisees recognized that christ was here assuming a divine prerogative. no mere man had any right to forgive sins. god alone could do that. hence the pharisees' charge of blasphemy. this is no declaration of forgiveness, based upon the knowledge of the man's penitence. christ does not merely _declare_ sins forgiven. he _actually_ forgives them. further, jesus, in the parable of the two debtors (luke ), declares that sins were committed against himself (cf. psa. : --"against thee, thee only, have i sinned"). d) the raising of the bodies of men is ascribed to him: john : , , ; : . five times it is here declared by jesus that it is his prerogative to raise the dead. it is true that others raised the dead, but under what different conditions? they worked by a delegated power (acts : ); but christ, by his own power (john : , ). note the agony of elisha and others, as compared with the calmness of christ. none of these claimed to raise the dead by his own power, nor to have any such power in the general resurrection of all men. christ did make such claims. e) he is to be the judge of all men; john : --"for the father judgeth no man, but hath committed all judgment unto the son." tim. : ; acts : ; matt. : - . the man of the cross is to be the man of the throne. the issues of the judgment are all in his hand. . divine attributes are possessed by him. a) omnipotence. matt : --"all power is given unto me in heaven and in earth." rev. : ; john : ; eph. i: - . here is power over three realms: first, all power on earth: over disease (luke : - ); death (john ); nature, water into wine (john ); tempest (matt. ). second, all power in hell: over demons (luke : , , ); evil angels (eph. ). third, all power in heaven: (eph. : - ). finally, power over all things: (heb. : ; : ; matt. : ). b) omniscience. john : --"now are we sure that thou knowest all things." : ; matt. ; ; col. : . illustrations: john : - ; mark : ; john : . "our lord always leaves the impression that he knew all things in detail, both past and future, and that this knowledge comes from his original perception of the events. he does not learn them by acquisition. he simply knows them by immediate perception. such utterances as matt. and luke carry in them a subtle difference from the utterances of the prophets. the latter spoke as men who were quite remote in point of time from their declaration of unfolding events. jesus spoke as one who is present in the midst of the events which he depicts. he does not refer to events in the past as if he were quoting from the historic narrative in the old testament. the only instance which casts doubt upon this view is mark : . the parallel passage in matthew omits, in many ancient versions, the words; "neither the son." the saying in mark is capable of an interpretation which does not contradict this view of his omniscience. this is an omniscience nevertheless, which in its manifestation to men is under something of human limitation."--_wood._ this limitation of knowledge is no argument against the infallibility of those things which jesus did teach: for example, the mosaic authorship of the pentateuch. that argument, says liddon, involves a confusion between limitation of knowledge and liability to error; whereas, plainly enough, a limitation of knowledge is one thing, and fallibility is another. st. paul says, "we know in part," and "we see through a glass darkly." yet paul is so certain of the truth of that which he teaches, as to exclaim, "but though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed." paul clearly believed in his own infallibility as a teacher of religious truth, and the church of christ has ever since regarded his epistles as part of an infallible literature. but it is equally clear that paul believed his knowledge of truth to be limited. infallibility does not imply omniscience, any more than limited knowledge implies error. if a human teacher were to decline to speak upon a given subject, by saying that he did not know enough about it, this would not be a reason for disbelieving him when he proceeded to speak confidently upon a totally different subject, thereby at least implying that he did not know enough to warrant his speaking. on the contrary, his silence in the one case would be a reason for trusting his statements in the other. the argument which is under consideration in the text would have been really sound, if our saviour had fixed the date of the day of judgment and the event had shown him to be mistaken. why stumble over the limitation of this attribute and not over the others? did he not hunger and thirst, for example? as god he is omnipresent, yet as man he is present only in one place. as god he is omnipotent; yet, on one occasion at least, he could do no mighty works because of the unbelief of men. c) omnipresence. matt. : --"for where two or three are gathered together in my name, there am i in the midst of them." he is with every missionary (matt. : ). he is prayed to by christians in every place ( cor. : ). prayer would be a mockery if we were not assured that christ is everywhere present to hear. he fills all things, every place (eph. : ). but such an all pervading presence is true only of deity. . his name is coupled with that of god the father. the manner in which the name of jesus christ is coupled with that of god the father clearly implies equality of the son with the father. compare the following: a) the apostolic benediction. cor. : . here the son equally with the father is the bestower of grace. b) the baptismal formula. matt. : ; acts : . "in the name," not the names (plural). how would it sound to say, "in the name of the father" _and of moses?_ would it not seem sacrilegious? can we imagine the effect of such words on the apostles? c) other passages. john : --"we will come: the father and i." : --"and this is life eternal that they might know thee, the only true god, _and jesus christ."_ the content of saving faith includes belief in jesus christ equally with the father. : --"i and my father are one." "one" is neuter, not masculine, meaning that jesus and the father constitute one power by which the salvation of man is secured. thess. : , --"now our lord jesus christ himself, and god, even our father...comfort your hearts." these two names, with a verb in the singular, intimate the oneness of the father with the son. . the self-consciousness of jesus regarding his own person and work. it will be interesting to search the gospel records to ascertain what was in the mind of jesus concerning himself--his relation to the father in particular. what bearing has the testimony of jesus upon the question of his deity? is the present christian consciousness borne out by the gospel narratives? is jesus christ a man of a much higher type of faith than ours, yet one with whom we believe in god? or is he, equally with god, the object of our faith? do we believe _with him_, or _on_ him? is there any indication in the words ascribed to jesus, as recorded in the gospels, of a consciousness on his part of his unique relation to god the father? is it jesus himself who is responsible for the christian's consciousness concerning his deity, or is the church reading into the gospel accounts something that is not really there? let us see. a) as set forth in the narrative of his visit to the temple. luke : - . this is a single flower out of the wonderfully enclosed garden of the first thirty years of our lord's life. the emphatic words, for our purpose, are "thy father," and "my father." these are the first recorded words of jesus. is there not here an indication of the consciousness on the part of jesus of a unique relationship with his heavenly father? mary, not joseph, asked the question, so contrary to jewish custom. she said: "thy father"; jesus replied in substance: "did you say _my_ father has been seeking me?" it is remarkable to note that christ omits the word "father" when referring to his parents, cf. matt. : ; mark : , . "_my_ father!" no other human lips had ever uttered these words. men said, and he taught them to say, "_our_ father." it is not too much to say that in this incident christ sees, rising before him, the great truth that god, and not joseph, is his father, and that it is in his true father's house that he now stands. b) as revealed at his baptism: matt. : - ; mark : -ll; luke : . here are some things to remember in connection with christ's baptism: first, jesus was well acquainted with the relation of john and his ministry to the old testament prophecy, as well as of john's own announcement that he was the messiah's fore-runner, and that he (john) was not worthy to untie the latchet of christ's shoes. second, to come then to john, and to submit to baptism at his hands, would indicate that jesus conceded the truth of all that john had said. this is emphasized when we remember jesus' eulogy of john (matt. ). thirdly, there is the descent of the spirit, and the heavenly voice; what meaning did these things have to jesus? if christ's sermon in the synagogue at nazareth is of any help here, we must believe that at his baptism, so much more than at the age of twelve, he was conscious that in thus being anointed he was associating himself in some peculiar way with the prophecy of isaiah, chapters and : "behold my servant... i have put my spirit upon him." all, therefore, that must have been wrapped up in the thought of the "servant of the lord" in the old testament would assuredly be quickened in his consciousness that day when the spirit descended upon him. see also luke : - ; acts : ; matt. : . but what did the heavenly voice signify to christ? "this is my beloved son" takes us back to the second psalm where this person is addressed as the ideal king of israel. the last clause--"in whom i am well pleased"--refers to isaiah , and portrays the servant who is anointed and empowered by the endowment of god's spirit. we must admit that the mind of jesus was steeped in the prophecies of the old testament, and that he knew to whom these passages referred. the ordinary jew knew that much. is it too much to say that on that baptismal day jesus was keenly conscious that these old testament predictions were fulfilled in him? we think not. c) as set forth in the record of the temptation. matt. : - ; mark : , ; luke : - . that jesus entered into the temptation in the wilderness with the consciousness of the revelation he received, and of which he was conscious at the baptism, seems clear from the narratives. certain it is that satan based his temptations upon christ's consciousness of his unique relation to god as his son. throughout the whole of the temptation satan regards christ as being in a unique sense the son of god, the ideal king, through whom the kingdom of god is to be established upon the earth. indeed, so clearly is the kingship of jesus recognized in the temptation narrative that the whole question agitated there is as to how that kingdom may be established in the world. it must be admitted that a careful reading of the narratives forces us to the conclusion that throughout all the temptation christ was conscious of his position with reference to the founding of god's kingdom in the world. d) as set forth in the calling of the twelve and the seventy. the record of this event is found in matt. ; mark : - ; : - ; luke : - ; : - . this important event in the life of our lord had an important bearing upon his self-consciousness as to his person and work. let us note some of the details: _first_, as to the number, twelve. is there no suggestion here with reference to the new jerusalem when the messiah shall sit upon the throne surrounded by the twelve apostles seated on their thrones? is not jesus here conscious of himself as being the centre of the scene thus described in the apocalypse? _second_, he gave them power. is not jesus here repeating what had been done for him at his baptism: conveying super-human power? who can give this power that is strong enough to make even demons obey? no one less than god surely. _third_, note that the message which he committed to the twelve concerned matters of life and death. not to receive that message would be equivalent to the rejection of the father. _fourth_, all this is to be done in _his_ name, and for _his_ name's sake. fidelity to jesus is that on which the final destiny of men depends. everything rises or falls in its relation to him. could such words be uttered and there be no consciousness on the part of the speaker of a unique relationship to the father and the things of eternity? know you of anything bolder than this? _fifth_, he calls upon men to sacrifice their tenderest affections for him. he is to be chosen before even father and mother (matt. : - ). e) as revealed in the sermon on the mount. matt. - ; luke : - . two references will be sufficient here. who is this that dares to set himself up as superior to moses and the law of moses, by saying, "but _i_ say unto you"? then, again, listen to christ as he proclaims himself to be the judge of all men at the last day (matt. : ). could jesus say all this without having any consciousness of his unique relationship to all these things? assuredly not. b. the work of jesus christ. the death of jesus christ. i. its importance. . it has a supreme place in the christian religion. christianity is a religion of atonement distinctively. the elimination of the doctrine of the death of christ from the religion that bears his name would mean the surrender of its uniqueness and claim to be the only true religion, the supreme and final revelation from god to the sons of men. it is its redemption feature that distinguishes christianity from any and all other religions. if you surrender this distinctive christian doctrine from its creed, then this supreme religion is brought down to the level of many other prevailing religious systems. christianity is not merely a system of ethics; it is the history of redemption through jesus christ, the personal redeemer. . its vital relation to jesus christ. the atonement is so closely related to jesus christ, so allied to his work, as set forth in the scriptures, that it is absolutely inseparable from it. christ was not primarily a religious teacher, a philanthropist, an ethical example; he was all these, yea, and much more--he was first and foremost the world's saviour and redeemer. other great men have been valued for their lives; he, above all, for his death, around which god and man are reconciled. the cross is the magnet which sends the electric current through the telegraph between earth and heaven, and makes both testaments thrill, through the ages of the past and future, with living, harmonious, and saving truth. other men have said: "if i could only live, i would establish and perpetuate an empire." the christ of galilee said: "my death shall do it." let us understand that the power of christianity lies, not in hazy indefiniteness, not in shadowy forms, not so much even in definite truths and doctrines, but in _the_ truth, and in _the_ doctrine of christ crucified and risen from the dead. unless christianity be more tnan ethical, it is not, nor can it really be ethical at all. it is redemptive, dynamic through that redemption, and ethical withal. . its relation to the incarnation. it is not putting the matter too strongly when we say that the incarnation was for the purpose of the atonement. at least this seems to be the testimony of the scriptures. jesus christ partook of flesh and blood in order that he might die (heb. : ). "he was manifested to take away our sins" ( john : ). christ came into this world to give his life a ransom for many (matt. : ). the very purpose of the entire coming of christ into the word, in all its varying aspects, was that, by assuming a nature like unto our own, he might offer up his life as a sacrifice for the sins of men. the faith of the atonement presupposes the faith of the incarnation. so close have been the relation of these two fundamental doctrines that their relation is one of the great questions which have divided men in their opinions in the matter: which is primary and which secondary; which is to be regarded as the most necessary to man's salvation, as the primary and the highest fact in the history of god's dealings with man. the atonement naturally arises out of the incarnation so that the son of god could not appear in our nature without undertaking such a work as the word atonement denotes. the incarnation is a pledge and anticipation of the work of atonement. the incarnation is most certainly the declaration of a purpose on the part of god to save the world. but how was the world to be saved if not through the atonement? . its prominence in the scriptures. it was the claim of jesus, in his conversation with the two disciples on the way to emmaus, that moses, and all the prophets, indeed, all the scriptures, dealt with the subject of his death (luke : , ). that the death of christ was the one great subject into which the old testament prophets searched deeply is clear from pet. : , . the atonement is the scarlet cord running through every page in the entire bible. cut the bible anywhere, and it bleeds; it is red with redemption truth. it is said that one out of every forty-four verses in the new testament deals with this theme, and that the death of christ is mentioned in all one hundred and seventy-five times. when you add to these figures the typical and symbolical teaching of the old testament some idea is gained as to the important place which this doctrine occupies in the sacred scriptures. . the fundamental theme of the gospel. paul says: "i delivered unto you first of all (i.e., first in order; the first plank in the gospel platform; the truth of primary importance) . . . that christ died for our sins" ( cor. : - ). there can be no gospel story, message or preaching without the story of the death of christ as the redeemer of men. . the one grand theme in heaven. moses and elias, the heavenly visitors to this earth, conversed about it (luke : , ), even though peter was ashamed of the same truth (matt. : - ). the theme of the song of the redeemed in heaven is that of christ's death (rev. : - ). ii. the scriptural definition of the death of christ. the scriptures set forth the death of jesus christ in a four-fold way: . as a ransom. matt. : ; pet. l; ; tim. : ; gal. : . the meaning of a ransom is clearly set forth in lev. : - : to deliver a thing or person by paying a price; to buy back a person or thing by paying the price for which it is held in captivity. so sin is like a slave market in which sinners are "sold under sin" (rom. : ); souls are under sentence of death (ezek. : ). christ, by his death, buys sinners out of the market, thereby indicating complete deliverance from the service of sin. he looses the bonds, sets the prisoners free, by paying a price--that price being his own precious blood. to whom this ransom is paid is a debatable question: whether to satan for his captives, or to eternal and necessary holiness, to the divine law, to the claims of god who is by his nature the holy lawgiver. the latter, referring to god and his holiness, is probably preferable. christ redeemed us from the curse of a broken law by himself being made a curse for us. his death was the ransom price paid for our deliverance. . a propitiation. rom. : ; john : ; heb. : (r. v.). christ is the propitiation for our sins; he is set forth by god to be a propitiation through his blood. propitiation means mercy-seat, or covering. the mercy-seat covering the ark of the covenant was called propitiation (exod. : ; heb. : .) it is that by which god covers, overlooks, and pardons the penitent and believing sinner because of christ's death. propitiation furnishes a ground on the basis of which god could set forth his righteousness, and yet pardon sinful men, rom. : , ; heb. : . christ himself is the propitiatory sacrifice, john : . the death of jesus christ is set forth as the ground on which a righteous god can pardon a guilty and sinful race without in any way compromising his righteousness. . as a reconciliation. rom. : ; cor. : , ; eph. : ; col. : . we are reconciled to god by the death of his son, by his cross, and by the blood of his cross--that is the message of these scriptures. reconciliation has two sides; active and passive. in the _active_ sense we may look upon christ's death as removing the enmity existing between god and man, and which had hitherto been a barrier to fellowship (see the above quoted texts). this state of existing enmity is set forth in such scriptures as rom. : --"because the carnal mind is enmity against god." also eph. : ; jas. : . in the _passive_ sense of the word it may indicate the change of attitude on the part of man toward god, this change being wrought in the heart of man by a vision of the cross of christ; a change from enmity to friendship thus taking place, cf. cor. : . it is probably better to state the case thus: god is propitiated, and the sinner is reconciled ( cor. : - ). . as a substitution. isa. : ; pet. : , : ; cor. : . the story of the passover lamb (exod. ), with cor. : , illustrates the meaning of substitution as here used: one life given in the stead of another. "the lord hath laid on him the iniquity of us all." god made christ, who knew no sin, to be sin for us. christ himself bore our sins in his own body on the tree--this is substitution. christ died in our place, bore our sins, paid the penalty due our sins; and all this, not by force, but willingly (john : , ). the idea of substitution is well illustrated by the nature of the preposition used in connection with this phase of christ's death: in matt. - christ is said to give his life a ransom _for_ all (also tim. : ). that this preposition means _instead of_ is clear from its use in matt. : --"archelaus did reign in the room (or in the stead) of his father, herod." also in luke : --"will he _for_ a fish give him a serpent?" (see heb. : , .) substitution, then, as used here means this: that something happened to christ, and because it happened to christ, it need not happen to us. christ died for our sins; we need not die for them if we accept his sacrifice. for further illustrations, see gen. : ; god providing a ram instead of isaac; also barabbas freed and christ bearing his cross and taking his place. upon a life i did not live; upon a death i did not die; upon another's death, another's life, i risk my soul eternally. iii. unscriptural views of christ's death. there are certain so called _modern_ views of the atonement which it may be well to examine briefly, if only to show how unscriptural they are. that the modern mind fails to see in the doctrine of the atonement what the orthodox faith has held for centuries to be the truth of god regarding this fundamental christian doctrine, there is certainly no doubt. to some minds today the death of jesus christ was but the death of a martyr, counted in the same category as the death of john huss or savonarola. or perchance christ's death was an exhibition to a sinful world of god's wondrous love. or it may be that christ, in his suffering of death, remains forever the sublime example of adherence to principles of righteousness and truth, even to the point of death. or, again, calvary may be an episode in god's government of the world. god, being holy, deemed it necessary to show to the world his hatred of sin, and so his wrath fell on christ. the modern mind does not consider christ's death as in any sense vicarious, or substitutionary. indeed, it fails to see the justice as well as the need or possibility of one man, and he so innocent, suffering for the sins of the whole race--past, present and future. every man must bear the penalty of his own sin, so we are told; from that there is no escape, unless, and it is fervently hoped and confidently expected, that god, whose wondrous love surpasses all human conception, should, as he doubtless will, overlook the eternal consequences of man's sin because of the great love wherewith he loves the race. the love of god is the hope of the race's redemption. what shall the christian church say to these things, and what shall be her reply? to the word of god must the church resort for her weapons in this warfare. if the so called modern mind and its doctrinal views agree with the scriptures, then the christian church may allow herself to be influenced by the spirit of the age. but if the modern mind and the scriptures do not agree in their results, then the church of christ must part company with the modern mind. here are some of the modern theories of the atonement: . the accident theory. briefly stated, this is the theory: the cross was something unforeseen in the life of christ. calvary was not in the plan of god for his son. christ's death was an accident, as unforeseen and unexpected as the death of any other martyr was unforeseen and unexpected. to this we reply: jesus was conscious all the time of his forthcoming death. he foretold it again and again. he was always conscious of the plots against his life. this truth is corroborated by the following scriptures: matt. - ; mark : - ; matt. : - ; luke : - ; matt, : ; : , , , - ; luke : , . further, in john : , we have words which distinctly contradict this false theory: "therefore doth my father love me, because i lay down my life, that i might take it again. no man taketh it from me, but i lay it down of myself. i have power to lay it down, and i have power to take it again. this commandment have i received of my father." in addition to this we may make mention of the many, many references and prophecies of the old testament to the fact of christ's death. then there is christ's own testimony to the fact of his death being predicted and foretold by the prophets (luke : , , ). see also isa. ; psa. ; . . the martyr theory. it is as follows: christ's death was similar in kind to that of john huss, or polycarp, or any other noble man who has given up his life as a sacrifice for a principle and for truth. to this we reply: then christ should have so declared himself. paul should have said so. that word was used for other christian deaths, why not for christ's? then there is no mystery about the atonement, and the wonder is that paul should have said anything about the mystery. further, if christ died as a martyr he might, at least, have had the same comforting presence of god afforded other martyrs in the hour of their death. why should he be god-forsaken in that crucial hour? is it right that god should make the holiest man in all the ages the greatest sufferer, if that man were but a martyr? when you recall the shrinking of gethsemane, could you really--and we say it reverently--call jesus as brave a man facing death as many another martyr has been? why should christ's soul be filled with anguish (luke : - ), while paul the apostle was exultant with joy (phil. : )? stephen died a martyr's death, but paul never preached forgiveness through the death of stephen. such a view of christ's death may beget martyrs, but it can never save sinners. . the moral example theory. christ's death has an influence upon mankind for moral improvement. the example of his suffering ought to soften human hearts, and help a man to reform, repent, and better his condition. so god grants pardon and forgiveness on simple repentance and reformation. in the same way a drunkard might call a man his saviour by whose influence he was induced to become sober and industrious. but did the sight of his suffering move the jews to repentance? does it move men today? such a view of christ's death does not deal with the question with which it is always connected, viz., the question of sin. . the governmental theory. this means that the benevolence of god requires that he should make an example of suffering in christ in order to exhibit to man that sin is displeasing in his sight. god's government of the world necessitates that he show his wrath against sin. true, but we reply: why do we need an incarnation for the manifestation of that purpose? why not make a guilty, and not an absolutely innocent and guileless man such an example of god's displeasure upon sin? were there not men enough in existence? why create a new being for such a purpose? . the love of god theoey. he died to show men how much god loved them. men ever after would know the feeling of the heart of god toward them. true, the death of christ did show the great love of god for fallen man. but men did not need such a sacrifice to know that god loved them. they knew that before christ came. the old testament is full of the love of god. read psalm . the scriptures which speak of god's love as being manifested in the gift of his son, tell us also of another reason why he gave his son: "that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life" (john : ); "herein is love, not that we loved god, but that he loved us, and sent his son to be the propitiation for our sins" ( john : ). we believe that christ's cross reveals the love of god, and that throughout all these ages men have been bowed in penitence as they have caught a vision of the one who hung thereon. but if you were to question the multitudes that have believed in god because of the cross, you would find that what moved them to repentance was not merely, if at all, certainly not primarily, that the cross revealed the love of god in a supreme way, but the fact that there at that cross god had dealt with the great and awful fact of sin, that the cross had forever removed it. "i examine all these views, beautiful as some of them are, appealing to the pride of man, but which leave out all thought of vicarious atonement, and say, 'but what shall be done with my sin? who shall put it away? where is its sacrifice? if without shedding of blood there is no remission of sin, where is the shed blood?' these views are neat, measurable, occasionally pathetic, and frequently beautiful, but they do not include the agony of the whole occasion and situation. they are aspect theories, partial conceptions. they do not take in the whole temple from its foundation to its roof. no man must set up his judgment against that of another man in a dogmatic way, but he may, yea, he must, allow his heart to speak through his judgment; and in view of this liberty, i venture to say that all these theories of the atonement are as nothing, most certainly shallow and incomplete to me . . . . as i speak now, at this very moment, i feel that the christ on the cross is doing something for me, that his death is my life, his atonement my pardon, his crucifixion the satisfaction for my sin, that from calvary, that place of a skull, my flowers of peace and joy blossom forth, and that in the cross of christ i glory."--_joseph parker._ iv. the necessity of christ's death. the necessity of the atonement lay in a twofold fact: the holiness of god, and the sinfulness of man. the doctrine of the atonement is a related subject, and it cannot be properly understood unless it is viewed as such. it is related to certain conditions existing between god and man--a condition and relation which has been affected by sin. it is necessary, therefore, to know this relation and how it has been affected by sin. this relation between god and man is a personal one. no other construction can legitimately be put upon the passages setting forth this relationship. "_thou_ has searched _me_, and known _me_." "_i_ am continually with _thee_." it is, moreover, an ethical relationship, and that which is ethical is at the same time personal and universal, that is to say, that god's dealings with mankind are expressed in a moral constitution of universal and eternal validity. these relationships are disordered by sin. no matter how sin came to be here we are morally conscious, by the testimony of a bad conscience, that we are guilty, and that our sin is not merely a matter of personal guilt but a violation of a universal moral law. . the holiness of god. we should carefully note the emphasis laid upon the doctrine of god's holiness in the old testament (see under attributes of god, p. ). the levitical law, the laws of clean and unclean, the tabernacle and the temple with its outer court, its holy and most holy place, the priestly order and the high priest, the bounds set around mt. sinai, things and persons that might not be touched without causing defilement, sacred times and seasons, these, and much more, speak in unmistakable terms of the holiness of god. we are thus taught that if sinful man is to approach unto god, it must be through the blood of atonement. the holiness of god demands that before the sinner can approach unto and have communion with him, some means of propitiation must be provided. this means of approach is set forth in the shed blood. . the sin of man. light and erroneous views of the atonement come from light and erroneous views of sin. if sin is regarded as merely an offence against man, a weakness of human nature, a mere disease, rather than as rebellion, transgression, and enmity against god, and therefore something condemning and punishable, we shall not, of course, see any necessity for the atonement. we must see sin as the bible depicts it, as something which brings wrath, condemnation, and eternal ruin in its train. we must see it as guilt that needs expiation. we must see sin as god sees it before we can denounce it as god denounces it. we confess sin today in such light and easy terms that it has almost lost its terror. in view of these two thoughts, the holiness of god and the sinfulness of man, the question naturally arises: how is the mercy of god to be manifested so that his holiness will not be compromised by his assuming a merciful attitude towards sinful men in the granting of forgiveness, pardon, justification? the answer is: the only way in which this can be done is by means of the atonement. . the fulfillment of the scriptures. we may add this third thought to the two already mentioned. there is a sense in which the atonement was necessary in order to the fulfillment of the predictions of the old testament--predictions inseparable from the person and work of the messiah. if jesus christ were the true messiah, then these predictions regarding his sufferings and death must be fulfilled in him (luke : - , ; isa. ; psa. ; ). v. the extent of christ's death. was the death of jesus christ for all mankind--for every human being in the world, or for man actually and ultimately regenerate only--the chosen church? was it for all mankind, irrespective of their relation to jesus christ, or must we limit the actual benefits of the atonement to those who are spiritually united to christ by faith? that the death of christ is intended to benefit all mankind seems clear from the following scriptures: isa. : ; tim. : ; john : , cf. cor. : ; rom. : ; cor. : . the scriptures, which to some seem to limit the effects of the atonement, are john : , cf. vv , ; eph. : - . certain it is that the doctrine of the atonement is presented in the scriptures as competent to procure and secure salvation for all. indeed, not only competent but efficacious to do this very thing. it might seem that there is an apparent contradiction in the above-named scriptures. the atonement, in its actual issue, should realize and actualize the eternal purpose of god, the which is set forth as a desire that all men should be saved and come to a saving knowledge of the truth as it is in jesus christ. this is testified to be the general and universal invitation of the scriptures to partake of the blessings of christ's death. thus the offer of the gospel to all is not a pretence but a reality on the part of god. the divine willingness that all men should share the benefits of the atonement is all-inclusive, and really means what is offered. yet on the other hand, we can not overlook the fact that, from another point of view the effects of the atonement--shall we say the _purpose_ of the atonement?--seems to be limited to the sphere of the the true church, so that only those who are really united to christ by faith actually share in the merits of the atonement. let us put it this way: "the atonement is _sufficient_ for all; it is _efficient_ for those who believe in christ." the atonement itself, so far as it lays the basis for the redemptive dealing of god with all men, is _unlimited_; the _application_ of the atonement is limited to those who actually believe in christ. he is the saviour of all men _potentially_ ( tim. : ); of believers alone _effectually_ ( tim. : ). the atonement is limited only by men's unbelief. . for the whole world. the scriptures set forth this fact in the following statements: "and he is the propitiation for our sins: and not for ours only, but also for the sins of the whole world" ( john : ). christ's death was the ground on which god, who is absolutely holy, could deal with the whole race of men in mercy, and pardon their sins. john : --"behold the lamb of god, which taketh away the sin of the world." not the sin of a few individuals, or of an elect race, like israel, but the sin of the whole world. this was a striking truth to reveal to a jew. tim. : --"who gave himself a ransom for all, to be testified in due time." it is for this reason, as the context of this passage shows, that we may pray for all men. if all men were not capable of being saved, how then could we pray to that end? . for each individual man. this is but a detailed statement of the fact that he died for the whole world. not a single individual man, woman, or child is excluded from the blessings offered in the atonement. heb. : --"but we see jesus, who was made a little lower than the angels for the suffering of death, crowned with glory and honor; that he by the grace of god should taste death for every man." leo the great ( ) affirmed that "so precious is the shedding of christ's blood for the unjust, that if the whole universe of captives would believe in the redeemer, no chain of the devil could hold them." general booth once said: "friends, jesus shed his precious blood to pay the price of salvation, and bought from god enough salvation to go around." . for the sinful, unjust, and ungodly. sinners of all sorts, degrees, and conditions may have a share in the redemptive work of christ. greece invited only the cultured, rome sought only the strong, judea bid for the religious only. jesus christ bids all those that are weary and heavy-hearted and over-burdened to come to him (matt. : ). rom. : - --"christ died for the ungodly...while we were yet sinners, christ died for us...when we were enemies, we were reconciled to god by the death of his son." pet. : --"for christ also hath once suffered for sins, the just for the unjust." christ died for _sinners_--those in open opposition to god; for the _unjust_--those who openly violate god's laws; for the _ungodly_--those who violently and brazenly refuse to pay their dues of prayer, worship, and service to god; for _enemies_ --those who are constantly fighting god and his cause. for all of these christ died. tim. : --"christ jesus came into the world to save sinners; of whom i am chief." paul was a _blasphemer_, a _persecutor_, _injurious_ (v. ), a _murderer_ (acts and ), yet god saved him; he was included in the atonement. note also that it is in this very connection that the apostle declares that the reason god saved him was in order that his salvation might be a pattern, or an encouragement to other great sinners, that god could and would save them, if they desired him to do so. . for the church. there is a peculiar sense in which it may be said that christ's death is for the church, his body, the company of those who believe in him. there is a sense in which it is perfectly true that christ's death avails only for those who believe in him; so in that sense it can be said that he died for the church more particularly. he is "the saviour of all men, specially of those that believe" ( tim. : ). herein lies the truth that is contained in the theory of a limited atonement. eph. : - --"christ also loved the church, and gave himself for it." not for any one particular denomination; not for any one organization within any four walls; but for all those whom he calls to himself and who follow him here. gal. : --"the son of god, who loved me, and gave himself for me." here the individual member of the church, the body of christ, is specifically mentioned as being included in the efficacy of the atonement. when luther first realized this particular phase of the atonement, he was found sobbing beneath a crucifix, and moaning: "mein gott, mein gott, fur mich! fur mich!" cor. : --"and through thy knowledge shall the weak brother perish, for whom christ died?" also rom. : . note the connection in which this truth is taught. if christ was willing to die for the weak brother--whom we, perchance, sneer at for his conscientious scruples--we ought to be willing to deny ourselves of some habit for his sake. how all-inclusive, all-comprehensive, far-reaching is the death of christ in its effects! not a few, but many shall be saved. he gave his life a ransom for _many_. god's purposes in the atonement shall not be frustrated. christ shall see of the travail of his soul, and shall be satisfied. many shall come from the north, the south, the east and the west and sit down in the kingdom. in that great day it will be seen (rev. : - ). vi. the effects of christ's death. . in relation to the physical or material universe. just as the material universe was in some mysterious manner affected by the fall of man (rom. : - , r. v.), so also is it affected by the death of jesus christ, which is intended to neutralize the effect of sin upon the creation. there is a cosmical effect in the atonement. the christ of paid is larger than the second adam--the head of a new humanity; he is also the center of a universe which revolves around him, and is in some mysterious way reconciled by his death. just how this takes place we may not be able definitely to explain. col. : --"and, having made peace through the blood of his cross, by him to reconcile all things unto himself; by him, i say, whether they be things in earth, or things in heaven." some day there shall be a new heaven and a new earth, wherein dwelleth righteousness ( pet. : ). see also heb. : , ; isa. and . . in relation to the world of men. a) the enmity existing between god and man is removed: rom. : ; col. : - . for explanation, see under scriptural definition of the atonement ((ii. , p. ). the ground of enmity between god and man--whether in the active or passive sense of _reconciliation_--is removed by christ's death. the world of mankind is, through the atonement, reconciled to god. b) a propitiation for the world's sin has been provided: john : ; : . see under propitiation (ii. , p. ). the propitiation reaches as far as does the sin. c) satan's power over the race has been neutralized: john : , --"now is the judgment of this world: now shall the prince of this world be cast out. and i, if i be lifted up from the earth, will draw all men unto me." also john : , ; col. : . the lifting up of christ on the cross meant the casting down of satan. satan no longer holds undisputed sway over the sons of men. the power of darkness has been broken. man need no longer be the slave of sin and satan. d) the question of the world's sin is settled: it need no longer stand as a barrier between god and man. strictly speaking, it is not now so much of a _sin_ question as it is a _son_ question; not, what shall be done with my sin? but, what shall i do with jesus, which is called christ? the sins of the old testament saints, which during all the centuries had been held, as it were, in abeyance, were put away at the cross (rom. : , ). sins present and future were also dealt with at the cross. by the sacrifice of himself, christ forever put away sin (heb. : ). e) the claims of a broken law have been met, and the curse resting upon man because of a broken law removed. col. : --"blotting out the handwriting of ordinances that was against us, which was contrary to us, and took it out of the way, nailing it to his cross." thus every claim of the holy law of god, which sinful man had violated, had been met. gal. : --"christ hath redeemed us from the curse of the law, being made a curse for us: for it is written, cursed is every one that hangeth on a tree." (see v. for the description of the curse.) the wages of sin, and the curse of sin, is death. christ by his death on the cross, paid that debt, and removed that curse. f) justification, adoption, sanctification, access to god, an inheritance, and the removal of all fear of death--all this is included in the effect of the death of christ in the behalf of the believer. rom. : ; gal. : - ; heb. : ; : , ; : ; : , . how comforting, how strengthening, how inspiring are these wonderful aspects of the effects of the death of our lord and saviour, jesus christ! . the effect of christ's death on satan. see under c) above. the devil must submit to the victory of christ. the dominion of satan, so far as the believer in christ is concerned, is now at an end: his dominion over the disobedient sons of men, too, will soon be at an end. christ's death was the pronouncement of satan's doom; it was the loss of his power over men. the power of the devil, while not yet absolutely destroyed, has been neutralized (heb. : ). the evil principalities and powers, and satan himself, did their worst at the cross, but there they received their deathblow (col. : , ). the resurrection of jesus christ. i. its important place in the christian religion. . it holds a unique place in christianity. christianity is the only religion that bases its claim to acceptance upon the resurrection of its founder. for any other religion to base its claim on such a doctrine would be to court failure. test all other religions by this claim and see. . it is fundamental to christianity. in that wonderful chapter on the resurrection ( cor. ) paul makes christianity answer with its life for the literal truth of the resurrection of jesus christ. that the body of the founder of the christian religion did not lie in the grave after the third day is fundamental to the existence of the religion of christ: "and if christ be not risen, then is our preaching vain, and your faith is also vain" (v. ). "if christ be not raised . . . ye are yet in your sins" (v. ). "then they also which are fallen asleep in christ are perished" (v. ). remove the resurrection from paul's gospel, and his message is gone. the resurrection of jesus christ is not an appendage to paul's gospel; it is a constitutive part of it. the importance of this doctrine is very evident from the prominent part it played in the preaching of the apostles: peter--acts : , ; : ; : ; : ; : ; peter : , . paul--acts : , ; : ; cor. ; phil. : . it was belief in such preaching that led to the establishment of the christian church. belief in the resurrection of christ was the faith of the early church (acts : ). the testimony to this great fact of christian faith was borne in the midst of the fiercest opposition. nor was it controverted, although the grave was well known and could have been pointed out. it was in this fact that christianity acquired a firm basis for its historical development. there was not only an "easter message," there was also an "easter faith." our lord's honor was, in a sense, staked upon the fact of his resurrection. so important did he regard it that he remained forty days upon the earth after his resurrection, giving many infallible proofs of the great fact. he appealed to it again and again as evidence of the truth of his claims: matt. : , ; john : - . both the friends and the enemies of christianity admit that the resurrection of jesus christ is vital to the religion that bears his name. the christian confidently appeals to it as an incontrovertible fact; the sceptic denies it altogether as a historical reality. "if the resurrection really took place," says an assailant of it, "then christianity must be admitted to be what it claims to be--a direct revelation from god." "if christ be not risen," says the apostle paul, "then is our preaching vain, and your faith is also vain." the one tries all he can to do away with the proofs submitted for the accepted fact; the other plainly says that if the resurrection cannot be believed, then christianity is nothing but a sham. if the resurrection of christ can be successfully denied, if it can be proven to be absolutely untrue, then the whole fabric of the gospel falls to pieces, the whole structure of the christian religion is shaken at its foundation, and the very arch of christianity crumbles into dust. then it has wrought only imaginary changes, deluded its most faithful adherents, deceived and disappointed the hopes of its most devoted disciples, and the finest moral achievements that adorn the pages of the history of the christian church have been based upon a falsehood. nor must we ignore the prominent place the resurrection of jesus christ occupies in the scriptures. more than one hundred times is it spoken of in the new testament alone. ii. the nature of the resurrection of jesus christ. . jesus christ actually died. some who disbelieve in the resurrection of christ assert that jesus merely swooned, and that pitying hands took him down from the cross, thinking that he had died. the cool air of the tomb in which he was placed revived him, so that he came forth from the tomb as though he had really risen from the dead. the disciples believed that he had really died and risen again. this theory is false for the following reasons: jesus christ appeared to the disciples after the third day, not as a weak, suffering, half-dead man, but as a conquering, triumphant victor over death and the grave. he never could have made the impression upon the disciples that he did, if he had presented the picture of a sick, half-dead man. from john : - we learn that when the soldiers pierced the side of christ, _there came forth blood and water_. physiologists and physicists agree that such a condition of the vital organs, including the heart itself, precludes the idea of a mere swoon, and proves conclusively that death had taken place. joseph of arimathaea asked permission to bury the body of jesus because he knew that jesus had been pronounced dead (matt. : , ). when the news was brought to pilate that christ had died, it is said that "pilate marvelled if he were already dead: and calling unto him the centurion, he asked him whether he had been any while dead. and when he knew it of the centurion, he gave the body to joseph" (mark : , ). the women brought spices to anoint a dead body, not a half-dead christ (mark : ). the soldiers pronounced him dead: "but when they came to jesus, and saw that he was dead already, they brake not his legs" (john : ). jesus christ himself, he who is the truth, testifies to the fact that he had really died: rev. : --"i am he that liveth, and was dead." . the fact that christ's body was actually raised from the dead. the resurrection of christ is not a spiritual resurrection, nor were his appearances to the disciples spiritual manifestations. he appeared to his disciples in a bodily form. the body that was laid in joseph's tomb came forth on that first easter morn twenty centuries ago. some maintain that it is not vital to belief in the resurrection of christ that we insist on a literal resurrection of the body of jesus; all that we need to insist on is that christ was ever afterwards known to be the victor over death, and that he had the power of an endless life. so it comes to pass that we have what is called an "easter message," as contrasted with an "easter faith" which believes in the literal resurrection of jesus christ from the dead. "faith has by no means to do with the knowledge of the form in which jesus lives, but only with the conviction that he is the living lord."--_harnack_ in _what is christianity?_ according to this theory, belief in christ's resurrection means nothing more than belief in the survival of the soul of jesus--that somehow or other jesus was alive, and lived with god, while his body yet saw corruption in the grave. we reply: this cannot be, for all the facts in the gospel narratives contradict such a theory. let us examine these narratives. a) we are confronted by the fact of an empty tomb. matt. : ; mark : ; luke : , ; john : , . the fact that the tomb was empty is testified to by competent witnesses --both friends and enemies: by the women, the disciples, the angels, and the roman guards. how shall we account for the absence of the body of jesus from the tomb? that it had not been stolen by outside parties is evident from the testimony of the soldiers who were bribed to tell that story (matt. : - ). such a guard never would have allowed such a thing to take place. their lives would have been thereby jeopardized. and if they were asleep (v. ), how could they know what took place? their testimony under such circumstances would be useless. the condition in which the linen cloths were found lying by those who entered the tomb precludes the possibility of the body being stolen. had such been the case the cloths would have been taken with the body, and not left in perfect order, thereby showing that the body had gone out of them. burglars do not leave things in such perfect order. there is no order in haste. then again, we have the testimony of angels to the fact that jesus had really risen as foretold (matt. : ; mark : ). the testimony of angels is surely trustworthy (heb. : ). b) there are other resurrections mentioned in the gospel records which were undoubtedly bodily resurrections. matt. : - ; luke : - ; john : - . these incidents throw light upon the resurrection of jesus. why did the officers say that they were afraid "that his disciples should come by night and steal him away" if they did not refer to the _body_ of jesus? they surely could not steal his soul. c) those who saw him after the resurrection recognized him as having the same body as he had before, even to the wound prints. john : ; luke : - . it is true that there were occasions on which he was not recognizable by the disciples, but such occasions were the result of the eyes of the disciples being holden in order that they might not know him. there was divine intervention on these occasions. does christ still retain the prints of the nails? is he still the lamb as though it had been slain? (rev. and ). d) there can be no doubt of the fact that the apostle paul believed in the bodily resurrection of christ. the corinthians, to whom the apostle wrote that wonderful treatise on the resurrection ( cor. ), were not spending their time denying a _spiritual_ resurrection; nor was the apostle spending his time trying to produce convincing arguments for a _spiritual_ resurrection. (see also rom. : .) e) it is clear also from christ's own testimony before and after the resurrection. matt. : ; luke : ; rev. : . no other construction can legitimately be put upon these words than that christ here refers to the resurrection of his body. f) the apostolic testimony corroborates this fact. acts : - ; pet. : , ; : . peter was at the tomb; he it was who stepped inside and saw the linen cloths lying. his testimony ought to be beyond question as to the fact at issue. g) the record of the appearances of christ prove a literal, physical resurrection. matt. : , ; john : - , cf. mark : ; luke : - ; john , etc. all these appearances bear witness to the fact that it was not an incorporeal spirit or phantom, but a real, bodily christ that they saw. he could be seen, touched, handled; he was recognizable; he ate and drank in their presence. h) lastly, many passages in the scriptures would be unintelligible except on the ground of a bodily resurrection of jesus christ from the grave. rom. : , ; eph. : , ; phil. : , ; thess. : - . . the nature of the resurrection body of christ. a) it was a real body; not a ghost, nor a phantom. that the resurrection body of jesus was not a phantom, but a body composed of "flesh and bones" is evident from luke : - . it could be "touched" (john : ), and bore the marks of his passion (john : - ). the likeness to his earthly body was not wholly parted with. [note: does this throw any light on the matter of recognition in heaven? has jesus christ still this body in the glory? shall we know him by the prints?] b) yet the body of jesus was more than a mere natural body. it bore marks and possessed attributes which proclaimed a relation to the celestial or supra-terrestrial sphere. for example: it could pass through barred doors (john : ), thus transcending physical limitations. it was not recognizable at times (luke : - ; john : , ; : , ; mark : ). this fact may be accounted for in two ways: first, supernaturally--their eyes were holden; second, that in that risen life the spiritual controls the material rather than as here, the material the spiritual; so that the spirit could change the outward form of the body at will and at any given time. [yet, note how jesus had power to make himself known by little acts, such as the breaking of the bread, and the tone of his voice. do we carry these little characteristics into the other life? shall we know our loved ones by these things?] then again, jesus was able to vanish out of sight of his friends (luke : ; john : , ; luke : ; acts : ). and so he could be in different places at very short intervals of time. can we explain these facts? no, not fully. yet we must not be so material as to totally disbelieve them. "daily, indeed, are men being forced to recognize that the world holds more mysteries than they formerly imagined it to do. probably physicists are not so sure of the impenetrability of matter, or even of the conservation of energy, as they once were; and newer speculations on the etheric basis of matter, and on the relation of the seen to the unseen universe (or universes) with forces and laws largely unknown, open up vistas of possibility which may hold in them the key to phenomena even as extraordinary as those in question."--_james orr_. c) christ's resurrection body was immortal. not only is it true that christ's body has not seen death since his resurrection, but it cannot die again. rom. : , ; rev. : , cf. luke : . [the lesson for us from this: christ is the first-fruits ( cor. : ).] iii. the credibility of the resurrection of christ. credibility refers to the acceptance of a fact in a manner that deserves belief; it is belief based upon good authority, reliable facts, and competent witnesses. credulity is belief in a thing without respect to the strength or weakness, reliability or unreliability of the authority, facts, or witnesses; it is a believing too readily, and with no reason for the faith or hope. the resurrection of christ is a fact proven by competent evidence, and deserving of intelligent acceptance and belief. it is a doctrine buttressed by "many infallible proofs." the lines of proof for the credibility of christ's resurrection which may be followed in harmony with our purpose are as follows: . the argument from cause and effect. certain things, conditions, institutions exist in our midst today; they are effects of causes, or a cause; what is that cause? among these we may mention-- a) the empty tomb. that was an effect; what was its cause? how did that grave become empty? (see under ii. a), p. ). the fact of an empty tomb must be accounted for. how do we account for it? renan, the french sceptic, wittingly said, and yet how truly: "you christians live on the fragrance of an empty tomb." b) the lord's day. the lord's day is not the original sabbath. who dared change it? for what reason, and on what ground was it changed? ponder the tenacity with which the jews held on to their sabbath given in eden, and buttressed amid the thunders of sinai. recall how jews would sooner die than fight on the sabbath day (cf. titus' invasion of jerusalem on the sabbath). the jews never celebrated the birthdays of great men; they celebrated events, like the passover. yet, in the new testament times we find jews changing their time-honored seventh day to the first day of the week, and, contrary to all precedent, calling that day after a man--the lord's day. here is an effect, a tremendous effect; what was its cause? we cannot have an effect without a cause. the resurrection of our lord was the cause for this great change in the day of worship. c) the christian church. we know what a grand and noble institution the christian church is. what would this world be without it? its hymns, worship, philanthropy, ministrations of mercy are all known to us. where did this institution come from? it is an effect, a glorious effect; what is its cause? when the risen christ appeared unto the discouraged disciples and revived their faith and hope, they went forth, under the all-conquering faith in a risen and ascended lord, and preached the story of his life, death, resurrection, ascension, and coming again. men believed these teachings; gathered themselves together to study the scriptures, to pray, to worship christ, and to extend his kingdom among men. this is how the church came into existence. its cause was the resurrection of christ. d) the new testament. if jesus christ had remained buried in the grave, the story of his life and death would have remained buried with him. the new testament is an effect of christ's resurrection. it was the resurrection that put heart into the disciples to go forth and tell its story. sceptics would have us believe that the resurrection of christ was an afterthought of the disciples to give the story of christ's life a thrilling climax, a decorative incident which satisfies the dramatic feeling in man, a brilliant picture at the end of an heroic life. we reply: there would have been no beautiful story to put a climax to if there had been no resurrection of the christ of the story. the resurrection does not grow out of the beautiful story of his life, but the beautiful story of christ's life grew out of the fact of the resurrection. the new testament is the book of the resurrection. . the argument from testimony. a) as to the number of the witnesses. the resurrection of christ as a historical fact is verified by a sufficient number of witnesses: over five hundred ( cor. : - ). in our courts, one witness is enough to establish murder; two, high treason; three, the execution of a will; seven, an oral will. seven is the greatest number required under our law. christ's resurrection had five hundred and fourteen. is not this a sufficient number? b) as to the character of the witnesses. the value of the testimony of a witness depends much upon his character; if that is impeached, then the testimony is discounted. scrutinize carefully the character of the men who bore witness to the fact of christ's resurrection. impeach them if you can. they are unassailable on ethical grounds. "no honorable opponent of the gospel has ever denied this fact. their moral greatness awakened an augustine, a francis of assisi, and a luther. they have been the unrivalled pattern of all mature and moral manhood for nearly two thousand years." in law much is made of the question of _motive_. what motive could the apostles have had in perpetrating the story of christ's resurrection upon people? every one of them (except one) died a martyr's death for his loyalty to the story of christ's resurrection. what had they to gain by fraud? would they have sacrificed their lives for what they themselves believed to be an imposture? nor are we to slight the testimony to christ's resurrection that comes to us from sources other than that of the inspired writers of the new testament. ignatius, a christian, and a contemporary of christ, a martyr for his faith in christ, in his _letter to the philadelphians_, says: "christ truly suffered, as he also truly raised up himself. i _know_ that after the resurrection he was in the flesh, and i believe him to be so still. and when he came to those who were with peter, he said to them, 'take, handle me, and see that i am not an incorporeal phantom!'" tertullian, in his _apolegeticus_, says: "the fame of our lord's remarkable resurrection and ascension being now spread abroad, pontius pilate, according to an ancient custom of communicating novel occurrences to the emperor, that nothing might escape him, transmitted to tiberius, emperor of rome, an account of the resurrection of our lord from the dead...tiberius referred the whole matter to the senate, who, being unacquainted with the facts, rejected it." the integrity of this passage is unquestioned by even the most sceptical critics. alleged discrepancies. [footnote: the following extract from dr. orr's book, _the resurrection of jesus_, will throw some light on the matter of differences in testimony, while maintaining the credibility of the fact itself. "an instructive example is furnished in a recent issue of the _bibliotheca sacra_. a class in history was studying the french revolution, and the pupils were asked to look the matter up, and report next day by what vote louis xvi was condemned. nearly half the class reported that the vote was unanimous. a considerable number protested that he was condemned by a majority of one. a few gave the majority as in a vote of . how utterly irreconcilable these reports seemed! yet for each the authority of reputable historians could be given. in fact, all were true, and the full truth was a combination of all three. on the first vote as to the king's guilt there was no contrary voice. some tell only of this. the vote on the penalty was given individually, with reasons, and a majority of declared for the death penalty, at once or after peace was made with austria, or after confirmation by the people. the votes for immediate death were only as against . history abounds with similar illustrations. as an example of another kind, reference may be made to rev. r. j. campbell's volume of _sermons addressed to individuals_, where, on pp. - and pp. - , the same story of a brighton man is told with affecting dramatic details. the story is no doubt true in substance; but for 'discrepancies'--let the reader compare them, and never speak more (or mr. campbell either) of the gospels!"] the seeming differences in the testimony of the witnesses to the resurrection may be largely, if not altogether reconciled by a correct knowledge of the manner and order of the _appearances_ of christ after his resurrection. the following order of appearances may help in the understanding of the testimony to the resurrection: . the women at the grave see the vision of angels. . the women separate at the grave to make known the news --mary magdalene going to tell peter and john, who doubtless lived close by (for it seems that they reached the grave in a single run). the other women go to tell the other disciples who, probably, were at bethany. . peter and john, hearing the news, run to the grave, leaving mary. they then return home. . mary follows; lingers at the grave; gets vision of the master, and command to go tell the disciples. . the other women see christ on the way. . christ appears to the two on the way to emmaus. . to simon peter. . to the ten apostles, and other friends. . to the apostles at tiberias. . to the apostles and multitude on the mount. . to the disciples and friends at the ascension. . to james ( cor. : ). . to paul ( cor. : ). iv. the results of the resurrection of jesus christ. . as to jesus christ himself. rom. : --"and declared to be the son of god with power, according to the spirit of holiness, by the resurrection from the dead." to "declare" means to mark off, to define, to set apart (acts : ; heb. : ). note: christ was not _made_ the son of god by the resurrection, but _declared_ such. had christ remained in the grave as other men had done, there would then have been no reasonable ground to impose faith in him. the empty tomb testifies to the deity of christ. matt. : - ; john : - . in these scriptures jesus christ bases his authority for his teaching and the truth of all his claims on his resurrection from the dead. (cf. under i. , in this chapter, p. .) see also matt. : --"risen, as he said." . as to the believer in jesus christ. a) assures him of his acceptance with god. rom. : --"who was delivered for our offences, and was raised again for our justification." so long as christ lay in the grave there was no assurance that his redemptive work had been acceptable to god. the fact that god raised jesus from the dead was evidence that the father was satisfied with the sacrifice christ had made for the sins of men. "of righteousness, because i go unto my father" (john : ). believing sinners may now rest satisfied that in him they are justified. this thought is illustrated by the picture of the jews waiting outside the temple for the coming out of the high priest (luke : ), thereby indicating that their sacrifice had been accepted. b) assures of him an interceding high priest in the heavens. rom. : --"who is he that condemneth? it is christ that died, yea rather, that is risen again, who is even at the right hand of god, who also maketh intercession for us." also heb. : . salvation was not completed at the cross; there is still need of daily forgiveness, and so of the continual presenting of the shed blood before the mercy-seat. the accusations of satan still need to be answered (zec. : - ; job and ; heb. : ). we need a moses, not only to deliver us from bondage, but also to plead for us and intercede for us because of our sins committed in the wilderness journey. herein is our assurance of forgiveness of sins committed after conversion--that our great high priest is always heard (john : ), and that he prays constantly for us that our faith fail not (luke : ). our temporary falls shall not condemn us, for our priest intercedes for us. c) assures him of all needed power for life and service. eph. : - --"the exceeding greatness of his power . . . which he wrought in christ, when he raised him from the dead, and set him at his own right hand in the heavenly places, far above all principality, and power, and might, . . . and gave him to be the head over all things to the church." also phil. : . there are two standards in the bible by which god's power is gauged: in the old testament, when god would have his people know the extent of his power, it is according to the power by which he brought israel out of egypt (micah : ); in the new testament, the unit of measurement of god's power is "according to the working of his mighty power, which he wrought in christ . . . when he raised him from the dead." the connection of phil. : gives the believer the promise and assurance not only of present power and victory, but also of future glorification. if we desire to know what god is able to do for and through us we are invited to look at the resurrection of jesus christ. d) the assurance of his own resurrection and immortality. thess. : --"for if we believe that jesus died and rose again, even so them also which sleep in jesus will god bring with him." cor. : --"knowing that he which raised up the lord jesus shall raise up us also by jesus, and shall present us with you." john : --"because i live, ye shall live also." . as to the world. a) the certainty of a resurrection. cor. : --"as in adam all die; even so in christ shall all be made alive." paul is here discussing a _bodily,_ and not a _spiritual_, resurrection (see under ii. d), p. ). as in adam all men die physically, so in christ all men are raised physically. the resurrection of jesus christ guarantees the resurrection of all men (see under resurrection, p. ). b) the certainty of a judgment day. acts : --"because he hath appointed a day, in the which he will judge the world in righteousness by that man whom he hath ordained; whereof he hath given assurance unto all men, in that he hath raised him from the dead." the resurrection of christ is god's unfailing testimony to the fact of a coming day of judgment for the world. the one is as sure as the other. the ascension and exaltation of jesus christ. i. the meaning of these terms. when we speak of the _ascension_ of christ we refer to that event in the life of our risen lord in which he departed visibly from his disciples into heaven. this event is recorded in acts : - --"this same jesus which is taken up from you into heaven," etc. by the _exaltation_ of jesus christ we mean that act of god by which the risen and ascended christ is given the place of power at the right hand of god. phil. : --"wherefore god also hath highly exalted him and given him a name which is above every name." eph. : , --"which he (god) wrought in christ, when he raised him from the dead, and set him at his own right hand in the heavenly places, far above all principality and power." see also heb. : . ii. the scriptural data for the doctrine. foregleams of this truth were granted to the prophets of the old testament times, psa. : ; : . they saw christ in prophetic vision not only as the meek and lowly one, but as the ascended and glorified lord. our lord himself, on many occasions, foretold his ascension and exaltation. these events were constantly before his mind's eye: luke : ; john : ; : . the new testament writers record the event: mark : ; luke : ; john : ; acts : - ; eph. : - ; heb. : . stephen, in his dying moments, was granted a vision of the exalted christ. he saw the "son of man standing on the right hand of god" (acts : , ). the apostles taught and preached these great truths: peter, acts : , ; : ; peter : . paul: eph. : - ; heb. : ; tim. : . iii. the necessity of the ascension and exaltation of jesus christ. the nature of the resurrection body of our lord necessitated his ascension and exaltation. such a body could not be subject to ordinary laws; it could not permanently abide here. christ's unique personality also required such an exit from the world. should not the exit of christ from this world be as unique as his entrance into it? then, again, consider the sinlessness of his life. if a miraculous exit was granted to men like elijah and enoch, who were sinful men, why should we marvel if such was granted to christ? indeed it seems perfectly natural, and quite in keeping with his whole life that just such an event as the ascension and exaltation should form a fitting finish to such a wonderful career. the ascension and exaltation were necessary to complete the redemptive work of christ. his work was not finished when he arose from the dead. he had not yet presented the blood of the atonement in the presence of the father; nor had he yet been given his place at the right hand of the father as the bestower of all spiritual gifts, and especially the gift of the holy spirit. the apostles were thus able to furnish to an unbelieving and inquisitive world a satisfactory account of the disappearance of the body of christ which had been placed in the tomb, and which they claimed to have seen after the resurrection. "where is your christ?" the scoffing world might ask. "we saw him ascend up into the heaven, and he is now at the father's right hand," the apostles could reply. it was further necessary in order that christ might become an ideal object of worship for the whole human race. we should not forget that christ's earthly ministry was a purely local one: he could be but in one place at a time. those who worshipped at his feet in jerusalem could not, at the same time, worship him in any other place. this was the lesson, doubtless, that the master desired to teach mary when she would fain hold on to him, and when he said, "touch me not." mary must worship now by faith, not by sight. iv. the nature of the ascension and exaltation of jesus christ. . it was a bodily and visible ascension. acts : - ; luke : . it was the same christ they had known in life, only glorified, who had tarried with them now for the space of forty days, who had delivered unto them certain commandments, and whose hands were even then outstretched in blessing that they saw slowly vanishing from their view up into the heavens. it was a body of flesh and bones, not flesh and blood. so will be our translation ( cor. : , ). . he passed up through the heavens. heb. : (r. v.); eph. : ; heb. : . whatever and how many created heavens there may be between the earth and the dwelling place of god, we may not know, but we are here told that christ passed through them all, and up to the highest heaven, indeed was made higher than the heavens. this means that he overcame all those evil principalities and powers that inhabit these heavenlies (eph. ) and who doubtless tried their best to keep him from passing through the heavens to present his finished work before the father. just as the high priest passed through the vail into the holy place, so christ passed through the heavens into the presence of god. . he took his place at the right hand of the father. he was exalted to the right hand of god. eph. : --"set him at his own right hand in the heavenly places, far above all principality and power." col. : --"christ sitteth on the right hand of god." this place was not taken by christ without conflict with these evil principalities and powers. but "he made a show of them openly, triumphing over them in it" (col. : ). see also acts : . what is meant by "the right hand of god"? is it a definite place, or is it simply a figure of speech denoting a place of authority and power? why can not both things be included? god has his dwelling place in heaven, and it is not incredible to believe that from the throne there christ exercises his divine prerogatives. stephen saw christ standing at the right hand of god in heaven. the "right hand of god" assuredly indicates the place of the accuser whom christ casts out (zec. : ; rev. : ); the place of intercession which christ now occupies (rom. : ); the place of acceptance where the intercessor now sits (psa. : ); the place of highest power and richest blessing (gen. : - ); the place of power (psa. : ). all these powers and prerogatives are christ's by reason of his finished work of redemption. v. the purpose of the ascension and exaltation of jesus christ. . he has entered heaven as a forerunner. heb. : --"whither the forerunner is for us entered, even jesus." the forerunner is one who enters into a place where the rest are to follow; one who is sent before to make observations; a scout, a spy. the levitical high priest was not a forerunner; no one could follow him. but where christ goes his people may go also. . he has gone to prepare a place for his people. heb. : - ; john : . he is there making all necessary preparations for the coming of his bride, the church. in some way it seems that the heavenly sanctuary had been defiled by sin. it was necessary, therefore, that christ purge it with his blood. what a home that will be if he prepares it! . he is now appearing before god in our behalf. heb. : --"to appear in the presence of god for us." he is there to act as high priest in our behalf; to present the blood of atonement. "before the throne my surety stands." and yet not so much before the throne as on the throne. he is the kingly priest. with authority he asks, and his petitions are granted. . he has taken his place at the father's right hand that he may fill all things, awaiting the day when he shall have universal dominion. eph. : . he fills all things with his presence, with his work, with himself. he is not a local christ any longer (cf. jer. : ). heb. : , ; acts : , --"he shall send jesus christ . . . . whom the heaven must receive until the times of restitution of all things." having won his victory, christ is now waiting for all the spoils to be gathered. he is expecting, not doubting, but assuredly waiting; already his feet are upon the neck of the enemy. the apocalypse pictures christ entering upon the actual possession of his kingdom. vi. the results of the ascension and exaltation of jesus christ. . it assures us of a free and confident access into the presence of god. heb. : - (r. v.)--"having then a great high priest, who hath passed through the heavens, jesus the son of god, let us hold fast our confession. . . . . let us therefore draw near with boldness unto the throne of grace." our great high priest is before the throne to present petitions, secure pardons for his people, and to communicate blessings in answer to their faith and prayers. we may have a free and fearless confidence in our approach to god. . an assured hope of immortality. cor. : - describes the longing of the christian to be clothed with a body after he has been called upon to lay aside this earthly tabernacle. he has no desire for a bodiless existence. the ascension and exaltation of christ assures the believer that as christ, so he also will take his place in heaven with a body like unto christ's own glorious body. . it gives the believer confidence in god's providence to believe that all things are working together for his good seeing that christ, the believer's head, is exalted far above all things in heaven and earth, it is possible for the believer to be master of circumstances, and superior to all his environment (eph. : ; cf. col. : - ). . christ has been made head over all things for the church. that is to say, that everything is subject to christ, and that for the church's sake. eph. : (r. v.)--"and he put all things in subjection under his feet, and gave him to be head over all things to the church." christ is the fullness of the father for the church (col. : ; : , ). christ bestows the holy spirit upon the church (acts : - ; john : - ). he receives for, and bestows upon the church spiritual gifts (eph. : - ). the doctrine of the holy spirit i. the personality of the holy spirit. . personal names given to the spirit. . personal pronouns used of the spirit. . the spirit associated with the father and the son. . the spirit possesses personal characteristics. . personal acts are ascribed to the holy spirit. . the spirit is subject to personal treatment. ii. the deity of the holy spirit. . divine names are given to the spirit. . divine attributes. . divine works. . name of the spirit associated with names of the deity. . comparison of old testament passages with some in the new testament. iii. the names of the holy spirit. . the holy spirit. . the spirit of grace. . the spirit of burning. . the spirit of truth. . the spirit of life. . the spirit of wisdom and knowledge. . the spirit of promise. . the spirit of glory. . the spirit of god and of christ. iv. the work of the holy spirit. . in relation to the world. a) the universe. b) the world of mankind. . in relation to the believer. . in relation to the scriptures. . in relation to jesus christ. v. offences against the holy spirit. . by the sinner. a) resisting. b) insulting. c) blaspheming. . by the believer. a) grieving. b) lying to. c) quenching. the doctrine of the holy spirit. we are living in the age of the spirit. the old testament period may be called the age of the father; the period covered by the gospels, the age of the son; from pentecost until the second advent of christ, the age of the spirit. all matters pertaining to the doctrine of the holy spirit should, therefore, be of special interest to us who live in this age of special privilege. yet how ignorant is the average christian concerning matters pertaining to the spirit. the christian church today needs to heed paul's exhortation: "now concerning spiritual gifts (or, perhaps better, "matters pertaining to the spirit"), i would not have you ignorant." may it not be that the reason why the sin against the holy spirit is so grievous is because it is a sin committed in the light and with the knowledge of the clearest and fullest revelation of the godhead. we cannot, therefore, afford to remain in ignorance of this all-important doctrine. i. the personality of the holy spirit. it seems strange that it should be necessary to discuss this phase of the subject at all. indeed, in the light of the last discourse of the master (john - ), it seems superfluous, if not really insulting. during all the ages of the christian era, however, it has been necessary to emphasize this phase of the doctrine of the spirit (cf. arianism, socinianism, unitarianism). . why is the personality of the holy spirit questioned? a) because, as contrasted with the other persons of the godhead, the spirit seems impersonal. the visible creation makes the personality of god the father somewhat easy to conceive; the incarnation makes it almost, if not altogether, impossible to disbelieve in the personality of jesus christ; but the acts and workings of the holy spirit are so secret and mystical, so much is said of his influence, graces, power and gifts, that we are prone to think of him as an influence, a power, a manifestation or influence of the divine nature, an agent rather than a person. b) because of the names given to the holy spirit. he is called _breath, wind, power._ the symbols used in speaking of the spirit are _oil, fire, water,_ etc. see john : - ; acts : - ; john : ; john : . it is not strange that in view of all this some students of the scriptures may have been led to believe, erroneously of course, that the holy spirit is an impersonal influence emanating from god the father. c) because the holy spirit is not usually associated with the father and the son in the greetings and salutation of the new testament. for illustration, see thess. : --"now god himself and our father, and our lord jesus christ, direct our way unto you." yet we must remember, in this connection, that the apostolic benediction in cor. : does associate the three persons of the trinity, thereby asserting their personality equally. d) because the word or name "spirit" is neuter. it is true that the same greek word is translated _wind_ and _spirit;_ also that the authorized version uses the neuter pronoun "itself," when speaking of the holy spirit (rom. : , ). as we shall see later, the revised version substitutes "himself" for "itself." the importance of the personality of the spirit, and of our being assured of this fact is forcibly set forth by dr. r. a. torrey: "if the holy spirit is a divine person and we know it not, we are robbing a divine being of the love and adoration which are his due. it is of the highest practical importance whether the holy spirit is a power that we, in our ignorance and weakness, are somehow to get hold of and use, or whether the holy spirit is a personal being . . . . who is to get hold of us and use us. it is of the highest experimental importance. . . . . many can testify to the blessing that came into their lives when they came to know the holy spirit, not merely as a gracious influence . . . . but as an ever-present, loving friend and helper." . method of proof. it is difficult to define _personality_ when used of the divine being. god cannot be measured by human standards. god was not made in the image of man, but man in the image of god. god is not a deified man; man is rather a limited god ("a little . . .. less than god." heb. : , r. v.). only god has a perfect personality. when, however, one possesses the attributes, properties and qualities of personality, then personality may be unquestionably predicated of such a being. does the holy spirit possess such properties? let us see. a) names that imply personality are given to the spirit. _the comforter:_ john : ; : . "comforter" means one who is called to your side--as a client calls a lawyer. that this name cannot be used of any abstract, impersonal influence is clear from the fact that in john : the same word is used of christ. (see rom. : ). again in john : the holy spirit, as the paraclete, is to take the place of a person--christ himself, and to personally guide the disciples just as jesus had been doing. no one but a person can take the place of a person; certainly no mere influence could take the place of jesus christ, the greatest personality that ever lived. again, christ, in speaking of the spirit as the comforter, uses the masculine definite article, and thus, by his choice of gender, teaches the personality of the holy spirit. there can be no parity between a person and an influence. b) personal pronouns are used of the holy spirit. john : , , - : twelve times in these verses the greek masculine pronoun _ekeinos_ (that one, he) is used of the spirit. this same word is used of christ in john : ; : , , , . this is especially remarkable because the greek word for spirit (_pneuma_) is neuter, and so should have a neuter pronoun; yet, contrary to ordinary usage, a masculine pronoun is here used. this is not a pictorial personification, but a plain, definite, clear-cut statement asserting the personality of the holy spirit. note also that where, in the authorized version, the neuter pronoun is used, the same is corrected in the revised version: not "itself," but "himself" (rom. : , ). c) the holy spirit is identified with the father and the son--and, indeed, with christians--in such a way as to indicate personality. the baptismal formula. matt. : . suppose we should read, "baptizing them in the name of the father, and of the son, and of _the wind or breath_." would that sound right? if the first two names are personal, is not the third? note also: "in the name" (singular), not names (plural), implying that all three are persons equally, the apostolic benediction. cor. : . the same argument may be used as that in connection with the baptismal formula, just cited. identification with christians. acts : . "for it seemeth good to the holy ghost, and to us." shall we say, "it seemeth good to _the wind_ and to us"? it would be absurd. : --"how god anointed jesus of nazareth with the holy ghost and with power." shall we read, "anointed .. with _power_ and power?" rom. : --"that ye may abound in hope, through the power of the holy ghost." shall we read, "that ye may abound in hope, through the power of the _power_"? see also luke : . would not these passages rebel against such tautological and meaningless usage? most assuredly. d) personal characteristics are ascribed to the holy spirit. the holy spirit is represented as searching the deepest and profoundest truths of god, and possessing knowledge of his counsels sufficiently to understand his purposes ( cor. : , ). could a mere influence do this? see also isa. : ; i pet. : . spiritual gifts are distributed to believers according to the _will_ of the spirit ( cor. ). here is wisdom, prudence and discretion, all of which are distinguishing marks of personality. the spirit not only bestows spiritual gifts, but bestows them discreetly, according as he thinks best. see john : also. the spirit is said to have a _mind_, and that implies thought, purpose, determination: rom. : , cf. v. . mind is an attribute of personality. e) personal acts are ascribed to the holy spirit. the spirit _speaks_: rev. : (cf. matt. : --"hear ye him.") it is the spirit who speaks through the apostles ( : ). speech is an attribute of personality. the spirit _maketh intercession:_ rom. : (r. v.), cf. heb. : ; i john : , , where christ is said to "make intercession." acts : ; : , ; : . in these passages the holy spirit is seen _calling_ missionaries, _overseeing_ the church, and _commanding_ the life and practice of the apostles and the whole church. such acts indicate personality. f) the holy spirit is susceptible to personal treatment. he may be _grieved_ (eph. : ); _insulted_ (heb. . ); _lied to_ (acts : ); blasphemed and sinned against (matt. : , ). indeed, the sin against the holy spirit is a much more grievous matter than the sin against the son of man. can such be said of an influence? can it be said even of any of the sons of men? ii. the deity of the holy spirit. by the deity of the holy spirit is meant that the holy spirit is god. this fact is clearly set forth in the scriptures, in a five-fold way: . divine names are given to the holy spirit. in acts : , the spirit is called _god_. and this in opposition to man, to whom, alone, ananias thought he was talking. can any statement allege deity more clearly? in cor. : --"we .... are transformed into the same image from glory to glory, even as from the lord the spirit" (r. v.). here the spirit is called the _lord_. for the meaning of "lord" see under the deity of christ, p. . . the holy spirit possesses divine attributes. he is _eternal_ in his nature (heb. : , r. v.); _omnipresent_ (psa. : - ); _omnipotent_ (luke : ); _omniscient_ ( cor. : , ). for the meaning of these attributes, see under the doctrine of god and jesus christ, pp. and . . divine works are ascribed to the holy spirit. _creation_ (gen. : ; psa. : , r. v.); job : --"the spirit of god hath made me, and the breath of the almighty hath given me life." _regeneration_ (john : - ); _resurrection_ (rom. : ). . the name of the holy spirit is associated with that of the father, and of the son. see under personality of the spirit, p. . the same arguments which there prove the personality of the spirit may be used here to prove the deity of the spirit. it would be just as absurd to say, "baptizing them in the name of the father, and of the son, and of _moses_"--thus putting moses on an equality with the father and the son--as it would be to say, "baptizing them in the name of the father, and of the son, and of the _wind_"--thus making the wind as personal as the father and the son. the spirit is on an equality with the father and the son in the distribution of spiritual gifts ( cor. : - ). . passages which in the old testament refer to god are in the new testament made to refer to the holy spirit. compare isa. : - with acts : - ; and exod. : with heb. : - . iii. the names of the holy spirit. just as the father and the son have certain names ascribed to them, setting forth their nature and work, so also does the holy spirit have names which indicate his character and work. . the holy spirit. luke : --"how much more shall your heavenly father give the holy spirit to them that ask him?" rom. : --"the spirit of holiness." in these passages it is the moral character of the spirit that is set forth. note the contrast: "ye, being evil," and "the holy spirit." the spirit is _holy_ in himself and produces holiness in others. . the spirit of grace. heb. : --"and hath done despite unto the spirit of grace." as the executive of the godhead, the spirit confers grace. to resist the spirit, therefore, is to shut off all hope of salvation. to resist his appeal is to insult the godhead. that is why the punishment mentioned here is so awful. . the spirit of burning. matt. : , --"he shall baptize you with the holy ghost, and with fire." isa. : --"when the lord shall have washed away the filth of the daughters of zion.... by the spirit of judgment and the spirit of burning." this cleansing is done by the blast of the spirit's burning. here is the searching, illuminating, refining, dross-consuming character of the spirit. he burns up the dross in our lives when he enters and takes possession. . the spirit of truth. john : ; : ; : ; i john : . as god is love, so the spirit is truth. he possesses, reveals, confers, leads into, testifies to, and defends the truth. thus he is opposed to the "spirit of error" ( john : ). . the spirit of life. rom. : --"for the law of the spirit of life in christ jesus hath made me free from the law of sin and death." that which had been the actuating principle of life, namely, the flesh, is now deposed, and its controlling place taken by the spirit. the spirit is thus the dynamic of the believer's experience that leads him into a life of liberty and power. . the spirit of wisdom and knowledge. that the references in isa. : ; : , are to be understood as referring to the spirit that abode upon the messiah, is clear from luke : where "spirit" is capitalized. christ's wisdom and knowledge resulted, in one aspect of the case, from his being filled with the spirit. "wisdom and understanding" refer to intellectual and moral apprehension; "counsel and might," the power to scheme, originate, and carry out; "knowledge and the fear of the lord," acquaintance with the true will of god, and the determination to carry it out at all costs. these graces are the result of the spirit's operations on the heart. . the spirit of promise. eph. : --"ye were sealed with that holy spirit of promise." the spirit is the fulfillment of christ's promise to send the comforter, and so he is the promised spirit. the spirit also confirms and seals the believer, and thus assures him that all the promises made to him shall be completely fulfilled. . the spirit of glory. pet. : --"the spirit of glory and of god resteth upon you." what is glory? glory as used in the scripture means character. the holy spirit is the one who produces godlike character in the believer (cf. cor. : ). . the spirit of god, and of christ. cor. : --"the spirit of god dwelleth in you." rom. : --"now if any man have not the spirit of christ, he is none of his." the fact that the spirit is sent from the father and the son, that he represents them, and is their executive, seems to be the thought conveyed here. . the comforter (p. ). iv. the work of the holy spirit. the work of the spirit may be summed up under the following headings: his work in the universe; in humanity as a whole; in the believer; with reference to the scriptures; and, finally, with reference to jesus christ. . in relation to the world. a) with regard to the universe. there is a sense in which the creation of the universe may be ascribed to god's spirit. indeed psa. : --"by the word of the lord were the heavens made; and all the host of them by the breath (spirit) of his mouth," attributes the work of creation to the trinity, the lord, the word of the lord, and the spirit of the lord. the creation of man is attributed to the spirit. job : --"the spirit of god hath made me, and the breath of the almighty hath given me life." it would be proper, doubtless, to say that the father created all things through the agency of the word and the spirit. in the genesis account of creation ( : ) the spirit is seen actively engaged in the work of creation. not only is it true that the spirit's agency is seen in the act of creation, but his power is seen also in the preservation of nature. isa. : --"the grass withereth, the flower fadeth, because the spirit of the lord bloweth upon it." a staggering declaration. the doctrine of the holy spirit the spirit comes in the fierce east wind with its keen, biting blast of death. he comes also in the summer zephyr, which brings life and beauty. b) with regard to humanity as a whole. john : - --"and when he is come, he will reprove the world of sin, and of righteousness, and of judgment; of sin, because they believe not on me; of righteousness, because i go unto my father and ye see me no more; of judgment, because the prince of this world is judged." here are three great facts of which the spirit bears witness to the world: the sin of unbelief in christ; the fact that christ was righteous and absolutely true in all that he claimed to be; the fact that the power of satan has been broken. of sin: the sin in which all other sins are embraced; of righteousness: the righteousness in which all other righteousness is manifested and fulfilled; of judgment: the judgment in which all other judgments are decided and grounded. of sin, belonging to man; of righteousness, belonging to christ; of judgment, belonging to satan. john : --"the spirit of truth ... shall testify of me." acts : --"and we are his witnesses of these things; and so is also the holy ghost." it is the work of the holy spirit to constantly bear witness of christ and his finished work to the world of sinful and sinning men. this he does largely, although hardly exclusively, through the testimony of believers to the saving power and work of christ: "ye also shall bear witness" (john : ). . the work of the spirit in relation to the believer. a) he regenerates the believer. john : - --"born of ... the spirit." tit. : --"the... renewing of the holy ghost." sonship, and membership in the kingdom of god, come only through the regenerating of the holy spirit. "it is the spirit that quickeneth." just as jesus was begotten of the holy ghost, so must every child of god who is to be an heir to the kingdom. b) the spirit indwells the believer. cor. : --"your body is the temple of the holy ghost which is in you." also : ; rom. : . every believer, no matter how weak and imperfect he may be, or how immature his christian experience, still has the indwelling of the spirit. acts : does not contradict this statement. evidently some miraculous outpouring of the spirit is intended there, the which followed the prayer and laying on of the hands of the apostles. "now if any man have not the spirit of christ, he is none of his." "no man can say that jesus is the lord, but by the holy ghost" (rom. : ; cor. : ). c) the spirit seals the believer with assurance of salvation. eph. : , --"in whom also after that ye believed, ye were sealed with that holy spirit of promise; which is the earnest of our inheritance." also : --"sealed unto the day of redemption." this sealing stands for two things: ownership and likeness ( tim. : - ). the holy spirit is "the spirit of adoption" which god puts into our hearts, by which we know that we are his children. the spirit bears witness to this great truth (gal. : ; rom. : , ). this sealing has to do with the heart and the conscience--satisfying both as to the settlement of the sin and sonship question. d) the holy spirit infills the believer. acts : --"and they were all filled with the holy ghost." eph. : --"be filled with the spirit." the filling differs somewhat from the indwelling. we may speak of the baptism of the spirit as that initial act of the spirit by which, at the moment of our regeneration, we are baptized by the spirit into the body of christ; the spirit then comes and takes up his dwelling within the believer. the filling with the spirit, however, is not confined to one experience, or to any one point of time exclusively; it may be repeated times without number. there is one baptism, but many infillings with the spirit. the experience of the apostles in the acts bears witness to the fact that they were repeatedly filled with the spirit. whenever a new emergency arose they sought a fresh infilling with the spirit (cf. acts : with : showing that the apostles who were filled on the day of pentecost were again filled a few days after). there is a difference between possessing the spirit, and being filled with the spirit. all christians have the first; not all have the second, although all may have. eph. : speaks of believers as being "sealed," whereas : commands those same believers to "be filled (to be being filled again and again) with the spirit." both the baptism and the infilling may take place at once. there need be no long wilderness experience in the life of the believer. it is the will of god that we should be filled (or, if you prefer the expression, "be baptized") with the spirit at the moment of conversion, and remain filled all the time. whenever we are called upon for any special service, or for any new emergency, we should seek a fresh infilling of the spirit, either for life or service, as the case may be. the holy spirit seeks--so we learn from the story of the acts--for men who are not merely possessed by but also filled with the spirit, for service ( : , ; : ; : ). possession touches assurance; infilling, service. e) the holy spirit empowers the believer for life and service. rom. : --"for the law of the spirit of life in christ jesus hath made me free from the law of sin and death" (also vv. - ). there are two natures in the believer: the flesh and the spirit (gal. : ). but while the believer is still in the flesh, he does not live after the flesh (rom. : , ). the holy spirit enables the believer to get constant and continual victory over sin. a single act of sin a believer may commit; to live in a state of sin is impossible for him, for the spirit which is within him gives him victory, so that sin does not _reign_ over him. if sinless perfection is not a scriptural doctrine, sinful imperfection is certainly less scriptural. the eighth chapter of romans exhibits a victorious life for the believer; a life so different from that depicted in the seventh chapter. and the difference lies in the fact that the holy spirit is hardly, if at all, mentioned in the seventh chapter, while in the eighth he is mentioned over twelve times. the spirit in the heart is the secret of victory over sin. then note how the holy spirit produces the blessed fruit of the christian life (gal. : , ). what a beautiful cluster of graces! how different from the awful catalogue of the works of the flesh (vv. - ). look at this cluster of fruit. there are three groups: the first, in relation to god--love, joy, peace; the second, in relation to our fellowman--longsuffering, gentleness, goodness; the third, for our individual christian life--faith, meekness, self-control. f) the holy spirit is the guide of the believer's life. he guides him as to the details of his daily life, rom. : ; gal. : , -"walk in the spirit." there is no detail of the believer's life that may not be under the control and direction of the spirit. "the steps (and, as one has well said,'the stops') of a good man are ordered by the lord." the holy spirit guides the believer as to the field in which he should labor. how definitely this truth is taught in the acts : - ; : , ; : - . what a prominent part the spirit played in selecting the fields of labor for the apostles! every step in the missionary activity of the early church seemed to be under the direct guidance of the spirit. g) the holy spirit anoints the believer. this anointing stands for three things: first, for _knowledge and teaching_. john : --"but the anointing which ye have received of him abideth in you, and ye need not that any man teach you; but as the same anointing teacheth you of all things, and is truth . . . ye shall abide in him." also : . it is not enough to learn the truth from human teachers, we must listen to the teaching of the spirit. cor. : - teaches us that there are some great truths that are spiritually discerned; they cannot be understood saving by the spirit-filled man, for they are "spiritually discerned." see also john : ; : . second, for _service_. how dependent christ was upon the holy spirit for power in which to perform the duties of life is clear from such passages as luke : --"the spirit of the lord is upon me, because he hath anointed me to preach," etc. also acts : --"how god anointed jesus of nazareth with the holy ghost and with power: who went about doing good." ezekiel teaches a lesson by his vivid picture of the activity of god portrayed in the wheels within wheels. the moving power within those wheels was the spirit of god. so in all our activity for god we must have the spirit of power. third, for _consecration_. three classes of persons in the old testament were anointed: the prophet, the priest, and the king. the result of anointing was consecration--"thy vows are upon me, o god"; knowledge of god and his will--"ye know all things"; influence--fragrance from the ointment. just as the incense at mecca clings to the pilgrim when he passes through the streets, so it is with him who has the anointing of the spirit. all his garments smell of myrrh, and aloes, and cassia. he has about him the sweet odor and scent of the rose of sharon and the lily of the valley. . the relation of the holy spirit to the scriptures. a) he is the author of the scriptures. holy men of god spake as they were moved by the holy spirit. pet. : , . the scriptures came by the inbreathing of god, tim. : . "hear what the spirit saith to the churches," eev. and . it was the spirit who was to guide the apostles into all the truth, and show them things to come (john : ). b) the spirit is also the interpreter of the scriptures. cor. : - . he is "the spirit of wisdom and revelation," eph. : . "he shall receive of mine and show it unto you," john : , . (see under the inspiration of the bible, p. .) . the relation of the holy spirit to jesus christ. how dependent jesus christ was, in his state of humiliation, on the holy spirit! if he needed to depend solely upon the spirit can we afford to do less? a) he was conceived by the holy spirit, born of the spirit, luke : . b) he was led by the spirit, matt. : . c) he was anointed by the spirit for service, acts : . d) he was crucified in the power of the spirit, heb. : . e) he was raised by the power of the spirit, rom. : ; : . f) he gave commandment to his disciples and church through the spirit, acts : . g) he is the bestower of the holy spirit, acts : . v. offences against the holy spirit. scarcely any phase of the doctrine of the spirit is more solemn than this. it behooves us all, believer and unbeliever alike, to be careful as to how we treat the holy spirit. sinning against the spirit is fraught with terrific consequences. for convenience sake we are classifying the offences against the spirit under two general divisions, namely, those committed by the unbeliever, and those committed by the believer. not that there is absolutely no overlapping in either case. for, doubtless, in the very nature of the case there must be. this thought will be kept in mind in the study of the offences against the spirit. . offences committed by the unbeliever. a) resisting the holy ghost. acts : -"ye do always resist the holy ghost." here the picture is that of the holy spirit attacking the citadel of the soul of man, who violently resists the gracious attempts of the spirit to win him. in spite of the plainest arguments, and the most incontestable facts this man wilfully rejects the evidence and refuses to accept the christ so convincingly presented. thus is the holy ghost resisted. (see acts : .) that this is a true picture of resistance to the holy spirit is clearly seen from stephen's recital of the facts in acts : - . b) insulting, or doing despite unto the holy spirit. heb. : (cf. luke : ). it is the work of the spirit to present the atoning work of christ to the sinner as the ground of his pardon. when the sinner refuses to believe or accept the testimony of the spirit, he thereby insults the spirit by esteeming the whole work of christ as a deception and a lie, or accounts the death of christ as the death of an ordinary or common man, and not as god's provision for the sinner. c) blaspheming the holy spirit. matt. : , . this seems to be the most grievous sin of all, for the master asserts that there is no forgiveness for this sin. sins against the son of man may be forgiven because it was easily possible, by reason of his humble birth, lowly parentage, etc., to question the claims he put forth to deity. but when, after pentecost, the holy spirit came, and presented to every man's conscience evidence sufficient to prove the truth of these claims, the man who then refused to yield to christ's claims was guilty of resisting, insulting, and that amounts to blaspheming the testimony of the whole godhead, of which the spirit is the executive. . offences committed by the believer. a) grieving the spirit. eph. : , ; isa. : (r. v.). to grieve means to make sad or sorrowful. it is the word used to describe the experience of christ in gethsemane; and so the sorrow of gethsemane may be endured by the holy spirit. the spirit is the most sensitive person of the godhead. he is called the "mother--heart" of god. the context of this passage (v. ) tells us how the spirit may be grieved: by "foolish talking and jesting." whenever the believer allows any of the things mentioned in this verse (and those stated also in gal. : - ) to find place in his heart and expression in his words and life; when these things abide in his heart and actively manifest themselves, then the spirit is sad and grieved. indeed to refuse any part of our moral nature to the full sway of the spirit is to grieve him. if we continue to grieve the spirit, then the grief turns into vexation (isa. : ). b) lying to the holy spirit. acts : , . the sin of lying to the spirit is very prominent when consecration is most popular. we stand up and say, "i surrender all" when in our hearts we know that we have not surrendered _all_. yet, like ananias, we like to have others believe that we have consecrated our all. we do not wish to be one whit behind others in our profession. bead carefully in this connection the story of achan (joshua ), and that of gehazi ( kings : - ). c) quenching the spirit. thess. : -"quench not the spirit." the thought of quenching the spirit seems to be used in connection with fire: "smoking flax shall he not quench" (matt. : ); "quench the fiery darts" (eph. : ). it is therefore related more to the thought of service than to that of life. the context of thess. : shows this. the manifestation of the spirit in prophesying was not to be quenched. the holy spirit is seen as coming down upon this gathered assembly for praise, prayer, and testimony. this manifestation of the spirit must not be quenched. thus we may quench the spirit not only in our hearts, but also in the hearts of others. how? by disloyalty to the voice and call of the spirit; by disobedience to his voice whether it be to testify, praise, to do any bit of service for god, or to refuse to go where he sends us to labor--the foreign field, for example. let us be careful also lest in criticizing the manifestation of the spirit in the testimony of some believer, or the sermon of some preacher, we be found guilty of quenching the spirit. let us see to it that the gift of the holy ghost for service be not lost by any unfaithfulness, or by the cultivation of a critical spirit on our part, so that the fire in our hearts dies out and nothing but ashes remain--ashes, a sign that fire was once there, but has been extinguished. from what has been said the following may be summarily stated: _resisting_ has to do with the regenerating work of the spirit; _grieving_ has to do with the indwelling holy spirit; _quenching_ has to do with the enduement of the spirit for service. the doctrine of man i. the creation and original condition of man. . image and likeness of god. . physical--mental--moral--spiritual. ii. the fall of man. . the scriptural account. . various interpretations. . the nature of the fall. . the results of the fall. a) on adam, and eve. b) on the race. ( ) various theories. ( ) scriptural declarations. the doctrine of man. i. the creation and original condition of man. . man made in the image and likeness of god. gen. : --"and god said, let us make man in our image, after our likeness." : --"for in the image of god made he man." what is meant by the terms _image_ and _likeness_? _image_ means the shadow or outline of a figure, while _likeness_ denotes the resemblance of that shadow to the figure. the two words, however, are practically synonymous. that man was made in the image and likeness of god is fundamental in all god's dealings with man ( cor. : ; eph. : - ; col. : ; james : ). we may express the language as follows: let us make man in our image to be our likeness. a) the image of god does not denote physical likeness. god is spirit; he does not have parts and passions as a man. (see under doctrine of god; the spirituality of god, pp. , ). consequently mormon and swedenborgian views of god as a great human are wrong. deut. : contradicts such a physical view of god (see p. , b, c). some would infer from psa. : --"i shall be satisfied, when i awake, with thy likeness," that in some remote way, a physical likeness is suggested. the r. v., however, changes somewhat the sense of this verse, and reads: "i shall be satisfied, when i awake, with _beholding_ thy form." see also num. : , r. v. it is fair to believe, however, that erectness of posture, intelligence of countenance, and a quick, glancing eye characterized the first man. we should also remember that the manifestations in the old testament, and the incarnation must throw some light upon this subject (see p. ). b) nor are the expressions "image" and "likeness" exhausted when we say that they consisted in man's dominion over nature, and the creation of god in general. indeed the supremacy conferred upon man presupposed those spiritual endowments, and was justified by his fitness, through them, to exercise it. c) positively, we learn from certain scriptures in what this image and likeness consisted. eph. : , --"and be renewed in the spirit of your mind; and that ye put on the new man, which after god is created in righteousness and true holiness (b. v., holiness of truth)." col. : --"and have put on the new man, which is renewed in knowledge after the image of him that created him." it is clear from these passages that the image of god consists in knowledge, righteousness, and holiness; moral, not physical likeness. d) the original man was endowed with intellectual faculties. he had sufficient intelligence to give names to the animals as they were presented before him (gen. : , ). adam had not only the power of speech, but the power of reasoning and thought in connection with speech. he could attach words to ideas. this is not the picture, as evolution would have us believe, of an infantile savage slowly groping his way towards articulate speech by imitation of the sounds of animals. e) the original man possessed moral and spiritual faculties. consider the moral test in genesis . adam had power to resist or to yield to moral evil. sin was a volitional thing. christ, the second adam, endured a similar test (matt. ). from all this it is evident that man's original state was not one of savagery. indeed there is abundant evidence to show that man has been degraded from a very much higher stage. both the bible and science agree in making man the crowning work of god, and that there will be no higher order of beings here on the earth than man. we must not forget that while man, from one side of his nature, is linked to the animal creation, he is yet supra-natural--a being of a higher order and more splendid nature; he is in the image and likeness of god. man has developed not _from_ the ape, but _away from_ it. he never was anything but potential man. "no single instance has yet been adduced of the transformation of one animal species into another, either by natural or artificial selection; much less has it been demonstrated that the body of the brute has ever been developed into that of the man. the links that should bind man to the monkey have not been found. not a single one can be shown. none have been found that stood nearer the monkey than the man of today."--_agassiz_. ii. the fall of man. the doctrine of the fall of man is not peculiar to christianity; all religions contain an account of it, and recognize the great and awful fact. had there been no such account as that found in genesis , there would still have remained the problem of the fall and sin. yet, the doctrine of the fall has a relation to christianity that it does not have to other religions, or religious systems. the moral character of god as seen in the christian religion far surpasses the delineation of the supreme being set forth in any other religion, and thus heightens and intensifies its idea of sin. it is when men consider the very high character of god as set forth in christianity, and then look at the doctrine of sin, that they find it hard to reconcile the fact that god, being the moral being he is, should ever allow sin to come into the world. to some minds these two things seem incompatible. . the scriptural account of the fall of man. the third chapter of genesis gives the fullest account of this awful tragedy in the experience of mankind. other scriptures: rom. : - ; i tim. : ; gen. : ; : ; psa. ; rom. : - . the purpose of the genesis narrative is not to give an account of the manner in which sin came into the _world,_ but how it found its advent into the _human race_. sin was already in the world, as the existence of satan and the chaotic condition of things in the beginning, strikingly testify. the reasonableness of the narrative of the fall is seen in view of the condition of man after he had sinned with his condition when he left the hand of the creator. compare gen. : with : , and psa. . if the fall of man were not narrated in genesis we should have to postulate some such event to account for the present condition in which we find man. in no part of the scripture, save in the creation account as found in the first two chapters of genesis, does man appear perfect and upright. his attitude is that of rebellion against god, of deepening and awful corruption. . various interpretations of the narrative of the fall of man. some look upon the whole narrative as being an _allegory_. adam is the rational part of man; eve, the sensual; the serpent, external excitements to evil. but the simplicity and artlessness of the narrative militates against this view. others, again, designate the narrative as being a _myth_. it is regarded as a truth invested in poetic form; something made up from the folklore of the times. but why should these few verses be snatched out of the chapter in which they are found and be called mythical, while the remaining verses are indisputably literal? then there is the _literal interpretation_, which takes the account as it reads, in its perfectly natural sense, just as in the case of the other parts of the same chapter. there is no intimation in the account itself that it is not to be regarded as literal history. it certainly is part of a historical book. the geographical locations in connection with the story are historic. the curse upon the man, upon the woman, and upon the ground are certainly literal. it is a fact that death is in the world as the wages of sin. unquestionably christ, and the other scripture writers regard the event as historical and literal: of. matt. : ; mark : ; cor. : ; i tim. : - ; i cor. : . . the nature of the fall. it must be kept in mind that adam and eve were free moral agents. that while they were sinless beings, it was yet possible for them to sin, just as it was possible for them not to sin. a careful reading of the narrative leads to the following remarks: the sin of our first parents was purely volitional; it was an act of their own determination. their sin was, like all other sin, a voluntary act of the will. it came from an outside source, that is to say, it was instigated from without. there was no sin in the nature of the first human pair. consequently there must have been an ungodly principle already in the world. probably the fall of satan and the evil angels had taken place already. the essence of the first sin lay in the denial of the divine will; an elevation of the will of man over the will of god. it was a deliberate transgressing of a divinely marked boundary; an overstepping of the divine limits. in its last analysis, the first sin was, what each and every sin committed since has been, a positive disbelief in the word of the living god. a belief of satan rather than a belief in god. it is helpful to note that the same lines of temptation that were presented to our first parents, were presented to christ in the wilderness (matt. : - ), and to men ever since then ( john : - ). satan's program is short and shallow after all. . the results of the fall. a) on our first parents--adam and eve. the results of sin in the experience of our first parents were as follows: the ground was cursed, so that henceforth it would not yield good alone (gen. : ). sorrow and pain to the woman in child-bearing, and subjection of woman to the man (gen. : ). exhausting physical labor in order to subsist (gen. : ). physical and spiritual death (gen. : ; : ; : ; rom. : ). of course, with all this came also a fear of god, a shame because of sin, a hiding from god's presence, and finally, an expulsion from the garden (gen. : - , - ). b) on the race--various theories. there are three general views held with regard to the effect of adam's sin upon the race. before looking at the strictly scriptural view in detail, let us briefly state these three theories: that adam's sin affected himself only; that every human being born into the world is as free from sin as adam was. the only effect the first sin had upon the race was that of a bad example. according to this theory man is well morally and spiritually. this view of the case is false because the scriptures recognize all men as guilty and as possessing a sinful nature; because man, as soon as he attains the age of responsibility commits sinful acts, and there is no exception to this rule; because righteousness is impossible without the help of god, otherwise redemption would be by works of righteousness which we have done, and this the scripture contradicts. according to this view man is perfectly well. (the pelagian theory.) that while adam's sin, as guilt, is not imputed to man, he is yet destitute of original righteousness, and, without divine help, is utterly unable to attain it. god, however, bestows upon each individual, at the dawn of consciousness, a special gift of his spirit, which is sufficient to enable man to be righteous, if he will allow his will to _co-operate_ with god's spirit. according to this view man is only half sick, or half well. this view also is false because the scriptures clearly state that man is utterly unable to do a single thing to save himself. (the semi-pelagian theory.) that because of the unity of the race in adam, and the organic unity of mankind, adam's sin is therefore imputed to his posterity. the nature which man now possesses is like to the corrupted nature of adam. man is totally unable to do anything to save himself. according to this theory man is not only not well, nor half well, but totally dead. ( the augustinian theory.) scriptural teaching. ( ) all men, without respect of condition or class, are sinners before god. rom. : , , , ; psa. ; isa. : . there may be a difference in the degree, but not in the fact of sin. all men, jew and gentile, have missed the mark, and failed to attain to god's standard. there is none righteous, no, not one. ( ) this universal sinful condition is vitally connected with the sin of adam. rom. : --"wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned." "for the judgment was by one to condemnation" ( : ). "for as by one man's disobedience many were made sinners" ( : ). all men were in adam when he sinned; fallen he, fallen they. herein lies the truth of the organic unity of the race. "in adam all die." two questions are raised here: how can man be held responsible for a depraved nature?--this touches the matter of _original sin_; and how can god justly impute adam's sin to us?--this deals with the question of the _imputation of sin_. ( ) the whole world rests under condemnation, wrath, and curse. rom. : --"that every mouth may be stopped, and all the world may become guilty before god." gal. : ; eph. : . the law of god demands a perfect obedience; but no son of man can yield such obedience; hence the curse of a broken law rests upon those breaking it. the wrath of god abides on all not vitally united by faith to jesus christ (john : ). ( ) unregenerate men are regarded as children of the devil, and not sous of god. john : - ; john : --"ye are of your father the devil." john : --"and we know that we are of god, and the whole world lieth in wickedness (in the wicked one, r. v.)." ( ) the whole race of men are in helpless captivity to sin and satan. rom. , chapter entire; john : - ; eph. : . ( ) the entire nature of man, mentally, morally, spiritually, physically, is sadly affected by sin. the _understanding_ is darkened (eph. : ; cor. : ); the _heart_ is deceitful and wicked (jer. : , ); the _mind and conscience_ are defiled (gen. : ; titus : ); the _flesh and spirit_ are defiled ( cor. : ); the _will_ is enfeebled (rom. : ); and we are utterly destitute of any godlike qualities which meet the requirements of god's holiness (rom. : ). what does all this mean? a. h. strong, in his _systematic theology_, explains the matter somewhat as follows: it does not mean the entire absence of conscience (john : ); nor of all moral qualities (mark : ); nor that men are prone to every kind of sin (for some sins exclude others). it does mean, however, that man is totally destitute of love to god which is the all absorbing commandment of the law (john : ); that the natural man has an aversion to god (rom. : ); that all that is stated under ( ) above is true of man; that man is in possession of a nature that is constantly on the downgrade, and from the dominion of which he is totally unable to free himself (rom. : , ). [illustration with caption: handwritten notations of rev. william evans, ph.d. d.d.] the doctrines of salvation a. repentance. b. faith. c. regeneration. d. justification. e. adoption. f. sanctification. g. prayer. the doctrines of salvation. a. repentance. i. the importance of the doctrine. ii. the nature of repentance. . as touching the intellect. . affecting the emotions. . will. a) confess sin. b) forsake sin. c) turn to god. iii. how repentance is produced. . divine side. . human side. . question of means. iv. results of repentance. . godward. . manward. a. repentance. i. the importance of the doctrine. the prominence given to the doctrine of repentance in the scriptures can hardly be overestimated. john the baptist began his public ministry, as did jesus also, with the call to repentance upon his lips (matt. : , ; : ). when jesus sent forth the twelve and the seventy messengers to proclaim the good news of the kingdom of heaven, he commanded them to preach repentance (luke : ; mark : ). foremost in the preaching of the apostles was the doctrine of repentance; peter, (acts : ); paul, (acts : ). the burden of the heart of god, and his one command to all men everywhere, is that they should repent ( pet. : ; acts : ). indeed, failure on the part of man to heed god's call to repentance means that he shall utterly perish (luke : ). does the doctrine of repentance find such a prominent place in the preaching and teaching of today? has the need for repentance diminished? has god lessened or changed the terms of admission into his kingdom? ii. the nature of repentance. there is a three-fold idea involved in true repentance: . as touching the intellect. matt. : --"he answered and said: i will not; but afterward he repented, and went". the word here used for "repent" means to change one's mind, thought, purpose, views regarding a matter; it is to have another mind about a thing. so we may speak of it as a revolution touching our attitude and views towards sin and righteousness. this change is well illustrated in the action of the prodigal son, and of the publican in the well-known story of the pharisee and the publican (luke and ). thus, when peter, on the day of pentecost, called upon the jews to repent (acts : - ), he virtually called upon them to change their minds and their views regarding christ. they had considered christ to be a mere man, a blasphemer, an impostor. the events of the few preceding days had proven to them that he was none other than the righteous son of god, their saviour and the saviour of the world. the result of their repentance or change of mind would be that they would receive jesus christ as their long promised messiah. . as touching the emotions. cor. : --"now i rejoice, not that ye were made sorry, but that ye sorrowed to repentance; for ye were made sorry after a godly manner, that ye might receive damage by us in nothing." the context (vv. - ) shows what a large part the feelings played in true gospel repentance. see also luke : ; cf. gen. : . the greek word for repentance in this connection means "to be a care to one afterwards," to cause one great concern. the hebrew equivalent is even stronger, and means to pant, to sigh, to moan. so the publican "beat upon his breast," indicating sorrow of heart. just how much emotion is necessary to true repentance no one can definitely say. but that a certain amount of heart movement, even though it be not accompanied with a flood of tears, or even a single tear, accompanies all true repentance is evident from the use of this word. see also psa. : . . as touching the will and disposition. one of the hebrew words for repent means "to turn." the prodigal said, "i will arise.... and he arose" (luke : , ). he not only thought upon his ways, and felt sorry because of them, but he turned his steps in the direction of home. so that in a very real sense repentance is a crisis with a changed experience in view. repentance is not only a heart broken _for_ sin, but _from_ sin also. we must forsake what we would have god remit. in the writings of paul repentance is more of an experience than a single act. the part of the will and disposition in repentance is shown: a) in the confession of sin to god. psa. : --"for i will declare mine iniquity: i will be sorry for my sin." the publican beat upon his breast, and said, "god be merciful to me a sinner" (luke : ). the prodigal said, "i have sinned against heaven" (luke : ). there must be confession to man also in so far as man has been wronged in and by our sin (matt. : , ; james : ). b) in the forsaking of sin. isa. : --"let the wicked forsake his way, and the unrighteous man his thoughts; and let him return unto the lord." prov. : ; matt. : , . c) in turning unto god. it is not enough to turn away from sin; we must turn unto god; thess. : ; acts : . iii. how repentance is produced. . it is a divine gift. acts : --"then hath god also to the gentiles granted repentance unto life." tim. : --"if god peradventure will give them repentance to the acknowledging of the truth." acts : , . repentance is not something which one can originate within himself, or can pump up within himself as one would pump water out of a well. it is a divine gift. how then is man responsible for not having it? we are called upon to repent in order that we may feel our own inability to do so, and consequently be thrown upon god and petition him to perform this work of grace in our hearts. . yet this divine gift is brought about through the use of means. acts : , , . the very gospel which calls for repentance produces it. how well this is illustrated in the experience of the people of nineveh (jonah : - )! when they heard the preaching of the word of god by jonah they believed the message and turned unto god. not any message, but the gospel is the instrument that god uses to bring about this desired end. furthermore, this message must be preached in the power of the holy spirit ( thess. : - ). rom. : --"or despisest thou the riches of his goodness and forbearance and long-suffering; not knowing that the goodness of god leadeth thee to repentance?" also pet. : . prosperity too often leads away from god, but it is the divine intention that it should lead to god. revivals come mostly in times of panic. rev. : ; heb. : , , . the chastisements of god are sometimes for the purpose of bringing his wandering children back to repentance. tim. : , . god oftentimes uses the loving, christian reproof of a brother to be the means of bringing us back to god. iv. the results of repentance. . all heaven is made glad. luke : , . joy in heaven, and in the presence of the angels of god. makes glad the heart of god, and sets the bells of heaven ringing. who are those "in the presence of the angels of god"? do the departed loved ones know anything about it? . it brings pardon and forgiveness of sin. isa. : ; acts : . outside of repentance the prophets and apostles know of no way of securing pardon. no sacrifices, nor religious ceremonies can secure it. not that repentance merits forgiveness, but it is a condition of it. repentance qualifies a man for a pardon, but it does not entitle him to it. . the holy spirit is poured out upon the penitent. acts : --"repent... and ye shall receive the gift of the holy ghost." impenitence keeps back the full incoming of the spirit into the heart. b. faith. i. the importance of the doctrine. ii. the definition of faith. . in general: a) knowledge. b) assent. c) appropriation. . in particular: a) towards god. b) towards christ. c) in prayer. d) in the word of god. . relation of faith to works. iii. the source of faith. . the divine side. . the human side. . means used. iv. some results of faith. . saved. . joy and peace. . do great works. b. faith. i. the importance of the doctrine. faith is fundamental in christian creed and conduct. it was the one thing which above all others christ recognized as the paramount virtue. the syrophoenician woman (matt. ) had perseverance; the centurion (matt. ), humility; the blind man (mark ), earnestness. but what christ saw and rewarded in each of these cases was faith. faith is the foundation of peter's spiritual temple ( pet. : - ); and first in paul's trinity of graces ( cor. : ). in faith all the other graces find their source. ii. the definition of faith. faith is used in the scriptures in a general and in a particular sense. . its general meaning: a) knowledge. psa. : --"and they that know thy name will put their trust in thee." rom. : --"so then faith cometh by hearing, and hearing by the word of god." faith is not believing a thing without evidence; on the contrary faith rests upon the best of evidence, namely, the word of god. an act of faith denotes a manifestation of the intelligence: "how shall they believe in him of whom they have not heard?" faith is no blind act of the soul; it is not a leap in the dark. such a thing as believing with the heart without the head is out of the question. a man may believe with his head without believing with his heart; but he cannot believe with his heart without believing with his head too. the heart, in the scriptures, means the whole man--intellect, sensibilities, and will. "as a man _thinketh_ in his heart." "why _reason_ ye these things in your hearts?" b) assent. mark : --"and the scribe said unto him, well, master, thou hast said the truth." so was it with the faith which christ demanded in his miracles: "believe ye that i am able to do this?" "yea, lord." there must not only be the knowledge that jesus is able to save, and that he is the saviour of the world; there must be also an assent of the heart to all these claims. those who, _receiving_ christ to be all that he claimed to be, _believed_ in him, became thereby sons of god (john : ). c) appropriation. john : ; : . there must be an appropriation of the things which we know and assent to concerning the christ and his work. intelligent perception is not faith. a man may know christ as divine, and yet aside from that reject him as saviour. knowledge affirms the reality of these things but neither accepts nor rejects them. nor is assent faith. there is an assent of the mind which does not convey a surrender of the heart and affections. faith is the consent of the will to the assent of the understanding. faith always has in it the idea of action--movement towards its object. it is the soul leaping forth to embrace and appropriate the christ in whom it believes. it first says: "my lord and my god," and then falls down and worships. a distinction between believing about christ and on christ is made in john : , , r. v.--"many believed _on_ him.... jesus therefore said to those jews that had believed _him_." s. the meaning of faith in particular: a) when used in connection with the name of god. heb. : --"but without faith it is impossible to please him; for he that cometh to god must believe that he is, and that he is a rewarder of them that diligently seek him." also acts : - ; rom. : - with gen. : - . there can be no dealings with the invisible god unless there is absolute faith in his existence. we must believe in his reality, even though he is unseen. but we must believe even more than the fact of his existence; namely, that he is a rewarder, that he will assuredly honor with definite blessing those who approach unto him in prayer. importunity will, of course, be needed (luke : - ). there must be confidence in the word of god also. faith believes all that god says as being absolutely true, even though circumstances seem to be against its fulfillment. b) when used in connection with the person and work of christ. recall the three elements in faith, and apply them here. first, there must be a _knowledge_ of the claims of christ as to his person and mission in the world: as to his person--that he is deity, john : - ; : ; phil. : -ll. as to his work--matt. : ; : - ; luke : , . second, there must be an _assent_ to all these claims, john : ; : ; matt. : ; john : , . third, there must be a personal _appropriation_ of christ as being all that he claims to be, john : , : , ; : . there must be surrender to a person, and not mere faith in a creed. faith in a doctrine must lead to faith in a person, and that person jesus christ, if salvation is to be the result of such belief. so martha was led to substitute faith in a doctrine for faith in a person (john : ). it is such faith--consisting of knowledge, assent, and appropriation --that saves. this is believing with the heart (rom. : , ). c) when used in connection with prayer. three passages may be used to set forth this relationship: john : , ; james : - , mark : . there must be no hesitation which balances between belief and unbelief, and inclines toward the latter--tossed one moment upon the shore of faith and hope, the next tossed back again into the abyss of unbelief. to "doubt" means to reason whether or no the thing concerning which you are making request can be done (acts : ; rom. : ). such a man only conjectures; he does not really believe. real faith thanks god for the thing asked for, if that thing is in accord with the will of god, even before it receives it (mark : ). note the slight: "that man." we must recognize the fact that knowledge, assent, and appropriation exist here also. we must understand the promises on which we base our prayer; we must believe that they are worth their full face value; and then step out upon them, thereby giving substance to that which, at the moment may be unseen, and, perchance, nonexistent, so far as our knowledge and vision are concerned, but which to faith is a splendid reality. d) when used in connection with the word and promise of god. first, we should know whether the particular promise in question is intended for us in particular. there is a difference in a promise being written _for_ us and _to_ us. there are dispensational aspects to many of the promises in the bible, therefore we must rightly divide, apportion, and appropriate the word of god (cf. i cor. : ). second, when once we are persuaded that a promise is _for_ us, we must believe that god means all he says in that promise; we must assent to all its truth; we must not diminish nor discount it. god will not, cannot lie (titus : ). third, we must appropriate and act upon the promises. herein lies the difference between belief and faith. belief is mental; faith adds the volitional; we may have belief without the will, but not faith. belief is a realm of thought; faith is a sphere of action. belief lives in the study; faith comes out into the market-places and the streets. faith substantiates belief--gives substance, life, reality, and activity to it (heb. : ). faith puts belief into active service, and connects possibilities with actualities. faith is acting upon what you believe; it is appropriation. faith counts every promise valid, and gilt-edged (heb. : ); no trial can shake it ( : ); it is so absolute that it survives the loss of its own pledge even ( : ). for illustration, see i kings : - . . the relation of faith to works. there is no merit in faith alone. it is not mere faith that saves, but faith in christ. faith in any other saviour but christ will not save. faith in any other gospel than that of the new testament will not save (gal. : , ). there is no contradiction between paul and james touching the matter of faith and works (cf. james : - ; rom. : - ). paul is looking at the matter from the godward side, and asserts that we are justified, in the sight of god, _meritoriously_, without absolutely any works on our part. james considers the matter from the manward side, and asserts that we are justified, in the sight of man, _evidentially_, by works, and not by faith alone ( : ). in james it is not the _ground_ of justification, as in paul, but the _demonstration_. see under justification, ii. , p. . iii. the source of faith. there are two sides to this phase of the subject--a divine and a human side. . it is the work of the triune god. _god the father_: rom. : ; i cor. . this is true of faith both in its beginning (phil. : ) and its development ( cor. ). faith, then, is a gift of his grace. _god the son_: heb. : --"looking unto jesus the author and finisher of our faith." (illustration, matt. : , --peter taking his eyes off christ.) i cor. ; luke : . _god the spirit_: gal. : ; i cor. : . the holy spirit is the executive of the godhead. why then, if faith is the work of the godhead, are we responsible for not having it? god wills to work faith in all his creatures, and will do so if they do not resist his holy spirit. we are responsible, therefore, not so much for the lack of faith, but for resisting the spirit who will create faith in our hearts if we will permit him to do so. . there is also a human side to faith. rom. : --"so then faith cometh by hearing, and hearing by the word of god." (cf. the context, vv. - .) acts : --"howbeit many of them which heard the word believed." in this instance the _spoken_ word, the gospel, is referred to; in other cases the written word, the scriptures, are referred to as being instrumental in producing faith. see also gal. : - . it was a looking unto the promises of god that brought such faith into the heart of abraham (rom. : ). prayer also is an instrument in the development of faith. luke is called the _human_ gospel because it makes so much of prayer, especially in connection with faith: : --"but i have prayed for thee that thy faith fail not." : --"and the apostles said unto the lord, increase our faith." see also mark : ; matt. : - . our faith grows by the use of the faith we already have. luke : , ; matt. : . iv. some results of faith. . we are saved by faith. we, of course, recall that the saving power of faith resides not in itself, but in the almighty saviour on whom it rests; so that, properly speaking, it is not so much faith, as it is faith in christ that saves. the whole of our salvation--past, present, and future, is dependent upon faith. our acceptance of christ (john : ); our justification (rom. : ); our adoption (gal. : ); our sanctification (acts : ); our keeping ( pet. : ), indeed our whole salvation from start to finish is dependent upon faith. . rest, peace, assurance, joy. isa. : ; phil. : ; rom. : ; heb. : - ; john : ; pet. : . fact, faith, feeling--this is god's order. satan would reverse this order and put feeling before faith, and thus confuse the child of god. we should march in accord with god's order: fact leads, faith with its eye on fact, following, and feeling with the eye on faith bringing up the rear. all goes well as long as this order is observed. but the moment faith turns his back on fact, and looks at feeling, the procession wabbles. steam is of main importance, not for sounding the whistle, but for moving the wheels; and if there is a lack of steam we shall not remedy it by attempting by our own effort to move the piston or blow the whistle, but by more water in the boiler, and more fire under it. feed faith with facts, not with feeling.--_a. t. pierson_. . do exploits through faith. heb. : - ; matt. : ; john : . note the wonderful things done by the men of faith as recorded in the eleventh chapter of hebrews. read vv. - . jesus attributes a kind of omnipotence to faith. the disciple, by faith, will be able to do greater things than his master. here is a mighty niagara of power for the believer. the great question for the christian to answer is not "what can i do?" but "how much can i believe?" for "all things are possible to him that believeth." c. regeneration, or the new birth. i. its nature. . not baptism. . not reformation. . a spiritual quickening. . an impartation of a divine nature. . a new and divine impulse. ii. its necessity. . universal. . the sinful condition of man demands it. . the holiness of god demands it. iii. the means. . the divine side. . the human side. . the means used. c. regeneration, or the new birth. it is of the utmost importance that we have a clear understanding of this vital doctrine. by regeneration we are admitted into the kingdom of god. there is no other way of becoming a christian but by being born from above. this doctrine, then, is the door of entrance into christian discipleship. he who does not enter here, does not enter at all. i. the nature of regeneration. too often do we find other things substituted by man for god's appointed means of entrance into the kingdom of heaven. it will be well for us then to look, first of all, at some of these substitutes. . regeneration is not baptism. it is claimed that john : --"except a man be born of water and of the spirit," and titus : --"the washing of regeneration," teach that regeneration may occur in connection with baptism. these passages, however, are to be understood in a figurative sense, as meaning the cleansing power of the word of god. see also eph. : --"with the washing of water by (or in) the word"; john : --"clean through the word." that the word of god is an agent in regeneration is clear from james : , and pet. : . if baptism and regeneration were identical, why should the apostle paul seem to make so little of that rite ( cor. : , and compare with it cor. : )? in the first passage paul asserts that he had _begotten_ them through the gospel; and in : he declares that he _baptized none of them_ save crispus and gaius. could he thus speak of baptism if it had been the means through which they had been begotten again? simon magus was baptized (acts ), but was he saved? cornelius (acts ) was saved even before he was baptized. . reformation is not regeneration. regeneration is not a natural forward step in man's development; it is a supernatural act of god; it is a spiritual crisis. it is not evolution, but involution--the communication of a new life. it is a revolution--a change of direction resulting from that life. herein lies the danger in psychology, and in the statistics regarding the number of conversions during the period of adolescence. the danger lies in the tendency to make regeneration a natural phenomenon, an advanced step in the development of a human life, instead of regarding it as a crisis. such a psychological view of regeneration denies man's sin, his need of christ, the necessity of an atonement, and the regenerating work of the holy spirit. . regeneration is a spiritual quickening, a new birth. regeneration is the impartation of a new and divine life; a new creation; the production of a new thing. it is gen. : over again. it is not the old nature altered, reformed, or re-invigorated, but a new birth from above. this is the teaching of such passages as john : - ; : ; eph. : , ; cor. : . by nature man is dead in sin (eph. : ); the new birth imparts to him new life--the life of god, so that henceforth he is as those that are alive from the dead; he has passed out of death into life (john : ). . it is the impartation of a new nature--god's nature. in regeneration we are made partakers of the divine nature ( pet. : ). we have put on the new man, which after god is created in holiness and righteousness (eph. : ; col. : ). christ now lives in the believer (gal. : ). god's seed now abides in him ( john : ). so that henceforth the believer is possessed of two natures (gal. : ). . a new and divine impulse is given to the believer. thus regeneration is a crisis with a view to a process. a new governing power comes into the regenerate man's life by which he is enabled to become holy in experience: "old things are passed away; behold all things are become new" ( cor. : ). see also acts : , and ezek. : - , john : - . ii. the imperative necessity of the new birth. . the necessity is universal. the need is as far reaching as sin and the human race: "except a man (lit. anybody) be born again, he cannot see the kingdom of god" (john : , cf. v. ). no age, sex, position, condition exempts anyone from this necessity. not to be born again is to be lost. there is no substitute for the new birth: "neither circumcision availeth anything, nor uncircumcision, but a new creature" (gal. : ). the absolute necessity is clearly stated by our lord: whatever is born of the flesh, must be born again of the spirit (john : - ). . the sinful condition of man demands it. john : --"that which is born of the flesh is flesh"--and it can never, by any human process, become anything else. "can the ethiopian change his skin, or the leopard his spots? then may ye also do good that are accustomed to do evil" (jer. : ). "they that are in the flesh cannot please god" (rom. : ); in our "flesh dwelleth no good thing" (rom. : ). the mind is darkened so that we cannot apprehend spiritual truth; we need a renewing of the mind (rom. : ). the heart is deceitful, and does not welcome god; we need to be pure in heart to see god. there is no thought of god before the eyes of the natural man; we need a change in nature that we may be counted among those "who thought upon his name." no education or culture can bring about such a needed change. god alone can do it. . the holiness of god demands it. if without holiness no man shall see the lord (heb. : ); and if holiness is not to be attained by any natural development or self-effort, then the regeneration of our nature is absolutely necessary. this change, which enables us to be holy, takes place when we are born again. man is conscious that he does not have this holiness by nature; he is conscious, too, that he must have it in order to appear before god (ezra : ). the scriptures corroborate this consciousness in man, and, still further, state the necessity of such a righteousness with which to appear before god. in the new birth alone is the beginning of such a life to be found. to live the life of god we must have the nature of god. iii. the means of regeneration. . regeneration is a divine work. we are "born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, _but of god"_ (john : ). it was of his own will he begat us (jas. : ): our regeneration is a creative act on the part of god, not a reforming process on the part of man. it is not brought about by natural descent, for all we get from that is "flesh." it is not by natural choice, for the human will is impotent. nor is it by self-effort, or any human generative principle. nor is it by the blood of any ceremonial sacrifices. it is not by pedigree or natural generation. it is altogether and absolutely the work of god. practically speaking, we have no more to do with our second birth, than we had to do with our first birth. the holy spirit is the divine agent in our regeneration. for this reason it is called the "renewing of the holy ghost" (tit. : ). we are "born of the spirit" (john : ). . and yet there is a human side to the work. john : and bring together these two thoughts--the divine and the human in regeneration: those who _received_ him (i. e., christ)....were born _of god._ the two great problems connected with regeneration are the efficiency of god and the activity of man. a) man is regenerated by means of the acceptance of the message of the gospel. god begat us by "the word of truth" (james : ). we are "born again," says peter ( ep. : ), "of incorruptible seed, by the word of god." we are "begotten through the gospel" ( cor. : ). these scriptures teach us that regeneration takes place in the heart of man when he reads or hears the word of god, or the gospel message, or both, and, because of the spirit working in the word as well as in the heart of man, the man opens his heart and receives that message as the word of life to his soul. the truth is illuminated, as is also the mind, by the spirit; the man yields to the truth, and is born again. of course, even here, we must remember that it is the lord who must open our hearts just as he opened the heart of lydia (acts : ). but the word must be believed and received by man. pet. : . b) man is regenerated by the personal acceptance of jesus christ. this is the clear teaching of john : , and gal. : . we become "children of god by faith in jesus christ." when a man, believing in the claims of jesus christ receives him to be all that he claimed to be--that man is born again. man therefore is not wholly passive at the time of his regeneration. he is passive only as to the change of his ruling disposition. with regard to the exercise of this disposition he is active. a dead man cannot assist in his own resurrection, it is true; but he may, and can, like lazarus, obey christ's command, and "come forth!" psa. : , illustrates both the divine and human part: "let _thy_ work appear unto thy servants," and then "the work of _our_ hands establish thou it." god's work appears first, then man's. so phil. : , . d. justification. i. its meaning. . relatively. . scripturally. . pardon--righteousness. ii. its method. . not by law. . by god's free grace. . the blood of christ. . faith. d. justification. i. the meaning of justification. . relatively. it is a change in a man's relation or standing before god. it has to do with relations that have been disturbed by sin, and these relations are personal. it is a change from guilt and condemnation to acquittal and acceptance. regeneration has to do with the change of the believer's nature; justification, with the change of his standing before god. regeneration is subjective; justification is objective. the former has to do with man's state; the latter, with his standing. . according to the language and usage of the scriptures. according to deut. : it means to declare, or to cause to appear innocent or righteous; rom. : - : to reckon righteous; psa. : : not to impute iniquity. one thing at least is clear from these verses, and that is, that to justify does not mean to _make_ one righteous. neither the hebrew nor greek words will bear such meaning. to justify means to set forth as righteous; to declare righteous in a legal sense; to put a person in a right relation. it does not deal, at least not directly, with character or conduct; it is a question of relationship. of course both character and conduct will be conditioned and controlled by this relationship. no real righteousness on the part of the person justified is to be asserted, but that person is declared to be righteous and is treated as such. strictly speaking then, justification is the judicial act of god whereby those who put faith in christ are declared righteous in his eyes, and free from guilt and punishment. . justification consists of two elements. a) the forgiveness of sin, and the removal of its guilt and punishment. it is difficult for us to understand god's feeling towards sin. to us forgiveness seems easy, largely because we are indifferent towards sin. but to a holy god it is different. even men sometimes find it hard to forgive when wronged. nevertheless god gladly forgives. micah : , --"who is a god like unto thee, that pardoneth iniquity, and passeth by the transgression of the remnant of his heritage? he retaineth not his anger forever, because he delighteth in mercy . . . . he will subdue our iniquities; and thou wilt cast all their sins into the depths of the sea." see also psa. : . what a wondrous forgiveness! forgiveness may be considered as the cessation of the moral anger and resentment of god against sin; or as a release from the guilt of sin which oppresses the conscience; or, again, as a remission of the punishment of sin, which is eternal death. in justification, then, all our sins are forgiven, and the guilt and punishment thereof removed (acts : , ; rom. : ). god sees the believer as without sin and guilt in christ (num. : ; rom. : , ). b) the imputation of christ's righteousness, and restoration to god's favor. the forgiven sinner is not like the discharged prisoner who has served out his term and is discharged from further punishment, but with no rights of citizenship. no, justification means much more than acquittal. the repentant sinner receives back in his pardon, the full rights of citizenship. the society of friends called themselves friends, not because they were friends one to another but because, being justified, they counted themselves friends of god as was abraham ( chron. : , james : ). there is also the imputation of the righteousness of jesus christ to the sinner. his righteousness is "unto all and upon all them that believe" (rom. : ). see rom. : - ; cor. : . for illustration, see philemon . ii. the method of justification. . negatively: not by works of the law. rom. : --"therefore by the deeds of the law there shall no flesh be justified in his sight; for by the law is the knowledge of sin." "therefore" implies that a judicial trial has taken place and a judgment pronounced. at the bar of god no man can be counted righteous in his sight because of his obedience to law. the burden of the epistle to the romans is to set forth this great truth. as a means of establishing right relations with god the law is totally insufficient. there is no salvation _by_ character. what men need is salvation _from_ character. the reason why the law cannot justify is here stated: "for by the law is the knowledge of sin." the law can open the sinner's eyes to his sin, but it cannot remove it. indeed, it was never intended to remove it, but to intensify it. the law simply defines sin, and makes it sinful, yea, exceedingly sinful, but it does not emancipate from it. gal. : gives us a further reason why justification cannot take place by obedience to the law. the law demands perfect and continual obedience: "cursed is every one that continueth not in all things which are written in the book of the law to do them." no man can render a perfect and perpetual obedience, therefore justification by obedience to the law is impossible. the only thing the law can do is to stop the mouth of every man, and declare him guilty before god (rom. : , ). gal. : , and : , rom. : , are very explicit in their denial of justification by law. it is a question of moses or christ, works or faith, law or promise, doing or believing, wages or a free gift. . positively: by god's peee grace--the origin or source of justification. rom. : --"being justified freely by his grace through the redemption that is in christ jesus." "freely" denotes that it is granted without anything done on our part to merit or deserve it. from the contents of the epistle up to this point it must be clearly evident that if men, sinful and sinning, are to be justified at all, it must be "by his free grace." . by the blood of jesus christ--the ground of justification. rom. : --"being justified . . . . through the redemption that is in christ jesus." : --"much more then, being now justified by his blood." cor. : (r. v.)--"him who knew no sin he made to be sin on our behalf; that we might become the righteousness of god in him." the bloodshedding of christ is here connected with justification. it is impossible to get rid of this double idea from this passage. the sacrifices of the old testament were more than a meaningless butchery--"without shedding of blood is no remission" of sin (heb. : ). the great sacrifice of the new testament, the death of jesus christ, was something more than the death of a martyr--men are "justified by his blood" (rom. : ). . by believing in jesus christ--the condition of justification. gal. : --"knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the law, but by the faith of jesus christ," or as the revised version margin has it: "but only through faith in jesus christ." rom. : --"to declare, i say, at this time his righteousness; that he might be just, and the justifier of him which believeth in jesus." "him that believeth in jesus" is contrasted with "as many as are of the works of the law" (gal. : ). when paul in romans : says: "now to him that worketh not, but believeth on him that justifieth the ungodly," he gives the death-blow to jewish righteousness. "his faith is counted for righteousness;" that pictures the man who, despairing of all dependence upon his works, casts himself unreservedly upon the mercy of god, as set forth in jesus christ, for his justification. thus it come to pass that "all that believe are justified from all things, from which ye could not be justified by the law of moses" (acts : ). the best of men need to be saved by faith in jesus christ, and the worst need only that. as there is no difference in the need, neither is there in the method of its application. on this common ground all saved sinners meet, and will stand forever. the first step, then, in justification is to despair of works; the second, to believe on him that justifieth the ungodly. we are not to slight good works, for they have their place, but they follow, not precede justification. the workingman is not the justified man, but the justified man is the workingman. works are not meritorious, but they meet with their reward in the life of the justified. the tree _shows_ its life by its fruits, but it was alive before the fruit or even the leaves appeared. (see under faith, ii. , p. , for further suggestions regarding the relation between faith and works.) summing up we may say that men are justified _judicially_ by god. (rom. : ); _meritoriously_ by christ, (isa. : ); _mediately_ by _faith_, (rom. : ); _evidentially_ by works, (james : , - ). the doctrines of salvation e. adoption. i. the meaning of adoption. . etymologically. . scripturally. ii. the time of adoption. . eternal. . when one believes. . complete at resurrection. iii. the blessings of adoption. . filial. . experimental. iv. some evidences of sonship. . guidance. . confidence. . access. . love for the brethren. . obedience. e. adoption. regeneration begins the new life in the soul; justification deals with the new attitude of god towards that soul, or perhaps better, of that soul towards god; adoption admits man into the family of god with filial joy. regeneration has to do with our change in nature; justification, with our change in standing; sanctification, with our change in character; adoption, with our change in position. in regeneration the believer becomes a child of god (john : , ); in adoption, the believer, already a child, receives a place as an adult son; thus the child becomes a son, the minor becomes an adult (gal. : - ). i. the meaning of adoption. adoption means _ the placing of a son_. it is a legal metaphor as regeneration is a physical one. it is a roman word, for adoption was hardly, if at all, known among the jews. it means the taking by one man of the son of another to be his son, so that that son has the same position and all the advantages of a son by birth. the word is pauline, not johannine. the word is never once used of christ. it is used of the believer when the question of rights, privileges, and heirship are involved. it is peculiarly a pauline word (gal. : ; rom. : , ; : ; eph. : ). john uses the word "children," not "sons," because he is always speaking of sonship from the standpoint of nature, growth, and likeness (cf. john : , r. v.). exodus : and heb. : , furnish two splendid illustrations of the scriptural sense and use of adoption. ii. the time when adoption takes place. . in a certain sense it is eternal in its nature. eph. : , --before the foundation of the world we were predestinated unto the adoption of children. we need to distinguish between the foreordaining to adoption, and the actual act of adoption which took place when we believed in christ. just as the incarnation was foreordained, and yet took place in time; and just as the lamb was slain from before the foundation of the word, and yet actually only on calvary. why then mention this eternal aspect of adoption? to exclude works and to show that our salvation had its origin solely in the grace of god (rom. : ; : , ). just as if we should adopt a child it would be a wholly gracious act on our part. . it takes place the moment one believes in jesus christ. john : --"beloved, now are we the sons of god." gal. : --"for ye are all the children of god by faith in christ jesus." see also john : . sonship is now the present possession of the believer. strange as it may be, inconceivable as it may seem, it is nevertheless true. the world may not think so (v. ), but god says so, and the christian believing it, exclaims, "i'm the child of a king." formerly we were slaves; now we are sons. . our sonship will be completed at the resurrection and coming again of our lord jesus christ. rom. : --"waiting for the adoption, to-wit, the redemption, of the body." here in this world we are _incognito_; we are not recognized as sons of god. but some day we shall throw off this disguise ( cor. : ). it doth not appear, it hath not yet appeared what we shall be; the revelation of the sons of god is reserved for a future day. see also i john : - . iii. the blessings of adoption. the blessings of adoption are too numerous to mention save in the briefest way. some of them are as follows: objects of god's peculiar love (john : ), and his fatherly care (luke : - ). we have the family name ( john : ; eph. : , ), the family likeness (rom. : ); family love (john : ; john : ); a filial spirit (rom. : ; gal. : ); a family service (john : , ; : ). we receive fatherly chastisement (heb. : - ); fatherly comfort (isa. : ; cor. : ), and an inheritance ( pet. : - ; rom. : ). iv. some evidences of sonship. those who are adopted into god's family are: led by the spirit (rom. : ; gal. : ). have a childlike confidence in god (gal. : , ). have liberty of access (eph. : ). have love for the brethren ( john : - ; : ). are obedient ( john : - ). f. sanctification. i. its meaning. . negatively--separation from evil. . positively--dedication unto god. . used of the divine nature. ii. when it takes place. . instant. . progressive. . complete. iii. the means. . divine. . human. . means used. f. sanctification. if regeneration has to do with our nature, justification with our standing, and adoption with our position, then sanctification has to do with our character and conduct. in justification we are declared righteous in order that, in sanctification, we may become righteous. justification is what god does for us, while sanctification is what god does in us. justification puts us into a right relationship with god, while sanctification exhibits the fruit of that relationship--a life separated from a sinful world and dedicated unto god. i. the meaning of sanctification. two thoughts are prominent in this definition: separation from evil, and dedication unto god and his service. . separation from evil. chron. : , - --"sanctify now yourselves, and sanctify the house of the lord god . . . . and carry forth the filthiness out of the holy places. . . . and the priests went into the inner part of the house of the lord, to cleanse it, and brought out all the uncleanness. . . .then they went in to hezekiah the king, and said, we have cleansed all the house of the lord." thess. : --"for this is the will of god, even your sanctification, that ye should abstain from fornication." see also heb. : ; exod. : - ; lev. : . it is evident from these scriptures that sanctification has to do with the turning away from all that is sinful and that is defiling to both soul and body. . separation or dedication unto god. in this sense whatever is set apart from a profane to a sacred use, whatever is devoted exclusively to the service of god, is sanctified. so it follows that a man may "sanctify his house to be holy unto the lord," or he may "sanctify unto the lord some part of a field of his possession" (lev. : , ). so also the first-born of all the children were sanctified unto the lord (num. : ). even the son of god himself, in so far as he was set apart by the father and sent into the world to do god's will, was sanctified (john : ). whenever a thing or person is separated from the common relations of life in order to be devoted to the sacred, such is said to be sanctified. . it is used of god. whenever the sacred writers desire to show that the lord is absolutely removed from all that is sinful and unholy, and that he is absolutely holy in himself they speak of him as being sanctified: "when i shall be sanctified in you before their eyes" (ezek. : ). ii. the time of sanctification. sanctification may be viewed as past, present, and future; or instantaneous, progressive, and complete. . instantaneous sanctification. cor. : --"and such were some of you: but ye are washed, but ye are sanctified, but ye are justified in the name of the lord jesus, and by the spirit of our god." heb. : , --"by the which will we are sanctified through the offering of the body of jesus christ once for all. . . . for by one offering he hath perfected forever them that are sanctified." by the death of jesus christ the sanctification of the believer takes place at once. the very moment a man believes in christ he is sanctified, that is, in this first sense: he is separated from sin and separated unto god. for this reason all through the new testament believers are called saints ( cor. : , r. v.; rom. : , r. v.). if a man is not a saint he is not a christian; if he is a christian he is a saint. in some quarters people are canonized after they are dead; the new testament canonizes believers while they are alive. note how that in cor. : "sanctified" is put before "justified." the believer grows _in_ sanctification rather than _into_ sanctification out of something else. by a simple act of faith in christ the believer is at once put into a state of sanctification. every christian is a sanctified man. the same act that ushers him into the state of justification admits him at once into the state of sanctification, in which he is to grow until he reaches the fulness of the measure of the stature of christ. . progressive sanctification. justification differs from sanctification thus: the former is an instantaneous act with no progression; while the latter is a crisis with a view to a process--an act, which is instantaneous and which at the same time carries with it the idea of growth unto completion. pet. : --"but grow in (the) grace, and in the knowledge of our lord and saviour jesus christ." cor. : --we "are transformed into the same image from glory to glory, even as from the lord the spirit." the tense is interesting here: we are being transformed from one degree of character, or glory, to another. it is because sanctification is progressive, a growth, that we are exhorted to "increase and abound" ( thess. : ), and to "abound more and more" ( : , ) in the graces of the christian life. the fact that there is always danger of contracting defilement by contact with a sinful world, and that there is, in the life of the true christian, an ever increasing sense of duty and an ever-deepening consciousness of sin, necessitates a continual growth and development in the graces and virtues of the believer's life. there is such a thing as "perfecting holiness" ( cor. : ). god's gift to the church of pastors and teachers is for the purpose of the perfecting of the saints in the likeness of christ _until_, at last, they attain unto the fulness of the divine standard, even jesus christ (eph. : - ). holiness is not a mushroom growth; it is not the thing of an hour; it grows as the coral reef grows: little by little, degree by degree. see also phil. : - . . complete and final sanctification. thess. : , r. v.--"and the god of peace himself sanctify you wholly; and may your spirit and soul and body be preserved entire, without blame at the coming of our lord jesus christ." "wholly" means complete in every part, perfect in every respect, whether it refers to the church as a whole, or to the individual believer. some day the believer is to be complete in all departments of christian character--no christian grace missing. complete in the "spirit" which links him with heaven; in the "body" which links him with earth; in the "soul" as being that on which heaven and earth play. maturity in each separate element of christian character: body, soul, and spirit. this blessing of entire and complete sanctification is to take place when christ comes: thess. : --"to the end that he may establish your hearts unblameable in holiness before god, even our father, at the coming of our lord jesus christ with all his saints." it is when we shall see him that we shall be like him ( john : ). how explicitly paul puts the matter in phil. : - , r. v. --"not that i have already obtained, or am already made perfect: but i press on, if so be that i may lay hold of that for which also i was laid hold on by christ jesus. brethren, i count not myself yet to have laid hold: but one thing i do, forgetting the things which are behind, and stretching forward to the things which are before, i press on toward the goal unto the prize of the high calling of god in christ jesus." iii. the means of sanctification. how are men sanctified? what means are used, and what agencies employed to make men holy and conform them into the likeness of christ? the agencies and means are both divine and human: both god and man contributing and co-operating towards this desired end. . from the divine side: it is the work of the triune god. a) god the father. thess. : , , r. v.--"and the god of peace himself sanctify you wholly. . . . faithful is he that calleth you, who will also do it." god's work is here contrasted with human efforts to achieve the preceding injunctions. just as in hebrews : , and philippians : , the beginner of faith is also the finisher; so is it here; consequently the end and aim of every exhortation is but to strengthen faith in god who is able to accomplish these things for us. of course there is a sense in which the believer is responsible for his progress in the christian life (phil. : , ), yet it is nevertheless true that, after all, it is the divine grace which works all in him (phil. : , ). we cannot purify ourselves, but we can yield to god and then the purity will come. the "god of peace," he who reconciles us--is the one who sanctifies us. it is as if the apostle said: "god, by his mighty power will do for you what i, by my admonitions, and you by your own efforts, cannot do." see also john : --"sanctify them through thy truth." christ addresses god as the one who is to sanctify the disciples. b) jesus christ the son. heb. : , r. v.--"by which will we have been sanctified through the offering of the body of jesus christ once for all." the death of jesus christ separates the believer from sin and the world, and sets him apart as redeemed and dedicated to the service of god. this same truth, namely, the sanctification of the church as based on the sacrificial death of christ, is set forth in eph. : , --"christ loved the church, and gave himself up for it; that he might sanctify it." christ is "made unto us . . . sanctification" ( cor. : ). see also heb. : , r. v. c) the holy spirit sanctifies. pet. : --"elect according to the foreknowledge of god the father, through sanctification of the spirit." thess. : --". . . . because god hath from the beginning chosen you to salvation through sanctification of the spirit and belief of the truth." the holy spirit seals, attests, and confirms the work of grace in the soul by producing the fruits of righteousness therein. it is the spirit of life in christ jesus who gives us freedom from the law of sin and death (rom. : ). he is called the _holy_ spirit, not only because he is absolutely holy himself, but also because he produces that quality of soul-character in the believer. the spirit is the executive of the god-head for this very purpose. it is the spirit's work to war against the lusts of the flesh and enable us to bring forth fruit unto holiness (gal. : - ). how wonderfully this truth is set forth in the contrast between the seventh and eighth chapters of romans. note the unsuccessful struggle of the former, and the victory of the latter. note also that there is no mention of the holy spirit in the seventh, while he is mentioned about sixteen times in the eighth chapter. herein lies the secret of failure and victory, sin and holiness. . from the human side. a) faith in the redemptive work of jesus christ. cor. : , r. v.--"but of him are ye in christ jesus, who was made unto us wisdom from god, and righteousness, and sanctification, and redemption." christ is indeed all these things to us, but, in reality, he becomes such only as we appropriate him for ourselves. only as the believer, daily, yea, even momentarily, takes by faith the holiness of jesus, his faith, his patience, his love, his grace, to be his own for the need of that very moment, can christ, who by his death was made unto him sanctification in the instantaneous sense, become unto him sanctification in the progressive sense--producing in the believer his own life moment by moment. herein lies the secret of a holy life--the momentarily appropriation of jesus christ in all the riches of his grace for every need as it arises. the degree of our sanctification is the proportion of our appropriation of christ. see also acts : . b) the study of the scriptures and obedience thereto. john : --"sanctify them through thy truth: thy word is truth." eph. : --"that he might sanctify and cleanse it (i.e., the church) with the washing of water by the word." john : --"now ye are clean through the word which i have spoken unto you." our sanctification is limited by our limitation in the knowledge of and our lack of obedience to the word of god. how does the word of god sanctify? by revealing sin; by awakening conscience; by revealing the character of christ; by showing the example of christ; by offering the influences and powers of the holy spirit, and by setting forth spiritual motives and ideals. there is no power like that of the word of god for detaching a man from the world, the flesh and the devil. c) various other agencies. heb. : , r. v.--"follow after . . . the sanctification without which no man shall see the lord." to "follow after" means to pursue, to persecute, as saul of tarsus pursued and followed the early christians. one cannot become a saint in his sleep. holiness must be the object of his pursuit. the lazy man will not be the holy man. heb. : , : god chastens us "for our profit, that we might be partakers of his holiness." chastisement ofttimes is intended to "produce the peaceable fruit of righteousness." rom. : - ; cor. : , : . sanctification is brought about in the life of the believer by his separating himself deliberately from all that is unclean and unholy, and by presenting, continually and constantly, the members of his body as holy instruments unto god for the accomplishment of his holy purposes. thus by these single acts of surrender unto holiness, sanctification soon becomes the habit of the life. g. prayer. i. its importance. ii. its nature. . as seen in its historic development. . scriptural terms. iii. its possibility. . the revelation of god. . the work of the son. . the assistance of the spirit. . the promises. . christian testimony. iv. its objects. . god the father. . christ the son. . the holy spirit. v. its method. . posture. . time and place. vi. hindeances and helps. . hindrances. . helps--essentials. g. prayer. i. the importance of prayer. even a cursory perusal of the scriptures will reveal the large and important place which the doctrine of prayer finds therein. the christian life cannot be sustained without it; it is the christian's vital breath. its importance is seen when we recall: that the neglect of prayer is grievous to the lord (isa. : , ; : , , r. v.). that many evils in life are to be attributed to the lack of prayer (zeph. : - ; dan. : , , cf. hosea : , ; : , ). that it is a sin to neglect prayer ( sam. : ). that to continue in prayer is a positive command (col. : , r. v.; thess. : ; we are commanded to take leisure or a vacation for prayer: cor. : ). that it is god's appointed method of obtaining what he has to bestow (dan. : ; matt. : - ; : - ; luke : ). that the lack of the necessary blessings in life comes from failure to pray (james : ). that the apostles regarded prayer as the most important employment that could engage their time or attention (acts : ; rom. : ; col. : ). ii. the nature of prayer. it is interesting to trace the development of prayer in the scriptures. in the life of the patriarch abraham prayer seems to have taken the form of a dialogue--god and man drawing near and talking to each other (gen. ; ); developing into intercession (gen. : ; : , ), and then into personal prayer (gen. : ; : ); jacob, (gen. : ; : - , ; hosea : ). the patriarchal blessings are called prayers (gen : ; deut. : ). during the period of the law. not very much prominence is given to formal prayer during this period. deut. : - seems to be the only one definitely recorded. prayer had not yet found a stated place in the ritual of the law. it seems to have been more of a personal than a formal matter, and so while the law may not afford much material, yet the life of the lawgiver, moses, abounds with prayer (exod. : ; : ; num. : - ). under joshua ( : - ; : ), and the judges (c. ) we are told that the children of israel "cried unto the lord." under samuel prayer seems to have assumed the nature of intercession ( sam. : , ; : - ); personal ( sam. : , ; : ). in jeremiah ( : ) moses and samuel are represented as offering intercessory prayer for israel. david seems to regard himself as a prophet and priest, and prays without an intercessor ( sam. : - ). the prophets seem to have been intercessors, e.g., elijah ( kings ). yet personal prayers are found among the prophets (jer. --both personal and intercessory; : ; : ; amos ). in the psalms prayer takes the form of a pouring out of the heart ( : ; : ; : , title). the psalmist does not seem to go before god with fixed and orderly petitions so much as simply to pour out his feelings and desires, whether sweet or bitter, troubled or peaceful. consequently the prayers of the psalmist consist of varying moods: complaint, supplication, confession, despondency, praise. true prayer consists of such elements as adoration, praise, petition, pleading, thanksgiving, intercession, communion, waiting. the closet into which the believer enters to pray is not only an oratory --a place of prayer, it is an observatory--a place of vision. prayer is not "a venture and a voice of mine; but a vision and a voice divine." isa. : ; : , illustrates all essential forms of address in prayer. iii. the possibility of prayer. this possibility consists in five things: . the revelation of god which christ has brought to us. john : --"no man hath seen god at any time; the only-begotten son, which is in the bosom of the father, he hath declared him." matt. : --". . . . neither knoweth any man the father, save the son, and he to whomsoever the son will reveal him." christ reveals god as a _personal_ god, as a being who sees, feels, knows, understands, and acts. belief in the personality of god is absolutely necessary to true prayer (heb. : ). christ reveals god as a _sovereign_ god (matt. : )--"with god all things are possible." god is sovereign over all laws; he can make them subservient to his will, and use them in answering the prayers of his children. he is not bound by any so-called unchangeable laws. christ revealed god as a _father_ (luke : ). in every instance in the life of christ whenever he addresses god in prayer it is always as father. the fact of the fatherhood of god makes prayer possible. it would be unnatural for a father not to commune with his child. . the sacrificial work of jesus christ. heb. : - , r. v.--"having therefore, brethren, boldness to enter into the holy place by the blood of jesus, by the way which he dedicated for us, a new and living way, through the veil, that is to say, his flesh; and having a great priest over the house of god; let us draw near with a true heart in fulness of faith." it is because of the death of christ, which removed the barrier that stood between god and us so that he could not consistently hear and answer our prayers, that he can now hear and answer the petitions of his children. . the inspiration of the holy ghost. rom. : --"likewise the spirit also helpeth our infirmities: for we know not what we should pray for as we ought: but the spirit himself maketh intercession for us with groanings which cannot be uttered." see also jude . the thought is this: even though we are assured that there is a personal god to hear us, and although we have the confidence that the barrier of sin which stood between us and god has been removed, so that we now desire to pray, we often are hindered because we either do not know what to say or what to ask for. we may ask too ardently for wrong things, or too languidly for the things we most need. and so we are afraid to pray. the assurance that this verse gives us is that the holy spirit will pray within us, and will indict the petition, helping us in our prayer life. . the many promises of the bible. we are told that there are over , of them. each promise is "yea and amen in jesus christ"; he is the guarantee and the guarantor of them all. they are not given to mock but to encourage us: "hath he said and shall he not do it? hath he spoken and shall he not make it good?" see john : ; : ; john : , ; luke : , etc. . the universal christian testimony. christians, by the millions, the world over, can and do testify to the fact that god both hears and answers prayer. the credibility, character, and intelligence of the vast number of witnesses make their testimony indisputable and incontrovertible. iv. the objects of prayer--to whom to pray. . to god. neh : ; acts : --"prayer was made without ceasing of the church unto god for him": god is holy--hence there must be no impurity in the life of the one praying; righteous, hence no crookedness; truthful, hence no lying or hypocrisy; powerful, hence we may have confidence; transcendent, hence reverence in our approach. . to christ. acts : --"lord jesus, receive my spirit." cor. : , ; tim. : . . the holy spirit. rom. : , sets forth the relation of the holy spirit and prayer, as do also zech. : ; eph. : ; jude . the holy spirit is god (acts : , ; matt. : ; cor. : ), hence is to be worshipped (matt. : ; rev. : ). the normal mode of prayer is prayer in the spirit, on the ground of the merits of the son, to the father: in the spirit, through the son, to the father. v. the method or manner of prayer. . with regard to the posture of the body. the soul may be in prayer no matter what is the attitude of the body. the scriptures sanction no special bodily posture. christ stood and prayed (john : ), knelt (luke : ), he also fell on his face on the ground (matt. : ); solomon knelt ( kings : ); elijah prayed with his elbows on his knees and his face buried in his hands; david prayed lying on his bed (psa. : ); peter prayed on the water (matt. : ); the dying thief, on the cross (luke : ). . time and place. time: _stated times_ (dan. : ; psa. : , ; acts : ; : ; : , ). _special occasions:_ choosing the twelve (luke : , ). before the cross (luke : - ). after great successes (john : , cf. mark : - ). _early in the morning_ (mark : ). _all night_ (luke : ). _times of special trouble_ (psa. : , cf. exod. : ; : ; : , ). _at meals_ (matt. : ; acts : ; tim. : , ). place of prayer: inner chamber (matt. : ); amid nature (matt. : ; mark : ). in the church (john : ; psa. : ). before the unsaved (acts : ; : ). in all places ( tim. : , r. v.). vi. hindrances and helps to prayer. . hindrances. indulged known sin (psa. : ; isa. : , ). wilful disobedience to known commandments (prov. : ). selfishness (james : ). unforgiving spirit (matt. : , ; : ). lack of faith (heb. : ; james : ). idols in the heart (ezek. : - ; : - ). . helps--essentials to prevailing prayer. sincerity (psa. : ; matt. : ). simplicity (matt. : , cf. : ). earnestness (james : ; acts : ; luke : ). persistence (luke : - ; col. : ; rom. : , r. v.). faith (matt. : ; james : ). unison with others (matt. : , ). definiteness (psa. : ; matt. : ). effort (exod. : ). in the name of jesus (john : ; : , ). with fasting (acts : , ; : ). the doctrine of the church i. definition; distinctions. . old testament. . new testament. . the church; christendom; kingdom. ii. the founding of the church. . in prophecy and promise. . historically founded. iii. membership in the church. conditions of entrance; characteristics. . repentance and baptism. . faith in the deity of jesus christ. . regeneration. . public confession of christ--baptism. . adherence to the apostles' doctrine. . characteristics. iv. figures under which the church is presented. . the body of christ. . the temple of god. . the bride of christ. v. the ordinances of the church. . baptism. . the lord's supper. vi. the vocation of the church. . to worship god. . to evangelize the world. . perfect each member. . to witness. . future glory. the doctrine of the church. there is great danger of losing sight of the church in the endeavor to emphasize the idea of the kingdom of heaven or christendom. we are prone to think it a small thing to speak of the church; the kingdom and christendom seem so large in comparison. we are tempted to distinguish and contrast churchism, as it is sometimes called, and christianity, to the disparagement of the former. it is well to remember that jesus christ positively identifies himself with the church (acts ) and not with christendom; he gave up his life that he might found the church (eph. : ). the apostle paul sacrificed himself in his endeavors to build up the church, not christendom. he speaks of his greatest sin as consisting in persecuting the church of god ( cor. : ). the supreme business of god in this age is the gathering of the church. some day it will be complete (eph. : ), and then the age will have served its purpose. i. definitions; distinctions. . old testament use of the word. lev. : --"and if the whole congregation of israel sin through ignorance, and the thing be hid from the eyes of the assembly . . . ." the hebrew word for _assembly_ means to _call_ or _assemble,_ and is used not only for the act of calling itself, but also for the assembly of the called ones. in this sense israel is called a "church," an assembly, because called out from among the other nations to be a holy people (acts : , "the church in the wilderness"). there is always a religious aspect associated with this particular call. . the new testament use of the word. it is from the new testament primarily, if not really exclusively, that the real meaning and idea of the church is derived. the christian church is a new testament institution, beginning with pentecost, and ending, probably, with the rapture. two words are of special importance in this connection: a) ecclesia, from two greek words meaning "to call out from." this word is used in all about times in the new testament. it is used in a secular sense in acts : --"it shall be determined in a lawful assembly"; of israel in the wilderness (acts : ), and of the assembly of believers in christ (matt. : ; : ; cor. : ; eph. : - ). in keeping with this idea the saints are said to be the "called-out" ones (rom. : ; cor. : ; cf. cor. : ). b) "kuriakon"--that which belongs to the lord. so we have "the supper of the lord" ( cor. : ); the "day of the lord" (rev. : ). see also luke : and rom. : , , as illustrating that over which the lord has dominion and authority. to sum up then: the church is composed of the body of believers who have been called out from the world, and who are under the dominion and authority of jesus christ. c) the growth of the church idea in the new testament. at first there was but one church at jerusalem. the meetings may have been held in different houses, yet there was but one church with one roster: so we read of the total membership consisting at one time of (acts : ), again of , ( : ), and still again of , ( : ), to which there were daily additions ( : ). the apostles were at the head of the church ( : - ). see acts, cc. and , for a fuller account of the first church. the second stage in the growth of the church was its spread throughout judea and samaria, as recorded in acts . antioch, in syria, then became the head of the gentile church (acts : ), as jerusalem was the head of the jewish church (acts ); paul representing the church at antioch, and peter and james at jerusalem. the assembly at antioch was called "the church" just as truly as was the assembly at jerusalem ( : ; : ). because of the missionary activities of the apostles, especially paul, churches sprang up in different cities, especially in asia minor, e.g., corinth, galatia, ephesus, and philippi. in view of all this the term "church" came to be used of the church _universal,_ that is, the complete body of christ as existing in every place ( cor. : ; gal. : , ; matt. : ); of _local_ churches in any one place (col. : ; phil. : ; cor. : , etc.); of _single meetings,_ even where two or three met together (matt. : ; col. : ; phil. : ; rom. : ). it is evident, then, from what has here been said, that by the term "church" is included all that is meant from the church universal to the meeting of the church in the house. wherever god's people meet in the name of christ to worship, there you have the church. . distinctions: a) the church and the kingdom. the church (which is the mystery) and the kingdom in mystery are now contemporary. the kingdom will be fully manifested at the coming of christ. the church is within the kingdom; probably the regenerate are "the children of the kingdom." the kingdom is comprised of both good and bad (matt. ); the church, of real saints only. the jews rejected the kingdom under christ and the apostles. that kingdom, now rejected, will be set up again when the messiah comes. this conception will help us to understand the parables of matthew , as well as the sermon on the mount. the tares are sown not in the church, but in the field, which is the world. the church may be looked upon as part of the kingdom of god, just as illinois is part of the united states. the kingdom is present, in a sense, just as the king is present in the hearts of his own people. there is a difference between the church and christendom, just as there is a difference between possessing and professing christians. baptized christendom is one thing, and the church of christ is another. b) the church visible and invisible: actual and ideal. the church _visible_ is composed of all those whose names are enrolled upon its roster; _invisible,_ of those whose names are written in the lamb's book of life; _actual,_ people imperfect, yet aiming after perfection, alive here on the earth; _ideal,_ departed saints who are now triumphant in heaven (heb. : ). there is a church in heaven just as there is one upon the earth; indeed, it is but a part of the one church; called the church _militant_ while upon the earth, and the church _triumphant_ in heaven. c) the church local and universal. by the first is meant the church in any particular place, such as "the church at corinth"; by the latter, the church as found in every place ( cor. : ). ii. the founding of the church. . foretold by christ. matt. : - --". . . . on this rock i will build my church." here is the church in prophecy and promise; the first mention of the church in the new testament. note the distinction here recognized between the "kingdom" and the "church." the church is to be founded on peter's confession of jesus christ as the son of the living god. no supremacy is here given to peter, as a comparison of these verses with john : - , and matt. : --in which the same privilege of the binding and loosing is given to the whole church and to all the apostles--will show. in matthew : - our lord recognizes the fact of the church, and also that it has the divine seal and sanction in the exercising of the power of the keys. . historically founded by the apostles. acts - : . the promise and prophecy of matt. : - is here fulfilled. here is the account of the first christian church in its glorious beginning, and as it actually existed in jerusalem. when a man became regenerate by believing in jesus christ he was thereby constituted a member of the church. there was no question as to whether he ought to join himself to the church or not; that was a fact taken for granted. so we read that the lord was adding to the church daily such as were being saved. the church was already a concrete institution to which every believer in christ united himself. "the apostles' doctrine" formed the standard of faith--a fulfillment of christ's prophecy and promise in matthew : - : "on this rock i will build my church," etc. the church had _stated places of meeting:_ the upper room (acts : ), the temple ( : ), the homes of members ( : , : ), and the synagogue; _stated times of_ meeting: daily ( : ), each lord's day ( : ), the _regular hours_ of prayer ( : ; : ); _a regular church roll:_ ( : ), , ( : ), , ( : ); _daily additions_ ( : ). that there were definitely, regularly organized churches is clear from the fact that the apostle paul addressed many of his epistles to churches in different localities. the letters to the corinthians (e.g., ep. - ) show that the churches had already recognized certain forms of service and liturgy; those to timothy and titus presume a regularly organized congregation of believers. that there is a church in the world is clear from cor. : - . the christian church is as much an entity as the gentile, or the jew ( cor. : ). the existence of church officers proves the existence of the church in an organized form: bishops and deacons (phil. : ), elders (acts : ), the presbytery ( tim. : ). church letters were granted to members (acts : ). iii. membership in the church--its conditions and characteristics. . repentance and baptism required of all its members. acts : - --"then peter said unto them, repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of jesus christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the holy ghost. then they that gladly received his word were baptized: and the same day there were added unto them about three thousand souls." . faith in the lord jesus christ as the divine redeemer. matt. : - ; acts : , . peter's entire sermon in acts illustrates this fact. . saved-regenerated. acts : --". . . . and the lord added to the church such as should be saved." cf. john : , . it was essential that the members of the early church should be "added unto the lord" before they were added to the church ( : ; : ). . baptism in the name of the triune god as an open confession of christ. matt. : --"go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the father, and of the son, and of the holy ghost." acts : - ; : , ; : : cf. rom. : , . . adherence to the apostolic doctrine. acts : --"and they continued steadfastly in the apostles' doctrine and fellowship." cf. "on this rock i will build my church" (matt. : - ); also eph. : . . characteristics of membership in the early church. the members were known as believers (acts : ); brethren ( : ; : ; rom. : --the absolute equality of all believers, cf. matt. : - ); christians (acts : ; : ); saints ( : ; cor. : ; rev. : ); elect (mark : ; rom. : ; eph. : ). iv. figures under which the church is set forth in the scriptures. . the body, of which christ is the head. two ideas are contained in this symbol: a) the relation of the church to christ, who is its head. eph. : , ; col. : ; : . the church is an organism, not an organization. there is a vital relation between christ and the church, both partaking of the same life, just as there is between the physical head and the body. we cannot join the church as we would a lodge or any mere human organization. we must be partakers by faith of christ's life before we can become members of christ's church, in the true sense. as the head of the church christ is its guardian and director (eph. : , ); the source of its life, filling it with his fulness (eph. : ); the centre of its unity and the cause of its growth (eph. : ; col. : ). b) the relation of the members one to another. cor. : - ; rom. : , ; eph. : - , , . . a temple, a building, a habitation, a dwelling-place for god's spirit. eph. : , ; cor. : - ; tim. : ; pet. : - ; rev. : ; cor. : . of this building christ is the cornerstone, and the prophets and apostles the foundation. in cor. christ is the chief cornerstone and the apostles the builders; the whole building is held in place by christ. . the bride of christ. cor. : ; eph. : - ; rev. : ; : . christ is the bridegroom (john : ). this is a great mystery (eph. : ). the bride becomes the wife of the lamb (rev. : ). v. the ordinances of the church. . baptism. matt. : , ; mark : ; acts : , ; : - ; : , . . the lord's supper. acts : , ; : --"and upon the first day of the week, when the disciples came together to break bread, paul preached unto them, ready to depart on the morrow; and continued his speech until midnight." cor. : - . vi. the vocation of the church. . to worship god and to glorify him on the earth: eph. : - --"according as he hath chosen us in him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and without blame before him in love: having predestinated us unto the adoption of children by jesus christ to himself, according to the good pleasure of his will. to the praise of the glory of his grace wherein he hath made us accepted in the beloved." . to evangelize the world with the gospel: matt. : , --"go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the father, and of the son, and of the holy ghost." acts ; : ; : - ; eph. : ; acts : . . to develop each individual christian until he attains unto the fulness of the stature of christ: eph. : - . hence the gift of pastors, teachers, etc. herein lies the value of church attendance--it promotes growth; failure to attend leads to apostasy (heb. : - ), cf. thess. : ; cor. . . a constant witness for christ and his word: acts : --"but ye shall receive power, after that the holy ghost is come upon you: and ye shall be witnesses unto me both in jerusalem, and in all judea, and in samaria, and unto the uttermost part of the earth." : , . . the future glory of the church: eph. : , ; eev. : - . the doctrine of the scriptures. i. names and titles. . the bible. . the testaments. . the scriptures. . the word of god. ii. inspiration. . definition. . distinctions. a) revelation. b) illumination. c) reporting. . views: a) natural inspiration. b) christian illumination. c) dynamic theory. d) concept theory. e) verbal inspiration. f) partial inspiration. g) plenary inspiration. . the claims of the scriptures themselves: a) the old testament. b) the new testament. . the character (or degrees) of inspiration. a) actual words of god himself. b) actual words communicated by god to men. e) individual freedom in choice of words--to what extent? the doctrine of the scriptures. i. the bible--its names and titles. . "the bible." our english word _bible_ comes from the greek words _biblos_ (matt. : ) and _biblion_ (diminutive form) (luke : ), which mean _"book."_ ancient books were written upon the biblus or papyrus reed, and from this custom came the greek name _biblos,_ which finally came to be applied to the sacred books. see mark : ; luke : ; : ; acts : ; : . the bible is not merely _a_ book, however. it is the book--the book that from the importance of its subjects, the wideness of its range, the majesty of its author, stands as high above all other books as the heaven is high above the earth. . "the old and new testaments." see luke : ; cor. : ; cor. : , ; heb. : ; : . the word _testament_ means _covenant,_ and is the term by which god was pleased to designate the relation that existed between himself and his people. the term _covenant_ was first of all applied to the relation itself, and afterward to the books which contained the record of that relation. by the end of the second century we find the "old covenant" and the "new covenant" as the established names of the jewish and christian scriptures; and origen, in the beginning of the third century, mentioned "the divine scriptures, the so-called old and new covenants." the old testament deals with the record of the calling and history of the jewish nation, and as such it is the old covenant. the new testament deals with the history and application of the redemption wrought by the lord jesus christ, and as such it is the new covenant. . "the scripture," and "the scriptures." the bible is also called "the scripture" (mark : ; : ; luke : ; john : ; : ; : ; rom. : ; gal. : ; pet. : ), and "the scriptures" (matt. : ; mark : ; luke : ; john : ; acts : ; rom. : ; tim. : ; pet. : ). these terms mean that the scriptures are "holy writings." by the early christians the most common designation for the whole bible was "the scriptures." . "the word of god." of all the names given to the bible, "the word of god" (mark : ; rom. : ; cor. : ; heb. : ; thess. : ) is doubtless the most significant, impressive, and complete. it is sufficient to justify the faith of the weakest christian. it gathers up all that the most earnest search can unfold. it teaches us to regard the bible as the utterance of divine wisdom and love--as god speaking to man. ii. the inspiration of the bible. . what is meant by the term "inspiration." this question is best answered by scripture itself. it defines its own terms. let us turn, then, "to the law and to the testimony." in tim. : --"all scripture is given by inspiration of god." the word "inspired" means literally "god-breathed." it is composed of two greek words--_theos=god;_ and _pnein=to breathe._ the term "given by inspiration" signifies, then, that the writings of the old testament, of which paul is here speaking, are the result of a certain influence exerted by god upon their authors. the meaning of the word "breathed," as here used, is brought out very forcibly by the comparison of two other words translated in the same way. the one is the greek word _psuchein=to breathe gently,_ while in tim. : the term denotes a forcible respiration. the other is the hebrew word _ah-ayrh=to breathe unconsciously,_ while tim. : denotes a conscious breathing. inspiration, then, as defined by paul in this passage, is the _strong, conscious inbreathing of god into men, qualifying them to give utterance to truth. it is god speaking through men, and the old testament is therefore just as much the word of god as though god spake every single word of it with his own lips._ the scriptures are the result of divine inbreathing, just as human speech is uttered by the breathing through a man's mouth. pet. : --"for not by the will of man was prophecy brought at any time, but being borne by the holy spirit, the holy men of god spoke." (this is a literal rendering, and brings out the sense more clearly.) the participle "moved" may be translated "when moved," so this passage teaches that holy men of god wrote the scripture _when_ moved to do so by the holy spirit. further, the participle is passive, and denotes "to be moved upon." this distinctly teaches that the scripture was not written by mere men, or at their suggestion, but by men _moved upon_, prompted, yea indeed, driven by the promptings of the holy spirit. this declaration of peter may be said to intimate that the holy ghost was especially and miraculously present with and in the writers of the scriptures, revealing to them truths which they did not know before, and guiding them alike in their record of these truths, and of the transactions of which they were eye and ear witnesses, so that they were enabled to present them with substantial accuracy to the minds of others. the statements of the scriptures regarding inspiration may be summed up as follows: holy men of god, qualified by the infusion of the breath of god, wrote in obedience to the divine command, and were kept from all error, whether they revealed truths previously unknown or recorded truths already familiar. in this sense, "all scripture is given by inspiration of god," the bible is indeed and in truth the very word of god, and the books of the bible are of divine origin and authority. . the distinction between inspiration, revelation, illumination, and verbatim reporting. a) the distinction between inspiration and revelation. it is of the greatest importance, in considering the theme of inspiration, to distinguish it clearly from revelation. the most cursory perusal of the scriptures reveals the fact that they consist of two different kinds of records: first, records of truth directly revealed and imparted to the mind of the writer by god, and which he could have learned in no other manner (such, for example, as the story of creation); and second, records of events that occurred within the writer's own observation, and of sayings that fell upon his own ears (such as moses' account of the exodus, paul's account of his interview with peter at antioch). in the one case, the writer records things that had not been revealed to man before; in the other case, he records facts which were as well known to others as to himself. now, revelation is that act of god by which he directly communicates truth not known before to the human mind. revelation discovers new truth, while inspiration superintends the communicating of that truth. all that is in the bible has not been "directly revealed" to man. it contains history, and the language of men, even of wicked men. but there is absolutely no part of the bible record that is not inspired. the history recorded in the bible is true. the sacred writers were so directed and influenced by the spirit that they were preserved, in writing, from every error of fact and doctrine. the history remains history. things not sanctioned by god, recorded in the bible, are to be shunned ( tim. : ). nevertheless, all these things were written under the guidance of the holy spirit. this is inspiration. this distinction should be definitely and clearly understood, for many of the most plausible arguments against the full inspiration of the scriptures have arisen from the fact that this has been either unrecognized or ignored. though all scripture is inspired, it does not stamp with divine authority every sentiment which it reports as uttered by the men of whom it speaks, nor does it mark with divine approval every action which it relates as performed by those with whose biographies it deals. in the book of job, for example, inspiration gives with equal accuracy the language of jehovah, the words of satan, and the speeches of job and his three friends; but it does not therefore place them all on the same level of authority. each speaker is responsible for his own utterances. neither satan, job, nor his three friends spoke by inspiration of god. they gave utterance to their own opinions; and all that inspiration vouches for is that no one of them is misrepresented, but that each one spoke the sentiments that are attributed to him in scripture. so, again, the fact that david's cruelty to the ammonites is recorded in the book of kings does not imply that god approved it any more than he approved the king's double crime of murder and adultery, which "displeased him." the inspiration of the book vouches only for the accuracy of the record. b) the distinction between inspiration and illumination. spiritual illumination refers to the influence of the holy ghost, common to all christians. no statement of a truth about god or spiritual things can be understood by a man unless the holy spirit takes it and reveals it to him. it is only the spiritual man who can understand spiritual things. "the natural man receiveth not the things of the spirit" ( cor. : ). no learning of the schools can lead him to know god. flesh and blood cannot reveal god to men (matt. : ). there is a vast difference between "a divine revelation of the mind of god" and "a divine action on the mind of man." the former is revelation; the latter is spiritual illumination. those who hold to the illumination theory to account for the origin of the bible revelation claim that there is in every man an intuitive faculty that grasps the supernatural, that lays hold of god and spiritual things; and that whatever insight into the nature and being of god is given man, is produced by the divine spirit playing upon this spiritual faculty in man, illuminating and irradiating it, so that it sees the perfection of god and is enabled to penetrate into his will. according to this view, the bible is the result of the meditations of godly men whose minds were acted upon by god. any revelation of divinity of which man is the recipient, comes in this manner. subjective illumination god has carried on since the world began, and is still carrying on by a great variety of methods. the scriptures are not in any way the oracles of god, nor do they come to us as direct, logical utterances of the divine mind. the patriarchs, prophets and apostles of old so deeply meditated on god and the things of god that their spiritual faculties were enlarged and illuminated to such a degree that they conceived of these visions of god, his nature, his will, etc., as recorded in the scriptures. now, it is true, doubtless, that a man may be granted a very deep insight into the nature and being of god by spiritual meditation. that a fire does burn in the bible, we do not deny. throughout all ages of the jewish and christian churches men have lit their spiritual torches at this fire, and in their light they have seen him who is invisible. this fire still burns, and to-day the devout student may catch its flame if, with uncovered head, with shoeless feet, and with humble spirit, he stands before the bush that ever burns and yet is never consumed. but this working of the truth of god on the mind of man is not god's revelation of his mind to man which the bible professes to be. the bible must of necessity be not merely a repository or receptacle of spiritual influences fitted to act upon the mind; it must be--it is--god making himself known to men. it is god speaking to man through men. in contradistinction to the illumination theory we have instances in the bible in which god made revelations of himself, his truth, and his will to men who were by no means at the time meditating upon god. see e.g.: john : - --"and one of them, named caiaphas, being the high priest that same year, said unto them, ye know nothing at all, nor consider that it is expedient for us, that one man should die for the people, and that the whole nation perish not. and this spake he not of himself: but being high priest that year, he prophesied that jesus should die for that nation; and not for that nation only, but that also he should gather together in one the children of god that were scattered abroad." see also num. : , . c) the distinction between inspiration and verbatim reporting. inspiration is not necessarily verbatim reporting. it is not absolutely necessary to make such a claim to prove the inspiration of the scriptures. verbatim reporting is, in a sense, a mere mechanical operation. it would have robbed the writers of their individuality, and made them mere machines. but no; the holy spirit used the memories, the intuitions, the judgments, and indeed the idiosyncrasies of the writers, so that while each recorded that part of the event or discourse which (as we may express it) adhered to himself, he was enabled to give it with substantial accuracy. . various theories of inspiration. it will be in order here to note briefly various theories of inspiration; for it must be known that all students do not agree as to the degree of inspiration that characterized the writers of the scripture. when a man says, "i believe in the inspiration of the bible," it will be quite in place in these days to ask him what he means by inspiration. following are some of the views of inspiration held at the present day. a) natural inspiration. this theory identifies inspiration with genius of a high order. it denies that there is anything supernatural, mysterious, or peculiar in the mode of the spirit's operation in and upon the scripture writers. it claims that they were no more inspired than were milton, shakespeare, mahomet, or confucius. such a theory we absolutely reject. for if such be the character of the inspiration possessed by the scripture writers, there is nothing to assure us that they were not liable to make the same errors, to teach the same false views of life, to give expression to the same uncertainties concerning the past, the present, and the future as did these shining lights of mere human genius. when david said, "the spirit of the lord spake by me, and his word was in my tongue," he meant something more than the prayer which forms the gem of _paradise lost._ when isaiah and his brethren said, "thus saith the lord," they claimed something higher than that they were speaking under the stirrings of poetic rapture. when paul said to the corinthians, "which things also we speak, not in the words which man's wisdom teacheth, but which the holy ghost teacheth ( cor. : )," he used the language to which you will find no parallel in the literature of mere human genius. and no man of candor or intelligence can pass from the writings even of the unapproachable shakespeare into the perusal of the bible without feeling that the difference between the two is not one simply of degree, but of kind; he has not merely ascended to a loftier outlook in the same human dwelling, but he has gone into a new region altogether. there is a certain "unknown quality" in this book which clearly distinguishes it from all others; and if we may take its own explanation of the matter, that unknown quality is its divine inspiration. b) universal christian inspiration, or illumination. according to this theory, the inspiration of the bible writers was the same as has characterized christians of every age; the ordinary christian of to-day is inspired as much as was the apostle paul. if this be the true view, there seems to be no plausible reason why a new bible should not be possible to-day. and yet no individual, however extreme his claims to inspiration may be, has even ventured such a task. c) mechanical, or dynamic inspiration. (see verbatim eeporting, page .) this theory ignores the human instrumentality in the writing of the scriptures altogether, and claims that the writers were passive instruments mere machines, just as insensible to what they were accomplishing as is the string of the harp or lyre to the play of the musician. how, then, do we account for the differences in style of the various writers, the preservation of their individualities, their idiosyncrasies? it seems evident that scripture cannot be made to harmonize with the application of this theory. d) concept, or thought inspiration. this theory claims that only the concepts, or thoughts, of men were given by inspiration. it will be examined more fully later. concept inspiration is opposed by e) verbal inspiration. here it is claimed that the very words of scripture were given by the holy spirit; that the writers were not left absolutely to themselves in the choice of words they should use. (see page .) f) partial inspiration. the favorite way of expressing this theory is, "the bible _contains_ the word of god." this statement implies that it contains much that is not the word of god, that is, that is not inspired. a serious question at once arises: who is to decide what is and what is not inspired? who is to be the judge of so vital a question? what part is inspired, and what part is not? who can tell? such a theory leaves man in awful and fatal uncertainty. g) plenary, or full, inspiration. this is the opposite of partial inspiration. it holds all scripture to be equally inspired, as stated on page . it bases its claim on tim. : . the revised version translation of tim. : is erroneous. the reader might infer from it that there is some scripture that is not inspired. if paul had said, "all scripture that is divinely inspired is also profitable, etc.," he would virtually have said, "there is _some_ scripture, _some_ part of the bible, that is _not profitable, etc.,_ and therefore is not inspired." this is what the spirit of rationalism wants, namely, to make human reason the test and judge and measure of what is inspired and what is not. one man says such and such a verse is not profitable to him, another says such and such a verse is not profitable to him; a third says such and such is not profitable to him. the result is that no bible is left. is it possible that anyone need be told the flat and sapless tautology that all divinely-inspired scripture is _also_ profitable? paul dealt in no such meaningless phrases. the word translated _also_ does not mean _also_ here. it means _and._ its position in the sentence shows this. again, the revised rendering is shown to be openly false because the revisers refused to render the same greek construction elsewhere in the same way, which convicts them of error. in hebrew : we read: "all things are naked and laid open before the eyes of him with whom we have to do." the form and construction of this verse is identical with that of tim. : . were we, however, to translate this passage as the revisers translated the passage in timothy, it would read: "all naked things are also open to the eyes of him with whom we have to do." all naked things are also open things! all uncovered things are also exposed things! there is no _also_ in the case. again, tim. : : "every creature of god is good and nothing is to be rejected." according to the principles the revisers adopted in rendering tim. : , this passage would read: "every good creature of god is also nothing to be rejected." the greek language has no such meaningless syntax. the place of the verb _is,_--which must be supplied,--is directly before the word "inspired," and not after it. the great rationalistic scholar, dewette, confessed candidly that the rendering the revisers here adopted cannot be defended. in his german version of the text, he gave the sense thus: "every sacred writing, i.e., of the canonical scriptures, is inspired of god and is useful for doctrine, etc." bishops moberly and wordsworth, archbishop trench, and others of the revision committee, disclaimed any responsibility for the rendering. dean burgon pronounced it "the most astonishing as well as calamitous literary blunder of the age." it was condemned by dr. tregelles, the only man ever pensioned by the british government for scholarship. in accordance with this weight of testimony, therefore, we hold to the rendering of the authorized version, and claim that all scripture is equally and fully inspired of god. . the claims of the scriptures to inspiration. that the writers of the scriptures claimed to write under the direct influence of the spirit of god there can be no doubt. the _quality_ or _degree_ of their insspiration may be called into question, but surely not the _fact_ of it. let us examine the testimony of the writers themselves. a) the claims of old testament writers to inspiration. (we use the word inspiration here as including revelation.) compare and examine the following passages: exod. : - --"and moses said unto the lord, o my lord, i am not eloquent, neither heretofore, nor since thou hast spoken unto thy servant; but i am slow of speech, and of a slow tongue. and the lord said unto him, who hath made man's mouth? or who maketh the dumb, or deaf, or the seeing, or the blind? have not i the lord? now therefore go, and i will be with thy mouth, and teach thee what thou shalt say. and he said, o my lord, send, i pray thee, by the hand of him whom thou wilt send. and the anger of the lord was kindled against moses, and he said, is not aaron the levite thy brother? i know that he can speak well. and also, behold, he cometh forth to meet thee; and when he seeth thee, he will be glad in his heart. and thou shalt speak unto him, and put words in his mouth, and i will be with thy mouth, and with his mouth, and will teach you what ye shall do." deut. : --"ye shall not add unto the word which i command you, neither shall ye diminish ought from it, that ye may keep the commandments of the lord your god which i command you." jer. : - --"but the lord said unto me, say not, i am a child: for thou shalt go to all that i shall send thee, and whatsoever i command thee thou shalt speak. be not afraid of their faces; for i am with thee to deliver thee, saith the lord. then the lord put forth his hand, and touched my mouth. and the lord said unto me, behold, i have put my words in thy mouth." also ezek. : ; micah : . these are but a few of the many passages in which the inspiration of the writers is affirmed and claimed. note further that the words "god said" occur ten times in the first chapter of genesis. it is claimed that such expressions as "the lord said," "the lord spake," "the word of the lord came," are found , times in the old testament. these writers, claiming to be the revealers of the will of god, almost always commenced their messages with the words, "thus saith the lord." that they were not deceived in their claims is evident from the minuteness and detail as to names, times and places which characterized their messages, and from the literal fulfillment of these oracles of god. b) the claims of the new testament writers to inspiration. it is worthy of note here to observe that inspiration is claimed by new testament writers for old testament writers as well as for themselves. read and compare the following passages: pet. : , --"knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation. for the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man; but holy men of god spake as they were moved by the holy ghost." pet. : , --"of which salvation the prophets have inquired and searched diligently, who prophesied of the grace that should come unto you: searching what, or what manner of time the spirit of christ which was in them did signify, when it testified beforehand the sufferings of christ, and the glory that should follow." acts : --"men and brethren, this scripture must needs have been fulfilled, which the holy ghost by the mouth of david spake before concerning judas, which was guide to them that took jesus." acts : --"and when they agreed not among themselves, they departed, after that paul had spoken one word, well spake the holy ghost by esaias the prophet unto our fathers." cor. : --"which things also we speak, not in the words which man's wisdom teacheth, but which the holy ghost teacheth; comparing spiritual things with spiritual." cor. : --"if any man think himself to be a prophet, or spiritual, let him acknowledge that the things that i write unto you are the commandments of the lord." thess. : --"for this cause also thank we god without ceasing, because, when ye received the word of god which ye heard of us, ye received it not as the word of men, but, as it is in truth, the word of god, which effectually worketh also in you that believe." peter : , --"this second epistle, beloved, i now write unto you; in both which i stir up your pure minds by way of remembrance: that ye may be mindful of the words which were spoken before by the holy prophets, and of the commandment of us the apostles of the lord and saviour." matt. : --"for it is not ye that speak, but the spirit of your father which speaketh in you." mark : --"but when they shall lead you, and deliver you up, take no thought beforehand what ye shall speak, neither do ye premeditate; but whatsoever shall be given you in that hour, that speak ye, for it is not ye that speak, but the holy ghost." see also luke : ; : , ; acts : . it is evident from these and many other passages of scripture that the writers of both the old and new testaments were conscious of having received revelations from god, and considered themselves inspired of god to write the scriptures. they felt while writing that they were giving expression to the infallible truth of god, and were conscious that the holy spirit was moving them to the work. . what is the natuee of the inspiration that characterized the writers of the scriptures, and in what degree were they under its influence? much has been said and written in answer to this question. were the _thoughts_ or _concepts_ alone inspired, or were the _words_ also inspired? were the words dictated by the holy spirit, or were the writers left to choose their own words? these are the knotty questions current today regarding the inspiration of the bible. we may say with certainty that a) at least some of the words of scripture are the identical words written or spoken by god himself. note exodus : --"the writing was the writing of god"; exodus : --"written with the finger of god." compare also deuteronomy : , ; : ; exodus : . see also chronicles : (r. v.)--"all this, said david, have i been made to understand in writing from the hand of jehovah"; daniel : --there "came forth the finger of a man's hand and wrote." in the new testament god is heard speaking both at the baptism and the transfiguration of jesus, saying, "this is my beloved son, in whom i am well pleased; hear ye him." it is clearly evident from these passages that some part of the inspired record claims to be a record of the exact words of god. b) it is also very definitely stated in scripture that god put into the mouths of certain men the very words they should speak, and told them what they should write. exod. : - --"and moses said unto the lord, o my lord, i am not eloquent, neither heretofore, nor since thou hast spoken unto thy servant: but i am slow of speech, and of a slow tongue. and the lord said unto him, who hath made man's mouth? or who maketh the dumb, or deaf, or the seeing, or the blind? have not i the lord? now therefore go, and i will be with thy mouth, and teach thee what thou shalt say. and he said, o my lord, send, i pray thee, by the hand of him whom thou wilt send. and the anger of the lord was kindled against moses, and he said, is not aaron the levite thy brother? i know that he can speak well. and also, behold, he cometh forth to meet thee: and when he seeth thee, he will be glad in his heart. and thou shalt speak unto him, and put words in his mouth: and i will be with thy mouth, and with his mouth, and will teach you what ye shall do." exod. : --"and the lord said unto moses, write thou these words: for after the tenor of these words i have made a covenant with thee and with israel." num. : , --"speak unto the children of israel, and take of every one of them a rod according to the house of their fathers, of all their princes according to the house of their fathers, twelve rods: write thou every man's name upon his rod. and thou shalt write aaron's name upon the rod of levi: for one rod shall be for the head of the house of their fathers." isa. : , , --"moreover the lord said unto me, take thee a great roll, and write in it with a man's pen concerning maher-shalal-hash-baz. for the lord spake thus to me with a strong hand, and instructed me that i should not walk in the way of this people, saying, say ye not, a confederacy, to all them to whom this people shall say, a confederacy; neither fear ye their fear, nor be afraid." jer. : --"but the lord said unto me, say not, i am a child: for thou shalt go to all that i shall send thee, and whatsoever i command thee thou shalt speak." jer. : --"therefore thou shalt speak all these words unto them; but they will not hearken to thee; thou shalt also call unto them; but they will not answer thee." jer. : --"therefore thou shall speak unto them this word: this saith the lord god of israel, every bottle shall be filled with wine: and they shall say unto thee, do we not certainly know that every bottle shall be filled with wine?" jer. : , --"the word that came to jeremiah from the lord, saying. thus speaketh the lord god of israel, saying, write thee all the words that i have spoken unto thee in a book." jer. : , , , , - --"and it came to pass in the fourth year of jehoiakim the son of josiah king of judah, that this word came unto jeremiah from the lord, saying, take thee a roll of a book, and write therein all the words that i have spoken unto thee against israel, and against judah, and against all the nations, from the day i spake unto thee, from the days of josiah, even unto this day. then jeremiah called baruch the son of neriah; and baruch wrote from the mouth of jeremiah all the words of the lord, which he had spoken unto him, upon a roll of a book. when michaiah the son of gemariah, the son of shaphan, had heard out of the book all the words of the lord. . . . then the word of the lord came to jeremiah, after that the king had burned the roll, and the words which baruch wrote at the mouth of jeremiah, saying, take thee again another roll, and write in it all the former words that were in the first roll, which jehoiakim the king of judah hath burned. and thou shalt say to jehoiakim king of judah, thou saith the lord; thou hast burned this roll, saying, why hast thou written therein, saying, the king of babylon shall certainly come and destroy this land, and shall cause to cease from thence man and beast? therefore thus saith the lord of jehoiakim king of judah; he shall have none to sit upon the throne of david: and his dead body shall be cast out in the day to the heat, and in the night to the frost. and i will punish him and his seed and his servants for their iniquity; and i will bring upon them, and upon the inhabitants of jerusalem, and upon the men of judah, all the evil that i have pronounced against them; but they hearkened not. then took jeremiah another roll, and give it to baruch the scribe, the son of neriah, who wrote therein from the mouth of jeremiah all the words of the book which jehoiakim king of judah had burned in the fire; and there were added besides unto them many like words." also ezek. : ; : , ; : ; : ; hab. : ; zech. : - . cor. : --"if any man think himself to be a prophet, or spiritual, let him acknowledge that the things that i write unto you are the commandments of the lord." rev. : , , , --"unto the angel of the church of ephesus write; these things saith he that holdeth the seven stars in his right hand, who walketh in the midst of the seven golden candle-sticks . . . . and unto the angel of the church in smyrna write; these things saith the first and the last, which was dead, and is alive . . . . and to the angel of the church in pergamos write; these things saith he which hath the sharp sword with two edges . . . . and unto the angel of the church in thyatira write; these things saith the son of god, who hath his eyes like unto a flame of fire, and his feet are like fine brass." also : ; : . rev. : --"and when the seven thunders had uttered their voices, i was about to write: and i heard a voice from heaven saying unto me, seal up those things which the seven thunders uttered, and write them not." to sum up these two arguments, then, let us say, regarding the nature of the inspiration of the sacred writings, that part of them claim to be the very words and writings of god himself, spoken by his own mouth, or written by his own hand: that another part claim to be the record of words spoken to certain men who wrote them down just as they were spoken. and yet if this is all that is involved in inspiration, shall we not be robbed of a very beautiful and helpful fact, namely, that the holy spirit saw fit to preserve the characteristics of the writers? do not the works of james, the faith of paul, and the love of john appeal to us in their own peculiar way? this leads to the statement that c) in a certain sense, and in respect to some parts of the scripture, the authors were (humanly speaking) left to choose their own words in relating divine truth. this was by no means true of all the sacred writings. there are instances recorded of men who spoke without knowing what they were saying; and of men and animals speaking without knowledge of the substance of their message: john : - --"and one of them, named caiaphas, being the high priest that same year, said unto them, ye know nothing at all, nor consider that it is expedient for us, that one man should die for the people, and that the whole nation perish not. and this spake he not of himself; but being high priest that year, he prophesied that jesus should die for that nation; and not for that nation only, but that also he should gather together in one the children of god that were scattered abroad." num. : - --"and the lord opened the mouth of the ass, and she said unto balaam, what have i done unto thee, that thou hast smitten me these three times? and balaam said unto the ass, because thou has mocked me: i would there were a sword in mine hand, for now would i kill thee. and the ass said unto balaam, am not i thine ass, upon which thou hast ridden ever since i was thine unto this day? was i ever wont to do so unto thee? and he said, nay." dan. : , --"and i heard, but i understood not: then said i, my lord, what shall be the end of these things? and he said, go thy way, daniel: for the words are closed up and sealed till the time of the end." and yet the gift of inspiration admitted of personal, diligent, and faithful research into the facts recorded--luke : - . this fact allowed the expression of the same thought in different words, such differences (by no means discrepancies) between the accounts of inspired men as would be likely to arise from the different standpoint of each. examples: matt. : , --"and as they were eating, jesus took bread, and blessed it, and brake it, and gave it to the disciples, and said, take, eat; this is my body. and he took the cup, and gave thanks, and gave it to them, saying, drink ye all of it." luke : , --"and he took bread, and gave thanks, and brake it, and gave unto them, saying, this is my body which is given for you; this do in remembrance of me. likewise also the cup after supper, saying, this cup is the new testament in my blood, which is shed for you." cor. : , --"and when he had given thanks, he brake it, and said, take, eat; this is my body, which is broken for you; this do in remembrance of me. after the same manner also he took the cup, when he had supped, saying, this cup is the new testament in my blood; this do ye, as oft as ye drink it, in remembrance of me." matt. : --"and lo a voice from heaven, saying, this is my beloved son, in whom i am well pleased." mark : --"and there came a voice from heaven, saying, thou art my beloved son, in whom i am well pleased." luke : --"and the holy ghost descended in a bodily shape like a dove upon him, and a voice came from heaven, which said, thou art my beloved son; in thee i am well pleased." the spirit employed the attention, the investigation, the memory, the fancy, the logic, in a word, all the faculties of the writer, and wrought through them. he guided the writer to choose what narrative and materials, speeches of others, imperial decrees, genealogies, official letters, state papers or historical matters he might find necessary for the recording of the divine message of salvation. he wrought in, with, and through their spirits, so as to preserve their individuality to others. he used the men themselves, and spoke through their individualities. "the gold was his; the mould was theirs." did inspiration affect the words used? if the question be asked whether or not inspiration affected the words, it must be answered in the affirmative. it is hardly possible that inspiration could insure the correct transmission of thought without in some way affecting the words. yet it affected the words not directly and immediately by dictating them in the ears of the writers, but mediately, through working on their minds and producing there such vivid and clear ideas of thoughts and facts that the writers could find words fitted to their purpose. we must conclude, therefore, that while from the divine side the holy spirit gave through men clearly and faithfully that which he wished to communicate, from the human side that communication came forth in language such as men themselves would naturally have chosen. this may seem to some to be an impossibility, and they would allege that if the words were affected by inspiration at all, there must have been dictation. but the must is a _non sequitur._ it is admitted that god works his purposes in the world through the ordinary actions of men, while yet no violence is done to their freedom. it is admitted, also, that god, through the gracious operations of his holy spirit, works in the hearts of his people so as to develop in each of them the new man, while yet the individuality of each is preserved; and the type of piety is just as distinct in each christian as the style is in each of the sacred writers. these cases are so nearly parallel as to suggest that all denials of the possibility of inspiration without the destruction of the individual characteristics are as unphilosophical as they are unwarranted. we may therefore safely say that in a very real sense the words as well as the thoughts have been given, whether mediately or immediately, under the influence of the divine spirit. we claim that the bible is in deed and in truth the very word of god; that it is the word of god in the language of men; truly divine, and at the same time truly human; that it is the revelation of god to his creatures; that infallible guidance was given to those who wrote it, so as to preserve them from error in the statement of facts; that what the writers of the scriptures say or write under this guidance is as truly said and written by god as if their instrumentality were not used at all; that the ideas expressed therein are the very ideas the holy ghost intended to convey; that god is in the fullest sense responsible for every word. this is what the bible claims for itself. the doctrine of angels. i. their existence. . the teaching of jesus. . the teaching of the apostles. ii. their nature. . created beings. . spiritual beings. . great power and might. . various grades. . the number of angels. iii. the fall of angels. . time and cause. . the work of fallen angels. . the judgment of fallen angels. iv. the work of angels. . their heavenly ministry. . their earthly ministry. a) in relation to the believer. b) in relation to christ's second coming. the doctrine of angels. we are not to think that man is the highest form of created being. as the distance between man and the lower forms of life is filled with beings of various grades, so it is possible that between man and god there exist creatures of higher than human intelligence and power. indeed, the existence of lesser deities in all heathen mythologies presumes the existence of a higher order of beings between god and man, superior to man and inferior to god. this possibility is turned into certainty by the express and explicit teaching of the scriptures. it would be sad indeed if we should allow ourselves to be such victims of sense perception and so materialistic that we should refuse to believe in an order of spiritual beings simply because they were beyond our sight and touch. we should not thus shut ourselves out of a larger life. a so-called liberal faith may express unbelief in such beings. does not such a faith (?) label itself narrow rather than liberal by such a refusal of faith? does not a liberal faith mean a faith that believes _much,_ not little--as much, not as little, as possible? i. their existence. . the teaching of jesus. matt. : --"for i say unto you, that in heaven their angels do always behold the face of my father which is in heaven." mark : --"but of that day and that hour knoweth no man, no, not the angels which are in heaven." : ; matt. : ; : . these are a sufficient number of passages, though they are by no means all, to prove that jesus believed in the existence of angels. jesus is not here speaking in any accommodative sense. nor is he simply expressing a superstitious belief existing among the jews at that time. this was not the habit of jesus. he did not fail to correct popular opinion and tradition when it was wrong, e.g., his rebuke of the false ceremonialism of the pharisees, and the unbelief of the sadducees in the resurrection. see also the sermon on the mount (matt. : - ). . the teaching of paul, and other apostles. thess. : --"and to you who are troubled, rest with us, when the lord jesus shall be revealed from heaven with his mighty angels," col. : --"let no man beguile you of your reward in a voluntary humility and worshipping of angels." is not one of the principal reasons for the writing of the epistle to the colossians to correct the gnostic theory of the worshipping of angels? see also eph. : , col. : . john believed in an angelic order of beings: john : ; rev. : ; : . peter: pet. : ; pet. : . see also jude ; luke : ; mark : ; heb. : . these and numerous other references in the scriptures compel the candid student of the word to believe in the existence of angels. ii. the natuee of angels. . they abe created beings. col. : --"for by him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers; all things were created by him, and for him." angels are not the spirits of the departed, nor are they glorified human beings (heb. : , ). neh. : --"thou, even thou, art lord alone; thou hast made heaven, the heaven of heavens, with all their host." . they are spiritual beings. heb. : --"are they not all ministering spirits?" psa. : --"who maketh his angels spirits; his ministers a flaming fire." it is thought by some that god creates angels for a certain purpose, and when that purpose is accomplished they pass out of existence. but that there are many, many angels in existence all the time is clear from the teaching of the scriptures. although the angels are "spirits," they nevertheless oft-times have appeared to men in visible, and even human form (gen. ; judges : ; : - ; matt. : ; luke : ; john : ). there seems to be no sex among the angels, although wherever the word "angel" is used in the scriptures it is always in the masculine form. . they are beings of great might and power. pet, : --"whereas angels, which are greater in power and might (than man)." psa. : --"angels that excel in strength." one angel was able to destroy sodom and gomorrah, and other guilty cities; one angel smote the first-born, and rolled away the great stone from the mouth of the tomb. one angel had power to lay hold of that old dragon, the devil (rev. : , ); one angel smote a hundred and fourscore and five thousand assyrians (isa. : ). their power is delegated; they are the angels of _his_ might ( thess. : ), the ministers through whom god's might is manifested. they are mighty, but not almighty. . there are various ranks and orders of angels. we read of michael, the archangel (jude ; thess. : ); angels, authorities, and powers--which are supposedly ranks and orders of angels ( pet. : ; col. : ). in the apocryphal books we find a hierarchy with seven archangels, including michael, gabriel, raphael, uriel. the fact that but one archangel is mentioned in the scriptures proves that its doctrine of angels was not derived, as some supposed, from babylonian and persian sources, for there we find seven archangels instead of one. . the number of angels. heb. : , r. v.--"innumerable hosts of angels." cf. kings : ; matt. : ; job : . iii. the fall of angels. originally all angels were created good. the scriptures speak of a fall of angels--"the angels that sinned." pet. : --"for if god spared not the angels that sinned, but cast them down to hell, and delivered them into chains of darkness, to be reserved unto judgment." jude --"and the angels which kept not their first estate, but left their own habitation, he hath reserved in everlasting chains under darkness unto the judgment of the great day." . the time of the fall of angels. some maintain that it took place before the creation recorded in genesis : --between verses one and two; that it was this fall which made the original creation (gen. : ) "waste and void." this view can neither be proven nor refuted, nevertheless the great and awful fact of a fall of angels remains. (see under doctrine of satan, p. , for fall of angels in connection with the fall of satan.) . the cause of the fall of angels. peter does not specify the sin. jude says they "kept not their first estate, but left their own habitation." this, taken in connection with deut. : , which seems to indicate that certain territories or boundaries were appointed unto the angels, and gen. : - , which speaks of the "sons of god" (which some suppose to refer to angels, which, however, is questionable), might seem to imply that the sin of the angels consisted in leaving their own abode and coming down to cohabit with the "daughters of men." thus their sin would be that of lust. to some expositors the context in jude would seem to warrant such a conclusion, inasmuch as reference is made to the sins of sodom and gomorrah. but this can hardly be true, for a close study of the text in genesis shows that by "the sons of god" are meant the sethites. this would seem to be the true interpretation; if so, then the sin recorded in genesis would be ( ) natural and not monstrous; ( ) scriptural, and not mythical (cf. num. ; judges : ; rev. : , - contains sins of a similar description); ( ) accords with the designations subsequently given to the followers of god (luke : ; rom. : ; gal. : ); ( ) has a historical basis in the fact that seth was regarded by his mother as a (the) son of from god, ( ) in the circumstance that already the sethites had begun to call themselves by the name of jehovah (gen. : ); ( ), finally, it is sufficient as a hypothesis, and is therefore entitled to the preference (after lange). there are still others who say that the sin of the angels was pride and disobedience. it seems quite certain that these were the sins that caused satan's downfall (ezek. ). if this be the true view then we are to understand the words, "estate" or "principality" as indicating that instead of being satisfied with the dignity once for all assigned to them under the son of god, they aspired higher. . the work of fallen angels. they oppose god's purposes (dan. : - ); afflict god's people (luke : ; matt. : , ); execute satan's purposes (matt. : ; : , ); hinder the spiritual life of god's people (eph. : ); try to deceive god's people ( sam. : - ). . the judgment of the fallen angels. jude ; pet. : ; matt. : , show that there is no hope of their redemption. their final doom will be in the eternal fire. according to cor. : it would seem as though the saints were to have some part in the judgment of fallen angels. iv. the work of angels. . their heavenly ministry. isa. ; rev. : , ; : , --priestly service and worship. . their earthly ministry. to the angels has been committed the administration of the affairs material to sense, e.g., showing hagar a fountain; appearing before joshua with a drawn sword; releasing the chains from peter, and opening the prison doors; feeding, strengthening, and defending the children of god. to the holy spirit more particularly has been committed the task of imparting the truth concerning spiritual matters. in general: angels have a relation to the earth somewhat as follows: they are related to winds, fires, storms, pestilence (psa. : ; : ; chron. : , , ). the nation of israel has a special relationship to angels in the sense of angelic guardianship (dan. : ; ezek. : ; dan. : ). in particular: angels have a special ministry with reference to the church of jesus christ--the body of believers. they are the saints' "ministering servants" (heb. : )--they do service for god's people. illustrations: to abraham (gen. ); to gideon (judg. ); to mary (luke ); to the shepherds (luke ); to peter (acts ); to paul (acts ). a) they guide the believer. they guide the worker to the sinner (acts : ), and the sinner to the worker (acts : ). note: the angel guides, but the spirit instructs ( : ). are angels interested in conversions? (luke : ). how they watch our dealing with the unsaved! b) they cheer and strengthen god's people. kings : - ; matt. : ; luke : ; cf. acts : - ; : . c) they defend, protect, and deliver god's servants. dan. : ; acts : ; kings : ; gen. : ; acts : -ll; : , . d) they are eyewitnesses of the church and the believer. tim. : --in matters of preaching, the service of the church, and soul-saving, the angels look on--a solemn and appalling thought. cor. : --the good angels are spectators while the church engages in fierce battle with the hosts of sin. this is an incentive to endurance. cor. : --"because of the angels." is there intimated here a lack of modesty on the part of the women so shocking to the angels, who veil their faces in the presence of god when they worship. e) they guard the elect dead. luke : ; matt. : . just as they guarded christ's tomb, and as michael guarded moses' tomb (jude ). f) they accompany christ at his second coming. separating the righteous from the wicked (matt. : , ; thess. : , ). executing god's wrath upon the wicked (matt. : - , r. v. how this is done, no human pen can describe. the most fearful imagery of the bible is connected with the judgment work of angels (cf. revelation; fire, hail, blood, plague of locusts, poison of scorpions, etc.)--whether actual or symbolic, it is awful. the doctrine of satan. i. his existence and personality. . existence. . personality. ii. his place and power. . a mighty angel. . prince of power of the air. . god of this world. . head of kingdom of darkness. . sovereign over death. iii. his character. . adversary. . diabolos. . wicked one. . tempter. iv. our attitude towards satan. . limited power of satan. . resist him. v. his destiny. . a conquered enemy. . under eternal curse. vi. demons. the doctrine of satan. throughout the scriptures satan is set forth as the greatest enemy of god and man. too long has satan been a subject of ridicule instead of fear. seeing the scriptures teach the existence of a personality of evil, man should seek to know all he can about such a being. much of the ridicule attached to the doctrine of satan comes from the fact that men have read their fancies and theories into the scriptures; they have read milton's _paradise lost_ but have neglected the book of job; they have considered the experiences of luther instead of the epistles of peter and jude. to avoid skepticism on the one hand, and ridicule on the other we must resort to the scriptures to formulate our views of this doctrine. i. the existence and personality of satan. . his existence. to science the existence of satan is an open question; it neither can deny nor affirm it. satan's existence and personality can be denied therefore only on purely _a priori_ grounds. the bible, however, is very clear and positive in its teaching regarding the existence of a personality of evil called the devil. it is popular in some circles today to spell devil with the "d" left off, thus denying his real existence. matt. : , --"then cometh the wicked one . . . . the enemy that sowed them is the devil." john : --"the devil having now put it into the heart of judas iscariot, simon's son, to betray him." see also acts : ; cor. : , ; pet. : ; jude . how satan came to be is not quite as clear a fact as that he exists. in all probability he was once a good angel. it is claimed by scholarly and reliable interpreters that his fall is portrayed in ezekiel : - ; cf. isa : - . that he was once in the truth but fell from it is evident from john : . his fall (luke : ) was probably in connection with the fall of angels as set forth in such passages as pet. : ; jude . pride (?) was one of the causes ( tim. : ; ezek. : , ). this fact may account for the expression "satan and his angels" (matt. : ). paul doubtless refers to the fact that satan was once an angel of light ( cor. : ). whenever satan is represented under the form of a serpent, we are to understand such expressions as describing him after his fall. there is certainly no ground for presenting the evil one as having horns, tail, and hoofs. this is only to bring into ridicule what is an exceedingly serious fact. a careful consideration of all the scriptures here given will assure the student that satan is not a figment of the imagination, but a real being. . his personality. john : --"ye are of your father the devil, and the lusts of your father ye will do. he was a murderer from the beginning, and abode not in the truth, because there is no truth in him. when he speaketh a lie, he speaketh of his own; for he is a liar, and the father of it." john : --"he that committeth sin is of the devil; for the devil sinneth from the beginning." satan is here set forth as a murderer, a liar, a sinner--all elements of personality. he had the "power over death" (heb. : ), and is the "prince of this world" (john : ). the narrative of satan in job. (cc. , ) strongly emphasizes his personality. he is as much a person as the "sons of god," job, and even god himself. zech. : , ; chron. : ; psa. : also emphasize the fact of satan's personality. throughout all these scriptures the masculine personal pronoun is used of satan, and attributes and qualities of personality are ascribed to him. unless we veto the testimony of the scriptures we must admit that satan is a real person. how can any one read the story of the temptation of christ (matt. : - ) and fail to realize both parties in the wilderness conflict were persons--christ, a person; satan, a person? such offices as those ascribed to satan in the scriptures require an officer; such a work manifests a worker; such power implies an agent; such thought proves a thinker; such designs are from a personality. our temptations may be said to come from three sources: the world, the flesh, and the devil. but there are temptations which we feel sure come from neither the world nor the flesh, e.g., those which come to us in our moments of deepest devotion and quiet; we can account for them only by attributing them to the devil himself. "that old serpent, the devil, has spoken with fatal eloquence to every one of us no doubt; and i do not need a dissertation from the naturalist on the construction of a serpent's mouth to prove it. object to the figure if you will, but the grim, damning fact remains." --_joseph parker._ there can scarcely be any doubt as to the fact that christ taught the existence of a personality of evil. there can be but three explanations as to the meaning of his teaching; first, that he accommodated his language to a gross superstition, knowing it to be such--if this be true then what becomes of his sincerity; second, that he shared the superstition not knowing it to be such--then what becomes of his omniscience, of his reliability as a teacher from god? third, that the doctrine is not a superstition, but actual truth--this position completely vindicates christ as to his sincerity, omniscience and infallibility as the teacher sent from god. ii. the place and power of satan. . a mighty angel. he was such, and probably is yet. jude , --they "speak evil of dignities. yet michael the archangel, when contending with the devil, he disputed about the body of moses, durst not bring against him a railing accusation, but said, the lord rebuke thee." daniel shows that satan has power to oppose one of the chief angels (vv. , in particular). in luke : christ calls satan "a strong man armed." he is "the prince of this world" (john : ). . prince of the power of the air. eph. : --"the prince of the power of the air, the spirit that now worketh in the children of disobedience." cf. : , . he is also prince of the demons or fallen angels, matt. : ; : ; luke : - . there is doubtless an allusion here to the fact that the world of evil spirits is organized, and that satan is at its head. . the god of this world. cor. : --"in whom the god of this world hath blinded the minds of them which believe not." he is "the prince of this world" (john : ; : ; : ; cf. eph. : , ; john : ). satan is not only the object of the world's worship, but also the moving spirit of its godless activities. . he heads a kingdom which is hostile to the kingdom of god and of christ. acts : --"to open their eyes, and to turn them from darkness to light, and from the power of satan unto god." col. : --"who hath delivered us from the power of darkness, and hath translated us into the kingdom of his dear son." the kingdom of light is headed by a person--jesus christ; the kingdom of darkness, by a person--satan. the one is a person equally with the other. . has sovereignty over the realm of death. heb. : --"that . . . . he might destroy him that had the power of death, that is, the devil." it would seem as if the souls of the unregenerate dead are (or were) to some extent under satan's dominion. iii. the character of satan. "we may judge of the nature and character of the evil one by the names and titles ascribed to him." . the adversary, or satan. zech. : --"and he showed me joshua the high priest standing before the angel of the lord, and satan standing at his right hand to resist him." (see vv. - .) pet. : --"your adversary the devil." luke : . see for use of the word: num. : . by adversary is meant one who takes a stand against another. satan is the adversary of both god and man. . the devil, diabolos. matt. : --"the enemy . . . . is the devil." john : --"ye are of your father the devil." this name is ascribed to satan times at least in the new testament, and indicates an accuser or slanderer (rev. : ). he slanders god to man (gen. : - ), and man to god (job : ; - ). . the wicked one. matt. : --"then cometh the wicked one." matt. : (r. v.); john : (r. v.). this title suggests that satan is not only wicked himself, but is also the source of all wickedness in the world. . the tempter. matt. : --"and when the tempter came to him." see gen. : - . none escape his temptations. he is continually soliciting men to sin. in this connection we may speak of the cunning and malignity of satan (gen. : ). satan transforms himself into an angel of light ( cor. : ). this phase of his work is well illustrated in the temptation of christ (matt. : - ), and the temptation of eve (gen. ). he fain would help christ's faith, stimulate his confidence in the divine power, and furnish an incentive to worship. the scriptures speak of the "wiles" or subtle methods of the devil (eph. : , ). the "old serpent" is more dangerous than the "roaring lion." satan's subtlety is seen in tempting men in their weak moments (matt. : - ; luke : - ); after great successes (john : , cf. vv. - ); by suggesting the use of right things in a wrong way (matt. : - ); in deluding his followers by signs and wonders ( thess. : , ). iv. our attitude towards satan. . so far as the believer is concerned his power is limited. job : - ; : - . satan had to ask leave of god to try job. john : ; : . satan hath been already judged, i.e., his power and dominion over believers was broken at the cross, by reason of christ's victory there. he had to ask permission to enter even swine (matt. : - ). satan is mighty, but not almighty. . he is to be resisted. pet. : , --"be sober, be vigilant; because your adversary the devil, as a roaring lion, walketh about seeking whom he may devour; whom resist steadfast in the faith." james : --"resist the devil, and he will flee from you." this resistance is best accomplished by submitting to god (rom. : - ; james : ), and by putting on the whole armor of god (eph. : - ). v. the destiny of satan. . he is a conquered enemy. that is, so far as the believer is concerned; john : ; : , ; john : ; col. : . . he is under a perpetual curse. gen. : , cf. isa. : . there is no removal of the curse from satan. . he is finally to be cast alive into the lake of fire, there to be tormented for ever and ever. matt. : ; rev. : --"and the devil that deceived them was cast into the lake of fire and brimstone, where the beast and the false prophet are, and shall be tormented day and night for ever and ever." vi. demons. (see under "fallen angels," p. .) the doctrine of the last things. a. the second coming of christ. b. the resurrection. c. the judgment. d. the destiny of the wicked. e. the reward of the righteous. the doctrine of the last things. under this caption are treated such doctrines as the second coming of christ, the resurrection of both the righteous and wicked, the judgments, final awards, and eternal destiny. a. the second coming of cheist. i. its importance. . prominence in the scriptures. . the christian hope. . the christian incentive. . the christian comfort. ii. its nature. . personal and visible coming to the earth. . different views. . distinctions. iii. its purpose. with reference to-- . the church. . the unregenerate. . the jews. . the enemies of god. . the millennium. iv. its date. . day and hour unknown. . recognizing the "signs." . imminent. a. the second coming of christ. i. its importance. . its prominence in the scriptures. it is claimed that one out of every thirty verses in the bible mentions this doctrine; to every one mention of the first coming the second coming is mentioned eight times; references to it are made in chapters; whole books ( and thess., e.g.) and chapters (matt. ; mark ; luke , e.g.) are devoted to it. it is the theme of the old testament prophets. of course, they sometimes merge the two comings so that it is not at first sight apparent, yet the doctrine is there. ( pet. : ). jesus christ bore constant testimony to his coming again (john : ; matt. and ; mark ; luke ; john : ). the angels, who bore such faithful testimony to christ's first advent, bear testimony to his second coming (acts : ; cf. heb. : , for the faithfulness of their testimony). the apostles faithfully proclaimed this truth (acts : , ; thess. : , ; heb. : ; john : ; jude , ). . the church of christ is bidden to look forward to christ's second coming as its great hope. titus : --"looking for that blessed hope, and the glorious appearing of the great god and our saviour jesus christ." pet. : . the one great event, that which supersedes all others, towards which the church is to look, and for which she is to ardently long, is the second coming of christ. g . it is set forth as the doctrine which will prove to be the greatest incentive to consistent living. matt. : - ; luke : - --"and take heed to yourselves, lest at any time your hearts be overcharged with surfeiting, and drunkenness, and cares of this life, and so that day come upon you unawares. . . . watch ye therefore, and pray always, that ye may be accounted worthy to escape all these things that shall come to pass, and to stand before the son of man." john : ; : . the test which the church should apply to all questions of practice: would i like to have christ find me doing this when he comes? . it is a doctrine of the greatest comfort to the believer. thess. : - . after stating that our loved ones who had fallen asleep in christ should again meet with us at the coming of our lord, the apostle says, "wherefore comfort one another with these words." why then should such a comforting and helpful doctrine as this be spoken against? many reasons may be suggested: the unreadiness of the church; preconceived views ( pet. : ); extravagant predictions as to time; lack of knowledge of the scriptures. may not the guilt on our part for rejecting the second coming of christ be as great if not greater than that of the jews for rejecting his first coming? ii. what is meant by the second coming of christ. . a personal and visible coming. acts : --"ye men of galilee, why stand ye gazing up into heaven? this same jesus, which is taken up from you into heaven, shall so come in like manner as ye have seen him go into heaven." thess. : , --"for the lord himself shall descend from heaven." rev. : . from these scriptures we learn that by the second coming of christ is meant the bodily, personal, and visible coming of our lord jesus christ to this earth with his saints to reign. . erroneous views concerning the second coming of christ. a) that the second coming means christ's coming at death. this cannot be the meaning, because-- death is not attended by the events narrated in thessalonians : , . indeed the second coming is here set forth as the opposite of death for "the dead in christ shall rise" from the dead when christ comes again. according to john : , christ comes for us, and not we go to him: "i will come again, and receive you unto myself." john : - --"peter seeing him (john) saith to jesus, lord, and what shall this man do? jesus saith unto him, if i will that he tarry till i come, what is that to thee? follow thou me. then went this saying abroad among the brethren, that that disciple should not die; yet jesus said not unto him, he shall not die; but, if i will that he tarry till i come, what is that to thee?" corinthians : - declares that at the second coming of christ we overcome, not succumb to, death. see john : ; matt. : . the foolishness of such interpretation is seen if we substitute the word "death" for the second coming of christ in such places where this coming is mentioned, e.g., phil. : ; matt. : --"verily i say unto you, there be some standing here, which shall not taste of death, till they see the son of man coming in his kingdom." b) that the second coming means the coming of the holy spirit. there is no doubt but that the coming of the holy spirit is a coming (john : - ), but it is by no means _the_ second coming, and for the following reasons: many of the testimonies and promises of the second coming were given _after_ pentecost, e.g., phil. : ; tim. : ; thess. : , ; cor. : , . christ does not receive us unto himself, but comes to us, at pentecost. in the second coming he takes us, not comes to us. the events of thessalonians : , did not occur on the day of pentecost, nor do they occur when the believer receives the holy spirit. c) that the second coming refers to the destruction of jerusalem. reply: the events of thessalonians : , did not take place then. john : - , and rev. : were written _after_ the destruction of jerusalem. from all that has been said then, it seems clear that the second coming of christ is an event still in the future. . the need of recognizing the distinction between christ's coming for his saints and with his saints. there is a distinction between the _presence_ and the _appearing_ of christ: the former referring to his coming _for,_ and the latter _with_ his saints. we should remember, further, that the second coming covers a period of time, and is not the event of a single moment. even the first coming covered over thirty years, and included the events of christ's birth, circumcision, baptism, ministry, crucifixion, resurrection, etc. the second coming will also include a number of events such as the rapture, the great tribulation, the millenium, the resurrection, the judgments, etc. iii. the purpose of the second coming. . so far as it concerns the church. thess. : - ; cor. : - ; phil. : , , r. v.; john : . when christ comes again he will first raise the righteous dead, and change the righteous living; simultaneously they shall be caught up to meet the lord in the air to be with him for ever. eph. : , ; cor. : ; rev. : - ; matt. : - . the church, the bride of christ, will then be married to her lord. matt. : ; tim. : ; pet. : ; cor. : - ; cor. : . believers will be rewarded for their faithfulness in service at his coming. (see under the final beward of the righteous, page .) . so far as it concerns the unconverted nations and individuals. matt. : ; rev. : ; matt. : , ; rev. : , ; isa. : ; thess. : - . a distinction must be recognized between the judgment of the living nations, and that of the great white throne. these are not the same, for no resurrection accompanies the judgment of the living nations, as in the case of the throne judgment. further, one thousand years elapse between these two judgments (rev. : - ). again, one is at the beginning of the millennium, and the other at its close. . with reference to the jews. the jews will be restored to their own land (isa. : ; ) in an unconverted state; will rebuild the temple, and restore worship (ezek. - ); will make a covenant with antichrist for one week (seven years), in the midst of which they will break the covenant (dan. : ; thess. ); they will then pass through the great tribulation (matt. : , , ; rev. : ; : ); are converted (as a nation) at the coming of christ (zech. : ; rev. : ); become great missionaries (zech. : - ); never more to be removed from the land (amos : ; ezek. : ). . with regard to antichrist, and the enemies of god's people. thess. : - ; rev. : ; : . these shall be destroyed by the brightness of his coming; will be cast finally into the bottomless pit. . to set up the millennial reign on the earth. the millennium means the thousand years reign of christ upon the earth (rev. : - ). some think that it is the continuation of the _kingdom age_ broken off by the unbelief of the jews at the time of the apostles. the millennium begins with the coming of christ with his saints; with the revelation of christ after the great tribulation (matt. : , ); at the close of the seventieth week of daniel. for illustration, see rev. : - ; dan. : , ; zech. : - . then comes the destruction of antichrist, the binding of satan, and the destruction of the enemies of god's people (rev. : ; : - , ). the judgment of the living nations (matt. ). the conversion and missionary activity of the jews (zech. : - ; cf. acts : - ). then, we may have a converted world, but not now, nor in this age; israel, not the church, then concerned. the nature of the millennium: it is a theocracy: jesus christ himself is the king (jer. : ; luke : - ). the apostles will, doubtless, reign with christ over the jews (isa. ; matt. : ); the church, over the gentile nations (luke : - ; heb. : , ). the capitol city will be jerusalem (isa. : - ). pilgrimages will be made to the holy city (zech. : ). the reign of christ will be one of righteousness and equity (isa. : ; psa. : ). a renovated earth (rom. : - ; isa. : ; c. ). the events closing the millennium are apostasy and rebellion (rev. : - ); the destruction of satan (rev. : ); the great white throne judgment (rev. : - ); a new heaven and a new earth (rev. and ). iv. the time of christ's second coming. we need to carefully distinguish between christ's coming _for_ his saints--sometime called the "rapture" or "parousia"; and his coming _with_ his saints--the "revelation" or "epiphany." in considering the matter of the "signs" of christ's coming we need to pay particular attention to and distinguish between those signs which have been characteristic of and peculiar to many generations, and have, consequently, been repeated; and those which are to characterize specifically the near approach of the coming of christ. christians are not altogether in the dark concerning these facts: luke : - --"so likewise ye, when ye see these things come to pass, know ye that the kingdom of god is nigh at hand" (v. ). also thess. : - --"but ye, brethren, are not in darkness, that that day should overtake you as a thief" (v. ). . no one knows the day nor the hour. matt. : - --"but of that day and hour knoweth no man, no, not the angels of heaven, but my father only" (v. ). mark : , cf. acts : . the scriptures tell us enough regarding the time of christ's coming to satisfy our faith, but not our curiosity. these statements of the master should be sufficient to silence that fanaticism which is so anxious to tell us the exact year, month, and even the day when christ will come. this day is hidden in the counsels of god. jesus himself, by a voluntary unwillingness to know, while in his state of humiliation, showed no curiosity to peer into the chronology of this event. we should not nor ought we to want to know more than christ did on this point. can it be that "that day" was not yet fixed in the counsels of the father, and that its date depended, somewhat at least, upon the faithfulness of the church in the evangelization of the world? we know not certainly. the revelation which jesus gave to john would seem to teach that "that day," which was at one time hidden from christ, is now, in his state of exaltation, known to him. . yet, we must not foeget that while we may not know the exact day or hour of christ's coming, we may know when it is near at hand. (matt. : - ; thess. : - .) there are certain "signs" which indicate its nearness: general apostasy and departure from the faith ( tim. : ; tim. : - ; luke : ). a time of great heaping up of wealth (james : - ). a time of great missionary activity (matt. : ). consider the missionary activity of the last century. is it not marvellous? is it a "sign" of his coming? the modern history of the jews throws much light on the question of the nearness of christ's coming. the following facts are interesting in this connection: the large number of jews returning to palestine; the waning of the power of the turkish government, which has held palestine with an iron hand and has excluded the jew; the plans already before the nations to give the holy land to the jews by consent of the powers; the early and latter rain in palestine; railroads, electric lights, etc., now in the land long desolate--the fig-tree is budding, and the hour of the coming is at hand. it should not be forgotten in this connection that many of the signs mentioned refer primarily to the coming of christ _with_ his saints. but if that stage of the coming be near then surely the first stage of it must be. other signs have reference to the first stage in the one great event of his coming, which is known as the "rapture" or christ's coming _for_ his saints. . it seems clear from the teaching of the scriptures that there is nothing to prevent the coming of christ for his saints at any moment. by this is meant that there is nothing, so far as we can sea from the teaching of the scriptures and the signs of the times, to hinder the introduction of the day of the lord, or the second coming of christ looked upon as a great whole--a series of events, by christ's coming to take his own people unto himself. in other words, there is nothing to hinder the "rapture" or "parousia"--the "epiphany," "manifestation," or "revelation" is something for a later day. some objections are offered to this view, the which it will be well to examine and answer even though briefly. first, that the gospel has not been preached into all the world (matt. : ), therefore the coming of christ is not imminent. reply: we must understand the emphatic words of the text: by "end" is meant the end of the age; but the rapture, or christ's coming _for_ his saints, of which we are here speaking as being imminent, is not the end of the age. by "world" is meant the inhabited earth; by "gospel," good news; by "witness," not conversion but testimony. even if these events are to precede the "rapture," have they not all been fulfilled? see acts : ; : ; rom. : ; col. : , , for the answer, which is certainly in the affirmative. we must give the same meaning to the word "world" in romans and colossians that we do to matt. : . further, is the church the _only_ witness? see rev. : . if the rapture is not the end of the age, and if an angel can proclaim the gospel, why cannot part of the work of witnessing be carried on after the rapture? second, peter, james, and john were told that they should not taste of death until they had seen the coming of christ's kingdom (matt. : ; mark : ; luke : ). reply: true, but was not this fulfilled when they saw christ on the transfiguration mount? peter, who was there, in his second epistle ( : - ) distinctly says it was thus fulfilled. third, the disciples were told that they shall not have gone over all the cities of israel until the son of man be come (matt. : ). reply: mark : , luke : shows that they did not finish all the cities, nor is there evidence anywhere that they ever did, for israel rejected the message of the kingdom. may it not be that under the restoration of the jews and the preaching of the "two witnesses" (rev. ) this shall be accomplished? fourth, christ said "this generation shall not pass, till all these things be fulfilled." see matt. : ; luke : ; mark : . reply: what is meant by a "generation"? some would say "forty years," consequently the master referred to the destruction of jerusalem, which event was the second coming of christ. but this is not necessarily the case. the word "generation" may refer to the jewish _race;_ cf. the use of the same greek word in matt. : ; : ; mark : ; luke : ; : ; : ; phil. : ; psa. : ; : . and in this connection consider carefully the wonderful preservation of the jewish race. other nations have passed away, having lost their identity; the jew remains--that generation (race) has not yet passed away, nor will it "till all these things be fulfilled." [footnote: _jesus is coming,_ by w.e.b., is heartily recommended as an exceedingly helpful book on this subject. the author is indebted thereto.] b. the resurrection of the dead. under this caption is included the resurrection of both the righteous and the wicked, although, as will be seen later, they do not occur at the same time. i. this doctrine clearly taught in the scriptures. . in the old testament. . in the new testament. ii. the nature of the resurrection. . literal resurrection of the bodies of all men. . resurrection of the body necessary to complete salvation. . the nature of the resurrection body. a) in general. b) the body of the believer. c) the body of the unbeliever. iii. the time of the resurrection. . of the righteous. . of the wicked. i. the doctrine of a resurrection clearly taught in the scriptures. . in the old testament. it is set forth in various ways: _in word:_ job : - --"for i know that my redeemer liveth, and that he shall stand at the latter day upon the earth: and though after my skin worms destroy this body, yet in my flesh shall i see god: whom i shall see for myself, and mine eyes shall behold, and not another; though my reins be consumed within me." also psa. : ; : ; dan. : - . _in figure:_ gen. : with heb. : --"accounting that god was able to raise him up, even from the dead; from whence also he received him in a figure." _in prophecy:_ isa. : --"thy dead men shall live, together with my dead body shall they arise. awake and sing, ye that dwell in the dust." the words "men" and "together with" may be omitted--"thy dead (ones) shall live." these words are jehovah's answer to israel's wail as recorded in vv. , . even if they refer to resurrection of israel as a nation, they yet teach a bodily resurrection. see also hosea : . _in reality:_ kings (elijah); kings : - (elisha and the shunamite's son); : (resurrection through contact with the dead bones of elisha). the old testament therefore distinctly teaches the resurrection of the body. mark : , which might seem to indicate that the apostles did not know of a bodily resurrection, is accounted for by their unwillingness to believe in a crucified christ. . in the new testament. _in word:_ note the teaching of jesus in john : , ; c. entire, note especially vv. , , , ; luke : , ; : , . the teaching of the apostles: paul, acts, : ; cor. ; thess. : - ; phil. : ; john, rev. : - ; . _in reality:_ the resurrection of saints (matt. : , ); of lazarus (john ); of jesus christ (matt. ). our lord's resurrection assured them of what till then had been a hope imperfectly supported by scriptural warrant, and contested by the sadducees. it enlarged that hope ( pet. : ), and brought the doctrine of the resurrection to the front ( cor. ). ii. the nature of the resurrection. . a literal resurrection of the bodies of all men--a universal resurrection. john : --"marvel not at this: for the hour is coming, in the which all that are in the graves shall hear his voice, and shall come forth." cor. : --"for as in adam all die, even so in christ shall all be made alive." the apostle is speaking of physical death in adam, and physical resurrection in christ. revelation : , and corinthians : both show the necessity of the raising of the body in order that judgment may take place according to things done in the body. see also job's hope ( : - ); david's hope (psa. : ). an objection is sometimes made to the effect that we literalize these scriptures which are intended to be metaphorical and spiritual. to this we reply: while the exact phrase, "resurrection of the body," does not occur in the bible, yet these scriptures clearly teach a physical rather than a spiritual resurrection. indeed john : - draws a sharp contrast between a spiritual (v. ) and a literal (v. ) resurrection. see also phil. : ; thess. : - . tim. : --"who concerning the truth have erred, saying that the resurrection is passed already," indicates that the early church believed in a literal resurrection. surely there is no reference here to a spiritual resurrection such as we read of in ephesians : . acts : speaks of a resurrection of the just and the unjust--this cannot refer to a spiritual resurrection surely. if the resurrection were spiritual then in the future state every man would have two spirits--the spirit he has here, and the spirit he would receive at the resurrection. the term "spiritual body" describes, not so much the body itself, as its nature. the "spiritual body" is body, not spirit, hence should not be considered as defining body. by the term "spiritual body" is meant the body spiritualized. so there is a natural body--a body adapted and designed for the use of the soul; and there is a spiritual body--a body adapted for the use of the spirit in the resurrection day. . the redemption of the body is included in our complete redemption. rom. : - --"and not only they, but ourselves also, which have the first fruits of the spirit, even we ourselves groan within ourselves, waiting for the adoption, to wit, the redemption of our body" (v. ). see also cor. : - . in john : and job : - we are taught that the dust into which our bodies have decayed will be quickened, which indicates a physical resurrection. this conception of the value of the body is doubtless what leads to the christian's care for his dead loved ones and their graves. the believer's present body, which is called "the body of his humiliation" (phil. : ) is not yet fitted for entrance into the kingdom ( cor. : ). paul's hope is not for a deliverence from the body, but the redemption of it ( cor. : ). . the nature of the resurrection body. a) in general. because the scripture teaches a literal resurrection of the body it is not necessary to insist on the literal resurrection of the identical body--hair, tooth, and nail--that was laid under the ground. the idea that at the resurrection we are to see hands flying across the sea to join the body, etc., finds no corroboration in the scriptures. such an idea is not necessary in order to be true to the bible teaching. mere human analogy ought to teach us this ( cor. : , )--"thou sowest not that body which shall be." the identity is preserved--that is all that we need to insist upon. what that identity tie is we may not yet know. after all it is not so much a question of material identity as of glorified individuality. the growth of the seed shows that there may be personal identity under a complete change of physical conditions. four things may be said about the resurrection body: first, it is not necessarily identical with that which descended into the grave; second, it will have some organic connection with that which descended into the grave; third, it will be a body which god, in his sovereignty, will bestow; fourth, it will be a body which will be a vast improvement over the old one. b) the body of the believer. phil. : (r. v.)--"who shall fashion anew the body of our humiliation, that it may be conformed to the body of his glory, according to the working whereby he is able even to subject all things unto himself." see also john : ; cor. : . what was the nature and likeness of christ's resurrection body which our resurrection body is to resemble? it was a real body (luke : ); recognizable (luke : ; john : ); powerful (john : ). summing up these passages, we may say that the resurrection body of the believer will be like the glorified body of christ. characteristics of the believer's resurrection body as set forth in cor. : it is not flesh and blood (vv. , ; cf. heb. : ; cor. : - ; luke : )--"flesh and bones," so not pure spirit; a real body. it is incorruptible (v. )--no decay, sickness, pain. it is glorious (v. ), cf. the transfiguration (matt. ); rev. : - . it has been said that adam and eve, in their unfallen state, possessed a glorious body. the face of stephen was glorious in his death (acts : ). cor. : . it is powerful (v. )--not tired, or weak; no lassitude; cf. now "spirit is willing, but the flesh is weak"; not so then. it is a spiritual body (v. ). here the soul is the life of the body; there the spirit will be the life of the body. it is heavenly (v. - ). c) the resurrection body of the unbeliever. the scriptures are strangely silent on this subject. it is worthy of note that in the genealogies of genesis no age is attached to the names of those who were not in the chosen line. is there a purpose here to ignore the wicked? in the story of the rich man and lazarus no name is given to the godless rich man; why? iii. the time of the resurrection. . the resurrection of the righteous. john : , , --"the last day." this does not mean a day of twenty-four hours, but a period of time. it will be safe, usually, to limit the word "day" to a period of twenty-four hours only where numeral, ordinal, or cardinal occurs in connection therewith, like "fourth day," etc. when the "day of grace," "day of judgment," "this thy day," etc., are mentioned, they refer to periods of time either long or short, as the case may be. cor. : --"but every man in his own order: christ the firstfruits; afterwards they that are christ's at his coming." thess. : - . in both these passages the resurrection of the believer is connected with the coming of christ. this event ushers in the last day; it is treated as a separate and distinct thing. . the resurrection of the wicked. as there is a difference in the issue (john : , ; dan. : , cf. literal hebrew rendering below) so there is as to time between the resurrection of the righteous and that of the wicked. phil. : --"if by any means i might attain unto the resurrection of (lit. out of) the dead." it was no incentive to paul simply to be assured that he would be raised from the dead; for he knew that all men would be thus raised. what paul was striving for was to be counted worthy of that first resurrection--of the righteous from among the wicked. the resurrection "out from among" the dead is the resurrection unto life and glory; the resurrection "of" the dead is to shame and contempt everlasting. cor. : - . note the expressions used, and their meaning: "then," meaning the next in order, the greek denoting sequence, not simultaneousness--each in his own cohort, battalion, brigade (cf. mark : --"first the blade, then the ear, after that the full corn in the ear"). nineteen hundred years have already elapsed between "christ the firstfruits" and "they that are christ's." how many years will elapse between the resurrection of "they that are christ's" and that of the wicked ("the end") we may not be able to definitely state, but certainly long enough for christ to have "put all enemies under his feet" (v. ). three groups or ranks are here mentioned: "christ," "they that are christ's," "the end" (the resurrection of the wicked). (cf. vv. , , --"seen of cephas, then of the twelve: after that . . . after that . . . then . . . and last of all he was seen of me also.") first christ, afterwards (later than) "they that are christ's" then (positively meaning afterwards, a new era which takes place after an interval) "cometh the end." dan. : --"and many of them that sleep in the dust of the earth shall awake, some (lit. those who awake at this time) to everlasting life, and some (lit. those who do not awake at this time) to shame and everlasting contempt." some of the most eminent hebrew scholars translate this passage as follows: "and (at that time) many (of thy people) shall awake (or be separated) out from among the sleepers in the earth dust. these (who awake) shall be unto life eternal, but those (who do not awake at that time) shall be unto contempt and shame everlasting." it seems clear from this passage that all do not awake at one (this) time, but only as many as are written in the book ( : ). eevelation : - shows that at least a thousand years--whatever period of time may be thereby designated--elapses between the resurrection of the righteous and the wicked. john : , ; dan. : ; rev. : all show that the resurrection of the wicked is always connected with the judgment, and that takes place at the close and not at the beginning of the day of the lord. whatever difficulties may present themselves in connection with the resurrection, whatever obstacles of a miraculous or supernatural nature may present themselves in connection therewith are to be met by remembering the truth enunciated by christ in connection with this very subject: matt. : --"ye do err, not knowing the scriptures, nor the power of god." (cf. v. .--"the same day came to him the sadducees, which say that there is no resurrection," etc., and the following verses for the setting of v. .) c. the judgment. i. the fact of the judgment. . as taught in the old testament. . as taught in the new testament. . the testimony of conscience. . the testimony of christ's resurrection. ii. the judge--christ. iii. the nature of the judgment. . judgment at the cross. . the daily judgment. . future judgment. a) of the saints. b) of the living nations. c) of the great white throne. d) of the fallen angels. e) of israel. c. the judgment. i. the fact of the judgment. . distinctly taught in the old testament. psa. : --"for he cometh, for he cometh to judge the earth: he shall judge the world with righteousness, and the people with his truth." while this passage refers more particularly to the rewarding of the righteous, yet the idea of judgment is here. both reward and punishment are involved in the idea of judgment. . the new testament. acts : --"because he hath appointed a day, in the which he will judge the world in righteousness by that man whom he hath ordained; whereof he hath given assurance unto all men, in that he hath raised him from the dead." heb. : . just as it is "appointed unto men once to die" so it is appointed unto men to appear before the judgment. there is no more escape from the one than from the other. it is part of the burden of both the old and new testament message that a day of judgment is appointed for the world. god's kingdom shall extend universally; but a judgment in which the wicked are judged and the righteous rewarded is necessary and in order that the kingdom of everlasting righteousness may be established upon the earth. . the conscience of all mankind corroborates the teaching of the scriptures with regard to the certainty of a coming judgment. this is true of both the individual and universal conscience. the discoveries of tablets as well as the history of all peoples establish this fact. this is enforced by eccl. : ; : --a book which is in a very real sense a book of worldly philosophy, narrating, as it does, the experiences and observations of a man who judged all things from the view-point of "under the sun," i.e., without special reference to any revelation from above. . the resurrection of jesus christ is a sure and certain proof which god has given to men of a coming judgment. acts : (quoted above). here is "assurance" in the sense of proof or ground of evidence. the context is suggestive: god had long borne with the sins of men, and in a sense, overlooked them. therefore men have thought that god would continue to do so. but no, this shall not be; there is a day of judgment coming, the evidence of which lies in the fact of the resurrection of jesus christ. ii. the judge--christ. john : , , ; tim. : ; cor. : ; acts : ; : . the man of the cross is the man of the throne. note the expression "because he is the son of man." that indicates his fitness to judge: he can sympathize. but he is equal with the father. this too indicates his competency to judge, for it implies omniscience. the texts which speak of god as judging the world are to be understood as referring to god the son. no appeal can be made from the son to the father. iii. the nature of the judgment. the erroneous idea that there is to be one great general judgment which is to take place at the end of the world, when all mankind shall stand before the great white throne, is to be guarded against. the judgments of the bible differ as to time, place, subjects, and results. . there is a judgment that is already past--the judgment at the cross. john : ; : ; cor. : ; gal. : ; pet. : . at this judgment bar satan was judged and his power over the believer broken. here also the sins of the believer were judged and put away. . there is a present judgment which is taking place daily in the life of the believer. cor. : , ; : ; tim. : ; cf., for illustration, sam. : , ; : , . this continual judgment must be going on in the life of the believer or there will be judgment from god because of the consequent failure to grow in grace. there must be constant and continual judging of sin as it comes up in the believer's life ( john : - ). . there is a future judgment. a) of the saints. cor. : - ; cor. : ; cor. : . this is to be a judgment with reference to the works, not the salvation, of the believer. it is called "the judgment seat of christ." that the saints are here referred to is clear from cor. : , , , ; also cor. : which says that those who are judged "shall have praise of god." this is not true of the wicked. this is a judgment, not for destiny, but for adjustment, for reward or loss according to our works, for position in the kingdom; every man according as his work shall be. b) of the living nations. matt. : - . this judgment will take place at the coming of christ with his saints. note three things in this chaper: first, the marriage supper of the lamb (w. - ); second, the judgment of the saints (vv. - ); third, the judgment of the living nations (vv. - ). this is not a general judgment of good and bad, for there are three classes here. "my brethren" can hardly refer to the saints, for then it would be "inasmuch as ye have done it unto yourselves, ye have done it unto me." nor is the church in this judgment, for she is already translated and rewarded as we have seen. the church no more belongs to the nations than does israel. the nations are those who deal with israel through the great tribulation. the "brethren" are probably the jewish remnant who have turned to christ during the great tribulation and whom the antichrist has severely persecuted as also have many of the wicked nations, like russia today. this is a judgment of nations that are living; there is no mention of the dead. c) of the great white throne. rev. : - . it is called the final judgment and takes place at the close of the millennium, after the judgment of the living nations (matt. ). it is a judgment of "the dead"; no mention is made of the living in connection therewith. note the difference between the judgments of the living nation and of the great white throne: the former at the beginning, the latter at the close of the millennium; one deals with the living, the other with the dead; one deals with conduct towards "the brethren," the other with general sins recorded in the books. d) of israel. ezek. : - ; psa. : - . takes place probably at the end of the great tribulation. e) of the fallen angels. jude ; pet. : . believers are associated with christ in this judgment ( cor. : ). d. the final destiny of the wicked. i. preliminary considerations. . difference between future of the righteous and wicked. . difficulty of figurative language. . disparity in number of the saved and lost. . prophecy vs. history. ii. the wicked die in their sins. iii. the wicked are not annihilated. iv. the wicked are raised from the dead for judgment. v. the punishment described. . death. . eternal. . punishment. . fire. . darkness. d. the final destiny of the wicked. "every view of the world has its eschatology. it cannot help raising the question of the whither, as well as of the what and the whence? ' , my lord,' said daniel to the angel, 'what shall be the end of these things?' ( : ). what is the end, the final destiny of the individual? does he perish at death, or does he enter into another state of being; and under what conditions of happiness or woe does he exist there? what is the end, the final aim of the great whole, that far-off divine event towards which the whole creation moves? it is vain to tell man not to ask these questions. he will ask them, and must ask them. he will pore over every scrap of fact, or trace of law, which seems to give an indication of an answer. he will try from the experience of the past, and the knowledge of the present, to deduce what the future shall be. he will peer as far as he can into the unseen; and, where knowledge fails, will weave from his hopes and trusts pictures and conjectures. "the christian view of the world also has its eschatology. the christian view, however, is positive, where that of science is negative; ethical, where it is material; human, where it is cosmogonic; ending in personal immortality, where this ends in extinction and death. the eschatology of christianity springs from its character as a teleological religion--it seeks to grasp the unity of the world through the conception of an end or aim."--_james orr._ this is probably the hardest of all the doctrines of christianity to be received. if we ask the reason why, we receive various answers. some would tell us that this doctrine is unwelcome to many because they feel themselves guilty, and their conscience tells them that unless they repent and turn to god this awful doom awaits them. others believe that it is because the thought of future punishment strikes terror to people's hearts, and therefore this doctrine is repulsive to them. to others again, the thought of future anguish seems utterly incompatable with the fatherly love of god. yet it is acknowledged to be a remarkable fact that both jesus and john, who more than any one else in the new testament represent the element of love in their lives and teaching, speak most of the future anguish of the wicked. that future punishment of the wicked holds a prominent place in the teachings of the scriptures there can be no reasonable doubt. what is between the covers of the bible is the preacher's message. yet great care must be exercised in the teaching or proclamation of this doctrine. after all it is not the saying of hard things that pierces the conscience of people; it is the voice of divine love heard amid the thunder. yet there must be no consciousness of cowardice in proclaiming the doctrine of future retribution, however awful its delineation may be. fear is a legitimate motive to which we may appeal, and while it may be classed among the lower motives, it is nevertheless true that it is the only motive that will effectively move some people to action. some recognized facts. there are certain preliminary facts which should be recognized in the discussion of this subject: . that it shall be well with the righteous, and woe to the wicked (isa. : , ). that there is to be retribution for sin and a reward for the righteous must be held to be beyond question, and must be recognized as an unchangeable law. one cannot very well meddle with that truth without serious danger. so long as a man persistently, willingly and knowingly continues in his sin he must suffer for it. that suffering the bible calls eternal death. . we must recognize that much of the language of the scripture dealing with this condition is couched in figurative terms. but the condition is none the less real because of that, for, generally speaking, the reality is more severe than the figure in which it is set forth. yet we need caution here, and must distinguish between the things that are stated in clear unmistakable language and those that are set forth in words symbolic and figurative. . the disparity in the number of saved and lost. there is a danger lest we should be unmindful of the problems connected with this doctrine, such as that seeming fewness of the saved; the condition of the heathen who have not had a chance to hear the gospel; and the difference in privilege and opportunity among those who live in so-called christian lands. . prophecy vs. history. we must recognize that it is more difficult to deal with facts which lie in the future than with those lying in the past. prophecy is always more difficult to deal with than history. the past we may sketch in details, the future but in broad outlines. "our treatment of themes that deal with the future must, in the very nature of the case be very different than it would be were we dealing with the things of the past. history and prophecy must be handled differently. in dealing with the history of god's past revelations--with the ages before the advent, with the earthly life and revelation of jesus christ, with the subsequent course of god's providence in the church--we are dealing with that which has already been. it stands in concrete reality before us, and we can reason from it as a thing known in its totality and its details. but when the subject of revelation is that which is yet to be, especially that which is yet to be under forms and conditions of which we have no direct experience, the case is widely altered. here it is at most outlines that we can look for; and even these outlines will be largely clothed in figure and symbol; the spiritual kernel will seek material investiture to body itself forth; the conditions of the future will require to be presented largely in forms borrowed from known relations. the outstanding thoughts will be sufficiently apparent, but the thoughts in which these thoughts are cast will partake of metaphor and image."--_james orr._ ii. the wicked are said to "die in their sins." john : , --"then said jesus again unto them, i go my way, and ye shall seek me, and shall die in your sins: whither i go, ye cannot come. i said therefore unto you, that ye shall die in your sins: for if ye believe not that i am he, ye shall die in your sins." rom. : --"for the wages of sin is death." see rev. : , ; : . the "death" spoken of here does not mean cessation of existence any more than eternal life means the beginning of existence. eternal life does not mean merely to live for ever, but to live in a state of blessedness for ever. eternal life deals not so much with quantity as with quality of existence. just so with eternal death. it is a quality of existence, not cessation of being. even in this life death can co-exist with life: "but she that liveth in pleasure is dead while she liveth" ( tim. : ); eph. : . what men call life god calls death. there are two things which the believer gets: at his regeneration, eternal life; at his resurrection, immortality; but in both instances he already has life and existence. so it is in the case of the wicked: the second death does not mean cessation of existence, for he is dead already, now in this life ( tim. : ; eph. : ; john : , ). rev. : describes what "death," as here used, means: "but the fearful, and the unbelieving... shall have their part in the lake which burneth with fire and brimstone: which is the second death." iii. the wicked are not annihilated. the texts most strongly urged as teaching the annihilation theory, if rightly interpreted, will be seen to refer to removal from off the earth, and not to future retribution. here are the principal passages: psa. : --"but the wicked shall perish, and the enemies of the lord shall be as the fat of lambs: they shall consume; into smoke shall they consume away." this psalm is written for the encouragement of israel and against her enemies and their power on the earth. this earthly power shall be utterly broken, and be of no more account than the smoke of a burnt sacrifice. the great truth taught here is that the earth is the inheritance of the saints, and that the wicked shall have no part in it. obadiah --" . . . and they shall be as though they had not been." these words are taken from the vision regarding edom, and refer to the destruction of the edomites and their land, and not to the future of the wicked in the next life. in speaking of the "everlasting punishment" with which the wicked will be visited, as recorded in thess. : , the annihilationist would say that reference is made to the "results or consequences" of that punishment and not to the punishment itself. but the scriptures state that it is the "punishment" itself, and not the consequences, that is everlasting. no such interpretation as that put upon these passages by those holding the annihilation theory can be maintained by sound exegesis. what need is there of a resurrection if the wicked are to be annihilated at death, or why should they be raised from the dead if only to be at once extinguished for ever? again, there is no such thing as "unconscious" punishment. you cannot punish anything that is unconscious. can you punish a stone or a house? punishment can take place only where there is consciousness on the part of the one suffering. iv. the wicked are to be punished. rom. : , --"but unto them that are contentious, and do not obey the truth, but obey unrighteousness, indignation and wrath, tribulation and anguish, upon every soul of man that doeth evil, of the jew first, and also of the gentile." "wrath" indicates the settled mind of god towards the persistently wicked (john : ); "indignation," the outbreak of that wrath at the day of judgment; "tribulation," severe affliction (matt. : ; : ; rev. : ); "anguish," torturing confinement in a strait place without relief, as in a dungeon, or in stocks. god grant that we may never know what these terms fully mean. matt. : , --"then shall he say also unto them on the left hand, depart from me, ye cursed, into everlasting fire, prepared for the devil and his angels. and these shall go away into everlasting punishment." thess. : - --"when the lord jesus shall be revealed from heaven with his mighty angels, in flaming fire taking vengeance on them that know not god, and that obey not the gospel of our lord jesus christ: who shall be punished with everlasting destruction from the presence of the lord, and from the glory of his power." see also mark : - which speaks of the wicked being cast into "hell, into the fire that never shall be quenched: where their worm dieth not, and the fire is not quenched." there are certain important words in these scriptures which demand our attention, and which we need to understand in order to get right views of the doctrine we are now considering. they are as follows: . "eternal." we read of "eternal" or "everlasting" punishment, "everlasting" fire. it is objected that the word "eternal" or "everlasting" does not mean "forever." this may be true. but we are all willing to admit that when this word qualifies the condition of the righteous it means for ever, without end, e.g., the righteous shall go "into life eternal." the same word, however, qualifies the punishment of the wicked, e.g., "these shall go away into everlasting punishment." fairness demands that we make the joy of the righteous and the punishment of the wicked--both qualified as they are by the same greek word--of the same duration. if there is an end to the reward of the righteous, there is also to the penalty of the wicked. the one lasts as long as the other. if "destruction" means annihilation, then there is no need of the word "eternal" to qualify it. further the scriptures present the punishment of the wicked not only as "eternal" (or age-long) but as enduring "for ever and ever," or "unto the ages of the ages" (rev. : ; : ; : , r. v.). here is a picture of ages tumbling upon ages in eternal succession. . "punishment." the meaning of this word will be found under the previous division (iii) dealing with the subject of annihilation. . "fire." this is one of the most constant images under which the torment and misery of the wicked is represented. fire is a symbol of the divine judgment of wrath (matt. : ). in matthew : the godless are represented as a tree hewn down and cast into the fire; in : the chaff (godless) is burned with unquenchable fire; in : the wicked are said to be cast into a furnace of fire. is the "fire" spoken of here _literal_ fire? it is an accepted law of language that a figure of speech is less intense than the reality. if "fire" is merely a figurative expression, it must stand for some great reality, and if the reality is more intense than the figure, what an awful thing the punishment symbolized by fire must be. it is contended that fire must necessarily consume; that nothing could continue to exist in fire. is it not remarkable that the baptist uses the word "unquenchable"' (greek, "asbestos") when speaking of this fire? is any light thrown on the question by the incident of the three hebrew children in the fiery furnace? did they consume, or did they withstand the fire? (dan. : ). in the parable of the tares (matt. : - ) our lord speaks of the tares being burned up. when christ retired to the house after delivering the parable, his disciples asked him to explain to them what he meant by the figures of speech he used in the parable. this request he granted. he explained the figurative language of the parable; every figurative word in it except that of "fire." he said: "the field is the world; the good seed are the children of the kingdom; but the tares are the children of the wicked one; the enemy that sowed them is the devil; the harvest is the end of the world; and the reapers are the angels. as therefore the tares are gathered and burned in the fire, so shall it be at the end of this world. . . . and they shall cast them into a furnace of fire: there shall be wailing and gnashing of teeth." why did not the master explain what he meant by the figurative word "fire"? he explained all the other figurative words, why not this one? did he forget? or did he intend that his disciples should have the impression that he was speaking of literal fire? here was his opportunity to explain his use of words, for the disciples were asking for just that very thing. was there any significance in the fact that jesus did not explain the word "fire"? whether we believe in literal fire or not, we certainly ought to ask for a reason for the master's failure to literalize the figurative word "fire." . "darkness." this word is used to describe the condition of the lost: "cast into outer darkness: there shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth." seven times these terms are found together: matt. : ; : , ; : ; : ; : ; luke : . the picture is that of a banquet which was usually held at night. the wicked are thrust out from the light, joy, and festivity into the darkness and gloom without, as into the remote gloom and anguish of a dungeon in which are found agony, wrath, and despair. is this a description of hell --absence of spiritual light; separation from the company of the saved; lamentation; impotent rage? e. the final reward of the righteous. i. the believer never dies. ii. the believer goes to be with christ. iii. the body of the believer is raised from the dead. iv. the believer is rewarded. v. the nature of the believer's reward. . the "crowns" of scripture. . the seven "overcomes" (rev. and ). vi. the new condition and abode of life for the saints. . new sphere of life. . a new home. . new conditions. e. the final reward of the righteous. if, says the apostle paul, in this present life we have a hope resting on christ, and nothing more, we are more to be pitied than all the rest of the world ( cor. : ). the idea is that if this hope in christ which the believer has is a delusive hope, with no prospect of fulfillment in the future, the christian is indeed in a sad state. he has chosen a life of self-denial; he will not indulge in the pleasures of the world, and if there are no pleasures in the darkness into which he is about to enter, then he has miscalculated, he has chosen a life that shall end in self-obliteration. if he has no home to go to, no god to welcome him, no king to say, "well done, exchange mortality for life," then he is indeed in a pitiable plight. but such is not the case. the hope of the christian enters beyond the vail, into the very presence of god himself, and endures throughout all the eternities. i. the christian never dies. john : --"verily, verily, i say unto you, if a man keep my saying, he shall never see death." : , --"jesus said unto her, i am the resurrection, and the life: he that believeth in me, though he were dead, yet shall he live: and whosoever liveth and believeth in me shall never die. believest thou this?" what jesus means here is not that the believer shall not pass through the experience that we call death, but that in reality it is not death, at least, not in the sense in which it is death to the unbeliever. jesus has taken the sting out of death. how sharply the contrast between death and the experience through which the believer passes is presented in thess. : , --"but i would not have you to be ignorant, brethren, concerning them which are asleep, that ye sorrow not, even as others which have no hope. for if we believe that jesus died and rose again, even so them also which sleep in jesus will god bring with him." jesus "died"--he tasted the awfulness of death; the believer in him "falls asleep." cf. john : --"our friend lazarus sleepeth." we have no ground in these words for the modern doctrine of soul-sleeping. christ did not mean to say that the soul is unconscious between the time of death and the resurrection. for, when the disciples did not understand his _figurative_ language, he told them _plainly,_ "lazarus is dead" ( : - ). what jesus meant was that death is something like that which takes place when we go to sleep. what takes place when we go to sleep? surely the current of life does not cease, but flows on, and when we awake we feel better and stronger than before. there is a shutting out of all the scenes of the world and time. just so it is in the case of the believer's death. three ideas are contained in the word "sleep": continued existence,--for the mind is active even though the body is still; repose--we lose our hold on and forget the things of the world; wakening--we always think of sleep as followed by awakening. the word "see" in john : means that the believer shall not gaze at death protractedly, steadily, exhaustively. death is not the objective of his gaze. the believer's outlook is that of life not death. the death of the body is to be reckoned no more as death than the life of the body is life ( tim. : ). the believer's back is turned upon death; he faces and gazes upon life. the temporary separation of the soul and body does not even interrupt, much less impair, the eternal life given by jesus. ii. the believer goes to be with christ. cor. : , r. v.--"being therefore always of good courage, and knowing that, whilst we are at home in the body, we are absent from the lord." phil. : , r. v.--"but i am in a strait betwixt the two, having the desire to depart and be with christ; for it is very far better." the experience (death-sleep) through which the believer passes ushers him at once into the presence of christ. it takes him instantly to be "at home" with the lord. surely there can be no hint of unconsciousness or the sleeping of the soul in these words. it would seem from paul's words in corinthians : - that some kind of spiritual body is given to the believer during the period of his waiting for the resurrection body. what paul longs for is not to be in a bodiless state, but to put on another body which shall not be subject to death. "at home with the lord"--that is what "death" (?) means to the believer. iii. the body of the believer is raised from the dead. see under the doctrine of the resurrection for the full discussion of the believer's resurrection body, its characteristics, etc. iv. the believer shall receive his final reward in the future. matt. : - --"and so he that had received five talents came and brought other five talents, saying, lord, thou deliveredst unto me five talents: behold, i have gained beside them five talents more. his lord said unto him, well done, thou good and faithful servant: thou hast been faithful over a few things, i will make thee ruler over many things: enter thou into the joy of thy lord. he also that had received two talents came and said, lord, thou deliveredst unto me two talents: behold, i have gained two other talents beside them. his lord said unto him, well done, good and faithful servant: thou hast been faithful over a few things, i will make thee ruler over many things: enter thou into the joy of thy lord." luke : - .--"he said therefore, a certain nobleman went into a far country to receive for himself a kingdom, and to return. and he called his ten servants, and delivered them ten pounds, and said unto them, occupy till i come. but his citizens hated him, and sent a message after him, saying, we will not have this man to reign over us. and it came to pass, that when he was returned, having received the kingdom, then he commanded these servants to be called unto him, to whom he had given the money, that he might know how much every man had gained by trading. then came the first, saying, lord, thy pound hath gained ten pounds. and he said unto him, well, thou good servant: because thou hast been faithful in a very little, have thou authority over ten cities. and the second came saying, lord, thy pound hath gained five pounds. and he said likewise to him, be thou also over five cities." matthew exhorts us to watch and wait for christ's coming; chapter shows us how we may obey this exhortation. chapter illustrates to us, in the parable of the virgins (vv. - ) the necessity of caring for the inward spiritual life; while the parable of the talents (vv. - ), emphasizes the necessity of activity for christ while awaiting his return. while both parables deal with the matter of the rewarding of the saints, they nevertheless present the subject from different viewpoints. the parable of the pounds was delivered before the entry into jerusalem; that of the talents, three days after; the pounds, to the multitudes; the talents, to the disciples. the pounds was given because the people thought that the kingdom would immediately appear, hence the idea of a long journey. in the pounds there is opposition to christ; in the talents, none. in the talents unequal sums are multiplied in the same proportion; in the pounds, equal sums in differed proportions. the parable of the pounds was uttered to repress impatience; that of the talents, to stimulate activity until christ should return. the talents are distributed not capriciously but according to each man's ability to handle them. he who had five talents was able to use five, and was therefore held responsible for the use of this number; so with the two, and the one. the question is not so much "how many talents have i received," but "to what use am i putting them?" the rewards for faithfulness are the same in each case--"be thou ruler over many cities." in the parable of the pounds it is different. all start out with the same number of pounds. as men differ in their use of them, in their fidelity, zeal and labor, so they differ in spiritual gains and rewards (ten cities, five cities). the reward of the believer will be in proportion to the faithfulness of his service for god with the use of the talents with which god has endowed him. the rewards therefore will differ according to the faithfulness or unfaithfulness of our service and life. faith in jesus christ saves the believer, but his position in the future life together with the measure of his reward will depend upon his faithfulness in the use of the gifts with which he has been endowed by god. thus it comes to pass that a man may be saved "yet so as by fire," i.e., saved because of his faith in christ, but minus his reward. see cor. : - --"in discharge of the task which god graciously entrusted to me, i--like a competent master-builder--have laid a foundation, and others are building upon it. but let every one be careful how and what he builds. for no one can lay any other foundation in addition to that which is already laid, namely, jesus christ. and whether the building which anyone is erecting on that foundation be of gold or silver or costly stones, of timber or hay or straw--the true character of each individual's work will become manifest. for the day of christ will disclose it, because that day is soon to come upon us clothed in fire, and as for the quality of every one's work--the fire is the thing which will test it. if any one's work--the building which he has erected--stands the test, he will be rewarded. if any one's work is burned up, he will suffer the loss of it; yet he will himself be rescued, but only, as it were, by passing through the fire." (translation from _weymouth's new testament._) while this passage has its primary reference, probably, to christian teachers and preachers, and touches the matter of doctrines that are taught, it nevertheless has a fitting and true application to the life and work of every believer. v. the nature of the believer's reward. . he shall receive a crown. the scriptures speak of a number of crowns: the crown of _life_ (james : ; rev. : , compare context which speaks of death); of _glory_ ( pet. : ; cf. john : ; heb. : ); of _righteousness_ ( tim. : ), the full realization of the imputed and inwrought righteousness of christ; of _rejoicing_ ( thess. : ), at the sight of converts that have been won by one's ministry for christ; of _gold_ (rev. : ); _incorruptible_ ( cor. : ), as compared with the perishable crowns of the greek games; _thy_ crown (rev. : ), that which is laid up for you, and which should not be lost by unfaithfulness; the summing up of all the previous expressions--all are characteristic of "thy" crown. . the seven "overcomes" in revelation (cc. , .). a) : --"eat of the tree of life, which is in the midst of the paradise of god." the tree of life, which has been practically unmentioned since genesis , where it was lost through sin, is here restored in accordance with the restitution of all things in christ. this figure expresses participation in life eternal--the believer shall die no more. b) : --"shall not be hurt of the second death." he who is born but once--"of the flesh"--dies twice: physically, and eternally. he (the believer) who is born twice--"of the flesh" and "of the spirit"--dies but once; that is, he passes through only that physical dissolution of soul and body which is called death. the "second death" means, to say the least, utter exclusion from the presence of god. to say that the believer shall not be hurt of the second death is equivalent to saying that he shall eternally behold the face of the father which is in heaven. c) : --he shall receive a "stone with a new name written" thereon; to the believer also will be given to eat of the "hidden manna." this figure may mean that to the believer is given the white stone of acquittal. in courts of justice in those days a black stone was given to the condemned. reference may here be made to the white stone (diamond?) which was not among the stones in the high priest's ephod, and thought by some to be the urim and thummim. the partaking of the hidden manna may refer to the fact that they who had resisted the eating of meat offered in sacrifice to idols would, as a reward, be allowed to feast on the bread of god, the divine food. the new name mentioned may stand for a new nature and character which the believer will possess in that new country. d) : , --authority over the nations. there is doubtless a reference here to the reign of the saints with the lord jesus christ on the millenial earth. those that have suffered with him shall also reign with him. e) : , --he shall be "arrayed in white garments," and his name shall in no wise be blotted out of the book of life. "white garments" undoubtedly refers to the righteousness of the saints. in the old testament days to be blotted out of the book of life meant to forfeit the privileges of the theocracy--to be shut out forever from god's favor. here the certainty of the believer's eternal security is assured. christ will rejoice over him and gladly confess that he knows him as one who belonged to him and served and confessed him on the earth. f) : --the believer will be a pillar in the temple of god; he shall go out no more; god will write upon him his own new name. philadelphia, the place in which was situated the church to whom these words were written, was subject to earthquakes, and quite frequently the massive pillars of the temple were shattered. it shall not be so with the believer--he shall never be moved. he will go in and out no more--no possibility of falling then. he will have the name of god written upon him--no danger of anyone else making claim to him. then the believer's period of probation will have passed away; he shall have a permanent and eternal place in the kingdom of the father. g) : , r. v.--"i will give to him to sit down with me in my throne." not "on" or "upon" but "in" my throne. christ will exalt us with himself. james and john wanted to sit by christ's side in the coming kingdom. here is something infinitely better--to sit with him in his throne. vi. the believer will enter into a new condition and abode of life. . a new sphere of life for the saints. new heavens and a new earth: paradise regained; new spiritual environment; new physical conditions. not surrounded by the temptations and defects of this mortal life. "no more sea"--to the jew a symbol of unmixed peril, trouble, and restlessness. . a new home for the saints. rev. - : --a picture of the holy city, the new jerusalem, which is to be the final and eternal abode of the people of god. within the new heavens and on the new earth is the holy city. note some characteristics of the holy city: its _name:_ new jerusalem--what music to the ear of the jew, who for so long had been without a city of his own! its _walls_ ( : ): high, secure, safe against all assaults. its _gates_ ( : , ): guarded by angels; names on gates; only saints enter. its _foundations_ (v. ): the apostles of the lamb; lustrous ( ). its _citizens:_ of the nations that are saved (citizens' characteristics : , ; : , r. v.; contrast with : , ). its _magnitude:_ stadia (the earthly jerusalem being but stadia). its _glory_ ( - ): what costliness! . new conditions of life for the redeemed. god's home is there ( : ); thus the believer has uninterrupted communion with god. some things that used to be have all passed away: death, mourning, curse, tears, sorrow, night--all have gone. new created things appear: the river of life, the tree of life, new service, new relationships, new light ( : ). "and after these things i heard a great voice of much people in heaven, saying, alleluia; salvation, and glory, and honour, and power, unto the lord our god: "and the four and twenty elders and the four beasts fell down and worshipped god that sat on the throne, saying, amen; alleluia. "and a voice came out of the throne, saying, praise our god, all ye his servants, and ye that fear him, both small and great. "and i heard as it were the voice of a great multitude, and as the voice of many waters, and as the voice of mighty thunderings, saying, alleluia: for the lord god omnipotent reigneth. "let us be glad and rejoice, and give honour to him: for the marriage of the lamb is come, and his wife hath made herself ready. "and to her was granted that she should be arrayed in fine linen, clean and white: for the fine linen is the righteousness of saints." available by the internet archive. the church handy dictionary to the right reverend father in god christopher wordsworth, d.d. lord bishop of lincoln, this little book is (with his lordship's kind permission) respectfully dedicated by the author. the church handy dictionary _dedicated by permission_ to the right rev. the lord bishop of lincoln. new york: james pott & co., & , astor place. church handy dictionary. _additions and corrections_. altar cloth, p. add-- this is the modern roman sequence of colours, but there is another more truly belonging to the english church, viz., the sarum, in which only _red_ and _white_ are used. heresy, p. , line, for "not taught" read "_formally condemned_." miracles, p. , at the end, dele. and add-- , which latter deals with certain specious arguments adduced by these writers against the _a priori_ possibility of a miracle taking place. presence, real, p. , add,-- bishop harold brown says, in his history of art. , "the doctrine of a real, spiritual presence is the doctrine of the english church," and quotes the following passage from jer. taylor: "the result of which doctrine is this: it is bread, and it is christ's body. it is bread in substance, christ in the sacrament; and christ is as really given to all that are truly disposed, as the symbols are: each as they can; christ as christ can be given; the bread and the wine as they can; and to the same real purpose to which they were designed." the article referred to above states, "the body of christ is given, taken, and eaten, in the supper, only after an heavenly and spiritual manner. and the mean whereby the body of christ is received and eaten in the supper is faith." preface from the nature of the case a little work such as this cannot lay claim to much originality, but must be, in the main, a compilation from various sources. thus the articles on controverted subjects set forth the views of the best authorities to which the compiler has had access, but not necessarily his own, though his stand-point all along is, he trusts, distinctly that of the church of england. the idea of this book was suggested by dean hook's invaluable church dictionary, but, as will be seen on comparison, it is by no means a mere abridgement of that work, many other authors having been laid under contribution, and fresh articles having been added. dean hook's dictionary is admirable for its comprehensiveness and general accuracy, but unfortunately the price puts it out of the reach of most of those for whose use the present "handy dictionary" is intended. the compiler wishes to furnish not only the younger clergy, but also the laity of the church of england, with a cheap and handy book of reference on all church matters. he believes that sunday school teachers and church workers, teachers in national schools, the upper scholars in church schools of higher grade, both public and private; and, indeed, all engaged in the elementary study of the prayer book, or of church history, will find this short "handy dictionary" full of useful information. the compiler desires in this place to acknowledge gratefully his obligations to all the authors and books consulted, especially to those contained in the following list:-- hook's church dictionary. hooker's ecclesiastical polity. bishop harold browne on the thirty-nine articles. bishop wordsworth's greek testament. bishop wordsworth's theophilus anglicanus. hart's ecclesiastical record'. riddle's christian antiquities. smith's bible dictionary. sir r. phillimore's ecclesiastical law. the s.p.c.k. teacher's prayer book. bishop barry's teacher's prayer book. procter on the book of common prayer. palmer's origines liturgicae. wheatly on the book of common prayer, pearson on the creed. sanderson's handbook of theology. hardwick's and other church histories. blunt's household theology. encyclopedia britannica. chamber's encyclopedia the globe encyclopedia. the official year book of the church of england. whitaker's almanack, etc., etc. ablutions. small quantities of wine and water poured into the chalice, after a celebration, and consumed by the priest. some take two ablutions, the first of wine, the second of wine and water mixed. the object of this is to insure the entire consumption of the consecrated element. absolution. in the anglican church the authoritative declaration, by a bishop or priest, of god's pardon to the truly penitent. "all the office and power of man in it is only to minister the external form, but the internal power and grace of remission of sins is properly god's." (_bingham_.) there are three forms of absolution in our prayer book, viz., in the order for morning and evening prayer; in the communion service, and in the office for the visitation of the sick. it is to be noticed in each case that confession precedes absolution. the scriptural authority for absolution is found in matt. xvi. ; xviii. ; john xx. ; cor. v. - ; cor. ii. . st. jerome compares the office of the christian priest in absolution, with that of the jewish priest in cases of cleansing from leprosy. abstinence, _see_ fasting. acolyte. one of the minor orders of the church of rome. an acolyte's duties are to wait upon the priests and deacons, carrying the bread and wine, &c. in some of our churches a layman, called a "server," performs these duties. adult baptism, _see_ baptism. advent. _latin_, coming. four advent sundays immediately precede christmas. they are so called because they are designed to prepare us to commemorate the _advent_, or _coming_, of christ in the flesh at christmas, and also to prepare for his second coming to judge the world. the ecclesiastical, or church year, begins with advent sunday. the season of advent is spoken of in a homily written as far back as the year a.d. . advowson. the right in perpetuity of patronage to a church, or any ecclesiastical benefice. affinity, _see_ kindred. agapae. love feasts. after a celebration of holy communion the early christians frequently partook of a social and friendly repast known by this name. this custom was discontinued in the vth. century on account of abuses. it has been partially revived by some dissenting sects of our own day, who partake of a frugal meal and narrate their spiritual "experiences." agnus dei. two latin words, meaning "lamb of god." it is an anthem sung in some places by the choir during the communion of the priest. the choir sing thrice, "o lamb of god, that takest away the sins of the world," adding twice, "have mercy upon us," and the third time, "grant us thy peace." the anthem is found in edward vi.'s first prayer book. agnosticism. a school of thought which denies that we can know anything of god, or of a future state. it does not say that there is no god, but simply that it is impossible for us to know anything of god. it would do away with all revelation and theology, and make us think of god as the great unknown and unknowable. aisle. from a latin word, meaning a _wing_. the lateral division of the choir, nave, or transept of a church. alb, _see_ vestments. alleluia or hallelujah. a hebrew word, meaning _praise ye the lord_. all saints' day. nov. st. on this day the church commemorates all the known and unknown departed christian worthies, and the communion of the church triumphant with the church as yet militant on earth. it is called also all hallows day. almoner. one who has the distribution of alms to the needy. in monasteries it was the officer who had charge of the almonry, or room where alms were distributed. the lord high almoner is a prelate who has the disposing of the alms of the sovereign. alms. relief given out of pity to the poor. in ecclesiastical language, the money collected during the offertory. alms should be collected every sunday, whether there is a communion or not, as the rubric directs. the disposal of the alms rests with the clergyman and churchwardens, when there is an offertory, _i.e._, when the offertory sentences are read (see rubric). collections made at other times seem to be at the clergyman's sole disposal. altar; lord's table; holy table; communion table. disputes have frequently arisen as to whether the holy table was to be called the _communion table_ or the _altar_. bingham writes--"the ancient writers used both names indifferently; some calling it altar, others the lord's table, the holy table, the mystical table, the tremendous table, &c., and sometimes both table and altar in the same sentence. ignatius, irenaeus, origan, and tertullian all call it altar. it is certain that they did not mean by altar what the jews and heathen meant: either an altar dressed up with images, or an altar for bloody sacrifices. in the first sense they rejected altars, both name and thing. but for their own mystical, unbloody sacrifice, as they called the eucharist, they always owned they had an altar." in our prayer book it is styled the _table_, the _holy table_, and the _lord's table_. the phrase _communion table_ occurs in the canons only. the word _altar_ is used in the coronation service. bishop sparrow, one of the reviewers of the prayer book in , writes thus:--"that no man take offence at the word _altar_, let him know, that anciently both these names, _altar_, or _holy table_ were used for the same thing; though most frequently the fathers and councils use the name _altar_. and both are fit names for that holy thing. por the holy eucharist being considered as a sacrifice, in the representation of the breaking of the bread, and the pouring forth of the cup, doing that to the holy symbols which was done to christ's body and blood, and so showing forth and commemorating the lord's death, and offering upon it the same sacrifice that was offered upon the cross, or rather the commemoration of that sacrifice, it may fitly be called an _altar_; which again is as fitly called an _holy table_, the eucharist being considered as a sacrament, which is nothing else but a distribution and application of the sacrifice to the several receivers." altar cloth. the nd canon provides that the altar be covered with a carpet of silk, or some other decent stuff; also with a fair linen cloth at the time of the ministration. it is usual in many churches to vest the altar in different colours to mark the various seasons of the church. thus at christmas, easter, and festivals, other than the feasts of martyrs, _white_ is used. for whit sunday and feasts of martyrs, _red_ is used. for trinity sunday _white_ is used, but for the sundays after trinity, _green_. _violet_ is the colour for advent, lent, rogation days, and vigils. altar lights, candles. on this subject, proctor in his book on the prayer book says, "no direction was given upon the subject of the ornaments of the church in edward vi.'s first prayer book, or in the act of uniformity which sanctioned it: but the publication of the book was immediately followed by injunctions ( ), condemning sundry popish ceremonies, and among them forbidding to set 'any lights upon the lord's board at any time.'" this was especially mentioned because the injunctions of had forbidden candles before pictures or images, but allowed "only two lights upon the high altar, before the sacrament, for the signification that christ is the very true light of the world." although these injunctions ( ) have not the authority of parliament, yet they were undoubtedly issued with the intention of promoting that uniformity in all parts of public worship which had been enjoined by statute, and under the large notions of the royal supremacy which then prevailed. they may fairly be considered as affording evidence of the contemporary practice, and of the intention of the authors of the prayer book in matters of rites and ceremonies. persons who yield the amount of authority to these injunctions (which never became law) which is readily given to others (which were law), consider that candles upon the communion table are ornaments which were forbidden in the second year of edward vi., and therefore are not authorized by our present rubric. on the other hand, we may conclude from the terms of elizabeth's act of uniformity, and from the rubric of her prayer book, that it was her intention to distinguish between the customs of , represented by edward's injunctions of that year, and those which, not being mentioned and forbidden in the statute, might be considered as authorized by the parliament of . and she certainly gave this practical interpretation to her own law, since in the royal chapel "the cross stood on the altar, and two candlesticks, and two tapers burning." hook, in his church dictionary, says,--"from the time of edward there never seems to have been a time when the lights were not retained in cathedral churches, and wherever we might look for an authoritative interpretation of the law. and to the present day the candles are to be seen on the altars of almost all cathedrals. in collegiate churches, also, they are usually found; and so also in the chapels royal, and in the chapels of several colleges in oxford and cambridge." altar linen. the rubric at the beginning of the communion service provides that "the table, at the communion-time," is to have a "fair white linen cloth upon it." and a further rubric declares that "what remaineth of the consecrated elements" is to be covered with "a fair linen cloth." this latter cloth is called a _corporal_, although some understand a cloth laid on the altar by that name. other things used in some churches at the time of the celebration are--( ) a _chalice-veil_, which is a square of silk embroidered and fringed, varying in colour, according to the season, or of transparent material edged with lace. it is used for covering the chalice. ( ) the _pall_, a small square of card-board, with linen on either side, is sometimes used to cover the chalice till after the people have communicated. ( ) the _burse_ is a kind of purse or pocket in which the corporal and pall are kept. altar rails. archbishop laud, , ordered that the holy table should be placed at the east end of the chancel, and protected from rude approach by rails. they do not appear to have been in general use in the western church before the reformation; although it is probable their use in the side chapels of cathedrals is early. it is hard to say whether by the latin word _cancelli_ is meant the chancel-screen or the altar-rails, in some cases probably the latter. the use of altar-rails is ancient in the eastern church. the space within the rails, where the altar stands, is called the sanctuary. altar screen. a screen behind the altar. altar vessels. flagon, chalice or cup, and paten. to these may be added the _cyborium_, a covered vessel, placed upon the altar of roman catholic churches, and holding the consecrated host. altar vessels from very ancient times have usually been made of the most costly materials which the congregation using them could afford. the flagon appears to be the vessel in which the wine is placed before consecration. the chalice, or cup, that in which it is consecrated, and administered to the people. the paten is the plate on which the bread is consecrated, and from which it is dispensed to the people. a second plate is used for the unconsecrated bread, and is placed, with the flagon, on the credence table. altruism, _see_ comtism. ambulatory, or processionary. the continuance of the aisles round the east end of a church, behind the altar. amen. a hebrew word meaning "so be it," and thus it is explained in the catechism. the same word in the greek is rendered the "verily, verily" of our lord's parables. it should be said aloud by every member of the congregation, as testifying his assent to the prayer or praise offered, who thus makes it his own. st. jerome says the primitive christians at their public offices "echoed out the amen like a thunderclap." when printed in the roman character in our prayer book it is for the minister to say alone; when in italics, it is for the people to say, and not for the minister. amice, _see_ vestments. anabaptists, _see_ baptists. andrew's (st.) day. nov. th. st. andrew appears to have been a disciple of the baptist before he became a follower of our lord. he was the means of bringing his brother simon, afterwards called peter, to jesus. after the ascension he is supposed to have laboured in scythia, and finally to have suffered death by crucifixion. the form of the cross on which he was martyred is called after him the st. andrew's cross. angel. a greek word, meaning a _messenger_, and as such it is applied sometimes to god's ministers on earth; _e.g._, the bishops of the seven churches of asia are called "angels" in rev. i. and ii. the word is more generally used of those bright beings who wait around the throne of god to do his will. they are the ministers of his good providence to us. angels are of a different order of creation from man. it is a mistake to believe that "the dead in christ" become angels. there are different orders among the angels; the prayer book speaks of "archangels," of "cherubim and seraphim." the bible tells us that the name of one of the archangels is michael; gabriel is also probably of this order, and raphael. the cherubim (the derivation of this word is uncertain) are frequently spoken of in the bible: gen. iii. ; exodus xxv. , ; ezekiel i. ; rev. iv. . the seraphim, (plural of _seraph_, a hebrew word, meaning _fiery_, or _burning_) are possibly referred to in psalm civ. , "he maketh his angels spirits, and his ministers a flaming fire." the holy angels are the objects of worship in the church of rome, in a degree which many think idolatrous, although romanists deny this. anglo-catholic church, _see_ church of england. annates, _see_ bounty, queen anne's. annunciation of the blessed virgin mary. march th. at the time of the reformation the church held seven festivals in honour of the virgin. our reformers have appointed a collect, epistle, and gospel, for only those two which have a foundation in the gospel, viz: the annunciation and the purification. two more, however, are retained in the calendar, viz: the visitation of the b. v. m., july nd, and the nativity of the b. v. m., september th. the two principal festivals were probably observed as early as the th century. it is to be noticed how the collects for both these festivals bring forward their bearing on our lord's life, rather than the incidents they commemorate in the life of the blessed virgin. anthem, _see_ church. music. antinomianism. (literally "_against law_") the doctrine or opinion that the _elect_ (see _calvinism_) are freed from obligation to keep the law of god. a power or privilege is asserted for the elect to do what they please without prejudice to their sanctity; it being maintained that to them nothing is sinful, and this is represented as the perfection of christian liberty. history shows, as was to be expected, that this doctrine has borne the most disastrous fruits among those who have embraced it. antiphon, antiphonally, _see_ church music. anti-type, _see_ type. apostasy. a renouncing of our religion either formally, or virtually by our actions. apostle. from a greek word, meaning "one sent." a designation of those twelve who were our lord's companions on earth, and who, afterwards, were _sent_ into "all the world to preach the gospel to every creature." after the treachery and death of judas iscariot, matthias was chosen to fill his place, st. paul, by virtue of his heavenly commission, is also termed an apostle. apostles' creed, _see_ creed. apostolical succession. "the line in which the ministry of the church is handed on from age to age by the laying on of hands by bishops; the _corporate_ lineage of the christian clergy, just as in the jewish church there was a _family_ lineage. the church of england maintains the apostolical succession in the preface to her ordination service. those are said to be in apostolical succession who have been sent to labour in the lord's vineyard by bishops, who were consecrated by other bishops, who, in their turn, were consecrated by others, until the derived authority is traced to the apostles, and through them to the great head of the church. the apostolical succession of the ministry is essential to the right administration of the sacraments. the clergy of the church of england can trace their connexion with the apostles by links in the long chain, not one of which is wanting, from the times of st. paul and st. peter to our own." (_hook's church dictionary_.) appropriation. in pre-reformation times. monasteries, and other spiritual corporations, frequently annexed to themselves benefices, placing in them some clergyman, who was called a vicar, to do the work of the place, for which they allowed him a certain sum out of the income they had appropriated. at the reformation, the monasteries, and religious houses were put down, and their property distributed among the favourites of henry viii., and so the patronage and major part of the income of these appropriated benefices came into the hands of laymen. thus, at the present day, a great number of our nobility and landed gentry are drawing large incomes from land, which is, in all right, the property of the church, while the clergy who do the work of the church receive a miserable pittance out of what was once their own. laymen drawing these incomes, "great-tithes," as they are called, are named lay-rectors. a benefice in the hands of a layman is termed, not an appropriation, but an _impropriation_. apse or apsis. a semi-circular, or polyhedral termination of the chancel. this style of church building, although common in the east, has not been in use since the th century in england until quite the last few years. mr. street, the architect of the law courts, built many churches in this style. in churches of this kind the altar should not be placed against the east wall, but upon the chord of the arc, as in the ancient basilicas. archbishop. an archbishop does not differ from a bishop in _order_, but only in _degree_. like a bishop he has his own diocese, but besides that he is the chief of the clergy of a whole province. this, however, is not always the case in the roman and eastern churches. to him all appeals are made from inferior jurisdictions within his province. he also, upon the king's writ, calls the bishops and clergy within his province to meet in convocation. archdeacon. as each province is divided into dioceses, severally presided over by a bishop, so each diocese is divided into archdeaconries, consisting of a certain number of parishes. over each archdeaconry one of the clergy, a priest, sometimes a bishop, is appointed to preside in subordination to the bishop of the diocese. the office dates back to very early times. in england the dioceses were divided into archdeaconries about the time of the norman conquest. arches, court of. an ancient court of appeal, belonging to the archbishop of canterbury. the judge of it is called the dean of _arches_, because he anciently held his court in the church of st. mary-le-bow (sancta maria de arcubus). (see _ecclesiastical courts_.) architecture. the principal styles of english architecture are: norman, to . round-headed doorways, windows and arches, heavy pillars and zig-zag ornaments. the nave of rochester cathedral is a good example. from to this style underwent a _transition_, the rounded arches becoming pointed, as in the choir of canterbury cathedral. early english, to . narrow, pointed windows, lancet-shaped; clustered pillars. example, the choir, westminster abbey, or salisbury cathedral. to was another _transition_ period, tracery being introduced into the windows, as at the east end of lincoln cathedral. decorated, to . geometrical tracery in windows, enriched doorways, and beautifully arranged mouldings. the lady chapel of ely cathedral is a good example. this style underwent _transition_ from to , when the lines became less flowing, as in the choir of york minster. perpendicular, to . upright lines of moulding in windows; doorways, a combination of square heads with pointed arches. example, king's college chapel, cambridge. tudor, or elizabethan, to . a debased species of perpendicular, mostly employed in domestic architecture. jacobean, to . an admixture of the classical with the gothic, or pointed style. arians. heretics, so named from arius, a native of libya, their first founder. he was born about the middle of the rd century, and taught that god the son was not equal to god the father, being neither consubstantial nor co-eternal with the father. as created by the father, arius looked upon our lord as the highest of all creatures, and in that sense the son of god. these heretics were condemned by the council of nice, in . arminians. a party so-called after arminius, (the latin form of james harmensen, a dutchman,) the opposer of calvinism. arminius held that salvation is possible for all men, if they repent and believe in jesus christ, inasmuch as he died for the sins of the whole world. they reject the doctrine of predestination, as generally held; and the doctrine of final perseverance, they deem uncertain and needing more proof. (see _antinomianism and calvinism_.) articles, the thirty-nine. the church of england's definition of christian doctrine, and as such they have to be subscribed by all who seek holy orders. formerly, every graduate of our universities had to subscribe them. many of the articles are of a confessedly elastic nature, being so framed as to embrace the views of the various parties in the church: but at the same time they are not so indefinite as many would have us believe. their history is this:--in cranmer, ridley, and others, drew up articles, which were more or less taken from the "confession of augsburgh," composed by luther and melancthon. in these articles were entirely re-modelled by archbishop parker and convocation, when they were reduced to . in , parker and convocation added article xxix., which made up our present , which were subscribed in the upper house of convocation, by the archbishops and bishops, and by all the clergy of the lower house. they were published the year after ( ) under the superintendence of bishop jewel, and the ratification, still subjoined to them in the prayer book, was added. with regard to their arrangement--the first five treat of the doctrine of the holy trinity; the three following establish the rule of christian faith; from the ninth to the eighteenth they bear reference to christians considered as individuals; and thence to the end they relate to christians, considered as members of a church or religious society. ascension day or holy thursday. the observation of this festival cannot be traced with certainty to an earlier period than the th century, although, in the western church, at any rate, it was in st. augustine's time so thorough and universal, that he supposes it to have had an apostolic origin. it is one of the four great festivals of the church. it is held forty days after easter, in memory of our lord's _ascension_ into heaven. special psalms and lessons are appointed for the day, as is also a special preface in the communion service. ash-wednesday. the first day of lent. it is so called from the ceremony anciently used in admitting people to penance, ashes being sprinkled upon their heads. a special service, called the commination service, is appointed for use on this day. associations, church, _see_ societies. athanasian creed, _see_ creed. atheist. the "fool who saith in his heart, there is no god." ps liii. the _atheist_ differs entirely from the _sceptic_ and _agnostic_ (which see). in "a plea for atheism," the writer says: "if the word 'god' is defined to mean an existence other than that existence of which i am a mode, then i deny 'god,' and affirm that it is impossible that 'god' can be." the psalmist's definition is the clearer. atonement. originally _at-one-ment_, the reconciling of two parties who were before at variance. from that the word easily passed into a term to denote the means by which the reconciliation was made, viz: the life and death of our saviour, eph. ii. . the doctrine of the church on this subject is expressed in article . attrition. this term is used by romanists to denote the lowest form of contrition, or repentance; namely, mere sorrow for sin because of its consequences. banns of marriage _see_ matrimony. baptism. this word means literally "dipping." holy baptism is one of the two sacraments taught by our church to be generally (universally) necessary to salvation. the _reason_ why the church baptizes is well shewn in the exhortation which immediately follows the gospel in the service for the "public baptism of such as are of riper years." the _doctrine_ of the church on the subject is explained in article xxvii., and in the catechism; also throughout her baptismal offices she shows what she believes it to be. notwithstanding this, there are diverse views held of holy baptism by parties in the church; as, for example, some will deny that the passage in john iii. has anything to do with baptism, although the church quotes it as a scriptural authority for baptism in the exhortation previously alluded to. these seem to degrade holy baptism into a mere formal admittance into the visible church, this being the view the wesleyans of the _present day_ take, but not their founder's view. hooker, in his fifth book, writes thus,--"baptism is not merely a sign or token of grace given, but an instrument or mean whereby we receive that grace; for it is a sacrament instituted by god for incorporation into christ, and so through his merit to obtain ( ) that saving grace of imputation which takes away all former guiltiness, ( ) that infused divine virtue of the holy ghost which gives to the powers of the soul their first disposition towards future newness of life. it is a seal perhaps to the grace of election before received; but to our sanctification here a step that hath not any before it." baptism, adult. this office was added at the last revision of the prayer book, in . it was made necessary by the general neglect of church ordinances during the rebellion. the service is formed from that for the baptism of infants, but there are important differences, as will be seen by comparison. confirmation and communion should immediately follow the baptism of an adult. baptism, infant. the question whether it is right to baptize infants will be gone into under the head of _baptists_. our present service for the baptism of infants is the out-come of many much older. baptism should always be administered in the presence of a congregation, as the rubric orders. the question about _sponsors_ will be gone into under that head. the first prayer is by luther, the second is from an old office; the gospel, with nearly all the addresses or exhortations here and elsewhere in the prayer book, is from the "consultation," the work of hermann, a german reformer. the questions to the sponsors are taken from an old office. the prayer of consecration came into the present form in ; but by consecration here we only mean that the element of water is separated from common to sacred uses. it is not a necessary part of baptism, as is shown by its being omitted in the office for private baptism. the only two things necessary for the validity of holy baptism are ( ) that it should be administered in water, ( ) in the name of the holy trinity, as is shown by the questions in that part of the office for private baptism which treats of receiving a child publicly into the church. it is to be noticed that the _rule_ of our church is that the child should be immersed in the water (see the rubric before the form of words which accompany the act of baptism). thus the rite of immersion can be claimed by any church people. the custom of affusion, or aspersion, or sprinkling, came into use in the western church as early as the th century; but in the ancient church baptism was so administered to the sick. the difference in the climates of western europe and the holy land is sufficient to account for the custom. the words which express the reception of the newly-baptized child into the congregation belong altogether to the english prayer book. the ceremony of making the sign of the cross has come down from the ancient church. the address to the congregation, the lord's prayer, and the thanksgiving which follows, were placed here in . it is to be noticed how clearly the church expresses her belief in the regeneration (see _regeneration_) of each baptized infant. the latter part of the last exhortation was added in . "the vulgar tongue" of course means the "common" or english language. the note at the end of the office, although declaring the eternal safety of a baptized child, dying before it commits actual sin, does not express any opinion as to the future of an unbaptized child. baptism, private. to be used only for "great cause and necessity." this service was drawn up in , chiefly from the "consultation." it is very much to be deplored that so few of the children baptized at home, who live, are brought to be publicly received into the church. the distinction which the poor draw between baptism and christening as meaning respectively private and public baptism is, of course, unfounded. baptism is also called "_christening_," because in it the child is made a christian, or member of christ. under this head we may also treat of lay baptism. until this was allowed in the church of england, but the rubrics were then brought into such a shape that baptism by any but a "lawful minister" was distinctly disallowed. still we find that by the present law, lay baptism, that is to say, baptism by any man, or even woman, is valid so far as to qualify for burial with the usual service. lay baptism is allowed in the roman church, as it was in the mediaeval church, and in primitive times. such having always been the custom of the catholic church, it is well that anybody should baptize a child in a case of great emergency, when a "lawful minister" cannot be procured. should the child live and be brought to church, the clergyman can always, if doubtful of the validity of the baptism, use the hypothetical form at the end of the office for private baptism. baptists or anabaptists. a name improperly assumed by those who deny the validity of infant baptism. they were formerly called _anabaptists_ because they _re-baptized_ all who had been baptized in their infancy. the baptists formed a separate community in england in . they may be looked upon as the successors of the dutch anabaptists. their object in forming themselves into a separate body was ( ) for the maintenance of a strictly calvinistic doctrine; ( ) for the exercise of a vigorous and exclusive discipline; ( ) for the practice of a literal scriptural ritual, especially in the matter of baptism. in church polity they follow the independents. the baptists hold that _immersion_ is essential to the validity of the ordinance. their leading idea is that the church must consist of true christians, and not merely of professing ones. in in the united kingdom there were _sunday_ _ministers_, _members_, _chapels_, _scholars_ , . , . , . , . in addition to these they have numerous congregations abroad, and they raise about l , yearly for missionary and benevolent purposes. infant baptism. the following reasons seem to afford ample proof that the baptism of infants has always been the practice of the church, notwithstanding all the baptists allege against it. under the law infants were admitted into covenant with god by circumcision when eight days old. gen. xvii. , , so, too, when the jews admitted proselytes into their communion, they not only circumcised all the males, but baptized all, male and female, infant and adult. thus, when the apostles were sent "to make proselytes of all nations, by baptizing them" (matt, xviii. , should be so translated) would they not baptize infants as well as adults, seeing that such was the jewish custom? compare john iii. , "except a man (greek, except _any one_) be born of _water_ and of the spirit he cannot enter the _kingdom of god_," with mark x. , where our lord says of infants that "of such is the _kingdom of god_." if so, they must be capable of baptism, both by water and the spirit. st. peter, when speaking of baptism, said the promise was not only to adults, but also to their _children_, acts ii. , . again, where there no _children_ among the whole households which were baptized by the apostles, acts xvi. , , cor. . ? the early fathers show that children were baptized in their time, which, in some cases, was less than a century after the apostles lived. justin martyr, for instance, writing a.d. (_i_._e_., years after the death of the last apostle), speaks of persons and years old, who had been made disciples to christ in their infancy. how can infants be made disciples, but by baptism? and, if these had been baptized in their infancy, it must have been during the lifetime of the apostle st. john, and of other apostolic men. barnabas' (st.) day. june th. this apostle's name was changed from joses into barnabas, which means the "son of consolation." he was a highly educated man, being brought up, as st. paul was, at the feet of gamaliel. he travelled with st. paul until there was a disagreement on the subject of mark, the kinsman of barnabas. after they separated, it is probable that st. barnabas laboured in cyprus. he is believed to have suffered martyrdom at salamis by being stoned. bartholomew's (st.) day. august th. this apostle is believed to have been identical with nathaniel. we are told nothing of his labours in the bible. he is believed to have worked in armenia and lycaonia, and to have suffered martyrdom by crucifixion at albanople. this day is rendered famous in history, on account of the horrible massacre of protestants in paris in . thirty thousand persons were put to death in france, and this with the deliberate consent of the pope and the authorities of the roman church! belfry. originally and properly, a watch-tower. that part of a church where the bells are hung. bells. bells have been used in churches in england from the th century. their various uses are well summed up in the following monkish distichs,-- "laudo deum verum, plebem voco, congrego clerum, defunctos ploro, pestem fugo, festa decoro." "funera plango, fulgura frango, sabbata pango, excito lentos, dissipo ventos, paco cruentos." in the roman church they are "baptized," with a certain ceremony; in the english church they are merely consecrated, that is, set apart for a sacred purpose. the "passing bell" is the tolling of a bell while anybody is dying, or _passing_ out of this life, in order that the faithful may offer prayers on his behalf. it is ordered by canon . benedicite. the apocryphal ending of daniel iii. it is a paraphrastical exposition of ps. ; it was commonly sung in the christian church in the th century. in it was ordered to be sung during lent instead of the _te deum_. it is now generally used when the lessons speak of the creation. the "three children" are ananias, azarias, and misael, who are better known by their chaldean names of shadrach, meshach, and abednego. benediction. a solemn act of blessing performed by bishops and priests of the church. a certain form was given by god himself for the use of the jewish priests, num. vi. - . in our church several forms are used agreeing with the office of which they form a part. the ordinary benediction at the end of the communion service is from phil, iv. , and num. vi. . benedictus. the song of zacharias, the father of the baptist, luke . - . the alternate psalm, called the _jubilate deo_, was inserted in to be used when the _benedictus_ happened to be read in the second lesson. the song of zacharias has always been a hymn of the church. benefice or living. a church endowed with a revenue for the performance of divine service; the holder of which is called a rector, or vicar, or incumbent, or perpetual curate (see under each head). heresy, simony, and other grave offences, disqualify a man from holding a benefice. a clergyman can only be deprived of his benefice for want of capacity, heresy, contempt of court, or crime. bible, the holy. so called from a greek word, meaning "the books," just as the word _scriptures_ means "the writings." the bible is divided into two parts--the old and the new testaments, or covenants. the old testament, or the covenant of god with the hebrew nation, is written partly in hebrew, and partly--the latter part--in aramaic. it is most important to remember that it was written by many different persons, and at widely different times, spreading over the course of , years. the new testament, or the new covenant of god with his people, whether jews or gentiles, although also written by many various authors, was produced between the years a.d. , and a.d. . the bible is called the "word of god" because the authors wrote by the inspiration of the holy ghost, heb. i.i; acts iv. ; peter i. ; &c. it is important to remember that we do not claim a _verbal_ inspiration, for the writers, but simply that god put into their minds what they should write. inspiration did not preserve them from errors in grammar, or natural philosophy, or anything else foreign to the actual design of the bible, which is the revelation of god, and of his will to man. thus, it is most important that we should know what books are inspired, and have a right to form a part of the holy scriptures, in other words what books are _canonical_. the old testament, as we have it now, was used by the jews in the time of our lord, who often quotes from its various books himself, thus stamping them with the divine authority which they claimed. ezra seems to have determined the canon of old testament scriptures. with regard to the new testament, the question of the authenticity and canonicity of some books was very much more difficult to determine, and an enormous amount of labour and scholarship has been expended on the subject. there can be no reasonable doubt now with regard to any of the _books_ of the new testament; the only thing now doubtful is what the original words were in the places where the ancient manuscripts differ. these differences are called _various readings_. the publication of the revised version of the new testament in was partly an attempt to settle this question. the differences, as a rule, are very unimportant. the chief translations of the bible into english are wiclif's, ; tindal (or tyndale) and coverdale's, ; the geneva bible, ; the bishops' bible, . the translation we use now, called the authorized version, was published in . about learned men were appointed by king james st for the task. we will now proceed to consider the contents of the bible, first remarking that the division into chapters and verses does not date back beyond the th century, that it rests on no authority, and very often spoils the sense. the old testament consists of books, which may be thus classified:--the books of the law; the historical books; the holy writings, or poetical books; and the prophetical books. _the books of the law_, five in number, were written by moses, and are called the pentateuch; they are:--genesis. exodus, leviticus, numbers, and deuteronomy. _the historical books_ are twelve. where the name of the author differs from the name of the book it is given in brackets,--joshua, judges (samuel?), ruth (samuel or ezra), st and nd samuel (samuel, nathan, and gad), st and nd kings (jeremiah), st and nd chronicles (ezra?), ezra, nehemiah, esther (author not known). _the poetical books_, or _hagiographa_, consist of five books,--job (author not known), psalms (by various authors, about half by david), proverbs (solomon chiefly), ecclesiastes (generally attributed to solomon), song of solomon, or canticles. _the prophetical books_ are divided into two classes, the greater prophets and the lesser prophets. they are so called, not from any superiority or inferiority, but from the extent of their writings. _the greater prophets_ are four in number,--isaiah, jeremiah (author of two books--his prophecy and his lamentations), ezekiel, daniel. _the minor prophets_ are twelve,--hosea, joel, amos, obadiah, jonah, micah, nahum, habakkuk, zephaniah, haggai, zechariah, malachi. the ordinary reader of the bible misses much from the fact that the books are not grouped in any chronological order. in the following table the books are placed so as to form a continuous history of the jews, while, by their side, are the names of those books which should be read as commentaries on the period. the book of job, however, it is impossible to place. he seems to have been a shepherd king, perhaps of the time of abraham, but he was not of the hebrew nation. the two books of the chronicles contain a summary of history from the creation down to the restoration under cyrus; parts, however, may be read with other books. (_for table_, _see opposite page_.) from the time of malachi to the birth of john the baptist, a period of about years, there seems to have been no special revelation from god. the _apocrypha_ was composed in that period by various authors. although parts of it are appointed to be read as lessons in church, yet it is not considered as inspired, and consequently it does not belong to the word of god. our church, in art. vi., says that "the other books (viz., the apocrypha) the church doth read for example of life and instruction of manners, but yet it doth not apply them to establish any doctrine." the church of rome receives the apocrypha as canonical. we now pass on to consider the new testament. it consists of books, written by eight persons. they were all written in greek, unless perhaps st. matthew's gospel, which some critics hold was originally written in hebrew. the whole of the new testament was written before the end of the first century, and during the lifetime of the apostle john. the books were all received from the first as inspired, except the epistle to the hebrews, epistles of james and jude, nd of peter, nd and rd of john, and the book of the revelation; but all these were in early times accepted as canonical. it is still doubtful who wrote the epistle to the hebrews. the _four gospels_ are by st. matthew, st. mark, st. luke, and st. john. of these, the first three are called the synoptical gospels, because they give a general view, and contain a brief account of the chief events of our saviour's life, his miracles and his parables, from the same standpoint. st. john chiefly dwells on our lord's words and discourses. the word "gospel" means "_good news_." the book of the _acts of the apostles_ is generally considered to have been written by st. luke (c.f. acts . with luke . - ). the epistles were written by the authors whose names they bear (except perhaps hebrews). seven of them are called _catholic_, which means addressed to the church _generally_, or _universally_, and not to particular persons or particular bodies of christians. the book of revelation, or apocalypse, is by st. john the apostle. the following is a chronological table of the books of the new testament, with their probable dates:-- books date a.d. s. matt's s. mark's s. luke's s. john's the acts i. thess. ii. thess. galatians i. corinth. ii. corinth. romans ephesians philipp. colloss. philemon i. tim. titus ii. tim. s. james i. peter ii. peter jude i. john ii. john iii. john revelation some scholars assign an earlier date to the revelation. chronological table of books of the old testament. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | | books illustrating | contemporary period | history | same period | prophets -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- creation | genesis, | i. chron. i. to x. | to | exodus. | (geneaologies). | settlement| numbers. | leviticus. | in | deuteronomy.| | canaan. | joshua. | | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- judges. | judges. | ruth. | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- kings. | i. samuel. \| i. chron. x. to xxix. ; psalms | | ii. samuel./| of david,asaph, ethan, and | | | sons of korah. | | i. kings | | ecclesiastes, canticles, and | jonah (time of jehu). | \| proverbs, (time of solomon). | | ii. kings /| i. chron. xxix. , to end of ii. | amos | | chron. | hosea | from uzziah | | | isaiah \ to end of | | | joel / hezekiah. | | | micah | | | | nahum | | | | | | | zephaniah\ time of | | | jeremiah / josiah. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- esther. | psalm cxxxvii. | habakkuk, daniel, | | obadiah, ezekiel. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ezra. | psalms cxx. to cxxxiv. (probably sung | haggai, zechariah, | on the way back). | malachi. nehemiah. | psalms cxiii. to xcviii. at consecration of | | temple. | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- bible christians. sometimes called bryanites. they are the followers of a mr. william o'bryan, a wesleyan local preacher in cornwall, who, in , separated from the wesleyans, and began himself to form societies upon the methodist plan. in doctrine they do not appear to differ from the various bodies of arminian methodists. the forms of public worship are of the same simple character. but in the administration of the lord's supper "it is usual to receive the elements in a sitting posture, as it is believed that that practice is more comformable to the posture of body in which it was first received by christ's apostles, than kneeling; but persons are at liberty to kneel, if it be more suitable to their views and feelings to do so." members of this sect are nearly all cornish people. _ministers_. _lay preachers_. _members_. . , . , . _on_ _sunday_ _probation_. _chapels_. _scholars_. . . . . bidding prayer. the prayer before the sermon. before the reformation it was called the _bidding of the beads_. the people were bid to pray for certain objects as the preacher successively named them. the canonical form of the present prayer is given in the th canon. the ordinary practice of using a collect is now sanctioned by custom. an extempore prayer, however, from the preacher is quite unauthorized. at the university sermons, and also on occasions of more than usual solemnity, the bidding prayer is always used. in borough towns it is appropriately repeated on the sunday next after november th, when the mayor is elected. bier. the carriage on which the coffin is carried to the grave. bishop, _see_ orders. bounty, queen anne's. before the reformation, the _annates_ or _first-fruits_, being the profits for one year of every vacant benefice, were paid to the pope. in henry viii.'s reign they were paid to him instead. queen anne, however, instead of receiving them for her own use, established a fund for the benefit of the poor clergy. this fund has since been called queen anne's bounty. money was granted to it also by parliament, and many generous individuals increased the sum. bowing at the name of jesus. this pious custom is ordered by the th canon of our church, in supposed accordance with the idea of the apostle in phil. ii. . in many churches the custom is now observed by bowing at the sacred name in the creed only; but the canon orders "due and lowly reverence to be done" whenever the "name of the lord jesus is mentioned in the time of divine service." bowing towards the altar. this reverent custom is still practised in many of the royal chapels, and in some churches and cathedrals, _e.g._, in christ church, oxford, in many village churches where the custom, once universal, has not died out, and it survives in some college chapels. the synod of said, "we heartily commend it to all good and well affected people, that they be ready to tender to the lord their reverence and obeisance, both at their coming in and going out of church, according to the most ancient custom of the primitive church in the purest times." broad church, _see_ church parties. burials act. a bill passed in parliament, . before the passing of the act no deceased persons (with certain exceptions, specified in the rubric) could be buried in consecrated ground without the service of the church of england being read over their remains. now, anyone who wishes to have his relatives or friends buried in any such ground without any religious service, or with any other christian and orderly service than that of the church of england, can do so. this service may be conducted by anybody, man, woman, or child, but hours' notice must be given in writing to the incumbent, who still has all his legal rights preserved. the burials bill deals solely with the churchyard, and confers no rights as to the tolling of the bell, or to the use of any church or consecrated chapel. under this act the clergy are empowered to use the service of the church for the burial of the dead in any unconsecrated burial ground or cemetery. the bill owes its origin to the agitation of dissenters, and that their supposed grievances were purely sentimental is shown by the fact that comparatively few funerals are taken under this act. burial service, the. the present arrangement of this office is the outcome of several revisions. in ( st prayer book of edward vi.) there was a special communion office for use at funerals. the custom obtaining in many places of the mourners coming to church on the sunday next following the funeral perhaps has its origin in the ancient practice of their receiving holy communion together. the rubric denying christian burial to the unbaptized, the excommunicate, and to suicides was added in . the first two sentences, or anthems--john xi. , , and job xix. - , formed part of an ancient office. the third sentence, i tim. vi. , and job i. , and the two psalms, were added in . the lesson formerly formed part of the mass for the dead. the sentences, or anthems, to be said at the grave side are from old offices, so also what follows down to the collects. the prayer, "for as much," &c., is called the _committal prayer_, and the practice of casting earth upon the coffin is part of a very old ceremony. the last two prayers were added in , and the "grace" in . many of the dissenting sects use this service. the whole office is of a nature to cheer the heart of the mourner, and to rouse in all a "hope full of immortality." calendar, the church, is the detailed (excepting, of course, the rubrics) law of the church for the daily worship of god. it also contains a list of fasts and festivals, or holy days. our church recognises eighty-two such holy days, of which the following is a classification, not including ash wednesday, holy week or passion week, and easter eve:-- in honour of our blessed lord (including ordinary lord's days) in honour of god the holy ghost in honour of the holy trinity in honour of the blessed virgin mary in honour of the holy angels in honour of the apostles and evangelists in honour of s. john baptist and other saints the object for which holy days are instituted, is the commemoration of some person or event by devotional observance, the devotion being, of course, offered to almighty god. (_blunt's household theology_.) the calendar contains a table of lessons, or portions of holy scripture, to be read in church, and rules for finding the date of the moveable feasts. the present table of lessons came into use jan. st, . (for holy days, &c., see under their respective heads.) call to the ministry. every candidate for deacon's orders (see ordinal) has this question put to him by the bishop,--"do you trust that you are inwardly moved by the holy ghost to take upon you this office and ministration, to serve god for the promoting of his glory and the edifying of his people?" in the "ordering of priests" a similar question is put in this form,--"do you think in your heart that you be truly called, according to the will of our lord jesus christ, and the order of this church of england, to the order and ministry of priesthood?" and in the "consecration of bishops" the question is put thus,--"are you persuaded that you be truly called to this ministration, according to the will of our lord jesus christ, and the order of this realm?" it should be noticed that the question is not "are you sure?" but (_a_) "do you trust?" (_b_) "do you think?" (_c_) "are you persuaded?" if a man deals earnestly and truly with his own heart, he can scarcely be deceived as to whether he answers these solemn questions truly or not. he need not wait for some miraculous intimation from the holy spirit. by ordinary signs he may safely judge: primarily, from his own sincere inward conviction; and in an inferior degree from the advice of his parents, or of god's ministers, or of other godly persons qualified to advise in such a matter. these are all ways of learning god's will. bishop oxenden, in his "pastoral office," says to the candidate for holy orders, "if, after looking well at your motive, you find it pure,--if you are entering the ministry in a serious, thoughtful spirit,--if the love of souls, and an earnest desire to save them, impels you--if you feel the work is one in which your soul will find delight, and that you are heartily willing to labour in the service of your heavenly master,--then i hesitate not to say that you have chosen for yourself the best and most delightful of all professions." this consciousness of purity of motive is a true indication that a candidate is called of god. calvinists. these form no particular sect, but are to be found among different bodies of christians. they are the followers of the reformer, john calvin, who was born in . the five _points_, or essential doctrines of calvinism, are ( ) particular election, ( ) particular redemption, ( ) moral inability in a fallen state, ( ) irresistible grace, and ( ) the final perseverance of the saints. in other words, a calvinist holds that before the foundation of the world god _elected_ a certain number to salvation, and _reprobated_ the rest of mankind to damnation; that christ jesus died only for the elect; that mankind are totally depraved in consequence of the fall; that god, in his own good time, calls all those he has before predestinated to life by the _irresistible_ power of the holy spirit to grace and salvation; that those once called can never finally fall from a state of grace. it is true that the th art. is so ambiguous in language that even such a doctrine as the above is not reproved by it; but the church of england, in her communion office, says that "christ, by the one oblation of himself once offered, made a full, perfect, and sufficient sacrifice, oblation, and satisfaction for the sins of the _whole_ world," and in the church catechism it is said that "god the son hath redeemed _all_ mankind." these two passages alone are enough to show that the church of england is not calvinistic in her doctrine. (see _antinomianism_ and _arminians_.) candles, _see_ altar lights. canon. a greek word, meaning a rule or measure. the laws of the church are called _canons_. the canons made before the reformation are binding on our church now, and are acted upon in the ecclesiastical courts, except where they have been superseded by subsequent canons, or by the provisions of an act of parliament. canon. an ecclesiastic, having the right to a stall in a cathedral, and of giving a vote in the chapter. he differs from a prebendary in that a prebendary means one who enjoys a prebend, or endowment, whereas a canon does not necessarily do so. in england the honorary canons are all without capitular revenues. canon. a name applied to part of the roman office of mass, and it was also made use of in first prayer book of edward vi. the name is given to the more solemn part of the eucharistic service, from just after the preface till the final close. canon of scripture, _see_ bible. canonical hours. at a very early date special hours of prayer were appointed by the church. in the church of rome the canonical hours begin with _vespers_, or evening prayer, about o'clock, or sunset; next follows _compline_, a service at bedtime; at midnight the service of _nocturns_, or _matins_, was held; _lauds_, an early morning service of praise, was held at cock-crow. then came the "little hours," _prime_ at o'clock, _terce_ at , _sext_ at noon, and _nones_ at . cantate domino. psalm xcviii, used occasionally at evening prayer in place of the magnificat. canticles. songs, especially also the song of solomon. the sacred songs appointed to be sung or said in the order for morning and evening prayer. these are the venite, te deum, benedicite, benedictus, jubilate, magnificat, cantate, nunc dimittis, and deus misereatur; each of which see. cassock, _see_ vestments. catechism. from a word meaning to _instruct by word of mouth_. the insertion of this elementary exposition of christian faith and practice into the prayer book is a feature of the reformation. the catechism, as drawn up in , finished with the explanation of the lord's prayer. the explanation of the sacraments was not added until . bishop overall is believed to have written it. the catechism formerly stood in the confirmation service, but was placed in its present position in . the first rubric at the end of the catechism has for a long time been rendered practically obsolete by the institution of sunday schools and children's services. cathedral. the chief church of every diocese is called the cathedral, because in it is the _cathedra_, or _seat_, of the bishop. every cathedral has a body of clergy belonging to it of various degrees of dignity. (see _dean_, _dean and chapter_.) catholic. a greek word, meaning _universal_ or _general_. the holy catholic church is the visible church of christ throughout the world, of all ages, all whose branches have retained unbroken the apostolical succession in the ministry. there may be erring branches of the true church. art. xix. declares, "as the church of jerusalem, alexandria, and antioch have erred, so also the church of rome hath erred...." it is improper to speak of the _roman_ catholic church simply by the name of catholic; in england, members of the church of england are _catholics_. cemetery. _a sleeping place_. the beautiful name given to places of burial by christians. ceremony. _ceremonia_ in its classical sense was a general term for worship. johnson defines a ceremony to be "outward rite, external form in religion." hooker uses the word in this sense. in a larger sense it may mean a whole office. all should read that part of the introduction to our prayer book which treats "of ceremonies, why some are to be abolished, and some retained" (written in ). _see_ also art. xxxiv. chalice, _see_ altar vessels. chancel. the choir, or upper part of a church, commonly at the east end, is called the chancel. it is the freehold of the incumbent should he be a rector. where there is a lay impropriator he has the freehold. it usually is raised some steps above the level of the nave, from which it was formerly separated by a screen, called the _rood_ screen, upon which was the _rood_, or figure of our blessed lord on the cross. the chancel contains the seats, or stalls, for the clergy and the choir. the east end of the chancel is partitioned off by the altar rails. the part thus enclosed is called the sanctuary, and contains the altar. the sanctuary is usually raised still higher than the chancel by additional steps. chancellor. a deputy of the bishop, with a jurisdiction in all ecclesiastical matters throughout the diocese. the chancellor of a cathedral is quite a different personage. he is an ecclesiastic, frequently a canon, who discharges many duties in connection with the cathedral of which he is chancellor. he directs the services, is secretary of the chapter, the librarian, the superintendent of schools connected with the cathedral, &c. these offices, however, are not always combined. chant, _see_ church music chapel. any consecrated building other than a parish church or cathedral. the word is also now applied to the meeting houses of the various dissenting bodies. lately, some of these bodies have taken to calling their places of worship _churches_. chaplain. a person authorized to officiate in places other than the parish church, such as the private chapels of noblemen, and the chapels attached to asylums, workhouses, hospitals, and the like. a statute of henry viii. restricts the number of chaplains which may be appointed by personages of various ranks as follows:--an archbishop, eight; a duke or bishop, six; marquis or earl, five; viscount, four; baron, knight of the garter, or lord chancellor, three; a duchess, marchioness, countess, baroness, the treasurer or comptroller of the king's household, the clerk of the closet, the king's secretary, the dean of the chapel, almoner, and master of the rolls, each of them two chaplains. the queen has forty-eight chaplains, called chaplains in ordinary. chapter. the governing body of a cathedral or collegiate church, consisting of the dean, the canons, prebendaries, &c. (see _dean and chapter_.) chapter house. a building attached to a cathedral, in which the dean and chapter meet for the transaction of business. charge. the address delivered by a bishop or archdeacon at their respective visitations of the clergy. chasible, or chasuble, _see_ vestment. cherub, _see_ angel. chimere, _see_ vestments choir, or quire. that part of a church which is called the chancel, is generally called the _choir_ in a cathedral. the word is also applied to the singing men and boys, who lead the musical part of the service. (see _church music_.) chorister. a member of the choir, and more properly one of the boys of the choir. christ. _the anointed one_. the greek form of the hebrew _messiah_. one of the titles of our blessed lord. acts x. . (see _trinity_, _the holy_.) christen, to. the same as to baptize. (see _baptism_.) christian. a title given, in ridicule possibly in the first instance, to the believers in christ by the people of antioch. (acts. xi. .) christian name. the name given us when we were made christians, viz., at our baptism. christmas day. dec. th. the day kept as the anniversary of our saviour's birth. this is believed to be the true day and month. w. h. mill says that the objections against it are "for the most part weak and groundless." this high festival has been kept at least since the ivth century. there are special psalms and lessons appointed, and a "proper preface" in the communion service. it is one of those "three times" at which all professing members of the church are expected to communicate every year. church, the. our prayer book supplies us with a definition in art. xix. the three chief branches of the church catholic are--( ) the eastern, or greek church; ( ) the western, or roman church; and ( ) the anglican church, of which the episcopal churches of england, scotland, ireland, america, and the colonies form part. although, unhappily, there are grave differences in both faith and ceremony among these great branches of the church, yet we can still profess our belief in "one holy catholic and apostolic church," inasmuch as we are all one by unity of faith in christ, by apostolical foundation, and succession of orders. it seems well here to give a brief sketch of the english, greek, and roman churches. church of england. christianity was introduced into britain at the end of the first, or beginning of the second, century. three british bishops were present at a council held at arles, in gaul, in . at the invasion of the heathen anglo-saxons the british church retreated into wales. in gregory the great, bishop of rome, sent augustine to this island, who was instrumental in reviving christianity in the south-east of england. when he came he found seven bishoprics existing, and two archbishoprics, viz., london and york. augustine was made the first archbishop of canterbury; this was the first appointment by papal authority in england. the northern part of england was evangelized in the earlier portion of the following century, by irish missionaries from iona, under aidan, bishop of lindisfarne; and his successor, finan, who lived to see christianity everywhere established north of the humber, and died in . "the planting, therefore, of the gospel in the anglo-saxon provinces of britain was the work of two rival missionary bands ( to ); in the south, the _roman_, aided by their converts, and some teachers out of gaul; in the north, the _irish_, whom the conduct of augustine and his party had estranged from their communion. if we may judge from the area of their field of action, it is plain that the irish were the larger body; but a host of conspiring causes gradually resulted in the spread and ascendancy of roman modes of thought." (hardwick.) in the time of archbishop theodore ( -- ) the fusion of the english christians was completed, and the pope began to assert (not without opposition) an usurped authority in the english church (_c.f._, hardwick). what are called the "dark ages" were indeed dark in the church, for then it was that she became erring in faith, doctrine, and practice, and almost a caricature of what she once was. this state of things continued until the th century, when the reformation took place. the movement was popular in england, and nearly all, clergy and people, were glad to see the superstitions and corruptions which had crept into the church swept away by archbishop cranmer and his colleagues. still, there was a party which would take no share in this movement, but remained faithful to the pope,--the representatives of what was falsely called the "old faith." notwithstanding the differences of faith between these two parties, they both continued nominally members of the church of england. it was not until that the roman catholic party seceded from the church of england, and formed a distinct sect. it is most important for churchmen to remember that the church of england did not secede from that of rome, but romanists seceded from the church of england. just as naaman the leper remained the same naaman after he was cured of his leprosy as he was before, so the church of england remained the same church of england after the reformation as she was before, composed of the same duly consecrated bishops, of the same duly ordained clergy, and of the same faithful people. the present church of england is the old catholic church of england, reformed in the th century of certain superstitious errors, but still the same church which came down from our british and saxon ancestors, and as such it possesses its original endowments, which were never, as some suppose, taken from one church and given to another. and thus, when roman catholics speak of our grand old cathedrals and parish churches as being once theirs, they assert what is not historically true. these buildings always belonged, as they do now, to the church of england, which church has been continuous from british times to the present. (see _endowment_.) the established church in england is governed by archbishops and bishops. besides these, there are suffragan (which see) bishops (dover, bedford, nottingham, and colchester). there are also retired colonial bishops in england. four new bishoprics have recently been created, and two more are in course of formation. as assistants to the bishops there are archdeacons, and rural deans. there about , benefices in england, and about , clergymen of every class. the church sittings number about , , . it is somewhat difficult to arrive at the number of the members of the church of england, as nonconformists have always objected to a religious census being made. taking the following official returns, we find that, out of every ,-- chrchs. dsntrs. school returns give cemetery " " marriages " " army " " (of which no fewer than are roman catholics.) navy returns give workhouse " " giving an average of per cent, to the church, and per cent, to dissenters. the whole population in england and wales in was , , church population at percent. , , nonconformist population (including roman catholics) , , with regard to educational matters, we find that scholars. in day schools connected with the church, there are , , ditto with wesleyans , ditto roman catholics , in british and undenominational schools , school board schools , , we also find that on hospital sunday, , the following contributions were made: church of england l , methodists (the various sects together) l , for missionary purposes the sums of money collected in were: church of england l , nonconformist societies in england l , _statistics of the anglican communion_ _bishops_. _clergy_. england and wales (including suffragan, and assistant, bishops) , ireland , scotland british colonies, india, &c. , united states , retired bishops --- ------ total (in round numbers) , church, the greek. this ancient branch of the catholic church is the church of the east. the great schism between the eastern and western churches took place in the eleventh century, though for centuries before a separation had been imminent. one of the chief causes of the separation of the eastern from the western church was that the latter holds the doctrine that the holy ghost proceeds from the son (_filioqe_) as well as from the father, eternally; and inserted the words "filioque" (and from the son) in the nicene creed. this the eastern church rejects; and also she errs in other details both of faith and practice. her orders are without doubt apostolical, and efforts have been made for her union with the anglican church, but the "filioque" clause in the creed has hitherto hindered this from being accomplished. church of rome. this is properly that branch of the great church catholic over which the bishop, or pope, of rome presides. it in no way belongs to the object of this work to trace the history of this church from apostolic times, nor yet to notice how by degrees it claimed and assumed the supremacy over other churches. but since we find amongst us certain congregations who worship according to the roman use, and who look up to the pope of rome as their head, it will be well to see how romanism was introduced into this land after the reformation. as has been before noticed (see _church of england_), it was not until about forty years after the papal usurpation had been suppressed in england that those who still remained roman at heart fell away from the ancient church of england, and constituted themselves into a distinct community or sect. this was in the year . this schismatic community was first governed by the jesuits. in a bishop, called the bishop of chalcedon, was consecrated, and sent from rome to rule the roman sect in england. the bishop of chalcedon was banished in , and then the adherents of the papacy in england were left without any bishops until the reign of james ii. this king favoured the romanists, and would gladly have re-introduced the roman catholic religion into the country. he filled many vacant sees with members of the church of rome; but all he did in favour of popery was more than reversed in the reign of his successor, william iii., prince of orange. in a bill, called the roman catholic emancipation bill, was passed, by which roman catholics were made eligible to sit in parliament, and restored to other rights of english citizenship from which they had before been excluded. in the present reign ( ) dr. wiseman, and a few other roman catholic priests, led the pope to trench upon the royal prerogative by establishing a romish hierarchy in this country. cardinal wiseman was made archbishop of westminster; and twelve others, bishops of territorial sees. a bill, however, was brought into parliament by the government to resist this papal aggression, and forbidding the assumption of english territorial titles. this act has been repealed. we of the reformed church hold that many doctrines and practices of the church of rome are erroneous and unscriptural, the most important of which are the following:--the doctrine of original sin, and justification, as defined by the council of trent; propitiatory sacrifice of the mass; transubstantiation; communicating in one kind only; the seven sacraments; purgatory; the worship, invocation, and intercession of the blessed virgin, saints, and angels; veneration of relics; worship of images; universal supremacy of the roman church; the immaculate conception of the blessed virgin; and the infallibility of the pope. these two last were not imposed upon the roman church as articles of faith, necessary to be believed, until and . with the exception of the last two, the above is a summary of the errors of rome, drawn up by dr. barrow, and quoted by bishop harold browne in his book on the articles. in england the roman church has two cardinals, one of whom (cardinal manning) is also archbishop, bishops, , other clergy. the number of roman catholic archbishops and bishops now holding office in the british empire is . church music. certain parts of our service are directed to be "said or sung," the former possibly describing the parochial, the latter the cathedral, manner of performing divine service. the use of musical instruments in the singing of praise to god is very ancient. the first psalm in the bible--viz., that which moses and miriam sang after the passage of the red sea--was then accompanied by timbrels. afterwards, when the temple was built, musical instruments were constantly used at public worship. in the th psalm the writer especially calls upon the people to prepare the different kinds of instruments wherewith to praise the lord. and this has been the constant practice of the church in all ages. it is not clearly known when organs were first brought into use, but we find that as early as the year the emperor of the east sent an organ as a present to pippin, king of france. it is certain that the use of them has been very common now for several hundreds of years. the custom of dividing the choir into two parts, stationed on either side of the chancel, in order that they may say, or sing, alternate verses, dates from the primitive church. thus miriam sang. (ex. xv. .) thus the angels in heaven sing. (isaiah vi. ) the psalms and canticles are generally sung to a chant. these are of two kinds--_gregorian_ and _anglican_. gregorian chants are very ancient; a collection of them was compiled by gregory, bishop of rome, about a.d. . they are sung in unison. anglican chants, which are of much more recent invention, are sung in harmony. nearly all our church music is based on the gregorian chant. a _single_ chant is an air consisting of two phrases, corresponding to the two parts into which every verse of the psalms and canticles is divided in our prayer book by a colon. a double chant consists of four parts. sometimes the canticles are sung to what is called a _service_, which is a musical arrangement similar to the anthem. _hymn_, a metrical song of praise. hymns are nowhere formally authorised in our church, with one exception, viz., the _veni creator_ in the ordination service. still, metrical hymns have been sung in the church from apostolic times, the words of some of which are extant. the "hymn" sung by our lord and his disciples at the last supper was probably the "hallel," psalms cvii.--cxviii. _anthem_, as the term is usually understood in england, consists of passages from holy scripture set to music; such also are _introits_. anthems are almost peculiar to our church, but have been in constant use in it since the reformation. other parts of the service, such as the prayers, the versicles, the litany, are frequently read either on one note (_monotoned_), or on one note occasionally varied at the end by a cadence (_intoned_). this is objected to by some as being unnatural; but it is not so. a child naturally _intones_ or _monotones_ if set to read or recite. and where a congregation have to repeat the same words together, it is absolutely necessary that they should do it on some given note, or the result would be babel. children in school, of their own accord, say their lessons together in a monotone. the practice of doing so in the church dates from the very earliest times. church parties. there always have been, and probably always will be, in every religious community different schools of thought. truth is many-sided, and while men may agree in prescribing a certain limit, outside which is error, yet within the boundary there may be room for many different views of central truths. in the church of england the views held by different parties are generally reckoned under three heads,--( ) _high church_, a section of which party are ritualists; ( ) _low church_, or _evangelicals_; ( ) _broad church_. roughly speaking their influence may be thus described: the high church party has deepened the sense of the church's corporate life and work, and added to the reverence, the order, the beauty of holy worship. the low church party has done much to awaken a spirit of vital personal religion. the broad church party has done much to co-ordinate the truths of religion with the certain results of science. the members of this party hold views more or less latitudinarian. the teaching of these three parties will best be seen by an enumeration of the names most favoured by each; thus high churchmen appeal to laud, hammond, sancroft, hooker, andrewes, cosin, pearson, ken, wilson, robert nelson, george herbert, john keble, and pusey. low churchmen delight in melanchthon, zwingli, cranmer, hooper, ridley, jewel, bunyan, whitfield, cowper, scott, cecil, john newton, romaine, venn, wilberforce, simeon, and henry martyn. the broad church school contains such names as bacon, milton, hales, jeremy taylor, tillotson, locke, isaac newton, coleridge, arnold, maurice, hare, robertson, kingsley, thirlwall, and stanley. church rate. a rate which the churchwardens and vestry had the right to levy on ratepayers for the repairs of the church, and for the expenses connected with divine service. ina, king of wessex, drew up a code of ecclesiastical laws, which were accepted in a national council in a.d. . among these laws was that--"the _church scot_ (or rate) for the repair of churches, and supply of all things necessary for divine worship, was to be paid by every house before martinmas, according to a valuation made at christmas." this right of the church to levy compulsory church rates was only taken from her by an act passed in the present reign, in consequence of the opposition raised by dissenters. church wardens. the office of church warden dates from very early times in england, but we have no clear account of its origin. the church wardens, of whom there are two in most parishes, are appointed at a meeting of parishioners held at easter. the incumbent has the power of appointing one, the other is elected by the vote of the parishioners. the church wardens were originally mere ecclesiastical officers; the state then added various civil functions to the office, such as levying rates, &c., but a good deal of this civil power has now been withdrawn. their business has become in substance that of assisting in the finances, repairs, warming, &c., of the church. it is also their duty to complain to the bishop or archdeacon if the incumbent be neglectful or irregular in the conduct of divine service. when church wardens have been chosen, they are admitted to their office by the archdeacon. the office is of one year's duration only. in many larger parishes they are assisted by synodmen, or sidesmen. a church warden should be a resident rate-payer; but non-residence is not always a disqualification. the following are certainly disqualified to hold office,--all aliens born, as well as aliens naturalized; all jews; all children under years of age; all persons convicted of felony; all idiots and insane persons. church yard. the ground adjoining the church, in which the dead are buried. it is the freehold of the parson, but inasmuch as it was the common burial place, it was fenced and cared for at the charge of the parishioners, who could be rated for it. recent _burial acts_ (which see) have lately given power to laymen to conduct funeral services even in the consecrated churchyard. rates have also been done away with, and thus we find the parson burdened with the charge of a churchyard in which any man, woman, or child, may hold funeral services. the church of england is the only religious body in england which may not have a distinct burial ground for her dead! churching of women. from the earliest times it has been usual for a woman after child-birth to come to god's house to offer thanks. it was so among the jews, although with them the idea of purification is involved as well as of thanksgiving, as it is in the eastern church at the present day. in some country places there is an idea that a woman can be "_churched_" at home, which is a contradiction in terms. circumcision of christ. a feast dating from before the th century, when a special service was already in use for it. the collect--a translation from an ancient latin one--sums up well the teaching of the day. clergy. a general name for ecclesiastics of all orders (see _orders_), as distinguished from the laity. the word is from a greek one, meaning a _portion_. clerk. the legal designation of a clergyman is "_clerk in holy orders_." the _parish clerk_ was formerly a person in holy orders, but his office, as defined in our prayer book, is usually discharged by a layman. the appointment of a parish clerk is in the hands of the incumbent, by whom also he may be dismissed; but in some parishes the office is a freehold. the almost universal use of choirs in churches has nearly done away with that strange mode of public worship which consisted of a duet between the parson and clerk. the clerk has certain stated fees for his assistance at marriages and funerals. cloister. a covered walk attached to monastic and collegiate buildings and cathedrals. collation. the appointment to a benefice by a bishop is called a _collation_. collect. a short concentrated prayer. the derivation of the word is doubtful. the greater part of our collects are found in the sacramentaries of st. leo (a.d. ), gelasius (a.d. ), and gregory the great (a.d. .) fifty-seven out of tie existing eighty-two prayer book collects are thus translations from the latin. the later collects may sometimes be distinguished from these ancient ones by their lack of terseness, and by their greater use of scriptural language. college. a corporation or community. the colleges of our universities are independent societies, governed by their own statutes and officers. still, they are connected in certain ways with the greater corporation, called the _university_ (which see.) collegiate churches. churches with a _college_, or body of canons or prebendaries attached, such as westminster abbey, and st. george's, windsor. the only others remaining now are wolverhampton, middleham, and brecon. commandments, the ten. the recital of the decalogue is peculiar to our english communion service. it was ordered in , possibly to counteract the growth of antinomianism (which see.) while other parts of the levitical law relating to _ceremonies_ and the like are not binding on christians, the commandments are so, because they embody the _moral_ law, which is for all time and all people. for the sense in which the commandments are to be understood, see the explanation of them in the catechism. the reason of their being placed in the communion service is to remind us of the duty of self-examination before we "presume to eat of that bread and drink of that cup," and to give us a standard whereby we may measure ourselves. for the alteration from the _seventh_ day to the _first_, see _sunday_. commendatory prayer. one of the four extra prayers added to the office for the visitation of the sick in . it is a most beautiful commendation of a "sick person at the point of departure" to god's gracious mercy. commination. the word means a _threat_, or _denunciation of vengeance_. the service, so-called in our prayer book, took its present shape in . it is, as the first exhortation states, an imperfect substitute for the primitive practice of open penance. notice that in using this service we do not invoke the wrath of god on sinners, but merely declare that a curse must rest on sin. the service is used on ash wednesday, although, if ordered, it may be used at other times. the first seven sentences are from deut. xxvii. - ; the eighth is from jer. xvii. ; the ninth is an agglomeration of sins condemned in scripture. the _amen_ here means not _so be it_, but _so it is_. the exhortation which follows is a succession of quotations from scripture. the rubric mentions the "place where they are accustomed to say the litany," which place is neither the _pulpit_ nor _reading pew_ mentioned in the first rubric in the office, but is a desk placed "in the midst of the church" (injunctions of ). following the lord's prayer, versicles, and collects, comes a most forcible confession couched in the words of scripture, but less comprehensive than those of the morning and communion services. the blessing, added in , is a shortened form of the old jewish blessing (num. vi. - ), but here it is precatory not declaratory. committal prayer. that prayer in the burial service in which the minister _commits_ the body to the ground, "earth to earth, ashes to ashes, dust to dust." (see _burial service_.) common prayer, _see_ liturgy. communion, the holy. variously called the _lord's supper_ and the _eucharist_. this service, formerly exclusively called the _liturgy_ is the highest act of christian worship. we will consider it under four heads,--( ) history; ( ) rubrics; ( ) service; ( ) views. ( ) _history_. the two sacraments--holy communion, and holy baptism--differ from all other christian observances in that they are the only two expressly ordained by our lord. we have four records of the institution of the lord's supper in the new testament, viz., matt, xxvi. - ; mark xiv. - ; luke xxii. - ; cor. xi. - . in obedience to our lord's command, "this do in remembrance of me," we find the apostles constantly celebrated the holy communion; acts ii. ; xx. ; &c. this was always accompanied by a set form of prayer, traces of which we may even find in the new testament--acts ii. ; cor. x. ; cor. xiv. . justin martyr, who wrote a.d. , gives an account of a sunday service. almsgiving usually, if not always, accompanied a celebration of the holy communion. as the number of christians increased, the various churches throughout europe compiled for their own use forms of prayer for the celebration of the holy eucharist; the form most used in england was known by the name of the "sarum, or salisbury, use." the communion service in our prayer book is based upon, and translated from, this "sarum use," with considerable modifications and adaptations. the first reformed office appeared in ; the first full english office was put forth in ; the present office is substantially that in the second prayer book of edward vi., . a great deal of it is from hermann's "consultation," a liturgy drawn up in by melanchthon and bucer. ( ) _rubrics_. the first, inserted in , has become virtually obsolete. the "ordinary," mentioned in the third, is the bishop, and the "canon" referred to is the th. for first part of fourth rubric, see _altar_. for the latter part of this rubric, see _eastward position_. this rubric was added in . the rubric before the commandments was inserted in , but the words "turning to the people," were added in . the next was inserted in . in the next rubric, the alternate form of giving out the epistle is for use when the passage selected as the epistle is not really from the epistles, but is some other "portion of scripture;" the "sung or said" refers, possibly, to the cathedral and parochial modes of conducting service. (see _church music_.) three rubrics follow the nicene creed; in the first, , the word "curate," there and elsewhere in the prayer book, means the minister in charge of the parish, having "cure of souls," not the assistant minister generally so denominated now. the direction that notice of holy communion is to be given at this part of the service is quite contradictory to the rubric following the prayer for the church militant, which should be altered. the word "homily," in the second of these rubrics, means "a plain sermon." two books of homilies have been put forth, one in , by archbp. cranmer and others, and the second in , by bishop jewel. there is no authority in this, or any other rubric, for changing the surplice for a black gown, neither is there any direction for a prayer before the sermon, although a form is given in the th canon. (see _bidding prayer_.) for the next rubric see _offertory_. the first rubric after the offertory sentences was inserted in ; in the alms were to be put in the poor box, and not presented. the next rubric orders the bread and wine to be placed on the holy table, thus implying the existence of some shelf or table, called the credence table, on which they had been previously placed. this rubric was omitted from to , which perhaps accounts for the custom existing in some churches of not placing the elements on the altar till the time of consecration. the rubrics before the two exhortations giving notice of holy communion, were inserted in , but now they have fallen into disuse. the next rubric, inserted in , refers to the custom, almost obsolete now, of intending communicants taking places in the chancel for the rest of the service. the rubric before the confession is ambiguous in language, and may mean that the confession is to be said by the minister alone. the next rubric, directing the bishop, if present, to pronounce the absolution, is from the scottish office, and was introduced here in . for the rubric before the consecration prayer, see _eastward position_. the "fair linen cloth," ordered to be thrown over what remains of the consecrated elements, is by some thought to represent the linen clothes in which the saviour's body was wrapped when placed in the tomb. of the nine rubrics at the close of the service, the second, third, and fourth are directed against the practice obtaining in the roman catholic church of solitary masses. the fifth is stated by archbishop parker and bishop cosin not to forbid the use of wafer-bread, but merely to legalize the use of ordinary bread. the rubric in the scottish liturgy expresses this more clearly,--"though it be lawful to have wafer-bread, it shall suffice that the bread be such as is usual." the sixth rubric exhibits the church's careful and reverent treatment of the remains of the consecrated elements; but its main office was to forbid the reservation of the blessed sacrament for the use of invalids and others. this was allowed in the primitive church, and is now by the scottish episcopal church; but the superstitions which grew up around the custom seemed to make the present rule necessary. the next rubric has been required since offerings in kind were discontinued. in the next rubric the lateran council ( ) enjoined one communion yearly, at easter-tide only; but the present rule is more in accordance with the custom of the ancient church, and encourages lay communions. the last rubric only provides for the distribution of alms when there is an offertory, _i.e._ the reading of the offertory sentences. other collections are in the hands of the incumbent only. the ordinary is the bishop. the "declaration" is a protest against certain low and gross notions of a carnal presence, as taught in the roman church. the "_kneeling_" here, and the "_meekly kneeling_" in the rubric after the consecration prayer, exclude prostration, which is not kneeling. ( ) _the service_. as was said in the paragraph on the _history_ of the communion service, it is chiefly taken from the "sarum use." when there is no celebration, the service concludes with a collect and the benediction, said immediately after the prayer for the church militant; and this is called the ante-communion office. the lord's prayer is said by the priest alone, notwithstanding the general rubric to the contrary; that, and the collect following, being taken from an office which was repeated by the priest alone, in preparation for mass. the decalogue was inserted in (see _commandments_.) in the collects following, the mediaeval offices coupled the pope, king, and bishop of diocese together. it is an ancient custom to sit during the reading of the epistle, and to stand during the reading of the gospel, out of reverence for the repetition of the words or acts of christ. the doxology "glory be to thee, o lord" has, from a very early period, followed the announcement of the gospel; but the "thanks be to thee, o lord," afterwards, is a comparatively late custom. for the nicene creed, see _creed_. in the prayer book of , the banns of marriage were ordered to be published after the nicene creed. for the sermon see article _sermon_. the sentences following are called the "offertory sentences;" formerly a verse was sung before the oblation of the elements. the next prayer, called the _prayer for the church militant_, has, in some form or other, formed part of every known liturgy. it is divided into three main parts--( ) the oblation; ( ) commemoration of the living; ( ) commemoration of the faithful departed. the oblation is twofold, firstly of the alms which have been collected, and, secondly, of the elements, the bread and wine for holy communion. the exhortations, here and elsewhere in the prayer book, are sixteenth century compositions. the first is from hermann's "consultation" (which see); the close of this exhortation is important as shewing that in certain cases the reformers allowed auricular confession. the parts of this service following the exhortations are respectively called the invitation, confession, absolution, and the "comfortable words," and are very characteristic of the anglican liturgy. after the "comfortable words" begins the most solemn part of the office, anciently called the canon. the versicles, called, after the latin for the first, the "sarsum corda," are found in all liturgies; and the "holy, holy, holy,"--the ter-sanctus,--is probably from apostolic times. the "proper prefaces" are five out of the ten found in english and roman missals; the first is an old form, re-modelled in ; the second remains as it was in ; the third dates from ; the fourth seems to be a new composition in ; the fifth, like the second, dates from . next follows a very beautiful prayer, called the "prayer of humble access," which is peculiar to the anglican liturgy. after this comes the "prayer of consecration." the recital of the words and actions used by our blessed lord at the institution of this holy feast has always formed an essential feature in every liturgy. the form of words to be used at the reception has varied. originally, the words used were, "the body of christ," "the blood of christ." of the form in use now, the first clause only was ordered in , the second only in , and both were combined in . the lord's prayer, following, formerly was part of the consecration prayer; and the next prayer, called the "oblation," was the conclusion of the consecration prayer in . after the alternate prayer, composed in , comes the ancient hymn known as the "gloria in excelsis," or "angelic hymn," or the "great doxology." it is of eastern origin, and in the time of athanasius was said, together with certain psalms, at dawn. the "benediction" is a scriptural composition of the reformed church, the latter part being from hermann's consultation. of the collects concluding the service, the first, second, and fourth are from ancient offices, the others being composed in . ( ) _views_, _or doctrine_. in nothing does the belief of men so differ as in this matter of holy communion. there may be said to be three views existing among members of the church of england relative to that which all allow to be the greatest ordinance of religion. this difference of belief in this matter is the real foundation of party spirit in the church. (_a_) the _symbolic_: viz., that consecration simply implies a setting apart for a holy use of certain elements by a minister authorised to do so; that the bread and wine thus set apart are symbols of christ's body, which was broken, and of his blood, which was shed; and that the participation of them is, on the one hand, a sign of the fellowship of love binding all true hearts together; and, on the other, a sign of the nourishment and growth of the soul, as fed by christ himself. this is the doctrine of zuinglius, the swiss reformer. it is adverse to the doctrine of the whole primitive church, which, says bishop h. browne, "unquestionably believed in a _presence_ of christ in the eucharist." (art. xxviii. sec. i.) (_b_) the _receptionist_; viz., that after consecration the elements become in such a sense changed that they become the channels through which the body and blood of christ are subsequently conveyed to those who receive them with certain dispositions of mind. the presence of christ in the elements is potential, not actual; that is, the elements have the power of conveying the presence of christ to only a properly qualified receiver. (_c_) the _objective_; viz., that after the consecration the elements receive not potentially, but actually, the present body and blood of christ, and that therefore, the presence does not depend, as in the view above, upon faithful participation, but upon the act of consecration. more briefly, the holy communion is considered as ( ) a memorial feast of love; ( ) the actual presence of christ in the heart of the faithful recipient; this might also be called the subjective view of the real presence; and ( ) the real presence of christ in the consecrated elements themselves, or the objective view. there is also the _sacrificial_ view of the eucharist, which is held, in a greater or less degree, by all schools of thought. sadler, in "church doctrine,--bible truth," thus states what he believes to be the church of england view--"the eucharist is the solemn ecclesiastical memorial of the sacrifice of the death of christ. it is the saviour's own ordained means of showing forth before god, men, and angels. his love in his death. just as the old law sacrifices were anticipatory showings forth of the one atoning death which was to be, so this communion is a memorial, or commemorative showing forth, of the one atoning death which has been." communion of the sick. this office differs from the ordinary communion service in its introduction, a special collect, epistle, and gospel being appointed. after this is concluded, the priest continues with the ordinary office, beginning "ye that do truly," &c. up to it was allowed to carry the consecrated elements from the church to the sick person; and even later than this we find the rubric allowing of reservation inserted at large in queen elizabeth's latin prayer book. this prayer book was drawn up for the use of the universities and the colleges of winchester and eton. the third rubric in the service is for the prevention of infection. the direction in the fourth rubric with regard to what is called "spiritual communion" is from the ancient office of extreme unction. the last rubric does not allow mere infection to be a sufficient excuse for a clergyman's not giving holy communion. communion of saints. an article of our faith. the faithful have ( ) an external fellowship, or communion, in the word and sacraments; ( ) an intimate union as the living members of christ. nor is this communion, or fellowship, broken by the death of any, for in christ all are knit together in one uninterrupted bond. comtism, or positivism. a philosophy taught by one auguste comte, a frenchman, who was born in , and died . he denied the deity, and introduced the worship of humanity. in his religion, which must not be confounded with his philosophy, there are many festivals, a calendar of saints, nine sacraments, and a caricature of the holy trinity. his _philosophical_ system is based on altruism, a word meaning much the same as the biblical command, "thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself." this philosophy has many adherents. conception, the immaculate, of the blessed virgin mary. a doctrine of the roman church, invented about the middle of the ninth century. it teaches that the blessed virgin herself was conceived and born without sin. although this dates from so far back, yet it was not imposed by the church of rome upon her members as a definite article of faith until the year a.d. . confession. the verbal admission of sin. the prayer book provides three forms of public confession--one in morning prayer, one in the communion service, and one in the commination service. besides this the church of england allows private confession to a priest in exceptional cases, as in the latter part of the first exhortation in the communion service, and in the rubric immediately preceding the absolution in the office for the visitation of the sick. private, or _auricular_, confession forms a prominent feature in the church of rome, and it is that which gives to the roman priest his great authority over his flock. the practice is, to some extent, founded upon s. james v. , which, however, is not necessarily to be understood as speaking of confession to a priest. confirmation, rite of. the practice of confirming those who have been baptized is spoken of in acts viii. - ; xix. - . in the early church it was administered by bishops alone, and followed as immediately as possible after baptism. such is the custom of the greek church at the present day, but there the office is not restricted to bishops, as in the western church, confirmation being administered with chrism, an unguent consecrated by a bishop. in the western church the rite became gradually dissociated from baptism, although it has never lost its primary signification as a _confirming_, or strengthening, by the holy ghost of those who have been baptized. it is now administered, as the rubric directs, to those who have arrived at "years of discretion," that is to say, to those who are old enough to understand the leading doctrines of the christian faith. the age at which bishops of the anglican church will confirm children varies a little in the different dioceses, but or is the general age. the rite of confirmation forms one of the seven sacraments of the churches of greece and rome. the preface to the service, inserted in , is, in substance, the rubric of . the vow, at all times implied, was not explicitly inserted until . the versicles and prayer are from ancient offices. the form of words accompanying the imposition of hands dates from . the lord's prayer was inserted in , and the collect following was composed in . the second collect is from the communion office. the concluding rubric, although making it a point of church order that people should be confirmed before coming to holy communion, allows that in certain cases the privilege conferred by the rite may be anticipated. confirmation of a bishop. when a bishop dies, or is translated, the sovereign grants a license, called a _conge d'elire_, to the dean and chapter of the vacant see to elect the person, whom by his letters missive he has appointed. the dean and chapter, having made their election, certify it to the sovereign, and to the archbishop of the province, and to the bishop elected; then the sovereign gives his royal assent under the great seal, directed to the archbishop, commanding him to _confirm_ and consecrate the bishop thus elected. the archbishop subscribes this "_fiat confirmatio_." after this, a long and formal process is gone through, and at length the bishop elect takes the oaths of office, and the election is ratified and decreed to be good. the matter is in no way of a spiritual nature. congregation. in an ordinary sense, an assemblage of people for public worship. in the bible our translators consider _congregation_ and _church_ convertible terms. psalm xxii. ; heb. ii. . congregationalists. the newer name of the _independents_. (which see.) congruity. a term used in the th art. the "school authors" mentioned are the theologians of the middle ages as compared with the "fathers" of the early times. bishop harold browne says, "the school-authors thought that some degree of goodness was attributable to unassisted efforts on the part of man towards the attainment of holiness: and, though they did not hold, that such efforts did, of their own merit, deserve grace, yet they taught that in some degree they were such as to call down the grace of god upon them, it being not indeed obligatory on the justice of god to reward such efforts by giving his grace, but it being agreeable to his nature and goodness to bestow grace on those who make such efforts." (art. x.) these endeavours on the part of man to attain to godliness were by the schoolmen said to deserve grace _de congnio_, _of congruity_. consanguinity, _see_ kindred. consecration of bishops, _see_ ordinal. consecration of churches, church yards, and cemeteries. a christian custom dating, at latest, from the th century. nor does the law of england recognise any place as a church until it has been consecrated by a bishop. nothing more, however, is implied, than that the building or place consecrated is set apart for holy uses. consecration of elements, _see_ communion, holy. consubstantiation. a doctrine of the lutheran church with regard to the real presence in holy communion. "it differs from transubstantiation, in that it does not imply a change in the substance of the elements. those who hold this doctrine, teach that the bread remains bread, and the wine remains wine; but that with, and by means of the consecrated elements, the true, natural body and blood of christ are communicated to the recipients." (bp. harold browne.) consultation, hermann's. a book frequently referred to in the articles on the different parts of the prayer book. hermann was archbishop of cologne at the time of the reformation, and adopted protestantism. he employed melanchthon and bucer, two celebrated reformers, to draw up a book of formularies, doctrine, and the like, which was called the _consultation_. much of our prayer book is derived from it. contrition, _see_ repentance. conversion. literally, _turning round_. by this is generally meant a sudden and sensible action of the blessed spirit upon a newly-awakened sinner. a certain party in the church, and nearly all dissenting bodies, declare the absolute necessity of _conversion_ before a person can be saved. this view is based upon a mistaken interpretation of our lord's intercourse with nicodemus, s. john iii., and confuses _conversion_ with _regeneration_ (which see). to the heathen, and infidel, _conversion_--a change of heart and life--is absolutely and always necessary to salvation; but the baptized christian may, by god's grace, so continue in that state of salvation (see _church catechism_) in which he was placed in baptism, that _conversion_, in the above sense, is not necessary to him; but inasmuch as all fall into sin day by day, he will need _renewal_, or _renovation_--the quiet and continuous work of the holy spirit upon his heart. there is not a single reference to sudden conversion in any of the formularies of the church of england. convocation. an assembly of bishops and clergy to consult on matters ecclesiastical. each province (canterbury and york) has its own convocation, consisting of two houses--an upper, in which the bishops of the province sit, and a lower, in which the deans, archdeacons, and chosen members of the clergy sit. these chosen clergy are called proctors, and are elected by the votes of the beneficed clergy. it was, and is, the custom of convocation to sit at the same time as parliament; but in the sixteenth century a great deal of the power and authority of convocation was lost, and it became no longer able to legislate for the church without the consent of parliament. cope, _see_ vestment. coronation. the solemn religious rite by which a sovereign prince is consecrated to his high office. the coronation service is substantially the same as that used in the times of the heptarchy, and is very valuable as recording certain high religious and political principles prevailing in those early times, and still to be cherished. corporal, _see_ altar linen. councils. general or oecumenical councils, or synods. assemblies of bishops from all parts of the world, to determine some weighty matter of faith or discipline. of such councils there have been six received by the whole catholic church, but the roman church acknowledges several others. of these six councils the first four are the most important:--( ) council of nice, a.d. , summoned by the emperor constantine, against the arian heresy. ( ) council of constantinople, a.d. , summoned by the emperor theodosius, against the heresy of macedonius. ( ) council of ephesus, a.d. , summoned by the emperor theodosius the younger, against the nestorian heresy. ( ) council of chalcedon, a.d. , summoned by the emperor marcianus, against the heresy of the eutychians. the other two generally received councils are the second and third councils of constantinople. (see _oecumenical_.) besides these _general_ councils, there are national, provincial, and diocesan councils, covenant. a mutual agreement between two or more parties. in the bible, god is spoken of as entering into covenant with man, as in gen. xv. - ; xxviii. - ; and elsewhere. in an historical sense it denotes a contract or convention agreed to by the scots in for maintaining the presbyterian religion free from innovation. this was called the national covenant. the "solemn league and covenant," a modification of the above, guaranteed the preservation of the scottish reformed church, and was adopted by parliament in . credence table. a table or shelf near the altar, on which the bread and wine to be used in holy communion are placed previously to consecration. the word seems to be derived from the italian _credenzare_, a buffet, or sideboard, at which meats were tasted in early times before being presented to the guests, as a precaution against poison. it is used for the more convenient observance of the rubric following the offertory sentences, "and when there is a communion, the priest shall _then_ place upon the table so much bread and wine as he shall think sufficient." creed. there are three creeds recognised in the catholic church--the _apostles' creed_, the _nicene creed_, and the _athanasian creed_. the name _creed_ is derived from the latin _credo_, "i believe." the _apostles' creed_, rehearsed in the morning and evening service of our church, is the most ancient of all creeds, and can be traced back, with few variations, almost to apostolic times; some indeed allege that it, in its earliest form, is referred to in rom. vi. , and tim. i. . it is in no way controversial, but is a simple and plain statement of the fundamental truths of christianity, and being such, a profession of faith in it is demanded of all candidates for baptism. the _nicene creed_, which has a place in the communion service, is so called from its being drawn up at the council of nicaea (a.d. ). a more distinct enunciation of belief was made necessary by the growth of the arian and other heresies which denied the godhead of our lord jesus christ. the latter portion, from "i believe in the holy ghost," was added later, viz., at the council of constantinople, a.d. . other heresies led to the introduction of the "_filioque clause_"--"who proceedeth from the father _and the son_"--at a still later date. this is one cause of the great schism between the eastern and western churches. the _athanasian creed_, recited on certain festivals instead of the apostles' creed, is not so ancient as the other two, nor does it rest on the same authority. it is not known for certain by whom it was composed, but at any rate it was not by athanasius. it has been regularly used in the western church since the year , and is regarded as a most valuable exposition of scriptural truth. so much objection is taken to the "damnatory clauses," as they are called, that it may be well to quote the declaration of the convocation of canterbury ( ):--"for the removal of doubts, and to prevent disquietude in the use of the creed, commonly called the creed of st. athanasius, it is hereby solemnly declared-- "(i.) that the confession of our christian faith, commonly called the creed of st. athanasius, doth not make any addition to the faith as contained in holy scripture, but warneth against errors, which from time to time have arisen in the church of christ. "(ii.) that as holy scripture in divers places doth promise life to them that believe, and declares the condemnation of them that believe not, so doth the church in this confession declare the necessity for all who would be in a state of salvation, of holding fast the catholic faith, and the great peril of rejecting the same. wherefore the warnings in this confession of faith are not to be understood otherwise than like warnings of holy scripture; for we must receive god's threatenings, even as his promises, in such wise as they are generally set forth in holy writ. moreover, the church doth not herein pronounce judgment on any particular person or persons, god alone being the judge of all." crosier. in skeat's etymological dictionary _crosier_ is derived from _crook_; thus a pastoral staff terminating in a crook. the use of a pastoral staff is ordered in the prayer book of the second year of edward vi. the pastoral staff of an archbishop is distinguished from the pastoral staff of a bishop by terminating in a cross instead of in a crook. cross. the instrument of death to our blessed lord, and as such it has been considered in all ages by the church as the most appropriate emblem, or symbol, of our christian profession. the sign of the cross was formerly used in nearly every part of the church service, but owing to the superstitious use of it by roman catholics it is retained in our church in the baptismal office only. crucifix. a cross upon which is a representation of our lord's body. it is used by the romanists, and the lutheran protestants, as an aid to devotion. in the church of england we sometimes find it in reredoses and stained glass. crypt. the subterranean vault under any portion of a church. possibly used as an additional place of worship; and, also, sometimes of burial, and of concealment. cup, _see_ altar vessels. curate. properly the person who has the _cure_, or care, of souls in a parish. in this way the word, is used in the prayer book. but the word, in common parlance, is used to denote the _assistant_ clergyman in a parish. he is licensed by the bishop of the diocese, and can be removed only by consent of the bishop after six months' notice. he can, however, resign, after giving the incumbent three months' notice. for particulars with regard to ordination see _orders_. cure. the spiritual charge of a parish, or, in another sense, the parish itself. daily prayers. every priest and deacon is bound to say publicly in church, if a congregation of two or three can be obtained; or privately, unless hindered by some good cause, the office for morning and evening prayer. this is directed in the preface of the book of common prayer. dalmatic, _see_ vestments. damnatory clauses, _see_ creed. deacon, _see_ orders. dead, _see_ burial service. deadly sin, _see_ sin. dean. an ecclesiastic next in degree to a bishop. he is the head of a corporate body called a chapter, attached to a cathedral, and has the direction of the cathedral services. deans of peculiars have no chapters. the _dean_ of a college at oxford or cambridge is the officer appointed to maintain discipline.* the _dean_ of _faculty_ presides over meetings of the particular faculty of which he is dean. it is an office in most ancient, and some modern universities. * _the dean of christ church, oxford, is the head both of the cathedral, and the college_. dean, rural, _see_ rural dean. dean and chapter. the governing body of a cathedral. decalogue, _see_ commandments. decoration of churches. it is right and fitting that churches should be made as beautiful as possible for the worship of almighty god, for so god himself directed the tabernacle to be made. the custom of especially decorating them with evergreens, flowers, &c., at the chief festivals of the church is a very ancient one. degrees. a rank or grade conferred by a university on her members. after three years' residence at oxford or cambridge, and after the passing of certain examinations, a degree is conferred on the student in accordance with the subjects in which he has passed. if, as is the general rule, he has studied and passed in arts,--classics, mathematics, and the like--the student is made a b.a., or bachelor in arts, and in about three years--not necessarily of residence--he is able to proceed to the higher degree of m. a., or master in arts, without further examination. other degrees are in the faculties of divinity, laws, medicine, and music; for the last it is not necessary to reside. the highest degree conferred by a university in any faculty is that of doctor. a bachelor of oxford wears a small black hood _trimmed_ with white fur; a bachelor of cambridge has a larger hood _lined_ with white fur. an oxford master wears a hood of black silk lined with _red_ silk, but the cambridge master's hood is of black silk lined with _white_ silk. the difference in shape can easily be seen by comparison. a dublin master's hood is lined with _blue_ silk. other universities have other colours; and many theological colleges, which have no power to confer degrees, have arrogated to themselves hoods with various linings, which bear a close resemblance to some of the hoods worn by graduates. deists. a _deist_ acknowledges the existence of a god, but denies the existence and necessity of any revelation. denominations. there appear to be about denominations having places of meeting for religious worship in england and wales. among these there are-- "armies," besides the salvation army. baptist sects. methodist sects. desk. the name usually given to the "reading-pew," mentioned in the rubric before the commination service, where morning and evening prayers are said or sung. in it was directed that the service should be said "in the quire" and "with a loud voice." this was done by the priest near to, and facing, the altar. in the service was directed to be said from such a place as the people could best hear. this direction caused a great commotion, one party retaining their old position in the chancel, the other performing all services in the body of the church. in the rubric before the order for morning prayer was brought into its present shape, and the "accustomed place" would undoubtedly be the chancel, but still the discretion left with the "ordinary" sanctioned the use of the unsightly "reading-pew" or _desk_, which is occasionally found outside the chancel and in the body of the church. deus misereatur. psalm lxvii., inserted in the evening service for occasional use instead of the nunc dimittis in . dignitary. one who holds cathedral or other preferment to which jurisdiction is annexed. "one who holds an ecclesiastical rank above a priest or canon." (chambers' etymological dictionary.) dimissory letters. when a candidate for holy orders is ordained by some bishop other than the one in whose diocese he is going to work, it is because the ordaining bishop has received leave, or _letters dimissory_, from the candidate's rightful diocesan. diocese. the extent of a bishop's rule. england at present is divided into dioceses; being in the province of canterbury, and in the province of york. it is to be very earnestly wished that these dioceses may be sub-divided, and the number of bishops increased, that the church may be more able to cope with the enormously increased population. dissenters. a _civil_, not a _religious_ term, and denotes those who have diverged from the civilly established religion of a country. episcopalians are dissenters in scotland, christians are dissenters in turkey. in england all are dissenters who do not belong to the church of england, whether they are protestants or papists. for further particulars see under their various names. donative. a form of conferring an ecclesiastical benefice on any clerk, by which he is exempt from presentation, induction, or institution; the patron acting virtually as a bishop. this is said to be the usual manner in which benefices were anciently conferred. doxology. an ascription of praise to god. the most familiar doxologies in use in our church are the "gloria patri," the "gloria in excelsis," and the well-known verse, "praise god from whom all blessings flow," &c. many of our prayers, especially those of thanksgiving, conclude with a doxology. east, turning to the. this is now generally done at the creeds. it is a survival of a general custom of worship towards the east--as the region of light, symbolical of the rising of the "sun of righteousness"--which is at least as old as the time of tertullian, who lived in the second century. eastward position. a term descriptive of the position used by a priest who adopts the custom of celebrating holy communion facing the east, with his back to the people. there is a very great difficulty in ascertaining what the rubrics with relation to the priest's position really mean, because the altar itself occupied various positions at the time the rules were framed. ( .) _position of altar_. "the table. . . .shall stand in the body of the church, or in the chancel," is the rubric of . "the holy table shall be set in the place where the altar stood. . . .saving when the communion of the sacrament is to be distributed, at which time the same shall be so placed in good sort (conveniently) within the chancel," is the direction in the injunctions of . by degrees, however, the custom of moving the holy table at the time of communion, and placing it length-ways in the church ceased, and it was allowed to remain at all times placed "altar-wise" at the east end of the church. ( .) _position of the priest_. in the rubric of the direction was for him "to stand humbly afore the midst of the altar," of course with his back to the people. in the present rubric, directing the "north-side," was introduced, but owing to the altar's standing east and west then, the position of the priest remained virtually the same as before. but when, through laud's influence, the holy table was removed back to its original position, the question was whether the priest was still to obey the letter of the rubric and stand at the "north-side," or rather what was now the "north end," or whether he too was to retain his old relative and original position. the matter has been further complicated by the insertion of the rubric before the consecration prayer in , which seems to favour the eastward position in directing the priest to "stand before the table," while, on the other hand, that very position renders it difficult to "break the bread before the people," unless, as some maintain, the "before" does not mean "in the sight of," but "in front of." easter. the great festival of the church's year, and kept in commemoration of our saviour's glorious resurrection. it has always been observed by the church, but in early ages there were bitter disputes as to the season when it was to be kept. some wished it to be observed on the actual anniversary, whether the day happened to be a sunday or not. the matter was settled at the council of nice, when it was decided that easter should be kept on the first sunday following the full moon which falls on, or next after, march st. the word _easter_ is probably derived from the name of a saxon goddess, whose festival was kept in the spring of the year. the other name, paschal, applied to this festival, is a hebrew word meaning "passage," and is applied to the jewish feast of the passover, to which the christian festival of easter corresponds. easter used to be the great day for baptism, for the restoring of penitents, and, in the early ages, even for the freeing of prisoners. every confirmed member of the church of england is expected to communicate on easter day, in accordance with the direction at the end of the communion service. easter anthems. certain passages, chosen from cor. v., rom. vi., cor. xv., directed to be sung instead of the _venite_ on easter day. ecclesiastical commissioners. "in the year the ecclesiastical commissioners were embodied. they are not, as many suppose, the dispensers of state funds to the church. they are a corporation for the purpose of holding as trustees a large amount of church revenues. the sources from which the income in their hands arises are certain annual payments from several bishoprics, emoluments of suspended canonries, the property of suspended deaneries and sinecure rectories, capitular estates, and other ecclesiastical sources." (webb's "england's inheritance in her church.") "the ecclesiastical commission does with the lands of bishops and chapters what these could never do for themselves. it can afford to wait for the falling in of leases, whereas those old corporations were obliged to renew them, that they might live on the money paid for renewals; and when it has got the lands it lets them for their full value. by this means it is able to pay the old corporations out of half their lands as much as they used to get from the whole under their own system, and the other moiety is taken out of the hands of laymen (regard being had to equity) and devoted to other beneficial purposes for the church. in this way the surplus revenues of capitular estates have been applied to the benefit of an immense number of parishes which had claims upon them." (dixon's "peek essay.") ecclesiastical courts. the following are the principal: the consistory courts of the bishops; the arches court of canterbury; and the supreme court of appeal, composed of members of the judicial committee of the privy council. under the public worship act the dean of the arches court has been made official principal of both provinces. a royal commission has recently issued a report upon the ecclesiastical courts, and the question of their constitution generally is under consideration. election. a choosing, hence the "chosen people" of god. there are three views taken of election,--the calvinistic, the arminian, and the catholic. the calvinistic view is that certain persons are from all eternity chosen or elected by god to salvation, the rest of mankind being condemned to eternal death (see _predestination_, _calvinism_, _antinomianism_.) the arminian view is that god, knowing what the life of every man born into the world shall be, and foreseeing that some "will refuse the evil and choose the good," hath elected them to eternal life. (see _arminianism_.) the catholic view is that god of his mercy elects certain of his creatures for a place in the visible church, and thus causes them to be placed in "a state of salvation," of which, however, they may fall short by their own perverseness. the church of england, as a branch of the great church catholic, is believed to teach this latter view, as will be seen by a study of her liturgy. elements. the bread and wine used in holy communion (see _communion, holy_). in holy baptism, water, wherein the person is baptized, is the _element_. elevation. in articles xxv. and xxviii. reference is made to a ceremony of the church of rome, called the elevation of the host, which consists in the consecrated wafer being held up, or elevated, for the adoration of the people. bp. harold browne says, "elevating the host resulted from a belief in transubstantiation. . . .there is evidently no scriptural authority for the elevation of the host, the command being, 'take, eat.' the roman ritualists themselves admit that there is no trace of its existence before the th or th centuries." (see _note on art_. xxviii.) ember days. in early times special fasts were appointed at the four seasons of the year, and of later years they have been made to have a special reference to the ordination of clergy which immediately follows them. the derivation of the name is uncertain. the days thus set apart, and now used for supplicating god's blessing on those about to be ordained, are the wednesday, friday, and saturday after the st sunday in lent, after whit sunday, after the th of september, and after the th of december. special collects are appointed for use on these days. emmanuel, or immanuel. a hebrew word, used as a name of our lord, and meaning, "god with us," isaiah vii. ; matt. i. . endowment. the permanent provision for the support of the ministry. the annual sum derived from the endowments of the established church amounts to rather more than _four millions sterling_. of this sum--tithes and rents voluntarily given to the church of england by charitable persons before the reformation bring in about l , , ; tithes, rents, and interest on money voluntarily given to the church of england since the reformation bring in about l , , . thus the total of the yearly value of endowments is about l , , . of this the state receives as taxes about l , , which leaves a net yearly value of endowments of about; l , , , which is paid to the clergy, of whom there are about , . it is thus divided: archbishops, bishops, archdeacons, receive about l , ; deans, canons, minor canons, singers, lay officers and servants, receive about l , ; , other clergy, rectors, vicars, and curates receive about l , , . the average, therefore, is just l , s. a week for each clergyman. to supplement its endowments, which were voluntarily given by private persons, the church receives, by free gifts from her own members, about five millions and a half sterling every year. this money is _all_ spent on schools, church institutions, charities, relief of the poor, foreign missions, expenses attendant upon the regular performance of divine worship, and building and restoring churches (see _establishment_.) epiphany. a greek word, meaning "manifestation." the term applied to that festival of the church observed on jan. th, in commemoration of our lord's _manifestation_ to the wise men from the east, the representatives of the gentile world. episcopacy. the term applied to the apostolical form of government, which consisted in the appointment of a bishop as an _overseer_ (for that is the meaning of the greek word) of a particular church. (see _orders_.) epistle. the name given to the _letters_ of the apostles, which the church has admitted as forming part of the canon of the new testament (see _bible_). st. paul wrote fourteen, if we allow the epistle to the hebrews to have been written by him. st. james wrote one, which, like others addressed to no particular church, is called a _general_ epistle. st. peter wrote two epistles; st. john, three; and st. jude, one. those portions of scripture read in the communion service, and called epistles, have been used, with few alterations, for years by the church of england. epistoler. the th canon directs that "in all cathedral and collegiate churches the holy communion shall be administered, . . . the principal minister using a decent cope, and being assisted with the gospeller and epistoler." so, in the advertisements published in the seventh year of elizabeth, we read, "the principal minister shall use a cope with gospeller and epistoler agreeably." erastianism. the heresy of erastus, a german, born . his main principle was that the source of all pastoral authority is the civil magistrate, who, whether christian or not, possesses an inherent right to nominate and commission teachers of religion, and is under no necessity of admitting the least difference between priests and laymen. eschatology. a term applied to doctrines relative to the state after death. establishment and endowment. these two terms are constantly linked together in the publications of the liberation society, and by other enemies of the church of england, as though they formed one and the same thing. in truth, they are wholly distinct, and are descriptive of two quite different features of the church of england. it is _established_, and it is also _endowed_. it is called the former because it is established in this country by the law of the land, and professes the acknowledged religion of the state. if the church were disestablished to-morrow she would still continue to be the true church of god in this country, because her origin, doctrine, and constitution are apostolic. besides being called a "state church," the church of england has also been called a "state _paid_ church." it is well to remember that the parochial clergy, and all others except army and navy chaplains and the like, do not receive one farthing from the state. the property, or _endowment_, of the church was the voluntary gift of private individuals in all ages, who, out of regard to the spiritual interests of those who lived upon their estates, built churches, and endowed them for the maintenance of religious worship. the state has no right to alienate any portion whatever of that property from the purpose for which it was given. (see _church of england_ and _endowment_.) eucharist. a term applied to the holy communion (which see), derived from the greek, and meaning, "a giving of thanks." it is used in the latin version of our articles. evangelicals, _see_ church parties. evangelists. properly, preachers of the "evangel," or gospel, of christ; eph. iv. . the term now is limited to the four writers of the gospel. eves, or vigils. the nights or evenings before certain holy days of the church. a list of days which have vigils may be found in the beginning of the prayer book, in the table of the vigils, fasts, and days of abstinence, to be observed in the year. (see _vigil_.) even-song. evening prayer. the word occurs in the table of proper lessons at the commencement of the prayer book. (see _morning prayer_.) evolution. a name given to the theory of the origin of animal life, set forth by certain scientists. thus they tell us that the account given us in genesis of the creation is certainly wrong. that man was not created as man, but that he has grown to be what he is through a series of stages. according to professor haeckel, the pedigree of man is as follows:-- . _monera_--formless little lumps of mucus matter supposed to be originated by spontaneous generation. . _amoebae_--a little piece of protoplasm enclosing a kernel. . _synamoebae_--a collection of amoebae. . _planaeada_. . _gastraeada_, or primaeval "stomach animals." . _turbellaria_, or worms of a very simple kind. . _scolecida_, worms of a higher class. . _himatega_, or worms of a higher class still. . _acrania_, or skull-less animals. . _monorrhina_, or animals with one nostril. . _selachii_, or primaeval fish. . _dipneusta_, or mud-fish. . _sozobranchia_, or gilled amphibians. . _sozura_, or tailed amphibians. . _protamnia_. . _primary mammals_. . _pouched animals_. . _prosimiae_, or semi-apes. . _tailed apes_. . _man-like apes_. . _ape-like men_. . _men_. this may be all true, and yet genesis need not be false. genesis begins with man as man, and not with man as a monera--supposing he ever was such. but when scientists speak of the principle of life as being the outcome of an act of spontaneous generation without any external creative power, then we must disagree with them. the principle of life is hidden with god alone, and must come from god. nor does it in any way affect our belief in almighty god, whether he was pleased to create man from the first in "his own image," or whether he was pleased to make him first pass through the preliminary stages professor haeckel enumerates! excommunication. an ecclesiastical censure, whereby the person against whom it is pronounced is for the time cast out of the communion of the church. the first rubric in the office for the burial of the dead prohibits the use of the service for any that die excommunicate. exhortation. the name given to the various addresses in the liturgy. they are nearly all the production of the reformers. the burial office is the only service of the prayer book which has not one or more of these exhortations. extreme unction. one of the seven so-called sacraments of the church of rome. it consists in the application of consecrated olive oil, by a priest, to the five organs of sense of a dying person. it is considered as conveying god's pardon and support in the last hour. it is administered when all hope of recovery is gone, and generally no food is permitted to be taken after it. this custom is founded on mark vi. , and james v. , , but in both these places it is evident that the anointing should be for the _recovery_ of the sick. when miraculous powers ceased in the church, it was reasonable that the unction should cease also. faculty. an order by the bishop of a diocese to award some privilege not permitted by common law. a faculty is necessary in order to effect any important alterations in a church, such as the erection of a gallery or an organ. without a faculty a person is not entitled to erect a monument within the walls of a church. faith. man is justified by god in respect of, and by means of, faith in christ. it is not the principal cause for our justification, that being god's mercy; it is not the meritorious cause of our justification, for that is christ's death; audit is not the efficient cause of our justification, for that is the operation of the holy spirit; but it is the _instrument_ on our _side_, by which we rely on god's word, and appeal to him for mercy, and receive a grant of pardon, and a title to the evangelical promises of god. fald stool. the desk at which the litany is usually said. in the rubric before the penitential psalm in the commination service a special place is mentioned for the saying of the litany, and this we know from the injunctions of was to be "in the midst of the church," thus marking the congregational character of the service. fall of man, _see_ sin, original. fasting. the romanist regards the use of fasting, or abstinence, as a means of grace; the protestant regards it only as a useful exercise, recommended in scripture, for the subduing of the flesh to the spirit. fasts. days appointed by the church for the particular discipline of the flesh, and for a peculiar sorrow for sin. a list of these days is given at the commencement of the prayer book. father, god the, _see_ trinity, the holy. fathers, the. a term applied generally to all the ancient orthodox christian writers. st. bernard, who flourished in the twelfth century, is reputed to be the last of the fathers. the _schoolmen_ (which see) succeeded the fathers. those writers who knew the apostles personally are called _apostolical_ fathers; such were hermas, barnabas, clement of rome, ignatius and polycarp. other fathers of the early church were justin, irenaeus, clement of alexandria, and tertullian. in the third century we have origen and cyprian, and succeeding them eusebius, athanasius, ambrose, basil, jerome or hieronymus, john chrysostom, and augustine. the writings of the fathers are most valuable to us as showing us what were the doctrines and ceremonies of the first christians. the tractarian movement was of great service in calling attention to the well-nigh forgotten mine of theological wealth stored up in these writers. pusey has published a library of the works of the fathers in english. feasts, or festivals. these are days of rejoicing in the church, in commemoration of some great truth of christianity, or of some great example of holy life. the commencement of the prayer book furnishes us with a list of these holy days. the rubric, after the nicene creed, directs that "the curate shall then declare to the people what holy days, or fasting days are in the week following to be observed." fellowship. a settled income bestowed by a college on a student as a reward for distinguished scholarship. various conditions are associated with these prizes in the different colleges. feria. a day which is neither a feast nor a fast. flagon, _see_ altar vessels. font. from a latin word, meaning a _fountain_. the vessel holding the water for baptism. the st canon says it is to be made of stone. by ancient custom it is usually placed at the west end of the church, near the door, as signifying that holy baptism is the entrance into christ's mystical body, the church. formulary, see _liturgy_. a formulary is a book containing the rites, ceremonies, and prescribed forms of the church. the formulary of the church of england is the book of common prayer. free will. see article x. the doctrine of our church is that although man has a perfectly free will to choose good or evil, yet we prefer the animal life to the spiritual life, and, through the badness of our perverse will, shall continue to prefer it until prevented by the grace of god. funeral service, _see_ burial of the dead. ghost, the holy, _see_ trinity, the holy. glebe. land belonging to an ecclesiastical benefice, and which forms part of its endowment, the freehold being vested in the incumbent. gloria in excelsis. "glory be (to god) on high." a hymn in the communion office, sometimes called the angelic hymn, because the first part was sung by angels at bethlehem. it has been used by the church for more than , years, and, in substance, was sung by polycarp at his martyrdom. gloria patri. "glory be to the father." this is one of the oldest doxologies of the church; in substance, at least, it is as old as the th century. it is directed to be said at the end of every psalm, thus turning jewish praises into christian hymns. gnostics. early heretics who boasted of their superior _knowledge_, for that is the meaning of the word, just as _agnostic_ means _without knowledge_. this heresy dates back to apostolic days, simon magus being considered its founder. they mixed up the christian faith with systems based on platonism, oriental philosophy, or corrupt judaism. st. john is believed to have written against the gnostics in certain parts of his gospel. god, _see_ trinity, the holy. the word _god_ can be traced back no further as yet than the gothic _gutha_, but no one knows its root. god-father, _see_ sponsors. god-mother, _see_ sponsors. golden number. a term used in the elaborate tables placed at the beginning of the prayer book for the finding of easter. the golden number of a year marks its place in a cycle, called the metonic cycle (from meton, an athenian astronomer b.c. ), of nineteen years. the year a.d. was fixed as the second year of such a cycle. hence the rule given to find the golden number, viz., "add one to the year of our lord, and then divide by ; the remainder, if any, is the golden number; but if there be no remainder, then is the golden number." good friday. the day regarded as the anniversary of our saviour's death. it has been observed from the first age of the church as a day of peculiar solemnity, to be spent in fasting and humiliation. gospel, _see_ bible. gospeller. the priest or deacon who, in the communion service, reads the gospel, standing at the north side of the altar. (see _epistoler_.) grace. favour. a word used with various meanings in holy scripture. the influence of the holy spirit upon the heart of man. graduate, _see_ degree. one who has passed through the curriculum of a university, and has had a degree conferred on him. greek church, _see_ church, the catholic. gregorian music, _see_ church music. guild. in the church, a society formed for a certain purpose, and governed by certain rules; to promote personal piety; or active usefulness. hades. unfortunately two distinct words in the original of the new testament have both been translated _hell_. _hades_ is one of these words; _gehenna_ is the other. the latter is applied only to the place of the damned, _hades_ is the abode of departed spirits, good and bad, waiting for the final judgment. when, in the creed, we say of our lord that he "descended into hell," it should be "into _hades_," showing that alive and dead he was perfect man. it is generally believed that a foretaste of final joy or woe is experienced in hades by the spirits waiting for their doom. heaven. the final abode of the blessed. hell. the final abode of the damned. (see _hades_.) heresy. from a greek word meaning "a choice," and thus an adoption and obstinate holding of a doctrine not taught by the catholic church. heresies began very early in the church, even in apostolic times. (see _gnostic_.) the heresies of the present day are for the most part revivals of the heresies of the first six centuries. heretic. one who holds doctrines opposed to those of the catholic church. (see above.) heterodox. contrary to the faith of the true church. hierarchy. properly, _rule_ in _sacred_ matters. the apostolic order of ministry. high church, _see_ church parties. holy day. a festival of the church. (see _feast_.) holy ghost. _see_ trinity, the holy. holy thursday. _see_ ascension day. holy week. some consider the terms _holy week_ and _passion week_ equally to apply to the week preceding easter--the last week in lent. this is dr. hook's opinion. others restrict the term _holy week_ to the week commencing with palm-sunday, and call the week preceding that _passion week_. undoubtedly the fifth sunday in lent was commonly called in old times passion sunday, because of the anticipation of the passion in the epistle. homilies. the homilies of the church of england are two books of discourses, composed at the time of the reformation, and appointed to be read in churches, on "any sunday or holy day, when there is no sermon." cranmer, ridley, and latimer are thought to have composed the first volume; the second is supposed to be by bishop jewel, . hoods. the ornamental fold which hangs down the back of a graduate to mark his degree. (see _degree_.) the th canon provides that "every minister saying the public prayers, or ministering the sacraments, or other rites of the church, if they are graduates, shall wear upon their surplice, at such times, such _hoods_ as by the orders of the universities are agreeable to their degrees." the same canon goes on to say "it shall be lawful for such ministers as are not graduates to wear upon their surplices, instead of _hoods_, some decent tippet of black, so it be not silk." hymn, _see_ church music. idolatry. the worship of any person or thing but the one true god, whether it be in the form of an image or not. immersion, _see_ baptism, infant. imposition, or laying on of hands, _see_ ordinal. impropriation. ecclesiastical property, the profits of which are in the hands of a layman. impropriations have arisen from the confiscation of monasteries in the time of henry viii., when, instead of restoring the tithes to church purposes, they were given to court favourites. incarnation. the act whereby christ, the "word, was made flesh." the "taking of the manhood into god." incumbent. a person in possession of a benefice. (see _benefice_.) independents. the first body of dissenters which actually broke away from the church of england was that of the _independents_, or--as they are nowadays perhaps more intelligibly called--the _congregationalists_. an independent sect seems to have existed about the year , the whole question in dispute between them and the church being then, as it is still, essentially one of "discipline," or church polity. they made each congregation a body corporate, governed exclusively by itself, and disclaim, more or less, every form of union between churches. in doctrine they are strictly calvinistic, and, reviving the ancient heresy of donatus, they profess to receive only accredited or really serious christians into their fellowship, and to exclude any who may prove themselves unworthy members. the independents are sometimes called _brownists_, from robert brown, a clergyman of the church of england, who was the first to secede from her ranks, and who, retreating to holland, set up a separatist communion. there are county and other associations at home and in the colonies, with , meetinghouses, and , preaching stations, being foreign mission stations; of ministers and missionaries they have about , . they reckon to have about , members in the british dominions. induction. the ceremony whereby a minister is put in actual possession of the living to which he has been presented. infallibility. the claim set up by the church of rome, either for the pope, or the church, or for the pope and the church consenting together; of absolute freedom from error in deciding questions of faith and doctrine. roman divines are not agreed among themselves as to precisely _where_ the infallibility of their church is found. certain it is that councils and popes have contradicted and anathematized each other. innocents' day, the holy. this festival has been observed ever since the rd century, in memory of the slaughtered children of bethlehem (matt. ii. .) its old english name is childermas, and it is kept on december th; the attendants on the nativity being st. stephen, a martyr in will and deed, december th; st. john the divine, a martyr in will though not in deed, december th; and the holy innocents, martyrs in deed but not in will, december th. inspiration. the extraordinary and supernatural influence of the holy spirit on the human mind, by which the sacred writers were qualified to set forth the things of god. in this sense the word occurs in tim. iii. . (see _bible_.) the word is also used of the ordinary influence of the holy spirit on the heart of man, as "cleanse the thoughts of our hearts by the _inspiration_ of thy holy spirit." institution. the legal act by which the bishop commits to a clergyman the cure of a church. institutions, church, _see_ societies. introit, _see_ church music irvingites. the followers of edward irving, a minister of the scottish establishment, who was born in , and died in . he was deposed from the presbyterian ministry for teaching that our lord's nature was peccable, or capable of sin. he gathered a congregation round him in london, and now has many followers both in scotland and england, and also in germany. his followers entertain peculiar notions about the millennium, and they claim to exercise the power of prophecy, to have the miraculous gift of tongues, and to be able to raise the dead. the irvingites call themselves "the catholic and apostolic church," and among their ministers number apostles, prophets, angels, evangelists, &c. they use as much as possible the liturgies of the church in their worship, and observe a very ornate ritual. in their principal places of worship the holy communion is administered daily, and throughout the day many other services are held. they recognise the three creeds of the catholic church as their rule of faith. they have places for public worship, besides many preaching stations, in england; the principal erection is in gordon square, london, and is a large building of considerable architectural pretensions. james's (st.) day. july th. the day on which the church celebrates the memory of the apostle st. james the great, or the elder. he was one of the sons of zebedee, and a brother of st. john the divine. he was the first of the apostles to suffer martyrdom. (acts xii. .) jesuits, or society of jesus. a roman catholic society founded by ignatius loyola, a spaniard, born in . members of the order bind themselves to yield the most blind, implicit, and unlimited obedience to the general of the order. before the conclusion of the th century the jesuits had obtained the chief direction of the youthful mind in every roman catholic country in europe. they had become the confessors of almost all its monarchs, and the spiritual guides of nearly every person distinguished for rank or influence. at different periods they obtained the direction of the most considerable courts, and took part in every intrigue and revolution. their great principle of action is not so much the advance of christianity, as the extension of the papal power; and in effecting this, their great maxim is "the end will justify the means." the society is still flourishing, and has a power which is probably as little imagined as it is unknown to all but themselves. jesus, _see_ trinity, the holy. john (st.) baptist's day. june th. this feast commemorates, not the martyrdom, but the miraculous birth of st. john baptist. it is the only nativity, besides that of our lord, that is kept by the church; although september th is marked in our calendar for the commemoration of the nativity of the blessed virgin mary. the festival has been observed since the th or th century. john (st.) the evangelist's day. december th. this festival, with those of st. stephen and the holy innocents, immediately follows on christmas day. "martyrdom, love, and innocence are first to be magnified, as wherein christ is most honoured." the eagle is supposed to be emblematic of st. john the evangelist. jubilate deo. psalm c, appointed to be sung in the morning service instead of the benedictus, when the latter happens to be read in the gospel for st. john baptist, or the lesson for the day. justification. this term signifies our being accounted just or righteous in the sight of god, not for any merit in ourselves, but solely for the sake of christ, and by our faith in him. the th article of the church of england treats of this. all believers are justified by christ, but that does not necessarily imply that they are sanctified; the one is a work wrought exterior to ourselves, the other is the work of the holy spirit in the individual heart of man. keys, power of the. the authority existing in the christian priesthood of administering the discipline of the church, and communicating or withholding its privileges. it is so called from our lord's words to st. peter in matt. xvi. . kindred, table of. the table of kindred and affinity found at the end of our prayer book was drawn up by archbishop parker, in . it rests on an act of henry viii., and is designed to be an authoritative interpretation of it. the whole is based on lev. xviii. - . the principles on which it is drawn up are the following:-- (_a_) it places both sexes on the same footing, forbidding to the man whatever is forbidden to the woman. (_b_) it forbids marriage to a man on the grounds of near kindred or consanguinity; omitting, however, prohibition of marriage between cousins as not being forbidden in the levitical law, nor definitely by the canon law. (_c_) acting on the important principle sanctioned by our lord himself, that "man and wife are one flesh," it puts affinity, or connection by marriage, on exactly the same footing as kindred, or connection by blood, affirming that a man's wife's connections are to be held strictly as his own. it is for this reason,--a reason distinctly based upon holy scripture,--that the marriage with a "deceased wife's sister" is forbidden. kneeling. the practice of kneeling in confession, in prayer, and in adoration, is of great antiquity. david says, "let us worship and bow down, let us _kneel_ before the lord our maker," psalm cxv. . see also ps. cxxxii. ; kings viii. ; ezra ix. - ; dan. vi. ; acts vii. ; acts ix. ; acts xx. , xxi. . our blessed lord himself "_kneeled down_" when he prayed, luke xxii. . how the example of david and solomon, ezra and daniel, st. stephen, st. peter and st. paul, nay, of our saviour himself, condemns the lolling, irreverent posture assumed by too many christians of the present day in the public worship of the lord of hosts! kyrie eleison. two greek words, meaning "lord, have mercy." the responses to the commandments are so called. laity, layman. a baptized member of the church, not being an ecclesiastic. the term "layman" denotes a positive rank, not the mere lack of rank. lambeth degrees. the archbishop of canterbury has the power of conferring degrees in any of the faculties of the university to which he himself belongs. these degrees are called _lambeth degrees_. the archbishop exercised this power as legate of the pope, retaining it (like the power of granting special marriage licences) under the tudor legislation. lapse. when a patron neglects to present a clergyman to a benefice within his gift, within six months after its vacancy, the benefice _lapses_ to the bishop; if he does not collate within six months, it _lapses_ to the archbishop: and if he does not collate within six months, it lapses to the crown. latter-day saints, _see_ mormonists. lay baptism. baptism administered by laymen. although not _authorized_ in our prayer book, such baptisms have always been held valid by the church of england. it is better that children should receive lay baptism than not be baptized at all. laying on of hands, _see_ ordination. this ceremony has always been esteemed an essential part of ordination, and rests on undoubted scriptural authority. it is also the form, in the anglican church, by which the bishop conveys the grace of confirmation. lecturn, or lectern. the desk from which the lessons are read. the form frequently adopted is that of the eagle, doubtless with some reference to the eagle, the symbol of st. john. the eagle lectern in peterborough cathedral was given in . lent. the name is probably derived from the old english _lencten_, "spring," from its always being observed at the spring-tide of the year. the forty days fast before easter are so called. in primitive times the duration of the fast appears to have been forty hours. the present custom of reckoning forty days, exclusive of the sundays, prevails from the th century. lessons. the portions of holy scripture read in morning and evening prayer. the calendar of lessons now in use was authorized on jan. st, . the lessons were then made generally shorter, by the selection of parts of chapters containing one complete subject and no more. a choice of lessons was given in many cases, that the same portions of scripture might not be read twice on the same day in churches with three sunday services. by the present arrangement the main substance of the whole of the old testament is now read through once every year; and the new testament twice, except the book of revelation, which, with a few omissions, is read once in the year. letters of orders. a certificate given by the bishop to every one whom he ordains, whether priest or deacon. churchwardens have the power to require the exhibition of the letters of orders of any minister assisting in the church of which they are guardians. litany. in the th century this name began specially to be applied to a form of supplication, used in times of need, which was sung in procession, with hymns and frequent responses, and with collects at the various halting places. the old litanies bore a general resemblance to ours. in cranmer, by desire of the king, drew up the first english litany, which was compiled principally from ancient sources. the litany at first was a separate service. in it was ordered to be sung after morning prayer. the act of uniformity of the present reign, , allows it to be used in the morning or evening, or as a separate service. it was ordered for wednesdays and fridays only in ; sundays were added in . literate. this term, applied to a clergyman, means one who has not taken a degree, and is not a member of a theological college. liturgy. from a greek word, meaning a public act or duty; it is now popularly used of the entire book of common prayer, although formerly it was applied only to the service for administering the holy eucharist. as each different part of the prayer book is discussed under its own heading, this article will be confined to (_a_) why a formulary is used; (_b_) the history of our own. (_a_) forms of prayer were used in the jewish church. moses and miriam used a prescribed form as a thanksgiving for the crossing of the red sea, exodus xv god appointed a form of prayer, deut. xxi. , ; also a benediction, num. vi. , . moses used a form of prayer, num. x. , . josephus and philo tell us that the worship both in the temple and in the synagogues consisted of a settled form of prayer; this our lord sanctioned by his frequent presence. he himself gave us a form of prayer--the lord's prayer. he promises a special blessing on congregational worship. matt, xviii. ; the "agreement" must pre-suppose a settled form. traces of forms of prayer some think are found in the new testament. the voice of history is unanimous on this point, nearly all the fathers testifying to the use of formularies. common sense reasons are plentiful, as, for instance, that in eccles. v. . a formulary makes the congregation independent of the minister's mood, or ability, or piety, or orthodoxy. (_b_) history. before the time of augustine ( ) the english church had its own national use, largely derived from the east, through the galilean church. it is certain that the entire roman ritual was never used, although attempts were made to force it upon the anglo-saxon church. there was a considerable variety in the manner of performing divine service in the different dioceses, each having its own particular "use." (see _sarum, use of_.) the earliest liturgy in general use in england was the book of offices, "secundum usum sarum," hence called the "sarum use," compiled by osmund, bishop of salisbury, in . this book contained much that had been in use from very early times. at the reformation it became necessary to remove the roman corruptions which had accumulated in the various office books, the "breviaries," the "missals," the "manuals," &c. one objection common to them all was that they were in latin. the object of the reformers was to retain as much of the old as was free from error. the first english prayer book was the _king's primer_, published ; and a communion service was put forth in . the _first prayer book of edward vi_., , was drawn up by a commission of bishops and divines under cranmer and ridley; an _ordinal_ was added in . the _second prayer book of edward vi_., , was a revised form of the older book. cranmer, peter martyr, and bucer assisted in the revision, and much was added from hermann's consultation (which see). this prayer book was almost identical with the one in use now. abolished during the reign of mary, it was restored by queen elizabeth, , with a few alterations. in a conference was held at hampton court under james i., between church and puritan divines, when some further alterations were made in deference to puritan objections. the last revision was made in , at the savoy conference, under charles ii., between bishops and presbyterian divines. the prayer book then took the form which we have now, save that in the services for use on nov. th, may th, and jan. th (charles the martyr) were removed. in a revised table of lessons was put forth. in permission was given to use the shortened service, to separate the services, and to use hymns. for further particulars the reader is referred to the articles on the various different services of the church. living, _see_ benefice. logos. greek, a _word_. christ is called "the word" because in him god is revealed to man. (john i.) the jews sometimes spoke of the messiah as the "word of god." lord, our, _see_ trinity, the holy. lord's day. the first day of the week, so called by st. john, rev. i. . sunday has ever been kept as the weekly festival in commemoration of our lord's resurrection on that day. in the fourth commandment, and elsewhere, we receive stringent directions to keep the _seventh_ day--that is to say, the sabbath, or saturday--holy. it will be well to see on what authority christians have hallowed the _first_, instead of the _last_, day of the week. we find from writers who were contemporary with the apostles, or who immediately succeeded them, that christians were always accustomed to meet on the first day of the week for the performance of their religious exercises. we find them asserting that this festival was instituted by the apostles, who acted under the immediate direction and influence of the holy ghost. from the constant practice of the apostles in keeping this day holy, it is believed by many that they must have had especial directions to that effect from their risen lord, who, we know, gave them instructions relating to "the kingdom of god."--his church,--during the forty days he was with them. and more, it was often while they were gathered together, celebrating the festival of the _lord's day_, that the lord himself appeared among them. lord's prayer. the prayer taught us by our blessed lord as the model of all our devotions. (matt. vi. .) but it is not only a model of prayer, but an express form to accompany all our worship. (luke xi. .) thus we find it frequently in our prayer book, no service being without it. the often repetition of it, however, in our sunday service is caused by the fact of three separate services being used as one whole. lord's supper, _see_ communion, holy. lord's table, _see_ altar. low church, _see_ church parties. low sunday. the sunday after easter is called _low sunday_, because, although it partakes in some sort of the festal nature of easter, it being the octave, yet it is a festival of a much lower degree than easter itself. luke's (st.) day. october . kept in commemoration of st. luke, the companion of st. paul, the author of the third gospel, and also probably of the book of the acts of the apostles. he is believed to have been a physician, and his writings prove that he was a man of education. according to st. augustine, his symbol is the ox, the sacrificial victim. lutherans. the followers of martin luther, an augustine monk, a german, born . he was the great reformer of the continent. they retain the use of the altar, some of the ancient vestments, lighted tapers, incense, crucifix, confession, &c. at the time of the reformation, the lutherans, meeting with nothing but opposition from the bishops, were constrained to act without them, and consequently they are in much the same position as the scottish presbyterian body, though not from the same cause. the lutherans earnestly protested, that they much wished to retain episcopacy, but that the bishops forced them to reject sound doctrine, and therefore they were unable to preserve their allegiance to them. the ritual and liturgies differ in the various lutheran countries, but in fundamental articles they all agree. lych gate. a covered gate of the churchyard where the body (_leich_, a corpse) rests on its way to burial. magnificat. the song of the blessed virgin, luke i. it is the first canticle of evening prayer, and has been sung in the church from very early times. maniple, or manuple, _see_ vestment. mariolatry. the worship, or cultus, of the blessed virgin mary. one of the principal errors of the church of rome, and on the increase. mark's (st.) day. april th. st. mark was a companion of st. peter, and is thought to have written his gospel under st. peter's directions. this evangelist is symbolized by the _man_. marriage, _see_ matrimony, holy. martinmas. november th. a festival formerly kept in honour of st. martin, bishop of tours, in france, in . martyr. one who lays down his life for his religion. the word means a "witness." st. stephen was the first, or proto-martyr. mary, the blessed virgin. we admit to her the title of "mother of god," but protest against her being worshipped. no instance of divine honour being _paid_ her is earlier than the fifth century. two festivals only in the church of england are kept in her honour, viz., the purification, and the annunciation. mass. in latin, _missa_, with which word congregations were accustomed to be dismissed. then it was used for the congregation itself, and finally became applied only to the communion service. materialism. one of the philosophies of the day which looks upon everything as the out-come of mere physical energy; denies the soul, and every spiritual force; and regards matter as eternal. matins, _see_ morning prayer. matrimony, holy. with regard to the marriage laws, the church and the state are not agreed. the former maintains holy matrimony to be a religious ceremony, while the state recognises the legality of mere civil contracts, and allows people to enter into the nuptial state by a civil ceremony. we find the early fathers distinctly stating that marriage is of a sacred nature. paley, in his moral philosophy, says, "whether it hath grown out of some tradition of the divine appointment of marriage in the persons of our first parents, or merely from a design to impress the obligation of the marriage-contract with a solemnity suited to its importance, the marriage-rite, in almost all countries of the world, has been made a religious ceremony; although marriage, in its own nature, and abstracted from the rules and declarations which the jewish and christian scriptures deliver concerning it, be properly a civil contract, and nothing more." it was forbidden in the th century during lent, and so custom and propriety forbid it now during the same season. in the manual marriages were prohibited in the following seasons:--(_a_) advent to the octave of epiphany, (_b_) septuagesima to the octave of easter inclusive, (_c_) rogation sunday to trinity sunday. the roman church has exalted holy matrimony into a sacrament. the state so far recognises the position of the church with regard to holy matrimony that no clergyman can be forced to marry a divorced person, though he may be obliged to lend his church to any other who will perform the ceremony. matrimony, the form of solemnization of. of all our services this preserves most of the older office in the sarum manual. some of the hortatory portions come as usual from hermann's consultation. there has been no change since , except the omission of the ceremony of giving gold and silver to the bride as "tokens of spousage." the service is divided into two parts (_a_) the marriage service proper, performed in the body of the church; (_b_) the succeeding service at the holy table, evidently intended as an introduction to the holy communion which should follow. _the banns_. from a barbarous latin word meaning an edict or proclamation. in the rubric directed them to be published immediately before the offertory sentences. the marriage acts of the georges are supposed to set aside this rubric, and to order them to be published after the second lesson. it is doubtful whether this does not apply to the evening service only, in places where there is no morning service. the _licence_ of the bishop makes the publication of banns unnecessary. without a special licence, marriage can be solemnized only between the hours of and in the forenoon. (_a_) _the marriage service_ proper should be performed in "the body of the church" (see rubric, ) the place selected being generally the chancel steps. the _exhortation_, , from the "consultation" chiefly; it rests on the following passages of holy scripture:--gen. ii. ; matt. xix. ; eph. v. - ; john ii. - ; heb. xiii. . no impediment being alleged, the _espousal_ or _betrothal_ follows. the joining of hands is from time immemorial the pledge of covenant, and is here an essential part of the marriage ceremony. the words of the betrothal are agreeable to the following passages: cor. xi. - ; eph. v. - ; col. iii. , ; tim. ii. - ; peter iii. - . the _marriage rite_ itself. the use of the ring is probably of pre-christian antiquity. the old service directed it to be worn on the fourth finger because "there is a vein leading direct to the heart." gold and silver was also given the bride in , but omitted in . the word "worship" means "honour," as in wycliffe's testament, matt. xix. , "_worship_ thy father and thy mother." (b) _the post-matrimonial service_. the rubric directs only the "minister or clerks" to go to the lord's table, but the practice is to carry out the older rubric, , "then shall they"--the whole marriage party--"go into the quire." a second psalm is added for use in cases when the language of the first would be unsuitable. the following rubric is almost unique, in directing the priest to turn his face to the people. the _versicles_ are substantially the same as those used at the visitation of the sick and in the churching of women. the concluding rubric dates from ; the rubric in definitely ordered the reception of holy communion. matthew's (st.) day. sept. st. this apostle and evangelist, before his call to the apostleship, was known as levi, the publican, or tax-gatherer. he may possibly have been the brother of st. james the less, and of st. thomas also. he was the first to write a gospel, which he addressed to the jews, his aim being to show that jesus was the messiah. it is probable that he alone, of all the new testament writers, wrote in hebrew. his symbol is the lion, according to st. augustine. matthias's (st.) day. feb. th. of st. matthias we know simply nothing, except that he was elected to the vacant place in the apostolic college, caused by the desertion and death of the traitor judas; acts i. to end. maundy thursday. the thursday before easter, being the day on which our lord instituted the holy sacrament of his body and blood. the name is a corruption of the latin word _mandatum_, meaning a command, in allusion to the "new commandment" of mutual love. messiah, _see_ trinity, the holy. methodists. the original methodists are the wesleyans, but already this sect has split up into numerous sections, or "churches," as they call themselves. the leading sub-divisions will each have a separate notice. the leading idea of methodism is a revival of religion by a free appeal to the feelings, and the method adopted is an elaborate system of "societies," and preaching the doctrine of "sensible conversion." the "people called methodists," or wesleyans, are the followers of john wesley, who was born in . he took his degree at oxford, and was ordained in . he held a fellowship at lincoln college until his marriage in . while at oxford, he, with his brother charles, of christ church, and his friend whitefield, of pembroke, and some twelve others, determined to live under a common rule of strict and serious behaviour; to receive frequently the holy communion; and to adopt a methodical and conscientious improvement of their time. after ordination, these two brothers, john and charles, set to work to revive a spirit of religion in the church of england, of which they were priests, and were aided by the good-will and sound paternal advice of some of the bishops. in john wesley went out as a missionary to georgia, in america, but the settlers rejected his services, and his mission to the indians was a failure. on his voyage out, he unfortunately came under the influence of some moravians; and on returning to england, after a three years' absence, he became a regular member of the moravian society in london. it was here he learnt the two peculiar doctrines of subsequent wesleyanism, viz.: ( ) instantaneous and sensible conversion, ( ) the doctrine of perfection, _i_._e_., of a christian maturity, on attaining which, he that is (in the wesleyan sense) "born again," "born of god," sinneth not. if, however, we take into view wesley's own persistent affirmation in later times, "i have uniformly gone on for fifty years, never varying from the doctrine of the church at all;" and many other such passages, we cannot escape the inevitable conclusion that the very doctrine on which his modern followers have built their separation from the church, is nothing else than a transient and _foreign_ element in their great founder's teaching. in wesley called around him his most trusted friends,--six clergymen of the church of england and four lay preachers, and held what we should now call a _retreat_; this meeting, however, is regarded by the wesleyans as the first regular "conference" of the methodist societies. it was in that wesley drew up a "deed of declaration," which was formally enrolled in chancery, establishing methodism in the eye of the law. this was an _unintentional_ step on the part of wesley towards an ultimate separation from the church. now it was too that he made his second great mistake of consecrating an english clergyman as bishop, and two laymen as presbyters of the american societies. this was the origin of the episcopal methodists of america. john wesley died in , almost his last printed utterance being, "i declare that i live and die a member of the church of england; and none who regard my opinion or advice will ever separate from it." (_john wesley_, _arminian magazine_, _april_, .) four years after his death, in , the separation took place, and the conference allowed the preachers to administer the lord's supper. no sooner was the severance complete than the punishment followed. in the _methodist new connexion_ split away from them, under a man named kilham. in the _primitive methodists_ caused another schism. in the _bible christians_ seceded, and so on. what would john wesley have thought of all this? only nine months before his death, he had solemnly charged his preachers: "in god's name, stop there! be church of england men still!" (wesley, sermons, iii. ). and his dying breath was spent in a prayer for the church! the minutes of the wesleyan methodist conference for the year - give the following statistics:-- members. . in great britain , . in ireland & irish missions , . in foreign missions , . south african conference , . french conference , total , on trial. . in great britain , . in ireland & irish missions . in foreign missions , . south african conference , . french conference total , ministers. . in great britain , . in ireland & irish missions . in foreign missions . south african conference . french conference total , on probation. . in great britain . in ireland & irish missions . in foreign missions . south african conference . french conference -- total supernumeries. . in great britain . in ireland & irish missions . in foreign missions . south african conference . french conference total ministers and full members in the australian wesleyan methodist "church," and in the methodist "church" of canada are under their respective conferences, and consequently are not enumerated above. whitaker's almanack for gives the following statistics for wesleyan methodism in great britain. it will be seen that its figures are slightly larger than those given above. ministers. , lay preachers. , members. , on probation. , chapels. , sunday scholars. , the finance of wesleyan methodism for was nearly as follows:-- missionary fund l , home mission income , education of minister's children , chapel building , training candidates for ministry , total l , during the past four years the wesleyan methodists have raised a "thanksgiving fund" amounting to l , . methodist association. in a controversy arose among the methodists as to the propriety of establishing a wesleyan theological institution; and a minister who disapproved of such a measure, and prepared and published some remarks against it, was expelled from the connexion. sympathizers with him were in like manner expelled. hence the formation of the _methodist association_, which differs from the parent society in a few particulars of church government. this society is now joined with the _wesleyan reform association_, and with the protestant methodists, the union being effected in . the amalgamation is known by the name of "_the united methodist free churches_." they number-- ministers. lay preachers. , members. , sunday scholars , on probation. , chapels. , methodists, calvinistic. up to , john wesley and george whitefield had worked in harmony, but then arose a difference of opinion between them on the doctrine of election, which resulted in their separation. whitefield held the calvinistic view, wesley the arminian. after whitefield's death, in , his followers gradually settled into two separate religious bodies, one being the _lady huntingdon's connexion_, or, as it is sometimes called, the _english calvinistic methodists_, and the other the _welsh calvinistic methodists_. whitefield was chaplain to the countess of huntingdon, and it was by his advice she became the patroness of his followers, and founded a college for the education of calvinistic preachers. the doctrines of this connexion are almost identical with those of the church of england, interpreted, of course, in a calvinistic sense, and her liturgy is generally employed. they have no general ecclesiastical government, and have become virtually congregational societies. the _welsh calvinistic methodists_ owe their origin in a great degree to a mr. harris, who did for wales much what wesley and whitefield did for england. he instituted "private societies" in , but it was not till that the connexion separated from the church. their church government differs slightly from wesleyanism, and their doctrines are said to be in accordance with the articles, interpreted in a calvinistic sense. chapels , ministers and preachers deacons , members , on probation , sunday scholars , during the year - , l , was collected for various religious purposes. methodist, new connexion. this party, under a mr. kilham, split off from the wesleyans in , four years after the wesleyans had left the church of england. in doctrines, and in all essential and distinctive features, it remains the same as its parent society. the grand distinction rests upon the different degrees of power allowed in each communion to the laity, the _methodist new connexion_ allowing them to participate in church government, whereas the wesleyans leave church government in the hands of the ministers. ministers lay preachers , members , on probation chapels , sunday scholars , methodists, primitive. the "primitives," or "ranters," as they are sometimes called, represent more truly the original genius of wesleyan methodism than any other of the various bodies into which the original secession from the church of england has split up. some still kept to camp-meetings and the like, after the original connexion had given them up. this practice was condemned by the conference of , and the consequence was the birth of the _primitive methodist connexion_ in . messrs. hugh bourne and william clowes may be looked upon as the fathers of this body. their doctrines are precisely the same as those of the original connexion. ministers , lay preachers , members , chapels , sunday scholars , methodist reformers. in certain points in methodist procedure were attacked in anonymous pamphlets called "fly sheets," which resulted in the expulsion of many ministers from the original society. they, with those sympathising with them, have set up a distinct machinery of methodism, although still regarding themselves as wesleyan methodists, illegally expelled. metropolitan. a bishop who presides over a province is called a metropolitan. michael (st.) & all angels. a festival observed on the th of september. st. michael is described in the old testament as the guardian angel of the jewish people; and in the new testament he is the great archangel fighting for god and his church against the devil. (see _angel_.) militant, the church. the name given to the church on earth in the prayer following the offertory. _militant_ means _fighting_, and is used of the church on earth in contra-distinction to the church triumphant, the church above. millennium. latin, _a thousand years_. certain people look for a return of christ to the earth before the end of the world, and hold that there will be a first or particular resurrection limited to the good, and a reign of christ with all the saints upon the earth for a thousand years, or _millennium_. this doctrine is chiefly based upon a most literal interpretation of part of the book of revelation (chap, xx.), which is confessedly the most figurative and mystical book in the bible. minor canons. priests in collegiate churches next in rank to the canons and prebendaries, but not of the chapter. they are responsible for the performance of daily service, and should be well skilled in church music. minister. _one who serves_. a term applied generally to the clergy about the time of the great rebellion. it is equivalent to the greek word rendered _deacon_. an effort was unsuccessfully made in to substitute _minister_ for _priest_ throughout the prayer book wherever the latter word occurred. miracle. latin, _a wonder_. the general notion of miracles, viz., that they are necessary proofs or credentials of our saviour's commission from god, can scarcely be maintained on scriptural grounds. (matt. vii. .) a better definition of miracles is given by archbishop thomson: "the miracles of the gospel are works done by christ in the course of his divine mission of mercy, which could not have proceeded from ordinary causes then in operation, and therefore proved the presence of a superhuman power, and which, by their nature and drift, showed that this power was being exerted in the direction of love and compassion for the salvation of mankind." if the miraculous works of christ were disproved and done away with, two miracles would still remain which are unassailable, viz., the character of christ, and the message of christ. therefore the question is not whether miracles by themselves are probable, but whether the lord from heaven, who lived on this earth--for none could have invented the story of his life; who left a message on earth--for none could have invented that message; added to his utterances certain marvels of love and compassion to draw men's eyes towards him for their good. this may be called the _historic_ consideration of miracles; the _scientific_ is briefly as follows:--we are told that the phenomena of nature are so many links in a chain of causes and effects, and to suppose that god breaks through this chain, is to make god contradict himself. to this it may be answered that apart from any question of miracles, there are already flaws in this chain of causation, or rather, powers from without that can shake it, as, for instance, the outbreak of a war rendering a country, which should have been fertile, barren and wasted. holy scripture is not responsible for the phrase, "suspension of the laws of nature." theologians do not dogmatise about the nature of miracles, and it would be well if science were less zealous for the inviolability of laws, the outside limits of which she cannot now ascertain. miracles are but a part of the gospel, and we judge them by the setting in which they are placed. those who received them at first were not made christians by them. (mark ix. , .) to us they are not even the beginning of faith, for christ was our teacher and friend before our infant minds could conceive what miracles meant. he, the sinless lord, is our first miracle; his teaching is our second miracle; and a third may be added, viz., the transforming power of the gospel in human hearts. the reader is referred to the sermon on _miracles_ in archbishop thomson's "life in the light of god's word," "the reign of law," by the duke of argyll, and sir edmund beckett's "review of hume and huxley on miracles." mission. _a sending forth_. the power or commission to preach the gospel. thus our blessed lord gave his disciples and their successors their mission, when he said, "go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature." mission. an effort to awaken or increase spiritual life in a parish by means of special services and sermons. missionary societies, _see_ societies. moravians, or united brethren. a sect generally said to have arisen under nicholas lewis, a german nobleman of the last century, and thus called because among the first converts were some moravian families. they themselves claim to have sprung from the greek church in the ninth century. hook says, "it is sometimes supposed that because the moravians have bishops they are less to be blamed than other dissenting sects. but, to say nothing of the doubt that exists with respect to the validity of their orders, an episcopal church may be, as the english moravians and romanists in this country are, in a state of schism. and the very fact that the difference between them and the church is not great, if this be so, makes the sin of their schism, in not conforming, yet greater." in england the _moravians_ number , members, , scholars, and have chapels and preaching stations. mormonists, or latter day saints. the founder of this sect was joseph smith, born in , of poor parents, in the state of vermont, u.s. at the age of he declared himself to have seen a vision of "two personages," who informed him that all existing christian sects were erroneous. according to his own account, this vision was repeated three years afterwards, when he was informed that the american indians were a remnant of the israelites, and that certain prophetical writings of the jews were buried in a spot from which he was destined to rescue them. the absurd story goes on to say that joseph smith accordingly found in a stone box, just covered with earth, in ontario, the "record," consisting of gold plates engraven with "reformed egyptian" characters. although discovered in , the angel would not allow smith to remove them until . luckily he also discovered the urim and thummim in the same box with the golden plates, and by its aid he was able to translate a portion of the revelation, which, when complete, composed a large volume. this volume he called the "book of mormon," "mormon" meaning, as he explained, _more good_, from "mor," a contraction for _more_, and "mon," the egyptian for _good_. _mormon_, too, was the name of a supposed prophet living in the fourth or fifth century. the golden plates, said to have been discovered in the above extraordinary manner, were never publicly produced, but three witnesses were found to testify that they had actually seen the plates, an angel having exhibited them. these three witnesses were the two brothers and the father of smith. four other witnesses of the name of whitmer also testified the same. the "book of mormon" was succeeded by a "book of doctrine and covenants," being a collection of special revelations made to smith and his associates. followers soon began to flock around the new "prophet," as smith called himself. but at the same time much hostility was shown to the sect. they were expelled from different states, until at last they settled in illinois. an altercation between the "saints" and the county resulted in the imprisonment of joseph smith and his brother hyrum; but in a mob broke into the prison and the brothers were shot. brigham young succeeded to the post of "prophet." fresh troubles with the state caused another migration of the "saints" in , who, after much suffering, settled in the valley of the great salt lake. there they have prospered, and the settlement itself, by the name of utah, has been admitted to the united states confederacy. they send missionary agents to all parts of the world to make fresh converts. the practice of polygamy they justify by their doctrine concerning "spiritual wives." they have published a "creed," in which they profess their belief in the holy trinity, in salvation through christ, in the necessity of the sacraments and the ordinary means of grace. they further believe that the miraculous gifts of the spirit continue. they believe in the word of god recorded in the bible, and in the book of mormon. they look for the restoration of the jews, and expect a millennium. they have congregations in england. morning prayer the _construction_ of the morning and evening services is so similar that they will both be considered under this heading. it will be noticed that the services recognise distinctly what may be called god's part and man's part in the communion of worship. they open by the message of god to his people, calling for penitence and promising forgiveness, which is met by the response of the confession. next pardon is pronounced in god's name, which naturally awakens in the pardoned soul the outburst of praise and thanksgiving in the lord's prayer, the psalms and the canticles. then the voice of god is again heard in the lessons, and his revelation is accepted by the response of faith in the creed. lastly, in the sense of his grace and the knowledge of his will, we turn to prayer for ourselves and for others, and end with the commendation of all to his blessing. many parts of the morning and evening service are considered under their own particular names, but the history of the rest is given here. the _introductory sentences_, from the psalms, the prophets, and new testament, are taken from old lent services. the _exhortation_, , was composed partly from the preceding sentences, and partly from ancient forms. the _confession_, , is derived from old forms. the _absolution_, like the previous part of the service, was added in . in the rubric, the words "remission of sins" were added by the hampton court conference in , to meet the objection that the word _absolution_ was popish. in the word _priest_ was substituted for "minister," showing that a deacon may not read the absolution. with the _lord's prayer_ the old latin service begins. the rubric directs it to be said with an "audible voice," because formerly it was said inaudibly, to keep it from the ears of the unbaptized. the direction that the people are to say it with the minister was added in . the _versicles_ date from the th century. the answer, "the lord's name be praised," was added in . for the _canticles_ and _creed_ see different articles. the _salutation_, "the lord be with you," is apostolic. next comes the _lesser litany_. the _versicles_ following are said by the priest "standing up," in accordance with mediaeval custom. morning prayer ended with the collect for grace until , when the five final prayers were added. the _second collect_ dates from th century, the _third_ from th century. the prayers for the _queen_, and for the _clergy and people_, stood in the litany in , and the _prayer of st. chrysostom_ (john, the golden mouthed) was in the litany in , and dates from the th century. the prayer for the _royal family_ was composed in . music, _see_ church music. nave. from the latin _navis_, a ship, because the _nave_, or body, of a church somewhat resembles the hull of a ship turned upside down. the nave formerly was always separated from the chancel (which see) by a screen. nicene creed, _see_ creed. non-conformists. the name now given to all those who do not conform to the practice of the established church. originally, however, it was restricted to the puritan section _within_ the church, dissidents from the church being called _separatists_, which is still their correct title. in elizabeth's reign many of the clergy refused to conform to the act of uniformity; the use of the surplice, and many things in the book of common prayer, being objectionable to them. the non-conformists afterwards assumed the name of puritan, which had previously been used of a heresy of the rd century. they formally separated from the church in . (see _puritan_.) north side, _see_ eastward position. nunc dimittis, or the song of simeon. (luke ii. .) the sweetest and most solemn of all the canticles--the thanksgiving of the aged saint for the sight of the saviour. it is appropriately sung by us after the revelation of christ in the lessons for the day. it is, and has been, used by the whole catholic church from the earliest times. oblation. an offering to god. in the office for the holy communion we pray god to "accept our alms and _oblations_." the word _oblations_ was added to this prayer at the same time that the rubric which directs the priest to "place upon the table so much bread and wine as he shall think sufficient," was inserted, . from this, many--wheatly, palmer, bishop patrick, &c.--conclude that the _oblation_ consists in the offering of the bread and wine. others would consider it merely synonymous with "_alms_." octave. the octave is the _eighth day_ after any principal festival of the church. in ancient times it was customary to observe these days with much devotion, including the whole period also from the festival to the octave. in our prayer book we observe the octaves of christmas, easter, ascension, and whit-sunday, by using the special preface appointed in the communion service at every celebration during the octave. the whit-sunday preface, however, is only used six days, because trinity sunday falls on the octave. oecumenical. (belonging to the whole inhabited world.) a term applied to general councils of the church, to distinguish them from councils of less importance. it is also a title of the patriarch of constantinople. offertory. in an ecclesiastical sense, the anthem said or sung while the offerings are being made; it is now frequently used to denote the alms collected. oblations in money or kind have always been made from apostolic times ( cor. xvi. ). out of these offerings in kind were taken the bread and wine used in the celebration of the holy communion. (see _alms_, _communion_.) orders, holy. three _orders_ have always been recognised in the church of christ--bishops, priests, and deacons. the preface to the ordinal in our prayer book affirms this very strongly. to these were added, but on a distinctly different footing, what are called the _minor orders_--sub-deacon, acolyte, exorcist, singer, reader, door-keeper; these are of merely ecclesiastical institution, and are not generally retained in the church of england, although the office of reader may be said to be in part revived, and the revival of sub-deacon is recommended. the church of rome has seven orders. articles xxiii., xxxvi. and xxxvii., as well as the preface referred to above, should be carefully read on this matter. (see also _apostolical succession_ and _ordinal_.) _bishop_. from a greek word (_episcopos_) meaning an "overseer." it is the title now given to the highest order in the christian ministry, to which appertains the function of ordination. of this order were titus and timothy, the one being bishop of crete, the other bishop of ephesus. in the english church a bishop must not be less than years old, a priest , and a deacon , unless dispensed by a faculty from the archbishop of canterbury. _priest_. the second order in the christian ministry. the word is a corruption of _presbyter_ (which see). in common with bishops, priests have the power to absolve, to consecrate, and to bless, but not to ordain. the difference between a priest and a deacon is far greater than that between a deacon and a layman. _deacon_. the lowest order in the english church. the word is derived from the greek, and means a _minister_. he is the assistant of the priest, and may only perform certain spiritual duties--_e._ _g_., the rubrics of our prayer book direct certain parts of the service to be taken by the "priest," while the rest is left to the "minister," priest or deacon as he may happen to be, unless from the nature of the office, we know that the term "minister" refers only to "priest." (see _minister_.) orders, qualifications for. although the preface to the ordinal and canon lay down generally what is necessary from candidates for holy orders, yet any one intending to be ordained had better write to the secretary of the bishop into whose diocese he thinks of going for further particulars as to the subjects for examination, &c. the papers generally necessary for deacon's orders are the following--( ) certificate of baptism, or a declaration by some competent witness that the candidate has completed his rd year and has been baptized. ( ) graduates of cambridge must have passed either the special theological, or the preliminary examination for holy orders; graduates of oxford must produce certificates that they have attended two courses of lectures by divinity professors. durham men must be either b.a. or l.th. dublin men must be b.a., and hold also the divinity testimonial. ( ) college testimonials. ( ) the "si quis," a notice read in the church of the place where the candidate resides, to give opportunity for raising objections, something like the asking of banns. ( ) letters testimonial for three years, or for the time elapsed since the candidate left college. this testimonial must be subscribed by three beneficed clergymen. ( ) a title, or nomination to a curacy. for priest's orders, the candidate requires , , and , as above. when a candidate is accepted by the bishop, he has then to pass an examination, which slightly differs in the various dioceses, but generally comprehends the following subjects, viz.--the bible; the new testament in greek, and a minute acquaintance with some specified portion of it; the prayer-book; the articles; church history; latin; some theological authors, such as pearson, hooker, butler, paley, &c.; a hebrew paper is set for those who care to take up hebrew. ordinal. "the form and manner of making, ordaining, and consecrating bishops, priests, and deacons." various forms of service for ordination have existed from the earliest times. although differing in many ways, each kept the essentials of ordination, viz., imposition of hands, with prayer and benediction, as used by the apostles themselves. the first reformed service was taken as usual partly from the ancient ordinals in use. it was revised in , and again in , when some changes, tending to greater solemnity, were introduced. the _preface_ insists upon the necessity of episcopal ordination. it determines the age at which men may be ordained, viz.. deacon at , priest at , bishop at , and speaks of the qualifications of candidates for the ministry. canon of mentions further qualifications necessary (see _orders_, _qualifications for_). the times for ordination appointed by the canon are, of course, the four ember seasons, which have been so set apart from the th century. _the form and manner of making of deacons_. after morning prayer, including the sermon, is ended, the candidates for deacon's orders, dressed either in surplice or gown, are presented by the archdeacon to the bishop, who is sitting in his chair in the sanctuary. the bishop's address to the people is of much the same nature as the si quis already read. the litany is made specially appropriate by the insertion of the suffrage, "that it may please thee to bless these thy servants, now to be admitted to the order of deacons (or priests), and to pour thy grace upon them; that they may duly execute their office, to the edifying of thy church, and the glory of thy holy name." then follows a special collect and epistle. before the gospel the bishop proceeds with the ordination service. until the oath of the queen's supremacy was administered here, but now it is taken before the service. sitting in his chair, the bishop puts certain searching questions to those he is about to ordain. the first is of the "inward call" of the holy ghost. this perhaps is sometimes misunderstood, but several high authorities unite with calvin in explaining it to be "the good testimony of our own heart, that we have taken this office neither from ambition, covetousness, nor any evil design, but out of a true fear of god, and a desire to edify the church." (see _call to the ministry_.) the next question is of the "outward call," and implies a willingness to accept all the regulations under which the ministry is to be exercised in the church of england. the third and fourth questions demand a belief in the bible, and a desire to read (and perhaps expound it) in the church. the next question explains the duties of the diaconate, and marks very distinctly the great difference between that order and the priesthood. the answer expresses the candidate's intention to be faithful in the public ministration of his office, and the answer to the next question his desire to be an example in his private life. the last question concerns canonical obedience. next follows the ordination itself, which is notable for its extreme simplicity in comparison with the great solemnity of the ordination of priests. the gospel is usually read by the deacon who passes first in the examination. the communion service is then proceeded with, one final prayer being added in behalf of those who have just become deacons in the church. _the form and manner of ordering of priests_. the ground-plan of this service is the same as that of the preceding. the deacons are ordained before the gospel, the priests after. the bishop's exhortation before putting the question brings out in a striking manner a picture of the whole pastoral duty and life. the first question dwells on the _outward call_ to the priesthood; the second, third, and fourth, on the _rule of faith and practice_; the fifth and sixth on the _individual life_; the seventh and eighth on the submission to _order and peace_. then follows a call to the congregation present to engage in _silent prayer_ on behalf of those about to be ordained to the priesthood. after which the hymn _veni creator_ is sung, as it always has been sung since the th century on this occasion; and after another prayer the special act of ordination is proceeded with. it is to be noticed that priests present are to join with the bishop in the laying on of hands in obedience to tim. iv. . the charge given in this ordination is threefold, (_a_) the dispensation of the word; (_b_) the dispensation of the sacraments; (_c_) the "power and commandment" of absolution, john xx. , and compare matt, xvi. ; xviii. . the service of the holy communion is then proceeded with, the final collect being a twofold prayer for the newly-ordained and for the people. the concluding rubric is a direction for the order of the service if priests and deacons are to be ordained on the same occasion. _the form of ordaining and consecrating of an archbishop or bishop_. this form of service differs from the other services in beginning with the communion service, placing the sermon in its usual place in that service, and then inserting the litany after the gospel and before the consecration. the service is to be conducted by the archbishop, or some bishop appointed by him. the presence of other bishops is implied throughout, according to the old rule, which prescribed, as a matter of church order, though not of absolute necessity, that three bishops at least should concur in the consecration. the candidate, vested in a rochet, is presented by two bishops, in accordance with a custom of great antiquity. the queen's mandate is then read, and the oath of canonical obedience taken. the litany contains a special suffrage and prayer. the questions which follow are substantially the same as in the ordination of priests; except that (_a_) in the sixth the duty of enforcing discipline is insisted upon; and (_b_)the seventh requires a promise to be faithful in ordaining others; and (_c_) the eighth lays stress on the duty of gentleness and charity. after this the bishop elect is to put on the rest of the episcopal habit. the form of consecration itself corresponds to the ordination of priests, save that in place of conferring the power of absolution, we have st. paul's exhortation to timothy ( tim. i. , ), to stir up the gift of consecration in "power, love, and soberness." the charge at the delivery of the bible takes the form of an earnest exhortation. the holy communion is then proceeded with. ordinary. where used in the prayer book this word almost always means the bishop of the diocese. the word properly signifies any judge authorized to take cognizance of causes in his own proper right. organ, _see_ church music. original sin, _see_ sin. ornaments of the church, and ministers thereof. this rubric is well known as the "ornaments rubric." it will be considered under two heads, ( ) the vestments of the minister, ( ) the ornaments of the church. ( .) this rubric had no existence in ; but a direction in the communion service says that the priest is to wear "a white albe plain, with a vestment or cope," and the assisting priests or deacons, "albes with tunicles," or dalmatics. at other services in parish churches the ministers were to use a surplice and, in cathedrals and colleges, the hood of their degree. at a celebration a bishop was to wear a surplice or albe, and a cope or vestment. in the ornaments rubric ran thus:--"the minister, at the time of the communion, and at all other times of his ministration, shall use neither albe, vestment, nor cope; but, being archbishop or bishop, he shall have and wear a rochet, and being priest or deacon, a surplice only." in this rubric was altered thus:--"the minister....shall use such ornaments in the church as were in use by authority of parliament in the second year of edward vi., according to the act of parliament set forth in the beginning of this book." this act spoke of authorizing the queen to ordain other ceremonies; but whether she did so or not, according to this act, has been a matter of controversy. but in the "advertisements" of archbishop parker ( ), no other vestment than the cope and surplice is named. in the rubric was altered into its present form. as a matter of history, it seems unquestionable that, with a few exceptions, all vestments except the surplice and hood in parish churches, and copes in some cathedrals, were disused after . within the last years, the use of the old vestments ordered in the first prayer book, and authorized by parliament, has been revived on the authority of the rubric of . the privy council, however, has, rightly or wrongly, pronounced against the legality of the revival of the vestments named in the rubric. (see _vestments_.) ( .) the ornaments of the church are discussed under the headings of _altar_, _altar lights_, &c. in canons to among the things pertaining to the church are enumerated ( ) a great bible and prayer book, ( ) a font of stone, ( ) a "decent communion table covered in time of divine service with a carpet of silk or other decent stuff," ( ) the "ten commandments to be set up" and "other chosen sentences written," ( ) a pulpit, ( ) an alms chest. orthodox. sound in doctrine according to the consentient testimony of scripture and the church. the opposite is _heterodox_. palm sunday. the sunday next before easter, so called from palm branches being strewed on the road by the multitude, when our saviour made his triumphal entry into jerusalem. pantheism. from two greek words meaning "all" and "god." it is a subtle kind of atheism, which makes god and the universe the same, and so denies the existence and sovereignty of any god over the universe. what may be called natural religion partakes largely of pantheism. papists. roman catholics. the term is derived from papa, a title restricted in the west to the pope. in the greek church it is the title of all parish priests. parable. in the new testament a figurative discourse, or a story with a typical meaning. in the old testament it sometimes signifies a mere discourse, as job's parable, job xxvi-xxxi. inclusive. the parable, in the new testament sense, was and is a common mode of expression in the east. parish. "that circuit of ground which is committed to the charge of one parson or vicar, or other minister." some think england was divided into parishes by archbishop honorius, about the year . there are instances of parish churches in england as early as the year . the cause of the great difference in the extent of different parishes is explained by the fact that churches were most of them built by lords of the manor for their tenants, and so the parish was the size of the lord's manor. in the number of parish churches was between , and , . there are now about , benefices; and many more district and mission churches, and chapels of ease. parson. the rector or incumbent of a parish, when the income of the living is derived from land. it represents two latin words, 'persona ecclesiae,' the ecclesiastical _person_ of a place. passing bell. a bell tolled now _after_ the death of a person. the th canon orders "when any one _is passing_ out of this life, a bell shall be tolled, and their minister shall not then be slack to do his last duty." thus the beautiful idea of calling for the prayers of the church, by the tolling of a bell, for the dying person is altogether lost sight of by our modern custom. passion week, _see_ holy week. pastor. literally, a _shepherd_: hence one who shepherds souls. pastoral staff. a staff shaped like a crook, which a bishop shall either bear "in his hand" or else have "borne or holden by his chaplain." this is the direction of a rubric in the prayer book of , and which is still the law of the church according to the present ornaments rubric. paten, _see_ altar vessels. patron. the person who has a right to present to a benefice. paul (st.), the conversion of, january . the festival of st. paul is not, as usual, of the day of his martyrdom, but of his miraculous conversion, and it is upon this, rather than on his wonderful character and work, that the services lay stress. peculiars. parishes exempt from the jurisdiction of the bishop of the diocese in which they lie. they were for the most part abolished in the reign of william iv. penance. in the law of england penance is an open ecclesiastical punishment for sin. this discipline of the church has fallen into disuse, a fact deplored in the opening exhortation of the commination service. absolution after penance has been exalted into a sacrament in the church of rome. penitential psalms. seven psalms, from their internal character, are thus called, viz., , , , , , , . these are appointed to be read on ash-wednesday. pentecost. a solemn festival of the jews, so called because it is celebrated _fifty days_ after the passover. it corresponds to the christian whitsuntide, which is sometimes called by the same name. perpetual curate. the incumbent of a church, chapel, or district, within the boundaries of a rectory or vicarage. his position is in every respect that of a vicar. pessimism. a philosophy which acknowledges the evils that are in the world, but instead of looking for a "new heaven and a new earth" it looks for release in unconsciousness. it is the religion of doubt, and hopelessness, and despair. it makes _the worst_ of everything. peter's (st.) day. june . this festival, originally a festival of both st. peter and st. paul, on the traditional anniversary of their common martyrdom, is of great antiquity, certainly known from the th century, and kept both in the east and west on this day. the institution of the festival of the conversion of st. paul has now transferred the commemoration of that apostle to another day, january th. pews. enclosed seats in churches. they did not come into use until the middle of the th century, and almost belong to the past now. but long before pews there were appropriated seats. the first mention of a "reading pew," or desk, in the body of the church, for the minister, is in : previous to that time his place was in the chancel. philip (st.) and st. james's day. may . there seems to be no adequate reason for the coupling together of these two apostles. in the greek church their festivals are observed separately. of st. philip we have notices only in st. john, and early tradition speaks of his preaching in pamphylia. of st. james the apostle, the son of alphaeus, sometimes supposed to be the same as "james the less," or the little, of mark xv. , we know nothing except his name in the apostolic catalogue. in the epistle for this day he is identified with james, the brother of the lord, surnamed the just, and author of the epistle bearing his name. but this identification is very uncertain. piscina. a drain for water, usually accompanied with decorative features, near the altar on the south side. it was formerly used to pour away the water in which any sacred vessel had been washed. in many churches the piscina is the only remaining trace of where an altar has been. plymouth brethren. the name is a misnomer. they call themselves merely "brethren," and instead of originating in plymouth, their principal source was near dublin. they date from , and their existence is a protest against all sectarianism, they holding that there should be a _visible_ unity among christians. they decline to be looked upon as one of the many sects into which christianity is divided, and refuse to be identified with any. they hold in great esteem the primitive constitution of the church, and trust largely to the power of prayer for the supply of their temporal necessities. they have no recognised ministry, but any one believing himself to be inspired of the spirit may address their meetings. polity, ecclesiastical. the constitution and government of the christian church, considered as a society. the great book on this subject is hooker's immortal work. pope. from _papa_, father, a title anciently given to all christian bishops; but at the end of the th century it was assumed exclusively by gregory vii., bishop of rome, whose successors' peculiar title it has ever since continued. (see _papists_.) there are but few instances of the exercise of the papal power in england before the norman conquest, nor has the church of england ever wholly submitted to papal rule. (see _church of england_.) positivism, _see_ comtism. prayer-book, _see_ liturgy. preaching. proclaiming the truths of religion. the term is not necessarily to be limited to what are called sermons, as we see by acts xv. , "moses of old time hath in every city them that _preach_ him, being _read_ in the synagogues every sabbath day." hooker, in his fifth book, cleverly argues against the exaltation of sermons as being _the_ means of grace to the detriment of other parts of public worship, a custom prevalent in his time among the puritans, and now among most of the dissenting sects. prebendary. a clergyman attached to a cathedral church, who anciently enjoyed a _prebend_, or stipend, arising from some part of the cathedral property, in return for his officiating at stated times in the cathedral. the appointment is now often honorary. (see _canon_.) precentor. the leader of a choir. in almost all cathedrals of old foundation in england, and very generally on the continent, the precentor was the first dignitary in the chapter, ranking next to the dean. he superintended the choral service and the choristers. in all new foundations the precentor is a minor canon, holding a rank totally different from, and inferior to that of his namesake of the older foundation. (see minor canon.) predestination, _see_ election. the th article treats of predestination, but in such a way as to make it very difficult to comprehend what it teaches with regard to this most controverted subject. it seems designedly drawn up, in guarded and general terms, on purpose to embrace all persons of tolerably moderate views. (see _arminianism_, _calvinism_, _antinomianism_.) prelate. generally a bishop, but strictly an ecclesiastic having jurisdiction over other ecclesiastics. presbyter. a greek word signifying an _elder_. in the christian church a _presbyter_ or _elder_ is one who is ordained to a certain office, and authorized by his _quality_, not his _age_, to discharge the several duties of that office and station in which he is placed. in this large and extended sense, bishops were sometimes called _presbyters_ in the new testament, for the apostles themselves did not refuse the title. priests are in an ordinary sense the presbyters of the church, and in the scotch liturgy, compiled in the reign of charles i, the word _presbyter_ is substituted for that of _priest_. (see _orders_.) presbyterians. a protestant sect which maintains that there is no order in the church superior to presbyters, and on that account has separated from the catholic church. this sect is established by law in scotland, where there nevertheless exists a national branch of the catholic church, under canonical bishops. of course the establishment or disestablishment of a sect in no way alters its position as being, or not being, a branch of the catholic church. from time to time considerable secessions have occurred in scotland from the established church, the principal being the "_united presbyterian church_," and the "_free church of scotland_." english presbyterians are not to be confounded with scotch presbyterians, the former being the main supporters of socinianism and rationalism in this country. the "_presbyterian church of england_" has presbyteries, congregations, , communicants. presence, real, _see_ communion, holy, part iv. the homily on the sacrament asserts, "thus much we must be sure to hold, that in the supper of the lord there is no vain ceremony or bare sign, _no untrue figure of a thing absent_; but the communion of the body and blood of our lord in a marvellous incorporation, which, by the operation of the holy ghost, is, through faith, wrought in the souls of the faithful." presentation. the offering of a clerk to the bishop by the patron of a benefice, for institution. priest, _see_ presbyter, & orders, holy. primate. a "primate" is the highest in rank in a national church. the archbishop of canterbury is primate of all england, but is without power in the province of york. the archbishop of york is primate of england. procession of the holy ghost. the doctrine that the holy ghost _proceeds_ from the father and the son. it is an incomprehensible mystery, and in thinking of it we shall do well to remember the words of gregory nazianzen to an objector; "do you tell me how the father is unbegotten, and i will then attempt to tell you how the son is begotten, and the spirit proceeds." the eastern or greek church (which see) split from the western on this question of the procession of the holy ghost, believing that the eternal procession is from the father alone, and not from the son. proctor a name given to the clergy elected by their brethren to represent them in convocation. the same name is given to those officers of the universities of oxford and cambridge whose duty it is to guard the morals, and preserve the quiet of the university. professor. a public teacher in a university. protestant. the term is now used of all who _protest_ against popery. it was originally given to those who _protested_ against a certain decree issued by the diet of spires in . province. the limit of an archbishop's jurisdiction, as a diocese is the limit of the jurisdiction of a bishop. (see _archbishop_ and _diocese_.) psalter. the word _psalter_ is often used by ancient writers for the book of the psalms, considered as a separate book of holy scripture; but the term is generally used now of the book in which the psalms are arranged for the public service of the church. the roman psalter, for instance, does not follow the course of the psalms as in the bible, but arranges them for the different services. the division of the psalms into daily portions, as given in our prayer books, has been done with a view to convenience. the _psalter_, properly speaking, is a separate book from that of common prayer. the english psalter does not follow the last translation of the bible (which is the authorized one), but that of coverdale's bible, corrected, which had become familiar to the people from constant use. public worship. the united service of the congregation. a christian duty very much neglected by the laity, notwithstanding the apostolic direction not to forsake "the assembling of ourselves together." (heb. x. .) formerly the law of the land compelled every parishioner to attend public worship, unless excommunicate. there is a special blessing promised to the assembly of believers for common prayer and praise. "where two or three are gathered together there am i in the midst of them." (matt, xviii. .) "the lord loveth the gates of zion more than all the dwellings of jacob" (ps. lxxxvii. .) both in the old testament and new testament this duty holds a prominent place. public worship regulation act. an act of parliament, passed in , for the better administration of the laws respecting the regulation of public worship. under this act any three aggrieved parishioners, calling themselves members of the church of england, though not necessarily communicants, may report to the bishop anything their clergyman does which they believe to be unlawful. the bishop may use his discretion whether proceedings are to be taken against the clergyman on the representation of his parishioners. if the litigious parties prefer it, the case may be taken out of the bishop's hands and brought before a judge appointed under this act--at present lord penzance. the workings of the act have been far from satisfactory to any, and in many cases have given rise to grave scandal. pulpit. a raised desk. sermons were formerly delivered from the steps of the altar. by canon , a raised desk, called a pulpit, is ordered in every church, from which the preacher is to address his flock. purgatory. a place in which souls are, by the romanists, supposed to be purged from carnal impurities, before they are received into heaven. the council of florence, , first gave an authoritative decree concerning purgatory,--"if any who truly repent depart from this life before that by worthy fruits of repentance they have made satisfaction for their sins of commission and omission, their souls are purified after death, and to relieving these pains, the suffrages of the faithful who are alive, to wit, the sacrifice of masses, prayers, alms, and other pious works, are profitable. but whether purgatory is a fire, or a mist, or a whirlwind, or anything else, we do not dispute." the idea of purgatory was very early broached by individuals. st. augustine, , speaks of it as a thing which "possibly may be found so, and possibly never;" the venerable bede says it is "not altogether incredible." origen, in the rd century, is by some thought to have been the first to teach distinctly the doctrine of purgatory, but his view differs altogether from the roman. article xxii. gives the view of the church of england on this subject. "purgatory... is a fond thing, vainly invented, and grounded upon no warranty of scripture, but rather repugnant to the word of god." however, in the celebrated "essays and reviews" case, the point arose in respect of a doctrine, scarcely discernible from that of purgatory, being taught by mr. h. b. wilson, and the privy council decided that there is no condemnation of it in the anglican formularies. the teaching of article xxii. is borne out by the following: luke xxiii, ; phil. i ; cor. v. ; rev. xiv. ; and many other passages. purification of the blessed virgin mary. february nd. the alternative title (the "presentation of christ in the temple,") suggests the lesson to be drawn from all the services of the day. the name "candle-mas day" is derived from the custom of a procession with torches, superseding (it is thought) the heathen festival of torches to ceres in the early part of february, with a reference to the true "light to lighten the gentiles." exodus xiii. - (the proper lesson for the day) gives the mosaic law of the dedication of the first-born. puritans. a name assumed by the ultra-protestants in the reigns of elizabeth, james i., and charles i. the following chapter of history is often much misrepresented by the enemies of the church:--in the time of the great rebellion seven thousand english clergymen, having refused to take the covenant, were ejected from their livings, their places being supplied by dissenting teachers. at the restoration it was required that all those persons who had thus become possessed of the property of the english church should either conform to the regulations of the church, or resign. of all the puritan clergy then in possession only fifteen hundred refused to conform. these fifteen hundred were ejected, and from what? from their rights? no; from what they had usurped. more than five thousand conformed and still retained possession of their benefices, so that but few of the loyal english clergy who had been ejected regained their rights even at the restoration. quakers. a sect owing their origin to george fox, a cattle-drover, in . they are also called the "society of friends." the first assembly for public worship was held in leicestershire in . the society is diminishing in numbers in the united kingdom. the body is much more numerous in america. three gradations of meetings or synods--monthly, quarterly, and yearly--administer the affairs of the society. fit persons are chosen by monthly meetings as _elders_, to watch over the religious duties of the members. they make provision for their poor, none of whom are ever known to require parochial relief. at the monthly meetings also marriages are sanctioned. monthly meetings being limited to a certain circuit, several monthly meetings compose a quarterly meeting, at which general reports are given and appeals heard. the yearly meeting has the general superintendence of the society. in case of disputes among friends the matter is submitted, not to law, but to arbitration. their solemn affirmations are accepted in lieu of oaths. the chief rule of their faith is that the inspiration of the holy spirit so guides and teaches them that the bible and all else is subordinate to this inward monition of the spirit. their ministers may be either male or female, the only qualification necessary being the immediate inspiration of the holy spirit. they decline to define in any way the doctrine of the holy trinity. they deny the necessity of any outward sign accompanying baptism, it being a wholly spiritual matter. also they affirm that taking or receiving the eucharist is not of perpetual obligation. and they condemn all war, even in self-defence, as unlawful for christians. the _society of friends_ consists of about , members, recorded ministers, and about unrecorded; and in england and wales they have places of worship. as a rule their moral character is excellent, and they are very valuable members of society. quinquagesima sunday. the _fiftieth_ day before easter, reckoning in whole numbers. questmen. the same as synod's men, or sidesmen. (see _churchwardens_.) rationalism. there are two ways by which the human mind can attain to a knowledge of the truth; first by receiving a divine revelation of it, and secondly by means of observation and reasoning. the name of _rationalism_ is given to that school of thought which believes that the latter of these two ways is of itself fully sufficient for the attainment of all truth. reading desk, _see_ desk. reading in. every incumbent upon entering his living is obliged to read the thirty-nine articles, and to give his assent thereto publicly, in church, on some sunday nearly following his appointment. he must also read the morning and evening prayer, and declare his assent to the prayer book. a certificate to that effect has to be signed by the churchwardens. the whole ceremony is known as that of "_reading in_." real presence, _see_ presence, real. rector. a clergyman who has charge of a parish, and who possesses all the tithes. the distinction between a rector and vicar is that the former has the whole right to all the ecclesiastical dues within his parish, whereas the latter is entitled only to a certain portion of those profits, the best part of which are often absorbed by the impropriator. reformation. the great revolt in europe in the th century against the papacy. the rescue of our church from the usurped dominion of the pope, and its restoration from the corruptions of popery to primitive purity was then effected. (see _church of england_.) refreshment sunday the fourth sunday in lent is so called probably because the gospel for the day relates the miracle of the feeding of the five thousand. it is also frequently called mid-lent sunday. in several parts of england it is known by the name of _mothering sunday_, from an ancient practice of making a pilgrimage to the mother church, usually the cathedral, of the neighbourhood on this day. the comparatively modern and local custom of young men and women going home to visit their parents on this day is probably a survival of the older practice. regeneration. a latin word meaning _new birth_, or being born again. the catechism teaches us that the grace of baptism is "a death unto sin, and a _new birth_ unto righteousness..." so, in perfect consistency with the catechism, the minister, immediately after the administration of holy baptism to a child, addresses the congregation thus: "seeing now, dearly beloved brethren, that this child is _regenerate_;" and he returns thanks to god that it hath pleased him "to regenerate this infant with thy holy spirit." the same connexion between regeneration and baptism is expressed in the office for private baptism and in the office for the baptism of adults. there has been much confusion and misunderstanding caused by using the word _regeneration_ as though it meant _conversion_. both the bible--tit. iii. ; john iii. - --and the fathers use _regeneration_ as the _new birth_ of baptism, but never as meaning anything else, unless figuratively as matt. xix. . (see _conversion, baptism_.) register. a parochial record of baptisms, marriages, and burials. the keeping of a church book for registering the age of those that should be born and christened in the parish began in the thirtieth year of henry viii. canon gives directions for the safe keeping of parish registers wherein baptisms, weddings, and burials were entered. duplicate registers of weddings are now kept by order of recent legislation, and also copies are made quarterly and given to the registrar of the district. there is a small fee payable by those who wish to search the parish registers; and for a copy of an entry s. d. is the legal charge. renovation. this action of the holy spirit upon the heart of man differs from regeneration (which see) in that it is progressive, and may often be repeated or totally lost. whereas regeneration comes only once, in or through baptism, and can never be repeated nor ever totally lost. repentance or contrition, a sincere sorrow for all past sins, an unfeigned disposition of mind to perform the will of god better for the future, and an actual avoiding and resisting of those temptations to sin under which we have before fallen. reredos. a screen behind an altar, necessary in cathedrals, and some large churches, because the altar is not against the east wall. the name is commonly given to all carved or decorated work immediately behind the altar. residentiary canons. these cathedral officers have to _reside_ in the cathedral close for three months in the year, in their respective turns, and take their part in the services of the cathedral. (see canon.) response. in the church service an answer made by the people speaking alternately with the minister. this has always been a fundamental feature in every liturgy. the practice has been handed down from the jewish church. resurrection. both the resurrection of our lord and our own future resurrection are articles of the christian faith. what the resurrection body will be like we do not know, but we believe that our mortal, corruptible body, which is laid in the grave, will rise again immortal and incorruptible. the principal passages of scripture bearing on the resurrection are-- thess. iv. - ; cor. xv. - ; rev. xx. ; phil. iii. ; rom. viii. . ring. _see_ matrimony, solemnization of. rites. religious observances prescribed by competent authority. this "competent authority" is described to be the church in that portion of the preface of the prayer book which treats of "ceremonies;" and the claim of this right for the church accords with art. xxxiv., which says: "every particular or national church hath authority to ordain, change, and abolish ceremonies or rites of the church ordained only by man's authority, so that all things be done to edifying." ritual. the name given before the reformation to that book or _manual_ (sometimes it was so called) which comprised all those occasional offices of the church which a presbyter could administer. the word is now often used of the mode or manner in which divine service is conducted. ritualist. ( ) a writer on the rites of churches. ( ) a name given of late to the school which has revived disused ceremonial in the church of england. (see _church parties_.) rochet, _see_ vestments. rood screen. a screen separating the chancel from the nave, on which the _rood_ (_i.e._, the figure of our lord on the cross) was placed, and on either side the blessed virgin and st. john. the place of the _rood_, where the screen was sufficiently substantial, as in cathedrals, has been almost universally converted into an organ loft. rubrics. rules for the ordering of divine service. they were formerly written or printed in a _red_ character, and therefore called _rubrics_, from a latin word signifying _red_. the most controverted rubric in the church of england is the well-known "_ornaments rubric_" (which see.) the rubrics dealing with the position of the priest at holy communion are examined in the articles on _communion_ and _eastward position_. rural dean. as each province is divided into dioceses, and each diocese into archdeaconries, so each archdeaconry is divided into rural deaneries, consisting of a certain number of parishes. over this rural deanery some beneficed clergyman, usually appointed by the bishop, presides. in the diocese of exeter the clergy elect their own rural deans. his duties are to call together the clergy in his deanery at certain times for the discussion of ecclesiastical matters. these meetings are called ruri-decanal chapters. it is also the duty of the rural dean to see that the churches in his deanery are in fit order for public worship, and supplied with those things by law required. he is to report any immorality or crime among the clergy of his deanery. the office of rural dean is an ancient office of the church, and is mentioned as early as the time of edward the confessor. sabaoth. a hebrew word meaning _hosts_ or _armies_. _jehovah sabaoth_ is the lord of hosts. "holy, holy, holy, lord god of sabaoth." sabbath. _rest_. the seventh day of the week, commanded in the decalogue to be kept holy, and still observed by the jews. the christian sabbath is kept on the first day of the week. (see _sunday_ and _lord's day_.) sacerdotalism. the spirit or character of the priestly class or priesthood; devotion to priestly interests. from latin _sacerdos_, one given to sacred things. sacrament. latin, _sacramentum_, an _oath_ or _promise_ ratified by a sacred or religious ceremony; thus the oath taken by soldiers in classical times was called _sacramentum_. in the early church the word "sacrament" was used to express the promises made by christians in holy baptism. then it came to be used of the ceremony itself, and thence to signify any religious ordinance. in this extended sense the church of england acknowledges other rites to be sacraments beside baptism and the eucharist; thus in the homily on swearing we find, "by the like holy promise the _sacrament of matrimony_ knitteth man and wife in perpetual love," &c. so the catechism does not limit the number of sacraments to two, but says, "two only, as _generally necessary to salvation_." thus in the church of england we distinguish baptism and the eucharist from all other ordinances, because they are, what the others are not, necessary for salvation to all men, wherever they can be had. other ordinances may confer grace, but baptism and the eucharist alone unite with christ himself. thus we may say that in the strict definition of the word there are only two sacraments. baptism and the supper of the lord. the roman catholic church teaches that there are _seven_ sacraments, but this can hardly be borne out; for if the word be taken in the larger sense as meaning any religious ordinance, then there are more than seven, but if in a limited sense, there are only two. for the roman view of sacraments see article xxv. the church catechism defines a sacrament in the strict sense as follows:--it is "an outward and visible sign of an inward and spiritual grace given unto us, ordained by christ himself as a means whereby we receive the same, and a pledge to assure us thereof." sacrifice. an offering made to god. in strictness of speech there has been but one great sacrifice--once offered, and never to be repeated--the sacrifice of the death of our lord jesus christ. he suffered "death upon the cross for our redemption; who made there (by his one oblation of himself once offered) a full, perfect, and sufficient sacrifice, oblation, and satisfaction for the sins of the whole world." but, figuratively speaking, all divine worship was anciently called a _sacrifice_, a sacrifice of praise and thanksgiving; but more especially this term has been applied to the eucharist. justin martyr and irenaeus, both fathers of the nd century, speak of the eucharist as a sacrifice. tertullian, of the rd century, does the same. (see _altar_, and _communion, the holy_.) sacrilege. the desecration of objects sacred to god. thus the robbing of churches or of graves, the abuse of sacred vessels and jars, by employing them for unhallowed purposes, the plundering and misappropriation of alms and donations, &c., are acts of sacrilege which, in the ancient church, were punished very severely. sacristan. the person to whose charge the sacred vestments, &c., in a church are committed. the word is now corrupted to _sexton_ (which see.) sacristy. the place in which sacred vestments, &c., are kept, answering to the modern vestry. saint. _holy_. the apostles in their epistles use this word simply for baptized believers, that is, for all christians. (see _communion of saints_.) saints' days. the church of rome commemorates an enormous number of holy men and women who have lived and died following in the footsteps of christ. but at the reformation it was decided to celebrate in the church of england only the festivals of the principal saints mentioned in the new testament. if the line was not drawn there, it was difficult to say where it should be drawn. when two holy-days occur (_i.e._, fall on the same day), the service appointed for the superior day should be used, but in certain cases the collect for the inferior day should be used after the collect for the superior day. as a general rule, a saint's day, or holy-day, takes precedence before an ordinary sunday. salvation army, the, was commenced as a christian mission in , by its present "general," then known as the "rev." w. booth, formerly a minister of the methodist new connexion. in the name "salvation army" was assumed. in the army was established in the united states and in france, and a weekly newspaper called the "war cry" was issued, which has now ( ) reached the sale of , copies. in the "army" had in great britain stations, or corps; officers (as the missionaries, male and female, entirely engaged in the work, are called); and held , services weekly in the streets, and in buildings bought, built, or hired for the purpose. "every member or soldier of the army is expected to wear an 's,' meaning salvation, on the collar, and those who can, provide themselves with a complete uniform of dark blue cloth thus marked." the grotesqueness, not to say irreverence, of many of their proceedings, and much of their language; the noise, excitement, and display which always accompany their work; the silly affectation of constantly using a quasi-military phraseology, and some other features of the movement, do not commend it to sober-minded christians; while the unauthorised celebration of the (so-called) sacrament of the lord's supper condemns it in the eyes of the church. sanctification. _holiness_; the effect of the holy spirit's work upon the heart of man, (see _justification_.) sanctuary. the place within the septum, or rails, where the altar stands in the christian church. the term is also used of the privilege of criminals, who, having fled to a sacred place, are free from arrest so long as they remain there. this custom of "sanctuary," which is now almost wholly done away with everywhere, arose from deut. xix. , , and joshua xx. sarum, the use of. in the early church in england every bishop was allowed to ordain rites and ceremonies, and prayers for use in his own diocese. the exercise of this power, in process of time, caused a considerable variety in the manner of performing divine service; and the custom of a diocese in its ceremonial, mode of chanting, &c., became a distinct _use_, and was known by the name of that diocese. thus gradually the _uses_, or customs, of york, sarum (or salisbury), hereford, exeter, lincoln, bangor, and doubtless others of which the records have perished, were recognised as defined and established varieties of the ritual of the english church. the most remarkable of these was the _use of sarum_. it was drawn up about by osmund, bishop of salisbury and chancellor of england. he re-built his cathedral, collected together clergy distinguished for learning, and skill in chanting, and took much pains to regulate the ecclesiastical offices; so that his church became a model for others, and his "custom-book" was wholly or partially followed in various parts of the kingdom, more especially in the south of england. we may look upon this _use_ as being the foundation of our present prayer book. satan. _an adversary_, _an enemy_, _an accuser_. sometimes the word satan is put for the devil, as in job i. , ; ps. cix. .; zech. iii. , . in the new testament it almost always means the devil, but in matt. xvi. , it simply means an _adversary_. "be gone, o mine adversary, you that withstand what i most desire," &c. the word devil is from the greek for an accuser, or calumniator. the devil, or satan, is a wicked spirit, who with many others, his angels or under-agents, is fighting against god. he has a limited dominion over all the sons of adam, except the regenerate, in his kingdom of this world. scarf or stole, _see_ vestments. sceptics. from a greek word meaning _to look about_, _to deliberate_. anciently the term was applied to a sect of philosophers founded by pyrrho. in modern times the word has been applied to deists, or those who doubt of the truth and authenticity of the sacred scriptures. schism. greek, a _fissure_, or _rent_. in an ecclesiastical sense it means a breaking off from communion with the church, on account of some disagreement in matters of faith or discipline. those who do so are called _schismatics_. to separate wilfully from the church of god is a sin; ( cor. i. ; iii. ; xi. ;) and we are directed to avoid those who cause divisions. (rom. xvi. .) in the litany we pray, "from heresy and _schism_, good lord deliver us." history brings before our notice many considerable _schisms_, in which whole bodies of men separated from the communion of the catholic church. such were, in the fourth century, the schisms of the donatists, and of the numerous heretics which sprung up in the church, as the arians, photinians, apollinarians, &c., the schism in the church of antioch; in the fifth century, the schism in the church of rome, between laurentius and symmachus; the schism of the rival popes at rome and avignon, in the fourteenth century. in england the chief schisms have been by the romanists, the independents, and the wesleyans. schoolmen. the title given to a class of learned theologians who flourished in the middle ages. they derive their name from the schools attached to the cathedrals or universities in which they lectured. the chief schoolmen were, albertus magnus, a dominican friar, died , bonaventure, surnamed the _seraphic_ doctor, born , and died a cardinal. thomas aquinas, surnamed the _angelical_ doctor, born , was a pupil of albertus magnus. john duns scotus, surnamed the _subtle_ doctor, was a scotchman by birth, but educated in paris. william ocham, surnamed the _singular_ doctor, was born in surrey, in england. he, too, like scotus, was educated at the university of paris, about the year . raymond lully, born in majorca, . durandus, surnamed the _most resolving_ doctor, bishop of meaux, . screen. any separation of one part of a church from another. the screens separating side chapels from the chancel, nave, or transept, are usually called _parcloses_. (see _rood screen_, &c.) scripture, holy, _see_ bible. sealed books. by an act of charles ii. it was ordered that the dean and chapter of every cathedral and collegiate church should obtain under the _great seal of england_ a true and perfect printed copy of the prayer book, as revised in his reign ( ), to be kept by them in safety for ever, and to be produced in any court of record when required. these copies are called "sealed books." seats, _see_ pew. sedilia. seats near an altar almost always on the south side, for the ministers officiating at the holy eucharist. see. latin, _sedes_, a seat. the scat of episcopal dignity and jurisdiction, where the bishop has his throne, or _cathedra_. septuagesima sunday. the sunday which is, in round numbers, _seventy days_ before easter. septuagint. the greek version of the old testament which was in general use in the time of our lord. the word _septuagint_ means _seventy_, and this name was given this version from the tradition that it was the work of _seventy_ translators. according to the common account, ptolemy philadelphus procured seventy-two learned jews (six from each tribe) to translate their sacred books into the greek language. the translators, it is said, were placed in houses on the island of pharos, at the mouth of the nile, where they completed their work in seventy-two days. the whole greek version of the hebrew scriptures was completed before b.c. . the gospels quote from this version. septum. the enclosure of the holy table, made by the altar rails. sepulchre or tomb. a niche figuring our lord's tomb, generally at the north side of the altar, and used in the scenic representations of our saviour's burial and resurrection. before the reformation these sacred plays were common on good friday and at easter. perhaps the most beautiful sepulchre now in england is in lincoln cathedral. sequestration. "the process by which the creditor of a clergyman of the church of england in possession of a living, sues out execution on his judgment, and obtains payment of the debt." "the bishop puts in force the law, and appoints sequestrators to take possession of the benefice and draw the emoluments, and pay them over to the creditor, first making due provision for the proper celebration of divine worship." seraphim, _see_ angels. sermons. orations or discourses, delivered by the clergy of the christian church in their religious assemblies. in the ancient church it was one of the chief offices of a bishop to preach, and it was only in the lesser churches of the city and country that the office of preaching devolved upon presbyters. deacons were never allowed to preach, and they are only permitted to do so now by special licence of the bishop (see _ordination service_.) st. augustine has laid down excellent rules for the practice of christian eloquence. the subject is to be weighty, the style answering to the subject. it was no part of the ancient oratory to raise the affections of the congregation, either by gesticulations, or the use of external shows. scarcely any of their sermons would last an hour, and many not half the time. many of st. augustine's might be preached in eight minutes. they always concluded their sermons, as we do now, with a doxology to the holy trinity. the preacher usually sat, and the people stood. the sermon in the church of england is enjoined after the nicene creed, according to ancient custom; but nowhere else. (see _preaching_.) service. in technical language those stated parts of the liturgy which are set to music; but the term is also used of the whole of public worship. sexagesima sunday. that sunday which is, in round numbers, _sixty_ days before easter. sexton. from _sacristan_. the name is now generally given to the person who digs the graves, &c. shakers. a party of enthusiasts who left england for america in . they affected to consider themselves as forming the only true church, and their preachers as possessed of the apostolic gift. they disowned baptism and the eucharist. their leader was anna lees, whom they believed to be the woman mentioned in the apocalypse (rev. xii. , ). shrove tuesday. the day before ash wednesday, so called in the church of england from the old saxon word _shrive_, _shrif_, _shrove_, which means to _confess_; it being our duty to confess our sins to god on that day in order to receive the holy communion, and thereby qualify ourselves for a more holy observance of lent. before the reformation auricular confession was compulsorily made to a priest, and absolution was sought. sick, communion of, _see_ communion of sick. sick, visitation of. a duty entailed upon the christian minister by canon , and by the rubric before the office for the visitation of the sick. this office, with the exception of the exhortations, is chiefly taken from the sarum use (which see). the service has little changed since , except by the addition in of the final commendation, and of the four beautiful collects appended to the service. the salutation is in obedience to our lord's command (luke x. ). the versicles are the same as those in the marriage service, except the prayer for deliverance from the enemy, which is taken from ps. lxxxix. , . after two collects come two very beautiful and practical exhortations, which are followed by an examination in the faith of the sick person. next comes the provision for confession and absolution, which is similar to that in the first exhortation at holy communion, as to private confession and special absolution. till the initiative was left wholly to the sick person, "then shall the sick man," &c., but now the minister is to "move him" to confession. the absolution is only to be given if the sick person "humbly and heartily desire it." the latter part of the absolution is taken from the ancient office, and is declaratory, the first clause being precatory. the phrase, "_i absolve thee_," has been much discussed; this form has been used ever since the th century. a rubric in provided this absolution for use in all cases of private confession, and thus it is probably the absolution referred to in the exhortation at holy communion. (see _absolution_.) the next collect is the original absolution, or reconciliation of a dying penitent, in the sacramentary of gelasius, a th century compilation. after the psalm comes a beautiful specimen of the ancient antiphon. the benediction was composed in , and the commendation was added in . (num. vi. - .) the four beautiful final prayers were added in . sidesmen or synodsmen, _see_ churchwardens. simon (st.) and jude's (st.) day. october th. these two apostles are found together in all the apostolic catalogues immediately after "james the son of alphaeus," and in the list of the "brethren of our lord" we have "james, judas, and simon;" thus it has been usual to identify the two lists. however, the weight of evidence seems against this identification. st. simon is surnamed the _canaanite_ (it ought to be _cananite_) and _zelotes_, which two names are really the same; the one being hebrew and the other greek. the "zealots" were an enthusiastic sect in judaea about the time of our lord. st. jude had two surnames, viz., thaddeus and lebbeus. of neither apostle have we any special notice in scripture, or trustworthy tradition. simony. the conferring of holy orders, or the presentation of any one to an ecclesiastical benefice for money, gift, or reward. canon calls it "the detestable sin of simony," and every person on being instituted to a benefice has to swear that he is not guilty of it. it is so called from the sin of _simon_ magus (acts viii. ), though paley states that the resemblance is an _imaginary_ one. sin. the subject _sin_ may be considered under various heads; . _original sin_; . _actual sin_; . _deadly sin_; . _sin against the holy ghost_. ( .) _original sin_. this is "the fault and corruption of our nature, which infects all men." (see article ix.) we inherit it from adam, our first parent. it is the dread consequence of the fall. scripture proofs: gen. viii. ; job xiv. ; ps. li. ; rom. viii. ; ep. iv. ; ep. ii. ; gal. iii. ; cor. xv. ; rom. v. , , , , . the church of england teaches that although all _taint_ of original sin is not done away in baptism, yet it holds that its _condemnation_ is remitted. ( .) _actual sin_. sin which we ourselves commit. ( .) _deadly sin_. (see article xvi.) the church of rome divides sin into two classes: _mortal_ sin, that sin which is in its nature gross, and is committed knowingly, wilfully, deliberately; and _venial sin_, sins of ignorance, and negligence, and the like. we also make a distinction between sins of greater or less enormity; we admit that there is a difference of degree, but the romanists make a difference in their nature and kind, a distinction we cannot admit. according to the romans, no amount of venial sins would ever make a mortal sin. we consider every sin to be in its nature mortal or deadly, and deserving of god's wrath and condemnation (james ii. , ), and only hope to be saved through the intercession of our "advocate with the father, jesus christ the righteous, who is the propitiation for our sins." ( .) _sin against the holy ghost_. (see article xvi.) what is the nature of this terrible sin which "shall not be forgiven, neither in this world nor in the world to come?" (matt. xii. , .) the church clearly teaches in article xvi. that wilful sin after baptism is not, as some have taught, _the_ unforgivable sin, but it seems rather to be "obstinate, resolute, and wilful impenitence, after all the means of grace and with all the strivings of the spirit, under the christian dispensation as distinguished from the jewish, and amid all the blessings and privileges of the church of christ." (harold browne on the thirty-nine articles.) this, in effect, is the teaching of st. augustine, that the sin against the holy ghost is a final and obdurate continuance in wickedness, despite the calls of god to repentance, joined with a desperation of the mercy of god. in matt. xii. , , it would seem that the unpardonable sin was committed by those who ascribed our lord's miracles to the power of beelzebub. societies, church. it will be possible to mention a few only of the _chief_ societies, &c., connected with the church, in a work like the present. they will be described under the headings ( ) charitable, ( ) educational, ( ) missionary, ( ) building, ( ) general. . _charitable_. each diocese has charities of its own in addition to those which are not of limited area,-- _the corporation of the sons of the clergy_. founded . registrar, w. p. bowman, esq. office, , bloomsbury place, london. objects, assistance to necessitous clergymen, their widows and maiden daughters; education of children of poor clergymen, and the starting of them in life. _the friend of the clergy corporation_, . secretary, rev. h. jona, , st. martin's place, trafalgar square, london. objects much the same as above. _the poor clergy relief corporation_, . secretary, dr. robert turtle pigott, , southampton street, strand. objects, immediate relief, both in money and clothing, to poor clergymen, their widows and orphans, in sickness and other temporary distress. _the cholmondeley charities_. treasurer, john hanby, esq., , middle scotland yard, whitehall, s.w. class i., augmentation of certain stipends. class ii., much the same as above societies. class iii., exhibitions to sons of clergymen to the universities. class iv., allowance for starting the children of clergymen in life. . _educational societies_. each diocese has societies of its own in addition to the following:-- _church of england sunday school institute_. founded . sec., j. palmer, esq., serjeant's inn, fleet street, e.c. objects, to provide educational appliances (books, lessons, &c.) both for teachers and scholars, and to assist teachers in the work of teaching by means of lectures, &c. _incorporated national society_. secretary, rev. j. duncan, national society office, sanctuary, westminster. object, to help forward the education of the poor in the principles of the established church by making grants to church schools and the like, and by training teachers. _society for promoting christian knowledge_ (see part v. of this article). . _missionary societies_, (_a_) home, (_b_) foreign. (_a_) _the missions to seamen society_. office, , buckingham street, strand, w.c. object, to make provision for the spiritual needs of british merchant sailors when afloat. _the navvy mission society_. office, palace chambers, bridge street, westminster, s.w. object, to promote the spiritual welfare of navvies working on railways, docks, &c. _church pastoral aid society_, . office, falcon court, , fleet street, london, e.c. object, to give grants to "evangelical" clergyman towards the incomes of additional curates and lay helpers in populous parishes. the committee interferes in the appointments. _additional curates' society_, . office, , whitehall, london, s.w. object, to assist in the payment of additional curates, irrespective of party views. this society does not interfere in the appointments, but very properly leaves them to the bishop and the incumbent. (_b_) _society for the propagation of the gospel in foreign parts_. incorporated . , delahay street, westminster, s.w. object, the spiritual care of our colonists and the evangelizing of the heathen in british dominions abroad on thorough church of england principles. _church missionary society_, . salisbury square, london, e.c. object, the preaching of the gospel of christ among the heathen, in strict accordance with the doctrines and discipline of the church of england. _colonial bishoprics fund_, , delahay street, westminster, s.w. object, to help endow colonial sees. there is also a mission to the jews, , lincoln's inn fields, london. . _building societies_. there are many diocesan, as well as general church building societies. _queen anne's bounty_. (see _bounty, queen anne's_.) dean's yard, westminster, s.w. object, the building of parsonage houses, &c. _incorporated church building society_. , whitehall, london. object, the enlargement, building and repairing of churches and chapels in england and wales. . _general societies_. these all have local branches. _society for promoting christian knowledge_. address, the secretaries, s.p.c.k., northumberland avenue, london, w.c. objects, to provide good and cheap bibles and prayer books in various languages; to circulate general literature of a high character in thorough keeping with the principles of the church of england, and suitable to all classes; to help forward church education, home mission work, the building of churches and chapels abroad, and the training of a native ministry abroad. _the religious tract society_, , paternoster row, london. object, the production and circulation of religious books, treatises, tracts and pure literature, in various languages, throughout the british dominions, and in foreign countries, of a protestant and evangelical description. _the british and foreign bible society_, , queen victoria st., london, e.c. object, the circulation of the holy scriptures in various languages without note or comment, both at home and abroad. _church penitentiary association_, , york buildings, adelphi, london. object, the establishment and maintenance of penitentiaries and houses of refuge throughout the country for the lessening of vice, and furthering efforts for the recovery of the fallen. _church of england temperance society_. object, the promotion of the habits of temperance; the reformation of the intemperate; and the removal of the causes which lead to intemperance. _the church defence association_. st. stephen's palace chambers, , bridge street, westminster. object, to resist all attempts to destroy or weaken the union between church and state, or to injure the temporal interests of the church. _english church union_, , wellington street, strand, london, w.c. object, to unite clergy and laity in loyal defence of the doctrine and discipline of the church of england and the rights and liberties of her faithful children. _the church association_, , buckingham street, strand. object, to uphold the doctrines of the evangelical party in the church of england. this society is notorious as the prosecutor of mr. mackonochie and other clergy of the same school. the free and open church association, , southampton street, strand. objects, ( ) the throwing open of our churches for the free and equal use of all classes; ( ) the adoption of the weekly offertory instead of pew rents; ( ) the opening of churches throughout the day for private prayer. _tithe redemption trust_. (see _tithes_.) socinianism. the doctrine of faustus socinus, an italian, born . he taught that the eternal father was the one only god, and that jesus was god no otherwise than by his superiority over all creatures. that jesus christ was not a mediator between god and man, but only a pattern to men. that the punishment of hell will last only for a time, after which both body and soul will be destroyed. that it is not lawful for princes to make war. many of the anabaptists are socinian in doctrine. (see _unitarianism_.) son of god, _see_ trinity, the holy. spike. the high pyramidical capping or roof of a tower. this is sometimes confounded with the word _steeple_, which latter really means the tower, with all its appendages. sponsors. in the administration of baptism, sponsors have from time immemorial held an important place. they are called _sponsors_, because they _respond_ or answer for the baptized. they are also called _sureties_, in virtue of the _security_ given by them to the church, that the baptized shall be "virtuously brought up to lead a godly and a christian life." they are also called _godparents_ because of the spiritual affinity created in baptism when they undertake a responsibility almost _parental_ in the future training of the baptized. in the church of rome godparents may not intermarry. anciently only one sponsor was required. their action at the font may be likened to that of those who brought the man sick of the palsy to our lord. (mark ii.) although it is not necessary to have sponsors for the validity of baptism, still the rule of the church of england requires that "there shall be for every male child to be baptized two godfathers and one godmother; and for every female, one godfather and two godmothers." (rubric.) and canon , "no person shall be urged to be present, nor be admitted to answer as godfather for his own child; nor any godfather or godmother shall be suffered to make any other answer or speech, than by the book of common prayer is prescribed in that behalf. neither shall any person be admitted godfather or godmother to any child at christening or confirmation, before the said person so undertaking hath received the holy communion." parents are now allowed to act as sponsors for their children. stalls. seats in the choir, or chancel. steeple, _see_ spire. stephen's (st.) day. dec. th. a festival in honour of the proto- (first) martyr, st. stephen. he was one of the seven deacons, and all we know of him is told us in acts vii. and viii. stole, _see_ vestments. succentor. the precentor's deputy in cathedral churches. at york he is a dignitary, and is called _succentor canonicorum_ to distinguish him from the other subchanter, who is a vicar-choral. succession, apostolical. _see_ apostolical succession and orders, holy. suffragans. properly all provincial bishops who are under a primate or metropolitan; but the word now is applied especially to assistant bishops, such as the bishop of bedford, the bishop of nottingham, &c. sunday. the first day of the week, so called by the saxons, because it was dedicated to the worship of the sun. among christians it is kept "holy" instead of the jewish sabbath, because on that day our lord rose from the dead, and for that reason it is called by st. john "the lord's day." (rev. i. .) _when_ the sunday began to be kept instead of the sabbath we are not quite sure, but we find that the apostles kept the first day of the week as a festival. our lord himself sanctioned it by his repeated appearance among his disciples on that day. the holy spirit, too, poured down his miraculous gifts on that day. the early christians observed the sunday. by many it is believed that it is one of the things in which our lord instructed his apostles before his ascension, while "speaking of things pertaining to the kingdom of god." (acts , .) the phrase "kingdom of god" is always used of the church. in keeping the sunday "holy," christians comply with the _spirit_ of the fourth commandment, which orders a seventh part of our time to be consecrated to god. super-altar, or re-table. a shelf or step behind the altar, on which the vases, candlesticks, and cross are placed. properly the _super-altar_ is a small portable slab of stone which is placed on wooden altars. supererogation. the th article gives the teaching of the church of england. romanists teach that there are certain good deeds which have been performed by saints over and above those necessary for their own salvation. from this fund of good works, technically known as the _treasury of merits_, the pope claims to have the power to draw and apply the good deeds of others to the benefit of those who are deficient in them themselves. supremacy. the church of england regards the sovereign as being over all persons, and all causes, ecclesiastical as well as civil, supreme in this realm. (see article xxxvii.) this does not teach in any way that the clergy derive their authority and mission from the state, as some misunderstand. (see _apostolical succession_.) surplice, _see_ vestments. surrogate. one appointed in place of another. thus to avoid the necessity of journeying to the bishop, he grants to other clergymen living in the principal towns, the power of giving licenses for marriage instead of publishing banns, of granting probates of wills, &c. these clergymen acting in place of the bishop are called _surrogates_. swedenborgians. the followers of emanuel, baron swedenborg, who was born in stockholm in , and died in london, . he believed himself to be the subject of inspiration, and taught that the scriptures have two senses, natural and spiritual. the natural sense is that held by the christian church, but the spiritual is that which is concealed within the natural sense of the same words. he taught that the second advent had been realized in the establishment of his new church, the "new jerusalem" of the apocalypse. they do not receive the usual doctrine of the trinity, and reject the doctrine of justification by faith alone. they administer the sacraments. they still profess to believe themselves visited by super-natural beings, by the apostles and other saints. it is not generally known that the heaven of the swedenborgian bears a close resemblance to the mahometan's idea of heaven,--a place of sensual delights; and one of their books which is as hard to obtain as the others are easy, named "conjugal love," is not particularly moral in its teaching! the _swedenborgians_ number societies, with , registered members. synod. a meeting duly summoned and constituted of ecclesiastical persons for the discussion of religious matters. synods are of less authority than general or oecumenical councils. te deum laudamus. a canticle of morning prayer, which has been sung for , years throughout the western church. its origin is not known. the tradition which ascribes it to st. ambrose, or to st. ambrose and st. augustine, conjointly, rests on very slight foundation. an able article in the _church quarterly review_ (april, ), comes to the conclusion that the te deum very probably originated from the monastery of st. honoratus, at lerins, about the middle of the th century. it is the great triumphant hymn of praise of the western church as the gloria in excelsis is of the eastern. verses to , are _praise_; vv. - are a _creed_ in our lord jesus christ; vv. - are _prayer_ to our lord broken by another burst of praise. there is a musical setting of the _te deum_, called the ambrosian, dating from the th century. testament, old and new, _see_ bible. testimonial letters, _see_ orders, qualifications for, thanksgiving, the general. composed by bishop reynolds, and inserted in . the custom obtaining in some churches of the congregation repeating this thanksgiving after the minister, was certainly not originally intended, and perhaps has been based on a mistaken idea of the meaning of the word "general," as applied to this thanksgiving: we understand it to mean that the _terms_ and _subjects_ of the prayer are _general_. theism. the recognition of a principle apart from nature, independent of nature, yet moulding, regulating, and sustaining nature. the idea of _personality_ is essential to theism. _a-theism_, literally, is the denial of _theism_. theology. the science which treats of the deity. it is too often forgotten that theology is a science as much as medicine or mathematics, or we should not find the laity so confident of their knowledge, and so ready to give the law on questions of systematic divinity. theological colleges. colleges specially established for the training of candidates for holy orders, in theology. they seem to answer to the assemblies of "sons of the prophets," spoken of in kings ii. , , , &c. these colleges have not the power of conferring degrees. thomas's (st.) day. dec. st. the name thomas (hebrew), and didymus (greek), means a "twin brother." some think st. matthew to have been his brother. the only incidents of his life with which we are acquainted, are told us by st. john, (xi. ; xiv. ; xx. .) tradition says that he laboured in persia, and finally suffered martyrdom in india. throne. the bishop's seat in his cathedral. anciently it stood behind the altar in churches which terminated in an apse. tippet, _see_ hood. tithes. a certain portion, or allotment, for the maintenance of the priesthood, being the tenth part of the produce of land, cattle, or other branches of wealth. it is an income, or revenue, common both to the jewish and christian priesthood. (gen. xiv. ; lev. xxvii. - ; &c.) the origin of _tithes_, in the christian church, was something of this kind: when a benefactor was not able or not willing to part with an estate out and out, he settled on the church which he was endowing a certain portion of the income arising out of the estate. the ratio which this portion bore to the whole amount varied enormously, and so one man gave a tithe of corn only, another a tithe of wood, another a tithe of meadow land, another a tithe of stock, another tithes of all these together. there is a very common mistake made that tithes are a kind of tax, levied on the whole country by act of parliament. they are nothing of the kind, being simply a certain portion of the income arising out of lands settled by the former owners of those lands for the maintenance of the parson of the parish. they date back to the th century. although the church is disestablished in ireland, tithes are still paid, not to the clergy, but to the government. disestablishment, therefore, is small gain to the farmer. _tithe redemption trust_. in the year a very excellent society was formed, called "the tithe redemption trust," the object of which is the very opposite of that at which the liberation society aims. it has been quietly at work for some years, endeavouring, with some success, to get back, either by redemption or by voluntary donation, the tithes which have been alienated by appropriation or impropriation. what portion of church property has been long enjoyed by private families, or by corporations, has, of course, become inalienable; but it would be a reasonable and a righteous thing (and all the more blessed for being voluntary) that every person who receives tithes, or possesses glebe land in a parish, for which no spiritual service is rendered, should give in some way or other to the church a very liberal percentage of what was never meant to be raised for the purpose of private emolument, but for the fitting discharge of ecclesiastical duties. (webb's "england's inheritance in her church.") title, _see_ orders, qualifications for. tractarianism. the anglican movement which began with the publication of the celebrated "_tracts for the times_" in . the principal results of this movement are ( ) the complete reintegration of the original theory of the church of england; of that "ancient religion which, in , had well-nigh faded out of the land;" ( ) the improvement which has taken place in the lives of the clergy, in the performance of the services, and in the condition of our churches; and the marked revival in the corporate life of the church herself. the great names of this movement are pusey, newman, marriott, oakley, manning, robert wilberforce, keble, and palmer. for some few the movement led to disastrous issues; and they fell at last into roman errors, and joined that erring church. transubstantiation. the name given to the philosophical theory whereby the church of rome has endeavoured to explain and define the doctrine of the real presence. in it they allege that the bread and wine in the eucharist is miraculously converted or changed into the very body and blood of our lord, by the consecration of the priest. this false doctrine is condemned in article xxviii. trent, council of. an important council of the roman church which met in , and was dissolved in . the city of trent is in the tyrol. it was at this council that the creed of the roman church was last defined, and all who differed from it were anathematised. neither the greek church nor the english church was represented there, so it has no claim to the title of oecumenical, or general, as asserted by romanists. trinity, the holy. the athanasian creed and article i. give the teaching of our church on the holy trinity. there we learn that in the unity of the godhead there be three persons; that is, though there be but one living and true god, yet there be three persons, who are that one living and true god. though the true god be but one in substance, yet he is three in subsistence, so as still to be but one substance. and these three persons, every one of which is god, and yet all three but one god, are really related to one another; as they are termed in scripture, one is the father, the other the son, the other the holy ghost. the father is the first person in the deity; not begotten, nor proceeding, but begetting; the son, the second, not begetting nor proceeding, but begotten; the holy ghost, the third, not begotten, nor begetting, but proceeding. the first is called the father, because he begot the second; the second is called the son, because he is begotten of the father; the third is called the holy ghost, because breathed both from the father and the son. this is a great mystery to us, which, however, we are not called upon to _understand_, but only to _believe_ on the plain statement of scripture. the father is god, john vi, ; gal. i. ; thess. i. , &c. the son is god, john i. ; xx. ; rom. ix. , &c. the holy ghost is god. this, however, has to be proved by implication and analogy, as with luke i. compare matt. i. ; acts v. , , with john iii. compare john v. ; with cor. iii. compare vi. , &c. the unity of the godhead is declared in many such passages as deut. vi. ; gal. iii. ; john x. , &c. the son of god, our lord jesus christ, "took man's nature in the womb of the blessed virgin, of her substance; so that the two whole and perfect natures, that is to say the godhead and manhood, were joined together in one person, never to be divided, whereof is one christ very god and very man." (art. ii. and luke i.) trinity sunday. this is a festival of western origin, and of comparatively recent date; the earliest formal notice of the festival is in england, under becket, in ; though the collect dates from the th century. triumphant, the church. those who have departed this life in god's faith and fear; the church in heaven. the church on earth is called the church militant. tunicle, _see_ vestments. type. an impression, image, or representation of some model which is termed the _anti-type_; thus the brazen serpent and the paschal lamb were types, of which our lord was the _anti-type_. unitarians. heretics who deny the divinity of our lord jesus christ, and the separate personality of the holy ghost. the name includes all deists, whether the arians of old, or the socinians (which see) of later years. the arians were heretics named after arius, whose doctrine was condemned at the council of nice, a.d. . he taught that there was a time when the son of god was not, and that he was created by the father. he called him by the name of god, but denied that he was _homoousios_, "_of one substance_" with the father. the arians seem to have held that the holy ghost also was a created being. the athanasian creed, vv. - opposes the arian heresy. the unitarians have in england ministers, chapels, and about mission stations. university. (lat., _universitas_, corporation.) a corporation of teachers and students instituted for the promotion of the higher education, and empowered to grant degrees in the various faculties of divinity, arts, law. medicine, &c. england has five universities, two ancient--oxford and cambridge; and three modern, viz., durham, london, and the victoria university, manchester. use, _see_ sarum, use of. utilitarianism. the name of the peculiar theory of ethics, or of the ground of moral obligation, that adopts, as the criterion of right, the happiness of mankind; or, as jeremy bentham defined it, "the greatest happiness of the greatest number." it is opposed to the view that founds moral distinctions on the mere arbitrary will of god. the most eminent modern advocates of utilitarianism are hume, bentham, paley, james mill, john stuart mill, sir james mackintosh, john austin, samuel bailey, herbert spencer, and bain. venial sin, _see_ sin. veni creator. an old latin hymn ascribed by common tradition to st. ambrose, but with no sufficient authority. it has been used with special reference to the gifts of ordination since the th century. the first version in the ordination service was inserted in , previous to that the second and longer form had been used. venite, exultemus domino. ps. xcv. has been sung as the "invitatory psalm," opening the service of praise, from time immemorial. it is found in the sarum use. in the eastern church a condensed form of it is used. verger. from the latin _virga_, a _rod_. one who carries the mace before the dean or canons in a cathedral, or conducts the congregation to their seats in church. versicles. the short ejaculatory prayers of our service, generally taken from holy scripture. version, the authorised. the version of the bible now in use in england. it was published in , and authorised by king james i. it retains in many places the original translation of tyndale, very little altered. a company of divines and scholars of the present day have been engaged in revising this version of the old testament. the result of their labours will probably be given to the public in . (see _bible_.) version, the revised. the version of the new testament put forth in . it is a revision of that of , made by a company of scholars and divines, and aims at being a more exact reproduction of the original. although at present it has not been authorised for public use, yet it will be found by all to be a very useful commentary on the authorised version. vespers, or evensong. the evening service of the church. for arrangement, &c., see _morning prayer_, but the various parts of the service are given each under its own heading. vestments. generally, the garments worn by the clergy in the public services of the church, but more particularly the special robes worn by some clergymen during the celebration of the holy communion. _alb_. a linen vestment longer than the surplice, and with tight sleeves. it is confined at the waist by a girdle, and, when employed in the eucharist, it is often, though not necessarily, ornamented with patches of embroidery called _apparels_. _amice_. a kind of broad linen collar, fastened with strings. _biretta_. a square cap of black silk worn at processions and other out-door functions. it is simply the ordinary cap (beret) of civil life, and, like the cassock, is not strictly an ecclesiastical vesture at all. it is worn also in church during certain parts of the service by extreme ritualists. _cassock_. a long coat buttoning over the breast and reaching to the feet, confined at the waist by a wide sash, called the cincture. it is worn immediately over the ordinary clothes of the minister, and is usually of black, though violet and scarlet are sometimes used. _chasuble_. an oval garment without sleeves, open at the sides, and having an aperture at the neck through which the priest passes his head. it is embroidered with a y-cross behind, and is considered the principal vestment of the priest. it varies in colour with the season. _cope_. a large semicircular cloak of silk or other material, fastening in front by a clasp or morse. at the back is a piece of embroidery in the shape of a shield, called the hood. it varies in colour with the season. _cotta_. a vestment of linen, shorter than the surplice, and not quite so full. it has short sleeves, and is frequently edged with lace. _dalmatic and tunicle_. these differ very slightly in form, but the former is generally the more richly embroidered. it is the special dress of the deacon at holy communion, and varies in colour with the season. _girdle_. a white cord, used to confine the alb at the waist. _hood_. (see article, _hood_.) _maniple_. a smaller stole worn over the left arm. _stole_. a narrow strip of silk passed round the neck and hanging in front to about the knees. it varies in colour with the season. _surplice_. a linen vestment of various degrees of fulness, and with long wide sleeves. it is the garment usually worn by the clergy of the church of england, although many of the above are ordered in the first prayer book of edward vi. the eucharistic vestments are the amice, alb, girdle, stole, maniple, tunicle, dalmatic and chasuble. besides these we have the episcopal vestments, called the _chimere_ and the _rochet_. _chimere_. the upper robe worn by a bishop, to which the lawn sleeves are generally attached. until queen elizabeth's time it was of scarlet, but in her reign it was changed into black satin. _rochet_. a linen garment worn by bishops under the chimere. the lawn sleeves now sewn on the chimere properly are part of the rochet, and formerly were much less full than now worn. (see _ornaments_.) vestry. a room attached to a church for the keeping of the vestments and sacred vessels. meetings of parishioners, for the despatch of the official business of the parish are held in this room, whence they are called _vestries_, or _vestry meetings_. it is not however essential to the validity of the meeting that it should be held in the vestry of the church, indeed, by making application under an act passed in , meetings in the vestry can be made illegal. notice of the meeting must be affixed on or near the door of the church three days previously. the incumbent is _ex-officio_ chairman of the meeting, and all persons rated to the relief of the poor are entitled to attend and vote. via media. the middle road. this position is occupied in the christian world by the anglican church. on the one side there is the church of rome; on the other, the ultra-protestant sects. the phrase is also used of any middle way between two extremes. viaticum. a provision made for a journey. in the ancient church both baptism and the eucharist were called _viatica_, because they are equally necessary for the safe passage of a man through this world to eternal life. more particularly, however, the term is used of the eucharist given to persons in immediate danger of death. the th canon of the council of nice ordains that none "be deprived of his perfect and most necessary _viaticum_ when he departs out of this life." vicar, _see_ rector. vicars choral. the assistants or deputies of the canons or prebendaries of cathedrals and collegiate churches, in the discharges of their duties. they are not necessarily all in holy orders; those who are so are now generally called "minor canons," (which see) and the others are "lay-clerks." vicar general. an officer whose duties are much the same as those of the chancellor of a diocese (which see.) vigil. the night or evening before certain holy-days of the church. the word means a _watching_, and is derived from the custom of the primitive christians, who used to spend the whole night previous to any great festival in watching and fasting. the collect for those holy-days which have vigils is read at the evening service of the day before. festivals occurring in seasons of joy as a rule have no vigil preceding them. virgin mary, _see_ mary. visitation. once in three years a bishop goes through his diocese, calling together the clergy at different centres, and delivering to them a _charge_, (which see.) an archdeacon does the same for his archdeaconry once a year. it is at this latter visitation that church-wardens are admitted to their office. visitation of the sick, _see_ sick. voluntary. a piece of music played on the organ at the beginning and close of divine service. formerly a voluntary was played after the psalms, sometimes after the second lesson. the name implies that its performance is optional. lord bacon approved of voluntaries as giving time for meditation. vulgar tongue. the native language of a country. the phrase in the baptismal office stood formerly, "in the english tongue," but it was altered to embrace the case of foreigners. vulgate. the latin translation of the bible in common use. the first vulgate of the old testament was translated, not from the original hebrew, but from the septuagint (which see), the author being unknown. the second vulgate was by st. jerome, and was made from the hebrew. a mixture of these two was authorised for use by the council of trent. other translations have since been made. it is the official and standard text in the roman church. wafers. the bread used by the romanists, by lutheran protestants, and by some ritualists in our own church, in the eucharist. wesleyans, _see_ methodists. whitsun-day, or whitsunday. the derivation of the name is doubtful; some taking it from whitsun, a corruption of pentecosten, the old anglo-saxon name for the day; and some from white sunday, because those who had been baptized on its eve wore white robes. this festival is the birthday of the church, and has been observed, like easter, from the first days of christianity. (see _pentecost_.) will, free, _see_ free will. word, the. a name given to our lord in the opening of st. john's gospel. the term was familiar to the jews. (see _logos_.) worship. besides meaning the supreme homage and devotion due to almighty god, it is also used in the bible and prayer book, to denote honour, respect, and reverence given to men. thus it is used in ps. lxxxiv. ; luke xiv. ; and in chron. xxix. , it seems to be used in both senses. in the marriage service the husband promises to _worship_ his wife, that is, to render her all due respect and honour. in like manner we call a mayor or a chancellor "worshipful." worship, public, _see_ public worship. year, the ecclesiastical. the different seasons of the church year have each a separate notice. the church begins her year with advent, because, as bishop cosin says, "she does not number her days, or measure her seasons, so much by the motion of the sun, as by the course of our saviour; beginning and counting her year with him who, being the true sun of righteousness, began now to rise upon the world." the works of john knox collected and edited by david laing, ll.d. volume first. edinburgh: james thin, south bridge. mdcccxcv. $works of john knox$. the wodrow society, instituted may . for the publication of the works of the fathers and early writers of the reformed church of scotland. the works of $john knox$. collected and edited by $david laing, ll.d.$ volume first. edinburgh: james thin, south bridge. mdcccxcv. ad scotos transeuntibus primo-occurrit magnus ille joannes cnoxus: quem si scotorum in vero dei cultu instaurando, velut apostolum quendam dixero. dixisse me quod res est existimabo. theod. beza. manufactured in the united states of america [illustration] $table of contents$. page advertisement, vii chronological notes of the chief events in the life of john knox, xi history of the reformation in scotland. introductory notice, xxv book first, -- , book second, -- , appendix. no. i.--interpolations and various readings in book first and second in buchanan's editions of the history, in , no. ii.--on the lollards in scotland, during the fifteenth century, no. iii.--patrick hamilton, abbot of ferne, no. iv.--on the royal pilgrimages to the shrine of st. duthack, at tain, in ross-shire, no. v.--foxe's account of henry forrest, and other martyrs in scotland, during the reign of king james the fifth, no. vi.--notices of the protestant exiles from scotland, during the reign of king james the fifth, no. vii.--alexander seyton, no. viii.--sir john borthwick, no. ix.--george wishart, no. x.--john rough, no. xi.--norman lesley, no. xii.--adam wallace, no. xiii.--walter myln, no. xiv.--on the title of sir applied to priests, no. xv.--on the tumult in edinburgh, at the procession on st. giles's day, , no. xvi.--provincial councils in scotland, - , no. xvii.--letter of mary queen of scots to lord james, prior of the monastery of st. andrews. july , no. xviii.--david forrest, general of the mint, [illustration] illustrations page no. i. ioannes cnoxvs. _from_ theod. bezÆ icones, etc., m.d.lxxx. xii no. ii. handwritten preface _facing page_ xxxi no. vii. signature of m jo. knox. xxxiv augusti a^o $advertisement$. this publication of the works of john knox, it is supposed, will extend to five volumes. it was thought advisable to commence the series with his history of the reformation in scotland, as the work of greatest importance. the next volume will thus contain the third and fourth books, which continue the history to the year ; at which period his historical labours may be considered to terminate. but the fifth book, forming a sequel to the history, and published under his name in , will also be included. his letters and miscellaneous writings will be arranged in the subsequent volumes, as nearly as possible in chronological order; each portion being introduced by a separate notice, respecting the manuscript or printed copies from which they have been taken. it may perhaps be expected that a life of the author should have been prefixed to this volume. the life of knox, by dr. m'crie, is however a work so universally known, and of so much historical value, as to supersede any attempt that might be made for a detailed biography; and none of the earlier sketches of his life is sufficiently minute or accurate to answer the purpose intended. in order to obviate the necessity of the reader having recourse to other authorities, i have added some chronological notices of the leading events in his life; reserving to the conclusion of the work any remarks, in connexion with this publication, that may seem to be requisite. i was very desirous of obtaining a portrait of the reformer, to accompany this volume. hitherto all my inquiries have failed to discover any undoubted original painting, among several which have either been so described, or engraved as such.[ ] in the meantime, a tolerably accurate fac-simile is given of the wood-cut portrait of knox,[ ] included by theodore beza, in his volume entitled "icones, _id est_, veræ imagines virorum doctrina simul et pietate illustrium," &c., published at geneva, in the year , to. it is the earliest of the engraved portraits, and, so far as we can judge, it ought to serve as a kind of test by which other portraits must be tried. a similar head engraved on copper, is to be found in verheiden's "præstantium aliquot theologorum, &c., effigies," published at the hague, in , folio; but this, i apprehend, is merely an improved copy from beza, and not taken from an original painting. it does not retain the expressive character of the ruder engraving, although the late sir david wilkie, whose opinion in such matters was second to none, was inclined to prefer this of verheiden to any at least of the later portraits of the reformer.[ ] it may not here be superfluous to mention, that this publication was projected by the editor many years ago, and that some arrangements had been entered into for having it printed in england. when the wodrow society, therefore, expressed a willingness to undertake the work, i proposed as a necessary condition, that i should have the privilege of causing a limited impression to be thrown off, for sale, chiefly in england; and the council, in the most liberal manner, at once acquiesced in this proposal. instead however of availing myself to the full extent of their liberality, which some circumstances rendered less desirable, but in order to avoid throwing, either upon the society or the editor, the extra expenses which have been incurred in various matters connected with the publication, it was finally arranged that a much more limited impression than was first proposed, should be thrown off on paper to be furnished by the bannatyne club, for the use of the members of that institution. november, . $chronological notes$. ioannes cnoxvs. [illustration: _from_ theod. bezÆ icones, etc., m.d.lxxx.] $chronological notes of the chief events in the life of john knox$. [sn: .] knox was born this year, at the village of gifford, near the town of haddington, in east-lothian. his father is said to have been descended from the knoxes of ranferly, in the county of renfrew; and the name of his mother was sinclair. knox himself, in describing an interview with the earl of bothwell, in , mentions that his father, grandfather, and great-grandfather, had all served his lordship's predecessors, and that some of them had died under their standards; which implies that they must have been settled for a considerable period in east-lothian, where the hepburns, earls of bothwell, had their chief residence. [sn: .] after being educated at haddington, knox was sent to the university of glasgow; where john major was principal regent or professor of philosophy and divinity. the name "joh[=a]nes knox," occurs in the registers of the university, among those of the students who were incorporated in the year . there is no evidence to shew that he afterwards proceeded to st. andrews, as is usually stated, either to complete his academical education, or publicly to teach philosophy, for which he had not qualified himself by taking his degree of master of arts. if he ever taught philosophy, it must have been in the way of private tuition. [sidenote .] about this time knox took priest's orders; and he was probably connected, for upwards of ten years, with one of the religious establishments in the neighbourhood of haddington. it is generally supposed, that between the years and , in the course of his private studies, the perusal of the writings of augustine and other ancient fathers, led him to renounce scholastic theology, and that he was thus prepared, at a mature period of life, to profess his adherence to the protestant faith. [sn: .] march . the name of "schir john knox" occurs among the witnesses to a deed concerning rannelton law, in a protocol-book belonging to the borough of haddington; and there is no reason to doubt that this was the reformer. [sn: .] knox entered the family of hugh douglas of longniddry, as tutor of his sons francis and george douglas; and also of alexander cockburn, son of john cockburn of ormiston. [sn: .] in this year he attached himself as an avowed adherent of george wishart, from the time of his first visit to east-lothian. [sn: .] george wishart suffered martyrdom at st. andrews, on the st of march - ; and on the th of may that year, cardinal beaton was murdered. [sn: .] april . knox, with his young pupils, entered the castle of st. andrews, as a place of safety from the persecution of the popish clergy. may. at the end of this month, or early in june, he received a public call to the ministry, which he obeyed with great reluctance; but having undertaken the office, he continued, along with john rough, to preach both in the parish church, and in the castle until its surrender. june. the french fleet appeared in st. andrews bay, to lay siege to the castle, which surrendered on the th of july; but in defiance of the terms of capitulation, the chief persons in the place were sent as prisoners on board the french galleys. during this winter, the vessel on board of which knox was confined, remained in the river loire. [sn: .] the vessel returned to scotland, about the time of the siege of haddington in june; and when within sight of st. andrews, knox uttered his memorable prediction, that he would yet survive to preach in that place where god had opened his mouth for the ministry. during this winter, he was kept prisoner at rouen, where he wrote a preface to balnaves's treatise of justification, which was sent to scotland, and until some years after his death, was supposed to be lost. [sn: .] february. knox obtained his liberty, after an imprisonment of nineteen months. he came to england, and soon afterwards was appointed by the english council to be a preacher in the town of berwick. [sn: .] april . knox was summoned to appear at newcastle before dr. tonstall, bishop of durham, to give an account of his doctrine. at the close of this year he was removed from berwick to newcastle, where he continued his ministerial labours. [sn: .] december. knox was appointed by the privy council of england one of six chaplains to edward the sixth. this led to his occasional residence in london during and . [sn: .] october. he received an offer of the bishopric of rochester; but this preferment he declined. [sn: .] in or about february, knox was summoned before the privy council of england, upon complaints made by the duke of northumberland; but was acquitted. april . he also declined accepting the vacant living of all-hallows, in london, and, on account of his refusal, was again summoned before the privy council. edward the sixth died on the th of july, and the persecution of the protestants being revived during the reign of queen mary, most of the reformed ministers and many of the laity made their escape, and sought refuge in foreign countries, in the course of that year. [sn: .] january . knox was at dieppe, where he remained till the end of february. he then proceeded to geneva, but was again at dieppe in july, "to learn the estate of england." april . the queen dowager, mary of guise, was installed regent of scotland. on the th of september, he received a call from the english congregation at frankfort on the maine, to become their minister. he accepted the invitation, and repaired to that city in november. [sn: .] in consequence of the disputes which arose in the english congregation at frankfort, in regard to the use of the book of common prayer, and the introduction of various ceremonies. knox was constrained to relinquish his charge; and having preached a farewell discourse on the th of march, he left that city, and returned to geneva. here he must have resumed his ministerial labours; as, on the st of november that year, in the "livre des anglois, à geneve," it is expressly said, that christopher goodman and anthony gilby were "appointed to preche the word of god and mynyster the sacraments, _in th' absence of john knox_." this refers to his having resolved to visit his native country. knox proceeded to dieppe in august, and in the following month landed on the east coast of scotland, not far from berwick. most of this winter he spent in edinburgh, preaching and exhorting in private. [sn: .] in the beginning of this year knox went to ayrshire, accompanied with several of the leading protestants of that county, and preached openly in the town of ayr, and in other parts of the country. he was summoned to appear before a convention of the popish clergy, on the th of may, at edinburgh. about the same time, he addressed his letter to the queen regent. having received a solicitation for his return to geneva, to become one of their pastors, knox left scotland in july that year. before this time he married marjory bowes. her father was richard, the youngest son of sir ralph bowes of streatlam; her mother was elizabeth, a daughter and co-heiress of sir roger aske of aske. on the th september, knox, along with his wife and his mother-in-law, were formally admitted members of the english congregation. at the annual election of ministers, on the th of december, knox and goodman were re-elected. [sn: .] having received a pressing invitation from scotland, which he considered to be his duty to accept, knox took leave of the congregation at geneva, and came to dieppe; but finding letters of an opposite tenor, dissuading him from coming till a more favourable opportunity, after a time he returned again to geneva. in may, his son nathaniel was born at geneva, and was baptized on the d, william whittingham, afterwards dean of durham, being god-father. on the th of december, knox and goodman still continued to be ministers of the english congregation at geneva. [sn: .] april. mary queen of scots was married, at paris, to francis, dauphin of france. in this year knox republished, with additions, his letter to the queen regent; and also his appellation from the cruel sentence of the bishops and clergy of scotland; and his first blast of the trumpet against the regiment of women. in november, his son eleazar was born at geneva, and was baptized on the th, myles coverdale, formerly bishop of exeter, being witness or god-father. november . upon the death of mary queen of england, elizabeth ascended the throne. on the th december, knox and goodman were again re-elected ministers of the english congregation. [sn: .] january . knox took his final departure from geneva, in consequence of an invitation to return to scotland; and was on that occasion honoured with the freedom of the city. in march, he arrived at dieppe, and finding that the english government refused to grant him a safeconduct, on the d april he embarked for leith, and reached edinburgh on the d may. during that month, the queen regent published a declaration against the protestants, and the lords of the congregation sent a deputation to remonstrate; but their remonstrance being despised, they took arms in self-defence. june . knox preached in st. andrews; and at perth on the th, when the populace defaced several of the churches or monasteries in that city. july . he was elected minister of edinburgh. owing to the troubles, within a brief space he was obliged to relinquish his charge; but he continued his labours elsewhere for a time, chiefly at st. andrews. july . on the death of henry ii. of france, his son francis, who had espoused mary queen of scots, and had obtained the matrimonial crown of scotland in november , at the age of sixteen, ascended the throne of france. august . the protestants assembled at stirling, and having resolved to solicit aid from england, on the d of that month knox proceeded to berwick to hold a conference with sir james crofts. in this month, he sent calvin a favourable report of his labours since his arrival in scotland: calvin's answer to this communication is dated in november. september . knox's wife and children, accompanied by christopher goodman, arrived in edinburgh. october . the protestants entered edinburgh, while the queen regent retired to leith, with the french troops which had come to her aid. [sn: .] february . a treaty concluded between england and the lords of the congregation. the english fleet blockaded the port of leith, and furnished reinforcements, their troops at the same time having entered scotland. april. at the end of this month, knox had returned to edinburgh. his work on predestination was published this year at geneva. june . the queen regent died in the castle of edinburgh. articles of peace were concluded in july. august . the scotish parliament assembled; and, on the th, the confession of faith was ratified, and the protestant religion formally established. december . francis ii. of france, the husband of mary queen of scots, died. december . the first meeting of the general assembly was held at edinburgh. at the end of this year, knox's wife died, leaving him the two sons above mentioned. [sn: .] an invitation having been sent by the protestant nobility to their young queen, to revisit scotland, she arrived from france, and assumed the government, on the th of august. [sn: .] may. knox engaged in a dispute at maybole, with quintin kennedy, abbot of crossragwell; of which dispute he published an account in the following year. december. he was summoned to appear before the privy council, on account of a circular letter which he had addressed to the chief protestants, in virtue of a commission granted to him by the general assembly. [sn: .] the town of edinburgh formed only one parish. knox, when elected minister, had the assistance of john cairns as reader. john craig, minister of the canongate or holyrood, had been solicited to become his colleague, in april ; but his appointment did not take place till june . [sn: .] march. knox married to his second wife, margaret stewart, daughter of andrew lord ochiltree. june . he was appointed by the general assembly to visit the churches in aberdeen and the north of scotland. the following assembly, th of december, gave him a similar appointment for fife and perthshire. [sn: .] knox was summoned before the privy council, on account of a sermon which, on the th of august, he had preached in st. giles's church. [sn: .] in this year he appears to have written the most considerable portion of his history of the reformation; having commenced the work in or . in consequence of the unsettled state of public affairs, after the murder of david riccio, th of march, knox left edinburgh, and retired for a time to kyle. june . james the sixth was born in the castle of edinburgh. december. knox obtained permission from the general assembly to proceed to england, having received from the english government a safeconduct, to visit his two sons, who were residing with some of their mother's relations. [sn: .] february . henry lord darnley was murdered. april . bothwell carried off queen mary to the castle of dunbar; and their marriage was celebrated on the th of may. june . bothwell fled from carberry-hill to dunbar; and the queen was brought to edinburgh, and afterwards confined in lochleven castle. about the same time, knox returned from england. july . at the king's coronation at stirling, knox preached an inaugural sermon on these words, "i was crowned young." august . james earl of murray was appointed regent of scotland. december . knox preached at the opening of parliament; and on the th, the confession of faith, which had been framed and approved by parliament in , with various acts in favour of the reformed religion, was solemnly ratified. [sn: .] may . queen mary escaped from lochleven; but her adherents, who had assembled at langside, being defeated, she fled into england, and was imprisoned by queen elizabeth for the rest of her life; having been beheaded at fotheringay on the th of february - . [sn: .] january . the earl of murray was assassinated at linlithgow; and on occasion of his funeral, knox preached a sermon on these words, "blessed are the dead who die in the lord." (rev. xiv. .) [sn: .] july . matthew earl of lennox was elected regent of scotland; but was assassinated on the th of september. on the following day, john earl of mar was chosen regent. october. knox had a stroke of apoplexy, but was enabled occasionally to resume his ministerial labours. [sn: .] may . the troubles which then agitated the country induced knox to quit the metropolis, and to retire to st. andrews. september. the news arrived of the massacre of the protestants on st. bartholomew's eve, th of august, at paris, and in other parts of france. [sn: .] july. on the cessation of hostilities, at the end of this month, a deputation from the citizens of edinburgh was sent to st. andrews, with a letter to knox, expressive of their earnest desire "that once again his voice might be heard among them." he returned in august, having this year published, at st. andrews, his answer to tyrie the jesuit. the earl of mar died on the th of october; and james earl of morton, on the th of november, was elected regent of scotland. on the same day, the th of november, having attained the age of sixty-seven, knox closed "his most laborious and most honourable career." he was buried in the church-yard of st. giles; but, as in the case of calvin, at geneva, no monument was erected to mark the place where he was interred. * * * * * knox left a widow, and two sons by his first marriage, and three daughters by the second. in the concluding volume will be given a genealogical tree, or notices of his descendants. $the history$ of the $reformation in scotland$. [illustration] $introductory notice to the history$. in the long series of events recorded in the annals of scotland, there is unquestionably none of greater importance than those which exhibit the progress and establishment of the reformed religion in the year . this subject has accordingly called forth in succession a variety of writers of different sentiments and persuasions. although in the contemporary historians, lesley, buchanan, and their successors, we have more or less copious illustrations of that period, yet a little examination will show that we possess only one work which bears an exclusive reference to this great event, and which has any claims to be regarded as the production of an original historian. fortunately the writer of the work alluded to was of all persons the best qualified to undertake such a task, not only from his access to the various sources of information, and his singular power and skill in narrating events and delineating characters, but also from the circumstance that he himself had a personal and no unimportant share in most of the transactions of those times, which have left the character of his own mind so indelibly impressed on his country and its institutions. it is scarcely necessary to subjoin the name of john knox. the doubts which were long entertained respecting knox's share in the "history of the reformation," have been satisfactorily explained. such passages as were adduced to prove that he could not have been the author, consist of palpable errors and interpolations. without adverting to these suspicions, we may therefore attend to the time when the work was actually written. * * * * * the necessity of leaving upon record a correct account of their proceedings suggested itself to the reformers at an early period of their career, and led to this history being commenced. knox arrived in scotland in may ; and by his presence and counsels, he served to animate and direct their measures, which were attended with so much success. in a letter dated from edinburgh d october that year, while alluding to the events which had taken place during their contentions with the queen regent and her french auxiliaries, he uses these words, "our most just requeastes, which ye shall, god willing, schortlie hereafter onderstand, together with our whole proceeding from the beginning of this matter, _which we ar to sett furth in maner of historie_." that he had commenced the work, further appears from a letter, dated edinburgh, d september , and addressed to secretary cecil by the english ambassador, randolph, in which he says, "i have tawlked at large with mr. knox concerning his hystorie. as mykle as ys written thereof shall be sent to your honour, at the comynge of the lords embassadours, by mr. john woode. he hath wrytten only one booke. if yow lyke that, he shall continue the same, or adde onie more. he sayethe, that he must have farther helpe then is to be had in thys countrie, for more assured knowledge of thyngs passed than he hath hymself, or can come bye here: yt is a work not to be neglected, and greatly wyshed that yt sholde be well handled." whether this portion of the work was actually communicated to cecil at that time, is uncertain; as no such manuscript has been discovered among his papers, either in the british museum or the state paper office. it could only have consisted of part of the second book; and this portion remains very much in its original state, as may be inferred from these two passages.--in july , while exposing "the craftyness of the queen regent," in desiring a private conference with the earl of argyle and lord james stewart, with the hope that she might be able to withdraw them from their confederates, we read, "and one of hir cheaf counsale in those dayis, (_and we fear but over inward with hir yit_,) said," &c. see page of this volume. this must necessarily have been written during the queen regent's life, or previously to june . during the following month, after noticing the earl of arran's escape from france, and the imprisonment of his younger brother, lord david hamilton, it is stated, "for the same tyme, the said frensche king, seing he could not have the erle him self, gart put his youngar brother ... in strait prisoun, _quhair he yitt remaneis, to witt, in the moneth of october, the yeir of god_ ." see page . in like manner, in a letter of intelligence, dated at hamilton, th october , and addressed to cecil, randolph says, "since nesbot went from hence, the duke never harde out of fraunce, _nor newes of his son the lord david_."--(sadler's state papers, vol. i. p. .) we might have supposed that his restraint was not of long duration, as he is named among the hostages left in england, at the treaty of berwick, th february - ; a circumstance of which knox could not have been ignorant, as he gives a copy of the confirmation of the treaty by the duke of chastelherault and the lords of the congregation; but it appears from one of the articles in the treaty of peace in july, that lord david hamilton, who was still a prisoner at bois de st. vincent, in france, then obtained liberty to return to scotland; and he arrived at edinburgh in october . we are therefore warranted to infer that this portion of the second book of his history, must have been written towards the end of the year . knox himself in his general preface, says, the intention was to have limited the period of the history from the year , until the arrival of queen mary from france to assume the government in this country, in august ; thus extending the period originally prescribed beyond the actual attainment of the great object at which the reformers aimed, in the overthrow of popish superstition, and the establishment by civil authority of the protestant faith, which was actually secured by the proceedings of the parliament that met at edinburgh on the st of august . but he further informs us, that he was persuaded not only to add the first book as an introduction, but to continue the narrative to a later period. this plan of extending the work he carried into effect in the year , when the first and fourth books were chiefly written, and when there is reason to believe that he revised and enlarged the intermediate portion, at least by dividing it into two parts, as books second and third. the fourth book extends to the year ; and he seems to intimate that he himself had no intention to continue the history to a later period; for alluding to the death of david riccio, in march - , he says, "of whom we delay now farther to speik, becaus that his end will requyre the descriptioun of the whole, _and referris it unto suche as god sall rayse up to do the same_;" and a marginal note on this passage, written probably by richard bannatyne in , says "_this ves never done be this authour_." dr. m'crie states, that "the first and fourth books were composed during the years , , and ," and that "some additions were made to the fourth book so late as ." the only evidence to support this supposition, is founded upon the circumstance of some marginal notes having been added in those years, and introduced by subsequent transcribers, as belonging to the text. whether the fifth book, published by david buchanan in , was actually written by the reformer, will be considered in the preliminary notice to that book. meanwhile it may be remarked, that the author himself whilst occasionally engaged in collecting materials for a continuation of his history, felt the necessity of delaying the publication; and in a letter addressed to mr. john wood, th february - , he expresses the resolution he had formed of withholding the work from the public during his own life. manuscript copies of the history. the manuscript of the history of the reformation which has been followed in this edition, fully confirms the preceding statements regarding the period of its composition. it also serves to shew that no suppressions or alterations had been made by his friends, after his death, in these four books. such an intention is alluded to, in a letter, dated from stirling, th august , and addressed to randolph, by george buchanan:--"as to maister knox, his historie is in hys freindes handes, and thai ar in consultation to mitigat sum part the acerbite of certain wordis, and sum taunts wherein he has followit too muche sum of your inglis writaris, as m. hal. et suppilatorem ejus graftone, &c." the manuscript contains four books, transcribed by several hands, and at different intervals. notwithstanding this diversity of hand-writing, there is every reason to believe that the most considerable part of the volume was written in the year , although it is not improbable that in the second and third books a portion of the original ms. of may have been retained. the marginal notes, which specify particular dates, chiefly refer to the years , or , and they leave no doubt in regard to the actual period when the bulk of the ms. was written, as those bearing the date are clearly posterior to the transcription of the pages where they occur. some of these notes, as well as a number of minute corrections, are evidently in knox's own hand; but the latter part of book fourth could not have been transcribed until the close of the year . this is proved by the circumstance that the words, "bot wnto this day, the . of december ," form an integral part of the text, near the foot of fol. , in "the ressonyng betuix the maister of maxwell and john knox." the whole of this section indeed is written somewhat hastily, like a scroll-copy, probably by richard bannatyne, his secretary, from dictation; but whether it was merely rewritten in , or first added in that year to complete book fourth, must be left to conjecture. i.--manuscript of .--in the editor's possession. the accompanying leaf exhibits an accurate fac-simile of part of the first page of the ms; and it is worthy of notice, that in the wodrow miscellany, vol. i. p. , a fac-simile of a paper entitled "the kirkis testimonial, &c.," dated th december , is evidently by the same hand.[ ] it has the signatures of three of the superintendents, erskine of dun, john spottiswood, and john wynram, as well as that of john knox. as this was a public document, and was no doubt written by the clerk of the general assembly, we may infer that knox's amanuensis, in , was either john gray, who was scribe or clerk to the assembly from till his death in , or one of the other scribes whom knox mentions, in his interview with queen mary, in , as having implicit confidence in their fidelity. but this is no very important point to determine, since the manuscript itself bears such unequivocal proofs of having passed through the author's hands. two short extracts, (corresponding with pages and of this volume,) are also selected on account of the marginal notes, both of which i think are in knox's own hand. further specimens of such notes or corrections will be given in the next volume. at fol. , four leaves are left blank to allow the form of "the election of the superintendant" to be inserted; but this can be supplied from either the glasgow ms. or the early printed copies. a more important omission would have been the first book of discipline, but this the ms. fortunately contains, in a more genuine state than is elsewhere preserved; and it will form no unimportant addition to the next volume of the history. the volume consists of folios, chiefly written, as already stated, in the year . no trace of its earlier possessors can be discovered; but the name of "mr. matthew reid, minister of north-berwick" (from to ,) written on the first page, identifies it with a notice, which is given by the editor of the edition: "there is also a complete ms. copy of the first four books of this history belonging now to mr. gavin hamilton, bookseller in edinburgh, which formerly belonged to the late reverend mr. matthew reid, minister of the gospel at north-berwick; it is written in a very old hand, the old spelling is kept, and i am informed that it exactly agrees with the glasgow ms., with which it was collated, during the time this edition was a printing." (page liii.) this ms., came into the possession of the rev. john jamieson, d.d., probably long before the publication of his etymological dictionary in , where he mentions his having two mss. of knox's history, (this, and the one marked no. viii.) in his list of authorities; but neither of them was known, and consequently had never been examined by dr. m'crie. at the sale of dr. jamieson's library in , both mss. were purchased by the editor. in the firm persuasion that this ms. must have been written not only during the reformer's life, but under his immediate inspection, and that all the existing copies were derived from it, more or less directly, i should have held it a most unprofitable labour to have collated the other mss., for no other purpose than to notice the endless variations, omissions, and mistakes of later transcribers. the reader may think i have paid too much regard in this respect to the various readings or errors in vautrollier's suppressed edition, and in the glasgow manuscript; but these copies being the only ones referable to the sixteenth century, are deserving of greater attention than those of a more recent age, while the variations pointed out frequently serve to account for the mistakes in the later transcripts. but before explaining the manner in which this edition has been printed, it may be proper to enumerate the other manuscripts which are known to be preserved; and i may take this opportunity of expressing to the several proprietors my grateful acknowledgments for the free use of the copies specified. ii.--vautr. edit.--printed at london in or . this edition, described at page xxxix, is here introduced as representing an intermediate ms., from which some of the existing copies were apparently derived. thomas vautrollier the printer, a native of france, came to england in the beginning of queen elizabeth's reign. he retired to scotland in the year , and printed several works at edinburgh in that and the following year. in , he returned to london, carrying with him a manuscript copy of knox's history, which he put to press; but all the copies were seized before the work was completed. the manuscript copy which he had obtained is not known to be preserved; but there is no reason to doubt that it was taken directly from the ms. of . this appears from the marginal notes and a variety of minute coincidences, perceptible on collating the printed portion. we may likewise conclude, that from it several of the later transcripts were taken of the introductory portion, and the fourth book, to complete the text of the unfinished printed volume. iii. ms. g.--in the university library, glasgow. in folio, containing leaves, written before the end of the sixteenth century. this ms. was long considered to be the earliest and most authentic copy of the history, and consequently no small degree of importance was attached to it. many years ago, (before i was aware of the existence of the ms. of ,) i obtained, through the rev. dr. m'turk, late professor of ecclesiastical history, the use of this manuscript for the purpose of collation; but i found that the text was so faithfully given in the edinburgh edition , folio, with the single exception of omitting such marginal notes as the ms. contains, that an entire collation of the text might only have exhibited slight occasional changes in orthography. at that time the ms. formed two volumes, in the old parchment covers, with uncut leaves; it has since been half-bound in one volume, and the edges unmercifully cropped. at the beginning of the volume there is inserted a separate leaf, being the title of a distinct work, having the signature of "m. jo. knox," in , probably the nephew of the reformer, who became minister of melrose. it has no connexion with the volume in which it is preserved; but it led to some vague conjectures that the writer of the history itself may have been "the younger mr. knox, seeing the former died in the year , and the other was alive nine years after;" or else, "that the latter mr. knox had perfected the work, pursuant to the order of the general assembly in the year or , so far as it was to be found in this ms."[ ] respecting the time of transcription, one minute circumstance is worthy of notice: knox in one place introduces the words, "as may be, &c., _in this year_ ," the copier has made it, "in this year ," an error not likely to have been committed previously to that year. but the hand-writing is clearly of a date about , although the fourth book may have been a few years earlier. the absence of all those peculiar blunders which occur in vautrollier's edition, evinces that the glasgow ms. was derived from some other source; while the marginal notes in that edition are a sufficient proof that the ms. in question was not the one employed by the english printer. it is in fact a tolerably accurate copy of the ms. of , with the exception of the marginal notes, and the entire omission of the first book of discipline. nearly all the marginal notes in the first and third books are omitted; and others having been incorporated with the text, led to the supposition that knox himself had revised the history at a later period of life. [illustration: signature: m jo. knox. augusti a^o ] this manuscript was presented to the university of glasgow by the rev. robert fleming, minister of a scotish congregation in london, and son of the author of "the fulfilling of the scriptures." wodrow communicated to bishop nicolson, a collation of the ms. with buchanan's folio edition of , pointing out many of his interpolations. this letter was inserted by nicolson in the appendix to his scotish historical library.[ ] iv. ms. a. ( .)--in the advocates library. in to, pp. . this ms. was acquired by the faculty of advocates, in , with the mass of wodrow's mss.--it is very neatly written by charles lumisden, whose name (but partially erased) with the date , occurs on the fly-leaf. wodrow was correct in imagining that the greater portion of the volume was transcribed from vautrollier's edition, some of the more glaring typographical errors being corrected; but in fact this copy was made from a previous transcript by lumisden, to be mentioned as no. x. ms. w. it contains however the fourth book of the history; and wodrow has collated the whole very carefully with the glasgow ms., and has marked the chief corrections and variations in the margin. v. ms. a. ( .)--in the advocates library. in folio. this volume also belonged to the wodrow collection. it is written in a very careless, slovenly manner, after the year , by one thomas wood; and is scarcely entitled to be reckoned in the number of the mss., as it omits large portions. thus, on the title of book fourth, it is called "a collection from the fourth book," &c. vi. ms. e.--in the university library, edinburgh. in folio, leaves, written in an ordinary hand, apparently about the year . it contains the four books, and includes both the first and second books of discipline; but it omits all the marginal notes, and displays very little accuracy on the part of the transcriber. it is in fact a transcript from the identical copy of vautrollier's edition, described as no. xiii., from its adopting the various marginal corrections and emendations on the printed portions of that copy. vii. ms. i.--in the possession of david irving, ll. d. in folio, leaves, written in a neat hand, and dated . it contains the four books; but, like the three preceding mss., it may without doubt be regarded as a transcript from vautrollier's edition, with the addition of book fourth of the history. it also contains both the first and second books of discipline, copied from calderwood's printed edition of , with such minute fidelity, as even to add the list of typographical "errata" at the end, with the references to the page and line of that edition. viii. ms. l. ( .)--in the editor's possession. in folio, leaves, written probably between and . it wants several leaves at the beginning, and breaks off with the third book, adding the acts of parliament against the mass, &c., passed in . it formerly belonged to the rev. dr. jamieson, and was purchased at his sale in . the press-marks on the fly leaf may probably identify the collection to which it formerly belonged, " h. .--hist. ," and "a. ." notwithstanding a ms. note by dr. jamieson, it is a transcript of no value, corresponding in most points with vautrollier's edition. ix. ms. n.--in the library at newtondon. in folio, pp. . this is a ms. of still less importance, but it serves to show the rarity of vautrollier's printed edition, previously to the appearance of buchanan's editions in . on the first leaf, the celebrated covenanting earl of glencairne has written,-- "this is the copie of johne knox his chronicle, coppiede in the yeere of god .--glencairne." it is in fact a literal transcript from a defective copy of the old suppressed edition; as the blanks in the ms. at pages , , and pages , , which break off, or commence at the middle of a sentence, would be completely supplied by pages , , and pages , , of vautrollier's text. at page , only the heads of the confession of faith are inserted, "but (it is added) yee shall find them fullie set downe in the first parliament of king james the sext, holden at edinburgh the of december , by james earle of murray, regent to this realme." this ms. ends with page of the printed copy; and after the words "would not suffer this corrupt generation to approve," instead of commencing with the book of discipline, from page , there is added, "_and because the whole booke of discipline, both first and secund, is sensyne printed by the selfe in one booke, i cease to insert it heere, and referres the reader to the said booke. finis._" x. ms. w.--in the possession of richard whytock, esq., edinburgh. in to, pp. , not perfect. it is in the hand-writing of charles lumisden, who succeeded his father as minister of duddingstone, and who, during the reign of charles the first, was much employed in transcribing. it is unquestionably copied from vautrollier's printed edition, but many of the palpable mistakes have been corrected, and the orthography improved. in general the marginal notes are retained, while some others, apparently derived from david buchanan's printed text, are added in a different hand. like vautrollier's edition, at page , this ms. breaks off with the first portion of the book of discipline, at the end of book third of the history. such are the manuscript copies of knox's history which are known to be preserved. there are however still existing detached portions of the history, made with the view of completing the defective parts of vautrollier's edition; and these may also be briefly indicated. xi. ms. c.--in the library of the church of scotland. this ms., in folio, was purchased by the general assembly in , from the executors of the rev. matthew crawfurd. the volume is in the old parchment cover, and has the autograph of "alex. colvill" on the first page. but it contains only the preliminary leaves of the text, and the concluding portion of the first book of discipline, (the previous portion being oddly copied at the end of it;) and book fourth of the history, all in the hand of a dutch amanuensis, about , for the purpose of supplying the imperfections of the suppressed edition. xii. ms. m.--in a copy of vautrollier's edition, which belonged to the rev. dr. m'crie, and is now in the possession of his son, the rev. thomas m'crie, the same portions are supplied in an early hand, containing eight leaves at the beginning, and ninety-nine at the end, along with a rude ornamented title, and a portrait of knox, copied by some unpractised hand from one of the old engravings. it contains the concluding portion of the first book of discipline, but several of the paragraphs in book fourth of the history are abridged or omitted. xiii. ms. l. ( .)--a copy of the same volume, with these portions similarly supplied, and including both the first and second books of discipline, appeared at the sale of george paton's library, in . it is now in the editor's possession. a number of the errors in printing have been carefully corrected on the margin, in an old hand; and the ms. portions are written in the same hand with no. vi. ms. e. of the entire work, which is literally transcribed from this identical copy. xiv. and xv. mss. l. ( and .)--i have also a separate transcript of book fourth, in folio, leaves, written about the year ; and another portion, in small vo, written in a still older hand, for the purpose of being bound with the suppressed edition. printed editions of the history. vautrollier's unfinished and suppressed edition, in or , has already been noticed at page xxxii. the fate of this edition is thus recorded by calderwood, in his larger ms. history:--"february . vauttrollier the printer took with him a copy of mr. knox's history to england, and printed twelve hundred of them; the stationers, at the archbishop's command, seized them the of february [ - ]; it was thought that he would get leave to proceed again, because the council perceived that it would bring the queen of scots in detestation." the execution of the unfortunate queen, which followed so soon after, or the death of the printer himself, in , may have prevented its completion. but copies had speedily come into circulation in its unfinished state. thus dr. (afterwards archbishop) bancroft, who frequently quotes this suppressed edition, says,--"if euer you meete with the historie of the church of scotland, penned by maister knox, and printed by vautrouillier: reade the pages quoted here in the margent."--(a survay of the pretended holy discipline, &c. imprinted at london, by iohn wolfe, , to, p. .) it is most inaccurately printed.[ ] this may have been partly owing to the state of the ms. which he had procured in scotland, as well as to haste in printing, and ignorance of the names of persons and places which occur in the work. the following is a fac-simile reprint of the first page, which corresponds with pages - of the present volume:-- chvrch of scotland. by these articles which god of his mercifull prouidence causeth the enemies of his truth to keepe in their registers maye appeare how mercifully god hath looked vppon this realme, retayning within it some sparke of his light, euen in the time of greatest darknes. neither ought any m[=a] to wonder albeit that some things be obscurely and some thinges doubtfully spoken. but rather ought al faithfull to magnifie gods mercy who without publike doctrine gaue so great light. and further we ought to consider that seeing that the enemies of iesus christe gathered the foresaide articles there vppon to accuse the persones aforesaide, that they woulde depraue the meaninge of gods seruauntes so farre as they coulde, as we doubt not but they haue done, in the heads of excommunication, swearing and of matrimony: in the which it is no doubt but the seruaunts of god did damne the abuse onelye, and not the right ordinance of god: for who knowes not that excommunication in these dayes was altogeather abused? that swearing aboundeth without punishment or remorse of conscience: and that diuorcementes was made, for such causes as worldly men had inuented: but to our history. albeit that the accusation of the bishop and of his complices was very grieuous, yet god so assisted his seruauntes partly by inclining the kinges heart to gentlenes (for diuerse of them were his great familiars) and partly by giuing bold and godly aunswers to their accusators, that the enemies in the ende were frustrate of their purpose. for while the bishop in mockage saide to adam reade of blaspheming, read beleeue ye that god is in heauen? he answered not as i do the sacramentes seuen: whereat the bishop thinking to haue triumphed said: sir loe vautrollier's edition is a small vo, commencing with signature b, page , and breaking off with signature mm, page , or near the beginning of the th chapter of the book of discipline, which knox has introduced at the conclusion of book third of his history. copies of this volume in fine condition are of rare occurrence. the edition of the history published at london by david buchanan in , and reprinted at edinburgh in the same year, in all probability under his own inspection, will be more particularly noticed in the following volume. it might perhaps have been well had this publication been actually prohibited, as milton[ ] seems to indicate was not unlikely to have taken place. so much use at least had been made of the unwarrantable liberties taken by the editor, in altering and adding passages, as for a length of time to throw discredit on the whole work. at length there appeared the very accurate edition, published at edinburgh , with a life of the author, by the rev. matthew crawfurd. besides this and the two editions published in a more popular form by william m'gavin, at glasgow, there are numerous modernized and spurious republications, all of them taken from buchanan's interpolated editions, and published at edinburgh, glasgow, and dundee, between the years and . even at an early period, both calderwood, who had made such copious extracts from the work, and spottiswood, who expressed his doubts respecting its authorship, appear to have employed vautrollier's inaccurate edition. the necessity of publishing the work with greater care and in its most genuine form, will therefore by readily admitted. the acquisition of the manuscript of , has enabled the editor to accomplish this, to a certain extent, by presenting the text of the history in the precise form "wherein he hath continued and perfectly ended at the year of god ," according to the declaration made to the first general assembly which met after his death. having such a ms. to follow, i have adhered to it with much more scrupulous accuracy, in regard to the othography,[ ] than otherwise might have been deemed advisable. at first sight, indeed, the language may appear somewhat uncouth, and it may require a glossary to be subjoined; but it was of essential importance that the work should be published in its original form, with the author's own marginal notes and relections, as the genuine production of the great scotish reformer. * * * * * the labour bestowed by the author in collecting information, with the desire of giving a true and faithful history of these transactions, rendered it also desirable that more than ordinary care should be bestowed in illustrating his narrative. for this purpose, i have taken considerable pains to identify the persons and places mentioned in the course of this history. knox himself, on more than one occasion, states, that while he was careful in relating facts, he was no observer of _times_ and _seasons_, in other words, that he made no pretensions to minute accuracy in dates. it became the more necessary to devote particular attention, either to confirm or correct his dates, by reference to contemporary documents; and no source that was accessible has been overlooked, although i am fully sensible that i may have failed in making suitable use of the information thus obtained. i have at least endeavoured to avoid cumbering the page with notes, unless where they seemed necessary to illustrate the text; and i consider no apology to be required for the articles inserted in the appendix. the first booke of the history of the reformatioun of religioun within the realme of scotland: conteanyng the maner and by what persons the light of christis evangell hath bene manifested unto this realme, after that horrible and universall defectioun from the trewth, which hes cume by the meanes of that romane antichrist. the preface. to the gentill readar, grace and peace frome god the father of our lord jesus christ, with the perpetuall encrease of the holy spreit.[ ] it is not unknowen, christeane reader, that the same clud[ ] of ignorance, that long hath darkened many realmes under this accurssed kingdome of that romane antichrist, hath also owercovered this poore realme; that idolatrie[ ] hath bein manteined, the bloode of innocentis hath bene sched, and christ jesus his eternall treuth hath bene abhorred, detested, and blasphemed. but that same god that caused light to schyne out of darknes, in the multitud of his mercyes, hath of long tyme opened the eis[ ] of some evin within this realme, to see the vanitie of that which then was universally embrased for trew religioun; and hes gevin unto them strenth to oppone thame selfis unto the same: and now, into these our last and moist corrupt dayis, hath maid his treuth so to triumphe amonges us, that, in despyte of sathan, hipochrisye is disclosed, and the trew wyrschipping of god is manifested to all the inhabitantis of this realme whose eis[ ] sathan blyndis not, eyther by thair fylthy lustes, or ellis by ambitioun, and insatiable covetousnes, which maek them repung to the power of god working by his worde. and becaus we ar not ignorant what diverse bruittis war dispersed of us, the professoures of jesus christ within this realme, in the begynnyng of our interprise, ordour was lackin, that all our proceidingis should be committed to register; as that thei war, by such as then paynfullie travailled[ ] boith by toung and pen; and so was collected a just volume, (as after will appeir,) conteanyng thingis done frome the fyftie-awght[ ] year of god, till the arrivall of the quenis majestie furth of france,[ ] with the which the collectour and writtar for that tyme was content, and never mynded further to have travailled in that kynd of writting.[ ] but, after invocatioun of the name of god, and after consultatioun with some faythfull,[ ] what was thought by thame expedient to advance goddis glorie, and to edifie this present generatioun, and the posteritie to come, it was concluded, that faythfull rehersall should be maid of such personages as god had maid instrumentis of his glorie, by opponyng of thame selfis to manifest abuses, superstitioun, and idolatrie; and, albeit thare be no great nomber, yet ar thei mo then the collectour wold have looked for at the begynnyng, and thairfoir is the volume some what enlarged abuif his expectatioun: and yit, in the begynnyng, mon we crave of all the gentill readaris, not to look of us such ane history as shall expresse all thingis that have occurred within this realme, during the tyme of this terrible conflict that hes bene betuix the sanctes of god and these bloody wolves who clame to thame selves the titill of clargie, and to have authoritie ower the saules of men; for, with the pollicey,[ ] mynd we to meddill no further then it hath religioun mixed with it. and thairfoir albeit that many thingis which wer don be omitted, yit, yf we invent no leys, we think our selves blamless in that behalf. of one other [thing] we mon foirwarne the discreat readaris, which is, that thei be not offended that the sempill treuth be spokin without partialitie; for seing that of men we neyther hunt for reward, nor yitt for vane[ ] glorie, we litill pass by the approbatioun of such as seldome judge weill of god and of his workis. lett not thairfoir the readar wonder, albeit that our style vary and speik diverslie of men, according as thei have declared thame selves sometymes ennemyes and sometymes freindis, sometymes fervent, sometymes cold, sometymes constant, and sometymes changeable in the cause of god and of his holy religioun: for, in this our simplicitie, we suppoise that the godlie shall espy our purpose, which is, that god may be praised for his mercy schawin, this present age may be admonished to be thankfull for goddis benefittis offerred, and the posteritie to cum may be instructed how wonderouslie hath the light of christ jesus prevailled against darkness in this last and most corrupted age. historiÆ initium.[ ] in the scrollis of glasgw is found mentioun of one whais name is not expressed,[ ] that, in the year of god , was burnt for heresye;[ ] bot what war his opinionis, or by what ordour he was condempned, it appearis not evidentlie. but our cronikilles mack mentioun, that in the dayis of king james the first, about the year of god , was deprehended in the universitie of sanctandrose, one named paull craw,[ ] a bohame,[ ] who was accused of heresye befoir such as then war called doctouris of theologie. his accusatioun consisted principallye, that he followed johnne husse and wyckleif, in the opinioun of the sacrament, who denyed that the substance of braid and wyn war changed be vertew of any wourdis; or that confessioun should be maid to preastis; or yitt prayeris to sanctes departed. whill that god geve unto him grace to resist thame, and not to consent to thair impietie, he was committed to the secular judge, (for our bischoppis follow pilat, who boith did condempne, and also wesche[ ] his handis,) who condempned him to the fyre; in the quhilk he was consumed in the said citie of sanctandrose, about the time afoir writtin. and to declair thame selvis to be the generatioun of sathan, who, from the begynnyng, hath bein ennemy to the treuth, and he that desyrith the same to be hyd frome the knowledge of men, thei putt a ball of brass in his mouth, to the end that he should nott geve confessioun of his fayth to the people, neyther yit that thei should understand the defence which he had against thair injust accusatioun and condemnatioun. bot that thair fatheris practise did nott greatlie advance thair kingdome of darknes, nether yit was it able utterlie to extingueise the trewth: for albeit, that in the dayis of kingis james the secund and thrid, we fynd small questioun of religioun moved within this realme, yit in the tyme of king james the fourt, in the saxt year of his reigne, and in the twenty-twa yeir of his age, which was in the year of god , war summoned befoir the king and his great counsell, by robert blackedar called archebischope of glasgw,[ ] the nomber of thretty personis, remanyng some in kyle-stewart, some in kingis-kyile, and some in cunyghame;[ ] amonges whome,[ ] george campbell of sesnok, adame reid of barskymming, johne campbell of new mylnes, andro shaw of polkemmate, helen chalmour lady pokillie,[ ] [marion][ ] chalmours lady stairs: these war called the lolardis of kyle. thei war accused of the articles following, as we have receaved thame furth of the register[ ] glasgw. * * * * * i. first, that images ar not to be had, nor yitt to be wirschepped. ii. that the reliques of sanctes are not to be wirschepped. iii. that lawis and ordinances of men vary frome tyme to tyme, and that by the pape. iv. that it is not lauchfull to feght, or to defend the fayth. (we translait according to the barbarousnes of thair latine and dictament.[ ]) v. that christ gave power to petir onlie, and not to his successouris, to bynd and lowse within the kyrk. vi. that christ ordeyned no preastis to consecrat. vii. that after the consecratioun in the messe, thare remanes braid;[ ] and that thair is nott the naturall body of christ. viii. that teythes aught not to be given to ecclesiasticall men, (as thei war then called.) ix. that christ at his cuming has tackin away power from kingis to judge.[ ] (this article we dowbt not to be the vennemouse accusatioun of the ennemyes, whose practise has ever bene to mack the doctrin of jesus christ suspect to kingis and rewllaris, as that god thairby wold depose thame of thair royall seattis, whare by the contrair, nothing confermes the power of magistrates more then dois goddis wourd.--but to the articles.) x. that everie faythfull man or woman is a preast. xi. that the unctioun of kingis ceassed at the cuming of christ. xii. that the pape is not the successour of petir, but whare he said, "go behynd me, sathan." xiii. that the pape deceavis the people by his bulles and his indulgenses. xiv. that the messe profiteth not the soules that ar in purgatorye. xv. that the pape and the bischoppis deceave the people by thare pardonis. xvi. that indulgenses aught not to be granted to feght against the saracenes. xvii. that the pape exaltis him self against god, and abuf god. xviii. that the pape can nott remitt the panes of purgatorye. xix. that the blessingis of the bischoppis (of dum doggis thei should have bein stilled) ar of non valew. xx. that the excommunicatioun of the kirk is not to be feared. xxi. that in to no case is it lauchfull to swear. xxii. that preastis mycht have wieffis, according to the constitutioun of the law. xxiii. that trew christianes receave the body of jesus christ everie day. xxiv. that after matrimonye be contracted, the kyrk may mack no divorcement. xxv. that excommunicatioun byndis nott. xxvi. that the pape forgevis not synnes, bot only god. xxvii. that fayth should not be gevin to miracules. xxviii. that we should not pray to the glorious virgyn marie, butt to god only. xxix. that we ar na mair bound to pray in the kirk then in other plaices. xxx. that we ar nott bound to beleve all that the doctouris of the kyrk have writtin. xxxi. that such as wirschep the sacrament of the kyrk (we suppoise thei ment the sacrament of the altar) committis idolatrie. xxxii. that the pape is the head of the kyrk of antichrist. xxxiii. that the pape and his ministeris ar murtheraris. xxxiv. that thei which ar called principallis in the church, ar thevis and robbaris. * * * * * by these articles,[ ] which god of his mercyfull providence caused the ennemies of his trewth to keip in thare registeris, may appeir how mercyfullie god hath looked upoun this realme, reteanyng within it some sponk of his light, evin in the tyme of grettast darkness. nether yit awght any man to wonder, albeit that some thingis be obscurly, and some thingis scabruslie spokin;[ ] but rather awght all faythfull to magnifye goddis mercy, who without publict doctrin gave so great light. and farther, we awght to considder, that seing that the ennemies of jesus christ gathered the foirsaid articles, thairupoun to accuse the personis foirsaid, that thei wold deprave the meanyng of goddis servandis so far as thei could; as we dowbt not bot thei have done, in the headis of excommunicatioun, swearing, and of matrimonye. in the which it is no dowbt but the servandis of god did dampne the abuse only, and not the rycht ordinance of god; for who knowes not, that excommunicatioun in these dayis was altogether abused! that swearing abounded without punishment, or remorse of conscience! and that divorsementis war maid for such causes as worldly men had invented!--but to our history. * * * * * albeit that the accusatioun of the bischop and his complices was verray grevouse, yitt god so assisted his servandis, partly be inclineing the kingis hart to gentilness, (for diverse of thame war his great familiaris,) and partly by geving bold and godly answeris to thair accusatouris, that the ennemies in the end war frustrat of thair purpoise. for whill the bischop, in mocking, said to adam reid of barskemyng,[ ] "reid, beleve ye that god is in heavin?" he answered, "not as i do the sacramentis sevin." whairat the bischop thinking to have triumphed, said, "sir, lo, he denyes that god is in heavin." whairat the king wondering, said, "adam reid, what say ye?" the other answered, "please your grace to heir the end betuix the churle and me." and thairwith he turned to the bischope, and said, "i nether think nor beleve, as thou thinkis, that god is in heavin; but i am most assured, that he is not only in the heavin, bot also in the earth. bott thou and thy factioun declayre by your workis, that eyther ye think thair is no god at all, or ellis that he is so shett up[ ] in the heavin, that he regardis not what is done into the earth; for yf thou fermelie beleved that god war in the heavin, thou should not mack thy self chek-meat to the king, and altogether forgett the charge that jesus christ the sone of god gave to his apostles, which was, to preach his evangell, and not to play the proud prelatts, as all the rabill of yow do this day. and now, sir, (said he to the king,) judge ye whither the bischop or i beleve best that god is in heavin." whill the bischope and his band could not weill revenge thame selfis, and whill many tantis war gevin thame in thair teith, the king, willing to putt ane end to farther reassonyng, said to the said adam reid, "will thou burne thy bill?" he answered, "sir, the bischope and ye will." with those and the lyik scoffis the bischop and his band war so dashed out of countenance, that the greattest part of the accusatioun was turned to lawchter. after that dyet, we fynd almoist no questioun for materis of religioun, the space ney of thretty yearis. for not long after, to witt in the year of god ,[ ] the said bischop blackcater departed this lief, going in his superstitious devotioun to hierusalem; unto whome succeided mr. james beatoun, sone to the lard of balfour, in fyfe, who was moir cairfull for the world then he was to preach christ, or yitt to advance any religioun, but for the fassioun only; and as he soght the warld, it fled him nott,[ ] it was weill knowin that at onis he was archbischop of sanctandrosse, abbot of dumfermeling, abirbroth, kylwynnyng, and chancellare of scotland: for after the unhappy feild of flowdoun,[ ] the which perrished king james the fourt, with the grettast parte of the nobilitie of the realme, the said beatoun, with the rest of the prelattis, had the haill regiment of the realme; and by reassone thairof, held and travailled to hold the treuth of god in thraldome and bondage, till that it pleased god of his great mercy, in the year of god , to raise up his servand, maister patrik hammyltoun, at whome our hystorie doith begyn. of whose progenye, lyif, and eruditioun, becaus men of fame and renune have in diverse workis writtin, we omitt all curiouse repetitioun, sending such as wald knaw farther of him then we write to franciss lambert,[ ] johne firth, and to that notable wark,[ ] laitlie sette furth be johne fox, englisman, of the lyvis and deathis of martyrs within this yle, in this our aige. * * * * * this servand of god, the said maister patrik, being in his youth providit to reassonable honouris and leving, (he was intitulat abbot of fern,[ ]) as one haiting the world and the vanitie thairof, left scotland, and passed to the schoollis in germany; for then the fame of the universitie of whittinberge was greatlie divulgat in all countreis, whare, by goddis providence, he became familiare with these lyghtis and notable servandis of christ jesus of that tyme, martyne luther, philipp melanthon, and the said franciss lambert,[ ] and did so grow and advance in godly knowledge, joyned with fervencie and integretie of lyiff, that he was in admiratioun with many. the zeall of goddis glorie did so eat him up, that he could of no long continuance remane thair, bot returned to his countrie, whair the brycht beames of the trew light which by goddis grace was planted in his harte, began most aboundantlie to burst furth, also weall in publict as in secreat: for he was, besydis his godlie knowledge, weill learned in philosophie: he abhorred sophistrye, and wold that the text of aristotelis should have bene better understand and more used in the schoolles then than it was; for sophistrie had corrupted all asweil in divinitie as in humanitie. in schort proces of tyme, the fame of his reasonis and doctrin trubled the clargye, and came to the earis of bischope james beatoun, of whome befoir we have maid mentioun, who being ane conjured ennemye to christ jesus, and one that long had had the whole regiment of this realme, bare impatientlie that any truble should be maid to that kingdome of darknes, whairof within this realme he was the head. and, thairfoir, he so travailled[ ] with the said maister patrik, that he gat him to sanctandrosse, whair, eftir the conference of diverse dayis, he had his freedome and libertie. the said bischop and his blooddy bucheouris, called doctouris, seamed to approve his doctryne, and to grant that many thingis craved reformatioun in the ecclesiastical regiment. and amanges the rest, thair was ane that secreatlie consented with him almest in all thingis, named frear alexander campbell, a man of good wytt and learnyng, butt yitt corrupt by the warld, as aftir we will hear. when the bischoppis and the clergye had fully understand the mynd and judgement of the said maistir patrik, and fearing that by him thair kingdome should be endomaged, thei travailled with the king, who then was young, and altogitther addict to thair commandiment, that he should pass in pilgramaige to sanct dothess in rosse,[ ] to the end that no intercessioun should be maid for the life[ ] of the innocent servant of god, who suspecting no such crueltie as in thair hartes was concluded, remaned still, (a lambe amonges the wolfis,) till that upoun a nycht hie was intercepted in his chalmer, and by the bischoppes band was caryed to the castell, whare that nycht he was keapt; and upoun the morne, produccid in judgement, he was condampned to dye by fyre for the testimonye of goddis trewth. the articles for the which he suffered war bot of pilgramage, purgatorye, prayer to sanctes, and for the dead, and such trifilles; albeit that materis of grettar importance had bein in questioun, as his treatise,[ ] which in the end we have added, may witness. now that the condempnatioun of the said mr. patrik should have greattar authoritie, thei caused the same to be subscrived by all those of any estimatioun that with tham war present, and to mack thair nomber great, thei tuck the subscriptionis of childrin, yf thei war of the nobilitie; for the erle of cassilles, which last decessed in france,[ ] then being bot twelf or threttein yearis of age, was compelled to subscrive his death, as him self did confesse. immediatlie after dennar, the fyre was prepaired befoir the ald colledge,[ ] and he led to the place of executioun. and yitt men suppoised that all was done but to geve unto him ane terrour, and to have caused him to have recanted, and have become recreant to those bloody beastis. but god, for his awin glorie, for the comforte of his servand, and for manifestatioun of thare beastly tyranny, had otherwiese decreed; for he so strenthened his faythfull witnes, that nether the luif of lyif, nor yitt the fear of that cruell death, could move him a joit to swarve from the trewth ones professed. at the plaice of executioun he gave to his servand, who had bene chalmer-child to him of a long tyme, his gown, his coit, bonet, and such lych garments, saying, "these will nott proffeit in the fyre; thei will proffeit thee: aftir this, of me thow cane receave no commoditie, except the example of my death, which, i pray thee, bear in mynd; for albeit it be bitter to the flesche, and feirfull befoir men, yet is it the entress unto eternall lyif, quhilk non shall possesse that denyis christ jesus befoir this wicked generatioun." the innocent servand of god being bound to the staik in the myddest of some coallis, some tymmer, and other mater appointed for the fyre, a trane of powder was maid and sett a fyre, quhilk gave to the blessed martyre of god a glaise, skrimpled[ ] his left hand, and that syd of his face, but nether kendilled the wood, nor yett the coallis.[ ] and so remaned the appointed to death in torment, till that men rane to the castell agane for moir poulder, and for wood more able to tack fyre; which at last being kendilled, with lowd voce he cryed, "lord jesus, receave my spreit! how long shall darknes owerquhelme this realme? and how long will thow suffer this tyranny of men?"--the fyre was slow, and thairfoir was his torment the more. bott moist of all was he greved by certane wicked men, amongis whome campbell the blak freir (of whome we spak befoir[ ]) was principall, who continuallie cryed, "convert, heretick: call upoun our lady: say _salve regina_," etc. to whome he answered, "departe, and truble me not, ye messingeris of sathan." bott whill that the foirsaid freir still roared one thing in great vehemency, he said unto him, "wicked man, thou knawis the contrair, and the contrair to me thou hast confessed: i appeall thee befoir the tribunall seatt of jesus christ!" after which and other wordis, which weall could nott be understand nor marked, bayth for the tumult, and vehemencye of the fyre, the witness of jesus christ gat victorie, after long sufferance, the last of februar, in the zeir of god j^m. v^e. twenty and sevin zearis.[ ] the said freir departed this lyif within few dayis after, in what estait we referr to the manifestatioun of the generall day. but it was plainlie knawin that he dyed, in glaskow, in a phrenesye, and as one dispared.[ ] now that all men may understand what was the singular eruditioun and godly knowledge of the said mr. patrik, we have inserted this his litill pithie werk, conteanyng his assertionis and determinationis concernyng the law, the office of the same, concernyng fayth, and the fruittis[ ] thairof; first, be the foirsaid maister patrik collected in latine, and after translated in inglisch. [a brief treatise of mr. patrike hamelton, called patrike's places, translated into english by john frith; with the epistle of the sayd frith prefixed before the same, as followeth.[ ] john frith unto the christian reader. blessed be god the father of our lord jesus christ, which in these last dayes and perillous tymes, hath styrred up in all countreys, witnesses unto his sonne, to testifye the truth unto the unfaythfull, to save at the least some from the snares of antichrist, which leade to perdition, as ye may here perceave by that excellent and well learned young man patrike hamelton, borne in scotland of a noble progeny; who to testifie the truth, sought all meanes, and tooke upon him priesthode, (even as paule circumcised timothy, to wynne the weake jewes,) that he might be admitted to preache the pure word of god. notwithstandyng, as soone as the chamberleyne [chancellor[ ]] and other byshops of scotland had perceaved that the light began to shyne, which disclosed their falsehode that they conveyed in darkenes, they layde handes on hym, and because he wold not deny his saviour christ at their instance, they burnt him to ashes. nevertheles, god of his bounteous mercy (to publishe to the whole world what a man these monsters have murthered) hath reserved a little treatise, made by this patrike,[ ] which, if ye lyst, ye may call patrik's places: for it treateth exactly of certaine common places, which knowen, ye have the pith of all divinitie. this treatise have i turned into the english toung, to the profite of my natioun; to whom i besech god to geve lyght, that they may espye the deceitfull pathes of perdition, and returne to the right way which leadeth to lyfe everlastyng.[ ] amen.] [the doctrine] of the law. the law is a doctrine that biddeth good, and forbiddeth evill, as the commandimentis heir contenit do specifie: the ten commandimentis. . thow shalt worschepp but one god. . thow shalt maik thee nane image to worschipp it. . thow shalt not sweare be his name in vane. . hold the sabbath day holy. . honour thie father and mother. . thow shalt not kill. . thow shalt not committ adulterie. . thow shalt nott steall. . thow shalt bear no fals witness. . thow shalt not desyre owght that belongeth unto thie nychtboure. [all these commandments are briefly comprised in these two here under ensuing]:--"love the lord thy god with all thyne harte, wyth all thy saule, and with all thy mynd." (deut. .)--"this is the first and great commandiment. the secund is lyik unto this, love thy nychtbour as thy selve. on these two commandimentis hang all the law and the propheittis." (matth. .) [certaine generall propositions proved by the scripture.][ ] i. he that loveth god, loveth his nychtbour.[ ]--"if anie man say, i love god, and yit hattith his nychtbour, he is a lyer: he that lovith not his brother whome he hath sene, how can he love god whome he hath nott sein." ( joan. .) ii. he that lovith his nychtbour as him self, keapeth the whole commandimentis of god.--"quhatsoever ye wald that men should do unto yow, evin so do unto thame: for this is the law and the propheittis." (matth. .)--he that loveth his nychtbour fulfilleth the law. "thow shalt not committ adulterie: thow shalt not kyll: thow shalt not steall: thow shalt not bear fals witnesse against thy nychtbour: thow shalt not desyre; and so furth: and yf thair be any uther commandiment, all ar comprehendit under this saying, love thy nychtbour as thy self." (rom. ; gallat. .) "he that loveth his nychtbour, kepith all the commandimentis of god." "he that loveth god, loveth his nychtboure." (roma. ; joan. .)--ergo, he that loveth god, kepith all his commandimentis. iii. he that hath the faith, loveth god.--"my father loveth yow, becaus ye luif me, and beleve that i came of god." (joan. .)--he that hath the faith, keapith all the commandimentis of god. he that hath the faith, loveth god; and he that loveth god, keapith all the commandimentis of god.--ergo, he that hath faith, keapith all the commandimentis of god. iv. he that keapeth one commandiment, keapeth thame all.--"for without fayth it is impossible to keap any of the commandimentis of god."--and he that hath the fayth, keapeth all the commandimentis of god.--ergo, he that keapith one commandiment of god, keapith thame all. v. he that keapith nott all the commandimentis of god, he keapith nane of thame.--he that keapith one of the commandimentis, he keapith all.--ergo, he that keapith not all the commandimentis, he keapith nane of thame. vi. it is not in our power, without grace, to keap anie of goddis commandimentis.--without grace it is impossible to keap ane of goddis commandimentis; and grace is not in our power.--ergo, it is not in our power to keap any of the commandimentis of god. evin so may ye reassone concerning the holy ghost, and fayth. vii. the law was gevin to schaw us our synne.--"be the law cumith the knowledge of the synne. i knew not what synne meant, bot throw the law. i knew not what lust had ment, except the law had said, thow shalt not lust. without the law, synne was dead:" that is, it moved me nott, nether wist i that it was synne, which notwithstanding was synne, and forbidden be the law. viii. the law biddith us do that which is impossible for us.--for it biddith us keape all the commandimentis of god: yitt it is not in oure power to keape any of thame.--ergo, it biddeth us doo that which is impossible for us. thow wilt say, "whairfoir doith god command us that which is impossible for us." i ansuere, "to mack thee know that thow arte bot evill, and that thair is no remeady to save thee in thine awin hand, and that thow mayest seak reamedy at some uther; for the law doith nothing butt command thee." [the doctrine] of the gospell. the gospell, is as moche to say, in oure tong, as good tydingis: lyk as everie one of these sentences be-- christ is the saviour of the world. christ is our saviour. christ deid for us. christ deid for our synnes. christ offerred him selve for us. christ bare our synnes upoun his back. christ bought us with his blood. christ woushe us with his blood. christ came in the warld to save synnaris. christ came in the warld to tak away our synnes. christ was the price that was gevin for us and for our synnes. christ was maid dettour for our synnes. christ hath payed our debt, for he deid for us. christ hath maid satisfactioun for us and for our synne. christ is our rychteousness. christ is oure wisdome. christ is our sanctifcatioun. christ is our redemptioun. christ is our satisfactioun. christ is our goodness. christ hath pacifeid the father of heavin. christ is ouris, and all his. christ hath delivered us frome the law, frome the devill, and hell. the father of heavin hath forgevin us for christis saik. or anie such other, as declair unto us the mercyes of god. the nature [and office] of the law, and of the gospell. the law schawith us, our synne. our condemnatioun, is the word of ire. is the word of dispair. is the word of displeasure. the gospell schawith us, a reamedy for it. oure redemptioun, is the word of grace. is the word of conforte. is the word of peace. a disputatioun betuix the law and the gospell. the law sayith, paye thy debt, thow art a synnar desparat. and thow shalt die. the gospell sayith, christ hath payed it. thy synnes ar forgevin thee. be of good conforte, thow shalt be saved. the law sayith, mack a mendis for thy synne. the father of heaven is wraith wyth thee. quhair is thy rychteousnes, goodnes, and satisfactioun? thou art bound and obligat unto me, [to] the devill, and [to] hell. the gospell sayith, christ hath maid it for thee. christ hath pacefeid him with his blood. christ is thy rychteousnes, thy goodnes, and satisfactioun christ hath delivered thee from thame all. [the doctrine] off faith. faith is to beleve god; "lyck as abraham beleved god, and it was compted unto him for rychteousnes." (gen. .)--"he that beleved god, beleved his word." (joan. .)--to beleve in him, is to beleve his word, and accompt it trew that he speikith. he that belevith not goddis word, beleveth not him self. he that belevith nott goddis word, he compteth him fals, and ane lyar, and beleveth not that he may and will fulfill his word; and so he denyeth both the myght of god and him self. ix. faith is the gift of god.--"everie good thing is the gift of god." (jacob. .)--fayth is good.--ergo, faith is the gift of god. x. [faith is not in our power.]--the gift of god is not in oure power.--"faith is the gift of god."--ergo, fayth is not in oure power. xi. [he that lacketh faith cannot please god.]--"without faith it is impossible to please god." (hebr. .)--all that cummith nott of fayth, is synne; for without faith can no man please god.--besydis, that he that lacketh faith, he trusteth nott god. he that trusteth not god, trusteth nott in his wourd. he that trusteth not in his wourd, hauldeth him self fals, and a liear. he that haldeth him self false and a lyer, he belevith not that he may doo that he promeseth, and so denyeth he that he is god. and how can a man, being of this fassioun, please him? no maner of way. yea, suppoise he did all the werkis of man and angell. xii. all that is done in fayth, pleaseth god.--"richt is the wourde of god, and all his werkis in faith." "lord, thine eis look to faith." that is asmuch to saye as, lord, thow delitest in fayth. god loveth him that belevith in him. how cane thei then displease him? xiii. he that hath the faith, is just and good.--and a good trie bringeth furth good fruite.--ergo, all that is in faith done pleaseth god. xiv. [he that hath faith, and believeth god, cannot displease him.]--moreovir, he that hath the faith belevith god.--he that belevith god, belevith his worde. he that belevith his word, woteth weall that he is trew and faithfull, and may nott lie: but knowith weall that he may and will boith fulfill his word. how can he then displease him? for thow canst not do ane greattar honor unto god, then to count him trew. thow wilt then say, that thift, murther, adulterie, and all vices, please god? nane, verrelie; for thei can not be done in faith: "for a good tree beareth good frute." he that hath the faith, woteth weall that he pleaseth god; for all that is done in fayth pleaseth god. (hebr. .) xv. faith is a suirness.--"faith is a suir confidence of thingis quhilk ar hoped for, and a certantie of thinges which ar not sene." (hebr. .)--"the same spreit certifieth our spreit that we are the children of god." (rom. .)--moirovir, he that hath the faith, woteth weill that god will fulfill his word.--ergo, fayth is a suirness. a man is justifeid be faith. "abraham beleveth god, and it was impueted unto him for ryghteousnes." "we suppose thirfoir that a man is justified (saith the apostill) without the workis of law." (rom. .)--"he that workith not, but belevith in him that justifieth the ungodlie, his faith is compted unto him for ryghteousnes." "the just man levith by faith." (abac. ; rom. .)--"we wote, that a man that is justifeid, is not justifeid be the workis of the law, but be the faith of jesus christ, and not by the deadis of the law." of the faith of christ the faith of christ is, to beleve in him; that is, to beleve his wourd, and to beleve that he will helpe thee in all thy neid, and deliver thee frome evill. thow wilt ask me, what word? i answer, the gospell. "he that beleveth on christ shalbe saved." "he that belevith the sone hath eternall lyif." "verrelie, verrelie, i say unto yow, he that belevith on me hath everlasting lyif." (joan. .)--"this i wret unto yow, that beleving in the name of the sone of god, ye may know that ye have eternall lyif." ( joan. .)--"thomas, becaus thow hast sein me thow belevest; but happie ar thei that have nott sein, and yit beleve in me." "all the propheittis to him bare witness, that whosoevir belevith in him shall have remissioun of thair synnes." (act. .)--"what must i do that i may be saved?" the apostill answerid, "beleve in the lord jesus christ, and thow shalt be saved." "yf thow acknowledge wyth the mouth, that jesus is the lord, and beleve in thyn harte that god raissed him up from the death, thow shalt be save." (rom. .)--"he that beleveth not in christ shalbe condemned." "he that beleveth nott the sone shall never see lyif; but the ire of god abydith upoun him." (joan. .)--"the holy ghost shall reprove the world of synne, becaus thei beleve not in me." "thei that beleve in jesus christ ar the sones of god." ye ar all the sones of god, because ye beleve in jesus christ. he that belevith in christ the sone of god is save. (galat. .)--"petir said, thow art christ, the sone of the leving god. jesus ansuered and said unto him, happie arte thow, symon, the sone of jonas; for flesch and blood hath nott oppened unto thee that, bot my father which is in heavin." (matth. .)--"we have beloved and knowin that thow arte christ the sone of the leving god." "i beleve that thow arte christ the sone of the leving god, which should come into the warld." "these thingis ar written that ye mycht beleve that jesus christ is the sone of god, and that in beleving ye mycht have lyef. i beleve that jesus is the sone of the leving god." (joan. .) xvi. he that belevith god, belevith the gospell.--he that belevith god, belevith his word:--and the gospell is his word. thairfoir he that belevith god, belevith his gospell. as christ is the saviour of the world, christ is our saviour. christ bought us with his bloode. christ woushe us with his blood. christ offerred him self for us. christ baire oure synnes upoun his back. xvii. he that belevith nott the gospell, belevith not god.--he that belevith not goddis word belevith nott him self:--and the gospell is goddis word.--ergo, he that belevith nott the gospell belevith nott god him self; and consequentlie thei that beleve nott as is above written, and such other, beleve not god. xviii. he that belevith the gospell, shalbe saved.--"go ye into all the world and preach the gospell unto everie creature: he that belevith and is baptised shalbe saved; bot he that belevith not shalbe condemned." a comparison betuix faith and indredulitie. faith is the root of all good:-- makith god and man freindis. bringith god and man to gither. incredulitie is the root of all evill:-- makith thame deidlie foes. bringith thame syndrie. all that proceidis frome faith pleaseth god. all that proceidith from incredulitie displeaseth god. faith only maketh a man good and rychteouse. incredulitie maketh him injust and evill. faith only maketh a man, the member of christ; the inheritour of heavin; the servand of god. faith schewith god to be a sweit father. fayth hauldith styff be the word of god: countith god to be trew. faith knowith god: lovith god and his nychtboure. faith only savith: extolleth god and his werkis. incredulitie maketh him, the member of the devill; the inheritour of hell; the servand of the devill. incredulitie maketh god a terrible judge: it causeth man wandir heir and thair: maketh him fals and a liear. incredulitie knoweth him nott. incredulitie lovith nether god nor nychtbour: onlie condemneth: extolleth flesche and hir awin deidis. off hope. hope is a trustie looking for of thingis that ar promesed to come unto us: as we hope the everlasting joy which christ hath promesed unto all that beleve on him. we should putt our hoipe and trust in god onlie, and no other thing. "it is good to trust in god, and nott in man." "he that trustith in his awin harte, he is a fuill." "it is good to trust in god, and not in princes." (psal. .)--"thei shal be lyik unto images that mack thame, and all that trust in thame." he that trusteth in his awin thoughts doeth ungodlie. "curssed be he that trustith in man." "bidd the rich men of this warld, that thei trust nott in thair unstable riches, but that thei trust in the leving god." "it is hard for them that trust in money to enter in the kingdome of god." moirovir, we should trust in him onelie, that may help us [god onlie can help us.]--ergo, we should trust in him onelie. weill is thame that trust in god: and wo to thame that trust him nott. "weill is the man that trustis in god; for god shalbe his trust." he that trusteth in him shall understand the trewth. "thei shall all rejoyse that trust in thee: thei shall all evir be glaid; and thow wilt defend thame." off charitie. charitie is the love of thy nychtboure. the rewll of charitie is to doo as thow woldest wer done unto thee: for charitie esteameth all alyke;[ ] the riche and the poore; the friend and the foe; the thankfull and the unthankfull; the kynnesman and stranger. a comparison betuix faith, hope, and charitie. faith commeth of the wourd of god: hope commeth of faith; and charitie springis of thame boith. faith belevis the word: hope trustith eftir that which is promessed be the wourd: and charitie doith good unto hir nychtbour, throw the love that sche hath to god, and glaidnes that is within hir selve. faith looketh to god and his worde: hope lookith unto his gift and reward: charitie lookith unto hir nychtbouris proffeit. faith receavith god: hoipe receaveth his reward: charitie lookith to hir nychtbour wyth a glaid hart, and that without any respect of reward. faith perteaneth to god onelie: hope to his reward, and charitie to hir nychtbour. [the doctrine] of good workis. no maner of werkis mack us rychteouse.--"we beleve that a man shalbe justifeid without werkis." (galat. .)--"no man is justifeid be the deidis of the law; but be the faith of jesus christ. and we beleve in jesus christ, that we may be justifeid be the faith of christ, and nott be the deidis of the law. yf rychteousnes came be the law, then christ deid in vane." that no man is justifeid be the law, it is manifest: for a rychteouse man levith by his faith; but the law is nott of faith. moirovir, since christ, the makar of heavin and earth, and all that thair in is, behoved to die for us; we ar compelled to grant, that we wer so far drowned in synne, that nether our deidis, nor all the treasouris that ever god maid, or might maik, might have help us out of thame: ergo, no deidis nor werkis maie mack us rychteouse. no werkis mak us unrychteouse.--for yf any werke maid us unrychteouse, then the contrarie werkis wold maik us rychteouse. butt it is provin, that no werkis can maik us righteouse: ergo, no werkis maik us unrychteouse. werkis maik us nether good nor evill. it is proven, that werkis nether maik us rychteouse nor unrychteouse: ergo, no werkis nether maik us good nor evill. for rychteouse and good ar one thing, and unrighteouse and evill, one. good werkis maik not ane good man, nor evill werkis ane evill man: but a good man makith good werkis, and ane evill man evill werkis. good fruct makith not the tree good, nor evill fruict the tree evill: but a good tree bearith good fruict, and ane evill tree evill fruict. a good man can not do evill werkis, nor ane evill man good werkis; for ane evill tree can not beare good fruct, nor ane good tree evill fruct. a man is good befoir he do good werkis, and ane evill man is evill before he do evill werkis; for the tree is good befoir it bear good fruict, and evill befoir it beir evill fruct. everie man is either good or evill. either maik the tree good, and the fruct good also, or ellis maik the tree evill, and the fruct lyikwyise evill. everie manes werkis ar eyther good or evill: for all fructis ar either good or evill. "either maik the tree good and the fruct also, or ellis maik the tree evill and the fruct of it lyikwyise evill." (matth. .)--a good man is knowin be his werkis; for a good man doith good werkis, and ane evill, evill werkis. "ye shall knaw thame be thair fruct; for ane good tree bringeth furth good fruct, and ane evill tree evill fruict." (matth. .)--a man is likened to the tree, and his werkis to the fruct of the trie. "bewar of the fals propheittis, which come unto yow in scheippis clothing; but inwardlie thei ar raveening wolves. ye shall knaw thame be thair fructis." none of oure werkis nether save us, nor condempne us. it is provin, that no werkis maik us either righteouse or unryghteouse, good nor evill: but first we are good befoir that we do good werkis, and evill befoir we do evill warkis: ergo, no werk neither save us nor condempne us. thow wilt say then, makith it no mater what we do? i answer thee, yes; for yf thow dost evill, it is a suir argument that thow art evill, and wantest faith. yf thow do good, it is ane argument that thow art good and hast faith; for a good tree bearith good fruct, and an evill tree evill fruct. yit good fruct maketh nott the tree good, nor evill fruct the tree evill. so that man is good befoir he do good werkis, and evill befoir he do evill werkis. the man is the tree: the werkis ar the fruct. faith maekith the good tree: incredulitie the evill tree. such a tree, such a fruct: such man, such warkis. for all that is done in faith pleasith god, and ar gud werkis; and all that is done without faith displeaseth god, and ar evill workis. quhosoevir thinketh to be saved by his werkis, denyeth christ is oure saviour, that christ deid for him, and, fynallie, all thing that belongeth to christ. for how is he thy saviour, yf thow mychtest save thy self by thy werkis? or to what end should he have deid for thee, yf any werkis of thine might have saved thee? what is this to say, christ deid for thee? it is nott that thow shouldest have deid perpetuallie, and that christ, to deliver thee frome death, deid for thee, and changed thy perpetuall death in his awin death. for thow madest the falt, and he suffered the pane, and that for the luif he had to thee, befoir ever thow wast borne, when thow haddest done neither good nor evill. now, since he hath payed thy debt, thow deist nott: no, thow canst nott, bot shouldest have bene damned, yf his death war not.[ ] bot since he was punished for thee, thow shalt not be punished. fynallie, he hath delivered thee from thye condemnatioun, and desyrith nought of thee, but that thow shouldest acknowledge what he hath done for thee, and bear it in mynd; and that thow woldest helpe other for his saik, boith in worde and deid, evin as he hath helped thee for nought, and without reward. o how ready would we be to help otheris, yf we knew his goodnes and gentilnes towardis us! he is a good and a gentill lord, and he doith all thingis for nought. let us, i beseich yow, follow his footsteps, whome all the world ought to prayse and wirschep. amen. he that thinkith to be savid be his werkis, calleth him selve christ:-- for he callith him self a saviour, which aparteaneth to christ onlie. what is a saviour, butt he that savith? and thow sayist, i save my self; which is asmuch to say as, i am christ; for christ is onlie the saviour of the world. we should do no good werkis, for that intent to get the inheritance of heavin, or remissioun of synnes throw thame. for whosoevir belevith to gett the inheritance of heavin or remissioun of synnes, throw werkis, he belevith nott to gett that for christis saik. and thei that beleve not, that thair synnes ar forgeivin thame, and that thei sal be saved for christis saik, thei beleve not the gospell; for the gospell sayith, yow sal be saved for christis saik: synnes ar forgevin yow, for christis saik. he that belevith not the gospell, belevith not god. and consequentlie, thei which beleve to be saved be thair werkis, or to gett remissioun of synnes be thair awin deidis, beleve not god, bot raccompt him a liear, and so utterlie denye him to be god. thow wilt say, shall we then do no good werkis? i say not so, but i say, we should do no good werkis for that intent to gett the kingdome of heavin, or remissioun of synnes. for yf we beleve to gett the inheritance of heavin throw good werkis, then we beleve nott to gett it throw the promesse of god. or, yf we think to gett remissioun of our synnes, as said is, we beleve nott that thei ar forgevin us by christ, and so we compt god a liear. for god sayith, thow shalt have the inheritance of heavin for my sonnes saik. yow say, it is nott so; but i will wynne it throw my awin werkis. so, i condempne not good werkis; but i condempne the fals trust in any werkis; for all the werkis that a man putteth confidence in, are thairwyth intoxicat or empoisoned, and become evill. quhairfoir, do good werkis; but be war thow do thame to gett any good throw thame; for yf thow do, thow receavest the good, not as the gift of god, bott as debte unto thee, and maikest thy self fellow with god, becaus thow wilt tack no thing from him for nought. what nedith he any thing of thyne, who gevith all thing, and is not the poorare? thairfoir do nothing to him, but tack of him; for he is ane gentill lord, and with, a glaidar harte will geve us all thingis that we neid, than we taik it of him. so that yf we want any thing, lett us witt our selfis. prease not then to the inheritance of heavin, throwght presumptioun of thy good werkis; for yf thow do, thow comptest thy selve holy and equall unto him, becaus thow wilt tack nothing of him for nowght; and so salt thow fall as lucifer fell from heavin for his pride. thus endis the said maistir patrikis articles.[ ] and so we returne to oure hystory. [sn: the forme and caussis of the preastis old curssing.] when those cruell wolves had, as thei supposed, cleane devored the pray, thei fynd thame selfis in warse caise then thei war befoir; for then within sanctandrose, yea, almost within the hole realme, (who heard of that fact,) thair was none found who begane not to inquyre, whairfoir was maistir patrik hammyltoun brunt? and when his articles war rehersed, questioun was holden, yf such articles war necessarie to be beleved under the pane of damnatioun. and so within schort space many begane to call in dowbt that which befoir thei held for a certane veritie, in so much that the universitie of sanctandrose, and sanct leonardis colledge principallie, by the labouris of maistir gawin logy,[ ] and the novises[ ] of the abbay, by the suppriour,[ ] begane to smell somwhat of the veritie, and to espy the vanitie of the receaved superstitioun. yea, within few yearis eftir, begane baith black and gray frearis publictlie to preache against the pride and idile lief of bischoppis, and against the abuses of the whole ecclesiasticall estaite. amongis whome was one called frear williame arth,[ ] who, in a sermone preached in dundye, spak somwhat moir liberallie against the licentious lyifes of the bischoppis nor thei could weall beair. he spaik farther against the abuse of curssing and of miracles. the bischop of brechin,[ ] having his placeboes and jackmen in the toun, buffatted the freir, and called him heretick. the freir, impatient of the injury receaved, past to sanctandrose, and did communicat the headis of his sermone with maister johnne mair,[ ] whose wourd then was holden as ane oracle, in materis of religioun; and being assured of him, that such doctrin mycht weall be defendid, and that he wald defend it, for it conteaned no heresye; thair was ane day appointed to the said frear, to maik repetitioun of the sam sermon; and advertisment was gevin to all such as war offended att the formar to be present. and so, in the parishe kirk of sanctandrose, upoun the day appointed, appeared the said frear, and had amonges his auditouris maistir johnne mair, maistir george lockart,[ ] the abbot of cambuskynneth,[ ] maistir patrik hepburne the priour of sanctandrose,[ ] with all the doctouris and maistires of the universities. the theame of his sermone was, "veritie is the strongest of all thingis." his discourse of curssing was, "that yf it war rychtlie used, it was the moist fearfull thing upoun the face of the earth; for it was the verray separatioun of man frome god: but that it should nott be used rashlie, and for everie light cause, but onlie against open and incorrigible synnaris. but now, (said he,) the avarice of preastis, and the ignorance of thair office, has caused it altogitther to be vilipended;[ ] for the preast, (said he,) whose dewitie and office is to pray for the people, standis up on sounday, and cryes, 'ane hes tynt a spurtill. thair is ane flaill stollin from thame beyound the burne. the goodwyiff of the other syd of the gait hes tynt a horne spune. goddis maleson and myne i geve to thame that knowis of this geyre, and restoris it not.'"--how the people mocked thair curssing, he ferther told a meary tale; how, after a sermoun that he had maid at dumfermling, he came to a house whair gossoppis was drynking thair soundayis penny, and he, being dry, asked drynk. "yis, father, (said ane of the gossoppes,) ye shall haif drynk; bot ye mon first resolve ane doubt which is rissen amongis us, to witt, what servand will serve a man beast on least expenssis." "the good angell, (said i,) who is manis keapar, who maikis great service without expenssis." "tush, (said the gossope,) we meane no so heigh materis: we meane, what honest man will do greatest service for least expensses?" and whill i was musing, (said the frear,) what that should meane, he said, "i see, father, that the greatest clerkis ar nott the wysest men. know ye not how the bischoppis and thair officiallis servis us husband men? will thei not give to us a lettir of curssing for a plack, to laste for a year, to curse all that looke ower our dick [dyke]? and that keapis our corne better nor the sleaping boy, that will have three schillingis of fye, a sark, and payre of schone in the year. and thairfoir, yf thair curssing dow any thing, we held the bischoppis beast chaip servandis, in that behalf, that ar within the realme." as concernyng miracles, he declaired, what diligence the ancientis took to try trew miracles frome false. "but now, (said he,) the greadynes of preastis not onlie receave false miracles, bot also thei cherise and feis knaiffis for that purpoise, that thair chapellis may be the better renouned, and thair offerand may be augmented. and thairupoun ar many chapelles founded, as that our lady war mychttiar, and that sche took more pleasour in one plaice then in ane uther; as of laite dayis our lady of karsgreng hes hopped fra ane grene hillock to ane uther. but honest men of sanctandrose, (said he,) yf ye luif your wyffis and your doughtaris, hald thame at hame, or ellis send thame in honest companye; for yf ye knew what miracles war kithed thaire, ye wold neyther thank god nor our lady." and thus he mearelie tanted thare trystis of hurdome and adulterye used at such devotioun. ane uther article was judged more hard; for he alledged the commoun law,[ ] that the civyle magistrate mycht correct the churchmen,[ ] and deprive thame of thaire benefices, for oppin vices. ane uther day, the same frear maid ane uther sermoun of the abbote [of] unreassone,[ ] unto whome and whose lawis he compared the prelattis of that age; for thei war subdewid to no lawis, no moir then was the abbote [of] unreassoun. and amonges uther thingis he told such a meary bourd. "thare was (said he) a prelatt, or at least a prelattis peir, a trew servand to the king of luif, who, upoun a nycht after suppar, asked at his gentillmen, be the fayth that thei awght to the king of luif, that thei should trewlie declare how many syndrie wemen everie ane of thame had haid, and how many of thame war menis wyffis. ane answered, he had lyne with fyve, and two of thame war maryed. the other answered, i have haid sevin, and three of thame ar maryed. it came at last to my lord him self, who macking it veray nyce for a lytill space, gave in the end ane plain confessioun, and said, 'i am the yongest man, and yitt have i haid the round desone; and sevin of thame ar menis wyffis.' now, (said the frear,) this god and king of luif, to whome our prelaittis maikis homage, is the maistir devill of hell, from whome such werkis and fruitis doo procead." this prelatt was knowin by his proper tockenes to have bene priour patrik hepburne,[ ] now bischop of murray, who to this day hes continewed in the professioun that he anes maid to his god and king of luif.[ ] it was supposed, notwithstanding this kynd of preaching, that this frear remaned papist in his heart; for the rest of the frearis, fearing to losse the benedictioun of the bischoppes, to witt, thair malt and thair maill, and thair other appoineted pensioun, cawsed the said frear to flye to england, whair, for defence of the paipe and paipistrie, his was cast in preasone[ ] at king hary his commandiment. but so it pleasith god to open up the mouth of baalames awin asse, to cry out againest the vitious lyves of the clergie of that aige. schorte after this, new consultatioun was tackin, that some should be brunt; for men began verray liberallie to speak. a meary gentillman, named johnne lyndesay, famylliar to bisehope james betoun, standing by when consultatioun was had, said, "my lord, yf ye burne any mo, except ye follow my counsall, ye will utterlye destroy your selves. yf ye will burne thame, lett thame be brunt in how sellarris; for the reik of maister patrik hammyltoun hes infected as many as it blew upoun."[ ] thus it pleased god, that thei should be tanted in thair awin face. but hear followis the moist meary of all. sandie furrour, who had bene empreasoned sevin yearis in the toure of londone, sir johnne dignwaill,[ ] according to the cheritie of churche men,[ ] enterteneid his wyiff, and waisted the poore manes substance. for the which caus, at his returnyng, he spaik more liberallie of preastis then thei could bear, and so was he declaired[ ] to be accused of heresye, and called to his ansuer to sanctandrose. he lapp up mearely upoun the scaffold, and, casting a gawmound, said, "whair ar the rest of the playaris?" maistir audro olephant,[ ] offended thairwyth, said, "it shalbe no play to yow, sir, befoir that ye depart." and so began to read his accusatioun. the first article whareof was, that he dispyssed the messe. his ansuer was, "i hear mo messis in awght dayis, then thre bischoppis thair sitting sayis in a year." accused secoundarly, of contemptioun of the sacramentis. "the preastis, (said he,) war the maist commoun contempnaris of sacramentis, and especiallie of matrimonye," and that he witnessed by any of the preastis thare present, and named the menis wyffis with whome thei had medled, and especiallie sir johnne dignwaill, who had sevin yearis togitther abused his awin wyff and consumed his substance; and said, "becaus i complayne of such injuries, i am hear summoned, and accused, as one that is worthy to be brunt. for goddis saik, (said he,) wil ye taick wyeffis of your awin, that i and utheris, whose wyiffis ye have abused, may be revenged upoun yow." then bisehope gawin dumbar,[ ] named the old bischop of abirdein, thinking to justifye him self befoir the people, said, "carll, thow shalt not know my wyff." the said alexander ansuered, "my lord, ye ar too old; bot, with the grace of god, i shall drynk with your dochtter or i departe." and thareat was smylling of the best, and lowd laughtter of some; for the bisehop had a dowghter maryed with andro balfour[ ] in that same toune. then the bischoppis bad, "away with the earll." but he ansured, "nay; i will not departe this houre; for i have more to speak against the vices of preastis, then i cane expresse this haill[ ] day." and so, after diverse purposes, thei commanded him to burne his bill. and he demanding the caus, thei said, "becaus ye have spoken these articles whairof ye ar accused." his ansuer was, "the mekill devill bear thame away, that first and last said thame." and so he tack the bill, and chowing it, hee after spatt it in mr. andro oliphantis face, saying, "now burne it or drune it, whitther ye will: ye heir na mair of me. butt i man have somewhat of everie ane of yow to begyn my pack agane, which a preast and my wyif, a preastis hoore, hes spentt." and so everie prelate and riche preast, glaid to be qwyte of his evill, gave him somwhat; and so departed hie, for he understood nothing of religioun. but so fearfull it was then to speak any thing against preastis, that the least word spokin against thame, yea, albeit it was spokin in a manes sleip, was judged heresye; and that was practised upoun richart carmichaell, yet leving in fyfe,[ ] who being young, and ane singar in the chapell royal of striveling, happened in his sleepe to say, "the devill tak away the preastis, for thei ar a gready pack." hie, thairfor, accused be sir george clappertoun, deane[ ] of the said chapell, was compelled tharefore to burne his bill. but god schort after raised up against thame strongar campionis. for alexander setoun,[ ] a blak frear, of good learning and estimatioun, began to tax the corrupt doctrin of the papistrye. for the space of a hole lentran,[ ] he tawght the commandimentis of god onlye, ever beatting in the earis of his auditouris, that the law of god had of many yearis not bein trewlie tawght; for menis traditionis had obscured the puritie of it. these war his accustomed propositionis: first, christ jesus is the end and perfectioun of the law. . thair is no syne quhair goddis law is not violated. . to satisfie for syne lyes not in manis power, but the remissioun thairof cumis by unfeaned reapentance, and by faith apprehending god the father mercifull in christ jesus, his sone. whill often tymes he puttis his auditouris in mynd of thir and the lyik headis, and maikis no mentioun of purgatorye, pardones, pilgramage, prayer to sanctes, nor such trifillis, the dum doctouris, and the rest of that forsworne rable, begane to suspect him; and yitt said thei nothing publictlie, till lentrain[ ] was ended, and he passed to dundie. and then, in his absence, ane hired for that purpose openlie damned the hole doctrin[ ] that befoir he had tawght. which cuming to the earis of the said frear alexander, then being in dundye, without delay he returned to sanctandrose, caused immediatlie to jow the bell, and to give significatioun that he wald preach; as that he did in deid. in the which sermon he affirmed, (and that more plainlie then at any uther tyme,) whatsoever in all his hole sermones hie had tawght befoir the haill lentrantyde preceding;[ ] adding, that within scotland thair was no trew bischoppe, yf that bischoppes should be knawin by such notes and vertewis, as sanct paule requyres in bischoppis. this delatioun flew with wyngis to the bischoppis earis, who, butt farther delay, send for the said frear alexander, who began greveouslie to complayne, and sharplye to accuse, that he had so sclanderouslie spokin of the dignitie of the bischoppes, as to say, "that it behoved a bischope to be a preachear, or ellis he was but a dume dogg, and fed not the flock, but fed his awin bellye." the man being witty, and mynded of that which was his most assured defence, said, "my lord, the reaportaris of such thingis ar manifest lyearis." whareat the bischope[ ] rejosed, and said, "your ansour pleasses me weall: i never could think of yow, that ye wold be so foolische as to affirme such thingis. whare ar thei knaiffis that have brought me this tale?" who compearing, and affirmyng the same that thei did befoir, hie still replyed, that thei ware leyaris. but whill the witnesses war multiplyed, and men war browght to attentioun, he turned him to the bischope, and said, "my lord, ye may see[ ] and considder what caris these asses have, who cane nott discerne betuix paull, isai, zacharie, and malachie and frear alexander setoun. in verray deid, my lord, i said that paule sayis, 'it behoveth a bischop to be ane teichear.' isai sayith, 'that thei that feid nott the flock ar dum doggis.' and zacharie sayeth, 'thei ar idoll pastouris.' i of my awin head affirmed nothing, butt declared what the spreitt of god had befoir pronunced; at whome, my lord, yf ye be nott offended, justly ye cane nott be offended at me. and so yit agane, my lord, i say, that thei ar manifest leyaris that reported unto yow, that i said, that ye and utheris that preach nott ar no bischoppis, but belly goddis." albeit after that, the bischope was heightly offended, asweill at the skwff[ ] and bitter mock, as at the bold libertie of that learned man; yitt durst he nott hasard for that present to execute his malice conceaved; for nott onlye feared he the learnyng and bold spreit of the man, bot also the favour that he had, alsweall of the people, as of the prince, king james the fyft, of whome he had good credite; for he was at that tyme his confessour, and had exhorted him to the feare of god, to the meditatioun of goddis law, and unto puritie of lyiff. butt the said bischope, with his complices, foirseing what danger mycht cume to thair estaite, yf such familiaritie should continew betuix the prince and a man so learned, and so repugnyng to thair affectionis, laubored by all meanes to mack the said frear alexander odiouse unto the kingis grace, and easely fand the meanes by the gray frearis, (who by thare hypochrisye deceaved many,) to traduce the innocent as ane heretyk. this accusatioun was easely receaved and more easelye beleved[ ] of the carnall prince, who altogitther was gevin to the filthy loostis of the fleshe, abhorred all counsall that repugned thairto. and becaus he did remember what a terrour the admonitionis of the said alexander was unto his corrupted conscience, without resistance he subscrived to thair accusatioun, affirmyng that he knew mair then thei did in that mater; for he understood weall ynewcht, that he smelled of the new doctrin, by such thingis as he had schawin to him under confessioun. and tharefoir he promessed, that he should follow the counsall of the bischoppes in punishing of him and of all utheris of that sect. these thingis understand by the said alexander, alsweall by informatioun of his freindis and familliaris, as by the strange contenance of the king unto him, provydit the nixt way to avoid the fury of a blynded prince: and so, in his habite,[ ] hie departed the realme,[ ] and cuming to berwik, wraitt back agane to the kingis grace his complaint and admonitioun, the verray tennour and copy whareof followis, and is this:-- maist gratious and sovering lord under the lord and king of all, of whome only thy hienes and majestie has power and authoritie to exercise justice within this thy realme, under god, who is king and lorde of all realmes, and thy grace and all mortale kingis ar bott onlye servandis unto that onlie immortall prince christ jesus, etc. it is nott (i wate) unknawin to thy gratious[ ] hieness, how that thy grace's umquhill servand and oratour, (and ever shalbe to my lyves end,) is departed out of thy realme unto the nixt adjacent of ingland. nochtheless i beleve the causse of my departing is unknawin to thy gratious[ ] majestie: quhilk only is, becaus the bischoppis and kirkmen of thy realme hes had heirtofoir sick authoritie upoun thy subjectis, that appearandly thei war rather king, and thow the subject, (quhilk injust regiment is of the selfe false, and contrair to holy scripture and law of god,) than thow thair king and maistir, and thei thy subjectis, (quhilk is verray trew, and testifiet expreasslie be the word of god.) and also, becaus thei will give no man of onye degree or staite (whome thei oft falslie call heretykis) audience, tyme, nor place to speak and have defence; quhilk is aganist all law, boith the ald law, called the law of moses, and the new law of the evangell. so that, gif i mycht have had audience and place to speak, and have schawin my just defence, conforme to the law of god, i should never have fled to any uther realme, suppose it should haif cost me my lyiff. bot becaus i beleved that i should haif haid no audience nor place to answer, (thei ar so great with thy grace,) i departed, not dowttand, bott moved of god, unto ane bettire tyme that god illuminate thy grace's eyn, to give everie man audience (as thow should and may, and is bound of the law of god,) who ar accused to the death. and to certifie thy hienes that thir ar no vane wordis, bot of dead and effect, heir i offer me to thy grace to come in thy realme agane, so that thy grace will give me audience, and hear what i have for me of the law of god: and caus ony bischope or abbot, frear or secular, quhilk is maist cuning, (some of thame cane not read thair matynes who ar maid judgeis in heresye!) to impugne me be the law of god; and give my parte be found wrang, thy grace being present and judge, i refuse no pane worthie or condigne for my falt. and give that i convict thame by the lawe of god, and that thei have nothing to lay to my charge, bot the law of man, and thair awin inventionis to uphald thair vane glorie and prydfull lyif, and dalye scorgeing of thy poore liegis; i reporte me to thy grace, as judge, whither he hes the victorye that haldis him at the law of god, quhilk cane not faill nor be false, or thei that haldis thame at the law of man, quhilk is rycht oft plane contrarie and aganis the law of god, and thairfoir of necessitie fals, and full of lesingis? for all thing that is contrarie to the veritie, (quhilk is christ and his law,) is of necessitie ane lesing. and to witnes that this cumis of all my harte, i shall remane in berwik whill i gett thy grace's answer, and shall without faill returne, haveing thy hand wreitt that i may haif audience, and place to speak. no more i desyre of thee; whaireof gif i had bene suire, i should never have departed. and that thow may know the treuth thairof, gif feare of the justness of my cause, or dredour of persequutioun for the same, had moved me to departe, i wold not so pleasandlie reverte: only distrust thairfoir was the caus of my departing. pardone me to say that quhilk lyes to thy grace's charge. thow arte bound by the law of god, (suppoise thei falslie lye, saying it perteanes nott to thy grace till intromett wyth sic materis,) to caus everie man, in any case, accused of his lyef, to have his just defence, and his accusaris produceit conforme to thair awin law. thei blynd thy grace's eyn, that knawis nothing of thair law: bot gif i prove nocht this out of thair awin law, i offer me to the death. thy grace, thairfoir, by experience may daly learne, (seing thei nether fear the king of heavin, as thair lyves testiffis, neyther thee thair naturall prince, as thare usurped power in thy actionis schawis,) why thy hienes should lye no langar blindit. thow may considder, that thei pretend nothing ellis bot only the mantenance and uphald of thair bardit mullis,[ ] augmenting of thare insatiable avarice, and continewall doune thringing and swallowing up thy poore lieges; nether preaching nor teaching out of the law of god, (as thei should,) to the rude, ignorant people, bot ay contending wha may be maist hie, maist riche, and nerrest thy grace, to putt the temporall lordis and liegis out of thy counsall[ ] and favour, who should be, and ar, maist tendir servandis to thy grace in all tyme of neid, to the defence of thee and thy croune. and whare thei desyre thy grace to putt at thy temporale lordis and liegis, because thei dispise thair vitiouse lyif, what ellis intend thei bot only thy death and destructioun? as thow may easilie perceave, suppoise thei cullour thair false intent and mynd, with the persute of heresye. for when thy baronis ar putt doun, what arte thow bot the king of bane?[ ] and then of necessitie man be guydit be thame: and thare, (no doubt,) whare ane blynd man is guyd, mon be ane fall in the myre. thairfoir lett thy grace tack hardiment and authoritie, quhilk thow hes of god, and suffer nott thair crewell persecutioun to procead, without audience geving to him that is accused, and just place of defence. and then, (no dowbt,) thow shall haif thy liegis hartis, and all that thei cane or may doo in tyme of neid; tranquillitie, justice, and policie in thy realme, and finallie, the kingdom of the heavins. please to gar have this, or the copy, to the clergy and kirkmen, and keap the principale, and thy grace shall have experience gif i go aganis ane worde that i haif hecht. i shall daylie maik my hartlie devotioun for thy grace, and for the prosperitie and wealfair of thy body and saule. i doubt nott bott thy gratiouse hienes will gif answere to thir presentis unto the presentar of this to thy hienes. of berwik, by thy hienes servand and oratour. (_sic subscribitur_,) alexander setoun. this letter was delivered to the kingis awin handis, and of many redd.[ ] but what could greatlie[ ] admonitionis availl, whare the pryde and corruptioun of prelattis commanded what thei pleased, and the flatterie of courteouris fostered the insolent prince in all impietie. * * * * * frome the death of that constant witness of jesus christ, maistir patrik hammyltoun, god disclosing the wickednes of the wicked, as befoir we have hearde, thare was one forress of lynlythqw[ ] tacken, who, after long empreasonment in the sea toure[ ] of sanctandross, was adjudgeit to the fyre by the said bischop james betoun, and his doctouris, for non uther cryme but becaus he had ane new testament in engliss. farther of that history we have nott, except that he deid constantlie, and with great patience, at sanctandross. after whose death, the flame of persecutioun ceassed, till the death of maistir normound gowrlaw, the space of ten yearis[ ] or neyrby; not that thei bloody beastis ceassed by all meanes to suppresse the light of god, and to truble such as in any sorte war suspected to abhore thair corruptioun; but becaus the realme was trubled with intestine and civile warres, in the which much blood was sched; first, at melrose, betuix the dowglasse and baleleweh, in the yeir of god j^m. v^c. twenty sax, the xviiij day of julij; nixt, at lynlythqw, betuix the hammyltonis and the erle of levenax, whair the said erle, with many utheris, lost his lyif, the thretten day of september, the year foirsaid; and last, betuix the king him self and the said dowglasses,[ ] whome he banished the realme, and held thame in exyle during his hole dayis. be reassone of these, we say, and of other trubles, the bischoppis and thair bloody bandis cold not fynd the tyme so favorable unto thame as thei requyred, to execut thair tyranny. in this mydd tyme, so did the wisdome of god provide, that hary the eyght, king of england, did abolishe frome his realme the name and authoritie of the pape of rome; suppress the abbayis, and uther places of idolatrie; which geve esperance to diverse realmes, that some godlye reformatioun should thairof have ensewed. and thairfoir, frome this our countrey, did diverse learned men, and utheris that leved in fear of persecutioun, repayre to that realme; whair albeit thei fand not such puritie as thei wished, (and thairfoir diverse of thame socht other countreis,) yit thei eschaped the tyranny of merciless men, and war reserved to better tymes, that thei mycht fructifie within his church, in diverse places and partis, and in diverse vocationis. alexander setoun remaned in england, and publictlie, (with great praise and conforte of many,) tawght the evangell in all sinceritie certane yearis. and albeit the craftynes of wyncester,[ ] and of otheris, circumvened the said alexander, that thei caused him at paules croce to affirme certane thingis that repugned to his formar trew doctrin;[ ] yit it is no dowbt, but that as god potentlie had rung with him in all his lyiff, but that also in his death, (which schortlie after followed,) he fand the mercy of his god, whareupoun he ever exhorted all men to depend. alexander alæsius, maistir johnne fyfe, and that famouse man doctor machabeus, departed unto duch land,[ ] whare by goddis providence thei war distributed to severall places.[ ] makdwell, for his singular prudence,[ ] besydis his learnyng and godlynes, was elected borrow maistir in one of the steadis.[ ] alesius was appointed to the universitie of lipsia;[ ] and so was maistir johnne fyff,[ ] whare, for thare honest behaveour and great cruditioun, thei war halden in admiratioun with all the godly. and in what honour, credite, and estimatioun, doctor machabeus[ ] was with christianus king of denmark, cawpmanhoven,[ ] and famowse men of diverse nationis, cane testifie. thus did god provid for his servandis, and did frustrat the expectatioun of these bloody beastis, who by the death of one, in whome the lyght of god did clearly schyne, intended to have suppressed christis trewth for ever within this realme. but the contrary had god decryed; for his death was the cause, (as said is,) that many did awaik frome the deadly sleape of ignorance, and so did jesus christ, the onlye trew light, schyne unto many, for the way-tackin of one. and albeit that these notable men did never after, (maistir johnne fyfe onlie excepted,) conforte this countree with thair bodelye presence; yit maid thame fructifie in his churche, and raissed thame up lightis out of darkness, to the prase of his awin mercy, and to the just condempnatioun of thame that then rewled, to wit, of the king, counsall, and nobilitie, yea of the hole people, who sufferred such notable personages, without crymes committed, to be injustlie persecuted, and so exyled. otheris war after evin so entraited: but of thame we shall speak in thair awin places. no soonare gatt the bischoppis oportunitie, (which alwyise thei sought,) but so sone renewed thei the battell against jesus christ; for the foirsaid leprouse bischop, in the year of god j^m. v^c. thretty four, caused to be summoned sir williame kirk, adam dayis, hendrie karnes, johnne stewart, indwellaris of leyth,[ ] with diverse otheris, such as, maistir williame johnestoun,[ ] maister henry hendyrson, schoolmaister of edinburgh,[ ] of whome some compeired in the abbay kirk of halyrudhouse, and so abjured and publictlie brynt thare byllis:[ ] otheris compeared nott, and tharefoir war exyled. butt in judgement war produced two, to wit, david stratoun,[ ] a gentilman, and maister normound gowrlay,[ ] a man of reassonable eruditioun, of whom we mon schortlye speak. in maister normound appeared knawledge, albeit joyned with weakness. but in david stratoun, could onlye be espyed, for the first, a haterent against the pride and avaritiousnes of the preastis; for the causse of his delatioun was, he had maid to him self ane fische boit to go to the sea. the bischop of murray, (then being priour of sanctandross,[ ]) and his factouris, urgeid him for the teind thairof. his ansuer was, yf thei wald haif teynd of that which his servandis wane in the sea, it war but reassoun, that thei should come and receave it whare his gatt the stock; and so, as was constantlye affirmed, he caused his servandis cast the tenth fische in the sea agane. processe of curssing was led against him, for non payment of such teindis:[ ] which when he contempned, he was delaited to answer for heresye. it trubled him vehementlie; and thairfoir he begane to frequent the company of such as war godlie; for befoir he had bene ane man verry stubburne, and one that dispysed all reading, (cheaflie of those thingis that war godly;) but miraculouslie, as it war, his appeared to be changeid; for he delyted in nothing but in reading, (albeit him self could not reid,) and was ane vehement exhortar of all men to concord, to qwyetness, and to the contempt of the warld. he frequented much the company of the lard of dun, whome god, in those dayis, had marvelouslie illuminated. upoun a day, as the lard of lowristoun,[ ] that yit lyveth, then being ane young man, was reading unto him upoun the new testament, in ane certane qwyet place in the feildis, as god had appointed, he chaunced to read these sentenceis of our maistir, jesus christ: "he that denyis me befoir men, or is eschamed of me in the myddest of this wicked generatioun, i will deny him in the presence of my father, and befoir his angellis." at which wordis, he suddandlie being as one ravissed, platt him self[ ] upoun his knees, and extending baith handis and visage constantlie to the heavin a reassonable tyme, at lenth he burst furth in these wourdis, "o lorde, i have bene wicked, and justlie may thow extract thy grace from me. but, lord, for thy mercyis saik, lett me never deny thee, nor thy trewth, for fear of death or corporall pane." the ischew declaired that his prayer was not vane: for when he, with the foirsaid maistir normound, was produceid in judgement in the abbey of halyrudhouse, the king him self, (all cled in redd,) being present, great laubouris war maid, that the said david stratoun should have recanteid, and brunt his bill. but he ever standing at his defence, alledgeing that he had not offended, in the end was adjudgeid unto the fyre; and then, when that he perceaved the danger, asked grace of the king, (which he wold willinglye have granted unto him:) the bischoppes proudly answered, that the kingis handis war bound in that case, and that he had no grace to give to such as by thare law war condempned. and so was he, with the said maistir normond, after dennar, upoun the twentye sevin day of august, the zeir of god j^m. v^c. thretty four foirsaid, lead to a place besydis the roode of greynsyd;[ ] and thair thei two war boyth hanged, and brunt, according to the mercy of the papisticall kirk.[ ] to that same dyett war summoned, as befoir we have said, otheris of whome some eschaiped in england,[ ] and so for that present eschaiped the death. this thaire tyranny notwithstanding, the knowledge of god did wonderouslie increase within this realme, partlie by reading, partlie by brotherlye conferance, which in those dangerouse dayis was used to the comforte of many; butt cheaflie by merchantis and marinaris, who, frequenting other cuntreis, heard the trew doctrin affirmed, and the vanitie of the papisticall religioun openlye rebucked: amongis whome war dundy and leyth principalles, against whome was maid ane verry strayte inquisitioun, by david betoun, cruell cardinall;[ ] and diverse war compelled to abjure and burne thair byllis, some in sanctandross, and some at edinburgh. about the same tyme, capitane johnne borthwik was brunt in figure, but by goddis providence eschaiped thair fury.[ ] and this was done, for a spectackle and triumphe to marie of loreane,[ ] laitlie arrived fra france, as wyff to james the fyft, king of scottis. what plagues sche brought with hir, and how thei yitt continew, such as ar nott blynd may manifestlie see. the raige of those bloody beastis proceadith so that the kingis courte it self eschaipit nott that danger; for in it diverse war suspected, and some accused. and yitt ever still did some lycht burst out in the myddis of darknes; for the trewth of christ jesus entered evin in the cloastearis, alsweall of frearis, as of monkis and channounes. johnne lyn, ane gray freare, left his hipocryticall habite, and the den of those murtheraris the gray frearis. ane black freir, called frear kyllour,[ ] sett furth the historye of christis passioun in forme of a play, quhilk he boith preached and practised opinlie in striveling, the king him salf being present, upoun a good friday in the mornyng: in the which, all thingis war so levelye expressed, that the verray sempill people understood and confessed, that as the preastis and obstinat pharisyes persuaded the people to refuise christ jesus, and caused pilat to condampne him; so did the bischoppes, and men called religious, blynd the people, and perswaid princes and judgeis to persecute sick as professis jesus christ his blessed evangell. this plane speaking so enflammed the hartes of all that bare the beastis mark, that thei ceassed nott, till that the said frear kyllour, and with him frear beverage, sir duncane symesoun,[ ] robert froster,[ ] ane gentilman, and dene thomas forret,[ ] channoun regulare and vicar of dolour, ane man of upright lief, who all togetther war cruelly murthered in one fyre,[ ] the last day of februar, in the zeir of [god] .[ ] this cruelty was used be the said cardinall, the chancellar, bischope of glasgw, and the incesteous bischope of dumblane.[ ] after that this cruelty was used in edinburght, upon the castell hill, to the effect that the rest of the bischoppes mycht schaw thame selfis no less fervent to suppress the light of god, than hie of sanctandrose was, war apprehended two in the diosey of glasgw. the one was named jeronimus russall,[ ] a cordyleyr frear, a young man of a meak nature, qwyk spreat, and good letteris; and one kennedy,[ ] who passed not xviij yearis of aige, one of excellent injyne in scotish poesye. to assist the bischope of glasgw in that cruell judgement, or att least to caus him dippe his handis in the blood of the sanctes of god, war send maister john lawder,[ ] maister andro oliphant,[ ] and frear maltman, sergeantis of sathan,[ ] apt for that purpose. the day appointed to thare crueltie approched, the two poore sanctis of god war presented befoir those bloody bowcheouris: grevouse war the crymes that war layed to thare charge. kennedy at the first was faynt, and glaidly wald have recanted. but whill that place of reapentance was denyed unto him, the spreit of god, which is the spreit of all conforte, begane to wyrk into him, yea the inward conforte begane to burst furth, alsweall in visage, as in tung and wourd; for his countenance begane to be chearfull, and with a joyfull voce upoun his kneis, hie said, "o eternal god! how wonderouse is that luf and mercy that thow bearest unto mankynd, and unto me the moist cative and miserable wrache above all utheris; for, evin now, when i wold have denyed thee, and thy sone, our lord jesus christ, my onlye saveour, and so have casten my self in everlesting damnatioun; thow, by thy awin hand, has pulled me frome the verray bottome of hell, and mackis me to feall that heavinlie conforte which tackis fra me that ungodly fear, whairwyth befoir i was oppressed. now i defy death; do what ye please: i praise my god i am readdy." the godly and learned jeronimus, rayled upoun by those godless tyrantes, ansured, "this is your houre and the power of darknes: now sytt ye as judgeis; and we stand wrongfullie accused, and more wrongfullie to be condempned; but the day shall come, when our innocency shall appeare, and that ye shall see your awin blyndness, to your everlesting confusioun. go fordward, and fulfill the measur of your iniquitie." whill that these servandis of god thus behaved thame selfis, aryseth a variance betuix the bischope and the beastis that came from the cardinall; for the bischope said, "i think it better to spayr these men, nor to putt thame to death."[ ] wharat the idiot doctouris offended, said, "what will yo do, my lord? will ye condempne all that my lord cardinall and the other bischoppes and we have done? yf so ye do, ye schaw your self ennemye to the kirk and us, and so we will reputt yow, be ye assured." at which wordis, the faythless man effrayed, adjudgeed the innocentis to dye, according to the desyre of the wicked. the meak and gentill jerome russall conforted the other with many confortable sentences, oft saying unto him, "brother, fear nott: more potent is he that is in us, then is hie that is in the world: the pane that we shall suffer is schorte, and shalbe lycht; but our joy and consolatioun shall never have end: and thairfoir lett us contend to enter in unto our maister and saveour, by the same strait way, which he has traidd[ ] befoir us. death cane not destroy us; for it is destroyed allreaddy by him for whose saik we suffer." wyth these and the like confortable sentences, thei passed to the place of executioun; and constantlie triumphed owir death and sathan, evin in the myddest of the flammyng fyre. and thus did those cruell beastis intend nothing but murther in all the quarteris of this realme.[ ] for so far had that blynded and most vitious man, the prince, (most vitious, we shall call him, for hie nether spaired manis wieff nor madyn, no more after his mariage then he did befoir,)--so far, we say, had he gevin him self to obey the tyranny of those bloody beastis, that he had maid a solempned vow, that none should be spaired that was suspect of heresye, yea, althought it war his awin sone. to press and push him fordward in that his fury, he lacked not flatteraris ynew; for many of his miazeonis war pensionaris to preastis; amangis whome, oliver synclar, yitt remaning ennemy to god, was the principale. and yit did not god cease to give to that blynded prince documentis, that some suddane plague was to fall upoun him, in case hie did not reapent his wicked lief; and that his awin mouth did confesse. for after that sir james hammyltoun was beheaded,[ ] (justlie or injustlie we disput nott,) this visioun came unto him, as to his familiaris him self did declare: the said sir james appeared unto him, having in his handis a drawin sworde, by the which fra the king hie stroke boith the armes, saying to him these wourdis, "tak that, whill thow receave a finall payment for all thy impietie." this visioun,[ ] with sorowfull conteanance, hie schew on the morow; and schortlie thaireftir deid his two sonnes, boith within the space of houris; yea, some say, within the space of sex houris.[ ] in his awin presence, georde steill, his greattest flatterar, and greattest ennemy to god that was in his courte, dropped of his horse, and deid without worde,[ ] that same day that, in oppin audience of many, the said george had refuisscd his portioun of christis kingdome, yf the prayeris of the virgin marie should not bring him thairto. how terrible a visioun the said prince saw, lying in lynlythqw, that nycht that thomas scott,[ ] justice clerk, dyed in edinburgh, men of good credite cane yitt reporte. for effrayed at mydnycht, or after, hie cryed for torches, and reissed all that lay besyd him in the palice, and told that thome scott was dead; for hie had bene at him with a company of devillis, and had said unto him these wordes, "o wo to the day, that ever i knew thee, or thy service; for, for serving of thee against god, against his servandis, and against justice, i am adjudgeid to endless torment." how terrible voces the said thomas scott pronunced befoir his death, men of all estaitis heard; and some that yitt lyve cane witness;[ ] his voce was ever, "_justo dei judicio condemnatus sum:_" that is, i am condempned by goddis just judgement. he was most oppressed for the delatioun and fals accusatioun of such as professed christis evangell, as maister thomas marjoribankis,[ ] and maister hew rig,[ ] then advocattis, did confesse to maister henrie balnavis; who, from the said thome scott, cam to him, as he and maister thomas ballenden[ ] war sytting in sanet geillis kirk, and asked him forgevance in the name of the said thomas. none of these terrible forwarnynges could eyther change or mollifie the heart of the indurat, licherous, and avaritious tyranne; but still he dois procead frome impietie to impietie. for, in the myddest of these admonitionis, he caused putt handis in that notable man, maister george balquhannan,[ ] to whome, for his singulare eruditioun and honest behaveour, was committed the charge to instruct some of his bastard children.[ ] butt, by the mercifull providence of god, he eschaped (albeit with great difficultie,) the rage of these that sought his blood, and remancs alyve to this day, in the yeare of god j^m. v^c. threseor sax yearis, to the glorie of god, to the great honour of his natioun, and unto the conforte of those that delyte in letteris and vertew. that singulare werke of david his psalmes in latine meter and poesie,[ ] besydis many utheris, cane witness the rare graces of god gevin to that man, which that tyrant, by instigatioun of the gray frearis, and of his other flatteraris, wold altogither have devored, yf god had nott providit remeady to his servand by eschaping.[ ] this cruelty and persecutioun[ ] notwithstanding, thei monstouris and hypocreattis the gray frearis, day by day, came farther in contempt; for not only did the learned espy[ ] thare abhominable hypocrisye, but also men, in whom no such graces nor giftis ware thought to have bene, begane plainlie to paynt the same furth to the people; as this ryme, which here we have inserted for the same purpose, maid by alexander erle of glencarne,[ ] yitt alyve, can witnesse, intitulat, ane epistle direct fra the holye armite of allarit,[ ] to his bretheren the gray freires. i, thomas, armite in larite, sainet frances brether[ ] hartlie greit, beseiking yow with ferme[ ] intent, to be walkryfe and diligent; for thir lutherians, rissen of new, our ordour daylie dois persew: thay smaikis do sett their haill intent, to reid this english new testament; and sayes, we have thame clene disceavit. therefore, in haist, they man be stoppit.[ ] our stait hypocrisie they prysse, and us blaspheamis on this wyse, sayand, that we are heretikes, and fals, loud, liand, mastif tykes; cumerars and quellars of christes kirk, sueir swongeouris[ ] that will not wirk, but ydlelie our living wynnes, devouring woulves into sheip skynnes, hurkland with huides into our neck, wyth judas mynd to jouck and beck, seikand christes peple to devoir, the down thringars of god his[ ] glore, professouris of hipocrisie, and doctouris in idolatrie, stout fyschares with the feindis nett, the upclosars of heavins yett, cankcarit corruptars of the creid, homlok sawares amangest good seid, to trow in traytouris, that do men tyiste, the hie way kennand thame fra chryst, monstouris with the beast his mark, dogges that never stintes to bark, kirk men that are with[ ] christ unkend, a sect that sathane self hes send, lurkand in holes, lyke traytour toddes, mantenaris of idoles and false goddes, fantastik fooles and feynzeit fleachearis, to turne fra the treuth[ ] the verie teachearis. for to declair thair haill sentence, wald mekle cummer your conscience. thay say your fayth it is sa stark, your cord and lowsie coit and sark, ye lippin, may bring yow to salvatioun, and quyte excludes christ his passioun. i dreid this doctryne, yf it last, sall either gar us wirk or fast; therfor, with speid we mon provyde, and not our proffit to oureslyde. i schaip my selfe, within schort quhyle, to turse[ ] our ladie in argyle; and there, uncraftie[ ] wyse to wirk, till that we bigged have ane kirk; syne miracles mak be your avyse. thay kettereles, though they had but lyse, the twa part to us they will bring: but ordourlie to dress this thing, a gaist i purpose to gar gang, be counsall of freir walter lang,[ ] quhilk sall mak certane demonstrations, to help us in our procurations, your haly ordour to decoir: that practik he proved anes before, betuix kirkcaldie and kingorne; but lymmars made therat sic skorne, and to his fame maide sic degressioun, sensyne he hard not the kinges confessioun.[ ] thoicht at that tyme he came na speid, i pray yow tak guid will as deid; and him amongest your selves receave, as ane worth mony of the leave. quhat i obteyne may, through his arte, ressoun wald ye had your parte. your ordour handles na monye, but for uther casualitie, as beif, meill, butter, and cheiss, or quhat that we have, that ye plese, send your bretheren _et habete_. as now nocht elles, but _valete_. be thomas your brother at command, a cullurune kythed throw many a land.[ ] when god had gevin unto that indurat prince sufficient documentis, that his rebellioun against his blessed evangell should not prosperouslie succeid, hie rases up against him warr, as that he did against obstinat saull, in the which he miserablie perrished, as we shall after hear. the occasioun of the warr was this. hary the eight, king of england, had a great desyre to have spokin with oure king; and in that poynt travailled so long, till that he gat a full promesse[ ] maid to his ambassadour, lord williame hawart. the place of meatting was appointed [at] york; which the king of england keap[t] with such solempnitie and preparationis, as never for such ane purpoise was sein in england befoir. great brute of that jorney, and some preparatioun for the same was maid in scotland; but in the end, by persuasioun of the cardinall david betoun, and by otheris of his factioun, that jorney was stayed, and the kinges promesse falsefeid. whareupoun war scharpe letteris of reproch send unto the king,[ ] and also unto his counsall. king hary frustrat, returned to london, and after his indignatioun declaired, began to fortifie with men his frontearis foranent scotland. thare war send to the bordouris sir robert bowis, the erle of anguss, and his brother, sir george duglass. upoun what uther trifeling questionis, (as for the debatable land and such like,) the war brak up, we omitt to wryte. the principall occasioun was the falsefeing of the promeisse befoir maid. oure king perceaving that the warr wald ryse, asked the prelattis and kirkmen, what supporte thei wald maik to the susteanyng of the same; for rather wald he yitt satisfie the desyre of his uncle, then he wald hasard warr, whare hie saw nott his force able to resist. thei promissed montanes of gold, (as sathan thaire father did to christ jesus yf he wold wirschipe him;) for rather wold thei have gone to hell, or he should have mett wyth king hary: for then, thought thei, fayr weill our kingdome; and fayr weill, thought the cardinall, his credite and glorie in france. in the end, thei promissed fyftie thousand crownes by year,[ ] to be weall payed, so long as the warres lested; and farther, that thaire servandis, and otheris that appartened unto thame, and war exemed from common service, should not the less serve in tyme of necessitie. these vane promisses lifted up in pryde the harte of the unhappye king: and so begynnis the warr. the realme was quartered, and men war laid in jedburgh and kelso. all man, (foollis we meane,) bragged of victorie; and in verray deid the begynnyng gave us a fayr schaw. for at the first wardane raid, which was maid at the sanct bartholomess day,[ ] in the zeir of god j^m. v^c. fourty twa, was the wardane sir robert bowis, his brother richard bowis, capitane of norhame, sir williame mallerie[ ] knycht, a bastarde sone of the erle of anguss, and james dowglas of parkhead, then rebelles, with a great number of borderaris, soldeouris, and gentilmen, tackin. [sn: haldane rig.] the reade was termed haldane rig.[ ] the erle of anguss, and sir george his brother, did narrowlie eschaipe. our papistis and preastis, proude of this victorye, encouraged the king, so that thare was nothing heard but, "all is owres. thei ar butt heretyckis. yf we be a thousand and thei ten thousand, thei dar not feght. france shall enter the ane parte, and we the other, and so shall england be conqueast within a year." yf any man was sein to smyle att sick vanitie, his was no more bot a tratour and ane heretyck. and yitt by these meanes, men had greattar libertie then thei had befoir, as concernyng thair conscience; for then ceassed the persecutioun. the warr continued till mydd september; and then was send doune the old duck of northfolk,[ ] with such ane army as a hundreth yearis befoir had not come in scotland. thei wer in amassing thaire forses, and setting fordwarte of thare preparationis and munitionis, which ware exceading great, till mydd october, and after; and then thei merched from berwik, and tended to the west, ever holding tweid upoun thair one syd, and never camped from that ryver the space of a myle, during the hole tyme thei continewed in scotland, which was ten or twelf dayis. forresse war runne upon the day to smallame,[ ] stichell, and such place nere about, but many snapparis thei gate. some cornes thei brunt, besydis that which the great host consumed, but small butting thei caryed away. [sn: fala raid.] the king assembled his forse att falow,[ ] (for hie was advertised that thei had promessed to come to edinburght,) and tackin the mustaris all att ane howre, two dayis befoir alhallow evein,[ ] thair war found with him auchttein thousand able men. upoun the bordouris, that awaited upoun the engliss army, war ten thousand men, with the erle of huntlie, lordis erskyn, seytoun, and home. these ware judgeid men ynew to hasard battell, albeit the other war esteamed fourtie thousand. whill the king lyis at fawla, abyding upoun the gunnes, and upoun advertisment frome the armye, the lordis begyne to remember how the king had bene long abused by his flatteraris, and principallie by the pensionaris of the preastis. it was anes concluded, that thei wald mack some new remembrance of lauder-brig[ ] to see yf that wald, for a seassoun, somewhat help the estait of thare cuntrie. but, becaus the lordis could nott aggrie amonges thame selfis, upoun the persones that deserved punishment, (for everie man favored his friend,) the hole eschaiped; and the purpoise was opened unto the king, and by him to the curteouris, who after that, till that thei came to edinburgh, stood in no litill feare: but that was suddandly foryett, as we shall after hear. whill tyme is thus protracted, the engliss army, for skarstye of victualles, (as was bruted,) retearis thame owir twead upoun the nycht, and so begynnes to skaill. whareof the king advertissed, desyris the lordis and barronis to assist him, to follow thame in england. whose answer was, with one consent, "that to defend his persone and realme, thei wold hasard lyef and whatsoever thei had; butt to invaid england, nether had thei so just titill as thei desyred; nether yit could thei be then able to do any thing to the hurte of england, considering that thei had long befoir bene absent fra thair houssis, thare provisioun was spent, thare horse wereyed, and that which was greatest of all, the tyme of year did utterlie reclame." this thare answer seamed to satisfie the king; for hie in woordis praised thare prudent foresight and wyse counsall. but the mynt maid to his curteouris, and that bald repulse of his desyres gevin to him in his awin face, so wounded his proud harte, (for long had hie roung[ ] as him self list,) that he decreed a notable revenge, which, no doubt, he had not failled to have executed, yf god by his awin hand had not cutted the coardis of his impietie. he returnes to edinburgh; the nobilitie, barones, gentilmen, and commones to thair awin habitationis: and this was the secund and thrid dayis of november. without longar delay, at the palice of halyrudhouse, was a new counsall convened, a counsall, we meane, of his abusaris; wharein war accusationis laide against the most parte of the nobilitie. some war heretickis, some favoraris of england, some freindis to the dowglassis, and so could thare be none faythfull to the king, in thaire opinioun. the cardinall and the preastis cast fagottis in the fyre with all thare force; and fynding the king hollie addict to thare devotioun, delivered unto him ane scroll,[ ] conteanyng the names of such as thei, in thare inquisitioun, had convict for heretickis. for this was the ordour of justice, which these holy fatheris keapt in dampnying of innocent men. whosoevir wald delaite any of heresye, he was heard: no respect nor consideratioun had what mynd the delatour bayre to the persone delated; whosoever war produced for witnesses war admitted, how suspitious and infame that ever thei ware; yf two or thre had provin any poynt, that by thare law was holden heresye, that was ane heretick: rested no moir but a day to be affixed to his condempnatioun, and to the executioun of thare corrupted sentence. what man could be innocent, whare such judgeis was party, the world may this day considder. trew it is, by fals judgement and false witnesses, have innocentis bene oppressed from the begynnyng. butt this fredome to sched innocent blood gatt never the devill but in the kingdome of antichrist, "that the innocent should dye, and neyther knaw accusatour nor yitt the witnesses that testifeid against him." butt how shall the antichrist be knowin, yf he shall not be contrarious to god the father, and his sone christ jesus, in law, lief, and doctrin. butt this we omitt. [sn: a ansure worthie of ane prince.] the same scroll had the cardinall and prelattis ones[ ] presented unto the king befoir, what tyme he returned frome the navigatioun about the ylis.[ ] butt then it was refuissed by the prudent and stowt counsall of the lard of grange,[ ] who opened clearly to the king the practise of the prelattis, and the danger that thairof mycht ensew. which considered by the king, (for being out of his passioun, he was tractable,) gave this answer, in the palice of halyrudhouse, to the cardinall and prelattis, after that thei had uttered thair malice, and schew what profit[ ] mycht arise to the croune, yf hie wold follow thair counsall. "pack you, jefwellis:[ ] gett yow to your chargeis, and reforme your awin lyves, and be nott instrumentis of discord betuix my nobilitie and me; or ellis, i avow to god, i shall reforme yow, not as the king of denmark by impreasonment does, neythor yitt as the king of england does, by hanging and heading; but i shall reforme yow by scharpe whingaris,[ ] yf ever i heir such motioun of yow againe." the prelattis dascht and astonyed with this ansure, ceassed for a seassoun to tempt any farther, by rigour against the nobilitie. but now, being informed of all proceadingis by thaire pensionaris, oliver synclar, ross lard of cragye,[ ] and utheris, who war to thame faythfull in all thingis, thei conclude to hasarde ones[ ] agane thare formar suyt; which was no sonar proponed but as sone it was accepted, with no small regrate maid by the kingis awin mouth, that he had so long dyspised thare counsall; "for, (said hie,) now i plainlie see your woordis to be trew. the nobilitie neyther desyres my honour nor continuance; for thei wold nott rydd a myle for my pleasur to follow my ennemyes. [sn: solan moss, how it began.] will ye tharefor fynd me the meanes, how that i may have a raid maid in england, without thare knawledge and consent, that may be knawin to be my awin raide? and i shall bynd me to your counsall for ever." thare concurred togitther achab and his false prophettis; thare war gratulationis and clappin of handis; thare war promisses of diligence, closenes, and felicitie. finally, conclusioun was tackin, that the west bordour of england, which was moist empty of men and garresonis, should be invaided; the kingis awin banner should be thare; oliver,[ ] the great moynzeoun,[ ] should be generall levetenant; but no man should be pryvey, (except the counsall that was thare then present,) of the interprise, till the verray day and executioun thaireof. the bischoppes glaidly took the charge of that raid. letteris war sent to such as thei wold charge to meat the king, day and place appointed. the cardinall, with the earle of errane, war directed to go to haddingtoun, to mack a shaw against the east bordour, when the utheris ware in readdynes to invaid the weast. and thus neather lacked counsall, practise, closenes, nor diligence, to sett fordwarte that interprise: and so, amanges these consultaris, thare was no doubt of ane good successe; and so was the scroll thankfullie receaved by the king him self, and putt into his awin pocket, whare it remaned to the day of his death, and then was found. in it war conteaned mo then ane hundreth landed men, besydis otheris of meaner degree, amonges whome was the lord hammyltoun him self,[ ] then secound persone of the realme, delaited. it was bruted, that this read was devised by the lord maxwell;[ ] butt the certaintie thairof we have not. the nyght befoir the day appointed to the interprise, the king was found at lowmabane.[ ] to him cumis cumpanyes frome all quarteris, as thei war appointed, no man knowing of ane uther, (for no generall proclamatioun past, but prevey letteris,) nether yitt did the multitude know any thing of the purpose till after mydnycht, when that the trompet blew, and commanded all man to march fordwart, and to follow the king, (who was constantlye supposed to have bene in the host.) guydes war appointed to conduct thame towardis england, as boith faythfullye and closlye thei did. upon the point of day, thei approched to the ennemys ground; and so passes the wattir without any great resistance maid unto thame. the forrow[ ] goes furth, fyre ryses, herschip mycht have bein sein on everie syd. the unprovedeid people war all together amased; for brycht day appearing, thei saw ane army of ten thowsand men; thare cornes and howssis[ ] upoun every syd send flambes of fyre unto the heavin. to thame it was more then a wonder, that such a multitud could have bene assembled and convoyed, no knowledge thairof cuming to any of thare wardanes. for supporte thei looked nott; and so at the first thei ware utterlie dispared. and yitt begane thei to assemble togitther, ten in one company, twenty in ane uther; and so, as the fray proceaded, thare troopes encreassed, but to no number; (for carleyle, fearing to have bein assaulted, suffered no man to ishe out of thare yettis;) and so the greatast nomber, that ever appeared or approched befoir the discomfitour, past nott thre or foure hundreth men; and yitt thei maid hott skarmisching, as in thair awin ground, in such fates,[ ] thei ar most experte. about ten houris, when fyris war kendilled and almost slokned[ ] on every syd, thought olyver tyme to schaw his glorie; and so incontinent was displayed the kingis baner; oliver upoun spearis lyft up upoun menis schoulderis, and thair with sound of trompett was he proclamed generall lievtenneant, and all man commanded to obey him, as the kingis awin persone under all hieast panes. thare was present the lord maxwaill, wardane, to whome the regiment,[ ] in absence of the king, propirlie apperteaned: he heard and saw all, butt thought more then he spak. thare war also present the erles glencarne and cassiles, with the lord flemyng, and many uther lordis, baronis, and gentilmen of lotheane, fyf, anguss, and mearnes. in this mean tyme did the skirmishing grow hottar[ ] then it was befoir: schouttis war heard on everie syd. some scottismen war stryckin doune; some not knowing the ground lared, and lost thair horse.[ ] some engliss horse of purpose war lett lowse, to provok gready and imprudent men to preak[ ] at thame; as many did, but fand no advantage. whill such disordour ryses more and more in the army, men cryed in everie care, "my lord lievetennant, what will ye do." charge was gevin, that all man should lyght and go to array; for thei wald fight it. otheris cryed, "against whome will ye feght? yone men will feght non utherwyise then ye see thame do, yf ye will stand hear whill the morne." new purpose was tackin, that the foott men, (thei had with thame certane bandis of soldeouris,[ ]) should softlye retear towardis scotland, and the horsemen should tack thare horse agane, and so follow in ordour. great was the noyse and confusioun that was heard, whill that everie man calles his awin sloghorne.[ ] the day was neyre spent, and that was the cause of the greatast fear. the lord maxwell perceiving what wold be the end of such begynnynges, stood upoun his foote with his freandis, who being admonissed to tack his horse, and provide for him self; ansured, "nay, i will rather abyd hear the chance that it shall please god to send me, then to go home and thare be hanged." and so hie remaned upoun his foote, and was tackin, whill the multitud fledd, and took the greattar schame. the ennemeis perceaving the disordour, increassed in courage. befoir thei shouted; but then thei strok. thei schote spearis and dagged arrowis, whare the cumpanyes war thikest. some reacuntaris war maid, but nothing availled. the soldeouris caist from thame thaire pickis, culveringis, and utheris weaponis fensable; the horsmen left thair spearis; and so, without judgement, all man fled. the sea was filling, and so the watter maid great stope; but the fear was such as happy was hie that mycht gett a tackar. such as passed the watter and eschaped that danger, nott weill acquented with the ground, fell into the sollen moss.[ ] the entrie thairof was pleasing yneuch, but as thei proceaded, all that took that way, eyther lost thare horse, or ellis thame selfis and horse boith. to be schort, a greattar feir and disconfiture, without cause, hes seldome bein sein. for it is said, that whare the men war nott sufficient to tack the handis of presonaris, some rane to houssis, and randred thame selfis to wemen. stout oliver[ ] was without strack tackin, fleing full manfully; and so was his glorie (stincking and foolishe proudnes we should call it,) suddandly turned to confusioun and schame. in that disconfiture war tackin the two erles foirsaid, the lordis flemyng, somervaill, and many otheris baronis and gentilmen, besydis the great multitud of servandis. worldly men may think, that all this came but by mysordour and fortoun, (as thei terme it;) but whosoever has the least sponk of the knowledge of god, may as evidentlie see the werk of his hand in this disconfiture, as ever was sein in any of the battelles left to us in registre by the holy ghost. [sn: . reg. .] for what more evident declaratioun have we, that god faught against benhadab, king of aram, when he was disconfited at samaria, then that we have that god faught with his awin arme against scotland? in this formare disconfiture, thare did two hundreth and thretty personis in the skyrmyshe, with sevin thousand following them in the great battell, putt to flyght the said benhadad with thretty kingis in his cumpany. but hear thare is, in this schamefull disconfiture of scotland, verray few mo then three hundreth men, without knowledge of any back or battell to follow, putt to flight ten thowsand men without resistance maide. thare did everie man reaconter his marrow, till that the slew such as matched thame. but heir without slawchter the multitud fled. thare had those of samaria the prophete of god to conforte, to instruct, and to promesse victorie unto thame. but england, in that persute, had nothing, but as god secreatlie wrought by his providence in these men that knew nothing of his wirking, nether yitt of the causes thareof, more then the wall that fell upoun the rest of benhadadis army knew what it did. and tharefor, yit agane we say, that such as in that suddane dejectioun beholdis not the hand of god, feghting against pride for fredome of his awin litill flock, injustly persecutted, dois willingly and malitiouslie obscure the glorie of god. but the end thairof is yitt more notable. the certane knowledge of the disconfiture cuming to the kingis earis, (who wated upoun newes at lowmaban,[ ]) hie was stryckin with ane suddane feare and astonisment, so that skarslye could hie speak, or had[ ] purpoise with any man. the nycht constrayned him to remane whare he was, and so yead[ ] to bed; but raise without rest or qwyet sleape. his continuall complaint was, "oh, fled oliver! is oliver tane? oh, fled oliver!" and these woordis in his melancholie, and as it war caryed away in ane transe, repeated hie from tyme to tyme, to the verray hour of his death. upone the morne, which was sanct katherins day,[ ] returned he to edinburgh, and so did the cardinall from hadingtoun. but the one being eschamed of the other, the brute of thare communicatioun came nott to publict audience. the king maid inventorie of his poise, of all his juwellis and other substance;[ ] and tharefter, as eschamed to look any man in the face, secreatlie departed to fyfe, and cuming to the hall-yardis,[ ] was humanlie receaved of the ladye[ ] grange, ane ancient and godly matron, (the lard at his cuming was absent.) in his cumpany war only with him williame kirkaldy, now lard of grange, and some otheris that wated upoun his chalmer. the lady at suppar, persaving him pensive, begane to conforte him, and willed him to tack the werk of god in good parte. "my portioun, (said he,) of this world is schorte, for i will nott be with you fyvetene dayis." his servandis reparing unto him, asked, whare hie wold have provisioun maid for his yule?[ ] quhilk then approched. he ansuered, with a disdanefull smyrk, "i can nott tell: chuse ye the place. butt this i cane tell you, or yule day,[ ] ye wilbe maisterless, and the realme without ane king." becaus of his displeasur, no man durst mack contradictioun unto him. so after that hie had visited the castell of carny,[ ] perteanyng to the erle of crawfurd, whare the said erles dowghter, ane of his hoores,[ ] was, hie returned to falkland and took bedd. and albeit thare appeared unto him no signes of death, yet hie constantly affirmed, befoir such ane day, "i shalbe dead." [sn: reginÆ nativitas] in this meantyme, was the quene upoun the point of hir delivery in linlithqw, who was delivered the awcht day of december,[ ] in the yeare of god j^m. v^c. fourty twa yearis, of marie, that then was borne, and now dois ring for a plague to this realme, as the progress of hir hole lief hath to this day declaired. the certantie that a dowghter was borne unto him cuming to his earis, he turned from such as spak with him, and said, "the devill go with it! it will end as it begane: it came from a woman; and it will end in a woman." after that, hie spak nott many woordis that war sensible. but ever hie harped upoun his old song, "fy, fled oliver! is oliver tane? all is loist." [sn: regis exitus.] in this meantyme, in his great extremitie, cumes the cardinall, (ane apt confortare for a desperat man.) he cryes in his ear, "tak ordour, schir, with your realme: who shall rewill during the minoritie of your dowghter? ye have knawin my service: what will ye have done? shall thare nott be four regentes chosyn? and shall nott i be principall of thame?" whatsoever the king answered, documentis war tackin that so should be, as my lord cardinall thought expedient.[ ] as many affirme, a dead manes hand was maid to subscrive ane blank, that thei mycht wryte above it what pleased thame best. this finissed, the cardinall posted to the quene, laitly befoir delivered, as said is. at the first sight of the cardinall, sche said, "welcome, my lord: is nott the king dead?" what moved hir so to conjecture, diverse men ar of diverse judgementis. many whisper, that of old his parte was in the pott, and that the suspition thairof caused him to be inhibite the quenis cumpany. howsoever it was befoir, it is plane that after the kingis death, and during the cardinallis lyif, whosoever guyded the court, he gat his secreat besynes sped of that gratiouse lady, eyther by day or by nycht. howsoever the tydingis lyked hir, she mended with als great expeditioun of that dowghter as ever she did befoir of any sone she bayre. the tyme of hir purificatioun was sonar then the leviticall law appointes. but she was no jewess, and thairefore in that she offended nott.[ ] the noyse of the death of king james divulgat, who departed this lyef, the threttene day of december, the year of god foirsaid,[ ] the hartes of men begane to be disclossed. all man lamented that the realme was left without a male to succeid; yit some rejosed that such ane ennemy to goddis treuth was tackin away. hie was called of some, a good poore manis king: of otheris hie was termed a murtherare of the nobilitie, and one that had decreed thair hole destructioun. some prased him for the repressing of thyft and oppressioun; otheris disprased him for the defoulling of menis wyffis and virgines. and thus men spak evin as affectionis led thame. and yitt none spack all together besydis the treuth; for a parte of all these foresaidis war so manifest, that as the verteuis could nott be denyed, so could nott the vices by any craft be clocked. the questioun of governement was throught this realme universallie moved. the cardinall proclamed the kingis last will,[ ] and thairin war expressed foure protectouris, or regentis, of whome him self was the first and principall, and with him war joyned the erles huntley, ergyle, and murray.[ ] this was done the mononday at the mercat croce of edinburgh. but the mononday following, took the hole regentis remissioun for there usurpatioun; for by the stout and wyese counsall of the larde of grange, did the erle of errane, then secound persone to the croune,[ ] causse assemble the nobilitie of the realme, and required the equitie of thare judgementis in that his just suyt to the governement of this realm, during the minoritie of hir to whome hie was to succeid, failling of hir and of hir lauchfull successioun.[ ] his freindis convened, the nobilitie assembled, the day of decisioun is appointed. [sn: the cardinalis reassonis against the governement of hammyltonis.] the cardinall and his factioun oppones[ ] thame to the governement of one man, and especiallie to the regiment of any called hammyltoun: "for who knowis nott, (say the cardinall,) that the hammyltonis ar cruell murtheraris, oppressouris of innocentis, proud, avaritiouse, duble, and false; and finallie, the pestilence in this commoun wealth." whairto the said erle ansured, "defraude me not of my right, and call me what ye please. whatsoever my freindis have bene, yitt, unto this day, hes no man caus to complaine upoun me, nether yitt am i mynded to flatter any of my freindis in thare evill doing; but by goddis grace shalbe as fordwarte to correct thare enormities, as any within the realme cane reassonablie requyre of me. and tharefor, yit agane, my lordis, in goddis name i crave that ye do me no wrong, nor defraud me not of my just titill befoir that ye have experience of my governement." at these woordis, war all that feared god or loved honestie so moved, that with one voce thei cryed, "that petitioun is most just, and onless we will do against god, justice, and equitie, it can nott be denyed." and, in dispyte of the cardinall and his suborned factioun, was he declaired governour, and with publict proclamatioun so denunceid to the people. the kingis palace, treasure, jewellis, garmentis, horse, and plate,[ ] war delivered unto him by the officiaris that had the formar charge; and he honored, feared, and obeyed more hartlie, then ever any king was befoir, so long as his abood at god. the caus of the great favor that was borne unto him was, that it was bruted that hie favored goddis woord; and becaus it was weall knowin, that hie was one appointed to have bene persecuted, as the scroll found in the kingis pockat, after his death, did witnesse. these two thingis to gitther, with ane opinioun that men had of his simplicitie, bowed the hartes of many unto him in the begynnyng, who after, with dolour of hartes, war compelled to change thare opinionis: but heirof will after be spoken. the varietie of materis that occurred we omitt, such as the ordour tackin for keaping of the young quene;[ ] of the provisioun for the mother; the home calling of the dowglassis; and other such, as apperteane to ane universall historye of the tyme: for, as befoir we have said, we mynd only to follow the progresse of the religioun, and of the matteris that cane not be dissevered from the same. * * * * * the governour[ ] establissed in governement, godly men repaired unto him, exhorted him to call to mynd for what end god had exalted him; out of what danger he had delivered him; and what expectatioun all men of honestie had of him. at thare instant suyting, more then of his awin motioun, was thomas guylliame,[ ] a blak freare, called to be precher. the man was of solid judgement, reassonable letteris, (as for that age,) and of a prompt and good utterance: his doctrine was holsome, without great vehemency against superstitioun. preached also sometymes johnne rowght, (who after, for the veritie of christ jesus, sufferred in england, in the dayis of marie of curssed memorie,[ ]) albeit not so learned, yett more sempill, and more vehement against all impietie. the doctrine of these two provoked against thame, and against the governour also, the hatterent of all such as more favored darknes then light, and thare awin bellyes more then god. the gray frearis, (and amonges the rest frear scott,[ ] who befoir had geavin him self furth for the greatest professour of christ jesus within scotland, and under that cullour had disclosed, and so endangered many,) these slaves of sathan, we say, rowped as thei had bein ravinis, yea, rather thei yelled and rored as devillis in hell, "heresy! heresy! guylliame and rought will cary the govornour to the dewill." the toune of edinburgh, for the most parte, was drouned in superstitioun: edwarte hope,[ ] young williame adamsone, sibilla lyndesay, patrik lyndesay,[ ] francess aikman; and in the cannogait, johnne mackaw, and ryngzeane broune, with few otheris, had the bruyte of knowledge in those dayis. ane wilsone, servand to the bisehope of dunkell, who nether knew the new testament nor the old, made a dispytfull rayling ballat against the preachcouris, and against the govenour, for the which he narrowly eschaped hanging. the cardinall moved boith heavin and hell to trouble the governour, and to stay the preaching; but yitt was the battell stowtlye foughtin for a seassone; for he was tackin, and was put first in dalkeith, after in seatoun. but at lenth by buddis gevin[ ] to the said lord seatoun, and to the old larde of lethingtoun,[ ] he was restored to sanctandross,[ ] frome whense he wrought all myscheif, as we shall after heare. the parliament approched, which was befoir the pashe;[ ] thare begane questioun of the abolishing of certane tyrannicall actes, made befoir,[ ] at devotioun of the prelattis, for manteanyng of thair kingdom of darkness, to witt, "that under pane of heresye, no man should reade any parte of the scriptures in the engliss toung, nether yitt any tractat or expositioun of any place of scripture." such articles begane to come in questioun we say, and men begane to inquyre, yf it was nott als lauchfull to men that understoode no latyne, to use the woorde of thare salvatioun in the toung thei understood, as it was for latine men to have it in latyne, græcianes or hebrewis to have it in thare tounges. it was ansured, that the kirk first had forbiddin all tounges but thei three. but men demanded, when that inhibitioun was gevin; and what counsall had ordeaned that, considering, that in the dayis of chrisostome he compleanes, that the people used not the psalmes, and other holy bookis, in thare awin toungis? and yf ye will say thei war greakis, and understoode the greak toung; we ansure, that christ jesus commanded his woorde to be preached to all nationis. now, yf it aught to be preached to all nationis,[ ] it must be preached in the tung thei understand: now, yf it be lauchfull to preach it, and to hear it preached[ ] in all tounges, why shall it not be lauchfull to read it, and to hear it red in all tounges? to the end that the people may trye the spreittis, according to the commandiment of the apostill. beaten with these and other reassonis, thei denyed not but it may be red in the vulgar toung, providit that the translatioun war trew. it was demanded, what could be reprehended in it? and when much searching was maid, nothing could be found, but that luif, say thei, was putt in the place of cheritie. when the questioun was asked, what difference was betuix the one and the other, and yf thei understud the nature of the greak terme _agape_?[ ] thei war dume. ressoned for the party of the secularis, the lord ruthven, (father to him that prudentlie gave counsall to tack just punishment upoun that knaif dawie,[ ] for that he abused the unhappy king hary[ ] in mo cases then one,) a stout and discreat man in the cause of god, and maister henrie balnevis, ane old professour: for the parte of the clargie, hay, dene of restalrige,[ ] and certane old boses with him. [sn: [g]et the name.] the conclusioun was, the commissionaris of browghtis, and a parte of the nobilitie requyred of the parliament, that it mycht be ennacted, "that it should be lauchfull[ ] to everie man to use the benefite of the translatioun which then thei had of the bibill and new testament, togitther with the benefite of other tractises conteanyng holsome doctrine, unto such tyme as the prelattis and kirk men should geve and sett furth unto thame ane translatioun more correct." the clargy hearto long repugned; butt in the end, convicted by reassonis and by multitud of votes in thare contrare, thei also condiscended; and so by act of parliament, it was maid free to all man and woman to reid the scriptures in thair awin toung, or in the engliss toung:[ ] and so war all actes maid in the contrair abolished. this was no small victorie of christ jesus, feghting against the conjured ennemyes of his veritie; not small conforte to such as befoir war holdin in such bondage, that thei durst not have red the lordis prayer, the ten commandimentis, nor articules of thare fayth, in the engliss toung, but thei should have bene accused of heresye. then mycht have bene sein the byble lying almaist upoun everie gentilmanis table. the new testament was borne about in many manis handes. we grant, that some (alace!) prophaned that blessed wourd; for some that, perchance, had never red ten sentenses in it, had it maist common in thare hand; thei wold chope thare familiares on the cheak with it, and say, "this hes lyne hyd under my bed-feitt these ten yearis." otheris wold glorie, "o! how oft have i bein in danger for this booke: how secreatlie have i stollen fra my wyff at mydnyeht to reid upoun it." and this was done of many to maik courte thairby; for all man esteamed the governour to have bein the most fervent protestand that was in europa. albeit we say that many abused that libertie granted of god miraculouslye, yitt thairby did the knowledge of god wonderouslie increase, and god geve his holy spreit to sempill men in great aboundance. then ware sett furth werkis in our awin toung, besydis those that came from england, that did disclose the pryde, the craft, the tyranny, and abuses of that romane antichrist. the fame of our governour was spred in diverse cuntreis, and many praised god for him. king hary send unto him his ambassadour, mr. saidlar,[ ] who lay in edinburgh a great parte of the sommer. his commissioun and negotiatioun was, to contract a perpetuall amitie betuix england and scotland: the occasion wharof god had so offerred, that to many men it appeared that from heavin he had declared his good pleasur in that behalf. for to king hary, of jane somer,[ ] (after the death of quene katherin, and of all utheris that mycht haif maid his mariage suspect,) was gevin a sone, edwarte the saxt of blessed memory, eldar some yearis then our maistress, and unto us was left a quene, as befoir we have heard. this wonderfull providence of god caused men of greatast judgement to enter in disputatioun with thame self, whither that, with good conscience, any man mycht repugne to the desyres of the king of england, considdering that thairby all occasioun of warr mycht be cutt of, and great commoditie mycht ensew to his realme. the offerris of king hary war so large, and his demandis so reassonable, that all that lovith quyetness war content tharewith. thare war sent from the parliament to king hary, in commissioun, schir williame hammyltoun,[ ] schir james lermont, and maister henry balnevis;[ ] who long remaynyng in england, so travailled that all thingis concernyng the mariage betuix edwart the saxt and marie quene of scottis was aggreed upoun, except the tyme of hyr deliverance to the custody of englismen. upoun the finall conclusioun of the which head, war added to the formare commissionaris williame erle of glencarne and schir george dowglasse, to whome was gevin ample commissioun and good instructionis. in scotland remaned maister saidlare. [sn: note weall.] advertismentis past so frequentlie betuix, yea, the handis of our lordis so liberallie war anoynted,[ ] besydis other commodities promissed, and of some receaved; for diverse presonaris tackin at solane mosse[ ] war send home ransome free, upoun promesse of thair fidelitie, which, as it was keapt, the ishew will witnesse. butt in the end, so weall war all ones content, (the cardinall, the quene, and the factioun of france, ever excepted,) that solempnedlye, in the abbay of halyrudhouse, was the contract of mariage betuix the personis foirsaid, togetther with all the clausis and conditionis requisite, for the faythfull observatioun tharof, red in publict audience, subscryved, sealled, approved and allowed of the governour for his parte, nobilitie and lordis for thare partes; and that nothing should lack that mycht fortifie the mater, was christis body sacrat, (as papistes terme it,) brokin betuix the said governour and maister saydlar, ambassadour, and receaved of thame boyth as a signe and tockin of the unitie of thare myndis, inviolablye[ ] to keap that contract,[ ] in all poyntis, as thei looked of christ jesus to be saved, and after to be reputed men wourthy of credite befoir the world. [sn: the quenis mariage the secound tym ratified.] the papistes raged against the governour, and against the lordis that consented, and abaide suyre at the contract foirsaide; and they made a brag to depose the governour,[ ] and to confund all: and without delay rased their forces, and came to linlitliqw, where the yong quene was kept.[ ] but, upoun the returneyng of the saidis ambassadouris from england, pacyficatioun was maid for that tyme; for, by the judgements of eyght personis for ather party, chosyn to judge, whitther that any thing was done by the said ambassadouris, in the contracting of that mariage, which to do thei had not sufficient power fra the counsall and parliament, it was found, that all thingis war done according to thare commissioun, and that so thei should stand: and so war the seallis of england and scotland interchanged. maister james fowles,[ ] then clerk of registre, receaved the great seall of england; and maister sadlare receaved the great seall of scotland. the headis of the contract we pass by. those thingis newly ratifeid, the merchantis maid frack[ ] to saill, and to thare trafique, which, by the truble of warris, had some yearis bein hindered. frome edinburgh war frauchted xii schippis richlie ladin, according to the wares of scotland. from other tounes and portes departed other, who all arryved upoun the coast of england, towardis the south, to witt, in yarmouht; and without any great necessitie, entered not only within readis, bot also within portes and places of commandiment, and whare that schippis mycht be arreisted. and becaus of the lait contracted amitie, and gentill intertenement that thei found at the first, thei maid no great expeditioun. bot being, as thei supposed, in securitie, in merynes thei spend the tyme, abyding upoun the wynd. in this meantyme, arryves from france to scotland the abbot of paislay,[ ] called bastard brother to the governour, (whome yitt many esteamed sone to the old bischope of dunkelden, called crychtoun,[ ]) and with him maister david panteyr, (who after was maid bischope of ross.) the brut of the learnyng of these two, and thare honest lyiff, and of thare fervencye and uprychtnes in religioun, was such, that great esperance thare was, that thare presence should haif bene confortable to the kirk of god. for it was constandlye affirmed of some, that without delay, the one and the other wald occupy the pulpete, and trewly preach jesus christ. but few dayis disclosed thair hypochrisye; for what terrouris, what promisses, or what enchanting boxis thei brought fra france, the commoun people knew not. but schort after, it was sein, that frear guylliame was inhibite to preach, and so departed to england; johnne rowght to kyle,[ ] (a receptakle of goddis servandis of old.) the men of counsall, judgement, and godlynes, that had travailled to promote the governour, and that gave him faythfull counsall in all dowtfull materis, war eyther craftely conveyed from him, or ellis, by threatnyng to be hanged, war compelled to leave him. of the one nomber, war the lard of grange foirsaid, maister henry balnavis, maister thomas ballentyne,[ ] and schir david lyndesay of the mont;[ ] men by whose laubouris he was promoted to honour, and by whose counsall he so used him self at the begynnyng, that the obedience gevin to him was nothing inferiour to that obedience that any king of scotland of many yearis had befoir him. yea, in this it did surmont the commoun obedience, that it proceaded from luif of those vertewis that was supposed to have bene in him. off the number of those that war threatned, war maister michaell durham,[ ] maister david borthwik,[ ] david foresse, and david bothwell; who counsalled him to have in his cumpany men fearing god, and not to foster wicked men in thare iniquitie, albeit thei war called his freindis, and war of his surname. this counsall understand by the foirsaid abbote, and by the hammyltonis, (who then repaired to the courte as ravenes to the carioun,) in plane wourdis it was said, "my lord governour nor his freandis will never be at qwyetness, till that a dosone of thire knaiffis that abuse his grace be hanged." these wourdis was spokin in his awin presence, and in the presence of some of thame that had better deserved then so to have bene entracted: the speakar was allowed for his bold and plane speakin. and so the wicked counsall deprehended, honest and godly men left the court and him in the handis of such, as by thare wicked counsall led him so far from god, that he falsefeid his promeise, dipt his handis in the bloode of the sanctes of god, and brought this commoun welth to the verray poynt of utter ruyne.[ ] and these war the first fructis of the abbot of paisley his godlynes and learnyng: butt heirefter we will hear more. [sn: the governour violated his fayth, refused god, and took absolutioun of the dewill.] all honest and godly men banished from the courte, the abbot and his counsall begynnis to lay befoir the inconstant governour, the dangeris that mycht ensew the alteratioun and change of religioun; the power of the king of france; the commoditie that mycht come to him and his house, by reatenyng the ancient league with france; and the great danger that he brought upoun him self, yf, in any joyt, he sufferred the authoritie of the pape to be violated or called in dowbt within this realme: considering that thairupoun only stood the securitie of his rycht to the successioun of the croune of this realme; for by goddis word wold not the devorcement of his father frome elizabeth home, his first wyf,[ ] be found lauchfull, and so wald his secound mariage be judgeit null, and he declaired bastard. caiaphas spak profesy, and yitt wist not what he spak; for, at that tyme, thare was no man that trewlie feared god, that mynded any such thing, but with thare hole force wold have fortifeid the titill that god had gevin unto him, and wold never have called in questioun thingis doun in tyme of darknes. but this head we pas by till god declair his will thairintill. ane other practise was used; for the cardinall being sett at libertie, (as befoir we have heard,) ceassed not to trafique with such of the nobilitie as he mycht draw to his factioun, or corrupt by any meanes, to raise a party against the said governour, and against such as stoode fast at the contract of mariage and peace with england; and so assemblit at linlythqw, the said cardinall, the earlis ergyle, huntely, bothwell, the bischoppis and thare bandis; and thairefter thei passed to striveling, and tooke with thame bayth the quenis, the mother and the dowghter,[ ] and threatned the depositioun of the said governour, as inobedient to thare haly mother the kirk, (so terme thei that harlott of babilon, rome.) the inconstant man, not throwghtlie grounded upoun god, left in his awin default destitut of all good counsall, and having the wicked ever blawing in his earis, "what will ye do! ye will destroy your self and your house for ever:"--the unhappy man, (we say,) beaten with these tentationis, randered him self to the appetites of the wicked; for he qwyetlie stall away from the lordis that war wyth him in[ ] the palice of halyrudhouse, past to stirling, subjected him self to the cardinall and to his counsall, receaved absolutioun, renunced the professioun of christ jesus his holy evangell, and violated his oath that befoir he had maid, for observatioun of the contract and league with england.[ ] at that tyme was our quene crouned,[ ] and new promess maid to france. the certaintie heirof cuming to king hary, our schotish schippis war stayed, the sayles tackin from thare rayes, and the merchantis and marynaris war commanded to suyre custody. new commissioun was send to maister saidlar, (who then still remaned in scotland,[ ]) to demand the caussis of that suddane alteratioun, and to travaill by all meanes possible, that the governour mycht be called back to his formar godly purpoise, and that he wold not do so foolishlie and inhonestlye, yea, so cruelly and unmercyfullie to the realme of scotland; that he wold not only lose the commodities offerred, and that war presentlie to be receaved, but that also he wold expone it to the hasard of fyre and suord, and other inconvenientis that mycht insew the warr that was to follow upoun the violatioun of his fayth: but nothing could availl. the devill keapt fast the grippe that he gatt, yea, evin all the dayis of his governement. for the cardinall gatt his eldast sone in pledge, whom he keapt in the castell of sanctandross, whill the day that goddis hand punished his pryde. king hary perceaving that all hope of the governouris reapentance was lost, called back his ambassadour, and that with fearfull threatnyngis, as edinburgh after felt; denunced warr, maid our schippis pryses, and merchantis and marynaris lauchfull preasonaris, which, to the browghtis of scotland, was no small hearschipp. butt thairat did the cardinall and preastis lawch, and jestinglye he said, "when we shall conqueise england, the merchantis shalbe recompenssed." the somar and the harvist pass ower without any notable thing; for the cardinall and abbot of paislie parted the pray amonges thame: the abused governour bayre the name only. in the begynnyng of the wynter, came the erle of levenox to scotland,[ ] sent fra france in haterent of the governour, whome the king, (by the cardinallis advise,) promessed to pronunce bastard, and so to maik the said erle governour. the cardinall forther putt the said erle in vane hoipe that the quene dowager should marye him. he browght with him some money, and more he after receaved fra the handis of la broche. butt at lenth, perceaving him self frustrate of all expectatioun that he had, eyther by france, or yitt by the promeise of the cardinall, he concluded to leave france, and to seak the favouris of england, and so begane to drawe a factioun aganis the governour; and in haterent of the otheris inconstancie, many favored him in the begynning; for thare assembled at the yule, in the toune of ayre, the erles of anguss, glencarne, cassilles, the lordis maxwaill, [and somerville,][ ] the lard of drumlangrig, the schireff of ayre,[ ] with all the force that thei, and the lordis that remaned constant at the opinioun of england, mycht mack; and after the yule, thei came to leyth. the governoure and cardinall, with thare forces, keape edinburgh, (for thei war slaklie persewed.) men excuse the erle of levenox in that behalf, and layd the blame upoun some that had no will of stewartis regiment. howsoever it was, such ane appointment was maid, that the said erle of levenox was disapoynted of his purpose, and narrowly eschaiped; and first gat him to glasgw, and after to dumbertane. schir george dowglass was delivered to be keapt as pledge. the erle his brother,[ ] was, in the lentrane after, tackin at the sege of glasgw. it was bruyted, that boyth the brethren, and otheris with thame, had lossed thare headis, yf by the providence of god the engliss army had nott arryved the sonare. after that the cardinall had gottin the governour hole addict to his devotioun, and had obtened his intent above a parte of his ennemyes, he begane to practise, how that such as he feared, and thairfoir deadly haited, should be sett by the earis one against ane other, (for in that, thowght the carnall man, stood his greatast securitie.) the lord ruthven he haited, be reassone of his knowledge of goddis woord: the lord gray he feared, becaus at that tyme he used the cumpany of such as professed godliness, and bare small favour to the cardinall. now, thus reassoned the worldly wise man, "yf i can putt ennimitie betuix those two, i shalbe rydd of a great nomber of unfreindis; for the most parte of the cuntrey will either assist the one or the other; and so will thei be otherwise occupied, then to watch for my displeasur." he fyndes the meanes, without longe process; for he laubouris with johnne charterowse, (a man of stout corage and many freindis,)[ ] to accept the provostrie of sanct johnestoun, which he purchasses to him by donatioun of the governour, with a charge to the said toune to obey him as thare lauchfull provest. whareat, not only the said lord ruthven, but also the toune, being offended, gave ane negative ansuer, alledging, that such intrusioun of men in office was hurtfull to thare priviledge and fredom; which granted unto thame free electioun of thare provest from year to year, at a certane tyme appointed, quhilk thei could not nor wold nott prevent. heirat the said johnne offended said, "that he wold occupie that office by force, yf thei wold not give it unto him of benevolence;" and so departed and communicat the mater with the lord gray, with normond leslie, and with other his freindis; whome he easily persuaded to assist him in that persuyt, becaus he appeared to have the governouris ryght, and had nott only a charge to the toune, as said is, but also he purchassed letteris to beseige it, and to tack it by strong hand, yf any resistance war maid unto him. such letteris, we say, made many to favour his actioun. the other maid for defence, and so tuk the maister of ruthven (the lord that after departed in england,)[ ] the mantenance of the toune, having in his cumpany the lard of moncreif,[ ] and other freindis adjacent. the said johnne maid frack for the persuyt; and upoun the magdelane day,[ ] in the mornyng, anno , approched with his forses; the lord gray tacking upoun him the principall charge. it was appointed, that normond leslye, with his freandis, should have come by schip, with munitioun and ordnance, as thei war in reddynes. but becaus the tyde served nott so soone as thei wold, the other thinking him self of sufficient forse, for all that war in the toune, entered in by the brig, whare thei fand no resistance, till that the formar parte was entered a pretty space within the fische gate;[ ] and then the said maister of ruthven, with his cumpany, stowtlie recountred thame, and so rudlye repulsed the formest, that such as war behynd gave back. the place of the retear was so straite, that men that durst not feght, could not flye at thare pleasur, (for the moist part of the lord gray his freindis war upoun the brig;) and so the slaughter was great; for thare fell in the edge of the suord threescoir men. the cardinall had rather that the unhappe had fallen on the other parte; but howsoever it was, he thowght that such truble was his conforte and advantage. the knowledge whareof came unto the earis of the partie that had receaved the disconfiture, and was unto thame no small greaff; for as many of thame entered in that actioun for his pleasour, so thowght thei to have had his fortificatioun and assistance, whairof fynding thame selfis frustrat, thei begane to looke more narrowly to thame selfis, and did not so much attend upon the cardinallis devotioun, as thei had wont to do befoir: and so was a new jelosey engendered amanges thame; for whosoever wold nott play to him the good vallett, was reputed amangis his ennemyes. the cardinall drew the governour to dundye;[ ] for he understood that the erle of rothess and maister henrie balnaves war with the lord gray in the castell of huntlie.[ ] the governour send and commanded the saidis erle and lord, with the foirsaid maister henrie, to come unto him to dundy, and appointeid the nixt day, at ten houris befoir none; which hour thei decreid to keap; and for that purpose assemblet thare folkis at bawgawy,[ ] or thareby. the cardinall advertissed of thare nomber, (thei war mo then thre hundreth men,) thowght it nott good that thei should joyn with the toune, for he feared his awin estaite; and so he persuaded the governour to pas furth of dundy befoir nyne houris, and to tak the strayth way to sanct johnnestoun.[ ] which perceaved by the foirsaid lordis, thei begane to feare that thei war come to persew thame, and so putt thame selves in ordour and array, and merched fordward of purpose to have biddin the uttermost. but the craftie fox foirseing, that in feghtting stood nott his securitie, rane to his last refuge, that is, to manifest treasone; and so consultatioun was tackin how that the force of the otheris mycht be brokin. and at the first, war send the lard of grange and the provest of sanctandross,[ ] (knowing nothing of treason,) to ask "why thei molested my lord governour in his jorney?" whairto thei ansuered, "that thei ment nothing less; for thei came at his grace's commandiment, to have keap the hour in dundy appointed by him, which becaus thei saw prevented, and knawing the cardinall to be thare unfreand,[ ] thei could nott butt suspect thare unprovided cuming furth of the toune; and thairfoir, thei putt thame selfis in ordour not to invaid, but to defend in caise thei war invaded." this ansure reported, was send to thame _the bischope of sanctandross_,* [sn: the abbot of pasley[ ]*] maister david panter, the lardis of balclewhe and coldinknowis, to desyre certane of the other cumpany to talk with thame; which thei easelie obteined, (for thei suspected no treasone.) after long communicatioun, it was demanded, yf that the erle and lord and maister henrie foirsaid, wold nott be content to talk with the governour, providit that the cardinall and his cumpany war of the ground? thei ansuerit, "that the governour mycht command thame in all thinges lauchfull, but thei had no will to be in the cardinalles mercye." fayre promisses ynew war maid for thare securitie. than was the cardinall and his band commanded to depart; as that he did according to the purpoise tackin. the governour remaned and ane certane with him; to whom came without cumpany the saidis erle, lord, and maister henrye. after many fair woordis gevin unto thame all, to witt, "that he wold have thame aggreed with the cardinall; and that he wold have maister henrye balnaves the wyrkar and instrument thairof," he drew thame fordwartes with him towardis sanet johnnestoun, whether to the cardinall was ridden. thei begane to suspect, (albeit it was to lett,) and tharefor thei desyred to have returned to thare folkis, for putting ordour unto thame. but it was ansuerid, "thei should send back fra the toune, but thei most neidis go fordwart with my lord governour." and so, partlye by flatterye and partlye by force, thei war compelled to obey. and how sone that ever thei war within the toune, thei war apprehended, and upoun the morne send all three to the black nesse, whare thei remaned so long as that it pleased the cardinallis graceless grace, and that was till that the band of manrent and of service, sett some of thame at libertie. and thus the cardinall with his craft prevalled on everie syd; so that the scotesh proverbe was trew in him, "so long rynnis the fox, as he fute hes."[ ] whether it was at this his jorney, or at ane other, that that bloody bowchar executed his crueltye upoun the innocent personis in sanct johnestoun, we can not affirme; neyther yett thairin study we to be curious; but rather we travall to expresse the veritie, whersoever it was done, then scrupluslye and exactly to appoint the tymes,[ ] which yitt we omitt nott when the certaintye occurres. the veritie of that cruell fact is this. at sanct paules day,[ ] befoir the first burnyng of edinburgh, came to sanct johnestoun the governour and cardinall, and there, upoun invyous delatioun, war a great nomber of honest men and wemen called befoir the cardinall, accused of heresye; and albeit that thei could be convict of nothing but only of suspitioun that thei had eittin a guse upoun fryday, four men war adjudged to be hanged, and a woman to be drouned; which cruell and most injust sentence was without mercy putt in executioun. the husband was hanged, and the wyfe, having ane suckin babe upoun hir breast, was drowned.--"o lorde, the land is nott yitt purged from such beastlye crueltye; neyther has thy just vengence yitt strickin all that war criminall of thare blood: but the day approchcs when that the punishment of that cruelty and of otheris will evidentlye appear." the names of the men that war hanged, war james huntar, williame lambe,[ ] williame andersoun, james rannelt, burgesses of sanct johnestoun. at that same tyme war banissed schir henrie eldar,[ ] johnne eldar, walter pyper, laurence pullare, with diverse utheris, whose names came nott to our knowledge. that sworne ennemye to christ jesus, and unto all in whome any sponk of trew knowledge appeared, had about that same tyme in preason diverse; amonges whome was johne roger, a blak freir, godly, learned, and ane that had fruetfully preached christ jesus, to the conforte of many in anguss and mearnes, whome that bloody man caused murther in the ground of the sea-toure of sanctandross, and then caused to cast him ower the craig, sparsing a false bruyt, "that the said johnne, seaking to flie, had broken[ ] his awin craig." thus ceassed nott sathan, by all meanes, to manteane his kingdome of darkness, and to suppresse the light of christis evangell. but potent is he against whome thei faught; for when thay wicked war in greatast securitie, then begane god to schaw his anger. for the thride day of maij, in the year of god j^m. v^c. xliiij yearis, without knowledge of any man in scotland, (we meane of such as should haif had the care of the realme,) was seene a great navye of schippis arryving towardis the firth. the postis came to the governour and cardinall, (who boith war in edinburgh,) what multitud of schippis ware sene, and what course thei took. this was upoun the setterday befoir nune. questioun was had, what should thei meane? borne said, it is no doubt but thei ar englismen, and we fear that thei shall land. the cardinall scripped and said, "it is but the island flote: thei ar come to mak a schaw, and to putt us in feare. i shall lodge all the men-of-ware into my cae,[ ] that shall land in scotland." still sittis the cardinall at his dennare, eavin as that thare had bene no danger appearing. men convenis to gase upoun the schippis, some to the castell hill, some to the craiggis, and other places eminent. but thare was no questioun, "with what forces shall we resist, yf we be invadit?" sone after sax houris at nycht, war arryved and had casten anker in the read of leyth, mo then two hundreth sailles. schortlie thare after the admirall schot a flote boite, which, frome grantoun craigis[ ] till be east leyth, sounded the deipe, and so returned to hir schippe. heirof war diverse opinionis. men of judgement foresaw what it ment. but no credite was geavin to any that wold say, "thei mynd to land." and so past all man to his rest, as yf thei schippis had bene a gard for thare defence. upone the poynt of day, upon sounday, the fourt of maij, addressed thei for landing, and ordered thei thare schippis so that a galay or two lade thare snowttis to the craiggis.[ ] the small schippis called pinaces, and light horsmen approched als neir as thei could. the great schippis discharged thare souldiouris in the smallare veschellis, and thei by bottis, sett upon dry land befoir ten houris ten thousand men, as was judged, and mo. the governour and cardinall seing then the thing that thei could nott, or att least thei wold nott beleve befoir, after that thei had maid a brag to feght, fled as fast as horse wold cary them; so that after, thei approched nott within twenty myllis of the danger. the erle of anguss, and george[ ] dowglas war that nycht freed of ward, (thei war in blakness.)[ ] the said schir george in merynes said, "i thank king hary and my gentill maisteris of england." [sn: the birning of edinburgh.] the engliss army betuix twelf and one hour[ ] entered in leyth, fand the tables covered, the dennaris prepared, such aboundance of wyne and victuallis, besydis the other substance, that the lyik riches within the lyik boundis was nott to be found, neyther in scotland nor england. upone the mononday the fyft of maij, came to thame from berwik and the bordour, two thowsand horsmen, who being somewhat reposed, the army, upoun the wedinsday marched towardis the toune of edinburgh, spoyled and brynt the same, and so did thei the palice of halyrudhouse.[ ] the horsmen took the house of cragmyllare, and gatt great spoyle tharein; for it being judged[ ] the strongast house near the toune, other then the castell of edinburgh, all man sowght to saif thare movables thairin. but the stoutness of the larde gave it over without schote of hack-que-boote, and for his reward was caused to merch upoun his foote to londoun. he is now capitane of dumbar and provest of edinburgh.[ ] the englismen seing no resistance, hurlled by force of men cannounes up the calsay to the butter-throne,[ ] or above, and hasarded a schoote at the for-entree of the castell. butt that was to thare awin paines; for thei lying without trinche or gabioun, war exponed to the force of the hole ordinance of the said castell, which schote, and that nott all in vane; for the quheill and extrye of one of the engliss cannownes war brokin, and some of thare men slayne; and so thei left with small honour that interprise, tackin rather of rashnes, then of any advised counsall. when the most parte of the day thei had spoyled and brynt, towardis the nyeht thei returned to leyth, and upoun the morow returned to edinburgh, and executed the rest of goddis judgementis for that tyme. and so when thei had consumed boyth the tounes, thai laded the schippis with spoyle thareof,[ ] and thei by land returned to berwik, using the cuntry for the most parte at thare awin pleasur. this was a parte of the punishment, which god took upoun the realme for infidelitie of the governour, and for the violatioun of his solempned oath. butt this was nott the end; for the realme was devided in two factionis; the one favored france; the other the league laitly contracted with england: the one did in no thingis throwghlie credite the uther; so that the countrey was in extreame calamitie; for to the englismen war delivered diverse strenthis, such as carelaverok, lowmaben and longhame. the maist parte of the bordouris war confederat with england. and albeit that first, at ankrome mure, in februare, in the year of god j^m. v^c. fourty four, was schir raif evers,[ ] with many other englismen slayne, and the yeare after war some of the saidis strenthis recovered; yitt was it nott without great loss and detriment to the commoun wealth. for in the moneth of junij, in the year of god j^m. v^c. fourty fyve, monsoure de lorge,[ ] with bandis of men of warr, came frome france for a further destructioun to scotland; for upoun thare brag was ane army rased. fordwarte go thei towardis wark,[ ] evin in the myddist of harvist. the cardinallis baner was that day displayed, and all his fecallis war charged to be under it. many had befoir promissed, but at the poynt it was left so bayre, that with schame it was schut up in the pock againe, and thei after a schaw returned with more schame to the realme, then skaith to thare ennemyes. the black booke of hammyltoun maikis mentioun of great vassalege[ ] done at that tyme by the governour, and the frenche.[ ] but such as with thare eyis saw the hole progresse, knew that to be a lye, and dois repute it amonges the veniale synnes of that race, which is to speake the best of thameselves thei can. that wynter following, so nurtored the french men, that thei learned to eatt, (yea, to beg,) caikes which at thare entrie thei skorned. without jesting, thei war so miserable entreated, that few returned to france agane with thare lyves. the cardinall had then almost fortifeid the castell of sanctandross, which he maid so strong, in his opinioun, that he regarded neyther england nor france. the erle of levenox, as said is, disapoynted of all thingis in scotland, past to england, whare he was receaved of king hary in protectioun, who gave him to wyffe lady margaret dowglas,[ ] of whome was borne hary, umquhile husband to our jezabell maistres. whill the inconstant governour was sometymes dejected and sometymes resed up againe be the abbot of paslay,[ ] who befoir was called "chaster then any madyn," begane[ ] to schaw him self; for after he had tackin by craft the castellis of edinburgh and dumbar, he tooke also possessioun of his eme's wyiff,[ ] the lady stennoss:[ ] the woman is and hes bein famouse, and is called lady gylton. hir ladiship was holdin alwayis in propertie;[ ] but how many wyiffis and virgenes he hes had sen that tyme in commoun, the world knowis, albeit nott all, and his bastard byrdis[ ] bear some witness. such is the example of holynes that the flock may receave of the papisticall bischoppis. [sn: the woordis of maister george wisharte in dondye.] in the myddest of all the calamities that came upoun the realme after the defectioun of the governour from christ jesus, came in scotland that blissed martyre of god maister george wisharte,[ ] in cumpany of the commissionaris befoir mentionat, in the year of god ; a man of such graces as befoir him war never hard within this realme, yea, and ar rare to be found yit in any man, nocht withstanding this great lyght of god that sence his dayis hes schyned unto us. he was not onlye singularlye learned, aisweall in godlye knowledge, as in all honest humane science; bot also he was so clearlye illummated with the spreat of prophesye, that he saw nott only thingis perteanyng to him self, but also such thingis as some tounes and the hole realme afterward felt, which he foir-spak, nott in secreat, but in the audience of many, as in thare awin places shalbe declaired. the begynnyng of his doctrin was in montrose. tharefra hie departed to dundy, whare, with great admiratioun of all that heard him, he tawght the epistill to the romanes, till that, by procurement of the cardinall, robert myll, then one of the principall men in dundye, and a man that of old had professed knowledge, and for the same had sufferred trublc, gave, in the quenis and governouris name, inhibitioun to the said maister george, that he should truble thare toune no more; for thei wold not suffer it. and this was said unto him, being in the publict place; which heard, he mused a pretty space,[ ] with his eis bent unto the heavin, and thareafter looking sorowfullie to the speakar, and unto the people, he said, "god is witness, that i never mynded your truble, but your conforte. yea, your truble is more dolorous unto me, then it is unto your selves. but i am assured that to refuse goddis word, and to chase from yow his messinger, shall not preserve yow frome truble; but it shall bring yow into it. for god shall send unto yow messingeris, who will not be efinayed of bornyng, nor yitt for banishment. i have offerred unto yow the woorde of salvatioun, and with the hasarde of my lyef i have remaned amanges yow. now ye your selves refuise me, and tharefoir man i leave my innocencye to be declared by my god. yf it be long prosperus with yow, i am nott ledd with the spreitt of treuth. butt and yf truble unlooked for apprehend yow, acknowledge the caus, and turne to god, for he is mercifull. but yf ye turne not at the first, he shall viseitt yow with fyre and sword." these woordis pronunsed, he came doune frome the preaching place. in the kirk present was the lord merschell,[ ] and diverse noblemen, who wold have had the said maister george to have remaned, or ellis to have gone with him in the countrey. butt for no requeast wold he eyther tary in the toune or on that syd of tay any longar. butt with possible expeditioun past to the west-land, whare he begane to offerr goddis woord, which was of many gladlye received, till that the bischop of glasgw, dumbar, by instigatioun of the cardinall came with his gatheringis to the toune of ayr, to mack resistance to the said maister george, and did first occupy the kirk. the erle of glencarne being thairof advertissed, repaired with his freindis to the toune with diligence, and so did diverse gentilmen of kyle, (amonges whome was the lard of lefnoryss,[ ] a man far different frome him that now lyvith*, [sn: anno .*] in maneris and religioun,) of whome to this day yitt many lyve, and have declared thame selfis alwayes zelous and bold in the caus of god, as after wilbe heard. when all war assembled, conclusioun was tackin that thei wold have the kirk; wharto the said maister george utterlye repugned, saying, "lett him allone; his sermon will nott much hurte: lett us go to the merkate croce;" and so thei did, whare he made so notable a sermon, that the verray ennemies thame selves war confounded. [sn: the bischope of glasgow his preaching in ayre.] the bischope preached to his jackmen, and to some old bosses of the toune. the summe of all his sermon was: "thei say that we shuld preach: why nott? bettir late thrive then never thrive: had us still for your bischop, and we shall provid better for the next tyme." this was the begynnyng and the end of the bischoppis sermon, who with haist departed the toune, butt returned nott agane to fulfill his promisse. the said maister george remaned with the gentilmen in kyle, till that he gate suyre knowledge of the estate of dondye. hie preached commonlie at the kirk of gaston,[ ] and used much in the barr.[ ] he was requyred to come to the kirk of mauchlyne, as that he did. but the schiref of ayr[ ] caused man the kirk, for preservatioun of a tabernakle that was thare, bewtyfull to the eie. the personis that held the kirk was george campbell of mongaswood, that yitt lyveth,* [sn: anno .*] mongo campbell of brounesyd, george read in dawdeling, the lard of tempilland.[ ] some zelous of the parishyne, amangis whome hew campbell of kingzeanclewch,[ ] offended that thei shuld be debarred thare parish kirk, concludit by force to enter. but the said maister george withdrew the said hew, and said unto him, "brother, christ jesus is as potent upoun the feildis as in the kirk; and i fynd that he him self often preached in the deserte, at the sea syd, and other places judged prophane, then that he did in the tempill of hierusalem. it is the woord of peace that god sendis by me: the blood of no man shalbe sched this day for the preaching of it." and so with drawing the hole people, he came to a dyck in a mure edge, upoun the sowth-west syd of mauchlyne, upoun the which he ascended. the hole multitude stood and sat about him, (god gave the day pleasing and hote.) he continewed in preach[ing] more then three houris. in that sermoun, god wrowght so wonderfullye with him, that ane of the most wicked men that was in that countrey, named laurence ranckin lard of scheill,[ ] was converted. the tearis rane from his eis in such habundance, that all men wondered. his conversioun was without hipochrysye, for his lyif and conversatioun witnessed it in all tymes to come. whill this faithfull servand of god was thus occupyed in kyle, woord rais that the plague of pestilence was rissen in dondye,[ ] which begane within foure dayis, after that the said maister george was inhibite preaching, and was so vehement, that it almost passed credibilitie, to hear what nomber departed everie foure and twenty houris. the certantie understand, the said maister george tooke his leave of kyle, and that with the regrate of many. bot no requeist could mack him to remane: his reassone was, "thei ar now in truble, and thei nead conforte: perchance this hand of god will make thame now to magnifie and reverence that woord, which befoir (for the fear of men,) thei sett at light price."[ ] cuming unto dondye, the joy of the faythfull was exceading great. he delayed no tyme, bot evin upoun the morow gave significatioun that he wold preache. and becaus the most parte war eyther seak, or ellis war in cumpany with those that war seak, he chosed the head of the east porte of the toune for his preaching place; and so the whole sat or stood within, the seik and suspected without the porte.[ ] the text upoun the which his first sermoun was made, he took fra the hundreth and sevin psalme; the sentence thareof, "he send his woorde and heallod thame;" and tharewith joyned these woordis, "it is neather herbe nor plaster, o lord, butt thy woord healleth all." in the which sermoun, he maist confortablie did intreat the dignitie and utilitie of goddis woord; the punishment that cumis for the contempt of the same; the promptitude of goddis mercy to such as trewlye turne to him; yea, the great happynes of thame whome god tackis from this miserie, evin in his awin gentill visitatioun, which the malice of man cane neyther eak nor paire. by the which sermoun he so rased up the hartis of all that heard him, that thei regarded nott death, but judged thame more happy that should departe, then such as should remane behynd; considering that thei knew nott yf thei shuld have such a confortar with thame at all tymes. he spared not to viseit thame that lay in the verray extreamitie; he conforted thame as that he mycht in such a multitude; he caused minister all thingis necessarye to those that mycht use meat or drynk; and in that poynt was the toune wonderouse beneficiall; for the poore was no more neglected then was the rich. whill he was spending his lyve to conforte the afflicted, the devill ceassed nott to stirr up his awin sone the cardinall agane, who corrupted by money a disperat preast, named schir johne wightone, to slay the said maister george, who looked not to him self in all thingis so circumspectlie as worldlie men wold have wissed. and upoun a day, the sermoun ended, and the people departing, no man suspecting danger, and tharefore nott heading the said maister george, the preast that was corrupted stood wating at the foot of the steppis, his goune lowse, and his whinger drawin into his hand under his gown, the said maister george, as that he was most scharpe of eie and judgement, marked him, and as he came neyr, he said, "my friend, what wald ye do?" and tharewith he clapped his hand upoun the preastis hand, wharein the whingar was, which he tooke from him. the preast abassed, fell down at his feitt, and openly confessed the veritie as it was. the noyse rysing, and cuming to the earis of the seik, thei cryed, "deliver the tratour to us, or ellis we will tack him by forse;" and so thei birst[ ] in at the yett. but maister george took him in his armes, and said, "whosoevir trubles him shall truble me; for he has hurte me in nothing, bot he hes done great conforte boyth to yow and me, to witt, he hes lattin us understand what we may feare in tymes to come. we will watch better." and so he appeased boith the one parte and the other, and saved the lyif of him that soght his. when the plague was so ceassed, that almost thare war none seak, he tooke his leave of thame, and said, "that god had almost putt end to that battell: he fand him self called to ane other." the gentilmen of the west had written unto him, that he should meitt thame at edinburgh; for thei wald requyre disputatioun of the bischoppis, and that he should be publictlie heard. whaireto he willinglye aggreed; but first, he passed to montrose, to salute the kirk thare; whare he remaned occupyed sometymes in preaching, but most parte in secreat meditatioun, in the which he was so earnest, that nycht and day he wold continew in it. whill he was so occupyed with his god, the cardinall drew a secreat drawght for his slawchter. he caused to writt unto him a letter, as it had bein frome his most familiare friend, the larde of kynneyre,[ ] "desyring him with all possible diligence to come unto him, for he was strickin with a suddane seakness." in this meantyme, had the tratour provided thre score men, with jackis and spearis, to lye in wate within a myll and a half of the toune of montrose, for his dispatche. the letter cuming to his hand, he maid haste at the first, (for the boy had brought a horse,) and so with some honest men, he passes forth of the toune. but suddandlye he stayed, and musing a space, returned back; whareat thei wondering, he said, "i will nott go: i am forbiddin of god: i am assured thare is treasone. lett some of yow, (sayis he,) go to yonder place, and tell me what ye fynd." diligence made, thei fand the treassone, as it was; which being schawin with expeditioun to maister george, he ansured, "i know that i shall finysh this[ ] my lief in that blood-thrusty manis handis; butt it will not be of this maner." the tyme approching that he had appointed to meit the gentilmen at edinburght, he took his leave of montrose, and, sore against the judgement of the lard of dune,[ ] he entered in his jorney, and so returned to dondy; but remaned not, but passed to the hous of a faythfull brother, named james watsone, who dwelt in inner gowrye, distant frome the said toune two myles, and that nycht, (as informatioun was gevin to us by williame spadin and johnne watsoun, both men of good credyte,) befoir day a litill he passed furth into a yard. the said williame and johne followed previlie, and took head what he did. when he had gone up and doune into ane alay a ressonable space, with many sobbes and deape grones, he platt upoun[ ] his knees, and setting thareon, his grones increassed; and frome his knees he fell upoun his face; and then the personis fornamed heard weaping and, as it war ane indigest sound, as it war of prayeris, in the which he continewed neyre ane hour, and after begane to be qwiet; and so arrose and came in to his bed. they that awated prevented him, as thei had bein ignorant, till that he came in; and than begane thei to demand whare he had bein? butt that nycht he wold ansuer nothing. upoun the morow, thei urged him agane; and whill that he dissimuled, thei said, "maister george, be plaine with us; for we heard your grones; yea, we heard your bitter murning, and saw yow boyth upoun your kneis and upoun your face." with dejected visage, he said, "i had rather ye had bein in your beddis, and it had bein more profitable to yow, for i was skarse weall occupyed." when thei instantlie urged him to lett thame know some conforte; he said, "i will tell yow, that i am assured that my travail is neir ane end; and tharefor call to god with me, that now i schrink not when the battell waxis moist hoote." and whill that thei weaped, and said, "that was small conforte unto thame;" [sn: prophecie spokin by maister george wisharte.] he ansured, "god shall send yow conforte after me. this realme shalbe illuminated with the light of christis evangell, as clearlie as ever was any realme sence the dayis of the apostles. the house of god shalbe builded in to it. yea, it sall not lack, (whatsoever the ennemye imagyne in the contrare,) the verray cope stone:"[ ] meanyng that it shuld anes be browght to the full perfectioun. "neyther, (said he,) shall this be long to: thare shall nott many suffer after me, till that the glorie of god shall evidently appear, and shall anes triumphe in dispyte of sathan. butt, allace! yf the people shall after be unthankfull, then fearfull and terrible shall the plagues be that after shall follow." and with these woordis he marched fordwardis in his jorney towardis sanct johnestoun; and so to fyff, and then to leyth. whare arryved, and hearing no wourd of those that appointed to meitt him, (to witt, the erle of cassilles, and the gentill men of kyle and cunynghame,[ ]) keap him self secreat a day or two. but begynnyng to wax sorowfull in spreit, and being demanded of the caus, of such as war nott into his cumpany of befoir, he said, "what differ i from a dead man, except that i eat and drynk? to this tyme god hes used my laubouris to the instructioun of otheris, and unto the disclosing of darknes; and now i lurk as a man that war eschamed, and durst not schaw him self befoir men." by these and lyik woordis, thei that heard him understoode that his desyre was to preach; and tharefoir said, "maist confortable it war unto us to hear yow: but becaus we know the danger wharein ye stand, we dar not desyre yow." "but dar ye and otheris hear, (said he,) and then lett my god provide for me, as best pleasith him." finally, it was concluded, that the nixt sounday he should preach in leyth; as that he did, and took the text, "the parable of the sowar that went furth to saw sead," mathæi, . and this was upoun a fyvetene dayis[ ] befoir yule. the sermon ended, the gentill men of lotheane, who then war earnest professouris of christ jesus, thought not expedient that he shuld remane in leyth, becaus that the governour and cardinall war schortlie to come to edinburgh; and tharefore thei tooke him with thame, and keapt him sometymes in brounestoun, sometymes in langnudry, and sometymes in ormestoun; for those thrie[ ] diligentlie awated upoun him. the sounday following, he preached in the kirk of enresk,[ ] besydis mussilburght, both befoir and at after none, whare thare was a great confluence of people, amonges whome was schir george douglass,[ ] who after the sermon said publictlie, [sn: the woordis of sir george dowglass.] "i know that my lord governour and my lord cardinall shall hear that i have bein at this preaching, (for thei war then in edinburght.) say unto thame that i will avow it, and will nott onlye manteane the doctrin that i have hard, bot also the persone of the teachare to the uttermost of my power." which woordis greatly rejosed the people and the gentilmen then present. [sn: maister george wisharte his threatnyng to two gray freiris.] one thing notable in that sermon we can not pass by. amonges otheris thare came two gray frearis, and standing in the entrie of the kirk doore, thei made some whispering to such as came in. which perceaved, the preachar said to the people that stoode ney thame, "i hartlye pray yow to mack roome to those two men: it may be that thei be come to learne." and unto thame he said, "come neyr, (for thei stoode in the verray entrye of the doore,) for i assure yow ye shall heare the woord of veritie, which shall eyther seall in to yow this same day your salvatioun, or condempnatioun." and so proceaded he in doctrin, supposing that thei wold have bein qwyette. but when he perceaved them still to truble the people that stood ney thame, (for vehement was he against the false wirschipping of god,) he turned unto thame the secound tyme, and with ane awfull countenance said, "o sergeantis of sathan, and deceavaris of the soules of men, will ye nether hear goddis trewth, nor suffer otheris to hear it? departe and tack this for your portioun,--god shall schortlie confound and disclose your hipochrisie: within this realme ye shall be abhominable unto men, and your places and habitationis shalbe desolate." this sentence he pronunced with great vehemeneye, in the myddist of the sermoun; and turneying to the people, he said, "yone wicked men have provocked the spreat of god to angar." and so he returned to his mater, and proceaded to the end. that dayis travaill ended, he came to langnudrye; and the two nixt soundayis preached in tranent, with the lyik grace and lyik confluence of people. in all his sermonis, after his departure from anguss, he forespake the schortnes of the tyme that he had to traval, and of his death, the day whairof he said approched neyar then any wold beleve. in the hynder end of those dayis that ar called the holy dayis of yule, past he, by consent of the gentilmen, to hadingtoun, whare it was supposed the greatast confluence of people should be, boyth be reassoun of the toune and of the countrey adjacent. the first day befoir nune the auditouris[ ] was reassonable, and yitt nothing in comparisone of that which used to be in that kyrk. butt the after nune, and the nixt day following befoir nune, the auditure[ ] was so selender, that many wondered. the cause was judged to have bein, that the erle bothwell, who in those boundis used to have great credite and obedience, by procurement of the cardinall, had gevin inhibitioun, asweell unto the toune, as unto the countrey, that thei should nott hear him under the pane of his displeasur. the first nycht he lay within the toune with david forress, now called the generall,[ ] ane man that long hes professed the trueth, and upoun whom many in that tyme depended. the secound nycht, he lay in lethingtoun, the lard[ ] whareof was ever civile, albeit not persuaded in religioun. the day following, befoir the said maister george past to the sermoun, thare came to him a boy with ane letter from the west land, which receaved and red, he called for johne knox,[ ] who had awaited upoun him carefullie frome the tyme he came to lotheane; with whome he began to enter in purpose, "that he weryed of the world:" for he perceaved that men begane to weary of god.[ ] the caus of his complaint was, the gentilmen of the west had writtin unto him, that thei could nott keape dyet at edinburgh. the said johne knox wondering that he desyred to keape any purpoise befoir sermoun, (for that was never his accustomed use befoir,) said, "schir, the tyme of sermoun approches: i will leave yow for the present to your meditatioun;" and so took the bill conteanyng the purpose foirsaid, and left him. the said maister george spaced up and doune behynd the hie altar more then half ane houre: his verray contenance and visage declared the greaf and alteratioun of his mynd. at last, he passed to the pulpett, but the auditure was small. he should have begune to have entreated the secound table of the law; but thareof in that sermoun he spak verray litill, but begane on this maner; "o lord, how long shall it be, that thy holy woord shalbe despysed, and men shall not regard thare awin salvatioun. i have heard of thee, hadingtoun, that in thee wold have bein at ane vane clerk play[ ] two or three thowsand people; and now to hear the messinger of the eternall god, of all thy toune nor parishe can not be nombred a hundreth personis. sore and feirfull shall the plagues be that shall ensew this thy contempt: with fyre and sword thow shalt be plagued; yea, thow haddingtoun, in speciall, strangearis shall possesse thee, and yow, the present inhabitantes shall eyther in bondage serve your ennemyes, or ellis ye shalbe chassed fra your awin habitationis; and that becaus ye have not knawin, nor will nott know the tyme of goddis mercifull visitatioun." in such vehemency and threatnyng continewed that servand of god neyr ane hour and ane half, in the which he declared all the plagues that ensewed, as plainlie as after our eyes saw thame performed. in the end he said, "i have forgotten my self and the mater that i should have entraited; but lett these my last woordis as concernyng publict preaching, remane in your myndis, till that god send yow new conforte." thairefter he maid a schorte paraphrasis upoun the secound table, with ane exhortatioun to patience, to the fear of god, and unto the werkis of mercy; and so putt end, as it war macking his last testament, as the ischew declaired, that the spreat of trewth and of trew judgement war both in his harte and mouth. for that same nycht was he apprehended, befoir mydnycht, in the house of ormestoun, by the erle bothwell, made for money bucheour to the cardinall. the maner of his tackin was thus: departing frome the toune of hadingtoun, he tuk his good nyght, as it war for ever, of all his acquentance, especiallie from hew dowglas of langnudrye. johne knox preassing to have gone with the said maister george, he said, "nay, returne to your barnes, and god blisse yow. one is sufficient for one sacrifice." and so he caused a twa handed sweard, (which commonly was caiyed with the said maister george,) be tackin fra the said johnne knox, who, albeit unwillinglie, obeyit, and returned with hew dowglass of langnudrye.[ ] maister george having to accompany him the lard of ormestoun, johnne sandelandis of caldar youngar, the lard of brounestoun, and otheris, with thare servandis, passed upoun foote, (for it was a vehement frost,) to ormestoun. after suppar he held confortable purpose of the death of goddis chosen childrin, and mearely[ ] said, "methink that i desyre earnestlye to sleap;" and thairwith he said, "will we sing a psalme?" and so he appointed the st psalme, which was put in scotishe meter, and begane thus,-- have mercy on me now, good lord, after thy great mercy, &c.:[ ] which being ended, he past to chalmer, and sonar then his commoun dyet was past to bed, with these wourdis, "god grant qwyet rest." befoir mydnycht, the place was besett about that none could eschape to mack advertisment. the erle bothwell[ ] came and called for the lard, and declaired the purpose, and said, "that it was but vane to maik him to hold his house; for the governour and the cardinall with all thare power war cuming," (and indead the cardinall was at elphinstoun,[ ] not a myle distant frome ormestoun;) [sn: the lord bothwellis promesse.] "butt and yf he wald deliver the man to him, he wold promeise upoun his honour, that he should be saif, and that it should pass the power of the cardinall to do him any harme or skaith." allured with these wordis, and tackin counsall with the said maister george, (who at the first word said, "open the yettis: the blissed will of my god be doun,") thei receaved in the erle bothwell him self, with some gentilmen with him, to whome maister george said, [sn: maister george his woordis to the erle bothwell.] "i praise my god that sa honorable a man as ye, my lord, receavis me this nycht, in the presence of these noble men; for now, i am assured, that for your honouris saik, ye will suffer nothing to be done unto me besydis the ordour of law. i am nott ignorant, that thaire law is nothing but corruptioun, and a clock to sched the bloode of the sanctes; but yitt i lesse fear to dye openlye, then secreatlye to be murthered." the said erle bothwell ansured, "i shall not onlye preserve your body frome all violence, that shalbe purposed against yow without ordour of law, but also i promeisse, hear in the presence of these gentilmen, that neyther shall the governour nor cardinall have thare will of yow;[ ] but i shall reteane yow in my awin handis, and in my awin place, till that eyther i shall mack yow free, or ellis restoir yow in the same place whare i receave yow." the lardis foirsaid said, "my lord, yf ye will do as ye have spokin, and as we think your lordship will do, then do we hear promesse unto your lordschip, that not only we our selfis shall serve yow all the dayis of our lyiff, but also we shall procure the haill professouris within lotheane to do the same. and upoun eyther the preservatioun[ ] of this our brother, or upoun his delyverie agane to our handis, we being reassonable advertissed to receave him, that we, in the name and behalf of our freindis, shall deliver to your lordschip, or to any sufficient man, that shall deliver to us agane this servand of god, our band of manrent in manor foirsaid." as thus promesse maid in the presence of god, and handis stracked upon boith the parties, for observatioun of the premisses,[ ] the said maister george was delivered to the handis of the said erle bothwell, who immediatlye departing with him, came to elphinstoun, whare the cardinall was; who knowing that caldar yongar and brunestoun war with the larde of ormestoun, send back with expeditioun to apprehend thame also. the noyse of horsmen being hard, the servandis gave advertisment, that mo then departed, or that war thare befoir, war returned; and whill that thei disput, what should be the motive, the cardinallis garison had ceased both the utter and the inner close. thei called for the larde, and for the larde of calder, who presenting thame selves, demanded what thare commissioun was. "to bring yow two," say thei, "and the larde of brunestoun to my lord governour." thei war nothing content, (as thei had no cause,) and yitt thei maid fayr contenance, and entreated the gentilmen to tack a drynk, and to bate thare horse, till that thei mycht putt thame selves in redynes to ryd with thame. in this meantyme, brunestoun convoyed him self, fyrst secreatlye, and then by spead of foote, to ormestoun wood, and frome thense to drundallon,[ ] and so eschaped that danger. the other two war putt in the castell of edinburght, whare the one, to witt caldar youngar, remaned whill his band of manrent to the cardinall was the meanes of his deliverance, and the other, to witt ormestoun, fread him self by leapping of the wall of the castell, betuix ten houris and allevin befoir none; and so breakin ward,[ ] he eschaped preassone, which he injustlye sufferred. the servand of god, maister george wisharte, was caryed first to edinburgh; thareafter browght back, for the fassionis saik, to the hous of hales[ ] agane, which was the principall place that then the erle bothwell had in lotheane. but as gold and wemen have corrupted all wordlye and fleschlye men from the begynning, so did thei him. for the cardinall gave gold, and that largelye, and the quene, with whome the said erle was then in the glondouris, promissed favouris in all his lauchfull suyttis to wemen, yf he wold deliver the said maister george to be keap[ ] in the castell of edinburgh. he made some resistance at the first, be reassone of his promesse:[ ] [sn: _ironice._] butt ane effeminat man cane nott long withstand the assaultes of a gratious quein. and so was the servand of god transported to edinburgh castell, whare he remaned nott many dayis. for that bloody wolfe the cardinall, ever thrusting the blood of the servand of god, so travailled with the abused governour, that he was content that goddis servand should be delivered to the power of that tyranne. and so, small inversioun being maid, pilate obeyed the petitioun of cayiaphas and of his fellowis, and adjugeid christ to be crucifeid. the servand of god delivered to the hande of that proude and mercyless tyranne, triumphe was maid by the preastis. the godly lamented, and accused the foolishnes of the governour; for, by the reteanyng of the said maister george, he mycht have caused protestantis and papistis, (rather proude romanistis,) to have served, the ane to the end, that the lyef of thare preachear mycht have bene saved, the other, for fear that he should have sett him at libertie agane, to the confusioun of the bischoppis. but where god is left, (as he had plainlie renunced him before,) what can counsall or judgement availl? how the servand of god was entreated, and what he did frome the day that he entered within the sea-tour of sanctandrose, quhilk was in the end of januare, in the year of god j^m. v^c. xlvj, unto the first of merch[ ] the same year, when he sufferred, we can not certanelye[ ] tell, except we understand that he wrett somewhat being in preason; but that was suppressed by the ennemyes. the cardinall delayed no tyme, but caused all bischoppis, yea, all the cleargy that had any preheminance, to be convocat to sanctandrose against the penult of februare, that consultatioun mycht be had in that questioun, which in his mynd was no less resolved then christis death was in the mynd of caiaphas; butt that the rest should bear the lyek burdein with him, he wold that thei should befoir the world subscrive whatsoever he did.[ ] in that day was wrought no less a wonder than was at the accusatioun and death of jesus christ, when that pilate and herode, who befoir war ennemyes, war maid freindis, by consenting of thame boith to christis condempnatioun, differris nothing, except that pilate and herode war brethrene under thare father the devill, in the estaite called temporall, and these two, of whome we ar to speak, war brethren (sonnes of the same father the devill) in the estaite ecclesiasticall. yf we enterlase merynes with earnest materis, pardon us, goode readar; for the fact is so notable that it deservith long memorye. [sn: the proude cardinall and the glorious foole dumbar.] the cardinall was knowin proude; and dumbare, archibischope of glasgw, was knowin a glorious foole; and yitt, becaus sometymes he was called the kingis maister,[ ] he was chancelour of scotland. the cardinall cumis evin thus same year, in the end of harvest befoir, to glasgw; upoun what purpose we omitt.[ ] [sn: a question worthy of such two prelattis.] but whill they remane togither, the one in the toune, the other in the castell,[ ] questioun ryses for bearing of thare croces. the cardinall alledgeid, by reassoun of his cardinallschip, and that he was _legatus natus_, and primat within scotland, in the kingdom of antichrist, that he should have the pre-eminence, and that his croce should not onlye go befoir, but that also it should onlye be borne, wharesoever he was. good gukstoun glaikstour, the foirsaid archibischop, lacked no reassonis, as he thowght, for mantenance of his glorie: he was ane archibischope in his awin dioscy, and in his awin cathedrall seat and church, and tharefor awght to give place to no man: the power of the cardinall was but begged from rome, and apperteined but to his awin persone, and nott to his bischoprik; for it mycht be, that his successour should nott be cardinall: bot his dignitie was annexed with his office, and did apperteane to all that ever should be bischoppis of glasgw. howsoever these dowbtis war resolved by the doctouris of divinitie of boith the prelattis; yitt the decisioun was as ye shall hear. cuming furth, (or going in, all is one,) att the qweir doore of glasgw kirk, begynnes stryving for state betuix the two croce beraris, so that from glowmyng thei come to schouldering; frome schouldering, thei go to buffettis, and from dry blawes, by neffis and neffelling; and then for cheriteis saik, thei crye, _dispersit, dedit pauperibus_, and assayis quhilk of the croces war fynast mettall, which staf was strongast, and which berar could best defend his maisteris pre-eminence; and that thare should be no superioritie in that behalf, to the ground gois boyth the croces. and then begane no litill fray, but yitt a meary game; for rockettis war rent, typpetis war torne, crounis war knapped,[ ] and syd gounis mycht have bene sein wantonly wag from the one wall to the other: many of thame lacked beardis, and that was the more pitie; and tharefore could not bukkill other by the byrse, as[ ] bold men wold haif doune. butt fy on the jackmen that did nott thare dewitie; for had the one parte of thame reacontered the other, then had all gone rycht. but the sanctuarye, we suppose, saved the lyves of many. how mearelye[ ] that ever this be writtin, it was bitter bowrding[ ] to the cardinall and his courte. it was more then irregularitie; yea, it mycht weall have bene judged lease majestie to the sone of perdition, the papes awin persone; and yitt the other in his foly, as proud as a packoke, wold lett the cardinall know that he was a bischop when the other was butt betoun, befoir he gat abirbrothok.[ ] this inemitie was judged mortall, and without all hope of reconsiliatioun. butt the blood of the innocent servand of god buryed in oblivioun all that braggine and boast. for the archibischope of glasgw was the first unto whome the cardinall wraitt, signifeing unto him what was done, and earnestly craving of him, that he wold assist with his presence and counsall, how that such are ennemye unto thare estaite mycht be suppressed. and thareto was nott the other slow, but keapt tyme appointed, satt nixt to the cardinall, voted and subscrivit first in the ranck, and lay ower the east blok-house[ ] with the said cardinall, till the martyre of god was consumed by fyre. for this we man note, that as all thei beastis consented in harte to the slawchter of that innocent, so did thei approve it with thare presence, having the hole ordinance of the castell of sanctandrose bent towardis the place of executioun, which was ney to the said castell, reddy to have schote yf any wold have maid defence, or reskew to goddis servand. the maner of his accusatioun, process, and ansueris followis, as we have receaved the same frome the book of the martyres,[ ] which, woord by woord, we have hear inserted, and that becaus the said book, for the great price thairof, is rare to be had. [the condemnation of m. george wischeart, gentleman, who suffered martyrdome for the fayth of christ jesus, at saint andrewes in scotland, anno , marche ; with the articles objected against him, and his answeres to the same.[ ] with moste tender affection and unfayned hart consider, (gentle reader,) the uncharitable maner of the accusation of maister george wischart, made by the bloudye enemies of christes fayth. note also the articles whereof he was accused, by order digested, and his meeke answeares, so farre as he had leave and leysure to speake. finally, ponder with no dissemblyng spirite the furious rage, and tragicall cruelnes of the malignant churche, in persecuting of this blessed man of god; and, of the contrarye, his humble, pacient, and most godly answeares, made to them sodaynely without al feare, not having respect to their glorious manasinges and boysterous threates, but charitably and without stop answearing: not movyng his countenance, nor changing his visage, as in his accusation hereafter folowyng manifestly shal appeare.] upone the last of februare, was send to the preason, quhare the servand of god lay, the deane of the toune, by the commandiment of the cardinall and his wicked counsall, and thai summoned the said maister george, that he should upoun the morne following appeir befoir the judge, then and thare to give accompt of his seditious and hereticall doctrine. to whome the said maister george ansuered, "what needith, (said he,) my lord cardinall to summound me to ansuere for my doctrine oppinlie befoir him, under whose power and dominioun i am thus straitlie bound in irnes. may not my lord compell me to ansuer to his extorte power? or belevith he that i am unprovided to rander accompt of my doctrine? to manifest your selves what men ye ar, it is weall done that ye keapt your old ceremonyes and constitutions maid by men." upoun the nixt morne, my lord cardinall caused his servandis to address thame selves in thare most warlyk array, with jack, knapscall, splent, speir, and axe, more semyng for the war, then for the preaching of the trew word of god. and when these armed campionis, marching in warlyk ordour, had conveyed the bischoppis unto the abbay church, incontinentlye thei sent for maistor george, who was conveyed unto the said churche by the capitane of the castell, and the nomber of ane hundreth men, addressed in maner foirsaid, lyik a lambe led thei him to sacrifice. as he entered in at the abbay church doore, there was a poore man lying vexed with great infirmities, asking of his almouse, to whome he flang his purse. and when he came befoir the cardinall, by and by the suppriour of the abbay, called dene johne wynreme,[ ] stoode up in the pulpete, and maid a sermon to all the congregatioun there then assembled, taking his mater out of the xiij chaptour of matthew; whose sermon was devided into four principall partes. the first was, a schorte and breaf declaratioun of the evangelist. the secound, of the interpretatioun of the good seid; and becaus he called the word of god the good seid, and heresye the evill seid, he declaired what heresye wes, and how it should be knowin. [sn: bona hÆreseos definitio.] he defyned it on this maner: "heresye is a fals opinioun, defended with pertinacie, cleirlye repugning to the word of god." the third parte of his sermoun was, the caus of heresye within that realme, and all other realmes. "the caus of heresie, (quod he,) is the ignorance of thame which have the cure of menis saules, to whome it necessarelie belongeth to have the trew understanding of the word of god, that thei may be able to wyn agane the fals doctouris of heresyes, with the sword of the spreat, which is the word of god; and not only to wyne agane, bot also to owircum:--as saith[ ] paule, 'a bischope most be faltles, as becumith the minister of god, not stubburne, not angrie, no drunkard, no feghtar, not gevin to filthy lucre; but harberous, one that loveth goodnes, sober mynded, rychteous, holy, temperat, and such as cleaveth unto the trew word of the doctrine, that he may be able to exhorte with holsome learning, and to improve that which thei say against him.'" the fourte parte of his sermon was, how heresyes should be knowin. "heresyes (quod he) be knawin on this maner: as the goldsmyth knowith the fyne gold frome the unperfite, by the towch stone, so lyikwyise may we know heresye by the undowbted towch stone, that is, the trew, syncere, and undefyled worde of god." at the last, he added, "that heretikis should he putt down in this present lyef: to the which propositioun the gospell appeired to repunge whilk he entreated of, 'lett thame boith grow unto the harvist:' the harvest is the end of the world; nevertheles, he affirmed, that thei should be putt down by the civile magistrat and law." and when he ended his sermone, incontinent thei caused maister george to ascend into the pulpet, there to heir his accusatioun and articles; for rycht against him stood up one of the fedd flok, a monstere,[ ] johnne lawder, ladin full of cursingis, writtin in paper, of the which he took out a roll boyth long and also full of cursingis,[ ] threatnynges, maledictionis, and wordis of devillesh spyte and malice, saying to the innocent maister george so many cruell and abhominable wordis, and hit him so spytfullie with the popis thunder, that the ignorant people dreded least the earth then wold have swallowed him up qwick. nochtwythstanding, he stood still with great patience hearing thare sayingis, not ones moving or changeing his countenance. when that this fedd sow had red throwghout all his lying minasingis, his face runnyng doune with sweat, and frothing at the mouth lyik ane bayre, he[ ] spate at maister george his face, saying, "what ansuerist thow to these sayingis, thow runnigat, tratour, theef, which we have dewlye proved by sufficient witnes against thee." maister george hearing this, satt doune upoun his kneis in the pulpete, making his prayer to god. when he had ended his prayer, sweitlye and christianelie he answered to thame all in this maner. maister george his oratioun. "many and horrible sayingis unto me, a christiane man, many wordis abhominable for to hear, ye haif spokin heir this day, which not only to teach, but also to think, i thowght it ever great abhominatioun. wharefore, i pray your discretionis quietlie to hear me, that ye may know what war my sayingis, and the maner of my doctrin. this my petitioun, my lordis, i desyre to be heard for three causes: the first is, becaus throw preaching of the word of god, his glorie is maid manifest: it is ressonabill tharefoir, for the avanceing of the glorie of god, that ye heare me teaching treulye the pure and syncere worde of god, without any dissimulatioun. the second reassone is, becaus that your helth springeth of the worde of god, for he workith all thing by his word: it war tharefoir ane unrychteous thing, yf ye should stope your earis from me teiching trewlye the word of god. the thrid reason is, becaus your doctrine speaketh furth many pestilentious,[ ] blasphemous, and abhominable wordis, not cuming by the inspiratioun of god, bot of the devill, on[ ] no less pearrell then my lyif: it is just tharefoir, and ressonable, your discreationis to know what my wordis and doctrine are, and what i have ever tawght in my tyme in this realme, that i perish not injustlye, to the great perrell of your soulles. wharfoir, boyth for the glorie and honour of god, your awin health, and savegard of my lyef, i beseik your discretionis to hear me, and in the meantyme i sall recyte my doctrin without any cullour. first, and cheiflie, since the tyme i came into this realme, i tawght nothing but the ten commandimentis of god, the twelf articles of the fayth, and the prayer of the lord, in the mother toung. moirovir, in dundy, i tawcht the epistill of sanct paule to the romanes; and i shall schaw your discretionis faythfullie what fassion and maner i used when i tawcht, without any humane dread, so that your discretionis give me your earis benevolent and attent." suddanlie then, with ane heycht voce,[ ] cryed the accusare, the fed sow, "thow heretike, runnigate, tratour, and theif, it was not lauchfull for thee to preach. thow hes tackin the power at thyne awin hand, without any autoritie of the church. we forthink that thow hes bene a preachar so long." then said all the hole congregatioun of the prelattis, with thare complices, these woordis, "yf we give him licience to preach, he is so craftie, and in holy scriptures so exercised, that he will perswaid the people to his opinioun, and rase them against us." maister george, seing thare maliciouse and wicked intent, appealed [from the lord cardinall to the lord governour, as[ ]] to ane indifferent and equall judge.[ ] to whome the accusare, johne lauder foirsaid, with hoggish voce answered, "is not my lord cardinall the secund persone within this realme, chancellar of scotland, archibischope of sanctandross, bischope of meropose, commendatour of abirbrothok, _legatus natus, legatus a latere_?" and so reciting as many titilles of his unworthy honouris[ ] as wold have lodin a schip, much sonare ane asse; "is not he, (quod johnne lauder,) ane equall judge apparantlye to thee? whome other desyrest thow to be thy judge?" to whome this humble man answered, saying, "i refuise not my lord cardinall, but i desyre the word of god to be my judge, and the temporall estate, with some of your lordschippis myne auditoures; becaus i am hear my lord governouris presonar." whareupone the pridefull and scornefull people that stood by, mocked him, saying, "suche man, such judge," speaking seditious and reprochfull wordis aganis the governour, and other the nobles, meanyng thame also to be heretykis. and incontinent, without all delay, thei wold have gevin sentence upoun maister george, and that without farther process, had not certane men thare counselled my lord cardinall to reid agane the articles, and to heir his ansueris thareupoun, that the people mycht nott complaine of his wrongfull condemnatioun. and schortlie for to declair, these war the articles following, with his ansueris, as far as thei wold give him leave to speak; for when he intended to mitigate thare lesingis, and schaw the maner of his doctrine, by and by thei stoped his mouth with ane other article. the first article. thow fals heretyk, runiagate, tratour, and theif, deceavar of the people, dispysest the holy churches, and in lyik case contemnest my lord governouris authoritie. and this we know for suyrtie, that when thow preached in dundye, and was charged be my lord governouris authoritie to desist, nevertheles thow woldest not obey, but persevered in the same. and tharefoir the bischope of brechin curssed thee,[ ] and delivered thee into the devillis handis, and gave thee in commandiment that thow souldest preach no more: yitt nochtwythstanding, thow didest continew obstinatlye. the ansuer. my lordis, i have red in the actes of the apostles, that it is not lauchfull, for the threattis and minacinges of men, to desist from the preaching of the evangell.[ ] tharefoir it is writtin, "we shall rather obey god then men." i have also red [in] the propheit malachie, "i shall curse your blissinges, and bliss your cursingis, sayeis the lord:" beleving firmelie, that he wold turne your cursingis into blissinges. the secund article. thow fals heretike did say, that a preast standing at the altare saying masse, was lyik a fox wagging his taill in julie. the ansuer. my lordis, i said not so. these war my sayinges: the moving of the body outward, without the inward moving of the harte, is nocht ellis bott the playing of ane ape, and nott the trew serving of god; for god is a secreit searchare of menis hartes: tharefoir, who will trewlye adorne and honour god, he must in spreit and veritie honour him. then the accusatour stopped his mouth with ane other article. the thrid article. thow fals heretik preachest aganis the sacramentis, saying, that thare ar not sevin sacramentis. the answer. my lordis, if it[ ] be your pleasuris, i tawght never of the nomber of the sacramentis, whither thei war sevin, or ane ellevin. so many as ar instituted by christ, and ar schawin to us by the evangell, i professe opinlie. except it be the word of god, i dar affirme nothing. the fourte article. thow fals heretike hes oppinlie tawght, that auriculare confessioun is not a blessed sacrament; and thow sayest, that we should only confess us to god, and to no preast. the answer. my lordis, i say, that auriculare confessioun, seing that it hath no promeis of the evangell,[ ] tharefoir it can not be a sacrament. of the confessioun to be maid to god, thare ar many testimonyes in scripture; as when david sayeth, "i thowght that i wold knowledge my iniquitie against my self unto the lord; and he forgave the trespasses[ ] of my synnes." heir, confessioun signifieth the secreat knowledge of our synnes befoir god: when i exhorted the people on this maner, i reproved no maner of confessioun. and farther, sanct james sayith, "knowledge your synnes[ ] one to ane uther, and so lett yow to have peace amonge your selfes." heir the apostle meaneth nothing of auriculare confessioun, but that we should acknawledge and confesse our selfis to be synneris befoir our brethrene, and befoir the world, and not to esteame our selfis as the gray freiris dois, thinking thame selfis allreddy purgeid.[ ] when that he had said these wordis, the horned bischopis and thare complices cryed, and girned[ ] with thare teith, saying, "see ye not what colouris he hath in his speich, that he may begile us, and seduce us to his opinioun." the fyft article. thow heretike didest say openlye, that it was necessarie to everie man to know and understand his baptisme, and that it was contrarie to generall counsallis, and the estaites of holy churche. the answer. my lordis, i beleve thare be none so unwyse hear, that will mak merchandise with ane frenche man, or any other unknawin stranger, except he know and understand first the conditioun or promeise maid by the french man or stranger. so lyikwyse i wold that we understood what thing we promeis in the name of the infante unto god in baptisme: for this caus, i beleve, ye have confirmatioun. then said maister bleiter,[ ] chaplen, that he had the devill within him, and the spreit of errour. then answered him a cheild,[ ] saying, "the devill cane not speik such wordis as yonder man doith speik." the saxt article. thow fals heretike, tratour, and theif, thow saidest that the sacrament of the altare was but a pece of bread, backin upon the asches, and no other thing elles; and all that is thare done, is but a superstitious ryte aganis the commandiment of god. the answer. oh lord god! so manifest lyes and blasphemyes the scripture doith not so teach yow. as concernyng the sacrament of the altare, (my lordis,) i never tawght any thing against the scripture, the which i shall, (by goddis grace,) mak manifest this day, i being ready tharefore to suffer death. the lauchfull use of the sacrament is most acceptable unto god: but the great abuse of it is verray detestable unto him. but what occasioun thei have to say such wordis of me, i sall schortlie schaw your lordschippes. i once chanced to meitt with a jew, when i was sailling upoun the watter of rhene.[ ] i did inqueir of him, what was the caus of his pertinacie, that he did not beleve that the trew messias was come, considering that thei had sene all the prophecyes, which war speking of him, to be fulfilled: moreover, the prophecyes tackin away, and the scepter of juda. by many other testimonyes of the scriptour, i vanquest him, and approved that messias was come, the which thei called jesus of nazareth. this jew answered agane unto me, "when messias cumith, he shall restore all thingis, and he sall not abrogate the law, which was gevin to our fatheris, as ye do. for why? we see the poore almost perish throw hunger amang yow, yitt yow ar nott moved with pitie towardis thame; butt among us jewes, thowght we be puir, thare ar no beggares found. secundarly, it is forbiddin by the law, to faine any kynd of imagrie of thingis in heavin above, or in the erth beneth, or in the scy under the erth; but one god only to honour; but your sanctuaries and churches ar full of idolles. thridly, a peice of braid backin upone the aschis, ye adore and wirschip, and say, that it is your god." i have rehersed hear but the sayingis of the jew,[ ] which i never affirmed to be trew. then the bischoppis schooke thare headis, and spitted into the earth: and what he ment in this mater farther, thei wold nott heare.[ ] the sevint article. thow fals heretike did say, that extreme unctioun was not a sacrament. the answer. my lord, forsuyth, i never tawght any thing of extreme unctioun in my doctrine, whetther it war a sacrament or no. the eyght article. thow fals heretike saidest that the holy watter is no sa good as wasche, and suche lyik. thow contempnest conjuring, and sayest, that holy churches cursing availled nott. the answere. my lordis, as for holy watter, what strenth it is of, i tawght never in my doctrine. conjuringes and exorzismes, yf thei war conformable to the word of god, i wold commend thame. but in so far as thei ar not conformeable to the commandiment and worde of god, i reprove thame. the nynt article. thow fals heretike and runnagate hast said, that everie layman is a preast; and such lyik thow sayest, that the pope hath no more power then any other man. the answere. my lordis, i tawght nothing but the worde of god. i remember that i have red in some places in sanct johnne and sanct petir, of the which one sayeth, "he hath made us kingis and preastis;" the other sayeth, "he hath made us the kinglye preasthode:" wharefoir, i have affirmed, any man being cuning and perfite in the word of god, and the trew faith of jesus christ, to have his power gevin him frome god, and not by the power or violence of men, but by the vertew of the word of god, the which word is called the power of god, as witnesseth sanct paule evidentlie ynewgh. and agane, i say, any unlearned man, and not exercised in the woord of god, nor yit constant in his faith, whatsoever estaite or order he be of; i say, he hath no power to bynd or loose, seing he wanteth the instrument by the which he bindeth or looseth, that is to say, the word of god. after that he had said these wordis, all the bischoppes lawghed, and mocked him. when that he beheld thare lawghing, "lawgh ye, (sayeth he,) my lordis? thowght that these my sayingis appeir scornefull and worthy of derisioun to your lordschippis, nevertheless thei ar verray weightye to me, and of a great valow; becaus that thei stand not only upon my lyif, bot also the honour and glorie of god." in the meantyme many godly men, beholding the wodness and great crueltie of the bischoppis, and the invincible patience of the said maister george, did greatlie mourne and lament. the tent article. thow fals heretike saidst, that a man hath no free will; but is lyik to the stoickis, which say, that it is nott in man's will to do any thing, but that all concupiscence and desyre cumith of god, of whatsoever kynd it be of. the answer. my lordis, i said nott so, trewlie: i say, that as many as beleve in christ firmelie, unto thame is gevin libertie, conformable to the saying of sanct johnne, "if the sone mak yow free, then shall ye verelie be free." of the contrarie, as many as beleve not in christ jesus, thei ar bound servandis of synne: "he that synneth is bound to synne." the ellevint article. thow fals heretike sayest, it is as lawfull to eitt flesche upoun fryday, as on sonday. the answere. pleasith it your lordschippis, i have redd in the epistles of sanct paule, "that who is cleane, unto thame all thingis is cleane." of the contrarie, "to the filthie men, all thingis ar uncleane." a faithfull man, cleane and holy, sanctifieth by the worde the creature of god; but the creature maketh no man acceptable unto god: so that a creature may not sanctifie any impure and unfaithfull man. but to the faythfull man, all thingis ar sanctifeid, by the prayer of the worde of god. after these sayingis of maister george, then said all the bischoppes, with thare complices, "quhat nedeth us any witnesse against him: hath he nott oppinlie hear spokin blasphemie?" the twelth article. thow fals heretike doest say, that we should nott pray to sanctes, butt to god onlye: say whetther thow hast said this or no: say schortlye. the answer. for the weaknes and the infirmitie of the heararis, (he said,) without doubt plainelie, that sanctis should not be honored nor incalled upone. my lordis, (said he,) thare ar two thingis worthy of note: the one is certane, and the other uncertane. it is found plainlie and certane in scriptures, that we should wirschipe and honour one god, according to the saying of the first commandiment, "thow sall onlie wirschip and honour thy lord god with all thy harte." but as for praying to and honoring of sanctes, thare is great dowbt amang many, whether thei hear or no invocatioun maid unto thame. tharefoir, i exhorted all men equallye in my doctrine, that thei should laif the unsure way, and follow the way which was taught us by our maister christ: he is onlye our mediatour, and maketh intercessioun for us to god his father: he is the doore, by which we must enter in: he that entereth not in by this doore, but clymeth ane other way, is a theif and a murtherare: he is the veritie and lyef: he that goeth out of this way, thare is no dowbt but he shall fall into the myre; yea, verrelye, he is fallin in to it all readdy. this is the fassioun of my doctrine, the which i have ever followed. verrelie that which i have heard and redd in the woorde of god, i taught opinelye and in no cornerris, and now ye shall witness the same, yf your lordschippis will hear me: except it stand by the worde of god, i dar nott be so bold to affirme any thing. these sayingis he rehersed diverse tymes. the xiii article. thow fals heretike has preached plainelie, saying, that thare is no purgatorie, and that it is a fayned thing, any man, after this lyfe, to be punished in purgatorie. the answere. my lordis, as i haif oftentymes said heirtofoir, without expresse witnes and testimonye of scripture, i dar affirme nothing. i have oft and divers tymes redd ower the bible, and yitt such a terme fand i never, nor yet any place of scripture applicable thairunto. tharefore, i was eschamed ever to teach of that thing, which i could nott fynd in scripture. then said he to maister johnne lauder, his accusare, "yf yow have any testimonye of the scripture, by the which ye may prove any such place, schew it now befoir this auditoure."[ ] but that dolt had not a worde to say for him self, but was as doume as a bitle[ ] in that mater. the xiiii article. thow fals heretyke hast taught plainelie against the vowis of monkis, freiris, nonnes, and preastis, saying, that whosoever was bound to such lyik vowis, thei vowed thame selves to the estate of damnatioun: moreover, that it was lauchfull for preastis to marye wyffis, and not to leve sole. the answer. of suth, my lordis, i have redd in the evangell, that thare ar three kynd of chast men: some ar gelded frome thare motheris wombe; some ar gelded by men; and some have gelded thame selfis for the kingdome of heavinis saik: verrelye, i say, these men ar blessed by the scripture of god. but as many as have nott the gyft of chastitie, nor yitt for the evangell have nott owercome the concupiscence of the flesche, and have vowed chastitie, ye have experience, althowght i suld hold my toung,[ ] to what inconvenience thei have vowed thame selfis. when he had said these wordis, thei were all doume,[ ] thinking better to have ten concubynes, then one maryed wyfe. the xv article. thow fals heretike and runnagate, sayest, that thow will not obey our generall nor principale[ ] councellis. the answer. my lordis, what your generall counsallis ar, i know not: i was never exercised in thame; butt to the pure woord of god i gave my laubouris. read hear your generall counsallis, or ellis give me a book, whairin thei ar conteaned, that i may reid thame: yf that thei aggree with the word of god, i will not disagree. [sn: this was freir scot.] then the ravineyng wolves turned into madnes,[ ] and said, "whareunto lett we him speak any further? reid furth the rest of the articles, and stay not upoun thame." amonges these cruell tygres, thare was one fals hypocryte, a seducer of the people, called johnne scot,[ ] standing behynd johnne lauderis back, hasting him to reid the rest of the articles, and nott to tary upone his wittie and godlye ansueris; "for we may not abyde thame, (quod he,) no more then the devill may abyde the sign of the croce, when it is named." the xvi article. thow heretike sayest, that it is vane to buyld to the honour of god costlie churches, seing that god remaneth not in churches made by menis handis, nor yit can god be in so litill space, as betuix the preastis handis. the answer. my lordis, salomon sayith, "yf that the heavin of heavinis can not comprehend thee, how much less this house that i have buylded." and job consenteth to the same sentence, saying, "seing that he is heychtar then the heavins, tharefor what can thow buyld unto him? he is deapar then the hell, then how sall thow know him? he is longar then the earth, and breadar then the sea." so that god can nott be comprehended into one space, becaus that he is infinite. these sayingis, nochtwithstanding, i said never that churches should be destroyed; bot of the contrarie, i affirmed ever, that churches should be susteaned and upholdin, that the people should be congregat in thame to hear the worde of god preached. moreover, wharesoever is the trew preaching of the word of god, and the lauchfull use of the sacramentes, undoubtedlye thare is god him self. so that both these sayingis ar trew together: god can nott be comprehended into any one place: and, "wharesoever thare ar two or three gathered in his name, thare is he present in the myddest of thame." then said he to his accusar, "yf thow thinkest any otherwyise then i say, schaw furth thy reasonis befoir this auditorie." then he, without all reassone, was dome,[ ] and could not answer a worde. the xvii article. thow fals heretike contemnest fasting, and sayest, thow shouldest not fast. the answer. my lordis, i find that fasting is commended in the scripture; tharefor i war a sclanderar of the gospell, yf i contemned fasting. and not so onlye, but i have learned by experience, that fasting is good for the health and conservatioun of the body. but god knowith onlye who fastith the trew fast. the xviii article. thow fals heretike hes preached opinlie, saying, that the soulles of men shall sleip to the latter day of judgement, and shall not obtene lyfe immortale untill that day. the answer. god, full of mercy and goodnes, forgeve thame that sayeth such thingis of me. i wote and know suirelie by the word of god, that he which hath begone to have the faith of jesus christ, and belevith fermelie in him, i know suirelie, that the sawll of that man shall never sleape, bot ever shall leve ane immortall lyef; the which lyef, frome day to day, is renewed in grace and augmented; nor yitt shall ever perish, or have ane end, but shall ever leve immortall with christ thare heid: to the which lyfe all that beleve in him shall come, and rest in eternall glorie. amen. * * * * * when that the bischoppis, with thare complices, had accused this innocent man, in maner and forme afoirsaid, incontinentlie thei condemned him to be brynt as are heretike, not having respect to his godly answeris and trew reassones which he alledged, nor yitt to thare awin consciences, thinking verelye, that thei should do to god good sacrifice, conformable to the sayingis of jesus christ in the gospell of sanct johnne, chapter : "thei shall excommunicat yow; yea, and the tyme shall come, that he which killeth yow shall think that he hath done to god good service." the prayer of maister george. "o immortall god! how long sall thow suffer the woodnes and great crudelitie of the ungodlie to exercise thare furie upoun thy servandes, which do further thy word in this world, seing thei desyre to do the contrarie, that is, to chok and destroy thy trew doctrin and veritie, by the which thow hast schewed thee unto the world, which was all drouned in blyndness and mysknowledge of thy name. o lord, we know suirlie, that thy trew servandes most neidis suffer, for thy names saik, persecutioun, afflictioun, and troubles in this present lyef, which is but a schaddow, as thow hast schewed to us, by thy propheittis and apostles. but yitt we desyre thee, (mercyfull father,) that thow conserve, defend, and help thy congregatioun, which thow hast chosen befoir the begynning of the world, and give thame thy grace to hear thy word, and to be thy trew servandis in this present lyef." then, by and by, thei caused the commoun people to remove,[ ] whose desyre was alwyise to hear that innocent speak. and the sonis of darknes pronunced thare sentence definitive, not having respect to the judgement of god. when all this was done and said, my lord cardinall caused his tormentares[ ] to pas agane with the meke lambe unto the castell, untill such tyme the fyre was maid reddy. when he was come into the castell, then thare came two gray feindis, freir scott and his mate, saying, "schir, ye must maik your confessioun unto us." he answered, and said, "i will mak no confessioun unto yow. go fetch me yonder man that preached this day, and i will maik my confessioun unto him." then thei sent for the suppriour of the abbay,[ ] who came to him with all dilegence; but what he said in this confessioun, i can not schaw.[ ] when the fyre was maid reddy, and the gallowse, at the west parte of the castell, neir to the priorie, my lord cardinall, dreading that maister george should have bene takin away by his freindis, tharefoir he commanded to bend all the ordinance of the castell richit against the place of executioun, and commanded all his gunnaris to be readdy, and stand besyde thare gunnes, unto such tyme as he war burned. all this being done, thei bound maister george's handis behind his back, and led him furth with thare soldeouris, from the castell, to the place of thare cruell and wicked executioun. as he came furth of the castell gate, thare mett him certane beggeris, asking of his almes, for goddis saik. to whome he answered, "i want my handis, wharewith i wont to geve yow almes. but the mercyfull lord, of his benignitie and aboundand grace, that fedith all men, votschafe to geve yow necessaries, boith unto your bodyes and soules." then afterward mett him two fals feindis, (i should say, freiris,) saying, "maister george, pray to our lady, that sche may be a mediatrix for yow to hir sone." to whome he answered meiklie, "cease: tempt me not, my brethrene." after this, he was led to the fyre, with a rope about his neck, and a chaine of irne about his myddill. when that he came to the fyre, he sat doun upoun his knees, and rose agane; and thrise he said these wordis, "o thow saviour of the warld, have mercy upon me: father of heavin, i commend my spreit into thy holy handis." when he had maid this prayer, he turned him to the people, and said these wordis: "i beseik yow, christiane brethrene and sisteris, that ye be nott offended att the word of god, for the afflictioun and tormentis which ye see already prepared for me. but i exhorte yow, that ye love the word of god, your salvatioun, and suffer patientlie, and with a confortable harte, for the wordis saik, which is your undoubted salvatioun and everlesting conforte. moirover, i pray yow, shew my brethrene and sisteris, which have heard me oft befoir, that thei cease nott nor leve of to learne the word of god, which i taught unto thame, after the grace gevin unto me, for no persequutionis nor trubles in this world, which lestith nott. and schaw unto thame, that my doctrine was no wyffes fables, after the constitutions maid by men; and yf i had taught menis doctrin, i had gottin grettar thankis by men. bot for the wordis saik, and trew evangell, which was gevin to me by the grace of god, i suffer this day by men, not sorowfullie, but with a glaid harte and mynd. for this caus i was sent, that i should suffer this fyre for christis saik. considder and behold my visage, ye sall not see me change my cullour. this gryme fyre i fear nott; and so i pray yow for to do, yf that any persecutioun come unto yow for the wordis saik; and nott to fear thame that slay the body, and afterwarte have no power to slay the saule. some have said of me, that i taught, that the saule of man should sleap untill the last day; but i know suirlie, and my faith is such, that my saule sail sowp[ ] with my saviour this nycht, or it be sex houris, for whome i suffer this." then he prayed for thame which accused him, saying, "i beseik the father of heavin to forgive thame that have of any ignorance, or ellis of any evill mynd, forged lyes upone me; i forgeve thame with all myne hearte: i beseik christ to forgeve thame that have condemned me to death this day ignorantlye." and last of all, he said to the people on this maner, "i beseik yow, brethrene and sisteris, to exhorte your prelattis to the learnyng of the word of god, that thei at the least may be eschamed to do evill, and learne to do good; and yf thei will not converte thame selves frome thare wicked errour, thare shall hastelie come upone thame the wrath of god,[ ] which thei sail not eschew." many faythfull wordis said he in the meane tyme, takin no head or cair of the cruell tormentis which war then prepared for him. then, last of all, the hangman, that was his tormentour, sat doune upoun his kneis, and said, "schir, i pray yow, forgive me, for i am nott guiltie of your death." to whome he answered, "come hither to me." when he was come to him, he kissed his cheik, and said, "lo! hear is a tokin that i forgeve thee: my harte, do thyn office." and then by and by, he was putt upoun the gibbet, and hanged, and there brynt to poulder.[ ] when that the people beheld the great tormenting of that innocent, thei mycht not withhold frome piteous morning and complaining of the innocent lambes slawchter.[ ] * * * * * [sn: the worldly strenth of the cardinall of scotland.] after the death of this blissed martyre of god, begane the people, in plaine speaking, to dampne and detest the crueltie that was used. yea, men of great byrth, estimatioun, and honour, at open tables avowed, that the blood of the said maister george should be revenged, or ellis thei should cost lyef for lyef. amonges whome johnne leslye,[ ] brother to the erle of rothess, was the cheaf; for he, in all cumpanyes, spared not to say, "that same whingar, (schawin furth his dager,) and that same hand, should be preastis to the cardinall." these bruytis came to the cardinalles earis; but he thought him self stout yneuch for all scotland; for in babylon, that is, in his new blok-house, he was suyre, as he thought; and upoun the feildis, he was able to matche all his ennemies. and to wryte the trewth, the most parte of the nobilitie of scotland had ether gevin unto him thare bandis of manrent, or ellis war in confideracye, and promessed amitie with him. he onlye feared thame in whose handis god did deliver him, and for thame had he laid his neattis so secreatlie, (as that he maid a full compt,) that thare feit could not eschap, as we shall after heare; and something of his formare practises we man reacompt. after the pasche he came to edinburgh, to hold the seinze,[ ] (as the papistes terme thare unhappy assemblie of baallis schaven sorte.) it was bruyted that something was purposed against him, at that tyme, by the erle of anguss and his freindis, whome he mortally hated, and whose destructioun he sought. but it failled, and so returned he to his strenth; yea, to his god and only conforte, asweill in heavin as in earth. and thare he remaned without all fear of death, promissing unto him self no less pleasur, nor did the riche man, of whome mentioun is maid by our maister in the evangell; for he did nott onlie rejois and say, "eitt and be glade, my saule, for thow hast great riches laid up in store for many dayis;" [sn: the braggyn of the cardinall a litle befoir his death.] bot also he said, "tush, a feg for the fead, and a buttoun for the braggyne of all the heretikis and thare assistance in scotland. is nott my lord governour myne? witness his eldast sone[ ] thare pledge at my table? have i not the quene at my awin devotioun? (he ment of the mother to mary that now myschevouslie regnes.) is not france my freind, and i freind to france? what danger should i fear?" and thus, in vanitie, the carnall cardinall delyted him self a lytill befoir his death. but yit he had devised to have cutt of such as he thought mycht cummer him; for he had appointed the haill gentilmen of fyff to have mett him at falkland, the mononday after that he was slane upoun the setterday. [sn: the treasoun of the cardinall.] his treasonable purpoise was nott understand but by his secreat counsall; and it was this: that normond leslie, schireff of fyff,[ ] and appearing air to his father, the erle of rothess; the said johnne leslye, father-brother to normound; the lardis of grange, eldar and youngar; schir james lermound of darsye,[ ] and provest of sanctandrose; and the faythfull lard of raith;[ ] should eyther have bene slane, or ellis tane, and after to have bene used at his pleasur. this interprise was disclosed after his slawchtter, partlye by letteris and memorialles found in his chalmer, butt playnlie affirmed by suche as war of the consall. many purposes war devised, how that wicked man mycht have bene tackin away. but all failled, till fryday, the xxviij of maij, anno , when the foirsaid normound came at nycht to sanctandross; williame kirkcaldye of grange youngar was in the toune befoir, awaitting upoun the purpoise; last came johnne leslye foirsaid, who was most suspected. what conclusion thei took that nycht, it was nott knawin, butt by the ischew which followed. [sn: how the cardinall was occupyed the nycht befoir that the mornyng he was slaine.] but airlie upoun the setterday, in the mornyng, the . of maij, war thei in syndree cumpanyes in the abbay kirk-yard, not far distant frome the castell. first, the yettis being oppin, and the draw-brig lettin doun, for receaving of lyme and stanes, and other thingis necessar for buylding, (for babylon was almost finished,)--first, we say, assayed williame kirkcaldy of grange youngar, and with him sex personis, and gottin enteress, held purpose with the portare, "yf my lord was walking?" who ansuered, "no." (and so it was in dead; for he had bene busy at his comptis with maistres marioun ogilbye[ ] that nycht, who was espyed to departe frome him by the previe posterne that morning; and tharefor qwyetness, after the reuillis of phisick, and a morne sleap[ ] was requisite for my lord.) whill the said williame and the portar talked, and his servandis maid thame to look the work and the workemen, approched normound leslye with his company; and becaus thei war in no great nomber, thei easilie gat entress. thei address thame to the myddest of the close, and immediatlie came johnne leslye, somewhat rudlye, and four personis with him. the portar, fearing, wold have drawin the brig; but the said johnne, being entered thairon, stayed, and lap in. and whill the portar maid him for defence, his head was brokin, the keyis tackin frome him, and he castin in the fowsea;[ ] and so the place was seased. the schowt arises:[ ] the workemen, to the nomber of mo then a hundreth, ran of the wallis, and war without hurte put furth at the wicked yett.[ ] the first thing that ever was done, williame kirkcaldye took the garde of the prevey posterne, fearing that the fox should have eschaped. then go the rest to the gentilmenis chalmeris, and without violence done to any man, thei put mo then fyftie personis to the yett: the nomber that interprised and did this, was but sextein personis. the cardinall, awalkned with the schouttis, asked from his windo, what ment that noyse? it was answered, that normound leslye had tackin his castell. which understand, he ran to the posterne; but perceaving the passage to be keapt without, he returned qwicklye to his chalmer, took his twahanded sword, and garte his chalmer child cast kystes, and other impedimentis to the doore. [sn: the cardinallis demand.] in this meane tyme came johnne leslye unto it, and biddis open. the cardinall askyne, "who calles?" he answeris, "my name is leslye." he re-demandis, "is that normond?" the other sayis, "nay; my name is johnne." "i will have normound," sayis the cardinall; "for he is my friend."[ ] "content your self with such as ar hear; for other shall ye gett nane." thare war with the said johnne, james melven,[ ] a man familiarlie acquented with maister george wisharte, and petir caremichaell,[ ] a stout gentilman. in this meanetyme, whill thei force at the doore, the cardinall hydis a box of gold under coallis that war laide in a secreat cornar. at lenth he asked, "will ye save my lyef?" the said johnne answered, "it may be that we will." "nay," sayis the cardinall, "swear unto me by goddis woundis, and i will open unto yow." then answered the said johnne, "it that was said, is unsaid;" and so cryed, "fyre, fyre;" (for the doore was verray stark;) and so was brought ane chymlay full of burnyng coallis. which perceaved, the cardinall or his chalmer child, (it is uncertane,) opened the doore, and the cardinall satt doune in a chyre, and cryed, [sn: the cardinallis confessioun.] "i am a preast; i am a preast: ye will nott slay me." the said johnne leslye, (according to his formar vowes,) strook him first anes or twyse, and so did the said petir. but james melven, (a man of nature most gentill and most modest,[ ]) perceaving thame boyth in cholere, withdrew thame, and said, "this worke and judgement of god, (althought it be secreit,) aught to be done with greattar gravitie;" and presenting unto him the point of the sweard, said, [sn: the godly fact and woordis of james melven.[ ]] "repent thee of thy formar wicked lyef, but especiallie of the schedding of the blood of that notable instrument of god, maister george wisharte, which albeit the flame of fyre consumed befoir men; yitt cryes it, a vengeance upoun thee, and we from god ar sent to revenge it: for heir, befoir my god, i protest, that nether the hetterent of thy persone, the luif of thy riches, nor the fear of any truble thow could have done to me in particulare, moved, nor movis me to stryk thee; but only becaus thow hast bein, and remanes ane obstinat ennemye against christ jesus and his holy evangell." and so he stroke him twyse or thrise trowght with a stog sweard; and so he fell, never word heard out of his mouth, but [sn: the cardinallis last woordis.] "i am a preast, i am a preast: fy, fy: all is gone."[ ] whill they war thus occupyed with the cardinall, the fray rises in the toune. the provest[ ] assembles the communitie, and cumis to the fowseis syd, crying, "what have ye done with my lord cardinall? whare is my lord cardinall? have ye slayne my lord cardinall? lett us see my lord cardinall?" thei that war within answered gentilye, "best it war unto yow to returne to your awin houssis; for the man ye call the cardinall has receaved his reward, and in his awin persone will truble the warld no more." but then more enraigedlye, thei cry, "we shall never departe till that we see him." and so was he brought to the east blok-house head, and schawen dead ower the wall to the faythless multitude, which wold not beleve bofoir it saw: how miserably lay david betoun, cairfull cardinall.[ ] and so thei departed, without _requiem æternam_, and _requiescant in pace_, song for his saule. now, becaus the wether was hote, (for it was in maij, as yo have heard,) and his funerallis could not suddandly be prepared, it was thowght best, to keap him frome styncking, to geve him great salt ynewcht, a cope of lead, and a nuk[ ] in the boddome of the sea-toore, (a place whare many of goddis childrene had bein empreasoncd befoir,) to await what exequeis his brethrene the bischoppes wold prepare for him.[ ] [sn: advertisment to the readar.] these thingis we wreat mearelie.[ ] but we wold, that the reader should observe goddis just judgementis, and how that he can deprehend the worldly wyse in thare awin wisdome, mak thare table to be a snare to trape thare awin feit, and thare awin presupposed strenth to be thare awin destructioun. these ar the workis of our god, wharby he wold admonish the tyrantis of this earth, that in the end he will be revenged of thare crueltye, what strenth so ever thei mack in the contrare. but such is the blyndnes of man, (as david speakis,) "that the posteritie does ever follow the footsteppes of thare wicked fatheris, and principallie in thare impietie;" for how litill differres the cruelty of that bastarde, that yitt is called bischope of sanctandrois,[ ] frome the crueltie of the formar, we will after heare. [sn: the bischope of sanctandrois was glaid, and yitt maid himself to be angree at the slauchter of the cardinall.] the death of this foirsaid tyrant was dolorous to the preastis, dolorous to the governour, most dolorous to the quene dowager;[ ] for in him perished faythfulnes to france, and the conforte to all gentilwemen, and especiallie to wantoun wedowis: his death most be revenged. to the courte agane repares the erle of anguss, and his brother schir george. laubour is maid for the abbacy of abirbrothok, and a grant was ones maid of the samyn, (in memorie whareof george dowglas,[ ] bastard sone to the said erle, is yet called postulat.) butt it was more proper, (think the hammyltonis,) for the governouris keching, nor for reward to the dowglasses. and yitt in esperance thairof, the saidis erle and george his brother war the first that voted, that the castell of sanctandrois should he beseiged. the bischope, to declair the zeall that he had to revenge the death of him that was his predecessour, (and yit for his wishe he wold nott haif had him leaving agane,) still blew the coallis. and first, he caused summound, then denunce accurssed, and then last, rebelles,[ ] not only the first interprisaris, but all such also as after did accumpany thame.[ ] and last of all, the seige was concluded, which begane in the end of august; (for the day thairof departed the soldeouris from edinburgh,) and continewed near to the end of januare. at what tyme, becaus thei had no other hope of wynnyng of it butt by hounger; and thairof also thei war dispared; for thei within had brockin throwght the east wall, and maid a plaine passage, by ane yron yett to the sea, which greatly releaved the besegeid, and abased the beseagearis; for then thei saw that thei could nott stope thame of victualles, onless that thei should be maisteris of the sea, and that thei clearlie understood thei could not be; for the engliss schippis had ones bein thare, and had browght williame kirkcaldy frome london, and with much difficultie, (becaus the said yett was nott then prepared,) and some loss of men, had randered him to the castell agane, and had tackin with thame to the courte of england, johnne lesly and maister henry balnavis, for perfyting of all contractes betuix thame and king harye, [sn: upon what conditionis king hary took the castell of sanctandrois in his protectioun.] who promissed to tak thame in his protectioun, upoun conditioun onlye, that thei should keape the governouris sone, my lord of errane,[ ] and stand freindis to the contract of mariage, whareof befoir we have made mentioun. these thingis clearly understand, (we say,) by the governour and his counsall, the preastis and the schavin sorte, thei conclude to make ane appointment, to the end, that under treuth thei mycht eyther gett the castell betrayed, or elles some principall men of the cumpany tackin at unwarres. in the which head was the abbot of dumfermling[ ] principall; and for that purpose had the lard of monquhany,[ ] (who was most familiar with those of the castell,) laubored at foote and hand, and proceaded so in his trafique, that from entress upoun daylyght at his pleasur, he gat licience to come upoun the nycht whensoever it pleased him. but god had nott appointed so many to be betrayed, albeit that he wold that thei should be punished, and that justlye, as heirafter we will hear. the headis of the coloured appointment war:-- . that thei should keap the castell of sanctandrois, ay and whill that the governour, and the authoritie of scotland, should gett unto thame ane sufficient absolutioun from the pape, (antichrist of rome,) for the slawchtter of the cardinall foirsaid. . that thei should deliver pledges for deliverie of that house, how sone the foirsaid absolutioun was delivered unto thame. . that thei, thare freindis, familiaris, servandes, and otheris to thame pertenyng, should never be persewed in the law, nor by the law,[ ] be the authoritie, for the slauchter foirsaid. but that thei should bruik[ ] commodities spirituall or temporall, whatsoever thei possessed befoir the said slauchter, evin as yf it had never bein committed. . that thei of the castell should keape the erle of errane,[ ] so long as thare pledges war keape.--and such lyik articles, liberall yneuch; for thei never mynded to keape word of thame, as the ischew did declaire. the appointment maid, all the godly war glaid; for some esperance[ ] thei had, that thairby goddis woord should somewhat bud, as in deid so it did. for johnne rowgh,[ ] (who sone after the cardinalles slawghter entered within the castell, and had continewed with thame the hole seige,) begane to preach in sanctandrois; and albeit he was nott the most learned, yit was his doctrin without corruptioun, and tharefoir weall lyiked of the people. at the pasche[ ] after, [sn: anno .] came to the castell of sanctandrois johnne knox, who, weareid of removing from place to place, be reassone of the persecutioun that came upoun him by this bischope of sanctandros, was determinat to have left scotland, and to have vesitid the schooles of germany, (of england then he had no pleasur, be reassone that the paipes name being suppressed, his lawes and corruptionis remaned in full vigour.) but becaus he had the cair of some gentilmenes childrene, whome certane yearis he had nurished in godlynes, thare fatheris solisted him to go to sanctandrois, that himself mycht have the benefite of the castell, and thare childrene the benefite of his doctrine; and so, (we say,) came he the tyme foirsaid to the said place, and, having in his cumpanye franciss dowglass of langnudrye, george his brother,[ ] and alexander cockburne, eldast sone then to the lard of ormestoun,[ ] begane to exercise thame after his accustomed maner. besydis thare grammare, and other humane authoris, he redd unto thame a catechisme, a compt whairof he caused thame geve publictlie in the parishe kirk of sanctandrois. he redd moreover unto thame the evangell of johnne, proceading whare he left at his departing from langnudrye, whare befoir his residence was; and that lecture he redd in the chapell, within the castell, at a certane hour. thei of the place, but especiallie maister henry balnaves and johne rowght, preachear, perceaving the manor of his doctrin, begane earnestlie to travaill with him, that he wold tack the preaching place upoun him. but he utterlie refuissed, alledgeing "that he wold nott ryne whare god had nott called him;" meanyng, that he wold do nothing without a lauchfull vocatioun. [sn: the first vocatioun by name of johne knox to preache.] whareupone thei prively amonges thame selfis advising, having with thame in counsall[ ] schir david lyndesay of the mont, thei concluded, that thei wold geve a charge to the said johnne, and that publictlie by the mouth of thare preachear. and so upoun a certane day, a sermone had of the electioun of ministeris, what power the congregatioun (how small that ever it was, passing the nomber of two or three) had above any man, in whome thei supposed and espyed the giftes of god to be, and how dangerous it was to refuise, and not to hear the voce of such as desyre to be instructed. these and other headis, (we say,) declaired, the said johnne rowght,[ ] prcachear, directed his wordis to the said johne knox, saying, "brother, ye shall nott be offended, albeit that i speak unto yow that which i have in charge, evin from all those that ar hear present, which is this: in the name of god, and of his sone jesus christ, and in the name of these that presentlie calles yow by my mouth, i charge yow, that ye refuise not this holy vocatioun, but that as ye tender the glorie of god, the encrease of christ his kingdome, the edificatioun of your brethrene, and the conforte of me, whome ye understand weill yneuch to be oppressed by the multitude of laubouris, that ye tack upoun yow the publict office and charge of preaching, evin as ye looke to avoid goddis heavye displeasur, and desyre that he shall multiplye his graces with yow." and in the end, he said to those that war present, "was not this your charge to me? and do ye not approve this vocatioun?" thei answered, "it was; and we approve it." whairat the said johnne[ ] abashed, byrst furth in moist abundand tearis, and withdrew him self to his chalmer. his conteanance and behaveour, fra that day till the day that he was compelled to present him self to the publict place of preaching, did sufficiently declair the greaf and truble of his hearte; for no man saw any sign of myrth of him, neyther yitt had he pleasur to accumpany any man, many dayis togetther. [sn: dean johne annan.] the necessitie that caused him to enter in the publict place, besydis the vocatioun foirsaid, was: dean[ ] johne annane,[ ] (a rottin papist,) had long trubled johnne rowght in his preaching: the said johnne knox had fortifeid the doctrine of the preachear by his pen, and had beattin the said dean johne from all defences, that he was compelled to fly to his last refuge, that is, to the authoritie of the church, "which authoritie, (said he,) damned all lutherianes and heretikes; and tharefoir he nedith no farther disputatioun." johne knox answered, "befoir we hold our selfis, or that ye can prove us sufficientlie convict, we must defyne the church, by the; rycht notes gevin to us in goddis scriptures of the trew church. we must decerne the immaculat spous of jesus christ, frome the mother of confusioun, spirituall babylon, least that imprudentlie we embrase a harlote instead of the cheast spous; yea, to speak it in plaine wordes, least that we submitt our selves to sathan, thinking that we submitt our selfis to jesus christ. for, as for your romane kirk, as it is now corrupted, and the authoritie thairof, whairin standis the hope of your victorie, i no more dowbt but that it is the synagog of sathan, and the head thairof, called the pape, to be that man of syne, of whome the apostle speakis, then that i doubt that jesus christ suffurred by the procurement of the visible kirk of hierusalem. [sn: the offer of johne knox first and last unto the papistis.] yea, i offer my selve, by woord or wryte, to prove the romane church this day farther degenerat from the puritie which was in the dayis of the apostles, then was the church of the jewes from the ordinance gevin by moses, when thei consented to the innocent death of jesus christ." these woordis war spokin in open audience, in the parishe kirk of sanctandrois, after that the said dean johne annane had spokin what it pleasith him, and had refuissed to dispute. the people hearing the offer, cryed with one consent, "we can not all read your writtingis, butt we may all hear your preaching: tharefore we requyre yow, in the name of god, that ye will lett us hear the probatioun of that which ye have affirmed; for yf it be trew, we have bene miserable deceaved." [sn: the first publict sermon[ ] of johne knox maid in the parish kirk of sanctandrois.] and so the nixt sounday was appointed to the said johne, to expresse his mynd in the publict preaching place. which day approching, the said johne took the text writtin in daniel, the sevint chapter, begynnyng thus: "and ane other king shall rise after thame, and he shall be unlyik unto the first, and he shall subdew three kinges, and shall speak wordis against the most heigh, and shall consome the sanctes of the most heigh, and think that he may change tymes and lawes, and thei shalbe gevin into his handis, untill a tyme, and tymes, and deviding of tymes." . in the begynnyng of his sermon, he schew the great luif of god towardis his church, whome it pleaseth to foirwarne of dangeris to come so many yearis befoir thei come to pas. . he breavelie[ ] entraited the estait of the israelitis, who thane war in bondage in babylon, for the most parte; and maid a schorte discourse of the foure impyres, the babyloniane, the persiane, that of the greakis, and the fourte of the romanes; in the destructioun whairof, rase up that last beast, which he affirmed to be the romane church; for to none other power that ever has yitt bein, do all the notes that god hes schawin to the propheit appertane, except to it allone; and unto it thei do so propirlie apperteane, that such as ar not more then blynd, may clearlie see thame. . but befoir he begane to opin the corruptionis of the papistrie, he defyned the trew kirk, schew the trew notes of it, whairupoun it was buylded, why it was the pillare of veritie, and why it could nott err, to witt, "becaus it heard the voce of the awin pastor, jesus christ, wold not hear a strangere, nether yitt wold be caryed about with everie kynd of doctrin." every ane of these headis sufficientlie declared, he entered to the contrar; and upoun the notes gevin in his text, he schew that the spreit of god in the new testament gave to this king other names,[ ] to witt, "the man of syn," "the antichrist," "the hoore of babylon." he schew, that this man of syn, or antichrist, was not to be restreaned to the person of any one man onlie, no more then by the fourte beast was to be understand the persone of any one emperour. but by sic meanes[ ] the spreat of god wold forewarne his chosyn of a body and a multitud, having a wicked head, which should not only be synefull him self, butt that also should be occasioun of syne to all that should be subject unto him, (as christ jesus is caus of justice to all the membres of his body;) and is called the antichrist, that is to say, one contrare to christ, becaus that he is contrare to him in lyeff, doctrin, lawes, and subjectes. and thane begane he to dissipher the lyves of diverse papes, and the lyves of all the scheavelynges for the most parte; thare doctrine and lawes he plainelie proved to repugne directlye to the doctrin and lawes of god the father, and of christ jesus his sone. [sn: _contra dei spiritum ad galatos ca. . versu , et , ._] this he proved by conferring the doctrin of justificatioun, expressed in the scriptures, which teach that man is "justifyed by faith only;" "that the blood of jesus christ purges us from all our synnes;" and the doctrin of the papistes, which attributeth justificatioun to the workis of the law, yea, to the workis of manis inventioun, as pilgremage, pardonis, and otheris sic baggage. that the papisticall lawes repugned to the lawes of the evangell, he proved by the lawis maid of observatioun of dayis, absteanyng from meattis, and frome mariage, which christ jesus maid free; and the forbidding whereof, sanct paule called "the doctrin of devillis." in handilling the notes of that beast gevin in the text, he willed men to considder yf these notes, [sn: the great woordis which the antichrist speakith.] "thare shall ane arise unlyk to the other, heaving a mouth speaking great thinges and blasphemous," could be applyed to any other, but to the pape and his kingdome; for "yf these, (said he,) be not great woordis and blasphemous, 'the successor of petir,' 'the vicare of christ,' 'the head of the kirk,' 'most holy,' 'most blessed,' 'that can not err;' that 'may maik rycht of wrong, and wrong of rycht;' that 'of nothing, may mak somewhat;' and that 'hath all veritie in the schryne of his breast;' yea, 'that hes power of all, and none power of him:' nay, 'not to say that he dois wrong, althought he draw ten thowsand millioun of saules with him self to hell.' yf these, (said he,) and many other, able to be schawin in his awin cannone law, be not great and blasphemous woordis, and such as never mortall man spak befoir, lett the world judge. and yitt, (said he,) is thare one most evident of all, to wit, johnne, in his revelatioun, sayis, 'that the merchandeise of that babyloniane harlot, amonges otheris thingis, shalbe the bodyes and saules of men.' now, lett the verray papistes thame selfis judge, yf ever any befoir thame took upoun thame power to relax the paines of thame that war in purgatorie, as thei affirme to the people that daily thei do, by the merites of thare messe, and of thare other trifilles." in the end he said, "yf any here, (and thare war present maister johne mayre,[ ] the universitie, the suppriour,[ ] and many channonis, with some freiris of boyth the ordouris,) that will say, that i have alledgeid scripture, doctour, or historye, otherwyise then it is writtin, lett thame come unto me with sufficient witness, and by conference i shall lett thame see, not onlye the originall whare my testimonyes ar writtin, but i shall prove, that the wrettaris ment as i have spokin." of this sermon, which was the first that ever johne knox maid in publict, was thare diverse bruyttis. some said, "otheris sned[ ] the branches of the papistrie, but he stryekis at the roote, to destroy the hole." otheris said, "yf the doctouris, and _magistri nostri_, defend nott now the pape and his authoritie, which in thare awin presence is so manifestlie impugned, the devill have my parte of him, and of his lawes boyth." otheris said, "maister george wishart spak never so plainelye, and yitt he was brunt: evin so will he be." in the end, otheris said, "the tyranny of the cardinall maid nott his cause the bettir, nether yitt the sufferring of goddis servand maid his cause the worse. and tharefoir we wold counsall yow and thame, to provide bettir defenses then fyre and sweard; for it may be that ellis ye wilbe disapointed: men now have other eyes then thei had than." this answer gave the lard of nydie,[ ] a man fervent and uprycht in religioun. the bastard bischope, who yit was not execrated, (consecrated[ ] thei call it,) wrait to the suppriour of sanctandrois, who (_sede vacante_) was vicare generall, "that he wondered that he sufferred sic hereticall and schismaticall doctrin to be tawght, and nott to oppone him self to the same." upoun this rebuck, was a conventioun of gray freiris and blak feindis appointed, with the said suppriour dean johnne wynrame, in sanct leonardis yardis, whareunto was first called johne rowght, and certane articles redd unto him; and thairafter was johnne knox called for. the caus of thare conventioun, and why that thei war called, was exponed; and the articles war read, which war these:-- i. no mortall man can be the head of the church. ii. the pape is ane antichrist, and so is no member of christis misticall body. iii. man may nether maik nor devise a religioun that is acceptable to god: butt man is bound to observe and keap the religioun that fra god is receaved, without chopping or changeing thairof. iv. the sacramentis of the new testament aucht to be ministred as thei war institut by christ jesus, and practised by his apostles: nothing awght to be added unto thame; nothing awght to be diminished from thame. v. the messe is abominable idolatrie, blasphemous to the death of christ, and a prophanatioun of the lordis suppar. vi. thare is no purgatorie, in the which the saules of men can eyther be pyned or purged after this lyef: butt heavin restis to the faythfull, and hell to the reprobat and unthankfull.[ ] vii. praying for the dead is vane, and to the dead is idolatrie. viii. thare is no bischoppes, except thei preach evin by thame selfis, without any substitut. ix. the teindis by goddis law do not apperteane of necessitie to the kirkmen. "the strangeness, (said the suppriour,) of these articles, which ar gaddered furth of your doctrin, have moved us to call for you, to hear your awin answeres." john knox said, "i, for my parte, praise my god that i see so honorable, and appearandlye so modest and qwyet are auditure. but becaus it is long since that i have heard, that ye ar one that is not ignorant of the treuth, i man crave of yow, in the name of god, yea, and i appell your conscience befoir that suppreme judge, that yf ye think any article thare expressed contrarious unto the treuth of god, that ye oppone your self plainelie unto it, and suffer nott the people to be tharewith deceaved. but, and yf in your conscience ye knaw the doctrin to be trew, then will i crave your patrocinye thareto; that, by your authoritie, the people may be moved the rather to beleve the trewth, whareof many dowbtes be reassone of our yowght."[ ] the suppriour answered, "i came nott hear as a judge, but only familiarlie to talk; and tharefore, i will nether allow nor condempne; butt yf ye list, i will reassone. why may nott the kirk, (said he,) for good causes, devise ceremonies to decore the sacramentis, and other goddis service?" johne knox. "becaus the kirk awght to do nothing, butt in fayth, and awght not to go befoir; but is bound to follow the voce of the trew pastor." the suppriour. "it is in fayth that the ceremonyes ar commanded, and thei have proper significationis to help our fayth; as the hardis in baptisme signifie the rowchnes of the law, and the oyle the softnes of goddis mercy; and lyikwyese, everie ane of the ceremonyes has a godly significatioun, and tharefoir thei boyth procead frome fayth, and ar done into faith." johne knox. "it is not yneucht that man invent a ceremonye, and then geve it a significatioun, according to his pleasur. for so mycht the ceremonyes of the gentiles, and this day the ceremonyes of mahomeit, be manteaned. but yf that any thing procead frome fayth, it man have the word of god for the assurance; for ye ar nott ignorant, 'that fayth cumis by hearing, and hearing by the word of god.' now, yf ye will prove that your ceremonyes procead from fayth, and do pleas god, ye man prove that god in expressed wordis hes commanded thame: or ellis shall ye never prove, that thei proceid from fayth, nor yitt that thei please god; but that thei ar synne, and do displease him, according to the wordis of the apostill, 'whatsoever is nott of fayth is synne.'" the suppriour. "will ye bynd us so strait, that we may do nothing without the expresse word of god? what! and i ask a drynk? think ye that i synne? and yitt i have nott goddis word for me." this answer gave he, as mycht appear, to schift ower the argument upon the freare, as that he did. johne knox. "i wald we should not jest in so grave a mater; nether wold i that ye should begyn to illud the trewth with sophistrie; and yf ye do, i will defend me the best that i can. and first, to your drinking, i say, that yf ye eyther eat or drynk without assurance of goddis worde, that in so doing ye displease god, and ye synne into your verray eatting and drynking. for sayis nott the apostle, speaking evin of meatt and drynk, 'that the creatures ar sanctifeid unto man, evin by the word and by prayer.' the word is this: 'all thingis ar clean to the clean,' &c. now, let me hear thus much of your ceremonyes, and i sall geve you the argument; bot i wonder that ye compare thingis prophane and holy thingis so indiscreatlie togetther. the questioun wes not, nor is nott of meat or drynk, whairinto the kingdome of god consistis nott; butt the questioun is of goddis trew wirschiping, without the quhilk we can have no societie with god. and, hear it is dowbted, yf we may tack the same fredome in the using of christis sacramentis, that we may do in eatting and drynking. one meat i may eatt, another i may refuise, and that without scrupill of conscience. i may change ane with ane other, evin as oft as i please. whither may we do the same in materis of religioun? may we cast away what we please, and reteane what we please? yf i be weill remembred, moses, in the name of god, sayis to the people of israell, 'all that the lord thy god commandis thee to do, that do thow to the lord thy god: add nothing to it; diminyshe nothing from it.' be this rewill, think i, that the kirk of christ will measur goddis religioun, and not by that which seames good in thare awin eis." the suppriour. "forgeve me: i spak it but in mowes, and i was dry. and now, father, (said he to the freir,) follow the argument. ye have heard what i have said, and what is answered unto me agane." arbuckill gray-freir.[ ] "i shall prove plainlye that ceremonyes ar ordeyned by god." johne knox. "such as god hes ordeyned we allow, and with reverence we use thame. but the questioun is of those that god hes nott ordeyned, such as, in baptisme, ar spattill, salt, candill, cuide, (except it be to keap the barne from cald,) hardis, oyle, and the rest of the papisticall inventionis." arbuckill. "i will evin prove these that ye dampne to be ordeyned of god." johne knox. "the pruif thareof i wald glaidly hear." arbuckill. "sayis not sanct paule, 'that another fundatioun then jesus christ may no man lay.' but upone this fundatioun some buyld, gold, silver, and precious stones; some hay, stuble, and wood. the gold, sylver, and precious stones, ar the ceremonyes of the church, which do abyd the fyre, and consumes nott away.' this place of scripture is most plaine," (sayis the foolish feind.) johne knox. "i prayse my god, throwght jesus christ, for i fynd his promeis suyre, trew, and stable. christ jesus biddis us 'nott fear, when we shalbe called befoir men, to geve confessioun of his trewth;' for he promisses, 'that it salbe gevin unto us in that hour, what we shall speak.' yf i had sowght the hole scripturis, i could not have produced a place more propir for my purpose, nor more potent to confound yow. now to your argument: the ceremonyes of the kirk, (say ye,) ar gold, silver, and pretious stonis, becaus thei ar able to abyd the fyre; but, i wold learne of yow, what fyre is it which your ceremonies does abyd? and in the meantyme, till that ye be advised to answer, i will schaw my mynd, and make ane argument against youris, upoun the same text. and first, i say, that i have heard this text adduced, for a pruf of purgatorie; but for defence of ceremonies, i never heard, nor yitt red it. but omitting whetther ye understand the mynd of the apostill or nott, i maik my argument, and say, that which may abyd the fyre, may abyd the word of god: but your ceremonies may not abyd the word of god: _ergo_, thei may not abyd the fyre; and yf they may not abyd the fyre, then ar they not gold, silver, nor precious stones. now, yf ye find any ambiguitie in this terme, fyre, which i interpret to be the woord, fynd ye me ane other fyre, by the which thingis buylded upoun christ jesus should be tryed then god and his woord, which both in the scriptures ar called fyre, and i shall correct my argument." arbuckill. "i stand nott thairupoun; but i deny your minor, to wit, that our ceremonies may not abyd the tryall of goddis woord." johne knox. [sn: _optima collatio._] "i prove, that abydis not the tryall of goddis word, which goddis word condempnes but goddis word condempnes your ceremonies: therefor thei do not abyd the tryall thairof. but as the theaf abydis the tryall of the inqueist, and tharby is condempned to be hanged, evin so may your ceremonies abyd the tryall of goddis word; but not ellis. and now, in few wordis to maik plane that wharein ye may seme to dowbt, to wit, that goddis woord damnes your ceremonies, it is evident; for the plaine and strate commandiment of god is, 'not that thing which appearis good in thy eis, shalt thow do to the lord thy god, but what the lord thy god hes commanded thee, that do thow: add nothing to it; diminish nothing from it'. [sn: deute. .] now onless that ye be able to prove that god hes commanded your ceremonies, this his formar commandiment will dampne boyth yow and thame." * * * * * the freir, somewhat abased[ ] what first to answer, whill he wanderis about in the myst, he falles in a fowll myre; for alledgeing that we may nott be so bound to the woord, he affirmed, "that the apostles had not receaved the holy ghost, when thei did wryte thare epistles; but after, thei receaved him, and then thei did ordeyn the ceremonies." (few wold have thought, that so learned a man wold have gevin so foolishe ane answer; and yitt it is evin as trew as he bayre a gray cowll.) johne knox, hearing the answer, starte, and said, "yf that be trew, i have long bein in ane errour, and i think i shall dye thairintill." the suppriour said to him, "father, what say ye? god forbide that ye affirme that; for then fayre weall the ground of our fayth." the freir astonyed, made the best schift that he could to correct his fall;[ ] but it wold not be. johne knox brought him oft agane to the ground of the argument: but he wold never answer directlie, but ever fled to the authoritie of the kyrk. whairto the said johnne answered ofter then ones, "that the spous of christ had nether power nor authoritie against the word of god." then said the freir, "yf so be, ye will leave us na kirk." "indead, (said the other,) in david i read that thare is a church of the malignantis, for he sayis, _odi ecclesiam malignantium_. that church ye may have, without the word, and doing many thingis directly feghtting against the word of god. of that church yf ye wilbe, i can not impead[ ] yow. bott as for me, i wilbe of none other church, except of that which hath christ jesus to be pastor, which hearis his voce, and will nott hear a strangeir." [sn: freir arbuckillis pruf for purgatorye.] in this disputatioun many other thingis war merealy skooft ower;[ ] for the freir, after his fall, could speak nothing to a purpose. for purgatorie he had no better pruf, but the authoritie of vergile in his sext Æneidos; and the panes thareof to him was ane evill wyff. how johne knox answered that, and many other thingis, him self did witness in a treatise that he wrate in the gallayis, conteanyng the some of his doctrin, and confessioun of his fayth,[ ] and send it to his familiaris in scotland; with his exhortatioun, that thei should continew in the trewth, which thei had professed, nochtwithstanding any worldly adversitie that mycht ensew thareof. [sn: the caus of the inserting of this disputatioun.] thus much of that disputatioun have we inserted hear, to the intent that men may see, how that sathan ever travellis to obscure the lyght; and yitt how god by his power, in his weak veschellis, confoundis his craft, and discloses his darkness. [sn: the practise of papistis that thare wickidnes should not be disclosed.] after this, the papistes nor frearis had not great heart of farther disputatioun or reassonyng; butt invented ane other schift, which appeared to proceid frome godlynes; and it was this. everie learned man in the abbay, and in the universitie, should preach in the parishe kirk his sonday about. the suppriour began, followed the officiall called spittall,[ ] (sermones penned to offend no man,) followed all the rest in thare ranckes. and so johne knox smelled out the craft, and in his sermonis, which he maid upone the weak dayis, he prayed to god, that thei should be als busye in preaching when thare should be more myster of it, then thare was then. [sn: the protestatioun of johne knox.] "allwyise, (said he,) i praise god, that christ jesus is preached, and nothing is said publictlie against the doctrin ye have heard. yf in my absence thei shall speak any thing, which in my presence thei do nott, i protest that ye suspend your judgement till that it please god ye hear me agane." [sn: maister james balfour anes joyned with the church, and did professe all doctrine tawght be johne knox.] god so assisted his weak soldeour, and so blessed his laubouris, that not onlye all those of the castell, but also a great nomber of the toune, openlie professed, by participatioun of the lordis table, in the same puritie that now it is ministrat in the churches of scotland, wyth that same doctrin, that he had taught unto thame. amongis whome was he that now eyther rewillis, or ellis misrewillis scotland, to wit, schir james balfour, (sometymes called maister james,[ ]) the cheaf and principall protestant that then was to be found in this realme. this we wryte, becaus we have heard that the said maister james alledgeis, that he was never of this our religioun; but that he was brought up in martine's[ ] opinioun of the sacrament, and tharefoir he can nott communicat with us. but his awin conscience, and two hundreth witness besydes, know that he lyes; and that he was ane of the cheaff, (yf he had not bein after coppis,) that wold have gevin his lyef, yf men mycht credite his wordis, for defence of the doctrin that the said johnne knox tawght. but albeit, that those that never war of us, (as none of monquhanye's sones have schawin thame selfis to be,) departe from us, it is no great wonder; for it is propir and naturall that the children follow the father; and lett the godly levar of that rase and progeny be schawen;[ ] for yf in thame be eather fear of god, or luf of vertew, farther then the present commoditie persuades thame, men of judgement ar deceaved. butt to returne to our historye. [sn: the rage of the marked beastis at the preaching of the treuth.] the preastis and bischoppis, enraged at these proceadingis, that war in sanctandrois, ran now upoun the governour, now upoun the quene, now upoun the hole counsall, and thare mycht have been hard complainetes and cryes, "what ar we doing? shall ye suffer this hole realme to be infected with pernicious doctrin? fy upoun yow, and fy upoun us." the quein and monsieur dosell,[ ] (who then was _a secretis mulierum_ in the courte,) conforted thame, and willed thame to be quyet, for thei should see remeady or it was long. [sn: the first cuming of the galayes anno .] and so was provin in dead; for upoun the penult day of junij, appeared in the sight of the castell of sanctandrois twenty ane frenche galayis, with a skeife of an army,[ ] the lyik whairof was never sein in that fyrth befoir. [sn: the treasonable fact of the governour and the quein dowager.] this treassonable meane had the governour, the bischope, the quein, and monsieur dosell, under the appointment drawin. bot to excuse thare treasone, viij dayis befoir, thei had presented ane absolutioun unto thame, as sent from rome, conteanyng, after the aggravatioun of the cryme, this clause, _remittimus irremissibile_, that is, we remitt the cryme that can nott be remitted. which considdered by the worst of the company[ ] that was in the castell, answer was gevin, [sn: the answer gevin to the governour when the castell of sanctandrois was required to be delivered.] "that the governour and counsall of the realme had promissed unto thame a sufficient and assured absolutioun, which that appeared nott to be; and tharefor could thei nott deliver the house, nether thought thei that any reassonable man wald requyre thame so to do, considering that promeis was nott keapt unto thame." the nixt day, after that the galayis arryved, thei summoned the hous, which being denyed, (becaus thei knew thame no magistrattis in scotland,) thei prepared for seage. and, first thei begane to assalt by sey, and schote two dayis. bott thairof thei nether gat advantage nor honour; for thei dang the sclattis of houssis, but neyther slew man, nor did harme to any wall. [sn: the gunnarris goddess.] but the castell handilled thame so, that sancta barbara, (the gunnaris goddess,) helped thame nothing; for thei lost many of thare rowaris, men chained in the galayis, and some soldeouris, bayth by sea and land. and farther, a galay that approched neyar then the rest, was so doung with the cannoun and other ordinance, that she was stopped under watter, and so almost drowned, and so had bein, war nott that the rest gave hir succourse in tyme, and drew hir first to the west sandis, without the schot of the castell, and thaireftir to dondye, whare thei remaned, till that the governour, who then was at the seige of langhope,[ ] came unto thame, with the rest of the french factioun. the seige by land was confirmed about the castell of sanctandrois, the xviiij day of julij. the trenchess war cast; ordinance was planted upoun the abbay kirk, and upoun sanct salvatouris colledge, and yitt was the steaple thairof brunt; which so noyed the castell, that neyther could thei keape thare blok-houssis, the sea-tour head, nor the west wall; for in all these places war men slaine by great ordinance. yea, thei monted the ordinance so height upoun the abbay kirk, that thei mycht discover the ground of the close[ ] in diverse places. moreover, within the castell was the pest,[ ] (and diverse thairin dyed,) which more effrayed some that was thairin, then did the externall force without. [sn: the sentence of johne knox to the castell of sanctandrois befoir it was won.] but johne knox was of ane other judgement, for he ever said, "that thare corrupt lyef could nott eschape punishment of god;" and that was his continuall advertisment, fra the tyme that he was called to preache. when thei triumphed of thare victorie, (the first twenty dayis thei had many prosperous chances,) he lamented, and ever said, "thei saw not what he saw." when thei bragged of the force and thicknes of thare walles, he said, "thei should be butt eggeschellis."[ ] when thei vanted, "england will reskew us," he said, "ye shall not see thame; but ye shalbe delivered in your ennemyis handis, and shalbe caryed to ane strange countrey." [sn: prior of cappua] upone the penult of julij,[ ] at nycht, was the ordinance planted for the battery; xiiij cannons, whareof four was cannons royall, called double cannons, besydis other peices. the battery begane att iiij houris in the mornyng, and befoir ten houris of the day, the haill sowth qwarter, betuix the foir tour and the east blok-house, was maid saltable. the lawer transe was condempned, diverse slane into it, and the east blok-house was schote of fra the rest of the place, betuix ten houris and ellevin. thare fell a schour of rane, that continewed neir ane hour, the lyek wharof had seldom bein sein: it was so vehement, that no man myeht abyd without a house: the cannounes war left allone. some within the castell war of judgement, that men should have ished, and putt all in the handis of god. but becaus that williame kirkcaldy was commonyng[ ] with the priour of cappua,[ ] who had the commissioun of that jorney from the king of france, nothing was interprysed. and so was appointment maid, and the castell randered upone setterday, the last of julij. [sn: the castell of sanctandrois refuised in thare greatest extremitie to appoint with the governour.] the headis of the appointment war; "that the lyefis of all within the castell should be saved, alsweall engliss as scottish; that thei should be saiflie transported to france; and in case that, upoun conditionis that by the king of france should be offerred unto thame, thei could nott be content to remane in service and fredome thare, thei should, upoun the king of france expenssis, be saiflie conveyed to what contrey thei wold requyre, other then scotland." wyth the governour thei wold have nothing ado, neyther yitt with any scottishe man; for thei had all tratorouslye betrayed them, "which," said the lard of grange eldar, (a man sempill, and of most stout corage,) "i am assured god shall revenge it, or it be long." [sn: maister james balfour was fleyed yneuch.] the galayes, weall furnessed with the spoyle of the castell foirsaid, after certane dayis, returned to france; and eschaping a great danger, (for upon the back of the sandis thei all schopped,) thei arryved first at fekcam,[ ] and thareafter past up the watter of sequane,[ ] and lay befoir rowane; whare the principall gentilmen, who looked for fredome, war dispersed and putt in syndrie preasonis. the rest war left in the galayis, and thare miserable entreated, amonges whome the foirsaid maister james balfour was, with his two brethrein, david and gilbert, men without god. which we wryt, becaus that we hear, that the said maister james, principall mysgydar now of scotland, denyes that he had any thing to do with the castell of sanctandrois, or yet that ever he was in the galayis. then was the joy of the papistis boyth of scotland and france evin in full perfectioun; for this was thare song of triumphe:-- preastis content yow now; preastis content yow now; for normond and his cumpany hes filled the galayis fow. the pope wrote his letters to the king of france, and so did he to the governour of scotland, thanking thame hartlie for the tacking panes to revenge the death of his kynd creature, the cardinall of scotland; desyring thame to continew in thare begune severitie, that such thingis after should not be attemptat. and so war all these that war deprehended in the castell dampned to perpetuall preasone; and so judged the ungodly, that after that in scotland should christ jesus never have triumphed. one thing we can not pass by: from scotland was send a famous clerk, (lawghe not, readar,) maister johnne hammyltoun of mylburne,[ ] with credite to the king of france, and unto the cardinall of lorane, (and yitt he nether had french nor latine, and some say his scottishe toung was nott verray good.) the sume of all his negotiatioun was, that those of the castell should be scharplie handilled. in which suyt, he was heard with favouris, and was dispatched fra the courte of france with letteris, and great credyte, which that famouse clark foryett by the way; for passing up to the craig[ ] of dumbertane, befoir his letteris war delyvered, he brack his nek; and so god took away a proude ignorant ennemye. butt now to our historie. [sn: _nulla fides regni sociis, etc._] these thingis against promeissis, (but princes have no fidelitie farther then for thare awin advantage,) done at rowane,[ ] the galayes departed to nantes, in bartainzie, whare upone the watter of lore[ ] thei lay the hole wyntar. in scotland, that somer, was nothing but myrth; for all yead[ ] with the preastis eavin at thare awin pleasur. the castell of sanctandrois was rased to the ground,[ ] the block houssis thairof cast doune, and the walles round about demolissed. whitther this was to fulfill thare law, which commandis places whare cartlinalles ar slane so to be used; or ellis for fear that england should have takin it, as after thei did broughty crage, we remitt to the judgement of such as was of counsall. [sn: pynckey cleucht.] this same year, in the begynnyng of september, entered in scotland ane army of ten thowsand men from england, by land, some schippes with ordinance came by sea. the governour and the bischope, heirof advertissed, gathered togetther the forces of scotland, and assembled at edinburgh. the protectour of england,[ ] with the erle of warwik, and thare army, remaned at preastoun, and about preastoun pannes:[ ] for thei had certane offerres to have bein proponed unto the nobilitie of scotland, concernyng the promeissis befoir maid by thame, unto the which king hary befoir his death gentillye required thame to stand fast; and yf thei so wald do, of him nor of his realme thei should have no truble, but the helpe and the conforte that he could maike thame in all thingis lauchfull. and heirupoun was thare a letter direct to the governour and counsall;[ ] which cuming to the handis of the bischope of sanctandros, he thought it could nott be for his advantage that it should be divulgat, and thairfoir by his craft it was suppressed. [sn: the securitie of the scotismen at pynkey cleucht.] upone the fryday, the [ixth[ ]] of september, the engliss army marched towardis leyth, and the scottishe army marched from edinburgh to enresk.[ ] the hole scottishe army was nott assembled, and yitt the skirmissing begane; for nothing was concluded but victorie without strok. the protectour, the erle of warwik, the lord gray, and all the engliss capitanes, war played[ ] at the dyce. no men war stowttar then the preastis and channounes, with thare schaven crownes and blak jackis. [sn: frydayis chase.] the erle of warwik and the lord gray, who had the cheaf charge of the horsmen, perecaving the host to be molested with the scotishe preakaris,[ ] and knowing that the multitud war nether under ordour nor obedience, (for thei war devided fra the great army,) sent furth certane troupes horsmen, and some of thare borderaris, eyther to feght thame, or ellis to putt thame out of thare syght, so that thei mycht not annoy the host. the skarmuch grewe hote, and at lenth the scottishmen gave back, and fled without gane turne. the chase continewed far, bayth towardis the east and towardis the weast; in the which many war slayne, and he that now is lord home was tane, which was the occasioun, that the castell of home[ ] was after randered to the engliss men. [sn: braggis.] the lose of these men neyther moved the governour, nor yitt the bischope, his bastard brother: thei should revenge the mater weall yneuch upoun the morne; for thei war handis ynew, (no word of god;) the engliss heretyckis had no faces; thei wald not abyd. [sn: the repulse of the horsmen of england.] upone the setterday, the armyis of boyth sydis past to array. the engliss army tackis the mydd parte of fawsyd hill,[ ] having thare ordinance planted befoir thame, and having thare schippes and two galayis brought as neir the land as watter wald serve. the scottishe army stood first in ane ressonable strenth and good ordour, having betuix thame and the engliss army the watter of esk, (otherwyese called mussilburgh watter;) butt at length a charge was gevin in the governouris behalf, with sound of trumpett, that all men should merche fordwarte, and go ower the watter.[ ] some say, that this was procured by the abbote of dumfermeling,[ ] and maister hew rig,[ ] for preservatioun of carbarry. men of judgement lyeked not the jorney; for thei thought it no wisdome to leave thare strenth. but commandiment upoun commandiment, and charge upoun charge, was gevin, which urged thame so, that unwillinglie thei obeyed. the erle of anguss,[ ] being in the vantgard, had in his cumpany the gentilmen of fyfe, of anguss, mernes, and the westland, with many otheris that of luif resorted to him, and especiallie those that war professouris of the evangell; for thei supposed, that england wold not have maid gret persuyt of him. he passed first throwght the watter, and arrayed his host direct befoir the ennemies. followed the erle of huntlie, with his northland men. last came the duke, having in his cumpany the erle of ergyle,[ ] with his awin freindis, and the body of the realme. the englesmen perceaving the danger, and how that the scottishe men intended to have tane the tope of the hill, maid hast to prevent the perrell. the lord gray was commanded to geve the charge with his men of armes, which he did, albeit the hasard[ ] was verray unliklye; for the erle of anguss host[ ] stood evin as a wall, and receaved the first assaultairis upon the pointis of thare spearis, (which war longar then those of the englismen,) so ruidlye, that fyftie horse and men of the first rank lay dead at ones, without any hurte done to the scottishe army, except that the spearis of the formar two rankis war brokin. which discomfitur receaved, the rest of the hors men fled; yea, some passed beyound fawsyd hill. the lord gray him self was hurte in the mouth, and plainelie denyed to charge agane; for he said, "it was alyik as to ryne against a wall." the galayis and the schippes, and so did the ordinance planted upoun the mydd hill, schote terriblye. but the ordinance of the galayis schooting longis the scotish army effrayed thame wonderuslye.[ ] and whill that everie man laubouris to draw from the north, whense the danger appeired, thei begyne to reyll, and with that war the engliss foot men marching fordwarte, albeit that some of thare horsmen war upoun the flight. the erle of anguss army stood still, looking that eyther huntlie[ ] or the duke should have recountered the nixt battell; but thei had decreid that the favoraris of england, and the heretickis, (as the preastis called thame,) and the englismen should parte it betuix thame for the day. the fear ryses, and at ane instant thei, which befoir war victouris, and war nott yitt assaulted with any force, (except with ordinance, as said is,) cast frome thame thare spearis and fled. so that goddis power was so evidentlie sein, that in one moment, yea, at one instant tyme, boyth the armyes war fleing. the schout came from the hill frome those that hoped no victorie upone the engliss parte; the schout ryses, (we say,) "thei flye, thei flie;" but at the first it could nott be beleved, till at the last it was clearlie sein, that all had gevin backis, and then begane a cruell slawchtter, (which was the greattar be reassone of the lait displeasur of the men of armes.) the chase and slaughter lasted till ney edinburght, upoun the one parte, and be-west dalkeith, upon the other.[ ] the number of the slane upoun the scotishe syd war judged ney ten thowsand men. the erle of huntley was tackin, and caryed to london; but he releved him self, being suyrtie for many ransonis, honestlie or unhonestlie[ ] we know nott; but, as the bruyt past, he used pollicye with england. in that same battell was slane the maister of erskin,[ ] deirlie beloved of the quein, for whome she maid great lamentatioun, and bayre his death many dayis in mind. when the certaintie of the disconfiture came, sche was in edinburgh abyding upon tydinges; but with expeditioun she posted that same nycht to stryveling, with monsieur dosell, who was als fleyed as "a fox when his hole is smoked." and thus did god tak the secound revenge upoun the perjured governour, with such as assisted him to defend ane injust qwerrell; albeit that many innocentis fell amonges the myddest of the wicked. the engliss army came to leyth, and thare tackin ordour with thare preasonaris and spoile, thei returned with this victorie, (which thei looked nott for,) to england. that wynter following was great heirschippes maid upoun all the bordouris of scotland. browghty crag[ ] was tane by the englismen, beseiged by the governour, but still keapt; and at it was slane gawen, the best of the hammyltonis,[ ] and the ordinance left. whareupon, the englismen encouraged, begane to fortifie upoun the hill above broughty hous, which was called the forte of broughty, and was verray noysome to dondy, which it brunt and laid waist; and so did it the moist parte of anguss, which was not assured, and under freindschipe with thame. that lentran[ ] following, [sn: .] was haddingtoun fortified by the engliss men. the maist parte of lothiane, from edinburgh east, was eyther assured or laid wast. thus did god plague in everie qwarter; butt men war blynd, and wald nott, nor could nott, considder the cause. the lardes ormestoun[ ] and brunestoun[ ] war banissed, and after forfalted,[ ] and so war all those of the castell of sanctandrois. the suyre knowledge of the trubles of scotland cuming to france, thare was prepared a navy and army. the navy was such as never was sein to come fra france, for the supporte of scotland; for besydis the galayis, being twenty twa then in nomber, thei had threscoir great schippis, besydis vittallaris. howsone soever thei took the playne seas, the read lyoun of scotland was displayed, and thei holdin as rebelles unto france, (such pollicye is no falsett in princes,) for good peax stoode betuix france and england, and the king of france approved nothing that thei did. the cheaf men, to whome the conducting of that army was committed, war monsieur dandelot, monsieur de termes, and peir de strois. in thare jorney thei maid some hereschepe upoun the coast of england; but it was nott great. [sn: .] they arryved in scotland in maij, anno .[ ] the galayis did visitt the forte of browghty, but did no more at that tyme. preparationis war maid for the seig of hadyngtoun; but it was ane other thing that thei ment, as the ischew declared. [sn: the parliament att hadingtoun.] the hole body of the realme assembled, the forme of a parliament was sett to be holdin thare, to witt, in the abbay of haddingtoun.[ ] the principall head was the mariage of the princess (by thame befoir contracted to king edwarte,) to the king of france, and of hir present deliverie, be reassone of the danger that she stood into, by the invasioun of our old ennemies of england. some war corrupted with buddis, some deceaved by flattering promessis, and some for fear war compelled to consent; for the french soldartis war the officiaris of armes in that parliament. the lard of balclewcht,[ ] a bloody man, with many goddis woundis, sware, "thei that wold nott consent should do war." the governour gat the duchry of chattellerawlt,[ ] with the ordour of the cokill, and a full discharge of all intromissionis with king james the fyft his treasure and substance whatsoever, with possessioun of the castell of dumbertane, till that ischew should be sein of the quenis body. [sn: the dukis fact, and what appearis to follow thareof.] with these, and other conditionis, stood he content to sell his soverane furth of his awin handis, which in the end wilbe his destructioun; god thairby punishing his formar wickedness, (yf speady reapentance prevent not goddis judgementis, which we hartly wishe.) huntley, ergyle, and anguss, was lykwiese maid knyghtis of the cockill;[ ] and for that and other good deid receaved, thei sold also thare parte. [sn: experience hes tawght, and farther will declair.] schortlie, none was found to resist that injust demand; and so was she sold to go to france, to the end that in hir youth she should drynk of that lycour, that should remane with hir all hir lyfetyme, for a plague to this realme, and for hir finall destructioun. and tharefoir, albeit that now a fyre cumes out frome hir, that consumes many, lett no man wonder, she is goddis hand, in his displeasur punishing our formare ingratitude. [sn: _perfice quod cepisti me deus propter tui nominis gloriam. junij ._[ ]] lett men patientlie abyd, and turne unto thare god, and then shall he eyther destroy that hoore in hir hurdome, or ellis he shall putt it in the harttis of a multitude, to tak the same vengeance upoun hir, that hes bein tane of jesabell and athalia, yea, and of otheris, of whome prophane historyis mak mentioun; for greattar abominatioun was never in the nature of any woman, then is in hir, whareof we have but sein only the buddis; butt we will after taist of the rype frutt of hir impietie, yf god cutt not hir dayis schorte. [sn: writtin the ---- of aprile, anno .] but to returne to our historie. [sn: the seige of hadingtoun.] this conclusioun tackin, that our quein, (butt farther delay,) should be delivered to france, the seig continewis, great schooting, but no assaulting; and yitt thei had fair occasioun offered unto thame. for the englismen approching to the toune, for the conforting of the beseiged, with powder, vittalles, and men, lost ane army of sax thowsand men. [sn: tuesdayis chase.] schir robert bowes[ ] so was tane, and the most parte of the borderaris war eyther tackin or slane. and so mycht the toune justlye have dispared of any farther succourse to have bein loked for; butt yit it held good; for the stout corage and prudent governement of schir james wolfurd,[ ] generall, who did so encorage the hole capitanes and soldartis, that thei determined to dye upon thare wallis. but from the tyme that the frenche men had gottin the bone for the which the dog barked, the persuyt of the toune was slow. the seig was rased, and she was convoyed by the weast seas to france,[ ] with four galayis, and some schippis; and so the cardinall of lorane gatt hir in his keping, a morsall, assuyre yow,[ ] meit for his awin mouth. we omitt many thingis that, occurred in this tyme; as the sitting doun of the schip called the cardinall, (the farest schip in france,) betuix sanct colmes inch and crawmond,[ ] without any occasioun, except negligence, for the day was fair, and the wetther calme; but god wold schaw, that the countrie of scotland can bear no cardinallis. in this tyme also, was thare a combate betuix the galayis and the engliss schippis; thei schote fracklie a whill. ane engliss schip took fyre, or ellis the galayis had come schorte hame, and, as it was, thei fled without mercy, till that thei war abuf sanct colmes inch.[ ] the capitanes left the galayes, and took a forte maid upoun the inch for thare defence. but the engliss schippis maid no persuyt, (except that thei brunt the cardinall whare that she lay,) and so the galayis and the galay-men did boyth eschape. ordoure was lackin, that nixt september, that some galayes should remane in scotland, and that the rest should returne to france; as that thei did all, except one that was tackin by ane engliss schip, (by one engliss schip onlye, we say,) as that thei war passing betuix dover and calice. that wynter remaned monsieur de arfe[ ] in scotland, with the bandis of french men. thei fortified enresk, to stay that the engliss should not invaid edinburgh and leyth. some skarmessis[ ] thare war betuix the one and the other, butt no notable thing done, except that the french had almost tackin hadingtoun; the occasioun whareof was this. the french men thinking thame selfis moir then maisteris in all partes of scotland, and in edinburgh principallie, thought that thei could do no wrong to no scottishe man; for a certane french man delivred a coulvering to george tod, scottisman, to be stocked, who bringing it throwght the streat, ane other french man clamed it, and wold have reft it from the said george; but he resisted, alledgeing that the frenche man did wronge. and so begane parties to assemble, asweall to the scottishman, as to the french; so that two of the french men war stryckin doune, and the rest chassed from the croce to nudrye's wynd head.[ ] the provost being upoun the streat, apprehended two of the french, and was carying thame to the tolbuyth; but from monsieur de essie's loodgeing and close isched furth french men, to the nomber of threscoir persones, with drawin sweardis, and resisted the said provest. but yitt the toune assembling repulsed thame, till that thei came to the nether bow;[ ] and thare monsieur la chapell, with the hole bandis of french men enarmed, rencontered the said provest, and[ ] repulsed him, (for the toune war without weapones, for the maist parte,) and so maid invasioun upoun all that thei mett. [sn: the slaughter of the capitane of the castell of edinburgh] and first, in the throt of the bow, war slane david kirk and david barbour, (being at the provostes back,) and thareafter war slane the said provest himself, being lard of stannoss, and capitane of the castell,[ ] james hammyltoun his sone,[ ] williame chapman, a godly man, maister williame stewarte,[ ] williame purvess, and a woman, named elizabeth stewarte; and thareafter taryed within the toune, by force, from fyve houris, till after sevin at nycht, and then reteared to the cannogat, as to thare receptackle and refuge. [sn: hadingtoun almost surprised by the french.] the hole toun, yea, the governour and nobilitie commoved at the unwoorthynes of this bold attemptat, craved justice upoun the malefactouris, or ellis thei wold tack justice of the hole. the quein, crafty yneweht, monsieur de essye, and monsieur dosel, laubored for pacificatioun, and did promeise, "that onless the french men, by thame selfis allone, should do such ane act, as mycht recompense the wrong that thei had done, that then thei should not refuise, but that justice should be executed to the rigour." these fayre woordis pleased our foollis, and so war the frenche bandis the nixt nycht direct to hadingtoun,[ ] to the which thei approched a lytill after mydnycht, so secreatlye, that thei war never espyed, till that the formar war within the basse courte, and the haill cumpany in the church yard, nott two payre of boot lenthis distant frome the toune. the soldartis, englishmen, war all a sleape, exceapt the watch, the which was sklender, and yitt the schowt arises, "bowes and billes: bowes and billes;" which is significatioun of extreame defence, to avoid the present danger, in all tounes of warr. the effrayed aryses: weapones that first come to hand serve for the nead. one[ ] amongis many cumes to the east porte, whare lay two great pieces of ordinance, and whare the ennemies war knowin to be, and cryed to his fellowes that war at the yett macking defence, "ware befoir;" and so fyres a great peace, and thareafter another, which god so conducted, that after thame was no farther persuyt maid; for the bullates redounded fra the wall of the freir kirk, to the wall of sanct katherine's chapell, which stood direct foiranent it, and fra the wall of the said chapell to the said kirk wall agane, so oft, that thare fell mo then ane hundreth of the french, att those two schottis only. thei schott oft, but the french reteired with diligence, and returned to edinburgh, without harme done, except the destructioun of some drynkin bear, which lay in the saidis chappell and kirk. and this was satisfactioun more then yneuht,[ ] for the slawchter of the said capitane and provest, and for the slawghter of such as war slane with him. this was the begynnyng of the french fruittis. [sn: the recovery of the castell of home.] this wynter, in the tyme of christen masse, was the castell of home recovered from the engliss, by the negligence of the capitane named dudley.[ ] [sn: the death of the lard of rayth.] this wynter also did the lard of rayth most innocentlie suffer, and after was forfalted, becaus that he wrait a bill to his sone, johne melvin,[ ] who then was in england, which was alleged to have bein found in the house of ormestoun; but many suspected the pauckis[ ] and craft of ringzen cockburne, (now called capitane ringzeane,[ ]) to whome the said letter was delivered. butt howsoever it was, thei cruell beastis, the bischope of sanctandrois and abbot of dumfermling, ceassed nott, till that the head of the said noble man was strickin from him; especiallie becaus that he was knawin to be ane that unfeanedlie favored the treuth of goddis word, and was a great freind to those that war in the castell of sanctandrois; of whose deliverance, and of goddis wonderouse wyrking with thame during the tyme of thare bondage, we man now speak, least that in suppressing of so notable a wark of god, we mycht justlie be accused of ingratitude. [sn: the entreatment of these of the castell of sanctandrois during thare captivity.] and, first, the principalles being putt in severall houssis, as befoir we have said, great laubouris was maid to mack thame have a good opinioun of the messe. but cheaflie travail was takin upoun normond leslye,[ ] the lard of grange, and the lard of petmyllie,[ ] who war in the castell of scherisburgh,[ ] that thei wold come to the messe with the capitane: who answered, "that the capitane had commandiment to keape thare bodyes, but he had no power to command thare conscience." the capitane replyed, "that he had power to command and to compell thame to go whare he yead." thei answered, "that to go to any lauchfull place with him, thei wold nott refuise; but to do any thing that was against thare conscience thei wold not, nether for him, nor yitt for the king." the capitane said, "will ye nott go to the messe?" thai answered, "no; and yf ye wald compell us, yitt will we displease yow farther; for we will so use our selfis thare, that all those that ar present shall knaw that we dispite it." these same answeris, (and somewhat scharpar,) williame kirkcaldye, petir carmichaell, and such as war with thame in mont sanct michaell, gave to thare capitane; for thei said, "thei wold nott only hear messe everie day, but that thei wold help to say it, provided that thei mycht stick the preastis, or ellis thei wold nott." maister henry balnaves,[ ] who was in the castell of rowane, was most sharplie assaulted of all; for becaus he was judged learned, (as he was, and is, in deid,) tharefoir learned men war appointed to trawall with him, with whome he had many conflictes; but god so ever assisted him, that thei departed confounded, and he, by the power of goddis spreit, remaned constant in the trewth and profession of the same, without any wavering or declynyng to idolatrie. in the preasone he wrait a most profitable treatise of justificatioun,[ ] and of the workis and conversatioun of a justifeid man: but how it is suppressed, we know nott. these that war in the galayis war threatned with tormentis, yf thei wold not geve reverence to the messe, (for at certane tymes the messe was said in the galay, or ellis heard upoun the schoar, in[ ] presence of the forsaris;) butt thei could never mack the poorest of that cumpanye to geve reverence to that idole. yea, when upoun the setterday at nycht, thei song thare _salve regina_, the hole scottishmen putt on thare cappes, thare hoodis, or such thing as thei had to cover thare headis; and when that otheris war compelled to kyss a paynted brod, (which thei called "nostre dame,") thei war not preassed after ones; for this was the chance. [sn: meary fact.] sone after the arrivall at nances,[ ] thare great _salve_ was song, and a glorious painted lady was brought in to be kissed, and, amongis otheris, was presented to one of the scotishmen then cheyned. he gentillye said, "truble me nott; such ane idole[ ] is accurssed; and tharefoir i will not tuich it." the patron and the arguesyn, with two officeris, having the cheaf charge of all such materis, said, "thow salt handill it;" and so thei violentlie thrust it to his face, and putt it betuix his handis; who seing the extremitie, tooke the idole, and advisitlie looking about, he caist it in the rivare, and said, "lett our lady now saif hir self: sche is lycht aneuch; lett hir learne to swyme." after that was no scotish man urged with that idolatrie. these ar thingis that appear to be of no great importance; and yit yf we do rychtlie considder, thei expresse the same obedience that god requyred of his people israell, when that thei should be caryed to babylon; for he gave charge unto thame, that when thei should see the babylonians wirschipe thare goddis of gold, silver, mettall, and woid, that thei should say, [sn: jere. .] "the goddis that have nott maid the heavin and the earth shall perish frome the heavin, and out of the earth." that confessioun gave that hole nomber, during the tyme of thare bondage: in the which, wald god thei had continewed in thare fredome; for then had nott maister james balfour bein officiall,[ ] neyther yitt borne a cope[ ] for pleasur of the bischope. but to proceid. the said maister james and johne knox being intill one galay, and being wounderous familiare with him, wold often tymes ask his judgement, "yf he thought that ever thei should be delivered?" whose answer was ever, fra the day that thei entered in the galayis, "that god wald deliver thame from that bondage, to his glorie, evin in this lyef." [sn: _quÆvis multa sint justorum mala._] and lyeing betuix dundye and sanctandrois, the secound tyme[ ] that the galayis returned to scotland, the said johne being so extreamlye seak, that few hoped his lyeff, the said maister james willed him to look to the land, and asked yf he knew it? who answered, "yes: i knaw it weall; for i see the stepill of that place, whare god first in publict opened my mouth to his glorie, and i am fullie persuaded, how weak that ever i now appear, that i shall nott departe this lyif, till that my toung shall glorifie his godlie name in the same place." this reported the said maister james in presence of many famous witness, many zearis befoir that ever the said johne sett his futt in scotland, this last tyme, to preache. [sn: johne knox his ansuer and counsall to the captives.] williame kirkcaldy, then of grange, youngar, petir carmichaell, robert and williame leslyes, who war altogetther in mont sanct michaell,[ ] wrait to the said johnne, asking his counsall, "yf thei mycht with saif conscience break thare preasone?" whose answer was, "that yf without the blood of any sched of spilt by thame for thare deliverance, thei mycht sett thame selfis at fredome, that thei mycht saiflye tak it: but to sched any manes bloode for thare fredome, thairto wold he never consent." adding farther, "that he was assured that god wold deliver thame, and the rest of that cumpany, evin in the eis[ ] of the world; but not by such meanes as we had looked for, that was by the force of freindis, or by thare other labouris." by such meanes he affirmed thei should nott be delivered, but that god wold so wirk in the deliverance of thame, that the praise thairof should redound to his glorie onlye. he willed, tharefoir, everie one to tack the occasioun that god offerred unto thame, providing that thei committed nothing against goddis expresse commandiment, for deliverance of thame selves. he was the more earnest in geving his counsall, becaus that the old larde of grange,[ ] and otheris, repugned to thare purpoise, fearing least that the eschaping of the otheris should be ane occasioun of thare warse entreatment. whareunto the said johnne answered, "that such fear proceided nott from goddis spreat, but only from ane blynd luif of the self; and tharefor, that no good purpoise was to be stayed for thingis that war in the handis and power of god." and added, "that in one instant god delivered all that cumpany in the handis of unfaythfull men, but so wald he nott releave thame. but some wald he deliver by one meanes, and at one tyme, and otheris must abyd for a season upon his good pleasur." this counsall in the end embrased, upoun the kinges evin,[ ] when french men commonlie use to drynk liberallie, the foirsaid four personis, having the helpe and conducting of a boy of the house, band all those that war in the castell, putt thame in syndrie houssis, locked the doores upon thame, took the keyis from the capitane, and departed, without harme done to the persone of any, or without tueching of any thing that apparteaned to the king, the capitane, or the house. [sn: the eschaping of williame kirkcaldye and his fellowis furth of mont sanct michaell.] great search was maid throweh the hole countrey for thame.[ ] but it was goddis gud pleasur so to conduct thame, that thei eschaped the handis of the faithless, albeit it was with long travaill, and grait pane and povertie susteaned; for the french boy left thame, and took with him the small poise that thei had; and so nether having money, nor knawledge of the countrey, and farther fearing that the boy should discrive thame, (as that in verray dead he did,) thei took purpose[ ] to devid thame selfis, to change thare garmentis, and to go in sindrie partes. the two brethrein, williame and robert leslyes,[ ] (who now ar become, the said robert especiall, ennemies to christ jesus and to all vertew,) came to rowane. williame kirkcaldy and petir carmichael, in beggaris garment, came to conqwet,[ ] and by the space of twelf or threttein weakis, thei travalled as poore marinaris, frome porte to porte, till at lenth thei gat a french schipe, and landed in the weast, and from thense came to england, whare thei mett befoir thame the said johne knox, who that same wynter was delivered, and alexander clerk[ ] in his cumpany. the said johne[ ] was first appointed preachar to berwik, then to newcastell; last he was called to london, and to the sowth partes of england, whare he remaned to the death of king edwart the sext.[ ] when he left england, then he passed to geneva, and thare remaned at his privat study, till that he was called by the engliss[ ] congregatioun, that then was assembled at franctfoorde, to be preachear to thame: which vocatioun he obeyed, (albeit unwillinglye,) at the commandiment of that notable servand of god, johne calvyne. at franctfoord he remaned, till that some of the learned, (whose names we suppress,) moir gevin to unprofitable ceremonies,[ ] then to synceritie of religioun, began to qwerrall with the said johnne; and becaus thei dispared to prevaill befoir the magistrat thare, for the establissing of thare corruptionis, thei accused him of treasone committed against the emperour, and against thare soverane quein marie, that in his admonitioun to england,[ ] he called the one lytill inferiour to nero, and the other more cruell then jezabell. the magistrat perceaving thare malice, and fearing that the said johnne should fall in the handis of his accusatouris, by one meane or by other, gave advertisment secreatlie to him to departe thare citie; for thei could not saif him yf he ware required by the emperour, or by the quein of england in the emperouris name; and so the said johne returned to geneva, from thense to deape, and thairafter to scotland, as we shall after hear. the tyme and that wynter that the galayes remaned in scotland, war delivered maister james balfour, his twa brethrein, david and gilbert, johne auchinlek, johnne sibbald, johne gray, william gutthery, and stevin bell.[ ] the gentilmen that remaned in preasonis war, by the procurement of the quein dowager, to the cardinall of lorane and to the king of france, sett at libertie in the moneth of julij, anno ; who schorte tharefter war called to scotland,[ ] thare peax proclamed, and thei thame selfis restored to thare landis, in dyspite of thare ennemies. and that was done in hatterent of the duck, becaus that then france begane to thrist to have the regiment of scotland in thare awin handis. how soever it was, god maid the heartis of thare ennemyes to sett thame at libertie and fredome. thare rested a nomber of commoun servandis yitt in the galayes, who war all delivered upoun the contract of peace that was maid betuix france and england, after the tackin of bullon; and so was the haill cumpany sett at libertie, none perishing,[ ] (no nott befoir the world,) except james melvin, who departed from the miserie of this lyif in the castell of byrst in bartainzea.[ ] [sn: the slaughter of that villane davy.] this we wryte to lett the posteriteis to come understand, how potentlye god wrought in preserving and delivering of these that had butt a small knowledge of his trewth, and for the luif of the same hasarded all; that yf that eyther we now in our dayis, having grettar lycht, or our posteriteis that shall follow us, shall see ane fearfull dispersioun of such as oppone thame selfis to impietie, or tack upoun thame to punishe the same, otherwiese then lawis of men will permite: yf, (we say,) we or thei[ ] shall see such left of men, yea, as it war, dispyssed and punished of god; yit lett us nott dampne the personis that punish vice, (and that for just caussis;) nor yitt dispare, butt that the same god that dejectes, (for causes unknawin to us,) will raise up agane the personis dejected, to his glorye and thare conforte. and to lett the world understand in plane termes what we meane, that great abusar of this commoun wealth, that pultron and vyle knave davie, was justlie punished, the nynt of merch, in the year of god[ ] j^m. v^c. threscore fyve, for abusing of the commoun wealth, and for his other villany,[ ] which we list nott to express, by the counsall and handis of james dowglas, erle of morton, patrik lord lyndesay, and the lord ruthven, with otheris assistaris in thare cumpany, who all, for thare just act, and most worthy of all praise, ar now unworthely left of thare brethrein, and suffer the bitterness of banishement and exyle. but this is our hope in the mercyes of our god, that this same blynd generatioun, whither it will or nott, shalbe compelled to see that he will have respect to thame that ar injustlye persewed; that he will apardoun thare formar offenses; that he will restore thame to the libertie of thare countrey and common wealth agane; and that he will punish, (in dispyte of man,) the head and the taill, that now trubles the just, and manteanes impietie. [sn: the reularis of mary, anno , and thaire predictioun.] the head is knawin: the taill hes two branches; the temporall lordis that manteane hir abhominationis, and hir flattering counsallouris, blasphemous balfour, now called clerk of register,[ ] sinclar deane of restalrige and bischope of brechin, blynd of ane eie in the body, but of boithe in his saule,[ ] upoun whome god schortlie after took vengeance; [john[ ]] leslye, preastis gett,[ ] abbot of londorse and bischope of ross, symon preastoun of craigmyllare,[ ] a right epicureane, whose end wilbe, or it be long, according to thare warkis. butt now to returne to our historye. * * * * * haddingtoun being keapt,[ ] and much hearschipe done about in the countrey, (for what the engliss men destroyed nott, that was consumed by the french,) god begynnis to feght for schotland; for in the toun he send a peast so contagious, that with great difficultie could thei have thare dead buryed. thei war oft refresched with new men, but all was in vane. hunger and pest within, and the persuyt of the ennemy with a campe volant lay about thame, and intercepted all victuallis, (except when thei war brought by ane convoy from berwik,) so constrayned thame that the counsall of england was compelled in spring tyme to call thare forses from that place; and so spuilzeing and burnyng some parte of the toune, thei left it to be occupyed to such as first should tack possessioun,--and those war the frenchmen, with a meane nomber of the ancient inhabitantis. and so did god performe the woordis and threatnyng of his servand, maister george wisharte, who said, "that for thare contempt of goddis messinger, thei should be visited with sweard and fyre, with pestilence, strangearis, and famyne;" which all thei fand in such perfectioun, that to this day yitt, that toune hes neyther recovered the formar beautie, nor yit men of such wisdome and habilitie, as then did inhabite it. hearafter was peace contracted betuix france and england and scotland;[ ] yea, a severall peace was contracted betuix scotland and flanderis, togetther with all the easterlingis; so that scotland had peace with the world.[ ] butt yitt wold thare bischopcs maik warr against god; for how sone that ever thei gat any qwyetness, thei apprehended adame wallace,[ ] alias fean, a sempill man, without great learnyng, but ane that was zelous in godlynes and of ane uprycht lyeff. he, with his wyif beatrice levingstoun, frequented the cumpany of the lady ormestoun,[ ] for instructioun of hir childrein, during the truble of hir husband, who then was banissed. this bastard, called bischope of sanctandrois, took the said adame furth of the place of wyntoun,[ ] (men supposed that thei thowght to have apprehended the lard,) and caryed him to edinburgh; whare, after certane dayis, he was presented to judgement in the kirk of the blak thevis alias freiris,[ ] befoir the duik, the erle of huntley, and diverse otheris besydis, the bischoppes and thare rable. thei begyn to accuse him, (maister johnne lauder[ ] was accusatour,) [sn: the accusatioun of adame wallace and his answeris.] "that he took upoun him to preach." he answered, "that he never judged himself worthy of sa excellent a vocatioun, and tharefoir he never took upoun him to preach; but he wold not deny, butt sometymes at the table, and sometymes in other prevey places, he wald reid, and had red the scriptures, and had gevin such exhortatioun as god pleaseth to geve to him, to such as pleased to hear him." [sn: the papisticall maner of accusatioun.] "knave, (quod ane,) what have ye to do to medle with the scriptures?" "i think, (said he,) it is the dewitie of everie christiane to seak the will of his god, and the assurance of his salvatioun, whare it is to be found, and that is within his old and new testament." "what then, (said ane other,) shall we leave to the bischoppis and kirkmen to do, yf everie man shalbe a babler upoun the byble?" "it becumith[ ] yow, (said he,) to speak more reverentlie of god, and of his blessed worde: yf the judge war uncorrupt, he wald punish yow for your blasphemye. but to your questioun, i answer, that albeit ye and i, and other fyve thowsand within this realme, should read the byble, and speak of it what god should geve us to speak, yitt left we more to the bischoppes to do, nor eyther thei will or yit can weill do; for we leave to thame publictly to preach the evangell of jesus christ, and to fead the flock, which he hath redeamed by his awin bloode, and hes commanded the same to the cayre of all trew pastouris. and when we leave this unto thame, me think we leave to thame a heavy burdein; and that we do unto thame na wrong, althowght we search our awin salvatioun whare it is to be found, considdering that thei ar but dum doggis, and unsavery salt, that hes altogither lost the seasson." the bischoppes heirat offended, said, "what pratting is this? lett his accusatioun be redd." and than was begun, "false tratour, heretik, thow baptised thy awin barne: thow said, thare is no purgatorie: thow said, that to pray to sanctes and for the dead is idolatrie and a vane superstitioun, &c. what sayis thow of these thinges?" he answered, "yf i should be bound to answer, i wold requyre an uprycht and indifferent judge." the erle of hunteley[ ] disdanefullie said, "foolishe man, wilt thow desyre ane uther judge nor my lorde dukis grace, great governour of scotland, and my lordis the bischoppes, and the clargy hear present?" whairto he answered, "the bischoppes can be no judges to me; for thei ar oppen ennemyes to me and to the doctrin that i professe. and as for my lord duck, i can not tell yf he hes the knowledge that should be in him that should judge and decerne betuix lyes and the trewth, the inventionis of men and the trew wirschipping of god. i desyre goddis word (and with that he produced the byble) to be judge betuix the bischoppes and me, and i am content that ye all hear, and yf by this book, i salbe convict to have tawght, spokin, or done, in materis of religioun, any thing that repugnes to goddis will, i refuise not to dye; but yf i can nott be convict, (as i am assured by goddis woord i sall nott,) then i in goddis name desyre your assistance, that malicious men execut not upoun me injust tyranny." the erle of hunteley said, "what a babling foole is this? thow shalt gett none other judges then those that sitt heir." wharunto the said adam ansured, "the good will of god be done. but be ye assured, my lord, with sic measur as ye mett to otheris, with the same measur it shalbe mett to yow agane. i know that i shall dye, but be ye assured, that my blood shalbe requyred of your handis." [sn: protestatioun of the erle of glencarne.] alexander erle of glencarne,[ ] yitt alyve, said to the bischope of orknay,[ ] and otheris that satt ney him, "tack yow yon, my lordis of the clargye;[ ] for hear i protest, for my parte, that i consent nott to his death." and so, without fear, prepared the said adam to answer. and first, to the baptising of his awin child, he said, "it was and is als lauchfull to me, for lack of a trew minister, to baptise my awin child, as that it was to abraham to circumcise his sone ismael and his familie. and as for purgatorie, praying to sanctes, and for the dead, i have oft redd, (said he,) boith the new and old testamentis, but i nether could find mentioun nor assurance of thame; and tharefoir, i beleve, that thei ar but mear inventionis of men, devised for covetousnes saik." "weall, (quod the bischope,) ye hear this, my lordis." "what sayis thow of the messe?" spearis the erle of huntley. he ansuered, "i say, my lord, as my master jesus christ sayis, 'that which is in greatast estimatioun befoir men, is abomination befoir god.'" [sn: lucÆ. [ .]] then all cryed out, "heresye! heresye!" and so was the sempill servand of god adjudged to the fyre; which he patientlie susteaned that same day, at after nune, upoun the castell-hill.[ ] and so began thei agane to pollute the land, which god had laitlie plagued; for yitt thare iniquitie was nott come to so full rypnes, as that god wold that thei should be manifested to this hole realme, (as this day thei ar,) to be faggottis prepared for the everlesting fyre, and to be men whome nether plagues may correct, nor the light of goddis woorde converte from thare darknes and impietie. the peace, as said is, contracted, the quein dowager past by sea to france, with galayes,[ ] that for that purpose war prepared, and took with hir diverse of the nobilitie of scotland, to witt, the erles huntley, glencarne, marschell, cassilles, the lordis maxwell, fleyming, schir george dowglass, togither with all the kinges sonnes, and diverse baronis and gentillmen of ecclesiasticall estait, the bischope of galloway, and many otheris, with promisses that thei should be richely rewarded for thare good service. what thei receaved we can nott tell; but few maid ruse at thare returnyng. the dowager had to practise somewhat with hir brethrein, the duck of gueise, and the cardinall of lorane, the weght wharof the governour after felt: for schortly after hir returnyng, was the governour deposed of the governement, (justly by god, but most injustly by men,) and she maid regent in the year of god j^m. v^c. fyfty four;[ ] and a croune putt upone hir head, als seimlye a sight, (yf men had eis,) as to putt a sadill upoun the back of ane unrewly kow. and so began she to practise practise upoun practise, how france mycht be advanced, hir freindis maid riche, and sche brought to immortall glorie: for that was hir commoun talk, "so that i may procure the wealth and honour of my freindis, and a good fame unto my self, i regard nott what god do after with me." and in verray deid, in deap dissimulatioun, to bring hir awin purpose to effect, sche passed the commoun sorte of wemen, as we will after heare. butt yit god, to whose evangell she declared hir self ennemye, in the end frustrat hir of all hir devises. [sn: the death and verteus of edward the sext.] thus did light and darknes stryve within the realme of scotland; the darknes ever befoir the world suppressing the light, from the death of that notable servand of god, maister patrik hammyltoun, unto the death of edwarde the saxt, that most godly and most verteous king that hath bein knowin to have rounge in england, or elles whare, these many yearis bypast, who departed the miserie of this lyef the vj of julij, anno, &c., . the death of this prince was lamented of all the godly within europe; for the graces gevin unto him of god, as weall of nature as of eruditioun and godlines, passed the measur that accustomablye useth to be gevin to other princes in thare grettast perfectioun, and yitt exceaded he nott sextein yearis of aige. what gravitie abuf age, what wisdome passing all expectatioun of man,[ ] and what dexteritie in answering in all thingis proponed, war into that excellent prince, the ambassadouris of all countreeis, (yea, some that war mortall ennemyes to him and to his realme, amonges whome the quein dowager of scotland was not the least,) could and did testifie; for the said quein dowager, returnyng from france throwght england, commoned with him at lenth,[ ] and gave record when sche came to this realme, "that sche fand more wisdome and solidd judgement in young king edward, then she wold have looked for in any three princes that war then in europe." his liberalitie towardis the godly and learned, that war in other realmes persecuted, was such as germanes, frenchmen, italianes, scottis, spainzardis, polonianes, grecianis, and hebrewis borne, can yitt geve sufficient document; for how honorablie war martyn buceir,[ ] petir martyre, joannes alasco, ...[ ] emanuel gualterus,[ ] and many otheris, upoun his publict stipendis interteaned, thare patentis can witnesse, and thei thame selfis during thare lyffis wold never have denyed. after the death of this most verteous prince, of whome the godless people of england, (for the most parte,) was nott worthy, sathan intended nothing less then the light of jesus christ utterly to have bein extinguissed, within the hole ile of britannye; for after him was rased up, in goddis hote displeasur, that idolatress jesabel, mischevous marie, of the spaynyardis bloode;[ ] a cruell persecutrix of goddis people, as the actes of hir unhappy regne can sufficiently witnesse.[ ] and in to scotland, that same tyme, (as we have hard,[ ]) rang that crafty practisar, marie of lorane, then named regent of scotland; who, bound to the devotioun of hir two brethrein, the duck of gueise, and cardinall of lorane, did onlye abyd the oportunitie to cutt the throttis of all those in whome she suspected any knowledge of god to be, within the realme of scotland. and so thought sathan, that his kingdome of darkness was in qwietness and rest, asweall in the one realme, as in the other: but that provident eie of the eternall our god, who continually watches for preservatioun of his church, did so dispone all thingis, that sathane schorte after fand him self far disapointed of his conclusioun tackin. for in that cruell persecutioun, used by that monstour, marie of england, war godlie men dispersed in diverse nationis, of whom it pleaseth the goodnes of our god to send some unto us, for our conforte and instructioun. [sn: who first after the death of king edwarde begane to preach in scotland.] and first cam a sempill man, williame harlaw,[ ] whose eruditioun, althowght it excell nott, yit for his zeill, and diligent plainess in doctrin, is he to this day worthy of praise, and remanes a fruitfull member within the church of scotland. after him cam that notable man, johne willok,[ ] as one that had some commissioun to the quein regent, from the duchess of emden. butt his principall purpose was to assay what god wald wirk by him in his native countrey. these two did sometymes, in severall cumpanyes, assemble the brethrein, who by thare exhortationis begane greatlie to be encoraged, and did schaw that thei had ane earnest thrist of godlines. [sn: elizabeth adamesoun and hir death.] and last came johne knox,[ ] in the end of the harvest, in the year of god j^m. v^c. fyfty fyve; who first being loodged in the house of that notable man of god, james syme, begane to exhorte secreatly in that same house; whareunto repared the lard of dun, david forress, and some certane personages of the toune, amonges whome was elizabeth adamsoun, then spous to james barroun,[ ] burges of edinburgh, who be reasson that she had a trubled conscience, delyted much in the cumpany of the said johne, becaus that he, according to the grace gevin unto him, opened more fullie the fontane of goddis mercyes, then did the commoun sorte of teachearis that sche had hard befoir, (for sche had heard none except freiris,) and did with such gredynes drynk thairof, that at hir death she did expresse the frute of hir hearing, to the great conforte of all those that repared to hir; for albeit that she sufferred most grevous torment in hir body, yitt out of hir mouth was heard nothing but praising of god, except that somtymes she wold lament the trubles of those that war trubled by hir. being somtymes demanded by hir sisteris, "what she thought of that pane, which she than sufferred in body, in respect of that wharewith sometymes she was trubled in spreit?" she ansuered, "a thowsand year of this torment, and ten tymes more joyned unto it, is not to be compared to the qwarter of ane hour that i sufferred in my spreit. i thank my god, throught jesus christ, that hes delivered me from that most fearfull pane; and welcome be this, evin so long as it pleassed his godlie majestie to exercise me thairwith." a litill befoir hir departuyre, she desyred hir sisteris, and some otheris that war besyd hir, to sing a psalme, and amonges others, she appointed the . psalme, begynnyng, "my saule praise thow the lord alwyes;"[ ] which ended, sche said, "at the teaching of this psalme, begane my trubled soule first effectually to taist of the mercy of my god, which now to me is more sweat and precious, then[ ] all the kingdomes of the earth war gevin to me to possesse thame a thowsand yearis." the preastis urged hir with thare ceremonies and superstitionis; to whome she answered, "depart from me, ye sergeantis[ ] of sathan; for i have refused, and in your awin presence do refuise, all your abominationis. that which ye call your sacrament and christes body, (as ye have deceaved us to beleve in tymes past,) is nothing but ane idole, and hes nothing to do with the rycht institutioun of jesus christ; and thairfor, in goddis name, i command yow nott to truble me." thei departed, allegeing, that she raved, and wist not what sche said. and she short thereafter sleapt in the lord jesus, to no small conforte of those that saw hir blessed departing. this we could nott omitt of this wourthy woman, who gave sa notable a confessioun, befoir that the great lycht of goddis word did universallie schyne throwght this realme. at the first cuming of the said johne knox, he perceaving diverse who had a zeall to godlynes maik small scrupill to go to the messe, or to communicat with the abused sacramentis in the papisticall maner, begane alsweall in privy conferance as in doctrin, to schaw the impietie of the messe, and how dangerous a thing it was to communicat in any sort with idolatrie. wharewith the conscience of some being effrayed, the mater began to be agitat fra man to man, and so was the said johne called to suppar by the lard of dun, for that same purpose, whare war conveaned david forress, maister robert lockart, johne willock, and williame maitland of lethingtoun youngar, a man of good learnyng, and of scharpe witt and reassonyng. the questioun was proponed, and it was answered by the said johne, "that no-wyise it was lauchfull to a christiane to present him self to that idoll." nothing was omitted that mycht maik for the temperisar,[ ] and yitt was everie head so fullie ansuered, and especially one whairinto thei thought thare great defence stood, to wit, "that paule at the commandiment of james, and of the eldaris of jerusalem, passed to the tempill and fanzeid him self to pay his vow with otheris." this, we say, and otheris, war so fullye ansuered, that williame maitland concluded, saying, "i see perfytlye, that our schiftis will serve nothing befoir god, seing that thei stand us in so small stead befoir man." the answer of johne knox to the fact of paule, and to the commandiment of james, was, "that paule's fact had nothing to do with thare going to the messe; for to pay vowes was sometymes goddis commandiment, and was never idolatrie: but thare messe, from the originall, was and remaned odiouse idolatrie; tharefor the factes war moist unlyik. secundarly, (said he,) i greatly dowbt whitther eyther james's commandiment or paule's obedience proceaded frome the holy ghost. we knaw thare counsall tended to this, that paule should schaw him self one that observed the verray small pointes of the law, to the end that he mycht purchase to him the favouris of the jewes, who war offended at him be reassone of the bruittis that war sparsed, that he tawght defectioun from moses. now, whill he obeyed thare counsall, he fell into the most disperat danger that ever he susteaned befor, whareof it was evident, that god approved nott that meane of reconciliatioun; but rather that he plainelie declaired, 'that evill should not be done that good mycht come of it.' evill it was to paule to confirme those obstinat jewes in thare superstitioun by his exampill; worse it was to him to expone him self, and the doctrin which befoir he had tawght, to sklander and mockage; and tharefoir, (concluded the said johne,) that the fact of paule, and the seqwell that tharof followed, appeired rather to feght against thame that wold go to the messe, than to geve unto thame any assurance to follow his example, onless that thei wold, that the lyik truble should instantlye apprehend thame that apprehended him, for obeying worldly wyise counsall." after these and lyik reassonynges, the messe began to be abhorred of such as befoir used it for the fassioun, and avoiding of sclander, (as then thei termed it.) johne knox, at the request of the lard of dun,[ ] followed him to his place of dun, whare he remaned a moneth, dalye exercised in doctrin, whairunto resorted the principall men of that countrey. after his returnyng, his residence was most in calder,[ ] whare repared unto him the lord erskin that now is,[ ] the erle of argyle, then lord of lorne,[ ] and lord james, then priour of sanctandrois,[ ] and now erle of murray; whare thei hard and so approved his doctrin, that thei wissed it to have bein publict. that same wynter[ ] he tawght commonly in edinburgh; and after the youle, by the conduct of the lard of barr, and robert campbell of kingyeancleucht, he came to kyle,[ ] and tawght in the barr, in the house of the carnell, in the kingyeancleuch, in the toune of air, and in the houssis of uchiltrie, and gathgyrth, and in some of thame ministrat the lordis table. befoir the pasche,[ ] the erle of glencarne send for him to his place of fynlastoun;[ ] whare, after doctrin, he lyikwiese ministrat the lordis table, whairof besydis him self war parttakaris, his lady, two of his sonnis, and certane of his freindis; and so returned he to calder, whare diverse frome edinburgh, and frome the countrey about, convened, asweall for the doctrin, as for the rycht use of the lordis table, which befoir thei had never practised. from thense he departed the secound tyme to the lard of dun; and teiching then in grettar libertie, the gentilmen required that he should ministrat lyikwiese unto thame the table of the lord jesus, whairof war partakaris the moist parte of the gentilmen of the mernse; who, god be praised, to this day constantlie do remane in the same doctrin which then thei professed, to witt, that thei refuissed all societie with idolatrie, and band thame selfis,[ ] to the uttermost of thare poweris, to manteane the trew preaching of the evangell of jesus christ, as god should offer unto thame preachearis and oportunitie. the bruyt heirof sparsed, (for the freiris from all qwarteris flokked to the bischoppes,) the said johne knox was summond to compeir in the kirk of the black freiris in edinburgh, the xv day of maij [ ,] which day the said johne decread to keape; and for that purpose johne erskin of dun, with diverse otheris gentilmen, convened to the toune of edinburgh. butt that dyet held nott; for whitther that the bischoppis perceaved informalitie in thare awin proceidyngis, or yf thei feared danger to ensew upoun thare extremitie, it was unknown unto us. but the setterday befoir the day appointed, thei caist thare awin summondis; and the said johne, the same day of the summondis, tawght in edinburgh in a greattar audience then ever befoir he had done in that toune: the place was the bischope of dunkellis his great loodgeing, whare he continewed in doctrin ten dayis, boyth befoir and after nune. the erle of glencarne allured the erle merschall,[ ] who with harye drummound,[ ] (his counsallour for that tyme,) heard ane exhortation, (but it was upone the nycht,) who war so weall contented with it, that thei boyth willed the said johne to wrait unto the quein regent somwhat that mycht move hir to heir the word of god. he obeyed thare desyre, and wrait that which after was imprinted, and is called "the letter to the quein dowager;"[ ] which was delivered into hir awin handis by the said alexander erle of glencarne. which letter, when sche had redd, within a day or two, she delivered it to that proud prelate, betoun,[ ] bischope of glasgw, and said in mockage, "please yow, my lord, to reid a pasqwill." which woordis cuming to the earis of the said johne, war the occasioun that to his letter he maid his additionis,[ ] as yitt may be sein. [sn: _nota._] as concernyng the threatnyngis pronunccd against hir awin persone, and the most principale of hir freindis, lett thare verray flatteraris see what hath failled of all that he hes writtin. and tharefor it war expedient that hir dochtter, now mischevouslye rynging, should look to that which hath passed befoir, least that in following the counsallis of the wicked, she end more miserablie then hir crafty mother did. whill johne knox was thus occupyed in scotland, letteris came unto him from the engliss kirk that was assembled in geneva, (which was separated from that superstitious and contentious cumpany that war at franckfoord,) commanding him in goddis name, as he that was thare chosin pastor, to repayre unto thame, for thare conforte. upone the which, the said johne took his leave from us, almost in everie congregatioun whare befor he had preached, and exhorted us to prayaris, to reading of the scriptures, and mutuall conference, unto such tyme as god should geve unto us grettar libertie. and hearupon he send befoir him to deape, his mother in law elizabeth bowes,[ ] and his wyef marjory, with no small dolour to thare hartes, and unto many of us. he him self, by procurement and laubouris of robert campbell of kingzeanclewch,[ ] remaned behynd in scotland, and passed to the old erle of ergyle,[ ] who then was in the castell of campbell,[ ] whare he tawght certane dayis. the lard of glenurquhare,[ ] (which yit liveth,) being one of his auditouris, willed the said erle of ergyle to reateane him still; but he, purposed upoun his jorney, wold not att that tyme stay for no requeast, adding, "that yf god so blessed thei small begynnynes, that thei continewed in godlyness, whensoever thei pleased to command him, thei should fynd him obedient;" but said, "that ones he must neadis visit that lytill flock which the wickedness of men had compelled him to leave." and so in the moneth of julij he left this realme, and past to france, and so to geneva. immediatly after, the bischoppis summoned him, and for none compeirance, brunt him in effigie at the croce of edinburgh, in the year of god .[ ] fra the which injust sentence the said johnne maid his appellatioun, and caused to print the same, and direct it to the nobilitie and commounes of scotland,[ ] as yitt may be redd. [sn: warr against england by the meanes of quein regent.] in[ ] the wynter that the said johne aboad in scotland, appeired a comet, the course whairof was from the south and south-west, to the north and north-east. it was sein the monethis of november, december, and januare. it was called "the fyrie boosome."[ ] sune after dyed christierne, king of denmark: and warr raise betuix scotland and england; for the commissionaris of boyth realmes, who almost the space of sex monethis entraitted upoun the conditionis of peace, and war upoun a neyr point of conclusioun [war disappointed.] the quein regent with hir counsall of the french factioun decreatted war at newbattil,[ ] without geving any advertisment to the commissionaris for the parte of scotland. such is the fidelitie of princes, guyded by preastis, when soever thei seik thare awin affectionis to be served. [sn: a calf with two headis.] in the end of that nixt harvest, was sein upoun the bordouris of england and scotland a strange fyre, which discended from the heavin, and brunt diverse cornes in boyth the realmes, but most in england. thare was presented to the quein regent, by robert ormestoun, a calf having two headdis, whareat sche scripped, and said, "it was but a commoun thing." the warr begane in the end of the harvest, as said is, and conclusioun was tackin that wark[ ] should be asseged. the army and ordinance past fordwarte to maxwell heucht.[ ] the quein regent remaned in the castell of home,[ ] and thinking that all thingis war in assurance, monsieur dosell, then lieutenant for france, gave charge that the cannonis should be transported ower the watter of twead, which was done with expeditioun, (for the french in such factes ar experte;) [sn: the fact of the nobilitie of scotland at maxwell hewcht.] but the nobilitie of scotland nothing content of such proceadingis, after consultatioun amongis thame selfis, past to the palzeon[ ] of monsieur dosell, and in his awin face declared, "that in no wiese wald thei invade england," and tharefoir command the ordinance to be reteired; and that it was, without farther delay.[ ] this putt ane effray in monsieur dosell his breathe,[ ] and kendilled such a fyre in the quein regentis stomak, as was nott weall slockened till hir braith failled. and thus was that enterprise frustrate. butt yitt warre continewed, during the which the evangell of jesus christ begane wonderouslye to floriss; for in edinburgh begane publictlie to exhorte, williame harlaw; johnne dowglass,[ ] who had (being with the erle of ergyle) preached in leyth, and sometymes exhorted in edinburgh; paule meaffen begane publictly to preach in dondye; and so did diverse otheris in anguss and the mernse. [sn: the secund returne of johne willok to scotland.] and last, at goddis good pleasur, arryved johnne wyllok the secound tyme from emden;[ ] whose returne was so joyfull to the brethrein, that thare zeall and godly courage daly encreassed. and albeit he contracted a dangerous seaknes, yitt he ceassed nott from laubouris, but tawght and exhorted from his bed: some of the nobilitie, [sn: lord setoun ane apostat.] (of whome some ar fallen back, amongis whome the lord setoun[ ] is cheaf,) with many baronis and gentilmen, war his auditouris, and by him war godly instructed, and wonderouslie conforted. thei keapt thare conventionis, and held counsallis with such gravitie and closnes, that the ennemyes trembled. [sn: the abolishing of images and trudle tharefoir.] the images war stollen away in all partes of the countrie; and in edinburgh was that great idole called sanct geyle,[ ] first drouned in the north loch,[ ] after brunt, which rased no small truble in the toun. for the freiris rowping lyik reavins upoun the bischoppes, the bischoppes ran upoun the quein, who to thame was favorable yneweh, but that she thowght it could not stand with hir advantage to offend such a multitud as then took upon thame the defence of the evangell, and the name of protestantes. [sn: the preacharis summoned.] and yitt consented sche to summond the preachearis; whareat the protestantis neyther offended, neyther yitt thairof effrayed, determined to keape the day of summondis,[ ] as that thei did. [sn: the practise of prelattis, and what thairof ensewed.] which perceaved by the prelattis and preastis, thei procured a proclamatioun to be publictlie maid, "that all men that war come to the toune without commandiment of the authoritie, should with all diligence repayre to the bordouris, and thare remane xv dayis:" for the bischope of galloway,[ ] in this maner of ryme, said to the quein, "madame, becaus thei ar come without ordour, i red ye, send thame to the bordour." [sn: the bold wourdis of james chalmeris of gaithgyrth.] now so had god provided, that the qwarter of the west-land, (in to the which war many faythfull men,) was that same day returned from the bordour; who understanding the mater to procead from the malice of the preastis, assembled thame selfis together, and maid passage to thame selfis, till thei came to the verray prevey chalmer, whare the quein regent and the bischoppes war. the gentilmen begane to complane upoun thare strange intertenement, considdering that hir grace had found into thame so faithfull obedience in all thingis lauchfull. whill that the quein begane to craft, a zelous and a bold man, james chalmeris of gaitgyrth,[ ] said, "madame, we know that this is the malice and devise of thei jefwellis, and of that bastard, (meanyng the bischope of sanctandrois,) that standis by yow: we avow to god we shall maik ane day of it. thei oppresse us and our tennantis for feading of thare idill bellyes: thei truble our preacheris, and wold murther thame and us: shall we suffer this any longare? na, madame: it shall nott be." and tharewith everie man putt on his steill bonet. thare was hard nothing of the quenis parte but "my joyes, my hartes, what ailes yow? me[ ] meanes no evill to yow nor to your preachearis. the bischoppes shall do yow no wrong. ye ar all my loving subjectes. me knew nathing of this proclamatioun. the day of your preachearis shalbe discharged, and me will hear the controversie that is betuix the bischoppes and yow. thei shall do yow no wrong. my lordis," said she to the bischoppes, "i forbid yow eyther to truble thame or thare preachearis." [sn: o crafty flatterar!] and unto the gentilmen who war wonderouslye commoved, she turned agane, and said, "o my heartis, should ye nott love the lord your god with all your harte, with all your mynd? and should ye nott luif your nychtbouris as your selfis?" with these and the lyik fair wordis, she keapt the bischoppes from buffattis at that tyme. [sn: the command of the bischoppis.] and so the day of summondis being discharged, begane the brethrein universallie to be farther encoraged. but yit could the bischoppes in no sorte be qwyet; for sanct geillis day approcheing, thei gave charge to the provest, baillies, and counsall of edinburgh, eyther to gett agane the ald sanct geile, or ellis upoun thaire expenssis to maik ane new image. [sn: the answer of edinburgh.] the counsall answered, "that to thame the charge appeired verray injust; for thei understood that god in some plaices had commanded idolles and images to be distroyed; but whare he had commanded ymages to be sett up, thei had nott redd; and desyred the bischope to fynd a warrant for his commandiment." [sn: edinburgh appelled from the sentence of the bischope of sanctandrose.] whareat the bischope offended, admonissed under pane of curssing; which thei prevented by a formall appellatioun;[ ] appelling from him, as from a parciall and corrupt judge, unto the pape's holynes; and so grettar thingis schortly following, that passed in oblivioun. yit wold nott the preastis and freiris cease to have that great solempnitie and manifest abhominatioun which thei accustomablie had upoun sanct geillis day,[ ] to witt, thei wold have that idole borne; and tharefor was all preparatioun necessar deuly maid. a marmouset idole was borrowed fra the gray freiris, (a silver peise of james carmichaell[ ] was laid in pledge:) it was fast fixed with irne nailles upon a barrow, called thare fertour. [sn: triumph for bearing of stock geill.] thare assembled preastis, frearis, channonis, and rottin papistes, with tabornes and trumpettis, banerris and bage-pypes, and who was thare to led the ring, but the quein regent hir self, with all hir schaivelingis, for honour of that feast. west about goes it, and cumis doun the hie streat, and doun to the canno croce.[ ] the quein regent dyned that day in sandie carpetyne's housse, betuix the bowes,[ ] and so when the idole returned back agane, sche left it, and past in to hir dennar. the heartes of the brethrein war wonderouslie inflammed, and seing such abominatioun so manifestlie manteaned, war decreed to be revenged. thei war devided in severall cumpanyes, wharof not one knew of ane other. thare war some temperisaris that day, (amonges whome david forress, called the generall,[ ] was one,) who, fearing the chance to be dune as it fell, laubored to stay the brethrein. butt that could not be; for immediatlie after that the quein was entered in the loodgeing, some of those that war of the interprise drew ney to the idole, as willing to helpe to bear him, and getting the fertour upon thare schulderis, begane to schudder, thinking that thairby the idole should have fallin. [sn: the douncasting of stock geill, and disconfitur of baalis preastis.] but that was provided and prevented by the irne nailles, as we have said; and so, begane one to cry "doun with the idole; doun with it;" and so without delay it was pulled doun. some brag maid the preastis patrons at the first; but when thei saw the febilness of thare god, (for one took him by the heillis, and dadding his head to the calsay, left dagon without head or handis, and said, "fye upon thee, thow young sanct geile, thy father wold haif taryed four such:") this considdered, (we say,) the preastis and freiris fled faster then thei did at pynckey clewcht.[ ] thare mycht have bein sein so suddane a fray as seildome hes bein sein amonges that sorte of men within this realme; for doun goes the croses, of goes the surpleise, round cappes cornar with the crounes. the gray freiris gapped, the blak frearis blew, the preastis panted, and fled, and happy was he that first gate the house; for such ane suddan fray came never amonges the generatioun of antichrist within this realme befoir. [sn: a meary englisman.] by chance thare lay upoun a stare a meary englissman, and seing the discomfiture to be without blood, thought he wold add some mearynes to the mater, and so cryed he ower a stayr, and said, "fy upoun yow, hoorsones, why have ye brockin ordour! doun the streat ye passed in array and with great myrth. why flie ye, vilanes, now, without ordour? turne and stryk everie one a strok for the honour of his god. fy, cowardis, fy, ye shall never be judged worthy of your wages agane!" but exhortationis war then unprofitable; for after that bell had brokin his neck, thare was no conforte to his confused army. the quein regent lade up this amonges hir other mementoes, till that sche mycht have sein the tyme proper to have revenged it. search was maid for the doaris, but none could be deprehended; for the brethrein assembled thame selfis in such sorte, in companyes, synging psalmes, and prasing god, that the proudast of the ennemies war astonied. [sn: the death of the bischope of galloway, and his last confessioun.] this tragedy of sanct geill was so terrible to some papistes, that dury, sometymes called for his filthines abbot stottikin, and then intitulat bischope of galloway,[ ] left his rymyng wharewith he was accustumed, and departed this lyef, evin as that he leved: for the articles of his beleve war; "i referr: decarte yow: ha, ha, the four kinges and all maid: the devill go with it: it is but a varlett: fra france we thought to have gottin a rooby;[ ] and yit is he nothing but a cowhuby." [sn: the vow of that marked beast dury bischope of galloway.] with such faith and such prayeris, departed out of this lyeff that ennemy of god, who had vowed and plainelie said, "that in dispyte of god, so long as thei that then war prelattis lyved, should that word (called the evangell) never be preached within this realme." [sn: the death of david panter.] after him followed that belly-god, maister david panter,[ ] called bischope of ross, evin with the lyik documentis, exceapt that he departed eatting and drynking, which, togitther with the rest that tharupoun dependis, was the pastyme of his lyef. [sn: the death of the bischope of orknay, reid.] the most parte of the lordis that war in france at the quenis mariage, althought that thei gat thare congie fra the courte, yit thei forget to returne to scotland.[ ] for whitther it was by ane italiane posset, or by french fegges, or by the potage of thare potingar, (he was a french man,) thare departed fra this lyef the erle of cassilles,[ ] the erle of rothose,[ ] lord flemyng,[ ] and the bischope of orknay, whose end was evin according to his lyfe:[ ] for after that he was dryvin back by a contrarious wynd, and forced to land agane at deape, perceaving his seiknes to encrease, he caused maik his bed betuix his two cofferis, (some said upoun thame:) such was his god, the gold that tharein was inclosed, that he could not departe tharefra, so long as memorie wold serve him. the lord james, then priour of sanctandrois, had (by all appearance) lyked of the same bust[ ] that dispatched the rest, for thareof to this day his stomack doeth testifie: but god preserved him for a bettir purpose. this same lord james, now erle of murray, and the said bischope, war commonlye at debate for materis of religioun; and tharefoir the said lord, hearing of the bischoppis disease, came to visitt him, and fynding him not sa weall at a point as he thowght he should have bein, and as the honour of the country requyred, said unto him, "fy, my lord, how ly ye so? will ye not go to your chalmer, and not ly hear into this commoun house?" [sn: orknayis answer, and his freindis whome.] his answer was, "i am weall whare i am, my lord, so long as i can tary; for i am neir unto my freindis, (meanyng his cofferis and the gold tharein.) but, my lord, (said he,) long have ye and i bein in pley for purgatory: i think that i shall know or it be long whetther thare be such a place or not." whill the other did exhorte him to call to mynd the promisses of god, and the vertew of christis death; he answered, "nay, my lord, lett me allon; for ye and i never aggreid in our lyiff, and i think we shall nott aggree now at my death; and tharefor lett me allone." the said lord james departed to his loodgeing, and the other schort after departed this lyef; whitther, the great day of the lord will declare. [sn: the quein regentis sentence of the death of hir papistis.[ ]] when the word of the departing of so many patrons of the papistrye, and of the maner of thare departing, cam unto the quein regent, after astonisment and musing, she said, "what shall i say of such men? thei lieved as beastis, and as beastis thei dye: god is not with thame, nether with that which thei interprise." [sn: dean of restalrig, hypocrite, began to preache.] whill these thingis war in doing in scotland and france, that perfyt hipocryte maister johne sinclare, then dene of restalrige,[ ] and now lord president and bischope of brechin, begane to preache in his kirk of restalrig; and at the begynnyng held himself so indifferent, that many had opinion of him, that he was nott far from the kingdom of god. but his hypochrisie could nott long be clocked; for when he understood that such as feared god began to have a good opinioun of him, and that the freiris and otheris of that sect begane to whisper, "that yf he took not head in tyme to him self, and unto his doctrin, he wold be the destructioun of the hole estait of the kirk." this by him understand, he appointed a sermon, in the which he promissed to geve his judgement upoun all such headis as then war in controversie in the materis of religioun. the bruyte heirof maid his audience great at the first; but that day he so handilled him self, that after that, no godly man did creditt him; for not only ganesaid he the doctrin of justificatioun and of prayer which befoir he had tawght, but also he sett up and manteaned the papistrie to the uttermost prick; yea, holy watter, pilgramage, purgatory, and pardonis war of such vertew in his conceit, that without thame he looked not, to be saved. [sn: maister david panter his consall to his forsworne brethrein the bischoppis.] in this meantyme, the clargye maid a brag that thei wald disput. but maister david panter,[ ] which then lived and lay at restalrig, dissuaded thame tharefra, affirmyng, "that yf ever thei disputed, but whare thame selfis war bayth judge and party, and whare that fyre and swerd should obey thare decrie, that then thare caus was wracked for ever; for thare victorie stood neyther in god, nor in his word, but in thare awin willis, and in the thingis concluded by thare awin counsallis, (togitther with sword and fyre,) whareto, (said he,) these new starte-up fellowis will give no place. but thei will call yow to your compt booke, and that is to the bible; and by it ye will no more be found the men that ye ar called, then the devill wilbe approvin to be god. and therefor, yf ye love your selfis, enter never in disputatioun; nether yitt call ye the mater in questioun; but defend your possessioun, or ellis all is lost." cayaphas could not geve ane bettir counsall to his companizeons; but yitt god disapointed boith thame and him, as after we shall hear. * * * * * [sn: the secound vocation of johne knox by letteris of the lordis.] at this same tyme, some of the nobilitie direct thare letteris to call johne knox from geneva, for thare conforte, and for the conforte of thare brethrein the preachearis, and otheris that then couragiouslye faught against the ennemyes of goddis trewth. the tenour of thare lettre is this: _grace, mercy, and peace, for salutatioun, &c._ deirlie beloved in the lord, the faithfull that ar of your acquentance in thir partes, (thankis be unto god,) ar stedfast in the beleve whareinto ye left thame, and hes ane godly thrist and desyre, day by day, of your presence agane; quhilk, gif the spreat of god will sua move and permitt tyme unto yow, we will hartly desyre yow, in the name of the lord, that ye will returne agane in thir partes, whare ye shall fynd all faithfull that ye left behynd yow, not only glaid to hear your doctrin, but wilbe reddy to jeopard lyffis and goodis in the forward setting of the glorie of god, as he will permitt tyme. and albeit the magistraittis in this countrey be as yitt but in the staite ye left thame, yitt at the maiking heirof, we have na experience of any mair crueltie to be used nor was befoir; but rather we have beleve, that god will augment his flock, becaus we see daly the freiris, ennemyes to christis evangell, in less estimatioun, baith with the quenis grace, and the rest of the nobilitie of our realme. this in few wordis is the mynd of the faithfull, being present, and otheris absent. the rest of our myndis this faythfull berare will schaw you at lenth. this, fair ye weill in the lord. off striveling, the tent of marche, anno .[ ] (this is the trew copy of the bill, being subscrived by the names underwrittin,) _sic subscribitur_, glencarne. lorne, (now ergyle.) erskyn. james stewart. these letteris war delivered to the said johne in geneva, by the handis of james sym, who now resteth with christ, and of james barroun, that yit liveth,[ ] in the moneth of maij immediatlie tharefter. which receaved, and advised upoun, he took consultatioun alsweall with his awin church as with that notable servand of god, johne calvin, and with other godlie ministers, who all with one consent, said, "that he could nott refuise that vocatioun, onless he wald declair him self rebellious unto his god, and unmercyfull to his contrie." and so he returned answer, with promessis to visite thame with ressonable expeditioun, and so sone as he mycht putt ordour to that dear flock that was committed to his charge. and so, in the end of the nixt september after, he departed from geneva, and came to deape, whare thare mett him contrare letteris; as by this his answer thareto we may understand. _the spreit of wisdom, constancie, and strenth be multiplied with yow, by the favour of god our father, and by the grace of our lord jesus christ._ according to my promeis, rycht honorable, i came to deape, the xxiiij of october, of full mynd, by the good will of god, with the first schippes to have visited yow. bot becaus two letteris, not verray pleassing to the flesche, wer there presented unto me, i was compelled to stay for a tyme. the one was directed to myself from a faithfull brother, which maid mentioun, that new consultatioun was appointed for finall conclusioun of the mater befoir purposed, and willed me tharefoir to abyd in these partes, till the determinatioun of the same. the other letter was direct from a gentilman to a friend, with charge to advertise me, that he had communed with all those that seamed most frack and fervent in the mater, and that into none did he fynd such boldness and constancie, as was requisite for such ane interprise; bot that some did (as he writteth) reapent that ever any such thing was moved; some war partlie eschamed; and otheris war able to deny, that ever thei did consent to any such purpose, yf any triall or questioun should be tackin thareof, &c. which letteris, when i had considdered, i partlie was confounded, and partlye was persed with anguise and sorrow. confounded i was, that i had so far travelled in the mater, moving the same to the most godly and the most learned that this day we know to lyve in europe, to the effect that i mycht have thare judgements and grave counsalles, for assurance alsweall of your consciences as of myne, in all interprises: and then that nothing should succead so long consultatioun, can not but redound eyther to your schame or myne; for eyther it shall appear; that i was mervelouse vane, being so solist whare no necessitie requyred, or ellis, that such as war my moveris thareto lacked the rypnes of judgement in thare first vocatioun. to some it may appear ane small and lycht mater, that i have cast of, and as it war abandoned, alsweall my particulare care, as my publict office and charge, leaving my house and poore familie destitut of all head, save god only, and committing that small (but to christ deirlie belovit) flock, ower the which i was appointed one of the ministeris, to the charge of ane other. this, i say, to worldly men may appear a small mater, but to me it was, and yit is such, that more worldly sustance then i will expresse, could not have caused me willinglie behold the eies of so many grave men weape at ones for my caus, as that i did, in tackin of my last good nycht frome thame. to whome, yf it please god that i returne, and questioun be demanded, what was the impediment of my purposed jorney? judge yow what i shall answer. the caus of my dolour and sorrow (god is witnes) is for nothing pertenyng eyther to my corporall contentment or worldly displeasur; butt it is for the grevouse plagues and punishmentis of god, which assuredly shall apprehend nott only yow, but everie inhabitant of that miserable realme and ile, except that the power of god, by the libertie of his evangell, deliver yow from bondage. [sn: the matrimoniall croun was granted, and frenche bandis war arryved.] i meane not only that perpetuall fyre and torment, prepared for the devill, and for such as denying christ jesus and his knawin veritie, do follow the sones of wickednes to perditioun, (which most is to be feared;) butt also that thraldome and miserie shall apprehend your awin bodyes, your childrein, subjectis, and posteritie, whome ye have betrayed, (in conscience, i can except none that bear the name of nobilitie,) and presentlie do feght to betray thame and your realme to the slavrie of strangeris. the warr begune, (althocht i acknawledge it to be the wark of god,) shalbe your destructioun, unless that, be tyme, remedy be provided. god opin your eis, that ye may espy and considder your awin miserable estaite. my wordis shall appeir to some scharpe and undiscreitlie spokin; but as charitie awght to interpreit all thingis to the best, so awght wyse men to understand, that a trew friend can nott be a flatterar, especiallie when the questions of salvatioun, boith of body and saule, ar moved; and that nott of one nor of two, but as it war of a hole realme and natioun. what ar the sobbes, and what is the affectioun[ ] of my trubled heart, god shall one day declare. but this will i add to my formar rigour and severitie, to wit, yf any perswad yow, for feir of dangeris that may follow, to faint in your formar purpose, be he never esteamed so wyse and freindly, lett him be judged of yow boith foolish and your mortall ennemy: foolishe, for becaus he understandeth nothing of goddis approved wisedome; and ennemye unto yow, becaus he lauboureth to separat yow from goddis favour; provoking his vengeance and grevouse plagues against yow, becaus he wald that ye should prefer your worldly rest to goddis prase and glorie, and the freindschipe of the wicked to the salvatioun of your brethrein. [sn: lett the papistis thame selvis judge of what spreit those sentenses could procead.] "i am nott ignorant, that feirfull trubles shall ensew your enterprise, (as in my formar letters i did signifie unto yow;) but o joyfull and confortable ar those trubles and adversities, which man susteaneth for accomplishment of goddis will, reveilled by his woord! for how terrible that ever thei appear to the judgement of the naturall man, yit ar thei never able to devore nor utterlie to consume the sufferraris: for the invisible and invincible power of god susteaneth and preserveth, according to his promeis, all such as with simplicitie do obey him." the subtell craft of pharao, many years joyned wyth his bloody cruelty, was not able to destroy the male childrein of israell, nether war the watteris of the redd sea, much less the rage of pharao, able to confound moses and the cumpany which he conducted; and that because the one had goddis promisse that thei should multiplie, and the other had his commandiment to enter into such dangeris. i wold your wisedomes should considder, that our god remaneth one, and is immutable; and that the church of christ jesus hath the same promeis of protectioun and defence that israell had of multiplicatioun; and farther, that no less caus have ye to enter in your formar interprise, then moses had to go to the presence of pharao; for your subjectis, yea, your brethrein ar oppressed, thare bodyis and saules haldin in bondage: and god speaketh to your consciences, (onles ye be dead with the blynd warld,) [sn: the deutie of the nobilitie.] that yow awght to hasard your awin lyves, (be it against kingis or empriouris,) for thare deliverance; for only for that caus ar ye called princes of the people, and ye receave of your brethrein honour, tribute, and homage at goddis commandiment; not be reasson of your birth and progenye, (as the most parte of men falslie do suppose,) but by ressoun of your office and dewtie, which is to vindicat and deliver your subjectes and brethrein from all violence and oppressioun, to the uttermost of your power. [sn: that letter lost by negligence and trubles.] advise diligentlie, i beseik yow, with the pointis of that letter, which i directed to the hole nobilitie, and lett everie man apply the mater and case to him self; for your conscience shall one day be compelled to acknowledge, that the reformatioun of religioun, and of publict enormities, doith appertene to mo then to the clargie, or cheaf reularis called kingis. [sn: god grant that our nobilitie would yitt understand.] the mychtie spreit of the lord jesus rewle and guyde your counsellis, to his glorie, your eternall conforte, and to the consolatioun of your brethrene. amen. from deape, the of october . these letteris receaved and redd, togetther with otheris direct to the hole nobilitie, and some particular gentilmen, as to the lardis of dun and pettarrow, new consultatioun was had what was best to be done: and in the end it was concluded, that thei wold follow fordwart thare purpose anes intended, and wold committ thame selfis, and whatsoever god had gevin unto thame, in his handis, rather then thei wold suffer idolatrie so manifestlie to regne, and the subjectes of that realme so to be defrauded, as long thei had bein, of the only food of thare saules, the trew preaching of christes evangell. and that everie ane should be the more assured of other, a commoun band was maid, and by some subscrived, the tennour whareof followis:-- "we, perceaving how sathan in his memberis, the antichristis of our tyme, cruelly doeth rage, seaking to dounethring and to destroy the evangell of christ, and his congregatioun, aught, according to our bonden deuitie, to stryve in our maisteris caus, evin unto the death, being certane of the victorie in him. the quhilk our dewitie being weall considdered, we do promesse befoir the majestie of god, and his congregatioun, that we (be his grace,) shall with all diligence continually apply our hole power, substance, and our verray lyves, to manteane, sett fordward, and establish the most blessed word of god and his congregatioun; and shall laubour at our possibilitie to have faythfull ministeris purely and trewlie to minister christis evangell and sacramentes to his people. we shall manteane thame, nuriss thame, and defend thame, the haill congregatioun of christ, and everie membour thairof, at our haill poweris and waring of our lyves, against sathan, and all wicked power that does intend tyranny or truble against the foirsaid congregatioun. onto the quhilk holy woord and congregatioun we do joyne us, and also dois forsaike and renunce the congregatioun of sathan, with all the superstitious abominatioun and idolatrie thareof: and moreover, shall declare our selfis manifestlie ennemies thairto, be this oure faithfull promesse befoir god, testifeid to his congregatioun, be our subscriptionis at thir presentis:-- "at edinburgh, the thrid day of december, the year of god j^m. v^c. fyfty sevin yearis: god called to witnesse.[ ] (_sic subscribitur_,) a. erle of ergile. glencarne. morton. archibald lord of lorne. johnne erskyne of doun.[ ] _et cetera_. [sn: the third vocatioun of johne knox by the lordis and churche of scotland.] befoir a litill that this band was subscryved, by the foirwrittin and many otheris, letteris war direct agane to johne knox fra the said lordis, togitther with thare letteris to maister calvin, craving of him, that by his authoritie he wold command the said johne anes agane to visit thame. these letteris war delivered by the handis of maister johne gray,[ ] in the moneth of november, the yeir of god j^m. v^c. fyfty awght, who at that same tyme past to rome for expeditioun of the bowes[ ] of ross to maister henry sinclare.[ ] immediatlie after the subscriptioun of this foirsaid band, the lordis and barons professing christ jesus, conveined frequentlie in counsall; in the which these headis war concluded:-- first, it is thought expedient, devised, and ordeaned, that in all parochines of this realme the commoun prayeris[ ] be redd owklie on sounday, and other festuall dayis, publictlie in the paroche kirkis, with the lessonis of the new and old testament, conforme to the ordour of the book of common prayeris: and yf the curattis of the parochynes be qualified, to cause thame to reid the samyn; and yf thei be nott, or yf thei refuise, that the maist qualifeid in the parish use and read the same. secoundly, it is thought necessare, that doctrin, preacheing, and interpretatioun of scriptures be had and used privatlie in qwyet houssis, without great conventionis of the people tharto, whill afterward that god move the prince to grant publict preacheing be faithfull and trew ministeris. * * * * * these two headis concernyng the religioun, and some otheris concernyng the polecy, being concluded, the old erle of ergile took the mantenance of johne dowglass, caused him preache publictlie in his hous, and reformed many thingis according to his consall. the same boldness took diverse otheris, alsweall within townes as to landwarte; which did not a litle truble the bischoppis and quein regent, as by this lettre and credite, committed to sir david hammyltoun [ ] fra the bischope of sanctandrois to the said erle of ergile, may be clearlic understand. the bischoppis letter to the old erle of ergyle. my lord, after maist hartlie commendatioun. this is to advertise your lordship, we have direct this berar, our cousing, towart your lordschipis, in sick besynes and effaris as concernes your lordschipis honour, proffeitt, and great weall; lyk as the said berar will declare your lordsehipe at mare lenth. praying your lordschipe effectuously to adverte thairto, and geve attendance to us, your lordschipis freindis, that ay hes willed the honour, proffeit, and uter wealth of your lordschipis house, as of our awin; and credite to the berar. and jesu haif your lordschipe in everlesting keaping. of edinburgh, the xxv day of merche, anno . (_sic subscribitur_,) your lordschippes att all power, j. sanctandrois. followis the credite.--memorandum to schir david hammyltoun, to my lord erle of ergile, in my behalf, and lett him see and heare everie articule. _in primis_, to repeit the ancient blood of his house, how long it hes stand, how notable it hes bein, and so many noble men hes bein erles, lordis, and knychtis thairof; how long thei have rong in thei partes, ever trew and obedient bayth to god and the prince, without any smote to thir dayis in any maner of sorte: and to remember how many notable men ar cuming of his house. secoundly, to schaw him the great affectioun i bear towardis him, his blood, house, and freindis, and of the ardent desyre i have of the perpetuall standing of it in honour and fame, with all thame that ar come of it: quhilk is my parte for many and diverse caussis, as ye shall schaw. thridly, to schaw my lord, how havy and displeasing[ ] it is to me now to hear, that he, wha is and hes bein sa noble a man, should be seduced and abused by the flattery of sick ane infamet person of the law[ ] and mensworne apostate, that under the pretense that he geves him self furth as a preachcar of the evangell and veritie, under that cullour settis furth schismes and divisionis in the haly kirk of god, with hereticall propositions, thinkand that under his mantenance and defence, to infect this countrey with heresy, perswading my said lord and otheris his barnes and freindis, that all that he speakis is scripture, and conforme thairto, albeit that many of his propositionis ar many yearis past condempned be generall counsallis and the haill estaite of christiane people. . to schaw to my lord, how perrelous this is to his lordschip and his house, and decay thareof, in caise the authoritie wold be scharpe, and wold use conforme bayth to civile and cannon, and als your awin municipall law of this realme. . to schaw his lordschipe, how wa[ ] i wold be eyther to hear, see, or knaw any displeasur that mycht come to him, his sone, or any of his house, or freindis, and especiallie in his awin tyme and dayis; and als how great displeasur i have ellis to hear great and evill bruyte of him, that should now in his aige, in a maner vary in[ ] his fayth; and to be alterat tharein, when the tyme is that he should be maist suir and firme thairin. . to schaw his lordschipe, that thare is dilatioun of that man, called dowglass or grant, of syndrie articules of heresye, quhilk lyes to my charge and conscience to put remeady to, or ellis all the pestilentious doctrin he sawes, and siclyik all that ar corrupt be his doctrin, and all that he drawes fra our fayth and christiane religioun, will ly to my charge afoir god, and i to be accused befoir god for ower seing of him, yf i putt nott remedy tharto, and correct him for sick thingis he is delaited of. and tharefor that my lord considder, and weay it weall, how heychtlie it lyes bayth to my honour and conscience: for yf i thole him, i wilbe accused for all thame that he infectis and corruptis in heresye. heirfor, i pray my lord, in my maist hartly manor, to tack this mater in the best parte, for his awin conscience, honour, and weall of him self, hous, freindis, and servandis; and sick lyik for my parte, and for my conscience and honour, that considdering that thare ar diverse articules of heresey to be laid to him that he is delated of, and that he is presentlie in my lordis cumpany, that my lord wold, be some honest way, departe with this man, and putt him fra him and fra his sonnes cumpanye; for i wold be richt sory that any being in any of thare cumpanyes should be called for sick causses, or that any of thame should be bruited to hold any sick men. and this i wold advertise my lord, and have his lordschippis answer and resolutioun, ere any summondis passed upoun him, togitther with my lordis answer. _item_, yf my lord wald have a man to instruct him trewlie in the fayth, and preache to him, i wold provide a cunning man to him, wharefoir i shall answer for his trew doctrin, and shall putt my saule tharefoir, that he shall teach nathing but trewly according to our catholik faith. off edinburgh, this last of merch, . (_sic subscribitur_,) j. sanctandrois.[ ] [sn: flesche and blood is preferred to god with the bischope.] _item_, attour, your lordschipe shall draw to good remembrance, and wey the great and havye murmur against me, bayth be the quenis grace, the kirk men, spirituall and temporall estaitis, and weall gevin people, meanyng, crying, and murmuring me greattumlie, that i do nott my office to thole sick infamouse persons with sick perversett doctrin, within my diosey and this realme, be ressoun of my legasey and primacey;[ ] quhilkis i have rather susteaned and long sufferred, for the great luif that i had to your lordschip and posteritie, and your freindis, and your house; als beleving suyrly your lordschippis wisedom should not have manteaned and mulled with sick thingis that mycht do me dishonour or displeasur, considdering i being reddy to have putt good ordour thairto alwayes; but hes allanerlie absteaned, for the luif of your lordschip and house foirsaid, that i bear trewly, knawing and seing the great skaith and dishonour and lack appeirandlye that mycht come tharthrowght, incaise your lordschip remeid not the samyn haistelly, whareby we mycht bayth be qwyet of all danger, quhilkis dowbtless will come upoun us bayth, yf i use nott my office, or that he be called, the tyme that he is now with your lordschip, and under your lordschippis protectioun. (_subserivit agane_,) j. sanctandrois. by these formar instructions, thow may perceave, gentill readar, what was the cayre that this pastor, with his complices, took to fead the flock committed to thare charge, (as thei alledge,) and to ganestand fals teachearis. hear is oft mentioun of conscience, of heresy, and suche other termes, that may fray the ignorant, and deceave the sempill. but we hear no cryme in particulare laid to the charge of the accused;[ ] and yit is he dampned as ane mensworne apostate. this was my lordis conscience, which he learned of his fatheris, the pharesies, old ennemyes to christ jesus, who damned him befoir thei hard him. but who rewlled my lordis conscience, when he took his eme's wyff, lady giltoun?[ ] considder thow the rest of his persuasioun, and thow shall clearlie see, that honour, estimatioun, luif to housse and freindis, is the best ground that my lord bischope hes, why he should persecut jesus christ in his members. we thowght good to insert the answeris of the said erle, which follow:-- the most remarkable notice of this lady occurs in the records of the town council of edinburgh, th november , on which day the provost and other members of council ordained "actis to be set furth, charging grizzell simpill lady stanehous adulterar, to remuif her self furth of the town betuix and mununday nixt, under the panys contenit in the proclamation set furth aganis adulteraris." as the archbishop of st. andrews had a residence in edinburgh, it was no doubt her living openly with him, that occasioned this peremptory enactment. without enlarging further, it may be added, that she acquired the lands of blair, in the lordship of culross, and was sometimes called "lady blair." she died in october , and in the confirmation of her testament dative, she is styled "ane honorabill lady gryssell sympill, lady stanehous." memorandum.--this present wryte is to mak answer particularly to everilk article, directed be my lord of sanctandrois to me, with schir david hammyltoun; quhilkis articles ar in nomber ix, and hear repeted and answered as i traist to his lordschippis contentment. . the first article puttis me in remembrance of the ancianitie of the blood of my hous, how many erles, lordis, and knychtes, hes bein thairof; how many noble men discended of the same hous, how long it continewed trew to god and the prince, without smot in thare dayis, in any maner of sorte. [answer.]--trew it is, my lord, that thare is weall long continewance of my hous, be goddis providence and benevolence of our princes, whome we have served, and shall serve trewly nixt to god: and the lyik obedience towardis god and our princes remanes with us yitt, or rather bettir, (praised be the lordis name,) nother know we any spot towardis our princess and hir dew obedience. and yf thare be offence towardis god, he is mercifull to remitt our offences; for "he will not the death of a synnar." lyik as, it standis in his omnipotent power to maik up housses, to continew the samyn, to alter thame, to maik thame small or great, or to extinguish thame, according to his awin inscrutable wisedome; for in exalting, depressing, and changeing of houssis, the laude and praise most be gevin to that ane eternall god, in whais hand the same standis. . the secound article bearis the great affectioun and love your lordschip bearis towardis me and my house; and of the ardent desyre ye have of the perpetuall standing thairof in honour and fame, with all thame that is cuming of it. [answer.]--forsuyth, it is your dewitie to wische good unto my hous, and unto thame that ar cuming of the same, not allanerlie for the faythfulnes, amitie, and societie, that hes bein betuix our foirbearis, but also for the lait conjunction of blood[ ] that is betuix oure saidis houssis, gif it be goddis pleasur that it have success; quhilk should give sufficient occasioun to your lordschip to wische good to my housse, and perpetuitie with goddis gloir, without quhilk nothing is perpetuall, unto whome be praise and wirschipe for ever and ever. amen. . thridly, your lordschip declares how displeasand it is to yow, that i should be seduced be ane infamed persone of the law,[ ] and be the flatterie of ane mensworne apostate, that, under pretence of his furth geving, maikis us to understand, that he is ane preachear of the evangell, and tharewith rases schismes and divisionis in the haill kirk of god; and be our mantenance and defence, wald infect this countrey with heresye; alledgeand that to be scripture, whilk thir many yearis bygane, hes bein condemned as heresye be the generall counsallis and haill estate of christiane people. ansure.--the god that creatted heavin and earth, and all that thairin is, preserve me fra seduceing; and i dread otheris many under the cullour of godlynes ar seduceid, and thinkis that thei do god a pleasur, when thei persecute ane of thame that professes his name. what that man is of the law we know nott: we hear nane of his flatterie: his mensworne aith of apostasie is ignorant to us. but yf he had maid ane unlefull aith, contrair goddis command, it war bettir to violate it then to observe it. he preaches nathing to us but the evangell. giff he wald otherwiese do, we wold nott beleve him, nor yitt ane angell of heavin. we hear him sawe na schismes nor divisiones, but sic as may stand with goddis word, whilk we shall caus him confesse in presence of your lordschip and the clargie, when ye requyre us thairto. and as to it that hes bein condempned be the generall counsallis, we traist ye knaw weall that all the generall counsalles hes bein at diversitie amanges thame selfis, and never twa of thame universallie aggreing in all pointis, in samekle as thei ar of men. but the spreit of veritie that bearis testimony of our lord jesus hes nott, nether can not, err; "for heavin and earth shall perishe or ane jote of it perishe." by this, my lord, nether teaches he, nether will we accept of him, but that whilk aggreis with goddis synceir word, sett furth be patriarkis, prophetis, apostles, and evangelistis, left to our salvatioun in his expresse word. and swa, my lord, to condempne the doctrin not examinat is not requyred; for when your lordschip pleassis to hear the confessioun of that manis faith, the maner of his doctrin, which aggreis with the evangell of jesus christ, i will caus him to assist to judgement, and shalbe present thairat with goddis pleasur, that he may rander recknyng of his beleve and our doctrin, to the superiour-poweris, according to the prescriptioun of that blood of the eternall testament, seilled be the immaculate lambe, to whome, with the father, and the holy spreit, be all honour and glorie, for ever and ever. amen. . the ferd article puttis me in remembrance, how dangerous it is, gif the authoritie wald putt at me and my house, according to civile and cannon lawes, and our awin municipale lawis of this realme, and how it appeareth to the decay of our house. ansure.--all lawis ar (or at the least should be) subject to goddis law, whilk law should be first placed and planted in everie manes hearte; it should have na impediment: men should not abrogat it for the defence and upsetting of thare awin advantage. gif it wald please authorities to put at our housse, for confessing of goddis word, or for mantenance of his law, god is mychtie yneuch in his awin caus: he should be rather obeyed nor man. i will serve my princess with bodye, harte, goodis, strenth, and all that is in my power, except that whilk is goddis dewitie, quhilk i will reserve to him self alone: that is, to wirschipe him in trewth and veritie, and als near as i can, conforme to his prescrived worde, to his awin honour and obedience of my princess. . the fyft article puttis me in remembrance how wa your lordschip wald be to hear, see, or know any displeasur that mycht come to me, my sone, or any of my house, and speciallie in my tyme and dayis, and als to hear the great and evill bruyte of me that should now in my aige in a maner begyn to warie fra[ ] my faith, and to be altered thairin, when the tyme is, that i should be maist suir and firme thairin. ansure.--youre lordschippis gud will is ever maid manifest to me in all your articles, that wald not hear, see, or knaw my displeasur, for the quhilkis i am bound to rander your lordschip thankis, and shall do the samyn assuredly. but as for wavering in my faith, god forbyd that i should sa do; for i beleve in god the father, almyghtie maikar of heavin and earth, and in jesus christ his onlie sone our salveour. my lord, i vary not in my faith; bot i praise god that of his goodnes now in my latter dayis hes of his infinit mercy oppynned his bosome of grace to me, to acknawledge him the eternall wisedome, his sone jesus christ, my omnisufficient satisfactioun to refuise all maner of idolatrie, superstitioun, and ignorance, whairwyth i haif bein blynded in tymes bygane, and now belevis that god wilbe mercyfull to me, for now he hes declared his blessed will clearlie to me, befoir my departing of this transitorie lyiff. . the sext article declaired that thare ar delationis of syndrie pointis of heresye upoun that man, called dowglas or grant, whilk lyes to your charge and conscience to putt remeady to, or ellis that all the pestilentiouse doctrin he sawis, and all whome he corruptes with his seid, wilbe requyred at your handis, and all whome he drawes fra your christiane faith; and yf ye should thole him, that ye wilbe accused for all thame whome he infectes with heresey; and tharefoir to regard your lordschippis honour and conscience heirintill. ansure.--what is his surname i knaw nott, but he calles him self dowglas;[ ] for i know nother his father nor his mother. i have heard him teache na articles of heresye; bot that quhilk aggreis with goddis word; for i wold manteane na man in heresey or errour. your lordschip regardis your conscience in the punishement thairof. i pray god that ye sua do, and examyn weall your conscience. he preaches aganis idolatrie: i remit to your lordschippis conscience yf it be heresye or not. he preaches aganis adulterie and fornicatioun: i referr that to your lordschippis conscience. he preaches aganis hypocrisye: i referr that to your lordschippis conscience. he preaches aganis all maner of abuses and corruptioun of christes synceir religioun: i refer that to your lordschippis conscience. my lord, i exhorte yow, in christis name, to wey all thir effaris in your conscience,[ ] and considder yf it be your dewitie also, not only to thole this, but in lyk maner to do the same. this is all, my lord, that i varye in my aige, and na uther thing, but that i knew nott befoir these offenses to be abhominable to god, and now knowing his will be manifestatioun of his word, abhorres thame. . the sevint article desyres me to way thir materis in maist hartlie maner, and to tack thame in best parte, for the weall of bayth our consciences, my hous, freindis, and servandis, and to put sic ane man out of my cumpany, for feir of the cummer and bruyt that should follow thairupoun, be reasson he is dilated of sindry hereseyis: and that your lordschip wald be sory to hear ony of our servandis delated or bruited for sic caussis, or for halding of any sic men; and that your lordschip wald understand my ansuer hearintill, or ony summondis passed thairupoun. ansure.--i thank your lordschip greatlie that ye ar so solist for the weall of me and my house, and is sa humane as to maik me the advertisment befoir ye have summoned, of your awin good will and benevolence; and hes weyed thir materis, als heychtlie as my judgement can serve me, bayth for your lordschippis honour and myn. and when i have reassoned all that i can do with my self in it, i think it ay best to serve god, and obey his manifest word, and nott be obstinat in his contrarie: syne to give thare dew obedience to our princes, rewllaris, and magistratis, and to hear the voce of goddis propheittis, declairing his good promisses to thame that reapentis, and threatnyng to obstinat wicked doaris, everlesting destructioun. your lordschip knawis weall the man: he hes spoking with your lordschip: i thought yow content with him. i heard na occasioun of offence in him. i can nott weall want him, or some preachar. i can nott put away sic ane man, without i knew him ane offendar, as i know nott; for i hear nothing of him, but sic as your lordschippis self heard of him, and sick as he yitt will professe in your presence, whenever your lordschip requires. sic ane man that is readdy to assist him self to judgement, should not be expelled without cognitioun of the cause; for lyik as i answered befoir in ane other article, when your lordschip pleassis that all the spirituall and temporall men of estaite in scotland beis convened, i shall caus him render ane accompt of his beleve and doctrin in your presences: then gif he deserves punishment and correctioun, lett him so suffer; give he be found faythfull, lett him leve in his faith. . the aucht article proponis to me, that your lordschip wald tack the laubour to gett me a man to instruct me in your catholick faith, and to be my preachear, for whais doctrine ye wald lay your saule, that he wald teach nathing but trewly conforme to your faith. ansure.--god almychtie send us many of that sorte, that will preache trewlie, and nathing but ane catholik universall christiane faith; and we heland rud people hes mister of thame. and yf your lordschip wald gett and provid me sic a man, i should provid him a corporall leving, as to my self, with great thankis to your lordschip; for trewly, i and many ma hes great myster of sick men. and becaus i am able to susteane ma nor ane of thame, i will requeist your lordschip earnestlie to provid me sic a man as yo wrait; "for the harvist is great, and thare ar few lauboraris." . the last and nynt article puttis me in remembrance, to considder what murmour your lordschip thollis, and great bruyt, at many manis handis, bayth spirituall and temporall, and at the quenis grace hand, and utheris weall gevin people, for nott putting of ordour to thir effaris; and that your lordschip hes absteaned fra executioun heirof, for luif of my house and posteritie, to the effect that my self should remaid it, for feir of the dishonour mycht come upoun us bayth for the same; whilk beand remeaded, mycht bring us out of all danger. ansure.--my lord, i knaw weall what murmur and indignatioun your lordschip thoillis at ennemies handis of all estaitis, for non-persewing of pure sempill christianes; and i know, that gif your lordschip wald use thare counsall, that wald be blud-schedding and burnyng of pure men, to maik your lordschip serve thare wicked appetites. yit your lordschip knawis your awin dewitie, and should not feare the danger of men, as of him whom ye professe. and verrely, my lord, thare is nathing that may be to your lordschippis releaf in this behalf, bot i will use your lordschippis counsall thairintill, and further the samyn, goddis honour being first provided, and the treuth of his eternall word having libertie. and to absteane for my luif fra persuyt, as your lordschip hes signified, i am addetted to your lordschip, as i have writtin diverse tymes befoir. but thare is ane above, for whais fear ye man absteane fra blude-schedding, or ellis, my lord, knok on your conscience. last of all, your lordschip please to considder, how desyrous some ar to have sedition amongis freindis; how mychtie the devill is to saw discord; how that mony wald desyre na better game but to hunt us at uther. i pray your lordschip begyle thame: we will aggree upoun all purpose, with goddis pleasur, standing to his honour. thare ar diverse houssis in scotland by us, that professe the same god secreatly. thei desyre but that ye begyn the bargane at us; and when it begynnis at us, god knawis the end thairof, and wha sall byd the nixt putt. my lord, considder this: mak na preparative of us. lett nott the vane exhortatioun of thame that regardis litill of the weall and strenth of bayth our houssis, sture up your lordschip, as thei wald to do aganis god, your awin conscience, and the weall of your posteritie for ever. and thairfoir now in the end, i pray your lordschip, wey thir thingis wysely; and gif ye do utherwyise, god is god, wes, and shalbe god, when all is wrocht that man can wirk. this ansuer receaved, the bischope and his complices fand thame selfis somewhat disapointed; for the bischoppes looked for nothing less then for such ansueris frome the erle of ergile; and thairfoir thei maid thame for thare extreame defence; that is, to corrupt and by buddis to styre up the quein regent in our contrare; as in the secound booke we shall more plainly heare. schorte after this, god called to his mercy the said erle of ergyle from the miseries of this lyef;[ ] whareof the bischoppis war glaid; for thei thowght that thare great ennemye was takin out of the way: but god disapointed thame. for as the said erle departed most constant in the trew faith of jesus christ, with a plane renunciatioun of all impietie, superstitioun, and idolatrie; so left he it to his sone in his testament, "that he should study to set fordwarte the publict and trew preaching of the evangell of jesus christ, and to suppress all superstitioun and idolatrie, to the uttermost of his power." in which poynt small falt can be found with him[ ] to this day. god be mercifull to his other offensses. amen. [sn: maij, anno .[ ]] ---------------------------------- [ ] the bischoppis continewed in thare provinciall counsall[ ] evin unto that day that johne knox arryved in scotland.[ ] and that thei mycht geve some schaw to the people that thei mynded reformatioun, thei sparsed abrod a rumor thairof, and sett furth somewhat in print, which of the people was called "the twa-penny fayth."[ ] . amonges thare actes, thare was much ado for cappes, schavin crounes, tippettis, long gounes, and such other trifilles. . _item_, that nane should enjoy office or benefice ecclesiasticall, except a preast. [sn: brotherlie charitie.] . _item_, that na kirk-man should nuriss his awin barnes in his awin cumpanye: but that everie one should hold the childrein of otheris. . that none should putt his awin sone in his awin benefice. . that yf any war found in open adultery, for the first falt, he should lose the thrid of his benefice; for the secound cryme, the half; and for the thrid, the hole benefice. but hearfra appelled the bischope of murray,[ ] and otheris prelattis, saying, "that thei wold abyd at the cannoun law." and so mycht thei weall yneuch do, so long as thei remaned interpretouris, dispensatouris, maikaris, and disannullaris of that law. but lett the same law have the trew interpretatioun and just executioun, and the devill shall als schone be provin a trew and obedient servand unto god, as any of that sorte shalbe provin a bischope, or yit to have any just authoritie within the church of christ jesus. but we returne to oure historye. [sn: the quein regent hir practises.] the persecutioun was decreid, asweall by the quein regent as by the prelattis; but thare rested a point, which the quein regent and france had nott at that tyme obteaned; to witt, that the croune matrimoniall should be granted to frances, husband to our soverane, and so should france and scotland be but one kingdome, the subjectes of boyth realmes to have equall libertie, scotismen in france, and french men in scotland. the glister of the proffeit that was judged heirof to have ensewed to scotishmen at the first sight, blynded many menis eyis. but a small wynd caused that myst suddantlye to vaniss away; for the greatast offices and benefices within the realme war appointed for french men. monsieur ruby[ ] keapt the great seall. vielmort was comptrollar.[ ] melrose and kelso[ ] should have bein a commend to the poore cardinall of lorane. the fredomes of scotish merchantis war restreaned in rowan, and thei compelled to pay toll and taxationis otheris then thare ancient liberties did bear. to bring this head to pass, to witt, to gett the matrimoniall croune, the quein regent left no point of the compas unsailled. with the bischoppis and preastis, sche practised on this maner: "ye may clearlie see, that i can not do what i wald within this realme; for these heretickis and confidderatis of england ar so band togitther, that thei stop all good ordour. butt will ye be favorable unto me in this suyt of the matrimoniall croune to be granted to my dowghtaris housband, then shall ye see how i shall handill these heretickis and tratouris or it be long." and in verray dead, in these hir promessis, sche ment no deceat in that behalf. unto the protestantis she said, "i am nott unmyndfull how oft ye have suyted me for reformatioun in religioun, and glaidly wald i consent thairunto; but ye see the power and craft of the bischop of sanctandrois, togetther with the power of the duck, and of the kirkmen, ever to be bent against me in all my proceadingis: so that i may do nothing, onless the full authoritie of this realme be devolved to the king of france, which can nott be butt by donatioun of the croune matrimoniall; which thing yf ye will bring to passe, then devise ye what ye please in materis of religioun, and thei shalbe granted." wyth this commission and credytt was lord james, then priour of sanctandrois, direct to the erle of ergyle, with mo other promessis then we list to reherse. by such dissimulatioun to those that war sempill and trew of harte, inflambed sche thame to be more fervent in hir petitioun, then hir self appeared to be. and so at the parliament, haldin at edinburght in the moneth of october,[ ] the yeir of god , it was clearlie voted, no man reclamyng, (except the duck[ ] for his entress;[ ]) and yitt for it thare was no better law produced, except that thare was ane solempned messe appointed for that purpose in the pontificall. this head obteaned, whaireat france and sche principallie schote, what faith sche keapt unto the protestantis, in this our secound book shalbe declared: in the begynnyng whairof, we man more amplie reherse some thingis, that in this our first ar summarly tweiched. the end of the first book. +telos+ the secound book of the historye of thingis done in scotland, in the reformatioun of religioun, begynnyng in the year of god j^m. v^c. fyfty aucht. oure purpose was to have maid the begynnyng of our historie from the thingis that war done from the year of god j^m. v^c. fyfty aucht yearis, till the reformatioun of religioun, which of goddis mercy we anes possessed;[ ] and yitt, in doctrin and in the rycht use of administratioun of sacramentis, do possesse. but becaus diverse of the godlie, (as befoir is said,) earnestlye requyred, that such personis as god raised up in the myddis of darknes, to oppone thame selfis to the same, should nott be omitted; we obeyed thare requeast, and have maid a schorte rehersall of all such materis as concerne religion, frome the death of that notable servand of god, maister patrik hammyltoun, unto the foirsaid year, when that it pleased god to look upoun us more mercyfullie then we deserved, and to geve unto us greattar boldness and better (albeit not without hasard and truble) successe in all our interprises then we looked for, as the trew narratioun of this secound book shall witness: the preface whareof followis. prefatio. least that sathan by our long silence shall tak occasioun to blaspheym, and to sklander us the protestantis of the realme of scotland, as that our fact tendit rather to seditioun and rebellioun, then to reformatioun of maners and abuses in religioun; we have thocht expedient, so trewlie and brievlie as we can, to committ to writting the causes moving us, (us, we say, are great parte of the nobilitie and baronis of the realme,) to tak the sweard of just defence against those that most injustly seak our destructioun. and in this our confessioun we shall faithfullie declair, what moved us to putt our handis to the reformatioun of religioun; how we have proceaded in the same; what we have asked, and what presentlie we requyre of the sacrat authoritie; to the end, that our caus being knawen, alsweall our ennemeis as our brethren in all realmes may understand how falslie we ar accused of tumult and rebellioun, and how unjustlie we ar persecuted by france and by thare factioun: as also, that our brethren, naturall scottismen, of what religioun so evir thei be, may have occasioun to examinat thame selfis, yf thei may with salf conscience oppone themselfes to us, who seak nothing bot christ jesus his glorious evangell to be preached, his holy sacramentis to be trewlie ministrat, superstitioun, tyrannye, and idolatrie to be suppressed in this realme; and, finallie, the libertie of this our native countrie to remane free from the bondage and tyranny of strangeris. * * * * * whill that the quein regent practised with the prelattis, how that christ jesus his blessed evangell mycht utterlie be suppressed within scotland, god so blessed the laubouris of his weak servandis, that na small parte of the baronis of this realme begane to abhorre the tyranny of the bischoppes: god did so oppin thare eyis by the light of his woord, that thei could clearelie decerne betuix idolatrie and the trew honoring of god. [sn: the first doubte.] yea, men almost universallie begane to dowbt whetther that thei myght, (god nott offended,) give thare bodelye presence to the messe, or yitt offer thare childrein to the papisticall baptisme. to the which dowbtes, when the most godlie and the most learned in europe had answered, both by word and writt, affirmyng, [sn: the secound.] "that neather of both we mycht do, without the extreame perrell of our saulles," we began to be more trubled; for then also began men of estimatioun, and that bare rewill amanges us, to examinat thame selfis concernyng thare dewities, alsweall towardis reformatioun of religioun, as towardis the just defence of thare brethren most cruelly persecuted. and so begane diverse questionis to be moved, to witt, "yf that with salf conscience such as war judgeis, lordis, and rewlaris of the people, mycht serve the uppare powers in maynteanyng idolatrie, in persecuting thare brethrein, and in suppressing christes trewth?" or, "whitther thei, to whome god in some caisses had committed the sweard of justice, mycht suffer the bloode of thare brethrein to be sched in thare presence, without any declaratioun that such tyrannye displeased thame?" [sn: scripturis answering the doubtis.] by the plane scriptures it was found, "that a lyvelie faith requyred a plane confessioun, when christes trewth is oppugned; that not only ar thei gyltie that do evill, bot also thei that assent to evill." and plane it is, that thei assent to evill, who seing iniquitie openly committed, by thare silence seame to justifie and allow whatsoever is done. these thingis being resolved, and sufficientlie provin by evident scriptures of god, we began everie man to look more diligentlie to his salvatioun: for the idolatrie and tyranny of the clargie, (called the churchmen,) was and is so manifest, that whosoever doth deny it, declair him self ignorant of god, and ennemy to christ jesus. we thairfore, with humbill confessioun of our formar offenses, with fasting and supplicatioun unto god, begane to seak some remeady in sa present a danger. and first, it was concluded, "that the brethren in everie toune at certane tymes should assemble togidder, to commoun prayeris, to exercise and reading of the scripturis, till it should please god to give the sermone of exhortatioun to some, for conforte and instructioun of the rest." and this our weak begynnyng god did so bless, that within few monethis the hartes of many war so strenthned, that we sought to have the face of a church amanges us, and open crymes to be punished without respect of persone. and for that purpose, by commoun electioun, war eldaris appointed, to whome the hole brethren promissed obedience: for at that tyme we had na publict ministeris of the worde; onlie did certane zelous men, (amonges whome war the lard of dun, david forress, maister robert lokharte, maister robert hammylton, williame harlay,[ ] and otheris,[ ]) exhorte thare brethrein, according to the giftes and graces granted unto thame. [sn: this was called the prevye kirk.] bot schort after did god stirre up his servand, paule methven,[ ] (his latter fall[ ] aught not to deface the work of god in him,) who in boldnes of spreit begane opinlie to preache christ jesus, in dundie, in diverse partes of anguss, and in fyffe; and so did god work with him, that many began opinly to abrenunce thare ald idolatrie, and to submitt thame selfis to christ jesus, and unto his blessed ordinances; insomuch that the toune of dundee began to erect the face of a publict churche reformed, in the which the worde was openlie preached, and christis sacramentcs trewlie ministrat. in this meantyme did god send to us our deare brother, johne willock,[ ] ane man godly, learned, and grave, who, after his schorte abode at dundie, repared to edinburgh, and thare (notwithstanding his long and dangerous seiknes) did so encorage the brethren by godly exhortationis, that we began to deliberat upoun some publict reformatioun; for the corruptioun in religioun was such, that with salf conscience we could na langar susteane it. yitt becaus we wold attempt nothing without the knowledge of the sacrate authoritie,[ ] with one consent, after the deliberatioun of many dayes, it was concluded, that by our publict and commoun supplicatioun, we should attempt the favouris, supporte, and assistance of the quein then regent, to a godly reformatioun. [sn: the lard of caldar eldar.] and for that purpoise, after we had drawin our oraisoun and petitionis, as followeth, we appointed from amanges us a man whose age and yearis deserved reverence, whose honestie and wirschip mycht have craved audience of ony magistrate on earth, and whose faithfull service to the authoritie at all tymes had bein suche, that in him culd fall no suspitioun of unlawfull disobedience. this oratour was that auncient and honorable father, schir james sandelandes of calder, knycht,[ ] to whome we geve commissioun and power in all our names then present, befoir the quein regent thus to speak:-- the first oratioun, and petitioun, of the protestantes of scotland to the quein regent. albeit we have of long tyme conteyned our selfis in that modestie, (maist noble princess,) that neyther the exile of body, tynsall of goodis, nor perishing of this mortall lyif, wes able to convein us to ask at your grace reformatioun and redress of those wrangis, and of that sore greaff, patientlie borne of us in bodyes and myndes of so long tyme; yitt ar we now, of verray conscience and by the fear of our god, compelled to crave at your grace's feit, remeady against the most injust tyranny used against your grace's most obedient subjectes, by those that be called the estate ecclesiasticall. [sn: controversye in religioun.] your grace can not be ignorant what controversie hath bein, and yit is, concernyng the trew religioun, and rycht wirschipping of god, and how the cleargye (as thei wilbe termed) usurpe to thame selfes suche empyre above the consciences of men, that whatsoever thei command must be obeyed, and whatsoever thei forbid must be avoided, without farder respect had to godis plesour, commandiment, or will, reveilled till us in his most holy worde; [sn: the tyrannye of the cleargie.] or ellis thare abydeth nothing for us but faggot, fyre, and sweard, by the which many of our brethrene, most cruellie and most injustlie, have bein strickin of laitt yearis within this realme: which now we fynd to truble and wound our consciences; for we acknowledge it to have bein our bound dewities befoir god, eyther to haif defended our brethren from those cruell murtheraris, (seing we ar a parte of that power which god hath establessed in this realme,) or ellis to haif gevin open testificatioun of our faith with thame, which now we offer our selfis to do, least that by our continewall silence we shall seame to justifie thare cruell tyranny; which doeth not onlie displease us, but your grace's wisdome most prudentlie doeth foirsee, that for the quieting of this intestine dissentioun, a publict reformatioun, alsweall in the religioun as in the temporall governement, war most necessarie; and to the performance thairof, most gravelie and most godlie, (as we ar informed,) ye have exhorted alsweall the cleargy as the nobilitie, to employ thare study, diligence, and care. we tharefoir of conscience dar na langar dissemble in so weighty a mater, which concerneth the glorie of god and our salvatioun: neather now dar we withdraw our presence, nor conceill our petitionis, least that the adversaries hearefter shall object to us, that place was granted to reformatioun, and yit no man suited for the same; and so shall our silence be prejudiciall unto us in tyme to come. and tharefoir we, knowing no other order placed in this realme, but your grace, in your grave counsall, sett to amend, alsweall the disordour ecclesiasticall, as the defaultes in the temporall regiment, most humblie prostrat our selfes befoir your featt, asking your justice, and your gratious help, against thame that falslie traduce and accuse us, as that we war heretickis and schismatikis, under that culour seiking our destructioun; [sn: the petitioun.] for that we seak the amendment of thare corrupted lyeffis, and christes religioun to be restored to the originall puritie. farther, we crave of your grace, with opin and patent earis, to heare these our subsequent requestis; and to the joy and satisfactioun of our trubled consciences, mercifullie to grant the same, onless by goddis plane worde any be able to prove that justlie thei awght to be denyed. the first petitioun. first, humblie we ask, that as we haif, of the lawes of this realme, after long debaite, obteaned to reade the holy bookes of the old and new testamentes in our commoun toung,[ ] as spirituall foode to our soullis, so from hensfurth it may be lauchfull that we may convene, publictlie or privatlie, to our commoun prayeris, in our vulgar toung; to the end that we may encrease and grow in knowledge, and be induceid, in fervent and oft prayer,[ ] to commend to god the holye church universall, the quoin our soverane, hir honorable and gratiouse husband, the habilitie[ ] of thare succcssioun, your grace regent, the nobilitie, and hole estait of this realme. secundly, yf it shall happin in oure saidis conventionis any hard place of scripture to be redd, of the which no proffeit arysith to the convenaris, that it shalbe lauchfull to any qualifiit personis in knowledge, being present, to interpreit and open up the saidis hard places, to goddis glorie and to the proffeit of the auditour. and yf any think that this libertie should be occasioun of confusioun, debait, or heresie; we ar content that it be providit, that the said interpretatioun shall underly the judgement of the most godly and most learned within the realme at this tyme. thridly, that the holy sacrament of baptisme may be used in the vulgare toung; that the godfatheris and witnesses may nott onlie understand the poyntes of the league and contract maid betuix god and the infant, bot also that the churche then assembled, more gravelie may be informed and instructed of thare dewiteis, whiche at all tymes thei owe to god, according to that promeise maid unto him, when thei war receaved in his houshold by the lavachre[ ] of spirituall regeneratioun. ferdlie, we desyre, that the holy sacrament of the lordis suppare, or of his most blessed body and bloode, may lykwyise be ministred unto us in the vulgare toung; and in boyth kyndis,[ ] according to the plane institutioun of our saviour christ jesus. and last, we most humblie requyre, that the wicked, sklanderous, and detestable lyiff of prelates, and of the state ecclesiasticall, may be so reformed, that the people by thame have nott occasioun (as of many dayis thei have had) to contempne thare ministerie, and the preaching wharof thei shuld be messingeris.[ ] and yf thei suspect, that we, rather invying thare honouris, or coveting thare riches and possessionis, then zelouslie desyring thare amendment and salvatioun, do travell and labour for this reformatioun; [sn: the offer.] we ar content not onlie that the rewllis and preceptis of the new testament, bot also the writtinges of the ancient fatheris, and the godly approved lawis of justiniane the emperour, decyd the contraversie betuix us and thame: and if it salbe found, that eyther malevolentlie or ignorantlie we ask more then these three foirnamed have requyred, and continewlie do requyre of able and trew ministeris in christes church, we refuise not correctioun, as your grace, with right judgement, shall think meit. bot and yf all the foirnamed shall dampne that whiche we dampne, and approve that whiche we requyre, then we most earnestlie beseik your grace, that notwithstanding the long consuetude which thei have had to live as thei list, that thei be compelled eyther to desist from ecclesiastical administratioun, or to discharge thare dewities as becumeth trew ministeris; so that the grave and godlie face of the primitive churche reduced, ignorance may be expelled, trew doctrine and good maneris may ones agane appeare in the churche of this realme. these thingis we, as most obedient subjectis, requyre of your grace, in the name of the eternall god, and of his sone, christ jesus; in presence of whose throne judiciall, ye and all other that hear in earth bear authoritie, shall geve accomptes of your temporall regiment. the spreit of the lord jesus move your grace's harte to justice and equitie. amen. * * * * * [sn: the practise of sathane.] these oure petitionis being proponed, the estate ecclesiasticall began to storme, and to devise all maner of leys to deface the equitie of our caus. thei bragged as that thei wald have publict disputatioun, which also we most earnestlie requyred, two thingis being provided; the formare, that the plane and writtin scriptures of god shuld decyde all contraversie; [sn: disputatioun with conditionis.] secoundlie, that our brethrene, of whom some war then exiled, and by them injustlie dampned, myght have free accesse to the said disputatioun, and salf conduct to returne to thair duelling places, nochtwithstanding any processe whiche befoir had bene led aganis thame in materis concernyng religioun. [sn: the offer of the papistis.] but these being by thame utterlie denyed, (for no judge wold thei admitt bot thame selfis, thare counsallis, and cannon law,) thei and thare factioun began to draw certane articles of reconciliation, promissing unto us, yf we wold admitt the messe, to stand in hir formare reverence and estimatioun, grant purgatorie after this lyiff, confesse prayer to sanctes and for the dead, and suffer thame to enjoye thare accustomed renttis, possession, and honour, that then thei wold grant unto us to pray and baptize in the vulgare toung, so that it war done secreatlie, and nott in the open assemblie. but the grosness of these articles wes suche, that with ane voce we refused thame; and constantlie craved justice of the quein regent, and a reasonable answer of our formare petitionis. [sn: the grant of the quein regent.] the quein, then regent, ane woman crafty, dissimulate, and fals, thinking to mak hir proffeit of both parteis, gave to us permissioun to use our selfis godlye according to our desyres, providit that we should not maik publict assembleis in edinburgh nor leyth; and did promeise hir assistance to our preacheouris, untill some uniforme ordour myght be established by a parliament. to thame, (we meane to the cleargy,) she quietlie gave significatioun of hir mynd, promissing that how sone any oportunitie should serve, she should so putt ordour in thare materis, that after thei should not be trubled; for some say thei gave hir a large purse,[ ] , lib., sayis the chronicle,[ ] gathered by the lard of erleshall.[ ] we, nothing suspecting hir dowblenes nor falshode, departed, fullelie contented with hir answer; and did use our selfis so qwietlie, that for hir pleasour we putt silence to johne dowglass, who publictlie wold have preached in the toune of leyth; for in all thingis we soght the contentment of hir mynd, so far furth as god should not be offended against us for obeying hir in thingis unlawfull. [sn: the apprehension of walter mylle.] schortlie after these thingis, that cruell tyrant and unmercyfull hypocrite, falselie called bischope of sanctandrois, apprehended that blessed martyre of christ jesus walter myln;[ ] a man of decrepite age, whome most cruellie and most unjustlie be put to death by fyre in sanctandrois, the twenty awcht day of aprile, the year of god j^m. v^c. fyfty aught yearis: whiche thing did so heighlie offend the hartis of all godlye, that immediatlie after his death began a new fervencie amongis the hole people; yea, evin in the toune of sanctandrois, begane the people plainelie to dampne suche injust crueltie; and in testificatioun that thei wold his death should abide in recent memorie, thare was castin together a great heape of stones in the place whare he was brynt. the bischope and preastis thairat offended, caused ones or twyse to remove the same, with denunciatioun of cursing, yf any man should thare lay ony stone. bott in vane was that wynd blowen; for still was the heape maid, till that preastis and papistis did steall away by nycht the stones to big thare walles, and to uther thare privat uses.[ ] [sn: the hypochrisie of the quein regent.] we suspecting nothing that the quein regent wes consenting to the foirnamed murther, most humilie did complayne of suche injust crueltie, requiring that justice in suche cases should be ministrate with greattare indifference. sche, as a woman borne to dissemble and deceave, began with us to lament the crueltie of the bischope, excusing hir self as innocent in that caus; for that the sentence was gevin without hir knowledge, becaus the man sometymes had bene ane preast; tharefoir the bischop's officiare[ ] did proceid upon him without any commissioun of the civile authoritie _ex officio_, as thei terme it. we yit nothing suspectand hir falsheid, requyred some ordour to be tackin against such enormities, whiche sche promissed as oft befoir. bot becaus schorte after thare wes a parliament to be haldin, for certane effares pertenyng rather to the quenis proffeit particulare, nor to the commoditie of the commoun wealth, we thocht good to expone our mater unto the hole parliament, and by thame to seak some redress. we tharefoire, with one consent, did offer to the quein and parliament[ ] a lettir in this tennour:-- the forme of the lettir gevin in parliament. "unto youre grace, and unto yow, rycht honorable lordis of this present parliament, humlie meanes and schawes your grace's faithfull and obedient subjectis: that quhare we ar dalie molested, sklandered, and injured be wicked and ignorant personis, place-haldaris of the ministers of the churche, who most untrewlie cease nott to infame us as heretickis, and under that name thei most cruellie haif persecuted diverse of our brethrein; and farder intend to execute thare malice against us, onles be some godlie ordour thare fury and raige be brydilled and stayed; and yitt in us thei ar able to prove no cryme worthy of punishment, onless that to read the holie scriptures in our assembleis, to invocat the name of god in publict prayeris, with all sobrietie to interprete and open the places of scripture that be redd, to the farther edificatioun of the brethrein assembled, and trewlie according to christ jesus his holy institutioun to minister the sacramentes, be crymes worthy of punishment. other crymes, (we say,) in us thei ar not abill to convict. and to the premisses ar we compelled; for that the saidis place-haldaris discharge no parte of thare deuiteis rychtlie till us, nether yitt to the people subject to us; and thairfoir, onless we should declair our selfis altogether unmyndfull of our awin salvatioun, we ar compelled, of verray conscience, to seak how that we and our brethrein may be delivered from the thraldome of sathan. [sn: protestatioun.] for now it hath pleased god to open our eyes, that manifestlie we see, that without extreame danger of our sowlles, we may in no wyise communicat with the damnable idolatrie, and intolerable abuses of the papisticall churche; and thairfoir most humblie requyre we of your grace, and of yow rycht honorable lordis, baronis, and burgesses assembled in this present parliament, prudentlie to wey, and as it becum[ ] just judges, to grant these our maist just and reasonable petitionis.-- "first, seing that the contraversie in religioun, which long hath continewed betuix the protestants of almany, helvetia, and other provinces, and the papisticall churche, is not yitt decyded by a lauchfull and generall counsall; and seing that our consciences ar lyikwyes towcheit with the fear of god, as was thares in the begynnyng of thare contraversie, we most humlie desyre, that all suche actes of parliament, as in the tyme of darknes gave power to the churche men to execute thare tyranny aganis us, be reasoun that we to thame wor delated as heretiques, may be suspended and abrogated, till a generall counsall lawfullie assembled have decyded all contraverseis in religioun. "and least that this mutatioun shuld seame to sett all men at libertie to lyve as thame list, we secundarelie requyre, that it be enacted by this present parliament, that the prelattis and thare officiaris[ ] be removed from place of judgement; onlie granting unto thame, nocht the less, the place of accusatouris in the presence of a temporall judge, befoir whom the churche men accusatouris salbe bundin to call any by thame accused of heresye, to whome also thei salbe bundin to deliver ane authentik copy of all depositionis, accusationis, and process led against the persone accused; the judge lykewyis delivering the same to the partie accused, assignyng unto him a competent terme to answer to the same, after he hath takin sufficient cautioun _de judicio sisti_. "thridly, we requyre, that all lawfull defences be granted to the personis accused; as yf he be able to prove, that the witnesses be personis unable by law to testifie aganis thame, that then thare accusationis and depositionis be null according to justice. "_item_, that place be granted to the partie accused, to explane and interprite his awin mynd and meanyng; which confessioun we requyre be inserted in publict actes, and be preferred to the depositionis of any witnesses, seing that nane owght to suffer for religioun, that is not found obstinat in his damnable opinioun. "last, we requyre, that our brethrene be not dampned for hereticques, onles, by the manifest word of god, thei be convicted to have erred from that faith whiche the holy spreit witnesseth to be necessarie to salvatioun; and yf so thei be, we refuise nott bot that thei be punished according to justice, onles by holsome admonitioun thei can be reduced to a better mynd. "these thingis requyre we to be considered of yow, who occupy the place of the eternall god, (who is god of ordour and trewth,) evin in suche sorte as ye will answer in the presence of his throne judiciall: requyring farder, that favorablie ye will have respect to the tendernes of our consciences, and to the truble which appeareth to follow in this commoun wealth, yf the tyranny of the prelattis, and of thare adherentis, be nott brydilled by god and just lawis. god move your hartes deeplie to considder your awin dewiteis and our present trubles." these our petitionis did we first present to the quein regent, becaus that we war determined to interprise nothing without hir knowledge, most humlie requyring hir favorable assistance in our just actioun. sche spared nott amyable lookis, and good wordes in aboundance; bot alwayis sche keaped our bill close in hir pocket. when we requyred secreatlie of hir grace, that our petitionis should be proponed to the hole assemblie, sche ansured, "that sche thought nott that expedient; for then wold the hole ecclesiasticall estate be contrarie to hir proceadingis, which at that tyme war great;" for the matrimoniall croune was asked, and in that parliament granted.[ ] "bot, (said sche,) how sone ordour can be tacken with these thingis, which now may be hyndered by the kirk men, ye shall know my goode mynd; and, in the meantyme, whatsoevir i may grant unto yow, shall glaidlie be granted." we yitt nothing suspecting hir falshode, was content to geve place for a tyme to hir pleasour, and pretended reasoun; and yitt thocht we expedient somewhat to protest befoir the dissolutioun of the parliament; for our petitionis war manifestlie knowen to the hole assemblie, as also how, for the quenis pleasour, we ceassed to persew the uttermost. our protestatioun was formed in manor following:-- forme of the protestatioun maid in parliament. "it is not unknawin to this honorable parliament, what contraversie is now laitlie rissin betuix those that wilbe called the prelattis and rewlarris of the church, and a great number of us, the nobilitie and commonaltie of this realme, for the trew wirschipping of god, for the dewitie of ministeris, for the rycht administratioun of christ jesus holie sacramentis: how that we have complained by our publict supplicationis to the quene regent, that our consciences ar burdened with unprofitable ceremonies, and are compelled to adhear to idolatrie; that such as tack upoun thame the office ecclesiasticall, discharge no parte thareof, as becumith trew ministeris to do; and finallie, that we and our brethrein ar most unjustlie oppressed by thare usurped authoritie. and also we suppose it is a thing sufficientlie knowin, that we wer of mynd at this present parliament to seik redress of suche enormiteis; bot, considering that the trubles of the tyme do nott suffer suche reformatioun as we, by goddis plane word, do requyre, we ar enforced to delay that which most earnestlie we desyre; and yitt, least that our silence should geve occasioun to our adversaries to think, that we repent our formare interprise, we can not cease to protest for remedy against that most unjust tyranny, which we heirtofoir most patientlie have susteaned. "and, first, we protest, that seing we can not obtene ane just reformatioun, according to goddis worde, that it be lauchfull to us to use oure selfis in materis of religioun and conscience, as we must ansuer unto god, unto suche tyme as our adversaries be able to prove thame selfis the trew ministers of christes churche, and to purge thame selfis of suche crymes as we have already layed to thare charge, offering our selfis to prove the same whensoever the sacrat authoritie please to geve us audience. "secundlie, we protest, that nether we, nor yit any other that godlie list to joyne with us in the trew faith, whiche is grounded upoun the invincible worde of god, shall incure any danger in lyiff or landis, or other politicall paines, for nott observing suche actes as heirtofoir have passed in favouris of our adversaries, neyther yit for violating of suche rytes as man without god's commandiment or worde hath commanded. "we, thridly, protest, that yf any tumult or uproare shall aryise amanges the membres of this realme for the diversitie of religioun, and yf it shall chance that abuses be violentlie reformed, that the cryme thairof be not impute to us, who most humlie do now seak all thinges to be reformed by ane ordour: [sn: lett the papistis observe.] bot rather whatsoever inconvenient shall happin to follow for lack of ordour tacken, that may be imputed to those that do refuise the same. "and last, we protest, that these our requeastis, proceading from conscience, do tend to none other end, bot to the reformatioun of abuses in religioun onlie: most humilie beseiking the sacred authoritie to tak us, faithfull and obedient subjectis, in protectioun against our adversaries; and to schaw unto us suche indifferencie in our most just petitionis, as it becumeth god's lievetenentis to do to those that in his name do call for defence against cruell oppressouris and bloode thrustie tyrantes."[ ] [sn: letteris to johne calvin.] these our protestationis publictlie redd, we desyred thame to have bene inserted in the commoun register; bot that by laubouris of ennemies was denyed unto us. nochttheles, the quein regent said, "me will remember what is protested; and me shall putt good ordour after this to all thingis that now be in contraversie." and thus, after that sche be craft had obteaned hir purpoise, we departed in good esperance of hir favouris, praysing god in our hartes that sche was so weall enclyned towardes godlynes. the goode opinioun that we had of hir synceritie, caused us not onlie to spend our goodis and hasarde our bodyes at hir pleasour, bot also, by our publict letters writtin to that excellent servand of god johne calvine, we did prayse and commend hir for excellent knowledge in goddis worde and good will towarttis the advancement of his glorie; requyring of him, that by his grave counsall and godlie exhortatioun he wald animat hir grace constantlie to follow that which godlie sche had begune. we did farther charplie rebuike, boith by word and writting, all suche as appeired to suspect in hir any vennoum of hypochrisie, or that war contrare to that opinioun which we had conceaved of hir godlie mynd. bott how far we war deceaved in our opinioun, and abused by hir craft, did suddandlie appeare: for how sone that all thingis perteanyng to the commoditie of france war granted by us, and that peace was contracted betuix king philip and france, and england and us,[ ] sche began to spew furth, and disclose the latent vennome of hir dowble harte. then began sche to frowne, and to look frowardlie to all suche as sche knew did favour the evangell of jesus christ. sche commanded her houshold to use all abhominationis at pasche; and sche hir self, to geve exampill to utheris, did communicat with that idole in open audience: sche comptrolled hir houshold, and wold know whare that everie ane receaved thare sacrament. and it is supposed, that after that day the devill took more violent and strong possessioun in hir[ ] then he had befoir; for, from that day fordwarte, sche appeared altogether altered, insomuche that hir countenances and factes did declair the vennome of hir harte. for incontinent sche caused our preachearis to be summoned;[ ] for whome, when we maid intercessioun, beseiching hir grace not to molest thame in thare ministerie, onles any man war able to convict thame of fals doctrin, sche could not bryddill hir toung from open blasphemy, but proudlie sche said, [sn: sche had gottin hir lessoun from the cardinall.] "in dispite of yow and of your ministeris boith, thei shalbe banisshed owt of scotland, albeit thei preached als trewlie as evir did sanct paule." which proud and blasphemous ansuer did greatlie astoniss us; and yit ceassed we not moist humilie to seak hir favouris, and by great diligence at last obteaned, that the summoundis at that tyme war delayed. for to hir wer send alexander erle of glencarne, and sir hew campbell of loudoun knycht, schiref of air, to reassoun with hir, and to crave some performance of hir manifold promisses. [sn: quene regentis ansure.] to whome sche ansured, "it became not subjectis to burden thare princess with promisses, farther then it pleaseth thame to keape the same." boith thei noble men faythfullie and boldly discharged thare dewitie, and plainlie foirwarned hir of the inconvenientis that war to follow; wharewyth sche somewhat astonied said, "sche wald advise."[ ] [sn: sanct johnestoun embrased the evangell.] in this meantyme did the toune of perth, called sanct johnestoun, embrase the trewth, which did provok hir to a new fury; in which sche willed the lord ruthven, provest of that toune,[ ] to suppress all suche religioun thare. [sn: lord ruthven his ansure.] to the which, when he ansured, "that he could maik thare bodyes to come to hir grace, and to prostrate thame selfis befoir her, till that sche war fullie satiate of thare bloode, bot to caus thame do against thare conscience, he could not promeise:" sche in fury did ansure, "that he was too malaperte to geve hir suche ansure," affirmyng, "that boyth he and thei should repent it." sche solisted maister james halyburtoun, provest of dundie,[ ] to apprehend paule methven,[ ] who, fearing god, gave secreat advertisement to the man to avoid the toune for a tyme. sche send furth suche as sche thought most able to perswade at pasche, to caus montrose, dundie, sanct johnestoun, and otheris suche places as had receaved the evangell, to communicat with the idole of the messe; bot thei could profeit nothing: the heartis of many war bent to follow the trewth reveilled, and did abhore superstitioun and idolatrie. whareat sche more heighlie commoved, did summound agane all the preachearis to compear at striveling, the tent day of maij, the year of god . which understand by us, we, wyth all humble obedience, sowght the meanes how sche myght be appeased, and our preachearis not molested: bot when we could nothing prevaill, it was concluded by the hole brethrein, that the gentilmen of everie cuntrie should accumpany thare preachouris to the day and place appointed. [sn: the first assemblie at sanct johnestoun.] whareto all men war most willing; and for that purpose the toune of dundy, the gentilmen of anguss and mernis, passed fordwarte with thare preachearis to sanct johnestoun, without armour, as peciable men, mynding onlie to geve confessioun with thare preachearis. and least that suche a multitude should have gevin fear to the quein regent, the lard of dun, a zelous, prudent, and godly man, passed befoir to the quein, then being in striveling, to declare to hir, that the caus of thare convocatioun was onlie to geve confessioun with thare preachearis, and to assist thame in thare just defence. sche understanding the fervencie of the people, began to craft with him, solisting him to stay the multitude, and the preachearis also, with promeise that sche wald tak some bettir ordour. [sn: the lard of dun stayed the congregatioun and the preachearis.] he, a man most gentill of nature, and most addict to please hir in all thingis not repugnant to god, wret to those that then war assembled at sanct johnestoun, to stay, and nott to come fordwarte; schawand what promess and esperance he had of the quenis grace favouris. at the reading of his letteris, some did smell the craft and deceat, and persuaded to pas fordwarte, unto the tyme a discharge of the formare summondis should be had, alledgeing, that otherwyis thare process of horning or rebellioun, should be executed against the preachearis; and so should not onlie thei, bot also all suche as did accumpanye thame, be involved in a lyik cryme. otheris did reassone, that the quenes promeisses was not to be suspected, neyther yitt the lard of dun his requeast to be contempned; and so did the hole multitude with thare preacheris stay. in this meanetyme that the preacheouris ware summoned, to wit, the secound of maij , arryved johne knox from france,[ ] who ludgeing two nychtis onlie in edinburgh, hearing the day appointed to his brethren, repared to dundee, whare he earnestlie requyred thame, "that he myght be permitted to assist his brethrein, and to geve confessioun of his faith with thame:" which granted unto him, [he] departed unto sanct johnestoun with thame; whare he began to exhorte, according to the grace of god granted unto him. the quein, perceaving that the preachearis did nott compeir, began to utter her malice; and notwythstanding any requeist maid in the contrarie, gave commandiment to putt thame to the horne, inhibiting all men under pane of thare rebellioun to assist, conforte, receave, or maynteane thame in any sorte. whiche extremitie perceaved by the said lard of dune, he prudentlie withdrew himself, (for otherwyes by all appearance he had not eschaped empresonement;) for the maister of maxwell,[ ] ane man zelous and stout in god's caus, (as then appeired,) under the cloak of ane uther small cryme, was that same day committed to warde, becaus he did boldlie affirme, "that to the uttermost of his power, he wold assist the preachearis and the congregatioun; notwythstanding any sentence whiche injustlie was, or should be, pronunced against thame. the lard of dun, cuming to sanct johnestoun, expounded the caise evin as it was, and did conceill nothing of the quenis craft and falshode. whiche understand, the multitud was so enflammed, that neyther could the exhortatioun of the preacheare, nor the commandiment of the magistrat, stay thame from distroying of the places of idolatrie. [sn: the doun casting of the freiris in sanct johnestoun.] the maner whairof was this:[ ] the preacheouris befoir had declaired, how odiouse was idolatrie in god's presence; what commandiment he had gevin for the destructioun of the monumentis thairof; what idolatrie and what abhominatioun was in the messe. it chanced, that the next day, whiche was the ellevint of maij, after that the preachearis wer exyled, that after the sermoun whiche was vehement against idolatrie, that a preast in contempt wold go to the messe; and to declair his malapert presumptioun, he wold opin up ane glorious tabernacle which stoode upoun the hie altare. thare stoode besyde, certane godly men, and amonges otheris a young boy, who cryed with a lowd voce, "this is intollerable, that when god by his worde hath planelie damned idolatrie, we shall stand and see it used in dispyte." the preast heirat offended, gave the chyld a great blow; who in anger took up a stone, and casting at the prcast, did hytt the tabernacle and brack doune ane ymage; and immediatlie the hole multitude that war about cast stones, and putt handis to the said tabernacle, and to all utheris monumentis of idolatrie; whiche thei dispatched, befoir the tent man in the toune war advertist, (for the moist parte war gone to dennar:) whiche noysed abroad, the hole multitude convened, not of the gentilmen, neyther of thame that war earnest professouris, bot of the raschall multitude, who fynding nothing to do in that churche, did run without deliberatioun to the gray and blak freris; and nochtwythstanding that thei had within thame verray strong gardis keapt for thare defence, yitt war thare gates incontinent brust upe. the first invasioun was upoun the idolatrie; and thareafter the commoun people began to seak some spoile; and in verray deid the gray freiris[ ] was a place so weall provided, that oneles honest men had sein the same, we wold have feared to have reported what provisioun thei had. thare scheittis, blancattis, beddis, and covertouris wer suche, as no erle in scotland hath the bettir: thair naiprie was fyne. [sn: thair provisioun.] thei wer bot awght personis in convent, and yitt had viij punscheonis of salt beaff, (considder the tyme of the yeare, the ellevint day of maij,) wyne, beare, and aill, besydis stoare of victuallis effeiring thareto. the lyik haboundance was nott in the blak frearis;[ ] and yitt thare was more then becam men professing povertie. the spoile was permitted to the poore: for so had the preacheouris befoir threatned all men, that for covetousnes saik none shuld putt thare hand to suche a reformatioun, that no honest man was enriched thairby the valew of a groate. thare conscience so moved thame, that thei suffered those hypocreattis tak away what thei could, of that whiche was in thare places. the priour of charter-howse was permitted to tack away with him evin so muche gold and silver as he was weall able to cary.[ ] so was menis consciences befoir beattin with the worde, that thei had no respect to thare awin particulare proffeit, bot onlie to abolishe idolatrie, the places and monumentis thareof: in which thei wer so busye, and so laborious, that within two dayis, these three great places, monumentis of idolatrie, to witt, the gray and blak theves,[ ] and charter-housse monkis, (a buylding of a wonderouse coast and greatness,[ ]) was so destroyed, that the walles onlie did remane of all these great edificationis. [sn: a godly vow.] whiche, reported to the quein, sche was so enraged that sche did avow, "utterlie to destroy sanct johnestoun, man, woman, and child, and to consume the same by fyre, and thairafter to salt it, in signe of a perpetuall desolatioun." we suspecting nothing suche creweltie, bot thinking that suche wordis myght eschape hir in choler, without purpose determinate, becaus sche was a woman sett a fyre by the complaintes of those hypocrytes who flocked unto hir, as ravennis to a carioun; we, (we say,) suspecting nothing suche beastlie crueltie, returned to our awin housses; leaving in sanct johnestoun johne knox to instruct, becaus thei war young and rude in christ. bott sche, sett a fyre, partlie be hir awin malice, partelie by commandiment of hir freindis in france, and not a litill by brybes, whiche sche and monsieur dosell receaved from the bischoppes and the preastis heir at home, did continew in hir rage. [sn: the complaint of the quein regent.] and first, sche send for all the nobilitie, to whome sche complaned, "that we meaned nothing bot a rebellioun." sche did grevouslie aggreage the destructioun of the charter-howse,[ ] becaus it was a kingis fundatioun; and thare was the tumbe of king james the first; and by suche other perswasionis sche maid the most parte of thame grant to persew us. and then incontinent send sche for hir frenchemen; for that was and hath ever bein hir joy to see scottishmen dip one with anotheris bloode. no man was at that tyme more frack against us then was the duke,[ ] lead by the crewell beast, the bischope of sanctandrois, and by these that yitt abuse him, the abbot of kilwynnyng,[ ] and matthew hammyltoun of mylburne,[ ] two cheaf ennemeis to christ jesus; yea, and ennemeis[ ] to the duke and to his hole house, bot in sa far as thairby thei may procure thair awin particulare proffeitt. these and suche other pestilent papistes ceassed nott to cast faggotis on the fyre, continewalie cryeing, "fordwarte upoun these heretiques; we shall ones rydd this realme of thame." the certantie heirof cuming to our knowledge, some of us repaired to the toune agane, about the day of maij, and thare did abyde for the conforte of our brethrein. whare, after invocatioun of the name of god, we began to putt the toune and ourselfis in suche strenth, as we thought myght best for our just defence. and, becaus we war nott utterlie dispared of the quenis favouris, we cawsed to forme a lettir to hir grace, as followeth:-- "to the quenis grace regent, all humill obedience and dewitie premissed. "as heirtofoir, with jeopard of our lyves, and yitt with willing hartes, we haif served the authoritie of scotland, and your grace, now regent in this realme, in service to our bodyes dangerous and painefull; so now, with most dolorous myndis we ar constraned, by injust tyrannye purposed against us, to declair unto your grace, that except this crueltie be stayed by your wisdome, we wilbe compelled to tak the sweard of just defence aganis all that shall persew us for the mater of religioun, and for our conscience saik; whiche awght not, nor may nott be subject to mortale creatures, farder than be god's worde man be able to prove that he hath power to command us. we signifie moreover unto your grace, that yf by rigour we be compelled to scale the extreme defence, that we will nott onlie notife our innocencie and petitionis to the king of france, to our maistres and to her housband, bot also to the princes and counsall of everie christiane realme, declairing unto thame, that this cruell, injust, and most tyrannicall murther, intended aganis townes and multitudis, wes, and is the onlie caus of our revolt from our accustomed obedience, whiche, in god's presence, we faythfullie promeise to our soverane maistres, to hir husband, and unto your grace regent; provided, that our consciences may lyve in that peace and libertie whiche christ jesus hath purchassed till us by his bloode; and that we may have his worde trewlie preached, and holie sacramentis ryghtlie ministrat unto us, without whiche we fermelie purpose never to be subject to mortall man: [sn: o whair is this fervencie now!] for better, we think, to expone our bodyes to a thowsand deathis, then to hasarde our soules to perpetuall condemnatioun, by denying christ jesus and his manifest veritie, whiche thing not onlie do thei that committ open idolatrie, bot also all suche as seing thare brethrene injustlie persewed for the caus of religioun, and having sufficient meanes to conforte and assist thame, do nott the less withdraw frome thame thair detfull supporte. [sn: o wald god that the nobilitie shuld yitt considere.] we wald nott your grace should be deceaved by the fals persuasionis of those cruell beastis, the churche men, who affirme, that your grace nedith nott greatlie to regarde the losse of us that professe christ jesus in this realme. yf (as god forbid) ye gif care to thare pestilent counsall, and so use against us this extremitie pretended; it is to be feared, that neyther ye, neyther yitt your posteritie, shall at any tyme after this fynd that obedience and faithfull service within this realme, whiche at all tymes yow have found in us. we declair our judgementis frelie, as trew and faithfull subjectis. god move your graces harte favorablie to interpreite our faythfull meanyng. further advertissing your grace, that the self same thing, together with all thingis that we have done, or yitt intend to do, we will notifie by our letteris to the king of france; asking of yow, in the name of the eternall god, and as your grace tenderis the peace and qwyetness of this realme, that ye invaid us nott with violence, till we receave ansur from our maistres, hir husband, and from thare advised counsall thare. and this we committ your grace to the protectioun of the omnipotent. "frome sanet johnestoun the of maij . (_sic subscribitur_,) your grace's obedient subjectis in all thingis not repugnant to god, "the faithfull congregatioun of christ jesus in scotland." in the same tennour we wrate to monsieur dosell in frenche, requiring of him, that by his wisdome he wold mitigate the quenis raige, and the raige of the preastis; otherwyis that flambe, whiche then begane to burne, wold so kendle that quhen some men wold, it culd not be slokenned; adding farder, that he declairit him self[ ] no faithfull servand to his maister the king of france, yf for the plesour of the preistis he wald persecut us, and so compell us to taik the sweard of just defence. in lyke maner we wrait to capitane serra la burse, and to all uther capitanis and frenche soldiouris in generall, admonischeing thame that thair vocatioun was nocht to fyght aganis us naturall scottishmen; nather yit that thai had any suche commandiment of thair maister. we besowght thame thairfoir nocht to provok us to inemitie aganest thame, considdering, that thay had found us favorable in thair most extreme necessiteis. we declairit farther unto thame, that yf thay enterit in hostilitie and bloody warre aganest us, that the same sould remane langar than thair and oure lyves, to witt, evin in all posteriteis to come, so lang as naturall scottishmen suld have power to revenge suche crewelty, and maist horribill ingratitude. thease letteris war causit be spred abroade in great habundance, to the end that sum myght cume to the knawlege of men. the quene regent hir letter was layed upoun hir cussing in the chapell royall at striveling, quhair sche accustomit to sitt at messe. sche looked upoun it, and put it in the pocket of hir goune. monsieur dosell and the capitanis receavit thairis deliverit evin be thair awin soldiouris, (for sum amongis thame war favoraris of the treuth,) quho efter the reading of thame, began to ryve thair awin beardis; for that was the modest behaveour of monsieur dosell, quhen treuth was told unto him, so that it repugne to his fantasie. these our letteris war suppressed to the uttermost of thair power, and yit thay come to the knowlege of mony. bot the raige of the quene and preistis culd nocht be stayed; bot fordwart thay move against us, quho than war bot are verrie few and meane number of gentilmen in sanct johnestoun. we perceaving the extremitie to approche, did wrytt to all bretherin, to repair towardis us for our releve; to the quhiche we fand all men so readie bent, that the work of god was evidentlie to be espyed. and becaus that we wold omitt na diligence to declair our innocencie to all men, we formit ane letter to those of the nobilitie who than persecuted us, as efter followeth:-- "to the nobilitie of scotland, the congregationis of chryst jesus within the same, desyr the spreit of ryghteous judgement." "becaus we ar nocht ignorant, that the nobilitie of this realme who now persecute us, employing thair hole study and force to manteyne the kingdome of sathan, of superstitioun and idolatrie, ar yit nochttheles devidit in opinioun; we, the congregatioun of christ jesus by yow injustlie persecuted, have thocht good, in one letter, to write unto yow severallie. ye ar devidit, we say, in opinioun; for sum of yow think that we who have tackin upoun us this interpryise to remove idolatrie, and the monumentis of the same, to erect the trew preaching of chryst jesus in the boundis committit to our chargis, ar heretickis, seditious men, and trubilleris of this commone wealth; and thairfoir that no punischment is sufficient for us: and so, blyndit with this rage, and under pretens to serve the authoritie, ye proclame warre, and threattin distructioun without all ordour of law aganis us. to yow, we say, that nather your blynd zeale, nather yit the colour of authoritie, sall excuse yow in godis presence, who commandeth "none to suffer death, till that he be opinlie convictit in jugement, to have offendit against god, and against his law writtin," whiche no mortall creature is able to prove against us: for quhatsoevir we have done, the same we have done at godis commandiment, who planelie commandis idolatrie, and all monumentis of the same to be destroyed and abolisshed, oure ernist and long requeist hath bein, and is, that in opin assemblie it may be disputit in presence of indifferent auditouris, [sn: the perpetuall requeist of the protestantis of scotland.] "whether that theis abhominationis, namit by the pestilent papistis, religioun, whiche thay by fyre and sweard defend, be the trew religioun of christ jesus or not?" now, this our humbill requeast denyed unto us, our lyves ar sought in most crewell maner. and ye, the nobilitie, (whose dewetie is to defend innocentis, and to brydle the fury and raige of wicked men, wer it of princes or emperouris,) do nochtwithstanding follow thare appetytis, and arme your selfis against us, your bretherin, and naturall cuntriemen; yea, against us that be innocent and just, as concerning all suche crymes as be layid to our chargis. yf ye think that we be criminall becaus that we dissent from your opinioun, considder, we beseiche yow, that the prophetis under the law, the apostles of christ jesus efter his assentioun, his primitive churche, and holy martyris, did disassent from the hole world in thare dayis; and will ye deny bot that thair actioun was just, and that all those that persecuted thame war murtheraris befoir god? may nocht the lyek be trew this day? what assurance have ye this day of your religioun, whiche the warld that day had nocht of thairis? ye have a multitude that aggre with yow, and so had thay. ye have antiquitie of tyme, and that thay lacked nocht. ye have counsales, lawis, and men of reputatioun that have establisshed all thingis, as ye suppose: bot none of all these can maik any religioun acceptable unto god, whiche onelie dependeth upon his awin will, revealled to man in his most sacred word. is it nocht than a wonder that ye sleip in so deadlie a securitie, in the mater of your awin salvatioun, considdering that god gevith unto yow so manifest tockens, that ye and your leaderis ar boith declynit from god? [sn: probatioun against the papistis.] for yf "the tree salbe judgit by the fruit," (as christ jesus affirmeth, that it must be,) than of necessitie it is that your prelattis, and the hole rable of thair clergie, be evill treeis. for yf adultrie, pryde, ambitioun, dronknes, covetousnes, incest, unthankfulnes, oppressioun, murther, idolatrie, and blasphemye, be evill fructis, thare can none of that generatioun, whiche clame to thame selfis the title of churche men,[ ] be judged gud treeis; for all these pestilent and wicked fruittis do they bring furth in greittest habundance: and gif thai be evill treis, (as ye your selfis must be compelled to confes thay ar,) advise prudentlie with what consciences ye can manteyne thame, to occupy the roume and place in the lordis vyne yarde. do ye nocht considder, that in so doing ye labour to manteyne the servandis of syne in thair filthie corruptioun; and so consequentlie ye labour, that the devill may regne, and still abuse this realme, by all iniquitie and tyrannye, and that chryst jesus and his blessed evangell be suppressed and extinguesshed? [sn: against suche as under colour of authoritie persequte thair bretherin.] "the name and the cloke of the authoritie, whiche ye pretend, will nothing excuse yow in godis presence; but rather sall ye beir duble condempnatioun; for that ye burdeane god, as that his good ordinance wer the caus of your iniquitie. all authoritie quhilk god hath establisshed, is good and perfyte, and is to be obeyed of all men, yea under the pane of damnatioun. [sn: difference betuix the persone and the authoritie.] but do ye nocht understand, that thair is a great difference betuix the authoritie quhiche is goddis ordinance, and the personis of those whiche ar placit in authoritie? the authoritie and goddis ordinance can never do wrang; for it commandeth, that vice and wickit men be punischit, and vertew, with verteous men and just, be maynteaned. but the corrupt persone placed in this authoritie may offend, and most commonelie doeth the contrare heirof; and is than the corruptioun of the persone to be followed, be ressone that he is cled with the name of the authoritie? or, sall those that obey the wicked commandiment of those that ar placed in authoritie be excusable befoir god? nocht so; nocht so. bott the plagues and vengeances of god tackin upoun kingis, thair servandis, and subjectis, do witnes to us the plane contrarie. pharao was a king, and had his authoritie of god, who commandit his subjectis to murther and torment the israelites, and at last most crewellie to persecut thair lyves. but was thare obedience, (blynd raige it should be called,) excusable befoir god? the universall plague doeth planelie declair, that the wicked commander, and those that obeyed, war alyke giltie befoir god. [sn: the fact of king saule.] and yf the example of pharao shalbe rejected, becaus he was ane ethnik, than lat us considder the factis of saule: he was a king anoynted of god, appoynted to regne ower his people, he commanded to persecut david, becaus (as he alledged) david was a traytour and usurper of the crowne; and lyekwyis commanded abimelech the hie preast and his fellowis to be slane: but did god approve any parte of this obedience? evident it is that he did nott. and think ye, that god will approve in yow that whiche he did dampne in otheris? be nocht deceaved: with god thair is no suche partialitie.[ ] yf ye obey the injust commandimentis of wicked rewlaris, ye sall suffer goddis vengeance and just punishment with thame. and thairfoir as ye tender your awin salvatioun, we most earnistlie requyre of yow moderatioun, and that ye stay your selfis, and the furye of utheris, from persecuting of us, till our cause be tryed in lauchfull and opin judgement. "and now, to yow that ar perswaded of the justice of our cause, that sumtyme have professed chryst jesus with us, and that also have exhorted us to this interpryse, and yit have left us in our extreme necessitie, or at the least look throw your fingaris, in this our truble, as that the matter apperteaned nocht unto yow; we say, that onles (all fear and warldlie respectis sett asyde) ye joyne your selffis with us, that as of god ye ar reputed traytouris, so shall ye be excomunicated from our societie, and from all participatioun with us in the administratioun of sacramentis. the glorie of this victorie, quhilk god shall geve to his churche, yea evin in the eyis of men, shall nocht apperteane to yow; bot the fearfull judgement, whiche apprehended ananias and his wyfe sapphyra, sall apprehend yow and your posteritie. [sn: lett both the one part and the uther judge yf god have nocht justified the caus of the innocentis.] ye may perchance contempne, and dispyise the excomunicatioun of the churche now by godis myghtie power erected amongis us, as a thing of no force; bot yit doubt we nothing, but that our churche, and the trew ministeris of the same, have the same power whiche our maister, christ jesus, granted to his apostles in these wordis, "whose synnis ye sall forgeve, shalbe forgevin; and whose synnis ye shall reteane, shall be reteaned;" and that, becaus thay preiche, and we beleve the same doctryne whiche is conteyned in his most blessed wourd. and thairfoir except that ye will contempne chryst jesus, ye nether can despyise our threatnyng, nether yit refuise us calling for your just defence. [sn: from quhens this corage did proceid the ishew declaired.] by your faynting, and by extracting of your support, the enimeis ar incoraged, thinking, that thay shall find no resistance: in whiche point, god willing, thay salbe deceaved. for gif thay war ten thowsand, and we bot are thowsand, thai sall nocht murther the least of our bretherin, but we (god assisting us) shall first committ our lyves in the handis of god for thair defence. but this shall aggravat your damnatioun; for ye declair your selfis boith traytouris to the treuth ones professed, and murtheraris of us, and of your bretherin, from whome ye draw your detfull and promisshed support, whome your onelie presence (to manis judgement) myght preserve from this danger. for our enimeis looke nocht to the power of god, bot to the force and strenth of man. when the nomber is mean to resist thame, than rage thay as bloody wolvis; bot a party equall or able to resist thame in apperance, doeth brydill thair fury. examinat your awin consciencis, and wey that sentence of our maister, chryst jesus, saying, "whosoevir denyeth me, or is aschamed of me befoir men, i shall deny him befoir my father." now is the day of his battell in this realme: yf ye deny us, your bretherin, suffering for his name's saik, ye do also deny him, as him self doeth witnes in these wordis, "whatsoevir ye did to any of these litill ones, that ye did to me; and what ye did nocht to one of those litill ones, that ye did nocht to me." gif these sentencis be trew, as concerning meat, drink, cloithing, and suche thingis as apperteane to the body, shall thai not be lykewyis trew in these thingis that apperteane to the preservatioun of the lyves of thowsandis, whose bloode is now sought, for professioun of christ jesus? and thus schortlie leave we yow, who sumtymes have professed christ jesus with us, to the examinatioun of your awin consciencis. and yit ones agane, of yow, who, blynded by superstitioun persecute us, we requyre moderatioun, till our cause may be tryed, whiche gif ye will nocht grant unto us for godis cause, yit we desyre yow to have respect to the preservatioun of our commone cuntree, whiche we can not sonnar betray in the handis of strangeris, than that one of us distroy and murther ane uther. considder our petitionis, and call for the spreit of richteous judgement." these our letteris being divulgat, some man began to reasoun whether of conscience thai myght invaid us or not, considdering that we offered dew obedience to the authoritie; requiring nothing bot the libertie of conscience, and our religioun and fact to be tryed by the word of god. oure letteris came with convenient expeditioun to the handis of the bretherin in cuninghame and kyle, who convened at the kirk of craggie,[ ] whare, efter some contrarious reassonis, alexander erle of glencarne, in zeall, burst furth in these wordis, "lat everie man serve his conscience. i will, by goddis grace, see my bretherin in sanct johnestoun: yea, albeit never man should accumpany me, i will go, and gif it war bot with a pick upoun my shulder; for i had rather dye with that cumpany, nor leve efter thame." these wordis so encoraged the rest, that all decreed[ ] to go fordward, as that thai did so stoutlie, that when lyoun herault, in his coat armour, commanded all man under the pane of treassone to returne to thair housses by publict sound of trumpett in glasgw, never man obeyed that charge, but all went fordward, as we will efter hear. when it was clearlie understand that the prelattis and thair adherantis, suppressing our petitionis so far as in thame lay, did kindill the furye of all men against us, it was thoght expedient to writt unto thame sum declaratioun of our myndis, whiche we did in this forme following:-- "to the generatioun of antichrist, the pestilent prelattis and thare schavillingis within scotland, the congregatioun of christ jesus within the same, sayeth, "to the end that ye shall not be abused, thinking to eschaipe just punishment, efter that ye in your blind fury have caused the bloode of many to be sched, this we notifie and declair unto yow, that yf ye proceid in this your malicious creweltie, ye shalbe entreated, wharesoevir ye shalbe apprehended, as murtheraris and oppin enimeis to god and unto mankind; and thairfoir, betymes cease from this blind raige. remove first from your selfis your bandis of bloody men of warre, and reforme your selffis to a more quiet lyve; and thairefter mitigat ye the authoritie whiche, without cryme committed upoun our parte, ye have inflammit aganis us; or ellis be ye assured, that with the same measure that ye have measured against us, and yit intend to measure to utheris, it salbe measured unto yow: that is, as ye by tyranny intend nocht onelie to destroy our bodyis, bot also by the same to hold our sowllis in bondage of the devill, subject to idolatrie, so shall we with all force and power, whiche god shall grant unto us, execut just vengeance and punishment upoun yow. yea, we shall begyn that same warre whiche god commanded israell to execut aganis the cananites; that is, contract of peace shall never be maid, till ye desist from your oppin idolatrie and crewell persecutioun of godis childrein. and this we signifie unto yow in the name of the eternall god, and of his sone christ jesus, whose veritie we profess, and evangell we will have preached, and holy sacramentis ryghtlie minstrat, so long as god will assist us to ganestand your idolatrie. tak this for advertisment, and be nocht deceaved." [sn: speikaris send by the quene to sanct johnestoun.] these our requeistis and advertismentis nochtwithstanding, monsieur dosell and his frenchemen, with the preastis and thair bandis, marched fordward against sanct johnestoun, and approched within ten myles to the town. than repaired the bretherin from all quartaris for our releaff. the gentilmen of fyffe, anguss, and mernis, with the town of dundie, war thay that first hasarded to resist the enimie; and for that purpoise was chosin a platt of ground,[ ] a myle and more distant from the town. in this meantyme the lord ruthven, provest of the town of sanct johnestoun, and a man whome many judged godlie and stout in that actioun, (as in verray dead he was evin unto his last breath,[ ]) left the town, and depairtit first to his awin place, and efter to the quene: whose defectioun and revolt was a great discoragement to the hartis of many; and yit did god so confort,[ ] that within the space of tuelf houris efter, the hartis of all men war erected agane; for those that war than assembillit did nocht so muche houp victorie by thair awin strenth, as by the power of him whose veritie they professed; and began one to confort another, till the hole multitude was erected in a reasonable esperance. the day efter that the lord ruthven depairted, whiche was the of maij, cam the erle of argyle, lord james, priour of sanctandrois, and the lord sempill, directed from the quene regent to inquire the caus of that convocatioun of liegis thare. to quhome, quhen it was ansuered, that it was onelie to resist that crewell tyranny devised against that poore town, and the inhabitants of the same, thay asked, "gif we myndit nocht to hold that town against the authoritie, and against the quene regent?" to the whiche questioun ansuered the lairdis of dun and pittarro, with the congregatioun of anguss and mernis, the maister of lyndesay, the lairdis of lundy, balvaird,[ ] and otheris barronis of fyffe, "that gif the quenis grace wald suffer the religioun thare begun to proceid, and nocht truble thair bretherin and sisteris that had professed christ jesus with thame, that the town, thay thame selffis, and quhatsoevir to thame perteaned, should be at the quenis commandiment." [sn: the fals suggestioun of the quene regent.] whiche ansuer understand,[ ] the erle of ergyle and the priour (quho boith war than protestantis) began to muse, and said planelie, that thay war far utherwayis informed by the quene, to witt, "that we mentt no religioun, but a plane rebellioun." to the whiche when we had answered simplie, and as the treuth was, to wit, "that we conveaned for none other purpose, bot onelie to assist our brethrein, who than war most injustlie persecuted; and thairfoir we desyred thame faithfullie to report our answer, and to be intercessouris to the quene regent, that suche creweltie suld nocht be usit against us, considering that we had offered in our former letteris, alsweill to the quenis grace, as to the nobilitie, our mater to be tryed in lauchfull judgement." thay promesed fidelitie in that behalff, whiche also thay keipt. the day efter, whiche was the day of maij, befoir that the saidis lordis depairted, in the morning johne knox desyred to speak with the same lordis; whiche grantit unto him, he was conveyed to thair ludgeing by the laird of balvaird,[ ] and thus he began:-- [sn: the oratioun of johne knox to the lordis.] "the present trublis, honorable lordis, owght to move the hartis, nocht onlie of the trew servandis of god, bot also of all suche as beare any favour to thare cuntree, and naturall cuntreymen, to discend within thame selfis and deiplie to considder quhat shalbe the end of this pretended tyranny. the raige of sathan seaketh the destructioun of all those that within this realme professe christ jesus; and thay that inflambe the quenis grace, and yow the nobles aganis us, regard nocht who prevaill, provided that thay may abuse the warld, and leve at thair pleasour, as heirtofoir thay have done. yea, i fear that some seak nothing more than the effusioun of scottis bloode, to the end that thair possessionis may be more patent to utheris. bot, becaus that this is nocht the principall whiche i have to speak, omitting the same to be considderit by the wisdome of those to quhome the cair of the commone wealth apperteaneth. " st. i most humbillie require of yow, my lordis, in my name, to say to the quenis grace regent, that we, who sche in hir blynd raige doeth persecute, ar goddis servandis, faithfull and obedient subjectis to the authoritie of this realme; that that religioun, whiche sche pretendeth to maynteyne by fyre and sweard, is nott the trew religioun of christ jesus, bot is expres contrarie to the same; a superstitioun devised be the brane of man; whiche i offer my selff to prove aganis all that within scotland will maynteane the contrarie, libertie of towng being granted unto me, and godis writtin word being admitted for judge. [sn: lett the papistes, rather ambitious romanistis, judge.] " d. i farder require your honouris, in my name, to say unto hir grace, that as of befoir i have writtin, sa now i say, that this hir interpryise shall nocht prosperouslie succeid in the end; and albeit for a tyme sche truble the sanctis of god, for sche feghteth nocht aganis man onelie, bot against the eternall god and his invincible veritie; and thairfoir, the end shalbe hir confusioun, oneles betymes sche repent and desist. "these thingis i require of yow, in the name of the eternall god, as from my mouth, to say unto hir grace; adding, that i have bein, and am a more assured friend to hir grace, than thay that either flattering hir ar servandis to hir corrupt appetytes,[ ] or ellis inflambe hir against us, who seik nothing bot goddis glorie to be advanceit, vice to be suppressed, and veritie to be maynteaned in this poore realme." [sn: the diligence of the erle of glencarne, and of the bretherin of the west, for the releif of sanct johnestoun.] thei all three did promese to report his wordis sa fer as thai culd, whiche efterwardis we understoode thai did. yea, the lord semple[ ] him self, a man sold under syne, enymye to god and to all godlynes, did yit maik suche report, that the quene was sumquhat offended, that any man suld use suche libertie in hir presence. sche still proceaded in hir malice; for immediatelie thairefter sche send hir lyoun herauld,[ ] with letteris, straitlie chargeing all man to avoid the toun, under the pane of treasone. whiche letteris, efter he had declaired thame to the cheife men of the congregatioun, he publictlie proclamed the same, upoun sounday, the [ th] of maij.[ ] in this mean tyme, come sure knawlege to the quene, to the duke, and to monsieur dosell, that the erle of glencarne, the lordis uchiltrie and boyd, the young schiref of air, the lairdis of cragy wallace, sesnock, carnell, barr, gaitgirth,[ ] and the hole congregatioun of kyle and cuninghame, approched for our releve; and in verray dead thay came in suche diligence, and suche a nomber, that as the enymie had just caus to fear, so have all that professe christ jesus just matter to praise god for thair fidelitie and stout corage in that nead; for by thair presence was the tyranny of the enymie brydilled. thare diligence was suche, that albeit the passage by striveling, and sex myles above, was stoppit, (for thair lay the quene with hir bandis, and gart cutt the brigis upoun the watter of forth, gwdy and teath,[ ] above striveling,) yit maid thay suche expeditioun throw desert and montane, that thay prevented the enymie, and approched within sex myles to our campe, whiche than lay without the town, awaiting upoun the enymie, befoir that any assured knawlege come to us of thair cunning. their number was judged to[ ] to tuentie fyve hundreth men, whairof thair was hundreth horsmen. the quene understanding how the said erle and lordis, with thair cumpany approched, causit to besett all wayis, that na advertisment should come to us, to the end that we, dispared of support, myght condiscend to suche appointment as sche required; and send first to require, that some discreat men of our number wald cum and speik the duke and monsieur dosell, (who than with thair armye did lye at auchterardour,[ ] ten myles fra sanct johnestoun,) to the end that some reasonable appointment myght be had. sche had perswaded the erle of ergyle, and all utheris, that we ment nothing bot rebellioun; and thairfoir had he promisshed unto hir, that in case we should nocht stand content with ane reasonable appointment, he should declair him self plane enymie unto us, nochtwithstanding that he professed the same religioun with us. from us war send the laird of dun,[ ] the lard of inverquharitie,[ ] and thomas scot of abbotishall,[ ] to heir quhat appointment the quene wald offer. the duke and monsieur dosell required, "that the town should be maid patent, and that all thingis should be referred to the quenis plesour." [sn: the petitioun of the protestantis for randering of sanct johnestoun.] to the whiche thai answered, "that nather had thay commissioun so to promese, nather durst thay of conscience so perswaid thair bretherin. bot yf that the quenis grace wald promeise, that no inhabitant of the town should be trublit for any suche crymes as myght be alledged aganis thame for the lait mutatioun of religioun, and abolishment of idolatrie, and for douncasting the places of the same; yf sche wald suffer the religioun begun to go fordward, and leif the town at hir depairting free from the garysonis of frenche soldiouris, that thay wald labour at the handis of thair bretherin that the quene should be obeyed in all thingis." monsieur dosell perceaving the danger to be great, yf that are suddane appointment should nocht[ ] be maid; and that thay war nocht able to execut thair tyranny against us, after that the congregatioun of kyle (of quhose cuming we had no advertisment) should be joyned with us; with gud wordis dismissed[ ] the saidis lairdis to perswaid the bretherin to quiet concord. to the whiche all men war so weill mynded, that with one voce thay cryed, "curssed be thay that seak effusioun of bloode, war, or dissentioun. lett us possess christ jesus, and the benefite of his evangell, and none within scotland shalbe more obedient subjectis than we shalbe." with all expeditioun war send from striviling agane, (efter that the cuming of the erle of glencarne was knawin, for the enymie for fear quaiked,) the erle of ergyle and lord james foirsaid, and in thair cumpany a crafty man, maister gavine hammiltoun, abbot of kilwynning,[ ] who war send by the quene to finishe the appointment foirsaid. bot befoir that thay came, was the erle of glencarne and his honorable cumpany arryved in the town; and then began all men to praise god, for that he had so mercifullie hard thame in thare maist extreme necessitie, and had send unto thame suche releafe as was able, without effusioun of bloode, to stay the raige of the ennemy. the erle of ergyle and lord james did earnistlie perswaid the agreement,[ ] to the whiche all men was willing. but sum did smell the craft of the adversarie, to wit, that thay war mynded to keip no point of the promeise longar than thay had obteanit thair intent. [sn: the ansuer of the erle of ergyle, and priour of sanctandrois.] with the erle of glencarne come our loving brother johne willok; johne knox was in the town befoir. these two went to the erle of ergyle and priour, accusing thame of infidelitie, in sa fer as thay had defrauded thair brethering of thair debtfull support and confort in thair greatest necessitie. thay ansuered boith, "that thair hart was constant with thair bretherin, and that thay wald defend that caus to the uttermost of thair power. bot becaus thay had promesed to laubour for concord, and to assist the quene, in case we refuised ressonable offerris, of conscience and honour, thay culd do na less than be faithfull in thair promeise maid: and thairfoir thay required that the bretherin myght be perswaided to consent to that reassonable appointment; promesing, in goddis presence, that yf the quene did break in ony joit thairof, that thay, with thair hole poweris, wald assist and concur with thair bretherin in all tymes to cum." [sn: the promeise of the foirsaidis.] this promeise maid, the preacheouris appeased the multitude, and obteaned in the end that all men did consent to the appointment foirsaid, whiche thay obteaned nocht without great labouris. and no wonder, for many foirsaw the danger to follow; yea, the preacheouris thame selfis, in oppin sermone, did affirme planelie, "that thay war assuredlie perswaided that the quene mentt no treuth: bot to stop the mouth of the adversarie, who injustlie did burthein us with rebellioun, thay moist earnistlie requyred all men to approve the appointment, and so to suffer hypocresie to discloise the selff." this appointment was concluded the th of maij, and the day following, at tua efter none, depairted the congregatioun from sanct johnestoun, after that johne knox had, in his sermone, exhorted all men to constancie, and unfeanedlie to thank god, for that it had pleased his mercie to stay the raige of the ennemy, without effusioun of bloode; also, that no brother should weary nor faint to support suche as should efter be lykewyis persecuted, "for, (said he,) i am assured, that no pairt of this promeise maid shalbe longar keipit than the quene and hir frenchemen have the upper hand." many of the ennemeis war at the same sermone; for after that the appointment was maid, they had free entres in the town to provide ludgeingis. befoir the lordis depairted, was this band made, quhose tenour followis, as it was writtin and subscryved.-- "at perth, the last day of maij, the yeir of god j^m. v^c. fiftie nyne yeiris, the congregationis of the west cuntrey, with the congregationis of fyfe, perth, dundie, anguss, mearnis, and munross, being conveaned in the town of perth, in the name of jesus christ, for furthsetting of his glorie; understanding na thing mair necessar for the samin than to keap ane constant amitie, unitie, and fellowschipe togidder, according as thay ar commanded be god, ar confederat, and become bundin and obleast in the presence of god, to concur and assist together in doing all thingis required of god in his scripture, that may be to his glorie; and at thair haill poweris[ ] to distroy, and away put, all thingis that dois dishonour to his name, so that god may be trewlie and puirelie wirschipped: and in case that any truble beis intended aganis the saidis congregationis, or ony part, or member[ ] thairof, the haill congregatioun shall concur, assist, and conveane togidder, to the defence of the samin congregatioun, or persone trubled; and shall nocht spair laubouris, goodis, substancis, bodyis, and lyves, in manteaning the libertie of the haill congregatioun, and everie member thairof, aganis whatsomevir power that shall intend the said trubill, for caus of religioun, or ony uther caus dependand thairupoun, or lay to thair charge under pretence thairof, althocht it happin to be coloured with ony uther outward caus. in witnessing and testimony of the quhilkis, the haill congregationis foirsaidis hes ordeyned and appointit the noblemen and personis underwrittin to subscrive thir presentis. (_sic subscribitur_,) arch. ergyle. glencarne. james stewart. r. lord boyd. mathow campbell of teringland.[ ] uchiltrie. [sn: the first slauchter of the frenchemen.] the tuenty nine day of maij entered the quene, the duke, monsieur dosell, and the frenchemen, who, in dischargeing thair voley of hacquebuttis, did weill mark the hous of patrik murray,[ ] a man fervent in religioun, and that baldlie had susteaned all dangeris in that trubill; against whose stair thay directed vj or vij schott, evin aganis the faces of those that war thare lyand. all man eschaped, except the sone of the said patrik, a boy of ten or tuelf yearis of aige, who being slane, was had to the quenis presence. bot sche understanding whose sone he was, said in mokage, "it is a pitie it chanced on the sone, and nocht on the father; bot seing that so is chanced, me can nocht be against fortune." this was hir happie entress to sanct johnestoun, and the great zeall sche tendeth to justice. [sn: idolatrie erected against the appointment.] the swarme of papistis that entered with hir began streyght to mak provisioun for thair messe; and becaus the altaris war nocht so easy to be repaired agane, thay provided tables, whairof sum befoir used to serve for drunkards, dysaris, and carteris;[ ] bot thay war holy aneuch for the preast and his padgean. the quene began to raige against all godlie and honest men; thair housses was oppressed by the frenchemen; the lauchfull magistratis, alsweall provest as bailies, war injustlie, and without all ordour, deposed from thair authoritie. a wicked man, void of godis fear, and destitut of all vertew, the lard of kinfawnse, was intrused by hir provest above the town,[ ] wharat all honest men was offended. thay left thair awin housses, and with thair wyeffis and childrein sought amongis thare bretherin some resting place for a tyme. [sn: against the appointment the secund tyme.] sche tuk ordour that four ensenzeis of the soldiouris should abyde in the town to maynteane idolatrie, and to resist the congregatioun. honest and indifferent men asked, why sche did so manifestlie violat hir promeise? [sn: secund ansuer of quene regent.] sche answered, "that sche was bundin to keap na promeise to hereticques: and moreover, that sche promeist onelie to leave the town free of frenche soldiouris, whiche, (said sche,) sche did, becaus that those that thairin war left war scottishmen." bot when it was reasoned in hir contrair, that all those that took waiges of france, war counted frenche soldiouris: [sn: the thrid ansuer.] sche answered, "princes must nocht so straitlie be bundin to keap thair promesses. myself, (said sche,) wold mak litill conscience to tak from all that sorte thair lyves and inheritance, yf i myght do it with als honest ane excuise." and than sche left the town in extreme bondage, efter that hir ungodlie frenche men had most crewelly entreated the maist parte of those that remaned in the same. [sn: the departure of the erle of ergyle and lord james fra the quene regent, with suche as assisted thame and thair first band.] the erle of argyle, and lord james foirsaidis, perceaving in the quene nothing but meare tyrranny and falshode, myndfull of thair former promesses maid to thair bretherin, did secreidlie convey thame selfis and thair cumpanyeis of the town; and with thame departed the lord ruthven, (of whome befoir mentioun is maid,) the erle of menteith, and the laird of tullibardin;[ ] who, in godis presence, did confiderat, and bynd thame selfis togidder, faithfullie promessing one to assist and defend another against all personis that wald persew thame for religionis saik; and also that thay, with thair hole force and power, wald defend the bretherin persecuted for the same caus. the quene, heyghlie offended at the suddane departure of the personis foirsaidis, send charge to thame to returne, under the heighest pane of hir displeasour. [sn: the ansuer of the erll of ergyle.] bot thay ansuered, "that with saif conscience thay culd nocht be partakaris of so manifest tyrranny as by hir was committed, and of so great iniquitie as thay perceaved devised, by hir and hir ungodlie counsale the prelattis." this ansuer was gevin to hir the first day of junij, and immediatlie the erle of ergyle and lord james repaired toward sanctandrois, and in thair jorney gaif advertisment, by wrytting, to the laird of dun, to the laird of pittarrow, to the provest of dundie,[ ] and otheris, professouris in anguss,[ ] to visite thame in sanctandrois the feird[ ] of junij, for reformatioun to be maid thair. whiche day thay keap, and broght in thair cumpany johne knox, who, the first day, after his cuming to fyfe, did preache in carraill, the nixt day in anstruther, mynding the thrid day, whiche was the sounday,[ ] to preache in sanctandrois. the bischope, hearing of reformatioun to be maid in his cathedrall churche, thoght tyme to sturr, or ellis never; and thairfoir assembled his collegis[ ] and confederat fellowis, besydis his uther freindis, and came to the town upoun the setterday at night, accumpanyed with a hundreth spearis, of mynd to have stopped johne knox to have preached. the two lordis and gentilmen foirsaid war onlie accumpanyed with thair quyet housholdis, and thairfoir was the suddane cuming of the bischope the more fearfull; for than was the quene and hir frenchmen departed from sanct johnestoun, and war lying in falkland, within tuelf myles of sanctandrois; and the town at that tyme had not gevin professioun of christ, and thairfoir could nocht the lordis be assured of thair freindschip. consultatioun being had, many war of mynd that the preaching should be delayed for that day, and especiallie that johne knox should nocht preache; for that did the bischope affirme that he wald nocht suffer, considdering that by his commandiment the picture of the said johne was befoir brunt. [sn: the bischope his good mynde toward johne knox.] he willed, thairfoir, ane honest gentillman, robert colvile of cleishe,[ ] to say to the lordis, "that in case johne knox presented him selff to the preaching place, in his town and principall churche, he should gar him be saluted with a dosane of culveringis, quherof the most parte should lyght upoun his nose." after long deliberatioun had, the said johne was called, that his awin judgement might be had. when many perswationis war maid that he should delay for that tyme, and great terrouris gevin in caise he should interpryse suche a thing, as it war in contempt of the bischope. he ansuered, "god is witnes that i never preached christ jesus in contempt of any man, nather mynd i at any tyme to present my selff to that place, having ather respect to my awin privat commoditie, eyther yit to the warldlie hurt of any creature; but to delay to preache the morrow, (onless the bodie be violentlie withholdin,) i can nocht of conscience: for in this town and churche began god first to call me to the dignitie of a preacheour, from the whiche i was reft by the tyrranny of france, by procurement of the bischopis, as ye all weall aneuch know: how long i continewed prisoneir, what torment i susteaned in the galaies, and what war the sobbes of my harte, is now no tyme to receat: this onelie i can nocht conceall, whiche mo than one have hard me say, when the body was far absent from scotland, that my assured houp was, in oppin audience, to preache in sanctandrois befoir i depairtod this lyeff. and thairfoir (said he,) my lordis, seing that god, above the expectatioun of many, hath brocht the body to the same place whair first i was called to the office of a preacher, and from the whiche most injustlie i was removed, i beseak your honouris nocht to stop me to present my selff unto my bretherin. and as for the fear of danger that may come to me, lett no man be solist; for my lyef is in the custody of him whose glorie i seak; and thairfoir i can nocht so fear thair boast nor tyrranny, that i will cease from doing my dewetie, when of his mercie[ ] he offereth the occasioun. i desyre the hand nor weapone of no man to defend me; onelie do i crave audience; whiche, yf it be denyed heir unto me at this tyme, i must seak farther whare i may haif it." [sn: the reformatioun of sanctandrois.] at these his wordis,[ ] the lordis war fullie content that he should occupie the place; which he did upoun sounday, the [ th] of junij, and did entreat of the ejectioun of the byaris and the sellaris furth of the tempill of jerusalem, as it is writtin in the evangelistis mathow and johne; and so applyed the corruptioun that was thair[ ] to the corruptioun that is in the papistrie; and christis fact, to the dewetie of those to whome god geveth power and zeall thairto; that alsweill the magistratis, the provest and bailies, as the communaltie for the most parte, within the town,[ ] did aggree to remove all monumentis of idolatrie, whiche also thay did with expeditioun. [sn: cowper mure.] the bischope advertisshed heirof, departed that same day to the quene, who lay with hir frenchmen, as said is, in falkland. the hote furie of the bischope did so kendill hir choler, (and yit the luif was verrie cold betuix thame,) that without farder delay, conclusioun was taikin to invaid sanctandrois, and the two young lordis foirsaidis,[ ] who than war thare verrie sklendarlie accumpanyed. postis war send from the quene with all diligence to cowper, distant onelie sex myles from sanctandrois, to prepair ludgeingis and victuallis for the quene and hir frenchemen. ludgeingis war sygned, and furiouris[ ] war send befoir. whiche thing understand, counsale was gevin to the lordis to marche fordward, and to prevent thame befoir thay came to cowper; whiche thay did, geving advertisment to all bretherin with possible expeditioun to repair towardis thame; whiche thay also did, with suche diligence, that in thair assemblie the wonderous wark of god myght have bene espyed: for when at nyght the lordis came to cowper, thay war nocht a hundreth horse, and a certane footmen, whom lord james brocht fra the coast syde; and yit befoir the nixt day at houris, (whiche was tyisday, the of junij,) thair number passed three thowsand men, whiche by godis providence came unto the lordis; from lowthiane, the lairdis of ormestoun, calder, haltoun, restalrig, and coilstoun,[ ] who, albeit thay understood at thair depairting from thair awin houssis no suche truble, yit war thay by thair good counsale verrie confortable that day. the lord ruthven came from sanct johnestoun, with some horsmen with him. the erle of rothess, schireff of fyffe, came with a honest cumpany. the townis of dundie and sanctandrois declaired thame selffis boith stout and faithfull. cowper, becaus it stoode in greatest danger, assisted with the hole force. finallie, god did so multiplie our number, that it appeared as men had rayned from the cloodis. the ennemy understanding nothing of our force, assured thame selffis of victorie. who had bene in falkland the nicht befoir, mycht have sene embrasing and kyssing betuix the quene, the duke, and the bischope. [sn: maister gavine hammiltounis vow.] bot maister gavine hammiltoun, gapare for the bischoprik of sanctandrois, above all other was lovinglie embrased of the quene; for he maid his solempne vow, "that he wald feght, and that he should never returne till he had brought those traytouris to hir grace, eyther quick or dead." and thus, befoir midnyght, did thay send fordward thair ordinance; thame selffis did follow befoir three houris in the morning. the lordis heirof advertised, assembilled thair cumpany airelie in the morning upoun cowper mure;[ ] whare by the advise of maister james halyburtoun, provest of dundie, was chosen a place of ground convenient for our defence; for it was so chosen, that upoun all sydis our ordinance mycht have bett the ennemie, and yit we have stand in saiftie,[ ] gif we had bene persewed, till we had cumed to hand straikis. the lord ruthven tuik the charge of the horsmen, and ordered thame so, that the ennemy was never permitted to espy our nomber: the day was dark, whiche helpit thairto. the enemy, (as befoir is said,) thinking to have fundin no resistance, after that thay had twyis or thryis practised with us, as that thay wald retyre, marched fordward with great expeditioun, and approched within a myle befoir that evir thair horsmen stayed; and yit thay keipit betuix us and them a wattir for thair strenth. it appeared to us that ather thay marched for cowper or sanctandrois; and thairfoir our horsmen in thare trowpe, and a parte of the footemen, with the ordinance,[ ] marched somewhat alwayis befoir thame for safetie of the town: the lordis, with the gentilmen of fyffe, and sa many of anguss and mearnes as war present, keape thame selffis close in a knott, neye to the nomber of a thowsand speiris. the townis of dundie and sanctandrois war arrayed in ane uther battell, who come nocht to the sight of the ennemy, till that efter xij houris the mist began to evanish, and than passed some of thair horsmen to a montane, from the height whairof thay mycht discerne our nomber. whiche perceaved by thame, thare horsmen and footemen stayed incontinent. postis ran to the duke and monsieur dosell, to declair our nomber, and what ordour we keaped; and than was mediatouris send to maik appointment. but thay war nocht suffered to approche neye to the lordis, neyther yit to the view of our camp; whiche put thame in greatter fear. [sn: first answer at cowper mure.] answer was gevin unto thame, "that as we had offended no man, so wald we seak appointment of no man; bot yf any wald seak our lyves, (as we war informed thay did,) thay should find us, yf thay pleased to mak diligence." this answer receaved, war send agane the lord lyndesay and laird of wauchtoun,[ ] who earnestlie requeasted us to concord, and that we wold nocht be the occasioun that innocent bloode should be sched. [sn: the secund ansuer.] we ansuered, "that nather had we querrall against any man nather yit sought we any manis bloode; onelie we war conveaned for defence of our awin lyves injustlie sought by uther." we added forther, "that yf thay culd find the meane that we and our bretherin myght be free from the tyrranny devised against us, that thay should reasonabillie desyre nothing whiche should be denyed for our parte." this ansuer receaved, the duke and monsieur dosell, haveing commissioun of the quene regent, required that assurance mycht be taikin for eight dayis, to the end that indifferent men in the meantyme micht commone upoun sum finall aggrement of those thingis whiche than war in controversie. heirto did we fullie consent, albeit that in nomber and force we war far superiour; and for testificatioun heirof, we send unto thame our hand-writtis, and we lykewyis receaved thairis, with promess that within two or three dayis some discreat men should be send unto us, to sanctandrois, with farther knawlege of the quenis mynd. the tennour of the assurance was this:-- the assurance. "we, james duke of chattellerault, erle of arrane, lord hammiltoun, &c., and my lord dosell, lievtenant for the king in thir partis, for our selffis, our assistaris and partakeris, being presentlie with us in cumpany, be the tennour heirof promittis faithfullie of honour to my lordis archibald erle of ergyle, and james commendatar of the priorie of sanctandrois, to thair assistaris and partakeris, being presentlie with thame in cumpany; that we, and our cumpany foirsaidis, shall reteir incontinent to falkland, and shall, with diligence, transport the frenchemen and our uther folkis now presentlie with us; and that na frencheman, or other souldiouris of ouris, shall remane within the boundis of fyffe, bot sa mony as befoir the raising of the last armye lay in disart, kirkcaldy, and kinghorne, and the same to ly in the same places onelie, yf we shall think goode: and this to have effect for the space of eight dayis following the dait heirof _exclusive_, that in the meantyme certane noble men, be the advise of the quenis grace, and rest of the counsale, may conveane to talk of sick thingis as may maik goode ordour and quyetnes amongis the quenis liegis. and further, we, nor nane of our assistaris, being present with us, shall invade, truble, or inquyet the saidis lordis, nor thair assistaris, dureing the said space: and this we bind and obleise us, upoun our lautie, fidelitie, and honour, to observe and keape in everie point above writtin, but fraude or gyle. in witnes whairof we have subscrivit thir presentis with our handis. "at garlabank,[ ] the xiij daij of junii . [signed] [signed] _the uther subscriptioun we culd nocht read, bot the simile is this_,--[ ] [signed] and, this receaved, we departed first, becaus we war thairto requeasted be the duke, and so we returned to cowper, lawding and praising god for his mercie schewed; and thairefter everie man departed to his duelling place. the lordis, and a great part of the gentilmen, passed to sanctandrois, who thair abode certane dayis, still looking for those that war promessed to come frome the quene, for appointment to be maid. bot we perceaving hir craft and disceat, (for under that assurance sche ment nothing ellis, but to convey hir selff, hir ordinance, and frenche men, over the wattir of forth,) took consultatioun what should be done[ ] for delivering of sanct johnestoun from these ungodlie soldiouris, and how our bretherin, exiled from thair awin housses, mycht be restored agane. [sn: the deliverance of sanct johnestoun.] it was concluded, that the bretherin of fyffe, anguss, mearnis, and stratherin, should convene at sanct johnestoun, the day of junij for that purpoise; and in the meantyme, war these letteris writtin be the erle of ergyle and lord james, to the quene than regent. [sn: letteris to the quene regent.] "madame,--efter our hartlie commendationis of service, this shalbe to schaw your grace, that upoun the day of junij, we war informed by thame that war communeris betuix my lord duke, monsieur dosell, and us, that we should have spoken irreverentlie of your grace, whiche we beseik your grace, for the trew service that we have maid, and ar reddy to maik at all tymes to your grace; that of your goodnes ye will lat us knaw the sayeris thairof, and we shall do the dewetie of trew subjectis to defend our awin innocencie; as we tak god to witnes of the gud zeale and love we beir towardis yow, to serve yow with trew hartis and all that we have, alsweill landis as goodis, desyring na uther thing for our service bot the libertie of our conscience, to serve our lord god as we will ansuer to him, whiche your grace aucht and should geve to us frelie unrequired. mairover, please your grace, that my lord duik, and the noble men being in striveling for the tyme, be your gracis avise, solisted us to pass to the congregatioun convened at the town of perth, to commoun of concord, whair we did our exact diligence, and brocht it to pas, as your grace knawis. and thair is a point that we plane is nocht observed to us, whiche is, that na soldiour should remane in the town, after your grace departing. and suppois it may be inferred, that it was spokin of frenche soldiouris allanerlie, yit we tuik it utherwais, lyik as we do yit, that scottishmen, or any uther natioun, takand the king of francis waiges, ar repute and haldin frenche soldiouris. thairfoir, sen we of good will and mynde brocht that matter to your gracis contentment, it will please your grace, of your goodnes, to remove the soldiouris and thair capitanes, with utheris that hes gottin charge of the town, that the same may be guyded and reulled frelie, as it was befoir, be the baillies and counsale, conforme to thair infeftmentis gevin to thame be the ancient and maist excellent kingis of this realme, to elect and cheise thair officiaris at michelmess, and thai to indure for the space of one yeir, conforme to the auld ryte and consuetude of this realme; whiche being done be your grace, we traist the better success shall follow thairupoun to your grace contentatioun,[ ] as the bearar will declair at mair lenth to your grace; whome god preserve." [sn: the summoning of sanct johnestoun.] to sanct johnestoun, with the gentilmen befoir expressed, did conveane the erle of menteath,[ ] the lard of glenurquhar,[ ] and diverse utheris who befoir had nocht presented thame selffis for defence of thair bretherin. when the hole multitude was conveaned, a trumpet was send by the lordis, commanding the capitanes and thair bandis to avoid the town, and to leave it to the ancient libertie and just inhabitantis of the same; alsua commanding the laird of killfaunes,[ ] insett provest be the quene, with the capitanes foirsaidis, to cast up the portis of the town, and maik the same patent to all our soveraneis liegis, to the effect, that alsweill trew religioun now aneis begun thairin may be maynteaned, and idolatrie utterlie suppressed; as alsua the said town mycht joise and brooke thair ancient lawis and liberteis unoppressed by men of wear, according to thair old privilegis granted to thame be the ancient princes of this realme, and conforme to the provisioun conteaned in the contract of mariage maid be the nobilitie and parliament of this realme with the king of france, beirand, that nane of our aid lawis nor liberteis should be alterat: adding thairto, gif they folishlie resisted, and thairin happined to commit murther, that thay should be entreated as murtheraris. to the whiche thay ansuered prowdlie, "that thay wald keap and defend that town, according to thair promess maid to the quene regent." [sn: communing at sanct johnestoun.] this answer receaved, preparatioun was maid for the seage and assault; for amangis all it was concluded, that the town should be sett at libertie, to what dangeris soever thair bodyis should be exponed. whill preparatioun was in making, came the erle of huntlie, the lord erskin, and maister johne bannatyne, justice clerk,[ ] requireing that the persute of the town should be delayed. to speak thame war appointed the erle of ergyle, lord james, and lord ruthven, who, perceaving in thame nothing but a drift of tyme, without any assurance that the former wrangis should be redressed, gave unto thame schort and plane ansuer, "that thay wald nocht delay thair purpoise ane hour; and thairfoir willed thame to certifie the capitanes in the town, that gif by pryde and foolishnes thay wald keape the town, and in so doing slay any of thair bretherin, that thay should everie one dye as murtheraris." the erle of huntlie displeased at this ansuer, departed, as hielie offended that he culd nocht dress suche appointment as should have contented the queue and the preastis. after thair departing, the town was agane summondit; bot the capitanes, supposing that na suddane persute should be maid, and looking for releif to have bein send from the quene, abode in thair former opinioun. and so upoun setterday, the [ th] of junij, at ten houris at nycht, commanded the lord ruthven, who beseaged the west quarter, to schoote the first voley; whiche being done, the town of dundie did the lyke, whose ordinance lay upoun the eist syde of the brig. the capitanes and soldiouris within the town, perceaving that thai war unable long to resist, required assurance till xij houris upoun the morne, promessing, "that gif or that hour thair came unto thame na releaf frome the quene regent, that thay wald rander the town, providing that thay should be suffered to departe the town with ensenzie displayed." we, thrusting the bloode of no man, and seaking onlie the libertie of our bretherin, condiscended to thair desyris, albeit that we mycht have executed against thame jugement without mercie, for that thay had refused our former favouris, and had slane one of our bretherin, and hurt two in thair resistance;[ ] and yit we suffered thame freelie to depart without any forther molestatioun. [sn: the bischope of murray.] the town being delivered from thare thraldome, upoun sounday the [ th] of junij, thankis war gevin unto god for his great benefite receaved, and consultatioun was taikin what was forder to be done. in this meantyme, four[ ] zealous men, considdering how obstinat, prowde, and dispitefull the bischope of murray[ ] had bein befoir; how he had threatned the town be his soldiouris and freindis, who lay in skune,[ ] thought good that some ordour should be taikin with him and with that place, whiche lay neir to the town end. the lordis wrait unto him, (for he lay[ ] within two myles to sanet johnestoun,) "that oneles he wald cum and assist thame, thay nather culd spair nor save his place." he ansuered be his writing, "that he wold cum, and wold do as thay thoght expedient; that he wold assist thame with his force, and wald vote with thame against the rest of the clargie in parliament." bot becaus this ansuer was slaw in cuming, the town of dundie, partelie offended for the slauchter of thair man, and especiallie bearing no goode favour to the said bischope, for that he was and is cheif ennemy to christ jesus, and that by his counsale alone was walter mylne our brother put to death, thay marched fordward. to stay thame was first send the provest of dundie, and his brother alexander halyburtoun, capitane, who litill prevaling, was send unto thame johne knox; bot befoir his cuming, thay war entered to the pulling down of the ydollis and dortour. and albeit the said maister james halyburtoun, alexander his brother, and the said johne, did what in thame lay to have stayed the furie of the multitude, yit war thay nocht able to put ordour universalie; and tharfoir thay send for the lordis, erle of ergyle, and lord james, who, cuming with all diligence, laboured to have saved the palace and the kirk. [sn: the distructioun of scone.] bot becaus the multitude had fundin, bureid in the kirk, a great number of idollis, hid of purpose to have preserved thame to a bettir day, (as the papistis speak,) the townis of dundie and sanct johnestoun culd nocht be satisfeit, till that the hole reparatioun and ornamentis of the churche, (as thay terme it,) war distroyed. and yit did the lordis so travell, that thay saved the bischopis palace, with the churche and place, for that nicht: for the two lordis did nocht depart till thay brocht with thame the hole nomber of those that most sought the bischopis displesour. the bischope, greatlie offended that any thing should have bein interprised in reformatioun of his place, asked of the lordis his band and hand-writting, whiche nocht two houris befoir he had send to thame. whiche delivered to his messinger, sir adame brown,[ ] advertisment was gevin, that yf any farder displesour chanced unto him, that he should nocht blame thame. the bischopis servandis, that same nycht, began to fortifie the place agane, and began to do violence to some that war careing away suche baggage as thay culd cum by. the bischopis girnell was keapt the first nycht by the laubouris of johne knox, who, by exhortatioun, removed suche as violentlie wald have maid irruptioun. that same nycht departed from sanct johnestoun the erle of ergyle, and lord james, as efter shalbe declaired. [sn: the caus of the burning of scone.] the morrow following, some of the poore, in houp of spoyle, and sum of dundie, to considder what was done, passed up to the said abbay of scone; whairat the bischopis servandis offended, began to threattene and speak proudlie: and, as it was constantlie affermed, one of the bischopis sonis stogged throuch with a rapper one of dundie, for becaus he was looking in at the girnell door. this brute[ ] noysed abrode, the town of dundie was more enraged than befoir, who, putting thame selffis in armour, send word to the inhabitants of sanct johnestoun, "that onles thay should supporte thame to avenge that injurie, that thai should never after that day concur with thame in any actioun." the multitud easelie inflambed, gave the alarme,[ ] and so was that abbay and palace appointit to saccag; in doing whairof thay took no lang deliberatioun, bot committed the hole to the merciment of fyre; wharat no small nomber of us war offended, that patientlie we culd nocht speak till any that war of dundie or sanct johnestoun. [sn: speaking of ane ancient matrone when scone was burning.] a poore aged matrone, seing the flambe of fyre pas up samichtelie, and perceaving that many war thairat offended, in plane and sober maner of speaking, said, "now i see and understand that goddis judgementis ar just, and that no man is able to save whare he will punische. since my remembrance, this place hath bein nothing ellis bot a den of hooremongaris. it is incredible to beleve how many wyffes hath bein adulterat, and virginis deflored, by the filthie beastis whiche hath bein fostered in this den; bot especiallie by that wicked man who is called the bischope. yf all men knew alsmuche as i, thay wald praise god; and no man wald be offended." this woman duelt into the toun, neye unto the abbay; at whose wordis war many pacifeid; affirming with hir, that it was goddis just judgement. and assuredlie, yf the laubouris or travell of any man culd have saved that place, it had nocht bein at that tyme destroyed;[ ] for men of greattest estimatioun lawboured with all diligence for the savetie of it. [sn: the taking of striviling.] whill these thingis war done at sanct johnestoun, the quene, fearing what should follow, determinat to send certane bandis of frenche soldiouris to striveling, for purpose to stop the passage to us that than war upoun the north syde of forth. whiche understand, the erle of ergyle and lord james departed secreatlie upoun the nycht, and with great expeditioun, preventing the frenchemen, thay took the town, (befoir whose cuming the rascheall multitude put handis in the thevis, i should say, frearis places and utterlie distroyed thame;) wharat the quene and hir factioun nocht a litill affrayed, with all diligence departed from edinburgh to dumbar. and so we with reasonable diligence merched fordwart to edinburgh, for reformatioun to be maid thair, whare we arrived the of junij. [sn: lord seytoun.] the provest for that tyme, the lord seytoun, a man without god, without honestie, and oftentymes without reasone, had befoir greatlie trubled and molested the bretherin; for he had taikin upoun him the protectioun and defence of the blak and gray frearis; and for that purpose did nocht onelie lye him self in the one everie nicht, bot also constraned the most honest of the town to wache those monstouris, to thair great greaf and truble. [sn: the cuming of the congregatioun to edinburgh.] bot hearing of our suddane cuming, he abandoned his charge, and had left the spoile to the poore, who had maid havock of all suche thingis as was movable in those placis befoir our cuming, and had left nothing bot bair wallis, yea, nocht sa muche as door or windok; wharthrow we war the less trubilled in putting ordour to suche places. after that certane dayis we had deliberat what was to be done, and that ordour was tackin for suppressing of all monumentis of idolatrie within that town, and the places nixt adjacent, determinatioun was taikin, to send some message[ ] to the quene, than regent; for sche had bruted, (as hir accustomed maner was, and yit hir dochteris is, ever to forge lyes,) that we sought nothing bot hir lyef, and a plane revoltment from the lawfull obedience dew to our soverane, hir authoritie, as by the tennour of these letteris may be sene:-- "frances and marie, be the grace of god, king and quene of scottis, daulphine and daulphines of viennois, to our lovittis, lyoun king of armes, &c., our schireffis in that parte, conjunctlie and severallie, specialie constitute, greting: for sa mekle as our darrest moder marie, quene dowager, regent of our realme, and lordis of our secreat counsale, perceaving the seditious tumult rased be ane parte of our liegis, nameing thame selffis the congregatioun, who, under pretense of religioun, have putt thame selffis in armes;[ ] and that hir grace, for satisfeing of everie manis conscience, and pacifeing of the saidis trubles, had offerred unto thame to affix ane parliament to be haldin in januare nixt to cum, (this was a manyfest leye, for this was nether offerred, nor by hir ancis thought upoun, till we required it,) or sonnar, gyf thay had pleased, for establissing of ane universall ordour in matteris of religioun, be our advise and estatis of our realme;[ ] and, in the meantyme, to suffer everie man to leaf at libertie of conscience, without truble, unto the tyme the said ordour war tackin be advise of our foirsaid [estates.[ ]] and at last, becaus it appeared mekle to stand upoun our burght of edinburght, offerred in lyke maner to latt the inhabitants thairof chease what maner of religioun thai wald sett up and use for that tyme; swa that na man mycht alledge that he was forsed to do against his conscience: quhilk offer the quenis grace, our said darrest moder, was at all tymes, and yit is, ready to fulfill. nochttheles, the said congregatioun being of mynd to receave no reasonable offerris, hes sensyne, by oppin dead, declaired, that it is na religioun, nor any thing thairto perteaning, that thai seak, bot onelie the subversioun of our authoritie, and usurpatioun of our crown; in manifest witnessing whairof, thay daylie receave inglismen with messagis unto thame, and sendis siclyk in ingland; and last of all, have violentlie intrometted with, taikin, and yit withhaldis the irnis of our cunzee hous,[ ] quhilk is ane of the cheife pointis that concernis our crown; and siclyke lies intrometted with our palice of halirudhouse. oure will is heirfoir, &c., that ye pas to the mercat croce of our said burght of edinburght, or any uther publict place within the same, and thair, be oppin proclamatioun in our name and authoritie, command and charge all and sindrie personis of the said congregatioun, or yit being presentlie within our said burght other than the inhabitantis thairof, that thay, within sex houris nixt efter our said charge, depart furth of the same under the pane of treasone; and als, that ye command and charge all and sindrie personis to leave thair cumpany, and adhear to our authoritie; with certificatioun to suche as do the contrare, shalbe repute and haldin as manifest traytouris to our crowne, &c." these letteris did nocht a litill greave us, who most injustlie war accused; for thare is never a sentence of the narrative trew, except that we stayed the irnes, and that for most just causses, to witt, because that daylie thair was suche nomber of hard-headis printed,[ ] that the basenes thairof maid all thingis exceiding dear; and thairfoir we war counsaled by the wysest to stay the irnes,[ ] whill farther ordour mycht be tackin. sche, with all possible diligence, posted for hir factioun. maister james balfour was nocht ydill in the meantyme. the lordis, to purge thame of these odious crymes, wrait unto hir a letter, in forme as efter followeth:-- [sn: the thrid letter to the quene regent.] "pleas your grace, be advertist, it is cum to our knowlcge, that your grace hath sett furth, be your letteris openelie proclamed that we, called by name the congregatioun, under pretence and colour of religioun, convene togidder to na uther purpose bot to usurpe our soveraneis authoritie, and to invaid your persone representand thairis at this present: quhilkis thingis appeiris to have proceidit of sinister informatioun, maid to your grace be our ennemeis, considdering that we never mynded sic thing, bot onelie our mynd and purpose was and is to promote and sett furth the glorie of god, maynteane and defend the trew preacharis of his word; and according to the same, abolish and put away idolatrie and false abuses, whiche may nocht stand with the said word of god: beseaking your grace to bear patientlie thairwith, and interpone your authoritie to the furtherance of the same, as is the dewetie of everie christiane prince and good magistrat. for as to the obedience of our soveraneis authoritie in all civile and politick matteris, we ar and shalbe als obedient as ony uther your gracis subjectis within the realme; and that our conventioun is for na uther purpose bot to save our preacheouris and thair auditouris fra the injurie and violence of our enymeis, quhilk should be mair amplie declaired be some of us in your gracis presence, yf yow war nocht accumpanyed with such as hes persewit our lyves and sought our bloode. thus, we pray almyghtie god to have your hienes in his eternall tuitioun. "at edinburght, the secund of julij ." and for farther purgatioun heirof, it was thocht necessar that we should sempillie expone, alsweill to hir grace as to the hole people, what war our requeastis and just petitionis. and for that purpoise, after that salf conduct was purchessed and granted, we directed unto hir two grave men of our counsale, to witt, the lardis of pittarrow and cuninghamheid,[ ] to whame we gaif commissioun and power, first, to expone our hole purpose and intent, whiche was none other than befoir at all tymes we had required, to witt, that we mycht injoy the libertie of conscience. secundlie, [that] christ jesus mycht be trewlie preached, and his holie sacramentis rychtlie ministrat unto us. [thirdly,] that unable ministeris micht be removed from ecclesiasticall administratioun; and that our preacheouris mycht be relaxit from the horne, and permitted to execut thair chargis without molestatioun, unto such tyme as ather by a generall counsale, lauchfullie convened, or by a parliament within the realme, the contraverseis in religioun wer decided. and, for declaratioun that hir grace was heirto willing, that the bandis[ ] of frenche men, who than war a burthein untollerable to the cuntrey, and to us so fearfull, that we durst nocht in peaciable and quiet maner hant the places whare thay did lye, should be send to france, thair native cuntrey: whiche thing is granted, hir grace should have experience of our accustomed obedience. [sn: the craftynes of the quene regent may yit be espyed.] to these headis sche did answer at the first so plesandlie, that sche put boith our commissioneris in full esperance that all should be granted; and for that purpose, sche desyred to speak with sum of greatter authoritie, promesing, that yf thay wald assure hir of thair detfull[ ] obedience, that sche wald deny nothing of that whiche was required. for satisfactioun of hir mynd, we send agane the erle of glencarne, the lord ruthven, the lord uchiltrie, and the said lard of pittarrow, with the same commissioun as of befoir. bot than sche began to handill the matter more craftelie, compleaning that sche was nocht sought in a gentill maner; and that thay in whome sche had put maist singular confidence, had left hir in hir greattest neid; and suche uther thingis, perteaning nothing to thair commissioun, proponed sche, to spend and dryve the tyme. thai answered, "that, by injust tyranny devised aganis thame and thair bretherin, (as hir grace did weill know,) thay war compelled to seak the extreme remedie; and thairfoir, that hir grace aucht nocht to wonder thocht godlie men left the cumpany whare thai nether fand fidelitie nor treuth." in the end of this communing, whiche was the xij day of julij , sche desyred to have talked privelie with the erle of ergyle, and lord james, priour of sanctandrois, "for ellis, (as sche alledged,) sche culd nocht bot suspect that thai pretendit to some uther hiear purpose nor religioun." [sn: accusationis.] sche and hir craftie counsale had abuesd the duke, perswaiding unto him, and unto his freindis, that the saidis erle and priour had conspyred, first to deprive our soverane hir dochter of hir authoritie, and thairefter the duke and his successioun of thair titill to the crown of scotland. by these invented lyes, sche inflambed the hartis of many against us, in so muche that some of our awin number began to murmur; whiche perceaved, alsweall the preacheouris, in thair publict sermonis, as we our selffis, by our publict proclamationis, gave purgatioun and satisfactioun to the people, planelie and simplie declairing what was our purpose, tacking god to witnes, that no suche crymes ever entered in our hartis as most injustlie was layed to our charge. the counsale, efter consultatioun, thocht nocht expedient that the saidis erle and priour should talk with the quene in ony sort; for hir former practises put all men in suspitioun, that some deceat lurked under suche colorat commoning. sche had befoir said, that yf sche culd by any meane sunder those two from the rest, sche was assured schortlie to cum by hir hole purpose; and one of hir cheaf counsale in those dayis, (and we fear bot over inward with hir yit,) said, "that or michelmess day, thay two should leaf thair headis;" and thairfoir all men feared to committ two suche young plantis to hir mercie and fidelitie. it was, thairfoir, finallie denyed that thai should talk [with] the quene, or ony to hir apperteaning, bot in places void of all suspitioun, whare thay should be equall in nomber with those that should talk [with] thame. [sn: the communing at preston.] the quene perceaving that hir craft culd nocht prevaill, was content that the duke's grace and the erle of huntlie, with utheris by hir appointed, should convene at prestoun, to commone [with] the saidis erle and priour, and suche utheris as the lordis of the congregatioun wald appoint, to the nomber of ane hundreth on the syde, of the whiche nomber aucht personis onelie should meit for conference. the principallis for thair partie war, the duke, the erle huntlie, the lordis erskin and somervell, maister gavine hammiltoun, and the justice clerk.[ ] from us war directed the erlis of ergyle and glencarne, the lordis ruthven, lord james, boyd, and uchiltrie, the lairdis dun and pittarrow, who, conveaning at prestoun, spak the hole day without any certane conclusioun: for this was the practise of the quene, and of hir factioun, by dryft of tyme to weary our cumpany, who, for the most parte, had bein upoun the feildis from the tent day of maij, that we being dispersed, sche mycht cum to hir purpose. in whiche sche was nocht altogidder deceaved; for our commonis war compelled to skaill for lack of expenssis, and our gentilmen, partelie constraned be lack of furnessing, and partlie houping sum small appointment, after so many communingis, returned for the most parte to thair duelling places, for reposing of thame selffis. [sn: the demand of quene regent, and answer of the protestantis.] the quene, in all these conventionis, seamed that sche wald geve libertie to religioun, provided, "that wharesoever sche was, our preacheouris sould cease, and the masse sould be maynteaned." we perceaving hir malitious craft, ansuered, "that as we wald compell hir grace to no religioun, so could we nocht of conscience, for the pleasur of any earthlie creature, put silence to godis trew messingeris; nather culd we suffer that the rycht administratioun of christis trew sacramentis should gif place to manifest idolatrie; for in so doing, we should declair ourselffis ennemeis to god, to christ jesus his sone, to his eternall veritie, and to the libertie and establishment of his churche within this realme; for your requeist being granted, there can no kirk within the same be so estableshit but at your pleasour, and by your residence and remaning thare ye myeht overthrow the samin." [sn: the last offeris of the protestantis to the quene regent.] this our last answer we send unto hir with the lord ruthven and laird of pittarrow; requiring of hir grace, in plane wordis, to signifie unto us what houpe we myeht have of hir favouris toward the outsetting of religioun. we also required that sche wald remove hir frenchemen, who war a fear to us, and a burthein most grevouse to our cuntrey: and that sche wald promess to us, in the word of a prince, that sche wald procure no mo to be send in; and than should we nocht onelie support, to the uttermost of our poweris, to furnish schippis and victuallis for thair transporting, bot also, upoun our honouris, should we tak hir body in our protectioun; and should promess, in the presence of god and the hole realme, to serve our soverane hir dochter, and hir grace regent, als faithfullie and als obedientlie as ever we did kingis within scotland: that, moreover, we should caus our preacheouris geve reasone of thair doctrin in hir audience, till any that pleased till impugne any thing that thay did or taught: finallie, that we should submit our selflis to a lauchtfull parliament, provided that the bischoppis, as the party accused, and our plane ennemeis, should be removed from judgement. [sn: the scoffing of the quene regent.] to no point wald sche answer directlie; bot in all thingis sche was so generall and so ambigua, that hir craft appeared to all men. sche had gottin assured knowlege that our cumpany was skailled, (for hir frenchemen war daylie amongis us, without molestatioun or hurt done unto thame,) and thairfoir sche began to discloise hir mynde, and said, "the congregatioun hes roung these two monethis bypast: me my selff wald ring now other two." the malice of hir hart being planelie perceaved, deliberatioun was had what was to be done. it was concluded, that the lordis, barronis, and gentilmen, with thare substantious housholdis, should remane in edinburgh that hole winter, for establissing of the church[ ] thair. [sn: the caus quhy the irnes stayed.] and becaus it was found, that by the corrupting of our money, the quene maid to hir selff immoderat gaines for maynteaning of hir soldiouris, to the distructioun of our haill commone weill, it was thocht necessar[ ] that the printing irnes, and all thingis to thame perteaning, should be stayed, for fear that sche should privelie caus transport thame to dumbar. [sn: the death of hary, king of france.] in this meantyme came the assured word, first, that the king of france was hurt, and after, that he was dead[ ] whiche, albeit it aucht to have put hir in mynd of hir awin estait and wicked interprise: for he that same tyme, in the fulnes of his glorie, (as sche hir self useth to speak,) had determined most crewell persecutioun aganis the sanctis of god in france, evin as sche hir selff was heir persecutand in scotland: and yit he so perished in his pryde, that all men mycht see that godis just vengeance did stryke him, evin quhen his iniquitie was cumed to full rypenes. albeit, (we say,) that this wonderouse wark of god in his suddane death, aucht to have dantoned hir furie, and gevin unto hir admonitioun, that the same god culd nocht suffer her obstinat malice against his treuth long to be unpunished; yit culd hir indurat hart nothing be moved to repentance: for hearing the staying of the printing irnes, sche raiged more outragiouslie than of befoir, and sending for all suche as wer of hir factioun, exponed hir grevous complaint, aggredging the same with many lyes, to wit, "that we had declaired that whiche befoir sche suspected; for what culd we meane ellis, bot usurpatioun of the crown, when we durst put handis to the cunze-hous, whiche was a portioun of the patrimony of the crown." sche farther alleged, "that we had spoyled the cunze-house of great sowmes of money." to the whiche we ansuered, boith by our letteris send to hir, and hir counsale, and by publict proclamatioun to the people, that we, without usurpatioun of any thing justlie perteaning to the crown of scotland, did stay the printing irnes, in consideratioun that the commone wealth was greatlie hurt by corrupting of our money; and becaus that we war borne counsalouris of this realme, sworne to procure the proffite of the same, we culd do no less of dewetie and of conscience than to stay that for a tyme, whiche we saw so abused, that oneles remedy war fundin, should turne to the detriment of the hole body of this realme. and as to hir fals accusatioun of spuilzie, we did remit us to the conscience of maister robert richesone[ ], maister of the cunze-hous, who from our handis receaved silver, gold, and mettall, alsweill cunzeit as uncunzeit; so that with us thair did nocht remane the valour of a bawbie.[ ] this our declaratioun and purgatioun nochtwithstanding, sche, partelie by hir craft and policie, and partelie by the lawbouris of the bischopis of sanctandrois and glasgw; procured the hole nomber that war with hir to consent to persew us with all creweltie and expeditioun, befoir that we culd haif our cumpany (whiche than was dispersed for new furnessing) assembled agane. the certantie heirof cuming to our knawlege, the setterday at nycht, the . [ d] of julij, we did in what us lay to gif advertisment to our bretherin; bot impossible it was that those of the west, anguss, mearnis, stratherin, or fyeff, in any nomber culd come to us; for the ennemie marched from dumbar upoun the sounday, and approched within two myles of us befoir the sone-rysing upoun monunday; for thay verrelie supposed to have found no resistance, being assured that the lordis onelie with certane gentillmen remaned, with thair privat housses. calling upoun god for counsale in that straytt, we soght what was the nixt defence. we mycht have left the town, and mycht have reteired our selffis without any danger; bot than we should have abandoned our bretherin of edinburgh, and suffered the ministrie thairof to have decayed, whiche to our hartis was so dolorous, that we thocht better to hasard the extreamitie than so to do. for than the most parte of the town appeared rather to favour us than the quenis factioun; and did offer unto us the uttermost of thair support, whiche for the most parte thay did faithfullie keap. [sn: leyth left the congregatioun.] the same did the town of leyth, bot thay keapit nocht the lyek fidelitie; for when we war upoun the feild, marching fordward for thair support, (for the frenche marched neye to thame,) thai randered thame selffis, without ferther resistance. and this thay did, as was supposed, by the treasone of some within thame selffis, and by the perswasioun of the lard of restalrig,[ ] who of befoir declaired himselff to have bein one of us, and nochtwithstanding,[ ] that day randered him selff undesyred to monsieur dosell. thair unprovided and suddane defectioun astonished many; and yit we retyred quyetlie to the syde of cragingatt,[ ] which place we tooke for resisting the ennemie. in the meantyme, diverse mediatouris passed betuix, amongis whome the lord ruthven, for our parte, wes principall. alexander erskin[ ] did muche travell to stay us and our soldiouris, that we should nocht joyne with thame of leyth, till that thay, as said is, had randered thame selffis to the frenche. the said alexander did oft promese, that the frenche wald stay, provided that we wold nocht joyne with these of leyth. bot efter that thai war randerit, we hard nothing of him bot threatning and disconfortable wordis. befoir it was eight houris in the morning, god had gevin unto us boith curage, and a reasonable nomber to withstand thair furie. the town of edinburght, sa mony as had subject thame selffis to discipline, and diverse utheris besydis thame, behavit thame selffis boith faithfullie and stoutlie. the gentilmen of lowthiane, especiall caldar, haltoun, and ormestoun, war verrey confortable, alsweill for thair counsale as for thair hole assistance. some gentilmen of fiffe prevented the frenche men; otheris war stopped, be reasone that the frenche had possessed[ ] leyth. alwais the ennemie tooke suche a fear, that thai determined nocht to invaid us whare we stoode, bot tooke purpose to have passed to edinburgh, by the other syde of the watter of leyth, and that becaus thay had the castell to thair freind, whiche was to us unknawin; for we supponed the lord erskin, capitane of the same, ather to have bein our freind, or at the least to have bein indifferent. [sn: the lord erskin and his fact.] bot when we had determined to feght, he send word to the erle of ergyle, to lord james, his sister sone,[ ] and to the uther noble men,[ ] that he wald declair him selff boith ennemie to thame and to the town, and wald schoote at boith, gif thay maid any resistance to the frenche men to enter in the town. this his treasonable defyence, send unto us by the lard of ricartoun,[ ] did abait the corage of many; for we culd nocht feght nor stop the ennemie, bot under the mercie of the castell and hole ordinance thairof. heirupoun was consultatioun tackin; and in conclusioun, it was found less domage to tak ane appointment, albeit the conditionis war nocht suche as we desyred, than to hasard battall betuix two suche ennemeis. after lang talkin, certane headis war drawin by us, whiche we desyred to be granted:-- "first, that no member of the congregatioun should be trubled in lief, landis, goodis, or possessionis by the quene, hir authoritie, nor any uther justice within the realme, for any thing done in the lait innovatioun, till a parliament (whiche should begin the tent of januar nixt) had decyded thingis in contraversie. " . that idolatrie should nocht be erected, whare it was at that day suppressed. " . that the preacheouris and ministeris should nocht be trubled in thair ministrie, whare thai war alreadie establessed, nather yit stopped to preache, wharesoever thai should chance to come. " . that no bandis of men of warr should be layed in garneshing within the town of edinburght. " . that the frenche men should be send away at a reasonable day, and that none uther should be broght in the cuntrey without consent of the haill nobilitie and parliament." but these our articles[ ] war altered, and ane uther forme disposeth, as efter followeth:[ ]-- "at the lynkis of leith, the . of julij , it is appointed in maner following:-- "in the first, the congregatioun and thair cumpany, utheris than the inhabitants of the said town, shall remove thame selffis furth of the said town, the morne at ten houris befoir none, the . of julij, and leaf the same void and red of thame and thair said cumpany, conforme to the quenis grace pleasour and desyre. "_item_, the said congregatioun shall caus the irnes of the cunze-hous,[ ] tacken away be thame, be randered and delivered to maister robert richardsone; and in lykewyis the quenis grace palace[ ] of halirudhous to be left and randered agane to maister johne balfour, or ony uther haveand hir grace sufficient power, in the same maner as it was receaved, and that betuix the making of thir articles and the morne at ten houris.--(for observing and keaping of thir tua articles abovewrittin, the lord ruthven and the lard of pittarrow hes entered thame selffis pledges.) "_item_, the saidis lordis of congregatioun, and all the memberis thairof, shall remane obedient subjectis to our soverane lord and ladyis authoritie, and to the quenis grace regent in thair place; and shall obey all lawis and lovable consuetudis of this realme, as thai war used of befoir the moving of this tumult and contraversie, exceptand the caus of religioun, whiche shalbe heirafter specifeid. [sn: in contemplatioun of these articles arose this proverb:--"gud day, sir johne, whill januar. "welcum, sir johne, quhill januar", &c.] "_item_, the said congregatioun, nor nane of thame, shall nocht truble nor molest a kirk-man be way of dead, nor yit shall maik thame any impediment in the peaciable bruiking, joising, and uptaking of thair rentis, proffittis, and deweties of thair benefices, bot that thai may frelie use and dispone upoun the same, according to the lawis and consuetude of this realme, to the tent day of januar nixt to cum. "_item_, the said congregatioun, nor nane of thame, shall in no wayis from thynefurth use ony force or violence, in casting down of kirkis, religious placis, or reparrelling thairof, bot the same sall stand skaithles of thame, unto the said tent day of januar. "_item_, the town of edinburght shall, without compulsioun, use and cheise what religioun and maner thairof thay please to the said day; sua that everie man may have fredome to use his awin conscience to the day foirsaid. "_item_, the quenis grace sall nocht interpone hir authoritie, to molest or truble the preacheouris of the congregatioun, nor thair ministrie, (to thame that pleasis to use the same,) nor na uther of the said congregatioun, in thair bodyis, landis, goodis, or possessionis, pensionis, or whatsumever uther kynd of goodis thai possess; nor yit thoill the clargie, or any uther haveand spirituall or temporall jurisdictioun, to truble thame, in ony maner of sort, privatlie or openelie, for the caus of religioun, or uther actioun depending thairupoun, to the said tent day of januar within writtin; and that everie man in particular leife in the meantyme according to his awin conscience. "_item_, that na man of warr, frenche nor scottis, be layed in daylie garnesoun within the town of edinburght, bot to repair thairto to do thair lefull besynes, and thairefter to reteir thame to thare garnesounis."[ ] this alteratioun in wordis and ordour was maid without knowledge and consent of those whose counsale we had used in all cases befoir. for sum of thame perceaving we began to faynt, and that we wald appoint with inequall conditionis, said, "god hath wonderfullie assisted us in our greatest dangeris: he hath strikin fear in the hartis of our ennemeis, when thai supposed thame selffis most assured of victorie: our case is nocht yit sa disperat that we nead to grant to thingis unreasonable and ungodlie; whiche, yf we do, it is to be feared that thingis sall nocht so prosperouslie succeid as thai have done heirtofoir." [sn: the promese of the duke and erle of huntlie.] when all thingis war commoned and aggreed upoun by myd personis, the duke and erle of huntlie, who that day war against us, desyred to speak the erlis of ergyle and glencarne, the lord james, and utheris of our partie: who obeying thare requeastis, mett thame at the querrell hollis,[ ] betuix leyth and edinburght, who in conclusioun promest to our lordis, "that yf the quene breake to us any one joyt of the appointment than maid, that thai should declair thame selffis plane ennemeis unto hir, and freindis to us." alsmuche promeshed the duke that he wold do, in case that sche wald nocht remove hir frenche men at are reasonable day; for the oppressioun whiche thai did was manifest to all men. this appointment maid and subscrived by the duke, monsieur dosell, and the erle of huntlie, the . of julij, we returned to the town of edinburght, whare we remanit till the nixt day at none; when, efter sermone, dennar, and a proclamatioun maid at the mercat croce in forme as followeth, we departed. forme of the proclamatioun. "forasmuche as it hath pleased god, that appointment is maid betuix the quene regent and us the lordis, hole[ ] protestantis of this realme, we have thocht good to signifie unto yow the cheafe headis of the same, whiche be these:-- " . first, that no member of the congregatioun shalbe trubled in lief, landis, goodis, or possessionis, by the quene, by hir authoritie, nor by any uther justice within this realme, for any thing done in this lait innovatioun, till that a parliament hath decyded thingis that be in contraversie. " . that idolatrie shall nocht be erected, whare it is now at this day suppressed. " . that the preachearis and ministeris shall nocht be trubled in the ministratioun, whare thai ar already established, nather yit stopped to preache whairsoevir thai shall happin to travaill within this realme. " . that no bandis of men of warr shalbe layed in garnesoun within the town of edinburght. "these cheafe headis of appointment concerning the libertie of religioun and conservatioun of our bretherin, we thoght goode to notifie unto yow, by this our proclamatioun, that in case wrong or injurie be done, by any of the contrarie factioun, to any member of our body, complaint may be maid to us, to whome we promese, as we will ansuer to god, our faitlifull support to the uttermost of our poweris." [sn: ansuer to the complaynt of the papistis.] at this proclamatioun, maid with sound of trumpett, war offended all the papistis: for, first, thai alledged it was done in contempt of the authoritie: secundarlie, that we had proclamed more than was conteaned in the appointment: and last, that we, in our proclamatioun, had maid no mentioun of any thing promished unto thame. to suche mummeris[ ] we answered, "that no just authoritie culd think the selff contempned, becaus that the treuth was by us maid manifest unto all, who utherwayis mycht have pretendit ignorance. secundlie, that we proclamed nathing, whiche [was] nocht finallie aggreit upoun in word and promeiss betuix us and thame with quhame the appointment was maid, whatsoevir thair scribeis had efter writtin, quha in verray deid had alterit, bayth in wordis and sentenceis, oure articles, as thay war first consavit; and yitt, gif thair awin writtingis war diligentlie examinit, the self same thing sall be found in substance. and last, to proclame any thing in thair favouris, we thocht it nocht necessarie, knawing that in that behalf thay thame selfis sould be diligent aneweh." and in this we war not desavit; for within fyftene dayis efter, thair was not ane schaveling in scotland, to wham teyndis, or any uthor rentis pertenit, bot he had that article of the appointment by hart, "that the kirk men sould be ansuerit of teyndis, rentis, and all uthir dewties, and that no man sould trubill nor molest thame." we depairting from edinburgh, the . of julij, came first to lynlythqw, and efter to striviling; whair, efter consultatioun, the band of defence, and mentenance of religioun, and for mutuall defence, evere ane of uther, was subscrivit of all that war thair present. the tennour of the band was this:-- "we foirseing the craft and slycht of our adversaries, tending all maner of wayis to circumvene us, and be prevy meanis intendis to assailzie everie ane of us particularie be fair hechtis and promisses, thairthrow to separat ane of us frome ane uthir, to oure utter rewyne and destructioun: for remedy heirof, we faythfullie and trewlie byndis us, in the presence of god, and as we tender the mentenance of trew religioun, that nane of us sall in tymeis cuming pas to the queneis grace dowriare, to talk or commun with hir for any letter [or] message send be hir unto us, or yitt to be send, without consent of the rest, and commone consultatioun thairupoun. and quhowsone that ather message or writt sall cum fra hir unto us, with utter diligence we sall notifie the same ane to ane uther; swa that nathing sall proceid heirin without commune consent of us all. "at striveling, the first day of august ." this band subscrivit, and we foirseing that the quene and bischopis menit nathing bot desait, thocht guid to seik ayde and support of all christiane princeis against hir and hir tyrrannie, in caise we sould be mair schairplie persewit. and becaus that ingland was of the same religioun, and lay nixt unto us, it was jugeit expedient first to prove thame; quhilk we did be ane or twa messingeris, as heirefter,[ ] in the awin place, mair ampill sall be declairit. efter we had abiddin certane dayis in striviling, the erle of argyle depairtit to glasgw; and becaus he was to depairt to his awin cuntrey, (with wham also past lord james,) to pacifie sum trubill quhilk, be the craft of the quene, was rasit in his absens, he requyreit the erle of glencairne, lord boyde, lord uchiltre, and utheris of kyle, to meit thair, for sum ordoure to be taikin, that the brethren sould not be oppressit; quhilk with ane consent thay did, and appoyntit the tent of september for the nixt conventioun at striveling. [sn: the first knawlege of the eschaiping of the erle of arrane out of france.] quhill thir thingis war in doing at glasgw, letteris and ane servand came fra the erle of arraine[ ] to the duik his father, signifeing unto him, that be the providence of god, he had eschaipit the frensche kyngis handis, quha maist treason abillie and maist crewellie had socht his lyfe, or at leist to have committit him to perpetuall presoun: [sn: let this be notit.] for the same tyme, the said frensche king, seing he could [not] have the erle him self, gart put his youngar brother,[ ] ane bairne of sick aige as could not offend, in strait presoun, quhair he yitt remaneis, to witt, in the moneth of october, the yeir of god j^m. v^c. lix yeiris: quhilk thingis war done be the craft and policie of the quene dowager, quhat tyme the duik and his freyndis war maist frack to sett fordwart hir caus. thir letteris resavit, and the estait of his twa soneis knawin, of whame the ane was escaipit, and the uthir in vyle preassoun cassin,[ ] the duke desyreit communing of the erle of argyle, quha, pairtlie against the will of sum that lovit him, raid unto the duik fra grlasgw to hammiltoun; quhair, abyding ane nycht, he declairit his jugement to the duik and to his freindis, especiallie to maister gawyne hamyltoun. the duik requyreit him and the lord james to write thair freindlie and confortabill letteris to his sone, quhilk thay baith maist willinglie did, and thairefter addressit thame to thair jornay. bot the verray day of thair depairting, came one bowtencourt,[ ] from the quene regent, with letteris, as was allegeit, from the kyng and quene of france to lord james, whilk he delyverit with ane braggin countenance and many threatning wordis. the tennour of his letteris was this:-- "_le roy._ "my cousing, i have bein greittumlie mervellitt, having understand the trubillis that ar happinnit in thir pairtis; and yit mair mervell that ye, of wham i had ane haill confidence, and alsua hes this honour to be sua neir the quenis grace, my wiffe, and hes resavit of umquhile the kyngis grace my father, hir grace, and me, sick graceis and favouris, that ye sould be sa forgetfull as to mak youre self the heid, and ane of the principall begynnaris and nureischaris of the tumultis and seditiounis thar ar sene thair. the quhilk, becaus it is sa strange as it is, and syne against the professioun that ye at all tymeis have maid, i can not gudlie beleif it; and gif it be sa, i can not think bot ye have bene entyseit and led thairto be sum personis that haif seduceit and caussit yow commit sic ane falt, as i am assureit ye repent of alreddy, quhilk will be ane greit emplesour[ ] to me, to the effect i mycht lose ane pairt of the occasioun i have to be miscontent with yow, as i will yow to understand i am, seing sua far ye have dissavit the esperance i had of yow, and your effectioun towart god, and the weill of our service, unto the quhilk ye knaw ye ar als mekill and mair obleist nor ony uther of the lordis thair. for this cause, desyrand that the materis mycht be dutelie[ ] amendit, and knawand quhat ye may heirintill, i thocht gude on this maner to write unto yow, and pray yow to tak heid to returne to the guid way, from quhilk ye ar declyneit, and caus me knaw the samin be the effectis that ye have ane uther attentioun nor this quhilk thir folies bipast makis me now to beleif; doing all that ever ye can to reduce all thyngis to thair first estait, and put the samin to the rycht and gud obedience that ye knaw to be dew unto god and unto me: [sn: braggis now.[ ]] utherwayis, ye may be weill assureit, that i will put to my hand, and that in gud eirnest, that ye and all thay have done, and dois as ye, sall[ ] feill, (throw thair awin falt,) that quhilk thay have deservit and meritit; evin as i have gevin charge to this gentilman, present beirar, to mak yow knaw mair largelie of my pairt; for quhilk caus, i pray yow creddeit him, evin as ye wald do my selff. prayand god, my cousing, to haif yow in his holy and worthy protectioun. "writtin at pareis, the xvij day of july ." the samyn messinger brocht alssua letteris frome the quene our soverane, mair scharp and threatning than the former; for hir conclusioun was, "_vous senteras la poincture a jamais_."[ ] this creddeit was, "that the kyng wald spend the croun of france, or that he war not revengeit upoun sick seditious personis. that he wald never have suspectit sick inobedience and sick defectioun frome his awin sister in him." to the quhilk the said lord james ansuerit, first by word, and than by writting, as followis:-- "schir, "my dewtie rememberit. your majestieis letter i resavit frome pareis, the xvij of julij last, proporting in effect, that your majestie sould mervell that i, being forgetfull of the graceis and favouris schawing me be the king, of blissitt memorie, your majestieis father, and the quenis grace, my soverane, sould declair my selff heid, and ane of the principall begynnaris of the allegeit tumultis and seditioun in thir pairtis, desaving thairby your majestieis expectatioun at all tymis hard of me; with assurance, that gif i did not declair by contrarie effectis my repentance, i, with the rest that had put, or yitt putis handis to that wark, sould resave the rewaird quhilk we had deservit and meritit. "schir, it grevis me heavelie that the cryme of ingratitude sould be laid to my charge be your hienes, and the rather that i persave the same to haif proceidit of sinister informatioun, of thame quhais pairt it was not sua to have reportit, gif trew service bigane had bene regairdit. and as tuiching the repentance, and declaratioun of the same be contrar effectis,[ ] that your majestic desyris i schaw, my conscience perswaidis me in thir proceidingis to have done na thing aganeis god, nor the debtfull[ ] obedience towartis your hienes and the queneis grace my soverane, utherwayis it sould have bene to repent, and als amendit allreddy, according to your majestieis expectatioun of me. bot your hienes being treulie informeit, and perswaidit that the thyng quhilk we have done makis for the advancement of godis glorie, (as it dois in deid,) without ony maner derogatioun to your majesteis dew obedience, we dowt not bot your majestie sall be weill contentit with our proceidingis, quhilk being groundit upoun the commandiment of the eternall god, we dar [nocht] leif the samyn unaccompleischeit; onelie wisching and desyreing your majestie did knaw the same, and treuth thairof, as it is perswaidit to our conscience, and all thame that ar treulie instructit in the eternall word of our god, upoun quham we cast our cair for all daingearis that may follow the accompleisment of his eternall will; and to quham we commend your hienes, beseiking him to illuminat your hart with the evangell of his eternall trewth, to knaw your majestieis dewtie towartis[ ] your pure subjectis, godis chosin pepill, and quhat ye aucht to craif justlie of thame agane; for than we sould haif na occatioun to feir your majestieis wraith and indignatioun, nor your hienes suspitioun in our inobedience. the samyn god mot[ ] have youre majestie in his eternall saifgard. "at dumbartane, the of august ." this answer, directit to the quene our soverane, and to francis hir husband, the quene dowager resavit, and was bold upoun it, as sche mycht weill yneuch; for it was suppoisit that the former letteris war forgeit heir at hame in scotland. the answer red by hir, sche said, "that sua proud ane answer was never gevin to king, prince, or princess." and yitt indifferent men thocht that he mycht have answerit mair schairplie, and not have transgressit modestie nor treuth. for quhair thay burding him with the greit benefitis quhilk of thame he had resavit, gif in plane wordis he had purgeit him self, effirming, that the greitest benefit that ever he receavit of thame was to spend in thair service, that quhilk god be utheris had providit for him, na honest man wald have accusit him, and na man wald have bene abill to have convickit him of ane lye. bot princeis must be pardonit to speik quhat thay pleise. [sn: the residence of johnne willock in edinburgh.] for confort of the brethren, and contynewance of the kyrk in edinburgh, was left thair our deir brother johnne willock, quha, for his faithfull laubouris and bald curage in that battell, deserves immortall prayse. for quhan it was fund dangerous that johnne knox, quha befoir was electit minister[ ] to that kyrk, sould contynew thair, the brethren requeistit the said johnne willock to abyde with thame, least that, for laik of ministeris, idolatrie sould be erectit up agane. to the quhilk he sua glaidlie consentit, that it mycht evidentlie appeir, that he preferrit the confort of his brethren, and the contynewance of the kirk thair, to his awin lyiff. one pairt of the frensche men war appointtit to ly in garnesoun at leith, (that was the first benefit thai gat for thair confideracie with thame,) the uthir pairt war appointit to ly in the cannogait; the quene and hir tryne abydeing in the abbay. oure brother johnne willock, the day efter our departure, prechit in sanct geillis kirk, and ferventlie exhortit the brethren to stand constant in the trewth quhilk thay had professit. at this and sum uther sermondis was the duke, and diverse utheris of the queneis factioun. this libertie and preching, with resort of all pepill thairto, did hielie offend the quene and the uther papistis. and first thay began to gif terrouris to the duke; affirmyng, that he wald he repute as ane of the congregatioun, gif he gaif his presence to the sermondis. thairefter thay begould[ ] to requyre that messe sould be sett up agane in sanct geillis kirk, and that the pepill sould be sett at libertie to chuse what religioun thay wald; for that, say thay, was contenit in the appointmentt, that the town of edinburgh sould cheis quhat religioun thay list. for obtening heirof, was send to the tolbuith,[ ] the duke, the erle of huntlie, and the lord seytoun, to solist all men to condiscend to the quenis mynd; quhairin the twa last did laubour that thay could, the duik not sa, bot as ane behalder, of quham the brethren had guid esperance. and efter many perswationis and threatningis maid be the saidis erle and lord, the brethren, stoutlie and valiantlie in the lord jesus, ganesaid thair maist injust petitionis, reasonyng, "that as of conscience thay mycht nocht suffr idolatrie to be credit quhair christ jesus was treulie precheit, sua could nocht the quene nor thay requyre any sick thyng, unless sche and thay wald plainlie violat thair faith and cheif article of the appointment; for it is planelie appointit, that na member of the congregatioun sall be molestit in any thing that, the day of the appointment, be peaceabillie possessit. bot sua it was that we, the brethren and protestantis of the toun of edinburgh, with oure ministeris, the day of the appointment, did peaceabillie possess sanct geilis kirk,[ ] appointit for us for preching of christis trew evangell, and rycht ministratioun of his holy sacramentis. thairfoir, without manifest violatioun of the appointment, ye can not remove us thairfra, quhill ane parliament have decydit the contraversie." [sn: the quene regentis malice against pure men.] this answer gevin, the haill brethren depairtit, and left the foirsaid erle, and lord seytoun the provest of edinburgh, still in the tolbuyth; quha persaving that thay could not prevaill in that maner, bot began to entreat that thay wald be quyett, and that thay wald sa far condiscend to the quenis plesour, as that thay wald chuse thame ane uthir kirk[ ] within the toun, or at the least be contentit that messe sould be said ather efter or befoir thair sermonis. to the quhilk, ansuer was gevin, "that to gif place to the devill, (quha was the cheif inventar of the messe,) for the plesour of ony creature, thay could not. thay war in possessioun of that kirk, quhilk thay could not abandone; nether could thay suffer idolatrie be erectit in the samyn, unless be violence thay sould be constrancit sa to do; and than thay war determinit to seik the nixt remedy." quhilk ansuer resavit, the erle of huntlie did lovinglie intreat thame to quyetnes; faithfullie promissing that in na sort thay sould be molestit, sa that thay wald be quyett, and mak na farther uproir. to the quhilk thay war maist willing; for thay socht onlie to serve god as he had commandit, and to keip thair possessioun, according to the appointment; quhilk be goddis grace thay did till the moneth of november, nochtwithstanding the greit bosting of the ennemy. for thay did not onlie convene to the preching, dailie supplicatiounis, and administratioun of baptisme, bot alssua the lordis tabill was ministratt, evin in the eyis of the verray ennemy, to the greit confort of mony afflictit conscience. and as god did potentlie wirk with his trew minister, and with his trubillit kirk, so did nocht the devill cease to enflamb the malice of the quene, and of the papistis with hir. for schort efter hir cuming to the abbay of halyrudhouse, sche caussit messe to be said, first in hir awin chapell, and efter in the abbay, quhair the altaris befoir war cassin doun. sche dischargit the commoun prayeris, and foirbad to gif ony portioun to sick as war the principall young men quha redd thame. hir malice extendit in lik maner to cambuskynneth;[ ] for thair sche dischargeit the portionis of als many of the channonis as had forsaikin papistrie. sche gaif command and inhibitioun, that the abbot of lundoris[ ] sould be[ ] ansuerit of any pairt of his leving in the north, becaus he had submitit him self to the congregatioun, and had put sum reformatioun to his place. be hir consent and retrahibitioun[ ] was the preching stuleis brokin in the kirk of leith, and idolatrie was erectit in the samyn, quhair it was befoir suppressit. hir frensche capitaneis, with thair suldiouris in greit companeis, in tyme of preching and prayeris, resortit to sanct geillis kirk in edinburgh, and maid thair commune deambulatour thairin, with sick lowd talking, as na perfyte audience could be had; and althocht the minister was ofttymes thairthrow compellit to cry out on thame, praying to god to red thame of sick locustis; thay nevirtheless continewit still in thair wickit purpoise, devisit and ordaneit be the quene, to have drawin our brethren of edinburgh and thame in cummer; swa that sche mycht have had ony cullorat occatioun to have brokin the liegue with thame. yitt, be goddis grace, thay behaveit thame selfis swa, that sche could fynd na falt with thame; albeit in all thir thingis befoir nameit, and in every ane of thame, sche is worthelie comptit to have contravenit the sayd appointment. we pass over the oppressing done of oure brethren in particular, quhilk had bene sufficient to have provin the appointment to have bene playne violatit; for the lord seytoun, without ony occasioun offerrit unto him, brak a chaise upoun alexander quhitelaw,[ ] as he came frome prestoun, accumpaneit with williame knox,[ ] towartis edinburgh, and ceassit not to persew him till he came to the toun of ormestoun: and this he did, supposing that the said alexander quhitelaw had bene johnne knox. in all this menetyme, and quhill that ma frensche men arryvit, thay ar not abill to pruif that we brak the appointment in any jote, except that ane hoirnit capp was taikin of ane proud preistis heid, and cut in four quarteris,[ ] becaus he said he wald weir[ ] it in dispyte of the congregatioun. [sn: the quene regentis false flattering letter to the duke.[ ]] in this menetyme, the quene, then regent, knawin assuredlie quhat force was schortlie to cum unto hir, ceassit not, by all meneis possibill, to cloik the incuming of the frensche, and to enflamb the hartis of oure cuntrey men aganis us. and for that purpoise, sche first wrait to my lord duike, in forme as followis:-- "my lord and cousing, "efter hartlie commendatioun; we ar informit that the lordis of the westland congregatioun intendis to mak ane conventioun and assembillie of thair kyn and freyndis upoun govane mure, besyde glasgw, on monnunday cum viij dayis, the [ st] day[ ] of august instant, for sum hie purpoise aganeis us, quhilk we can nott skantlie beleve,[ ] considdering thay have na occasioun upoun our pairt sa to do. and albeit ye knaw the appointment was maid be our avise,[ ] yitt we acceptit the samin at your desyre, and hes sensyne maid na cause quhairby thay mycht be movit to cum in the contrair thairof. lyke as we ar yitt myndit to keip firme and stabill all thingis promesit be yow in our behalf. we think, on the uther pairt, it is your dewatie to requyre tham, that thay contravene not thair pairt thairof in na wyise;[ ] and in caice thay meane ony evill towartis us, and sua will breck thaire promeise, we beleif ye will, at the uttermost of your power, convene with us, and compell tham to do that thing quhilk thay aucht, gif thay will nocht. praying yow to have your selff, your kin and freyndis, in reddynes to cum to us, as ye sall be adverteist be proclamatioun, in caise the congregatioun assembill tham selffis for any purpoise aganeis us, or the tennour of the said appointment: assureand yow, without thay gadder, and mak first occasioun, we sall nott put yow to any paneis in that behalf; and that ye adverteis us in writt, quhat we may lippin to heirin with this beirar, quha will schaw yow the fervent mynd we beir to have concord with the said congregatioun, quhat offeris we haif maid to thame, and how desyrous we ar to draw thame to the obedience of our soveranis authoritie, to quham ye sall gif creddeit; and god keip yow. "at edinburgh, the tent day of august ." [sn: the regentis letter to the barronis.] the lyke letter sche wrait to everie lord, barroun, and gentilman, of this tennour:-- "trest freynd, "efter hartlie commendatioun; we dowt nott bot ye have hard of the appointment maid besyde leith, betuix my lord duik, the erle of huntlie, and monsieur dosell, on the ane pairt, and the lordis of the congregatioun, on the uther syde; quhilk appointment we have approvit in all poyntis, albeit it was taikin by our avise; and is myndit to observe and keip all the contentis thairof for our pairt. nochtheless, we ar informeit, the saidis lordis of the congregatioun intendis schortlie to convene all sick personeis as will assist to thame, for interprysing of sum heycht purpoise aganis us, our authoratie, and tennour of the said appointment, quhilk we can not beleif, seing thay nather haif, nor sall have, ony occasioun gevin thairto on our pairt, and yit thinkis not reassonabill, in caise thay meane ony sick thing: and thairfoir have thocht it guid to gif wairning to oure speciall freyndis of the adverteisment we have gottin, and amangis the rest, to yow, quham we esteme of that nomber. praying yow to have your self, youre kin, and folkis in reddynes to cum to us."--and sua furth, as in the uthir letter above sent to the duike, word efter word. [sn: the practise of quene regent.] efter that by thir letteris, and by the dissaitfull furnissing of hyr solistaris, sche had sumquhat steirit up the hairtis of the pepill against us, than sche began oppinlie to complayne, "that we war of mynd to invaid hir persone; that we wald keip na pairt of the appointment; and thairfoir sche was compellit to crave the assistance of all men against our injust persute." and this practise sche usit, as befoir is said, to abuse the simplicitie of the pepill, that thay sould not suddanlie espy for quhat purpois sche brocht in hir new bandis of men of weir, quha did arryve about the middis of august to the nomber of ane thousand men. the rest war appointit to cum efter, with monsieur de la broche,[ ] and with the bischop of amiance,[ ] quha arryvit the nynetene day of september following, as gif thay had bene ambassadouris: [sn: the arryvell of the frensche.[ ]] bot quhat was thair negotiatioun, the effect did declair, and thay thame selffis could not long conceill; for baith be tung and pen thay utterit, "that thay war send for the utter exterminatioun of all thame that wald not professe the papisticall religioun in all pointis." the quenis practise nor craft could not blynd the eyeis of all men; nether yitt could hir subtiltie hyde hir awin schame, bot that many did espy hir desait: and sum spairit not to speik thair jugement liberallie; quha foirseing the dainger gaif adverteisment, requyring that provisioun mycht be fund, befoir that the evill sould exceid our wisdome and strenth to put remedy to the same; for prudent men foirsaw, that sche prctendit ane plane conqueist. bot to the end, that the pepill sould not suddanlie stur, sche wald nocht bring in hir full force at aneis, (as befoir is said,) bot by continewall traffique purposit to augment hir army, so that in the end we sould not be abill to resist. bot the greitest pairt of the nobilitie, and many of the pepill, war so enchantit by hir treassonabill solistaris, that thay could not heir, nor creddeit the treuth planelie spokin. the frensche than, efter the arryvell of thair new men, began to brag: [sn: the devisioun of the lordis landis by the frensche.] than began thay to devyde the landis and lordschippis according to thair awin fantaseis; for ane was styleit monsieur de ergyle; ane uther, monsieur le priour; the thrid, monsieur de ruthven; yea, thay war assureit, in thair awin opinioun, to possesse quhatsoever thay list, that sum askit the rentallis and revenewis of dyverse mennis landis, to the end that [thay] mycht chuse the best. and yitt in this menetyme, sche eschame nott to sett out ane proclamatioun, in this forme:-- [sn: ane proclamatioun sett out be the quene regent, to blind the vulgar pepill.[ ]] "forsamekle as we understand that certane seditious personis hes inventit and blawin abrod dyvers rumouris and evill brutis, tending thairby to steir up the hartis of the pepill, and swa to stope all reconciliatiounis betuix us and our subjectis, being of the nomber of the congregatioun, and consequentlie to kyndill and nureise continewall stryfe and devisioun in this realme, to the manifest subvertioun of the haill estaitis thairof; and amangis uther purpoisses, hes maliciouslie devisit for that effect, and hes perswaidit too many, that we haif violatit the appointment laitlie tane, in sa far as ony ma frensche men sensyne ar cumit in: and that we ar myndit to draw in greit forceis of men of weir furth of france, to suppres the libertie of this realme, oppres the inhabitantis thairof, and mak up straingaris with thair landis and goodis: quhilk reportis ar all (god knawis) maist vayne, fenzeit, and untrew. for it is of treuth, that nathing hes bene done on oure pairt sen the said appointment, quhairby it may be allegeit, that ony point thairof hes bene contravenit: nor yitt was at that tyme any thing communit or concludit to stope the sending in of frensche men; as may cleirlie appeir be inspectioun of the said appointment, quhilk the beirar heirof hes presentlie to schaw. [sn: lett the bischop of amiance and monsieur de la broche letteris writtin to france, witness that.[ ]] quhat[evir] nomber of men of weir be arryveit, we [have] sick regaird to our honour, and quyetnes of this realme, that in caise in the rowme of everie ane frensche man that is in scotland thair war ane hundreth at our command, yitt sould not for that any joyt that is promesit be brokin, or any alteratioun be maid be oure provocatioun; bot the said appointment[ ] treulie and surelie observit in everie point, gif the said congregatioun will in lyk maner faithfullie keip thair pairt thairof. nor yitt meane we to truble any man in the peaceabill possessioun of thair guidis and rowmes, nor yitt to enreache[ ] the crowne, and far less any strangear, with your substance; for our derrest sone and dochter, the king and quene, ar by godis provisioun placeit in the rowme, quhair all men of jugement may weill considder thay have na neid of any manis guidis. and for our self, we seik na thing bot debtfull obedience unto thame, sick as guid subjectis aucht to gif to thair soveraneis, without deminutioun of your liberteis and priveleigeis, or alteratioun of your lawis.[ ] thairfoir, we thocht guid to notifie unto yow our guid mynd foirsaid, and desyreis yow not to gif eir nor creddeitt to sic vayne imaginationis, quhairof, befoir god, no pairte ever enterit in our consait; nor suffer your selfis be thairby led frome youre dew obedience; assureing yow, ye sall ever fynd with us trewth in promeisses, and ane moderlie luif towartis all; yow behaifand your selffis our[ ] obedient subjectis. [sn: few dayis efter declairit the treuth of this] bot of one thing we gif yow wairning, that quhairas sum prechearis of the congregatioun, in thair publict sermonis, speikis irreverentlie and sklanderouslie, alsweill of princeis in generall, as of our self in particulare, and of the obedience to the hiear poweris; induceing the pepill, be that pairt of thair doctrine, to defectioun frome thair dewatie, quhilk pertenis na thing to religioun, bot rather to seditioun and tumult, thingis direct contrar to religioun: thairfoir we desyre yow to tak ordour in youre toun and boundis, that quhan the prechearis repairis thair, thay use thame selfis mair modestlie in thay behalfis, and in thair precheing not to mell sa mekle with civill policie and publict governance, nor yit name us, or uther princeis, bot with honour and reverence, utherwayis it will nocht be sufferrit. [sn: jesabell wald be honourit, bot helias wald nott.] attour,[ ] sen ye haif presentlie the declaratioun of our intentioun, we desire to knaw lykwayis quhat sall be your pairt to us, that we may understand quhat to lippin for at your handis; quhairof we desire ane playne declaratioun in writt, with this beirar, without excuise or delay. "at edinburgh, the twentie aucht of august ." this proclamatioun sche send be hir messingeris throwch all the cuntrey, and had hir solistaris in all pairtis, quha paynefullie travellit to bring men to hir opinioun; amangis quham thir war the principallis, sir johnne bellenden, justice clerk; maister james balfour, officiall of lowthiane, maister thomas and maister williame scottis, sonnis to the laird of balwerie,[ ] sir robert carnegy, and maister gawane hammiltoun; quha for faynting of the bretheris hairtis, and drawing many to the queneis factioun against thair natyve cuntrey, have declairit thame selfis ennemeis to god, and traytouris to thair commune wealth. bot abuiff all utheris maister james balfour, officiall for the tyme, aucht to be abhoirrit; for he, of ane auld professoure, is becum ane new denyare of christ jesus, and manifest blasphemar of his eternall veritie, aganis his knawlege and conscience; seiking to betray his brethren and natyve cuntrey in the handis of ane crewell and unfaithfull natioun. the answer to this former proclamatioun was maid in forme as followis:-- "to the nobilitie, burghis, and communitie of this realme of scotland, the lordis, baronis, and utheris, bretherin of the christiane congregatioun, wischis encrease of wisdome, with the advancement of the glorie of god, and of the communwealth, &c. &c. "the love of oure natyve cuntrey craifis, the defence of oure honouris requyreis, and the synceritie of oure conscienceis compellis us, (derrest brethren,) to answer sum pairt to the last writtingis and proclamatiounis sett furth be the queneis grace regent, no less to mak us and oure caus odiouse, than to abuse your simplicitie to youre finall destructioun, conspyreit of auld, and now alreaddy put to wark. and first, quhair sche allegeis certane seditious personeis have of malice inventit and blawin abrod diverse rumouris, [tending] thairby (as sche allegeis) to steir up the hartis of the pepill to seditioun, be reassone that the frensche men ar croppin in of lait in our cuntrey; trew it is, (deir brethren,) that all sick as beir naturall lufe to thair cuntrey, to yow, thair brethren, inhabitantis thairof, to our housses, wyffis, bairneis, the esperance of your posteratie, and schortlie to your commun-wealth, and the ancient lawis and libertieis thairof, can not bot in hart lament, with mowth and teiris complayne, the maist craftie assaultis devisit and practisit, to the utter rewyne of all thir thyngis foirnameit; and that sua manifestlie is gane to wark, that evin in our eyeis oure derrest brethren, trew memberis of oure commun-welth, ar maist crewellie oppressit by strangearis; in sa far that sum ar baneissit thair awin housses, sum robbit and spuilzeit of thair substance, conqueist by thair just laubouris in the sweit of thair browis; sum crewellie murtherit at the pleasour of thir inhumane souldiouris; and altogidder have thair lyvis in sick feir and dreddour, as gif the ennemy war in the myddis of thame; so that nathing can seme plesand unto thame, quhilk thay possess in the bowellis of thair natyve cuntrey; sa neir jugeis everie man, (and not but just caus,) the practise usit upoun thair brethren to approche nixt unto thame thair selffis, wyffeis, bairneis, housses, and substanceis, quhilk altogidder ar cassin at the feit of straingearis, men of weir, to be by thame thus abusit att thair unbrydillit lustis desyre. now, if it be seditioun, (deir brethren,) to complane, lament, and pour furth befoir god the sorrowis [and] sobbis of oure dolorouse hartis, crying to him for redress of thir enormyteis, (quhilk ellis quhair is not to be found;) and thir altogidder dois [proceid] of the unlauchfull halding of strange suldiouris over the heidis of oure brethren; gif this to complayne be sedition, then indeid, (deir brethren,) can nane of us be purgeit of that cryme; for as in verray hart we dampne sick inhumayne creweltie, with the wickit and craftie pretence thairof, sua can we, nor dar we nott, neather be mouthis speiking, nor yitt by keiping of silence, justifie the same. neather do we heir aggrege the breking of the appointmentt maid at leith, (quhilk alwayis hes manifestlie bene done;) bot quhan we remember quhat aith we have maid to our commun-welth, and how the dewatie we aucht to the same compellis us to cry outt, that hir grace, be wickit and ungodlie counsall, gais maist craftelie about utterlie to oppress the same, and ancient lawis and libertieis thairof, alsweill aganeis the king of francis promeise, hir awin dewatie, in respect of the heich promotionis that sche resavit thairby, quhilk justlie sould have caussit hir to have bene indeid that quhilk sche wald be callit, (and is nathing less in veritie,) to wit, ane cairfull mother ovir this commun-wealth; bot quhat motherlie cair sche hes usit towardis yow, ye can not be ignorant. [sn: lett the nobilitie juge heirof.] haif ye nocht bene, evin frome the first entres of hir regne, ever smytit and oppressit with unaccustomit and exhorbitant taxatiounis, [more] than ever war usit within this realme? yea, and how far was it socht heir to have bene brocht in upoun yow and your posteritie, under cullour to have bene laid up in stoir for the weiris? the inquisitioun tane of all your guidis, movable and immovabill, be way of testament; the seiking of the haill coill and saltt of this realme, to have bene laid up in stoir and gernall, and sche allane to have bene merchant thairof, dois teache yow be experience sum of her motherlie cair. "agane, quhat cair ower your commun-wealth dois hir grace instantlie beir, quhan evin now presentlie, and of ane lang tyme bygane, be the ministerie of sum, (quha better deserve the gallowis, than ever did cochrane,[ ]) sche dois sua corrupt the layit[ ] money, and lies brocht it in sick basenes, and sic quantatie of scruiff, that all men that hes thair eyis oppin may persaif ane extreme beggarie to be brocht thairthrow upoun the haill realme, swa that the haill exchange and traffique to be had with forane natiounis, (ane thing maist necessarie in all commun-wealthis,) sall thairby be utterlie extinguissitt; and all the ganeis resavit thairby is, that sche thairwith intertenis strangearis upoun oure heidis. for, brethren, ye knaw that hir money hes servit for na uther purpoise in our commun-wealth this lang tyme bigane; and the impunitie of thir wickit ministeris, (quhame laitlie we spak of,) hes brocht the mater to sick ane licentious enormitie, and plane contempt of the commun-wealth, that now thay spair not planelie to brek doun and convert the guid and stark money, cunzeit in our soveraneis less age, into this thair corruptit skruiff and baggage of hard-heidis and non suntis,[ ] maist lyik that sche and thay had conspyreit to destroy all the haill gud cunzey of this realme, and consequentlie that pairt of the commun-wealth. [sn: lett sir robert richartsoun, and utheris,[ ] answer to this.] besydeis all this, thair clyppit and rowngeit soussis,[ ] quhilk had no passage thir three yeiris past in the realme of france, ar commandit to have course in this realme, to gratifie thairby hir new cumit suldiouris. and all thir thingis togidder, ar done without the avise or consent of the nobilitie and counsall of this realme, and manifestlie thairthrow, against our ancient lawis and liberteis. "thridlie, hir last and maist wechty proceiding, mair fullie declairis hir motherlie cair hir grace beiris to our commun-wealth and us, quhan in tyme of peace, but any occatioun of forane weiris, thowsandis of strangearis ar layd heir and thair upoun the neckis of our pure memberis of this commun-wealth; thair idill bellyis fed upoun the pure substance of the communitie, conqueist by thair just laubouris in the panefull sueit of thair browis. quhilk to be trew, dumbar, north-berwick, tranent, prestounpanis, mussilburgh, leith, cannogait, kingorne, kirkcaldy, dysert, with the depauperat saullis that this day dwell thairin, can testifie; quhais oppressioun, as doutless it is enterit in befoir the justice sait of god, sa aucht it justlie to move oure hartis to have reuth and compassioun upoun thir oure pure brethren, and at oure poweris to provide remedy for the same. and albeit hir strangearis had bene garneissit with money, (as ye knaw weill thay war nott,) yitt can thair heir lying be na wayis bot maist hurtfull to our commun-wealth, seing that the fertilitie of this realme hes never bene sa plenteouse, that it was abill of any continewance to sustene the self, and inhabitantis thairof, without support of forane cuntreis; far less abill, besydeis the same, to susteane thowsandis of strangeris quhairwith it is burdenit, to the derthing of all viweris,[ ] as the murmour and complaint of edinburgh this day dois testifie. bot to quhat effect the commun-wealth is this way burdenit, the end dois declair; for schortlie war thair brocht to the feyldis against our soveraneis trew liegeis, even us youre brethren, quha, (god knawis,) socht not ellis bot peace of conscience, under protectioun of oure soverane, and reformatioune of thir enormiteis, for na uther caus bot that we wald nott renunce the evangell of jesus chryst, and subdew oure neckis under the tyranie of that man of syn, the romane antichrist, and his foirsworne schavillingis, quha at all tymeis moist tyrannicalie oppressit oure saullis with hunger of goddis trew word, and reft oure guidis and substanceis, to waist the same upoun thair foull lustis and stynking harlottis. "bot, (o deir brethren,) this was nocht the cheif pretence and finall scope of hir proceidingis, (as thir dayis do weill declair;) for had not god gevin in oure hartis to withstand that oppressioun with weaponis of maist just defence, thow, o sanct johnestoun and dundie, had bene in na better estait nor youre sister of leyth is this day. for thocht we in verray deid (god is witnes) menit then na thing bot, in the simplicitie of oure hartis, the mentenance of trew religioun, and saiftie of oure brethren professouris of the same, yit lay thair ane uther serpent lurking in the breist of our adversareis, as this day, (prayse to god,) is planelie oppinnit to all that list behald, to witt, to bring yow and us baith under the perpetuall servitude of strangearis; for we being appointit, as ye knaw, tuiching religioun to be reassonit in the counsall at the day affixt, and na occatioun maid to brek the same on our syde, (as is weill knawin,) yitt come thair furth writtingis and complayntis, that this day and that day we war prepairit to invaid hir graceis persone, (quhan in verray treuth thair was never sic thing thocht, as the verray deid hes declairit;) bot becaus sche was befoir deliberatt to bryng in frensche men to bayth oure destructionis, that ye sould nott stur thairwith, sche maid yow to understand, that thay bandis came onlie for the saiftie of hir awin persone. o craft, brethren! o subtiltie! bot behald the end. [sn: the caus of the frenche menis cuming with wyffis and bairneis.] thay ar cum, (yitt not sa mony, na, not the saxt pairt that sche desyreit and lukit for,) and how?[ ] not onlie with weaponis to defend hir graceis persone, bot with wyffis and bairneis, to plant in youre natyve rowmeis,[ ] as thay have alreddy begun in the toun of leith, the principall port and stapill of all this realme, the gernall and furnitour of the counsall and sait of justice: and heir will thay duell, quhill thay may rainforce thame with greitar nomber of thair fallow suldiouris, to subdew than the rest, gif god withstand not. and yitt hir grace feirit nor eschamit not to write, 'gif thay war ane hundreth frensche men for everie ane of thame that is in scotland, yitt thay sould harme na man.' tell thow now, leith! gif that be trew: gif this be not ane crafty entrie to ane manifest conqueist, foirthocht of auld, juge yow, deir brethren! thus to forte our tounis, and evin the principall port of our realme, and to lay sa strang garnisouns[ ] of straingearis thairin, without any consent of the nobilitie and counsall of this realme, bot expres aganeis thair mynd, (as our writtingis send to hir grace beiris record,) gif this be not to oppres the ancient lawis and libertieis of oure realme, lett all wise men say to it.[ ] and farther, to tak the barne-yairdis new gatherrit, the gernallis replenischeit, the houssis garnissit, and to sitt doun thairin, and be force to putt the just possessouris and ancient inhabitantis thairfra, with thair wyffis, bairneis, and servandis, to schyft [for] thame selfis in begging, gif thair be na uthir meaneis, thay being trew scottis men, memberis of our commun-wealth, and our deir brethren and sisteris, borne, fosterit, and brocht up in the bowellis of oure commune and natyve cuntrey: gif this be not the manifest declaratioun of thair auld pretence and mynd to the haill scottis natioun, lett your awin conscience, (brethren,) be juge heirin. was all leith of the congregatioun? na, i think nott; yitt war all alyk servit. "let this motherlie cair than be tryit be the fruttis thairof: first, be the greit and exhorbitant taxatiounis usit upoun yow, and yitt ten tymeis greittar preissit at, as ye knaw. secundlie, the utter depravatioun of our counzie, to conqueiss tharby money to interteyne strangearis, frensche suldiouris, upoun yow, to mak thame strong haldis, leist ye sould sumtyme expell thame out of your natyve rowmeis.[ ] thridlie, be the daylie rainforceing of the said frensche souldiouris, in strenth and nomber, with wyffis and bairneis, planting in your brethrenis houssis and possessiouns. indeid, hir grace is, and lies bene at all tymes cairfull to procure be hir craft of fair wordis, fair promeissis, and sumtyme buddis, to allure your simplicitie to that poynt, to joyne your self to hir suldiouris, to dantoun and oppres us, that ye the remanent, (we being cut of,) may be ane easie pray to hir slychtis, quhilk god, of infinite gudnes, lies now discoveritt to the eyeis of all that list to behald. bot credeit the warkis, (deir brethren,) gif ye will not creddeit us; and lay the exampill of forane natiouns, yea, of your awin brethren, befoir your eyis and procure not your awin rewyne willinglie. yff ye tender trew religioun, ye see how hir grace beiris hir[self] plane ennemy thairto, and mentenis the tyrannie of thair idill bellies, the bischopis, aganeis godis kirk. giff religioun be nott perswaidit unto yow, yit cast ye not away the cair ye aucht to have ower your commun-welth, quhilk ye see manifestlie and violentlie rewyneit befoir your eyis. gif this will nott move yow, remember your deir wyffis, children, and posteratie, your ancient heretageis and houssis; and think weill thir strangearis will regaird na mair your rycht thairunto, than thay have done your brethrenis of leyth, quhan ever occatioun sall serve. bot gif ye purpoise, as we dout not bot that all thay that ather haif wit or manheid will declair and prove indeid, to bruik your ancient rowmeis and heretageis, conquerit maist valiantlie, and defendit be your maist nobill progenitouris against all strangearis, invaidaris or the same, as the frenscheis pretendis planelie this day; gif ye will not he slavis unto thame, and to have your liffis, your wiffis, your bairnes, your substance, and quhatsoever is deir unto yow, cassin at thair feitt, to be usit and abusit at the plesour of strange suldiouris, as ye see your brethrenis at this day befoir your eyeis; gif ye will not have experience sum day heirof in your awin personeis, (as we suppone the least of yow wald not glaidlie have, bot rather wald chuse with honour to die in defence of his awin natyve rowme, than leif and serve sa schamefull ane servitud;) than, brethren, let us joyne our forceis, and baith with witt and manheid resist thir begynningis, or ellis our libertieis heirefter sall be deirar bocht. [sn: ane proverb.] lett us surelie[ ] be perswaidit, 'quhan our nychtbouris house be on fyre, that we duell nott without daingear.'[ ] lett na man withdraw himself heirfra: and gif any will be sa unhappy and myschevous, (as we suppone nane to be,) let us altogidder reput, hald, and use him, (as he is indeid,) for ane ennemy to us, and to him self, and to his commun-weill. the eternall and omnipotent god, the trew and onlie revengear of the oppressit, be oure confort and oure protectour against the fury and raige of the tyrantis of this warld; and especiallie frome the insaciabill covetousnes of the guisianeis[ ] generatioun. amen." besydis this, our publict letter, sum men answerit certane heidis of hir proclamatioun on this maner:-- "gyff it be seditious to speik the treuth in all sobrietie, and to complayne quhan thay ar woundit, or to call for help against unjust tyrannie befoir that thair throttis be cutt, than can we not deny, bot we ar criminall and giltie of tumult and seditioun. for we have said that our commun-wealth is oppressit, that we and our brethren ar hurt be the tyrrannie of strangearis, and that we feir bondage and slaverie, seing that multitudeis of cruell murtheraris ar daylie brocht in our cuntrey, without our counsall, or knawlege and consent. we dispuit not sa mekill quhidder the bringing in of ma frensche men be violating of the appointment, (quhilk the quene nor hir factioun can not deny to be manifestlie brokin be thame, in ma caisses than ane,) as that we wald knaw, gif the heipping of strangearis upoun strangearis above us, without our counsall or consent, be ane thing that may stand with the libertie of our realme, and with the proffitt of our commun wealth. it is not unknawin to all men of jugement, that the fruitis of our cuntrey, in the maist commun yeiris, be na mair than sufficient reassonabill to nureis the borne inhabitantis of the same. bot now, seing that we have bene vexit with weiris, taikin upoun us at the plesour of france, by the quhilk the maist fruttfull portioun of our cuntrey in corneis hes bene waistit; quhatt man is sa blynd bot that he may see, that sic bandis of ungodlie and idill suldiouris can be na thing ellis bot ane occatioun to fameis our pure brethren? and in this poynt we refuise nott, (quhilk is the cheif,) the jugement of all naturall scottis men." the quene regent allegeit, "that althocht thair war ane hundreith frensche men for ane in scotland, yitt sche is not myndit to trubill any in his just possessioun." quhairto we answer, "that we disput not quhat sche intendis, (quhilk nochttheless, be probabill conjectouris, is to be suspectit;) bot alwayis we affirme, that sick ane multitude of frensche men is ane burding, not onlie unproffitabill, bot alssua intollerabill to this pure realme, especiallie being intreatit as thay ar be hir and monsieur dosell; for gif thair waigeis be payit out of france, than ar thay baith (the quene, we say, and monsieur dosell,) traytouris to the kyng and counsall; for the pure communis of this realme have sustenit thame with the sweit of thair browis, sence the contracting of the peace, and sumquhat befoir. "quhat motherlie effectioun sche hes declairit to this realme, and to the inhabitantis of the same, hir warkis have evidentlie declairit, evin sence the first houre that sche hes borne authoritie; and albeit men will not this day see quhat daingear hyngis over thair heidis, yitt feir we, that or it be long, experience sall teich sum that we feir not without cause. the crewell murthar and oppressioun usit be thame quham now sche fosteris, is till us ane sufficient argument, quhatt is to be luikit for, quhan hir nomber is sa multipleit, that oure force sall not be abill to gainestand thair tyranie. [sn: the doctrine of our precharis concerning obedience to be gevin to magistrattis.[ ]] "quhair sche complenis of our prechearis, affirmyng that irreverentlie thay speik of princeis in generall, and of hir in particular, induceing the pepill thairby to defectioun frome thair dewatie, &c., and thairfor that sick thing can nott be sufferit: becaus this occatioun is had aganis[ ] godis trew ministeris, we can not bot witnes quhat tred and ordour of doctrine thay have keipitt and yitt keip in that poynt. in publict prayeris thay commend to god all princeis in generall, and the magistrattis of this our natyve realme in particular. in oppin audience thay declair the auctoratie of princeis and magistratis to be of god; and thairfoir thay affirme, that thay aucht to be honourit, feirit, obeyit, evin for conscience saik; providit that thay command nor requyre nathing expreslie repugning to godis commandiment and plane will, reveillit in his holy worde. mairover, thay affirme, that gif wickit personeis, abusing the auctoratie estableischet be god, command thingis manifestlie wickit, that sick as may and do brydill thair inordinatt appetyteis of princeis, can not be accusit as resistaris of the aucthoratie, quhilk is godis gud ordinance. to brydill the fury and raige of princeis in free kingdomes and realmeis, thay affirme it appertenis to the nobilitie, sworne and borne counsallouris of the same, and allsua to the barronis and pepill, quhais voteis and consent ar to be requyreit in all greit and wechty materis of the commun-welth. quhilk gif thay do not, thay declair thame selffis criminall with thair princeis, and sa subject to the same vengeance of god, quhilk thay deserve, for that thay pollute the sait of justice, and do, as it war, mak god author of iniquytie. thay proclame and thay cry, that the same god quha plaigit pharoo, repulsit senacherib, struik herod with wormes, and maid the bellies of dogis the grave and sepulchrie of despytefull jesabell, will nott spair the crewell princeis, murtheraris of chrystis memberis in this our tyme. on this maner thay speik of princeis in generall, and of youre grace in particular. [sn: lett sick as this day leif witnes quhat god hes wrocht since the wrytting and publicatioun heirof.[ ]] this onlie we have hard ane of oure prechearis say, rebuiking the vane excuise of sick as flatter thame selffis, be reassone of the auctoratie; 'many now a dayis, (said he,) will have na uther religioun nor faith than the quene and the authoratie hes.'[ ] bot is it [not] posseble, that the quene be sa far blyndit that sche will haif na religioun, nor na uther fayth, than may content to the cardinall of lorane? and may it nott lykwyise be abill, that the cardinall be sua corrupt, that he will admitt na religioun quhilk dois nott establische the paip in his kingdome: bot plane it is, that the paip is lievetenent to sathan, and ennemy to chryst jesus, and to his perfyte religioun. lett men thairfoir considder quhat daingear thay stand in, gif thair salvatioun sall depend upoun the queneis faith and religioun. farder we have never hard any of oure prechearis speik of the quene regent, nether publictlie nor privatlie. quhair hir grace declairis, 'it will nocht be sufferit that oure prechearis mell with policie, nor speik of hir nor of uther princeis bot with reverence,' we answer, 'that as we will justifie and defend nathing in oure prechearis, quhilk we fynd not god to have justifeit and allowit in his messingeris befoir thame; sua dar we not forbid thame oppinlie to reprehend that quhilk the spreit of god, speiking in the propheitis and [sn: the prophettis haif middillit with policey, and his reprovit the corruptioun thairof.] apostillis, hes reprehendit befoir thame. helias did personallie reprove achab and jesabell of idolatrie, of avarice, of murther; and sicklik esaias the propheit callitt the magistrattis of jerusalem in his tymeis companzeounis to thevis, princeis of sodome, brybe-takeris, and murtheraris: he complenit that thair silver was turnit in to dross, that thair wyne was myngleit with watter, and that justice was bocht and sauld. jeremias said, 'that the baneis of king jehoiakim sould widder with the sone.' christ jesus callit herod a fox; and paul callit the hie preist ane payntit wall, and prayit unto god that he sould strike him, because that against justice he commandit him to be smyttin. now gif the lyk or greittar corruptiounis be in the warld this day, quha dar interprise to put silence to the spreit of god, quhilk [will] not be subject[ ] to the appetyteis of wickit princeis?" [sn: the cuming of the erle of arrane to scotland, and his joyning with the congregatioun.[ ]] we have befoir said, that the tent day of september was appointit for ane conventioun to be haldin at striveling, to the quhilk repairit the maist pairt of the lordis of the congregatioun. at that same tyme arryvitt the erle of arrane, quha, efter that he had salutit his father, came with the erie of ergyle and lord james to striviling to the said conventioun. in quhilk diverse godlie men complenit upoun the tyrranie usit against thair brethren, and especiallie that ma frensche men wer brocht in to oppress thair cuntrey. efter the consultatioun of certane dayis, the principall lordis, with my lord of arrane and erie of ergyle, past to hammyltoun, for consultatioun to be taikin with my lord duikis grace. and in this menetyme came assureit word that the frensche men war begun to fortifie leith; quhilk thing, as it did mair evidentlie discover[ ] the queneis craft, sua did deiplie greiff the hartis of the haill nobilitie thair, quha, with ane consentt, aggreit to write unto the quene, in forme as followis:-- [sn: letteris to the quene regent.] "at hammyltoun, the xix[ ] day of september . "pleise your grace, "we ar credibillie informeit, that your army of frensche men sould instantlie begin to plant in leith, to fortifie the same, of mynd to expell the ancient inhabitants thairof, our brethren of the congregatioun; quhairof we marvell not a littill, that your grace sould sua manifestlie brek the appointment maid at leith, but ony provocatioun maid be us and our brethren. and seing the samyn is done without ony maner consent of the nobilitie and counsale of this realme, we esteme the same nocht onlie oppressioun of our pure brethren, indwellaris of the said town, bot allsua verray prejudiciall to the commun-wealth, and playne contrair to oure ancient lawis and libertieis: heirfoir desyreis your grace to caus the samyn warke interprysit, be stayit; and nott to attempt sua raschlie and manifestlie against your graceis promeis, against the commun-wealth, the ancient lawis and libertieis thairof, (quhilk thingis, besyde the glorie of god, ar maist deir and tender unto us, and onlie our pretence;) utherwayis, assuring your grace, we will complayne to the haill nobilitie and communitie of this realme, and maist eirnistlie seik for redress thairof. and thus, recommending oure humyll service unto youre hienes, your graceis answer maist eirnistlie we desire, quham we committ to the eternall protectioun of god. "at hammyltoun, day and yeir forsaid. be youre graceis humyll and obedient servitouris." (this letter was subscrivit with the handis of my lord duik, the erie of arrane, argyle, glencairne, and menteith; be the lordis ruthwen, uchiltre, boyd, and by utheris diverse, barronis and gentilmen.)--to this requeist sche wald nott answer be writt, bot with ane letter of creddeit sche send sir robert carnegy[ ] and maister david boirthick,[ ] tua, quham amangis many utheris, sche abusit, and by quham sche corruptit the hartis of the sempill. they travellit with the duik, to bring him agane to the queneis factioun. la broche and the bischop of amiance were schort befoir arryvit; and, as it was brutit, war directit as ambassadouris; bot thay keipitt cloise thair haill commissioun: thay onlie maid large promeisses to thame that wald be thairis, and leif the congregatioun. the quene did grevouslie complayne, that we haid intelligence with ingland. [sn: the petitioun of labroche.] the conclusioun of thair commissioun was to solist my lord duike to put all in the queneis will, and than wald sche be gratious aneuch. [sn: the answer.] it was answerit, "that na honest men durst committ thame selfis to the mercie of sick thrott-cuttaris[ ] as sche had about hir; quham, gif sche wald remove, and joyne to hir ane counsall of naturall scottismen, permitting the religioun to have fre passage, than sould nane in scotland be mair willing to serve hir grace than sould the lordis and brethren of the congregatioun be." [sn: letter to the lord erskin.] at the same tyme, the duik his grace and the lordis wrait to my lord erskin, capitane of castell of edinburgh, in forme as followis: "my lord and cousing, "efter oure hartlie commendatioun, this present is to adverteise yow, that we ar credibillie informeit, the army of frensche men instantlie in this realme, but ony avise of the counsale of nobilitie, ar fortifieand, of ellis schortlie intendis to fortifie the town of leith, and expell the ancient inhabitantis thairof; quhairby thay proclame to all that will oppin thair eiris to heir, or ene to se, quhat is thair pretence. and seing the faithfulnes of youre antecessouris, and especiallie of your father, of honorabill memorie, was sa recommendit and experimentit to the estaitis and counsallouris of this realme, throwch affectioun thay persawit in him towartis the commun-wealth thairof, that thay doubtit not to gif in his keiping the key, as it war, of the counsall, the justice, and policey of this realme, the castellis of edinburgh and striveling;[ ] we can not bot beleif ye will rather augment the honorabill favoure of your housse, be steidfast favour and lawtie to your commun-wealth, than throuch the subtell persuatioun of sum, (quhilk cair not quhat efter sail cum of yow and your house,) at the present wald abuse yow, to the performance of thair wickit interprysis and pretensis against oure commun-wealth, utterlie to destroy the same. and heirfoir, seing that we haif writtin to the queneis grace, to desist fra that interpryse, utherwise that we will complane to the nobilitie and communitie of the realme, and seik redress thairof. we lykwise beseik yow, as our tender freynd, brother, and member of the same commun-wealth with us, that ye on na wayis mell or assent to that ungodlie interpryise aganeis the commun-wealth; and lykwyise, that ye wald saif your body, and the jewell of this countrey commitit to yow and your predicessouris lawtie and fidelitie toward youre natyve countrey and commun-wealth, gif ye think to be repute heirefter ane of the samyn, and wald rather be brother to us, nor to strangers; for we do gather by the effectis, the secreitis of menis hartis, utherwayis inserceabill unto us. this we write, nott that we ar in dout of yow, bot rather to wairne yow of the daingear, in caise ye thoill your self to be enchantit with fair promeissis and craftie counsalouris. for lett na man flatter him selff: we desyre all man [to] knaw, that thocht he war our father, (sen god hes oppinnit oure eyes to se his will,) be he ennemy to the commun-wealth, quhilk now is assailzeit, and we with it, and all trew memberis thairof, he sall be knawin (and as he is in deid) ennemy to us, to oure lyvis, housses, babis, heretageis, and quhat sumevir is contenit within the same. for as the schip perischeing, quhat can be saif that is within?[ ] sua the commun-wealth being betrayit, quhat particular member can leif in quyetnes? and thairfoir in sa far as the saidis castellis ar commitit to your credeitt, we desyre yow to schaw youre faithfulnes and stoutnes, as ye tender us, and quhatsumevir appertenis to us. and seing we ar assureit ye will be assailzeit bayth with craft and force, as now be wairnyng we help yow against the first, sua against the last ye sall not myss in all possibill haist to have oure assistance. onlie schaw your selff the man. saiff your persone by wisdome, strenth your selff against force, and the almychtie god assist yow in baith the ane and the uther, and oppin youre eyis[ ] understanding, to see and persaif the craft of sathan and his suppoistis. "at hammyltoun, the xix day[ ] of september . be your brethren, &c." [sn: the tyrranny of the frensche.] the duike and lordis understanding that the fortificatioun of leith proceidit, appointit thair haill forceis to convene at striviling the xv day of october, that frome thence thai mycht marche fordwart to edinburgh, for the redress of the greit enormyteis quhilk the frensche did to the haill cuntrey, quhilk be thame was sua oppressitt that the lyfe of all honest man[ ] was bitter unto him. in this meintyme, the lordis directit thair letteris to diverse pairtis of the cuntrey, makand mentioun quhat dangear did hing ower all men, giff the frensche sould be sufferit to plant in this cuntrey at thair plesoure. thay maid mentioun farder, how humblie thay had socht the queue regent, that sche wald send away to france hir frensche men, quha war ane burding unproffitable and grevous to thair commun-wealth; and how that sche nochtwithstanding did daylie augment hir nomber, brynging wyffis and bairneis; a declaratioun of ane plane conqueist, &c. the quene, than regent, perseving that hir crafte began to be espiit, be all meaneis possebill travellit to blynd the pepill. and first, sche send furth hir pestilent postis foirnameit in all pairtis of the cuntrey, to perswaid all man that sche offerit all thingis reassonabill to the congregatioun; and that thay refusing all reassoun, pretendit na religioun, bot ane plane revolt frome the authoratie. sche temptit every man in particular, alse weill thay that war of the congregatioun, as thame that war neutrallis. sche assaultit everie man, as sche thocht maist easelie he mycht have bene ovircum. to the lord ruthven sche send the justice clerk and his wiff, quhn, is dochter to the wife[ ] of the said lord. quhat was thair commissioun and creddeit, is na farther knawin than the said lord hes confessit, quhilk is, that large promeisses of proffitt was offerrit, gif he wald leiff the congregatioun and be the queneis. to lord james, priour of sanctandrois, was send maister johnne spense of condy, with ane letter and creddeit, as followis:-- "the memoriall of maister johnne spense of condy,[ ] the thretty day of september. " . ye sall say, that hir[ ] greit favour towartis yow movis hir to this. " . that sche now knawis, that the occatioun of your depairting frome hir was the favoure of the word and of religioun; with the quhilk albeit sche was offendit, yitt knawing your hart and the hartis of the uther lordis firmelie fixit thairupoun, sche will beir with yow in that behalf, and at youre awin sychtis sche will sett fordwart that caus at hir power, as may stand with goddis word, the commun policey of this realme, and the princeis honour. (note, gud reiddar, quhat vennoum lurkis heir; for plane it is, that the policey quhilk sche pretendit, and the princeis honour, will never suffer christ jesus to ring in this realme.) " . to say, that the occasioun of the assembling of thir men of weir, and fortifeing of leith, is, that it was gevin hir to understand be sum about hir, that it is not the advancement of the word and religioun quhilk is socht at this tyme, bot rather ane pretense to owerthraw, or alter the authoratie of your sister, of the quhilk sche belevis still that ye ar nott participant; and considdering the tendernes betuix yow and your sister, sche trestis mair in yow in that behalf than in any leving. [sn: lett this be notit, o craftie flatterie![ ] (bot befoir the erle of arrane arryvit, and that the duke depairtit frome hir factioun, sche ceassit not contynewallie to cry, that the priour socht to mak him self king; and sua not onlie to depryve his sister to mak him selff king, bot alssua to defraude the lordis duikeis grace and his housse: bot foirseing ane storme, sche began to seik ane new wynd.) "sche farther willit, to offer the way-sending of the men of weir, gif the former suspitioun could be removit. sche lamentit the trubill that appeirit to follow gif the mater sould lang stand in debait. sche promeist hir faithfull laubouris for reconciliatioun, and requyreit the samyn of him; requiring farther, faith, favour, and kyndnes, towartis his sister; and to adverteise for his pairt quhat he desyreit, with promeise that he mycht obtene quhat he plesit to desyre, &c." to this letter and creddeit, the said lord james answerit as followis:-- "pleise youre grace, "i resavit your hienes writting, and have hard the creddeit of the beirar; and fynding the busynes of sick importance, that daingerouse it war to gif haistie answer, and alssua your petitionis ar sua, that with my honour i can nott answer thame privatlie be my selff: i have thocht guid to delay the same till that i may have the jugement of the haill counsall. for this poynt i will not conceill frome youre grace, that amangis us thair is ane solempnit aith, that nane of us sall trafique with youre grace secreitlie; nether yitt that any of us sall mak ane [ad]dress for him selff particularlie; quhilk aith, for my pairt, i purpoise to keip inviolatit to the end. bot quhan the rest of the nobillmen sall convene, i sall leif nathing that lyis in my power undone that may mak for the quyetnes of this pure realme, providing that the glorie of christ jesus be nott hinderit by oure concord. and gif youre grace sall be found sua tractabill as now ye offer, i doutt nott to obteyne of the rest of my brethren sick favouris towartis youre service, as youre grace sall have just occatioun to stand content. for god i tak to record, that in this actioun i have nether socht, nether yitt seikis, any uther thing than godis glorie to encrease, and the libertie of this pure[ ] realm to be mentenit. farther, i have schawin to youre messinger quhat thingis have myslykeit me in youre proceidingis, evin frome sick ane hart as i wald wysche to god ye and all men did knaw. and this with hartlie commendatioun of service to youre grace, i hartlie commit your hienes to the eternall protectioun of the omnipotent. "at sanctandrois, the first of october. (_sic subscribitur_,) "your graceis humyll and obedient servitour, j. st."[ ] this answer resaivet, sche raigeit as hypocrasie usis, quhan it is prickit; and persaving that sche could nott wirk quhat sche wald at the handis of men particularie, sche sett furth ane proclamatioun, universallie to be proclameit, in the tennour as followis:-- "forsamekle as it is understand to the queneis grace, that the duke of chastellerault hes laitlie directit his missyveis in all pairtis of this realme, makand mentioun that the frensche men lait arryvit, with thair wyffis and bairneis, ar [begunne][ ] to plant in leith, to the rewyne of the commun-welth, quhilk he and his pairttakeris will not pas ower with patient behalding, desyring to knaw quhat will be everie manis pairt; and that the fortificatioun of leith is[ ] ane purpoise devysit in france, and that thairfoir monsieur de la broche and the bischop of amiance ar cumit in this cuntrey; ane thing sa vaine and untrew, that the contrarie thairof is notour to all men of free jugement: thairfoir hir grace, willing that the occatiouns quhairby hir grace was movit sa to do be maid patent, and quhat hes bene hir proceidingis sen the appointment last maid on the linkis besyde leith, to the effect that the treuth of all thingis being maid manifest, everie man may understand how injustlie that will to suppres the libertie of this realme is laid to hir charge, hes thocht expedient to mak this discours following:-- "fyrst, althocht efter the said appointment, dyverse of the said congregatioun, and that not of the meaneast sort, had contravenit violentlie the pointis thairof, and maid sundrie occatiouns of new cummer, the samyn was in ane pairt wynkit att and ower-luikit, in hoip that thay with tyme wald remember thair dewatie, and abstene fra sick evill behaviouris, quhilk conversioun hir grace ever sochtt, rather than any puneisment, with sick cair and solicitud be all meaneis, quhill, in the menetyme, na thing was providit for hir awin securitie. bot at last, be thair frequent messageis to and fra ingland, thair intelligence than was persavit: yit hir grace trestis the quene of ingland (lett thame seik as thay pleise) will do the office of ane christiane princes in tyme of ane sworne peax; throw quhilk force was to hir grace (seand sua greit defectioun of greit personageis,) to have recourse to the law of nature; and lyk as ane small bird, being persewit, will provide sum nest, sua hir grace could do na less, in caise of persute, nor provide sum sure retrait for hir selff and hir cumpany; and to that effect, chusit the toun of leith, as place convenient thairfoir; becaus, first, it was hir derrest dochteris propertie, and na uther persone could acclame tytle or enteress thairto, and als becaus in tyme afoir it had bene fortifeit. about the same tyme that the seiking support of ingland was maid manifest, arryvit the erle of arrane, and adjoinit him selff to the congregatioun, upoun farder promisses nor the[ ] pretendit quarrell of religioun that was to be sett up be thame in authoratie, and sua to pervert the haill obedience. [sn: false leying toung, god has confoundit thee!] and as sum of the said congregatioun at the samyn tyme had putt to thair handis, and takin the castell of brochty, put furth the keiparis thairof: immediatlie came fra the said duike to hir grace unluikit for, ane writing, beside many uther,[ ] compleneand of the fortificatioun of the said toun of leith, in hurt of the ancient inhabitantis thairof, brether of the said congregatioun, quhairof he than professit him self ane member; and albeit that the beirar of the said writting was ane unmeitt messinger in ane mater of sick consequence, yitt hir grace direc[ted] to him twa personeis of guid creddeit and reputatioun with answer, offerrand, gif he wald caus ane mendis be maid for that quhilk was commitit aganeis the lawis of the realme, to do further nor could be cravit of reassone, and to that effect to draw sum conference, quhilk for inlaik of him and his collegis, tuik no end. [sn: god hes purgeit his pepill of that false accusatioun.] nochttheles thay continewallie sensyne contynewis in thair doingis, usurping the authoratie, commanding and chargeing free borrowis to cheise provestis and officiaris of thair nameing, and to assyst to thame in the purpoise thay wald be att; and thatt thay will nocht suffer provisioun to be brocht for sustentatioun of hir graceis housseis; and greit pairt hes sa planelie sett asyde all reverence and humanitie, quhairby everie man may knaw that it is na mater of religioun, bot ane plane usurpatioun of authoratie, and na dout bot sempill men, of gude zeall in tymeis bigane, thairwith falslie hes bene desavit. bot as to the queneis grace pairt, god, quha knawis the secreitis of all hartis, weill kennis, and the warld sall see be experience, that the fortificatioun of leith was devisit for na uther purpoise bot for recourse to hir hienes and hir cumpany, in caise thay war persewit. quhairfoir, all gud subjectis that hes the feir of god in thair hartis, will not suffer thame selffis be sick vaine perswatiouns to be led away from thair dew obedience, bot will assist in defence of thair soveraneis quarrel aganeis all sick as will persew the same wrangouslie. thairfoir, hir grace ordaneis the officiaris of armeis to pas to the mercat-croceis of all heid borrowis of this realme, and thair be oppin proclamatioun command and charge all and sundrie the liegeis thairof, that nane of thame tak upoun hand to put thame selfis in armeis, nor tak pairt with the said duke or his assistaris, under the pane of treassone." thir letteris being devulgatt, the hartis of many war steirit; for thay jugeit the narratioun of the queue regent to have bene trew: uthiris understanding the samin to be utterlie false. bot becaus the lordis desyreit all man [to] juge in thair cause, thay sett out this declaratioun subsequent:-- [sn: the declaratioun of the lordis against the former proclamatioun.] "we ar compellit unwillinglie to answer the grevouse accusatiouns maist injustlie laid to our chargeis be the quene regent and hir perverst counsall, quha cease not, by all craft and malice, to mak us odiouse to our darrest brethren, naturall scotismen; as that we pretendit na uther thing bot the subversioun and owerthraw of all just authoritie, quhan, god knawis, that we thocht na thing bot that sick authoratie as god approvis by his word, be establischeit, honourit, and obeyit amangis us. trew it is that we have complenit, (and continewallie must complene,) till god send redress, that our commun cuntrey is oppressit with strangearis; that this inbringing of suldiouris, with thair wiffis and children, and planting of men of weir in oure free tounis, appeiris to us ane reddy way to conqueist: and we maist eirnistlie requyre all indifferent personeis to juge betwix us and [the] quene regent in this cause,[ ] to wit, quhidder that our complaynt be just or nott; for, for quhat uther purpoise sould sche this multiplie strangearis upoun us, bot onlie in respect of conqueist; quhilk is ane thing not of lait devisit be hir and hir avaritiouse house. [sn: the avarice of thame of lorane and gweise.] we ar not ignorant, that sax yeris past, the questioun was demandit, of ane man of honest reputatioun, quhat nomber of men was abill to dantoun scotland, and to bring it to the full obedience of france. she allegeis, that to say the fortificatioun of leith was ane purpoise devisit in france, and that for that purpoise war monsieur de la broche, and the bischop amiance send to this cuntrey, is ane thing sa vaine and untrew, that the contrarie thairof is notour to all men of fre jugement. bot evident it is, quhatsoever sche allegeis, that sence thair arryvall, leith was begun to be fortifeit. sche allegeis, that sche, seing the defectioun of greit personageis, was compellitt to have recourse to the law of nature, and lyk ane small bird persewit,[ ] to provide for sum sure retreitt to hir selff and hir cumpany. bot quhy dois sche not answer, for quhatt purpoise did sche bring in hir new bandis of men of weir? was thair any defectioun espyit befoir thair arryvall? was not the congregatioun under appointment with hir? quhilk, quhatsoever sche allegeis, sche is not abill to prove that we haid contravenit in any chief poynt, befoir that her new throt-cuttaris arryvit, yea, befoir that thay began to fortifie leith; ane place, says sche, maist convenient for hir purpoise, as in verray deid it is for the resaving of strangearis at hir plesour: for gif sche haid fearit the persute of hir body, sche haid the insche, dumbar, blaknes, fortis and strenthis alreddy maid. yea, bot they could not sa weill serve hir turne as leith, becaus it was hir dochteris propertie, and na uther could haif tytill to it, and becaus it had bene fortifeit of befoir. that all men may knaw the just tytle hir dochter and sche hes to the toun of leith, we sall in few wordis declair the trewth. "it is not unknawin to the maist pairt of this realme, that thair hes bene ane auld haitrent and contentioun betuix edinburght and leith;[ ] edinburgh seiking continewallie to possess that libertie, quhilk be donatioun of kyngis thay have lang injoyit; and leith, be the contrary, aspyring to ane libertie and fredome in prejudice of edinburgh. [sn: the title that the quene [had] or hes[ ] to leith.] the quene regent, ane woman that could mak hir proffitt of all handis, was nott ignorant how to compass hir awin mater; and thairfoir secreitlie sche gaif adverteisment to sum of leith, that sche wald mak thair toun fre, gif that sche mycht do it with any cullour of justice. [sn: the laird of restalrig superiour to leith.] be quhilk promeise, the principall men of them did travell with the laird of restalrig,[ ] ane man nether prudent nor fortunat, to quhome the superioratie of leyth appertenit, that he sould sell his haill tytle and rycht to our soverane, for certane sowmeis of money, quhilk the inhabitantis of leith payit, with ane large taxatioun mair, to the quene regent, in hoip to have bene maid free in dispite and defraud of edinburgh. quhilk rycht and superioratie, quhan sche haid gottin, and quhan the money was payit, the first fruittis of thair libertie thay now eitt with bitternes, to wit, that strangearis sall possess thair town. this is hir just tytle quhilk hir dochter and sche may clame to that towne. and quhair sche allegeis that it was fortifeit befoir, we ask, gif that [was] done without consent of the nobilatie and estaitis of the realme, as sche now, and hir craftie counsallouris do in dispyte and contempt of us the lauchfull heidis[ ] and borne counsallouris of this realme. "how far we have socht support of ingland, or of ony uther princes, and how just cause we haid, and haif sa to do, we sall schortlie mak manifest unto the warld, to the prayse of godis haly name, and to the confusioun of all thame that sclander us for sa doing. for this we feir nott to confess, that as in this oure interpryse against the devill, idolatrie, and the mentenance of the same, we cheiflie and onlie seik godis glorie to be notifeit unto man, synne to be puncisit, and vertew to be mentenit; sua quhair power faillis of oure self, we will seik quhair soever god sall offer the same; and yitt in sa doing, we ar assureit, nether till offend god, nether yitt to do any thing repugnant to our dewiteis. we hartlie prayse god, quha movit the hart of the erle of arrane to joyne him selff with us, his persecuteit brethren; bot how maliciouse ane ley it is, that we have promesit to sett him up in authoratie, the ischew sall declair. god we tak to record, that na sick thing hes to this day enterit in oure hartis. nether yitt hes he, the said erie, nather any to him appertenyng, movit unto us ony sick mater; quhilk, gif thay sould do, yitt ar we not sa sklender in jugement, that inconsidderatlie we wald promeis that quhilk efter we mycht repent. we speik and write to goddis glorie:[ ] the leist of us knawis better quhat obedience is dew to ane lauchfull authoritie, than sche or hir counsall dois practise the office of sick as worthelie may sitt upoun the sait of justice; for we offer, and we performe, all obedience quhilk god hes commandit; for we nether deny toll, tribute, honour, nor feir till hir, nor till hir officiaris: we onlie brydill hir blynd raige, in the quhilk sche wald erect and mentene idolatrie, and wald murther oure brethren quha refusses the same. bott sche dois utterlie abuse the authoratie establischeitt by god: sche prophaneis the throne of his majestie in erth, making the saitt of justice, quhilk aucht to be the sanctuary and refuge of all godlie and vertuouse personeis, injustlie afflictit, to be ane den and receaptakle to thevis, murtheraris, idolateris, huremongaris, adulteraris, and blasphemaris of god and all godlynes. [sn: the wickitness of the bischopis.[ ]] it is mair than evident, quhat men thay ar, and lang have bene, quham sche by hir power mentenis and defendis; and alssua quhat hes bene our conversatioun sence it hes plesit god to call us to his knawlege, quham now in hir fury sche crewellie persecuteis. we deny nocht the taking of the house of brouchty;[ ] and the cause being considderit, we think that na naturall scottisman will be offendit at oure fact. quhan the assureit knawlege came unto us that the fortificatioun of leith was begun, everie man began to inquyre quhat daingear mycht ensew to the rest of the realme, giff the frensche sould plant in dyverse placeis, and quhat war the placeis that mycht maist [annoy] us.[ ] [sn: the caus that browchty craig was takin.[ ]] in conclusioun it was found, that the taking of the said housse be frensche men sould be destructioun to dundie, and hurtfull to sanct johnnstoun, and to the haill cuntrey; and thairfoir it was thocht expedient to prevent the daingear, as that we did for preservatioun of oure brethren and commun cuntrey. it is nocht unknawin quhat ennemyis thir twa tounis have, and quhow glaidlie wald sum haif all guid ordour and pollecey owerthrawin in thame. the conjectureis that the frensche war of mynd schortlie to have takin the same, war not obscure. bot quhatsoever thay pretendit, we can nott repent that we (as said is) have preventit the daingear; and wald god that our power haid bene in the same maner to have foircloissit thair entres to leith; for quhat trubill the pure realme sall endure befoir thatt thay murtheraris and injust possessouris be removit from the same, the ischew will declair. [sn: lett all man juge.] giff hir accusatioun against my lord duikis grace, and that we refusit conference, be trewlie and sempillie spokin, we will nott refuise the jugement of thay verray men, quham sche allegeis to be of sa honest a reputatioun. [sn: the duikeis answer.] thay knaw that the dukeis grace did answer, that gif the realme mycht be sett at libertie frome the bondage of thay men of weir quhilk presentlie did oppress it, and was sa feirfull to him and his brethren, that thay war compellit to absent thame selfis from the placeis quhair sche and thay maid residence; thatt he and the haill congregatioun sould cum and gif all debtfull[ ] obedience to oure soverane hir dochter, and unto hir grace, as regent for the tyme. bot to enter in conference, sa lang as sche keipis above him and his brethren that feirfull scourge of crewell strangearis, he thocht na wyise man wald counsall him. and this his answer we approve, adding farther, that sche can mak us no promeis quhilk sche can keip nor we can creddeit, sa lang as sche is forceit with the strenth, and reuillit be the counsall of frensche.[ ] we ar not ignorant that princeis think it guid policey to betray thair subjectis be breking of promeissis, be thay never so solempnitlie maid. we have nott forgett quhat counsall sche and monsieur dosell gaif to the duike against thame that slew the cardinall, and keip the castell of sanctandrois: and it was this, "that quhat promeis thay list to requyre sould be maid unto thame: bot how sone that the castell was randerit, and thyngis brocht to sick pass as was expedient, that he sould chope the heidis frome everie ane of thame." to the quhilk quhan the duike answerit, "that he wald never consent to sa treassonabill ane act, bot gif he promesit fidelitie, he wald faithfullie keip it." monsieur dosell said, in mockage to the quene, in frensche, "that is ane guid sempill nature, bot i knaw na uther prince that wald swa do." gif this was his jugement in sa small ane mater, quhat have we to suspect in this oure caus: [sn: _nota._] for now the question is not of the slauchter of ane cardinall, bot of the just abolisching of all that tyrannie quhilk that romane antechryst hes usurpit above us, of the suppressing of idolatrie, and of the reformatioun of the haill religioun, by that verming of schavelingis utterlie corruptit. [sn: the quarrell betuix france and the congregatioun of scotland.] now, gif the slauchter of ane cardinall be ane syn irremissebill,[ ] as thay thair selffis affirme, and gif faith aucht not to be keipit to heretykes, as thair awin law speikis, quhat promeise can sche that is reullit be the counsall and commandyment of ane cardinall, mak to us, that can be sure? "quhair sche accusis us, that we usurp authoritie, to command and charge free browchis to cheise provestis and officiaris of our nameing, &c., we will that the haill browchis of scotland testifie in that caise, quhydder that we have usit ony kynd of violence, bot lovinglie exhortit sick as askit support, to cheise sick in office as had the feir of god befoir thair eyis, luffitt equitie and justice, and war nott notit with avarice and brybing. bot wonder it is, with quhatt face sche can accuse us of thatt quhairof we ar innocent, and sche sua oppinlie criminall, that the haill realme knawis hir iniquities. in that caise, hes sche nott compellit the toun of edinburgh to reteane ane man to be thair provest,[ ] [sn: the lord seytoun unworthy of regiment.[ ]] maist unworthy of ony regiment in ane weill rewlit commun-wealth? hes sche nott enforceitt thame to tak baillies of hir appoyntment, and sum of thame sua meitt for thair office, in this trubilsum tyme, as ane sowtar is to saill[ ] ane schip in ane stormy day? [sn: _optima collatio._] sche compleneis thatt we will nott suffer provisioun to be maid for hir house. in verray deid we unfeinzeitlie repent, that befoir this we tuik nott better ordour that thir murtheraris and oppressouris, quham sche pretendis to nureise, for oure destructioun, had not bene disapointit of that greit provisioun of victuallis quhilk sche and thay have gadderit, to the greit hurt of the haill cuntrey. bot as god sall assist us in tymeis cuming, we sall do diligence sum-quhatt to frustrat thair devillysche purpoise. [sn: lett the papistis juge gif god hes not gevin jugement to the displesour of thair hartis.] quhatt baith sche and we[ ] pretend, we dout not bot god, quha can not suffer the abuse of his awin name lang to be unpunischeit, sall one day declair; and unto him we feir nott to committ oure cause. nether yitt feir we in this presentt to say, that against us sche makis ane maist maliciouse ley. [sn: the ley to the quene regent.] quhair that sche sayis, that it is na religioun that we ga about, bot ane plane usurpatioun of the authoritie, god forbid that sick impietie sould enter into oure hartis, that we sould mak his holie religioun ane cloik and covertour of oure iniquitie. frome the begynning of this contraversie, it is evidentlie knawin quhat have bene oure requeistis, quhilk gif the rest of the nobilitie and communitie of scotland will caus be peformeit unto us, giff than ony sygne of rebellioun appeir in us, lett us be reputit and punisit as traytouris. bot quhill strangearis ar brocht in to suppres us, our commun-welth, and posteritie, quhill idolatrie is mentenit, and christ jesus his trew religioun dispysit, quhill idill bellies and bludy tyrantis, the bischopis, ar mentenit, and christis trew messingeris persecutit; quhill, fynallie, vertew is contemnit, and vice extollit, quhill that we, ane greit pairt of the nobilitie and communaltie of this realme, ar maist injustlie persecuteit, quhat godlie man can be offendit that we sall seik reformatioun of thir enormiteis, (yea, evin be force of armes, seing that uthirwayis it is denyit unto us;) we ar assureit that nether god, neather nature, neather ony just law, forbiddis us. [sn: the caus that movit the nobilitie of this realme to oppone thame to the quene regent.] god hes maid us counsallouris be birth of this realme; nature byndis us to luiff our awin cuntrey; and just lawis commandis us to support oure brethren injustlie persecutit. yea, the aith that we have maid, to be trew to this commune-wealth, compellis us to hasard quhatsoever god hes gevin us, befoir that we see the miserabill rewyne of the same. gif ony think this is not religioun quhilk now we seik, we answer, that it is nathing ellis, bot the zeall of the trew religioun quhilk movis us to this interpryse: [sn: the same mynd remanis to this day.] for as the ennemy dois craftelie foirsee that idolatrie can not be universalie mentenit, onless that we be utterlie suppressit, sua do we considder that the trew religioun (the puritie quhairof we onlie requyre) can not be universalie erectit, unless strangearis be removit, and this pure realme purgeit of thir pestilencis quhilk befoir have infectit it. and thairfoir, in the name of the eternall god, and of his sone chryst jesus, quhais caus we sustene, we requyre all oure brethren, naturall scottis men, prudentlie to considder oure requeistis, and with judgment to decerne betuix us and the quene regent and hir factioun, and not to suffer thame selfis to be abused by her craft and deceat, that eather thei shall lift thair weaponis against us thair brethren, who seik nothing butt godis glorie, eyther yitt that thei extract frome us thare just and detfull[ ] supporte, seing that we hasard our lyves for preservatioun of thame and us, and of our posteritie to come: assuring suche as shall declair thame selves favoraris of her factioun, and ennemeis unto us, that we shall repute thame, whensoever god shall putt the sword of justice in our handis, worthie of such punishment, as is dew for such as studie to betray thair countree in the handis of strangearis." [sn: this promeiss was foryett,[ ] and thairfoir hes god plagued. what spreit could haue hoped for victorie in so disperate dangearis.] this our answer was formed, and divulgat in some places, but not universallie, be reassone of our day appointit to meitt at striveling, as befoir is declaired. in this meantyme, the quene her postes ran with all possible expeditioun to draw men to her devotioun; and in verray deid, sche fand mo favoraris of her iniquitie then we suspected. for a man that of long tyme had bene of our nomber in professioun, offered (as himself did confesse) his service to the quene regent, to travaill betuix hir grace and the congregatioun for concord. sche refused nott his offer; bott knowing his simplicitie, sche was glad to employ him for her advantage. the man is maister robert lockart,[ ] a man of whome many have had and still have good opinioun, as tweiching his religioun; bott to enter in the dresse of suche affaris, nott so convenient, as godlie and wyise men wold requyre. he travailled nocht the less earnestlie in the quene regentis affares, and could nott be perswaded bot that sche ment sincerlie, and that sche wold promote the religioun to the uttermost of her power. he promissed in hir name, that sche wald putt away hir frensche men, and wald be reulled by the counsall of naturall scottismen. when it was reassoned in his contrary, "that yf sche war so mynded to do, sche could have found mediatouris a great deall more convenient for that purpose." he feared nott to affirme, "that he knew more of her mynd then all the frenche or scottis that war in scotland, yea more then her awin brethren that war in france." he travailled with the erle of glencarne, the lordis uchiltrie and boid, with the larde of dun, and with the preacheouris, to whome he had certane secreat letteris, which he wald not deliver, onless that thei wald maik a faithfull promeise, that thei should never reveill the thing conteaned in the same. to the whiche it was answered, "that in no wyise thei could maik suche a promeise, be reassone that thei war sworne one to another, and altogetther in one body, that thei should have no secreat intelligence nor dress with the quene regent, bot that thei should communicat with the great counsall whatsoever sche proponed unto thame, or thei did answer unto her." as by this answer, written by johne knox to the quene regent, may be understand,[ ] the tennour whairof followis:-- "[madame,][ ] "my dewitie moist humilie premissed: your grace's servand, maister robert lockard, maist instantlie hes requyred me and otheris, to whome your graceis letteris, as he alledged, war directed, to receave the same in secreat maner, and to geve to him answer accordinglie. bot becaus some of the nomber that he required war and ar upoun the great counsall of this realme, and thairfoir ar solempnedlie sworne to have nothing to do in secreate maner, neather with your grace, neather yitt with any that cumis fra yow, or fra your counsall; and swa thei could not receave your grace letteris with sick conditionis as the said maister robert required; and thairfoir thocht he good to bring to your grace agane the said letteris close. and yitt becaus, as he reportis, he hes maid to your grace some promeise in my name; att his requeist, i am content to testifie by my letter and subscriptioun, the sume of that quhilk i did communicat with him. in dondie, after many wourdis betuix him and me, i said, that albeit diverse sinister reportis had bene maid of me, yitt did i never declair any evident tockin of haiterent nor inmitie against your grace. for yf it be the office of a verray freind to geve trew and faythfull counsall to thame whome he seis ryn to destructioun for lack of the same, i could nott be provin ennemye to your grace, bot rather a freind unfeaned.[ ] for what counsall i had gevin to your grace, my writtingis, alsweall my letteris and additioun to the same, now prented,[ ] as diverse otheris quhilkis i wrait fra sanct johnestoun, may testifie. i farther added, that sick ane ennemye was i unto yow, that my tung did bayth perswaid and obteane, that your authoritie and regiment should be obeyed of us in all thingis lawchfull, till ye declaired your self open ennemye to this commoun-wealth, as now, allace! ye have done. this i willed him moreover to say to your grace, that yf ye, following the counsall of flatterand men, having no god bot this world and thair bellies, did proceid in your malice against christ jesus his religioun, and trew ministeris, that ye should do nothing ellis but accclerat and haste godis plague and vengeance upoun your self and upoun your posteritie: and that ye, (yf ye did not change your purpose hastelie,) should bring your self in sick extreame danger, that when ye wold seak remeady, it should nott be sa easy to be found, as it had bene befoir. this is the effect and sume of all that i said at that tyme, and willed him, yf he pleased, to communicat the same to your grace. and the same yitt agane i notifie unto your grace, by this my letter, writtin and subscryved at edinburgh, the of october . (_sic subscribitur_,) "your grace's to command in all godlynes. "john knox. "_postscriptum._--god move your harte[ ] yitt in tyme to considder, that ye feght nott against man, bot against the eternall god, and against his sone jesus christ, the onlie prince of the kingis of the earth." * * * * * at whiche answer, the said maister robert was so offended, that he wald nott deliver his letteris, saying, "that we wer ungodlie and injuriouse to the quene regent yf we suspected any craft in hir." to the whiche it was answered, by one of the preacheouris, "that tyme should declair, whitther he or thei war deceaved. yff sche should nott declair hir self ennemye to the trew religioun whiche thei professed, yf ever sche had the upper hand, then thei wald be content to confesse that thei had suspected her sinceritie without just cause. bot and yf sche should declair her malice no less in tymes cuming than sche had done befoir, thei required that he should be more moderat then to dampne thame whose conscience he knew nott." and this was the end of the travaill for that tyme, after that he had trubled the conscience of many godlie and qwiet personis. for he and other who war her hyred postes, ceassed nott to blaw in the earis of all man, that the quene wes hevelie done to; that sche required nothing bot obedience to her doghtter; that sche was content that the trew religioun should go fordwarde, and that all abuses should be abolished; and be this meane thei broght a gruge and divisioun amang our selfis. for many (and our brethrene of lowthiane especiallie) began to murmur, that we soght another thing than religioun, and so ceassed to assist us certane dayis, after that we wer cumed to edinburgh, whiche we did according to the former diet, the day of october. this grudge and truble amangis our selfis was not reased by the foirsaid maister robert[ ] onlye, bot by those pestilentis whome befoir we have expressed, and maister james balfour especiallie, whose vennemouse tounges against god and his trew religioun, as thei deserve punishement of men, so shall thei not escheap godis vengeance, onless that spedelie thei reapent. [sn: the secound admonitioun to the quene regent.] after our cuming to edinburgh the day foirnamed, we assembled in counsall, and determined to geve new advertisement to the quenis grace regent, of our conventioun, and in suche sorte; and so with commoun consent we send unto her our requeast, as followis:-- "[madame,][ ] "it will pleise your grace reduce to your remembrance, how at our last conventioun at hammyltoun, we required your hienes, in our maist humbill maner, to desist from the fortifeing of this town of leyth, then interprysed and begone, quhilk appeared to us (and yitt does) ane entree to ane conqueist, and overthrow to our liberties, and altogidder against the lawis and custumes of this realme,[ ] seing it was begune, and yit continewis, without any advise and consent of the nobilitie and counsall of this realme. quhaifoir now, as of befoir, according to our dewitie to our commoun-wealth, we most humelie requyre your grace to caus your strangearis and soldiouris whatsumever to departe of the said town of leyth, and maik the same patent, not onlye to the inhabitantis, bot also to all scottishmen, our soverane ladyes liegis. assureand your hienes, that yf, refusand the samyn, ye declair thairby your evill mynd toward the commoun-weill and libertie of this realme, we will (as of befoir) mene and declair the caus unto the haill nobilitie and communaltie of this realme; and according to the oath quhilk we have sworne for the mantenance of the commoun-weall, in all maner of thingis to us possible, we will provid reamedy: thairfoir requyring most humblie your grace answer in haist with the berar, becaus in our eyis the act continewallie proceadis, declaring ane determinatioun of conquest, quhilk is presumed of all men, and not without caus. and thus, after our humill commendatioun of service, we pray almychttie god to have your grace in his eternall tuitioun." * * * * * these our letteris receaved, our messinger was threatned, and withholdin a whole day. thairefter he was dismissed, without ony other answer bot that sche wald send ane answer when sche thocht expedient. in this meantyme, becaus the rumour ceassed nott, that the duke his grace usurped the authoritie, he was compelled, with the sound of trumpete, at the mercat croce of edinburgh, to maik his purgatioun, in forme as followis, the xix day of october: [sn: the duik long befoir falslie accused of usurpatioun.[ ]] the purgatioun of the duik. "forsamekle as my lord duik of chastellerault, understanding the fals reporte maid be the quene regent against him, that he and his sone, my lord of arrane, should pretend usurpatioun of the croune and authoritie of this realme, when in verray deid he nor his said sone never anis mynded sic thingis, bott allanerlie in simplicitie of heart, movit partlie be the violent persute of the religioun and trew professouris thairof, partlie by compassioun of the commoun-wealth and poore communitie of this realme, oppressed with strangearis, he joyned him self with the rest of the nobilitie, with all hasard, to supporte the commoun caus of that ane and of that uther; hes thoght expedient to purge him self and his said sone, in presence of yow all, as he had done in presence of the counsall, of that same cryme, of auld, evin be summondis, laid to his charge the secound year of the regne of our soverane lady. quhilk malice hes continewed ever against him, maist innocent of that cryme, as your experience bearis witness; and planelie protestis, that neather he nor his said sone suittis and seikis any pre-eminence,[ ] eather to the croune or authoritie, bot als far as his puissance may extend, is readdy, and ever shalbe, to concur with the rest of the nobilitie his brethren, and all otheris whais hartis ar tweichet to manteane the commoun caus of religioun and liberty of thair native cuntrey, planelie invaded be the said regent and hir said soldiouris, wha onlye does forge sick vane reportis to withdraw the heartis of trew scottisemen from the succour thai aught of bound dewitie to thair commoun-weall opprest. quharefoir [he] exhortis all men that will manteane the trew religioun of god, or withstand this oppressioun or plane conquest, interprysed be strangearis upoun our native scottisemen, nott to credyte sick fals and untrew reportis, bot rather concurr with us and the rest of the nobilitie, to sett your countree at libertie, expelling strangearis thairfra; whiche doing, ye shall schaw your self obedient to the ordinance of god, whiche was establisshed for mantenance of the commoun-weall, and trew members of the same." the xxi day of october, cam fra the quene then regent maister robert forman,[ ] lyoun king of armes, who broght unto us ane writting in this tennour and credit:-- "eftir commendatioun: we have receavit your letter of edinburgh the xix of this instant, whiche appeared to us rather to have cumit fra ane prince to his subjectis, nor fra subjectis to thame that bearis authoritie: for answer whairof, we have presentlie directed unto yow this berar, lyon herald king of armes, sufficientlie instructed with our mynd, to whome ye shall geve credence. "at leyth, the of october . (_sic subscribitur_,) "marie r." [sn: lett this be noted, and left all men judge of the purpose of the frenche.] his credit is this:-- "that sche woundered how any durst presume to command her in that realme, whiche neaded not to be conquest by any force, considering that it was allready conqueissed by marriage; that frenche men could nott be justlie called strangearis, seing that thei war naturalized; and thairfoir that sche wald neather maik that toun patent, neather yitt send any man away, bot as sche thocht expedient. sche accused the duik of violating his promeise: sche maid long protestatioun of her love towardis the commoun-wealth of scotland; and in the end commanded, that under pane of treassone, all assistaris to the duke and unto us, should departe from the toune of edinburgh."[ ] this answer receaved, credite heard, preconceaved malice sufficientlie espyed, consultatioun was tacken what was expedient to be done. and for the first it was concluded, that the herauld should be stayed till farder determinatioun should be tacken. [sn: the ordour of the suspensioun of the quein regent, from authoritie within scotland.] the haill nobilitie, baronis, and broughes, then present, wer commanded to convene in the tolbuyth of edinburgh, the same xxj day of october, for deliberatioun of these materis. whare the hole caus being exponed by the lord ruthven, the questioun was proponed, "whetther sche that so contempteouslie refuissed the most humill requeist of the borne counsallouris of the realm, being also bott a regent, whose pretenses threatned the boundage of the hole commoun-wealth, awght to be sufferred so tyrannouslie to impyre above tham?" and because that this questioun had nott bene befoir disputed in open assemblie, it was thoght expedient that the judgement of the preachearis should be required; who being called and instructed in the caise, johne willok, who befoir had susteaned the burthen of the churche in edinburgh, commanded[ ] to speik, maid discourse, as followeth, affirmyng:-- [sn: the discourse of johne willock.] "first, that albeit magistratis be goddes ordinance, having of him power and authoritie, yitt is not thair power so largelie extended, but that is bounded and limited by god in his word. "and secundarlie, that as subjectis ar commanded to obey thair magistratis, so ar magistratis commanded to geve some dewitie to the subjectis; so that god by his word, hes prescribed the office of the one and of the other. "thridlie, that albeit god hath appointed magistratis his lievtennentis on earth, and hes honored thame with his awin title, calling thame goddis, that yitt he did never so establess any, but that for just causses thei mycht have bene depryved. "fourtlie, that in deposing of princes, and those that had bene in authoritie, god did nott alwyise use his immediate poware; but sometymes he used other meanis whiche his wisedome thocht good and justice approved, as by asa he removed maacha his awin mother from honour and authoritie, whiche befoir sche had brooked; by jehu he destroyed joram, and the haill posteritie of achab; and by diverse otheris he had deposed from authoritie those whome befoir he had establesshed by his awin worde." [sn: the causes.] and heirupoun concluded he, "that since the quene regent denyed her cheaf dewitie to the subjectis of this realme, whiche was to minister justice unto thame indifferentlie, to preserve thair liberties from invasioun of strangearis, and to suffer thame have godis word freelie and openlie preached amanges thame; seing, moreover, that the quene regent wes ane open and obstinat idolatress, a vehement manteanare of all superstitioun and idolatrie; and, finallie, that sche utterlie dispysed the counsall and requeistis of the nobilitie, he could see no reassone why they, the borne counsallouris, nobilitie, and baronis of the realme, mycht nott justlie deprive her from all regiment and authoritie amanges thame." [sn: the judgement of johne knox, in the dispositioun of the quein regent.] heirefter was the judgement of johne knox required, who, approving the sentence of his brother, added,-- "first, that the iniquitie of the quene regent, and mysordour owght in nowyis to withdraw neather our heartis, neather yitt the heartis of other subjectis, from the obedience dew unto our soveranis. "secundarly, that and yf we deposed the said quene regent rather of malice and privat invy, than for the preservatioun of the commoun-wealth, and for that her synnes appeared incurable, that we should nott escheap godis just punishment, howsoever that sche had deserved rejectioun from honouris. "and thridlie, he required that no suche sentence should be pronunced against her, bott that upoun her knawin and oppen reapentance, and upoun her conversioun to the commoun-wealth, and submissioun to the nobilitie, place should be granted unto her of regresse to the same honouris from the whiche, for just causses, sche justlie might be deprived." the votes of everie man particularlie by him self required, and everie man commanded to speik, as he wald ansure to god, what his conscience judged in that mater, thair was none found, amonges the hole number, who did nott, by his awin toung consent to her deprivatioun. thairefter was her process[ ] committed to writt, and registrat, as followeth:-- [sn: the enormities committed by the quein regent.] "at edinburgh, the twenty one day of october . the nobilitie, baronis, and broughes convenit to advise upoun the affairis of the commoun-weall, and to ayde, supporte, and succour the samyn, perceaving and lamenting the interprysed destructioun of thair said commoun-weall, and overthrow of the libertie of thair native cuntree, be the meanes of the quene regent, and certane strangearis her prevey counsallouris, plane contrarie oure soveranes lord and ladyis mynd, and direct against the counsall of the nobilitie, to proceid by litill and litill evin unto the uttermost, sa that the urgent necessitie of the commoun-weall may suffer na langare delay, and earnestlie craves our supporte: seing heirfoir that the said quene regent, (abusing and owir passing our soveranes lord and ladyis commissioun, gevin and granted to her,) hes in all her proceidingis, persewit the baronis and broughes within this realme, with weapones and armour of strangearis, butt ony process or ordour of law, thei being oure soverane lord and ladyis trew liegis, and never called nor convict in any cryme be ony judgement lauchfull; as first at sanct johnestoun, in the moneyth of maij, sche assembled her army against the towne and inhabitantis thairof, never called nor convict in any cryme, for that thei professed trew wirschip of god, conforme to his moist sacrat worde; and lyikwyis in the moneyth of junij last, without any lauchfull ordour or calling going befoir, invaded the persones of syndre noble men and baronis with force of armes convenit at sanctandrois, onlie for caus of religioun, as is notoriouslie knawin, thei never being callit nor convict in ony cryme: attour layed garnisonis the same moneth upoun the inhabitantis of the said toun of sanct johnestoun, oppressing the liberties of the quenis trew lieges; for feir of whiche her garnisones, ane great parte of the inhabitantis thairof, fled of the towne, and durst nott resorte agane unto thair housses and heretages, whill thei war restored be armes, thei notwithstanding never being called nor convict in any cryme. and farder, that samyn tyme did thrust in upoun the headis of the inhabitantis of the said towne provest and baillies, against all ordour of electioun; as laitlie, in this last moneth of september, sche had done in the townes of edinburgh and jedburgh, and diverse utheris plaices, in manifest[ ] oppressioun of our liberties. last of all, declairing her evill mynd toward the nobilitie, commountie,[ ] and haill natioun, hes brocht in strangearis, and dalie pretendis to bring in grettar force of the samyn; pretending ane manifest conqueast of our native rowmes and countree, as the deid it self declaires: in sa far as sche heaving brocht in the saidis strangearis, but ony advise of the said counsall and nobilitie, and contrair thair expresse mynd send to her grace in writt, hes plaicet and planted her saidis strangearis in ane of the principall townis and portis of the realme, sending continewallie for grettar forces, willing thairby to suppress the commoun-weall, and libertie of our native countree, to mak us and our posteritie slaves to strangearis for ever: whiche, as it is intollerable in commoun-wealthis and free cuntreis, sa is it verray prejudiciall to our soverane ladye, and her airis quhatsumever, in caise our soverane lord deceise butt airis of hir grace's persone; and to perfurneise hir wicked interpises,[ ] consavit (as appeiris) of inveterat malice against our cuntree and natioun, causes (but any consent or advise of the counsall and nobilitie) cunzie layit-money, sa base, and of sick quantitie, that the hole realme shalbe depauperat, and all traffique with forane nationis evertit thairby; and attour, her grace places and manteanes, contrair the pleasour of the counsall of this realme, are strangear in ane of the greattest offices of credite within this realme, that is, in keaping of the great seall[ ] thairof, quhairintill great parrellis may be ingenerat to the commoun-weall and libertie thairof: [sn: hir doughter followed the same; for to davy was delivered the greatt seall.[ ]] and farder, laitlie send the said great seall furth of this realme be the said strangeare, contrair the advise of the said counsall, to what effect god knawis; and hes ellis be his meanes alterat the auld law and consuetude of our realme, ever observit in the graces and pardonis granted be our soveranes to all thair liegis being repentand of thair offenses committed against thair hienes or the liegis of the realme; and hes introducit a new captiouse styill and forme of the saidis pardonis and remissionis, attending to the practise of france, tending thairby to draw the saidis liegis of this realme, be process of tyme, in a deceavable snair; and farder, sall creipe in the haill subversioun and alteratioun of the remanent lawis of this realme, in contrair the contentis of the appointment of marriage; and als peace being accordit amanges the princes, reteanes the great armye of strangearis after command send be the king of france to reteyre the same, maiking excuise that thei war reteaned for suppressing of the attemptatis of the liegis of this realme, albeit the haill subjectis thairof, of all estaitis, is and ever hes bene reddy to give all debtfull obedience to thair soveranis, and thair lawchfull ministeris, proceiding, be godis ordinance: and the said armye of strangearis not being payed of waiges, was layed be her grace upoun the neckis of the poore communitie of our native countree, who was compelled be force to defraude tham selfis, thair wyffis, and barnes, of that poore substance quhilk thei mycht conqueiss with the sweit of thair browis, to satisfie thair hungar and necessiteis, and quyte the samyn to susteane the idill bellies of thir strangearis. throw the whiche in all partis raise sick havye lamentatioun, and complaint of the communitie, accusing the nobilitie and counsall of thair slewth, that as the same oppressioun we dowbt nott hes entered in befoir the justice-seat of god, sa hes it movit our heartis to rewth and compassioun. and for redressing of the samyn, with other great offenses committed against the publict weall of this realme, we have convened hear, as said is; and as oft tymes of befoir, hes maist humblie, and with all reverence, desyred and required the said quene regent, to redress the saidis enormities, and especiallie to remove her strangearis from the neckis of the poore communitie, and to desist fra interprysing or fortificatioun of strenthis within this realme, against the express will of the nobilitie and counsall of the same: yitt we being convened the mair stark for feir of her strangearis, whome we saw presume na other thing bot with armes to persew our lyves and possessiounis, besoght hir grace to remove the feare of the samyn, and mak the towne patent to all our soverane lord and ladyis liegis; the same on nawyise wald her grace grant unto; but when some of our cumpany in peciable maner went to view the said towne, thair wes boyth great and small munitioun schot furth at thame. and seing thairfoir that neather access was granted to be used, nor yitt her grace wald joyne her self to us, to consult upoun the effairis of our commoun-weall, as we that be borne counsallouris to the same, be the ancient lawis of the realme; but fearing the judgement of the counsall wald reforme, as necessitie requyred, the foirsaid enormities, sche refuisses all maner of assistance with us, and be force and violence intendis to suppresse the liberties of our commoun-weall, and of us the favoraris of the samyn: we, thairfoir, sa mony of the nobilitie, barones, and provest of burrowes, as ar tweichet with the cair of the commoun-weall, (unto the whiche we acknowledge our self nott onlie borne, bot alswa sworne protectouris and defendaris, against all and whatsomever invaidaris of the same,) and moved be the foirsaidis proceidingis notorious, and with the lamentable complaynt of oppressioun of our communitie, our fallow memberis of the samyn: perceaving farder, that the present necessitie of our commoun-weill may suffer na delay, being convenit (as said is) presentlie in edinburgh, for supporte of our commoun-weall, and ryplie consulted and advisit, taking the fear of god befoir our eyis, for the causses foirsaidis, whiche ar notorious, with one consent and commoun vote, ilk man in ordour his judgement being required, in name and authoritie of our soverane lord and lady, suspendis the said commissioun granted be our saidis soveranis to the said quene dowager; dischargeing her of all administratioun or authoritie sche hes or may have thairby, unto the nixt parliament to be sett be our advise and consent; and that becaus the said quene, be the foirsaidis faltis notorious, declairis hir self ennemye to our commoun-weall, abusing the power of the said authoritie, to the destructioun of the samyn. and lyikwyise, we discharge all members of her said authoritie fra thinfurth; and that na cunze be cunzeit fra thinfurth without expresse consent of the said counsall and nobilitie, conforme to the lawis of this realme, whiche we manteane: and ordanis this to be notifeid and proclamed be officiaris of armes, in all head burghis within the realme of scotland. in witnes of the whiche, our commoun consent and free vote, we have subscrivit this present act of suspensioun with our handis, day, yeare, and place foirsaidis." [(_sic subscribitur_,) by us, the nobility and commouns of the protestants of the churche of scotland.][ ] after that this our act of suspensioun was by sound of trumpett divulgat at the mercat croce of edinburgh, we dismissed the herauld with this answer:-- "pleis your grace, "we resavit your answer, and heard the credit of lyoun king of armes, whairby we gathered sufficientlie your perseverance in evill mynd toward us, the glorie of god, our commoun-weall, and libertie of our native countrey. for savetie of the whiche, according to our dewitie, we have in our soverane lord and ladyeis name suspended your commissioun, and all administratioun of the policey your grace may pretend thairby, being maist assuiredlie persuaded, your proceidingis[ ] ar direct contrair our soveranes lord and ladyis will, whiche we ever esteame to be for the weall, and nott for the hurte of this our commoun-wealth. and as your grace will nott acknawledge us, our soverane lord and ladyis liegis, trew barones and liegis, for your subjectis and counsall, na mair will we acknawledge yow for any regent[ ] or lauchfull magistrat unto us; seing, gif any auctoritie ye have be reassone of our soveranis commissioun granted unto your grace, the same, for maist wechtie reassones, is worthelie suspended be us, in the name and authoritie of our soveranis, whais counsall we ar of in the effares of this our commoun-weall. and for als mekle as we ar determinat, with hasard of our lyves, to sett that towne[ ] at libertie, whairin ye have most wrangouslie planted[ ] your soldiouris and strangearis, for the reverence we aucht to your persone, as mother to our soverane lady, we require your grace to transporte your persone thairfra, seing we ar constrayned,[ ] for the necessitie of the commoun-weall, to sute the samyn be armes, being denyed of the libertie thairof, be sindree requisitionis maid of befoir. attour, your grace wald caus departe with yow out of the said towne, ony persone havand commissioun in ambassadore, yf any sick be, or in lieutennentschip of our soveranis, together with all frenchemen, soldiouris, being within the same, (whais bloode we thrust nott, becaus of the auld amitie and freindschip betuix the realme of france, and us, whiche amitie, be occasioun of the mariage of our soverane lady to the king of that realme, should rather increase nor decrease;) and this we pray your grace and thame bayth to do within the space of twenty four houris, for the reverence we awcht unto your persones. and thus recommending our humill service to your grace, we committ your hienes to the eternall protectioun of god. "at edinburgh, the xxiij day[ ] of october . "your graces humile servitouris."[ ] the day following, we summoned the towne of leyth by the sound of trumpet, in forme as followeth:-- "i require and charge, in name of oure soverane lord and lady, and of the counsall presentlie in edinburgh, that all scottis and frenche men, of whatsumever estait and degree thai be, that thei departe of this towne of leyth within the space of twelf houris, and maik the samyn patent to all and sindrie our soverane ladyis liegis; for seing we have na sick haitrent at eyther that ane or that other,[ ] that we thrust the bloode of any of the twa, for that ane is our naturall brother, borne, nurished, and broght up within the bowellis of ane commoun countree; and with that other, our natioun hes continewed lang amitie and allya, and hopis that sa shall do sa lang as swa thei list to use us, and nott suite to maik slavis of freindis, whiche this strenthnyng of oure townis pretendis. and thairfoir maist hartlie desyres that ane and that uther, to desist frome fortifeing and manteanyng of this towne, in our soveranis and thair said counsallis name, desyres thame to maik the same free within the space of xij houris." [sn: treasson amongis the counsall.] defiance gevin, thair was skarmissing, without great slawchtter. preparatioun of scailles[ ] and ledderis was maid for the assault, whiche was concluded by commoun consent of the nobilitie and barones. the scailles war appointed to be maid in sanct gelis churche, so that preaching was neglected, whiche did nott a little greve the preachearis, and many godlie with thame. the preacharis spared not openlie to say, "that thei feared the successe of that interpryse should nott be prosperous, becaus the begynnyng appeired to bring with it some contempt of god and of his word. other places, (said thei,) had bene more apt for suche preparationis, then whare the people convenit to commoun prayeris and unto preacheing." in verray deid the audience was wounderfullie trubled all that[ ] tyme, whiche (and other mysordour espyed amanges us) gave occasioun to the preachearis to efferme, "that god could nott suffer suche contempt of his worde, and abuses of his grace, long to be unpunished." the quene had amangis us her assured espiallis, who did not onlie signifie unto her what wes our estait, bot also what was our counsall, purposes, and devises. borne of our awin company war vehementlie suspected to be the verray betrayouris of all our secreattis; for a boy of the officiallis of lowthiane, maister james balfour,[ ] was tackin carying a writting, whiche did open the maist secreat thing was devised in the counsall; yea, these verray thingis whiche war thocht[ ] to have bene knawin but to a verray few. [sn: the duck and his freindis feirfull.] by suche domesticall ennemyis war nott onlie our purposes frustrat, bot also our determinationis wer oftyme owerthrowin and changed. the dukis freindis geve unto him suche terrouris, that he was greatlie trubled; and by his fear war trubled many otheris. [sn: the ungodlie soldiouris.] the men of warr (for the maist parte wer men without god or honestie) made a mutiney, becaus thai lacked a parte of thair waiges: thei had done the same in lynlythqw befoir, quhair thei maid a proclamatioun, "that thei wald serve any man to suppress the congregatioun, and sett up the messe agane." thai maid a fray upoun the erle of ergylis hieland men, and slew one of the principall children of his chalmer; who notwithstanding behaved him self so moderatlie, and so studiouse to pacifie that tumult, that many woundered alsweill of his prudent counsall and stowtness, as of the great obedience of his cumpany. the ungodlie soldiouris notwithstanding maligned, and continewing in thair mysordour, thei boasted the lard of tullybarne[ ] and uther noble men, who cohorted thame to quyetness. [sn: the quein regentis practises.] all these trubles war practised by the quene, and putt in executioun by the tratouris amangis our selff; who, albeit they then lurked, and yitt ar not manifestlie noted, yitt we dowbt not but god shall utter thame to thair confusioun, and to the example of utheris. to pacifie the men of warr, a collectioun was devised. but becaus some wer poore, and some wer nigardis and avaritiouse, thair could no sufficient sowme be obteined. [sn: the fact of the counsall.] it was thocht expedient that a cunze should be erected, that everie noble man should cunzie his silver work to supplie the present necessitie; and thairthrow david forress, johne harte,[ ] and utheris who befoir had charge of the cunzie-house,[ ] did promeise thair faythfull lawbouris. [sn: the treasoun of johne heart.] bot when the mater come to the verray point, the said johne heart, and utheris of his factioun, stall away, and tuk with thame the instrumentis apt for thair purpose. whetther this was done by the falsheid and feablenes of the said johnne, or the practising of otheris, is yitt uncertane. rested then no hoip amangis our selfis that any money could be furnessed; and thairfoir it was concluded, by a few of those whom we judged most secreat, that schir raiff saidlair, and schir james croftis,[ ] then having charge at berwik, should be tempted, yf thei wald supporte us with any reassonable soume in that urgent necessitie. and for that purpose, was the lard of ormestoun directed unto thame in so secreat maner as we could devise. bot yit our counsall was disclosed to the quene, who appointed the lord bothwell, (as him selff confessed,) to wait upoun the returnyng of the said lard, as that he did with all diligence; and so being assuredlie informed by what way he came, the said erle bothwell foirsett[ ] his way, and cuming upoun him at unwares, did tack him, after that he was evill wounded in the heid;[ ] for nether could he gett his led horse, nor yitt his steall bonet. with him was tacken the sowme of four thowsand crownis of the sone, whiche the forenammed schir raiff and schir james moist lovinglie had send for our supporte. the bruit heirof cuming to our earis, oure dolour was dowbled; not so muche for the loss of the money, as for the tynsall of the gentilman, whome we suspected to have bene slane, or at the least that he should be delivered to the quenis handis. and so upoun the suddane, the erle of errane, the lord james, the maister of maxwell, with the most parte of the horsemen, took purpose to persew the said erle bothwell, yf thei mycht apprehend him in creychttoun or morhame, whittherto (as thei war informed) he had reteared him self after his treassonable fact: we call his fact treassonable, becaus that thrie dayis befoir he had send his especiall servand, maister michaell balfour, to us to edinburgh, to purchese of the lordis of the counsall licence to come and speak us; whiche we granted, efter that he had promesed, that in the meantyme he should neather hurte us, neather yitt any till us appertenyng, till that he should writt his answer agane, whitther that he wald joyne with us or not. [sn: the erle bothwell fals in promeise, and his treasonable fact.] he gave us farder to understand, that he wald discharge him self of the quene, and thairefter wald assist us. and yitt in this meantyme, he crewelly and tratorouslie hurte and spuilzeid the noble man foirsaid. albeit that the departure and counsall of the erle of arrane and lord james, with thair cumpany foirsaid, wes verray suddane and secreat; yitt was the erle bothwell,[ ] then being in crychttoun, advertissed, and so eschaiped with the money, whiche he took with him self, as the capitane of his house, john somervaill, (whiche was tackin without lang persuyte,) confessed and affermed. becaus the noble men that soght redress, soght rather his saiftie and reconsiliatioun; then destructioun and haitrent thei committed his house to the custody of a capitane, to witt, capitane forbess, to whome, and to all soldiouris thair left, was gevin a schairpe commandiment, that all thingis found within the said hous of crychttoun,[ ] (which war putt in inventorie in presence of the lordis,) should be keipt till that the erle bothwell should geve answer, whitther he wald maik restitutioun or nott. tyme of advertisment was granted unto him the hole day subsequent, till going doune of the sone. in absence of the saidis lordis and horsemen, (we meane the same day that thei departed, whiche wes the last of october,) the provest and towne of dundye, togetther with some soldiouris, passed furth of the toune of edinburgh, and caryed with thame some great ordinance to schuitt at leyth. the duck his grace, the erle of glencarne, and the rest of the noble men, wer gone to the preacheing, whair thei continewed to nye twelf houris. the frenche being advertissed by ane named[ ] clerk, (who after was apprehended,) that our horsemen wer absent, and that the hole companye wer at dennar, issched, and with great expeditioun came to the place whair our ordinance wes laid. [sn: the first defair[ ] of the congregatioun.] the towne of dundye, with a few otheris, resisted a whill, alsweall with thair ordinance as haquebuttis; but being left of our ungodlye and feable soldiouris, who fled without strok offered or gevin, thei war compelled to give back, and so to leave the ordinance to the ennemyis, who did farder persew the fugitives, to witt, to the myddis of the cannogaite, and to the fute of leyth wynd. [sn: the crueltie of the frenche.] thair crewelty then began to discover the self; for the decrepit, the aiged, the women and childrein, fand no greater favouris in thair furye, then did the strang man, who maid resistance. it was verray appeiring, that amanges our selfis thair wes some treassoun. for when, upoun the first alarm, all man maid haist for releve of thair brethren, whome in verray deid we mycht have saved, and at least we mycht have saved the ordinance, and have keapt the cannogait from danger; for we wer anis merched fordwarte with bold curage, but then, (we say,) wes a schowt reased amonges our selfis, (god will discloise the traytouris one day,) affermyng "that the hole frenche cumpanye war entered in at leyth wynd upoun our backis." what clamor and misordour did then suddanelie arryise, we list nott to expresse with multiplicatioun of wordis. the horsemen, and some of those that aught to have putt ordour to otheris, over-rod thair poore brethren at the enteress of the netthir bow. the crye of discomforte arose in the toun; the wicked and malignant blasphemed; the feable, (amanges whome the justice clerk, schir johne bannatyne[ ] was,) fledd without mercye: with great difficultie could thei be keapt in at the weast porte. maister gavin hammyltoun[ ] cryed with a lowd voce, "drynk now as ye have browen." the frenche perceaving, be the clamour of our fray, followed, as said is, to the myddis of the cannogait, to no great nomber, bott a twenty or thretty of thair _infantes perdues_.[ ] for in that meantyme the rest reteired thame selves with our ordinance. [sn: the erle of ergyle.] the erle of ergyle and his men wer the first that stopped the fleying of our men, and compelled the porte to be opened efter that it was schoot. [sn: lord robert stewart.] bott in verray deid, lord robert stewarte,[ ] abbot of halyrudehouse, was the first that isched out. after him followed many upoun the backis of the frenche. at last cam my lord duck, and then was no man mair frack nor was maister gavin hammyltoun foirsaid. the frenche brunt a baikhouse, and tooke some spuilzie from the poores of the cannogait. thei slew a papist and dronken preast, named schir thomas sklatter, ane aiged man, a woman gevin sowk and her child, and of oure soldiouris to the nomber of ten. certane wer tane, amongis whome capitane mowat was one, [and] maister charles geddes, servitour to the maister of maxwell. [sn: the castell schot one shott.] the castell[ ] that day schot ane schott at the frenche, declairing thame thairby freindis to us, and ennemy to thame; bott he suddanelie repented of weall-doing. [sn: the quein regentis rejosing, and unwomanlie behaviour.] the queyn glad of victorye, sat upoun the ramparte to salute and welcome hir victorious suddartis.[ ] one brought a kirtill, one uther ane pettycote, the thrid, a pote or pane; and of invy more then womanlie lawchtter, sche asked, "whair bocht ye your ware? _je pense_[ ] _que vous l'aves achete sans argent._"[ ] this was the great and motherlie cayre whiche schee tooke for the truble of the poore subjectis of this realme. [sn: the counsall of the maister of maxwell.] the erle bothwell, lifted up in his awin conceat, be reassoun of this our repulse and disconfitour, utterlie refused any restitutioun; and so within two dayis after was his house spulzeid, in whiche war no thingis of ony great importance, his evidentis and certane clothing excepted. frome that day back, the curage of many was dejected. with great difficultie could men be reteaned in the towne; yea, some of the greatast estimatioun determined with thame selfis to leave the interpryise. many fled away secreatlie, and those that did abyd, (a verray few excepted,) appeared destitut of counsall and manheid. the maister of maxwell,[ ] a man stowt and wittie, foirseing the danger, desyrit moist gravelie eyther to tak suche ordour that thei mycht remane to the terrour of the ennemy, or ellis that thei should reteyre thame selfis with thair ordinance and baneris displeyed in ordour. but the wittis of men being dasched, no counsall could prevaill. thus we continewed from the wednisday, the last of october, till mononday the fyft of november,[ ] never two or thrie abyding ferme in one opinioun the space of twenty-four houris. the pestilent wittis of the quenis practisaris did then exercise thame selfis, (god sall recompanse thair maliciouse craft in thair awin bosome, we dowbt not;) for thei caused two godlie and fordward young men, the lardis of pharnyherst and cesfurd,[ ] who ones had glaidlie joyned thame selfis with us, to withdraw thame selfis and thair freindis: the same thei did to the erle mortoun, who promissed to be oures, but did never planelie joyne. thei intysed the capitane of the castell to deny us supporte, in caise we war persewed; and, finallie, the counsall of some was no less pestiferous against us, then was the counsall of achitophell against david and his discomforted soldiouris. "rander, o lord, to the wicked according to thair malice." [sn: the last discomfiture upoun monunday.] upoun mononday, the fyft[ ] of november, did the frenche ische out of leyth betymes, for kepping[ ] of the victuallis whiche should have cumed to us. we being trubled amanges our selfis, and, as said is, devided in opinionis, wer neather circumspect when thei did ische, neather yitt did we follow with suche expeditioun as had bene meitt for men that wald have sought our advantage. our soldiouris could skarslie be dong furth of the towne. the erle of arrane, lord james, and a certane with thame, maid haist. many honest man then followed, and maid suche diligence, that thei caused the frenche ones to retear somewhat effrayedlie. the rest that ware in leyth, perceaving the danger of thair fallowis, isshed out for thair succurse. the erle of arrane and lord james foirsaid, being more fordward nor prudent and circumspect, did compell the capitanes, as is allegeit, to bring thare men so ney, that eyther thei must neidis have hasarded battell with the hole frenche men, (and that under the mercy of thair cannonis also,) or ellis thei must neidis reteyre in a verray narrow cure.[ ] for our men warr approched ney[ ] to restalrig. the one parte of the frenche wer upoun the north towardis the sea, the other parte marched frome leyth to edinburgh; and yitt thei marched so, that we could have foughten neather cumpany, befoir that thei should have joyned. we took purpoise thairfoir to reteire towardis the towne, and that with expeditioun, least that the formare cumpany of the frenche should eyther have invaided the towne, befoir that we could have cumed to the reskew thairof, or ellis have cutted us of from the entress, at the abbay of halyrudhouse, as appeirandlie thei had done, yf that the lard of grange and alexander quhytlaw, with a few horsemen, had nott stayed boith thair horsemen and thair footmen. the cumpany whiche was nixt us, perceaving that we reteired with speid, send furth thair skyrmissaris, to the nomber of thre or foure hundreth, who took us att ane disadvantage; befoir us having the myre of restalrig[ ] betuix us and thame, so that in no wise we could charge thame; and we war inclosed by the park dyke,[ ] so that in nowyse we could avoid thair schott. thair horsmen followed upoun our taillis, and slew diverse; our awin[ ] horsemen over-rode our futemen; and so be reassoun of the narrowness of the place, thair was no resistance maid. the erle of arrane, and lord james, in great danger, lyghted amanges the footmen, exhorting thame to have some respect to ordour, and to the saiftie of thair brethren, whome, by thair fleying, thei exponed to murther, and so war cryminall of thair deth. capitane alexander halyburtoun, a man that feared god, taryed with certane of his soldiouris behynd, and maid resistance, till that he was first schote and tackin. bot being knawin, those cruell murtheraris wounded him in diverse partis to the death.[ ] and yit, as it war by the power of god, he was brocht in to the toun, whair in few, but yit most plane wordis, he gave confessioun of his fayth, testifeing, "that he dowbted nothing of godis mercy, purchassed to him by the bloode of christ jesus; neather yit that he repented, that it pleased god to maik him worthie to sched his bloode, and spend his lyif in the defence of so just a cause." [sn: the death of alexander halyburtoun, capitane.] and thus, with the dolour of many, he ended his dolour, and did enter, (we dowt nott,) in that blessed immortalitie within two houris efter that we war defait.[ ] thare war slane to the nomber of twenty-four or thretty men, the maist parte poore. thair war tackin the lard of pitmyllie, the lard of pharny youngar, the maister of bowchane, george luvell of dundie,[ ] and some otheris of lowar estait; johnne dunbar, lieutennent to capitane mowet.[ ] capitane david murray had his horse slane, and him self hurte[ ] in the leg. [sn: how and why william maitland left leyth.] few dayis befoir oure first defait, whiche was upon alhallow evin,[ ] williame maitland of lethingtoun younger,[ ] secreattar to the quene, perceaving him self not onlye to be suspected as one that favored our parte, bot also to stand in danger of his lyiff, yf he should remane amangis sa ungodlie a cumpany; for quhensoevir materis came in questioun, he spaired not to speik his conscience; whiche libertie of toung, and gravitie of judgement, the frenche did heyghlie disdane. whiche perceaved by him, he convoyed him self away in a mornyng, and randered him self to maister kirkcaldye, lard of grange, who cuming to us, did exhorte us to constancie, assuring us, that in the quene thair was nothing but craft and deceat. he travailled exceidinglie to have reteaned the lordis togidder, and maist prudentlie laid befoir thair eyis the dangearis that myeht ensew thair departing of the town. bot fear and dolour had so seazed[ ] the hartis of all, that thei could admitt no consolatioun. the erle of arrane, and lord james, offered to abyd, yff any reassonable cumpany wald abyd with thame. bott men did so steall away, that the witt of man could not stay thame. yea, some of the greatast determined planelie that thei wald not abyd. [sn: the lord erskyn declaired him self ennemye to the congregatioun.] the capitane of the castell, than lord ersken, wald promeise unto us no favouris. but said, "he most neidis declair himself freind to those that war able to supporte and defend him." whiche answer gevin to the lord james,[ ] discoraged those that befoir had determined to have biddin the uttermost, rather then to have abandoned the towne, so that the castell wald have stand[ ] thair friend. but the contrarie declaired, everie man took purpose for him self. the complaintis of the brethren within the towne of edinburgh was lamentable and sore. the wicked then began to spew furth the vennoum whiche befoir lurked in thare cankered hearte. the godly, alsweall those that war departed, as the inhabitants of the towne, wer so trubled, that some of thame wald have preferred death to lyve, at godis pleasur. for avoiding of danger, it was concludit that thei should departe at mydnycht. the duik maid provisioun for his ordinance, and caused it to be send befoir; but the rest was left to the cayr of the capitane of the castell, who receaved it, alsweall that whiche appertenith to lord james, as that of dundy. [sn: the dispyte of the papistis of edinburgh.] the dispytfull toungis of the wicked raylled upoun us, calling us traytouris and heretiques: everie ane provoked other to cast stanes at us. one cryed, "allace, yf i mycht see;" ane other, "fye, give advertisment to the frenche men that thei may come, and we shall help thame now to cutt the throttis of these heretiques." and thus, as the sword of dolour passed throught our heartis, so war the cogitationis and formar determinationis of many heartis then reveilled. [sn: the worst is not yit come to our ennemyes.] for we wald never have belevit that our naturall countrey men and wemen could have wisshed our destructioun so unmercifullie, and have so rejosed in our adversitie: god move thair heartis to repentance! for ellis we fear that he whose caus we susteane sall lett thame feill the weght of the yock of crewell strangearis, in whose handis thei wisshed us to have bene betrayed. we stayed nott till that we came to striveling, whiche we did the day efter that we departed from edinburgh; for it was concluded, that thair consultatioun should be tacken, what was the nixt remeady in so desperat a mater. [sn: the sermoun of johne knox, in stryveling, in the greatest of our trubles.] the nixt wedinsday, whiche was the . of november,[ ] johnne knox preached, (johne willock was departed to england, as befoir he had appointed,) and entreated the , , , , and versicules of the fourscoir psalme, whair david, in the persoune of the afflicted people of god, speaketh thus:[ ] the fourt verse: "o thow the eternall, the god of hostis, how long shall thow be angree against the prayer of thy people. . thow hest fed us with the bread of tearis, and hath gevin to us tearis to drynk in great measure. . thow hest maid us a stryf unto our nychtbouris, and our ennemyis laugh us to scorne amangis thame selfis. . o god of hostis, turne us agane: maik thy face to schyne, and we shalbe saved." [ . thow hes brocht a vine out of egypte: thow hes cast out the heathen, and planted it.][ ] &c. [sn: the argument of the . psalme.] this psalme had the said johne begun in edinburgh, as it war foirseing our calamitie, of whiche in verray deid he did not obscurelie speik, butt planelie did admonishe us, that he was assured of trubles suddanelie to come; and thairfoir exhorted all men to prayeris. he entreated the three first versicles in edinburgh, to the conforte of many. he declaired the argument of the psalme, affermeing for his judgment, that it was maid by david him self, who, in the spreitt of prophesye, foirsaw the miserable estait of godis people, especiallie after that the ten tribes wer devided, and departed frome the obedience of juda; for it was nott, (said he,) without caus that josephe, ephraim, benjamin, and manasse, war especiallie named, and nott juda; to witt, becaus that thei came first to calamitie, and war translaited from thair awin inheritance, whill that juda yitt possessed the kingdome. he confessed that justlie thei war punished for idolatrie committed. but he affirmed, that amanges thame continewalie thair remaned some trew wirschipparis of god, for whose conforte war the propheittis send, alsweill to call thame to reapentance, as to assure thame of deliverance, and of the promisse of god to be performed unto thame. [sn: the divisioun.] he divided the psalme in three partis, to wit, in a prayer: . in the ground whairupoun thair prayer was founded: . and in the lamentable complaintis, and the vow whiche thei maik to god. thare prayer was, "that god should convert and turne thame; that he should maik his face to schyn upoun thame; and that he should restoir thame to thair formar dignitie." the groundis and fundationis of thair prayeris ware, . that god him self had becum pastour and governour unto thame: . that he had tacken the protectioun of thame in his awin hand: . that he had chosin his habitatioun amangis thame: . that he had delivered thame frome bondage and thraldome: . that he had multiplyed and blessed thame with many notable benedictionis. upoun those two partis he gave these notis:-- first, that the felicitie of godis people may not be measured by any externall appeirance; for oftyn it is, that the same people, to whome god becumis not onlye creator, bot also pastour and protectour, is more seveirlie intreated, then those nationis whair verray ignorance and contempt of god reigneth. secondlie, that god never maid his acquentance and leigue with any people by his worde, bott that thare he had some of his elect; who, albeit thei suffered for a tyme in the myddis of the wicked, yitt in the end thei fand conforte, and felt in verray experience, that godis promisses ar nott in vane. thridlie, that these prayeris wer dyted unto the people by the holy ghost, befoir thei came to the uttermost of truble, till assure thame that god, by whose spreit the prayare was dited, wald nott contempt the same in the myddis of thair calamities. the thrid parte, conteynyng the lamentable complaynt, he entreated in stryveling, in presence of my lord duik, and of the hole counsall. in the expositioun whairof, he declaired, whairfoir god somtymes suffered his chosin flock to be exponed to mockage, to dangearis, and to appeiring destructioun; to witt, that thei may feill the vehemencye of godis indignatioun; that thei may knaw how litill strenth is in thair selfis; that thei may leave a testimony to the generationis following, alsweill of the malice of the devill against goddis people, as of the mervaillouse werk of god, in preserving his litill flock by far other meanes then man can espye. in explanyng these wordis, "how long shall thow be angree, o lord, against the prayer of thy people?" he declaired, how dolorouse and fearfull it was to feght against that tentatioun, that god turned away his face from our prayaris; for that was nothing ellis then to comprehend and conceave god to be armed to our destructioun: whiche temptatioun no flesche can abyd nor owercome, onless the mychtie spreit of god interpone the self suddanelie. the example he gave, the impatience of saule, when god wald nott hear his prayaris. the difference betuix the elect and reprobate in that temptatioun, he planelie declaired to be, that the elect, susteaned by the secreat power of goddis spreit, did still call upoun god, albeit that he appeared to contempt thair prayaris; whiche, (said he,) is the sacrifice most acceptable to god, and is in a maner evin to feght with god, and to ovircum him, as jacob did in warsling with his angell. butt the reprobat, (said he,) being denyed of thair requeastis at godis hand, do eather cease to pray, and altogitther contempt god, who straitlie commandeth us to call upoun him in the day of adversitie; or ellis thei seik at the devill that whiche thei see thei can nott obteane by god. in the secound parte he declared, how hard it was to this corrupt nature of ouris not to rejose and putt confidence in the self, when god geveth victorye; and thairfoir how necessare it was that man by afflictioun should be brocht to the knawledge of his awin infirmitie, least that, puffed up with vane confidence, he maik ane idoll of his awin strenth, as did king nabuchadnezzar. he did gravelie disput upoun the nature of the blynd warld, whiche, in all ages, hath insolentlie rejosed when god did chasten his awin children, whose glory and honour, becaus the reprobat can never see, thairfoir thei dispyise thame, and the wonderouse werk of god in thame. and yit, (said he,) the joy and rejosing of the warld is but meare sorrow, becaus the end of it tendith to suddane destructioun, as the ryatouse banquetting of balthasar declaireth. applying these headis to the tyme and personis, (he said,) yf none of goddis children had suffered befoir us the same injureis that presentlie we susteane, these our trubles wald appear intollerable; suche is our tender delicacie, and self luif of our awin flesche, that those thingis whiche we lychtlie pass over in otheris, we can greatlie complane of, yf thei tweiche our selfis. i dowbt not bot that some of us have ofter then ones redd this psalme, as also that we have redd and heard the travaill and trubles of our ancient fatheris.[ ] but whiche of us, eather in reading or hearing thair dolouris and temptationis, did so discend in to oure selfis that we felt the bitterness of thair passionis? i think none. and thairfoir hes god brocht us to some experience in our awin personis. [sn: _specialis applicatio_] but, yit, because the mater may appeir obscure, onless it be more propirlie applyed, i can nott bot of conscience use suche plainnes as god shall grant unto me. oure faces ar this day confounded, oure ennemyes triumphe, oure heartis have quaiked for fear, and yitt thei remane oppressed with sorrow and schame. but what shall we think to be the verray cause that god hath thus dejected us? yf i shall say, our synnes and formar unthankfulness to god, i speik the treuth. butt yitt i spack more generalie then necessitie required: for when the synnes of men ar rebucked in generall, seldome it is that man discendeth within him self, accusing and dampnyng in him self that whiche most displeaseth god. butt rather he dowttis that to be a cause, whiche befoir god is no cause in deid. for example, the israelitis, feghting against the tribe of benjamin, wer twise discomfeitted, with the loss of fourtie thowsand men. thei lamented and bewailled boyth first and last; but we fynd nott that thei cam to the knawledge of thair offence and synne, whiche wes the cause that thei fell in the edge of the sworde; but rather thei dowted that to have bene a cause of thair mysfortoun, whiche god had commanded: for thei ask, "shall we go and feght any more against our brethren, the sonnes of benjamin?" by whiche questioun, it is evident, that thei supposed that the caus of thair overthrow and discomfeit was, becaus thei had lifted the sword against thair brethren and naturall countreymen. and yitt, the expresse commandiment of god that wes gevin unto thame, did deliver thame from all cryme in that caise. and yitt, no dowte but that thare wes some caus in the israelitis that god gave thame so over in the handis of those wicked men, against whom he send thame, by his awin expressed commandiment, till execut his judgementis. [sn: lett scotland yitt tack head.] suche as do weall mark the historye and the estait of that people, may easilie see the caus why god wes offended. all the haill people had declyned from god; idolatrie was manteaned by the commoun consent of the multitude; and as the text sayeth, "everie man did that whiche appeareth good in his awin eyis." in this meantyme, the levite compleaned of the vilanye that was done unto him self, and unto his wyf, whiche oppressed by the benjamites of gibeah, died under thare fylthy lustis. whiche horrible fact inflammed the heartis of the hole people to taik vengeance upoun that abhominatioun: and thairin thei offended not; but in this thei failled, that thei go to execut judgement against the wicked, without any reapentance or remorse of conscience of thair formare offenses, and defectioun from god. and, farther, becaus thei war a great multitude, and the other war far inferiour unto thame, thei trusted in thair awin strenth, and thought thame selfis able aneuch to do thair purpose, without any invocatioun of the name of god. bot after that thei had twise provin the vanitie of thair awin strenth, thei fasted and prayed, and being humbled befoir god, thai receaved a more favorable answer, ane assured promeise of the victorye. the lyik may be amangis us, albeit suddanelie we do nott espye it. and to the end that everie man may the bettir examyne him self, i will devide our hole cumpany in two sortes of men: the one ar those that from the begynnyng of this truble have susteaned the commoun danger with thair brethren: the other be those whiche laitlie be joyned to our fallowschip. in the one and in the other, i fear, that just caus shalbe found that god should thus have humiled us. and albeit, that this appear strange at the first hearing, yitt yf everie man shall examyn him self, and speik as that his conscience dites unto him, i dowbt not bot he shall subscrive my sentence. lett us begyn at our selves, who longast hes continewed in this battell. when we war a few nomber, in comparisoun of our ennemyes, when we had neather erle nor lord (a few excepted) to conforte us, we called upoun god; we tooke him for our protectour, defence, and onlie refuge. amanges us was heard no braggin of multitude, of our strenth, nor pollecey: we did onlye sob to god, to have respect to the equitie of our cause, and to the crewell persute of the tyranefull ennemye. butt since that our nomber hath bene thus multiplyed, and cheaflie sen my lord duik[ ] his grace with his freindis have bene joyned with us, thair was nothing heard, bot "this lord will bring these many hundreth spearis: this man hath the credite to perswaid this cuntrey; yf this erle be ouris, no man in suche a boundis will truble us." and thus the best of us all, that befoir felt godis potent hand to be our defence, hath of lait dayis putt flesche to be our arme. butt whairin yit hathe my lord duik his grace and his freindis offended? it may be that, as we haif trusted in thame, so have thei putt too muche confidence in thair awin strenth. but granting so be not,[ ] i see a cause most just, why the duik and his freindis should thus be confounded amangis the rest of thair brethren. i have nott yit forgottin what was the dolour and anguishe of my awin hearte, when at sanet johnestoun, cowper mure, and edinburgh crages, those crewell murtheraris, that now hath putt us to this dishonour, threatned our present destructioun: my lord duik his grace and his freindis at all the three jornayes, wes to thame a great conforte, and unto us a great discorage; for his name and authoritie did more effray and astonise us, then did the force of the other; yea, without his assistance, thei could not have compelled us to appoint with the quene upoun so unequall conditionis. i am uncertane yf my lordis grace hath unfeanedlie repented of that his assistance to those murtheraris unjustlie persewing us. yea, i am uncertane yff he hath reapented of that innocent bloode of chrystes blessed martyres, whiche was sched in his defalt. but lett it be that so he hath done, (as i hear that he hath confessed his offence befoir the lordis and brethren of the congregatioun,) yit i am assured, that neather he, nether yit his freindis, did feall befoir this tyme the anguishe and greaf of heartis whiche we felt, when in thair blynd furye thei persewed us: and thairfoir hath god justlie permitted both thame and us to fall in this confusioun at ones: us, for that we putt our trust and confidence in man; and thame, becaus that thei should feill in thair awin hearttis how bytter was the coupe which thei maid otheris to drynk befoir thame. [sn: _conclusio._] restis that boith thei and we turne to the eternall oure god, (who beattis doun to death, to the intent that he may raise up agane, to leav the remembrance of his wonderouse deliverance, to the praise of his awin name,) whiche yf we do unfeanedlie, i no more dowbt but that this our dolour, confusioun, and feare, shalbe turned into joy, honour, and boldness, then that i dowt that god gave victorye to the israelitis over the benjamites, after that twise with ignominye thei war repulsed and doung back. [sn: lett the papistis and greatest ennemyis witness.] yea, whatsoever shall become of us and of our mortall carcasses, i dowt not but that this caus, (in dyspite of sathan,) shall prevaill in the realme of scotland. for, as it is the eternall trewth of the eternall god, so shall it ones prevaill, howsoever for a time it be impugned. it may be that god shall plague some, for that thei delyte nott in the trewth, albeit for warldlye respectis thei seame to favour it. yea, god may tak some of his dearest children away befoir that thair eyis see greattar trubles. bott neather shall the one nor the other so hynder this actioun, but in the end it shall triumphe. * * * * * this sermoun ended, in the whiche he did vehementlie exhorte all man to amendment of lyffe, to prayaris, and to the warkis of charitie, the myndis of men began wounderouslye to be erected. and immediatlie after dennare, the lordis passed to counsall,[ ] unto the whiche the said johnne knox was called to mack invocatioun of the name of god, (for other preachearis war nane with us at that tyme.) in the end it was concluded, that williame maitland[ ] foirsaid should pas to londoun to expone our estait and conditioun to the quein and counsall, and that the noble men should departe to thair quyett, to the sextene day of december, whiche tyme was appointed to the nixt conventioun in striveling, as in this our thrid booke following shalbe more amplie declaired. endis the secound booke of the historye of the progresse of religioun within scotland.[ ] _look upoun us, o lorde, in the multitude of thy mercyes; for we ar brought evin to the deape of the dongeoun._ appendix. [illustration] appendix. no. i. interpolations and various readings in the editions of knox's history of the reformation, by david buchanan, printed at london, , folio, and reprinted at edinburgh, , to. (the pages and lines at the left-hand side refer to the present edition.) page , line . (_this title and preface are not contained in buchanan's editions._) , l. . _instead of the words_, "in the scrollis of glasgw," &c., _it begins_, in the records of glasgow is found mention of one whose name was james resby, an englishman by birth, scholler to wickliff: he was accused as an heretike, by one lawrence lindors in scotland, and burnt for having said, that the pope was not the vicar of christ, and that a man of wicked life was not to be acknowledged for pope. this fell out anno . farther our chronicles make mention, that _in the dayis_,[ ] &c. , l. . _injust accusatioun and condemnatioun._ both these godly men, resby and craw, suffered martyrdom for christ his truth, by henry wardlaw, bishop of st. andrewes, whom the prelates place amongst their worthies. but that their wicked _practise did not greatly advance_, &c.--l. . , l. . helene chalmer, lady pokellie, isabelle chambers, lady stairs. , l. . _ar not to be had_ in the kyrk, nor to be worshipped.-- . _that it is not_ lawfull to fight for the faith, nor to defend the faith by the sword, if we be not driven to it by necessity, which is above all law.-- . _gave power to peter_, as also to the other apostles, and not to the pope his pretended successour, _to binde_, &c.-- . _to consecrate_ as they do in the romish church these many yeers.-- . _were then called_, to wit, wholly, but a part to the poor, widow, or orphans, and other pious uses. , l. . _is a preast_, in that sence that they are called by the apostle saint john, apoc. i. , v. , xx. .-- . _coming of christ_; and truely it was but late since kings were anointed, namely in scotland, for edgar was the first anointed king in scotland, about the year .-- . _the souls_, who in those dayes were said to be _in purgatory_.-- . _not to be feared_, if there be no true cause for it.-- . _to swear_, to wit, idly, rashly, and in vain.-- . _priests_ may have wives, _according to the constitution of the law_, and of the primitive christian church.-- . _every day_ by faith.-- . _be contracted_ and consummate, the kyrk may make, &c.-- . _bindes not_ if unjust. , l. . _to miracles_, to such namely as the romish were then, and are to this day.-- . _to god onely_, since he onely hears us, and can help us.-- . _are murtherars_ of souls.-- . _that they which are called_ princes and prelates in the church, _are theives and robbers_. , l. . _upon the_ morrow after brought forth to judgment. , l. . into vulgar language.-- . (_this title and fryth's preface are not contained in buchanan's editions._) , l. . _was ane called_ will. arithe. , l. . _his_ parasites and jackmen. , l. . _and cryes_, anne has lost hir spindle.-- . _flaill stollin_ behinde the barne. , l. . _he said_--she said.-- . _that look_ over our ditch.-- . _we hold_ the bishops the cheapest servant. , l. . _for the_ other friers fearing. , l. . _in_ hollow cellars, for the smoke of. , l. , _he_ leapt up merrily upon the scaffold, and, casting a gambade, said. , l. . thy majesties sometime servant.--(_in this letter of seaton's_, your grace is _uniformly changed to_ majestie.) , l. . _to put_ out _thy_. , l. . _could greatly_ availl.-- . _fostered the_ unadvised _prince in all_ dissolutenesse, by which means they made him obsequious unto them. , l. , . _ten yearis or_ thereabout.-- . _realme_ in these times.--_intestine and_ cruell.-- . _levenax_--lenox, who was sisters son to the earle of arran. , l. . _of rome_; commanded the bible to be read in english; _suppressed_.-- . _of idolatrie_, with their idols, which gave great hope.--(_in the margin_,) . . the civil troubles give some rest to god's flock for a time.-- . _craftynes of_ gardner, bishop of.-- . _but that_ god potently had assisted him in all his life, _but_. , l. . _maid_ he _them_. , l. . _johnne stewart_ of leyth.-- . _johnestoun_, advocate. , l. . _laird of dun_, areskin.-- . _as one_ revived, cast _himself_. , l. . _whome war_ those of dundie.-- . _borthwik_, provost of lithcow.--(_in the margin_,) lesly writes this done . john borthwick fled into england, from whence henry sent him into germanie to the protestant princes. , l. . _frearis_ and _monks_, as of _channons_. , l. . alexander _kennedy_.-- . _excellent_ wit in vulgar _poesy_. , l. - . _so far had_ they blinded and corrupted the inconsiderate prince, that he gave _himself to obey the tyrannie of those bloodie beasts_, and he _made a solemne vow_. , l. . _suddane_ punishment.-- . _upon him_, if _he did not repent_, and amend his _life_. , l. . _and deid_, not saying one _worde_, _that same day that_, in _audience_. , l. . _forgevance_ of the said _thomas_. , l. - . _change or_ alter the heart of the infortunate and misled prince, but still he did proceed in his accustomed wayes. _for in the midst of these_ evills. , l. . _eschaping_, (the keepers being asleep, he went out at the window.)-- . _espy_ and detest.-- . earle of glevearne. , l. - . after _god had given unto that_ mis-informed _prince sufficient documents_, _that his_ warring _against his blessed_ gospel _should not prosperously succeed_, _he_ raised up _against him_ warres, as he did of old against divers princes that would not hear his voice, _in the which he_ lost himself, _as we shall_ here_after heare_. , l. . _our kingdome_ of abbots, monks, &c., _and_. , l. . _forresse war runne upon_--forces were sent up and down to. , l. . _to skaill_ and sunder.-- . _wounded his_ high stomacke.-- . _had not_ cut the dayes of his life. , l. . _preastis_--prelats. , l. . _what tyme_--at that time when.-- . _yles_, in the yeere .-- . _jefwellis_--juglers. , l. . _i shall_ reproove _you by sharpe_ punishments.-- . _honour nor continuance_--honour nor countenance. , l. . _thare concurred ... prophettis_, (_omitted._)-- . _closenes and_ fidelity among them.-- . _should be_ theirs.-- . _that raid_--that device.-- - . _amonges whome was_ the erle of arran, notwithstanding his siding with the current of the court, and his neernesse in blood to the king. _it was bruited._ , l. . _the_ foreward _goeth forth_, feare _rises_.-- . _thousand men_; their beacons _on every side_. , l. , . _experte_. _about ten houris_--expert, about ten hours.-- , . _baner_; and he upholden by two spears, _lift up_.-- . _and mearns_. _in this_ mountain _did_.-- . _array_ in order. , l. . _softlye_--safely. , l. . _to tack the_ bandis.-- . _somervaill_ and oliphant, _and many_.-- . _worldly men_ say that. , l. . who waited upon news at lochmaban.--(_in the margin_,) others say, at carlaverock, neere by the place where the defeat was given, called solway mosse. , l. . _ane of his_ mistresses. , l. . _for a_ scourge.-- . _it will end_ with _a woman_. from mary, daughter to robert bruse, married to walter stuart, he feared that his daughter should be married to ane of another name and family; but yow see by god's providence, the crown remains in one and the same family and name to this day, notwithstanding the many plots of the pretenders to the crowne both at home and abroad.-- . _ane_ fit _comforter_.-- . _that so_ it _should be_. , l. . _best_. the cardinal having hired one henry balfour, a priest, to make a false testament; which was done accordingly, but in vain.-- . (_in the margin_,) marke the queenes mourning for the king. (_and a few lines lower down_,) others stick not to say, that the king was hastned away by a potion. levit. .--divers characters of the king arise: post funera virtus. , l. , . _disprased him for_ being much given to women. the prelats and clergie feared a change in the king's mind, as he had expressed himself some few years before.-- . _cloked_. yet to speak truth of him, his vices may justly be attributed to the times, and his breedeing, and not any wickednesse in his nature; for he gave many expressions of a good nature, namely, in his sobriety and justice, &c. _the question._-- . _he_ pretended _to succeid_.-- . _oppones thame_, and are against _the governement_. , l. . _against_ god's _justice_.-- . _and_ so, _in despite_. , l. . _heirof_ we _will after_ speak.-- . severed.-- . _the_ erle of arran thus being _established in_ the _governement_.-- . _exalted him_ to be governour, _out of what danger he had delivered him_, he being in the bloody scroll, as wee saw before; _and what expectation all men of honesty had of him_, because they saw him a soft man, they conceited goodnesse of him. , l. . _drouned_--devoured. , l. . _scriptures in the_ vulgar _tongue_.-- . _als_, (_omitted_.)-- . _the kirk_--the church, he means the prelats, _first_.-- . _thei three_--but the three, viz., hebrew, greek, and latine. , l. . _people used not_--people used the psalmes.-- . _old boses_--old bishops. , l. . _had of the_ old and new.-- , . _thair awin_ vulgar _toung_, _and so war_.-- . _in the_ vulgar _toung_.-- . (_in the margin_,) note the hypocrisie of worldlings. , l. . _to maik courte_, and curry favour _thairby_.-- . (_in the margin_,) nothing could be said against the lawfulnes of edward's birth. katharine of spain and anne bullen being dead before his mother was married to his father. , l. . _ensew to_ this _realme_.-- . _maister_ radulph _saidlair_. , l. . _contract of marriage_ made _betuix_.-- . _abaide suyre at_--abode fast to. , l. . _abbot of paislay_, called now of late john hamilton, _bastard brother_, &c.--(_in the margin there is added_,) he was before sometimes called cunningham, sometimes colwan, so uncertaine was it who was his father.-- . _one_ or the other would go to _the pulpit_. , l. . _then_ to have been so used-- . _deprehended_--followed.-- . _his_ counterfeit _godlynes_.-- . _heirefter_--heirof.-- . _any joyt_--one jote.-- . _his rycht_--his pretended right.-- . _for by goddis word_ could not be good the divorcement of his father from elizabeth hume, sister to the lord hume, his lawfull wife, and consequently his marriage with beton, neece to james beton, bishop of st. andrews, (elizabeth hume being alive,) must be null, and he declared bastard. _caiaphas spake_, &c. , (_to this marginal note is added_,) renouncing his religion in the gray friers. , l. . _governour_; first, because he himselfe was borne by beton, his father's lawfull wife, elizabeth humes being yit alive; next, because his grandfather was borne by mary stuart to james hammilton, when her lawfull husband thomas boyd was yet alive. so the earle of lennox did not only pretend to be lawfully next to the crowne, as the late king james the fifth did often declare, that if he died without heire male, he would settle the crowne upon him, but also lawfull heire of the earledome of arran, as being descended from margaret hamilton, borne to mary stuart and james hammilton after the death of thomas boyd, her former husband, (now by this time the inconstant earle of arran had given himselfe wholly to the cardinall.) _the cardinall_, &c.--(_in the margin_,) all this was then said by the cardinal. _penes authorem fides esto._ , l. . _ayre_--ayre, campbell.-- . _to leyth_--to light.-- . _the sonare_--in time. , l. . _that he wold_ take.-- . _wold not_ grant.-- . _communicat_--communed. , l. , . _the magdelane day_--saint magdalen's day.-- . _gray tacking_--gray took. , l. . _had his fortificatioun_--had fortification.-- . _so much attend_--so attend.-- , . _play_ the good servant unto him, was reputed his enemy.-- . _thei war_ no more then .--(_in the margin_,) as they went to dundee, they said they were going to burn the readers of the new testament, and that they would stick to the old, for luther, said they, had made the new. , l. . _to have_ kept.--( . prevented, _i.e._ anticipated.)-- . _thare_ friend.-- . _was_ sent to the bischop of saint andrews, the abbot of paisley.-- . _war_ on the place. , l. . _ane certane_ number.-- . _whether to_--whereto.-- . _his craft_ perswaded. , l. . _ower the craig_--over the wall.-- . _broke his craig_--broken his owne neck. , l. . _thei_--the ships. , l. . _other then_--after the castle. , l. . _feallis war_--files war charged to be. , l. , . _hary_, sometime husband to our queen and mistresse.-- . _eme's wyiff_--enemies _wife_.-- . _in propertie_--in povertie. , l. . _he hes had_ since, and that _in common_. , l. . _hornyng_--burning.-- . _with him_--with them. , l. , and , l. . _in anno_ , (_inserted in the text thus_,) that now liveth in the year of our lord . , l. . _porte_ or gate. , l. . _intreat_ of.-- . _neyther eak_--neither maid.-- . _thame as_ he could; being _such_.-- . _wold have_ used. , l. . _whingar_--dagger.-- , . _may feare_, in time to come, we will.-- . _another_--another place. , l. , . _sound_ of prayers.-- . _prevented_--came before.-- , . _grones; yea, we heard your bitter_--(_omitted_.) , l. . _awfull_--irefull.-- . _hypocrisie_ within this realme; ye shall. , l. . _verray countenance_--weary countenance. , l. . _declared_ fully. the spirit of truth. , l. , , and . _and so_ the said john knox, _albeit_, &c., (_the intermediate words being omitted_.) , l. . _premisses_--promise.-- . _the larde_--johan cockburne, laird. , l. . _transported to edinburgh_, where the cardinall then had a convention of prelats, wherein somewhat was said of redressing the abuses of the church, and reforming the lives of the clergie; but it took no effect. m. wischarde remained but few dayes in edinburgh: _for that bloody wolfe the cardinall_, ever thirsting after the blood _of the servand of god_.-- . _to be crucified._ the cardinall, seeing it was forbidden by the canon law to priests to sit as judges upon life and death, although the crime were heresie, sent to the governour, desiring him to name some lay-judge to pronounce sentence against m. wischarde. the governour had freely condescended to the cardinall's request, without delay, if david hamilton of preston, a godly and wise man, had not remonstrated unto him, that he could expect no better end then saul, since he persecuted the saints of god, for that truth which he professed once with such a shew of earnestnesse; the profession thereof being the only cause of his advancement to that high degree wherein he was: the governour, moved at this speech of david hamilton's, answered the cardinall, that he would not meddle with the blood of that good man; and told him, that his blood should be on him, for he himselfe would be free of it. at this the cardinall was angry, and said he would proceed, and that he had sent to the governour of meere civility, without any need. and so.-- . _penult_,--the seven and twentieth day. , l. , _have receaved_ from certaine records, which we relate truely, as neere as possibly we can. _upon the last._ , l. . _as saith paule_ to timothy.-- . _be able_ with wholsome learning, and to impugne.-- . _the gospell_ he treated of appeareth not to repugne.-- . _lawder_, a priest. , l. . _full of_ outrages, threatnings. , l. . _my lords_, it is not so by your pleasures. , l. . _i vanquest him_--i witnessed to him. , l. . _and spitted_ on the ground.-- . _layman_--man. , l. . _our generall_ or provinciall counsells. , l. . _innocent_ man speak.-- . _two_ feinds, two gray friers.-- - . _came to him with all diligence._ and conferred with him a pretty while, at last, burst forth in tears, but so soon as he was able to speak, he asked him, if he would receive the communion? master wischarde answered, he would most willingly, if he could have it according to christ's institution, under both kinds. the sub-prior went to the cardinall and his prelats, he told them, that master wischarde was an innocent man; which he said, not to intercede for his life, but to make known the innocency of the man unto all men, as it was known to god. at these words the cardinall was angry, and said to the sub-prior, long agoe we knew what you were. then the sub-prior demanded, whether they would suffer m. wischarde to receive the communion or not? they answered, no. a while after m. wischarde had ended with the sub-prior, the captaine of the castle, with some other friends, came to him, and asked him, if he would break fast with them? he answered, most willingly, for i know you to be most honest and godly men; so all being ready, he desired them to sit downe, and heare him a while with patience. then he discoursed to them about halfe an houre concerning the lord's supper, his sufferings and death for us. he exhorteth them to love one another, laying aside all rancor, envie, and vengeance, as perfect members of christ, who intercedes continually for us to god the father. after this, he gave thanks, and blessing the bread and wine, he took the bread and brake it, and gave to every one of it, bidding each of them, remember that christ had died for them, and feed on it spiritually; so taking the cup, he bade them, remember that christ's blood was shed for them, &c.; and after, he gave thanks and prayed for them. when he had done, he told them, that he would neither eat nor drink more in this life; and so retired to his chamber. immediately after came to him (sent from the cardinall) two executioners; one brought him a coat of linnen died black, and put it upon him; the other brought some bags full of powder, which they tied to severall parts of his body. then having dressed him, they brought him to an outer roome, neere to the gate of the castle. then the fire was made ready, and the stake at the west port of the castle, neere to the priory. over against the place of execution, the castle windows were hung with rich hangings, and velvet cushions, laid for the cardinall and prelats, who from thence did feed their eyes with the torments of this innocent man. _the cardinal dreading._ , l. . _and led_--and with sound of trumpet led.-- . _tempt me not_, i intreat you. _after this._-- . _words: i beseik you_--words, having obtained leave to speak a little, i beseech you. , l. . _then_ the executioner, _that was his tormentor_.-- . _and then by and by_ the trumpet sounding, he was tyed to the stake, and the fire kindled. the captaine of the castle, for the love he bore to m. wischarde, drew so neer to the fire, that the flame thereof did him harme; he wished m. wischarde to be of good courage, and to beg from god the forgivenesse of his sins; to whom m. wischarde answered thus: this fire torments my body, bot no wayes abates my spirit. then m. wischarde, looking towards the cardinall, said, he who in such state, from that high place, feedeth his eyes with my torments, within few dayes shall be hanged out at the same window, to be seen with as much ignominy, as he now leaneth there in pride. then with this, the executioner drawing the cord, stopt his breath; presently after, the fire being great, he was consumed to powder. the prelats would not suffer any prayers to be made for him, according to their custome. after the death of master wischarde, the cardinall was cryed up by his flatterers, and all the rabble of the corrupt clergie, as the onely defender of the catholike church, and punisher of hereticks, neglecting the authority of the sluggish governour: and it was said by them, that if the great prelates of latter dayes, both at home and abroad, had been so stout and zealous of the credit of the catholike church, they had not onely suppressed all hereticks, but also kept under the lay-men, who were so forward and stubborne. on the other side, _when that the people beheld the great tormenting of that innocent, they could not withhold from piteous mourning and complaining of the innocent lamb's slaughter_. _after the death_, &c. , l. . _or_ else it _should cost life for life_; and that in a short time they should be like hogs kept for slaughter, by this vitious priest, and wicked monster, which neither minded god, nor cared for men. amongst those that spake against the cardinall's cruelty, _john leslie, brother to the earle of rothes, was chief_, with his cozen norman lesley, who had been a great follower of the cardinall, and very active for him but a little before, fell so foule with him, that they came to high reproaches one with another. the occasion of their falling out was a private businesse, wherein norman lesley said he was wronged by the cardinall. on the other side, the cardinall said he was not with respect used by norman lesley his inferiour. the said john lesley, _in all companies, spared not to say_, that that same dagger, (shewing forth his dagger,) and that same hand, should be put in the cardinall's brest. _these brutes came_, &c.-- . _and promessed amitie with him_, and so he gave his bastard eldest daughter in marriage to the earle of crawford his eldest son and heir, and caused the wedding to be celebrate with such state, as if she had been a princes lawfull daughter. _he only feared_, &c. , l. . _not only_ say.-- . _fead_--fooles.-- . _mary that now mischevouslie regnes_--mary that now, , raignes.-- . _but by his secreat counsall_, (_omitted_.) , l. . _in no great number_--in great number. , (_in the margin_,) the fact and words of james melvin. , l. . _fowseis syde_--house side-- , . _how miserably lay david betoun, cairfull cardinall_, (_these words are omitted_.) , l. . _the death of this aforesaid tyrant_, as it was pleasing to some, to wit, to those who had received the reformation of religion, for they were mightily afraid of him, and also to sundry romanists whom he kept under as slaves; so on the other side, it _was dolorous to the priests_. , l. . _besieged._ divers gentlemen of fife went into the castle, and abode there with the leslies during the first siege; and john rough was preacher to them.-- . _and for his_ riches _he would not_. , l. . _the hole seige_, having left the castle, because he could do little good upon those that were with him; so addicted were they to their evil wayes, _begane to preach in_ the city of s. andrews. , l. . _any man_, namely, in the time of need, as that was. , l. . _kynd of doctrine_--wind of doctrine. , l. . _whither may we do the same in matters of religion?_ (_omitted_.) , l. . _that god hes_ ordained. , l. . _for upoun the_ nine and twentieth _day_.-- . _with a_ great army.-- . _in that_ haven before. , l. . _the seige by_ sea and land was laid about the castle of s. andrews, the three and twentieth day of july.-- . _brunt_; and some upon the street that leads to the castle.-- . _ground of the_ court of the castle.-- . _corrupt lyef_, having fallen into all kinde of licentiousnesse, puft up with pride of their successe, and relying upon england for help in case of need, _could not escape_. , l. . _upone the_ nine and twentieth of july.-- . _xiiij_--thirteen cannons.-- . _place._ betwixt ten of the clock and eleven, there fell. , l. . _men without god_, (omitted.)-- . _gallayis_, among others john knox was in the galleys all the winter. , l. . _schooting longis_--shooting amongst.-- . _began to reyll_--begin to faile. , l. . _forfaulted_--sore assaulted. , l. . _ordour of the cokill_, and a pension of , lib. turn. _with a full discharge_. , l. . _hir finall destruction_--her own ruine.-- . _lett men patientlie abyd_ god's appointed tyme, and turn unto him with hearty repentance, then god will surely stop the fire that now comes from her, by sudden changing her heart to deal favourably with his people; or else by taking her away, or by stopping her to go on in her course by such meanes as he shall think meet in his wisdom, for he having all in his hand disposeth of all, and doth with all according to his own will, unto which we must not onley yeald, but also be heardily pleased with it, since it is absolutely good, and both by sacred and prophane history we ar taught to do so; for in them we finde that princes have been raised up by his hands to punish his people; but when they turned unto him with hearty repentance, he either turned the heart of the prince to deal kindly with his people; or else did take him away; or at least did stop his violent course against his people. of this the examples are so frequent, that we spare to name them heere. _but to returne to our historie._ , l. . _a godly man_, (_omitted_.) , l. . _in the saidis chappell_, &c.--in the sands, chappell, &c. , l. . _of a justifeid man: but how it is suppressed, we know nott_--of a man justified, which is extant to this day.--(_in the margin_,) with a smudge?] note: this booke was printed , at edinburgh, by tho. utrover: (_in the to edit_.) tho. voutroler. , l. . _meanes as_ they looked for. , l. . _discrive_--discover. , l. . _the duck_ hamilton: (_also, at page_ , l. .) , l. . _the temporal lordis that_ maintain such abominations as we see, and flattering counsellors of state, _blasphemous_. , l. . _others besydis._ the bishops and their rable, they _begin_. , l. . _thei will_ do, or can do. , l. . _tack you yon_--take heed all you. , l. . _but few_ were made rich. , l. . _thare patentis_--their parents.-- . _displeasur, that_ idolatrous and mischievous marie.-- . _cruell persecution, used by_ queen marie of england. , l. . _as in doctrin_--as in preaching. , l. . _and_ bent themselves. , l. . _was_ published, which we have caused to be printed at the end of this book, _and is called_.-- to . _and tharefor_, &c., (_the whole of this sentence is omitted_.) , l. . _both realmes_ were disappointed _who_. , l. . instead of, _thare assembled preastis_--their asses, bloody priests, friers, &c. , l. . _thareof to this day_--thareof to his death.-- . _now erle_--after earle.-- . _thei lieved as beastis_--they left me as beasts. , l. . _to his glorie_--to your eternall glorie. , l. . _many others_--many other letters. , l. . _and geve attendance to us, your_--and to have care to use. , l. . _together ... answer_, (_omitted_.)-- . _hes allanerlie_--has modestlie _absteaned_. , l. . _this pastor_, or rather impostour.-- . _his eme's wyff_--his cousin's wife. , l. . _what that_ man of the law is. , l. . _nether can_ err.-- . _synceir_, (_omitted_.)-- . _cannon_--common _law_. , l. . _cummer_--rumour. , l. . _by_ (_i.e._ beside) _us_--neer us. book second. , l. . (_in the margin_,) note. here is a solecisme in state expression, newly invented by the court parasites. , l. . (_in the margin_,) note. to call the crown-matrimoniall, is an absurd solecisme, newly then invented at court. , l. . (_in the margin_,) note. and now in these latter days it hath pleased god in his goodnesse to grant the pure and primitive discipline also unto the church of scotland.-- . _long_, (_omitted_.) , l. . _the libertie of_, (_omitted_.) , l. . _the extreme_, (_omitted_.) , l. . _to give the_ gift of exhortation by sermon. , l. . _to convein us_--to make us. , l. . _our presence_, or counsell, or petitions.-- . _mercifullie_--bountifullie.-- . _the first petition_--here beginneth the particular demands. , l. . _of the which_, without explanation, hardly can arise any profit to the hearers. , l. . _to live_ at their lust. , l. . _a large purse_, , l. _turn._ or _scots_, gathered, (_livres tournois?_)-- . _in things_ as we thought _unlawfull_. , l. . _lords_, barons, and burgesses _of this_. , l. . _in parliament_ holden at edinburgh, anno . , l. . _any other_ of the godly that list. , l. . _and it_ appeared, that after that day that malice took more violent and strong possession in hir then it did before. , l. . _quenis_ favour. , l. . _thare rebellioun_--high rebellion. , l. . _vehement_--very vehement. , l. . _to instruct_ the people. , l. . _duke_ hamilton.-- , . now cheaf, &c., (_same reading as in vautrollier's edit., quoted in note ._)-- . _best for_--best serve for. , l. . _your grace's_--your princely. , l. . _extreme necessiteis_--most great extremities.-- . _thair and oure lyves_--their owne lives. , l. . _espyed._ the tenour whereof followeth. _and._-- . _that_ ye _the nobilitie_. , l. . _is it nocht_, &c.--it is not.-- . _judged_ to be _gud treeis_. , l. . _doth_ contrary to this authority.-- , . _he is cled_--it is clothed. , l. . _war thay that first_--war there, they that first.-- . _platt of ground_--place of ground. , l. . _war erected_--were set up.-- , . _hope_ of _victorie_. , l. . _that we_ in whom _she_.-- . _ar servandis_--as servants. , l. . _gart cutt the brigis_--caused the bridges to be cut. , l. . _teringland_--tarmganart. , l. , . _cowper, ... assisted_--cowper, ... was assisted.-- . _practised with us_--made shew unto us. , l. . _truble, or_ disquiet.-- . _subscrived_, &c.-- subscribed, james hamilton, meneits dosell. , l. . _plane_--plainly see. , l. . _cast up the portis_--open the gates.-- , _beirand_--bearing, namely. , l. . _departed, as hielie_--departed, and was highly. , l. . _the_ --the six and twentieth.-- . _four_, (_omitted_.) , l. . _wald vote_--would consent.-- . _palace and the kirk_--place, and the place and the church.-- . _idollis, hid_--hid goods. , l. . _unto him_, he would _that_.-- . _irruption_--interruption.-- . _stogged_--thrust. , l. . _in the one_--in one of the colledges.-- . _was to be done, and that ordour_--was best to be done, and what order.-- . _and yit hir dochteris is_--by advice of hir counsell.-- . _hir grace_--our mother. , l. . _to affix_--to appoint.-- . _our realme_--our religion. , l. . _to suche_--that such.-- . _sche_--the queen regent.-- . _thame_selves.-- . _advertist_, that. , l. . _nothing to_ the commission, she proposed. , l. . _abused_ duke hamilton, perswading him.-- . _his_ successors of their pretended title.-- . _crymes_ were ever entred into.-- . _should leaf_--should lose.-- . _the duke's grace_--duke hamilton. , l. . _small appointment_--finall appointment.-- . _earthlie_ treasure. , l. . _outsetting_--upsetting.-- . _no mo_--no man. , l. . _substantious housholdis_--chief domesticks. , l. . _bawbie_, or fartheing.-- . _those of_, (_omitted_.) , l. . _restalrig_--lestarrig. , l. . _januar_ had decreed. , l. . _thai war_--they are.-- . _in the first_ congregation. , l. . _maner_--matter.-- . _skaithles_--harmless.-- . _thoill_--suffer. , l. . _other haveand spirituall_--other, either spiritual.-- . _religioun, or_ any other.-- . _in all_ such causes.-- . _to speak_ with. , l. . _the lordis_ protestants.-- . _unto_ the chief heads of the appointment, _whiche be these_.-- . _this_ our _proclamatioun_. , l. . _adversaries_, who trie _all maner_.-- . _and hir_, (_omitted_.) , l. . _quhat tyme_--at the time that. , l. . _baith_, (_omitted_.)--_le roy_, (_omitted_.) (_title inserted_,) the king his letter to the lord james.-- . _bein_, (_omitted_.) , l. . _father_, from the queen my wife, and from _me_.-- . _strange_ to me, and so farre _against_.-- . _gudlie_ well.-- , . _ye ar declyneit_--ye have declined.-- . _attention_--intention.-- . _thair_--your.--_thay_--ye. , l. . _vous senteras_--vous en sentires.-- . _schir_, (_omitted_.)--the lord james his letter to the king.-- . _my_ most humble _dewtie_.-- . _last_, importing.-- . _majestie_ doth.-- . _hard_--had.-- . _grevis me_ very _heavilie_. , l. . _sould_ not _have_.-- , . _as_ we were perswaded in _our_.-- . _cair_ from. , l. . _na man_ could. , l. . _benefit_ which.-- . _libertie_ of.-- . _tolbuith_--town. , l. . _nether_ yet.-- . _for schort_--for that _after_. , l. . _deambulatour_--deambulation.-- . _falt_ in.-- . _worthelie_--justlie.-- . _done_, (_omitted_.) , l. . _thair kyn_--your kin.-- . _contravene_--violate.-- . _mak_ first--give first. , l. . _lippin_--trust.-- . _to have_ good.-- . _taikin_ without.-- . _saidis_, (_omitted_.)-- . _our pairt._ but in case against all reason they should mean any such thing, we _have thocht_.-- . _furnissing_--surmising. , l. . _put_ fit _remedy_.-- . _could_--would.-- . _list_, so that some asked for.-- . _sche_ was not ashamed _to sett_.-- . _personis_ have of malice.-- . _stope all_ manner of reconciliations.-- . _estaitis_--state.-- . _ar cumit_--came.--_ar myndit_--do mind. , l. . _ony_ part thereof _contravenit_.-- . _communit_--commovit.-- . _ane_, (_omitted_.) , l. . _ever_, (_omitted_.)-- . _obedience_ of _higher_.-- . _direct_ quite.-- . _with_ reverence. , l. . _simplicitie_, and to _work your finall_.-- . _of_ our _posteritie, and_ to be short, to our _commun-wealth_.-- . _foirnameit._ this is so _manifestly_.-- . _is not to be_--is to be. , l. . _brocht it_ to such basenesse, and such a deale of strife _that all men_.-- . _guid and_ weighty _money_. , l. . _that_ wicked _man_.-- . _quha at_ that tyme.-- . _reassonit_ with all _in the_. , l. . _thairin_, not only _without_.-- . _the houssis garnissit_, (_omitted_.) , l. . _yea_, even of our brethren. , l. . _covetousnes of the_ cardinall of guyse and the hamiltons. _amen._ , l. . _trubill any_ unjust _possession_. , l. . _over_ our _heads_.-- . _tred_--course. , l. . _personis ... be god_, move princes to _command_.-- . _of_ misled _princes_.-- . _thair_ misled _princes_.-- . _crewell_ misled princes, who authorize the _murtherar_. , l. . _murther_, and such like: _esaias_.-- . _appelyteis of_ misled _princeis_. , l. . _my lord dukis grace_--the duke. , l. - . _hienes, quham ... god_, expecting earnestly your answer. , l. . _experimentit_--dear. , l. . _lawlie_ to our.-- . _of the_ same: and that ye would _rather_. , l. . _onlie_ to shew. , l. . _to_ this _commun-wealth_.-- . _a_ plain _declaratioun_. , l. . _pleis your grace_--madame.-- , . _sall_ treat or deal _for himself_. , l. . _ye_ knew fully, and all men else.-- , . the queen's proclamation. , l. . _thing not of lait_--thing of lait. , l. . _as in_ deed _it is_.-- . _haid_ inche, colme, _dumbar_.-- . _maid_; yet all these _could_.-- . _the trewth_, (_omitted_.)-- . _seiking_ constantly _to possesse_ the _libertie_ of leith, which _be donation of_ ancient _kingis thay have long_ enjoyed. , l. . _to wit_--is.-- . _mentenance_--mantainers. , l. , . _to this day_, (_omitted_.)-- . _write to_ the praise of _goddis_.-- . _honour_, (_omitted_.) , l. . _our_, (_omitted_.)-- . _be of_ such _reputatioun_. , l. . _quhan_, (_omitted_.) , l. . _support_--our _support_. , l. . _presentt_ day, _that_.--_maist_, (_omitted_.) , l. . _onlie_--openlie.-- . _deceat, that_ to _lift thair weaponis against thair brethren_.-- . _glorie_, or _yet_. , l. . _thame_, so they did answer unto her, _as by_. , l. . _moist_, (_omitted_.) , l. . _self and_ those that followeth you. _and that._ , l. . _it will ... remembrance_--your majestie may call to minde, _how at_. , l. . _we will_ (as befoir) move _and declair_.-- . _humbill_, (_omitted_.) , l. . _maid_ by these about _the quene_.-- . _never anis_ hath made any shew of any such thing, _bott_ only _in_.-- . _poore_ commonalty.-- . _lady_: which accusation hath continued ever against him, as guilty of that crime; he therefore now openly _and plainlie_ protesteth. ---- (_opposite to line , the first marginal note begins_,) now the duke seeing the queen's partie decline, and the protestant party grow strong, he once more changeth the profession of his religion, and joyneth with the protestants, as strongest.--(_and at line ,_) how true this is, the constant course of the family can tell. , l. . _your_--our.--(_marginal note_,) _let this bee noted, and let all men judge of the purpose of the frenche_, and how good and wise patriots they were, who sold our soveraign to france for their private profit, and they by name were the hamiltons. , l. . _so_ tyranically to domineer over them. , l. . _called and_, (_omitted_.)-- . _that_ it _is_.-- . _never so_ firmly establish any, but at his pleasure, he seeing just cause, might deprive them.-- . _used_--useth second _means_. , l. . _idolatrie_, as also she openly declares the countrie to be conquest, and no more free. _and finallie_.-- . (_marginal note_,) _in the disposition_--in the deposition.-- , . _and_ disorder.-- . _our_ soveraigne.-- . _awin_, (_omitted_.) , l. . _uttermost_ ruine, _so that_.-- . _for that_--only because.-- . _lauchfull_, (_omitted_.)-- . _of sanct johnestoun_, (_omitted_.) , l. . _in this_ last _moneth_.-- . _in_ other _townes_.-- . _soverane lord_ deceased without heirs of her _persone_.-- . _our_ whole _cuntree_.--_causes_--caused ... to coine lead-_money_. , l. . _and attour, her grace places_--again, she so placeth. , l. . _be his_--by this.-- . _remissionis_, conform _to the practise_. , l. . _fearing_ lest _the_. , l. . _pleise your grace_--madame. , l. . _lord and_ lady their _true_.-- . _for_ worthy _reasons_.-- . _sute_--follow.-- , . _maid_ oft before. again we desire you _cause_. , l. . _xxiii of october_-- of october.-- . _that thei_, (_omitted_.)-- . _sa lang as_ they use us as friends, and not strive _to make_. , l. . _name_, requiring thame.-- . _the ungodlie soldiouris_, in hatred of goodnesse and good men, continuing in their disorder, mocke _the laird_.-- . _shall_ make them know me. , l. . _without_ delay. , l. . the captain of _the castle_.-- . _desyred_, (_omitted_.)-- . _back, the_ carriage of money _was dejected_. , l. . _betimes_ in the morning for keeping. , l. , , l. . _so that in no wise we could charge thame_, (_omitted_.) , l. . _after_ our departure. , l. . _before lurked_--there lurked. , l. . _alas if i might see_ another defie given: _give advertisement_. , l. . _continewalie_, (_omitted_.) , l. . _altogitther_, (_omitted_.) , l. . _i_ speak _more generallie then_ the present _necessity_ requireth: _for_. , l. . _thair_ own _formar offences_. , l. . _himself_, i _speik_. , l. and . _uncertane_--certaine.-- . _when_ their blinde fury _pursued us_.--l. . (_in the margin_,) let the house of hamilton remember this. , l. . _thair_ home and _quiet_.-- . with this we end _the second book of the history_, &c. the end of the second book. no. ii. the lollards in scotland during the fifteenth century. in tracing the history of the reformation, we must always revert to a much earlier period than that of luther. the chief witnesses against the corrupt ceremonies and discipline of the church of rome belonged to two distinct sects, but entertaining nearly the same sentiments--the albigenses, who were chiefly settled about toulouse and albigeois, in languedoc; and the valdenses, who inhabited the mountainous tract of country, (known as the cottian alps,) in the provinces of dauphine and provence, in the south of france, and in piedmont, in the north of italy. both sects may be considered as descendants of the primitive christians, and the long series of persecutions which they endured, may have conduced to spread their opinions in other lands, and to keep alive a spirit of religious inquiry and freedom. the great english reformer john wykliffe, died in the year . the persecutions which arose after his death, drove many of his adherents into exile, and brought some of them to the western parts of scotland, who, having settled in ayrshire, obtained the name of the lollards of kyle. any notices respecting them that have been preserved are unfortunately very scanty, but should not be overlooked in a work like the present. andrew of wyntoun, prior of lochlevin, the author of a metrical chronicle, written about the year , when recording the appointment of robert duke of albany as governor of scotland, in the year , commends him for his opposition to lollards and heretics:-- "he was a constant catholike, all lollard he hatyt, and hereticke."--(vol. ii. p. .) it was during his administration, that the first martyr of the reformed religion was committed to the flames at perth, for alleged heresy, in the year or . this was eight or nine years previously to the death of john huss, that "generous and intrepid martyr and confessor of christ," as luther justly calls him. walter bower, the continuator of fordun, is probably the only original historian who has preserved an account of resby, of which the following is an extract:-- "lib. xv. cap. xx. de combustione jacobi resby hÆretici apud perth. "eodem anno [mccccvi] die combustus est jacobus resby, presbyter anglicus de schola johannis wykliff, hæreticus condemnatus in concilio cleri sub magistro laurentio de lundoris, inquisitore hæreticæ pravitatis, solidissimo clerico et famoso theologo, vitæ sanctitate quamplurimum collaudato. qui quidem jacobus, quamvis interdum celeberrimus reputabatur simplicibus prædicatione, periculosissimas tamen conclusiones intersperserat in sua dogmatizatione. quarum prima fuit, quod papa de facto non est christi vicarius. secunda, nullus est papa, nec christi vicarius, nisi sit sanctus. de consimilibus, vel pejoribus, tenuit quadraginta conclusiones. cujus tam scripta quam auctorem inquisitor confutavit, et ad ignem applicavit et incineravit. hujusmodi errores excerpti sunt de hæresibus dicti johannis wykliff hæresiarchæ, damnati londoniis in anglia, anno domini mccclxxx, per primatem angliæ, et tredecim episcopos, ae magistros in sacra theologia triginta, ex dialogo, trialogo, et aliis suis libris. conclusiones et libelli istius hæretici adhuc a nonnullis lolardis habentur in scotia, et curiose servantur, ex instinctu diaboli, per tales quibus aquæ furtivæ dulciores sunt, et panis absconditus suavior."--(vol. i. p. .) the several abbreviates of the scotichronicon notice resby's fate. law's ms. places it in ; but the larger "extracta ex cronicis scocie," gives the year , nor omits the circumstance "de talibus et pejoribus xl. conclusiuncs; _cujus liber adhuc restant curiose servantur per lolardos in scocie_." among later writers who mention resby, spotiswood says, "john wickliffe in england, john hus and jerome of prague in bohemia, did openly preach against the tyranny of the pope, and the abuses introduced in the church; and in this countrey, one called joannes [james] resby an englishman, and _de schola_ wickliffi, as the story speaketh, was brought in question for some points of doctrine which he taught, and condemned to the fire. he was charged by master laurence lendores with heretical opinions; whereof we have two only mentioned; one, that the pope was not christ's vicar; the other, that he was not to be esteemed pope, if he was a man of wicked life. for maintaining these two points, he suffered in the year ."--(history of the church, p. .) this date is also given in the breve cronicon, (apud registrum glasguense, p. .) "combustio jacobi henrici [resby] apud perth, a.d. ." the prevalence of such opinions is still more evident from the oath which masters of arts were required to take, in the newly founded university of st. andrews; it being enacted at a congregation, held on the th of june , that all who commenced masters of arts should swear, among other things, that they would resist all adherents of the sect of lollards. "item, jurabitis quod ecclesiam defendetis contra insultum lollardorum, et quibuscunque eorum secte adherentibus pro posse vestro resistetis."--(ms. records of the university, quoted by dr. m'crie, life of melville, vol. i. p. .) knox commences his history with referring to some person whose name did not appear in the scrollis or registers of glasgow, who suffered in that city in the year . david buchanan and petrie have rather hastily concluded that resby was the person referred to, overlooking both the difference of time and the place of his execution. another proof of the increase of the lollards in scotland, is furnished by an act in the parliament of king james the first, held at perth, on the th march - , soon after his return from his long captivity in england:-- "of heretickis and lollardis. "item, anentis heretikis and lollardis, that ilk bischop sall ger inquyr be the inquisicione of heresy, quhar ony sik beis fundyne, ande at thai be punyst as lawe of haly kirk requiris: ande, gif it misteris, that secular power be callyt tharto in suppowale and helping of haly kirk."--(acta parl. scotiæ, vol. ii. p. .) the prevalence of reformed opinions is also clear from the appointment of a dignified churchman as heretical inquisitor. such an office would obviously never have been contemplated, unless for the wide spread of what was deemed to be heresy. laurence of lindores, abbot of scone, in , was the first professor of law in the newly erected university of st. andrews, and he is described as "solidissimus clericus et famosus theologus, vitæ sanctitate quamplurimum collaudatus." but the title of haereticÆ pravitatis inquisitor, formed his highest distinction; and he is said to have given no peace or rest to heretics or lollards. whether laurence of lindores resigned his situation as abbot on obtaining other preferment, is uncertain. in july , when elected dean of the faculty of arts, at st. andrews, he is styled rector of creich, master of arts, licentiate in theology, inquisitor for the kingdom of scotland, &c. this office of dean he held till his death, when (post mortem felicis memoriæ magistri laurencii de lundoris,) mr. george newton, provost of the collegiate church of bothwell, was elected his successor, th september .--(registers of the university.) lindores is said to have written "examen hæreticorum lolardorum, quos toto regno exegit." the next martyr was paul craw or crawar, a native of bohemia, by old scotish writers called beum. as knox seems to have had before him the brief notice contained in the first edition of foxe's "actes and monuments," the passage from that edition may here be quoted:-- "¶ paule craws a bohemian. "the same yere [ ] also was paul craws a bohemian taken at s. andrews by the bishop henry, and delivered over to the seculer power to be burnt, for holdyng contrary opinions vnto the church of rome, touching the sacrament of the lords supper, the worshipping of sainctes, auriculer confessyon, with other of wycleffes opinions."--(foxe, p. , first edit., , folio.) the earlier notices given of this martyr by bower the continuator of fordun, and hector boece, may also be quoted, the latter in the words of his translator john bellenden, archdean of murray, in the reign of james the fifth. it will be observed that bower mentions laurence of lindores as inquisitor, whereas boece says it was john fogo, his successor in that office, who acted on this occasion, which some authorities place in , others in , or in the following year. "de combustione pauli crawar arch-hÆretici, et de lolardis. "anno sequenti [mccccxxxiii] accusatus est paulus crawar teutonicus, xxiij. die mensis julij, apud sanctum andream, et hæreticus obstinatus repertus, convictus est et condemnatus, et ad ignem applicatus et incineratus. hic, ut dicitur, missus fuit ab hæreticis pragensibus de bohemia, qui tune in maleficiis nimium prævalebant, ad inficiendum regnum scotorum, recommissus per ipsorum literas, tanquam præcellens arte medicine. hic in sacris literis et in allegatione bibliæ promptus et exercitatus inveniebatur; sed ad insipientiam sibi, omnes quasi illos articulos erroneos pragenses et wiklivienses pertinaciter tenebat: sed per venerabilem virum magistrum laurentium de londoris, inquisitorem hæreticæ pravitatis, qui nusquam infra regnum requiem dedit hæreticis, vel lolardis, confutatus est."--(scotichronicon, vol. ii. p. .) bower, after this extract, in the remainder of the chapter, and the two following ones, has given some account of the rise and opinions of these heretics, and the mode of confuting them; which are too long for quotation. bellenden's briefer notice is as follows:-- "nocht lang efter was tane in sanct androis ane man of beum namit paule craw, precheand new and vane superstitionis to the pepyl, specially aganis the sacrament of the alter, veneration of sanctis, and confession to be maid to priestis. at last he was brocht afore the theologis, and al his opinionis condampnit. and because he perseuerit obstinatly to the end of his pley, he was condampnit and brint. he confessit afore his death that he was send out of beum to preiche to scottis the heresyis of hus and wiccleif. the king commendit mekyl this punition, and gaif the abbacy of melros to johne fogo, for he was principall convikar of this paule."--(bellenden's cronyklis of scotland, fol. ccxlvij of orig. edition.) it is a mistake, however, to say that fogo was thus rewarded for the zeal he displayed in convicting paul crawar of heresy in . dr. john fogo was abbot of melrose in the year , when he was sent to rome on an embassy from king james the first. he was the king's confessor, and was present at the council of basil in .--(morton's monastic annals, pp. , .) sir james balfour treats him with very little ceremony:--"this zeire , (he says,) the king, at the earnist sollicitatione of the clergey, bot especially of henrey wardlaw, bishope of st. andrewes, bestowed the abbey of melrosse upone a luberdly mounke of the cisteauxe order, quho had wretten a blasphemous pamphlet against paull crau's heresy, named johne fogo."--(annals, vol. i. p. .) but it was not obscure men or strangers who were occasionally subjected to the charge of heresy. in the reign of james the third, the case of the primate of scotland is worthy of special notice. in , patrick graham, son of lord graham, and nephew of james the first, was translated from the see of brechin to st. andrews. graham proceeded to rome to obtain his confirmation, but the enmity of the boyds during their power at court occasioned him to delay for some years his return to scotland. during this period, the archbishop of york having renewed an old contested claim as metropolitan of the scotish church, graham succeeded in obtaining from pope sixtus the fourth a sentence, whereby it was declared "a thing unfitting that an english prelate should be the primate of scotland, by reason of the warres that might break forth betwixt the two kingdoms."--the king, in , calls him "consanguineo nostro carissimo;" and in the same year is styled as "conservator privilegiorum ecclesiæ scoticanæ." he is said to have returned in the year ; and both buchanan and spottiswood have given a minute and interesting account of the troubles in which he was involved. in , pope. sixtus the fourth erected the see of st. andrews into an archbishoprick, and thus graham became primate, pope's nuncio, and legatus a latere. but his zeal and innovations in reforming abuses, excited the envy and opposition both of the clergy and persons in civil authority; and darkened the latter days of his life to such a degree, that he was brought to trial, and by the pope's legate, named huseman, who came to scotland for that purpose, he was degraded from his dignities, and condemned to perpetual imprisonment, as a heretic, schismatic, &c.; and was put under the custody of william schevez, archdean of st. andrews, who was appointed his coadjutor and successor. bishop lesley (p. ,) places graham's trial in , and says, he was first imprisoned in inchcolm, then removed to dunfermling, and soon after to the castle of lochleven, where he died in . see also sir james balfour's annals, vol. i. p. . "this end (says spottiswood) had that worthy man, in virtue and learning inferior to none of his time, oppressed by the malice and calumny of his enemies, chiefly for that they feared reformation of their wicked abuses by his means." * * * * * of the lollards mentioned by knox as summoned for trial before james the fourth in , no additional information has been obtained. alexander alesius, in , takes notice of john campbell of cesnock having also been summoned and acquitted: see rev. chr. anderson's annals, vol. ii. p. ; john davidson's memoriall of two worthie christians, &c., p. , edinb. , vo; and calderwood's history, vol. i. p. . in "the praise of aige," a poem, written about that time by walter kennedy, a younger son of gilbert lord kennedy, the progenitor of the earls of cassilis, we find these lines:-- "this warld is sett for to dissaive us evin, pryde is the nett, and cuvatece is the trane; for na reward, except the joy of hevin, wald i be yung in to this warld agane. _the schip of faith, tempestuous wind and rane dryvis in the see of lollerdry that blawis_; my yowth is gane, and i am glaid and fane, honour with aige to every vertew drawis." the same author, in his flyting or poetical contest with william dunbar, among other terms of reproach, styles his antagonist "lamp lollardorum;" and also, "judas jow, juglour, lollard lawreat."--(dunbar's poems, vol. ii. pp. , , .) no. iii. patrick hamilton, abbot of ferne. in collecting some notices of this memorable person, it may be remarked, that knox has passed over his history much more briefly than likely he would have done, had he himself been at st. andrews at the time of his execution. it has been customary to give a rather exaggerated account of hamilton's birth and family connexions. bishop burnet says, "the first who suffered in this age (in scotland) was patrick hamilton, a person of very noble blood: his father was brother to the earl of arran, and his mother sister to the duke of albany: so nearly was he on both sides related to the king. he was provided of the abbey of fern in his youth; and being designed for greater preferments, he was sent to travel," &c.--(hist. of the reform., vol. i. p. .) similar terms are employed by later writers. this notion to hamilton's high descent and parentage requires to be somewhat modified. his father, sir patrick hamilton of kincavel, was an illegitimate son of james first lord hamilton, by a daughter of witherspoon of brighouse, and died in . sir patrick afterwards obtained a letter of legitimation under the great seal, th january - ; and in a charter of the settlement of the hamilton estates about the same time, by the earl of arran, he was called next in succession, (failing the earl's lawful issue,) after sir james hamilton of fynnart, who was the natural son of james second lord hamilton, created earl of arran in , and who was legitimated on the same day with sir patrick. the latter was slain in a conflict on the streets of edinburgh, th april . his wife was catharine stewart, daughter of alexander duke of albany, the second son of king james the second. she is also described as a natural daughter; the marriage of her parents having been dissolved on alleged propinquity of blood, by a sentence of divorce, pronounced d march - . it is proper however to observe, that illegitimation caused by the dissolution of such marriages, in conformity with the complicated rules of the canon law, was not considered to entail disgrace on the children, nor did it always interrupt the succession either in regard to titles or property. their children were,-- . james hamilton of kincavel, sheriff of linlithgowshire, and captain of blackness in . he was summoned on a charge of heresy in , but escaped to england. (see note .) he obtained permission to return in , and was the means of accomplishing the downfall of his cousin, sir james hamilton of fynnart, (ib. p. .) the sentence given against him by the popish clergy at holyrood house, th august , was reversed and annulled by the general assembly in june . . patrick hamilton the martyr. . katharine hamilton, who is mentioned in a letter, th march , (ib. p. , note,) as wife of the late captain of dunbar castle. the reference in that letter may have been not to her brother patrick, who was _brent_ in , but to james, who was condemned for heresy in . the word _brent_ therefore might be read _banished_. patrick hamilton was born about the year . being intended for the church, he no doubt received a liberal education, and the influence of his family connexions was sure to obtain for him high preferment. the time when he was promoted to the abbacy of ferne, in the county of ross, is nowhere stated, except in the vague, general terms, "in his youth." it is however quite certain that ferne was held, along with the abbacy of kelso _in commendam_, by andrew stewart, bishop of caithness, who died in . sir robert gordon, in his genealogy of the earls of sutherland, (p. ,) says, that on "the th day of june yeirs, andrew stuart, bishop of catheneys, commendator of the abbayes of kelso and ferne, died at his castle of skibo," &c. (p. .) a manuscript calendar of ferne, which may be held as the best authority, places the bishop's death in . but although this benefice was conferred on patrick hamilton, there is no evidence to show that he was ever in priest's orders, as he necessarily, at the time of this condemnation, would have been degraded, or deprived of such orders. he appears however to have prosecuted his studies at st. andrews, and to have taken his master's degree, according to the following entry in the registers of that university:-- "congreg. tenta, oct. . mag^r. patricius hamilton abbas de ferne rossen. dioc. in facultatem est receptus." it was probably in the following year that hamilton went abroad, in the farther prosecution of his studies, visiting wittenberg and marburg, and becoming acquainted with luther, melancthon, and francis lambert. from the sentence pronounced by the archbishop and his assistants, it is evident that before hamilton's visit to the continent he had been suspected of cherishing heretical opinions. at the university of marburg, he publicly set forth certain conclusions or theses for disputation, on the subject of faith and good works. his theses may have been printed at the time: they have been preserved, in the english translation, by john fryth, of which there are several editions, sometimes under the title of 'patrick's places,' and are also inserted in knox's history, and in foxe's book of martyrs. hamilton returned to scotland in , impelled by a zeal to impart to his countrymen the knowledge of the truth which he had acquired: the result of which is well known; having been apprehended and taken prisoner to the castle of st. andrews, tried by archbishop beaton, and condemned for heresy, and suffering at the stake on the last of february - . * * * * * some extracts from contemporary writers, relating to patrick hamilton, may here be quoted. the first extract is taken from the dedication of lambert's work, which has been oftener mentioned than examined in recent times. it was first published in the year ; but the following extract is from an edition bearing the following title, "exegeseos francisci lamberti avenionensis, in sanctam divi ioannis apocalypsim, libri vii. basileae per nicolaum brylingerum. anno m.d.xxxix." vo. it occurs in the dedication to "the illustrious prince philip, landgrave of hesse." unfortunately it does not give the date.-- "habuisti anno supeiriore in tua nova academia marpurgensi ex scotia unum, qui vere suam in dei ecclesiam attulit gloriam, patricius hammilton, ex illustrissima hammiltonum familia, quæ ex summis regni scotiæ; ae regi, sanguine proximius junctis, est. ls cum esset annorum circiter trium et viginti, eruditionisque non vulgaris, et in dei sermonibus, iudicij, et certissimi et solidissimi, ab illo mundi angulo, nempe scotia, venit ad tuam academiam, ut abundantius in dei veritate confirmaretur, de quo veruntamen testor, me vix alium repperisse, qui de eloquiis dei, spiritualius, ac syncerius loqueretur. sæpe enim mecum de cisdem contulit. præterea et is primus fuit, qui post erectam a tua sublimitate academiam, in eadem christianissima aliquot axiomata palam et doctissime, me hoc illi consulente, asseruit. ubi autem robustior in pietatis doctrina factus est, assumpto uno ex tribus quos secum huc veniens duxerat, rediit in scotiam, et palam christum docuit, factus scotorum primus et idem inclytus, +apostolos+. mox principes sacerdotum cum satrapis suis, apud sancti andreæ urbem convenerunt in unum, adversus dominum, et christum, illiusque apostolum patritium, et ilium quantumvis sanguine clarum, et (ut puto) rege adhue puero, ab eis seducto (neque enim metu cognatorum eius quidquam alioqui ausi fuissent in cum) vocarunt in concilium suum, in calen. martias, huins anni. at ille in christi confessione ardens totus tempus ipsum prævenit, et pridie cal[=e]. martij mane, illis pinguibus samariæ vaccis adfuit, et ab illis velut a judæis christus, damnatus mox, et morti adjudicatus est, atque a prandio ipsiusmet dici combustus, et factus deo in hostiam sanctam, et vivam. is vere allulit in dei ecclesiam non solum gloriam suam, sed et vitam. hune veluti suavissimum florem, maturumque fructum, ab ipso initio protulit, noua et foelix illa academia tua. non es fraudatus desiderio tuo. idcirco enim maxime illam erexisti, quod cuperes ut intrepidi christi confessores, et constantes veritatis assertores ex ea prodirent. ecce jam unum habes, et eundem quidem inclytum multis nominibus, alij, cum domino visum fuerit, sequentur." in a work still less known, and indeed of which only one solitary copy is known to be preserved, we find an interesting allusion to hamilton. the author, john gau or gaw, will afterwards be noticed among the protestant exiles, appendix, no. vi. the volume has this title within an ornamented border:-- "the richt bay to the kingdome of hevine is techit heir in the x commandis of god / and in the creid / and pater noster / in the quhilk al chrissine man sal find al thing yat is neidful and requirit to onderstand to the saluation of the saul." (colophon,) "prentit in malmw / be me jhone rochstraten the xvi day of october / anno m.d.xxxiii." the allusion to hamilton's fate occurs in "ane epistil to the nobil lordis and baronis of scotland," in which the author complains of "the blynd giders and pastors quhilk sekis bot the mylk and wow of the scheip, quhilk alsua thinkkis na scheyme to cal thayme selff vicars of christ and successours of the apostlis," and says, "the thrid and principal causs (viz. of the want of religious instruction) is the sekkis n. and n. quhilk ar rissine laitlie in the kirk and prechis dremis and fablis and the tradicions of men, and notht the vangel, and giff ony amangis thayme wald prech it and notht thair tradicions thay ar haldine for heritikis, as ye knaw be experience of patrik hammiltone quhom thay pat crewellie to the deid bot now he liffis with christ quhom he confessit befor the princis of this vardil, bot the voce of his blwid cryis yeit with the bluid of abel to the hewine." * * * * * the next extracts are from foxe's martyrology; and it may be proper to be more particular in describing the early editions of that well known work, as knox's reference to it, at one period, was held to be a proof that the history of the reformation was not composed by him. during foxe's exile, he published at strasburgh a small latin work, entitled "commentarii rerum in ecclesia gestarum, maxi-marumque, per totam europam persecutionum, a vuicleui temporibus ad hanc vsque ætat[=e] descriptio. liber primus. autore ioanne foxo anglo. argentorati, exc. vuendelinus rihelius, anno m.d.liiii." small vo. dedicated to christopher duke of wurtemberg. five years later, at basil, he published a large folio, also under the title of "rerum in ecclesia gestarum, &c., commentarii," dedicated to thomas duke of norfolk, from basil, st sept. . in this work, at pages - , is a short account of patrick hamilton, with a reference to francis lambert's work on the apocalypse. but it is to foxe's great english work, in , that knox refers, and as the first book of his history was not written until , no anachronism can be discovered in such a reference. the succession of queen elizabeth to the english throne, evidently suggested the propriety of putting upon record a detailed history of the fearful sufferings and persecutions which had been endured. the first edition bears the following title:-- "actes and monuments of these latter and perillous dayes, touching matters of the church, wherein ar comprehended and described the great persecutions & horrible troubles, that have bene wrought and practised by the romishe prelates, speciallye in this realme of england and scotlande, from the yeare of our lorde a thousande, unto the tyme nowe present. gathered and collected according to the _true copies & wrytinges certificatorie, as wel of the parties themselves that suffered, as also out of the bishops registers, which wer the doers thereof, by_ iohn foxe. ¶ imprinted at london by iohn day, _dwellyng ouer aldersgate_. cum priuilegio regiæ maiestatis." this edition has no date; but the "kalender" and "almanacke for yeares," commencing in , shows that it was printed in that year, although not actually published till . the following is a literal copy of the account of hamilton's trial and execution contained in this rare edition:-- "[illustration: hand pointing right] patrike hamelton a skot. "like as there was no place, neyther of germanye, italye, or fraunce, wherin there was not some impes or braunches spr[=o]ge out of that mooste frutefull rote and foundation of luther. so likewise was not this ile of brittaine without his frute and braunches: amongst whom patricke hamelton a skottishman borne, being a yong man of an excellent nature and towardnes, but muche more commendable and praise worthye, for that he was of the kynges bloud and family, being the most ancient and noble stocke and name in all scotlande. the tender florishing age of this noble yonge man made his deathe so muche the more horrible, which of it selfe was but to muche cruell and detestable, for that skarse xxiii. yeres old, wh[=e] he was burned by dauid beton cardinall of saint andrewes, and his fellow byshoppes. which yong manne if he had chosen to leade his life, after the manner of other courtiers in all kinde of licentious riotousnes, he should peradventure haue found praise without pearill or punishment in that his florishinge age: but for so much as he joyned godlinesse wyth his stock, and vertue with his age, he coulde by no meanes escape the hands of the wicked. so that in all thinges and in al ages, the saying of s. paule is verified. whosoeuer dooth desire and studye to liue godlye in christe, he shall suffer persecution as a companion of his godlinesse. "for there is nothinge safe or sure in thys world, but wickednesse and synne. who euer sawe the cardinals or bishoppes rage wyth their cruell inquisitions, againste aduoutrye, riot, ambition, unlawfull gaming, dronkennesse, rapines, and wilfulnesse to doo all kinde of mischeues. anye man that list for all them, maye exercise vsurye, make tumultes, haunt whores, sweare and forsweare, and deceiue at his owne will and pleasure. "but if any man were truely addict to the desire and study of godlines, confessing christ to be his only patrone and aduocate, excludynge the merites of saintes, acknowledginge fre iustification by faith in christ, denying purgatory (for these articles hamelton was burned) in these poyntes they nether spare age or kinred, nether is there any so great power in y^e world that may withstand their maiesty or autority. how great an ornament might so noble, learned and excellent a yong man haue bene vnto that realme, being endued with so great godlines, and such a singular wit and disposition, if the skots had not enuied their owne commodity? what and how great commendation there was of that yong man, what hope of his disposition, his singuler learning and doctrine, and what a maturitye and ripenese of iudgemente was in him, did appeare amongste the germains whereas he might declare him self. for in the vniuersity of marpurge, which was then newlye erect by phillip prince of hessia, he openlye proceding: handled him selfe so, intreating and iudging matters of the church, with such praise and commendation, passynge al expectation for his age, that he made not only the common people, but also the learned to haue him in great admiration. beat[=o] whych n[=o]ber, when as many delighted in his princely wit, amongest all other, it appeared firste in fraunces lambert, who in the preface dedicatory, of his work vpon the apocalips, maketh euident mention of this patricke. "at the last wh[=e] as by the vse and familiarity of learned men, he daily profited more and more, his minde being enflamed with godlinesse, he began to consider with him selfe, touching his returne into his countrye, thinkinge (as hys mind greatly desired) that it wold come to pas that like a godly marchaunt he would delyuer some frute and light of that learning, whyche he had received and gotten abrode. in this his thought and purpose, taking vnto him a companion, he returned home without any l[=o]ger delay, vpon a godly and holy purpose and entent, but not with like successe. for this ingenious yong manne beinge lightened bothe in spirite and doctrine, not susteining or suffring the filthinesse and blindnes of his co[=u]try, was first accused of heresy, and afterward constantly and stoutly disputing with the cardinal and his band, at the last he was oppressed by the c[=o]spiracy of his enemies, and efter sentence of cond[=e]nation geuen against him, the same daye after dinner he was caried to the fire & burned, the king being yet but a child; wheras by y^e most grave testimony of his bloud, he left the verity & truth of god, fixed and confirmed in y^e harts and mindes of manye." (page .) foxe survived till april , and published four successive editions of his "actes and monuments." the second edition appeared in the year , and the third in . in the passages relating to the scotish martyrs, he has furnished ample details, which are not to be found in the first edition; and for these he gives as his authority "ex scripto testimonio scotorum." his enlarged account of hamilton, from the edition, may therefore be quoted; although it contains a few repetitions. the story of m. patricke hamelton. . persecutors. iames beton, archb. of s. andrew. m. hew spens, deane of diuinitie in the vniuersitie of s. andrew. m. iohn weddell, rector of the vniuersitie. iames symson, officiall. tho. ramsay, chan[=o], and deane of the abbey of s. andrewes. allane meldrum, chanon. iolm greson, principall of the blacke friers. iohn dillidaffe, warden of the gray friers. martin balbur, lawyer. iohn spens, lawyer. alexander young, baccheler of diuinitie, chanon. frier alex. chambell, priour of the blacke friers, &c. martyrs. patricke hamelton. at st. andrewes in scotland. an. . the causes. patrike hamelton a scottish man borne, of an high and noble stock, and of the kynges bloud, yong and of flourishing age, and excellent towardnes, of . yeares called abbot of ferme first commyng out of his country with thre companions, to seeke godly learning, went to the uniuersitie of marpurge in germanye, which university was then newly erected by phillip lantgraue of hesse: where he vsing conference and familiaritie with learned men, namely m. franciscus lambertus, so profited in knowledge, and mature iudgement in matters of religion, that he through the incitation of the sayd lambert, was the first in al the vniuersitie of marpurge, which publickely dyd set vp conclusions there to be disputed of, concernyng fayth and workes: arguyng also no lesse learnedly then feruently vppon the same, what these propositions and conclusions were, partly in his treatise hereafter followyng, called patrike places, may appeare. thus the ingenious wyt of this learned patrike increasing haply more and more in knowledge, and inflamed with godlynes, at length began to reuolue with himselffe, touchyng his returne into his countrey, beyng desirous to importe vnto hys countrye men, some fruite of the understandyng, which he had receaued abroad. wherupon persisting in his godly purpose, he toke one of the iij. whom he brought out of scotland, and so returned home without any longer delay.[ ] where he, not susteinyng the miserable ignoraunce and blyndnes of that people, after he had valiauntly taught and preached the truth, and refelled their abuses, was first accused of heresie, and afterward, constantly and stoutly susteinyng the quarell of gods gospell, against the high priest, and archbyshop of s. andrew, named james beton, was cited to appeare before him and his colledge of priests, the first day of march . but he beyng not onely forward in knowledge, but also ardent in spirite, not tarying for the houre appoynted, prenented the time, and came very early in the mornyng, before he was looked for, and there mightely disputyng against them, when he could not by the scriptures be conuicted, by force he was oppressed: and so, the sentence of condemnation beyng giuen agaynst him, the same day after dyner, in all the hoate hast, he was had away to the fire, and there burned, the kyng beyng yet but a child, which made the byshops more bold. and thus was this noble hamelton, the blessed seruaunt of god, without all iust cause, made away by cruell aduersaries, yet not without great fruite to the church of christ, for the graue testimony of his bloud, left the verity and truth of god, more fixed and confirmed in the hartes of many, then euer could after be pluckt away: in so much that diuers afterward standing in his quarel, susteined also the lyke martyrdome, as hereafter (christ willyng) shall appeare, as place and tyme shall require. in the meane season we thinke good to expresse here his articles, and order of his processe as we receaued them from scotland, out of the registers. ¶ the articles and opinions obiected agaynst m. patrike hamelton, by iames beton, archbyshop of s. andrewes.[ ] that man hath no free will. that there is no purgatory. that the holy patriarkes were in heauen, before christes passion. that the pope hath no power to loose and bynde: neither any pope had that power, after s. peter. that the pope is antichrist, and that euery priest hath the power that the pope hath. that m. patrike hamelton was a byshop. that it is not necessary to obteine any bulles from any byshop. that the vow of the popes religion, is a vow of wickednes. that the popes lawes be of no strength. that all christians worthy to be called christians, do know that they be in the state of grace. that none be saued, but they are before predestinate. whosoeuer is in deadly sinne, is vnfaythfull. that god is the cause of sinne, in this sence, that is, that he withdraweth hys grace from men, whereby they sinne. that it is deuilishe doctrine, to enioyne to any sinner, actuall penaunce for sinne. that the sayd m. patrike himself doubteth whether all children departing incontinent after their baptisme, are saued or condemned. that auricular confession is not necessary to saluation. these articles aboue written, were geuen in, and layd agaynst m. hamelton, and inserted in their registers, for the which also he was condemned, by them which hated him, to death. but other learned men, which commoned and reasoned with hym, do testifie, that these articles folowyng were the very articles for the which he suffered.[ ] . man hath no free will. . a man is onely iustified by fayth in christ. . a man, so long as he liueth, is not without sinne. . he is not worthy to be called a christian, which beleueth not that he is in grace. . a good man doth good workes: good workes do not make a good man. . an euill man bringeth forth euil workes: euil workes, being faithfully repented, do not make an euill man. . fayth, hope, and charitie be so lynked together, that one of them can not be without an other, in one man, in this life. ¶ and as touching the other articles, whereupon the doctours gaue their iugementes, as diuers do report, he was not accused of them before the byshop. albeit in priuate disputation, he affirmed and defended the most of them. here foloweth the sentence pronounced agaynst hym. christi nomine inuocato: we iames, by the mercy of god, archbishop of saint andrew, primate of scotland, wyth the counsaile, decree, and authoritie of the most reuerend fathers in god, and lordes, abbottes, doctoures of theologie, professors of the holy scripture, and maisters of the uniuersitie, assisting us for the tyme, sitting in iudgement within our metropolitane church of s. andrew, in the cause of hereticall prauitie, agaynst m. patrike hamelton, abbot or pensionarie of ferne, being summoned to appeare before vs, to aunswere to certeine articles affirmed, taught, and preached by hym, and so appearyng before vs, and accused, the merites of the cause beyng ripely weyde, discussed, and understanded by faythful inquisition made in lent last passed: we haue fonnde the same m. patrike, many wayes infamed wyth heresie, disputing, holding, and maintaynyng diuers heresies of martin luther, and hys folowers, repugnant to our fayth, and which is already[ ] condemned by generall councels, and most famous vniuersities. and he being vnder the same infamie, we decernyng before, hym to be summoned and accused vpon the premisses, he of euill mynde (as may be presumed) passed to other partes, forth of the realme, suspected and noted of heresie. and beyng lately returned, not beyng admitted, but of his owne head, without licence or priuiledge, hath presumed to preach wicked heresie. we have found also, that, he hath affirmed, published, and taught diuers opinions of luther, and wicked heresies, after that he was summoned to appeare before vs and our councell:[ ] that man hath no free wyll: that man is in sinne so long as he lyueth: that children incontinent after their baptisme, are sinners: all christians that be worthy to be called christians, do know that they are in grace: no man is iustified by workes, but by fayth onley: good workes make not a good man, but a good man doth make good workes: that fayth, hope, and charitie, are so knit, that he that hath the one, hath the rest, and he that wanteth the one of them, wanteth the rest, &c., wyth diuers other heresies and detestable opinions: and hath persisted so obstinate in the same, that by no counsaile nor perswasion, he may be drawen therefrom, to the way of our right fayth. all these premisses being considered, we hauing god and the integritie of our fayth before our eyes, and followyng the counsaile and aduise of the professours of the holy scripture, men of law, and others assistyng vs, for the tyme:[ ] do pronounce, determine, and declare, the sayd m. patrike hamelton, for his affirmyng, confessing, and maintayning of the foresayd heresies, and his pertinacitie (they beyng condemned already by the church, general councels, and most famous vniuersities) to be an hereticke, and to haue an euil opinion of the fayth, and therefore to be condemned and punished, like as we condemne, and define hym to be punished, by this our sentence definitiue, depriuyng and sentencyng him, to be depriued of all dignities, honours, orders, offices, and benefices of the church: and therfore do iudge and pronounce him to be deliuered ouer to the secular power,[ ] to be punished, and his goodes to be confiscate. this our sentence definitiue, was geuen and read at our metropolitan churche of s. andrewes, the last day of the moneth of february, an. , beyng present, the most reuerend fathers in christ, and lordes, gawand bishop of glasgow, george byshop of dunkelden. iohn, byshop of brecham. william, byshop of dunblane. patrike, prior of saint andrew. dauid, abbot of abirbrothok. george, abbot of dunfermelyng. alexander, abbot of caunbuskyneth. henry, abbot of lendors. iohn, prior of pittynweme. the deane, and subdeane of glasgow. m. hew spens. thomas ramsay. allane meldrum, &c. in the presence of the clergy and the people. after the condemnation and martyrdome of this true saint of god was dispatched, by the bishops and doctours of scotland, the rulers and doctours of the uniuersitie of louane hearyng therof, receaued such ioyc and consolation, at the shedyng of that innocent bloud, that for the aboundance of hart, they could not stay their penne, to vtter condigne thankes, applaudyng and triumphyng in their letters, sent to the forcsayd byshop of s. andrewes, and doetours of scotland, at the worthy and famous descruynges of their atchieued enterprise, in that behalfe: as by the tenour of their sayd letter may appeare, which here foloweth. ¶ the copy of a letter congratulatorie, sent from the doctours of louane, to the archbyshop of s. andrewes and doctours of scotland, commendyng them for the death of m. patrike hamelton. your excellent vertue (most honourable bishop) hath so deserued, that albeit we be farre distant, both by sea and land, without coniunction of familiaritie, yet we desire with all our hartes, to thanke you for your worthy deede, by whose workes, that true faith which, not long ago, was tainted with heresie, not onely remaineth vnhurt, but also is more confirmed. for as our deare frend m. alexander galoway, chanon of aberdon, hath shewed vs, the presumption of the wicked hereticke patrike hamelton, which is expressed in this your example, in that you haue cut him of, when there was no hope of amendement, &c. the which thyng, as it is thought commendable to vs, so the manor of the procedyng was no lesse pleasant, that the matter was performed by so great consent of so many estates, as of the clergy, nobility, and vulgare people, not rashely, but most prudently, the order of law beyng in all poynts obserued. we haue sene the sentence which ye pronounced, and alway do approue the same, not doubtyng but that the articles which be inserted, are erroneous: so that whosoeuer wil defend for a truth, any one of the same, with pertinacitie, should be esteemed an enemy to the fayth, and an aduersary to the holy[ ] scripture. and albeit one or two of them appeare to be without errour, to them that will consider onely the bare wordes: as (for example) good workes make not a good man, but a good man worketh good workes, yet there is no doubt, but they conteine a lutheran sense, which, in a maner, they signifie: to witte, that workes done after fayth, and justification, make not a man the better, nor are worthy of any reward before god. beleue not, that this example shall haue place onely among you, for there shalbe among externe nations, which shall imitate the same, &c. certainly, ye haue geuen vs great courage, so that now we acknowledge your vniuersitie,[ ] which was founded accordyng to the example of our vniuersitie of louane, to be equall to ours, or els aboue: and would god occasion were offered of testifying our myndes toward you. in the meane tyme, let vs labour with one consent, that the rauenyng wolues may be expelled from the shepefold of christ, while we haue tyme. let vs study to preach to the people more learnedly hereafter, and more wisely. let vs have inquisitours, and espyers of bookes, containyng that doctrine, especially that is brought in from farre countreys, whether by apostatiue monkes, or by marchauntes, the most suspected kynde of men in these dayes. it is sayd, that since scotland first embraced the christian fayth, it was neuer defiled with any heresie. perseuer therfore, beyng moued thereunto by the example of england, your next neighbour, which in this most troublous tyme, is not chaunged, partly by the workyng of the byshops, among the which[ ] roffensis hath shewed hymselfe an euangelicall phoenix, and partly of the kyng, declaryng hymselfe to be an other mathias of the new law: pretermittyng nothyng that may defend the law of his realme. the which, if your most renowned kyng of scotland will follow, he shall purchase to himselfe eternal glory. further, as touchyng the condigne commendation, due for your part (most reuerend byshop) in this behalfe, it shal not be the least part of your prayse, that these heresies haue bene extinct sometymes in scotland, you beyng primate of scotland and principal authour therof: albeit that they also which haue assisted you, are not to be defrauded of their deserued prayse, as the reuerend byshop of glasgow, of whose erudition, we haue here geuen vs partly to understand, and also the reuerend byshop of aberden, a stoute defender of the fayth, together with the rest of the prelates, abbots, priours, and professours of holy scripture. let your reuerend fatherhode take this litle testificate of our duety toward you, in good part, whom we wish long and happely well to fare in christ. from louane, an. , aprill . by the maisters and professours of theologie in the vniuersitie of louane, yours to commaunde. ¶ in this epistle of the louaniane doctours, i shall not neede (gentle reader) to note vnto thee, what a pernitious thyng in a common wealth, is blynd ignoraunce, when it falleth into cruell hartes. which may well be compared to a sword put in the handes of one, that is both blynd and mad. for as the blynd man, hauyng no sense to see and iudge knoweth not whom he striketh: so the madde man, beyng cruell and furious, hath no compassion in sparyng any. wherupon it happeneth many tymes with these men, as it dyd with the blynd furious phariseis, that as they hauyng the sword of authoritie in their handes, in stede of malefactours and false prophetes, slue the true prophetes of god, and at last crucified the kyng of glory: so these catholicke louanians and folowers of their messias of rome, take in their handes the sworde of iurisdiction, who neither seyng what to spare, nor caryng whom they smite, vnder the stile and pretense of heretiques, murther and blaspheme without mercy, the true preachers of the gospell, and the holy annoynted of the lord. * * * * * "but to returne to the matter agayne of m. hamelton, here is moreouer to be observed, as a note worthy of memory, that in the yeare of the lord , in the which yeare this present history was collected in scotland, there were certaine faythfull men of credite then alyue, who beyng present the same tyme, when m. patrike hamelton was in the fire, heard him to cite and appeale the blacke frier called campbel, that accused him, to appeare before the hygh god, as generall iudge of all men, to aunswere to the innocency of his death, and whether his accusation was iust or not, betwene that and a certaine day of the next moneth, which he there named. moreouer by the same witnes it is testified, that the sayd frier dyed immediatly before the sayd day came, without remorse of conscience, that he had persecuted the innocent. by the example wherof diuers of the people the same tyme, much mused, and firmely beleued the doctrine of the foresayd m. hamelton, to be good and iust. "hereunto i thought good to adioyne a certaine godly and profitable treatise of the sayd m. patrike hamelton, written first by him in latine, and afterward translated by john frith into english, which he names patrikes places; not vnprofitable in my mynde, to be sene and read of all men, for the pure and comfortable doctrine conteined in the same, as not onely by the treatise it selfe may appeare, but also by the preface of the sayd john frith, prefixed before; which also i thought not inconuenient to insert with the same, as here foloweth." * * * * * the "brief treatise," translated by john fryth, which immediately follows the above extracts from foxe, has already been included in the present volume: see pages to . it appears from some payments in the treasurer's accounts, in , that patrick hamilton had left an illegitimate daughter named isobell. some readers perchance may think that such a fact should have remained unnoticed, as casting a blemish on his hitherto pure and immaculate character; but a regard to what may be called historical justice, will not allow such a circumstance to be concealed, while the habitual licentious conduct of the highest dignitaries of the church at that time are, in the course of the present work, so frequently alluded to. "item, the x day of aprile deliuerit to be ane gowne to issobell hammiltoun, _dochter to umquhill patrik abbot of fern_, four elnis frenche blak, price of the eln xxxiiij s.... summa, vj lib. xvj s. "item, deliuerit to be hir are kirtill, thre elnis frenehe brown, price of the eln xxx s.... summa, iiij lib. x s. "item, deliuerit to hir to walt the samin, and to be hir pertlettis, ane eln blak veluet, price thairof, ... lvj s." in the following month of may , another gown was furnished to isobell hamilton. no. iv. on the royal pilgrimages to the shrine of st. duthack, at tain, in ross-shire. in a note to page , i expressed some doubt as to the accuracy of the statement that king james the fifth was sent in pilgrimage to the shrine of st. duthack, immediately previous to the trial and condemnation of patrick hamilton. had the treasurer's accounts for , or the household book between july and august , been preserved, they might have enabled us to trace the king's movements. but the statement is highly improbable in itself. mr. tytler has shown that james only escaped from the thraldom of the douglasses at the end of may , or nearly three months after hamilton's sentence; and it was most unlikely from the vigilant restraint under which the king was kept that he would have been allowed to traverse a great part of the country upon such an errand. it may also be kept in view, that if an application had been made to james, before he assumed the reins of government, it is scarcely probable his interference would have had any effect in preventing the sentence of the ecclesiastical courts from being carried into execution. * * * * * want of space prevents me from inserting here, as i intended, a series of extracts from the treasurer's accounts during the reign of james the fourth, in connexion with his visits to that celebrated shrine. i shall therefore merely notice, that the public registers furnish some evidence to shew that he made an annual pilgrimage to st. duthack's chapel, in ross-shire. on more than one occasion the king rode unattended from stirling across the mountain pass of the grampians, leading from fettercairn to the north side of the dee, and from thence to elgin, inverness, and tain. these repeated visits to a distant shrine may have been performed as an act of penance, the chapel having been founded by his father, james the third. such a journey, with a few attendants, he appears to have made in august , or only one month previously to his setting out on his calamitous expedition, when he was slain at floddon. no. v. foxe's account of henry forrest, and other martyrs in scotland, during the reign of king james the fifth. the fate of henry forress or forrest seems to have excited much less attention than might have been expected. in the note to page , i suggested that the probable time of his martyrdom may be placed in ; and he may thus be regarded as the second victim in the cause of the reformed faith in scotland. the strict inquisition which took place, and caused a number of persons to forsake their native country, whilst others met with a similar fate as his own in the course of a few years, may have contributed to this comparative silence. even foxe, to whom we are chiefly indebted for preserving an account of his fate, seems to have been ignorant of it in ; as in the following short paragraph, from the first edition of his work, he refers to those who suffered in edinburgh in , as the next in succession to the abbot of ferne:-- "¶ five burnt in skotland. "seuen yeres after patrik hamelton, whose history is before passed, there were v. burnte in skotland, in the city of edenborow, being the metropolitike citye of al skotlande, of the which fiue two were dominicane friers, one priest, one gentleman, and the fifthe was a channon: whose iudges and inquisitors were these: jhon maior, archbishop of s. androwes, petrus chappellanus, and the franciscane friers, whose labor and diligence is never wanting in such matters." (page .) * * * * * at the same time i suggested that henry forrest was the son of thomas forrest of linlithgow, who was in the employment of king james the fourth. since that sheet was printed, i find the name of "heniricus forrus" in the list of students who were incorporated, that is, became bachelors of arts, at the university of glasgow, in the year . if this was the martyr, we may presume that at the time of his martyrdom he must have been upwards of thirty years of age. this however may have been another person of the same name, as we find "henricus forrest," as a determinant in st. leonard's college, st. andrews, in , which leaves no doubt of his having, two years later, witnessed the fate of patrick hamilton. the following is foxe's account from his enlarged edition of his "actes and monuments," in :-- "henry forest, martyr. persecutors. iames beton, archbishop of s. andrewes. frier walter laitig, bewrayer of the confession of this henry forest. martyrs henry forest. at. s. andrewes in scotland. the causes within few years after martydome of m. patrike hamelton, one henry forest, a yong man borne in lithquow, who a little before, hand receyued the orders of benet and colet (as they terme them) affirmed and sayd, that m. patrike hamelton died a martyr, and that his articles were true: for the which he was apprehended, and put in prison by james beton, archbishop of saint andrewes. who shortly after, caused a certaine frier named walter laing, to heare his confession. to whom when henry forest in secret confession had declared his conscience how he thought m. patrike to bee a good man and wrongfully to be put to death, and that his articles were true and not hereticall: the frier came and vttered to the bishop the confession that he had hearde, which before was not thoroughly known. whereupon it followed that his confession beyng brought as sufficient probation agaynst him, he was therfore conuented before the councell of the clergy and doctors, and there concluded to bee an hereticke, equall in iniquity with m. patricke hamelton, and there decreed to be geuen to the secular indges to suffer death. "when the day came of hys death, and that he should first be degraded, and was brought before the cleargy in a grene place, beyng betwene the castle of s. andrews, and another place called monymaill, as sone as he entred in at the dore, and saw the face of the clergy, perceiuing wherunto they tended, he cryed with a loude voyce, saying: fie, on falshoode: fye on false friers, reuealers of confession: after this day, let no man euer trust any false friers, contemners of god's word and deceiuers of men. and so they proceding to degrade him of hys small orders of benet and collet, he sayd with a loud voyce, take from me not onely your owne orders, but also your owne baptisme, meaning thereby, whatsoeuer is besides that which christ hymselfe instituted, whereof there is a great rablement in baptisme. then after hys degradation, they condemned hym as an heretike equal with m. patrike aforesaide: and so he suffred death for his faythfull testimony of the truth of christ, and of hys gospell, at the northchurch stile of the abbey church of s. andrew, to the entent that all the people of anguishe [angus] might see the fire, and so might be the more feared from falling into the like doctrine, whiche they terme by the name of heresie. _ex scripto testimonio scotorum_." * * * * * foxe next proceeds to narrate the persecution of james hamilton, brother of patrick, of katherine hamilton, their sister, and of a woman at leith. this must have occurred in , as hamilton was in england early in . see note ; and the rev. christopher anderson's annals of the english bible, vol. ii. p. . foxe joins with this an account of the martyrdom of david straton and norman gourlay, as follows:-- "james hamelton. katherine hamelton his sister. a wife of lyeth, persecuted. dauid straton, norman gurley, martyrs. persecutors. iames hay, bishop of rose and commissioner of iames beton, archbishop of s. andrewes. m. iohn spens, lawyer. martyrs. iames hamelton, brother to m. patrike. katherine hamelton, a wyfe of lieth. dauid straton. m. norman gurlay. the causes. within a yere after the martirdom of henry forest, or there about, was called james hamelton of kyntlitgow, hys sister katherine hamelton the spouse of the captain of dunbar, also an other honest woman of leith, dauid straton of the house of lawristonne, and m. norman gurlay. these were called the abbey church of halyrowdhouse in edenburgh by james hay, b. of rose, commissioner to james beton archbishop, in presence of k. james the v. of that name: who upon the day of theyr accusation was altogether clad in red apparel. james hamelton accused as one that mainteaned the opinions of m. patricke, hys brother. to whome the kyng gaue counsaile to departe, and not to appeare: for in case he appeared he could not help him, because the byshops had persuaded him, that the cause of heresie did in no wise appertayne vnto him, and so james fled and was condemned as an heretike, and all his goods and landes confiscat, and disposed vnto others. catherine hamilton hys sister, appeared vpon the schaffold, and beyng accused of an horrible heresie, to witte, that her owne workes could not saue her, she graunted the same, and after longe reasoning betwene her and m. john spens the lawyer, she concluded in this maner: work here, worke there: what kinde of workyng is al this? i know perfectly that no kynde of workes can saue mee, but onely the workes of christ my lord and sauiour. the kyng hearing these wordes, turned hym about and laught, and called her vnto hym and caused her to recant, because she was hys aunt, and she escaped. the woman of leith was detected hereof, that when the mydwife in tyme of her labour, bad her say our ladye helpe mee: she cryed, christe helpe me, christ helpe me, in whose helpe i trust. shee also was caused to recant, and so escaped, without confiscation of her goodes, because she was maryed. maister norman gurlay, for that he sayd, there was no such thyng as purgatory, and that the pope was not a byshop, but antichrist, and had no jurisdiction in scotland. also dauid straton, for that he sayd, there was no purgatorie, but the passion of christe, and the tribulations of this world, and because that, when m. robert lowson vicare of eglesgrig asked his tieth fishe of hym, he dyd cast them to him out of the boate, so that some of them fell into the sea: therefore he accused him, as one that shoulde haue sayd, that no tithes should be payed. these two, because after great solicitation made by the kyng, they refused to abiure and recant, were therefore condemned by thee byshop of rose as heretickes, and were burned vpon the grene side, betwene leith and edenburgh, to the entent that the inhabitaunts of fiffe, seyng the fyre, might be stricken with terrour and feare, not to fall into the lyke. _ex eodem scripto._ ¶ and thus much touchyng those martyrs of scotland, whiche suffered vnder james beton, archbishop of s. andrewes. after whom succeded dauid beton in the same archbyshopprike, vnder whom diuers other were also martyred, as hereafter (god willyng) in their order shall appeare." "¶ the historie touching the persecution in scotlande, with the names and causes of suche blessed martyrs, whiche in the same countrey suffered for the truth, after the tyme of patricke hamelton. "thus hauyng finished the tyme and rase of kyng henry the eight, it remayneth nowe according to my promise made before, here to place and adjoine so much as hath come to our handes, touchyng the persecution of scotland, and of the blessed martyrs of christ, whiche in that countrey likewise suffred for the true religion of christ, and testimony of their fayth. to proccede therefore in the history of these scotlandc matters, next after the mention of dauid straton and m. nicholas gurlay, with whom we ended before, pag. , the order of tyme woulde require nexte to inferre the memorye of sir john borthwike knight, commonly called captayne borthwyke. who beyng accused of heresie (as the papistes call it) and cited therfore, an. , and not appearyng, and escaping out into other countreys, was condemned for the same, being absent, by the sentence of dauid beaton archbishop of saint andrewes, and other prelates of scotland, and all his goodes confiscate, and his picture at last burned in the open market place, &c. but for so muche as the storye of hym, with his articles obiected against hym, and his confutation of the same, is already expressed sufficiently in the firste edition of actes and monuments, and because he being hapily deliuered out of their handes, had no more but onely his picture burned, referring the reader to the booke aboue mentioned, we wyll now (the lord willing) prosecute suche other as followed, begynnyng firste in order with thom. forret and his felowes. their story is this. persecutors. dauid beton, bishop and cardinal of saint andrewes. george creichton, bishop of dunkelden. martyrs. tho. forret, priest. fryer iohn kelowe. fryer benarage. duncan sympson, priest. rob. foster, a gentleman, with three or foure other men of striuelyng, martyrs. the causes. not long after the burnyng of dauid strutton, and m. gurlay aboue mentioned, in the dayes of dauid beaton bishop and cardinall of s. andrewes, and george creichton bishop of dunkelden, a canon of s. colmes inche, and vicar of dolone, called deane thomas forret, preached euery sonday to his parishners, the epistle or gospel, as it fell for the tyme: whiche then was a great noueltie in scotlande, to see anye man preach, except a blacke fryer, or a gray frier: and therefore the fryers enuyed hym, and accused hym to the bishop of dunkelden (in whose dioces he remayned) as an heretike and one that shewed the mysteries of the scriptures to the vulgare people in englishe, to make the clergie detestable in the sight of the people. the bishop of dunkelden moued by the fryers instigation, called the sayde deane thomas, and saide to hym: my joye deane thomas, i loue you well, and therefore i must geue you my counsayle, how you shal rule and guide your selfe. to whom thomas sayd, i thanke your lordship hartily. then the bishop begun his counsaile on this manner. my joy deane thomas, am enfourmed that you preache the epistle or gospell euery sonday to your parishners, and that you take not the kowe, nor the vpmoste cloth from your parishners, whiche thyng is very preiudiciall to the churche men: and therefore my joye deane thomas, i would you tooke your kowe and your vpmost cloth, as other church men do, or els it is too much to preach euery sonday, for in so doyng you may make the people think that we shoulde preache likewise. but it is enough for you, when you finde any good epistle, or any good gospel, that setteth foorth the libertie of the holy church, to preache that, and let the rest be. thomas answeared: my lorde, i thinke that none of my parishners wyl complaine that i take not the kow nor the vpermost cloth, but wyll gladly geue me the same together with any other thing that they haue, and i wyll geue and communicate with them any thyng that i haue, and so my lord we agree right wel, and there is no discord among vs. and where your lordship sayth, it is too muche to preache euery sonday: in deede i thinke it is too litle, and also woulde wishe that your lordshyp dyd the like. nay, nay, deane thomas (sayth my lord) let that bee, for we are not ordeyned to preache. then said thomas, when your lordship byddeth me preach, when i finde any good epistle, or a good gospell, truely my lorde, i haue readde the newe testament and the olde, and all the epistles and the gospels, and among them all i coulde neuer finde any euyl epistle, or any euyl gospel: but if your lordship wil shewe me the good epistle and the good gospell, and the euyll epistle and the euyll gospel, then i shall preache the good, and omyt the euyl. then spake my lord stoutly, and said, i thanke god that i neuer knewe what the olde and newe testament was, (and of these wordes rose a prouerbe which is common in scotland: ye are like the bishop of dunkelden, that knewe neither newe nor olde lawe:) therefore deane thomas, i wyll know nothyng but my portous and my pontifical. go your way, and let be al these fantasies: for if you perseuer in these erroneous opinions, ye wyl repent it when you may not mende it. thomas said, i trust my cause be iust in the presence of god, and therefore i passe not muche what doo folowo thereupon, and so my lorde and he departed at that tyme. and soone after a summons was directed from the cardinall of saint andrewes and the said bishop of dunkelden vpon the said deane thomas forret, vpon two blacke fryers called fryer john kelow, and an other called benarage, and vpon one priest of striueling called duncane sympson, and one gentleman called robert foster in striuelyng, with other three or foure, with them of the towne of striuelyng: who at the day of their appearaunce after their summonyng, were condemned to the death without any place of recantation, because (as was alleged) they were heresiarkes or chiefe heretikes and teachers of heresies, and especially because many of them were at the bridal and marriage of a priest, who was vicar of twybodye beside striuelyng, and dyd eate fleshe in lent at the said brydal, and so they were altogether burnt vpon the castle hyll of edenbrough, where they that were first bounde to the stake, godly and marueylously dyd comfort them that came behynde. here foloweth the maner of persecution vsed by the cardinall of scotland, against certaine persons in perth. persecutors. dauid beton, bishop and cardinall of st. andrewes. martyrs. robert lambe. william anderson. iames hunter. iames raueleson. iames founleson. hellen stirke, his wyfe. the causes. first there was a certayne acte of parlamente made in the gouernment of the lorde hamleton earle of arran, and gouernour of scotlande, geuyng priuilege to all men of the realme of scotlande, to reade the scriptures in their mother tongue, and language, secluding neuerthelesse all reasonyng, conference, conuocation of people to heare the scriptures readde or expounded. which liberty of priuate reading being graunted by publike proclamation, lacked not his own fruit, so that in sundry partes of scotlande thereby were opened the eyes of the elect of god to see the truth, and abhorre the papistical abominations. amongst the which were certane persons in saint johnston, as after is declared. at this tyme there was a sermon made by fryer spense, in saint johnston, _alias_ called perth, affirmyng prayer made to saintes to be so necessarye, that without it there coulde be no hope of saluation to man. whiche blasphemous doctrine a burges of the saide towne called robert lambe, could not abide, but accused hym in open audience, of erroneous doctrine, and adiured hym in gods name to vtter the truth. the which the fryer beyng striken with feare, promised to do, but the trouble, tumult, and sturre of the people encreased so, that the fryer could haue no audience, and yet the saide robert with great daunger of his life escaped the handes of the multitude, namely of the women, who contrary to nature, addressed them to extreme cruelty agaynst hym. at this tyme in the yeare of our lord, , the enemies of the truth procured john chartuous, who fauoured the truth, and was prouost of the saide citie and towne of perth, to be deposed from his office by the sayd gouernours authoritie, and a papist called master alexander marbecke to be chosen in his roum, that they might bring the more easily their wicked enterprise to an ende. after the deposing of the former prouost, and election of the other, in the moneth of january the yeare aforesaid, on saint paules day, came to saint johnston, the gouernour, the cardinall, the earle of argile justice, sir john campbel of lunde knight, and justice depute, the lord borthwyke, the bishop of dunblane, and orkney, with certeyne others of the nobilitie. and although there were many accused for the crime of heresie (as they terme it) yet these persons were only apprehended vpon the said saint paules day, rob. lambe, wil. anderson, james hunter, james raueleson, james founleson, and hellen stirke his wife, and cast that night in the spay tower of the said citie, the morowe to abide judgement. upon the morow, when they appeared and wer brought forth to judgement in the towne, was laid in general to all their charge, the violatyng of the act of parlament before expressed, and their conference and assemblies in hearing and expoundyng of scripture against the tenour of the saide acte. robert lambe was accused in speciall for interruptyng of the fryer in the pulpit: which he not only confessed, but also affirmed constantly, that it was the dutie of no man, which vnderstood and knew the truth, to heare the same impugned without contradiction, and therfore sundry which there wer present in judgement, who hyd the knowledge of the truth, should beare their burden in gods presence for consenting to the same. the said robert also with william anderson, and james raueleson, were accused for hanging vp the image of saint fraunces in a corde, nailyng of rammes hornes to his head, and a cowes rumpe to his taile, and for eating of a goose on alhalow euen. james hunter being a simple man, and without learnyng, and a fletcher by occupation, so that he coulde be charged with no greate knowledge in doctrine, yet because he often vsed the suspect companye of the rest, he was accused. the woman hellen stirke was accused, for that in her chyldbed shee was not accustomed to cal vpon the name of the virgine mary, beyng exhorted thereto by her neighbours, but onely vpon god, for jesus christes sake, and because shee saide in like maner, that if shee her selfe had ben in the tyme of the virgin mary, god might haue loked to her humilitie and base estate, as he dyd to the virgins, in making her the mother of christe, thereby meaning, that ther was no merites in the virgin, which procured her that honor, to be made the mother of christ, and to be preferred before other women, but gods only free mercy exalted her to that estate. which wordes were counted most execrable in the face of the clergie and whole multitude. james raueleson aforesaid building a house, set vpon the round of his fourth stayre, the three crowned diademe of peter carued of tree, which the cardinal tooke as done in mockage of his cardinals hat, and this procured no fauor to the said james at their handes. these forenamed persons vpon the morow after saint paules' day were condemned and iudged to death, and that by an assise, for violatyng (as was alleged) the act of parlament, in reasoning and conferring vpon scriptures, for eatyng flesh vpon dayes forbidden, for interruptyng the holy fryer in the pulpit, for dishonoring of images, and blasphemyng of the virgin mary, as they alleged. after sentence geuen, their hands were bound, and the men cruelly entreated. which thyng the woman beholding desired likwise to be bound by the sergeantes with her husband for christes sake. there was great intercession made by the towne in the meane season for the lyfe of these persons aforenamed, to the gouernour, who of him self was wyllyng so to haue done, that they might haue bene deliuered. but the gouernour was so subiect to the appetite of the cruel priestes, that he could not do that which he would. yea, they manaced to assist his enemyes, and to depose hym, except he assisted their cruelty. there were certaine priestes in the citie, who dyd eate and drinke before in these honest mens houses, to whom the priestes were much bounden. these priestes were earnestly desired to entreate for their hostesse, at the cardinalles handes: but they altogether refused, desiryng rather their death then preseruation. so cruell are these beastes from the lowest to the highest. then after, they were caryed by a great band of armed men (for they feared rebellion in the towne, except they had their men of warre) to the place of execution, whiche was common to al theeues, and that to make their cause appeare more odious to the people. robert lambe at the gallowes foote made his exhortation to the people, desiryng them to feare god, and leaue the leauen of papistical abominations, and manifestly there prophesied of the ruine and plague whiche came vppon the cardinall thereafter. so euery one comfortyng an other, and assuring them selues to sup together in the kingdome of heauen, that nyght commended them selues to god, and dyed constantly in the lord. the woman desired earnestly to dye with her husband, but shee was not suffered: yet folowyng hym to the place of execution, shee gaue hym comfort, exhortyng hym to perseuerance and pacience for christes sake, and partyng from hym with a kysse, sayd on this maner: husband, reioyce, for we haue lyued together many ioyful dayes: but this day, in which we must dye, ought to be most ioyful to vs both, because we must haue ioy for euer. therfore i wyll not byd you good night, for we shall sodaynely meete with ioy in the kyngdome of heauen. the woman after was taken to a place to be drowned, and albeit shee had a chyld sucking on her breast, yet this moued nothyng the vnmerciful hartes of the enemies. so after she had commended her children to the neighbors of the towne for gods sake, and the suckyng barne was geuen to the nurse, shee sealed vp the truth by her death. _ex registris et instrumentis a scotia missis._" no. vi. notices of the protestant exiles from scotland during the reign of king james the fifth. dr. m'crie, in his life of knox, appendix, vol. i., and the rev. christopher anderson, in his annals of the english bible, vol. ii., have collected nearly all the information that can be gleaned respecting the chief persons who became exiles on account of their religious sentiments at this early period. i shall, therefore, content myself with giving little more than a simple enumeration of their names. * * * * * alexander alesse, (in latin, alesius,) as mentioned in a note to page , was a native of edinburgh, born in the year , and educated at st. andrews. the rev. christopher anderson in his annals of the english bible, has introduced a variety of interesting notices of alexander alesse, with extracts from some of his earlier publications. according to a statement in one of his works, he fled from scotland in the year , and his conversion was owing to his interviews with patrick hamilton when under confinement. a collection of his writings, if carefully translated, and accompanied with a detailed memoir of his life, would form a very suitable and valuable addition to the series of the wodrow publications. he became professor of divinity in the university of leipzig, where he died on the th of march . john elder, according to his own information, was a native of caithness, and had spent twelve years as a student at the universities of aberdeen, st. andrews, and glasgow. he fled to england probably in or ; and about two years later, he addressed a letter to henry the eighth, with a plan or description of scotland, containing a project for the union of the two kingdoms. the letter written in or , contains a bitter invective against beaton and "the proud papisticall bishops" in scotland. it was printed in the bannatyne miscellany, vol. i., from the original ms. preserved in the british museum. elder was patronized by the earl of lennox, and became tutor to henry lord darnley. in , he published a "letter sent into scotland, &c.," on occasion of the marriage of philip and mary. this very curious tract, which is now of great rarity, he dedicated to robert stuard, bishop of caithness. in , he was in france, as we learn from a letter respecting him, inserted in stevenson's illustrations of scotish history, (printed for the maitland club,) p. ; and which mentions that he had shewn to queen mary the hand-writing of darnley, when eight years of age. it ends with remarking of elder, what was probably true enough: "he hath wit to play the aspye (spy) where he listeth." john fyfe: see page , where it is noticed that he prosecuted his studies under gawin logye, at st. andrews. he may no doubt be identified with the person styled joannes fidelis, a native of scotland, who obtained considerable academical distinction abroad. bishop burnet, and other writers, state that fyfe accompanied alesse to leipzig, where he was professor; but, in reference to this statement, a passage in the acta eruditorum, p. , lipsiæ , asserts, that the registers of that university having been carefully examined, no mention of his name could be discovered. if we substitute francfort instead of leipzig, the notice would be substantially correct, as alesius had for a short time been professor there before his removal to leipzig; and while there he published amongst other tracts an academical oration, "de restituendis scholis oratio, habita in celebri academiæ francofordiana ad oderam, an. , mense iunio." the name of john fidelis scotus, as professor of philosophy and divinity, was inscribed in the registers of the university of francfort, in . he was created doctor, and chosen rector in ; and he died on the th of march , in the d year of his age. (notitia universitatis francofurtanæ, pp. , , folio.) this notice does not confirm the report mentioned by calderwood, that fyfe had returned to scotland, and died at st. leonard's, soon after the reformation, in . john gaw has already been mentioned at page , as author of a rare work entitled "the richt way to hevin," which bears to have been printed at malmoe, (in sweden,) in the year . many years ago, in passing through that town, the seat of a university, i had the curiosity to inquire in their library if any copy of that volume was preserved--but it was altogether unknown. the author appears to have attended the university of st. andrews; as we find the name of johannes gall, (_scotice_ gaw,) among the determinants, in the year ; but of his subsequent history no information has been obtained. james harryson, a native of the south of scotland. the work mentioned under a latin title by dr. m'crie, (life of knox, vol. i. p. ,) as described by bale, was written in english, and printed at the time under this title--"an exhortation to the scottes to conform themselves to the honorable, expedient, and godly union betweene the two realmes of englande and scotlande. lond. in aedibus ric. grafton, ," small vo. the preface, dedicated to edward duke of somerset, is signed "james harryson scottyshman." henry henryson: see page , note . william johnstone, advocate: see page , note . dr. patrick anderson, in his ms. history mentions neill johnstone, a brother of william johnstone, among the persons who were accused of heresy, . whether the advocate continued in his adherence to the catholic faith may be held doubtful; as after his death, we find, in the proceedings of the general assembly, th december , that mr. andrew johnstone, brother-german _to umquhill mr. william johnstone_, required process for reduction of the sentence pronounced by umquhill james [beaton] archbishop of st. andrews, against him and his brother for alleged heresies. this request was referred to the superintendent of lothian and the session of edinburgh to follow the same process as had been led in previous cases. on the th december , this matter was again brought before the assembly, when it was declared that the articles referred to were not heretical, and the judges formerly appointed were ordained to proceed to a final decision of the said action. (booke of the kirk, vol i. pp. , .) gawin logye, principal of st. leonard's college, st. andrews, from to , has been noticed at page ; of his subsequent history no particulars have been discovered. dr. john macalpyne, who is best known by his latin name machabaeus, was born before the close of the th century. it is unnecessary to repeat the notices given by dr. m'crie, (life of knox, vol. i. p. .) he took his master's degree at one of the universities, but i have not observed his name either in the registers of st. andrews, or glasgow. john macalpyne was prior of the dominican convent at perth, from to . (rev. james scott's ms. extracts, and mr. parker lawson's book of perth, p. .) his flight therefore to england may be placed in rather than in . spottiswood, (hist. p. ,) and burnet, (hist, of reform, vol. i. p. ,) say he was liberally entertained by nicholas shaxton, bishop of salisbury; and myles coverdale, some time bishop of exeter, was his brother-in-law. after visiting wittenberg, he received an invitation to settle in denmark, in the year , and became professor in the university of copenhagen, and one of the chaplains of christian the second, king of denmark. he assisted in translating the bible into that language, which was published in the year . some of his writings are indicated in nyerup's dansk-norsk litteratur lexicon, vol. ii. p. . the earl of rothes having been sent as ambassador to denmark, in the spring of ; in the treasurer's accounts, among other payments connected with this embassy, we find s. was paid on the th of march that year, to "ane boy sent to sanctandrois to my lord of rothes thair, with writingis of my lord gouernouris, _to be given at his arriving in denmark to maister johne makcalpyne_ and alexander lyell there." dr. machabaeus, or macalpyne, died at copenhagen, th december . john mackbrair is mentioned by spottiswood as "a gentleman of galloway, who forsaking the country for religion, became a preacher in the english church; in the time of queen marie's persecution he fled to francford, and served the english congregation as minister. afterwards called by some occasion to the charge of a church in the lower germany, he continued there the rest of his days."--(history, p. .) it is very certain, however, that mackbriar was in priest's orders before retiring to the continent. he was incorporated in st. salvator's college, st. andrews, in , and became a determinant in . on the th july , john lokart of bar, and two others were denounced rebels, &c., for assistance rendered, in may last, to mr., _alias_ sir john m'brair, formerly canon of glenluce, in breaking ward of the lord governor's castle of hammiltoune, where he was imprisoned, being charged for sundry great and odious crimes, heresies, &c., and conducting him to the house of bar.--(pitcairn's criminal trials, vol. i. p. *.) this addition to his name signifies an uncertainty whether he had taken his degree as master or only that of bachelor of arts. archbishop hamilton, in a letter, without date, but probably in , refers to his having expelled from the house of ochiltree the apostate macbraire, and inflicted heavy fines on his followers. the name of john makebray is included in the list of the principal persons who escaped from england to the continent, in , after the accession of queen mary. in , he appears from the "discourse of the troubles begun at frankfort," to have taken an active share in the proceedings of the english congregation there. he afterwards became pastor of a congregation in lower germany, and according to bale, he wrote an account of the formation and progress of that church. on the accession of queen elizabeth, mackbrair returned to england and officiated as a preacher; and on the th of november , he was inducted to the vicarage of st. nicholas, in newcastle. he survived for many years, and was buried on the th of november .--(see m'crie's life of knox, vol. i. p. , and the authorities there quoted.) james mackdowell: see page , note . robert richardson studied in st. leonard's college, st. andrews, where he became, in , a canon regular and sacrist of the holy cross; and in , a canon of the abbey of cambuskenneth. in that year he published at paris a latin work, an exegesis on the rule of st. augustine. there is no reason to doubt that he was the same person as the sir robert richardson, a priest, mentioned in by sadler, (letters, vol. i. p. .) sadler, in a letter to henry viii, dated november , again commends richardson who had been forced to flee from scotland for fear of persecution, having "done very honestly and diligently in his calling," "in the setting furth and true preaching of the word of god."--(state papers, vol. i. p. .) but this priest must be distinguished from his namesake, the prior of st. mary's isle, who has been noticed at page ; and who took his degree as master of arts at st. andrews, in . james wedderburn, the eldest son of james wedderburn, a merchant in dundee, was one of a family distinguished by their poetical genius. he was educated at st. andrews, being incorporated in that university in . in calderwood's history, vol. i. p. , will be found an interesting account of his life, and notices of his writings, of which unfortunately there are none preserved. john wedderburn, a younger brother, was also educated at st. andrews, being a determinant, in , and a licentiate in . he was appointed vicar of dundee. at a later period, having been licensed of heresy, the escheat of the goods belonging to mr. john wedderburn, "convict. de certis criminibus heresieos," was granted to his brother henry wedderburn, for a composition of s. in or , (m'crie's life of knox, vol. i. p. .) in march - , a pursuivant was directed to pass to dundee and search james rollokkis gudes, and maister john wedderburn, (ib. p. .) john wedderburn is said to have gone to germany, where he became acquainted with luther and melanethon. while residing abroad he translated some of their works or "dytements" into scotish verse; and the metrical version of various psalms, included in the volume of "gude and godly ballates:" see page . it is also stated, that after the death of james the fifth, he returned to scotland, but was again compelled to expatriate himself; and that he died in england, in .--(calderwood's hist. vol. i. p. .) no. vii. alexander seyton. in mentioning alexander seyton, calderwood says, "he was of a quicke ingyne, and tall stature;" and adds, "i find in mr. john davidson's scrolles, that he was brother to ninian seton laird of tough."--(hist. vol. i. p. .) in this case he must have been the youngest son of sir alexander seyton of touch and tillybody in stirlingshire; and the pedigree of that family may in part be thus exhibited:-- i. sir alexander seyton of touch and tillybody in stirlingshire. married lady elizabeth erskine, daughter of thomas second earl of mar. ii. sir alexander, his son and successor, had a charter of the barony of tulchfrasere on the forfeiture of murdoch earl of fyfe, in . he was killed at floddon in . he married elizabeth, daughter of alexander lord home. iii. sir ninian seyton, his son and successor, on the th of august , obtained a divorce from his wife matilda grahame. (liber ofliciulis s. andreæ, p. .) he was alive in : david seyton was probably another son, as well as alexander. they prosecuted their studies at the same time at st. andrews. iv. walter seyton, son and heir of sir ninian seyton of tullibody, had a charter of the barony of touchfraser and tullibody, th january - ; and another, th may . among wodrow's biographical collections at glasgow, are "collections upon the life of alexander seaton, dominican frier, confessor to king james the fifth, and afterwards chaplain to the duke of suffolk in england;" which are printed in the appendix to "the history of the house of seytoun," pp. - , glasgow , to. but wodrow's account consists of little else than mere extracts from knox, foxe, and calderwood. alexander seyton, as already stated, was educated at st. andrews. a person of the same name became a licentiate in ; but the confessor may more probably be identified with alexander seyton, who, with david seyton, appear among the determinants in , and the intrants in , as _potentes_, who paid the highest fees. at page i have suggested that the year of seyton's flight to england, when he addressed his letter to king james the fifth, may have been or . according to knox, seyton remained in england, and taught the gospel in all sincerity; which drew upon him the power of gardyner bishop of winchester, and led to his making a recantation or final declaration at paul's cross, in opposition to his former true doctrine. this was published at the time in a small tract, of which a copy is preserved in the archiepiscopal library at lambeth. it is entitled, "the declaracion made at paules crosse in the cytye of london, the fourth sonday of advent, by alexander seyton, and mayster willyam tolwyn, persone of s. anthonyes in the sayd cytye of london, the year of our lord god m.d.xli., newly corrected and amended." (the colophon,) "imprinted at london in saynt sepulchre's parysshe, in the olde bayly, by rychard lant. ad imprimendum solum." mo. eight leaves. an account is given by foxe of seyton's examination, or "certaine places or articles gathered out of seyton's sermons by his adversaries;" which, he says, he "exhibits to the reader, to the intent that men may see, not only what true doctrine seyton then preached consonant to the scriptures, but also what wrangling cauillers can do, in depraining that is right, or in wrastyng that is well ment, &c."-- , edit. . bale informs us that seyton died in the year , in the house of charles brandon, duke of suffolk, to whose household he officiated as chaplain.--(script. bryt. cent. xiv. p. .) no. viii. sir john borthwick. sir john borthwick was a younger son of william third lord borthwick, who was slain at floddon in . sir ralph sadler mentions "captain borthwick, lieutenant of the french king's guard," as one of the persons who were appointed by james the fifth, to accompany the english ambassador when presented at court in february - .--(state papers, vol. i. p. .) on the th of may - , or immediately after the baptism of prince james, and after james the fifth had purposed setting out on his voyage round the western isles, borthwick had been cited to appear before cardinal beaton and other prelates at st. andrews, on a charge of heresy. in the cardinal's absence, who accompained the king in this expedition, gawin archbishop of glasgow, and lord chancellor of scotland, presided; but borthwick having escaped to england, he was condemned, and excommunicated, and his effigy burnt at the market-cross of st. andrews. soon after this borthwick wrote a defence of himself, in the form of answers to the several articles of his accusation. it has been preserved by foxe, in his latin commentaries printed at basil, in , folio, pp. - , with the title of "actio, processus, seu articuli contra d. joan. borthuicum, equitem auratum in scotia, &c.," [ ,] to which is prefixed an address "d. borthuichus ad lectorem." in the first edition of foxe's english "actes and monuments," , pp. - , and in vo. edit. , vol. v. pp. - , it occurs under this title, "the act or processe, or certain articles agaynst syr jhon borthuike knight, in scotland; with the answer and confution of the said borthuicke; whose preface to the reader here followeth, &c." but foxe, when republishing his work, says, "for as muche as the storye of hym, with his articles objected against hym, and his confutation of the same is already expressed sufficiently in the firste edition of actes and monuments, and because he being happily deliuered out of their handes had no more but onely his picture burned, referring the reader to the booke above mentioned, we wyll now, (the lord willing,) prosecute such other as followed, &c."--( d edition, , p. .) after the reformation, borthwick brought an action of declarator before john wynram, superintendent of fife, (who, as sub-prior of st. andrews, had sat, in , as one of his judges,) th of august , and on the th of september following, the articles and sentence were reversed. the process of declarator, embodying the original sentence and articles extracted from the register of cardinal beaton, is printed in the bannatyne miscellany, vol. i. pp. - . see also calderwood's hist. vol. i. pp. - ; keith's hist. vol. i. p. ; lyon's st. andrews, vol. i. pp. - .--"this worthie knight, (says calderwood,) ended his aige with fulnesse of daies at st. andrewes." this took place before , when william borthwick is mentioned as son and heir of the late sir john borthwick of cinery. no. ix. george wishart the martyr. calderwood states, that "mr. george wishart was a gentleman of the house of pittarrow."--(hist. vol. i. p. .) and in the wodrow miscellany, in an introductory notice, i have said, "he was born in the early part of the th century, and is believed to have been a younger son of james wishart of pittaro, who was admitted justice clerk, in december , and continued till between and ."--(vol. i. p. .) further inquiries have failed in ascertaining this point; and it must have been through some collateral branch if any such relationship existed. a note of various early charters relating to the wisharts of pittaro, was most obligingly communicated by patrick chalmers of auldbar, esq.; and several others are contained in the register of the great seal; but the want of space, and their not serving to throw any light upon the martyr's parentage, causes me to omit such notices. there is a fine old portrait, not unworthy of holbein, said to be of george wishart, in the possession of archibald wishart, esq., w.s., edinburgh, which bears the date, m.d.xliii. Ætat. . if this portrait can be identified, the date would fix his birth to the year . but his early history and education are quite unknown. the facts discovered relating to his history may briefly be stated. * * * * * . wishart had been employed as master of a school in montrose; but being summoned by john hepburn, bishop of brechin, on a charge of heresy, for teaching his scholars the greek new testament, he fled to england. see petrie's history of the catholick church, part , p. . hague , folio. . he was at bristol, preaching against the worship and mediation of the virgin mary; but he was led to make a public recantation, and burnt his faggot in the church of st. nicholas in that city, in token of his abjuration. it was probably immediately after this humiliating act that he went abroad. . he appears to have remained in germany and switzerland till after the death of james the fifth. he mentions in his examination, (see supra, page ,) a conversation he had with a jew, while sailing on the rhine. about the same time he translated "the confession of faith of the churches of switzerland," which was printed a year or two after his death, and which has been reprinted in the wodrow miscellany, vol. i. pp. - . . this year he was residing us a member of corpus christi college, cambridge, according to the interesting account of his habits and acquirements by his pupil emery tylney, which is preserved in foxe's martyrology. , or in the following year, he returned to scotland; and he continued to preach in different parts of the country; at montrose, dundee, and in ayrshire, and subsequently at leith, and in east-lothian. . on the th of january he was apprehended at ormiston, carried prisoner first to edinburgh, and then to st. andrews. his trial was on the th of february, and his execution on the st of march: (see supra, page .) three months later cardinal beaton was assassinated. * * * * * in a work like the present, it is desirable to avoid all controversial remarks; but i hope to be excused in offering a few words in regard to what has been considered a serious charge against george wishart. the precise date of wishart's return to scotland is very doubtful. knox, (supra, page ,) places it in , but joins this with an explanation which might carry it back to july , and with the defeat of the governor, which belongs to a later period. mr. tytler, (hist. vol. v. p. ,) says, "from the time of his arrival in the summer of , _for more than two years_ wishart appears to have remained in scotland, protected by the barons who were then in the interest of henry, and who favoured the doctrines of the reformation." yet nevertheless, according to mr. tytler, and later authorities, he was employed as a messenger in may , conveying letters from crichton of brunstone to the earl of hertford at newcastle, and from thence, with other letters, to henry the eighth, in relation to a projected scheme devised by the laird of brunstone for the assassination of cardinal beaton; and after having had an interview with the king at greenwich, returning first to newcastle, and then to scotland. this employment--which has been held up as a notable discovery--proceeds upon the fact of "a scotishman, _called wyshart_," being mentioned as the bearer of the letters referred to; and the laird of brunstone having been wishart's "great friend and protector," in , hence it is concluded that the person employed was george wishart the martyr. among the wisharts of that time the name of _george_ was not peculiar to him. _george wischart_ was one of the bailies of dundee, d may , and for several years previously; and in the protocol book of thomas ireland, notary public in dundee, belonging to that borough, i observed the copy of a deed, in which "_georgius wischart_, frater-germanus joannis wischart de pettarrow," was one of the procurators in a matter concerning "_georgius wischart_, armiger crucis regis galliæ," th june . now, in reply to the above argument, i beg to remark, that there is no certain evidence of george wishart having returned to scotland earlier than or ; that if the name of _george wishart_ had been specified in the letters, there were other persons of that name who might equally have been employed in such services; and that if it had been ascertained beyond all doubt that he possessed a full knowledge of the plots against beaton devised by crichton of brunstone, even then, according to the terms of the earl of hertford's letter, and confirmed by the letter in reply from the english council, the attempt was to be confined to the _arrestment of the cardinal_, while passing through fife--the proposal of _sleeing him_, having been suggested only as an alternative, in case of necessity. but to say nothing of the uncongenial nature of the employment, to a man such as described by his devoted pupil emery tylney, who had been under his tuition at cambridge, for twelve months, in , it may further be urged,-- . that wishart had no occasion to entertain a personal animosity to the cardinal; and that being denounced, or put to the horn, and liable to summary arrestment and execution, he could not have undertaken the task at such a time, of carrying letters and messages between the conspirators. . that the plots against beaton being well known, even to the cardinal himself, if wishart had in any way been concerned in them, it would unquestionably have formed a leading accusation against him in his trial,--but no allusion to such a charge was ever whispered. and lastly,--that the actual enterprise, by which the castle of st. andrews was taken, and the cardinal murdered, on the th of may, was in a great measure a scheme hastily arranged and executed, mainly in revenge of the martyr's own fate, and altogether unconnected and uninfluenced by any former plots devised by crichton of brunstone, but which have been employed to implicate the irreproachable character of george wishart. no. x. john rough. a brief notice of this very zealous preacher is given at page . i regret that only a portion can be added in this place of the interesting account of his examination and death in december , as preserved in foxe's "actes and monuments." calderwood's account of rough's martyrdom, (hist. vol. i. p. ,) is abridged from the same authority. "the death and martyrdome of john rowgh, minister, and margaret mearyng, burned at london the xxii. of december. in this furious time of persecution, were also burned these twoo constaunt and faithfull martyrs of christe, john rough a minister, and margarette mearyng. this rough was borne in scotland, who (as him selfe confesseth in his aunsweres to boners articles) because some of his kinsfolke woulde haue kept him from his right of inheritaunce which he had to certaine landes, did at the age of xvij. yeares, in despite (and the rather to displease his frendes) professe hym selfe into the order of the blacke friers at sterlyng in scotland: where he remained the space of xvi. yeares, vntill suche tyme as the lorde hamulton, earle of arren, and gouernour of the realme of scotlande aforesaid (castyng a fauour vnto hym) did sue vnto the archbishop of s. andrewes, to haue him out of his professed order, that as a secular priest he might serue hym for his chaplaine. at whiche request the archbishop caused the prouinciall of that house, hauyng thereto authoritie, to dispence with hym for his habite and order. this sute beeyng thus by the earle obtained, the said rough remained in his seruice one whole yeare: during which time it pleased god to open his eyes, and to geue hym some knowledge of his truthe, and thereupon was by the said gouernour sent to preache in the freedome of ayre, where he continued four yeares, and then after the death of the cardinall of scotland, hee was appointed to abide at s. andrewes, & there had assigned vnto hym a yearely pension of xx. pound from kyng henry the eight, kyng of england. howbeit, at last waiyng with him selfe his owne daunger, and also abhorryng the idolatrie and superstition of his countrey, and hearyng of the freedome of the gospell within this realme of england, hee determined with hym selfe not to tary any longer there: and therefore soone after the battaile of musclebourough, he came first vnto carliell, and from thence vnto the duke of somerset, then lord protectour of england, and by his assignement had appointed vnto him out of the kinges treasury xx. poundes of yearely stipend, and was sent (as a preacher) to serue at carliell, barwicke, and newcastell. from whence (after he had there, according to the lawes of god, and also of this realme, taken a countrey woman of his to wife) he was called by the archbishop of yorke that then was, vnto a benefice nigh in the towne of hull: where hee continued vntill the death of that blessed and good king, edward vi. but in the beginnyng of the reigne of queene mary (perceauyng the alteration of religion, and the persecution that would thereupon arise, and feelyng hys owne weakenes) he fled with his wife into friseland, and dwelt there at a place culled morden, labouryng truely for his liuyng, in knittyng of cappes, hose, and suche like thinges, till about the ende of the moneth of october last before his death. at whiche tyme, lackyng yearne and other such necessary prouision for the mainteinaunce of his occupation, he came ouer againe into england, here to prouide for the same, and the x. day of nouember arriued at london. where hearyng of the secrete societie, and holy congregation of gods children there assembled, he ioyned himselfe vnto them, and afterwardes beyng elected their minister and preacher, did continue moste vertuously exercised in that godly fellowship, teaching and confirmyng them in the truth and gospell of christe. but in the ende such was the prouidence of god, who disposeth all thinges to the best, the xij. daye of december, he with cutbert simson and others, through the crafty and traiterous suggestion of a false hipocrite and dissembling brother called roger sargeaunt, a taylor, were apprehended by the vicechamberlaine of the queenes house, at the saracens heade in islington: where the congregation had then purposed to assemble themselues to their godly and accustomable exercises of prayer, and hearyng the word of god: which pretence, for the safegard of all the rest, they yet at their examinations, couered and excused by hearing of a play that was then appointed to be at that place. the vice chamberlaine after he had apprehended them, caried rough and simson vnto the counsell, who charged them to haue assembled together to celebrate the communion or supper of the lord, and therefore after sundry examinations and aunsweres, they sent the saide rough vnto newgate: but his examinations they sent vnto the bishop of london, with a letter signed with their handes, the copy whereof followeth. ¶ a letter sent from the queenes councell vnto boner bishop of london, touching the examination of iohn rough minister. after our hartye commendations to your good lordship, we sende you here inclosed the examination of a scotish man, named iohn rough, who by the queenes maiesties commaundement is presently sent to newgate, beeyng of the chief of them that vpon sondaie laste, vnder the colour of commyng to see a play at the saracen's head in islington, had prepared a communion to be celebrated and received there among certaine other seditious and hereticall persons. and forasmuche as by the sayd roughes examination, contayning the storie and progresse of his former life, it well appeareth of what sort he is: the queenes highnes hath willed vs to remit him vnto your lordship, to the end that beyng called before you out of prison, as oft as your lordship shall thinke good, ye maie proceede, both to his further examination, and otherwise orderyng of him, accordyng to the lawes, as the case shall require. and thus we bid your lordship hartely wel to fare. from s. james the xv. of december, . your lordships louyng frendes. nicholas ebor. f. shrewsbery. edward hastinges. antony mountague. iohn bourne. henry iernegam. boner now minding to make quicke dispatch, did within three dayes after the receite of the letter (the xviij. day of december) send for thys rough out of newgate, and in his palace at london ministered vnto him xij. articles: many whereof because they containe onely questions of the profession and religion of that age, wherein both he and his parentes were christened (which in sundry places are already mentioned) i do here for breuitie omit: minding to touch such onely, as pertayne to matters of faith now in controuersie, and then chiefely obiected agaynst the martyrs and saintes of god, which in effect are these." * * * * * for these articles against john rough, and his answers, and also a letter written by him in prison, with a further notice of his appearance before bishop bonner, the reader must be referred to foxe's own work. his fellow-sufferer margaret mearyng, was one of his flock: after being condemned and degraded, both of them were "led vnto smithfield the xxij. daye of december , and there most joyfully gave up their lives for the profession of christes gospell." no. xi. norman lesley. norman lesley, the eldest son of george earl of rothes, (see page ,) is first named in the parliamentary proceedings against the murderers of cardinal beaton; and a dagger, the sheath of silver richly chased, and the handle of ivory, preserved at leslie house, according to tradition, was made use of by him on that occasion. although he may be considered as the leader in that enterprise, there is no evidence to shew that he was actually one of the perpetrators. the cause of his hostility is said to have thus originated. the lands of easter wemyss in fife, became annexed to the crown by the forfeiture of sir james colville, (then deceased,) th march ; and were given by james the fifth to the rothes family. after the king's death, the forfeiture was reduced in parliament on the th december , under the direction of cardinal beaton; which so offended the master of rothes, that it is said to have been the proximate cause of the cardinal's murder.--(senators of the college of justice, p. .) after lesley's forfeiture and imprisonment in france, he visited various countries, and also returned to scotland. on the th of may , the lairds of phillorth, fyvie, meldrum, and others, were summoned "to underly the law for the resset of normond leslie."--(treasurer's accounts.) his subsequent history is thus related by spottiswood:-- "after his release from captivity he returned into scotland, but fearing the governour he went into denmark, where not finding that kind reception he expected, he betook himself to england, and had an honourable pension allowed him; which was thankfully answered during the reign of edward the sixt. queen mary succeeding, he found not the like favour, and thereupon went to france, where he had a company of men of armes given him, with which he served the french king in his warres against the emperour charles the fifth, and in pursuing the enemy whom he had in chase, was wounded with the shot of a pistoll, whereof he died the day after, at montreul. he was a man of noble qualities, and full of courage, but falling unfortunately in the slaughter of the cardinal, which he is said at his dying to have sore repented, he lost himself and the expectation which was generally held of his worth."--(history, p. .) it appears that norman lesley at the time he entered the service of the king of france, had obtained absolution from the court of rome for his share in the cardinal's murder. a particular account of his death is preserved by sir james melville, and may here be quoted:-- "bot the king drew langis the frontiers toward a gret strenth callit renty, wher he planted his camp and beseigit the said strenth, quhilk i hard the constable promyse to delyuer vnto the k. before the end of aucht dayes. quhilk promyse was not keped, for themperour cam in persone with his armye for the releif therof.... at quhilk tym normond lesly maister of rothes wan gret reputation. for with a thretty scotis men he raid up the bray vpon a faire grey gelding; he had aboue his corsellet of blak veluet, his cot of armour with tua braid whyt croises, the ane before and thother behind, with sleues of mailze, and a red knappisk bonet vpon his head, wherby he was kend and sean a far aff be the constable, duc of augien and prince of conde. wher with his thretty he chargit vpon threscore of ther horsmen with culuerins, not folowed with seuen of his nomber; wha in our sicht straik v of them fra ther horse with his speir, before it brak; then he drew his swerd and ran in amang them, not caring ther continuell schutting, to the admiration of the behalders. he slew dyuers of them; at lenth when he saw a company of speirmen comming doun against him, he gaif his horse the spurris, wha carried him to the constable and fell doun dead, for he had many schotis: and worthy normond was also schot in dyuers partis, wherof he died xv dayes efter. he was first caried to the kingis awin tent, wher the duc of augyen and prince of conde told his maiestie that hector of troy was not mair vailzeand them the said normond: whom the k. wald so dressit with his awen serurgiens, and maid gret mean for him; sa did the constable and all the rest of the princes. bot na man maid mair dule nor the lard of grange, wha cam to the camp the nyxt day efter, fra a quyet raid wher he had been directed."--(memoirs, p. , bannatyne club edition, edinb. , to.) * * * * * norman lesley, master of rothes, married issobel lindesay, daughter of john fifth lord lindesay of the byres, but left no issue; and, as stated in note , the title, on his father's death, in , devolved on andrew, the son of a second marriage. no. xii. adam wallace. john hamilton, abbot of paisley and bishop-elect of dunkeld, was nominated by his brother the governor to the see of st. andrews, as beaton's successor, in ; and after a considerable period, his appointment was confirmed at the court of rome. on the th march - , in the name of the bishops and kirkmen, he presented a supplication to the governor and council, for "help and remeid against the sacramentaris and those infected with the pestilential hersie of luther;" while others, it is added, "abjurit and relapsit, baneist of auld, now comes pertlie [openly] without any dreidour, nocht allenarly in the far parts of the realme, but als to the court and presens of your lordships, and sometimes preaches opinlie, and instructs utheris in the said dampnable heresies."--(keith's history, vol. i. p. .) during his negociations with the court of rome, hamilton transmitted an information, urging his claims as primate and _legatus natus_. he refers in it to the increasing number of heretics in the diocese of glasgow, both in the time of the late archbishop, (gawin dunbar, who died in ,) and during the vacancy in that see, and assumes credit to himself for having visited that diocese and purged it of many obnoxious heretics; and in particular, for having expelled that apostate macbraire, from the house of ochiltree, and inflicted heavy fines on his adherents, and for having caused (vallasius) wallace, a native of that diocese, after he had been convicted and condemned for heresy, before a convention of the nobility and clergy, to be delivered over to the secular power, to the flames. (mackeson's ms. as quoted in m'crie's life of knox, vol. ii. p. .) in addition to note at page , it may be mentioned, that wallace had been employed in the family of cockburn of ormiston, in teaching his children after they had been deprived of knox's instructions, and while cockburn himself was forfeited and in exile. the following account of wallace's trial and condemnation is copied from foxe's actes and monuments, and may be compared with that given by knox, at pages - . in reference to the formidable array of prelates and the nobility assembled in the church of the blackfriars' monastery, to the trial of this "simple man," whom knox celebrates as "zealous in godliness, and of an upright life," i find in the treasurer's accounts, that between july and september , the sum of £ , s. d. was paid to james dalyell, (who was "one of the masters of work,") "quhilk he debursit in preparing of ane scaffald the tyme of the accusatioun of wallace." "the story and martyrdome of adam wallace in scotland. "there was set vpon a scaffold made hard to the chauncellary wall of the blacke friers church in edinbrough on seates made thereupon, the lord gouernour. aboue him at his backe sat m. gawin hamelton deane of glasgue, representing the metropolitane pastor thereof. upon a seat on his right hand sat the archbishop of s. andrewes. at his backe, and aside somewhat stoode the officiall [of] lowthaine. next to the byshop of s. andrewes, the bishop of dumblane, the byshop of murray, the abbot of dunfermling, the abbot of glenluce, wyth other churchmen of lower estimation, as the official of s. andrewes and other doctours of that nest and citie. and at the other end of the seat sat maister [of] uchiltrie. on his left hand sat the earle of argyle justice, with his deputye syr john campbell of lundy vnder his feete. next hym the earle of huntly. then the earle of anguish, the byshop of gallaway, the prior of s. andrewes, the bishop of orknay, the lord forbes, dane john wynrime suppriour of s. andrewes, and behinde the seates stoode the whole senate, the clarke of the register, &c. at the further end of the chauncelary wall in the pulpit was placed m. john lauder parson of marbottle, accuser, clad in a surplice, and a red hood, and a great congregation of the whole people in the body of the church, standing on the ground. after that, syr john ker prebendary of s. gyles church was accused, conuicted, and condemned, for the false making and geuing forth of a sentence of diuorce, and thereby falsly diuorced and parted a man and hys lawfull wyfe, in the name of the deane of roscalrige [restalrig], and certayne other judges appointed by the holy father the pope. he graunted the falshood, and that neuer any such thing was done in deede, nor yet ment nor moued by the foresayd judges; and was agreed to be banished the realmes of scotland and england for hys lyfe tyme, and to lose his right hand if he were found or apprehended therin hereafter, and in the meane time to leaue his benefices for euer, and they to be vacant. after that was brought in adam wallace, a simple poore man in appearance, conueyed by john of cunnoke seruant to the bishop of s. andrewes, and set in the middest of the scaffold, who was commaunded to looke to the accuser: who asked him what was hys name. he aunswered, adam wallace. the accuser said he had an other name, which he graunted, and sayd he was commonly called feane. then asked he where he was borne; within two myle of fayle (sayd he) in kyle. then sayd the accuser, i repent that euer such a poore man as you should put these noble lordes to so great encumbrance thys day by your vayne speakyng. and i must speake (sayd he) as god geueth me grace, and i beleue i haue sayd no euill to hurt any body. would god (sayd the accuser) ye had neuer spoken, but you are brought forth for so horrible crimes of heresie, as neuer was imagined in thys countrey of before, and shall be sufficiently proued, that ye cannot deny it: and i forethinke that it should be heard, for hurting of weak consciences. now i wyll ye thee no more, and thou shalt heare the pointes that thou art accused of. adam wallace, alias feane, thou art openly delated and accused for preaching, saying, and teaching of the blasphemies and abominable heresies vnderwritten. in the first, thou hast sayd and taught, that the bread and wyne on the altar, after the wordes of consecration, are not the body and bloud of jesu christ. he turned to the lord gouernour, and lords aforesayd, saying: i sayd neuer nor taught nothyng, but that i found in this booke and writte (hauyng there a bible at his belte, in french, dutch, and english) which is the worde of god, and if you will be content that the lord god and his worde be judge to me and this his holy writ, here it is, and where i haue sayd wrong, i shall take what punishment you will put to me: for i neuer said nothyng concerning this that i am accused of, but that which i found in this writte. what diddest thou say, sayd the accuser? i sayd (quoth he) that after our lord jesus christ had eaten the pascall lambe in hys latter supper wyth his apostles, and fulfilled the ceremonies of the olde law, he instituted a new sacrament in remembrance of his death then to come. he tooke bread, he blessed, and brake it, and gaue it to hys disciples, and sayde: "take ye, eate ye, thys is my bodye, which shall be broken and geuen for you: and lykewise the cuppe, blessed, and badde them drinke all therof, for that was the cup of the new testament, which shoulde be shedde for the forgeuing of many. how oft ye do thys, do it in my remembraunce." (matth. .) then sayd the bishop of s. andrewes, and the officiall of lowthaine, with the deane of glasgue, and many other prelates: we know this well enough. the earle of huntly sayd: thou aunswerest not to that which is laide to thee: say either yea or nay therto. he aunswered, if ye wyll admitte god and his word spoken by the mouth of hys blessed sonne jesus christ our lord and sauiour, ye wyll admit that i haue sayd: for i haue sayd or taught nothing, but that the word, which is the triall and touchstone, sayth, whiche ought to be judge to me, and to all the world. why (quoth the earle of huntly) hast thou not a judge good enough; and trowest thou that we know not god and his worde; aunswere to that is spoken to thee: and then they made the accuser speake the same thyng ouer agayne. thou saydest (quoth the accuser) and hast taught, that the bread and wyne in the sacrament of the aultar, after the wordes of the consecration, are not ye body and bloud of our sauiour jesus christ. he aunswered: i sayd neuer more then the write sayth, nor yet more then i haue sayd before. for i know well by s. paule when he sayth: whosoeuer eateth this bread, and drinketh of this cup vnworthely, receaueth to himselfe damnation. ( cor. xi.) and therfore when i taught (which was but seldome, and to them onely which required and desired me) i sayd, that if the sacrament of the aultar were truly ministred, and vsed as the sonne of the liuyng god did institute it, where that was done, there was god himselfe by his divine power, by the which he is ouer all. the byshop of orkney asked him: beleuest thou not (sayd he) that the bread and wyne in the sacrament of the aultar, after the wordes of the consecration, is the very body of god, flesh, bloud, and bone? he aunswered: i wot not what that word consecration meaneth. i haue not much latin, but i beleue that the sonne of god was conceaued of the holy ghost, and borne of the virgine mary, and hath a naturall body with handes, feete, and other members, and in the same body hee walked vp and downe in the world, preached, and taught, he suffered death vnder pontius pilate, was crucified, dead, and buried, and that by his godly power hee raysed that same body agayne the thyrd day: and the same body ascended into heauen, and sitteth on the right hand of the father, whiche shall come agayne to iudge both the quicke and the dead. and that this body is a naturall body with handes and feete, and can not be in two places at once, hee sheweth well him selfe: for the whiche euerlastyng thankes be to hym that maketh this matter cleare. when the woman brake the oyntment on hym, aunsweryng to some of his disciples whiche grudged thereat, hee sayd: the poore shall you haue alwayes with you, but me shall you not haue alwayes, (math. .) meanyng of his naturall body. and likewise at his ascension sayd he to the same disciples that were fleshly, and would euer haue had him remainyng with them corporally: it is needefull for you that i passe away, for if i passe not away, the comforter the holy ghost shall not come to you (john .) (meanyng that his naturall body behoued to be taken away from them): but be stoute and of good cheare, for i am with you vnto the worldes end. (math. . john .) and that the eatyng of his very flesh profiteth not, may well be knowen by his wordes whiche he spake in the vj. of john, where after that he had sayd: except ye eate my flesh and drinke my bloud, ye shal not haue life in you: they murmuryng thereat, he reproued them for their grosse & fleshly takyng of his wordes, and sayd: what will ye thinke when ye see the sonne of man ascend to the place that it came fro? it is the spirite that quickneth, the flesh profiteth nothyng, (john. ,) to be eaten as they tooke it, and euen so take ye it. it is an horrible heresie, sayd the byshop of orknay. when he began to speake agayne, and the lord gouernour iudge if hee had right by the write, the accuser cryed: ad secundam. nunc ad secundam, aunswered the archbyshop of s. andrewes. then was he bidden to heare the accuser, who propounded the second article, and sayd: thou saydedst lykewise, and openly byddest teach, that the masse is very idolatry, and abhominable in the sight of god. he aunswered and sayd: i haue read the bible and word of god in three tounges, and haue vnderstand them so farre as god gaue me grace, and yet read i neuer that word masse in it all: but i found (sayd he) that the thyng that was hyghest and most in estimation amongest men, and not in the word of god, was idolatry, and abhominable in the sight of god. and i say the masse is holden greatly in estimation, and hygh amongest men, and is not founded in the word, therefore i sayd it was idolatry and abhominable in the sight of god. but if any man will finde it in the scripture, and proue it by gods word, i will graunt myne errour, and that i haue fayled: otherwise not, and in that case i will submit me to all lawfull correction and punishment. ad tertiam, sayd the archbyshop. then sayd the accuser: thou hast sayd and openly taught that the god which we worshyp, is but bread, sowen of corne, growyng of the earth, baked of mens handes, and nothyng els. he aunswered, i worshyp the father, the sonne, and the holy ghost, three persons in one godhead, whiche made and fashioned the heauen and earth, and all that is therein of naught, but i know not which god you worship: and if you will shewe me whom you worship, i shall shewe you, what he is, as i can by my iudgemene. beleuest thou not (sayd the accuser) that the sacrament of the alter, after the wordes of the consecration betwixt the priestes handes, is the very body and bloud of the sonne of god, & god hymself? what the body of god is, sayd he, & what kynde of body he hath, i haue shewed you, so farre as i haue found in scripture. then sayd the accuser: thou hast preached, sayd, and openly taught diuers and sundry other great errours and abhominable heresies agaynst all the vij. sacraments, which for shortnes of tyme i pretermit and ouer pass. whether doest thou graunt thy foresayd articles that thou art accused of, or no, and thou shalt heare them shortly? and then repeted the accuser the iij. articles aforesayde shortly ouer, and asked him whether he graunted or denied them. he aunswered that before he had said of his aunsweres, and that he sayd nothyng, but agreeing to the holy word as he vnderstoode, so god iudge him, and his owne conscience accuse hym, and thereby woulde he abide vnto the tyme he were better instructed by scripture, and the contrary proued, euen to the death: and said to the lord gouernour and other lordes: if you condemne me for holding by gods word, my innocent bloud shalbe required at your handes, when ye shalbe brought before the iudgement seat of christ, who is mightie to defend my innocent cause, before whome ye shall not denye it, nor yet be able to resiste hys wrath: to whom i referre the vengeaunce, as it is written: "vengeaunce is myne, and i will rewarde." (heb. .) then gaue they forth sentence, and condemned him by the lawes, and so left him to the secular power, in the handes of syr john campbell justice deputie, who deliuered hym to the prouost of edenbrough to be burnt on the castlehill; who incontinent made hym to be put in the vppermost house in the towne wyth irons about his legges and necke, and gaue charge to syr hew terrye to keepe the key of the sayde house, an ignoraunt minister and impe of sathan, and of the byshops; who by direction, sent to the poore man two gray friers to instructe hym, wyth whom he woulde enter into no commoning. soone after that was sent in two blacke friers, an englishe frier & an other subtile sophister called arbircromy, with the which englishe frier he would haue reasoned and declared hys fayth by the scriptures. who aunswered, he had no commission to enter in disputation with hym, and so departed and left him. then was sent to hym a worldly wise man, and not vngodly in the vnderstanding of the truth, the deane of roscalrige,[ ] who gaue hym christian consolation, amongest the which he exhorted him to beleue the realtie of the sacrament after the consecration. but he would consent to nothing that had not euidence in the holy scripture, and so passed ouer that night in singing, and lauding god to the eares of diuers hearers, hauing learned the psalter of dauid without booke, to his consolation: for before they had spoyled hym of hys bible, which alwaies til after he was condemned, was with him where euer he went. after that, syr hew knew that he had certaine bookes to read and comfort his spirit, who came in a rage & tooke the same from him, leauing him desolate (to his power) of all consolation, and gaue diuers vngodly & injurious prouocations by his deuilishe venome, to haue peruerted him a poore innocent, from the patience & hope he had in christ hys sauiour: but god suffered him not to be moued therewith, as plainely appeared to the hearers and seers for the tyme. so all the next morning abode this poore man in yrons, and prouision was commaunded to be made for his burnyng agaynst the next day. which day the lord gouernour, and all the principall both spirituall and temporall lords departed from edenbrough to their other busines. after they were departed, came the deane of roscalrige to him againe & reasoned with him after his wit. who aunswered as before, he would say nothing concerning his faith, but as the scripture testifieth, yea though an aungell came from heauen to perswade him to the same: sauing that he confessed himselfe to haue receaued good consolation of the said deane in other behalfes, as becommeth a christian. then after came in the said terry again & examined him after his old maner, and said he would garre deuils to come forth of him ere euen. to whom he aunswered: you should be a godly man to geue me rather consolation in my case. when i knewe you were come, i prayed god i myght resiste your temptations, which i thanke him, he hath made me able to doe: therefore i pray you let me alone in peace. then he asked of one of the officers that stoode by, is your fire makyng ready? who tolde hym it was. he aunswered, as it pleaseth god: i am ready soone or late, as it shall please him: and then he spake to one faythfull in that company, & bad him commend him to all the faythfull, beyng sure to meete together with them in heauen. from that tyme to his forth commyng to the fire, spake no man with him. at his forth commyng, the prouost with great manasing wordes forbad him to speake to any man or any to him, as belyke he had commaundement of his superiours. commyng from the towne to the castle hill, the common people sayd, god haue mercy vpon him. and on you to (sayd he). beyng beside the fire he lifted vp his eyn to heauen twise or thrise, and sayd to the people: let it not offend you, that i suffer the death this day, for the truthes sake, for the disciple is not aboue his master. then was the prouost angry that he spake. then looked he to heauen agayne, and sayd: they will not let me speake. the corde beyng about hys necke, the fire was lighted, and so departed he to god constauntly, and with good countenaunce to our sightes. _ex testimonijs & literis e petitis, an. ._" no. xiii. walter myln. the trial and condemnation of this venerable priest has been noticed by all our ecclesiastical historians--including george buchanan, and lindesay of pitscottie. see knox, supra, p. ; calderwood, vol. i. p. ; spottiswood, p. ; howie's scots worthies, &c. the account preserved by foxe, is however the most minute and interesting. in his earlier years myln had travelled in germany, and afterwards became priest of the church of lunan, in angus. information having been laid against him for refusing to say mass in the time of cardinal beaton, he abandoned his cure; but after many years had elapsed, he was taken in the town of dysart, in fife, and carried to st. andrews, where after the trial, as recorded in the following extracts, he was condemned to the flames, on the th april . buchanan, who calls him "a priest of no great learning," erroneously places his death in april . all the authorities concur in describing him as a decrepit old man of eighty-two years of age; but no notice is taken of the circumstance that during the later period of his life, probably while in retirement, he had married; and that his widow survived him many years. this appears from a payment in the accounts of the collector general of thirds of benefices, , when there was paid "to the relict of umquhile walter myln, according to the allowance of the old comptis, £ , s. d." "the martyrdome of the blessed seruaunt of god, walter mille. "among the rest of the martyrs of scotland, the marueilous constancie of walter mille is not to be passed ouer with silence. out of whose ashes sprang thousandes of his opinion and religion in scotland, who altogether chose rather to dye, then to be any longer ouertroden by the tyranny of the foresayd, cruell, ignoraunt, and beastly byshops, abbots, monkes, and friers, and so began the congregation of scotland to debate the true religion of christ agaynst the frenchmen and papistes, who sought alwayes to depresse and keepe downe the same: for it began soon after the martyrdome of walter mille, of the which the forme hereafter followeth. in the yeare of our lord, , in the tyme of mary duches of longawayll queene regent of scotland, and the sayd john hamelton beyng byshop of s. andrewes, and primate of scotland, this walter mille (who in his youth had bene a papist) after that he had bene in almaine, & had heard the doctrine of the gospell, he returned agayne into scotland, and setting aside all papistry and compelled chastitie, maryed a wife, whiche thyng made him vnto the byshops of scotland to be suspected of heresie: and after long watchyng of hym hee was taken by two popishe priestes, one called sir george straqwhen, and the other sir hew turry,[ ] seruauntes to the sayd byshop for the tyme, within the town of dysart in fiffe, and brought to s. andrewes and imprisoned in the castle thereof. he beyng in prison, the papistes earnestly trauailed and laboured to haue seduced him, and threatned him with death and corporall tormentes, to the entent they would cause him to recant and forsake the truth. but seyng they could profit nothyng thereby, and that he remained still firme and constaunt, they laboured to perswade him by fayre promises, and offere vnto hym a monkes portion for all the dayes of his lyfe, in the abbaye of dunfermelyng, so that hee would denye the thynges he had taught, and graunt that they were heresie: but he continuyng in the truth euen vnto the end, despised their threatnynges and fayre promises. then assembled together the byshops of s. andrewes, murray, brechin, caitnes, and atheins, the abbots of dunfermelyng, landors, balindrinot, and cowper, with doctours of theologie of s. andrewes, as john greson blacke frier, and dane john uynrame suppriour of s. andrewes, william cranston provost of the old colledge, with diuers others, as sondry friers black & gray. these being assembled and hauyng consulted together, he was taken out of prison and brought to the metropolitane church where he was put in a pulpit before the bishops to be accused, the . day of aprill. beyng brought vnto the church and climyng vp to the pulpit, they seyng him so weake and feeble of person, partly by age and trauaile, & partly by euill intreatment, that without helpe he could not clime vp, they were in dispayre not to haue heard him for weakenesse of voyce. but when he began to speake, he made the churche to ryng and sounde agayne, with so great courage & stoutnes, that the christians which were present, were no lesse rejoyced, then the aduersaries were confounded and ashamed. he beyng in the pulpit, and on his knees at prayer, sir andrew oliphant one of the byshops priestes, commanded hym to arise and to aunswere to his articles, saying on this manner: sir walter mille, arise and aunswere to the articles, for you hold my lord here ouer long. to whom walter after he had finished his prayer, aunswered saying: we ought to obey god more then men, i serue one more mighty, euen the omnipotent lord: and where you call me sir walter, they call me walter, and not sir walter, i haue bene ouer long one of the pope's knightes. now say what thou hast to say. these were the articles whereof he was accused, with his aunswers vnto the same. oliphant. what thincke you of priestes mariage. mille. i hold it a blessed band, for christ himselfe maintained it, and approued the same, and also made it free to all men: but ye thinke it not free to you: ye abhorre it, and in the meane tyme take other mens wiues and daughters, & will not keepe the bande that god hath made. ye vow chastitie, & breake the same. s. paule had rather marry than burne: the whiche i haue done, for god forbad neuer mariage to any man, of what state or degree so euer he were. oliph. thou sayest there is not vij. sacramentes. mille. geue me the lordes supper and baptisme, and take you the rest, & part them among you: for if there be vij. why haue you omitted one of them, to wit, mariage, & geue your selues to sclaunderous and ungodly whoredome. oliph. thou art agaynst the blessed sacrament of the aultar, and sayest, that the masse is wrong, and is idolatry. mille. a lord or a kyng sendeth & calleth many to a dyner, and when the dyner is in readynesse, he causeth to ryng a bell, and the men come to the hall, and sit downe to be partakers of the dyner, but the lord turnyng his backe vnto them eateth all himselfe, and mocked them: so do ye. oliph. thou denyest the sacrament of the aultar to be the very body of christ really in flesh and bloud. mille. the very scripture of god is not to be taken carnally but spiritually, and standeth in fayth onely: & as for the masse, it is wrong, for christ was once offered on the crosse for mans trespasse, and will neuer be offered agayne, for then he ended all sacrifice. oliph. thou denyest the office of a byshop. mille. i affirme that they whom ye call byshops, do no byshops workes, nor vse the offices of bishops, (as paul byddeth writyng to timothy,) but lyue after their owne sensuall pleasure and take no care of the flocke, nor yet regarde they the word of god, but desire to be honored and called, my lordes. oliph. thou speakest agaynst pilgrimage, and callest it a pilgrimage to whoredome. mille. i affirm that, and say that it is not commanded in the scripture, and that there is no greater whoredome in no places, then at your pilgrimages, except it be in common brothells. oliph. thou preachest quietly and priuatly in houses and openly in the fieldes. mille. yea man, and on the sea also sailyng in shyp. oliph. wilt thou not recant thyne erroneous opinions, and if thou wilt not, i will pronounce sentence agaynst thee. mille. i am accused of my lyfe: i know i must dye once, & therfore as christ said to judas: _quod facis, fac citíus_. ye shall know that i wil not recant the truth, for i am corne, i am no chaffe, i wil not be blowen away with the winde nor burst with the flaile, but i will abyde both. * * * * * these thynges rehearsed they of purpose, with other light trifles, to augment their finall accusation, and then sir andrew oliphant pronounced sentence agaynst him that he should be deliuered to the temporall judge, and punished as an hereticke, which was to be burnt. notwithstandyng his boldnes and constauncie moued so the hartes of many, that the byshop's stuard of his regalitie, prouest of the towne called patrike learmond, refused to be his temporall judge: to whom it appertained if the cause had been just. also the byshop's chamberlaine beyng therewith charged, would in no wise take vppon hym so vngodly an office. yea the whole towne was so offended with his unjust condemnation, that the byshop's seruauntes could not get for their money so much as one cord to tye him to the stake, or a tarre barrell to burne him, but were constrained to cut the cordes of their maistors owne pauillon to serue their turne. neuerthelesse one seruaunt of the byshop's more ignoraunt and cruell then the rest, called alexander symmerwyll, enterprising the office of a temporall judge in that part, conueyed him to the fire, where agaynst all naturall reason of man, his boldnes and hardynes did more & more increase: so that the spirite of god workyng miraculously in hym, made it manifest to the people that his cause and articles were just and he innocently put downe. now when all thynges were ready for his death and he conueyed with armed men to the fire, oliphant bad hym passe to the stake: and he sayd, nay, but wilt thou put me vp with thy hand and take part of my death, thou shalt see me passe vp gladly, for by the law of god i am forbydden to put handes vpon my selfe. then oliphant put him vp with his hand, and he ascended gladly, saying; _introibo ad altare dei_, and desired that he might haue place to speake to the people, the which oliphant and other of the burners denyed, saying that he had spoken ouer much, for the bishops were altogether offended that the matter was so long continued. then some of the young men committed both the burners, & the byshops their maisters to the deuill, saying that they beleued that they should lament that day, and desired the sayd walter to speake what he pleased. and so after he had made his humble supplication to god on his knees, he arose, and standyng vpon the coales sayd on this wise. deare frendes, the cause why i suffer this day is not for any crime layed to my charge (albeit i be a miserable sinner before god) but onely for the defence of the fayth of jesus christ, set forth in the new and old testament vnto vs, for which the as the faythful martyrs haue offered them selues gladly before, beyng assured after the death of their bodyes of eternall felicitie, so this day i prayse god that he hath called me of his mercy among the rest of his seruaunts, to seale vp his truth with my life: which as i haue receaued it of hym, so willingly i offer it to his glory. therfore as you will escape the eternall death, be no more seduced with the lyes of priestes, monkes, friers, priours, abbots, byshops, and the rest of the sect of antichrist, but depend onely vpon jesus christ and his mercy, that ye may be deliuered from condemnation. all that while there was great mournyng and lamentation of the multitude, for they perceiuyng his patience, stoutnes, and boldnes, constancie, and hardynes, were not onely moued and styrred vp, but their hartes also were so inflamed, that hee was the last martyr that dyed in scotland for the religion. after his prayer, he was hoysed vp on the stake, and beyng in the fire, he sayd: lord haue mercy on me: pray people while there is tyme, and so constauntly departed. epitaphium. non nostra impietas aut actæ crimina vitæ armarunt hostes in mea fata truces. sola fides christi sacris signata libellis, quæ vitæ causa est, est mihi causa necis. after this, by the just judgement of god, in the same place where walter mille was burnt, the images of the great church of the abbey, which passed both in number and costlynes, were burnt in tyme of reformation. _ex fideli testimonio è scotia misso._ and thus much concerning such matters as happened, and such martyrs as suffered in the realme of scotland for the faith of christ jesus, and testimony of his truth." the epitaph, quoted in the above extracts from foxe, was written by patrick adamson, who became archbishop of st. andrews. no. xiv. on the title of sir, applied to priests. at this period, in england as well as in scotland, the title of sir was usually applied to priests, obviously derived from the latin _dominus_. but the origin of this application, or rather the peculiar class of the priesthood to whom it was applicable, has not been well defined. it was to distinguish them from persons of civil or military knighthood that they were popularly called pope's knights, and not as some writers have supposed, because the title was conferred on the secular clergy by the bishop of rome. in the account of the trial of walter myln, who was burnt for heresy in , (see this appendix, no. xiii.) it is related, that when his accusers addressed him as "sir walter myln," he answered, "and where you call me sir walter, they call me walter, and not sir walter: _i have been ouer long one of the pope's knightes._" sir david lyndesay says,-- "the pure priest thinkis he gets na richt be he nocht stylit like ane knicht, and callit _schir_ befoir his name, as schir thomas and schir williame." dr. jamieson, in his dictionary, (v. _pope's knights_,) has collected much curious information on this head, but says, he could assign no reason why this designation, "is more frequently given to one called a chapellan than to any other; sometimes to the exclusion of a parson or parish priest, who is mentioned at the same time as maister." the reason for this, perhaps, may be accounted for without much difficulty, if the suggestion should be correct, (as i apprehend it is,) that it denoted the academical rank or degree which had been taken; and was not intended to designate an inferior order of the priesthood. this title of sir was never applied to laymen, and appears to have been given both to the regular and secular clergy, or persons in priests orders who had taken their bachelor's degree; but it was not an academical title in itself. those priests who received the appointment of chaplains, were chiefly persons who, either from want of means or influence, had not been able to prosecute their studies the full time at a university, to obtain the higher rank as master of arts; and therefore the title of sir was given them, but simply to mark the absence of that academical rank, which was long held in great respect, and led to the practice, both among the clergy and laity, until the close of the th century, of signing master before their names. thus, in the present volume, we have _sir_ george clapperton, who was sub-dean of the chapel royal, (p. ,) _sir_ duncan symsoun, (p. ,) and _sir_ william layng, as chaplains, (p. ,) and many others, besides _sir_ john knox, (p. xiv.); and i believe it cannot be shown that any of the persons alluded to had taken the degree of master of arts. on the other hand, ecclesiastics of all ranks, from archbishops and abbots, to friars and vicars, who are known to have done so, are never styled _sir_, but have always _master_ prefixed to their baptismal names, in addition to the titles of their respective offices. for instance, we have maister james beton, who became primate, (p. ,) maister patrick hepburn, prior of st. andrews, (p. ,) maister james beton, archbishop of glasgow, (p. ,) maister david panter, secretary and bishop of ross, (p. ,) and a hundred others, who held different ecclesiastical appointments. in one instance, (see page ,) we find "sir _alias_ mr. john macbrair," from an uncertainty as to his proper designation. on the institution of the college of justice, one half of the judges belonged to the spiritual side; and at the first sederunt, th may , when their names and titles are specified, the churchmen have, with one exception, _magister_ prefixed to their names,--the exception being _dominus_ joannes dingwell, provost of trinity college, near edinburgh. it cannot be said he was so styled from holding any situation in the church inferior to the rectors of eskirk, and finevin, or the provost of dunglass, three of his brethren who then took their seats on the bench as judges. (see note .) the sederunt of the provincial council held at edinburgh, th november , as published by wilkins, vol. iv. p. , exhibits the usual designations and the order of precedency among the dignitaries of the church. they are, after giving archbishop hamilton his titles, ranked under the following heads:--"episcopi.--vicarii generales sedium vacantium.--abbates, priores, et commendatarii.--doctores in theologia, licentiati et bacalaurei.--ordines praedicatorum.--ordines conventualium: ordines s. augustini: ordines sanctissimae trinitatis de redemptione captivorum: ordines carmeletarum." in this list the higher clergy are styled simply william bishop of, &c., quintin abbot of, &c., alexander prior of, &c., william commendator of, &c. among those who had taken degrees in theology, as doctors, licentiates, or bachelors, there are seven with the title of master, and three with f. or _frater_ prefixed to their names. of the preaching friars, there were four, all designed f. or _frater_. the conventual and other orders, included provosts of collegiate churches, deans, archdeacons, subdeacons, rectors, canons, and subpriors; of whom there are fifteen with the title of m. or _magister_, and only six with d. or _dominus_, so usual was it to find that a regular academical course of study was requisite for obtaining promotion in the church, even when the weight of family interest might have been supposed sufficient otherwise to have secured it. * * * * * this opportunity may be taken to add a few explanatory words on the academical designations which so frequently occur in the footnotes to this volume. there is likewise considerable difficulty in defining such titles; and the following explanations may require to be modified. the three universities in scotland founded during the course of the th century, were formed on the model of those of paris and bologna. the general name applied to students of all ranks was _supposita_, or _supposts_; implying that they wore subject to the provost and masters in the university. the _incorporati_ were persons who upon entering the college had taken the oaths, and were matriculated in the registers; but this was not confined to students who first entered upon their studies at college, as it might include persons of advanced life, who had been educated and obtained their degrees at some other university. the usual course extended over four years, and was devoted to the study of philosophy, including rhetoric, dialectics, ethics, and physics. in the middle of the third year, students were allowed to propose themselves as candidates for the degree of bachelor of arts; and for this purpose, those who had completed or _determined_ their course of study, during the _trivium_ or period of three years, obtained the name of _determinantes_; and such as acquitted themselves were confirmed _bachelors_ by the dean of faculty. the _intrantes_ or licentiates were a class farther advanced, and denoted that they were prepared to enter or take their _master's_ degree. for obtaining this a more extended examination took place before they were _laureated_, or received the title of master of arts, which qualified them to lecture or teach the seven liberal arts.--see article universities, in the last edit, of the encyclopædia britannica, vol. xxi.; statuta universitatis oxoniensis; m'crie's life of melville, d edit. vol. ii. p. , _et seq._; and principal lee's introduction to the edinburgh academic annual for . no. xv. on the tumult in edinburgh, at the procession on st. giles's day, . it has not been ascertained in what way st. Ægidius or st. giles became the tutelar saint of our metropolis. regarding the saint himself, as there prevails less diversity of opinion than usual, we may assume that st. giles flourished about the end of the seventh century. according to butler, and other authorities,--"this saint, whose name has been held in great veneration for several ages in france and england, is said to have been an athenian by birth, and of noble extraction. his extraordinary piety and learning, (it is added,) drew the admiration of the world upon him in such a manner, that it was impossible for him to enjoy, in his own country, that obscurity and retirement which was the chief object of his desires on earth." having sailed for france, he spent many years in the wild deserts near the mouth of the rhone, and afterwards in a forest in the diocese of nismes. the bollandists have shewn that this district belonged to the french, towards the beginning of the eighth century when st. giles died; and that his body remained there till the th century: "when, (as we are informed by the anonymous author of 'lives of saints,' printed at london , vols. to.,) "the albigenses being very troublesome in that country, it was thought proper to remove it to toulouse, where it is still kept in st. saturnin's church.... his name occurs on the first of september in the calendars of the english church before the reformation; that, and two antient churches in london, are a sufficient proof of his being known and honoured by our devout ancestors."--(lives, &c. vol. iv. p. .) maitland, the historian of edinburgh, has collected much curious matter connected with the metropolitan church of st. giles; and observes, it is beyond dispute that st. giles's was the first parish church in the city, although he was unable to determine at what time or by whom it was founded. notices of _a parish church_, distinct from the more ancient church of st. cuthbert's, may be traced back to the th or th century; and there exists a charter of david ii., under the great seal, th december , granting the lands of upper merchiston to the chaplain officiating at the altar of st. katherine's chapel in _the parish church_ of st. giles, edinburgh. it is so designed in subsequent deeds, in the years and ; the latter being an indenture for building some additional chapels and vaults in the church. in the following century a great many separate altarages were endowed; and in the year , it was erected by james the third, into a collegiate church, consisting of a provost, a curate, sixteen prebendaries, a sacristan, a minister of the choir, and four choristers. (maitland's hist. p. .) we may easily suppose that the possession of an undoubted relic of the patron saint, would, in those days, be regarded as an inestimable treasure. an obligation granted by the provost and council of edinburgh, to william preston of gortoun, on the th june , is still preserved, and records the fact, that "the arme bane of saint gele, the quhilk bane he left to our mother kirk of saint gele of edinburgh," had been obtained, after long entreaty and considerable expense, through the assistance of the king of france. another historian of our city in referring to this donation, says--"the magistrates of the city, in gratitude for the donation made to their church, granted a charter in favour of the heirs of preston of gortoun, (whose descendants, he adds, are to this hour proprietors of that estate in the county of edinburgh,) entitling the nearest heir of the donor, being of the name of preston, to carry this sacred relique in all processions. the magistrates at the same time, obliged themselves to found in this church an altar, and to appoint a chaplain for celebrating an annual mass of requiem for the soul of the donor; and that a tablet, displaying his arms, and describing his pious donation, should be put up in the chapel. the relique, embossed in silver, was kept among the treasure of the church till the reformation."--(arnot's hist. of edinb. p. .) it was customary on the st of september, the festival day of the patron saint, to have a solemn procession through the streets of edinburgh. a figure of st. giles, carved in wood, the size of life, had hitherto formed a conspicuous object in this procession. in the year , notwithstanding the progress which the reformed opinions had made, it was resolved to celebrate this festival with more than ordinary solemnity; and several persons accused of heresy, instead of being sent to the flames on the castlehill, were reserved to form part of the procession, and to abjure their opinions, while the queen regent was to countenance it with her presence. on such occasions it had been customary to deck the image of the saint. thus in september , the dean of guild paid s. "for paynting of sanct geill;" in , the charge paid to walter bynning for doing this was s. in the accounts of , s. was paid by the dean of guild "for paynting of sanct geill;" and d. for "beiring of him to the painter, and fra;" and, at the same time, "for mending and polishing sanct gelis arme, d.;" and also a sum "to alexander robesoun tailzeour, for mending of sanct gelis capis." but previously to the day of procession in , knox states, that "the images were stollen away in all parts of the countrey; and _in edinburgh was that great idoll called sanct geyle_, first drowned in the north loch, after burnt, which raised _no small trouble_ in the town." sir james balfour in his annals, says, this image "was a grate log of wood or idoll, which the priests called sant geilles." the trouble referred to was no doubt the injunction of the archbishop of st. andrews, to have this image replaced; and various payments by the city treasurer, in - , refer to the appellation by the town of edinburgh against the sentence of archbishop hamilton, obliging the town to have the image of st. giles replaced. from this we may infer that the image had been stolen in the year . knox's account of the tumult that ensued is by far the most minute and amusing: see pages - . bishop lesley is much more concise. after mentioning the circumstance that several persons had been accused of heresy at a convocation or provincial council of the whole prelates and clergy assembled at edinburgh, at the end of july, he adds--"bot nane was executed or punished in thair bodeis, bot ordanit to abjure thair errouris at the mercatt croce of edinburgh, apoun sainct gelis day, the first of september; bot thair was so gret a tumult rased that day on the hie street of edinburgh, that thay quha was appointed to do open pennance war suddantlie careid away, and the haill processioun of the clergie disperced; the image of sanct geill being borne in processione, was taikin perforce fra the beraris thairof, brokin and distroyed; quhairwith the quene regent was heichlie offendit; and for stanchinge of the lyk trouble in tyme cuming, she appointed the lorde setoun to be provest of the toun of edinburgh, quha keped the same in resonable guid ordour quhill the nixt symmer thaireftir."--(history, p. .) saint geill, however, never recovered from his degradation on that day: and in june , the magistrates directed the portraiture of the saint, which had served as their emblem, to be cut out of the city standard, _as an idol_, and a thistle to be inserted, "emblematical (as a recent writer remarks) of rude reform, but leaving the hind which accompanied st. giles, as one of the heraldic supporters of the city arms."--(caledonia, vol. ii. p. .) the jewels, silver-work, vestments, and other articles belonging to the church of st. giles, were sold by authority of the magistrates, in , as will be taken notice of in a subsequent volume. no. xvi. provincial councils in scotland, in - . respecting the meetings of the provincial councils in scotland before the reformation, it may be sufficient in this place to refer to the well known tract by sir david dalrymple, lord hailes, entitled "historical memorials concerning the provincial councils of the scottish clergy, from the earliest accounts to the area of the reformation." edinb. , to. it is reprinted in the d edition of his annals of scotland, vol. iii. pp. - , edinb. , vols. vo. the reader may also consult with advantage, dr. m'crie's life of knox, vol. i. pp. , , , &c.; and bishop keith's history, vol. i. p. , &c. no. xvii. letter of mary queen of scots to lord james prior of the monastery of st. andrews. july . calderwood, when noticing the arrival of the sieur de bethancourt in scotland, speaks of his bringing "forged letters" to lord james stewart; but the whole of his account (vol. i. p. ,) was evidently derived from knox, but whose words are, "with letteris, as was allegit:" see supra, page . spottiswood, on the other hand, throws no doubt on their genuineness, but says the bearer was monsieur crock; and he inserts (hist. p. ,) a different version of that of francis the second, from the one which knox has given, and also the following letter, of which knox, at page , only makes mention to quote the concluding phrase. "the letter (says spottiswood) sent by the queen, was of the tenor following:-- "mary, queen of scotland and france, to james prior of the monasterie of s. andrewes. "i cannot, my cousin, wonder enough, how you that are nighest us in bloud, and greatly benefitted by our liberality, as yourself knoweth, should be so presumptuous and wickedly disposed, as by one and the same fact to violate the majesty of god and the authority belonging to me and my husband; for to me it is a wonder that you, who being with me did complain of the duke of chattellerault, and divers others for dismissing my authority, should now be the leader of a faction in matters of greatest weight, wherein not only the honour of god is touched, but my authority all utterly taken away: which i would have more easily believed of any other of my subjects than of you, for i had a speciall hope of your fidelity, and am not a little grieved that you should have deceived me; though yet i can scarse be perswaded, that you are gone so far from truth and reason, as to be carried away with such blinde errours which i wish were not, as any in the world else, beseeching god to illuminate you with his light, that returning into the right way you may shew your self (by doing things contrary to that you have already performed) a good man, and obedient to our lawes; whereof by these letters i thought good to admonish you, and withall earnestly to intreat you to amend your by-gone faults, with better deeds in time coming; that the anger which i and my husband have conceived against you, may by that means be mitigated. otherwise i would have you understand, that we will take such punishment of you, that you shall ever remember us, which shall be to me a most grievous thing. god i beseech to keep you from all danger. _paris the . of july, ._" no. xviii. david forrest, general of the mint. david forrest, general of the mint, was probably a native of east-lothian. his name first occurs in , as entertaining george wishart, in his house in the town of haddington. knox speaks of him, when mentioning this circumstance, as "ane man that long hes professed the truth," (p. .) he had retired to england soon afterwards, as sir ralph sadler, when noticing that forrest had come to england, along with william maitland of lethington, and mr. henry balnaves, in november , he adds,--"who departed out of england in the beginning of the reign of queen mary for cause of religion, and now retuurneth agayn because of these troubles in scotland, as he sayeth."--(letters, vol. i. p. .) after the reformation, when the want of qualified persons for the ministry was deeply felt, forrest was one of several laymen, who, from having previously given proofs of their sincere zeal and piety, were nominated at the first general assembly, in december , as "thought apt and able to minister." on the d july , david forrest was specially requested by the assembly "to tak on the ministerie." on the next day, his answer to that request "was referred to the superintendent of lothian and kirk of edinburgh." again, on the th december , "david forrest, notwithstanding he objected his owne inabilitie, was charged by the whole assemblie, as he would avoide disobedience to their voices, without farther delay, to addresse himself to enter in the ministerie, where he salbe appointed, seeing it was knowen sufficientlie that he was able for that function."--(booke of the universall kirk, vol. i. pp. , , .) although forrest did not comply with this injunction, he continued to be a member of assembly for several years, and was named on committees "for the decision of questions," and for other matters. his promotion as general of the mint may possibly have had its influence in his refusing to take upon himself the office of the ministry. he appears to have long been connected with the mint. in the treasurer's accounts, june - , david forres is styled "magister cone;" but he must have been superseded, as the office of "maister cunzeour," was filled by john achesoun, from at least to . but forrest again appears in - ; and for several years, (between and ,) we find monthly payments in the treasurer's accounts to the principal officers of the mint, viz., to david forrest, general of the cunzie-house, £ , s. andrew henderson, wardane, £ , s. d. maister john balfour, comptar wardane, £ , s. d., (who, in october , was succeeded by david adamesoun, with the same monthly fee or salary of £ , s. d.) james mosman, assayer, (succeeded in april , by thomas achesoun,) £ , s. d. and james gray, sinckar of the irnis, £ , with an additional sum, "for brisseling, grynding, neilling, and tempering the irnis," of £ , s. d. in the treasurer's accounts , we also find that different sums were allowed us "feis extraordinar" to most of these officials, for services rendered "in the tyme of troubill." footnotes [ ] that lord torphichen's picture at calder house is a portrait of knox, cannot be doubted, and it may have been copied from an older painting; but at best it is a harsh and disagreeable likeness, painted at least a century after knox's death. it was engraved for dr. m'crie's work; and, on a large scale, there is a most careful engraving of it, by a very ingenious and modest artist, mr. william penny of mid-calder. [ ] the ornamented border in the original is very rudely cut: here it is given only in outline. a french translation of beza's volume appeared in , with several additional portraits; but it is somewhat remarkable that a totally different portrait should have been substituted in place of that of knox. this, i think, may be explained, from the circumstance of the original cut having been either injured or lost; and not from the other exhibiting a more correct likeness of the scotish reformer. from its marked resemblance, i am convinced, that the portrait substituted was intended for william tyndale.--when the engraved pseudo-portraits of knox are brought together, it is quite ludicrous to compare the diversity of character which they exhibit. besides the ordinary likeness, with the long flowing beard, copied from bad engravings to worse, we have the holyrood one, not unworthy of holbein, of a mathematician, with a pair of compasses; the head at hamilton palace, which might serve for the hermit of copmanhurst; and others that would be no unsuitable illustrations to any account of the fools and jesters entertained at the scotish court. [ ] i state this from having lent him verheiden's work, for the purpose of his copying knox's portrait. perhaps the fine arts sustained by the death of this eminent painter, no greater loss than in his leaving unfinished the most exquisite design of "knox dispensing the sacrament," which, in its half-finished state, has fortunately been secured by the royal scotish academy. his previous painting of "knox preaching to the lords of the congregation," is sadly disfigured by the extravagant action and expression of the reformer. [ ] this ms. when rebound, at some early time, was unfortunately too much cut in the edges. its present ragged state suggested a minute examination, which shows that the volume consists of seventeen sets or quires, each of them, with two exceptions, having twenty-two or twenty-four leaves. six of those quires, judging from the hand-writing and the colour of the ink, were apparently written somewhat later than the rest:--viz., the th set, fol. - ; the th and th, fol. - ; the th, fol. - ; the th, fol. - ; and the last set, fol. to the end. what renders this the more evident is, that while the first page of each set runs on continuously from the previous page, as if there was no interruption, the catchword on the last page of these rewritten sets or quires, often stops in the middle of the page, or the beginning of a line, leaving the rest blank, owing to the style of writing, or the matter contained in these sets having varied from those which they had replaced. [ ] the following is the title of a work on the harmony of the gospels, with a fac-simile of the signature referred to: "in nomine dnj. nostrj jesu chrj anno salutis humanæ . contextus historiæ euangelicæ secundum tres euangelistas mat. mar. et lucam.--septembris ." [ ] app. no. vi. pp. - . lond. , vo. nicolson, in giving some account of the history, considers the question of the authorship, which was then reckoned doubtful, and referring particularly to the glasgow manuscript, he says, it "was lately presented to the college by mr. robert fleming, a late preacher at rotterdam, now at london, mr. knox's great-grandchild; who having several of his said ancestor's papers in his hand, pretends to assure them, that this very book is penn'd by the person whose name it commonly bears. for the better proof of this matter he sends them the preface of another book, written in the same hand, wherein are these words:--'_in nomine domini nostri jesu christi, &c., septembris_ ^o, m. jo. knox, _august_ , _a_^o .' there might indeed have been some strength in this evidence, were we not assur'd that the famed knox dy'd in ; so that nothing could be written by him in . there was one mr. john knox, who was moderator of the synod of merse in ; who perhaps is mr. fleming's true ancestor, as well as the transcriber of this book, and might be one of the assistants in the revising of it."--(ib. p. .) these remarks gave considerable offence to fleming, who answers them, at some length, but without throwing any new light on the subject, in the preface to his "practical discourse on the death of king william iii. &c.," p. xii; lond. , vo. fleming was not a descendant of knox. it is indeed true that his grandfather married knox's daughter; but his father was the issue of a subsequent marriage. these facts are plainly stated in a letter from r. fleming to wodrow, dated at london, on the th of june . [ ] in the footnotes, the errors and mistakes in vautrollier's edition are occasionally pointed out. a sample of them may here be brought together:-- p. . aue hes tuit aue spurtill. . priests of whordome--trystis of whoredome. . andrewe balsone--balfour. . baltlewich, lyniltquilk, lemax--balcleueh, lynlithgow, levenax. . the time thereof--the teind thereof. . paying such losses--paying such teinds. . earle of gleuearne--earle of glencarne. . appoints--oppones. . the cardinal skipped--the cardinal scripped. . taken from--given to. . inversion--intercession. . entracted--entreated. . enduer him--cummer him. . receiving of limes and staues--receiving of lime and stanes. _ib._ in great number--in no great number. . cryed i am leslie a priest--cryed, i am a priest. . the queen's daughter--the queen dowager. . langundrie--langnidrie. . the gouernoures--the gunnar's. . should be--should not be. . scotish preachers--scotish prikers. . scarcenesse--scarmishing. . some drunken beare, which laye in the saudes chappell and church--some drynkin bear, which lay in the syidis chappell and kirk. . were pressed--were not pressed. . silbard--sibbald. . and for his other william--and for his other villany. . lordes maxwell flying--lords maxwell, fleming. . wilbock--willock. . meruses--mernes. . hearie--harie. . according to comely and common lawes--according to the civile and cannon lawes. . auow your graces hart--move your graces heart. . ancheddirdour--auchterarder. . should be--should not be. . estates of our religion--estates of our realme. [ ] see "areopagitica; a speech of mr. john milton for the liberty of unlicens'd printing," addressed to the parliament of england, london, , to. in arguing against the abuses committed by licensers of the press, he says, "nay, which is more lamentable, if the work of any deceased author, though never so famous in his lifetime, and even to this day, come to their hands for license to be printed or reprinted, if there be found in his book one sentence of a venturous edge, uttered in the height of zeal, (and who knows whether it might not be the dictate of a divine spirit,) yet, not suiting with every low decrepit humour of their own, though it were knox himself, the reformer of a kingdom, that spake it, they will not pardon him their dash: the sense of that great man shall to all posterity be lost for the fearfulness, or the presumptuous rashnesse of a prefunctory licenser. and to what an author this violence hath bin lately done, and in what book of greatest consequence to be faithfully publisht, i could now instance, but shall forbear till a more convenient season."--(page .) [ ] in following the ms. of , i have discarded all contractions, and generally avoided the old form of using _u_ and _w_ for _v_, or _v_ for _u_; _i_ for _j_. in order to avoid distracting the attention of an ordinary reader, such words in the ms. as _hie_ for _he_, _on_ for _one_, _cane_ for _can_, _don_ for _done_, are printed in the usual form; but indeed the orthography of the ms. is very irregular, and might have justified much greater innovations. [ ] this preface is not contained in either of the editions by david buchanan of the history printed in . [ ] in ms. g, "cloude." [ ] in ms. i, "whairby idolatrie." [ ] in ms. g, "eyis." [ ] ib. [ ] in the ms. "trawalled." [ ] that is, the year . [ ] mary queen of scots arrived from france on the th of august . [ ] the author's original intention, as here stated, was, that the history should merely embrace the limited period from to . that portion was probably revised and enlarged, to form books second and third, when this introductory book was added in . [ ] this phrase was not uncommon: see page . but ms. i. makes it, "some faythfull brethrene, concerning that which was thought." [ ] that is, the civil policy. [ ] in the ms. "wane." [ ] this title occurs as a marginal note in the ms. [ ] in the ms. it was originally written "mentioun of one n.," the words, "whais name is not expressed," being afterwards added on the margin. the letter n., it may be observed, was an abbreviation of _non nemo_, i.e. _aliquis_, or somebody, a mode adopted from the canon law, when the name of a person was not ascertained. [ ] from the collation of david buchanan's text, it will be seen that he has here inserted the words "one whose name was james resby, an englishman by birth, schollar to wickliff: he was accused as a hereticke, by one laurence lindores," &c. buchanan overlooks the circumstance that resby suffered martyrdom at perth, fifteen years before the person referred to by knox. see appendix, no. i., "interpolations in knox's history by david buchanan."--in the appendix, no. ii., some notices will be given of resby and other lollards in scotland, during the th century. [ ] bower, the continuator of fordun, calls him paul crawar, and fixes the date of his execution on the d of july . (see appendix no. ii.) [ ] in mss. g, a, &c., "a bohemian." [ ] in the ms. "wach." [ ] robert blackader, on the th of june , was styled prebendary of cardross, in the cathedral church of glasgow, (registrum episcopatus glasguenis, p. .) on the d of that month, he sat among the lords of council, as bishop elect of aberdeen, which seems to discredit the statement of keith and other writers, of his having been consecrated at rome by pope sixtus iv., upon the death of bishop spens. (registrum episcopatus aberdonensis, mr. innes's preface, page xlii. note.) blackader, however, was much employed in public negotiations with england and other countries. he was translated to the see of glasgow, previously to february ; and during his episcopate, that see was erected into an archbishopric. as stated in a following page, blackader died on the th of july . see page . [ ] the shire of ayr in former times was locally divided into the three districts of carrick, kyle, and cunningham; and those districts are still retained, but without any political or judicial distinction. kyle was the central district, between the rivers doon and irvine; and was subdivided into two sections, by the river ayr, king's-kyle lying on the south, and kyle-stewart on the north of the river.--(chalmers's caledonia, vol. iii. p. .) [ ] in the ms., a blank space had been left for these names, which were apparently added at a somewhat later period.--the escape of john campbell of cesnock at this time is taken notice of by alexander alesius in his letter to james fifth, see appendix no. ii. [ ] mure of polkellie, the title of _lady_ being given by courtesy.--from a detailed genealogical account of the family of chalmers of gadgirth in ayrshire, inserted in the appendix to nisbet's heraldry, vol. i., we find that john chalmers, in a charter dated , was styled son and heir of sir john chalmers of galdgirth; and that one of his daughters, margaret, was married to george campbell of cesnock; and another, helen, to robert mure of polkellie. a third daughter is mentioned in the following note. [ ] the baptismal name of lady stair is left blank in the ms., and calderwood, who copied from knox, inserted the letter n., to indicate this; while david buchanan supplied the name of isabella. on the supposition that knox himself had so written it, professor forbes, in noticing the lord president stair's descent from one of the lollards of kyle, says, "the historian hath mistaken the lady's name; for, by writings in the earl of stair's hand, it appears she was called marion chalmers, daughter to mr. john chalmers of gadgirth, whose good family was very steady in the matters of religion."--(journal of decisions, &c., p. , edinb. , folio.)--on the other hand, in the pedigree of the gadgirth family, in nisbet, william dalrymple of stair is said to have married isabella chalmers. [ ] this "register," and "the scrollis" referred to in the former page, were probably the court-books of the official of glasgow, an office usually held by one of the canons of the diocese. but no registers of the kind are known to be preserved. [ ] the additions to articles , , , , and , included within a parenthesis, are evidently comments by knox. [ ] in mss. g, a, &c., "bread." [ ] that is, to judge in matters of divine worship. [ ] vautroullier's suppressed edition of the history commences, on sign. b., page , with those three words. the previous sheet, or pages, containing the title and preface, had no doubt been set up, but the sheet may have been either delayed at press till the volume was completed, or all the copies carried off and destroyed when the book was prohibited. [ ] in vautr. edit., and mss. g, a, &c., "doubtfully spoken." [ ] in this place, the ms. has "basqueming," and vautroullier's edition makes it "adam reade of blaspheming."--adam reid of stair-white, or barskyming, the representative of an ancient family in ayrshire, probably accompanied james the fourth, in his first voyage to the western isles, in july . he obtained two charters, under the great seal, of the king's fortress of ardcardane, and some lands near tarbert, in north kintyre, dated th september , and th august , in which he is designated "adam rede de sterquhite." the service annexed to the first grant included the maintenance of six archers sufficiently provided with bows and arrows, upon occasion of the king's curbing the inhabitants of the isles, who had long set the royal authority at defiance: "neenon sustentando sex homines defensivos architenentes, cum arcubus et sagittis bene suffultos, ad serviendum regi, et successoribus suis, in guerris si quas reges in insulis contra inhabitantes carundem habere contigerit, cum dictus adam vel hæredes sui ad hoc requisitus fuerit." [ ] for "shut up;" in vautr. edit., and mss. g, a, &c., "set up." [ ] the erroneous date of occurs in the ms. and in all the subsequent copies; it is also repeated by spotiswood. the actual time of his decease is thus recorded,--"obitus roberti blacader primi archiepiscopi glasguensis, vigesimo octavo die julij a.d. ."--(regist. episcop. glasg., vol. ii. p. .) the place where blackader died is not ascertained; but bishop lesley confirms knox's statement, that he had set out on a pilgrimage to the holy land. "scotia discedit, paucis post diebus, episcopus glasgoensis, robertus blacaderus pio studio illa loca (quæ christi vestigiis trita, aliisque humilitatis, virtutisque monumentis illustrata erant) invisendi flagrans hierosolymitana profectione suscepta; sed mortis impetu præclusa, ad coelites in itinere migravit."--(de rebus gestis, &c., p. , romæ, , to.) in his english history, lesley mentions this more briefly, "about this time, [ th of july ,] the bishop of glasgow, quha wes passit to jerusalem, or he com to the end of his journay, deceissit the xxix [ th] day of july. he was ane noble, wyse, and godlie man."--(hist. p. , edinb. , to.) [ ] the truth of this remark is very evident, as beaton, along with his high civil and ecclesiastical appointments, held several great church benefices. he was the youngest son of john beaton of balfour, and was educated at st. andrew's. in , the name "ja. betone" occurs among the _intrantes_; in , among the _determinantes_; and in , as a licentiate, he took the degree of master of arts. in october , maister james betoun was presented to the chantry of cathness, vacant by the decease of mr. james auchinleck.--(bannatyne miscellany, vol. ii. p. .) in , he was provost of the collegiate church of bothwell, and prior of whithorn. in , he was abbot of dunfermline, and a lord of the session. in the following year he succeeded his brother as lord treasurer. in , he was raised to the see of galloway; and within twelve months having been translated to glasgow, as successor to blackader, he resigned the office of treasurer. in the rolls of parliament, th november , the archbishop of glasgow appears as chancellor of the kingdom; and he secured to himself the rich abbacies of arbroath and kilwinning. on succeeding to the primacy of s. andrew's, in , he resigned the commendatory of arbroath in favour of his nephew david beaton, with the reservation to himself of half its revenues during his life. in a letter to cardinal wolsey, dr. magnus the english ambassador, on the th of january - , after referring to the archbishop of st. andrews, as "the gretteste man booth of landes and experience withyne this realme," speaks of beaton as "nooted to be veraye subtill and dissymuling."--(state papers, vol. iv. p. .) but with all his dignities and wealth, he experienced occasional reverses of fortune; and in , upon a change in public affairs, he was deprived of the office of lord chancellor. he died in . [ ] on the th of september . [ ] in the preface to lambert's "exegeseos in sanctam diui ioannis apocalypsim, libri vii." the passage will be given in the appendix, no. iii. [ ] this reference to the well known "actes and monumentes" of john foxe, the english martyrologist, has more than once been pointed out as an anachronism. thus, spottiswood asserts, that foxe's work "came not to light [till] some ten or twelve years after mr. knox his death," (p. ,) and concludes, that "the history given forth in his name was not of his inditing." but knox's phrase, "laitlie sett furth," is quite applicable to the first publication of foxe's martyrology; as there is no reason to doubt that knox wrote this portion of his history in , and it is certain that foxe's "actes and monumentes," &c., printed at london by john daye, was completed in the beginning of , in large folio. in this edition there is an account of patrick hamilton, which (with some other notices) will be given verbatim in the appendix, no. iii. foxe's martyrology was again printed by daye, "newly recognized by the author," in , vols. folio; a third time in ; and a fourth (being probably the earliest edition of which spottiswood had any knowledge) in . [ ] hamilton was merely titular abbot of ferne, and was not in holy orders. his predecessor, andrew stewart, was bishop of caithness, and commendator of the two abbeys of kelso and ferne. he died th june ; and the latter benefice was probably then conferred on hamilton. ferne is a parish in the eastern part of the shire of ross. the abbey was founded by farquhard first earl of ross, in the reign of alexander the third. the church, built or completed by william earl of ross, who died in , was a handsome structure of about feet in length, with chapels on the north and on the south sides. it continued to be used as the parish church till sunday the th of october , when, during public service, the flagstone roof, and part of the side walls fell in, and killed persons, besides others who died in consequence of the injuries they sustained.--(scots magazine, , p. .) at a later period ( ), the centre part of the church of ferne, but reduced in its length, was repaired, with a new roof, and still serves as the parish church. unless for some ruined portions of the side chapels attached to the eastern end of the church, which were suffered to remain, all marks of its venerable antiquity have now disappeared. [ ] it was at marburg, the capital of upper hesse, and not at wittemberg, where lambert was professor. [ ] in the ms. "trawailled." the letters _w_ and _v_ are used indiscriminately by knox's amanuensis. [ ] this statement, we presume, is incorrect, as there is no evidence to show that james the fifth visited the shrine of st. duthac at this time. lesley speaks of the king dealing with hamilton, which implies at least a knowledge of his accusation, "adhortante rege ipso."--(de rebus gestis, &c., p. .) the chapel of st. duthac, bishop of ross, now in ruins, is situated about half a mile to the north-east of the town of tain. in the appendix no. iv. will be given various extracts from the treasurer's accounts relating to the frequent pilgrimages which james the fourth made to this shrine, as illustrative of a superstitious custom of that period. [ ] in the ms. "lief." [ ] see page . [ ] gilbert kennedy third earl of cassilis. he was probably only at st. andrews for one session; as his name does not occur in the registers of the university. in , he was at paris, pursuing his studies under george buchanan, who dedicated to him his first edition of linacre's latin grammar. lord cassilis was one of the prisoners taken at solway moss in . as knox afterwards mentions, he died at dieppe in . [ ] the university of st. andrews, founded by bishop wardlaw in the year , was confirmed by papal authority in . its endowments, however, continued to be very limited, until st. salvator's college was erected and endowed in by james kennedy, his successor in the see. at this time it received the name of the old college, to distinguish it from that of st. leonard's college, created in , and st. mary's, in . [ ] in vautr. edit., and mss. g, a, &c., "scorched." [ ] lindesay of pitscottie, (_circa_ ,) in his detailed account of hamilton's condemnation, after narrating the martyr's last speeches, and his solemn appeal to campbell, proceeds,--"then they laid to the fire to him; but it would no ways burn nor kindle a long while. then a baxtar, called myrtoun, ran and brought his arms full of straw, and cast it in to kindle the fire: but there came such a blast of wind from the east forth of the sea, and raised the fire so vehemently, that it blew upon the frier that accused him, that it dang him to the earth, and brunt all the fore part of his coul; and put him in such a fray, that he never came to his right spirits again, but wandered about the space of forty days, and then departed."--(edit. , p. ; edit. , p. .) pitscottie gives the false date of september . this writer indeed is often very inaccurate in names and dates; but his details were evidently derived from some contemporary authority. [ ] foxe, and other authorities, state that campbell was prior of the dominican or blackfriars monastery, st. andrews. [ ] according to modern computation, the year . [ ] foxe, in republishing his "actes and monumentes," among other additions, has the following paragraph:--"but to return to the matter of master hamelton; here is, moreover, to be observed, as a note worthy of memory, that in the year of our lord , in which year this present history was collected in scotland, there were certain faithful men of credit then alive, who being present the same time when master patrick hamelton was in the fire, heard him to cite and appeal the black friar called campbell, that accused him, to appear before the high god, as general judge of all men, to answer to the innocency of his death, and whether his accusation was just or not, between that and a certain day of the next month, which he then named. moreover, by the same witness it is testified, that the said friar had immediately before the said day come, without remorse of conscience, that he had persecuted the innocent; by the example whereof divers of the people, the same time much mused, and firmly believed the doctrine of the aforesaid master hamelton to be good and just."--(third edit. p. , lond. , folio.) [ ] in vautr. edit. "true fruites;" in mss. g, &c., "trow fruittis." [ ] the above title, and fryth's preface are not contained in knox's ms., but are inserted from foxe's martyrology, p. , d edit., lond. . [ ] this evidently refers to archbishop beaton; but he had previously been deprived of the chancellorship: see note, page . [ ] hamilton's treatise was probably printed as an academical dissertation, whilst he was at marburg, in . it in uncertain whether fryth's translation was published during his own life. there are at least three early editions, with this title, "dyvers frutefull gatherynges of scripture: and declaryng of fayth and workes." one was printed at london by thomas godfray, and two others by william copland, each of them without a date, but probably before .--(dibdin's typogr. antiq., vol. iii. pp. , , .) in - , michael lobley, a printer in st. paul's churchyard, had license to print "the sermonde in the wall, thereunto annexed, the common place of patryk hamylton."--(ib., p. .) foxe's copy of this treatise differs from the present in a number of minute particulars, which would occupy too much space to point out. [ ] john fryth, as the reward of his zeal in the cause of religion, was confined to the tower, in , and was brought to the stake, at smithfield, on the th of july .--(see the rev. chr. anderson's annals of the english bible, vol. i. pp. - .) [ ] this title, with the numbers of the propositions, and the words included within brackets, are supplied from foxe. also a few trifling corrections in the orthography. [ ] these propositions are put in a syllogistic form; but the terms _major_, _minor_, and _conclusion_, marked on the margin of foxe's copy, except in one or two instances at the beginning, are not contained in knox's ms. such as are marked, being incorrectly given by his transcriber, as well as in vautr. edit., are here omitted. [ ] in vautr. edit. and mss. e, a, and i, is this marginal note--"this is to be understood of circumstance of worldlie men, and not of them of god; for the neirer that men draw to god, we ar bound the more to love them." also a similar note to page , prop. iv., "christ is the ende and fulfillinge of the lawe to everie one that beleveth." [ ] foxe has given this sentence more correctly:--"now, seying he hath payed thy dette, thou needest, neither canst thou pay it, but shouldest bee damned, if hys bloud were not." [ ] in republishing his "actes and monumentes," foxe, along with fryth's translation of "patrick hamilton's places," has subjoined "certaine brief notes or declarations upon the foresayd places of m. patrike." he says, "this little treatise of m. patrike's places, albeit in quantitie it be but short, yet in effect it comprehendeth matter able to fill large volumes, declaryng to us the true doctrine of the law, of the gospell, of fayth, and of workes, with the nature and properties, and also the difference of the same." but foxe's notes are too long to be here inserted, and they have several times been reprinted. [ ] gawin logye, under whom so many of the early reformers had prosecuted their studies, was educated at st. andrews, and took his degree of master of arts in . in , "gavinus logye" was "regens coll. sancti leonardi de novo fundati." in the "acta fac. art.," his name occurs as principal of that college in . calderwood says, that in the year , logye "was forced to flee out of the countrie," (vol. i. p. .) this date is certainly erroneous. at the election of martin balfour, as dean of faculty, "mag^r. gavinus logye," principal of st. leonard's college, was appointed one of his assessors, on the d of november . he probably fled before the close of the year ; but of his subsequent history no particulars have been discovered. logye's immediate successor was "dominus thomas cunnynghame," whose name first occurs as principal regent, on the d of november . [ ] in ms. g, "novittis;" in other mss., and in vautr. edit., "novices." [ ] probably john wynrame, see note . [ ] in vautr. edit., "william archbishop," and also in mss. a, i, and w. in ms. e, "william arth." in ms. g, "william arithe." [ ] john hepburn, bishop of brechin, was descended of the hepburns of bothwell. he held this see from , for upwards of forty years, till his death in august .--(keith's catal.) [ ] best known by his latin name major. he was a native of haddington, and spent many years on the continent, where he acquired great reputation by his numerous works, and became a doctor of the sorbonne. after his return to scotland, he was for a short time ( - ) principal regent in the college of glasgow, where knox himself was his pupil. he was at this time vicar of dunlop; and treasurer of the chapel royal at stirling. in , he was incorporated in the university of st. andrews; and became provost of st. salvator's college; an office which he held till his death in . see m'crie's life of knox, vol. i. pp. , ; and irving's life of buchanan, pp. , . [ ] george lockhart, provost of the collegiate church of crichton, in mid-lothian, was rector of the university of st. andrews, from to . he was the author of more than one work, printed at paris, on dialectic philosophy. he afterwards was dean of glasgow, where he died on the d of june .--(obituary in the registrum episcopatus glasguensis, vol. ii. p. .) [ ] the abbot of cambuskenneth, alexander myln, was appointed first president of the college of justice in . in , alexander myl, was a determinant at st. andrews. in , he was official of dunkeld, and in that year he wrote a latin work, lives of the bishops of dunkeld, first printed in , for the bannatyne club. in brunton and haig's historical account of the senators, a very accurate notice is given of his several preferments in the church. myln, who died about the close of the year , is acknowledged to have been a man of great accomplishments, and to have displayed a most commendable zeal for religion and learning. [ ] in the year , on the death of his uncle, john hepburn, prior of the metropolitan church of st. andrews, patrick hepburn succeeded; and held the priorate till , when advanced to the see of moray. see note . [ ] the scotish parliament passed an act on the subject, on the th of june , in which the cause of this disregard of the censures of the church is mainly attributed to "the dampnable persuasions of heretikis, and thair perversit doctrine," which, it is added, "gevis occasioun to lichtly (or despise) the process of cursing, and uther censures of haly kirk."--(acta parl. vol. ii. p. ; keith's hist., vol. i. p. .) there is a singular production by one of the early scotish poets, a priest named sir john rowll, called his cursing, which exemplifies the abuses to which this process was perverted. it was written between and , and is directed chiefly against the stealers, among other articles, of fyve fat geiss of sir johne rowllis, with caponis, hennis, and uther fowlis; but it also contains a general invective against persons who defraud the clergy of their tythes or dues. the following entries in the treasurer's books, shew that ecclesiastical persons were not exempted from such censures:-- "item, the thrid day of november [ ], to sir johne smyth, notare, to pass to execut the process upon the abbot of melross, and prioress of eccles, for non payment of thair taxt,. xl. s. "item, the first day of junij [ ], to ane cheplane to pass to curss the prioress of north berwick and eccles, for non payment of thair taxtis,. xx. s." [ ] in ms. a, &c., "canon law." [ ] in ms. g, "kirkmen."--the church of rome, however, always performed the ceremony of depriving a priest of his holy orders, before being handed over to the secular authorities for punishment; "because (in the words of a modern writer) she was too watchful over the immunities of the privileged order of priests, to deliver them up to temporal jurisdiction, till stripped of the sacerdotal character, and _degraded_ to the situation of laymen." (dowling's history of romanism, p. , new york, , vo.) [ ] the abbot of unreason in scotland, was a similar character to the lord of misrule in england. "this pageant potentate," as stowe calls him, "was annually elected, and his rule extended through the greater part of the holydays conected with the festival days of christmas." but these "fine and subtle disguisings, masks, and mummeries," too often degenerated into abuse, as indeed was to be expected, when such pastimes had for their object to turn all lawful authority into ridicule, and more particularly to burlesque the services of the church. on such occasions, "the rude vulgar occupied the churches, profaned the holy places by a mock imitation of the sacred rites, and sung indecent parodies of the hymns of the church;" and the lively representation of a scene of this kind is familiar to most readers, in a well known work of fiction, "the abbot." part of sir walter scott's comment on his own description may be here quoted:--"the indifference of the clergy, even when their power was greatest, to the indecent exhibitions, which they always tolerated, and sometimes encouraged, forms a strong contrast to the sensitiveness with which they regarded any serious attempt, by preaching or writing, to impeach any of the doctrines of the church."--(waverley novels.) [ ] patrick hepburn, son to patrick first earl of bothwell, was educated at st. andrews, under his uncle, john hepburn, prior of st. andrews, whom he succeeded in . he was secretary from to . in , he was advanced to the see of moray, and was likewise commendator of scone. he retained his bishopric after the reformation; and died at his palace and castle of spynic on the th of june . [ ] knox has been blamed for recording this "merry bourd" or jest; but bishop hepburn had rendered himself notorious by his profligacy. this indeed appears on the face of the public records. under the great seal there passed the following letters of legitimation;--( .) "johanni et patricio hepburn, bastardis filiis naturalibus patricii prioris sancti andreæ." dec. .--also, ( .) "legitimatio adami, patricii, georgii, johannis, et patricii hepburn, bastardorum filiorum naturalium patricii episcopi moraviensis." oct. . and, ( .) "legitimatio jonetæ et agnetis hepburn, bastardarum filiorum naturalium patricii moraviensis episcopi." maij . here are no less than nine illegitimate children, evidently by different mothers. ( .) agnes hepburn, another daughter of the late patrick bishop of murray, was also legitimated on th feb. . [ ] in ms. g, "he was imprisonit." [ ] according to spotiswood, (hist. p. ,) these words were spoken at the time when henry forrest was to be burnt for heresy. see note . [ ] in vautr. edit., "dungwaill." in ms. g, "dungwell."--sir john dingwall was a priest, and evidently a person of some note. on the th of august , his name occurs in the treasurer's accounts, when s. d. was paid to "ane child to bring the auld (service?) bookis out of edinburgh fra sir johne dingwall to dundie." john dingwall, archdeacon of caithness, was one of the auditors who signs the treasurer's accounts, in october . in two charters under the great seal, th september, and th november , he is designed archdeacon of caithness, and rector of strabrok, in linlithgowshire. in another charter, th april , he is styled "dominus johannes dingwall præpositus ecclesim collegiatæ sanctre trinitatis prope burgum de edinburgh." having been nominated one of the spiritual lords at the institution of the college of justice, on the th of may , at the first meeting of the court, he took his seat under the title of provost of trinity college. but he did not long enjoy his judicial office, as he died before the th of july .--(brunton and haig's senators of the college of justice, p. .) buchanan wrote an epigram on dingwall, founded upon some verses of sir adam otterburn of redhall, king's advocate, ("argumento sumpto ex adami otterburni equitis clarissimi hexametris,") from which it may be inferred that dingwall's father had been a priest, and left him no patrimony; that he himself had acquired great wealth, accompanied with pride and luxury, whilst employed at the court of rome; and that a monument had been erected to his memory, containing his titles in high sounding terms. [ ] in ms. g, "kirkmen." see some notes on the use of the title "sir," as applied to priests, in appendix, no. iv. [ ] in ms. g, "delaittit." [ ] some notice of oliphant will be given in a subsequent page. [ ] gawin dunbar was the son of sir alexander dunbar of westfield, and dame elizabeth sutherland; (see note to poems of william dunbar, vol. ii. p. , edinb. , vols. vo.) and not son of sir james dunbar of cumnock, as keith states. he had been a student at st. audrews, where he took his master's degree in . on the th of october , his name occurs as dean of his native diocese of moray. he also held the office of clerk-register from to . in , dunbar received a presentation to the archdeaconry of st. andrews. (regist. secr. sigil.) on the death of bishop gordon, th june , being promoted to the see of aberdeen, he resigned his archdeaconry. he died at a very advanced age on the th or th of march - .--(preface by the editor, mr. cosmo innes, to the registrum episcopatus aberdonensis, p. lv.) [ ] in vautr. edit. and ms. a, &c., "andro balsone." he was probably related to martin balfour, "official principal" of st. andrews, rector of dunyno, and a canon of st. salvator's church, st. andrews. the name of andrew balfour occurs among the licentiates of st. leonard's college in ; but we cannot say whether or not he was the person who is here mentioned. [ ] in ms. "hell." [ ] richard carmichael, _yet living in fife_; that is, in the year ; but these words are literally copied by dr. patrick anderson in his ms. history of scotland, (vol. i. p. .) this seems sufficiently absurd in a work which was written as late as , or nearly years subsequent to carmichael's accusation. "ane letter maid to richard carmichaell, remittand to him his eschete gudis pertenying to our soverane, throw being of the said richard abjurit of heresy," &c., was passed under the privy seal, on the th of march . [ ] clapperton was only sub-dean of the chapel royal of stirling. the deanery, which was first conjoined with the provostry of kirkheugh, st. andrews, was afterwards annexed to the bishopric of galloway. henry weemys, bishop of galloway, was accordingly dean of the chapel royal, during his incumbency, from to .--in ms. g, clapperton is erroneonsly called sir john.--from the treasurer's accounts we learn, that schir george clappertoun was "maister elimosinar to the kingis grace," during the latter years of james the fifth ( to .) "dominus georgius clappertoun," on the th of july , obtained a presentation to the provostship of trinity college near edinburgh.--(reg. mag. sig., vol. xiv.) he sat in the provincial council at edinburgh in under this title.--(wilkins, concilia, vol. iv. p. , where his name is erroneously given as george cryghton.) he probably resigned this office on being appointed sub-dean of the chapel royal. after the reformation, he still retained the designation of sub-dean, and received his two-thirds of the benefice, although john duncanson was minister. sir george clapperton, sub-dean of the chapel royal of stirling, and vicar of kirkinner, granted a life-rent of the teinds of kirkinner, th september . (analecta scotica, vol. i. p. .) "sir george clappertoun, sub dene of the kingis majesties chapell royall of striveling, deceissit in the moneth of apryle ." in his testament, written at striviling in his "awin dwelling house," on the th of that month, as he nominates mr. robert pont, provost of trinity college, to act as oversman, and one of his assignees, we may infer, that clapperton had embraced the reformed doctrines.--(reg. of confirmed testaments, st sept. .) [ ] in ms. g, "seytoun." [ ] in vautr. edit. and mss. g, a, &c., "a whole lent." [ ] in ms. g, "lent." [ ] in vautr. edit. and ms. g, "condemned the holie doctrine." [ ] in vautr. edit. and ms. a, &c., "the whole lent past." in ms. g, "whatsoever he had taught in all his sermons before, the hole lent-tyde preceiding." [ ] james beaton, archbishop of st. andrews. [ ] in vautr. edit. and mss. g, a, &c., "ye may heir." [ ] in vautr. edit. "skoffe." [ ] in ms. g, the words "and more easely beleved," are omitted. in vautr. edit. and ms. a, &c., the passage reads, "this accusation was easely beleeved of," &c. [ ] in the habit of the dominican order to which he belonged. [ ] the exact time of seaton's flight from scotland, and the date of his letter to the king, have not been ascertained. the probable date is or . some particulars of his history will be given in the appendix, no. vii. [ ] in ms. g, "thy grace's." [ ] in ms. g, "thy grace's." [ ] in ms. g, "bairdit mulls;" in vautr. edit, and ms. l , "barbed mules;" ms. i, has "barbed mooles;" mss. a, w, and e, "bardit" or "barded mules"--the meaning of the phrase is, mules with trappings, or richly caparisoned. [ ] in ms. g, "conceat." [ ] the custom of choosing the king of the bean on the vigil of the epiphany ( th of january), was not peculiar to this country. the payments in the treasurer's accounts show, that a "queen of the bene" was frequently chosen. for the custom itself, see strutt's sports and pastimes; brand's popular antiquities, by sir henry ellis; and jamieson's dictionary, _v._ bane. sir thomas urquhart of cromarty, amongst other remarks, says, the presbyterians made use of kings "as we do of card-kings, in playing at the hundred," &c., "or, as the french on the epiphany-day use their _roy de la febre_, or king of the bean; whom, after they have, honoured with drinking of his health, and shouting aloud _le roy boit, le roy boit_, they make pay for all the reckoning; not leaving him sometimes one peny, rather then that the exorbitancie of their debosh should not be satisfied to the full."--(most exquisite jewell, lond. , p. .) [ ] in ms. l , after the words, "of many read," there is added, "for every gentleman at court was curious to gett the coppie of the same, as was thocht weill of by the most part; but what," &c. on the other hand, the transcriber of that ms., in the next paragraph, omits two or three passages, concerning "the bloodie beasts," and "bands," in referring to the persecutions at this time, by "beaton and his doctors." [ ] in ms. g, "greitlie." [ ] the time of forresse, or forrest's imprisonment and martyrdom has not been well ascertained; and knox's subsequent remark, "after whose death, the flame of persecution ceased, till the death of norman gourlay, the space of ten years or neirby," is not intelligible, according to the dates usually assigned. foxe gives no precise date, but says, that _within few years after_ hamilton's martyrdom, "ane henry forrest, a young man born in linlithgow, who a little before had received the orders of benet and collet, &c., suffered death at the north church stile of the abbey church of st. andrews," (edit. , p. .)--caldorwood has copied from foxe, and supposes it might have been in , or the year following. (hist, vol. i. p. .) keith conjectures it was about . (hist, vol. i. p. ;) and m'crie, in . (life of knox, vol. i. p. .)--as knox speaks of forresse's "long imprisonment," we may conjecture it was in . from the treasurer's accounts, th of may , we find that some persons were then under accusation of heresy, letters having been sent on that day "to the bishop of st. andrews, to advertize him of the changing of the dirt of the accusation of the lutherans."--forrest was a benedictine monk; and from mention of the town where he was born, we may conjecture he was the son of "thomas forrest of linlithgow," to whom various sums were paid by the treasurer "to the bigging of the dyke about the paliss of linlithgow," between april and july . [ ] vautr. edit, and all the later mss. have erroneously "the _said_ tower." the castle of st. andrews, originally built in the year , by bishop roger, as an episcopal residence, stands close to the sea-shore, and one of the towers projecting into the sea, no doubt obtained for it this name. "a _nuik_ in the bottom of the sea tower, a place where many of god's children had been imprisoned before," is again mentioned by knox in . [ ] see note above: all the mss. read "ten years." [ ] the events here mentioned were all connected with the sway of the douglasses in the minority of james the fifth. the first was the attempt by sir walter scott of buccleuch, at the head of horse, at melrose, to rescue the king from the earl of angus, on the th of january . the second was an equally unsuccessful attempt, for the same end, by the earl of lennox, at kirkliston, on the th of september that year, where lennox was cruelly slain by sir james hamilton of finnart. but the king at length made his escape from falkland in july , (or, as mr. tytler conjectures, on the d or d of may.) on the th of september that year, an act of forfeiture was passed against archibald earl of angus, his uncle, and his brother sir george douglas. they had retired to england, and continued in exile till the death of james in . [ ] wyncester, that is stephen gardyner, bishop of winchester. he became lord chancellor of england in the reign of mary, and died in november . see lord campbell's lives of the chancellors, vol. ii. pp. - . [ ] both foxe and calderwood have preserved a detailed account of seaton's accusation in , in which year his "declaration made at poules crosse," was printed at london. a notice of this rare tract, and some further particulars of his history will be added in the appendix, no. vii. [ ] "duch land," _deutschland_--means germany, not holland. [ ] see appendix, no. vi.--protestant exiles from scotland. [ ] in ms. g, "providence." [ ] steidis, _stadts_--probably one of the states in north holland. calderwood has strangely confounded macdowall and macchabeus, as one person. macdowall's christian name is not given by any of our writers; but there is, i think, little doubt that he was james mackdowell, one of the determinants in st. leonard's college, st. andrews, in the year . [ ] alexander alesius, or alesse, was a native of edinburgh, born in , and educated at st. andrews. calderwood, bayle, the biographia britannica, dr. m'crie, and, in particular, the rev. christopher anderson, (annals of the english bible, vol. ii. pp. - ,) have given detailed accounts of his subsequent life and writings. he was imprisoned, and narrowly escaped the persecuting violence of his superior, patrick hepburn, prior of st. andrews, in the year . alesse has the merit of being among the first who contended for the translation of the scriptures into the vernacular tongue. he died at leipzig on the th of march . [ ] john fyfe prosecuted his studies in st. leonard's college, st. andrews, under gawin logye. his name occurs as a determinant, in , and a licentiate in . dr. m'crie says, that fyfe having fled from st. andrews, accompanied alesse to germany, and shared in his honours at leipzig.--(life of knox, vol. i. p. .) he is said to have returned to scotland, and died in st. leonard's, about the beginning of the reformation, or soon after.--(calderwood's hist. vol. i. p. .) he seems however to have been a professor at frankfort. see appendix, no. vi. [ ] dr. m'crie has brought together a number of particulars respecting dr. john macchabeus.--(life of knox, vol. i. p. .) some additional notices will be given in the appendix, no. vi. but it may here be noticed, in connexion with the following footnote, that macchabeus was brought from wittemburg to copenhagen, in the year ; that he was one of the translators of the bible into danish, first printed at kiobenhaffn, in , folio; and that he died on the th of december . [ ] in vautr. edit., and mss. g, w, &c., "cawpmanhowen;" in ms. g, "capmanhoven." this name joined with the words "and famous men," might suggest that an individual was meant. it is however copenhagen, (in danish, kiobenhaven, _i.e._ the merchant's haven,) the city in which macchabeus attained great distinction. sir david lyndesay of the mount, in his official character as lyon-king at arms, visited denmark in ; and his acquaintance with macchabeus might have led to the first publication of his dialog, or four books of the monarchie, under a fictitious designation, although actually printed by john scot, either at st. andrews or edinburgh in : it bears on the title, "imprintit at the command and expensis of doctor machabevs in capmanhovin." there is a later edition, apparently in and , with a similar imprint, but the name is rendered "nachabeus." [ ] the th of august , is the date assigned for the trial, "befoir the bishop of ross, be ane commission of the bischope of sanctandrois," of kirk and others. (diurnal of occurrents, p. .) of these persons, calderwood informs us, that sir william kirk, as his name denotes, was a priest; but "whether he compeared and abjured, or fled, we can find no certaintie;" that adam dayes, or dease, was "a ship-wright that dwelt on the north side of the bridge of leith;" that henry cairnes, "skipper in leith, fled out of the countrie to the easter seas;" and that "john stewart, indweller in leith, died in exile." (hist. vol. i. p. .)--"henricus cairnys, incola de leith," was denounced as a fugitive, and condemned for heresy, in - ; and on the th of april , the names of seven sons and five daughters of henry carnis in leith, are specified in a letter under the privy seal, granting them the escheat of the various goods and property which belonged to their father.--(m'crie's life of knox, vol. i. pp. - .) [ ] in vautr. edit., ms. a. &c., is added, "our advocate."--johnstone studied at st. andrews, and his name appears among the determinants, in st. leonard's college, in . mr. william johnstone was the last of nine advocates who were admitted at the insitution of the court of session, th may . the time when he fled appears to have been two years later. but after the death of james v, he returned to scotland, probably with the governor, and apostatized from the reformed faith. this we learn from a letter, written to the pope, in the queen's name, which states, "that the bearer, mr. william johnstone, a layman, had ten years previously imbibed the new doctrines; that after much distress of mind, he earnestly longed to be reunited to the mystical body of christ, but no opportunity had hitherto presented itself. wherefore james earl of arran, governor of our kingdom, supplicates that his holiness the pope might receive the said william into the bosom of the church." this letter is dated the th of april .--(epistolæ regum scotorum, vol. ii. p. .) [ ] henryson, or henderson, appears in the list of licentiates in st. salvator's college, st. andrews, in . he had previously been employed as an assistant to mr. david vocat, principal master and tutour of the grammar school of the burgh of edinburgh, who having chosen "his kind freend and discipill, master henry henrison, to be con-master;" this nomination was approved of by george bishop of dunkeld and abbot of holyroodhouse; and (apparently on the death of vocat,) it was further confirmed by a royal charter, dated st of march , enjoyning that "the said master henry henrysoun be at hie solempne festivale tymes with ws, the said abbot and our successouris, at hie mass and ewin sang, with his surples upoun him, to do ws service the time that we sall doe devyne service within our said abbey, as efferis." (reg. mag. sigilli, lib. xxiii. no. .--see m'crie's life of melville, vol. ii. p. ,) calderwood, in mentioning that henryson had fled, and been condemned as a heretic, adds, that he died in england.--(hist. vol. i. p. .) the escheat of his goods was granted to james bannatyne, according to an entry in the treasurer's accounts, , , "compositio bonorum eschætorum magistri henrici henderson convict. de crimine heresieos, _ab antiquo concess_. jacobo bannatyne," &c. (m'crie's life of knox, vol. i. p. .) [ ] to burn one's bill, was a sign of recantation. "the form of burning one's bill, (says keith,) or recanting, was this--the person accused was to bring a faggot of dry sticks and burn it publicly, by which ceremony he signified that he destroyed that which should have been the instrument of his death." (hist. vol. i. p. .) [ ] david stratoun is described by calderwood and other writers, as a brother of the laird of lauriston. (see note to next page.) on the th of march - , for the sum of £ , the composition of a tenement in dundee, falling to the king, "per decessum davidis straitoun in quhitstoun, justificati ad mortem pro certis criminibus heresieos," was granted to david gardyne and mariote erskyn. pitscottie erroneously places the execution of stratoun and gourlay under the year . their trial took place in holyroodhouse, in the king's presence; james hay, bishop of ross, (from to ,) acting as commissioner for archbishop beaton.--(see foxe's martyrs; cald. hist. vol. i. p. ; keith's hist. vol. i., p. .) [ ] norman gourlay was in priest's orders, and had been a student at st. andrews. his name occurs in the list of determinants, in , and of licentiates, in . [ ] these words are added in the margin of the ms., probably in knox's own hand. [ ] see note .--the rev. c. anderson shows, from foxe, that it was the vicar of ecclesgreig, and not prior hepburn, with whom stratoun had a dispute about tythes. (annals, vol. ii. p. .) [ ] from the register of the great seal, it is evident that the stratouns of stratoun and the stratouns of lauriston in kincardineshire, were one and the same family. thus we find that charters were granted to ( .) alexander stratoun de eodem, and agnes ogilvy his spouse, in ; and to alexander stratoun de lauranstoun, (of the barony of stratoun,) in . ( .) andrew stratoun de eodem, and isobel lindsay his spouse, in . ( .) george stratoun, son and heir of andrew stratoun de eodem, in ; and george stratoun de lauriston, in . (the last will of george stratoun of that ilk, is recorded th april , in the register of confirmed testaments.) ( .) alexander stratoun, son and heir of george stratoun de eodem, in . this alexander stratoun de eodem was served heir of george stratoun de eodem, his father, d june . david stratoun, who suffered martyrdom, was probably a younger son of the first alexander stratoun above mentioned. [ ] in ms. g, "cast himself." [ ] the rood or cross of greenside. the actual site of the gibbet, where criminals were executed, is somewhat doubtful; (maitland's edinburgh, p. ;) but it was near the road leading from the calton towards leith. james the second, in , had granted a piece, on the eastern side of this road, in the place which still retains the name of the greenside, for holding public sports and tournaments. [ ] in ms. g, "church." [ ] among the persons who fled at this time to england, was james hamilton, sheriff of linlithgow, and brother of patrick hamilton; also his sister katherine. in august , cranmer introduces him to crumwell as a gentleman who had left his country for no cause, but "that he favoured the truth of god's word;" and on the th of april , he sent to crumwell a copy of the sentence given against him by the bishops at holyrood, praying that henry would write to his nephew on his behalf. see the rev. chr. anderson's annals of the english bible, vol. ii. pp. , . hamilton obtained permission to return in . [ ] the exact dates of the several persons accused of heresy, or who suffered martyrdom in scotland during the reign of james the fifth, in many instances cannot be ascertained; but it is evident that while many persons were accused between and , the flames of persecution were rekindled with greater fury, at the time that david beaton became coadjutor of st. andrews, and was raised to the dignity of a cardinal, at the close of the year . [ ] knox has here mistaken the time when sir john borthwick, being accused, but having made his escape to england, was burned in effigy. the date was the th of may , or two days after the baptism of prince james. see appendix, no. viii. [ ] mary of lorraine, daughter of the duke of guyse, and widow of the duke of longueville, became james the fifth's second queen. on her arrival from france, she landed at balcomie, near crail, in fife, on the th of june . she was conveyed to st. andrews with great pomp; and pitscottie has furnished an interesting account of the pageants, &c., represented on that festive occasion. see also lyon's hist, of st. andrews, vol. i. p. . [ ] in vautr. edit., "killor." unfortunately his play, which probably was represented in or , has not been preserved. neither has any information respecting friar kyllour himself been discovered. [ ] the property of persons convicted of heresy and other penal crimes, became escheated to the crown; and the escheat was usually bestowed by a special grant from the king under the privy seal, upon payment of a composition to the high treasurer. on the st of march - , such a grant was made to james menteith, "of all gudis quhilkis pertenit to uniquhile sir duncane symsoun, chaplane, and pertenyis to our soverane lord be reason of eschete, through justifying of the said sir duncane to the deid for certane crymes of heresy imput to him."--(m'crie's knox, vol. i. p. .) [ ] in vautr. edit. and the later mss. "forrester." robert forrester was "brother to thomas forrestare of arngibbonne." along with "william forrestare, son to john forrestare, burgess of stirling," and three other persons, he found surety to underly the law, on the ground of "haifing and using of sic bukis as ar suspect of heresy," &c. th january - .--(pitcairn's criminal trials, vol. i. p. .) it appears from knox and other authorities, that he was condemned, and suffered on the st of march that year; and after their death, the goods of robert forrester, and of william forrester, were confiscated d march - . [ ] of thomas forret, canon-regular in the monastery of st. colm's inch, and vicar of dollar, who finished his education at cologne, an interesting account is preserved in foxe's martyrs, and has been copied into "the scots worthies." his father is said to have been master of the king's stables, in the reign of james the fourth. in the treasurer's accounts, in february , we find the name of thomas forret, as one of the persons at court to whom dresses were furnished at the king's expense. in like manner,-- " , july . item, to thome foret, in bredil-silver of ane hors send furth of sanct johnstoun to the king, ix s. " , july . item, to thome foret, to pas to fast castle, to see the inglis schippis, xiiij s." [ ] in ms. g, is added, "upoun the castell hill." [ ] that is - , the year then being reckoned to commence on the th of march. but the actual date of their martyrdom, instead of the last day of february, seems to have been the st of march, according to an incidental notice in the household books of james the fifth; as, in order to render the example more striking, the king himself was present:-- " mar. . accusatio hæreticorum et eorum combustio, apud edinburgh, rege presente."--(archæologia, vol. xxii. p. .) the next day the king returned to linlithgow. a corresponding notice is furnished by the treasurer's accounts, st of march . "item, deliverit to archibald heriot messinger, to pas and search their goods who were abjured and declared heretics in edinburgh and stirling, xij s." [ ] that is, the cardinal beaton; gawin dunbar, archbishop of glasgow and lord chancellor; and george crichton, bishop of dunkeld. [ ] in a letter from sir thomas wharton, at carlisle, th november , to lord crumwell, it is said, "there was at dumfreis laitlie one frere jerom, callid a well lernid man, taken by the lorde maxvell upon commandment from the bishopis, and lyith in sore yerons, like to suffre for the inglish menes opynyons, as thai saie, anenpst the lawis of gode. hit passeth abrode daylie, thankes be to god, there, all that same notwithstandinge."--(state papers, vol. v. p. .) [ ] petrie the church historian, says, "the summer following ( ,) jerome russell, a gray friar, and thomas kennedy, a young man of aire, not above years of age, were at glascow, accused of heresy."--(hist. p. .) whether he had any authority for calling him thomas, can only be conjectured. calderwood names him n. kennedy; hence he has been called ninian; but see note . [ ] of mr. john lauder mention will afterwards be made, in connexion with knox's account of george wishart's trial. [ ] oliphant was educated at st. andrews, his name occurring among the determinants, in . having taken his master's degree, he obtained preferment in the church, as vicar of foulis and innertig; and was employed by cardinal beaton as his confidential agent at rome. in sadler's state papers is an intercepted letter from beaton to him, dated th november , (vol. i. p. .) in may , in the proceedings against sir john borthwick, he is styled notary public, and secretary to cardinal beaton. oliphant, (misnamed eliphant,) in the provincial council, held at edinburgh in , is styled "secretarius et notarius in concilio."--(wilkins, conc. vol. i. p. .) in and , he was again employed at rome, in the affairs of the governor and of archbishop hamilton; and in , he appeared as the accuser of walter myll, when tried for heresy. see next note. the name of mr. andro oliphant, notary public, also occurs in november , in the acts of parliament, (vol. ii. p. .) [ ] in ms. g, "servantis." in vautr. edit. "servantes;" and vautr. edit., mss. a, e, &c., read "meitman." of this friar, who with lauder and oliphant, are emphatically styled "servants of satan," not much is known. according to pitscottie, whilst schir andrew oliphant stood forth as the public accuser of walter myln, in april , friar maltman preached a sermon on the same occasion, previously to his trial in the abbey kirk of st. andrews. [ ] petrie, in his notice of their trial, says, "because bishop gawin dunbar was thought cold in the business, messrs. john lauder, and andro oliphant, and frier maltman, were sent from edinburgh to assist him."--(hist. part ii, p. .) we may indeed conclude, that unless for the zeal of these inquisitors, russell and kennedy might have escaped martyrdom. [ ] in ms. g, "trod:" in vautr. edit. "taken." [ ] thomas duke of norfolk, in a letter to lord crumwell from berwick, th of march , says, "dayly commeth unto me, some gentlemen and some clerkes, wich do flee owte of scotland, as they saie, for redyng of scripture in inglishe; saying that, if they were taken, they sholde be put to execution. i geve them gentle wordes; and to some, money." in the same letter, he adds, "here is nowe in this toune, and hath be[ne] a good season, she that was wife to the late capitaigne of donbar, and dare not retorne, for holding our waies, as she saithe. she was in englande, and sawe quene jane. she was sir patricke hamelton's doughter, and her brother was brent in scotlande or yeres past."--(state papers, vol. v. p. .) this last reference as to date is an obvious mistake. see extract from foxe's martyrs, in appendix, no. v., respecting katherine hamilton, and her brother, james hamilton of kincavel, who returned in , and is mentioned in the following note. [ ] sir james hamilton of finnart was a bastard son of james first earl of arran; but he obtained letters of legitimation, jan. - . his slaughter of the earl of lennox in , (see note ,) was rewarded by the captaincy of linlithgow palace. in buchanan's admonition, written in , after the regent earl of murray's death, to expose "the practises of the hamiltons," there is a detailed account of the several conspiracies against james the fifth, in which sir james was concerned. but hamilton latterly became a favourite of the king, and acquired large possessions. in , he was appointed an extraordinary lord of session; and, as master of works, he superintended the building or additions made to the palace of linlithgow, blackness castle, and other royal edifices.--(treasurer's accounts, sept. , and april .) on the th of october , is this entry,-- "item, gevin to schir james hammiltoun, master of wark, to compleit the kingis wark in striveling, as the appointment and contract maid betuix the compt and him thairupon beris, iiij^m. lib." (£ .) "item, (in april ,) gevin to schir james hammyltoun, in parte payment of the rest of his comptis for the warkis of lynlythqw and blakness, at the kingis command, be ane precept, iij^c. lib." (£ .) but his fate was not less sudden than it must have been unexpected. in the same record, we find that on the th of august , a messenger was employed "for summonyng of ane assiss to schir james hammiltoun, and for wyne brocht into the lordis, being upoun his inqueist, xv s. x d."--his accuser was james hamilton of kincavel, sheriff of linlithgow, and being convicted of treason, which had been long concealed, his sentenco was carried into immediate execution. [ ] pitscottie has given a more detailed narrative of sir james hamilton's condemnation and of the king's vision. [ ] the birth of a prince, named james after his father, on d of may , is mentioned at page , note . the younger son, named arthur, duke of rothesay, &c., was born at stirling, in april , where he died, according to lesley, eight days after his baptism.--(hist. p. .) in the treasurer's accounts, about the end of april , there was paid "to andre zare in striviling, for ane cap of leid that my lord duke was buried in." prince james died within six hours of arthur. mr. tytler falls into a strange mistake in placing their death subsequently to that of queen margaret, widow of james the fourth. in a letter to her brother henry the eighth, written from stirling, on the th of may , she mentions the great distress "for the death of the prynce and hys brothar, both with the kyng my derrest son, and the quene hys wyffe."--(state papers, vol. v. p. .) the queen dowager died, however, within a few months; the "diurnal of occurrents" says on the th of november. this date is evidently incorrect, as on the st of that month, messengers were despatched with letters "to divers lordis and gentilmen to cum to the quenis tyrement." (treasurer's accounts.) a letter, describing her last illness, is preserved among the state papers, vol. v. p. , written in december, by ray the pursuevant, who had been sent by the privy council to scotland specially to report on the subject. [ ] his death may be referred to the end of the year , or early in ; as the treasurer paid "to david hardy, be ane tykket of george steilis, for hinging of the tapescherie in halyrudhouse, and doun taking of the samin, vij s." on the oct. .--the name of george steill is occasionally met with in the treasurer's accounts, during the reign of james the fifth. we may conjecture that he was the son of john steill, one of the servitors to james the fourth, (apparently king's tailor,) from to . george, who was a burgess of edinburgh, had acquired the lands of houston, and other property. he had a charter under the great seal, of the office of coquet clerk of the borough: "officii clericatus coketæ burgi de edinburgo," sept. . the charters of the lands of houston, in linlithgowshire, were granted to himself and christian wilson his spouse, july , and sept. . he had also a charter of "the common-myre near duddingston loch," in the county of edinburgh, july . in the year , the common-myre is described as extending to acres, in the barony of preistfield, now prestonfield, (retours, edin. no. .) [ ] thomas scott of pitgorno, in fife, was the second son of sir william scott of balweary, (douglas's baronage, p. .) a person of the same name was a licentiate at st. andrews in . he seems to have held some situation at court, as, among other persons of the royal household, he received £ , at christmas , for their "fealis and pensionis." in , the treasurer also paid "thomas scot for his fee, be the kingis precept," the sum of £ , s. d. on the th of october , scott was admitted an ordinary lord of session, in the room of his father, who was then deceased--(senators of the college of justice, p. .) as a further mark of royal favour, he was appointed justice clerk in . a letter, signed by him, "thomas scott of pitgorno," on the st of december , addressed to crumwell, complains of the resetting of traitors who had escaped to england, (some of them, we may suppose, were persons accused of heresy;) and he concludes with suggesting that henry the eighth would make an acceptable "propyne" to his nephew, by sending james a young lion, brought from flanders.--(state papers, vol. v. p. .) [ ] scott's death must have taken place about the close of , the office of justice-clerk having been conferred on thomas bellenden of auchinoul, th december that year. in a letter written by mr. alexander colvile, justice-depute, th december , the above confession of scott is thus mentioned in connection with the appointment of suitable persons to the office of justice-clerk, "if he, i say, be not a sound, conscientious man, and free of baise bribrie, he may prove a pernitious instrument, and to the cawse that iniquitie may be committed; as we have yit in memorie of one thomas scot of abotishall, quho was justice clerk to james the fift, of happie memorie, quho being strukin with a terror of conscience, at the hour of his death, for his evill cariage in that place, dyed in desperation, crying, 'i am damned! i am damned!'"--(pitcairn's criminal trials, vol. iii. p. .) a proof of scott's iniquitous proceedings is embodied in the act of parliament rescinding the forfeiture of john lord glammys, on the th of march - , upon a pretended confession, being "fraudfullie indusit be umquhile thomas scot, justice-clerk, and utheris familiaris to our said umquhile soverane lord, to mak the said pretendit confessioune, sayand to him, that his life, landis, gudis, movabill and ummovabill, suld be saif to him; and that na process nor sentence of forfaultor sould be led aganis him."--(acta parl. scot. vol. ii. p. .) [ ] mr. thomas marjoribanks of ratho, was one of the ten advocates admitted at the institution of the college of justice, th of may . he acquired the lands of ratho in ; and in that year, he was provost of edinburgh, and sat in the parliaments and . he was admitted a lord of session, and clerk-register, on the th of february - , as successor to sir james foulis. "maister thomas marjoribankis, now clerk of oure soverane ladyes register, for his feyes in the yeris of god and ," received "for ilk year merkis, _summa_ £ , s. d." he was deprived of the office of clerk-register in , and died before .--(senators of the college of justice, p. .) [ ] mr. hugh rigg was admitted an advocate, on the th of november . he obtained a charter of confirmation to himself and janet hopper his spouse, of the lands of carberry, in the shire of edinbuigh, st july . the old baronial mansion-house of carberry stands in the eastern part of the parish of inveresk.--(new statistical account.) hugh rigg is again mentioned by knox, and also by pitscottie, as one of the four persons to whom the governor of scotland communicated the overtures of the duke of somerset, immediately previous to the battle of pinkie. he was succeeded by his son james rig of carberry, whose name occurs, in and , in lists of assize (pitcairn's crim. trials); and "mag^r. quintigernus rig," was served heir to his father, james rig of carbarry, jan. .--(retours, edinb. no. .) [ ] mr. thomas bellenden, or bannatyne, of auchinoul, was the son of patrick bellenden. he was admitted an ordinary judge on the d of june . he was appointed director of chancery, th of september ; and on the th of december , he succeeded scott of pitgorno, as justice-clerk. he was one of the commissioners who met for redress, on the border; and sir william eure informs crumwell, on the th of january , that he had "hade diverse commynyages with mr. thomas bellendyn, one of the said counsellours for scotlande, a man by estymatioun apperaunte to be of th'age of fiftye zeres or above, and of gentle and sage conversatioun, specially touching the staye of the spiritualitie of scotland."--(state papers, vol. v. p. .) he died in , and was succeeded in his offices of justice-clerk and director of chancery, by his eldest son, sir john bellenden. [ ] buchanan was born in the year . having taken his bachelor's degree at st. andrews, d oct. , he completed his academical course at paris. it is usually stated that he returned to scotland, along with gilbert earle of cassilis, in . the following notices from the treasurer's accounts, prove that date to be incorrect. "item, the xvj day of februar [ - ,] be the kingis gracis precept and speciale command to maister george balquhannan and andro myln, servandis to lord james, to be thame twa gounis," &c., and various other "leverays," viz., "hoiss, bonettis, hugtonis, and doublettis." "item, [the xxj day of august ,] to master george balquhannan, at the kingis command, xx lib." in july , upon occasion of "the quenis (magdalene's) saull mess and dirige, quham god assolze," maister george balquhanan received a goun of paryse blak, lyned with blak satyne, &c. also £ , at the king's command. [ ] lord james stewart, to whom buchanan acted as tutor, was the king's natural son, by elizabeth shaw, of the family of sauchie.--(dr. irving's life of buchanan, p. .) he had the abbacies of kelso and melrose conferred on him; but he died at an early age, in the year . [ ] on the title of the first edition of buchanan's paraphrase of the psalms, he is characterized as _poetarum nostri sæculi facile princeps_. it was printed at paris, by henry stephanus, in vo, without date; but apparently in . a second edition has the date . but the same printer had published a selection of psalms by buchanan, with corresponding versions by other poets, at paris in , to. [ ] the date of buchanan's escape from scotland is fixed by his own statement to the beginning of the year , when he says five persons (symson, forrester, &c., see note ) were condemned to the flames, whilst nine others made a formal recantation of their lutheran errors, and many more were driven into exile; among whom was george buchanan, who escaped by the window of his bed-chamber, while his keepers were asleep: "in his fuit georgius buchananus qui, sopitis custodibus, per cubiculi fenestram evaserat."--(hist. lib. xiv.) [ ] these words seem to belong to the last paragraph; but all the copies place them as here printed. [ ] in ms. g, "espy and detest." [ ] alexander lord kilmauris, third son of the fourth earl of glencairn. in , he was in england as a hostage for his father's sincerity; and sir ralph sadler says, in a letter to henry the eighth, "furthermore, he hath written to your majesty to have his son home, entring other pledges for him. he is called the lord of kilmaurs, and the master of glencairn; and in my poor opinion, they be few such scots in scotland, both for his wisdom and learning, and well dedicate to the truth of christ's word and doctrine."--(sadler's papers, vol. i. p. .) "the acute sadler," as sir walter scott remarks, "discerned the germ of those qualities which afterwards made this nobleman the great promoter of the reformation, and in consequence a steady adherent of the english interest." (ib.) both the earl of glencairn, and his son lord kilmaurs, received pensions from henry the eighth. owing to the death of his brothers, he succeeded to the earldom in , and survived till . [ ] thomas douchtie, hermit of alareit, or loretto, near musselburgh--see note . [ ] in ms. g, "francis ordour dos." [ ] in ms. g, "gud." [ ] in ms. l , "stayed." [ ] in vautr. edit. "such lasie scamleris." [ ] in ms. g, "christis glorie." [ ] in ms. g, "to." [ ] in ms. g, "fra treuth." [ ] to _turse_, or carry. in ms. g, and all the other copies, it is "to curse," which has no sense. [ ] in ms. g, "on craftie." [ ] friar _walter_ is apparently a mistake for friar william laing. (see the following note.) foxe has stated it was through this friar william laing, "bewrayer of the confession to archbishop james beaton," that henry forrest, whose fate is mentioned at page , was condemned and given over to the secular judges to suffer death. see the extract from foxe's martyrs, in appendix, no. v. [ ] calderwood says, "frier laing had been confessor to the king," (hist. vol. i. p. ;) and the treasurer's accounts in , show that "schir william layng, chaplane," was then attached to the court. on the th of february - , he received various articles of dress, viz., a gown of french black, a hugtoun of parise black, a doublet of black sattin, and a black bonnet. on the d dec. , "abbis, towellis," &c., were furnished "to his chapell." in , "schir william layng," is described as "maister elymosinar in the princes house;" £ , s. d. having been previously paid "for his liveray clathis, be ane precept, above the ordinar, admittit to him in my lord prince house;" and in july that year, £ was "gevin to schir william layng, chaplane, enterit this zere (in the household)."--"willelmus laynge, studens," was incorporated in the university of glasgow, in ; and another "willelmus layng, clericus parochialis glasguensis," in . [ ] according to a contemporary chronicler, the chapel of our lady of loretto was founded so late as , by thomas douchtie, here styled the hermit of alareit. "in this mene tyme ( ,) thair come ane heremeit callit thomas douchtie, in scotland, quha had bein lang capitane [captive?] befoir the turk, as was allegit, and brocht ane ymage of our lady with him, and foundit the cheppil of laureit besyid musselburgh."--(diurnal of occurrents, p. , edinb. , to.) in like manner buchanan says, this impostor douchtye, having returned from italy, built a church to the virgin mary, and made great gain by his fictitious miracles.--(hist. lib. xiv. p. .) the chapel dedicated to our lady of loretto, (sometimes called alareit,) stood beyond the eastern gate of musselburgh, near the links; and the name for the locality is still retained. it was connected with the nunnery of the sciennes, and became one of the most noted shrines in scotland, during the reign of james the fifth. lesley says, that the king, previously to his marriage, having sailed for france, ( th july ,) the vessel in which he had embarked, after sailing by the north of scotland, and the west, was driven by a storm, and that he landed at st. ninians, in galloway, "and sua returnit to strivilinge, _and thairfra passit on his feet in pilgrimage to the chapell of lorrett_, besid mussilburgh."--(hist. p. .) queen margaret, in a letter to henry the eighth, printed in the state papers, vol. v. p. , (where it is placed under the year , instead of ,) thus mentions her son's voyage, saying that his nephew had been "in grete dangere of seyis, be contrare wyndis, quhilk agane his mynd, be extreme stormis, compellit to mak course furth of this est sey northward, compassing the maist parte of this realme throuch the occeane seyis, and be the grace of god arryvit in the port of st. ninianis callit quhithorne." james, after his pilgrimage on foot from stirling, sailed from leith, with a squadron of seven vessels, and had a more fortunate voyage. on the th of september , the treasurer paid £ , s. d. to sir henry balfour, in part of £ , "to be gevin to puir houshuldarris to pray for his hienes prosperous returnyng." [ ] proposals for such a meeting had been made in , and again in . the above meeting was to have taken place on the th of january - , according to articles agreed upon the previous month.--(state papers, vol. v. p. ; tytler's hist. vol. v. p. .) [ ] henry the eighth, says sir walter scott, "insulted james by the threat, that he had still the name rod in in keeping which had chastized his father. by that rod, the duke of norfolk was intimated, who, while yet earl of surrey, commanded at flodden, where james iv. fell."--(hist. of scotland, vol. ii. p. .) see note . [ ] pitscottie says, that the bishops, in apprehension that james might follow his uncle's example, in casting down the abbeys, "budded (bribed) the king to bide at home, and gave him three thousand pounds by year to sustain his house, off their benefices." at a later date, the clergy, we are told, offered to contribute and assign to him of yearly rent of their benefices, the sum of thirty thousand pounds; or to enlarge the sum to £ , , provided the king gave them a secular judge to their mind, to execute justice on the wicked heretics whom they had delated to the king, in the list or scroll elsewhere referred to.--(hist. pp. , , , edit. .) it was but proper that the clergy, to whom the king had sacrificed so much, should thus manifest their liberality; but indeed such contributions were not unusual, on the part of the beneficed clergy and dignitaries of the church. in august , previously to the calamitous expedition which had such a fatal catastrophe at floddon, the clergy contributed the sum of £ , , s. d. (treasurer's accounts.) [ ] the th of august . [ ] in ms. g, "malberie." the name should be mowbray. [ ] halden rig, or hawden rig, in roxburghshire, a few miles to the east of kelso. in the ms. it was originally written "maxwell heucht," but this is corrected to haldane rig. in the later mss. "reade," is written more intelligibly "raid." [ ] thomas howard, second duke of norfolk, when earl of surrey, convoyed the princess margaret from england, to her marriage with james the fourth, at holyrood, in ; and he commanded the english army at floddon, in , when the rashness of that gallant but unfortunate monarch proved fatal to himself, and so disastrous to his country. he died in ; and was succeeded by his eldest son, thomas third duke of norfolk, who was lieutenant-general in the north, and had also been at floddon. he commanded the english troops which invaded the southern parts of scotland, in august and died in , upwards of eighty years of age. [ ] now smailholm. [ ] fala muir, a plain near the western termination of the lammermuir hills. [ ] in vautr. edit. "hallow-evin." the eve of hallowmass; in scotland, halloween, the st of october; hallowmass, or all saints, of course, being the st of november. [ ] this alludes to the summary execution by the scotish nobles of cochrane and other favourites of james the third, in hanging them over the bridge of lauder, in the year , as related by all our historians. [ ] in vautr. edit. "had he runne." [ ] see note , respecting this scroll. [ ] in the later copies, "once." [ ] the date of the king's voyage round the isles has been mistaken by most of the older writers, such as buchanan, lesley, and others. this may have partly arisen from confounding it with his previous voyage in . (see note .) james purposed to have sailed on the th of may , but he deferred setting out till after the birth of his son, who was born at st. andrews on the d of may. this happy event james communicated in a letter to his uncle, the king of england, on the same day: "it hes liket god of his great gudnes to have send unto us, this day of may instant, ane sone and prince, fair and lillik to succeid to ws and this our realme. we think it accordis ws weill to mak you participant with ws of sic joyus gud novellis," &c.--(state papers, vol. v. p. .) the baptism of the prince took place on the th of may, and the king is said to have sailed on the day following. the treasurer's accounts for and , which furnish a number of interesting notices connected with the expense of this voyage, show that the arrangements for sailing were not compleated before the th or th of june, which may be held as the actual date of the expedition. in the collection of state papers referred to, are two letters, conveying reports of the preparations for the voyage, furnished by some of "the espiallis," or english spies; and also another letter from james himself to henry the eighth, on his return, dated at edinburgh the th of july , in which he says, that "all thingis standyng at gude poynt and ordour, we addressit us, as we thought expedient, to visie our ilis, north and southt, for ordouring of thame in justice and good policy," &c. (ib. p. .) [ ] james kirkcaldy of grange held the office of high treasurer from the th march , till the death of james in ; but his accounts during the latter months of the king's reign are not preserved. having accompanied james to france, the laird of grange had also acted as treasurer extraordinary from th september , until the king's return in may . [ ] in the ms. "propheit." [ ] in ms. g, "josrellis;" ms. a, "jesuits;" ms. l , "jeffells." [ ] in vautr. edit., ms. l , &c., "i shall reprove you by sharpe punishmentes."--from an interesting letter of sir william eure to crumwell, dated from berwick, th january - , it seems, that this answer or reprimand was uttered at linlithgow, rather than holyrood; and was occasioned by his witnessing the representation of sir david lyndesay's play, called, "ane satire on the three estates," which evidently produced a strong, but unfortunately no lasting impression on the king's mind. after describing "the enterlude," eure proceeds, "my lorde, the same maister bellenden shewed me, that after the said enterluyd fynished, the king of scottes did call upon the bischope of glasgow [gawin dunbar], being chauncelour, and diverse other buschopes, exorting thaym to reforme thair facions and maners of lyving, saying, that oneles thay soe did, he wolde send sex of the proudeste of thayme unto his uncle of england, and, as those were ordoured, soe he wold ordour all the reste that wolde not amende: and therunto the chauncelour should [did] aunsuer, and say unto the king, that one worde of his graces mouthe should suffice thayme to be at commaundement: and the king haistely and angrely answered, that he wold gladely bestowe any wordes of his mouthe that could amend thaym."--(state papers, vol. v. p. .) [ ] john ross of craigie, near perth, was one of the prisoners taken at solway moss, in .--(state papers, vol. v. p. .) [ ] in the later copies, "once." [ ] oliver sinclair, see note . [ ] in vautr. edit. "minion." [ ] knox has previously alluded to this scroll or list of names. see pages and . sir ralph sadler, in a letter to henry the eighth, dated th of march , details a conversation he had with the governor, who told him, "that a number of noblemen and gentlemen the late king had gotten written in a roll, _which were all accused of heresy_; of the which, (he said,) he was the first, and the earl of cassilis, the earl of glencairn and his son, the earl marishal, and a great many gentlemen, to the number of eighteen score, because they were all well minded to god's word, which then they durst not avow; but now, (quoth he,) i shall do mine endeavour to set forth the glory of god with the assistance of the king's majesty."--(sadler's papers, vol. i. p. .) [ ] herbert lord maxwell, warden of the west marches, was taken prisoner at the battle of solway. sir ralph sadler, in a letter dated th april , reports a detailed conversation he had with him on the state of scotland.--(state papers, vol. i. p. .) he died in . [ ] lochmaben--see note . [ ] that is, the foray. in vautr. edit. this sentence, reads, "the forward goeth forth, feare ryses, daunger might have bin scene on every side." the later mss. are equally unintelligible. [ ] the words, "cornes and houses," connecting the foot of p. , and the top of p. , in vautr. edit, have been omitted; and this omission occurs also in mss. i, and l . [ ] in vautr. edit. "fentes." [ ] in vautr. edit. "slaked." [ ] in vautr. edit., and ms. g, &c., "the regiment of things." [ ] in ms. g, "gritter." [ ] in vautr. edit. "were mired, and lost their horses." [ ] in ms. g, "proik;" ms. a, "pricke." [ ] in ms. g, "of futemen soldeors." [ ] in vautr. edit. "his own sluggard;" in mss. g, i, and l , "slughorne." [ ] in ms. a, "solloway mosse;" in vautr. edit. "the slimy mosse." solway moss derives its name from the solway frith, a well known arm of the sea, which forms the boundary between england and scotland for upwards of fifty miles. the moss lies on the cumberland side of the small river sark, in the tract of land formerly known as the debateable ground. [ ] oliver sinclair of pitcairns was the third son of sir oliver sinclair of roslin. he was a favourite of james the fifth; and pitscottie says the king placed him as governor of temptallon or tautallon castle, when the powerful family of the douglasses were driven into exile.--(hist. p. .) it is more probable it was some years later that he received the command of this stronghold, which is on a cliff overhanging the sea, about two miles to the east of north berwick. in the treasurer's accounts, june , we find £ "was delivered to olivere sinclare, in cowper, to pay the kingis gentillmen with." in the following month, £ was paid "to olivere inclare, in compleat payment of his lyveray clathis." and on the th oct. , there was "gevin to olipher sinclar at the kingis command, to the warkis of tamtalloun," £ , s. d. in november , when the queen dowager died at methven, he and john tennant, two of the gentlemen of the king's privy chamber, were sent to take and lock up all her goods.--(state papers, vol. v. p. .) he was taken prisoner after his shameful defeat at solway; but obtained his liberty in . sadler mentions, that when he was about to repair to tantallon castle, at the end of that year, as a place of security, under the protection of sir george douglas, sinclair was lying in wait, in a small village near hand, in the hope of seizing him and his retinue.--(sadler's papers, vol. i. pp. , , .) [ ] lochmaben, in the parish of that name in annandale. lesley, however, says, "during the tyme of this raid, the king of scotland remanit in carlaverock upoun the bordour, not far from soloway moss."--(hist. p. .) the distance of either place from the scene of this disgraceful defeat was not considerable. lochmaben was a royal castle; and pitscottie, like knox, says, that the king "was in the castle of lochmaben."--(hist. p. .) but pinkerton and tytler follow lesley. [ ] _hand_, or hold: in ms. g, "hald." [ ] in vautr. edit., ms. g, &c., "and so went." [ ] th of november.--james was still at edinburgh on the th of november, when he wrote a letter to henry the eighth.--(state papers, vol. v. p. .) [ ] see note . [ ] hallyards, in the parish of auchtertool. [ ] in vautr. edit., ms. g, &c., "the lady of grange." this was janet melville, daughter of sir john melville of raith, and helen napier. she married james kirkcaldy of grange, high treasurer, from to . see page , note . [ ] yule, or christmas; as in vautr. edit., mss. e, i, and l . [ ] in vautr. edit. "christmas daye." [ ] castle of carny, in the parish of moonzie, in the shire of fife. [ ] these words are omitted in ms. g. [ ] lesley and later writers say that mary was born on the th of december. prince labanoff, however, proves that it was the th, "c'est la véritable date.--j'ai trouvé dans le _state paper office_ de londres, une lettre autographe de marie stuart de , dans laquello elle dit: _le viij décembre, xlij^e de ma naissance_."--(lettres de marie stuart, vol. i. p. .) [ ] this story of cardinal beaton having forged, or caused the king, in his last moments, to subscribe his name to a paper, which he afterwards filled up as a will, constituting beaton regent during the minority of mary, has been discredited; (see note in keith's hist. vol. i. p. ;) but it undoubtedly obtained credence at the time, as sadler reports a conversation he had with the governor on the th april , who said, "we have other matters to charge the cardinal with; for _he did counterfeit_, (quoth he,) _the late king's testament_; and when the king was even almost dead, (quoth he,) he took his hand in his, and so caused him to subscribe a blank paper."--(sadler's papers, vol. i. p. .) lesley also says the cardinal made some impediment to arran's appointment as governor, "alleging that the king be his testament nominat four regentis: _bot the same on no wise could be verefeit nor provin_."--(hist. p. .) buchanan further confirms this by asserting, that beaton "having bribed henry balfour, a mercenary priest, he, with his assistance, forged a false will for the king," &c.--(hist. lib. xv. .) this henry balfour is the priest or chaplain who is mentioned at the end of note . [ ] in ms. g, this sentence occurs on the margin, having been omitted in the text by the transcriber. [ ] james the fifth died at falkland, and was buried in the chapel of the palace of holyroodhouse. the day of his death is variously stated. some writers, as knox, calling it the th, others the th of december; but in the treasurer's accounts, there are various payments connected with his obsequies, under this head,-- "the expensis debursit be the compter fra the tyme of the kingis grace decess quhoine god assolze, _quhilk ves the xxj day of december_, anno etc. xlij^e" &c. [ ] see note . [ ] buchanan states, that the three persons who were joined with beaton, when the king's pretended will was proclaimed, were the earls of huntly, argyle, and arran. knox and spottiswood, instead of arran, name the earl of murray, who was bastard brother of james the fifth.--(keith's hist. vol. i. p. .) [ ] james hamilton, earl of arran, failing mary queen of scots, then an infant, was next heir to the crown. [ ] in ms. g, "successors." [ ] in vautr. edit. "appoints;" the same blunder is copied in mss. i, and l . [ ] on the last of february - , the treasurer's accounts exhibits this "item, gevin to henry wardlaw, for the writing of the inventour buke of all the kingis clething, jowellis, and uther gere, for his laubouris, xl s." [ ] the infant queen remained in the palace of linlithgow, under the nominal charge of the queen dowager. parliament, in march , nominated the earls marishal and montrose, lords erskine, ruthven, livingstone, lindesay of byres, and seton, and sir james sandilands of calder, "as keepers of the quenis grace," or any two of them quarterly.--(acta parl. scot. vol. ii. p. .) [ ] on the d of december , after the death of james the fifth, james hamilton, d earl of arran, was chosen regent or governor of scotland during the minority of the infant princess. at the first meeting of the estates of parliament, on the th of march , his appointment was confirmed, with a declaration of his being second person of the realm, and nearest to succeed to the crown, "failing our sovereign lady, and the children lawfully to be gotten of hir body."--(acta parl. scot, vol. ii. p. .) [ ] friar thomas guilliam, (or williams,) is described as a native of athelstaneford in east lothian; and is said to have attained considerable distinction in his order of dominican or black friars in scotland. the governor entertained him as his chaplain, until the return of his brother the abbot of paisley from france, had the effect of withdrawing him from the english interest, and disowning the new doctrines. the friar's name occurs in the treasurer's accounts:-- - , on the d of february, there was furnished "to be ryding gownis, with hudis, to freir thomas gilzame, and freir alexander lindsay, of scottis black," &c. also, "cottis, ryding sokkis," &c. , st april, "gevin to freir thomas gilzem, at his grace command, at his passing to hamilton, v lib. x s." on the following day, the d of april, sir ralph sadler communicates to henry the eighth the information, "that the governor was clearly altered from your majesty, and will surely revolt to the cardinal, the earls of lennox, huntley, argyle, and murray, and the clergy, to his own utter confusion.... in so much as the said governor hath not only _put away his friers preachers_, which he hath all this while defended, and kept about him to preach the word of god, but also hath secretly sent to the said cardinal and earls," &c. (vol. i. p. .) [ ] in vautr. edit., mss. g, &c., the words "in the dayis of marie of curssed memorie," are omitted. [ ] calderwood, under the year , says, "a landed man, named johne scot, after he had travelled through italie, france, and the holie land, returneth home. he brought with him from jerusalem some date-tree leaves, and a pocke full of stones, which he fained were taken out of the pillar to which christ was bound, when he was scourged." he then records some instances of scot's extraordinary fasting, first in scotland, and afterwards at rome, venice, and london; and also of his deceptions.--(hist. vol. i. p. .) in april , john scot "was wardit in the castle of edinburgh, for not obeying a decreit against him be james lawson of hieriggs; the quhilk johne scot fastit without meat or drink of veritie xxxij dayes, exceptand ane drink of water." and on the th of october, "he was brocht nakit to the croce of edinburgh, quhair he preichit publictlie, the samyne quhilk fasting was be helpe of the virgin marye."--(diurnal of occurrents, pp. , .) in , on the th of july, there was paid "to johne scot, callit the santt, at the kingis command, xxij s."--(treasurer's accounts.) in george makeson's ms., among his "recollectionis of my lordis g[racis] missives," &c., is this note, "to let freir johne scott vant [want] na thing for his bukis and pensioun: at command quhairof i gaif him xxiij lib. septembris ." [ ] edward hope, in , was one of the bailies of edinburgh. [ ] this patrick lyndesay was probably the same person whose name appears in the treasurer's accounts, as follows:-- , april . "item, gevin to patrick lindsay, goldsmyth, for making of the quenis grace selis, and graving thairof, and for service and laubouris done he him to our soverane lord, quham god assolze, as the precept direct thairupoun beris, xxxj lib." [ ] in vautr. edit., &c., "at length by notice given." [ ] sir richard maitland of lethington, near haddington, whose name is honourably associated with the early poetical literature of scotland, was born in , and studied at st. andrews. he then went to france to study the laws. he was admitted as a judge in , and was often employed in public commissions. he died at the advanced age of , on the th of march .--(brunton and haig's senators of the college of justice, p. .) [ ] cardinal beaton was arrested in the end of january - , and imprisoned by the governor first in the castle of dalkeith, from whence he was transferred to blackness. he at last obtained permission to go to his own castle of st. andrews, under the guard of george fifth lord seaton, (who died in .) sir ralph sadler confirms the above statement by knox, of seaton having been bribed by the cardinal. in a letter to henry the eighth, th april , he says the governor told him of the proposal to have the castle of st. andrews delivered to the lord seaton, and all the cardinal's retainers put out, "nevertheless, (quoth he,) the lord seton being corrupt by the cardinal with great sums of money and other gifts, brought the cardinal into his own strength, in the said castle of st. andrews. and whereas the lord seton, (quoth he,) hath not twelve or sixteen men within the castle, the cardinal hath three hundred; so that he is plainly at his own liberty," &c. sadler adds, "i told him he had been very evil served, and that the lord seton had a great matter to answer unto. whereunto he said, that he should answer to it," &c.--(sadler's papers, vol. i. pp. , , , , and .) [ ] pasche, or easter: the parliament met on the th of march - . [ ] knox apparently refers to various acts passed in the parliament held at edinburgh, th of march - , at which the king was present. these acts prohibited all discussion on matters of religion; and persons from arguing against the pope's authority, under the pain of death and confiscation of their goods; suspected heretics were declared to be incapable of exercising any office; and such as had fled to avoid the censures of the church, were held to be condemned.--(acta parl. scot. vol. ii. p. .) there were still earlier acts against heresy, and the importation of heretical books. the act th july , contains some additions in the original record, on the th september , (see fac-simile plate, vol. ii. p. ;) and the act so enlarged was renewed, th june , (ib. p. .) there is also preserved a letter written by james the fifth, addressed to the lords of council and session, dated at aberdeen, d may , in reference to "diverse tractatis and bukes translatit out of latin in our scottis toung be heretikis, favouraris and of the secte of luther," which were sent to various parts of the realm; and the lords, on the th of may, passed some stringent rules, for destroying all such books, and for punishing trespassers and suspected persons.--(acts of sederunt, p. , edinb. , folio.) but the acts alluded to were in part nullified by the additions made to them on the th march - , (acta parl. scot. vol. ii. p. .) on the same day, parliament sanctioned the "haifing the haly write, in the vulgar toung," as mentioned in note . [ ] these words, "now, yf" &c., are omitted in mss. a and w. [ ] the words, "and to hear it preached," are omitted in ms. g. [ ] in ms. g. "[greek: agapê.]" [ ] david rizzio. [ ] henry, lord darnley. [ ] it may be remarked, that either hay's name, or dean of restalrig, appear to be a mistake; and the marginal note may have had reference to this.--in , thomas gibson, dean of restalrig, was conjoined with cardinal beaton as his suffragan; and it was proposed, that whilst acting in that capacity, gibson should retain the benefices which he then held. at the provincial council in , mr. john sinclair, afterwards bishop of brechin, and lord president, sat as dean of restalrig.--(wilkins, concilia, vol. iv. p. .) [ ] in ms. g, "lesoun," (lesum.) in vautr. edit. "lawfull." [ ] the act of parliament, th march - , allowing the translation of the scriptures "in the vulgar tongue, in the english or scotish, of a good translation," was proclaimed on the th of that month. it has been doubted whether, during the short interval which this act was allowed to remain in force, any edition was printed in scotland; most probably there was. but we know that parliamentary enactments of a previous date were insufficient to prevent the importation of copies of tyndale's translation of the new testament, so early as , as well as in subsequent years: see the rev. c. anderson's annals of the english bible, vol. ii. [ ] sir ralph sadler was born in the year . having gained a situation in the family of thomas lord crumwell, he was brought under the notice of henry the eighth, and after various other engagements, he commenced his diplomatic career in , by an embassy to scotland. he was again in this country as ambassador on seveval subsequent occasions. his "state papers and letters," edited by arthur clifford, with a memoir by sir walter scott, edinb. , vols. to, is a work of great importance for illustrating the history of the period to which they relate. [ ] lady jane seymour. [ ] in vautr. edit., and in ms. g, hamilton's name is omitted. [ ] the commissioners sent to england in march - , were sir james learmonth of balcomie, treasurer; sir william hamilton of sanquhar; and henry balnaves of halhill, secretary. their names frequently occur in the political transactions of the period. they returned to edinburgh sometime between the th and st of july . in the course of their negotiation, (in may,) the earl of glencairn and sir george douglas wore joined with them. see sadler's state papers, vol. i. pp. - , , . [ ] alluding to the pensions granted by the english monarch, as an effectual mode of securing such persons to his interest. [ ] in vautr. edit. "solon mosse." the rout of the scotch forces at solway took place on the th of november . among the state papers (vol. v. p. ) recently published, is a document intitled, "the yerely value of the lands, and also the value and substance in goodis, of the scottish prisoners lately taken at salone mosse." the principal persons were the earls of cassilis and glencairne, lords somerville, maxwell, gray, oliphant, and flemyng, oliver sinclair, george hume of eyton, robert erskine son of lord erskine, walter seton of tough, patrick hepburn of waughton, and john ross of craigie. [ ] in vautr. edit. "immediately." [ ] the treaty of pacification between the two kingdoms, and the projected alliance of edward the sixth with queen mary, when she had attained the age of ten years, sanctioned by the parliament of scotland, th of june, was concluded at greenwich on the st of july . but this proceeding, as stated in the text, was opposed by cardinal beaton and the french faction. (see next note.) the commissioners, however, as mentioned in the preceding note, having returned, this treaty, on the th of august, was solemnly ratified by the governor, "at the high mass, solemnly sung with shalms and sack-buts, in the abbey church of the holyroodhouse," and the great seal of scotland appended to the treaty.--(rymer's foedera, vol. xiv. pp. - ; acta parl. scot. vol. ii. pp. , ; sadler's state papers, vol. i. p. .) [ ] in vautr. edit. the words, "and they made a brag to depose the governour," are omitted.--sadler, on the th of july , writes to the english monarch, that the governor had informed him of the intention of the cardinal and his party "to come to linlithgow to surprize the young queen, _and afterwards_, (if they can,) _to depose and put him downe_."--(sadler's papers, vol. i. p. .) and in another letter from edinburgh, dated the d of july, he says, "_i thinke they woll not fight, for all their bragges._ the cardynall and his complices do lye at lythcoo, with the nomber of or ; and the governour and his frendes and adherentes, with or , do lye here in this toune, not myle a sonder; and ambassadours go bytwen them to treate the matiers, so that, by treatie, it is thought they shall agree, and no hurte done."--(state papers, vol. v. p. .) [ ] this sentence, on to the words "confouud all," is written on the margin of the ms. with this addition, "as after follows;" which, i presume, has reference to the concluding part of the sentence, although it is partially deleted. the statement is not only correct in itself, but is required for the context. in ms. g, vautr. edit., and all the other copies, while the marginal addition, "the papists raged," &c., and also the words, "as after follows," are incorporated with the text, the clause, "and without delay," &c., is wholly omitted. [ ] sir james foulis of colinton was appointed clerk-register in , and was also admitted a lord of session, at the first meeting of the court, on the th of may . he held the office of clerk-register till , the year before his death. the treasurer paid "to maister henry foullis, for his umquhill fatheris feyes, in the yeris of god and , £ , s. d." [ ] in vautr. edit. "preparation." [ ] john hamilton, abbot of paisley. he arrived in scotland between the d and th of april . [ ] george crichton, a son of crichton of naughton, (keith's bishops, p. ,) must have been far advanced in life at this time. he was a fellow-student with dunbar the poet at st. andrews, having taken his master's degree in the year . he was abbot of holyroodhouse, which he probably resigned on obtaining possession of the see of dunkeld, previously to november . in , he was nominated an extraordinary lord of session, (senators of the college of justice, p. ;) and died on the th of january . [ ] see note . [ ] or, bellenden, justice-clerk. see note . [ ] it is surprising that sir david lyndesay, among the various persons who were accused of heresy, should have escaped all persecution. for a time, the personal attachment of james the fifth may explain this exemption, having been in his service since the king's infancy; but the effects of lyndesay's satirical writings must have rendered him peculiarly obnoxious to the clergy. yet we find him officially employed in foreign missions, as lyon-king at arms, till within a short time of his death, which took place about the year . [ ] michael durham appears among the determinants in st. leonard's college, st. andrews, in , and the licentiates in . it is probable he then went abroad, and took a degree in medicine at some foreign university. from the treasurer's accounts, we learn that for a short period before the death of james the fifth, he was king's physician:-- , july or august, "item, to maister michaell durehame, doctour in medecyne, (enterit before the last feist of whitsunday,) for his half yearis fee, £ ." , jan., "item, gevin to maister michael durehame, doctour in medecyne, be one precept in recompensatioun of service done be him to our sovernne lord, quhome god assolze, and for the rest of his feis, as his said precept beris, £ ." [ ] the name of david borthwick occurs among the determinants in the pedagogy of st. andrews, in . he became king's advocate, and will be afterwards noticed. [ ] in ms. g, "to the uter point of ruyne." [ ] james second earl of arran was the grandson of sir james hamilton of cadzow, created lord hamilton in , and the princess mary, daughter of james the second, and relict of thomas boyd, earl of arran. his father was thrice married. his first wife was beatrix drummond, by whom he had one daughter, married to andrew stewart lord evandale and ochiltree. his second wife was lady elizabeth home, sister of alexander earl of home, from whom he obtained a divorce in . janet, daughter of sir david beaton of creich, comptroller of scotland, was his third wife, by whom he had his son james, second earl of arran; but who being born during the life of his father's divorced wife, his legitimacy depended on the validity of his divorce. had he, in such a case, been set aside, matthew earl of lennox would have been next in succession. [ ] the infant queen, who had hitherto been kept in the palace of linlithgow, (note ,) was brought to stirling on the d of july , (note .) after the governor's very inconsistent proceedings in the month of august, and his reconciliation with the cardinal, queen mary was crowned with great ceremony, on the th of september . the following entries are from the treasurer's accounts:-- . "item, the fourth day of august, be my lord governoris precept and speciall command, deliverrit to mathew hammiltoun, capitane and kepar of the palice of linlithqw, for furnesyng of the said palice, the sowme of £ . "item, to the lord levingstoun, for keping of the princes[s] in linlithqw, quhilk was awin him the sum of £ , s. d. october. "item, to the lord levingstoun, for keping of the princes[s] in striveling, fra the xxiij day of julij in anno domini etc. xliij^o to the last day of this moneth of october inclusive, £ ." [ ] in ms. g, "with him than in." [ ] all this took place about the d of september, or within nine days of the governor's ratification of the english alliance, mentioned in note , and six days of his having issued a proclamation against the cardinal.--(sadler's papers, vol. i. pp. , , .) [ ] on the th of september : see note . [ ] sadler, in this embassy, arrived in edinburgh in march . notwithstanding the treaty referred to in a previous note, he did not succeed in the great object of his mission at this time, that of gaining the governor to a steady adherence to his original policy of favouring the reformed doctrines, and adhering to the english in opposition to the french interest. sadler was recalled in december ; and the country was speedily invaded and devastated by the english troops. [ ] matthew earl of lennox returned to scotland, by the advice of cardinal beaton, and landed at dumbarton on the last day of march . [ ] a blank in the ms. and in all the copies. the name of somerville is supplied on the authority of letters from sir ralph sadler to henry the eighth, and from the privy council of england to sadler.--(sadler, vol. i. p. ; state papers, vol. v. p. .) [ ] sir hugh campbell of loudon. [ ] in ms. g, "was efter tane in the lenterne, at the siege of glasgw." [ ] john charteris of couthilgourdy had been elected provost of perth, st october , but was discharged, by appointment of the governor, th january - , when mr. alexander m'breck was chosen. patrick lord ruthven, who was chosen provost on the th october , was attempted to be discharged on the th january - , and to be replaced by john charteris; but the ruthven party prevailing, charteris was not admitted. the skirmish of which knox here gives a minute and accurate description, took place on the d of july , when lord gray's partizans were repulsed with a loss of upwards of sixty men.--(adamson's muses threnodie, by cant, pp. , , .) lord gray, in october that year, received from the cardinal a grant of part of the lands of rescobie in forfarshire, for his "ready and faithful help and assistance in these dangerous times of the church." [ ] patrick master of ruthven was the oldest son of patrick third lord ruthven, the principal actor in rizzio's murder, on the th march , and who fled into england, where he died on the th june that year. having predeceased his father, and leaving no issue, patrick was succeeded by his next brother, william, who is styled master of ruthven, in a charter, th april . this son, who was afterwards created earl of gowrye, was also concerned with his father in the murder of rizzio. [ ] moncrieffe of moncrieffe, in the parish of dunbarny, perthshire. [ ] mary magdalene's day, the d of july. but the year was , and not : see note ; and the diurnal of occurrents, p. , where forty persons are said to have been slain. [ ] in ms. g, "a pretty spaice fra the fische-yet." [ ] sadler, on the th of november , states that "the governor and cardinal are now gone over the water of forth, into fife and angus," to gain the earl of rothes, the lords gray, ogilvy, and glammis, to their party, "either by force or policy."--(sadler's papers, vol. i. p. .) [ ] castle huntley, in the parish of longforgan, built by the second lord gray of foulis. he had extensive possessions in the carse of gowrye, and according to tradition, he named the castle after his lady, a daughter of the earl of huntley. [ ] in ms. g, "balgawy." the place referred to is balgavie, near innergowrye, two or three miles from dundee, on the road to perth. [ ] the old name of the city of perth. [ ] the provost of st. andrews in , was sir james learmonth of balcomie, or dairsye. [ ] in vautr. edit. "their friend." [ ] the marginal explanation having been taken into the text, the later copies read as if the bishop of st. andrews and the abbot of paisley were different persons. john hamilton, abbot of paisley, became cardinal beaton's successor in the metropolitan see. in ms. g, the passage reads, "this answer reported, was send to thame the bishop of sanct andrewes, the abbot of pasley, mr. david panter," &c., "to desyre," &c. in vautr. edit. it is still further from the correct reading, by the omission of _thame_, "this answer reported, was sent to the bishop of sainct andrewes, the abbot of pasley," &c. [ ] this proverbial phrase, "ay rynnis the fox, quhill he fute hes," occurs at the end of a poem "againis treason," by dunbar.--(poems, vol. i. p. .) [ ] the parliament met at edinburgh, in december , and the following act against hereticks was passed on the th; which may be quoted in connexion with the proceedings at perth in the following month,-- "the quhilk day, my lord governour causit to be schewin and proponit in plane parliament to all estatis being thair gaderit, how thair is gret murmure _that heretikis mair and mair risis and spredis within this realme_, sawand dampnable opinionis incontrar the fayth and lawis of haly kirk, actis and constitutionis of this realme: exhortand thairfor all prelatis and ordinaris, ilkane within thair awin diocy and jurisdictioun, to inquir apoun all sic manor of personis, and proceid aganis thame according to the lawis of haly kirk; and my said lord governour salbe rady at all tymes to do thairin that accordis him of his office."--(acta parl. scot. vol. ii. p. .) [ ] st. paul's day was the th of january, and the year - , is fixed by the reference to "the first burning of edinburgh," by the english troops under the earl of hertford, in may . (see note .) keith, and his editor mr. parker lawson, are at a loss to reconcile the dates of the governor and cardinal's visit to perth, and the execution of the persons mentioned by knox. knox's account of these martyrs at perth is corroborated not only by the more detailed account given in foxe's martyrs, (p. ,) but by the following extracts from the treasurer's accounts. the governor spent his yule or christmas, , not at st. andrews, but at stirling. the following were payments made by the treasurer:-- , december. "item, in the tyme of zule, deliverit to my lord governour, to play at the cartis with the quenis grace in striviling, in ane hundreth crownis of the sonn, £ ." - , "item, the xij day of januar, efter the aggreance maid betuix my lord governour and the saidis lordis, (earl of levinox, &c.,) at convenit in leith againis his grace, hyrit liiij cart hors, quhilk past agane to striveling with the said artalze, and fra striveling to sanct jhonstoun [and] dunde, _for punising certane heretikis_ within the saidis townis, and payit to the saidis hors viij dayis wagis, to every hors on the day iij s.... summa, lxiiij lib. xvj s. "item, xx jannarij, after the counsale and convention haldin at striviling, at my lord governoris departing towart sanct johnstoun _for punischment as said is_, hyrit to turs certane small artalze with his grace thair, xxvj cart hors, to ilk hors the day iij s.... summa, xxxj lib. iiij s. "item, to xij pyoneris, quhilkis past and convoyit the said small artalze, viij dayis wagis, to every man in the day ij s. summa, ix lib. xij s." in mercer's chronicle of perth, is this brief notice, "the execution of james hunter, robert lambe, james ronaldstone, and his spouse, at perth, in januar, in sanct pawlis day. [- ] yeiris." [ ] his name was robert, not william lamb, burgess of perth. calderwood has given a detailed account, as related by "mr. john davidson, a diligent searcher in the last acts of our martyrs," of the manner in which lamb interrupted friar spence, when preaching on all-hallow-day. see wodrow society edit, of his history, vol. i. p. . he also states that knox's account of these perth martyrs "is confirmed by the registers of the justice-court, where it is registered, that robert lamb, merchant in perth, james ranoldsone, skinner, william andersone, maltman, james hunter, fleshour, were convicted of art and part in breaking the act of parliament, by holding an assemblie and convention in sanct anne's chappell, in the spey-yards, upon sanct andrewes day [ th nov.] last by past, conferring and disputing there upon the holie scriptures.... item, helen stirk, spous to james ranoldsone, convicted becaus of art and part in breaking the acts of parliament, in dishonouring the virgin marie." see also foxe's martyrs, p. . the executions at this time are thus very summarily noticed in the diurnal of occurrents, (p. ,)-- "upoun the xxviij day of januare [ - ,] the governour with his lordis past to sanct johnstoun and dundie, and brunt mony limmaris in the said tolbuis [townis]." [ ] sir henry elder, as his name denotes, was in priest's orders; and john elder, we may suppose, was his brother. in a list of the magistrates of perth, elected th oct. , we find "john elder, treasurer;" and, as a burgess of the town, he is to be distinguished from john elder "the redshank," who fled at this time into england. (see appendix, no. vi.) in the treasurer's accounts, - , there was £ paid as the composition for the remission granted to john elder, burgess of perth, and also £ for the similar exemption given to laurence pillour, "pro disputatione in sacris scripturis contra tenorem acti parliamenti."--(m'crie's life of knox, vol. i. p. .) [ ] in the ms. "broking." [ ] in ms. g, &c., "eye." [ ] in vautr. edit. "granton hilles." [ ] in vautr. edit. "the hilles." [ ] in ms. g, "sir george." sir george douglas of pittendreich was brother of the earl of angus. [ ] blackness castle, in the parish of carriden, linlithgowshire, close to the river forth, about five or six miles above south queensferry. this is one of the four fortresses which were stipulated in the act of union, in , to be kept in repair. [ ] in vautr. edit. "between one and two of the clock." [ ] during this expedition under the earl of hertford, the town of edinburgh, with the exception of the castle, was "utterly ruinate and destroyed with fire," during the space of four successive days; "also, we brent th'abbey called holy rode-house, and the pallice adjonynge to the same." this took place in the beginning of may .--(dalyell's fragments of scotish history, p. .) [ ] in ms. g, the word "judged" is omitted.--craigmillar castle, now a picturesque ruin, in the parish of libberton, is about three miles south from edinburgh. the english forces, on the th of may , "past to craiginillar, quhilk was haistilie gevin to thame: promesed to keip the samyne without skaith; quhilk promes thai break, and brunt and destroyit the said hous."--(diurnal of occurrents, p. .) [ ] sir simon preston of craigmillar. he was provost of edinburgh in , and three following years. his father, simon preston, had been provost in . [ ] the tron, or beam, used for weighing merchandize, stood in the high street, nearly opposite what is now called the tron church. but the butter-tron was probably at the building afterwards called the weigh-house, which stood nearly in the middle of the street, at the head of the west bow, leading to the castle. [ ] among the spoils, it is stated, that the furniture and library in the palace of holyrood were carried off; including a fine brazen font from the abbey. (see archæologia scotica, vol. iv. p. .) but some of the books and furniture had previously been removed by the governor to hamilton palace, where probably they are still preserved. on the th of may the treasurer paid, "be his gracis speciall command, to certane pure men quhilkis tursit (carried) his gracis cofferis out of the palice of halyrudhous to the castell of edinburgh, and fra thare to the castell of hammiltoun, the soume of xj lib." "item, (on the th of may,) to ane pure man of edinburgh, quhilkis savit fifty-pece of weschell of my lord governouris, the tyme of the inglische menis being thair, and deliverit the samyn to sir david hammiltoun, x s." [ ] ancrum moor, about a mile and a half to the north of the village of that name, in the county of roxburgh. the battle took place on the th of february - , when sir ralph evers was slain, and the english forces routed. [ ] captain de lorge montgomery, with about men, arrived from france in may or june .--(acta parl. scot. vol. ii. pp. - .) [ ] the castle of wark, a border fortress, on the bank of the river tyne in northumberland, near coldstream. [ ] in vautr. edit. "great slaverie." [ ] in ms. g, "the frenche captane." [ ] matthew stewart fourth earl of lennox, had retired to england in . he married lady margaret douglas, daughter of the earl of angus and margaret, widow of king james the fourth. she was thus niece of the english monarch, at whose court she resided until her marriage. their son was henry lord darnley, who married mary queen of scots. the earl of lennox became regent of scotland in , upon the death of the earl of murray. [ ] john hamilton, archbishop of st. andrews, was a natural son of james first earl of arran. he pursued his studies first at glasgow, and afterwards at paris. in , he obtained the rich abbacy of paisley; and as abbot he sat in the parliaments of and . his relationship to the governor, over whom he obtained great influence, led to his rapid promotion. he was successively lord privy seal, high treasurer, bishop of dunkeld, and a judge in the court of session. on the death of cardinal beaton, he became his successor as primate. the "catechisme," which usually passes under his name, from having been printed at his expense, at st. andrews, in , exhibits a solitary instance on the part of the roman catholic clergy to convey spiritual instruction, and is most creditable to his memory. [ ] that is, the abbot of paisley now began, &c. [ ] in the ms. this word _eme's_, at first inaccurately written, was corrected, but not distinctly, and led to the substitution of _enemies wyfe_, in all the other copies. _eme_ usually means _uncle_; here it merely signifies _kinsman_. [ ] lady grizell sempill was the eldest daughter of robert third lord sempill, and was the second wife of james hamilton of stenhouse, captain of the castle of edinburgh. a charter under the great seal was granted of the lands of kittiemuir, on the th of march , "jacobi hamilton de stanehouse et grizeldi sempill ejus conjugi." her husband, who was provost of edinburgh, was slain in endeavouring to quell a tumult between some of the auxiliary troops quartered in the canongate, and the inhabitants, on the st of october . [ ] in ms. g, "gilston;" and in vautr. edit., &c., "haldin in povertie." it probably means, that her connexion with the archbishop always continued. some further notice of this lady will be given in a subsequent note. [ ] george martine, in his "reliquiæ divi andreæ," written in , has given an account of hamilton, in which, in reference to the archbishop and this lady, he says, "i have seen copies of charters granted by this archbishop to william, john, and james hamiltons, his three naturall sones born of this grizzell sempill; and they are designed her naturall sones, but they came all to be forfeited." (p. .) letters of legitimation of john and william hammylton, bastard sons of grissel sempill, daughter of robert master of sempill, were dated th oct. .--(reg. mag. sigill.) [ ] knox places wishart's return to scotland in , although the commissionars to whom he alludes came back in july . the exact time has not been well ascertained: see appendix, no. ix. [ ] in ms. g, "a litill space." [ ] william fourth earl marishall, according to sadler's report to henry, th march , was "a goodly young gentleman, well given to your majesty, as i take him." he was friendly to the reformation, and survived till about the year .--(sadler's papers, vol. i. p. .) [ ] in ms. g, "locnoreis." the person referred to was george crawfurd of leifnorris, or loch norris, now called dumfries house, the seat of the marquess of bute, in the parish of old cumnock, ayrshire. [ ] gaston, or galston, a parish in the district of kyle. [ ] this phrase, "used much in the bar," signifies that he frequented the house of barr, the seat of john lockhart of barr, in the parish of galston. [ ] sir hugh campbell of loudoun, was hereditary sheriff of the county of ayr. [ ] the persons here named were all proprietors of lands in ayrshire. mongarswood, or monkgarswood, is in the parish of mauchline; bronnsyde, in sorne; dawdeling, (in vautr. edit. "dawdilling,") or daldilling, also in the parish of sorne; and tempilland, in that of auchinleck. the crawfurds were proprietors of templeland; and the reids of daldilling, appear in the retours and , in the succession of their property.--(ayr, nos. and .) [ ] kinyeancleuch is in the parish of mauchline. hugh campbell was a cadet of the campbells of loudoun; and his son robert campbell of kinyeancleuch, who is afterwards mentioned, was a special friend of knox, and much distinguished himself by his singular zeal and devotedness in promoting the reformation. [ ] in vautr. edit. "shaw." laurence rankin, laird of sheill, in the parish of ochiltree, ayrshire. [ ] the year is the date usually assigned for the ravages of the plague in dundee. it would seem to have prevailed in different parts of the country for two or three successive years. the probable time of wishart's visit on that occasion may have been in august , as we are told, "in this tyme the pest was wonder greit in all burrowis townis of this realme, quhair mony peipill deit with great skant and want of victuallis."--(diurnal of occurrents, p. .) [ ] in ms. g, "at lycht parte." [ ] during the sixteenth century, the town of dundee was surrounded by a double wall, with ports or gates, which were all removed about sixty years ago, with the exception of the east gate, called the cowgate port, which was then "allowed to stand, from respect to wishart's memory, and his services to the inhabitants of dundee, during the plague of ; and it is still kept in good preservation."--(new stat. account, forfarshire, p. .) [ ] in ms. g, "thay thrist in." [ ] john kynneir of kynneir, in the parish of kilmany, in fife. he was served heir to his father david kynneir _de eodem_, in the lands and barony of kynneir, th july .--(retours, fife, no. .) [ ] in vautr. edit., mss. g, a, &c., "i shall ende my lyfe." [ ] john erskine of dun, near montrose, a zealous and consistent friend of the reformation. after the establishment of the reformation, in july , although a layman, he was admitted to the office of superintendent of angus and mearns. [ ] in ms. g, "with money siches and deip grones, he plat doun." in vautr. edit. "he fell upon." [ ] in ms. g, "keape-stone:" vautr. edit. has "keepe stone." [ ] the words following "to meitt him," are a subsequent marginal addition by the author. [ ] in ms. g, "and this the fyftein day befoir yuill." vautr. reads, "the xv day before christmas." [ ] that is, alexander crichton of brunstone, hugh douglas of long-niddry, and john cockburn of ormiston.--as there are two places of the name of brunstone in mid-lothian, it may be proper to notice, that it must have been the old castle now in ruins, in the parish of pennycuik, where wishart occasionally resided, and not the house of that name, at the eastern extremity of libberton parish, which was built, or afterwards belonged to the lauderdale family. see a subsequent note respecting the crichtons of brunstone. [ ] or inveresk, six miles from edinburgh. [ ] sir george douglas of pittendreich, was a younger son of george, master of angus, who was killed at floddon in , and brother of archibald, seventh earl of angus. "he was, (says sir walter scott,) a man of spirit and talents; shared with his brother in the power which he possessed during the minority of james v.; was banished with him, and almost all the name of douglas, into england, where they remained till the death of the king; and were then sent by henry back to their native country, along with the solway prisoners, in order to strengthen the english party in scotland."--(sadler's papers, vol. i. p. , note.) his name appears on the st of april , as an extraordinary lord of session, which disproves the account in douglas's peerage of his having been killed at pinkie, in september . having predeceased his brother, his eldest son, in , became eighth earl of angus. [ ] in ms. g, "audience." [ ] in ms. g, "auditors." [ ] david forres, or forrest, is several times mentioned by knox: he afterwards held the office of general of the conzie house or mint. [ ] sir richard maitland of lethington: see note .--the house of lethington, being a massive old tower, with some modern additions, and now called lennox love, is rather more than a mile to the south of haddington. [ ] this is the first occasion on which knox introduces himself. [ ] in ms. g, the words after "world," are omitted. [ ] clerk plays was another name for those dramatic entertainments, which in france and england were known under the title of _mysteries_, and which were usually founded on some passage of scripture. [ ] long-niddry is situated in the parish of gladsmuir, east-lothian, about four miles from tranent, near the shore of the firth. [ ] in ms. g, "mirrelie." [ ] these lines occur in a metrical version of some of the psalms, visually, and no doubt correctly, attributed to john wedderburn, vicar of dundee. whether there was any printed edition so early as , cannot be ascertained; but there was a large impression ( copies) of what was culled "the dundee psalms," printed in scotland before , in the stock of robert smyth, bookseller in edinburgh.--(bannatyne miscellany, vol. ii. pp. , .) the collection of psalms and sacred poems, known by the title of "the gude and godly ballates," may have been the psalms alluded to; and of this collection there still exist one copy at least of editions printed at edinburgh, by john ross, in ; by robert smyth, in ; and again by andre hart, in . in this collection is found the version of the st psalm, mentioned by knox as having been sung by wishart. it extends to verses: the first four may serve as a specimen. the reader may consult calderwood's history, vol. i. pp. - , for an interesting account of the family of james wedderburn, merchant in dundee, his eldest son james, and another son, as well as john the translator of the psalms, having distinguished themselves by their "good gifts of poesie." _miserere mei deus._ psal. . have mercy on me, god of might, of mercy lord and king; for thy mercy is set full right above all eirdly thing. therefore i cry baith day and night, and with my hert sail sing: to thy mercy with thee will i go. have mercy on me, (o gude lord,) efter thy greit mercy. my sinfull life does me remord, quhilk sair hes grevit thee: bot thy greit grace hes mee restord, throw grace, to libertie: to thy mercy with thee will i go. _et secundum multitudinem._ gude lord i knaw my wickednes, contrair to thy command, rebelland ay with cruelnes, and led me in ane band to sathan, quha is merciles; zit, lord, heir me cryand: to thy mercy with thee will i go. quhat king can tell the multitude, lord, of thy greit mercy, sen sinners hes thy celsitude resisted cruellie. zit na sinner will thou seclude, that this will cry to thee: to thy mercie with thee will i go. [ ] patrick third earl of bothwell succeeded his father in , when an infant. in , he was lord of liddesdale, and keeper of the royal castle of hermitage. sir ralph sadler, on the th of may that year, says of him, "as to the earl of bothwell, who, as ye know, hath the rule of liddersdale, i think him the most vain and insolent man in the world, full of pride and folly, and here, i assure you, nothing at all esteemed."--(sadler's papers, vol. i. p. .) at the time of wishart's apprehension, he was high sheriff of the county of haddington. in douglas and wood's peerage of scotland, (vol. i. pp. - ,) will be found a detailed account of his subsequent fortunes. he died, probably in exile, in september . [ ] elphingstone tower is situated in the parish of tranent, about two miles from the village of that name. [ ] in ms. g, "over you." [ ] in ms. g, "persuasion." [ ] in ms. g, "promeis." [ ] this name drundallon, or dwndallon, is not very distinct in the ms., and no such place is now known. [ ] john cockburn of ormiston.--in the diurnal of occurrents, p. , it is stated, that "upoun the xvj day of januar, the governour and the cardinall, to the nomber of men, past to ormestoun, [some words here omitted?] and the yong laird of calder; they war all brocht and put in the castell of edinburgh; and the laird of ormestoun, and the yong laird of calder followand, was tane be the capitane, callit james hamiltoun of stanehous." wishart's name may have been omitted in this paragraph, but it fixes the date of his apprehension at ormiston. the following entries occur in the treasurer's accounts, on the th of march - ,-- "item, to jhonne patersoun, pursevant letters direct furth of edinburgh to ormistoun and haddingtoun, to summond the laird of ormistoun to underly the law in edinburgh the xiij day of apprile nyxt to cum, _for resetting of maister george wischeart, he being at the horne_, etc. and _for breking of the waird within the castell of edinburgh_, etc. togydder with ane other letter to arreist the saiddis lairdis gudis, etc., x s." "item, ( th of april,) with ane memoriall of the principall lordis and baronis namys of est louthiane, to summond thame to be in edinburgh xiij^th aprilis instant, to pass upon the assiss of the laird of ormistoiin, quho was to thoill law that day for brekking of our souerane ladyis waird within the castell of edinburgh." [ ] hailes castle is situated in a secluded spot on the banks of the tyne, in the parish of prestonkirk, east lothian. it belonged at this time to the earl of bothwell. the ruins still shew that it must have been of considerable extent and strength, like most buildings of the kind intended for a place of defence. [ ] in ms. g, "keipit." [ ] the following is an act of council, obliging bothwell to deliver to the governor the person of george wishart, on the th of january - ,-- "the quhilk day, in presens of my lord governour and lords of counsel, comperit patrick erle bothuell, and hes bundin and oblist him to deliver maister george wischart to my lord governour, or ony utheris in his behalf, quham he will depute to ressave him betuix this and the penult day of januar instant _inclusive_, and sal kepe him surelie, and answer for him in the meyn tyme, under all the hiest pane and charge that he may incur, giff he falzies herintill."--(regist. concil. fol. ; epist. regum scotorum, vol. ii. p. .) [ ] there seems no reason to question the accuracy of these dates; although spotiswood marks wishart's execution as having taken place on the d of march ; and mr. tytler says the th, adopting an evident blunder in the "diurnal of occurrents," where the th of march, instead of the th of february, is given as the day when the council was held for wishart's trial and condemnation. his execution took place on the following day. i observe that at page of the miscellany of the wodrow society, i have fallen into the same mistake. [ ] this word is omitted in ms. g. [ ] pitscottie mentions, that the cardinal having sent to the governor for a "commissioun and ane judge criminall to give doom on maister george, if the clergie fand him guiltie;" the governor, upon the remonstrance of sir david hamilton, was persuaded to write to the cardinal "to continue (or postpone) the accusatioun of maister george wisehart quhyll he and he spoke togidder; and if he wold not, his awin blood be upon his awin head, for he would not consent that any man sould suffer persecutioun at that tyme."--(dalyell's edit., p. .) [ ] gawin dunbar was a younger son of sir john dunbar of mochrun. he pursued his studies at glasgow. in he was appointed dean of moray. in the following year obtained the priory of whithorn in galloway; and was intrusted with the education of james the fifth. in the treasurer's accounts, , are the following entries:-- "item, xvj^to februarij [ - ,] gevin to maister gawin dunbar, _the kingis maister_, to by necessar thingis for the kingis chamer, ix lib. "item, (the th day of august,) to maister gawan dunbar, _the kingis maister_, for expensis maid be him in reparaling of the chamer in the quhilk the king leris now, in the castell, iij lib." on the translation of james beaton to the primacy, dunbar was promoted to the see of glasgow; and he continued to enjoy the favour of his royal pupil during the whole of his reign. he held the office of lord chancellor from to ; and died on the th of april . a detailed account of this prelate is given in brunton and haig's senators of the college of justice, pp. - . [ ] see note . [ ] the castle and episcopal palace of glasgow stood a little to the westward of the cathedral church. the building, with its site and garden, having been vested in the crown, when episcopacy was abolished, were granted in the year , for the purpose of erecting an infirmary; and the ancient but ruinous building was then removed.--(caledonia, vol. iii. p. .) [ ] in ms. g, "knypsed." [ ] in ms. g, "as sum bold men." [ ] in vautr. edit. "merilie." [ ] in vautr. edit. "bitter mirth." [ ] this ludicrous but unbecoming contest seems to have taken place on the th of june , when mons. lorge de montgomery arrived from france with auxiliary troops: "upon the same day, the bischope of glasgow pleit with the cardinall about the bering of his croce in his dyocie, and boith thair croccis war brokin, in the kirk of glasgow, through thair stryving for the samin."--(diurnal of occurrents, p. .) bishop lesley mentions it as having occurred at an earlier period, when the patriarch of venice, who was sent by the pope, first came to glasgow, when "the cardinall and the principall bischoppes come thair and ressaved him with gret honour. bot in the meintyme, (he adds,) thair happinned ane suddane discord within the kirk of glasgw, betuix the cardinall and bischoppe of glasgw, for thair pre-heminence of the bering of the cardinallis crosse within that kirk, quhair boith the archebischoppes crosses was brokin, and diverse of thair gentill men and servandis wes hurt."--(hist. p. .) cornelius le brun, a dutch traveller, describes a similar contest which took place, whilst he was at rome during the jubilee of , between two processions meeting first in a narrow street, near monte cavallo, and afterwards in the church of st. john, in laterano, in which several persons were killed, to the great scandal of religion. but the italians, he says, "qui sont plaisans de leur naturel et encline à la raillerie se mocquoient furieusement de cette avanture."--(voyage en levant, p. . delft, , folio.) [ ] this, according to tradition, was the eastern tower or corner, and the place of wishart's execution was nearly opposite, at the foot of what is called castle wynd. spotiswood says, "a scaffold in the meantime erecting on the east part of the castle towards the abbey, with a great tree in the middest, in manner of a gibbet, into which the prisoner was to be tied.... the fore tower was hanged with tapestry, and rich cushions laid for case of the cardinal and prelates, who were to behold that spectacle."--(history, p. .) [ ] as stated in note , "the actes and monumentes of martyrs," by john foxe, was originally printed at london, by john daye, in , in a large volume in folio. it was "newly recognized and enlarged by the author," in , when he incorporated a number of passages relating to martyrs in scotland, which he gives on this authority, "_ex scripto testimonio scotorum_." in many places of these additions, the details are more minute than the corresponding passages in knox's history; yet there is such a coincidence in the information, that foxe may possibly have been indebted for some of them to the scotish reformer. the account of wishart, however, is copied from a printed book: see notes , . [ ] the title of the accusation and the introductory paragraph, are not contained in knox's ms., but are supplied from foxe, edit. . [ ] dean john wynrame was born in , and educated at st. andrews. in , his name occurs among the determinants in st. salvator's college. the date of his appointment as sub-prior of the monastery of st. andrews has not been ascertained. but on the th of nov. , he is styled in the "regist. fac. art.," dominus joh. wynrame, sup^r. sancti andree coenobii. his name often occurs in knox, in connexion with transactions of a later date. see m'crie's life of knox, vol. i. p. ; bannatyne miscellany, vol. i. p. . [ ] in ms. g, "as sayis the apostle paull." [ ] it will be observed that all these opprobrious terms applied to lauder are copied from foxe, or rather from the black-letter tract, printed by john daye, of which dr. m'crie has given a description in his life of knox, vol. i. p. . [ ] in ms. g, the words "writtin," &c., to "cursingis," are omitted. [ ] mr. john lauder, who acted as public accuser or prosecutor on other occasions, as well as this of wishart, was educated at st. andrews. his name occurs among the licentiates "in pedagogio," in the year . in a decree arbitral, dated at st. andrews, th october , he thus designates himself: "ego johannes lauder, artium magister, clericus sancti andreæ diocesis, publicus sacris apostolica et imperiali auctoritatibus notarius, ac in officio scriptoris archivii romane curie matriculatus ac descriptus."--(rental book of st. andrews, .) from the treasurer's accounts we find that he was frequently employed in ecclesiastical negotiations. thus in ,-- "item, to maister johne lauder, to pass to rome in the kingis erandis, maid in fynance v^c [ ] frankis, price of ilk frank x s. vi d., scottis money, £ , s. "item, gevin to him at his departing, to by him horse and other necessaris, £ . "item, to robene bertoun, for the fraucht of ane litill schip, in the quhilk the said maister johne past in flanderes, £ . "item, dresses to his twa servandis," &c. again, in ,-- "item, to maister johne lauder, to performeis certaine the kingis grace's erandis in rome, j^m [ ] frankis, summa, £ ." in july ,-- "item, to maister johnne lauder, for his [laubours] in writing of directionis to the courte of [rome?] for promotioun of the abbayis of coldinghame, [kelso, and] melros, to the kingis; grace sonis." [ ] in foxe, "your doctrine uttereth many blasphemous," &c. [ ] in foxe, "with." [ ] in foxe, "high voyce." [ ] the words inclosed in brackets, are omitted in knox's ms., and in all the subsequent copies, such as ms. g, vautr. edit., &c. they are however necessary for the context, and are supplied from foxe. [ ] see note . [ ] see a subsequent note respecting cardinal beaton. [ ] the bishop of brechin (john hepburn, see page ) hearing that george wishart taught the greek new testament in the school of montrose, summoned him to appear on a charge of heresy, upon which wishart fled the kingdom. this was in the year . see appendix, no. ix. [ ] in foxe, and vautr. edit., "gospell." [ ] in knox's ms., and vautr. edit., "it is." [ ] in foxe, and vautr. edit., "gospell." [ ] in foxe, "punishment;" in vautr. edit. "trespasse." [ ] foxe gives the passage as follows: "knowledge your faultes one to an other, and praye one for an other, that you may be healed." [ ] the whole of this sentence, after the quotation from the epistle of james, is omitted in foxe, edit. .--it may have been an explanatory remark by knox. [ ] in foxe, "grynned;" and the word "horned" before "bischopis," is omitted. in vautr. edit. "gyrned." [ ] in vautr. edit. "bleitter chaplin;" and in ms. g, "blecter." pitscottie has "blaitter:" it may be only a term of reproach, and not the name of a person. [ ] in vautr. edit. "child." pitscottie, who introduces wishart's accusation, but somewhat condensed, in this place makes it, "than answered ane yong scoller boy, 'it is a devillish taill to say so: for the devill can not move a man to speik as yon man dois.'" [ ] sailing on the rhine. it may have been during this visit to germany, and probably switzerland, that wishart employed himself in translating the first confession of faith of the helvetian churches. this confession was printed after wishart's death, about the year , and has been reprinted, for the first time, in the "miscellany of the wodrow society," vol. i. pp. - . [ ] in the ms. "jew," and "jewes," are written "jow," and "jowes." [ ] the concluding words of this sentence from "earth: and" &c., are omitted in the printing, by vautroullier, at the foot of page , or the top of page . a similar omission occurs in mss. i, a, and w: the two latter keeping out the words "and spitted into the." [ ] in foxe, "auditorie." [ ] in foxe, "dumbe as a beetle." [ ] in foxe, "hold my peace" [ ] in foxe, "dumbe." [ ] as in foxe, and in ms. g, &c., this evidently should be "provinciall." [ ] in foxe, "woodnes." [ ] see some notices of scot, at page .--in foxe, "called joh. gray-finde scot." [ ] in foxe, "dumbe." [ ] in foxe, "to voyde away." [ ] in foxe, "warders." [ ] dean john wynrame: see note . [ ] david buchanan has an interpolation in this place, (see appendix, no. i.,) respecting wishart's dispensing the sacrament, on the morning of his execution, to the captain of the castle. it is nearly the same as in george buchanan's history, and pitscottie's chronicle, but somewhat condensed. [ ] in foxe, "sup." [ ] in foxe, there is this marginal note: "m. george wyscheart prophesieth of the death of the cardinall, what followed after."--david buchanan has here another interpolation, containing the alleged prediction by george wishart of cardinal beaton's death. it was probably copied from george buchanan: see the passage in appendix, no. i.--pitscottie also relates such a prediction, in the following words: "captain, god forgive yon man that lies so glorious on yon wall-head; but within few days, he shall lye as shamefull as he lyis glorious now."--(dalyell's edit. p. .) [ ] in foxe's work is introduced a wood-cut representation of "the martyrdome of m. george wiseheart;" he is suspended on a gibbet, in the midst of flames. it is evidently an imaginary portrait. [ ] the account of wishart, contained in foxe's martyrs, ends with the above words. it is followed by a paragraph, described in the margin as "the just judgment of god upon david beaton, a bloudy murtherer of god's saintes,"--which the reader will find copied into note . foxe acknowledges that he followed a printed work, (_ex histor. impressa_;) having in fact introduced a literal copy of the latter portion of a very rare tract, of which dr. m'crie has given a description in his life of knox, vol. i. p. . the general title is, "the tragicall death of dauid beato, bishoppe of sainct andrewes in scotland; whereunto is joyned the martyrdom of maister george wyseharte, gentleman, for whose sake the aforesayd bishoppe was not long after slayne," &c. the preface of "robert burrant to the reader," extends to twelve leaves. next follows sir david lyndesay's poem on the cardinall's death; and then "the accusation" of wishart, which foxe incorporates in his martyrology, from whence knox's copy is taken, as well as the abridged copy inserted in pitscottie's chronicle. the volume extends to signature f vi. in eights, black letter, without date, "imprinted at london, by john day and william seres." lyndesay's poem, under the title of "the tragedy," &c., is included in all the subsequent editions of his poems. see it quoted in a subsequent page. [ ] john lesley was the second son of william lesley, who was killed at floddon, along with his brother george second earl of rothes; william's eldest son, george, succeeding to the title in , as third earl. john lesley is styled late of parkhill in the summons of treason for the cardinal's slaughter; and we find that john lesley, rector of kynnore, and brother-german of george earl of rothes, had a charter of the king's lands of parkhill in fife, th march . he also held some office at court, as the treasurer, in december , paid "john leslie, bruther to the erle rothwes, be the kingis command, for his liveray," £ . again on the d oct. , there was "gevin to johnne leslye, broder to my lord of rothes, to by him clathis to his mariage," £ . he was taken prisoner at solway in , and released st july , upon payment of merks sterling. along with his nephew norman lesley, master of rothes, and the other conspirators, he was forfeited, th august ; and died without issue.--(douglas and wood's peerage, vol. ii. p. .) [ ] in vautr. edit. "diet;" _seinzie_, is synod or assembly.--a provincial council or synod was appointed to be held in the black friars at edinburgh, on the th january - . knox says that the cardinal came to attend it, "after the pasche," or easter, ( th april ;) the meeting, therefore, had probably been adjourned. the archbishop of st. andrews, as lord hailes remarks, "was, at that period, understood to be perpetual president in provincial councils.... this may be imputed to the title of _legate_, which the archbishops of st. andrews had obtained from the papal see."--(histor. memorials, p. .) [ ] see note . [ ] norman lesley, as heir apparent to his father, is here called sheriff of fife. his father, george earl of rothes, was constituted hereditary sheriff of the county, by james the fifth, in the year . [ ] sir james leirmonth of balcomy and dairsye, in fife, was the son of david leirmonth of clatta, who acquired the estate of dairsye, in . he was for many years provost of st. andrews, between and . patrick leirmonth of dairsye, was served heir of his father, sir james leirmonth of balcomy, th march - .--(retours, fife, no. .) [ ] sir john melville of raith, knight: see a subsequent note. [ ] marion ogilvy was the daughter of sir james ogilvy, who was created lord ogilvy of airly, in the year , and who died about . her son, by cardinal beaton, was the ancestor of the beatons, or bethunes, of nether tarvet, (nisbet's heraldry, vol. i. p. ;) and it was her daughter, margaret beaton, whose marriage with david lindesay master of crawfurd, (and afterwards ninth earl,) the cardinal celebrated at finhaven in angus, almost immediately after wishart's death.--on the th november , letters were sent by a pursuevant, "chargeing marioun ogilby to find soverte to underly the lawis for interlyning of the quenis grace letteris." marion ogilvy, designed as lady melgund, died in june . in her testament, mention is made of her son, david betoun of melgund, and mr. alexander betoun, archdene of lothian. this alexander, it is said, became a protestant minister. [ ] in vautr. edit. "a morning sleepe." [ ] in vautr. edit. "into the foule sea;" in ms. g, "fowsie;" that is, the _fosse_, or ditch, which extended round the castle, except towards the sea. [ ] in ms. g, these three words are omitted. [ ] in vautr. edit. "the wicked gate;" in ms. g, "wickit yet." [ ] norman lesley, master of rothes, usually considered as having been the principal actor in the cardinal's slaughter, was the eldest son of george third earl of rothes. in june , there was furnished a gown of black satin, lined with black velvet, a doublet of black velvet, hose of paris black, a black bonnet, &c., "to normond leslie."--(treasurer's accounts.) and in august that year, at the king's command, the treasurer paid him £ . in december , dresses being also furnished to him, shews that he held some situation at court. after his forfeiture, he entered the service of the king of france, and died of his wounds, in the year , as will be related in a subsequent note. [ ] in vautr edit. "james melvin;" in ms. g, "melvell." [ ] in the summons of treason, he is styled peter carmichael of balmadie. how long this "stout gentleman" survived, is uncertain; but he appears to have been succeeded by his brother. a charter of confirmation under the great seal was passed, "_quondam petro carmichaell de balmadie_, euphemiæ wymes ejus conjugi, et quondam jacobo carmichaell de balmadie suo fratri," of the lands of kirkdrone, easter drone, balmadie, and quhelphill, in the shires of perth and lanark, th december . the next in succession seems to have been david, who died before : david carmichael of balmadie, on the th november , having been served heir of his father, david carmichael of balmadie. two years later, in another service, he is styled "dom. david carmichael de balmadie miles."--(retours, fife, no. , ; perth, , .) the lands of balmadie are in the lordship and regality of abernethy. [ ] in the summons of treason, he is called james melville elder. see footnote, where knox makes mention of his death, in france, under the year . [ ] knox must certainly be held responsible for this marginal note, which has given rise to so much abuse. but after all, this phrase, "_the godly fact and words_," applies to the _manner_ of putting beaton to death, as a just punishment inflicted on a persecutor of god's saints, rather than an express commendation of the act itself. [ ] david beaton was a younger son of john beaton of balfour, in fife. he was born in , and his name occurs in the registers of the university of st. andrews in , and of glasgow, in . he afterwards went to france, where he studied the civil and canon law. his first preferment was the rectorship of campsie, in , when he was designed "clericus s. andreæ diocesis;" and in that year he was made resident for scotland in the court of france. in , his uncle, james beaton, being made primate of st. andrews, resigned in his favour the commendatory of arbroath, or aberbrothock, reserving to himself, during life, the half of its revenues. david beaton sat, as abbot of arbroath, in the parliament . he was afterwards employed in public services abroad. in december , he was consecrated bishop of mirepoix in languedoc. the king of france contributed to beaton's advancement to the cardinalate, to which he was promoted by the title of "sti. stephani in monte coelio." in the same month he was made coadjutor of st. andrews, and declared future successor to his uncle, james beaton.--(keith's catalogue of bishops, p. ; senators of the college of justice, p. .) in a letter, dated th march , "the abbot of arbroath, now bushope of sanct andrewes," is mentioned, his uncle having died in the beginning of . on the th december , the cardinal archbishop was created lord high chancellor. he was assassinated upon saturday the th of may . [ ] sir james leirmonth of dairsye: see note . he had filled the office of master of the household in the reign of james the fifth, (holinshed's chronicle, p. , edit. ,) and not treasurer, as previously stated at page , and in tytler's scotland, vol. v. p. , when mentioned as one of the commissioners sent to england in march , to treat of the marriage of the infant princess with edward the sixth. [ ] these words, "how miserably," &c., are scored, as if deleted, and are omitted in all the other copies. [ ] in vautr. edit. "a corner;" in ms. g, "a neuk." [ ] the following paragraph is given by foxe, in connexion with his account of wishart's martyrdom, as mentioned in note :-- "a note of the just punishment of god upon the cruell cardinall archbyshop of saint andrewes, named beaton. "it was not long after the martyrdome of the blessed man of god, m. george wischeart aforesayd, who was put to death by david beaton, the bloudy archbyshop and cardinall of scotland, as is above specified, an. , the first day of march, but the sayd dauid beaton, archbyshop of s. andrewes, by the just revenge of god's mighty judgement, was slayen within his own castle of s. andrewes, by the handes of one lech [leslie] and other gentlemen; who, by the lord styrred vp, brake in sodeinly into his castle upon him, and in his bed murthered him the same yeare, the last day of may, crying out, 'alas, alas, slay me not, i am a priest.' and so lyke a butcher he lyved, and like a butcher he dyed, and lay monethes and more unburyed, and at last, like a carion, buryed in a dunghill. an. , maij ult. _ex historia impressa._"--(foxe, edit. , p. .) sir david lyndesay thus alludes to the cardinal's fate, in his poem entitled "the tragedie of the umquhyle maist reverend father david, be the mercy of god, cardinal, and archebischop of sanct androis," &c.,-- "quhen every man had judgit as him list, they saltit me, syne closit me in ane kist. i lay unburyit sevin monethis, and more or i was borne, to closter, kirk, or queir, in are midding, quhilk pane bene to deplore, without suffrage of chanoun, monk, or freir; all proud prelatis at me may lessonis leir, quhilk rang so lang, and so triumphantlye, syne in the dust doung doun so dolefullye." foxe's statement respecting the cardinal's burial, is evidently incorrect. sir james balfour, in his ms. account of the bishops of st. andrews, says of cardinal beaton, that "his corpse, after he had lyne salted in the bottom of the sea-tower, within the castell, was nine months thereafter taken from thence, and obscurely interred in the convent of the black friars of st. andrews, in anno ." holinshed, in some measure, reconciles these apparent contradictions: after referring to what knox has called "the coloured appointment," (see p. ,) entered into by the governor, in the view of having his son released, it is added, "_they delivered also the dead bodye of the cardinall_, after it had layne buried in a dunghill, within the castell, ever sithence the daye which they slew him."--(chron. of scotland, p. , edit. .) this must have been either in december , or in january - , immediately after the governor had raised the siege of the castle. [ ] in vautr. edit. "merily." [ ] john hamilton: see note . immediately after the quotation in the previous note, foxe continues: "after this david beaton, succeeded john hamelton, archbyshop of s. andrewes, an. ; who to the extent that he would in no wayes appeare inferiour to his predecessour in augmentyng the number of the holy martyrs of god, in the next yeare following called a certaine poore man to judgement, whose name was adam wallace. the order and maner of whose story here foloweth." (see note .) [ ] in vautr. edit. and the later mss., "dolorous to the queen's daughter." [ ] george douglas was a natural son of archibald earl of angus. to qualify him for preferment in the church, a letter of legitimation was passed under the great seal, th march - . on the death of cardinal beaton, in the contest for his several preferments, the abbacy of arberbrothick, (now arbroath,) had been conferred on douglas by the governor. hume of godscroft, alluding to his title of postulate of aberbrothock, says, he "not only did postulate it, but apprehended it also, and used it as his own."--(hist. of the house of douglas and angus, vol. ii. p. , edit. .) yet james beaton obtained possession of the abbacy, and retained it till , when he was raised to the see of glasgow. in the treasurer's accounts for november , we find that "maister james betoun, postulat of aberbrothock," was ordered to find surety "to underly the lawis, for tressonable intercommunyng with schir jhonn dudlie inglisman, sumtyme capitane of the fort of brochty;" and persons were sent "to aberbrothok to requyre the place thairof to be gevin oure to my lord governouris grace, becaus maister james betoun wes at the horne."--douglas took an active share in devising the murder of rizzio, in . upon the death of patrick hepburn, bishop of moray, douglas became his successor, and was consecrated th february - . keith says he was bishop of moray for sixteen years; and that he was buried in the church of holyroodhouse. [ ] the summons of treason against the conspirators in the castle of st. andrews, is contained in the acts of parliament. it was passed under the great seal on the th of june , and it cited them to compear before the parliament on the th of july, within the city of edinburgh. on the th of july the parliament met, and continued the summons until the th of august. on the same day, were "letters direct to fyf, chargeing all maner of man that nane of thame tak upone hande to molest, trouble, or mak onye impediment to normound leslie or his complicies, that thai may frelie cum to edinburgh to the parliament and allege thair defensis, and frelie to pas and repas," &c.--(treasurer's accounts.) some overtures to parliament for their remission having proved abortive, the persons referred to were declared guilty of high treason, and their lands and goods forfeited. the chief persons mentioned in the summons were--norman lesley, fear of rothes; peter carmichael of balmadie; james kirkaldy of the grange; william kirkaldy, his eldest son; david kirkaldy, his brother; john, patrick, and george kirkaldy, brothers to the said james kirkaldy of the grange; john leslie of parkhill; alexander inglis; james melville elder; john melville, bastard son to the laird of raith; alexander melville; david balfour, son to the laird of mountquhanny; william guthrie; sir john auchinleck, chaplain; and sir john young, chaplain.--(acta parl. scot. vol. ii. pp. , .) [ ] pitscottie, after stating that the conspirators at the end of six days were put to the horn, thus proceeds in his narrative:--"so they keipit still the castle of sanct andros, and furnished it with all neccssar; and all sie as suspected thamselffis guiltie of the said slauchter, past into the said castle for thair defence, to witt, the laird of grange, maister hendrie prymros, [err. for balnaves,] the laird of pitmillie, the old persone george leslie, sir johne auchinleck, _with many utheris, who wer nocht at the slauchter_, but suspected thamselffis to be borne at evill will; thairfoir they lap in to the castle, and remained thair the space of halfe ane yeir, and would not obey the authoritie, nor yitt hear of no appoyntment nor offerris which was offerred unto thame be the authoritie. but still malignant aganis the queine and governour, thinked thamselffis strong enough againes thame both; and send thair messingeris to ingland to seik support; but quhat they gott, i cannot tell."--(dalyell's edit. p. .) spotiswood is much more concise. he says, "diverse persons, upon the news of the cardinal's death, came and joyned with those that had killed him, especially maister henry balnaves, the melvilles of the house of raith, and some gentlemen of fife, to the number of seven score persons, who all entered into the castle the day after the slaughter, and abode there during the term of the first siege. john rough, he that had attended the governour as chaplain in the beginning of his regiment, came also thither, and became their preacher."--(history, p. .) [ ] james lord hamilton, afterwards third earl of arran, and eldest son of the governor, was kept as a hostage in the castle of st. andrews at the time of the cardinal's slaughter. he was retained by the conspirators as a pledge for their own advantage. in the event of his being delivered to the english, the parliament, on the th of august , passed an act, excluding lord hamilton from all right of succession to the family estates and the crown, (being then regarded as presumptive heir to the crown,) during the time of his captivity. [ ] this was george durie. george, abbot of dunfermline, was present at the sentence against patrick hamilton in february - , yet it appears that his kinsman, james beaton, archbishop of st. andrews, was actually commemdator. durie, however, who was archdeacon of st. andrews, styles himself abbot in , and continued to act as subordinate to beaton during the primate's life. beaton died in ; and durie's appointment to the abbacy of dunfermline was confirmed by james the fifth. he was nominated an extraordinary lord of session, d july . durie continued to act as commendator, or abbot, till , when he went to france, and died on the th january - : his successor on the bench took his seat on the th november that year. according to dempster, two years after his death he was canonized by the church of rome.--(senators of the college of justice, p. ; keith's hist. vol. i. p. ; registrum de dunfermlyn, p. xvi.) [ ] montquhanie is in the parish of kilmany, and was the seat of sir michael balfour. [ ] "nor by the law," omitted in vautr. edit. [ ] in vautr. edit. "enjoy." [ ] in ms. g, and other copies, "arran:" see note . [ ] in vautr. edit. "_esperance_", here and elsewhere, is rendered "hope." [ ] see note . [ ] pasche, or easter. in , this festival fell on the th of april. thus it was upwards of ten months after the cardinal's death before knox took shelter in the castle of st. andrews. as this notice fixes the duration of knox's abode within the castle to less than four months, we may suppose that his vocation to the ministry, by john rough, was in the end of may, or early in june . the castle had been besieged by the governor, without any success, from the end of august till december . but the french fleet, to assist the governor in its reduction, arrived in june , and the castle being again invested both by sea and land, and receiving no expected aid from england, the besieged were forced to capitulate on the last of july that year. [ ] hugh douglas of long-niddry, in the parish of gladsmuir, east-lothian, about four miles from tranent. (see patten's expedition, sig. d ii. for a notice of his wife, when the english came "to lang nuddrey.") the mansion-house of long-niddry "is now known only by a circular mound, rising a few feet above the ground, containing the subterraneous vaults which were connected with the building."--(stat. acc. haddington, p. .) near it is the ruinous chapel which still bears the name of john knox's kirk. hugh douglas, the father of knox's pupils, francis and george, was a cadet of the douglasses of dalkeith. he must have died before the year ; as his son, francis douglas of langnudry, is named as third in the line of succession to james earl of morton, failing his lawful male issue, in the deed of ratification, dated th april .--(acta parl. scot. vol. ii. p. .) [ ] alexander cockburn, knox's pupil, according to the inscription on a brazen tablet, erected to his memory in the aisle of the old church of ormiston, was born in the year - .--(collection of epitaphs, &c., p. , glasgow, , mo; stat. acc. haddington, p. .) the following is the inscription alluded to, as still extant at ormiston:-- "hic conditur mag. alexander cockburn, primogenitus joannis domini ormiston et alisonæ sandilands, ex preclara familia calder, qui natus januarij : post insignem linguarum professionem, obiit anno ætatis suæ , cal. sept." as cockburn was born in - , he must have died in . the tablet referred to also contains buchanan's lines. _omnia quæ longa_, &c., celebrating his learning, and lamenting his premature fate. dempster likewise quotes these lines and another elegy on his death, by buchanan. (opera, vol. ii. pp. , ,) and says, that alexander cockburn, who had spent several years abroad, published various works, of which he had only seen three, the titles of which he specifies; but he mistakes the date of his death, in placing it in , and his age, as .--(hist. eccles. p. .) [ ] in ms. g, "in cumpany." [ ] john rough is said to have been born in . it must have been previous to that date, as his name, "johannes rouch," occurs in the second class or division of persons who were incorporated in st. leonard's college, in the year . he entered a monastery at stirling, when only seventeen years of age. the reputation he had acquired as a preacher, induced the governor to procure a dispensation for him to leave the monastery, and become one of his chaplains. in the treasurer's accounts, february - , he is called "maister johnne ra, chaplane to my lord governour," upon occasion of receaving "ane goun, doublet, hoiss, and bonet." foxe mentions that rough visited rome twice, and was very much shocked with what he witnessed in that city, which he had been taught to regard as the fountain of sanctity. he entered the castle of st. andrews, as knox states, soon after the cardinal's slaughter; but he retired to england before the capitulation in . (see calderwood's account of him, vol. i. p. .) he continued to preach till the death of edward the sixth; when he crossed to narden in friesland. but having come over to london, he was informed against to bishop bonner, by whose orders he was committed to the flames at smithfield, on the d of december . "an account of his examination, and two of his letters, (says dr. m'crie,) breathing the true spirit of a christian martyr, may be seen in foxe, p. - ."--(life of knox, vol. i. pp. , , .) rough's fate is thus commemorated, in a rare poetical tract by thomas bryce, entitled "a compendeous register in metre, conteigning the names and pacient suffryngs of the membres of jesus christ; and the tormented and cruelly burned within england, since the death of our famous kyng of immortal memory, edwarde the sixte," &c. london, , vo. december [ .] when jhon roughe, a minister weke, and margaret mering, with corage died, because christ onely they did seeke, with fier of force they must bee fried; when these in smithfield were put to death, we wishte for our elizabeth. [ ] in vautr. edit. "m. iohne." [ ] in vautr. edit. the name annand having been omitted, he is spoken of as "dean john." [ ] dean john annand was an ecclesiastic of some note. in a decreet arbitral, dated th oct. , as well as in the sentence pronounced against sir john borthwick, in , he is styled a canon of the metropolitan church of st. andrews. he became principal of st. leonard's college in , and he held that office till , when he was succeeded by john law. [ ] in vautr. edit. "preaching." [ ] in vautr. edit. "briefly." [ ] in vautr. edit. "other new names." [ ] in ms. g, "names." [ ] or major: (see note .) he was born in , and consequently at this time was far advanced in years. at the provincial council held in , "_m. johannes mayr_, decanus facultatis theologicæ universitatis sancti andrete, et martinus balfour, doctores in theologia, _annosi_, _grandævi_, _et debiles_, comparuerunt per procuratores."--(wilkins, concil., vol. iv. p. .) he died in . [ ] john wynrame: see note . [ ] in vautr. edit. "others hewed;" in ms. g, "utheris hued." [ ] in ms. g, "nydre."--the person referred to was james forsyth of nydie, who had a charter of the salmon fishings pertaining to the king, in the water of edyn, in fyfe, th september . the name of james forsyth of nydie in the regality of st. andrews, between and , occurs in an old rental book belonging to the city of st. andrews. one of his descendants was alexander forsyth, who was served heir of his father james forsyth, in the lands of nydie easter, in the regality of st. andrews, th april .--(retours, fife, no. .) [ ] john hamilton, abbot of paisley, as already stated, was appointed high treasurer in , when kirkaldy of grange was superseded. the abbot's accounts, under his designation of bishop of dunkeld, were rendered on the st october , having commenced th august . in the title of his accounts, commencing st october , and rendered on the th of september , he is styled archbishop of st. andrews. he may therefore have been promoted to the primacy in october ; but he was not inducted until the year . this date is fixed by the archbishop himself, in a deed, st march , as "the th year of our consecration, and the th of our translation to the primacy."--(lyons hist. of st. andrews, vol. ii. p. .) keith has shown that hamilton, who had been presented to the see of dunkeld on the death of george crichton, in january - , was not consecrated until , or more probably the beginning of . in like manner he continued to be styled john bishop of dunkeld, until the th june ; immediately after which date his translation to st. andrews no doubt took place.--(catal. of bishops, pp. , .) [ ] in ms. g, "unfaythfull." [ ] that is, as in ms. g, &c., "our youth;" vautr. edit. has "your thoughtes." [ ] this friar may probably be identified with alexander arbuckylle, whose name appears in the list of determinants, in the fourth class ( ^tus actus) "in pedagogio," at st. andrews, in . there was a franciscan monastery of observantines at st. andrews, to which he doubtless belonged. [ ] in ms. g, and in vautr. edit., "abashed." [ ] in ms. g, "his fault." [ ] in vautr. edit. "hinder." [ ] in vautr. edit. "were merily skoft ower." [ ] the treatise which knox wrote on board the french galley, containing a confession of his faith, and which he sent to his friends in scotland, is not known to be preserved. the substance of it was probably embodied in some of his subsequent writings. knox might, however, have had some reference to the epistle which he addressed to his brethren in scotland, in , in connexion with balnaves's confession, or treatise on justification, (see note .) [ ] mr. john spittal, official principal of st. andrews, held the office of rector of the university, from to . in the "liber officialis s. andree principalis," from which extracts were printed for the abbotsford club, edinb. , to, his name occasionally occurs: thus, "joannes spittal a niuibus rector, in utroque jure licentiatus, officialis sancti andree principalis," &c., aprilis ; and on the th february - , he has the additional title of provost of the collegiate church of st. mary in the fields, near edinburgh--"prepositus ecclesie collegiate diui virginis marie de campis prope edinburgh," (pp. , , ; wilkins, concilia, vol. iv. p. .) [ ] sir james balfour of pittendreich, eldest son of balfour of montquhanie, (see before, p. ,) is styled by principal robertson, and not unjustly, us "the most corrupt man of his age." having joined the conspirators at st. andrews, he was, when the castle was surrendered to the french, sent on board the same galley with knox. according to spotiswood, he obtained his freedom before the other prisoners were released, by abjuring his profession; and upon his return to scotland, he was appointed official of lothian, by the archbishop of st. andrews.--(hist. p. .) at a subsequent time, when raised to the bench, he took his seat under the title of parson of flisk. [ ] that is, martin luther's. [ ] in ms. g, "lat the godlie bewar of that race and progeny." so in vautr. edit., with this addition, "progenie by eschewing." the obvious meaning of the words is, "let the person of that race who lives godly be shown." [ ] sir james balfour of pittendreich, eldest son of balfour of montquhanie, (see before, p. ,) is styled by principal robertson, and not unjustly, us "the most corrupt man of his age." having joined the conspirators at st. andrews, he was, when the castle was surrendered to the french, sent on board the same galley with knox. according to spotiswood, he obtained his freedom before the other prisoners were released, by abjuring his profession; and upon his return to scotland, he was appointed official of lothian, by the archbishop of st. andrews.--(hist. p. .) at a subsequent time, when raised to the bench, he took his seat under the title of parson of flisk. [ ] that is, martin luther's. [ ] in ms. g, "lat the godlie bewar of that race and progeny." so in vautr. edit., with this addition, "progenie by eschewing." the obvious meaning of the words is, "let the person of that race who lives godly be shown." [ ] langhope, a castle on the borders, belonging to lord maxwell, which the english had obtained possession of. [ ] in vautr. edit. "court." [ ] in vautr. edit. "plague." [ ] in the ms. "age." [ ] in vautr. edit. "the xxix of july." [ ] in vautr. edit. "comming with the priour," &c. [ ] leon strozzi, a knight of malta, prior of capua, and captain-general of the galleys of france. his brother, peter strozzi, was captain of the french galleys which came to scotland in . [ ] in ms. g, vautr. edit., &c., "felcam."--that is, the vessels arrived at fecamp, a sea-port of normandy, about half-way between dieppe and havre. [ ] the water of sequane, or the river seine, is one of the four great rivers of france. it rises in burgundy, and passing the cities of paris and rouen, (called by knox, rowane,) flows into the english channel at havre. [ ] this john hamilton of milburn is not mentioned by the historian of the hamiltons. the earliest of the family mentioned is matthew, in . his name, however, is correctly given by knox, as we find in the treasurer's accounts, these three payments:-- , january. "item, be my lord governouris precept deliverit to my lord cardinale, quhilk he lent to maister jhonn hammyltoun of mylburne, to set furth the artailze at birgen raid, £ ." , november. "item, to maister jhonn hammyltoun of mylburn, maister of wark for the tyme to the quenys grace's bigingis, quhilk he debursit upoun hir grace's warkis _befoir his departing towart france_, as his tiket of compt, heir present to schaw, beris, £ , s. d." "item, to maister jhonn hammyltoun of mylburne, _direct to the kingis grace of france_, in the effaris of this realme, £ ." that knox is also correct in regard to the time of his death, may be inferred from the date of these payments, and from the circumstance that (his son, no doubt) matthew hamilton _of mylburn_, had a charter under the great seal of the lands of houston in linlithgowshire, dated in . this matthew had another charter of the same lands to himself, and to agnes livingstone his spouse, and to henry hamilton his son and heir apparent, th november . his son predeceased him, and the property came to robert, fratri quondam mathæi hamilton de melburne. see anderson's house of hamilton, p. *. [ ] in vautr. edit. "mountain." _craig_, a _rock_, is in other passages also erroneously made _mountain_. [ ] the city of rouen, in normandy. [ ] nantes in bartanze, or britanny, the large commercial city in the west of france. it is situated in the department of the loire inferieure, about twenty-seven miles from the mouth of the river loire. [ ] in ms. g, and vautr. edit., "went." [ ] the castle and episcopal palace of st. andrews is now in ruins. it stands on a detached point of land to the north of the town, and is bounded on two sides by the sea. it entered from the south side by a drawbridge, across a deep fosse or ditch, which being now removed and filled up with rubbish, very much injures the picturesque appearance of the castle. after its surrender, on the last of july , the castle was ordered by an act of council to be rased to the ground. the fortress and "block-houses" were no doubt partially demolished, but the building itself was speedily repaired and inhabited by archbishop hamilton, whose arms cut in stone still remain over one of the windows at the south-east corner. the north-west corner or keep was surmounted by a tower, and is the place mentioned by knox at pages , , as "the sea-tower." on entering it, after descending a few steps, the dungeon is shewn to visitors by letting down a light, till it nearly reaches the bottom, at about feet. the diameter at the top may be feet, and after a descent of or feet, it gradually widens to or feet diameter, cut out of the solid rock. there is no appearance of any similar excavation at the north-east corner. the castle, when surrendered, was abundantly supplied with provisions, and it contained the cardinal's money and furniture, to the value, it is said, of £ , ; and also the property of other persons, which had been brought hither as to a place of security. [ ] the earl of hertford, created duke of somerset, was lord protector of england. of his expedition into scotland, there was published at the time a minute and interesting account. see note . [ ] preston is near the village of prestonpans, in the parish of that name, being about eight miles east from edinburgh. [ ] in this place in the ms., half a page on the reverse of fol. , and nearly as much at the top of the next leaf, are left blank, us if for the purpose of afterwards inserting the letter here mentioned.--there is still preserved among the "state papers, in the reign of henry the eighth," a letter addressed by that monarch to the governor and council of scotland, on the th december , (vol. v. p. .) it expresses his desire for peace and tranquillity; but stipulates that the siege of st. andrews shall be relinquished, as he formerly had made promise to the gentlemen in the castle "to helpe them in their necessities." the english monarch died on the th of january - ; and it is scarcely necessary to add, that the expected aid was not sent. [ ] in all the copies, "friday the th." [ ] or inveresk. [ ] in ms. g, "playand;" in vautr. edit., "playing." [ ] in vautr. edit. "preachers." [ ] hume castle, in roxburghshire, in the united parishes of stitchell and hume, was a celebrated border fortress, often besieged by the english.--alexander fifth lord home, succeeded his father in , a few days after the battle of pinkie. it was in order to save his life, he being then a prisoner, that his mother, lady home, was influenced to surrender the castle to the english, th september ; from whom it was recovered by stratagem, in , as minutely detailed by beaugué, in his history of the campaigns, &c., pp. - . lord home was appointed warden of the east marches; and was a supporter of the reformation. he died in . [ ] falside hill or bray, is in the parish of inveresk, near carberry hill. [ ] the battle of pinkie took place in a field to the east of musselburgh, and adjacent to pinkie house. [ ] george durie, abbot of dunfermline: see note . [ ] hugh rigg of carberry: see note . buchanan mentions him as one of the persons by whose advice the governor suppressed the duke of somerset's letters; and calls him "a lawyer, more remarkable for his large body and personal strength, than for any knowledge of military affairs." [ ] archibald douglas seventh earl of angus, succeeded his grandfather, the sixth earl, who was slain at floddon, along with his son george master of angus. he married margaret, the queen dowager, mother of james the fifth, and during the king's minority he obtained and exercised great power; but was banished when james had assumed the royal authority. his daughter, lady margaret douglas, by the queen dowager, became countess of lennox, and mother of darnley. the earl of angus died at tantallon castle in the year . [ ] archibald campbell, fifth earl of argyle: see a subsequent note near the end of book first. [ ] ms. g, has "the armie." [ ] the word "host," omitted in the ms., is supplied from ms. g. [ ] in ms. g, "frayed thame grettumlie." vautr. edit. has, "affraied them wonderouslie." [ ] in ms. g, "the erle of huntlie." [ ] dr. patrick anderson, in his ms. history of scotland, in describing the disastrous flight at pinkie, says, "it was owing more to lack of good and prudent government, than by any manhood of the enemie. for it was plainly reported, that some were traitors amongst us, and that they received gold from england; whereupon the following distich was said, it was _your_ gold, and _our_ traitors wanne the field of pinkie, and noe englishman." the date of this calamitous defeat at pinkie, near musselburgh, was the th of september . the english forces were accompanied by william patten, who, from his notes or diary, published his curious and interesting work, intituled, "the expedicion into scotlande of the most woorthely fortunate prince edward, duke of soomerset, vncle vnto our most noble souereign lord the kinges maiestie edvvard the vi. goouernour of hys hyghnes persone, and protectour of hys graces realmes, dominions, & subiectes: made in the first yere of his maiesties most prosperous reign, and set out by way of diarie, by w. patten, londoner. vivat victor."--colophon, "imprinted in london, by richard grafton, &c., m.d.xlviii." small vo, bl. . [ ] in ms. g, "many ransomes;" in vautr. edit., "many reasons, honestie or unhonestie." [ ] robert master of erskine, eldest son of john fourth lord erskine, (and fifth earl of mar, who died in .) as stated in the text, he was slain at pinkie, th september ; and leaving no issue, his next brother thomas, master of erskine, having also predeceased his father, john erskine, originally intended for the church, became sixth earl of mar, in . [ ] in vautr. edit. _craig_ is rendered "mountains."--broughty craig, now known as broughty ferry, at the mouth of the river tay, four miles below dundee. the old castle, now in ruins, forms a conspicuous object from the opposite side of the river.--among other disbursements for "resisting of our old enemies," are the following:-- "item, (jan. - ,) at my lord of argilys passing to dunde, lieutenant for the tyme, for the recovering of the said toun and fort of brochty furth of the inglismennis bandis, rasit ane band of j^o [ men] of weyr, send with him, and put under the governance of duncan dundass; and to the said men of weyr, ... iij^m lib." "item, (feb. - ,) to summound alexander quhitlaw of new grange, to underly the law for his tressonable art, part, and counsale geving to the putting of the house of brouchtye in the englische mennis handis, continewall remanying with thame, conveying of thame to the byrnyng of dunde and forfair, rydand and gangand with thame in all thair dedis and heir-schippis upoun our souerane ladyis landis and subjectis, etc." [ ] probably in january or february - . bishop lesley mentioning gawin hamilton's death, calls him "gubernatoris cognato," (de rebus, &c., p. ,) and "awin tender kynisman" of the governor.--(hist. p. .) we may therefore suppose he was the same person with gawin hamilton of orbiston, who was named in the settlement of the hamilton estates in .--(anderson's house of hamilton, p. .) in october , the treasurer repaid "to maister gawyne hammyltoun, quhilk he debursit in the castle of edinburgh, the tyme of the field (of pynkeclouch) xxvi lib." he had previously been engaged in conducting the siege of st. andrews, as in december , "the compttar, (or treasurer,) discharges him in this moneth, quhairwith he sowld have been dischargeit in the moneth of december, in anno , quhilk was deliverit to j^c lxxx culvering men, under the governaunce of capitane gawyne hammylton and robert lindesay, parson of covingtoun; quhilk band was rasit for recovering of the castell of sanctandrois, and indurit v monethis, to ilkane of thir culvering men in the moneth, iiij lib. summa to the said space, ... iij^m vj^c lib." (£ .) "item, the samyne tyme, under the governaunce of the saidis capitanis j^c xx pikmen, quhilkis alsua remanit the tyme of the said assege, to every ane of thame in the moneth, iij lib. x s. summa be the said space, ... ij^m lib." (£ .) "item, to the saidis twa capitanis, for thair awin feis, thair hand-seinze lieutenant, provest, clerk, and officiaris of band, ilkane of the said capitanis in the moneth, j^c lib. summa in the saidis v monethis, j^m lib." (£ .) [ ] in vautr. edit. "that lent." [ ] john cockburn, (who has been already noticed, and will be again met with under the year ,) was forfeited th december . [ ] alexander crichton of brunstone was a leading agent in the english schemes for assassinating cardinal beaton, although eventually accomplished without his aid. from his connexion with george wishart, some fruitless attempts have been made to implicate wishart in such schemes. see appendix, no. ix.--the situation of brunstone, in the barony of pennycuik, is already noticed at page . a charter under the great seal of the lands of gilberton, was granted to alexander creichtoun of burnstoun, and john creichtoun his son and heir, th november . on the th november , there was paid, "be my lord governouris speciall command, to the laird of brounstoun, in support of his expensis maid in tyme of his being in ingland, lauborand for redres of certane scottis schippis tane be the inglische men, &c., lib." he was forfeited, and escaped from scotland in the year . his death must have taken place before the th december , as on that day the process of forfeiture against him was reduced by the scotish parliament, at the instance of john creichton, eldest lawful son and heir of _umquhile_ alexander creichton of burnstane.--(acta parl. scot. vol. ii. p. .) on the th february - , john creichton of brunstone, had a charter of confirmation of the lands of gilbertoun; and another, on the th february - , of the lands of stanyhill, in the shire of edinburgh. in the retours we find the names of james creichton junior, as heir of his brother john, of lands in the barony of pennycuik, th may ; and james creichton, as heir of john creichton of brunstone, his father, of the lands of brunstone, &c., in the barony of pennycuik, th may . [ ] in vautr. edit. "after sore assalted." [ ] knox has evidently mistaken the year. mons. de dessé, mons. dandelot, and pierre strozzi, captain of the galleys, arrived in scotland, about june ; and mons. de térmes, in the year following: see . bishop lesley has given a detailed account of their proceedings.--(history, p. , &c.) see also "l'histoire de la guerre d'escosse, traitant comme le royaume fut assailly, & en grand' partie occupé par les anglois, & depuis rendu paisible à sa reyne, & reduit en son ancien estat & dignité, par ian de beaugué, gentilhomme françois. a paris, ," vo. a translation of this work, ascribed to dr. p. abercromby, was published at edinburgh in , vo, with an historical preface. a ms. note by the celebrated dr. archibald pitcairne, in a copy in my possession, asserts that the preface was written by crawford the historiographer, although claimed by the translator as his own; "but poor crawford," he adds, was then dead. [ ] this meeting of parliament referred to, was "holdin at the abbay of hadingtoun," on the th july ; of which the only proceedings recorded are the "propositioun by the maist christian king of france; and the determinatioun of the three estatis, concerning the mariage of our soverane lady with the dolphin of france."--(acta parl. scot., vol. ii. p. .) [ ] sir walter scott of branxholm, was served heir of his father, sir walter, in october . he was slain in edinburgh by sir walter ker of cessfurd, and andrew kerr of fernyhurst, in october .--(acta parl. scot. vol. ii. p. .) in the diurnal of occurrents, the writer noticing his slaughter, calls him "ane valzeand guid knycht," (p. .) knox simply styles him "a bloody man."--(see douglas and wood's peerage, vol. i. p. ; and scott's lay of the last minstrel.) [ ] the proposed alliance between queen mary and the dauphin of france having been agreed to at stirling, on the th february - , the same day, the governor, james earl of arran, was created duke of chatellerault, by the king of france and the letters patent of his nomination were registered by the parliament of france, on the d of april. [ ] the order of st. michael was instituted by louis xi., king of france, in . the number of knights was limited to thirty-six. it received the name of the cockle, from the escalop-shells of gold with which the collar of the order was ornamented.--in september , is this payment by the treasurer, "item, for paintting of my lord governoures armes setting furth of the collar that day that my lord of angus and argyle had ressavit the ordour, xlv s." from the date, we might have concluded that this referred to the order of the cockle, had it not been that three years previously mention is made, in a letter from one of the english "espialles," in scotland, (communicated to lord wharton, on the th june ,) that "the order of the cocle," with a collar of gold, had then been sent from france to the earl of angus.--(state papers, vol. v. p. .) [ ] in the ms. this marginal note is scored through, as if to be deleted; but this seems to have been done by a later hand. a few of the letters are cut away by the binder, but the note itself occurs in vautrollier's edition, p. ; which does not contain the marginal words that follow, marking the precise time when this portion of the history was written. it is worthy of notice, that on the th june , bothwell having escaped to dunbar, queen mary surrendered herself to the nobles at carberry hill, and two days later, she was imprisoned in lochleven castle. the marginal words, therefore, to this purport, "finish what thou hast begun, o my god, for the glory of thy name: th june ," may be regarded as if the author had viewed that event as being a partial accomplishment of his prediction which he states to have been written in april . but the language here used by knox, it is impossible to vindicate. [ ] on the th november , a pursuevant was sent to stirling "with letters to the maister of arskine, charging him to keip sir robert bowes, inglisman, untransportit hame in his awin cuntré, quhill my lord governour and counsale be farder avisit."--(treasurer's accounts.) [ ] sir james wilford was taken prisoner by the french at dunbar, in the year : see holinshed's chronicles, england, vol. ii. p. ; scotland, p. , edit. . [ ] prince alexander labanoff, in his collection of the letters of mary queen of scots, states, that at the end of july , m. de brézé, who arrived for that end, and villegaignon, commander of the french squadron, received the young queen and her suite, at dumbarton. on the th august, he adds, mary stuart disembarked at the port of brest, and was immediately conducted to st. germain-en-laye, where she was educated as one of the royal family.--(lettres de marie stuart, &c., vol. i.) the following entries from the treasurer's accounts, as relating to the young queen, are not devoid of interest, in connexion with the similar payments quoted in note ,-- "item, (march ,) the comptar dischargis him, gevyn to my lord erskyn and lord levingstoun, to ane compte of thair feyes restand awyn thame for keping of the quenis grace persoun, the sowme of j^c lxxvi lib. vi s. viij d. "item, mair to thame, in compleit pament of all feyes restand awyn thame for the causis forsaid, (fra the last day of november in the zeir of god zeris,) unto the last day of februar, in the zeir of god j^m v^c and fortye sevyn zeris, [ - ,] quhilk was the day of thair departing with the quenis grace to dumbartane, and sa dischargit the sowme of ij^m ( ) lib. "item, (july ,) to johnne patersoun, to pas for marinaris to be pylattis, and to pas about in the galayes to the vest seyes, that past to france with the quenis grace, xxij s." [ ] in ms. g, and vautr. edit., "i assure yow." [ ] cramond, a village on the south side of the frith of forth, five or six miles higher up than leith. [ ] in october , a messenger was directed "to charge the maister capitane, quarter maisterris, and skippares of the schip callit the schallop, chargeing thame to prepair and mak hir reddye for the recovering of sanct colmys inche."--(treasurer's accounts.) st. colme's inch is a small island in the frith of forth, within two miles of the shore from aberdour. there are still some remains of fortifications of a recent date. the island of inch-colme is chiefly remarkable for the ruins of an abbey founded by king alexander the first, about the year , and dedicated to st. columba. the inmates were canon-regulars of st. augustine. [ ] although the name is apparently "de arfe" in the ms., it might be read "de aese." but the name "de arfe" is found in vautr. edit., and in mss. a, e, i, and w. ms. l , has "de anfe." in the ms. as originally written it stood, "that wynter remaned _monsieur de termes_ in scotland," &c. this name was afterwards deleted, and that of "de arfe" interlined; and it so appears in the copies above specified. but in ms. g, the original words are retained, thus indicating that the intermediate ms. from which ms. g was transcribed, may have been made previously to the correction of the name.--on the th june , £ . s. was paid by the treasurer "to alexander ross, pursevante, to attend upoun monsieur darse and the frenche bande." the name, however, should be _mons. de dessé_, who continued in command of the french troops in scotland, during . mons. de termes arrived at dumbarton with reinforcements, early in , when dessé returned to france.--(beaugué, histoire, fol. , .) [ ] in vautr. edit. "scarcenesse." [ ] niddry's wynd, is now called niddry street, its former character of a wynd or close having been changed, when the houses at the top of it were removed in , and the street called south bridge was built, which connects the old town of edinburgh with the southern districts. [ ] the nether bow port or gate was a large building, with houses on each side, dividing or forming a barrier between the high street of edinburgh, and the street in continuation still known as the canongate, where the french troops were quartered during the winter - . the building alluded to was removed as an obstruction to the street, in the year . [ ] in ms. g, and vautr. edit., "violentlie repulsit him." [ ] james hamilton, laird of stenhouse, already alluded to at page , was provost of the city as well as captain of the castle. bishop lesley says the occurrence which led to his death, took place early in october . it must have been on or before the first of that month, as sir william hamilton of sanquhar was on that day appointed captain of the castle of edinburgh, with the salary of £ , s. d.--(treasurer's accounts.) [ ] james hamilton was his father's deputy as captain of the castle; and was also director of the chancery. [ ] in ms. g, "mr. walter stewart." [ ] the town of haddington was strongly garrisoned by lord grey of wilton and the english forces, in april ; and was soon after besieged by the french auxiliaries, and likewise in the following year, but on both occasions without success. the friar kirk belonged to the franciscan or gray friars; the choir of which, from its beautiful structure, was called _lucerna laudoniæ_, (the lamp of lothian.) notwithstanding all the changes this church has undergone in the course of five or six centuries, it still exhibits the outlines of an imposing building, about feet long, surmounted by a handsome square tower. no traces are now preserved of st. catherine's chapel. [ ] according to beaugué, this was a french soldier "corrupted by the enemy," who had served them as a spy. [ ] in other copies, "aneughe,"--"enough." [ ] see note .--bishop lesley says, the castle, which had been left in charge of sir edward dudley, was recovered on st. stephen's night, ( th december,) .--(hist. pp. , .) [ ] the laird of raith was sir john melville, knight. charters of the lands of murdocairney, in fife, were granted to him and his wife helen napier, in and . james the fifth, who conferred on him the honour of knighthood, appointed him captain of the castle of dunbar. he was accused of heresy by cardinal beaton; but was not convicted. it may have been in reference to this charge that he obtained from the king a remission "for all crimes, excepting treason," which he may have committed prior to the th august .--(pitcairn's crim. trials, vol. i. p. *.) subsequently being in favour of the english alliance, when all correspondence with england had been interdicted, an intercepted letter, addressed by sir john melville to his son, was laid hold of, and formed the ground of accusation for treason. on the d december , writings were sent from edinburgh "to all the lairdis and gentilmen of fyfe to be heir dec. ^to. upoun the laird of rathis assise;" and on that day, the treasurer paid s. "to adame m'cullo, pursewant, send agane to fyfe to summond ane assiss to the laird of raith; and to execute summoundis of tressoun upoun the laird of petmille, and maister henry balnavis, to the xxj day of februar [ - .]" he was accordingly tried and executed in - , and his forfeited estates were bestowed on david hamilton, youngest son of the governor.--(buchan. hist. lib. xv. c. .) the forfeited estates, however, were restored by queen mary to his eldest son john melville, by a special gift dated th feb. - .--(criminal trials, vol. i. p. *.) he survived till the th july . [ ] in vautr. edit. "prankes." [ ] ninian cockburn, called captain ringan. in vautr. edit. "reingzein," and "rengzeane," being a common or vulgar pronunciation of the name ninian. [ ] in order not to crowd the pages unnecessarily, some further particulars respecting norman lesley are reserved for the appendix, no. xi. [ ] monypenny of pitmilly, in the parish of kingsbarns, in fife, is a family of old standing. the mother of cardinal beaton was isabell monypenny of pitmilly. david monypenny, heir apparent of petmillie, had a charter under the great seal, dated th march . it is noticed at note , that summons of treason upon the laird of petmille, to the st february - , had been served on the th december . but one of his daughters, as well as the "laird," was implicated in countenancing the conspirators. on the last of november , "a messinger was sent with ane letter direct to summound jonet monypenie, douchtor to the laird of petmylle, for hir remanyng in the castell of sanctandrois, and intercommonyng and assistance gevin be hir to normound leslie and his complices, slaares of my lord cardinall."--(treasurer's accounts.) [ ] sherisburg, is evidently cherburg or cherbourg, a well known sea-port in france, in lower normandy, (near cape la hogue.) [ ] henry balnaves of halhill raised himself to distinction by his talents and application. after pursuing his studies abroad for several years, he returned to scotland, and was admitted an advocate in november . in july , he was appointed a lord of session; and survived till the year . a more minute account of his history will be given in vol. iii., in connexion with extracts from the treatise mentioned in the following note, to which knox prefixed an epistle, in the year . [ ] this treatise on justification, of which knox, we are informed, had expressed an earnest desire, _as almost nothing more_, that it should be diligently sought after, and preserved from perishing, was discovered in ms. at ormiston, subsequently to the death both of knox and the author. yet david buchanan, instead of these words, makes knox to say, "which is extant to this day." it was first published under the following title:-- "the confession of faith, conteining how the troubled man should seeke refuge at his god, thereto led by faith: with the declaration of the article of justification at length, &c. compiled by m. henry balnaves of halhill, and one of the lords of session and counsell of scotland, being a prisoner within the old pallaice of roane: in the year of our lord . imprinted at edinburgh, by thomas vautrollier. ." small vo. [ ] in vautr. edit. the words, "the messe was said in the gallay, or ellis heard upoun the schoar, in," are omitted by the printer, at the foot of page . the words are likewise omitted in mss. l and . [ ] the city of nantes: see note . [ ] ms. g reads correctly, "such an _idolle_;" but vautr. edit. has, "such a _jewell_ is accursed;" and this blunder is retained in mss. a, e, i, ("javel,") l , and w.--although no name is given in regard to the incident alluded to, this "merry fact" evidently happened to knox himself. [ ] official of lothian: see notes and . [ ] in ms. g, "a kape." [ ] probably in june . [ ] mont st. michel is a benedictine abbey, with a village strongly fortified, on a rocky island, surrounded with quicksands, and only accessible at low water. it is sixteen miles s.w. of avranches, in normandy. its situation is highly picturesque; and many chivalrous associations are connected with the place; which, during the fifteenth century, had often been besieged, but unsuccessfully, by the english. from its strong and isolated position, it had probably been chosen for that purpose, and it still continues to be used for a state prison. [ ] in ms. g, "eyes." [ ] see note . [ ] the king's even, is evidently meant for the eve of epiphany, and the king of the bean: see footnote to page . david buchanan, aware of this allusion, from his long residence in france, has this marginal illustration: "_le jour de roys au soir, quand ils crient 'le roy boit.'_" the mention of this _fête_ may show, that kirkaldy and his companions had made their escape on the th of january, and in the year - . [ ] sir john masone, ambassador for england at the french court, on the th june , says, "touching the scots at st. andrews, he (the constable of france) told me that the lord grange and his brother are flown he wist not whither, and two others were already set at liberty; and that the rest, at the king (edward vi.) my master's contentation, should out of hand be put at large."--(tytler's edward vi., &c., vol. i. p. .) [ ] in vautr. edit. "they purposed." [ ] the names of these brethren are very much overlooked by the different peerage writers of scotland, in their pedigrees of the rothes family. the first marriage of george earl of rothes with margaret crichton, daughter of william lord crichton, was declared before to be uncanonical. but by this lady, "his affidate spouse," he had four sons: the eldest was george, who died unmarried; the others were norman, william, and robert. the reader may be referred to the appendix of nisbet's heraldry, vol. ii. p. , to explain the grounds upon which the two latter, as heirs-male, were passed over in the succession, at their father's death, in , when andrew lesley, the eldest son by subsequent marriage, and who had married a niece of the governor the earl of arran, became earl of rothes. of these two brethren, william is styled in macfarlane's genealogical collections, "laird of cairnie, and, (it is added,) as some say, he died without succession." bishop lesley, in noticing the death of norman lesley in france, in , says, "the king of france, for recompence of his service, received _his eldest brodir william_ in favour, and maid him gentill man of his chalmer."--(history, p. .) knox's words in the text imply that he was alive in . the other brother robert, is perhaps the same who was admitted an advocate in the court of session, in may . he settled in morayshire, in the parish of spynie, and became founder of the fendrassie family. he married janet elphingstone, a daughter of robert lord elphingstone, and left three sons and two daughters. an inscription, in latin verse, in the cathedral church of elgin, while it commemorates their virtues and attachment, records that he and his wife were interred in the same grave.--(monteith's theatre of mortality, p. , edinb., , vo.) [ ] le conquet, a small town of britanny, with a good harbour, opposite the island of ushant, sixteen miles west of brest. [ ] he was probably the same person with alexander clark of balbirnie, who became lord provost of edinburgh from to inclusive. [ ] in this paragraph knox sums up briefly his own history between february - , when he was delivered from the french galley, and his first return to scotland, in the end of harvest . [ ] edward died on the th july . [ ] the word "english" is omitted in vautr. edit. [ ] knox has abstained from entering upon any statement of the disputes which took place in the english congregation at francfort, in , in consequence of the introduction, by dr. coxe and others, of the book of common prayer, and the use of various ceremonies. a short paper by knox himself, connected with the charge brought against him before the magistrates of francfort, has been preserved by calderwood, (hist., vol. i. p. ,) and will naturally fall to be included in vol. iii. of the present work. but a detailed account of the transactions at that time was drawn up and published anonymously, three years after knox's death, by one of the nonconformists. it is entitled, "a brieff discours off the troubles begunne at franckford in germany, anno domini . abowte the booke off common prayer and ceremonies, and continued by the englishe men theyre, to thame off q. maries reigne," and was originally published (at geneva) in , to. there is an accurate reprint of it at london, by john petheram, , vo, in which it is suggested, by the rev. thomas m'crie, with great probability, the author may have been dr. william whittingham. [ ] there were two editions of knox's admonition printed in , within a few months of each other, under a fictitious imprint, and both of them abroad, as will be fully described in vol. iii. [ ] in printing these names, vautr. edit. is very incorrect; instead of john sibbald, john gray, william guthrie, &c., it has "john _sibbard_, john gray, _within gathered_, and stevin bell." yet this unintelligible nonsense is literally copied in mss. l and . mss. a, w, and e, have "sibbard," but give guthry's name correctly. in the summons of treason against the conspirators, john sibbald is called "brother of the laird of cukiston;" and auchinleck is styled sir john auchinleck, chaplain. for mention of guthrey, in connexion with an indignity offered to the cardinal's body, the reader may be referred to pitscottie. in the treasurer's accounts, we find s. was paid to a messenger, sent on the d of december , with "letters to serche and seik the gudes of maister jhonne gray, persoun of sanct nycholace kirk, beside cowper, quhilkis pertenis to our souerane lady be resoun of eschete, throu the said maister jhonnis being fugitive fra the lawes for art and part of the slauchter of the cardinall."--gray's name, however, is not included in the list of persons forfeited by the parliament on the th august . [ ] from the above paragraph in knox, it appears that the prisoners were liberated at different periods between the winter of - , and july . [ ] this statement of knox, written in , or twenty years after the event, is certainly very much opposed to assertions which are easier made than proved, that all the persons concerned in cardinal beaton's assassination came to a violent death. there is no doubt that bishop lesley says, "cædis ujus auctores violenta morte deo vindice mulctantur;" (de rebus gestis, &c., p. ;) but he passes this over in silence, in his english history. dempster also asserts "nam nullus nefariorum percussorum non violenta morte extinctus est."--(hist. eccles. p. .) "so, 'tis observed by the protestants, that there was not one of his (beaton's) murderers but afterwards died a violent, and, for the most part, an ignominious death."--(preface to beaugué's history, p. .) it is not necessary to quote similar assertions reiterated by writers of the present day. james melville died, it is true, during his imprisonment, in or , but certainly not a violent death. norman lesley died of his wounds, but in no inglorious manner, in ; and nineteen years later, in august , sir william kirkaldy of grange, after his gallant defence of the castle of edinburgh, suffered an ignominious death. any other instance of a violent death remains to be proven. [ ] james melvin or melville. see note . spotiswood says he was "one of the house of carnbee." in this way, we may conjecture he was brother of john mailvile of carnbee, who had charters of the lands of granton, st february - , and to his wife margaret leirmonth, th may . their son, john mailvile of carnbee junior, and his wife janet inglis, had a charter of half of these lands, th june . the person who acted such a prominent part in cardinal beaton's murder, was called senior, probably to distinguish him from james, "naturali et legitimo filio" of john mailvile of carnbee, who had a charter of half the lands of carnbee, th november .--brist in bartanzea, is the same as brest, the well known sea-port of france, one of the best harbours in europe, on the west coast of britanny. [ ] ms. g, "gif we, i say, or they." [ ] in vautr. edit. "yeare of our lord." [ ] in vautr. edit. the word _villain_ was mistaken for the name of a person, and thus we have "his other _william_;" and in the marginal note, "the slaughter of that _williame_ davie."--the date of this event, so memorable in scotish history, from its relation to queen mary, was the th of march - . [ ] balfour, as stated at page , was official of lothian, and he still retained his ecclesiastical denomination, parson of flisk, when raised to the bench, th november . immediately after rizzio's murder, in march , he was knighted, and appointed lord clerk-register, in place of mr. james macgill, one of the conspirators. and on the th december , balfour became lord president, by the title of pettendreich. [ ] john sinclair, bishop of brechin, died in april : see subsequent note. [ ] the person here referred to, and whose baptismal name is left blank in the ms., and in all the later copies, was john lesley, bishop of ross. this eminent and learned prelate, whom knox calls "a priest's gett," or illegitimate child, was the natural son of gawin lesley, parson of kingussie, as keith, in his catalogue of bishops, has shown from original documents. lesley's several preferments will afterwards be noticed. he survived till the year . [ ] in vautr. edit. "gate;" ms. g, "geitt." [ ] sir symon preston of craigmillar: see note . [ ] in the ms. "keape." [ ] a treaty of peace between england and france, comprising scotland, was concluded at boulogne, on the th march, and proclaimed at edinburgh in april . [ ] there was concluded a commercial treaty between france and the low countries, th april ; and a treaty of peace between the emperor charles the fifth and mary queen of scots, th december . [ ] from foxe's account, of wallace's trial, we learn that he was a native of fail, in ayrshire; and there was a family of wallace of feale. fail, or failford, in the parish of torbolton, was the site of a monastery founded in , which belonged to the red friars. (see the notices in new stat. account, ayrshire, p. , &c.) the manner in which knox speaks of wallace as "a simple man without learning," may mean, without much pretension to learning, or not having enjoyed a learned education. yet we find two persons of the same name, adam wallace, incorporated at glasgow in and .--his trial and execution took place in ; yet in the latin verses by john johnston of st. andrews, on the scotish martyrs, the date given is th july . ("constantissime demum pro testimonio christi mortuus, edinburgi xvii julij .") [ ] the wife of john cockburn of ormiston, called in those days lady ormiston, was alison sandilands, daughter of sir james sandilands of calder. her son alexander, was knox's pupil: see note . she was still alive in , when vautrollier dedicated "to the honourable and vertuous ladie alison sandilands, lady of hormiston," the treatise called "the confession of faith," by henry balnaves, (see note ,) the ms. of which had been fortunately discovered at ormiston, by richard bannatyne, knox's secretary. [ ] winton castle, in the parish of pencaitland, east lothian, about five miles west from haddington, appears to have been a place of great splendour, according to the glowing description of it by sir richard maitland, in his "historie and cronicle of the house of seyton," p. . winton house or castle, "biggit, with the yard and garding thereof," by george second lord seaton, we are informed, was burned, and the policy destroyed, "by the english of old;" but the house was re-edified by george tenth lord seaton, and third earl of winton, in . [ ] the monastery of the dominican or black friars was one of the largest establishments in edinburgh, with extensive gardens, occupying the site of the building which formerly was the high school, on the rising ground to the south of the cowgate. the close, or "le venelle," still known as the blackfriars wynd, formed a connexion between the monastery and the high street, and had been granted to the friars by alexander the second. the convent was burned to the ground by a sudden fire, on the th april , and had only been partially rebuilt at the time of the reformation. [ ] to the notices at page , respecting john lauder, it may be added, that being one of the auditors of the chamberlain's accounts for the archbishoprick of st. andrews, from to , he is styled archdeacon of teviotdale.--(ms. rental book, advocates library.) in foxe's account of the trial of adam wallace, , lauder is called parson of morebattle. in february , he is styled archidene of teviotdale, and notary public of st. andrews.--(acta parl. scot., vol. ii. p. .) in the same year, lauder signs a deed as "_secretarius_" of archbishop hamilton, (ms. rental book, at st. andrews;) as the deed referred to was cancelled, and reconfirmed in , without any notice of lauder's name, it may be conjectured that he had died during that interval. [ ] in ms. g, "bindeth." [ ] george gordon, fourth earl of huntley, succeeded his grandfather in the year . in , after cardinal beaton's death, he became lord high chancellor. his subsequent history is well known; and he was killed fighting against the earl of murray, at corrichie, about twelve miles from aberdeen, th october .--(douglas and wood's peerage, vol. i. p. ; senators of the college of justice, p. - .) [ ] see note . [ ] robert reid: see subsequent note. [ ] in vautr. edit. "take yon all, my lordis, of the clergie." [ ] foxe, in his book of martyrs, as already noticed in note , has given a minute account of the trial and execution of adam wallace. it will be inserted as no. xii. in the appendix to this volume, every contemporary narrative of such proceedings, at this early period, being possessed of more than ordinary interest. [ ] the queen dowager of scotland embarked at leith on the th, reached dieppe on the th, and rouen on the th september . in this visit to her daughter in france, she was absent for upwards of twelve months. on her return, she landed at portsmouth, about the middle of october , and proceeded to london, where she was welcomed by edward the sixth and the english court. see note . [ ] in december , henry the second, king of france, wrote to the duke of chatelherault, to induce him to resign the regency of scotland in favour of the queen dowager; and on the d march - , the young queen addressed an order to the duke to that effect. this led to his resignation, and on the th april , mary of guise, queen dowager, was proclaimed regent of scotland, with great solemnity and public rejoicings. [ ] in ms. g, and vautr. edit., "all understanding or expectatioun of men." [ ] according to the journal by the english monarch, which contains a description of the queen dowager's sumptuous entertainment during the period she remained at the court of edward, from the d of october to the th of november .--(tytler's edward vi., &c., vol. ii. pp. , .) bishop lesley also takes notice of the "gret banqueting and honorabill pastyme maid for intertenement of the quene douarier;" and "of the honorabill convoye" she had in returning through england, until she reached berwick, (hist. p. ;) when some of the scotish nobility escorted her to holyrood, where she arrived at the end of november that year. [ ] in ms. g, "martin luther." [ ] in the ms. a blank space is left, as if for the purpose of filling in some other names; such as paulus fagius, francis dryander, and justus jonas, who, like the three above mentioned, were eminent foreign divines, and came to england during the reign of edward the sixth. [ ] in adding the name _emanuel gualterus_, knox has evidently confounded two persons: _emanuel_ tremelius, a learned italian, who succeeded fagius as king's reader of hebrew, (strype's eccl. memorials, vol. ii. p. ,) and rudolphus _gualterus_ of zurich, who had visited england in .--(strype's life of cranmer, p. .)--martin bucer died in ; peter martyr, in ; and john a lasco, in . [ ] it is scarcely necessary to add that queen mary of england was the daughter of henry the eighth, by catharine of arragon. her accession to the throne is reckoned from the death of edward the sixth, th july . she married philip, king of spain, th july ; and died th november . [ ] during the short reign of queen mary, it has been reckoned that not less than upwards of persons were committed to the flames, on account of their religious sentiments. [ ] see page . [ ] william harlaw was born soon after the year ; and, as we are informed by calderwood, "first was a taylour in edinburgh; thereafter went to england, and preached some times as a deacoun, according to the corrupt custome of that kirk, under the reigne of king edward. howbeit he was not verie learned, yet his doctrine was plaine and sound, and worthie of commendatioun."--(history, vol. i. p. .) on the death of edward, he returned to scotland in , and in , began "publicly to exhort in edinburgh," and also in other parts of the country. he was one of the preachers, at perth, who were denounced as rebels for usurping the authority of the church, th may .--(see page .) harlaw, in , became minister of the parish of st. cuthberts, in the vicinity of edinburgh, and he continued there till his death. robert pont, who had for four years been his colleague, was presented to "the vicaraige of st. cuthbert's kirk, vaicand be the deceise of william harlaw," in december . [ ] john willock was a native of ayrshire. spotiswood says, he became a franciscan, and lesley, a dominican friar. having at an early period relinquished his monastic habit, he went to england, and was employed as a preacher in st. catherine's, london, and also as chaplain to the duke of suffolk. on the accession of queen mary to the throne of england, he escaped to the continent, and practised as a physician at embden, in friesland. in , and in , he twice visited scotland, on a mission to the queen regent, respecting trade; and having returned in october , he undertook the public office of the ministry. see the notices in the wodrow miscellany, vol. i. pp. - , and the authorities there quoted. [ ] knox's arrival in scotland may be placed about the end of september . he set out from geneva in the previous month, and came to dieppe, from whence he sailed, and landed on the east coast of scotland, not far from berwick. [ ] see subsequent note, page . [ ] this was apparently a metrical version of psalm , but the line does not correspond with any of the known versions of the psalms in metre. the wedderburns, however, may have versified a greater number of psalms than those contained in the volume best known as "the gude and godly ballates:" see note . [ ] in ms. a, "then if all." [ ] in ms. g, "servantis." [ ] in vautr. edit. "that might serve for the purpose." [ ] john erskine of dun.--the house of dun is in the parish of that name, in forfarshire, about half-way between montrose and brechin. [ ] calder house, near mid-calder, in west-lothian, was the seat of sir james sandilands.--his second son james, in , succeeded "schir walter lyndesay, knycht of the roddis, and lord of sanct johns," (he is so styled in sir david lyndesay's register of armes, , fol. ,) as preceptor of torphichen, and thus became head of the knights hospitallers of st. john of jerusalem in scotland. in , lord st. john having resigned the possessions of the order to the crown, he obtained a new charter of the lands belonging to the knights templars and hospitallers in scotland, erected into a barony, with the title of lord torphichen.--(spottiswoode miscellany, vol. ii. pp. , - .) [ ] john fifth lord erskine, and afterwards sixth earl of mar, at this time was governor of edinburgh castle. [ ] archibald campbell, lord lorne, succeeded his father, the fourth earl of argyle, in . [ ] lord james stewart was the natural son of james the fifth, by margaret erskine, daughter of john fifth earl of mar, and fourth lord erskine. this lady afterwards married sir robert douglas of lochleven; and she appears to have enjoyed a pension from the king; as the treasurer, in september , in his "exoneratio," has, "item, gevin to the lady lochlevin, in contentatioun of her pensioun, awing to her zerelie, be ane precept, vj^clxvj lib. xiij s. iiij d." (£ , s. d.) her son lord james stewart was born in , and when five years of age, in , the king conferred on him the priory of st. andrews. in the treasurer's accounts, march , are various entries for dresses to the kingis grace sonis, lord james of kelso, and lord james of sanctandrois; and in may, to "the abbot of kelso, and the priour of sanctandrois." he was also prior of maçon, in france. as prior of st. andrews, he sat in the provincial council held at edinburgh, in october .--(wilkins, concilia, vol. iv. p. .) he was sent to france in march , to invite queen mary to return to scotland; by whom, on the th january - , he was raised to the peerage by the title of earl of murray. [ ] that is, the winter of . [ ] most of these places in kyle, in which knox taught or officiated, have already been noticed; being the seats of john lockhart of barr, hugh wallace of carnell, robert campbell of kingyeancleuch, andrew stewart lord ochiltree, and james chalmers of gadgirth. [ ] easter fell on the th of april, in . [ ] finlayston in the parish of kilmalcolm, near the clyde, to the east of port-glasgow. the silver cups which were used by knox on this occasion, are still carefully preserved; and the use of them was given at the time of dispensing the sacrament in the parish church of kilmalcolm, so long as the glencairn family resided at finlayston.--the title of earl of glencairn has been dormant since the death of james th earl in . [ ] dr. m'crie, on the authority of this passage, says, that most of the gentlemen of the mearns "entered into a solemn and mutual bond, in which they renounced the popish communion, and engaged to maintain and promote the pure preaching of the gospel, as providence should favour them with opportunities. this seems to have been the first of those religious bonds or covenants, by which the confederation of the protestants in scotland was so frequently ratified."--(life of knox, vol. i. p. .)--i do not think, however, that knox's words are quite conclusive on this point: that the mutual agreement or resolution of the gentlemen of the mearns, had assumed the form of a band or covenant, such as "the common band," signed on the d december , (see page ,) or those of a later date, which knox has inserted in the second book of his history. [ ] william keith, fourth earl marischall, succeeded his grandfather, in . he accompanied james the fifth in his visit to france, in ; and was nominated an extraordinary lord of session in . see note , for sir ralph sadler's opinion of him. it was at his request that knox, in the year , addressed his letter to the queen dowager. he died th october . [ ] we find that at the siege of leith, in , "young henry drummond" was slain.--(lesley's hist. p. ; holinshed's chron. p. .) [ ] this letter to the queen dowager was originally printed in a very small volume, without date, or name of the place or printer, but apparently on the continent: it is entitled "the copie of a letter sent to the ladye mary dowagire regent of scotland, by john knox, in the yeare ." [ ] james beaton was nephew of the cardinal, and was preferred to the see of glasgow in . he has been incidentally mentioned in note ; and in reference to this, lesley says that the governor, after cardinal beaton's death, "disponed the archbishoprike of sanct androis to his owne broder, the abbot of paisley, and gaif ane gift of the abbay [abbacy] of arbroith to george douglas, bastard sone to the erle of angus, _notwithstanding that maister james beatoun_, tender cousing to the cardinall, _was lawfullie provydit thairto of befoir_; quhilk maid gret trubill in the countrey eftirwart."--(hist. p. .) it may be added, that when beaton was translated to glasgow in , the abbacy of arbroath was conferred on lord john hamilton, second son of the governor.--(ib. p. .) [ ] the letter addressed by knox to the queen dowager in , (as above, note ,) was reprinted at geneva, "_nowe augmented and explained by the author_, in the yeare of our lord ." it will be included in volume third. [ ] elizabeth bowes, mother-in-law of the reformer, sent before him to dieppe. she was the daughter and co-heiress of sir roger aske of aske in yorkshire, and by her husband, richard bowes, youngest son of sir ralph bowes of streathan, had two sons and ten daughters. see pedigree of the family, in m'crie's life of knox, vol. ii. p. . knox's first letter addressed "to his mother in law, mistres bowis," is dated from london, d june . [ ] this very zealous and disinterested friend of the reformer, as stated in note , was a cadet of the ancient family of campbell of loudon. [ ] archibald campbell, "the old" earl of argyle, was fourth earl, and died in the year . [ ] castle campbell, now in ruins, is situated in the ochil hills, immediately above the village of dollar. it was burned and destroyed by montrose, during the civil wars, in . [ ] sir colin campbell of glenurchy, the ancestor of the breadalbane family. he was a younger son, but by the death of two elder brothers, he succeeded to the family estates in . he became a stedfast friend to the reformed religion; and survived till the year . [ ] this date should evidently be . knox having remained in scotland till after spring, he arrived at dieppe, in the month of july . [ ] knox's appellation against the sentence of the bishops, in , was first printed in the year . [ ] there seems to be a confusion in the dates of the events recorded in this paragraph. knox, as stated above, had left scotland in july , and returned in may ; yet the comet he mentions was evidently that which made its appearance in september .--(hevelii cometographia, p. . see also next note.) christian the third, king of denmark, died at the castle of coldinghuus, st january , aged . the commissioners for a treaty with england met at dunse, in july ; and afterwards at carlisle, for settling matters in the borders. this treaty was concluded in july . yet the queen regent, before november , at the instigation of france, was prevailed upon to declare war with england. but the nobility and barons would not consent to the proposed invasion. [ ] bishop lesley, at the close of , among other "portenta," describes this "flammivomus et barbatus cometa."--(de rebus, &c. p. .) sir james balfour also says, "a fearfull comett appeired this zeire [ ,] which not only, as the sequell proved, protendit change in government, but in religione lykwayes."--(annals, vol. i. p. .) in those days comets were regarded as the harbingers of disastrous events. thus shakespeare, in the first part of his henry vi.,-- "comets importing change of times and states;" and again,-- "now shine it like a comet of revenge, a prophet to the fall of all our foes;" and milton, in paradise lost,-- "and like a comet burn'd, that fires the length of ophiuchus huge in th' artick sky, and from his horrid hair shakes pestilence and war." [ ] newbattle, in the parish of that name in mid-lothian, was the site of an abbey founded by david the first, in the year . [ ] wark castle: see note , page . [ ] maxwell-heugh, is a village on a height to the south of the tweed, nearly opposite the eastern part of the town of kelso. [ ] hume castle: see note , page . [ ] in ms. g, "pavilion." [ ] this was in november . [ ] ms. g, instead of "breath," substitutes very oddly, "this put an affray in monsieur d'oysell's breaches." [ ] of these preachers, harlaw has been noticed at page : douglas and methven will afterwards be mentioned. [ ] john willock returned to scotland from embden in friesland, (see note , page ,) in october . he continued to preach in different parts of the country, and to officiate publicly in edinburgh, in the year , when it was unsafe for knox to remain.--(wodrow miscellany, vol. i. p. .) [ ] george, sixth lord seatoun. [ ] sanct geill, or st. giles, was the tutelar saint of the metropolis, whose name is still retained in connexion with the collegiate church in the old town of edinburgh. [ ] the north loch formed a kind of boundary of the city towards the north, in the hollow ground, between princes street and the old town, and extended nearly from st. cuthbert's church to the trinity college church, in former times. [ ] in pitcairn's criminal trials will be found some interesting details, respecting four of the preachers mentioned by knox, who were denounced "as rebels for usurping the authority of the church," th may , viz., john christison and william harlaw, at perth; john willock, at ayr; and paul methven, at dundee; along with the names of the persons who became cautioners for their appearance, (vol. i. p. *, &c.) [ ] andrew durie: see subsequent note to page . [ ] james, son of robert chalmer of gadgirth, by margaret, daughter of sir hugh campbell of loudoun. he had several charters under the great seal in , of parts of his estate in the shires of ayr and wigtoun. he married annabella, daughter of john cunninghame of caprintoun, in ayrshire. (nisbet's heraldry, app. * , vol. i. p. .) [ ] this use of "me," instead of "i," or "we," occurs in all the copies. [ ] this appellation, according to some payments made by authority of the town council, was not later than february - . [ ] st. giles's day was the st of september. in the appendix, no. xiii., some contemporary notices will be given of the disturbances which were occasioned in september , by this idolatrous procession. [ ] james carmichael was for many years one of the magistrates of edinburgh. he filled the office of dean of guild from october to , again, from to , and from to . in his official capacity, he had the charge of the "kirk werk," that is of looking after the preservation of st. giles's church, and taking charge of the jewels, the gold and silver candlesticks, eucharists, chalices, and other precious things belonging to that church; but these were all ruthlessly disposed of, by order of the council, (including the _arm-bane_ of sanct geill, or rather the ring with "ane dyamant stane, quhilk wes on the fingar of the forsaid arme of sanct geill,") in october . see appendix, no. xiii. [ ] in ms. g, "the comone crose."--probably the girth cross, at the foot of the canongate, near holyrood. but arnot also makes mention of st. john's cross, and of a third, near the tolbooth in that street.--(hist. of edinburgh, p. .) [ ] between the _bowes_, must mean the west-bow and the nether-bow; or the two principal gates of the old town. [ ] david forress: see note , page . [ ] see pages - . [ ] andrew durie, bishop of galloway, was brother of george durie, abbot of dunfermline, (note ,) and was born before the year . his name, "andreas durie," occurs in the registers of both colleges, as having been incorporated at st. andrews, in the year ; and at glasgow, in . he probably completed his studies abroad. upon a vacancy in the abbacy of melrose, he had sufficient interest to procure the king's letters of commendation to the pope, in the year , and notwithstanding powerful rival claims, he succeeded in the following year in obtaining the benefice. andrew, abbot of melrose, was present at the trial of sir john borthwick, in ; and he appears as an extraordinary lord of session on the d of july . on the following day, he was recommended to be successor to henry wemyss as bishop of galloway, conjoined with the deanery of the chapel royal, and the abbacy of tungland upon his resigning that of melrose, but retaining a pension of marks, and some other emoluments. in the provincial council at edinburgh, , his name is enrolled as "andreas episcopus candidæ casæ et capellæ regiæ strivilingensis."--he was the bearer of a letter from queen mary, in france, to her mother, in june .--(lettres de marie stuart, vol. i. p. .) bishop durie died at edinburgh, in september . his name occurs in the list of scottish poets; but none of his writings are known to be preserved, although his sayings recorded by knox, indicate a rhyming propensity. john rolland of dalkeith, in the prologue of his "seven sages," a kind of poetical romance, alludes to the poets who flourished at the scotish court, and after naming lyndsay, bellenden, and william stewart, who he says, to mak in scottis, richt weill he knew that art, he immediately adds, bishop durie, sum tyme of galloway, for his pleasure sum tymes wald tak thair part. [ ] this has an evident allusion to the name of mons. de ruby, one of the frenchmen patronized at this time by the queen dowager. bishop lesley, in noticing the several appointments made by the queen regent, in , says, there was "ane callit monsieur rubie, frenchman, a procutour of paris, appointit to keip the greit seill, and to be as vice-chancelar and assistar to the erle of huntlie, then chancelar."--(history, p. .) he was controller of her household, in : see subsequent note, page . [ ] david panter, or panyter, who held several church livings, was much employed in public negotiations abroad. his uncle patrick panter, abbot of cambuskenneth, and david panter, were successively secretaries of state in the reigns of james the fourth and fifth, and "being admirably versed in the latin tongue," their names are honourably distinguished by the series of letters of our kings, addressed to foreign princes, which ruddiman published under the title of "epistolæ regum scotorum," &c., in the years and , in vols. vo. in the treasurer's accounts, , we find this entry,-- "item, the thrid day of aprile, gevin for vj^c. ( ) crownis of the sonn, of fynance deliverit in france to maister david panyter, secretar ambassatour thair, the sowme of viij^c. x lib." (£ .) on the same day, a similar payment of crowns (or £ ) was delivered to sir john campbell of lundy, ambassador in france. panter was promoted to the see of ross in the latter part of . sir james balfour, in his annals, calls him "a notable adulterer."--(annals, vol. i. p. .) he died, says holinshed, of a lingering illness, at stirling, on the st of october .--(keith's catal. of bishops, p. .) [ ] bishop lesley, in noticing the return of the commissioners from the queen's marriage, says, "they came to deip about the ende of (august,) quhair suddantlie all the principall nobillmen and prelatis became seik. but shortlie thairefter, the most of thame, being of the wysest and most valyeant of the realme of scotland, deceissit their, to the gret hurt of the commoun weill of the realme."--(hist. p. .) the dates of their death are, however, not accurately given, either by lesley or more recent historians. the commissioners who were appointed on the th and th of june , were james beaton, archbishop of glasgow; lord james stewart, prior of st. andrews; george lord seaton, provost of edinburgh; and john erskine of dun, provost of montrose; along with robert reid, bishop of orkney; george earl of rothes; gilbert earl of cassillis, lord treasurer; and james lord flemyng, great chamberlain. the first four being present in the parliament held at edinburgh th november , to report their proceedings, it was then mentioned, that the bishop of orkney was "deceissit, and the earls of rothes, cassillis, and the lord flemyng yit remannand in the partis of france."--(acta parl. scot. vol. ii. p. .) this shows that no tidings of their death had then reached this country: see the three following notes. [ ] gilbert kennedy, third earl of cassilis, as already noticed at page , completed his studies under george buchanan at paris. in , he was appointed high treasurer; and was one of the eight commissioners sent from scotland as representatives of the scottish nation, at the marriage of mary and the dauphin of france. he died on his return, at dieppe, on the th november . [ ] george lesley, third earl of rothes, the father of norman lesley, was tried before the governor for his accession to the murder of cardinal beaton, but wan unanimously acquitted. he was the son of william lesley and margaret daughter of sir michael balfour of mountquhannie; and this relationship may have induced james balfour and his brothers to join their cousin, norman lesley, in the castlo of st. andrews. the earl of rothes had been appointed one of the lords of council and session th november ; and he attended james the fifth, in his journey to france in . he was employed in various public commissions; and was sent as ambassador to denmark in . he died at dieppe on the th november . his son andrew succeeded to the title as fourth earl of rothes, and was served heir of his father, th february - .--(burgh court-book of dundee, marked vol. iv.) [ ] james lord flemyng, hereditary great chamberlain of scotland, was the third of his family in succession who held that office, having succeeded his father, malcolm, lord flemyng, who was slain at pinkie, in . james, as mentioned above, was one of the commissioners who were seized with illness at dieppe. on the th november, he made his testament; and having returned to paris for the benefit of medical aid, he lingered there till he died on the th december , aged .--(crawfurd's officers of state, p. .) [ ] robert reid, although accused by knox of avarice, applied at least his wealth to laudable purposes; and in the words of keith, was "a man of great learning, and a most accomplished politician." he entered st. salvator's college, st. andrews, in , and took his master's degree in ; and then proceeded to paris. on his return to scotland, he became successively sub-dean and official of moray; abbot of kinloss, in ; commendator of beaulieu, in ; one of the lords of council and session, in ; bishop of orkney, in ; and lord president of the court of session, about the end of . during all this time, he was frequently employed in foreign embassies, and other diplomatic affairs. a variety of liberal benefactions on his part have been recorded, such as the foundation of bursaries, the adornment of the buildings at kinloss, which he enriched with what was considered an ample library, and the endowment of a school at kirkwall. he also erected an addition to the bishop's palace in kirkwall; and the cathedral church of st. magnus, in that town, still exhibits the fine porch and some additional pillars erected at his expense; and had he survived for a few years, he no doubt would have put a finishing hand to this venerable edifice; the choir or chancel of which serves for the parish church, (fitted up as usual in defiance of all good taste.) bishop reid's munificence was not limited to his own diocese, as a bequest of merks towards founding a college for the education of youth in edinburgh, enabled the magistrates, in , to purchase from the provost of the kirk of field, (st. mary's in the fields,) the ground on which were erected the buildings of our university. lesley styles bishop reid a man "of singular wit, judgment, guid learning, and lyve, with lang experience," (hist. p. ;) and says he died at dieppe on the th, but according to other authorities, it was the th september .--(keith's catal. pp. - ; senators of the college of justice, pp. - .) [ ] in ms. g, "lickit of the same buist." [ ] to this marginal note there was added, "insignia quidem elogium;" but those words are deleted. [ ] john sinclair was the fourth son of sir oliver sinclair of roslin, and a younger brother of henry sinclair, bishop of ross. he was admitted one of the lords of council and session, under the title of rector of snaw, th april . in , he sat in the provincial council at edinburgh, as dean of restalrig. in , he was promoted to the see of brechin. his brother henry, bishop of ross and president of the court of session, having died in - , the bishop of brechin was, on the th november, advanced to the presidentship of the session. but he did not long enjoy his judicial and prelatic dignities, as he was seized with fever, and died in the month of april . this we learn from ferrerius, the continuator of hector boethius, who, mentioning that henry sinclair, bishop of ross, had collected materials for writing a history of scotland, which were in the hands of john sinclair, bishop of brechin, says, "sed idem (præsul) quoque pauculos post menses in febrem peracutam decidit, ex qua derepente o virorum in terris numero exemptus est."--(h. boethii hist. app. p. , paris, , folio.) [ ] see note . [ ] that is, th of march - . [ ] sym and barron were citizen burgesses of edinburgh, and zealous friends of the reformer. as here intimated, james sym, in whose house knox resided, on his return to scotland, had died before . at page , knox has given an account of the death of elizabeth adamson, barron's wife, in . james barron was one of the magistrates of edinburgh, and filled the office of dean of guild from michaelmas , to the same term in ; and again in and . at the first general assembly, held at edinburgh th december , james barron and edward hope were the commissioners appointed for the town, along with john knox, as minister. his name also occurs in the proceedings of the assemblies in the years , , and --(booke of the universall kirk, pp. , , , .) [ ] in ms. g, "afflictioun;" vautr. edit. has "affection." [ ] the "band" subscribed by the earls of argyle, glencairn, morton, and others, dated d december , has been considered as the first covenant or engagement of the scottish reformers, for their mutual defence, in which they engage "to maintain, set forward, and establish the word of god, and his congregation." see, however, note . [ ] keith supposes it was erskine of dun who signed the letter at page , "for the lord erskine (he says) had not yet joined himself to that party."--(hist. vol. i. p. .) [ ] there was a john gray who took his master's degree at st. andrews, in the year . it is uncertain whether the person mentioned in the text can be identified with mr. john gray, who held the office of clerk to the general assembly, from till his death, which took place in april .--(register of conf. testaments; booke of the univ. kirk, vol. i. pp. , .) [ ] that is, to procure the papal bulls, confirming sinclair's appointment to the see of ross, upon the death of david panter, in october : (see note .) but it appears that sinclair was not consecrated until . [ ] henry sinclair, a younger son of sir oliver sinclair of roslin, was born in the year . he studied at st. andrews, and was incorporated in st. leonard's college in . he obtained the favour of james the fifth, who appointed him a lord of session; and he was admitted on the th november , as rector of glasgow. in , he was commendator of the abbey of kilwinning; which benefice he exchanged with gawin hamilton for the deanery of glasgow. he was employed in various public matters abroad; and during the absence of bishop reid, he acted as vice-president of the court of session. on reid's death, he was admitted, on the d december , as lord president; and in , he succeeded david panter in the see of ross. he died at paris, after undergoing a painful surgical operation, on the d january . lesley calls him "ane wyse and lernit prelate," (hist. p. ,) and ferrerius refers to his ms. collections for writing a history of scotland. his name written upon various books and manuscripts preserved in the advocates library, and in other collections, evince his great love of literature, in common with several other members of his family. [ ] it has generally been supposed that the book of common prayer of the church of england, known as the liturgy of edward the sixth, was the one here recommended; and the mention of "the lessonis of the new and old testament, conforme to the ordour," &c., renders this most probable. dr. m'crie has considered this point very fully in his life of knox, (note dd, vol. i. p. - ,) and comes to a similar conclusion. if, however, the english prayer book was then used, it was soon afterwards replaced by "the forme of prayers and ministrations of the sacraments, &c., vsed in the englishe congregation at geneva: and approved, by the famous and godly learned man, iohn caluyn." this volume was originally "imprinted at geneva, by iohn crespin, m.d.lvi." small vo. there were later impressions at geneva, in and . it was very frequently reprinted in this country between and , and was usually prefixed to the metrical version of the psalms. [ ] sir david hamilton of preston, as heir of his father robert hamilton, had charters of the lands of priestgill and langkype, in and . he was one of the attendants of james the fifth in his voyage to france in .--he survived till november : see the detailed account given in anderson's house of hamilton, p. . [ ] in ms. g, "how heavy and displeasing a thing." [ ] not one who belonged to the law, but a person whom the law had rendered infamous.--the reference here is to john douglas: see page . [ ] vautr. edit. makes this "how well," which changes the sense. [ ] in ms. g, "waver from:" vautr. edit. has "vary of his faith." [ ] in the other copies, the signature is simply "sanct androis." [ ] the archbishop here alludes to his being _legatus natus_, or pope's legate, as well as primate of the scottish church. [ ] that is, john douglas. [ ] in a former page, mention is made of this lady, who obtained in her days sufficient notoriety. (see p. , notes and .) grizzel sempill was the daughter of robert master of sempill, who succeeded his father, william, as third lord sempill, in . the death of her husband, james hamilton of stanehouse, is also mentioned by knox at page . he had been appointed captain of the castle of edinburgh, about september ; (lesley's hist. p. ;) and five years later, when he lost his life, he also filled the office of provost of the city. his eldest son and heir, james, who was slain at the same time, was his father's deputy, and director of the chancery. notwithstanding the ambiguity of knox's statement at page , we may charitably conclude, it was only subsequent to her husband's death that she became the avowed mistress of john hamilton, archbishop of st. andrews, by whom she had several children: (see note .) two of her sons are thus styled in the register of the great seal: "legitimatio johannis hammyltoun junioris bastardi filii naturalis grissillidis sempill filiæ roberti magistri de sempill, et willielmi hammyltoun ejus fratris etiam bastardi." oct. . see also note by george crawfurd, in his officers of state, p. .--it was probably in virtue of some property she may have acquired that she obtained the title of lady gilton; as there is no evidence of her having contracted any second marriage. on the th july , (not , as usually stated,) william third lord creichton of sanquhar, was slain in the governor's chamber by robert master of sempill; who was acquitted by the governor, on the th september .--(pitcairn's crim. trials, vol. i. p. *.) "he escaped punishment, (says pitscottie,) by means of john hamilton, bishop of st. andrews, brother to the governor, who entertained the lady stenhouse, _commonly called lady gilton_, daughter to this robert lord semple, as his concubine." from the date of the remission, it must have been her brother who had committed this murder. buchanan and other authorities likewise attribute his acquittal to the same influence; and one compiler says of the archbishop, in very plain terms, "amangis many utheris his harlottis, he interteayned this harlot semple, nather bewtifull, of good fame, or utherwayis in any sort notable, except his awin kynsman, and followed him as scho had bene his lauchfull wyffe."--(johnston's hist, of scotland, ms., advocates library.) [ ] archibald fourth earl of argyle, in , married to his first wife, lady helen hamilton, second daughter of james first earl of arran, and sister of the duke of chattelherault. their son archibald succeeded as fifth earl of argyle about the end of . see page . [ ] see note . [ ] in ms. g, "waver from." [ ] spotiswood says that douglas was a carmelite or white friar.--(hist. p. .) it is not improbable he may have been the same person whose name appears as a determinant in st. salvator's college in . in that year another john douglas had the same rank in st. mary's college, where he became a licentiate in . it is, i think, quite certain that john douglas, who was chaplain to the earl of argyle in , and who may have assumed the name of grant to escape apprehension, should not be confounded with the provost of st. mary's college, as keith and other writers have done. the latter was born about the year , and was descended from the douglasses of pettendreich. he studied at st. andrews at the same time with john wynrame, and was a determinant in st. leonard's college in , and a licentiate in . whether he was the person who entered the carmelite order, may be left to conjecture; but on st october , he was elected provost of st. mary's college. in , "magister joannes douglas prepositus novi collegii mariani," was elected rector of the university; and being annually elected to this office for the unprecedented period of twenty-three successive years, ( - , being called "vigesimus tertius rectoratus johannis douglas,) and being a constant resident in st. andrews, it is obvious he could not have been the obscure person who was protected by the earl of argyle. [ ] "how the bishop's conscience (says dr. m'crie) stood affected as to these points, we know not; but it is certain that his practice was very far from being immaculate."--(wilkins, concilia, vol. iv. p. ; life of knox, vol. i. p. .) [ ] archibald fourth earl of argyle, in , was designed son and heir-apparent of colin earl of argyle. he succeeded to the title before . in , he was opposed to the proposed alliance of edward the sixth and mary queen of scots; and distinguished himself at the battle of pinkie, in , and at the siege of haddington, in the following year. the precise time of his death is not ascertained; and his testament is not known to be preserved. but he died towards the close of , as on the st august that year he granted a charter to his son archibald, then lord lorne; on the d december following, in the confirmation of the same charter, it is expressed that he was then deceased. [ ] knox in thus alluding to the conduct of archibald fifth earl of argyle, evidently points at his continued adherence to queen mary, at the time when the above passage was written. [ ] in ms. g, and vautr. edit., this date is introduced into the text, as th of may . if this was not a clerical mistake, it might be held to indicate that the intermediate ms., from which vautrollier's edition, as well as the glasgow ms. was taken, had been transcribed in that year. [ ] on the margin of the ms. is written, apparently in knox's own hand, and then deleted, "here tak in the beggars summonds warning the freres." in vautr. edit., in ms. g, and in all the other copies, it is introduced in this place, where it stands wholly unconnected. the paper referred to occurs at the end of the original ms., (fol. ,) as a single leaf, entitled "the blind, crooked, &c., to the flockis of all friars within this realme," &c. it will be seen that the author had finally resolved upon inserting it near the beginning of book second. [ ] see note , and appendix, no. xiv. for some notices of this provincial council, in - . [ ] knox himself fixes the date of his arrival in scotland to the d of may : see page . [ ] in the ms. it was originally "the threepenny faith." spottiswood and other writers, (see keith, vol. i. pp. , ,) have erroneously imagined that this refers to the catechisme, "set furth, in his provincial counsale," by archbishop hamilton; which has this colophon, "prentit at sanct androus, be the command and expensis of the maist reuerend father in god, iohne archbischop of sanct androus, and primat of ye hail kirk of scotland, the xxix. day of august, the zeir of our lord m.d. lii." to, leaves. but besides the difference of six years in the date, and the absurdity of supposing that a volume of that size could have been sold for such a price, the catechism was never intended for the laity, but was specially enjoyned to be used by "all and sindry personis, vicars and curattis," both for their own edification, and for reading a portion of it to "thair awin parochianaris,"--"quhen thair cummis na precheour to thame to schaw thame the word of god."--of the twopenny faith, published in , no copy is known to be preserved. [ ] it is said that hepburn, bishop of moray, imagining that the last of the enactments which knox has specified had a special reference to his licentious conduct, justified himself, not by an appeal to the canon law, but to example set by archbishop hamilton, who presided in the council. [ ] at page , notice is taken of the appointment of monsieur de ruby, in , as keeper of the great seal; and he is there said to have been comptroller in . for this we have the authority of lindsay of pitscottie, who says, "soone thairefter, she (the queen regent) changed her officeris of state, and maid ane maister ruby comptroller, quho used sick rigour in his office, that incontinent he was deposed."--(chronicles, sub anno .) but it must be added, that pitscottie is very inaccurate in many of his statements; as vielmort, according both to knox and lesley, held the office of comptroller; and the latter expressly says, that ruby "kepit the great seill during the hoill time of the queen regent's government," (hist. p. ;) that is, from till . and in , in an act of parliament, he is styled "m^c ynes de rubbay _garde des seaulx_ dicelle dame," apparently meaning queen mary.--(acta parl. scot. vol. ii. p. .) according to another authority, he held the great seal until , when he was succeeded by david rizzio.--(scott's staggering state, app. p. . see tytler's hist. vol. vi. p. .) [ ] bartholomew villemore, it is said, had been named comptroller by queen mary, in march - , but he was never admitted.--(scott's staggering state, app. p. .) but bishop lesley mentions his appointment as comptroller by the queen regent in the year .--(history, p. .) [ ] lord james stewart, the eldest of the natural sons of james the fifth, is noticed at page , as having been educated under george buchanan, and as commendator of the monasteries of kelso and melrose: see also page , note . but the date of his death is there erroneously stated. instead of , it happened in august or september . the queen dowager nominated her uncle, charles cardinal of lorraine, and brother of francis duke of guyse, to be his successor, "be vertue of the acte of naturalization," (lesley's history, p. ;) but the cardinal never obtained possession of these lucrative benefices. the commendatorship of melrose was afterwards conferred on james douglas, a cadet of the morton family. [ ] parliament did not meet till the th of november . [ ] the duke of chattelherault gave in, at the parliament held at edinburgh on the th december , a protestation "tuiching the marriage of our souerane lady;" and another protest, on the th november , "tuiching the crowne matrimoniale."--(acta parl. scot. vol. ii. p. , .) [ ] in ms. g, "except the duke for his interest." [ ] in ms. g, "professed;" and in the second next line, "profess;" but the words are corrected to "possessed," and "possess," in edit. . [ ] in vautr. edit. and ms. g, "harlawe." [ ] these early and zealous friends of the reformation, who undertook the office of exhorters, were all laymen, with perhaps the exception of robert hamilton, who afterwards became minister of st. andrews. robert lockhart is mentioned by knox in october , as endeavouring to make an agreement between the queen regent, and the congregation, without success. [ ] in ms. g, "meffen." [ ] paul methven, after the reformation, was appointed minister of jedburgh; but to the scandal of his brethren in the ministry, and according to the account of "this horrible fact," related by knox in his fourth book, he was found guilty of adultery, and deposed and excommunicated, june . [ ] respecting willock, see notes , . [ ] "sacrate authoritie," here, and in other places, may mean the _constituted_ rather than "sacred authority," as in ms. g, and vautr. edit. [ ] sir james sandilands of calder, the ancestor of the torphichen family. his pedigree is fully detailed in douglas and wood's peerage of scotland, vol. ii. pp. - . he was born about the year ; and had a charter of lands to himself and margaret forrester, only daughter of archibald forrester of corstorphine, d august . in the peerage, sir james is said to have "died after ." this date may have misled mr. tytler, in stating that it was the preceptor of the knights of st. john, commonly called lord st. john, who made this appearance in parliament.--(history, vol. vi. pp. , .) but dr. m'crie has in like manner confounded the father with his second son.--(life of knox, vol. i. p. .) sir james probably survived till the beginning of . on the th july , his eldest son and successor was styled "john sandilands of calder, younger," which proves that his father was still alive. james sandilands, his second son, became lord st. john, and, as stated in note , he obtained the temporal lordship of lord torphichen, in ; but leaving no issue, the title, on his death, devolved on his grand-nephew, james sandilands of calder, th november . [ ] this permission to read the scriptures "in our common tongue," refers to the act of parliament th march - : see page . [ ] in vautr. edit. "in severitie of prayer;" ms. g has "in fervent and oft prayers." [ ] ms. g has "stabilitie;" vautr. edit. "abilitie." [ ] in ms. g, "lavacrie." [ ] the council of constance, in , whilst acknowledging that "christ instituted the venerable sacrament of the eucharist, after the supper, and administered it to his disciples under the forms of bread and wine;" nevertheless decreed that the laity should not be allowed to partake of the cup. this prohibition by the romish church, was the occasion of great discontent in some of the foreign churches, more especially in bohemia and switzerland, from the time of john huss to that of luther.--as both george wishart and knox had previously dispensed the sacrament, according to the original institution, this may have led to this demand for such a privilege to the protestants in scotland, in . [ ] it is not unlikely that this last demand, and the increasing strength of the reformers, may have led the catholic prelates and clergy to enact some of the canons in their last provincial council, for reforming the lives of their own body. [ ] in ms. g, "a longe purs." [ ] vautr. edit. omits the important words, "sayis the chronicle," and reads, " , powndes gathered by the laird of earles haule."--in the anonymous "historie of the estate of scotland," the sum to be paid, it is said, "was within , lib."--(wodrow miscellany, vol. i. p. .) [ ] this chronicle is not known to be extant; but robert lindsay of pitscottie, in his chronicles of scotland compiled about , enumerates, as one of his authors, "sir william bruce of earleshall, knight, who hath written very justly all the deeds since floudoun field."--in douglas's baronage, pp. - , there is a genealogy of this family, from which we learn that sir william was the heir of his father, sir alexander bruce of earlshall, who had the honour of knighthood conferred on him by james the fourth. sir william succeeded his father in , and is said to have been knighted by the same monarch. this is apparently a mistake; but his name appears as _miles_, in a charter dated . in may , sir william bruce became surety for maxwell of teling, (criminal trials, vol. i. p. * ;) but how long after this he may have survived, is uncertain. [ ] pitscottie, calderwood, spottiswood, and other writers, have given an account of the fate of this aged priest, who suffered martyrdom at st. andrews, in the eighty-second year of his age. but foxe's account of his trial and sentence is the earliest and most minute, and will be inserted as no. xiv. of the appendix to the present volume. myln himself expressed a hope, which was realized, that he would be the last person in this country thus to suffer for the cause of truth. [ ] although this _cairn_ was not allowed to remain, there has lately been erected, within sight of the castle of st. andrews, a granite obelisk, to commemorate the names of the more eminent scotish martyrs. it bears the following inscription:-- "in memory of the martyrs patrick hamilton, henry forrest, george wishart, walter mill, who, in support of the protestant faith, suffered by fire at st. andrews, between the years mdxxviii and mdlviii. _the righteous shall be held in everlasting remembrance._ [ ] in vautr. edit. "officiall." [ ] see note . [ ] in vautr. edit. "becommeth." [ ] in vautr. edit. "officers." [ ] see page . [ ] no notice of this protest occurs in the acts and proceedings of the parliament held at edinburgh on the th november , when, from the reference to the crown matrimonial, at page , it must have been presented. knox indeed says it was refused; but the proceedings of that parliament, which also sat on the th december, seem not to have been fully recorded, or at least preserved. [ ] the treaty of peace referred to was concluded at cateau-cambrésis, between france, england, and spain, on the d april . the evident design of the courts of france and spain at this time was to endeavour the extirpation of heresy, or the protestant faith in england, as well as in other countries. [ ] in ms. g, "in hir hairt." [ ] it has already been noticed that the preachers summoned were paul methven, john christison, william harlaw, and john willock. as they did not appear on the day finally fixed, they and their cautioners were denounced as rebels, on the th of may . see the sentence, in m'crie's life of knox, vol. i. p. . [ ] in the outer margin, (fol. iii,) knox had written some words which have been scored through, and are partly cut away by the binder. as well as i can decipher the words, the sentence may be thus read:--"luik quhether it be best to tak in heir the beggars warning, or in the place befoir appoynted." see note , page ; also pages , . [ ] patrick lord ruthven held the provostship of perth for many successive years: see note . [ ] mr. james halyburton is usually styled tuter of pitcur. at the siege of brochty, in - , he was left in command of certain companies of horse.--(lesley's hist. p. .) he filled the office of provost of dundee for a considerable period, as will afterwards be noticed. his name, as provost, occurs in parliamentary proceedings, and .--(acta parl. scot. vol. ii. pp. , .) [ ] in ms. g, "meffen." [ ] at page , knox says that the meeting of provincial council in - , continued till the day of his arrival; whilst according to bishop lesley, this provincial council, held at edinburgh in , "endit apoun the x daye of apryle. efter the quhilk, the quene regent immediatelie caused summounde john knox, john willox, john douglas, and paule meffane, to compeir before the justice in striveling the x day of maij, onder the pane of rebellioun."--(hist, p. .) to reconcile this with the date of knox's arrival in scotland, dr. m'crie has remarked, that "though the acts were concluded on the th april, it was not agreed to close the council on that day." [ ] sir john maxwell, second son of robert fourth lord maxwell, being presumptive heir of his brother, was called master of maxwell, in charters granted to him and his wife agnes, eldest daughter and co-heiress of william fourth lord herreis of terregles, st february - . his elder brother robert was served heir of his father, st august , and married lady beatrix douglas, second daughter of james earl of morton; but he died th september ; and his posthumous son john became sixth lord maxwell. but sir john maxwell of terregles still retained his designation as master, and was actively employed in public affairs. in december , and again in , he was one of the commissioners for a treaty of peace with england; and was warden of the west marches.--(lesley's hist. p. .) from the above statement by knox, it appears he had been committed to ward by order of the queen regent. bishop lesley thus makes mention of his having escaped from the castle of edinburgh. although the date , appears in the printed copy as supplied by the editor, the events recorded from page to page , belong to :--"about this tyme, the master of maxwell, quho was keped presoner in the castell of edinburgh, departed furth of the same be ane corde our the wall thairof, quhair thair was certane horsis in redines with frendis of his owne, quho receaved and convoyide him in his owne countrey; and sone thaireftir he joyned him selfe with the lordis of the congregatione."--(hist. p. .) [ ] [in note , it is stated that knox had changed his intention of inserting "the beggars summonds," at the end of book first; and purposed introducing it into this place, with a sentence which was written on the top margin of the ms. the glasgow manuscript, fol. , b, in reference to this alteration, has this marginal note: "thair is in this place, in the uther copie, inserted the summoundis against the freris, quhilk is in the end of the first buke." unfortunately the binder has cut away two lines at the top of the page, and the deficiency cannot be supplied from any other copy. in order, however, not to interrupt the narrative in the text, the summonds is here inserted in a different type.] . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . "zealous brether . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . upon the gaittis and ports of all the freiris places within this realme, in the moneth of januar , preceding that whitsunday that they delodged, which is this, etc. _and so tak in heir the beggars warning._ "the blynd, cruked, bedrelles, wedowis, orphelingis, and all uther pure, sa viseit be the hand of god, as may not worke, to the flockes of all freires within this realme, we wishe restitutioun of wranges bypast, and reformatioun in tyme cuming, for saluatioun. "ye yourselfes ar not ignorant, and thocht ye wald be, it is now, thankes to god, knawen to the haill warlde, be his infallible worde, that the benignitie or almes of all christian pepill perteynis to us allanerly; quhilk ye, being hale of bodye, stark, sturdye, and abill to wyrk, quhat under pretence of povertie, (and nevirtheles possessing maist easelie all abundance,) quhat throw cloiket and huided simplicitie, thoght your proudnes is knawen, and quhat be feynzeit holines, quhilk now is declared superstitioun and idolatrie, hes thir many yeirs, exprese against godis word, and the practeis of his holie apostles, to our great torment, (allace!) maist falslie stowen fra us. and als ye have, be your fals doctryne and wresting of godis worde, (lerned of your father sathan,) induced the hale people, hie and law, in sure hoip and beleif, that to cloith, feid, and nurreis yow, is the onlie maist acceptable almouss allowit before god; and to gif ane penny, or ane peice of bread anis in the oulk, is aneuch for us. evin swa ye have perswaded thame to bigge to yow great hospitalis, and manteyne yow thairin be thair purs, quhilk onlie perteinis now to us be all law, as biggit and dottat to the pure, of whois number ye are not, nor can be repute, nether be the law of god, nor yit be na uther law proceiding of nature, reasoun, or civile policie. quhairfore seing our number is sa greate, sa indigent, and sa heavilie oppressit be your false meanis, that nane takes care of oure miserie; and that it is better for us to provyde thir our impotent members, quhilk god hes gevin us, to oppone to yow in plaine contraversie, than to see yow heirefter (as ye have done afoir) steill fra us our lodgeings, and our selfis, in the meintyme, to perreis and die for want of the same. we have thocht gude thairfoir, or we enter with yow in conflict, to warne yow, in the name of the grit god, be this publick wryting, aflixt on your yettis quhair ye now dwell, that ye remove furthe of our said hospitalis, betuix this and the feist of whitsunday next, sua that we the onelie lawfull proprietaris thairof may enter thairto, and efterward injoye thai commodities of the kyrk, quhilke ye have heirunto wranguslie halden fra us. certifying yow, gif ye failye, we will at the said terme, in haile number, (with the helpe of god, and assistance of his sanctis in eirthe, of quhais reddie supporte we dout not,) enter and tak possessioun of our said patrimony, and eject yow utterlie furthe of the same. "_lat him thairfor that befoir hes stollen, steill na mair; but rather lat him wyrk wyth his handes, that he may be helpefull to the pure._ "fra the haill cities, townis, and villages of scotland, the fyrst day of januare ." [ ] the monastery of the observantine order of franciscan or grey friars of perth, is said to have been founded in the year , by the lord oliphant.--(app. to keith's bishops, p. .) this was sir lawrence oliphant of aberdalgy, created lord oliphant, before . according to dempster, the founder was hieronymus lyndesay, doctor of laws, and brother to the earl of crawfurd.--(see. also hay's scotia sacra, ms. p. .) it was situated near the walls, on the south side of the city of perth; and after the destruction of the building, the ground was converted into a public burial place. [ ] the monastery of the dominican or black friars of perth, was situated near the walls, on the north side of the town, and was founded by alexander the second, in the year . in this building the scotish monarchs usually resided when at perth; and meetings of parliament were sometimes held within the church, as well as several of the provincial councils. it was here where james the first met with his tragical fate, th february - . [ ] adam forman, last prior of the charter-house, along with the rest of his brethren, retired to errol, of which church they were patrons, carrying with them, no doubt, as much of the treasures they possessed as they were able to appropriate. he afterwards granted a feu to his relation, john forman, of some lands belonging to the monastery. in , george hay of nethirlyff was created commendator, and the lands erected into a lordship; but eventually, in , he resigned his title, and the name of lord and prior of the charter-house of perth became extinct. [ ] in ms. g, "the blak and gray freiris;" vautr. edit. has "theeves." [ ] bishop lesley, in describing the ruthless manner in which "the multitude of the people and craftismen" proceeded in demolishing the altars, images, &c., in the parish kirk of perth, says, they then "passed strait way to the abbay of the charter house, and pullit the hoill place downe, alsweill the kirk thairof as uther housses, places, and all the coastlie bigginnis quhilkis was maid be king james the first, fundatour thairof, quhilk _was the farest abbay and best biggit of any within the realme of scotlande_; and cuttit downe the hoill growing trees and all uther policies."--(history, p. .) the destruction seems to have been very complete. but the prior and his brethren were allowed to retire in safety: see note . [ ] the charter-house, or, as it was called, "monasterium vallis virtutis," at perth, was a splendid edifice, founded and richly endowed by king james the first, in the year . it was the only religious establishment of any extent in scotland of the order of carthusians, or white friars. holinshed says it "was not as yet throughly finished" at the time of that monarch's barbarous murder, in - ; but he was buried there with great solemnity. james the second, in the general council held at perth, th may , granted a charter of several lands in perthshire to the prior and convent of the carthusian monastery of the _valley of virtue_, near perth.--(reg. magni sigilli: acta parl. scot. vol. ii. p. .) a century later, in november , margaret, the mother of james the fifth, having died at methven, in the vicinity of perth, was also "buried in the charterhouse church of saint johns towne, by [beside] the tombe of king james the first. the king himself and many nobles of the realme were present at the funeralles, which were kept in most solemne and pompous maner."--(holinshed's chronicles, scotland, p. ; chronicle of perth, p. . edinb. .) [ ] james duke of chattelherault. [ ] gawin hamilton, the fourth son of james hamilton of raploch, was born about the year , and educated at st. andrews. his name occurs as a determinant of st. leonard's college in , and a licentiate in . his connexions early secured for him promotion in the church; and in , he sat as dean of the metropolitan church of glasgow, and as vicar-general during the vacancy in that see. as already mentioned, (page ,) hamilton, in the year , exchanged the deanery of glasgow for the abbacy of kilwinning. in - , he was sent in embassy to the king of france.--(treas. accounts.) in anderson's house of hamilton, p. ; keith's catal. of bishops, p. ; and in brunton and haig's senators, p. , his subsequent history is somewhat fully detailed. [ ] matthew hamilton of mylburne has already been noticed, at page , as the son of john hamilton of mylburne, who had been sent to france in . he was succeeded by his brother robert, who had a charter under the great seal, "roberto hamilton, fratri quondam mathei hamilton de milburne, terrarum de livingstone, in vic. de linlithgow," dated th june . [ ] vautr. edit. omits six words, and reads, "two chiefe enemies to the duke." [ ] monsieur d'oysel, who had been resident ambassador in scotland from the king of france, in , till his return in , (see page ,) was again sent in that capacity in .--(lesley's hist. pp. , .) he continued from that time, as formerly, to be one of the queen dowager's principal counsellors in all her affairs. in , he is called "lord dosell, lieutenant of the king of france," (crim. trials, vol. i. p. * ;) and under this title he will be noticed in a subsequent page. but here i may add, that doysel must have returned to france when the french troops left scotland, in , as, in the following year, he was a third time about to proceed to this country, "to haif remanit in the castle of dunbar and fort of inchekeith, to the cuming of the quenes hienes, (queen mary, from france,) and than to haif randerit these strenthis at hir command. notwithstanding, (bishop lesley continues,) whosone he come to london, the queen of ingland wald not suffer him to pas farder, but causit him returne agane in france, for that she affermit that he and monsieur rubie was the principall aucthoris of all the trubles quhilkis was in scotland, betuix the quene regent and the nobilitie thairof, and that it was to be fearit he wald do the lyke in tyme cuming, gif he war permittit to pas in thair cuntrey."--(history, p. .) [ ] in ms. g, "kirkmen." [ ] in ms. g, "particularitie." [ ] craigie, a parish of that name in ayrshire. [ ] in the ms. "decryed." [ ] in ms. g, "a piece of ground." [ ] patrick lord ruthven held the provostship of perth during the year , (his father, william lord ruthven, having been provost in and ,) and he was annually re-elected, without intermission, until the year of his death, . [ ] vautr. edit. has "comfort them;" and ms. g, "comfort his." [ ] patrick master of lindesay, afterwards sixth lord lindesay of byres; walter lundy of lundy; and sir andrew murray of balvaird. [ ] for, "understood." [ ] in ms. g, "balwaird;" in vautr. edit. "balwarde."--sir andrew murray of balvaird succeeded his father, sir david murray, who died in december . [ ] in ms. g, "flattering hir grace, ar servandis of," &c., "or else inflame." [ ] robert third lord semple, who succeeded his father in . [ ] robert forman, at this time, was lyon-king at arms. [ ] sunday the th may. keith (p. ) takes notice, that if the proclamation was "done on a sunday, it must have been on the th." in his other reference to the days of the week, during may and june , knox has fallen into a similar discrepancy. [ ] these ayrshire gentlemen were matthew campbell, sheriff of ayr; john wallace of craigie; george campbell of cesnock; hugh wallace of carnell; john lockhart of barr; and james chalmer of gadgirth. [ ] the water of goodie flows from the lake of monteath in strathern, and falls into the forth, about nine miles above stirling. the teith is a beautiful stream connected with some of the perthshire lakes, (lochs katrine, achray, &c.,) and loses its name, at its junction with the forth, thirteen miles from callander. [ ] in ms. g, "was of good compt, fyve and twentie hundreth men," &c. [ ] auchterarder, a village, in the parish of that name, in perthshire, about fourteen miles from perth, on the road to stirling. [ ] john erskine of dun. [ ] john ogilvy of inverquharity, in the parish of kirriemuir, forfarshire. [ ] he is afterwards mentioned as one of the sons of sir william scott of balwearie. [ ] in vautr. edit. "nocht" is omitted. [ ] in the ms. "dimisshed." [ ] see note , p. . [ ] in the ms. "swaid the argument." [ ] in vautr. edit. "and that, that hole powers." [ ] in the ms. "number." [ ] or terinzean: in vautr. edit. "teringland."--at page , he is called young sheriff of ayr. he succeeded his father, sir hugh campbell of loudoun, in . [ ] this was no doubt patrick murray of tibbermuir, in perthshire, who became cautioner for william harlaw, and was amerciated for his non-appearance to underly the law, &c., on the th may . [ ] in vautr. edit. "dizardes;" in ms. g, "dycearis," that is, players at cards and dice. [ ] the queen regent, upon the tumults in perth, and the destruction of the religious houses there, in may , may have intended to supersede patrick lord ruthven, as provost of perth; but it does not appear that either thomas charteris, or his son john charteris of kinfauns, ever held the office during the reign of queen mary. [ ] sir william murray of tullibardin, ancestor of the atholl family. he died in . [ ] james halyburton, as formerly noticed, was provost of dundee. [ ] vautr. edit. reads, "in anguish." [ ] in ms. g, "the fourt." [ ] in ms. g, "mynding the sonday, quhilk was the thrid, to preiche in sanct androis." sunday was the th of june. [ ] vautr. edit. makes this "colledges." [ ] robert colville of cleish was a natural son of sir james colville of easter wemyss. he had a charter of the barony of cleish, th july . he was forfeited by parliament, th december ; but his forfeiture was rescinded, th december . he was killed at the siege of leith, th may , and was succeeded by his son robert colville, the ancestor of the lord colvilles of ochiltree. [ ] in ms. g, "quhen god of his mercie offereth." [ ] in ms. g, "at these wordis, quhilk he spak;" in vautr. edit. "at these wordes, the lordes." [ ] in ms. g, and vautr. edit. "that was then." [ ] ms. g, has "the comonalty of the town;" but the edit. omits the words, "of the town." [ ] the earl of argyle, and lord james stewart. [ ] in ms. g, "curriors were send before, and lugeingis war assignit." in vautr. edit. "lodgings were assigned, and furriers were," &c. [ ] the persons here named, were john cockburn of ormiston, john sandilands of calder, william lauder of halton, robert logan of restalrig, and george brown of colstoun. [ ] to the west of the town of cupar; but now all under tillage or planting. [ ] in ms. g, "yit we to have standin in saiftie." [ ] ms. g omits "with the ordinance." [ ] patrick hepburn of wauchton. [ ] the mss. and printed copies give the name of this place variously, as gartabank, gartabanks, garlebank, garlie bank, &c.--this place, of which no other mention occurs in scotish history, may be called a hill-farm, situated about a mile to the south of cupar of fife, and the highest ground in the parish. "the hostile camps, (says the author of the stat. account of that parish, in ,) were only separated by the river eden.... the principal men in both armies repaired to the highest eminence of the garlie bank, a spot known by the name of the _howlet_, or _owl hill_, and which commanded a full view of the whole plain, wherein the troops were now drawn up in order of battle, and there adjusted and signed that truce," &c. (vol. xvii. p. .) [ ] this memorandum, "the uther subscriptioun," &c., evidently shows that knox's amanuensis must have had the original paper before him; although it is possible he has failed in giving a minutely accurate fac-simile. in vautr. edit. the above words are retained; but instead of any fac-simile, the name is printed "_meneits_." mss. a, e, and w, follow vautrollier's edit. in copying this unmeaning name, "meneits;" ms. i, makes it "menetis." in ms. l , only the first half of the paper is transcribed. in ms. g, a different reading appears, the names being given, without any explanation, "james ducke. l.l. ennen j." the above assurance, which is only known to have been preserved by knox, has been often reprinted. calderwood, for instance, (hist. vol. i. p. ,) includes it, and evidently upon conjecture he gives the signatures as "james duke. l. lieutenant etc." i have tried the sagacity of many skilful persons of the present day, to decipher the fac-simile; and i think the only plausible interpretation is, that since it must necessarily have been d'oysel's signature, it may be the initials of his name, joined with his title as _locum tenens_, or lieutenant of henry the second, king of france, for this explanation i am indebted to john riddell, esq., advocate; accompanied with notices of a contract, dated edinburgh, march , between george lord seyton and some of his connexions, which begins, "we marie be the grace of god quene dowerar, and regent of scotland, being riplie and at lenth advisit wyth our deir cousingis and counsalaris lord henry clewtyne, lord vile pareise, doysel and sanct augnen, lieutenant general to the kingis majestie of france, in thir partis of scotland; monsieur ruber, keipar of the grete seill of scotlande," &c. further, in anselme's "histoire genealogique," &c., vol. iv. p. , among the peers of france, in the account of gaspard de schomberg, we find that his wife was "jeanne chasteigneir," whom he married th july . she survived till the d year of her age, in , and is described as d'oysel's widow: "veuve d' henry clutin, seigneur de villeparisis, d'oysel et de s. aignan au maine, vice roy en escoce; depuis ambassadeur pour le roy charles ix. a rome, et fille de jean chasteignier iii. du nom, seigneur de le rocheposay," &c. [ ] in ms. g, the words "what shuld be done," are omitted. [ ] in ms. g, "contentment." [ ] william (graham) th earl of menteith, succeeded his father, john, th earl, who was killed in a scuffle with the tutor of appin, in october . he married, while under age, the daughter of sir james douglas of drumlanrig, relict of edward lord crichton of sanquhar. he survived till . [ ] sir colin campbell of glenurchy: see note . [ ] john charteris of kinfauns, near perth: see notes , . [ ] sir john bannatyne, or bellenden, eldest son of thomas bellenden of auchinoul, whom he succeeded as lord justice clerk, th june . at this time he was employed by the queen regent to negotiate between her and the lords of the congregation; whom he afterwards joined. [ ] in ms. g., "assistance." [ ] in vautr. edit. "four" omitted. [ ] patrick hepburn, whom knox introduces in an earlier part of his history, as prior of st. andrews (see page ,) was advanced to the see of moray in ; and at the same time he held the abbacy of scone in perpetual _commendam_. in all his assedations or leases of lands, as keith makes mention, the bishop of moray, until his death, th june , employed his additional title of "monasterii de scone commendatarius perpetuus." various charters, showing his alienation of the church lands, will be seen in the "registrum episcopatus moraviensis," printed for the bannatyne club, bu the duke of sutherland. edinb. , to. [ ] ms. g, has, "in the abbay of scone." this monastery of canon-regulars of st. augustine, situated about a mile above perth, was founded by king alexander the first, in the year . it was long used as a royal residence; and the famous stone, or chair of coronation, having been brought to scone at a remote period, it continued for several centuries to be the place where our kings were accustomed to be crowned. [ ] in ms. g, "lay in the said abbay, quhilk was within." [ ] ms. g, omits "sir" before the name of adam brown. this title indicates his having been in priest's orders. [ ] in ms. g, "the brute heirof." [ ] in the ms. "alarmezand." [ ] knox in this place not only disclaims any share in the destruction of the abbey; but he expressly states he exerted himself for its preservation. according to "the chronicle of perth," the burning of scone, took place "on tuysday efter midsomer day, the th of junij zeiris;" and the same authority says, "the reformation of the charter house and freiris beside perth," was on the th of may , (pp. , . edinb. , to.) [ ] in ms. g, "messingers." vautr. edit. has "message." [ ] in ms. g, "in armour." vautr. edit. has "in armes." [ ] in vautr. edit. "of our religion." [ ] "estates" omitted in the orig. ms., and supplied from vautr. edit. it is "statis" in ms. g. [ ] vautr. edit. reads, "have violently intermitted withtaken, and yet withholdes the irones of our counsell house:" see subsequent note. [ ] in ms. g, "numbers of lions (alias called hardheids) prented;" that is, a particular kind of coin struck. some explanation will be given in a subsequent note of the coins here mentioned, which were in ordinary circulation. [ ] irons, or instruments made use of in coining money. [ ] john wishart of pittaro, and william cunningham of cunninghamhead, in the parish of dreghorn, ayrshire. respecting the latter, it may be mentioned, that he sat in the parliament, august ; and that his name occurs in the proceedings of the general assembly, june , and august .--(booke of the universall kirk, vol. i. pp. , , .) [ ] in the ms. "bonds." [ ] in ms. g, "dutifull;" in vautr. edit. "dutiefull." [ ] sir john bellenden of anchinoul, justice-clerk: see note . [ ] in ms. g, "the kirk." vautr. edit. has "the church there." [ ] in ms. g, "it was thought expedient and necessarie." vautr. edit. is the same as the text, but omits "to thame," before the word "pertaining." [ ] a reference to the history of france will explain knox's allusion to the treacherous conduct of henry the second, in the arrestment and execution of two of his councillors who had avowed their attachment to the protestant faith. the death of the french king, which followed almost immediately after, was occasioned in a tournament held in honour of the marriage of his daughter with the king of spain. in jousting with the count de montgomery, a splinter of his lance inflicted a deep wound over the king's left eye, and after lingering for twelve days, he expired on the th july . his son the dauphin, and husband of mary queen of scots, was only sixteen years of age when he succeeded to the throne, under the name of francis the second. [ ] mr. robert richardson, according to one of the most accurate of our antiquarian genealogists, "was descended of a stock of ancient and opulent burgesses of edinburgh, where they had long remained in reputation and respect;" and he being "a person of great wealth and credit, was upon the fame of his integrity preferred to the treasurer's place by the queen regent, on the death of the earl of cussilis, anno , and made also general of the mint. when mr.richardson came first to the office, he designs himself _burgense de edinburgh_; but soon after that, having got the commendatory of st. mary isle, which was a cell of holyroodhouse abbay, from that he henceforth took his title."--(crawfurd's officers of state, p. .) richardson's name occurs as one of the auditors of the treasurer's accounts, , ; and as connected with the mint, in - . as clerk of the treasury, he rendered the accounts of the late gilbert earl of cassillis on the th march - , that nobleman having died in france, on the th november , (register of conf. testaments, feb. , ,) and not on the th of that month, as stated at page . richardson continued to officiate in the room of the high treasurer, until his own appointment to the office th march - . he also held more than one lucrative ecclesiastical situation. on the th february - , a charter under the great seal, of the lands of nether gogar, in the county of edinburgh, was granted to mr. robert richardson, _vicar of exfurde_. on the last of march - , he obtained a gift of the priory of st. mary's isle of trail, near kirkcudbright (reg. secr. sig.): this dignity entitled him to sit as a lord and member of parliament. at a later date, (in ,) we find him styled archdeacon of teviotdale. he died in : and william lord ruthven, on the th june , was appointed high treasurer, the office being vacant by the death of the commendator of st. mary's isle. sir john scott says, that richardson had "conquest a great estate." this is very evident, from the various charters he had of lands in the counties of edinburgh and east lothian; and his estates were apportioned to his two sons, sir james richardson of smeaton, and sir robert richardson of pencaitland, baronet: see crawfurd, _ut supra_, and scott's staggering state, p. . [ ] a _bawbee_, the vulgar name for a halfpenny. in the reign of queen mary, it was equivalent to three pennies scotish money, but was afterwards raised to six pennies. the particular coins so designated, were billon or copper, and are described in lindsay's "coinage of scotland," p. . cork, , to. [ ] robert logan of restalrig, in the vicinity of edinburgh, and parish of south leith. this ancient family possessed considerable influence, from their connexion with leith, of which they held the superiority; as will be more fully detailed in a subsequent note. [ ] in ms. g, "and yit, notwithstanding." [ ] this name is probably a corruption of craig-end gate. the calton hill was then known as the north craigs, and the street called the low calton, the road leading from edinburgh to leith, was also known by that name; although the easter road would better suit the localities, as elsewhere described.--(wodrow miscellany, vol. i. pp. - .) [ ] better known as sir alexander erskine of gogar, fourth son of john fourth lord erskine. he was born about the year ; and was captain of the castle of edinburgh, under his brother lord erskine, earl of mar, who became regent of scotland. after the regent's death, in , he had the charge of stirling castle, and the custody of james the sixth. in , he was constable of edinburgh castle; and died sometime between and . his eldest surviving son was created earl of kelly, in . [ ] in vautr. edit. "passed." [ ] lord james stewart, as already noticed, was son of james the fifth, by lady margaret erskine, daughter of john fourth lord erskine: see page , note . he was thus sister's son of the governor of the castle of edinburgh, who maintained at this time a strict neutrality between the queen regent's party and the reformers. "there is something very gallant, (says sir walter scott,) in the conduct of this nobleman, who, during such a period, was determined to refuse admittance either to french or english, the two powerful allies of the contending factions."--(sadler's papers, vol. i. p. .) [ ] ms. g reads, "the uther nobillmen that war with us." [ ] he was no doubt the same person who appears at page , as the earl marischal's "counsaillour," in ; but it may be doubted whether it was not his son who was killed at the seige of leith, in may . general drummond, afterwards lord strathallan, in his "genealogie of the house of drummond," refers to the former passage in knox, as an incident in the life of henry drummond of riccarton, the second son of sir john drummond of innerpeffrey. having married janet creichton, who was heiress of the property of riccarton, (in the parish of linlithgow,) he became the founder of the family of drummond of riccarton. lord strathallan says, "he was a valiant gentleman, and of good breeding, and served the french king henrie the second, as capitane of his archer-guard," (p. . edinb. , to.) in the appendix to that volume, the editor says, "this 'counsaillour' was certainly no great clerk, as among the balcarras letters and papers in the advocates library, is an original receipt, in french, for crowns, (cinq cens cscuz,) which is thus signed, 'hary dr[=o]mond, wy^t my hand at the pen, led be my lord marschallis servand, maister jhone elder.' it has no date, but was probably about the year ." (ib. p. .)--on the th july , the treasurer paid s. to a boy "passand to dumblane to hairie drummond with ane clois writting of the quenis grace, with deligence." [ ] bishop lesley has given the articles of this pacification in a different form from knox: see keith's history, (vol. i. p. ,) whose remarks, however, apply to the latin history, _de rebus gestis_, &c., p. . romæ, , to. in the corresponding passage of his english history, lesley has given the erroneous date d july; and says the appointment took place "be mediatione and labouris of the erle of huntlie, quha travelled ernistlie for stanching of bluidshed that day."--(hist. p. .) [ ] in ms. g, "and in ane uther forme disposed, as efter followis." [ ] the office of the mint, of which richardson was then general. see subsequent note. [ ] in ms. g, "hir palace." [ ] in vautr. edit. "garrisons." [ ] the quarrel or quarry holes, afterwards called the "upper quarries," towards the east declivity of the calton hill, at the head of the easter road to leith, opposite maryfield. [ ] in ms. g, "and haill protestantis." [ ] in ms. g, "murmuirs." vautr. edit. also has "murmures." [ ] queen elizabeth ascended the throne of england th november . at the beginning of book third, knox has entered more into detail respecting the application which was made by the protestants of scotland for aid at this time. [ ] james third earl of arran was the eldest son of the duke of chatetherault. about the year , he went to france, and obtained the command of the scotish guard, at the court of henry the second. in , he fell into so much disgrace, on account of his expressing himself to the duke of guise in favour of the reformed doctrines, that, as stated in the next note, his life was in danger. having made his escape from paris, he came to geneva, and returning by the north of germany to england, he was received with much distinction by queen elizabeth. he arrived in scotland, on the th september , (sadler's state papers, vol. i. p. ,) and openly joined the reformers. [ ] lord david hamilton was the third son of the duke of chatelherault. he had a charter of lands in fife, granted to him st august . he was in france, along with his eldest brother the earl of arran, in , as mentioned in the previous note. secretary cecil, in a letter dated th july , as quoted by mr. tytler, says, "what may the duke's grace there (in france) look for, when his eldest son was so persecuted, as, to save his life, he was forced to flee france and go to geneva, not without great difficulty; his second brother, the lord david, now cruelly imprisoned by monsieur chevigny, one chosen out to show cruelty to your nation; divers scots of the earl's (arran's) family put to torture; and, finally, all the duchy of chastelherault seised to the crown."--(hist. vol. vi. p. .) [ ] in vautr. edit. "the other cast in vile prison." [ ] the sieur de béthencourt arrived from france about the end of july . a letter of recommendation from mary queen of scots, addressed to the duke of chatelherault, dated at paris ( th) july, is contained in prince a. labanoff's collection of "lettres de marie stuart," vol. i. p. . he was sent to this country, in the view to ascertain and use all means that were necessary, for restoring matters to the good estate in which they had previously been. after thanking the duke for his good offices rendered to the queen regent her mother, in circumstances of great difficulty, her words are,--"s'estant pour ceste cause delibéré y mectre la main et chercher tous moïens pour réduire les choses au bon estat ou elles estoient, il a advisé dépescher par dela le sieur de béthencourt, présent porteur, par lequel j'ay bien voullu vous faire entendre le contentement quo j'ay du service quo vous vous este essayé m'y faire, et prier, mon cousin, emploïer tous moïens pour faire rabiller les faultes doulcement et oster l'occasion de faire par autre voye sentir aux mauvais combien ils ont offencé le roy, mondit seigneur, et moy: estant asseurée que jamais vous ne sçaurez faire chose qui me soit plus agréable."--(lettres, &c., vol. i. p. .)--among various payments by the treasurer, after the queen regent's death, (in june ,) to her attendants and other persons, we find, "item, to monsieur buttonecourt and his wife, lxxx lib." [ ] in ms. g, "plesour;" in vautr. edit. "displeasure." [ ] in ms. g, "duetifullie," vautr. edit. has "dewly amendid." [ ] in this marginal note, vautr. edit. has "brages inough." [ ] in ms. g, "that yow and all they that hes done, and dois as ye do, sall." [ ] these words may be rendered, "you will feel the point of it for ever." the letter referred to is not contained in prince a. labanoff's collection of queen mary's letters; but an english copy of it is preserved in spotiswood's history, p. , and will be inserted in the appendix to the present volume. [ ] in ms. g, "be certaine effectis." [ ] in ms. g, "dewtiefull;" vautr. edit. "duteifull obedience." [ ] in ms. g, "towards us your." [ ] "mot" is omitted both in ms. g. and vautr. edit. [ ] the inhabitants or congregation of edinburgh, met in the tolbooth or council house, on the th july , and publickly elected knox as their minister.--(historie of the estate of scotland, in wodrow miscellany, p. .) "with this choice, (dr. m'crie remarks,) which was approved by his brethren, knox judged it his duty to comply, and immediately began his labours in the city." he was soon afterwards obliged to leave edinburgh, but john willock, who became his colleague, supplied his place, and in the month of august dispensed the sacrament in st. giles's church.--(ib. p. .) [ ] in ms. g. and vautr. edit. "began." [ ] the tolbooth or council house must not be confounded with the old tollbooth or jail, which was described in as ruinous, and ordered to be demolished. it was, however, repaired, and has been immortalized as "the heart of mid-lothian." in chambers's "reekiana," a number of curious and interesting notices are collected regarding this building, which was situated at the west-end of st. giles's church, and encroached so much on that part of the high street, called the luckenbooths, as to leave only a kind of lane to the north, of feet wide. further to the south, and connected with the south-west corner of st. giles's church, with a covered passage to the parliament square, there was a large mass of buildings, which included what was known as the new tolbooth or council house, the goldsmith's hall, &c. all these were pulled down when the signet library was built, and the ornamented exterior of the parliament house, (begun in , and completed in ,) was so unfortunately sacrificed. the old tolbooth or jail was demolished in ; and the changes which took place in and around the parliament square at that time, completely altered the singularly picturesque character of the old town of edinburgh. [ ] here, and in other places, vautr. edit. has "church." [ ] in vautr. edit. the word "kirk" or "church" is omitted. [ ] the abbey of cambuskenneth was founded by king david the first, in the year . this house, of the order of canon-regulars of st. augustine, although connected with stirling, is in the parish of logie, and shire of clackmannan. it was situated on the north side of the river forth, about one mile n.e. from the town of stirling. during the wars with england, it was often plundered, but in , it was nearly all demolished; and there now remains little besides a square tower of fine proportions, to indicate its site.--see sir j.g. dalyell's "brief analysis of the chartularies of the abbey of cambuskenneth, chapel royal of stirling," &c. edinb. . vo. [ ] in vautr. edit. "lyndors."--the abbey of lindores, in the parish of newburgh, fife, was, like most of our monastic buildings, finely situated, overlooking the fertile shores of the tay. it was founded by david earl of huntingdon, brother to king william the lion, upon his return from the holy land, about the year . it was erected into a temporal lordship by king james the sixth, th december , in favour of sir patrick lesley of pitcairly, son of andrew fifth earl of rothes, who had held the abbacy _in commendam_, since .--john abbot of lindores who is here mentioned, must have been a person of some importance; yet his name has not been discovered, although he sat in parliament in and subsequent years, and he appears in the sederunt of the lords of session, in november . some further particulars respecting him will be given in a subsequent note. [ ] ms. g, "sould not be." [ ] in ms. g, and vautr. edit., "procurement was the preiching stooll." [ ] alexander whitelaw of new grange, had been a pensioner in england so early as the time of edward the sixth, for which the earl of huntly caused him to be forfeited, th july . see before, note . at a later period, he became an active and confidential agent of knox and the reformed party; and his name frequently occurs in their correspondence in sir ralph sadler's state papers. knox speaks of whitelaw as a man who had often hazarded himself, and all he had, for the cause of god. throgmorton calls him "a very honest, sober, and godly man, and the most truly affectionate to england of any scotsman." accordingly, he gave him a letter of recommendation to elizabeth's council, and, as he was very religious, he counsels them to let him see _as little sin in england_ as possible.--(note by sir walter scott, in sadler's papers, vol. i. pp. , .) in the account of the collector of the thirds of benefices, , two bolls of wheat are deducted--or "defalkit for the teindis of the newgrange of aberbrothock, be reasone the same was nocht lauborit the zeir compted, be occasion of the pley dependand thairupon, betuix alexander quhytlaw and william stewart." three bolls of bear, and eight bolls of meal, were deducted for the same cause. [ ] william knox, a younger brother of the reformer, was then a merchant. in september , the english council, out of respect to his brother, granted a patent "to william knox, a merchant, giving him liberty, for a limited time, to trade to any port of england, in a vessel of one hundred tons burden."--(strype's memorials, vol. ii. p. .) and knox himself, in a letter written in , says, "my brother, william knox, is presentlie with me. what ye wold haif frome scotland, let me know this monunday at nycht; for hie must depart on tyisday."--(m'crie's life of knox, vol. i. pp. , .) he afterwards became a preacher, and was for many years minister of cockpen in mid-lothian.--(ms. books of assignation of stipends; wodrow miscellany, vol. i. pp. , .) [ ] in ms. g, "in four pieces." [ ] in the ms. "wald nott weir." [ ] in ms. g, this marginal note, and that on the next page, are taken into the text. [ ] in the ms. the date is left blank, "the &c. day." vautr. edit. and ms. g, read, "the th day of august." [ ] in ms. g, "we can skairslie beleve." [ ] in ms. g, "was maid against, or without our advyse." in vautr. edit. "was made by." [ ] in ms. g, "in na cais." [ ] monsieur de la brosse, and the bishop of amiens, arrived in scotland on the th september . sir ralph sadler, on the th, says, "the bishop arrived in leith three days previously, with three vessels, and men." on the th he writes, "la brosse, and the bishop of amyens, are arrived at leyth, with so gret company, besyds ther housholde men, as far as we can lerne. and the bishop, as they say, cometh to curse, and also to dispute with the protestants, and to reconcile them, if it wolbe," &c.--(sadler's letters, vol. i. p. .) "jacques de la brosse, knycht," had been one of the french ambassadors, who were present at the parliament, th december , for treating of a renewal of the amity between the two kingdoms.--(acta parl. scot. vol. ii. p. .) when again sent to this country, in september , on the accession of francis the second to the throne of france, bishop lesley calls him "monsieur de la broche."--(history, p. .) the bishop of amiens was nicholas de pellevé, who was afterwards archbishop of sens, and elected cardinal. he came in the character of legate _a latere_ from the pope, and was accompanied by three doctors of the sorbonne, whom spotiswood calls dr. furmer, dr. brochet, and dr. ferretier.--(hist. p. .) [ ] in vautr. edit. "ammiance." [ ] in ms. g, "the arryval of franchemen and ma." vautr. edit. corresponds with the text. [ ] this marginal note is taken into the text in ms. g. [ ] in ms. g, this marginal note ends, "witness how this was kept;" but vautr. edit. is the same with the text. the letters here referred to as having been sent to france, are not contained in any printed collection. [ ] in the orig. ms. and in vautr. edit. "proclamation." [ ] in ms. g, "inriche." [ ] in ms. g, "our liberties," and "our laws." [ ] in ms. g, "as obedient." [ ] in ms. g, "and seing ye have presently." vautr. edit. has, "and seeing you have presently." [ ] a genealogical account of the ancient family of the scots of balweary, in fife, is inserted in douglas's baronage, pp. - . from this we learn, that there were five persons of the same name, in regular succession, at the end of the th, and during the th century. sir william scott, who was taken prisoner at floddon, was nominated the first of the lords of session on the temporal side, at the institution of the college of justice in may ; but he died very soon after; as thomas scott of petgormo, his second son, was appointed his successor, th november that year. this thomas scott was justice-clerk, whose death, in , knox has recorded: see page . another thomas scott of petgormo, probably a younger son of his brother sir william, had a charter of the lands of petgormo, confirmed d march . i have some old deeds, between the years of and , in some of which he is styled of abbotshall, in others, of petgormo. [ ] see note . [ ] in the ms. "laid;" vautr. edit. has "laied money;" ms. g, "layit mony." in september , the treasurer delivered to an english miner, "aucht unce of siluer, to mak ane assay of siluer and _layit_ mony." in , it is called "allayed" (alloyed) money. [ ] during the minority of queen mary, great quantities of base money had been struck, or brought from france and flanders, and obtaining circulation, had the effect of raising the prices of provisions and other necessaries in this country. many enactments were made in regard to the currency at this time, apparently without much effect; at length, in the year , all such money was called in by public proclamation, to prevent the further circulation of false, counterfeit, and clipped money. the particular kinds here named, were _hard-heads_, or lions, a small coin with the royal cypher crowned, on one side, and a lion _rampant_ on the other. the _non sunts_, so called in acts of parliament, had the arms of francis and mary, mostly bearing the date . this name was given them from the legend, on the obverse, iam. non. svnt. dvo. sed. vna. caro. the comparative value of these coins is determined by an act of parliament, december , by which "all non sunts were proclamit to d., bawbies to d., plakis to d., and hard-heidis to half-penyis; and the penneis to stand as thai ar."--(acta parl. scot. vol. ii. p. ; lindsay's coinage of scotland, p. .) [ ] see page . [ ] in ms. g, "thair clippit and rongit sollis." vautr. edit. has "clippit and rounged souses." that is, clipped or _ronged sols_ or _sous_, (a kind of small french money well known,) worn away, or reduced in size by a file: the _sou_ being equivalent to _centimes_, and _sous_ to a _franc_. [ ] in ms. g, "derthning of all victuillis;" vautr. edit. has "vivaris." [ ] in ms. g, "and how are they cum?" [ ] in ms. g, "townes;" in vautr. edit. "roomes." [ ] in the other copies "garrisouns." [ ] in ms. g, "see to it;" in vautr. edit. as above. [ ] in ms. g, "realme;" in vautr. edit. "roomes." [ ] in ms. g, "further." [ ] "quhen thy neighbours house is on fire, take tent to thy awn."--("scottish proverbs: gathered together by david fergusson, sometime minister at dunfermline," &c. edinburgh, , to.) [ ] in ms. g, "guysianis;" in vautr. edit. "guisians." [ ] in ms. g, "gevin to princes." [ ] in ms. g, "becaus this accusatioun is layd against;" vautr. edit. has, "because this occasion is layd against." [ ] this marginal note occurs both in ms. g, and in vautr. edit.; but ms. g, makes it, "let sick as this day live, witness if god hes wrocht since the writting of this."--the precise time when this note was written is doubtful, as several leaves of the original ms., (folios to ,) corresponding with pages to of the present edition, seem to have been rewritten, after , but before knox's death, in , and in all probability in the hand of his secretary, richard bannatyne. in this portion of the ms. the colour of the ink, &c., resembles the latter part of book fourth; but it exhibits a peculiar orthography, and is transcribed with much less accuracy than usual. [ ] in ms. g, "haldis;" in vautr. edit. "had." [ ] in the ms. "subjit." [ ] in ms. g, this marginal note reads, "the hame cuming of the erie of arran out of france." [ ] in the ms. "discryve;" vautr. edit. and ms. g, have "discover." [ ] in vautr. edit. "the xxix day." [ ] robert carnegy of kynnaird, in fife, was the son of john carnegy, who was killed at floddon. on the th july , he was nominated a lord of session.--(senators of the college of justice, p. .) he was sent to england in , to treat for the ransom of the earl of huntley, lord chancellor, who had been taken prisoner at the battle of pinkie. in and , carnegy filled the office of "clerk of our soueraine ladyis thesaurar," for which he had a yearly pension of £ , s. d.--(treasurer's accounts.) in february - , the treasurer paid "to robert carnegy, for his expensis passand to france and england, in our soueraine ladyis and my lord governouris service, quhen he remanit the space of xv weekis, in iiij^c crounis of the sone, v^c lib." (£ .)--he was frequently employed in public negotiations; and had the honour of knighthood conferred on him for his services. [ ] mr. david borthwick of lochill, advocate, will be afterwards noticed. in , he became lord advocate, and one of the judges in the court of session. [ ] in ms. g, "cut-throattis." [ ] the charge of the royal family became a kind of hereditary employment for the erskines of mar. john, fourth lord erskine, had the keeping of james the fifth in his youth; and was appointed governor of stirling castle. in may , he had a charter constituting him and his heirs captain and constable of the castle of stirling. he was likewise one of two noblemen to whom the charge of queen mary, in her infancy, was entrusted. he was afterwards made keeper of edinburgh castle, and died in . he was succeeded by his third son, john fifth lord erskine, (as already noticed at page ,) both in his title and heritable offices. when the duke of chatelherault resigned the regency to the queen dowager, the castle of edinburgh was put in the hands of lord erskine. in , as governor of this important fortress, he maintained a strict neutrality between the two contending parties, as knox mentions at the beginning of book third of his history. and james the sixth, while yet an infant, was entrusted to his care. [ ] in ms. g, "within it." [ ] in vautr. edit. "your eyis of." [ ] in vautr. edit. "the day." [ ] in the other mss. "men." [ ] sir john bellenden of auchinoul, who, for thirty years, from , was justice-clerk, appears to have been twice married. the above reference is to his first wife; and from a charter dated th may , we learn that her name was barbara kennedy. she was thus the daughter of sir hugh kennedy of girvan-mains, by lady janet stewart, eldest daughter of john second earl of atholl, who was killed at floddon in . this lady was four times married: first, to alexander master of sutherland, who died in ; then, in , to sir hugh kennedy; next, in , to henry lord methven, who was killed at pinkie in . her fourth husband was patrick lord ruthven; and in a charter, granted in the prospect of this marriage in , she is styled lady methven. she was lord ruthven's second wife, and probably survived him. sir john bellenden's second wife, according to a charter, th july , was janet seyton. she survived him, as we learn from his confirmed testament: he having died on the th october .--(register of conf. test., &c., vol. vi. th august .) [ ] he was the son of john spens of condie, in the county of perth, and was born about the year . he was educated at st. andrews, and became a determinant, in st. salvator's college, in . in , he was one of nine advocates selected by the court of session, to procure before them in all actions. he was joined with henry lauder as advocate to our soueraine lady, in , and had the salary of £ ; and on lauder's death in , he became his successor, and at the same time was raised to the bench. he joined the reformers, and is frequently noticed in the proceedings of the general assembly. [ ] in ms. g, "that the quenis grace favour." [ ] in vautr edit. "craftie flatterer:" in ms. g, this marginal note is omitted. [ ] in ms. g, and vautr. edit. "poore." [ ] in ms. g, the name is written in full, "james stewart;" in vautr. edit. it is contracted as above, "j. st." [ ] this word, omitted in the ms., is supplied from vautr. edit. [ ] in the orig. ms. "as." [ ] in vautr. edit. and ms. g, "than the pretended." [ ] in ms. g, "mony uther thingis." [ ] in ms. g, "and the quein regent in this cais." vautr. edit. has, "in this cause." [ ] vautr. edit. has here in the margin, "nota." [ ] this feeling of jealousy between the towns of edinburgh and leith, originating in narrow-minded policy, was of an old standing. the harbour and mills of lieth, then known as inverleith, were granted by robert the first, in the year , to the community of edinburgh; and in , they acquired other rights and privileges by purchase from logan of restalrig, who possessed the banks of the river. during the th and following century, the magistrates of edinburgh passed some acts of a very oppressive and illiberal kind, against the inhabitants of leith. in , during the english invasion, the town and harbour were completely destroyed; but the queen regent, in favour of the inhabitants, purchased anew the superiority in , from robert logan of restalrig, for £ scotish money; it was strongly fortified in ; and was taken possession of by the french auxiliary troops, on behalf of the queen regent, who proposed to have erected the town into a royal burgh. her death, in june , defeated this project; and the citizens of edinburgh afterwards obtained the superiority from mary queen of scots, for the sum of , marks. [ ] in the ms. "had" is omitted; in ms. g, it is "hes or had;" in vautr. edit. "hath or had." [ ] the logans of restalrig were an ancient family of great influence, from their possessions at leith and restalrig. the factious person to whom knox alludes was robert logan, who was arrested by order of the magistrates of edinburgh, and committed to prison, th september . [ ] in ms. g, "lawfull heirs and borne counsallers." vautr. edit. omits "heirs," or "heidis," and reads, "the lawfull and borne counsellers." [ ] in vautr. edit. on the margin, "nota." [ ] not inserted in ms. g. [ ] see note . [ ] in the orig. ms. it is, apparently, "neir us:" ms. g. has "micht most noy us;" vautr. edit. reads, "might most annoy us." [ ] in ms. g, "the caus of the taking of brochtie craig." [ ] in ms. g. and vautr. edit. "dutifull." [ ] in ms. g, "forced with the frenchmen, and reullit with be the counsaill of france;" vautr. edit. has, "forced with the strength, and ruled by the counsell of france." [ ] this alludes to the emphatic phrase in the absolution sent from rome, to cardinal beaton's murderers, _remittimus irremissibile_; but which was rejected by the parties who were concerned as not being the "sufficient assured absolution," which had been promised should be obtained for them: see page . [ ] george fifth lord seaton, was elected provost of edinburgh at michaelmas , by command of the queen regent; and he conducted the affairs of the city in such an arbitrary manner, that in april he committed one of the bailies and the town-clerk to prison. on another occasion he threatened all the bailies with a similar imprisonment, if, during his absence, they failed in securing certain persons whom he named.--(maitland's hist. of edinburgh, p. .) [ ] in ms. g, "the lord seytounis unworthie regiment:" and it omits the three following marginal notes. [ ] in ms. g, "to steir;" vautr. edit., as above, has, "to saile a schippe." [ ] in the orig. ms. "baith we and sche." [ ] in ms. g, "debtfull;" in vautr. edit. "dutifull." [ ] in vautr. edit. "forged." [ ] mr. robert lockhart has already been mentioned by knox, (page ,) among the laymen who undertook the office of exhorters. he appears to have been gained over to her views by the queen regent; and the treasurer's accounts exhibit the following payments made to him by her special command. on the th january - , "be the quenis grace precept to master robert lockhart, xxx lib." "item, the xxiij day of februar, be the quenis grace precept to maister robert lockhart, xl lib." [ ] in ms. g, "unto hir grace the quein regent, may be understude." [ ] supplied from ms. g. [ ] in ms. g, these words are thus transposed,--"i culd not be proven enemie, bot rather an unfayned freind to your grace." vautr. edit. follows the text, except "proved" for "proven." [ ] in the year , at geneva: see note , page . [ ] in ms. g, "your graces hairt." vautr. edit. has, "your hearte." [ ] robert lockhart, see page . [ ] supplied from ms. g. [ ] in ms. g, "of this cuntrey." vautr. edit. has, "realme." [ ] vautr. edit. omits this marginal note; but it occurs in ms. g. [ ] in ms. g, "seikes or sutes ony pre-eminence, eyther to." vautr. edit. makes it, "sues nor seekes anie pre-heminence." [ ] "maister robert foirman," in , was ross herald; and in that capacity, on the th may , he was "direct fra the counsale, with certain articulis to be schawand to the king of france; and frathin to the empriour," the treasurer on that day having paid "to hym, to be his expenses in his jornay, £ ."--on the death of the celebrated poet, sir david lyndesay of the mount, forman, in , became his successor as lyon king-at-arms. [ ] keith has copied from knox the "credeit" or commission from the queen regent; but in the appendix to his history he says, "i make little doubt he (knox) has curtailed the same, and formed it so as to serve his own purpose: and had this credit been contained in as few words as this author relates it, the regent might have easily inserted the whole of it in her letter, without any unbecoming prolixity. i do, therefore, recommend to my readers not to satisfy themselves with this account of the credit, but to look into _that_ which archbishop spottiswood narrates; which, as it is much more distinct in answering to each part of complaint from the congregationers, so it has all the air of ingenuity, and seems fully to answer the character of that wise and worthy princess." he then proceeds to quote from spottiswood's ms. some remarks, differing from the corresponding passage in the printed history; but these are too long to be here quoted: see keith, hist. vol. i. pp. , - . [ ] in ms. g, "of the kirk of edinburgh, being commanded." vautr. edit. is the same as the text. [ ] in ms. g, "was thair protest." vautr. edit. has, "process." [ ] in ms. g, "in sygne of manifest oppresioun." vautr. edit., as in the text, omits the words "sygne of." [ ] in ms. g, "commonaltie." [ ] in ms. g, "and to performance of thir hir wicked nterprises." vautr. edit. reads, "to performe these her wicked interprises." [ ] the stranger referred to, was monsieur de ruby, who has already been noticed: see pages , . secretary cecil, in a letter to sir ralph sadler, from london, th november , says, "at this present monsieur ruby is here, and hath spoken with the quenes majestye this daye. his errand, i thynke, be to goe into fraunce, and, by the waye here, to expostulate upon certain greeffs in that quenes name. he telleth many tales, and wold very fayne have the queenes majestye beleve that he sayth truth." some of these "tales" are specified--such as, that the scotts report they have had £ in ayde from england, &c. it is afterwards added, "ruby departeth to-morrow."--(sadler's state papers, vol. i. p. .) [ ] this marginal note, in ms. g, reads, "hir dauchter followis the same, for to davie was the greitt seill gevin."--in the list of officers of state, appended to scott's staggering state, (see note, page ,) riccio is said to have succeeded mons. de ruby; but the public records furnish no evidence to show that david riccio ever was intrusted with the great seal. his highest promotion was private secretary to the queen and darnley; as will more particularly be noticed in the next volume, towards the conclusion of the history. [ ] the words enclosed within brackets, occur both in ms. g. and vautr. edit.; but neither copy has any signatures. keith, in his remarks on this act of deposition of the queen regent, says, "and for this reason, (the few persons present at framing it,) perhaps, they thought fit not to sign the act man by man, but to wrap it up after this general manner, viz., _by us the nobility_," &c.--(hist. vol. i. p. .) this evidently is a mistake, as the act itself concludes with the express statement, "subscrivit _with our handis_," &c.--in the ms. of , a blank space of half a page at the end of the above act, has been left for the purpose of inserting the signatures, we may suppose, in a kind of fac-simile. keith previously mentions, that the councillors who signed the letter to the queen, on the d october, were twenty-nine in number, viz., the duke of chatelherault; _earls_, arran, eglinton, argyll, rothes, morton, glencairn, marischal, sutherland; _lords_, erskine, ruthven, home, athens (alexander gordon, afterwards bishop of galloway,) the prior of st. andrews (lord james stewart,) livingston, master of maxwell, boyd, ochiltree; _barons_, tullibardine, glenorchy, lindsay, dun, lauriston, cunningham, calder, pittarrow; _provosts_ of edinburgh, st. andrews, dundee. but see the note to the letter itself, in the following page . [ ] in ms. g, "your doingis." vautr. edit. has, "proceedings." [ ] in ms. g, "for our regent." vautr. edit. has, "anie." [ ] the town of leith. [ ] in ms. g, "placed." vautr. edit. has, "planted." [ ] in ms. g, "accustomed." [ ] in vautr. edit. "the day;" and this date is followed in all the copies, excepting ms. g. [ ] in the british museum (mss. cotton. calig., b. x., f. .) there is a contemporary transcript of this letter, which contains the signatures, or rather the names of the persons who signed it, as follows: "your grace's humble serviteurs, the council, having the authority unto the next parliament, erected by common election of the earls, lords, and barons, convened at edinburgh, of the protestant faction. (_earls._) my lord duke's grace and earl of arran. the e. of argile. the e. of glencairn. (_lords._) james of st. andrews. the lord ruthven. the master of maxwell. (_barons._) tullibardine. the laird of dun. the laird of pittarrow. the provost of aberdeen, for the burrows." [ ] in ms. g, "the ane and the other." vautr. edit. has, "either the one or the other." some other trivial differences in this summonds occur in ms. g. [ ] in the ms. of , "scalles." [ ] in ms. g, "at that." [ ] in may , we find him styled, "maister james balfoure, officiall of sanctandrois, within the archedenerie of lowthiane."--(criminal trials, vol. i. p. .) [ ] in ms. g, "quhilk we thocht." [ ] sir william murray of tullibardine. [ ] john hart was connected with the mint in some subordinate capacity. his name does not occur among the officers of the mint, in the treasurer's accounts, at this time; but it occurs in a proclamation, dated th march , respecting the false and adulterated coins (placks and hard-heads) which were ordered to be brought to the mint.--(lindsay's coinage of scotland, pp. , .) [ ] the cunyie house, or scotish mint, was near the foot of gray's close, entering from the cowgate, and formed a kind of small court or square. but these buildings bear the date of having been erected in . the mint had previously been moved from one place to another, such as edinburgh castle, holyrood house, dalkeith, &c. thus we find in the treasurer's accounts, february - , is the following payment:--"item, allowit to the comptar, be payment maid be johne achesoun, maister cwnzeour, to maister william m'dowgale, maister of werk, for expensis maid be him vpon the bigging of the cwnze-house, within the castell of edinburgh, and beting of the cwnze-house within the palace of halierudhouse, fra the xi day of februar zeris, to the of april , &c., £ , s. d." [ ] in the view of affording aid to the lords of the congregation, a commission was granted to the earl of northumberland, sir ralph sadler, and sir james crofts. the ostensible object was the settlement of some border disputes, which were arranged on the d september; but by remaining at berwick, they were able, with greater facility and secrecy, to hold communication with the protestant party in scotland, without apparently infringing the treaty of peace which had previously been concluded. sadler's private instructions to this effect are dated th august , and he was empowered to treat with any persons he thought advisable, and to distribute, with all due discretion and secrecy, money to the extent of £ .--(sadler's state papers, vol. i. pp. xxix. .) the arrival of the french troops in aid of the queen regent, led to a more direct and ostensible assistance on the part of england, in sending auxiliary forces to support the scotish reformers. [ ] in ms. g, "beset;" in vautr. edit. "foreset." [ ] john cockburn of ormistoun has already been noticed, in the notes to pages , , , &c. in october , he received at berwick, from sir ralph sadler and sir james crofts, £ sterling, in french crowns, for the present relief of the lords of the congregation; and also crowns (or £ , s. d.) which was given to him for his own use. but the earl of bothwell, and some of the french troops, being informed of this booty, waylaid him near dunpendar-law, in east lothian, on the last of october, and robbed him of this treasure, wounding him severely.--(wodrow miscellany, vol. i. p. .) on the th november, sadler and crofts wrote to secretary cecil, with the information of the "mishap" which "hath chaunced to the saide ormestoun, to our no little grief and displeasure."--(state papers, vol. i. pp. , , , .) cockburn is introduced among the "scotish worthies," in a work written in verse, by alexander garden of aberdeen, before the year , but which seems never to have been printed, and the ms. unfortunately cannot now be traced. garden calls him "ane honourable and religious gentleman, very dilligent and zealous in the work of reformation:" "for perrels, promises, expense nor pains, from thy firm faith no not a grain weight gains." and, in reference to bothwell's attack, he says,-- "thy blood-shed sooth'd and taught this time, i know, when curtfoot bothwell like a limmer lay, (a traytor try'd, yea, and a tirrant too,) and unawarrs did wound thee on the way." (ms. hist. of the family of cockburn of ormistoun, circa .) [ ] james hepburn, earl of bothwell, succeeded his father, patrick third earl, in september : see page . at this time he was in secret correspondence with the reformers, and had professed attachment to their cause; but being gained over by the queen dowager, this spoliation of cockburn of ormistoun displayed the insincerity of his character. the earl of arran and lord james stewart proceeded with men "to revenge the said injury, thinking to find the earl bothwell in creichtoun; but a little before their coming to the said place, he was depairted," &c.--(wodrow miscellany, vol. i. p. .) [ ] crichton castle, now in ruins, was formerly a place of considerable strength, with an interior quadrangle. at this time it belonged to the earl of bothwell. it is situated in the parish of that name, in the east part of mid-lothian, about eleven miles from edinburgh. [ ] the name is left blank in all the mss. [ ] in vautr. edit. "the first departing of." [ ] in vautr. edit. "bannantine;" in ms. g, "bellenden." sir john bellenden has frequently been mentioned: see pages , . [ ] mr. gawyn hamilton: in ms. g. is added, "abbote of kilwynning:" see note . [ ] vautr. edit. makes this, "of their infants losse." it is the french phrase, "les enfans perdus d'une armée," the forlorn hope of an army. [ ] lord robert stewart was the natural son of james the fifth, by euphemia elphinstone. he had a grant of the abbacy of holyrood in , while yet an infant; alexander myln, commendator of cambuskenneth, being administrator. he joined the reformers, and approved of the confession of faith in . in , he exchanged his abbacy with adam bothwell, bishop of orkney, for the temporalities of that bishoprick. his lands in orkney and zetland were erected into an earldom in his favour, th october . [ ] in ms. g, "the capitain of the castell." vautr. edit. is the same as the text, in omitting these words. [ ] in ms. g. and vautr. edit. "victorious souldiours," or "soldiers." [ ] in the ms. of , "pause." [ ] or, "i think you have bought it without money." [ ] sir john maxwell, who afterwards, in his wife's right, as co-heiress, assumed the title of lord herries. see note . [ ] knox has here mistaken the particular days: wednesday was the first, and monday the sixth of november. [ ] the persons here named were ker of cessfurd, and ker of pharnihurst. [ ] monday was the sixth of november: see above, note . [ ] in ms. g, "for keiping;" in vautr. edit. "keeping." [ ] in ms. g. and vautr. edit. "corner." [ ] in ms. g, "neir." [ ] the village of restalrig is situated about half a mile to the north-east of holyrood house. it was formerly a place of some importance, and contained a collegiate church, founded by king james the second, with a dean, nine prebendaries, and two singing-boys. a portion of this church has been restored, and fitted up as a place of worship in connexion with the parish church of south leith. the _myre_ was no doubt that low marshy ground, formerly covered with water, which extended to the precincts, or "the park-dyke," of the palace and abbey of holyrood. in a lease of the park of holyroodhouse, to "john huntar, burgess of the cannogait," a special charge is included "for uphalding and repairing of our said park dyke, and casteing and redding of the fowseis about the medowis," &c.; and also for "the keping of the said park, the abbotis medow, _and groundless myre_ within the same." th march - .--(register of signatures, vol. i.) sadler and crofts, in a letter written about the th of november , (vol. i. p. ,) have given an account of this skirmish, fought at restalrig on the previous day, on which occasion the protestant party, commanded by the earl of arran and lord james stewart, were surrounded in the marshy ground, and their retreat to edinburgh only accomplished with a loss of thirty men slain, and forty taken prisoners. [ ] in vautr. edit. "parke dich." [ ] ms. g. omits "awin;" in vautr. edit. it is, "owne." [ ] captain alexander halyburton, at page , is mentioned by knox as the brother of james halyburton, provost of dundee, with whom he is by some modern writers confounded. he had previously been in the queen's service, as in august , he received £ , for his pension of the whitsunday term.--(treasurer's accounts.) bishop lesley, in his account of this skirmish, which he places about the end of september, says, that the french troops were "not content to be sieged within the toun" of leith; "at last, thay come fordwarte with their hoill forces, purposing to invayde the toune of edinburgh; bot the scottis men come furth of the toun, albeit out of ordour, and encontered the frenche men apoun the croftis besyde the abbay of holieruidhous, betuix leithe and edinburgh; quhair the scottis men war put to flyte, and capitane alexander halieburton with mony utheris was slayne, and the frenche men persewit the chase evin to the poirtis of edinburgh, and had maid gret slauchter, war not thair was twa gret cannonis schot furth of the castell at the frenche army, quhilk stayed thame frome forder persuit; so they retered agane to leithe."--(history, p. .) [ ] this sentence in ms. g. reads, "and thus with dolour of many, he ended his dolour within two hours efter the defate, and enter, we doubt not, in that blissit immortality, quhilk abydes all that beleve in christ jesus trewly." all the later mss. correspond verbatim with vautrollier's edit., which is the same with the text above, except the latter words, "within two hours after _our departure_." [ ] the persons here mentioned as having been taken prisoners, were probably david monypenny of pitmilly, or his son david; andrew fernie of fernie, in the parish of monimail, the property having afterwards come by marriage into the family of arnot; james stewart, master of buchan, second son of john third earl of buchan, (his elder brother john having been killed at pinkie in ); and george lovell, a burgess of dundee. on the th november , george lovell, burgess of dundee, and margaret rollok, his wife, had a charter under the great seal, of certain acres of land in the lordship of dudhope, forfarshire. on the previous month, he obtained a letter of legitimation for his bastard son alexander. in may , lovell was fined £ , by the justice depute, as security for paul methven, in consequence of his non-appearance at trial. [ ] in the ms. of , a blank space is left here, and at the end of the next sentence, as if for the purpose of adding some farther details, which may explain the apparent want of connexion. [ ] in ms. g, "schote." vautr. edit. has "hurte." [ ] all-hallow even, the last day of october, being the eve of hallowmas, of all-saints. [ ] william maitland, the eldest son of sir richard maitland of lethington, became secretary to queen mary, in . [ ] in the orig. ms. "ceased." [ ] ms. g. adds, "his sister-son." vautr. edit. omits these additional words. [ ] in ms. g, "have stude;" in vautr. edit. "wold have stood." [ ] wednesday was the th of november. [ ] in the ms. of , "this." [ ] verse , supplied from ms. g, is omitted in the ms. of , and in vautr. edit. [ ] in ms. g, "forefathers;" in vautr. edit. "auncient fathers." [ ] in the ms. of , "duik" is often written "duck." [ ] in ms. g, "it be not so." [ ] vautr. edit. makes it, "passed to comishall." [ ] see sadler's letters and state papers, vol. i. pp. - , for the instructions and other matters connected with the mission of william maitland of lethington to london at this time. [ ] in ms. g, "the end of the secund buik:" vautr. edit. has "endeth," &c. [ ] the words in italics are usually those in the text, quoted for greater facility in shewing the connexion.--in buchanan's editions there are numerous marginal notes. many of these are literally copied from vautrollier's suppressed edition; and of those which the editor has added, only such as might be mistaken as knox's, are here taken notice of. [ ] "the godly zeal of m. hamelton towardes his countrey." [ ] "articles out of the registers."--(marginal note.) [ ] "his articles otherwise more truely collected."--(marginal note.) [ ] "condemned by councelles and uniuersities, but here is no mention of the scripture."--(marginal note.) [ ] "note here that these articles agree not wyth the articles in the register before mentioned." [ ] "wolues in lambes skinnes." [ ] "m. patricke geuen to the secular power." [ ] "if ye coulde shew to what place of the scripture, we would gladly heare you." [ ] "the vniuersitie of s. andrewes was founded about the yeare of our lord , in the reigne of kyng james the first, who brought into scotland, out of other countreyes, . doctors of diuinitie, and . doctours of decrees, wyth diuers other. hect. boet. lib. . cap. ." (marginal note.) [ ] "he meaneth fysher b. of rochester, who wrote agaynst oecolampadius and luther, and at length was beheaded for treason." (marginal note.) [ ] mr. john sinclair, dean of restalrig, who became bishop of brechin. see supra, p. . [ ] evidently the same person named terrye, in the previous account of wallace. see page . pitscottie calls him sir hugh curry. * * * * * transcriber's note: . footnotes are numerous and many are lengthy. they are placed at the end of the book to make the text easier to read. . sidenotes are marked as sn: and, where possible, are placed at the beginning of the paragraph to which they pertain. where there are multiple sidenotes in a paragraph, they are embedded in the paragraph as close as possible to that to which they refer. . there are numerous asterisks in the text, three of which (pp. , and ) refer to sidenotes on those pages. other asterisks will be seen in footnote references to outside sources. . superscripts are represented by ^. . there are multiple instances of different spellings for the same word. those have been retained. obvious typos have been corrected. . quote (") marks have been retained as in the original. . footnote numbers cited as internal references have been changed from the original to conform to the footnote numbers in this document; and, where necessary, comments have been altered to reflect the format of this document without changing the intent. . instances of accented letters have been changed as follows: a. pp. and - macron represented as wh[=e] b. p. macron represented as ætat[=e] c. p. macron represented as am[=o]gst d. pp. and macron represented as n[=o]ber e. p. macron represented as beat[=o] f. p. macron represented as cal[=e] g. p. macron represented as chan[=o] h. p. macron represented as co[=u]try i. p. macron represented as cond[=e]nation j. p. macron represented as c[=o]spiracy k. p. macron represented as dr[=o]mond l. p. xiii macron represented as joh[=a]nes m. p. macron represented as l[=o]ger n. p. xli macron represented as m[=a] o. p. macron represented as spr[=o]ge the assembly of god _miscellaneous writings of_ c. h. mackintosh _volume iii_ loizeaux brothers _new york_ first edition tenth printing loizeaux brothers, inc., publishers _a nonprofit organization, devoted to the lord's work and to the spread of his truth_ west st street, new york , n. y. printed in the united states of america contents pages the man of god - decision for christ - prayer in its proper place - "gilgal" - thoughts on confirmation vows - thoughts on the lord's supper - the assembly of god - the christian: his position and his work - the christian priesthood - father! thy sovereign love--_poem_ papers on evangelization - the living god and a living faith - a scriptural inquiry as to the sabbath, the law, and christian ministry - the ministry of christ; past, present, and future - prayer and the prayer meeting - _the original numbering of these writings has been retained, many of the above may be had separately in pamphlet form._ "the man of god" the sentence which we have just penned occurs in paul's second epistle to his beloved son timothy--an epistle marked, as we know, by intense individuality. all thoughtful students of scripture have noticed the striking contrast between the two epistles of paul to timothy. in the first, the church is presented in its order, and timothy is instructed as to how he is to behave himself therein. in the second, on the contrary, the church is presented in its ruin. the house of god has become the great house, in the which there are vessels to dishonor as well as vessels to honor; and where, moreover, errors and evils abound--heretical teachers and false professors, on every hand. it is in this epistle of individuality, then, that the expression, "the man of god" is used with such obvious force and meaning. it is in times of general declension, of ruin and confusion that the faithfulness, devotedness, and decision of the individual man of god are specially called for. and it is a signal mercy for such an one to know that, spite of the hopeless failure of the church as a responsible witness for christ, it is the privilege of the individual to tread as holy a path, to taste as deep communion, and to enjoy as rich blessings, as could be known in the church's brightest days. this is a most encouraging and consolatory fact--a fact established by many infallible proofs, and set forth in the very passage from which our heading is taken. we shall here quote at length this passage of singular weight and power: "but continue thou in the things which thou hast learned and hast been assured of, knowing of whom thou hast learned them; and that from a child thou hast known the holy scriptures, which are able to make thee wise unto salvation through faith which is in christ jesus. all scripture is given by inspiration of god, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness, that the man of god may be _perfect_, throughly _furnished unto all good works_"[i.] ( tim. iii. - ). here we have "the man of god," in the midst of all the ruin and confusion, the heresies and moral pravities of the last days, standing forth in his own distinct individuality, "perfect, thoroughly furnished unto all good works." and, may we not ask, what more could be said in the church's brightest days? if we go back to the day of pentecost itself, with all its display of power and glory, have we anything higher, or better, or more solid than that which is set forth in the words "perfect, thoroughly furnished unto all good works?" and is it not a signal mercy for anyone who desires to stand for god, in a dark and evil day, to be told that, spite of all the darkness, the evil, the error and confusion, he possesses that which can make a child _wise_ unto salvation, and make a man _perfect_ and thoroughly furnished unto all good works? assuredly it is; and we have to praise our god for it, with full and overflowing hearts. to have access, in days like these, to the eternal fountain of inspiration, where the child and the man can meet and drink and be satisfied--that fountain so clear that the honest, simple soul can understand; and so deep that you cannot reach the bottom--that peerless, priceless volume which meets the child at his mother's knee, and makes him wise unto salvation; and meets the man in the most advanced stage of his practical career and makes him perfect and fully furnished for the exigence of every hour. however, we shall have occasion, ere we close this paper, to look more particularly at "the man of god," and to consider what is the special force and meaning of this term. that there is very much more involved in it than is ordinarily understood, we are most fully persuaded. there are three aspects in which man is presented in scripture: in the first place, we have _man in nature_; secondly, _a man in christ_; and, thirdly, we have, _the man of god_. it might perhaps be thought that the second and third are synonymous; but we shall find a very material difference between them. true, i must be a man in christ before i can be a man of god; but they are by no means interchangeable terms. let us then, in the first place, consider man in nature. this is a very comprehensive term indeed. under this title, we shall find every possible shade of character, temperament, and disposition. man, on the platform of nature, graduates between two extremes. you may view him at the very highest point of cultivation, or at the very lowest point of degradation. you may see him surrounded with all the advantages, the refinements and the so-called dignities of civilized life; or you may find him sunk in all the shameless and barbarous customs of savage existence. you may view him in the almost numberless grades, ranks, classes, and _castes_ into which the human family has distributed itself. then again, in the self-same class, or caste, you will find the most vivid contrasts, in the way of character, temper, and disposition. there, for example, is a man of such an atrocious temper that he is the very horror of every one who knows him. he is the plague of his family circle, and a perfect nuisance to society. he can be compared to a porcupine with all his quills perpetually up; and if you meet him once you will not wish to meet him again. there, on the other hand, is a man of the sweetest disposition and most amiable temper. he is just as attractive as the other is repulsive. he is a tender, loving, faithful husband; a kind, affectionate, considerate father; a thoughtful, liberal master; a kindly, genial neighbor; a generous friend, beloved by all, and justly so: the more you know him the more you must like him, and if you meet him once you are sure to wish to meet him again. further, you may meet on the platform of nature, a man who is false and deceitful to the very heart's core. he delights in lying, cheating, and deception. he is mean and contemptible in his thoughts, words and ways; a man to whom all who know him would like to give as wide a berth as possible. and, on the other hand, you may meet a man of high principle, frank, honorable, generous, upright; one who would scorn to tell a lie, or do a mean act; whose reputation is unblemished, his character unexceptionable. his word would be taken for any amount; he is one with whom all who know him would be glad to have dealings; an almost perfect natural character; a man of whom it might be said, he lacks but one thing. finally, as you pass to and fro on nature's platform, you may meet the atheist who affects to deny the existence of god; the infidel who denies god's revelation; the skeptic and the rationalist who disbelieves everything. and, on the other hand, you will meet the superstitious devotee who spends his time in prayers and fastings, ordinances, and ceremonies; and who feels sure he is earning a place in heaven by a wearisome round of religious observances that actually _un_fit him for the proper functions and responsibilities of domestic and social life. you may meet men of every imaginable shade of religious opinion, high church, low church, broad church, and no church; men who, without a spark of divine life in their souls, are contending for the powerless forms of a traditionary religion. now, there is one grand and awfully solemn fact common to all these various classes, castes, grades, shades, and conditions of men who occupy the platform of nature, and that is there is not so much as a single link between them and heaven--there is no link with the man who sits at the right hand of god--no link with the new creation. they are unconverted, and without christ. as regards god, and christ, and eternal life, and heaven, they all--however they may differ morally, socially, and religiously--stand on one common ground; they are far from god--they are out of christ--they are in their sins--they are in the flesh--they are of the world--they are on their way to hell. there is really no getting over this, if we are to listen to the voice of holy scripture. false teachers may deny it. infidels may pretend to smile contemptuously at the idea; but scripture is plain as can be. it speaks in manifold places of a fire that never shall be quenched, and of a worm that shall never die. it is the very height of folly for anyone to seek to set aside the plain testimony of the word of god on this most solemn and weighty subject. better far to let that testimony fall, with all its weight and authority, upon the heart and conscience--infinitely better to flee from the wrath to come than to attempt to deny that it is coming, and that, when it does come, it will abide forever--yes, forever, and forever, and forever! tremendous thought!--over-whelming consideration! may it speak with living power to the soul of the unconverted reader, leading him to cry out in all sincerity, "what is to be done?" yes, here is the question, "what must i do to be saved?" the divine answer is wrapped up in the following words which dropped from the lips of two of christ's very highest and most gifted ambassadors. "repent and be converted," said peter to the jew. "believe on the lord jesus christ, and thou shalt be saved and thy house," said paul to the gentile. and again, the latter of these two blessed messengers, in summing up his own ministry, thus defines the whole matter, "testifying both to the jews, and also to the greeks, repentance toward god, and faith toward our lord jesus christ." how simple! but how real! how deep! how thoroughly practical! it is not a nominal, national head belief. it is not saying, in mere flippant profession, "i believe." ah! no; it is something far deeper and more serious than this. it is much to be feared that a large amount of the professed faith of this our day is deplorably superficial, and that many who throng our preaching rooms and lecture halls are, after all, but wayside and stony ground hearers. the plough of conviction and repentance has not passed over them. the fallow ground has never been broken up. the arrow of conviction has never pierced them through and through. they have never been broken down, turned inside out--thoroughly revolutionized. the preaching of the gospel to all such is just like scattering precious seed on the hard pavement or the beaten highway. it does not penetrate. it does not enter into the depths of the soul; the conscience is not reached; the heart is not affected. the seed lies on the surface, it has not taken root, and is soon carried away. nor is this all. it is also much to be feared that many of the preachers of the present day, in their efforts to make the gospel simple, lose sight of the abiding necessity of repentance, and the essential necessity of the action of the holy ghost, without which so-called faith is a mere human exercise and passes away like the vapors of the morning, leaving the soul still in the region of nature, satisfied with itself, daubed with the untempered mortar of a merely human gospel that cries peace, peace, where there is no peace, but the most imminent danger. all this is very serious, and should lead the soul into profound exercise. we want the reader to give it his grave and immediate consideration. we would put this pointed question to him, which we entreat him to answer, now, "_have you got eternal life_?" say, dear friend, _have you_? "he that believeth on the son of god hath eternal life." grand reality! if you have not got this, you have nothing. you are still on that platform of nature of which we have spoken so much. yes, you are still there; no matter though you were the very fairest specimen to be found there--amiable, polished, affable, frank, generous, truthful, upright, honorable, attractive, beloved, learned, cultivated, and even pious after a merely human fashion. you may be all this, and yet not have a single pulsation of eternal life in your soul. this may sound harsh and severe. but it is true; and you will find out its truth sooner or later. we want you to find it out _now_. we want you to see that you are a thorough bankrupt, in the fullest sense of that word. a deed of bankruptcy has been filed against you in the high court of heaven. here are its terms, "_they that are in the flesh cannot please god_." have you ever pondered these words? have you ever seen their application to yourself? so long as you are unrepentant, unconverted, unbelieving, you cannot do a single thing to please god--not one. "in the flesh" and "on the platform of nature" mean one and the same thing; and so long as you are there, you cannot please god. "you must be born again"--must be renewed in the very deepest springs of your being: unrenewed nature is wholly unable to see, and unfit to enter, the kingdom of god. you must be born of water and of the spirit--that is by the living word of god, and of the holy ghost. there is no other way by which to enter the kingdom. it is not by self-improvement, but by new birth we reach the blessed kingdom of god. "that which is born of the flesh is flesh;" and "the flesh profiteth nothing," for "they that are in the flesh cannot please god." how distinct is all this! how pointed! how personal! how earnestly we desire that the unawakened or undecided reader should, just now, take it home to himself, as though he were the only individual upon the face of the earth. it will not do to generalize--to rest satisfied with saying, "we are all sinners." no; it is an intensely individual matter. "you _must_ be born again." if you again ask, "how?" hear the divine response from the lips of the master himself, "as moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, even so must the son of man be lifted up; that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have eternal life." here is the sovereign remedy, for every poor broken-hearted, conscience-smitten, hell-deserving sinner--for every one who owns himself lost--who confesses his sins, and judges himself--for every weary, heavy-laden, sin-burdened soul--here is god's own blessed promise: jesus died, that you might live. he was condemned, that you might be justified. he drank the cup of wrath, that you might drink the cup of salvation. behold him hanging on yonder cross for thee. see what he did for thee. believe that he satisfied, on your behalf, _all_ the claims of justice before the throne of god. see all your sins laid on him--your guilt imputed to him--your entire condition represented and disposed of by him. see his atoning death answering perfectly for all that was or ever could be brought against you. see him rising from the dead, having accomplished all. see him ascending into the heavens, bearing in his divine person the marks of his finished atonement. see him seated on the throne of god, in the very highest place of power. see him crowned with glory and honor. believe in him, and you will receive remission of sins, the gift of eternal life, the seal of the holy ghost. you will pass off the platform of nature--you will be "_a man in christ_." footnote: [i.] the reader should be informed that the word which is rendered "perfect," in the above passage, occurs but this once in the entire new testament. it is [greek: artios] (artios) and signifies, ready, complete, well fitted; as an instrument with all its strings, a machine with all its parts, a body with all its limbs, joints, muscles, and sinews. the usual word for "perfect" is [greek: teleios] (teleios) which signifies the reaching of the moral _end_, in any particular thing. part ii. to all whose eyes have been opened to see their true condition by nature, who have been brought under the convicting power of the holy ghost, who know something of the real meaning of a broken heart and a contrite spirit--to all such it must be of the deepest possible interest to know the divine secret of rest and peace. if it be true--and it is true, because god says it--that "they that are _in the flesh_ cannot please god," then how is any one to get _out of the flesh_? how can he pass off the platform of nature? how can he reach the blessed position of those to whom the holy ghost declares, "ye are not in the flesh but in the spirit"? these are momentous questions, surely. for, be it thoroughly known and ever remembered, that no improvement of our old nature is of any value whatsoever as to our standing before god. it may be all very well, so far as this life is concerned, for a man to improve himself by every means within his reach, to cultivate his mind, furnish his memory, elevate his moral tone, advance his social position. all this is quite true, so true as not to need a moment's argument. but, admitting in the fullest manner the truth of all this, it leaves wholly untouched the solemn and sweeping statement of the inspired apostle that, "they that are in the flesh cannot please god." there _must_ be a new standing altogether, and this new standing cannot be reached by any change in the old nature--by any doings or formalities, feelings, ordinances of religion, prayers, alms or sacraments. do what you will with nature and it is nature still. "that which is born of the flesh is flesh;" and do what you will with flesh you cannot make it spirit. there must be a new life--a life flowing from the new man, the last adam, who has become, in resurrection, the head of a new race. how is this most precious life to be had? hear the memorable answer--hear it, anxious reader, hear it and live. "verily, verily, i say unto you, he that heareth my word, and believeth on him that sent me, _hath_ everlasting life, and shall not come into judgment; but _is passed_ from death unto life" (john v. ). here we have a total change of standing; a passing from death to life; from a position in which there is not so much as a single link with heaven, with the new creation, with the risen man in glory, into a position in which there is not a single link with the first man, with the old creation, and this present evil world. and all this is through believing on the son of god--not _saying_ we believe, but really, truly, heartily, believing on the son of god; not by a mere intellectual faith, but believing with the heart. thus only does any one become a man in christ. every true believer is a man in christ. whether it be the convert of yesterday or the hoary headed saint of fifty or sixty years' standing as a christian, each stands in precisely the same blessed position--he is in christ. there can be no difference here. the practical _state_ may differ immensely; but the positive standing is one and the same. as on the platform of nature, you may meet with every imaginable shade, class, grade, and condition (though all having one common standing) so on the new, the divine, the heavenly platform, you may meet with every possible variety of practical condition: the greatest possible difference in intelligence, experience, and spiritual power, while all possessing the same standing before god, all being in christ. there can be no degrees as to standing, whatever there may be as to state. the convert of yesterday, and the hoary headed father in christ are both alike as to standing. each is a man in christ, and there can be no advance upon this. we sometimes hear of, "the higher christian life:" but, strictly speaking, there is no such thing as a higher or a lower christian life, inasmuch as christ is the life of every believer. it may be that those who use the term mean a right thing. they probably refer to the higher stages of the christian life--greater nearness to god, greater likeness to christ, greater power in the spirit, more devotedness, more separation from the world, more entire consecration of heart to christ. but all these things belong to the question of our _state_, not to our standing. this latter is absolute, settled, unchangeable. it is in christ--nothing less, nothing more, nothing different. if we are not in christ, we are in our sins; but if we are in christ, we cannot possibly be higher, as to standing. if the reader will turn with us, for a few moments, to i cor. xv. - , he will find some powerful teaching on this great foundation truth. the apostle speaks here of two men, "the first and the second." and let it be carefully noted that the second man is by no means federally connected with the first, but stands in contrast with him--a new, independent, divine, heavenly source of life in himself. the first man has been entirely set aside, as a ruined, guilty, outcast creature. we speak of adam federally, as the head of a race. personally, adam was saved by grace; but if we look at him from a federal standpoint, we see him a hopeless wreck. the first man is an irremediable ruin. this is proved by the fact of a _second_ man; for truly we may say of the men as of the covenants, "if the first had been found faultless, then should no place have been sought for the second." but the very fact of a second man being introduced demonstrates the hopeless ruin of the first. why a second, if aught could be made of the first? if our old adam nature was, in any wise, capable of being improved, there was no need of something new. but "they that are in the flesh cannot please god." "for in christ jesus neither circumcision availeth anything, nor uncircumcision, but a new creation" (rom. viii.: gal. vi.). there is immense moral power in all this line of teaching. it sets forth christianity in vivid and striking contrast with every form of religiousness under the sun. take judaism or any other _ism_ that ever was known or that now exists in this world, and what do you find it to be? is it not invariably something designed for the testing, or experimenting for the improvement, or advancement of the first man? unquestionably. but what is christianity? it is something entirely new--heavenly, spiritual, divine. it is based upon the cross of christ, in the which the first man came to his end, where sin was put away, judgment borne, the old man crucified and put out of god's sight forever, so far as all believers are concerned. the cross closes, for faith, the history of the first man. "i am crucified with christ," says the apostle. and again, "they that are christ's have crucified the flesh with its affections and lusts." are these mere figures of speech, or do they set forth, in the mighty words of the holy ghost, the grand fact of the entire setting aside of the first man, as utterly worthless and condemned? the latter, most assuredly. christianity starts, as it were, from the open grave of the second man, to pursue its bright career onward to eternal glory. it is, emphatically, a new creation in which there is not so much as a single shred of the old thing--for in this "all things are of god." and if "_all things_" are of god, there can be nothing of man. what rest! what comfort! what strength! what moral elevation! what sweet relief for the poor burdened soul that has been vainly seeking, for years perhaps, to find peace in self-improvement! what deliverance from the wretched thralldom of legality, in all its phases, to find out the precious secret that my guilty, ruined, bankrupt self--the very thing that i have been trying by every means in my power to improve, has been completely and forever set aside--that god is not looking for any amendment in it--that he has condemned it and put it to death in the cross of his son! what an answer is here to the monk, the ascetic, and the ritualist! oh, that it were understood in all its emancipating power! this heavenly, this divine, this spiritual christianity. surely were it only known in its living power and reality, it would deliver the soul from the thousand and one forms of corrupt religion whereby the arch-enemy and deceiver is ruining the souls of untold millions. we may truly say that satan's most successful effort against the truth of the gospel, against the christianity of the new testament, is seen in the fact of his leading unconverted people to take and apply to themselves ordinances of the christian religion, and to profess many of its doctrines. in this way he blinds their eyes to their own true condition, as utterly ruined, guilty, and undone; and strikes a deadly blow at the pure gospel of christ. the best piece that was ever put upon the "old garment" of man's ruined nature is the profession of christianity; and, the better the piece, the worse the rent. see mark ii. . let us bend an attentive ear to the following weighty words of the greatest teacher and best exponent of true christianity the world ever saw. "for _i_ through the law _am dead_ to the law, that i might live to god. _i am crucified_ with christ; nevertheless i live; yet _not i_, but christ liveth in me." mark this, "i--not i--but christ." the old "i"--"crucified." the new "i"--christ. "and the life which i now live in the flesh, i live by the faith of the son of god, who loved me and gave himself for me" (gal. ii. , ).[ii.] this, and nothing else, is christianity. it is not "the old man," the first man, becoming religious, even though the religion be the profession of the doctrines, and the adopting of the ordinances of christianity. no; it is the death and burial of the old man--the old i--and becoming a new man in christ. every true believer is a new man in christ. he has passed clean out of the old creation-standing--the old estate of sin and death, guilt and condemnation; and he has passed into a new creation-standing--a new estate of life and righteousness in a risen and glorified christ, the head of the new creation, the last adam. such is the position and unalterable standing of the feeblest believer in christ. there is absolutely no other standing for any christian. i must either be in the first man or in the second. there is no _third_ man, for the second man is the last adam. there is no middle ground. i am either _in christ_, or i am _in my sins_. but if i am in christ, i am as he is before god. "as _he is so are we_, in this world." he does not say, "as he _was_" but "as he _is_." that is, the christian is viewed by god as one with christ--the second man, in whom he delights. we do not speak of his deity, of course, which is incommunicable. that blessed one stood in the believer's stead--bore his sins, died his death, paid his penalty, represented him in every respect; took all his guilt, all his liabilities, all that pertained to him as a man in nature, stood as his substitute, in all the verity and reality of that word, and having divinely met his case, and borne his judgment, he rose from the dead, and is now the head, the representative, and the only true definition of the believer before god. to this most glorious and enfranchising truth, scripture bears the amplest testimony. the passage which we have just quoted from galatians is a most vivid, powerful, and condensed statement of it. and if the reader will turn to rom. vi. he will find further evidence. we shall quote some of the weighty sentences. "what shall we say then? shall we continue in sin, that grace may abound? far be the thought. how shall _we that are dead_ to sin, live any longer therein? know ye not, that so many of us as were baptized to jesus christ were baptized to his death? therefore we are buried with him by baptism unto death; that _like as christ_ was raised up from the dead by the glory of the father, _even so we also_ should walk in newness of life. for if we have been planted together in the likeness of his death, we shall be also of resurrection. knowing this that _our old man is crucified with him_, that the body of sin might be destroyed, that henceforth we should not serve sin. for he that is dead is freed from sin. now if we _be dead with christ_, we believe that we shall also live with him. knowing that christ being raised from the dead, dieth no more; death hath no more dominion over him. for in that he died, he died unto sin once; but in that he liveth he liveth unto god. likewise reckon ye also yourselves to be dead indeed unto sin, but alive unto god, through jesus christ our lord" (rom. vi. i- ). reader, mark especially these words in the foregoing quotation--"we that _are dead_"--"we are buried with him"--"_like as christ_ was raised ... _even so_ we also"--"our old man is crucified with him"--"dead with christ"--"dead indeed unto sin." do we really understand such utterances? have we entered into their real force and meaning? do we, in very deed, perceive their application to ourselves? these are searching questions for the heart, and needful. the real doctrine of rom. vi. is but little apprehended. there are thousands who profess to believe in the atoning virtue of the death of christ, but who do not see aught therein beyond the forgiveness of their _sins_. they do not see the crucifixion, death, and burial of the old man--the destruction of the body of sin--the condemnation of sin--the entire setting aside of the old system of things belonging to their first adam condition--in a word their perfect identification with a dead and risen christ. hence it is that we press this grand and all-important line of truth upon the attention of the reader. it lies at the very base of all true christianity, and forms an integral part of the truth of the gospel. let us hearken to further evidence on the point. hear what the apostle said to the colossians: "wherefore, if ye be _dead with christ_ from the rudiments of the world, why, _as though living in the world_, are ye subject to ordinances, after the commandments and doctrines of men, [such as] touch not, taste not, handle not"?--thus it is that human ordinances speak to us, telling us not to touch this, not to taste that, not to handle the other, as if there could possibly be any divine principle involved in such things--"which all are to perish with the using;" and "which, have indeed a show of wisdom in will worship, and humility, and neglecting of the body--not in any honor--to the satisfying of the flesh. if ye then be risen with christ, seek those things which are above, where christ sitteth on the right hand of god. set your mind on things that are above, not on things on the earth. for _ye have died_ and your life is hid with christ in god" (col. ii., iii. ). here, again, let us inquire how far we enter into the true force, meaning, and application of such words as these--"why as though _living in the world_," etc.? are we living in the world or living in heaven--which? the true christian is one who has died out of this present evil world. he has no more to do with it than christ. "like as christ ... even so we." he is dead to the law--dead to sin: alive in christ--alive to god--alive in the new creation. he belongs to heaven. he is enrolled as a citizen of heaven. his religion, his politics, his morals are all heavenly. he is a heavenly man walking on the earth, and fulfilling all the duties which belong to the varied relationships in which the hand of god has placed him, and in which the word of god most fully recognizes him, and amply guides him, such as husband, father, master, child, servant, and such like. the christian is not a monk, an ascetic, or a hermit. he is, we repeat, a heavenly, spiritual man, _in_ the world, but not _of_ it. he is like a foreigner, so far as his residence here is concerned. he is in the body, as to the fact of his condition; but not in the flesh as to the principle of his standing. he is _a man in christ_. ere closing this article, we should like to call the reader's attention to cor. xii. in it he will find, at once, the _positive standing_ and the _possible state_ of the believer. the standing is fixed and unalterable, as set forth in that one comprehensive sentence--"a man in christ." the state may graduate between the two extremes presented in the opening and closing verses of this chapter. a christian may be in the third heaven, amid the seraphic visions of that blessed and holy place; or he may, if not watchful, sink down into all the gross and evil things named in vers. , . it may be asked, "is it possible that a true child of god could ever be found in such a low moral condition?" alas! alas! reader, it is indeed possible. there is no depth of sin and folly into which a christian is not capable of plunging, if not kept by the grace of god. even the blessed apostle himself, when he came down from the third heaven, needed "a thorn in the flesh" to keep him from being "exalted above measure." we might suppose that a man who had been up in that bright and blessed region could never again feel the stirrings of pride. but the plain fact is that even the third heavens cannot cure the flesh. it is utterly incorrigible and must be judged and kept under, day by day, hour by hour, moment by moment, else it will cut out plenty of sorrowful work for us. still, the believer's standing is in christ, forever justified, accepted, perfect in him. and, moreover, he must ever judge his state by his standing, never his standing by his state. to attempt to reach the standing by my state is _legalism_; to refuse to judge my state by the standing is _antinomianism_. both--though so diverse one from the other--are alike false, alike opposed to the truth of god, alike offensive to the holy ghost, alike removed from the divine idea of "a man in christ." footnote: [ii.] the reader will distinguish between the expression "in the flesh" as used in gal. ii. , and in rom. viii. , . in the former, it simply refers to our condition as in the body. in the latter, it sets forth the principle or ground of our standing. the believer is in the body, as to the fact of his condition; but he is not in the flesh as to the principle of his standing. part iii. having considered the deeply interesting questions of "a man in nature" and "a man in christ," it remains for us now to consider, in this third and last part, the deeply practical subject of the title of this paper, namely, the man of god. it would be a great mistake to suppose that every christian is a man of god. even in paul's day--in the days of timothy, there were many who bore the christian name who were very far indeed from acquitting themselves as men of god, that is, as those who were really god's men, in the midst of the failure and error which, even then, had begun to creep in. it is the perception of this fact that renders the second epistle to timothy so profoundly interesting. in it we have what we may call ample provision for the man of god, in the day in which he is called to live--a dark, evil, and perilous day, most surely, in which all who will live godly must keep the eye steadily fixed on christ himself--his name--his person--his word, if they would make any headway against the tide. it is hardly possible to read second timothy without being struck with its intensely individual character. the very opening address is strikingly characteristic. "i thank god, whom i serve from my forefathers with pure conscience, that without ceasing i have remembrance of thee in my prayers night and day." what glowing words are these! how affecting to harken thus to one man of god pouring the deep and tender feelings of his great, large, loving heart into the heart of another man of god! the dear apostle was beginning to feel the chilling influence that was fast creeping over the professing church. he was tasting the bitterness of disappointed hopes. he found himself deserted by many who had once professed to be his friends and associates in that glorious work to which he had consecrated all the energies of his great soul. many were becoming "ashamed of the testimony of our lord, and of his prisoner." it was not that they altogether ceased to be christians, or abandoned the christian profession; but they turned their backs upon paul, and left him alone in the day of trial. now, it is under such circumstances that the heart turns, with peculiar tenderness, to individual faithfulness and affection. if one is surrounded, on all hands, by true-hearted confessors--by a great cloud of witnesses--a large army of good soldiers of jesus christ--if the tide of devotedness is flowing around one and bearing him on its bosom, he is not so dependent upon individual sympathy and fellowship. but, on the other hand, when the general condition of things is low, when the majority prove faithless, when old associates are dropping off, it is then that personal grace and true affection are specially valued. the dark background of general declension throws individual devotedness into beauteous relief. thus it is in this exquisite epistle which now lies open before us. it does the heart good to harken to the breathings of the aged prisoner of jesus christ, who can speak of serving god from his forefathers with pure conscience, and of unceasing remembrance of his beloved son and true yoke-fellow. it is specially interesting to notice that, both in reference to his own history and that of his beloved friend, paul goes back to facts of very early date--facts in their own individual paths, facts prior to their meeting one another, and prior to what we may call their church associations--important and interesting as these things surely are in their place. paul had served god, from his forefathers, with pure conscience, before he had known a fellow-christian. this he could continue to do though deserted by all his christian companions. so also, in the case of his faithful friend, he says, "i call to remembrance the unfeigned faith that is in thee, which dwelt in thy grandmother lois, and thy mother eunice: and i am persuaded that is in thee also." this is very touching and very beautiful. we cannot but be struck with such references to the previous history of those beloved men of god. the "pure conscience" of the one, and "the unfeigned faith" of the other, indicate two grand moral qualities which all must possess if they would prove true men of god in a dark and evil day. the former has its immediate reference, in all things, to the one living and true god; the latter draws all its springs from him. that, leads us to walk _before_ god; this, enables us to walk _with_ him. both together are indispensable in forming the character of the true man of god. it is utterly impossible to over-estimate the importance of keeping a pure conscience before god, in all our ways. it is positively invaluable. it leads us to refer everything to god. it keeps us from being tossed hither and thither by every wave and current of human opinion. it imparts stability and consistency to the entire course and character. we are all in imminent danger of falling under human influence--of shaping our way according to the thoughts of our fellow-man, adopting his cue, or mounting his hobby. all this is destructive of the character of the man of god. if you take your tone from your fellow, if you suffer yourself to be formed in a merely human mould, if your faith stands in the wisdom of man, if your object is to please men, then instead of being a man of god, you will become a member of a party or clique. you will lose that lovely freshness and originality so essential to the individual servant of christ, and become marked by the peculiar and dominant features of a sect. let us carefully guard against this. it has ruined many a valuable servant. many who might have proved really useful workmen in the vineyard, have failed completely through not maintaining the integrity of their individual character and path. they began with god. they started on their course in the exercise of a pure conscience, and in the pursuit of that path which a divine hand had marked out for them. there was a bloom, a freshness, and a verdure about them, most refreshing to all who came in contact with them. they were taught of god. they drew near to the eternal fountain of holy scripture and drank for themselves. perhaps they did not know much; but what they did know was real because they received it from god, and it turned to good account for "there is much food in the tillage of the poor." but, instead of going on with god, they allowed themselves to get under human influence; they got truth secondhand, and became the vendors of other men's thoughts; instead of drinking at the fountain head, they drank at the streams of human opinion; they lost originality, simplicity, freshness, and power, and became mere copyists, if not miserable caricatures. instead of giving forth those "rivers of living water" which flow from the true believer in jesus, they dropped into the barren technicalities and cut and dry common-places of mere systematized religion. beloved christian reader, all this must be sedulously guarded against. we must watch against it, pray against it, believe against it, and live against it. let us seek to serve god, with a pure conscience. let us live in his own immediate presence, in the light of his blessed countenance, in the holy intimacy of personal communion with him, through the power of the holy ghost. this, we may rest assured, is the true secret of power for the man of god, at all times, and under all circumstances. we must walk with god, in the deep and cherished sense of our own personal responsibility to him. this is what we understand by "a pure conscience." but will this tend, in the smallest degree, to lessen our sense of the value of true fellowship, of holy communion with all those who are true to christ? by no means; indeed it is the very thing which will impart power, energy, and depth of tone to the fellowship. if every "man in christ" were only acquitting himself thoroughly as "a man of god," what blessed fellowship there would be! what heart work! what glow and unmistakable power! how different from the dull formalism of a merely nominal assent to certain accredited dogmas of a party, on the one hand, and from the mere _esprit de corps_ of cliquism, on the other. there are few terms in such common use and so little understood as "fellowship." in numberless cases, it merely indicates the fact of a nominal membership in some religious denomination--a fact which furnishes no guarantee whatsoever of living communion with christ, or personal devotedness to his cause. if all who are nominally "in fellow ship" were acquitting themselves thoroughly as men of god, what a very different condition of things we should be privileged to witness! but what is fellowship? it is, in its very highest expression, having one common object with god, and taking part in the same portion; and that object, that portion, is christ--christ known and enjoyed through the holy ghost. this is fellowship with god. what a privilege! what a dignity! what unspeakable blessedness! to be allowed to have a common object and a common portion with god himself! to delight in the one in whom he delights! there can be nothing higher, nothing better, nothing more precious than this. not even in heaven itself shall we know aught beyond this. our own condition will, thank god, be vastly different. we shall be done with a body of sin and death, and be clothed with a body of glory. we shall be done with a sinful, sorrowful, distracting world, where all is directly opposed to god and to us, and we shall breathe the pure, invigorating atmosphere of that bright and blessed world above. for, in so far as our fellowship is real, it is now as it shall be then, "with the father and with his son jesus christ"--"in the light," and by the power of the holy ghost. thus much as to our fellowship with god. and, as regards our fellowship one with another, it is simply as we walk in the light; as we read, "if we walk in the light, as he is in the light, we have fellowship one with another, and the blood of jesus christ his son cleanseth us from all sin" (i john i. ). we can only have fellowship one with another as we walk in the immediate presence of god. there may be a vast amount of mere intercourse without one particle of divine fellowship. alas! alas! a great deal of what passes for christian fellowship is nothing more than the merest religious gossip--the vapid, worthless, soul-withering chit-chat of the religious world, than which nothing can be more miserably unprofitable. true christian fellowship can only be enjoyed in the light. it is when we are individually walking with god, in the power of personal communion, that we really have fellowship one with another, and this fellowship consists in real heart enjoyment of christ as our one object, our common portion. it is not heartless traffic in certain favorite doctrines which we receive to hold in common. it is not morbid sympathy with those who think, and see, and feel with us in some favorite theory or dogma. it is something quite different from all this. it is delighting in christ, in common with all those who are walking in the light. it is attachment to him, to his person, his name, his word, his cause, his people. it is joint consecration of heart and soul to that blessed one who loved us and washed us from our sins in his own blood, and brought us into the light of god's presence, there to walk with him and with one another. this, and nothing less, is christian fellowship; and where this is really understood it will lead us to pause and consider what we say when we declare, in any given case, "such an one is in fellowship." but we must proceed with our epistle, and there see what full provision there is for the man of god, however dark the day may be in which his lot is cast. we have seen something of the importance--yea, rather, we should say the indispensable necessity of "a pure conscience," and "unfeigned faith," in the moral equipment of god's man. these qualities lie at the very base of the entire edifice of practical godliness which must ever characterize the genuine man of god. but there is more than this. the edifice must be erected as well as the foundation laid. the man of god has to work on amid all sorts of difficulties, trials, sorrows, disappointments, obstacles, questions and controversies. he has his niche to fill, his path to tread, his work to do. come what may, he must serve. the enemy may oppose; the world may frown; the church may be in ruins around him; false brethren may thwart, hinder, and desert; strife, controversy, and division may arise and darken the atmosphere; still the man of god must move on, regardless of all these things, working, serving, testifying, according to the sphere in which the hand of god has placed him, and according to the gift bestowed upon him. how is this to be done? not only by keeping a pure conscience and the exercise of an unfeigned faith--priceless, indispensable qualities! but, further, he has to harken to the following weighty word of exhortation--"wherefore i put thee in remembrance that thou stir up the gift of god, which is in thee by the putting on of my hands." the gift must be stirred up, else it may become useless if allowed to lie dormant. there is great danger of letting the gift drop into disuse through the discouraging influence of surrounding circumstances. a gift unused will soon become useless; whereas, a gift stirred up and diligently used grows and expands. it is not enough to possess a gift, we must wait upon the gift, cultivate it, and exercise it. this is the way to improve it. and observe the special force of the expression, "the gift of god." in eph. iv. we read of "the gift of christ," and there, too, we find all the gifts, from the highest to the lowest range, flowing down from christ the risen and glorified head of his body, the church. but in second timothy, we have it defined as "the gift of god." true it is--blessed be his holy name!--our lord christ is god over all, blessed forever, so that the gift of christ is the gift of god. but we may rest assured there is never any distinction in scripture without a difference; and hence there is some good reason for the expression "gift of god." we doubt not it is in full harmony with the nature and object of the epistle in which it occurs. it is "the gift of god" communicated to "the man of god" to be used by him notwithstanding the hopeless ruin of the professing church, and spite of all the difficulty, darkness, and discouragement of the day in which his lot is cast. the man of god must not allow himself to be hindered in the diligent cultivation and exercise of his gift, though everything seems to look dark and forbidding, for "god hath not given us the spirit of fear; but of power and of love, and of a sound mind." here we have "god" again introduced to our thoughts, and that, too, in a most gracious manner, as furnishing his man with the very thing he needs to meet the special exigence of his day--"the spirit of power, and of love, and of a sound mind." marvelous combination! truly, an exquisite compound after the art of the apothecary! power, love, and wisdom! how perfect! not a single ingredient too much. not one too little. if it were merely a spirit of power, it might lead one to carry things with a high hand. were it merely a spirit of love, it might lead one to sacrifice truth for peace' sake; or indolently to tolerate error and evil rather than give offence. but the power is softened by the love; and the love is strengthened by the power; and, moreover, the spirit of wisdom comes in to adjust both the power and the love. in a word, it is a divinely perfect and beautiful provision for the man of god--the very thing he needs for "the last days" so perilous, so difficult, so full of all sorts of perplexing questions and apparent contradictions. if one were to be asked what he would consider most necessary for such days as these? surely he should, at once, say, "power, love, and soundness of mind." well, blessed be god, these are the very things which he has graciously given to form the character, shape the way, and govern the conduct of the man of god, right on to the end. but there is further provision and further exhortation for the man of god. "be not thou therefore ashamed of the testimony of our lord, nor of me his prisoner; but be thou partaker of the afflictions of the gospel according to the power of god." in pentecostal days, when the rich and mighty tide of divine grace was flowing in, and bearing thousands of ransomed souls upon its bosom; when all were of one heart and one mind; when those outside were overawed by the extraordinary manifestations of divine power, it was rather a question of partaking of the _triumphs_ of the gospel, than its afflictions. but in the days contemplated in second timothy, all is changed. the beloved apostle is a lonely prisoner at rome; all in asia had forsaken him; hymeneus and philetus are denying the resurrection; all sorts of heresies, errors, and evils are creeping in; the landmarks are in danger of being swept away by the tide of apostasy and corruption. in the face of all this, the man of god has to brace himself up for the occasion. he has to endure hardness; to hold fast the form of sound words; he has to keep the good thing committed to him; to be strong in the grace that is in christ jesus; to keep himself _disentangled_ --however he may be _engaged_; he must keep himself free as a soldier; he must cling to god's sure foundation; he must purge himself from the dishonorable vessels in the great house; he must _flee_ youthful lusts, and _follow_ righteousness, faith, love, peace, with them that call on the lord out of a pure heart. he must avoid foolish and unlearned questions. he must turn away from formal and heartless professors. he must be thoroughly furnished for all good works, perfectly equipped through a knowledge of the holy scriptures. he must preach the word; be instant in season and out of season. he must watch in all things; endure afflictions; and do the work of an evangelist. what a category for the man of god! who is sufficient for these things? where is the spiritual power to be had for such works? it is to be had at the mercy-seat. it is to be found in earnest, patient, believing, waiting upon the living god, and in no other way. all our springs are in him. we have only to draw upon him. he is sufficient for the darkest day. difficulties are nothing to him, and they are bread for faith. yes, beloved reader, difficulties of the most formidable nature are simply bread for faith, and the man of faith will develop and grow strong thereby. unbelief says, "there is a lion in the way;" but faith slays the lion that roars along the path of the nazarite of god. it is the privilege of the true believer to rise above all the hostile influences which surround him, no matter what they are, or from whence they spring; and, in the calmness and brightness of the divine presence, enjoy as high communion, and taste as rich and rare privileges as ever were known in the church's brightest days. let us remember this--every man of god needs to remember it: there is no comfort, no peace, no strength, no moral power, no true elevation to be derived from looking at the ruins. we must look up out of the ruins to the place where our lord christ has taken his seat, at the right hand of the majesty in the heavens. or rather, to speak more according to our true position, we should look down from our place in the heavens upon all the ruins of earth. to realize our place in christ, and to be occupied in heart and soul with him, is the true secret of power to carry ourselves as men of god. to have christ ever before us--his work for the conscience, his person for the heart, his word for the path, is the one grand, sovereign, divine remedy for a ruined self, a ruined world, a ruined church. but we close. very gladly would we linger, in company with the reader, over the contents of this most precious second timothy. truly refreshing would it be to dwell upon all its touching allusions, its earnest appeals, its weighty exhortations. but this would demand a volume, and hence we must leave the christian reader to study the epistle for himself, praying that the eternal spirit who indited it may unfold and apply it in living power to his soul, so that he may be enabled to acquit himself as an earnest, faithful, whole-hearted man of god and servant of christ, in the midst of a scene of hollow profession, and heartless worldly religiousness. may the good lord stir us all up to a more thorough consecration of ourselves, in spirit, soul, and body--all we are and all we have--to his service! we think we can really say we long for this--long for it, in the deep sense of our lack of it--long for it, more intensely, as we grow increasingly sick of the unreal condition of things within and around us. o beloved christian, let us earnestly, believingly, and perseveringly cry to our own ever gracious god to make us more real, more whole-hearted, more thoroughly devoted to our lord jesus christ in all things. in the father's house "the wanderer no more will roam, the lost one to the fold hath come, the prodigal is welcomed home, o lamb of god, through thee! "though clothed in rags, by sin defiled, the father did embrace his child; and i am pardoned, reconciled, o lamb of god, through thee! "it is the father's joy to bless; his love has found for me a dress, a robe of spotless righteousness, o lamb of god, in thee! "and now my famished soul is fed, a feast of love for me is spread, i feed upon the children's bread, o lamb of god, in thee! "yea, in the fulness of his grace, god put me in the children's place, where i may gaze upon his face, o lamb of god, in thee! "not half his love can i express, yet, lord, with joy my lips confess, this blessed portion i possess, o lamb of god, in thee! "thy precious name it is i bear, in thee i am to god brought near, and all the father's love i share, o lamb of god, in thee!" decision for christ in approaching the subject of "decision for christ," there are two or three obstacles which lie in our way--two or three difficulties which hang around the question, which we would fain remove, if possible, in order that the reader may be able to view the matter on its own proper ground, and in its own proper bearings. in the first place, we encounter a serious difficulty in the fact that very few of us, comparatively, are in a condition of soul to appreciate the subject, or to suffer a word of exhortation thereon. we are, for the most part, so occupied with the question of our soul's salvation,--so taken up with matters affecting ourselves, our peace, our liberty, our comfort, our deliverance from the wrath to come, our interest in christ,--that we have but little heart for aught that purely concerns christ himself--his name, his person, his cause, his glory. there are, we may say, two things which lie at the foundation of all true decision for christ, namely, a conscience purged by the blood of jesus, and a heart that bows with reverent submission to the authority of his word in all things. now we do not mean to dwell upon these things in this paper; first, because we are anxious to get at once to our immediate theme; and secondly, because we have so often dwelt on the subject of establishing the conscience in the peace of the gospel, and on setting before the heart the paramount claims of the word of god. we merely refer to them here for the purpose of reminding the reader that they are absolutely essential materials in forming the basis of decision for christ. if my conscience is ill at ease, if i am in doubt as to my salvation, if i am filled with "anxious thought" as to whether i am a child of god or not, decision for christ is out of the question. i must know that christ died for me before i can intelligently and happily live for him. so, also, if there be any reserve in the heart as to my entire subjection to the authority of christ as my lord and master; if i am keeping some chamber of my heart, be it ever so remote, ever so small, closed against the light of his word, it must of necessity hinder my whole-hearted decision for him in this world. in a word, i must know that _christ is mine_ and _i am his_ ere my course down here can be one of unswerving, uncompromising decision for him. if the reader hesitates as to this, if he is still in doubt and darkness, let him pause and turn directly to the cross of the son of god and hearken to what the holy spirit declares as to all those who simply put their trust therein. let him drink into his inmost soul these words: "be it known unto you, therefore, that through this man is preached unto you the forgiveness of sins; and by him _all_ that _believe are_ justified from _all_ things from which ye could not be justified by the law of moses." yes, reader, these are the glad tidings for you. "_all_, from _all_," by faith in a crucified and risen lord. but we see another difficulty in the way of our subject. we greatly fear that while we speak of decision for christ, some of our readers may suppose that we are contending for some notion or set of notions of our own; that we are pressing some peculiar views or principles to which we vainly and foolishly venture to apply the imposing title of "decision for christ." all this we do most solemnly disclaim. the words which stand at the head of this paper are the simple expression of our thesis. we do not contend for attachment to sect, party, or denomination; for adherence to the doctrines or commandments of men. we write in the immediate presence of him who searcheth the hearts and trieth the reins of the children of men, and we distinctly avow that our one object is to urge upon the christian reader the necessity of decision for christ. we would not, if we know ourselves, pen a single line to swell the ranks of a party, or draw over adherents to any particular doctrinal creed or any special form of church polity. we are impressed with the conviction that where christ has his right place in the heart, all will be right; and that where he has not, there will be nothing right. and further, we believe that nothing but plain decision for christ can effectually preserve the soul from the fatal influences that are at work around us in the professing church. mere orthodoxy cannot preserve us. attachment to religious forms will not avail in the present fearful struggle. it is, we feel persuaded, a simple question of christ as our _life_, and christ as our _object_. may the spirit of god now enable us to ponder aright the subject of "decision for christ"! it is well to bear in mind that there are certain great truths--certain immutable principles--which underlie all the dispensations of god from age to age and which remain untouched by all the failure, the folly and the sin of man. it is on these great moral truths, these foundation principles, that faith lays hold, and in them finds its strength and sustenance. dispensations change and pass away, men prove unfaithful in their varied positions of stewardship and responsibility, but the word of the lord endureth forever. it never fails. "forever, o lord, thy word is settled in heaven." and again, "thou hast magnified thy word above all thy name."[iii.] nothing can touch the eternal truth of god, and therefore what we want at all times is to give that truth its proper place in our hearts; to let it act on our conscience, form our character, and shape our way. "thy word have i hid in my heart, that i might not sin against thee." "man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of the lord." this is true security. here lies the real secret of decision for christ. what god has spoken must govern us in the most absolute manner ere our path can be said to be one of plain decision. there may be tenacious adherence to our own notions, obstinate attachment to the prejudices of the age, a blind devotion to certain doctrines and practices resting on a traditionary foundation, certain opinions which we have received to hold without ever inquiring as to whether or not there be any authority whatever for such opinions in holy scripture. there may be all this and much more, and yet not one atom of genuine decision for christ. now we feel we cannot do better than furnish our readers with an example or two drawn from the page of inspired history, which will do more to illustrate and enforce our theme than aught that we could possibly advance. and first, then, let us turn to the book of esther, and there contemplate for a few moments the instructive history of "mordecai the jew." this very remarkable man lived at a time in which the jewish economy had failed through the unfaithfulness and disobedience of the jewish people. the gentile was in power. the relationship between jehovah and israel could no longer be publicly acknowledged. the faithful jew had but to hang his harp on the willows and sigh over the faded light of other days. the chosen seed was in exile; the city and temple where their fathers worshiped were in ruins, and the vessels of the lord's house were in a strange land. such was the outward condition of things in the day in which mordecai's lot was cast. but in addition to this there was a man very near the throne occupying only the second place in the empire, sitting beside the very fountain-head of authority, possessing princely wealth, and wielding almost boundless influence. to this great man, strange to say, the poor exiled jew sternly refuses to bow. nothing will induce him to yield a single mark of respect to the second man in the kingdom. he will save the life of ahasuerus, but he will not bow to haman. reader, why was this? was this blind obstinacy, or bold decision--which? in order to determine this we must inquire as to the real root or principle of mordecai's acting. if, indeed, there was no authority for his conduct in the law of god, then must we at once pronounce it to have been blind obstinacy, foolish pride, or, it may have been, envy of a man in power. but if, on the other hand, there be within the covers of the five inspired books of moses a plain authority for mordecai's deportment in this matter, then must we, without hesitation, pronounce his conduct to have been the rare and exquisite fruit of attachment to the law of his god, and uncompromising decision for him and his holy authority. this makes all the difference. if it be merely a matter of private opinion,--a question concerning which each one may lawfully adopt his own view,--then, verily, might such a line of conduct be justly termed the most narrow-minded bigotry. we hear a great deal now-a-days about narrow-mindedness on the one hand, and large-heartedness on the other. but as a roman orator, over two thousand years ago, exclaimed in the senate-house of rome, "conscript fathers: long since, indeed, we have lost the true names of things," so may we, in the bosom of the professing church, at the close of the nineteenth century, repeat, with far greater force, "long since we have lost the true names of things." for what do men now call bigotry and narrow-mindedness? a faithful clinging to and carrying out of "thus saith the lord." and what do they designate large-heartedness? a readiness to sacrifice truth on the altar of politeness and civility. reader, be thou fully assured that thus it is at this solemn moment. we do not want to be sour or cynical, morose or gloomy; but we must speak the truth if we are to speak at all. we desire that the tongue may be hushed in silence, and the pen may drop from the hand, if we could basely cushion the plain, bold, unvarnished truth through fear of scattering our readers, or to avoid the sneer of the infidel. we cannot shut our eyes to the solemn fact that god's truth is being trampled in the dust--that the name of jesus is despised and rejected. we have only to pass from city to city, and from town to town, of highly-favored england, and read upon the walls the melancholy proofs of the truth of our assertions. truth is flung aside, in cold contempt. the name of jesus is little set by. on the other hand, man is exalted, his reason deified, his will indulged. where must all this end? "in the blackness of darkness forever." how refreshing, in the face of all this, to ponder the history of mordecai the jew! it is very plain that he knew little and cared less about the thoughts of men on the question of narrow-mindedness. he obeyed the word of the lord; and this we must be allowed to call real breadth of mind, true largeness of heart. for what, after all, is a narrow mind? a narrow mind we hold to be a mind which refuses to open itself to admit the truth of god. and what, on the contrary, is a large and liberal heart? a heart expanded by the truth and grace of god. let us not be scared away from decision in the path of obedience by the scornful epithets which men have bestowed upon that path. it is a path of peace and purity, a path where the light of an approving conscience is enjoyed, and upon which the beams of divine favor ever pour themselves in undimmed lustre. but why did mordecai refuse to bow to haman? was there any great principle at stake? was it merely a whim of his own? had he a "thus saith the lord" for his warrant in refusing a single nod of the head to the proud amalekite? yes. let us turn to the seventeenth chapter of the book of exodus, and there we read, "and the lord said unto moses, write this for a memorial in a book, and rehearse it in the ears of joshua: for i will utterly put out the remembrance of amalek from under heaven. and moses built an altar, and called the name of it jehovah-nissi; for he said, because the lord hath sworn that the lord will have war with amalek from generation to generation."[iv.] here, then, was mordecai's authority for not bowing to haman the agagite. a faithful jew could not do reverence to one with whom jehovah was at war. the heart might plead a thousand excuses and urge a thousand reasons. it might seek an easy path for itself on the plea that the jewish system was in ruins and the amalekite in power, and that therefore it was worse than useless, yea, it was positively absurd, to maintain such lofty ground when the glory of israel was gone and the amalekite was in the place of authority. "of what use," it might be argued, "can it be to uphold the standard when all is gone to pieces? you are only making your degradation more remarkable by the pertinacious refusal to bow your head. would it not be better to give just one nod? that will settle the matter. haman will be satisfied, and you and your people will be safe. do not be obstinate. show a tendency to be courteous. do not stand up in that dogged way for a thing so manifestly non-essential. besides, you should remember that the command in exodus xvii. was only to be rehearsed in the ears of joshua, and only had its true application in his bright and palmy days. it was never meant for the ears of an exile, never intended to apply in the days of israel's desolation." all this, and much beside, might have been urged on mordecai; but ah, the answer was simple: "god hath spoken. this is enough for me. true, we are a scattered people; but the word of the lord is not scattered. he has not reversed his word about amalek, nor entered into a treaty of peace with him. jehovah and amalek are still at war, and amalek stands before me in the person of this haughty agagite. how can i bow to one with whom jehovah is at war? how can i do homage to a man whom the faithful samuel would hew in pieces before the lord?" "well, then," it might be further urged upon this devoted jew, "you will all be destroyed. you must either bow or perish." the answer is still most simple: "i have nothing to do with consequences. they are in the hand of god. obedience is my path, the results are with him. it is better to die with a good conscience than live with a bad one. it is better to go to heaven with an uncondemning heart than remain upon earth with a heart that would make me a coward. god has spoken. i can do no otherwise. may the lord help me! amen." oh, how well we can understand the mode in which this faithful jew would be assaulted by the enemy. nothing but the grace of god can ever enable any one to maintain a deportment of unflinching decision at a moment in which everything within and around is against us. true it is, we know that it is better to suffer anything than deny our lord or fly in the face of his commandments; but yet how little are some of us prepared to endure a single sneer, a single scornful look, a single contemptuous expression, for christ's sake. and perhaps there are few things harder, for some of us at least, to bear than to be reproached on the ground of narrow-mindedness and bigotry. we naturally like to be thought large-hearted and liberal. we like to be accounted men of enlightened mind, sound judgment, and comprehensive grasp. but we must remember that we have no right to be liberal at our master's expense. we have simply to obey. thus it was with mordecai. he stood like a rock, and allowed the whole tide of difficulty and opposition to roll over him. he would not bow to the amalekite, let the consequence be what it might. obedience was his path. the results were with god. and look at the result! in one moment the tide was turned. the proud amalekite fell from his lofty eminence, and the exiled jew was lifted from his sackcloth and ashes and placed next the throne. haman exchanged his wealth and dignities for a gallows; mordecai exchanged his sackcloth for a royal robe. now it may not always happen that the reward of simple obedience will be as speedy and as signal as in mordecai's case. and moreover, we may say that we are not mordecais, nor are we placed in his position. but the principle holds good, whoever and wherever we are. there is not one of us, however obscure or insignificant, that has not a sphere within which our influence is felt for good or for evil. and besides, independent altogether of our circumstances and the apparent results of our conduct, we are called upon to obey implicitly the word of the lord--to have his word hidden in our hearts--to refuse with unswerving decision, to do or say aught that the word of the living god condemns. "how can i do this great wickedness, and sin against god?" this should be the language, whether it be the question of a child tempted to steal a lump of sugar, or the most momentous step in evil that one can be tempted to take. the strength and moral security of mordecai's position lay in this fact, that he had the word of god for his authority. had it not been so, his conduct would have been senseless in the extreme. to have refused the usual expression of respect to one in high authority, without some weighty reason, could only be regarded as the most unmeaning obstinacy. but the moment you introduce a "thus saith the lord," the matter is entirely changed. the word of the lord endureth forever. the divine testimonies do not fade away or change with the times and seasons. heaven and earth shall pass away, but one jot or tittle of what our god hath spoken shall never pass away. hence, what had been rehearsed in the ears of joshua, as he rested in triumph under the banner of jehovah, was designed to govern the conduct of mordecai, though clothed in sackcloth as an exile, in the city of shushan. ages and generations had passed away; the days of the judges and the days of the kings had run their course; but the commandment of the lord with respect to amalek had lost--could lose--none of its force. "the lord _hath sworn_ that the lord will have war with amalek," not merely in the days of joshua, nor in the days of the judges, nor in the days of the kings, but "from generation to generation." such was the record--the imperishable and immutable record of god; and such was the plain, solid and unquestionable foundation of mordecai's conduct. and here let us say a few words as to the immense importance of entire submission to the word of god. we live in a day which is plainly marked by strong self-will. man's reason, man's will and man's interest are working together, with appalling success, to ignore the authority of holy scripture. so long as the statements of the word of god chime in with man's reason, so long as they do not run counter to his will, and are not subversive of his interests, so long will he tolerate them; or, it may be, he will quote them with a measure of respect, or at least with self-complacency; but the moment it becomes a question of scripture _versus_ reason, will or interest, the former is either silently ignored or contemptuously rejected. this is a very marked and solemn feature of the days that are now passing over our heads. it behooves christians to be aware of it, and to be on their watch-tower. we fear that very few, comparatively, are truly alive to the real state of the moral atmosphere which enwraps the religious world. we do not refer here so much to the bold attacks of infidel writers. to these we have alluded elsewhere. what we have now before us is rather the cool indifference on the part of professing christians as to scripture; the little power which pure truth wields over the conscience; the way in which the edge of scripture is blunted or turned aside. you quote passage after passage from the inspired volume, but it seems like the pattering of rain upon the window: the _reason_ is at work, the _will_ is dominant, _interest_ is at stake, human opinions bear sway, god's truth is practically, if not in so many words, set aside. all this is deeply solemn. we know of few things more dangerous than intellectual familiarity with the letter of scripture where the spirit of it does not govern the conscience, form the character, and shape the way. we want to tremble at the word of god, to bow down in reverential submission to its holy authority in all things. a single line of scripture ought to be sufficient for our souls on any point, even though, in carrying it out, we should have to move athwart the opinions of the highest and best of men. may the lord raise up many faithful and true-hearted witnesses in these last days,--men like the faithful mordecai,--who would rather ascend a gallows than bow to an amalekite! for the further illustration of our theme, we shall ask the reader to turn to the sixth chapter of the book of daniel. there is a special charm and interest in the history of these living examples presented to us in the holy scriptures. they tell us how the truth of god was acted upon, in other days, by men of like passions with ourselves; they prove to us that in every age there have been men who so prized the truth, so reverenced the word of the living god, that they would rather face death, in its most appalling forms, than to depart one hair's breadth from the narrow line laid down by the authoritative voice of their lord and master. it is healthful to be brought into contact with such men--healthful at all times, but peculiarly so in days like the present, when there is so much laxity and easy-going profession--so much of mere theory--when every one is allowed to go his own way, and hold his own opinion, provided always that he does not interfere with the opinions of his neighbor--when the commandments of god seem to have so little weight, so little power over the heart and conscience. tradition will get a hearing; public opinion will be respected; anything and everything, in short, but the plain and positive statements of the word of god, will get a place in the thoughts and opinions of men. at such a time, it is, we repeat, at once healthful and edifying to muse over the history of men like mordecai the jew, and daniel the prophet, and scores of others, in whose estimation a single line of holy scripture rose far above all the thoughts of men, the decrees of governors, and the statutes of kings, and who declared plainly that they had nothing whatever to do with consequences where the word of the lord was concerned. absolute submission to the divine command is that which alone becomes the creature. it is not, be it observed and well remembered, that any man or any number of men have any right to demand subjection to their decisions or decrees. no man has any right to enforce his opinions upon his fellow. this is plain enough, and we have to bless god for the inestimable privilege of civil and religious liberty, as enjoyed under this government. but what we urge upon our readers, just now, is plain decision for christ, and implicit subjection to his authority, irrespective of everything, and regardless of consequences. this is what we do most earnestly desire for ourselves and for all the people of god in these last days. we long for that condition of soul, that attitude of heart, that quality of conscience, which shall lead us to bow down in implicit subjection to the commandments of our lord and saviour jesus christ. no doubt there are difficulties, stumbling blocks, and hostile influences to be encountered. it may be said, for instance, that "it is very difficult for one, now-a-days, to know what is really true and right. there are so many opinions and so many ways, and good men differ so in judgment about the simplest and plainest matters, and yet they all profess to own the bible as the only standard of appeal; and, moreover, they all declare that their one desire is to do what is right, and to serve the lord, in their day and generation. how, then, is one to know what is true or what is false, seeing that you will find the very best of men ranged on opposite sides of the same question?" the answer to all this is very simple. "if thine eye be single thy whole body shall be full of light." but, most assuredly, my eye is not single if i am looking at men, and reasoning on what i see in them. a single eye rests simply on the lord and his word. men differ, no doubt--they have differed, and they ever will differ, but i am to harken to the voice of my lord and do his will. his word is to be my light and my authority, the girdle of my loins in action, the strength of my heart in service, my only warrant for moving hither and thither, the stable foundation of all my ways. if i were to attempt to shape my way according to the thoughts of men, where should i be? how uncertain and unsatisfactory would my course be! if i really want to be guided aright, my god will surely guide me; but if i am looking to men, if i am governed by mixed motives, if i am seeking my own ends and interests, if i am seeking to please my fellows, then, undoubtedly, my body shall be full of darkness, heavy clouds shall settle down upon my pathway, and uncertainty mark all my goings. christian reader, think of these things. think deeply of them. depend upon it they have a just claim upon your attention. do you earnestly desire to follow your lord? do you really aim at something beyond mere empty profession, cold orthodoxy, or mechanical religiousness? do you sigh for reality, depth, energy, fervor, and whole-heartedness? then make christ your one object, his word your rule, his glory your aim. may the blessed spirit be pleased to use for the furtherance of these ends our meditation on the interesting narrative of "daniel the prophet." "it pleased darius to set over the kingdom a hundred and twenty princes, which should be over the whole kingdom; and over these, three presidents, of whom daniel was first; that the princes might give accounts unto them, and the king should have no damage. then this daniel was preferred above the presidents and princes, because an excellent spirit was in him; and the king thought to set him over the whole realm. then the presidents and princes sought to find occasion against daniel concerning the kingdom; but they could find none occasion or fault; forasmuch as he was faithful, neither was there any error or fault found in him" (dan. vi. i- ). what a testimony! how truly refreshing to the heart! "no error or fault!" even his most bitter enemies could not put their finger upon a single blemish in his character, or a flaw in his practical career. truly this was a rare and admirable character--a bright witness for the god of israel, even in the dark days of the babylonish captivity--an unanswerable proof of the fact that no matter where we are situated, or how we are circumstanced, no matter how unfavorable our position, or how dark the day in which our lot is cast, it is our happy privilege so to carry ourselves, in all the details of daily life, as to give no occasion to the enemy to speak reproachfully. how sad when it is otherwise! how humiliating when those who make a high profession are found constantly breaking down in the most commonplace affairs of domestic and commercial life! there are few things which more tend to discourage the heart than that. no doubt worldly people are only too ready to find occasion against those who profess the name of jesus; and, further, we have to remember that there are two sides to every question, and that, very frequently, a broad margin must be left for exaggeration, high coloring, and false impressions. but still, it is the christian's plain duty so to walk in every position and relationship of life, as that "no error or fault" may be found in him. we should not make any excuses for ourselves. the duties of our situation, whatever it may happen to be, should be scrupulously performed. a careless manner, a slovenly habit, an unprincipled mode of acting, on the part of the christian, is a serious damage to the cause of christ, and a dishonor to his holy name. and, on the other hand, diligence, earnestness, punctuality, and fidelity, bring glory to that name. and this should ever be the christian's object. he should not aim at his own interest, his own reputation, or his own advancement, in seeking to carry himself aright in his family and in his calling in life. true, it will promote his interest, establish his reputation, and further his progress, to be upright and diligent in all his ways; but none of these things should ever be his motive. he is to be ever and only governed by the one thing, namely, to please and honor his lord and master. the standard which the holy ghost has set before us, as to all these things, is furnished in the words of the apostle to the philippians, "that ye may be blameless and harmless, the sons of god without rebuke in the midst of a crooked and perverse nation, among whom ye shine as lights in the world." we should not be satisfied with anything less than this. "they could find none occasion nor fault, forasmuch as he was faithful, neither was there any error or fault found in him." noble testimony! would that it were more called forth, in this our day, by the deportment, the habits, the temper, and ways of all those who call themselves christians. but there was one point in which daniel's enemies felt they could lay hold of him. "then said these men, we shall not find any occasion against this daniel, except we find it against him concerning _the law of his god_." here was a something in the which occasion might be found to ruin this beloved and honored servant of god. it appears that daniel had been in the habit of praying three times a day with his windows open toward jerusalem. this fact was well known, and was speedily laid hold of, and turned to account. "then these presidents and princes assembled together to the king, and said thus unto him, king darius, live for ever. all the presidents of the kingdom, the governors, and the princes, the counsellors, and the captains, have consulted together to establish a royal statute, and to make a firm decree, that whosoever shall ask a petition of any god or man for thirty days, save of thee, o king, he shall be cast into the den of lions. now, o king, establish the decree, and sign the writing, that it be not changed, according to the law of the medes and persians, which altereth not. wherefore king darius signed the writing and the decree." here, then, was a deep plot, a subtle snare, laid for the blameless and harmless daniel. how would he act in the face of all this? would he not feel it right to lower the standard? well, if the standard was something of his own, he might surely lower it, and perhaps he ought. but if it were something divine--if his conduct was based upon the truth of god, then clearly it was his place to hold it up as high as ever, regardless of statutes, decrees, and writings established, signed, and countersigned. the whole question hinged upon this. just as in the case of mordecai the jew, the question hinged upon the one point of whether he had any divine warrant for refusing to bow to haman; so, in the case of daniel the prophet, the question was, had he any divine authority for praying toward jerusalem. it certainly seemed strange and odd. many might have felt disposed to say to him, "why persist in this practice? what need is there for opening your windows and praying toward jerusalem, in such a public manner? can you not wait until night has drawn her sable curtain around you, and your closet door has shut you in, and then pour out your heart to your god? this would be prudent, judicious, and expedient. and, surely, your god does not exact this of you. he does not regard time, place, or attitude. all times and places are alike to him. are you wise--are you right, in persisting in such a line of action under such circumstances? it was all well enough before this decree was signed, when you could pray when and as you thought right; but now it does seem like the most culpable fatuity and blind obstinacy to persevere; it is as though you really courted martyrdom." all this, and much more, we may easily conceive, might be suggested to the mind of the faithful jew; but still the grand question remained, "what saith the scripture?" was there any divine reason for daniel's praying toward jerusalem? assuredly there was! in the first place, jehovah had said to solomon, in reference to the temple at jerusalem, "mine eyes and my heart shall be there perpetually." jerusalem was god's earthly centre. it was, it is, and ever shall be. true, it was in ruins--the temple was in ruins; but god's word was not in ruins; and here is faith's simple but solid warrant. king solomon had said, at the dedication of the temple, hundreds of years before daniel's time, "if thy people sin against thee, (for there is no man that sinneth not,) and thou be angry with them, and deliver them over before their enemies, and they carry them away captive unto a land far off or near. yet if they bethink themselves in the land whither they are carried captive, and turn and pray unto thee, in the land of their captivity, saying, we have sinned, we have done amiss, and have dealt wickedly; if they return to thee with all their heart and with all their soul in the land of their captivity, whither they have carried them captive, and pray toward their land, which thou gavest unto their fathers, and toward the city which thou hast chosen, and toward the house which i have built for thy name: then hear thou from the heavens, even from thy dwelling-place, their prayer and their supplications, and maintain their cause, and forgive thy people which have sinned against thee" ( chron. vi. - ). now this was precisely what daniel was doing--this was the ground he took. he was a captive exile, but his heart was at jerusalem, and his eyes followed his heart. if he could not sing the songs of zion, he could at least breathe his prayers toward zion's hill. if his harp was on the willows at babylon, his fond affections turned toward the city of god, now a heap of ruins, but ere long to be an eternal excellency, "the joy of the whole earth." it mattered not to him that a decree had been signed by earth's greatest monarch, forbidding him to pray toward the city of his fathers and to his father's god. it mattered not to him that the lion's den was yawning to receive him, and the lion's jaws ready to devour him. like his brother mordecai, he had nothing to do with consequences. mordecai would rather mount the gallows than bow to haman, and daniel would rather descend to the lion's den than cease to pray to jehovah. these, surely, were the worthies. they were men whose hearts and consciences were governed absolutely by the word of god. the world may dub them bigots and fools; but, oh! how the heart does long for such bigots and fools, in these days of false liberality and wisdom! it might have been said to mordecai and daniel that they were contending for mere trifles--for things wholly indifferent and non-essential. this is an argument often used; but, oh! it has no weight with an honest and devoted heart. indeed, there is nothing more contemptible, in the judgment of every true lover of jesus, than the principle that regulates the standard as to essentials and non-essentials. for, what is it? simply this, "all that concerns my salvation is essential; all that merely affects the glory of christ is non-essential." how terrible is this! reader, dost thou not utterly abhor it? what! shall we accept salvation as the fruit of our lord's death, and deem aught that concerns him non-essential? god forbid. yea; rather let us entirely reverse the matter, and regard all that concerns the honor and glory of the name of jesus, the truth of his word, and the integrity of his cause, as vital, essential, and fundamental; and all that merely concerns ourselves as non-essential and indifferent. may god grant us this mind! may nothing be deemed trivial by us which has for its foundation the word of the living god! thus it was with those devoted men whose history we have been glancing at. mordecai would not bow his head, and daniel would not close his window. blessed men! the lord be praised for such, and for the inspired record of their actings. mordecai would rather surrender life than diverge from the truth of god, and daniel would rather do the same than turn away from god's centre. jehovah had said that he would have war with amalek from generation to generation, and therefore mordecai would not bow. jehovah had said of jerusalem, "mine eyes and my heart shall be there perpetually;" therefore daniel would not cease to pray toward that blessed centre. the word of the lord endureth forever, and faith takes its stand on that imperishable foundation. there is an eternal freshness about every word that has come forth from the lord. his truth holds good throughout all generations; its bloom can never be brushed away, its light can never fade, its edge can never be blunted. all praise be to his holy name! but let us look for a moment at the result of daniel's faithfulness. the king was plunged into the deepest grief when he discovered his mistake. "he was sore displeased with himself." so well he might. he had fallen into a snare; but daniel was in good keeping. it was all right with him. "the name of the lord is a strong tower, the righteous runneth into it, and is safe." it matters not whether it be a lion's den at babylon or a prison at philippi; faith and a good conscience can make a man happy in either. we question if daniel ever spent a happier night on this earth, than the night he spent in the lion's den. he was there for god, and god was there with him. he was there with an approving conscience and an uncondemning heart. he could look up from the very bottom of that den straight into heaven: yea, that den was heaven upon earth to his happy spirit. who would not rather be daniel in the den than darius in the palace? the one happy in god; the other "sore displeased with himself." darius would have every one pray to him; daniel would pray to none but god. darius was bound by his own rash decree; daniel was bound only by the word of the living god. what a contrast! and then see in the end what signal honor was put upon daniel. he stood publicly identified with the one living and true god. "o daniel," cried the king, "servant of the living god." truly he had earned this title for himself. he was, unquestionably, a faithful servant of god. he had seen his three brethren cast into a furnace because they would worship _only_ the true god, and he had been cast into the lion's den because he would pray _only_ to him; but the lord had appeared for them and him, and given them a glorious triumph. he had allowed them to realize that precious promise made of old to their fathers, that they should be the head and their enemies the tail; that they should be above and their enemies below. nothing could be more marked--nothing could more forcibly illustrate the value which god puts upon plain decision and true-hearted devotedness, no matter where, when, or by whom exhibited. oh! for an earnest heart in this day of lukewarmness! o lord, revive thy work! how gentle god's commands! how kind his precepts are! we'll cast our burdens on the lord, and trust his constant care. beneath his watchful eye his saints securely dwell: the hand that bears all nature up, will guard his children well. why should an anxious load press down our weary mind? we haste, o father, to thy throne, and sweet refreshment find. thy goodness stands approved-- unchanged from day to day: we drop our burdens at thy feet, to bear a song away! ---_philip doddrige._ footnotes: [iii.] ["thou hast magnified thy word (or saying) according to all thy name," seems more exactly to give the meaning of the passage. ed.] [iv.] it is deeply interesting to note that neither the jews' best friend nor their worst enemy is once formally named in the book of esther; but faith could recognize both the one and the other. prayer, in its proper place there is a strong tendency in the human mind to take a one-sided view of things. this should be carefully guarded against. it would ever be our wisdom to view things as god presents them to us, in his holy word. we should put things where he puts them, and leave them there. were this more faithfully attended to, the truth would be much more clearly understood, and souls much better instructed. there is a divinely appointed place for everything, and we should avoid putting right things in wrong places, just as carefully as we would avoid setting them aside altogether. the one may do as much damage as the other. let any divine institution be taken out of its divinely-appointed place, and it must necessarily fail of its divinely-appointed end. this, i imagine, will hardly be questioned by any enlightened or well-regulated mind. it will be admitted, on all hands, to be wrong to put things in any place but just where god intended them to be. and in proportion to the importance of a right thing is the importance of having it in its right place. this remark holds good, in a special manner, with respect to the hallowed and most precious exercise of prayer. it is hard to imagine how any one, with the word of god in his hand, could presume to detract from the value of prayer. it is one of the very highest functions, and most important privileges of the christian life. no sooner has the new nature been communicated by the holy ghost, through faith in christ, than it expresses itself in the sweet accents of prayer. prayer is the earnest breathing of the new man, drawn forth by the operation of the holy ghost, who dwells in all true believers. hence, to find any one praying is to find him manifesting divine life in one of its most touching and beauteous characteristics, namely, dependence. there may be a vast amount of ignorance displayed in the prayer, both in its character and object; but the _spirit_ of prayer is, unquestionably, divine. a child may ask for a great many foolish things; but, clearly, he could not ask for any thing if he had not life. the ability and desire to ask are the infallible proofs of life. no sooner had saul of tarsus passed from death unto life, than the lord says of him, "_behold he prayeth_!" (acts ix.) doubtless he had, as "a pharisee of the pharisees," said many "long prayers;" but not until he "saw that just one, and heard the voice of his mouth," could it be said of him, "behold, _he prayeth_." saying prayers and praying, are two totally different things. a self-righteous pharisee may excel in the former; none but a converted soul can enjoy the latter. the spirit of prayer is the spirit of the new man; the language of prayer is the distinct utterance of the new life. the moment a spiritual babe is born into the new creation, it sends up its cry of dependence and of trust toward the source of its birth. who would dare to hush or hinder that cry? let the babe be gently satisfied and encouraged, not ignorantly hindered or rudely silenced. the very cry which ignorance would seek to stifle, falls like sweetest music on the parent's ear. it is the proof of life. it evidences the existence of a new object around which the affections of a parent's heart may entwine themselves. all this is plain enough. it commends itself to every renewed mind. the man who could think of hushing the accents of prayer must be wholly ignorant of the precious and beautiful mysteries of the new creation. the understanding of the praying one may need to be instructed; but oh! let not the spirit of prayer be quenched. let the beams of divine revelation, in all their emancipating power, shine in upon the struggling conscience, but let not the breathings of the new life be interrupted. the newly-converted soul may be in great darkness. the chilling mists of legalism may enwrap his spirit. he may not, as yet, be able to rest fully in christ and his accomplished work. his awakened conscience may not, as yet, have found its peace-giving answer in the precious blood of jesus. doubts and fears may sorely beset him. he may not know about the important doctrine of the two natures, and the continual conflict between them. he is bowed down beneath the humiliating sense of indwelling sin, and sees not, as yet, the ample provision which redeeming love has made for that very thing, in the sacrifice and priesthood--the blood and advocacy of the lord jesus christ. the joyous emotions which attended upon the first moments of his conversion may have passed away. the beams of the sun of righteousness may be hidden by the heavy clouds which arise from within and around him. it is not with him as in days past. he marvels at the sad change which has come over him, and well nigh doubts if he were ever converted at all. need we wonder that such an one should cry mightily to god? yea, the wonder would be if he could do aught else. how, then, should we treat him? should we teach him not to pray? god forbid. this would be to do the work of satan, who, assuredly, hates prayer most cordially. to drop a syllable which could even be understood as making little of an exercise so entirely divine, would be to fly in the face of the entire book of god, to deny the very example of christ, and hinder the utterance of the holy ghost in the new-born soul. the old and new testament scriptures literally teem with exhortations and encouragements to pray. to quote the passages would fill a volume. the blessed master himself has left his people an example as to the unceasing exercise of a spirit of prayer. he both prayed himself and taught his disciples to pray. the same is true of the holy ghost in the apostles. (see the following passages; luke iii. ; vi. ; ix. , ; xi. i- ; xviii. i- ; acts i. ; iv. ; rom. xii. ; xv. ; eph. vi. ; phil. iv. ; col. iv. - ; i thess. v. ; thess. iii. i, ; i tim. ii. i- ; heb. xiii. ; james v. , .) if my reader will look out and ponder the foregoing passages, he will have a just view of the place which prayer occupies in the christian economy. he will see that disciples are exhorted to pray; and that it is only disciples who are so exhorted. he will see that prayer is a grand prominent exercise of the household of god, and that he must be of that household to engage in it. he will see that prayer is the undoubted utterance of the new life; and that the life therefore must be there to utter itself. he will see that prayer is an important part of the christian's privilege; and that it enters in no wise in the foundation of the christian's peace. thus, he will be able to put prayer in its proper place; and how important it is that it should be so put! how important it is that the anxious inquirer should see that the deep and solid foundations of his present and everlasting peace were laid in the work of the cross, nineteen centuries ago! how important that the blood of jesus should stand out before the soul in clear and bold relief, in its solitary grandeur, as the alone foundation of the sinner's rest! a soul may be earnestly seeking and crying for salvation, and all the while be ignorant of the great fact that it is ready to his hand--that he is actually commanded to accept a free, full, present, personal, and eternal salvation--that christ has done all--that a brimming cup of salvation is set before him, which faith has only to take and drink for its everlasting satisfaction. the gospel of god's free grace points to the rent vail--the empty tomb--the occupied throne above. (matt. xxviii; heb. i. and x.) what do these things declare? what do they utter in the anxious sinner's ear? salvation! salvation! the rent vail, the empty tomb, the occupied throne, all cry out, salvation! reader, do you really want salvation? then why not take it, as god's free gift? are you looking to your own heart or to christ's finished work for salvation? is it needful, think you, to wait that god should do something more for your salvation? if so, then christ's work were not finished; the ransom were not paid. but christ said "_it is finished_," and god says, "i have found a ransom" (job xxxiii. john xix.). and if _you_ have to do, say, or think aught, to complete the work of salvation, then christ would not be a whole, a perfect saviour. and, further, it would be a plain denial of rom. iv. , which says, "to him that _worketh not_, but believeth on him that _justifieth the ungodly_, his faith is counted for righteousness." take heed that you are not mixing up your poor prayers with the glorious work of redemption, completed by the lamb of god on the cross. prayer is most precious; but, remember, "without faith it is impossible to please god" (heb. xi. ); and if you have faith, you have christ; and having christ, you have all. if you say you are crying for mercy, the word of god points you to mercy's copious stream flowing from the finished sacrifice. you have all your anxious heart can want in jesus, and he is god's free gift to you just as you are, where you are, _now_. if you had _to be_ aught else but what you are, or _to go_ anywhere else from where you are, then salvation would not be "by grace, through faith" (eph. ii. ). if you are anxious to get salvation, and god desires you should have it, why need you be another moment without it? it is all ready. christ died and rose again. the holy ghost testifies. the word is plain. "_only believe._" oh, may the spirit of god lead any anxious soul to find settled repose in jesus. may he lead you to look away from all besides, straight to an all-sufficient atonement. may he give clearness of apprehension, and simplicity of faith to all; and may he especially endow all who stand up to teach and preach with the ability "rightly to divide the word of truth," so that they may not apply to the unregenerate sinner, or the anxious inquirer, such passages of scripture as refer only to the established believer. very serious damage is done both to the truth of god, and to the souls of men, by an unskilful division and application of the word. there must be spiritual life, before there can be spiritual action; and the _only_ way to get spiritual life is by _believing_ on the name of the son of god[v.] (john i. , ; iii. - , ; v. ; xx. ). if, therefore, the precepts of god's word be applied to persons who have not the spiritual life to act in them, confusion must be the result. the precious privileges of the christian are turned into a heavy yoke for the unconverted. a strange system of half-law half-gospel is propounded, whereby true christianity is robbed of its characteristic glory, and the souls of men are plunged in mist and perplexity. there is urgent need for clearness in setting forth the true ground of a sinner's peace. when souls are convicted of sin, and have life, but not liberty, they want a full, clear, unclouded gospel. the claims of a divinely-awakened conscience can only be answered by the blood of the cross. if anything, no matter what, be added to the finished work of christ, the soul must be filled with doubt and darkness. may god grant us to know more fully the true place and value of simple faith in the lord jesus christ, and of earnest prayer in the holy ghost. c. h. m. footnote: [v.] when the jailer at philippi inquired of paul and silas, "what must i do to be saved?" they simply replied, "_believe_ on the lord jesus christ and thou shalt be saved, and thy house" (acts xvi. , ). it would, surely, be well if this method of dealing with an anxious inquirer were more faithfully adopted. "gilgal" joshua v. "whatsoever things were written aforetime were written for our learning, that we through patience and comfort of the scriptures might have hope" (rom. xv. ). these few words furnish a title, distinct and unquestionable, for the christian to range through the wide and magnificent field of old testament scripture, and gather therein instruction and comfort, according to the measure of his capacity and the character or depth of his spiritual need. and were any further warrant needed, we have it with equal clearness in the words of another inspired epistle: "now all these things happened unto them (israel) for ensamples; and they are written for our admonition, upon whom the ends of the world are come" (i cor. x. ). no doubt, in reading the old testament, as in reading the new, there is constant need of watchfulness--need of self-emptiness, of dependence upon the direct teaching of the holy spirit, by whom all scripture has been indited. the imagination must be checked, lest it lead us into crude notions and fanciful interpretations, which tend to no profit, but rather to the weakening of the power of scripture over the soul, and hindering our growth in the divine life. still, we must never lose sight of the divine charter made out for us in rom. xv. --never forget for a single moment that "whatsoever things were written aforetime were written for our learning." it is in the strength of these words that we invite the reader to accompany us back to the opening of the book of joshua, that we may together contemplate the striking and instructive scenes presented there, and seek to gather up some of the precious "learning" there unfolded. if we mistake not, we shall learn some fine lessons on the banks of the jordan, and find the air of gilgal most healthful and bracing for the spiritual constitution. we have all been accustomed to look at jordan as the figure of death--the death of the believer--his leaving this world and going to heaven. doubtless the believer has often read and heard these lines: "could we but stand where moses stood, and view the landscape o'er, not jordan's stream nor death's cold flood could fright us from the shore." but all this line of thought, feeling and experience is very far below the mark of true christianity. a moment's reflection in the true light which scripture pours upon our souls would be sufficient to show how utterly deficient is the popular religious thought as to jordan. for instance, when a believer dies and goes to heaven, is he called to fight? surely not. all is rest and peace up yonder--ineffable, eternal peace. not a ripple on that ocean. no sound of alarm throughout that pure and holy region. no conflict there. no need of armor. we shall want no girdle, because our garments may flow loosely around us. we shall not need a breast-plate of righteousness, for divine righteousness has there its eternal abode. we shall have no need of sandals, for there will be no rough or thorny places in that fair and blissful region. no shield called for there, inasmuch as there will be no fiery darts flying. no helmet of salvation, for the divine and eternal results of god's salvation shall then be reached. no sword, inasmuch as there will be neither enemy nor evil occurrent throughout all that blissful, sunny region. hence, therefore, jordan cannot mean the death of the believer and his going to heaven, for the simplest of all reasons, that it was when israel crossed the jordan that their fighting, properly speaking, began. true they had fought with amalek in the wilderness; but it was in canaan that their real war commenced. the careful reader of the scriptures will readily see this. but does not jordan represent death? most surely it does. and must not the believer cross it? yes; but he finds it dry, because the prince of life has gone down into its deepest depths, and opened up a pathway for his people, by the which they pass over into their heavenly inheritance. moses, from pisgah's top, gazed upon the promised land. _personally_, under the governmental dealings of god, he was prevented from going over jordan. but looking at him _officially_, we know that the law could not possibly bring the people into canaan; so moses' course must end there, for he represents the law. but christ, the true joshua, has crossed the jordan, and not only crossed it, but turned it into a pathway by which the ransomed host can pass over dry-shod into the heavenly canaan. the christian is not called to stand shivering on the brink of the river of death, as one in doubt as to how it may go with him. that river is dried up for faith. its power is gone. our adorable lord "has abolished death, and brought life and incorruptibility to light by the gospel." faith can now, therefore, sing triumphantly, "o death, where is thy sting? o grave, where is thy victory? the sting of death is sin; and the strength of sin is the law; but thanks be to god, which giveth us the victory through our lord jesus christ" (i cor. xv. - ). glorious, enfranchising fact! let us praise him for it. let all our ransomed powers adore him. let our whole moral being be stirred up to chant the praises of him who has taken the sting from death, and destroyed him who had the power of death, that is, the devil, and conducted us into a sphere which is pervaded throughout with life, light, incorruptibility, and glory. may our entire practical career be to his glory! we shall now proceed to examine more particularly the teaching of scripture on this great subject, and may the holy spirit himself be our immediate instructor! "and joshua rose early in the morning; and they removed from shittim, and came to jordan, he and all the children of israel, and lodged there before they passed over. and it came to pass after three days, that the officers went through the host; and they commanded the people, saying, when ye see the ark of the covenant of the lord your god, and the priests, the levites, bearing it, then ye shall remove from your place, and go after it. _yet there shall be a space between you and it_, about two thousand cubits by measure: come not near unto it, _that ye may know the way by which ye must go: for ye have not passed this way heretofore_" (josh. iii. i- ). there are three deeply important points in israel's history which the reader would do well to ponder. there is, first, the blood-stained lintel, in the land of egypt; secondly, the red sea; thirdly, the river jordan. now in each of these we have a type of the death of christ, in some one or other of its grand aspects--for, as we know, that precious death has many and various aspects, and nothing can be more profitable for the christian, and nothing, surely, ought to be more attractive, than the study of the profound mystery of the death of christ. there are depths and heights in that mystery which eternity alone will unfold; and it should be our delight now, under the powerful ministry of the holy ghost, through the perfect light of holy scripture, to search into these things for the strength, comfort and refreshment of the inward man. looking, then, at the death of christ, as typified by the blood of the paschal lamb, we see in it that which screens us from the judgment of god. "i will pass through the land of egypt this night, and will smite all the firstborn in the land of egypt, both man and beast; and against all the gods of egypt i will execute judgment; i am the lord. and the blood shall be to you for a token upon the houses where ye are; and when i see the blood, i will pass over you, and the plague shall not be upon you to destroy you, when i smite the land of egypt" (ex. xii.). now, we need hardly say, it is of the deepest moment for the exercised, consciously guilty soul, to know that god has provided a shelter from wrath and judgment to come. no right-minded person would think for a moment of undervaluing this aspect of the death of christ. "when i see the blood, i will pass over you." israel's safety rested upon god's estimate of the blood. he does not say, "when _you_ see the blood." the judge saw the blood, knew its value, and passed over the house. israel was screened by the blood of the lamb--by god's estimate of that blood, not by their own. precious fact! how prone we are to be occupied with our thoughts about the blood of christ, instead of with god's thoughts! we feel we do not value that precious blood as we ought--who ever did, or ever could? and then we begin to question if we are safe, seeing we so sadly fail in our estimate of christ's work and in our love to his person. now if our _safety_ depends in the smallest degree upon our estimate of christ's work, or our love to his person, we are in more imminent danger than if it depended upon our keeping the law. true it is,--most true--who could think of denying it?--we ought to value christ's work, and we ought to love himself. but if all this be put upon the footing of a righteous claim, and if our safety rests upon our answering to that claim, then are we in greater danger and more justly condemned than if we stood on the ground of a broken law. for just in proportion as the claims of christ are higher than the claims of moses, and in proportion as christianity is higher than the legal system, so are we worse off, in greater danger, farther from peace, if our safety depends upon our response to those higher claims. mark, it is not that we ought not to answer to such claims; we most certainly ought. but who among us does? and hence, so far as we are concerned, our ruin and guilt are only made more manifest, and our condemnation more righteous, if we stand upon the claims of christ, because we have not answered to them. if we are to be saved by our estimate of christ, by our response to his claims, by our appreciation of his love, we are worse off by far than if we were placed under the claims of the law of moses. but, blessed be god, it is not so. we are saved by grace,--free, sovereign, divine and eternal grace,--not by our sense of grace. we are sheltered by the blood, not by our estimate of the blood. jehovah did not say, on that awful night, "when _you_ see the blood, and estimate it as you ought, i will pass over you." nothing of the kind. this is not the way of our god. he wanted to shelter his people, and to let them know that they were sheltered,--perfectly, because divinely sheltered,--and therefore he places the matter wholly upon a divine basis; he takes it entirely out of their hands, by assuring them that their safety rested simply and entirely upon the blood, and upon his estimate thereof. he gives them to understand that they had nothing whatever to do with providing the shelter. it was his to _provide_. it was theirs to _enjoy_. thus it stood between jehovah and his israel in that memorable night; and thus it stands between him and the soul that simply trusts in jesus now. we are not saved by _our_ love, or _our_ estimate, or _our_ anything. we are saved by the blood behind which faith has fled for refuge, and by god's estimate of it, which faith apprehends. and just as israel, within that blood-stained lintel screened from judgment,--safe from the sword of the destroyer,--could feed upon the roasted lamb, so may the believer, perfectly sheltered from the wrath to come,--sweetly secure from all danger, screened from judgment,--feed upon christ in all the preciousness of what he is. but more of this by and by. we are specially anxious that the reader should weigh the point on which we have been dwelling, if he be one who has not yet found peace, even as to the question of safety from judgment to come, which, as we shall see (if god permit) ere we close this paper, is but a part, though an ineffably precious part, of what the death of christ has procured for us. we have very little idea indeed of how much of the leaven of self-righteousness cleaves to us, even after our conversion, and how immensely it interferes with our peace, our enjoyment of grace, and our consequent progress in the divine life. it may be we fancy we have done with self-righteousness when we have given up all thought of being saved by our works; but alas, it is not so, for the evil takes new forms; and of all these, none is more subtle than the feeling that we do not value the blood as we ought, and the doubting our safety on that ground. all this is the fruit of self-righteousness. we have not done with _self_. true, we are not, it may be, making a saviour of our _doings_, but we are of our _feelings_. we are seeking, unknown to ourselves perhaps, to find some sort of title in our love to god or our appreciation of christ. now all this must be given up. we must rest simply on the blood of christ, and upon god's testimony to that blood. he sees the blood. he values it as it deserves. he is satisfied. this ought to satisfy us. he did not say to israel, when i see how you behave yourselves; when i see the unleavened bread, the bitter herbs, the girded loins, the shod feet, i will pass over you. no doubt all these things had their proper place; but that proper place was not as the ground of safety, but as the secret of communion. they were called to behave themselves--called to keep the feast; but it was as _being_, not _in order to be_, a sheltered people. this made all the difference. it was because they were divinely screened from judgment that they could keep the feast. they had the authority of the word of god to assure them that there was no judgment for them; and if they believed that word, they could celebrate the feast in peace and safety. "through faith he kept the passover, and the sprinkling of blood, lest he that destroyed the firstborn should touch them" (heb. xi. ). here lies the deep and precious secret of the whole matter. it was by faith he kept the passover. god had said, "when i see the blood, i will pass over you," and he could not deny himself. it would have been a denial of his very nature and character, and an ignoring of his own blessed remedy, had a single hair of an israelite's head been touched on that deeply solemn night. it was not, we repeat, in anywise a question of israel's state or israel's deservings. it was simply and entirely a question of the value of the blood _in god's sight_, and of the truth and authority of his own word. what stability is here!--what peace and rest! what a solid ground of confidence! the blood of christ! the word of god! true, divinely true--let it never be forgotten or lost sight of--it is only by the grace of the holy spirit that the word of god can be received, or the blood of christ relied upon. still, it is the word of god and the blood of christ, and nothing else, which give peace to the heart as regards all question of coming judgment. there can be no judgment for the believer. and why? because the blood is on the mercy-seat, as the perfect proof that judgment has been already executed. "he bore on the tree the sentence for me, and now both the surety and sinner are free." yet, all praise to his name, thus it stands as to every soul that simply takes god at his word, and rests in the precious blood of christ. it is as impossible that such an one can come into judgment, as that christ himself can. all who are sheltered by the blood are as safe as the word of god is sure--as safe as christ himself. it seems perfectly wonderful for any poor sinful mortal to be able to pen such words; but the blessed fact is, it is either this or nothing. if there is any question as to the believer's safety, then the blood of christ is not on the mercy-seat, or it is of no account in the judgment of god. if it be a question of the believer's state, of his worthiness, of his feelings, of his experience, of his walk, of his love, of his devotedness, of his appreciation of christ, then would there be no force, no value, no truth in that glorious sentence, "when i see the blood, i will pass over;" for in that case the form of speech should be entirely changed, and a dark and chilling shade be cast over its heavenly lustre. it should then be, "when i see the blood, and----" but no, beloved, anxious reader, it is not, and it never can be, thus. nothing must ever be added--not the weight of a feather, to that precious blood which has perfectly satisfied god as a judge, and which perfectly shelters every soul that has fled for safety behind it. if the righteous judge has declared himself satisfied, surely the guilty culprit may well be satisfied also. god is satisfied with the blood of jesus; and when the soul is satisfied likewise, all is settled, and there is peace as regards the question of judgment. "there is no condemnation to them that are in christ jesus." how can there be, seeing he has borne the condemnation in their stead? to doubt the believer's exemption from judgment is to make god a liar, and to make the blood of christ of none effect. the reader will note that thus far we have been occupied only with the question of deliverance from judgment--a most weighty question surely. but, as we shall see in the course of this series of papers, there is far more secured for us by the death of christ than freedom from judgment and wrath, blessed as that is. that peerless sacrifice does a great deal more for us than keep god out as a judge. but for the present we pause, and shall close this paper with a solemn and earnest question to the reader, _art thou sheltered by the blood of jesus_? do not rest, beloved, until you can answer with a clear and unhesitating "yes." remember, you are either sheltered by the blood, or exposed to the horrors of eternal judgment. part ii. in our last paper we had before us israel under the shelter of the blood. a grand reality, most surely: who could duly estimate it? what human language could suitably unfold the deep blessedness of being screened from the judgment of god by the blood of the lamb--of being within that hallowed circle where wrath and judgment can never come? who can speak aright of the privilege of feeding in perfect safety on the lamb whose precious blood has forever averted from us the wrath of a sin-hating god? but blessed as all this is, there is much more than this. there is far more comprehended in the salvation of god than deliverance from judgment and wrath. we may have the fullest assurance that our sins are forgiven, that god will never enter into judgment with us on account of our sins, and yet be very far indeed from the enjoyment of the true christian position. we may be filled with all manner of fears about ourselves--fears occasioned by the consciousness of indwelling sin, the power of satan, the influence of the world. all these things may crop up before us, and fill us with the gravest apprehensions. thus, for example, when we turn to ex. xiv., we find israel in the deepest distress, and almost overwhelmed with fear. it would seem as if they had for the moment lost sight of the fact that they had been under the cover of the blood. let us look at the passage. "and the lord spake unto moses, saying, speak unto the children of israel, that they turn and encamp before pi-hahiroth, between migdol and the sea, over against baal-zephon: before it shall ye encamp by the sea. for pharaoh will say of the children of israel, they are entangled in the land, the wilderness hath shut them in. and i will harden pharaoh's heart, that he shall follow after them: and i will be honored upon pharaoh, and upon all his host; that the egyptians may know that i am the lord. and they did so. and it was told the king of egypt that the people fled: and the heart of pharaoh and of his servants was turned against the people, and they said, why have we done this, _that we have let israel go from serving us_?"--mark these words:--"and he made ready his chariot, and took his people with him. and he took six hundred chosen chariots, and all the chariots of egypt, and captains over every one of them. and the lord hardened the heart of pharaoh king of egypt, and he pursued after the children of israel: and the children of israel went out with a high hand. but the egyptians pursued after them, all the horses and chariots of pharaoh, and his horsemen, and his army, and overtook them, encamping by the sea, beside pi-hahiroth, before baal-zephon. and when pharaoh drew nigh, the children of israel lifted up their eyes, and, behold, the egyptians marched after them; and they were _sore afraid_: and the children of israel _cried out_ unto the lord." now, we may feel disposed to ask, are these the people whom we have seen so recently feeding, in perfect safety, under the cover of the blood? the very same. whence, then, these fears, this intense alarm, this agonizing cry? did they really think that jehovah was going to judge and destroy them, after all? not exactly. of what, then, were they afraid? of perishing in the wilderness after all. "and they said unto moses, because there were no graves in egypt, hast thou taken us away to die in the wilderness? wherefore hast thou dealt thus with us, to carry us forth out of egypt? is not this the word that we did tell thee in egypt, saying, let us alone, that we may serve the egyptians! for it had been better for us to serve the egyptians, than that we should die in the wilderness." all this was most gloomy and depressing. their poor hearts seem to fluctuate between "graves in egypt" and death in the wilderness. there is no sense of deliverance; no adequate knowledge either of god's purposes or of god's salvation. all seems utter darkness, almost bordering upon hopeless despair. they are thoroughly hemmed in and "shut up." they seem in a worse plight than ever. they heartily wish themselves back again amid the brick-kilns and stubble fields of egypt. deserts sands on either side of them; the sea in front; pharaoh and all his terrific hosts behind! the case seemed perfectly hopeless; and hopeless it was, so far as they were concerned. they were utterly powerless, and they were being made to realize it, and this is a very painful process to go through; but very wholesome and valuable, yea, most necessary for all. we must all, in one way or another, learn the force, meaning, and depth of that phrase, "without strength." it is exactly in proportion as we find out what it is to be without strength, that we are prepared to appreciate god's "due time." but, we may here inquire, "is there aught in the history of god's people now answering to israel's experience at the red sea?" doubtless there is; for we are told that the things which happened unto israel are our ensamples, or types. and, most surely, the scene at the red sea is full of instruction for us. how often do we find the children of god plunged in the very depths of distress and darkness as to their state and prospects! it is not that they question the love of god, or the efficacy of the blood of jesus, nor yet that god will reckon their sins to them, or enter into judgment with them. but still, they have no sense of full deliverance. they do not see the application of the death of christ to their _evil nature_. they do not realize the glorious truth that by that death they are completely delivered from this present evil world, from the dominion of sin, and from the power of satan. they see that the blood of jesus screens them from the judgment of god; but they do not see that _they_ are "dead to sin;" that their "old man is crucified with christ;" that not only have their sins been put upon christ at the cross, but _they themselves_, as sinful children of adam, have been, by the act of god, identified with christ in his death; that god pronounces them _dead and risen with christ_. (see col. iii. i- and the sixth chapter of romans.) but if this precious truth is not apprehended, by faith, there is no bright, happy, emancipating sense of full and everlasting salvation. they are, to speak according to our type, at egypt's side of the red sea, and in danger of falling into the hands of the prince of this world. they do not see "_all_ their enemies dead on the sea-shore." they cannot sing the song of redemption. no one can sing it, until he stands by faith on the wilderness side of the red sea, or, in other words, until he sees his complete deliverance from sin, the world, and satan--the great foes of every child of god. thus, in contemplating the facts of israel's history, as recorded in the first fifteen chapters of exodus, we observe that they did not raise a single note of praise until they had passed through the red sea. we hear the cry of sore distress under the cruel lash of pharaoh's task-masters, and amid the grievous toil of egypt's brick-kilns. and we hear the cry of terror when they stood "between migdol and the sea." all this we hear; but not one note of praise, not a single accent of triumph, until the waters of the red sea rolled between them and the land of bondage and of death, and they saw all the power of the enemy broken and gone. "thus the lord saved israel that day out of the hand of the egyptians; and israel saw the egyptians dead upon the sea-shore. and _israel saw that great work which the lord did_ upon the egyptians: and the people feared the lord and his servant moses. _then sang_ moses and the children of israel." now, what is the simple application of all this to us as christians? what grand lesson are we to learn from the scenes on the shores of the red sea? in a word, of what is the red sea a type? and what is the difference between the blood-stained lintel and the divided sea? the red sea is the type of the death of christ, in its application to all our spiritual enemies, sin, the world, and satan. by the death of christ the believer is completely and forever delivered from the _power_ of sin. he is, alas! conscious of the _presence_ of sin; but its power is gone. he has died to sin, in the death of christ; and what power has sin over a dead man? it is the privilege of the christian to reckon himself as much delivered from the dominion of sin as a man lying dead on the floor. what power has sin over such an one? none whatever. no more has it over the christian. sin _dwells_ in the believer, and will do so to the end of the chapter; but its _rule_ is gone. christ has wrested the sceptre from the grasp of our old master, and shivered it to atoms. it is not merely that his blood has purged our _sins_; but his death has broken the power of _sin_. it is one thing to know that our sins are forgiven, and another thing altogether to know that "the body of sin is destroyed"--its rule ended--its dominion gone. many will tell you that they do not question the forgiveness of their past sins, but they do not know what to say as to indwelling sin. they fear lest, after all, that may come against them, and bring them into judgment. such persons are, to use the figure, "between migdol and the sea." they have not learnt the doctrine of rom. vi. they have not as yet, in their spiritual intelligence and apprehension, reached the resurrection side of the red sea. they do not know what it is to be dead unto sin, and alive unto god through jesus christ our lord. and let the reader particularly note the force of the apostle's word, "_reckon_." how very different it is, in every way, from our word, "_realize_!" this latter word may do very well where natural or human things are concerned. we can realize physical or material facts; but where a spiritual truth is involved, it is not a question of realizing, but of reckoning. how can i realize that i am dead to sin? all my own experience, my own feelings, my inward self-consciousness seems to offer a flat contradiction to the truth. i cannot realize that i am dead; but god tells me i am. he assures me that he counts me to have died to sin when christ died. i believe it; not because i feel it, but because god says it. i reckon myself to be what god tells me i am. if i were sinless, if i had no sin in me, i should never be told to reckon myself dead to sin; neither should i ever be called to listen to such words as, "let not sin, therefore, _reign_ in your mortal body." but it is just because i have sin dwelling in me, and in order to give me full practical deliverance from its reigning power, that i am taught the grand enfranchising truth, that the dominion of sin is broken by the death of christ in which i also died. how do i know this? is it because i feel it? certainly not. how could i feel it? how could i realize it? how could i ever have the self-consciousness of it, while in the body? impossible. but god tells me i have died in the death of christ. i believe it. i do not reason about it. i do not stagger at it because i cannot find any evidence of its truth in myself. i take god at his word. i reckon myself to be what he tells me i am. i do not endeavor to struggle, and strive, and work myself into a sinless state which is impossible. neither do i imagine myself to be in it, which were a deceit and a delusion; but by a simple, childlike faith, i take the blessed ground which faith assigns me, in association with a dead christ. i look at christ there, and see in him, according to god's word, the true expression of where i am, in the divine presence. i do not reason from myself upwards, but i reason from god downwards. this makes all the difference. it is just the difference between unbelief and faith,--between law and grace--between human religion and divine christianity. if i reason from self, how can i have any right thought of what is in the heart of god?--all my conclusions must be utterly false. but if, on the other hand, i listen to god and believe his word, my conclusions are divinely sound. abraham did not look at himself and the improbability, nay, the impossibility of having a son in his old age; but he believed god and gave glory to him. and it was counted to him for righteousness. it is an unspeakable mercy to get done with self, in all its phases and in all its workings, and to be brought to rest, in all simplicity, on the written word, and on the christ which that written word presents to our souls. self-occupation is a deathblow to fellowship, and a great barrier to the soul's rest and progress. it is impossible for any one to enjoy settled peace so long as he is occupied with himself. he must cease from self, and harken to god's word, and rest, without a single question, on its pure, precious, and everlasting record. god's word never changes. i change; my frames, my feelings, my experience, my circumstances, change continually; but god's word is the same yesterday, and to-day, and forever. furthermore, it is a grand and essential point for the soul to apprehend that christ is the only definition of the believer's place before god. this gives immense power, liberty, and blessing. "as he is, so are we, in this world" (i john iv. ). this is something perfectly wonderful! let us ponder it: let us think of a poor, wretched, guilty slave of sin, a bondslave of satan, a votary of the world, exposed to an eternal hell--such an one taken up by sovereign grace, delivered completely from the grasp of satan, the dominion of sin, the power of this present evil world--pardoned, washed, justified, brought nigh to god, accepted in christ, and perfectly and forever identified with him, so that the holy ghost can say, as christ is, so is he in this world! all this seems too good to be true; and, most assuredly, it is too good for us to get; but, blessed be the god of all grace, and blessed be the christ of god! it is not too good for him to give. god gives like himself. he will be god, spite of our unworthiness and satan's opposition. he will act in a way worthy of himself, and worthy of the son of his love. were it a question of our deservings, we could only think of the deepest and darkest pit of hell. but seeing it is a question of what is worthy of god to give, and that he gives according to his estimate of the worthiness of christ, then, verily, we can think of the very highest place in heaven. the glory of god, and the worthiness of his son, are involved in his dealings with us; and hence everything that could possibly stand in the way of our eternal blessedness, has been disposed of in such a manner as to secure the divine glory, and furnish a triumphant answer to every plea of the enemy. is it a question of trespass? "he has forgiven us all trespasses." is it a question of sin? he has condemned sin at the cross, and thus put it away. is it a question of guilt? it is canceled by the blood of the cross. is it a question of death? he has taken away its sting, and actually made it part of our property. is it a question of satan? he has destroyed him, by annulling all his power. is it a question of the world? he has delivered us from it, and snapped every link which connected us with it. thus, beloved christian reader, it stands with us if we are to be taught by scripture, if we are to take god at his word, if we are to believe what he says. and we may add, if it be not thus, we are in our sins; under the power of sin; in the grasp of satan; obnoxious to death; part and parcel of an evil, christless, godless world, and exposed to the unmitigated wrath of god--the vengeance of eternal fire. oh that the blessed spirit may open the eyes of god's people, and give them to see their proper place, their full and eternal deliverance in association with christ who died for them, and _in whom they have died_, and _thus_ passed out of the power of all their enemies! part iii. having glanced at two of the leading points in our subject, namely, israel freed from guilt under the shelter of the blood, and israel freed from all their enemies in the passage of the red sea, we have now to contemplate for a few moments israel crossing the jordan, and celebrating the paschal feast at gilgal, in which they represent the risen position of christians now. the christian is one who is not only sheltered from judgment by the blood of the lamb, not only delivered from the power of all his enemies by the death of christ, but is also associated with him where he now is, at the right hand of god; he is, with christ, passed out of death, in resurrection, and is blessed with all spiritual blessings, in the heavenlies, in christ. he is thus a heavenly man, and, as such, is called to walk in this world in all the varied relationships and responsibilities in which the good hand of god has placed him. he is not a monk, or an ascetic, or a man living in the clouds, fit neither for earth or heaven. he is not one who lives in a dreamy, misty, unpractical region; but, on the contrary, one whose happy privilege it is, from day to day, to reflect, amid the scenes and circumstances of earth, the graces and virtues of christ, with whom, through infinite grace, and on the solid ground of accomplished redemption, he is linked in the power of the holy ghost. such is the christian, according to the teaching of the new testament. let the reader see that he understands it. it is very real, very definite, very positive, very practical. a child may know it, and realize it, and exhibit it. a christian is one whose sins are forgiven, who possesses eternal life, and knows it; in whom the holy ghost dwells; he is accepted in and associated with a risen and glorified christ; he has broken with the world, is dead to sin and the law, and finds his object and his delight, and his spiritual sustenance, in the christ who loved him and gave himself for him, and for whose coming he waits every day of his life. this, we repeat, is the new testament description of a christian. how immensely it differs from the ordinary type of christian profession around us we need not say. but let the reader measure himself by the divine standard, and see wherein he comes short; for of this he may rest assured, that there is no reason whatsoever, so far as the love of god, or the work of christ, or the testimony of the holy ghost, is concerned, why he should not be in the full enjoyment of all the rich and rare spiritual blessings which appertain to the true christian position. dark unbelief, fed by legality, bad teaching, and spurious religiousness, rob many of god's dear children of their proper place and portion. and not only so, but, from want of a thorough break with the world, many are sadly hindered from the clear perception and full realization of their position and privileges as heavenly men. but we are rather anticipating the instruction unfolded to us in the typical history of israel, in josh. iii.-v., to which we shall now turn. "and joshua rose early in the morning; and they removed from shittim, and came to jordan, he and all the children of israel, and lodged there before they passed over. and it came to pass, after three days, that the officers went through the host. and they commanded the people, saying, when ye see the ark of the covenant of the lord your god, and the priests the levites bearing it, then ye shall remove from your place, and go after it. _yet there shall be a space between you and it_, about two thousand cubits by measure: _come not near unto it, that ye may know the way by which ye must go; for ye have not passed this way heretofore_" (josh. iii. i- ). it is most desirable that the reader should, with all simplicity and clearness, seize the true spiritual import of the river jordan. it typifies the death of christ in one of its grand aspects, just as the red sea typifies it in another. when the children of israel stood on the wilderness side of the red sea, they sang the song of redemption. they were a delivered people--delivered from egypt and the power of pharaoh. they saw all their enemies dead on the sea-shore. they could even anticipate, in glowing accents, their triumphal entrance into the promised land. "thou in thy mercy hast led forth the people which thou hast redeemed; thou hast guided them in thy strength unto thy holy habitation. the people shall hear, and be afraid: sorrow shall take hold on the inhabitants of palestina. then the dukes of edom shall be amazed; the mighty men of moab, trembling shall take hold upon them: all the inhabitants of canaan shall melt away. fear and dread shall fall upon them: by the greatness of thine arm they shall be still as a stone; till thy people pass over, o lord, till the people pass over which thou hast purchased. thou shalt bring them in, and plant them in the mountain of thine inheritance, in the place, o lord, which thou hast made for thee to dwell in; in the sanctuary, o lord, which thy hands have established. the lord shall reign for ever and ever." all this was perfectly magnificent, and divinely true. but they were not yet in canaan. jordan--of which, most surely, there is no mention in their glorious song of victory--lay between them and the promised land. true, in the purpose of god and in the judgment of faith, the land was theirs; but they had to traverse the wilderness, cross the jordan, and take possession. how constantly we see all this exemplified in the history of souls! when first converted, there is nothing but joy and victory and praise. they know their sins forgiven; they are filled with wonder, love, and praise. being justified by faith, they have peace with god, and they can rejoice in hope of his glory, yea, and joy in himself through jesus christ our lord. they are in rom. v. i- ; and, in one sense, there can be nothing higher. even in heaven itself we shall have nothing higher or better than "joy in god." persons sometimes speak of rom. viii. being higher than rom. v.: but what can be higher than "joy in god"? if we are brought to god, we have reached the most exalted point to which any soul can come. to know him as our portion, our rest, our stay, our object, our all; to have all our springs in him, and know him as a perfect covering for our eyes, at all times, and in all places, and under all circumstances--this is heaven itself to the believer. but there is this difference between rom. v. and viii., that vi. and vii. lie between; and when the soul has traveled practically through these latter, and learns how to apply their profound and precious teaching to the great questions of indwelling sin and the law, then it is in a better state, though, most assuredly, not in a higher standing. we repeat, and with emphasis, the words "_traveled practically_." for it must be even so, if we would really enter into these holy mysteries according to god. it is easy to talk about being "dead to sin" and "dead to the law"--easy to see these things written in rom. vi. and vii.--easy to grasp, in the intellect, the mere theory of these things. but the question is, have we made them our own--have they been applied practically to our souls by the power of the holy ghost? are they livingly exhibited in our ways to the glory of him who, at such a cost to himself, has brought us into such a marvelous place of blessing and privilege? it is much to be feared that there is a vast amount of merely intellectual traffic in these deep and precious mysteries of our most holy faith, which, if only laid hold of in spiritual power, would produce wonderful results in practice. but we must return to our theme; and in doing so, we would ask the reader if he really understands the true spiritual import of the river jordan? what does it really mean? we have said that it typifies the death of christ. but in what aspect? for that precious death, as we are now considering, has many and various aspects. we believe the jordan sets forth the death of our lord jesus christ as that by which we are introduced into the inheritance he has obtained for us. the red sea _delivered israel from_ egypt and the power of pharaoh. jordan _brought them into_ the land of canaan. we find both in the death of christ. he, blessed be his name, has, by his death on the cross--his death for us--delivered us from our sins, from their guilt and condemnation, from satan's power, and from this present evil world. but more than this: he has, by the same infinitely precious work, brought us _now_ into an entirely new position, in resurrection and in living union and association with himself, where he is at god's right hand. such is the distinct teaching of eph. ii. "but god, who is rich in mercy, for his great love wherewith he loved us, even when we were dead in sins, _hath quickened us together with christ_, (by grace ye are saved;) and _hath raised us up together_, and made us _sit together in the heavenlies_ in christ jesus" (vers. - ). note the little word "_hath_." he is not speaking of what god _will_ do, but of what he _hath_ done--done for us, and with us, in christ jesus. the believer has not to wait till he passes out of this life to enjoy his inheritance in heaven. in the person of his living and glorified head, through faith, by the spirit, he belongs there now, and is free to all that god has given to all his own.[vi.] is all this real and true? yes! as real and true as that christ hung on the cross and lay in the grave; as real and true as that we were dead in trespasses and sins; as real and true as the truth of god can make it; as real and true as the indwelling of the holy spirit in the body of every true believer. mark, reader, we are not now speaking of the practical working-out of all this glorious truth in the life of christians from day to day. this is another thing altogether. alas, alas! if our only idea of true christian position were to be drawn from the practical career of professing christians, we might give up christianity as a myth or a sham. but, thank god, it is not so. we must learn what true christianity is from the pages of the new testament, and, having learnt it there, judge ourselves, our ways, our surroundings, by its heavenly light. in this way, while we shall ever have to confess and mourn our shortcomings, our hearts shall ever, more and more, be filled with praise to him whose infinite grace has brought us into such a glorious position, in union and fellowship with his own son--a position, blessed be god, in nowise dependent upon our personal state, but which, if really apprehended, must exert a powerful influence upon our entire course, conduct, and character. footnote: [vi.] [there are three very distinct aspects of the death of christ which, to apprehend clearly, is of unspeakable value to the soul. st. that which is typified in the blood of the paschal lamb on israel's doors in egypt. this is the judgment of god against the sinner in the person of the substitute provided for him. rom. iii. - applies to this. it brings peace to the soul who believes, for his judgment is passed. christ has borne it in our stead. nd. as revealed at the passage of the red sea. there it is fully manifested that god is _for_ his people; he has completely overcome their enemy and freed them from his power forever. the prince and his hosts, who ruled over them unto death, are drowned in the sea. god's people have passed out of his dominions, and can now go on with god in perfect freedom. no condemnation remains. henceforth, to faith, satan is a vanquished foe. god's people are delivered; they can now, in settled peace, worship, praise, and serve their god. blessed, holy deliverance and service! rom. vi.-vii. gives the full teaching of this aspect of the death of christ. rd. as seen in the passage of jordan. there is no judgment to escape there; no foe pressing behind. it is a question of entering the good land which is just across. it is the death of christ here as _the ending of his people's history_ _as children of adam_; that, by resurrection, he may now introduce them, as having died and risen with him, into the place of glory where he has gone. by this it can be said, "as he is, so are we in this world" (i john iv. ) col. ii. -iii. , is the new testament doctrine of this precious truth. ed.] part iv. the more deeply we ponder the typical instruction presented in the river jordan, the more clearly we must see that the whole christian position is involved in the standpoint from which we view it. jordan means death, but, for the believer, a death that is _past_--the death we have gone through as identified with christ, and which, through resurrection, has brought us on the other side--the canaan side--where he is now. he, typified by the ark, has passed over before us into jordan, to stem its torrent for us, and make it a dry path for our feet, so that we might pass clean over into our heavenly inheritance. the prince of life has destroyed, on our behalf, him that had the power of death. he has taken the sting from death; yea, he has made death itself the very means by which we reach, even now, in spirit and by faith, the true heavenly canaan. let us see how all this is unfolded in our type. mark particularly the commandment given by the officers of the host. "when ye see the ark of the covenant of the lord your god, and the priests the levites bearing it, then ye shall remove from your place, and go after it." the ark must go first. they dared not to move one inch along that mysterious way, until the symbol of the divine presence had gone before. "yet there shall be a space between you and it, about two thousand cubits by measure: _come not near unto it that ye may know the way by which ye must go_; for ye have _not passed this way heretofore_." it was an awful flood ahead of them. no mortal could tread it with impunity. death and destruction are linked together. "it is appointed unto men once to die; but after this the judgment" (heb. ix.) who can stand before the king of terrors? who can face that grim and terrible foe? who can encounter the swellings of jordan? who, except the ark go first, can face death and judgment? poor peter thought he could; but he was sadly mistaken. he said unto jesus, "lord, whither goest thou? jesus answered him, whither i go, _thou canst not follow me now_; but thou shalt follow me afterwards." how fully these words explain the import of that mystic "space" between israel and the ark. peter did not understand that space. he had not studied aright josh. iii. . he knew nothing of that terrible pathway which his blessed master was about to enter upon. "peter said unto him, lord, why cannot i follow thee now? i will lay down my life for thy sake." poor dear peter! how little he knew of himself, or of that which he was--sincerely, no doubt, though ignorantly--undertaking to do! how little did he imagine that the very sound of death's dark river, heard even in the distance, would be sufficient so to terrify him, as to make him curse and swear that he did not know his master! "jesus answered him, wilt thou lay down thy life for my sake? verily, verily, i say unto thee, the cock shall not crow till thou hast denied me thrice." "yet there shall be a space between you and it." how needful! how absolutely essential! truly there was a space between peter and his lord. jesus had to go before. he had to meet death in its most terrific form. he had to tread that rough path in profound solitude--for who could accompany him? "there shall be a space between you and it: come not near to it, that ye may know the way by which ye must go; for ye have not passed this way heretofore." "thou canst not follow me _now_: but thou shalt follow me _afterwards_." blessed master! he would not suffer his poor feeble servant to enter upon that terrible path, until he himself had gone before, and so entirely changed its character, that the pathway of death should be lighted up with the beams of life and the light of god's face. our jesus has "abolished death, and brought life and incorruptibility to light by the gospel." thus death is no longer death to the believer. it was death to jesus, in all its intensity, in all its horrors, in all its reality. he met it as the power which satan wields over the soul of man. he met it as the penalty due to sin. he met it as the just judgment of god against sin--against us. there was not a single feature, not a single ingredient, not a single circumstance, which could possibly render death formidable which did not enter into the death of christ. he met all; and, blessed be god, _we are accounted as having gone through all in and by him_. we died in him, so that death has no further claim upon us, or power over us. its claims are disposed of, its power broken and gone for all believers. the whole scene is cleared completely of death, and filled with life and incorruptibility. and hence, in peter's case, we find our lord, in the last chapter of john, most graciously meeting the desire of his servant's heart--a desire in which he was perfectly sincere--the desire to follow his beloved lord. "verily, verily, i say unto thee, when thou wast young, thou girdest thyself, and walkedst whither thou wouldest; but when thou shalt be old, thou shalt stretch forth thy hands, and another shall gird thee, and carry thee whither thou wouldest not. this spake he signifying by what death he should glorify god." thus death, instead of being the judgment of god to overwhelm peter, was turned into a means by which peter could glorify god. what a glorious change! what a stupendous mystery! how it magnifies the cross, or rather the one who hung thereon! what a mighty revolution, when a poor sinful man can, by death, glorify god! so completely has death been robbed of its sting, so thoroughly has its character been changed that, instead of shrinking from it with terror, we can meet it, if it does come, and go through it with song of victory; and instead of its being to us the wages of sin, it is a means by which we can glorify god. all praise to him who has so wrought for us! to him who has gone down into jordan's deepest depths for us, and made there a highway by which his ransomed people can pass over into their heavenly inheritance! may our hearts adore him! may all our powers be stirred up to magnify his holy name! may our whole life be devoted to his praise! may we appreciate the grace and lay hold of the inheritance. but we must proceed with our type. "and joshua spake unto the priests, saying, take up the ark of the covenant, and pass over before the people. and they took up the ark of the covenant, and went before the people. and the lord said unto joshua, this day will i begin to magnify thee in the sight of all israel, that they may know that as i was with moses, so i will be with thee." joshua stands before us as a type of the risen christ, leading his people, in the power of the holy ghost, into their heavenly inheritance. the priests bearing the ark into the midst of jordan typify christ going down into death for us, and destroying completely its power. "he passed through death's dark raging flood, to make our rest secure;" and not only to make it secure, but to lead us into it, in association with himself, now, in spirit and by faith; by-and-by, in actual fact. "and joshua said unto the children of israel, come hither, and hear the words of the lord your god. and joshua said, hereby ye shall know that the _living_ god is among you, and that he will without fail drive out from before you the canaanites.... behold, the ark of the covenant of the lord of all the earth passeth over before you into jordan." the passage of the ark into jordan proved two things, namely, the presence of the living god in the midst of his people; and that he would most surely drive out all their enemies from before them. the death of christ is the basis and the guarantee of everything to faith. grant us but this, that christ has gone down into death for us, and we argue, with all possible confidence, that, in this one great fact, all is secured. god is with us, and god is for us. "he that spared not his own son, but delivered him up for us all, how shall he not with him also freely give us all things?" the difficulty of unbelief is, "how shall he?" the difficulty of faith is, "how shall he _not_?" israel might wonder how all the hosts of canaan could ever be expelled from before them: let them gaze on the ark in the midst of jordan, and cease to wonder, cease to doubt. the less is included in the greater. and hence we can say, what may we not expect, seeing that christ has died for us? there is nothing too good, nothing too great, nothing too glorious, for god to do for us, and in us, and with us, seeing he has not spared his only-begotten son, but delivered him up for us all. everything is secured for us by the precious death of christ. it has opened up the everlasting flood-gates of the love of god, so that the rich streams thereof might flow down into the very depths of our souls. it fills us with the sweetest assurance that the one who could bruise his only-begotten son, on the cursed tree, for us, will meet our every need, carry us through all our difficulties, and lead us into the full possession and enjoyment of all that his eternal purpose of grace has in store for us. having given us such a proof of his love, even when we were yet sinners, what may we not expect at his hands now that he views us in association with that blessed one who glorified him in death--the death that he died for us? when israel saw the ark in the midst of jordan, they were entitled to consider that all was secured. as our lord also said to his disciples before leaving them, "be of good cheer, i have overcome the world;" and, in view of his cross, he could say, "now is the prince of this world cast out." true, israel had, as we know, to take possession: they had to plant their feet upon the inheritance; but the power that could stem death's dark waters, could also drive out every foe from before them, and put them in peaceful possession of all that god had promised. part v. in closing this series of brief papers on gilgal, we must turn our thoughts to the practical application of that which has been engaging our attention. if it be true--and it is true--that jesus died for us, it is equally true that we have died in him; as one of our own poets has sweetly put it: "for me, lord jesus, thou hast died and i have died in thee: thou'rt risen--my bands are all untied, and now thou livest in me. the father's face of radiant grace shines now in light on me." now this is a great practical truth--none more so. it lies at the very foundation of all true christianity. if christ has died for us, then, in very deed, he has taken us completely out of our old condition, with all that appertained to it, and placed us upon an entirely new footing. we can look back from resurrection-ground on which we now stand, into the dark river of death, and see there, in its deepest depths, the memorial of the victory gained for us by the prince of life. we do not look forward to death; we look back at it. we can truly say, "the bitterness of death is past." jesus met death for us in its most terrible form. just as the river of jordan was divided when it presented its most formidable appearance--"for jordan overfloweth all its banks all the time of harvest"--so our jesus encountered our last great enemy, vanquished him in his most fearful form, and left behind, in the very centre of death's dark domain, the imperishable record of his glorious victory. all praise, homage, and adoration to his peerless name! it is our privilege, by faith and in spirit, to stand on canaan's side of jordan, and erect our memorial of what the saviour, the true joshua, has done for us. "and it came to pass, when all the people were clean passed over jordan, that the lord spake unto joshua, saying, take you twelve men out of the people, _out of every tribe a man_. and command ye them, saying, take you hence out of the midst of jordan, _out of the place where the priests' feet stood firm_, twelve stones; and ye shall carry them over with you, and leave them in the lodging-place where ye shall lodge this night. then joshua called the twelve men whom he had prepared of the children of israel, _out of every tribe a man_. and joshua said unto them, pass over before the ark of the lord your god, into the midst of jordan, and take you up _every man of you_ a stone upon his shoulder, according unto the number of the tribes of the children of israel: that this may be a sign among you, that when your children ask their fathers in time to come, saying, what mean ye by these stones? then ye shall answer them, that the waters of jordan were cut off before the ark of the covenant of the lord; when it passed over jordan, the waters of jordan were cut off: and these stones shall be _for a memorial_ unto the children of israel for ever" (josh. iv: i- ). the great fact was to be seized, and practically carried out by the whole assembly, "of every tribe a man"--"every man of you a stone upon his shoulder," a stone taken from the very spot where the priests' feet stood firm. all were to be brought into living personal contact with the great mysterious fact that the waters of jordan were cut off. all were to engage in erecting such a memorial of this fact as should elicit inquiry from their children as to what it meant. it was never to be forgotten. what a lesson is here for us! are we erecting our memorial? are we giving evidence--such evidence as may strike even the mind of a child--of the fact that our jesus has vanquished the power of death for us? are we affording any practical proof in daily life that christ has died for us, and that we have died in him? is there aught in our actual history, from day to day, answering to the figure set forth in the passage just quoted--"every man of you a stone upon his shoulder"? are we declaring plainly that we have passed clean over jordan--that we belong to heaven--that we are not in the flesh, but in the spirit? do our children see aught in our habits and ways, in our spirit and deportment, in our whole character and manner of life, leading them to inquire, "what mean ye by these things?" are we living as those who are dead with christ--dead to sin--dead to the world? are we practically freed from the world--letting go our hold of present things, in the power of communion with a risen christ? these are searching questions for the soul, beloved christian reader. let us seek to meet them honestly, as in the divine presence. we profess these things, we hold them in theory. we say we believe that jesus died for us, and that we died in him. where is the proof--where the abiding memorial--where the stone on the shoulder? let us judge ourselves honestly before god. let us no longer rest satisfied with anything short of the thorough, practical, habitual carrying out of the great truth that "we are dead, and our life is hid with christ in god." mere profession is worthless. we want the living power--the true result--the proper fruit. "and the people came up out of jordan on the tenth day of the first month, and encamped in gilgal, in the east border of jericho. and _those twelve stones which they took out of jordan_"--stones of peculiar import--no other stones could tell such a tale, teach such a lesson, or symbolize such a stupendous fact--no other stones like them--"those twelve stones did joshua pitch in gilgal. and he spake unto the children of israel, saying, when your children shall ask their fathers in time to come, saying, what mean these stones? then ye shall let your children know, saying, _israel came over this jordan on dry land_. for the lord your god dried up the waters of jordan from before you, until ye were passed over, as the lord your god did to the red sea, which he dried up from before us, until we were gone over: that all the people of the earth might know the hand of the lord, that it is mighty: that ye might fear the lord your god forever." here, then, we see israel at gilgal. "everything was finished that the lord commanded joshua to speak unto the people, according to all that moses commanded joshua." every member of the host had passed clean over jordan--not one had been suffered to feel the slightest touch of the river of death. grace had brought them all safely over into the inheritance promised to their fathers. they were not only separated from egypt by the red sea, but actually brought into canaan across the dry bed of the jordan, and encamped in gilgal, in the plains of jericho. and now mark what follows. "and it came to pass, when all the kings of the amorites which were on the side of jordan westward, and all the kings of the canaanites which were by the sea, heard that the lord had dried up the waters of jordan from before the children of israel, until we were passed over, that their heart melted, neither was there spirit in them any more, because of the children of israel. _at that time_"--note the words!--when all the nations were paralyzed with terror at the very thought of this people--"at that time the lord said unto joshua, make thee _sharp knives_, and circumcise again the children of israel the second time." how deeply significant is this: how suggestive are these "sharp knives"! how needful! if israel are about to bring the sword upon the canaanites, israel must have the sharp knife applied to themselves. they had never been circumcised in the wilderness. the reproach of egypt had never been rolled away from them. and ere they could celebrate the passover, and eat of the old corn of the land of canaan, they must have the sentence of death written upon them. no doubt this was aught but agreeable to nature; but it must be done. how could they take possession of canaan with the reproach of egypt resting upon them? how could uncircumcised people dispossess the canaanites? impossible! the sharp knives had to do their work throughout the camp of israel ere they could eat of canaan's food or prosecute the warfare which of necessity belongs to it. "and joshua made him sharp knives, and circumcised the children of israel at the hill of the foreskins. and this is the cause why joshua did circumcise. all the people that came out of egypt that were males, even all the men of war, died in the wilderness by the way, after they came out of egypt.... and their children, whom he raised up in their stead, them joshua circumcised: for they were uncircumcised, because they had not circumcised them by the way.... and the lord said unto joshua, this day have i rolled away the reproach of egypt from off you. wherefore the name of the place is called gilgal ("rolling") unto this day. and the children of israel encamped in gilgal, and kept the passover on the fourteenth day of the month, at even, in the plains of jericho. and they did eat of the old corn of the land on the morrow after the passover, unleavened cakes and parched corn, in the self-same day. and the manna ceased on the morrow after they had eaten of the old corn of the land; neither had the children of israel manna any more; but they did eat of the fruit of the land of canaan that year." here, then, we have a type of the full christian position. the christian is a heavenly man, dead to the world, crucified with christ, associated with him where he now is, and, while waiting for his appearing, occupied in heart with him, feeding by faith upon him as the proper nourishment of the new man. such is the christian's position--such his portion. but in order to enter fully into the enjoyment thereof, there must be the application of the "sharp knife" to all that belongs to mere nature. there must be the sentence of death written upon that which scripture designates as "the old man." all this must be really and practically entered into if we would maintain our position or enjoy our proper portion as heavenly men. if we are indulging nature; if we are living in a low, worldly atmosphere; if we are going in for this world's pursuits, its pleasures, its politics, its riches, its honors, its fashions, and its distinctions--then, verily, it is impossible that we can be enjoying fellowship with our risen head and lord.[vii.] christ is in heaven, and to enjoy him we must be living, in spirit and by faith, where he is. he is not of this world; and if we are of it, we cannot be enjoying fellowship with him. "if we say that we have fellowship with him, and walk in darkness, we lie, and do not the truth" (i john i. ). this is most solemn. if i am living in and of the world, i am walking in darkness, and i can have no fellowship with a heavenly christ. "wherefore," says the blessed apostle, "if ye be dead with christ from the rudiments of the world, why, _as though living in the world_, are ye subject to ordinances?" do we really understand these words? have we weighed the full force of the expression, "living in the world"? is the christian not to be as one living in the world? clearly not. he is to live, in spirit, where christ is. as to fact, he is obviously on this earth, moving up and down, and in and out, in the varied relations of life, and in the varied spheres of action in which the hand of god has set him. but his home is in heaven. his life is there. his object, his rest, his proper _all_, is in heaven. he does not belong to earth. his citizenship is in heaven; and in order to make this good in practice from day to day, there must be the denial of self, the mortification of our members. all this comes vividly out in col. iii. indeed, it would be impossible to give a more striking exposition of the entire subject of "gilgal" than that presented in the following lines: "if ye then be risen with christ, seek those things which are above, where christ sitteth on the right hand of god. set your affections on things above, not on things on the earth. for ye have died, and your life is hid with christ in god. when christ our life shall appear, then shall ye also appear with him in glory." and now comes the true spiritual import and application of "gilgal" and its "sharp knives"--"mortify, therefore, your members which are upon the earth." may the holy spirit lead us into a deeper and fuller understanding of our place, portion and practice as christians. would to god that we better knew what it is to feed upon the old corn of the land, at the true spiritual gilgal, that thus we might be better fitted for the conflict and service to which we are called! footnote: [vii.] the reader may here remark that "the old corn of the land of canaan" is a type of christ risen and glorified. the manna is a type of christ in his humiliation. the remembrance of him in the latter is ineffably precious to the soul. it is sweet to look back and trace his way as the lowly, humble, self-emptied man. this is to feed upon the hidden manna--"christ, once humbled here." nevertheless, a risen, ascended and glorified christ is the true object for the heart of the christian; but to enjoy him there, the reproach of this present evil world--all conformity to it--must be rolled away from us by the spiritual application of the circumcision of christ. he was not conformed to this world, and we must be prepared to identify ourselves with him in this. thoughts on the confirmation vows "all that the lord hath spoken we will do." such were the memorable words with which the people of israel virtually abandoned the ground on which the blessed god had just been setting them, and on which, too, he had dealt with them in bringing them up out of the land of egypt. "ye have seen," said he, "what i did unto the egyptians, and how i bare you on eagles' wings, and brought you unto myself." all this was grace--pure, perfect, divine grace. he heard the groans and beheld the sorrows of the people amid the darkness and degradation of egyptian bondage, and in his unmingled mercy he came down to deliver them. he sought not their aid, he looked not for aught from them. "his own arm brought salvation." he acted _for_ them, _with_ them, and _in_ them; and that, too, in the solitariness and sovereignty of his own unfailing grace. he said to moses at the opening of the book of exodus, "_i am come down to deliver them_." this was absolute and unqualified grace. there was no "if," no "but," no condition, no vow, no resolve. it was free grace, founded upon god's eternal counsels, and righteously displayed in immediate connection with "the blood of the lamb." hence, from first to last, the word to israel was, "_stand still, and see the salvation of jehovah_." they were not called to "resolve," or to "vow," or to "do." god was acting for them--he was doing all: he placed himself between them and every enemy, and every evil. he spread forth the shield of his salvation that they might hide themselves behind its impenetrable defences, and abide there in peace. but, alas, israel made a vow--a strange, a singular vow indeed. not satisfied with god's doings, they would fain talk of their own. they would be doing, as if god's salvation were incomplete; and in lamentable ignorance of their own weakness and nothingness, they said, "all that the lord hath spoken we will do." this was taking a bold stand, a high ground. for a poor worm to make such a vow proved how little grace was really understood, or nature's true condition apprehended. however, israel having undertaken to "_do_," they were put to the test, and the most cursory view of ex. xix. will be sufficient to show what a marked change took place the moment they had uttered the words "we will do." the lord had just reminded them of how he "bare them on eagles' wings, and brought them unto himself;" but now he says, "set bounds unto the people round about, saying, take heed to yourselves, that ye go not up into the mount, or touch the border of it: whosoever toucheth the mount shall be surely put to death." this was a very different aspect of things. and let my reader remember, it was the simple result of man's having said, "i will do." there is far more involved in those words than many might imagine. if we take our eyes off from god's actings, and fix them on our own, the consequences must be disastrous in the extreme. but we shall see this more fully ere we close this paper. let us now inquire how the house of israel fulfilled their singular vow. we shall see that it ended like human vows in every age.[viii.] did they do "_all_" that the lord commanded? did they "continue in all things which are written in the book of the law, to do them?" alas, no. on the contrary, we find that ere the tables of testimony were given, they had broken the very first commandment in the decalogue, by making a golden calf, and bowing down thereto. this was the earliest fruit of their broken vow; and then, onward they went, from stage to stage, dishonoring the name of the lord--breaking his laws, despising his judgments, trampling under foot his sacred institutions. then followed the stoning of his messengers whom, in patient grace and long-suffering, he sent unto them. finally, when the only-begotten son came forth from the bosom of the father, they with wicked hearts rejected and with wicked hands crucified him. thus we pass from sinai to calvary: at the former we hear man undertaking to do all the lord's commandments, and at the latter see him crucifying the lord himself. so much for man's vows, so much for man's "_i will do_." the fragments of the tables of testimony scattered beneath the fiery mount told the first melancholy tale of the failure of man's audacious resolution: nor was there any real break in the narrative, which has its closing scene around the cross of calvary. all was failure--gross, unmitigated failure. thus it must ever be when man presumes to vow or resolve in the presence of god. now there is a very striking resemblance between israel's vow at the foot of mount sinai and the confirmation vow of the establishment. we have rapidly glanced at the former; let us now refer to the latter. in "the ministration of public baptism of infants," after various prayers and the reading of the gospel, the minister addresses the godfathers and godmothers on this wise: "dearly beloved, ye have brought this child here to be baptized; ye have prayed that our lord jesus christ would vouchsafe to receive him, to release him of his sins, to sanctify him with the holy ghost, to give him the kingdom of heaven and everlasting life. ye have heard also that our lord jesus christ hath promised in his gospel to grant all these things that ye have prayed for: which promise he, for his part, will most surely keep and perform. wherefore, after this promise made by christ, this infant must also faithfully, for his part, promise by you that are his sureties (until he come of age to take it upon himself), that _he will renounce_ the devil and all his works, and constantly believe god's holy word and _obediently keep his commandments_. i demand, therefore, dost thou, in the name of this child, renounce the devil and all his works, the vain pomp and glory of the world, with all covetous desires of the same, and the carnal desires of the flesh, so that thou wilt not follow nor be led by them? _answer_: i renounce them all." again: "wilt thou obediently keep god's holy will and commandments, and walk in the same all the days of thy life? _answer_: i will." both the above vows the children, when come to years of discretion, deliberately and solemnly take upon themselves, as may be seen by reference to "the order of confirmation." thus we have, in the first place, people vowing and resolving, on behalf of unconscious infants, to "renounce the world, the flesh, and the devil," and to keep all god's commandments, all the days of their life; and, in the second place, we find those children, in due time, placing themselves under the weight of those awful vows; and all this, moreover, as a necessary condition to the fulfilment of christ's promise. that is to say, if they allow aught of the world, the flesh or the devil to adhere to them; or if they fail in the faithful keeping of _all_ god's commandments, then they cannot be saved, but must, so far as they are concerned, inevitably be condemned. in short, salvation is here made to depend on a covenant to which man makes himself a party. christ is represented as willing to do his part, provided always that man accomplishes his; but not otherwise. in other words, there is an "_if_" in the matter, and, as a consequence, there never is, and never can be, the certainty of salvation; yea, there can only be the constant terror of eternal condemnation hanging over the soul; that is, if there is any thought about the matter at all. if the heart is not perfectly assured of the fact that christ has in very deed done all; that he has put away our sin; that he has forever canceled our debt; that he has settled, by his perfect sacrifice, every question that could possibly arise, whether it be the charges of conscience, the accusings of satan, or the claims of divine justice; that he has not left a cloud on the prospect; that all is perfectly done--in a word, that we stand before god in the power of divine righteousness, and in the same favor with his own son; if, i say, there be any doubt in the soul as to the eternal truth of all these things--then there cannot be settled peace. and that there is not this settled peace in the case of those who have taken on themselves the above tremendous vows is but too evident from the clouds and darkness which hang around their spirits as they tread the next stage of their ecclesiastical journey. we could hardly expect that persons who boldly vow to renounce all evil, and perfectly to fulfil all good, could approach the lord's table with any other acknowledgment than the following, namely: "the burden of our sins is intolerable." it would need an obtuse conscience to be able to shake off the conviction that those vows have been unfulfilled; and then, assuredly, the burden must be intolerable. if i have taken vows upon me, they will, without doubt, prove in the sequel to be dishonored vows; and thus the whole matter of my salvation comes to the ground, and i find myself, according to the terms of my own self-chosen covenant, righteously exposed to the curses of a broken law. i have undertaken to do everything; and yet i have in reality done nothing. hence i am "cursed;" for the word is, "cursed is every one that continueth not in all things which are written in the book of the law, to do them." nor will it at all alter the matter to say that those extraordinary vows are entered into in dependence upon divine grace; for there cannot be such a thing as dependence upon _grace_ when people are placing themselves directly under the _law_. no two things can be more opposite than law and grace. they are put in direct contrast in paul's epistles to the romans and galatians. "whosoever of you are justified by the law ([greek: en nomô]),[ix.] ye are fallen from grace" (gal. v. ). hence, to think of depending upon grace when putting myself under law is precisely the same as if i were to look to god for grace to enable me to subvert the entire gospel of his son jesus christ. "as many as are of works of law ([greek: ergôn nomou])[ix.] are under the curse." could i depend upon god's grace to enable me to abide under the curse? the thought is preposterous in the extreme. and be it observed that the apostle, in the last-quoted passage, does not merely say, "as many as fail to keep the law are under the curse." this he distinctly teaches, no doubt; but the special point is, that as many as attempt to stand before god on the ground of "works of law," are of necessity under the curse, for the simplest of all reasons, that they are not able to satisfy his claims. in order for man to satisfy god's claims, he must bewhat in himself he cannot be; that is, without sin. the law demands, as its right, perfect obedience; and those who take upon them the confirmation vows promise perfect obedience. they promise to renounce all evil, and to fulfil all good, in the most absolute manner; and moreover, they make their salvation to depend upon their fulfilment of those vows; else why make them at all? this, when looked at in the light of the apostolic teaching in romans and galatians, is the most complete denial of all the fundamental truths of the gospel. in the first place, it is a denial of man's total ruin, of his condition as one "dead in trespasses and sins," "alienated from the life of god," "without strength," "ungodly," "enmity against god." if i can undertake to renounce all evil, and to do all god's commandments, then, assuredly, i do not know myself to be a lost, ruined, helpless creature; and, as a consequence, i do not need a saviour. if i can boldly undertake to "_renounce_" and to "_do_," to "keep" and to "walk," i am manifestly not lost, and hence i do not want salvation; i am not dead, and hence i do not want life; i am not "without strength," and hence i do not want the energy of that new, that divine life which is imparted by the holy ghost to all who, by his grace, believe in the son of god. if i am capable of doing for myself, i do not want another, even the lord jesus christ, to do all for me. again, as flowing out of what has already been stated, those vows do entirely set aside the essential glories, divine dignities and sacred virtues of the cross of christ. if i can get a godfather and godmother to take vows on them on my behalf until i am capable of taking them on myself, then it is evident i cannot possibly know the deep blessedness of having all my vows, all my responsibilities and liabilities as a lost sinner, all my sins and shortcomings,--everything, in short,--fully and eternally answered in the cross. if there is anything in my case which has not been perfectly settled in the cross, then i must inevitably perish. i may make vows and resolutions, but they are as the morning cloud that passeth away. i may get a sponsor to renounce the devil on my behalf, and i may in due time talk of renouncing him for myself; but what if the devil all the while has fast hold of both my sponsor and myself? he will not renounce me, unless the chain by which he binds me has been snapped asunder by the cross. again, i may get a sponsor to undertake to keep all god's commandments for me, and, in due time, i may undertake to keep them for myself; but what if neither my sponsor nor i really understand the true nature or spirituality, the majesty or stringency, of that law? yea, more. what if both he and i are, by our very vows, made debtors to do the whole law, and thus shut up under its terrible curse? what then becomes of all our vows and resolutions? is it not plain that i am throwing overboard the cross? truly so. that cross must either be everything or nothing to me. if it is anything it must be everything; and if it is not everything it is nothing. thus it stands, my beloved reader. the gospel of the grace of god sets forth christ as the great sponsor and surety of his people. the confirmation service sets one sinner to stand sponsor for another, or for himself. the gospel sets forth one, who is possessed of "unsearchable riches," as the security for his people; the confirmation service sets one bankrupt to stand security for another or for himself. what avails such security? who would accept of it? it is perfectly valueless to god and man. if i am a bankrupt, i cannot promise to pay anything, and if i could promise, no one would accept of it--yea, it would be justly regarded in the light of an empty formality. the promissory note of a bankrupt is little worth; and truly the vows and resolutions of a poor ruined sinner are not merely an empty formality, but a solemn mockery, in the presence of almighty god. no one who knows himself would presume to vow, or resolve, to keep all god's commandments--such an one would have the full conviction that he could never do anything of the kind. but, as a further reply to the statement that those confirmation vows are made in entire dependence upon the grace of god, i would observe that grace can only be known or trusted by those who are his. "they that know thy name will put their trust in thee," and none else. now, the word of god connects eternal life with the knowledge of him. "this is life eternal, that they might know thee, the only true god, and jesus christ, whom thou hast sent" (john xvii. ). if, therefore, i have eternal life, i need not make vows to get it. if i am eternally saved, i need not make vows to get salvation. if my sins are all canceled by the precious blood of the lamb, i need not make vows to get them canceled. neither baptismal vows, confirmation vows, sacramental vows, nor any other vows are necessary for one who has found life, righteousness, wisdom, sanctification, redemption--yea, all things in christ. the comfort and peace of the feeblest believer are based upon the fact that christ took all his vows, all his liabilities, all his sins, all his iniquities entirely upon himself, and, by his death upon the cross, gloriously discharged them all. this sets him entirely free. hence, it follows that if i am not a child of god, i cannot keep vows; and if i am, i need not make them. in either case, i deny man's fallen condition, and set aside the true glories of the cross. it may be in ignorance--it may be with the most sincere intention--no doubt; but the most profound ignorance and the purest sincerity cannot alter the real principle which lies at the root of all manner of vows, promises, and resolutions. there is, beyond all question, involved therein a plain denial of the great foundation-truths of the christian religion. a vow assumes the competency to fulfil. well, then, if i vow to keep all god's commandments perfectly, all the days of my life, i am not lost or without strength. i must have strength, else i could not undertake such a ponderous responsibility. and, my reader, remark further the strange anomaly involved in this system of vows; that while it denies my lost estate, it robs me of everything approaching to a certainty of ever being saved. if i resolve to keep god's commandments as a necessary condition of my salvation, i never can be sure of being saved until i have fulfilled the condition; but inasmuch as i never can fulfil it, i, therefore, never can be sure of my salvation; and thus i travel on, from stage to stage, from baptism to confirmation, from confirmation to communion, and from communion to the death-bed, in a state of miserable doubt and torturing uncertainty. this is not the gospel. it is "a different gospel which is not another." the immediate effect of the work of christ, when laid hold of by faith, is to give settled peace to the conscience; the effect of the system of vows, is to keep the heart in constant doubt and heaviness. how many have approached the ordinance of confirmation with trembling hearts, at the thought of having to take upon their own shoulders the solemn vows which, from the period of their baptism, had rested on their godfathers and godmothers. how could it be otherwise with an honest mind? if i am really sincere, the thought of having to take on myself those solemn baptismal vows, must fill me with horror. some, alas! go through these things with thoughtless hearts and frivolous minds; but it is evident the confirmation service was never framed for such. it was designed for thoughtful, serious, earnest spirits; and all such must, assuredly, retire from the ceremony, with troubled hearts and burdened consciences. with what different feelings we gaze upon the cross of the son of god! there, in good truth, satan was renounced, and his works destroyed. there the law of god was magnified and made honorable, vindicated, and established. there the justice of god was fully answered. there satan was vanquished; there conscience gets its full answer; there the cup of god's unmingled wrath against sin was drained to the dregs by his blessed son. where is the proof of all this? not in the unaccomplished, dishonored vows of poor frail mortals; but in a risen, ascended, glorified christ, seated at the right hand of the majesty in the heavens. who that knows aught of the pure and most excellent grace of god, or that has tasted aught of the true blessedness of divinely-accomplished redemption, could tolerate such language as, "christ for his part" and "this infant for his part?" who that has listened, by faith, to those words, "it is finished," issuing, as they do, from amid the solemn scenes of calvary, could endure a sinful mortal's "_i do_," or "_i will_?" what a total setting aside of grace! what a tarnishing of the brightness of god's salvation! what an insult to the righteousness of god, which is by faith, and without works! what a manifest return to a religion of ordinances and the poor works of man! christ and an infant, or the infant's sureties, are placed on the same platform to work out salvation. is it not so? if not, what mean the words, "christ for his part, and this infant for his part?" is it not plain that salvation is made to depend upon something or some one besides christ? unquestionably. the vows must be fulfilled, or there is no salvation! miserable condition! christ's accomplished work abandoned for a sinner's unaccomplishable vows and resolutions! man's "i do" substituted for christ's "i have finished!" my reader, can you own such a fearful surrender of the truth of god? are you content with such a sandy foundation? whither, think you, will such a system lead you? to heaven, or to rome? which? be honest. take the new testament, search it from cover to cover, and see if you can find such a thing as infants making vows by proxy, to renounce the world, the flesh, and the devil, and to keep all god's commandments, in order to salvation. there is not so much as a shadow of a foundation for such an idea. "by works of law shall no flesh living be justified." "but now the righteousness of god, without law, is manifested, being witnessed by the law and the prophets." "to him that worketh not, but believeth on him that justified the ungodly, his faith is counted to him for righteousness." "for by grace are ye saved, through faith; and that not of yourselves it is the gift of god: not of works, lest any man should boast." "not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to his mercy he saved us." (see rom. iii. - ; iv. , ; eph. ii. , ; titus iii. - .) these are but a very few of the numerous passages which might be adduced in proof of the fact that the confirmation vows are diametrically opposed to the truth of god--totally subversive of the grace of god. if my vows mean anything i must be miserable, because i am in imminent danger of being lost forever, inasmuch as i have _not_ kept them, and never could keep them. oh! what sweet relief for the wearied heart and sin-burdened conscience in the atoning blood of jesus! what full deliverance from my worthless and worse than worthless vows! _christ has done all._ he has put away sin--made peace--brought in everlasting righteousness--brought life and immortality to light. in him may you, my beloved reader, find abiding peace, unfading joy, and everlasting glory. to him and his perfect work i now most affectionately commend you, body, soul, and spirit, fully assuring you my object in this paper is not to attack the prejudices, or wound the feelings of any, but simply to take occasion to show how the perfect work of the lord jesus christ is thrown into full and blessed relief by being looked at in contrast with the "confirmation vows." footnotes: [viii.] there is a passage in the book of deuteronomy which, as it may present a difficulty to some minds, should be noticed here. "and the lord heard the voice of your words, when ye spake unto me; and the lord said unto me, i have heard the voice of the words of this people which they have spoken unto thee: _they have well said all that they have spoken_" (deut. v. ). from this passage, it might seem as though the lord approved of their making a vow; but if my reader will take the trouble of reading the entire context, from verse to , he will see that it has nothing whatever to say to the vow, but that it contains the expression of their terror at the consequences of their vow. they were not able to endure that which was commanded. "if," said they "we hear the voice of the lord our god any more, then we shall die. for who is there of all flesh that hath heard the voice of the living god speaking out of the midst of the fire, as we have, and lived? go thou near, and hear all that the lord our god shall say; and speak thou unto us all that the lord our god shall speak unto thee; and we will hear it and do it." it was the confession of their own inability to encounter jehovah in that awful aspect which their proud legality had led him to assume. it is impossible that the lord could ever commend an abandonment of free and changeless grace for a sandy foundation of works of law. (see "notes on the book of exodus," page . same publishers.) [ix.] [that is, as many as are on that principle--of "law," "works of law." ed.] thoughts on the lord's supper; designed for the help of christians in this day of difficulty. _new edition, revised._ preface the institution of the lord's supper must be regarded, by every spiritual mind, as a peculiarly touching proof of the lord's gracious care and considerate love for his church. from the time of its appointment until the present hour, it has been a steady, though silent, witness to a truth which the enemy, by every means in his power, has sought to corrupt and set aside, namely, that redemption is an accomplished fact to be enjoyed by the weakest believer in jesus. eighteen centuries have rolled away since the lord jesus appointed "the bread and the cup" in the eucharist as the significant symbols of his broken body and his blood shed for us; and notwithstanding all the heresy, all the schism, all the controversy and strife, the war of principles and prejudices which the blotted page of ecclesiastical history records, this most expressive institution has been observed by the saints of god in every age. true, the enemy has succeeded, throughout a vast section of the professing church, in wrapping it up in a shroud of dark superstition; in presenting it in such a way as actually to hide from the view of the communicant the grand and eternal reality of which it is the memorial; in displacing christ and his accomplished sacrifice by a powerless ordinance--an ordinance, moreover, which by the very mode of its administration proves its utter worthlessness and opposition to the truth. (see note to page .) yet, notwithstanding rome's deadly error in reference to the ordinance of the lord's supper, it still speaks to every circumcised ear and every spiritual mind the same deep and precious truth--it "shows the lord's death till he come." the body has been broken, the blood has been shed once, no more to be repeated; and the breaking of bread is but the memorial of this emancipating truth. with what profound interest and thankfulness, therefore, should the believer contemplate "the bread and the cup"! without a word spoken, there is the setting forth of truths at once the most precious and glorious: grace reigning--redemption finished--sin put away--everlasting righteousness brought in--the sting of death gone--eternal glory secured--"grace and glory" revealed as the free gift of god and the lamb--the unity of the "one body," as baptized by "one spirit." what a feast! it carries the soul back, in the twinkling of an eye, over a lapse of eighteen hundred years, and shows us the master himself, "in the same night in which he was betrayed," sitting at the supper table, and there instituting a feast which, from that solemn moment, that memorable night, until the dawn of the morning, should lead every believing heart at once backward to the cross and forward to the glory. this feast has ever since, by the very simplicity of its character, and yet the deep significance of its elements, rebuked the superstition that would deify and worship it, the profanity that would desecrate it, and the infidelity that would set it aside altogether: and furthermore, while it has rebuked all these, it has strengthened, comforted and refreshed the hearts of millions of god's beloved saints. it is sweet to think of this--sweet to bear in mind, as we assemble on the first day of the week round the supper of the lord, that apostles, martyrs and saints have gathered round that feast, and found therein, according to their measure, refreshment and blessing. schools of theology have arisen, flourished, and disappeared; doctors and fathers have accumulated ponderous tomes of divinity; deadly heresies have darkened the atmosphere, and rent the professing church from one end to the other; superstition and fanaticism have put forth their baseless theories and extravagant notions; professing christians have split into sects innumerable--all these things have taken place; but the lord's supper has continued, amid the darkness and confusion, to tell out its simple yet comprehensive tale. "as oft as ye eat this bread, and drink this cup, ye do show[x.] the lord's death till he come" (i cor. xi. ). precious feast! thank god for the great privilege of celebrating it! and yet is it but a sign, the elements of which must, in nature's view, be mean and contemptible. bread broken, wine poured out--how simple! faith alone can read, in the sign, the thing signified; and therefore it needs not the adventitious circumstances which false religion has introduced in order to add dignity, solemnity and awe to that which derives all its value, its power and its impressiveness from its being a memorial of an eternal fact which false religion denies. may you and i, beloved reader, enter with more freshness and intelligence into the meaning of the lord's supper, and with deeper experience into the blessedness of breaking that bread which is "the communion of the body of christ," and drinking of that cup which is "the communion of the blood of christ." in closing these few prefatory lines, i commend this treatise to the lord's gracious care, praying him to make it useful to the souls of his people. c. h. m. footnote: [x.] [the greek word translated "show" is more exactly rendered "announce" or "proclaim"--same word as in i cor. ix. . ed.] thoughts on the lord's supper "for i have received of the lord that which also i delivered unto you, that the lord jesus, the same night in which he was betrayed, took bread: and when he had given thanks, he brake it, and said, take, eat; this is my body, which is broken for you: this do in remembrance of me. after the same manner also he took the cup, when he had supped, saying, this cup is the new testament in my blood: this do ye, as oft as ye drink it, in remembrance of me. for as often as ye eat this bread, and drink this cup, ye do show the lord's death till he come."--i cor. xi. - . i desire to offer a few brief remarks on the subject of the lord's supper, for the purpose of stirring up the minds of all who love the name and institutions of christ to a more fervent and affectionate interest in this most important and refreshing ordinance. we should bless the lord for his gracious consideration of our need in having established such a memorial of his dying love, and also in having spread a table at which _all_ his members might present themselves without any other condition than the indispensable one of personal connection with and obedience to him. the blessed master knew well the tendency of our hearts to slip away from him, and from each other, and to meet this tendency was _one_, at least, of his objects in the institution of the supper. he would gather his people around his own blessed person; he would spread a table for them where, in view of his broken body and shed blood, they might remember him, and the intensity of his love for them, and from whence, also, they might look forward into the future, and contemplate the glory of which the cross is the everlasting foundation. there, if anywhere, they would learn to forget their differences, and to love one another; there they might see around them those whom the love of god had invited to the feast, and whom the blood of christ had made fit to be there. however, in order that i may the more easily and briefly convey to the mind of my reader what i have to say on this subject, i shall confine myself to the four following points, viz.: st. the nature of the ordinance of the lord's supper. d. the circumstances under which it was instituted. d. the persons for whom it was designed. th. the time and manner of its observance. i. and first, as to the nature of the ordinance of the lord's supper. this is a cardinal point. if we understand not the nature of the ordinance, we shall be astray in all our thoughts about it. the supper, then, is purely and distinctly a feast of thanksgiving--thanksgiving for grace already received. the lord himself, at the institution of it, marks its character by giving thanks. "he took bread: ... when he had given thanks," etc. praise, and not prayer, is the suited utterance of those who sit at the table of the lord. true, we have much to pray for, much to confess, much to mourn over; but the table is not the place for mourners: its language is, "give strong drink unto him that is ready to perish, and wine unto those that be of heavy hearts. let him drink and forget his poverty, and remember his misery no more." ours is "a cup of blessing," a cup of thanksgiving, the divinely appointed symbol of that precious blood which has procured our ransom. "the bread which we break, is it not the communion of the body of christ?" how, then, could we break it with sad hearts or sorrowful countenances? could a family circle, after the toils of the day, sit down to supper with sighs and gloomy looks? surely not. the supper was the great family meal, the only one that was sure to bring _all the family together_. faces that might not have been seen during the day were sure to be seen at the supper table, and no doubt they would be happy there. just so it should be at the lord's supper: the family should assemble there; and when assembled, they should be happy, unfeignedly happy, in the love that brings them together. true, each heart may have its own peculiar history--its secret sorrows, trials, failures, and temptations, unknown to all around; but these are not the objects to be contemplated at the supper: to bring them into view is to dishonor the lord of the feast, and make the cup of blessing a cup of sorrow. the lord has invited us to the feast, and commanded us, notwithstanding all our shortcomings, to place the fulness of his love and the cleansing efficacy of his blood between our souls and everything; and when the eye of faith is filled with christ, there is no room for aught beside. if my sin be the object which fills my eye and engages my thoughts, of course i must be miserable, because i am looking right away from what god commands me to contemplate; i am remembering my misery and poverty, the very things which god commands me to forget. hence the true character of the ordinance is lost, and, instead of being a feast of joy and gladness, it becomes a season of gloom and spiritual depression; and the preparation for it, and the thoughts which are entertained about it are more what might be expected in reference to mount sinai than to a happy family feast. if ever a feeling of sadness could have prevailed at the celebration of this ordinance, surely it would have been on the occasion of its first institution, when, as we shall see when we come to consider the second point in our subject, there was everything that could possibly produce deep sadness and desolation of spirit; yet the lord jesus could "give thanks;" the tide of joy that flowed through his soul was far too deep to be ruffled by surrounding circumstances; he had a joy even in the breaking and bruising of his body and in the pouring forth of his blood which lay far beyond the reach of human thought and feeling. and if he could rejoice in spirit, and give thanks in breaking that bread which was to be to all future generations of the faithful the memorial of his broken body, should not we rejoice therein, we who stand in the blessed results of all his toil and passion? yes; it becomes us to rejoice. but it may be asked, is there no preparation necessary? are we to sit down at the table of the lord with as much indifference as if we were sitting down to an ordinary supper table? surely not--we need to be right in our souls, and the first step toward this is peace with god--that sweet assurance of our eternal salvation which most certainly is not the result of human sighs or penitential tears, but the simple result of the finished work of the lamb of god, attested by the spirit of god. apprehending this by faith, we apprehend that which makes us perfectly fit for god. many imagine that they are putting honor upon the lord's table when they approach it with their souls bowed down into the very dust, under a sense of the intolerable burden of their sins. this thought can only flow from the legalism of the human heart, that ever-fruitful source of thoughts at once dishonoring to god, dishonoring to the cross of christ, grievous to the holy ghost, and completely subversive of our own peace. we may feel quite satisfied that the honor and purity of the lord's table are more fully maintained when the blood of christ is made the only title than if human sorrow and human penitence were superadded.[xi.] however, the question of preparedness will come more fully before us as we proceed with our subject; i shall therefore state another principle connected with the nature of the lord's supper, viz., that there is involved in it an intelligent recognition of the oneness of the body of christ. "the bread which we break, is it not the communion of the body of christ? for we, being many, are one bread, and one body; for we are all partakers of that one bread." now there was sad failure and sad confusion in reference to this point at corinth: indeed, the great principle of the church's oneness would seem to have been totally lost sight of there. hence the apostle observes that "when ye come together into one place, this is not to eat the lord's supper, for every one taketh before other _his own_ supper" (i cor. xi. , ). here, it was isolation, and not unity; an individual, and not a corporate question: "_his own supper_" is strikingly contrasted with "_the lord's supper_." the _lord's_ supper demands that the body be fully recognized: if the one body be not recognized, it is but sectarianism: the lord himself has lost his place. if the table be spread upon any narrower principle than that which would embrace the whole body of christ, it is become a sectarian table, and has lost its claim upon the hearts of the faithful. on the contrary, where a table is spread upon this divine principle, which embraces _all_ the members of the body _simply as such_, every one who refuses to present himself at it is chargeable with schism, and that, too, upon the plain principles of i cor. xi. "there must," says the apostle, "be heresies among you, that they which are approved may be made manifest among you." when the great church principle is lost sight of by any portion of the body, there must be heresies, in order that the approved ones may be made manifest! and under such circumstances it becomes the business of each one to approve himself, and so to eat. the "approved" ones stand in contrast with the heretics, or those who were doing their own will.[xii.] but it may be asked, do not the numerous denominations at present existing in the professing church altogether preclude the idea of ever being able to gather the whole body together? and, under such circumstances, is it not better for each denomination to have their own table? if there be any force in this question, it merely goes to prove that the people of god are no longer able to act upon god's principles, but that they are left to the miserable alternative of acting on human expediency. thank god, such is not the case. the truth of the lord endureth forever, and what the holy ghost teaches in i cor. xi. is binding upon every member of the church of god. there were divisions, and heresies, and unholiness, existing in the assembly at corinth, just as there are divisions, and heresies, and unholiness, existing in the professing church now; but the apostle did not tell them to set up separate tables on the one hand, nor yet to cease from breaking bread on the other. no; he presses upon them the principles and the holiness connected with "the church of god," and tells those who could approve themselves accordingly to eat. the expression is, "_so let him eat_." we are to eat, therefore: our care must be to eat "_so_," as the holy ghost teaches us; and that is in the true recognition of the holiness and oneness of the church of god.[xiii.] when the church is despised, the spirit be-must be grieved and dishonored, and the certain end will be spiritual barrenness and freezing formalism: and although men may substitute intellectual for spiritual power, and human talents and attainments for the gifts of the holy ghost, yet will the end be "like the heath in the desert." the true way to make progress in the divine life is to live for the church, and not for ourselves. the man who lives for the church is in full harmony with the mind of the spirit, and must necessarily grow. on the contrary, the man who is living for himself, having his thoughts revolving round, and his energies concentrated upon, himself, must soon become cramped and formal, and, in all probability, openly worldly. yes; he will become worldly, in some sense of that extensive term; for the world and the church stand in direct opposition, the one to the other; nor is there any aspect of the world in which this opposition is more fully seen than in its religious aspect. what is commonly called the _religious world_ will be found, when examined in the light of the presence of god, to be more thoroughly hostile to the true interests of the church of god than almost anything. but i must hasten on to other branches of our subject, only stating another simple principle connected with the lord's supper, to which i desire to call the special attention of the christian reader; it is this: the celebration of the ordinance of the lord's supper should be the distinct expression of the unity of all believers, and not merely of the unity of a certain number gathered on certain principles, which distinguish them from others. if there be any term of communion proposed, save the all-important one of faith in the atonement of christ, and a walk consistent with that faith, the table becomes the table of a sect, and possesses no claims upon the hearts of the faithful. furthermore, if by sitting at the table i must identify myself with any one thing, whether it be principle or practice, not enjoined in scripture, as a term of communion, there also the table becomes the table of a sect. it is not a question of whether there may be christians there or not; it would be hard indeed to find a table amongst the reformed communities of which some christians are not partakers. the apostle did not say, "there must be heresies among you, that they which are _christians_ may be made manifest among you." no; but "that they which are _approved_." nor did he say, "let a man prove himself a christian, and so let him eat." no; but "let a man approve himself," i. e., let him shew himself to be one of those who are not only upright in their consciences as to their individual act in the matter, but who are also confessing the oneness of the body of christ. when men set up terms of communion of their own, there you find the principle of heresy; there, too, there must be schism. on the contrary, where a table is spread in such a manner and upon such principles as that a christian, subject to god, can take his place at it, then it becomes schism not to be there; for, by being there, and by walking consistently with our position and profession there, we, so far as in us lies, confess the oneness of the church of god--that grand object for which the holy ghost was sent from heaven to earth. the lord jesus, having been raised from the dead, and having taken his seat at the right hand of god, sent down the holy ghost to earth for the purpose of forming one body. mark, to form _one body_--not many bodies. he has no sympathy with the many bodies, as such; though he has blessed sympathy with many members in those bodies, because they, though being members of sects or schisms, are nevertheless, members of the one body; but he does not form the many bodies, but the one body, for "by one spirit are we all baptized into one body, whether we be jews or gentiles, whether we be bond or free; and have all been made to drink into one spirit" (i cor. xii. ). i desire that there may be no misunderstanding on this point. i say the holy ghost cannot approve the schisms in the professing church, for he himself has said of such, "i praise you not." he is grieved by them--he would counteract them; he baptizes all believers into the unity of the one body, so that it cannot be thought, by any intelligent mind, that the holy ghost could sustain schisms, which are a grief and a dishonor to him. we must however, distinguish between the spirit's dwelling in the church, and his dwelling in individuals. he dwells in the body of christ, which is the church (see i cor. iii. ; eph. ii. ); he dwells also in the body of the believer, as we read, "your body is the temple of the holy ghost, which is in you, which ye have of god" (i cor. vi. ). the only body or community, therefore, in which the spirit can dwell, is _the whole church of god_; and the only person in which he can dwell is the believer. but, as has already been observed, the table of the lord, in any given locality, should be the exhibition of the unity of the whole church. this leads us to another principle connected with the nature of the lord's supper, viz., this, it is an act whereby we not only shew the death of the lord until he come, but whereby we also give expression to a fundamental truth, which cannot be too strongly or too frequently pressed upon the minds of christians, at the present day, viz., that_ all believers are_ "_one loaf--one body_." it is a very common error to view this ordinance merely as a channel through which grace flows to the soul of the individual, and not as an act bearing upon the whole body, and bearing also upon the glory of the head of the church. that it is a channel through which grace flows to the soul of the individual communicant there can be no doubt, for there is blessing in every act of obedience. but that individual blessing is but a very small part of it, can be seen by the attentive reader of i cor. xi. it is the lord's death and the lord's coming, that are brought prominently before our souls in the lord's supper; and where any one of these elements is excluded there must be something wrong. if there be anything to hinder the complete showing forth of the lord's death, or the exhibition of the unity of the body, or the clear perception of the lord's coming, then there must be something radically wrong in the principle on which the table is spread, and we only need a single eye, and a mind entirely subject to the word and spirit of christ, in order to detect the wrong. let the christian reader, now, prayerfully examine the table at which he periodically takes his place and see if it will bear the threefold test of i cor. xi., and if not, let him, in the name of the lord, and for the sake of the church, abandon it. there are heresies, and schisms flowing from heresies, in the professing church, but "let a man approve himself, and so let him eat" the lord's supper; and if, once for all, it be asked, what means the term "approved?" it may be answered, it is in the first place, to be personally true to the lord in the act of breaking bread; and in the next place, to shake off all schism, and take our stand, firmly and decidedly, upon the broad principle which will embrace all the members of the flock of christ. we are not only to be careful that we ourselves are walking in purity of heart and life before the lord; but also, that the table of which we partake has nothing connected with it that could at all act as a barrier to the unity of the church. it is not merely a personal question. nothing more fully proves the low ebb of christianity at the present day, or the fearful extent to which the holy ghost is grieved, than the miserable selfishness which tinges, yea, pollutes, the thoughts of professing christians. everything is made to hinge upon the mere question of self. it is _my_ forgiveness--_my_ safety--_my_ peace--_my_ happy frames and feelings, and not the glory of christ, or the welfare of his beloved church. well, therefore, may the words of the prophet be applied to us, "thus saith the lord, consider your ways. go up to the mountain and bring wood, and build the house; and i will take pleasure in _it_ and i will be glorified. ye looked for much, and lo, it came to little; and when ye brought it home, i did blow upon it. why? saith the lord of hosts. because of _my house_ that is waste, and ye run every man to _his own_ house" (hag. i. - ). here is the root of the matter. self stands in contrast with the house of god; and, if self be made the object, no marvel that there should be a sad lack of spiritual joy, energy, and power. to have these, we must be in fellowship with the spirit's thoughts. he thinks of the body of christ; and, if we are thinking of self, we must be at issue with him; and the consequences are but too apparent. ii. having now treated of what i conceive to be by far the most important point in our subject, i shall proceed to consider, in the second place, the circumstances under which the lord's supper was instituted. these were particularly solemn and touching. the lord was about to enter into dreadful conflict with all the powers of darkness--to meet all the deadly enmity of man; and to drain to the dregs the cup of jehovah's righteous wrath against sin. he had a terrible morrow before him--the most terrible that had ever been encountered by man or angel; yet, notwithstanding all this, we read that "on _the same night_ in which he was betrayed, he took bread." what unselfish love is here! "the same night"--the night of profound sorrow--the night of his agony and bloody sweat---the night of his betrayal by one, and his denial by another, and his desertion by all of his disciples--on that very night, the loving heart of jesus was full of thoughts about his church--on that very night he instituted the ordinance of the lord's supper. he appointed the bread to be the emblem of his body broken, and the wine to be the emblem of his blood shed; and such they are to us now, as often as we partake of them, for the word assures us that "as often as ye eat _this bread_ and drink _this cup_, ye do show _the lord's death_, till he come." now, all this, we may say, attaches peculiar importance and sacred solemnity to the supper of the lord; and, moreover, gives us some idea of the consequences of eating and drinking unworthily.[xiv.] the voice which the ordinance utters in the circumcised ear is ever the same. the bread and the wine are deeply significant symbols; the bruised corn and the pressed grape being both combined to minister strength and gladness to the heart: and not only are they significant in themselves, but they are also to be used in the lord's supper, as being the very emblems which the blessed master himself ordained on the night previous to his crucifixion; so that faith can behold the lord jesus presiding at _his own table_--can see him take the bread and the wine, and hear him say, "take, eat; this is my body;" and again, of the cup, "drink ye _all_ of it. for this is my blood of the new testament which is shed for many for the remission of sins." in a word, the ordinance leads the soul back to the eventful night already referred to--brings before us all the reality of the cross and passion of the lamb of god, in which our whole souls can rest and rejoice; it reminds us, in the most impressive manner, of the unselfish love and pure devotedness of him, who, when calvary was casting its dark shadow across his path, and the cup of jehovah's righteous wrath against sin, of which he was about to be the bearer, was being filled for him, could, nevertheless, busy himself about us, and institute a feast which was to be both the expression of our connection with him, and with all the members of his body. and may we not infer, that the holy ghost made use of the expression "_the same night_," for the purpose of remedying the disorders that had arisen in the church at corinth? was there not a severe rebuke administered to the selfishness of those who were taking "_their own supper_," in the spirit's reference to the same night in which the lord of the feast was betrayed? doubtless there was. can selfishness live in the view of the cross? can thoughts about our own interests, or our own gratification, be indulged in the presence of him who sacrificed himself for us? surely not. could we heartlessly and wilfully despise the church of god--could we offend or exclude beloved members of the flock of christ, while gazing on that cross on which the shepherd of the flock, and the head of the body, was crucified?[xv.] ah, no; let believers only keep near the cross--let them remember "the same night"--let them keep in mind the broken body and shed blood of the lord jesus christ, and there will soon be an end to heresy, schism, and selfishness. if we could only bear in mind that the lord himself presides at the table, to dispense the bread and wine; if we could hear him say, "take this, and divide it among yourselves," we should be better able to meet _all_ our brethren on the _only_ christian ground of fellowship which god can own. in a word, the person of christ is god's centre of union. "i," said christ, "if i be lifted up from the earth, will draw all men unto _me_." each believer can hear his blessed master speaking from the cross, and saying of his fellow believers, "_behold thy brethren_;" and, truly, if we could distinctly hear this, we should act, in a measure, as the beloved disciple acted towards the mother of jesus; our hearts and our homes would be open to all who have been thus commended to our care. the word is, "_receive ye one another, as christ also received us to the glory of god_." there is another point worthy of notice, in connection with the circumstances under which the lord's supper was instituted, namely, its connection with the jewish passover. "then came the day of unleavened bread, when the passover must be killed. and he sent peter and john, saying, go and prepare us the passover, that we may eat.... and _when the hour was come_, he sat down, and the twelve apostles with him. and he said unto them, with desire i have desired to eat this passover with you before i suffer; for i say unto you, i will not any more eat thereof, until it be fulfilled in the kingdom of god. and he took the cup [i. e., the cup of the passover], and gave thanks, and said, take this and divide it among yourselves; for i say unto you, i will not drink of the fruit of the vine until the kingdom of god shall come" (luke xxii. - ). the passover was, as we know, the great feast of israel, first observed on the memorable night of their happy deliverance from the thralldom of egypt. as to its connection with the lord's supper, it consists in its being the marked _type_ of that of which the supper is the _memorial_. the passover pointed _forward_ to the cross; the supper points _back_ to it. but israel was no longer in a fit moral condition to keep the passover, according to the divine thoughts about it; and the lord jesus, on the occasion above referred to, was leading his apostles away altogether from the jewish element to a new order of things. it was no longer to be a lamb sacrificed, but bread broken and wine drunk in commemoration of a sacrifice once offered, the efficacy of which was to be eternal. those whose minds are bowed down to jewish ordinances, may still look, in some way or another, for the periodical repetition, either of a sacrifice, or of something which is to bring them into a place of greater nearness to god.[xvi.] some there are who think that in the lord's supper the soul makes, or renews, a covenant with god, not knowing that if we were to enter into covenant with god, we should inevitably be ruined; as the only possible issue of a covenant between god and man is the failure of one of the parties (i. e., man), and consequent judgment. thank god, there is no such thing as a covenant with us. the bread and wine, in the supper, speak a deep and wondrous truth; they tell of the broken body and shed blood of the lamb of god--the lamb of god's own providing. here the soul can rest with perfect complacency; it is the new testament in the blood of christ, and not a covenant between god and man. man's covenant had signally failed, and the lord jesus had to allow the cup of the fruit of the vine (the emblem of joy in the earth) to pass him by. earth had no joy for him--israel had become "the degenerate plant of a strange vine;" wherefore, he had only to say, "i will not drink of the fruit of the vine, until the kingdom of god shall come." a long and dreary season was to pass over israel, ere her king could take any joy in her moral condition: but, during that time, "the church of god" was to "keep the feast" of unleavened bread, in all its moral power and significance, by putting away the "old leaven of malice and wickedness," as the fruit of fellowship with him whose blood cleanseth from all sin. however, the fact of the lord's supper having been instituted immediately after the passover, teaches us a very valuable principle of truth, viz., this: the destinies of the church and of israel are inseparably linked with the cross of the lord jesus christ. true, the church has a higher place, even identification with her risen and glorified head; yet all rests upon the cross. yes; it was on the cross that the pure sheaf of corn was bruised and the juices of the living vine pressed forth by the hand of jehovah himself, to yield strength and gladness to the hearts of his heavenly and earthly people forever. the prince of life took from jehovah's righteous hand the cup of wrath, the cup of trembling, and drained it to the dregs in order that he might put into the hands of his people the cup of salvation, the cup of god's ineffable love, that they might drink and forget their poverty, and remember their misery no more. the lord's supper expresses all this. there the lord presides; there the redeemed should meet in holy fellowship and brotherly love, to eat and drink before the lord; and while they do so, they can look back at their master's _night_ of deep sorrow, and forward to his day of glory--that "morning without clouds," when "he shall come to be glorified in his saints, and to be admired in all them that believe." iii. we shall now consider, in the third place, the persons for whom, and for whom _alone_, the lord's supper was instituted. the lord's supper, then, was instituted for the church of god--the family of the redeemed. all the members of that family should be there; for none can be absent without incurring the guilt of disobedience to the plain command of christ and his inspired apostle; and the consequence of this disobedience will be positive spiritual decline and a complete failure in testimony for christ. such consequences, however, are the result only of wilful absence from the lord's table. there are circumstances which, in certain cases, may present an insurmountable barrier, though there might be the most earnest desire to be present at the celebration of the ordinance, as there ever will be where the mind is spiritual; but we may lay it down as a fixed principle of truth that no one can make progress in the divine life who wilfully absents himself from the lord's table. "all the congregation of israel" were commanded to keep the passover (ex. xii.). no member of the congregation could with impunity be absent. "the man that is clean, and is not in a journey, and forbeareth to keep the passover, even the same soul shall be cut off from among his people: because he brought not the offering of the lord in his appointed season, that man shall bear his sin" (num. ix. ). i feel that it would be rendering really valuable service to the cause of truth, and a furtherance of the interests of the church of god, if an interest could be awakened on this important subject. there is too much lightness and indifference in the minds of christians as to the matter of their attendance at the table of the lord; and where there is not this indifference, there is an unwillingness arising from imperfect views of justification. now both these hindrances, though so different in their character, spring from one and the same source, viz., selfishness. he who is indifferent about the matter will selfishly allow trifling circumstances to interfere with his attendance: he will be hindered by family arrangements, love of personal ease, unfavorable weather, trifling or, as it frequently happens, imaginary bodily ailments--things which are lost sight of or counted as nothing when some worldly object is to be gained. how often does it happen that men who have not spiritual energy to leave their houses on the lord's day have abundant natural energy to carry them some miles to gain some worldly object on monday. alas that it should be so! how sad to think that worldly gain could exert a more powerful influence on the heart of the christian than the glory of christ and the furtherance of the church's benefit! for this is the way in which we must view the question of the lord's supper. what would be our feelings, amid the glory of the coming kingdom, if we could remember that, while on earth, a fair or a market, or some such worldly object, had commanded our time and energies, while the assembly of the lord's people around his table was neglected? beloved christian reader, if you are in the habit of absenting yourself from the assembly of christians, i pray you to ponder the matter before the lord ere you absent yourself again. reflect upon the pernicious effect of your absence in every way. you are failing in your testimony for christ; you are injuring the souls of your brethren, and you are hindering the progress of your own soul in grace and knowledge. do not suppose that your actings are without their influence on the whole church of god: you are at this moment either helping or hindering every member of that body on earth. "if _one_ member suffer, all the members suffer with it." this principle has not ceased to be true, though professing christians have split into so many different divisions. nay, it is so divinely true, that there is not a single believer on earth who is not acting either as a helper to, or a drain upon, the whole body of christ; and if there be any truth in the principle already laid down (viz., that the assembly of christians and the breaking of bread in any given locality is, or ought to be, the expression of the unity of the whole body), you cannot fail to see that if you absent yourself from that assembly, or refuse to join in giving expression to that unity, you are doing serious damage to all your brethren as well as to your own soul. i would lay these considerations on your heart and conscience, in the name of the lord, looking to him to make them influential.[xvii.] but not only does this culpable and pernicious indifference of spirit act as a hindrance to many, in presenting themselves at the lord's table; imperfect views of justification produce the same unhappy result. if the conscience be not perfectly purged, if there be not perfect rest in god's testimony about the finished work of christ, there will either be a shrinking from the supper of the lord, or an unintelligent celebration of it. those only can show the lord's death who know, through the teaching of the holy spirit, the value of the lord's death. if i regard the ordinance as a means whereby i am to be brought into a place of greater nearness to god, or whereby i am to obtain a clearer sense of my acceptance, it is impossible that i can rightly observe it. i must believe, as the gospel commands me to believe, that all my sins are forever put away ere i can take my place with any measure of spiritual intelligence at the lord's table. if the matter be not viewed in this light, the lord's supper can only be regarded as a kind of step to the altar of god, and we are told in the law that we are not to go up by steps to god's altar, lest our nakedness be discovered (ex. xx. ). the meaning of which is, that all human efforts to approach god must issue in the discovery of human nakedness. thus we see that if it be indifference that prevents the christian from being at the breaking of bread, it is most culpable in the sight of god, and most injurious to his brethren and himself; and if it be an imperfect sense of justification that prevents, it is not only unwarrantable, but most dishonoring to the love of the father, the work of the son, and the clear and unequivocal testimony of the holy ghost. but it is not unfrequently said, and that, too, by those who profess spirituality and intelligence, "i derive no spiritual benefit by going to the assembly: i am as happy in my own room, reading my bible." i would affectionately ask such, are we to have no higher object before us in our actings than our own happiness? is not obedience to the command of our blessed master--a command delivered on "the same night in which he was betrayed"--a far higher and nobler object to set before us than anything connected with self? if he desires that his people should assemble in his name, for the express object of showing forth his death till he come, shall we refuse because we feel happier in our own rooms? he tells us to be there: we reply, "we feel happier at home." our happiness, therefore, must be based on disobedience; and, as such, it is an unholy happiness. it is much better, if it should be so, to be unhappy in the path of obedience than happy in the path of disobedience. but i verily believe, the thought of being happier at home is a mere delusion, and the end of those deluded by it will prove it such. thomas might have deemed it indifferent whether he was present with the other disciples, but he had to do without the lord's presence, and to wait for eight days, until the disciples came together on the first day of the week; for there and then the lord was pleased to reveal himself to his soul. and just so will it be with those who say, "we feel happier at home than in the assembly of believers." they will surely be behindhand in knowledge and experience; yea, it will be well if they come not under the terrible woe denounced by the prophet: "woe to the idol shepherd that _leaveth the flock_! the sword shall be upon his arm, and upon his right eye; his arm shall be clean dried up, and his right eye shall be utterly darkened" (zech. xi. ). and again, "not forsaking the assembling of ourselves together, _as the manner of some is_; but exhorting one another, and so much the more as ye see the day approaching. for if we sin wilfully, after that we have received the knowledge of the truth, there remaineth no more sacrifice for sins, but a certain fearful looking for of judgment and fiery indignation, which shall devour the adversaries" (heb. x. - ). as to the objection upon the grounds of the barrenness and unprofitableness of christian assemblies, it will generally be remarked that the greatest spiritual barrenness will always be found in connection with a captious and complaining spirit; and i doubt not that if those who complain of the unprofitableness of meetings, and draw from thence an argument in favor of their remaining at home, were to spend more time in secret waiting on the lord for his blessing on the meetings, they would have a very different experience. and now, having shown from scripture who ought to be at the breaking of bread, we shall proceed to consider who ought _not_. on this point scripture is equally explicit: in a word, then, none should be there who are not members of the true church of god. the same law which commanded _all_ the congregation of israel to eat the passover, commanded all uncircumcised strangers _not_ to eat; and now that christ our passover has been sacrificed for us, none can keep the feast, (which is to extend throughout this entire dispensation,) nor break the bread nor drink the wine in true remembrance of him, save those who know the cleansing and healing virtues of his precious blood. to eat and drink without this knowledge, is to eat and drink unworthily--to eat and drink judgment; like the woman in num. v. who drank the water of jealousy, to make the condemnation more manifest and awfully solemn. now it is in this that christendom's guilt is specially manifest. in taking the lord's supper, the professing church has, like judas, put her hand on the table with christ and betrayed him; she has eaten with him, and at the same time lifted up her heel against him. what will be her end? just like the end of judas. "he, then, having received the sop, _went immediately out_: and"--the holy ghost adds, in awful solemnity--"it was night." terrible night! the strongest expression of divine love only elicited the strongest expression of human hatred. so will it be with the false professing church collectively, and each false professor individually; and all those who, though baptized in the name of christ, and sitting down at the table of christ, have nevertheless been his betrayers, will find themselves at last thrust out into outer darkness--involved in a night which shall never see the beams of the morning--plunged in a gulf of endless and ineffable woe; and though they may be able to say to the lord, "we have eaten and drunk in thy presence, and thou hast taught in our streets," yet his solemn, heartrending reply will be, while he shuts the door against them, "depart from me! i never knew you." o reader, think of this, i pray you; and if you be yet in your sins, defile not the lord's table by your presence; but instead of going thither as a hypocrite, repair to calvary as a poor ruined and guilty sinner, and there receive pardon and cleansing from him who died to save just such as you are. iv. having now considered, through the lord's mercy, the nature of the lord's supper; the circumstances under which it was instituted; and the persons for whom it was designed; i would only add a word as to what scripture teaches us about the time and manner of its celebration. although the lord's supper was not _first_ instituted on the first day of the week, yet the twenty-fourth of luke and the twentieth of acts are quite sufficient to prove, to a mind subject to the word, that that is the day on which the ordinance should specially be observed. the lord broke bread with his disciples on "the first day of the week" (luke xxiv. ); and "on the first day of the week the disciples came together to break bread" (acts xx. ). these scriptures are quite sufficient to prove that it is not once a month, nor once in three months, nor once in six months, that disciples should come together to break bread, but once a week at least, and that upon the first day of the week. nor can we have any difficulty in seeing that there is a moral fitness in the first day of the week for the celebration of the lord's supper: it is the resurrection day--the church's day, in contrast with the seventh, which was israel's day; and as, in the institution of the ordinance, the lord led his disciples away from jewish things altogether, (by refusing to drink of the fruit of the vine--the passover cup,--and then instituting another ordinance) so, in the day on which that ordinance was to be celebrated, we observe the same contrast between heavenly and earthly things. it is in the power of resurrection that we can rightly show the lord's death. when the conflict was over, melchizedek brought forth bread and wine, and blessed abram, in the name of the lord. thus, too, our melchizedek, when all the conflict was over and the victory gained, came forth in resurrection with bread and wine, to strengthen and cheer the hearts of his people, and to breathe upon them that peace which he had so dearly purchased. if, then, the first day of the week be the day on which scripture teaches the disciples to break bread, it is clear that man has no authority to alter the period to once a month, or once in six months. and i doubt not, when the affections are lively and fervent toward the person of the lord himself, the christian will desire to show the lord's death as frequently as possible: indeed, it would seem, from the opening of acts, that the disciples broke bread daily. this we may infer from the expression "breaking bread from house to house" (or "at home"). however, we are not left to depend upon mere inference as to the question of the first day of the week being the day on which the disciples came together to break bread: we are distinctly taught this, and we see its moral fitness and beauty. thus much as to the _time_. and now one word about the _manner_. it should be the special aim of christians to show that the breaking of bread is their grand and primary object in coming together on the first day of the week. they should show that it is not for preaching or teaching that they assemble, though teaching may be a happy adjunct, but that the breaking of bread is the leading object before their minds. it is the work of christ which we show forth in the supper, wherefore it should have the first place; and when it has been duly set forth, there should be a full and unqualified opening left for the work of the holy ghost in ministry. the office of the spirit is to set forth and exalt the name, the person and the work of christ; and if he be allowed to order and govern the assembly of christians, as he undoubtedly should, he will ever give the work of christ the primary place. i cannot close this paper without expressing my deep sense of the feebleness and shallowness of all that i have advanced, on a subject of really commanding interest. i do feel before the lord, in whose presence i desire to write and speak, that i have so failed to bring out the full truth about this matter, that i almost shrink from letting these pages see the light. it is not that i have a shadow of doubt as to the truth of what i have endeavored to state; no: but i feel that, in writing upon such a subject as the breaking of bread, at the time when there is such sad confusion among professing christians, there is a demand for pointed, clear, and lucid statements, to which i am little able to respond. we have but little conception of how entirely the question of the breaking of bread is connected with the church's position and testimony on earth; and we have as little conception of how thoroughly the question has been misunderstood by the professing church. the breaking of bread ought to be the distinct enunciation of the fact that all believers are _one body_; but the professing church, by splitting into sects, and by setting up a table for each sect, has practically denied that fact. in truth, the breaking of bread has been cast into the background. the table, at which the lord should preside, is almost lost sight of, by being placed in the shade of the pulpit, in which man presides: the pulpit, which, alas! is too often the instrument of creating and perpetuating disunion, is, to many minds, the commanding object; while the table, which if properly understood would perpetuate love and unity, is made quite a secondary thing. and even in the most laudable effort to recover from such a lamentable condition of things, what complete failure have we seen. what has the evangelical alliance effected? it has effected this, at least, it has developed a need existing among professing christians, which they are confessedly unable to meet. they want union, and are unable to attain it. why? because they will not give up everything which has been _added_ to the truth to meet together according to the truth, to break bread as disciples. i say, _as disciples_, and not as church-men, independents, baptists, etc. it is not that all such may not have much valuable truth, i mean those of them who love our lord jesus christ: they certainly may; but they have no _truth_ that should prevent them from meeting _together_ to break bread. how could truth ever hinder christians from giving expression to the unity of the church? impossible! a sectarian spirit in those who hold truth may do this, but truth never can. but how is it now in the professing church? christians, of various communities, can meet for the purpose of reading, praying, and singing together during the week, but when the first day of the week arrives, they have not the least idea of giving the only real and effectual expression of their unity, which the holy ghost can recognize, which is the breaking of bread. "we being many are one bread and one body; for we are _all_ partakers of that _one_ bread." the sin at corinth was their not tarrying one for another. this appears from the exhortation with which the apostle sums up the whole question (i cor. xi.), "wherefore, my brethren, when ye come together to eat, tarry one for another." why were they to tarry one for another? surely, in order that they might the more clearly express their unity. but what would the apostle have said, if, instead of coming together, into one place, they had gone to different places, according to their different views of truth? he might then say with, if possible, greater force, "ye cannot eat the lord's supper." (see _margin_.) it may, however, be asked, "how could all the believers in london meet in one place?" i reply, if they could not meet in one place, they could, at least, meet on one principle. but how did the believers at jerusalem meet together? the answer is, they were "_of one accord_." this being so, they had little difficulty about the question of a meeting-room. "solomon's porch," or anywhere else, would suit their purpose. they gave expression to their unity, and that, too, in a way not to be mistaken. neither various localities, nor various measures of knowledge and attainment, could, in the least, interfere with their unity. there was "one body and one spirit." finally, i would say, the lord will assuredly honor those who have faith to believe and confess the unity of the church on earth; and the greater the difficulty in the way of doing so, the greater will be the honor. the lord grant to all his people a single eye, and a humble and honest spirit. thy broken body, gracious lord, is shadowed by this broken bread; the wine which in this cup is poured points to the blood which thou hast shed. and while we meet together thus, we show that we are one in thee; thy precious blood was shed for us-- thy death, o lord, has set us free. brethren in thee, in union sweet-- forever be thy grace adored-- 'tis in thy name, that now we meet, and know thou'rt with us, gracious lord. we have one hope--that thou wilt come; thee in the air we wait to see, when thou wilt take thy people home, and we shall ever reign with thee. footnotes: [xi.] it is needful to bear in mind that, while the blood of christ is that alone which introduces the believer, in holy boldness, into the presence of god, yet it is nowhere set forth as our centre, or bond of union. truly precious is it for every blood-washed soul to remember, in the secret of the divine presence, that the atoning blood of jesus has rolled away for ever his heavy burden of sin. yet the holy ghost can only gather us to the person of a risen and glorified christ, who, having shed the blood of the everlasting covenant, is gone up into heaven in the power of an endless life, to which divine righteousness inseparably attaches. a living christ, therefore, is our centre and bond of union. the blood having answered for us to god, we gather round our risen and exalted head in the heavens. "i, if i be lifted up from the earth, will draw all men unto _me_." we behold in the cup in the lord's supper the symbol of shed blood; but we are neither gathered round the cup nor the blood, but round him who shed it. the blood of the lamb has put away every obstacle to our fellowship with god; and in proof of this the holy ghost has come down to baptize believers into one body, and gather them round the risen and glorified head. the wine is _the memorial_ of a life shed out for sin: the bread is _the memorial_ of a body broken for sin: but we are not gathered round a life poured out, nor round a body broken, but round a living christ, who dieth no more, who cannot have his body broken any more, or his blood shed any more. this makes a serious difference; and when looked at in connection with the discipline of the house of god, the difference is immensely important. very many are apt to imagine that when any one is put away from or refused communion, the question is raised as to there being a link between his soul and christ. a moment's consideration of this point in the light of scripture will be sufficient to prove that no such question is raised. if we look at the case of the "wicked person" in i cor. v., we see one put away from the communion of the church on earth who was nevertheless a christian, as people say. he was not, therefore, put away because he was not a christian: such a question was never raised; nor should it be in any case. how can we tell whether a man is eternally linked with christ or not? have we the custody of the lamb's book of life? is the discipline of the church of god founded upon what we can know, or upon what we _cannot_? was the man in i cor. v. linked eternally with christ, or not? was the church told to inquire? even suppose we could see a man's name written in the book of life, that would not be the ground of receiving him into the assembly on earth, or retaining him there. that which the church is held responsible for, is to keep herself pure in doctrine, pure in practice, and pure in association, and all this on the ground of being god's house. "thy testimonies are very sure; holiness becometh thy house, o lord, for ever." when any one was separated, or "cut off," from the congregation of israel, was it because of not being an israelite? by no means; but because of some moral or ceremonial defilement which could not be tolerated in god's assembly. in achan's case (josh. vii.), although there were six hundred thousand souls ignorant of his sin, yet god says, "_israel hath sinned_." why? because they were looked at as god's assembly, and there was defilement there which, if not judged, all would have been broken up. [xii.] those who are competent to do so can look at the original of this important chapter, where they will see that the word translated "approved" (ver. ) comes from the same root as that translated "examine himself" (ver. ). thus we see that the man who approves himself takes his place amongst the approved, and is the very opposite of those who were amongst the heretics. now the meaning of a heretic is not merely one who holds false doctrine, though one may be a heretic in so doing, but one who persists in the exercise of _his own will_. the apostle knew that there must be heresies at corinth, seeing that there were sects: those who were doing their own will were acting in opposition to god's will, and thus producing division; for god's will had reference to the whole body. those who were acting heretically were despising the church of god. [xiii.] it may be well to add a word here for the guidance of any simple-hearted christian who may find himself placed in circumstances in which he is called upon to decide between the claims of different tables which might seem to be spread upon the same principle. to confirm and encourage such an one in a truthful course of action, i should regard as a most valuable service. suppose, then, i find myself in a place where two or more tables have been spread; what am i to do? i believe i am to inquire into the _origin_ of these various tables, to see how it became needful to have more than one table. if, for example, a number of christians meeting together have admitted and retained amongst them any unsound principles, affecting the person of the son of god, or subversive of the unity of the church of god on earth; if, i say, such principles be admitted and retained in the assembly, or if persons who hold and teach them be received and acknowledged by the assembly; under such painful and humiliating circumstances the faithful can no longer be there. why? because i cannot take my place at it without identifying myself with manifestly unchristian principles. the same remark, of course, applies if the case be that of corrupt conduct unjudged by the assembly. now, if a number of christians should find themselves placed in the circumstances above described, they would be called upon to maintain the purity of the truth of god while acknowledging as ever the oneness of the body. we have not only to maintain the grace of the lord's table, but the _holiness_ of it also. truth is not to be sacrificed in order to maintain unity, nor will _true_ unity ever be interfered with by the strict maintenance of truth. it is not to be imagined that the unity of the body of christ is interfered with when a community based upon unsound principles, or countenancing unsound doctrine or practice, is separated from. the church of rome charged the reformers with schism because they separated from her; but we know that the church of rome lay, and still lies, under the charge of schism because she imposes false doctrine upon her members. let it only be ascertained that the truth of god is called in question by any community, and that, to be a member of that community, i must identify myself with unsound doctrine or corrupt practice, and then it cannot be schism to separate from such a community; nay, i am bound to separate. [xiv.] it is usual to apply the term "unworthily," in this passage, to _persons_ doing the act, whereas it really refers to the _manner_ of doing it. the apostle never thought of calling in question the christianity of the corinthians; nay, in the opening address of his epistle, he looks at them as "the church of god which is at corinth, sanctified in christ jesus, called saints" (or saints by calling). how could he use this language in the first chapter, and in the eleventh call in question the worthiness of these saints to take their seat at the lord's supper? impossible. he looked upon them as saints, and as such he exhorted them to celebrate the lord's supper in a worthy manner. the question of any but true christians being there, is never raised; so that it is utterly impossible that the word "unworthily" could apply to _persons_. its application is entirely to the _manner_. the persons were worthy, but their manner was not; and they were called, as saints, to judge themselves as to their _ways_, else the lord might judge them in their _persons_ as was already the case. in a word, it was as true christians they were called to judge themselves. if they were in doubt as to that, they were utterly unable to judge anything. i never think of setting my child to judge as to whether he is my child or not; but i expect him to judge himself as to his habits, else, if he do not, i may have to do, by chastening, what he ought to do by self-judgment. it is because i look upon him as my child, that i will not allow him to sit at my table with soiled garments and disorderly manners. [xv.] the reader will bear in mind that the text does not touch the question of scriptural discipline. there may be many members of the flock of christ who could not be received into the assembly on earth, inasmuch as they may possibly be leavened by false doctrine, or wrong practice. but, though we might not be able to receive them, we do not, by any means, raise the question as to their being in the lamb's book of life. this is not the province nor the prerogative of the church of god. "_the lord_ knoweth them that are his; and let every one that nameth the name of christ depart from iniquity" ( tim. ii. ). [xvi.] the church of rome has so entirely departed from the truth set forth in the lord's supper, that she professes to offer, in the mass, "an unbloody sacrifice for the sins of the living and the dead." now, we are taught, in heb. ix. , that "without shedding of blood is no remission;" consequently, the church of rome has no remission of sins for her members. she robs them of this precious reality, and instead thereof, gives them an anomalous and utterly unscriptural thing, called "an unbloody sacrifice, or mass." this, which, according to her own practice and the testimony of heb. ix. , can never take away sin, she offers day by day, week by week, and year by year. a sacrifice without blood must, if scripture be true, be a sacrifice without remission. hence, therefore, the sacrifice of the mass is a positive blind raised by the devil, through the agency of rome, to hide from the sinner's view the glorious sacrifice of christ, "_once offered_," and never to be repeated. "christ, being raised from the dead, dieth no more; death hath no more dominion over him" (rom. vi. ). every fresh sacrifice of the mass only declares the inefficiency of all the previous sacrifices, so that rome is only mocking the sinner with an empty shadow. but she is consistent in her wickedness, for she withholds the cup from the laity, and teaches her members that they have body and blood and all in the wafer. but, if the blood be still in the body, it is manifestly not shed, and then we get back to the same gloomy point, namely, "no remission." "without shedding of blood is no remission." how totally different is the precious and most refreshing institution of the lord's supper, as set before us in the new testament. there we find the bread broken, and the wine poured out--the significant symbols of a body broken, and of blood shed. the wine is not in the bread, because the blood is not in the body, for, if it were, there would be "no remission." in a word, the lord's supper is the distinct memorial of an eternally accomplished sacrifice; and none can communicate thereat, with intelligence or blessing, save those who know the full remission of sins. it is not that we would, by any means, make knowledge a term of communion, for very many of the children of god, through bad teaching, and various other causes, do not know the perfect remission of sins, and were they to be excluded on that ground, it would be making _knowledge_ a term of communion, instead of _life_ and _obedience_. still, if i do not know, experimentally, that redemption is an accomplished fact, i shall see but little meaning in the symbols of bread and wine; and, moreover, i shall be in great danger of attaching a species of efficacy to the memorials, which belongs only to the great reality to which they point. [xvii.] i can only feel myself responsible to present myself in the assembly when it is gathered on proper church ground, i. e., the ground laid down in the new testament. people may assemble, and call themselves the church of god, in any given locality, but if they do not exhibit the characteristic features and principles of the church of god as set forth in holy scripture, i cannot own them. if they refuse, or lack spiritual power, to judge worldliness, carnality, or false doctrine, they are evidently not on proper church ground: they are merely a religious fraternity, which, in its collective character, i am in no wise responsible before god to own. hence the child of god needs much spiritual power, and subjection to the word, to be able to carry himself through all the windings of the professing church in this peculiarly evil and difficult day. the assembly of god or, the all-sufficiency of the name of jesus in a day like the present, when almost every new idea becomes the centre or gathering-point of some new association, we cannot but feel the value of having divinely formed convictions as to what the assembly of god really is. we live in a time of unusual mental activity, and hence there is the more urgent need of calm and prayerful study of the word of god. that word, blessed be its author, is like a rock amid the ocean of human thought. there it stands unmoved, notwithstanding the raging of the storm and the ceaseless lashing of the waves. and not only does it thus stand unmoved itself, but it imparts its own stability to all who simply take their stand upon it. what a mercy to make one's escape from the heavings and tossings of the stormy ocean, and find a calm resting place on that everlasting rock. this, truly, is a mercy. were it not that we have "the law and the testimony," where should we be? whither should we go? what should we do? what darkness! what confusion! what perplexity! a thousand jarring voices fall, at times, upon the ear, and each voice seems to speak with such authority, that if one is not well taught and grounded in the word, there is great danger of being drawn away, or, at least, sadly unhinged. one man will tell you that _this_ is right; another will tell you _that_ is right; a third will tell you that _everything_ is right; and a fourth will tell you that _nothing_ is right. with reference to the question of church position, you will meet with some who go _here_; some who go _there_; some who go _everywhere_; and some who go _nowhere_. now, under such circumstances, what is one to do? all cannot possibly be right. and yet, surely, there is something right. it cannot be that we are _compelled_ to live in error, in darkness, or uncertainty. "_there is a path_," blessed be god, though "no fowl knoweth it, and the vulture's eye hath not seen it. the lion's whelps have not trodden it, nor the fierce lion passed by it." where is this safe and blessed path? hear the divine reply: "behold, _the fear of the lord_, that is wisdom: and _to depart from evil_ is understanding" (job xxviii.). let us, therefore, in the fear of the lord, in the light of his infallible truth, and in humble dependence upon the teaching of the holy spirit, proceed to the examination of the subject which stands at the head of this paper; and may we have grace to abandon all confidence in our own thoughts, and the thoughts of others, so that we may heartily and honestly yield ourselves up to be taught only of god. now, in order to get fairly into the grand and all-important subject of the assembly of god, we have first to state _a fact_; and, secondly, to ask _a question_. the fact is this, _there is an assembly of god on the earth_. the question is, _what is that assembly_? i. and, first then, as to our _fact_. there is such a thing as the assembly of god on the earth. this is a most important fact, surely. god has an assembly on the earth. i do not refer to any merely human organization, such as the greek church; the church of rome; the church of england; the church of scotland; or to any of the various systems which have sprung from these, framed and fashioned by man's hand, and carried on by man's resources. i refer simply to that assembly which is gathered by god the holy ghost, round the person of god the son, to worship and hold fellowship with god the father. if we set forth upon our search for the assembly of god, or for any expression thereof, with our minds full of prejudice, preconceived thoughts, and personal predilections; or if, in our searchings, we seek the aid of the flickering light of the dogmas, opinions, and traditions of men, nothing is more certain than that we shall fail to reach the truth. to recognize god's assembly, we must be exclusively taught by god's word, and led by god's spirit; for, of god's assembly, as well as of the sons of god, it may be said, "the world knoweth it not." hence, then, if we are, in any wise, governed by the spirit of the world; if we desire to exalt man; if we seek to commend ourselves to the thoughts of men; if our object be to gain the attractive ends of a plausible and soul-ensnaring expediency, we may as well, forthwith, abandon our search for any true expression of the assembly of god, and take refuge in that form of human organization which most fully commends itself to our thinkings or our conscientious convictions. further, if our object be to find a religious community in which the word of god is read, or in which the people of god are found, we may speedily satisfy ourselves, for it would be hard indeed to find a section of the professing christian body in which one or both of these objects might not be realized. finally, if we merely aim at doing all the good we can, without any question as to how we do it; if _per fas aut nefas_, "right or wrong," be our motto in whatever we undertake; if we are prepared to reverse those weighty words of samuel, and say that, "to sacrifice is better than to obey, and the fat of rams better than to harken," then is it worse than vain for us to pursue our search for the assembly of god, inasmuch as that assembly can only be discovered and approved by one who has been taught to flee from the thousand flowery pathways of human expediency, and to submit his conscience, his heart, his understanding, his whole moral being to the supreme authority of "thus saith the lord." in one word, then, the obedient disciple knows that there is such a thing as god's assembly: and he it is, too, that will be enabled, through grace, to understand what is a true expression of it. the sincere student of scripture knows, full well, the difference between that which is founded, formed, and governed by the wisdom and the will of man, and that which is gathered round, and governed by christ the lord. how vast is the difference! it is just the difference between god and man. but we may here be asked for the scripture proofs of our fact that there is such a thing on the earth as _the_ assembly of god, and we shall, at once, proceed to furnish these; for we may be permitted to say that, without the authority of the word, all statements are utterly valueless. what, therefore, saith the scripture? our first proof shall be that famous passage, in matthew xvi., "when jesus came into the coast of cæsarea philippi, he asked his disciples, saying whom do men say that i, the son of man, am? and they said, some say that thou art john the baptist; some, elias; and others, jeremias, or one of the prophets. he saith unto them, but whom say ye that i am? and simon peter answered and said, thou art the christ, the son of the living god. and jesus answered and said unto him, blessed art thou, simon bar-jona: for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my father which is in heaven. and i say also unto thee, that thou art peter; and upon this rock i will build my assembly[xviii.] ([greek: ekklêsian]); and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it" (vers. - ). here our blessed lord intimates his purpose to build an assembly, and sets forth the true foundation of that assembly, namely, "christ, the son of the living god." this is an all-important point in our subject. the building is founded on the rock, and that rock is not the poor failing, stumbling, erring peter, but christ, the eternal son of the living god; and every stone in that building partakes of the rock-life which, as being victorious over all the power of the enemy, is indestructible.[xix.] again, passing over a section of matthew's gospel, we come to an equally familiar passage: "moreover, if thy brother shall trespass against thee, go and tell him his fault between thee and him alone: if he shall hear thee, thou hast gained thy brother. but if he will not hear thee, then take with thee one or two more, that in the mouth of two or three witnesses every word may be established. and if he shall neglect to hear them, tell it unto the assembly, but if he neglect to hear the assembly, let him be unto thee as a heathen man and a publican. verily i say unto you, whatsoever ye shall bind on earth shall be bound in heaven; and whatsoever ye shall loose on earth, shall be loosed in heaven. again, i say unto you, that if two of you shall agree on earth as touching anything that they shall ask, it shall be done for them of my father which is in heaven. for where two or three are _gathered_ together _in my name_, there am i in the midst of them" (chap. xviii. - ). we shall have occasion to refer to this passage again, under the second division of our subject. it is here introduced merely as a link in the chain of scripture evidence of the fact that there is such a thing as the assembly of god on the earth. this assembly is not a name, a form, a pretence, an assumption. it is a divine reality--an institution of god, possessing his seal and sanction. it is a something to be appealed to in all cases of personal trespass and dispute which cannot be settled by the parties involved. this assembly may consist of only "two or three" in any particular place--the smallest plurality, if you please; but there it is, owned of god, and its decisions ratified in heaven. now, we are not to be scared away from the truth on this subject, by the fact that the church of rome has attempted to base her monstrous pretensions on the two passages which we have just quoted. that church is not god's assembly, built on the rock christ, and gathered in the name of jesus; but a human apostasy, founded on a failing mortal, and governed by the traditions and doctrines of men. we must not, therefore, suffer ourselves to be deprived of god's reality by reason of satan's counterfeit. god has his assembly on the earth, and we are responsible to confess the truth of it, and to be a practical expression of it. this may be difficult, in a day of confusion like the present. it will demand a single eye--a subject will--a mortified mind. but let the reader be assured of this, that it is his privilege to possess as divine certainty as to what is a true expression of the assembly of god, as surely as the truth concerning his own salvation through the blood of the lamb; nor should he be satisfied without this. i should not be content to go on for an hour without the assurance that i am, in spirit and principle, associated with those whose ground of gathering is purely their common membership in the assembly of god--that assembly which includes all saints. i say, in spirit and principle, because i may happen to be in a place where there is no such local expression of the assembly; in which case i must be satisfied to hold fellowship, in spirit, with all those who are thus gathered. this simplifies the matter amazingly. if i cannot have a true expression of god's assembly, i shall have nothing. it will not do to point me to a religious community, with some christians therein, the gospel preached, and the ordinances administered. i must be convinced that in very truth, they are gathered on that ground which, in my heart and conscience, frees them from the charge of sectarianism. i can own the children of god individually anywhere; but sectarianism i cannot own or sanction. no doubt this will give offence. it will be called bigotry, narrow-mindedness, intolerance, and the like. but this need not discourage us. all we have to do is to ascertain the truth as to god's assembly, and cleave to it, heartily and energetically, at all cost. if god has an assembly--and scripture says he has--then let me be with those who maintain its principles, and nowhere else. it must be in this as in all other matters, truth or nothing. if there be a local expression of that assembly, well; be there in person. if not, be content to hold spiritual communion with all who humbly and faithfully own and occupy that holy ground. it may sound and seem like liberality to be ready to sanction and go with everything and everybody. it may appear very easy and very pleasant to be in a place "where everybody's will is indulged, and nobody's conscience is exercised"--where we may hold what we like, and say what we like, and do what we like, and go where we like. all this may seem very delightful--very plausible--very popular--very attractive; but oh! it will be barrenness and bitterness in the end; and, in the day of the lord, it will assuredly be burnt up as so much wood, hay, and stubble, that cannot stand the action of his judgment. but let us proceed with our scripture proofs. in the acts of the apostles, or rather, the acts of the holy ghost, we find the assembly formally set up. a passage or two will suffice: "and they, continuing daily with one accord in the temple, and breaking bread from house to house, did eat their meat with gladness and singleness of heart, praising god, and having favor with all the people. and the lord added to the assembly, daily, such as should be saved" (acts ii. , ). such was the original, simple apostolic order. when a person was converted, he thereby belonged to the assembly and took his place in it: there was no difficulty in the matter, there were no sects or parties, each claiming to be considered _a_ church, a cause, or an interest. there was just the one thing, and that was the assembly of god, where he dwelt, acted, and ruled. it was not a system formed according to the will, the judgment, or even the conscience of man. man had not, as yet, entered upon the business of church-making. this was god's work. it was just as exclusively god's province and prerogative to baptize the saved into one body by one spirit, as to save the scattered.[xx.] why, we may justly inquire, should it be different now? why should the regenerated seek to belong to something else than that to which they already belong--the assembly of god? is not that sufficient? assuredly. should they seek aught else? assuredly not. we repeat, with emphasis, "_either that or nothing_." true it is, alas! that failure, and ruin, and apostasy have come in. man's wisdom, and his will; or, if you please, his reason, his judgment, and his misguided conscience have wrought, in matters ecclesiastical, and the result appears before us in the almost numberless and nameless sects and parties of the present moment. still, we are bold to say, that the ground of assembling as at the beginning, simply as being members of the assembly of god, remains the same, spite of all the failure, the error, and the confusion, which have come in. the difficulty in reaching it practically may be great, but its reality, when reached, is unaltered, and unalterable. in apostolic times the assembly stood out, in bold relief, from the dark background of judaism on the one hand, and paganism on the other. it was impossible to mistake it; there it stood, a grand reality! a company of living men, gathered, indwelt, ruled and regulated by god the holy ghost, so that the unlearned or unbelieving coming in, were convinced of all, and constrained to acknowledge that god was there. (see carefully, i cor. xii., xiv. throughout.) thus, in this gospel, our blessed lord intimates his purpose of building an assembly. this assembly is historically presented to us in the acts of the apostles. then, when we turn to the epistles of paul, we find him addressing the assembly in seven distinct places, namely, rome, corinth, galatia, ephesus, philippi, colosse, and thessalonica; and finally, in the opening of the book of revelation, we have addresses to seven distinct assemblies. now, in all these places, the assembly of god was a plain, palpable, real thing, established and maintained by god himself. it was not a human organization, but a divine institution--a testimony--a light bearer for god, in each place. thus much as to our scripture proofs of the fact that god has an assembly on the earth, gathered, indwelt, and governed by the holy ghost who is the true and only vicar of christ upon earth. the gospel prophetically intimates the assembly; the acts historically presents the assembly; and the epistles formally address the assembly. all this is plain. and if it be broken into fragments now, it is for us to be gathered on the ground of the _one_ assembly of god, and to be a true expression of it. and let it be carefully noted that we will listen to nothing on this subject but the voice of holy scripture. let not reason speak, for we own it not. let not tradition lift her voice, for we wholly disregard her. let not expediency thrust itself upon us, for we shall give it no place whatever. we believe in the all-sufficiency of holy scripture--that it is sufficient to furnish the man of god thoroughly--to equip him perfectly for all good works ( tim. iii. , ). the word of god is either sufficient or it is not. we believe it to be amply sufficient for every exigency of god's assembly. it could not be otherwise if god be its author. we must either deny the divinity or admit the sufficiency of the bible. there is not a single hair's breadth of middle ground. it is impossible that god could have written an imperfect, an insufficient book. this is a very grave principle in connection with our subject. many of our protestant writers have, in assailing popery, maintained the sufficiency and authority of the bible; but it does seem very plain to us that they are always at fault when their opponents turn sharp round upon them and demand proof from scripture for many things sanctioned and adopted by protestant communities. there are many things adopted and practised in the national establishment and other protestant communities, which have no sanction in the word; and when the shrewd and intelligent defenders of popery have called attention to these things, and demanded authority for them, the weakness of mere protestantism has been strikingly apparent. if we admit, for a moment, that, in some things, we must have recourse to tradition and expediency, then who will undertake to fix the boundary line? if it be allowable to depart from scripture at all, how far are we to go? if the authority of tradition be admitted at all, who is to fix its domain? if we leave the narrow and well-defined pathway of divine revelation, and enter upon the wide and bewildering field of human tradition, has not one man as much right as another to make a choice? the gates of hell shall assuredly prevail against every human system--against all those corporations and associations which men have set on foot. and in no case has that triumph been, even already, made more awfully manifest than in that of the church of rome itself, although it has arrogantly laid claim to this very declaration of our lord as the bulwark of its strength. nothing can withstand the power of the gates of hell but the assembly of the living god, for that is built upon "the living stone." now the local expression of that assembly may be but "two or three gathered in the name of jesus," a poor, feeble, despised handful. it is well to be clear and decided as to this. christ's promise can never fail. he has, blessed be his name, come down to the lowest possible point by which the assembly can be represented, even "_two_." how gracious! how tender! how considerate! how like himself! he attaches all the dignity--all the value--all the efficacy of his own divine and deathless name to an obscure handful gathered round himself. it must be very evident to the spiritual mind that the lord jesus, in speaking of the "two or three" thought not of those vast systems which have sprung up in ancient, mediæval, and modern times, throughout the eastern and western world, numbering their adherents and votaries, not by "twos or threes," but by kingdoms, provinces, and parishes. it is very plain that a baptized kingdom, and "two or three" living souls gathered in the name of jesus, do not and cannot mean the same thing. baptized christendom is one thing, and the assembly of god is another. what this latter is, we have yet to unfold; we are here asserting that they are not, and cannot be, the same thing. they are constantly confounded, though no two things can be more distinct.[xxi.] if we would know under what figure christ presents the baptized world, we have only to look at the "leaven" and the "mustard tree" of matt. xiii. the former gives us the internal, and the latter the external character of "the kingdom of heaven"--of that which was originally set up in truth and simplicity--a real thing, though small, but which, through satan's crafty working, has become inwardly a corrupt mass, though outwardly a far-spreading, showy, popular thing in the earth, gathering all sorts beneath the shadow of its patronage. such is the lesson--the simple but deeply solemn lesson to be learnt by the spiritual mind from the "leaven" and the "mustard-tree" of matt. xiii. and we may add, one result of learning this lesson would be an ability to distinguish between "the kingdom of heaven" and "the assembly of god." the former may be compared to a wide morass, the latter to a running stream passing through it, and in constant danger of losing its distinctive character, as well as its proper direction, by intermingling with the surrounding waters. to confound the two things is to deal a deathblow to all godly discipline and consequent purity in the assembly of god. if the kingdom and the assembly mean one and the same thing, then how should we act in the case of "that wicked person" in i cor. v.? the apostle tells us "to put him away." where are we to put him? our lord himself tells us distinctly that "the field is _the world_;" and again, in john xvii., he says that his people are not of the world. this makes all plain enough. but men tell us, in the very face of our lord's statement, that the field is the assembly, and the tares and wheat, ungodly and godly, are to grow together, that they are on no account to be separated. thus the plain and positive teaching of the holy ghost in i cor. v. is set in open opposition to the equally plain and positive teaching of our lord in matt. xiii.; and all this flows from the effort to confound two distinct things, namely, "the kingdom of heaven" and "the assembly of god." it would not by any means comport with the object of this paper to enter further upon the interesting subject of "the kingdom." enough has been said, if the reader has thereby been convinced of the immense importance of duly distinguishing that kingdom from the assembly. what this latter is we shall now proceed to inquire; and may god the holy ghost be our teacher! ii. in handling our question as to the assembly of god, it will give clearness and precision to our thoughts to consider the four following points, namely:-- first, what is the _material_ of which the assembly is composed? secondly, what is the _centre_ round which the assembly is gathered? thirdly, what is the _power_ by which the assembly is gathered? fourthly, what is the _authority_ on which the assembly is gathered? i. and, first, then, as to the material of which god's assembly is composed; it is, in one word, those possessing salvation, or eternal life. we do not enter the assembly in order to be saved, but as those who are saved. the word is, "_on_ this rock i will build my church." he does not say, "on my church i will build the salvation of souls." one of rome's boasted dogmas is this--"there is no salvation out of the true church." yes, but we can go deeper still, and say, "off the true rock there is no church." take away the rock, and you have nothing but a baseless fabric of error and corruption. what a miserable delusion, to think of being saved by that! thank god, it is not so. we do not get to christ through the church, but to the church through christ. to reverse this order is to displace christ altogether, and thus have neither rock, nor church, nor salvation. we meet christ as a life-giving saviour, before we have anything to say to the assembly at all; and hence we could possess eternal life, and enjoy full salvation, though there were no such thing as the assembly of god on the earth.[xxii.] we cannot be too simple in grasping this truth, at a time like the present, when ecclesiastical pretention is rising to such a height. the church, falsely so called, is opening her bosom with delusive tenderness, and inviting poor sin-burdened, world-sick, and heavy-laden souls to take refuge therein. she, with crafty liberality, throws open her treasury door, and places her resources at the disposal of needy, craving, yearning souls. and truly those resources have powerful attractions for those who are not on "the rock." there is an ordained priesthood, professing to stand in an unbroken line with the apostles.--alas! how different the two ends of the line!--there is a continual sacrifice. alas! a bloodless one, and therefore a worthless one. (heb. ix. .)--there is a splendid ritual. alas! it seeks its origin amid the shadows of a by-gone age--shadows which have been for ever displaced by the person, the work, and the offices of the eternal son of god. for ever be his peerless name adored! the believer has a very conclusive answer to all the pretensions and promises of the romish system. he can say he has found his _all_ in a crucified and risen saviour. what does he want with the sacrifice of the mass? he is washed in the blood of christ. what does he want with a poor, sinful, dying priest, who cannot save himself? he has the son of god as his priest. what does he want with a pompous ritual, with all its imposing adjuncts? he worships in spirit and in truth, within the holiest of all, whither he enters with boldness, through the blood of jesus. nor is it merely with roman catholicism we have to do in the establishment of our first point. we fear there are thousands besides roman catholics who, in heart, look to the church, if not for salvation, at least to be a stepping-stone thereto. hence the importance of seeing clearly that the materials of which god's assembly is composed are those possessing salvation, in whom is eternal life; so that whatever be the object of that assembly, it most certainly is not to provide salvation for its members, seeing that all its members are saved ere they enter it at all. god's assembly is a houseful of saved ones from one end to the other. blessed fact! it is not an institution set on foot for the purpose of providing salvation for sinners, nor yet for providing for their religious wants. it is a saved, living body, formed and gathered by the holy ghost, to make known to "principalities and powers in the heavenlies, the manifold wisdom of god," and to declare to the whole universe the all-sufficiency of the name of jesus. now, the great enemy of christ and the church is well aware of what a powerful testimony the assembly of god is called and designed to yield on the earth; and therefore he has put forth all his hellish energy to quash that testimony in every possible way. he hates the name of jesus, and everything tending to glorify that name. hence his intense opposition to the assembly as a whole, and to each local expression thereof, wherever it may happen to exist. he has no objection to a mere religious establishment set on foot for the purpose of providing for man's religious wants, whether maintained by government or by voluntary effort. you may set up what you please. you may join what you please. you may be what you please; anything and everything for satan but the assembly of god, and the practical expression of it in any given place. that he hates most cordially, and will seek to blacken and blast by every means in his power. but those consolatory accents of the lord christ fall with divine power on the ear of faith: "on this rock i will build my assembly, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it." . this conducts us naturally to our second point, namely, what is the centre round which god's assembly is gathered? the centre is christ--the living stone, as we read in the epistle of peter, "to whom coming as unto a living stone, disallowed indeed of men, but chosen of god, and precious, ye also, as living stones, are built up a spiritual house, a holy priesthood, to offer up spiritual sacrifices, acceptable to god by jesus christ" (chap. ii. , ). it is around the person of a living christ then, that god's assembly is gathered. it is not round a doctrine, however true; nor round an ordinance, however important; but round a living, divine person. this is a great cardinal and vital point which must be distinctly seized, tenaciously held, and faithfully and constantly avowed and carried out. "to whom coming." it is not said "_to which_ coming." we do not come to a thing, but to a person. "let us go forth therefore unto _him_" (heb. xiii.). the holy ghost leads us _only_ to jesus. nothing short of this will avail. we may speak of joining _a_ church, becoming a member of a congregation, attaching ourselves to a party, a cause, or an interest. all these expressions tend to darken and confuse the mind, and hide from our view the divine idea of the assembly of god. it is not our business to join anything. when god converted us, he joined us by his spirit to christ and to all the members of christ, and that should be enough for us. christ is the only centre of god's assembly. and, we may ask, is not he sufficient? is it not quite enough for us to be "joined to the lord?" why add aught thereto? "where two or three are gathered together _in my name_, there am i in the midst of them" (matt. xviii. ). what more can we need? if jesus is in our midst, why should we think of setting up a human president? why not unanimously and heartily allow him to take the president's seat, and bow to him in all things? why set up human authority, in any shape or form, in the house of god? but this is done, and it is well to speak plainly about it. man is set up in that which professes to be an assembly of god. we see human authority exercised in that sphere in which divine authority alone should be acknowledged. it matters not, so far as the foundation principle is concerned, whether it be pope, parson, priest, or president. it is man set up in christ's place. it may be the pope appointing a cardinal, a legate, or a bishop to his sphere of work; or it may be a president appointing a man to exhort or to pray for ten minutes. the principle is one and the same. it is human authority acting in that sphere where only god's authority should be owned. if christ be in our midst, we can count on him for everything. now, in saying this, we anticipate a very probable objection. it may be said by the advocates of human authority, "how could an assembly ever get on without some human presidency? would it not lead to all sorts of confusion? would it not open the door for everyone to intrude himself upon the assembly, quite irrespective of gift or qualification?" our answer is a very simple one. jesus is all-sufficient. we can trust him to keep order in his house. we feel ourselves far safer in his gracious and powerful hand than in the hands of the most attractive human president. we have all spiritual gifts treasured up in jesus. he is the fountain-head of all ministerial authority. "he hath the seven stars." let us only confide in him, and the order of our assembly will be as perfectly provided for as the salvation of our souls. this is just the reason of our connecting, in the title of this pamphlet, "the all-sufficiency of the name of jesus" with the "assembly of god." we believe that the name of jesus is, in very truth, all-sufficient, not only for personal salvation, but for all the exigencies of the assembly--for worship, communion, ministry, discipline, government, everything. having him, we have all and abound. this is the real marrow and substance of our subject. our one aim and object is to exalt the name of jesus; and we believe he has been dishonored in that which calls itself his house. he has been dethroned, and man's authority has been set up. in vain does he bestow a ministerial gift; the possessor of that gift is not free to exercise it without the seal, the sanction, and the authority of man. and not only is this so, but if man thinks proper to give his seal, his sanction and authority, to one possessing not a particle of spiritual gift--yea, it may be, not a particle of spiritual life--he is nevertheless a recognized minister. in short, man's authority without christ's gift makes a man a minister; whereas christ's gift without man's authority does not. if this be not a dishonor done to the lord christ, what is? christian reader, pause here, and deeply ponder this principle of human authority. we confess we are anxious you should get to the root of it, and judge it thoroughly, in the light of holy scripture, and the presence of god. it is, be assured of it, the grand point of distinction between the principles of the assembly of god and every human system of religion under the sun. if you look at all those systems, from romanism down to the most refined form of religious association, you will find man's authority recognized and demanded. with that you may minister; without it you must not. on the contrary, in the assembly of god, christ's gift _alone_ makes man a minister, apart from all human authority. "not of men, neither by man, but by jesus christ, and god the father, who raised him from the dead." (gal. i. i). this is the grand principle of ministry in the assembly of god. now, in classing romanism with all the other religious systems of the day, let it, once for all, be distinctly understood that it is _only_ in reference to the principle of ministerial authority. god forbid that we should think of comparing a system which shuts out the word of god, and teaches idolatry, the worship of saints and angels, and a whole mass of gross, abominable error and superstition, with those systems where the word of god is held up, and more or less of scriptural truth promulgated. nothing can be further from our thoughts. we believe popery to be satan's master-piece, in the way of a religious system, although many of the people of god have been, and may yet be, involved therein. further, let us at this stage plainly aver that we believe the saints of god are to be found in every protestant community, both as ministers and members; and that the lord uses them in many ways--blesses their work, service, and personal testimony. and, finally, we feel it right to declare that we would not move a finger to touch any one of those systems. it is not with the systems we have to do; the lord will deal with them. our business is with the saints in those systems, to seek by every spiritual and scriptural agency to get them to own and act upon the divine principles of the assembly of god. having said thus much, in order to prevent misunderstanding, we return with increased power to our point, namely, that the thread of human authority runs through every religious system in christendom, and that, in good truth, there is not a hair's breadth of consistent standing ground between the church of rome and a true expression of the assembly of god. we believe that an honest seeker after truth, setting out from amid the dark shadows of popery, cannot possibly halt until he finds himself in the clear and blessed light of that which is a true expression of god's assembly. he may take years to travel over the intervening space. his steps may be slow and measured; but if only he follows the light, in simplicity and godly sincerity, he will find no rest between those two extremes. the ground of the assembly of god is the true position for all the children of god. alas! they are not all there; but this is only their loss and their lord's dishonor. they should be there because not only is god there, but he is allowed to act and _rule_ there. this latter is of all-importance, inasmuch as it may be truly said, is not god everywhere? and does he not act in various places? true, he is everywhere, and he works in the midst of palpable error and evil. but he is not allowed to _rule_ in the systems of men, seeing that man's authority is really supreme, as we have already shown. and in addition to this, if the fact of god's converting and blessing souls in a system be a reason why we should be there, then we ought to be in the church of rome, for how many have been converted and blessed in that awful system? even in the recent revival we have heard of persons being stricken in roman catholic chapels. what proves too much proves nothing at all, and hence no argument can be based on the fact of god's working in a place. he is sovereign, and may work where he pleases. we are to be subject to his authority, and work where we are commanded, my master may go where he pleases, but i must go where i am told. but some may ask, "is there no danger of incompetent men intruding their ministry upon an assembly of god? and in the event of this, where is the difference between that assembly and the systems of men?" we reply, assuredly there is very great danger. but then such a thing would be _despite_, not in virtue of, the principle. this makes all the difference. yes, indeed, we have seen mistakes and failures which are most humiliating. let no one imagine that, while we contend for the truth concerning the assembly of god, we are at all ignorant or forgetful of the dangers and trials to which any carrying out its principles are exposed. far from it. no one could be for twenty-eight years on that ground without being painfully conscious of the difficulty of maintaining it. but then the very trials, dangers, and difficulties only prove to be so many proofs--painful if you please, but proofs of the truth of the position; and were there no remedy but an appeal to human authority--a setting up of man in christ's place--a return to worldly systems, we should without hesitation pronounce the remedy to be far worse than the disease. for were we to adopt the remedy, we should have the very worst symptoms of the disease, not to be mourned over as disease, but gloried in as the fruits of so-called order. but blessed be god, there is a remedy. what is it? "_there am i_ in the midst." this is enough. it is not, "there is a pope, a priest, a parson, or a president in their midst, at their head, in the chair, or in the pulpit." no thought of such a thing, from cover to cover of the new testament. even in the assembly of god at corinth, where there was most grievous confusion and disorder, the inspired apostle never hints at such a thing as a human president, under any name whatsoever. "_god is the author_ of peace in all the assemblies of the saints" (i cor. xiv. ). god was there to keep order. they were to look to him, not to a man, under any name. to set up man to keep order in god's assembly is sheer unbelief, and an open insult to the divine presence. now, we have been often asked to adduce scripture in proof of the idea of divine presidency in an assembly. we at once reply, "there am i;" and "god is the author." on these two pillars, even had we no more, we can triumphantly build the glorious truth of divine presidency--a truth which _must_ deliver all, who receive and hold it from god, from every system of man, call it by what name you please. it is, in our judgment, impossible to recognize christ as the centre and sovereign ruler in the assembly, and continue to sanction the setting up of man. when once we have tasted the sweetness of being under christ, we can never again submit to the servile bondage of being under man. this is not insubordination or impatience of control. it is only the utter refusal to bow to a false authority--to sanction a sinful usurpation. the moment we see man usurping authority in that which calls itself the church, we simply ask, "who are you?" and retire to a sphere where god alone is acknowledged. "but, then, there are errors, evils, and abuses even in this very sphere." doubtless; but if there are, we have the word of god to correct them. and hence, if an assembly should be troubled by the intrusion of ignorant and foolish men--men who have never yet measured themselves in the presence of god--men who boldly overleap the wide domain over which common sense, good taste, and moral propriety preside, and then vainly talk of being led by the holy spirit--restless men, who _will_ be at something, and who keep the assembly in a continual state of nervous apprehension, not knowing what is to come next--should any assembly be thus grievously afflicted, what should they do? abandon the ground in impatience, chagrin, and disappointment? give all up as a myth, a fable, an idle chimera? go back to that from which they once came out? alas! this is what some have done, thus proving that they never understood what they had been doing; or if they had understood it, that they had not faith to pursue it. may the lord have mercy upon such, and open their eyes that they may see from whence they have fallen, and get a true view of the assembly of god, in contrast with the most attractive of the systems of men. but what is an assembly to do when abuses creep in? correct them by the word of god. this is god's authoritative voice. we are fully aware of the difficulties and trials connected with any expression of the assembly of god. we believe its difficulties and trials are perfectly characteristic. there is nothing under the canopy of heaven that the devil hates as he hates that. he will leave no stone unturned to oppose it. we have seen this exemplified again and again. an evangelist may go to a place and preach the all-sufficiency of the name of jesus for the salvation of the soul, and he will have thousands hanging on his lips. let the same man return, and, while he preaches the same gospel, take another step and proclaim the all-sufficiency of that same jesus for all the exigencies of an assembly of believers, and he will find himself opposed on all hands. why is this? because the devil hates the very feeblest expression of the assembly of god. you may see a town left for ages and generations to its dark and dull routine of religious formalism--a dead people gathering once a week to hear a dead man go through a dead service, and all the rest of the week living in sin and folly. there is not a breath of life, not a leaf stirring. the devil likes it well. but let some one come and unfurl the standard of the name of jesus--jesus for the soul and jesus for the assembly--and you will soon see a mighty change. the rage of hell is excited, and the dark and dreadful tide of opposition rises. this, we most fully believe, is the true secret of many of the bitter attacks that have been recently made on those who maintain the principles of the assembly of god. no doubt we have to mourn over many mistakes, errors, and failures. we have given much occasion to the adversary in various ways. we have been a poor blotted epistle, a faint and feeble witness, a flickering light. for all this we have to be deeply humbled before our god. nothing could be more unbecoming in us than pretention or assumption, or the putting forth of high-sounding ecclesiastical claims. the dust is our place. yes, beloved brethren, the place of confession and self-judgment becomes us, in the presence of our god. still, we are not to let slip the glorious principles of the assembly of god because we have so shamefully failed in carrying them out: we are not to judge the truth by our exhibition of it, but to judge our exhibition by the truth. it is one thing to occupy divine ground, and another thing to carry ourselves properly thereon; and while it is perfectly right to judge our practice by our principles, yet truth is truth for all that, and we may rest assured that the devil hates the truth which characterizes the assembly. a mere handful of poor people, gathered in the name of jesus, as members of his body, to break bread in remembrance of him, is a thorn in the side of the devil. true it is that such an assembly evokes the wrath of men, inasmuch as it throws their office and authority overboard, and they cannot bear that. yet we believe the root of the whole matter will be found in satan's hatred of the special testimony which such an assembly bears to the all-sufficiency of the name of jesus for every possible need of the saints of god. this is a truly noble testimony, and we earnestly long to see it more faithfully carried out. we may fully count upon intense opposition. it will be with us as it was with the returned captives in the days of ezra and nehemiah. we may expect to encounter many a rehum and many a sanballat. nehemiah might have gone and built any other wall in the whole world but the wall of jerusalem, and sanballat would never have molested him. but to build the wall of jerusalem was an unpardonable offence. and why? just because jerusalem was god's earthly centre, round which he will yet gather the restored tribes of israel. this was the secret of the enemy's opposition. and mark the affected contempt. "if a fox go up, he shall even break down their stone wall." and yet sanballat and his allies were not able to break it down. they might cause it to cease because of the jews' lack of faith and energy; but they could not break it down when god would have it up. how like is this to the present moment! surely there is nothing new under the sun. there is affected contempt, but real alarm. and, oh! if those who are gathered in the name of jesus were only more true in heart to their blessed centre, what testimony there would be! what power! what victory! how it would tell on all around. "where two or three are gathered together in my name, there am i." there is nothing like this under the sun, be it ever so feeble and contemptible. the lord be praised for raising up such a witness for himself in these last days. may he greatly increase its effectiveness, by the power of the holy ghost! . we must now very briefly glance at our third point, namely, what is the power by which the assembly is gathered. here again man and his doings are set aside. it is not man's will choosing; nor man's reason discovering; nor man's judgment dictating; nor man's conscience demanding; it is the holy ghost gathering souls to jesus. as jesus is the only centre, so the holy ghost is the only gathering power. the one is as independent of man as the other. it is "where two or three are _gathered_." it does not say "where two or three are _met_." persons may meet together round any centre, on any ground, by any influence, and merely form a society, an association, a community. but the holy ghost gathers saved souls only to christ. an assembly may not embrace all the saints of god in a locality. in such a case they cannot be called the assembly of god in that place. but if they are assembled as members of the body of christ, they occupy the ground of the assembly of god. this is a very simple truth. a soul led by the holy ghost will gather only to the name of the lord; and if we gather to aught else, be it a point of truth, or some ordinance or another, we are not in that matter led by the holy ghost. it is not a question of life or salvation. thousands are saved by christ that do not own him as their centre. they are gathered to some form of church government, some favorite doctrine, some special ordinance, some gifted man. the holy ghost will never gather to any one of these. he gathers only to a risen christ. this is true of the whole church of god upon earth; and each local assembly, wherever convened, is the expression of the whole. now, the _power_ in an assembly will very much depend upon the measure in which each member thereof is gathered in integrity of heart to the name of jesus. if i am gathered to a party holding peculiar opinions--if i am attracted by the people, or by the teaching--if, in a word, it be not the power of the holy ghost, leading me to the true centre of god's assembly, i shall only prove a hindrance, a weight, a cause of weakness. i shall be to an assembly what a waster is to a candle; and instead of adding to the general light and usefulness, i shall do the very reverse. all this is deeply practical. it should lead to much exercise of heart and self-judgment as to what has drawn me to an assembly, and as to my ways therein. we are fully persuaded that the tone and testimony of an assembly have been greatly weakened by the presence of persons not understanding their position. some present themselves there because they get teaching and blessing there which they cannot get anywhere else. some come because they like the simplicity of the worship. others come looking for love. none of these things are up to the mark. we should be in an assembly simply because the name of jesus is the only standard set up there, and the holy spirit has "gathered" us thereto. no doubt ministry is most precious, and we shall have it, in more or less power, where all is ordered aright. so also as to simplicity of worship: we are sure to be simple, and real, and true, when the divine presence is realized, and the sovereignty of the holy ghost fully owned and submitted to. and as to love, if we go _looking for it_ we shall surely be thoroughly disappointed: but if we are enabled to _cultivate_ and _manifest it_, we shall be sure to get a great deal more than we expect or deserve. it will generally be found that those persons who are perpetually complaining of want of love in others are utterly failing in love themselves; and, on the other hand, those who are really walking in love will tell you that they receive a thousand times more than they deserve. let us remember that the best way to get water out of a dry pump is to pour a little water in. you may work at the handle until you are tired, and then go away in fretfulness and impatience, complaining of that horrible pump; whereas, if you would just pour in a little water, you would get in return a gushing stream to satisfy your utmost desire. we have but little conception of what an assembly would be were each one distinctly led by the holy ghost, and gathered _only_ to jesus. we should not then have to complain of dull, heavy, unprofitable, trying meetings. we should have no fear of an unhallowed intrusion of mere nature and its restless doings--no _making_ of prayer--no talking for talking's sake--no hymn-book seized to fill a gap. each one would know his place in the lord's immediate presence--each gifted vessel would be filled, fitted, and used by the master's hand--each eye would be directed to jesus--each heart occupied with him. if a chapter were read, it would be the very voice of god. if a word were spoken, it would tell with power upon the heart. if prayer were offered, it would lead the soul into the very presence of god. if a hymn were sung, it would lift the spirit up to god, and be like sweeping the strings of the heavenly harp. we should have no ready-made sermons--no teaching or preaching prayers, as though we would explain doctrines to god, or tell him a whole host of things about ourselves--no praying _at_ our neighbors, or asking for all manner of graces for them, in which we ourselves are lamentably deficient--no singing for music's sake, or being disturbed if harmony be interfered with. all these evils should be avoided. we should feel ourselves in the very sanctuary of god, and enjoy a foretaste of that time when we shall worship in the courts above, and go no more out. we may be asked, "where will you find all this down here?" ah! this is the question. it is one thing to present a _beau ideal_ on paper, and another thing to realize it in the midst of error, failure, and infirmity. through mercy, some of us have tasted, at times, a little of this blessedness. we have occasionally enjoyed moments of heaven upon earth. oh, for more of it! may the lord, in his great mercy, raise the tone of the assemblies everywhere! may he greatly enlarge our capacity for more profound communion and spiritual worship! may he enable us so to walk, in private life, from day to day so as to judge ourselves and our ways in his holy presence, that at least we may not prove a lump of lead or a waster to any of god's assemblies. and then, even though we may not be able to reach in experience the true expression of the assembly, yet let us never be satisfied with anything less. let us honestly aim at the loftiest standard, and earnestly pray to be lifted up thereto. as to the _ground_ of god's assembly, we should hold it with jealous tenacity, and never consent for an hour to occupy any other. as to the tone and character of an assembly, they may and will vary immensely, and will depend upon the faith and spirituality of those gathered. where the tone of things is felt to be low,--when meetings are felt to be unprofitable--where things are said and done repeatedly which are felt by the spiritual to be wholly out of place, let all who feel it wait on god--wait continually--wait believingly--and he will assuredly hear and answer. in this way the very trials and exercises which are peculiar to an assembly will have the happy effect of casting us more immediately upon him, and thus the eater will yield meat, and the strong sweetness. we must count upon trials and difficulties in any expression of the assembly, just because it is _the_ right and divine way for god's people on earth. the devil will put forth every effort to drive us from that true and holy ground. he will try the patience, try the temper, hurt the feelings, cause offence in nameless and numberless ways--anything and everything to make us forsake the true ground of the assembly. it is well to remember this. we can only hold the divine ground by faith. this marks the assembly of god, and distinguishes it from every human system. you cannot get on there save by faith. and, further, if you want to be somebody, if you are seeking a place, if you want to exalt _self_, you need not think of any true expression of the assembly. you will soon find your level there, if it be in any measure what it should be. fleshly or worldly greatness, in any shape, will be of no account in such an assembly. the divine presence withers up everything of that kind, and levels all human pretension. finally, you cannot get on in the assembly if you are living in secret sin. the divine presence will not suit you. have we not often experienced in the assembly a feeling of uneasiness, caused by the recollection of many things which had escaped our notice during the week? wrong thoughts--foolish words--unspiritual ways--all these things crowd in upon the mind, and exercise the conscience, in the assembly! how is this? because the atmosphere of the assembly is more searching than that which we have been breathing during the week. we have not been in the presence of god in our private walk. we have not been judging ourselves; and hence, when we take our place in a spiritual assembly, our hearts are detected--our ways are exposed in the light; and that exercise which ought to have gone on in private--even the needed exercise of self-judgment, must go on at the table of the lord. this is poor, miserable work for us, but it proves the power of the presence of god in the assembly. things must be in a miserably low state in any assembly when hearts are not thus detected and exposed. it is a fine evidence of the power of the holy spirit in an assembly when careless, carnal, worldly, self-exalting, money-loving, unprincipled persons are compelled to judge themselves in god's presence, or, failing this, are driven away by the spirituality of the atmosphere. such an assembly is no place for these. they can breathe more freely outside. now, we cannot but judge that numbers that have departed from the ground of the assembly have done so because their practical ways did not comport with the purity of the place. no doubt it is easy, in all such cases, to find an excuse in the conduct of those who are left behind. but if the _roots_ of things were in every case laid bare, we should find that many leave an assembly because of inability or reluctance to bear its searching light. "thy testimonies are very sure; holiness becometh thy house, o lord, forever." evil _must_ be judged, for god cannot sanction it. if an assembly does not it is not practically god's assembly at all, though composed of christians, as we say. to pretend to be an assembly of god, and not judge false doctrine and evil ways, would involve the blasphemy of saying that god and wickedness can dwell together. the assembly of god must keep itself pure, because it is his dwelling-place. men may sanction evil, and call it liberality and large-heartedness so to do; but the house of god must keep itself pure. let this great practical truth sink down into our hearts, and produce its sanctifying influence upon our course and character. . a very few words will suffice to set forth, in the last place, "the _authority_" on which the assembly is gathered. it is the word of god alone. the charter of the assembly is the eternal word of the living and true god. it is not the traditions, the doctrines, nor the commandments of men. a passage of scripture, to which we have more than once referred in the progress of this paper, contains at once the standard round which the assembly is gathered, the power by which it is gathered, and the authority by which it is gathered--"the name of jesus"--"the holy ghost"--"the word of god." now these are the same all over the world. whether i go to new zealand, to australia, to canada, to london, to paris, to edinburg, or dublin, the centre, the gathering power, and the authority are one and the same. we can own no other centre but christ; no gathering energy but the holy ghost; no authority but the word of god; no characteristic but holiness of life and soundness in doctrine. such is a true expression of the assembly of god, and we cannot acknowledge aught else. saints of god we can acknowledge, love, and honor as such, wherever we find them; but human systems we look upon as dishonoring to christ, and hostile to the true interest of the saints of god. we long to see all christians on the true ground of the assembly. we believe it to be the place of real blessing and effective testimony. we believe there is a character of testimony yielded by carrying out the principles of the assembly which cannot be yielded otherwise, even were each member a whitefield in evangelistic power. we say this not to lower evangelistic work. god forbid. we would that all were whitefields. but then we cannot shut our eyes to the fact that many affect to despise the assembly, under the plea of going out as evangelists; and when we trace their path, and examine the results of their work, we find that they have no provision for the souls that have been converted by their means. they seem not to know what to do with them. they quarry the stones, but do not build them together. the consequence is that souls are scattered hither and thither, some persuing a desultory course, others living in isolation, all at fault as to true church ground. now, we believe that all these should be gathered on the ground of the assembly of god, to have "fellowship in the breaking of bread and in prayer." they should "come together on the first day of the week, to break bread," looking to the lord christ to edify them by the mouth of whom he will. this is the simple path--the normal, the divine idea, needing, it may be, more faith to realize it, because of the clashing and conflicting elements of the present day, but none the less simple and true on that account. we are aware, of course, that all this will be pronounced proselytizing, and party spirit, by those who seem to regard it as the very _beau ideal_ of christian liberality and large-heartedness to be able to say, "i belong to nothing." strange, anomalous position! it just resolves itself in this: it is _somebody_ professing _nothingism_ in order to get rid of all responsibility, and go with all and everything. this is a very easy path for nature, and amiable nature, but we shall see what will come of it in the day of the lord. even now we regard it as positive unfaithfulness to christ, from which may the good lord deliver his people. but let none imagine that we want to place the evangelist and the assembly in opposition. nothing is further from our thoughts. the evangelist should go forth from the bosom of the assembly, in full fellowship therewith; he should work not only to gather souls to christ, but also bring them to an assembly, where divinely-gifted pastors might watch over them, and divinely-gifted teachers instruct them. we do not want to clip the evangelist's wings, but only to guide his movements. we are unwilling to see real spiritual energy expended in desultory service. no doubt it is a grand result to bring souls to christ. every soul linked to jesus is a work done forever. but ought not the lambs and sheep to be gathered and cared for? would anyone be satisfied to purchase sheep, and then leave them to wander whithersoever they list? surely not. but whither should christ's sheep be gathered? is it into the folds of man's erection, or into an assembly gathered on divine ground? into the latter unquestionably; for that, we may rest assured, however feeble, however despised, however blackened and maligned, is the place for all the lambs and sheep of the flock of christ. here, however, there will be responsibility, care, anxiety, labor, a constant demand for watchfulness and prayer; all of which flesh and blood would like to avoid, if possible. there is much that is agreeable and attractive in the idea of going through the world as an evangelist, having thousands hanging on one's lips, and hundreds of souls as the seals of one's ministry: but what is to be done with these souls? by all means show them their true place with those gathered on the ground of the assembly of god, where, notwithstanding the ruin and apostasy of the professing body, they can enjoy spiritual communion, worship, and ministry. this will involve much trial and painful excise. it was so in apostolic times. those who really cared for the flock of christ had to shed many a tear, send up many an agonizing prayer, spend many a sleepless night. but, then, in all these things, they tasted the sweetness of fellowship with the chief shepherd; and when he appears, their tears, their prayers, their sleepless nights will be remembered and rewarded; while those who are building up human systems will find them all come to an end, to be heard of no more forever; and the false shepherds, who ruthlessly seize the pastoral staff only to use it as an instrument of filthy gain to themselves, shall have their faces covered with everlasting confusion. but, we may be asked, "is it not worse than useless to seek to carry out the principles of the assembly of god, seeing that the professing church is in such complete ruin?" we reply by asking, "are we to be disobedient because the church is in ruin? are we to continue in error because the dispensation has failed?" surely not. we own the ruin, mourn over it, confess it, take our share in it, and in its sad consequences, seek to walk softly and humbly in the midst of it, confessing ourselves to be most unfaithful and unworthy. but though we have failed, christ has not failed. he abideth faithful; he cannot deny himself. he has promised to be with his people to the end of the age. matt. xviii. holds as good to-day as it did years ago. "let god be true and every man a liar." we utterly repudiate the idea of men setting about church-making, or pretending to ordain ministers. we look upon it as a pure assumption, without a single shadow of scripture authority. it is god's work to gather his church and raise up ministers. we have no business to form ourselves into a church, or to ordain office-bearers. no doubt the lord is very gracious, tender, and pitiful. he bears with our weakness, and overrules our mistakes, and where the heart is true to him, even though in ignorance, he will assuredly lead on into higher light. but we must not use god's grace as a plea for unscriptural acting, any more than we should use the church's ruin as a plea for sanctioning error. we have to confess the ruin, count on the grace, and act in simple obedience to the word of the lord. such is the path of blessing at all times. the remnant, in the days of ezra, did not pretend to the power and splendor of solomon's days, but they obeyed the word of solomon's lord, and they were abundantly blessed in their deed. they did not say, "things are in ruin, and therefore we had better remain in babylon, and do nothing." no; they simply confessed their own and their people's sin, and counted on god. this is precisely what we are to do. we are to own the ruin, and count on god. finally, if we be asked, "where is the true expression of this assembly of god now?" we reply, "where christ is truly the centre of gathering; the one body the ground; the holy spirit the leader; the holy scriptures the sole authority; and holiness the practice." reader, are you assembled on this divine ground? if so, cling to it with your whole soul. are you in this path? if so, press on with all the energies of your moral being. never be content with anything short of his dwelling in you, and your conscious nearness to him. let not satan rob you of your proper portion by leading you to rest in a mere name. let him not tempt you to mistake your ostensible _position_ for your real _condition_. cultivate secret communion--secret prayer--constant self-judgment. be especially on your guard against every form of spiritual pride. cultivate lowliness, meekness, and brokenness of spirit, tenderness of conscience, in your own private walk. seek to combine the sweetest grace towards others with the boldness of a lion where truth is concerned. then will you be a blessing in the assembly of god, and an effective witness of the all-sufficiency of the name of jesus. the veil is rent:--our souls draw near unto a throne of grace; the merits of the lord appear, they fill the holy place. his precious blood has spoken there, before and on the throne: and his own wounds in heaven declare, th' atoning work is done. 'tis finished!--here our souls have rest, his work can never fail: by him, our sacrifice and priest, we pass within the veil. within the holiest of all, cleansed by his precious blood, before the throne we prostrate fall, and worship thee, o god! boldly the heart and voice we raise, his blood, his name, our plea: assured our prayers and songs of praise ascend, by christ, to thee. footnotes: [xviii.] the same greek word, _ecclesia_, has been rendered both "church" and "assembly" in our english translation--"assembly" gives the true meaning. [xix.] it is of the utmost importance to distinguish between what christ builds, and what man builds. "the gates of hell" shall assuredly prevail against all that is merely of man; and hence it would be a fatal mistake to apply to man's building words which only apply to christ's. man may build with "wood, hay, stubble," alas! he does; but all that our lord christ builds shall stand forever. the stamp of eternity is upon every work of his hand. all praise to his glorious name! [xx.] there is no such thing in scripture as being a member of _a_ church. every true believer is a member of _the_ church of god--the body of christ, and can therefore no more be, properly, a member of anything else, than my arm can be a member of any other body. the only true ground on which believers can gather is set forth in that grand statement, "there is one body, and one spirit." and again, "we being many are one loaf, and one body" (eph. iv. ; i cor. x. ). if god declares that there is but "one body," it must be contrary to his mind to own more than that one. now, while it is quite true that no given number of believers in any given place can be called "the body of christ," or "the assembly of god;" yet they should be gathered on the ground of that body and that assembly, and on no other ground. we call the reader's special attention to this principle. it holds good at all times, in all places, and under all circumstances. the fact of the ruin of the professing church does not touch it. it has been true since the day of pentecost; is true at this moment; and shall be true until the church is taken to meet her head and lord in the clouds, that "_there is one body_." all believers belong to that body; and they should meet on that ground, and on no other. [xxi.] the reader will need to ponder the distinction between the church viewed as "the body of christ," and as "the house of god." he may study eph. i. ; i cor. xii. for the former. eph. ii. ; i cor. iii.; i tim. iii. for the latter. the distinction is as interesting as it is important. [xxii.] the reader will do well to note the fact that, in matt. xvi., we have the very earliest allusion to the church, and there our lord speaks of it as a future thing. he says, "on this rock i _will_ build my church." he does not say, "i _have_ been, or i _am_ building." in short the church had no existence until our lord christ was raised from the dead and glorified at the right hand of god. then, but not until then, the holy ghost was sent down to baptize believers, whether jews or gentiles, into one body, and unite them to the risen and glorified head in heaven. this body has been on the earth since the descent of the holy ghost; is here still, and shall be until christ comes to fetch it to himself. it is a perfectly unique thing. it is not to be found in old testament scripture. paul expressly tells us it was not revealed in other ages; it was hid in god, and never made known until it was committed to him. (see, carefully, rom. xvi. , ; eph. iii. - ; col. i. - .) true it is--most blessedly true--that god had a people in old testament times. not merely the nation of israel, but a quickened, saved, spiritual people, who lived by faith, went to heaven, and are there "the spirits of just men made perfect." but the church is never spoken of until matt. xvi., and there only as a future thing. as to the expression used by stephen, "the church in the wilderness" (acts vii. ), it is pretty generally known that it simply refers to the congregation of israel. the _termini_ of the church's earthly history are pentecost (acts ii.), and the rapture (i thess. iv. , ). the christian his position and his work. part i. what is the true position of a christian? and what has he got to do? are questions of the very deepest practical importance. it is assumed, of course, that he has eternal life: without this, one cannot be a christian at all. "he that believeth on the son of god hath everlasting life." this is the common portion of all believers. it is not a matter of attainment, a matter of progress, a thing which some christians have and others have not. it belongs to the very feeblest babe in the family of god, as well as to the most matured and experienced servant of christ. all are possessed of eternal life, and can never by any possibility lose it. but our present theme is not life, but position and work; and in considering it, we shall ask the reader to turn for a moment to a passage in heb. xiii. perhaps we cannot do better than quote it for him. there is nothing like the plain and solid word of holy scripture. "be not carried about with divers and strange doctrines; for it is a good thing that the heart be established with grace; not with meats, which have not profited them that have been occupied therein. we have an altar, whereof they have no right to eat which serve the tabernacle. for the bodies of those beasts, whose blood is brought into the sanctuary by the high priest for sin are burned without the camp. wherefore jesus also, that he might sanctify the people with his own blood, suffered without the gate. let us go forth therefore unto him without the camp, bearing his reproach. for here have we no continuing city, but we seek one to come" (vers. - ). here, then, we have one grand aspect of the christian's position. it is defined by the position of his lord. this makes it divinely simple; and, we may add, divinely settled. the christian is identified with christ. amazing fact! "as he is so _are_ we in this world." it is not said, "as he is, so _shall_ we be in the world to come." no; this would not come up to the divine idea. it is, "so are we _in this world_." the position of christ defines the position of the christian. but this glorious fact tells in a double way; it tells upon the christian's place before god; and it tells on his place as regards this present world. it is upon the latter that heb. xiii. instructs us so blessedly, and it is that which is now more especially before us. jesus suffered without the gate. this fact is the basis on which the apostle grounds his exhortation to the hebrew believers to go forth without the camp. the cross of christ closed his connection with the camp of judaism; and all who desire to follow him must go outside to where he is. the final breach with israel is presented, morally, in the death of christ; doctrinally, in the epistle to the hebrews; historically, in the destruction of jerusalem. in the judgment of faith, jerusalem was as thoroughly rejected when the messiah was nailed to the cross, as it was when the army of titus left it a smouldering ruin. the instincts of the divine nature, and the inspired teachings of scripture, go before the actual facts of history. "jesus suffered without the gate." for what end? "that he might sanctify (or set apart to god) the people with his own blood." what follows? what is the necessary practical result? "let us go forth therefore unto him without the camp, bearing his reproach." but what is "the camp?" primarily, judaism; but, most unquestionably, it has a moral application to every organized system of religion under the sun. if that system of ordinances and ceremonies which god himself had set up--if judaism, with its imposing ritual, its splendid temple, its priesthood and its sacrifices, has been found fault with, condemned, and set aside, what shall be said of any or all of those organizations which have rebuilt it? if our lord christ is outside of that, how much more out of these! yes, christian reader, we may rest assured that the outside place, the place of rejection and reproach is that to which we are called, if we would know aught of true fellowship with our lord jesus christ. mark the words! "let us go forth." will any christian say, "no; i cannot go forth. my place is inside the camp. i must work there?" if so, then, there must be moral distance between you and jesus, for he is as surely outside the camp as he is on the throne of god. if your sphere of work lies inside the camp, when your master tells you to go forth, what shall we say for your work? can it be "gold, silver, precious stones?" can it have your lord's approving smile? it may exhibit his overruling hand, and illustrate his sovereign goodness; but can it possibly have his unqualified approval while carried on in a sphere from which he commands you to go forth? the all-important thing for every true servant is to be found exactly where his master would have him. the question is not, "am i doing a great deal of work? but am i pleasing my master? i may seem to be doing wonders in the way of work; my name may be heralded to the ends of the earth as a most laborious, devoted, and successful workman; and, all the while, i may be in an utterly false position, indulging my own unbroken will, pleasing myself, and seeking some personal end or object." all this is very solemn indeed, and demands the consideration of all who really desire to be found in the current of god's thoughts. we live in a day of much wilfulness. the commandments of christ do not govern all. we think for ourselves, in place of submitting ourselves absolutely to the authority of the word. when our lord tells us to go forth without the camp, we, instead of yielding a ready obedience, begin to reason as to the results which we can reach by remaining within. scripture seems to have little or no power over our souls. we do not aim at simply pleasing christ. provided we can make great show of work, we think all is right. we are more occupied with results which, after all, may only tend to magnify ourselves, than with the earnest purpose to do what is agreeable to the mind of christ. but are we to be idle? is there nothing for us to do in the outside place to which we are called? is christian life to be made up of a series of negations? is there nothing positive? let heb. xiii. furnish the clear and forcible answer to all these inquiries. we shall find it quite as distinct in reference to our _work_ as it is in reference to our _position_. what, then, have we got to do? two things; and these two in their comprehensive range take in the whole of a christian's life in its two grand aspects. they give us the inner and the outer life of the true believer. in the first place, we read, "by him therefore let us offer the sacrifice of praise to god continually, that is, the fruit of our lips, giving thanks to his name." is not this something? have we not here a very elevated character of work? yes, verily, the most elevated that can possibly engage the energies of our renewed being. it is our privilege to be occupied, morning, noon, eventide, and midnight, in presenting the sacrifice of praise to god--a sacrifice which, he assures us, is ever most acceptable to him. "whoso offereth praise," he says, "glorifieth me." let us carefully note this. praise is to be the primary and continual occupation of the believer. we, in our fancied wisdom, would put work in the first place. we are disposed to attach chief importance to bustling activity. we have such an overweening sense of the value of _doing_, that we lose sight of the place which worship occupies in the thoughts of god. again, there are some who vainly imagine that they can please god by punishing their bodies. they think that he delights in their vigils, fastings, floggings, and flagellations. miserable, soul-destroying, god-dishonoring delusion! will not those who harbor it and act upon it bend their ears and their hearts to those gracious words which we have just penned, "whoso offereth praise glorifieth me?" true, it is, that those words are immediately followed by that grand practical statement, "and to him that ordereth his conversation aright, will i show the salvation of god." but still, here, as everywhere, the highest place is assigned to praise, not to work. and, most assuredly, no man can be said to be ordering his conversation aright who abuses his body and renders it unfit to be the vessel or instrument by which he can serve god. no, reader, if we really desire to please god, to gratify his heart and to glorify his name, we shall give our heart's attention to heb. xiii. , and seek to offer the sacrifice of praise _continually_. yes, "continually." not merely now and then, when all goes on smoothly and pleasantly. come what may, it is our high and holy privilege to offer the sacrifice of praise to god. it does so glorify god when his people live in an atmosphere of praise. it imparts a heavenly tone to their character, and speaks more powerfully to the hearts of those around them than if they were preaching to them from morning till night. a christian should "rejoice in the lord alway," always reflecting back upon this dark world the blessed beams of his father's countenance. thus it should ever be. nothing is so unworthy of a christian as a fretful spirit, a gloomy temper, a sour, morose-looking face. and not only is it unworthy of a christian, but it is dishonoring to god, and it causes the enemies of truth to speak reproachfully. no doubt, tempers and dispositions vary; and allowance must be made in cases of weak bodily health, and of circumstances of sorrow. it is not easy to look pleasant when the body is in suffering; and, further, we should be very far indeed from the commending anything like levity or the everlasting smile of mere unsubdued nature. but scripture is clear and explicit. it tells us to "offer the sacrifice of praise to god continually, that is, the fruit of our lips giving thanks to his name." how simple! "_the fruit of our lips._" this is what our god delights in. it is his joy to be surrounded with the praises of hearts filled to overflowing with his abounding goodness. thus it will be throughout eternity, in that bright home of love and glory to which we are so rapidly hastening. and let the reader specially note the words, "_by him_." we are to offer our sacrifice of praise by the hand of our great high priest, who is ever in the presence of god for us. this is most consolatory and assuring to our hearts. jesus presents our sacrifice of praise to god. it must therefore be ever acceptable, coming thus by the priestly hand of the great minister of the sanctuary. it goes up to god, not as it proceeds from us, but as it is presented by him. divested of all the imperfection and failure attaching to us, it ascends to god in all the fragrance and acceptancy belonging to him. the feeblest note of praise, the simple "thank god!" is perfumed with the incense of christ's infinite preciousness. this is unspeakably precious: and it should greatly encourage us to cultivate a spirit of praise. we should be "continually" praising and blessing god. a murmuring or fretful word should never cross the lips of one who has christ for his portion, and who stands identified with that blessed one in his position and his destiny. but we must draw this paper to a close by a rapid glance at the other side of the christian's work. if it is our privilege to be continually praising and blessing god, it is also our privilege to be doing good to man. "but to do good and to communicate forget not; for with such sacrifices god is well pleased." we are passing through a world of misery, of sin and death and sorrow. we are surrounded by broken hearts and crushed spirits, if we would only look them out. yes; this is the point; _if we would only look them out_. it is easy for us to close our eyes to such things, to turn away from them, to forget that there are such things always within reach of us. we can sit in our easy chair, and speculate about truth, doctrines, and the letter of scripture; we can discuss the theories of christianity, and split hairs about prophecy and dispensational truth, and, all the while, be shamefully failing in the discharge of our grand responsibility as christians. we are in imminent danger of forgetting that christianity is a living reality. it is not a set of dogmas, a number of principles strung together on a thread of systematized divinity, which unconverted people can have at their fingers' ends. neither is it a set of ordinances to be gone through, in dreary formality, by lifeless, heartless professors. no; it is life--life eternal--life implanted by the holy ghost, and expressing itself in those two lovely forms on which we have been dwelling, namely, praise to god and doing good to man. such was the life of jesus when he trod this earth of ours. he lived in the atmosphere of praise; and he went about doing good. and he is our life, and he is our model on which the life is to be formed. the christian should be the living expression of christ, by the power of the holy ghost. it is not a mere question of leading what is called a religious life, which very often resolves itself into a tiresome round of duties which neither yield "praise" to god nor one atom of "good" to man. there must be _life_, or it is all perfectly worthless. "the kingdom of god is not meat or drink; but righteousness and peace and joy in the holy ghost. for he that in these things serveth christ is acceptable to god, and approved of men" (rom. xiv. , ). beloved christian reader, let us earnestly apply our hearts to the consideration of these great practical truths. let us seek to be christians not merely in name but in reality. let us not be distinguished as the mere vendors of peculiar "_views_." oh! how worthless are views! how utterly profitless is discussion! how wearisome are theological hair-splittings! let us have life, light, and love. these are heavenly, eternal, divine. all else is vanity. how we do long for reality in this world of sham--for deep thinkers and earnest workers in this day of shallow talkers! note.--the reader will find it profitable to compare heb. xiii. - with i peter ii. - . "let us go forth therefore unto him," says paul. "to whom coming," says peter. then we have "the holy priesthood" offering up spiritual sacrifices of praise. and "the royal priesthood" doing good and communicating--"showing forth the virtues of him who hath called us out of darkness into his marvelous light." the two scriptures give us a magnificent view of fundamental, devotional and practical christianity. part ii. we must ask the reader to open his bible and read heb. x. - . in it he will find a very deep and marvelous view of the christian's position and his work. the inspired writer gives us, as it were, three solid pillars on which the grand edifice of christianity rests. these are, first, _the will of god_; secondly, _the work of christ;_ and, thirdly, _the witness of the holy ghost_, in scripture. if these grand realities be laid hold of in simple faith, the soul _must_ have settled peace. we may assert, with all possible confidence, that no power of earth or hell, men or devils, can ever disturb the peace which is founded upon heb. x. - . let us then, in the first place, dwell, for a few moments, on the manner in which the apostle unfolds, in this magnificent passage, the will of god. in the opening of the chapter, we are instructed as to the utter inadequacy of the sacrifices under the law. they could never make the conscience perfect--they could never accomplish the will of god--never fulfil the gracious desire and purpose of his heart. "the law, having a shadow of good things to come, and not the very image of the things, can never with those sacrifices which they offered year by year continually make the comers thereunto perfect. for then would they not have ceased to be offered? because _the worshipers once purged_ should have had _no more conscience of sins_." let the reader carefully note this. "the worshipers once purged should have had no more conscience of sins." he does not say--"no more _consciousness of sins_." there is an immense difference between these two things; and yet, it is to be feared, they are often confounded. the christian has, alas, the consciousness of _sin in him_, but he ought to have no conscience of _sins on him_, inasmuch as he is purged once and forever, by the precious blood of christ. some of the lord's people have a habit of speaking of their continual need of applying to the blood of christ, which, to say the least of it, is by no means intelligent, or in accordance with the accurate teaching of holy scripture. it seems like humility; but, we may rest assured, true humility can only be found in connection with the full, clear, settled apprehension of the truth of god, and as to his gracious will concerning us. if it be his will that we should have "no more conscience of sins," it cannot be true humility, on our part, to go on from day to day, and year to year, with the burden of sins upon us. and, further, if it be true that christ has borne our sins and put them away forever--if he has offered one perfect sacrifice for sins, ought we not assuredly to know that we are perfectly pardoned and perfectly purged? is it--can it be, true humility to reduce the blood of christ to the level of the blood of bulls and of goats? but this is what is virtually done, though, no doubt, unwittingly, by all who speak of applying continually to the blood of christ. one reason why god found fault with the sacrifices under the law was, as the apostle tells us, "in those sacrifices there is a remembrance again made of sins every year." this, blessed be his name, was not according to his mind. he desired that every trace of guilt and every remembrance of it should be blotted out, once and forever; and hence it cannot be his will that his people should be continually bowed down under the terrible burden of unforgiven sin. it is _contrary_ to his will; it is subversive of their peace, and derogatory to the glory of christ and the efficacy of his one sacrifice. one grand point of the inspired argument, in hebrews x., is to show that the continual remembrance of sins and the continual repetition of the sacrifice go together; and therefore, if christians now are to have the burden of sins constantly on the heart and conscience, it follows that christ should be offered again and again--which were a blasphemy. his work is done, and hence our burden is gone--gone forever. "it is not possible that the blood of bulls and goats should take away sin. wherefore, when he cometh into the world, he saith, sacrifice and offering thou wouldest not, but a body hast thou prepared me. in burnt-offerings and sacrifices for sin thou hast had no pleasure. then said i, lo, i come (in the volume of the book it is written of me) to do thy will, o god. above, when he said, sacrifice and offering and burnt-offerings and offerings for sin thou wouldest not, neither hadst pleasure therein (which are offered by the law) then said he, lo, i come to do thy will, o god. he taketh away the first that he may establish the second. by the which will we are sanctified (or set apart) by the offering of the body of jesus christ _once_." here we are conducted, in the most distinct and forcible manner, to the eternal source of the whole matter, namely, the will of god--the purpose and counsel formed in the divine mind, before the foundation of the world, before any creature was formed, before sin or satan existed. it was the will of god, from all eternity, that the son should, in due time, come forth and do a work which was to be the foundation of the divine glory and of all the counsels and purposes of the trinity. it would be a very grave error indeed to suppose that redemption was an afterthought with god. he had not, blessed be his holy name, to sit down and plan what he would do, when sin entered. it was all settled beforehand. the enemy, no doubt, imagined that he was gaining a wonderful victory when he meddled with man in the garden of eden. in point of fact, he was only giving occasion for the display of god's eternal counsels in connection with the work of the son. there was no basis for those counsels, no sphere for their display in the fields of creation. it was the meddling of satan--the entrance of sin--the ruin of man, that opened a platform on which a saviour-god might display the riches of his grace, the glories of his salvation, the attributes of his nature, to all created intelligences. there is great depth and power in those words of the eternal son, "in the volume of the book it is written of me." to what "volume" does he here refer? is it to old testament scripture merely? surely not; the apostle quotes from the old testament, but it is nothing less than the roll of god's eternal counsels in which the "vast plan" was laid, according to which, in the appointed time, the eternal son was to come forth and appear on the scene, in order to accomplish the divine will, vindicate the divine glory, confound the enemy utterly, put away sin, and save ruined man in a manner which yields a richer harvest of glory to god than ever he could have reaped in the fields of an unfallen creation. all this gives immense stability to the soul of the believer. indeed it is utterly impossible for human language to set forth the preciousness and blessedness of this line of truth. it is such rich consolation to every pious soul to know that one has appeared in this world to do the will of god--whatever that will might be. "lo, i come to do thy will o god." such was the one undivided purpose and object of that perfect human heart. he never did his own will in anything. he says, "i came down from heaven, not to do mine own will, but the will of him that sent me." it mattered not to him what that will might involve to himself personally. the decree was written down in the eternal volume that he should come and do the divine will; and, all homage to his peerless name! he came and did it perfectly. he could say, "a body hast thou prepared me." "mine ears hast thou opened." "i clothe the heavens with blackness, and i make sackcloth their covering. the lord god hath given me the tongue of the learned, that i should know how to speak a word in season to him that is weary: he wakeneth morning by morning, he wakeneth mine ear to hear as the learned. the lord god hath opened mine ear, and i was not rebellious, neither turned away back. i gave my back to the smiters, and my cheeks to them that plucked off the hair: i hid not my face from shame and spitting" (isa. l. - ). but this leads us, in the second place, to contemplate the work of christ. it was ever the delight of the heart of jesus to do his father's will and finish his work. from the manger at bethlehem to the cross of calvary, the one grand object that swayed his devoted heart was the accomplishment of the will of god. he perfectly glorified god, in all things. this, blessed be god, perfectly secures our full and everlasting salvation, as the apostle in this passage, so distinctly states. "by the which will we are sanctified, through the offering of the body of jesus christ once." here our souls may rest, beloved reader, in sweetest peace and unclouded certainty. it was the will of god that we should be set apart to himself, according to all the love of his heart, and all the claims of his throne; and our lord christ, in due time, in pursuance of the everlasting purpose as set forth "in the volume of the book," came forth from the glory which he had with the father, before all worlds, to do the work which forms the imperishable basis of all the divine counsels and of our eternal salvation. and--forever be his name adored!--he has finished his work. he has perfectly glorified god in the midst of the scene in which he has been so dishonored. at all cost he has vindicated him and made good his every claim. he magnified the law and made it honorable. he vanquished every foe, removed every obstacle, swept away every barrier, bore the judgment and wrath of a sin-hating god; destroyed death and him that had the power of it, extracted its sting, and spoiled the grave of its victory. in a word, he gloriously accomplished all that was written in the volume of the book concerning him; and now we see him crowned with glory and honor, at the right hand of the majesty in the heavens. he travelled from the throne to the dust of death, in order to accomplish the will of god, and having done so, he has gone back to the throne, in a new character and on a new footing. his pathway from the throne to the cross was marked by the footprints of divine and everlasting love; and his pathway from the cross back to the throne is sprinkled by his atoning blood. he came from heaven to earth to do the will of god, and, having done it, he returned to heaven again, thus opening up for us "a new and living way" by which we draw nigh to god, in holy boldness and liberty, as purged worshipers. all is done. every question is settled. every barrier is removed. the vail is rent. that mysterious curtain which, for ages and generations, had shut god in from man, and shut man out from god, was rent in twain, from top to bottom, by the precious death of christ; and now we can look right up into the opened heavens and see on the throne the man who bore our sins in his own body on the tree. a seated christ tells out, in the ear of faith, the sweet emancipating tale that all that had to be done is done--done forever--done for god--done for us. yes; all is settled now, and god can, in perfect righteousness, indulge the love of his heart, in blotting out all our sins and bringing us nigh unto himself in all the acceptance of the one who sits beside him on the throne. and let the reader carefully note the striking and beautiful way in which the apostle contrasts _a seated christ in heaven with the standing priest on earth_. "every priest standeth daily ministering, and offering oftentimes the same sacrifices, which can never take away sins. but this man, after he had offered one sacrifice for sins, forever ([greek: eis to diênekes]--in perpetuity) sat down on the right hand of god; from henceforth expecting till his enemies be made his footstool. for by one offering he hath perfected forever (in perpetuity) them that are sanctified." this is exceedingly blessed. the priest, under the levitical economy, could never sit down, for the obvious reason that his work was never done. there was no seat provided in the temple or in the tabernacle. there is remarkable force and significance in the manner in which the inspired writer puts this. "_every priest_"--"standeth _daily_"--"offering _oftentimes_"--"_the same sacrifices_"--"which can _never take away sins_." no human language could possibly set forth, more graphically, the utter inefficacy of the levitical ceremonial. how strange that, in the face of such a passage of holy scripture, christendom should have set up a human priesthood, with its daily sacrifice!--a priesthood moreover, not belonging to the tribe of levi, not springing from the house of aaron, and therefore having no sort of divine title or sanction. and, then as to the sacrifice, it is, according to their own admission, a sacrifice without blood, and therefore a sacrifice without remission, for, "without the shedding of blood there is no remission" (heb. ix. ). hence, this self-made priesthood is a daring usurpation, and her sacrifices a worthless vanity--a positive lie--a mischievous delusion. the priests of whom the apostle speaks in heb. x. were priests of the tribe of levi and of the house of aaron--the only house, the only tribe ever recognised of god as having any title to assume the office and the work of an earthly priest. and, further, the sacrifices which the aaronic priests offered were appointed by god, for the time being, to serve as _figures_ of him that was to come; but they never gave him any pleasure, inasmuch as they could never take away sins; and the true priest having come, the true sacrifice having been offered, the figures have been forever abolished. now, in view of all this, what shall we say of christendom's priests and christendom's sacrifices? what will a righteous judge say to them? we cannot attempt to dwell upon such an awful theme. we can merely say, alas! alas! for the poor souls that are deluded and ruined by such antichristian absurdities. may god in his mercy deliver them and lead them to rest in the one offering of jesus christ--that precious blood that cleanses from all sin. may many be led to see that a repeated sacrifice and a seated christ are in positive antagonism. if the sacrifice must be repeated, christ has no right to his seat and to his crown--god pardon the very penning of the words! if christ has a divine right to his seat and to his crown, then to repeat a sacrifice is simply a blasphemy against his cross, his name, his glory. to repeat in any way, or under any form whatsoever, the sacrifice, is to deny the efficacy of christ's one offering, and to rob the soul of anything like an approach to the knowledge of remission of sins. a repeated sacrifice and perfect remission are an absolute contradiction in terms. but we must turn, for a moment, to the third grand point in our subject, namely, the witness of the holy ghost. this is of the deepest possible moment for the reader to understand. it gives great completeness to the subject. how are we to know that christ has, by his work on the cross, absolutely and divinely accomplished the will of god? simply by the witness of the holy ghost in scripture. this is the third pillar on which the christian's position rests, and it is as thoroughly divine and, therefore, as thoroughly independent of man as the other two. it is very evident that man had nothing to do with the eternal counsels of the trinity--nothing to do with the glorious work accomplished on the cross. all this is clear; and it is equally clear that man has nothing to do with the authority on which our souls receive the joyful news as to the _will of god_, and _the work of christ_, inasmuch as it is nothing less than _the witness of the holy ghost_. we cannot be too simple as to this. it is not, by any means, a question of our feelings, our frames, our evidences, or our experiences--things interesting in their right place. we must receive the truth solely and simply on the authority of that august witness who speaks to us in holy scripture. thus we read, "whereof the holy ghost also is a witness to us; for after that he had said before, this is the covenant that i will make with them after those days, saith the lord; i will put my laws into their hearts, and in their minds will i write them; and their sins and iniquities will i remember no more." here, then, we have fully before us the solid foundation of the christian's position and the christian's peace. it is all of god, from first to last. the _will_, the _work_, and the _witness_ are all divine. the lord be praised for this glorious fact! what should we do, what would become of us, were it otherwise? in this day of confusion, when souls are tossed about by every wind of doctrine--when the beloved sheep of christ are driven hither and thither, in bewilderment and perplexity--when ritualism with its ignorant absurdities, and rationalism with its impudent blasphemies, and spiritualism with its horrible traffic with demons, are threatening the very foundations of our faith, how important it is for christians to know what those foundations really are, and that they should be consciously resting thereon! part iii. we would recall for a moment to the reader's attention the third point in our subject, namely, "the witness of the holy ghost in scripture." we feel it to be of too much importance to be dismissed with such a cursory glance as we were able to give it at the close of our last paper. it is absolutely essential to the enjoyment of settled peace that the heart should rest _solely_ on the authority of holy scripture. nothing else will stand. inward evidences, spiritual experiences, comfortable frames, happy feelings, are all very good, very valuable, and very desirable; indeed we cannot prize them too highly in their right place. but, most assuredly, their right place is not at the foundation of the christian position. if we look to such things as the ground of our peace, we shall very soon become clouded, uncertain, and miserable. the reader cannot be too simple in his apprehension of this point. he must rest like a little child upon the testimony of the holy ghost in the word. it is blessedly true that "he that believeth hath the witness in himself." and again, "the spirit itself beareth witness with our spirit that we are the children of god." all this is essential to christianity; but it must, in no wise, be confounded with the witness of the holy ghost, as given to us in holy scripture. the spirit of god never leads any one to build upon his work as the ground of peace, but only upon the finished work of christ, and the unchangeable word of god; and we may rest assured that the more simply we rest on these the more settled our peace will be, and the clearer our evidences, the brighter our frames, the happier our feelings, the richer our experiences. in short, the more we look away from self and all its belongings, and rest in christ, on the clear authority of scripture, the more spiritually minded we shall be; and the inspired apostle tells us that "to be spiritually minded (or, the minding of the spirit) is life and peace." the best evidence of a spiritual mind is childlike repose in christ and his word. the clearest proof of an unspiritual mind is self-occupation. it is a poor affair to be trafficking in _our_ evidences, or _our_ anything. it looks like piety, but it leads away from christ--away from scripture--away from god; and this is not piety, or faith, or christianity. we are intensely anxious that the reader should seize, with great distinctness, the importance of committing his whole moral being to the divine authority of the word of god. it will never fail him. all else may go, but "the word of our god shall stand forever." heart and flesh may fail. internal evidences may become clouded; frames, feelings, and experiences may all prove unsatisfactory; but the word of the lord, the testimony of the holy ghost, the clear voice of holy scripture, must ever remain unshaken. "and this is the word which by the gospel is preached unto us." thus much, then, as to the divine and everlasting basis of the christian's position, as set forth in the tenth chapter of the epistle to the hebrews. let us, now, see what this same scripture tells us of the christian's work, and of the sphere in which that work is to be carried on. the christian is brought into the immediate presence of god, inside the veil, into the holiest of all. this is his proper place, if indeed we are to listen to the voice of scripture. "having therefore, brethren, boldness to enter into the holiest by the blood of jesus, by a _new_ and _living_ way which he hath consecrated for us, through the veil, that is to say, his flesh; and having a high-priest over the house of god; _let us draw near_ with a true heart, in full assurance of faith, having our hearts sprinkled from an evil conscience, and our bodies washed with pure water." our god, blessed be his holy name, would have us near unto himself. he has made out for us a title clear and indisputable in "_the blood of jesus_." nothing more is needed. that precious blood stands out before the eye of faith in all its infinite value. in it alone we read our title. it is not the blood _and_ something else--be that something what it may. the blood constitutes our exclusive title. we come before god in all the perfect efficacy of that blood which rent the veil, glorified god as to the question of sin, canceled our guilt according to all the demands of infinite holiness, silenced, forever, every accuser, every foe. we enter by a new and living way--a way which can never become old or dead. we enter by the direct invitation, yea, by the distinct command of god. it is positive disobedience not to come. we enter to receive the loving welcome of our father's heart, it is an insult to that love not to come. he tells us to "come boldly"--to "draw near" with full, unclouded confidence--a boldness and confidence commensurate with the love that invites us; the word that commands us, and the blood that fits and entitles us. it is offering dishonor to the eternal trinity not to draw near. reader, is all this, think you, understood and taught in christendom? say, do christendom's creeds, confessions, and liturgical services harmonize with apostolic teaching in heb. x.? alas! alas! they do not. nay, they are in direct antagonism; and the state of souls, accordingly, is the very reverse of what it ought to be. in place of "draw near" it is keep off. in place of liberty and boldness, it is legality and bondage. in place of a heart sprinkled from an evil conscience, it is a heart bowed down beneath the intolerable burden of unforgiven sin. in place of a great high priest seated on the throne of god, in virtue of accomplished redemption, we have poor mortal--not to say sinful--priests standing from week to week, all the year round in wearisome routine, actually contradicting, in their barren formularies, the very foundation truths of christianity. how truly deplorable is all this! and then the sad condition of the lord's dear people, the lambs and sheep of that precious flock for which he died! it is this that so deeply affects us. it is of little use attacking christendom. we quite admit this; but we yearn over the souls of god's people. we long to see them fully delivered from false teaching, from judaism, legalism, and every other _ism_ that robs them of a full salvation and a precious saviour. we long to reach them with the clear and soul-satisfying teachings of holy scripture, so that they may know and enjoy the things that are freely given to them of god. we can truly say there is nothing which gives us such painful concern as the state of the lord's dear people, scattered upon the dark mountains and desolate moors: and one special object for which we desire to live is to be the instrument of leading them into those green pastures and beside those still waters where the true shepherd and bishop of their souls longs to feed them, according to all the deep and tender love of his heart. he would have them near himself, reposing in the light of his blessed countenance. it is not according to his mind or his loving heart that his people should be kept at a dim cold distance from his presence, in doubt and darkness. ah, no; reader, his word tells us to draw near--to come boldly--to appropriate freely--to make our very own all the precious privileges to which a father's love invites us, and a saviour's blood entitles us. "_let us draw near._" this is the voice of god to us. christ has opened up the way. the veil is rent, our place is in the holiest of all, the conscience sprinkled, the body washed, the soul entering intelligently into the atoning value of the blood, and the cleansing, sanctifying power of the word--its action upon our habits, our ways, our associations, our entire course and character. all this is of the very utmost practical value to every true lover of holiness--and every true christian is a lover of holiness. "the body washed with pure water" is a perfectly delightful thought. it sets forth the purifying action of the word of god on the christian's entire course and character. we must not be content with having the heart sprinkled by the blood; we must also have the body washed with pure water. and what then? "_let us hold fast_ the profession of our hope ([greek: elpidos]) without wavering (for he is faithful that promised)." blessed parenthesis! we may well hold fast, seeing he is faithful. our hope can never make ashamed. it rests, in holy calmness, upon the infallible faithfulness of him who cannot lie, whose word is settled for ever in heaven, far above all the changes and chances of this mortal life, above the din of controversy, the strife of tongues, the impudent assaults of infidelity, the ignorant ravings of superstition--far away above all these things, eternally settled in heaven is that word which forms the ground of our "hope." it well becomes us, therefore, to hold fast. we should not have a single wavering thought--a single question--a single misgiving. for a christian to doubt is to cast dishonor upon the word of a faithful god. let sceptics, and rationalists, and infidels doubt, for they have nothing to believe, nothing to rest upon, no certainty. but for a child of god to doubt, is to call in question the faithfulness of the divine promiser. we owe it to his glory, to say nothing of our own peace, to "hold fast the confession of our hope without wavering." thus may it be with every beloved member of the household of faith, until that longed-for moment "when faith and hope shall cease, and love abide alone." but there is one more interesting branch of christian work at which we must glance ere closing this paper. "_let us consider one another_, to provoke unto love and to good works." this is in lovely moral keeping with all that has gone before. the grace of god has so richly met all our personal need--setting before us such an array of precious privileges--an opened heaven--a rent veil--a crowned and seated saviour--a great high priest--a perfectly purged conscience--boldness to enter--a hearty welcome--a faithful promiser--a sure and certain hope: having all these marvelous blessings in full possession, what have we got to do? to consider ourselves? nay verily; this were superfluous and sinfully selfish. we could not possibly do so well for ourselves as god has done for us. he has left nothing unsaid, nothing undone, nothing to be desired. our cup is full and running over. what remains? simply to "consider one another;" to go out in the activities of holy love, and serve our brethren in every possible way; to be on the lookout for opportunities of doing good; to be ready for every good work; to seek in a thousand little ways to make hearts glad; to seek to shed a ray of light on the moral gloom around us; to be a stream of refreshing in this sterile and thirsty wilderness. these are some of the things that make up a christian's work. may we attend to them! may we be found provoking one another, not to envy and jealousy, but to love and good works; exhorting one another daily; diligently availing ourselves of the public assembly, and so much the more, as we see the day approaching. may the holy spirit engrave upon the heart of both writer and reader these most precious exhortations so thoroughly characteristic of our glorious christianity--"_let us draw near_"--"_let us hold fast_"--"_let us consider one another!_" * * * * * the veil is rent:--our souls draw near unto a throne of grace; the merits of the lord appear, they fill the holy place. his precious blood has spoken there. before and on the throne: and his own wounds in heaven declare, the atoning work is done. 'tis finished!--here our souls have rest, his work can never fail: by him, our sacrifice and priest, we pass within the veil. within the holiest of all, cleansed by his precious blood, before the throne we prostrate fall and worship thee, o god! */ the christian priesthood we want the reader to open his bible and read i pet. ii. i- . in this lovely scripture he will find three words on which we will ask him to dwell with us for a little. they are words of weight and power--words which indicate three great branches of practical christian truth--words conveying to our hearts a fact which we cannot too deeply ponder, namely, that christianity is a living and divine reality. it is not a set of doctrines, however true; a system of ordinances, however imposing; a number of rules and regulations, however important. christianity is far more than any or all of these things. it is a living, breathing, speaking, active, powerful reality--something to be seen in the every day life--something to be felt in the scenes of personal, domestic history, from hour to hour--something formative and influential--a divine and heavenly power introduced into the scenes and circumstances through which we have to move, as men, women, and children, from sunday morning to saturday night. it does not consist in holding certain views, opinions, and principles, or in going to this place of worship or that. christianity is the life of christ communicated to the believer--dwelling _in_ him--and flowing out _from_ him, in the ten thousand little details which go to make up our daily practical life. it has nothing ascetic, or sanctimonious about it. it is genial, pure, elevated, holy, divine. such is christianity. it is christ dwelling in the believer, and reproduced, by the power of the holy ghost, in the believer's daily practical career. but let us turn to our three words; and may the eternal spirit expound their deep and holy meaning to our souls! and first, then, we have the word "living." "to whom coming, as unto a living stone, disallowed indeed of men, but chosen of god, and precious, ye also, as living stones, are built up." here we have what we may call the foundation of christian priesthood. there is evidently an allusion here to that profoundly interesting scene in matt. xvi. to which we must ask the reader to turn for a moment. "when jesus was come into the coasts of cæsarea philippi, he asked his disciples, saying, whom do men say that i, the son of man, am?[xxiii.] and they said, 'some say thou art john the baptist; some, elias; and others, jeremias, or one of the prophets.'" there was endless speculation, simply because there was no real heart-work respecting the blessed one. some said this, some said that; and, in result, no one cared who or what he was; and hence he turns away from all this heartless speculation, and puts the pointed question to his own, "but whom say ye that i am?" he desired to know what they thought about him--what estimate their hearts had formed of him. "and simon peter answered and said, thou art the christ, the son of the _living_ god." here we have the true confession. here lies the solid foundation of the whole edifice of the church of god and all true practical christianity--"christ the son of the _living_ god." no more dim shadows--no more powerless forms--no more lifeless ordinances--all must be permeated by this new, this divine, this heavenly life which has come into this world, and is communicated to all who believe in the name of the son of god. "and jesus answered and said unto him, blessed art thou, simon bar-jona; for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my father which is in heaven. and i say also unto thee, that thou art peter; and upon this rock i _will build_ my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it." now, it is evidently to this magnificent passage that the apostle peter refers in the second chapter of his first epistle, when he says, "to whom coming, as unto a _living_ stone, disallowed indeed of men, but chosen of god, and precious, ye also, as _living_ stones (the same words), are built up," etc. all who believe in jesus are partakers of his risen, victorious, _rock_ life. the life of christ, the son of the living god, flows through all his members, and through each in particular. thus we have the _living_ god, the _living_ stone, the _living_ stones. it is all life together--life flowing down from a living source, through a living channel, and imparting itself to all believers, thus making them living stones. now, this life having been tried and tested, in every possible way, and having come forth victorious, can never again be called to pass through any process of trial, testing, or judgment whatsoever. it has passed through death and judgment. it has gone down under all the waves and billows of divine wrath, and come forth at the other side in resurrection, in divine glory and power--a life victorious, heavenly, and divine, beyond the reach of all the powers of darkness. there is no power of earth or hell, men or devils, that can possibly touch the life which is possessed by the very smallest and most insignificant stone in christ's assembly. all believers are built upon the living stone, christ; and are thus constituted living stones. he makes them like himself in every respect, save of course, in his incommunicable deity. is he a living stone? they are living stones. is he a precious stone? they are precious stones. is he a rejected stone? they are rejected stones--rejected, disallowed of men. they are, in every respect, identified with him. ineffable privilege! here, then, we repeat, is the solid foundation of the christian priesthood--the priesthood of all believers. before any one can offer up a spiritual sacrifice, he must come to christ, in simple faith, and be built on him as the foundation of the whole spiritual building. "wherefore also it is contained in the scripture (isa. xxviii. ), behold, i lay in sion a chief corner-stone, elect, precious; and he that believeth in him shall not be confounded." how precious are these words! god himself has laid the foundation, and that foundation is christ; and all who simply believe in christ--all who give him the confidence of their hearts--all who rest satisfied with him, are made partakers of his resurrection-life, and thus made living stones. how blessedly simple is this! we are not asked to assist in laying the foundation. we are not called upon to add the weight of a feather to it. god has laid the foundation, and all we have to do is to believe and rest thereon; and he pledges his faithful word that we shall never be confounded. the very feeblest believer in jesus has god's own gracious assurance that he shall never be confounded--never be ashamed--never come into judgment. he is as free from all charge of guilt and every breath of condemnation as that living rock on whom he is built. beloved reader, are you on this foundation? are you built on christ? have you come to him as god's living stone, and given him the full confidence of your heart? are you thoroughly satisfied with god's foundation? or are you seeking to add something of your own--your own works, your prayers, your ordinances, your vows and resolutions, your religious duties? if so, if you are seeking to add the smallest jot to god's foundation, you may rest assured, you will be confounded. god will not suffer such dishonor to be offered to his tried, elect, precious, chief corner stone. think you that he could allow aught, no matter what, to be placed beside his beloved son, in order to form, with him, the foundation of his spiritual edifice? the bare thought were an impious blasphemy. no; it must be christ alone. he is enough for god, and he may well be enough for us; and nothing is more certain than that all who reject, or neglect, turn away from, or add to, god's foundation, shall be covered with everlasting confusion. but, having glanced at the foundation, let us look at the superstructure. this will lead us to the second of our three weighty words. "to whom coming as unto a _living_ stone ... ye also, as living stones, are built up a spiritual house, a _holy_ priesthood, to offer up spiritual sacrifices, acceptable to god by jesus christ." all true believers are holy priests. they are made this by spiritual birth, just as aaron's sons were priests in virtue of their natural birth. the apostle does not say, ye _ought to be_ living stones, and, ye ought to be holy priests. he says ye _are_ such. no doubt, being such, we are called upon to act accordingly; but we must be in a position before we can discharge the duties belonging to it. we must be in a relationship before we can know the affections which flow out of it. we do not become priests by offering priestly sacrifices. but being, through grace, made priests, we are called upon to present the sacrifice. if we were to live a thousand years twice told, and spend all that time working, we could not work ourselves into the position of holy priests; but the moment we believe in jesus--the moment we come to him in simple faith--the moment we give him the full confidence of our hearts, we are born anew into the position of holy priests, and are then privileged to draw nigh and offer the priestly sacrifice. how could any one, of old, have constituted himself a son of aaron? impossible. but being born of aaron, he was thereby made a member of the priestly house. we speak not now of capacity, but simply of the position. this latter was reached not by effort, but by birth. and now, let us enquire as to the nature of the sacrifice which, as holy priests, we are privileged to offer. we are "to offer up spiritual sacrifices, acceptable to god by jesus christ." so also in heb. xiii. , we read, "by him therefore let us offer the sacrifice of praise to god continually, that is, the fruit of our lips giving thanks to his name." here, then, we have the true nature and character of that sacrifice which, as holy priests, we are to offer. it is praise--"praise to god continually." blessed occupation! hallowed exercise! heavenly employment! and this is not to be an occasional thing. it is not merely at some peculiarly favored moment, when all looks bright and smiling around us. it is not to be merely amid the glow and fervor of some specially powerful public meeting, when the current of worship flows deep, wide, and rapid. no; the word is, "praise _continually_." there is no room, no time for complaining or murmuring, fretfulness and discontent, impatience and irritability, lamenting about our surroundings, whatever these may be, complaining about the weather, finding fault with those who are associated with us, whether in public or in private, whether in the congregation, in the business, or in the family circle. holy priests should have no time for any of these things. they are brought nigh to god, in holy liberty, peace, and blessing. they breathe the atmosphere and walk in the sunlight of the divine presence, in the new creation, where there are no materials for a sour and discontented mind to feed upon. we may set it down as a fixed principle--an axiom--that whenever we hear anyone pouring out a string of complaints about circumstances, his neighbors etc., such an one is not realizing the place of holy priesthood, and, as a consequence, not exhibiting its practical fruits. a holy priest should "rejoice in the lord always"--ever ready to praise god. true, he may be tried in a thousand ways; but he brings his trials to god in communion, not to his fellow-man in complaining. "hallelujah" is the proper utterance of the very feeblest member of the christian priesthood. but we must now look, for a moment, at the third and last branch of our present theme. this is presented in that highly expressive word "royal." the apostle goes on to say, "but ye are a chosen generation, a _royal_ priesthood ... that ye should show forth the virtues (see margin) of him who hath called you out of darkness into his marvelous light." this completes the lovely picture of the christian priesthood.[xxiv.] as _holy_ priests, we draw nigh to god, and present the sacrifice of praise. as royal priests we go forth among our fellow-men, in all the details of practical daily life, to show forth the virtues--the graces--the lovely moral features of christ. every movement of a royal priest should emit the fragrance of the grace of christ. mark again, the apostle does not say, _ye ought to be_ royal priests. he says ye _are_; and as such we are to show forth the virtues of christ. nothing else becomes a member of the royal priesthood. to be occupied with myself, to be taking counsel for my own ease, my own interest, my own enjoyment, to be seeking my own ends, and caring about my own things, is not the act of a royal priest at all. christ never did so; and i am told to show forth his virtues. he, blessed be his name, grants to his people, in this the time of his absence, to anticipate the day when he shall come forth as a royal priest, and sit upon his throne, and send forth the benign influence of his dominion to the ends of the earth. we are called to be the present expression of the kingdom of christ--the expression of himself. and let none suppose that the actings of a royal priest are to be confined to the matter of _giving_. this would be a grave mistake. no doubt, a royal priest will give, and give liberally if he has it; but to limit him to the mere matter of communicating would be to rob him of some of the most precious functions of his position. the very man who penned the words on which we are dwelling said on one occasion--and said it without shame, "silver and gold have i none;" and yet at that very moment, he was acting as a royal priest, by bringing the precious virtue of the name of jesus to bear on the impotent man (acts. iii.). the blessed master himself, we know, possessed no money; but he went about doing good; and so should we: nor do we need money to do it. indeed it very often happens that we do mischief instead of good with our silver and gold. we may take people off the ground on which god has placed them, namely, the ground of honest industry, and make them dependent upon human alms. moreover, we may often make hypocrites and sycophants of people by our injudicious use of money. hence, therefore, let no one imagine that he cannot act as a royal priest without earthly riches. what riches are required to speak a kindly word--to drop the tear of sympathy--to give the soothing, genial look? none whatever save the riches of god's grace--the unsearchable riches of christ, all of which are laid open to the most obscure member of the christian priesthood. i may be poorly clad, without a penny in the world, and yet carry myself truly as a royal priest, by diffusing around me the fragrance of the grace of christ. but, perhaps, we cannot more suitably close these few remarks on the christian priesthood, than by giving a very vivid illustration drawn from the inspired page--the narrative of two beloved servants of christ who were enabled, under the most distressing circumstances, to acquit themselves as holy and royal priests. turn to acts xvi. - . here we have paul and silas thrust into the innermost part of the prison at philippi, their backs covered with stripes, and their feet fast in the stocks, in the darkness of the midnight hour. what were they doing? murmuring and complaining? ah, no! they had something better and brighter to do. here were two really "living stones," and nothing that earth or hell could do could hinder the life that was in them expressing itself in its proper accents. but what, we repeat, were these living stones doing? these partakers of the rock-life--the victorious, resurrection-life of christ--how did they employ themselves? well, then, in the first place, as _holy_ priests they offered the sacrifice of praise to god. yes, "at midnight, paul and silas prayed and sang praises to god." how precious is this! how morally glorious! how truly refreshing! what are stripes, or stocks, or prison walls, or gloomy nights, to living stones and holy priests? nothing more than a dark background to throw out into bright and beauteous relief the living grace that is in them. talk of circumstances! ah, it is little any of us know of trying circumstances. poor things that we are, the petty annoyances of daily life are often more than enough to cause us to lose our mental balance. paul and silas were really in trying circumstances; but they were there as living stones and holy priests. yes, reader, and they were there as royal priests, likewise. how does this appear? certainly not by scattering silver and gold. it is not likely the dear men had much of these to scatter. but oh, they had what was better, even "the virtues of him who had called them out of darkness into his marvelous light." and where do these virtues shine out? in those touching words addressed to the jailer, "_do thyself no harm_." these were the accents of a _royal_ priest, just as the song of praise was the voice of a _holy_ priest. thank god for both! the voices of the holy priests went directly up to the throne of god and did their work there; and the words of the royal priests went directly to the jailer's hard heart and did their work there. god was glorified and the jailer saved by two men rightly discharging the functions of "_the christian priesthood_." father! thy sovereign love has sought captives to sin, gone far from thee: the work that thine own son hath wrought, has brought us back, in peace, and free! and now, as sons before thy face, with joyful steps the path we tread, which leads us on to that blest place prepared for us, by christ our head. thou gav'st us, in eternal love, to him, to bring us home to thee; suited to thine own thoughts above as sons, like him, with him to be. oh, boundless grace! what fills with joy unmingled all that enter there; god's nature, love without alloy, our hearts are given e'en now to share! oh, keep us, love divine, near thee! that we our nothingness may know; and ever to thy glory be, walking in faith while here below. j. n. d. footnotes: [xxiii.] let the reader note this title, "_son of man_." it is infinitely precious. it is a title indicating our lord's rejection as the messiah, and leading out into that wide, that universal sphere over which he is destined in the counsels of god, to rule. it is far wider than son of david, or son of abraham, and has peculiar charms for us, inasmuch as it places him before our hearts as the lonely, outcast stranger, and yet as the one who links himself in perfect grace with us in all our need--one whose footprints we can trace all across this dreary desert. "the son of man hath not where to lay his head." and yet it is as son of man that he shall, by-and-by, exercise that universal dominion reserved for him according to the eternal counsels of god. see daniel vii. [xxiv.] the intelligent reader does not need to be told that all believers are priests; and, further, that there is no such thing as a priest upon earth, save in the sense in which all true christians are priests. the idea of a certain set of men, calling themselves priests in contrast with the people--a certain caste distinguished by title and dress from the body of christians, is not christianity at all, but judaism or intelligently worse. all who read the bible and bow to its authority will be perfectly clear as to these things. papers on evangelization chapter i. a word to the evangelist. we trust it may not be deemed out of place if we venture to offer a word of counsel and encouragement to all who have been and are engaged in the blessed work of preaching _the gospel of the grace of god_. we are, in some measure, aware of the difficulties and discouragements which attend upon the path of every evangelist, whatever may be his sphere of labor or measure of gift; and it is our heart's desire to hold up the hands and cheer the hearts of all who may be in danger of falling under the depressing power of these things. we increasingly feel the immense importance of an earnest, fervent gospel testimony everywhere; and we dread exceedingly any falling off therein. we are imperatively called to "do the work of an evangelist," and not to be moved from that work by any arguments or considerations whatsoever. let none imagine that, in writing thus, we mean to detract, in the smallest degree, from the value of teaching, lecturing, or exhortation. nothing is further from our thoughts. "these things ought ye to have done, and not to leave the other undone." we mean not to compare the work of the evangelist with that of the teacher, or to exalt the former at the expense of the latter. each has its own proper place, its own distinctive interest and importance. but is there not a danger, on the other hand, of the evangelist abandoning his own precious work in order to give himself to the work of teaching and lecturing? is there not a danger of the evangelist becoming merged in the teacher? we fear there is; and it is under the influence of this very fear that we pen these few lines. we observe, with deep concern, some who were once known amongst us as earnest and eminently successful evangelists, now almost wholly abandoning their work and becoming teachers and lecturers. this is most deplorable. _we really want evangelists._ a true evangelist is almost as great a rarity as a true pastor. alas! alas! how rare are both! the two are closely connected. the evangelist gathers the sheep; the pastor feeds and cares for them. the work of each lies very near the heart of christ--the divine evangelist and pastor; but it is with the former we have now more immediately to do--to encourage him in his work, and to warn him against the temptation to turn aside from it. we cannot afford to lose a single ambassador just now, or to have a single preacher silent. we are perfectly aware of the fact that there is in some quarters a strong tendency to throw cold water upon the work of evangelization. there is a sad lack of sympathy with the preacher of the gospel; and, as a necessary consequence, of active co-operation with him in his work. further, there is a mode of speaking of gospel preaching which argues but little sympathy with the heart of him who wept over impenitent sinners, and who could say, at the very opening of his blessed ministry, "the spirit of the lord is upon me, because he hath anointed me _to preach the gospel to the poor_" (isa. lxi.; luke iv.). and again, "let us go into the next towns, that i may preach there also: for therefore came i forth" (mark i. ). our blessed lord was an indefatigable preacher of the gospel, and all who are filled with his mind and spirit will take a lively interest in the work of all those who are seeking in their feeble measure to do the same. this interest will be evinced, not only by earnest prayer for the divine blessing upon the work, but also by diligent and persevering efforts to get immortal souls under the sound of the gospel. this is the way to help the evangelist, and this way lies open to every member of the church of god--man, woman, or child. all can thus help forward the glorious work of evangelization. if each member of the assembly were to work diligently and prayerfully in this way, how different would it be with the lord's dear servants who are seeking to make known the unsearchable riches of christ. but, alas! how often is it otherwise. how often do we hear even those who are of some repute for intelligence and spirituality, when referring to meetings for gospel testimony, say, "oh, i am not going there; it is _only_ the gospel." think of that! "_only the gospel._" if they would put the idea into other words, they might say, "it is _only_ the heart of god--_only_ the precious blood of christ--_only_ the glorious record of the holy ghost." this would be putting the thing plainly. nothing is more sad than to hear professing christians speak in this way. it proves too clearly that their souls are very far away from the heart of jesus. we have invariably found that those who think and speak slightingly of the work of the evangelist are persons of very little spirituality; and on the other hand, the most devoted, the most true hearted, the best taught saints of god, are always sure to take a profound interest in that work. how could it be otherwise? does not the voice of holy scripture bear the clearest testimony to the fact of the interest of the trinity in the work of the gospel? most assuredly it does. who first preached the gospel? who was the first herald of salvation? who first announced the good news of the bruised seed of the woman? the lord god himself, in the garden of eden. this is a telling fact in connection with our theme. and further, let us ask, who was the most earnest, laborious, and faithful preacher that ever trod this earth? the son of god. and who has been preaching the gospel for the last eighteen centuries? the holy ghost sent down from heaven. thus then we have the father, the son, and the holy ghost all actually engaged in the work of evangelization; and if this be so, who are we to dare to speak slightingly of such a work? nay, rather may our whole moral being be stirred by the power of the spirit of god so that we may be able to add our fervent and deep amen to those precious words of inspiration, "how beautiful are the feet of them that preach the gospel of peace, and bring glad tidings of good things!" (isa. lii. ; rom. x. .) but it may be that these lines shall be scanned by some one who has been engaged in the work of preaching the gospel, and is beginning to feel rather discouraged. it may be that he has been called to preach in the same place for years, and he feels burdened by the thought of having to address the same audience, on the same subject, week after week, month after month, year after year. he may feel at a loss for something new, something fresh, some variety. he may sigh for some new sphere, where the subjects which are familiar to him will be new to the people. or, if this cannot be, he may feel led to substitute lectures and expositions for the fervid, pointed, earnest preaching of the gospel. if we have in any measure set forth the reader's feelings on this subject, we think it will greatly help him in his work to bear in mind that the one grand theme of the true evangelist is christ. the power to handle that theme is the holy ghost. the one to whom that theme is to be unfolded is the poor lost sinner. now, christ is ever new; the power of the holy ghost is ever fresh; the soul's condition and destiny ever intensely interesting. furthermore, it is well for the evangelist to bear in mind, on every fresh occasion of rising to preach, that his unconverted hearers are totally ignorant of the gospel, and hence he should preach as though it were the first time they had ever heard the message, and the first time he had ever delivered it. for, be it remembered, the preaching of the gospel, in the divine acceptation of the phrase, is not a mere barren statement of evangelical doctrine--a certain form of words enunciated over and over again in wearisome routine. far, very far from it. the gospel is really the large loving heart of god welling up and flowing forth toward the poor lost sinner in streams of life and salvation. it is the presentation of the atoning death and glorious resurrection of the son of god; and all this in the present energy, glow, and freshness of the holy ghost, from the exhaustless mine of holy scripture. moreover, _the_ one absorbing object of the preacher is to win souls for christ, to the glory of god. for this he labors and pleads; for this he prays, weeps, and agonizes; for this he thunders, appeals, and grapples with the heart and conscience of his hearer. his object is not to teach doctrines, though doctrines may be taught; his object is not to expound scripture, though scripture may be expounded. these things lie within the range of the teacher or lecturer; but let it never be forgotten, the preacher's object is to bring the saviour and the sinner together--to win souls to christ. may god by his spirit keep these things ever before our hearts, so that we may have a deeper interest in the glorious work of evangelization! we would, in conclusion, merely add a word of exhortation in reference to the lord's day evening. we would, in all affection, say to our beloved and honored fellow-laborers, seek to give that one hour to the great business of the soul's salvation. there are hours in the week, and, surely, it is the least we may devote _one_ of these to this momentous work. it so happens that during that interesting hour we can get the ear of our fellow-sinner. oh, let us use it to pour in the sweet story of god's free love and of christ's full salvation. chapter ii. a motto for the evangelist. ( cor. x. .) "to _preach the gospel in the regions beyond you_." these words, while they set forth the large-heartedness of the self-denying and devoted apostle, do also furnish a fine model for the evangelist, in every age. the gospel is a traveler; and the preacher of the gospel must be a traveler likewise. the divinely-qualified and divinely-sent evangelist will fix his eye upon "_the world_." he will embrace, in his benevolent design, the human family. from house to house; from street to street; from city to city; from province to province; from kingdom to kingdom; from continent to continent; from pole to pole. such is the range of the "good news" and the publisher thereof. "the regions beyond" must ever be the grand gospel motto. no sooner has the gospel lamp cast its cheering beams over a district, than the bearer of that lamp must think of the regions beyond. thus the work goes on. thus the mighty tide of grace rolls, in enlightening and saving power, over a dark world which lies in "the region of the shadow of death." "waft, waft, ye winds, the story, and you, ye waters, roll, till, like the sea of glory, it spreads from pole to pole." christian reader, are you thinking of "the regions beyond you?" this expression may, in your case, mean the next house, the next street, the next village, the next city, the next kingdom, or the next continent. the application is for your own heart to ponder: but say, are you thinking of "the regions beyond you?" i do not want you to abandon your present post at all; or, at least, not until you are fully persuaded that your work, at the post, is done. but, remember, the gospel plough should never stand still. "_onward_" is the motto of every true evangelist. let the shepherds abide by the flocks; but let the evangelists betake themselves hither and thither, to gather the sheep. let them sound the gospel trump, far and wide, o'er the dark mountains of this world, to gather together the elect of god. this is the design of the gospel. this should be the object of the evangelist, as he sighs after "the regions beyond." when cæsar beheld, from the coast of gaul, the white cliffs of britain, he earnestly longed to carry his arms thither. the evangelist, on the other hand, whose heart beats in unison with the heart of jesus, as he casts his eye over the map of the world, longs to carry the gospel of peace into regions which have heretofore been wrapped in midnight gloom, covered with the dark mantle of superstition, or blasted beneath the withering influences of "a form of godliness without the power." it would, i believe, be a profitable question for many of us to put to ourselves, how far are we discharging our holy responsibilities to "the regions beyond." i believe the christian who is not cultivating and manifesting an evangelistic spirit, is in a truly deplorable condition. i believe, too, that the assembly which is not cultivating and manifesting an evangelistic spirit is in a dead state. one of the truest marks of spiritual growth and prosperity, whether in an individual or in an assembly, is earnest anxiety after the conversion of souls. this anxiety will swell the bosom with most generous emotions; yea, it will break forth in copious streams of benevolent exertion, ever flowing toward "the regions beyond." it is hard to believe that "the word of christ" is "dwelling richly" in any one who is not making some effort to impart that word to his fellow-sinners. it matters not what may be the amount of the effort; it may be to drop a few words in the ear of a friend, to give a tract, to pen a note, to breathe a prayer. but one thing is certain, namely, that a healthy, vigorous christian will be an evangelistic christian--a teller of good news--one whose sympathies, desires, and energies, are ever going forth toward "the regions beyond." "i must preach the gospel to other cities also, for therefore am i sent." such was the language of the true evangelist. it is very doubtful whether many of the servants of christ have not erred in allowing themselves, through one influence or another, to become too much localized--too much tied in one place. they have dropped into routine work--into a round of stated preaching in the same place, and, in many cases, have paralyzed themselves and paralyzed their hearers also. i speak not, now, of the labors of the pastor, the elder, or the teacher, which must, of course, be carried on in the midst of those who are the proper subjects of such labors. i refer more particularly to the evangelist. such an one should never suffer himself to be localized. the world is his sphere--"the regions beyond," his motto--to gather out god's elect, his object--the current of the spirit, his line of direction. if the reader should be one whom god has called and fitted to be an evangelist, let him remember these four things--the sphere, the motto, the object, and the line of direction, which all must adopt if they would prove fruitful laborers in the gospel field. finally, whether the reader be an evangelist or not, i would earnestly intreat him to examine how far he is seeking to further the gospel of christ. we must not stand idle. time is short! eternity is rapidly posting on! the master is most worthy! souls are most precious! the season for work will soon close! let us, then, in the name of the lord, be up and doing. and when we have done what we can, in the regions around, let us carry the precious seed into "the regions beyond." chapter iii. the work of an evangelist. (acts xvi. - .) we ventured to offer a word to the evangelist, which we now follow up with a paper on the evangelist's work; and we cannot do better than select, as the basis of our remarks, a page from the missionary record of one of the greatest evangelists that ever lived. the passage of scripture that stands at the head of this article furnishes specimens of three distinct classes of hearers, and also the method in which they were met by the great apostle of the gentiles, guided, most surely, by the holy ghost. we have, first, _the earnest seeker_; secondly, _the false professor_; and thirdly, _the hardened sinner_. these three classes are to be met everywhere, and at all times, by the lord's workman; and hence we may be thankful for an inspired account of the right mode of dealing with such. it is most desirable that those who go forth with the gospel should have skill in dealing with the various conditions of soul that come before them, from day to day; and there can be no more effectual way of attaining this skill than the careful study of the models given us by god the holy ghost. let us then, in the first place, look at the narrative of the earnest seeker. the laborious apostle, in the course of his missionary journeyings, came to troas, and there a vision appeared to him in the night, "there stood a man of macedonia, and prayed him, saying, come over into macedonia and help us. and after he had seen the vision, immediately we endeavored to go into macedonia, assuredly gathering that the lord had called us for to preach the gospel unto them. therefore loosing from troas, we came with a straight course to samothracia, and the next day to neapolis; and from thence to philippi, which is the chief city of that part of macedonia, and a colony: and we were in that city abiding certain days. and on the sabbath we went out of the city by a river side, where prayer was wont to be made; and we sat down, and spake unto the women which resorted thither. and a certain woman named lydia, a seller of purple, of the city of thyatira, which worshiped god, heard us; whose heart the lord opened, that she attended unto the things that were spoken of paul. and when she was baptized, and her household, she besought us, saying, if ye have judged me to be faithful to the lord, come into my house and abide there. and she constrained us" (acts xvi. - ). here, then, we have a touching picture--something well worth gazing at and pondering. it is a picture of one who, having through grace gotten a measure of light, was living up to it, and was earnestly seeking for more. lydia, the seller of purple, belonged to the same interesting generation as the eunuch of ethiopia, and the centurion of cæsarea. all three appear on the page of inspiration as quickened souls not emancipated--not at rest--not satisfied. the eunuch had gone from ethiopia to jerusalem in search of something on which to rest his anxious soul. he had left that city still unsatisfied, and was devoutly and earnestly hanging over the precious page of inspiration. the eye of god was upon him, and he sent his servant philip with the very message that was needed to solve his difficulties, answer his questions, and set his soul at rest. god knows how to bring the philips and the eunuchs together. he knows how to prepare the heart for the message and the message for the heart. the eunuch was a worshiper of god; but philip is sent to teach him how to see god in the face of jesus christ. this was precisely what he wanted. it was a flood of fresh light breaking in upon his earnest spirit, setting his heart and conscience at rest, and sending him on his way rejoicing. he had honestly followed the light as it broke in upon his soul, and god sent him more. thus it is ever. "to him that hath shall more be given." there never was a soul who sincerely acted up to his light that did not get more light. this is most consolatory and encouraging to all anxious enquirers. if the reader belongs to this class, let him take courage. if he is one of those with whom god has begun to work, then let him rest assured of this, that he who hath begun a good work will perform the same until the day of jesus christ. he will, most surely, perfect that which concerneth his people. but let no one fold his arms, settle upon his oars, and coolly say, "i must wait god's time for more light. i can do nothing--my efforts are useless. when god's time comes i shall be all right; till then, i must remain as i am." these were not the thoughts or feelings of the ethiopian eunuch. he was one of the earnest seekers; and all earnest seekers are sure to be happy finders. it must be so, for "god is a rewarder of them that diligently seek him" (heb. xi. ). so also with the centurion of cæsarea. he was a man of the same stamp. he lived up to his light. he fasted, he prayed, and gave alms. we are not told whether he had read the sermon on the mount: but it is remarkable that he exercised himself in the three grand branches of practical righteousness set forth by our lord in the sixth chapter of matthew.[xxv.] he was moulding his conduct and shaping his way according to the standard which god had set before him. his righteousness exceeded the righteousness of the scribes and pharisees, and therefore he entered the kingdom. he was, through grace, a real man, earnestly following the light as it streamed in upon his soul, and he was led into the full blaze of the gospel of the grace of god. god sent a peter to cornelius, as he had sent a philip to the eunuch. the prayers and alms had gone up as a memorial before god, and peter was sent with a message of full salvation through a crucified and risen saviour. now it is quite possible that there are persons who, having been rocked in the cradle of easy-going evangelical profession, and trained up in the flippant formalism of a self-indulgent, heaven-made-easy religion, are ready to condemn the pious conduct of cornelius, and pronounce it the fruit of ignorance and legality. such persons have never known what it was to deny themselves a single meal, or to spend an hour in real, earnest prayer, or to open their hand, in true benevolence, to meet the wants of the poor. they have heard and learnt, perchance, that salvation is not to be gained by such means--that we are justified by faith without works--that it is to him that worketh not, but believeth on him that justifieth the ungodly. all this is most true; but what right have we to imagine that cornelius was praying, fasting, and giving alms in order to earn salvation? none whatever--at least if we are to be governed by the inspired narrative, and we have no other means of knowing aught about this truly excellent and interesting character. he was informed by the angel that his prayers and his alms had gone up as a memorial before god. is not this a clear proof that these prayers and alms were not the trappings of self-righteousness, but the fruits of a righteousness based on the knowledge which he had of god? surely the fruits of self-righteousness and legality could never have ascended as a memorial to the throne of god; nor could peter ever have said concerning a mere legalist that he was one who feared god and worked righteousness. ah, no, reader; cornelius was a man thoroughly in earnest. he lived up to what he knew, and he would have been quite wrong to go further. to him the salvation of his immortal soul, the service of god, and eternity, were grand and all-absorbing realities. he was none of your easy-going professors, full of flippant, vapid, worthless talk, but _doing_ nothing. he belonged to another generation altogether. he belonged to the _working_, not the _talking_ class. he was one on whom the eye of god rested with complacency, and in whom the mind of heaven was profoundly interested. and so was our friend of thyatira, lydia, the seller of purple. she belonged to the same school--she occupied the same platform as the centurion and the eunuch. it is truly delightful to contemplate these three precious souls--to think of one in ethiopia; another at cæsarea; and a third at thyatira or philippi. it is particularly refreshing to contrast such downright thorough-going, earnest souls, with many in this our day of boasted light and knowledge, who have got the plan of salvation, as it is termed, in their heads, the doctrines of grace on the tongue, but the world in the heart; whose absorbing object is self, self, self,--miserable object! we shall have occasion to refer more fully to these latter under our second head; but, for the present, we shall think of the earnest lydia; and we must confess it is a far more grateful exercise. it is very plain that lydia, like cornelius and the eunuch, was a quickened soul; she was a worshiper of god; she was one who was right glad to lay aside her purple-selling, and betake herself to a prayer-meeting, or to any such like place where spiritual profit was to be had, and where there were good things going. "birds of a feather flock together," and so lydia soon found out where a few pious souls, a few kindred spirits, were in the habit of meeting to wait on god in prayer. all this is lovely. it does the heart good to be brought in contact with this deep-toned earnestness. surely the holy ghost has penned this narrative, like all holy scripture, for our learning. it is a specimen case, and we do well to ponder it. lydia was found diligently availing herself of any and every opportunity; indeed she exhibited the real fruits of divine life, the genuine instincts of the new nature. she found out where saints met for prayer, and took her place among them. she did not fold her arms and settle down on her lees, to wait, in antinomian indolence and culpable idleness, for some extraordinary undefinable thing to come upon her, or some mysterious change to come over her. no; she went to a prayer-meeting--the place of expressed need--the place of expected blessing: and there god met her, as he is sure to meet all who frequent such scenes in lydia's spirit. god never fails an expectant heart. he has said, "they shall not be ashamed that wait for me;" and, like a bright and blessed sunbeam on the page of inspiration, shines that pregnant, weighty, soul-stirring sentence, "god is a rewarder of them that diligently seek him." he sent a philip to the eunuch in the desert of gaza. he sent a peter to the centurion, in the town of cæsarea. he sent a paul to a seller of purple, in the suburbs of philippi; and he will send a message to the reader of these lines, if he be a really earnest seeker after god's salvation. it is ever a moment of deepest interest when a prepared soul is brought in contact with the full gospel of the grace of god. it may be that that soul has been under deep and painful exercise for many a long day, seeking rest but finding none. the lord has been working by his spirit, and preparing the ground for the good seed. he has been making deep the furrows so that the precious seed of his word may take permanent root, and bring forth fruit to his praise. the holy ghost is never in haste. his work is deep, sure and solid. his plants are not like jonah's gourd, springing up in a night and perishing in a night. all that he does will stand, blessed be his name. "i know that whatsoever god doeth, it shall be forever." when he convicts, converts, and liberates a soul, the stamp of his own eternal hand is upon the work, in all its stages. now, it must have been a moment of intense interest when one in lydia's state of soul was brought in contact with that most glorious gospel which paul carried (acts xvi. ). she was thoroughly prepared for his message; and surely his message was thoroughly prepared for her. he carried with him truth which she had never heard and never thought of. as we have already remarked, she had been living up to her light; she was a worshiper of god; but we are bold to assert that she had no idea of the glorious truth which was lodged in the heart of that stranger who sat beside her at the prayer-meeting. she had come thither--devout and earnest woman that she was--to pray and to worship, to get some little refreshment for her spirit, after the toils of the week. how little did she imagine that at that meeting she should hear the greatest preacher that ever lived, save one, and that she should hear the very highest order of truth that had ever fallen upon mortal ears. yet thus it was. and, oh, how important it was for lydia to have been at that memorable prayer meeting! how well it was she had not acted as so many, now-a-days, act, who after a week of toil in the shop, the warehouse, the factory, or the field, take the opportunity of lying in bed on sunday! how many there are whom you will see at their post from monday morning till saturday night, working away with all diligence at their calling, but for whom you will look in vain at the meeting on the lord's day. how is this? they will tell you, perhaps, that they are so worn out on saturday night that they have no energy to rise on sunday, and therefore they spend this day in sloth, lounging, and self-indulgence. they have no care for their souls, no care for eternity, no care for christ. they care for themselves, for their families, for the world, for money-making; and hence you will find them up with the dawn of monday and off to their work. lydia did not belong to this class at all. no doubt she attended to her business, as every right-minded person will. we dare say--indeed, we are sure--she kept very excellent purple, and was a fair, honest trader, in every sense of the word. but she did not spend her sabbath in bed, or lounging about her house, or nursing herself up, and making a great fuss about all she had to do during the week. neither do we believe that lydia was one of those self-occupied folk whom a shower of rain is sufficient to keep away from a meeting. no; lydia was of a different stamp altogether. she was an earnest woman, who felt she had a soul to save, and an eternity before her, and a living god to serve and worship. would to god we had more lydias in this our day! it would give a charm, and an interest, and a freshness to the work of an evangelist, for which many of the lord's workmen have to sigh in vain. we seem to live in a day of terrible unreality as to divine and eternal things. men, women, and children are real enough at their money-making, their pursuits, and their pleasures; but oh, when the things of god, the things of the soul, the things of eternity, are in question, the aspect of people is that of a yawning indifference. but the moment is rapidly approaching--every beat of the pulse, every tick of the watch, brings us nearer to it--when the yawning indifference shall be exchanged for "weeping, wailing, and gnashing of teeth." if this were more deeply felt, we should have many more lydias, prepared to lend an attentive ear to paul's gospel. what force and beauty in those words, "whose heart the lord opened, that _she attended_ unto the things that were spoken of paul." lydia was not one of those who go to meetings to think of anything and everything but the things that are spoken by the lord's messengers. she was not thinking of her purple, or of the prices, or the probable gains or losses. how many of those who fill our preaching rooms and lecture halls follow the example of lydia? alas! we fear but very few indeed. the business, the state of the markets, the state of the funds, money, pleasure, dress, folly--a thousand and one things are thought of, and dwelt upon, and attended to, so that the poor vagrant, volatile heart is at the ends of the earth instead of "_attending_" to the things that are spoken. all this is very solemn, and very awful. it really ought to be looked into and thought of. people seem to forget the responsibility involved in hearing the gospel preached. they do not seem to be in the smallest degree impressed with the weighty fact that the gospel never leaves any unconverted person where it finds him. he is either saved by receiving, or rendered more guilty by rejecting it. hence it becomes a serious matter to hear the gospel. people may attend gospel meetings as a matter of custom, as a religious service, or because they have nothing else to do, and the time would hang heavy upon their hands; or they may go because they think that the mere act of going has a sort of merit attached to it. thus thousands attend preachings at which christ's servants, though not pauls in gift, power, or intelligence, unfold the precious grace of god in sending his only begotten son into the world to save us from everlasting torment and misery. the virtue and efficacy of the atoning death of the divine saviour--the lamb of god--the dread realities of eternity--the awful horrors of hell, and the unspeakable joys of heaven--all these weighty matters are handled, according to the measure of grace bestowed upon the lord's messengers, and yet how little impression is produced! they "reason of righteousness, temperance, and judgment to come," and yet how few are made even to "tremble!" and why? will anyone presume to excuse himself for rejecting the gospel message on the ground of his inability to believe it? will he appeal to the very case before us, and say, "the lord opened her heart; and if he would only do the same for me, i, too, should attend; but until he does, i can do nothing"? we reply, and with deep seriousness, such an argument will not avail thee in the day of judgment. indeed we are most thoroughly convinced that thou wilt not dare to use it then. thou art making a false use of lydia's charming history. true it is, blessedly true, the lord opened her heart; and he is ready to open thine also, if there were in thee but the hundredth part of lydia's earnestness. and dost thou not know full well, reader, that there are two sides to this great question, as there are to every question? it is all very well, and sounds very forcibly, for thee to say, "i can do nothing." but who told thee this? where hast thou learnt it? we solemnly challenge thee, in the presence of god, canst thou look up to him and say, "i can do nothing--i am not responsible?" say, is the salvation of thy never-dying soul just _the_ one thing in which thou canst do nothing? thou canst do a lot of things in the service of the world, of self, and of satan; but when it becomes a question of god, the soul, and eternity, you coolly say, "i can do nothing--i am not responsible." ah! it will never do. all this style of argument is the fruit of a one-sided theology. it is the result of the most pernicious reasoning of the human mind upon certain truths in scripture which are turned the wrong way and sadly misapplied. but it will not stand. this is what we urge upon the reader. it is of no possible use arguing in this way. the sinner is responsible; and all the theology, and all the reasoning, and all the fallacious though plausible objections that can be scraped together, can never do away with this weighty and most serious fact. hence, therefore, we call upon the reader to be, like lydia, in earnest about his soul's salvation--to let every other question, every other point, every other subject, sink into utter insignificance in comparison with this one momentous question--the salvation of his precious soul. then, he may depend upon it, the one who sent philip to the eunuch, and sent peter to the centurion, and sent paul to lydia, will send some messenger and some message to him, and will also open his heart to attend. of this there cannot possibly be a doubt, inasmuch as scripture declares that "god is not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance." all who perish, after having heard the message of salvation--the sweet story of god's free love, of a saviour's death and resurrection--shall perish without a shadow of an excuse, shall descend into hell with their blood upon their guilty heads. their eyes shall then be open to see through all the flimsy arguments by which they have sought to prop themselves up in a false position, and lull themselves to sleep in sin and worldliness. but let us dwell for a moment on "the things that were spoken of paul." the spirit of god hath not thought proper to give us even a brief outline of paul's address at the prayer-meeting. we are therefore left to other passages of holy scripture to form an idea of what lydia heard from his lips on that interesting occasion. let us take, for example, that famous passage in which he reminds the corinthians of the gospel which he had preached to them. "moreover, brethren, i declare unto you the gospel which i preached unto you, which also ye have received, and wherein ye stand; by which also ye are saved if ye keep in memory what i preached unto you, unless ye have believed in vain. for i delivered unto you first of all that which i also received, how that christ died for our sins according to the scriptures; and that he was buried, and that he rose again the third day according to the scriptures" (i cor. xv. i- ). now we may safely conclude that the foregoing passage of scripture contains a compendium of the things that were spoken of paul at the prayer-meeting at philippi. the grand theme of paul's preaching was christ--christ for the sinner--christ for the saint--christ for the conscience--christ for the heart. he never allowed himself to wander from this great centre, but made all his preachings and all his teachings circulate round it with admirable consistency. if he called on men, both jews and gentiles, to repent, the lever with which he worked was christ. if he urged them to believe, the object which he held up for faith was christ, on the authority of holy scripture. if he reasoned of righteousness, temperance, and judgment to come, the one that gave cogency and moral power to his reasoning was christ. in short, christ was the very gist and marrow, the sum and substance, the foundation and top stone of paul's preaching and teaching. but, for our present purpose, there are three grand subjects, found in paul's preaching, to which we desire to call the reader's attention. these are, first, the grace of god; secondly, the person and work of christ; and thirdly, the testimony of the holy ghost as given in the holy scriptures. we do not attempt to go into these vast subjects here; we merely name them, and entreat the reader to ponder them, to muse over them, and seek to make them his own. (i) the grace of god--his free, sovereign favor--is the source from whence salvation flows--salvation in all the length, breadth, height, and depth of that most precious word--salvation which stretches, like a golden chain, from the bosom of god, down to the very deepest depths of the sinner's guilty and ruined condition, and back again to the throne of god--meets all the sinner's necessities, overlaps the whole of the saint's history, and glorifies god in the highest possible manner. ( ) then, in the second place, the person of christ and his finished work are the _only_ channel through which salvation can possibly flow to the lost and guilty sinner. it is not the church and her sacraments, religion and its rites and ceremonies--man or his doings in any shape or form. it is the death and resurrection of christ. "he died for our sins, was buried, and rose again the third day." this was the gospel which paul preached, by which the corinthians were saved, and the apostle declares, with solemn emphasis, "if any man preach any other gospel, let him be accursed." tremendous words for this our day! ( ) but, thirdly, the authority on which we receive the salvation is the testimony of the holy ghost in scripture. it is "according to the scriptures." this is a most solid and comforting truth. it is not a question of feelings, or experiences, or evidences; it is a simple question of faith in god's word wrought in the heart by god's spirit. it is a serious reflection for the evangelist, that wherever god's spirit is at work, there satan is sure to be busy. we must remember and ever be prepared for this. the enemy of christ and the enemy of souls is always on the watch, always hovering about to see what he can do, either to hinder or corrupt the work of the gospel. this need not terrify or even discourage the workman; but it is well to bear it in mind and be watchful. satan will leave no stone unturned to mar or hinder the blessed work of god's spirit. he has proved himself the ceaseless, vigilant enemy of that work, from the days of eden down to the present moment. now, in tracing the history of satan, we find him acting in two characters, namely, as a serpent, or as a lion--using craft or violence. he will try to deceive; and, if he cannot succeed, then he will use violence. thus it is in this sixteenth chapter of the acts. the apostle's heart had been cheered and refreshed by what we moderns should pronounce, "a beautiful case of conversion." lydia's was a very real and decided case, in every respect. it was direct, positive, and unmistakable. she received christ into her heart, and forthwith took christian ground by submitting to the deeply significant ordinance of baptism. nor was this all. she immediately opened her house to the lord's messengers. hers was no mere lip profession. it was not merely _saying_ she believed. she proved her faith in christ, not only by going down under the water of baptism, but also by identifying herself and her household with the name and cause of that blessed one whom she had received into her heart by faith. all this was clear and satisfactory. but we must now look at something quite different. the serpent appears upon the scene in the person of the deceiver. "it came to pass, as we went to prayer, a certain damsel possessed with a spirit of divination met us, which brought her masters much gain by soothsaying. the same followed paul and us, and cried, saying, these men are the servants of the most high god, which show unto us the way of salvation. and this did she many days. but paul, being grieved, turned and said to the spirit, i command thee in the name of jesus christ to come out of her. and he came out the same hour" (vers. - ). here, then, was a case eminently calculated to test the spirituality and integrity of the evangelist. most men would have hailed such words from the lips of this damsel as an encouraging testimony to the work. why then was paul grieved? why did he not allow her to continue to bear witness to the object of his mission? was she not saying the truth? were they not the servants of the most high god? and were they not showing the way of salvation? why be grieved with--why silence such a witness? because it was of satan; and, most assuredly, the apostle was not going to receive testimony from him. he could not allow satan to help him in his work. true, he might have walked about the streets of philippi owned and honored as a servant of god, if only he had consented to let the devil have a hand in the work. but paul could never consent to this. he could never suffer the enemy to mix himself up with the work of the lord. had he done so, it would have given the deathblow to the testimony at philippi. to have permitted satan to put his hand to the work, would have involved the total shipwreck of the mission to macedonia. it is deeply important for the lord's workman to weigh this matter. we may rest assured that this narrative of the damsel has been written for our instruction. it is not only a statement of what has occurred, but a sample of what may and indeed what does occur every day.[xxvi.] besides christendom is full of false profession. there are multitudes of false professors at this moment, throughout the wide domain of christian profession. it is sad to have to say it, but so it is, and we must press the fact upon the attention of the reader. we are surrounded, on all sides, by those who give a merely nominal assent to the truths of the christian religion. they go on, from week to week, and from year to year, professing to believe certain things which they do not in reality believe at all. there are thousands who, every lord's day, profess to believe in the forgiveness of sins, and yet, were such persons to be examined, it would be found that they either do not think about the matter at all, or, if they do think, they deem it the very height of presumption for any one to be sure that his sins are forgiven. this is very serious. only think of a person standing up in the presence of god and saying, "i believe in the forgiveness of sins," and all the while he does not believe any such thing! can anything be more hardening to the heart, or more deadening to the conscience than this? it is our firm persuasion that the forms and the formularies of professing christianity are doing more to ruin precious souls than all the forms of moral pravity put together. it is perfectly appalling to contemplate the countless multitudes that are at this moment rushing along the well-trodden highway of religious profession, down to the eternal flames of hell. we feel bound to raise a warning note. we want the reader most solemnly to take heed as to this matter. we have only instanced one special formulary, because it refers to a subject of very general interest and importance. how few, comparatively, are clear and settled as to the question of forgiveness of sins! how few are able, calmly, decidedly, and intelligently, to say, "_i know_ that my sins are forgiven!" how few are in the real enjoyment of full forgiveness of sins, through faith in that precious blood that cleanseth from all sin! how solemn, therefore, to hear people giving utterance to such words as these, "i believe in the forgiveness of sins," while, in fact, they do not believe their own very utterance! is the reader in the habit of using such a form of words? does he believe it? say, dear friend, are thy sins forgiven? art thou washed in the precious atoning blood of christ? if not, why not? the way is open. there is no hindrance. thou art perfectly welcome, this moment, to the free benefits of the atoning work of christ. though thy sins be as scarlet; though they be black as midnight, black as hell; though they rise like a dreadful mountain before the vision of thy troubled soul, and threaten to sink thee into eternal perdition; yet do these words shine with divine and heavenly lustre on the page of inspiration, "_the blood of jesus christ, god's son, cleanseth us from_ all _sin_" (i john i. ). but mark, friend, do not go on, week after week, mocking god, hardening thine own heart, and carrying out the schemes of the great enemy of christ, by a false profession. this marks the damsel possessed by a spirit of divination, and here her history links itself with the present awful condition of christendom. what was the burden of her song, during those "many days" in the which the apostle narrowly considered her case? "these men are the servants of the most high god, which _show unto us_ the way of salvation." but she was not saved--she was not delivered--she was, all the while, under satan's power herself. thus it is with christendom--thus it is with each false professor throughout the length and breadth of the professing church. we know of nothing, even in the deepest depths of moral evil, or in the darkest shades of heathenism, more truly awful than the state of careless, hardened, self-satisfied, fallow-ground professors, who on each successive lord's day give utterance, either in their prayers or their singing, to words which, so far as they are concerned, are wholly false. the thought of this is, at times, almost over-whelming. we cannot dwell upon it. it is really too sorrowful. we shall therefore pass on, having once more solemnly warned the reader against every shade and degree of false profession. let him not say or sing aught that he does not heartily believe. the devil is at the bottom of all false profession, and by means thereof he seeks to bring discredit on the work of the lord. but how truly refreshing to contemplate the actings of the faithful apostle in the case of the damsel. had he been seeking his own ends, or had he been merely a minister of religion, he might have welcomed her words as a tributary stream to swell the tide of his popularity, or promote the interest of his cause. but paul was not a mere minister of religion; he was a minister of christ--a totally different thing. and we may notice that the damsel does not say a word about christ. she breathes not the precious, peerless name of jesus. there is total silence as to him. this stamps the whole thing as of satan. "no man can call jesus lord but by the holy ghost." people may speak of god, and of religion; but christ has no place in their hearts. the pharisees, in the ninth of john, could say to the poor man, "give god the praise;" but in speaking of jesus, they could say, "this man is a sinner." thus it is ever in the case of corrupt religion, or false profession. thus it was with the damsel in acts xvi. there was not a syllable about christ. there was no truth, no life, no reality. it was hollow and false. it was of satan; and hence paul would not and could not own it; he was grieved with it and utterly rejected it. would that all were like him! would that there were the singleness of eye to detect, and the integrity of heart to reject the work of satan in much that is going on around us! such an eye paul, through grace, possessed. he was not to be deceived. he saw that the whole affair was an effort of satan to mix himself up with the work, that thus he might spoil it altogether. "but paul, being grieved, turned and said to the spirit, i command thee, in the name of jesus christ, to come out of her. and he came out the same hour." this was true spiritual action. paul was not in any haste to come into collision with the evil one, or even to pronounce upon the case at all; he waited many days; but the very moment that the enemy was detected he is resisted and repulsed with uncompromising decision. a less spiritual workman might have allowed the thing to pass, under the idea that it might turn to account and help forward the work. paul thought differently; and he was right. he would take no help from satan. he was not going to work by such an agency; and hence, in the name of jesus christ--that name which the enemy so sedulously excluded--he puts satan to flight. but no sooner was satan repulsed as the serpent, than he assumed the character of a lion. craft having failed, he tried violence. "and when her masters saw that the hope of their gains was gone, they caught paul and silas and drew them into the market-place unto the rulers, and brought them to the magistrates, saying, these men, being jews, do exceedingly trouble our city, and teach customs which are not lawful for us to receive, neither to observe, being romans. and the multitude rose up together against them; and the magistrates rent off their clothes, and commanded to beat them. and when they had laid many stripes upon them, they cast them into prison, charging the jailor to keep them safely" (vers. - ). thus the enemy seemed to triumph; but be it remembered that christ's warriors gain their most splendid victories by apparent defeat. the devil made a great mistake when he cast the apostle into prison. indeed it is consolatory to reflect that he has never done anything else but make mistakes, from the moment that he left his first estate down to the present moment. his entire history, from beginning to end, is one tissue of errors. and thus, as has been already remarked, the devil made a great mistake when he cast paul into prison at philippi. to nature's view it might have seemed otherwise; but in the judgment of faith, the servant of christ was much more in his right place in prison for the truth's sake, than outside at his master's expense. true, paul might have saved himself. he might have been an honored man, owned and acknowledged as "a servant of the most high god," if he had only accepted the damsel's testimony, and suffered the devil to help him in his work. but he could not do this, and hence he had to suffer. "and the multitude (ever fickle and easily swayed) rose up together against them: and the magistrates rent off their clothes, and commanded to beat them. and when they had laid many stripes upon them, they cast them into prison, charging the jailor to keep them safely. who, having received such a charge, _thrust_ them into the inner prison, and made their feet fast in the stocks" (vers. - ). here, then, some might have said, was an end to the work of the evangelist in the city of philippi. here was an effectual stop to the preaching. not so; the prison was the very place, at the moment, for the evangelist. his work was there. he was to find a congregation within the prison walls which he could not have found outside. but this leads us, in the third and last place, to the case of the hardened sinner. it was very unlikely that the jailor would ever have found his way to the prayer-meeting at the river side. he had little care for such things. he was neither an earnest seeker, nor a deceiver. he was a hardened sinner, pursuing a very hardening occupation. jailors, from the occupation of their office, are, generally speaking, hard and stern men. no doubt there are exceptions. there are some tender-hearted men to be found in such situations; but, as a rule, jailors are not tender. it would hardly suit them to be so. they have to do with the very worst class of society. much of the crime of the whole country comes under their notice; and many of the criminals come under their charge. accustomed to the rough and the coarse, they are apt to become rough and coarse themselves. now, judging from the inspired narrative before us, we may well question if the philippian jailor was an exception to the general rule with respect to men of his class. certainly he does not seem to have shown much tenderness to paul and silas. "he _thrust_ them into the _inner_ prison, and made their feet _fast_ in the stocks." he seems to have gone to the utmost extreme in making them uncomfortable. but god had rich mercy in store for that poor, hardened, cruel jailor; and, as it was not at all likely that he would go to hear the gospel, the lord sent the gospel to him; and, moreover, he made the devil the instrument of sending it. little did the jailor know whom he was thrusting into the inner prison--little did he anticipate what was to happen ere another sun should rise. and we may add, little did the devil think of what he was doing when he sent the preachers of the gospel into jail, there to be the means of the jailor's conversion. but the lord jesus christ knew what he was about to do, in the case of a poor hardened sinner. he can make the wrath of man to praise him and restrain the remainder. "he everywhere hath sway, and all things serve his might, his ev'ry act pure blessing is, his path unsullied light. "when he makes bare his arm, who shall his work withstand? when he his people's cause defends, who then shall stay his hand?" it was his purpose to save the jailor; and so far from satan's being able to frustrate that purpose, he was actually made the instrument of accomplishing it. "god's purpose shall stand; and he will do all his pleasure." and where he sets his love upon a poor, wretched, guilty sinner, he will have him in heaven, spite of all the malice and rage of hell. as to paul and silas, it is very evident that they were in their right place in the prison. they were there _for the truth's sake_, and therefore _the lord was with them_. hence they were perfectly happy. what, though they were confined within the gloomy walls of the prison, with their feet made fast in the stocks, prison walls could not confine their spirits. nothing can hinder the joy of one who has the lord with him. shadrach, meshach, and abednego, were happy in the fiery furnace. daniel was happy in the lions' den; and paul and silas were happy in the dungeon of philippi: "and at midnight paul and silas prayed, and sang praises to god: and the prisoners heard them." what sounds to issue from the inner prison! we may safely say that no such sounds had ever issued thence before. curses and execrations and blasphemous words might have been heard; sighs, cries, and groans come forth from those walls. but to hear the accents of prayer and praise, ascending at the midnight hour, must have seemed strange indeed. faith can sing as sweetly in a dungeon as at a prayer-meeting. it matters not where we are, provided always that we have god with us. his presence lights up the darkest cell, and turns a dungeon into the very gate of heaven. he can make his servants happy anywhere, and give them victory over the most adverse circumstances, and cause them to shout for joy in scenes where nature would be overwhelmed with sorrow. but the lord had his eye upon the jailor. he had written his name in the lamb's book of life before the foundation of the world, and he was now about to lead him into the full joy of his salvation. "and suddenly there was a great earthquake, so that the foundations of the prison were shaken: and immediately all the doors were opened, and every one's bands were loosed" (ver. ). now if paul had not been in full communion with the mind and heart of christ, he would assuredly have turned to silas and said, "now is the moment for us to make our escape. god has most manifestly appeared for us, and set before us an open door. if ever there was an opening of divine providence surely this is one." but no; paul knew better. he was in the full current of his blessed master's thoughts, and in full sympathy with his master's heart. hence he made no attempt to escape. the claims of _truth_ had brought him into prison; the activities of _grace_ kept him there. providence opened the door; but faith refused to walk out. people talk of being guided by providence; but if paul had been so guided, the jailor would never have been a jewel in his crown. "and the keeper of the prison awaking out of his sleep and seeing the prison doors open, he drew out his sword, and would have killed himself, supposing that the prisoners had been fled" (ver. ). this proves, very plainly, that the earthquake, with all its attendant circumstances, had not touched the heart of the jailor. he naturally supposed, when he saw the doors open, that the prisoners were all gone. he could not imagine a number of prisoners sitting quietly in jail when the doors lay open and their chains were loosed. and then what was to become of him if the prisoners were gone? how could he face the authorities? impossible. anything but that. death, even by his own hand, was preferable to that. thus the devil had conducted this hardened sinner to the very brink of the precipice, and he was about to give him the final and fatal push over the edge, and down to the eternal flames of hell; when lo, a voice of love sounded in his ear. it was the voice of jesus through the lips of his servant--a voice of tender and deep compassion--"_do thyself no harm_." this was irresistible. a hardened sinner could meet an earthquake; he could meet death itself; but he could not withstand the mighty melting power of love. the hardest heart must yield to the moral influence of love. "then he called for a light, and sprang in, and came _trembling_, and fell down before paul and silas, and brought them out, and said, sirs, what must i do to be saved?" love can break the hardest heart. and surely there was love in those words, "do thyself no harm," coming from the lips of one to whom he had done so much harm a few hours before. and, be it noted, there was not a single syllable of reproach, or even of reflection, uttered by paul to the jailor. this was christ-like. it was the way of divine grace. if we look through the gospels, we never find the lord casting reproach upon the sinner. he has tears of sorrow; he has touching words of grace and tenderness; but no reproaches--no reflections--no reproach to the poor distressed sinner. we cannot attempt to furnish the many illustrations and proofs of this assertion; but the reader has only to turn to the gospel story to see its truth. look at the prodigal: look at the thief. not one reproving word to either. thus it is in every case; and thus it was with god's spirit in paul. not a word about the harsh treatment--the thrusting into the inner prison--not a word about the stocks. "do thyself no harm." and then, "believe on the lord jesus christ, and thou shalt be saved, and thy house." such is the rich and precious grace of god. it shines, in this scene, with uncommon lustre. it delights in taking up hardened sinners, melting and subduing their hard hearts, and leading them into the sunlight of a full salvation; and all this in a style peculiar to itself. yes, god has his style of doing things, blessed be his name; and when he saves a wretched sinner, he does it after such a fashion as fully proves that his whole heart is in the work. it is his joy to save a sinner--even the very chief--and he does it in a way worthy of himself. and now, let us look at the fruit of all this. the jailor's conversion was most unmistakable. saved from the very brink of hell, he was brought into the very atmosphere of heaven. preserved from self-destruction, he was brought into the circle of god's salvation; and the evidences of this were as clear as could be desired. "and they spake unto him the word of the lord, and to all that were in his house. and he took them the same hour of the night, and washed their stripes; and was baptized, he and all his straightway. and when he had brought them into his house, he set meat before them, and rejoiced, _believing in god, with all his house_." what a marvelous change! the ruthless jailor has become the generous host! "if any man be in christ, he is a new creature; old things are passed away: behold, all things are become new." how clearly we can now see that paul was right in not being guided by _providences_! how much better and higher to be led by the "eye" of god! what an eternal loss it would have proved to him had he walked out at the open door! how much better to be conducted out by the very hand that had thrust him in--a hand once the instrument of cruelty and sin, now the instrument of righteousness and love! what a magnificent triumph! what a scene, altogether! how little had the devil anticipated such a result from the imprisonment of the lord's servants! he was thoroughly outwitted. the tables were completely turned upon him. he thought to hinder the gospel, and, behold! he was made to help it on. he had hoped to get rid of two of christ's servants, and, lo! he lost one of his own. christ is stronger than satan; and all who put their trust in him and move in the current of his thoughts shall most assuredly share in the triumphs of his grace now, and shine in the brightness of his glory forever. thus much, then, as to "the work of an evangelist." such are the scenes through which he may have to pass--such the cases with which he may have to come in contact. we have seen the earnest seeker satisfied; the deceiver silenced; the hardened sinner saved. may all who go forth with the gospel of the grace of god know how to deal with the various types of character that may cross their path! may many be raised up to do the work of an evangelist! footnotes: [xxv.] the reader will notice that in matthew vi. i, the marginal reading is the correct one: "take heed that ye do not your _righteousness_ before men, to be seen of them." then we have the three departments of this righteousness, namely, alms-giving (ver. ); prayer (ver. ); fasting (ver. ). these were the very things cornelius was doing. in short, he feared god, and was working righteousness, according to his measure of light. [xxvi.] [an evangelist will not travel far in our day to find persons who will take him warmly by the hand, and profess lively interest in his work. a moment's intercourse with them, however, will disclose them to be agents of "christian science," of "millennial dawn" of "seventh day adventism" or of some one or other of like systems--messengers of satan, all professing christianity, though in reality destroyers of it; pluming themselves with its name, only to get inside and work destruction the more easily. ed.] chapter iv. letters to an evangelist. dearest a----, i have been much interested, and i trust profited, of late, by tracing, through the gospels and the acts, the various notices of the work of evangelization; and it has occured to me that it may not be amiss to present to you, as one much occupied in the blessed work, a few of the thoughts that have suggested themselves to my mind. i shall feel myself much more free in this way, than if i were writing a formal treatise. and, first of all, i have been greatly struck with the simplicity with which the work of evangelizing was carried on in primitive times; so very unlike a great deal of what obtains among us. it seems to me that we moderns are quite too much hampered by conventional rules--too much fettered by the habits of christendom. we are sadly deficient in what i may call spiritual elasticity. we are apt to think that in order to evangelize there must be a special gift; and even where there is this special gift, there must be a great deal of machinery and human arrangement. when we speak of doing the work of an evangelist, we, for the most part, have before our minds great public halls, and crowded audiences, for which there is a demand for considerable gift and power for speaking. now you and i thoroughly believe, that in order to preach the gospel publicly, there must be a special gift from the head of the church; and, moreover, we believe according to eph. iv. , that christ has given, and does still give, "evangelists." this is clear, if we are to be guided by scripture. but i find in the gospels, and in the acts of the apostles, that a quantity of most blessed evangelistic work was done by persons who were not specially gifted at all, but who had an earnest love for souls, and a deep sense of the preciousness of christ and his salvation. and, what is more, i find in those who were specially gifted, called, and appointed by christ to preach the gospel, a simplicity, freedom, and naturalness in their mode of working, which i greatly covet for myself and for all my brethren. let us look a little into scripture. take that lovely scene in john i. - . john pours out his heart in testimony to jesus: "behold the lamb of god!" his soul was absorbed with the glorious object. what was the result? "two disciples heard him speak, and they followed jesus." what then? "one of the two which heard john speak, and followed him, was andrew, simon peter's brother." and what does he do? "_he first findeth his own brother_ simon, and saith unto him, we have found the messias, which is, being interpreted, the christ. and he brought him to jesus." again, "the day following, jesus would go forth into galilee, and findeth philip, and saith unto him, follow me.... _philip findeth nathanael_, and saith unto him, we have found him, of whom moses in the law, and the prophets, did write, jesus of nazareth, the son of joseph.... _come and see._" here then, dearest a., is the style of thing for which i earnestly long: this individual work, this laying hold of the first man that comes in our way, this finding one's own brother, and bringing him to jesus. i do feel we are deficient in this. it is all right enough to gather congregations, and address them, as god gives ability and opportunity. neither you nor i would pen a single word to detract from the value of such a line of work. by all means hire rooms, halls, and theatres; put out bills inviting people to come; leave no lawful means untried to spread the gospel. seek to get at souls as best you can. far be it from me to cast a damp upon any who are seeking to carry on the work in this public way. but does it not strike you that we want more of the individual work? more of the private, earnest, personal dealing with souls? do you not think that if we had more "philips" we should have more "nathanaels?" if we had more "andrews," we should have more "simons?" i cannot but believe it. there is amazing power in an earnest personal appeal. do you not often find that it is after the more formal public preaching is finished, and the close personal work begins, that souls are reached? how is it then that there is so little of this latter? does it not often happen at our public preachings, that when the formal address is delivered, a hymn sung, and a word of prayer offered, all disperse without any attempt at individual work? i speak not now, mark you, of the preacher--who cannot possibly reach every case, but of the scores of christians who have been listening to him. they have seen strangers enter the room, they have sat beside them; they have, it may be, noticed their interest, seen the tear stealing down the cheek; and yet they have let them pass away without a single loving effort to reach them, or to follow up the good work. no doubt it may be said, "it is much better to allow the spirit of god to follow up his own work. we may do more harm than good. and besides, people do not like to be spoken to: they will look upon it as an impertinent intrusion, and they will be driven away from the place altogether." there is considerable weight in all this. i fully appreciate it; and i am sure you do likewise, dearest a. i fear great blunders are committed by injudicious persons intruding upon the sacred privacy of the soul's deep and holy exercises. it needs tact and judgment; in short, it needs direct spiritual guidance to be able to deal with souls; to know whom to speak to, and what to say. but allowing all this, as we do in the fullest possible manner, i think you will agree with me that there is, as a rule, something lacking in connection with our public preachings. is there not a want of that deep, personal, loving interest in souls which will express itself in a thousand ways that act powerfully on the heart? i confess that i have often been pained by what has come under my own notice in our preaching-rooms. strangers come in and are left to find a seat wherever they can. no one seems to think of them. christians are there, and they will hardly move to make room for them. no one offers them a bible or hymn-book. and when the preaching is over, they are allowed to go as they came; not a loving word of inquiry as to whether they enjoyed the truth preached; not even a kindly look which might win confidence and invite conversation. on the contrary, there is a chilling reserve, amounting almost to repulsiveness. all this is very sorrowful; and perhaps you will tell me that i am drawing too highly colored a picture. alas! the picture is only too true. and what makes it all the more deplorable is, that one knows as a fact that many persons frequent our preaching-rooms and lecture-halls in the deepest exercise, and they are only longing to open their hearts to some one who could offer them a little spiritual counsel; but through timidity, reserve, or nervousness, they shrink from making any advance, and have but to retire to their homes and to their bedchambers, lonely and sad, there to weep in solitude because no man cares for their precious souls. now i feel persuaded that much of this might be remedied if those christians who attend the gospel preachings were more _on the look out_ for souls: if they would attend, not so much for their own profit, as in order to be co-workers with god, in seeking to bring souls to jesus. no doubt it is very refreshing to christians to hear the gospel fully and faithfully preached. but it would not be the less refreshing because they were intensely interested in the conversion of souls, and in earnest prayer to god in the matter. and, besides, it could in no wise interfere with their personal enjoyment and profit to cultivate and manifest a lively and loving interest in those who surround them, and to seek at the close of the meeting to help any who may need and desire to be helped. it has a surprising effect upon the preacher, upon the preaching, upon the whole meeting, when the christians who attend are really entering into, and discharging, their high and holy responsibilities to christ and to souls. it imparts a certain tone and creates a certain atmosphere which must be felt in order to be understood; but when once felt it cannot easily be dispensed with. but, alas, how often is it otherwise! how cold, how dull, how dispiriting is it at times to see the whole congregation clear out the moment the preaching is over! no loving, lingering groups gathering round young converts or anxious inquirers. old experienced christians have been present; but, instead of pausing with the fond hope that god would graciously use them to speak a word in season to him that is weary, they hasten away as though it were a matter of life and death that they should be home at a certain hour. do not suppose, dearest a., that i wish to lay down rules for my brethren. far be the thought. i am merely, in the freest possible manner, pouring out the thoughts of my heart to one with whom i have been linked in the work of the gospel for many years. i feel convinced there is a something lacking. it is my firm persuasion that no christian is in a right condition, if he is not seeking in some way to bring souls to christ. and, on the same principle, no assembly of christians is in a right condition if it be not a thoroughly evangelistic assembly. we should all be on the lookout for souls; and then we may rest assured we should see soul-stirring results. but if we are satisfied to go on from week to week, month to month, and year to year, without a single leaf stirring, without a single conversion, our state must be truly lamentable. but i think i hear you saying, "where is all the scripture we were to have had? where the many quotations from the gospels and the acts?" well, i have gone on jotting down the thoughts which have for some considerable time occupied my mind; and now, space forbids my going further at present. but if you so desire, i shall write you a second letter on the subject. meanwhile, may the lord, by his spirit, make us more earnest in seeking the salvation of immortal souls, by every legitimate agency. may our hearts be filled with genuine love for precious souls, and then we shall be sure to find ways and means of getting at them! ever, believe me, dearest a., your deeply affectionate yoke-fellow, * * * letter ii. there is one point in connection with our subject which has much occupied my mind; and that is, the immense importance of cultivating an earnest faith in the presence and action of the holy ghost. we want to remember, at all times, that we can do nothing, and that god the holy ghost can do all. it holds good in the great work of evangelization, as in all beside, that it is "not by might, nor by power, but by my spirit, saith the lord of hosts." the abiding sense of this would keep us humble, and yet full of joyful confidence. humble, because we can do nothing; full of joyful confidence, because god can do all. moreover, it would have the effect of keeping us very sober and quiet in our work--not cold and indifferent, but calm and serious, which is a great matter just now. i was much struck with a remark lately made by an aged workman, in a letter to one who had just entered the field. "excitement," says this writer, "is not power, but weakness. earnestness and energy are of god." this is most true and most valuable. but i like the two sentences taken together. if we were to take either apart, i think you and i would prefer the latter; and for this reason: there are many, i fear, who would regard as "excitement" what you and i might really consider to be "earnestness and energy." now i do confess, i love a deep-toned earnestness in the work. i do not see how a man can be otherwise than deeply and thoroughly in earnest, who realizes in any measure the awfulness of eternity, and the state of all those who die in their sins. how is it possible for any one to think of an immortal soul standing on the very brink of hell, and in danger at any moment of being dashed over, and not be serious and earnest? but this is not excitement. what i understand by excitement is the working up of mere nature, and the putting forth of such efforts of nature as are designed to work on the natural feelings--all high pressure--all that is merely sensational. this is all worthless. it is evanescent. and not only so, but it superinduces weakness. we never find aught of this in the ministry of our blessed lord or his apostles: and yet what earnestness! what untiring energy! what tenderness! we see an earnestness which wore the appearance of being beside oneself; an energy which hardly afforded a moment for rest or refreshment; and a tenderness which could weep over impenitent sinners. all this we see; but no excitement. in a word, all was the fruit of the eternal spirit; and all was to the glory of god. moreover, there was ever that calmness and solemnity which becomes the presence of god, and yet that deep earnestness which proved that man's serious condition was fully realized. now, dear brother, this is precisely what we want, and what we ought diligently to cultivate. it is a signal mercy to be kept from all merely natural excitement; and, at the same time, to be duly impressed with the magnitude and solemnity of the work. thus the mind will be kept properly balanced, and we shall be preserved from the tendency to be occupied with _our_ work merely because it is ours. we shall rejoice that christ is magnified, and souls are saved, whoever be the instrument used. i have been thinking a good deal lately of that memorable time, now exactly ten years ago, when the spirit of god wrought so marvelously in the province of ulster. i think i gathered up some valuable instruction from what then came under my notice. that was a time never to be forgotten by those who were privileged to be eyewitnesses of the magnificent wave of blessing which rolled over the land. but i now refer to it in connection with the subject of the spirit's action. i have no doubt whatever that the holy ghost was grieved and hindered in the year , by man's interference. you remember how that work began. you remember the little school-house by the road side, where two or three men met, week after week, to pour out their hearts in prayer to god, that he would be pleased to break in upon the death and darkness which reigned around: and that he would revive his work, and send out his light and his truth in converting power. you know how these prayers were heard and answered. you and i were privileged to move through these soul-stirring scenes in the province of ulster; and i doubt not the memory of them is fresh with you, as it is with me, this day. well, what was the special character of that work in its earlier stages? was it not most manifestly a work of god's spirit? did not he take up and use instruments the most unfit and unfurnished, according to human thinking, for the accomplishment of his gracious purpose? do we not remember the style and character of the agents who were chiefly used in the conversion of souls? were they not for the most part "unlearned and ignorant men?" and further, can we not distinctly recall the fact that there was a most decided setting aside of all human arrangement and official routine? working men came from the field, the factory, and the workshop, to address crowded audiences; and we have seen hundreds hanging in breathless interest upon the lips of men who could not speak five words of good grammar. in short, the mighty tide of spiritual life and power rolled in upon us, and swept away for the time being a quantity of human machinery, and ignored all question of man's authority in the things of god and the service of christ. now we can well remember, that just in so far as the holy ghost was owned and honored, did the glorious work progress; and, on the other hand, in proportion as man intruded himself, in bustling self-importance, upon the domain of the eternal spirit, was the work hindered and quashed. i saw the truth of this illustrated in numberless cases. there was a vigorous effort made to cause the living water to flow in official and denominational channels, and this the holy ghost would not sanction. moreover, there was a strong desire manifested, in many quarters, to make sectarian capital out of the blessed movement; and this the holy ghost resented. nor was this all. the work and the workman were _lionized_ in all directions. cases of conversion which were judged to be "striking" were blazed abroad and paraded in the public prints. travellers and tourists from all parts visited these persons, took notes of their words and ways, and wafted the report of them to the ends of the earth. many poor creatures, who had up to that time lived in obscurity, unknown and unnoticed, found themselves, all of a sudden, objects of interest to the wealthy, the noble, and the public at large. the pulpit and the press proclaimed their sayings and doings; and, as might be expected, they completely lost their balance. knaves and hypocrites abounded on all hands. it became a grand point to have some strange and extravagant experience to tell; some remarkable dream or vision to relate. and even where this ill-advised line of action did not issue in producing knavery and hypocrisy, the young converts became heady and high-minded, and looked with a measure of contempt upon old established christians, or those who did not happen to be converted after their peculiar fashion--"stricken," as it was termed. in addition to this, some very remarkable characters--men of desperate notoriety, who seemed to be converted, were conveyed from place to place, and placarded about the various streets, and crowds gathered to see them and hear them recount their history; which history was very frequently a disgusting detail of immoralities and excesses which ought never to have been named. several of these remarkable men afterwards broke down, and returned with increased ardor to their former practices. these things, dearest a., i witnessed in various places. i believe the holy ghost was grieved and hindered, and the work marred thereby. i am thoroughly convinced of this: and hence it is that i think we should earnestly seek to honor the blessed spirit; to lean upon him in all our work; to follow where he leads, not run before him. his work will stand: "whatsoever god doeth it shall be forever." "the works that are done upon the earth, he is the doer of them." the remembrance of this will ever keep the mind well balanced. there is great danger of young workmen getting so excited about _their_ work, _their_ preaching, _their_ gifts, as to lose sight of the blessed master himself. moreover, they are apt to make preaching the _end_ instead of the _means_. this works badly in every way. it injures themselves, and it mars their work. the moment i make preaching my end, i am out of the current of the mind of god, whose end is to glorify christ; and i am out of the current of the heart of christ, whose end is the salvation of souls and the full blessing of his church. but where the holy ghost gets his proper place, where he is duly owned and trusted, there all will be right. there will be no exaltation of man; no bustling self-importance; no parading of the fruits of our work; no excitement. all will be calm, quiet, real, and unpretending. there will be the simple, earnest, believing, patient waiting upon god. self will be in the shade; christ will be exalted. i often recall a sentence of yours. i remember your once saying to me, "heaven will be the best and safest place to hear the results of our work." this is a wholesome word for all workmen. i shudder when i see the names of christ's servants paraded in the public journals, with flattering allusion to their work and its fruits. surely those who pen such articles ought to reflect upon what they are doing: they should consider that they may be ministering to the very thing which they ought to desire to see mortified and subdued. i am most fully persuaded that the quiet, shady, retired path is the best and safest for the christian workman. it will not make him less earnest but the contrary. it will not cramp his energy, but increase and intensify it. god forbid that you or i should pen a line or utter a sentence which might in the most remote way tend to discourage or hinder a single worker in all the vineyard of christ. no, no, this is not the moment for aught of this kind. we want to see the lord's laborers thoroughly in earnest; but we believe, most assuredly, that true earnestness will ever result from the most absolute dependence upon god the holy ghost. but only see how i have run on! and yet i have not referred to those passages of scripture of which i spoke in my last. well, dearly beloved in the lord, i am addressing one who is happily familiar with the gospels and acts, and who therefore knows that the great workman himself, and all those who sought to tread in his blessed footsteps, owned and honored the eternal spirit as the one by whom all their works were to be wrought. i must now close for the present, my much loved brother and fellow-laborer; and i do so with a full heart, commending you, in spirit and soul and body, to him who has loved us, and washed us from our sins in his own blood, and called us to the honored post of workers in his gospel field. may he bless you and yours, most abundantly, and increase your usefulness a thousandfold! as ever, and for ever, your deeply affectionate work-fellow, * * * letter iii. there is another point which stands intimately connected with the subject of my last letter, and that is, the place the word of god occupies in the work of evangelization. in my last letter, as you will remember, i referred to the work of the holy ghost, and the immense importance of giving him his proper place. how clearly the precious word of god is connected with the action of the holy spirit, i need not say. both are inseparably linked in those memorable words of our lord to nicodemus--words so little understood--so sadly misapplied: "except a man be born of water and of the spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of god" (john iii). now, you and i, dearest a., fully believe that in the above passage the word is presented under the figure of "water." thank god, we are not disposed to give any credit to the ritualistic absurdity of baptismal regeneration. we are, i believe, most thoroughly convinced that no one ever did, ever will, or ever could, get life by water baptism. that all who believe in christ ought to be baptized we fully admit; but this is a totally different thing from the fatal error that substitutes an ordinance for the atoning death of christ, the regenerating power of the holy ghost, and the life-giving virtues of the word of god. i shall not waste your time or my own in combating this error, but at once assume that you agree with me in thinking that when our lord speaks of being "born of water and of the spirit," he refers to the word and the holy ghost. thus, then, the word is the grand instrument to be used in the work of evangelization. many passages of holy scripture establish this point with such clearness and decision as to leave no room whatever for dispute. in the first chapter of james, ver. , we read, "of his own will begat he us _with the word of truth_." again, in i pet. i. , we read, "being born again, not of corruptible seed, but of incorruptible, _by the word of god_, which liveth and abideth forever." i must quote the whole passage because of its immense importance in connection with our subject: "for all flesh is as grass, and all the glory of man as the flower of grass. the grass withereth, and the flower thereof falleth away; but the word of the lord endureth forever. _and this is the word which by the gospel is preached unto you._" this last clause is of unspeakable value to the evangelist. it binds him, in the most distinct manner, to the word of god as the instrument--the only instrument--the all-sufficient instrument, to be used in his glorious work. he is to give the word to the people; and the more simply he gives it the better. the pure water should be allowed to flow from the heart of god to the heart of the sinner, without receiving a tinge from the channel through which it flows. the evangelist is to preach the word; and he is to preach it in simple dependence upon the power of the holy ghost. this is the true secret of success in preaching. but while i urge this great cardinal point in the work of preaching--and i believe it cannot be too strongly urged--i am very far indeed from thinking that the evangelist should give his hearers a quantity of truth. so far from this, i consider it a very great mistake. he ought to leave this to the teacher, lecturer, or pastor. i often fear that very much of our preaching shoots over the heads of the people, owing to the fact of our seeking rather to unfold truth than to reach souls. we rest satisfied, it may be, with having delivered a very clear and forcible lecture, a very interesting and instructive exposition of scripture, something very valuable for the people of god; but the unconverted hearer has sat unmoved, unreached, unimpressed. there has been nothing for him. the lecturer has been more occupied with his lecture than with the sinner--more taken up with his subject than with the soul. now i am thoroughly convinced that this is a serious mistake, and one into which we all--at least i am--very apt to fall. i deplore it deeply, and i earnestly desire to correct it. i question if this very mistake may not be viewed as the true secret of our lack of success. but, dearest a., i should not perhaps say "_our_ lack" but _my_ lack. i do not think--so far as i know aught of your ministry--that you are exactly chargeable with the defect to which i am now just referring. of this, however, you will be the best judge yourself; but of one thing i am certain, namely, that the most successful evangelist is the one who keeps his eye fixed on the sinner, who has his heart bent on the salvation of souls, yea, the one with whom the love for precious souls amounts almost to a passion. it is not the man who unfolds the most truth, but the man who longs most after souls, that will have the most seals to his ministry. i assert all this, mark you, in the full and clear recognition of the fact with which i commenced this letter, namely, that the word is the grand instrument in the work of conversion. this fact must never be lost sight of, never weakened. it matters not what agency may be used to make the furrow, or in what form the word may clothe itself, or by what vehicle it may be conveyed; it is only by "the word of truth" that souls are begotten. all this is divinely true, and we would ever bear it in mind. but do we not often find that persons who undertake to preach the gospel (particularly if they continue long in one place) are very apt to leave the domain of the evangelist--most blessed domain!--and travel into that of the teacher and lecturer? this is what i deprecate and deeply deplore. i know i have erred in this way myself, and i mourn over the error. i write in all loving freedom to you--the lord has of late deepened immensely in my soul the sense of the vast importance of earnest gospel preaching. i do not--god forbid that i should--think the less of the work of a teacher or pastor. i believe that wherever there is a heart that loves christ, it will delight to feed and tend the precious lambs and sheep of the flock of christ, that flock which he purchased with his own blood. but the sheep must be gathered before they can be fed; and how are they to be gathered but by the earnest preaching of the gospel? it is the grand business of the evangelist to go forth upon the dark mountains of sin and error, to sound the gospel trumpet and gather the sheep; and i feel convinced that he will best accomplish this work, not by elaborate exposition of truth; not by lectures however clear, valuable, and instructive; not by lovely unfoldings of prophetic, dispensational, or doctrinal truth--most precious and important in the right place--but by fervid, pointed, earnest dealing with immortal souls; the warning voice, the solemn appeal, the faithful reasoning of righteousness, temperance, and judgment to come--the awakening presentation of death and judgment, the dread realities of eternity, the lake of fire and the worm that never dies. in short, beloved, it strikes me we want awakening preachers. i fully admit that there is such a thing as _teaching_ the gospel, as well as _preaching_ it. for example, i find paul teaching the gospel in rom. i.-viii. just as i find him preaching the gospel in acts xiii. or xvii. this is of the very last importance at all times, inasmuch as there are almost sure to be a number of what we call "exercised souls" at our public preachings, and these need an emancipating gospel--the full, clear, elevated, resurrection gospel. but admitting all this, i still believe that what is needed for successful evangelization is, not so much a great quantity of truth as an intense love for souls. look at that eminent evangelist george whitefield. what think you was the secret of his success? no doubt you have looked into his printed sermons. have you found any great breadth of truth in them? i question it. indeed i must say i have been struck with the contrary. but oh! there was that in whitefield which you and i may well covet and long to cultivate. there was a burning love for souls--a thirst for their salvation--a mighty grappling with the conscience--a bold, earnest, face-to-face dealing with men about their past ways, their present state, their future destiny. these were the things that god owned and blessed; and he will own and bless them still. i am persuaded--i write as under the very eye of god--that if our hearts are bent upon the salvation of souls, god will use us in that divine and glorious work. but on the other hand, if we abandon ourselves to the withering influences of a cold, heartless, godless fatalism; if we content ourselves with a formal and official statement of the gospel--a very cheerless sort of thing; if, to use a vulgar phrase, our preaching is on the principle of "take it or leave it," need we wonder if we do not see conversions? the wonder would be if there were any to see. no, no; i believe we want to look seriously into this great practical subject. it demands the solemn and dispassionate consideration of all who are engaged in the work. there are dangers on all sides. there are conflicting opinions on all sides. but i cannot conceive how any christian man can be satisfied to shirk the responsibility of looking after souls. a man may say, "i am not an evangelist; that is not my line; i am more of a teacher, or a pastor." well, i understand this; but will any one tell me that a teacher or pastor may not go forth in earnest longing after souls? i cannot admit it for a moment. nay more; it does not matter in the least what a man's gift is, or even though he should not possess any prominent gift at all, he can and ought, nevertheless, to cultivate a longing desire for the salvation of souls. would it be right to pass a house on fire, without giving warning, even though one were not a member of the fire brigade? should we not seek to save a drowning man, even though we could not command the use of a patent life-boat? who in his senses would maintain aught so monstrous? so, in reference to souls, it is not so much a gift or knowledge of truth that is needed, as a deep and earnest longing for souls--a keen sense of their danger, and a desire for their rescue. ever, dearest a., your deeply affectionate yoke-fellow, * * * letter iv. when i took up my pen to address you in my first letter, i had no idea that i should have occasion to extend the series to a fourth. however, the subject is one of intense interest to me; and there are just two or three points further on which i desire very briefly to touch. and in the first place i deeply feel our lack of a prayerful spirit in carrying on the work of evangelization. i have referred to the subject of the spirit's work; and also to the place which god's word ought ever to get; but it strikes me we are very deficient in reference to the matter of earnest, persevering, believing prayer. this is the true secret of power. "we," say the apostles, "will give ourselves continually to prayer and to the ministry of the word." here is the order: "prayer, and the ministry of the word." prayer brings in the power of god; and this is what we want. it is not the power of eloquence, but the power of god; and this can only be had by waiting upon him. "he giveth power to the faint; and to them that have no might he increaseth strength. even the youths shall faint and be weary, and the young men shall utterly fall: but they that wait upon the lord shall renew their strength; they shall mount up with wings as eagles; they shall run, and not be weary; and they shall walk, and not faint" (isa. xl. - ). it seems to me, dearest a., that we are far too mechanical, if i may so express myself, in the work. there is too much of what i may call going through a service. i greatly fear that some of us are more on our legs than on our knees; more in the railway carriage than in the closet; more on the road than in the sanctuary; more before men than before god. this will never do. it is impossible that our preaching can be marked by power and crowned with results, if we fail in waiting upon god. look at the blessed master himself--that great workman. see how often he was found in prayer. at his baptism; at his transfiguration; previous to the appointment and mission of the twelve. in short, again and again we find that blessed one in the attitude of prayer. at one time he rises up a great while before day, in order to give himself to prayer. at another time he spends the whole night in prayer, because the day was given up to work. what an example for us! may we follow it! may we know a little better what it is to agonize in prayer. how little we know of this!--i speak for myself. it sometimes appears to me as if we were so much taken up with preaching engagements that we have no time for prayer--no time for closet work--no time to be alone with god. we get into a sort of whirl of public work; we rush from place to place, from meeting to meeting, in a prayerless, barren condition of soul. need we wonder at the little result? how could it be otherwise when we so fail in waiting upon god? _we_ cannot convert souls--god alone can do this; and if we go on without waiting on him, if we allow public preaching to displace private prayer, we may rest assured our preaching will prove barren and worthless. we really must "give ourselves to prayer" if we would succeed in the "ministry of the word." nor is this all. it is not merely that we are lacking in the holy and blessed practice of private prayer. this is, alas! too true, as i have said. but there is more than this. we fail in our public meetings for prayer. the great work of evangelization is not sufficiently remembered in our prayer-meetings. it is not definitely, earnestly, and constantly kept before god in our public reunions. it may occasionally be introduced in a cursory, formal manner, and then dismissed. indeed, i feel there is a great lack of earnestness and perseverance in our prayer-meetings generally, not merely as to the work of the gospel, but as to other things as well. there is frequently great formality and feebleness. we do not seem like men in earnest. we lack the spirit of the widow in luke xviii., who overcame the unjust judge by the bare force of her importunity. we seem to forget that god will be inquired of; and that he is a rewarder of them that diligently seek him. it is of no use for any one to say, "god can work without our earnest pleading; he will accomplish his purposes; he will gather out his own." we know all this; but we know also that he who has appointed the end has appointed the means; and if we fail in waiting on him, he will get others to do his work. the work will be done, no doubt, but we shall lose the dignity, the privilege, and the reward of working. is this nothing? is it nothing to be deprived of the sweet privilege of being co-workers with god, of having fellowship with him in the blessed work which he is carrying on? alas! alas! that we prize it so little. still we do prize it; and perhaps there are few things in which we can more fully taste this privilege than in united earnest prayer. here every saint can join. here all can add their cordial amen. all may not be preachers; but all can pray--all join in prayer; all can have fellowship. and do you not find, beloved brother, that there is always a stream of deep and real blessing where _the assembly_ is drawn out in earnest prayer for the gospel, and for the salvation of souls? i have invariably seen it, and hence it is always a source of unspeakable comfort, joy, and encouragement to my heart when i see the assembly stirred up to pray, for then i am sure god is going to give copious showers of blessing. moreover, when this is the case, when this most excellent spirit pervades the whole assembly, you may be sure there will be no trouble as to what is called "the responsibility of the preaching." it will be all the same who does the work, provided it is done as well as it can be. if the assembly is waiting upon god, in earnest intercession for the progress of the work, it will not be a question as to the one who is to take the preaching, provided christ is preached and souls are blessed. then there is another thing which has of late occupied my mind a good deal; and that is our method of dealing with young converts. most surely there is immense need of care and caution, lest we be found accrediting what is not the genuine work of god's spirit at all. there is very great danger here. the enemy is ever seeking to introduce spurious materials into the assembly, in order that he may mar the testimony and bring discredit upon the truth of god. all this is most true, and demands our serious consideration. but does it not seem to you, beloved, that we often err on the other side? do we not often, by a stiff and peculiar style, cast a chill upon young converts? is there not frequently something repulsive in our spirit and deportment? we expect young christians to come up to a standard of intelligence which has taken us years to attain. nor this only. we sometimes put them through a process of examination which only tends to harass and perplex. now assuredly this is not right. the spirit of god would never puzzle, perplex, or repulse a dear anxious inquirer--never, no never. it could never be according to the mind or heart of christ to chill the spirit of the very feeblest lamb in all his blood-bought flock. he would have us seeking to lead them on gently and tenderly--to soothe, nourish, and cherish them, according to all the deep love of his heart. it is a great thing to lay ourselves out, and hold ourselves open to discern and appreciate the work of god in souls, and not to mar it by placing our own miserable crotchets as stumbling-blocks in their pathway. we need divine guidance and help in this as much as in any other department of our work. but, blessed be god, he is sufficient for this as for all beside. let us only wait on him: let us cling to him, and draw upon his exhaustless treasury for each case as it arises, for exigence of every hour. he will never fail a trusting, expectant, dependent heart. i must now close this series of letters. i think i have touched most, if not all, of the points which i had in my mind. you will, i trust, bear in mind, beloved in the lord, that i have, in all these letters, simply jotted down my thoughts in the utmost possible freedom, and in all the intimacy of true brotherly friendship. i have not been writing a formal treatise, but pouring out my heart to a beloved friend and yoke-fellow. this must be borne in mind by all who may read these letters. may god bless and keep you, dearest a. may he crown your labours with his richest and best blessing! may he keep you from every evil work, and preserve you unto his own everlasting kingdom! ever believe me, my dearest a., your deeply affectionate * * * letter v. it seems as though i must once more take up my pen to address you on certain matters connected with the work of evangelization, which have forced themselves upon my attention for some time past. there are three distinct branches of the work which i long to see occupying a far more definite and prominent place among us; and these are, the tract depot, the gospel preaching, and the sunday-school. it strikes me that the lord is awakening attention to the importance of the tract depot as a valuable agency in the work of evangelization; but i question if we, on this side of the atlantic, are thoroughly in earnest on the subject. how is this? have books and tracts lost their interest and value in our eyes? or does the fault lie in the mode of conducting our tract depots? to my mind there seems to be something lacking in reference to this matter. i would fain see a well-conducted depot in every important town; by "well-conducted" i mean one taken up and carried on as a direct service to the lord, in true love for souls, deep interest in the spread of the truth, and at the same time in a sound business way. i have known several depots fall to the ground through lack of business habits on the part of the conductors. they seemed very earnest, sincere persons, but quite unfit to conduct a business. in short, they were persons in whose hands any business would have fallen through. then in many places there is the most deplorable failure as to the valuable and interesting work of conducting a depot. and how can we best reach the people, for whom the tracts and books are prepared? i believe by having the books and tracts exposed for sale in a shop window, where that is possible, so that people may see them as they pass, and step in and purchase what they want. many a soul has been laid hold of in this way. many, i doubt not, have been saved and blessed by means of tracts, seen for the first time in a shop window or arranged on a counter. but where there is no such opportunity, the assembly's meeting-room is the tract depot's natural home. there is, manifestly, a real want of a tract depot in every large town, conducted by some one of intelligence and sound business habits, who would be able to speak to persons about the tracts, and to recommend such as might prove helpful to anxious inquirers after truth. in this way, i feel persuaded, much good might be done. the christians in the town would know where to go for tracts, not only for their own personal reading, but also for general distribution. surely if a thing is worth doing at all, it is worth doing well; and if the tract depot be not worth attending to, we know not what is. the tract depot must be taken up in direct service to christ. and i feel assured that where it is so taken up and so carried on, in energy, zeal, and integrity, the lord will own it and he will make it a blessing. is there no one who will take up this valuable work for christ's sake and not for the sake of remuneration? is there no one who will enter upon it in simple faith, looking to the living god? here lies the root of the matter, dearest a. for this branch of the work, as for every other branch, we need those who trust god and deny themselves. it seems to me that a grand point would be gained if the tract depot were placed on its proper footing, and viewed as an integral part of the evangelistic work, to be taken up in responsibility to the lord, and carried on in the energy of faith in the living god. every branch of gospel work--the depot, the preaching, the sunday-school--must be carried on in this way. it is all well and most valuable to have fellowship--full cordial fellowship, in all our service; but if we wait for fellowship and co-operation in the starting of work which comes within the range of personal, as well as collective, responsibility, we shall find ourselves very much behind--or the work may not be done at all. i shall have occasion to refer more particularly to this point, when i come to treat of the preaching and the sunday-school. all i want now, is to establish the fact that the tract depot is a branch, and a most important and efficient branch, of evangelistic work. if this be thoroughly grasped by our friends, a great point is gained. i must confess to you, dearest a., that my moral sense has often been grievously offended by the cold, commercial style in which the publishing and sale of books and tracts are spoken of--a style befitting perhaps a mere commercial business, but most offensive when adopted in reference to the precious work of god. i admit in the fullest way--nay, i actually contend for it--that the proper management of the depot demands good sound business habits, and upright business principles. but at the same time i am persuaded that the tract depot will never occupy its true ground--never realize the true idea, never reach the desired end--until it is firmly fixed on its holy basis, and viewed as an integral part of that most glorious work to which we are called--even the work of active, earnest, persevering evangelization. and this work must be taken up in the sense of responsibility to christ, and in the energy of faith in the living god. it will not do for an assembly of christians, or some wealthy individual, to take up an inefficient protégé, and commit to such an one the management of the affair in order to afford a means of living. it is most blessed for all to have fellowship in the work; but i am thoroughly convinced that the work must be taken up in direct service to christ, to be carried on in love for souls, and real interest in the spread of the truth. i hope to address you again on the other two branches of my theme. meanwhile, i remain, dearest a., your deeply affectionate yoke-fellow, * * * letter vi. i have, in some of the earlier letters of this series, dwelt upon the unspeakable importance of keeping up with zeal and constancy, a faithful preaching of the gospel--a distinct work of evangelization, carried on in the energy of love to precious souls, and with direct reference to the glory of christ--a work bearing entirely upon the unconverted, and therefore quite distinct from the work of teaching, lecturing, or exhorting, in the bosom of the assembly; which latter is, i need not say, of equal importance in the mind of our lord christ. my object in referring again to this subject is to call your attention to a point in connection with it, respecting which, it seems to me, there is a great want of clearness amongst some of our friends. i question if we are, as a rule, thoroughly clear as to the question of individual responsibility in the work of the gospel. i admit, of course, that the teacher or lecturer is called to exercise his gift, to a very great extent, on the same principle as the evangelist; that is, on his own personal responsibility to christ; and that the assembly is not responsible for his individual services; unless indeed he teach unsound doctrine, in which case the assembly is bound to take it up. but my business is with the work of the evangelist; and he is to carry on his work outside of the assembly. his sphere of action is the wide, wide world. "go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature." here is the sphere and here the object of the evangelist--"_all_ the world"--"_every_ creature." he may go forth from the bosom of the assembly, and return thither again laden with his golden sheaves; nevertheless he goes forth in the energy of personal faith in the living god, and on the ground of personal responsibility to christ; nor is the assembly responsible for the peculiar _mode_ in which he may carry on his work. no doubt the assembly is called into action when the evangelist introduces the _fruit_ of his work in the shape of souls professing to be converted, and desiring to be received into fellowship at the lord's table. but this is another thing altogether, and must be kept distinct. the evangelist must be left free: this is what i contend for. he must not be tied down to certain rules or regulations, nor cramped by special conventionalities. there are many things which a large-hearted evangelist will feel perfectly free to do which might not commend themselves to the spiritual judgment and feelings of some in the assembly; but, provided he does not traverse any vital or fundamental principle, such persons have no right to interfere with him. and be it remembered, dearest a., that when i use the expression, "spiritual judgment and feelings," i am taking the very highest possible view of the case, and treating the objector with the highest respect. i feel this is but right and proper. every true man has a right to have his feelings and judgment--not to speak of conscience--treated with all due respect. there are, alas! everywhere, men of narrow mind, who object to everything that does not square with their own notions--men who would fain tie the evangelist down to the exact line of things and mode of acting which according to their thinking would suit the assembly of god's people when gathered for worship at the table of the lord. all this is a thorough mistake. the evangelist should pursue the even tenor of his way, regardless of all such narrowness and meddling. take, for example, the matter of singing hymns. the evangelist may feel perfectly free to use a class of hymns or gospel songs which would be wholly unsuitable for the assembly. the fact is, he _sings_ the gospel for the same object that he _preaches_ it, namely, to reach the sinner's heart. he is just as ready to sing "come" as to preach it. such, dearest a., is the judgment which i have had on this subject for many years, though i am not quite sure if it will fully commend itself to your spiritual mind. it strikes me we are in danger of slipping into christendom's false notion of "establishing a cause," and "organizing a body." hence it is that the four walls in which the assembly meets are regarded by many as a "chapel," and the evangelist who happens to preach there is looked upon as "the minister of the chapel." all this has to be carefully guarded against: but my object in referring to it now is to clear up the point with respect to the gospel preaching. the true evangelist is not the minister of any chapel; or the organ of any congregation; or the representative of a body; or the paid agent of any society. no; he is the ambassador of christ--the messenger of a god of love--the herald of glad tidings. his heart is filled with love to souls; his lips anointed by the holy ghost; his words clothed with heavenly power. let him alone! fetter him not by your rules and regulations! leave him to his work and to his master! and further, bear in mind that the church of god can afford a platform broad enough for all sorts of workmen and every possible style of work, _provided only_ that foundation truth be not disturbed. it is a fatal mistake to seek to reduce every one and every thing to a dead level. christianity is a living, a divine reality. christ's servants are sent by him, and to him they are responsible. "who art thou that judgest another man's servant? to his own master he standeth or falleth" (rom. xiv.). we may depend upon it, dearest a., these things demand our serious consideration, if we do not want to have the blessed work of evangelization marred in our hands. i have just one other point that i would refer to before closing my letter, as it has been rather a vexed question in certain places--i allude to what has been termed "the responsibility of the preaching." how many of our friends have been and are harassed about this question! and why? i am persuaded that it is from not understanding the true nature, character, and sphere of the work of evangelization. hence we have had some persons contending for it that the sunday evening preaching should be left open. "open to what?" that is the question. in too many cases it has proved to be "open" to a character of speaking altogether unsuited to many who had come there, or who had been brought by friends, expecting to hear a full, clear, earnest gospel. on such occasions our friends have been disappointed, and the unconverted perfectly unable to understand the meaning of the service. surely such things ought not to be; nor would they be if men would only discern the simplest thing possible, namely, the distinction between all meetings in which christ's servants exercise their ministry on their own personal responsibility, and all meetings which are purely reunions of the assembly, whether for the lord's supper, for prayer, or for any other purpose whatsoever. your deeply affectionate, * * * letter vii. through want of space i was obliged to close my last letter without even touching upon the subject of the sunday-school: i must, however, devote a page or two to a branch of work which has occupied a very large place in my heart for thirty years. i should deem my series incomplete were this subject left untouched. some may question how far the sunday-school can be viewed as an integral part of the work of evangelization. i can only say it is mainly in this light i regard it. i look upon it as one great and most interesting branch of gospel work. the superintendent of the sunday-school and the teacher of the sunday-school class are workers in the wide gospel field, just as distinctly as the evangelist or preacher of the gospel. i am fully aware that a sunday-school differs materially from an ordinary gospel preaching. it is not convened in the same way, or conducted in the same manner. there is, if i may so express myself, a union of the parent, the teacher, and the evangelist, in the person of the sunday-school worker. for the time being he takes the place of the parent: he seeks to do the duty of a teacher; but he aims at the object of the evangelist--that priceless object, the salvation of the souls of the precious little ones committed to his charge. as to the mode in which he gains his end--as to the details of his work--as to the varied agencies which he may bring to bear, he alone is responsible. i am aware that exception is taken to the sunday-school on the ground that its tendency is to interfere with parental or domestic training. now i must confess, dearest a., that i cannot see any force whatever in this objection. the true object of the sunday-school is, not to supersede parental training, but to help it where it exists, or to supply its lack where it does not exist. there are, as you and i well know, hundreds of thousands of dear children who have no parental training at all. thousands have no parents, and thousands more have parents who are far worse than none. look at the multitudes that throng the lanes, alleys, and courtyards of our large cities and towns, who seem hardly a degree above mere animal existence--yea, many of them like little incarnate demons. who can think upon all these precious souls without wishing a hearty god-speed to all _true_ sunday-school workers, and earnestly longing for more thorough earnestness and energy in that most blessed work? i say "_true_" sunday-school workers, because i fear that many engage in the work who are not true, not real, not fit. many, i fear, take it up as a little bit of fashionable religious work, suited to the younger members of religious communities. many, too, view it as a kind of set-off to a week of self-indulgence, folly, and worldliness. all such persons are an actual hindrance rather than a help to this sacred service. then again, there are many who sincerely love christ, and long to serve him in the sunday-school, but who are not really fitted for the work. they are deficient in tact, energy, order, and rule. they lack that power to adapt themselves to the children, and to engage their young hearts, which is so essential to the sunday-school worker. it is a great mistake to suppose that every one who stands idle in the market-place is fit to turn into this particular branch of christian labor. on the contrary, it needs a person thoroughly fitted of god for it; and if it be asked, "how are we ever to be supplied with suited agents for this branch of evangelistic service?" i reply, just in the same way as you are to be supplied in any other department--by earnest, persevering, believing prayer. i am most thoroughly persuaded that if christians were more stirred up by god's spirit to feel the importance of the sunday-school--if they could only seize the idea that it is, like the tract depot and the preaching, part and parcel of that most glorious work to which we are called in these closing days of christendom's history--if they were more permeated by the idea of the evangelistic nature and object of sunday-school work, they would be more instant and earnest in prayer, both in the closet and in the public assembly, that the lord would raise up in our midst a band of earnest, devoted, whole-hearted sunday-school workers. this is the lack, dearest a.; and may god, in his abounding mercy, supply it! he is able, and surely he is willing. but then he will be waited on and inquired of; and "he is the rewarder of them that _diligently_ seek him." i think we have much cause for thankfulness and praise for what has been done in the way of sunday-schools during the last few years. i well remember the time when many of our friends seemed to overlook this branch of work altogether. even now many treat it with indifference, thus weakening the hand and discouraging the hearts of those engaged in it. but i shall not dwell upon this, inasmuch as my theme is the sunday-school, and not those who neglect or oppose it. i bless god for what i see in the way of encouragement. i have often been exceedingly refreshed and delighted by seeing some of our very oldest friends rising from the table of their lord, and proceeding to arrange the benches on which the dear little ones were soon to be ranged to hear the sweet story of a saviour's love. and what could be more lovely, more touching, or more morally suited, than for those who had just been remembering the saviour's dying love to seek, even by the arrangement of the benches, to carry out his living words, "suffer the little children to come unto me?" there is very much i should like to add as to the mode of working the sunday-school; but perhaps it is just as well that each worker should be wholly cast upon the living god for counsel and help as to details. we must ever remember that the sunday-school, like the tract depot and the preaching, is entirely a work of individual responsibility. this is a grand point; and where it is fully understood, and where there is real earnestness of heart and singleness of eye, i believe there will be no great difficulty as to the particular mode of working. a large heart, and a fixed purpose to carry on the great work and fulfil the glorious mission committed to us, will effectually deliver us from the withering influence of crotchets and prejudices--those miserable obstructions to all that is lovely and of good report. may god pour out his blessing on all sunday-schools, upon the pupils, the teachers, and the superintendents! may he also bless all who are engaged, in any way, in the instruction of the young! may he cheer and refresh their spirits by giving them to reap many golden sheaves in their special corner of the one great and glorious gospel field! ever believe me, dearest a., your deeply affectionate * * * the living god and a living faith there is one great substantial fact standing prominently forth on every page of the volume of god, and illustrated in every stage of the history of god's people--a fact of immense weight and moral power at all times, but specially in seasons of darkness, difficulty, and discouragement, occasioned by the low condition of things among those who profess to be on the lord's side. the fact is this, _that faith can always count on god, and god will always answer faith_. such is our fact, such our thesis; and if the reader will turn with us, for a few moments, to chron xx., he will find a very beautiful and very striking illustration. this chapter shows us the good king jehoshaphat under very heavy pressure indeed--it records a dark moment in his history. "it came to pass after this also, that the children of moab, and the children of ammon, and with them other besides the ammonites, came against jehoshaphat to battle. then" (for people are ever quick to run with evil tidings) "there came some that told jehoshaphat, saying, there cometh a great multitude against thee from beyond the sea, on this side syria." here was a difficulty of no ordinary nature. this invading host was made up of the descendants of lot and of esau; and this fact might give rise to a thousand conflicting thoughts and distracting questions in the mind of jehoshaphat. they were not egyptians or assyrians, concerning whom there could be no question whatever; but both esau and lot stood in certain relations to israel, and a question might suggest itself as to how far such relations were to be recognized. not this only. the practical state of the entire nation of israel--the actual condition of god's people, was such as to give rise to the most serious misgivings. israel no longer presented an unbroken front to the invading foe. their visible unity was gone. a grievous breach had been made in their battlements. the ten tribes and the two were rent asunder, the one from the other. the condition of the former was terrible, and that of the latter, shaky enough. thus the circumstances of king jehoshaphat were dark and discouraging in the extreme; and, even as regards himself and his practical course, he was but just emerging from the consequences of a very humiliating fall, so that his reminiscences would be quite as cheerless as his surroundings. but it is just here that our grand substantial fact presents itself to the vision of faith, and flings a mantle of light over the whole scene. things looked gloomy, no doubt; but god was to be counted upon by faith, and faith could count upon him. god is a never failing resource--a great reality, at all times, and under all circumstances. "god is our refuge and strength, a very present help in trouble. therefore will not we fear, though the earth be removed, and though the mountains be carried into the midst of the sea. though the waters thereof roar and be troubled, though the mountains shake with the swelling thereof. there is a river, the stream whereof shall make glad the city of god, the holy place of the tabernacles of the most high. god is in the midst of her, she shall not be moved: god shall help her, and that right early. the heathen raged, the kingdoms were moved: he uttered his voice, the earth melted. the lord of hosts is with us; the god of jacob is our refuge" (psa. xlvi. i- ). here, then, was jehoshaphat's resource in the day of his trouble; and to it he at once betook himself, in that earnest faith which never fails to draw down power and blessing from the living and true god, to meet every exigency of the way. "and jehoshaphat feared, and set himself to seek the lord, and proclaimed a fast throughout all judah. and judah gathered themselves together, to ask help of the lord; even out of all the cities of judah they came to seek the lord. and jehoshaphat stood in the congregation of judah and jerusalem, in the house of the lord, before the new court, and said, o lord god of our fathers, art not thou god in heaven? and rulest not thou over all the kingdoms of the heathen? and in thy hand is there not power and might, so that none is able to withstand thee? art not thou our god, who didst drive out the inhabitants of this land before thy people israel, and gavest it to _the seed of abraham thy friend for ever_?" these are the breathings of faith--faith that enables the soul to take the very highest possible ground. it mattered not what unsettled questions there might be between esau and jacob; there were none between abraham and the almighty god. now, god had given the land to abraham, his friend. for how long? _for ever._ this was enough. "the gifts and calling of god are without repentance." god will never cancel his call, or take back a gift. this is a fixed foundation principle; and on this faith always takes its stand with firm decision. the enemy might throw in a thousand suggestions; and the poor heart might throw up a thousand reasonings. it might seem like presumption and empty conceit, on the part of jehoshaphat, to plant his foot on such lofty ground. it was all well enough in the days of david, or of solomon, or of joshua, when the unity of the nation was unbroken, and the banner of jehovah floated in triumph over the twelve tribes of israel. but things were sadly changed; and it ill became one in jehoshaphat's circumstances to use such lofty language or assume to occupy such a high position. what is faith's reply to all this? a very simple, but a very powerful one--god never changes. he is the same yesterday, to-day, and forever. had he not made abraham a present of the land of canaan? had he not bestowed it upon his seed forever? had he not ratified the gift by his word and his oath--these two immutable things in which it was impossible for him to lie? unquestionably. but then what of the law? did not that make some difference? none whatever, as regards god's gift and promise. four centuries previous to the giving of the law, was the great transaction settled and stablished between the almighty god and abraham his friend--and settled and stablished forever. hence nothing can possibly touch this. there were no legal conditions proposed to abraham. all was pure and absolute grace. god gave the land to abraham by promise, and not by law, in any shape or form. now, it was on this original ground that jehoshaphat took his stand; and he was right. it was the only thing for him to do. he had not one hair's breadth of solid standing ground, short of these golden words, "thou gavest it to the seed of abraham thy friend forever." it was either this or nothing. _a living faith always lays hold on the living god._ it cannot stop short of him. it looks not at men or their circumstances. it takes no account of the changes and chances of this mortal life. it lives and moves and has its being in the presence of the living god; it rejoices in the cloudless sunlight of his blessed countenance. it carries on all its artless reasonings in the sanctuary, and draws all its happy conclusions from the facts discovered there. it does not lower the standard according to the condition of things around, but boldly and decidedly takes up its position on the very highest ground. now, these actings of faith are always most grateful to the heart of god. the living god delights in a living faith. we may be quite sure that the bolder the grasp of faith, the more welcome it is to god. we need never suppose that the blessed one is either gratified or glorified by the workings of a legal mind. no, no; he delights to be trusted without a shadow of reserve or misgiving. he delights to be fully counted upon and largely used; and the deeper the need, and the darker the surrounding gloom, the more is he glorified by the faith that draws upon him. hence, we may assert with perfect confidence, that the attitude and the utterances of jehoshaphat, in the scene before us, were in full accordance with the mind of god. there is something perfectly beautiful to see him, as it were, opening the original lease, and laying his finger on that clause in virtue of which israel held as tenants forever under god. nothing could cancel that clause or break that lease. no flaw there. all was ordered and sure. "thou _gavest_ it to the seed of abraham thy friend _forever_." this was solid ground--the ground of god--the ground of faith, which no power of the enemy can ever shake. true, the enemy might remind jehoshaphat of sin and folly, failure and unfaithfulness. nay, he might suggest to him that the very fact of the threatened invasion proved that israel had fallen, for had they not done so, there would be neither enemy nor evil. but for this, too, grace had provided an answer--an answer which faith knew well how to appropriate. jehoshaphat reminds jehovah of the house which solomon had built to his name. "they have built thee a sanctuary therein for thy name, saying, if, when evil cometh upon us, as a sword, judgment, or pestilence, or famine, we stand before this house, and in thy presence (for thy name is in this house), and cry unto thee in our affliction, then thou will hear and help. and now, behold, the children of ammon, and moab, and mount seir, whom thou wouldest not let israel invade, when they came out of the land of egypt, but they turned from them, and distroyed them not. behold, i say, how they reward us, to come to cast us out of _thy possession, which thou hast given us to inherit_. o our god, wilt thou not judge them? for we have no might against this great company that cometh against us; neither know we what to do, but _our eyes are upon thee_" (vers. - ). here, truly, is a living faith dealing with the living god. it is no mere empty profession--no lifeless creed--no cold uninfluential theory. it is not a man "saying he has faith." such things will never stand in the day of battle. they may do well enough when all is calm, smooth, and bright; but when difficulties have to be grappled with--when the enemy has to be met face to face, all merely nominal faith, all mere lip profession, will prove like autumn leaves before the blast. nothing will stand the test of actual conflict but a living personal faith in a living personal saviour-god. this is what is needed. it is this which alone can sustain the heart, come what may. faith brings god into the scene, and all is strength, victory, and perfect peace. thus it was with the king of judah, in the days of chron. xx. "we have no might; neither know we what to do; but our eyes are upon thee." this is the way to occupy god's ground, even with the eyes fixed on god himself. this is the true secret of stability and peace. the devil will leave no stone unturned to drive us off the true ground which, as christians, we ought to occupy in these last days; and we, in ourselves, have no might whatever against him. our only resource is in the living god. if our eyes are upon him, nothing can harm us. "thou wilt keep him in perfect peace, whose mind is stayed on thee, because he trusteth in thee." reader, art thou on god's ground? canst thou give a "thus saith the lord" for the position which thou occupiest, at this moment? art thou consciously standing on the solid ground of holy scripture? is there anything questionable in thy surroundings and associations? we beseech thee to weigh these questions solemnly as in the divine presence. be assured they are of moment just now. we are passing through critical moments. men are taking sides; principles are working and coming to a head. never was it more needful to be thoroughly and unmistakably on the lord's side. jehoshaphat never could have met the ammonites, moabites, and edomites, had he not been persuaded that his feet were on the very ground which god had given to abraham. if the enemy could have shaken his confidence as to this, he would have had an easy victory. but jehoshaphat knew where he was; he knew his ground. he understood his bearings; and therefore he could fix his eyes with confidence upon the living god. he had no misgivings as to his position. he did not say, as many do, now-a-days, "i am not quite sure. i hope i am; but sometimes clouds come over my soul, and make me hesitate as to whether i am really on divine ground." ah! no, reader, the king of judah would not have understood such language at all. all was clear to him. his eye rested on the original grant. he felt sure he was on the true ground of the israel of god; and albeit all israel were not there with him, yet god was with him, and that was enough. his was a living faith in the living god--the only thing that will stand in the day of trial. there is something in the attitude and utterance of the king of judah, on that memorable occasion, well worthy of the reader's profound attention. his feet were firmly fixed on god's ground, and his eyes as firmly fixed on god himself; and in addition to this, there was the deep sense of his own thorough nothingness. he had not so much as a shadow of a doubt as to the fact of his being in possession of the very inheritance which god had given him. he knew that he was in his right place. he did not _hope_ it; still less did he doubt it; no, he knew it. he could say, "i believe and am sure." this is all-important. it is impossible to stand against the enemy, if there is anything equivocal in our position. if there be any secret misgiving as to our being in our right place--if we cannot give a "thus saith the lord" for the position which we occupy, the path we tread, the associations in which we stand, the work in which we are engaged, there will, most assuredly, be weakness in the hour of conflict. satan is sure to avail himself of the smallest misgiving in the soul. all must be settled as to our positive standing, if we would make any headway against the enemy. there must be an unclouded confidence as to our real position before god, else the foe will have an easy victory. now, it is precisely here that there is so much weakness apparent among the children of god. very few, comparatively, are clear, sound, and settled as to their foundation--very few are able, without any reserve, to take the blessed ground of being washed in the blood of jesus, and sealed with the holy spirit. at times they hope it. when things go well with them; when they have had a good time in the closet; when they have enjoyed nearness to god in prayer, or over the word; while they are sitting under a clear, fervent, forcible ministry--at such moments, perhaps, they can venture to speak hopefully about themselves. but, very soon, dark clouds gather; they feel the workings of indwelling sin; they are afflicted with wandering thoughts; or it may be, they have been betrayed into some levity of spirit, or irritability of temper; then they begin to _reason_ about themselves, and to question whether they are, in reality, the children of god. and from reasonings and questionings, they very speedily slip into positive unbelief, and then plunge into the thick gloom of a despondency bordering on despair. all this is most sad. it is, at once, dishonoring to god, and destructive to the soul's peace; and as to progress, in such a condition, it is wholly out of the question. how can any one run a race, if he has not cleared the starting post? how can he erect a building, if he has not laid the foundation? and, on the same principle, how can a soul grow in the divine life, if he is always liable to doubt whether he has that life or not? but it may be that some of our readers are disposed to put such a question as the following, "how can i be sure that i am on god's ground?--that i am washed in the blood of jesus and sealed with the holy spirit?" we reply, how do you know that you are a lost sinner? is it because you feel it? is mere feeling the ground of your faith? if so, it is not a divine faith at all. true faith rests _only_ on the testimony of holy scripture. no doubt, it is by the gracious energy of the holy ghost that any one can exercise this living faith; but we are speaking now of the true ground of faith--the authority--the basis on which it rests, and that is simply the holy scriptures which, as the inspired apostle tells us, are able to make us wise unto salvation, and which even a child could know, without the church, the clergy, the fathers, the doctors, the councils, the colleges, or any other human intervention whatsoever. "abraham believed god." here was divine faith. it was not a question of feeling. indeed, if abraham had been influenced by his feelings, he would have been a doubter instead of a believer. for what had he to build upon in himself? "his own body now dead." a poor ground surely on which to build his faith in the promise of an innumerable seed. but, we are told, "he considered not his own body now dead" (rom. iv.). what, then, did he consider? he considered the word of the living god, and on that he rested. now this is faith. and mark what the apostle says: "he staggered not at the promise of god through unbelief" (for unbelief is always a staggerer), "but was strong in faith, giving glory to god: and being fully persuaded that what he had promised, he was able also to perform. and _therefore_ it was imputed to him for righteousness." "ah! but," the anxious reader may say, "what has all this to say to my case? i am not an abraham--i cannot expect a special revelation from god. how am i to know that god has spoken to me? how can i possess this precious faith?" well, dear friend, mark the apostle's further statement. "now," he adds, "it was not written for his (abraham's) sake alone, that it was imputed to him; but for us also, to whom it shall be imputed, if"--if what?--if we feel, realize, or experience aught in ourselves? nay, but "if we believe on him that raised up jesus our lord from the dead; who was delivered for our offences, and was raised again for our justification." all this is full of solid comfort and richest consolation. it assures the anxious inquirer that he has the self-same ground and authority to rest upon that abraham had, with an immensely higher measure of light thrown on that ground, inasmuch as abraham was called to believe in a promise, whereas we are privileged to believe in an accomplished fact. he was called to look forward to something which was to be done; we look back at something that is done, even an accomplished redemption, attested by the fact of a risen and glorified saviour, at the right hand of the majesty in the heavens. but as to the ground or authority on which we are called to rest our souls, it is the same in our case as in abraham's and all true believers' in all ages--it is the word of god--the holy scriptures. there is no other foundation of faith but this; and the faith that rests on any other is not true faith at all. a faith resting on human tradition--on the authority of the church--on the authority of so-called general councils--on the clergy--or on learned men, is not divine faith, but mere superstition; it is a faith which "stands in the wisdom of men," and "not in the power of god" (i cor. ii. ). now, it is utterly impossible for any human pen or mortal tongue to overstate the value or importance of this grand principle--this principle of a living faith. its value at the present moment is positively unspeakable. we believe it to be the divine antidote against most, if not all, the leading errors, evils, and hostile influences of the day in which our lot is cast. there is a tremendous shaking going on around us. minds are agitated. disturbing forces are abroad. there is a loosening of the foundations. old institutions, to which the human mind clings, as the ivy to the oak, are tottering on every side; and many are actually fallen: and thousands of souls that have been finding shelter in them are dislodged and scared, and know not whither to turn. some are saying, "the bricks are thrown down, but we will build with hewn stone." many are at their wit's end, and most are ill at ease. nor is this all; there is a numerous class, for the most part, of those who are not so much concerned about the condition and destiny of religious institutions and ecclesiastical systems, as about the condition and destiny of their own precious souls--of those who are not so much agitated by questions about "broad church," "high church," "low church," "state church," or "free church," as about this one great question, "what must i do to be saved?" what have we to say to these latter? what is the real want of their souls? simply this, "a living faith in the living god." this is what is needed for all who are disturbed by what they see without, or feel within. our unfailing resource is in the living god and in his son jesus christ, as revealed by the holy spirit in the holy scriptures. here is the true resting-place of faith, and to this we do, most earnestly, most urgently and solemnly, invite the anxious reader. in one word, we entreat him to stay his whole soul on the word of god--the holy scriptures. here we have authority for all that we need to know, to believe, or to do. is it a question of anxiety about my eternal salvation? hear the following words, "therefore, thus saith the lord god, behold, i lay in zion _for a foundation_, a stone, a tried stone, a precious corner stone, _a sure foundation_: he that believeth shall not make haste" (isa. xxviii. ). these precious words, so pregnant with tranquilizing power, are quoted by the inspired apostle in the new testament scriptures: "wherefore also it is contained in the scripture, behold, i lay in sion a chief corner stone, elect, precious: and _he that believeth on him shall not be confounded_" (i peter ii. ). what solid comfort--what deep and settled repose for the anxious soul is here! god has laid the foundation, and that foundation is nothing less than his own eternal and co-equal son, the son who had dwelt from all eternity in his bosom. this foundation is, in every respect, adequate to sustain the whole weight of the counsels and purposes of the eternal three in one--to meet all the claims of the nature, the character, and the throne of god. being all this, it must needs be fully adequate to meet all the need of the anxious soul, of what kind soever that need may be. if christ is enough for god he must of necessity be enough for man--for any man--for the reader; and that he is enough is proved by the very passage just quoted. he is god's own foundation, laid by his own hand, the foundation and centre of that glorious system of royal and victorious grace set forth in the word "zion." (see heb. xii. - .) he is god's own precious, tried, chief corner stone--that blessed one who went down into death's dark waters--bore the heavy judgment and wrath of god against sin--robbed death of its sting, and the grave of its victory--destroyed him that had the power of death--wrested from the enemy's grasp that terrible weapon with which sin had armed him, and made it the very instrument of his eternal defeat and confusion. having done all this, he was received up into glory, and seated at the right hand of the majesty in the heavens. such is god's foundation, to which he graciously calls the attention of every one who really feels the need of something divinely solid on which to build, in view of the hollow and shadowy scenes of this world, and in prospect of the stern realities of eternity. dear reader, you are now invited to build upon this foundation. be assured it is for you as positively and distinctly as though you heard a voice from heaven speaking to your own very self. the word of the living god is addressed "to every creature under heaven"--"whosoever will" is invited to come. the inspired volume has been placed in your hand and laid open before your eyes; and for what think you? is it to mock or to tantalize you by presenting before you what was never intended for you? ah! no, reader; such is not god's way. does he send his sunlight and showers to mock and to tantalize, or to gladden and refresh? do you ever think of calling in question your own very personal welcome to study the book of creation? never; and yet there might be some show of foundation of such a question, inasmuch as, since that wondrous volume was thrown open, sin has entered and thrown its dark blots over the pages thereof. but, spite of sin and all its forms and all its consequences, spite of satan's power and malice, god has spoken. he has caused his voice to be heard in this dark and sinful world. and what has he said? "behold, i lay in zion a foundation." this is something entirely new. it is as though our blessed, loving, and ever gracious god had said to us, "here, i have begun on the new. i have laid a foundation, on the ground of redemption, which nothing can ever touch, neither sin, or satan, or aught else. i _lay_ the foundation, and pledge my word that whosoever believes--whosoever commits himself, in childlike, unquestioning confidence, to my foundation--whosoever rests in my christ--whosoever is satisfied with my precious, tried, chief corner stone, shall never--no, never--no, never be confounded--never be put to shame--never be disappointed--shall never perish, world without end." beloved reader, dost thou still hesitate? we solemnly avow we cannot see even the shadow of a foundation of a reason why thou shouldest. if there were any question raised, or any condition proposed, or any barrier erected, reason would that thou mightest hesitate. if there were so much as a single preliminary to be settled by thee--if it were made a question of feeling or of experience, or of aught else that thou couldst do, or feel, or be, then verily thou mightest justly pause. but there is absolutely nothing of the sort. there is the christ of god and the word of god, and--what then? "he that believeth shall not be confounded." in short it is simply "a living faith in the living god." it is taking god at his word. it is believing what he says because he says it. it is committing your soul to the word of him who cannot lie. it is doing what abraham did when he believed god and was counted righteous. it is doing what jehoshaphat did when he planted his foot firmly on those immortal words, "thou gavest it to the seed of abraham thy friend, forever." it is doing what the patriarchs, the prophets, the apostles, the saints in all ages have done, when they rested their souls for time and eternity upon that word which "is settled forever in heaven," and thus lived in peace and died in hope of a glorious resurrection. it is resting calmly and sweetly on the immovable rock of holy scripture, and thus proving the divine and sustaining virtue of that which has never failed any who who trusted it, and never will, and never can. oh! the unspeakable blessedness of having such a foundation in a world like this where death, decay, and change are stamped upon all; where friendship's fondest links are snapped in the twinkling of an eye by death's rude hand; where all that seems, to nature's view, most stable, is liable to be swept away in a moment by the rushing tide of popular revolution; where there is absolutely nothing on which the heart can lean, and say, "i have now found permanent repose." what a mercy, in such a scene, to have "a living faith in the living god." "they shall not be ashamed that wait for me." such is the veritable record of the living god--a record made good in the experience of all those who have been enabled, through grace, to exercise a living faith. but then we must remember how much is involved in those three words, "_wait for me_." the waiting must be a real thing. it will not do to _say_ we are waiting on god, when, in reality, our eye is askance upon some human prop or creature confidence. we must be absolutely "shut up" to god. we must be brought to the end of self, and to the bottom of circumstances, in order fully to prove what the life of faith is, and what god's resources are. god and the creature can never occupy the same platform. it must be god alone. "my soul, wait thou _only_ upon god; for my expectation is from him. he _only_ is my rock and my salvation" (psa. lxii. , ). thus it was with jehoshaphat, in that scene recorded in chron. xx. he was wholly cast upon god. it was either god or nothing. "we have no might." but what then? "our eyes are upon thee." this was enough. it was well for jehoshaphat not to have so much as a single atom of might--a single ray of knowledge. he was in the very best possible attitude and condition to prove what god was. it would have been an incalculable loss to him to have been possessed of the very smallest particle of creature strength or creature wisdom, inasmuch as it could only have proved a hindrance to him in leaning exclusively upon the arm and the counsel of the almighty god. if the eye of faith rests upon the living god--if he fills the entire range of the soul's vision, then what do we want with might or knowledge of our own? who would think of resting in that which is human when he can have that which is divine? who would lean on an arm of flesh, when he can lean on the arm of the living god? reader, art thou, at this moment in any pressure, in any trial, need, or difficulty? if so, let us entreat thee to look simply and solely to the living god. turn away thine eyes completely from the creature: "cease from man, whose breath is in his nostrils." let thy faith take hold now on the strength of god himself. put thy whole case into his omnipotent hand. cast thy burden, whatever it is, upon him. let there be no reserve. he is as willing as he is able, and as able as he is willing, to bear all. only trust him fully. he loves to be trusted--loves to be used. it is his joy, blessed be his name, to yield a ready and a full response to the appeal of faith. it is worth having a burden, to know the blessedness of rolling it over upon him. so the king of judah found it in the day of his trial, and so shall the reader find it now. god never fails a trusting heart. "they shall not be ashamed that wait for me." precious words! let us mark how they are illustrated in the narrative before us. no sooner had jehoshaphat cast himself completely upon the lord, than the divine response fell, with clearness and power, upon his ear. "harken ye, all judah, and ye inhabitants of jerusalem, and thou king jehoshaphat; thus saith the lord unto you, be not afraid or dismayed by reason of this great multitude; for the battle is not yours, but god's ... ye shall not need to fight in this battle. set yourselves, stand ye still, and see the salvation of the lord with you, o judah and jerusalem: fear not, nor be dismayed; to-morrow go out against them; for the lord will be with you." what an answer! "the battle is not yours, but god's." only think of god's having a battle with people! assuredly there could be little question as to the issue of such a battle. jehoshaphat had put the whole matter into god's hands, and god took it up and made it entirely his own. it is always thus. faith puts the difficulty, the trial, and the burden into god's hands, and leaves him to act. this is enough. god never refuses to respond to the appeal of faith; nay, it is his delight to answer it. jehoshaphat had made it a question between god and the enemy. he had said, "they have come to cast us out of _thy_ possession, which thou hast given us to inherit." nothing could be simpler. god had given israel the land, and he could keep them in it, spite of ten thousand foes. thus faith would reason. the self-same hand that had placed them in the land could keep them there. it was simply a question of divine power. "o our god, wilt thou not judge them? for we have no might against this great company that cometh against us; neither know we what to do; but our eyes are upon thee." it is a wonderful point in the history of any soul, to be brought to say, "i have no might." it is the sure precursor of divine deliverance. the moment a man is brought to the discovery of his utter powerlessness, the divine word is, "stand still, and see the salvation of god." one does not want "might" to "stand still." it needs no effort to "see the salvation of god." this holds good in reference to the sinner in coming to christ, at the first; and it holds equally good in reference to the christian in his whole career from first to last. the great difficulty is to get to the end of our own strength. once there, the whole thing is settled. there may be a vast amount of struggle and exercise ere we are brought to say "without strength!" but, the moment we take that ground, the word is, "stand still, and see the salvation of god." human effort, in every shape and form, can but raise a barrier between our souls and god's salvation. if god has undertaken for us, we may well be still. and has he not? yes, blessed be his holy name, he has charged himself with all that concerns us, for time and eternity; and hence we have only to let him act for us, in all things. it is our happy privilege to let him go before us, while we follow on "in wonder, love, and praise." thus it was in that interesting and instructive scene on which we have been dwelling. "jehoshaphat bowed his head, with his face to the ground: and all judah and the inhabitants of jerusalem fell before the lord, worshiping the lord. and the levites, of the children of the kohathites, and of the children of the korhites, stood up to praise the lord god of israel with a loud voice on high." here we have the true attitude and the proper occupation of the believer. jehoshaphat withdrew his eyes from "that great company that had come against him," and fixed them upon the living god. jehovah had come right in and placed himself between his people and the enemy, just as he had done in the day of the exodus, at the red sea, so that instead of looking at the difficulties, they might look at him. this, beloved reader, is the secret of victory at all times, and under all circumstances. this it is which fills the heart with praise and thanksgiving, and bows the head in wondering worship. there is something perfectly beautiful in the entire bearing of jehoshaphat and the congregation, on the occasion before us. they were evidently impressed with the thought that they had nothing to do but to praise god. and they were right. had he not said to them, "ye shall not need to fight"? what then had they to do? what remained for them? nothing but praise. jehovah was going out before them to fight; and they had but to follow after him in adoring worship. "and they rose early in the morning, and went forth in the wilderness of tekoa: and as they went forth, jehoshaphat stood and said, hear me, o judah, and ye inhabitants of jerusalem; believe in the lord your god, so shall ye be established; believe his prophets, so shall ye prosper" ( chron. xx. ). it is of the very last importance that god's word should ever have its own supreme place in the heart of the christian. god has spoken. he has given us his word; and it is for us to lean unshaken thereon. we want nothing more. the divine word is amply sufficient to give confidence, peace, and stability to the soul. we do not need evidences from man to prove the truth of god's word. that word carries its own powerful evidences with it. to suppose that we require human testimony to prove that god's word is true, is to imply that man's word is more valid, more trustworthy, more authoritative, than the word of god. if we need a human voice to interpret, to ratify, to make god's revelation available, then we are virtually deprived of that revelation altogether. we call the special attention of the reader to this point. it concerns the integrity of holy scripture. the grand question is this, is god's word sufficient or not? do we really want man's authority to make us sure that god has spoken? far be the thought! this would be placing man's word above god's word, and thus depriving us of the _only_ solid ground on which our souls can lean. this is precisely what the devil has been aiming at from the very beginning, and it is what he is aiming at now. he wants to remove from beneath our feet the solid rock of divine revelation, and to give us instead the sandy foundation of human authority. hence it is that we do so earnestly press upon our readers the urgent need of keeping close to god's word, in simple unquestioning faith. it is really the true secret of stability and peace. if god's word be not enough for us, without man's interference, we are positively left without any sure basis of our soul's confidence; yea, we are cast adrift on the wild watery waste of skepticism, we are plunged in doubt and dark uncertainty: we are most miserable. but, thanks and praise be to god, it is not so. "_believe in the lord your god, so shall ye be established: believe his prophets, so shall ye prosper._" here is the resting-place of faith in all ages. god's eternal word, which is settled forever in heaven, which he has magnified according to all his name, and which stands forth in its own divine dignity and sufficiency before the eye of faith. we must utterly reject the idea that aught in the way of human authority, human evidences, or human feelings, is needful to make the testimony of god full weight in the balances of the soul. grant us but this, that god has spoken, and we argue with bold decision that nothing more is needed as a foundation for genuine faith. in a word, if we want to be established and to prosper, we have simply to "believe in the lord our god." it was this that enabled jehoshaphat to bow his head in holy worship. it was this that enabled him to praise god for victory ere a single blow was struck. it was this that conducted him into "the valley of berachah" (_blessing_) and surrounded him with spoil more than he could carry away. and now we have the soul-stirring record: "and when he had consulted with the people, he appointed _singers unto the lord_, and that should praise the beauty of holiness, as they went out before the army, and to say, praise the lord: for his mercy endureth forever." what a strange advance guard for an army! a company of singers! such is faith's way of ordering the battle. "and when they began to sing and to praise, the lord set ambushments against the children of ammon, moab, and mount seir, which were come against judah, and they were smitten." only think of the lord setting ambushments! think of his engaging in the business of military tactics! how wonderful! god will do any thing that his people need, if only his people will confide in him, and leave themselves and their affairs absolutely in his hand. "and when judah came toward the watch-tower in the wilderness, they looked unto the multitude, and, behold, they were dead bodies fallen to the earth, and none escaped." such was the end of "that great company"--that formidable host--that terrible foe. all vanished away before the presence of the god of israel. yes, and had they been a million times more numerous, and more formidable, the issue would have been the same, for circumstances are nothing to the living god, and nothing to a living faith. when god fills the vision of the soul, difficulties fade away, and songs of praise break forth from joyful lips. "and when jehoshaphat and his people came to take away the spoil of them" (for that was all they had to do) "they found among them in abundance both riches with the dead bodies, and precious jewels, which they stripped off for themselves, more than they could carry away; and they were three days in gathering of the spoil, it was so much. and on the fourth day, they assembled themselves in the valley of berachah; for there they blessed the lord." such, beloved reader, must ever be the result of a living faith in the living god. more than two thousand five hundred years have rolled away since the occurrence of the event on which we have been dwelling; but the record is as fresh as ever. no change has come over the living god, or over the living faith which ever takes hold of his strength, and counts on his faithfulness. it is as true to-day as it was in the day of jehoshaphat, that those who believe in the lord our god shall be established, and shall prosper. they shall be endowed with strength, crowned with victory, clothed with spoils, and filled with songs of praise. may we, then through the gracious energy of the holy spirit, ever be enabled to exercise "a living faith in the living god!" a scriptural inquiry as to the true nature of the sabbath, the law, and christian ministry the sabbath. if it were merely a question of the observance or non-observance of a day, it might be easily disposed of, inasmuch as the apostle teaches us in rom. xiv. , , and also in col. ii. , that such things are not to be made a ground of judgment. but seeing there is a great principle involved in the sabbath question, we deem it to be of the very last importance to place it upon a clear and scriptural basis. we shall quote the fourth commandment at full length: "remember the sabbath day, to keep it holy. six days shalt thou labor, and do all thy work; but the seventh day is the sabbath of the lord thy god: in it thou shalt not do any work, thou, nor thy son, nor thy daughter, thy manservant, nor thy maidservant, nor thy cattle, nor thy stranger that is within thy gates: for in six days the lord made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them is, and rested the seventh day: wherefore the lord blessed the sabbath day, and hallowed it" (ex. xx. - ). this same law is repeated in exodus xxxi. - . and in pursuance thereof we find in numbers xv. a man stoned for gathering sticks on the sabbath day. all this is plain and absolute enough. man has no right to alter god's law in reference to the sabbath; no more than he has to alter it in reference to murder, adultery, or theft. this, we presume, will not be called in question. the entire body of old testament scripture fixes the seventh day as the sabbath; and the fourth commandment lays down the mode in which that sabbath was to be observed. now where, we ask, is this precedent followed? where is this command obeyed? is it not plain that the professing church neither keeps the right day as the sabbath, nor does she keep it after the scripture mode? the commandments of god are made of none effect by human traditions, and the glorious truths which hang around "the lord's day" are lost sight of. the jew is robbed of his distinctive day and all the privileges therewith connected, which are only suspended for the present, while judicial blindness hangs over that loved and interesting, though now judged and scattered, people. and furthermore, the church is robbed of her distinctive day and all the glories therewith connected, which if really understood would have the effect of lifting her above earthly things into the sphere which properly belongs to her, as linked by faith to her glorified head in heaven. in result, we have neither pure judaism nor pure christianity, but an anomalous system arising out of an utterly unscriptural combination of the two. however, we desire to refrain from all attempt at developing the deeply spiritual doctrine involved in this great question, and confine ourselves to the plain teaching of scripture on the subject; and in so doing we maintain that if the professing church quotes the fourth commandment and parallel scriptures in defense of keeping the sabbath, then it is evident that in almost every case the law is entirely set aside. observe, the word is, "thou shalt not do any work." this ought to be perfectly binding on all who take the jewish ground. there is no room here for introducing what we deem to be "works of necessity." we may think it necessary to kindle fires, to make servants harness our horses and drive us hither and thither. but the law is stern and absolute, severe and unbending. it will not, it can not, lower its standard to suit our convenience or accommodate itself to our thoughts. the mandate is, "thou shalt not do _any_ work," and that, moreover, on "the seventh day," which answers to our saturday. we ask for a single passage of scripture in which the day is changed, or in which the strict observance of the day is in the smallest degree relaxed. we request the reader of these lines to pause and search out this matter thoroughly in the light of scripture. let him not be scared as by some terrible bugbear, but let him, in true berean nobility of spirit, "search the scriptures." by so doing he will find that from the second chapter of genesis down to the very last passage in which the sabbath is named, it means the _seventh_ day and none other; and further, that there is not so much as a shadow of divine authority for altering the mode of observing that day. law is law, and if we are under the law we are bound to keep it or else be cursed; for "it is written, cursed is every one that continueth not in all things which are written in the book of the law to do them" (deut. xxvii. ; gal. iii. ). but it will be said, "we are not under the mosaic law; we are the subjects of the christian economy." granted; most fully, freely and thankfully granted. all true christians are, according to the teaching of romans vii. and viii. and galatians iii. and iv., the happy and privileged subjects of the christian dispensation. but if so, what is the day which specially characterizes that dispensation? not "the seventh day," but "the first day of the week"--"the lord's day." this is pre-eminently the christian's day. let him observe this day with all the sanctity, the sacred reverence, the hallowed retirement, the elevated tone, of which his new nature is capable. we believe the christian's retirement from all secular things cannot possibly be too profound on the lord's day. the idea of any one, calling himself a christian, making the lord's day a season of what is popularly called recreation, unnecessary traveling, personal convenience, or profit in temporal things, is perfectly shocking. we are of opinion that such acting could not be too severely censured. we can safely assert that we never yet came in contact with a godly, intelligent, right-minded christian person who did not love and reverence the lord's day; nor could we have any sympathy with any one who could deliberately desecrate that holy and happy day. we are aware, alas, that some persons have through ignorance or misguided feelings said things in reference to the lord's day which we utterly repudiate, and that they have done things on the lord's day of which we wholly disapprove. we believe that there is a body of new testament teaching on the important subject of the lord's day quite sufficient to give that day its proper place in every well-regulated mind. the lord jesus rose from the dead on that day (matt, xxviii. i- ; mark xvi. i, ; luke xxiv. i; john xx. i). he met his disciples once and again on that day (john xx. , ). the early disciples met to break bread on that day (acts xx. ). the apostle, by the holy ghost, directs the corinthians to lay by their contributions for the poor on that day (i cor. xvi. ). and finally, the exiled apostle was in the spirit and received visions of the future on that day (rev. i. ). the above scriptures are conclusive. they prove that the lord's day occupies a place quite unique, quite heavenly, quite divine. but they as fully prove the entire distinctness of the jewish sabbath and the lord's day. the two days are spoken of throughout the new testament with fully as much distinctness as we speak of saturday and sunday. the only difference is that the latter are heathen titles, and the former divine. (comp. matt. xxviii. i; acts xiii. , xvii. , xx. ; col. ii. ). having said thus much as to the question of the jewish sabbath and the lord's day, we shall suggest the following questions to the reader, namely: where in the word of god is the sabbath said to be changed to the first day of the week? where is there any repeal of the law as to the sabbath? where is the authority for altering the day or the mode of observing it? where in scripture have we such an expression as "the christian sabbath"? where is the lord's day ever called the sabbath?[xxvii.] we would not yield to any of our dear brethren in the various denominations around us in the pious observance of the lord's day. we love and honor it with all our hearts; and were it not that the gracious providence of god has so ordered it in these realms that we can enjoy the rest and retirement of the lord's day without pecuniary loss, we should feel called upon to abstain from business, and give ourselves wholly up to the worship and service of god on that day--not as a matter of cold legality, but as a holy and happy privilege. it would be the deepest sorrow to our hearts to think that a true christian should be found taking common ground with the ungodly, the profane, the thoughtless, and the pleasure-hunting multitude, in desecrating the lord's day. it would be sad indeed if the children of the kingdom and the children of this world were to meet in an excursion train on the lord's day. we feel persuaded that any who in any wise profane or treat with lightness the lord's day act in direct opposition to the word and spirit of god. the law. as regards the law, it is looked at in two ways; first, as a ground of justification; and secondly, as a rule of life. a passage or two of scripture will suffice to settle both the one and the other: "therefore by the deeds of the law there shall no flesh be justified in his sight: for by the law is the knowledge of sin" (rom. iii. ). "therefore we conclude that a man is justified by faith without the deeds of the law" (ver. ). again: "knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the law, but by the faith of jesus christ, even we have believed in jesus christ, that we might be justified by the faith of christ, and not by the works of the law; for by the works of the law shall no flesh be justified" (gal. ii. ). then, as to its being a rule of life, we read, "wherefore, my brethren, ye also are become dead to the law by the body of christ; that ye should be married to another, even to him that is raised from the dead, that we should bring forth fruit unto god" (rom. vii. ). "but now are we delivered from the law, being dead to that (see margin) wherein we were held: that we should serve in newness of spirit, and not in the oldness of the letter" (ver. ). observe in this last-quoted passage two things: first, "we are delivered from the law;" second, not that we may do nature's pleasure, but "that we should _serve_ in newness of spirit." being delivered from bondage, it is our privilege to "serve" in liberty. again we read, further on in the chapter, "and the commandment which was ordained to life, i found to be _unto death_" (ver. ). it evidently did not prove as a rule of _life_ to him. "i was _alive without the law_ once; but _when the commandment came_, sin revived, and _i died_" (ver. ). whoever "i" represents in this chapter was alive until the law came, and then he died. hence, therefore, the law could not have been a rule of life to him; yea, it was the very opposite, even a rule of death. in a word, then, it is evident that a sinner cannot be justified by the works of the law; and it is equally evident that the law is not the rule of the believer's life. "for as many as are of the works of the law are under the curse" (gal. iii. ). the law knows no such thing as a distinction between a regenerated and an unregenerated man: it curses all who attempt to stand before it. it rules and curses a man so long as he lives; nor is there any one who will so fully acknowledge that he cannot keep it as the true believer, and hence no one would be more thoroughly under the curse. what, therefore, is the ground of our justification? and what is our rule of life? the word of god answers, "we are justified by the faith of christ," and christ is our rule of life. he bore all our sins in his own body on the tree; he was made a curse for us; he drained on our behalf the cup of god's righteous wrath; he deprived death of its sting, and the grave of its victory; he gave up his life for us; he went down into death, where we lay, in order that he might bring us up in eternal association with himself in life, righteousness, favor and glory, before our god and his god, our father and his father. (see carefully the following scriptures: john xx. ; rom. iv. ; v. i- ; vi. i- ; vii. _passim_, viii. i- ; i cor. i. , ; vi. ; xv. - ; cor. v. - ; gal. iii. , - ; iv. ; eph. i. - ; ii. i- ; col. ii. - ; heb. ii. , ; i peter i. .) if the reader will prayerfully ponder all these passages of scripture he will see clearly that we are not justified by the works of the law; and not only so, but he will see how we are justified. he will see the deep and solid foundations of the christian's life, righteousness and peace planned in god's eternal counsels, laid in the finished atonement of christ, developed by god the holy ghost in the word, and made good in the happy experience of all true believers. then, as to the believer's rule of life, the apostle does not say, to me to live is the law; but, "to me to live is christ" (phil. i. ). christ is our rule, our model, our touchstone, our all. the continual inquiry of the christian should be, not is this or that according to law? but is it like christ? the law never could teach me to love, bless and pray for my enemies; but this is exactly what the gospel teaches me to do, and what the divine nature leads me to do. "love is the fulfilling of the law;" and yet, were i to seek justification by the law, i should be lost; and were i to make the law my standard of action, i should fall far short of my proper mark. we are predestinated to be conformed, not to the law, but to the image of god's son. we are to be like him. (see matt. v. - ; rom. viii. ; i cor. xiii. - ; rom. xiii. - ; gal. v. - ; eph. i. - ; phil. iii. , ; ii. ; iv. ; col. iii. i- .) it may seem a paradox to some to be told that "the righteousness of the law is fulfilled in us" (rom. viii. ), and yet that we cannot be justified by the law, nor make the law our rule of life. nevertheless, thus it is if we are to form our convictions by the word of god. nor is there any difficulty to the renewed mind in understanding this blessed doctrine. we are by nature "dead in trespasses and sins," and what can a dead man do? how can a man get life by keeping that which requires life to keep it--a life which he has not? and how do we get life? christ is our life. we live in him who died for us; we are blessed in him who became a curse for us by hanging on a tree; we are righteous in him who was made sin for us; we are brought nigh in him who was cast out for us (rom. v. - ; eph. ii. - ; gal. iii. ). having thus life and righteousness in christ, we are called to walk as he walked, and not merely to walk as a jew. we are called to purify ourselves even as he is pure; to walk in his footsteps; to show forth his virtues; to manifest his spirit (john xiii. , ; xvii. - ; i peter ii. ; i john ii. , ; iii. ). we shall close our remarks on this head by suggesting two questions to the reader, namely, would the ten commandments without the new testament be a sufficient rule of life for the believer? is not the new testament a sufficient rule without the ten commandments? surely that which is insufficient cannot be our rule of life. we receive the ten commandments as part of the canon of inspiration; and moreover, we believe that the law remains in full force to rule and curse a man as long as he liveth. let a sinner only try to get life by it, and see where it will put him; and let a believer only shape his way according to it, and see what it will make of him. we are fully convinced that if a man is walking according to the spirit of the gospel, he will not commit murder nor steal; but we are also convinced that a man, confining himself to the standard of the law of moses would fall very far short of the spirit of the gospel. the subject of "the law" would demand much more elaborate exposition, but the limits of this paper do not admit of it, and we therefore entreat of the reader to look out the various passages of scripture referred to and ponder them carefully. in this way we feel assured he will arrive at a sound conclusion, and be independent of all human teaching and influence. he will see how that a man is justified freely by the grace of god through faith in a crucified and risen christ; that he is made a partaker of divine life, and introduced into a condition of divine and everlasting righteousness, and consequent exemption from all condemnation; that in this holy and elevated position christ is his object, his theme, his model, his rule, his hope, his joy, his strength, his all; that the hope which is set before him is to be with jesus where he is, and to be like him forever. and he will also see that if as a lost sinner he has found pardon and peace at the foot of the cross, he is not, as an accepted and adopted son, sent back to the foot of mount sinai, there to be terrified and repulsed by the terrible anathemas of a broken law. the father could not think of ruling with an iron law the prodigal whom he had received to his bosom in purest, deepest, richest grace. oh no! "being justified by faith, we have peace with god through our lord jesus christ; by whom also we have access by faith into this grace wherein we stand, and rejoice in hope of the glory of god" (rom. v. i, ). the believer is justified not by works, but by _faith_; he stands not in law, but in _grace_; and he waits not for judgment, but for _glory_. we come now, in the third place, to treat of the subject of the christian ministry; in reference to which we have only to say, that we hold it to be a divine institution: its source, its power, its characteristics, are all divine and heavenly. we believe that the great head of the church received in resurrection gifts for his body. he, and not the church, or any section of the church, is the reservoir of the gifts. they are vested in him, and not in the church. he imparts them as, and to whom, he will. no man, nor body of men, can impart gifts. this is christ's prerogative, and his alone; and we believe that when he imparts a gift, the man who receives that gift is responsible to exercise the same, whether as an evangelist, a pastor or a teacher, quite independently of all human authority. we do not by any means believe that all are endowed with the above gifts, though all have some ministry to fulfil. all are not evangelists, pastors, and teachers. such precious gifts are only administered according to the sovereign will of the divine head of the church. man has no right to interfere with them. wherever they really exist, it is the place of the assembly to recognize them with devout thankfulness. christians are exhorted to remember them that are over them in the lord, to know them that guide them, and those who addict themselves to the ministry of the saints, and those who have spoken to them the word of life. were they to refuse to do so, they would only be forsaking and rejecting their own mercies, for all things are theirs. (see rom. xii. - ; i cor. iii. - ; xii., xiv., xvi. ; gal. i. - ; eph. iv. - ; i thess. v. , ; heb. xiii. , ; i peter iv. , .) all this is simple enough. we can easily see where a man is divinely qualified for any department of ministry. it is not if a man _say_ he has a gift, but if he in reality has it. a man may say he has a gift on the same principle as he may say he has faith (james ii. ), and it may only be, after all, an empty conceit of his own ill-adjusted mind, which a spiritual assembly could not recognize for a moment. god deals in realities. a divinely-gifted evangelist is a reality; a teacher is a reality; a pastor is a reality; and such will be duly recognized, thankfully received, and counted worthy of all esteem and honor for their work's sake. now we hold that unless a man has a _bona fide_ gift imparted to him by the head of the church, all the instruction, all the education, and all the training that men could impart to him would not constitute him a christian minister. if a man has a gift, he is responsible to exercise, to cultivate, and to wait upon his gift. but unless a man has a direct gift from christ, though he had all the learning of a newton, all the philosophy of a bacon, all the eloquence of a demosthenes, he is not a christian minister. he may be a very gifted and efficient minister of religion, so called; but a minister of religion and a minister of christ are two different things. and further, we believe that where the lord christ has bestowed a gift, that gift makes the possessor thereof a christian minister, whom all true christians are bound to own and receive, quite apart from all human appointment: whereas, though a man had all the human qualifications, human titles and human authority which it is possible to possess, and yet lacked that one grand reality, namely, christ's gift, he is not a minister of christ. we thank god for christian ministry; and we feel assured that there are many truly gifted servants of christ in the various denominations around us; but they are ministers of christ on the ground of possessing his gift, and not, by any means, on the ground of man's ordination. man cannot add aught to a heaven-bestowed gift. as well might he attempt to add a shade to the rainbow, a tint to the violet, motion to the waves, height to the snow-capped mountains, or daub with a painter's brush the peacock's plumage, as attempt to render more efficient by his puny authority the gift which has come down from the risen and glorified head of the church. ah no! the vine, the olive and the fig-tree, in jotham's parable (judges ix.) needed not the appointment of the other trees. god had implanted in each its specific virtue. it was only the worthless bramble which hailed with delight an appointment that raised it from the position of _a real nothing_ to be _an official something_. thus it is with a divinely-gifted man. he has what god has given him: he wants, he asks no more. he rises above the narrow enclosure which man's authority would erect around him, and plants his foot upon that elevated ground where prophets and apostles have stood. he feels that it lies not within the range of the schools and colleges of this world to open to him his proper sphere of action. it appertains not to them to provide a setting for the precious gem which sovereign grace has imparted. the hand which has bestowed the gem can alone provide the proper setting. the grace which has implanted the gift can alone throw open a proper sphere for its exercise. what! can it be possible that those gifts which emanate from the church's triumphant and glorious lord are not available for her edification until they are dragged through the mire of a heathen mythology? alas for the heart that can think so! as well might we say that the fatness of the olive and the pure blood of the grape must be mingled with the contents of a quagmire to render them available for human use. but it will be asked, "were there not elders and deacons in the early church, and ought we not to have such likewise?" unquestionably there were elders and deacons in the early church. they were appointed by the apostles, or those whom the apostles deputed: that is to say, they were appointed by the holy ghost--the only one who could then, or can now, appoint them. we believe that none but god can make or appoint an elder, and therefore for man to set about such work is but a powerless form, an empty name. men may, and do, point us to the shadows of their own creation, and call upon us to recognize in those shadows divine realities; but alas! when we examine them in the light of holy scripture, we cannot even trace the outline, to say nothing of the living, speaking features of the divine original. we see divinely-appointed elders in the new testament, and we see humanly-appointed elders in the professing church; but we can by no means accept the latter as a substitute for the former. we cannot accept a mere shadow in lieu of the substance. neither do we believe that men have any divine authority for their act when they set about making and appointing elders. we believe that when paul, or timothy, or titus, ordained elders, they did so as acting by the power and under the direct authority of the holy ghost; but we deny that any man, or body of men, can so act now. we believe it was the holy ghost then, and it must be the holy ghost now. human assumption is perfectly contemptible. if god raises up an elder or a pastor we thankfully own him. he both can and does raise up such. he does raise up men fitted by his spirit to take the oversight of his flock, and to feed his lambs and sheep. his hand is not shortened that he cannot provide those blessings for his church even amid its humiliating ruins. the reservoir of spiritual gift in christ the head is not so exhausted that he cannot shed forth upon his body all that is needed for the edification thereof. we are of opinion that were it not for our impatient attempts to provide for ourselves by making pastors and elders of our own, we should be far more richly endowed with pastors and teachers after god's own heart. we need not marvel that he leaves us to our own resources when by our unbelief we limit him in his. instead of "proving" him, we "limit" him, and therefore we are shorn of our strength and left in barrenness and desolation; or, what is worse, we betake ourselves to the miserable provisions of human expediency. however, we believe it is far better, if we have not god's reality, to remain in the position of real, felt, confessed weakness than to put forth the hollow assumption of strength; we believe it is better to be real in our poverty than to put on the appearance of wealth. it is infinitely better to wait on god for whatever he may be pleased to bestow, than to limit his grace by our unbelief, or hinder his provision for us by making provision for ourselves. we ask, where is the church's warrant for calling, making or appointing pastors? where have we an instance in the new testament of a church electing its own pastor? acts i. - has been adduced in proof. but the very wording of the passage is sufficient to prove that it furnishes no warrant whatever. even the eleven apostles could not elect a brother apostle, but had to commit it to higher authority. their words are, "thou, lord, _which knowest the hearts of all_, show whether of these two _thou hast chosen_." this is very plain. they did not attempt to choose. god knew the heart. he had formed the vessel. he had put the treasure therein, and he alone could appoint it to its proper place. it is very evident, therefore, that the case of the eleven apostles calling upon the lord to choose a man to fill up their number affords no precedent whatever for a congregation electing a pastor: it is entirely against any such practice. god alone can make or appoint an apostle or an elder, an evangelist or a pastor. this is our firm belief, and we ask for scripture proof of its unsoundness. human opinion will not avail; tradition will not avail; expediency will not avail. are we taught from the word of god that the early church ever elected its own pastors or teachers? we positively affirm that there is not so much as a single line of scripture in proof of any such custom. if we could only find direction in the word of god to make and appoint pastors, we should at once seek to carry such direction into effect; but in the absence of any divine warrant we could only regard it as a mimicry on our part to attempt any such a thing. why was not the church at ephesus, or why were not the churches at crete, directed to elect or appoint elders? why was the direction given to timothy and titus without the slightest reference to the church, or to any part of the church? because, as we believe, timothy and titus acted by the direct power and under the direct authority of god the holy ghost, and hence their appointment was to be regarded by the church as divine.[xxviii.] but where have we anything like this now? where is the timothy or the titus now? where is there the least intimation in the new testament that there should be a succession of men invested with the power to ordain elders or pastors? true, the apostle paul, in his second epistle to timothy, says, "the things which thou hast heard of me among many witnesses, the same commit thou to faithful men, who shall be able to teach others also" ( tim. ii. ). but there is not a word here about a succession of men having power to ordain elders and pastors. assuredly teaching is not ordination; still less is it imparting the power to ordain. if the inspired apostle had meant to convey to the mind of timothy that he was to commit to others authority to ordain, and that such authority was to descend by a regular chain of succession, he could and would have done so; and in that case the passage would have run thus: "the power which has been vested in you, the same do thou vest in faithful men, that they may be able also to ordain others." such, however, is not the case; and we deny that there is any man or body of men now upon earth possessing power to ordain elders, nor was that power or authority ever committed to the church. we hold it to be absolutely divine; and therefore, when god sends an elder or a pastor, an evangelist or a teacher, we thankfully hail the heaven-bestowed gift;[xxix.] but we desire to be delivered from all empty pretension. we will have god's reality or nothing. we will have heaven's genuine coin, not earth's counterfeit. like the tirshatha of old, who said "that they should not eat of the most holy things till there stood up a priest with urim and thummim" (ezra ii. ), so would we say, let us rather, if it must be so, remain without office-bearers than substitute for god's realities the shadows of our own creation. ezra could not accept the pretensions of men. men might _say_ they were priests; but if they could not produce the divine warrant and the divine qualifications, they were utterly rejected. in order for a man to be entitled to approach the altar of the god of israel, he should not only be descended from aaron, but also be free from every bodily blemish. (see lev. xxi. - .) so now, in order for any man to minister in the church of god, he must be a regenerated man, and he must have the necessary spiritual qualifications. even st. paul, in his powerful appeal to the conscience and judgment of the church at corinth, refers to his spiritual gifts and the fruits of his labor as the indisputable evidences of his apostleship. (see cor. x., xii.) before dismissing the subject of the christian ministry, we would offer a remark upon the practise of laying on of hands, which is presented in the new testament in two ways. first, we find it connected with the communication of a positive gift. "neglect not the gift that is in thee, which was given thee by prophecy, with the laying on of the hands of the presbytery" (i tim. iv. ). this is again referred to in the second epistle: "wherefore i put thee in remembrance that thou stir up the gift of god which is in thee by the putting on of my hands" ( tim. i. ). this latter passage fixes the import of the expression "presbytery," as used in the first epistle. both passages prove that the act of laying on of hands in timothy's case was connected with the imparting of a gift. but secondly, we find the laying on of hands adopted simply for the purpose of expressing full fellowship and identification, as in acts xiii. . it could not possibly mean ordination in this passage, inasmuch as paul and barnabas had been in the ministry long before. it simply gave beautiful expression to the full identification of their brethren in that work unto which the holy ghost had called them, and to which he alone could send them forth. now we believe that the laying on of hands as expressing ordination, if there be not the power to impart a gift, is worth nothing, if indeed it be not mere assumption; but if it be merely adopted as the expression of full fellowship in any special work or mission, we should quite rejoice in it. for example, if two or three brethren felt themselves called of god to go on an evangelistic mission to some foreign land, and that those with whom they were in communion perceived in them the needed gift and grace for such a work, we should deem it exceedingly happy were they to set forth their unqualified approval and their brotherly fellowship by the act of laying on of hands. beyond this we can see no value whatever in that act. having thus, so far as our limits would permit, treated of the questions of the sabbath, the law, and the christian ministry; having shown that we honor and observe the lord's day, that we give the law its divinely appointed place, and finally, that we hold the sacred and precious institution of the christian ministry, we might close this paper, did we not feel called upon to present a few other points. in our general teaching and preaching we seek to set forth the fundamental truths of the gospel, such as the doctrine of the trinity; the eternal sonship; the personality of the holy ghost; the plenary inspiration of holy scripture; the eternal counsels of god in reference to his elect; the fullest and freest presentation of his love to a lost world; the solemn responsibility of every one who hears the glad tidings of salvation to accept the same; man's total ruin by nature and by practice; his inability to help himself in thought, word, or deed; the utter corruption of his will; christ's incarnation, death, and resurrection; his absolute deity and perfect humanity in one person; the perfect efficacy of his blood to cleanse from all sin; perfect justification and sanctification by faith in christ, through the operation of god the holy ghost; the eternal security of all true believers; the entire separation of the church in calling, standing and hope from this present world. then, again, we hold, in common with many of our brethren in the denominations, that the hope of the believer is set forth in these words of christ: "i will come again and receive you unto myself; that where i am, there ye may be also" (john xiv. ). we believe that the early christians were converted to "that blessed hope"--that it was the common hope of christians in apostolic times. to adduce proofs would swell this paper into a volume. furthermore, we believe that all disciples should meet on the first day of the week to break bread (acts xx. ); and when so met, they should look to the head of the church to furnish the needed gifts, and to the holy ghost to guide in the due administration of these gifts. as to the scriptural ordinance of baptism, we look upon it as a beautiful exhibition of the truth of the believer's identification with christ in death. (see matt. xxviii. ; mark xvi. ; acts ii. , ; viii. ; x. , ; xvi. ; rom. vi. , .) as regards the precious institution of the lord's supper, we believe that christians should celebrate it on every lord's day, and that in so doing they commemorate the lord's death until he come. we believe that as baptism sets forth our death with christ, so the lord's supper sets forth christ's death for us. we do not see any authority in the word of god for regarding the lord's supper as "a sacrifice," "a sacrament," or "a covenant." the word is, "this do in remembrance of me." (see matt. xxvi. - ; mark xiv. - ; luke xxii. , ; i cor. xi. - .) the above is a very brief but explicit statement of what we hold, and preach and practise. we meet in public: our worship meetings, our prayer meetings, our reading meetings, our lectures, our gospel preachings, are all open to the public. but we have done. we would in this closing line entreat the reader to "search the scriptures." let him try everything by that standard. let him see to it that he has plain scripture for everything with which he stands connected. "to the law and to the testimony: if they speak not according to this word, it is because there is no light in them" (isa. viii. .). we can honestly say we love with all our hearts all those who love our lord jesus christ in sincerity; and wherever there is one who preaches a full, free and an everlasting salvation to perishing sinners, through the blood of the lamb, we wish him godspeed in the name of the lord. we now commend the reader to the blessing of the father, and of the son, and of the holy ghost. if he be a true believer, we pray that in his course down here he may be a bright and faithful witness for his absent lord. but if he be one who has not yet found peace in jesus, we would say to him, with solemn emphasis and earnest affection, "behold the lamb of god, which taketh away the sin of the world!" (john i. ). c. h. m. footnotes: [xxvii.] for a fuller exposition of the doctrine of the sabbath, see "notes on genesis" (chap. ii.); also, "notes on exodus" (chaps. xvi. and xxxi.). [xxviii.] we would here offer a remark in reference to the appointment of deacons in acts vi. this case has been adduced in proof of the rightness of a congregation electing its own pastor; but the proof fails in every particular. in the first place, the business of those deacons was "to serve tables." their functions as deacons were temporal, not spiritual. they might possess spiritual gift independently altogether of their deaconship. stephen did possess such. but more than this. although the disciples were called upon to look out for men competent to take charge of their temporal affairs, yet the apostles alone could appoint them. their words are, "whom _we_ may appoint over this business." in other words, although there is a vast difference between a deacon and a pastor, between taking charge of money and taking the oversight of souls, yet even in the matter of a deacon the appointment in acts vi. was entirely divine; and hence it affords no warrant for a church electing its own pastor. we might further add that _office_ and _gift_ are clearly distinguished in the word of god. there might be, and were, many elders and deacons in any given church, and yet the fullest and freest exercise of gift when the whole church came together into one place. elders and deacons might or might not have the gift of teaching or exhortation. such gift was quite independent of their special office. in i cor. xiv., where it is said, "ye may all prophesy one by one," and where we have a full view of the public assembly, there is not a word about an elder or a president of any kind whatever. [xxix.] let the reader carefully note that _gifts_, as evangelists, pastors, teachers, prophets, being given directly by the head of the church for the edification of his people on earth (see eph. iv. - ) were never appointed or "licensed" by apostolic hands or any others. elders and deacons were to act as guides and to serve in the assemblies in which they had their place. to this position or _office_ they were appointed by an apostle, or one sent by him. [ed.] the ministry of christ past, present, and future (scriptures read before lecture, exodus xxi. i- ; john xiii. i- ; luke xii. .) "for even the son of man came not to be ministered unto, but to minister, and to give his life a ransom for many." (mark x. .) it is very necessary, beloved friends, to retire from all thoughts about our service to the lord, and our work for him, and to have our hearts occupied with his service toward us. and when i say this, you will not suppose for a moment that it is my desire or thought to weaken in any heart in this assembly, in the smallest degree, the desire to work for christ, whatever sphere he may open for you, or according to whatever gift he may have bestowed upon you. quite the reverse; indeed, i would seek in every way to strengthen and intensify that desire. but then one knows, both from experience and observation, that we may be so occupied with _our_ work and _our_ services that our hearts may lose the sense of what christ is toward us in his marvelous character as a servant. and here let me say that my immediate thesis to-night is the lord jesus as the servant of his people's necessities. that is the field into which we are introduced by those scriptures which have been read in your hearing. the lord jesus is the servant of the soul's necessities in every stage of its history, from first to last,--from the depths of your ruin and degradation as sinners, in all your weakness and failure as saints from day to day, until he plants you in the joys of his own kingdom. and his services will not end there; for, as we read in luke xii. , he will gird himself, and serve us in the glory. thus his work as a servant overlaps the whole of the soul's history, past, present, and future. he has served us in the past, he is serving us now, and he will serve us forever. and here allow me to say that the line of truth which i have to bring before you to-night is of a directly individual character. we were speaking, on this night week, of the truth with respect to our corporate condition and character, and therefore i feel all the more free on this occasion to enter upon what is more directly personal--to speak of truth which bears directly on the soul's individual condition and wants. and i would ask you, my beloved hearers, to place yourselves, so far as through grace you can, in all simplicity and reality, straight in view of this theme--christ the servant of our necessities. it is possible there may be souls in this room who want to begin at the very beginning with this most precious theme. they want to know christ as the one who came into this world to serve them in all their deep and varied need as lost, self-destroyed, guilty, hell-deserving sinners. if there be any such present to-night, i would ask them to ponder deeply that verse which i have read, "the son of man is come to serve and to give." this is a divine reality. jesus came into this world to meet our need, to serve us in all that in which we need his precious service, and to give his life a ransom for many; to serve us by bearing our sins in his own body on the tree, and working out a full and an eternal salvation. he did not come to get--he did not come to take--he did not come to be ministered to--he did not come to be gazed at--he came to be used; and therefore, while the soul that is exercised may be raising this harassing question, "what can i do for the lord?" the answer is, "you must pause and see and believe what the lord has done for you. you must stand still and see the salvation of god." remember those words of divine and evangelistic sweetness, "to him that _worketh not_, but believeth on him that justifieth the ungodly, his faith is counted for righteousness." (rom. iv. .) you can never intelligently or properly serve christ until you know and believe how he has served you. you must cease your restless doings, and rest in a divinely accomplished work. then, but not until then, will you be able to start on a career of christian service. it is most necessary for all anxious souls to understand that all true christian service begins with the possession of eternal life, and is rendered in the power of the holy ghost, the indwelling spirit, in the light and on the authority of holy scripture. this is the divine idea of christian work and service. now, though the primary object of this meeting, brethren, is for those who are saints of god, who have set out on their course, still i do not think it would be according to the heart and sympathies of christ to overlook the fact that there may be some soul in this congregation that wants, as i said, just to begin at the very beginning with this precious mystery--christ the servant. i say, there may be some here to-night that have never taken the attitude of simple repose in christ's finished work. they have, it may be, begun to think of their soul's salvation, to think about eternity; but they are occupied with the thought that the lord is claiming something from them: "i must do this, i must do that, and i must do the other." now, my beloved friends, if such be here, i repeat, with deepest earnestness, you must cease altogether from your own doings, cease from your own reasonings, cease from your own feelings; because, be assured of it, it is neither feeling nor thinking nor reasoning nor doing at all, but it is pausing and gazing. it is hearing and believing. it is looking off from yourselves and your service to christ and his service. it is ceasing from your restless and worthless doings, and reposing in full, unquestioning confidence in the one offering of jesus christ, which has perfectly satisfied and perfectly glorified god as to the great question of your sin and guilt. here lies the divine secret of peace--peace in jesus--peace with god--eternal peace. nothing will ever be right till you get on this ground. if you are occupied with your doings for christ, you will never get peace; but if you will only take god at his word, and rest in his christ, you shall possess a peace which no power of earth or hell can ever disturb. now, my beloved hearers, i ask you, before i proceed, this question, is there a heart in this congregation that has not yet rested here? is there a heart here to-night that will say, i am not satisfied with christ's service: i cannot rest in his work? what! the son of god has stooped to serve you. the one who made you, the one who gave you life and breath and all things, the one to whom all are responsible, he has stooped to become your servant. it is not a question of asking you to do any thing, or asking you to give any thing, because--mark those words--they are words which sweep all through the history of the son of man--they are words which, in all their length and breadth and fullness, you can take up and use as if you were the only object of this service in the world--"the son of man is come to serve and to give." he is not come to get; he is not come to ask. the legal mind leads you to think that god is an exactor--that he is making demands upon you--that he wants your services in one way or another. but oh remember, i pray you, that your first great business, your primary and all-important work, is to believe in jesus--to rest sweetly in him, and in what he has done for you on the cross, and in what he is doing for you on the throne. "this is the work of god, that ye believe on him whom he hath sent." you remember the interesting question of the psalmist--a question asked when his eye rested on the magnitude and multitude of jehovah's benefits--"what shall i render unto the lord for all his benefits?" what is the reply? "i will take the cup of salvation, and call upon the name of the lord." is this the way to "render unto the lord"? yes, this is just the way that gratifies and glorifies him. if you really want to _render_, you must _take_. take what? "the cup of salvation"--a full and brimming cup, most surely; and as you drink of that cup, as the glories of god's salvation shine in the vision of your soul, then will streams of living praise flow from your grateful heart. and you know he says, "whoso offereth praise, glorifieth me." in a word, then, you must, first of all, allow your soul to dwell upon the marvelous mystery of christ's service toward you in all the depth of your need; and the more you dwell upon that, the more will you be in the true attitude to serve him. take another striking illustration. when david, as you remember, in that remarkable passage in the second book of samuel (chap. vii.), sat in his house of cedar, and looked around at all that god had done for him, he said, "i must rise and build a house." immediately the prophet was despatched to david to correct him on this point: "you shall not build me a house, but i will build you a house." you must reverse the matter. god wants you to sit down and gaze yet more fully and intently upon his actings on your behalf. he wants you to look, not only at the past and the present, but to look on into the bright future; to see your entire history overlapped by his own magnificent grace. and what, let me ask, was the effect of all this upon the heart of david? we have the answer in that one pithy statement: "then went king david in, and sat before the lord, and said, 'who am i?'" mark the attitude, and ponder the question. they are full of deep meaning. "_he sat._" this is rest and sweet repose. he wanted to go to work too soon. no, says god, you must sit down and look at my work, and trace my actings on your behalf in the past, the present, and the future. and then the question, "_who am i?_" in this we see the blessed fact that self was for the moment lost sight of. it was flung into the shade by the lustre of divine revelation. self and its poor little actings were set aside by the glory of god and the rich magnificence of his actings on behalf of his servant. now, some might have thought that david was an active, useful man when he was rising to take the trowel to build the house; and they might have thought him a good-for-nothing man to be sitting still when there was work to be done. but, brethren, let us remember that god's thoughts are not as our thoughts. he prizes our worship much more highly than our work. indeed, it is only the true and intelligent worshiper that can be a true and intelligent workman. no doubt god most graciously accepts our poor services, even stamped as they so often are with mistakes of all sorts. but when it becomes a question of the comparative value of service and worship, the former must give place to the latter; and we know that when our brief span of working time shall have expired, our eternity of worship shall begin. sweet thought! and let me further remark, ere leaving this part of our subject, that no one need fear in the least that the practical effect of what i have been saying will be to cripple your service, or lead you to fold your arms in culpable idleness or cold indifference. the very reverse is the case, as you may see in the history of david himself. study at your leisure, i chronicles xxviii, xxix. there you have a splendid presentation of service--a most triumphant answer to all who would place work before worship. there you see, as it were, king david rising from the attitude of a worshiper into that of a workman, and making ample provision for the building of that very house of which he was not allowed to set one stone upon another. and not only does he make provision according to the claims of holiness, but, as he says, "because i have set my affection to the house of my god, i have of mine own proper good, of gold and silver, which i have given to the house of my god, _over and above all_ that i have prepared for the holy house, even three thousand talents of gold, of the gold of ophir, and seven thousand talents of refined silver, to overlay the walls of the house." in other words, as we should express it, out of his own private purse, he gave the princely sum of over sixteen millions as a free gift toward the house which was to be reared by the hand of another. this, as he informs us, was "over and above what he had prepared for the holy house," which latter greatly exceeded the amount of england's national debt. thus we see that it is the true worshiper that makes the effective servant. it is when we have sat and gazed on the actings of christ for us that we are enabled in any small degree to act for him. and then, too, we shall be able to say with david, as he surveyed the untold wealth prepared for the house of god, "it is all thine, and of thine own have we given thee." i. but we must now turn for a few moments to the opening paragraph of exodus xxi--"if thou buy a hebrew servant, six years he shall serve; and in the seventh, he shall go out free for nothing. if he came in by himself, he shall go out by himself: if he were married, then his wife shall go out with him. if his master have given him a wife, and she have borne him sons or daughters; the wife and her children shall be her master's, and he shall go out by himself. and if the servant shall plainly say, i love my master, my wife, and my children; i will not go out free: then his master shall bring him unto the judges; he shall also bring him to the door, or unto the door-post; and his master shall bore his ear through with an awl; and he shall serve him forever." here, then, we have one of the shadows of good things to come--a shadow or figure of the true servant, the lord jesus christ, that blessed one who loved the church and gave himself for it. the hebrew servant, having served the legal time, was perfectly free to go out; but he loved his wife and his children, and that, too, with such a love as led him to surrender his own personal liberty for their sakes. he proved his love for them by sacrificing himself. he might have gone forth and enjoyed his freedom, but what of them? how could he leave them behind? impossible. he loved them too well for that; and hence he deliberately walked to the door-post, and there, in the presence of the judges, had his ear bored in token of perpetual service. this was love indeed. there was no mistake about it. the wife and each child, as they gazed ever after on that bored ear, could read the touching and powerful proof of the love of that servant's heart. here, beloved, is something for the heart to dwell upon--yea, something over which the heart may well break itself. we see in this old-testament type the everlasting lover of our souls--jesus, the true servant. you remember that remarkable occasion in our lord's life when he was setting before his disciples the solemn fact of his approaching cross and passion. you will find it in the eighth chapter of the gospel of mark: "and he began to teach them that the son of man must suffer many things, and be rejected of the elders, and of the chief priests, and scribes, and be killed, and after three days rise again. and he spake that saying openly. and peter took him, and began to rebuke him." peter would fain, though he knew it not, have interrupted the true servant in his movement to the door-post. he would have him pity himself, and maintain his own personal freedom. but oh, brethren, hearken to the withering rebuke administered to the very man who just before had made such a fine confession of christ! "but when he had turned about and looked on his disciples, he rebuked peter, saying, 'get thee behind me, satan; for thou savorest not the things that be of god, but the things that be of men.'" mark the action. "he turned and looked on his disciples," as though he would say, if i hearken to your counsel, peter--if i pity myself--if i retreat from that cross which lies before me, then what is to become of these? it is the hebrew servant saying, "i love my wife, i love my children, i will not go out free." it is of the very last possible importance for us to see that there was no necessity whatever laid upon the lord jesus christ to walk to the cross; there was no necessity whatever laid upon him to leave the glory which he had with the father from all eternity and come down here; and when he had come down into this world, and taken perfect humanity upon him, there was no necessity laid upon him that he should have gone to the cross; for at any moment during the whole of his blessed history, from the manger of bethlehem to the cross of calvary, he might have gone back to where he came from. death had no claim upon him. the prince of this world came and had nothing in him. he could say, speaking of his life, "no man taketh it from me, but i lay it down of myself." (john x. .) and on his way from the garden to the cross we hear him saying, "thinkest thou that i cannot now pray to my father, and he shall presently give me more than twelve legions of angels? but how then shall the scriptures be fulfilled, that thus it must be?" and may we not say there was much more truth than the utterers were aware of in these accents of mockery which fell on the blessed saviour's ear as he hung on the cross--"he saved others; himself he cannot save"? but they might have said, himself he will not save. ah, no! blessed forever be his name! he did not pity or spare himself, but he pitied us. he beheld us in our hopeless ruin, guilt, misery, and danger. he saw that there was no eye to pity, no arm to save; and--all praise to his matchless name!--he laid aside his glory, came down into this wretched world, became a man, that as a man he might, by the sacrifice of himself, deliver us from the lake of fire, and associate us with himself on the new and eternal ground of accomplished redemption, in the power of resurrection-life, according to the eternal counsels of god, and to the praise of his glory. now, we cannot possibly overestimate the importance of dwelling upon the fact that there was no necessity whatever laid upon our blessed lord jesus christ to die on the cross, and to endure the wrath of god. neither in his person, in his nature, nor in his relations was he obnoxious to death. he was god over all, blessed forever. he was the eternal son of god. and in his human nature he was pure, spotless, sinless, perfect. he knew no sin. he did always and only the things that pleased god. he glorified him, and finished his work; and he has saved us in such a way as to glorify god in the most wonderful manner. he was, to use the language of our type, free to go out by himself; but ah, beloved, had he done so, your place and mine must inevitably have been the lake of fire forever. to all this the holy ghost delights to bear testimony, as one of our own poets has sweetly sung-- "and, lord, thy perfect fitness to do a saviour's part, the holy ghost doth witness to each believer's heart." most true; and we might with equal truth say, "his fitness to do a servant's part," because it was the very height of his glory, the very dignity of his person; it was the glory whence he had descended, that enabled him to stoop down to the very depths of his people's necessities. there is not a necessity--no, not one--in the deepest range of his people's history, or in the lowest depths of their condition, that he has not reached in his marvelous character and his divine ministry as the servant of his people's necessities. brethren, let us never forget this. nay, rather let us constantly cherish in our hearts the most grateful remembrance of it. the more we dwell upon the height of christ's personal glory, the more fully we shall see the depths of his humiliation. the more profoundly we meditate upon the glory of what he _was_, the more we must be arrested by the grace of what he _became_. "ye know the grace of our lord jesus christ, that, though he was rich, yet for your sakes he became poor, that ye through his poverty might be rich." who can measure the heights and the depths of those two words, "rich" and "poor," in their application to our adorable lord and saviour? no created intelligence can fathom them; but most assuredly we should cultivate the habit of dwelling upon the love that shines all along the pathway of the divine servant as he walked to the cross for us. it is as we dwell upon his love to us that our hearts shall be drawn out by the holy ghost in the power of responsive love to him. "the love of christ constraineth us; because we thus judge, that if one died for all, then were all dead; and that he died for all, that they which live should not henceforth live unto themselves, but unto him which died for them, and rose again." ( cor. v. , .) ii. having thus glanced at our lord's service toward us in the past, let us look for a few moments at his present service--at what he is now doing for us continually in the presence of god. this we have most blessedly presented to us in that part of john xiii. which i have read for you this evening. the same precious grace shines in this as in all that on which we have been dwelling. if we look back at the past, we behold the perfect servant nailed to the cross for us; if we look up to the throne now, we behold him girded for us, not only according to our present need, but according to the perfect love of his heart--his love to the father, his love to the church, his love to each individual believer from the beginning to the end of time. "now before the feast of the passover, when jesus knew that his hour was come that he should depart out of this world unto the father, having loved his own which were in the world, he loved them unto the end. and during supper [see greek], the devil having now put into the heart of judas iscariot, simon's son, to betray him; jesus knowing that the father had given all things into his hands, and that he was come from god, and went to god; he riseth from supper, and laid aside his garments; and took a towel, and girded himself. after that he poureth water into a basin, and began to wash the disciples' feet, and to wipe them with the towel wherewith he was girded." here, then, we have a most marvelous presentation of christ's present service toward "his own which are in the world." there is something peculiarly precious in the expression, "_his own_." it brings us so very near to the heart of christ. it is so sweet to think that he can look at such poor, feeble, failing creatures as we are, and say, they are mine. it matters not what others may think about them; they belong to me, and i must have them in a condition worthy of the place whence i came, and whither i am going. this, brethren, is ineffably precious and edifying for our souls. it was in the sense of his personal glory, in the consciousness that he had come from god and was going to god, that he could stoop down and wash his people's feet. there was nothing, could be nothing, higher than the place whence jesus had come; there was nothing, could be nothing, lower than the defiled feet of his disciples: but, blessed and praised forever be his name! he fills up in his own divine person and marvelous service every point between those two extremes. he can lay one hand on the throne of god, and the other on our feet, and be himself the divine and eternal link between. now, there are three things in this scripture which i am anxious to put clearly before you this evening. in the first place, we have the special action of our lord toward his own in the world; secondly, the spring of that action; and thirdly, the measure of the action:--the action, its spring, and its measure. (i.) and first, the action itself. you will bear in mind, beloved in the lord, that what we have presented here is not "the washing of regeneration." that pertains to the first stage of our lord's service on our behalf. "his own which are in the world"--all who belong to that highly privileged class (and that is simply all who believe in his name) have passed through that great washing, in virtue of which christ can pronounce them "clean every whit." there is not a spot or a stain upon the very feeblest of that blessed number whom he calls "his own." "he that is washed needeth not save to wash his feet, but _is clean every whit_: and _ye are clean_, but not all." if a single spot could be detected on one of christ's own, it would be a dishonor cast upon him, inasmuch as he has washed us from all our guilt according to the perfection of his work as the servant of our need, and, far above all, the servant of the eternal counsels, purposes, and glory of god. he found us clean never a whit, and he has made us "clean every whit." this is the washing of regeneration, which is never repeated. we have a figure of this in the case of the priests of the mosaic economy. on the great day of their inauguration they were washed in water. this action was never repeated. but after this, from day to day, in order to fit them for the daily discharge of their priestly functions, they had to wash their hands and their feet in the brazen laver in the tabernacle, or the brazen sea in the temple. this daily washing is the figure of the action in john xiii. the two washings, being distinct, must never be confounded; and being intimately connected, must never be separated. the washing of regeneration is divinely and eternally complete: the washing of sanctification is being divinely and continually carried on. the former is never repeated; the latter is never interrupted. that gives us a part _in_ christ, of which nothing can rob us; and this gives us a part _with_ christ, of which any thing may deprive us. the one is the basis of our eternal life; the other is the ground of our daily communion. beloved brethren, see that you understand the meaning of having your feet washed, moment by moment, by the hands of that blessed one who is girded as the divine servant of your present need. it is utterly impossible for any one to overestimate the importance of this work; but we may at least gather something of its value from our lord's words to peter; for peter, like ourselves, alas! was very far from seizing the full significance of what his lord was doing. "then cometh he to simon peter; and peter saith unto him, 'lord, dost thou wash my feet?' jesus answered and said unto him, 'what i do thou knowest not now; but thou shalt know hereafter. peter saith unto him, 'thou shalt never wash my feet.' jesus answered him, 'if i wash thee not, thou hast no part _with_ me.'" here is the grand point--"part with me." the washing of regeneration gives us a part _in_ christ: the daily washing of sanctification gives us a part _with_ christ. in order to full, intelligent, happy communion, we must have a clean conscience, and clean feet. the blood of atonement secures the former; the water of purification maintains the other. but both the blood and the water flowed from a crucified christ. the death of christ is the necessary basis of every thing. he died to make us clean; he lives to keep us clean. we are made as clean as his death can make us; we are kept as clean as his life can keep us. and, be it remembered, this marvelous ministry of christ on our behalf never ceases. he ever liveth to act _for_ us on high, and to act _on_ us and _in_ us by his word and spirit. he speaks to god for us, and he speaks to us for god. he came from god, and traveled down to the profoundest depths of our need. he has gone back to god, to bear us ever on his heart, to meet our daily need, and to maintain us in the integrity of the position and relationship into which he has introduced us. this is replete with solid comfort for the soul. we are passing through a defiling world, where we are constantly liable to contract evils of one kind or another which, though they cannot touch our eternal life, can very seriously affect our communion. it is impossible for us to tread the sanctuary of the divine presence with soiled feet; and hence the deep and unspeakable blessedness of having one ever in the presence of god for us--one who, having been in this scene, knows its true character; and one who, having come from god, and gone back to him, knows the full extent of his claims, and all that is needful to fit us for fellowship with him. the provision is divinely perfect. sin or uncleanness can never be found in the presence of god. if we can make light of either the one or the other, god cannot and will not. the holiness that shines in the demand for purity is as bright as the grace that provides it. grace has made the provision, but holiness demands the application thereof. the goodness of god provided a laver for the priests of old, but the holiness of god demanded that the priests should use that laver. the great washing of inauguration introduced them to the office of the priesthood; the washing in the laver fitted them for the duties of that office. how could acceptable priestly service be discharged with unclean hands? impossible. and we may say it is as impossible that we can walk in the pathway of holiness if our feet are not washed and wiped by that blessed one who has girded himself to serve us in this matter perpetually. all this is divinely simple. there are two links in christianity; namely, the link of eternal life, which can never be snapped by any thing; and the link of personal communion, which can be snapped in a moment by the weight of a feather. now, it is as our ways are cleansed by the holy action of the word, through the holy ghost, that our communion is maintained in its unbroken integrity. but if i am afraid to face the word of god, or if i am willfully refusing its action, how can i enjoy communion with god? i am not speaking now of ignorance of the word of god. the lord bears with a wonderful amount of ignorance in us--far more than we could bear with in one another. i do not now refer to the question of ignorance. but suppose a case. a young person entered these walls a few weeks ago, and took her seat on one of these benches. she was dressed out in all the fashion of this world--her head adorned with feathers and flowers, and her fingers with jewels. her heart full of vanity and folly. here the grace of god met her in all its fullness and freeness. the arrow of divine conviction entered her soul. she was broken down under the mighty power of the word, in the hands of the holy ghost. she was brought to repentance toward god, and faith in the lord jesus christ. she was saved, there and then, and left the place rejoicing in a full salvation. this joy continued for many days. she was engrossed with her newly found treasure. she never thought about her feathers, her flowers, or her jewels. true, she continued to wear them, simply because she as yet saw nothing wrong in so doing. she knew not as yet that there was so much as a single sentence in the word of god bearing upon such things. brethren, let me just remind you that we should be prepared for such a case as this, and be prepared to meet it. some of us, i fear, have but little wisdom or patience to deal with cases of this type. we are in undue haste to enter upon what i may call the stripping process. this is a mistake. we must allow time for the hidden virtues of the kingdom of god to develop themselves. we must not attempt to reduce the christian assembly into a place in which a certain livery is adopted. this will never do. we really cannot reduce all to a dead level. we must allow the word of god to act on the life which the spirit of god has implanted. i do nothing but mischief to people if i get them to adopt a certain style of dress merely at my suggestion. the grand thing is to allow the kingdom of god to assert its holy sway over the entire character. this is to his glory and the soul's genuine progress. let us pursue our case. our young friend, in the course of her reading, is arrested by the following pointed passage: "in like manner also, that women adorn themselves in modest apparel, with shamefacedness and sobriety; not with broidered hair, or gold, or pearls, or costly array; but (which becometh women professing godliness) with good works." (i tim. ii. , .) and again, "whose adorning let it not be that outward adorning of plaiting the hair, and of wearing of gold, or of putting on of apparel; but let it be the hidden man of the heart, in that which is not corruptible, even the ornament of a meek and quiet spirit, which is in the sight of god of great price." (i pet. iii. , .) now, here, brethren, we have illustrated for us the present ministry of christ--the action of the word upon the soul--the application of the basin to the feet--the washing of water by the word. it is jesus stooping down to wash the feet of this young disciple. the question is, how will she receive the action? will she resist it, or yield to it? will she push away the basin? will she refuse the gracious ministry? "if i wash thee not, thou hast no part _with_ me." this is very solemn, and it demands our most serious attention. next in moral importance to having the conscience purged by the blood of christ stands this cleansing of our ways by the action of the word, through the power of the holy ghost. the former gives us a part _in_ christ; the latter, a part _with_ christ. that is never repeated; this must never be interrupted. if we really desire fellowship with christ, we must allow him to wash our feet moment by moment. we cannot tread the pure precincts of the sanctuary of god with defiled feet any more than we can enter them with a defiled conscience. hence, therefore, dearly beloved in the lord, let us look well to it that we have our ways continually submitted to the purifying action of the precious word of god. let us put away every thing which that word condemns; let us abandon every position and every association and every practice which that word condemns, that so our holy fellowship with christ may be maintained in its freshness and integrity. nothing is more dangerous than to trifle with evil in any shape or form. ignorance god can and does most graciously bear with, but the willful resistance of his word in any one point is sure to lead to disastrous results. the heart becomes hardened, the conscience seared, the moral sense blunted, and the whole moral being gets into a most deplorable condition. we get away from the lord, and make shipwreck of faith and a good conscience. may the lord keep us near to himself, walking with him in tenderness of conscience and uprightness of heart. may his word ever tell in living formative power upon our souls, that so our way be cleansed according to the claims of the sanctuary of god. ( .) but let us now inquire for a moment into the spring of this action on which we have been dwelling. this is presented with touching sweetness and power in the first verse of john xiii.--"having loved his own which were in the world, he loved them unto the end." here, then, brethren, we have the mighty spring of christ's present ministry. it is the changeless love of his heart--a love that was stronger than death, and which many waters could not quench. "christ loved the church, and gave himself for it; that he might sanctify and cleanse it with the washing of water by the word." (eph. v. , .) this is the blessed basis and the motive-spring of that marvelous ministry which our lord jesus christ is now carrying on for us and toward us. he knew what he was undertaking when he uttered those words in the fortieth psalm, "lo, i come to do thy will, o god." he knew what it would cost him when he took up our case. but his love was and is divinely equal to all. we need not be afraid of exhausting that love which triumphed over all the unutterable horrors of calvary, and went down under the deep and dark waters of death and judgment. we may at times feel ashamed to have so often to bring our defiled feet to that blessed one to cleanse them; but his love is equal to all, and that love is the spring of his precious and indispensable ministry. it is a common saying that love is blind, but i look upon it as a libel upon love. most certainly it does not and could not apply to the love of christ. he knew all that was in us, and he knows now all our ways and all our weakness and all our follies; but he loves us notwithstanding all, and in the power of that love he acts toward us in order to deliver us from all that he sees in us and about us which would hinder our holy fellowship with the father and with his son. brethren, of what use, may i ask you, would a blind love be to you or to me? surely, none whatever. how could we ever repose in a love which only acted toward us in ignorance of our blots and blemishes! impossible. what we want is a love superior to all our imperfections, and a love that can deliver us from them. this love we have in christ, blessed be his name! it is a love that, however it may expose us to ourselves, will never expose us to another. it is a love that comes to us with the basin and towel, and stoops down in infinite tenderness and lowly, matchless grace to wash away every soil, and give us the comfortable sense of being "clean every whit." this, brethren, is the love which you and i need, and this is the love which we have found in divine fullness and power in the heart of that perfect servant who is girded for us ever before the throne. "having loved _his own_ which were in the world, he loved them"--how long? as long as they behaved themselves, and walked with unsoiled feet? ah, no! this would never do for such as we. "he loved them _unto the end_." precious, perfect, divine, everlasting love! a love that overlaps and underlies and outlives all our blots and blemishes, our failings and falterings, our wants and weaknesses, our wanderings and waywardness; a love that has come to us armed with all that our condition could possibly demand; a love that will never cease to act for us and toward us and in us, until it presents us in unblemished perfectness before the throne of god. ( .) and now one word as to the measure of christ's present action for us and toward us. this is a point of unspeakable value and importance. it is essential for us to know that, whether it be a question of christ's service for us in the past or his present service, the measure of both the one and the other is and can be nothing less than the claims of the sanctuary, the throne, and the nature of god. we might suppose that the measure would be our necessities, but this would never do. if we think of christ's atoning work, we know, and rejoice to know, that precious work has done very much more than meet the deepest measure of our necessities as sinners. blessed be god! the work of the cross has divinely met all the claims of god. it could never give solid peace to our souls merely to know that the very highest claims of human conscience had been met by the atoning death of christ. we must be assured on divine authority that the highest claims of the government, the character, the nature, and the glory of god have all been perfectly met by the precious work of christ. thus it is through infinite grace, and here every divinely exercised soul can find settled and eternal peace. nor is it otherwise in respect to christ's present work for us. it could never satisfy our souls, brethren, to be told that that work is measured by our very deepest need. that need is met, no doubt; but it is because christ's present ministry goes far beyond that need, and reaches to, and satisfies the claims of, the sanctuary of god. unspeakable mercy! here we may rest in perfect tranquillity. we have one on high undertaking for us, ever living in the presence of god for us; one who not only knows our necessities, but knows also the claims of god. he knows what this scene is through which we are passing, and he knows what that scene is into which he has entered; and, all praise to his name! he meets in his own perfect ministry both the one and the other. he must needs meet all our claims since he meets all god's claims, for the less must ever be included in the greater. what solid comfort is here! what unruffled repose! we have one in the presence of god for us, in whose hands all our affairs are perfectly, because divinely, safe. they can never fall through, never go wrong. we may say that ere ever the very weakest of those whom christ calls "his own in the world" can fail, christ himself must fail, and that can be _never_. his own are as safe as himself. what a grand reality! with what perfect confidence may we refer every objector, every accuser, every opposer, to this blessed manager! and what folly, on our part, to attempt to answer such ourselves! oh, beloved brethren, may we learn to lean more confidently on that blessed one who thus presents himself before our souls as the girded servant of our deep and manifold necessities. may we prize his precious ministry more and more--his ministry for us, his ministry to us. may we repose more sweetly in the assurance that he is speaking to the father for us, in all our failures, in all our shortcomings, in all our sins. may we remember, for our exceeding comfort, that even before we slip, he has been pleading for us, as he pleaded for peter. "i have prayed for thee," said the loving one, "that thy faith fail not." oh, the matchless grace of these words! he did not pray that peter might not fall, but that, having fallen, his confidence might not give way, his faith might not fail. thus, too, he pleads for us, and thus we are sustained, and thus we are restored when we fall, else we should very speedily go from bad to worse, and make shipwreck altogether. "he ever liveth to make intercession for us." we are sustained by his precious and powerful ministry every moment. we could not stand for a single hour without him. things are continually turning up which would prove destructive of our fellowship, if we had not that blessed one acting for us, whose intervention on our behalf never ceases. he knows not only our need, but he knows what the sanctuary demands; and not only does he know it, but he provides for it, according to his own infinite perfectness and acceptance before god, meeting his people's necessities. now, there are some people--i do not know whether there are any here to-night--but there are some people who have got such a one-sided notion of the standing of the believer, that they throw the lord's priestly ministry overboard altogether. i say it is one-sided, and there is nothing more dangerous than one-sided truth--nothing. i would far rather see a man going through the length and breadth of london publishing palpable error, such as the simplest mind could detect. i would have far less apprehension of the mischievous result of his ministry than of the teaching of a man who takes up one side of a truth, and presses it in such a way as to interfere with some other truth. now, there is an adjusting power in the truth of god--an adjusting power in scripture that constitutes one of its brightest moral glories; and hence we find that while the word of god most fully and blessedly establishes the truth that the believer stands complete in christ, justified from all things, accepted in the beloved, "clean every whit," it, at the same time, with equal clearness and fullness, sets forth the fact that the believer is, in himself, a poor feeble creature, exposed to manifold snares, temptations, and hostile influences; liable at any moment to fall into error and evil; utterly unable to keep himself, or to grapple with the difficulties and dangers which surround him; liable at any moment to contract defilement, which would unfit him for the holy fellowship and worship of the sanctuary. how, then, are all those things to be met? how is the christian to be kept in the face of such things? having an evil nature, a crafty foe, and a hostile world to cope with, how is he to get on? how is he to be kept? how is he to be restored if he wanders? how is he to be lifted up if he falls? the answer to all these questions is found in that ever-precious sentence of inspiration, "he ever liveth to make intercession for us;" and again, "he is able to save to the uttermost;" and again, "we shall be saved by his life;" and again, "because i live, ye shall live also;" and again, "we have an advocate with the father." brethren, how the heart delights to give forth and to ponder over such utterances as these! they are marrow and fatness to the soul. how can any one, in the face of such passages--to say nothing of his own necessary experiences as to himself and his surroundings--think of calling in question the grand foundation-truth of the priesthood of christ, in its application to believers now? i can only say, i know not. but alas! alas! there is no accounting for the depths of error into which we may fall, if we allow our minds to work, and get away from the direct authority of holy scripture. and we may truly say that a most palpable proof of our need of the intercession of christ is to be found in the sad fact that any of his servants should be found to deny it. i shall add no more on this point, save to warn all the lord's dear people against the terrible error of denying our continual need of the priestly ministry, the precious intercession and all-prevailing advocacy of our lord jesus christ--an error second only to the denial of his atoning work. for most surely our need of his priesthood is second only to our need of his atoning blood. iii. having then briefly, and, alas! imperfectly, glanced at our lord's ministry in the past and in the present, we cannot close without a reference to his ministry in the future. some may feel disposed to say, i do not understand how our lord can ever be found serving us in the future. i can understand his serving us now on the throne, but how he is to serve us in the kingdom is, i confess, beyond me. no doubt it is most marvelous, and had we not his own veritable words for it, we might well hesitate in our statement of the fact that our lord christ shall serve his people in the very brightness of the glory. but let us hear what he himself saith to us. turn for a moment to luke xii. : "let your loins be girded about, and your lights burning; and ye yourselves like unto men that wait for their lord, when he will return from the wedding; that when he cometh and knocketh, they may open unto him immediately. blessed are those servants, whom the lord when he cometh shall find watching: verily i say unto you, that _he shall gird himself, and make them to sit down to meat, and will come forth and serve them_." this is distinct and unmistakable. most marvelous, no doubt, but as plain as it is marvelous. christ will serve us in the kingdom. he will serve us forever. his ministry overlaps our entire history. it reaches down to the very deepest depths of our need as sinners, and up to the very loftiest heights of the glory. it goes back to the past, it covers the present, and it stretches away into the boundless future. blessed be his name! he loves to serve us, and he gives us the assurance that the very moment, as it were, that he enters upon the glory of name! has given us a whole heart, and nothing can satisfy him in return but a whole heart from us. his entire service--past, present, and future--is the fruit of his perfect love; and nothing can meet his desire, with respect to us, save a heart responsive in its affections to him. and where there is this, it will express itself in an anxious, earnest longing for his coming. "blessed are those servants, whom their lord when he cometh shall find watching." may the eternal spirit fill our hearts with genuine love to the person of our own adorable lord and saviour; that so our one grand and undivided purpose may be to live for him in this scene from which he has been cast out, and to wait for that moment when we shall see him as he is, and be like him and with him forever. _c. h. m._ prayer and the prayer-meeting in considering the deeply important subject of prayer, two things claim our attention; first, the moral basis of prayer; secondly, its moral conditions. i. the basis of prayer is set forth in such words as the following: "_if ye abide in me, and my words abide in you_, ye shall ask what ye will, and it shall be done unto you." (john xv. .) again, "beloved, _if our heart condemn us not_, then have we confidence toward god. and whatsoever we ask, we receive of him, _because we keep his commandments_, and do those things that are pleasing in his sight." (i john iii. , .) so also, when the blessed apostle seeks an interest in the prayers of the saints, he sets forth the moral basis of his appeal--"pray for us; _for we trust we have a good conscience_, in all things willing to live honestly." (heb. xiii. .) from these passages, and many more of like import, we learn that, in order to effectual prayer, there must be an obedient heart, an upright mind, a good conscience. if the soul be not in communion with god--if it be not abiding in christ--if it be not ruled by his holy commandments--if the eye be not single, how could we possibly look for answers to our prayers? we should, as the apostle james says, be "asking amiss, that we may consume it upon our lusts." how could god, as a holy father, grant such petitions? impossible. how very needful, therefore, it is to give earnest heed to the moral basis on which our prayers are presented. how could the apostle have asked the brethren to pray for him, if he had not a good conscience, a single eye, an upright mind--the moral persuasion that in all things he really wished to live honestly? we may safely assert, he could do no such thing. but may we not often detect ourselves in the habit of lightly and formally asking others to pray for us? it is a very common formulary amongst us--"remember me in your prayers," and most surely nothing can be more blessed or precious than to be borne upon the hearts of god's dear people in their approaches to the mercy-seat; but do we sufficiently attend to the moral basis? when we say, "brethren pray for us," can we add, as in the presence of the searcher of hearts, "for we trust we have a good conscience, in all things willing to live honestly"? and when we ourselves bow before the throne of grace, is it with an uncondemning heart--an upright mind--a single eye--a soul really abiding in christ, and keeping his commandments? these, beloved reader, are searching questions. they go right to the very centre of the heart--down to the very roots and moral springs of our being. but it is well to be thoroughly searched--searched in reference to every thing, but especially in reference to prayer. there is a terrible amount of unreality in our prayers--a sad lack of the moral basis--a vast amount of "asking amiss." hence, the want of power and efficacy in our prayers--hence, the formality--the routine--yea, the positive hypocrisy. the psalmist says, "if i regard iniquity in my heart, the lord will not hear me." how solemn this is! our god will have reality; he desireth truth in the inward parts. he, blessed be his name, is real with us, and he will have us real with him. he will have us coming before him as we really are, and with what we really want. how often, alas! it is otherwise, both in private and in public! how often are our prayers more like orations than petitions--more like statements of doctrine than utterances of need! it seems, at times, as though we meant to explain principles to god, and give him a large amount of information. these are the things which cast a withering influence over our prayer-meetings, robbing them of their freshness, their interest, and their value. those who really know what prayer is--who feel its value, and are conscious of their need of it, attend the prayer-meeting in order to pray, not to hear orations, lectures, and expositions from men on their knees. if they want lectures, they can attend at the lecture-hall or the preaching-room; but when they go to the prayer-meeting, it is to pray. to them, the prayer-meeting is the place of expressed need and expected blessing--the place of expressed weakness and expected power. such is their idea of "the place where prayer is wont to be made;" and therefore when they flock thither, they are not disposed or prepared to listen to long preaching prayers, which would be deemed barely tolerable if delivered from the desk, but which are absolutely insufferable in the shape of prayer. we write plainly, because we feel the need of great plainness of speech. we deeply feel our want of reality, sincerity, and truth in our prayers and prayer-meetings. not unfrequently it happens that what we call prayer is not prayer at all, but the fluent utterance of certain known and acknowledged truths and principles, to which one has listened so often that the reiteration becomes tiresome in the extreme. what can be more painful than to hear a man on his knees explaining principles and unfolding doctrines? the question forces itself upon us, "is the man speaking to god, or to us?" if to god, surely nothing can be more irreverent or profane than to attempt to explain things to him; but if to us, then it is not prayer at all, and the sooner we rise from the attitude of prayer the better, inasmuch as the speaker will do better on his legs and we in our seats. and, having referred to the subject of attitude, we would very lovingly call attention to a matter which, in our judgment, demands a little serious consideration; we allude to the habit of sitting during the holy and solemn exercise of prayer. we are fully aware, of course, that the grand question in prayer is, to have the _heart_ in a right attitude. and further, we know, and would ever bear in mind, that many who attend our prayer-meetings are aged, infirm, and delicate people, who could not possibly kneel for any length of time--perhaps not at all. then again, it often happens that, even where there is not physical weakness, and where there would be real desire to kneel down, as feeling it to be the proper attitude, yet, from actual want of space, it is impossible to change one's position. all these things must be taken into account; but, allowing as broad a margin as possible in which to insert these modifying clauses, we must still hold to it that there is a very deplorable lack of reverence in many of our public reunions for prayer. we frequently observe young men, who can neither plead physical weakness nor want of space, sitting through an entire prayer-meeting. this, we confess, is offensive, and we cannot but believe it grieves the spirit of the lord. we ought to kneel down when we can; it expresses reverence and prostration. the blessed master "kneeled down and prayed." (luke xxii. .) his apostle did the same, as we read in acts xx. , "when he had thus spoken, he kneeled down and prayed with them all." and is it not comely and right so to do? assuredly it is. and can aught be more unseemly than to see a number of people sitting, lolling, lounging, and gaping about while prayer is being offered? we consider it perfectly shocking, and we do here most earnestly beseech all the lord's people to give this matter their solemn consideration, and to endeavor, in every possible way, both by precept and example, to promote the godly habit of kneeling at our prayer-meetings. no doubt those who take part in the meeting would greatly aid in this matter by short and fervent prayers; but of this, more hereafter. part ii. we shall now proceed to consider, in the light of holy scripture, the moral conditions or attributes of prayer. there is nothing like having the authority of the divine word for every thing in the entire range of our practical christian life. scripture must be our one grand and conclusive referee in all our questions. let us never forget this. what, then, saith the scripture as to the necessary moral conditions of prayer? turn to matthew xviii. --"again i say unto you, that _if two of you shall agree_ on earth as touching any thing that they shall ask, it shall be done for them of my father which is in heaven." here we learn that one necessary condition of our prayers is, _unanimity_--cordial agreement--thorough oneness of mind. the true force of the words is, "if two of you shall symphonize"--shall make one common sound. there must be no jarring note, no discordant element. if, for example, we come together to pray about the progress of the gospel--the conversion of souls, we must be of one mind in the matter--we must make one common sound before our god. it will not do for each to have some special thought of his own to carry out. we must come before the throne of grace in holy harmony of mind and spirit, else we cannot claim an answer, on the ground of matthew xviii. . now, this is a point of immense moral weight. its importance, as bearing upon the tone and character of our prayer-meetings, cannot possibly be overestimated. it is very questionable indeed whether any of us have given sufficient attention to it. have we not to deplore the objectless character of our prayer-meetings? ought we not to come together more with some definite object on our hearts, as to which we are going to wait together upon god? we read in the first chapter of acts, in reference to the early disciples, "these all continued _with one accord_ in prayer and supplication, with the women, and mary the mother of jesus, and with his brethren."[xxx.] and again, in the second chapter, we read, "when the day of pentecost was fully come, they were _all with one accord in one place_." they were waiting, according to our lord's instructions, for the promise of the father--the gift of the holy ghost. they had the sure word of promise. the comforter was, without fail, to come; but this, so far from dispensing with prayer, was the very ground of its blessed exercise. they prayed; they prayed in one place; they prayed with one accord. they were thoroughly agreed. they all, without exception, had one definite object before their hearts. they were waiting for the promised spirit; they continued to wait; and they waited with one accord, until he came. men and women, absorbed with one object, waited in holy concord, in happy symphony--waited on, day after day, earnestly, fervently, harmoniously waited until they were indued with the promised power from on high. should not we go and do likewise? is there not a sad lack of this "one accord," "one place" principle in our midst? true it is, blessed be god, we have not to ask for the holy ghost to come,--he has come; we have not to ask for the outpouring of the spirit,--he has been poured out: but we have to ask for the display of his blessed power in our midst. supposing our lot is cast in a place where spiritual death and darkness reign. there is not so much as a single breath of life--not a leaf stirring. the heaven above seems like brass; the earth beneath, iron. such a thing as a conversion is never heard of. a withering formalism seems to have settled down upon the entire place. powerless profession, dead routine, stupefying mechanical religiousness, are the order of the day. what is to be done? are we to allow ourselves to fall under the fatal influence of the surrounding malaria? are we to yield to the paralyzing power of the atmosphere that inwraps the place? assuredly not. if not, what then? let us, even if there be but two who really feel the condition of things, get together, with one accord, and pour out our hearts to god. let us wait on him, in holy concord, with united, firm purpose, until he send a copious shower of blessing upon the barren spot. let us not fold our arms and vainly say, "the time is not come." let us not yield to that pernicious offshoot of a one-sided theology, which is rightly called fatalism, and say, "god is sovereign, and he works according to his own will. we must wait his time. human effort is in vain. we cannot get up a revival. we must beware of mere excitement." all this seems very plausible; and the more so because there is a measure of truth in it; indeed it is all true, so far as it goes: but it is only one side of the truth. it is truth, and nothing but the truth; but it is not _the whole truth_. hence its mischievous tendency. there is nothing more to be dreaded than one-sided truth; it is far more dangerous than positive, palpable error. many an earnest soul has been stumbled and turned completely out of the way by one-sided or misapplied truth. many a true-hearted and useful workman has been chilled, repulsed, and driven out of the harvest-field by the injudicious enforcement of certain doctrines having a measure of truth, but not _the_ full truth of god. nothing, however, can touch the truth, or weaken the force of matthew xviii. . it stands in all its blessed fullness, freeness, and preciousness before the eye of faith; its terms are clear and unmistakable. "if two of you shall agree upon earth, as touching _any thing_ that they shall ask, it shall be done for them of my father which is in heaven." here is our warrant for coming together to pray for any thing that may be laid on our hearts. do we mourn over the coldness, barrenness, and death around us? are we discouraged by the little apparent fruit from the preaching of the gospel--the lack of power in the preaching itself, and the total absence of practical result? are our souls cast down by the barrenness, dullness, heaviness, and low tone of all our reunions, whether at the table of our lord, before the mercy-seat, or around the fountain of holy scripture? what are we to do? fold our arms in cold indifference? give up in despair? or give vent to complaining, murmuring, fretfulness, or irritation? god forbid! what then? come together, "with one accord in one place;" get down on our faces before our god, and pour out our hearts, as the heart of one man, pleading matthew xviii. . this, we may rest assured, is the grand remedy--the unfailing resource. it is perfectly true that "god is sovereign," and this is the very reason why we should wait on him; perfectly true that "human effort is in vain," and that is the very reason for seeking divine power; perfectly true that "we cannot get up a revival," and that is the very reason for seeking to get it _down_; perfectly true that "we must beware of mere excitement;" equally true that we must beware of coldness, deadness, and selfish indifference. the simple fact is, there is no excuse whatever--so long as christ is at the right hand of god--so long as god the holy ghost is in our midst and in our hearts--so long as we have the word of god in our hands--so long as matthew xviii. shines before our eyes--there is, we repeat, no excuse whatever for barrenness, deadness, coldness, and indifference--no excuse for heavy and unprofitable meetings--no excuse whatever for lack of freshness in our reunions or of fruitfulness in our service. let us wait on god, in holy concord, and the blessing is sure to come. part iii. if we turn to matthew xxi. , we shall find another of the essential conditions of effectual prayer. "and all things whatsoever ye shall ask in prayer, _believing_, ye shall receive." this is a truly marvelous statement. it opens the very treasury of heaven to faith. there is absolutely no limit. our blessed lord assures us that we shall receive whatsoever we ask in simple faith. the apostle james, under the inspiration of the holy ghost, gives us a similar assurance in reference to the matter of asking for wisdom. "if any of you lack wisdom, let him ask of god, that _giveth to all liberally_, and upbraideth not; and it shall be given him. but"--here is the moral condition--"let him ask _in faith, nothing wavering_. for he that wavereth is like a wave of the sea, driven with the wind and tossed. for let not that man think that he shall obtain any thing of the lord." from both these passages we learn that if our prayers are to have an answer, they must be prayers of faith. it is one thing to utter words in the form of prayer, and another thing altogether to pray in simple faith, in the full, clear, and settled assurance that we shall have what we are asking for. it is greatly to be feared that many of our so-called prayers never go beyond the ceiling of the room. in order to reach the throne of god, they must be borne on the wings of faith, and proceed from hearts united and minds agreed, in holy purpose, to wait on our god for the things which we really require. now, the question is, are not our prayers and prayer-meetings sadly deficient on this point? is not the deficiency manifest from the fact that we see so little result from our prayers? ought we not to examine ourselves as to how far we really understand these two conditions of prayer, namely, unanimity and confidence? if it be true--and it is true, for christ has said it--that two persons agreed to ask in faith can have whatsoever they ask, why do we not see more abundant answers to our prayers? must not the fault be in us?--are we not deficient in concord and confidence? our lord, in matthew xviii. , comes down, as we say, to the very smallest plurality--the smallest congregation--even to "two;" but of course the promise applies to dozens, scores, or hundreds. the grand point is, to be thoroughly agreed and fully persuaded that we shall get what we are asking for. this would give a different tone and character altogether to our reunions for prayer. it would make them very much more real than our ordinary prayer-meeting, which, alas! alas! is often poor, cold, dead, objectless, and desultory, exhibiting any thing but cordial agreement and unwavering faith. how vastly different it would be if our prayer-meetings were the result of a cordial agreement on the part of two or more believing souls, to come together and wait upon god for a certain thing, and to persevere in prayer until they receive an answer! how little we see of this! we attend the prayer-meeting from week to week--and very right we should--but ought we not to be exercised before god as to how far we are agreed in reference to the object or objects which are to be laid before the throne? the answer to this question links itself on to another of the moral conditions of prayer. let us turn to luke xi. "and he said unto them, 'which of you shall have a friend, and shall go unto him at midnight, and say unto him, friend, lend me three loaves; for a friend of mine in his journey is come to me, and i have nothing to set before him? and he from within shall answer and say, trouble me not; the door is now shut, and my children are with me in bed; i cannot rise and give thee. i say unto you, though he will not rise and give him because he is his friend, yet because of his _importunity_ he will rise and give him as many as he needeth. and i say unto you, ask, and it shall be given you; seek, and ye shall find; knock, and it shall be opened unto you. for every one that asketh receiveth; and he that seeketh findeth; and to him that knocketh it shall be opened.'" (ver. - .) these words are of the very highest possible importance, inasmuch as they contain part of our lord's reply to the request of his disciples, "lord, teach us to pray." let no one imagine for a moment that we would dare to take it upon ourselves to teach people how to pray. god forbid! nothing is further from our thoughts. we are merely seeking to bring the souls of our readers into direct contact with the word of god--the veritable sayings of our blessed lord and master--so that, in the light of those sayings, they may judge for themselves as to how far our prayers and our prayer-meetings come up to the divine standard. what, then, do we learn from luke xi? what are the moral conditions which it sets before us? in the first place, it teaches us to be _definite_ in our prayers. "friend, lend me three loaves." there is a positive need felt and expressed; there is the one thing before the mind and on the heart, and to this one thing he confines himself. it is not a long, rambling, desultory statement about all sorts of things: it is distinct, direct, and pointed,--i want three loaves, i cannot do without them, i must have them, i am shut up, the case is urgent, the time of night--all the circumstances give definiteness and earnestness to the appeal. he cannot wander from the one point, "friend, lend me three loaves." no doubt it seems a very untoward time to come--"midnight." every thing looks discouraging. the friend has retired for the night, the door is shut, his children are with him in bed, he cannot rise. all this is very depressing; but still the definite need is pressed: he must have the three loaves. now, we cannot but judge that there is a great practical lesson here which may be applied, with immense profit, to our prayers and our prayer-meetings. must we not admit that our reunions for prayer suffer sadly from long, rambling, desultory prayers? do we not frequently give utterance to a whole host of things of which we do not really feel the need, and which we have no notion of waiting for at all? should we not sometimes be taken very much aback were the lord to appear to us at the close of our prayer-meeting and ask us, what do you really want me to give or to do? we feel most thoroughly persuaded that all this demands our serious consideration. we believe it would impart great earnestness, freshness, glow, depth, reality, and power to our prayer-meetings were we to attend with something definite on our hearts, as to which we could invite the fellowship of our brethren. some of us seem to think it necessary to make one long prayer about all sorts of things--many of them very right and very good, no doubt--but the mind gets bewildered by the multiplicity of subjects. how much better to bring some one object before the throne, earnestly urge it, and pause, so that the holy spirit may lead out others, in like manner, either for the same thing or something else equally definite. long prayers are often wearisome; indeed, in many cases, they are a positive infliction. it will perhaps be said that we must not prescribe any time to the holy spirit. true indeed;--away from us be the thought! who would venture upon such a piece of daring blasphemy? we are simply comparing what we find in scripture (where their brief pointedness is characteristic--see matt. vi, john xvii., acts iv. - , eph. i, iii, etc.) with what we too often--not always, thank god!--find in our prayer-meetings. let it, then, be distinctly borne in mind that "long prayers" are not the rule in scripture. they are referred to in mark xii. , etc., in terms of withering disapproval. brief, fervent, pointed prayers impart great freshness and interest to the prayer-meeting; but on the other hand, as a general rule, long and desultory prayers exert a most depressing influence upon all. but there is another very important moral condition set forth in our lord's teaching in luke xi, and that is, "_importunity_." he tells us that the man succeeds in gaining his object simply by his importunate earnestness. he is not to be put off; he must get the three loaves. importunity prevails even where the claims of friendship prove inoperative. the man is bent on his object; he has no alternative. there is a demand, and he has nothing to meet it--"i have nothing to set before my traveling friend." in short, he will not take a refusal. now, the question is, how far do we understand this great lesson? it is not, blessed be god, that he will ever answer us "from within." he will never say to us, "trouble me not"--"i cannot rise and give thee." he is ever our true and ready "friend"--"a cheerful, liberal, and unupbraiding giver." all praise to his holy name! still, he encourages importunity, and we need to ponder his teaching. there is a sad lack of it in our prayer-meetings. indeed, it will be found that in proportion to the lack of definiteness is the lack of importunity. the two go very much together. where the thing sought is as definite as the "three loaves," there will generally be the importunate asking for it, and the firm purpose to get it. the simple fact is, we are too vague and, as a consequence, too indifferent in our prayers and prayer-meetings. we do not seem like people _asking for what they want, and waiting for what they ask_. this is what destroys our prayer-meetings, rendering them pithless, pointless, powerless; turning them into teaching or talking-meetings, rather than deep-toned, earnest prayer-meetings. we feel convinced that the whole church of god needs to be thoroughly aroused in reference to this great question; and this conviction it is which compels us to offer these hints and suggestions, with which we are not yet done. part iv. the more deeply we ponder the subject which has been for some time engaging our attention, and the more we consider the state of the entire church of god, the more convinced we are of the urgent need of a thorough awakening every where in reference to the question of prayer. we cannot--nor do we desire to--shut our eyes to the fact that deadness, coldness, and barrenness seem, as a rule, to characterize our prayer-meetings. no doubt we may find here and there a pleasing exception, but speaking generally, we do not believe that any sober, spiritual person will call in question the truth of what we state, namely, that the tone of our prayer-meetings is fearfully low, and that it is absolutely imperative upon us to inquire seriously as to the cause. in the papers already put forth on this great, all-important, and deeply practical subject, we have ventured to offer to our readers a few hints and suggestions. we have briefly glanced at our lack of confidence, our failure in cordial unanimity, the absence of definiteness and importunity. we have referred in plain terms--and we must speak plainly if we are to speak at all--to many things which are felt by all the truly spiritual amongst us to be not only trying and painful, but thoroughly subversive of the real power and blessing of our reunions for prayer. we have spoken of the long, tiresome, desultory, preaching prayers which, in some cases, have become so perfectly intolerable, that the lord's dear people are scared away from the prayer-meetings altogether. they feel that they are only wearied, grieved, and irritated, instead of being refreshed, comforted, and strengthened; and hence they deem it better to stay away. they judge it to be more profitable, if they have an hour to spare, to spend it in the privacy of their closet, where they can pour out their hearts to god in earnest prayer and supplication, than to attend a so-called prayer-meeting, where they are absolutely wearied out with incessant, powerless, hymn-singing, or long preaching prayers. now, we more than question the rightness of such a course. we seriously doubt if this be at all the way to remedy the evils of which we complain. indeed, we are thoroughly persuaded it is not. if it be right to come together for prayer and supplication--and who will question the rightness?--then surely it is not right for any one to stay away merely because of the feebleness, failure, or even the folly of some who may take part in the meeting. if all the really spiritual members were to stay away on such a ground, what would become of the prayer-meeting? we have very little idea of how much is involved in the elements which compose a meeting. even though we may not take part audibly in the action, yet if we are there in a right spirit--there really to wait upon god, we marvelously help the tone of a meeting. besides, we must remember that we have something more to do in attending a meeting than to think of our own comfort, profit, and blessing. we must think of the lord's glory; we must seek to do his blessed will, and try to promote the good of others in every possible way; and neither of these ends, we may rest assured, can be attained by our deliberately absenting ourselves from the place where prayer is wont to be made. we repeat, and with emphasis, the words, "_deliberately_ absenting ourselves"--staying away because we are not profited by what takes place there. many things may crop up to hinder our being present--ill-health, domestic duties, lawful claims upon our time if we are in the employment of others,--all these things have to be taken into account; but we may set it down as a fixed principle that _the one who can designedly absent himself from the prayer-meeting is in a bad state of soul_. the healthy, happy, earnest, diligent soul will be sure to be found at the prayer-meeting. but all this conducts us, naturally and simply, to another of those moral conditions at which we have been glancing in this series of papers. let us turn for a moment to the opening lines of luke xviii. "and he spake a parable unto them to this end, _that men ought always to pray, and not to faint_: saying, 'there was in a city a judge, which feared not god, neither regarded man. and there was a widow in that city, and she came unto him, saying, avenge me of mine adversary. and he would not for a while; but afterward he said within himself, though i fear not god, nor regard man, yet, because this widow troubleth me, i will avenge her, lest by her continual coming she weary me.' and the lord said, 'hear what the unjust judge saith. and shall not god avenge his own elect, which cry day and night unto him, though he bear long with them? i tell you that he will avenge them speedily.'" (ver. i- .) here, then, we have pressed upon our attention the important moral condition of _perseverance_. "men ought _always_ to pray, and _not to faint_." this is intimately connected with the definiteness and importunity to which we have already referred. we want a certain thing; we cannot do without it. we importunately, unitedly, believingly, and perseveringly wait on our god until he graciously send an answer, as he most assuredly will, if the moral basis and the moral conditions be duly maintained. _but we must persevere._ we must not faint, and give up, though the answer does not come as speedily as we might expect. it may please god to exercise our souls by keeping us waiting on him for days, months, or perhaps years. the exercise is good. it is morally healthful; it tends to make us real; it brings us down to the roots of things. look, for example, at daniel. he was kept for "three full weeks" waiting on god, in profound exercise of soul. "in those days i daniel was mourning three full weeks. i ate no pleasant bread, neither came flesh nor wine in my mouth, neither did i anoint myself at all, till three full weeks were fulfilled." all this was good for daniel. there was deep blessing in the spiritual exercises through which this beloved and honored servant of god was called to pass during those three weeks. and what is specially worthy of note is, that the answer to daniel's cry had been despatched from the throne of god at the very beginning of his exercise, as we read at verse , "then said he unto me, 'fear not daniel; for _from the first day that thou didst set thine heart to understand, and to chasten thyself before thy god, thy words were heard, and i am come for thy words_. but"--how marvelous and mysterious is this!--"the prince of the kingdom of persia withstood me one and twenty days; but, lo, michael, one of the chief princes, came to help me; and i remained there with the kings of persia. now i am come to make thee understand what shall befall thy people in the latter days." all this is full of interest. here was the beloved servant of god mourning, chastening himself, and waiting upon god. the angelic messenger was on his way with the answer. the enemy was permitted to hinder; but daniel continued to wait: he prayed, and fainted not; and in due time the answer came. is there no lesson here for us? most assuredly there is. we, too, may have to wait long in the holy attitude of expectancy, and in the spirit of prayer; but we shall find the time of waiting most profitable for our souls. very often our god, in his wise and faithful dealing with us, sees fit to withhold the answer, simply to prove us as to the reality of our prayers. the grand point for us is, to have an object laid upon our hearts by the holy ghost--an object as to which we can lay the finger of faith upon some distinct promise in the word, and to persevere in prayer until we get what we want. "praying _always_ with all prayer and supplication in the spirit, and _watching_ thereunto _with all perseverance_ and supplication for all saints." (eph. vi. .) all this demands our serious consideration. we are as sadly deficient in perseverance as we are in definiteness and importunity. hence the feebleness of our prayers and the coldness of our prayer-meetings. we do not come together with a definite object, and hence we are not importunate, and we do not persevere. in short, our prayer-meetings are often nothing but a dull routine--a cold, mechanical service--something to be gone through--a wearisome alternation of hymn and prayer, hymn and prayer, causing the spirit to groan beneath the heavy burden of mere profitless bodily exercise. we speak plainly and strongly: we speak as we feel. we must be permitted to speak without reserve. we call upon the whole church of god, far and wide, to look this great question straight in the face--to look to god about it--to judge themselves about it. do we not feel the lack of power in all our public reunions? why those barren seasons at the lord's table? why the dullness and feebleness in the celebration of that precious feast which ought to stir the very deepest depths of our renewed being? why the lack of unction, power, and edification in our public readings--the foolish speculations and the silly questions which have been advanced and answered for the last forty years? why those varied evils on which we have been dwelling, and which are being mourned over almost every where by the truly spiritual? why the barrenness of our gospel services? why are souls not smitten down under the word? why is there so little gathering-power? brethren, beloved in the lord, let us rouse ourselves to the solemn consideration of these weighty matters. let us not be satisfied to go on with the present condition of things. we call upon all those who admit the truth of what we have been putting forth in these pages on "prayer and the prayer-meeting," to unite in cordial, earnest, united prayer and supplication. let us seek to get together according to god; to come as one man and prostrate ourselves before the mercy-seat, and perseveringly wait upon our god for the revival of his work, the progress of his gospel, the ingathering and upbuilding of his beloved people. let our prayer-meetings be really prayer-meetings, and not occasions for giving out our favorite hymns, and starting our fancy tunes. the prayer-meeting ought to be the place of expressed heed and expected blessing--the place of expressed weakness and expected power--the place where god's people assemble with one accord, to take hold of the very throne of god, to get into the very treasury of heaven, and draw thence all we want for ourselves, for our households, for the whole church of god, and for the vineyard of christ. such is the true idea of a prayer-meeting, if we are to be taught by scripture. may it be more fully realized amongst the lord's people every where. may the holy spirit stir us all up, and press upon our souls the value, importance, and urgent necessity of unanimity, confidence, definiteness, importunity, and perseverance in all our prayers and prayer-meetings. yes, there's a power which man can wield, when mortal aid is vain; that eye, that arm, that love to reach, that list'ning ear to gain. that power is prayer, which soars on high, through jesus, to the throne, and moves the hand which moves the world to bring deliverance down. _c. h. m._ note.--it may perhaps be useful to notice that in the foregoing most needful pages, the beloved author has been speaking of the _prayer-meeting_, and the moral basis and conditions of prayer in general, not of personal, secret prayer. the importance of it can hardly be overestimated. the lack or neglect of this soon tells in the spiritual life of the christian. is not the lack of this the explanation of much leanness of soul, from which knowledge alone is not able to lift us up? it is, as it were, the spiritual gauge of our soul's condition. there, in the secret of the closet, the godly soul ever loves to pour out in its father's ear its trials, its fears, its desires, its wants, its thanksgivings, in all their details. and what comfort, what joy, what godly strength and purpose, the soul carries from thence! what preparation to go through the daily toil, and testings of the day! beloved of the lord, let us wait on god, that we may know more of this secret power, gotten in our closet with him. [ed.] footnote: [xxx.] how interesting to find "mary the mother of jesus" named here, as being at the prayer-meeting! what would she have said if any one had told her that millions of professing christians would yet be praying to her? * * * * * transcriber notes: common puctuation errors repaired obvious typos repaired page - - an "a" added" i shall only prove a hindrance, "a" weight, a cause of weakness. page - - heavy laden changed to heavy-laden page - - "thradom" misspelled "thralldom" page - - "diciples" misspelled "disciples" page - - true hearted changed to true-hearted page - - well regulated changed to well-regulated page - - "o death, where is thy sing" changed to "o death, where is thy sting. page - - "the breaking of break" changed to "the breaking of bread". page - - "decalogue" should be a proper noun (ten commandments), changed to "decalogue". page - - "compentency" misspelled "competency". page - - "eucharist" is a proper noun, changed to "eucharist". page - - "paraylzed" misspelled, changed to "paralyzed". the american church dictionary and cyclopedia by the rev. william james miller, m.a., b.d. "_of the things pertaining to the kingdom of god_."--acts : . new york thomas whittaker and bible house copyright, , by thomas whittaker preface the writer of the following pages has long been convinced, from an experience of many years in the ministry, that a great desideratum among church people is a church dictionary, especially one not so expensive as the more costly works, and at the same time something more complete and satisfactory than a mere glossary of terms. what seems to be needed is an inexpensive, handy volume, "short enough for busy people, plain enough for common people, cheap enough for poor people," yet complete enough to give the information needed. the present work was undertaken with this object in view. it was thought "worth while"; for if words are things, then greater familiarity with the phraseology of the church will lead to greater knowledge "of the things pertaining to the kingdom of god." what is here set forth is really a handy book of ready reference _arranged in alphabetical order_; and while some of the articles may seem to be too brief, yet the system of cross references adopted, it is believed, will throw considerable light on subjects where it is employed and thus enables the book to be kept within the limits already specified. the title, the american church dictionary, indicates the purpose as well as those for whom it is written. in preparing it, the writer worked under the { } conviction that not only is it necessary to set forth the historic facts, doctrines, terminology, customs and usages of the church, but also to indicate the _spirit of the church_ as well,--the spirit that pervades all her life, her teachings and her customs, and which when once possessed makes us deeply conscious of her continuous life from the beginning, as having a history and glorious traditions. many sources of information have been drawn from, the thoughts of many writers have been laid under contribution, but not always was it possible to make acknowledgment, as what is here presented is the result of the writer's general reading and study. as such the work is sent forth with the hope that all who refer to its pages may find it adequate to the purpose described and realize the full meaning of st. cyprian's word's, "_he cannot have god for his father, who has not the church for his mother_." w. j. m. dictionary and cyclopaedia a ablutions.--a term used to designate the ceremonial washing of the sacred vessels after holy communion, with wine and water which are reverently consumed by the priest. these ablutions are in conformity with the rubric which directs, "and if any of the consecrated bread and wine remain after the communion, it shall not be carried out of the church; but the minister and other communicants shall, immediately after the blessing, reverently eat and drink the same." absolution.--the forgiveness of sins on earth by the son of man through his agents, the bishops and priests of the church. their commission is embodied in the words of the ordination office, "receive the holy ghost for the office and work of a priest in the church of god, now committed unto thee by the imposition of our hands. whose sins thou dost forgive, they are forgiven; and whose sins thou dost retain, they are retained." this commission contains our { } lord's own words to be found in st. john : and , and they are his commission to his ministers. attempts have been made to explain away these words; but it is unquestionably the office of the holy ghost to invest those ordained with the power of dispensing god's word and sacraments, and of performing what is necessary "for the perfecting of the saints, for the work of the ministry, and for the edifying of the body of christ." (see keys, power of). absolution, the.--the name given to the form of words by which a penitent person is absolved. there are two forms in the prayer book; the longer form being used at morning and evening prayer, the shorter one being usually confined to use in the communion office. absolve.--to loose, to set free from the bondage of sin. (see absolution, also keys, power of). abstinence.--the church makes a distinction between _abstinence_ and _fasting_. abstinence is the reduction of food for the sake of self-discipline, while fasting is going without food of any kind as a more severe act of discipline. abstinence is to be exercised on "other days of fasting" _i.e._, other than ash wednesday and good friday which are absolute fasts. (see fasts, table of; also fasting). acolyte.--a word derived from the greek, and used to designate one who serves the priest in the celebration of the holy eucharist. his chief duties are to arrange the elements on the credence, to light the candles, receive the offerings and present them, and also the bread, wine and water, to the priest at the proper time in the celebration. { } adult baptism.--the rule of the church is infant baptism. she brings children even in their tenderest years within her fold and there trains them up "in the nurture and admonition of the lord." but when in england the puritans and anabaptists arose and prevailed, then there grew up a generation that reached maturity without having been baptized, and then it was that there arose the necessity for "the ministration of baptism to such as are of riper years and able to answer for themselves." to meet such cases the present service in the prayer book for the baptism of adults was prepared and set forth in a.d. . that the church of england had no form for the baptism of adults previous to the year is not only an interesting fact, but it is also one of those historic side-lights which brings into bold relief what was the custom of the church from time immemorial. advent.--derived from the latin, and means _coming_. the word is used of the first coming of christ at his birth, and of his second coming to judge the world. these are commemorated in the first season of the church year, the _season of advent_, which begins on the sunday nearest to st. andrew's day (nov. ) whether before or after, and continues until christmas day. the advent season is intended to be a preparation for the due observance of christmas, is penitential in character and a time of increased devotions both public and private. the benedicite is sung instead of the te deum; the benedictus is recited in full, and the collect for the first sunday in advent is used daily throughout the season. the color for altar hangings, etc., is purple or violet. advent sunday.--a name to be found in the prayer book for the first sunday in advent. it is commonly regarded as the first day of the church year, and as such the _christian's new year's day_. from the fact that the church year anticipates the civil new year by a whole month it is thought that the church thereby teaches that the kingdom of god should be first in our thoughts, (see advent, also christian year). affusion.--the _pouring_ (which the word means) of water on the recipient of baptism, when the baptism is not by immersion. questions have arisen from the very earliest ages as to the matter and form with which this sacrament is to be administered. the original mode was undoubtedly by the descent of the person to be baptized into a stream or pool of water. the practice of immersion was not, however, regarded as an essential feature of baptism. there can be little doubt that affusion was practiced instead of immersion, at the discretion of the priest, in ancient as well as in modern times. the prayer book provides for either mode. the method is a matter of indifference, the essential point being that the candidate for baptism come into actual contact with water while the words, "i baptize thee in the name of the father, and of the son, and of the holy ghost," are spoken. agape.--a greek word meaning _love_. the name given to the "love feast" or social meal which the ancient christians were accustomed to have when they came together and which was partaken of before the celebration of the holy eucharist. but owing to abuses, which st. paul rebuked in writing to the { } corinthians, it was finally abolished. there seems to be some confusion of ideas in regard to this ancient custom as is seen in the wrong use that is made of the term lord's supper (which see). agnus dei.--meaning "the lamb of god." this is the name given to the prayer "o lamb of god, who takest away the sins of the world, have mercy upon us," to be found in the litany and gloria in excelsis. the agnus dei is often sung as an anthem after the prayer of consecration in the holy communion. it is also the name given to a representation of a lamb with banner as an emblem of christ. (see emblems). aisle.--this term is often wrongly applied to the alleys or passageways between the pews of a church. aisle, properly speaking, is an architectural term given to the side or wing of a church or cathedral separated from the nave by rows of pillars and arches. the word is derived from the latin _ala_, meaning a wing. alb.--a long white linen garment worn as one of the eucharistic vestments. (see vestments). alleluia.--a hebrew word meaning "praise ye the lord." sometimes written "hallelujah." it is used on joyous occasions such as christmas and easter. all saints' day.--a feast held on november , in commemoration of all saints of the church who are not commemorated on other days. this festival is very dear to the hearts of christians. it is a day full of touching memories, when in the holy eucharist we memorialize before god the lives not only of martyrs and confessors and the great army of valiant { } and faithful souls in every age and clime, but also of those dear to us by ties of kindred and affection,--fathers, mothers, brothers, sisters, little children and noble youth--who "having finished their course in faith do now rest from their labors." it is thus we have brought home to us, as in no other way, the meaning and reality of "the communion of saints." amid the solemnities of worship "and memorial we thus learn that the living and the dead are bound together by ties that are eternal, ties that no change of time can break, because before god they are _one_ in the mystical body of christ. (see diptychs). almanac, church.--an annual publication setting forth the dates and times of the holy days and seasons of the church's year, with the table of lessons, directions concerning the church colors and other information about the church, such as the organization of the dioceses, number of communicants; clergy list, the general convention and other organizations; also, the list of the american bishops, both living and departed. in fact a well-edited church almanac is so full of information no intelligent communicant can afford to be without one, as a guide and help to his devotions throughout the year. (see calendar). alms bason.--a shallow dish or plate, usually made of some precious metal, in which the offerings of the people are received and placed on the altar. alpha and omega.--the first and last letters of the greek alphabet. they are used of our lord to set forth his eternal and divine nature, as in revelation i:ii, "i am alpha and omega, the first and the last." in their greek form these letters are used { } in the symbolism and decoration of the church, either separately or as a monogram. altar.--the holy table, of wood or stone, on which the sacrament of the lord's body and blood is offered to god as a "sacrifice of praise and thanksgiving." "altar" and "table" are used interchangeably in holy scripture, and both words are used in the prayer book for the same thing. from the very earliest times the altar has always been the most prominent object in the church, being placed at the end of the chancel and elevated, being approached by three or more steps. architecturally as well as devotionally the altar is the distinctive feature, the objective point of the building to which all else conforms. properly speaking, the building is erected for the altar, and not the altar for the building. (see lord's table). altar cross.--the cross surmounting the altar, made usually of polished brass or of some precious metal. the altar cross is handed down to us from the primitive church, so that to-day wheresoever the english or the american flag waves there "the altar and the cross" are set up. the cross is placed over the middle of the altar, in the most sacred and prominent part of the church, "in order that the holy symbol of our faith may be constantly before the eyes of all who worship therein, to shine through the gloom of this world and point them to the skies." altar lights.--two candles in candlesticks placed on the retable of the altar and lighted at the celebration of the holy eucharist; frequently called eucharistic lights. they are used to symbolize our lord as { } the light of the world in his two natures, human and divine. the symbolical use of lighted tapers in divine service is of primitive antiquity and their use is being generally restored in both the english and american branches of the church. this is evidenced by the table in the tourist's church guide for , in which it appears that in there were churches in which the altar lights were used, while in the number had increased to , . (see lights on the altar). altar linen.--the linen pieces used in decorating the altar for the celebration of the holy communion are so called. there is first the "fair white linen cloth," the width of the top of the altar, and falling over the ends fifteen or twenty inches ending with a fringe. it is usually embroidered with five crosses to represent the five wounds of our lord. other pieces are the corporal to cover the middle part of the altar and on which are placed the paten and chalice during the celebration; the "fair linen cloth," or thin lawn veil required by the rubric to cover the elements after consecration; the purificators, and also the pall,--each of which is described under its proper title (which see). altar rail.--the railing enclosing the sanctuary in which the altar stands, and at which the communicants kneel in receiving the holy communion, is called, in the institution office the _altar rail_. supposed to have been first introduced by archbishop laud as a protection of the altar against the lawlessness and irreverence of the puritans. altar vessels.--(see vessels, sacred). { } ambulatory.--the name given to the passageway running around and back of the altar, being a continuation of the aisles of the church. generally used for processionals to and from the choir. amen.--a hebrew word meaning "so be it," or "so it is," as it is used at the end of prayers, hymns or creed. it signifies approval of, or assent to, what has gone before. the use of the "amen" in public worship emphasizes the priesthood of the laity, as for example, in the consecration of the elements in the holy communion, while the celebrating priest stands before god offering to him this holy oblation, he does it in company with all the faithful, and to signify their cooperation with him in this great act they say "amen," adopting his words and acts as their own. in the early church the "amen" was said with such heartiness, an ancient writer describes it as sounding "like a clap of thunder." (see responsive service). american church, the.--the name, and one that is growing in popularity, that is generally given to the body legally known as "the protestant episcopal church in the united states of america." the term "american church" is descriptive of "the holy catholic church" having this land and people as the field of its operations. when our lord commanded his apostles to go forth and make disciples of all nations, and they went forth to carry out this command, they gave to every nation to which they came the church in its completeness with powers of perpetuity. to every nation were given the christian faith, the apostolic ministry, the sacraments and the christian worship or liturgy. hence there { } sprung up national churches, all equal and having union with one another in these four essentials of christian truth and order. the episcopal church in the united states by reason of its origin, history and character is to be regarded as one of these national churches and the name which is to embody this idea will no doubt be found and set forth by the proper ecclesiastical authority in due time. it is difficult to say just how the name "protestant episcopal" came into use, but it has always been a hindrance to our growth because it requires so much to be said in explanation, which is always a disadvantage. meantime the name "american church" is coming more and more into general use, as it is clear, definite and historic, following the analogy of the naming of the ancient national churches. the episcopal church in the united states is the daughter of the ancient, historic. catholic and apostolic church of england, is partaker of the same life and the inheritor with the mother church of the same worship, rites, customs, doctrines and traditions, and, therefore, its position, likewise, is ancient and historic, catholic and apostolic. (see anglican church, also anglican communion). the history of the church in america covers a period of more than three hundred years, and its first beginnings on these shores are full of interest. we refer to a few of them. from an old chronicle it is learned that in the year , on the shores of frobisher's straits, "master walfall celebrated a communion upon land, at the partaking whereof were the captain and many others with him. the celebration { } of the divine mystery was the first signs, seals and confirmation of christ's passion and death ever known in these quarters." it is a remarkable and interesting fact that the book of common prayer was first used in the territory now covered by the united states, not on the atlantic coast as one would naturally suppose, but on the pacific coast, on the shores of drake's bay, california. this took place on st. john baptist's day, june th, , the officiating minister having been the rev. francis fletcher, chaplain to francis drake. the place where this service was held has been marked by a handsome cross, known as the "prayer book cross," erected by bishop nichols through the munificence of the late geo. w. childs, of philadelphia. in the course of time, settlements were made along the atlantic coast and evidence is given of the church's services being held at very early dates. in a.d. , the first permanent settlement was effected in virginia. in may of that year, under the rev. robert hunt, a priest of the church of england, services began to be held regularly and a church building was erected at jamestown. this was thirteen years before the "pilgrim fathers" landed on plymouth rock. the church was planted in all the colonies and included a greater portion of the population. but in time other religious bodies were also established and as these organizations had everything necessary for their growth and development they grew and prospered. with the { } church it was far different. for more than one hundred and fifty years it existed on these shores an episcopal church without an episcopate. there could be no confirmations and no ordinations to the ministry unless candidates were willing to take the long and perilous voyage to england. the result was the supply of clergy fell off, and children, although baptized, yet because they could not be confirmed, finally wandered away to other folds. repeated efforts were made to secure the consecration of a bishop for the church in america, but owing to political and ecclesiastical complications this was not possible until after the revolutionary war. in a.d. , on november th, the rev. samuel seabury, d.d., was consecrated in aberdeen, scotland, by the scottish bishops, for the church in connecticut and as the first bishop in america. on february th, , the rev. william white, d.d., of pennsylvania, and the rev. samuel provoost, d.d., of new york, were consecrated bishops by the two archbishops of the church of england and the bishop of bath and wells, and peterborough, in lambeth palace, london. a few years later, viz., on september th, , the rev. james madison, d.d., of virginia, was consecrated in england by the archbishop of canterbury, the bishop of london and the bishop of rochester. by the consecration of these four bishops abroad the american church secured the episcopate from the ancient and apostolic sources, and thus gained the power of perpetuating itself. the significance of this may be seen when we reflect that the ancient canons of the church require that not less than three bishops shall unite in the consecration of a bishop. this enactment is designed to provide against any possible defect in the succession of any one of the { } consecrating bishops. we thus see how careful the church has always been in conferring this great office, and how particular the american church was to meet every ecclesiastical requirement according to the ancient order and traditions. it may be interesting to note that the first bishop consecrated on american soil was the rt. rev. thomas john claggett, the first bishop of maryland, in whose consecration all four of the american bishops united. this took place in trinity church, new york, september th, . from that time to the present, the american episcopate has increased greatly by reason of the growing needs of the church in this rapidly developing country. more than two hundred bishops have been consecrated for the work of the church in the united states and for its missions in the foreign field. the growth of the church itself, likewise, has been remarkable when we consider the disadvantages under which it labored in those early days and the bitter prejudice against it which even yet is not wholly done away. to-day there is not a state or a territory which is not under the pastoral care of a bishop, many of the states having several dioceses each with its bishop at its head. the quiet, persistent loyalty to the truth "as this church hath received the same," the reasonable terms of admission to her fold, the missionary zeal and enterprise, the practical work enlisting so largely the labors and cooperation of the laity, the far-reaching influence on the religious thought of the day, the proposal of the terms for christian unity, the multiplying of services and the more { } frequent communions, all manifest her inner and outward growth and demonstrate the reality and high purpose of her mission to this land and nation. (see growth of the church.) amice.--one of the eucharistic vestments. (see vestments). anaphora.--the greek name for the offering or, oblation in the holy eucharist and is usually applied to that portion of the office beginning with "lift up your hearts" and including the prayer of consecration. all that precedes this is called the proanaphora (which see). andrew, feast of saint.--a holy day of the church observed on november , and is of very ancient date. it is known to have been observed since a.d. . st. andrew was of bethsaida in galilee and the brother of st. peter. he was the first who found the messiah and brought others to him. it was this fact in his life that suggested to the young men of the american church the organization of "the brotherhood of st. andrew" (which see). st. andrew was the first called to be a disciple and apostle, with st. peter. after the dispersion of the apostles, st. andrew is said to have carried the gospel to what is now called turkey in asia and also to russia and was the first founder of the russian church, as st. paul was of the english church. after laboring in turkey in europe, he suffered martyrdom at patras, a.d. , being crucified on a cross the shape of the letter x, to which his name has been given. as st. andrew is greatly reverenced in scotland, the st. andrew's cross was made a part of the national banner { } of great britain on the union of scotland with england in . the st. andrew's cross (scotland) with the cross of st. patrick (ireland) and the cross of st. george (england) were made in to form the present _union jack_ so dear to the english nation. in ecclesiastical art st. andrew is represented holding in his hand a cross saltire, or else leaning upon it. angels.--(see holy angels.) it is also to be noted that the term "angels" is used in the new testament for the bishops of the church, as in the epistles to the seven churches of asia (rev. and ) which are addressed, "unto the angel of the church of------", _i.e_., the bishop. anglican church, the.--the name given to the church of england as being the church of the anglo-saxon race. the church was introduced into britain as early as a.d. , probably by st. paul and it has continued there the same organization ever since, and the church of the whole english nation until within the last years, when divers and sundry religious bodies have sprung up. thus the english nation from that early period of the church's first introduction into britain down to the present time, has never been without the orthodox _faith_; the _apostolic ministry_ in three orders--bishops, priests and deacons; the _sacraments_ and the ancient _liturgy_. moreover, the church of england has always affirmed her own national integrity and independence and although overcome and brought into subjection to a foreign power, and finally regained her former independence--yet throughout all she has ever retained the four essentials of christian truth and order mentioned, and thus { } demonstrates that she is a true branch of the church founded by christ, and as such catholic and apostolic. for one to say that the church of england was founded by henry viii, or to say that it is a "schism from the roman church" shows great ignorance of even the plainest facts of history. the following statement, from a secular paper, the _providence_ (r. i.) _journal_ is worth reprinting: "it is still quite usual even for intelligent persons to misunderstand the purposes of the english reformers, and the result of the english reformation. . . . the supremacy of rome has never been borne patiently by the english people, whose church organization was established long before rome took the trouble to interfere with it; and several english kings had quarreled before henry the eighth's time with the holy see. what the english reformers wanted, and what they accomplished under elizabeth, was reform _within the church_. it was on the continent that protestantism _without the church_, built up a new ecclesiastical organization. all this, it may be, is a matter only of historical value to the busy nineteenth century. but even if facts in a historical aspect are of small importance to an intensely practical generation, it is as well to have these facts right as wrong." (see undivided church). anglican communion, the.--the term used to designate the churches that are in communion with the church of england and hold the same faith, order and worship. under this term are included the church of england, the church of ireland, the church of scotland, the churches in british north america, the west indies, australia, south africa and in all the english colonies { } throughout the world wherever established. the episcopal church in the united states is also included in the anglican communion, being identical with the church of england as is set forth in the preface to the prayer book, in which it is declared, "this church is far from intending to depart from the church of england in any essential point of doctrine, discipline and worship; or further than local circumstances require." the anglican communion is one of the most powerful forces in our modern religious world. from statistics we learn that it has a larger membership than any other religious body among english-speaking people. the following table taken from the new york _world_ almanac for gives some idea of the religion of english-speaking people. episcopalians , , methodists of all descriptions , , roman catholics , , presbyterians of all descriptions , , baptists of all descriptions , , congregationalists , , free thinkers , , lutherans, etc , , unitarians , , minor religious sects , , of no particular religion , , ----------- english-speaking population , , anglo catholic--the historic or catholic church exists to-day in three main branches or communions, viz.: the eastern or greek church, the roman church, and the anglican. the term "anglo catholic" is used to describe the historic church of the { } english-speaking people as being catholic and apostolic, and as having an unquestioned descent from the church founded by christ and his apostles. (see anglican church; anglican communion, and also american church). anointing the sick.--the anointing of the sick with oil as recommended in st. james : and , has generally prevailed in the universal church and came to be called "extreme unction." there was an office for its use in the prayer book of , but it was omitted in subsequent revisions because its use in most parts of the church had become mechanical and confined to dying persons. the rite has been restored in some places on the authority of individual bishops as a scriptural practice. a scottish bishop calls it "the lost pleiad of the anglican firmament," and says, "one must at once confess and deplore that a distinctly scriptural practice has ceased to be commanded in the church of england, for no one can doubt that a sacramental use of anointing the sick has been from the beginning." annunciation, the.--a feast of the church held on march th, to commemorate the visit of the angel gabriel to the blessed virgin mary, to announce to her the incarnation of the son of god, his message to her being, "fear not, mary, for thou hast found favor with god. and behold, thou shalt conceive in thy womb, and bring forth a son, and shall call his name jesus." the feast of the annunciation has been observed from the very earliest times, sermons being still extant which were preached on this day as early as a.d. . it is still observed with great { } solemnity; proper psalms are appointed, being the th, st, d, and th, also proper lessons, as well as collect, epistle and gospel. the church color for altar and other hangings is white. it is to be noted that the feast of the annunciation is placed among the days of obligation (which see). antependium.--the name given to the covering hanging in front of the lectern, pulpit or altar, and being the color of the church season. the altar hanging is usually called the _frontal_. anthem.--originally the same as antiphon; "anthem" being simply the anglicized form of the word. later, the terms "anthem" and "antiphon" came to stand for two different ideas. _anthem_ is any musical setting of words bearing upon the services of the day, other than a hymn or canticle, although the canticles are sometimes called anthems, as in the rubric before the _venite_ in the morning prayer. the rubric in the evening prayer provides for an anthem after the collect beginning, "lighten our darkness." _antiphon_ has come to mean a verse of scripture which is sung wholly or in part before and after the psalms or canticles, and designed to strike the key-note of the teaching of the day. antiphon.--(see anthem). antiphonal.--the alternate singing or chanting by two sides of the choir and congregation, each taking a verse in turn. this mode of rendering the music of the church is of very ancient origin; it prevailed in the ancient jewish worship as the antiphonal structure of the psalms indicates. it is a reproduction of the heavenly worship as described by isaiah, "and one { } cried unto another and said." it seems to be also a practical following out of the admonition, "teaching and admonishing one another in psalms and hymns and spiritual songs." (col. : .) apocalypse.--the name given to the last book of the bible; a greek word meaning _revelation_. the book of the revelation was written by st. john evangelist about a.d. or . its purpose is set forth by bishop wordsworth as follows: "the apocalypse is a manual of consolation to the church in her pilgrimage through this world to the heavenly canaan of her rest." apocrypha.--this is the name given to certain books generally bound with the old and new testament scriptures which the sixth article of religion describes as "the other books (as hierome saith) the church doth read for example of life and instruction of manners; but yet doth it not apply them to establish any doctrine." they are called apocryphal for the reason that while they are usually bound up with the bible, yet they are not regarded as canonical. apocrypha is a greek word meaning _hidden_, secret or unknown. several of the lessons are taken from the apocryphal books, and the benedicite, which is sung as an alternate to the te deum, is taken from one of them, namely, "the song of the three children." apostle.--one who is sent; messenger; ambassador. the name given to our lord's twelve commissioned disciples who were thus made "the original fountain of ministerial authority and capacity pouring forth twelve streams, and from whom were to flow all the branches of that river whose streams should make { } glad the city of god by carrying to it the blessings of his grace." (see bishop). apostles' creed.--the shorter form of the creed as set forth in the prayer book is called the apostles' creed because it was generally believed to have been composed by the apostles themselves before they separated and left jerusalem. however true or untrue this old tradition may be, it is quite certain that this "form of sound words" embodies the "apostles' doctrine," or teaching, and each article finds its corresponding statement in the bible. it is the oldest form of the creed that has come down to us and contains a brief summary of the fundamental truths of the christian religion. (see orthodox.) there are twelve articles grouped into three paragraphs each setting forth what is to be believed concerning each person of the blessed trinity. in other words the apostles' creed is what we believe concerning the name into which we are baptized. it is, therefore, the creed of the baptismal office and is recited in the daily services, while the longer creed, commonly called the nicene, is reserved for the eucharistic office. apostolate.--the office and dignity of an apostle; the whole body of bishops throughout the world. apostolic fathers.--(see fathers, the). apostolic succession--"the fundamental principle of the christian ministry is, that it is derived from our blessed lord himself, from whom it is perpetuated by episcopal ordination," and just this is what is meant by apostolic succession. the apostolic succession is simply the evidence of the fact that the christian ministry has never failed to exist since { } the time when our lord commissioned it and sent it forth. it is often called the _doctrine_ of the apostolic succession, but it is more of a fact than a doctrine; a fact substantiated by the history of the church, as much so as the succession of the kings and queens of england is a fact known of all men acquainted with the history of the english nation. for this reason we have the statement in the preface to the ordinal: "it is evident unto all men diligently reading holy scripture and ancient authors, that from the apostles' time there have been these orders of ministers in christ's church,--bishops, priests and deacons." the christian church has not been left without its records; its history is as well marked on the pages of history as that of any other kingdom or organization. (see episcopacy; episcopate; bishop, also ministry), apse.--an architectural term descriptive of the semicircular or polygonal shape in which the chancel is frequently built. from a greek word meaning a joining; also a bow, an arch, a vault. apsidal.--pertaining or relating to an apse; like an apse, as apsidal chancel. archbishop--a bishop who presides over a province of dioceses; an official title, but not an order. archdeacon.--a term introduced from the church of england and applied to a priest who presides over an archdeaconry or convocation; or to one who is the general missionary of a diocese, or of a prescribed district in a diocese of the american church. articles of religion, xxxix--certain statements of doctrine set forth by the english church in a time of great controversy to define her position as differing { } from rome on the one hand and from protestantism on the other. they are called _articles of religion_ as distinguished from the articles of the faith, which are contained in the creed and recited in the services of the church. the thirty-nine articles were set forth in the year , then revised as they now stand in and were adopted with the exception of the twenty-first article, by the american church in . they are published as an appendix to the prayer book. ascension day.--a feast observed with great solemnity forty days after easter in commemoration of our lord's ascension into heaven. it is also called holy thursday. st. augustine, a.d. , calls this one of the festivals which are supposed to have been instituted by the apostles themselves, so that it must have been generally observed in his time. in the system of the church, ascension day is regarded as one of the very highest festivals set apart in honor of our lord. proper psalms, proper lessons and proper preface in the communion service place it on the same footing as christmas day, easter and whitsun day. the services are usually brightened with special music; the altar is decked with flowers and white hangings as symbolical of the joy which characterizes the celebration. ascension day is preceded by the rogation days (which see), as days of preparation for its due observance; it is also one of the days of obligation (which see). ascription--the words used at the end of a sermon, beginning, "and now to god the father," etc. during the ascription the people stand and at the end respond, amen. { } ash wednesday--the first day of lent; one of the two absolute fast days of the church, the other being good friday. in ancient times the first day of lent was called _caput jejunii_, _i.e._, "head of the fast," because lent began on that day. it was also called _dies cinerum_, _i.e._, "day of ashes," from the custom of placing ashes on the head of penitents who presented themselves before the bishop on this day. ash wednesday is a day of deep devotion, of prayer, fasting, self-examination and confession of sin. the public services are most solemn; the proper lessons, and proper psalms, the collect, epistle and gospel, together with the penitential office to be especially used on this day, all mark it as a day of "weeping, fasting and praying." the psalms appointed are the seven penitential psalms, viz., the th, d, and th, used at morning prayer; the st used in the penitential office, and d, th and d read at evening prayer. (see penitential psalms.) the church color for ash wednesday is purple or violet. assistant minister.--a priest or deacon appointed to assist or help the rector of a parish in his work is thus called. lately the term "curate" has been employed to designate the assistant minister of a parish. b banners.--on festal occasions banners are often carried in choir processionals "to signify yet more clearly the progress and future triumph of the church, { } according to that description of her in the song of solomon: 'who is she that looketh forth as the morning, fair as the moon, clear as the sun, and terrible as an army with banners?'" banns of marriage.--the word "bann" is derived from the saxon word _bannen_, meaning, to proclaim. the term "banns of marriage," means, therefore, the publication of intended marriages, and are published for three sundays before the event, in the church where the ceremony is to take place. the publishing of the banns in the church of england is required by law. in the american prayer book, provision is made for the publishing of the banns of marriage, but as it is not required by law the custom has fallen into disuse. baptism, adult.--(see adult baptism). baptism, holy.--one of the two great sacraments ordained by christ as generally (universally) necessary to salvation. holy baptism is the initiatory rite by which we are admitted into the fellowship of christ's religion, admitted into his church. baptism is a covenant made between god and man; of this covenant the christian name, which was then given us, is the reminder; reminding us of our new relationship with god. the grace conferred in holy baptism is threefold, ( ) regeneration, or the new birth (see regeneration); ( ) admission into the spiritual kingdom, or the holy catholic church, and ( ) the forgiveness of all our sins, for in the nicene creed we confess, "i acknowledge one baptism for the remissions of sins." the vows of holy baptism are three in number, ( ) to renounce, ( ) to believe and ( ) to obey. these cover "the whole duty of man," { } and it is by the use of the means of grace with diligent prayer that he is enabled to keep them and to grow into the likeness of christ, whose member he is because incorporated into him by holy baptism. the outward, visible sign or form in baptism is water, with the unfailing use of the words, "in the name of the father, and of the son, and of the holy ghost." this effects a valid baptism. baptism, conditional.--as holy baptism can take place only once in any individual life, the church has always been most careful that it should not be repeated. but it sometimes happens that grave doubts arise as to the validity of one's baptism, or the fact of baptism is only a matter of conjecture. in such cases the church has provided for conditional, or hypothetical baptism. the form is, "if thou art not already baptized, (name) i baptize thee in the name of the father, and of the son, and of the holy ghost, amen." in such a case if the baptism has already taken place and was valid, the hypothetical baptism passes for naught, but if it were not valid or had not taken place, the hypothetical baptism is effective. baptism, infant.--(see infant baptism). baptism, private.--the proper place for the administration of holy baptism is in the church, and the church warns her people "that without great and reasonable cause and necessity, they procure not their children to be baptized at home in their houses." but when need shall compel them so to do, she provides for the emergency by the service entitled, "the ministration of private baptism of children in houses," as set forth in the prayer book. in this office no { } provision is made for sponsors. the child is to be brought afterwards into the church to the intent that the congregation may be certified of the true form of baptism privately before used. then it is publicly received and the sponsors answer for the child and become responsible for its christian training, publicly before the congregation. baptismal regeneration.--(see regeneration, also new birth). baptismal shell.--a scallop shell, either real or made of precious metal, used by the priest for pouring the water on the head of the candidate in holy baptism. baptistry.--a portion of a church set apart for the administration of holy baptism. sometimes the baptistry was erected as a separate building or attached to a church or cathedral, specially adapted for baptism by immersion. barnabas, feast of saint.--a holy day of the church observed on june th. st. barnabas was born at cyprus, but was a jew of the tribe of levi. his original name was joses, but after our lord's ascension he was called barnabas, meaning the "son of consolation." (acts : .) he stands out in the new testament scriptures as one who is ever helpful, which may have suggested his new name; thus he sold his land, giving the money to the apostles in order that the necessities of the infant church might be met. so also he stood sponsor, so to speak, for st. paul, vouching for the sincerity of his conversion. having thus brought him to the apostles and securing his recognition as an apostle we find that he was { } associated with st. paul for about fourteen years in his missionary journeys. after the separation of the apostles nothing is recorded of st. barnabas, but tradition tells us that he returned to cyprus, spending the remainder of his life among his countrymen, and that he suffered martyrdom, being stoned to death by the unbelieving jews at salamis. st. barnabas is said to have left an epistle which bears his name and which is still extant. it is regarded by many scholars as genuine, but by many others its authenticity is regarded as very doubtful. in ecclesiastical art st. barnabas is represented as holding st. matthew's gospel; as being stoned; as pressing a stone to his breast; as being burned to death; with an open book and staff; with three stones; with a fire near him. bartholomew, feast of st.--observed on august th, in commemoration of the life and virtues of the apostle st. bartholomew. in holy scripture there is the mere mention of the name of this apostle, but it is thought that bartholomew and nathanael are one and the same person. the reason for this supposition lies in the fact that st. john in his gospel never mentions bartholomew, while he often speaks of nathanael, and the other evangelists, though they mention bartholomew, never take notice of nathanael. from this fact, it is supposed that the same person is designated by these two names. if st. bartholomew is the same person as nathanael, then it is he whom our lord described as "an israelite indeed, in whom is no guile." st. bartholomew is thought to have preached the gospel in northern india, where he is said to have left a hebrew copy of st. matthew's { } gospel. he afterwards went to armenia. he suffered martyrdom in albanopolis, by being crucified with his head downwards. in ecclesiastical art, st. bartholomew is variously represented with a knife and book; with a knife in his hand and the devil under his feet; also as healing a princess of armenia. bason.--(see alms bason). belfry.--that part of the steeple in which a bell is hung. sometimes a separate tower is built, in a room of which the bell is placed. the old name was campanile, from _campana_, a bell. the most remarkable of the campaniles is that at pisa, commonly called the "leaning tower." benedic, anima mea.--the canticle beginning, "praise the lord, o my soul," which the latin words mean. it consists of the first four and the last three verses of the d psalm and is used as an alternate to the nunc dimittis. it is not set forth in the english prayer book as a canticle. benedicite.--the benedicite is taken from the apocryphal book of "the song of the three children" and has been used from very ancient times as a hymn in christian worship. st. chrysostom, a.d. , spoke of it as "that wonderful and marvelous song which from that day to this has been sung everywhere throughout the world, and shall yet be sung by future generations." an analysis of this hymn shows it to be not simply a haphazard enumeration of the "works of the lord," but a fine grouping of them in classes to which they belong. the prelude, contained in the first verse, is a call to all the works of the lord to "praise him and magnify him forever." { } then beginning with the angels as god's ministers we find four great divisions or classifications as follows: i. the heavens, verses to . ii. mid air, verses to . iii. the earth, verses to . iv. all mankind, from verse to the end; this last division being a call to mankind in general--the people of israel, priests and servants of the lord, spirits and souls of the righteous, and all "holy and humble men of heart," to praise the lord and magnify him forever,--followed in christian worship by the _gloria patri_, as an act of high praise of the holy, blessed and adorable trinity, made known to us by the revelation of our lord and saviour jesus christ. the benedicite was first placed in the english prayer book in the year , to be sung as an alternate to the te deum. it is usually sung during advent and lent. benediction.--a blessing, such as that given at the end of the communion office and in the marriage service. it is also the act of setting apart for sacred use that which is to be used in the services of the church. reverential instinct teaches that it is unbecoming to transfer from the shop to the altar or church articles designed for holy use without first being set apart for such purpose. hence it is usual to bless by some appropriate service altar furniture, linen and other objects for holy use, that they may be set apart from all unhallowed and common uses. such is the meaning of the consecration of our churches, and when new articles are added it seems but fitting { } that they also should be set apart for sacred use, and this is done by an office of benediction. the benediction can only be pronounced by a bishop or priest. benedictus.--the canticle beginning "blessed be the lord god of israel," used after the second lesson at morning prayer. it is the song uttered by zacharias on the naming of st. john baptist and is found in st. luke i: - . the benedictus has been used as a responsory canticle to the gospel lessons from very ancient times as the daily memorial of the incarnation. as such it is the proper respond to the second lesson, the _jubilate_ being simply an alternate, to be used when the benedictus occurs in the lesson for the day. during advent it is to be sung entire; at other times only four verses may be used. betrothal.--that portion of the marriage service in which the man and the woman join hands and give their troth (_i.e._, truth or promise of fidelity) each to the other. this is the marriage vow and is usually said at the foot of the chancel steps, the marriage proper (with the ring) taking place at the altar rail. bible, the english.--the english version of the bible as we now have it, commonly called the "authorized version" was set forth a. d. . it was the work of many hands and of several generations. the translation made by william tyndale, a.d. , is regarded as the foundation or primary version, as the versions that followed were substantially reproductions of it. three successive stages may be recognized in the work of translation; ( ) the publication of the great bible in ; ( ) the bishop's bible of and in the reign of elizabeth, and ( ) the publication { } of the king's bible in in the reign of james i. thus the form in which the english bible has now been read for more than years was the result of various revisions made between and . this old and familiar version of the bible was revised a.d. by a large body of english and american scholars, but their revision has never become very popular. (see lectionary, also scriptures in prayer book). bidding prayer.--the th canon of the english church in enjoined a bidding prayer in the form of an exhortation to be used before all sermons, each petition or exhortation beginning, "let us pray for," or "ye shall pray for," to which the people responded. the term "bidding" is from the old saxon word "bede," meaning _prayer_. the litany and, also, the prayer for the church militant in the communion office bear some resemblance to the bidding prayer, especially in the enumeration of the objects prayed for. the bidding prayer is now very rarely used, although attempts have been made to revive its use, especially in purely preaching services. biretta.--a black cap of peculiar shape worn by the clergy in outdoor processions and services and sometimes in church. when worn by a bishop the color is purple. bishop.--the highest of the three orders of the sacred ministry (bishops, priests and deacons). it is derived from the greek word _episcopos_, the transition being, episcopus, biscop, bishop; the "p" melting into "b." the word means _overseer_. the functions of a bishop are to rule his diocese, ordain to the ministry, administer confirmation, consecrate church { } buildings, etc. the bishops are the successors of the apostles and bear the same office. that they are not now called apostles will appear from the following statement: "when the apostles, in anticipation of their approaching death, appointed their successors in the superintendence of the several churches which they had founded, as timothy at ephesus and titus at crete, the title of _apostolos_ was reserved by way of reverence to those who had been personally sent by christ himself; _episcopos_ was assigned to those who succeeded them in the highest office of the church, as _overseers of pastors_ as well as of _flocks_; and _presbuteros_ became the distinctive appellation of the _second order_, so that after the first century, _no writer has designated the office of one of this second order by the term episcope. this assertion cannot be controverted, and its great significance is self-evident_." (see holy orders, episcopacy, also ministry). bishop's charge--title i, canon , sec. ix of the canons of the general convention makes the following provision: "it is deemed proper that every bishop of this church shall deliver, at least once in three years, a charge to the clergy of his diocese, unless prevented by reasonable cause. and it is also deemed proper that, from time to time, he shall address to the people of his diocese pastoral letters on some points of christian doctrine, worship or manners." in his charge the bishop has opportunity to speak on great questions of the day and to emphasize that which he deems to be for the best interests of the church. in addition to his charge, the bishop is required to make an annual address to his diocese in council { } assembled, in which he reviews the state of the diocese, and sets forth his official acts for the year. bishop coadjutor--when a bishop of a diocese, by reason of old age or other permanent cause of infirmity, or by reason of extent of territory, is unable to discharge his episcopal duties, one bishop may be elected by and for the diocese to assist him in his work. the title of such assistant is "bishop coadjutor." in case of the death of the bishop, the bishop coadjutor succeeds him in his office and becomes bishop of the diocese. bishop, election of.--the provisions made by the general canons of the american church for the election of a bishop are as follows: the bishop of a diocese is elected by the clergy and laity of the diocese in council assembled. (the method of election is different in different dioceses.) on a bishop being chosen, certificates of his election and also testimonials of his being worthy must be signed by a constitutional majority of the convention by whom he is elected. these, together with the approbation of his testimonials by the house of deputies in general convention and its consent to his consecration are then presented to the house of bishops. if the house of bishops consent to his consecration, the presiding bishop notifies the bishop-elect of such consent. if the bishop-elect accepts, the presiding bishop then takes order for his consecration, either by himself and two other bishops, or by three bishops whom he may appoint for that purpose. in case the election takes place during a recess of the general convention and more than three months before the meeting of the { } next general convention, then the above certificates of election and testimonials must be submitted to the standing committees of the different dioceses. if a majority of the standing committees consent to the proposed consecration, the presiding bishop is notified of the fact, and the same is communicated to all the bishops of this church in the united states (except those whose resignations have been accepted), and if a majority of the bishops consent to the consecration, the presiding bishop takes order for the consecration of the bishop-elect. it is further ordered that "no man shall be consecrated a bishop of this church until he shall be thirty years old." bishop, missionary--a bishop elected by the house of deputies of the general convention, on nomination by the house of bishops, and consecrated to exercise episcopal functions in states or territories, or parts thereof, not organized into dioceses. missionary bishops are in the same manner nominated, elected and consecrated for the work of the church in foreign fields. bishop, the presiding.--(see presiding bishop). bishop, resignation of.--(see jurisdiction, resignation of). bishop's visitation.--title i, canon , sec. x of the general canons of the american church provides that, "every bishop in this church shall visit the churches within his diocese at least once in three years, for the purpose of examining the state of his church, inspecting the behavior of his clergy, administering the apostolic rite of confirmation, ministering the word, and, if he think fit, administering { } the sacrament of the lord's supper to the people committed to his charge." it is usual, however, for the american bishops to visit the parishes of their dioceses at least once a year. bishopric.--the office or jurisdiction of a bishop. black.--one of the church colors; to be used only on good friday and at funerals. this usage applies to the stole as well as to the altar hangings. (see church colors). blessed virgin mary.--the title which the church has always given to the mother of our lord, and by which all devout churchmen speak of her of whom the angel declared, "blessed art thou among women." "not even the glorified saints who have attained to the purity and bliss of heaven are raised to higher blessedness and purity than that saintly maiden was whom elizabeth was inspired to call 'the mother of my lord.' this sanctity of the blessed virgin through her association with her divine son has always been kept vividly in view by the church." the perpetual virginity of the lowly mother of our lord has always been a very strong tradition among all devout christians; a belief which is prompted by reverence for the great mystery of the incarnation, and confirmed by the universal consent of the church. the term "brethren" of our lord, which occurs in the new testament means simply kindred, according to the jewish use of the word. two days are set apart to the honor of the blessed virgin, viz., the feast of the annunciation, march th, and the feast of the purification, february d. (see articles on these festivals.) { } blessing of peace, the.--the benediction at the end of the communion service, beginning, "the peace of god," etc. this beautiful benediction is peculiar to the anglican liturgy, both as to form and place. reverence and a devout mind will not permit any one to leave the church before this blessing is pronounced. board of managers.--the executive committee which has charge of the general missions of the american church, and which, when the board of missions is not in session, exercises all the corporate powers of the domestic and foreign missionary society (which see). board of missions.--the legislative branch of the domestic and foreign missionary society (which see) and which holds its sessions during the general convention. bounden duty.--it is thus the prayer book expresses the obligation of all the confirmed to attend and participate in the holy communion whenever it is celebrated. the words occur in the prayer of consecration. bowing.--the late canon liddon, in one of his sermons, said, "the reverence of the soul is best secured when the body, its companion and instrument, is reverent also." this truth pervades all the church's worship. besides kneeling and standing, _bowing_, also, was always and is still customary in the devotions of the true disciple. thus in regard to bowing towards the altar, the th canon of the english church of , which enjoins the custom, declares, "doing reverence and obeisance both at their coming in and going out of churches, chancels, or chapels was a most { } ancient custom of the primitive church in the purest times." bowing at the name of jesus is a very old and scriptural custom according to the spirit of st. paul's words in phil. : . "at the name of jesus every knee should bow," and is enjoined by the th canon of in these words, "when in the time of divine service the lord jesus shall be mentioned, due and lowly reverence shall be done by all persons present." bowing at the _glorias_ was first introduced about a.d. as a protest against arianism, a heresy which denied the divinity and coequality of god the son. breaking of the bread--one of the new testament names for the holy communion (which see) and one of the four marks of the church's unbroken continuity. (acts : .) brotherhood of st. andrew.--the name of an organization of men in the church, the object of which is the spread of christ's kingdom among men. the members have two rules for their guidance ( ) the rule of prayer; to pray daily that the object of the society may be accomplished, and ( ) the rule of service; to make an earnest effort each week to bring at least one man within the hearing of the gospel of jesus christ. this organization has proved to be very popular and has grown rapidly in power and influence. it began as a parish organization in st. james' church, chicago, in , and proved to be so effective in winning men to the service of the church, that other parishes heard of it; took up the same line of work; so that there are now , active chapters with a membership of , men. the brotherhood has also been organized in { } canada, in england, scotland, and even in australia, and in every place it is proving to be a great help and blessing to the church. this work was prompted by the example of the apostle st. andrew. (see andrew, feast of st.) burial.--the burial office set forth in the prayer book is intended for the church's own people, and therefore it cannot be used over an unbaptized adult, because not being baptized he is not a member of the church. it cannot be used over an excommunicated person because he has been cut off from the church's privileges. it cannot be used over one who has committed suicide, even if a member of the church, for by this act he has voluntarily removed himself "from the sphere of its sanctions," and to whom all branches of the church as well as our own have ever denied the use of this office. the reason for these prohibitions may be learned when we consider that the burial office is founded on the fact of our incorporation into christ's mystical body, on which is founded our hope of the general resurrection. the whole service is colored by this belief and is illustrated and confirmed by the lesson read from st. paul's epistle to the corinthians, setting forth the doctrine that our lord's incarnation is the source of all spiritual life and, therefore, the source of eternal life in the world to come. the proper place for the use of the burial office is the church and it ought not to be used in houses except for great cause. burse.--a square pocket or case, in which the corporal and pall are kept when not in use. { } c calendar.--the word "calendar" is derived from the latin word _calo_, meaning, to reckon. from this the first day of every roman month was called _calends_, hence calendar. calendars are known to have been in use at a very early date. one is still extant that was formed as early as a.d. , and another drawn up for the church in carthage dates from a.d. . the origin of christian calendars is clearly coeval with the commemoration of martyrs, which began at least as early as the martyrdom of polycarp, a.d. . the church calendar is set forth in the introductory portion of the prayer book, consisting of several tables giving the holy days of the church with their proper lessons, and also the ordinary days of the year with the daily lessons. it is well to note that the calendar as thus set forth is the detailed law of the church for the daily worship of god. there is so much stated and implied in this law it is well worth our careful study, and the reader is referred to this introductory portion of the prayer book. (see christian year). candidate.--the name commonly given to one who is preparing for holy baptism or confirmation. the name is also applied to one who seeks admission to the sacred ministry, and is therefore enrolled as a "candidate for holy orders." candlemas.--a popular name for the feast of the purification, observed on february d, from the custom of lighting up churches with tapers and lamps in remembrance of our lord having been declared { } on this day by simeon to be "a light to lighten the gentiles." (st. luke : - .) canon.--a greek word meaning _rule_, and in the usage of the church has various applications, as follows: . the canon of scripture means those books of scripture which the church has received or accepted as inspired, and therefore declares them to be canonical, to distinguish them from profane, apocryphal or disputed books. . canon law means the body of ecclesiastical laws enacted by the church for the rule and discipline of its clergy and people. there are ecumenical canons, including the apostolic canons of unknown date, and the canons of the undisputed general councils; the canons of the english church which are regarded as binding in this country where they do not conflict with enactments of the american church; the general canons of the american church, and the diocesan canons enacted by the various dioceses. . the canon of the liturgy, by which is meant the rule for the celebration of the holy communion by which it is always to be offered. this includes the prayer of consecration, which was formerly called the "canon of the mass." . canon, the name given to a clergyman connected with a cathedral; an officer of the cathedral staff; a member of the cathedral chapter. canonical--pertaining, or according to the canons. canonical hours.--seven stated hours appointed for devotional exercises, viz., nocturns, matins with lauds, prime, tierce, sext, nones, and vespers with { } compline. each of the seven hours is said to commemorate some point in the passion of our lord, as set forth in the old rhyme, "at _mattins_ bound, at _prime_ reviled, condemned to death at _tierce_, nailed to the cross at _sexts_, at _nones_ his blessed side they pierced. "they take him down at _vesper_-tide in grave at _compline_ lay: who thenceforth bids his church observe the sevenfold hours alway." canonical residence.--by this is meant that every clergyman of the american church is connected with some one or other of the various dioceses, and is always under some bishop. his canonical residence begins with his ordination, or from the bishop's acceptance of his letter of transfer from one diocese to another. (see dimissory letter). canticle.--a word derived from the latin _canticulus_, meaning a little song, from _cantus_ a song. the term is applied to the detached psalms and hymns used in the services of the church, such as the venite, benedictus, magnificat, etc. cantoris.--derived from _cantor_, meaning a singer, and is used to designate the north side of the choir, where the precentor sits. architecturally and ecclesiastically, the altar is always regarded as the _east_ whether it is so in reality or not. north side, therefore, is the left of the altar as we face it. cardinal virtues.--(see virtues, the cardinal). cassock.--a long black coat, fastened in front and { } reaching to the feet, worn by the clergy with or without robes and signifying separation from the world. the cassock is also worn by choristers and choirmen under their surplices. catechism.--a short instruction set forth in the prayer book, "to be learned by every person before he be brought to be confirmed by the bishop." the word "catechism" is derived from a greek word, and means literally an instruction by word of mouth of such a kind as to draw out a reply. as it now stands, the catechism is really an "unfinished fragment." it was begun in , under edward vi. it was afterwards gradually enlarged, the commandments being given in full in ; the section on the two sacraments was added in , and the "duty towards my neighbor" was revised in . the catechism, as set forth in the prayer book, shows five general divisions, ( ) the christian covenant; ( ) the christian faith; ( ) the christian duty; ( ) the christian prayer or worship, and ( ) the christian sacraments or means of grace. the rubric at the end of the catechism provides that "the minister of every parish shall diligently, upon sundays and holy days, or on some other convenient occasions, openly in the church, instruct or examine so many children of his parish sent unto him, as he shall think convenient, in some part of this catechism." the object of this rubric is that the minister may have opportunity to prepare the younger members of his flock for confirmation. the catechism from its comprehensive exposition of duty and doctrine and its simple, familiar style of question and answer is well adapted for the purpose. and on { } all the five points enumerated the children of the parish may be duly instructed in their preparation for holy confirmation, if parents and guardians will be guided by the next rubric which directs them to send their children to the minister for instruction. catechumen.--the name given to a convert of the early church who was being instructed in christian doctrine preparatory to holy baptism. cathedral.--the word "cathedral," derived from the greek word _cathedra_, meaning a seat, is the name given to the church where the bishop's seat or throne is. as such, it is the chief church in the diocese and the centre of the bishop's work. around it are gathered the educational and charitable institutions of the diocese. it is the centre of diocesan activities and of the mission work carried on by the cathedral clergy under the direction of the bishop. of the cathedral as an institution a recent writer has said: "it must be granted that a cathedral in its origin was nothing more than a missionary creation, where the bishop of a partly unevangelized country placed his seat with his council of clergy grouped around him, whose duty was to go forth into the surrounding districts with the message of the gospel, to plant smaller churches which should be subordinate or parochial centres, and to return again periodically to the diocesan church as headquarters, for the counsel, direction and inspiration of their chief." (see diocese). catholic.--the word "catholic" was very early adopted as descriptive of the church founded by our lord and his apostles. it means universal, or embracing all. in this sense the church is catholic in { } these three things, ( ) it is for all people; ( ) it teaches all the gospel, and ( ) it endures throughout all ages. this distinguishes the christian church from the old jewish church which was but temporal, local, national. again, the word catholic is used as being descriptive of the orthodoxy of any particular church or individual as being in agreement with the one, undivided church which has expressed itself in the ecumenical or general councils. the word is, also, used to describe that which is believed on the authority of the church, as for example, the doctrine of the blessed trinity is a _catholic_ doctrine because it is the universally accepted teaching of the church and having the sure warrant of holy scripture. thus we learn that the word _catholic_ is a very significant term and sets forth the real nature of the church and her teachings. it enables us to test our own orthodoxy, to know whether we are loyal and true, in accord with "the faith once delivered to the saints," and, without doubt, will save us from being "carried away with every blast of vain doctrine." this word, then, so greatly misunderstood, so wrongly used, yet meaning what it does, ought to be used with thoughtful care. for intelligent churchmen the term "catholic church" should not mean, nor be used to mean, simply the roman church, but rather that glorious body in which we declare our belief when we say in the creed, "i believe in the holy catholic church." celebrant.--he who celebrates the holy eucharist { } whether bishop or priest, is so called. a deacon cannot celebrate or administer the holy communion. ceremonies.--(see rites and ceremonies). chalice.--the cup, made of precious metal, in which the wine is consecrated at the holy communion and from which it is received by the communicants. derived from the latin word _calix_, genitive, _calicis_, meaning, a cup. (see vessels, sacred). chalice veil.--a square of silk embroidered and fringed, varying in color according to the church season. it is used for covering the chalice when empty. chancel.--that part of the church building set apart as the place of the clergy and others who minister in the church service. it includes the sanctuary where the holy communion is celebrated and the choir where the other offices are said. the chancel was formerly, and is even now in many places, divided from the nave by a screen or lattice work (cancelli) and is raised by steps above the level of the body of the church. chancellor.--an officer of the diocese, learned in the law, whose duty it is to act as the legal counselor of the bishop and of the standing committee in matters affecting the interests of the church, as his professional counsel may be asked or required. chancellor is also the title of a cathedral officer; the name is also given to the head of a university. chantry.--a small chapel attached to a parish church where the daily offices are said, _e_. _g_., the chantry of grace church, new york. anciently the chantry was an endowed chapel. { } chasuble.--the vestment worn by the celebrant at the holy eucharist. for full description see vestments. childermas.--the old english popular name for holy innocents day (which see). chimere.--the garment worn by a bishop, now usually of black satin, but formerly of scarlet. it has lawn sleeves attached to it which properly belong to the rochet, the white vestment worn underneath. the derivation of the name is unknown. choir.--properly speaking the word "choir" is an architectural term used only of cathedrals and is that part of the building which in parish churches is called the chancel. it is usually separated from the cathedral nave by a screen. the term is also used to designate the body of singers appointed to render the music of the church services. choir, the vested.--(see surpliced choir). choral service.--(see even song, also intone and plain song.) christian.--in the th chapter of the acts of the apostles, the th verse, we read, "and the disciples were called _christians_ first in antioch." as the result of the persecutions which arose about st. stephen, some of the disciples who had to flee for their lives came to antioch. in time there grew up a church there, a mixed society of jews and gentiles, and the citizens of antioch naturally asked, "what are they?" "what name do they bear?" "what is their object?" while they were acquainted with the jews and their peculiarities, they saw that this was not a jewish organization, for it embraced gentiles as well. when { } they learned that the one bond which held this society together was their belief in a messiah, a christ, the people of antioch, who were celebrated for their fertility in nicknames, called the members of this society, _christians_. without doubt the name was given in ridicule. it did not spread widely at first; it is only twice used in the bible and each time as a word of reproach. but as often happens with names thus conferred, this was a name to remain forever; a name that was to be powerful and far-reaching; a name that was to stand for all that is lovely, noble and beautiful in human life. such is the origin of the name we bear. we are christians because we know no other name but that of christ and no other bond but that of union with christ. we are made christians in our baptism, for we are then brought into union with christ and made members of his body. the old word _christen_, meaning to baptize, really means _to christian_, that is, to make christian by incorporating us into christ. christian name.--(see name, christian.) christian unity.--(see unity, church). christian year, the.--the church's year of festivals and fasts is called the _christian year_ because as bishop cosin says, "the church does not number her days, or measure her seasons, so much by the motion of the sun, as by the course of our saviour; beginning and counting her year with him who, being the true sun of righteousness, began now to rise upon the world." the christian year is one of our richest possessions and has been handed down to us from the most ancient { } times. by it the church regulates her public worship, makes generous provision for the reading of the bible and for us, her people, it is the measure of our coming up to the house of god. by means of it we connect the passage of time with the great facts of redemption and thus are enabled to so number our days that we may apply our hearts unto wisdom. an examination of its structure reveals the fact that it insures the scriptural setting forth of the gospel, not in part, but in all its fulness. its principal divisions are as follows: i. advent, the coming of christ; the season includes four sundays. ii. christmas, incarnation and birth of christ. iii. epiphany, the manifestation of christ to the gentiles: season variable and may include six sundays. iv. septuagesima or the pre-lenten season; three sundays: why god the son came to earth; consciousness of sin. v. lent, including holy week, good friday, and easter even; penitence and amendment of life; redemption by the blood of christ. vi. easter, the risen life; teaching of the great forty days. vii. ascension, the hope of glory. viii. whitsun tide, the gift of the holy ghost. ix. the trinity season, the completed revelation; the moralities of the gospel. in addition to these great divisions or seasons, there are the holy days dotting the calendar--saints' days commemorating the grace given unto god's { } faithful servants, and other holy days each having its special scriptural teaching. (see fasts, table of, also feasts.) the value of the christian year cannot be too highly estimated, for after all has been said, the fact remains, that no better instructor in the truths of the bible can be found than what is commonly called the christian year. christmas day.--christmas is preeminently a church festival, and observed on december th. on this day the church celebrates with joy, gladness and exultation the nativity of her lord, who became incarnate (_i.e._, took our nature upon him) and was born of a pure virgin. as the angels at his birth, so mankind ever since has hailed the day of his nativity with exceeding great joy. the puritans strove with all their ardor to destroy it, but happily did not succeed. the argument used against it, that the birthday of the child jesus is not known, and, therefore, cannot be preserved, does not prevail against the universal longing to celebrate in some way this great event. we are not surprised, therefore, to find that from the very earliest period christmas was observed. st. chrysostom, in the fourth century, speaks of it as being even then of great antiquity. in one of his epistles he mentions that julius i, about a.d. , had caused strict inquiry to be made and had confirmed the observance of christmas on december th. christmas has always been observed with several celebrations of the holy eucharist, three at least taking place; one at midnight, another at early dawn and the third at midday. the growing devotion of the { } american church has demanded this celebration of christmas and, therefore, at the last revision of the prayer book a second collect, epistle and gospel for this day was inserted. it is customary to decorate our churches on christmas with evergreen as symbolical of the eternal nature of our lord; to deck the altar with white symbol of joy and purity, and in some places with lighted candles to typify our lord as the light of the world. church.--the word used in holy scripture for church is _ecclesia_, from the greek word _ek-kaleo_, meaning to call out. an ecclesia, therefore, is a body _called out_. the rev. francis j. hall has given the following explanation, "the church is called the _ecclesia_ because her membership consists of those who are called of god, and adopted as his children and heirs of everlasting life. the name teaches that the origin of the church was due, not to any human act of organization, but to divine operations and a divine ingathering of the elect. the mark by which the elect are distinguished in holy scripture is membership of the church by baptism, although ultimate salvation requires further conditions." the use of the term _ecclesia_ came originally from the calling out of israel from egypt; "out of egypt have i called my son;" this is the first use of the word. the true conception of the church is a body called out from the world, and set apart to the service of god, as such it is called the kingdom of god, over which god reigns and in which they who are called serve him. (see unity, church; kingdom of god; church catholic; also anglican church). { } church building fund.--a very important and helpful organization exists in the american church known as "the american church building fund commission." it was established october th, , by the general convention and consists of all the bishops, and one clergyman and one layman from each diocese and missionary jurisdiction appointed by the bishop thereof, and of twenty members-at-large appointed by the presiding bishop. its object is to create by an annual offering from every congregation, as recommended by the general convention, and by individual gifts, a fund of one million dollars, portions of the principal to be loaned, and of the interest given, to aid the building of churches wherever needed. in order to hold property and carry on the work of loaning money on mortgage in a safe and legal manner, it was necessary to organize a corporation and this was done under the laws of the state of new york, the title of the organization being that given above. this commission is one of the most efficient agencies in church extension; many a mission through its aid being enabled to erect a house of worship, which otherwise would have had to give up in despair and abandon all hopes of having the church's worship and administration of the sacraments. church catholic, the.--the kingdom of christ, partly visible here on earth, partly invisible behind the veil. the church catholic embraces three great divisions: i. the church militant, here on earth, struggling, fighting (which militant means) against sin to overcome it. { } ii. the church expectant where the soul abides after death in a state of expectancy of the final resurrection; called, also, the intermediate state (which see). iii. the church triumphant in heaven where the soul reunited to the body has its perfect consummation and bliss in god's eternal and everlasting glory. church chronology.--under this head may be given certain dates and events which may be regarded as "turning points" in the history of the christian church: event. date. day of pentecost, birthday of the church a.d. death of st. john at ephesus the ten great persecutions of christians - i. general council, at nicea ii. general council, at constantinople iii. general council, at ephesus iv. general council, at chalcedon leo the great revised the roman liturgy v. general council, at constantinople gregory the great revised the roman liturgy st. augustine came to england vi. general council, at constantinople venerable bede died at yarrow, england alfred the great founded oxford university final separation of church in east and west osmund, bishop of salisbury, revised english liturgy crusades began bible divided into chapters wickliffe and his work - first book printed, a latin bible, at mentz martin luther and his work - john calvin - { } english reformation - first english prayer book set forth present authorized version of the bible present english prayer book set forth church introduced into america - bishop seabury consecrated in scotland first american bishop three additional bishops consecrated in england for american church - name changed to protestant episcopal american prayer book set forth oct. , american prayer book revised - church club.--throughout the american church there are a number of church clubs composed of laymen, associated together for the purpose of discussing problems of church work and belief and studying out more thoroughly what this church teaches and what its history is. in some of these clubs eminent bishops and other clergy and laymen are invited to deliver lectures which are afterwards printed in book form. the church club has done much to raise up a class of intelligent and well-informed churchmen who are proving to be a great help and blessing to the church. church colors.--also called liturgical colors. from the most ancient times it has been customary to deck the church's altar with hangings of rich material which vary in color with the church season. as commonly used at the present time the church colors are five in number, viz., white, red, violet, green and black. their use may be briefly set forth as follows: _white_ is used on all the great festivals of our lord, of the blessed virgin, and of those saints who did not suffer martyrdom; it is also the color for all saints' day, and the feast of st. michael and all { } angels; white is the symbol of joy and purity. _red_ is used on the feasts of martyrs, typifying that they shed their blood for the testimony of jesus; it is also used at whitsun tide, symbolizing the cloven tongues of fire in the likeness of which the holy ghost descended on the apostles. _violet_ is the penitential color and is used in advent, lent, the ember and rogation days, on the feasts of the holy innocents, etc. _green_ is the ordinary color for days that are neither feasts nor fasts as being the pervading color of nature; it is chiefly used during the epiphany tide and the long period of the trinity season. _black_ is made use of at funerals and on good friday. this use of the colors applies to the stole as well as to the altar hangings. the black stole is always out of place, incongruous, except at funerals and on good friday. where they are used, the cope, chasuble, maniple, dalmatic and tunic also vary with the season in the same manner. the use of the church colors, besides "decking the place of his sanctuary" is also most helpful to the devotions of the people, in that it teaches them by the eye the various seasons of the church's joy or mourning. church congress.--an organization of the clergy and laity in the american church having for its object the general discussion of living questions of the day and the application of revealed truth to the needs of our modern life. it was organized in on the model of the english church congress which, no doubt, suggested such an organization for the church in the united states. it is not a legislative body, but rather an "open court" for the free { } exchange of views. meetings are held annually and an elaborate programme of subjects is prepared for each meeting, with appointed essayists and speakers, and volunteer speakers are permitted. the proceedings of each congress are published in book form, of which the rev. dr. wildes for so many years the general secretary says, "the proceedings, addresses and speeches of the several sessions embodied in annual reports form a _thesaurus_ of ripe learning, vigorous thought and eloquent utterance upon great questions of the times, of which the episcopal church may well be proud. to the student in theology and its cognate topics, no less than to clergymen and thoughtful laymen, these volumes will be found most valuable." church militant.--(see church catholic, the). church missions house.--this is a name that ought to be familiar to every american churchman. it is the name given to the handsome building which is the headquarters of "the domestic and foreign missionary society of the protestant episcopal church in the united states of america." for many years the headquarters of the society were in rented rooms in the bible house, new york city. by special offerings given for the purpose by many generous churchmen, the society was provided with the means to erect this beautiful and spacious building. the corner-stone was laid on the southeast corner of fourth avenue and twenty-second street in new york city on october , . the building was occupied by the society on new year's day, , and on the th of the same month, st. paul's day, the building was formally dedicated. "thus after more than { } seventy years, during which the society had been a tenant, the society, representing our whole church, was established in its own beautiful home." the church mission house is a perfect beehive of church work. here all the leading interests of the church are centred. in its spacious, well-lighted rooms are the offices of the missionary society. here, too, are the headquarters of the woman's auxiliary, the american building fund commission, the officers of the general convention, of the general clergy relief fund, the brotherhood of st. andrew, the girls' friendly society and other church agencies. here, too, in its beautiful chapel the noontide prayers are daily offered for the spread of the gospel of christ throughout the world. the church missions house is well worth a visit by those who are visiting new york even for only a few days. (see domestic and foreign missionary society). church temperance society.--this society was organized in , and has for its object the promotion of _temperance_ in its strict meaning. its adult membership combines those who temperately use and those who totally abstain from intoxicating liquors as beverages. it works on the lines of moral as well as legal suasion, and its practical objects are: . training the young in habits of temperance. . rescue of the drunkard. . restriction of the saloon by legislation, and . counteractive agencies, such as coffee-houses, working-men's clubs, reading-rooms and other attractive wholesome resorts. the church temperance legion deals with boys, seeking to induce them to keep sober, pure, and reverent from the { } earliest years of manhood and it endeavors to perpetuate those habits in men. church wardens.--the name given to two officers of a parish usually distinguished by the titles, senior and junior. in some dioceses they are elected directly by the people of the parish at the same time the vestrymen are elected. in other dioceses they are appointed by the newly elected vestry. the senior warden is usually appointed by the rector and the junior warden is elected by the vestry. it is the special duties of the wardens to see that the church edifice is kept from unhallowed use; that it be kept clean and in good repair, duly lighted and warmed; to provide a sufficient supply of books and ecclesiastical vestments to be used in the public ministrations by the minister, and to provide proper elements for the celebration of the holy communion and preserve due order during service. in the absence of the rector one of the wardens presides at parish and vestry meetings. church year.--(see christian year). churching.--equivalent to the purification among the jews, and which in the life of the blessed virgin mary is commemorated as a feast of the church on february . the reader is directed to the service set forth in the prayer book under the title, "the thanksgiving of women after childbirth; commonly called, the churching of women." "although every deliverance from peril or sorrow demands a tribute of thanksgiving to god, yet god himself has placed a mark on the pains of childbirth (gen. : ); and therefore, as bearing special reference to the cause of { } all other misery, the church has appointed a special office of praise in acknowledgment of the primeval curse converted into a blessing." circumcision, the.--a feast of the church observed on january st, in commemoration of our lord's obedience to the law of circumcision and his receiving the name jesus (which see, also holy name). originally this date was observed as the octave of christmas. its first mention as the feast of the circumcision was about a.d. . in the annotated prayer book there is the following note: "january st was never in any way connected with the opening of the christian year; and the religious observance of this day (new year's day) has never received any sanction from the church, except as the octave of christmas and the feast of the circumcision. the spiritual point of the season all gathers about christmas. as the modern new year's day is merely conventionally so (new year's day being on march th until about years ago), there is no reason why it should be allowed at all to dim the lustre of a day so important to all persons and all ages as christmas day." the feast of the circumcision is designed to be observed with great solemnity. there are proper psalms, being the th and th for morning prayer, and the th and d for evening prayer, also proper lessons and collect, epistle and gospel, these last to be used every day until the epiphany. the church color is, white, and the feast is placed among the days of obligation (which see). clergy.--a collective name for the bishops, priests and deacons of the church. the priesthood and the { } people are generally distinguished from each other by the titles _clergy_ and _laity_. the term clergy is derived from the greek word _cleros_, meaning a lot or portion, either because the clergy--_clerikoi_--are the lord's portion, as being allotted to his service; or because god is their portion and inheritance. the laity are so called from the greek word _laos_, meaning people, as being the chosen and peculiar people of god. clerical.--pertaining to the work and office of the clergy. cloister.--a covered walk about a cathedral or church or collegiate building, oftentimes forming a portion of the quadrangle. coadjutor.--(see bishop coadjutor). collect.--the name given to the prayers set forth in the prayer book and especially to the short prayers used in connection with epistles and gospels. the origin of the name is uncertain and various meanings have been given to it. some have connected it with the _collected_ assembly of the people; others have interpreted the name as indicating that the prayer so-called, _collects_ together the topics of previous prayers or else those of the epistle and gospel for the day. another interpretation is that which distinguishes the collect as the prayer offered by the priest _alone_ on behalf of the people, while in the litanies and versicles the priest and people pray alternately. as of common prayer in general, so it may be concluded especially of the collect in particular, "that it is the supplications of many gathered into one by the voice of the priest and offered up by him to the father through our lord and mediator jesus christ." { } comfortable words.--the name given to the short passages of scripture read after the absolution in the communion service. it has been pointed out that these are peculiar to our liturgy and that "perhaps the object of their introduction was the obvious one suggested in the title of _comfortable words_, of confirming the words of absolution with those of christ and his apostles; and of holding forth our lord and saviour before the communicants, in the words of holy scripture to prepare them for 'discerning' his body in the sacrament." commendatory prayer.--a beautiful and impressive prayer added to the prayer book in , and which is to be said over a dying person. this prayer ought to be memorized by every churchman so as to use it in any emergency for, as bishop coxe suggests in "thoughts on the services," "whether a clergyman be present or not, no christian should be willing to die, or be permitted to die, without the _commendatory prayer_ said by some one present at or near the moment of departure. church people are not heathen, that they should neglect this bounden duty to one who is passing away. 'father into thy hands i commend my spirit,' said the saviour with his dying breath. so should the sick person in his own behalf; or those who love him in his behalf, if because of the pain or unconsciousness of death, he cannot frame the petition for himself." commandments, the ten.--(see decalogue.) common prayer.--bishop whitehead has given the following explanation of this term: "common prayer is so called in distinction from private or { } special prayer. it comprehends those needs and expresses those religious feelings which are common to all god's children who come together to worship. so we make our common supplications, confess our common sins, and offer our common sacrifice of praise and thanksgiving, of alms and devotion." (see worship, also prayer book.) communion, holy.--(see holy communion.) communion of saints.--an article of the creed by which is meant the fellowship with, or union in christ of all who are one with him whether they are among the living in the church on earth or the departed in paradise. the communion of saints is specially realized in the holy eucharist. this spiritual food is our lord's own divine substance and life, by participation in which the faithful christian enters into a communion with his lord which death cannot end or even interrupt. all who enter, whether in the present or in the past, into this communion with their risen lord are thereby bound together in holy fellowship one with another also. it is this holy fellowship of those whom the spirit has sanctified, one with another and with their lord, that we call the communion of saints. (see all saints' day.) compline.--one of the seven canonical hours (which see). confirmation.--an ordinance of the church, sacramental in character and grace conferring. it is administered to those who have been baptized and is effected by prayer and the laying on of hands by the bishop. hence the scriptural name for it is "the laying on of hands." its chief grace is the seven-fold { } gift of the holy ghost by means of which we are sealed, made firm or strong, and equipped "manfully to fight under christ's banner against sin, the world and the devil." confirmation is a further advance in the christian life and entitles the recipient to be admitted to the holy communion. the scriptural authority for confirmation is very manifest. thus in acts : - , we have the first recorded confirmation, and in the th chapter we find another account of the same administration. in hebrews : , , we find confirmation or the laying on of hands mentioned as a first or foundation principle of the doctrine of christ, as necessary to the health of the soul as repentance, faith, baptism, resurrection and eternal judgment. in ephesians : and , it is spoken of as a "sealing," and made a plea for righteousness of life: and in the fourth chapter, verse , it is spoken of in the same way, as well as other passages which might be cited. confirmation having such scriptural authority, it is to be noted that it has always and in all places been practiced by the historic church and that even at this present time nine-tenths of all christian people still hold to confirmation as essential and necessary to the religious life. while the above scriptural authority and universal practice are sufficient evidence that the use of confirmation is according to the mind of christ, yet it will be interesting to know the estimate of this holy ordinance by those who have departed from the practice of the universal church, which is given as follows: methodist testimony.--"i was determined { } not to be without it, and therefore went and received confirmation, even since i became a methodist preacher."--_dr. adam clarke_. baptist testimony.--"we believe that laying on of hands, with prayer, upon baptized believers as such, is an ordinance of christ, and ought to be submitted unto by all persons to partake of the lord's supper."--_baptist association, september , _. congregational testimony.--"the confession of the name of christ is, after all, very lame, and will be so till the discipline which christ ordained be restored, and the rite of confirmation be recovered in its full use and solemnity."--_dr. coleman, boston_. presbyterian testimony.--"the rite of confirmation thus administered to baptized children, when arrived at competent years, shows clearly that the primitive church in her purest days, exercised the authority of a mother over her baptized children."--_committee of the general assembly_. consecrate.--to make sacred; to set apart for sacred use, as the elements in the holy communion, church buildings, etc. a bishop is said to be consecrated to his office by the act of laying on of hands by other bishops. consecration, prayer of.--that portion of the communion office beginning with the words, "all glory be to thee, almighty god," etc., and by which the bread and the wine become the body and the blood of christ. this is the most solemn act of the whole service and comprises ( ) the words of institution, ( ) the oblation and ( ) the invocation, followed by the intercessions. { } consecration of church buildings.--the service provided in the prayer book whereby a church building erected and paid for is separated, by the administration of the bishop from all unhallowed, ordinary and common uses and dedicated to god's service, for reading his holy word, for celebrating his holy sacraments, for offering to his glorious majesty the sacrifices of prayer and thanksgiving, for blessing his people in his name, and for all other holy offices. the building thus set apart becomes god's house and not man's, and as such calls for acts of reverence on man's part as he enters it to meet god where he has thus caused his name to dwell there. convention.--a name quite generally used in the united states for a council of the church. (see general convention, diocesan convention, also council.) convocation.--the term "convocation" as used in the american church has reference to certain territorial divisions in a diocese, or the grouping together of the clergy and laity of certain districts of a diocese, for the more efficient and systematic work of missions. usually each diocese is divided into two or more convocational districts, each one presided over by a priest, either elected by the clergy of the convocation or appointed by the bishop, and usually called the "dean of convocation." this arrangement has been found to be very helpful in creating a greater interest in the work of diocesan missions and in promoting church extension within the convocational limits. the term is also applied to the annual meetings of { } the bishop, clergy and laity of a missionary jurisdiction, which being a mission, is not entitled to hold a diocesan council or convention. cope.--a long cloak of silk or other rich material, semicircular in shape, fastened in front at the neck by a clasp or morse and having on the back a flat hood embroidered. it is worn over the alb or surplice and varies in color according to the church season. usually worn in processions by priest or bishop and is symbolical of rule. corporal.--one of the pieces of altar linen. a napkin of fine linen to be spread on the altar, and upon which the sacred vessels are placed at the holy communion. when the altar breads are on the altar, the lower right hand corner of the corporal is turned back over them, except during the oblation and consecration. cotta.--a shorter form of the surplice, not so full and having short sleeves. the short surplice worn by choir-boys and choirmen is usually called a cotta. council.--an assemblage of the church met together for the purpose of considering matters of faith and discipline and legislating upon them. the council may be ecumenical, _i.e._, general, or else of local interest and as such may be national, provincial or diocesan. the general councils are those held by the undivided church (which see) and which have been universally received. they are generally regarded as being six in number, as follows: i. council of nicea, held a.d. , met to consider the heresy of arius and which gave us the nicene creed. { } ii. council of constantinople, held a.d. , to consider the heresy of macedonius and which reaffirmed the nicene creed and completed it as it now stands except the "filioque." iii. council of ephesus, held a.d. , to consider the nestorian heresy. iv. council of chalcedon, held a.d. , to consider the heresy of the eutychians. v. second council of constantinople, held a.d. , to confirm the decisions of the first four general councils. vi. third council of constantinople, held a.d. , against a development of eutychianism. (see ecumenical.) credence.--a table or shelf made of wood or stone placed at the side of the sanctuary to hold the elements and vessels preparatory to consecration in the holy communion. the derivation is not certainly known. some suppose it is derived from an anglo-saxon word meaning "to make ready"; while others think it is derived from the italian word for "buffet"--_credenzare_, meaning to taste food or drink before handed to another,--an old court custom. the presence of the credence in the sanctuary is made necessary by the rubric which directs that the bread and wine shall not be placed on the altar until the time of the offertory. creed.--a name derived from the latin word, _credo_, meaning _i believe_, and signifying the belief. the creed begins with the words "i believe," because each and every statement in it contains a truth superior to reason, revealed by almighty god and proposed { } to our faith faculty. in the american church two forms of the creed are used, namely the apostles' and the nicene, to each of which the reader is referred. (see also orthodox.) two customs in saying the creed have come down to us from the most ancient times, ( ) that of turning to the east or towards the altar in saying it, and ( ) that of bowing the head at the holy name of jesus. cross, the.--among the ancients death by crucifixion was a very common mode of execution. among the romans, death on the cross was regarded as the most degraded death possible, and was used in the punishment of slaves and the lowest class of criminals. it was thus our blessed lord was humiliated; nay, it was thus that "he humbled himself, and became obedient unto death, even the death of the cross." (phil. : .) this humiliating death of our lord by crucifixion, led his followers to regard the cross with feelings of the greatest reverence. henceforth, the cross, the instrument of a shameful death, became the symbol of glory. it became the emblem of the christian religion. it was placed on all church buildings and over the altar as the everlasting sign of the eternal hope of the christian's belief. it became also a manual act. the custom of crossing oneself, as an act of devotion may be traced back to the very beginnings of christianity. the prayer book makes provision for the newly baptized to be signed "with the sign of the cross in token that hereafter he shall not be ashamed to confess the faith of christ crucified," and it is thought that if it be neither wrong { } nor superstitious on this occasion, it cannot be at other times. (see emblems.) crucifer.--from a latin word meaning cross-bearer, a name used to designate one who carries the cross in choir processionals. cruets.--for the greater convenience of the priest in celebrating the holy communion, vessels of glass or precious metal, called cruets, are placed on the credence to hold the wine and water, and from which at the proper time in the service, the chalice is supplied. crypt.--a vault beneath a church, more especially under the chancel and sometimes used for burial. the word is sometimes given to the basement of a church where services are held. curate.--derived from the latin _curatus_, meaning one who is charged with the _cura_, _i.e._, the cure or care of souls. originally _curate_ meant any one under the rank of bishop, having the cure of souls, but now the name is usually given to the assistant minister in a parish. (see assistant minister.) d daily prayer, the.--by the appointment of daily morning and evening prayer set forth in the prayer book the church designs that services should be held every day in the church throughout the year. this is usually regarded as being impracticable and therefore the daily prayer does not prevail in our churches. it has been pointed out, however, that "churches { } without such an offering of morning and evening prayer are clearly alien to the system and principles of the book of common prayer, and to make the offering in the total absence of worshippers seems scarcely less so. but as every church receives blessings from god in proportion as it renders to him the honor due unto his name, so it is much to be wished that increased knowledge of devotional principles may lead on to such increase of devotional practice as may make the omission of the daily offices rare in the churches of our land." dalmatic.--a robe of silk or other rich material with wide but short sleeves, and richly embroidered, worn by the deacon or gospeller at the holy eucharist. not usually worn, although its use is being restored. daughters of the king.--an organization of the young women of the church, organized in . a careful distinction should be made between the daughters of the king and "the king's daughters." this organization came into existence some time before the king's daughters was organized, and it is to be noted that the daughters of the king is more of an _order_ than a society and is distinctively a church organization. the purpose of the order is "for the spread of christ's kingdom among young women," and "the active support of the plans of the rector in whose parish the particular chapter may be located." its badge is a cross of silver, a greek cross fleury and its mottoes are, "magnanimeter crucem sustine" and "for his sake." its colors are white and blue. the order of the daughters of the king is very similar to { } the brotherhood of st. andrew, and is designed to do for young women what the brotherhood does for young men. days of obligation.--these are days on which communicants are bound by the faith they profess to be present at the celebration of the holy communion and to rest as much as possible from servile work. such days of obligation are the following: all sundays in the year, not but . christmas day th december. feast of the circumcision st january. feast of the epiphany th january. annunciation day th march. easter day movable. ascension day movable. whitsun day movable. all saints' day st november. deacon.--one who has been ordained to the lowest order of the ministry. the account of the institution of the order of deacons is found in the acts of the apostles : - . we here learn that the first deacons were ordained to attend especially to the benevolent work of the church in caring for the poor, but they were also preachers of the word. the office of deacon is still retained in the church as an order of the ministry, for "it is evident unto all men reading holy scripture and ancient authors, that from the apostles' time there have been these orders of ministers in christ's church,--bishops, priests and deacons." a deacon may assist the priest at the altar and administer the cup. he may baptize, say all choir offices, and if he is learned and { } is licensed thereto by the bishop, he may preach, but he cannot administer the holy communion, or pronounce the absolution and the benediction. he wears his stole over the left shoulder and fastened under his right arm. if a candidate for priest's orders and can pass the required examination, he may after a year's service as a deacon be advanced to the priesthood. deaconess.--in the apostles' time there were holy women set apart for the work of the church, for example phoebe, the servant or deaconess, who was commended by st. paul. this order of deaconesses continued until about the seventh century, when the changed conditions of the church interfered with its usefulness. in many places the order has of late years been revived and is demonstrating its original usefulness. the american church has recognized the need of such an order of women in its work, and in the general canons provision is made for establishing the order and for its continuance and regulation. according to these, a woman to be admitted to the office of deaconess must be at least twenty-five years of age, a communicant of the church, and fit and capable to discharge the duties of the office. before she can act as a deaconess she must be set apart for that office by an appropriate religious service. when thus set apart she shall be under the direct oversight of the bishop of the diocese, to whom she may resign her office at any time, but having once resigned her office she is not privileged to be reappointed thereto unless the bishop shall see "weighty cause for such reappointment." { } training schools for deaconesses have been established in various parts of the country where candidates for this office receive special instruction and are trained for their work. dean.--an ecclesiastical title; the presiding officer of a cathedral. the word is derived from the latin _decanus_, meaning one presiding over ten. in england the dean is a church dignitary and ranks next to the bishop. the word is used in the american church, but with a considerable modification of its original meaning. the cathedral in the american church not having become fully developed, the duties and rights of the dean as the presiding officer of the cathedral have not been fully determined, or at all events not made a reality. so that for the most part the title as used in this country is simply honorary. decalogue.--the name given to the ten commandments and derived from the greek word, _dekalogos_, meaning the ten words or discourses. they are divided into two tables; the first four commandments set forth our duty towards god, and the last six our duty towards man. the reading of the ten commandments in the communion office is peculiar to our liturgy and were added in the year , together with the response after each commandment, "lord, have mercy upon us and incline our hearts to keep this law." while the commandments were originally introduced to our liturgy as a warning and safeguard against the lawlessness of extreme puritans, they are, nevertheless, helpful to all as a preparation for the right reception of the holy communion; leading the congregation to an examination of their "lives and { } conversation by the rule of god's commandments." the translation of the decalogue used in the communion office is not that of the present authorized version, but that of the "great bible" of - , which was retained because the people had grown familiar with it. to the commandments is added our lord's summary of the law, which may be read at the discretion of the minister. decani.--a term used to designate the south side of the choir, (the right side as we face the altar) that being the side where the dean sits. dedication, feast of.--the annual commemoration of the consecration of a church building is so called. from ancient authors we learn that when christianity became prosperous and flourishing, churches were everywhere erected and were solemnly consecrated, the dedications being celebrated with great festivities and rejoicing. the rites and ceremonies used upon these occasions were a great gathering of bishops and others from all parts, the celebration of divine offices, singing of hymns and psalms, reading the holy scriptures, sermons and orations, receiving the blessed sacrament, prayers and thanksgivings, liberal alms bestowed on the poor, gifts to the church; and, in short, mighty expressions of mutual love and kindness and universal rejoicing with one another. these dedications from that time forward were always commemorated once a year and were solemnized with great pomp and much gathering of the people, the solemnity usually lasting eight days. the feast of the dedication is frequently kept in many parishes now and its observance has been found { } to be most helpful to both priest and people, recalling to mind the joy and gladness of the day of the consecration of their church and being the time for the revival of old faiths and pledges, and consequently of renewed interest in the church, its work and its worship. deposition.--the name used in the general canons for degradation from the office of the ministry, as the penalty for offenses therein enumerated. deposition can only be performed by a bishop after sufficient evidence. when a bishop thus deposes any one, he is required to send "notice of such deposition from the ministry to the ecclesiastical authority of every diocese and missionary jurisdiction of this church, in the form in which the same is recorded." the object of this is to prevent any one thus deposed from officiating anywhere in the church. he has been cut off from all office in the church and from all rights of exercising that office. deprecations.--the name given to certain petitions in the litany (which see). descent into hell.--an article of the creed in which we confess our belief that our lord while his body lay in the grave, descended into the place of departed spirits. the word "hell" as here used is the english translation of the greek word _hades_, which means not the place of torment, (for which another greek word is used, viz., gehenna) but that covered, hidden place where the soul awaits the general resurrection. the rubric before the creed gives this interpretation of the word, and permission is given to churches to use instead of it, the words "place of departed spirits," "which are considered as words of { } the same meaning in the creed." (see intermediate state.) diaconate.--the office of a deacon, or the order of deacons collectively. dies irae.--the first two words of a latin hymn, meaning "day of wrath," being the th of the hymnal. it is supposed to have been written in the twelfth century by thomas of celano. the translation of this hymn used in the hymnal was made by the rev. w. j. irons, in . it seems to be a poetic and devotional embodiment of the words to be found in hebrews : , "a certain fearful looking for of judgment and fiery indignation," and is much used during advent. the music to which it is usually sung was written by the rev. john b. dykes in , and is a most beautiful rendering of this ancient and sublime hymn. digest of the canons.--the name given to the collection of the laws or canons of the american church enacted and set forth by the general convention. the word "digest" is derived from the latin word _digestus_, meaning carried apart, resolved, digested, and is applied to a body of laws arranged under their proper heads or titles. the canons set forth by the general convention as thus arranged come under four titles, viz.: title i.--of the orders of the ministry and of the doctrine and worship of this church. under this head there are twenty-six canons. title ii.--of discipline, thirteen canons. title iii.--of the organized bodies and officers of the church, nine canons. { } title iv.--miscellaneous provisions, four canons. there is also an appendix of standing resolutions. dimissory letter.--a letter given to a clergyman removing from one diocese to another. the general canons provide that "before a clergyman shall be permitted to settle in any church or parish, or be received into union with any diocese of this church as a minister thereof, he shall produce to the bishop, or if there be no bishop, to the standing committee thereof, a letter of dismission from under the hand and seal of the bishop with whose diocese he has been last connected . . . which shall be delivered within six months from the date thereof; and when such clergyman shall have been so received he shall be considered as having passed entirely from the jurisdiction of the bishop from whom the letter of dismission was brought, to the full jurisdiction of the bishop or other ecclesiastical authority by whom it shall be accepted and become thereby subject to all the canonical provisions of this church." the effect of this law is that in the episcopal church there can be no strolling, irresponsible evangelists or preachers, and thus the people are protected from imposture, and may know, when the proper steps are taken, that their ministers come to them fully accredited and duly authorized to minister to them in christ's name. diocese.--the territorial limits of a bishop's jurisdiction. properly speaking the diocese is the real unit of church life. originally the bishop went first in the establishing of the church in any nation or country; out of this jurisdiction grew the parishes or local congregation, being ministered to by the priests { } under the bishop. in the american church, through force of circumstances, the reverse of this has been the case. but notwithstanding, the fact remains here as elsewhere that the diocese with the bishop at its head is the real unit of church life and organization, and the parish a dependency of it and from which it gets its corporate existence as a parish. in the phraseology of the canons, a missionary bishop presides over a "missionary jurisdiction" which it is expected will develop into a diocese, but according to the true theory of the church his _missionary jurisdiction_ is really a diocese. (see cathedral.) diocesan.--the name given to a bishop who presides over a diocese. the word also means relating or pertaining to a diocese. diocesan convention.--the annual gathering of the bishop, clergy and people of a diocese. the bishop and clergy represent their own order and the people are represented by delegates elected by the vestries of the various parishes. the purpose of the convention is to review the work of the past year; make provision for the work of the year following, and by legislative acts provide such laws as may further the purpose for which the diocese exists. for cause special conventions may be called, a month's notice at least being given to the clergy, and to the parishes within the diocese. (see convention.) diocesan missions.--church work done in a diocese outside of its parishes and having for its object the extension of the church within the territorial limits of the diocese, is called _diocesan missions_. this work is prompted by those words of our lord { } when he said, "let us go into the next towns that i may preach there also; for therefore came i forth." the diocese embraces all the people within its limits and for them all it has a message and a blessing. for the deliverance of this message and the bestowal of this blessing all, both clergy and laity, have responsibilities and therefore the church turns to them for the means whereby this work can be carried on. the support of diocesan missions is as obligatory on all members of the church as the support of the bishop or their own parish, and to this all will contribute annually if they love the lord jesus in sincerity and truth. (see convocation.) diptychs.--in the early ages of the church it was customary to recite in holy commemoration the names of eminent bishops, of saints and martyrs; the names of those who had lived righteously and had attained the perfection of a virtuous life. for this purpose the church possessed certain books, called _diptychs_, from their being _folded together_, and in which the names of such persons "departed in the true faith," were written that the deacon might rehearse them at the time when the memorial of the departed was made at the celebration of the holy eucharist. this was done to excite and lead the living to the same happy state by following their good example; and also to celebrate the memory of them as still living, according to the principles of our religion, and not properly dead, but only translated by death to a more divine life. to this custom is to be traced the origin of the christian calendar (which see). in many parishes at the present time a similar { } custom obtains, of reciting at the holy communion on all saints' day the names of parishioners who, during the year, have departed in the true faith of god's holy name. discretion, years of.--in the prayer book the rite of confirmation is described as "the laying on of hands on those who are baptized and come to years of discretion." the phrase "years of discretion" is defined in the rubric at the end of the catechism, as follows, "so soon as children are come to a competent age _and can say the creed, the lord's prayer and the ten commandments, and can answer the other questions of this short catechism, they shall be brought to the bishop_." according to the modern capacity of children, they are able to learn what is required by the time they are from _twelve_ to _fourteen_ years old; but if they are quick and intelligent children, they will probably be ready to "be brought to the bishop to be confirmed by him" at an even earlier age. from immemorial usage this is evidently the intention of the church. dispensation.--a formal license, granted by ecclesiastical authority, to do something which is not ordinarily permitted by the canons, or to leave undone something that may be prescribed. in the american canons, dispensation has special reference to an official act by the bishop whereby he may excuse candidates for holy orders from pursuing certain studies required by canon. divine liturgy.--(see holy communion, also liturgy.) divine service.--in the old rubrical usage of the { } church, "divine service" always meant the holy communion, which was also called the _divine liturgy_. the central point of all divine worship, towards which all other services gravitate, and around which they revolve, like planets around the sun, is the great sacrificial act of the church, the offering of the blessed sacrament of the lord's body and blood. domestic and foreign missionary society.--this society is the largest and most influential working organization in the american church. by means of it the church shows how aggressive she is, for it has enabled her to place bishops and missionaries in many of the states and in all the territories in the union and also in foreign lands. this society is the church's established agency, under the authority and direction of the general convention, for the prosecution of missions among the negroes of the south, the indians in the north, the people in the new states and territories in the west and in some of the older dioceses; in all the society maintains work in forty-three dioceses and seventeen missionary jurisdictions in this country. it also conducts missions among the nations in africa, china, japan, haiti, mexico, porto rico and the philippines. it pays the salary and expenses of twenty-three missionary bishops and the bishop of haiti, and provides entire or partial support for sixteen hundred and thirty ( , ) other missionaries, besides maintaining many schools, orphanages and hospitals. for the prosecution of this work the society expends about $ , a year, which amount it expects to receive from the devotions of the faithful. the society should be { } remembered in making wills, and its constant needs should never be forgotten since it must regularly each and every year provide for so great a work. the legal title of this important society is, "_the domestic and foreign missionary society of the protestant episcopal church in the united states of america_." the society was organized by the general convention in and incorporated by the state of new york, may th, , and is organized as follows: members.--the society is considered as comprehending all persons who are members of this church. board of missions.--composed of all the bishops of the church in the united states and the members for the time being of the house of deputies of the general convention (including the delegates from the missionary jurisdictions), the members of the board of managers and the secretary and treasurer of the board. the missionary council.--comprises all bishops of the church, all members of the board of managers, and such other clergymen and laymen as may be elected by the general convention, and in addition thereto, one presbyter and one layman from each diocese and missionary jurisdiction to be chosen by the convention, council or convocation of such diocese or jurisdiction. the missionary council meets annually except in the general convention years, and is competent to take all necessary action in regard to the missionary work of the church consistent with the general policy of the board of missions. board of managers.--comprises the presiding bishop, fifteen other bishops, fifteen presbyters and { } fifteen laymen selected from the missionary council. the board of managers, thus composed, has the management of the general missions of the church, and when the board of missions is not in session, exercises all the corporate powers of the domestic and foreign missionary society. the headquarters of the society are in the church missions house (which see) at fourth avenue, new york city. the publications of the society by which its work is made known are "the spirit of missions," published monthly; "the quarterly message," and "the young christian soldier," published weekly and monthly. domestic missions.--(see domestic and foreign missionary society.) dominical letter.--meaning sunday letter is one of the first seven letters of the alphabet used in the calendar to mark the sundays throughout the year. the first seven days of the year being marked by a. b. c. d. e. f. g., the following seven days are similarly marked, and so throughout the year. the letter which stands against the sundays in any given year is called the dominical or sunday letter. for example, the year began on tuesday and the first week of that year with the first seven letters of the alphabet would give us the following table: jan. . tuesday a. " . wednesday b. " . thursday c. " . friday d. " . saturday e. " . sunday f. " . monday g. { } from this table we learn that the dominical letter for is f., for that letter falls opposite the first sunday in that year. the dominical letters were first introduced into the calendar by the early christians. they are of use in finding on what day of the week any day of the month falls in a given year, and especially in finding the day on which easter falls. (see tables in the prayer book.) dossal. hangings of silk or other material placed at the back of the altar as a decoration and to hide the bare wall. the dossal is used where there is no reredos and usually is of the church color for the festival or season. derived from the latin word _dorsum_, meaning back. doxology.--any form or verse in which glory is ascribed to god or the blessed trinity, for example, the _gloria in excelsis_, which is called the greater doxology, and the _gloria patri_, the lesser doxology. the concluding words of the lord's prayer beginning, "for thine is the kingdom," etc., is also called the doxology. derived from the greek word _doxologia_, from _doxa_, praise and _logos_, meaning word. duly.--in the prayer of thanksgiving in the holy communion, the acknowledgment is made, "we heartily thank thee, for that thou dost vouchsafe to feed us who have _duly_ received." the word _duly_ as here used is the english word for the latin _rite_, which means according to proper form and ordinance, _i.e._, as prescribed by and universally used in the church catholic; without which there can be no proper sacrament. the word also occurs in the definition of the church in the { } xix article of religion and has there the same interpretation. e eagle.--the figure of an eagle is often used in the church as an emblem to symbolize the flight of the gospel message over the world. to this end the lectern from which the holy scriptures are read is generally constructed in the form of an eagle with outstretched wings on which the bible rests. it is usually made of polished brass, but sometimes carved in wood. the eagle is also used as an emblem of the evangelist st. john, who more than any other of the apostles, was granted a clearer insight into things heavenly, as may be seen from the gospel, epistles and the revelation which he was inspired to write. early communion.--from the very earliest ages of the church it has been the custom to begin the devotions of the lord's day with the holy communion celebrated at an early hour. through the influence of the puritans in england this beautiful and helpful custom fell into abeyance for a while, but through the growing devotion of the revived church both in england and america it has been restored. to-day there are very few parishes where the early communion is not to be had, and the practice is growing and spreading as the result of increased knowledge of the church's devotional system. the motive of the early communion, especially on the lord's day, may be said to be twofold: first, the recognition of the holy { } communion as the distinctive act of worship for each lord's day, without taking part in which no primitive christian would have been considered to have properly kept sunday, and secondly, the reverent desire to receive fasting, or as bishop jeremy taylor has said, "to do this honor to the blessed sacrament, that it be the first food we eat and the first beverage we drink on that day." (see holy communion, also frequent communion.) east, turning to the.--by this expression is meant turning to the altar in saying the creed and glorias and in celebrating the holy communion, this last being called the _eastward position_. this practice arose from a custom in the early church. when converts to christianity were baptized, which was usually in the early morning, they first turning to the west where the night was fast receding, renounced the world and the powers of darkness, then turning to the east where the sun was rising as the source of all light, they confessed their belief in christ who, in holy scripture is himself called the east, "the dayspring from on high." for this reason they prayed facing the east, and when they came to build their churches they built them running east and west; the chancel, in which the altar is placed, being in the east and towards it they made their prayers and confessed their belief. thus it came about that the altar in our churches is always regarded architecturally and ecclesiastically as the east whether it is so in reality or not. easter day.--a festival in honor of our lord's resurrection has been observed from the very { } foundation of christianity. this is evident from the early disputes had concerning it, not as to whether such a day should be kept, but as to the _particular time when_ the festival should be observed. the eastern christians wished to celebrate the feast on the third day after the jewish passover, on whatever day of the week this fell. the western christians contended that the feast of the resurrection ought always to be observed on a sunday. this controversy was finally settled by the council of nicea, a.d. , which decreed that everywhere the great feast of easter should be observed upon one and the same day and that a sunday. in accordance with this decision easter day is always the first sunday after the full moon, which happens upon or next after, the st of march; and if the full moon happens upon a sunday, easter day is the sunday after. by this rule easter will always fall between the d of march, the earliest date, and the th of april, the latest day on which it can possibly fall. the original name of the festival was _pascha_, derived from the hebrew word for passover. the more familiar name of _easter_ is traceable as far back as the time of the venerable bede, a.d. . the derivation of the word is uncertain. some think that it is derived from a saxon term meaning "rising"; others think the word _eost_ or _east_ refers to the tempestuous character of the weather at that season of the year and find its root in the anglo-saxon yst, meaning a storm. again others derive the word from the old teutonic _urstan_, to rise. it is worthy of note that "the idea of sunrise is self-evident in the english { } name of the festival on which the sun of righteousness arose from the darkness of the grave." easter was always accounted the queen of festivals the highest of all holy days, and celebrated with the greatest solemnity, and the prayer book provisions are in keeping with this fact. churches are decorated with flowers and plants as symbolical of the resurrection. white hangings for the altar and white vestments have always been used at easter in reference to the angel who brought the tidings of the resurrection, who appeared in "garments white as snow" and "his countenance was as lightning." in the early church christians were wont to greet one another on this day with the joyous salutation, "christ is risen," to which the response was made, "christ is risen indeed." this custom is still retained in the greek church. this joyous salutation seems to be retained in our services, for instead of the _venite_ we have as the invitatory, the easter anthem, in which we call upon one another to "keep the feast," for that "christ our passover is sacrificed for us," and is also "risen from the dead; and become the first-fruits of them that slept." easter even.--the day between good friday and easter day is so called and commemorates the descent of our blessed lord's soul into hell (the place of departed spirits), while his body rested in the grave. "there has ever been something of festive gladness in the celebration of easter even which sets it apart from lent, notwithstanding the fast still continues. to the disciples it was a day of mourning after an absent master, but the church of { } the resurrection sees already the triumph of the lord over satan and death." baptism is wont to be administered on easter even, because this was one of the two great times for baptizing converts in the primitive church, the other being pentecost or whitsun day. easter monday and tuesday.--it was a very ancient custom of the church to prolong the observance of easter, as the "queen of festivals." at first the festival was observed through seven days, and the code of theodosius directed a cessation of labor during the whole week. afterwards the special services became limited to three days, the council of constance, a.d. , having enjoined that pentecost and easter should both be celebrated with three festival days. this is now the custom of the anglican communion, which provides collect, epistle and gospel not only for easter day, but also for easter monday and easter tuesday. easter tide.--the weeks following easter day and reaching to ascension day are so called. they commemorate the forty days our lord spent on earth after his resurrection, commonly called the great forty days (which see). eastern church.--the collective term by which is designated the churches which formerly made part of the eastern empire of rome. the greek, russian, coptic, armenian, syrian and other eastern churches are those usually included in this communion. but in strictness, the term "eastern" or "oriental church" is applied only to the graeco-russian church in communion with the patriarch of { } constantinople. the great schism whereby the communion between the east and the west was broken took place, a.d. . eastward position.--(see east, turning to.) ecclesiastical year.--(see christian year.) ecumenical.--from a greek word meaning general or universal. the name is given to certain councils composed of bishops and other ecclesiastics from the whole church. a council to be ecumenical must meet three requirements: ( ) it must be called of the whole catholic church; ( ) it must be left perfectly free, and ( ) it must be one whose decrees and definitions were subsequently accepted by the whole church. it is commonly believed that there have been only six great councils of the church that satisfy these conditions. for a list of them see council. elder.--this is the english translation of the greek word _presbuteros_, meaning presbyter or priest, the title of one admitted to the second order of the ministry. it has been pointed out that "in scriptural usage and in church history such a person as a _lay_ elder is an impossible person; the words contradict each other. the first hint of such an office was given by calvin." (see priest.) elements.--the bread and the wine in the holy communion, and the water in holy baptism are so-called. ember days.--the ember days are the wednesday, friday and saturday after the first sunday in lent; whitsun day; the th of september and the th day of december, and are regarded as the fasts { } of the four seasons. the time of their observance was definitely fixed by the council of placentia, a.d. . their origin is ascribed to apostolic tradition. the derivation of the name ember is uncertain. some trace it to the saxon word _ymbren_, meaning a "circuit," because they are periodically observed. others derive it from the anglo-saxon word _aemyrian_, meaning "ashes," because these days are appointed to be kept as fasts, and ashes, as a sign of humiliation and mourning, were constantly associated with fasting. the ember days are appointed to be observed at the four seasons named because the sundays following are the set times for ordination to the sacred ministry. for this reason one of the two prayers, entitled, "for those who are to be admitted into holy orders," is to be read daily throughout the week. emblems.--symbols and emblems of various kinds take a foremost place in sacred art. some of these are here given: the cross is the special symbol of christianity. it appears in a variety of shapes, the most familiar being the latin cross, the passion cross, the greek cross, st. andrew's cross and the maltese cross. the triangle is the emblem of the holy trinity, as is also the trefoil (which see). the circle is the ancient emblem of eternity, being without beginning or end; enclosing a triangle it means three in one or the blessed trinity; enclosing a cross it symbolizes eternal life. the crown is used as the symbol of victory and sovereignty. the lamb--agnus dei--is the chief emblem of { } our blessed lord. bearing a banner it signifies victory and is an emblem of the resurrection. the star is a christmas emblem, commemorating the star of bethlehem. it has generally five points, but sometimes _seven_, the number of perfection. the fish was a very early symbol of our lord. the letters which form the greek word for fish, viz.: ichthus are the initials in greek of the words _jesus, christ, god, son, and saviour_. the anchor is the emblem of the christian's hope. the ship is a symbol of the church as the ark of salvation, in which we are saved, as noah was saved by the ark. the lion is the symbol of our lord who is called in revelation : , the "lion of the tribe of judah." the dove is used as the emblem of the holy ghost. the emblems of the four evangelists are as follows: st. matthew, a winged man; st. mark, a winged lion; st. luke, a winged ox, and st. john, an eagle. emmanuel.--a hebrew word used as a name of our lord, and means, "god with us." the rev. morgan dix, d.d., in his book "the gospel and philosophy," speaking of the word _emmanuel_, says, "'god with us' is the sum of the christian religion. that is a proper description of the religion from the beginning to the end. emmanuel: the meaning of the word was not exhausted in those blessed years, three and thirty in all, during which christ was seen in judea and known as the prophet of nazareth. it is as accurate, as necessary to-day; it shall be true { } till all be fulfilled, till the earth and the heavens shall pass away and the new earth shall appear. . . . this presence of the personal god, a presence not made by our faith, but disclosed to our faith that we may believe and adore, is secured to the faithful in their generations by ordinances, instruments and institutions adapted to that end. . . . that system is known as the holy catholic church." epact, the.--the epact is the moon's age at the beginning of any given year. the term is derived from the greek word, _epacte_, meaning _carried on_. the epact is used in the calculations for finding on what day easter will fall. (see tables in the prayer book.) epiphany, the.--a feast of the church observed on january th to commemorate the manifestation of christ by the leading of a star. occurring twelve days after christmas, it is frequently called "twelfth day." the word _epiphany_ is derived from the greek and means _manifestation_ or showing forth. it was originally used both for christmas day when christ was manifested in the flesh and for this day when he was manifested by a star to the gentiles. later on, about the fourth century and in the western church the epiphany seems to have acquired a more independent position and to be observed with special reference to the manifestation to the magi of the east. it thus became the occasion of the giving of praise and thanksgiving to god for thus proclaiming the gospel to the gentile world as well as to the jews, his chosen people. an examination of the services for the feast of the epiphany shows that the { } commemoration is really threefold: ( ) our lord's manifestation by a star to the magi; ( ) the manifestation of the glorious trinity at his baptism, and ( ) the manifestation of the glory and divinity of christ by his miraculous turning water into wine at the marriage in cana of galilee; all of which are said to have happened on the same day, though not in the same year. "the epiphany is a festival which has always been observed with great ceremony throughout the whole church; its threefold meaning and its close association with the nativity as the end of the christmas tide, making it a kind of accumulative festival." epiphany, sundays after.--the epiphany is continued in the sundays following, the number of which is variable being dependent on the time easter is kept. there may be one "sunday after epiphany" or there may be six. the scriptural teachings of these sundays are all illustrative of the fact that the eternal word was manifested in the flesh. episcopacy.--the name given to that form of church government in which bishops are the chief pastors with priests and deacons under them. the word is derived from the greek _episcopos_, meaning overseer; _bishop_ being the anglicized form of the greek word. much controversy has been held in regard to church government, as if the form was a matter of uncertainty, or not clearly revealed. the question can only be decided by first regarding christianity as an institution, as the kingdom of god, and then inquiring whether this institution, founded by our lord, has been characterized always by the same { } thing. in regard to church government we find that the church as an institution was always governed by bishops, and that for years after christ no christian people recognized any other ministry but that of bishops, priests and deacons. since the reformation the controversy has come up and various theories, especially presbyterian and congregationalist, have been advanced. but even now the question of church government may be considered as a matter of fact rather than of theory. if we take the whole christian world of to-day, we find that the number of christians is in round numbers _five hundred millions_. of this number only _one hundred million_ are non-episcopal, so that we may conclude from the universal acceptance of episcopacy before the reformation and from the large preponderance of adherents to this form of church government at this present time,--from these facts we may safely conclude that episcopacy is in accordance with the mind of the master. this, at least, is the conclusion of the best scholarship of the day, both episcopal and non-episcopal. for example, a non-episcopal divine has set forth his conclusions in the following statement: "the apostles embodied the episcopal element into the constitution of the church, and from their days to the time of the reformation, or for fifteen hundred years, there was no other form of church government anywhere to be found. wheresoever there were christians there were also bishops; and often where christians differed in other points of doctrine or custom, and made schisms and divisions in the church, yet did they all remain unanimous in this, in retaining bishops." so { } also, the historian gibbon gives his conclusion as follows: "'no church without a bishop' has been a _fact_ well as a maxim since the time of tertullian and irenaeus; after we have passed over the difficulties of the first century, we find the _episcopal government established_, till it was interrupted by the republican genius of the swiss and german reformers." (see ministry, the.) episcopate.--the office of a bishop. the term is variously used. it means not only the office or dignity of a bishop, but it may also mean the period of time during which any particular bishop exercises his office in presiding over a diocese. again, _episcopate_ is the collective name for the whole body of bishops of the christian church, lists of which have been carefully preserved from the beginning. the episcopate of the american church includes all the bishops from bishop seabury, our first bishop, down to the bishop who was last consecrated. epistle, the.--the portion of holy scripture read before the gospel in the communion office, generally taken from one of the n. t. epistles, though sometimes from the acts of the apostles or from one of the books of the prophets of the old testament. it is well to note that the collect, epistle and gospel embody the special teaching of the day for which they are appointed. epistle side.--the south or right side of the altar from which the epistle is read. when the priest celebrates alone, he first reads the epistle at the south side and then passes to the north side where he reads the gospel. { } epistoler.--the minister who reads the epistle for the day and acts as sub-deacon at the celebration of the holy eucharist. eschatology.--that department of theology devoted to inquiry concerning the "last things,"--the advent of christ, death and the state of the departed, the judgment to come and the final award. espousal.--that portion of the marriage service in which the contracting parties answer "i will" to the questions, "n. wilt thou have this woman to thy wedded wife" and "n. wilt thou have this man to thy wedded husband." this seems to be the remains of the old form of _espousals_, which was different and distinct from the office of marriage, and which was often performed some weeks or months or perhaps years before. something similar to what is now called "engagement," only that it had the blessing of mother church upon it. in the greek church at the present time there are still two different offices, viz.: the one of espousals and the other of marriage, which are now performed on the same day, although formerly on different days. eucharist.--derived from a greek word meaning "giving of thanks." it is the name universally applied to the holy communion (which see). eucharistic lights.--(see altar lights.) eucharistic vestments.--the special vestments worn in celebrating the holy eucharist to mark the dignity of the service and as symbolical of the passion of our lord which is therein commemorated. they are as follows: the amice, alb, girdle, stole, maniple and chasuble worn by the celebrant, and the dalmatic { } and tunicle, worn by the deacon and sub-deacon; each of which is described under the heading, vestments (which see). from ancient sources we learn that it was the universal custom of the church to wear distinctive vestments at the celebration of the holy communion to mark it as the only service ordained by christ himself, and also as the highest act of christian worship. this is evidenced by the fact that the seven historical churches which have possessed a continuous life since the nicene era, viz.: the latin, greek, syrian, coptic, armenian, nestorian and the georgian--all use the eucharistic vestments. when we consider that these historic churches have not been in communion with one another for over a thousand years, we cannot but conclude that any point on which they are agreed must go back to the middle of the fifth century and must be part of their united traditions from a still earlier date. from the fact that these historic churches, having no communion with one another, do agree in the use of distinctive vestments for the holy eucharist, we learn that their use is not, as is sometimes supposed, an imitation of rome but is a catholic and primitive custom. the eucharistic vestments are now used in more than two thousand churches in england and america, thus showing how they recognize and are reasserting their catholic heritage. evangelical.--belonging to, or consistent with, the holy gospels, derived from the greek word for gospel. evangelical canticles.--the name given to the canticles sung in the church service which are taken { } from the gospels, viz.: benedictus, magnificat and nunc dimittis. evangelists.--the name given to the writers of the four gospels. eve, or even.--the day before a festival, as christmas eve, easter even, and designed to be a preparation for the due observance of the festival it precedes. by rubric it is provided that the collect appointed for any sunday or other feast may be used at the evening service of the day before. even song.--the name given in the calendar of the english prayer book to the order for daily evening prayer and is frequently used in the american church. it is a very old term and a very significant one, indicating that the evening oblation chorally rendered is evidently the mind of the church and its ancient usage. our beautiful evening prayer thus rendered is certainly much more in keeping with scripture and much more elevating than the "song services," or "vesper services" of the various denominations. these latter are not regarded as "romish" and are very popular. yet in some places if a choral even song is attempted, at once the cry of "romanism" is raised, and yet from holy scripture we learn that music is a divinely ordained element in the public worship of god and the service thus rendered is an approach to the worship of heaven. (see intone; plain song also psalter.) examination for holy orders.--title i, canon of the digest provides that "there shall be assigned to every candidate for priest's orders three separate examinations." these examinations are made by the { } bishop in the presence of two or more priests. the three examinations are on the following subjects: i. the books of holy scripture, in english, greek and hebrew. ii. the evidences of christianity, christian ethics and dogmatic theology. iii. church history, ecclesiastical polity, the book of common prayer, the constitution and canons of the church and those of the diocese to which the candidate belongs. the examination for deacon's orders is on the books of holy scripture, and on the book of common prayer. excommunication.--an ancient discipline of the church whereby a person for cause was cut off from all the privileges of the church. this discipline has practically fallen into abeyance, people for the most part excommunicate themselves. in the english prayer book is an office called "a commination, or denouncing of god's anger and judgments against sinners, with certain prayers, to be used on the first day of lent," which was set forth until the ancient discipline may be restored. exhortation.--the name given to the short addresses in the prayer book, beginning, "dearly beloved brethren." the exhortation was introduced into the daily offices in and . formerly morning and evening prayer began with the lord's prayer, but the revisers thinking this too abrupt a beginning they introduced the sentences, exhortation, confession and absolution as a more fitting preparation for the worship that follows. it has been pointed out that { } this exhortation was probably inserted under the impression that the people at large were extremely ignorant of the true nature of worship at the time. five principal parts of worship are mentioned in it: ( ) confession of sin, ( ) absolution, ( ) thanksgiving and praise, ( ) hearing god's word, and ( ) prayer for spiritual and bodily benefits. the exhortations in the communion office were originally set forth in , revised in and . they were introduced at a time when the laity of the church of england were in danger of two extremes: first, a total neglect of the holy communion which had sprung up during the middle ages, and secondly, that fearful irreverence towards the holy communion which arose from the dreadful principles held respecting it by the puritans. in the face of these dangers, these exhortations were placed where they are, for the instruction of the people as well as for hortatory purposes. expectation sunday.--the sunday following ascension day is so called. being the only lord's day which intervenes between the ascension of our lord and the descent of the holy ghost, it represents that period during which the apostles were obeying the command of their master when "he commanded them that they should not depart from jerusalem, but wait for the promise of the father." they remained therefore, in the city _expecting_ the gift of the comforter which was bestowed on the feast of pentecost. expectation week.--the week preceding whitsun day is so called. (see expectation sunday.) { } f fair linen cloth, fair white linen cloth.--in the communion office there are two rubrics, the first of which reads as follows: "the table, at the communion time having a _fair white linen cloth_ upon it," etc. by this is meant the long linen cloth the breadth of the top of the altar and falling over the ends eighteen or twenty inches. the other rubric reads, "when all have communicated, the minister shall return to the lord's table, and reverently place upon it what remaineth of the consecrated elements, covering the same with a _fair linen cloth_." by this is meant the lawn chalice veil. it is to be noted that when this rubric was made, the word "fair" meant _beautiful_. the white linen cloth can be made "fair," _i.e._, beautiful by means of embroidery, and this is done by embroidering upon it five crosses to symbolize the five wounds of our blessed lord on the cross, and by having the ends finished with a heavy linen fringe. also, the lawn chalice veil is made "fair" by being similarly beautified with embroidery, a cross being worked near the edge. faith.--"divine, or as it is called, catholic faith is a gift of god and a light of the soul; illuminated by which, a man assents fully and unreservedly to all which almighty god has revealed and which he proposes to us by his church to be believed, whether written or unwritten. it is also a belief in the whole gospel, as distinguished from a reception of some portion of it only; and it is a faith so full of the love of god as that it leads us to act differently from what we { } should if we did not believe and marks us out as a peculiar people among men."--from manual of instruction. from the above definition we learn that faith has a twofold meaning, ( ) the act of believing, and ( ) the thing believed, or the deposit of faith or doctrine which all members of christ are bound to receive. this deposit of faith is embodied in the holy scriptures but is summarized for us in the articles of the creed which are grouped around the name into which we are baptized,--the father, and the son and the holy ghost. in the american church two forms of the creed are used, viz. the apostles' and the nicene (which see). these embody "the faith once delivered to the saints." faithful, the.--the new testament and prayer book name for all the baptized, who, being admitted into the household of faith, are the people of the faith--_fideles_, that is, _believers_. faldstool.--literally, a portable folding seat, similar to a camp stool, and formerly used by a bishop when officiating in any church other than his cathedral. the name now is generally applied to the litany desk (which see). fasting.--going without food of any kind as a religious discipline and as a help to the spiritual life, especially on the great fasts of the church. the homily on fasting says: "fasting is found to be of two sorts; the one outward, pertaining to the body; the other inward, in the heart and mind. the outward fast is an abstinence from meat, drink and all natural food, for the determined time of fasting; yea, from all { } delicacies, pleasures and delectations worldly. the inward fast consists in that godly sorrow which leads us to bewail and detest our sins and to abstain from committing them." fasting communion.--(see early communion.) fasts, table of.--the reformers of the english church retained and enjoined _one hundred and twenty-three_ days in each year, to be sanctified wholly or in part as fasts and days of abstinence. these, with the exception of the table of vigils, have been retained in the american prayer book and are the following: absolute fasts, ash wednesday and good friday. other days of fasting, _on which the church requires such a measure of abstinence as is more especially suited to extraordinary acts and exercises of devotion, namely_: i. the forty days of lent. ii. the ember days at the four seasons. iii. the three rogation days. iv. all fridays in the year, except christmas day. these fasting days must always be announced to the congregation in church, the rubric in the communion office requiring that "then the minister shall declare unto the people what holy days or fasting days are in the week following to be observed." fathers, the.--the name used to designate the ancient writers of the church. their writings are of the greatest value as bearing witness to the n. t. scriptures and their interpretation, and also as { } showing forth the belief and usage of the church in the earliest years of its history. (see traditions, also undivided church.) the term "fathers" is generally confined to the writers of the first five or six hundred years of the christian era. they are usually grouped together according to the period in which they lived, _e.g._, the _apostolic fathers_ are those who lived nearest to the time, and to some extent contemporary with the apostles, viz. st. barnabas, st. clement, st. ignatius, hermas and st. polycarp. another class is called the _ante nicene fathers_, or those who lived between the date of st. polycarp, a.d. , and the date of the nicene council, a.d. , such as justin martyr, st. irenseus, clemens alexandrinus, tertullian, origen, st. cyprian. a third class dates from the nicene council, such as st. athanasius; eusebius, the church historian; st. cyril of jerusalem; st. hilary of poicters; st. basil, the great; st. gregory of nyssa; st. gregory nazianzen; st. chrysostom, st. jerome, st. ambrose, st. augustine, st. leo, who is commonly regarded as the last of the fathers, although st. gregory of rome is placed in the list as well as a few later writers. the above is not a complete list, only a few of the principal fathers having been mentioned. it is pointed out in milman's "latin christianity" that "the eastern and the western church have each four authors of note, whom they recognize as fathers _par excellence_. those of the eastern church are st. athanasius, st. basil, st. chrysostom and st. gregory { } nazianzen. those of the western church are st. jerome, st. ambrose, st. augustine and st. gregory of rome,--the fathers respectively of her monastic system, of her sacerdotal authority, of her scientific theology and of her popular religion." feasts or festivals.--days set apart for the celebration of some great event connected with our blessed lord or his saints, also called holy days. the rubric in the communion office requires that each feast shall be announced to the congregation on the sunday preceding the day on which it occurs. they are set forth in a table to be found in the introductory portion of the prayer book as follows: a table of feasts. _to be observed in this church throughout the year_. all sundays in the year. st. bartholomew the apostle. the circumcision of our lord. st. matthew the apostle. the epiphany. st. michael and all angels. the conversion of st. paul. st. luke the evangelist. the purification of the blessed st. simon and st. jude the virgin. apostles. st. matthias the apostle. all saints, the annunciation of the blessed st. andrew the apostle. virgin mary. st. thomas the apostle. st. mark the evangelist. the nativity of our lord. st. philip and st. james the st. stephen the martyr. apostles. st. john the evangelist. the ascension of our lord. the holy innocents. st. barnabas the apostle. monday and tuesday in easter the nativity of st. john baptist. week. st. peter the apostle. monday and tuesday in whitsun st. james the apostle. week. the transfiguration of our lord. feria.--a term derived from the latin and used to designate days which are neither feasts nor fasts. { } filioque.--the latin for the words "and the son" which occur in our form of the nicene creed. they are not found in the original creed as used in the greek church, but were added by the third council of toledo, a.d. . this addition to the creed by the western church was the subject of a long controversy between the east and the west, which with other complications finally led to their entire separation in a.d. . (see procession of the holy ghost.) fish.--the figure of a fish has been used from the very earliest days as a symbol in the christian church. among the early christians it was used as a secret sign by which they knew one another in the days of persecution. the significance of the fish as a christian symbol is set forth under emblems (which see). flagon.--one of the eucharistic vessels. a large pitcher-shaped vessel made of precious metal and used to hold the wine before its consecration in the chalice. it is sometimes used in the consecration. font.--the vessel which contains the water for the purpose of baptism, usually of stone and vase-shaped, _i.e._, a large bowl on a pedestal, being sometimes circular and sometimes octagonal. the position of the font in primitive times was at or near the church door to signify that baptism is the entrance into the church mystical. this position is still retained in some churches at the present time, but in most churches it is placed near the chancel for convenience, or because no place at the door was provided by the architect. fonts were formerly required to be covered and locked; originally their covers were simple flat { } movable lids, but they were subsequently very highly ornamented, assuming the form of spires and enriched with various decorations in carved wood or polished brass. the font is so called from the latin word _fons_, genitive _fontis_, meaning a _fountain_ or spring, referring to baptism as a laver of regeneration, the source of new and spiritual life. foreign missions.--(see domestic and foreign missionary society.) forms.--one great objection brought against the episcopal church by many persons not members of it is what they call _forms and ceremonies_. they say what they want is "spiritual religion," and this objection seems to be so final with them there is evidently nothing more to be said. it is not the purpose of this article to go into a vindication of forms, but rather to point out how unreasonable this objection is. if it were real, it would do away with all social forms and all forms in business as well as in religion. but they who make this objection do not adhere to it in their own religion. they cannot come together, even in a "prayer meeting" without some method or form which must be gone through with. even the quakers who, above all others, lay the greatest stress on "spiritual religion," must have their _form_--of silence, speech, dress and of even the architecture of their meeting-place, and which form is peculiar to them. this being the case the question, therefore, is not "shall we have forms?" but, "_what_ form shall we have in our public worship?" for we have learned that we _must_ have some kind of form. the episcopal church simply clings to that which was from the { } beginning, because the experience of centuries demonstrates that this is best, more consonant to reason and more expressive of the religious wants of man. hence she values her book of common prayer which is the outgrowth of the devotions of the ages and she cherishes the usages and traditions that have grown up around it. the episcopal church does not insist on forms merely for the sake of forms, but she values them for their helpfulness, for what they convey to the soul faithfully using them, and also, because they enable us to worship god as did his faithful people in all the ages past. forty days, the great.--easter tide which commemorates the period of forty days our lord spent on earth after his resurrection with his apostles "and speaking of the things pertaining to the kingdom of god" (acts : and ). from many of our lord's parables as well as from other utterances by him in his teaching we learn that the words "kingdom of god" mean _his church_. so, then, during this mysterious time of his resurrection life our lord was giving his final instructions concerning his church, and to this instruction is to be traced many of the church's usages and practices set forth in the acts of the apostles which otherwise are inexplicable--for example--the choice of st. matthias in the place of the traitor judas--thus indicating the perpetuity of the apostolate; the observance of the first day of the week instead of the seventh; the ordaining of deacons thus indicating "divers orders" in his church; the rite of confirmation; frequent communion, infant baptism and many other things to be noted in the { } acts of the apostles, which have become inherent features of the church; how else are they to be accounted for and explained but as being among "the things pertaining to the kingdom of god" of which the master spake during these great forty days? if not, then how came about their universal acceptance and continuance even unto this present day? fourth sunday in lent.--the sundays in lent are numbered. first, second, third, etc., through the six sundays. but the last three sundays are so striking in their teaching that additional names are given to them in order to emphasize that special teaching. thus the th sunday is called palm sunday; the th, passion sunday. so, also, the fourth sunday in lent has its special name or names. thus it is called _mid lent sunday_ because the middle of lent has been reached. it is also called _refreshment sunday_ from the gospel for the day which gives the account of our lord feeding the multitude in the wilderness, and thereby indicating a more joyous note in the service for this day than belongs to the other sundays in lent. an old english name for this sunday is _mothering sunday_. mid lent was considered somewhat of a holiday on which servants and children absent from home were permitted by their employers to visit their mothers. the name, doubtless, had its origin from the ancient custom of making pilgrimages to the mother church or cathedral of the diocese. (see lent, sundays in.) fraction.--the name given to the manual act of breaking the bread by the priest during the consecration in the holy communion, according to the { } rubric which directs, "and here to break the bread." (see manual acts.) free and open churches.--these words express the idea embodied in a movement in the american church that has been making for many years to make the house of prayer what it was originally, viz. _free_ for all people, no reserved or rented pews, but every seat free and unreserved, so that high and low, rich and poor alike shall be equal in the father's house; and open not simply when there is a service, but open all the time for private prayer as well as public. this movement is growing rapidly so that to-day more than half of our churches are thus free, and a great many of them are kept open all day long every day in the week. it is found that many earnest and devout souls, homeless perhaps, or dwellers in hotels or boarding-houses where there is little or no privacy, as well as others, gladly avail themselves of this privilege of the _open church_ and find comfort in it. a society for the promotion of free and open churches has been organized for many years with headquarters in philadelphia. frequent communion.--the influence of the puritans on the religious life of the church was in many instances tremendous and far-reaching. while the prayer book provides for _frequent communion_, that is, every lord's day and holy day at the least, yet under the puritan influence _infrequent_ communion became prevalent, and four times a year at the most came to be considered sufficient. when the church began to pass out from under this influence we find that a _monthly_ celebration became the universal rule { } in the church, and even with this many seem now to be satisfied. but as the church grew, as the study of the prayer book and of church history became more general and the church began to assert herself, to claim her heritage, we find a return to the ancient order and scriptural rule. the sunday and holy day eucharist was more and more restored, so that to-day there are very few parishes where "frequent communion" is not the rule. on this subject the bishop of maryland, the rt. rev. william paret, d.d., has remarked, "god's word and all history show that receiving the holy communion every lord's day was the _old way_ and receiving once a month entirely a modern custom. in often receiving we are copying the whole church of the first three hundred years." friday.--in the prayer book we find that friday of each week is placed in the table of fasts to be observed in this church throughout the year, and the rubric directs that it be announced to the congregation on the sunday before. friday as a fast is intended to be the weekly memorial of the crucifixion of our lord just as sunday is the weekly memorial of the resurrection. both are alike obligatory as both are enjoined by the same authority. it is encouraging to note a growing recognition of this fast and a more general desire to honor weekly the day of our lord's crucifixion with a public service in church and by personal acts of self-denial and devotion on the part of the faithful. (see good friday, also fasts, table of.) frontal.--the name given to a hanging in front of the altar. the same as antependium (which see). { } fruits of the spirit.--(see spirit, fruits of.) funerals.--the solemn burial of the dead (which see). in the church there is no such thing as "preaching a funeral," as it is called, but the reverent and devout committal of the "body to the ground," "looking for the general resurrection in the last day and the life of the world to come, through our lord jesus christ." plainness and simplicity should mark so holy a function. g gehenna.--in the original greek of the new testament scriptures there are two words unfortunately translated by our one english word "hell." the first of these is _gehenna_, meaning the "place of torment." the second is _hades_, which also occurs in the original greek of the creed, and means the _hidden_, covered, intermediate world where the soul rests between death and the general resurrection. when, therefore, we confess in the creed that our lord "descended into hell," we do not mean that he entered the "place of torment," but the "place of departed spirits" or _hades_. this difference of meaning of the word "hell" as used in our english translation of the bible and the creed should be borne in mind. general clergy relief fund.--this is the abbreviated title of a society organized by the general convention under the corporate name, "the trustees of the fund for the relief of the widows and orphans { } of deceased clergymen, and of aged, infirm and disabled clergymen of the protestant episcopal church in the united states of america, a corporation created in the year by chapter of the laws of the state of new york." this is one of the most important funds in the church and commands the generous support of all earnest and devoted church people. as its name implies, it is a fund established for the purpose of taking care of aged and infirm clergy who through age or sickness have become disabled and can no longer fulfil their ministry. the conscience of the church makes her feel obligated, like the national government, to take care of her faithful servants in their old age and disability, and also to provide for the care of the widows and orphans of deceased clergymen. the church, however, cannot do this blessed work of relief, unless all her people contribute largely to this fund. general confession, the.--the form of words used by both minister and people in humbly acknowledging their sins before god in preparation for the true worship of his name about to follow. the general confession was placed in the morning prayer in and in the evening prayer in . such beginning of our public worship is in accordance with the practice of the primitive christians, who, as st. basil, writing in the fourth century, tells us, "in all churches, immediately upon their entering into the house of prayer, made confession of their sins unto god, with much sorrow, concern and tears, every man pronouncing his own confession with his own mouth." a similar general confession, but more heart searching, { } is also to be found in the communion office, to be said in preparation for the due reception of the sacrament. a third confession is also set forth in the penitential office and commonly called the "ash wednesday confession." general convention, the.--the legislative body of the american church which meets triennially and is composed of the bishops and representatives from all the dioceses and missionary jurisdictions. the convention is composed of two houses, ( ) the house of bishops and ( ) the house of clerical and lay deputies consisting of four clerical and four lay representatives from each diocese, and one delegate of each order from every missionary jurisdiction. both houses together constitute the _general convention_. all the laws of the church in the united states are made by this convention, but it can make no alteration in the constitution or in the liturgy and offices unless the same has been adopted in one convention, and submitted to all the dioceses, and afterwards adopted in another convention. for any measure to become a law it must be adopted by the concurrent action of both houses. the general convention provides also for the admission of new dioceses; for church extension, and for the erection of missionary jurisdictions both in the united states and in foreign lands, electing the bishops for them. the presiding officer is the senior bishop by consecration, who presides in the house of bishops and when both houses meet as one body. when the convention is not in session he acts as the primate of the american church. (see presiding bishop.) the house of { } clerical and lay deputies also has its president or presiding officer who is chosen from among the clerical deputies at each meeting of the convention. general council.--(see council, also ecumenical.) general thanksgiving, the.--the title of one of the prayers in morning and evening prayer. it is called general as being suitable to all men, and in contradistinction to the special thanksgivings to be used by request of members of the congregation for special mercies vouchsafed. general theological seminary.--an institution of learning for the education of men for the sacred ministry, established by the general convention of the american church, may th, , and incorporated april th, . the institution is situated in chelsea square, new york city, and has a very valuable property worth; $ , , . . the endowments amount to over; $ , . the number of students average about each year. number of alumni , . whole number matriculated since about , . volumes in the library , . generally necessary.--in the definition given in the church catechism of holy baptism and the lord's supper, these sacraments are declared to be "generally necessary to salvation." from the way many persons postpone their own baptism, neglect the baptism of their children and ignore the holy communion, it would seem that they think the word "generally" in the above clause, means "usually," but not essential to religious life. this is a mistake. the word "generally" as used when the catechism was set forth is simply the anglicized form of the latin word { } _generaliter_, meaning _universally_, always, absolutely necessary for every one who would be saved, and therefore, imperative where the sacraments may be had. genuflexion.--a temporary bending of the knee as distinguished from actual kneeling; usually made towards the altar as the symbol of christ's presence. ghost. ghostly.--ghost is the old saxon word for _spirit_ and is still used in the name of the third person of the holy trinity. _ghostly_, the adjective form of the word, has been retained in the prayer book and means _spiritual_, _e_. _g_., in the confirmation service one of the sevenfold gifts of the holy ghost is called "ghostly strength," that is, spiritual strength. ghost, the holy.--(see holy ghost.) gifts of the holy ghost, sevenfold.--the gifts bestowed on the baptized by the laying on of hands in confirmation, viz.: "the spirit of wisdom and understanding, the spirit of counsel and ghostly strength, the spirit of knowledge and true godliness and the spirit of holy fear," as enumerated in isaiah : . these gifts may be briefly interpreted as follows: wisdom, to choose the one thing needful. understanding, to know how to attain it. counsel, the habit of asking guidance of god. strength, to follow where he shall lead. knowledge, that we may learn to know god. godliness, that knowing him we may grow like him. holy fear, meaning reverence and adoration. girdle.--a white cord to confine the alb at the { } waist: used at the celebration of the holy eucharist. (see vestments.) girls' friendly society.--a society of young women organized in the american church in , and is a branch of a similar society in the church of england. the society has for its object the spiritual welfare of girls and young women through association and friendship with one another. the society has (in ) , members in the united states and , associate members. a monthly magazine, the g. f. s. a. _record_, is published as the official organ of the society. headquarters, the church missions house, new york city. gloria in excelsis.--meaning "glory in the highest," the title of the final hymn in the communion office. it is called the "greater doxology," and also, the "angelic hymn" as it is based on the song of the angels at christ's birth, which forms its opening words. the _gloria in excelsis_ is the oldest and most inspiring of all christian hymns. its author and the time of its composition are unknown, but it was in use in the very earliest ages of the church as a daily morning hymn. its introduction into the liturgy appears to have been gradual. the first words of it are found in the liturgy of st. james, from which fact we learn that the germ of it was evidently used in apostolic times. it is interesting to note that in ancient liturgies the _gloria in excelsis_ was placed at the beginning and not at the end of the communion office. it occupied such a position in our own liturgy until a.d. , when it was placed after the thanksgiving. by the rubric permission is { } given to use a hymn instead of it, and this is often done during advent and lent, thus reserving the _gloria in excelsis_ for use in more joyous seasons such as christmas, easter, etc. gloria patri.--meaning "glory to the father," the first words of the short anthem used after each psalm and elsewhere in the services, viz. "glory be to the father, and to the son, and to the holy ghost, as it was in the beginning, is now, and ever shall be, world without end. amen." it is often called the "lesser doxology." the _gloria patri_ has been used in christian worship from the beginning and is traceable to the baptismal formula. its frequent use in our services is not a vain repetition, as some suppose, but is very devotional and helpful to increased earnestness in worship, drawing our thoughts from man, his wants and experiences, and directing them to the triune god, the author and giver of every good and perfect gift. sung after the psalms it gives to them a christian meaning and interpretation. in accordance with the ancient usage _the gloria_ is said with bowed head as an act of worship and of faith, and is also said facing the altar or east. (see east, turning to.) gloria tibi.--the latin title of the words of praise sung when the holy gospel is announced in the holy communion, viz. "glory be to thee, o lord." this _gloria_ also comes down to us from the ancient usage of the church. it is said with the bowed head as an act of worship. godfathers, godmothers.--(see sponsors.) golden number.--the golden number is that { } which marks the position of any given year in the lunar cycle, which is a period of nineteen years. meton, an athenian philosopher, discovered that, at the end of every such period, the new moons take place on the same days of the months whereon they occurred before its commencement. this discovery was considered to be so important, it became the custom to inscribe the rule for finding the moon's age on a tablet in _golden_ letters and placed in the market-place at athens; hence arose the term _golden number_. the golden number may be found by adding one to the year of our lord, and dividing the sum by , when the remainder, if any, is the _golden number_. if there be no remainder, the golden number is . _one_ is added to the year of our lord because the first year of the christian era was the second of the cycle. the time of easter may be found by means of the golden number. (see tables in prayer book.) good friday.--the last friday in lent on which we commemorate the death of our lord. it is called good friday from the blessed results of our saviour's sufferings, for by the shedding of his own most precious blood he obtained eternal redemption for us. it is the most solemn and binding of all fridays and should be observed as an absolute fast in token of our sorrow for sin, and in preparation for the easter communion. all unnecessary work, all social engagements and pleasures are especially to be avoided by all those who reverence their lord, and remember of what good friday is the solemn memorial. it is a day of church-going, and it will be found that the good friday services are very { } impressive, solemn and soul-stirring. the proper psalms are the d, th and th in morning prayer, and the th and th for evening prayer. proper lessons and three special collects, together with the epistle and gospel all set forth, amid the solemnities of worship, the momentous story of the saviour's passion and death. in many places, it is usual to have in addition to the appointed services, the "three hours service" (which see), held from m. to p. m., in commemoration of our lord's agony on the cross, and consisting of special prayers and hymns with addresses or meditations. the holy communion is not celebrated on good friday, in accordance with the immemorial usage of the church; only the introductory portion of the service is used. the altar is entirely stripped of its hangings and ornaments, except the cross, and is sometimes covered with black hangings. the observance of good friday is inwoven into the very texture of the christian religion, having been kept from the very first age of christianity with strictest fasting and humiliation. the mind of the church seems always to have been, "this day is not one of man's institution, but was consecrated by our lord jesus christ when he made it the day of his most holy passion." good shepherd, sunday of.--the name given in the western church to the second sunday after easter. the french know it as the sunday of the _bon pasteur_. the name is suggested by the gospel for the day which sets forth our lord as "the good shepherd," and who in the epistle is called the "shepherd and bishop of our souls." { } gospel.--the word "gospel" is derived from the anglo-saxon _godspell_, signifying "good news"; founded originally on certain words used by the angel in announcing the saviour's birth, viz.: "behold, i bring you _good tidings_ of great joy" (st. luke : ). the word is greatly misunderstood and frequently misapplied, the idea seems to be that "gospel religion," "gospel sermons" and "preaching the gospel," mean certain doctrines such as individual election, calling, justification, sanctification and the like. these are regarded as being very scriptural, and in accordance with the scriptural method. when, however, we turn to the scriptures we find that such doctrines are not "the gospel" at all, but simply deductions from it. in the new testament the word "gospel" is applied _exclusively_ to the announcement of certain events, certain outward facts connected with the second person in the blessed trinity, namely, the incarnation, birth, life, death, burial, resurrection and ascension of the son of god. such was the "good tidings" announced by the angelic choir, such is the purpose of the new testament scriptures, and that gospel religion or gospel preaching which brings these sublime facts to bear on the hearts and lives of men, as living realities and guiding motives, alone can be scriptural and truly gospel. this being the case, we can understand how the church's year with its changing seasons of joy and penitence, setting forth so clearly all these facts in our lord's life, preaches the very gospel of christ and in accordance with the scriptural method. (see christian year.) gospels, the.--the four canonical records of the { } life of our lord written by st. matthew, st. mark, st. luke and st. john. the first three are called the "synoptic gospels," because they all look at the events they describe from the same point of view; while the standpoint of st. john is quite different. his purpose was not to give the history of our lord as did the other evangelists, but to teach the mysteries arising out of that history. for example, st. john says nothing about the circumstances of our lord's birth, but he sets forth the _mystery_ which those circumstances embraced,--the incarnation of the word, or eternal son of god. for this reason, the fourth gospel is called by ancient writers a "spiritual gospel," because it contains less of historical narrative than the others and more of doctrine. gospel, the holy.--the title given to the passage from the gospels read at holy communion, commonly called "the gospel for the day." during the reading of the holy gospel the people are to stand as required by the rubric. this custom is intended to show a reverent regard to the son of god above all other messengers. gospel side.--the north side of the altar (the left side as we face the altar) at which the holy gospel is read. (see epistle side.) gospeller.--the priest or deacon appointed to read the holy gospel at a celebration of the holy eucharist, is so, called. government, church.--(see episcopacy.) gown, the black.--an academical gown; an official or distinctive dress worn by students and officers of a college or university, and also by officials of a { } court of justice. it is not an ecclesiastical garment, although it was customary during a time of great spiritual decadence in the church for the gown with bands to be worn during the preaching of the sermon in the service. this, however, has long since been given up; the surplice is more properly worn. grace.--the word "grace" means a _special favor_, and is applied to the whole obedience, merit, passion and death of our lord and the benefits that flow from them,--justification, wisdom, sanctification, redemption. the church, which is the body of christ, is called the _kingdom of grace_, for in it we become members of christ and partakers of his grace and heavenly benediction. the sacraments, as well as other ordinances, are called "means of grace," because they are the appointed instrumentalities whereby god gives grace to his faithful people, to help them in living faithfully and in obtaining salvation. gradine.--a name sometimes given to the shelf at the back of the altar and attached to the wall or reredos, upon which are placed the candlesticks, flowers and other ornaments. there may be two or more such shelves. gradual.--a portion of scripture formerly sung after the epistle for the day, from the steps of the pulpit or altar, and hence called _gradual_, from the latin _gradus_, meaning a step. greek church.--a name often used for the eastern church (which see). green.--one of the church colors, and used during the epiphany and trinity seasons. (see church colors.) { } gregorian music.--the gregorian tones are certain chants of peculiar beauty and solemnity handed down to us from remote antiquity. they are said to have been set forth in their present form by gregory the great in the sixth century, from whom they are named. they are numbered from _one_ to _eight_, with a few added supplementary tones of great dignity and beauty. each tone has various endings. where the psalter is sung, the gregorian chants are usually employed, being sung antiphonally, but the _glorias_ in full, that is by both sides of the choir together. growth of the church.--the course of the episcopal church in the united states has been characterized by a very remarkable growth--a growth that has attracted the attention of the public press, both religious and secular. thus the roman catholic _news_ said recently, "the gains of the episcopalians in this country, steady, onward, undeniable, and that at the expense of the denominations called evangelical, is one of the remarkable characteristics of our times." the following statement appeared in _public opinion_: "a good showing is made by the so-called protestant episcopal church in the united states. the general growth of the church far exceeds, proportionately, that of the population at large, or of any other religious section of it in particular. it looks like the 'church of the future.'" this statement may be illustrated by the returns of the last census. in the decade ending the population increased per cent., while the increase of the episcopal church was per cent. during the preceding decade ( - ) the increase of population was per cent., but that of { } the church was per cent. before the civil war, (in ) this church had one communicant for about every of the population; in it had one for every ; in , one for every , and in it had one communicant for every of the population. the comparison of growth of this church with other religious bodies was set forth in a statement by the new york _independent_, from which it appears that the rate of increase during the period examined was for the episcopal church per cent.; for the lutherans, ; baptists, ; methodists, ; and presbyterians, per cent. in the census returns in the population of the united states was , , and the episcopal church had then only , communicants. to-day ( ) the state of new york alone with a population of only , , has , communicants, being about one-fourth of the population in that state. the _missionary monthly_, a presbyterian publication, speaking of the church in new york city, said: "the episcopalians far outnumber any other denomination in their membership. their relative growth also surpasses all others. in the presbyterian membership in this city was , , while the episcopalians numbered , . now the episcopalians almost double the presbyterians in the matter of church membership." these last two items refer only to new york, but it is a well established fact that the church is growing rapidly in all parts of our land. to-day there is not a state or territory where the episcopal church has not its bishop or bishops and body of clergy and faithful people; even in far away alaska the altar and the cross have been set up, and the rate { } of increase throughout the united states is larger than that of any other religious body in this land. moreover, it is a striking fact that the episcopal church is the only religious body in the united states (except the roman catholic) which covers the entire country. guardian angels.--(see holy angels.) guild.--an organization or society. a name given to a society in the church, having for its object the welfare of the parish to which it belongs, or the promotion of some special church work. usually the purpose of a church guild is to bring the members together in devotion of spirit and in cooperative work under the direction of the rector; and in every way to bring the full church system to bear on the hearts and lives of all. h habit.--the name given to the garb worn by the clergy, _e_. _g_., the robes worn by a bishop are frequently called the "episcopal habit"; also, the garb worn by members of a religious order, such as the sisters of charity, etc. hades.--the greek word for the place of departed spirits, translated in the english bible and, also, in the creed by the word "hell," not, however, the place of torment. (see descent into hell, also intermediate state.) hallelujah.--a hebrew word, meaning "praise the lord"; same as alleluia (which see). { } heaven.--the final abode of the righteous, where after the general resurrection they find their perfect consummation and bliss, both in body and soul, in god's eternal and everlasting glory. hell.--the final abode of the wicked and impenitent. justin martyr, an ancient father of the church, who lived a.d. , describes hell as "a place where those are to be punished who have lived wickedly, and who do not believe that those things which god hath taught us by christ will come to pass." the original greek word for "hell," as the place of torment, is gehenna (which see). heresy. heretic.--the word "heresy" is derived from a greek word, meaning "a choice," and is applied to doctrines or beliefs that are contrary to divine revelation as witnessed to by the holy catholic church. a "heretic" is one who prefers such false teaching to "the faith once delivered to the saints." concerning such st. paul says, "a man that is an heretic, after the first and second admonition, reject" (st. titus : ). the church regards the true faith as of such vital importance to her life and to the life of each individual soul, she bids us to pray in the litany, "from all false doctrine, _heresy_, and schism, good lord, deliver us." high celebration.--a term commonly employed to describe the solemn midday service of the holy eucharist with the full adjuncts of ritual and music. there is always a gospeller and epistoler in addition to the celebrant. the music is often of an elaborate character and the ceremonial more imposing. it is generally reserved for the greater festivals. { } historic episcopate.--this is a term that came into prominence when at the general convention of , which met in chicago, the house of bishops set forth the terms which it deemed a sufficient basis for the reunion of christendom. by it is meant the ministry preserved and perpetuated by apostolic succession (which see, also episcopacy). historiographer.--an official custodian and compiler of historical records pertaining to the church, appointed by the general convention. several of the dioceses have also their appointed historiographers. holy angels.--the service and ministry of the holy angels and their guardianship over the sons of men is a doctrine set forth by the church in her beautiful service for st. michael and all angels day, (which see). elsewhere in the liturgy she brings out the same great truth. when we gather around the altar of god in the holy eucharist we do so "with angels and archangels and with all the company of heaven." it has always been a tradition of christianity that "angels attend at the ministration of holy baptism and at the celebration of the holy communion; and that as lazarus was the object of their tender care, so in sickness and death they are about the bed of the faithful and carry their souls to the presence of christ in paradise." holy communion.--one of the two great sacraments ordained by christ and generally (_i.e._, always) necessary to salvation; this being the sacrament of the lord's body and blood. the following explanation has been given by the rev. morgan dix, d.d.: "three names are given to this sacrament according { } to the way in which it is regarded. it is called the _holy communion_, because it is the means of keeping that union with almighty god through the incarnation which was commenced in our baptism, and because thereby all the faithful are spiritually one with each other. it is called the _lord's supper_ with historical reference to the time and circumstance of its institution. it is called the _holy eucharist_, as being the great act of praise and thanksgiving rendered by the church in acknowledgment of the blessings of redemption. it is also called preeminently the _divine liturgy_, as including and comprehending all acts of worship and religion, and as being the first and chief of all rites and functions; and it is both a sacrifice and a sacrament. it is the great commemorative sacrifice of the church, unbloody, mystical and spiritual; accompanying the perpetual oblation of himself which our great high priest, jesus christ, makes in heaven, where he ever liveth and intercedes for us. in it the passion of christ is perpetually shown forth to the almighty father, and his priests on earth unite in the oblation which he makes at the mercy seat. it is the _sacrament_ in which the faithful feed upon his most blessed body and blood, in a divine mystery and after a spiritual manner, which is to be believed though it cannot be explained. our lord is really present throughout the whole of this solemn and august action, though in no carnal, corporal or material manner." (see real presence.) the prayer book provides that this blessed sacrament shall be celebrated at least every sunday and holy day for which collect, epistle and gospel are { } provided; the only exception to this rule being good friday. (see early communion; frequent communion, also worship.) holy days and seasons.--(see christian year, also articles on feasts, fasts and gospel.) holy ghost, the.--the third person of the blessed trinity. it is of faith to believe that god the holy ghost is a person, not simply an influence as the vagueness of modern religionism seems to imply, but a person so real that sin can be committed against him, as in the case of ananias who was accused of lying to the holy ghost (acts : ); a person so real that he is represented as engaged in such personal acts as teaching, testifying, guiding into all truth, and as interceding. the holy ghost is to be believed in as very and eternal god, of one substance, majesty and glory with the father and the son. he, the comforter, having been given we are now living under the dispensation of the holy ghost. the third paragraph of the creed (each article of which is to be attributed to or affirmed of, the holy ghost) brings out this truth and sets forth his presence and work in the church. this is illustrated by the following statement: "by being born again of water and the _holy ghost_ we are made members of 'the holy catholic church'; by keeping the unity of the _spirit_ in the bond of peace, we enjoy the 'communion of saints'; through the _holy ghost_ we receive the 'remission of sins,' first in our baptism and afterwards in the holy communion and other ordinances; it is through the _holy ghost_ that the lord shall quicken our mortal bodies in the 'resurrection,' and by his grace we { } shall be enabled to give a good answer at the judgment seat of christ and so attain to the 'life everlasting.'" (see procession of the holy ghost.) holy innocents' day.--a festival of the church observed on the third day after christmas, december th, in memory of the children of bethlehem, whose death herod caused, and who have always been regarded as the infant martyrs of the christian church, for that "not in speaking, but in dying, have they confessed christ." this feast is one of the very oldest of holy days, having always been associated with the observance of christmas. holy name, the.--the name of jesus (which see). bishop jeremy taylor says, "this is the name which we should engrave in our hearts, and write upon our foreheads, and pronounce with our most harmonious accents, and rest our faith upon, and place our hopes in, and love with the overflowings of charity and joy and adoration." an old custom that has come down to us from the most ancient times is that of bowing at the holy name of jesus, especially in reciting the creed. the th canon of the english church ( ) gives the meaning of this custom as follows: "when in time of divine service the lord jesus shall be mentioned, _due_ and _lowly reverence_ shall be done by all persons present, as it hath been accustomed, testifying by these outward ceremonies and gestures their inward humility, christian resolution, and due acknowledgment that the lord jesus christ, the true and eternal son of god, is the only saviour of the world, in whom alone all mercies, graces and promises { } of god to mankind, for this life and the life to come, are fully and wholly comprised." holy orders.--a term used to designate the sacred ministry, and is expressive of the position and authority of the ministry of the church. holy scripture as well as ancient authors and the universal practice of the church bear witness to the fact that almighty god of his divine providence hath appointed "divers orders" in his church and that these orders have always and in all places been _three_ in number, viz., bishops, priests and deacons. (see bishop, episcopacy, deacon, minister, priest.) holy table.--(see altar.) holy thursday.--a name commonly given to ascension day (which see); not to be confounded with thursday in holy week, which is more properly known as maundy thursday. holy week.--the last week in lent is so called and among the ancients was known also as "the great week," because of the important events in the last week in our lord's life which it commemorates. it is a week of solemn and awful memories, a holy time of deepest devotion and searchings of heart. the church has always kept it as such. from day to day, amid the solemnities of worship, we follow our lord in his passion, live it over again, as in psalm and hymn, in proper lessons, in epistles and gospels and pleading, prayers the whole record of the royal reception, the final teachings, betrayal, the cruel mockery, the desertion, and the awful agony on the cross, the death and the burial of the lord of life is solemnly recited as a memorial before god. each { } day is significant, thus: the first day of the week, the sixth sunday in lent, is called palm sunday, in reference to the palms strewn in our lord's way on his entrance into jerusalem; _monday_ and _tuesday_ witnessed the final disputations with the jews; _wednesday_ stands out as the day of the lord's betrayal and the beginning of the events which reached their climax on good friday; _thursday_ is ever to be remembered as the day of the commands, first, concerning love, and secondly, the institution of the blessed sacrament with its "do this in remembrance of me"; _good friday_, the day of the crucifixion and death, and _saturday_, easter even, which commemorates the descent of our lord's soul into hell while his body rested in the grave. homilies.--the two books of homilies or sermons referred to in the xxxvth article of religion. the first volume was written during the reign of edward vi, in , and the second in . they treat of such topics as "good works," "repentance," "prayer," "the number of the sacraments," "the right use of the church," etc. the books of homilies are received in the american church so far as they are an explication of christian doctrine and instructive in piety and morals. the list of subjects treated of in the second book is given in the xxxvth article of religion. hood.--an ornamental fold hanging down the back, denoting the academical degree which the person officiating has taken in college or university. it is made of silk, the color indicating the degree according to the university usage. the church of england { } by canon enjoins that every minister, who is a graduate, shall wear his proper hood during the time of divine service. the hood is quite commonly worn in the united states by both bishops and clergy. hosanna.--a hebrew word, meaning, "save, we beseech thee." hours of prayer.--(see canonical hours.) house of bishops.--the upper house of the general convention in which all diocesan, coadjutor and missionary bishops have seats, representing their own order. the term is often used as a collective name for all the bishops of the american church. (see general convention.) house of god.--the church building is so called because it is set apart for the worship of god. that it is something more than a mere lecture hall, or concert room or auditorium, as it is commonly regarded by modern religionism will appear from the following taken from the annotated prayer book: "the church is the _house of god_, not man's house; a place wherein to meet with him with the closest approach which can be made in this life. hence, if jacob consecrated with the ceremony of unction the place where god made his covenant with him, and said of it, 'this is none other but the house of god, and this is the gate of heaven'; so should our churches be set apart and consecrated with sacred ceremonies making them holy to the lord. so also, because they are to be in reality, and not by a mere stretch of the imagination, the presence chambers of our lord, we must regard them as the nearest to { } heaven in holiness of all places on earth by the virtue of that presence. and lavishing all costly material, and all earnest skill upon their first erection and decoration, we shall ever after frequent them with a consciousness that 'the lord is in his holy temple,' and that all which is done there should be done under a sense of the greatest reverence towards him." housel.--an old english word for the holy eucharist. thus an old english canon of a.d. orders every priest "to give _housel_ (_i.e._ holy communion) to the sick when they need it." the word also appears in chaucer's canterbury tales, in piers plowman, beaumont and fletcher and also in shakespeare. so, also, we find the term _houselling cloth_, meaning a large cloth spread before the people while receiving. the word evidently meant a _sacrifice_. humble access, prayer of.--the name given to the beautiful prayer offered in great humility just before the consecration in the holy communion, beginning, "we do not presume," etc. the words are taken from the most ancient liturgies. hymn board.--a tablet to which the numbers of the hymns to be sung at any service are affixed, and which is placed in a conspicuous place for the greater convenience and guidance of the congregation. the purpose of the hymn board is to do away with the custom of announcing the day of the month and the hymns, but this is not generally carried out in practice. hymnal, the.--as the church has a book for her _common prayer_, so also she has a book for her _common praise_, and this is known as the hymnal. the { } hymnal as it now stands was set forth by the action of the general convention of , and is the outgrowth of much study, many changes and a great deal of legislation since the time when there was bound up with the prayer book a few hymns for congregational use. the present imposing volume has hymns drawn from almost every source and age, and, no doubt, meets every need and requirement. hymns.--the first hymn mentioned in the annals of christianity was that sung by the angels at the birth of our lord, from which we have the _gloria in excelsis_, and the second was that sung by our lord and his apostles immediately after the last supper in the upper room, known as the _hallel_. in early times anything sung to the praise of god was called a hymn. afterwards the use of the term became more restricted. pliny shows that in the year the christians instituted a custom of meeting together before sunrise to sing hymns of praise. melody only was used, not harmony, and the tunes employed were, doubtless, of jewish character. originally all music of the christian church was almost entirely vocal. in the third and fourth centuries the christian religion began to grow largely in the number of its followers, in wealth and position; magnificent churches were built under constantine the emperor, and then it came to pass that choirs were instituted definitely by the council of laodicea, a.d. . for two centuries the music of the church deteriorated. in the sixth century gregory the great instituted many reforms, so that the credit of reviving real congregational singing belonged to him. (see gregorian music.) the { } connection of religion with music is shown by the fact that nearly every great revival of religion has been accompanied by a great outburst of song. beginning with the reformation, the form of hymn, called _chorale_, originated in the reformed church of germany and largely with martin luther. the most popular part in congregational singing was the singing of hymns and there have been three successive styles in hymn-tunes. the first was the diatonic; the second the florid (from to ), and the third the modern style (from to the present time). this modern style is in some respects a return to the old style of the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries, with this distinction, that the harmonies instead of being pure diatonic are more chromatic and less plain. (see music, also organs.) hypothetical form.--(see baptism, conditional.) i ichthus.--the greek word for fish (which see). i. h. s.--the first three letters of the greek word for jesus, and equivalent to the english letters j. e. s. they are largely used in church decorations as symbols of the holy name. immersion.--the dipping into the water of recipients of holy baptism. for the relative importance of _immersion_ and _affusion_, see article on affusion. immovable feasts.--those feasts of the church which always occur on the same date such as { } christmas day, feast of the epiphany, etc. as some of the feasts, such as ascension day, whitsun day, etc., are movable depending on the time easter is kept. tables and rules for the movable and immovable feasts are set forth in the prayer book for convenience and to avoid confusion. (see christian year, also feasts and gospel.) imposition of hands.--a technical term for the _laying on of hands_ by the bishop in confirmation. wheatley on the prayer book remarks: "this is one of the most ancient ceremonies in the world. it has always been used to determine the blessing pronounced to those particular persons on whom the hands are laid, and to signify that the persons, who thus lay on their hands, act and bless by divine authority. thus jacob blessed ephraim and manasses, not as a parent only, but as a prophet. moses laid his hands on joshua, by express command from god, and as supreme minister over his people; and thus our blessed lord laid his hands upon little children and blessed them, and upon those that were sick and healed them. . . . and the apostles, from so ancient a custom and universal a practice, continued the rite of _imposition of hands_ for communicating the holy spirit in confirmation, which was so constantly and regularly observed by them, that st. paul calls the whole office, _laying on of hands_," and it may be added one of the first "principles of the doctrine of christ" (hebrews : and ). this term also refers to the laying on of hands by the bishop in ordination to the sacred ministry, by which is conferred the grace of holy order, and one { } is admitted to the office and work of a deacon, of priest or bishop, "which offices were evermore had in such reverend estimation, that no man might presume to execute any of them except he were first called, tried, examined and known to have such qualities as are requisite for the same; and also by public prayer, with _imposition of hands_, were approved and admitted thereunto by lawful authority." (preface to ordinal in prayer book.) incarnation, the.--a latinized name for the act by which the second person of the blessed trinity, god's only son, the eternal "word was made flesh," _i.e._, took our nature upon him; and also for the doctrine that "the godhead and manhood were joined together in one person never to be divided" (ii article of religion). this truth is embodied for us in the creed, in the words, "jesus christ, his only son our lord; who was conceived by the holy ghost, born of the virgin mary." this great outward fact is the foundation of all that follows: upon it christianity depends and all christian doctrine has reference to it. by reason of the incarnation the church as a living body becomes christ's body on earth, and in the church and by means of it man is brought into union with him who is the beginning of a new race, the head of a new and spiritual creation. thus it is that the sacraments, which are often called the "extension of the incarnation," become more than they seem. they are the means of our participation in christ's holy humanity, and of our growing into his likeness, as we use them with faith and true repentance. { } incense.--incense is one of the six points of ritual which it is claimed have always characterized the worship of the christian church. it was the practice of the church of england up to the reformation, and even after that was frequently used. it is used in many churches at the present time. it is more of a scriptural usage than a roman use, and while there is no canon or enactment forbidding its use, yet in the present state of our church life it is not likely to become a very popular restoration for some time to come. incumbent.--a term peculiar to the english church but frequently used in this country to designate the rector of a parish. the word means one who holds or is in possession of any office; it occurs in the institution office. infant baptism.--if the church were simply a voluntary society founded on the bible, as is commonly supposed, there would be no special reason why infants should be baptized, except as a matter of sentiment. if, on the other hand, the church is a divine institution, founded on christ and his apostles, and is declared in holy scripture to be the mystical body of christ, in which we are united to him, admitted into covenant with god and so brought into a new relationship with god, then _infant baptism_ is not only one of the most reasonable, but one of the most urgent doctrines of the christian religion, because it is in holy baptism that all these blessings are vouchsafed to us. (see baptism, holy.) by this sacrament the youngest infant is lifted up, so to speak, out of the world of nature and transplanted into { } christ's spiritual kingdom. it becomes thus a child of grace. its little life is made right with god. the old evil of our race has been rectified. it is henceforth not only a child of adam, but also a child, or member of the second adam, jesus our lord. by its new birth in holy baptism, the child becomes as fully incorporated into the new and spiritual race of which christ is the head, as ever it was incorporated into the race of mankind by its natural birth. it may not be conscious of this, any more than it was conscious of its natural birth, but it has, nevertheless, made a right beginning through the thoughtful care of others. it has, by this ministration, been grafted into the body of christ. it has been put in the way of true spiritual growth and training. henceforth it may be brought up as "the child of god" and not as an alien. to this end the church gives it spiritual caretakers, whose duty it is to see that this child is virtuously brought up to lead a godly and a christian life according to this beginning. this is the meaning of _infant baptism_; and the church has always regarded such baptism as a reasonable and benevolent work, as is exemplified by her universal practice from the beginning. the "mercy to babes" in the old dispensation has not been lost out of the new, the dispensation of the spirit of love, which brings to all, even to the _infant_, as well as to its parents, god's mercy which "he promised to our forefathers, abraham and his seed forever." (see name, the christian.) inhibit.--meaning to restrain or prohibit the exercise of the sacred ministry; a discipline exercised by a bishop for cause. { } innocents, the.--(see holy innocents' day.) i. n. r. i.--the initials of the latin version of the accusation placed over our lord's head on the cross, viz.: "jesus nazarenus rex judaeorum," and meaning "jesus of nazareth (the) king of (the) jews." these letters are often used in church decoration. institution, letter of.--(see institution, office of.) institution, office of.--the service in the prayer book entitled, "an office of institution of ministers into parishes or churches." canon , title i of the digest requires "that on the election of a minister into any church or parish, the vestry shall notify the bishop of such election, in writing; and if the minister be a priest, the bishop may, if requested by the vestry to do so, institute him according to the office established by this church." if the institution is to take place, the bishop issues an official letter, called, "the letter of institution," in which he gives and grants unto the duly elected rector his license and authority to perform the office of a priest in the parish, stating name and place. the rector is then duly instituted according to the service set forth, either by the bishop himself, or by a priest appointed by him, in which the letter of institution is read; god's blessing invoked on the newly appointed rector and his work; the keys of the church are given him by the wardens; a sermon is preached on the duties of pastor and people by some one appointed by the bishop, and the holy eucharist is celebrated by the newly instituted minister. after the benediction, it is directed that, the wardens, vestry and others shall { } salute and welcome him, bidding him godspeed. by the wording of the canon this service is not obligatory and adds nothing to the contract or agreement already made between the minister and vestry. the service, therefore, is not often used, although it would be desirable that every pastorate should be thus inaugurated. institution, words of.--the words used by our blessed lord when he instituted the sacrament of his body and blood, and which are incorporated in the prayer of consecration as set forth in the communion service. these words form the essential part of the consecration and the rubric directs that they be accompanied by certain manual acts which are prescribed. (see manual acts.) to effect a valid sacrament there must be the unfailing use of our lord's own words in instituting the blessed sacrament, the elements of bread and wine, and a duly appointed priesthood. instruction.--the name given to a short, practical address, generally on some usage, feature or doctrine of the church, as distinguished from the more formal sermon. intercessions of the litany.--those petitions in the litany which have for their response the words, "we beseech thee to hear us, good lord," are so called. (see litany.) intermediate state.--death is a separation of the soul and body; the body becoming lifeless and eventually decomposing into dust, the soul continuing to live as truly as ever. what becomes of the living soul when thus separated from the body by death? { } "our lord," says the rev. j. h. blunt, "has answered this question to a certain extent by the parable of lazarus and the rich man (st. luke : - ). by that parable he has taught us that the living souls of the departed live in a condition of happiness or misery suitable to the judgment which the all-seeing eye of god has passed upon their lives; the good lazarus at rest in 'abraham's bosom,' the wicked dives 'in torments.' at the same time our lord has clearly revealed by his own words and those of his apostles that there will be a general judgment at the last day, when all, good and bad, will have to stand before the throne of god, not as bodiless souls, but with soul and body. and further, the book of revelation follows up the words of christ and his apostles with some very distinct disclosures as to the _increased_ happiness of the good and the _increased_ misery of the wicked after the final and open award of the judge has been given in the general judgment. the separate existence of the soul between death and the judgment day is, therefore, called the _intermediate state_!" (see hades, also descent into hell.) intonation.--the first two or three notes of a gregorian chant introducing the recitative note; usually sung without the organ, by one of the clergy or choir who is called the cantor or precentor. intone.--to recite or chant on one note with inflections of the voice at stated places, according to certain rules. the minister intones the prayers, epistle, gospel, etc. anciently the entire service was musically rendered, the scriptures having their own peculiar intonation and inflections, the ordinary reading { } tone being altogether excluded. this practice has been strictly adhered to in many of the english cathedrals from the most ancient times to the present. in many parishes the services are also musically rendered, the clergy intoning the prayers, the responses being sung by the congregation. the custom is growing in favor as an inspiring and scriptural method of rendering the services. (see evensong.) introit.--the psalm which is sung while the clergy are entering the sanctuary for the celebration of the holy communion. its literal meaning is _the entrance_. formerly the introit was appointed for every celebration of the holy communion as well as collect, epistle and gospel. in the first prayer book of edward vi, the introits were all printed before the collect. some of these are selected with a "striking appropriateness to the days for which they are appointed and show a deep appreciation of the prophetic sense of holy scripture." they are not often used at the present time as hymns have been generally substituted, since the omission of the introits from the prayer book. invitatory.--the name given to the _venite_ (o come let us sing, etc.) as being an invitation to the use of the psalms in worship. this psalm, the th, has been so named and used since the time of the temple worship at jerusalem. invocation, the.--the words, "in the name of the father, and of the son, and of the holy ghost," used before sermons, is so called; to which the people respond "amen." this is a very ancient usage, and founded on the belief that so important a work as { } "preaching the word" should be done in the name of the lord. the _invocation_ is the name given also to the third paragraph of the prayer of consecration in the communion office, in which the merciful father is invoked that he may "vouchsafe to bless and sanctify with thy word and holy spirit, these thy gifts and creatures of bread and wine, that we, receiving them according to thy son our saviour jesus christ's holy institution, in remembrance of his death and passion, may be partakers of his most blessed body and blood." j james (st.) the great.--one of the apostles of our lord, whose festival is observed on july th, st. james was the brother of st. john and the son of zebedee and salome. with st. john he received the appellation of "boanerges" from our lord. he has also been surnamed the _great_ or the _greater_ by the church, but neither of these designations can be satisfactorily accounted for. st. james was the first of the apostles who suffered martyrdom and the only one whose death is recorded in the new testament (acts : ). in ecclesiastical art st. james is variously represented as a pilgrim with staff; with staff and shell; as a child with staff and wallet with shell upon it; on a white charger conquering the saracens; this last with reference to his being regarded as the patron saint of spain, santiago, "st. iago of compostella." { } james (st.) the less.--the son of cleophas, or alphaeus and mary, and brother of thaddaeus or st. jude. he was one of the twelve apostles and the writer of the epistle which bears his name. st. james was the first bishop of jerusalem and was put to death there, at the passover a.d. , in a popular commotion, probably caused by the publication of his epistle. he is commemorated on the double festival of st. philip and st. james, observed on may ; these two apostles having been associated together in the most ancient calendars, although in other calendars they were commemorated on different days. in ecclesiastical art st. james the less is represented with a fuller's club in his hand; as a child with palm branch; a saw in his hand, etc. jesus.--the human name of our lord, given to him at his circumcision and meaning _saviour_. the name _jesus_ was by no means an uncommon name among the jews. it is in the greek what _joshua_ is in hebrew, who is twice called in the new testament _jesus_, as in acts : and heb. : . in both these passages the word jesus means joshua, having reference to his work as a leader and deliverer of israel. so also we meet with jesus the son of sirach, who wrote the book ecclesiasticus. st. paul speaks of one jesus who was called justus (col. : ), and in acts : , we read of "a certain sorcerer, a false prophet, a jew, whose name was bar-jesus," _i.e._, son of jesus. josephus mentions many of the same name. thus our lord took a common name, but a name which henceforth was to be above every name. as the name _jesus_ is the same as joshua, its { } significance may be learned from its derivation. joshua the son of nun was first called _oshea_, but moses changed it to jehoshea, (contracted to joshua) from _jah_, (jehovah) and oshea, saviour, and meaning, "he by whom _god will save_ his people from their enemies." thus joshua was a type of the spiritual saviour of the world. the name as borne by our lord means "god our saviour," as the angel declared, "for he shall save his people from their sins." the ancient prophecy that he should be called "_emmanuel_, god with us," was fulfilled when our lord was called jesus. when then we profess our belief in jessu as we do in the creed, it is as if we said, "i believe that jesus, in the highest and utmost importance of that name, to be the saviour of the world. i acknowledge there is no other way to heaven beside that which he has shown us; there is no other means which can procure it for us but his blood; there is no other person who shall confer it on us but himself. and with this full acknowledgment i _believe_ in jesus." (see holy name.) john baptist, saint.--the forerunner of our lord who was sent to prepare the way for his coming. he was miraculously born of zacharias and elizabeth, both being "old and well-stricken in years." although he suffered martyrdom, he is commemorated on the day of his nativity, as his birth heralded the incarnation. the festival of the nativity of st. john baptist has been observed since the fourth or fifth century on june th, as this was undoubtedly the day of his birth, since he was six months older than our lord. this date, also, is supposed to be { } connected with his words, "he must increase, but i must decrease." the days after june th begin to decrease in length, but after the christmas tide they begin to increase. st. john was beheaded by herod antipas, when he was about thirty years old. he was a prophet, the greatest of all--the last prophet of the old dispensation and the first of the new, and our lord declared that among all previously born of women none was greater than john the baptist. in ecclesiastical art st. john baptist is variously represented, with a lamb on a book, small cross, close crown or cap; with tunic of camel's hair; cope fastened with two leather thongs crossed; with lamb and locust; his head on a dish. john evangelist, saint.--commemorated on the second day after christmas, december th. st. john was the son of zebedee and salome and brother of st. james the great. the sons of zebedee were, doubtless, among the first called of our lord's disciples and st. john was from the first among those nearest and dearest to our lord. not only was he one of the twelve apostles but he was one of the three chosen witnesses of our lord's greatest glory and humiliation on earth, viz.: in his transfiguration, and the agony in gethsemane. he delights to call himself "the disciple whom jesus loved." he lay on jesus' bosom at the paschal supper and to him the lord committed the care of his own mother when he died. st. john "is known to the affection of the church as the apostle of love, and to her intellect as the _theologos_, the divine." besides his gospel he wrote the three epistles bearing his name and the revelation. st. { } john is said to have spent the later years of his life at ephesus, and is the only one of the apostles who died a natural death. he died at the age of , having been born the same year as our lord. in the emblems of the four evangelists (see emblems) the eagle is always allowed to represent st. john, and most fitly, "for like the eagle he soars high above the earth basking in the pure sunlight of divine truth." joining the church.--this is a phrase that has been brought over from the usage and phraseology of the various denominations. its use among church people has been productive of the greatest harm. in the first place, it is hardly a correct phrase for a churchman to use. we may "join" an odd fellows' lodge or a debating society, but we do not _join_ a family or household which god's church is. we are born or adopted into a family, and so we are adopted into god's family; incorporated, grafted into the body of christ, his church, and not simply "join" it as we would a debating society or a political club. in the next place, harm has been done by the use of this phrase by church people, because as popularly understood it is in direct contradiction to the belief and practice of the church. according to this phraseology holy baptism counts for nothing, and yet the bible teaches that it is in holy baptism that we are made members of the church, and that all future blessings are dependent on this spiritual fact. when then, church people take up this mode of speech and use it in reference to confirmation as is so often done, they practically ignore the significance of holy baptism and the church's method and appointed order. { } the effect of this becomes apparent in the lives of many of the church's baptized children. because, in whatever religious teaching they receive, their baptism is never referred to, and they are never reminded that they are _now_ god's children by adoption and grace _because baptized_, it comes to pass that, when these same children are asked to be confirmed, they think and act as if they were invited to "join the church." and as they are more influenced by the speech and methods of the various religious bodies which prevail in their community than they are by the church's teaching, they imagine that something extraordinary is required; they feel as if they must somehow "have got" religion; or they do not feel prepared to "experience religion"; or else they don't know whether they will or will not "join the episcopal church." in all this we see the result of the application and use of "other systems" rather than that of the church. thus many an earnest and loving young heart has been lost to the church, notwithstanding it was given to god in its tenderest years to be trained up for him. confirmation is not "joining the church." if we are baptized, we have been "received into christ's holy church and made a living member of the same." and because this is true, the church has a further blessing in store for her children. this she would bestow by the ministrations of her chief pastors in the laying on of hands by the bishop; and to this our young people might go naturally and easily and at the same time soberly and reverently, if they were properly instructed and lovingly led. there is no reason why { } any young baptized person might not thus go to his or her confirmation, claiming this blessing as their right and privilege as children of god and citizens of his kingdom. (see baptism; name, the christian; regeneration; also confirmation.) jubilate deo.--the latin title of the one hundredth psalm, translated "o be joyful in the lord," and which is sung as an alternate to the _benedictus_ when the latter occurs in the lesson for the day. jude, saint.--also called thaddaeus or labbaeus, "the brother of james," and whose name sometimes appears as _judas_, and in one instance it is added in parenthesis, "not iscariot." st. jude was an apostle of our lord and wrote the epistle which bears his name. he is sometimes called the jeremiah of the new testament, as he wrote to the church in "solemn and rugged language of present perils and coming storms." the object of his epistle is to contend earnestly for pure christian doctrine, and it is he who has given us that stirring text which is adopted as a motto by all true and loyal churchmen, viz.: "that ye should earnestly contend for the faith which was once delivered to the saints." he is said to have been married and to have left descendants who were summoned before the emperor domitian as confessors for christ's sake. st. jude is commemorated on the double festival of st. simon and st. jude, observed on october th. it may be that the union of these two names is intended to be an illustration of that unity of the faith for which the epistle of st. jude so strongly contends, as these two apostles ministered and suffered together, (see simon, st.) the collect { } for the day embodies this idea. in ecclesiastical art st. jude is variously represented, as having a boat in his hand; a boat hook; a carpenter's square; a ship with sails in his hand; carrying loaves or a fish; with a club; with an inverted cross; with a medallion of our saviour on his breast or in his hand; with a halbert; as a child with a boat in his hand. jurisdiction, episcopal.--by this term is meant the sphere of a bishop's rule or ministration. this is defined in article of the constitution adopted by the general convention which provides, "and every bishop of this church shall confine the exercise of his episcopal office to _his proper diocese_, unless requested to ordain, or confirm, or perform any other act of the episcopal office in another diocese by the ecclesiastical authority thereof." jurisdiction, missionary.--a portion of a state or territory set apart for the missionary work of the american church, to the oversight of which a missionary bishop has been appointed, is so called. the term missionary jurisdiction is also applied to the foreign field where a missionary bishop has been appointed to the exercise of episcopal functions in any missionary station which the house of bishops with the concurrence of the house of deputies may have designated. jurisdiction, resignation of.--sometimes it happens that a bishop from old age, or sickness, or other cause desires to resign his episcopal jurisdiction. to do this, he must gain the consent of the house of bishops. the canons on this subject are very stringent and make it difficult for a bishop to resign. the { } teaching of the church is that "a bishop is bound to his diocese for life," and therefore, she is very reluctant that the relationship should be broken or interfered with except for great and necessary cause; on which ground alone the resignation is permitted. justification.--a theological word used to designate the forgiveness of the sinner and his restoration to a right relationship with god. the cause of justification may be given as follows: the principal cause.--god's mercy. the meritorious cause.--christ's death. the efficient cause.--the operation of the holy ghost. the instrumental cause on god's side.--the ministry of the word, baptism and the holy communion. the instrumental cause on man's side.--faith which works by love. k kalendar.--the same as calendar (which see). keys of the church.--to the rector belongs the control of the keys of the church building, and this because he alone can determine what services shall be held in it. if he chooses he can hold services every day; he can celebrate the holy eucharist every day or as often as he thinks best, and no one can interfere with him. he has charge of the spiritualities of the parish and in this he is left absolutely free, being amenable to his bishop only. the vestry have nothing to do in determining what use the rector shall { } make of the church building in carrying out the provisions of the prayer book. the office of institution recognizes this right in that one of its provisions is that "then shall the senior warden (or the member of the vestry supplying his place) present the keys of the church to the new incumbent, saying, in the name and behalf of------parish [or church] i do receive and acknowledge you, the reverend, (name) as priest and rector of the same; and in token thereof, give into your hands the _keys of the church_." keys, power of the.--a phrase used in reference to the discipline of the church which our lord has intrusted to the bishops and pastors of the flock as "ministers and stewards of his grace." this phrase involves the doctrines of absolution and excommunication; the idea of opening and shutting, admission and rejection, and the administration of the sacraments. in holy scripture, the "power of the keys" is called a "binding and loosing"; also a "remitting and retaining of sin," having reference to the authority to admit into communion with the church or to exclude therefrom. (see st. matt. : ; : ; and st. john : .) kindred, table of.--a table set forth in the prayer book of the church of england, with the title, "table of kindred and affinity, wherein whosoever are related are forbidden in scripture and in our laws to marry together." while this table is not published in the american prayer book, it is regarded by many american canonists as the law of the protestant episcopal church in the united states. it is interesting to note that this table is (or at least was until a few { } years ago) embodied in the statutes of the state of maryland, and that in some other states there are laws forbidding the marriage of first cousins. kingdom of god.--the new testament name for the church. st. matthew uses the phrase, "kingdom of heaven," while the other evangelists employ the term, "kingdom of god," both being equivalent terms meaning the same thing, viz.: the kingdom of christ on earth, the kingdom of the gospel, the church of christ. this is, indeed, a heavenly and divine kingdom, for though it is now set up on earth yet its nature, its purpose, its powers and its ends are "of heaven." that this phrase is used to signify the church on earth can be seen most plainly in the various parables in which our lord likens the "kingdom of heaven" to such things as of necessity belong to the present time. see the parables in st. matt. ; also in st. mark : - . the gospel which our lord delivered to man is not an abstract gospel, but "the gospel of the kingdom ":--see st. matt. : ; : ; : ; st. mark : ; st. luke : ; : ; : ; : ; acts : ; : ; : ; : ; : and . from these and many other passages we learn that our lord embodied his truth and salvation in an _institution_ which should be the means of its preservation, the instrument of its promulgation throughout the world, and into which men are admitted by holy baptism to become partakers of his salvation. this truth appears constantly in the bible and is the basis of its appeals to live righteously and godly in this present world. as an example of this see col. : and . { } kissing the stole.--the stole represents the yoke of christ, and the priest in recognition of that yoke and of his vows, kisses the stole each time he puts it on to show his willingness to submit to that yoke. kneeling.--the most fitting posture in which prayer is to be offered to god. our blessed lord himself by his own example has taught us this. in regard to kneeling in public worship, the annotated prayer book has this note: "the gesture of kneeling is not only a mark of personal humility and reverence, but also one of those acts required of every one as an individual component part of the body which forms the congregation. to neglect it, is to neglect a duty which is owing to god and man in this respect as well as the other. we have no right to conspicuous private gestures in a public devotional assembly; nor are the gestures which we use (in conformity to the rules of the church) to be necessarily interpreted as hypocritical because our personal habits or feelings may not be entirely consistent with them. as the clergy have an official duty in church, irrespective of their personal characters, so also have the laity. it may be added that a respectful conformity to rules enjoining such official duties, may often lead onward to true personal reverence and holiness." kyrie.--the greek title of the responses after the ten commandments in the communion office. _kyrie_ means "lord," and taken with the greek word _eleison_, they form the first words of the response "lord, have mercy." { } l lady day.--the english popular name for the feast of the annunciation (which see). laity.--derived from the latin _laicus_, greek _laikos_, from _laos_, meaning "people." the word means of, or pertaining to the people as distinguished from the clergy. the term was first used in the second century. it ought to be noticed that the term laity, or layman does not mean the mere absence of rank, but denotes a positive order in the church. the word is the equivalent of "brethren," as we read in the acts of the apostles, of the first church council which issued the first pastoral letter, which begins "the apostles and elders and _brethren_ send greeting" (acts : ). when in our conventions or councils the vote by orders is called for, the clergy vote by themselves and the laity by themselves; in this we have an illustration of the laity as an order in the church. lamb and flag.--a symbolical representation of our blessed lord, used in church decorations. the lamb is the chief emblem of our saviour who was called by st. john baptist, "the lamb of god that taketh away the sins of the world." the lamb is represented with a nimbus or glory of four rays, one partly concealed by the head. the rays are marks of divinity and belong only to our lord. the lamb bearing a flag or banner signifies victory, and is an emblem of the resurrection. this symbolism is appropriately used at easter. { } lambeth conference.--the name given to the assemblage of the bishops of the anglican communion on the invitation of the bishop of canterbury, and held in lambeth palace. the first meeting was held in ; the second in ; the third in , and the fourth in ; the bishops thus coming together every ten years for mutual counsel and advice concerning the great work of the anglican communion throughout the world. as many as two hundred bishops have thus come together in conference, at one time. lammas day.--the old name given to the first day of august because on that day in anglo-saxon times it was the custom to bring into the church offerings in kind, loaves, representing the first-fruits, of the harvest. the word "lammas" is derived from the anglo-saxon word _hlafmaesse_, _hlaf_ meaning a loaf, and _maesse_ meaning "mass." as the first of august in old calendars was the feast of st. peter-in-chains, it is also supposed that _lammas_ is an abbreviation of _vincula mass_, or the feast of st. peter _ad vincula_ in commemoration of his deliverance from chains. last things, the four.--these are death, judgment, heaven, hell. (see eschatology.) these subjects being so very solemn in their import, they are frequently taken as topics of instruction or of sermons during the advent season, when our thoughts are turned to the contemplation of our lord's second coming "in his glorious majesty to judge both the quick and the dead." lauds.--one of the seven canonical hours (which see). { } lay baptism.--baptism administered by a layman. the church has always held that baptism by any man in case of necessity is valid. but only great necessity, such as sudden danger or sickness and the inability to secure the services of a clergyman, should be just cause for baptism by a layman, and then great care should be taken that the proper form and words are used. (see baptism, holy.) it is well to note that when holy baptism is administered by one who is not a clergyman _without such necessity_ as mentioned above, the person baptizing is guilty of a great sin, even though his act may bring a blessing to the person baptized. his act cannot be undone, but it ought not to have been done. layman.--one of the laity (which see). lay-reader.--a layman who reads the church service in the absence of the priest. usually he is licensed to do so by the bishop of the diocese. the american church has a canon on the subject, setting forth the method of appointment and regulating his work, from which it is learned that the lay-reader is very much limited in the service he renders being permitted to use only those portions of the service which do not belong properly to the ministry. when the priest is present a laymen may read the lessons in the daily morning and evening prayer, and also the litany as far as the lord's prayer. laying on of hands.--the ceremony by which one is ordained to the sacred ministry by the bishop, and by which he administers the rite of confirmation, (see imposition of hands.) { } lectern.--the desk or stand from which the scriptural lessons in church are read, and is so called from this fact. the term "lectern" is derived from the latin word _lecturni_, meaning a pulpit or from the greek _lektron_, a couch or rest for a book. lecterns as used in our churches are sometimes constructed of wood or stone, but frequently of polished brass, in the form of an eagle with outstretched wings, (on which the bible rests) to symbolize the flight of the gospel message throughout the world. lectionary.--the tables to be found in the prayer book setting forth the portions of scripture to be read daily in public worship throughout the year, also the proper lessons for sundays and the holy days of the church. the word is derived from the latin _lectus_, from _lego_, to gather, to read. from this origin we have the word _lection_, meaning a reading or lesson read; he who reads was called _lector_, a name given to one of the minor orders in the ancient church. _the lectionary_ as found in the prayer book contains most ample provision for the reading of god's holy word. by this appointment the old testament is read once during the year, and some portions of it more frequently. the new testament is read three times, while the book of psalms is read twelve times or once a month. no other religious body makes so large provision for the public reading of the scriptures, and the episcopal church has been appropriately called a "bible reading church." the lectionary as it now stands was set forth by the general convention of , being a revision of the old lectionary which had been in use since , the time of the first { } setting forth of the american prayer book. (see lessons; also scriptures in prayer book.) lent, the season of.--the word "lent" has no special significance save only as it designates the time of the fast before easter. the word is derived from the anglo-saxon _lencten_, meaning the spring season. from this we learn that the _lenten fast_ means simply the fast that comes in the spring of the year. it was appointed at this time for the reason that our lord's passion and death occurred at this time of the year and these devotions of the faithful grouped themselves around that sad hour on calvary. at first, the fast may not have extended over the paschal week, but it was arranged at a very early period to cover the forty days preceding easter. beginning with ash wednesday the lenten season really covers a period of forty-six days, but as sunday has always been regarded as a feast, these six sundays are not counted as belonging to the fast. (see lent, sundays in.) there can be no great difficulty in assigning a reason for this solemnity to be kept for forty days. for many reasons "forty" is a scriptural number. _forty_ years the children of israel were under discipline in their pilgrimage in the wilderness. moses fasted _forty_ days in the mount. elijah was _forty_ days in the wilderness. _forty_ days did the ninevites fast and repent them of their sins to avert the judgments foretold by the prophet jonah. and _forty_ days did our lord fast in the wilderness when about to enter upon his public ministry. from these references we learn that it is both scriptural and helpful that this season of penitence should be prolonged for us, that bearing { } in mind these incidents of "forty years" and "forty days" of devotion and discipline which characterized the history of god's people, and also our lord's example, we may be like minded in prayer, in discipline and in turning to god. the devotions of the lenten fast are intimately connected with easter which it precedes and are intended to prepare the mind and heart for the devout celebration of the "queen of festivals" and for the easter communion. lent being a penitential season the ecclesiastical color is purple or violet. the _benedicite_ takes the place of the _te deum_ and the ash wednesday collect is used every day throughout the season. lent, sundays in.--as stated in the preceding article the lenten fast does not include all the days between ash wednesday and easter, for the _sundays_ are so many days above the number forty. they are excluded because the lord's day is always kept as a festival and never as a fast. these six sundays, therefore, are called "sundays in lent, not _of_ lent; they are in the midst of it, but do not form part of it; on these sundays we continue without interruption to celebrate our saviour's resurrection." the sundays in lent are named in the prayer book first, second, third, fourth, fifth; the last sunday being set forth as "the sunday next before easter." popular usage, however, has assigned other names to the closing sundays in lent, for example, the fourth sunday is usually called _mid lent sunday_, for the reason that the lenten fast is half over. it is also called _refreshment sunday_, from the gospel for the day which gives the account of our lord { } miraculously feeding the five thousand in the wilderness; another name is _mothering sunday_ (which see). the fifth sunday is called _passion sunday_, from the fact that on that day the church begins the solemn recital of our lord's sufferings. the sixth sunday is known as _palm sunday_ as it was on this day our lord made his triumphal entry into jerusalem, when the people hailed him as king and strewed palm branches in his way, crying "hosanna to the son of david." lesser litany, the.--that portion of the litany beginning, "o christ, hear us," and ending with the prayer, "we humbly beseech thee, o father," is so called. it is often used as a penitential ending to week-day services during lent. lessons, the.--the word "lesson" is derived from the latin _lectio_, meaning a reading, and signifies a portion of scripture appointed to be read during divine service; applied especially to those scriptures read in the daily services. two lessons are to be read at each service in accordance with the custom of the early christians, one from the old testament and one from the new. the principle upon which the lessons are thus selected is set forth by justin martyr, who lived a.d. - , as follows: "the apostles have taught, as they learned themselves, first the law and then the gospel; for what is the law but the gospel foreshadowed; or what is the gospel but the law fulfilled." (see calendar, lectionary, and also scriptures in prayer book.) letter dimissory.--(see dimissory letter.) letter of orders.--the name given to the certificate of ordination to the sacred ministry, with the { } bishop's seal, and given by him to each priest or deacon whom he ordains. the form of this certificate varies in the use of different bishops. letter of transfer.--canon , section i, title of the digest provides that, "a communicant removing from one parish to another shall procure from the rector (if any) of the parish of his last residence, or if there be no rector, from one of the wardens, a certificate stating that he or she is a communicant in good standing; and the rector of the parish or congregation to which he or she removes shall not be required to receive him or her as a communicant until such letter be produced." lights on the altar.--(see altar lights.) in addition to what is set forth in the article to which the reader is referred, we reproduce from wheatley on the prayer book the following: "among other ornaments of the church were _two_ lights enjoined by the injunctions of king edward vi to be set upon the altar as a significant ceremony to represent the light which christ's gospel brought into the world. and this, too, was ordered by the very same injunction which prohibited all other lights and tapers that used to be superstitiously set before images or shrines. and these lights, used time out of mind in the church, are still continued in most, if not all, cathedral and collegiate churches and chapels, . . . and ought also by this rubric, to be used in all parish churches and chapels." linen cloth.--(see fair linen cloth.) litany, the.--the word "litany" is of greek origin, from _litancia_, derived from _lite_, meaning a { } "prayer." in the early church litany included all supplications and prayers whether public or private. afterwards it came to mean a special supplication, offered with intense earnestness, and this will explain the title of the litany in the prayer book, viz.: "the litany, or general supplication." the litany as now used is substantially the same as that compiled by gregory the great at the end of the sixth century. it is a separate and distinct service, but is commonly used as a matter of convenience after morning prayer, and may be used after the evening prayer. it is appointed to be read on wednesdays, fridays and sundays, and like all other prayers is said kneeling. an examination of the litany shows it to be divided into six divisions as follows: i. _the invocations_ being earnest appeals for mercy to each person in the godhead, first separately and then collectively. ii. _the deprecations_, being those petitions having as their response, "good lord, deliver us." iii. _the obsecrations_, being the last three petitions having as their response, "good lord, deliver us," beginning with the petition, "by the mystery," etc. iv. _the intercessions_, including all the petitions to which the people respond, "we beseech thee to hear us, good lord." v. _the supplications_, beginning, "o christ hear us," down to vi. _the prayers_ with which the litany closes. by reason of its responsive character the litany is a very soul stirring and heart searching supplication, is designed to keep the attention constantly on the alert and to enliven devotion by calling upon the congregation to make their petitions for those deliverances and blessings recited by the minister. { } litany desk.--a kneeling desk, sometimes called a faldstool, from which the litany is read. its customary place in the church is on the floor of the nave in front of the chancel in accordance with the injunction issued during the reigns of edward vi and queen elizabeth. the significance of this position may be seen by reference to the words of the prophet joel read on ash wednesday as the epistle, "let the priests, the ministers of the lord, weep _between the porch and the altar_, and let them say, spare thy people, o lord." liturgical colors.--(see church colors.) liturgy.--the word "liturgy" is derived from the greek _leitourgia_, meaning a public work or duty, whether civil or religious. it then became generally used with reference to sacred offices, whence arose its ecclesiastical use to signify the solemnization of the rites of the christian church. afterwards, it came to be especially applied to the office for the celebration of the holy eucharist and as such the term is technically used in church history. the liturgy being the office of the celebration of the holy eucharist, it has for its nucleus our lord's words of institution. these with their accompanying divine acts form the centre around which all subsequent prayers, praises and ritual customs gathered, and the history of these is the history of liturgies. liturgies have been used in the christian church from the beginning as the ancient liturgies demonstrate. of these there are many still extant in mss. some of them fully as old as the oldest mss. of the bible. while they vary in arrangement and phraseology, yet the leading and essential { } table showing the descent of principal liturgies ------------------------------------------------ our lord's words of institution | apostolic nucleus of a liturgy | -------------------------------------------------------------- | | | | liturgy of st. james, liturgy of st. mark, liturgy of liturgy of st. john, antioch, or jerusalem or alexandria st. peter, st. paul, or ephesus | | or rome | ------------- | | | | | present liturgy | liturgy of lyons liturgy of syriac of egypt | | st. basil liturgy of | --------------------- | st. james | | | | liturgy of | | mozarabic liturgy liturgy st. chrysostom monophysite | or spanish of britain of tours | liturgies | liturgy | | present liturgy -------------- ------------- of oriental or | | | russian church ambrosian sacramentary augustine's revised liturgy of st. leo liturgy of britain | | | present sacramentary salisbury, york and liturgy of st. gelasius other english liturgies of milan | | sacramentary present liturgy of the of st. gregory church of england | | present liturgy -------------------- of rome | | liturgy of liturgy of scottish church american church { } parts are common to them all and are found without substantial variation, thus pointing to one common source. all liturgies existing at the present time trace their origin back to apostolic times through four main sources, as follows: i. the liturgy of st. james, composed in the first instance for the churches of palestine. ii. the liturgy of st. mark, for the church in alexandria. iii. the liturgy of st. peter, for the church in rome, from which the existing roman liturgy is derived. iv. the liturgy of st. john, for the church in ephesus. it is from this last that our own liturgy is derived. this ephesine liturgy was introduced into france at a very early age by missionaries who came to lyons. from france missionaries went over to england and there preached christ and introduced the liturgy which they were accustomed to use, so that when st. augustine went from rome to england, a.d. , expecting to find it a heathen land, he found christians already there and using a liturgy somewhat different from that of rome. these differences in the english liturgy showed an eastern origin, thus confirming its apostolic origin and thus demonstrate that our liturgy did not come from the church of rome. rome's power and influence being introduced into england did, indeed, made its impress on the national religious life, but the english liturgy never lost its distinctive eastern characteristics which remain to this day. at the time of the reformation the { } liturgy after many revisions was first set forth in the english language on whitsun day, . it was again revised in , and again other changes were made in and finally in . since which time very slight changes have been made in it. the american liturgy was formally set forth on september , , being adopted from the english prayer book, modified according to the agreement made with the scottish bishops who consecrated our first bishop, the rt. rev. samuel seabury, d.d., for the diocese of connecticut. (see article entitled prayer book.) lord's day.--the first day of the week is not the sabbath, but the _lord's day_, and as such has been observed since the resurrection of our lord, of which it is the weekly commemoration. from the new testament itself we learn that the first day of the week, commonly called sunday, has always been the day which christians have consecrated to god's service. the rt. rev. f. w. taylor, d.d., has given us the following clear statement concerning the first day of the week observed as the lord's day: "our saviour jesus christ, in the exercise of this his lordship over the day, has first of all abolished the ordinance of the seventh day, and substituted, by the holy spirit guiding his church into all truth, the ordinance of the first day, as that one day in seven which the fourth commandment enjoins to be kept sacred to god as a moral obligation. then our lord has made this day one of the highest spiritual privilege, by uniting it to his own person and work as the day of his resurrection, the weekly recurrence of the { } christian passover, a perpetual easter; and also as the weekly memorial of his supreme gift of the holy ghost upon the feast of pentecost, to abide with his church forever. it is preeminently a day of joy and gladness before the lord, and should first of all be observed to the lord, in the assembling of the church together for worship and communion with god and for spiritual instruction and profit. hence the prayer book prescribes a collect, epistle and gospel for every sunday in the year, and its rubrics plainly teach us that according to the mind of the church the principal service of every lord's day should be the celebration of the holy eucharist. our lord has also taught us by his example as well as by precept, that works of mercy, both spiritual and corporal, are lawful to be done on this day, and are peculiarly appropriate to it." lord's prayer, the.--the prayer which our blessed lord taught his disciples when he said, "after this manner, therefore, pray ye," or as given in another place, "when ye pray, say our father," etc. the church has always taken these words literally, so that in all her services--daily prayer, litany, baptism, confirmation, holy communion, marriage, visitation of the sick, etc., the lord's prayer is always an integral part. in the communion office the lord's prayer occurs twice, but it is to be noted that the rubric directs the first to be said by the _priest alone_, as a part of his private preparation. with regard to the second there is the following rubric: "then shall the minister say the lord's prayer, _the people repeating after him every petition_." { } these last words (in italics) are omitted in the first rubric, thus indicating a difference of use. lord's supper, the.--(see holy communion.) in regard to the use of the words "lord's supper" as a name for the holy communion, we reproduce the following from the annotated prayer book, which is worth considering: "the term (the lord's supper) is borrowed from cor. : , where st. paul applies it to the agape or love-feasts which then accompanied the celebration of the holy eucharist. how the singular and inexact use of it which is handed down in our prayer book arose, it is difficult to say; and it is a transference of a scriptural term from one thing to another which cannot be wholly justified. the name thus given to the holy sacrament has led many to confuse the lord's last supper with the institution of the sacrament itself, which it is expressly said took place '_after_ supper' (st. luke : ) and '_when_ he had supped'" ( cor. : ). lord's table, the.--a prayer book name for the altar (which see). in scriptural usage the words "altar" and "table" are synonymous, that is, they are different names for the same thing in different aspects or as respects different uses of it. the word "altar" is also used in the prayer book, in the office of institution for the inducting of a priest to the charge of a parish, in which he is described as "one who serves at the altar"; is directed to be "received within the rails of the altar," and again, to "kneel at the altar to present his supplication for himself." low celebration.--this is a term commonly used to describe a celebration of the holy eucharist on { } ordinary week-days and in the early morning on sundays and feasts. at these the celebrant is unassisted except by a server and there is no choir. all parts of the office are consequently said, not sung. low sunday.--the first sunday after easter is the octave of the queen of festivals and is commonly called "low sunday." it is so called from its contrast with the high festival of easter day. the same note of holy joy is struck, but lower down on the scale. luke, festival of saint.--a holy day of the church observed on october . of the life of st. luke the evangelist very little is known, but uniting tradition and the references made to him in holy scripture we learn the following particulars: st. luke was not one of the apostles and was probably not converted until after the ascension of our lord, although one tradition has it that he was one of the two disciples with whom our lord conversed on the road to emmaus. st. luke himself testifies that he was not from the beginning an eye-witness and minister of the word. he appears to have studied medicine at antioch, and st. paul, in one of his epistles, refers to him as "luke, the beloved physician." a late tradition represents him to have been a painter as well as a physician, and he is said to have painted a picture of the blessed virgin. he was undoubtedly a scholarly and accomplished man. to him we are indebted for two of the canonical books--the gospel which bears his name and the acts of the apostles. st. luke's gospel gives more incidents in our lord's life than any of the others, and the beauty and { } exceeding sweetness of his story of the great life are enriched with those gospel hymns which have characterized the church's worship ever since, viz.: gloria in excelsis, benedictus, magnificat and nunc dimittis. our lord appears in this gospel as the great high priest, winning by his sacrifice on the cross, mercy and pardon for sinners. it is for this reason that in ecclesiastical art, st. luke is represented by the winged ox as setting forth christ's atonement through sacrifice. lych gate.--the word "lych," derived from the anglo-saxon _lie_, or the german _leiche_, means a body, especially a dead body, a corpse. the term _lych gate_ is the old name given to a churchyard gate with a porch or covering, under which a bier may be rested while the introductory portion of the burial service is being read. such gates are quite frequently found in england, and occasionally in this country. m magna charta.--the great document exacted by barons from king john of england at runnymede, june th, , by which was declared english liberty and english freedom in church and state, and the ancient rights and privileges of the people were clearly defined and guaranteed. in this document is set forth the independence of england's church, and from it we learn how untrue is the popular belief that the church of england was founded by henry viii, { } for among its opening words are these (in latin): "the _church of england_ shall be free and her liberties unimpaired." we here see the church of england referred to as a body already existing, in a _state document_ nearly two hundred years before henry viii was born, which is truly a suggestive fact to all thoughtful people. magnificat.--the latin title, meaning "doth magnify," of the hymn sung after the first lesson at daily evening prayer. it is found in the gospel of st. luke i: - , and is the song of praise which the blessed virgin mary gave utterance to "at the very season when the divine overshadowing brought about the incarnation of the word." this beautiful hymn is used at the evening service as the daily commemoration of the incarnation. this use of the magnificat can be traced as far back as the fifth century and it has been used in the english church at vespers for over years. for some reason the magnificat was omitted from the first american prayer book set forth in , but at the last revision in it was restored. maniple.--a scarf, like a short stole, worn on the left arm over the alb by the celebrating priest at the holy communion. (see vestments.) manual acts.--the acts prescribed by the rubrics to be used by the priest in consecrating the elements in the holy communion. the rubric reads, "(_a_) here the priest is to take the paten into his hands, (_b_) and here to break the bread, (_c_) and here to lay his hand upon all the bread, (_d_) here he is to take the cup into his hands, (_e_) and here he is to lay his { } hand upon every vessel in which there is any wine to be consecrated." this is the most solemn part of the whole ministration of the liturgy. "there cannot be too great exactness and reverent formality on the part of the celebrant in consecrating the elements by means of which, when consecrated, an acceptable sacrifice is to be carried up to the father, and the body and blood of our lord jesus christ received by the communicants." mark, feast of saint.--observed april . st. mark is called the evangelist because he is the writer of the gospel which bears his name. he was the companion of st. peter and accompanied him in his missionary travels. it is supposed that he wrote his gospel at the dictation of st. peter. st. mark is said to have founded the church in alexandria, and one of the ancient liturgies is called by his name. he suffered martyrdom on easter day, april th, a.d. , being cruelly bound with cords and dragged through the streets of the city until he was dead. it is said that his body was removed, a.d. , to venice, where the famous church of st. mark was erected over his grave. this festival has been observed since a.d. . in ecclesiastical art, st. mark is represented with a lion at his side, with reference to the royal character of the son of david, which is emphasized in this gospel. marriage.--the sad prevalence of divorce in the united states might not have come to pass if people had clear ideas of what marriage really is. marriage is a great deal more than simply a civil contract. it is a divine institution, "an honorable estate, instituted { } by god in the time of man's innocency." it is a religious ceremony and is sacramental in character. it ought, therefore, to be clearly understood that marriage simply by a "squire" or other legal officer, detracts from the sacredness and dignity of "this holy estate," and belittles the binding character of the "marriage tie." even a secular paper could declare, "we do not believe there should be any civil marriages of any kind. every ceremony should be solemnized by the church and lifted above the level of a real estate transaction." in this custom of civil or legal marriages may be found at least one cause, perhaps the principal cause of divorce, for it encourages such a low view of the sacredness of the marriage rite. taught by our lord and his apostles, the church emphasizes the religious and sacramental character of holy matrimony and has always enjoined its solemnization with ecclesiastical ceremonies and by ecclesiastical persons. this is clearly set forth by the earliest christian writers. thus st. ignatius in one of his epistles says: "it is fitting for those who purpose matrimony to accomplish their union with the sanction of the bishop, that their marriage may be in the lord." tertullian speaks of marriages being "ratified before god," and adds, "how can we find words to describe the happiness of that marriage in which the church joins together, which the oblation confirms, the benediction seals, the angels proclaim when sealed, and the father ratifies." st. ambrose calls marriage a sacrament, and says, "marriage must be sanctified by the priest's sanction and blessing." { } these utterances unfold the mind of the church in the times nearest the days of our lord and his apostles, and in all ages ever since the church has never abandoned this position in her practice and formularies. a careful study of the marriage service in the prayer book will show it to be a very clear setting forth of the nature of marriage. it will also be seen how fully this service has retained the belief concerning marriage which the church has always held since the time of our lord and his apostles. (see betrothal, also espousal.) mary, the blessed virgin.--(see blessed virgin mary.) mass--the old name for the sacrament of the holy communion, being a corruption of the latin, _ite, missa est_, meaning "the people are now dismissed." "this name was retained in the prayer book of , the title of the office being 'the supper of the lord, and the holy communion, commonly called the mass.'" in the prayer book of the word "mass" was dropped and has not since appeared in the prayer book, and in consequence has become generally disused. the term, however, is still retained in popular usage as in the words christmas, michaelmas, etc. the swedish and also the german reformers retained the name "mass" for the principal service of the church, whether it did or did not include a celebration of the holy communion. matthew, feast of saint.--observed september . a feast in honor of st. matthew has been observed since a.d. , and he is known in the church as both apostle and evangelist. st. matthew had { } been a publican or tax-gatherer, and while in his office at capernaum, receiving the customs from those who passed over the sea of galilee he was called by our lord and, we read, "he at once arose and followed him." he is called levi by st. mark and st. luke. this was probably his former name and he was named matthew when he became a disciple. being one of the twelve, he himself saw and heard most of what he relates in the gospel which he wrote. it was first written in hebrew, especially for the jews, but was afterwards, probably by st. matthew himself, written in greek. this gospel tells us more than the others of our lord's human life, and it is for this reason that in ecclesiastical art the symbol assigned to st. matthew is "the likeness of a man" with wings. matthias, feast of saint.--observed february . the only record we have of st. matthias in the new testament is that to be found in acts i: - where it is recorded that he was chosen to be an apostle in the place of the traitor judas. this passage is read for the epistle for the day. we have here the new testament witness to the fact that the number of the apostles was to be increased and the apostleship perpetuated to the end of time by its being committed to others, as in the case of st. paul and st. barnabas apparently in the place of st. james who had been put to death by herod, and of some other apostle whose death is not recorded. according to the tradition of the church, st. matthias ministered for some years among the jews; he then went to cappadocia where he preached the gospel and where he eventually suffered martyrdom, being stoned { } and afterwards beheaded about a.d. . in ecclesiastical art, st. matthias is variously represented as bearing a halbert; leaning upon a sword; holding a sword by the point; with a lance, hatchet or axe; with a stone in his hand; with a carpenter's square; with a book and scimitar. matins.--the order for morning prayer was called by the ancient popular name of _matins_ (abbreviated from matutinae) in the original english prayer book of . this name is still retained in the tables of lessons set forth in the english prayer book. it is often used now as a brief and convenient substitute for the longer title in the prayer book, "the order for daily morning prayer." one of the canonical hours (which see). matrimony, holy.--(see marriage.) maundy thursday.--the name given to thursday in holy week, "maundy" being a corruption of _dies mandati_, meaning the day of the command; mandati, derived from _mandatum_, meaning a command. the name is given from the command our lord gave on this day, when he instituted the holy communion, viz.: "do this in remembrance of me;" and also his commandment concerning love. "that ye love one another as i have loved you." thursday in holy week is sometimes incorrectly called "holy thursday," a name which from time immemorial has been given to ascension day. maundy thursday is always observed with great solemnity. the celebration of the holy eucharist on this day has great significance, and is never omitted where it is possible to be had. the ecclesiastical color for the celebration is white, but for other services of the day, violet. { } meditation.--an act of the devout life by which the soul seeks closer intercourse with god. it has been well said that "meditation is the correlative of prayer. in prayer we speak to god. in _meditation_ god speaks to us. we bow our heads to listen; therefore meditation should be on our knees. it is the attitude of a humble and teachable frame of mind, and our acknowledgment of the divine presence." membership, church.--(see baptism, holy; joining the church, and also name, the christian.) mensa.--a slab of stone used as the surface of the altar is so called. _mensa_ is a latin word, meaning a table. michael (st.) and all angels.--a holy day of the church observed on september th. a festival in honor of st. michael and all angels, to commemorate the community of service between angels and men, has been observed since the fifth century. formerly two days were dedicated to st. michael, viz., may th and september th, and in medieval times a third, on october th, but the day most generally observed was that which we now keep. in the eastern church, st. michael's day is november th, while march th and july th are observed in honor of the archangel gabriel. these two, michael and gabriel, are the only angels or archangels whose names are mentioned in the bible. st. michael and all angels' day is observed with great solemnity. proper psalms are appointed being the st and d for morning prayer, and the th and th for evening prayer. there are also proper lessons, and { } collect, epistle and gospel. the church color is white. (see holy angels.) mid lent sunday.--(see fourth sunday in lent.) militant, church.--a name used to describe the church on earth, fighting (which the word _militant_ means) or contending against the powers of the world, to distinguish it from the church expectant and the church triumphant. (see church catholic.) in the communion office the prayer said after the presentation of offerings is called "the prayer for the church militant," which is a pleading for the holy church throughout the world offered in union with the great sacrifice. ministry, the.--the scriptural teaching in regard to the sacred ministry is that certain persons are set apart to act as the agents of god towards men and the agents of men towards god. the power of the ministry is inherent in, and derived from christ, as when he said, "as my father hath sent me, even so send i you." this was his commission to the apostles, and to them he promised, "lo, i am with you always even unto the end of the world." this promise implies a transmission of this commission, so that the ministry should never die out, but be continued from generation to generation and from century to century, "even to the end of the world." it also implies that he will work in them and through them, so that whatsoever they shall do in his name shall be his work. as to the nature of this ministry it is declared in the preface to the ordinal that "it is evident unto all men diligently reading holy scripture and ancient authors, that from the apostles' time { } there have been these orders of ministers in christ's church,--bishops, priests and deacons." and we find that these "offices were evermore had in such reverend estimation," that for , years after christ no christian people recognized any other ministry but that of bishops, priests and deacons; and we also find that even at this present time nine-tenths of all christian people are ministered to by a ministry in three orders. (see episcopacy, pastors and also holy orders.) miserere.--meaning "have mercy." the latin title of the st psalm which is used in the penitential office appointed to be read on ash wednesday. missal.--in the early ages of the church the office of the holy communion was contained in several separate volumes, one for the epistles, one for the gospels, another for the anthems and a fourth for the service itself with the collects. these four volumes were eventually united into one volume under the name _missal_, _i.e._, pertaining to the mass, and therefore, it is the old title of the book containing all that pertains to the office of the holy communion. mission.--a sending forth to preach the gospel, as when our lord sent forth his apostles. the word involves also the idea of power and authority and also a definite sphere of operations. thus when a bishop is consecrated, it is for some particular diocese where he has, by reason of his consecration, "the power of mission." so also, a priest who is rector of a parish has the "power of mission" in that parish. and the bishop has no authority to minister in any other diocese, nor the priest in any other parish, save only { } as they may be invited to do so by the ecclesiastical authority thereof. such "power of mission" is bestowed by the church through her bishops and it is thus that she maintains order and prevents confusion in her work. mission. parochial.--the word "mission" is also applied to a special effort made in a parish to arouse and quicken its people; to lead them to a deeper realization and appreciation of the privileges and blessings of christ's religion; to set forth clearly by a series of addresses and instructions how they can bring the church's system to bear on their hearts and lives and to lead them to ask, "can we not all do more than we are now doing and do all with a better spirit?" a mission is conducted by a priest specially invited for the purpose and is chosen for his aptness in carrying on such special work. if well conducted and blessed of god a mission brings great spiritual blessings to the parish in which it is held and its happy results are to be seen in the awakened life and renewed energy of its people. missionary.--one who is sent, whether bishop, priest, deacon or layman, to do the work of the church where it has not been established, whether at home or abroad. as an adjective, the word means, of or pertaining to missions. missionary council, the.--(see domestic and foreign missionary society.) missioner.--the name given to the priest who conducts a parochial mission. (see mission, parochial.) missions.--the missionary work of the church. this includes _foreign missions_, as in africa, china, { } japan, etc., and _domestic missions_, _i.e._, the church's work within the united states where there are no dioceses; also work in towns and villages in dioceses where parishes have not been established. this last is called diocesan missions (which see, also, domestic and foreign missionary society). mitre.--the official covering for the head worn by the order of bishops. it represents mystically the cloven tongues of fire which lighted on the heads of the apostles on the day of pentecost. the mitre is worn by many bishops of the american church, and the general convention, by its committee on vestments, declared, "the first bishop of the american succession (bishop seabury) was accustomed to wear the mitre in certain offices; and the first of our bishops ever consecrated in america (bishop claggett of maryland) continued its use. it has not been generally followed, but in the opinion of this committee this historic fact justifies any bishop in resuming it." mixed chalice.--the symbolical mixing of water with wine in the holy communion to represent the union of the human with the divine nature in the incarnation. it is also a lively memorial of him who for our redemption did shed out of his most precious side both water and blood. this mixing of water with wine for this purpose seems to have been an apostolical use and very probably was practiced by our lord himself. this ancient practice remained universal for the first , years after christ in all churches, and is now quite common. morning prayer.--the name given to the church's daily office of prayer offered in the morning. in the { } first prayer book of both the morning service and that for evening began with the lord's prayer and ended with the third collect. in , the sentences, exhortation, confession and absolution were prefixed to morning prayer, but not to the order for evening prayer. in , they were prefixed to evening prayer also; and both morning and evening prayer were then lengthened at the end by the addition of all that follows the third collect. (see daily prayer; also matins.) morse.--the clasp used to fasten the cope in front is so called. it is frequently made of precious metal and set with jewels. from the latin _morsus_, meaning a _bite_, hence a clasp. mothering sunday.--a popular name used in england for the fourth sunday in lent. it is supposed to have derived this name from the epistle for the day in which occur the words "jerusalem which is above is free, which is the mother of us all." this no doubt gave rise to the custom in england of making pilgrimages to the mother church of the diocese, _i.e._, the cathedral. this sunday also became a holiday on which young persons in service were permitted to visit their mothers in their homes. (see fourth sunday in lent; also lent, sundays in.) movable feasts and fasts.--those feasts and fasts which are not observed on a fixed date, but are variable being dependent on the time easter is kept. easter day is always the first sunday after the full moon which happens upon or next after the twenty-first day of march; and if the full moon happen upon a sunday, easter day is the sunday after. the { } _movable feasts_ are the following: advent sunday which is always the nearest sunday to the feast of st. andrew (nov. ) whether before or after; the three remaining sundays in advent; septuagesima, sexagesima and quinquagesima sundays; the six sundays in lent; rogation sunday; ascension day, whitsun day and trinity sunday; monday and tuesday in easter week; monday and tuesday in whitsun week; also the number of sundays during the epiphany and trinity seasons is variable, these seasons being longer or shorter according to the time easter is kept. the _movable fasts_ are the forty days of lent, including ash wednesday, good friday, easter even and the lenten ember days; the rogation days and the whitsun tide ember days. music, church.--(see hymns; gregorian music, plain song, and even song, also intone.) recognizing the fact that music always characterized the worship of god's church both under the old dispensation and under the new, the essential thing is the character of the music in our churches to-day and the mode of rendering it. the organist, upon whom so much depends, should be a competent musician, with a good knowledge of the music of the church, and the music that he uses should be strictly sacred music. the choir should consist of the best voices and most cultivated singers available. they should be trained with care, not only in the music they are to sing, but also in the church service. the late bishop thorold remarked on this subject, "we are all coming to feel that church music is a great help to worship. . . .but i also feel that if members of the choir accept { } from god and the minister the privilege of taking part in the services, the one thing they owe to almighty god, to the congregation and to themselves, is reverence. i know choirs where their singing is almost a means of grace; it is done so beautifully, so reverently and with so much care that it lifts up the whole service to a higher level. the one secret of all good and acceptable rendering of the church's music is _reverence_." mystery.--a truth or fact of religion which has been revealed but not explained is called a mystery, because proposed to our faith faculty, such as the incarnation, the atonement, the blessed trinity, the doctrine of the eucharist. st. paul speaks of the whole revelation of christ as the "mystery of godliness." derived from the greek word _musterion_, which in the greek church is the equivalent of our word "sacrament." mystical body of christ.--the church is called the mystical body of christ because he is the head and we members of his body. it is by means of its sacraments that we are made members of him and partakers of his nature and life. (see incarnation.) n n or m.--the letters placed after the first question in the church catechism, "what is your name?" to show that the christian name or names of the person questioned should be given. "n" stands for { } the latin word _nomen_, meaning name; while the letter "m" is an abbreviation of double "n. n.," the "n" being doubled according to an old custom to indicate the plural, viz., _nomina_, meaning names. the same thing is to be seen in the letters "ll.d." standing for the degree of "doctor of laws," the double "ll" signifying the plural _legum_, meaning "of laws." name, the holy.--(see holy name, also jesus.) name, the christian.--the name received in holy baptism. in former days people in general had only one name, as john, henry, mary, etc., and were further known by their occupation or some other distinctive word. but the names of trades, place, etc., thus _added on_ to the christian name, (_i.e._, _supra_ or _sur nomen_) gradually became permanent _surnames_, so that now every person after infancy and baptism has two names, viz., a christian name and a surname. the christian name we receive at our christening, that is, christianing or baptism or new birth. it is _given_, not inherited. it is a new name given to us in our baptism because we then become something new. it is given in baptism to indicate a new relationship to god by thus being brought into covenant with him. we find many examples in the bible of new names given in connection with a change of spiritual conditions. thus abram's name was changed to _abraham_ when god made his covenant with him, and jacob's name was changed to _israel_ when that covenant was renewed with him, which had been made with abraham. in the same way and for the same reason christian names have great significance. they are the sign that those who bear them have been brought into covenant with god, that they have been { } made in their baptism, "members of christ, the children of god, and inheritors of the kingdom of heaven." (see baptism, holy; also christian.) nativity of our lord.--the prayer book title of the festival of christmas is, "the nativity of our lord, or the birthday of christ, commonly called christmas day" (which see). nave.--the body of the church building; that portion of it before the choir or chancel, and between the aisles in which the congregation sits. derived from the latin word _navis_ meaning a ship, and is intended to symbolize "the ark of christ's church." neophyte.--a term applied in the primitive church to the newly baptized--"newly grafted" (which the word means) into christianity. it was customary for them to wear white garments at their baptism and for eight days after. the word is still frequently used. new birth.--the name which the new testament scriptures, and the church for nearly two thousand years have given to holy baptism, which is the laver of regeneration, the new and spiritual birth. (see baptism, holy; also regeneration.) nicea, council of.--the first of the great ecumenical councils, held in nice, or nicea, a.d. . it was at this council that what we call the nicene creed was set forth although additional definitions touching the holy ghost were inserted at the second general council (the first held at constantinople, a.d. ) and therefore, this form of the faith is frequently called the niceno-constantinopolitan creed. it is to { } be noted that this council did not originate the creed or the faith; it simply bore witness to it; its members simply testified to what was always most surely believed among them in their several dioceses throughout the world. thus the nicene council simply reaffirmed the consentient voice and witness of the church in general. or as st. athanasius, who was a member of this council, wrote concerning it, "about the faith they wrote not 'it seemed good,' but 'thus believes the catholic church'; and therefore they confessed how they believed, in order to show that their sentiments were not novel, but apostolical, and what they wrote down was no discovery of theirs, but is the same as was taught by the apostles." (see council.) nicene creed.--the name commonly given to the longer of the two creeds set forth in the prayer book, from its being settled at the council of nicea (which see). it was introduced into the liturgy, a.d. . the rubric directs that it be specially recited in the service on christmas day, easter day, ascension day, whitsun day and trinity sunday; but it is always used at the holy communion whenever celebrated. the nicene is the creed of worship; the apostles' the creed of instruction and of the daily offices. nocturns.--a name given to certain services which in ancient times were held during the night. the psalter was usually recited during the three parts into which the night was divided. one of the seven canonical hours (which see). nonconformists.--a name given in england { } to those who do not conform to the usages and doctrines of the national church. the word as used now is practically synonymous with _dissenter_. nones.--one of the seven canonical hours (which see). the "ninth hour," or p. m. north side.--that part of the front of the altar which is on the right hand of the cross, and consequently on the left of the celebrant as he faces the altar; the side where the holy gospel is read. nowell.--the old english name for christmas; the same as _noel_, derived from _natale_, meaning a birthday. it is also the old name for a carol sung in praise of the incarnation. nunc dimittis.--the latin title for the song of simeon, meaning "now lettest thou (thy servant) depart (in peace)," which is sung after the second lesson at evening prayer in praise of the manifestation of the incarnate word. it is to be found in st. luke : - . the nunc dimittis has been so used throughout the church from the earliest ages, being mentioned in the apostolical constitutions (written in the early part of the fifth century) as an evening canticle. there are english versions of it as early as the fourteenth century. when the american prayer book was set forth in , this beautiful hymn, for some reason, was omitted, but always to the regret of intelligent and devout church people. when, however, the prayer book was revised in the nunc dimittis was restored, so that now this ancient song continues to gladden the hearts of the faithful and devout in the american church as it did the hearts of the faithful in the old time before them. { } o oblation.--the act of offering the memorial of the body and blood of christ in the holy eucharist, as is done in the second paragraph of the prayer of consecration, entitled "the oblation." sometimes this name is given to the whole office. the _oblations_ are the bread and wine placed on the altar at the offertory preparatory to their consecration. obligation, days of.--(see days of obligation.) obsecrations.--the three petitions of the litany beginning ( ) "by the mystery of thy holy incarnation," ( ) "by thine agony and bloody sweat" and ( ) "in all time of our tribulation" are called the obsecrations, or entreaties. these petitions "go on the principle that every several act of our lord's mediatorial life has its appropriate saving energy; that virtue goes out of each, because each is the act of a divine person and has a divine preciousness." (see litany.) occasional offices.--those services of the prayer book which are not in constant use, but used only as occasion may require, such as the office for holy matrimony, the order for the burial of the dead, the order for confirmation, the baptismal services, visitation of the sick, etc. occasional prayers.--the prayers set forth in the prayer book under the title, "prayers and thanksgivings upon several occasions," such as the prayer for congress to be used during their session; the prayer for a sick person; thanksgiving for recovery from sickness, etc., which are read on request. { } occurrence of holy days.--the coincidence of two or more holy days falling on the same date. when this happens, the question arises which is to be observed, which takes precedence. the ancient rule may be illustrated by the following: when the first sunday in advent and st. andrew's day fell on the same date the sunday took precedence and only the collect for the saint's day was read; the fourth sunday in advent took precedence of st. thomas day; while the feasts of st. stephen, st. john evangelist, holy innocents, and the circumcision, if any of these days occurred on the same date as the first sunday after christmas, the saint's day and also the circumcision took precedence of the sunday. a good church almanac will give the needed information concerning the "occurrence of holy days" which takes place during the year. octave.--the eighth day after a festival. the intervening days are said to be "of" or within its octave and partake of the character of the festival. the only feasts mentioned in the prayer book, having an octave as of obligation are christmas, easter, ascension and whitsun day, each being honored with a proper preface in the communion office which is to be used each day during the week. trinity sunday was formerly the octave of whitsun day, and probably for this reason its proper preface is not repeated during the week. offertory, the.--that portion of the communion service during which the alms of the people, and the bread and the wine are received and solemnly presented on the altar. the word "offertory" is often { } wrongly applied to the _offerings_, a mistake which should be carefully avoided. it is to be noted that the offertory is an important part of worship. it is not an impertinence, but stands in the line of duties along side of prayer and singing. to give money each time you go to church, and in the appointed way will bring blessings from god. pew rent is not "giving" in this sense, any more than paying the butter bill or for a seat at the opera house. we refer to the offering to god for religious or charitable purposes, regularly through the _offertory_ in church. so your alms will go up with your prayers as a memorial before god. offertory sentences.--in the old liturgies there was formerly a short anthem after the gospel, called _offertorium_; for this in our liturgy has been substituted the "offertory sentences," being short selections from holy scripture setting forth "instructions, injunctions and exhortations to the great duty of giving; setting before us the necessity of performing it and the manner of doing it." office.--the term "office," in ecclesiastical usage, means a formulary of devotions; a form of service appointed for a particular occasion; a prescribed form or act of worship; thus the daily morning and evening prayer are called the "daily offices." the word is commonly used of the various services set forth in the prayer book, as "baptismal office," "communion office," etc. open churches.--(see free and open churches.) ordain, ordination.--the act of setting apart to the sacred ministry and whereby { } the grace of orders is conferred. the right or power to ordain belongs solely to the bishop and this he does with prayer and laying on of hands. (see imposition of hands.) the times of ordination prescribed by canon law are the sundays after the ember days (which see). these became the settled times of ordination as early as the fourth or fifth century. but the bishops are privileged to ordain at other times if necessity require. order.--the word "order" as used in the prayer book means _regulation_ or _ordinance_, according to its derivation from the latin word _ordo_. this is seen in the title of the communion office which reads, "the order for the administration of the lord's supper, or holy communion," _i.e._, the prescribed way in which the holy communion shall be celebrated. so, also, of all other services; the prayer book sets forth the order or manner in which they shall be ministered, and such they are called. orders, holy.--(see holy orders.) ordinal, the.--the name given to that portion of the prayer book containing the offices for the consecration of bishops and the ordination of priests and deacons. the ordinal being what it is, is very properly prefaced with a statement of the witness of history to the fact "that from the apostles' time there have been these orders of ministers in christ's church--bishops, priests and deacons." it is interesting to note that "our ordinal was not taken word for word from the roman pontifical, but was framed on the comprehensive and broad ground of all known forms and manners of ordination used in all branches of the { } catholic church." the ordinal is also sometimes called "the pontifical." ordinary.--the name given to the bishop of the diocese, or other ecclesiastical authority who has ordinary jurisdiction. organizations, church.--the american church is not simply a teaching and worshipping body, but it is also a working organization. its activities reach out in all directions and touch almost every conceivable need. besides its well organized dioceses and parishes which are working with such effectiveness in their several localities, there are many other organizations enlisting the cooperation of churchmen everywhere. there are the general institutions, such as the general theological seminary, the domestic and foreign missionary society, the woman's auxiliary, the american church building fund commission, free and open church association, the prayer-book distribution society, the brotherhood of st. andrew, the girls' friendly society, the fund for relief of widows and orphans of deceased clergymen and of the aged and infirm and disabled clergymen, the daughters of the king; all of which are treated of under their proper heads. other organizations are the society for the increase of the ministry, the evangelical education society, the american church missionary society, society for promoting christianity among the jews, the guild of st. barnabas for nurses; church temperance society; missions among deaf mutes; etc. besides these, there are religious orders, church clubs, sisterhoods, many charity and hospital organizations; and while this enumeration does { } not include all the various organizations that are at work, yet these are given that the reader may form some idea of what this church is doing and how fully she enlists the cooperation of the laity in her general work. organs.--musical instruments have been used in the worship of god from the time when, after the passage of the red sea, moses and miriam sang their song of praise accompanied by timbrels. the worship of the temple was noted for the great number and variety of musical instruments employed in it. as to when organs were first brought into use, it is not clearly known, but it is recorded that about the year constantius copronymus, emperor of constantinople, sent an organ as a present to king pepin of france. soon after charlemagne's time organs became common. in the eleventh century a monk named theophilus wrote a curious treatise on organ-building. but it was not until the fifteenth century that the organ began to be anything like the noble instrument which it now is, the most comprehensive and important of all wind instruments. orientation.--the name given to the act of turning to the east or altar as an act of faith and worship in the church service. (see east, turning to.) it is also an architectural term used in reference to church buildings running east and west. ornaments.--by "ornaments" is meant the necessary furniture of the church for the proper conduct of divine service, and the vestments to be worn by the clergy. in this the church of the present day is largely guided by what is called the "ornaments { } rubric" of the english prayer-book. according to this it would seem that among the necessary ornaments for the proper furnishing of the church are the following: the altar, with its cross, candlesticks and coverings; paten and chalice; cruets, font and pulpit; and that the necessary vestments of the priest are the chasuble, alb and girdle, stole, surplice, cope; for the bishop the same with the addition of the rochette, mitre and pastoral staff. orphrey.--a band of embroidery used to ornament the vestments. orthodox.--in accordance with the doctrine of the church; holding fast "the faith once delivered to the saints." the faith has been defined by the ecumenical councils as set forth in the creeds which "ought thoroughly to be received and believed, for they may be proved by most certain warrants of holy scripture" (viii article of religion). p pall.--a square card, the upper side of which is covered with silk the color of the church season and underneath with linen, loosely stitched so as to be readily removed in order to be washed. it is used to cover the chalice when the holy eucharist is celebrated. palm sunday.--the sixth sunday in lent, the first day in holy week. it commemorates the entry of our lord into jerusalem when the people strewed { } the way with palm branches and cried, "hosanna to the son of david." it was formerly customary for worshippers to appear on this day in procession carrying in their hands palms, or yew or willow branches, which were blessed before the beginning of the communion service. on palm sunday the church has always begun to set before god and man the gospel account of the passion of our lord, that by st. matthew being read on this day. (see lent, sundays in.) paraclete.--another name for the holy ghost, signifying one who is invoked to aid or comfort. it was this word our lord used when he said, "i will send you another comforter," _i.e._, paraclete. elsewhere, the word is also translated _advocate_. paradise.--the place where the souls of the righteous dwell during the intermediate state (which see). the name is also applied to the happy abode of adam and eve before the fall. parish.--the term "parish" as used in the american church signifies a local congregation having a church building, and duly organized under the title of "rector, wardens and vestrymen." it is always given a name, such as st. john's, christ church, trinity, etc. it is competent for any number of persons, usually not less than ten, to associate themselves together to form a parish. in the articles of association, the parish acknowledges and accedes to the constitution, canons, doctrines, discipline and worship of the protestant episcopal church in the diocese in which it is located. if on presentation of these articles, the council or convention of the diocese gives its consent, the parish shall be accounted duly established. { } the word is derived from the greek _paroikia_, and was originally used to designate the sphere of a bishop's jurisdiction as distinguished from that of an archbishop, but when the former was gradually parcelled out into smaller portions these began to be called _parishes_. parish house.--by reason of the growing activities of the american church, it is found necessary to have some building other than the church where the active and sometimes secular work of the parish can be carried on, a place where societies, guilds, schools, etc., can have their own proper "workshop." such building is called the "parish house," and is absolutely necessary for any active and growing parish. parish register.--a book in which all births. baptisms, confirmations, deaths, and marriages that occur in the parish are recorded, together with the list of families and communicants. the importance of the parish register and the care with which it should be kept will appear when it is considered that it is a legal document. parishioner.--one who belongs to a parish. the parish partakes of the character of the people who compose it; if they are earnest and devoted, loyal and true to the church's appointments, the parish is sure to be prosperous. in other words, the church lives as they who are of it live. it is vital with their vitality. it is a live body as they are live christians. thus the success of a parish is not wholly dependent on the rector, but on the people as well. parochial mission.--(see mission, parochial.) parson.--the old name used in england for the { } rector or incumbent of a parish. parson and person are the same word, being derived from the latin _persona_. the parson is so called, as blackstone tells us, "because by his person the church which is an invisible body, is represented." paschal.--pertaining to easter, from the fact that the original name of the festival was _pascha_, _i.e._, the passover. passion.--meaning _suffering_, and is used almost exclusively of our lord's sufferings, as expressed in the article of the creed, "suffered under pontius pilate, was crucified, dead, and buried." passion sunday.--the fifth sunday in lent is so called because on this day our lord began to make open prediction of his sufferings, and in her round of worship the church begins the solemn commemoration of his passion and death. (see lent, sundays in.) passion tide.--the name given to the last two weeks of lent beginning with the fifth sunday in lent, during which our lord's passion and death are commemorated. passion week.--the week before holy week. this name should not be applied to the last week of lent, which is properly called holy week, or as called by the primitive christians, the "great week." pastor.--a latin word meaning shepherd. christ having called himself the good shepherd, or good pastor, the name has been assumed for his ministers. they bear the same relation to the flock over which they are placed. a pastor is a teacher, guide, exemplar, friend, administrator. he deals with { } individuals. his intercourse is personal. his offices are for all and for each. pastorship includes many and varied offices,--minister, rector, preacher, priest, but all offices and all labors have reference to men's spiritual interests. he who is a pastor has the cure, _i_. _e_., care, charge of men's souls. pastorship, therefore, is a very sacred as well as a very responsible office. it is well to note that a minister is not a pastor simply because he is ordained; besides the divine call and divine appointment in ordination, there is also the call from the people to define that number of souls over which the charge is to be exercised. this is brought out in the "office of institution of ministers into parishes or churches," to be found in the prayer-book. pastoral letter.--a letter issued by the rector of a parish, or by the bishop of the diocese on some subject affecting the welfare of the church in its devotions or work. perhaps the most important of such pastoral letters is that which is issued by the house of bishops at the close of each general convention, touching on grave questions of the day or on the prospects of the church throughout the nation, and which is required by canon to be read in all the churches. pastoral staff.--a staff used by a bishop, as an ensign of his office, at all public episcopal ministrations. it is generally borne by his chaplain. the pastoral staff is made in the shape of a shepherd's crook and is frequently given to the bishop at his consecration, to denote that he is then constituted a shepherd over the flock of christ. this use of the { } pastoral staff comes down to us from the most ancient times. paten.--the plate, made of precious metal, on which the bread is consecrated at the holy communion and from which it is administered to the communicants. when properly made, the lower part of the paten will fit into or over the edge of the chalice. the word is derived from the latin, _patena_ or the greek, _patane_, meaning a flat, open dish. (see vessels, sacred.) paul, conversion of saint.--a feast of the church observed on january th, in memory of the conversion of st. paul, through whose preaching god caused the light of the gospel to shine throughout the world. st. paul is not commemorated as the other apostles are, by his death or martyrdom, but as stated above, by his conversion because it was so wonderful in itself and was so important and beneficial to the church. he labored more abundantly than they all. while the other apostles had their particular fields of labor, st. paul had the care of all the churches and by his labors contributed very much to the propagation of the gospel throughout the world. there are good reasons for believing that he extended his apostolical labors even to the remote island of britain. we find him described by two names, _saul_ and _paul_, the first being hebrew, relating to his jewish origin and the other latin, assumed by him, as some think, at his conversion, as an act of humility, styling himself less than the least of all saints. st. paul suffered martyrdom, having been beheaded, in the sixty-eighth year of his age, at rome, under nero, in the general { } persecution of christians upon the pretense that they set fire to the city. it was from the instrument of his execution that the custom arose of representing him in ecclesiastical art with a sword in his hand. penance.--in the early ages of the church the commission of grievous error in life or doctrine was, punished by exclusion from the communion of the church; and in order to obtain readmission, offenders were obliged to submit to a prescribed course of penitence. the regulations as to the length and manner of this discipline varied in different times and in the several branches of the church; the administration of it was chiefly in the hands of the bishops. it is this "godly discipline" to which reference is had in the commination office in the prayer-book of the church of england, and which is used "until the said discipline may be restored again, which is much to be wished." penance is also regarded as one of the lesser sacraments. penitential office.--an office of deep devotion and contrition to be used on ash wednesday, which was added to the prayer-book at its last revision in . its place in the service is during the latter part of the litany. it may be used on other days at the discretion of the minister. (see ash wednesday.) penitential psalms.--being the th, d, th, st, d, th and d psalms of david, all of which are read during the services on ash wednesday (which see). there are no prayers more fitted for penitent sinners than the seven penitential psalms, if we enter into the feelings of compunction, { } love, devotedness and confidence with which the royal psalmist was penetrated. the purport of each psalm may be briefly stated as follows: psalm exhibits a sinner in earnest and hearty prayer after having sinned, with assured hope and confidence in the mercy of god. psalm shows how a sinner is brought to understand his sins, to confess and bewail them and obtain remission. psalm , in which the penitent earnestly prays to god to pardon his sins and mitigate his punishment. psalm shows the great sorrow of a sinner for his sins. psalm shows how a sinner in affliction of mind prays to god and derives comfort from his help and goodness. psalm shows how a sinner in tribulation cries to god for deliverance; while psalm may be used in any spiritual or temporal tribulation. pentecost.--the greek name for the "feast of weeks" in the jewish church. the word means _fiftieth_, the feast being fifty days after the feast of the passover. whitsun day is so called, being observed fifty days after easter, the christian passover, and because it was on the day of pentecost that the holy ghost was given. (see whitsun day.) peter, festival of saint.--a holy day of the church observed on june th in honor of the apostle saint peter, and is one of the oldest of christian festivals, having been traced back to the second century. st. peter was one of the first two disciples { } whom our lord called. his original name was simon or simeon, which was changed into cephas, which in the syrian language, signifies a _stone_ or _rock_; from this it was derived into the greek _petros_, and so termed by us peter. this new name was to denote the firmness and constancy which st. peter should manifest in preaching the gospel and in establishing the church. he has left two epistles which appear in the new testament as the "first and second epistles general of st. peter." it is said that his later years were spent at rome where he was crucified with his head downwards, on the hill where the vatican now stands, on the same day, june th (as is generally believed) that st. paul was beheaded a.d. . in ecclesiastical art st. peter is variously represented, with a key in his hand; with a key and church; with keys and cross; in chains and in prison, etc. philip (st.) and st. james' day.--a festival observed on may st in memory of two apostles of our lord, st. philip and st. james. the reason for coupling together the names of these two apostles is not quite clear, but it may be taken as an illustration of the manner in which our lord sent forth his apostles, two and two. st. philip was a native of bethsaida, a town bordering on the sea of tiberias and was one of the first of our lord's disciples and was his constant companion and follower. he brought nathanael, a person of great note and eminence, to the knowledge of the messiah; and it was to st. philip that certain greeks went with the request, "sir, we would see jesus." st. philip is said to have carried the gospel to northern asia, where by his { } preaching and miracles he made many converts; his name has also been connected with the church in russia. he suffered martyrdom at hieropolis, a city of phrygia, where he was crucified and stoned on the cross. in ecclesiastical art st. philip is variously represented; with a basket in his hand; with two loaves and a cross; with a tall cross and book, etc. for notice of st. james see article on james (st.) the less. piscina.--a stone basin with a drain pipe to carry off water used in the ablutions of the sacred vessels at the celebration of the holy eucharist. plain song.--the name given to the ancient music with which the church service was rendered. thus blunt in the annotated prayer-book, speaking of church music says, "in the remodeling of our english services, the great aim was not to discard, but to utilize the ancient plain song, to adapt it to the translated offices, to restore it to something more of its primitive 'plainness,' to rid it of its modern corruptions, its wearisome ornaments and flourishes so that the priest's part, on the one hand, might be intelligible and distinct, not veiled in a dense cloud of unmeaning notes, and the people's part made so easy and straightforward as to render their restored participation in the public worship of the sanctuary at once practicable and pleasurable." post communion.--the name given to that portion of the communion office which is read after all have communicated, and is the giving of thanks for the grace received. postulant.--the canonical name for one who { } desires to become a candidate for holy orders and whose name is entered by the bishop upon the list of postulants, as required by canon , title i of the digest. a postulant having been duly received may afterwards be recommended by the standing committee of the diocese, to the bishop for admission as a candidate for holy orders. postures in public worship.--the principles involved in the postures to be taken in public worship are set forth in the article on kneeling (which see). while to the stranger in the church the various postures taken in the services seem complicated, yet the rule for them is very simple, which is this: we stand in praise, kneel in prayer and are seated during the hearing of the word. prayer.--prayer has been defined as the soul's converse with god, or communion with god in devotional exercises, and may be said to be a universally recognized necessity in the life of man. but prayer involves much more than simply asking for certain things, which seems to be the common conception of this duty. properly speaking, prayer consists of five parts, as follows: . adoration \ . thanksgiving / which concern gods glory. . confession \ . petition / which concern our individual needs. . intercession, which concerns the needs of others. the efficacy of prayer rests on the mediation of christ, and its warrant is to be found in the words, "ask and it shall be given you; seek and ye shall { } find; knock and it shall be opened unto you." god our father has promised to hear the petitions of those who ask in his son's name, and who faithfully call upon him and we know that his promise cannot fail. there are many remarkable instances of the power of prayer to be found both in the old and the new testaments, as well, also, in the lives of many earnest and faithful men who, in this present time, continue "instant in prayer." prayer book, the.--the title of our manual of devotions is "the book of common prayer." it is called _common prayer_, because it is to be used by the congregation in public worship, and is thus distinguished from prayer in private. as such it comprehends the needs, feelings and devotions common to all. the efficacy of common prayer consists in its being a united service and to this end arises the necessity of a prescribed form. such prescribed form had its origin in the christian church from the very earliest ages, and so early were liturgies introduced that four of them are mentioned under the names of st. peter, st. mark, st. james and st. john. (see liturgies.) liturgies thus became an inherent feature of the christian church, and wherever it was planted its worship was according to such prescribed form. thus when christianity was introduced into britain we find a liturgy in use there from the beginning. this liturgy continued in use, although varying in many details in different dioceses, until it was superseded by the book of offices set forth by osmund, bishop of salisbury, in a.d. , known as the _sarum use_. this was adopted with little variation by { } most of the churches of the kingdom. but gradually the public offices became defaced by the innovations and corruptions of rome; these, however, were expunged at the time of the reformation and the book of common prayer was set forth. the prayer-book as we now have it is the result of a long period of study and legislation. it is to be noticed that it was not the object of the english reformers to create something new, to introduce innovations, but simply to exclude errors and corruptions. to this end, they retained those portions of the ancient formularies which were sanctioned by the holy scriptures and by primitive usage. the first practical result of this movement is seen in the first prayer-book of edward vi set forth in english, and which was publicly used on whitsun day, june th, . afterwards many other revisions took place, until the english prayer-book, as it practically is now, was set forth in ; since which time only a few and unimportant changes have been made. the american prayer-book, adapted from the english book was set forth and ratified october th, , and afterwards revised in - , as it now stands. (see responsive service, forms, also scriptures in prayerbook.) prayers for the dead.--prayers for the departed are in accordance with the devout instinct and loving heart of man, and are sanctioned by all the liturgies of the primitive church. in these we find that the commemorations of the departed were not only general commemorations, but that names of persons who were to be prayed for were read out from the diptychs { } (which see). the devout mind does not argue about "prayers for the dead," he prays them. "how can i cease to pray for thee? somewhere in god's great universe thou art to-day. can he not reach thee with his tender care? can he not hear me when for thee i pray?" precentor.--the name given to the choirmaster; one who is director of the music in a choir. pre-lenten season.--the name commonly given to the weeks preceding lent covered by the three sundays entitled, _septuagesima_, _sexagesima_ and _quinquagesima_. the season is so called because the services on these sundays are intended to prepare us for the due observance of lent. (see septuagesima.) presbyter.--the original word for "elder" in the new testament is _presbuteros_, shortened in english to _presbyter_; further shortened to _prester_, and finally to priest (which see, also elder). presentation of christ.--a festival of the church observed on february . it is a double festival as we learn from its title which reads, "the presentation of christ in the temple, commonly called the purification of saint mary the virgin." "this connection," says blunt, "of the two events is, doubtless, to show the close relation which the acts of the blessed virgin bore to the incarnation of our lord; and that she is most honored by associating her with her divine son." the festival is popularly called candlemas (which see). it is the fortieth day after christmas, that being the period at which the rites of purification and presentation were enjoined by the law. { } presiding bishop.--the name given to the senior bishop by consecration of the american church, who presides in the house of bishops and in the general convention when both houses meet as one body. when the convention is not in session he acts as primate of the american church. following is the list of those bishops who have acted as presiding bishops: --bishop seabury from nov. , , to feb. , . --bishop white from feb. , to july , . --bishop griswold from july , , to feb. , . --bishop chase from feb. , , to sept. , . --bishop brownell from sept. , , to jan. , . --bishop hopkins from jan. , , to jan. , . --bishop smith from jan. , , to may , . --bishop lee from may , to april , . --bishop williams from april , to feb. , . --bishop clark from feb. , . priest.--the shortened form for presbyter. the title of the second order of the ministry. his chief duties are to offer the holy sacrifice in the eucharist, to administer baptism, to give absolution, to give the priestly blessing at marriages, churchings, and at other services of the church: in fact, to exercise every sacred function which is not properly or exclusively episcopal, that is, belonging to the bishop. (see presbyter, also elder.) primate.--the name given to a metropolitan or archbishop who is the presiding bishop of a national church. prime.--one of the seven canonical hours (which see). { } prisoners.--(see visitation of prisoners.) private baptism.--(see baptism, private.) proanaphora.--a more churchly name for the introductory parts of the communion office, commonly called "ante communion." properly speaking, the proanaphoral service includes all that portion of the communion service which precedes the _sursum corda_, "lift up your hearts." pro-cathedral.--a parish church used for cathedral or diocesan purposes, but without the formation of a legal cathedral organization and without a cathedral chapter. procession of the holy ghost.--the word "procession" is used to express the relation in the blessed trinity between the father and the holy ghost. as we believe that the son is eternally begotten of the father, so we believe that the holy ghost is a person eternally proceeding from the father, as set forth in the article of the creed, "who proceedeth from the father and the son." the words "and the son" were added later, and the article is generally interpreted as meaning that the holy ghost emanates from the father through the son, and therefore proceeds from both; or as an ancient writer expressed it, "always hath the spirit proceeded from the father and received of the son." (see holy ghost, also filioque.) processional cross.--the standard cross borne in front of a procession of choir and clergy as they enter or go out of the church. this method of entering the church is a very old custom and still prevails where the choir is vested. { } proper lessons.--the portions of scripture from the old and new testaments appointed to be read on a sunday or holy day at morning and evening prayer. the word "proper" as thus used is intended to indicate that the lesson is appropriate to the sunday or holy day and is to be read on that day instead of the lesson appointed for the daily office. (see lectionary, also lesson.) proper preface.--the preface is that portion of the communion office, beginning with the words "lift up your hearts," immediately preceding the ter sanctus (which see), and the _proper preface_ contains the additional words set forth to emphasize the great truths commemorated on certain high festivals, namely, christmas day, easter day, ascension day, whitsun day and trinity sunday. proper psalms.--certain great days of the church are so important in the truths they set forth, the church hath thought good to order that all holy scriptures that can possibly be used in illustration thereof shall be read on those days. thus in addition to the proper lessons there are also _proper psalms_, and the days for which they are appointed with the number of the psalms to be read are to be found in the table prefixed to the psalter in the prayer-book. protestant.--a name given to certain persons who protested against a law made by the emperor charles v and his diet in . the name is commonly applied to what are known as "evangelical denominations," as opposed to romanism. but as so many heretics, atheists, free-thinkers and nothingarians are included under the name _protestant_, the word is going { } out of use among church-people, having lost much of its proper meaning. protestant episcopal.--(see american church.) provinces.--the name given to certain grouping together of two or more dioceses for the more convenient management of the work and legislation of the church. the chief or presiding bishop of the province is generally the bishop of the metropolis or chief city and therefore he is styled metropolitan, and also archbishop. in england the church is divided into two provinces, canterbury and york. the church in the united states is practically only one province. but the growth and increase of the church here have been so great, it is being found more and more necessary to seek a proper division into provinces, and steps have already been taken to this end. psalter, the.--the name given to the book of psalms as set forth in the prayer-book for use in public worship. the psalms were originally set forth to be sung, not said, and this is the only proper way of rendering them in the church's service. the colon to be found in each verse of the psalter is put there to facilitate chanting them. the present method of reading the psalter arose simply from lack of musical facilities in the early days of the church in this country; and because this method still prevails in many places, the average churchman thinks this is the proper way of rendering them. this is a mistake, and in many parishes this mistake has been corrected; the psalter for the day being sung just as the detached psalms, such as the _venite_, _jubilate_, etc., are sung. it is to be noted that the version of the psalter { } is not that of the authorized version of , but that of the great bible of . this was retained in the prayer-book because the people had become familiar with it, and because it is more rhythmical and suited to chanting. the psalter is divided into sixty portions to be used at daily morning and evening prayer and is thus designed to be read through once a month. (see daily prayer.) purification, the.--(see presentation of christ, also candlemas.) purificator.--the name given to a small linen napkin used for wiping the sacred vessels after a celebration. q quadragesima.--meaning _fortieth_; a name to be found in the prayer-book for the first sunday in lent, because it occurs about forty days before easter. quadrilateral.--the name commonly given to the summary of the declaration of the house of bishops made in the general convention held at chicago in , concerning the terms which they deemed to be a sufficient basis for the reunion of christendom, and which was reaffirmed by the conference of bishops of the anglican communion, held at lambeth palace, england, in july, . this declaration is summarized under four heads as follows: i. the holy scriptures of the old and new testaments, as "containing all things necessary to { } salvation," and as being the rule and ultimate standard of faith. . the apostles' creed, as the baptismal symbol; and the nicene creed, as the sufficient statement of the christian faith. . the two sacraments ordained by christ himself--baptism and the supper of the lord--ministered with unfailing use of christ's words of institution, and of the elements ordained by him. . the historic episcopate, locally adapted in the methods of its administration to the varying needs of the nations and peoples called of god into the unity of his church. qualifications for holy orders.--these are stated in the preface to the ordinal set forth in the prayer-book as follows: that the candidate be of the age required by the canon in that case provided; that he be a man of virtuous conversation and without crime; and, after examination and trial, found to be sufficiently instructed in the holy scripture and otherwise learned as the canons require. (see examination for holy orders.) quick.--a word used in the creed and elsewhere in the prayer-book, being the old english word for the _living_ as distinguished from the dead. quicunque vult.--the name given to the athanasian creed, from the first latin words with which it begins, and meaning "whosoever will." the athanasian creed is not used in the american church, but is found in the english prayer-book and is required to be said on certain festivals. quiet day.--the name given to a day set apart { } for special devotions, meditation and instruction for the members of a parish, or school or society. there is always a celebration of the holy eucharist, hours of prayer with a meditation or instruction given by the priest, with times of silent prayer and intercession. such days have been found to be very helpful in deepening the spiritual life, and are usually conducted by a priest well experienced in such work, and who is specially invited for the purpose. quinquagesima.--the name given to the sunday next before lent, because it is the _fiftieth_ day before easter; quinquagesima meaning fiftieth. (see septuagesima.) r rail.--(see altar rail.) ratification, the.--the american prayer-book having been set forth, it was duly ratified by the action of the general convention on october th, , and the certificate of such ratification appears in every copy of the prayer-book, declaring "it to be the liturgy of this church," and requiring "that it be received as such by all the members of the same." real presence.--the name given to the church's doctrine concerning christ's presence in the holy eucharist. the term "real presence" is intended to signify that the presence of our lord in this sacrament is a reality; that while his presence is spiritual, it is none the less real, and not simply figurative. the sacrament is not a mere sign or token of an absent { } christ. it is a great deal more. as it is christ who invites, bids and calls us to this feast and provides the spiritual food for it, it would be strange indeed if we were uncertain whether he is there to receive us and to feed us; and if he is present, his presence must be very _real_. under the outward form of bread and wine we have the scriptural warrant to believe that the body and the blood of christ are given, taken and received verily and indeed by the faithful in the lord's supper, to the strengthening and refreshing of their souls,--as declared in the church catechism and the twenty-eighth article of religion. being assured of this fact, it is useless and only fruitful in doubt and perplexity, to speculate upon the manner of this presence, which is a _mystery of the gospel_; as such the church has received and taught it, but has never explained or defined. this being the attitude of the church, it will be our wisdom to say of this mystery: "christ was the word that spake it; he took the bread and brake it, and what that word did make it, that i believe and take it." reception into the church.--(see baptism, private.) recessional.--the name given to the retiring of choir and clergy in due order after a church service. some objection has been raised to this use of the word, but as nothing better has been substituted for it, the word continues in use. { } rector.--the official title of the priest who has charge of a parish and as such is its ruler, guide and director. the word means "one who rules." like other organizations, the parish must have a head, and by the canons of the church, the rector is head of the parish. as such he is _ex officio_ head of all its organizations. he is the presiding officer at all vestry meetings, superintendent of the sunday-school, and president of all guilds, brotherhoods and other parochial societies. these offices he may delegate to others, but _ex officio_ the rector is head of all, and all that may be done in the parish is to be done with reference to his consent and approval. rectory.--the house owned by the parish, intended for the use of the rector as his home. red letter days.--those festivals of the church for which collect, epistle and gospel are provided in the prayer-book. they are so called from having been printed in the calendar in red letters. the words have passed into popular use to denote any notably auspicious or favorable day; a day to be remembered. refreshment sunday.--the fourth sunday in lent is so called from the gospel for the day, which relates the feeding of the five thousand by our lord in the wilderness. as the late bishop coxe pointed out in his "thoughts on the services," "having thus far (in the lenten services) considered the havoc of sin, we come now to consider its repair; and because the sufficiency of christ to refresh and satisfy our hunger and thirst after righteousness is exhibited in the gospel for this day. it has little of the austere character of the other sundays in lent; and its design is the { } encouragement of catechumens and penitents." (see fourth sunday in lent; also lent, sundays in.) regeneration.--the inward and spiritual gift in holy baptism is _regeneration_, that is being born anew. it is well to note that regeneration, or the "new birth" is often confounded with "conversion," or they are regarded as synonymous terms. this is a mistake and contrary to the teaching of holy scripture. regeneration is a new birth unto god whereby we become partakers of the nature of christ. as the natural birth, so the new and spiritual birth can take place only once, and that in holy baptism. a baptized christian may repeatedly fall from grace, and by repentance, by amendment of life and by forgiveness he may be again restored, (this is _conversion_), but he cannot be said to be again _regenerate_ without a grievous misapprehension of the language of the bible and a _total departure from the doctrine of the primitive church_. by _regeneration_, therefore, is meant that gracious act of god whereby for christ's sake. he brings us into a new relationship with himself, adopts us as his own children, translates us into the kingdom of his son, incorporates us into his church, and so brings us under the influence of the holy spirit. regeneration is the name originated for baptism by our lord himself in his discourse with nicodemus, as recorded in the third chapter of st. john's gospel, and it is for this reason that this passage is appointed to be read in the service for the baptism of adults. (see baptism, holy; also infant baptism.) register.--(see parish register.) registrar.--the title of an officer of the { } convention, whether of the general convention or of the convention or council of a diocese. his duty is to collect and preserve such papers, reports, journals and other documents relating to the history and property of the church as are now or may hereafter become the property of the convention, and to keep the same in a safe and convenient place. religious orders.--in the american church there are many religious orders composed of men or women who have separated themselves from the world that they may devote themselves by associated effort more unreservedly to the church's work. some are bands of priests, like the "society of the mission priests of st. john evangelist," or the "order of the holy cross," this latter also including laymen; others are bands of laymen alone, such as the "order of the brothers of nazareth"; and others are sisterhoods, composed of women who have devoted themselves for life to the work of the church, such as the "sisters of st. mary," "sisters of st. monica," etc. members of the sisterhoods do work in schools, hospitals, and among the wretched, the poor and neglected. these religious orders have proved to be very efficient aids in the church's work in many parts of our land and are highly commended for the sacrifice they display and for the admirable methods of their work. reproaches, the.--in the ancient observance of good friday there was used a service called "the reproaches." this consisted of certain striking passages read from micah : and , as well as other scriptures, with the respond, "holy god, holy and mighty, holy and immortal, have mercy upon us." { } they are called "reproaches" from the character of the first passage read, namely, "o my people what have i done unto thee, and wherein have i wearied thee? answer me;" this being read also as a respond to the other passages. the reproaches are now frequently used in many churches on good friday as a separate service and are very solemn and impressive. reredos.--a carved or sculptured screen of wood or stone placed above and back of the altar, the word is a compound of the old english _rere_, the same as "rear," and the french word _dos_, derived from the latin _dorsum_, meaning "back." responds.--in the old system of reading holy scripture in divine service, short selections from different books of the bible were read successively, with short anthems being sung after each, which were called "responds." this responsory system of reading holy scripture is still retained in its old form in the case of the ten commandments when read in the communion service. one of the principal changes made in revising the prayer-book in was the setting forth of longer lessons with responsory canticles sung at the end only. thus the respond to the first morning lesson is the te deum, and the respond to the second lesson is the benedictus, etc. responses.--the name given to the answers made by the people in the church services as in the versicles, the litany, after the ten commandments, etc. responsive service.--the glory of the episcopal church is its _responsive service_, as provided by the book of common prayer. by means of this, the people have their part in the service. thus { } worship becomes general throughout the whole congregation and the people are not silent spectators, nor yet simply an audience. but however reasonable and desirable this may be, there is a deeper principle involved. the responsive character of the services brings out and emphasizes the "priesthood of the people." st. peter, in his first general epistle, writing to the baptized, says of them, "but ye are a chosen generation, a royal priesthood, an holy nation, a peculiar people, that ye should show forth the praise of him who hath called you out of darkness into his marvelous light." thus the baptized are called in holy scripture "a royal priesthood," and this doctrine pervades the prayer-book. the whole system of responsive worship is founded upon the priesthood of the laity, and enables them to _show forth the praise_ of him who hath called them out of darkness into his marvelous light. (see amen; forms; also versicles.) retable.--a shelf at the back of the altar, usually fastened to the reredos, on which are placed the altar cross, the vases for flowers, and the candlesticks. the necessity for the retable arises from the fact of the reverent usage of the church, which requires that nothing shall be placed on the altar but the eucharistic vessels, the book rest and the book. retreat.--this is a term used to designate a time of retirement as a means of deepening the spiritual life of the clergy, for whose benefit it is held. it involves a temporary submission to the monastic rule of silence, meditation, confession and conference. in holy scripture we read of our lord and his disciples { } constantly going into retreat in some shape or other. christ on the hilltop, st. paul in the desert near damascus, st. peter on the roof of his house, retired for prayer and meditation. the retreat as now conducted gives each one the opportunity to make special effort to see more clearly those great principles of religion which can only be seen by such effort and by such special spiritual exercises. in some dioceses an annual pre-lenten retreat is held for both bishop and clergy in preparation for the solemn and spiritual work of lent. it is a cheering sign of spiritual revival which many will welcome, to see bishop and clergy thus meeting and withdrawing for a season from the world, for prayer, for intercommunion and instruction. ring.--the custom of the wedding ring was probably adopted by the early church from the marriage customs of the jews and also of the heathen, as its use has been almost universal. from its shape, having neither beginning nor ending, it is regarded as an emblem of eternity, constancy, and integrity. it is placed on the fourth finger of the woman's left hand, and the ancient ceremony of doing so was to place it first on the thumb at the name of the first person of the trinity; on the next finger, at the name of the son; on the third at the name of the holy ghost, and then on the fourth finger, and leaving it there at the word "amen." the ring is, also, frequently given at the consecration of a bishop, to symbolize his espousal with the church in his diocese. thus bestowed, it is the symbol of authority and is called the _episcopal ring_. { } rites and ceremonies.--the rites and ceremonies of the church are based on the apostolic injunction, "let all things be done decently and in order." by _rites_ are meant certain prescribed ordinances, and by _ceremonies_ certain sacred observances, as distinguished from sacraments. these when prescribed by lawful authority are instrumental in promoting uniformity of worship and are conducive to regularity and edification. we learn from the twentieth article of religion that the power to decree rites and ceremonies rests with the church, and, as set forth in the twenty-fourth article, "every particular and national church hath authority to ordain, change and abolish ceremonies, ordained only by man's authority." the rites and ceremonies of the american church, are set forth and implied in the book of common prayer, marked out in the rubrics and the tables prefixed to it. ritual. ritualism.--by _ritual_ is meant the ceremonial part of religion; the name is also applied to the book in which the rites and ceremonies are set forth. by _ritualism_ is meant the system of ritual or prescribed form of religious worship. therefore, these words meaning what they do are to be lifted up out of all party spirit and are to be regarded as expressive of the church's real system of worship. loyalty to the prayer-book demands obedience to the rubrics on the part of both minister and people. then it is well to remember that when the prayer-book was first set forth in , the principal change was that the services should be said in english; the ritual remained the same. this explains the origin of many practices which now prevail in the church as { } a matter of course, such as kneeling, bowing at the name of jesus, the use of vestments, etc. these are simply what had been in use in the early church, and the use of the prayer-book presupposes them all. it is well, also, to observe that ritualism properly considered, emphasizes the continuity of the church before and after the reformation, and is a standing protest against the false idea that the episcopal church was founded by henry the eighth, or that it is a mere schism from the church of rome. (see ornaments; also undivided church, the.) rochet.--a bishop's vestment, and may be described as a long narrow surplice or alb which he wears under the chimere (which see). rogation days.--the monday, tuesday and wednesday before ascension day. they are days of abstinence preparatory to the great feast of the ascension. they are so called from the latin word _rogare_, meaning to ask, and coming as they do in the early part of the year, it was customary on these days to ask god's blessing on the fruits of the earth. so that the rogation days bear the same relation to the plowing and sowing that thanksgiving day bears to the harvest. two special prayers for this purpose, entitled "for fruitful seasons,--to be used on rogation sunday and the rogation days," were introduced into the american prayer-book at its last revision in . the rogation days were originated about the middle of the fifth century by mamercus, bishop of vienne in gaul, on the occasion of a great calamity that threatened his diocese; whence arose the custom of saying the litany and certain psalms such as d { } and th, during perambulations of parishes. this method of celebrating the rogation days still prevails in many parishes in england. rogation sunday.--the fifth sunday after easter, being the sunday next before the rogation days and ascension day is so called, and no doubt from the words with which the gospel for the day begins, "verily, verily, i say unto you, whatsoever ye shall _ask_ the father in my name, he will give it you." (see rogation days.) rood screen.--the word "rood" is the old saxon word for _cross_ or crucifix; and the term "rood screen" is the name given to the screen or open partition to be seen in many churches, placed between the chancel and the nave, and which is always surmounted by the rood, _i.e._, the cross. rubric.--the rules or directions in the prayer-book, printed in italics, concerning the method of conducting the services. while they are now usually printed in black ink, they are still called _rubrics_ from the fact that they were formerly always printed in red; rubric being derived from a latin word meaning _red_. s sabaoth.--the hebrew word for "hosts." the words "lord god of sabaoth," to be found in the te deum, mean the same as "lord god of hosts" in the ter sanctus in the communion service. { } sabbath.--the jewish weekly day of _rest_ (which the word means) observed on the seventh day because god rested on that day from his work of creation. it is no longer binding on christians, and the name is very improperly applied to the first day of the week which christians observe as a day of rest and worship. (see lord's day.) sacrament.--the word "sacrament" is derived from the latin _sacramentum_, meaning the military oath required of the soldiers of ancient rome. its outward sign was the uplifted hand whereby the soldier pledged himself to loyalty, which may be regarded as the thing signified by that outward gesture. the word came to be used for those ordinances of the christian church possessing an "outward sign" and conveying an "inward grace." thus the church catechism treating of the two sacraments "generally necessary to salvation, that is to say, baptism and the supper of the lord," defines a sacrament as being an outward and visible sign ordained by christ, of an inward and spiritual grace given by him as its accompaniment. this definition has reference to the sacramental system of the church and means that christ appointed only two sacraments that are generally or universally necessary to salvation. it does not imply that there are not other sacramental agencies in the church--but only that these two are absolutely necessary to salvation. for example, if a man would be saved he must receive holy baptism and holy communion where these sacraments are to be had; but for his salvation it is not necessary that he should be married, or ordained to the sacred ministry, and yet marriage and { } ordination are thoroughly sacramental in character in that they are grace conferring, and therefore, in her book of homilies the church calls them sacraments, the great english divines generally take this position in regard to the sacraments and the sacramental system of the church. thus archbishop bramhall declares: "the proper and certain sacraments of the christian church, common to all, or (in the words of our church) _generally necessary_ to salvation, are but two, baptism and the supper of the lord. . . . the rest we retain, though not under the notion of such proper and general sacraments,--as confirmation, ordination, matrimony, penitence and lastly, the visitation of the sick." so also, bishop jeremy taylor says, "it is none of the doctrine of the church of england, that there are two sacraments only, but that 'two only are generally necessary to salvation.'" sacred vessels.--(see vessels, sacred.) sacrifice.--a solemn offering made to god according to his ordinance, for his honor and for the benefit of sinners, as in the holy communion which is called "our sacrifice of praise and thanksgiving," and in which the merits and death of christ are pleaded for the remission of our sins. sacristan.--an old word derived from the latin _sacra_, meaning sacred things, still retained to designate one who has charge of the sacristy with all its contents, viz., the vestments and sacred vessels. the word has been corrupted into _sexton_ which is now used for the man who takes care of the church building. sacristy.--the apartment in a church building { } where the vestments, books and sacred vessels are kept; sometimes called the vestry. saint.--the new testament name for all the baptized, who are declared to be "an holy nation," by reason of their incorporation into christ's mystical body. like the ancient people of god they may not in their individual lives fully realize their high destiny, yet are they partakers of an holy calling. the word has since come to be used only of those of extraordinary virtue and who, perchance, suffered for the truth's sake. saints' days.--it has always been characteristic of the devotional system of the christian church to commemorate before god the grace given to his faithful servants whereby they were enabled to live righteously and to bear witness to his truth, and to pray that we may follow the good examples of these his servants and with them be made partakers of everlasting life. (see diptychs.) the day commemorated is generally that of the saint's death, because like his master, he passed through death to the portals of everlasting life. according to the prayer-book the saints commemorated in this church are the twelve apostles; st. john baptist and st. barnabas; the evangelists st. mark and st. luke; the holy innocents, st. stephen; conversion of st. paul; and in addition, st. michael and all angels' day, and all saints' day. the saints commemorated in our calendar are all treated of elsewhere under their proper titles, to which the reader is referred. sanctuary.--meaning the "holy place"; the name given to that portion of the chancel within the rail { } where the altar stands; from this fact the whole church building is frequently called the sanctuary of god. schism.--derived from a greek word, meaning _fissure_, or _rent_, and may be defined as a rending of the body of christ, his church on earth, and making divisions in the one body. the divisions between the east and west, and between rome and the anglican communion may be described in st. paul's words as "schism _in_ the body," rather than schism _from_ it, inasmuch as none of these three bodies has lost any of the essentials of church unity--the apostolic ministry, the sacraments, the creeds and the holy scriptures. but the word also means separation from the church and is applied to those religious bodies which have abandoned the historic church. such wilful separation, whether within the church or without, st. paul, in corinthians, calls a sin ( cor. : ; : ; : ), and in romans : , we are directed to avoid those who cause divisions. the church regards her unity as of such vital importance to her own life and to the life of each individual soul, she bids us pray in the litany, "from all false doctrine, heresy, and schism, good lord, deliver us." (see unity, church; and also undivided church.) scriptures in the prayer-book.--it has been pointed out, on the authority of a careful and detailed calculation that of the whole prayer-book, three-fifths of it are taken from the bible and that two-fifths of all the church's worship are carried on in the actual words of holy scripture. again, that one-half of this divine service is praise; one-fourth, prayer; and { } one-fourth, reading of the bible. from these facts, the episcopal church has been rightly called a "bible reading church." we thus learn the great value of the prayer-book in setting forth "the things pertaining to the kingdom of god." (see lectionary.) seasons, the church.--(see christian year.) sedilia.--from the latin _sedile_, meaning a seat. the name given to the seats near the altar, usually placed against the south wall, to be used by the clergy during the sermon at the holy communion. see.--derived from the latin word _sedes_, meaning a seat. the word is used to designate the place of a bishop's jurisdiction, and his place of residence, the city where his cathedral is; usually called the _see city_. sentences, the opening.--short passages of holy scripture read at the beginning of daily morning and evening prayer, are so called, and are intended to strike the keynote of the service to follow. originally the daily services began with the lord's prayer, but in the sentences, with the exhortation, confession and absolution were prefixed to morning prayer; they were not placed in the evening prayer until . in the last revision of the american prayer-book additional sentences were added and arranged to strike the keynote of the church's great festivals and fasts, such as christmas day, good friday, easter, etc. septuagesima.--the name given to the third sunday before lent. the explanation of this name for this sunday has been given as follows: "there being exactly fifty days between the sunday next { } before lent and easter day inclusive, that sunday is termed _quinquagesima_, _i.e._, the fiftieth; and the two sundays immediately preceding are called from the next round numbers, _sexagesima_, _i.e._, sixtieth, and _septuagesima_, _i.e._, the seventieth." the reason for thus numbering these sundays has been beautifully set forth in "thoughts on the services" as follows: "the church now (septuagesima sunday) enters the penumbra of her lenten eclipse, and all her services are shadowed with the sombre hue of her approaching season of humiliation. . . .we have turned our back upon dear old christmas and the group of holy days that hand in hand seemed fairly to dance around it; and setting our faces towards the more sober, but still more glorious, light of easter we begin to number the days of preparation, which if duly observed will fit us to keep the paschal as the apostle commands, 'not with the old leaven. . .but with the unleavened bread of sincerity and truth.'" (see pre-lenten season.) server.--one who attends the priest at a celebration of the holy communion. the server may be either a layman or one of the clergy. sexagesima.--the second sunday before lent is so called, because it is about sixty days before easter; _sexagesima_ meaning sixtieth. (see septuagesima.) sexts.--one of the seven canonical hours (which see). shell.--(see baptismal shell.) shrove tuesday.--the old name given to the tuesday before ash wednesday, because on that day every one was accustomed to go to the priest before { } beginning the observance of lent, to be shrived, shriven, shrove, _i.e._, to confess and be absolved. certain social customs have been popularly connected with this day, making it a day of merriment and sports and dining on pancakes or fritters. the practice of eating pancakes on this day still survives in many places, and hence it is also called pancake tuesday or pancake day. sick.--(see visitation of the sick.) sign of the cross.--(see cross, the.) simon (st.) and saint jude's day.--a festival of the church observed on october th. the union of these two apostles on this day of commemoration is intended to teach, as we learn from the collect, a lesson of christian love and that oneness or unity of the church for which our lord prayed. st. simon was called to be an apostle and he is mentioned in holy scripture as the "canaanite" and "zelotes," both words meaning a _zealot_. he is supposed to have labored in egypt and parts of africa adjacent. one tradition has it that he suffered martyrdom by being sawn asunder in persia, at the same time with st. jude who ministered in that country and who was martyred by the magi. for this reason st. simon is usually represented in ecclesiastical art with a saw in his hand. for notice of st. jude, see jude, saint. sisterhoods.--(see religious orders.) six points of ritual.--certain ritual acts in the celebration of the holy communion which it is claimed have always characterized the worship of the christian church. they are enumerated as follows: ( ) two lights on the altar. ( ) the eastward { } position. ( ) the eucharistic vestments, ( ) wafer bread. ( ) the mixed chalice, and ( ) incense; each of which is described under its own proper title to which the reader is referred. spirit.--(see holy ghost; also ghost, ghostly.) spirit, gifts of the.--(see gifts of the holy ghost, sevenfold.) spirit, fruits of the.--in the fifth chapter of the epistle to the galatians st. paul sets forth the fruits of the spirit as nine in number, viz: ( ) love, ( ) joy, ( ) peace, ( ) longsuffering, ( ) gentleness, ( ) goodness, ( ) faith, ( ) meekness, ( ) temperance. in this enumeration it will be found that the arrangement is threefold, corresponding to the three great aspects of life. for example, the first three, "love, joy, and peace," have reference to the life of a christian in his intercourse _with god_. the next four, "longsuffering, gentleness, goodness and faith," describe the qualities which should characterize the christian in his bearing towards his _fellow-men_--(faith, it is to be understood, in this enumeration means trust, belief in man, and not the theological virtue, which is regarded as a root rather than a fruit). in the remaining fruits of the spirit we have a description of the christian life in respect of _self_ viz., "meekness and temperance"--"meekness," by which is meant a due estimate of the place which self ought to hold, and "temperance," the rigorous determination to see to it that self is kept in place. it is interesting to note that the _fruits of the spirit_ form the subject of one of the petitions in the litany. spirit of missions, the.--the official organ of { } the american church by which knowledge of her missionary work at home and abroad is made known. it is published monthly, is well edited and filled each month with very readable and valuable information which all should possess. the publication office is in the church missions house, fourth ave., new york city. (see domestic and foreign missionary society.) sponsors.--it would be difficult to say with any degree of certainty at what period the office of _sponsors_ was established, but it appeared in the very earliest ages of the christian church. it is supposed that persecution and the presence of heresy led to its institution. during the time of those early persecutions it stands to reason that the heads of the church must have been aware of the probability of some at least of those who had been baptized of receding from their vows and thus sinning away their baptismal grace. it was but natural that they should adopt every precaution to ascertain the character of those whom, by baptism, they admitted to the christian covenant. they required, therefore, that some of their own body answer for the real conversion of the presumed neophyte, and should also be sureties for the fulfilment of the promises then made. then there were the probabilities during persecution that the parents might not outlive the violence of the times and be enabled to watch over the moral and religious education of their baptized children. the church was anxious not to lose these lambs of the flock, and so it was a wise and godly provision that there should be some one who, in default of their parents, surviving or { } in case of their apostasy, might see to it that their godchildren were "brought up to lead a godly and a christian life." the advantages arising from this ancient institution of _sponsors_ were so great that it has been continued throughout all ages of the church. and even in this present time, if all sponsors would fulfil their duties, many a child now lost to the church, might have been saved to it and brought up in the nurture and admonition of the lord. in the case of baptism of infants, the significance of _sponsors_ is very great, in that baptism is a covenant, in which god on the one hand is represented by his minister, and the child is represented by his sponsors, who answer for him and agree to see to it that this child shall be virtuously brought up and so trained that it shall lead the rest of his life according to this beginning. the sponsors are called godfathers and godmothers because of the spiritual affinity created in baptism, their responsibility for the training of the child being almost parental. (see baptism, holy; infant baptism; also name, the christian.) stalls.--seats in the choir (_i.e._, chancel) for clergy and choristers, commonly called choir stalls. standing committee.--the general canons of the american church provide that in every diocese there shall be a _standing committee_ (usually composed of not less than three clergymen and two laymen who shall be communicants) to be appointed by the convention thereof, whose duties, except so far as provided for by the canons of the general convention, may be prescribed by the canons of the respective dioceses. in every diocese where there is a bishop the { } standing committee acts as his council of advice. it recommends to him persons to be admitted to holy orders or as candidates for holy orders, etc. as the representative of the diocese, it gives its consent to the consecration of a bishop elected by any other diocese. when there is no bishop, the standing committee becomes the ecclesiastical authority of the diocese for all purposes declared in the canons. state of salvation.--by holy baptism we are admitted into christ's church, his kingdom of grace, which in the church catechism is declared to be a "state of salvation," _i.e._, a christian condition in which it is quite certain the salvation of god is within our reach and in which as we are responsive to all its overtures of grace we may grow into the likeness of god's dear son. our final salvation is dependent on our continuance in this state of salvation by god's grace unto our life's end. stephen, festival of saint.--a holy day of the church observed on december , in memory of st. stephen the proto-martyr, _i.e._, the _first_ christian martyr. the position of the three holy days after christmas is remarkable. we have here brought into immediate nearness to the birth of christ the three kinds of members who are joined to him by martyrdom, viz., those who are martyrs both in will and deed, as st. stephen; those who are martyrs in will but not in deed, _i.e._, escaped with life as st. john; and lastly, those who are martyrs in deed, but had no wills of their own to sacrifice to god, as the holy innocents. the festival of st. stephen dates as far back as the fourth century. the reason for its institution is thus { } given by an ancient writer, "christ was born on earth that stephen might be born in heaven." nothing is known of st. stephen before his selection for ordination as a deacon, but in the th and th chapters of the book of the acts of the apostles is given a very full account of his being made a deacon; of his doing "great wonders and miracles among the people," because he was "full of faith and power"; of his accusation and eloquent defense, and finally of his martyrdom by stoning, in the midst of which, like his divine master, he prayed for his murderers. in ecclesiastical art, st. stephen is represented as a deacon holding stones in a napkin or in his robe or in his hand. stir up sunday.--a popular name given to the sunday next before advent, from the first two words with which the collect for the day begins, viz.: "stir up, we beseech thee, o lord, the wills of thy faithful people," etc. this sunday is the end of the christian year, and consequently a time of review, gathering up the fragments that remain, that so with renewed strength and stronger purpose--_stirred up wills_, we may enter on the new year which begins on the following sunday. stole.--a long band or scarf of silk worn by the priest around the neck and hanging down in front to about the knees. it is one of the altar vestments and should be worn when administering any sacrament. the stole should be of the proper color of the church season and may be white, green, red, violet or black. it is intended to symbolize the ropes or bands with which our lord was bound to the pillar when he was { } scourged. it also signifies the yoke of patience which the minister of christ must bear as the servant of god. when worn by a deacon, it is placed on the left shoulder and fastened under the right arm. (see vestments; also kissing the stole.) subdeacon.--in former times the name given to him who assisted the celebrant at the holy communion was deacon, and the name _subdeacon_ to one who waited on the deacon as the deacon waited on the celebrant, and he was permitted to read the epistle. in time, however, these attending clergy came to be called by names characteristic of the most conspicuous parts of their duties, viz.: the gospeler and epistoler. substance.--a word derived from the latin, used in theology as the equivalent of the greek word _ousia_, meaning "essence," and used in the definition of the nature of the godhead. thus we say that god is one in substance (_i.e._, essence) but in persons, three. the word is found in the creed in the article which speaks of the son as "being of one substance with the father." suffrages.--the intercessory versicles and responses after the creed in morning and evening prayer and towards the end of the litany, are so called. sunday.--(see lord's day.) sunday letter.--(see dominical letter.) sunday-schools.--sunday-schools were originated in the church of england by one of its clergy, the rev. thomas steck, who afterwards, in , called in mr. robert raikes, a layman, to assist him. such schools gradually spread and increased, until to-day it { } is said that the sunday-schools of the world number three millions of teachers and over thirty millions of scholars. of late years especially the sunday-school has become a most important factor in our church life, and yet notwithstanding its very manifest purpose it is ever presenting problems very difficult to solve. these perplexing problems no doubt arise from two main causes, ( ) a practical, though oftentimes unconscious, ignoring of the church's own order and method and ( ) from the mixed conditions of the religious world of to-day "by reason of our unhappy divisions." as far as can be seen, all that has been written, published and preached on this subject seems to resolve itself into simply this--try to do the best you can with the material you have, the short time allotted to this work, usually one hour a week, and the absolute voluntaryism of the whole undertaking. and yet in spite of this discouraging outlook, there can be no doubt that the sunday-school offers one of the very best fields for genuine church work and is "worth while," as has been fully demonstrated in many places of earnest toil for god. this work is far-reaching in its influence and no estimate can be given of the possible good it may do in moulding lives. the rev. g. w. shinn, d.d., speaking of the sunday-school sets forth its object as follows: "it offers to aid parents, sponsors and pastors in developing the religious life of the young, in filling their minds with the truths of our most holy faith, and in training them to serve god faithfully in their day and generation. whatever its defects of administration, this is its aim." super-altar.--a small portable slab of stone used { } to consecrate upon and placed on an unconsecrated altar or a wooden altar. super-frontal.--a covering on the top of the altar which hangs down eight or ten inches in front, varying in color according to the church season. sureties.--(see sponsors.) surplice.--the outer garment, made of linen, worn over the cassock by the officiating minister during the church service. it is a loose flowing vestment, generally reaching to the knees, having broad, full, open sleeves. it is not specially a priestly garment, as it is worn by deacons and also by lay-readers, and in a modified form by choristers. the word is derived from the latin, _superpelliceum_, meaning an over-garment. (see vestments.) surpliced choir.--when the body of singers of the church service is composed of boys and men they are vested in cassocks and surplices or cottas and given a place in the chancel. this is a very ancient usage in the church of god, reaching back to the temple service at jerusalem. in the description of that service given in chronicles : and we read: "also the levites which were the singers, all of them of asaph, of heman, of jeduthun, with their sons and their brethren, being arrayed in white linen . . . stood at the east end of the altar . . . praising and thanking god." in this whole passage we see the original of those surpliced choirs by which the same psalms of david have been sung in every age of the christian church. the surpliced choir has always been a feature of the anglican church, peculiar to it as a national custom. { } and as the american church is the daughter of the english church, having derived from her all her great treasures of devotion and beauty in worship, so she, too, employs the vested choir and encourages its use. in this connection, it is interesting to note that the first mention of a surpliced choir in america is in connection with old st. michael's church, charleston, s. c. in the history of this parish may be found the following interesting reference to the vested choir: "in there was a bill for 'washing the surplaces (sic) of clergy and children.' a little earlier the vestry requested the rector to entertain, at their expense, six of the boys on sunday as 'an incitement for their better performance of the service'; and in the organist was requested to have at least twelve choir boys." thus as early as the end of the eighteenth century the music of the church was rendered by a surpliced choir in a southern parish. for some reason vested choirs were given up in the american church and for many years little or nothing was heard of them. but after a while when the church here got more thoroughly established and began to put on strength we find that its growing devotion demanded _the restoration_ of the vested choir. this demand became so general that to-day there are very few parishes in which the music is not thus rendered. this is not to be wondered at, for it is found by actual experience that the surpliced choir of men and boys, numbering from twenty to sixty voices according to the size of the parish, is better suited to render the church's music, more in keeping with the church's devotions and { } more inspiring and helpful to the congregation. many a parish has thus been lifted up, strengthened, the services made more attractive and the attendance at them increased, because the music rendered in this manner becomes thoroughly congregational, such as the people themselves can join in and make it their own. sursum corda.--the latin title of that portion of the communion office which begins, "lift up your hearts," which the latin words mean. this is found almost word for word in every known liturgy from the earliest times, and without doubt has come down to us from the apostolic age. even at so early a date as a.d. we find st. cyprian giving an explanation of the meaning and purpose of the _sursum corda_ as follows: "it is for this cause that the priest before worship uses words of introduction and puts the minds of his brethren in preparation by saying, 'lift up your hearts'; that while the people answer, 'we lift them up unto the lord,' they may be reminded that there is nothing for them to think of except the lord." symbol.--the ancient name for "creed," which in the greek language was called _symbolon_, _i.e._, watchword, by which as the sentinel recognizes a friend, so the christian soldier is distinguished from the open enemies or false friends of the religion of christ. synod.--the word used in the eastern church for what is called in the western church a _council_. it is from a greek word meaning coming together. (see council.) { } t table.--(see lord's table.) te deum.--the latin title of the hymn beginning "we praise thee, o god," sung after the first lesson at morning prayer. it is one of the oldest of christian hymns. the old tradition that it was first sung impromptu and antiphonally by st. ambrose and st. augustine at the baptism of the latter in a.d. , is not now accepted, as there is evidence to show that the te deum is much older than the time of st. ambrose. so early as a.d. , we find st. cyprian using almost the same words as occur in the te deum. it is now generally believed that this noble canticle in its present form, is a composition of the fourth or fifth century and that it represents a still more ancient hymn. the te deum is sung in the church service every day except during advent and lent when the _benedicite_ is sung instead. ten commandments.--(see decalogue.) temperance.--(see church temperance society.) ter sanctus.--meaning _thrice holy_. the latin title of the hymn in the communion office beginning "holy, holy, holy." this hymn is of the most ancient origin and forms part of all the oldest liturgies. in the liturgies of st. basil and st. chrysostom, it is called the "triumphal hymn." testimonials.--the general canons of the church prescribe that when the standing committee of a diocese recommends to the bishop a candidate for holy orders for ordination to the diaconate or { } priesthood, that it shall present to the bishop a certificate or testimonial to the effect that the candidate "hath lived piously, soberly and honestly, and hath not since his admission as a candidate for orders, written, taught or held anything contrary to the doctrine and discipline of the protestant episcopal church." the action of the committee in recommending such person to be admitted a candidate for holy orders was based on testimonials made by the clergy and laymen who knew the candidate personally. so, also, when a bishop is elected, testimonials of his election by the convention which elected him, and from the house of deputies of the general convention, or from the standing committees of the various dioceses, of their approbation of his election and also of his fitness for the office of a bishop, must be presented to the house of bishops before order can be taken for his consecration. thanksgiving.--(see general thanksgiving, the.) thanksgiving day.--the day appointed by the civil authority for the rendering of thanks to god for the blessings bestowed on this land and nation during the year. it usually partakes of the nature of a harvest home festival, prompted no doubt by the character of the service set forth in the prayer-book to be used on this day, entitled, "a form of prayer and thanksgiving to almighty god for the fruits of the earth and all other blessings of his merciful providence." it is interesting to note that the first thanksgiving day in america was appointed, not by the pilgrims, as many persons mistakenly believe, but by members of the church of england. it was { } celebrated at monhegan, off the maine coast, near the mouth of the kennebec river, as far back as --thirteen years prior to the arrival of the mayflower in plymouth harbor--and chaplain seymore preached a sermon "gyving god thankes for our happy metynge and saffe aryvall into ye countrie." the earliest thanksgiving day of the plymouth colonists was in . theological virtues.--the three virtues, _faith_, _hope_ and _charity_ or _love_, as enumerated by st. paul in the th chapter of corinthians, are called theological virtues because they are the gift of god and have god for their object. they may be explained as follows: faith is a gift of god, infused into our souls, whereby we firmly believe all these things which god has revealed. hope is a gift of god, which helps us to expect with confidence that god will give us all things necessary to salvation, if we only do what he requires of us. charity is a gift of god, whereby we love almighty god above all things for his sake and our neighbors as ourselves. thirty-nine articles.--(see articles of religion.) thomas (st.) the apostle.--the twenty-first day of december is observed in memory of st. thomas, who was called by our lord to be an apostle. we find very little in holy scripture concerning st. thomas, but there are four sayings of his recorded which are indicative of his character. they are as follows: . "lord we know not whither thou goest, and how can we know the way?"--st. john : . { } . "let us also go, that we may die with him."--st. john : . . "except i shall see in his hands the print of the nails and put my fingers in the print of the nails and thrust my hand into his side, i will not believe."--st. john : . . "my lord and my god."--st. john : . from these sayings we see in st. thomas, ( ) the spirit of inquiry, ( ) bravery in the face of danger, ( ) his doubt and unbelief, and ( ) strong conviction and the triumph of faith. an ancient writer declared that "by this doubting of st. thomas we are more confirmed in our belief than by the faith of the other apostles." it is upon this fact that the collect for the day is founded. st. thomas is said to have carried the gospel to the parthians, medes, persians and chaldeans, among whom he founded the church. it is believed, also, that he preached the gospel in india. he suffered martyrdom, having been put to death by the brahmins at taprobane, now called sumatra. in ecclesiastical art, st. thomas is represented as handling our lord's wounds; or in reference to his martyrdom, with a lance or spear; also, holding a carpenter's square. three hours' service.--a solemn service quite generally held in our churches on good friday, from m. to p. m. in commemoration of our lord's agony on the cross. it usually consists of meditations, or short addresses, on the seven words on the cross, or on kindred topics, interspersed with hymns on the passion, special prayers, and spaces of silence for private intercession. if well conducted it is a { } most impressive and helpful service and serves to bring out the awful events of that momentous day when the saviour of men was cruelly put to death by those whom he came to save. thurifer.--the name given to one who bears the censer in services where incense is used. thursday, holy.--(see ascension day.) thursday in holy week.--(see maundy thursday.) tierce.--the third hour or a. m. one of the seven canonical hours (which see). tradition.--a term used in the thirty-fourth article of religion to denote customs, rites, forms and ceremonies of the church which have been transmitted by oral communications or long established usage, and which though not commanded in so many words in holy scripture, yet have always been used and kept in the holy catholic church. for this reason they are revered, practiced and retained in its various branches at the present time. such traditions are the following: . the observance of the first day of the week instead of the seventh. . the observance of the christian year, or the system of feasts and fasts and holy seasons according to the events in our lord's life. . the baptism of infants. . the use of liturgical worship. . the use of vestments by the ministers in divine service. . the arrangement of our churches after the model of the temple. { } . the observance of the seven hours of prayer. . the sign of the cross in baptism and at other times. . the choral service. all these traditions of the universal church are retained or permitted by the american branch of the church. it is also to be noted that by _tradition_ is meant the uniform teaching of the church from the beginning, _i.e._, the witness that the church bears by the writings of the fathers and the enactments of her general councils to the truths of the christian religion and the interpretation of holy scripture. this is in accord with st. peter's words, "no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation." inasmuch as the church is the "witness and keeper of holy writ," and that it is upon her testimony that we know what is the bible, it is but reasonable to defer to her interpretation, her universal customs and traditions as to its meaning. (see undivided church; also fathers, the.) transepts.--when churches are built in the form of a cross they have two wings, one on each side, projecting at right angles with the nave and chancel. these projected wings, forming the arm of the cross, are called the _transepts_, north and south. transfiguration, the.--a feast of the church observed on august , in commemoration of our lord's transfiguration on the mount in the presence of his three disciples, st. peter, st. james and st. john. it is a restored festival in our calendar. the american church having thought good to order a revision of { } the prayer-book after a hundred years use of it as set forth in the year , completed this revision in after fifteen years of labor spent upon it. the first action taken on the subject was by the general convention in , when among other changes and restorations the feast of the transfiguration was restored to the calendar and appointed to be observed august . this date it is thought is the actual time of the year at which the transfiguration took place. as a day of commemoration, this festival has been observed in the eastern church since a.d. , and in the western church since the year . it was ordered to be universally observed in a.d. . we cannot doubt that its restoration to our calendar is a decided gain to our spiritual treasury of devotions and instructions, for it commemorates an event in our lord's life which has deep significance in relation to our lord himself and also to our own spiritual life. our lord, before his last journey to jerusalem, took the three chief apostles with him into a high mountain and then as he prayed, he was transfigured before them. his raiment became white as the light, his face shone as the sun, and moses and elias appeared and talked with him. "and there came a voice out of the cloud, saying, this is my beloved son, hear him." it was thus that his divine nature was revealed and enabled the apostle st. john to testify, "we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the father." proper lessons and proper psalms for the services for this day as well as collect, epistle and gospel emphasize the importance of the feast of the transfiguration and mark it as one of the { } great days of the church. the ecclesiastical color is white. trefoil.--an ornament used in gothic architecture, formed by mouldings in the head of window lights, tracery, panelings, etc., so arranged as to resemble the _trefoil_, (_i.e._, three leaved) clover, as an emblem of the trinity. trine immersion.--the name given to the practice in the primitive church, of dipping a person, who was being baptized, three times beneath the surface of the water, _i.e._, at each name of the three persons in the blessed trinity. when baptism was by affusion or pouring, as is usual at the present time, the affusion was also trine. the apostolic canons insisted so strongly on this mode of baptism that they enjoined that the bishop or priest who did not thus administer it should be deposed. this threefold method of baptism still prevails in the church and is the only proper method of administering this sacrament. trinity, the holy.--a name applied to the godhead and signifying three in one and one in three--the father, the son, and the holy ghost--a doctrine which is held by all branches of the catholic church, and by the greater number of the various christian denominations. the word "trinity" is not found in the bible and is said to have been first used by theophilus, bishop of antioch, in the second century as a concise expression of the christian faith concerning the godhead, that "there is but one living and true god, everlasting, without body, parts or passions; of infinite power, wisdom and goodness; the maker and preserver of all things both visible and { } invisible. and in the unity of this godhead there be three persons, of one substance, power and eternity: the father, the son, and the holy ghost." (art. i). the doctrine of the trinity deals with matter beyond reason but not contrary to reason; is the subject of revelation and as such is proposed to our faith faculty. for this reason it is called a mystery of the gospel. trinity season, the.--the long period between trinity sunday and the first sunday in advent is so called. its length is dependent on the time easter is kept and may include as many as twenty-seven sundays. the devotions and the scriptural lessons are intended to bring before us the moralities of the gospel and the practical duties of the christian life. or as bishop coxe has finely expressed it, "the first half of the year is devoted to doctrine primarily, and to duty as seen in direct relation to doctrine. so, the second half is devoted to duty primarily, and to doctrine only as reduced to practical piety, thus is the christian year divided between the creed and the decalogue." the last sunday of the season is observed as the "sunday next before advent," but is popularly called "stir up sunday" from the first two words of the collect for the day. the church color for the trinity season is green. trinity sunday.--trinity sunday is a festival of late institution, as the day on which it is observed was originally kept as the octave of whitsun day. it was not until a.d. that it was first directed by the synod of aries to be observed by the whole church as trinity sunday, although thomas a beckett is said to have instituted this festival in england in { } a.d. , and reference is made to it as early as a.d. . the observance of this day is very significant and rounds out or completes the former commemorations of the year. as set forth in "thoughts on the services," "the church's services have culminated; to-day they mount up to the throne of the godhead; for knowing the son and the holy ghost, we know the father also, and that these three are not three gods, but one god. the church to-day celebrates the glory and majesty of god in his essence and in his works. in the word _trinity_, she simply sums up what is revealed concerning him,--that in substance he is one, but in persons, three. . . . the collect enables us to worship the _unity_ which exists in the power of the divine majesty, even while we acknowledge the glory of the eternal trinity." proper lessons, proper psalms and proper preface in the communion office emphasize the importance of the festival and mark it as one of the great days of the church. the ecclesiastical color is white. trisagion.--a greek word meaning the same as _ter sanctus_, _i.e._, "thrice holy," but it is not used in the greek church for the same thing, but is the title of the respond used in the reproaches and other services, namely, "holy god, holy and mighty, holy and immortal, have mercy upon us." triumphal hymn.--the ancient name given to the ter sanctus, the hymn in the communion office beginning, "holy, holy, holy." triumphant, the church.--the church in heaven. (see church catholic.) { } tunicle.--a vestment worn by the subdeacon or epistoler at the celebration of the holy communion; somewhat similar to the dalmatic worn by the deacon or gospeler, but shorter, narrower and not so elaborately embroidered. turning to the east.--(see east, turning to.) twelfth day.--a popular name given to the feast of the epiphany which occurs twelve days after christmas. many social rites and customs have long been connected with the evening of this festival, which is commonly called "twelfth night." u unction.--(see anointing the sick.) undivided church.--in the great work of the reformation in the sixteenth century, the church of england did not seek to introduce innovations, to erect a new church in the place of the old, or to change the old religion for a new religion. what it aimed to do was to retain its ancient heritage, but at the same time to free the old church from certain grave abuses, to purify the old religion from many harmful superstitions which had sprung up during the middle ages. thus "the continuity of the english church was the first principle of the english reformation." in all the work of reformation, covering a long period of time, the appeal was constantly made to the primitive standards of the _undivided church_; to holy scripture as interpreted by the teaching and customs of the primitive church, { } the writings of the fathers and the decisions of the general councils. the reasonableness of this appeal will appear when we consider that it is this early age of christianity, the age nearest to the time of the apostles, which best preserved the personal instructions of the twelve, which was most likely to be in accord with the will of our lord and which maintained the church's unity unimpaired. it was during this time, because the church was one and undivided, that the canon of scripture was established, that it was possible to hold the ecumenical councils which defined "the faith once delivered to the saints," and gave us the creeds as the "rule of faith." for this reason the english church in her reformation appealed to the practice, teaching and decisions of the _undivided church_. it was thus she was enabled to preserve her historic continuity. the original unity of the church was finally broken by the great schism between the east and the west which took place a.d. , (see traditions; also fathers, the.) unity, church.--the most apparent, most manifest teaching of holy scripture is the unity or oneness of the church of christ. it was for this our lord prayed, "that they all may be one; as thou, father, art in me, and i in thee, that they also may be one in us: that the world may believe that thou hast sent me" (st. john : ). we have in these words declared the purpose of such unity, viz.: "that the world may believe." so, also, st. paul wrote, "endeavoring to keep the unity of the spirit in the bond of peace. there is one body and one spirit, even as ye are called in one hope of your calling; one lord, one { } faith, one baptism, one god and father of all" (ephesians : - ). again, in the new testament the church is called the body of christ, the kingdom of heaven, the bride, and its people are declared to be branches of the one vine jesus christ himself. "the great thought running through all the new testament descriptions of the church is that of the church's unity in itself through its union with christ the head." there is not the slightest warrant in the bible for the present state of our divided christianity, which is simply the result of sin and man's waywardness. this truth is becoming more and more realized among many earnest and thoughtful men in all religious bodies and they are longing and praying for the reunion of christendom. this desire has also developed a study of church history which heretofore has been a much neglected department of christian knowledge. this more general study of the history of the church has already been productive of the greatest good. it has given men broader views and a clearer conception of that kingdom of grace, of which christ is the head and which is to be the one, living witness whereby the world may be brought to believe that the divine father hath sent his son to be the world's saviour. for this blessed consummation many earnest and devout men in all places and in almost every communion are using daily the following beautiful prayer for unity. "o lord jesus christ, who saidst unto thine apostles, peace i leave with you, my peace i give unto you: regard not our sins, but the faith of thy { } church; and grant her that peace and unity, which is agreeable to thy will, who livest and reignest with the father and the holy ghost, one god, world without end. amen." (see undivided church.) unleavened bread.--from time immemorial the bread used in the holy communion has generally been unleavened, or wafer bread as it is sometimes called, from its shape, being made round like a wafer. unleavened bread is used from a sense of reverence, using something specially made for so holy a purpose, and also because unleavened bread is not so likely to crumble as ordinary bread. it is also believed that this was undoubtedly the kind of bread our lord used when he instituted the blessed sacrament. use.--this is an ecclesiastical term to designate the liturgy or prayer-book peculiar to any diocese or national church and differing from other liturgies in minor details. for example, in the early ages of the english church there were different "uses," or customs, such as the salisbury or "sarum use "; meaning the prayer-book set forth by osmond in a.d. , and used in the diocese of salisbury. so also, there was the "use of bangor," the "use of york," the "hereford use," etc., but all these differing "uses" were finally superseded by the one national use, the present prayer-book of the church of england. the american prayer-book is declared in the title page to be "the book of common prayer and administrations of the sacraments and other rites and ceremonies of the church (catholic) _according to_ the use of the protestant episcopal church in the united states of america." { } v veil.--(see chalice veil.) veni creator spiritus.--the latin title of a very ancient hymn to the holy ghost, sung in the ordination offices, appropriate to whitsun day, and formerly sung at the celebration of the holy eucharist. the authorship of this hymn is commonly ascribed to st. ambrose, a.d. . the first english version (added to the prayer-book in ) has been attributed to john dryden. venite exultemus.--meaning, "o come, let us sing," the latin title of the th psalm, sung as the first canticle at morning prayer as an invitatory to the use of the psalter. (see invitatory.) verger.--the name originally given to one who carried the _verge_, or staff, before a cathedral or collegiate dignitary. the name is now commonly applied to a paid usher. versicles.--little verses or sentences uttered by the officiating minister with corresponding replies or responses by the congregation. for example, v. o lord, open thou our lips. r. and our mouth shall show forth thy praise. this feature of public worship has prevailed in the christian church from the most ancient times, as we find it mentioned as early as a.d. as being even then of ancient origin. this is with special reference to the versicles after the lord's prayer in the daily offices, which have been called the sursum corda of the daily services. (see responsive services.) { } vespers.--one of the seven canonical hours (which see). it was from the ancient offices of vespers and compline that the present service of evening prayer was compiled. this service is sometimes now called vespers and also even song (which see). vessels, sacred.--the vessels used in celebrating the holy communion are so called, from the sacred purpose for which they are intended. these sacred vessels are the chalice, paten and flagon, which should be made of silver or gold only--the best that we have for so sacred a purpose. vestments.--it has been pointed out that "the clergy and all who act ministerially in divine service are clad in surplices and other vestments, not that they may have a decent and uniform appearance in sight of the congregation, but as wearing robes distinctive of their office in ministering before him whom they worship." in this statement we have a rationale, so to speak, of the use of vestments, and it is a very striking fact that such use has universally prevailed in the historic churches from the most ancient times. (see eucharistic vestments.) of the vestments thus worn in the church's services there are first the eucharistic vestments, namely: the amice, is a broad linen band richly embroidered, first placed on the head and then dropped on the shoulders as a covering for the neck and is intended to symbolize the helmet of salvation. it also symbolizes the linen cloth with which the jews blindfolded our lord. the alb, a long white linen garment with narrow sleeves tied at the waist by a white cord. it is { } emblematic of purity and innocence and also of the ministerial office. it also represents the white garment in which herod clothed our saviour. the girdle, used to confine the alb at the waist, is emblematic of the work of the lord, to perform which the sacred ministers gird up, as it were, their loins. the girdle, and also the stole and maniple are intended to represent the cords and fetters with which the officers bound jesus in his passion. the maniple is a scarf like a short stole, worn on the left arm over the sleeve of the alb by the celebrant. it is made of silk, with a fringe and embroidered with three crosses. the stole (which see). when used at the celebration it is worn crossed on the breast and kept in place by the girdle. like the girdle and maniple, it symbolizes the ropes or bands with which our lord was bound to the pillar when he was scourged. the chasuble is a circular cloak worn over the alb and hanging from the shoulders. it is universally called "the vestment" because it is _the_ characteristic eucharistic robe of all christendom and has been so from the earliest age of the church. the rationale is thus given: "the over-vesture or chasuble as touching the mystery signifieth the purple mantle that pilate's soldiers put upon christ after that they had scourged him. and as touching the minister, it signifieth charity, a virtue excellent above all others." other vestments worn by the clergy are the cassock, the surplice, biretta, hood, and when assisting at the holy communion, the dalmatic and tunicle; and by bishops, the chimere, rochet, mitre and cope (this last { } may also be worn by a priest); each of which is described under its proper head, to which the reader is referred. vestry.--the name given to the room attached to or within the church building, used for vesting in, or in which the vestments are kept. from the old custom of parish meetings be held in it, such meetings were called the vestry; a name that has since been applied to the representatives of the parish elected annually to manage its financial and secular affairs. it is to be noted that there is nothing to be found in the primitive church corresponding to the modern vestry. this fact may explain why it is that the vestry system, as such, is ever presenting problems difficult to solve. the "vestry problem" has commanded the attention of the general convention from time to time, but so far nothing has been presented for its solution. the purpose and duties of the vestry as commonly understood may be stated as follows: it is the duty of the wardens and vestry (it ought to be always with the advice of the bishop) to consider and determine upon the election of a minister when the rectorship is vacant; to see that the minister is well and properly supported, sufficiently and punctually paid; to make and execute all contracts for the erection of church edifices, rectories and other church buildings; to provide for their furnishing and repair and due preservation; to hold all church property as trustees of the parish, and as such generally to transact all temporal and financial business of the parish. (for the duties of wardens, see church wardens.) via media.--a latin term, meaning _middle course_ { } as between two extremes. the term is used to describe the anglican or episcopal church as avoiding romanism on the one hand, and protestantism on the other. viaticum.--a term used to describe the holy communion administered to a dying person. a canon of the nicene council (a.d. ) provided that no one should "be deprived of his perfect and most necessary _viaticum_ when he departs out of this life." the word means "a provision made for a journey." vicar.--a term introduced from the english church and applied to one who has charge of a chapel connected with a parish, as his sole charge. for example, the term has been applied to certain clergy of trinity church, new york, who have charge of chapels which possess the dignity of parishes, but the support of which is derived mainly from the parish corporation. in the english church, the rector, or chapter, or religious house or even a layman, has the whole right to the income of the parish but the vicar only to a certain portion of it as the pastor of the flock. the origin and meaning of this title as used in the church of england are thus given in blackstone's commentaries, "these appropriating corporations, or religious houses, were wont to depute one of their body to perform divine service in those parishes of which the society was the parson. this officiating minister was in reality no more than a curate, deputy or vicegerent of the appropriator, and therefore called _vicarius_ or _vicar_." vigils.--vigils are the _evens_ before certain feasts. in the ancient use of the church, festivals were { } commonly ushered in by the attendance of preceding vigils, or watchings all the night as a preparation for the solemnities of the following day, and were observed with fasting and prayer. vincent, rule of saint.--st. vincent of lerins who died a.d. has always been revered in the church and is known as the author of the saying, "quod semper, quod ubique, quod ab omnibus, creditum est," meaning what has been done or believed _always_, _everywhere_ and _by all_ is to be accepted. the principle involved in these words is the test of orthodoxy and the sanction for the church's usages. st. vincent's rule, therefore, still holds good, for nothing can be of the faith, as necessary to be believed unless it can satisfy the tests of antiquity, universality and general consent. (see traditions; also undivided church.) virgin mary.--(see blessed virgin mary.) virtues, the cardinal.--the four virtues, namely, prudence, justice, temperance and fortitude, which solomon sets forth in the book of wisdom, viii, , are called cardinal virtues because they are most important in the christian life. they may be briefly defined as follows: prudence, choosing the right and knowing what means to employ for accomplishing it. justice, rendering to all their dues. temperence, the virtue of self-control in all things. fortitude, bravery in doing god's will. virtues, theological.--(see theological virtues.) visitation, episcopal.--(see bishop's visitation.) visitation of prisoners.--the title of an office { } in the prayer-book. it is not contained in the english prayer-book but was taken from the irish book of common prayer of and inserted in the american prayer-book in . this is a very comprehensive and appropriate office, proving of great value to the clergy who are called to minister to the spiritual wants of prisoners. visitation of the sick.--a requirement of the church is that "when any person is sick, notice shall be given thereof to the minister of the parish." when the minister visits such sick person, the prayer-book provides a service which may be used, entitled "the order for the visitation of the sick." this service was first set forth in but was added to in , since which date it has remained practically unchanged. it is a very beautiful and affecting service, bringing great peace and comfort to the sick and is another fine illustration of the tender care our mother church shows for all her children in all conditions of their life. as there is so much misapprehension as to the meaning and purpose of the ministrations of christ's ministers at the bedside of the sick, we give the following excellent comment on this office in wheatley's treatise on the prayer-book: "though private friends may pray for us and with us, yet we can by no means place such confidence in their prayers, as we may in those sent to heaven in our behalf by such as are peculiarly commissioned to offer them. for this reason it is enjoined by st. james in his epistle, that if any be sick, they shall call for the elders of the church. from this it may be observed, that the care of sending for the minister { } is left to the sick. for the priest himself, it is very probable, may never have heard of his sickness; or, if he has, may not be so good a judge when his visit will be seasonable. for this reason it is ordered by the rubric that 'when any person is sick, notice shall be given thereof to the minister of the parish'; not when the person is just expiring (as is too often done), but when the disease first discovers its approach. to put it off to the last scene of life, is to defer the office till it can do no good. for when the sickness is grown past recovery, to pray for his restoration is only to mock the almighty; and what spiritual advantage can be expected from the minister's assistance to one who is unable to do anything for himself?" vow.--a promise made to god. being brought into covenant with god in holy baptism, the vows or promises made unto god in that sacrament are three in number: . renunciation, by which we renounce the three great powers of evil,--world, flesh and devil. . faith, by which we confess our belief in the name into which we are baptized--father, son and holy ghost, around which the articles of the christian faith as contained in the apostles' creed are grouped. . obedience, by which we promise to serve god truly all the days of our life. these three vows of baptism cover the whole period of life--past, present and future, and are the basis of all godly and righteous living. over and above these vows of their baptism members of religious orders make special vows to god,--vows { } of poverty, obedience and chastity for the more efficient prosecution of the work they have undertaken for the glory of god and the benefit of souls. w wafer bread.--(see unleavened bread.) wardens.--(see church wardens.) warnings.--the exhortations in the communion office announcing a future celebration are called "warnings," and are intended to be a sufficient notification to the communicants so that they may make their preparation for the receiving of the communion. where there are frequent celebrations, as on every sunday and holy day, "the rubric does not seem to enjoin their constant use, but to require this form of exhortation to be used at those times when the minister thinks it necessary to 'give warning,' that is, to exhort his people, respecting the celebration of the holy communion. the tone of the rubric and of the exhortations is plainly fitted to a time of infrequent communion." water.--in the church catechism it is declared that the outward visible sign or form in baptism is, "water; wherein the person is baptized. in the name of the father, and of the son, and of the holy ghost." by the rubric in the office for holy baptism it is directed that the font is to be filled with "pure water." it is thus the church fulfils our lord's command, following literally his words, "baptizing them with water." water, therefore, is the essential element of holy baptism, just as the bread and wine are the { } elements in the holy communion. water as used in holy baptism signifies "cleansing," the amount of water to be used the church has always regarded as matter of indifference. wedding ring.--(see ring.) wednesday.--in the earliest ages of the christian church its devotions were always characterized by both weekly and annual fasts. during the week the first christians always kept two fasts; one on _wednesday_, the day on which our lord was betrayed, and the other on friday, the day on which he was crucified. both the english and american churches have perpetuated this custom by appointing wednesday and friday of each week as litany days. western church.--a term frequently met with in church history and denoting the churches which formerly made part of the western empire of rome, _i.e._, the church in western europe,--italy, spain, france, etc. the church of england is also included under this term as being a branch of the catholic and apostolic church. whitsun day.--a high festival observed in the church on the fiftieth day after easter, in commemoration of the outpouring of the holy spirit upon the apostles on the day of pentecost as "they were all with one accord in one place" in jerusalem. whitsun day is the birthday of the christian church, and as such it has been commemorated for nearly two thousand years by christian people and observed by them with holy joy and deep thanksgiving for the fulfilment of our lord's promise to send the comforter to his comfortless people. { } by the devotions of whitsun day we have brought to our remembrance, in the most beautiful and striking manner, the operations of god by the spirit's power. by proper psalms, proper lessons and eucharistic scriptures, and by proper preface in the communion service, we learn how that in the holy ghost and his presence in the church we have the great power and renewing grace of god made availing to us. the ecclesiastical color is red as symbolical of the "cloven tongues like as of fire," in which form the holy ghost lighted on the head of each of the apostles. (see holy ghost.) as to the derivation of the word "whitsun" there seems to be great uncertainty and difference of opinion. some derive it from the word _white_, shortened to "whit," in reference to the diffusions of light and knowledge which on this day were shed upon the apostles, in order to the enlightening of the world; also in reference to this being the time of baptism in the ancient church, each candidate being clothed with white garments. others derive it from the old saxon word _wit_, meaning wisdom which is the special gift of the holy ghost. again others derive it from the word _pentecost_, the original name of the festival, through the german _pfingsten_, hence pingsten, changed in the saxon to wingsten, and this being corrupted into _whitsun_, meaning, therefore the same as pentecost, that is, the fiftieth day. (this last seems to be the most probable derivation as is seen in the use of the terms _whitsun_ monday, _whitsun_ tide, etc.) this festival is of especial interest to churchmen { } as it was on whitsun day, june th, , that the book of common prayer, in english, was first used. "that day was doubtless chosen," says a beautiful writer, "as a devout acknowledgment that the holy ghost was with the church of england in the important work then taken. may he ever preserve these devotional offices from the attacks of enmity or _unwisdom_, and continue them in that line of catholic unity wherein he has guided the church hitherto to keep them." whitsun monday; whitsun tuesday.--two days observed with great solemnity as the continuation of the high festival of whitsun day. for the origin and appointment of these days see easter monday and tuesday. whitsun tide.--the week beginning with whitsun day is so called. during this week the whitsun ember days are observed, (wednesday, friday, and saturday), as a preparation for trinity sunday, one of the stated times of ordination. wine.--one of the elements used in the celebration of the holy communion as our lord commanded. it is to be noticed that unfermented grape juice, raisin water, and the like do not constitute the proper element in the holy communion, and if these are used the sacrament is not valid. in the general convention which met in chicago in , the house of bishops declared by resolution that "the use of unfermented wine was unwarranted by the example of our lord, and contrary to the custom of the catholic church." this was still more strongly affirmed by the lambeth conference which met in , in the { } following resolution: "that the bishops assembled in this conference declare that the use of unfermented juice of the grape or any other liquid other than true wine diluted or undiluted, as the element in the administration of the cup in holy communion, is unwarranted by the example of our lord and is an unauthorized departure from the custom of the catholic church." this declaration by both these bodies was called forth by the agitation of the "temperance people." woman's auxiliary, the.--this is a society, as its name indicates, composed of the women of the church which acts as an auxiliary to the domestic and foreign missionary society (which see), and by the labors and generous gifts of its members supplements the work of the general society. there is also a junior department including the younger women of the church who have become interested in missionary work. besides systematic efforts to raise money for the work of missions, the members prepare boxes of clothing and household necessities for the families of missionaries. the auxiliary is very helpful and has enlisted the faithful labors of christian women in fifty-nine dioceses and twenty-one missionary districts. an idea of the work accomplished by this organization may be gained by considering the report made for the year ending september st, , from which it is learned that the woman's auxiliary contributed that year the noble sum of $ , . , and prepared and sent out , boxes valued at $ , . , making a total for the year of $ , . . it may be interesting to note that the united offering placed { } on the altar by the woman's auxiliary at the triennial meeting held in san francisco during the general convention of , amounted to the handsome sum of $ , . . the headquarters of the society are in the church missions house, new york city. word, the.--the name given to our blessed lord by st. john in the beginning of his gospel, to set forth the preexistence and divinity of the son of god and the creation of the world by him. pearson on the creed makes the following comment: "the jews were constantly taught that the word of god was the same with god, and that by that word all things were made. and therefore, st. john delivered so great a mystery so briefly, as speaking to those who at once understood him. only what they knew not was that this word was made flesh, and that this word made flesh was jesus christ." the greek for "the word" is _logos_. words on the cross, the seven.--our blessed lord was nailed to the cross at nine o'clock in the morning and hanged thereon until three o'clock, when he died. during these six hours of his crucifixion he uttered seven sayings, called the _seven words from the cross_; they are as follows: . "father, forgive them; for they know not what they do." . "to-day thou shalt be with me in paradise." . "woman, behold thy son." "behold thy mother." . "my god, my god, why hast thou forsaken me?" . "i thirst." { } . "it is finished." . "father, into thy hands i commend my spirit." (see three hours' service.) worship.--our word _worship_ is the modern form of the early english word _worthship_. and while the word was originally used to denote honor or respect paid to any one worthy of it, it came in time to be used exclusively of the giving of honor to god, of which he above all others is worthy. thus we have the word applied almost exclusively to what we now call public worship. by this is meant the united homage of the members of the church rendered to god as their almighty king. and it is to be noted that whilst god accepts the worship of each individual or family, yet he loves more the public worship of his church, for we read in the book of psalms, "the lord loveth the gates of zion more than all the dwellings of jacob." while this is very manifest to any careful student of the bible, yet in these our days there is nothing so misunderstood as the nature and obligation of _public worship_. so much so is this the case it has been declared that worship is a "lost art." this has come to pass, no doubt, from the misapprehension of the purpose of this "assembling of ourselves together." the common idea is that we go to church to "hear preaching." but preaching is not worship, nor is it the chief purpose of our coming together in the house of god each lord's day. we come together _to worship_, and the true idea of worship is to give, to render homage. worship is an unselfish offering. it is giving god the praise. it is the grateful homage of grateful creatures to him who { } has blessed them and preserved them. preaching is but an incident of such an assembly gathered for such a purpose, and oftentimes is not really necessary. it is also to be noticed that the church's true worship is the holy communion; all other services are but adjuncts to the one service appointed by our lord himself. in the primitive church an ordinary christian would not have considered that he had kept the lord's day as a day of worship if he had not attended a celebration of the holy communion. when, therefore, our people grasp these scriptural ideas, then no longer can it be said that worship is a "lost art" among the american people. (see holy communion; also responsive service.) x x.--the letter x resembles the shape of the cross of st. andrew, which has come into quite prominent notice as being the badge of the brotherhood of st. andrew (which see). x p.--these letters belong under this head only in appearance as they are in reality the first two letters of the greek word _christos_, meaning "christ." the x is the greek letter _chi_ and is equivalent to the english letters "ch"; the p is called _rho_ and is the same as the letter "r;" they thus represent the first three letters of the word _christ_. these two greek letters are used in church decorations either separately or as a monogram, as a symbol or emblem of our lord. { } y y cross.--by reason of its shape, the cross embroidered on the chasuble (which see) is called the y cross, and is intended to represent the outstretched arms of our blessed lord on the cross, and symbolizes the sacrifice which he there offered for the sins of the whole world, of which the holy eucharist is the perpetual memorial. year.--(see christian year.) yule.--the old english name for christmas (which see). a word of doubtful origin. yule tide.--the season or time of christmas. z zealot.--one of a fanatical jewish sect, which prevailed in the time of our lord. in the new testament, this name is given to one of our lord's apostles, namely, st. simon (which see). zuchetto.--the name give to a skull cap worn by the clergy instead of the biretta; when worn by a priest the color is black, but that worn by a bishop is purple. { } index. ablutions absolution absolution, declaration of absolve abstinence acolyte, his duties adult baptism advent, season of advent sunday affusion agape age for confirmation agnus dei aisle alb alleluia all saints' day almanac, church alms bason alpha and omega altar altar cross altar lights altar linen altar rail altar vessels. see vessels, sacred ambulatory american church american church, meaning of the term amice anaphora andrew, saint angel, one of n. t. names for bishop angels. see holy angels anglican church anglican communion anglo catholic annual address, the bishop's, annunciation, the anointing the sick antependium anthem antiphon. see anthem antiphonal apocalypse, the apocrypha apostle apostles' creed doctrine apostolate apostolic fathers. see fathers, apostolic succession apse apsidal archbishop archdeacon { } articles of religion, xxxix, articles of religion not a creed, ascension day ascription ash wednesday assistant minister banners banns of marriage baptism, adult. see adult baptism baptism, holy baptism, conditional baptism, infant. see infant baptism baptism, private baptism should be administered in church baptismal regeneration. see regeneration baptismal shell baptistry barnabas, saint bartholomew, saint bason. see alms bason belfry benedic, anima mea benedicite benediction benedictus betrothal bible, the english bible reading church , bidding prayer biretta birthday of the church bishop bishop's charge bishop coadjutor bishop consecrated by not less than three bishops bishop, derivation of the word bishop, election of bishop, missionary bishop, the presiding. see presiding bishop bishop's resignation. see jurisdiction, resignation of, bishop's visitation bishopric black blessed virgin mary blessing church furniture blessing of peace board of managers board of missions bounden duty bowing bowing at the name of jesus , breaking of the bread brotherhood of st andrew burial burial office when not to be used burse calendar origin of candidate candlemas canon law of scripture of the liturgy { } canonical canonical hours canonical residence canticle cantoris cardinal virtues. see virtues, cardinal cassock catechism divisions of an unfinished fragment catechumen cathedral catholic celebrant ceremonies. see rites and ceremonies chalice chalice veil chancel chancellor change of church name chantry chasuble childermas chimere choir choir, the vested. see surpliced choir choral service. see even song choral service not "romish" christen, to christian christian name. see name, christian christian unity. see unity, church christian year, divisions of, , christian's new year's day christmas day church an institution .... introduced into britain, building fund ... catholic chronology club colors congress militant. see church catholic missions house of england not founded by henry the eighth , , temperance society wardens year, see christian year year preaches the gospel churching circumcision, the clergy clerical cloister coadjutor. see bishop coadjutor collect comfortable words commendatory prayer commandments. see decalogue common prayer, meaning of communion, holy. see holy communion { } communion of saints compline. see canonical hours confirmation confirmation not joining the church consecrate consecration, prayer of of church buildings of first bishop on american soil convention convocation cope corporal cotta council credence creed cross, the crucifier cruets crypt curate daily prayer, the dalmatic daughters of the king days in holy week, their significance days of obligation, list of deacon deaconess dean decalogue translation of decalogue when added to communion office decani dedication, feast of deposition deprecations descent into hell diaconate dies irae digest of canons list of titles dimissory letter diocesan diocesan convention diocesan missions diocese diptychs discretion, years of dispensation divine liturgy. see holy communion divine service divisions among christians not sanctioned by the bible domestic and foreign missionary society domestic missions. see d. and f. society domenical letter dossal doxology duly, its ecclesiastical meaning eagle early communion { } east, turning to, origin of custom easter day easter even easter monday and tuesday easter tide eastern church eastward position. see east, turning to ecclesiastical year. see christian year ecumenical elder elements ember days emblems emmanuel epact, the epiphany, feast of commemoration threefold sundays after episcopacy episcopal ring episcopate epistle of st. barnabas epistle, the epistle side epistoler eschatology espousal essentials of christian truth and order eucharist eucharistic lights. see altar lights eucharistic vestments evangelical evangelical canticles evangelists eve or even even song examination for holy orders, list of excommunication exhortation expectation sunday expectation week extension of the incarnation fair linen cloth fair white linen cloth faith faithful, the faldstool fasting fasting communion fasts, table of fathers, the feasts or festivals feria filioque first american bishop first principle of english reformation fish flagon font foreign missions. see d. and f. society forms forty days, the great fourth sunday in lent fraction free and open churches frequent communion { } friday as obligatory as sunday, frontal fruits of the spirit. see spirit, fruits of funerals gehenna general clergy relief fund general confession, the general convention general councils, list of , general thanksgiving general theological seminary generally necessary genuflexion ghost ghostly ghost, the holy. see holy ghost gifts (sevenfold) of the holy ghost girdle girls' friendly society gloria in excelsis gloria patri not a vain repetition gloria tibi god fathers and mothers. see sponsors golden number good friday good shepherd, sunday of gospel--meaning of the word gospel hymns gospels, the four gospel, the holy gospel side gospeller government, church. see episcopacy gown, the black grace grace of baptism threefold gradine gradual greek church. see eastern church green gregorian music growth of the church , guardian angels. see holy angels guild habit hades hallelujah. see alleluia heaven hell heresy heretic high celebration historic episcopate historiographer holy angels holy communion every lord's day holy days and seasons. see christian year holy ghost, the procession of holy innocents' day { } holy name, the holy orders holy table. see altar holy thursday holy week homilies, the hood hosanna hours of prayer. see canonical hours house of bishops house of god housel humble access, prayer of hymn board hymnal, the hymns hypothetical form ichthus i. h. s immersion immovable feasts imposition of hands incarnation, the incense incumbent infant baptism inhibit innocents. see holy innocents' day i. n. r. i. institution, office, of letter of words of instruction intercessions of the litany intermediate state intonation intone introit invitatory invocation, the before the sermon james (st.) the great james (st.) the less jesus, the holy name of derivation of the word john baptist, saint john evangelist, saint joining the church jubilate deo jude, saint jurisdiction, episcopal missionary resignation of justification, cause of kalendar. see calendar keys of the church keys, power of the kindred, table of kingdom of god kissing the stole kneeling kyrie lady day laity why so called lamb and flag { } lambeth conference lammas day last things, the four lauds lay baptism layman lay reader laying on of hands lectern lectionary lent, season of why observed forty days, sundays in lesser litany lessons, the letter dimissory. see dimissory letter of orders of transfer lights on the altar linen cloth, see fair linen cloth litany, the divisions of desk liturgical colors. see church colors liturgy liturgies, table of lord's day, the not the sabbath lord's prayer, the when said by priest alone lord's supper, wrong use of the term lord's table, the low celebration low sunday luke, festival of saint lych gate magna charta magnificat daily memorial of incarnation maniple manual acts mark, feast of saint marriage sacramental vow mary. see blessed virgin mary mass matthew, feast of saint matthias, feast of saint matins matrimony, holy. see marriage maundy thursday meditation membership, church mensa mercy to babes michael (st.) and all angels mid lent sunday. see fourth sunday in lent militant, church ministry, the ministry of the holy angels , miserere missal mission parochial missionary { } missionary bishop. see bishop, missionary council, see d. and f. society missioner missions mitre mixed chalice mode of baptism , morning prayer morse mothering sunday movable feasts and fasts music, church mystery mystical body of christ n. or m. name, the holy. see holy name the christian why it is given nathanael nativity of our lord nave neophyte new birth nicea, council of did not originate the creed nicene creed when introduced into liturgy no strolling, irresponsible preachers nocturns non-conformists nones north side nowell nunc dimittis oblation obligation. see days of obligation obsecrations occasional offices prayers occurrence of holy days octave octaves set forth in prayer book offertory, the sentences office, ecclesiastical meaning offices of a pastor open churches. see free and open churches ordain ordination order--its ecclesiastical meaning orders, holy. see holy orders ordinal, the ordinary organizations, church organizing a parish organs orientation ornaments orphrey orthodox { } pall palm sunday paraclete paradise parish partakes of the character of its people house register parishioner parochial mission. see mission, parochial parson paschal passion sunday tide week pastor pastoral letter staff paten paul, conversion of saint penance penitential office penitential psalms, their meaning penitential psalms used on ash wednesday pentecost perpetual virginity of blessed virgin mary peter, festival of saint philip (st.) and st. james' day, piscina plain song pontifical. see ordinal post communion postulant postures in public worship prayer five parts of for church militant . . for unity prayer book, the cross first used in english prayer book of eastern origin , prayers for the dead precentor pre lenten season presbyter--how shortened to priest presentation of christ presiding bishop presiding bishops, list of priest priesthood of the laity primate prime prisoners. see visitation of prisoners private baptism. see baptism, private proanaphora pro-cathedral procession of the holy ghost processional cross proper lessons proper preface proper psalms protestant protestant episcopal. see american church provinces { } psalter, the should be sung translation of purification, the purificator purpose of english reformation quadragesima quadrilateral, the qualifications for holy orders, quick quicunque vult quiet day quinquagesima rail. see altar rail ratification, the real presence reception into the church. see baptism, private recessional rector head of the parish rectory red letter day refreshment sunday regeneration and conversion not synonymous register. see parish register, registrar religion of english-speaking people religious orders reproaches, the reredos responds responses responsive service retable retreat reunion of christendom desired revised bible ring rites and ceremonies ritual ritualism rochet rogation days special prayers, rogation sunday rood screen rubric sabbaoth sabbath sacraments necessary to salvation sacred vessels. see vessels, sacred sacrifice sacristan sacristy saint saints' days sanctuary schism between east and west , scriptures in prayer book seasons, church. see christian year { } sedilia see sentences, the opening septuagesima server sexagesima sexts. see canonical hours shell. see baptismal shell shrove tuesday sick. see visitation of sick sign of the cross. see cross simon (st.) and st. jude's day, sisterhoods. see religious orders six points of ritual spirit. see ghost, and holy ghost gifts of. see gifts of holy ghost fruits of the spirit of missions sponsors stalls standing committee state of salvation stephen, festival of saint stir up sunday stole subdeacon substance suffrages sunday. see lord's day sunday letter. see dominical letter sunday schools super altar sureties. see sponsors surname, meaning of word surplice surpliced choir sursum corda symbol synod table, see lord's table te deum old tradition, concerning ten commandments. see decalogue temperance. see church temperance society ter sanctus terms of christian unity testimonials testimony to scriptural character of confirmation , thanksgiving. see general thanksgiving thanksgiving day first held theological virtues the baptized a holy nation thirty-nine articles. see articles of religion thomas (st.) the apostle three hours service thurifer thursday, holy. see ascension day thursday in holy week. see maundy tierce. see canonical hours time of keeping easter, when settled times of baptism ordination { } tradition transepts transfiguration, the translations of the bible trefoil trine immersion trinity, the holy season sunday trisagion triumphal hymn triumphant, the church tunicle turning to the east. see east, turning to twelfth day unction. see anointing the sick undivided church union jack--its origin unity, church, unleavened bread use, its ecclesiastical meaning, veil. see chalice veil veni creator spiritus venite exultemus verger versicles vespers vessels, sacred vestments, list of vestry, the vestries not found in primitive church via media viaticum vicar vigils vincent, rule of saint virgin mary. see blessed virgin mary virtues, the cardinal theological. see theological virtues visitation, episcopal. see bishop's visitation visitation of prisoners sick vow vows of baptism , religious orders wafer bread. see unleavened bread wardens. see church wardens warnings water wedding ring. see ring wednesday western church what constitutes a valid sacrament what constitutes an ecumenical council whitsun day derivation of the word { } whitsun monday and tuesday, tide whole duty of man why bishops are not now called apostles why we go to church wine, declaration concerning, witness and keeper of holy writ woman's auxiliary word, the words on the cross worship x the cross of st. andrew x p y cross year. see christian year yule tide zealot zuccheto proofreading team. cicero's tusculan disputations; also, treatises on the nature of the gods, and on the commonwealth. literally translated, chiefly by c. d. yonge. new york: harper & brothers, publishers, franklin square. . harper's new classical library. comprising literal translations of cÆsar. virgil. sallust. horace. cicero's orations. cicero's offices &c. cicero on oratory and orators. cicero's tusculan disputations, the republic, and the nature of the gods. terence. tacitus. livy. vols. juvenal. xenophon. homer's iliad. homer's odyssey. herodotus. demosthenes. vols. thucidides. Æschylus. sophocles. euripides. vols. plato. [select dialogues.] mo, cloth, $ . per volume. harper & brothers _will send either of the above works by mail, postage prepaid, to any part of the united states, on receipt of the price_. note. the greater portion of the republic was previously translated by francis barham, esq., and published in . although ably performed, it was not sufficiently close for the purpose of the "classical library," and was therefore placed in the hands of the present editor for revision, as well as for collation with recent texts. this has occasioned material alterations and additions. the treatise "on the nature of the gods" is a revision of that usually ascribed to the celebrated benjamin franklin. contents. _tusculan disputations_ _on the nature of the gods_ _on the commonwealth_ the tusculan disputations. introduction. in the year a.u.c. , and the sixty-second year of cicero's age, his daughter, tullia, died in childbed; and her loss afflicted cicero to such a degree that he abandoned all public business, and, leaving the city, retired to asterra, which was a country house that he had near antium; where, after a while, he devoted himself to philosophical studies, and, besides other works, he published his treatise de finibus, and also this treatise called the tusculan disputations, of which middleton gives this concise description: "the first book teaches us how to contemn the terrors of death, and to look upon it as a blessing rather than an evil; "the second, to support pain and affliction with a manly fortitude; "the third, to appease all our complaints and uneasinesses under the accidents of life; "the fourth, to moderate all our other passions; "and the fifth explains the sufficiency of virtue to make men happy." it was his custom in the opportunities of his leisure to take some friends with him into the country, where, instead of amusing themselves with idle sports or feasts, their diversions were wholly speculative, tending to improve the mind and enlarge the understanding. in this manner he now spent five days at his tusculan villa in discussing with his friends the several questions just mentioned. for, after employing the mornings in declaiming and rhetorical exercises, they used to retire in the afternoon into a gallery, called the academy, which he had built for the purpose of philosophical conferences, where, after the manner of the greeks, he held a school, as they called it, and invited the company to call for any subject that they desired to hear explained, which being proposed accordingly by some of the audience became immediately the argument of that day's debate. these five conferences, or dialogues, he collected afterward into writing in the very words and manner in which they really passed; and published them under the title of his tusculan disputations, from the name of the villa in which they were held. * * * * * book i. on the contempt of death. i. at a time when i had entirely, or to a great degree, released myself from my labors as an advocate, and from my duties as a senator, i had recourse again, brutus, principally by your advice, to those studies which never had been out of my mind, although neglected at times, and which after a long interval i resumed; and now, since the principles and rules of all arts which relate to living well depend on the study of wisdom, which is called philosophy, i have thought it an employment worthy of me to illustrate them in the latin tongue, not because philosophy could not be understood in the greek language, or by the teaching of greek masters; but it has always been my opinion that our countrymen have, in some instances, made wiser discoveries than the greeks, with reference to those subjects which they have considered worthy of devoting their attention to, and in others have improved upon their discoveries, so that in one way or other we surpass them on every point; for, with regard to the manners and habits of private life, and family and domestic affairs, we certainly manage them with more elegance, and better than they did; and as to our republic, that our ancestors have, beyond all dispute, formed on better customs and laws. what shall i say of our military affairs; in which our ancestors have been most eminent in valor, and still more so in discipline? as to those things which are attained not by study, but nature, neither greece, nor any nation, is comparable to us; for what people has displayed such gravity, such steadiness, such greatness of soul, probity, faith--such distinguished virtue of every kind, as to be equal to our ancestors. in learning, indeed, and all kinds of literature, greece did excel us, and it was easy to do so where there was no competition; for while among the greeks the poets were the most ancient species of learned men--since homer and hesiod lived before the foundation of rome, and archilochus[ ] was a contemporary of romulus--we received poetry much later. for it was about five hundred and ten years after the building of rome before livius[ ] published a play in the consulship of c. claudius, the son of cæcus, and m. tuditanus, a year before the birth of ennius, who was older than plautus and nævius. ii. it was, therefore, late before poets were either known or received among us; though we find in cato de originibus that the guests used, at their entertainments, to sing the praises of famous men to the sound of the flute; but a speech of cato's shows this kind of poetry to have been in no great esteem, as he censures marcus nobilior for carrying poets with him into his province; for that consul, as we know, carried ennius with him into Ætolia. therefore the less esteem poets were in, the less were those studies pursued; though even then those who did display the greatest abilities that way were not very inferior to the greeks. do we imagine that if it had been considered commendable in fabius,[ ] a man of the highest rank, to paint, we should not have had many polycleti and parrhasii? honor nourishes art, and glory is the spur with all to studies; while those studies are always neglected in every nation which are looked upon disparagingly. the greeks held skill in vocal and instrumental music as a very important accomplishment, and therefore it is recorded of epaminondas, who, in my opinion, was the greatest man among the greeks, that he played excellently on the flute; and themistocles, some years before, was deemed ignorant because at an entertainment he declined the lyre when it was offered to him. for this reason musicians flourished in greece; music was a general study; and whoever was unacquainted with it was not considered as fully instructed in learning. geometry was in high esteem with them, therefore none were more honorable than mathematicians. but we have confined this art to bare measuring and calculating. iii. but, on the contrary, we early entertained an esteem for the orator; though he was not at first a man of learning, but only quick at speaking: in subsequent times he became learned; for it is reported that galba, africanus, and lælius were men of learning; and that even cato, who preceded them in point of time, was a studious man: then succeeded the lepidi, carbo, and gracchi, and so many great orators after them, down to our own times, that we were very little, if at all, inferior to the greeks. philosophy has been at a low ebb even to this present time, and has had no assistance from our own language, and so now i have undertaken to raise and illustrate it, in order that, as i have been of service to my countrymen, when employed on public affairs, i may, if possible, be so likewise in my retirement; and in this i must take the more pains, because there are already many books in the latin language which are said to be written inaccurately, having been composed by excellent men, only not of sufficient learning; for, indeed, it is possible that a man may think well, and yet not be able to express his thoughts elegantly; but for any one to publish thoughts which he can neither arrange skilfully nor illustrate so as to entertain his reader, is an unpardonable abuse of letters and retirement: they, therefore, read their books to one another, and no one ever takes them up but those who wish to have the same license for careless writing allowed to themselves. wherefore, if oratory has acquired any reputation from my industry, i shall take the more pains to open the fountains of philosophy, from which all my eloquence has taken its rise. iv. but, as aristotle,[ ] a man of the greatest genius, and of the most various knowledge, being excited by the glory of the rhetorician isocrates,[ ] commenced teaching young men to speak, and joined philosophy with eloquence: so it is my design not to lay aside my former study of oratory, and yet to employ myself at the same time in this greater and more fruitful art; for i have always thought that to be able to speak copiously and elegantly on the most important questions was the most perfect philosophy. and i have so diligently applied myself to this pursuit, that i have already ventured to have a school like the greeks. and lately when you left us, having many of my friends about me, i attempted at my tusculan villa what i could do in that way; for as i formerly used to practise declaiming, which nobody continued longer than myself, so this is now to be the declamation of my old age. i desired any one to propose a question which he wished to have discussed, and then i argued that point either sitting or walking; and so i have compiled the scholæ, as the greeks call them, of five days, in as many books. we proceeded in this manner: when he who had proposed the subject for discussion had said what he thought proper, i spoke against him; for this is, you know, the old and socratic method of arguing against another's opinion; for socrates thought that thus the truth would more easily be arrived at. but to give you a better notion of our disputations, i will not barely send you an account of them, but represent them to you as they were carried on; therefore let the introduction be thus: v. _a._ to me death seems to be an evil. _m._ what, to those who are already dead? or to those who must die? _a._ to both. _m._ it is a misery, then, because an evil? _a._ certainly. _m._ then those who have already died, and those who have still got to die, are both miserable? _a._ so it appears to me. _m._ then all are miserable? _a._ every one. _m._ and, indeed, if you wish to be consistent, all that are already born, or ever shall be, are not only miserable, but always will be so; for should you maintain those only to be miserable, you would not except any one living, for all must die; but there should be an end of misery in death. but seeing that the dead are miserable, we are born to eternal misery, for they must of consequence be miserable who died a hundred thousand years ago; or rather, all that have ever been born. _a._ so, indeed, i think. _m._ tell me, i beseech you, are you afraid of the three-headed cerberus in the shades below, and the roaring waves of cocytus, and the passage over acheron, and tantalus expiring with thirst, while the water touches his chin; and sisyphus, who sweats with arduous toil in vain the steepy summit of the mount to gain? perhaps, too, you dread the inexorable judges, minos and rhadamanthus; before whom neither l. crassus nor m. antonius can defend you; and where, since the cause lies before grecian judges, you will not even be able to employ demosthenes; but you must plead for yourself before a very great assembly. these things perhaps you dread, and therefore look on death as an eternal evil. vi. _a._ do you take me to be so imbecile as to give credit to such things? _m._ what, do you not believe them? _a._ not in the least. _m._ i am sorry to hear that. _a._ why, i beg? _m._ because i could have been very eloquent in speaking against them. _a._ and who could not on such a subject? or what trouble is it to refute these monstrous inventions of the poets and painters?[ ] _m._ and yet you have books of philosophers full of arguments against these. _a._ a great waste of time, truly! for who is so weak as to be concerned about them? _m._ if, then, there is no one miserable in the infernal regions, there can be no one there at all. _a._ i am altogether of that opinion. _m._ where, then, are those you call miserable? or what place do they inhabit? for, if they exist at all, they must be somewhere. _a._ i, indeed, am of opinion that they are nowhere. _m._ then they have no existence at all. _a._ even so, and yet they are miserable for this very reason, that they have no existence. _m._ i had rather now have you afraid of cerberus than speak thus inaccurately. _a._ in what respect? _m._ because you admit him to exist whose existence you deny with the same breath. where now is your sagacity? when you say any one is miserable, you say that he who does not exist, does exist. _a._ i am not so absurd as to say that. _m._ what is it that you do say, then? _a._ i say, for instance, that marcus crassus is miserable in being deprived of such great riches as his by death; that cn. pompey is miserable in being taken from such glory and honor; and, in short, that all are miserable who are deprived of this light of life. _m._ you have returned to the same point, for to be miserable implies an existence; but you just now denied that the dead had any existence: if, then, they have not, they can be nothing; and if so, they are not even miserable. _a._ perhaps i do not express what i mean, for i look upon this very circumstance, not to exist after having existed, to be very miserable. _m._ what, more so than not to have existed at all? therefore, those who are not yet born are miserable because they are not; and we ourselves, if we are to be miserable after death, were miserable before we were born: but i do not remember that i was miserable before i was born; and i should be glad to know, if your memory is better, what you recollect of yourself before you were born. vii. _a._ you are pleasant: as if i had said that those men are miserable who are not born, and not that they are so who are dead. _m._ you say, then, that they are so? _a._ yes; i say that because they no longer exist after having existed they are miserable. _m._ you do not perceive that you are asserting contradictions; for what is a greater contradiction, than that that should be not only miserable, but should have any existence at all, which does not exist? when you go out at the capene gate and see the tombs of the calatini, the scipios, servilii, and metelli, do you look on them as miserable? _a._ because you press me with a word, henceforward i will not say they are miserable absolutely, but miserable on this account, because they have no existence. _m._ you do not say, then, "m. crassus is miserable," but only "miserable m. crassus." _a._ exactly so. _m._ as if it did not follow that whatever you speak of in that manner either is or is not. are you not acquainted with the first principles of logic? for this is the first thing they lay down, whatever is asserted (for that is the best way that occurs to me, at the moment, of rendering the greek term [greek: axiôma]; if i can think of a more accurate expression hereafter, i will use it), is asserted as being either true or false. when, therefore, you say, "miserable m. crassus," you either say this, "m. crassus is miserable," so that some judgment may be made whether it is true or false, or you say nothing at all. _a._ well, then, i now own that the dead are not miserable, since you have drawn from me a concession that they who do not exist at all can not be miserable. what then? we that are alive, are we not wretched, seeing we must die? for what is there agreeable in life, when we must night and day reflect that, at some time or other, we must die? viii. _m._ do you not, then, perceive how great is the evil from which you have delivered human nature? _a._ by what means? _m._ because, if to die were miserable to the dead, to live would be a kind of infinite and eternal misery. now, however, i see a goal, and when i have reached it, there is nothing more to be feared; but you seem to me to follow the opinion of epicharmus,[ ] a man of some discernment, and sharp enough for a sicilian. _a._ what opinion? for i do not recollect it. _m._ i will tell you if i can in latin; for you know i am no more used to bring in latin sentences in a greek discourse than greek in a latin one. _a._ and that is right enough. but what is that opinion of epicharmus? _m._ i would not die, but yet am not concerned that i shall be dead. _a._ i now recollect the greek; but since you have obliged me to grant that the dead are not miserable, proceed to convince me that it is not miserable to be under a necessity of dying. _m._ that is easy enough; but i have greater things in hand. _a._ how comes that to be so easy? and what are those things of more consequence? _m._ thus: because, if there is no evil after death, then even death itself can be none; for that which immediately succeeds that is a state where you grant that there is no evil: so that even to be obliged to die can be no evil, for that is only the being obliged to arrive at a place where we allow that no evil is. _a._ i beg you will be more explicit on this point, for these subtle arguments force me sooner to admissions than to conviction. but what are those more important things about which you say that you are occupied? _m._ to teach you, if i can, that death is not only no evil, but a good. _a._ i do not insist on that, but should be glad to hear you argue it, for even though you should not prove your point, yet you will prove that death is no evil. but i will not interrupt you; i would rather hear a continued discourse. _m._ what, if i should ask you a question, would you not answer? _a._ that would look like pride; but i would rather you should not ask but where necessity requires. ix. _m._ i will comply with your wishes, and explain as well as i can what you require; but not with any idea that, like the pythian apollo, what i say must needs be certain and indisputable, but as a mere man, endeavoring to arrive at probabilities by conjecture, for i have no ground to proceed further on than probability. those men may call their statements indisputable who assert that what they say can be perceived by the senses, and who proclaim themselves philosophers by profession. _a._ do as you please: we are ready to hear you. _m._ the first thing, then, is to inquire what death, which seems to be so well understood, really is; for some imagine death to be the departure of the soul from the body; others think that there is no such departure, but that soul and body perish together, and that the soul is extinguished with the body. of those who think that the soul does depart from the body, some believe in its immediate dissolution; others fancy that it continues to exist for a time; and others believe that it lasts forever. there is great dispute even what the soul is, where it is, and whence it is derived: with some, the heart itself (_cor_) seems to be the soul, hence the expressions, _excordes_, _vecordes_, _concordes;_ and that prudent nasica, who was twice consul, was called corculus, _i.e._, wise-heart; and Ælius sextus is described as _egregie_ cordatus _homo, catus Æliu' sextus_--that great _wise-hearted_ man, sage Ælius. empedocles imagines the blood, which is suffused over the heart, to be the soul; to others, a certain part of the brain seems to be the throne of the soul; others neither allow the heart itself, nor any portion of the brain, to be the soul, but think either that the heart is the seat and abode of the soul, or else that the brain is so. some would have the soul, or spirit, to be the _anima_, as our schools generally agree; and indeed the name signifies as much, for we use the expressions _animam agere_, to live; _animam efflare_, to expire; _animosi_, men of spirit; _bene animati_, men of right feeling; _exanimi sententia_, according to our real opinion; and the very word _animus_ is derived from _anima_. again, the soul seems to zeno the stoic to be fire. x. but what i have said as to the heart, the blood, the brain, air, or fire being the soul, are common opinions: the others are only entertained by individuals; and, indeed, there were many among the ancients who held singular opinions on this subject, of whom the latest was aristoxenus, a man who was both a musician and a philosopher. he maintained a certain straining of the body, like what is called harmony in music, to be the soul, and believed that, from the figure and nature of the whole body, various motions are excited, as sounds are from an instrument. he adhered steadily to his system, and yet he said something, the nature of which, whatever it was, had been detailed and explained a great while before by plato. xenocrates denied that the soul had any figure, or anything like a body; but said it was a number, the power of which, as pythagoras had fancied, some ages before, was the greatest in nature: his master, plato, imagined a threefold soul, a dominant portion of which--that is to say, reason--he had lodged in the head, as in a tower; and the other two parts--namely, anger and desire--he made subservient to this one, and allotted them distinct abodes, placing anger in the breast, and desire under the præcordia. but dicæarchus, in that discourse of some learned disputants, held at corinth, which he details to us in three books--in the first book introduces many speakers; and in the other two he introduces a certain pherecrates, an old man of phthia, who, as he said, was descended from deucalion; asserting, that there is in fact no such thing at all as a soul, but that it is a name without a meaning; and that it is idle to use the expression "animals," or "animated beings;" that neither men nor beasts have minds or souls, but that all that power by which we act or perceive is equally infused into every living creature, and is inseparable from the body, for if it were not, it would be nothing; nor is there anything whatever really existing except body, which is a single and simple thing, so fashioned as to live and have its sensations in consequence of the regulations of nature. aristotle, a man superior to all others, both in genius and industry (i always except plato), after having embraced these four known sorts of principles, from which all things deduce their origin, imagines that there is a certain fifth nature, from whence comes the soul; for to think, to foresee, to learn, to teach, to invent anything, and many other attributes of the same kind, such as to remember, to love, to hate, to desire, to fear, to be pleased or displeased--these, and others like them, exist, he thinks, in none of those first four kinds: on such account he adds a fifth kind, which has no name, and so by a new name he calls the soul [greek: endelecheia], as if it were a certain continued and perpetual motion. xi. if i have not forgotten anything unintentionally, these are the principal opinions concerning the soul. i have omitted democritus, a very great man indeed, but one who deduces the soul from the fortuitous concourse of small, light, and round substances; for, if you believe men of his school, there is nothing which a crowd of atoms cannot effect. which of these opinions is true, some god must determine. it is an important question for us, which has the most appearance of truth? shall we, then, prefer determining between them, or shall we return to our subject? _a._ i could wish both, if possible; but it is difficult to mix them: therefore, if without a discussion of them we can get rid of the fears of death, let us proceed to do so; but if this is not to be done without explaining the question about souls, let us have that now, and the other at another time. _m._ i take that plan to be the best, which i perceive you are inclined to; for reason will demonstrate that, whichever of the opinions which i have stated is true, it must follow, then, that death cannot be an evil; or that it must rather be something desirable; for if either the heart, or the blood, or the brain, is the soul, then certainly the soul, being corporeal, must perish with the rest of the body; if it is air, it will perhaps be dissolved; if it is fire, it will be extinguished; if it is aristoxenus's harmony, it will be put out of tune. what shall i say of dicæarchus, who denies that there is any soul? in all these opinions, there is nothing to affect any one after death; for all feeling is lost with life, and where there is no sensation, nothing can interfere to affect us. the opinions of others do indeed bring us hope; if it is any pleasure to you to think that souls, after they leave the body, may go to heaven as to a permanent home. _a._ i have great pleasure in that thought, and it is what i most desire; and even if it should not be so, i should still be very willing to believe it. _m._ what occasion have you, then, for my assistance? am i superior to plato in eloquence? turn over carefully his book that treats of the soul; you will have there all that you can want. _a._ i have, indeed, done that, and often; but, i know not how it comes to pass, i agree with it while i am reading it; but when i have laid down the book, and begin to reflect with myself on the immortality of the soul, all that agreement vanishes. _m._ how comes that? do you admit this--that souls either exist after death, or else that they also perish at the moment of death? _a._ i agree to that. and if they do exist, i admit that they are happy; but if they perish, i cannot suppose them to be unhappy, because, in fact, they have no existence at all. you drove me to that concession but just now. _m._ how, then, can you, or why do you, assert that you think that death is an evil, when it either makes us happy, in the case of the soul continuing to exist, or, at all events, not unhappy, in the case of our becoming destitute of all sensation? xii. _a._ explain, therefore, if it is not troublesome to you, first, if you can, that souls do exist after death; secondly, should you fail in that (and it is a very difficult thing to establish), that death is free from all evil; for i am not without my fears that this itself is an evil: i do not mean the immediate deprivation of sense, but the fact that we shall hereafter suffer deprivation. _m._ i have the best authority in support of the opinion you desire to have established, which ought, and generally has, great weight in all cases. and, first, i have all antiquity on that side, which the more near it is to its origin and divine descent, the more clearly, perhaps, on that account, did it discern the truth in these matters. this very doctrine, then, was adopted by all those ancients whom ennius calls in the sabine tongue casci; namely, that in death there was a sensation, and that, when men departed this life, they were not so entirely destroyed as to perish absolutely. and this may appear from many other circumstances, and especially from the pontifical rites and funeral obsequies, which men of the greatest genius would not have been so solicitous about, and would not have guarded from any injury by such severe laws, but from a firm persuasion that death was not so entire a destruction as wholly to abolish and destroy everything, but rather a kind of transmigration, as it were, and change of life, which was, in the case of illustrious men and women, usually a guide to heaven, while in that of others it was still confined to the earth, but in such a manner as still to exist. from this, and the sentiments of the romans, in heaven romulus with gods now lives, as ennius saith, agreeing with the common belief; hence, too, hercules is considered so great and propitious a god among the greeks, and from them he was introduced among us, and his worship has extended even to the very ocean itself. this is how it was that bacchus was deified, the offspring of semele; and from the same illustrious fame we receive castor and pollux as gods, who are reported not only to have helped the romans to victory in their battles, but to have been the messengers of their success. what shall we say of ino, the daughter of cadmus? is she not called leucothea by the greeks, and matuta by us? nay, more; is not the whole of heaven (not to dwell on particulars) almost filled with the offspring of men? should i attempt to search into antiquity, and produce from thence what the greek writers have asserted, it would appear that even those who are called their principal gods were taken from among men up into heaven. xiii. examine the sepulchres of those which are shown in greece; recollect, for you have been initiated, what lessons are taught in the mysteries; then will you perceive how extensive this doctrine is. but they who were not acquainted with natural philosophy (for it did not begin to be in vogue till many years later) had no higher belief than what natural reason could give them; they were not acquainted with the principles and causes of things; they were often induced by certain visions, and those generally in the night, to think that those men who had departed from this life were still alive. and this may further be brought as an irrefragable argument for us to believe that there are gods--that there never was any nation so barbarous, nor any people in the world so savage, as to be without some notion of gods. many have wrong notions of the gods, for that is the nature and ordinary consequence of bad customs, yet all allow that there is a certain divine nature and energy. nor does this proceed from the conversation of men, or the agreement of philosophers; it is not an opinion established by institutions or by laws; but, no doubt, in every case the consent of all nations is to be looked on as a law of nature. who is there, then, that does not lament the loss of his friends, principally from imagining them deprived of the conveniences of life? take away this opinion, and you remove with it all grief; for no one is afflicted merely on account of a loss sustained by himself. perhaps we may be sorry, and grieve a little; but that bitter lamentation and those mournful tears have their origin in our apprehensions that he whom we loved is deprived of all the advantages of life, and is sensible of his loss. and we are led to this opinion by nature, without any arguments or any instruction. xiv. but the greatest proof of all is, that nature herself gives a silent judgment in favor of the immortality of the soul, inasmuch as all are anxious, and that to a great degree, about the things which concern futurity: one plants what future ages shall enjoy, as statius saith in his synephebi. what is his object in doing so, except that he is interested in posterity? shall the industrious husbandman, then, plant trees the fruit of which he shall never see? and shall not the great man found laws, institutions, and a republic? what does the procreation of children imply, and our care to continue our names, and our adoptions, and our scrupulous exactness in drawing up wills, and the inscriptions on monuments, and panegyrics, but that our thoughts run on futurity? there is no doubt but a judgment may be formed of nature in general, from looking at each nature in its most perfect specimens; and what is a more perfect specimen of a man than those are who look on themselves as born for the assistance, the protection, and the preservation of others? hercules has gone to heaven; he never would have gone thither had he not, while among men, made that road for himself. these things are of old date, and have, besides, the sanction of universal religion. xv. what will you say? what do you imagine that so many and such great men of our republic, who have sacrificed their lives for its good, expected? do you believe that they thought that their names should not continue beyond their lives? none ever encountered death for their country but under a firm persuasion of immortality! themistocles might have lived at his ease; so might epaminondas; and, not to look abroad and among the ancients for instances, so might i myself. but, somehow or other there clings to our minds a certain presage of future ages; and this both exists most firmly, and appears most clearly, in men of the loftiest genius and greatest souls. take away this, and who would be so mad as to spend his life amidst toils and dangers? i speak of those in power. what are the poet's views but to be ennobled after death? what else is the object of these lines, behold old ennius here, who erst thy fathers' great exploits rehearsed? he is challenging the reward of glory from those men whose ancestors he himself had ennobled by his poetry. and in the same spirit he says, in another passage, let none with tears my funeral grace, for i claim from my works an immortality. why do i mention poets? the very mechanics are desirous of fame after death. why did phidias include a likeness of himself in the shield of minerva, when he was not allowed to inscribe his name on it? what do our philosophers think on the subject? do not they put their names to those very books which they write on the contempt of glory? if, then, universal consent is the voice of nature, and if it is the general opinion everywhere that those who have quitted this life are still interested in something, we also must subscribe to that opinion. and if we think that men of the greatest abilities and virtues see most clearly into the power of nature, because they themselves are her most perfect work, it is very probable that, as every great man is especially anxious to benefit posterity, there is something of which he himself will be sensible after death. xvi. but as we are led by nature to think there are gods, and as we discover, by reason, of what description they are, so, by the consent of all nations, we are induced to believe that our souls survive; but where their habitation is, and of what character they eventually are, must be learned from reason. the want of any certain reason on which to argue has given rise to the idea of the shades below, and to those fears which you seem, not without reason, to despise; for as our bodies fall to the ground, and are covered with earth (_humus_), from whence we derive the expression to be interred (_humari_), that has occasioned men to imagine that the dead continue, during the remainder of their existence, under ground; which opinion has drawn after it many errors, which the poets have increased; for the theatre, being frequented by a large crowd, among which are women and children, is wont to be greatly affected on hearing such pompous verses as these, lo! here i am, who scarce could gain this place, through stony mountains and a dreary waste; through cliffs, whose sharpen'd stones tremendous hung, where dreadful darkness spread itself around. and the error prevailed so much, though indeed at present it seems to me to be removed, that although men knew that the bodies of the dead had been burned, yet they conceived such things to be done in the infernal regions as could not be executed or imagined without a body; for they could not conceive how disembodied souls could exist; and, therefore, they looked out for some shape or figure. this was the origin of all that account of the dead in homer. this was the idea that caused my friend appius to frame his necromancy; and this is how there got about that idea of the lake of avernus, in my neighborhood, from whence the souls of undistinguish'd shape, clad in thick shade, rush from the open gate of acheron, vain phantoms of the dead. and they must needs have these appearances speak, which is not possible without a tongue, and a palate, and jaws, and without the help of lungs and sides, and without some shape or figure; for they could see nothing by their mind alone--they referred all to their eyes. to withdraw the mind from sensual objects, and abstract our thoughts from what we are accustomed to, is an attribute of great genius. i am persuaded, indeed, that there were many such men in former ages; but pherecydes[ ] the syrian is the first on record who said that the souls of men were immortal, and he was a philosopher of great antiquity, in the reign of my namesake tullius. his disciple pythagoras greatly confirmed this opinion, who came into italy in the reign of tarquin the proud; and all that country which is called great greece was occupied by his school, and he himself was held in high honor, and had the greatest authority; and the pythagorean sect was for many ages after in such great credit, that all learning was believed to be confined to that name. xvii. but i return to the ancients. they scarcely ever gave any reason for their opinion but what could be explained by numbers or definitions. it is reported of plato that he came into italy to make himself acquainted with the pythagoreans; and that when there, among others, he made an acquaintance with archytas[ ] and timæus,[ ] and learned from them all the tenets of the pythagoreans; and that he not only was of the same opinion with pythagoras concerning the immortality of the soul, but that he also brought reasons in support of it; which, if you have nothing to say against it, i will pass over, and say no more at present about all this hope of immortality. _a._ what, will you leave me when you have raised my expectations so high? i had rather, so help me hercules! be mistaken with plato, whom i know how much you esteem, and whom i admire myself, from what you say of him, than be in the right with those others. _m._ i commend you; for, indeed, i could myself willingly be mistaken in his company. do we, then, doubt, as we do in other cases (though i think here is very little room for doubt in this case, for the mathematicians prove the facts to us), that the earth is placed in the midst of the world, being, as it were, a sort of point, which they call a [greek: kentron], surrounded by the whole heavens; and that such is the nature of the four principles which are the generating causes of all things, that they have equally divided among them the constituents of all bodies; moreover, that earthy and humid bodies are carried at equal angles by their own weight and ponderosity into the earth and sea; that the other two parts consist, one of fire, and the other of air? as the two former are carried by their gravity and weight into the middle region of the world, so these, on the other hand, ascend by right lines into the celestial regions, either because, owing to their intrinsic nature, they are always endeavoring to reach the highest place, or else because lighter bodies are naturally repelled by heavier; and as this is notoriously the case, it must evidently follow that souls, when once they have departed from the body, whether they are animal (by which term i mean capable of breathing) or of the nature of fire, must mount upward. but if the soul is some number, as some people assert, speaking with more subtlety than clearness, or if it is that fifth nature, for which it would be more correct to say that we have not given a name to than that we do not correctly understand it--still it is too pure and perfect not to go to a great distance from the earth. something of this sort, then, we must believe the soul to be, that we may not commit the folly of thinking that so active a principle lies immerged in the heart or brain; or, as empedocles would have it, in the blood. xviii. we will pass over dicæarchus,[ ] with his contemporary and fellow-disciple aristoxenus,[ ] both indeed men of learning. one of them seems never even to have been affected with grief, as he could not perceive that he had a soul; while the other is so pleased with his musical compositions that he endeavors to show an analogy betwixt them and souls. now, we may understand harmony to arise from the intervals of sounds, whose various compositions occasion many harmonies; but i do not see how a disposition of members, and the figure of a body without a soul, can occasion harmony. he had better, learned as he is, leave these speculations to his master aristotle, and follow his own trade as a musician. good advice is given him in that greek proverb, apply your talents where you best are skill'd. i will have nothing at all to do with that fortuitous concourse of individual light and round bodies, notwithstanding democritus insists on their being warm and having breath, that is to say, life. but this soul, which is compounded of either of the four principles from which we assert that all things are derived, is of inflamed air, as seems particularly to have been the opinion of panætius, and must necessarily mount upward; for air and fire have no tendency downward, but always ascend; so should they be dissipated that must be at some distance from the earth; but should they remain, and preserve their original state, it is clearer still that they must be carried heavenward, and this gross and concrete air, which is nearest the earth, must be divided and broken by them; for the soul is warmer, or rather hotter, than that air, which i just now called gross and concrete: and this may be made evident from this consideration--that our bodies, being compounded of the earthy class of principles, grow warm by the heat of the soul. xix. we may add, that the soul can the more easily escape from this air, which i have often named, and break through it, because nothing is swifter than the soul; no swiftness is comparable to the swiftness of the soul, which, should it remain uncorrupt and without alteration, must necessarily be carried on with such velocity as to penetrate and divide all this atmosphere, where clouds, and rain, and winds are formed, which, in consequence of the exhalations from the earth, is moist and dark: but, when the soul has once got above this region, and falls in with, and recognizes, a nature like its own, it then rests upon fires composed of a combination of thin air and a moderate solar heat, and does not aim at any higher flight; for then, after it has attained a lightness and heat resembling its own, it moves no more, but remains steady, being balanced, as it were, between two equal weights. that, then, is its natural seat where it has penetrated to something like itself, and where, wanting nothing further, it may be supported and maintained by the same aliment which nourishes and maintains the stars. now, as we are usually incited to all sorts of desires by the stimulus of the body, and the more so as we endeavor to rival those who are in possession of what we long for, we shall certainly be happy when, being emancipated from that body, we at the same time get rid of these desires and this rivalry. and that which we do at present, when, dismissing all other cares, we curiously examine and look into anything, we shall then do with greater freedom; and we shall employ ourselves entirely in the contemplation and examination of things; because there is naturally in our minds a certain insatiable desire to know the truth, and the very region itself where we shall arrive, as it gives us a more intuitive and easy knowledge of celestial things, will raise our desires after knowledge. for it was this beauty of the heavens, as seen even here upon earth, which gave birth to that national and hereditary philosophy (as theophrastus calls it), which was thus excited to a desire of knowledge. but those persons will in a most especial degree enjoy this philosophy, who, while they were only inhabitants of this world and enveloped in darkness, were still desirous of looking into these things with the eye of their mind. xx. for if those men now think that they have attained something who have seen the mouth of the pontus, and those straits which were passed by the ship called argo, because, from argos she did chosen men convey, bound to fetch back the golden fleece, their prey; or those who have seen the straits of the ocean, where the swift waves divide the neighboring shores of europe, and of afric; what kind of sight do you imagine that will be when the whole earth is laid open to our view? and that, too, not only in its position, form, and boundaries, nor those parts of it only which are habitable, but those also that lie uncultivated, through the extremities of heat and cold to which they are exposed; for not even now is it with our eyes that we view what we see, for the body itself has no senses; but (as the naturalists, ay, and even the physicians assure us, who have opened our bodies, and examined them) there are certain perforated channels from the seat of the soul to the eyes, ears, and nose; so that frequently, when either prevented by meditation, or the force of some bodily disorder, we neither hear nor see, though our eyes and ears are open and in good condition; so that we may easily apprehend that it is the soul itself which sees and hears, and not those parts which are, as it were, but windows to the soul, by means of which, however, she can perceive nothing, unless she is on the spot, and exerts herself. how shall we account for the fact that by the same power of thinking we comprehend the most different things--as color, taste, heat, smell, and sound--which the soul could never know by her five messengers, unless every thing were referred to her, and she were the sole judge of all? and we shall certainly discover these things in a more clear and perfect degree when the soul is disengaged from the body, and has arrived at that goal to which nature leads her; for at present, notwithstanding nature has contrived, with the greatest skill, those channels which lead from the body to the soul, yet are they, in some way or other, stopped up with earthy and concrete bodies; but when we shall be nothing but soul, then nothing will interfere to prevent our seeing everything in its real substance and in its true character. xxi. it is true, i might expatiate, did the subject require it, on the many and various objects with which the soul will be entertained in those heavenly regions; when i reflect on which, i am apt to wonder at the boldness of some philosophers, who are so struck with admiration at the knowledge of nature as to thank, in an exulting manner, the first inventor and teacher of natural philosophy, and to reverence him as a god; for they declare that they have been delivered by his means from the greatest tyrants, a perpetual terror, and a fear that molested them by night and day. what is this dread--this fear? what old woman is there so weak as to fear these things, which you, forsooth, had you not been acquainted with natural philosophy, would stand in awe of? the hallow'd roofs of acheron, the dread of orcus, the pale regions of the dead. and does it become a philosopher to boast that he is not afraid of these things, and that he has discovered them to be false? and from this we may perceive how acute these men were by nature, who, if they had been left without any instruction, would have believed in these things. but now they have certainly made a very fine acquisition in learning that when the day of their death arrives, they will perish entirely. and if that really is the case--for i say nothing either way--what is there agreeable or glorious in it? not that i see any reason why the opinion of pythagoras and plato may not be true; but even although plato were to have assigned no reason for his opinion (observe how much i esteem the man), the weight of his authority would have borne me down; but he has brought so many reasons, that he appears to me to have endeavored to convince others, and certainly to have convinced himself. xxii. but there are many who labor on the other side of the question, and condemn souls to death, as if they were criminals capitally convicted; nor have they any other reason to allege why the immortality of the soul appears to them to be incredible, except that they are not able to conceive what sort of thing the soul can be when disentangled from the body; just as if they could really form a correct idea as to what sort of thing it is, even when it is in the body; what its form, and size, and abode are; so that were they able to have a full view of all that is now hidden from them in a living body, they have no idea whether the soul would be discernible by them, or whether it is of so fine a texture that it would escape their sight. let those consider this, who say that they are unable to form any idea of the soul without the body, and then they will see whether they can form any adequate idea of what it is when it is in the body. for my own part, when i reflect on the nature of the soul, it appears to me a far more perplexing and obscure question to determine what is its character while it is in the body--a place which, as it were, does not belong to it--than to imagine what it is when it leaves it, and has arrived at the free æther, which is, if i may so say, its proper, its own habitation. for unless we are to say that we cannot apprehend the character or nature of anything which we have never seen, we certainly may be able to form some notion of god, and of the divine soul when released from the body. dicæarchus, indeed, and aristoxenus, because it was hard to understand the existence and substance and nature of the soul, asserted that there was no such thing as a soul at all. it is, indeed, the most difficult thing imaginable to discern the soul by the soul. and this, doubtless, is the meaning of the precept of apollo, which advises every one to know himself. for i do not apprehend the meaning of the god to have been that we should understand our members, our stature, and form; for we are not merely bodies; nor, when i say these things to you, am i addressing myself to your body: when, therefore, he says, "know yourself," he says this, "inform yourself of the nature of your soul;" for the body is but a kind of vessel, or receptacle of the soul, and whatever your soul does is your own act. to know the soul, then, unless it had been divine, would not have been a precept of such excellent wisdom as to be attributed to a god; but even though the soul should not know of what nature itself is, will you say that it does not even perceive that it exists at all, or that it has motion? on which is founded that reason of plato's, which is explained by socrates in the phædrus, and inserted by me, in my sixth book of the republic. xxiii. "that which is always moved is eternal; but that which gives motion to something else, and is moved itself by some external cause, when that motion ceases, must necessarily cease to exist. that, therefore, alone, which is self-moved, because it is never forsaken by itself, can never cease to be moved. besides, it is the beginning and principle of motion to everything else; but whatever is a principle has no beginning, for all things arise from that principle, and it cannot itself owe its rise to anything else; for then it would not be a principle did it proceed from anything else. but if it has no beginning, it never will have any end; for a principle which is once extinguished cannot itself be restored by anything else, nor can it produce anything else from itself; inasmuch as all things must necessarily arise from some first cause. and thus it comes about that the first principle of motion must arise from that thing which is itself moved by itself; and that can neither have a beginning nor an end of its existence, for otherwise the whole heaven and earth would be overset, and all nature would stand still, and not be able to acquire any force by the impulse of which it might be first set in motion. seeing, then, that it is clear that whatever moves itself is eternal, can there be any doubt that the soul is so? for everything is inanimate which is moved by an external force; but everything which is animate is moved by an interior force, which also belongs to itself. for this is the peculiar nature and power of the soul; and if the soul be the only thing in the whole world which has the power of self-motion, then certainly it never had a beginning, and therefore it is eternal." now, should all the lower order of philosophers (for so i think they may be called who dissent from plato and socrates and that school) unite their force, they never would be able to explain anything so elegantly as this, nor even to understand how ingeniously this conclusion is drawn. the soul, then, perceives itself to have motion, and at the same time that it gets that perception, it is sensible that it derives that motion from its own power, and not from the agency of another; and it is impossible that it should ever forsake itself. and these premises compel you to allow its eternity, unless you have something to say against them. _a._ i should myself be very well pleased not to have even a thought arise in my mind against them, so much am i inclined to that opinion. xxiv. _m._ well, then, i appeal to you, if the arguments which prove that there is something divine in the souls of men are not equally strong? but if i could account for the origin of these divine properties, then i might also be able to explain how they might cease to exist; for i think i can account for the manner in which the blood, and bile, and phlegm, and bones, and nerves, and veins, and all the limbs, and the shape of the whole body, were put together and made; ay, and even as to the soul itself, were there nothing more in it than a principle of life, then the life of a man might be put upon the same footing as that of a vine or any other tree, and accounted for as caused by nature; for these things, as we say, live. besides, if desires and aversions were all that belonged to the soul, it would have them only in common with the beasts; but it has, in the first place, memory, and that, too, so infinite as to recollect an absolute countless number of circumstances, which plato will have to be a recollection of a former life; for in that book which is inscribed menon, socrates asks a child some questions in geometry, with reference to measuring a square; his answers are such as a child would make, and yet the questions are so easy, that while answering them, one by one, he comes to the same point as if he had learned geometry. from whence socrates would infer that learning is nothing more than recollection; and this topic he explains more accurately in the discourse which he held the very day he died; for he there asserts that, any one, who seeming to be entirely illiterate, is yet able to answer a question well that is proposed to him, does in so doing manifestly show that he is not learning it then, but recollecting it by his memory. nor is it to be accounted for in any other way, how children come to have notions of so many and such important things as are implanted, and, as it were, sealed up, in their minds (which the greeks call [greek: ennoiai]), unless the soul, before it entered the body, had been well stored with knowledge. and as it had no existence at all (for this is the invariable doctrine of plato, who will not admit anything to have a real existence which has a beginning and an end, and who thinks that that alone does really exist which is of such a character as what he calls [greek: eidea], and we species), therefore, being shut up in the body, it could not while in the body discover what it knows; but it knew it before, and brought the knowledge with it, so that we are no longer surprised at its extensive and multifarious knowledge. nor does the soul clearly discover its ideas at its first resort to this abode to which it is so unaccustomed, and which is in so disturbed a state; but after having refreshed and recollected itself, it then by its memory recovers them; and, therefore, to learn implies nothing more than to recollect. but i am in a particular manner surprised at memory. for what is that faculty by which we remember? what is its force? what its nature? i am not inquiring how great a memory simonides[ ] may be said to have had, or theodectes,[ ] or that cineas[ ] who was sent to rome as ambassador from pyrrhus; or, in more modern times, charmadas;[ ] or, very lately, metrodorus[ ] the scepsian, or our own contemporary hortensius[ ]: i am speaking of ordinary memory, and especially of those men who are employed in any important study or art, the great capacity of whose minds it is hard to estimate, such numbers of things do they remember. xxv. should you ask what this leads to, i think we may understand what that power is, and whence we have it. it certainly proceeds neither from the heart, nor from the blood, nor from the brain, nor from atoms; whether it be air or fire, i know not, nor am i, as those men are, ashamed, in cases where i am ignorant, to own that i am so. if in any other obscure matter i were able to assert anything positively, then i would swear that the soul, be it air or fire, is divine. just think, i beseech you: can you imagine this wonderful power of memory to be sown in or to be a part of the composition of the earth, or of this dark and gloomy atmosphere? though you cannot apprehend what it is, yet you see what kind of thing it is, or if you do not quite see that, yet you certainly see how great it is. what, then? shall we imagine that there is a kind of measure in the soul, into which, as into a vessel, all that we remember is poured? that indeed is absurd; for how shall we form any idea of the bottom, or of the shape or fashion of such a soul as that? and, again, how are we to conceive how much it is able to contain? shall we imagine the soul to receive impressions like wax, and memory to be marks of the impressions made on the soul? what are the characters of the words, what of the facts themselves? and what, again, is that prodigious greatness which can give rise to impressions of so many things? what, lastly, is that power which investigates secret things, and is called invention and contrivance? does that man seem to be compounded of this earthly, mortal, and perishing nature who first invented names for everything; which, if you will believe pythagoras, is the highest pitch of wisdom? or he who collected the dispersed inhabitants of the world, and united them in the bonds of social life? or he who confined the sounds of the voice, which used to seem infinite, to the marks of a few letters? or he who first observed the courses of the planets, their progressive motions, their laws? these were all great men. but they were greater still who invented food, and raiment, and houses; who introduced civilization among us, and armed us against the wild beasts; by whom we were made sociable and polished, and so proceeded from the necessaries of life to its embellishments. for we have provided great entertainments for the ears by inventing and modulating the variety and nature of sounds; we have learned to survey the stars, not only those that are fixed, but also those which are improperly called wandering; and the man who has acquainted himself with all their revolutions and motions is fairly considered to have a soul resembling the soul of that being who has created those stars in the heavens: for when archimedes described in a sphere the motions of the moon, sun, and five planets, he did the very same thing as plato's god, in his timæus, who made the world, causing one revolution to adjust motions differing as much as possible in their slowness and velocity. now, allowing that what we see in the world could not be effected without a god, archimedes could not have imitated the same motions in his sphere without a divine soul. xxvi. to me, indeed, it appears that even those studies which are more common and in greater esteem are not without some divine energy: so that i do not consider that a poet can produce a serious and sublime poem without some divine impulse working on his mind; nor do i think that eloquence, abounding with sonorous words and fruitful sentences, can flow thus without something beyond mere human power. but as to philosophy, that is the parent of all the arts: what can we call that but, as plato says, a gift, or, as i express it, an invention, of the gods? this it was which first taught us the worship of the gods; and then led us on to justice, which arises from the human race being formed into society; and after that it imbued us with modesty and elevation of soul. this it was which dispersed darkness from our souls, as it is dispelled from our eyes, enabling us to see all things that are above or below, the beginning, end, and middle of everything. i am convinced entirely that that which could effect so many and such great things must be a divine power. for what is memory of words and circumstances? what, too, is invention? surely they are things than which nothing greater can be conceived in a god! for i do not imagine the gods to be delighted with nectar and ambrosia, or with juventas presenting them with a cup; nor do i put any faith in homer, who says that ganymede was carried away by the gods on account of his beauty, in order to give jupiter his wine. too weak reasons for doing laomedon such injury! these were mere inventions of homer, who gave his gods the imperfections of men. i would rather that he had given men the perfections of the gods! those perfections, i mean, of uninterrupted health, wisdom, invention, memory. therefore the soul (which is, as i say, divine) is, as euripides more boldly expresses it, a god. and thus, if the divinity be air or fire, the soul of man is the same; for as that celestial nature has nothing earthly or humid about it, in like manner the soul of man is also free from both these qualities: but if it is of that fifth kind of nature, first introduced by aristotle, then both gods and souls are of the same. xxvii. as this is my opinion, i have explained it in these very words, in my book on consolation.[ ] the origin of the soul of man is not to be found upon earth, for there is nothing in the soul of a mixed or concrete nature, or that has any appearance of being formed or made out of the earth; nothing even humid, or airy, or fiery. for what is there in natures of that kind which has the power of memory, understanding, or thought? which can recollect the past, foresee the future, and comprehend the present? for these capabilities are confined to divine beings; nor can we discover any source from which men could derive them, but from god. there is therefore a peculiar nature and power in the soul, distinct from those natures which are more known and familiar to us. whatever, then, that is which thinks, and which has understanding, and volition, and a principle of life, is heavenly and divine, and on that account must necessarily be eternal; nor can god himself, who is known to us, be conceived to be anything else except a soul free and unembarrassed, distinct from all mortal concretion, acquainted with everything, and giving motion to everything, and itself endued with perpetual motion. xxviii. of this kind and nature is the intellect of man. where, then, is this intellect seated, and of what character is it? where is your own, and what is its character? are you able to tell? if i have not faculties for knowing all that i could desire to know, will you not even allow me to make use of those which i have? the soul has not sufficient capacity to comprehend itself; yet, the soul, like the eye, though it has no distinct view of itself, sees other things: it does not see (which is of least consequence) its own shape; perhaps not, though it possibly may; but we will pass that by: but it certainly sees that it has vigor, sagacity, memory, motion, and velocity; these are all great, divine, eternal properties. what its appearance is, or where it dwells, it is not necessary even to inquire. as when we behold, first of all, the beauty and brilliant appearance of the heavens; secondly, the vast velocity of its revolutions, beyond power of our imagination to conceive; then the vicissitudes of nights and days, the fourfold division of the seasons, so well adapted to the ripening of the fruits of the earth, and the temperature of our bodies: and after that we look up to the sun, the moderator and governor of all these things; and view the moon, by the increase and decrease of its light, marking, as it were, and appointing our holy days; and see the five planets, borne on in the same circle, divided into twelve parts, preserving the same course with the greatest regularity, but with utterly dissimilar motions among themselves; and the nightly appearance of the heaven, adorned on all sides with stars; then, the globe of the earth, raised above the sea, and placed in the centre of the universe, inhabited and cultivated in its two opposite extremities, one of which, the place of our habitation, is situated towards the north pole, under the seven stars: where the cold northern blasts, with horrid sound, harden to ice the snowy cover'd ground; the other, towards the south pole, is unknown to us, but is called by the greeks [greek: antichthona]: the other parts are uncultivated, because they are either frozen with cold, or burned up with heat; but where we dwell, it never fails, in its season, to yield a placid sky, to bid the trees assume the lively verdure of their leaves: the vine to bud, and, joyful, in its shoots, foretell the approaching vintage of its fruits: the ripen'd corn to sing, while all around full riv'lets glide; and flowers deck the ground: then the multitude of cattle, fit part for food, part for tilling the ground, others for carrying us, or for clothing us; and man himself, made, as it were, on purpose to contemplate the heavens and the gods, and to pay adoration to them: lastly, the whole earth, and wide extending seas, given to man's use. when we view these and numberless other things, can we doubt that they have some being who presides over them, or has made them (if, indeed, they have been made, as is the opinion of plato, or if, as aristotle thinks, they are eternal), or who at all events is the regulator of so immense a fabric and so great a blessing to men? thus, though you see not the soul of man, as you see not the deity, yet, as by the contemplation of his works you are led to acknowledge a god, so you must own the divine power of the soul, from its remembering things, from its invention, from the quickness of its motion, and from all the beauty of virtue. where, then, is it seated, you will say? xxix. in my opinion, it is seated in the head, and i can bring you reasons for my adopting that opinion. at present, let the soul reside where it will, you certainly have one in you. should you ask what its nature is? it has one peculiarly its own; but admitting it to consist of fire, or air, it does not affect the present question. only observe this, that as you are convinced there is a god, though you are ignorant where he resides, and what shape he is of; in like manner you ought to feel assured that you have a soul, though you cannot satisfy yourself of the place of its residence, nor its form. in our knowledge of the soul, unless we are grossly ignorant of natural philosophy, we cannot but be satisfied that it has nothing but what is simple, unmixed, uncompounded, and single; and if this is admitted, then it cannot be separated, nor divided, nor dispersed, nor parted, and therefore it cannot perish; for to perish implies a parting-asunder, a division, a disunion, of those parts which, while it subsisted, were held together by some band. and it was because he was influenced by these and similar reasons that socrates neither looked out for anybody to plead for him when he was accused, nor begged any favor from his judges, but maintained a manly freedom, which was the effect not of pride, but of the true greatness of his soul; and on the last day of his life he held a long discourse on this subject; and a few days before, when he might have been easily freed from his confinement, he refused to be so; and when he had almost actually hold of that deadly cup, he spoke with the air of a man not forced to die, but ascending into heaven. xxx. for so indeed he thought himself, and thus he spoke: "that there were two ways, and that the souls of men, at their departure from the body, took different roads; for those which were polluted with vices that are common to men, and which had given themselves up entirely to unclean desires, and had become so blinded by them as to have habituated themselves to all manner of debauchery and profligacy, or to have laid detestable schemes for the ruin of their country, took a road wide of that which led to the assembly of the gods; but they who had preserved themselves upright and chaste, and free from the slightest contagion of the body, and had always kept themselves as far as possible at a distance from it, and while on earth had proposed to themselves as a model the life of the gods, found the return to those beings from whom they had come an easy one." therefore, he argues, that all good and wise men should take example from the swans, who are considered sacred to apollo, not without reason, but particularly because they seem to have received the gift of divination from him, by which, foreseeing how happy it is to die, they leave this world with singing and joy. nor can any one doubt of this, unless it happens to us who think with care and anxiety about the soul (as is often the case with those who look earnestly at the setting sun), to lose the sight of it entirely; and so the mind's eye, viewing itself, sometimes grows dull, and for that reason we become remiss in our contemplation. thus our reasoning is borne about, harassed with doubts and anxieties, not knowing how to proceed, but measuring back again those dangerous tracts which it has passed, like a boat tossed about on the boundless ocean. but these reflections are of long standing, and borrowed from the greeks. but cato left this world in such a manner as if he were delighted that he had found an opportunity of dying; for that god who presides in us forbids our departure hence without his leave. but when god himself has given us a just cause, as formerly he did to socrates, and lately to cato, and often to many others--in such a case, certainly every man of sense would gladly exchange this darkness for that light: not that he would forcibly break from the chains that held him, for that would be against the law; but, like a man released from prison by a magistrate or some lawful authority, so he too would walk away, being released and discharged by god. for the whole life of a philosopher is, as the same philosopher says, a meditation on death. xxxi. for what else is it that we do, when we call off our minds from pleasure, that is to say, from our attention to the body, from the managing our domestic estate, which is a sort of handmaid and servant of the body, or from duties of a public nature, or from all other serious business whatever? what else is it, i say, that we do, but invite the soul to reflect on itself? oblige it to converse with itself, and, as far as possible, break off its acquaintance with the body? now, to separate the soul from the body, is to learn to die, and nothing else whatever. wherefore take my advice; and let us meditate on this, and separate ourselves as far as possible from the body, that is to say, let us accustom ourselves to die. this will be enjoying a life like that of heaven even while we remain on earth; and when we are carried thither and released from these bonds, our souls will make their progress with more rapidity; for the spirit which has always been fettered by the bonds of the body, even when it is disengaged, advances more slowly, just as those do who have worn actual fetters for many years: but when we have arrived at this emancipation from the bonds of the body, then indeed we shall begin to live, for this present life is really death, which i could say a good deal in lamentation for if i chose. _a._ you have lamented it sufficiently in your book on consolation; and when i read that, there is nothing which i desire more than to leave these things; but that desire is increased a great deal by what i have just heard. _m._ the time will come, and that soon, and with equal certainty, whether you hang back or press forward; for time flies. but death is so far from being an evil, as it lately appeared to you, that i am inclined to suspect, not that there is no other thing which is an evil to man, but rather that there is nothing else which is a real good to him; if, at least, it is true that we become thereby either gods ourselves, or companions of the gods. however, this is not of so much consequence, as there are some of us here who will not allow this. but i will not leave off discussing this point till i have convinced you that death can, upon no consideration whatever, be an evil. _a._ how can it, after what i now know? _m._ do you ask how it can? there are crowds of arguers who contradict this; and those not only epicureans, whom i regard very little, but, somehow or other, almost every man of letters; and, above all, my favorite dicæarchus is very strenuous in opposing the immortality of the soul: for he has written three books, which are entitled lesbiacs, because the discourse was held at mitylene, in which he seeks to prove that souls are mortal. the stoics, on the other hand, allow us as long a time for enjoyment as the life of a raven; they allow the soul to exist a great while, but are against its eternity. xxxii. are you willing to hear then why, even allowing this, death cannot be an evil. _a._ as you please; but no one shall drive me from my belief in mortality. _m._ i commend you, indeed, for that; though we should not be too confident in our belief of anything; for we are frequently disturbed by some subtle conclusion. we give way and change our opinions even in things that are more evident than this; for in this there certainly is some obscurity. therefore, should anything of this kind happen, it is well to be on our guard. _a._ you are right in that; but i will provide against any accident. _m._ have you any objection to our dismissing our friends the stoics--those, i mean, who allow that the souls exist after they have left the body, but yet deny that they exist forever? _a._ we certainly may dismiss the consideration of those men who admit that which is the most difficult point in the whole question, namely, that a soul can exist independently of the body, and yet refuse to grant that which is not only very easy to believe, but which is even the natural consequence of the concession which they have made--that if they can exist for a length of time; they most likely do so forever. _m._ you take it right; that is the very thing. shall we give, therefore, any credit to pauæstius, when he dissents from his master, plato? whom he everywhere calls divine, the wisest, the holiest of men, the homer of philosophers, and whom he opposes in nothing except this single opinion of the soul's immortality: for he maintains what nobody denies, that everything which has been generated will perish, and that even souls are generated, which he thinks appears from their resemblance to those of the men who begot them; for that likeness is as apparent in the turn of their minds as in their bodies. but he brings another reason--that there is nothing which is sensible of pain which is not also liable to disease; but whatever is liable to disease must be liable to death. the soul is sensible of pain, therefore it is liable to perish. xxxiii. these arguments may be refuted; for they proceed from his not knowing that, while discussing the subject of the immortality of the soul, he is speaking of the intellect, which is free from all turbid motion; but not of those parts of the mind in which those disorders, anger and lust, have their seat, and which he whom he is opposing, when he argues thus, imagines to be distinct and separate from the mind. now this resemblance is more remarkable in beasts, whose souls are void of reason. but the likeness in men consists more in the configuration of the bodies: and it is of no little consequence in what bodies the soul is lodged; for there are many things which depend on the body that give an edge to the soul, many which blunt it. aristotle, indeed, says that all men of great genius are melancholy; so that i should not have been displeased to have been somewhat duller than i am. he instances many, and, as if it were matter of fact, brings his reasons for it. but if the power of those things that proceed from the body be so great as to influence the mind (for they are the things, whatever they are, that occasion this likeness), still that does not necessarily prove why a similitude of souls should be generated. i say nothing about cases of unlikeness. i wish panætius could be here: he lived with africanus. i would inquire of him which of his family the nephew of africanus's brother was like? possibly he may in person have resembled his father; but in his manners he was so like every profligate, abandoned man, that it was impossible to be more so. whom did the grandson of p. crassus, that wise and eloquent and most distinguished man, resemble? or the relations and sons of many other excellent men, whose names there is no occasion to mention? but what are we doing? have we forgotten that our purpose was, when we had sufficiently spoken on the subject of the immortality of the soul, to prove that, even if the soul did perish, there would be, even then, no evil in death? _a._ i remembered it very well; but i had no dislike to your digressing a little from your original design, while you were talking of the soul's immortality. _m._ i perceive you have sublime thoughts, and are eager to mount up to heaven. xxxiv. i am not without hopes myself that such may be our fate. but admit what they assert--that the soul does not continue to exist after death. _a._ should it be so, i see that we are then deprived of the hopes of a happier life. _m._ but what is there of evil in that opinion? for let the soul perish as the body: is there any pain, or indeed any feeling at all, in the body after death? no one, indeed asserts that; though epicurus charges democritus with saying so; but the disciples of democritus deny it. no sense, therefore, remains in the soul; for the soul is nowhere. where, then, is the evil? for there is nothing but these two things. is it because the mere separation of the soul and body cannot be effected without pain? but even should that be granted, how small a pain must that be! yet i think that it is false, and that it is very often unaccompanied by any sensation at all, and sometimes even attended with pleasure; but certainly the whole must be very trifling, whatever it is, for it is instantaneous. what makes us uneasy, or rather gives us pain, is the leaving all the good things of life. but just consider if i might not more properly say, leaving the evils of life; only there is no reason for my now occupying myself in bewailing the life of man, and yet i might, with very good reason. but what occasion is there, when what i am laboring to prove is that no one is miserable after death, to make life more miserable by lamenting over it? i have done that in the book which i wrote, in order to comfort myself as well as i could. if, then, our inquiry is after truth, death withdraws us from evil, not from good. this subject is indeed so copiously handled by hegesias, the cyrenaic philosopher, that he is said to have been forbidden by ptolemy from delivering his lectures in the schools, because some who heard him made away with themselves. there is, too, an epigram of callimachus[ ] on cleombrotus of ambracia, who, without any misfortune having befallen him, as he says, threw himself from a wall into the sea, after he had read a book of plato's. the book i mentioned of that hegesias is called [greek: apokarterterôn], or "a man who starves himself," in which a man is represented as killing himself by starvation, till he is prevented by his friends, in reply to whom he reckons up all the miseries of human life. i might do the same, though not so fully as he, who thinks it not worth any man's while to live. i pass over others. was it even worth my while to live, for, had i died before i was deprived of the comforts of my own family, and of the honors which i received for my public services, would not death have taken me from the evils of life rather than from its blessings? xxxv. mention, therefore, some one, who never knew distress; who never received any blow from fortune. the great metellus had four distinguished sons; but priam had fifty, seventeen of whom were born to him by his lawful wife. fortune had the same power over both, though she exercised it but on one; for metellus was laid on his funeral pile by a great company of sons and daughters, grandsons, and granddaughters; but priam fell by the hand of an enemy, after having fled to the altar, and having seen himself deprived of all his numerous progeny. had he died before the death of his sons and the ruin of his kingdom, with all his mighty wealth elate, under rich canopies of state; would he then have been taken from good or from evil? it would indeed, at that time, have appeared that he was being taken away from good; yet surely it would have turned out advantageous for him; nor should we have had these mournful verses, lo! these all perish'd in one flaming pile; the foe old priam did of life beguile, and with his blood, thy altar, jove, defile. as if anything better could have happened to him at that time than to lose his life in that manner; but yet, if it had befallen him sooner, it would have prevented all those consequences; but even as it was, it released him from any further sense of them. the case of our friend pompey[ ] was something better: once, when he had been very ill at naples, the neapolitans, on his recovery, put crowns on their heads, as did those of puteoli; the people flocked from the country to congratulate him--it is a grecian custom, and a foolish one; still it is a sign of good fortune. but the question is, had he died, would he have been taken from good, or from evil? certainly from evil. he would not have been engaged in a war with his father-in-law;[ ] he would not have taken up arms before he was prepared; he would not have left his own house, nor fled from italy; he would not, after the loss of his army, have fallen unarmed into the hands of slaves, and been put to death by them; his children would not have been destroyed; nor would his whole fortune have come into the possession of the conquerors. did not he, then, who, if he had died at that time, would have died in all his glory, owe all the great and terrible misfortunes into which he subsequently fell to the prolongation of his life at that time? xxxvi. these calamities are avoided by death, for even though they should never happen, there is a possibility that they may; but it never occurs to a man that such a disaster may befall him himself. every one hopes to be as happy as metellus: as if the number of the happy exceeded that of the miserable; or as if there were any certainty in human affairs; or, again, as if there were more rational foundation for hope than fear. but should we grant them even this, that men are by death deprived of good things; would it follow that the dead are therefore in need of the good things of life, and are miserable on that account? certainly they must necessarily say so. can he who does not exist be in need of anything? to be in need of has a melancholy sound, because it in effect amounts to this--he had, but he has not; he regrets, he looks back upon, he wants. such are, i suppose, the distresses of one who is in need of. is he deprived of eyes? to be blind is misery. is he destitute of children? not to have them is misery. these considerations apply to the living, but the dead are neither in need of the blessings of life, nor of life itself. but when i am speaking of the dead, i am speaking of those who have no existence. but would any one say of us, who do exist, that we want horns or wings? certainly not. should it be asked, why not? the answer would be, that not to have what neither custom nor nature has fitted you for would not imply a want of them, even though you were sensible that you had them not. this argument should be pressed over and over again, after that point has once been established, which, if souls are mortal, there can be no dispute about--i mean, that the destruction of them by death is so entire as to remove even the least suspicion of any sense remaining. when, therefore, this point is once well grounded and established, we must correctly define what the term to want means; that there may be no mistake in the word. to want, then, signifies this: to be without that which you would be glad to have; for inclination for a thing is implied in the word want, excepting when we use the word in an entirely different sense, as we do when we say that a fever is wanting to any one. for it admits of a different interpretation, when you are without a certain thing, and are sensible that you are without it, but yet can easily dispense with having it. "to want," then, is an expression which you cannot apply to the dead; nor is the mere fact of wanting something necessarily lamentable. the proper expression ought to be, "that they want a good," and that is an evil. but a living man does not want a good, unless he is distressed without it; and yet, we can easily understand how any man alive can be without a kingdom. but this cannot be predicated of you with any accuracy: it might have been asserted of tarquin, when he was driven from his kingdom. but when such an expression is used respecting the dead, it is absolutely unintelligible. for to want implies to be sensible; but the dead are insensible: therefore, the dead can be in no want. xxxvii. but what occasion is there to philosophize here in a matter with which we see that philosophy is but little concerned? how often have not only our generals but whole armies, rushed on certain death! but if it had been a thing to be feared, l. brutus would never have fallen in fight, to prevent the return of that tyrant whom he had expelled; nor would decius the father have been slain in fighting with the latins; nor would his son, when engaged with the etruscans, nor his grandson with pyrrhus have exposed themselves to the enemy's darts. spain would never have seen, in one campaign, the scipios fall fighting for their country; nor would the plains of cannæ have witnessed the death of paulus and geminus, or venusia that of marcellus; nor would the latins have beheld the death of albinus, nor the leucanians that of gracchus. but are any of these miserable now? nay, they were not so even at the first moment after they had breathed their last; nor can any one be miserable after he has lost all sensation. oh, but the mere circumstance of being without sensation is miserable. it might be so if being without sensation were the same thing as wanting it; but as it is evident there can be nothing of any kind in that which has no existence, what can there be afflicting to that which can neither feel want nor be sensible of anything? we might be said to have repeated this over too often, only that here lies all that the soul shudders at from the fear of death. for whoever can clearly apprehend that which is as manifest as the light--that when both soul and body are consumed, and there is a total destruction, then that which was an animal becomes nothing--will clearly see that there is no difference between a hippocentaur, which never had existence, and king agamemnon, and that m. camillus is no more concerned about this present civil war than i was at the sacking of rome, when he was living. xxxviii. why, then, should camillus be affected with the thoughts of these things happening three hundred and fifty years after his time? and why should i be uneasy it i were to expect that some nation might possess itself of this city ten thousand years hence? because so great is our regard for our country, as not to be measured by our own feeling, but by its own actual safety. death, then, which threatens us daily from a thousand accidents, and which, by reason of the shortness of life, can never be far off, does not deter a wise man from making such provision for his country and his family as he hopes may last forever; and from regarding posterity, of which he can never have any real perception, as belonging to himself. wherefore a man may act for eternity, even though he be persuaded that his soul is mortal; not, indeed, from a desire of glory, which he will be insensible of, but from a principle of virtue, which glory will inevitably attend, though that is not his object. the process, indeed, of nature is this: that just in the same manner as our birth was the beginning of things with us, so death will be the end; and as we were noways concerned with anything before we were born, so neither shall we be after we are dead. and in this state of things where can the evil be, since death has no connection with either the living or the dead? the one have no existence at all, the other are not yet affected by it. they who make the least of death consider it as having a great resemblance to sleep; as if any one would choose to live ninety years on condition that, at the expiration of sixty, he should sleep out the remainder. the very swine would not accept of life on those terms, much less i. endymion, indeed, if you listen to fables, slept once on a time on latmus, a mountain of caria, and for such a length of time that i imagine he is not as yet awake. do you think that he is concerned at the moon's being in difficulties, though it was by her that he was thrown into that sleep, in order that she might kiss him while sleeping. for what should he be concerned for who has not even any sensation? you look on sleep as an image of death, and you take that on you daily; and have you, then, any doubt that there is no sensation in death, when you see there is none in sleep, which is its near resemblance? xxxix. away, then, with those follies, which are little better than the old women's dreams, such as that it is miserable to die before our time. what time do you mean? that of nature? but she has only lent you life, as she might lend you money, without fixing any certain time for its repayment. have you any grounds of complaint, then, that she recalls it at her pleasure? for you received it on these terms. they that complain thus allow that if a young child dies, the survivors ought to bear his loss with equanimity; that if an infant in the cradle dies, they ought not even to utter a complaint; and yet nature has been more severe with them in demanding back what she gave. they answer by saying that such have not tasted the sweets of life; while the other had begun to conceive hopes of great happiness, and, indeed, had begun to realize them. men judge better in other things, and allow a part to be preferable to none. why do they not admit the same estimate in life? though callimachus does not speak amiss in saying that more tears had flowed from priam than his son; yet they are thought happier who die after they have reached old age. it would be hard to say why; for i do not apprehend that any one, if a longer life were granted to him, would find it happier. there is nothing more agreeable to a man than prudence, which old age most certainly bestows on a man, though it may strip him of everything else. but what age is long, or what is there at all long to a man? does not old age, though unregarded, still attend on childhood's pastimes, as the cares of men? but because there is nothing beyond old age, we call that long: all these things are said to be long or short, according to the proportion of time they were given us for. artistotle saith there is a kind of insect near the river hypanis, which runs from a certain part of europe into the pontus, whose life consists but of one day; those that die at the eighth hour die in full age; those who die when the sun sets are very old, especially when the days are at the longest. compare our longest life with eternity, and we shall be found almost as short-lived as those little animals. xl. let us, then, despise all these follies--for what softer name can i give to such levities?--and let us lay the foundation of our happiness in the strength and greatness of our minds, in a contempt and disregard of all earthly things, and in the practice of every virtue. for at present we are enervated by the softness of our imaginations, so that, should we leave this world before the promises of our fortune-tellers are made good to us, we should think ourselves deprived of some great advantages, and seem disappointed and forlorn. but if, through life, we are in continual suspense, still expecting, still desiring, and are in continual pain and torture, good gods! how pleasant must that journey be which ends in security and ease! how pleased am i with theramenes! of how exalted a soul does he appear! for, although we never read of him without tears, yet that illustrious man is not to be lamented in his death, who, when he had been imprisoned by the command of the thirty tyrants, drank off, at one draught, as if he had been thirsty, the poisoned cup, and threw the remainder out of it with such force that it sounded as it fell; and then, on hearing the sound of the drops, he said, with a smile, "i drink this to the most excellent critias," who had been his most bitter enemy; for it is customary among the greeks, at their banquets, to name the person to whom they intend to deliver the cup. this celebrated man was pleasant to the last, even when he had received the poison into his bowels, and truly foretold the death of that man whom he named when he drank the poison, and that death soon followed. who that thinks death an evil could approve of the evenness of temper in this great man at the instant of dying? socrates came, a few years after, to the same prison and the same cup by as great iniquity on the part of his judges as the tyrants displayed when they executed theramenes. what a speech is that which plato makes him deliver before his judges, after they had condemned him to death! xli. "i am not without hopes, o judges, that it is a favorable circumstance for me that i am condemned to die; for one of these two things must necessarily happen--either that death will deprive me entirely of all sense, or else that, by dying, i shall go from hence into some other place; wherefore, if all sense is utterly extinguished, and if death is like that sleep which sometimes is so undisturbed as to be even without the visions of dreams--in that case, o ye good gods! what gain is it to die? or what length of days can be imagined which would be preferable to such a night? and if the constant course of future time is to resemble that night, who is happier than i am? but if on the other hand, what is said be true, namely, that death is but a removal to those regions where the souls of the departed dwell, then that state must be more happy still to have escaped from those who call themselves judges, and to appear before such as are truly so--minos, rhadamanthus, Æacus, triptolemus--and to meet with those who have lived with justice and probity![ ] can this change of abode appear otherwise than great to you? what bounds can you set to the value of conversing with orpheus, and musæus, and homer, and hesiod? i would even, were it possible, willingly die often, in order to prove the certainty of what i speak of. what delight must it be to meet with palamedes, and ajax, and others, who have been betrayed by the iniquity of their judges! then, also, should i experience the wisdom of even that king of kings, who led his vast troops to troy, and the prudence of ulysses and sisyphus: nor should i then be condemned for prosecuting my inquiries on such subjects in the same way in which i have done here on earth. and even you, my judges, you, i mean, who have voted for my acquittal, do not you fear death, for nothing bad can befall a good man, whether he be alive or dead; nor are his concerns ever overlooked by the gods; nor in my case either has this befallen me by chance; and i have nothing to charge those men with who accused or condemned me but the fact that they believed that they were doing me harm." in this manner he proceeded. there is no part of his speech which i admire more than his last words: "but it is time," says he, "for me now to go hence, that i may die; and for you, that you may continue to live. which condition of the two is the best, the immortal gods know; but i do not believe that any mortal man does." xlii. surely i would rather have had this man's soul than all the fortunes of those who sat in judgment on him; although that very thing which he says no one except the gods know, namely, whether life or death is most preferable, he knows himself, for he had previously stated his opinion on it; but he maintained to the last that favorite maxim of his, of affirming nothing. and let us, too, adhere to this rule of not thinking anything an evil which is a general provision of nature; and let us assure ourselves, that if death is an evil, it is an eternal evil, for death seems to be the end of a miserable life; but if death is a misery, there can be no end of that. but why do i mention socrates, or theramenes, men distinguished by the glory of virtue and wisdom? when a certain lacedæmomian, whose name is not so much as known, held death in such contempt, that, when led to it by the ephori, he bore a cheerful and pleasant countenance; and, when he was asked by one of his enemies whether he despised the laws of lycurgus, "on the contrary," answered he, "i am greatly obliged to him, for he has amerced me in a fine which i can pay without borrowing, or taking up money at interest." this was a man worthy of sparta. and i am almost persuaded of his innocence because of the greatness of his soul. our own city has produced many such. but why should i name generals, and other men of high rank, when cato could write that legions have marched with alacrity to that place from whence they never expected to return? with no less greatness of soul fell the lacedæmonians at thermopylæ, on whom simonides wrote the following epitaph: go, stranger, tell the spartans, here we lie, who to support their laws durst boldly die.[ ] what was it that leonidas, their general, said to them? "march on with courage, my lacedæmonians. to-night, perhaps, we shall sup in the regions below." this was a brave nation while the laws of lycurgus were in force. one of them, when a persian had said to him in conversation, "we shall hide the sun from your sight by the number of our arrows and darts," replied, "we shall fight, then in the shade." do i talk of their men? how great was that lacedæmonian woman, who had sent her son to battle, and when she heard that he was slain, said, "i bore him for that purpose, that you might have a man who durst die for his country!" however, it is a matter of notoriety that the spartans were bold and hardy, for the discipline of a republic has great influence. xliii. what, then, have we not reason to admire theodorus the cyrenean, a philosopher of no small distinction, who, when lysimachus threatened to crucify him, bade him keep those menaces for his courtiers? "to theodorus it makes no difference whether he rot in the air or underground." by which saying of the philosopher i am reminded to say something of the custom of funerals and sepulture, and of funeral ceremonies, which is, indeed, not a difficult subject, especially if we recollect what has been before said about insensibility. the opinion of socrates respecting this matter is clearly stated in the book which treats of his death, of which we have already said so much; for when he had discussed the immortality of the soul, and when the time of his dying was approaching rapidly, being asked by criton how he would be buried, "i have taken a great deal of pains," saith he, "my friends, to no purpose, for i have not convinced our criton that i shall fly from hence, and leave no part of me behind. notwithstanding, criton, if you can overtake me, wheresoever you get hold of me, bury me as you please: but believe me, none of you will be able to catch me when i have flown away from hence." that was excellently said, inasmuch as he allows his friend to do as he pleased, and yet shows his indifference about anything of this kind. diogenes was rougher, though of the same opinion; but in his character of a cynic he expressed himself in a somewhat harsher manner; he ordered himself to be thrown anywhere without being buried. and when his friends replied, "what! to the birds and beasts?" "by no means," saith he; "place my staff near me, that i may drive them away." "how can you do that," they answer, "for you will not perceive them?" "how am i then injured by being torn by those animals, if i have no sensation?" anaxagoras, when he was at the point of death at lampsacus, and was asked by his friends, whether, if anything should happen to him, he would not choose to be carried to clazomenæ, his country, made this excellent answer, "there is," says he, "no occasion for that, for all places are at an equal distance from the infernal regions." there is one thing to be observed with respect to the whole subject of burial, that it relates to the body, whether the soul live or die. now, with regard to the body, it is clear that, whether the soul live or die, that has no sensation. xliv. but all things are full of errors. achilles drags hector, tied to his chariot; he thinks, i suppose, he tears his flesh, and that hector feels the pain of it; therefore, he avenges himself on him, as he imagines. but hecuba bewails this as a sore misfortune: i saw (a dreadful sight) great hector slain, dragg'd at achilles' car along the plain. what hector? or how long will he be hector? accius is better in this, and achilles, too, is sometimes reasonable: i hector's body to his sire convey'd, hector i sent to the infernal shade. it was not hector that you dragged along, but a body that had been hector's. here another starts from underground, and will not suffer his mother to sleep: to thee i call, my once-loved parent, hear, nor longer with thy sleep relieve thy care; thine eye which pities not is closed--arise; ling'ring i wait the unpaid obsequies. when these verses are sung with a slow and melancholy tune, so as to affect the whole theatre with sadness, one can scarce help thinking those unhappy that are unburied: ere the devouring dogs and hungry vultures... he is afraid he shall not have the use of his limbs so well if they are torn to pieces, but is under no such apprehensions if they are burned: nor leave my naked bones, my poor remains, to shameful violence and bloody stains. i do not understand what he could fear who could pour forth such excellent verses to the sound of the flute. we must, therefore, adhere to this, that nothing is to be regarded after we are dead, though many people revenge themselves on their dead enemies. thyestes pours forth several curses in some good lines of ennius, praying, first of all, that atreus may perish by a shipwreck, which is certainly a very terrible thing, for such a death is not free from very grievous sensations. then follow these unmeaning expressions: may on the sharp rock his mangled carcass lie, his entrails torn, to hungry birds a prey! may he convulsive writhe his bleeding side, and with his clotted gore the stones be dyed! the rocks themselves were not more destitute of feeling than he who was hanging to them by his side; though thyestes imagines he is wishing him the greatest torture. it would be torture, indeed, if he were sensible; but as he is not, it can be none; then how very unmeaning is this: let him, still hovering o'er the stygian wave, ne'er reach the body's peaceful port, the grave! you see under what mistaken notions all this is said. he imagines the body has its haven, and that the dead are at rest in their graves. pelops was greatly to blame in not having informed and taught his son what regard was due to everything. xlv. but what occasion is there to animadvert on the opinions of individuals, when we may observe whole nations to fall into all sorts of errors? the egyptians embalm their dead, and keep them in their houses; the persians dress them over with wax, and then bury them, that they may preserve their bodies as long as possible. it is customary with the magi to bury none of their order, unless they have been first torn by wild beasts. in hyrcania, the people maintain dogs for the public use; the nobles have their own--and we know that they have a good breed of dogs; but every one, according to his ability, provides himself with some, in order to be torn by them; and they hold that to be the best kind of interment. chrysippus, who is curious in all kinds of historical facts, has collected many other things of this kind; but some of them are so offensive as not to admit of being related. all that has been said of burying is not worth our regard with respect to ourselves, though it is not to be neglected as to our friends, provided we are thoroughly aware that the dead are insensible. but the living, indeed, should consider what is due to custom and opinion; only they should at the same time consider that the dead are noways interested in it. but death truly is then met with the greatest tranquillity when the dying man can comfort himself with his own praise. no one dies too soon who has finished the course of perfect virtue. i myself have known many occasions when i have seemed in danger of immediate death; oh! how i wish it had come to me! for i have gained nothing by the delay. i had gone over and over again the duties of life; nothing remained but to contend with fortune. if reason, then, cannot sufficiently fortify us to enable us to feel a contempt for death, at all events let our past life prove that we have lived long enough, and even longer than was necessary; for notwithstanding the deprivation of sense, the dead are not without that good which peculiarly belongs to them, namely, the praise and glory which they have acquired, even though they are not sensible of it. for although there be nothing in glory to make it desirable, yet it follows virtue as its shadow; and the genuine judgment of the multitude on good men, if ever they form any, is more to their own praise than of any real advantage to the dead. yet i cannot say, however it may be received, that lycurgus and solon have no glory from their laws, and from the political constitution which they established in their country; or that themistocles and epaminondas have not glory from their martial virtue. xlvi. for neptune shall sooner bury salamis itself with his waters than the memory of the trophies gained there; and the boeotian leuctra shall perish sooner than the glory of that great battle. and longer still shall fame be before it deserts curius, and fabricius, and calatinus, and the two scipios, and the two africani, and maximus, and marcellus, and paulus, and cato, and lælius, and numberless other heroes; and whoever has caught any resemblance of them, not estimating it by common fame, but by the real applause of good men, may with confidence, when the occasion requires, approach death, on which we are sure that even if the chief good is not continued, at least no evil is. such a man would even wish to die while in prosperity; for all the favors that could be heaped on him would not be so agreeable to him as the loss of them would be painful. that speech of the lacedæmonian seems to have the same meaning, who, when diagoras the rhodian, who had himself been a conqueror at the olympic games, saw two of his own sons conquerors there on the same day, approached the old man, and, congratulating him, said, "you should die now, diagoras, for no greater happiness can possibly await you." the greeks look on these as great things; perhaps they think too highly of them, or, rather, they did so then. and so he who said this to diagoras, looking on it as something very glorious, that three men out of one family should have been conquerors there, thought it could answer no purpose to him to continue any longer in life, where he could only be exposed to a reverse of fortune. i might have given you a sufficient answer, as it seems to me, on this point, in a few words, as you had allowed the dead were not exposed to any positive evil; but i have spoken at greater length on the subject for this reason, because this is our greatest consolation in the losing and bewailing of our friends. for we ought to bear with moderation any grief which arises from ourselves, or is endured on our own account, lest we should seem to be too much influenced by self-love. but should we suspect our departed friends to be under those evils, which they are generally imagined to be, and to be sensible of them, then such a suspicion would give us intolerable pain; and accordingly i wished, for my own sake, to pluck up this opinion by the roots, and on that account i have been perhaps somewhat more prolix than was necessary. xlvii. _a._ more prolix than was necessary? certainty not, in my opinion. for i was induced, by the former part of your speech, to wish to die; but, by the latter, sometimes not to be unwilling, and at others to be wholly indifferent about it. but the effect of your whole argument is, that i am convinced that death ought not to be classed among the evils. _m._ do you, then, expect that i am to give you a regular peroration, like the rhetoricians, or shall i forego that art? _a._ i would not have you give over an art which you have set off to such advantage; and you were in the right to do so, for, to speak the truth, it also has set you off. but what is that peroration? for i should be glad to hear it, whatever it is. _m._ it is customary, in the schools, to produce the opinions of the immortal gods on death; nor are these opinions the fruits of the imagination alone of the lecturers, but they have the authority of herodotus and many others. cleobis and biton are the first they mention, sons of the argive priestess; the story is a well-known one. as it was necessary that she should be drawn in a chariot to a certain annual sacrifice, which was solemnized at a temple some considerable distance from the town, and the cattle that were to draw the chariot had not arrived, those two young men whom i have just mentioned, pulling off their garments, and anointing their bodies with oil, harnessed themselves to the yoke. and in this manner the priestess was conveyed to the temple; and when the chariot had arrived at the proper place, she is said to have entreated the goddess to bestow on them, as a reward for their piety, the greatest gift that a god could confer on man. and the young men, after having feasted with their mother, fell asleep; and in the morning they were found dead. trophonius and agamedes are said to have put up the same petition, for they, having built a temple to apollo at delphi, offered supplications to the god, and desired of him some extraordinary reward for their care and labor, particularizing nothing, but asking for whatever was best for men. accordingly, apollo signified to them that he would bestow it on them in three days, and on the third day at daybreak they were found dead. and so they say that this was a formal decision pronounced by that god to whom the rest of the deities have assigned the province of divining with an accuracy superior to that of all the rest. xlviii. there is also a story told of silenus, who, when taken prisoner by midas, is said to have made him this present for his ransom--namely, that he informed him[ ] that never to have been born was by far the greatest blessing that could happen to man; and that the next best thing was to die very soon; which very opinion euripides makes use of in his cresphontes, saying, when man is born, 'tis fit, with solemn show, we speak our sense of his approaching woe; with other gestures and a different eye, proclaim our pleasure when he's bid to die.[ ] there is something like this in crantor's consolation; for he says that terinæsus of elysia, when he was bitterly lamenting the loss of his son, came to a place of divination to be informed why he was visited with so great affliction, and received in his tablet these three verses: thou fool, to murmur at euthynous' death! the blooming youth to fate resigns his breath: the fate, whereon your happiness depends, at once the parent and the son befriends.[ ] on these and similar authorities they affirm that the question has been determined by the gods. nay, more; alcidamas, an ancient rhetorician of the very highest reputation, wrote even in praise of death, which he endeavored to establish by an enumeration of the evils of life; and his dissertation has a great deal of eloquence in it; but he was unacquainted with the more refined arguments of the philosophers. by the orators, indeed, to die for our country is always considered not only as glorious, but even as happy: they go back as far as erechtheus,[ ] whose very daughters underwent death, for the safety of their fellow-citizens: they instance codrus, who threw himself into the midst of his enemies, dressed like a common man, that his royal robes might not betray him, because the oracle had declared the athenians conquerors, if their king was slain. menoeceus[ ] is not overlooked by them, who, in compliance with the injunctions of an oracle, freely shed his blood for his country. iphigenia ordered herself to be conveyed to aulis, to be sacrificed, that her blood might be the cause of spilling that of her enemies. xlix. from hence they proceed to instances of a fresher date. harmodius and aristogiton are in everybody's mouth; the memory of leonidas the lacedæmonian and epaminondas the theban is as fresh as ever. those philosophers were not acquainted with the many instances in our country--to give a list of whom would take up too much time--who, we see, considered death desirable as long as it was accompanied with honor. but, notwithstanding this is the correct view of the case, we must use much persuasion, speak as if we were endued with some higher authority, in order to bring men to begin to wish to die, or cease to be afraid of death. for if that last day does not occasion an entire extinction, but a change of abode only, what can be more desirable? and if it, on the other hand, destroys, and absolutely puts an end to us, what can be preferable to the having a deep sleep fall on us, in the midst of the fatigues of life, and being thus overtaken, to sleep to eternity? and, should this really be the case, then ennius's language is more consistent with wisdom than solon's; for our ennius says, let none bestow upon my passing bier one needless sigh or unavailing tear. but the wise solon says, let me not unlamented die, but o'er my bier burst forth the tender sigh, the friendly tear.[ ] but let us, if indeed it should be our fate to know the time which is appointed by the gods for us to die, prepare ourselves for it with a cheerful and grateful mind, thinking ourselves like men who are delivered from a jail, and released from their fetters, for the purpose of going back to our eternal habitation, which may be more emphatically called our own; or else to be divested of all sense and trouble. if, on the other hand, we should have no notice given us of this decree, yet let us cultivate such a disposition as to look on that formidable hour of death as happy for us, though shocking to our friends; and let us never imagine anything to be an evil which is an appointment of the immortal gods, or of nature, the common parent of all. for it is not by hazard or without design that we have been born and situated as we have. on the contrary, beyond all doubt there is a certain power which consults the happiness of human nature; and this would neither have produced nor provided for a being which, after having gone through the labors of life, was to fall into eternal misery by death. let us rather infer that we have a retreat and haven prepared for us, which i wish we could crowd all sail and arrive at; but though the winds should not serve, and we should be driven back, yet we shall to a certainty arrive at that point eventually, though somewhat later. but how can that be miserable for one which all must of necessity undergo? i have given you a peroration, that you might not think i had overlooked or neglected anything. _a._ i am persuaded you have not; and, indeed, that peroration has confirmed me. _m._ i am glad it has had that effect. but it is now time to consult our health. to-morrow, and all the time we continue in this tusculan villa, let us consider this subject; and especially those portions of it which may ease our pain, alleviate our fears, and lessen our desires, which is the greatest advantage we can reap from the whole of philosophy. * * * * * book ii. on bearing pain. i. neoptolemus, in ennius, indeed, says that the study of philosophy was expedient for him; but that it required limiting to a few subjects, for that to give himself up entirely to it was what he did not approve of. and for my part, brutus, i am perfectly persuaded that it is expedient for me to philosophize; for what can i do better, especially as i have no regular occupation? but i am not for limiting my philosophy to a few subjects, as he does; for philosophy is a matter in which it is difficult to acquire a little knowledge without acquainting yourself with many, or all its branches, nor can you well take a few subjects without selecting them out of a great number; nor can any one, who has acquired the knowledge of a few points, avoid endeavoring with the same eagerness to understand more. but still, in a busy life, and in one mainly occupied with military matters, such as that of neoptolemus was at that time, even that limited degree of acquaintance with philosophy may be of great use, and may yield fruit, not perhaps so plentiful as a thorough knowledge of the whole of philosophy, but yet such as in some degree may at times deliver us from the dominion of our desires, our sorrows, and our fears; just as the effect of that discussion which we lately maintained in my tusculan villa seemed to be that a great contempt of death was engendered, which contempt is of no small efficacy towards delivering the mind from fear; for whoever dreads what cannot be avoided can by no means live with a quiet and tranquil mind. but he who is under no fear of death, not only because it is a thing absolutely inevitable but also because he is persuaded that death itself hath nothing terrible in it, provides himself with a very great resource towards a happy life. however, i am not tolerant that many will argue strenuously against us; and, indeed, that is a thing which can never be avoided, except by abstaining from writing at all. for if my orations, which were addressed to the judgment and approbation of the people (for that is a popular art, and the object of oratory is popular applause), have been criticised by some people who are inclined to withhold their praise from everything but what they are persuaded they can attain to themselves, and who limit their ideas of good speaking by the hopes which they conceive of what they themselves may attain to, and who declare, when they are overwhelmed with a flow of words and sentences, that they prefer the utmost poverty of thought and expression to that plenty and copiousness (from which arose the attic kind of oratory, which they who professed it were strangers to, though they have now been some time silenced, and laughed out of the very courts of justice), what may i not expect, when at present i cannot have the least countenance from the people by whom i used to be upheld before? for philosophy is satisfied with a few judges, and of her own accord industriously avoids the multitude, who are jealous of it, and utterly displeased with it; so that, should any one undertake to cry down the whole of it, he would have the people on his side; while, if he should attack that school which i particularly profess, he would have great assistance from those of the other philosophers. ii. but i have answered the detractors of philosophy in general, in my hortensius. and what i had to say in favor of the academics, is, i think, explained with sufficient accuracy in my four books of the academic question. but yet i am so far from desiring that no one should write against me, that it is what i most earnestly wish; for philosophy would never have been in such esteem in greece itself, if it had not been for the strength which it acquired from the contentions and disputations of the most learned men; and therefore i recommend all men who have abilities to follow my advice to snatch this art also from declining greece, and to transport it to this city; as our ancestors by their study and industry have imported all their other arts which were worth having. thus the praise of oratory, raised from a low degree, is arrived at such perfection that it must now decline, and, as is the nature of all things, verge to its dissolution in a very short time. let philosophy, then, derive its birth in latin language from this time, and let us lend it our assistance, and bear patiently to be contradicted and refuted; and although those men may dislike such treatment who are bound and devoted to certain predetermined opinions, and are under such obligations to maintain them that they are forced, for the sake of consistency, to adhere to them even though they do not themselves wholly approve of them; we, on the other hand, who pursue only probabilities, and who cannot go beyond that which seems really likely, can confute others without obstinacy, and are prepared to be confuted ourselves without resentment. besides, if these studies are ever brought home to us, we shall not want even greek libraries, in which there is an infinite number of books, by reason of the multitude of authors among them; for it is a common practice with many to repeat the same things which have been written by others, which serves no purpose but to stuff their shelves; and this will be our case, too, if many apply themselves to this study. iii. but let us excite those, if possible, who have had a liberal education, and are masters of an elegant style, and who philosophize with reason and method. for there is a certain class of them who would willingly be called philosophers, whose books in our language are said to be numerous, and which i do not despise; for, indeed, i never read them: but still, because the authors themselves declare that they write without any regularity, or method, or elegance, or ornament, i do not care to read what must be so void of entertainment. there is no one in the least acquainted with literature who does not know the style and sentiments of that school; wherefore, since they are at no pains to express themselves well, i do not see why they should be read by anybody except by one another. let them read them, if they please, who are of the same opinions; for in the same manner as all men read plato and the other socratics, with those who sprung from them, even those who do not agree with their opinions, or are very indifferent about them; but scarcely any one except their own disciples take epicurus or metrodorus into their hands; so they alone read these latin books who think that the arguments contained in them are sound. but, in my opinion, whatever is published should be recommended to the reading of every man of learning; and though we may not succeed in this ourselves, yet nevertheless we must be sensible that this ought to be the aim of every writer. and on this account i have always been pleased with the custom of the peripatetics and academics, of disputing on both sides of the question; not solely from its being the only method of discovering what is probable on every subject, but also because it affords the greatest scope for practising eloquence; a method that aristotle first made use of, and afterward all the aristotelians; and in our own memory plilo, whom we have often heard, appointed one time to treat of the precepts of the rhetoricians, and another for philosophical discussion, to which custom i was brought to conform by my friends at my tusculum; and accordingly our leisure time was spent in this manner. and therefore, as yesterday before noon we applied ourselves to speaking, and in the afternoon went down into the academy, the discussions which were held there i have acquainted you with, not in the manner of a narration, but in almost the very same words which were employed in the debate. iv. the discourse, then, was introduced in this manner while we were walking, and it was commenced by some such an opening as this: _a._ it is not to be expressed how much i was delighted, or rather edified, by your discourse of yesterday. for although i am conscious to myself that i have never been too fond of life, yet at times, when i have considered that there would be an end to this life, and that i must some time or other part with all its good things, a certain dread and uneasiness used to intrude itself on my thoughts; but now, believe me, i am so freed from that kind of uneasiness that there is nothing that i think less worth any regard. _m._ i am not at all surprised at that, for it is the effect of philosophy, which is the medicine of our souls; it banishes all groundless apprehensions, frees us from desires, and drives away fears: but it has not the same influence over all men; it is of very great influence when it falls in with a disposition well adapted to it. for not only does fortune, as the old proverb says, assist the bold, but reason does so in a still greater degree; for it, by certain precepts, as it were, strengthens even courage itself. you were born naturally great and soaring, and with a contempt for all things which pertain to man alone; therefore a discourse against death took easy possession of a brave soul. but do you imagine that these same arguments have any force with those very persons who have invented, and canvassed, and published them, excepting indeed some very few particular persons? for how few philosophers will you meet with whose life and manners are conformable to the dictates of reason! who look on their profession, not as a means of displaying their learning, but as a rule for their own practice! who follow their own precepts, and comply with their own decrees! you may see some of such levity and such vanity, that it would have been better for them to have been ignorant; some covetous of money, some others eager for glory, many slaves to their lusts; so that their discourses and their actions are most strangely at variance; than which nothing in my opinion can be more unbecoming: for just as if one who professed to teach grammar should speak with impropriety, or a master of music sing out of tune, such conduct has the worst appearance in these men, because they blunder in the very particular with which they profess that they are well acquainted. so a philosopher who errs in the conduct of his life is the more infamous because he is erring in the very thing which he pretends to teach, and, while he lays down rules to regulate life by, is irregular in his own life. v. _a._ should this be the case, is it not to be feared that you are dressing up philosophy in false colors? for what stronger argument can there be that it is of little use than that some very profound philosophers live in a discreditable manner? _m._ that, indeed, is no argument at all, for as all the fields which are cultivated are not fruitful (and this sentiment of accius is false, and asserted without any foundation, the ground you sow on is of small avail; to yield a crop good seed can never fail), it is not every mind which has been properly cultivated that produces fruit; and, to go on with the comparison, as a field, although it may be naturally fruitful, cannot produce a crop without dressing, so neither can the mind without education; such is the weakness of either without the other. whereas philosophy is the culture of the mind: this it is which plucks up vices by the roots; prepares the mind for the receiving of seeds; commits them to it, or, as i may say, sows them, in the hope that, when come to maturity, they may produce a plentiful harvest. let us proceed, then, as we began. say, if you please, what shall be the subject of our disputation. _a._ i look on pain to be the greatest of all evils. _m._ what, even greater than infamy? _a._ i dare not indeed assert that; and i blush to think i am so soon driven from my ground. _m._ you would have had greater reason for blushing had you persevered in it; for what is so unbecoming--what can appear worse to you, than disgrace, wickedness, immorality? to avoid which, what pain is there which we ought not (i will not say to avoid shirking, but even) of our own accord to encounter, and undergo, and even to court? _a._ i am entirely of that opinion; but, notwithstanding that pain is not the greatest evil, yet surely it is an evil. _m._ do you perceive, then, how much of the terror of pain you have given up on a small hint? _a._ i see that plainly; but i should be glad to give up more of it. _m._ i will endeavor to make you do so; but it is a great undertaking, and i must have a disposition on your part which is not inclined to offer any obstacles. _a._ you shall have such: for as i behaved yesterday, so now i will follow reason wherever she leads. vi. _m._ first, then, i will speak of the weakness of many philosophers, and those, too, of various sects; the head of whom, both in authority and antiquity, was aristippus, the pupil of socrates, who hesitated not to say that pain was the greatest of all evils. and after him epicurus easily gave in to this effeminate and enervated doctrine. after him hieronymus the rhodian said, that to be without pain was the chief good, so great an evil did pain appear to him to be. the rest, with the exceptions of zeno, aristo, pyrrho, were pretty much of the same opinion that you were of just now--that it was indeed an evil, but that there were many worse. when, then, nature herself, and a certain generous feeling of virtue, at once prevents you from persisting in the assertion that pain is the chief evil, and when you were driven from such an opinion when disgrace was contrasted with pain, shall philosophy, the preceptress of life, cling to this idea for so many ages? what duty of life, what praise, what reputation, would be of such consequence that a man should be desirous of gaining it at the expense of submitting to bodily pain, when he has persuaded himself that pain is the greatest evil? on the other side, what disgrace, what ignominy, would he not submit to that he might avoid pain, when persuaded that it was the greatest of evils? besides, what person, if it be only true that pain is the greatest of evils, is not miserable, not only when he actually feels pain, but also whenever he is aware that it may befall him. and who is there whom pain may not befall? so that it is clear that there is absolutely no one who can possibly be happy. metrodorus, indeed, thinks that man perfectly happy whose body is free from all disorders, and who has an assurance that it will always continue so; but who is there who can be assured of that? vii. but epicurus, indeed, says such things that it should seem that his design was only to make people laugh; for he affirms somewhere that if a wise man were to be burned or put to the torture--you expect, perhaps, that he is going to say he would bear it, he would support himself under it with resolution, he would not yield to it (and that by hercules! would be very commendable, and worthy of that very hercules whom i have just invoked): but even this will not satisfy epicurus, that robust and hardy man! no; his wise man, even if he were in phalaris's bull, would say, how sweet it is! how little do i regard it! what, sweet? is it not sufficient, if it is not disagreeable? but those very men who deny pain to be an evil are not in the habit of saying that it is agreeable to any one to be tormented; they rather say that it is cruel, or hard to bear, afflicting, unnatural, but still not an evil: while this man who says that it is the only evil, and the very worst of all evils, yet thinks that a wise man would pronounce it sweet. i do not require of you to speak of pain in the same words which epicurus uses--a man, as you know, devoted to pleasure: he may make no difference, if he pleases, between phalaris's bull and his own bed; but i cannot allow the wise man to be so indifferent about pain. if he bears it with courage, it is sufficient: that he should rejoice in it, i do not expect; for pain is, beyond all question, sharp, bitter, against nature, hard to submit to and to bear. observe philoctetes: we may allow him to lament, for he saw hercules himself groaning loudly through extremity of pain on mount oeta. the arrows with which hercules presented him were then no consolation to him, when the viper's bite, impregnating his veins with poison, rack'd him with its bitter pains. and therefore he cries out, desiring help, and wishing to die, oh that some friendly hand its aid would lend, my body from this rock's vast height to send into the briny deep! i'm all on fire, and by this fatal wound must soon expire. it is hard to say that the man who was obliged to cry out in this manner was not oppressed with evil, and great evil too. viii. but let us observe hercules himself, who was subdued by pain at the very time when he was on the point of attaining immortality by death. what words does sophocles here put in his mouth, in his trachiniæ? who, when deianira had put upon him a tunic dyed in the centaur's blood, and it stuck to his entrails, says, what tortures i endure no words can tell, far greater these, than those which erst befell from the dire terror of thy consort, jove-- e'en stern eurystheus' dire command above; this of thy daughter, oeneus, is the fruit, beguiling me with her envenom'd suit, whose close embrace doth on my entrails prey, consuming life; my lungs forbid to play; the blood forsakes my veins; my manly heart forgets to beat; enervated, each part neglects its office, while my fatal doom proceeds ignobly from the weaver's loom. the hand of foe ne'er hurt me, nor the fierce giant issuing from his parent earth. ne'er could the centaur such a blow enforce, no barbarous foe, nor all the grecian force; this arm no savage people could withstand, whose realms i traversed to reform the land. thus, though i ever bore a manly heart, i fall a victim to a woman's art. ix. assist, my son, if thou that name dost hear, my groans preferring to thy mother's tear: convey her here, if, in thy pious heart, thy mother shares not an unequal part: proceed, be bold, thy father's fate bemoan, nations will join, you will not weep alone. oh, what a sight is this same briny source, unknown before, through all my labors' course! that virtue, which could brave each toil but late, with woman's weakness now bewails its fate. approach, my son; behold thy father laid, a wither'd carcass that implores thy aid; let all behold: and thou, imperious jove, on me direct thy lightning from above: now all its force the poison doth assume, and my burnt entrails with its flame consume. crestfallen, unembraced, i now let fall listless, those hands that lately conquer'd all; when the nemæan lion own'd their force, and he indignant fell a breathless corse; the serpent slew, of the lernean lake, as did the hydra of its force partake: by this, too, fell the erymanthian boar: e'en cerberus did his weak strength deplore. this sinewy arm did overcome with ease that dragon, guardian of the golden fleece. my many conquests let some others trace; it's mine to say, i never knew disgrace.[ ] can we then, despise pain, when we see hercules himself giving vent to his expressions of agony with such impatience? x. let us see what Æschylus says, who was not only a poet but a pythagorean philosopher also, for that is the account which you have received of him; how doth he make prometheus bear the pain he suffered for the lemnian theft, when he clandestinely stole away the celestial fire, and bestowed it on men, and was severely punished by jupiter for the theft. fastened to mount caucasus, he speaks thus: thou heav'n-born race of titans here fast bound, behold thy brother! as the sailors sound with care the bottom, and their ships confine to some safe shore, with anchor and with line; so, by jove's dread decree, the god of fire confines me here the victim of jove's ire. with baneful art his dire machine he shapes; from such a god what mortal e'er escapes? when each third day shall triumph o'er the night, then doth the vulture, with his talons light, seize on my entrails; which, in rav'nous guise, he preys on! then with wing extended flies aloft, and brushes with his plumes the gore: but when dire jove my liver doth restore, back he returns impetuous to his prey, clapping his wings, he cuts th' ethereal way. thus do i nourish with my blood this pest, confined my arms, unable to contest; entreating only that in pity jove would take my life, and this cursed plague remove. but endless ages past unheard my moan, sooner shall drops dissolve this very stone.[ ] and therefore it scarcely seems possible to avoid calling a man who is suffering, miserable; and if he is miserable, then pain is an evil. xi. _a._ hitherto you are on my side; i will see to that by-and-by; and, in the mean while, whence are those verses? i do not remember them. _m._ i will inform you, for you are in the right to ask. do you see that i have much leisure? _a._ what, then? _m._ i imagine, when you were at athens, you attended frequently at the schools of the philosophers. _a._ yes, and with great pleasure. _m._ you observed, then, that though none of them at that time were very eloquent, yet they used to mix verses with their harangues. _a._ yes, and particularly dionysius the stoic used to employ a great many. _m._ you say right; but they were quoted without any appropriateness or elegance. but our friend philo used to give a few select lines and well adapted; and in imitation of him, ever since i took a fancy to this kind of elderly declamation, i have been very fond of quoting our poets; and where i cannot be supplied from them, i translate from the greek, that the latin language may not want any kind of ornament in this kind of disputation. but, do you not see how much harm is done by poets? they introduce the bravest men lamenting over their misfortunes: they soften our minds; and they are, besides, so entertaining, that we do not only read them, but get them by heart. thus the influence of the poets is added to our want of discipline at home, and our tender and delicate manner of living, so that between them they have deprived virtue of all its vigor and energy. plato, therefore, was right in banishing them from his commonwealth, where he required the best morals, and the best form of government. but we, who have all our learning from greece, read and learn these works of theirs from our childhood; and look on this as a liberal and learned education. xii. but why are we angry with the poets? we may find some philosophers, those masters of virtue, who have taught that pain was the greatest of evils. but you, young man, when you said but just now that it appeared so to you, upon being asked by me what appeared greater than infamy, gave up that opinion at a word. suppose i ask epicurus the same question. he will answer that a trifling degree of pain is a greater evil than the greatest infamy; for that there is no evil in infamy itself, unless attended with pain. what pain, then, attends epicurus, when he says that very thing, that pain is the greatest evil! and yet nothing can be a greater disgrace to a philosopher than to talk thus. therefore, you allowed enough when you admitted that infamy appeared to you to be a greater evil than pain. and if you abide by this admission, you will see how far pain should be resisted; and that our inquiry should be not so much whether pain be an evil, as how the mind may be fortified for resisting it. the stoics infer from some petty quibbling arguments that it is no evil, as if the dispute were about a word, and not about the thing itself. why do you impose upon me, zeno? for when you deny what appears very dreadful to me to be an evil, i am deceived, and am at a loss to know why that which appears to me to be a most miserable thing should be no evil. the answer is, that nothing is an evil but what is base and vicious. you return to your trifling, for you do not remove what made me uneasy. i know that pain is not vice--you need not inform me of that: but show me that it makes no difference to me whether i am in pain or not. it has never anything to do, say you, with a happy life, for that depends upon virtue alone; but yet pain is to be avoided. if i ask, why? it is disagreeable, against nature, hard to bear, woful and afflicting. xiii. here are many words to express that by so many different forms which we call by the single word evil. you are defining pain, instead of removing it, when you say, it is disagreeable, unnatural, scarcely possible to be endured or borne, nor are you wrong in saying so: but the man who vaunts himself in such a manner should not give way in his conduct, if it be true that nothing is good but what is honest, and nothing evil but what is disgraceful. this would be wishing, not proving. this argument is a better one, and has more truth in it--that all things which nature abhors are to be looked upon as evil; that those which she approves of are to be considered as good: for when this is admitted, and the dispute about words removed, that which they with reason embrace, and which we call honest, right, becoming, and sometimes include under the general name of virtue, appears so far superior to everything else that all other things which are looked upon as the gifts of fortune, or the good things of the body, seem trifling and insignificant; and no evil whatever, nor all the collective body of evils together, appears to be compared to the evil of infamy. wherefore, if, as you granted in the beginning, infamy is worse than pain, pain is certainly nothing; for while it appears to you base and unmanly to groan, cry out, lament, or faint under pain; while you cherish notions of probity, dignity, honor, and, keeping your eye on them, refrain yourself, pain will certainly yield to virtue, and, by the influence of imagination, will lose its whole force.--for you must either admit that there is no such thing as virtue, or you must despise every kind of pain. will you allow of such a virtue as prudence, without which no virtue whatever can even be conceived? what, then? will that suffer you to labor and take pains to no purpose? will temperance permit you to do anything to excess? will it be possible for justice to be maintained by one who through the force of pain discovers secrets, or betrays his confederates, or deserts many duties of life? will you act in a manner consistently with courage, and its attendants, greatness of soul, resolution, patience, and contempt for all worldly things? can you hear yourself called a great man when you lie grovelling, dejected, and deploring your condition with a lamentable voice; no one would call you even a man while in such a condition. you must therefore either abandon all pretensions to courage, or else pain must be put out of the question. xiv. you know very well that, even though part of your corinthian furniture were gone, the remainder might be safe without that; but if you lose one virtue (though virtue in reality cannot be lost), still if, i say, you should acknowledge that you were deficient in one, you would be stripped of all. can you, then, call yourself a brave man, of a great soul, endued with patience and steadiness above the frowns of fortune? or philoctetes? for i choose to instance him, rather than yourself, for he certainly was not a brave man, who lay in his bed, which was watered with his tears, whose groans, bewailings, and whose bitter cries, with grief incessant rent the very skies. i do not deny pain to be pain--for were that the case, in what would courage consist?--but i say it should be assuaged by patience, if there be such a thing as patience: if there be no such thing, why do we speak so in praise of philosophy? or why do we glory in its name? does pain annoy us? let it sting us to the heart: if you are without defensive armor, bare your throat to it; but if you are secured by vulcanian armor, that is to say by resolution, resist it. should you fail to do so, that guardian of your honor, your courage, will forsake and leave you.--by the laws of lycurgus, and by those which were given to the cretans by jupiter, or which minos established under the direction of jupiter, as the poets say, the youths of the state are trained by the practice of hunting, running, enduring hunger and thirst, cold and heat. the boys at sparta are scourged so at the altars that blood follows the lash in abundance; nay, sometimes, as i used to hear when i was there, they are whipped even to death; and yet not one of them was ever heard to cry out, or so much as groan. what, then? shall men not be able to bear what boys do? and shall custom have such great force, and reason none at all? xv. there is some difference between labor and pain; they border upon one another, but still there is a certain difference between them. labor is a certain exercise of the mind or body, in some employment or undertaking of serious trouble and importance; but pain is a sharp motion in the body, disagreeable to our senses.--both these feelings, the greeks, whose language is more copious than ours, express by the common name of [greek: ponos]: therefore they call industrious men painstaking, or, rather, fond of labor; we, more conveniently, call them laborious; for laboring is one thing, and enduring pain another. you see, o greece! your barrenness of words, sometimes, though you think you are always so rich in them. i say, then, that there is a difference between laboring and being in pain. when caius marius had an operation performed for a swelling in his thigh, he felt pain; when he headed his troops in a very hot season, he labored. yet these two feelings bear some resemblance to one another; for the accustoming ourselves to labor makes the endurance of pain more easy to us. and it was because they were influenced by this reason that the founders of the grecian form of government provided that the bodies of their youth should be strengthened by labor, which custom the spartans transferred even to their women, who in other cities lived more delicately, keeping within the walls of their houses; but it was otherwise with the spartans. the spartan women, with a manly air, fatigues and dangers with their husbands share; they in fantastic sports have no delight, partners with them in exercise and fight. and in these laborious exercises pain interferes sometimes. they are thrown down, receive blows, have bad falls, and are bruised, and the labor itself produces a sort of callousness to pain. xvi. as to military service (i speak of our own, not of that of the spartans, for they used to march slowly to the sound of the flute, and scarce a word of command was given without an anapæst), you may see, in the first place, whence the very name of an army (_exercitus_[ ]) is derived; and, secondly, how great the labor is of an army on its march: then consider that they carry more than a fortnight's provision, and whatever else they may want; that they carry the burden of the stakes,[ ] for as to shield, sword, or helmet, they look on them as no more encumbrance than their own limbs, for they say that arms are the limbs of a soldier, and those, indeed, they carry so commodiously that, when there is occasion, they throw down their burdens, and use their arms as readily as their limbs. why need i mention the exercises of the legions? and how great the labor is which is undergone in the running, encounters, shouts! hence it is that their minds are worked up to make so light of wounds in action. take a soldier of equal bravery, but undisciplined, and he will seem a woman. why is it that there is this sensible difference between a raw recruit and a veteran soldier? the age of the young soldiers is for the most part in their favor; but it is practice only that enables men to bear labor and despise wounds. moreover, we often see, when the wounded are carried off the field, the raw, untried soldier, though but slightly wounded, cries out most shamefully; but the more brave, experienced veteran only inquires for some one to dress his wounds, and says, patroclus, to thy aid i must appeal ere worse ensue, my bleeding wounds to heal; the sons of Æsculapius are employ'd, no room for me, so many are annoy'd. xvii. this is certainly eurypylus himself. what an experienced man!--while his friend is continually enlarging on his misfortunes, you may observe that he is so far from weeping that he even assigns a reason why he should bear his wounds with patience. who at his enemy a stroke directs, his sword to light upon himself expects. patroclus, i suppose, will lead him off to his chamber to bind up his wounds, at least if he be a man: but not a word of that; he only inquires how the battle went: say how the argives bear themselves in fight? and yet no words can show the truth as well as those, your deeds and visible sufferings. peace! and my wounds bind up; but though eurypylus could bear these afflictions, Æsopus could not, where hector's fortune press'd our yielding troops; and he explains the rest, though in pain. so unbounded is military glory in a brave man! shall, then, a veteran soldier be able to behave in this manner, and shall a wise and learned man not be able? surely the latter might be able to bear pain better, and in no small degree either. at present, however, i am confining myself to what is engendered by practice and discipline. i am not yet come to speak of reason and philosophy. you may often hear of old women living without victuals for three or four days; but take away a wrestler's provisions but for one day, and he will implore the aid of jupiter olympius, the very god for whom he exercises himself: he will cry out that he cannot endure it. great is the force of custom! sportsmen will continue whole nights in the snow; they will bear being almost frozen upon the mountains. from practice boxers will not so much as utter a groan, however bruised by the cestus. but what do you think of those to whom a victory in the olympic games seemed almost on a par with the ancient consulships of the roman people? what wounds will the gladiators bear, who are either barbarians, or the very dregs of mankind! how do they, who are trained to it, prefer being wounded to basely avoiding it! how often do they prove that they consider nothing but the giving satisfaction to their masters or to the people! for when covered with wounds, they send to their masters to learn their pleasure: if it is their will, they are ready to lie down and die. what gladiator, of even moderate reputation, ever gave a sigh? who ever turned pale? who ever disgraced himself either in the actual combat, or even when about to die? who that had been defeated ever drew in his neck to avoid the stroke of death? so great is the force of practice, deliberation, and custom! shall this, then, be done by a samnite rascal, worthy of his trade; and shall a man born to glory have so soft a part in his soul as not to be able to fortify it by reason and reflection? the sight of the gladiators' combats is by some looked on as cruel and inhuman, and i do not know, as it is at present managed, but it may be so; but when the guilty fought, we might receive by our ears perhaps (but certainly by our eyes we could not) better training to harden us against pain and death. xviii. i have now said enough about the effects of exercise, custom, and careful meditation. proceed we now to consider the force of reason, unless you have something to reply to what has been said. _a._ that i should interrupt you! by no means; for your discourse has brought me over to your opinion. let the stoics, then, think it their business to determine whether pain be an evil or not, while they endeavor to show by some strained and trifling conclusions, which are nothing to the purpose, that pain is no evil. my opinion is, that whatever it is, it is not so great as it appears; and i say, that men are influenced to a great extent by some false representations and appearance of it, and that all which is really felt is capable of being endured. where shall i begin, then? shall i superficially go over what i said before, that my discourse may have a greater scope? this, then, is agreed upon by all, and not only by learned men, but also by the unlearned, that it becomes the brave and magnanimous--those that have patience and a spirit above this world--not to give way to pain. nor has there ever been any one who did not commend a man who bore it in this manner. that, then, which is expected from a brave man, and is commended when it is seen, it must surely be base in any one to be afraid of at its approach, or not to bear when it comes. but i would have you consider whether, as all the right affections of the soul are classed under the name of virtues, the truth is that this is not properly the name of them all, but that they all have their name from that leading virtue which is superior to all the rest: for the name "virtue" comes from _vir_, a man, and courage is the peculiar distinction of a man: and this virtue has two principal duties, to despise death and pain. we must, then, exert these, if we would be men of virtue, or, rather, if we would be men, because virtue (_virtus_) takes its very name from _vir_, man. xix. you may inquire, perhaps, how? and such an inquiry is not amiss, for philosophy is ready with her assistance. epicurus offers himself to you, a man far from a bad--or, i should rather say, a very good man: he advises no more than he knows. "despise pain," says he. who is it saith this? is it the same man who calls pain the greatest of all evils? it is not, indeed, very consistent in him. let us hear what he says: "if the pain is excessive, it must needs be short." i must have that over again, for i do not apprehend what you mean exactly by "excessive" or "short." that is excessive than which nothing can be greater; that is short than which nothing is shorter. i do not regard the greatness of any pain from which, by reason of the shortness of its continuance, i shall be delivered almost before it reaches me. but if the pain be as great as that of philoctetes, it will appear great indeed to me, but yet not the greatest that i am capable of bearing; for the pain is confined to my foot. but my eye may pain me, i may have a pain in the head, or sides, or lungs, or in every part of me. it is far, then, from being excessive. therefore, says he, pain of a long continuance has more pleasure in it than uneasiness. now, i cannot bring myself to say so great a man talks nonsense; but i imagine he is laughing at us. my opinion is that the greatest pain (i say the greatest, though it may be ten atoms less than another) is not therefore short, because acute. i could name to you a great many good men who have been tormented many years with the acutest pains of the gout. but this cautious man doth not determine the measure of that greatness or of duration, so as to enable us to know what he calls excessive with regard to pain, or short with respect to its continuance. let us pass him by, then, as one who says just nothing at all; and let us force him to acknowledge, notwithstanding he might behave himself somewhat boldly under his colic and his strangury, that no remedy against pain can be had from him who looks on pain as the greatest of all evils. we must apply, then, for relief elsewhere, and nowhere better (if we seek for what is most consistent with itself) than to those who place the chief good in honesty, and the greatest evil in infamy. you dare not so much as groan, or discover the least uneasiness in their company, for virtue itself speaks to you through them. xx. will you, when you may observe children at lacedæmon, and young men at olympia, and barbarians in the amphitheatre, receive the severest wounds, and bear them without once opening their mouths--will you, i say, if any pain should by chance attack you, cry out like a woman? will you not rather bear it with resolution and constancy? and not cry, it is intolerable; nature cannot bear it! i hear what you say: boys bear this because they are led thereto by glory; some bear it through shame, many through fear, and yet are we afraid that nature cannot bear what is borne by many, and in such different circumstances? nature not only bears it, but challenges it, for there is nothing with her preferable, nothing which she desires more than credit, and reputation, and praise, and honor, and glory. i choose here to describe this one thing under many names, and i have used many that you may have the clearer idea of it; for what i mean to say is, that whatever is desirable of itself, proceeding from virtue, or placed in virtue, and commendable on its own account (which i would rather agree to call the only good than deny it to be the chief good) is what men should prefer above all things. and as we declare this to be the case with respect to honesty, so we speak in the contrary manner of infamy; nothing is so odious, so detestable, nothing so unworthy of a man. and if you are thoroughly convinced of this (for, at the beginning of this discourse, you allowed that there appeared to you more evil in infamy than in pain), it follows that you ought to have the command over yourself, though i scarcely know how this expression may seem an accurate one, which appears to represent man as made up of two natures, so that one should be in command and the other be subject to it. xxi. yet this division does not proceed from ignorance; for the soul admits of a twofold division, one of which partakes of reason, the other is without it. when, therefore, we are ordered to give a law to ourselves, the meaning is, that reason should restrain our rashness. there is in the soul of every man something naturally soft, low, enervated in a manner, and languid. were there nothing besides this, men would be the greatest of monsters; but there is present to every man reason, which presides over and gives laws to all; which, by improving itself, and making continual advances, becomes perfect virtue. it behooves a man, then, to take care that reason shall have the command over that part which is bound to practise obedience. in what manner? you will say. why, as a master has over his slave, a general over his army, a father over his son. if that part of the soul which i have called soft behaves disgracefully, if it gives itself up to lamentations and womanish tears, then let it be restrained, and committed to the care of friends and relations, for we often see those persons brought to order by shame whom no reasons can influence. therefore, we should confine those feelings, like our servants, in safe custody, and almost with chains. but those who have more resolution, and yet are not utterly immovable, we should encourage with our exhortations, as we would good soldiers, to recollect themselves, and maintain their honor. that wisest man of all greece, in the niptræ, does not lament too much over his wounds, or, rather, he is moderate in his grief: move slow, my friends; your hasty speed refrain, lest by your motion you increase my pain. pacuvius is better in this than sophocles, for in the one ulysses bemoans his wounds too vehemently; for the very people who carried him after he was wounded, though his grief was moderate, yet, considering the dignity of the man, did not scruple to say, and thou, ulysses, long to war inured, thy wounds, though great, too feebly hast endured. the wise poet understood that custom was no contemptible instructor how to bear pain. but the same hero complains with more decency, though in great pain: assist, support me, never leave me so; unbind my wounds, oh! execrable woe! he begins to give way, but instantly checks himself: away! begone! but cover first the sore; for your rude hands but make my pains the more. do you observe how he constrains himself? not that his bodily pains were less, but because he checks the anguish of his mind. therefore, in the conclusion of the niptræ, he blames others, even when he himself is dying: complaints of fortune may become the man, none but a woman will thus weeping stand. and so that soft place in his soul obeys his reason, just as an abashed soldier does his stern commander. xxii. the man, then, in whom absolute wisdom exists (such a man, indeed, we have never as yet seen, but the philosophers have described in their writings what sort of man he will be, if he should exist); such a man, or at least that perfect and absolute reason which exists in him, will have the same authority over the inferior part as a good parent has over his dutiful children: he will bring it to obey his nod without any trouble or difficulty. he will rouse himself, prepare and arm himself, to oppose pain as he would an enemy. if you inquire what arms he will provide himself with, they will be contention, encouragement, discourse with himself. he will say thus to himself: take care that you are guilty of nothing base, languid, or unmanly. he will turn over in his mind all the different kinds of honor. zeno of elea will occur to him, who suffered everything rather than betray his confederates in the design of putting an end to the tyranny. he will reflect on anaxarchus, the pupil of democritus, who, having fallen into the hands of nicocreon, king of cyprus, without the least entreaty for mercy or refusal, submitted to every kind of torture. calanus the indian will occur to him, an ignorant man and a barbarian, born at the foot of mount caucasus, who committed himself to the flames by his own free, voluntary act. but we, if we have the toothache, or a pain in the foot, or if the body be anyways affected, cannot bear it. for our sentiments of pain as well as pleasure are so trifling and effeminate, we are so enervated and relaxed by luxuries, that we cannot bear the sting of a bee without crying out. but caius marius, a plain countryman, but of a manly soul, when he had an operation performed on him, as i mentioned above, at first refused to be tied down; and he is the first instance of any one's having had an operation performed on him without being tied down. why, then, did others bear it afterward? why, from the force of example. you see, then, that pain exists more in opinion than in nature; and yet the same marius gave a proof that there is something very sharp in pain for he would not submit to have the other thigh cut. so that he bore his pain with resolution as a man; but, like a reasonable person, he was not willing to undergo any greater pain without some necessary reason. the whole, then, consists in this--that you should have command over yourself. i have already told you what kind of command this is; and by considering what is most consistent with patience, fortitude, and greatness of soul, a man not only restrains himself, but, somehow or other, mitigates even pain itself. xxiii. even as in a battle the dastardly and timorous soldier throws away his shield on the first appearance of an enemy, and runs as fast as he can, and on that account loses his life sometimes, though he has never received even one wound, when he who stands his ground has nothing of the sort happen to him, so they who cannot bear the appearance of pain throw themselves away, and give themselves up to affliction and dismay. but they that oppose it, often come off more than a match for it. for the body has a certain resemblance to the soul: as burdens are more easily borne the more the body is exerted, while they crush us if we give way, so the soul by exerting itself resists the whole weight that would oppress it; but if it yields, it is so pressed that it cannot support itself. and if we consider things truly, the soul should exert itself in every pursuit, for that is the only security for its doing its duty. but this should be principally regarded in pain, that we must not do anything timidly, or dastardly, or basely, or slavishly, or effeminately, and, above all things, we must dismiss and avoid that philoctetean sort of outcry. a man is allowed sometimes to groan, but yet seldom; but it is not permissible even in a woman to howl; for such a noise as this is forbidden, by the twelve tables, to be used even at funerals. nor does a wise or brave man ever groan, unless when he exerts himself to give his resolution greater force, as they who run in the stadium make as much noise as they can. the wrestlers, too, do the same when they are training; and the boxers, when they aim a blow with the cestus at their adversary, give a groan, not because they are in pain, or from a sinking of their spirits, but because their whole body is put upon the stretch by the throwing-out of these groans, and the blow comes the stronger. xxiv. what! they who would speak louder than ordinary are they satisfied with working their jaws, sides, or tongue or stretching the common organs of speech and utterance? the whole body and every muscle is at full stretch if i may be allowed the expression; every nerve is exerted to assist their voice. i have actually seen the knees of marcus antonius touch the ground when he was speaking with vehemence for himself, with relation to the varian law. for, as the engines you throw stones or darts with throw them out with the greater force the more they are strained and drawn back; so it is in speaking, running, or boxing--the more people strain themselves, the greater their force. since, therefore, this exertion has so much influence--if in a moment of pain groans help to strengthen the mind, let us use them; but if they be groans of lamentation, if they be the expression of weakness or abjectness, or unmanly weeping, then i should scarcely call him a man who yielded to them. for even supposing that such groaning could give any ease, it still should be considered whether it were consistent with a brave and resolute man. but if it does not ease our pain, why should we debase ourselves to no purpose? for what is more unbecoming in a man than to cry like a woman? but this precept which is laid down with respect to pain is not confined to it. we should apply this exertion of the soul to everything else. is anger inflamed? is lust excited? we must have recourse to the same citadel, and apply to the same arms. but since it is pain which we are at present discussing, we will let the other subjects alone. to bear pain, then, sedately and calmly, it is of great use to consider with all our soul, as the saying is, how noble it is to do so, for we are naturally desirous (as i said before, but it cannot be too often repeated) and very much inclined to what is honorable, of which, if we discover but the least glimpse, there is nothing which we are not prepared to undergo and suffer to attain it. from this impulse of our minds, this desire for genuine glory and honorable conduct, it is that such dangers are supported in war, and that brave men are not sensible of their wounds in action, or, if they are sensible of them, prefer death to the departing but the least step from their honor. the decii saw the shining swords of their enemies when they were rushing into the battle. but the honorable character and the glory of the death which they were seeking made all fear of death of little weight. do you imagine that epaminondas groaned when he perceived that his life was flowing out with his blood? no; for he left his country triumphing over the lacedæmonians, whereas he had found it in subjection to them. these are the comforts, these are the things that assuage the greatest pain. xxv. you may ask, how the case is in peace? what is to be done at home? how we are to behave in bed? you bring me back to the philosophers, who seldom go to war. among these, dionysius of heraclea, a man certainly of no resolution, having learned fortitude of zeno, quitted it on being in pain; for, being tormented with a pain in his kidneys, in bewailing himself he cried out that those things were false which he had formerly conceived of pain. and when his fellow-disciple, cleanthes, asked him why he had changed his opinion, he answered, "that the case of any man who had applied so much time to philosophy, and yet was unable to bear pain, might be a sufficient proof that pain is an evil; that he himself had spent many years at philosophy, and yet could not bear pain: it followed, therefore, that pain was an evil." it is reported that cleanthes on that struck his foot on the ground, and repeated a verse out of the epigonæ: amphiaraus, hear'st thou this below? he meant zeno: he was sorry the other had degenerated from him. but it was not so with our friend posidonius, whom i have often seen myself; and i will tell you what pompey used to say of him: that when he came to rhodes, after his departure from syria, he had a great desire to hear posidonius, but was informed that he was very ill of a severe fit of the gout; yet he had great inclination to pay a visit to so famous a philosopher. accordingly, when he had seen him, and paid his compliments, and had spoken with great respect of him, he said he was very sorry that he could not hear him lecture. "but indeed you may," replied the other, "nor will i suffer any bodily pain to occasion so great a man to visit me in vain." on this pompey relates that, as he lay on his bed, he disputed with great dignity and fluency on this very subject: that nothing was good but what was honest; and that in his paroxysms he would often say, "pain, it is to no purpose; notwithstanding you are troublesome, i will never acknowledge you an evil." and in general all celebrated and notorious afflictions become endurable by disregarding them. xxvi. do we not observe that where those exercises called gymnastic are in esteem, those who enter the lists never concern themselves about dangers? that where the praise of riding and hunting is highly esteemed, they who practice these arts decline no pain? what shall i say of our own ambitious pursuits or desire of honors? what fire have not candidates run through to gain a single vote? therefore africanus had always in his hands xenophon, the pupil of socrates, being particularly pleased with his saying, that the same labors were not equally heavy to the general and to the common man, because the honor itself made the labor lighter to the general. but yet, so it happens, that even with the illiterate vulgar an idea of honor is of great influence, though they cannot understand what it is. they are led by report and common opinion to look on that as honorable which has the general voice. not that i would have you, should the multitude be ever so fond of you, rely on their judgment, nor approve of everything which they think right: you must use your own judgment. if you are satisfied with yourself when you have approved of what is right, you will not only have the mastery over yourself (which i recommended to you just now), but over everybody, and everything. lay this down, then, as a rule, that a great capacity, and lofty elevation of soul, which distinguishes itself most by despising and looking down with contempt on pain, is the most excellent of all things, and the more so if it does not depend on the people and does not aim at applause, but derives its satisfaction from itself. besides, to me, indeed, everything seems the more commendable the less the people are courted, and the fewer eyes there are to see it. not that you should avoid the public, for every generous action loves the public view; yet no theatre for virtue is equal to a consciousness of it. xxvii. and let this be principally considered: that this bearing of pain, which i have often said is to be strengthened by an exertion of the soul, should be the same in everything. for you meet with many who, through a desire of victory, or for glory, or to maintain their rights, or their liberty, have boldly received wounds, and borne themselves up under them; and yet those very same persons, by relaxing that intenseness of their minds, were unequal to bearing the pain of a disease; for they did not support themselves under their former sufferings by reason or philosophy, but by inclination and glory. therefore some barbarians and savage people are able to fight very stoutly with the sword, but cannot bear sickness like men; but the grecians, men of no great courage, but as wise as human nature will admit of, cannot look an enemy in the face, yet the same will bear to be visited with sickness tolerably, and with a sufficiently manly spirit; and the cimbrians and celtiberians are very alert in battle, but bemoan themselves in sickness. for nothing can be consistent which has not reason for its foundation. but when you see those who are led by inclination or opinion, not retarded by pain in their pursuits, nor hindered by it from succeeding in them, you may conclude, either that pain is no evil, or that, notwithstanding you may choose to call an evil whatever is disagreeable and contrary to nature, yet it is so very trifling an evil that it may so effectually be got the better of by virtue as quite to disappear. and i would have you think of this night and day; for this argument will spread itself, and take up more room some time or other, and not be confined to pain alone; for if the motives to all our actions are to avoid disgrace and acquire honor, we may not only despise the stings of pain, but the storms of fortune, especially if we have recourse to that retreat which was pointed out in our yesterday's discussion; for, as if some god had advised a man who was pursued by pirates to throw himself overboard, saying, "there is something at hand to receive you; either a dolphin will take you up, as it did arion of methymna; or those horses sent by neptune to pelops (who are said to have carried chariots so rapidly as to be borne up by the waves) will receive you, and convey you wherever you please. cast away all fear." so, though your pains be ever so sharp and disagreeable, if the case is not such that it is worth your while to endure them, you see whither you may betake yourself. i think this will do for the present. but perhaps you still abide by your opinion. _a._ not in the least, indeed; and i hope i am freed by these two days' discourses from the fear of two things that i greatly dreaded. _m._ to-morrow, then, for rhetoric, as we were saying. but i see we must not drop our philosophy. _a._ no, indeed; we will have the one in the forenoon, and this at the usual time. _m._ it shall be so, and i will comply with your very laudable inclinations. * * * * * book iii. on grief of mind. i. what reason shall i assign, o brutus, why, as we consist of mind and body, the art of curing and preserving the body should be so much sought after, and the invention of it, as being so useful, should be ascribed to the immortal gods; but the medicine of the mind should not have been so much the object of inquiry while it was unknown, nor so much attended to and cultivated after its discovery, nor so well received or approved of by some, and accounted actually disagreeable, and looked upon with an envious eye by many? is it because we, by means of the mind, judge of the pains and disorders of the body, but do not, by means of the body, arrive at any perception of the disorders of the mind? hence it comes that the mind only judges of itself when that very faculty by which it is judged is in a bad state. had nature given us faculties for discerning and viewing herself, and could we go through life by keeping our eye on her--our best guide--there would be no reason certainly why any one should be in want of philosophy or learning; but, as it is, she has furnished us only with some feeble rays of light, which we immediately extinguish so completely by evil habits and erroneous opinions that the light of nature is nowhere visible. the seeds of virtues are natural to our constitutions, and, were they suffered to come to maturity, would naturally conduct us to a happy life; but now, as soon as we are born and received into the world, we are instantly familiarized with all kinds of depravity and perversity of opinions; so that we may be said almost to suck in error with our nurse's milk. when we return to our parents, and are put into the hands of tutors and governors, we are imbued with so many errors that truth gives place to falsehood, and nature herself to established opinion. ii. to these we may add the poets; who, on account of the appearance they exhibit of learning and wisdom, are heard, read, and got by heart, and make a deep impression on our minds. but when to these are added the people, who are, as it were, one great body of instructors, and the multitude, who declare unanimously for what is wrong, then are we altogether overwhelmed with bad opinions, and revolt entirely from nature; so that they seem to deprive us of our best guide who have decided that there is nothing better for man, nothing more worthy of being desired by him, nothing more excellent, than honors and commands, and a high reputation with the people; which indeed every excellent man aims at; but while he pursues that only true honor which nature has in view above all other objects, he finds himself busied in arrant trifles, and in pursuit of no conspicuous form of virtue, but only some shadowy representation of glory. for glory is a real and express substance, not a mere shadow. it consists in the united praise of good men, the free voice of those who form a true judgment of pre-eminent virtue; it is, as it were, the very echo of virtue; and being generally the attendant on laudable actions, should not be slighted by good men. but popular fame, which would pretend to imitate it, is hasty and inconsiderate, and generally commends wicked and immoral actions, and throws discredit upon the appearance and beauty of honesty by assuming a resemblance of it. and it is owing to their not being able to discover the difference between them that some men ignorant of real excellence, and in what it consists, have been the destruction of their country and of themselves. and thus the best men have erred, not so much in their intentions as by a mistaken conduct. what? is no cure to be attempted to be applied to those who are carried away by the love of money, or the lust of pleasures, by which they are rendered little short of madmen, which is the case of all weak people? or is it because the disorders of the mind are less dangerous than those of the body? or because the body will admit of a cure, while there is no medicine whatever for the mind? iii. but there are more disorders of the mind than of the body, and they are of a more dangerous nature; for these very disorders are the more offensive because they belong to the mind and disturb it; and the mind, when disordered, is, as ennius says, in a constant error: it can neither bear nor endure anything, and is under the perpetual influence of desires. now, what disorders can be worse to the body than these two distempers of the mind (for i overlook others), weakness and desire? but how, indeed, can it be maintained that the mind cannot prescribe for itself, when she it is who has invented the medicines for the body, when, with regard to bodily cures, constitution and nature have a great share, nor do all who suffer themselves to be cured find that effect instantly; but those minds which are disposed to be cured, and submit to the precepts of the wise, may undoubtedly recover a healthy state? philosophy is certainly the medicine of the soul, whose assistance we do not seek from abroad, as in bodily disorders, but we ourselves are bound to exert our utmost energy and power in order to effect our cure. but as to philosophy in general, i have, i think, in my hortensius, sufficiently spoken of the credit and attention which it deserves: since that, indeed, i have been continually either disputing or writing on its most material branches; and i have laid down in these books all the discussions which took place between myself and my particular friends at my tusculan villa. but as i have spoken in the two former of pain and death, this book shall be devoted to the account of the third day of our disputations. we came down into the academy when the day was already declining towards afternoon, and i asked one of those who were present to propose a subject for us to discourse on; and then the business was carried on in this manner: iv. _a._ my opinion is, that a wise man is subject to grief. _m._ what, and to the other perturbations of mind, as fears, lusts, anger? for these are pretty much like what the greeks call [greek: pathê]. i might call them diseases, and that would be a literal translation, but it is not agreeable to our way of speaking. for envy, delight, and pleasure are all called by the greeks diseases, being affections of the mind not in subordination to reason; but we, i think, are right in calling the same motions of a disturbed soul perturbations, and in very seldom using the term diseases; though, perhaps, it appears otherwise to you. _a._ i am of your opinion. _m._ and do you think a wise man subject to these? _a._ entirely, i think. _m._ then that boasted wisdom is but of small account, if it differs so little from madness? _a._ what? does every commotion of the mind seem to you to be madness? _m._ not to me only; but i apprehend, though i have often been surprised at it, that it appeared so to our ancestors many ages before socrates; from whom is derived all that philosophy which relates to life and morals. _a._ how so? _m._ because the name madness[ ] implies a sickness of the mind and disease; that is to say, an unsoundness and an unhealthiness of mind, which they call madness. but the philosophers call all perturbations of the soul diseases, and their opinion is that no fool is ever free from these; but all that are diseased are unsound; and the minds of all fools are diseased; therefore all fools are mad. for they held that soundness of the mind depends on a certain tranquillity and steadiness; and a mind which was destitute of these qualities they called insane, because soundness was inconsistent with a perturbed mind just as much as with a disordered body. v. nor were they less ingenious in calling the state of the soul devoid of the light of the mind, "a being out of one's mind," "a being beside one's self." from whence we may understand that they who gave these names to things were of the same opinion with socrates, that all silly people were unsound, which the stoics have carefully preserved as being derived from him; for whatever mind is distempered (and, as i just now said, the philosophers call all perturbed motions of the mind distempers) is no more sound than a body is when in a fit of sickness. hence it is that wisdom is the soundness of the mind, folly a sort of unsoundness, which is insanity, or a being out of one's mind: and these are much better expressed by the latin words than the greek, which you will find the case also in many other topics. but we will discuss that point elsewhere: let us now attend to our present subject. the very meaning of the word describes the whole thing about which we are inquiring, both as to its substance and character. for we must necessarily understand by "sound" those whose minds are under no perturbation from any motion as if it were a disease. they who are differently affected we must necessarily call "unsound." so that nothing is better than what is usual in latin, to say that they who are run away with by their lust or anger have quitted the command over themselves; though anger includes lust, for anger is defined to be the lust of revenge. they, then, who are said not to be masters of themselves, are said to be so because they are not under the government of reason, to which is assigned by nature the power over the whole soul. why the greeks should call this mania, i do not easily apprehend; but we define it much better than they, for we distinguish this madness (_insania_), which, being allied to folly, is more extensive, from what we call _furor_, or raving. the greeks, indeed, would do so too, but they have no one word that will express it: what we call _furor_, they call [greek: melancholia], as if the reason were affected only by a black bile, and not disturbed as often by a violent rage, or fear, or grief. thus we say athamas, alcmæon, ajax, and orestes were raving (_furere_); because a person affected in this manner was not allowed by the twelve tables to have the management of his own affairs; therefore the words are not, if he is mad (_insanus_), but if he begins to be raving (_furiosus_). for they looked upon madness to be an unsettled humor that proceeded from not being of sound mind; yet such a person might perform his ordinary duties, and discharge the usual and customary requirements of life: but they considered one that was raving as afflicted with a total blindness of the mind, which, notwithstanding it is allowed to be greater than madness, is nevertheless of such a nature that a wise man may be subject to raving (_furor_), but cannot possibly be afflicted by insanity (_insania_). but this is another question: let us now return to our original subject. vi. i think you said that it was your opinion that a wise man was liable to grief. _a._ and so, indeed, i think. _m._ it is natural enough to think so, for we are not the offspring of flints; but we have by nature something soft and tender in our souls, which may be put into a violent motion by grief, as by a storm; nor did that crantor, who was one of the most distinguished men that our academy has ever produced, say this amiss: "i am by no means of their opinion who talk so much in praise of i know not what insensibility, which neither can exist, nor ought to exist. "i would choose," says he, "never to be ill; but should i be so, still i should choose to retain my sensation, whether there was to be an amputation or any other separation of anything from my body. for that insensibility cannot be but at the expense of some unnatural ferocity of mind, or stupor of body." but let us consider whether to talk in this manner be not allowing that we are weak, and yielding to our softness. notwithstanding, let us be hardy enough, not only to lop off every arm of our miseries, but even to pluck up every fibre of their roots. yet still something, perhaps, may be left behind, so deep does folly strike its roots: but whatever may be left it will be no more than is necessary. but let us be persuaded of this, that unless the mind be in a sound state, which philosophy alone can effect, there can be no end of our miseries. wherefore, as we began, let us submit ourselves to it for a cure; we shall be cured if we choose to be. i shall advance something further. i shall not treat of grief alone, though that indeed is the principal thing; but, as i originally proposed, of every perturbation of the mind, as i termed it; disorder, as the greeks call it: and first, with your leave, i shall treat it in the manner of the stoics, whose method is to reduce their arguments into a very small space; afterward i shall enlarge more in my own way. vii. a man of courage is also full of faith. i do not use the word confident, because, owing to an erroneous custom of speaking, that word has come to be used in a bad sense, though it is derived from confiding, which is commendable. but he who is full of faith is certainly under no fear; for there is an inconsistency between faith and fear. now, whoever is subject to grief is subject to fear; for whatever things we grieve at when present we dread when hanging over us and approaching. thus it comes about that grief is inconsistent with courage: it is very probable, therefore, that whoever is subject to grief is also liable to fear, and to a broken kind of spirits and sinking. now, whenever these befall a man, he is in a servile state, and must own that he is overpowered; for whoever admits these feelings, must admit timidity and cowardice. but these cannot enter into the mind of a man of courage; neither, therefore, can grief: but the man of courage is the only wise man; therefore grief cannot befall the wise man. it is, besides, necessary that whoever is brave should be a man of great soul; that whoever is a man of a great soul should be invincible; whoever is invincible looks down with contempt on all things here, and considers them, beneath him. but no one can despise those things on account of which he may be affected with grief; from whence it follows that a wise man is never affected with grief: for all wise men are brave; therefore a wise man is not subject to grief. and as the eye, when disordered, is not in a good condition for performing its office properly; and as the other parts, and the whole body itself, when unsettled, cannot perform their office and business; so the mind, when disordered, is but ill-fitted to perform its duty. the office of the mind is to use its reason well; but the mind of a wise man is always in condition to make the best use of his reason, and therefore is never out of order. but grief is a disorder of the mind; therefore a wise man will be always free from it. viii. and from these considerations we may get at a very probable definition of the temperate man, whom the greeks call [greek: sôphrôn]: and they call that virtue [greek: sôphrosynên], which i at one time call temperance, at another time moderation, and sometimes even modesty; but i do not know whether that virtue may not be properly called frugality, which has a more confined meaning with the greeks; for they call frugal men [greek: chrêsimous], which implies only that they are useful; but our name has a more extensive meaning: for all abstinence, all innocency (which the greeks have no ordinary name for, though they might use the word [greek: ablabeia], for innocency is that disposition of mind which would offend no one) and several other virtues are comprehended under frugality; but if this quality were of less importance, and confined in as small a compass as some imagine, the surname of piso[ ] would not have been in so great esteem. but as we allow him not the name of a frugal man (_frugi_), who either quits his post through fear, which is cowardice; or who reserves to his own use what was privately committed to his keeping, which is injustice; or who fails in his military undertakings through rashness, which is folly--for that reason the word frugality takes in these three virtues of fortitude, justice, and prudence, though it is indeed common to all virtues, for they are all connected and knit together. let us allow, then, frugality itself to be another and fourth virtue; for its peculiar property seems to be, to govern and appease all tendencies to too eager a desire after anything, to restrain lust, and to preserve a decent steadiness in everything. the vice in contrast to this is called prodigality (_nequitia_). frugality, i imagine, is derived from the word _fruge_, the best thing which the earth produces; _nequitia_ is derived (though this is perhaps rather more strained; still, let us try it; we shall only be thought to have been trifling if there is nothing in what we say) from the fact of everything being to no purpose (_nequicquam_) in such a man; from which circumstance he is called also _nihil_, nothing. whoever is frugal, then, or, if it is more agreeable to you, whoever is moderate and temperate, such a one must of course be consistent; whoever is consistent, must be quiet; the quiet man must be free from all perturbation, therefore from grief likewise: and these are the properties of a wise man; therefore a wise man must be free from grief. ix. so that dionysius of heraclea is right when, upon this complaint of achilles in homer, well hast thou spoke, but at the tyrant's name my rage rekindles, and my soul's in flame: 'tis just resentment, and becomes the brave, disgraced, dishonor'd like the vilest slave[ ]-- he reasons thus: is the hand as it should be, when it is affected with a swelling? or is it possible for any other member of the body, when swollen or enlarged, to be in any other than a disordered state? must not the mind, then, when it is puffed up, or distended, be out of order? but the mind of a wise man is always free from every kind of disorder: it never swells, never is puffed up; but the mind when in anger is in a different state. a wise man, therefore, is never angry; for when he is angry, he lusts after something; for whoever is angry naturally has a longing desire to give all the pain he can to the person who he thinks has injured him; and whoever has this earnest desire must necessarily be much pleased with the accomplishment of his wishes; hence he is delighted with his neighbor's misery; and as a wise man is not capable of such feelings as these, he is therefore not capable of anger. but should a wise man be subject to grief, he may likewise be subject to anger; for as he is free from anger, he must likewise be free from grief. again, could a wise man be subject to grief, he might also be liable to pity, or even might be open to a disposition towards envy (_invidentia_); i do not say to envy (_invidia_), for that can only exist by the very act of envying: but we may fairly form the word _invidentia_ from _invidendo_, and so avoid the doubtful name _invidia;_ for this word is probably derived from _in_ and _video_, looking too closely into another's fortune; as it is said in the melanippus, who envies me the flower of my children? where the latin is _invidit florem._ it may appear not good latin, but it is very well put by accius; for as _video_ governs an accusative case, so it is more correct to say _invideo florem_ than _flori._ we are debarred from saying so by common usage. the poet stood in his own right, and expressed himself with more freedom. x. therefore compassion and envy are consistent in the same man; for whoever is uneasy at any one's adversity is also uneasy at another's prosperity: as theophrastus, while he laments the death of his companion callisthenes, is at the same time disturbed at the success of alexander; and therefore he says that callisthenes met with man of the greatest power and good fortune, but one who did not know how to make use of his good fortune. and as pity is an uneasiness which arises from the misfortunes of another, so envy is an uneasiness that proceeds from the good success of another: therefore whoever is capable of pity is capable of envy. but a wise man is incapable of envy, and consequently incapable of pity. but were a wise man used to grieve, to pity also would be familiar to him; therefore to grieve is a feeling which cannot affect a wise man. now, though these reasonings of the stoics, and their conclusions, are rather strained and distorted, and ought to be expressed in a less stringent and narrow manner, yet great stress is to be laid on the opinions of those men who have a peculiarly bold and manly turn of thought and sentiment. for our friends the peripatetics, notwithstanding all their erudition, gravity, and fluency of language, do not satisfy me about the moderation of these disorders and diseases of the soul which they insist upon; for every evil, though moderate, is in its nature great. but our object is to make out that the wise man is free from all evil; for as the body is unsound if it is ever so slightly affected, so the mind under any moderate disorder loses its soundness; therefore the romans have, with their usual accuracy of expression, called trouble, and anguish, and vexation, on account of the analogy between a troubled mind and a diseased body, disorders. the greeks call all perturbation of mind by pretty nearly the same name; for they name every turbid motion of the soul [greek: pathos], that is to say, a distemper. but we have given them a more proper name; for a disorder of the mind is very like a disease of the body. but lust does not resemble sickness; neither does immoderate joy, which is an elated and exulting pleasure of the mind. fear, too, is not very like a distemper, though it is akin to grief of mind, but properly, as is also the case with sickness of the body, so too sickness of mind has no name separated from pain. and therefore i must explain the origin of this pain, that is to say, the cause that occasions this grief in the mind, as if it were a sickness of the body. for as physicians think they have found out the cure when they have discovered the cause of the distemper, so we shall discover the method of curing melancholy when the cause of it is found out. xi. the whole cause, then, is in opinion; and this observation applies not to this grief alone, but to every other disorder of the mind, which are of four sorts, but consisting of many parts. for as every disorder or perturbation is a motion of the mind, either devoid of reason, or in despite of reason, or in disobedience to reason, and as that motion is excited by an opinion of either good or evil; these four perturbations are divided equally into two parts: for two of them proceed from an opinion of good, one of which is an exulting pleasure, that is to say, a joy elated beyond measure, arising from an opinion of some present great good; the other is a desire which may fairly be called even a lust, and is an immoderate inclination after some conceived great good without any obedience to reason. therefore these two kinds, the exulting pleasure and the lust, have their rise from an opinion of good, as the other two, fear and grief, have from an opinion of evil. for fear is an opinion of some great evil impending over us, and grief is an opinion of some great evil present; and, indeed, it is a freshly conceived opinion of an evil so great that to grieve at it seems right: it is of that kind that he who is uneasy at it thinks he has good reason to be so. now we should exert, our utmost efforts to oppose these perturbations--which are, as it were, so many furies let loose upon us and urged on by folly--if we are desirous to pass this share of life that is allotted to us with ease and satisfaction. but of the other feelings i shall speak elsewhere: our business at present is to drive away grief if we can, for that shall be the object of our present discussion, since you have said that it was your opinion that a wise man might be subject to grief, which i can by no means allow of; for it is a frightful, miserable, and detestable thing, which we should fly from with our utmost efforts--with all our sails and oars, as i may say. xii. that descendant of tantalus, how does he appear to you--he who sprung from pelops, who formerly stole hippodamia from her father-in-law, king oenomaus, and married her by force?--he who was descended from jupiter himself, how broken-hearted and dispirited does he not seem! stand off, my friends, nor come within my shade, that no pollutions your sound hearts pervade, so foul a stain my body doth partake. will you condemn yourself, thyestes, and deprive yourself of life, on account of the greatness of another's crime? what do you think of that son of phoebus? do you not look upon him as unworthy of his own father's light? hollow his eyes, his body worn away, his furrow'd cheeks his frequent tears betray; his beard neglected, and his hoary hairs rough and uncomb'd, bespeak his bitter cares. o foolish Æetes! these are evils which you yourself have been the cause of, and are not occasioned by any accidents with which chance has visited you; and you behaved as you did, even after you had been inured to your distress, and after the first swelling of the mind had subsided!--whereas grief consists (as i shall show) in the notion of some recent evil--but your grief, it is very plain, proceeded from the loss of your kingdom, not of your daughter, for you hated her, and perhaps with reason, but you could not calmly bear to part with your kingdom. but surely it is an impudent grief which preys upon a man for not being able to command those that are free. dionysius, it is true, the tyrant of syracuse, when driven from his country, taught a school at corinth; so incapable was he of living without some authority. but what could be more impudent than tarquin, who made war upon those who could not bear his tyranny; and, when he could not recover his kingdom by the aid of the forces of the veientians and the latins, is said to have betaken himself to cuma, and to have died in that city of old age and grief! xiii. do you, then, think that it can befall a wise man to be oppressed with grief, that is to say, with misery? for, as all perturbation is misery, grief is the rack itself. lust is attended with heat, exulting joy with levity, fear with meanness, but grief with something greater than these; it consumes, torments, afflicts, and disgraces a man; it tears him, preys upon his mind, and utterly destroys him: if we do not so divest ourselves of it as to throw it completely off, we cannot be free from misery. and it is clear that there must be grief where anything has the appearance of a present sore and oppressing evil. epicurus is of opinion that grief arises naturally from the imagination of any evil; so that whosoever is eye-witness of any great misfortune, if he conceives that the like may possibly befall himself, becomes sad instantly from such an idea. the cyrenaics think that grief is not engendered by every kind of evil, but only by unexpected, unforeseen evil; and that circumstance is, indeed, of no small effect on the heightening of grief; for whatsoever comes of a sudden appears more formidable. hence these lines are deservedly commended: i knew my son, when first he drew his breath, destined by fate to an untimely death; and when i sent him to defend the greeks, war was his business, not your sportive freaks. xiv. therefore, this ruminating beforehand upon future evils which you see at a distance makes their approach more tolerable; and on this account what euripides makes theseus say is much commended. you will give me leave to translate them, as is usual with me: i treasured up what some learn'd sage did tell, and on my future misery did dwell; i thought of bitter death, of being drove far from my home by exile, and i strove with every evil to possess my mind, that, when they came, i the less care might find.[ ] but euripides says that of himself, which theseus said he had heard from some learned man, for the poet had been a pupil of anaxagoras, who, as they relate, on hearing of the death of his son, said, "i knew that my son was mortal;" which speech seems to intimate that such things afflict those men who have not thought on them before. therefore, there is no doubt but that all those things which are considered evils are the heavier from not being foreseen. though, notwithstanding this is not the only circumstance which occasions the greatest grief, still, as the mind, by foreseeing and preparing for it, has great power to make all grief the less, a man should at all times consider all the events that may befall him in this life; and certainly the excellence and divine nature of wisdom consists in taking a near view of, and gaining a thorough acquaintance with, all human affairs, in not being surprised when anything happens, and in thinking, before the event, that there is nothing but what may come to pass. wherefore ev'ry man, when his affairs go on most swimmingly, e'en then it most behooves to arm himself against the coming storm: loss, danger, exile, returning ever, let him look to meet; his son in fault, wife dead, or daughter sick; all common accidents, and may have happen'd that nothing shall seem new or strange. but if aught has fall'n out beyond his hopes, all that let him account clear gain.[ ] xv. therefore, as terence has so well expressed what he borrowed from philosophy, shall not we, from whose fountains he drew it, say the same thing in a better manner, and abide by it with more steadiness? hence came that steady countenance, which, according to xantippe, her husband socrates always had; so that she said that she never observed any difference in his looks when he went out and when he came home. yet the look of that old roman, m. crassus, who, as lucilius says, never smiled but once in his lifetime, was not of this kind, but placid and serene, for so we are told. he, indeed, might well have had the same look at all times who never changed his mind, from which the countenance derives its expression. so that i am ready to borrow of the cyrenaics those arms against the accidents and events of life by means of which, by long premeditation, they break the force of all approaching evils; and at the same time i think that those very evils themselves arise more from opinion than nature, for if they were real, no forecast could make them lighter. but i shall speak more particularly on these matters after i have first considered epicurus's opinion, who thinks that all people must necessarily be uneasy who believe themselves to be in any evils, let them be either foreseen and expected, or habitual to them; for with him evils are not the less by reason of their continuance, nor the lighter for having been foreseen; and it is folly to ruminate on evils to come, or such as, perhaps, never may come: every evil is disagreeable enough when it does come; but he who is constantly considering that some evil may befall him is loading himself with a perpetual evil; and even should such evil never light on him, he voluntarily takes upon himself unnecessary misery, so that he is under constant uneasiness, whether he actually suffers any evil, or only thinks of it. but he makes the alleviation of grief depend on two things--a ceasing to think on evil, and a turning to the contemplation of pleasure. for he thinks that the mind may possibly be under the power of reason, and follow her directions: he forbids us, therefore, to mind trouble, and calls us off from sorrowful reflections; he throws a mist over our eyes to hinder us from the contemplation of misery. having sounded a retreat from this statement, he drives our thoughts on again, and encourages them to view and engage the whole mind in the various pleasures with which he thinks the life of a wise man abounds, either from reflecting on the past, or from the hope of what is to come. i have said these things in my own way; the epicureans have theirs. however, let us examine what they say; how they say it is of little consequence. xvi. in the first place, they are wrong in forbidding men to premeditate on futurity and blaming their wish to do so; for there is nothing that breaks the edge of grief and lightens it more than considering, during one's whole life, that there is nothing which it is impossible should happen, or than, considering what human nature is, on what conditions life was given, and how we may comply with them. the effect of which is that we are always grieving, but that we never do so; for whoever reflects on the nature of things, the various turns of life, and the weakness of human nature, grieves, indeed, at that reflection; but while so grieving he is, above all other times, behaving as a wise man, for he gains these two things by it: one, that while he is considering the state of human nature he is performing the especial duties of philosophy, and is provided with a triple medicine against adversity--in the first place, because he has long reflected that such things might befall him, and this reflection by itself contributes much towards lessening and weakening all misfortunes; and, secondly, because he is persuaded that we should bear all the accidents which can happen to man with the feelings and spirit of a man; and, lastly, because he considers that what is blamable is the only evil. but it is not your fault that something has happened to you which it was impossible for man to avoid. for that withdrawing of our thoughts which he recommends when he calls us off from contemplating our misfortunes is an imaginary action; for it is not in our power to dissemble or to forget those evils which lie heavy on us; they tear, vex, and sting us--they burn us up, and leave no breathing time. and do you order us to forget them (for such forgetfulness is contrary to nature), and at the same time deprive us of the only assistance which nature affords, the being accustomed to them? for that, though it is but a slow medicine (i mean that which is brought by lapse of time), is still a very effectual one. you order me to employ my thoughts on something good, and forget my misfortunes. you would say something worthy a great philosopher if you thought those things good which are best suited to the dignity of human nature. xvii. should pythagoras, socrates, or plato say to me, why are you dejected or sad? why do you faint, and yield to fortune, which, perhaps, may have power to harass and disturb you, but should not quite unman you? there is great power in the virtues; rouse them, if they chance to droop. take fortitude for your guide, which will give you such spirits that you will despise everything that can befall man, and look on it as a trifle. add to this temperance, which is moderation, and which was just now called frugality, which will not suffer you to do anything base or bad--for what is worse or baser than an effeminate man? not even justice will suffer you to act in this manner, though she seems to have the least weight in this affair; but still, notwithstanding, even she will inform you that you are doubly unjust when you both require what does not belong to you, inasmuch as though you who have been born mortal demand to be placed in the condition of the immortals, and at the same time you take it much to heart that you are to restore what was lent you. what answer will you make to prudence, who informs you that she is a virtue sufficient of herself both to teach you a good life and also to secure you a happy one? and, indeed, if she were fettered by external circumstances, and dependent on others, and if she did not originate in herself and return to herself, and also embrace everything in herself, so as to seek no adventitious aid from any quarter, i cannot imagine why she should appear deserving of such lofty panegyrics, or of being sought after with such excessive eagerness. now, epicurus, if you call me back to such goods as these, i will obey you, and follow you, and use you as my guide, and even forget, as you order me, all my misfortunes; and i will do this the more readily from a persuasion that they are not to be ranked among evils at all. but you are for bringing my thoughts over to pleasure. what pleasures? pleasures of the body, i imagine, or such as are recollected or imagined on account of the body. is this all? do i explain your opinion rightly? for your disciples are used to deny that we understand at all what epicurus means. this is what he says, and what that subtle fellow, old zeno, who is one of the sharpest of them, used, when i was attending lectures at athens, to enforce and talk so loudly of; saying that he alone was happy who could enjoy present pleasure, and who was at the same time persuaded that he should enjoy it without pain, either during the whole or the greatest part of his life; or if, should any pain interfere, if it was very sharp, then it must be short; should it be of longer continuance, it would have more of what was sweet than bitter in it; that whosoever reflected on these things would be happy, especially if satisfied with the good things which he had already enjoyed, and if he were without fear of death or of the gods. xviii. you have here a representation of a happy life according to epicurus, in the words of zeno, so that there is no room for contradiction in any point. what, then? can the proposing and thinking of such a life make thyestes's grief the less, or Æetes's, of whom i spoke above, or telamon's, who was driven from his country to penury and banishment? in wonder at whom men exclaimed thus: is this the man surpassing glory raised? is this that telamon so highly praised by wondering greece, at whose sight, like the sun, all others with diminish'd lustre shone? now, should any one, as the same author says, find his spirits sink with the loss of his fortune, he must apply to those grave philosophers of antiquity for relief, and not to these voluptuaries: for what great abundance of good do they promise? suppose that we allow that to be without pain is the chief good? yet that is not called pleasure. but it is not necessary at present to go through the whole: the question is, to what point are we to advance in order to abate our grief? grant that to be in pain is the greatest evil: whosoever, then, has proceeded so far as not to be in pain, is he, therefore, in immediate possession of the greatest good? why, epicurus, do we use any evasions, and not allow in our own words the same feeling to be pleasure which you are used to boast of with such assurance? are these your words or not? this is what you say in that book which contains all the doctrine of your school; for i will perform on this occasion the office of a translator, lest any one should imagine that i am inventing anything. thus you speak: "nor can i form any notion of the chief good, abstracted from those pleasures which are perceived by taste, or from what depends on hearing music, or abstracted from ideas raised by external objects visible to the eye, or by agreeable motions, or from those other pleasures which are perceived by the whole man by means of any of his senses; nor can it possibly be said that the pleasures of the mind are excited only by what is good, for i have perceived men's minds to be pleased with the hopes of enjoying those things which i mentioned above, and with the idea that it should enjoy them without any interruption from pain." and these are his exact words, so that any one may understand what were the pleasures with which epicurus was acquainted. then he speaks thus, a little lower down: "i have often inquired of those who have been called wise men what would be the remaining good if they should exclude from consideration all these pleasures, unless they meant to give us nothing but words. i could never learn anything from them; and unless they choose that all virtue and wisdom should vanish and come to nothing, they must say with me that the only road to happiness lies through those pleasures which i mentioned above." what follows is much the same, and his whole book on the chief good everywhere abounds with the same opinions. will you, then, invite telamon to this kind of life to ease his grief? and should you observe any one of your friends under affliction, would you rather prescribe him a sturgeon than a treatise of socrates? or advise him to listen to the music of a water organ rather than to plato? or lay before him the beauty and variety of some garden, put a nosegay to his nose, burn perfumes before him, and bid him crown himself with a garland of roses and woodbines? should you add one thing more, you would certainly wipe out all his grief. xix. epicurus must admit these arguments, or he must take out of his book what i just now said was a literal translation; or, rather, he must destroy his whole book, for it is crammed full of pleasures. we must inquire, then, how we can ease him of his grief who speaks in this manner: my present state proceeds from fortune's stings; by birth i boast of a descent from kings; hence may you see from what a noble height i'm sunk by fortune to this abject plight. what! to ease his grief, must we mix him a cup of sweet wine, or something of that kind? lo! the same poet presents us with another sentiment somewhere else: i, hector, once so great, now claim your aid. we should assist her, for she looks out for help: where shall i now apply, where seek support? where hence betake me, or to whom resort?" no means remain of comfort or of joy, in flames my palace, and in ruins troy; each wall, so late superb, deformed nods, and not an altar's left t' appease the gods. you know what should follow, and particularly this: of father, country, and of friends bereft, not one of all these sumptuous temples left; which, while the fortune of our house did stand, with rich wrought ceilings spoke the artist's hand. o excellent poet! though despised by those who sing the verses of euphorion. he is sensible that all things which come on a sudden are harder to be borne. therefore, when he had set off the riches of priam to the best advantage, which had the appearance of a long continuance, what does he add? lo! these all perish'd in one blazing pile; the foe old priam of his life beguiled, and with his blood, thy altar, jove, defiled. admirable poetry! there is something mournful in the subject, as well as in the words and measure. we must drive away this grief of hers: how is that to be done? shall we lay her on a bed of down; introduce a singer; shall we burn cedar, or present here with some pleasant liquor, and provide her something to eat? are these the good things which remove the most afflicting grief? for you but just now said you knew of no other good. i should agree with epicurus that we ought to be called off from grief to contemplate good things, if we could only agree upon what was good. xx. it may be said, what! do you imagine epicurus really meant this, and that he maintained anything so sensual? indeed i do not imagine so, for i am sensible that he has uttered many excellent things and sentiments, and delivered maxims of great weight. therefore, as i said before, i am speaking of his acuteness, not of his morals. though he should hold those pleasures in contempt which he just now commended, yet i must remember wherein he places the chief good. for he was not contented with barely saying this, but he has explained what he meant: he says that taste, and embraces, and sports, and music, and those forms which affect the eyes with pleasure, are the chief good. have i invented this? have i misrepresented him? i should be glad to be confuted; for what am i endeavoring at but to clear up truth in every question? well, but the same man says that pleasure is at its height where pain ceases, and that to be free from all pain is the very greatest pleasure. here are three very great mistakes in a very few words. one is, that he contradicts himself; for, but just now, he could not imagine anything good unless the senses were in a manner tickled with some pleasure; but now he says that to be free from pain is the highest pleasure. can any one contradict himself more? the next mistake is, that where there is naturally a threefold division--the first, to be pleased; next, to be in pain; the last, to be affected neither by pleasure nor pain--he imagines the first and the last to be the same, and makes no difference between pleasure and a cessation of pain. the last mistake he falls into in common with some others, which is this: that as virtue is the most desirable thing, and as philosophy has been investigated with a view to the attainment of it, he has separated the chief good from virtue. but he commends virtue, and that frequently; and indeed c. gracchus, when he had made the largest distributions of the public money, and had exhausted the treasury, nevertheless spoke much of defending the treasury. what signifies what men say when we see what they do? that piso, who was surnamed frugal, had always harangued against the law that was proposed for distributing the corn; but when it had passed, though a man of consular dignity, he came to receive the corn. gracchus observed piso standing in the court, and asked him, in the hearing of the people, how it was consistent for him to take corn by a law he had himself opposed. "it was," said he, "against your distributing my goods to every man as you thought proper; but, as you do so, i claim my share." did not this grave and wise man sufficiently show that the public revenue was dissipated by the sempronian law? read gracchus's speeches, and you will pronounce him the advocate of the treasury. epicurus denies that any one can live pleasantly who does not lead a life of virtue; he denies that fortune has any power over a wise man; he prefers a spare diet to great plenty, and maintains that a wise man is always happy. all these things become a philosopher to say, but they are not consistent with pleasure. but the reply is, that he doth not mean _that_ pleasure: let him mean any pleasure, it must be such a one as makes no part of virtue. but suppose we are mistaken as to his pleasure; are we so, too, as to his pain? i maintain, therefore, the impropriety of language which that man uses, when talking of virtue, who would measure every great evil by pain. xxi. and indeed the epicureans, those best of men--for there is no order of men more innocent--complain that i take great pains to inveigh against epicurus. we are rivals, i suppose, for some honor or distinction. i place the chief good in the mind, he in the body; i in virtue, he in pleasure; and the epicureans are up in arms, and implore the assistance of their neighbors, and many are ready to fly to their aid. but as for my part, i declare that i am very indifferent about the matter, and that i consider the whole discussion which they are so anxious about at an end. for what! is the contention about the punic war? on which very subject, though m. cato and l. lentulus were of different opinions, still there was no difference between them. but these men behave with too much heat, especially as the opinions which they would uphold are no very spirited ones, and such as they dare not plead for either in the senate or before the assembly of the people, or before the army or the censors. but, however, i will argue with them another time, and with such a disposition that no quarrel shall arise between us; for i shall be ready to yield to their opinions when founded on truth. only i must give them this advice: that were it ever so true, that a wise man regards nothing but the body, or, to express myself with more decency, never does anything except what is expedient, and views all things with exclusive reference to his own advantage, as such things are not very commendable, they should confine them to their own breasts, and leave off talking with that parade of them. xxii. what remains is the opinion of the cyrenaics, who think that men grieve when anything happens unexpectedly. and that is indeed, as i said before, a great aggravation of a misfortune; and i know that it appeared so to chrysippus--"whatever falls out unexpected is so much the heavier." but the whole question does not turn on this; though the sudden approach of an enemy sometimes occasions more confusion than it would if you had expected him, and a sudden storm at sea throws the sailors into a greater fright than one which they have foreseen; and it is the same in many other cases. but when you carefully consider the nature of what was expected, you will find nothing more than that all things which come on a sudden appear greater; and this upon two accounts: first of all, because you have not time to consider how great the accident is; and, secondly, because you are probably persuaded that you could have guarded against it had you foreseen if, and therefore the misfortune, having been seemingly encountered by your own fault, makes your grief the greater. that it is so, time evinces; which, as it advances, brings with it so much mitigation that though the same misfortunes continue, the grief not only becomes the less, but in some cases is entirely removed. many carthaginians were slaves at rome, and many macedonians, when perseus their king was taken prisoner. i saw, too, when i was a young man, some corinthians in the peloponnesus. they might all have lamented with andromache, all these i saw......; but they had perhaps given over lamenting themselves, for by their countenances, and speech, and other gestures you might have taken them for argives or sicyonians. and i myself was more concerned at the ruined walls of corinth than the corinthians themselves were, whose minds by frequent reflection and time had become callous to such sights. i have read a book of clitomachus, which he sent to his fellow-citizens who were prisoners, to comfort them after the destruction of carthage. there is in it a treatise written by carneades, which, as clitomachus says, he had inserted into his book; the subject was, "that it appeared probable that a wise man would grieve at the state of subjection of his country," and all the arguments which carneades used against this proposition are set down in the book. there the philosopher applies such a strong medicine to a fresh grief as would be quite unnecessary in one of any continuance; nor, if this very book had been sent to the captives some years after, would it have found any wounds to cure, but only scars; for grief, by a gentle progress and slow degrees, wears away imperceptibly. not that the circumstances which gave rise to it are altered, or can be, but that custom teaches what reason should--that those things which before seemed to be of some consequence are of no such great importance, after all. xxiii. it may be said, what occasion is there to apply to reason, or to any sort of consolation such as we generally make use of, to mitigate the grief of the afflicted? for we have this argument always at hand, that nothing ought to appear unexpected. but how will any one be enabled to bear his misfortunes the better by knowing that it is unavoidable that such things should happen to man? saying this subtracts nothing from the sum of the grief: it only asserts that nothing has fallen out but what might have been anticipated; and yet this manner of speaking has some little consolation in it, though i apprehend not a great deal. therefore those unlooked-for things have not so much force as to give rise to all our grief; the blow perhaps may fall the heavier, but whatever happens does not appear the greater on that account. no, it is the fact of its having happened lately, and not of its having befallen us unexpectedly, that makes it seem the greater. there are two ways, then, of discerning the truth, not only of things that seem evil, but of those that have the appearance of good. for we either inquire into the nature of the thing, of what description, and magnitude, and importance it is--as sometimes with regard to poverty, the burden of which we may lighten when by our disputations we show how few things nature requires, and of what a trifling kind they are--or, without any subtle arguing, we refer them to examples, as here we instance a socrates, there a diogenes, and then again that line in cæcilius, wisdom is oft conceal'd in mean attire. for as poverty is of equal weight with all, what reason can be given why what was borne by fabricius should be spoken of by any one else as unsupportable when it falls upon themselves? of a piece with this is that other way of comforting, which consists in pointing out that nothing has happened but what is common to human nature; for this argument doth not only inform us what human nature is, but implies that all things are tolerable which others have borne and are bearing. xxiv. is poverty the subject? they tell you of many who have submitted to it with patience. is it the contempt of honors? they acquaint you with some who never enjoyed any, and were the happier for it; and of those who have preferred a private retired life to public employment, mentioning their names with respect; they tell you of the verse[ ] of that most powerful king who praises an old man, and pronounces him happy because he was unknown to fame and seemed likely to arrive at the hour of death in obscurity and without notice. thus, too, they have examples for those who are deprived of their children: they who are under any great grief are comforted by instances of like affliction; and thus the endurance of every misfortune is rendered more easy by the fact of others having undergone the same, and the fate of others causes what has happened to appear less important than it has been previously thought, and reflection thus discovers to us how much opinion had imposed on us. and this is what the telamon declares, "i, when my son was born," etc.; and thus theseus, "i on my future misery did dwell;" and anaxagoras, "i knew my son was mortal." all these men, by frequently reflecting on human affairs, had discovered that they were by no means to be estimated by the opinion of the multitude; and, indeed, it seems to me to be pretty much the same case with those who consider beforehand as with those who derive their remedies from time, excepting that a kind of reason cures the one, and the other remedy is provided by nature; by which we discover (and this contains the whole marrow of the matter) that what was imagined to be the greatest evil is by no means so great as to defeat the happiness of life. and the effect of this is, that the blow is greater by reason of its not having been foreseen, and not, as they suppose, that when similar misfortunes befall two different people, that man only is affected with grief whom this calamity has befallen unexpectedly. so that some persons, under the oppression of grief, are said to have borne it actually worse for hearing of this common condition of man, that we are born under such conditions as render it impossible for a man to be exempt from all evil. xxv. for this reason carneades, as i see our friend antiochus writes, used to blame chrysippus for commending these verses of euripides: man, doom'd to care, to pain, disease, and strife, walks his short journey thro' the vale of life: watchful attends the cradle and the grave, and passing generations longs to save: last, dies himself: yet wherefore should we mourn? for man must to his kindred dust return; submit to the destroying hand of fate, as ripen'd ears the harvest-sickle wait.[ ] he would not allow a speech of this kind to avail at all to the cure of our grief, for he said it was a lamentable case itself that we were fallen into the hands of such a cruel fate; and that a speech like that, preaching up comfort from the misfortunes of another, was a comfort adapted only to those of a malevolent disposition. but to me it appears far otherwise; for the necessity of bearing what is the common condition of humanity forbids your resisting the will of the gods, and reminds you that you are a man, which reflection greatly alleviates grief; and the enumeration of these examples is not produced with a view to please those of a malevolent disposition, but in order that any one in affliction may be induced to bear what he observes many others have previously borne with tranquillity and moderation. for they who are falling to pieces, and cannot hold together through the greatness of their grief, should be supported by all kinds of assistance. from whence chrysippus thinks that grief is called [greek: lypê], as it were [greek: lysis], that is to say, a dissolution of the whole man--the whole of which i think may be pulled up by the roots by explaining, as i said at the beginning, the cause of grief; for it is nothing else but an opinion and judgment formed of a present acute evil. and thus any bodily pain, let it be ever so grievous, may be endurable where any hopes are proposed of some considerable good; and we receive such consolation from a virtuous and illustrious life that they who lead such lives are seldom attacked by grief, or but slightly affected by it. xxvi. but as besides this opinion of great evil there is this other added also--that we ought to lament what has happened, that it is right so to do, and part of our duty, then is brought about that terrible disorder of mind, grief. and it is to this opinion that we owe all those various and horrid kinds of lamentation, that neglect of our persons, that womanish tearing of our cheeks, that striking on our thighs, breasts, and heads. thus agamemnon, in homer and in accius, tears in his grief his uncomb'd locks;[ ] from whence comes that pleasant saying of bion, that the foolish king in his sorrow tore away the hairs of his head, imagining that his grief would be alleviated by baldness. but men do all these things from being persuaded that they ought to do so. and thus Æschines inveighs against demosthenes for sacrificing within seven days after the death of his daughter. but with what eloquence, with what fluency, does he attack him! what sentiments does he collect! what words does he hurl against him! you may see by this that an orator may do anything; but nobody would approve of such license if it were not that we have an idea innate in our minds that every good man ought to lament the loss of a relation as bitterly as possible. and it is owing to this that some men, when in sorrow, betake themselves to deserts, as homer says of bellerophon: distracted in his mind, forsook by heaven, forsaking human kind, wide o'er the aleïan field he chose to stray, a long, forlorn, uncomfortable way![ ] and thus niobe is feigned to have been turned into stone, from her never speaking, i suppose, in her grief. but they imagine hecuba to have been converted into a bitch, from her rage and bitterness of mind. there are others who love to converse with solitude itself when in grief, as the nurse in ennius, fain would i to the heavens find earth relate medea's ceaseless woes and cruel fate.[ ] xxvii. now all these things are done in grief, from a persuasion of their truth and propriety and necessity; and it is plain that those who behave thus do so from a conviction of its being their duty; for should these mourners by chance drop their grief, and either act or speak for a moment in a more calm or cheerful manner, they presently check themselves and return to their lamentations again, and blame themselves for having been guilty of any intermissions from their grief; and parents and masters generally correct children not by words only, but by blows, if they show any levity by either word or deed when the family is under affliction, and, as it were, oblige them to be sorrowful. what! does it not appear, when you have ceased to mourn, and have discovered that your grief has been ineffectual, that the whole of that mourning was voluntary on your part? what does that man say in terence who punishes himself, the self-tormentor? i think i do my son less harm, o chremes, as long as i myself am miserable. he determines to be miserable: and can any one determine on anything against his will? i well might think that i deserved all evil. he would think he deserved any misfortune were he otherwise than miserable! therefore, you see, the evil is in opinion, not in nature. how is it when some things do of themselves prevent your grieving at them? as in homer, so many died and were buried daily that they had not leisure to grieve: where you find these lines-- the great, the bold, by thousands daily fall, and endless were the grief to weep for all. eternal sorrows what avails to shed? greece honors not with solemn fasts the dead: enough when death demands the brave to pay the tribute of a melancholy day. one chief with patience to the grave resign'd, our care devolves on others left behind.[ ] therefore it is in our own power to lay aside grief upon occasion; and is there any opportunity (seeing the thing is in our own power) that we should let slip of getting rid of care and grief? it was plain that the friends of cnæus pompeius, when they saw him fainting under his wounds, at the very moment of that most miserable and bitter sight were under great uneasiness how they themselves, surrounded by the enemy as they were, should escape, and were employed in nothing but encouraging the rowers and aiding their escape; but when they reached tyre, they began to grieve and lament over him. therefore, as fear with them, prevailed over grief, cannot reason and true philosophy have the same effect with a wise man? xxviii. but what is there more effectual to dispel grief than the discovery that it answers no purpose, and has been undergone to no account? therefore, if we can get rid of it, we need never have been subject to it. it must be acknowledged, then, that men take up grief wilfully and knowingly; and this appears from the patience of those who, after they have been exercised in afflictions and are better able to bear whatever befalls them, suppose themselves hardened against fortune; as that person in euripides, had this the first essay of fortune been, and i no storms thro' all my life had seen, wild as a colt i'd broke from reason's sway; but frequent griefs have taught me to obey.[ ] as, then, the frequent bearing of misery makes grief the lighter, we must necessarily perceive that the cause and original of it does not lie in the calamity itself. your principal philosophers, or lovers of wisdom, though they have not yet arrived at perfect wisdom, are not they sensible that they are in the greatest evil? for they are foolish, and foolishness is the greatest of all evils, and yet they lament not. how shall we account for this? because opinion is not fixed upon that kind of evil, it is not our opinion that it is right, meet, and our duty to be uneasy because we are not all wise men. whereas this opinion is strongly affixed to that uneasiness where mourning is concerned, which is the greatest of all grief. therefore aristotle, when he blames some ancient philosophers for imagining that by their genius they had brought philosophy to the highest perfection, says, they must be either extremely foolish or extremely vain; but that he himself could see that great improvements had been made therein in a few years, and that philosophy would in a little time arrive at perfection. and theophrastus is reported to have reproached nature at his death for giving to stags and crows so long a life, which was of no use to them, but allowing only so short a span to men, to whom length of days would have been of the greatest use; for if the life of man could have been lengthened, it would have been able to provide itself with all kinds of learning, and with arts in the greatest perfection. he lamented, therefore, that he was dying just when he had begun to discover these. what! does not every grave and distinguished philosopher acknowledge himself ignorant of many things, and confess that there are many things which he must learn over and over again? and yet, though these men are sensible that they are standing still in the very midway of folly, than which nothing can be worse, they are under no great affliction, because no opinion that it is their duty to lament is ever mingled with this knowledge. what shall we say of those who think it unbecoming in a man to grieve? among whom we may reckon q. maximus, when he buried his son that had been consul, and l. paulus, who lost two sons within a few days of one another. of the same opinion was m. cato, who lost his son just after he had been elected prætor, and many others, whose names i have collected in my book on consolation. now what made these men so easy, but their persuasion that grief and lamentation was not becoming in a man? therefore, as some give themselves up to grief from an opinion that it is right so to do, they refrained themselves, from an opinion that it was discreditable; from which we may infer that grief is owing more to opinion than nature. xxix. it may be said, on the other side, who is so mad as to grieve of his own accord? pain proceeds from nature, which you must submit to, say they, agreeably to what even your own crantor teaches, for it presses and gains upon you unavoidably, and cannot possibly be resisted. so that the very same oileus, in sophocles, who had before comforted telamon on the death of ajax, on hearing of the death of his own son, is broken-hearted. on this alteration of his mind we have these lines: show me the man so well by wisdom taught that what he charges to another's fault, when like affliction doth himself betide, true to his own wise counsel will abide.[ ] now, when they urge these things, their endeavor is to prove that nature is absolutely and wholly irresistible; and yet the same people allow that we take greater grief on ourselves than nature requires. what madness is it, then, in us to require the same from others? but there are many reasons for our taking grief on us. the first is from the opinion of some evil, on the discovery and certainty of which grief comes of course. besides, many people are persuaded that they are doing something very acceptable to the dead when they lament bitterly over them. to these may be added a kind of womanish superstition, in imagining that when they have been stricken by the afflictions sent by the gods, to acknowledge themselves afflicted and humbled by them is the readiest way of appeasing them. but most men appear to be unaware what contradictions these things are full of. they commend those who die calmly, but they blame those who can bear the loss of another with the same calmness, as if it were possible that it should be true, as is occasionally said in love speeches, that any one can love another more than himself. there is, indeed, something excellent in this, and, if you examine it, something no less just than true, that we love those who ought to be most dear to us as well as we love ourselves; but to love them more than ourselves is absolutely impossible; nor is it desirable in friendship that i should love my friend more than myself, or that he should love me so; for this would occasion much confusion in life, and break in upon all the duties of it. xxx. but we will speak of this another time: at present it is sufficient not to attribute our misery to the loss of our friends, nor to love them more than, if they themselves could be sensible of our conduct, they would approve of, or at least not more than we do ourselves. now as to what they say, that some are not at all appeased by our consolations; and, moreover, as to what they add, that the comforters themselves acknowledge they are miserable when fortune varies the attack and falls on them--in both these cases the solution is easy: for the fault here is not in nature, but in our own folly; and much may be said against folly. but men who do not admit of consolation seem to bespeak misery for themselves; and they who cannot bear their misfortunes with that temper which they recommend to others are not more faulty in this particular than most other persons; for we see that covetous men find fault with others who are covetous, as do the vainglorious with those who appear too wholly devoted to the pursuit of glory. for it is the peculiar characteristic of folly to perceive the vices of others, but to forget its own. but since we find that grief is removed by length of time, we have the greatest proof that the strength of it depends not merely on time, but on the daily consideration of it. for if the cause continues the same, and the man be the same, how can there be any alteration in the grief, if there is no change in what occasioned the grief, nor in him who grieves? therefore it is from daily reflecting that there is no real evil in the circumstance for which you grieve, and not from the length of time, that you procure a remedy for your grief. xxxi. here some people talk of moderate grief; but if such be natural, what occasion is there for consolation? for nature herself will determine, the measure of it: but if it depends on and is caused by opinion, the whole opinion should be destroyed. i think that it has been sufficiently said, that grief arises from an opinion of some present evil, which includes this belief, that it is incumbent on us to grieve. to this definition zeno has added, very justly, that the opinion of this present evil should be recent. now this word recent they explain thus: those are not the only recent things which happened a little while ago; but as long as there shall be any force, or vigor, or freshness in that imagined evil, so long it is entitled to the name of recent. take the case of artemisia, the wife of mausolus, king of caria, who made that noble sepulchre at halicarnassus; while she lived, she lived in grief, and died of it, being worn out by it, for that opinion was always recent with her: but you cannot call that recent which has already begun to decay through time. now the duty of a comforter is, to remove grief entirely, to quiet it, or draw it off as much as you can, or else to keep it under, and prevent its spreading any further, and to divert one's attention to other matters. there are some who think, with cleanthes, that the only duty of a comforter is to prove that what one is lamenting is by no means an evil. others, as the peripatetics, prefer urging that the evil is not great. others, with epicurus, seek to divert your attention from the evil to good: some think it sufficient to show that nothing has happened but what you had reason to expect; and this is the practice of the cyrenaics. but chrysippus thinks that the main thing in comforting is, to remove the opinion from the person who is grieving, that to grieve is his bounden duty. there are others who bring together all these various kinds of consolations, for people are differently affected; as i have done myself in my book on consolation; for as my own mind was much disordered, i have attempted in that book to discover every method of cure. but the proper season is as much to be attended to in the cure of the mind as of the body; as prometheus in Æschylus, on its being said to him, i think, prometheus, you this tenet hold, that all men's reason should their rage control? answers, yes, when one reason properly applies; ill-timed advice will make the storm but rise.[ ] xxxii. but the principal medicine to be applied in consolation is, to maintain either that it is no evil at all, or a very inconsiderable one: the next best to that is, to speak of the common condition of life, having a view, if possible, to the state of the person whom you comfort particularly. the third is, that it is folly to wear one's self out with grief which can avail nothing. for the comfort of cleanthes is suitable only for a wise man, who is in no need of any comfort at all; for could you persuade one in grief that nothing is an evil but what is base, you would not only cure him of grief, but folly. but the time for such precepts is not well chosen. besides, cleanthes does not seem to me sufficiently aware that affliction may very often proceed from that very thing which he himself allows to be the greatest misfortune. for what shall we say? when socrates had convinced alcibiades, as we are told, that he had no distinctive qualifications as a man different from other people, and that, in fact, there was no difference between him, though a man of the highest rank, and a porter; and when alcibiades became uneasy at this, and entreated socrates, with tears in his eyes, to make him a man of virtue, and to cure him of that mean position; what shall we say to this, cleanthes? was there no evil in what afflicted alcibiades thus? what strange things does lycon say? who, making light of grief, says that it arises from trifles, from things that affect our fortune or bodies, not from the evils of the mind. what, then? did not the grief of alcibiades proceed from the defects and evils of the mind? i have already said enough of epicurus's consolation. xxxiii. nor is that consolation much to be relied on, though it is frequently practised, and sometimes has some effect, namely, "that you are not alone in this." it has its effect, as i said, but not always, nor with every person, for some reject it; but much depends on the application of it; for you ought rather to show, not how men in general have been affected with such evils, but how men of sense have borne them. as to chrysippus's method, it is certainly founded in truth; but it is difficult to apply it in time of distress. it is a work of no small difficulty to persuade a person in affliction that he grieves merely because he thinks it right so to do. certainly, then, as in pleadings we do not state all cases alike (if i may adopt the language of lawyers for a moment), but adapt what we have to say to the time, to the nature of the subject under debate, and to the person; so, too, in alleviating grief, regard should be had to what kind of cure the party to be comforted can admit of. but, somehow or other, we have rambled from what you originally proposed. for your question was concerning a wise man, with whom nothing can have the appearance of evil that is not dishonorable; or at least, anything else would seem so small an evil that by his wisdom he would so overmatch it as to make it wholly disappear; and such a man makes no addition to his grief through opinion, and never conceives it right to torment himself above measure, nor to wear himself out with grief, which is the meanest thing imaginable. reason, however, it seems, has demonstrated (though it was not directly our object at the moment to inquire whether anything can be called an evil except what is base) that it is in our power to discern that all the evil which there is in affliction has nothing natural in it, but is contracted by our own voluntary judgment of it, and the error of opinion. xxxiv. but the kind of affliction of which i have treated is that which is the greatest; in order that when we have once got rid of that, it may appear a business of less consequence to look after remedies for the others. for there are certain things which are usually said about poverty; and also certain statements ordinarily applied to retired and undistinguished life. there are particular treatises on banishment, on the ruin of one's country, on slavery, on weakness, on blindness, and on every incident that can come under the name of an evil. the greeks divide these into different treatises and distinct books; but they do it for the sake of employment: not but that all such discussions are full of entertainment. and yet, as physicians, in curing the whole body, attend to even the most insignificant part of the body which is at all disordered, so does philosophy act, after it has removed grief in general; still, if any other deficiency exists--should poverty bite, should ignominy sting, should banishment bring a dark cloud over us, or should any of those things which i have just mentioned appear, there is for each its appropriate consolation, which you shall hear whenever you please. but we must have recourse again to the same original principle, that a wise man is free from all sorrow, because it is vain, because it answers no purpose, because it is not founded in nature, but on opinion and prejudice, and is engendered by a kind of invitation to grieve, when once men have imagined that it is their duty to do so. when, then, we have subtracted what is altogether voluntary, that mournful uneasiness will be removed; yet some little anxiety, some slight pricking, will still remain. they may indeed call this natural, provided they give it not that horrid, solemn, melancholy name of grief, which can by no means consist with wisdom. but how various and how bitter are the roots of grief! whatever they are, i propose, after having felled the trunk, to destroy them all; even if it should be necessary, by allotting a separate dissertation to each, for i have leisure enough to do so, whatever time it may take up. but the principle of every uneasiness is the same, though they may appear under different names. for envy is an uneasiness; so are emulation, detraction, anguish, sorrow, sadness, tribulation, lamentation, vexation, grief, trouble, affliction, and despair. the stoics define all these different feelings; and all those words which i have mentioned belong to different things, and do not, as they seem, express the same ideas; but they are to a certain extent distinct, as i shall make appear perhaps in another place. these are those fibres of the roots which, as i said at first, must be traced back and cut off and destroyed, so that not one shall remain. you say it is a great and difficult undertaking: who denies it? but what is there of any excellency which has not its difficulty? yet philosophy undertakes to effect it, provided we admit its superintendence. but enough of this. the other books, whenever you please, shall be ready for you here or anywhere else. * * * * * book iv. on other perturbations of the mind. i. i have often wondered, brutus, on many occasions, at the ingenuity and virtues of our countrymen; but nothing has surprised me more than their development in those studies, which, though they came somewhat late to us, have been transported into this city from greece. for the system of auspices, and religious ceremonies, and courts of justice, and appeals to the people, the senate, the establishment of an army of cavalry and infantry, and the whole military discipline, were instituted as early as the foundation of the city by royal authority, partly too by laws, not without the assistance of the gods. then with what a surprising and incredible progress did our ancestors advance towards all kind of excellence, when once the republic was freed from the regal power! not that this is a proper occasion to treat of the manners and customs of our ancestors, or of the discipline and constitution of the city; for i have elsewhere, particularly in the six books i wrote on the republic, given a sufficiently accurate account of them. but while i am on this subject, and considering the study of philosophy, i meet with many reasons to imagine that those studies were brought to us from abroad, and not merely imported, but preserved and improved; for they had pythagoras, a man of consummate wisdom and nobleness of character, in a manner, before their eyes, who was in italy at the time that lucius brutus, the illustrious founder of your nobility, delivered his country from tyranny. as the doctrine of pythagoras spread itself on all sides, it seems probable to me that it reached this city; and this is not only probable of itself, but it does really appear to have been the case from many remains of it. for who can imagine that, when it flourished so much in that part of italy which was called magna græcia, and in some of the largest and most powerful cities, in which, first the name of pythagoras, and then that of those men who were afterward his followers, was in so high esteem; who can imagine, i say, that our people could shut their ears to what was said by such learned men? besides, it is even my opinion that it was the great esteem in which the pythagoreans were held, that gave rise to that opinion among those who came after him, that king numa was a pythagorean. for, being acquainted with the doctrine and principles of pythagoras, and having heard from their ancestors that this king was a very wise and just man, and not being able to distinguish accurately between times and periods that were so remote, they inferred, from his being so eminent for his wisdom, that he had been a pupil of pythagoras. ii. so far we proceed on conjecture. as to the vestiges of the pythagoreans, though i might collect many, i shall use but a few; because they have no connection with our present purpose. for, as it is reported to have been a custom with them to deliver certain precepts in a more abstruse manner in verse, and to bring their minds from severe thought to a more composed state by songs and musical instruments; so cato, a writer of the very highest authority, says in his origins, that it was customary with our ancestors for the guests at their entertainments, every one in his turn, to celebrate the praises and virtues of illustrious men in song to the sound of the flute; from whence it is clear that poems and songs were then composed for the voice. and, indeed, it is also clear that poetry was in fashion from the laws of the twelve tables, wherein it is provided that no song should be made to the injury of another. another argument of the erudition of those times is, that they played on instruments before the shrines of their gods, and at the entertainments of their magistrates; but that custom was peculiar to the sect i am speaking of. to me, indeed, that poem of appius cæcus, which panætius commends so much in a certain letter of his which is addressed to quintus tubero, has all the marks of a pythagorean author. we have many things derived from the pythagoreans in our customs, which i pass over, that we may not seem to have learned that elsewhere which we look upon ourselves as the inventors of. but to return to our purpose. how many great poets as well as orators have sprung up among us! and in what a short time! so that it is evident that our people could arrive at any learning as soon as they had an inclination for it. but of other studies i shall speak elsewhere if there is occasion, as i have already often done. iii. the study of philosophy is certainly of long standing with us; but yet i do not find that i can give you the names of any philosopher before the age of lælius and scipio, in whose younger days we find that diogenes the stoic, and carneades the academic, were sent as ambassadors by the athenians to our senate. and as these had never been concerned in public affairs, and one of them was a cyrenean, the other a babylonian, they certainly would never have been forced from their studies, nor chosen for that employment, unless the study of philosophy had been in vogue with some of the great men at that time; who, though they might employ their pens on other subjects--some on civil law, others on oratory, others on the history of former times--yet promoted this most extensive of all arts, the principle of living well, even more by their life than by their writings. so that of that true and elegant philosophy (which was derived from socrates, and is still preserved by the peripatetics and by the stoics, though they express themselves differently in their disputes with the academics) there are few or no latin records; whether this proceeds from the importance of the thing itself, or from men's being otherwise employed, or from their concluding that the capacity of the people was not equal to the apprehension of them. but, during this silence, c. amafinius arose and took upon himself to speak; on the publishing of whose writings the people were moved, and enlisted themselves chiefly under this sect, either because the doctrine was more easily understood, or because they were invited thereto by the pleasing thoughts of amusement, or that, because there was nothing better, they laid hold of what was offered them. and after amafinius, when many of the same sentiments had written much about them, the pythagoreans spread over all italy: but that these doctrines should be so easily understood and approved of by the unlearned is a great proof that they were not written with any great subtlety, and they think their establishment to be owing to this. iv. but let every one defend his own opinion, for every one is at liberty to choose what he likes: i shall keep to my old custom; and, being under no restraint from the laws of any particular school, which in philosophy every one must necessarily confine himself to, i shall always inquire what has the most probability in every question, and this system, which i have often practised on other occasions, i have adhered closely to in my tusculan disputations. therefore, as i have acquainted you with the disputations of the three former days, this book shall conclude the discussion of the fourth day. when we had come down into the academy, as we had done the former days, the business was carried on thus: _m._ let any one say, who pleases, what he would wish to have discussed. _a._ i do not think a wise man can possibly be free from every perturbation of mind. _m._ he seemed by yesterday's discourse to be free from grief; unless you agreed with us only to avoid taking up time. _a._ not at all on that account, for i was extremely satisfied with your discourse. _m._ you do not think, then, that a wise man is subject to grief? _a._ no, by no means. _m._ but if that cannot disorder the mind of a wise man, nothing else can. for what--can such a man be disturbed by fear? fear proceeds from the same things when absent which occasion grief when present. take away grief, then, and you remove fear. the two remaining perturbations are, a joy elate above measure, and lust; and if a wise man is not subject to these, his mind will be always at rest. _a._ i am entirely of that opinion. _m._ which, then, shall we do? shall i immediately crowd all my sails? or shall i make use of my oars, as if i were just endeavoring to get clear of the harbor? _a._ what is it that you mean, for i do not exactly comprehend you? v. _m._ because, chrysippus and the stoics, when they discuss the perturbations of the mind, make great part of their debate to consist in definitions and distinctions; while they employ but few words on the subject of curing the mind, and preventing it from being disordered. whereas the peripatetics bring a great many things to promote the cure of it, but have no regard to their thorny partitions and definitions. my question, then, was, whether i should instantly unfold the sails of my eloquence, or be content for a while to make less way with the oars of logic? _a._ let it be so; for by the employment of both these means the subject of our inquiry will be more thoroughly discussed. _m._ it is certainly the better way; and should anything be too obscure, you may examine that afterward. _a._ i will do so; but those very obscure points you will, as usual, deliver with more clearness than the greeks. _m._ i will, indeed, endeavor to do so; but it well requires great attention, lest, by losing one word, the whole should escape you. what the greeks call [greek: pathê] we choose to name perturbations (or disorders) rather than diseases; in explaining which, i shall follow, first, that very old description of pythagoras, and afterward that of plato; for they both divide the mind into two parts, and make one of these partake of reason, and the other they represent without it. in that which partakes of reason they place tranquillity, that is to say, a placid and undisturbed constancy; to the other they assign the turbid motions of anger and desire, which are contrary and opposite to reason. let this, then, be our principle, the spring of all our reasonings. but notwithstanding, i shall use the partitions and definitions of the stoics in describing these perturbations; who seem to me to have shown very great acuteness on this question. vi. zeno's definition, then, is this: "a perturbation" (which he calls a [greek: pathos]) "is a commotion of the mind repugnant to reason, and against nature." some of them define it even more briefly, saying that a perturbation is a somewhat too vehement appetite; but by too vehement they mean an appetite that recedes further from the constancy of nature. but they would have the divisions of perturbations to arise from two imagined goods, and from two imagined evils; and thus they become four: from the good proceed lust and joy--joy having reference to some present good, and lust to some future one. they suppose fear and grief to proceed from evils: fear from something future, grief from something present; for whatever things are dreaded as approaching always occasion grief when present. but joy and lust depend on the opinion of good; as lust, being inflamed and provoked, is carried on eagerly towards what has the appearance of good; and joy is transported and exults on obtaining what was desired: for we naturally pursue those things that have the appearance of good, and avoid the contrary. wherefore, as soon as anything that has the appearance of good presents itself, nature incites us to endeavor to obtain it. now, where this strong desire is consistent and founded on prudence, it is by the stoics called [greek: boulêsis], and the name which we give it is volition; and this they allow to none but their wise man, and define it thus: volition is a reasonable desire; but whatever is incited too violently in opposition to reason, that is a lust, or an unbridled desire, which is discoverable in all fools. and, therefore, when we are affected so as to be placed in any good condition, we are moved in two ways; for when the mind is moved in a placid and calm motion, consistent with reason, that is called joy; but when it exults with a vain, wanton exultation, or immoderate joy, then that feeling may be called immoderate ecstasy or transport, which they define to be an elation of the mind without reason. and as we naturally desire good things, so in like manner we naturally seek to avoid what is evil; and this avoidance of which, if conducted in accordance with reason, is called caution; and this the wise man alone is supposed to have: but that caution which is not under the guidance of reason, but is attended with a base and low dejection, is called fear. fear is, therefore, caution destitute of reason. but a wise man is not affected by any present evil; while the grief of a fool proceeds from being affected with an imaginary evil, by which his mind is contracted and sunk, since it is not under the dominion of reason. this, then, is the first definition, which makes grief to consist in a shrinking of the mind contrary to the dictates of reason. thus, there are four perturbations, and but three calm rational emotions; for grief has no exact opposite. vii. but they insist upon it that all perturbations depend on opinion and judgment; therefore they define them more strictly, in order not only the better to show how blamable they are, but to discover how much they are in our power. grief, then, is a recent opinion of some present evil, in which it seems to be right that the mind should shrink and be dejected. joy is a recent opinion of a present good, in which it seems to be right that the mind should be elated. fear is an opinion of an impending evil which we apprehend will be intolerable. lust is an opinion of a good to come, which would be of advantage were it already come, and present with us. but however i have named the judgments and opinions of perturbations, their meaning is, not that merely the perturbations consist in them, but that the effects likewise of these perturbations do so; as grief occasions a kind of painful pricking, and fear engenders a recoil or sudden abandonment of the mind, joy gives rise to a profuse mirth, while lust is the parent of an unbridled habit of coveting. but that imagination, which i have included in all the above definitions, they would have to consist in assenting without warrantable grounds. now, every perturbation has many subordinate parts annexed to it of the same kind. grief is attended with enviousness (_invidentia_)--i use that word for instruction's sake, though it is not so common; because envy (_invidia_) takes in not only the person who envies, but the person, too, who is envied--emulation, detraction, pity, vexation, mourning, sadness, tribulation, sorrow, lamentation, solicitude, disquiet of mind, pain, despair, and many other similar feelings are so too. under fear are comprehended sloth, shame, terror, cowardice, fainting, confusion, astonishment. in pleasure they comprehend malevolence--that is, pleased at another's misfortune--delight, boastfulness, and the like. to lust they associate anger, fury, hatred, enmity, discord, wants, desire, and other feelings of that kind. but they define these in this manner: viii. enviousness (_invidentia_), they say, is a grief arising from the prosperous circumstances of another, which are in no degree injurious to the person who envies; for where any one grieves at the prosperity of another, by which he is injured, such a one is not properly said to envy--as when agamemnon grieves at hector's success; but where any one, who is in no way hurt by the prosperity of another, is in pain at his success, such a one envies indeed. now the name "emulation" is taken in a double sense, so that the same word may stand for praise and dispraise: for the imitation of virtue is called emulation (however, that sense of it i shall have no occasion for here, for that carries praise with it); but emulation is also a term applied to grief at another's enjoying what i desired to have, and am without. detraction (and i mean by that, jealousy) is a grief even at another's enjoying what i had a great inclination for. pity is a grief at the misery of another who suffers wrongfully; for no one is moved by pity at the punishment of a parricide or of a betrayer of his country. vexation is a pressing grief. mourning is a grief at the bitter death of one who was dear to you. sadness is a grief attended with tears. tribulation is a painful grief. sorrow, an excruciating grief. lamentation, a grief where we loudly bewail ourselves. solicitude, a pensive grief. trouble, a continued grief. affliction, a grief that harasses the body. despair, a grief that excludes all hope of better things to come. but those feelings which are included under fear, they define thus: there is sloth, which is a dread of some ensuing labor; shame and terror, which affect the body--hence blushing attends shame; a paleness, and tremor, and chattering of the teeth attend terror--cowardice, which is an apprehension of some approaching evil; dread, a fear that unhinges the mind, whence comes that line of ennius, then dread discharged all wisdom from my mind; fainting is the associate and constant attendant on dread; confusion, a fear that drives away all thought; alarm, a continued fear. ix. the different species into which they divide pleasure come under this description; so that malevolence is a pleasure in the misfortunes of another, without any advantage to yourself; delight, a pleasure that soothes the mind by agreeable impressions on the ear. what is said of the ear may be applied to the sight, to the touch, smell, and taste. all feelings of this kind are a sort of melting pleasure that dissolves the mind. boastfulness is a pleasure that consists in making an appearance, and setting off yourself with insolence.--the subordinate species of lust they define in this manner: anger is a lust of punishing any one who, as we imagine, has injured us without cause. heat is anger just forming and beginning to exist, which the greeks call [greek: thymôsis]. hatred is a settled anger. enmity is anger waiting for an opportunity of revenge. discord is a sharper anger conceived deeply in the mind and heart. want an insatiable lust. regret is when one eagerly wishes to see a person who is absent. now here they have a distinction; so that with them regret is a lust conceived on hearing of certain things reported of some one, or of many, which the greeks call [greek: katêgorêmata], or predicaments; as that they are in possession of riches and honors: but want is a lust for those very honors and riches. but these definers make intemperance the fountain of all these perturbations; which is an absolute revolt from the mind and right reason--a state so averse to all rules of reason that the appetites of the mind can by no means be governed and restrained. as, therefore, temperance appeases these desires, making them obey right reason, and maintains the well-weighed judgments of the mind, so intemperance, which is in opposition to this, inflames, confounds, and puts every state of the mind into a violent motion. thus, grief and fear, and every other perturbation of the mind, have their rise from intemperance. x. just as distempers and sickness are bred in the body from the corruption of the blood, and the too great abundance of phlegm and bile, so the mind is deprived of its health, and disordered with sickness, from a confusion of depraved opinions that are in opposition to one another. from these perturbations arise, first, diseases, which they call [greek: nosêmata]; and also those feelings which are in opposition to these diseases, and which admit certain faulty distastes or loathings; then come sicknesses, which are called [greek: arrhôstêmata] by the stoics, and these two have their opposite aversions. here the stoics, especially chrysippus, give themselves unnecessary trouble to show the analogy which the diseases of the mind have to those of the body: but, overlooking all that they say as of little consequence, i shall treat only of the thing itself. let us, then, understand perturbation to imply a restlessness from the variety and confusion of contradictory opinions; and that when this heat and disturbance of the mind is of any standing, and has taken up its residence, as it were, in the veins and marrow, then commence diseases and sickness, and those aversions which are in opposition to these diseases and sicknesses. xi. what i say here may be distinguished in thought, though they are in fact the same; inasmuch as they both have their rise from lust and joy. for should money be the object of our desire, and should we not instantly apply to reason, as if it were a kind of socratic medicine to heal this desire, the evil glides into our veins, and cleaves to our bowels, and from thence proceeds a distemper or sickness, which, when it is of any continuance, is incurable, and the name of this disease is covetousness. it is the same with other diseases; as the desire of glory, a passion for women, to which the greeks give the name of [greek: philogyneia]: and thus all other diseases and sicknesses are generated. but those feelings which are the contrary of these are supposed to have fear for their foundation, as a hatred of women, such as is displayed in the woman-hater of atilius; or the hatred of the whole human species, as timon is reported to have done, whom they call the misanthrope. of the same kind is inhospitality. and all these diseases proceed from a certain dread of such things as they hate and avoid. but they define sickness of mind to be an overweening opinion, and that fixed and deeply implanted in the heart, of something as very desirable which is by no means so. what proceeds from aversion, they define thus: a vehement idea of something to be avoided, deeply implanted, and inherent in our minds, when there is no reason for avoiding it; and this kind of opinion is a deliberate belief that one understands things of which one is wholly ignorant. now, sickness of the mind has all these subordinate divisions: avarice, ambition, fondness for women, obstinacy, gluttony, drunkenness, covetousness, and other similar vices. but avarice is a violent opinion about money, as if it were vehemently to be desired and sought after, which opinion is deeply implanted and inherent in our minds; and the definition of all the other similar feelings resembles these. but the definitions of aversions are of this sort: inhospitality is a vehement opinion, deeply implanted and inherent in your mind, that you should avoid a stranger. thus, too, the hatred of women, like that felt by hippolytus, is defined; and the hatred of the human species like that displayed by timon. xii. but to come to the analogy of the state of body and mind, which i shall sometimes make use of, though more sparingly than the stoics. some men are more inclined to particular disorders than others; and, therefore, we say that some people are rheumatic, others dropsical, not because they are so at present, but because they are often so: some are inclined to fear, others to some other perturbation. thus in some there is a continual anxiety, owing to which they are anxious; in some a hastiness of temper, which differs from anger, as anxiety differs from anguish: for all are not anxious who are sometimes vexed, nor are they who are anxious always uneasy in that manner: as there is a difference between being drunk and drunkenness; and it is one thing to be a lover, another to be given to women. and this disposition of particular people to particular disorders is very common: for it relates to all perturbations; it appears in many vices, though it has no name. some are, therefore, said to be envious, malevolent, spiteful, fearful, pitiful, from a propensity to those perturbations, not from their being always carried away by them. now this propensity to these particular disorders may be called a sickness from analogy with the body; meaning, that is to say, nothing more than a propensity towards sickness. but with regard to whatever is good, as some are more inclined to different good qualities than others, we may call this a facility or tendency: this tendency to evil is a proclivity or inclination to falling; but where anything is neither good nor bad, it may have the former name. xiii. even as there may be, with respect to the body, a disease, a sickness, and a defect, so it is with the mind. they call that a disease where the whole body is corrupted; they call that sickness where a disease is attended with a weakness, and that a defect where the parts of the body are not well compacted together; from whence it follows that the members are misshapen, crooked, and deformed. so that these two, a disease and sickness, proceed from a violent concussion and perturbation of the health of the whole body; but a defect discovers itself even when the body is in perfect health. but a disease of the mind is distinguishable only in thought from a sickness. but a viciousness is a habit or affection discordant and inconsistent with itself through life. thus it happens that, in the one case, a disease and sickness may arise from a corruption of opinions; in the other case, the consequence may be inconstancy and inconsistency. for every vice of the mind does not imply a disunion of parts; as is the case with those who are not far from being wise men. with them there is that affection which is inconsistent with itself while it is foolish; but it is not distorted, nor depraved. but diseases and sicknesses are parts of viciousness; but it is a question whether perturbations are parts of the same, for vices are permanent affections: perturbations are such as are restless; so that they cannot be parts of permanent ones. as there is some analogy between the nature of the body and mind in evil, so is there in good; for the distinctions of the body are beauty, strength, health, firmness, quickness of motion: the same may be said of the mind. the body is said to be in a good state when all those things on which health depends are consistent: the same may be said of the mind when its judgments and opinions are not at variance with one another. and this union is the virtue of the mind, which, according to some people, is temperance itself; others make it consist in an obedience to the precepts of temperance, and a compliance with them, not allowing it to be any distinct species of itself. but, be it one or the other, it is to be found only in a wise man. but there is a certain soundness of mind, which even a fool may have, when the perturbation of his mind is removed by the care and management of his physicians. and as what is called beauty arises from an exact proportion of the limbs, together with a certain sweetness of complexion, so the beauty of the mind consists in an equality and constancy of opinions and judgments, joined to a certain firmness and stability, pursuing virtue, or containing within itself the very essence of virtue. besides, we give the very same names to the faculties of the mind as we do to the powers of the body, the nerves, and other powers of action. thus the velocity of the body is called swiftness: a praise which we ascribe to the mind, from its running over in its thoughts so many things in so short a time. xiv. herein, indeed, the mind and body are unlike: that though the mind when in perfect health may be visited by sickness, as the body may, yet the body may be disordered without our fault; the mind cannot. for all the disorders and perturbations of the mind proceed from a neglect of reason; these disorders, therefore, are confined to men: the beasts are not subject to such perturbations, though they act sometimes as if they had reason. there is a difference, too, between ingenious and dull men; the ingenious, like the corinthian brass, which is long before it receives rust, are longer before they fall into these perturbations, and are recovered sooner: the case is different with the dull. nor does the mind of an ingenious man fall into every kind of perturbation, for it never yields to any that are brutish and savage; and some of their perturbations have at first even the appearance of humanity, as mercy, grief, and fear. but the sicknesses and diseases of the mind are thought to be harder to eradicate than those leading vices which are in opposition to virtues; for vices may be removed, though the diseases of the mind should continue, which diseases are not cured with that expedition with which vices are removed. i have now acquainted you with the arguments which the stoics put forth with such exactness; which they call logic, from their close arguing: and since my discourse has got clear of these rocks, i will proceed with the remainder of it, provided i have been sufficiently clear in what i have already said, considering the obscurity of the subject i have treated. _a._ clear enough; but should there be occasion for a more exact inquiry, i shall take another opportunity of asking you. i expect you now to hoist your sails, as you just now called them, and proceed on your course. xv. _m._ since i have spoken before of virtue in other places, and shall often have occasion to speak again (for a great many questions that relate to life and manners arise from the spring of virtue); and since, as i say, virtue consists in a settled and uniform affection of mind, making those persons praiseworthy who are possessed of her, she herself also, independent of anything else, without regard to any advantage, must be praiseworthy; for from her proceed good inclinations, opinions, actions, and the whole of right reason; though virtue may be defined in a few words to be right reason itself. the opposite to this is viciousness (for so i choose to translate what the greeks call [greek: kakia], rather than by perverseness; for perverseness is the name of a particular vice; but viciousness includes all), from whence arise those perturbations which, as i just now said, are turbid and violent motions of the mind, repugnant to reason, and enemies in a high degree to the peace of the mind and a tranquil life, for they introduce piercing and anxious cares, and afflict and debilitate the mind through fear; they violently inflame our hearts with exaggerated appetite, which is in reality an impotence of mind, utterly irreconcilable with temperance and moderation, which we sometimes call desire, and sometimes lust, and which, should it even attain the object of its wishes, immediately becomes so elated that it loses all its resolution, and knows not what to pursue; so that he was in the right who said "that exaggerated pleasure was the very greatest of mistakes." virtue, then, alone can effect the cure of these evils. xvi. for what is not only more miserable, but more base and sordid, than a man afflicted, weakened, and oppressed with grief? and little short of this misery is one who dreads some approaching evil, and who, through faintheartedness, is under continual suspense. the poets, to express the greatness of this evil, imagine a stone to hang over the head of tantalus, as a punishment for his wickedness, his pride, and his boasting. and this is the common punishment of folly; for there hangs over the head of every one whose mind revolts from reason some similar fear. and as these perturbations of the mind, grief and fear, are of a most wasting nature, so those two others, though of a more merry cast (i mean lust, which is always coveting something with eagerness, and empty mirth, which is an exulting joy), differ very little from madness. hence you may understand what sort of person he is whom we call at one time moderate, at another modest or temperate, at another constant and virtuous; while sometimes we include all these names in the word frugality, as the crown of all; for if that word did not include all virtues, it would never have been proverbial to say that a frugal man does everything rightly. but when the stoics apply this saying to their wise man, they seem to exalt him too much, and to speak of him with too much admiration. xvii. whoever, then, through moderation and constancy, is at rest in his mind, and in calm possession of himself, so as neither to pine with care, nor be dejected with fear, nor to be inflamed with desire, coveting something greedily, nor relaxed by extravagant mirth--such a man is that identical wise man whom we are inquiring for: he is the happy man, to whom nothing in this life seems intolerable enough to depress him; nothing exquisite enough to transport him unduly. for what is there in this life that can appear great to him who has acquainted himself with eternity and the utmost extent of the universe? for what is there in human knowledge, or the short span of this life, that can appear great to a wise man? whose mind is always so upon its guard that nothing can befall him which is unforeseen, nothing which is unexpected, nothing, in short, which is new. such a man takes so exact a survey on all sides of him, that he always knows the proper place and spot to live in free from all the troubles and annoyances of life, and encounters every accident that fortune can bring upon him with a becoming calmness. whoever conducts himself in this manner will be free from grief, and from every other perturbation; and a mind free from these feelings renders men completely happy; whereas a mind disordered and drawn off from right and unerring reason loses at once, not only its resolution, but its health.--therefore the thoughts and declarations of the peripatetics are soft and effeminate, for they say that the mind must necessarily be agitated, but at the same time they lay down certain bounds beyond which that agitation is not to proceed. and do you set bounds to vice? or is it no vice to disobey reason? does not reason sufficiently declare that there is no real good which you should desire too ardently, or the possession of which you should allow to transport you? and that there is no evil that should be able to overwhelm you, or the suspicion of which should distract you? and that all these things assume too melancholy or too cheerful an appearance through our own error? but if fools find this error lessened by time, so that, though the cause remains the same, they are not affected, in the same manner, after some time, as they were at first, why, surely a wise man ought not to be influenced at all by it. but what are those degrees by which we are to limit it? let us fix these degrees in grief, a difficult subject, and one much canvassed.--fannius writes that p. rutilius took it much to heart that his brother was refused the consulship; but he seems to have been too much affected by this disappointment, for it was the occasion of his death: he ought, therefore, to have borne it with more moderation. but let us suppose that while he was bearing this with moderation, the death of his children had intervened; here would have started a fresh grief, which, admitting it to be moderate in itself, yet still must have been a great addition to the other. now, to these let us add some acute pains of body, the loss of his fortune, blindness, banishment. supposing, then, each separate misfortune to occasion a separate additional grief, the whole would be too great to be supportable. xviii. the man who attempts to set bounds to vice acts like one who should throw himself headlong from leucate, persuaded that he could stop himself whenever he pleased. now, as that is impossible, so a perturbed and disordered mind cannot restrain itself, and stop where it pleases. certainly whatever is bad in its increase is bad in its birth. now grief and all other perturbations are doubtless baneful in their progress, and have, therefore, no small share of evil at the beginning; for they go on of themselves when once they depart from reason, for every weakness is self-indulgent, and indiscreetly launches out, and does not know where to stop. so that it makes no difference whether you approve of moderate perturbations of mind, or of moderate injustice, moderate cowardice, and moderate intemperance; for whoever prescribes bounds to vice admits a part of it, which, as it is odious of itself, becomes the more so as it stands on slippery ground, and, being once set forward, glides on headlong, and cannot by any means be stopped. xix. why should i say more? why should i add that the peripatetics say that these perturbations, which we insist upon it should be extirpated, are not only natural, but were given to men by nature for a good purpose? they usually talk in this manner. in the first place, they say much in praise of anger; they call it the whetstone of courage, and they say that angry men exert themselves most against an enemy or against a bad citizen: that those reasons are of little weight which are the motives of men who think thus, as--it is a just war; it becomes us to fight for our laws, our liberties, our country: they will allow no force to these arguments unless our courage is warmed by anger.--nor do they confine their argument to warriors; but their opinion is that no one can issue any rigid commands without some bitterness and anger. in short, they have no notion of an orator either accusing or even defending a client without he is spurred on by anger. and though this anger should not be real, still they think his words and gestures ought to wear the appearance of it, so that the action of the orator may excite the anger of his hearer. and they deny that any man has ever been seen who does not know what it is to be angry; and they name what we call lenity by the bad appellation of indolence. nor do they commend only this lust (for anger is, as i defined it above, the lust of revenge), but they maintain that kind of lust or desire to be given us by nature for very good purposes, saying that no one can execute anything well but what he is in earnest about. themistocles used to walk in the public places in the night because he could not sleep; and when asked the reason, his answer was, that miltiades's trophies kept him awake. who has not heard how demosthenes used to watch, who said that it gave him pain if any mechanic was up in a morning at his work before him? lastly, they urge that some of the greatest philosophers would never have made that progress in their studies without some ardent desire spurring them on.--we are informed that pythagoras, democritus, and plato visited the remotest parts of the world; for they thought that they ought to go wherever anything was to be learned. now, it is not conceivable that these things could be effected by anything but by the greatest ardor of mind. xx. they say that even grief, which we have already said ought to be avoided as a monstrous and fierce beast, was appointed by nature, not without some good purpose, in order that men should lament when they had committed a fault, well knowing they had exposed themselves to correction, rebuke, and ignominy; for they think that those who can bear ignominy and infamy without pain have acquired a complete impunity for all sorts of crimes; for with them reproach is a stronger check than conscience. from whence we have that scene in afranius borrowed from common life; for when the abandoned son saith, "wretched that i am!" the severe father replies, let him but grieve, no matter what the cause. and they say the other divisions of sorrow have their use; that pity incites us to hasten to the assistance of others, and to alleviate the calamities of men who have undeservedly fallen into them; that even envy and detraction are not without their use, as when a man sees that another person has attained what he cannot, or observes another to be equally successful with himself; that he who should take away fear would take away all industry in life, which those men exert in the greatest degree who are afraid of the laws and of the magistrates, who dread poverty, ignominy, death, and pain. but while they argue thus, they allow indeed of these feelings being retrenched, though they deny that they either can or should be plucked up by the roots; so that their opinion is that mediocrity is best in everything. when they reason in this manner, what think you--is what they say worth attending to or not? _a._ i think it is. i wait, therefore, to hear what you will say in reply to them. xxi. _m._ perhaps i may find something to say; but i will make this observation first: do you take notice with what modesty the academics behave themselves? for they speak plainly to the purpose. the peripatetics are answered by the stoics; they have my leave to fight it out, who think myself no otherwise concerned than to inquire for what may seem to be most probable. our present business is, then, to see if we can meet with anything in this question which is the probable, for beyond such approximation to truth as that human nature cannot proceed. the definition of a perturbation, as zeno, i think, has rightly determined it, is thus: that a perturbation is a commotion of the mind against nature, in opposition to right reason; or, more briefly, thus, that a perturbation is a somewhat too vehement appetite; and when he says somewhat too vehement, he means such as is at a greater distance from the constant course of nature. what can i say to these definitions? the greater part of them we have from those who dispute with sagacity and acuteness: some of them expressions, indeed, such as the "ardors of the mind," and "the whetstones of virtue," savoring of the pomp of rhetoricians. as to the question, if a brave man can maintain his courage without becoming angry, it may be questioned with regard to the gladiators; though we often observe much resolution even in them: they meet, converse, they make objections and demands, they agree about terms, so that they seem calm rather than angry. but let us admit a man of the name of placideianus, who was one of that trade, to be in such a mind, as lucilius relates of him, if for his blood you thirst, the task be mine; his laurels at my feet he shall resign; not but i know, before i reach his heart, first on myself a wound he will impart. i hate the man; enraged i fight, and straight in action we had been, but that i wait till each his sword had fitted to his hand. my rage i scarce can keep within command. xxii. but we see ajax in homer advancing to meet hector in battle cheerfully, without any of this boisterous wrath. for he had no sooner taken up his arms than the first step which he made inspired his associates with joy, his enemies with fear; so that even hector, as he is represented by homer,[ ] trembling, condemned himself for having challenged him to fight. yet these heroes conversed together, calmly and quietly, before they engaged; nor did they show any anger or outrageous behavior during the combat. nor do i imagine that torquatus, the first who obtained this surname, was in a rage when he plundered the gaul of his collar; or that marcellus's courage at clastidium was only owing to his anger. i could almost swear that africanus, with whom we are better acquainted, from our recollection of him being more recent, was noways inflamed by anger when he covered alienus pelignus with his shield, and drove his sword into the enemy's breast. there may be some doubt of l. brutus, whether he was not influenced by extraordinary hatred of the tyrant, so as to attack aruns with more than usual rashness; for i observe that they mutually killed each other in close fight. why, then, do you call in the assistance of anger? would courage, unless it began to get furious, lose its energy? what! do you imagine that hercules, whom the very courage which you would try to represent as anger raised to heaven, was angry when he engaged the erymanthian boar, or the nemæan lion? or was theseus in a passion when he seized on the horns of the marathonian bull? take care how you make courage to depend in the least on rage. for anger is altogether irrational, and that is not courage which is void of reason. xxiii. we ought to hold all things here in contempt; death is to be looked on with indifference; pains and labors must be considered as easily supportable. and when these sentiments are established on judgment and conviction, then will that stout and firm courage take place; unless you attribute to anger whatever is done with vehemence, alacrity, and spirit. to me, indeed, that very scipio[ ] who was chief priest, that favorer of the saying of the stoics, "that no private man could be a wise man," does not seem to be angry with tiberius gracchus, even when he left the consul in a hesitating frame of mind, and, though a private man himself, commanded, with the authority of a consul, that all who meant well to the republic should follow him. i do not know whether i have done anything in the republic that has the appearance of courage; but if i have, i certainly did not do it in wrath. doth anything come nearer madness than anger? and indeed ennius has well defined it as the beginning of madness. the changing color, the alteration of our voice, the look of our eyes, our manner of fetching our breath, the little command we have over our words and actions, how little do all these things indicate a sound mind! what can make a worse appearance than homer's achilles, or agamemnon, during the quarrel? and as to ajax, anger drove him into downright madness, and was the occasion of his death. courage, therefore, does not want the assistance of anger; it is sufficiently provided, armed, and prepared of itself. we may as well say that drunkenness or madness is of service to courage, because those who are mad or drunk often do a great many things with unusual vehemence. ajax was always brave; but still he was most brave when he was in that state of frenzy: the greatest feat that ajax e'er achieved was, when his single arm the greeks relieved. quitting the field; urged on by rising rage, forced the declining troops again t'engage. shall we say, then, that madness has its use? xxiv. examine the definitions of courage: you will find it does not require the assistance of passion. courage is, then, an affection of mind that endures all things, being itself in proper subjection to the highest of all laws; or it may be called a firm maintenance of judgment in supporting or repelling everything that has a formidable appearance, or a knowledge of what is formidable or otherwise, and maintaining invariably a stable judgment of all such things, so as to bear them or despise them; or, in fewer words, according to chrysippus (for the above definitions are sphærus's, a man of the first ability as a layer-down of definitions, as the stoics think. but they are all pretty much alike: they give us only common notions, some one way, and some another). but what is chrysippus's definition? fortitude, says he, is the knowledge of all things that are bearable, or an affection of the mind which bears and supports everything in obedience to the chief law of reason without fear. now, though we should attack these men in the same manner as carneades used to do, i fear they are the only real philosophers; for which of these definitions is there which does not explain that obscure and intricate notion of courage which every man conceives within himself? and when it is thus explained, what can a warrior, a commander, or an orator want more? and no one can think that they will be unable to behave themselves courageously without anger. what! do not even the stoics, who maintain that all fools are mad, make the same inferences? for, take away perturbations, especially a hastiness of temper, and they will appear to talk very absurdly. but what they assert is this: they say that all fools are mad, as all dunghills stink; not that they always do so, but stir them, and you will perceive it. and in like manner, a warm-tempered man is not always in a passion; but provoke him, and you will see him run mad. now, that very warlike anger, which is of such service in war, what is the use of it to him when he is at home with his wife, children, and family? is there, then, anything that a disturbed mind can do better than one which is calm and steady? or can any one be angry without a perturbation of mind? our people, then, were in the right, who, as all vices depend on our manners, and nothing is worse than a passionate disposition, called angry men the only morose men.[ ] xxv. anger is in no wise becoming in an orator, though it is not amiss to affect it. do you imagine that i am angry when in pleading i use any extraordinary vehemence and sharpness? what! when i write out my speeches after all is over and past, am i then angry while writing? or do you think Æsopus was ever angry when he acted, or accius was so when he wrote? those men, indeed, act very well, but the orator acts better than the player, provided he be really an orator; but, then, they carry it on without passion, and with a composed mind. but what wantonness is it to commend lust! you produce themistocles and demosthenes; to these you add pythagoras, democritus, and plato. what! do you then call studies lust? but these studies of the most excellent and admirable things, such as those were which you bring forward on all occasions, ought to be composed and tranquil; and what kind of philosophers are they who commend grief, than which nothing is more detestable? afranius has said much to this purpose: let him but grieve, no matter what the cause. but he spoke this of a debauched and dissolute youth. but we are inquiring into the conduct of a constant and wise man. we may even allow a centurion or standard-bearer to be angry, or any others, whom, not to explain too far the mysteries of the rhetoricians, i shall not mention here; for to touch the passions, where reason cannot be come at, may have its use; but my inquiry, as i often repeat, is about a wise man. xxvi. but even envy, detraction, pity, have their use. why should you pity rather than assist, if it is in your power to do so? is it because you cannot be liberal without pity? we should not take sorrows on ourselves upon another's account; but we ought to relieve others of their grief if we can. but to detract from another's reputation, or to rival him with that vicious emulation which resembles an enmity, of what use can that conduct be? now, envy implies being uneasy at another's good because one does not enjoy it one's self; but detraction is the being uneasy at another's good, merely because he enjoys it. how can it be right that you should voluntarily grieve, rather than take the trouble of acquiring what you want to have? for it is madness in the highest degree to desire to be the only one that has any particular happiness. but who can with correctness speak in praise of a mediocrity of evils? can any one in whom there is lust or desire be otherwise than libidinous or desirous? or can a man who is occupied by anger avoid being angry? or can one who is exposed to any vexation escape being vexed? or if he is under the influence of fear, must he not be fearful? do we look, then, on the libidinous, the angry, the anxious, and the timid man, as persons of wisdom, of excellence? of which i could speak very copiously and diffusely, but i wish to be as concise as possible. and so i will merely say that wisdom is an acquaintance with all divine and human affairs, and a knowledge of the cause of everything. hence it is that it imitates what is divine, and looks upon all human concerns as inferior to virtue. did you, then, say that it was your opinion that such a man was as naturally liable to perturbation as the sea is exposed to winds? what is there that can discompose such gravity and constancy? anything sudden or unforeseen? how can anything of this kind befall one to whom nothing is sudden and unforeseen that can happen to man? now, as to their saying that redundancies should be pared off, and only what is natural remain, what, i pray you, can be natural which may be too exuberant? xxvii. all these assertions proceed from the roots of errors, which must be entirely plucked up and destroyed, not pared and amputated. but as i suspect that your inquiry is not so much respecting the wise man as concerning yourself (for you allow that he is free from all perturbations, and you would willingly be so too yourself), let us see what remedies there are which may be applied by philosophy to the diseases of the mind. there is certainly some remedy; nor has nature been so unkind to the human race as to have discovered so many things salutary to the body, and none which are medicinal to the mind. she has even been kinder to the mind than to the body; inasmuch as you must seek abroad for the assistance which the body requires, while the mind has all that it requires within itself. but in proportion as the excellency of the mind is of a higher and more divine nature, the more diligence does it require; and therefore reason, when it is well applied, discovers what is best, but when it is neglected, it becomes involved in many errors. i shall apply, then, all my discourse to you; for though you pretend to be inquiring about the wise man, your inquiry may possibly be about yourself. various, then, are the cures of those perturbations which i have expounded, for every disorder is not to be appeased the same way. one medicine must be applied to the man who mourns, another to the pitiful, another to the person who envies; for there is this difference to be maintained in all the four perturbations: we are to consider whether our discourse had better be directed to perturbations in general, which are a contempt of reason, or a somewhat too vehement appetite; or whether it would be better applied to particular descriptions, as, for instance, to fear, lust, and the rest, and whether it appears preferable to endeavor to remove that which has occasioned the grief, or rather to attempt wholly to eradicate every kind of grief. as, should any one grieve that he is poor, the question is, would you maintain poverty to be no evil, or would you contend that a man ought not to grieve at anything? certainly this last is the best course; for should you not convince him with regard to poverty, you must allow him to grieve; but if you remove grief by particular arguments, such as i used yesterday, the evil of poverty is in some manner removed. xxviii. but any perturbation of the mind of this sort may be, as it were, wiped away by the method of appeasing the mind, if you succeed in showing that there is no good in that which has given rise to joy and lust, nor any evil in that which has occasioned fear or grief. but certainly the most effectual cure is to be achieved by showing that all perturbations are of themselves vicious, and have nothing natural or necessary in them. as we see, grief itself is easily softened when we charge those who grieve with weakness and an effeminate mind; or when we commend the gravity and constancy of those who bear calmly whatever befalls them here, as accidents to which all men are liable; and, indeed, this is generally the feeling of those who look on these as real evils, but yet think they should be borne with resignation. one imagines pleasure to be a good, another money; and yet the one may be called off from intemperance, the other from covetousness. the other method and address, which, at the same time that it removes the false opinion, withdraws the disorder, has more subtlety in it; but it seldom succeeds, and is not applicable to vulgar minds, for there are some diseases which that medicine can by no means remove. for, should any one be uneasy because he is without virtue, without courage, destitute of a sense of duty or honesty, his anxiety proceeds from a real evil; and yet we must apply another method of cure to him, and such a one as all the philosophers, however they may differ about other things, agree in. for they must necessarily agree in this, that commotions of the mind in opposition to right reason are vicious; and that even admitting those things to be evils which occasion fear or grief, and those to be goods which provoke desire or joy, yet that very commotion itself is vicious; for we mean by the expressions magnanimous and brave, one who is resolute, sedate, grave, and superior to everything in this life; but one who either grieves, or fears, or covets, or is transported with passion, cannot come under that denomination; for these things are consistent only with those who look on the things of this world as things with which their minds are unequal to contend. xxix. wherefore, as i before said, the philosophers have all one method of cure, so that we need say nothing about what sort of thing that is which disturbs the mind, but we must speak only concerning the perturbation itself. thus, first, with regard to desire itself, when the business is only to remove that, the inquiry is not to be, whether that thing be good or evil which provokes lust, but the lust itself is to be removed; so that whether whatever is honest is the chief good, or whether it consists in pleasure, or in both these things together, or in the other three kinds of goods, yet should there be in any one too vehement an appetite for even virtue itself, the whole discourse should be directed to the deterring him from that vehemence. but human nature, when placed in a conspicuous point of view, gives us every argument for appeasing the mind, and, to make this the more distinct, the laws and conditions of life should be explained in our discourse. therefore, it was not without reason that socrates is reported, when euripides was exhibiting his play called orestes, to have repeated the first three verses of that tragedy-- what tragic story men can mournful tell, whate'er from fate or from the gods befell, that human nature can support--[ ] but, in order to persuade those to whom any misfortune has happened that they can and ought to bear it, it is very useful to set before them an enumeration of other persons who have borne similar calamities. indeed, the method of appeasing grief was explained in my dispute of yesterday, and in my book on consolation, which i wrote in the midst of my own grief; for i was not myself so wise a man as to be insensible to grief, and i used this, notwithstanding chrysippus's advice to the contrary, who is against applying a medicine to the agitations of the mind while they are fresh; but i did it, and committed a violence on nature, that the greatness of my grief might give way to the greatness of the medicine. xxx. but fear borders upon grief, of which i have already said enough; but i must say a little more on that. now, as grief proceeds from what is present, so does fear from future evil; so that some have said that fear is a certain part of grief: others have called fear the harbinger of trouble, which, as it were, introduces the ensuing evil. now, the reasons that make what is present supportable, make what is to come very contemptible; for, with regard to both, we should take care to do nothing low or grovelling, soft or effeminate, mean or abject. but, notwithstanding we should speak of the inconstancy, imbecility, and levity of fear itself, yet it is of very great service to speak contemptuously of those very things of which we are afraid. so that it fell out very well, whether it was by accident or design, that i disputed the first and second day on death and pain--the two things that are the most dreaded: now, if what i then said was approved of, we are in a great degree freed from fear. and this is sufficient, as far as regards the opinion of evils. xxxi. proceed we now to what are goods--that is to say, to joy and desire. to me, indeed, one thing alone seems to embrace the question of all that relates to the perturbations of the mind--the fact, namely, that all perturbations are in our own power; that they are taken up upon opinion, and are voluntary. this error, then, must be got rid of; this opinion must be removed; and, as with regard to imagined evils, we are to make them more supportable, so with respect to goods, we are to lessen the violent effects of those things which are called great and joyous. but one thing is to be observed, that equally relates both to good and evil: that, should it be difficult to persuade any one that none of those things which disturb the mind are to be looked on as good or evil, yet a different cure is to be applied to different feelings; and the malevolent person is to be corrected by one way of reasoning, the lover by another, the anxious man by another, and the fearful by another: and it would be easy for any one who pursues the best approved method of reasoning, with regard to good and evil, to maintain that no fool can be affected with joy, as he never can have anything good. but, at present, my discourse proceeds upon the common received notions. let, then, honors, riches, pleasures, and the rest be the very good things which they are imagined to be; yet a too elevated and exulting joy on the possession of them is unbecoming; just as, though it might be allowable to laugh, to giggle would be indecent. thus, a mind enlarged by joy is as blamable as a contraction of it by grief; and eager longing is a sign of as much levity in desiring as immoderate joy is in possessing; and, as those who are too dejected are said to be effeminate, so they who are too elated with joy are properly called volatile; and as feeling envy is a part of grief, and the being pleased with another's misfortune is a kind of joy, both these feelings are usually corrected by showing the wildness and insensibility of them: and as it becomes a man to be cautious, but it is unbecoming in him to be fearful, so to be pleased is proper, but to be joyful improper. i have, in order that i might be the better understood, distinguished pleasure from joy. i have already said above, that a contraction of the mind can never be right, but that an elation of it may; for the joy of hector in nævius is one thing-- 'tis joy indeed to hear my praises sung by you, who are the theme of honor's tongue-- but that of the character in trabea another: "the kind procuress, allured by my money, will observe my nod, will watch my desires, and study my will. if i but move the door with my little finger, instantly it flies open; and if chrysis should unexpectedly discover me, she will run with joy to meet me, and throw herself into my arms." now he will tell you how excellent he thinks this: not even fortune herself is so fortunate. xxxii. any one who attends the least to the subject will be convinced how unbecoming this joy is. and as they are very shameful who are immoderately delighted with the enjoyment of venereal pleasures, so are they very scandalous who lust vehemently after them. and all that which is commonly called love (and, believe me, i can find out no other name to call it by) is of such a trivial nature that nothing, i think, is to be compared to it: of which cæcilius says, i hold the man of every sense bereaved who grants not love to be of gods the chief: whose mighty power whate'er is good effects, who gives to each his beauty and defects: hence, health and sickness; wit and folly, hence, the god that love and hatred doth dispense! an excellent corrector of life this same poetry, which thinks that love, the promoter of debauchery and vanity, should have a place in the council of the gods! i am speaking of comedy, which could not subsist at all without our approving of these debaucheries. but what said that chief of the argonauts in tragedy? my life i owe to honor less than love. what, then, are we to say of this love of medea?--what a train of miseries did it occasion! and yet the same woman has the assurance to say to her father, in another poet, that she had a husband dearer by love than ever fathers were. xxxiii. however, we may allow the poets to trifle, in whose fables we see jupiter himself engaged in these debaucheries: but let us apply to the masters of virtue--the philosophers who deny love to be anything carnal; and in this they differ from epicurus, who, i think, is not much mistaken. for what is that love of friendship? how comes it that no one is in love with a deformed young man, or a handsome old one? i am of opinion that this love of men had its rise from the gymnastics of the greeks, where these kinds of loves are admissible and permitted; therefore ennius spoke well: the censure of this crime to those is due who naked bodies first exposed to view. now, supposing them chaste, which i think is hardly possible, they are uneasy and distressed, and the more so because they contain and refrain themselves. but, to pass over the love of women, where nature has allowed more liberty, who can misunderstand the poets in their rape of ganymede, or not apprehend what laius says, and what he desires, in euripides? lastly, what have the principal poets and the most learned men published of themselves in their poems and songs? what doth alcæus, who was distinguished in his own republic for his bravery, write on the love of young men? and as for anacreon's poetry, it is wholly on love. but ibycus of rhegium appears, from his writings, to have had this love stronger on him than all the rest. xxxiv. now we see that the loves of all these writers were entirely libidinous. there have arisen also some among us philosophers (and plato is at the head of them, whom dicæarchus blames not without reason) who have countenanced love. the stoics, in truth, say, not only that their wise man may be a lover, but they even define love itself as an endeavor to originate friendship out of the appearance of beauty. now, provided there is any one in the nature of things without desire, without care, without a sigh, such a one may be a lover; for he is free from all lust: but i have nothing to say to him, as it is lust of which i am now speaking. but should there be any love--as there certainly is--which is but little, or perhaps not at all, short of madness, such as his is in the leucadia-- should there be any god whose care i am-- it is incumbent on all the gods to see that he enjoys his amorous pleasure. wretch that i am! nothing is more true, and he says very appropriately, what, are you sane, who at this rate lament? he seems even to his friends to be out of his senses: then how tragical he becomes! thy aid, divine apollo, i implore, and thine, dread ruler of the wat'ry store! oh! all ye winds, assist me! he thinks that the whole world ought to apply itself to help his love: he excludes venus alone, as unkind to him. thy aid, o venus, why should i invoke? he thinks venus too much employed in her own lust to have regard to anything else, as if he himself had not said and committed these shameful things from lust. xxxv. now, the cure for one who is affected in this manner is to show how light, how contemptible, how very trifling he is in what he desires; how he may turn his affections to another object, or accomplish his desires by some other means; or else to persuade him that he may entirely disregard it: sometimes he is to be led away to objects of another kind, to study, business, or other different engagements and concerns: very often the cure is effected by change of place, as sick people, that have not recovered their strength, are benefited by change of air. some people think an old love may be driven out by a new one, as one nail drives out another: but, above all things, the man thus afflicted should be advised what madness love is: for of all the perturbations of the mind, there is not one which is more vehement; for (without charging it with rapes, debaucheries, adultery, or even incest, the baseness of any of these being very blamable; not, i say, to mention these) the very perturbation of the mind in love is base of itself, for, to pass over all its acts of downright madness, what weakness do not those very things which are looked upon as indifferent argue? affronts and jealousies, jars, squabbles, wars, then peace again. the man who seeks to fix these restless feelings, and to subjugate them to some regular law, is just as wise as one who'd try to lay down rules by which men should go mad.[ ] now, is not this inconstancy and mutability of mind enough to deter any one by its own deformity? we are to demonstrate, as was said of every perturbation, that there are no such feelings which do not consist entirely of opinion and judgment, and are not owing to ourselves. for if love were natural, all would be in love, and always so, and all love the same object; nor would one be deterred by shame, another by reflection, another by satiety. xxxvi. anger, too, when it disturbs the mind any time, leaves no room to doubt its being madness: by the instigation of which we see such contention as this between brothers: where was there ever impudence like thine? who on thy malice ever could refine?[ ] you know what follows: for abuses are thrown out by these brothers with great bitterness in every other verse; so that you may easily know them for the sons of atreus, of that atreus who invented a new punishment for his brother: i who his cruel heart to gall am bent, some new, unheard-of torment must invent. now, what were these inventions? hear thyestes: my impious brother fain would have me eat my children, and thus serves them up for meat. to what length now will not anger go? even as far as madness. therefore we say, properly enough, that angry men have given up their power, that is, they are out of the power of advice, reason, and understanding; for these ought to have power over the whole mind. now, you should put those out of the way whom they endeavor to attack till they have recollected themselves; but what does recollection here imply but getting together again the dispersed parts of their mind into their proper place? or else you must beg and entreat them, if they have the means of revenge, to defer it to another opportunity, till their anger cools. but the expression of cooling implies, certainly, that there was a heat raised in their minds in opposition to reason; from which consideration that saying of archytas is commended, who being somewhat provoked at his steward, "how would i have treated you," said he, "if i had not been in a passion?" xxxvii. where, then, are they who say that anger has its use? can madness be of any use? but still it is natural. can anything be natural that is against reason? or how is it, if anger is natural, that one person is more inclined to anger than another? or that the lust of revenge should cease before it has revenged itself? or that any one should repent of what he had done in a passion? as we see that alexander the king did, who could scarcely keep his hands from himself, when he had killed his favorite clytus, so great was his compunction. now who that is acquainted with these instances can doubt that this motion of the mind is altogether in opinion and voluntary? for who can doubt that disorders of the mind, such as covetousness and a desire of glory, arise from a great estimation of those things by which the mind is disordered? from whence we may understand that every perturbation of the mind is founded in opinion. and if boldness--that is to say, a firm assurance of mind--is a kind of knowledge and serious opinion not hastily taken up, then diffidence is a fear of an expected and impending evil; and if hope is an expectation of good, fear must, of course, be an expectation of evil. thus fear and other perturbations are evils. therefore, as constancy proceeds from knowledge, so does perturbation from error. now, they who are said to be naturally inclined to anger, or to pity, or to envy, or to any feeling of this kind, their minds are constitutionally, as it were, in bad health; yet they are curable, as the disposition of socrates is said to have been; for when zopyrus, who professed to know the character of every one from his person, had heaped a great many vices on him in a public assembly, he was laughed at by others, who could perceive no such vices in socrates; but socrates kept him in countenance by declaring that such vices were natural to him, but that he had got the better of them by his reason. therefore, as any one who has the appearance of the best constitution may yet appear to be naturally rather inclined to some particular disorder, so different minds may be more particularly inclined to different diseases. but as to those men who are said to be vicious, not by nature, but their own fault, their vices proceed from wrong opinions of good and bad things, so that one is more prone than another to different motions and perturbations. but, just as it is in the case of the body, an inveterate disease is harder to be got rid of than a sudden disorder; and it is more easy to cure a fresh tumor in the eyes than to remove a defluxion of any continuance. xxxviii. but as the cause of perturbations is now discovered, for all of them arise from the judgment or opinion, or volition, i shall put an end to this discourse. but we ought to be assured, since the boundaries of good and evil are now discovered, as far as they are discoverable by man, that nothing can be desired of philosophy greater or more useful than the discussions which we have held these four days. for besides instilling a contempt of death, and relieving pain so as to enable men to bear it, we have added the appeasing of grief, than which there is no greater evil to man. for though every perturbation of mind is grievous, and differs but little from madness, yet we are used to say of others when they are under any perturbation, as of fear, joy, or desire, that they are agitated and disturbed; but of those who give themselves up to grief, that they are miserable, afflicted, wretched, unhappy. so that it doth not seem to be by accident, but with reason proposed by you, that i should discuss grief, and the other perturbations separately; for there lies the spring and head of all our miseries; but the cure of grief, and of other disorders, is one and the same in that they are all voluntary, and founded on opinion; we take them on ourselves because it seems right so to do. philosophy undertakes to eradicate this error, as the root of all our evils: let us therefore surrender ourselves to be instructed by it, and suffer ourselves to be cured; for while these evils have possession of us, we not only cannot be happy, but cannot be right in our minds. we must either deny that reason can effect anything, while, on the other hand, nothing can be done right without reason, or else, since philosophy depends on the deductions of reason, we must seek from her, if we would be good or happy, every help and assistance for living well and happily. book v. whether virtue alone be sufficient for a happy life. i. this fifth day, brutus, shall put an end to our tusculan disputations: on which day we discussed your favorite subject. for i perceive from that book which you wrote for me with the greatest accuracy, as well as from your frequent conversation, that you are clearly of this opinion, that virtue is of itself sufficient for a happy life: and though it may be difficult to prove this, on account of the many various strokes of fortune, yet it is a truth of such a nature that we should endeavor to facilitate the proof of it. for among all the topics of philosophy, there is not one of more dignity or importance. for as the first philosophers must have had some inducement to neglect everything for the search of the best state of life: surely, the inducement must have been the hope of living happily, which impelled them to devote so much care and pains to that study. now, if virtue was discovered and carried to perfection by them, and if virtue is a sufficient security for a happy life, who can avoid thinking the work of philosophizing excellently recommended by them, and undertaken by me? but if virtue, as being subject to such various and uncertain accidents, were but the slave of fortune, and were not of sufficient ability to support herself, i am afraid that it would seem desirable rather to offer up prayers, than to rely on our own confidence in virtue as the foundation for our hope of a happy life. and, indeed, when i reflect on those troubles with which i have been so severely exercised by fortune, i begin to distrust this opinion; and sometimes even to dread the weakness and frailty of human nature, for i am afraid lest, when nature had given us infirm bodies, and had joined to them incurable diseases and intolerable pains, she perhaps also gave us minds participating in these bodily pains, and harassed also with troubles and uneasinesses, peculiarly their own. but here i correct myself for forming my judgment of the power of virtue more from the weakness of others, or of myself perhaps, than from virtue itself: for she herself (provided there is such a thing as virtue; and your uncle brutus has removed all doubt of it) has everything that can befall mankind in subjection to her; and by disregarding such things, she is far removed from being at all concerned at human accidents; and, being free from every imperfection, she thinks that nothing which is external to herself can concern her. but we, who increase every approaching evil by our fear, and every present one by our grief, choose rather to condemn the nature of things than our own errors. ii. but the amendment of this fault, and of all our other vices and offences, is to be sought for in philosophy: and as my own inclination and desire led me, from my earliest youth upward, to seek her protection, so, under my present misfortunes, i have had recourse to the same port from whence i set out, after having been tossed by a violent tempest. o philosophy, thou guide of life! thou discoverer of virtue and expeller of vices! what had not only i myself, but the whole life of man, been without you? to you it is that we owe the origin of cities; you it was who called together the dispersed race of men into social life; you united them together, first, by placing them near one another, then by marriages, and lastly, by the communication of speech and languages. you have been the inventress of laws; you have been our instructress in morals and discipline; to you we fly for refuge; from you we implore assistance; and as i formerly submitted to you in a great degree, so now i surrender up myself entirely to you. for one day spent well, and agreeably to your precepts, is preferable to an eternity of error. whose assistance, then, can be of more service to me than yours, when you have bestowed on us tranquillity of life, and removed the fear of death? but philosophy is so far from being praised as much as she has deserved by mankind, that she is wholly neglected by most men, and actually evil spoken of by many. can any person speak ill of the parent of life, and dare to pollute himself thus with parricide, and be so impiously ungrateful as to accuse her whom he ought to reverence, even were he less able to appreciate the advantages which he might derive from her? but this error, i imagine, and this darkness has spread itself over the minds of ignorant men, from their not being able to look so far back, and from their not imagining that those men by whom human life was first improved were philosophers; for though we see philosophy to have been of long standing, yet the name must be acknowledged to be but modern. iii. but, indeed, who can dispute the antiquity of philosophy, either in fact or name? for it acquired this excellent name from the ancients, by the knowledge of the origin and causes of everything, both divine and human. thus those seven [greek: sophoi], as they were considered and called by the greeks, have always been esteemed and called wise men by us; and thus lycurgus many ages before, in whose time, before the building of this city, homer is said to have lived, as well as ulysses and nestor in the heroic ages, are all handed down to us by tradition as having really been what they were called, wise men; nor would it have been said that atlas supported the heavens, or that prometheus was bound to caucasus, nor would cepheus, with his wife, his son-in-law, and his daughter have been enrolled among the constellations, but that their more than human knowledge of the heavenly bodies had transferred their names into an erroneous fable. from whence all who occupied themselves in the contemplation of nature were both considered and called wise men; and that name of theirs continued to the age of pythagoras, who is reported to have gone to phlius, as we find it stated by heraclides ponticus, a very learned man, and a pupil of plato, and to have discoursed very learnedly and copiously on certain subjects with leon, prince of the phliasii; and when leon, admiring his ingenuity and eloquence, asked him what art he particularly professed, his answer was, that he was acquainted with no art, but that he was a philosopher. leon, surprised at the novelty of the name, inquired what he meant by the name of philosopher, and in what philosophers differed from other men; on which pythagoras replied, "that the life of man seemed to him to resemble those games which were celebrated with the greatest possible variety of sports and the general concourse of all greece. for as in those games there were some persons whose object was glory and the honor of a crown, to be attained by the performance of bodily exercises, so others were led thither by the gain of buying and selling, and mere views of profit; but there was likewise one class of persons, and they were by far the best, whose aim was neither applause nor profit, but who came merely as spectators through curiosity, to observe what was done, and to see in what manner things were carried on there. and thus, said he, we come from another life and nature unto this one, just as men come out of some other city, to some much frequented mart; some being slaves to glory, others to money; and there are some few who, taking no account of anything else, earnestly look into the nature of things; and these men call themselves studious of wisdom, that is, philosophers: and as there it is the most reputable occupation of all to be a looker-on without making any acquisition, so in life, the contemplating things, and acquainting one's self with them, greatly exceeds every other pursuit of life." iv. nor was pythagoras the inventor only of the name, but he enlarged also the thing itself, and, when he came into italy after this conversation at phlius, he adorned that greece, which is called great greece, both privately and publicly, with the most excellent institutions and arts; but of his school and system i shall, perhaps, find another opportunity to speak. but numbers and motions, and the beginning and end of all things, were the subjects of the ancient philosophy down to socrates, who was a pupil of archelaus, who had been the disciple of anaxagoras. these made diligent inquiry into the magnitude of the stars, their distances, courses, and all that relates to the heavens. but socrates was the first who brought down philosophy from the heavens, placed it in cities, introduced it into families, and obliged it to examine into life and morals, and good and evil. and his different methods of discussing questions, together with the variety of his topics, and the greatness of his abilities, being immortalized by the memory and writings of plato, gave rise to many sects of philosophers of different sentiments, of all which i have principally adhered to that one which, in my opinion, socrates himself followed; and argue so as to conceal my own opinion, while i deliver others from their errors, and so discover what has the greatest appearance of probability in every question. and the custom carneades adopted with great copiousness and acuteness, and i myself have often given in to it on many occasions elsewhere, and in this manner, too, i disputed lately, in my tusculan villa; indeed, i have sent you a book of the four former days' discussions; but the fifth day, when we had seated ourselves as before, what we were to dispute on was proposed thus: v. _a._ i do not think virtue can possibly be sufficient for a happy life. _m._ but my friend brutus thinks so, whose judgment, with submission, i greatly prefer to yours. _a._ i make no doubt of it; but your regard for him is not the business now: the question is now, what is the real character of that quality of which i have declared my opinion. i wish you to dispute on that. _m._ what! do you deny that virtue can possibly be sufficient for a happy life? _a._ it is what i entirely deny. _m._ what! is not virtue sufficient to enable us to live as we ought, honestly, commendably, or, in fine, to live well? _a._ certainly sufficient. _m._ can you, then, help calling any one miserable who lives ill? or will you deny that any one who you allow lives well must inevitably live happily? _a._ why may i not? for a man may be upright in his life, honest, praiseworthy, even in the midst of torments, and therefore live well. provided you understand what i mean by well; for when i say well, i mean with constancy, and dignity, and wisdom, and courage; for a man may display all these qualities on the rack; but yet the rack is inconsistent with a happy life. _m._ what, then? is your happy life left on the outside of the prison, while constancy, dignity, wisdom, and the other virtues, are surrendered up to the executioner, and bear punishment and pain without reluctance? _a._ you must look out for something new if you would do any good. these things have very little effect on me, not merely from their being common, but principally because, like certain light wines that will not bear water, these arguments of the stoics are pleasanter to taste than to swallow. as when that assemblage of virtues is committed to the rack, it raises so reverend a spectacle before our eyes that happiness seems to hasten on towards them, and not to suffer them to be deserted by her. but when you take your attention off from this picture and these images of the virtues to the truth and the reality, what remains without disguise is, the question whether any one can be happy in torment? wherefore let us now examine that point, and not be under any apprehensions, lest the virtues should expostulate, and complain that they are forsaken by happiness. for if prudence is connected with every virtue, then prudence itself discovers this, that all good men are not therefore happy; and she recollects many things of marcus atilius[ ], quintus cæpio[ ], marcus aquilius[ ]; and prudence herself, if these representations are more agreeable to you than the things themselves, restrains happiness when it is endeavoring to throw itself into torments, and denies that it has any connection with pain and torture. vi. _m._ i can easily bear with your behaving in this manner, though it is not fair in you to prescribe to me how you would have me carry on this discussion. but i ask you if i have effected anything or nothing in the preceding days? _a._ yes; something was done, some little matter indeed. _m._ but if that is the case, this question is settled, and almost put an end to. _a._ how so? _m._ because turbulent motions and violent agitations of the mind, when it is raised and elated by a rash impulse, getting the better of reason, leave no room for a happy life. for who that fears either pain or death, the one of which is always present, the other always impending, can be otherwise than miserable? now, supposing the same person--which is often the case--to be afraid of poverty, ignominy, infamy, or weakness, or blindness, or, lastly, slavery, which doth not only befall individual men, but often even the most powerful nations; now can any one under the apprehension of these evils be happy? what shall we say of him who not only dreads these evils as impending, but actually feels and bears them at present? let us unite in the same person banishment, mourning, the loss of children; now, how can any one who is broken down and rendered sick in body and mind by such affliction be otherwise than very miserable indeed? what reason, again, can there be why a man should not rightly enough be called miserable whom we see inflamed and raging with lust, coveting everything with an insatiable desire, and, in proportion as he derives more pleasure from anything, thirsting the more violently after them? and as to a man vainly elated, exulting with an empty joy, and boasting of himself without reason, is not he so much the more miserable in proportion as he thinks himself happier? therefore, as these men are miserable, so, on the other hand, those are happy who are alarmed by no fears, wasted by no griefs, provoked by no lusts, melted by no languid pleasures that arise from vain and exulting joys. we look on the sea as calm when not the least breath of air disturbs its waves; and, in like manner, the placid and quiet state of the mind is discovered when unmoved by any perturbation. now, if there be any one who holds the power of fortune, and everything human, everything that can possibly befall any man, as supportable, so as to be out of the reach of fear or anxiety, and if such a man covets nothing, and is lifted up by no vain joy of mind, what can prevent his being happy? and if these are the effects of virtue, why cannot virtue itself make men happy? vii. _a._ but the other of these two propositions is undeniable, that they who are under no apprehensions, who are noways uneasy, who covet nothing, who are lifted up by no vain joy, are happy: and therefore i grant you that. but as for the other, that is not now in a fit state for discussion; for it has been proved by your former arguments that a wise man is free from every perturbation of mind. _m._ doubtless, then, the dispute is over; for the question appears to have been entirely exhausted. _a._ i think, indeed, that that is almost the case. _m._ but yet that is more usually the case with the mathematicians than philosophers. for when the geometricians teach anything, if what they have before taught relates to their present subject, they take that for granted which has been already proved, and explain only what they had not written on before. but the philosophers, whatever subject they have in hand, get together everything that relates to it, notwithstanding they may have dilated on it somewhere else. were not that the case, why should the stoics say so much on that question, whether virtue was abundantly sufficient to a happy life? when it would have been answer enough that they had before taught that nothing was good but what was honorable; for, as this had been proved, the consequence must be that virtue was sufficient to a happy life; and each premise may be made to follow from the admission of the other, so that if it be admitted that virtue is sufficient to secure a happy life, it may also be inferred that nothing is good except what is honorable. they, however, do not proceed in this manner; for they would separate books about what is honorable, and what is the chief good; and when they have demonstrated from the one that virtue has power enough to make life happy, yet they treat this point separately; for everything, and especially a subject of such great consequence, should be supported by arguments and exhortations which belong to that alone. for you should have a care how you imagine philosophy to have uttered anything more noble, or that she has promised anything more fruitful or of greater consequence, for, good gods! doth she not engage that she will render him who submits to her laws so accomplished as to be always armed against fortune, and to have every assurance within himself of living well and happily--that he shall, in short, be forever happy? but let us see what she will perform? in the mean while, i look upon it as a great thing that she has even made such a promise. for xerxes, who was loaded with all the rewards and gifts of fortune, not satisfied with his armies of horse and foot, nor the multitude of his ships, nor his infinite treasure of gold, offered a reward to any one who could find out a new pleasure; and yet, when it was discovered, he was not satisfied with it; nor can there ever be an end to lust. i wish we could engage any one by a reward to produce something the better to establish us in this belief. viii. _a._ i wish that, indeed, myself; but i want a little information. for i allow that in what you have stated the one proposition is the consequence of the other; that as, if what is honorable be the only good, it must follow that a happy life is the effect of virtue: so that if a happy life consists in virtue, nothing can be good but virtue. but your friend brutus, on the authority of aristo and antiochus, does not see this; for he thinks the case would be the same even if there were anything good besides virtue. _m._ what, then? do you imagine that i am going to argue against brutus? _a._ you may do what you please; for it is not for me to prescribe what you shall do. _m._ how these things agree together shall be examined somewhere else; for i frequently discussed that point with antiochus, and lately with aristo, when, during the period of my command as general, i was lodging with him at athens. for to me it seemed that no one could possibly be happy under any evil; but a wise man might be afflicted with evil, if there are any things arising from body or fortune deserving the name of evils. these things were said, which antiochus has inserted in his books in many places--that virtue itself was sufficient to make life happy, but yet not perfectly happy; and that many things derive their names from the predominant portion of them, though they do not include everything, as strength, health, riches, honor, and glory: which qualities are determined by their kind, not their number. thus a happy life is so called from its being so in a great degree, even though it should fall short in some point. to clear this up is not absolutely necessary at present, though it seems to be said without any great consistency; for i cannot imagine what is wanting to one that is happy to make him happier, for if anything be wanting to him, he cannot be so much as happy; and as to what they say, that everything is named and estimated from its predominant portion, that may be admitted in some things. but when they allow three kinds of evils--when any one is oppressed with every imaginable evil of two kinds, being afflicted with adverse fortune, and having at the same time his body worn out and harassed with all sorts of pains--shall we say that such a one is but little short of a happy life, to say nothing about the happiest possible life? ix. this is the point which theophrastus was unable to maintain; for after he had once laid down the position that stripes, torments, tortures, the ruin of one's country, banishment, the loss of children, had great influence on men's living miserably and unhappily, he durst not any longer use any high and lofty expressions when he was so low and abject in his opinion. how right he was is not the question; he certainly was consistent. therefore, i am not for objecting to consequences where the premises are admitted. but this most elegant and learned of all the philosophers is not taken to task very severely when he asserts his three kinds of good; but he is attacked by every one for that book which he wrote on a happy life, in which book he has many arguments why one who is tortured and racked cannot be happy. for in that book he is supposed to say that a man who is placed on the wheel (that is a kind of torture in use among the greeks) cannot attain to a completely happy life. he nowhere, indeed, says so absolutely; but what he says amounts to the same thing. can i, then, find fault with him, after having allowed that pains of the body are evils, that the ruin of a man's fortunes is an evil, if he should say that every good man is not happy, when all those things which he reckons as evils may befall a good man? the same theophrastus is found fault with by all the books and schools of the philosophers for commending that sentence in his callisthenes, fortune, not wisdom, rules the life of man. they say never did philosopher assert anything so languid. they are right, indeed, in that; but i do not apprehend anything could be more consistent, for if there are so many good things that depend on the body, and so many foreign to it that depend on chance and fortune, is it inconsistent to say that fortune, which governs everything, both what is foreign and what belongs to the body, has greater power than counsel. or would we rather imitate epicurus? who is often excellent in many things which he speaks, but quite indifferent how consistent he may be, or how much to the purpose he is speaking. he commends spare diet, and in that he speaks as a philosopher; but it is for socrates or antisthenes to say so, and not for one who confines all good to pleasure. he denies that any one can live pleasantly unless he lives honestly, wisely, and justly. nothing is more dignified than this assertion, nothing more becoming a philosopher, had he not measured this very expression of living honestly, justly, and wisely by pleasure. what could be better than to assert that fortune interferes but little with a wise man? but does he talk thus, who, after he has said that pain is the greatest evil, or the only evil, might himself be afflicted with the sharpest pains all over his body, even at the time he is vaunting himself the most against fortune? and this very thing, too, metrodorus has said, but in better language: "i have anticipated you, fortune; i have caught you, and cut off every access, so that you cannot possibly reach me." this would be excellent in the mouth of aristo the chian, or zeno the stoic, who held nothing to be an evil but what was base; but for you, metrodorus, to anticipate the approaches of fortune, who confine all that is good to your bowels and marrow--for you to say so, who define the chief good by a strong constitution of body, and well-assured hope of its continuance--for you to cut off every access of fortune! why, you may instantly be deprived of that good. yet the simple are taken with these propositions, and a vast crowd is led away by such sentences to become their followers. x. but it is the duty of one who would argue accurately to consider not what is said, but what is said consistently. as in that very opinion which we have adopted in this discussion, namely, that every good man is always happy, it is clear what i mean by good men: i call those both wise and good men who are provided and adorned with every virtue. let us see, then, who are to be called happy. i imagine, indeed, that those men are to be called so who are possessed of good without any alloy of evil; nor is there any other notion connected with the word that expresses happiness but an absolute enjoyment of good without any evil. virtue cannot attain this, if there is anything good besides itself. for a crowd of evils would present themselves, if we were to allow poverty, obscurity, humility, solitude, the loss of friends, acute pains of the body, the loss of health, weakness, blindness, the ruin of one's country, banishment, slavery, to be evils; for a wise man may be afflicted by all these evils, numerous and important as they are, and many others also may be added, for they are brought on by chance, which may attack a wise man; but if these things are evils, who can maintain that a wise man is always happy when all these evils may light on him at the same time? i therefore do not easily agree with my friend brutus, nor with our common masters, nor those ancient ones, aristotle, speusippus, xenocrates, polemon, who reckon all that i have mentioned above as evils, and yet they say that a wise man is always happy; nor can i allow them, because they are charmed with this beautiful and illustrious title, which would very well become pythagoras, socrates, and plato, to persuade my mind that strength, health, beauty, riches, honors, power, with the beauty of which they are ravished, are contemptible, and that all those things which are the opposites of these are not to be regarded. then might they declare openly, with a loud voice, that neither the attacks of fortune, nor the opinion of the multitude, nor pain, nor poverty, occasions them any apprehensions; and that they have everything within themselves, and that there is nothing whatever which they consider as good but what is within their own power. nor can i by any means allow the same person who falls into the vulgar opinion of good and evil to make use of these expressions, which can only become a great and exalted man. struck with which glory, up starts epicurus, who, with submission to the gods, thinks a wise man always happy. he is much charmed with the dignity of this opinion, but he never would have owned that, had he attended to himself; for what is there more inconsistent than for one who could say that pain was the greatest or the only evil to think also that a wise man can possibly say in the midst of his torture, how sweet is this! we are not, therefore, to form our judgment of philosophers from detached sentences, but from their consistency with themselves, and their ordinary manner of talking. xi. _a._ you compel me to be of your opinion; but have a care that you are not inconsistent yourself. _m._ in what respect? _a._ because i have lately read your fourth book on good and evil: and in that you appeared to me, while disputing against cato, to be endeavoring to show, which in my opinion means to prove, that zeno and the peripatetics differ only about some new words; but if we allow that, what reason can there be, if it follows from the arguments of zeno that virtue contains all that is necessary to a happy life, that the peripatetics should not be at liberty to say the same? for, in my opinion, regard should be had to the thing, not to words. _m._ what! you would convict me from my own words, and bring against me what i had said or written elsewhere. you may act in that manner with those who dispute by established rules. we live from hand to mouth, and say anything that strikes our mind with probability, so that we are the only people who are really at liberty. but, since i just now spoke of consistency, i do not think the inquiry in this place is, if the opinion of zeno and his pupil aristo be true that nothing is good but what is honorable; but, admitting that, then, whether the whole of a happy life can be rested on virtue alone. wherefore, if we certainly grant brutus this, that a wise man is always happy, how consistent he is, is his own business; for who, indeed, is more worthy than himself of the glory of that opinion? still, we may maintain that such a man is more happy than any one else. xii. though zeno the cittiæan, a stranger and an inconsiderable coiner of words, appears to have insinuated himself into the old philosophy; still, the prevalence of this opinion is due to the authority of plato, who often makes use of this expression, "that nothing but virtue can be entitled to the name of good," agreeably to what socrates says in plato's gorgias; for it is there related that when some one asked him if he did not think archelaus the son of perdiccas, who was then looked upon as a most fortunate person, a very happy man, "i do not know," replied he, "for i never conversed with him." "what! is there no other way you can know it by?" "none at all." "you cannot, then, pronounce of the great king of the persians whether he is happy or not?" "how can i, when i do not know how learned or how good a man he is?" "what! do you imagine that a happy life depends on that?" "my opinion entirely is, that good men are happy, and the wicked miserable." "is archelaus, then, miserable?" "certainly, if unjust." now, does it not appear to you that he is here placing the whole of a happy life in virtue alone? but what does the same man say in his funeral oration? "for," saith he, "whoever has everything that relates to a happy life so entirely dependent on himself as not to be connected with the good or bad fortune of another, and not to be affected by, or made in any degree uncertain by, what befalls another; and whoever is such a one has acquired the best rule of living; he is that moderate, that brave, that wise man, who submits to the gain and loss of everything, and especially of his children, and obeys that old precept; for he will never be too joyful or too sad, because he depends entirely upon himself." xiii. from plato, therefore, all my discourse shall be deduced, as if from some sacred and hallowed fountain. whence can i, then, more properly begin than from nature, the parent of all? for whatsoever she produces (i am not speaking only of animals, but even of those things which have sprung from the earth in such a manner as to rest on their own roots) she designed it to be perfect in its respective kind. so that among trees and vines, and those lower plants and trees which cannot advance themselves high above the earth, some are evergreen, others are stripped of their leaves in winter, and, warmed by the spring season, put them out afresh, and there are none of them but what are so quickened by a certain interior motion, and their own seeds enclosed in every one, so as to yield flowers, fruit, or berries, that all may have every perfection that belongs to it; provided no violence prevents it. but the force of nature itself may be more easily discovered in animals, as she has bestowed sense on them. for some animals she has taught to swim, and designed to be inhabitants of the water; others she has enabled to fly, and has willed that they should enjoy the boundless air; some others she has made to creep, others to walk. again, of these very animals, some are solitary, some gregarious, some wild, others tame, some hidden and buried beneath the earth, and every one of these maintains the law of nature, confining itself to what was bestowed on it, and unable to change its manner of life. and as every animal has from nature something that distinguishes it, which every one maintains and never quits; so man has something far more excellent, though everything is said to be excellent by comparison. but the human mind, being derived from the divine reason, can be compared with nothing but with the deity itself, if i may be allowed the expression. this, then, if it is improved, and when its perception is so preserved as not to be blinded by errors, becomes a perfect understanding, that is to say, absolute reason, which is the very same as virtue. and if everything is happy which wants nothing, and is complete and perfect in its kind, and that is the peculiar lot of virtue, certainly all who are possessed of virtue are happy. and in this i agree with brutus, and also with aristotle, xenocrates, speusippus, polemon. xiv. to me such are the only men who appear completely happy; for what can he want to a complete happy life who relies on his own good qualities, or how can he be happy who does not rely on them? but he who makes a threefold division of goods must necessarily be diffident, for how can he depend on having a sound body, or that his fortune shall continue? but no one can be happy without an immovable, fixed, and permanent good. what, then, is this opinion of theirs? so that i think that saying of the spartan may be applied to them, who, on some merchant's boasting before him that he had despatched ships to every maritime coast, replied that a fortune which depended on ropes was not very desirable. can there be any doubt that whatever may be lost cannot be properly classed in the number of those things which complete a happy life? for of all that constitutes a happy life, nothing will admit of withering, or growing old, or wearing out, or decaying; for whoever is apprehensive of any loss of these things cannot be happy: the happy man should be safe, well fenced, well fortified, out of the reach of all annoyance, not like a man under trifling apprehensions, but free from all such. as he is not called innocent who but slightly offends, but he who offends not at all, so it is he alone who is to be considered without fear who is free from all fear, not he who is but in little fear. for what else is courage but an affection of mind that is ready to undergo perils, and patient in the endurance of pain and labor without any alloy of fear? now, this certainly could not be the case if there were anything else good but what depended on honesty alone. but how can any one be in possession of that desirable and much-coveted security (for i now call a freedom from anxiety a security, on which freedom a happy life depends) who has, or may have, a multitude of evils attending him? how can he be brave and undaunted, and hold everything as trifles which can befall a man? for so a wise man should do, unless he be one who thinks that everything depends on himself. could the lacedæmonians without this, when philip threatened to prevent all their attempts, have asked him if he could prevent their killing themselves? is it not easier, then, to find one man of such a spirit as we are inquiring after, than to meet with a whole city of such men? now, if to this courage i am speaking of we add temperance, that it may govern all our feelings and agitations, what can be wanting to complete his happiness who is secured by his courage from uneasiness and fear, and is prevented from immoderate desires and immoderate insolence of joy by temperance? i could easily show that virtue is able to produce these effects, but that i have explained on the foregoing days. xv. but as the perturbations of the mind make life miserable, and tranquillity renders it happy; and as these perturbations are of two sorts, grief and fear, proceeding from imagined evils, and as immoderate joy and lust arise from a mistake about what is good, and as all these feelings are in opposition to reason and counsel; when you see a man at ease, quite free and disengaged from such troublesome commotions, which are so much at variance with one another, can you hesitate to pronounce such a one a happy man? now, the wise man is always in such a disposition; therefore the wise man is always happy. besides, every good is pleasant; whatever is pleasant may be boasted and talked of; whatever may be boasted of is glorious; but whatever is glorious is certainly laudable, and whatever is laudable doubtless, also, honorable: whatever, then, is good is honorable (but the things which they reckon as goods they themselves do not call honorable); therefore what is honorable alone is good. hence it follows that a happy life is comprised in honesty alone. such things, then, are not to be called or considered goods, when a man may enjoy an abundance of them, and yet be most miserable. is there any doubt but that a man who enjoys the best health, and who has strength and beauty, and his senses flourishing in their utmost quickness and perfection--suppose him likewise, if you please, nimble and active, nay, give him riches, honors, authority, power, glory--now, i say, should this person, who is in possession of all these, be unjust, intemperate, timid, stupid, or an idiot--could you hesitate to call such a one miserable? what, then, are those goods in the possession of which you may be very miserable? let us see if a happy life is not made up of parts of the same nature, as a heap implies a quantity of grain of the same kind. and if this be once admitted, happiness must be compounded of different good things, which alone are honorable; if there is any mixture of things of another sort with these, nothing honorable can proceed from such a composition: now, take away honesty, and how can you imagine anything happy? for whatever is good is desirable on that account; whatever is desirable must certainly be approved of; whatever you approve of must be looked on as acceptable and welcome. you must consequently impute dignity to this; and if so, it must necessarily be laudable: therefore, everything that is laudable is good. hence it follows that what is honorable is the only good. and should we not look upon it in this light, there will be a great many things which we must call good. xvi. i forbear to mention riches, which, as any one, let him be ever so unworthy, may have them, i do not reckon among goods; for what is good is not attainable by all. i pass over notoriety and popular fame, raised by the united voice of knaves and fools. even things which are absolute nothings may be called goods; such as white teeth, handsome eyes, a good complexion, and what was commended by euryclea, when she was washing ulysses's feet, the softness of his skin and the mildness of his discourse. if you look on these as goods, what greater encomiums can the gravity of a philosopher be entitled to than the wild opinion of the vulgar and the thoughtless crowd? the stoics give the name of excellent and choice to what the others call good: they call them so, indeed; but they do not allow them to complete a happy life. but these others think that there is no life happy without them; or, admitting it to be happy, they deny it to be the most happy. but our opinion is, that it is the most happy; and we prove it from that conclusion of socrates. for thus that author of philosophy argued: that as the disposition of a man's mind is, so is the man; such as the man is, such will be his discourse; his actions will correspond with his discourse, and his life with his actions. but the disposition of a good man's mind is laudable; the life, therefore, of a good man is laudable; it is honorable, therefore, because laudable; the unavoidable conclusion from which is that the life of good men is happy. for, good gods! did i not make it appear, by my former arguments--or was i only amusing myself and killing time in what i then said?--that the mind of a wise man was always free from every hasty motion which i call a perturbation, and that the most undisturbed peace always reigned in his breast? a man, then, who is temperate and consistent, free from fear or grief, and uninfluenced by any immoderate joy or desire, cannot be otherwise than happy; but a wise man is always so, therefore he is always happy. moreover, how can a good man avoid referring all his actions and all his feelings to the one standard of whether or not it is laudable? but he does refer everything to the object of living happily: it follows, then, that a happy life is laudable; but nothing is laudable without virtue: a happy life, then, is the consequence of virtue. and this is the unavoidable conclusion to be drawn from these arguments. xvii. a wicked life has nothing which we ought to speak of or glory in; nor has that life which is neither happy nor miserable. but there is a kind of life that admits of being spoken of, and gloried in, and boasted of, as epaminondas saith, the wings of sparta's pride my counsels clipp'd. and africanus boasts, who, from beyond mæotis to the place where the sun rises, deeds like mine can trace? if, then, there is such a thing as a happy life, it is to be gloried in, spoken of, and commended by the person who enjoys it; for there is nothing excepting that which can be spoken of or gloried in; and when that is once admitted, you know what follows. now, unless an honorable life is a happy life, there must, of course, be something preferable to a happy life; for that which is honorable all men will certainly grant to be preferable to anything else. and thus there will be something better than a happy life: but what can be more absurd than such an assertion? what! when they grant vice to be effectual to the rendering life miserable, must they not admit that there is a corresponding power in virtue to make life happy? for contraries follow from contraries. and here i ask what weight they think there is in the balance of critolaus, who having put the goods of the mind into one scale, and the goods of the body and other external advantages into the other, thought the goods of the mind outweighed the others so far that they would require the whole earth and sea to equalize the scale. xviii. what hinders critolaus, then, or that gravest of philosophers, xenocrates (who raises virtue so high, and who lessens and depreciates everything else), from not only placing a happy life, but the happiest possible life, in virtue? and, indeed, if this were not the case, virtue would be absolutely lost. for whoever is subject to grief must necessarily be subject to fear too, for fear is an uneasy apprehension of future grief; and whoever is subject to fear is liable to dread, timidity, consternation, cowardice. therefore, such a person may, some time or other, be defeated, and not think himself concerned with that precept of atreus, and let men so conduct themselves in life, as to be always strangers to defeat. but such a man, as i have said, will be defeated; and not only defeated, but made a slave of. but we would have virtue always free, always invincible; and were it not so, there would be an end of virtue. but if virtue has in herself all that is necessary for a good life, she is certainly sufficient for happiness: virtue is certainly sufficient, too, for our living with courage; if with courage, then with a magnanimous spirit, and indeed so as never to be under any fear, and thus to be always invincible. hence it follows that there can be nothing to be repented of, no wants, no lets or hinderances. thus all things will be prosperous, perfect, and as you would have them, and, consequently, happy; but virtue is sufficient for living with courage, and therefore virtue is able by herself to make life happy. for as folly, even when possessed of what it desires, never thinks it has acquired enough, so wisdom is always satisfied with the present, and never repents on her own account. xix. look but on the single consulship of lælius, and that, too, after having been set aside (though when a wise and good man like him is outvoted, the people are disappointed of a good consul, rather than be disappointed by a vain people); but the point is, would you prefer, were it in your power, to be once such a consul as lælius, or be elected four times, like cinna? i have no doubt in the world what answer you will make, and it is on that account i put the question to you. i would not ask every one this question; for some one perhaps might answer that he would not only prefer four consulates to one, but even one day of cinna's life to whole ages of many famous men. lælius would have suffered had he but touched any one with his finger; but cinna ordered the head of his colleague consul, cn. octavius, to be struck off; and put to death p. crassus[ ], and l. cæsar[ ], those excellent men, so renowned both at home and abroad; and even m. antonius[ ], the greatest orator whom i ever heard; and c. cæsar, who seems to me to have been the pattern of humanity, politeness, sweetness of temper, and wit. could he, then, be happy who occasioned the death of these men? so far from it, that he seems to be miserable, not only for having performed these actions, but also for acting in such a manner that it was lawful for him to do it, though it is unlawful for any one to do wicked actions; but this proceeds from inaccuracy, of speech, for we call whatever a man is allowed to do lawful. was not marius happier, i pray you, when he shared the glory of the victory gained over the cimbrians with his colleague catulus (who was almost another lælius; for i look upon the two men as very like one another), than when, conqueror in the civil war, he in a passion answered the friends of catulus, who were interceding for him, "let him die?" and this answer he gave, not once only, but often. but in such a case, he was happier who submitted to that barbarous decree than he who issued it. and it is better to receive an injury than to do one; and so it was better to advance a little to meet that death that was making its approaches, as catulus did, than, like marius, to sully the glory of six consulships, and disgrace his latter days, by the death of such a man. xx. dionysius exercised his tyranny over the syracusans thirty-eight years, being but twenty-five years old when he seized on the government. how beautiful and how wealthy a city did he oppress with slavery! and yet we have it from good authority that he was remarkably temperate in his manner of living, that he was very active and energetic in carrying on business, but naturally mischievous and unjust; from which description every one who diligently inquires into truth must inevitably see that he was very miserable. neither did he attain what he so greatly desired, even when he was persuaded that he had unlimited power; for, notwithstanding he was of a good family and reputable parents (though that is contested by some authors), and had a very large acquaintance of intimate friends and relations, and also some youths attached to him by ties of love after the fashion of the greeks, he could not trust any one of them, but committed the guard of his person to slaves, whom he had selected from rich men's families and made free, and to strangers and barbarians. and thus, through an unjust desire of governing, he in a manner shut himself up in a prison. besides, he would not trust his throat to a barber, but had his daughters taught to shave; so that these royal virgins were forced to descend to the base and slavish employment of shaving the head and beard of their father. nor would he trust even them, when they were grown up, with a razor; but contrived how they might burn off the hair of his head and beard with red-hot nutshells. and as to his two wives, aristomache, his countrywoman, and doris of locris, he never visited them at night before everything had been well searched and examined. and as he had surrounded the place where his bed was with a broad ditch, and made a way over it with a wooden bridge, he drew that bridge over after shutting his bedchamber door. and as he did not dare to stand on the ordinary pulpits from which they usually harangued the people, he generally addressed them from a high tower. and it is said that when he was disposed to play at ball--for he delighted much in it--and had pulled off his clothes, he used to give his sword into the keeping of a young man whom he was very fond of. on this, one of his intimates said pleasantly, "you certainly trust your life with him;" and as the young man happened to smile at this, he ordered them both to be slain, the one for showing how he might be taken off, the other for approving of what had been said by smiling. but he was so concerned at what he had done that nothing affected him more during his whole life; for he had slain one to whom he was extremely partial. thus do weak men's desires pull them different ways, and while they indulge one, they act counter to another. xxi. this tyrant, however, showed himself how happy he really was; for once, when damocles, one of his flatterers, was dilating in conversation on his forces, his wealth, the greatness of his power, the plenty he enjoyed, the grandeur of his royal palaces, and maintaining that no one was ever happier, "have you an inclination," said he, "damocles, as this kind of life pleases you, to have a taste of it yourself, and to make a trial of the good fortune that attends me?" and when he said that he should like it extremely, dionysius ordered him to be laid on a bed of gold with the most beautiful covering, embroidered and wrought with the most exquisite work, and he dressed out a great many sideboards with silver and embossed gold. he then ordered some youths, distinguished for their handsome persons, to wait at his table, and to observe his nod, in order to serve him with what he wanted. there were ointments and garlands; perfumes were burned; tables provided with the most exquisite meats. damocles thought himself very happy. in the midst of this apparatus, dionysius ordered a bright sword to be let down from the ceiling, suspended by a single horse-hair, so as to hang over the head of that happy man. after which he neither cast his eye on those handsome waiters, nor on the well-wrought plate; nor touched any of the provisions: presently the garlands fell to pieces. at last he entreated the tyrant to give him leave to go, for that now he had no desire to be happy[ ]. does not dionysius, then, seem to have declared there can be no happiness for one who is under constant apprehensions? but it was not now in his power to return to justice, and restore his citizens their rights and privileges; for, by the indiscretion of youth, he had engaged in so many wrong steps and committed such extravagances, that, had he attempted to have returned to a right way of thinking, he must have endangered his life. xxii. yet, how desirous he was of friendship, though at the same time he dreaded the treachery of friends, appears from the story of those two pythagoreans: one of these had been security for his friend, who was condemned to die; the other, to release his security, presented himself at the time appointed for his dying: "i wish," said dionysius," you would admit me as the third in your friendship." what misery was it for him to be deprived of acquaintance, of company at his table, and of the freedom of conversation! especially for one who was a man of learning, and from his childhood acquainted with liberal arts, very fond of music, and himself a tragic poet--how good a one is not to the purpose, for i know not how it is, but in this way, more than any other, every one thinks his own performances excellent. i never as yet knew any poet (and i was very intimate with aquinius), who did not appear to himself to be very admirable. the case is this: you are pleased with your own works; i like mine. but to return to dionysius. he debarred himself from all civil and polite conversation, and spent his life among fugitives, bondmen, and barbarians; for he was persuaded that no one could be his friend who was worthy of liberty, or had the least desire of being free. xxiii. shall i not, then, prefer the life of plato and archytas, manifestly wise and learned men, to his, than which nothing can possibly be more horrid, or miserable, or detestable? i will present you with an humble and obscure mathematician of the same city, called archimedes, who lived many years after; whose tomb, overgrown with shrubs and briers, i in my quæstorship discovered, when the syracusans knew nothing of it, and even denied that there was any such thing remaining; for i remembered some verses, which i had been informed were engraved on his monument, and these set forth that on the top of the tomb there was placed a sphere with a cylinder. when i had carefully examined all the monuments (for there are a great many tombs at the gate achradinæ), i observed a small column standing out a little above the briers, with the figure of a sphere and a cylinder upon it; whereupon i immediately said to the syracusans--for there were some of their principal men with me there--that i imagined that was what i was inquiring for. several men, being sent in with scythes, cleared the way, and made an opening for us. when we could get at it, and were come near to the front of the pedestal, i found the inscription, though the latter parts of all the verses were effaced almost half away. thus one of the noblest cities of greece, and one which at one time likewise had been very celebrated for learning, had known nothing of the monument of its greatest genius, if it had not been discovered to them by a native of arpinum. but to return to the subject from which i have been digressing. who is there in the least degree acquainted with the muses, that is, with liberal knowledge, or that deals at all in learning, who would not choose to be this mathematician rather than that tyrant? if we look into their methods of living and their employments, we shall find the mind of the one strengthened and improved with tracing the deductions of reason, amused with his own ingenuity, which is the one most delicious food of the mind; the thoughts of the other engaged in continual murders and injuries, in constant fears by night and by day. now imagine a democritus, a pythagoras, and an anaxagoras; what kingdom, what riches, would you prefer to their studies and amusements? for you must necessarily look for that excellence which we are seeking for in that which is the most perfect part of man; but what is there better in man than a sagacious and good mind? the enjoyment, therefore, of that good which proceeds from that sagacious mind can alone make us happy; but virtue is the good of the mind: it follows, therefore, that a happy life depends on virtue. hence proceed all things that are beautiful, honorable, and excellent, as i said above (but this point must, i think, be treated of more at large), and they are well stored with joys. for, as it is clear that a happy life consists in perpetual and unexhausted pleasures, it follows, too, that a happy life must arise from honesty. xxiv. but that what i propose to demonstrate to you may not rest on mere words only, i must set before you the picture of something, as it were, living and moving in the world, that may dispose us more for the improvement of the understanding and real knowledge. let us, then, pitch upon some man perfectly acquainted with the most excellent arts; let us present him for awhile to our own thoughts, and figure him to our own imaginations. in the first place, he must necessarily be of an extraordinary capacity; for virtue is not easily connected with dull minds. secondly, he must have a great desire of discovering truth, from whence will arise that threefold production of the mind; one of which depends on knowing things, and explaining nature; the other, in defining what we ought to desire and what to avoid; the third, in judging of consequences and impossibilities, in which consists both subtlety in disputing and also clearness of judgment. now, with what pleasure must the mind of a wise man be affected which continually dwells in the midst of such cares and occupations as these, when he views the revolutions and motions of the whole world, and sees those innumerable stars in the heavens, which, though fixed in their places, have yet one motion in common with the whole universe, and observes the seven other stars, some higher, some lower, each maintaining their own course, while their motions, though wandering, have certain defined and appointed spaces to run through! the sight of which doubtless urged and encouraged those ancient philosophers to exercise their investigating spirit on many other things. hence arose an inquiry after the beginnings, and, as it were, seeds from which all things were produced and composed; what was the origin of every kind of thing, whether animate or inanimate, articulately speaking or mute; what occasioned their beginning and end, and by what alteration and change one thing was converted into another; whence the earth originated, and by what weights it was balanced; by what caverns the seas were supplied; by what gravity all things being carried down tend always to the middle of the world, which in any round body is the lowest place. xxv. a mind employed on such subjects, and which night and day contemplates them, contains in itself that precept of the delphic god, so as to "know itself," and to perceive its connection with the divine reason, from whence it is filled with an insatiable joy. for reflections on the power and nature of the gods raise in us a desire of imitating their eternity. nor does the mind, that sees the necessary dependences and connections that one cause has with another, think it possible that it should be itself confined to the shortness of this life. those causes, though they proceed from eternity to eternity, are governed by reason and understanding. and he who beholds them and examines them, or rather he whose view takes in all the parts and boundaries of things, with what tranquillity of mind does he look on all human affairs, and on all that is nearer him! hence proceeds the knowledge of virtue; hence arise the kinds and species of virtues; hence are discovered those things which nature regards as the bounds and extremities of good and evil; by this it is discovered to what all duties ought to be referred, and which is the most eligible manner of life. and when these and similar points have been investigated, the principal consequence which is deduced from them, and that which is our main object in this discussion, is the establishment of the point, that virtue is of itself sufficient to a happy life. the third qualification of our wise man is the next to be considered, which goes through and spreads itself over every part of wisdom; it is that whereby we define each particular thing, distinguish the genus from its species, connect consequences, draw just conclusions, and distinguish truth from falsehood, which is the very art and science of disputing; which is not only of the greatest use in the examination of what passes in the world, but is likewise the most rational entertainment, and that which is most becoming to true wisdom. such are its effects in retirement. now, let our wise man be considered as protecting the republic; what can be more excellent than such a character? by his prudence he will discover the true interests of his fellow-citizens; by his justice he will be prevented from applying what belongs to the public to his own use; and, in short, he will be ever governed by all the virtues, which are many and various. to these let us add the advantage of his friendships; in which the learned reckon not only a natural harmony and agreement of sentiments throughout the conduct of life, but the utmost pleasure and satisfaction in conversing and passing our time constantly with one another. what can be wanting to such a life as this to make it more happy than it is? fortune herself must yield to a life stored with such joys. now, if it be a happiness to rejoice in such goods of the mind, that is to say, in such virtues, and if all wise men enjoy thoroughly these pleasures, it must necessarily be granted that all such are happy. xxvi. _a._ what, when in torments and on the rack? _m._ do you imagine i am speaking of him as laid on roses and violets? is it allowable even for epicurus (who only puts on the appearance of being a philosopher, and who himself assumed that name for himself) to say (though, as matters stand, i commend him for his saying) that a wise man might at all times cry out, though he be burned, tortured, cut to pieces, "how little i regard it!" shall this be said by one who defines all evil as pain, and measures every good by pleasure; who could ridicule whatever we call either honorable or base, and could declare of us that we were employed about words, and uttering mere empty sounds; and that nothing is to be regarded by us but as it is perceived to be smooth or rough by the body? what! shall such a man as this, as i said, whose understanding is little superior to the beasts', be at liberty to forget himself; and not only to despise fortune, when the whole of his good and evil is in the power of fortune, but to say that he is happy in the most racking torture, when he had actually declared pain to be not only the greatest evil, but the only one? nor did he take any trouble to provide himself with those remedies which might have enabled him to bear pain, such as firmness of mind, a shame of doing anything base, exercise, and the habit of patience, precepts of courage, and a manly hardiness; but he says that he supports himself on the single recollection of past pleasures, as if any one, when the weather was so hot as that he was scarcely able to bear it, should comfort himself by recollecting that he was once in my country, arpinum, where he was surrounded on every side by cooling streams. for i do not apprehend how past pleasures can allay present evils. but when he says that a wise man is always happy who would have no right to say so if he were consistent with himself, what may they not do who allow nothing to be desirable, nothing to be looked on as good but what is honorable? let, then, the peripatetics and old academics follow my example, and at length leave off muttering to themselves; and openly and with a clear voice let them be bold to say that a happy life may not be inconsistent with the agonies of phalaris's bull. xxvii. but to dismiss the subtleties of the stoics, which i am sensible i have employed more than was necessary, let us admit of three kinds of goods; and let them really be kinds of goods, provided no regard is had to the body and to external circumstances, as entitled to the appellation of good in any other sense than because we are obliged to use them: but let those other divine goods spread themselves far in every direction, and reach the very heavens. why, then, may i not call him happy, nay, the happiest of men, who has attained them? shall a wise man be afraid of pain? which is, indeed, the greatest enemy to our opinion. for i am persuaded that we are prepared and fortified sufficiently, by the disputations of the foregoing days, against our own death or that of our friends, against grief, and the other perturbations of the mind. but pain seems to be the sharpest adversary of virtue; that it is which menaces us with burning torches; that it is which threatens to crush our fortitude, and greatness of mind, and patience. shall virtue, then, yield to this? shall the happy life of a wise and consistent man succumb to this? good. gods! how base would this be! spartan boys will bear to have their bodies torn by rods without uttering a groan. i myself have seen at lacedæmon troops of young men, with incredible earnestness contending together with their hands and feet, with their teeth and nails, nay, even ready to expire, rather than own themselves conquered. is any country of barbarians more uncivilized or desolate than india? yet they have among them some that are held for wise men, who never wear any clothes all their life long, and who bear the snow of caucasus, and the piercing cold of winter, without any pain; and who if they come in contact with fire endure being burned without a groan. the women, too, in india, on the death of their husbands have a regular contest, and apply to the judge to have it determined which of them was best beloved by him; for it is customary there for one man to have many wives. she in whose favor it is determined exults greatly, and being attended by her relations, is laid on the funeral pile with her husband; the others, who are postponed, walk away very much dejected. custom can never be superior to nature, for nature is never to be got the better of. but our minds are infected by sloth and idleness, and luxury, and languor, and indolence: we have enervated them by opinions and bad customs. who is there who is unacquainted with the customs of the egyptians? their minds being tainted by pernicious opinions, they are ready to bear any torture rather than hurt an ibis, a snake, a cat, a dog, or a crocodile; and should any one inadvertently have hurt any of these animals, he will submit to any punishment. i am speaking of men only. as to the beasts, do they not bear cold and hunger, running about in woods, and on mountains and deserts? will they not fight for their young ones till they are wounded? are they afraid of any attacks or blows? i mention not what the ambitious will suffer for honor's sake, or those who are desirous of praise on account of glory, or lovers to gratify their lust. life is full of such instances. xxviii. but let us not dwell too much on these questions, but rather let us return to our subject. i say, and say again, that happiness will submit even to be tormented; and that in pursuit of justice, and temperance, and still more especially and principally fortitude, and greatness of soul, and patience, it will not stop short at sight of the executioner; and when all other virtues proceed calmly to the torture, that one will never halt, as i said, on the outside and threshold of the prison; for what can be baser, what can carry a worse appearance, than to be left alone, separated from those beautiful attendants? not, however, that this is by any means possible; for neither can the virtues hold together without happiness, nor happiness without the virtues; so that they will not suffer her to desert them, but will carry her along with them, to whatever torments, to whatever pain they are led. for it is the peculiar quality of a wise man to do nothing that he may repent of, nothing against his inclination, but always to act nobly, with constancy, gravity, and honesty; to depend on nothing as certainty; to wonder at nothing, when it falls out, as if it appeared strange and unexpected to him; to be independent of every one, and abide by his own opinion. for my part, i cannot form an idea of anything happier than this. the conclusion of the stoics is indeed easy; for since they are persuaded that the end of good is to live agreeably to nature, and to be consistent with that--as a wise man should do so, not only because it is his duty, but because it is in his power--it must, of course, follow that whoever has the chief good in his power has his happiness so too. and thus the life of a wise man is always happy. you have here what i think may be confidently said of a happy life; and as things now stand, very truly also, unless you can advance something better. xxix. _a._ indeed i cannot; but i should be glad to prevail on you, unless it is troublesome (as you are under no confinement from obligations to any particular sect, but gather from all of them whatever strikes you most as having the appearance of probability), as you just now seemed to advise the peripatetics and the old academy boldly to speak out without reserve, "that wise men are always the happiest"--i should be glad to hear how you think it consistent for them to say so, when you have said so much against that opinion, and the conclusions of the stoics. _m._ i will make use, then, of that liberty which no one has the privilege of using in philosophy but those of our school, whose discourses determine nothing, but take in everything, leaving them unsupported by the authority of any particular person, to be judged of by others, according to their weight. and as you seem desirous of knowing how it is that, notwithstanding the different opinions of philosophers with regard to the ends of goods, virtue has still sufficient security for the effecting of a happy life--which security, as we are informed, carneades used indeed to dispute against; but he disputed as against the stoics, whose opinions he combated with great zeal and vehemence. i, however, shall handle the question with more temper; for if the stoics have rightly settled the _ends_ of goods, the affair is at an end; for a wise man must necessarily be always happy. but let us examine, if we can, the particular opinions of the others, that so this excellent decision, if i may so call it, in favor of a happy life, may be agreeable to the opinions and discipline of all. xxx. these, then, are the opinions, as i think, that are held and defended--the first four are simple ones: "that nothing is good but what is honest," according to the stoics; "nothing good but pleasure," as epicurus maintains; "nothing good but a freedom from pain," as hieronymus[ ] asserts; "nothing good but an enjoyment of the principal, or all, or the greatest goods of nature," as carneades maintained against the stoics--these are simple, the others are mixed propositions. then there are three kinds of goods: the greatest being those of the mind; the next best those of the body; the third are external goods, as the peripatetics call them, and the old academics differ very little from them. dinomachus[ ] and callipho[ ] have coupled pleasure with honesty; but diodorus[ ] the peripatetic has joined indolence to honesty. these are the opinions that have some footing; for those of aristo,[ ] pyrrho,[ ] herillus,[ ] and of some others, are quite out of date. now let us see what weight these men have in them, excepting the stoics, whose opinion i think i have sufficiently defended; and indeed i have explained what the peripatetics have to say; excepting that theophrastus, and those who followed him, dread and abhor pain in too weak a manner. the others may go on to exaggerate the gravity and dignity of virtue, as usual; and then, after they have extolled it to the skies, with the usual extravagance of good orators, it is easy to reduce the other topics to nothing by comparison, and to hold them up to contempt. they who think that praise deserves to be sought after, even at the expense of pain, are not at liberty to deny those men to be happy who have obtained it. though they may be under some evils, yet this name of happy has a very wide application. xxxi. for even as trading is said to be lucrative, and farming advantageous, not because the one never meets with any loss, nor the other with any damage from the inclemency of the weather, but because they succeed in general; so life may be properly called happy, not from its being entirely made up of good things, but because it abounds with these to a great and considerable degree. by this way of reasoning, then, a happy life may attend virtue even to the moment of execution; nay, may descend with her into phalaris's bull, according to aristotle, xenocrates, speusippus, polemon; and will not be gained over by any allurements to forsake her. of the same opinion will calliphon and diodorus be; for they are both of them such friends to virtue as to think that all things should be discarded and far removed that are incompatible with it. the rest seem to be more hampered with these doctrines, but yet they get clear of them; such as epicurus, hieronymus, and whoever else thinks it worth while to defend the deserted carneades: for there is not one of them who does not think the mind to be judge of those goods, and able sufficiently to instruct him how to despise what has the appearance only of good or evil. for what seems to you to be the case with epicurus is the case also with hieronymus and carneades, and, indeed, with all the rest of them; for who is there who is not sufficiently prepared against death and pain? i will begin, with your leave, with him whom we call soft and voluptuous. what! does he seem, to you to be afraid of death or pain when he calls the day of his death happy; and who, when he is afflicted by the greatest pains, silences them all by recollecting arguments of his own discovering? and this is not done in such a manner as to give room for imagining that he talks thus wildly from some sudden impulse; but his opinion of death is, that on the dissolution of the animal all sense is lost; and what is deprived of sense is, as he thinks, what we have no concern at all with. and as to pain, too, he has certain rules to follow then: if it be great, the comfort is that it must be short; if it be of long continuance, then it must be supportable. what, then? do those grandiloquent gentlemen state anything better than epicurus in opposition to these two things which distress us the most? and as to other things, do not epicurus and the rest of the philosophers seem sufficiently prepared? who is there who does not dread poverty? and yet no true philosopher ever can dread it. xxxii. but with how little is this man himself satisfied! no one has said more on frugality. for when a man is far removed from those things which occasion a desire of money, from love, ambition, or other daily extravagance, why should he be fond of money, or concern himself at all about it? could the scythian anacharsis[ ] disregard money, and shall not our philosophers be able to do so? we are informed of an epistle of his in these words: "anacharsis to hanno, greeting. my clothing is the same as that with which the scythians cover themselves; the hardness of my feet supplies the want of shoes; the ground is my bed, hunger my sauce, my food milk, cheese, and flesh. so you may come to me as to a man in want of nothing. but as to those presents you take so much pleasure in, you may dispose of them to your own citizens, or to the immortal gods." and almost all philosophers, of all schools, excepting those who are warped from right reason by a vicious disposition, might have been of this same opinion. socrates, when on one occasion he saw a great quantity of gold and silver carried in a procession, cried out, "how many things are there which i do not want!" xenocrates, when some ambassadors from alexander had brought him fifty talents, which was a very large sum of money in those times, especially at athens, carried the ambassadors to sup in the academy, and placed just a sufficiency before them, without any apparatus. when they asked him, the next day, to whom he wished the money which they had for him to be paid: "what!" said he, "did you not perceive by our slight repast of yesterday that i had no occasion for money?" but when he perceived that they were somewhat dejected, he accepted of thirty minas, that he might not seem to treat with disrespect the king's generosity. but diogenes took a greater liberty, like a cynic, when alexander asked him if he wanted anything: "just at present," said he, "i wish that you would stand a little out of the line between me and the sun," for alexander was hindering him from sunning himself. and, indeed, this very man used to maintain how much he surpassed the persian king in his manner of life and fortune; for that he himself was in want of nothing, while the other never had enough; and that he had no inclination for those pleasures of which the other could never get enough to satisfy himself; and that the other could never obtain his. xxxiii. you see, i imagine, how epicurus has divided his kinds of desires, not very acutely perhaps, but yet usefully: saying that they are "partly natural and necessary; partly natural, but not necessary; partly neither. that those which are necessary may be supplied almost for nothing; for that the things which nature requires are easily obtained." as to the second kind of desires, his opinion is that any one may easily either enjoy or go without them. and with regard to the third, since they are utterly frivolous, being neither allied to necessity nor nature, he thinks that they should be entirely rooted out. on this topic a great many arguments are adduced by the epicureans; and those pleasures which they do not despise in a body, they disparage one by one, and seem rather for lessening the number of them; for as to wanton pleasures, on which subject they say a great deal, these, say they, are easy, common, and within any one's reach; and they think that if nature requires them, they are not to be estimated by birth, condition, or rank, but by shape, age, and person: and that it is by no means difficult to refrain from them, should health, duty, or reputation require it; but that pleasures of this kind may be desirable, where they are attended with no inconvenience, but can never be of any use. and the assertions which epicurus makes with respect to the whole of pleasure are such as show his opinion to be that pleasure is always desirable, and to be pursued merely because it is pleasure; and for the same reason pain is to be avoided, because it is pain. so that a wise man will always adopt such a system of counterbalancing as to do himself the justice to avoid pleasure, should pain ensue from it in too great a proportion; and will submit to pain, provided the effects of it are to produce a greater pleasure: so that all pleasurable things, though the corporeal senses are the judges of them, are still to be referred to the mind, on which account the body rejoices while it perceives a present pleasure; but that the mind not only perceives the present as well as the body, but foresees it while it is coming, and even when it is past will not let it quite slip away. so that a wise man enjoys a continual series of pleasures, uniting the expectation of future pleasure to the recollection of what he has already tasted. the like notions are applied by them to high living; and the magnificence and expensiveness of entertainments are deprecated, because nature is satisfied at a small expense. xxxiv. for who does not see this, that an appetite is the best sauce? when darius, in his flight from the enemy, had drunk some water which was muddy and tainted with dead bodies, he declared that he had never drunk anything more pleasant; the fact was, that he had never drunk before when he was thirsty. nor had ptolemy ever eaten when he was hungry; for as he was travelling over egypt, his company not keeping up with him, he had some coarse bread presented him in a cottage, upon which he said, "nothing ever seemed to him pleasanter than that bread." they relate, too, of socrates, that, once when he was walking very fast till the evening, on his being asked why he did so, his reply was that he was purchasing an appetite by walking, that he might sup the better. and do we not see what the lacedæmonians provide in their phiditia? where the tyrant dionysius supped, but told them he did not at all like that black broth, which was their principal dish; on which he who dressed it said, "it was no wonder, for it wanted seasoning." dionysius asked what that seasoning was; to which it was replied, "fatigue in hunting, sweating, a race on the banks of eurotas, hunger and thirst," for these are the seasonings to the lacedæmonian banquets. and this may not only be conceived from the custom of men, but from the beasts, who are satisfied with anything that is thrown before them, provided it is not unnatural, and they seek no farther. some entire cities, taught by custom, delight in parsimony, as i said but just now of the lacedæmonians. xenophon has given an account of the persian diet, who never, as he saith, use anything but cresses with their bread; not but that, should nature require anything more agreeable, many things might be easily supplied by the ground, and plants in great abundance, and of incomparable sweetness. add to this strength and health, as the consequence of this abstemious way of living. now, compare with this those who sweat and belch, being crammed with eating, like fatted oxen; then will you perceive that they who pursue pleasure most attain it least; and that the pleasure of eating lies not in satiety, but appetite. xxxv. they report of timotheus, a famous man at athens, and the head of the city, that having supped with plato, and being extremely delighted with his entertainment, on seeing him the next day, he said, "your suppers are not only agreeable while i partake of them, but the next day also." besides, the understanding is impaired when we are full with overeating and drinking. there is an excellent epistle of plato to dion's relations, in which there occurs as nearly as possible these words: "when i came there, that happy life so much talked of, devoted to italian and syracusan entertainments, was noways agreeable to me; to be crammed twice a day, and never to have the night to yourself, and the other things which are the accompaniments of this kind of life, by which a man will never be made the wiser, but will be rendered much less temperate; for it must be an extraordinary disposition that can be temperate in such circumstances." how, then, can a life be pleasant without prudence and temperance? hence you discover the mistake of sardanapalus, the wealthiest king of the assyrians, who ordered it to be engraved on his tomb, i still have what in food i did exhaust; but what i left, though excellent, is lost. "what less than this," says aristotle, "could be inscribed on the tomb, not of a king, but an ox?" he said that he possessed those things when dead, which, in his lifetime, he could have no longer than while he was enjoying them. why, then, are riches desired? and wherein doth poverty prevent us from being happy? in the want, i imagine, of statues, pictures, and diversions. but if any one is delighted with these things, have not the poor people the enjoyment of them more than they who are the owners of them in the greatest abundance? for we have great numbers of them displayed publicly in our city. and whatever store of them private people have, they cannot have a great number, and they but seldom see them, only when they go to their country seats; and some of them must be stung to the heart when they consider how they came by them. the day would fail me, should i be inclined to defend the cause of poverty. the thing is manifest; and nature daily informs us how few things there are, and how trifling they are, of which she really stands in need. xxxvi. let us inquire, then, if obscurity, the want of power, or even the being unpopular, can prevent a wise man from being happy. observe if popular favor, and this glory which they are so fond of, be not attended with more uneasiness than pleasure. our friend demosthenes was certainly very weak in declaring himself pleased with the whisper of a woman who was carrying water, as is the custom in greece, and who whispered to another, "that is he--that is demosthenes." what could be weaker than this? and yet what an orator he was! but although he had learned to speak to others, he had conversed but little with himself. we may perceive, therefore, that popular glory is not desirable of itself; nor is obscurity to be dreaded. "i came to athens," saith democritus, "and there was no one there that knew me:" this was a moderate and grave man who could glory in his obscurity. shall musicians compose their tunes to their own tastes? and shall a philosopher, master of a much better art, seek to ascertain, not what is most true, but what will please the people? can anything be more absurd than to despise the vulgar as mere unpolished mechanics, taken singly, and to think them of consequence when collected into a body? these wise men would contemn our ambitious pursuits and our vanities, and would reject all the honors which the people could voluntarily offer to them; but we know not how to despise them till we begin to repent of having accepted them. there is an anecdote related by heraclitus, the natural philosopher, of hermodorus, the chief of the ephesians, that he said "that all the ephesians ought to be punished with death for saying, when they had expelled hermodorus out of their city, that they would have no one among them better than another; but that if there were any such, he might go elsewhere to some other people." is not this the case with the people everywhere? do they not hate every virtue that distinguishes itself? what! was not aristides (i had rather instance in the greeks than ourselves) banished his country for being eminently just? what troubles, then, are they free from who have no connection whatever with the people? what is more agreeable than a learned retirement? i speak of that learning which makes us acquainted with the boundless extent of nature and the universe, and which even while we remain in this world discovers to us both heaven, earth, and sea. xxxvii. if, then, honor and riches have no value, what is there else to be afraid of? banishment, i suppose; which is looked on as the greatest evil. now, if the evil of banishment proceeds not from ourselves, but from the froward disposition of the people, i have just now declared how contemptible it is. but if to leave one's country be miserable, the provinces are full of miserable men, very few of the settlers in which ever return to their country again. but exiles are deprived of their property! what, then! has there not been enough said on bearing poverty? but with regard to banishment, if we examine the nature of things, not the ignominy of the name, how little does it differ from constant travelling! in which some of the most famous philosophers have spent their whole life, as xenocrates, crantor, arcesilas, lacydes, aristotle, theophrastus, zeno, cleanthes, chrysippus, antipater, carneades, panætius, clitomachus, philo, antiochus, posidonius, and innumerable others, who from their first setting-out never returned home again. now, what ignominy can a wise man be affected with (for it is of such a one that i am speaking) who can be guilty of nothing which deserves it? for there is no occasion to comfort one who is banished for his deserts. lastly, they can easily reconcile themselves to every accident who measure all their objects and pursuits in life by the standard of pleasure; so that in whatever place that is supplied, there they may live happily. thus what teucer said may be applied to every case: "wherever i am happy is my country." socrates, indeed, when he was asked where he belonged to, replied, "the world;" for he looked upon himself as a citizen and inhabitant of the whole world. how was it with t. altibutius? did he not follow his philosophical studies with the greatest satisfaction at athens, although he was banished? which, however, would not have happened to him if he had obeyed the laws of epicurus and lived peaceably in the republic. in what was epicurus happier, living in his own country, than metrodorus, who lived at athens? or did plato's happiness exceed that of xenocrates, or polemo, or arcesilas? or is that city to be valued much that banishes all her good and wise men? demaratus, the father of our king tarquin, not being able to bear the tyrant cypselus, fled from corinth to tarquinii, settled there, and had children. was it, then, an unwise act in him to prefer the liberty of banishment to slavery at home? xxxviii. besides the emotions of the mind, all griefs and anxieties are assuaged by forgetting them, and turning our thoughts to pleasure. therefore, it was not without reason that epicurus presumed to say that a wise man abounds with good things, because he may always have his pleasures; from whence it follows, as he thinks, that that point is gained which is the subject of our present inquiry, that a wise man is always happy. what! though he should be deprived of the senses of seeing and hearing? yes; for he holds those things very cheap. for, in the first place, what are the pleasures of which we are deprived by that dreadful thing, blindness? for though they allow other pleasures to be confined to the senses, yet the things which are perceived by the sight do not depend wholly on the pleasure the eyes receive; as is the case when we taste, smell, touch, or hear; for, in respect of all these senses, the organs themselves are the seat of pleasure; but it is not so with the eyes. for it is the mind which is entertained by what we see; but the mind may be entertained in many ways, even though we could not see at all. i am speaking of a learned and a wise man, with whom to think is to live. but thinking in the case of a wise man does not altogether require the use of his eyes in his investigations; for if night does not strip him of his happiness, why should blindness, which resembles night, have that effect? for the reply of antipater the cyrenaic to some women who bewailed his being blind, though it is a little too obscene, is not without its significance. "what do you mean?" saith he; "do you think the night can furnish no pleasure?" and we find by his magistracies and his actions that old appius,[ ] too, who was blind for many years, was not prevented from doing whatever was required of him with respect either to the republic or his own affairs. it is said that c. drusus's house was crowded with clients. when they whose business it was could not see how to conduct themselves, they applied to a blind guide. xxxix. when i was a boy, cn. aufidius, a blind man, who had served the office of prætor, not only gave his opinion in the senate, and was ready to assist his friends, but wrote a greek history, and had a considerable acquaintance with literature. diodorus the stoic was blind, and lived many years at my house. he, indeed, which is scarcely credible, besides applying himself more than usual to philosophy, and playing on the flute, agreeably to the custom of the pythagoreans, and having books read to him night and day, in all which he did not want eyes, contrived to teach geometry, which, one would think, could hardly be done without the assistance of eyes, telling his scholars how and where to draw every line. they relate of asclepiades, a native of eretria, and no obscure philosopher, when some one asked him what inconvenience he suffered from his blindness, that his reply was, "he was at the expense of another servant." so that, as the most extreme poverty may be borne if you please, as is daily the case with some in greece, so blindness may easily be borne, provided you have the support of good health in other respects. democritus was so blind he could not distinguish white from black; but he knew the difference between good and evil, just and unjust, honorable and base, the useful and useless, great and small. thus one may live happily without distinguishing colors; but without acquainting yourself with things, you cannot; and this man was of opinion that the intense application of the mind was taken off by the objects that presented themselves to the eye; and while others often could not see what was before their feet, he travelled through all infinity. it is reported also that homer[ ] was blind, but we observe his painting as well as his poetry. what country, what coast, what part of greece, what military attacks, what dispositions of battle, what array, what ship, what motions of men and animals, can be mentioned which he has not described in such a manner as to enable us to see what he could not see himself? what, then! can we imagine that homer, or any other learned man, has ever been in want of pleasure and entertainment for his mind? were it not so, would anaxagoras, or this very democritus, have left their estates and patrimonies, and given themselves up to the pursuit of acquiring this divine pleasure? it is thus that the poets who have represented tiresias the augur as a wise man and blind never exhibit him as bewailing his blindness. and homer, too, after he had described polyphemus as a monster and a wild man, represents him talking with his ram, and speaking of his good fortune, inasmuch as he could go wherever he pleased and touch what he would. and so far he was right, for that cyclops was a being of not much more understanding than his ram. xl. now, as to the evil of being deaf. m. crassus was a little thick of hearing; but it was more uneasiness to him that he heard himself ill spoken of, though, in my opinion, he did not deserve it. our epicureans cannot understand greek, nor the greeks latin: now, they are deaf reciprocally as to each other's language, and we are all truly deaf with regard to those innumerable languages which we do not understand. they do not hear the voice of the harper; but, then, they do not hear the grating of a saw when it is setting, or the grunting of a hog when his throat is being cut, nor the roaring of the sea when they are desirous of rest. and if they should chance to be fond of singing, they ought, in the first place, to consider that many wise men lived happily before music was discovered; besides, they may have more pleasure in reading verses than in hearing them sung. then, as i before referred the blind to the pleasures of hearing, so i may the deaf to the pleasures of sight: moreover, whoever can converse with himself doth not need the conversation of another. but suppose all these misfortunes to meet in one person: suppose him blind and deaf--let him be afflicted with the sharpest pains of body, which, in the first place, generally of themselves make an end of him; still, should they continue so long, and the pain be so exquisite, that we should be unable to assign any reason for our being so afflicted--still, why, good gods! should we be under any difficulty? for there is a retreat at hand: death is that retreat--a shelter where we shall forever be insensible. theodorus said to lysimachus, who threatened him with death, "it is a great matter, indeed, for you to have acquired the power of a spanish fly!" when perses entreated paulus not to lead him in triumph, "that is a matter which you have in your own power," said paulus. i said many things about death in our first day's disputation, when death was the subject; and not a little the next day, when i treated of pain; which things if you recollect, there can be no danger of your looking upon death as undesirable, or, at least, it will not be dreadful. that custom which is common among the grecians at their banquets should, in my opinion, be observed in life: drink, say they, or leave the company; and rightly enough; for a guest should either enjoy the pleasure of drinking with others, or else not stay till he meets with affronts from those that are in liquor. thus, those injuries of fortune which you cannot bear you should flee from. xli. this is the very same which is said by epicurus and hieronymus. now, if those philosophers, whose opinion it is that virtue has no power of itself, and who say that the conduct which we denominate honorable and laudable is really nothing, and is only an empty circumstance set off with an unmeaning sound, can nevertheless maintain that a wise man is always happy, what, think you, may be done by the socratic and platonic philosophers? some of these allow such superiority to the goods of the mind as quite to eclipse what concerns the body and all external circumstances. but others do not admit these to be goods; they make everything depend on the mind: whose disputes carneades used, as a sort of honorary arbitrator, to determine. for, as what seemed goods to the peripatetics were allowed to be advantages by the stoics, and as the peripatetics allowed no more to riches, good health; and other things of that sort than the stoics, when these things were considered according to their reality, and not by mere names, his opinion was that there was no ground for disagreeing. therefore, let the philosophers of other schools see how they can establish this point also. it is very agreeable to me that they make some professions worthy of being uttered by the mouth of a philosopher with regard to a wise man's having always the means of living happily. xlii. but as we are to depart in the morning, let us remember these five days' discussions; though, indeed, i think i shall commit them to writing: for how can i better employ the leisure which i have, of whatever kind it is, and whatever it be owing to? and i will send these five books also to my friend brutus, by whom i was not only incited to write on philosophy, but, i may say, provoked. and by so doing it is not easy to say what service i may be of to others. at all events, in my own various and acute afflictions, which surround me on all sides, i cannot find any better comfort for myself. the nature of the gods. * * * * * book i. i. there are many things in philosophy, my dear brutus, which are not as yet fully explained to us, and particularly (as you very well know) that most obscure and difficult question concerning the nature of the gods, so extremely necessary both towards a knowledge of the human mind and the practice of true religion: concerning which the opinions of men are so various, and so different from each other, as to lead strongly to the inference that ignorance[ ] is the cause, or origin, of philosophy, and that the academic philosophers have been prudent in refusing their assent to things uncertain: for what is more unbecoming to a wise man than to judge rashly? or what rashness is so unworthy of the gravity and stability of a philosopher as either to maintain false opinions, or, without the least hesitation, to support and defend what he has not thoroughly examined and does not clearly comprehend? in the question now before us, the greater part of mankind have united to acknowledge that which is most probable, and which we are all by nature led to suppose, namely, that there are gods. protagoras[ ] doubted whether there were any. diagoras the melian and theodorus of cyrene entirely believed there were no such beings. but they who have affirmed that there are gods, have expressed such a variety of sentiments on the subject, and the disagreement between them is so great, that it would be tiresome to enumerate their opinions; for they give us many statements respecting the forms of the gods, and their places of abode, and the employment of their lives. and these are matters on which the philosophers differ with the most exceeding earnestness. but the most considerable part of the dispute is, whether they are wholly inactive, totally unemployed, and free from all care and administration of affairs; or, on the contrary, whether all things were made and constituted by them from the beginning; and whether they will continue to be actuated and governed by them to eternity. this is one of the greatest points in debate; and unless this is decided, mankind must necessarily remain in the greatest of errors, and ignorant of what is most important to be known. ii. for there are some philosophers, both ancient and modern, who have conceived that the gods take not the least cognizance of human affairs. but if their doctrine be true, of what avail is piety, sanctity, or religion? for these are feelings and marks of devotion which are offered to the gods by men with uprightness and holiness, on the ground that men are the objects of the attention of the gods, and that many benefits are conferred by the immortal gods on the human race. but if the gods have neither the power nor the inclination to help us; if they take no care of us, and pay no regard to our actions; and if there is no single advantage which can possibly accrue to the life of man; then what reason can we have to pay any adoration, or any honors, or to prefer any prayers to them? piety, like the other virtues, cannot have any connection with vain show or dissimulation; and without piety, neither sanctity nor religion can be supported; the total subversion of which must be attended with great confusion and disturbance in life. i do not even know, if we cast off piety towards the gods, but that faith, and all the associations of human life, and that most excellent of all virtues, justice, may perish with it. there are other philosophers, and those, too, very great and illustrious men, who conceive the whole world to be directed and governed by the will and wisdom of the gods; nor do they stop here, but conceive likewise that the deities consult and provide for the preservation of mankind. for they think that the fruits, and the produce of the earth, and the seasons, and the variety of weather, and the change of climates, by which all the productions of the earth are brought to maturity, are designed by the immortal gods for the use of man. they instance many other things, which shall be related in these books; and which would almost induce us to believe that the immortal gods had made them all expressly and solely for the benefit and advantage of men. against these opinions carneades has advanced so much that what he has said should excite a desire in men who are not naturally slothful to search after truth; for there is no subject on which the learned as well as the unlearned differ so strenuously as in this; and since their opinions are so various, and so repugnant one to another, it is possible that none of them may be, and absolutely impossible that more than one should be, right. iii. now, in a cause like this, i may be able to pacify well-meaning opposers, and to confute invidious censurers, so as to induce the latter to repent of their unreasonable contradiction, and the former to be glad to learn; for they who admonish one in a friendly spirit should be instructed, they who attack one like enemies should be repelled. but i observe that the several books which i have lately published[ ] have occasioned much noise and various discourse about them; some people wondering what the reason has been why i have applied myself so suddenly to the study of philosophy, and others desirous of knowing what my opinion is on such subjects. i likewise perceive that many people wonder at my following that philosophy[ ] chiefly which seems to take away the light, and to bury and envelop things in a kind of artificial night, and that i should so unexpectedly have taken up the defence of a school that has been long neglected and forsaken. but it is a mistake to suppose that this application to philosophical studies has been sudden on my part. i have applied myself to them from my youth, at no small expense of time and trouble; and i have been in the habit of philosophizing a great deal when i least seemed to think about it; for the truth of which i appeal to my orations, which are filled with quotations from philosophers, and to my intimacy with those very learned men who frequented my house and conversed daily with me, particularly diodorus, philo, antiochus, and posidonius,[ ] under whom i was bred; and if all the precepts of philosophy are to have reference to the conduct of life, i am inclined to think that i have advanced, both in public and private affairs, only such principles as may be supported by reason and authority. iv. but if any one should ask what has induced me, in the decline of life, to write on these subjects, nothing is more easily answered; for when i found myself entirely disengaged from business, and the commonwealth reduced to the necessity of being governed by the direction and care of one man,[ ] i thought it becoming, for the sake of the public, to instruct my countrymen in philosophy, and that it would be of importance, and much to the honor and commendation of our city, to have such great and excellent subjects introduced in the latin tongue. i the less repent of my undertaking, since i plainly see that i have excited in many a desire, not only of learning, but of writing; for we have had several romans well grounded in the learning of the greeks who were unable to communicate to their countrymen what they had learned, because they looked upon it as impossible to express that in latin which they had received from the greeks. in this point i think i have succeeded so well that what i have done is not, even in copiousness of expression, inferior to that language. another inducement to it was a melancholy disposition of mind, and the great and heavy oppression of fortune that was upon me; from which, if i could have found any surer remedy, i would not have sought relief in this pursuit. but i could procure ease by no means better than by not only applying myself to books, but by devoting myself to the examination of the whole body of philosophy. and every part and branch of this is readily discovered when every question is propounded in writing; for there is such an admirable continuation and series of things that each seems connected with the other, and all appear linked together and united. v. now, those men who desire to know my own private opinion on every particular subject have more curiosity than is necessary. for the force of reason in disputation is to be sought after rather than authority, since the authority of the teacher is often a disadvantage to those who are willing to learn; as they refuse to use their own judgment, and rely implicitly on him whom they make choice of for a preceptor. nor could i ever approve this custom of the pythagoreans, who, when they affirmed anything in disputation, and were asked why it was so, used to give this answer: "he himself has said it;" and this "he himself," it seems, was pythagoras. such was the force of prejudice and opinion that his authority was to prevail even without argument or reason. they who wonder at my being a follower of this sect in particular may find a satisfactory answer in my four books of academical questions. but i deny that i have undertaken the protection of what is neglected and forsaken; for the opinions of men do not die with them, though they may perhaps want the author's explanation. this manner of philosophizing, of disputing all things and assuming nothing certainly, was begun by socrates, revived by arcesilaus, confirmed by carneades, and has descended, with all its power, even to the present age; but i am informed that it is now almost exploded even in greece. however, i do not impute that to any fault in the institution of the academy, but to the negligence of mankind. if it is difficult to know all the doctrines of any one sect, how much more is it to know those of every sect! which, however, must necessarily be known to those who resolve, for the sake of discovering truth, to dispute for or against all philosophers without partiality. i do not profess myself to be master of this difficult and noble faculty; but i do assert that i have endeavored to make myself so; and it is impossible that they who choose this manner of philosophizing should not meet at least with something worthy their pursuit. i have spoken more fully on this head in another place. but as some are too slow of apprehension, and some too careless, men stand in perpetual need of caution. for we are not people who believe that there is nothing whatever which is true; but we say that some falsehoods are so blended with all truths, and have so great a resemblance to them, that there is no certain rule for judging of or assenting to propositions; from which this maxim also follows, that many things are probable, which, though they are not evident to the senses, have still so persuasive and beautiful an aspect that a wise man chooses to direct his conduct by them. vi. now, to free myself from the reproach of partiality, i propose to lay before you the opinions of various philosophers concerning the nature of the gods, by which means all men may judge which of them are consistent with truth; and if all agree together, or if any one shall be found to have discovered what may be absolutely called truth, i will then give up the academy as vain and arrogant. so i may cry out, in the words of statius, in the synephebi, ye gods, i call upon, require, pray, beseech, entreat, and implore the attention of my countrymen all, both young and old; yet not on so trifling an occasion as when the person in the play complains that, in this city we have discovered a most flagrant iniquity: here is a professed courtesan, who refuses money from her lover; but that they may attend, know, and consider what sentiments they ought to preserve concerning religion, piety, sanctity, ceremonies, faith, oaths, temples, shrines, and solemn sacrifices; what they ought to think of the auspices over which i preside;[ ] for all these have relation to the present question. the manifest disagreement among the most learned on this subject creates doubts in those who imagine they have some certain knowledge of the subject. which fact i have often taken notice of elsewhere, and i did so more especially at the discussion that was held at my friend c. cotta's concerning the immortal gods, and which was carried on with the greatest care, accuracy, and precision; for coming to him at the time of the latin holidays,[ ] according to his own invitation and message from him, i found him sitting in his study,[ ] and in a discourse with c. velleius, the senator, who was then reputed by the epicureans the ablest of our countrymen. q. lucilius balbus was likewise there, a great proficient in the doctrine of the stoics, and esteemed equal to the most eminent of the greeks in that part of knowledge. as soon as cotta saw me, you are come, says he, very seasonably; for i am having a dispute with velleius on an important subject, which, considering the nature of your studies, is not improper for you to join in. vii. indeed, says i, i think i am come very seasonably, as you say; for here are three chiefs of three principal sects met together. if m. piso[ ] was present, no sect of philosophy that is in any esteem would want an advocate. if antiochus's book, replies cotta, which he lately sent to balbus, says true, you have no occasion to wish for your friend piso; for antiochus is of the opinion that the stoics do not differ from the peripatetics in fact, though they do in words; and i should be glad to know what you think of that book, balbus. i? says he. i wonder that antiochus, a man of the clearest apprehension, should not see what a vast difference there is between the stoics, who distinguish the honest and the profitable, not only in name, but absolutely in kind, and the peripatetics, who blend the honest with the profitable in such a manner that they differ only in degrees and proportion, and not in kind. this is not a little difference in words, but a great one in things; but of this hereafter. now, if you think fit, let us return to what we began with. with all my heart, says cotta. but that this visitor (looking at me), who is just come in, may not be ignorant of what we are upon, i will inform him that we were discoursing on the nature of the gods; concerning which, as it is a subject that always appeared very obscure to me, i prevailed on velleius to give us the sentiments of epicurus. therefore, continues he, if it is not troublesome, velleius, repeat what you have already stated to us. i will, says he, though this new-comer will be no advocate for me, but for you; for you have both, adds he, with a smile, learned from the same philo to be certain of nothing.[ ] what we have learned from him, replied i, cotta will discover; but i would not have you think i am come as an assistant to him, but as an auditor, with an impartial and unbiassed mind, and not bound by any obligation to defend any particular principle, whether i like or dislike it. viii. after this, velleius, with the confidence peculiar to his sect, dreading nothing so much as to seem to doubt of anything, began as if he had just then descended from the council of the gods, and epicurus's intervals of worlds. do not attend, says he, to these idle and imaginary tales; nor to the operator and builder of the world, the god of plato's timæus; nor to the old prophetic dame, the [greek: pronoia] of the stoics, which the latins call providence; nor to that round, that burning, revolving deity, the world, endowed with sense and understanding; the prodigies and wonders, not of inquisitive philosophers, but of dreamers! for with what eyes of the mind was your plato able to see that workhouse of such stupendous toil, in which he makes the world to be modelled and built by god? what materials, what tools, what bars, what machines, what servants, were employed in so vast a work? how could the air, fire, water, and earth pay obedience and submit to the will of the architect? from whence arose those five forms,[ ] of which the rest were composed, so aptly contributing to frame the mind and produce the senses? it is tedious to go through all, as they are of such a sort that they look more like things to be desired than to be discovered. but, what is more remarkable, he gives us a world which has been not only created, but, if i may so say, in a manner formed with hands, and yet he says it is eternal. do you conceive him to have the least skill in natural philosophy who is capable of thinking anything to be everlasting that had a beginning? for what can possibly ever have been put together which cannot be dissolved again? or what is there that had a beginning which will not have an end? if your providence, lucilius, is the same as plato's god, i ask you, as before, who were the assistants, what were the engines, what was the plan and preparation of the whole work? if it is not the same, then why did she make the world mortal, and not everlasting, like plato's god? ix. but i would demand of you both, why these world-builders started up so suddenly, and lay dormant for so many ages? for we are not to conclude that, if there was no world, there were therefore no ages. i do not now speak of such ages as are finished by a certain number of days and nights in annual courses; for i acknowledge that those could not be without the revolution of the world; but there was a certain eternity from infinite time, not measured by any circumscription of seasons; but how that was in space we cannot understand, because we cannot possibly have even the slightest idea of time before time was. i desire, therefore, to know, balbus, why this providence of yours was idle for such an immense space of time? did she avoid labor? but that could have no effect on the deity; nor could there be any labor, since all nature, air, fire, earth, and water would obey the divine essence. what was it that incited the deity to act the part of an ædile, to illuminate and decorate the world? if it was in order that god might be the better accommodated in his habitation, then he must have been dwelling an infinite length of time before in darkness as in a dungeon. but do we imagine that he was afterward delighted with that variety with which we see the heaven and earth adorned? what entertainment could that be to the deity? if it was any, he would not have been without it so long. or were these things made, as you almost assert, by god for the sake of men? was it for the wise? if so, then this great design was adopted for the sake of a very small number. or for the sake of fools? first of all, there was no reason why god should consult the advantage of the wicked; and, further, what could be his object in doing so, since all fools are, without doubt, the most miserable of men, chiefly because they are fools? for what can we pronounce more deplorable than folly? besides, there are many inconveniences in life which the wise can learn to think lightly of by dwelling rather on the advantages which they receive; but which fools are unable to avoid when they are coming, or to bear when they are come. x. they who affirm the world to be an animated and intelligent being have by no means discovered the nature of the mind, nor are able to conceive in what form that essence can exist; but of that i shall speak more hereafter. at present i must express my surprise at the weakness of those who endeavor to make it out to be not only animated and immortal, but likewise happy, and round, because plato says that is the most beautiful form; whereas i think a cylinder, a square, a cone, or a pyramid more beautiful. but what life do they attribute to that round deity? truly it is a being whirled about with a celerity to which nothing can be even conceived by the imagination as equal; nor can i imagine how a settled mind and happy life can consist in such motion, the least degree of which would be troublesome to us. why, therefore, should it not be considered troublesome also to the deity? for the earth itself, as it is part of the world, is part also of the deity. we see vast tracts of land barren and uninhabitable; some, because they are scorched by the too near approach of the sun; others, because they are bound up with frost and snow, through the great distance which the sun is from them. therefore, if the world is a deity, as these are parts of the world, some of the deity's limbs must be said to be scorched, and some frozen. these are your doctrines, lucilius; but what those of others are i will endeavor to ascertain by tracing them back from the earliest of ancient philosophers. thales the milesian, who first inquired after such subjects, asserted water to be the origin of things, and that god was that mind which formed all things from water. if the gods can exist without corporeal sense, and if there can be a mind without a body, why did he annex a mind to water? it was anaximander's opinion that the gods were born; that after a great length of time they died; and that they are innumerable worlds. but what conception can we possibly have of a deity who is not eternal? anaximenes, after him, taught that the air is god, and that he was generated, and that he is immense, infinite, and always in motion; as if air, which has no form, could possibly be god; for the deity must necessarily be not only of some form or other, but of the most beautiful form. besides, is not everything that had a beginning subject to mortality? xi. anaxagoras, who received his learning from anaximenes, was the first who affirmed the system and disposition of all things to be contrived and perfected by the power and reason of an infinite mind; in which infinity he did not perceive that there could be no conjunction of sense and motion, nor any sense in the least degree, where nature herself could feel no impulse. if he would have this mind to be a sort of animal, then there must be some more internal principle from whence that animal should receive its appellation. but what can be more internal than the mind? let it, therefore, be clothed with an external body. but this is not agreeable to his doctrine; but we are utterly unable to conceive how a pure simple mind can exist without any substance annexed to it. alcmæon of crotona, in attributing a divinity to the sun, the moon, and the rest of the stars, and also to the mind, did not perceive that he was ascribing immortality to mortal beings. pythagoras, who supposed the deity to be one soul, mixing with and pervading all nature, from which our souls are taken, did not consider that the deity himself must, in consequence of this doctrine, be maimed and torn with the rending every human soul from it; nor that, when the human mind is afflicted (as is the case in many instances), that part of the deity must likewise be afflicted, which cannot be. if the human mind were a deity, how could it be ignorant of any thing? besides, how could that deity, if it is nothing but soul, be mixed with, or infused into, the world? then xenophanes, who said that everything in the world which had any existence, with the addition of intellect, was god, is as liable to exception as the rest, especially in relation to the infinity of it, in which there can be nothing sentient, nothing composite. parmenides formed a conceit to himself of something circular like a crown. (he names it stephane.) it is an orb of constant light and heat around the heavens; this he calls god; in which there is no room to imagine any divine form or sense. and he uttered many other absurdities on the same subject; for he ascribed a divinity to war, to discord, to lust, and other passions of the same kind, which are destroyed by disease, or sleep, or oblivion, or age. the same honor he gives to the stars; but i shall forbear making any objections to his system here, having already done it in another place. xii. empedocles, who erred in many things, is most grossly mistaken in his notion of the gods. he lays down four natures[ ] as divine, from which he thinks that all things were made. yet it is evident that they have a beginning, that they decay, and that they are void of all sense. protagoras did not seem to have any idea of the real nature of the gods; for he acknowledged that he was altogether ignorant whether there are or are not any, or what they are. what shall i say of democritus, who classes our images of objects, and their orbs, in the number of the gods; as he does that principle through which those images appear and have their influence? he deifies likewise our knowledge and understanding. is he not involved in a very great error? and because nothing continues always in the same state, he denies that anything is everlasting, does he not thereby entirely destroy the deity, and make it impossible to form any opinion of him? diogenes of apollonia looks upon the air to be a deity. but what sense can the air have? or what divine form can be attributed to it? it would be tedious to show the uncertainty of plato's opinion; for, in his timæus, he denies the propriety of asserting that there is one great father or creator of the world; and, in his book of laws, he thinks we ought not to make too strict an inquiry into the nature of the deity. and as for his statement when he asserts that god is a being without any body--what the greeks call [greek: asômatos]--it is certainly quite unintelligible how that theory can possibly be true; for such a god must then necessarily be destitute of sense, prudence, and pleasure; all which things are comprehended in our notion of the gods. he likewise asserts in his timæus, and in his laws, that the world, the heavens, the stars, the mind, and those gods which are delivered down to us from our ancestors, constitute the deity. these opinions, taken separately, are apparently false; and, together, are directly inconsistent with each other. xenophon has committed almost the same mistakes, but in fewer words. in those sayings which he has related of socrates, he introduces him disputing the lawfulness of inquiring into the form of the deity, and makes him assert the sun and the mind to be deities: he represents him likewise as affirming the being of one god only, and at another time of many; which are errors of almost the same kind which i before took notice of in plato. xiii. antisthenes, in his book called the natural philosopher, says that there are many national and one natural deity; but by this saying he destroys the power and nature of the gods. speusippus is not much less in the wrong; who, following his uncle plato, says that a certain incorporeal power governs everything; by which he endeavors to root out of our minds the knowledge of the gods. aristotle, in his third book of philosophy, confounds many things together, as the rest have done; but he does not differ from his master plato. at one time he attributes all divinity to the mind, at another he asserts that the world is god. soon afterward he makes some other essence preside over the world, and gives it those faculties by which, with certain revolutions, he may govern and preserve the motion of it. then he asserts the heat of the firmament to be god; not perceiving the firmament to be part of the world, which in another place he had described as god. how can that divine sense of the firmament be preserved in so rapid a motion? and where do the multitude of gods dwell, if heaven itself is a deity? but when this philosopher says that god is without a body, he makes him an irrational and insensible being. besides, how can the world move itself, if it wants a body? or how, if it is in perpetual self-motion, can it be easy and happy? xenocrates, his fellow-pupil, does not appear much wiser on this head, for in his books concerning the nature of the gods no divine form is described; but he says the number of them is eight. five are moving planets;[ ] the sixth is contained in all the fixed stars; which, dispersed, are so many several members, but, considered together, are one single deity; the seventh is the sun; and the eighth the moon. but in what sense they can possibly be happy is not easy to be understood. from the same school of plato, heraclides of pontus stuffed his books with puerile tales. sometimes he thinks the world a deity, at other times the mind. he attributes divinity likewise to the wandering stars. he deprives the deity of sense, and makes his form mutable; and, in the same book again, he makes earth and heaven deities. the unsteadiness of theophrastus is equally intolerable. at one time he attributes a divine prerogative to the mind; at another, to the firmament; at another, to the stars and celestial constellations. nor is his disciple strato, who is called the naturalist, any more worthy to be regarded; for he thinks that the divine power is diffused through nature, which is the cause of birth, increase, and diminution, but that it has no sense nor form. xiv. zeno (to come to your sect, balbus) thinks the law of nature to be the divinity, and that it has the power to force us to what is right, and to restrain us from what is wrong. how this law can be an animated being i cannot conceive; but that god is so we would certainly maintain. the same person says, in another place, that the sky is god; but can we possibly conceive that god is a being insensible, deaf to our prayers, our wishes, and our vows, and wholly unconnected with us? in other books he thinks there is a certain rational essence pervading all nature, indued with divine efficacy. he attributes the same power to the stars, to the years, to the months, and to the seasons. in his interpretation of hesiod's theogony,[ ] he entirely destroys the established notions of the gods; for he excludes jupiter, juno, and vesta, and those esteemed divine, from the number of them; but his doctrine is that these are names which by some kind of allusion are given to mute and inanimate beings. the sentiments of his disciple aristo are not less erroneous. he thought it impossible to conceive the form of the deity, and asserts that the gods are destitute of sense; and he is entirely dubious whether the deity is an animated being or not. cleanthes, who next comes under my notice, a disciple of zeno at the same time with aristo, in one place says that the world is god; in another, he attributes divinity to the mind and spirit of universal nature; then he asserts that the most remote, the highest, the all-surrounding, the all-enclosing and embracing heat, which is called the sky, is most certainly the deity. in the books he wrote against pleasure, in which he seems to be raving, he imagines the gods to have a certain form and shape; then he ascribes all divinity to the stars; and, lastly, he thinks nothing more divine than reason. so that this god, whom we know mentally and in the speculations of our minds, from which traces we receive our impression, has at last actually no visible form at all. xv. persæus, another disciple of zeno, says that they who have made discoveries advantageous to the life of man should be esteemed as gods; and the very things, he says, which are healthful and beneficial have derived their names from those of the gods; so that he thinks it not sufficient to call them the discoveries of gods, but he urges that they themselves should be deemed divine. what can be more absurd than to ascribe divine honors to sordid and deformed things; or to place among the gods men who are dead and mixed with the dust, to whose memory all the respect that could be paid would be but mourning for their loss? chrysippus, who is looked upon as the most subtle interpreter of the dreams of the stoics, has mustered up a numerous band of unknown gods; and so unknown that we are not able to form any idea about them, though our mind seems capable of framing any image to itself in its thoughts. for he says that the divine power is placed in reason, and in the spirit and mind of universal nature; that the world, with a universal effusion of its spirit, is god; that the superior part of that spirit, which is the mind and reason, is the great principle of nature, containing and preserving the chain of all things; that the divinity is the power of fate, and the necessity of future events. he deifies fire also, and what i before called the ethereal spirit, and those elements which naturally proceed from it--water, earth, and air. he attributes divinity to the sun, moon, stars, and universal space, the grand container of all things, and to those men likewise who have obtained immortality. he maintains the sky to be what men call jupiter; the air, which pervades the sea, to be neptune; and the earth, ceres. in like manner he goes through the names of the other deities. he says that jupiter is that immutable and eternal law which guides and directs us in our manners; and this he calls fatal necessity, the everlasting verity of future events. but none of these are of such a nature as to seem to carry any indication of divine virtue in them. these are the doctrines contained in his first book of the nature of the gods. in the second, he endeavors to accommodate the fables of orpheus, musæus, hesiod, and homer to what he has advanced in the first, in order that the most ancient poets, who never dreamed of these things, may seem to have been stoics. diogenes the babylonian was a follower of the doctrine of chrysippus; and in that book which he wrote, entitled "a treatise concerning minerva," he separates the account of jupiter's bringing-forth, and the birth of that virgin, from the fabulous, and reduces it to a natural construction. xvi. thus far have i been rather exposing the dreams of dotards than giving the opinions of philosophers. not much more absurd than these are the fables of the poets, who owe all their power of doing harm to the sweetness of their language; who have represented the gods as enraged with anger and inflamed with lust; who have brought before our eyes their wars, battles, combats, wounds; their hatreds, dissensions, discords, births, deaths, complaints, and lamentations; their indulgences in all kinds of intemperance; their adulteries; their chains; their amours with mortals, and mortals begotten by immortals. to these idle and ridiculous flights of the poets we may add the prodigious stories invented by the magi, and by the egyptians also, which were of the same nature, together with the extravagant notions of the multitude at all times, who, from total ignorance of the truth, are always fluctuating in uncertainty. now, whoever reflects on the rashness and absurdity of these tenets must inevitably entertain the highest respect and veneration for epicurus, and perhaps even rank him in the number of those beings who are the subject of this dispute; for he alone first founded the idea of the existence of the gods on the impression which nature herself hath made on the minds of all men. for what nation, what people are there, who have not, without any learning, a natural idea, or prenotion, of a deity? epicurus calls this [greek: prolêpsis]; that is, an antecedent conception of the fact in the mind, without which nothing can be understood, inquired after, or discoursed on; the force and advantage of which reasoning we receive from that celestial volume of epicurus concerning the rule and judgment of things. xvii. here, then, you see the foundation of this question clearly laid; for since it is the constant and universal opinion of mankind, independent of education, custom, or law, that there are gods, it must necessarily follow that this knowledge is implanted in our minds, or, rather, innate in us. that opinion respecting which there is a general agreement in universal nature must infallibly be true; therefore it must be allowed that there are gods; for in this we have the concurrence, not only of almost all philosophers, but likewise of the ignorant and illiterate. it must be also confessed that the point is established that we have naturally this idea, as i said before, or prenotion, of the existence of the gods. as new things require new names, so that prenotion was called [greek: prolêpsis] by epicurus; an appellation never used before. on the same principle of reasoning, we think that the gods are happy and immortal; for that nature which hath assured us that there are gods has likewise imprinted in our minds the knowledge of their immortality and felicity; and if so, what epicurus hath declared in these words is true: "that which is eternally happy cannot be burdened with any labor itself, nor can it impose any labor on another; nor can it be influenced by resentment or favor: because things which are liable to such feelings must be weak and frail." we have said enough to prove that we should worship the gods with piety, and without superstition, if that were the only question. for the superior and excellent nature of the gods requires a pious adoration from men, because it is possessed of immortality and the most exalted felicity; for whatever excels has a right to veneration, and all fear of the power and anger of the gods should be banished; for we must understand that anger and affection are inconsistent with the nature of a happy and immortal being. these apprehensions being removed, no dread of the superior powers remains. to confirm this opinion, our curiosity leads us to inquire into the form and life and action of the intellect and spirit of the deity. xviii. with regard to his form, we are directed partly by nature and partly by reason. all men are told by nature that none but a human form can be ascribed to the gods; for under what other image did it ever appear to any one either sleeping or waking? and, without having recourse to our first notions,[ ] reason itself declares the same; for as it is easy to conceive that the most excellent nature, either because of its happiness or immortality, should be the most beautiful, what composition of limbs, what conformation of lineaments, what form, what aspect, can be more beautiful than the human? your sect, lucilius (not like my friend cotta, who sometimes says one thing and sometimes another), when they represent the divine art and workmanship in the human body, are used to describe how very completely each member is formed, not only for convenience, but also for beauty. therefore, if the human form excels that of all other animal beings, as god himself is an animated being, he must surely be of that form which is the most beautiful. besides, the gods are granted to be perfectly happy; and nobody can be happy without virtue, nor can virtue exist where reason is not; and reason can reside in none but the human form; the gods, therefore, must be acknowledged to be of human form; yet that form is not body, but something like body; nor does it contain any blood, but something like blood. though these distinctions were more acutely devised and more artfully expressed by epicurus than any common capacity can comprehend; yet, depending on your understanding, i shall be more brief on the subject than otherwise i should be. epicurus, who not only discovered and understood the occult and almost hidden secrets of nature, but explained them with ease, teaches that the power and nature of the gods is not to be discerned by the senses, but by the mind; nor are they to be considered as bodies of any solidity, or reducible to number, like those things which, because of their firmness, he calls [greek: steremnia];[ ] but as images, perceived by similitude and transition. as infinite kinds of those images result from innumerable individuals, and centre in the gods, our minds and understanding are directed towards and fixed with the greatest delight on them, in order to comprehend what that happy and eternal essence is. xix. surely the mighty power of the infinite being is most worthy our great and earnest contemplation; the nature of which we must necessarily understand to be such that everything in it is made to correspond completely to some other answering part. this is called by epicurus [greek: isonomia]; that is to say, an equal distribution or even disposition of things. from hence he draws this inference, that, as there is such a vast multitude of mortals, there cannot be a less number of immortals; and if those which perish are innumerable, those which are preserved ought also to be countless. your sect, balbus, frequently ask us how the gods live, and how they pass their time? their life is the most happy, and the most abounding with all kinds of blessings, which can be conceived. they do nothing. they are embarrassed with no business; nor do they perform any work. they rejoice in the possession of their own wisdom and virtue. they are satisfied that they shall ever enjoy the fulness of eternal pleasures. xx. such a deity may properly be called happy; but yours is a most laborious god. for let us suppose the world a deity--what can be a more uneasy state than, without the least cessation, to be whirled about the axle-tree of heaven with a surprising celerity? but nothing can be happy that is not at ease. or let us suppose a deity residing in the world, who directs and governs it, who preserves the courses of the stars, the changes of the seasons, and the vicissitudes and orders of things, surveying the earth and the sea, and accommodating them to the advantage and necessities of man. truly this deity is embarrassed with a very troublesome and laborious office. we make a happy life to consist in a tranquillity of mind, a perfect freedom from care, and an exemption from all employment. the philosopher from whom we received all our knowledge has taught us that the world was made by nature; that there was no occasion for a workhouse to frame it in; and that, though you deny the possibility of such a work without divine skill, it is so easy to her, that she has made, does make, and will make innumerable worlds. but, because you do not conceive that nature is able to produce such effects without some rational aid, you are forced, like the tragic poets, when you cannot wind up your argument in any other way, to have recourse to a deity, whose assistance you would not seek, if you could view that vast and unbounded magnitude of regions in all parts; where the mind, extending and spreading itself, travels so far and wide that it can find no end, no extremity to stop at. in this immensity of breadth, length, and height, a most boundless company of innumerable atoms are fluttering about, which, notwithstanding the interposition of a void space, meet and cohere, and continue clinging to one another; and by this union these modifications and forms of things arise, which, in your opinions, could not possibly be made without the help of bellows and anvils. thus you have imposed on us an eternal master, whom we must dread day and night. for who can be free from fear of a deity who foresees, regards, and takes notice of everything; one who thinks all things his own; a curious, ever-busy god? hence first arose your [greek: heimarmenê], as you call it, your fatal necessity; so that, whatever happens, you affirm that it flows from an eternal chain and continuance of causes. of what value is this philosophy, which, like old women and illiterate men, attributes everything to fate? then follows your [greek: mantikê], in latin called _divinatio_, divination; which, if we would listen to you, would plunge us into such superstition that we should fall down and worship your inspectors into sacrifices, your augurs, your soothsayers, your prophets, and your fortune-tellers. epicurus having freed us from these terrors and restored us to liberty, we have no dread of those beings whom we have reason to think entirely free from all trouble themselves, and who do not impose any on others. we pay our adoration, indeed, with piety and reverence to that essence which is above all excellence and perfection. but i fear my zeal for this doctrine has made me too prolix. however, i could not easily leave so eminent and important a subject unfinished, though i must confess i should rather endeavor to hear than speak so long. xxi. cotta, with his usual courtesy, then began. velleius, says he, were it not for something which you have advanced, i should have remained silent; for i have often observed, as i did just now upon hearing you, that i cannot so easily conceive why a proposition is true as why it is false. should you ask me what i take the nature of the gods to be, i should perhaps make no answer. but if you should ask whether i think it to be of that nature which you have described, i should answer that i was as far as possible from agreeing with you. however, before i enter on the subject of your discourse and what you have advanced upon it, i will give you my opinion of yourself. your intimate friend, l. crassus, has been often heard by me to say that you were beyond all question superior to all our learned romans; and that few epicureans in greece were to be compared to you. but as i knew what a wonderful esteem he had for you, i imagined that might make him the more lavish in commendation of you. now, however, though i do not choose to praise any one when present, yet i must confess that i think you have delivered your thoughts clearly on an obscure and very intricate subject; that you are not only copious in your sentiments, but more elegant in your language than your sect generally are. when i was at athens, i went often to hear zeno, by the advice of philo, who used to call him the chief of the epicureans; partly, probably, in order to judge more easily how completely those principles could be refuted after i had heard them stated by the most learned of the epicureans. and, indeed, he did not speak in any ordinary manner; but, like you, with clearness, gravity, and elegance; yet what frequently gave me great uneasiness when i heard him, as it did while i attended to you, was to see so excellent a genius falling into such frivolous (excuse my freedom), not to say foolish, doctrines. however, i shall not at present offer anything better; for, as i said before, we can in most subjects, especially in physics, sooner discover what is not true than what is. xxii. if you should ask me what god is, or what his character and nature are, i should follow the example of simonides, who, when hiero the tyrant proposed the same question to him, desired a day to consider of it. when he required his answer the next day, simonides begged two days more; and as he kept constantly desiring double the number which he had required before instead of giving his answer, hiero, with surprise, asked him his meaning in doing so: "because," says he, "the longer i meditate on it, the more obscure it appears to me." simonides, who was not only a delightful poet, but reputed a wise and learned man in other branches of knowledge, found, i suppose, so many acute and refined arguments occurring to him, that he was doubtful which was the truest, and therefore despaired of discovering any truth. but does your epicurus (for i had rather contend with him than with you) say anything that is worthy the name of philosophy, or even of common-sense? in the question concerning the nature of the gods, his first inquiry is, whether there are gods or not. it would be dangerous, i believe, to take the negative side before a public auditory; but it is very safe in a discourse of this kind, and in this company. i, who am a priest, and who think that religions and ceremonies ought sacredly to be maintained, am certainly desirous to have the existence of the gods, which is the principal point in debate, not only fixed in opinion, but proved to a demonstration; for many notions flow into and disturb the mind which sometimes seem to convince us that there are none. but see how candidly i will behave to you: as i shall not touch upon those tenets you hold in common with other philosophers, consequently i shall not dispute the existence of the gods, for that doctrine is agreeable to almost all men, and to myself in particular; but i am still at liberty to find fault with the reasons you give for it, which i think are very insufficient. xxiii. you have said that the general assent of men of all nations and all degrees is an argument strong enough to induce us to acknowledge the being of the gods. this is not only a weak, but a false, argument; for, first of all, how do you know the opinions of all nations? i really believe there are many people so savage that they have no thoughts of a deity. what think you of diagoras, who was called the atheist; and of theodorus after him? did not they plainly deny the very essence of a deity? protagoras of abdera, whom you just now mentioned, the greatest sophist of his age, was banished by order of the athenians from their city and territories, and his books were publicly burned, because these words were in the beginning of his treatise concerning the gods: "i am unable to arrive at any knowledge whether there are, or are not, any gods." this treatment of him, i imagine, restrained many from professing their disbelief of a deity, since the doubt of it only could not escape punishment. what shall we say of the sacrilegious, the impious, and the perjured? if tubulus lucius, lupus, or carbo the son of neptune, as lucilius says, had believed that there were gods, would either of them have carried his perjuries and impieties to such excess? your reasoning, therefore, to confirm your assertion is not so conclusive as you think it is. but as this is the manner in which other philosophers have argued on the same subject, i will take no further notice of it at present; i rather choose to proceed to what is properly your own. i allow that there are gods. instruct me, then, concerning their origin; inform me where they are, what sort of body, what mind, they have, and what is their course of life; for these i am desirous of knowing. you attribute the most absolute power and efficacy to atoms. out of them you pretend that everything is made. but there are no atoms, for there is nothing without body; every place is occupied by body, therefore there can be no such thing as a vacuum or an atom. xxiv. i advance these principles of the naturalists without knowing whether they are true or false; yet they are more like truth than those statements of yours; for they are the absurdities in which democritus, or before him leucippus, used to indulge, saying that there are certain light corpuscles--some smooth, some rough, some round, some square, some crooked and bent as bows--which by a fortuitous concourse made heaven and earth, without the influence of any natural power. this opinion, c. velleius, you have brought down to these our times; and you would sooner be deprived of the greatest advantages of life than of that authority; for before you were acquainted with those tenets, you thought that you ought to profess yourself an epicurean; so that it was necessary that you should either embrace these absurdities or lose the philosophical character which you had taken upon you; and what could bribe you to renounce the epicurean opinion? nothing, you say, can prevail on you to forsake the truth and the sure means of a happy life. but is that the truth? for i shall not contest your happy life, which you think the deity himself does not enjoy unless he languishes in idleness. but where is truth? is it in your innumerable worlds, some of which are rising, some falling, at every moment of time? or is it in your atomical corpuscles, which form such excellent works without the direction of any natural power or reason? but i was forgetting my liberality, which i had promised to exert in your case, and exceeding the bounds which i at first proposed to myself. granting, then, everything to be made of atoms, what advantage is that to your argument? for we are searching after the nature of the gods; and allowing them to be made of atoms, they cannot be eternal, because whatever is made of atoms must have had a beginning: if so, there were no gods till there was this beginning; and if the gods have had a beginning, they must necessarily have an end, as you have before contended when you were discussing plato's world. where, then, is your beatitude and immortality, in which two words you say that god is expressed, the endeavor to prove which reduces you to the greatest perplexities? for you said that god had no body, but something like body; and no blood, but something like blood. xxv. it is a frequent practice among you, when you assert anything that has no resemblance to truth, and wish to avoid reprehension, to advance something else which is absolutely and utterly impossible, in order that it may seem to your adversaries better to grant that point which has been a matter of doubt than to keep on pertinaciously contradicting you on every point: like epicurus, who, when he found that if his atoms were allowed to descend by their own weight, our actions could not be in our own power, because their motions would be certain and necessary, invented an expedient, which escaped democritus, to avoid necessity. he says that when the atoms descend by their own weight and gravity, they move a little obliquely. surely, to make such an assertion as this is what one ought more to be ashamed of than the acknowledging ourselves unable to defend the proposition. his practice is the same against the logicians, who say that in all propositions in which yes or no is required, one of them must be true; he was afraid that if this were granted, then, in such a proposition as "epicurus will be alive or dead to-morrow," either one or the other must necessarily be admitted; therefore he absolutely denied the necessity of yes or no. can anything show stupidity in a greater degree? zeno,[ ] being pressed by arcesilas, who pronounced all things to be false which are perceived by the senses, said that some things were false, but not all. epicurus was afraid that if any one thing seen should be false, nothing could be true; and therefore he asserted all the senses to be infallible directors of truth. nothing can be more rash than this; for by endeavoring to repel a light stroke, he receives a heavy blow. on the subject of the nature of the gods, he falls into the same errors. while he would avoid the concretion of individual bodies, lest death and dissolution should be the consequence, he denies that the gods have body, but says they have something like body; and says they have no blood, but something like blood. xxvi. it seems an unaccountable thing how one soothsayer can refrain from laughing when he sees another. it is yet a greater wonder that you can refrain from laughing among yourselves. it is no body, but something like body! i could understand this if it were applied to statues made of wax or clay; but in regard to the deity, i am not able to discover what is meant by a quasi-body or quasi-blood. nor indeed are you, velleius, though you will not confess so much. for those precepts are delivered to you as dictates which epicurus carelessly blundered out; for he boasted, as we see in his writings, that he had no instructor, which i could easily believe without his public declaration of it, for the same reason that i could believe the master of a very bad edifice if he were to boast that he had no architect but himself: for there is nothing of the academy, nothing of the lyceum, in his doctrine; nothing but puerilities. he might have been a pupil of xenocrates. o ye immortal gods, what a teacher was he! and there are those who believe that he actually was his pupil; but he says otherwise, and i shall give more credit to his word than to another's. he confesses that he was a pupil of a certain disciple of plato, one pamphilus, at samos; for he lived there when he was young, with his father and his brothers. his father, neocles, was a farmer in those parts; but as the farm, i suppose, was not sufficient to maintain him, he turned school-master; yet epicurus treats this platonic philosopher with wonderful contempt, so fearful was he that it should be thought he had ever had any instruction. but it is well known he had been a pupil of nausiphanes, the follower of democritus; and since he could not deny it, he loaded him with insults in abundance. if he never heard a lecture on these democritean principles, what lectures did he ever hear? what is there in epicurus's physics that is not taken from democritus? for though he altered some things, as what i mentioned before of the oblique motions of the atoms, yet most of his doctrines are the same; his atoms--his vacuum--his images--infinity of space--innumerable worlds, their rise and decay--and almost every part of natural learning that he treats of. now, do you understand what is meant by quasi-body and quasi-blood? for i not only acknowledge that you are a better judge of it than i am, but i can bear it without envy. if any sentiments, indeed, are communicated without obscurity, what is there that velleius can understand and cotta not? i know what body is, and what blood is; but i cannot possibly find out the meaning of quasi-body and quasi-blood. not that you intentionally conceal your principles from me, as pythagoras did his from those who were not his disciples; or that you are intentionally obscure, like heraclitus. but the truth is (which i may venture to say in this company), you do not understand them yourself. xxvii. this, i perceive, is what you contend for, that the gods have a certain figure that has nothing concrete, nothing solid, nothing of express substance, nothing prominent in it; but that it is pure, smooth, and transparent. let us suppose the same with the venus of cos, which is not a body, but the representation of a body; nor is the red, which is drawn there and mixed with the white, real blood, but a certain resemblance of blood; so in epicurus's deity there is no real substance, but the resemblance of substance. let me take for granted that which is perfectly unintelligible; then tell me what are the lineaments and figures of these sketched-out deities. here you have plenty of arguments by which you would show the gods to be in human form. the first is, that our minds are so anticipated and prepossessed, that whenever we think of a deity the human shape occurs to us. the next is, that as the divine nature excels all things, so it ought to be of the most beautiful form, and there is no form more beautiful than the human; and the third is, that reason cannot reside in any other shape. first, let us consider each argument separately. you seem to me to assume a principle, despotically i may say, that has no manner of probability in it. who was ever so blind, in contemplating these subjects, as not to see that the gods were represented in human form, either by the particular advice of wise men, who thought by those means the more easily to turn the minds of the ignorant from a depravity of manners to the worship of the gods; or through superstition, which was the cause of their believing that when they were paying adoration to these images they were approaching the gods themselves. these conceits were not a little improved by the poets, painters, and artificers; for it would not have been very easy to represent the gods planning and executing any work in another form, and perhaps this opinion arose from the idea which mankind have of their own beauty. but do not you, who are so great an adept in physics, see what a soothing flatterer, what a sort of procuress, nature is to herself? do you think there is any creature on the land or in the sea that is not highly delighted with its own form? if it were not so, why would not a bull become enamored of a mare, or a horse of a cow? do you believe an eagle, a lion, or a dolphin prefers any shape to its own? if nature, therefore, has instructed us in the same manner, that nothing is more beautiful than man, what wonder is it that we, for that reason, should imagine the gods are of the human form? do you suppose if beasts were endowed with reason that every one would not give the prize of beauty to his own species? xxviii. yet, by hercules (i speak as i think)! though i am fond enough of myself, i dare not say that i excel in beauty that bull which carried europa. for the question here is not concerning our genius and elocution, but our species and figure. if we could make and assume to ourselves any form, would you be unwilling to resemble the sea-triton as he is painted supported swimming on sea-monsters whose bodies are partly human? here i touch on a difficult point; for so great is the force of nature that there is no man who would not choose to be like a man, nor, indeed, any ant that would not be like an ant. but like what man? for how few can pretend to beauty! when i was at athens, the whole flock of youths afforded scarcely one. you laugh, i see; but what i tell you is the truth. nay, to us who, after the examples of ancient philosophers, delight in boys, defects are often pleasing. alcæus was charmed with a wart on a boy's knuckle; but a wart is a blemish on the body; yet it seemed a beauty to him. q. catulus, my friend and colleague's father, was enamored with your fellow-citizen roscius, on whom he wrote these verses: as once i stood to hail the rising day, roscius appearing on the left i spied: forgive me, gods, if i presume to say the mortal's beauty with th' immortal vied. roscius more beautiful than a god! yet he was then, as he now is, squint-eyed. but what signifies that, if his defects were beauties to catulus? xxix. i return to the gods. can we suppose any of them to be squint-eyed, or even to have a cast in the eye? have they any warts? are any of them hook-nosed, flap-eared, beetle-browed, or jolt-headed, as some of us are? or are they free from imperfections? let us grant you that. are they all alike in the face? for if they are many, then one must necessarily be more beautiful than another, and then there must be some deity not absolutely most beautiful. or if their faces are all alike, there would be an academy[ ] in heaven; for if one god does not differ from another, there is no possibility of knowing or distinguishing them. what if your assertion, velleius, proves absolutely false, that no form occurs to us, in our contemplations on the deity, but the human? will you, notwithstanding that, persist in the defence of such an absurdity? supposing that form occurs to us, as you say it does, and we know jupiter, juno, minerva, neptune, vulcan, apollo, and the other deities, by the countenance which painters and statuaries have given them, and not only by their countenances, but by their decorations, their age, and attire; yet the egyptians, the syrians, and almost all barbarous nations,[ ] are without such distinctions. you may see a greater regard paid by them to certain beasts than by us to the most sacred temples and images of the gods; for many shrines have been rifled, and images of the deities have been carried from their most sacred places by us; but we never heard that an egyptian offered any violence to a crocodile, an ibis, or a cat. what do you think, then? do not the egyptians esteem their sacred bull, their apis, as a deity? yes, by hercules! as certainly as you do our protectress juno, whom you never behold, even in your dreams, without a goat-skin, a spear, a shield, and broad sandals. but the grecian juno of argos and the roman juno are not represented in this manner; so that the grecians, the lanuvinians, and we, ascribe different forms to juno; and our capitoline jupiter is not the same with the jupiter ammon of the africans. xxx. therefore, ought not a natural philosopher--that is, an inquirer into the secrets of nature--to be ashamed of seeking a testimony to truth from minds prepossessed by custom? according to the rule you have laid down, it may be said that jupiter is always bearded, apollo always beardless; that minerva has gray and neptune azure eyes; and, indeed, we must then honor that vulcan at athens, made by alcamenes, whose lameness through his thin robes appears to be no deformity. shall we, therefore, receive a lame deity because we have such an account of him? consider, likewise, that the gods go by what names we give them. now, in the first place, they have as many names as men have languages; for vulcan is not called vulcan in italy, africa, or spain, as you are called velleius in all countries. besides, the gods are innumerable, though the list of their names is of no great length even in the records of our priests. have they no names? you must necessarily confess, indeed, they have none; for what occasion is there for different names if their persons are alike? how much more laudable would it be, velleius, to acknowledge that you do not know what you do not know than to follow a man whom you must despise! do you think the deity is like either me or you? you do not really think he is like either of us. what is to be done, then? shall i call the sun, the moon, or the sky a deity? if so, they are consequently happy. but what pleasures can they enjoy? and they are wise too. but how can wisdom reside in such shapes? these are your own principles. therefore, if they are not of human form, as i have proved, and if you cannot persuade yourself that they are of any other, why are you cautious of denying absolutely the being of any gods? you dare not deny it--which is very prudent in you, though here you are not afraid of the people, but of the gods themselves. i have known epicureans who reverence[ ] even the least images of the gods, though i perceive it to be the opinion of some that epicurus, through fear of offending against the athenian laws, has allowed a deity in words and destroyed him in fact; so in those his select and short sentences, which are called by you [greek: kyriai doxai],[ ] this, i think, is the first: "that being which is happy and immortal is not burdened with any labor, and does not impose any on any one else." xxxi. in his statement of this sentence, some think that he avoided speaking clearly on purpose, though it was manifestly without design. but they judge ill of a man who had not the least art. it is doubtful whether he means that there is any being happy and immortal, or that if there is any being happy, he must likewise be immortal. they do not consider that he speaks here, indeed, ambiguously; but in many other places both he and metrodorus explain themselves as clearly as you have done. but he believed there are gods; nor have i ever seen any one who was more exceedingly afraid of what he declared ought to be no objects of fear, namely, death and the gods, with the apprehensions of which the common rank of people are very little affected; but he says that the minds of all mortals are terrified by them. many thousands of men commit robberies in the face of death; others rifle all the temples they can get into: such as these, no doubt, must be greatly terrified, the one by the fears of death, and the others by the fear of the gods. but since you dare not (for i am now addressing my discourse to epicurus himself) absolutely deny the existence of the gods, what hinders you from ascribing a divine nature to the sun, the world, or some eternal mind? i never, says he, saw wisdom and a rational soul in any but a human form. what! did you ever observe anything like the sun, the moon, or the five moving planets? the sun, terminating his course in two extreme parts of one circle,[ ] finishes his annual revolutions. the moon, receiving her light from the sun, completes the same course in the space of a month.[ ] the five planets in the same circle, some nearer, others more remote from the earth, begin the same courses together, and finish them in different spaces of time. did you ever observe anything like this, epicurus? so that, according to you, there can be neither sun, moon, nor stars, because nothing can exist but what we have touched or seen.[ ] what! have you ever seen the deity himself? why else do you believe there is any? if this doctrine prevails, we must reject all that history relates or reason discovers; and the people who inhabit inland countries must not believe there is such a thing as the sea. this is so narrow a way of thinking that if you had been born in seriphus, and never had been from out of that island, where you had frequently been in the habit of seeing little hares and foxes, you would not, therefore, believe that there are such beasts as lions and panthers; and if any one should describe an elephant to you, you would think that he designed to laugh at you. xxxii. you indeed, velleius, have concluded your argument, not after the manner of your own sect, but of the logicians, to which your people are utter strangers. you have taken it for granted that the gods are happy. i allow it. you say that without virtue no one can be happy. i willingly concur with you in this also. you likewise say that virtue cannot reside where reason is not. that i must necessarily allow. you add, moreover, that reason cannot exist but in a human form. who, do you think, will admit that? if it were true, what occasion was there to come so gradually to it? and to what purpose? you might have answered it on your own authority. i perceive your gradations from happiness to virtue, and from virtue to reason; but how do you come from reason to human form? there, indeed, you do not descend by degrees, but precipitately. nor can i conceive why epicurus should rather say the gods are like men than that men are like the gods. you ask what is the difference; for, say you, if this is like that, that is like this. i grant it; but this i assert, that the gods could not take their form from men; for the gods always existed, and never had a beginning, if they are to exist eternally; but men had a beginning: therefore that form, of which the immortal gods are, must have had existence before mankind; consequently, the gods should not be said to be of human form, but our form should be called divine. however, let this be as you will. i now inquire how this extraordinary good fortune came about; for you deny that reason had any share in the formation of things. but still, what was this extraordinary fortune? whence proceeded that happy concourse of atoms which gave so sudden a rise to men in the form of gods? are we to suppose the divine seed fell from heaven upon earth, and that men sprung up in the likeness of their celestial sires? i wish you would assert it; for i should not be unwilling to acknowledge my relation to the gods. but you say nothing like it; no, our resemblance to the gods, it seems, was by chance. must i now seek for arguments to refute this doctrine seriously? i wish i could as easily discover what is true as i can overthrow what is false. xxxiii. you have enumerated with so ready a memory, and so copiously, the opinions of philosophers, from thales the milesian, concerning the nature of the gods, that i am surprised to see so much learning in a roman. but do you think they were all madmen who thought that a deity could by some possibility exist without hands and feet? does not even this consideration have weight with you when you consider what is the use and advantage of limbs in men, and lead you to admit that the gods have no need of them? what necessity can there be of feet, without walking; or of hands, if there is nothing to be grasped? the same may be asked of the other parts of the body, in which nothing is vain, nothing useless, nothing superfluous; therefore we may infer that no art can imitate the skill of nature. shall the deity, then, have a tongue, and not speak--teeth, palate, and jaws, though he will have no use for them? shall the members which nature has given to the body for the sake of generation be useless to the deity? nor would the internal parts be less superfluous than the external. what comeliness is there in the heart, the lungs, the liver, and the rest of them, abstracted from their use? i mention these because you place them in the deity on account of the beauty of the human form. depending on these dreams, not only epicurus, metrodorus, and hermachus declaimed against pythagoras, plato, and empedocles, but that little harlot leontium presumed to write against theophrastus: indeed, she had a neat attic style; but yet, to think of her arguing against theophrastus! so much did the garden of epicurus[ ] abound with these liberties, and, indeed, you are always complaining against them. zeno wrangled. why need i mention albutius? nothing could be more elegant or humane than phædrus; yet a sharp expression would disgust the old man. epicurus treated aristotle with great contumely. he foully slandered phædo, the disciple of socrates. he pelted timocrates, the brother of his companion metrodorus, with whole volumes, because he disagreed with him in some trifling point of philosophy. he was ungrateful even to democritus, whose follower he was; and his master nausiphanes, from whom he learned nothing, had no better treatment from him. xxxiv. zeno gave abusive language not only to those who were then living, as apollodorus, syllus, and the rest, but he called socrates, who was the father of philosophy, the attic buffoon, using the latin word _scurra_. he never called chrysippus by any name but chesippus. and you yourself a little before, when you were numbering up a senate, as we may call them, of philosophers, scrupled not to say that the most eminent men talked like foolish, visionary dotards. certainly, therefore, if they have all erred in regard to the nature of the gods, it is to be feared there are no such beings. what you deliver on that head are all whimsical notions, and not worthy the consideration even of old women. for you do not seem to be in the least aware what a task you draw on yourselves, if you should prevail on us to grant that the same form is common to gods and men. the deity would then require the same trouble in dressing, and the same care of the body, that mankind does. he must walk, run, lie down, lean, sit, hold, speak, and discourse. you need not be told the consequence of making the gods male and female. therefore i cannot sufficiently wonder how this chief of yours came to entertain these strange opinions. but you constantly insist on the certainty of this tenet, that the deity is both happy and immortal. supposing he is so, would his happiness be less perfect if he had not two feet? or cannot that blessedness or beatitude--call it which you will (they are both harsh terms, but we must mollify them by use)--can it not, i say, exist in that sun, or in this world, or in some eternal mind that has not human shape or limbs? all you say against it is, that you never saw any happiness in the sun or the world. what, then? did you ever see any world but this? no, you will say. why, therefore, do you presume to assert that there are not only six hundred thousand worlds, but that they are innumerable? reason tells you so. will not reason tell you likewise that as, in our inquiries into the most excellent nature, we find none but the divine nature can be happy and eternal, so the same divine nature surpasses us in excellence of mind; and as in mind, so in body? why, therefore, as we are inferior in all other respects, should we be equal in form? for human virtue approaches nearer to the divinity than human form. xxxv. to return to the subject i was upon. what can be more childish than to assert that there are no such creatures as are generated in the red sea or in india? the most curious inquirer cannot arrive at the knowledge of all those creatures which inhabit the earth, sea, fens, and rivers; and shall we deny the existence of them because we never saw them? that similitude which you are so very fond of is nothing to the purpose. is not a dog like a wolf? and, as ennius says, the monkey, filthiest beast, how like to man! yet they differ in nature. no beast has more sagacity than an elephant; yet where can you find any of a larger size? i am speaking here of beasts. but among men, do we not see a disparity of manners in persons very much alike, and a similitude of manners in persons unlike? if this sort of argument were once to prevail, velleius, observe what it would lead to. you have laid it down as certain that reason cannot possibly reside in any but the human form. another may affirm that it can exist in none but a terrestrial being; in none but a being that is born, that grows up, and receives instruction, and that consists of a soul, and an infirm and perishable body; in short, in none but a mortal man. but if you decline those opinions, why should a single form disturb you? you perceive that man is possessed of reason and understanding, with all the infirmities which i have mentioned interwoven with his being; abstracted from which, you nevertheless know god, you say, if the lineaments do but remain. this is not talking considerately, but at a venture; for surely you did not think what an encumbrance anything superfluous or useless is, not only in a man, but a tree. how troublesome it is to have a finger too much! and why so? because neither use nor ornament requires more than five; but your deity has not only a finger more than he wants, but a head, a neck, shoulders, sides, a paunch, back, hams, hands, feet, thighs, and legs. are these parts necessary to immortality? are they conducive to the existence of the deity? is the face itself of use? one would rather say so of the brain, the heart, the lights, and the liver; for these are the seats of life. the features of the face contribute nothing to the preservation of it. xxxvi. you censured those who, beholding those excellent and stupendous works, the world, and its respective parts--the heaven, the earth, the seas--and the splendor with which they are adorned; who, contemplating the sun, moon, and stars; and who, observing the maturity and changes of the seasons, and vicissitudes of times, inferred from thence that there must be some excellent and eminent essence that originally made, and still moves, directs, and governs them. suppose they should mistake in their conjecture, yet i see what they aim at. but what is that great and noble work which appears to you to be the effect of a divine mind, and from which you conclude that there are gods? "i have," say you, "a certain information of a deity imprinted in my mind." of a bearded jupiter, i suppose, and a helmeted minerva. but do you really imagine them to be such? how much better are the notions of the ignorant vulgar, who not only believe the deities have members like ours, but that they make use of them; and therefore they assign them a bow and arrows, a spear, a shield, a trident, and lightning; and though they do not behold the actions of the gods, yet they cannot entertain a thought of a deity doing nothing. the egyptians (so much ridiculed) held no beasts to be sacred, except on account of some advantage which they had received from them. the ibis, a very large bird, with strong legs and a horny long beak, destroys a great number of serpents. these birds keep egypt from pestilential diseases by killing and devouring the flying serpents brought from the deserts of lybia by the south-west wind, which prevents the mischief that may attend their biting while alive, or any infection when dead. i could speak of the advantage of the ichneumon, the crocodile, and the cat; but i am unwilling to be tedious; yet i will conclude with observing that the barbarians paid divine honors to beasts because of the benefits they received from them; whereas your gods not only confer no benefit, but are idle, and do no single act of any description whatever. xxxvii. "they have nothing to do," your teacher says. epicurus truly, like indolent boys, thinks nothing preferable to idleness; yet those very boys, when they have a holiday, entertain themselves in some sportive exercise. but we are to suppose the deity in such an inactive state that if he should move we may justly fear he would be no longer happy. this doctrine divests the gods of motion and operation; besides, it encourages men to be lazy, as they are by this taught to believe that the least labor is incompatible even with divine felicity. but let it be as you would have it, that the deity is in the form and image of a man. where is his abode? where is his habitation? where is the place where he is to be found? what is his course of life? and what is it that constitutes the happiness which you assert that he enjoys? for it seems necessary that a being who is to be happy must use and enjoy what belongs to him. and with regard to place, even those natures which are inanimate have each their proper stations assigned to them: so that the earth is the lowest; then water is next above the earth; the air is above the water; and fire has the highest situation of all allotted to it. some creatures inhabit the earth, some the water, and some, of an amphibious nature, live in both. there are some, also, which are thought to be born in fire, and which often appear fluttering in burning furnaces. in the first place, therefore, i ask you, where is the habitation of your deity? secondly, what motive is it that stirs him from his place, supposing he ever moves? and, lastly, since it is peculiar to animated beings to have an inclination to something that is agreeable to their several natures, what is it that the deity affects, and to what purpose does he exert the motion of his mind and reason? in short, how is he happy? how eternal? whichever of these points you touch upon, i am afraid you will come lamely off. for there is never a proper end to reasoning which proceeds on a false foundation; for you asserted likewise that the form of the deity is perceptible by the mind, but not by sense; that it is neither solid, nor invariable in number; that it is to be discerned by similitude and transition, and that a constant supply of images is perpetually flowing on from innumerable atoms, on which our minds are intent; so that we from that conclude that divine nature to be happy and everlasting. xxxviii. what, in the name of those deities concerning whom we are now disputing, is the meaning of all this? for if they exist only in thought, and have no solidity nor substance, what difference can there be between thinking of a hippocentaur and thinking of a deity? other philosophers call every such conformation of the mind a vain motion; but you term it "the approach and entrance of images into the mind." thus, when i imagine that i behold t. gracchus haranguing the people in the capitol, and collecting their suffrages concerning m. octavius, i call that a vain motion of the mind: but you affirm that the images of gracchus and octavius are present, which are only conveyed to my mind when they have arrived at the capitol. the case is the same, you say, in regard to the deity, with the frequent representation of which the mind is so affected that from thence it may be clearly understood that the gods[ ] are happy and eternal. let it be granted that there are images by which the mind is affected, yet it is only a certain form that occurs; and why must that form be pronounced happy? why eternal? but what are those images you talk of, or whence do they proceed? this loose manner of arguing is taken from democritus; but he is reproved by many people for it; nor can you derive any conclusions from it: the whole system is weak and imperfect. for what can be more improbable than that the images of homer, archilochus, romulus, numa, pythagoras, and plato should come into my mind, and yet not in the form in which they existed? how, therefore, can they be those persons? and whose images are they? aristotle tells us that there never was such a person as orpheus the poet;[ ] and it is said that the verse called orphic verse was the invention of cercops, a pythagorean; yet orpheus, that is to say, the image of him, as you will have it, often runs in my head. what is the reason that i entertain one idea of the figure of the same person, and you another? why do we image to ourselves such things as never had any existence, and which never can have, such as scyllas and chimæras? why do we frame ideas of men, countries, and cities which we never saw? how is it that the very first moment that i choose i can form representations of them in my mind? how is it that they come to me, even in my sleep, without being called or sought after? xxxix. the whole affair, velleius, is ridiculous. you do not impose images on our eyes only, but on our minds. such is the privilege which you have assumed of talking nonsense with impunity. but there is, you say, a transition of images flowing on in great crowds in such a way that out of many some one at least must be perceived! i should be ashamed of my incapacity to understand this if you, who assert it, could comprehend it yourselves; for how do you prove that these images are continued in uninterrupted motion? or, if uninterrupted, still how do you prove them to be eternal? there is a constant supply, you say, of innumerable atoms. but must they, for that reason, be all eternal? to elude this, you have recourse to equilibration (for so, with your leave, i will call your [greek: isonomia]),[ ] and say that as there is a sort of nature mortal, so there must also be a sort which is immortal. by the same rule, as there are men mortal, there are men immortal; and as some arise from the earth, some must arise from the water also; and as there are causes which destroy, there must likewise be causes which preserve. be it as you say; but let those causes preserve which have existence themselves. i cannot conceive these your gods to have any. but how does all this face of things arise from atomic corpuscles? were there any such atoms (as there are not), they might perhaps impel one another, and be jumbled together in their motion; but they could never be able to impart form, or figure, or color, or animation, so that you by no means demonstrate the immortality of your deity. xl. let us now inquire into his happiness. it is certain that without virtue there can be no happiness; but virtue consists in action: now your deity does nothing; therefore he is void of virtue, and consequently cannot be happy. what sort of life does he lead? he has a constant supply, you say, of good things, without any intermixture of bad. what are those good things? sensual pleasures, no doubt; for you know no delight of the mind but what arises from the body, and returns to it. i do not suppose, velleius, that you are like some of the epicureans, who are ashamed of those expressions of epicurus,[ ] in which he openly avows that he has no idea of any good separate from wanton and obscene pleasures, which, without a blush, he names distinctly. what food, therefore, what drink, what variety of music or flowers, what kind of pleasures of touch, what odors, will you offer to the gods to fill them with pleasures? the poets indeed provide them with banquets of nectar and ambrosia, and a hebe or a ganymede to serve up the cup. but what is it, epicurus, that you do for them? for i do not see from whence your deity should have those things, nor how he could use them. therefore the nature of man is better constituted for a happy life than the nature of the gods, because men enjoy various kinds of pleasures; but you look on all those pleasures as superficial which delight the senses only by a titillation, as epicurus calls it. where is to be the end of this trifling? even philo, who followed the academy, could not bear to hear the soft and luscious delights of the epicureans despised; for with his admirable memory he perfectly remembered and used to repeat many sentences of epicurus in the very words in which they were written. he likewise used to quote many, which were more gross, from metrodorus, the sage colleague of epicurus, who blamed his brother timocrates because he would not allow that everything which had any reference to a happy life was to be measured by the belly; nor has he said this once only, but often. you grant what i say, i perceive; for you know it to be true. i can produce the books, if you should deny it; but i am not now reproving you for referring all things to the standard of pleasure: that is another question. what i am now showing is, that your gods are destitute of pleasure; and therefore, according to your own manner of reasoning, they are not happy. xli. but they are free from pain. is that sufficient for beings who are supposed to enjoy all good things and the most supreme felicity? the deity, they say, is constantly meditating on his own happiness, for he has no other idea which can possibly occupy his mind. consider a little; reflect what a figure the deity would make if he were to be idly thinking of nothing through all eternity but "it is very well with me, and i am happy;" nor do i see why this happy deity should not fear being destroyed, since, without any intermission, he is driven and agitated by an everlasting incursion of atoms, and since images are constantly floating off from him. your deity, therefore, is neither happy nor eternal. epicurus, it seems, has written books concerning sanctity and piety towards the gods. but how does he speak on these subjects? you would say that you were listening to coruncanius or scævola, the high-priests, and not to a man who tore up all religion by the roots, and who overthrew the temples and altars of the immortal gods; not, indeed, with hands, like xerxes, but with arguments; for what reason is there for your saying that men ought to worship the gods, when the gods not only do not regard men, but are entirely careless of everything, and absolutely do nothing at all? but they are, you say, of so glorious and excellent a nature that a wise man is induced by their excellence to adore them. can there be any glory or excellence in that nature which only contemplates its own happiness, and neither will do, nor does, nor ever did anything? besides, what piety is due to a being from whom you receive nothing? or how can you, or any one else, be indebted to him who bestows no benefits? for piety is only justice towards the gods; but what right have they to it, when there is no communication whatever between the gods and men? and sanctity is the knowledge of how we ought to worship them; but i do not understand why they are to be worshipped, if we are neither to receive nor expect any good from them. xlii. and why should we worship them from an admiration only of that nature in which we can behold nothing excellent? and as for that freedom from superstition, which you are in the habit of boasting of so much, it is easy to be free from that feeling when you have renounced all belief in the power of the gods; unless, indeed, you imagine that diagoras or theodorus, who absolutely denied the being of the gods, could possibly be superstitious. i do not suppose that even protagoras could, who doubted whether there were gods or not. the opinions of these philosophers are not only destructive of superstition, which arises from a vain fear of the gods, but of religion also, which consists in a pious adoration of them. what think you of those who have asserted that the whole doctrine concerning the immortal gods was the invention of politicians, whose view was to govern that part of the community by religion which reason could not influence? are not their opinions subversive of all religion? or what religion did prodicus the chian leave to men, who held that everything beneficial to human life should be numbered among the gods? were not they likewise void of religion who taught that the deities, at present the object of our prayers and adoration, were valiant, illustrious, and mighty men who arose to divinity after death? euhemerus, whom our ennius translated, and followed more than other authors, has particularly advanced this doctrine, and treated of the deaths and burials of the gods; can he, then, be said to have confirmed religion, or, rather, to have totally subverted it? i shall say nothing of that sacred and august eleusina, into whose mysteries the most distant nations were initiated, nor of the solemnities in samothrace, or in lemnos, secretly resorted to by night, and surrounded by thick and shady groves; which, if they were properly explained, and reduced to reasonable principles, would rather explain the nature of things than discover the knowledge of the gods. xliii. even that great man democritus, from whose fountains epicurus watered his little garden, seems to me to be very inferior to his usual acuteness when speaking about the nature of the gods. for at one time he thinks that there are images endowed with divinity, inherent in the universality of things; at another, that the principles and minds contained in the universe are gods; then he attributes divinity to animated images, employing themselves in doing us good or harm; and, lastly, he speaks of certain images of such vast extent that they encompass the whole outside of the universe; all which opinions are more worthy of the country[ ] of democritus than of democritus himself; for who can frame in his mind any ideas of such images? who can admire them? who can think they merit a religious adoration? but epicurus, when he divests the gods of the power of doing good, extirpates all religion from the minds of men; for though he says the divine nature is the best and the most excellent of all natures, he will not allow it to be susceptible of any benevolence, by which he destroys the chief and peculiar attribute of the most perfect being. for what is better and more excellent than goodness and beneficence? to refuse your gods that quality is to say that no man is any object of their favor, and no gods either; that they neither love nor esteem any one; in short, that they not only give themselves no trouble about us, but even look on each other with the greatest indifference. xliv. how much more reasonable is the doctrine of the stoics, whom you censure? it is one of their maxims that the wise are friends to the wise, though unknown to each other; for as nothing is more amiable than virtue, he who possesses it is worthy our love, to whatever country he belongs. but what evils do your principles bring, when you make good actions and benevolence the marks of imbecility! for, not to mention the power and nature of the gods, you hold that even men, if they had no need of mutual assistance, would be neither courteous nor beneficent. is there no natural charity in the dispositions of good men? the very name of love, from which friendship is derived, is dear to men;[ ] and if friendship is to centre in our own advantage only, without regard to him whom we esteem a friend, it cannot be called friendship, but a sort of traffic for our own profit. pastures, lands, and herds of cattle are valued in the same manner on account of the profit we gather from them; but charity and friendship expect no return. how much more reason have we to think that the gods, who want nothing, should love each other, and employ themselves about us! if it were not so, why should we pray to or adore them? why do the priests preside over the altars, and the augurs over the auspices? what have we to ask of the gods, and why do we prefer our vows to them? but epicurus, you say, has written a book concerning sanctity. a trifling performance by a man whose wit is not so remarkable in it, as the unrestrained license of writing which he has permitted himself; for what sanctity can there be if the gods take no care of human affairs? or how can that nature be called animated which neither regards nor performs anything? therefore our friend posidonius has well observed, in his fifth book of the nature of the gods, that epicurus believed there were no gods, and that what he had said about the immortal gods was only said from a desire to avoid unpopularity. he could not be so weak as to imagine that the deity has only the outward features of a simple mortal, without any real solidity; that he has all the members of a man, without the least power to use them--a certain unsubstantial pellucid being, neither favorable nor beneficial to any one, neither regarding nor doing anything. there can be no such being in nature; and as epicurus said this plainly, he allows the gods in words, and destroys them in fact; and if the deity is truly such a being that he shows no favor, no benevolence to mankind, away with him! for why should i entreat him to be propitious? he can be propitious to none, since, as you say, all his favor and benevolence are the effects of imbecility. * * * * * book ii. i. when cotta had thus concluded, velleius replied: i certainly was inconsiderate to engage in argument with an academician who is likewise a rhetorician. i should not have feared an academician without eloquence, nor a rhetorician without that philosophy, however eloquent he might be; for i am never puzzled by an empty flow of words, nor by the most subtle reasonings delivered without any grace of oratory. but you, cotta, have excelled in both. you only wanted the assembly and the judges. however, enough of this at present. now, let us hear what lucilius has to say, if it is agreeable to him. i had much rather, says balbus, hear cotta resume his discourse, and demonstrate the true gods with the same eloquence which he made use of to explode the false; for, on such a subject, the loose, unsettled doctrine of the academy does not become a philosopher, a priest, a cotta, whose opinions should be, like those we hold, firm and certain. epicurus has been more than sufficiently refuted; but i would willingly hear your own sentiments, cotta. do you forget, replies cotta, what i at first said--that it is easier for me, especially on this point, to explain what opinions those are which i do not hold, rather than what those are which i do? nay, even if i did feel some certainty on any particular point, yet, after having been so diffuse myself already, i would prefer now hearing you speak in your turn. i submit, says balbus, and will be as brief as i possibly can; for as you have confuted the errors of epicurus, my part in the dispute will be the shorter. our sect divide the whole question concerning the immortal gods into four parts. first, they prove that there are gods; secondly, of what character and nature they are; thirdly, that the universe is governed by them; and, lastly, that they exercise a superintendence over human affairs. but in this present discussion let us confine ourselves to the first two articles, and defer the third and fourth till another opportunity, as they require more time to discuss. by no means, says cotta, for we have time enough on our hands; besides that, we are now discussing a subject which should be preferred even to serious business. ii. the first point, then, says lucilius, i think needs no discourse to prove it; for what can be so plain and evident, when we behold the heavens and contemplate the celestial bodies, as the existence of some supreme, divine intelligence, by which all these things are governed? were it otherwise, ennius would not, with a universal approbation, have said, look up to the refulgent heaven above, which all men call, unanimously, jove. this is jupiter, the governor of the world, who rules all things with his nod, and is, as the same ennius adds, ----of gods and men the sire,[ ] an omnipresent and omnipotent god. and if any one doubts this, i really do not understand why the same man may not also doubt whether there is a sun or not. for what can possibly be more evident than this? and if it were not a truth universally impressed on the minds of men, the belief in it would never have been so firm; nor would it have been, as it is, increased by length of years, nor would it have gathered strength and stability through every age. and, in truth, we see that other opinions, being false and groundless, have already fallen into oblivion by lapse of time. who now believes in hippocentaurs and chimæras? or what old woman is now to be found so weak and ignorant as to stand in fear of those infernal monsters which once so terrified mankind? for time destroys the fictions of error and opinion, while it confirms the determinations of nature and of truth. and therefore it is that, both among us and among other nations, sacred institutions and the divine worship of the gods have been strengthened and improved from time to time. and this is not to be imputed to chance or folly, but to the frequent appearance of the gods themselves. in the war with the latins, when a. posthumius, the dictator, attacked octavius mamilius, the tusculan, at regillus, castor and pollux were seen fighting in our army on horseback; and since that the same offspring of tyndarus gave notice of the defeat of perses; for as p. vatienus, the grandfather of the present young man of that name, was coming in the night to rome from his government of reate, two young men on white horses appeared to him, and told him that king[ ] perses was that day taken prisoner. this news he carried to the senate, who immediately threw him into prison for speaking inconsiderately on a state affair; but when it was confirmed by letters from paullus, he was recompensed by the senate with land and immunities.[ ] nor do we forget when the locrians defeated the people of crotone, in a great battle on the banks of the river sagra, that it was known the same day at the olympic games. the voices of the fauns have been often heard, and deities have appeared in forms so visible that they have compelled every one who is not senseless, or hardened in impiety, to confess the presence of the gods. iii. what do predictions and foreknowledge of future events indicate, but that such future events are shown, pointed out, portended, and foretold to men? from whence they are called omens, signs, portents, prodigies. but though we should esteem fabulous what is said of mopsus,[ ] tiresias,[ ] amphiaraus,[ ] calchas,[ ] and helenus[ ] (who would not have been delivered down to us as augurs even in fable if their art had been despised), may we not be sufficiently apprised of the power of the gods by domestic examples? will not the temerity of p. claudius, in the first punic war, affect us? who, when the poultry were let out of the coop and would not feed, ordered them to be thrown into the water, and, joking even upon the gods, said, with a sneer, "let them drink, since they will not eat;" which piece of ridicule, being followed by a victory over his fleet, cost him many tears, and brought great calamity on the roman people. did not his colleague junius, in the same war, lose his fleet in a tempest by disregarding the auspices? claudius, therefore, was condemned by the people, and junius killed himself. coelius says that p. flaminius, from his neglect of religion, fell at thrasimenus; a loss which the public severely felt. by these instances of calamity we may be assured that rome owes her grandeur and success to the conduct of those who were tenacious of their religious duties; and if we compare ourselves to our neighbors, we shall find that we are infinitely distinguished above foreign nations by our zeal for religious ceremonies, though in other things we may be only equal to them, and in other respects even inferior to them. ought we to contemn attius navius's staff, with which he divided the regions of the vine to find his sow?[ ] i should despise it, if i were not aware that king hostilius had carried on most important wars in deference to his auguries; but by the negligence of our nobility the discipline of the augury is now omitted, the truth of the auspices despised, and only a mere form observed; so that the most important affairs of the commonwealth, even the wars, on which the public safety depends, are conducted without any auspices; the peremnia[ ] are discussed; no part of the acumina[ ] performed; no select men are called to witness to the military testaments;[ ] our generals now begin their wars as soon as they have arranged the auspicia. the force of religion was so great among our ancestors that some of their commanders have, with their faces veiled, and with the solemn, formal expressions of religion, sacrificed themselves to the immortal gods to save their country.[ ] i could mention many of the sibylline prophecies, and many answers of the haruspices, to confirm those things, which ought not to be doubted. iv. for example: our augurs and the etrurian haruspices saw the truth of their art established when p. scipio and c. figulus were consuls; for as tiberius gracchus, who was a second time consul, wished to proceed to a fresh election, the first rogator,[ ] as he was collecting the suffrages, fell down dead on the spot. gracchus nevertheless went on with the assembly, but perceiving that this accident had a religious influence on the people, he brought the affair before the senate. the senate thought fit to refer it to those who usually took cognizance of such things. the haruspices were called, and declared that the man who had acted as rogator of the assembly had no right to do so; to which, as i have heard my father say, he replied with great warmth, have i no right, who am consul, and augur, and favored by the auspicia? and shall you, who are tuscans and barbarians, pretend that you have authority over the roman auspicia, and a right to give judgment in matters respecting the formality of our assemblies? therefore, he then commanded them to withdraw; but not long afterward he wrote from his province[ ] to the college of augurs, acknowledging that in reading the books[ ] he remembered that he had illegally chosen a place for his tent in the gardens of scipio, and had afterward entered the pomoerium, in order to hold a senate, but that in repassing the same pomoerium he had forgotten to take the auspices; and that, therefore, the consuls had been created informally. the augurs laid the case before the senate. the senate decreed that they should resign their charge, and so they accordingly abdicated. what greater example need we seek for? the wisest, perhaps the most excellent of men, chose to confess his fault, which he might have concealed, rather than leave the public the least atom of religious guilt; and the consuls chose to quit the highest office in the state, rather than fill it for a moment in defiance of religion. how great is the reputation of the augurs! and is not the art of the soothsayers divine? and must not every one who sees what innumerable instances of the same kind there are confess the existence of the gods? for they who have interpreters must certainly exist themselves; now, there are interpreters of the gods; therefore we must allow there are gods. but it may be said, perhaps, that all predictions are not accomplished. we may as well conclude there is no art of physic, because all sick persons do not recover. the gods show us signs of future events; if we are occasionally deceived in the results, it is not to be imputed to the nature of the gods, but to the conjectures of men. all nations agree that there are gods; the opinion is innate, and, as it were, engraved in the minds of all men. the only point in dispute among us is, what they are. v. their existence no one denies. cleanthes, one of our sect, imputes the way in which the idea of the gods is implanted in the minds of men to four causes. the first is that which i just now mentioned--the foreknowledge of future things. the second is the great advantages which we enjoy from the temperature of the air, the fertility of the earth, and the abundance of various benefits of other kinds. the third cause is deduced from the terror with which the mind is affected by thunder, tempests, storms, snow, hail, devastation, pestilence, earthquakes often attended with hideous noises, showers of stones, and rain like drops of blood; by rocks and sudden openings of the earth; by monstrous births of men and beasts; by meteors in the air, and blazing stars, by the greeks called _cometæ_, by us _crinitæ_, the appearance of which, in the late octavian war,[ ] were foreboders of great calamities; by two suns, which, as i have heard my father say, happened in the consulate of tuditanus and aquillius, and in which year also another sun (p. africanus) was extinguished. these things terrified mankind, and raised in them a firm belief of the existence of some celestial and divine power. his fourth cause, and that the strongest, is drawn from the regularity of the motion and revolution of the heavens, the distinctness, variety, beauty, and order of the sun, moon, and all the stars, the appearance only of which is sufficient to convince us they are not the effects of chance; as when we enter into a house, or school, or court, and observe the exact order, discipline, and method of it, we cannot suppose that it is so regulated without a cause, but must conclude that there is some one who commands, and to whom obedience is paid. it is quite impossible for us to avoid thinking that the wonderful motions, revolutions, and order of those many and great bodies, no part of which is impaired by the countless and infinite succession of ages, must be governed and directed by some supreme intelligent being. vi. chrysippus, indeed, had a very penetrating genius; yet such is the doctrine which he delivers, that he seems rather to have been instructed by nature than to owe it to any discovery of his own. "if," says he, "there is anything in the universe which no human reason, ability, or power can make, the being who produced it must certainly be preferable to man. now, celestial bodies, and all those things which proceed in any eternal order, cannot be made by man; the being who made them is therefore preferable to man. what, then, is that being but a god? if there be no such thing as a deity, what is there better than man, since he only is possessed of reason, the most excellent of all things? but it is a foolish piece of vanity in man to think there is nothing preferable to him. there is, therefore, something preferable; consequently, there is certainly a god." when you behold a large and beautiful house, surely no one can persuade you it was built for mice and weasels, though you do not see the master; and would it not, therefore, be most manifest folly to imagine that a world so magnificently adorned, with such an immense variety of celestial bodies of such exquisite beauty, and that the vast sizes and magnitude of the sea and land were intended as the abode of man, and not as the mansion of the immortal gods? do we not also plainly see this, that all the most elevated regions are the best, and that the earth is the lowest region, and is surrounded with the grossest air? so that as we perceive that in some cities and countries the capacities of men are naturally duller, from the thickness of the climate, so mankind in general are affected by the heaviness of the air which surrounds the earth, the grossest region of the world. yet even from this inferior intelligence of man we may discover the existence of some intelligent agent that is divine, and wiser than ourselves; for, as socrates says in xenophon, from whence had man his portion of understanding? and, indeed, if any one were to push his inquiries about the moisture and heat which is diffused through the human body, and the earthy kind of solidity existing in our entrails, and that soul by which we breathe, and to ask whence we derived them, it would be plain that we have received one thing from the earth, another from liquid, another from fire, and another from that air which we inhale every time that we breathe. vii. but where did we find that which excels all these things--i mean reason, or (if you please, in other terms) the mind, understanding, thought, prudence; and from whence did we receive it? shall the world be possessed of every other perfection, and be destitute of this one, which is the most important and valuable of all? but certainly there is nothing better, or more excellent, or more beautiful than the world; and not only there is nothing better, but we cannot even conceive anything superior to it; and if reason and wisdom are the greatest of all perfections, they must necessarily be a part of what we all allow to be the most excellent. who is not compelled to admit the truth of what i assert by that agreeable, uniform, and continued agreement of things in the universe? could the earth at one season be adorned with flowers, at another be covered with snow? or, if such a number of things regulated their own changes, could the approach and retreat of the sun in the summer and winter solstices be so regularly known and calculated? could the flux and reflux of the sea and the height of the tides be affected by the increase or wane of the moon? could the different courses of the stars be preserved by the uniform movement of the whole heaven? could these things subsist, i say, in such a harmony of all the parts of the universe without the continued influence of a divine spirit? if these points are handled in a free and copious manner, as i purpose to do, they will be less liable to the cavils of the academics; but the narrow, confined way in which zeno reasoned upon them laid them more open to objection; for as running streams are seldom or never tainted, while standing waters easily grow corrupt, so a fluency of expression washes away the censures of the caviller, while the narrow limits of a discourse which is too concise is almost defenceless; for the arguments which i am enlarging upon are thus briefly laid down by zeno: viii. "that which reasons is superior to that which does not; nothing is superior to the world; the world, therefore, reasons." by the same rule the world may be proved to be wise, happy, and eternal; for the possession of all these qualities is superior to the want of them; and nothing is superior to the world; the inevitable consequence of which argument is, that the world, therefore, is a deity. he goes on: "no part of anything void of sense is capable of perception; some parts of the world have perception; the world, therefore, has sense." he proceeds, and pursues the argument closely. "nothing," says he, "that is destitute itself of life and reason can generate a being possessed of life and reason; but the world does generate beings possessed of life and reason; the world, therefore, is not itself destitute of life and reason." he concludes his argument in his usual manner with a simile: "if well-tuned pipes should spring out of the olive, would you have the slightest doubt that there was in the olive-tree itself some kind of skill and knowledge? or if the plane-tree could produce harmonious lutes, surely you would infer, on the same principle, that music was contained in the plane-tree. why, then, should we not believe the world is a living and wise being, since it produces living and wise beings out of itself?" ix. but as i have been insensibly led into a length of discourse beyond my first design (for i said that, as the existence of the gods was evident to all, there was no need of any long oration to prove it), i will demonstrate it by reasons deduced from the nature of things. for it is a fact that all beings which take nourishment and increase contain in themselves a power of natural heat, without which they could neither be nourished nor increase. for everything which is of a warm and fiery character is agitated and stirred up by its own motion. but that which is nourished and grows is influenced by a certain regular and equable motion. and as long as this motion remains in us, so long does sense and life remain; but the moment that it abates and is extinguished, we ourselves decay and perish. by arguments like these, cleanthes shows how great is the power of heat in all bodies. he observes that there is no food so gross as not to be digested in a night and a day; and that even in the excrementitious parts, which nature rejects, there remains a heat. the veins and arteries seem, by their continual quivering, to resemble the agitation of fire; and it has often been observed when the heart of an animal is just plucked from the body that it palpitates with such visible motion as to resemble the rapidity of fire. everything, therefore, that has life, whether it be animal or vegetable, owes that life to the heat inherent in it; it is this nature of heat which contains in itself the vital power which extends throughout the whole world. this will appear more clearly on a more close explanation of this fiery quality, which pervades all things. every division, then, of the world (and i shall touch upon the most considerable) is sustained by heat; and first it may be observed in earthly substances that fire is produced from stones by striking or rubbing one against another; that "the warm earth smokes"[ ] when just turned up, and that water is drawn warm from well-springs; and this is most especially the case in the winter season, because there is a great quantity of heat contained in the caverns of the earth; and this becomes more dense in the winter, and on that account confines more closely the innate heat which is discoverable in the earth. x. it would require a long dissertation, and many reasons would require to be adduced, to show that all the seeds which the earth conceives, and all those which it contains having been generated from itself, and fixed in roots and trunks, derive all their origin and increase from the temperature and regulation of heat. and that even every liquor has a mixture of heat in it is plainly demonstrated by the effusion of water; for it would not congeal by cold, nor become solid, as ice or snow, and return again to its natural state, if it were not that, when heat is applied to it, it again becomes liquefied and dissolved, and so diffuses itself. therefore, by northern and other cold winds it is frozen and hardened, and in turn it dissolves and melts again by heat. the seas likewise, we find, when agitated by winds, grow warm, so that from this fact we may understand that there is heat included in that vast body of water; for we cannot imagine it to be external and adventitious heat, but such as is stirred up by agitation from the deep recesses of the seas; and the same thing takes place with respect to our bodies, which grow warm with motion and exercise. and the very air itself, which indeed is the coldest element, is by no means void of heat; for there is a great quantity, arising from the exhalations of water, which appears to be a sort of steam occasioned by its internal heat, like that of boiling liquors. the fourth part of the universe is entirely fire, and is the source of the salutary and vital heat which is found in the rest. from hence we may conclude that, as all parts of the world are sustained by heat, the world itself also has such a great length of time subsisted from the same cause; and so much the more, because we ought to understand that that hot and fiery principle is so diffused over universal nature that there is contained in it a power and cause of generation and procreation, from which all animate beings, and all those creatures of the vegetable world, the roots of which are contained in the earth, must inevitably derive their origin and their increase. xi. it is nature, consequently, that continues and preserves the world, and that, too, a nature which is not destitute of sense and reason; for in every essence that is not simple, but composed of several parts, there must be some predominant quality--as, for instance, the mind in man, and in beasts something resembling it, from which arise all the appetites and desires for anything. as for trees, and all the vegetable produce of the earth, it is thought to be in their roots. i call that the predominant quality,[ ] which the greeks call [greek: hêgemonikon]; which must and ought to be the most excellent quality, wherever it is found. that, therefore, in which the prevailing quality of all nature resides must be the most excellent of all things, and most worthy of the power and pre-eminence over all things. now, we see that there is nothing in being that is not a part of the universe; and as there are sense and reason in the parts of it, there must therefore be these qualities, and these, too, in a more energetic and powerful degree, in that part in which the predominant quality of the world is found. the world, therefore, must necessarily be possessed of wisdom; and that element, which embraces all things, must excel in perfection of reason. the world, therefore, is a god, and the whole power of the world is contained in that divine element. the heat also of the world is more pure, clear, and lively, and, consequently, better adapted to move the senses than the heat allotted to us; and it vivifies and preserves all things within the compass of our knowledge. it is absurd, therefore, to say that the world, which is endued with a perfect, free, pure, spirituous, and active heat, is not sensitive, since by this heat men and beasts are preserved, and move, and think; more especially since this heat of the world is itself the sole principle of agitation, and has no external impulse, but is moved spontaneously; for what can be more powerful than the world, which moves and raises that heat by which it subsists? xii. for let us listen to plato, who is regarded as a god among philosophers. he says that there are two sorts of motion, one innate and the other external; and that that which is moved spontaneously is more divine than that which is moved by another power. this self-motion he places in the mind alone, and concludes that the first principle of motion is derived from the mind. therefore, since all motion arises from the heat of the world, and that heat is not moved by the effect of any external impulse, but of its own accord, it must necessarily be a mind; from whence it follows that the world is animated. on such reasoning is founded this opinion, that the world is possessed of understanding, because it certainly has more perfections in itself than any other nature; for as there is no part of our bodies so considerable as the whole of us, so it is clear that there is no particular portion of the universe equal in magnitude to the whole of it; from whence it follows that wisdom must be an attribute of the world; otherwise man, who is a part of it, and possessed of reason, would be superior to the entire world. and thus, if we proceed from the first rude, unfinished natures to the most superior and perfect ones, we shall inevitably come at last to the nature of the gods. for, in the first place, we observe that those vegetables which are produced out of the earth are supported by nature, and she gives them no further supply than is sufficient to preserve them by nourishing them and making them grow. to beasts she has given sense and motion, and a faculty which directs them to what is wholesome, and prompts them to shun what is noxious to them. on man she has conferred a greater portion of her favor; inasmuch as she has added reason, by which he is enabled to command his passions, to moderate some, and to subdue others. xiii. in the fourth and highest degree are those beings which are naturally wise and good, who from the first moment of their existence are possessed of right and consistent reason, which we must consider superior to man and deserving to be attributed to a god; that is to say, to the world, in which it is inevitable that that perfect and complete reason should be inherent. nor is it possible that it should be said with justice that there is any arrangement of things in which there cannot be something entire and perfect. for as in a vine or in beasts we see that nature, if not prevented by some superior violence, proceeds by her own appropriate path to her destined end; and as in painting, architecture, and the other arts there is a point of perfection which is attainable, and occasionally attained, so it is even much more necessary that in universal nature there must be some complete and perfect result arrived at. many external accidents may happen to all other natures which may impede their progress to perfection, but nothing can hinder universal nature, because she is herself the ruler and governor of all other natures. that, therefore, must be the fourth and most elevated degree to which no other power can approach. but this degree is that on which the nature of all things is placed; and since she is possessed of this, and she presides over all things, and is subject to no possible impediment, the world must necessarily be an intelligent and even a wise being. but how marvellously great is the ignorance of those men who dispute the perfection of that nature which encircles all things; or who, allowing it to be infinitely perfect, yet deny it to be, in the first place, animated, then reasonable, and, lastly, prudent and wise! for how without these qualities could it be infinitely perfect? if it were like vegetables, or even like beasts, there would be no more reason for thinking it extremely good than extremely bad; and if it were possessed of reason, and had not wisdom from the beginning, the world would be in a worse condition than man; for man may grow wise, but the world, if it were destitute of wisdom through an infinite space of time past, could never acquire it. thus it would be worse than man. but as that is absurd to imagine, the world must be esteemed wise from all eternity, and consequently a deity: since there is nothing existing that is not defective, except the universe, which is well provided, and fully complete and perfect in all its numbers and parts. xiv. for chrysippus says, very acutely, that as the case is made for the buckler, and the scabbard for the sword, so all things, except the universe, were made for the sake of something else. as, for instance, all those crops and fruits which the earth produces were made for the sake of animals, and animals for man; as, the horse for carrying, the ox for the plough, the dog for hunting and for a guard. but man himself was born to contemplate and imitate the world, being in no wise perfect, but, if i may so express myself, a particle of perfection; but the world, as it comprehends all, and as nothing exists that is not contained in it, is entirely perfect. in what, therefore, can it be defective, since it is perfect? it cannot want understanding and reason, for they are the most desirable of all qualities. the same chrysippus observes also, by the use of similitudes, that everything in its kind, when arrived at maturity and perfection, is superior to that which is not--as, a horse to a colt, a dog to a puppy, and a man to a boy--so whatever is best in the whole universe must exist in some complete and perfect being. but nothing is more perfect than the world, and nothing better than virtue. virtue, therefore, is an attribute of the world. but human nature is not perfect, and nevertheless virtue is produced in it: with how much greater reason, then, do we conceive it to be inherent in the world! therefore the world has virtue, and it is also wise, and consequently a deity. xv. the divinity of the world being now clearly perceived, we must acknowledge the same divinity to be likewise in the stars, which are formed from the lightest and purest part of the ether, without a mixture of any other matter; and, being altogether hot and transparent, we may justly say they have life, sense, and understanding. and cleanthes thinks that it may be established by the evidence of two of our senses--feeling and seeing--that they are entirely fiery bodies; for the heat and brightness of the sun far exceed any other fire, inasmuch as it enlightens the whole universe, covering such a vast extent of space, and its power is such that we perceive that it not only warms, but often even burns: neither of which it could do if it were not of a fiery quality. since, then, says he, the sun is a fiery body, and is nourished by the vapors of the ocean (for no fire can continue without some sustenance), it must be either like that fire which we use to warm us and dress our food, or like that which is contained in the bodies of animals. and this fire, which the convenience of life requires, is the devourer and consumer of everything, and throws into confusion and destroys whatever it reaches. on the contrary, the corporeal heat is full of life, and salutary; and vivifies, preserves, cherishes, increases, and sustains all things, and is productive of sense; therefore, says he, there can be no doubt which of these fires the sun is like, since it causes all things in their respective kinds to flourish and arrive to maturity; and as the fire of the sun is like that which is contained in the bodies of animated beings, the sun itself must likewise be animated, and so must the other stars also, which arise out of the celestial ardor that we call the sky, or firmament. as, then, some animals are generated in the earth, some in the water, and some in the air, aristotle[ ] thinks it ridiculous to imagine that no animal is formed in that part of the universe which is the most capable to produce them. but the stars are situated in the ethereal space; and as this is an element the most subtle, whose motion is continual, and whose force does not decay, it follows, of necessity, that every animated being which is produced in it must be endowed with the quickest sense and the swiftest motion. the stars, therefore, being there generated, it is a natural inference to suppose them endued with such a degree of sense and understanding as places them in the rank of gods. xvi. for it may be observed that they who inhabit countries of a pure, clear air have a quicker apprehension and a readier genius than those who live in a thick, foggy climate. it is thought likewise that the nature of a man's diet has an effect on the mind; therefore it is probable that the stars are possessed of an excellent understanding, inasmuch as they are situated in the ethereal part of the universe, and are nourished by the vapors of the earth and sea, which are purified by their long passage to the heavens. but the invariable order and regular motion of the stars plainly manifest their sense and understanding; for all motion which seems to be conducted with reason and harmony supposes an intelligent principle, that does not act blindly, or inconsistently, or at random. and this regularity and consistent course of the stars from all eternity indicates not any natural order, for it is pregnant with sound reason, not fortune (for fortune, being a friend to change, despises consistency). it follows, therefore, that they move spontaneously by their own sense and divinity. aristotle also deserves high commendation for his observation that everything that moves is either put in motion by natural impulse, or by some external force, or of its own accord; and that the sun, and moon, and all the stars move; but that those things which are moved by natural impulse are either borne downward by their weight, or upward by their lightness; neither of which things could be the case with the stars, because they move in a regular circle and orbit. nor can it be said that there is some superior force which causes the stars to be moved in a manner contrary to nature. for what superior force can there be? it follows, therefore, that their motion must be voluntary. and whoever is convinced of this must discover not only great ignorance, but great impiety likewise, if he denies the existence of the gods; nor is the difference great whether a man denies their existence, or deprives them of all design and action; for whatever is wholly inactive seems to me not to exist at all. their existence, therefore, appears so plain that i can scarcely think that man in his senses who denies it. xvii. it now remains that we consider what is the character of the gods. nothing is more difficult than to divert our thoughts and judgment from the information of our corporeal sight, and the view of objects which our eyes are accustomed to; and it is this difficulty which has had such an influence on the unlearned, and on philosophers[ ] also who resembled the unlearned multitude, that they have been unable to form any idea of the immortal gods except under the clothing of the human figure; the weakness of which opinion cotta has so well confuted that i need not add my thoughts upon it. but as the previous idea which we have of the deity comprehends two things--first of all, that he is an animated being; secondly, that there is nothing in all nature superior to him--i do not see what can be more consistent with this idea and preconception than to attribute a mind and divinity to the world,[ ] the most excellent of all beings. epicurus may be as merry with this notion as he pleases; a man not the best qualified for a joker, as not having the wit and sense of his country.[ ] let him say that a voluble round deity is to him incomprehensible; yet he shall never dissuade me from a principle which he himself approves, for he is of opinion there are gods when he allows that there must be a nature excellently perfect. but it is certain that the world is most excellently perfect: nor is it to be doubted that whatever has life, sense, reason, and understanding must excel that which is destitute of these things. it follows, then, that the world has life, sense, reason, and understanding, and is consequently a deity. but this shall soon be made more manifest by the operation of these very things which the world causes. xviii. in the mean while, velleius, let me entreat you not to be always saying that we are utterly destitute of every sort of learning. the cone, you say, the cylinder, and the pyramid, are more beautiful to you than the sphere. this is to have different eyes from other men. but suppose they are more beautiful to the sight only, which does not appear to me, for i can see nothing more beautiful than that figure which contains all others, and which has nothing rough in it, nothing offensive, nothing cut into angles, nothing broken, nothing swelling, and nothing hollow; yet as there are two forms most esteemed,[ ] the globe in solids (for so the greek word [greek: sphaira], i think, should be construed), and the circle, or orb, in planes (in greek, [greek: kyklos]); and as they only have an exact similitude of parts in which every extreme is equally distant from the centre, what can we imagine in nature to be more just and proper? but if you have never raked into this learned dust[ ] to find out these things, surely, at all events, you natural philosophers must know that equality of motion and invariable order could not be preserved in any other figure. nothing, therefore, can be more illiterate than to assert, as you are in the habit of doing, that it is doubtful whether the world is round or not, because it may possibly be of another shape, and that there are innumerable worlds of different forms; which epicurus, if he ever had learned that two and two are equal to four, would not have said. but while he judges of what is best by his palate, he does not look up to the "palace of heaven," as ennius calls it. xix. for as there are two sorts of stars,[ ] one kind of which measure their journey from east to west by immutable stages, never in the least varying from their usual course, while the other completes a double revolution with an equally constant regularity; from each of these facts we demonstrate the volubility of the world (which could not possibly take place in any but a globular form) and the circular orbits of the stars. and first of all the sun, which has the chief rank among all the stars, is moved in such a manner that it fills the whole earth with its light, and illuminates alternately one part of the earth, while it leaves the other in darkness. the shadow of the earth interposing causes night; and the intervals of night are equal to those of day. and it is the regular approaches and retreats of the sun from which arise the regulated degrees of cold and heat. his annual circuit is in three hundred and sixty-five days, and nearly six hours more.[ ] at one time he bends his course to the north, at another to the south, and thus produces summer and winter, with the other two seasons, one of which succeeds the decline of winter, and the other that of summer. and so to these four changes of the seasons we attribute the origin and cause of all the productions both of sea and land. the moon completes the same course every month which the sun does in a year. the nearer she approaches to the sun, the dimmer light does she yield, and when most remote from it she shines with the fullest brilliancy; nor are her figure and form only changed in her wane, but her situation likewise, which is sometimes in the north and sometimes in the south. by this course she has a sort of summer and winter solstices; and by her influence she contributes to the nourishment and increase of animated beings, and to the ripeness and maturity of all vegetables. xx. but most worthy our admiration is the motion of those five stars which are falsely called wandering stars; for they cannot be said to wander which keep from all eternity their approaches and retreats, and have all the rest of their motions, in one regular constant and established order. what is yet more wonderful in these stars which we are speaking of is that sometimes they appear, and sometimes they disappear; sometimes they advance towards the sun, and sometimes they retreat; sometimes they precede him, and sometimes follow him; sometimes they move faster, sometimes slower, and sometimes they do not stir in the least, but for a while stand still. from these unequal motions of the planets, mathematicians have called that the "great year"[ ] in which the sun, moon, and five wandering stars, having finished their revolutions, are found in their original situation. in how long a time this is effected is much disputed, but it must be a certain and definite period. for the planet saturn (called by the greeks [greek: phainon]), which is farthest from the earth, finishes his course in about thirty years; and in his course there is something very singular, for sometimes he moves before the sun, sometimes he keeps behind it; at one time lying hidden in the night, at another again appearing in the morning; and ever performing the same motions in the same space of time without any alteration, so as to be for infinite ages regular in these courses. beneath this planet, and nearer the earth, is jupiter, called [greek: phaethôn], which passes the same orbit of the twelve signs[ ] in twelve years, and goes through exactly the same variety in its course that the star of saturn does. next to jupiter is the planet mars (in greek, [greek: pyroeis]), which finishes its revolution through the same orbit as the two previously mentioned,[ ] in twenty-four months, wanting six days, as i imagine. below this is mercury (called by the greeks [greek: stilbôn]), which performs the same course in little less than a year, and is never farther distant from the sun than the space of one sign, whether it precedes or follows it. the lowest of the five planets, and nearest the earth, is that of venus (called in greek [greek: phôsphoros]). before the rising of the sun, it is called the morning-star, and after the setting, the evening-star. it has the same revolution through the zodiac, both as to latitude and longitude, with the other planets, in a year, and never is more than two[ ] signs from the sun, whether it precedes or follows it. xxi. i cannot, therefore, conceive that this constant course of the planets, this just agreement in such various motions through all eternity, can be preserved without a mind, reason, and consideration; and since we may perceive these qualities in the stars, we cannot but place them in the rank of gods. those which are called the fixed stars have the same indications of reason and prudence. their motion is daily, regular, and constant. they do not move with the sky, nor have they an adhesion to the firmament, as they who are ignorant of natural philosophy affirm. for the sky, which is thin, transparent, and suffused with an equal heat, does not seem by its nature to have power to whirl about the stars, or to be proper to contain them. the fixed stars, therefore, have their own sphere, separate and free from any conjunction with the sky. their perpetual courses, with that admirable and incredible regularity of theirs, so plainly declare a divine power and mind to be in them, that he who cannot perceive that they are also endowed with divine power must be incapable of all perception whatever. in the heavens, therefore, there is nothing fortuitous, unadvised, inconstant, or variable: all there is order, truth, reason, and constancy; and all the things which are destitute of these qualities are counterfeit, deceitful, and erroneous, and have their residence about the earth[ ] beneath the moon, the lowest of all the planets. he, therefore, who believes that this admirable order and almost incredible regularity of the heavenly bodies, by which the preservation and entire safety of all things is secured, is destitute of intelligence, must be considered to be himself wholly destitute of all intellect whatever. i think, then, i shall not deceive myself in maintaining this dispute upon the principle of zeno, who went the farthest in his search after truth. xxii. zeno, then, defines nature to be "an artificial fire, proceeding in a regular way to generation;" for he thinks that to create and beget are especial properties of art, and that whatever may be wrought by the hands of our artificers is much more skilfully performed by nature, that is, by this artificial fire, which is the master of all other arts. according to this manner of reasoning, every particular nature is artificial, as it operates agreeably to a certain method peculiar to itself; but that universal nature which embraces all things is said by zeno to be not only artificial, but absolutely the artificer, ever thinking and providing all things useful and proper; and as every particular nature owes its rise and increase to its own proper seed, so universal nature has all her motions voluntary, has affections and desires (by the greeks called [greek: hormas]) productive of actions agreeable to them, like us, who have sense and understanding to direct us. such, then, is the intelligence of the universe; for which reason it may be properly termed prudence or providence (in greek, [greek: pronoia]), since her chiefest care and employment is to provide all things fit for its duration, that it may want nothing, and, above all, that it may be adorned with all perfection of beauty and ornament. xxiii. thus far have i spoken concerning the universe, and also of the stars; from whence it is apparent that there is almost an infinite number of gods, always in action, but without labor or fatigue; for they are not composed of veins, nerves, and bones; their food and drink are not such as cause humors too gross or too subtle; nor are their bodies such as to be subject to the fear of falls or blows, or in danger of diseases from a weariness of limbs. epicurus, to secure his gods from such accidents, has made them only outlines of deities, void of action; but our gods being of the most beautiful form, and situated in the purest region of the heavens, dispose and rule their course in such a manner that they seem to contribute to the support and preservation of all things. besides these, there are many other natures which have with reason been deified by the wisest grecians, and by our ancestors, in consideration of the benefits derived from them; for they were persuaded that whatever was of great utility to human kind must proceed from divine goodness, and the name of the deity was applied to that which the deity produced, as when we call corn ceres, and wine bacchus; whence that saying of terence,[ ] without ceres and bacchus, venus starves. and any quality, also, in which there was any singular virtue was nominated a deity, such as faith and wisdom, which are placed among the divinities in the capitol; the last by Æmilius scaurus, but faith was consecrated before by atilius calatinus. you see the temple of virtue and that of honor repaired by m. marcellus, erected formerly, in the ligurian war, by q. maximus. need i mention those dedicated to help, safety, concord, liberty, and victory, which have been called deities, because their efficacy has been so great that it could not have proceeded from any but from some divine power? in like manner are the names of cupid, voluptas, and of lubentine venus consecrated, though they were things vicious and not natural, whatever velleius may think to the contrary, for they frequently stimulate nature in too violent a manner. everything, then, from which any great utility proceeded was deified; and, indeed, the names i have just now mentioned are declaratory of the particular virtue of each deity. xxiv. it has been a general custom likewise, that men who have done important service to the public should be exalted to heaven by fame and universal consent. thus hercules, castor and pollux, Æsculapius, and liber became gods (i mean liber[ ] the son of semele, and not him[ ] whom our ancestors consecrated in such state and solemnity with ceres and libera; the difference in which may be seen in our mysteries.[ ] but because the offsprings of our bodies are called "liberi" (children), therefore the offsprings of ceres are called liber and libera (libera[ ] is the feminine, and liber the masculine); thus likewise romulus, or quirinus--for they are thought to be the same--became a god. they are justly esteemed as deities, since their souls subsist and enjoy eternity, from whence they are perfect and immortal beings. there is another reason, too, and that founded on natural philosophy, which has greatly contributed to the number of deities; namely, the custom of representing in human form a crowd of gods who have supplied the poets with fables, and filled mankind with all sorts of superstition. zeno has treated of this subject, but it has been discussed more at length by cleanthes and chrysippus. all greece was of opinion that coelum was castrated by his son saturn,[ ] and that saturn was chained by his son jupiter. in these impious fables, a physical and not inelegant meaning is contained; for they would denote that the celestial, most exalted, and ethereal nature--that is, the fiery nature, which produces all things by itself--is destitute of that part of the body which is necessary for the act of generation by conjunction with another. xxv. by saturn they mean that which comprehends the course and revolution of times and seasons; the greek name for which deity implies as much, for he is called [greek: kronos,] which is the same with [greek: chronos], that is, a "space of time." but he is called saturn, because he is filled (_saturatur_) with years; and he is usually feigned to have devoured his children, because time, ever insatiable, consumes the rolling years; but to restrain him from immoderate haste, jupiter has confined him to the course of the stars, which are as chains to him. jupiter (that is, _juvans pater_) signifies a "helping father," whom, by changing the cases, we call jove,[ ] _a juvando_. the poets call him "father of gods and men;"[ ] and our ancestors "the most good, the most great;" and as there is something more glorious in itself, and more agreeable to others, to be good (that is, beneficent) than to be great, the title of "most good" precedes that of "most great." this, then, is he whom ennius means in the following passage, before quoted-- look up to the refulgent heaven above, which all men call, unanimously, jove: which is more plainly expressed than in this other passage[ ] of the same poet-- on whose account i'll curse that flood of light, whate'er it is above that shines so bright. our augurs also mean the same, when, for the "thundering and lightning heaven," they say the "thundering and lightning jove." euripides, among many excellent things, has this: the vast, expanded, boundless sky behold, see it with soft embrace the earth enfold; this own the chief of deities above, and this acknowledge by the name of jove. xxvi. the air, according to the stoics, which is between the sea and the heaven, is consecrated by the name of juno, and is called the sister and wife of jove, because it resembles the sky, and is in close conjunction with it. they have made it feminine, because there is nothing softer. but i believe it is called juno, _a juvando_ (from helping). to make three separate kingdoms, by fable, there remained yet the water and the earth. the dominion of the sea is given, therefore, to neptune, a brother, as he is called, of jove; whose name, neptunus--as _portunus, a portu_, from a port--is derived _a nando_ (from swimming), the first letters being a little changed. the sovereignty and power over the earth is the portion of a god, to whom we, as well as the greeks, have given a name that denotes riches (in latin, _dis_; in greek, [greek: ploutôn]), because all things arise from the earth and return to it. he forced away proserpine (in greek called [greek: persephonê]), by which the poets mean the "seed of corn," from whence comes their fiction of ceres, the mother of proserpine, seeking for her daughter, who was hidden from her. she is called ceres, which is the same as geres--_a gerendis frugibus_[ ]--"from bearing fruit," the first letter of the word being altered after the manner of the greeks, for by them she is called [greek: dêmêtêr], the same as [greek: gêmêtêr].[ ] again, he (_qui magna vorteret_) "who brings about mighty changes" is called mavors; and minerva is so called because (_minueret_, or _minaretur_) she diminishes or menaces. xxvii. and as the beginnings and endings of all things are of the greatest importance, therefore they would have their sacrifices to begin with janus.[ ] his name is derived _ab eundo_, from passing; from whence thorough passages are called _jani_, and the outward doors of common houses are called _januæ_. the name of vesta is, from the greeks, the same with their [greek: hestia]. her province is over altars and hearths; and in the name of this goddess, who is the keeper of all things within, prayers and sacrifices are concluded. the _dii penates_, "household gods," have some affinity with this power, and are so called either from _penus_, "all kind of human provisions," or because _penitus insident_ (they reside within), from which, by the poets, they are called _penetrales_ also. apollo, a greek name, is called _sol_, the sun; and diana, _luna_, the moon. the sun (_sol_) is so named either because he is _solus_ (alone), so eminent above all the stars; or because he obscures all the stars, and appears alone as soon as he rises. _luna_, the moon, is so called _a lucendo_ (from shining); she bears the name also of lucina: and as in greece the women in labor invoke diana lucifera, so here they invoke juno lucina. she is likewise called diana _omnivaga_, not _a venando_ (from hunting), but because she is reckoned one of the seven stars that seem to wander.[ ] she is called diana because she makes a kind of day of the night;[ ] and presides over births, because the delivery is effected sometimes in seven, or at most in nine, courses of the moon; which, because they make _mensa spatia_ (measured spaces), are called _menses_ (months). this occasioned a pleasant observation of timæus (as he has many). having said in his history that "the same night in which alexander was born, the temple of diana at ephesus was burned down," he adds, "it is not in the least to be wondered at, because diana, being willing to assist at the labor of olympias,[ ] was absent from home." but to this goddess, because _ad res omnes veniret_--"she has an influence upon all things"--we have given the appellation of venus,[ ] from whom the word _venustas_ (beauty) is rather derived than venus from _venustas_. xxviii. do you not see, therefore, how, from the productions of nature and the useful inventions of men, have arisen fictitious and imaginary deities, which have been the foundation of false opinions, pernicious errors, and wretched superstitions? for we know how the different forms of the gods--their ages, apparel, ornaments; their pedigrees, marriages, relations, and everything belonging to them--are adapted to human weakness and represented with our passions; with lust, sorrow, and anger, according to fabulous history: they have had wars and combats, not only, as homer relates, when they have interested themselves in two different armies, but when they have fought battles in their own defence against the titans and giants. these stories, of the greatest weakness and levity, are related and believed with the most implicit folly. but, rejecting these fables with contempt, a deity is diffused in every part of nature; in earth under the name of ceres, in the sea under the name of neptune, in other parts under other names. yet whatever they are, and whatever characters and dispositions they have, and whatever name custom has given them, we are bound to worship and adore them. the best, the chastest, the most sacred and pious worship of the gods is to reverence them always with a pure, perfect, and unpolluted mind and voice; for our ancestors, as well as the philosophers, have separated superstition from religion. they who prayed whole days and sacrificed, that their children might survive them (_ut superstites essent_), were called superstitious, which word became afterward more general; but they who diligently perused, and, as we may say, read or practised over again, all the duties relating to the worship of the gods, were called _religiosi_--religious, from _relegendo_--"reading over again, or practising;" as _elegantes_, elegant, _ex eligendo_, "from choosing, making a good choice;" _diligentes_, diligent, _ex diligendo_, "from attending on what we love;" _intelligentes_, intelligent, from understanding--for the signification is derived in the same manner. thus are the words superstitious and religious understood; the one being a term of reproach, the other of commendation. i think i have now sufficiently demonstrated that there are gods, and what they are. xxix. i am now to show that the world is governed by the providence of the gods. this is an important point, which you academics endeavor to confound; and, indeed, the whole contest is with you, cotta; for your sect, velleius, know very little of what is said on different subjects by other schools. you read and have a taste only for your own books, and condemn all others without examination. for instance, when you mentioned yesterday[ ] that prophetic old dame [greek: pronoia], providence, invented by the stoics, you were led into that error by imagining that providence was made by them to be a particular deity that governs the whole universe, whereas it is only spoken in a short manner; as when it is said "the commonwealth of athens is governed by the council," it is meant "of the areopagus;"[ ] so when we say "the world is governed by providence," we mean "by the providence of the gods." to express ourselves, therefore, more fully and clearly, we say, "the world is governed by the providence of the gods." be not, therefore, lavish of your railleries, of which your sect has little to spare: if i may advise you, do not attempt it. it does not become you, it is not your talent, nor is it in your power. this is not applied to you in particular who have the education and politeness of a roman, but to all your sect in general, and especially to your leader[ ]--a man unpolished, illiterate, insulting, without wit, without reputation, without elegance. xxx. i assert, then, that the universe, with all its parts, was originally constituted, and has, without any cessation, been ever governed by the providence of the gods. this argument we stoics commonly divide into three parts; the first of which is, that the existence of the gods being once known, it must follow that the world is governed by their wisdom; the second, that as everything is under the direction of an intelligent nature, which has produced that beautiful order in the world, it is evident that it is formed from animating principles; the third is deduced from those glorious works which we behold in the heavens and the earth. first, then, we must either deny the existence of the gods (as democritus and epicurus by their doctrine of images in some sort do), or, if we acknowledge that there are gods, we must believe they are employed, and that, too, in something excellent. now, nothing is so excellent as the administration of the universe. the universe, therefore, is governed by the wisdom of the gods. otherwise, we must imagine that there is some cause superior to the deity, whether it be a nature inanimate, or a necessity agitated by a mighty force, that produces those beautiful works which we behold. the nature of the gods would then be neither supreme nor excellent, if you subject it to that necessity or to that nature, by which you would make the heaven, the earth, and the seas to be governed. but there is nothing superior to the deity; the world, therefore, must be governed by him: consequently, the deity is under no obedience or subjection to nature, but does himself rule over all nature. in effect, if we allow the gods have understanding, we allow also their providence, which regards the most important things; for, can they be ignorant of those important things, and how they are to be conducted and preserved, or do they want power to sustain and direct them? ignorance is inconsistent with the nature of the gods, and imbecility is repugnant to their majesty. from whence it follows, as we assert, that the world is governed by the providence of the gods. xxxi. but supposing, which is incontestable, that there are gods, they must be animated, and not only animated, but endowed with reason--united, as we may say, in a civil agreement and society, and governing together one universe, as a republic or city. thus the same reason, the same verity, the same law, which ordains good and prohibits evil, exists in the gods as it does in men. from them, consequently, we have prudence and understanding, for which reason our ancestors erected temples to the mind, faith, virtue, and concord. shall we not then allow the gods to have these perfections, since we worship the sacred and august images of them? but if understanding, faith, virtue, and concord reside in human kind, how could they come on earth, unless from heaven? and if we are possessed of wisdom, reason, and prudence, the gods must have the same qualities in a greater degree; and not only have them, but employ them in the best and greatest works. the universe is the best and greatest work; therefore it must be governed by the wisdom and providence of the gods. lastly, as we have sufficiently shown that those glorious and luminous bodies which we behold are deities--i mean the sun, the moon, the fixed and wandering stars, the firmament, and the world itself, and those other things also which have any singular virtue, and are of any great utility to human kind--it follows that all things are governed by providence and a divine mind. but enough has been said on the first part. xxxii. it is now incumbent on me to prove that all things are subjected to nature, and most beautifully directed by her. but, first of all, it is proper to explain precisely what that nature is, in order to come to the more easy understanding of what i would demonstrate. some think that nature is a certain irrational power exciting in bodies the necessary motions. others, that it is an intelligent power, acting by order and method, designing some end in every cause, and always aiming at that end, whose works express such skill as no art, no hand, can imitate; for, they say, such is the virtue of its seed, that, however small it is, if it falls into a place proper for its reception, and meets with matter conducive to its nourishment and increase, it forms and produces everything in its respective kind; either vegetables, which receive their nourishment from their roots; or animals, endowed with motion, sense, appetite, and abilities to beget their likeness. some apply the word nature to everything; as epicurus does, who acknowledges no cause, but atoms, a vacuum, and their accidents. but when we[ ] say that nature forms and governs the world, we do not apply it to a clod of earth, or piece of stone, or anything of that sort, whose parts have not the necessary cohesion,[ ] but to a tree, in which there is not the appearance of chance, but of order and a resemblance of art. xxxiii. but if the art of nature gives life and increase to vegetables, without doubt it supports the earth itself; for, being impregnated with seeds, she produces every kind of vegetable, and embracing their roots, she nourishes and increases them; while, in her turn, she receives her nourishment from the other elements, and by her exhalations gives proper sustenance to the air, the sky, and all the superior bodies. if nature gives vigor and support to the earth, by the same reason she has an influence over the rest of the world; for as the earth gives nourishment to vegetables, so the air is the preservation of animals. the air sees with us, hears with us, and utters sounds with us; without it, there would be no seeing, hearing, or sounding. it even moves with us; for wherever we go, whatever motion we make, it seems to retire and give place to us. that which inclines to the centre, that which rises from it to the surface, and that which rolls about the centre, constitute the universal world, and make one entire nature; and as there are four sorts of bodies, the continuance of nature is caused by their reciprocal changes; for the water arises from the earth, the air from the water, and the fire from the air; and, reversing this order, the air arises from fire, the water from the air, and from the water the earth, the lowest of the four elements, of which all beings are formed. thus by their continual motions backward and forward, upward and downward, the conjunction of the several parts of the universe is preserved; a union which, in the beauty we now behold it, must be eternal, or at least of a very long duration, and almost for an infinite space of time; and, whichever it is, the universe must of consequence be governed by nature. for what art of navigating fleets, or of marshalling an army, and--to instance the produce of nature--what vine, what tree, what animated form and conformation of their members, give us so great an indication of skill as appears in the universe? therefore we must either deny that there is the least trace of an intelligent nature, or acknowledge that the world is governed by it. but since the universe contains all particular beings, as well as their seeds, can we say that it is not itself governed by nature? that would be the same as saying that the teeth and the beard of man are the work of nature, but that the man himself is not. thus the effect would be understood to be greater than the cause. xxxiv. now, the universe sows, as i may say, plants, produces, raises, nourishes, and preserves what nature administers, as members and parts of itself. if nature, therefore, governs them, she must also govern the universe. and, lastly, in nature's administration there is nothing faulty. she produced the best possible effect out of those elements which existed. let any one show how it could have been better. but that can never be; and whoever attempts to mend it will either make it worse, or aim at impossibilities. but if all the parts of the universe are so constituted that nothing could be better for use or beauty, let us consider whether this is the effect of chance, or whether, in such a state they could possibly cohere, but by the direction of wisdom and divine providence. nature, therefore, cannot be void of reason, if art can bring nothing to perfection without it, and if the works of nature exceed those of art. how is it consistent with common-sense that when you view an image or a picture, you imagine it is wrought by art; when you behold afar off a ship under sail, you judge it is steered by reason and art; when you see a dial or water-clock,[ ] you believe the hours are shown by art, and not by chance; and yet that you should imagine that the universe, which contains all arts and the artificers, can be void of reason and understanding? but if that sphere which was lately made by our friend posidonius, the regular revolutions of which show the course of the sun, moon, and five wandering stars, as it is every day and night performed, were carried into scythia or britain, who, in those barbarous countries, would doubt that that sphere had been made so perfect by the exertion of reason? xxxv. yet these people[ ] doubt whether the universe, from whence all things arise and are made, is not the effect of chance, or some necessity, rather than the work of reason and a divine mind. according to them, archimedes shows more knowledge in representing the motions of the celestial globe than nature does in causing them, though the copy is so infinitely beneath the original. the shepherd in attius,[ ] who had never seen a ship, when he perceived from a mountain afar off the divine vessel of the argonauts, surprised and frighted at this new object, expressed himself in this manner: what horrid bulk is that before my eyes, which o'er the deep with noise and vigor flies? it turns the whirlpools up, its force so strong, and drives the billows as it rolls along. the ocean's violence it fiercely braves; runs furious on, and throws about the waves. swiftly impetuous in its course, and loud, like the dire bursting of a show'ry cloud; or, like a rock, forced by the winds and rain, now whirl'd aloft, then plunged into the main. but hold! perhaps the earth and neptune jar, and fiercely wage an elemental war; or triton with his trident has o'erthrown his den, and loosen'd from the roots the stone; the rocky fragment, from the bottom torn, is lifted up, and on the surface borne. at first he is in suspense at the sight of this unknown object; but on seeing the young mariners, and hearing their singing, he says, like sportive dolphins, with their snouts they roar;[ ] and afterward goes on, loud in my ears methinks their voices ring, as if i heard the god sylvanus sing. as at first view the shepherd thinks he sees something inanimate and insensible, but afterward, judging by more trustworthy indications, he begins to figure to himself what it is; so philosophers, if they are surprised at first at the sight of the universe, ought, when they have considered the regular, uniform, and immutable motions of it, to conceive that there is some being that is not only an inhabitant of this celestial and divine mansion, but a ruler and a governor, as architect of this mighty fabric. xxxvi. now, in my opinion, they[ ] do not seem to have even the least suspicion that the heavens and earth afford anything marvellous. for, in the first place, the earth is situated in the middle part of the universe, and is surrounded on all sides by the air, which we breathe, and which is called "aer,"[ ] which, indeed, is a greek word; but by constant use it is well understood by our countrymen, for, indeed, it is employed as a latin word. the air is encompassed by the boundless ether (sky), which consists of the fires above. this word we borrow also, for we use _æther_ in latin as well as _aer;_ though pacuvius thus expresses it, --this, of which i speak, in latin's _coelum_, _æther_ call'd in greek. as though he were not a greek into whose mouth he puts this sentence; but he is speaking in latin, though we listen as if he were speaking greek; for, as he says elsewhere, his speech discovers him a grecian born. but to return to more important matters. in the sky innumerable fiery stars exist, of which the sun is the chief, enlightening all with his refulgent splendor, and being by many degrees larger than the whole earth; and this multitude of vast fires are so far from hurting the earth, and things terrestrial, that they are of benefit to them; whereas, if they were moved from their stations, we should inevitably be burned through the want of a proper moderation and temperature of heat. xxxvii. is it possible for any man to behold these things, and yet imagine that certain solid and individual bodies move by their natural force and gravitation, and that a world so beautifully adorned was made by their fortuitous concourse? he who believes this may as well believe that if a great quantity of the one-and-twenty letters, composed either of gold or any other matter, were thrown upon the ground, they would fall into such order as legibly to form the annals of ennius. i doubt whether fortune could make a single verse of them. how, therefore, can these people assert that the world was made by the fortuitous concourse of atoms, which have no color, no quality--which the greeks call [greek: poiotês], no sense? or that there are innumerable worlds, some rising and some perishing, in every moment of time? but if a concourse of atoms can make a world, why not a porch, a temple, a house, a city, which are works of less labor and difficulty? certainly those men talk so idly and inconsiderately concerning this lower world that they appear to me never to have contemplated the wonderful magnificence of the heavens; which is the next topic for our consideration. well, then, did aristotle[ ] observe: "if there were men whose habitations had been always underground, in great and commodious houses, adorned with statues and pictures, furnished with everything which they who are reputed happy abound with; and if, without stirring from thence, they should be informed of a certain divine power and majesty, and, after some time, the earth should open, and they should quit their dark abode to come to us, where they should immediately behold the earth, the seas, the heavens; should consider the vast extent of the clouds and force of the winds; should see the sun, and observe his grandeur and beauty, and also his generative power, inasmuch as day is occasioned by the diffusion of his light through the sky; and when night has obscured the earth, they should contemplate the heavens bespangled and adorned with stars, the surprising variety of the moon in her increase and wane, the rising and setting of all the stars, and the inviolable regularity of their courses; when," says he, "they should see these things, they would undoubtedly conclude that there are gods, and that these are their mighty works." xxxviii. thus far aristotle. let us imagine, also, as great darkness as was formerly occasioned by the irruption of the fires of mount Ætna, which are said to have obscured the adjacent countries for two days to such a degree that no man could recognize his fellow; but on the third, when the sun appeared, they seemed to be risen from the dead. now, if we should be suddenly brought from a state of eternal darkness to see the light, how beautiful would the heavens seem! but our minds have become used to it from the daily practice and habituation of our eyes, nor do we take the trouble to search into the principles of what is always in view; as if the novelty, rather than the importance, of things ought to excite us to investigate their causes. is he worthy to be called a man who attributes to chance, not to an intelligent cause, the constant motion of the heavens, the regular courses of the stars, the agreeable proportion and connection of all things, conducted with so much reason that our intellect itself is unable to estimate it rightly? when we see machines move artificially, as a sphere, a clock, or the like, do we doubt whether they are the productions of reason? and when we behold the heavens moving with a prodigious celerity, and causing an annual succession of the different seasons of the year, which vivify and preserve all things, can we doubt that this world is directed, i will not say only by reason, but by reason most excellent and divine? for without troubling ourselves with too refined a subtlety of discussion, we may use our eyes to contemplate the beauty of those things which we assert have been arranged by divine providence. xxxix. first, let us examine the earth, whose situation is in the middle of the universe,[ ] solid, round, and conglobular by its natural tendency; clothed with flowers, herbs, trees, and fruits; the whole in multitudes incredible, and with a variety suitable to every taste: let us consider the ever-cool and running springs, the clear waters of the rivers, the verdure of their banks, the hollow depths of caves, the cragginess of rocks, the heights of impending mountains, and the boundless extent of plains, the hidden veins of gold and silver, and the infinite quarries of marble. what and how various are the kinds of animals, tame or wild? the flights and notes of birds? how do the beasts live in the fields and in the forests? what shall i say of men, who, being appointed, as we may say, to cultivate the earth, do not suffer its fertility to be choked with weeds, nor the ferocity of beasts to make it desolate; who, by the houses and cities which they build, adorn the fields, the isles, and the shores? if we could view these objects with the naked eye, as we can by the contemplation of the mind, nobody, at such a sight, would doubt there was a divine intelligence. but how beautiful is the sea! how pleasant to see the extent of it! what a multitude and variety of islands! how delightful are the coasts! what numbers and what diversity of inhabitants does it contain; some within the bosom of it, some floating on the surface, and others by their shells cleaving to the rocks! while the sea itself, approaching to the land, sports so closely to its shores that those two elements appear to be but one. next above the sea is the air, diversified by day and night: when rarefied, it possesses the higher region; when condensed, it turns into clouds, and with the waters which it gathers enriches the earth by the rain. its agitation produces the winds. it causes heat and cold according to the different seasons. it sustains birds in their flight; and, being inhaled, nourishes and preserves all animated beings. xl. add to these, which alone remaineth to be mentioned, the firmament of heaven, a region the farthest from our abodes, which surrounds and contains all things. it is likewise called ether, or sky, the extreme bounds and limits of the universe, in which the stars perform their appointed courses in a most wonderful manner; among which, the sun, whose magnitude far surpasses the earth, makes his revolution round it, and by his rising and setting causes day and night; sometimes coming near towards the earth, and sometimes going from it, he every year makes two contrary reversions[ ] from the extreme point of its course. in his retreat the earth seems locked up in sadness; in his return it appears exhilarated with the heavens. the moon, which, as mathematicians demonstrate, is bigger than half the earth, makes her revolutions through the same spaces[ ] as the sun; but at one time approaching, and at another receding from, the sun, she diffuses the light which she has borrowed from him over the whole earth, and has herself also many various changes in her appearance. when she is found under the sun, and opposite to it, the brightness of her rays is lost; but when the earth directly interposes between the moon and sun, the moon is totally eclipsed. the other wandering stars have their courses round the earth in the same spaces,[ ] and rise and set in the same manner; their motions are sometimes quick, sometimes slow, and often they stand still. there is nothing more wonderful, nothing more beautiful. there is a vast number of fixed stars, distinguished by the names of certain figures, to which we find they have some resemblance. xli. i will here, says balbus, looking at me, make use of the verses which, when you were young, you translated from aratus,[ ] and which, because they are in latin, gave me so much delight that i have many of them still in my memory. as then, we daily see, without any change or variation, --the rest[ ] swiftly pursue the course to which they're bound; and with the heavens the days and nights go round; the contemplation of which, to a mind desirous of observing the constancy of nature, is inexhaustible. the extreme top of either point is call'd the pole.[ ] about this the two [greek: arktoi] are turned, which never set; of these, the greeks one cynosura call, the other helice.[ ] the brightest stars,[ ] indeed, of helice are discernible all night, which are by us septentriones call'd. cynosura moves about the same pole, with a like number of stars, and ranged in the same order: this[ ] the phoenicians choose to make their guide when on the ocean in the night they ride. adorned with stars of more refulgent light, the other[ ] shines, and first appears at night. though this is small, sailors its use have found; more inward is its course, and short its round. xlii. the aspect of those stars is the more admirable, because, the dragon grim between them bends his way, as through the winding banks the currents stray, and up and down in sinuous bending rolls.[ ] his whole form is excellent; but the shape of his head and the ardor of his eyes are most remarkable. various the stars which deck his glittering head; his temples are with double glory spread; from his fierce eyes two fervid lights afar flash, and his chin shines with one radiant star; bow'd is his head; and his round neck he bends, and to the tail of helice[ ] extends. the rest of the dragon's body we see[ ] at every hour in the night. here[ ] suddenly the head a little hides itself, where all its parts, which are in sight, and those unseen in the same place unite. near to this head is placed the figure of a man that moves weary and sad, which the greeks engonasis do call, because he's borne[ ] about with bended knee. near him is placed the crown with a refulgent lustre graced. this indeed is at his back; but anguitenens (the snake-holder) is near his head:[ ] the greeks him ophiuchus call, renown'd the name. he strongly grasps the serpent round with both his hands; himself the serpent folds beneath his breast, and round his middle holds; yet gravely he, bright shining in the skies, moves on, and treads on nepa's[ ] breast and eyes. the septentriones[ ] are followed by-- arctophylax,[ ] that's said to be the same which we boötes call, who has the name, because he drives the greater bear along yoked to a wain. besides, in boötes, a star of glittering rays about his waist, arcturus called, a name renown'd, is placed.[ ] beneath which is the virgin of illustrious form, whose hand holds a bright spike. xliii. and truly these signs are so regularly disposed that a divine wisdom evidently appears in them: beneath the bear's[ ] head have the twins their seat, under his chest the crab, beneath his feet the mighty lion darts a trembling flame.[ ] the charioteer on the left side of gemini we see,[ ] and at his head behold fierce helice; on his left shoulder the bright goat appears. but to proceed-- this is indeed a great and glorious star, on th' other side the kids, inferior far, yield but a slender light to mortal eyes. under his feet the horned bull,[ ] with sturdy limbs, is placed: his head is spangled with a number of stars; these by the greeks are called the hyades, from raining; for [greek: hyein] is to rain: therefore they are injudiciously called _suculæ_ by our people, as if they had their name from [greek: hys], a sow, and not from [greek: hyô]. behind the lesser bear, cepheus[ ] follows with extended hands, for close behind the lesser bear he comes. before him goes cassiopea[ ] with a faintish light; but near her moves (fair and illustrious sight!) andromeda,[ ] who, with an eager pace, seems to avoid her parent's mournful face.[ ] with glittering mane the horse[ ] now seems to tread, so near he comes, on her refulgent head; with a fair star, that close to him appears, a double form[ ] and but one light he wears; by which he seems ambitious in the sky an everlasting knot of stars to tie. near him the ram, with wreathed horns, is placed; by whom the fishes[ ] are; of which one seems to haste somewhat before the other, to the blast of the north wind exposed. xliv. perseus is described as placed at the feet of andromeda: and him the sharp blasts of the north wind beat. near his left knee, but dim their light, their seat the small pleiades[ ] maintain. we find, not far from them, the lyre[ ] but slightly join'd. next is the winged bird,[ ] that seems to fly beneath the spacious covering of the sky. near the head of the horse[ ] lies the right hand of aquarius, then all aquarius himself.[ ] then capricorn, with half the form of beast, breathes chill and piercing colds from his strong breast, and in a spacious circle takes his round; when him, while in the winter solstice bound, the sun has visited with constant light, he turns his course, and shorter makes the night.[ ] not far from hence is seen the scorpion[ ] rising lofty from below; by him the archer,[ ] with his bended bow; near him the bird, with gaudy feathers spread; and the fierce eagle[ ] hovers o'er his head. next comes the dolphin;[ ] then bright orion,[ ] who obliquely moves; he is followed by the fervent dog,[ ] bright with refulgent stars: next the hare follows[ ] unwearied in his course. at the dog's tail argo[ ] moves on, and moving seems to sail; o'er her the ram and fishes have their place;[ ] the illustrious vessel touches, in her pace, the river's banks;[ ] which you may see winding and extending itself to a great length. the fetters[ ] at the fishes' tails are hung. by nepa's[ ] head behold the altar stand,[ ] which by the breath of southern winds is fann'd; near which the centaur[ ] hastens his mingled parts to join beneath the serpent,[ ] there extending his right hand, to where you see the monstrous scorpion stand, which he at the bright altar fiercely slays. here on her lower parts see hydra[ ] raise herself; whose bulk is very far extended. amid the winding of her body's placed the shining goblet;[ ] and the glossy crow[ ] plunges his beak into her parts below. antecanis beneath the twins is seen, call'd procyon by the greeks.[ ] can any one in his senses imagine that this disposition of the stars, and this heaven so beautifully adorned, could ever have been formed by a fortuitous concourse of atoms? or what other nature, being destitute of intellect and reason, could possibly have produced these effects, which not only required reason to bring them about, but the very character of which could not be understood and appreciated without the most strenuous exertions of well-directed reason? xlv. but our admiration is not limited to the objects here described. what is most wonderful is that the world is so durable, and so perfectly made for lasting that it is not to be impaired by time; for all its parts tend equally to the centre, and are bound together by a sort of chain, which surrounds the elements. this chain is nature, which being diffused through the universe, and performing all things with judgment and reason, attracts the extremities to the centre. if, then, the world is round, and if on that account all its parts, being of equal dimensions and relative proportions, mutually support and are supported by one another, it must follow that as all the parts incline to the centre (for that is the lowest place of a globe) there is nothing whatever which can put a stop to that propensity in the case of such great weights. for the same reason, though the sea is higher than the earth, yet because it has the like tendency, it is collected everywhere, equally concentres, and never overflows, and is never wasted. the air, which is contiguous, ascends by its lightness, but diffuses itself through the whole; therefore it is by nature joined and united to the sea, and at the same time borne by the same power towards the heaven, by the thinness and heat of which it is so tempered as to be made proper to supply life and wholesome air for the support of animated beings. this is encompassed by the highest region of the heavens, which is called the sky, which is joined to the extremity of the air, but retains its own heat pure and unmixed. xlvi. the stars have their revolutions in the sky, and are continued by the tendency of all parts towards the centre. their duration is perpetuated by their form and figure, for they are round; which form, as i think has been before observed, is the least liable to injury; and as they are composed of fire, they are fed by the vapors which are exhaled by the sun from the earth, the sea, and other waters; but when these vapors have nourished and refreshed the stars, and the whole sky, they are sent back to be exhaled again; so that very little is lost or consumed by the fire of the stars and the flame of the sky. hence we stoics conclude--which panætius[ ] is said to have doubted of--that the whole world at last would be consumed by a general conflagration, when, all moisture being exhausted, neither the earth could have any nourishment, nor the air return again, since water, of which it is formed, would then be all consumed; so that only fire would subsist; and from this fire, which is an animating power and a deity, a new world would arise and be re-established in the same beauty. i should be sorry to appear to you to dwell too long upon this subject of the stars, and more especially upon that of the planets, whose motions, though different, make a very just agreement. saturn, the highest, chills; mars, placed in the middle, burns; while jupiter, interposing, moderates their excess, both of light and heat. the two planets beneath mars[ ] obey the sun. the sun himself fills the whole universe with his own genial light; and the moon, illuminated by him, influences conception, birth, and maturity. and who is there who is not moved by this union of things, and by this concurrence of nature agreeing together, as it were, for the safety of the world? and yet i feel sure that none of these reflections have ever been made by these men. xlvii. let us proceed from celestial to terrestrial things. what is there in them which does not prove the principle of an intelligent nature? first, as to vegetables; they have roots to sustain their stems, and to draw from the earth a nourishing moisture to support the vital principle which those roots contain. they are clothed with a rind or bark, to secure them more thoroughly from heat and cold. the vines we see take hold on props with their tendrils, as if with hands, and raise themselves as if they were animated; it is even said that they shun cabbages and coleworts, as noxious and pestilential to them, and, if planted by them, will not touch any part. but what a vast variety is there of animals! and how wonderfully is every kind adapted to preserve itself! some are covered with hides, some clothed with fleeces, and some guarded with bristles; some are sheltered with feathers, some with scales; some are armed with horns, and some are furnished with wings to escape from danger. nature hath also liberally and plentifully provided for all animals their proper food. i could expatiate on the judicious and curious formation and disposition of their bodies for the reception and digestion of it, for all their interior parts are so framed and disposed that there is nothing superfluous, nothing that is not necessary for the preservation of life. besides, nature has also given these beasts appetite and sense; in order that by the one they may be excited to procure sufficient sustenance, and by the other they may distinguish what is noxious from what is salutary. some animals seek their food walking, some creeping, some flying, and some swimming; some take it with their mouth and teeth; some seize it with their claws, and some with their beaks; some suck, some graze, some bolt it whole, and some chew it. some are so low that they can with ease take such food as is to be found on the ground; but the taller, as geese, swans, cranes, and camels, are assisted by a length of neck. to the elephant is given a hand,[ ] without which, from his unwieldiness of body, he would scarce have any means of attaining food. xlviii. but to those beasts which live by preying on others, nature has given either strength or swiftness. on some animals she has even bestowed artifice and cunning; as on spiders, some of which weave a sort of net to entrap and destroy whatever falls into it, others sit on the watch unobserved to fall on their prey and devour it. the naker--by the greeks called _pinna_--has a kind of confederacy with the prawn for procuring food. it has two large shells open, into which when the little fishes swim, the naker, having notice given by the bite of the prawn, closes them immediately. thus, these little animals, though of different kinds, seek their food in common; in which it is matter of wonder whether they associate by any agreement, or are naturally joined together from their beginning. there is some cause to admire also the provision of nature in the case of those aquatic animals which are generated on land, such as crocodiles, river-tortoises, and a certain kind of serpents, which seek the water as soon as they are able to drag themselves along. we frequently put duck-eggs under hens, by which, as by their true mothers, the ducklings are at first hatched and nourished; but when they see the water, they forsake them and run to it, as to their natural abode: so strong is the impression of nature in animals for their own preservation. xlix. i have read that there is a bird called platalea (the shoveller), that lives by watching those fowls which dive into the sea for their prey, and when they return with it, he squeezes their heads with his beak till they drop it, and then seizes on it himself. it is said likewise that he is in the habit of filling his stomach with shell-fish, and when they are digested by the heat which exists in the stomach, they cast them up, and then pick out what is proper nourishment. the sea-frogs, they say, are wont to cover themselves with sand, and moving near the water, the fishes strike at them, as at a bait, and are themselves taken and devoured by the frogs. between the kite and the crow there is a kind of natural war, and wherever the one finds the eggs of the other, he breaks them. but who is there who can avoid being struck with wonder at that which has been noticed by aristotle, who has enriched us with so many valuable remarks? when the cranes[ ] pass the sea in search of warmer climes, they fly in the form of a triangle. by the first angle they repel the resisting air; on each side, their wings serve as oars to facilitate their flight; and the basis of their triangle is assisted by the wind in their stern. those which are behind rest their necks and heads on those which precede; and as the leader has not the same relief, because he has none to lean upon, he at length flies behind that he may also rest, while one of those which have been eased succeeds him, and through the whole flight each regularly takes his turn. i could produce many instances of this kind; but these may suffice. let us now proceed to things more familiar to us. the care of beasts for their own preservation, their circumspection while feeding, and their manner of taking rest in their lairs, are generally known, but still they are greatly to be admired. l. dogs cure themselves by a vomit, the egyptian ibis by a purge; from whence physicians have lately--i mean but few ages since--greatly improved their art. it is reported that panthers, which in barbarous countries are taken with poisoned flesh, have a certain remedy[ ] that preserves them from dying; and that in crete, the wild goats, when they are wounded with poisoned arrows, seek for an herb called dittany, which, when they have tasted, the arrows (they say) drop from their bodies. it is said also that deer, before they fawn, purge themselves with a little herb called hartswort.[ ] beasts, when they receive any hurt, or fear it, have recourse to their natural arms: the bull to his horns, the boar to his tusks, and the lion to his teeth. some take to flight, others hide themselves; the cuttle-fish vomits[ ] blood; the cramp-fish benumbs; and there are many animals that, by their intolerable stink, oblige their pursuers to retire. li. but that the beauty of the world might be eternal, great care has been taken by the providence of the gods to perpetuate the different kinds of animals, and vegetables, and trees, and all those things which sink deep into the earth, and are contained in it by their roots and trunks; in order to which every individual has within itself such fertile seed that many are generated from one; and in vegetables this seed is enclosed in the heart of their fruit, but in such abundance that men may plentifully feed on it, and the earth be always replanted. with regard to animals, do we not see how aptly they are formed for the propagation of their species? nature for this end created some males and some females. their parts are perfectly framed for generation, and they have a wonderful propensity to copulation. when the seed has fallen on the matrix, it draws almost all the nourishment to itself, by which the foetus is formed; but as soon as it is discharged from thence, if it is an animal that is nourished by milk, almost all the food of the mother turns into milk, and the animal, without any direction but by the pure instinct of nature, immediately hunts for the teat, and is there fed with plenty. what makes it evidently appear that there is nothing in this fortuitous, but the work of a wise and foreseeing nature, is, that those females which bring forth many young, as sows and bitches, have many teats, and those which bear a small number have but few. what tenderness do beasts show in preserving and raising up their young till they are able to defend themselves! they say, indeed, that fish, when they have spawned, leave their eggs; but the water easily supports them, and produces the young fry in abundance. lii. it is said, likewise, that tortoises and crocodiles, when they have laid their eggs on the land, only cover them with earth, and then leave them, so that their young are hatched and brought up without assistance; but fowls and other birds seek for quiet places to lay in, where they build their nests in the softest manner, for the surest preservation of their eggs; which, when they have hatched, they defend from the cold by the warmth of their wings, or screen them from the sultry heat of the sun. when their young begin to be able to use their wings, they attend and instruct them; and then their cares are at an end. human art and industry are indeed necessary towards the preservation and improvement of certain animals and vegetables; for there are several of both kinds which would perish without that assistance. there are likewise innumerable facilities (being different in different places) supplied to man to aid him in his civilization, and in procuring abundantly what he requires. the nile waters egypt, and after having overflowed and covered it the whole summer, it retires, and leaves the fields softened and manured for the reception of seed. the euphrates fertilizes mesopotamia, into which, as we may say, it carries yearly new fields.[ ] the indus, which is the largest of all rivers,[ ] not only improves and cultivates the ground, but sows it also; for it is said to carry with it a great quantity of grain. i could mention many other countries remarkable for something singular, and many fields, which are, in their own natures, exceedingly fertile. liii. but how bountiful is nature that has provided for us such an abundance of various and delicious food; and this varying with the different seasons, so that we may be constantly pleased with change, and satisfied with abundance! how seasonable and useful to man, to beasts, and even to vegetables, are the etesian winds[ ] she has bestowed, which moderate intemperate heat, and render navigation more sure and speedy! many things must be omitted on a subject so copious--and still a great deal must be said--for it is impossible to relate the great utility of rivers, the flux and reflux of the sea, the mountains clothed with grass and trees, the salt-pits remote from the sea-coasts, the earth replete with salutary medicines, or, in short, the innumerable designs of nature necessary for sustenance and the enjoyment of life. we must not forget the vicissitudes of day and night, ordained for the health of animated beings, giving them a time to labor and a time to rest. thus, if we every way examine the universe, it is apparent, from the greatest reason, that the whole is admirably governed by a divine providence for the safety and preservation of all beings. if it should be asked for whose sake this mighty fabric was raised, shall we say for trees and other vegetables, which, though destitute of sense, are supported by nature? that would be absurd. is it for beasts? nothing can be less probable than that the gods should have taken such pains for beings void of speech and understanding. for whom, then, will any one presume to say that the world was made? undoubtedly for reasonable beings; these are the gods and men, who are certainly the most perfect of all beings, as nothing is equal to reason. it is therefore credible that the universe, and all things in it, were made for the gods and for men. but we may yet more easily comprehend that the gods have taken great care of the interests and welfare of men, if we examine thoroughly into the structure of the body, and the form and perfection of human nature. there are three things absolutely necessary for the support of life--to eat, to drink, and to breathe. for these operations the mouth is most aptly framed, which, by the assistance of the nostrils, draws in the more air. liv. the teeth are there placed to divide and grind the food.[ ] the fore-teeth, being sharp and opposite to each other, cut it asunder, and the hind-teeth (called the grinders) chew it, in which office the tongue seems to assist. at the root of the tongue is the gullet, which receives whatever is swallowed: it touches the tonsils on each side, and terminates at the interior extremity of the palate. when, by the motions of the tongue, the food is forced into this passage, it descends, and those parts of the gullet which are below it are dilated, and those above are contracted. there is another passage, called by physicians the rough artery,[ ] which reaches to the lungs, for the entrance and return of the air we breathe; and as its orifice is joined to the roots of the tongue a little above the part to which the gullet is annexed, it is furnished with a sort of coverlid,[ ] lest, by the accidental falling of any food into it, the respiration should be stopped. as the stomach, which is beneath the gullet, receives the meat and drink, so the lungs and the heart draw in the air from without. the stomach is wonderfully composed, consisting almost wholly of nerves; it abounds with membranes and fibres, and detains what it receives, whether solid or liquid, till it is altered and digested. it sometimes contracts, sometimes dilates. it blends and mixes the food together, so that it is easily concocted and digested by its force of heat, and by the animal spirits is distributed into the other parts of the body. lv. as to the lungs, they are of a soft and spongy substance, which renders them the most commodious for respiration; they alternately dilate and contract to receive and return the air, that what is the chief animal sustenance may be always fresh. the juice,[ ] by which we are nourished, being separated from the rest of the food, passes the stomach and intestines to the liver, through open and direct passages, which lead from the mesentery to the gates of the liver (for so they call those vessels at the entrance of it). there are other passages from thence, through which the food has its course when it has passed the liver. when the bile, and those humors which proceed from the kidneys, are separated from the food, the remaining part turns to blood, and flows to those vessels at the entrance of the liver to which all the passages adjoin. the chyle, being conveyed from this place through them into the vessel called the hollow vein, is mixed together, and, being already digested and distilled, passes into the heart; and from the heart it is communicated through a great number of veins to every part of the body. it is not difficult to describe how the gross remains are detruded by the motion of the intestines, which contract and dilate; but that must be declined, as too indelicate for discourse. let us rather explain that other wonder of nature, the air, which is drawn into the lungs, receives heat both by that already in and by the coagitation of the lungs; one part is turned back by respiration, and the other is received into a place called the ventricle of the heart.[ ] there is another ventricle like it annexed to the heart, into which the blood flows from the liver through the hollow vein. thus by one ventricle the blood is diffused to the extremities through the veins, and by the other the breath is communicated through the arteries; and there are such numbers of both dispersed through the whole body that they manifest a divine art. why need i speak of the bones, those supports of the body, whose joints are so wonderfully contrived for stability, and to render the limbs complete with regard to motion and to every action of the body? or need i mention the nerves, by which the limbs are governed--their many interweavings, and their proceeding from the heart,[ ] from whence, like the veins and arteries, they have their origin, and are distributed through the whole corporeal frame? lvi. to this skill of nature, and this care of providence, so diligent and so ingenious, many reflections may be added, which show what valuable things the deity has bestowed on man. he has made us of a stature tall and upright, in order that we might behold the heavens, and so arrive at the knowledge of the gods; for men are not simply to dwell here as inhabitants of the earth, but to be, as it were, spectators of the heavens and the stars, which is a privilege not granted to any other kind of animated beings. the senses, which are the interpreters and messengers of things, are placed in the head, as in a tower, and wonderfully situated for their proper uses; for the eyes, being in the highest part, have the office of sentinels, in discovering to us objects; and the ears are conveniently placed in a high part of the person, being appointed to receive sound, which naturally ascends. the nostrils have the like situation, because all scent likewise ascends; and they have, with great reason, a near vicinity to the mouth, because they assist us in judging of meat and drink. the taste, which is to distinguish the quality of what we take; is in that part of the mouth where nature has laid open a passage for what we eat and drink. but the touch is equally diffused through the whole body, that we may not receive any blows, or the too rigid attacks of cold and heat, without feeling them. and as in building the architect averts from the eyes and nose of the master those things which must necessarily be offensive, so has nature removed far from our senses what is of the same kind in the human body. lvii. what artificer but nature, whose direction is incomparable, could have exhibited so much ingenuity in the formation of the senses? in the first place, she has covered and invested the eyes with the finest membranes, which she hath made transparent, that we may see through them, and firm in their texture, to preserve the eyes. she has made them slippery and movable, that they might avoid what would offend them, and easily direct the sight wherever they will. the actual organ of sight, which is called the pupil, is so small that it can easily shun whatever might be hurtful to it. the eyelids, which are their coverings, are soft and smooth, that they may not injure the eyes; and are made to shut at the apprehension of any accident, or to open at pleasure; and these movements nature has ordained to be made in an instant: they are fortified with a sort of palisade of hairs, to keep off what may be noxious to them when open, and to be a fence to their repose when sleep closes them, and allows them to rest as if they were wrapped up in a case. besides, they are commodiously hidden and defended by eminences on every side; for on the upper part the eyebrows turn aside the perspiration which falls from the head and forehead; the cheeks beneath rise a little, so as to protect them on the lower side; and the nose is placed between them as a wall of separation. the hearing is always open, for that is a sense of which we are in need even while we are sleeping; and the moment that any sound is admitted by it we are awakened even from sleep. it has a winding passage, lest anything should slip into it, as it might if it were straight and simple. nature also hath taken the same precaution in making there a viscous humor, that if any little creatures should endeavor to creep in, they might stick in it as in bird-lime. the ears (by which we mean the outward part) are made prominent, to cover and preserve the hearing, lest the sound should be dissipated and escape before the sense is affected. their entrances are hard and horny, and their form winding, because bodies of this kind better return and increase the sound. this appears in the harp, lute, or horn;[ ] and from all tortuous and enclosed places sounds are returned stronger. the nostrils, in like manner, are ever open, because we have a continual use for them; and their entrances also are rather narrow, lest anything noxious should enter them; and they have always a humidity necessary for the repelling dust and many other extraneous bodies. the taste, having the mouth for an enclosure, is admirably situated, both in regard to the use we make of it and to its security. lviii. besides, every human sense is much more exquisite than those of brutes; for our eyes, in those arts which come under their judgment, distinguish with great nicety; as in painting, sculpture, engraving, and in the gesture and motion of bodies. they understand the beauty, proportion, and, as i may so term it, the becomingness of colors and figures; they distinguish things of greater importance, even virtues and vices; they know whether a man is angry or calm, cheerful or sad, courageous or cowardly, bold or timorous. the judgment of the ears is not less admirably and scientifically contrived with regard to vocal and instrumental music. they distinguish the variety of sounds, the measure, the stops, the different sorts of voices, the treble and the base, the soft and the harsh, the sharp and the flat, of which human ears only are capable to judge. there is likewise great judgment in the smell, the taste, and the touch; to indulge and gratify which senses more arts have been invented than i could wish: it is apparent to what excess we have arrived in the composition of our perfumes, the preparation of our food, and the enjoyment of corporeal pleasures. lix. again, he who does not perceive the soul and mind of man, his reason, prudence, and discernment, to be the work of a divine providence, seems himself to be destitute of those faculties. while i am on this subject, cotta, i wish i had your eloquence: how would you illustrate so fine a subject! you would show the great extent of the understanding; how we collect our ideas, and join those which follow to those which precede; establish principles, draw consequences, define things separately, and comprehend them with accuracy; from whence you demonstrate how great is the power of intelligence and knowledge, which is such that even god himself has no qualities more admirable. how valuable (though you academics despise and even deny that we have it) is our knowledge of exterior objects, from the perception of the senses joined to the application of the mind; by which we see in what relation one thing stands to another, and by the aid of which we have invented those arts which are necessary for the support and pleasure of life. how charming is eloquence! how divine that mistress of the universe, as you call it! it teaches us what we were ignorant of, and makes us capable of teaching what we have learned. by this we exhort others; by this we persuade them; by this we comfort the afflicted; by this we deliver the affrighted from their fear; by this we moderate excessive joy; by this we assuage the passions of lust and anger. this it is which bound men by the chains of right and law, formed the bonds of civil society, and made us quit a wild and savage life. and it will appear incredible, unless you carefully observe the facts, how complete the work of nature is in giving us the use of speech; for, first of all, there is an artery from the lungs to the bottom of the mouth, through which the voice, having its original principle in the mind, is transmitted. then the tongue is placed in the mouth, bounded by the teeth. it softens and modulates the voice, which would otherwise be confusedly uttered; and, by pushing it to the teeth and other parts of the mouth, makes the sound distinct and articulate. we stoics, therefore, compare the tongue to the bow of an instrument, the teeth to the strings, and the nostrils to the sounding-board. lx. but how commodious are the hands which nature has given to man, and how beautifully do they minister to many arts! for, such is the flexibility of the joints, that our fingers are closed and opened without any difficulty. with their help, the hand is formed for painting, carving, and engraving; for playing on stringed instruments, and on the pipe. these are matters of pleasure. there are also works of necessity, such as tilling the ground, building houses, making cloth and habits, and working in brass and iron. it is the business of the mind to invent, the senses to perceive, and the hands to execute; so that if we have buildings, if we are clothed, if we live in safety, if we have cities, walls, habitations, and temples, it is to the hands we owe them. by our labor, that is, by our hands, variety and plenty of food are provided; for, without culture, many fruits, which serve either for present or future consumption, would not be produced; besides, we feed on flesh, fish, and fowl, catching some, and bringing up others. we subdue four-footed beasts for our carriage, whose speed and strength supply our slowness and inability. on some we put burdens, on others yokes. we convert the sagacity of the elephant and the quick scent of the dog to our own advantage. out of the caverns of the earth we dig iron, a thing entirely necessary for the cultivation of the ground. we discover the hidden veins of copper, silver, and gold, advantageous for our use and beautiful as ornaments. we cut down trees, and use every kind of wild and cultivated timber, not only to make fire to warm us and dress our meat, but also for building, that we may have houses to defend us from the heat and cold. with timber likewise we build ships, which bring us from all parts every commodity of life. we are the only animals who, from our knowledge of navigation, can manage what nature has made the most violent--the sea and the winds. thus we obtain from the ocean great numbers of profitable things. we are the absolute masters of what the earth produces. we enjoy the mountains and the plains. the rivers and the lakes are ours. we sow the seed, and plant the trees. we fertilize the earth by overflowing it. we stop, direct, and turn the rivers: in short, by our hands we endeavor, by our various operations in this world, to make, as it were, another nature. lxi. but what shall i say of human reason? has it not even entered the heavens? man alone of all animals has observed the courses of the stars, their risings and settings. by man the day, the month, the year, is determined. he foresees the eclipses of the sun and moon, and foretells them to futurity, marking their greatness, duration, and precise time. from the contemplation of these things the mind extracts the knowledge of the gods--a knowledge which produces piety, with which is connected justice, and all the other virtues; from which arises a life of felicity, inferior to that of the gods in no single particular, except in immortality, which is not absolutely necessary to happy living. in explaining these things, i think that i have sufficiently demonstrated the superiority of man to other animated beings; from whence we should infer that neither the form and position of his limbs nor that strength of mind and understanding could possibly be the effect of chance. lxii. i am now to prove, by way of conclusion, that every thing in this world of use to us was made designedly for us. first of all, the universe was made for the gods and men, and all things therein were prepared and provided for our service. for the world is the common habitation or city of the gods and men; for they are the only reasonable beings: they alone live by justice and law. as, therefore, it must be presumed the cities of athens and lacedæmon were built for the athenians and lacedæmonians, and as everything there is said to belong to those people, so everything in the universe may with propriety be said to belong to the gods and men, and to them alone. in the next place, though the revolutions of the sun, moon, and all the stars are necessary for the cohesion of the universe, yet may they be considered also as objects designed for the view and contemplation of man. there is no sight less apt to satiate the eye, none more beautiful, or more worthy to employ our reason and penetration. by measuring their courses we find the different seasons, their durations and vicissitudes, which, if they are known to men alone, we must believe were made only for their sake. does the earth bring forth fruit and grain in such excessive abundance and variety for men or for brutes? the plentiful and exhilarating fruit of the vine and the olive-tree are entirely useless to beasts. they know not the time for sowing, tilling, or for reaping in season and gathering in the fruits of the earth, or for laying up and preserving their stores. man alone has the care and advantage of these things. lxiii. thus, as the lute and the pipe were made for those, and those only, who are capable of playing on them, so it must be allowed that the produce of the earth was designed for those only who make use of them; and though some beasts may rob us of a small part, it does not follow that the earth produced it also for them. men do not store up corn for mice and ants, but for their wives, their children, and their families. beasts, therefore, as i said before, possess it by stealth, but their masters openly and freely. it is for us, therefore, that nature hath provided this abundance. can there be any doubt that this plenty and variety of fruit, which delight not only the taste, but the smell and sight, was by nature intended for men only? beasts are so far from being partakers of this design, that we see that even they themselves were made for man; for of what utility would sheep be, unless for their wool, which, when dressed and woven, serves us for clothing? for they are not capable of anything, not even of procuring their own food, without the care and assistance of man. the fidelity of the dog, his affectionate fawning on his master, his aversion to strangers, his sagacity in finding game, and his vivacity in pursuit of it, what do these qualities denote but that he was created for our use? why need i mention oxen? we perceive that their backs were not formed for carrying burdens, but their necks were naturally made for the yoke, and their strong broad shoulders to draw the plough. in the golden age, which poets speak of, they were so greatly beneficial to the husbandman in tilling the fallow ground that no violence was ever offered them, and it was even thought a crime to eat them: the iron age began the fatal trade of blood, and hammer'd the destructive blade; then men began to make the ox to bleed, and on the tamed and docile beast to feed[ ]. lxiv. it would take a long time to relate the advantages which we receive from mules and asses, which undoubtedly were designed for our use. what is the swine good for but to eat? whose life, chrysippus says, was given it but as salt[ ] to keep it from putrefying; and as it is proper food for man, nature hath made no animal more fruitful. what a multitude of birds and fishes are taken by the art and contrivance of man only, and which are so delicious to our taste that one would be tempted sometimes to believe that this providence which watches over us was an epicurean! though we think there are some birds--the alites and oscines[ ], as our augurs call them--which were made merely to foretell events. the large savage beasts we take by hunting, partly for food, partly to exercise ourselves in imitation of martial discipline, and to use those we can tame and instruct, as elephants, or to extract remedies for our diseases and wounds, as we do from certain roots and herbs, the virtues of which are known by long use and experience. represent to yourself the whole earth and seas as if before your eyes. you will see the vast and fertile plains, the thick, shady mountains, the immense pasturage for cattle, and ships sailing over the deep with incredible celerity; nor are our discoveries only on the face of the earth, but in its secret recesses there are many useful things, which being made for man, by man alone are discovered. lxv. another, and in my opinion the strongest, proof that the providence of the gods takes care of us is divination, which both of you, perhaps, will attack; you, cotta, because carneades took pleasure in inveighing against the stoics; and you, velleius, because there is nothing epicurus ridicules so much as the prediction of events. yet the truth of divination appears in many places, on many occasions, often in private, but particularly in public concerns. we receive many intimations from the foresight and presages of augurs and auspices; from oracles, prophecies, dreams, and prodigies; and it often happens that by these means events have proved happy to men, and imminent dangers have been avoided. this knowledge, therefore--call it either a kind of transport, or an art, or a natural faculty--is certainly found only in men, and is a gift from the immortal gods. if these proofs, when taken separately, should make no impression upon your mind, yet, when collected together, they must certainly affect you. besides, the gods not only provide for mankind universally, but for particular men. you may bring this universality to gradually a smaller number, and again you may reduce that smaller number to individuals. lxvi. for if the reasons which i have given prove to all of us that the gods take care of all men, in every country, in every part of the world separate from our continent, they take care of those who dwell on the same land with us, from east to west; and if they regard those who inhabit this kind of great island, which we call the globe of the earth, they have the like regard for those who possess the parts of this island--europe, asia, and africa; and therefore they favor the parts of these parts, as rome, athens, sparta, and rhodes; and particular men of these cities, separate from the whole; as curius, fabricius, coruncanius, in the war with pyrrhus; in the first punic war, calatinus, duillius, metellus, lutatius; in the second, maximus, marcellus, africanus; after these, paullus, gracchus, cato; and in our fathers' times, scipio, lælius. rome also and greece have produced many illustrious men, who we cannot believe were so without the assistance of the deity; which is the reason that the poets, homer in particular, joined their chief heroes--ulysses, agamemnon, diomedes, achilles--to certain deities, as companions in their adventures and dangers. besides, the frequent appearances of the gods, as i have before mentioned, demonstrate their regard for cities and particular men. this is also apparent indeed from the foreknowledge of events, which we receive either sleeping or waking. we are likewise forewarned of many things by the entrails of victims, by presages, and many other means, which have been long observed with such exactness as to produce an art of divination. there never, therefore, was a great man without divine inspiration. if a storm should damage the corn or vineyard of a person, or any accident should deprive him of some conveniences of life, we should not judge from thence that the deity hates or neglects him. the gods take care of great things, and disregard the small. but to truly great men all things ever happen prosperously; as has been sufficiently asserted and proved by us stoics, as well as by socrates, the prince of philosophers, in his discourses on the infinite advantages arising from virtue. lxvii. this is almost the whole that hath occurred to my mind on the nature of the gods, and what i thought proper to advance. do you, cotta, if i may advise, defend the same cause. remember that in rome you keep the first rank; remember that you are pontifex; and as your school is at liberty to argue on which side you please[ ], do you rather take mine, and reason on it with that eloquence which you acquired by your rhetorical exercises, and which the academy improved; for it is a pernicious and impious custom to argue against the gods, whether it be done seriously, or only in pretence and out of sport. * * * * * book iii. i. when balbus had ended this discourse, then cotta, with a smile, rejoined, you direct me too late which side to defend; for during the course of your argument i was revolving in my mind what objections to make to what you were saying, not so much for the sake of opposition, as of obliging you to explain what i did not perfectly comprehend; and as every one may use his own judgment, it is scarcely possible for me to think in every instance exactly what you wish. you have no idea, o cotta, said velleius, how impatient i am to hear what you have to say. for since our friend balbus was highly delighted with your discourse against epicurus, i ought in my turn to be solicitous to hear what you can say against the stoics; and i therefore will give you my best attention, for i believe you are, as usual, well prepared for the engagement. i wish, by hercules! i were, replies cotta; for it is more difficult to dispute with lucilius than it was with you. why so? says velleius. because, replies cotta, your epicurus, in my opinion, does not contend strongly for the gods: he only, for the sake of avoiding any unpopularity or punishment, is afraid to deny their existence; for when he asserts that the gods are wholly inactive and regardless of everything, and that they have limbs like ours, but make no use of them, he seems to jest with us, and to think it sufficient if he allows that there are beings of any kind happy and eternal. but with regard to balbus, i suppose you observed how many things were said by him, which, however false they may be, yet have a perfect coherence and connection; therefore, my design, as i said, in opposing him, is not so much to confute his principles as to induce him to explain what i do not clearly understand: for which reason, balbus, i will give you the choice, either to answer me every particular as i go on, or permit me to proceed without interruption. if you want any explanation, replies balbus, i would rather you would propose your doubts singly; but if your intention is rather to confute me than to seek instruction for yourself, it shall be as you please; i will either answer you immediately on every point, or stay till you have finished your discourse. ii. very well, says cotta; then let us proceed as our conversation shall direct. but before i enter on the subject, i have a word to say concerning myself; for i am greatly influenced by your authority, and your exhortation at the conclusion of your discourse, when you desired me to remember that i was cotta and pontifex; by which i presume you intimated that i should defend the sacred rites and religion and ceremonies which we received from our ancestors. most undoubtedly i always have, and always shall defend them, nor shall the arguments either of the learned or unlearned ever remove the opinions which i have imbibed from them concerning the worship of the immortal gods. in matters of religion i submit to the rules of the high-priests, t. coruncanius, p. scipio, and p. scævola; not to the sentiments of zeno, cleanthes, or chrysippus; and i pay a greater regard to what c. lælius, one of our augurs and wise men, has written concerning religion, in that noble oration of his, than to the most eminent of the stoics: and as the whole religion of the romans at first consisted in sacrifices and divination by birds, to which have since been added predictions, if the interpreters[ ] of the sibylline oracle or the aruspices have foretold any event from portents and prodigies, i have ever thought that there was no point of all these holy things which deserved to be despised. i have been even persuaded that romulus, by instituting divination, and numa, by establishing sacrifices, laid the foundation of rome, which undoubtedly would never have risen to such a height of grandeur if the gods had not been made propitious by this worship. these, balbus, are my sentiments both as a priest and as cotta. but you must bring me to your opinion by the force of your reason: for i have a right to demand from you, as a philosopher, a reason for the religion which you would have me embrace. but i must believe the religion of our ancestors without any proof. iii. what proof, says balbus, do you require of me? you have proposed, says cotta, four articles. first of all, you undertook to prove that there "are gods;" secondly, "of what kind and character they are;" thirdly, that "the universe is governed by them;" lastly, that "they provide for the welfare of mankind in particular." thus, if i remember rightly, you divided your discourse. exactly so, replies balbus; but let us see what you require. let us examine, says cotta, every proposition. the first one--that there are gods--is never contested but by the most impious of men; nay, though it can never be rooted out of my mind, yet i believe it on the authority of our ancestors, and not on the proofs which you have brought. why do you expect a proof from me, says balbus, if you thoroughly believe it? because, says cotta, i come to this discussion as if i had never thought of the gods, or heard anything concerning them. take me as a disciple wholly ignorant and unbiassed, and prove to me all the points which i ask. begin, then, replies balbus. i would first know, says cotta, why you have been so long in proving the existence of the gods, which you said was a point so very evident to all, that there was no need of any proof? in that, answers balbus, i have followed your example, whom i have often observed, when pleading in the forum, to load the judge with all the arguments which the nature of your cause would permit. this also is the practice of philosophers, and i have a right to follow it. besides, you may as well ask me why i look upon you with two eyes, since i can see you with one. iv. you shall judge, then, yourself, says cotta, if this is a very just comparison; for, when i plead, i do not dwell upon any point agreed to be self-evident, because long reasoning only serves to confound the clearest matters; besides, though i might take this method in pleading, yet i should not make use of it in such a discourse as this, which requires the nicest distinction. and with regard to your making use of one eye only when you look on me, there is no reason for it, since together they have the same view; and since nature, to which you attribute wisdom, has been pleased to give us two passages by which we receive light. but the truth is, that it was because you did not think that the existence of the gods was so evident as you could wish that you therefore brought so many proofs. it was sufficient for me to believe it on the tradition of our ancestors; and since you disregard authorities, and appeal to reason, permit my reason to defend them against yours. the proofs on which you found the existence of the gods tend only to render a proposition doubtful that, in my opinion, is not so; i have not only retained in my memory the whole of these proofs, but even the order in which you proposed them. the first was, that when we lift up our eyes towards the heavens, we immediately conceive that there is some divinity that governs those celestial bodies; on which you quoted this passage-- look up to the refulgent heaven above, which all men call, unanimously, jove; intimating that we should invoke that as jupiter, rather than our capitoline jove[ ], or that it is evident to the whole world that those bodies are gods which velleius and many others do not place even in the rank of animated beings. another strong proof, in your opinion, was that the belief of the existence of the gods was universal, and that mankind was daily more and more convinced of it. what! should an affair of such importance be left to the decision of fools, who, by your sect especially, are called madmen? v. but the gods have appeared to us, as to posthumius at the lake regillus, and to vatienus in the salarian way: something you mentioned, too, i know not what, of a battle of the locrians at sagra. do you believe that the tyndaridæ, as you called them; that is, men sprung from men, and who were buried in lacedæmon, as we learn from homer, who lived in the next age--do you believe, i say, that they appeared to vatienus on the road mounted on white horses, without any servant to attend them, to tell the victory of the romans to a country fellow rather than to m. cato, who was at that time the chief person of the senate? do you take that print of a horse's hoof which is now to be seen on a stone at regillus to be made by castor's horse? should you not believe, what is probable, that the souls of eminent men, such as the tyndaridæ, are divine and immortal, rather than that those bodies which had been reduced to ashes should mount on horses, and fight in an army? if you say that was possible, you ought to show how it is so, and not amuse us with fabulous old women's stories. do you take these for fabulous stories? says balbus. is not the temple, built by posthumius in honor of castor and pollux, to be seen in the forum? is not the decree of the senate concerning vatienus still subsisting? as to the affair of sagra, it is a common proverb among the greeks; when they would affirm anything strongly, they say "it is as certain as what passed at sagra." ought not such authorities to move you? you oppose me, replies cotta, with stories, but i ask reasons of you[ ]. * * * vi. we are now to speak of predictions. no one can avoid what is to come, and, indeed, it is commonly useless to know it; for it is a miserable case to be afflicted to no purpose, and not to have even the last, the common comfort, hope, which, according to your principles, none can have; for you say that fate governs all things, and call that fate which has been true from all eternity. what advantage, then, is the knowledge of futurity to us, or how does it assist us to guard against impending evils, since it will come inevitably? but whence comes that divination? to whom is owing that knowledge from the entrails of beasts? who first made observations from the voice of the crow? who invented the lots?[ ] not that i give no credit to these things, or that i despise attius navius's staff, which you mentioned; but i ought to be informed how these things are understood by philosophers, especially as the diviners are often wrong in their conjectures. but physicians, you say, are likewise often mistaken. what comparison can there be between divination, of the origin of which we are ignorant, and physic, which proceeds on principles intelligible to every one? you believe that the decii,[ ] in devoting themselves to death, appeased the gods. how great, then, was the iniquity of the gods that they could not be appeased but at the price of such noble blood! that was the stratagem of generals such as the greeks call [greek: stratêgêma], and it was a stratagem worthy such illustrious leaders, who consulted the public good even at the expense of their lives: they conceived rightly, what indeed happened, that if the general rode furiously upon the enemy, the whole army would follow his example. as to the voice of the fauns, i never heard it. if you assure me that you have, i shall believe you, though i really know not what a faun is. vii. i do not, then, o balbus, from anything that you have said, perceive as yet that it is proved that there are gods. i believe it, indeed, but not from any arguments of the stoics. cleanthes, you have said, attributes the idea that men have of the gods to four causes. in the first place (as i have already sufficiently mentioned), to a foreknowledge of future events; secondly, to tempests, and other shocks of nature; thirdly, to the utility and plenty of things we enjoy; fourthly, to the invariable order of the stars and the heavens. the arguments drawn from foreknowledge i have already answered. with regard to tempests in the air, the sea, and the earth, i own that many people are affrighted by them, and imagine that the immortal gods are the authors of them. but the question is, not whether there are people who believe that there are gods, but whether there are gods or not. as to the two other causes of cleanthes, one of which is derived from the great abundance of desirable things which we enjoy, the other from the invariable order of the seasons and the heavens, i shall treat on them when i answer your discourse concerning the providence of the gods--a point, balbus, upon which you have spoken at great length. i shall likewise defer till then examining the argument which you attribute to chrysippus, that "if there is in nature anything which surpasses the power of man to produce, there must consequently be some being better than man." i shall also postpone, till we come to that part of my argument, your comparison of the world to a fine house, your observations on the proportion and harmony of the universe, and those smart, short reasons of zeno which you quote; and i shall examine at the same time your reasons drawn from natural philosophy, concerning that fiery force and that vital heat which you regard as the principle of all things; and i will investigate, in its proper place, all that you advanced the other day on the existence of the gods, and on the sense and understanding which you attributed to the sun, the moon, and all the stars; and i shall ask you this question over and over again, by what proofs are you convinced yourself there are gods? viii. i thought, says balbus, that i had brought ample proofs to establish this point. but such is your manner of opposing, that, when you seem on the point of interrogating me, and when i am preparing to answer, you suddenly divert the discourse, and give me no opportunity to reply to you; and thus those most important points concerning divination and fate are neglected which we stoics have thoroughly examined, but which your school has only slightly touched upon. but they are not thought essential to the question in hand; therefore, if you think proper, do not confuse them together, that we in this discussion may come to a clear explanation of the subject of our present inquiry. very well, says cotta. since, then, you have divided the whole question into four parts, and i have said all that i had to say on the first, i will take the second into consideration; in which, when you attempted to show what the character of the gods was, you seemed to me rather to prove that there are none; for you said that it was the greatest difficulty to draw our minds from the prepossessions of the eyes; but that as nothing is more excellent than the deity, you did not doubt that the world was god, because there is nothing better in nature than the world, and so we may reasonably think it animated, or, rather, perceive it in our minds as clearly as if it were obvious to our eyes. now, in what sense do you say there is nothing better than the world? if you mean that there is nothing more beautiful, i agree with you; that there is nothing more adapted to our wants, i likewise agree with you: but if you mean that nothing is wiser than the world, i am by no means of your opinion. not that i find it difficult to conceive anything in my mind independent of my eyes; on the contrary, the more i separate my mind from my eyes, the less i am able to comprehend your opinion. ix. nothing is better than the world, you say. nor is there, indeed, anything on earth better than the city of rome; do you think, therefore, that our city has a mind; that it thinks and reasons; or that this most beautiful city, being void of sense, is not preferable to an ant, because an ant has sense, understanding, reason, and memory? you should consider, balbus, what ought to be allowed you, and not advance things because they please you. for that old, concise, and, as it seemed to you, acute syllogism of zeno has been all which you have so much enlarged upon in handling this topic: "that which reasons is superior to that which does not; nothing is superior to the world; therefore the world reasons." if you would prove also that the world can very well read a book, follow the example of zeno, and say, "that which can read is better than that which cannot; nothing is better than the world; the world therefore can read." after the same manner you may prove the world to be an orator, a mathematician, a musician--that it possesses all sciences, and, in short, is a philosopher. you have often said that god made all things, and that no cause can produce an effect unlike itself. from hence it will follow, not only that the world is animated, and is wise, but also plays upon the fiddle and the flute, because it produces men who play on those instruments. zeno, therefore, the chief of your sect, advances no argument sufficient to induce us to think that the world reasons, or, indeed, that it is animated at all, and consequently none to think it a deity; though it may be said that there is nothing superior to it, as there is nothing more beautiful, nothing more useful to us, nothing more adorned, and nothing more regular in its motions. but if the world, considered as one great whole, is not god, you should not surely deify, as you have done, that infinite multitude of stars which only form a part of it, and which so delight you with the regularity of their eternal courses; not but that there is something truly wonderful and incredible in their regularity; but this regularity of motion, balbus, may as well be ascribed to a natural as to a divine cause. x. what can be more regular than the flux and reflux of the euripus at chalcis, the sicilian sea, and the violence of the ocean in those parts[ ] where the rapid tide does europe from the libyan coast divide? the same appears on the spanish and british coasts. must we conclude that some deity appoints and directs these ebbings and flowings to certain fixed times? consider, i pray, if everything which is regular in its motion is deemed divine, whether it will not follow that tertian and quartan agues must likewise be so, as their returns have the greatest regularity. these effects are to be explained by reason; but, because you are unable to assign any, you have recourse to a deity as your last refuge. the arguments of chrysippus appeared to you of great weight; a man undoubtedly of great quickness and subtlety (i call those quick who have a sprightly turn of thought, and those subtle whose minds are seasoned by use as their hands are by labor): "if," says he, "there is anything which is beyond the power of man to produce, the being who produces it is better than man. man is unable to make what is in the world; the being, therefore, that could do it is superior to man. what being is there but a god superior to man? therefore there is a god." these arguments are founded on the same erroneous principles as zeno's, for he does not define what is meant by being better or more excellent, or distinguish between an intelligent cause and a natural cause. chrysippus adds, "if there are no gods, there is nothing better than man; but we cannot, without the highest arrogance, have this idea of ourselves." let us grant that it is arrogance in man to think himself better than the world; but to comprehend that he has understanding and reason, and that in orion and canicula there is neither, is no arrogance, but an indication of good sense. "since we suppose," continues he, "when we see a beautiful house, that it was built for the master, and not for mice, we should likewise judge that the world is the mansion of the gods." yes, if i believed that the gods built the world; but not if, as i believe, and intend to prove, it is the work of nature. xi. socrates, in xenophon, asks, "whence had man his understanding, if there was none in the world?" and i ask, whence had we speech, harmony, singing; unless we think it is the sun conversing with the moon when she approaches near it, or that the world forms an harmonious concert, as pythagoras imagines? this, balbus, is the effect of nature; not of that nature which proceeds artificially, as zeno says, and the character of which i shall presently examine into, but a nature which, by its own proper motions and mutations, modifies everything. for i readily agree to what you said about the harmony and general agreement of nature, which you pronounced to be firmly bound and united together, as it were, by ties of blood; but i do not approve of what you added, that "it could not possibly be so, unless it were so united by one divine spirit." on the contrary, the whole subsists by the power of nature, independently of the gods, and there is a kind of sympathy (as the greeks call it) which joins together all the parts of the universe; and the greater that is in its own power, the less is it necessary to have recourse to a divine intelligence. xii. but how will you get rid of the objections which carneades made? "if," says he, "there is no body immortal, there is none eternal; but there is no body immortal, nor even indivisible, or that cannot be separated and disunited; and as every animal is in its nature passive, so there is not one which is not subject to the impressions of extraneous bodies; none, that is to say, which can avoid the necessity of enduring and suffering: and if every animal is mortal, there is none immortal; so, likewise, if every animal may be cut up and divided, there is none indivisible, none eternal, but all are liable to be affected by, and compelled to submit to, external power. every animal, therefore, is necessarily mortal, dissoluble, and divisible." for as there is no wax, no silver, no brass which cannot be converted into something else, whatever is composed of wax, or silver, or brass may cease to be what it is. by the same reason, if all the elements are mutable, every body is mutable. now, according to your doctrine, all the elements are mutable; all bodies, therefore, are mutable. but if there were any body immortal, then all bodies would not be mutable. every body, then, is mortal; for every body is either water, air, fire, or earth, or composed of the four elements together, or of some of them. now, there is not one of all these elements that does not perish; for earthly bodies are fragile: water is so soft that the least shock will separate its parts, and fire and air yield to the least impulse, and are subject to dissolution; besides, any of these elements perish when converted into another nature, as when water is formed from earth, the air from water, and the sky from air, and when they change in the same manner back again. therefore, if there is nothing but what is perishable in the composition of all animals, there is no animal eternal. xiii. but, not to insist on these arguments, there is no animal to be found that had not a beginning, and will not have an end; for every animal being sensitive, they are consequently all sensible of cold and heat, sweet and bitter; nor can they have pleasing sensations without being subject to the contrary. as, therefore, they receive pleasure, they likewise receive pain; and whatever being is subject to pain must necessarily be subject to death. it must be allowed, therefore, that every animal is mortal. besides, a being that is not sensible of pleasure or pain cannot have the essence of an animal; if, then, on the one hand, every animal must be sensible of pleasure and pain, and if, on the other, every being that has these sensations cannot be immortal, we may conclude that as there is no animal insensible, there is none immortal. besides, there is no animal without inclination and aversion--an inclination to that which is agreeable to nature, and an aversion to the contrary: there are in the case of every animal some things which they covet, and others they reject. what they reject are repugnant to their nature, and consequently would destroy them. every animal, therefore, is inevitably subject to be destroyed. there are innumerable arguments to prove that whatever is sensitive is perishable; for cold, heat, pleasure, pain, and all that affects the sense, when they become excessive, cause destruction. since, then, there is no animal that is not sensitive, there is none immortal. xiv. the substance of an animal is either simple or compound; simple, if it is composed only of earth, of fire, of air, or of water (and of such a sort of being we can form no idea); compound, if it is formed of different elements, which have each their proper situation, and have a natural tendency to it--this element tending towards the highest parts, that towards the lowest, and another towards the middle. this conjunction may for some time subsist, but not forever; for every element must return to its first situation. no animal, therefore, is eternal. but your school, balbus, allows fire only to be the sole active principle; an opinion which i believe you derive from heraclitus, whom some men understand in one sense, some in another: but since he seems unwilling to be understood, we will pass him by. you stoics, then, say that fire is the universal principle of all things; that all living bodies cease to live on the extinction of that heat; and that throughout all nature whatever is sensible of that heat lives and flourishes. now, i cannot conceive that bodies should perish for want of heat, rather than for want of moisture or air, especially as they even die through excess of heat; so that the life of animals does not depend more on fire than on the other elements. however, air and water have this quality in common with fire and heat. but let us see to what this tends. if i am not mistaken, you believe that in all nature there is nothing but fire, which is self-animated. why fire rather than air, of which the life of animals consists, and which is called from thence _anima_,[ ] the soul? but how is it that you take it for granted that life is nothing but fire? it seems more probable that it is a compound of fire and air. but if fire is self-animated, unmixed with any other element, it must be sensitive, because it renders our bodies sensitive; and the same objection which i just now made will arise, that whatever is sensitive must necessarily be susceptible of pleasure and pain, and whatever is sensible of pain is likewise subject to the approach of death; therefore you cannot prove fire to be eternal. you stoics hold that all fire has need of nourishment, without which it cannot possibly subsist; that the sun, moon, and all the stars are fed either with fresh or salt waters; and the reason that cleanthes gives why the sun is retrograde, and does not go beyond the tropics in the summer or winter, is that he may not be too far from his sustenance. this i shall fully examine hereafter; but at present we may conclude that whatever may cease to be cannot of its own nature be eternal; that if fire wants sustenance, it will cease to be, and that, therefore, fire is not of its own nature eternal. xv. after all, what kind of a deity must that be who is not graced with one single virtue, if we should succeed in forming this idea of such a one? must we not attribute prudence to a deity? a virtue which consists in the knowledge of things good, bad, and indifferent. yet what need has a being for the discernment of good and ill who neither has nor can have any ill? of what use is reason to him? of what use is understanding? we men, indeed, find them useful to aid us in finding out things which are obscure by those which are clear to us; but nothing can be obscure to a deity. as to justice, which gives to every one his own, it is not the concern of the gods; since that virtue, according to your doctrine, received its birth from men and from civil society. temperance consists in abstinence from corporeal pleasures, and if such abstinence hath a place in heaven, so also must the pleasures abstained from. lastly, if fortitude is ascribed to the deity, how does it appear? in afflictions, in labor, in danger? none of these things can affect a god. how, then, can we conceive this to be a deity that makes no use of reason, and is not endowed with any virtue? however, when i consider what is advanced by the stoics, my contempt for the ignorant multitude vanishes. for these are their divinities. the syrians worshipped a fish. the egyptians consecrated beasts of almost every kind. the greeks deified many men; as alabandus[ ] at alabandæ, tenes at tenedos; and all greece pay divine honors to leucothea (who was before called ino), to her son palæmon, to hercules, to Æsculapius, and to the tyndaridæ; our own people to romulus, and to many others, who, as citizens newly admitted into the ancient body, they imagine have been received into heaven. these are the gods of the illiterate. xvi. what are the notions of you philosophers? in what respect are they superior to these ideas? i shall pass them over; for they are certainly very admirable. let the world, then, be a deity, for that, i conceive, is what you mean by the refulgent heaven above, which all men call, unanimously, jove. but why are we to add many more gods? what a multitude of them there is! at least, it seems so to me; for every constellation, according to you, is a deity: to some you give the name of beasts, as the goat, the scorpion, the bull, the lion; to others the names of inanimate things, as the ship, the altar, the crown. but supposing these were to be allowed, how can the rest be granted, or even so much as understood? when we call corn ceres, and wine bacchus, we make use of the common manner of speaking; but do you think any one so mad as to believe that his food is a deity? with regard to those who, you say, from having been men became gods, i should be very willing to learn of you, either how it was possible formerly, or, if it had ever been, why is it not so now? i do not conceive, as things are at present, how hercules, burn'd with fiery torches on mount oeta, as accius says, should rise, with the flames, to the eternal mansions of his father. besides, homer also says that ulysses[ ] met him in the shades below, among the other dead. but yet i should be glad to know which hercules we should chiefly worship; for they who have searched into those histories, which are but little known, tell us of several. the most ancient is he who fought with apollo about the tripos of delphi, and is son of jupiter and lisyto; and of the most ancient jupiters too, for we find many jupiters also in the grecian chronicles. the second is the egyptian hercules, and is believed to be the son of nilus, and to be the author of the phrygian characters. the third, to whom they offered sacrifices, is one of the idæi dactyli.[ ] the fourth is the son of jupiter and asteria, the sister of latona, chiefly honored by the tyrians, who pretend that carthago[ ] is his daughter. the fifth, called belus, is worshipped in india. the sixth is the son of alcmena by jupiter; but by the third jupiter, for there are many jupiters, as you shall soon see. xvii. since this examination has led me so far, i will convince you that in matters of religion i have learned more from the pontifical rites, the customs of our ancestors, and the vessels of numa,[ ] which lælius mentions in his little golden oration, than from all the learning of the stoics; for tell me, if i were a disciple of your school, what answer could i make to these questions? if there are gods, are nymphs also goddesses? if they are goddesses, are pans and satyrs in the same rank? but they are not; consequently, nymphs are not goddesses. yet they have temples publicly dedicated to them. what do you conclude from thence? others who have temples are not therefore gods. but let us go on. you call jupiter and neptune gods; their brother pluto, then, is one; and if so, those rivers also are deities which they say flow in the infernal regions--acheron, cocytus, pyriphlegethon; charon also, and cerberus, are gods; but that cannot be allowed; nor can pluto be placed among the deities. what, then, will you say of his brothers? thus reasons carneades; not with any design to destroy the existence of the gods (for what would less become a philosopher?), but to convince us that on that matter the stoics have said nothing plausible. if, then, jupiter and neptune are gods, adds he, can that divinity be denied to their father saturn, who is principally worshipped throughout the west? if saturn is a god, then must his father, coelus, be one too, and so must the parents of coelus, which are the sky and day, as also their brothers and sisters, which by ancient genealogists are thus named: love, deceit, fear, labor, envy, fate, old age, death, darkness, misery, lamentation, favor, fraud, obstinacy, the destinies, the hesperides, and dreams; all which are the offspring of erebus and night. these monstrous deities, therefore, must be received, or else those from whom they sprung must be disallowed. xviii. if you say that apollo, vulcan, mercury, and the rest of that sort are gods, can you doubt the divinity of hercules and Æsculapius, bacchus, castor and pollux? these are worshipped as much as those, and even more in some places. therefore they must be numbered among the gods, though on the mother's side they are only of mortal race. aristæus, who is said to have been the son of apollo, and to have found out the art of making oil from the olive; theseus, the son of neptune; and the rest whose fathers were deities, shall they not be placed in the number of the gods? but what think you of those whose mothers were goddesses? they surely have a better title to divinity; for, in the civil law, as he is a freeman who is born of a freewoman, so, in the law of nature, he whose mother is a goddess must be a god. the isle astypalæa religiously honor achilles; and if he is a deity, orpheus and rhesus are so, who were born of one of the muses; unless, perhaps, there may be a privilege belonging to sea marriages which land marriages have not. orpheus and rhesus are nowhere worshipped; and if they are therefore not gods, because they are nowhere worshipped as such, how can the others be deities? you, balbus, seemed to agree with me that the honors which they received were not from their being regarded as immortals, but as men richly endued with virtue. but if you think latona a goddess, how can you avoid admitting hecate to be one also, who was the daughter of asteria, latona's sister? certainly she is one, if we may judge by the altars erected to her in greece. and if hecate is a goddess, how can you refuse that rank to the eumenides? for they also have a temple at athens, and, if i understand right, the romans have consecrated a grove to them. the furies, too, whom we look upon as the inspectors into and scourges of impiety, i suppose, must have their divinity too. as you hold that there is some divinity presides over every human affair, there is one who presides over the travail of matrons, whose name, _natio_, is derived _a nascentibus_, from nativities, and to whom we used to sacrifice in our processions in the fields of ardæa; but if she is a deity, we must likewise acknowledge all those you mentioned, honor, faith, intellect, concord; by the same rule also, hope, juno, moneta,[ ] and every idle phantom, every child of our imagination, are deities. but as this consequence is quite inadmissible, do not you either defend the cause from which it flows. xix. what say you to this? if these are deities, which we worship and regard as such, why are not serapis and isis[ ] placed in the same rank? and if they are admitted, what reason have we to reject the gods of the barbarians? thus we should deify oxen, horses, the ibis, hawks, asps, crocodiles, fishes, dogs, wolves, cats, and many other beasts. if we go back to the source of this superstition, we must equally condemn all the deities from which they proceed. shall ino, whom the greeks call leucothea, and we matuta, be reputed a goddess, because she was the daughter of cadmus, and shall that title be refused to circe and pasiphae,[ ] who had the sun for their father, and perseis, daughter of the ocean, for their mother? it is true, circe has divine honors paid her by our colony of circæum; therefore you call her a goddess; but what will you say of medea, the granddaughter of the sun and the ocean, and daughter of Æetes and idyia? what will you say of her brother absyrtus, whom pacuvius calls Ægialeus, though the other name is more frequent in the writings of the ancients? if you did not deify one as well as the other, what will become of ino? for all these deities have the same origin. shall amphiaraus and tryphonius be called gods? our publicans, when some lands in boeotia were exempted from the tax, as belonging to the immortal gods, denied that any were immortal who had been men. but if you deify these, erechtheus surely is a god, whose temple and priest we have seen at athens. and can you, then, refuse to acknowledge also codrus, and many others who shed their blood for the preservation of their country? and if it is not allowable to consider all these men as gods, then, certainly, probabilities are not in favor of our acknowledging the _divinity_ of those previously mentioned beings from whom these have proceeded. it is easy to observe, likewise, that if in many countries people have paid divine honors to the memory of those who have signalized their courage, it was done in order to animate others to practise virtue, and to expose themselves the more willingly to dangers in their country's cause. from this motive the athenians have deified erechtheus and his daughters, and have erected also a temple, called leocorion, to the daughters of leus.[ ] alabandus is more honored in the city which he founded than any of the more illustrious deities; from thence stratonicus had a pleasant turn--as he had many--when he was troubled with an impertinent fellow who insisted that alabandus was a god, but that hercules was not; "very well," says he, "then let the anger of alabandus fall upon me, and that of hercules upon you." xx. do you not consider, balbus, to what lengths your arguments for the divinity of the heaven and the stars will carry you? you deify the sun and the moon, which the greeks take to be apollo and diana. if the moon is a deity, the morning-star, the other planets, and all the fixed stars are also deities; and why shall not the rainbow be placed in that number? for it is so wonderfully beautiful that it is justly said to be the daughter of thaumas.[ ] but if you deify the rainbow, what regard will you pay to the clouds? for the colors which appear in the bow are only formed of the clouds, one of which is said to have brought forth the centaurs; and if you deify the clouds, you cannot pay less regard to the seasons, which the roman people have really consecrated. tempests, showers, storms, and whirlwinds must then be deities. it is certain, at least, that our captains used to sacrifice a victim to the waves before they embarked on any voyage. as you deify the earth under the name of ceres,[ ] because, as you said, she bears fruits (_a gerendo_), and the ocean under that of neptune, rivers and fountains have the same right. thus we see that maso, the conqueror of corsica, dedicated a temple to a fountain, and the names of the tiber, spino, almo, nodinus, and other neighboring rivers are in the prayers[ ] of the augurs. therefore, either the number of such deities will be infinite, or we must admit none of them, and wholly disapprove of such an endless series of superstition. xxi. none of all these assertions, then, are to be admitted. i must proceed now, balbus, to answer those who say that, with regard to those deified mortals, so religiously and devoutly reverenced, the public opinion should have the force of reality. to begin, then: they who are called theologists say that there are three jupiters; the first and second of whom were born in arcadia; one of whom was the son of Æther, and father of proserpine and bacchus; the other the son of coelus, and father of minerva, who is called the goddess and inventress of war; the third one born of saturn in the isle of crete,[ ] where his sepulchre is shown. the sons of jupiter ([greek: dioskouroi]) also, among the greeks, have many names; first, the three who at athens have the title of anactes,[ ] tritopatreus, eubuleus, and dionysus, sons of the most ancient king jupiter and proserpine; the next are castor and pollux, sons of the third jupiter and leda; and, lastly, three others, by some called alco,[ ] melampus, and tmolus, sons of atreus, the son of pelops. as to the muses, there were at first four--thelxiope, aoede, arche, and melete--daughters of the second jupiter; afterward there were nine, daughters of the third jupiter and mnemosyne; there were also nine others, having the same appellations, born of pierus and antiopa, by the poets usually called pierides and pieriæ. though _sol_ (the sun) is so called, you say, because he is _solus_ (single); yet how many suns do theologists mention? there is one, the son of jupiter and grandson of Æther; another, the son of hyperion; a third, who, the egyptians say, was of the city heliopolis, sprung from vulcan, the son of nilus; a fourth is said to have been born at rhodes of acantho, in the times of the heroes, and was the grandfather of jalysus, camirus, and lindus; a fifth, of whom, it is pretended, aretes and circe were born at colchis. xxii. there are likewise several vulcans. the first (who had of minerva that apollo whom the ancient historians call the tutelary god of athens) was the son of coelus; the second, whom the egyptians call opas,[ ] and whom they looked upon as the protector of egypt, is the son of nilus; the third, who is said to have been the master of the forges at lemnos, was the son of the third jupiter and of juno; the fourth, who possessed the islands near sicily called vulcaniæ,[ ] was the son of menalius. one mercury had coelus for his father and dies for his mother; another, who is said to dwell in a cavern, and is the same as trophonius, is the son of valens and phoronis. a third, of whom, and of penelope, pan was the offspring, is the son of the third jupiter and maia. a fourth, whom the egyptians think it a crime to name, is the son of nilus. a fifth, whom we call, in their language, thoth, as with them the first month of the year is called, is he whom the people of pheneum[ ] worship, and who is said to have killed argus, to have fled for it into egypt, and to have given laws and learning to the egyptians. the first of the Æsculapii, the god of arcadia, who is said to have invented the probe and to have been the first person who taught men to use bandages for wounds, is the son of apollo. the second, who was killed with thunder, and is said to be buried in cynosura,[ ] is the brother of the second mercury. the third, who is said to have found out the art of purging the stomach, and of drawing teeth, is the son of arsippus and arsinoe; and in arcadia there is shown his tomb, and the wood which is consecrated to him, near the river lusium. xxiii. i have already spoken of the most ancient of the apollos, who is the son of vulcan, and tutelar god of athens. there is another, son of corybas, and native of crete, for which island he is said to have contended with jupiter himself. a third, who came from the regions of the hyperborei[ ] to delphi, is the son of the third jupiter and of latona. a fourth was of arcadia, whom the arcadians called nomio,[ ] because they regarded him as their legislator. there are likewise many dianas. the first, who is thought to be the mother of the winged cupid, is the daughter of jupiter and proserpine. the second, who is more known, is daughter of the third jupiter and of latona. the third, whom the greeks often call by her father's name, is the daughter of upis[ ] and glauce. there are many also of the dionysi. the first was the son of jupiter and proserpine. the second, who is said to have killed nysa, was the son of nilus. the third, who reigned in asia, and for whom the sabazia[ ] were instituted, was the son of caprius. the fourth, for whom they celebrate the orphic festivals, sprung from jupiter and luna. the fifth, who is supposed to have instituted the trieterides, was the son of nysus and thyone. the first venus, who has a temple at elis, was the daughter of coelus and dies. the second arose out of the froth of the sea, and became, by mercury, the mother of the second cupid. the third, the daughter of jupiter and diana, was married to vulcan, but is said to have had anteros by mars. the fourth was a syrian, born of tyro, who is called astarte, and is said to have been married to adonis. i have already mentioned one minerva, mother of apollo. another, who is worshipped at sais, a city in egypt, sprung from nilus. the third, whom i have also mentioned, was daughter of jupiter. the fourth, sprung from jupiter and coryphe, the daughter of the ocean; the arcadians call her coria, and make her the inventress of chariots. a fifth, whom they paint with wings at her heels, was daughter of pallas, and is said to have killed her father for endeavoring to violate her chastity. the first cupid is said to be the son of mercury and the first diana; the second, of mercury and the second venus; the third, who is the same as anteros, of mars and the third venus. all these opinions arise from old stories that were spread in greece; the belief in which, balbus, you well know, ought to be stopped, lest religion should suffer. but you stoics, so far from refuting them, even give them authority by the mysterious sense which you pretend to find in them. can you, then, think, after this plain refutation, that there is need to employ more subtle reasonings? but to return from this digression. xxiv. we see that the mind, faith, hope, virtue, honor, victory, health, concord, and things of such kind, are purely natural, and have nothing of divinity in them; for either they are inherent in us, as the mind, faith, hope, virtue, and concord are; or else they are to be desired, as honor, health, and victory. i know indeed that they are useful to us, and see that statues have been religiously erected for them; but as to their divinity, i shall begin to believe it when you have proved it for certain. of this kind i may particularly mention fortune, which is allowed to be ever inseparable from inconstancy and temerity, which are certainly qualities unworthy of a divine being. but what delight do you take in the explication of fables, and in the etymology of names?--that coelus was castrated by his son, and that saturn was bound in chains by his son! by your defence of these and such like fictions you would make the authors of them appear not only not to be madmen, but to have been even very wise. but the pains which you take with your etymologies deserve our pity. that saturn is so called because _se saturat annis_, he is full of years; mavors, mars, because _magna vortit_, he brings about mighty changes; minerva, because _minuit_, she diminishes, or because _minatur_, she threatens; venus, because _venit ad omnia_, she comes to all; ceres, _a gerendo_, from bearing. how dangerous is this method! for there are many names would puzzle you. from what would you derive vejupiter and vulcan? though, indeed, if you can derive neptune _a nando_, from swimming, in which you seem to me to flounder about yourself more than neptune, you may easily find the origin of all names, since it is founded only upon the conformity of some one letter. zeno first, and after him cleanthes and chrysippus, are put to the unnecessary trouble of explaining mere fables, and giving reasons for the several appellations of every deity; which is really owning that those whom we call gods are not the representations of deities, but natural things, and that to judge otherwise is an error. xxv. yet this error has so much prevailed that even pernicious things have not only the title of divinity ascribed to them, but have also sacrifices offered to them; for fever has a temple on the palatine hill, and orbona another near that of the lares, and we see on the esquiline hill an altar consecrated to ill-fortune. let all such errors be banished from philosophy, if we would advance, in our dispute concerning the immortal gods, nothing unworthy of immortal beings. i know myself what i ought to believe; which is far different from what you have said. you take neptune for an intelligence pervading the sea. you have the same opinion of ceres with regard to the earth. i cannot, i own, find out, or in the least conjecture, what that intelligence of the sea or the earth is. to learn, therefore, the existence of the gods, and of what description and character they are, i must apply elsewhere, not to the stoics. let us proceed to the two other parts of our dispute: first, "whether there is a divine providence which governs the world;" and lastly, "whether that providence particularly regards mankind;" for these are the remaining propositions of your discourse; and i think that, if you approve of it, we should examine these more accurately. with all my heart, says velleius, for i readily agree to what you have hitherto said, and expect still greater things from you. i am unwilling to interrupt you, says balbus to cotta, but we shall take another opportunity, and i shall effectually convince you. but[ ] * * * xxvi. shall i adore, and bend the suppliant knee, who scorn their power and doubt their deity? does not niobe here seem to reason, and by that reasoning to bring all her misfortunes upon herself? but what a subtle expression is the following! on strength of will alone depends success; a maxim capable of leading us into all that is bad. though i'm confined, his malice yet is vain, his tortured heart shall answer pain for pain; his ruin soothe my soul with soft content, lighten my chains, and welcome banishment! this, now, is reason; that reason which you say the divine goodness has denied to the brute creation, kindly to bestow it on men alone. how great, how immense the favor! observe the same medea flying from her father and her country: the guilty wretch from her pursuer flies. by her own hands the young absyrtus slain, his mangled limbs she scatters o'er the plain, that the fond sire might sink beneath his woe, and she to parricide her safety owe. reflection, as well as wickedness, must have been necessary to the preparation of such a fact; and did he too, who prepared that fatal repast for his brother, do it without reflection? revenge as great as atreus' injury shall sink his soul and crown his misery. xxvii. did not thyestes himself, not content with having defiled his brother's bed (of which atreus with great justice thus complains, when faithless comforts, in the lewd embrace, with vile adultery stain a royal race, the blood thus mix'd in fouler currents flows, taints the rich soil, and breeds unnumber'd woes)-- did he not, i say, by that adultery, aim at the possession of the crown? atreus thus continues: a lamb, fair gift of heaven, with golden fleece, promised in vain to fix my crown in peace; but base thyestes, eager for the prey, crept to my bed, and stole the gem away. do you not perceive that thyestes must have had a share of reason proportionable to the greatness of his crimes--such crimes as are not only represented to us on the stage, but such as we see committed, nay, often exceeded, in the common course of life? the private houses of individual citizens, the public courts, the senate, the camp, our allies, our provinces, all agree that reason is the author of all the ill, as well as of all the good, which is done; that it makes few act well, and that but seldom, but many act ill, and that frequently; and that, in short, the gods would have shown greater benevolence in denying us any reason at all than in sending us that which is accompanied with so much mischief; for as wine is seldom wholesome, but often hurtful in diseases, we think it more prudent to deny it to the patient than to run the risk of so uncertain a remedy; so i do not know whether it would not be better for mankind to be deprived of wit, thought, and penetration, or what we call reason, since it is a thing pernicious to many and very useful to few, than to have it bestowed upon them with so much liberality and in such abundance. but if the divine will has really consulted the good of man in this gift of reason, the good of those men only was consulted on whom a well-regulated one is bestowed: how few those are, if any, is very apparent. we cannot admit, therefore, that the gods consulted the good of a few only; the conclusion must be that they consulted the good of none. xxviii. you answer that the ill use which a great part of mankind make of reason no more takes away the goodness of the gods, who bestow it as a present of the greatest benefit to them, than the ill use which children make of their patrimony diminishes the obligation which they have to their parents for it. we grant you this; but where is the similitude? it was far from deianira's design to injure hercules when she made him a present of the shirt dipped in the blood of the centaurs. nor was it a regard to the welfare of jason of pheræ that influenced the man who with his sword opened his imposthume, which the physicians had in vain attempted to cure. for it has often happened that people have served a man whom they intended to injure, and have injured one whom they designed to serve; so that the effect of the gift is by no means always a proof of the intention of the giver; neither does the benefit which may accrue from it prove that it came from the hands of a benefactor. for, in short, what debauchery, what avarice, what crime among men is there which does not owe its birth to thought and reflection, that is, to reason? for all opinion is reason: right reason, if men's thoughts are conformable to truth; wrong reason, if they are not. the gods only give us the mere faculty of reason, if we have any; the use or abuse of it depends entirely upon ourselves; so that the comparison is not just between the present of reason given us by the gods, and a patrimony left to a son by his father; for, after all, if the injury of mankind had been the end proposed by the gods, what could they have given them more pernicious than reason? for what seed could there be of injustice, intemperance, and cowardice, if reason were not laid as the foundation of these vices? xxix. i mentioned just now medea and atreus, persons celebrated in heroic poems, who had used this reason only for the contrivance and practice of the most flagitious crimes; but even the trifling characters which appear in comedies supply us with the like instances of this reasoning faculty; for example, does not he, in the eunuch, reason with some subtlety?-- what, then, must i resolve upon? she turn'd me out-of-doors; she sends for me back again; shall i go? no, not if she were to beg it of me. another, in the twins, making no scruple of opposing a received maxim, after the manner of the academics, asserts that when a man is in love and in want, it is pleasant to have a father covetous, crabbed, and passionate, who has no love or affection for his children. this unaccountable opinion he strengthens thus: you may defraud him of his profits, or forge letters in his name, or fright him by your servant into compliance; and what you take from such an old hunks, how much more pleasantly do you spend it! on the contrary, he says that an easy, generous father is an inconvenience to a son in love; for, says he, i can't tell how to abuse so good, so prudent a parent, who always foreruns my desires, and meets me purse in hand, to support me in my pleasures: this easy goodness and generosity quite defeat all my frauds, tricks, and stratagems.[ ] what are these frauds, tricks, and stratagems but the effects of reason? o excellent gift of the gods! without this phormio could not have said, find me out the old man: i have something hatching for him in my head. xxx. but let us pass from the stage to the bar. the prætor[ ] takes his seat. to judge whom? the man who set fire to our archives. how secretly was that villany conducted! q. sosius, an illustrious roman knight, of the picene field,[ ] confessed the fact. who else is to be tried? he who forged the public registers--alenus, an artful fellow, who counterfeited the handwriting of the six officers.[ ] let us call to mind other trials: that on the subject of the gold of tolosa, or the conspiracy of jugurtha. let us trace back the informations laid against tubulus for bribery in his judicial office; and, since that, the proceedings of the tribune peduceus concerning the incest of the vestals. let us reflect upon the trials which daily happen for assassinations, poisonings, embezzlement of public money, frauds in wills, against which we have a new law; then that action against the advisers or assisters of any theft; the many laws concerning frauds in guardianship, breaches of trust in partnerships and commissions in trade, and other violations of faith in buying, selling, borrowing, or lending; the public decree on a private affair by the lætorian law;[ ] and, lastly, that scourge of all dishonesty, the law against fraud, proposed by our friend aquillius; that sort of fraud, he says, by which one thing is pretended and another done. can we, then, think that this plentiful fountain of evil sprung from the immortal gods? if they have given reason to man, they have likewise given him subtlety, for subtlety is only a deceitful manner of applying reason to do mischief. to them likewise we must owe deceit, and every other crime, which, without the help of reason, would neither have been thought of nor committed. as the old woman wished that to the fir which on mount pelion grew the axe had ne'er been laid,[ ] so we should wish that the gods had never bestowed this ability on man, the abuse of which is so general that the small number of those who make a good use of it are often oppressed by those who make a bad use of it; so that it seems to be given rather to help vice than to promote virtue among us. xxxi. this, you insist on it, is the fault of man, and not of the gods. but should we not laugh at a physician or pilot, though they are weak mortals, if they were to lay the blame of their ill success on the violence of the disease or the fury of the tempest? had there not been danger, we should say, who would have applied to you? this reasoning has still greater force against the deity. the fault, you say, is in man, if he commits crimes. but why was not man endued with a reason incapable of producing any crimes? how could the gods err? when we leave our effects to our children, it is in hopes that they may be well bestowed; in which we may be deceived, but how can the deity be deceived? as phoebus when he trusted his chariot to his son phaëthon, or as neptune when he indulged his son theseus in granting him three wishes, the consequence of which was the destruction of hippolitus? these are poetical fictions; but truth, and not fables, ought to proceed from philosophers. yet if those poetical deities had foreseen that their indulgence would have proved fatal to their sons, they must have been thought blamable for it. aristo of chios used often to say that the philosophers do hurt to such of their disciples as take their good doctrine in a wrong sense; thus the lectures of aristippus might produce debauchees, and those of zeno pedants. if this be true, it were better that philosophers should be silent than that their disciples should be corrupted by a misapprehension of their master's meaning; so if reason, which was bestowed on mankind by the gods with a good design, tends only to make men more subtle and fraudulent, it had been better for them never to have received it. there could be no excuse for a physician who prescribes wine to a patient, knowing that he will drink it and immediately expire. your providence is no less blamable in giving reason to man, who, it foresaw, would make a bad use of it. will you say that it did not foresee it? nothing could please me more than such an acknowledgment. but you dare not. i know what a sublime idea you entertain of her. xxxii. but to conclude. if folly, by the unanimous consent of philosophers, is allowed to be the greatest of all evils, and if no one ever attained to true wisdom, we, whom they say the immortal gods take care of, are consequently in a state of the utmost misery. for that nobody is well, or that nobody can be well, is in effect the same thing; and, in my opinion, that no man is truly wise, or that no man can be truly wise, is likewise the same thing. but i will insist no further on so self-evident a point. telamon in one verse decides the question. if, says he, there is a divine providence, good men would be happy, bad men miserable. but it is not so. if the gods had regarded mankind, they should have made them all virtuous; but if they did not regard the welfare of all mankind, at least they ought to have provided for the happiness of the virtuous. why, therefore, was the carthaginian in spain suffered to destroy those best and bravest men, the two scipios? why did maximus[ ] lose his son, the consul? why did hannibal kill marcellus? why did cannæ deprive us of paulus? why was the body of regulus delivered up to the cruelty of the carthaginians? why was not africanus protected from violence in his own house? to these, and many more ancient instances, let us add some of later date. why is rutilius, my uncle, a man of the greatest virtue and learning, now in banishment? why was my own friend and companion drusus assassinated in his own house? why was scævola, the high-priest, that pattern of moderation and prudence, massacred before the statue of vesta? why, before that, were so many illustrious citizens put to death by cinna? why had marius, the most perfidious of men, the power to cause the death of catulus, a man of the greatest dignity? but there would be no end of enumerating examples of good men made miserable and wicked men prosperous. why did that marius live to an old age, and die so happily at his own house in his seventh consulship? why was that inhuman wretch cinna permitted to enjoy so long a reign? xxxiii. he, indeed, met with deserved punishment at last. but would it not have been better that these inhumanities had been prevented than that the author of them should be punished afterward? varius, a most impious wretch, was tortured and put to death. if this was his punishment for the murdering drusus by the sword, and metellus by poison, would it not have been better to have preserved their lives than to have their deaths avenged on varius? dionysius was thirty-eight years a tyrant over the most opulent and flourishing city; and, before him, how many years did pisistratus tyrannize in the very flower of greece! phalaris and apollodorus met with the fate they deserved, but not till after they had tortured and put to death multitudes. many robbers have been executed; but the number of those who have suffered for their crimes is short of those whom they have robbed and murdered. anaxarchus,[ ] a scholar of democritus, was cut to pieces by command of the tyrant of cyprus; and zeno of elea[ ] ended his life in tortures. what shall i say of socrates,[ ] whose death, as often as i read of it in plato, draws fresh tears from my eyes? if, therefore, the gods really see everything that happens to men, you must acknowledge they make no distinction between the good and the bad. xxxiv. diogenes the cynic used to say of harpalus, one of the most fortunate villains of his time, that the constant prosperity of such a man was a kind of witness against the gods. dionysius, of whom we have before spoken, after he had pillaged the temple of proserpine at locris, set sail for syracuse, and, having a fair wind during his voyage, said, with a smile, "see, my friends, what favorable winds the immortal gods bestow upon church-robbers." encouraged by this prosperous event, he proceeded in his impiety. when he landed at peloponnesus, he went into the temple of jupiter olympius, and disrobed his statue of a golden mantle of great weight, an ornament which the tyrant gelo[ ] had given out of the spoils of the carthaginians, and at the same time, in a jesting manner, he said "that a golden mantle was too heavy in summer and too cold in winter;" and then, throwing a woollen cloak over the statue, added, "this will serve for all seasons." at another time, he ordered the golden beard of Æsculapius of epidaurus to be taken away, saying that "it was absurd for the son to have a beard, when his father had none." he likewise robbed the temples of the silver tables, which, according to the ancient custom of greece, bore this inscription, "to the good gods," saying "he was willing to make use of their goodness;" and, without the least scruple, took away the little golden emblems of victory, the cups and coronets, which were in the stretched-out hands of the statues, saying "he did not take, but receive them; for it would be folly not to accept good things from the gods, to whom we are constantly praying for favors, when they stretch out their hands towards us." and, last of all, all the things which he had thus pillaged from the temples were, by his order, brought to the market-place and sold by the common crier; and, after he had received the money for them, he commanded every purchaser to restore what he had bought, within a limited time, to the temples from whence they came. thus to his impiety towards the gods he added injustice to man. xxxv. yet neither did olympian jove strike him with his thunder, nor did Æsculapius cause him to die by tedious diseases and a lingering death. he died in his bed, had funeral honors[ ] paid to him, and left his power, which he had wickedly obtained, as a just and lawful inheritance to his son. it is not without concern that i maintain a doctrine which seems to authorize evil, and which might probably give a sanction to it, if conscience, without any divine assistance, did not point out, in the clearest manner, the difference between virtue and vice. without conscience man is contemptible. for as no family or state can be supposed to be formed with any reason or discipline if there are no rewards for good actions nor punishment for crimes, so we cannot believe that a divine providence regulates the world if there is no distinction between the honest and the wicked. but the gods, you say, neglect trifling things: the little fields or vineyards of particular men are not worthy their attention; and if blasts or hail destroy their product, jupiter does not regard it, nor do kings extend their care to the lower offices of government. this argument might have some weight if, in bringing rutilius as an instance, i had only complained of the loss of his farm at formiæ; but i spoke of a personal misfortune, his banishment.[ ] xxxvi. all men agree that external benefits, such as vineyards, corn, olives, plenty of fruit and grain, and, in short, every convenience and property of life, are derived from the gods; and, indeed, with reason, since by our virtue we claim applause, and in virtue we justly glory, which we could have no right to do if it was the gift of the gods, and not a personal merit. when we are honored with new dignities, or blessed with increase of riches; when we are favored by fortune beyond our expectation, or luckily delivered from any approaching evil, we return thanks for it to the gods, and assume no praise to ourselves. but who ever thanked the gods that he was a good man? we thank them, indeed, for riches, health, and honor. for these we invoke the all-good and all-powerful jupiter; but not for wisdom, temperance, and justice. no one ever offered a tenth of his estate to hercules to be made wise. it is reported, indeed, of pythagoras that he sacrificed an ox to the muses upon having made some new discovery in geometry;[ ] but, for my part, i cannot believe it, because he refused to sacrifice even to apollo at delos, lest he should defile the altar with blood. but to return. it is universally agreed that good fortune we must ask of the gods, but wisdom must arise from ourselves; and though temples have been consecrated to the mind, to virtue, and to faith, yet that does not contradict their being inherent in us. in regard to hope, safety, assistance, and victory, we must rely upon the gods for them; from whence it follows, as diogenes said, that the prosperity of the wicked destroys the idea of a divine providence. xxxvii. but good men have sometimes success. they have so; but we cannot, with any show of reason, attribute that success to the gods. diagoras, who is called the atheist, being at samothrace, one of his friends showed him several pictures[ ] of people who had endured very dangerous storms; "see," says he, "you who deny a providence, how many have been saved by their prayers to the gods." "ay," says diagoras, "i see those who were saved, but where are those painted who were shipwrecked?" at another time, he himself was in a storm, when the sailors, being greatly alarmed, told him they justly deserved that misfortune for admitting him into their ship; when he, pointing to others under the like distress, asked them "if they believed diagoras was also aboard those ships?" in short, with regard to good or bad fortune, it matters not what you are, or how you have lived. the gods, like kings, regard not everything. what similitude is there between them? if kings neglect anything, want of knowledge may be pleaded in their defence; but ignorance cannot be brought as an excuse for the gods. xxxviii. your manner of justifying them is somewhat extraordinary, when you say that if a wicked man dies without suffering for his crimes, the gods inflict a punishment on his children, his children's children, and all his posterity. o wonderful equity of the gods! what city would endure the maker of a law which should condemn a son or a grandson for a crime committed by the father or the grandfather? shall tantalus' unhappy offspring know no end, no close, of this long scene of woe? when will the dire reward of guilt be o'er, and myrtilus demand revenge no more?[ ] whether the poets have corrupted the stoics, or the stoics given authority to the poets, i cannot easily determine. both alike are to be condemned. if those persons whose names have been branded in the satires of hipponax or archilochus[ ] were driven to despair, it did not proceed from the gods, but had its origin in their own minds. when we see Ægistus and paris lost in the heat of an impure passion, why are we to attribute it to a deity, when the crime, as it were, speaks for itself? i believe that those who recover from illness are more indebted to the care of hippocrates than to the power of Æsculapius; that sparta received her laws from lycurgus[ ] rather than from apollo; that those eyes of the maritime coast, corinth and carthage, were plucked out, the one by critolaus, the other by hasdrubal, without the assistance of any divine anger, since you yourselves confess that a deity cannot possibly be angry on any provocation. xxxix. but could not the deity have assisted and preserved those eminent cities? undoubtedly he could; for, according to your doctrine, his power is infinite, and without the least labor; and as nothing but the will is necessary to the motion of our bodies, so the divine will of the gods, with the like ease, can create, move, and change all things. this you hold, not from a mere phantom of superstition, but on natural and settled principles of reason; for matter, you say, of which all things are composed and consist, is susceptible of all forms and changes, and there is nothing which cannot be, or cease to be, in an instant; and that divine providence has the command and disposal of this universal matter, and consequently can, in any part of the universe, do whatever she pleases: from whence i conclude that this providence either knows not the extent of her power, or neglects human affairs, or cannot judge what is best for us. providence, you say, does not extend her care to particular men; there is no wonder in that, since she does not extend it to cities, or even to nations, or people. if, therefore, she neglects whole nations, is it not very probable that she neglects all mankind? but how can you assert that the gods do not enter into all the little circumstances of life, and yet hold that they distribute dreams among men? since you believe in dreams, it is your part to solve this difficulty. besides, you say we ought to call upon the gods. those who call upon the gods are individuals. divine providence, therefore, regards individuals, which consequently proves that they are more at leisure than you imagine. let us suppose the divine providence to be greatly busied; that it causes the revolutions of the heavens, supports the earth, and rules the seas; why does it suffer so many gods to be unemployed? why is not the superintendence of human affairs given to some of those idle deities which you say are innumerable? this is the purport of what i had to say concerning "the nature of the gods;" not with a design to destroy their existence, but merely to show what an obscure point it is, and with what difficulties an explanation of it is attended. xl. balbus, observing that cotta had finished his discourse--you have been very severe, says he, against a divine providence, a doctrine established by the stoics with piety and wisdom; but, as it grows too late, i shall defer my answer to another day. our argument is of the greatest importance; it concerns our altars,[ ] our hearths, our temples, nay, even the walls of our city, which you priests hold sacred; you, who by religion defend rome better than she is defended by her ramparts. this is a cause which, while i have life, i think i cannot abandon without impiety. there is nothing, replied cotta, which i desire more than to be confuted. i have not pretended to decide this point, but to give you my private sentiments upon it; and am very sensible of your great superiority in argument. no doubt of it, says velleius; we have much to fear from one who believes that our dreams are sent from jupiter, which, though they are of little weight, are yet of more importance than the discourse of the stoics concerning the nature of the gods. the conversation ended here, and we parted. velleius judged that the arguments of cotta were truest; but those of balbus seemed to me to have the greater probability.[ ] on the commonwealth. * * * * * preface by the editor. this work was one of cicero's earlier treatises, though one of those which was most admired by his contemporaries, and one of which he himself was most proud. it was composed b.c. it was originally in two books: then it was altered and enlarged into nine, and finally reduced to six. with the exception of the dream of scipio, in the last book, the whole treatise was lost till the year , when the librarian of the vatican discovered a portion of them among the palimpsests in that library. what he discovered is translated here; but it is in a most imperfect and mutilated state. the form selected was that of a dialogue, in imitation of those of plato; and the several conferences were supposed to have taken place during the latin holidays, b.c., in the consulship of caius sempronius, tuditanus, and marcus aquilius. the speakers are scipio africanus the younger, in whose garden the scene is laid; caius lælius; lucius furius philus; marcus manilius; spurius mummius, the brother of the taker of corinth, a stoic; quintus Ælius tubero, a nephew of africanus; publius rutilius rufus; quintus mucius scævola, the tutor of cicero; and caius fannius, who was absent, however, on the second day of the conference. in the first book, the first thirty-three pages are wanting, and there are chasms amounting to thirty-eight pages more. in this book scipio asserts the superiority of an active over a speculative career; and after analyzing and comparing the monarchical, aristocratic, and democratic forms of government, gives a preference to the first; although his idea of a perfect constitution would be one compounded of three kinds in due proportion. there are a few chasms in the earlier part of the second book, and the latter part of it is wholly lost. in it scipio was led on to give an account of the rise and progress of the roman constitution, from which he passed on to the examination of the great moral obligations which are the foundations of all political union. of the remaining books we have only a few disjointed fragments, with the exception, as has been before mentioned, of the dream of scipio in the sixth. * * * * * introduction to the first book, by the original translator. cicero introduces his subject by showing that men were not born for the mere abstract study of philosophy, but that the study of philosophic truth should always be made as practical as possible, and applicable to the great interests of philanthropy and patriotism. cicero endeavors to show the benefit of mingling the contemplative or philosophic with the political and active life, according to that maxim of plato--"happy is the nation whose philosophers are kings, and whose kings are philosophers." this kind of introduction was the more necessary because many of the ancient philosophers, too warmly attached to transcendental metaphysics and sequestered speculations, had affirmed that true philosophers ought not to interest themselves in the management of public affairs. thus, as m. villemain observes, it was a maxim of the epicureans, "sapiens ne accedat ad rempublicam" (let no wise man meddle in politics). the pythagoreans had enforced the same principle with more gravity. aristotle examines the question on both sides, and concludes in favor of active life. among aristotle's disciples, a writer, singularly elegant and pure, had maintained the pre-eminence of the contemplative life over the political or active one, in a work which cicero cites with admiration, and to which he seems to have applied for relief whenever he felt harassed and discouraged in public business. but here this great man was interested by the subject he discusses, and by the whole course of his experience and conduct, to refute the dogmas of that pusillanimous sophistry and selfish indulgence by bringing forward the most glorious examples and achievements of patriotism. in this strain he had doubtless commenced his exordium, and in this strain we find him continuing it at the point in which the palimpsest becomes legible. he then proceeds to introduce his illustrious interlocutors, and leads them at first to discourse on the astronomical laws that regulate the revolutions of our planet. from this, by a very graceful and beautiful transition, he passes on to the consideration of the best forms of political constitutions that had prevailed in different nations, and those modes of government which had produced the greatest benefits in the commonwealths of antiquity. this first book is, in fact, a splendid epitome of the political science of the age of cicero, and probably the most eloquent plea in favor of mixed monarchy to be found in all literature. * * * * * book i. i. [without the virtue of patriotism], neither caius duilius, nor aulus atilius,[ ] nor lucius metellus, could have delivered rome by their courage from the terror of carthage; nor could the two scipios, when the fire of the second punic war was kindled, have quenched it in their blood; nor, when it revived in greater force, could either quintus maximus[ ] have enervated it, or marcus marcellus have crushed it; nor, when it was repulsed from the gates of our own city, would scipio have confined it within the walls of our enemies. but cato, at first a new and unknown man, whom all we who aspire to the same honors consider as a pattern to lead us on to industry and virtue, was undoubtedly at liberty to enjoy his repose at tusculum, a most salubrious and convenient retreat. but he, mad as some people think him, though no necessity compelled him, preferred being tossed about amidst the tempestuous waves of politics, even till extreme old age, to living with all imaginable luxury in that tranquillity and relaxation. i omit innumerable men who have separately devoted themselves to the protection of our commonwealth; and those whose lives are within the memory of the present generation i will not mention, lest any one should complain that i had invidiously forgotten himself or some one of his family. this only i insist on--that so great is the necessity of this virtue which nature has implanted in man, and so great is the desire to defend the common safety of our country, that its energy has continually overcome all the blandishments of pleasure and repose. ii. nor is it sufficient to possess this virtue as if it were some kind of art, unless we put it in practice. an art, indeed, though not exercised, may still be retained in knowledge; but virtue consists wholly in its proper use and action. now, the noblest use of virtue is the government of the commonwealth, and the carrying-out in real action, not in words only, of all those identical theories which those philosophers discuss at every corner. for nothing is spoken by philosophers, so far as they speak correctly and honorably, which has not been discovered and confirmed by those persons who have been the founders of the laws of states. for whence comes piety, or from whom has religion been derived? whence comes law, either that of nations, or that which is called the civil law? whence comes justice, faith, equity? whence modesty, continence, the horror of baseness, the desire of praise and renown? whence fortitude in labors and perils? doubtless, from those who have instilled some of these moral principles into men by education, and confirmed others by custom, and sanctioned others by laws. moreover, it is reported of xenocrates, one of the sublimest philosophers, that when some one asked him what his disciples learned, he replied, "to do that of their own accord which they might be compelled to do by law." that citizen, therefore, who obliges all men to those virtuous actions, by the authority of laws and penalties, to which the philosophers can scarcely persuade a few by the force of their eloquence, is certainly to be preferred to the sagest of the doctors who spend their lives in such discussions. for which of their exquisite orations is so admirable as to be entitled to be preferred to a well-constituted government, public justice, and good customs? certainly, just as i think that magnificent and imperious cities (as ennius says) are superior to castles and villages, so i imagine that those who regulate such cities by their counsel and authority are far preferable, with respect to real wisdom, to men who are unacquainted with any kind of political knowledge. and since we are strongly prompted to augment the prosperity of the human race, and since we do endeavor by our counsels and exertions to render the life of man safer and wealthier, and since we are incited to this blessing by the spur of nature herself, let us hold on that course which has always been pursued by all the best men, and not listen for a moment to the signals of those who sound a retreat so loudly that they sometimes call back even those who have made considerable progress. iii. these reasons, so certain and so evident, are opposed by those who, on the other side, argue that the labors which must necessarily be sustained in maintaining the commonwealth form but a slight impediment to the vigilant and industrious, and are only a contemptible obstacle in such important affairs, and even in common studies, offices, and employments. they add the peril of life, that base fear of death, which has ever been opposed by brave men, to whom it appears far more miserable to die by the decay of nature and old age than to be allowed an opportunity of gallantly sacrificing that life for their country which must otherwise be yielded up to nature. on this point, however, our antagonists esteem themselves copious and eloquent when they collect all the calamities of heroic men, and the injuries inflicted on them by their ungrateful countrymen. for on this subject they bring forward those notable examples among the greeks; and tell us that miltiades, the vanquisher and conqueror of the persians, before even those wounds were healed which he had received in that most glorious victory, wasted away in the chains of his fellow-citizens that life which had been preserved from the weapons of the enemy. they cite themistocles, expelled and proscribed by the country which he had rescued, and forced to flee, not to the grecian ports which he had preserved, but to the bosom of the barbarous power which he had defeated. there is, indeed, no deficiency of examples to illustrate the levity and cruelty of the athenians to their noblest citizens--examples which, originating and multiplying among them, are said at different times to have abounded in our own most august empire. for we are told: of the exile of camillus, the disgrace of ahala, the unpopularity of nasica, the expulsion of lænas,[ ] the condemnation of opimius, the flight of metellus, the cruel destruction of caius marius, the massacre of our chieftains, and the many atrocious crimes which followed. my own history is by no means free from such calamities; and i imagine that when they recollect that by my counsel and perils they were preserved in life and liberty, they are led by that consideration to bewail my misfortunes more deeply and affectionately. but i cannot tell why those who sail over the seas for the sake of knowledge and experience [should wonder at seeing still greater hazards braved in the service of the commonwealth]. iv. [since], on my quitting the consulship, i swore in the assembly of the roman people, who re-echoed my words, that i had saved the commonwealth, i console myself with this remembrance for all my cares, troubles, and injuries. although my misfortune had more of honor than misfortune, and more of glory than disaster; and i derive greater pleasure from the regrets of good men than sorrow from the exultation of the worthless. but even if it had happened otherwise, how could i have complained, as nothing befell me which was either unforeseen, or more painful than i expected, as a return for my illustrious actions? for i was one who, though it was in my power to reap more profit from leisure than most men, on account of the diversified sweetness of my studies, in which i had lived from boyhood--or, if any public calamity had happened, to have borne no more than an equal share with the rest of my countrymen in the misfortune--i nevertheless did not hesitate to oppose myself to the most formidable tempests and torrents of sedition, for the sake of saving my countrymen, and at my own proper danger to secure the common safety of all the rest. for our country did not beget and educate us with the expectation of receiving no support, as i may call it, from us; nor for the purpose of consulting nothing but our convenience, to supply us with a secure refuge for idleness and a tranquil spot for rest; but rather with a view of turning to her own advantage the nobler portion of our genius, heart, and counsel; giving us back for our private service only what she can spare from the public interests. v. those apologies, therefore, in which men take refuge as an excuse for their devoting themselves with more plausibility to mere inactivity do certainly not deserve to be listened to; when, for instance, they tell us that those who meddle with public affairs are generally good-for-nothing men, with whom it is discreditable to be compared, and miserable and dangerous to contend, especially when the multitude is in an excited state. on which account it is not the part of a wise man to take the reins, since he cannot restrain the insane and unregulated movements of the common people. nor is it becoming to a man of liberal birth, say they, thus to contend with such vile and unrefined antagonists, or to subject one's self to the lashings of contumely, or to put one's self in the way of injuries which ought not to be borne by a wise man. as if to a virtuous, brave, and magnanimous man there could be a juster reason for seeking the government than this--to avoid being subjected to worthless men, and to prevent the commonwealth from being torn to pieces by them; when, even if they were then desirous to save her, they would not have the power. vi. but this restriction who can approve, which would interdict the wise man from taking any share in the government beyond such as the occasion and necessity may compel him to? as if any greater necessity could possibly happen to any man than happened to me. in which, how could i have acted if i had not been consul at the time? and how could i have been a consul unless i had maintained that course of life from my childhood which raised me from the order of knights, in which i was born, to the very highest station? you cannot produce _extempore_, and just when you please, the power of assisting a commonwealth, although it may be severely pressed by dangers, unless you have attained the position which enables you legally to do so. and what most surprises me in the discourses of learned men, is to hear those persons who confess themselves incapable of steering the vessel of the state in smooth seas (which, indeed, they never learned, and never cared to know) profess themselves ready to assume the helm amidst the fiercest tempests. for those men are accustomed to say openly, and indeed to boast greatly, that they have never learned, and have never taken the least pains to explain, the principles of either establishing or maintaining a commonwealth; and they look on this practical science as one which belongs not to men of learning and wisdom, but to those who have made it their especial study. how, then, can it be reasonable for such men to promise their assistance to the state, when they shall be compelled to it by necessity, while they are ignorant how to govern the republic when no necessity presses upon it, which is a much more easy task? indeed, though it were true that the wise man loves not to thrust himself of his own accord into the administration of public affairs, but that if circumstances oblige him to it, then he does not refuse the office, yet i think that this science of civil legislation should in no wise be neglected by the philosopher, because all resources ought to be ready to his hand, which he knows not how soon he may be called on to use. vii. i have spoken thus at large for this reason, because in this work i have proposed to myself and undertaken a discussion on the government of a state; and in order to render it useful, i was bound, in the first place, to do away with this pusillanimous hesitation to mingle in public affairs. if there be any, therefore, who are too much influenced by the authority of the philosophers, let them consider the subject for a moment, and be guided by the opinions of those men whose authority and credit are greatest among learned men; whom i look upon, though some of them have not personally governed any state, as men who have nevertheless discharged a kind of office in the republic, inasmuch as they have made many investigations into, and left many writings concerning, state affairs. as to those whom the greeks entitle the seven wise men, i find that they almost all lived in the middle of public business. nor, indeed, is there anything in which human virtue can more closely resemble the divine powers than in establishing new states, or in preserving those already established. viii. and concerning these affairs, since it has been our good fortune to achieve something worthy of memorial in the government of our country, and also to have acquired some facility of explaining the powers and resources of politics, we can treat of this subject with the weight of personal experience and the habit of instruction and illustration. whereas before us many have been skilful in theory, though no exploits of theirs are recorded; and many others have been men of consideration in action, but unfamiliar with the arts of exposition. nor, indeed, is it at all our intention to establish a new and self-invented system of government; but our purpose is rather to recall to memory a discussion of the most illustrious men of their age in our commonwealth, which you and i, in our youth, when at smyrna, heard mentioned by publius rutilius rufus, who reported to us a conference of many days in which, in my opinion, there was nothing omitted that could throw light on political affairs. ix. for when, in the year of the consulship of tuditanus and aquilius, scipio africanus, the son of paulus Æmilius, formed the project of spending the latin holidays at his country-seat, where his most intimate friends had promised him frequent visits during this season of relaxation, on the first morning of the festival, his nephew, quintus tubero, made his appearance; and when scipio had greeted him heartily and embraced him--how is it, my dear tubero, said he, that i see you so early? for these holidays must afford you a capital opportunity of pursuing your favorite studies. ah! replied tubero, i can study my books at any time, for they are always disengaged; but it is a great privilege, my scipio, to find you at leisure, especially in this restless period of public affairs. you certainly have found me so, said scipio, but, to speak truth, i am rather relaxing from business than from study. nay, said tubero, you must try to relax from your studies too, for here are several of us, as we have appointed, all ready, if it suits your convenience, to aid you in getting through this leisure time of yours. i am very willing to consent, answered scipio, and we may be able to compare notes respecting the several topics that interest us. x. be it so, said tubero; and since you invite me to discussion, and present the opportunity, let us first examine, before any one else arrives, what can be the nature of the parhelion, or double sun, which was mentioned in the senate. those that affirm they witnessed this prodigy are neither few nor unworthy of credit, so that there is more reason for investigation than incredulity.[ ] ah! said scipio, i wish we had our friend panætius with us, who is fond of investigating all things of this kind, but especially all celestial phenomena. as for my opinion, tubero, for i always tell you just what i think, i hardly agree in these subjects with that friend of mine, since, respecting things of which we can scarcely form a conjecture as to their character, he is as positive as if he had seen them with his own eyes and felt them with his own hands. and i cannot but the more admire the wisdom of socrates, who discarded all anxiety respecting things of this kind, and affirmed that these inquiries concerning the secrets of nature were either above the efforts of human reason, or were absolutely of no consequence at all to human life. but, then, my africanus, replied tubero, of what credit is the tradition which states that socrates rejected all these physical investigations, and confined his whole attention to men and manners? for, with respect to him what better authority can we cite than plato? in many passages of whose works socrates speaks in such a manner that even when he is discussing morals, and virtues, and even public affairs and politics, he endeavors to interweave, after the fashion of pythagoras, the doctrines of arithmetic, geometry, and harmonic proportions with them. that is true, replied scipio; but you are aware, i believe, that plato, after the death of socrates, was induced to visit egypt by his love of science, and that after that he proceeded to italy and sicily, from his desire of understanding the pythagorean dogmas; that he conversed much with archytas of tarentum and timæus of locris; that he collected the works of philolaus; and that, finding in these places the renown of pythagoras flourishing, he addicted himself exceedingly to the disciples of pythagoras, and their studies; therefore, as he loved socrates with his whole heart, and wished to attribute all great discoveries to him, he interwove the socratic elegance and subtlety of eloquence with somewhat of the obscurity of pythagoras, and with that notorious gravity of his diversified arts. xi. when scipio had spoken thus, he suddenly saw lucius furius approaching, and saluting him, and embracing him most affectionately, he gave him a seat on his own couch. and as soon as publius rutilius, the worthy reporter of the conference to us, had arrived, when we had saluted him, he placed him by the side of tubero. then said furius, what is it that you are about? has our entrance at all interrupted any conversation of yours? by no means, said scipio, for you yourself too are in the habit of investigating carefully the subject which tubero was a little before proposing to examine; and our friend rutilius, even under the walls of numantia, was in the habit at times of conversing with me on questions of the same kind. what, then, was the subject of your discussion? said philus. we were talking, said scipio, of the double suns that recently appeared, and i wish, philus, to hear what you think of them. xii. just as he was speaking, a boy announced that lælius was coming to call on him, and that he had already left his house. then scipio, putting on his sandals and robes, immediately went forth from his chamber, and when he had walked a little time in the portico, he met lælius, and welcomed him and those that accompanied him, namely, spurius mummius, to whom he was greatly attached, and c. fannius and quintus scævola, sons-in-law of lælius, two very intelligent young men, and now of the quæstorian age.[ ] when he had saluted them all, he returned through the portico, placing lælius in the middle; for there was in their friendship a sort of law of reciprocal courtesy, so that in the camp lælius paid scipio almost divine honors, on account of his eminent renown in war and in private life; in his turn scipio reverenced lælius, even as a father, because he was older than himself. then after they had exchanged a few words, as they walked up and down, scipio, to whom their visit was extremely welcome and agreeable, wished to assemble them in a sunny corner of the gardens, because it was still winter; and when they had agreed to this, there came in another friend, a learned man, much beloved and esteemed by all of them, m. manilius, who, after having been most warmly welcomed by scipio and the rest, seated himself next to lælius. xiii. then philus, commencing the conversation, said: it does not appear to me that the presence of our new guests need alter the subject of our discussion, but only that it should induce us to treat it more philosophically, and in a manner more worthy of our increased audience. what do you allude to? said lælius; or what was the discussion we broke in upon? scipio was asking me, replied philus, what i thought of the parhelion, or mock sun, whose recent apparition was so strongly attested. _lælius._ do you say then, my philus, that we have sufficiently examined those questions which concern our own houses and the commonwealth, that we begin to investigate the celestial mysteries? and philus replied: do you think, then, that it does not concern our houses to know what happens in that vast home which is not included in walls of human fabrication, but which embraces the entire universe--a home which the gods share with us, as the common country of all intelligent beings? especially when, if we are ignorant of these things, there are also many great practical truths which result from them, and which bear directly on the welfare of our race, of which we must be also ignorant. and here i can speak for myself, as well as for you, lælius, and all men who are ambitious of wisdom, that the knowledge and consideration of the facts of nature are by themselves very delightful. _lælius._ i have no objection to the discussion, especially as it is holiday-time with us. but cannot we have the pleasure of hearing you resume it, or are we come too late? _philus_. we have not yet commenced the discussion, and since the question remains entire and unbroken, i shall have the greatest pleasure, my lælius, in handing over the argument to you. _lælius._ no, i had much rather hear you, unless, indeed, manilius thinks himself able to compromise the suit between the two suns, that they may possess heaven as joint sovereigns without intruding on each other's empire. then manilius said: are you going, lælius, to ridicule a science in which, in the first place, i myself excel; and, secondly, without which no one can distinguish what is his own, and what is another's? but to return to the point. let us now at present listen to philus, who seems to me to have started a greater question than any of those that have engaged the attention of either publius mucius or myself. xiv. then philus said: i am not about to bring you anything new, or anything which has been thought over or discovered by me myself. but i recollect that caius sulpicius gallus, who was a man of profound learning, as you are aware, when this same thing was reported to have taken place in his time, while he was staying in the house of marcus marcellus, who had been his colleague in the consulship, asked to see a celestial globe which marcellus's grandfather had saved after the capture of syracuse from that magnificent and opulent city, without bringing to his own home any other memorial out of so great a booty; which i had often heard mentioned on account of the great fame of archimedes; but its appearance, however, did not seem to me particularly striking. for that other is more elegant in form, and more generally known, which was made by the same archimedes, and deposited by the same marcellus in the temple of virtue at rome. but as soon as gallus had begun to explain, in a most scientific manner, the principle of this machine, i felt that the sicilian geometrician must have possessed a genius superior to anything we usually conceive to belong to our nature. for gallus assured us that that other solid and compact globe was a very ancient invention, and that the first model had been originally made by thales of miletus. that afterward eudoxus of cnidus, a disciple of plato, had traced on its surface the stars that appear in the sky, and that many years subsequently, borrowing from eudoxus this beautiful design and representation, aratus had illustrated it in his verses, not by any science of astronomy, but by the ornament of poetic description. he added that the figure of the globe, which displayed the motions of the sun and moon, and the five planets, or wandering stars, could not be represented by the primitive solid globe; and that in this the invention of archimedes was admirable, because he had calculated how a single revolution should maintain unequal and diversified progressions in dissimilar motions. in fact, when gallus moved this globe, we observed that the moon succeeded the sun by as many turns of the wheel in the machine as days in the heavens. from whence it resulted that the progress of the sun was marked as in the heavens, and that the moon touched the point where she is obscured by the earth's shadow at the instant the sun appears opposite.[ ] * * * xv. * * *[ ] i had myself a great affection for this gallus, and i know that he was very much beloved and esteemed by my father paulus. i recollect that when i was very young, when my father, as consul, commanded in macedonia, and we were in the camp, our army was seized with a pious terror, because suddenly, in a clear night, the bright and full moon became eclipsed. and gallus, who was then our lieutenant, the year before that in which he was elected consul, hesitated not, next morning, to state in the camp that it was no prodigy, and that the phenomenon which had then appeared would always appear at certain periods, when the sun was so placed that he could not affect the moon with his light. but do you mean, said tubero, that he dared to speak thus to men almost entirely uneducated and ignorant? _scipio._ he did, and with great * * * for his opinion was no result of insolent ostentation, nor was his language unbecoming the dignity of so wise a man: indeed, he performed a very noble action in thus freeing his countrymen from the terrors of an idle superstition. xvi. and they relate that in a similar way, in the great war in which the athenians and lacedæmonians contended with such violent resentment, the famous pericles, the first man of his country in credit, eloquence, and political genius, observing the athenians overwhelmed with an excessive alarm during an eclipse of the sun which caused a sudden darkness, told them, what he had learned in the school of anaxagoras, that these phenomena necessarily happened at precise and regular periods when the body of the moon was interposed between the sun and the earth, and that if they happened not before every new moon, still they could not possibly happen except at the exact time of the new moon. and when he had proved this truth by his reasonings, he freed the people from their alarms; for at that period the doctrine was new and unfamiliar that the sun was accustomed to be eclipsed by the interposition of the moon, which fact they say that thales of miletus was the first to discover. afterward my friend ennius appears to have been acquainted with the same theory, who, writing about [ ] years after the foundation of rome, says, "in the nones of june the sun was covered by the moon and night." the calculations in the astronomical art have attained such perfection that from that day, thus described to us by ennius and recorded in the pontifical registers, the anterior eclipses of the sun have been computed as far back as the nones of july in the reign of romulus, when that eclipse took place, in the obscurity of which it was affirmed that virtue bore romulus to heaven, in spite of the perishable nature which carried him off by the common fate of humanity. xvii. then said tubero: do not you think, scipio, that this astronomical science, which every day proves so useful, just now appeared in a different light to you,[ ] * * * which the rest may see. moreover, who can think anything in human affairs of brilliant importance who has penetrated this starry empire of the gods? or who can think anything connected with mankind long who has learned to estimate the nature of eternity? or glorious who is aware of the insignificance of the size of the earth, even in its whole extent, and especially in the portion which men inhabit? and when we consider that almost imperceptible point which we ourselves occupy unknown to the majority of nations, can we still hope that our name and reputation can be widely circulated? and then our estates and edifices, our cattle, and the enormous treasures of our gold and silver, can they be esteemed or denominated as desirable goods by him who observes their perishable profit, and their contemptible use, and their uncertain domination, often falling into the possession of the very worst men? how happy, then, ought we to esteem that man who alone has it in his power, not by the law of the romans, but by the privilege of philosophers, to enjoy all things as his own; not by any civil bond, but by the common right of nature, which denies that anything can really be possessed by any one but him who understands its true nature and use; who reckons our dictatorships and consulships rather in the rank of necessary offices than desirable employments, and thinks they must be endured rather as acquittances of our debt to our country than sought for the sake of emolument or glory--the man, in short, who can apply to himself the sentence which cato tells us my ancestor africanus loved to repeat, "that he was never so busy as when he did nothing, and never less solitary than when alone." for who can believe that dionysius, when after every possible effort he ravished from his fellow-citizens their liberty, had performed a nobler work than archimedes, when, without appearing to be doing anything, he manufactured the globe which we have just been describing? who does not see that those men are in reality more solitary who, in the midst of a crowd, find no one with whom they can converse congenially than those who, without witnesses, hold communion with themselves, and enter into the secret counsels of the sagest philosophers, while they delight themselves in their writings and discoveries? and who would think any one richer than the man who is in want of nothing which nature requires; or more powerful than he who has attained all that she has need of; or happier than he who is free from all mental perturbation; or more secure in future than he who carries all his property in himself, which is thus secured from shipwreck? and what power, what magistracy, what royalty, can be preferred to a wisdom which, looking down on all terrestrial objects as low and transitory things, incessantly directs its attention to eternal and immutable verities, and which is persuaded that though others are called men, none are really so but those who are refined by the appropriate acts of humanity? in this sense an expression of plato or some other philosopher appears to me exceedingly elegant, who, when a tempest had driven his ship on an unknown country and a desolate shore, during the alarms with which their ignorance of the region inspired his companions, observed, they say, geometrical figures traced in the sand, on which he immediately told them to be of good cheer, for he had observed the indications of man. a conjecture he deduced, not from the cultivation of the soil which he beheld, but from the symbols of science. for this reason, tubero, learning and learned men, and these your favorite studies, have always particularly pleased me. xviii. then lælius replied: i cannot venture, scipio, to answer your arguments, or to [maintain the discussion either against] you, philus, or manilius.[ ] * * * we had a friend in tubero's father's family, who in these respects may serve him as a model. sextus so wise, and ever on his guard. wise and cautious indeed he was, as ennius justly describes him--not because he searched for what he could never find, but because he knew how to answer those who prayed for deliverance from cares and difficulties. it is he who, reasoning against the astronomical studies of gallus, used frequently to repeat these words of achilles in the iphigenia[ ]: they note the astrologic signs of heaven, whene'er the goats or scorpions of great jove, or other monstrous names of brutal forms, rise in the zodiac; but not one regards the sensible facts of earth, on which we tread, while gazing on the starry prodigies. he used, however, to say (and i have often listened to him with pleasure) that for his part he thought that zethus, in the piece of pacuvius, was too inimical to learning. he much preferred the neoptolemus of ennius, who professes himself desirous of philosophizing only in moderation; for that he did not think it right to be wholly devoted to it. but though the studies of the greeks have so many charms for you, there are others, perhaps, nobler and more extensive, which we may be better able to apply to the service of real life, and even to political affairs. as to these abstract sciences, their utility, if they possess any, lies principally in exciting and stimulating the abilities of youth, so that they more easily acquire more important accomplishments. xix. then tubero said: i do not mean to disagree with you, lælius; but, pray, what do you call more important studies? _lælius._ i will tell you frankly, though perhaps you will think lightly of my opinion, since you appeared so eager in interrogating scipio respecting the celestial phenomena; but i happen to think that those things which are every day before our eyes are more particularly deserving of our attention. why should the child of paulus Æmilius, the nephew of Æmilius, the descendant of such a noble family and so glorious a republic, inquire how there can be two suns in heaven, and not ask how there can be two senates in one commonwealth, and, as it were, two distinct peoples? for, as you see, the death of tiberius gracchus, and the whole system of his tribuneship, has divided one people into two parties. but the slanderers and the enemies of scipio, encouraged by p. crassus and appius claudius, maintained, after the death of these two chiefs, a division of nearly half the senate, under the influence of metellus and mucius. nor would they permit the man[ ] who alone could have been of service to help us out of our difficulties during the movement of the latins and their allies towards rebellion, violating all our treaties in the presence of factious triumvirs, and creating every day some fresh intrigue, to the disturbance of the worthier and wealthier citizens. this is the reason, young men, if you will listen to me, why you should regard this new sun with less alarm; for, whether it does exist, or whether it does not exist, it is, as you see, quite harmless to us. as to the manner of its existence, we can know little or nothing; and even if we obtained the most perfect understanding of it, this knowledge would make us but little wiser or happier. but that there should exist a united people and a united senate is a thing which actually may be brought about, and it will be a great evil if it is not; and that it does not exist at present we are aware; and we see that if it can be effected, our lives will be both better and happier. xx. then mucius said: what, then, do you consider, my lælius, should be our best arguments in endeavoring to bring about the object of your wishes? _lælius._ those sciences and arts which teach us how we may be most useful to the state; for i consider that the most glorious office of wisdom, and the noblest proof and business of virtue. in order, therefore, that we may consecrate these holidays as much as possible to conversations which may be profitable to the commonwealth, let us beg scipio to explain to us what in his estimation appears to be the best form of government. then let us pass on to other points, the knowledge of which may lead us, as i hope, to sound political views, and unfold the causes of the dangers which now threaten us. xxi. when philus, manilius, and mummius had all expressed their great approbation of this idea[ ] * * * i have ventured [to open our discussion] in this way, not only because it is but just that on state politics the chief man in the state should be the principal speaker, but also because i recollect that you, scipio, were formerly very much in the habit of conversing with panætius and polybius, two greeks, exceedingly learned in political questions, and that you are master of many arguments by which you prove that by far the best condition of government is that which our ancestors have handed down to us. and as you, therefore, are familiar with this subject, if you will explain to us your views respecting the general principles of a state (i speak for my friends as well as myself), we shall feel exceedingly obliged to you. xxii. then scipio said: i must acknowledge that there is no subject of meditation to which my mind naturally turns with more ardor and intensity than this very one which lælius has proposed to us. and, indeed, as i see that in every profession, every artist who would distinguish himself, thinks of, and aims at, and labors for no other object but that of attaining perfection in his art, should not i, whose main business, according to the example of my father and my ancestors, is the advancement and right administration of government, be confessing myself more indolent than any common mechanic if i were to bestow on this noblest of sciences less attention and labor than they devote to their insignificant trades? however, i am neither entirely satisfied with the decisions which the greatest and wisest men of greece have left us; nor, on the other hand, do i venture to prefer my own opinions to theirs. therefore, i must request you not to consider me either entirely ignorant of the grecian literature, nor yet disposed, especially in political questions, to yield it the pre-eminence over our own; but rather to regard me as a true-born roman, not illiberally instructed by the care of my father, and inflamed with the desire of knowledge, even from my boyhood, but still even more familiar with domestic precepts and practices than the literature of books. xxiii. on this philus said: i have no doubt, my scipio, that no one is superior to you in natural genius, and that you are very far superior to every one in the practical experience of national government and of important business. we are also acquainted with the course which your studies have at all times taken; and if, as you say, you have given so much attention to this science and art of politics, we cannot be too much obliged to lælius for introducing the subject: for i trust that what we shall hear from you will be far more useful and available than all the writings put together which the greeks have written for us. then scipio replied: you are raising a very high expectation of my discourse, such as is a most oppressive burden to a man who is required to discuss grave subjects. and philus said: although that may be a difficulty, my scipio, still you will be sure to conquer it, as you always do; nor is there any danger of eloquence failing you, when you begin to speak on the affairs of a commonwealth. xxiv. then scipio proceeded: i will do what you wish, as far as i can; and i shall enter into the discussion under favor of that rule which, i think, should be adopted by all persons in disputations of this kind, if they wish to avoid being misunderstood; namely, that when men have agreed respecting the proper name of the matter under discussion, it should be stated what that name exactly means, and what it legitimately includes. and when that point is settled, then it is fit to enter on the discussion; for it will never be possible to arrive at an understanding of what the character of the subject of the discussion is, unless one first understands exactly what it is. since, then, our investigations relate to a commonwealth, we must first examine what this name properly signifies. and when lælius had intimated his approbation of this course, scipio continued: i shall not adopt, said he, in so clear and simple a manner that system of discussion which goes back to first principles; as learned men often do in this sort of discussion, so as to go back to the first meeting of male and female, and then to the first birth and formation of the first family, and define over and over again what there is in words, and in how many manners each thing is stated. for, as i am speaking to men of prudence, who have acted with the greatest glory in the commonwealth, both in peace and war, i will take care not to allow the subject of the discussion itself to be clearer than my explanation of it. nor have i undertaken this task with the design of examining all its minuter points, like a school-master; nor will i promise you in the following discourse not to omit any single particular. then lælius said: for my part, i am impatient for exactly that kind of disquisition which you promise us. xxv. well, then, said africanus, a commonwealth is a constitution of the entire people. but the people is not every association of men, however congregated, but the association of the entire number, bound together by the compact of justice, and the communication of utility. the first cause of this association is not so much the weakness of man as a certain spirit of congregation which naturally belongs to him. for the human race is not a race of isolated individuals, wandering and solitary; but it is so constituted that even in the affluence of all things [and without any need of reciprocal assistance, it spontaneously seeks society]. xxvi. [it is necessary to presuppose] these original seeds, as it were, since we cannot discover any primary establishment of the other virtues, or even of a commonwealth itself. these unions, then, formed by the principle which i have mentioned, established their headquarters originally in certain central positions, for the convenience of the whole population; and having fortified them by natural and artificial means, they called this collection of houses a city or town, distinguished by temples and public squares. every people, therefore, which consists of such an association of the entire multitude as i have described, every city which consists of an assemblage of the people, and every commonwealth which embraces every member of these associations, must be regulated by a certain authority, in order to be permanent. this intelligent authority should always refer itself to that grand first principle which established the commonwealth. it must be deposited in the hands of one supreme person, or intrusted to the administration of certain delegated rulers, or undertaken by the whole multitude. when the direction of all depends on one person, we call this individual a king, and this form of political constitution a kingdom. when it is in the power of privileged delegates, the state is said to be ruled by an aristocracy; and when the people are all in all, they call it a democracy, or popular constitution. and if the tie of social affection, which originally united men in political associations for the sake of public interest, maintains its force, each of these forms of government is, i will not say perfect, nor, in my opinion, essentially good, but tolerable, and such that one may accidentally be better than another: either a just and wise king, or a selection of the most eminent citizens, or even the populace itself (though this is the least commendable form), may, if there be no interference of crime and cupidity, form a constitution sufficiently secure. xxvii. but in a monarchy the other members of the state are often too much deprived of public counsel and jurisdiction; and under the rule of an aristocracy the multitude can hardly possess its due share of liberty, since it is allowed no share in the public deliberation, and no power. and when all things are carried by a democracy, although it be just and moderate, yet its very equality is a culpable levelling, inasmuch as it allows no gradations of rank. therefore, even if cyrus, the king of the persians, was a most righteous and wise monarch, i should still think that the interest of the people (for this is, as i have said before, the same as the commonwealth) could not be very effectually promoted when all things depended on the beck and nod of one individual. and though at present the people of marseilles, our clients, are governed with the greatest justice by elected magistrates of the highest rank, still there is always in this condition of the people a certain appearance of servitude; and when the athenians, at a certain period, having demolished their areopagus, conducted all public affairs by the acts and decrees of the democracy alone, their state, as it no longer contained a distinct gradation of ranks, was no longer able to retain its original fair appearance. xxviii. i have reasoned thus on the three forms of government, not looking on them in their disorganized and confused conditions, but in their proper and regular administration. these three particular forms, however, contained in themselves, from the first, the faults and defects i have mentioned; but they have also other dangerous vices, for there is not one of these three forms of government which has not a precipitous and slippery passage down to some proximate abuse. for, after thinking of that endurable, or, as you will have it, most amiable king, cyrus--to name him in preference to any one else--then, to produce a change in our minds, we behold the barbarous phalaris, that model of tyranny, to which the monarchical authority is easily abused by a facile and natural inclination. and, in like manner, along-side of the wise aristocracy of marseilles, we might exhibit the oligarchical faction of the thirty tyrants which once existed at athens. and, not to seek for other instances, among the same athenians, we can show you that when unlimited power was cast into the hands of the people, it inflamed the fury of the multitude, and aggravated that universal license which ruined their state.[ ] * * * xxix. the worst condition of things sometimes results from a confusion of those factious tyrannies into which kings, aristocrats, and democrats are apt to degenerate. for thus, from these diverse elements, there occasionally arises (as i have said before) a new kind of government. and wonderful indeed are the revolutions and periodical returns in natural constitutions of such alternations and vicissitudes, which it is the part of the wise politician to investigate with the closest attention. but to calculate their approach, and to join to this foresight the skill which moderates the course of events, and retains in a steady hand the reins of that authority which safely conducts the people through all the dangers to which they expose themselves, is the work of a most illustrious citizen, and of almost divine genius. there is a fourth kind of government, therefore, which, in my opinion, is preferable to all these: it is that mixed and moderate government which is composed of the three particular forms which i have already noticed. xxx. _lælius._ i am not ignorant, scipio, that such is your opinion, for i have often heard you say so. but i do not the less desire, if it is not giving you too much trouble, to hear which you consider the best of these three forms of commonwealths. for it may be of some use in considering[ ] * * * xxxi. * * * and each commonwealth corresponds to the nature and will of him who governs it. therefore, in no other constitution than that in which the people exercise sovereign power has liberty any sure abode, than which there certainly is no more desirable blessing. and if it be not equally established for every one, it is not even liberty at all. and how can there be this character of equality, i do not say under a monarchy, where slavery is least disguised or doubtful, but even in those constitutions in which the people are free indeed in words, for they give their suffrages, they elect officers, they are canvassed and solicited for magistracies; but yet they only grant those things which they are obliged to grant whether they will or not, and which are not really in their free power, though others ask them for them? for they are not themselves admitted to the government, to the exercise of public authority, or to offices of select judges, which are permitted to those only of ancient families and large fortunes. but in a free people, as among the rhodians and athenians, there is no citizen who[ ] * * * xxxii. * * * no sooner is one man, or several, elevated by wealth and power, than they say that * * * arise from their pride and arrogance, when the idle and the timid give way, and bow down to the insolence of riches. but if the people knew how to maintain its rights, then they say that nothing could be more glorious and prosperous than democracy; inasmuch as they themselves would be the sovereign dispensers of laws, judgments, war, peace, public treaties, and, finally, of the fortune and life of each individual citizen; and this condition of things is the only one which, in their opinion, can be really called a commonwealth, that is to say, a constitution of the people. it is on this principle that, according to them, a people often vindicates its liberty from the domination of kings and nobles; while, on the other hand, kings are not sought for among free peoples, nor are the power and wealth of aristocracies. they deny, moreover, that it is fair to reject this general constitution of freemen, on account of the vices of the unbridled populace; but that if the people be united and inclined, and directs all its efforts to the safety and freedom of the community, nothing can be stronger or more unchangeable; and they assert that this necessary union is easily obtained in a republic so constituted that the good of all classes is the same; while the conflicting interests that prevail in other constitutions inevitably produce dissensions; therefore, say they, when the senate had the ascendency, the republic had no stability; and when kings possess the power, this blessing is still more rare, since, as ennius expresses it, in kingdoms there's no faith, and little love. wherefore, since the law is the bond of civil society, and the justice of the law equal, by what rule can the association of citizens be held together, if the condition of the citizens be not equal? for if the fortunes of men cannot be reduced to this equality--if genius cannot be equally the property of all--rights, at least, should be equal among those who are citizens of the same republic. for what is a republic but an association of rights?[ ] * * * xxxiii. but as to the other political constitutions, these democratical advocates do not think they are worthy of being distinguished by the name which they claim. for why, say they, should we apply the name of king, the title of jupiter the beneficent, and not rather the title of tyrant, to a man ambitious of sole authority and power, lording it over a degraded multitude? for a tyrant may be as merciful as a king may be oppressive; so that the whole difference to the people is, whether they serve an indulgent master or a cruel one, since serve some one they must. but how could sparta, at the period of the boasted superiority of her political institution, obtain a constant enjoyment of just and virtuous kings, when they necessarily received an hereditary monarch, good, bad, or indifferent, because he happened to be of the blood royal? as to aristocrats, who will endure, say they, that men should distinguish themselves by such a title, and that not by the voice of the people, but by their own votes? for how is such a one judged to be best either in learning, sciences, or arts?[ ] * * * xxxiv. * * * if it does so by hap-hazard, it will be as easily upset as a vessel if the pilot were chosen by lot from among the passengers. but if a people, being free, chooses those to whom it can trust itself--and, if it desires its own preservation, it will always choose the noblest--then certainly it is in the counsels of the aristocracy that the safety of the state consists, especially as nature has not only appointed that these superior men should excel the inferior sort in high virtue and courage, but has inspired the people also with the desire of obedience towards these, their natural lords. but they say this aristocratical state is destroyed by the depraved opinions of men, who, through ignorance of virtue (which, as it belongs to few, can be discerned and appreciated by few), imagine that not only rich and powerful men, but also those who are nobly born, are necessarily the best. and so when, through this popular error, the riches, and not the virtue, of a few men has taken possession of the state, these chiefs obstinately retain the title of nobles, though they want the essence of nobility. for riches, fame, and power, without wisdom and a just method of regulating ourselves and commanding others, are full of discredit and insolent arrogance; nor is there any kind of government more deformed than that in which the wealthiest are regarded as the noblest. but when virtue governs the commonwealth, what can be more glorious? when he who commands the rest is himself enslaved by no lust or passion; when he himself exhibits all the virtues to which he incites and educates the citizens; when he imposes no law on the people which he does not himself observe, but presents his life as a living law to his fellow-countrymen; if a single individual could thus suffice for all, there would be no need of more; and if the community could find a chief ruler thus worthy of all their suffrages, none would require elected magistrates. it was the difficulty of forming plans which transferred the government from a king into the hands of many; and the error and temerity of the people likewise transferred it from the hands of the many into those of the few. thus, between the weakness of the monarch and the rashness of the multitude, the aristocrats have occupied the middle place, than which nothing can be better arranged; and while they superintend the public interest, the people necessarily enjoy the greatest possible prosperity, being free from all care and anxiety, having intrusted their security to others, who ought sedulously to defend it, and not allow the people to suspect that their advantage is neglected by their rulers. for as to that equality of rights which democracies so loudly boast of, it can never be maintained; for the people themselves, so dissolute and so unbridled, are always inclined to flatter a number of demagogues; and there is in them a very great partiality for certain men and dignities, so that their equality, so called, becomes most unfair and iniquitous. for as equal honor is given to the most noble and the most infamous, some of whom must exist in every state, then the equity which they eulogize becomes most inequitable--an evil which never can happen in those states which are governed by aristocracies. these reasonings, my lælius, and some others of the same kind, are usually brought forward by those that so highly extol this form of political constitution. xxxv. then lælius said: but you have not told us, scipio, which of these three forms of government you yourself most approve. _scipio._ you are right to shape your question, which of the three i most approve, for there is not one of them which i approve at all by itself, since, as i told you, i prefer that government which is mixed and composed of all these forms, to any one of them taken separately. but if i must confine myself to one of these particular forms simply and exclusively, i must confess i prefer the royal one, and praise that as the first and best. in this, which i here choose to call the primitive form of government, i find the title of father attached to that of king, to express that he watches over the citizens as over his children, and endeavors rather to preserve them in freedom than reduce them to slavery. so that it is more advantageous for those who are insignificant in property and capacity to be supported by the care of one excellent and eminently powerful man. the nobles here present themselves, who profess that they can do all this in much better style; for they say that there is much more wisdom in many than in one, and at least as much faith and equity. and, last of all, come the people, who cry with a loud voice that they will render obedience neither to the one nor the few; that even to brute beasts nothing is so dear as liberty; and that all men who serve either kings or nobles are deprived of it. thus, the kings attract us by affection, the nobles by talent, the people by liberty; and in the comparison it is hard to choose the best. _lælius._ i think so too, but yet it is impossible to despatch the other branches of the question, if you leave this primary point undetermined. xxxvi. _scipio._ we must then, i suppose, imitate aratus, who, when he prepared himself to treat of great things, thought himself in duty bound to begin with jupiter. _lælius._ wherefore jupiter? and what is there in this discussion which resembles that poem? _scipio._ why, it serves to teach us that we cannot better commence our investigations than by invoking him whom, with one voice, both learned and unlearned extol as the universal king of all gods and men. how so? said lælius. do you, then, asked scipio, believe in nothing which is not before your eyes? whether these ideas have been established by the chiefs of states for the benefit of society, that there might be believed to exist one universal monarch in heaven, at whose nod (as homer expresses it) all olympus trembles, and that he might be accounted both king and father of all creatures; for there is great authority, and there are many witnesses, if you choose to call all many, who attest that all nations have unanimously recognized, by the decrees of their chiefs, that nothing is better than a king, since they think that all the gods are governed by the divine power of one sovereign; or if we suspect that this opinion rests on the error of the ignorant, and should be classed among the fables, let us listen to those universal testimonies of erudite men, who have, as it were, seen with their eyes those things to the knowledge of which we can hardly attain by report. what men do you mean? said lælius. those, replied scipio, who, by the investigation of nature, have arrived at the opinion that the whole universe [is animated] by a single mind[ ]. * * * xxxvii. but if you please, my lælius, i will bring forward evidences which are neither too ancient nor in any respect barbarous. those, said lælius, are what i want. _scipio._ you are aware that it is now not four centuries since this city of ours has been without kings. _lælius._ you are correct; it is less than four centuries. _scipio._ well, then, what are four centuries in the age of a state or city? is it a long time? _lælius._ it hardly amounts to the age of maturity. _scipio._ you say truly; and yet not four centuries have elapsed since there was a king in rome. _lælius._ and he was a proud king. _scipio._ but who was his predecessor? _lælius._ he was an admirably just one; and, indeed, we must bestow the same praise on all his predecessors as far back as romulus, who reigned about six centuries ago. _scipio._ even he, then, is not very ancient. _lælius._ no; he reigned when greece was already becoming old. _scipio._ agreed. was romulus, then, think you, king of a barbarous people? _lælius._ why, as to that, if we were to follow the example of the greeks, who say that all people are either greeks or barbarians, i am afraid that we must confess that he was a king of barbarians; but if this name belongs rather to manners than to languages, then i believe the greeks were just as barbarous as the romans. then scipio said: but with respect to the present question, we do not so much need to inquire into the nation as into the disposition. for if intelligent men, at a period so little remote, desired the government of kings, you will confess that i am producing authorities that are neither antiquated, rude, nor insignificant. xxxviii. then lælius said: i see, scipio, that you are very sufficiently provided with authorities; but with me, as with every fair judge, authorities are worth less than arguments. scipio replied: then, lælius, you shall yourself make use of an argument derived from your own senses. _lælius._ what senses do you mean? _scipio._ the feelings which you experience when at any time you happen to feel angry with any one. _lælius._ that happens rather oftener than i could wish. _scipio._ well, then, when you are angry, do you permit your anger to triumph over your judgment? no, by hercules! said lælius; i imitate the famous archytas of tarentum, who, when he came to his villa, and found all its arrangements were contrary to his orders, said to his steward, "ah! you unlucky scoundrel, i would flog you to death, if it were not that i am in a rage with you." capital, said scipio. archytas, then, regarded unreasonable anger as a kind of sedition and rebellion of nature which he sought to appease by reflection. and so, if we examine avarice, the ambition of power or of glory, or the lusts of concupiscence and licentiousness, we shall find a certain conscience in the mind of man, which, like a king, sways by the force of counsel all the inferior faculties and propensities; and this, in truth, is the noblest portion of our nature; for when conscience reigns, it allows no resting-place to lust, violence, or temerity. _lælius._ you have spoken the truth. _scipio._ well, then, does a mind thus governed and regulated meet your approbation? _lælius._ more than anything upon earth. _scipio._ then you would not approve that the evil passions, which are innumerable, should expel conscience, and that lusts and animal propensities should assume an ascendency over us? _lælius._ for my part, i can conceive nothing more wretched than a mind thus degraded, or a man animated by a soul so licentious. _scipio._ you desire, then, that all the faculties of the mind should submit to a ruling power, and that conscience should reign over them all? _lælius._ certainly, that is my wish. _scipio._ how, then, can you doubt what opinion to form on the subject of the commonwealth? in which, if the state is thrown into many hands, it is very plain that there will be no presiding authority; for if power be not united, it soon comes to nothing. xxxix. then lælius asked: but what difference is there, i should like to know, between the one and the many, if justice exists equally in many? and scipio said: since i see, my lælius, that the authorities i have adduced have no great influence on you, i must continue to employ you yourself as my witness in proof of what i am saying. in what way, said lælius, are you going to make me again support your argument? _scipio._ why, thus: i recollect, when we were lately at formiæ, that you told your servants repeatedly to obey the orders of more than one master only. _lælius._ to be sure, those of my steward. _scipio._ what do you at home? do you commit your affairs to the hands of many persons? _lælius._ no, i trust them to myself alone. _scipio._ well, in your whole establishment, is there any other master but yourself? _lælius._ not one. _scipio._ then i think you must grant me that, as respects the state, the government of single individuals, provided they are just, is superior to any other. _lælius._ you have conducted me to this conclusion, and i entertain very nearly that opinion. xl. and scipio said: you would still further agree with me, my lælius, if, omitting the common comparisons, that one pilot is better fitted to steer a ship, and a physician to treat an invalid, provided they be competent men in their respective professions, than many could be, i should come at once to more illustrious examples. _lælius._ what examples do you mean? _scipio._ do not you observe that it was the cruelty and pride of one single tarquin only that made the title of king unpopular among the romans? _lælius._ yes, i acknowledge that. _scipio._ you are also aware of this fact, on which i think i shall debate in the course of the coming discussion, that after the expulsion of king tarquin, the people was transported by a wonderful excess of liberty. then innocent men were driven into banishment; then the estates of many individuals were pillaged, consulships were made annual, public authorities were overawed by mobs, popular appeals took place in all cases imaginable; then secessions of the lower orders ensued, and, lastly, those proceedings which tended to place all powers in the hands of the populace. _lælius._ i must confess this is all too true. all these things now, said scipio, happened during periods of peace and tranquillity, for license is wont to prevail when there is little to fear, as in a calm voyage or a trifling disease. but as we observe the voyager and the invalid implore the aid of some one competent director, as soon as the sea grows stormy and the disease alarming, so our nation in peace and security commands, threatens, resists, appeals from, and insults its magistrates, but in war obeys them as strictly as kings; for public safety is, after all, rather more valuable than popular license. and in the most serious wars, our countrymen have even chosen the entire command to be deposited in the hands of some single chief, without a colleague; the very name of which magistrate indicates the absolute character of his power. for though he is evidently called dictator because he is appointed (dicitur), yet do we still observe him, my lælius, in our sacred books entitled magister populi (the master of the people). this is certainly the case, said lælius. our ancestors, therefore, said scipio, acted wisely.[ ] * * * xli. when the people is deprived of a just king, as ennius says, after the death of one of the best of monarchs, they hold his memory dear, and, in the warmth of their discourse, they cry, o romulus! o prince divine, sprung from the might of mars to be thy country's guardian! o our sire! be our protector still, o heaven-begot! not heroes, nor lords alone, did they call those whom they lawfully obeyed; nor merely as kings did they proclaim them; but they pronounced them their country's guardians, their fathers, and their gods. nor, indeed, without cause, for they added, thou, prince, hast brought us to the gates of light. and truly they believed that life and honor and glory had arisen to them from the justice of their king. the same good-will would doubtless have remained in their descendants, if the same virtues had been preserved on the throne; but, as you see, by the injustice of one man the whole of that kind of constitution fell into ruin. i see it indeed, said lælius, and i long to know the history of these political revolutions both in our own commonwealth and in every other. xlii. and scipio said: when i shall have explained my opinion respecting the form of government which i prefer, i shall be able to speak to you more accurately respecting the revolutions of states, though i think that such will not take place so easily in the mixed form of government which i recommend. with respect, however, to absolute monarchy, it presents an inherent and invincible tendency to revolution. no sooner does a king begin to be unjust than this entire form of government is demolished, and he at once becomes a tyrant, which is the worst of all governments, and one very closely related to monarchy. if this state falls into the hands of the nobles, which is the usual course of events, it becomes an aristocracy, or the second of the three kinds of constitutions which i have described; for it is, as it were, a royal--that is to say, a paternal--council of the chief men of the state consulting for the public benefit. or if the people by itself has expelled or slain a tyrant, it is moderate in its conduct as long as it has sense and wisdom, and while it rejoices in its exploit, and applies itself to maintaining the constitution which it has established. but if ever the people has raised its forces against a just king and robbed him of his throne, or, as has frequently happened, has tasted the blood of its legitimate nobles, and subjected the whole commonwealth to its own license, you can imagine no flood or conflagration so terrible, or any whose violence is harder to appease than this unbridled insolence of the populace. xliii. then we see realized that which plato so vividly describes, if i can but express it in our language. it is by no means easy to do it justice in translation: however, i will try. when, says plato, the insatiate jaws of the populace are fired with the thirst of liberty, and when the people, urged on by evil ministers, drains in its thirst the cup, not of tempered liberty, but unmitigated license, then the magistrates and chiefs, if they are not utterly subservient and remiss, and shameless promoters of the popular licentiousness, are pursued, incriminated, accused, and cried down under the title of despots and tyrants. i dare say you recollect the passage. yes, said lælius, it is familiar to me. _scipio._ plato thus proceeds: then those who feel in duty bound to obey the chiefs of the state are persecuted by the insensate populace, who call them voluntary slaves. but those who, though invested with magistracies, wish to be considered on an equality with private individuals, and those private individuals who labor to abolish all distinctions between their own class and the magistrates, are extolled with acclamations and overwhelmed with honors, so that it inevitably happens in a commonwealth thus revolutionized that liberalism abounds in all directions, due authority is found wanting even in private families, and misrule seems to extend even to the animals that witness it. then the father fears the son, and the son neglects the father. all modesty is banished; they become far too liberal for that. no difference is made between the citizen and the alien; the master dreads and cajoles his scholars, and the scholars despise their masters. the young men assume the gravity of sages, and sages must stoop to the follies of children, lest they should be hated and oppressed by them. the very slaves even are under but little restraint; wives boast the same rights as their husbands; dogs, horses, and asses are emancipated in this outrageous excess of freedom, and run about so violently that they frighten the passengers from the road. at length the termination of all this infinite licentiousness is, that the minds of the citizens become so fastidious and effeminate, that when they observe even the slightest exertion of authority they grow angry and seditious, and thus the laws begin to be neglected, so that the people are absolutely without any master at all. then lælius said: you have very accurately rendered the opinions which he expressed. xliv. _scipio._ now, to return to the argument of my discourse. it appears that this extreme license, which is the only liberty in the eyes of the vulgar, is, according to plato, such that from it as a sort of root tyrants naturally arise and spring up. for as the excessive power of an aristocracy occasions the destruction of the nobles, so this excessive liberalism of democracies brings after it the slavery of the people. thus we find in the weather, the soil, and the animal constitution the most favorable conditions are sometimes suddenly converted by their excess into the contrary, and this fact is especially observable in political governments; and this excessive liberty soon brings the people collectively and individually to an excessive servitude. for, as i said, this extreme liberty easily introduces the reign of tyranny, the severest of all unjust slaveries. in fact, from the midst of this unbridled and capricious populace, they elect some one as a leader in opposition to their afflicted and expelled nobles: some new chief, forsooth, audacious and impure, often insolently persecuting those who have deserved well of the state, and ready to gratify the populace at his neighbor's expense as well as his own. then, since the private condition is naturally exposed to fears and alarms, the people invest him with many powers, and these are continued in his hands. such men, like pisistratus of athens, will soon find an excuse for surrounding themselves with body-guards, and they will conclude by becoming tyrants over the very persons who raised them to dignity. if such despots perish by the vengeance of the better citizens, as is generally the case, the constitution is re-established; but if they fall by the hands of bold insurgents, then the same faction succeeds them, which is only another species of tyranny. and the same revolution arises from the fair system of aristocracy when any corruption has betrayed the nobles from the path of rectitude. thus the power is like the ball which is flung from hand to hand: it passes from kings to tyrants, from tyrants to the aristocracy, from them to democracy, and from these back again to tyrants and to factions; and thus the same kind of government is seldom long maintained. xlv. since these are the facts of experience, royalty is, in my opinion, very far preferable to the three other kinds of political constitutions. but it is itself inferior to that which is composed of an equal mixture of the three best forms of government, united and modified by one another. i wish to establish in a commonwealth a royal and pre-eminent chief. another portion of power should be deposited in the hands of the aristocracy, and certain things should be reserved to the judgment and wish of the multitude. this constitution, in the first place, possesses that great equality without which men cannot long maintain their freedom; secondly, it offers a great stability, while the particular separate and isolated forms easily fall into their contraries; so that a king is succeeded by a despot, an aristocracy by a faction, a democracy by a mob and confusion; and all these forms are frequently sacrificed to new revolutions. in this united and mixed constitution, however, similar disasters cannot happen without the greatest vices in public men. for there can be little to occasion revolution in a state in which every person is firmly established in his appropriate rank, and there are but few modes of corruption into which we can fall. xlvi. but i fear, lælius, and you, my amiable and learned friends, that if i were to dwell any longer on this argument, my words would seem rather like the lessons of a master, and not like the free conversation of one who is uniting with you in the consideration of truth. i shall therefore pass on to those things which are familiar to all, and which i have long studied. and in these matters i believe, i feel, and i affirm that of all governments there is none which, either in its entire constitution or the distribution of its parts, or in the discipline of its manners, is comparable to that which our fathers received from our earliest ancestors, and which they have handed down to us. and since you wish to hear from me a development of this constitution, with which you are all acquainted, i shall endeavor to explain its true character and excellence. thus keeping my eye fixed on the model of our roman commonwealth, i shall endeavor to accommodate to it all that i have to say on the best form of government. and by treating the subject in this way, i think i shall be able to accomplish most satisfactorily the task which lælius has imposed on me. xlvii. _lælius._ it is a task most properly and peculiarly your own, my scipio; for who can speak so well as you either on the subject of the institutions of our ancestors, since you yourself are descended from most illustrious ancestors, or on that of the best form of a constitution which, if we possess (though at this moment we do not, still), when we do possess such a thing, who will be more flourishing in it than you? or on that of providing counsels for the future, as you, who, by dispelling two mighty perils from our city, have provided for its safety forever? fragments. xlviii. as our country is the source of the greatest benefits, and is a parent dearer than those who have given us life, we owe her still warmer gratitude than belongs to our human relations. * * * nor would carthage have continued to flourish during six centuries without wisdom and good institutions. * * * in truth, says cicero, although the reasonings of those men may contain most abundant fountains of science and virtue; still, if we compare them with the achievements and complete actions of statesmen, they will seem not to have been of so much service in the actual business of men as of amusement for their leisure. * * * * * introduction to the second book, by the original translator. in this second book of his commonwealth, cicero gives us a spirited and eloquent review of the history and successive developments of the roman constitution. he bestows the warmest praises on its early kings, points out the great advantages which had resulted from its primitive monarchical system, and explains how that system had been gradually broken up. in order to prove the importance of reviving it, he gives a glowing picture of the evils and disasters that had befallen the roman state in consequence of that overcharge of democratic folly and violence which had gradually gained an alarming preponderance, and describes, with a kind of prophetic sagacity, the fruit of his political experience, the subsequent revolutions of the roman state, which such a state of things would necessarily bring about. book ii. i. [when, therefore, he observed all his friends kindled with the de]sire of hearing him, scipio thus opened the discussion. i will commence, said scipio, with a sentiment of old cato, whom, as you know, i singularly loved and exceedingly admired, and to whom, in compliance with the judgment of both my parents, and also by my own desire, i was entirely devoted during my youth; of whose discourse, indeed, i could never have enough, so much experience did he possess as a statesman respecting the republic which he had so long governed, both in peace and war, with so much success. there was also an admirable propriety in his style of conversation, in which wit was tempered with gravity; a wonderful aptitude for acquiring, and at the same time communicating, information; and his life was in perfect correspondence and unison with his language. he used to say that the government of rome was superior to that of other states for this reason, because in nearly all of them there had been single individuals, each of whom had regulated their commonwealth according to their own laws and their own ordinances. so minos had done in crete, and lycurgus in sparta; and in athens, which experienced so many revolutions, first theseus, then draco, then solon, then clisthenes, afterward many others; and, lastly, when it was almost lifeless and quite prostrate, that great and wise man, demetrius phalereus, supported it. but our roman constitution, on the contrary, did not spring from the genius of one individual, but from that of many; and it was established, not in the lifetime of one man, but in the course of several ages and centuries. for, added he, there never yet existed any genius so vast and comprehensive as to allow nothing at any time to escape its attention; and all the geniuses in the world united in a single mind could never, within the limits of a single life, exert a foresight sufficiently extensive to embrace and harmonize all, without the aid of experience and practice. thus, according to cato's usual habit, i now ascend in my discourse to the "origin of the people," for i like to adopt the expression of cato. i shall also more easily execute my proposed task if i thus exhibit to you our political constitution in its infancy, progress, and maturity, now so firm and fully established, than if, after the example of socrates in the books of plato, i were to delineate a mere imaginary republic. ii. when all had signified their approbation, scipio resumed: what commencement of a political constitution can we conceive more brilliant, or more universally known, than the foundation of rome by the hand of romulus? and he was the son of mars: for we may grant this much to the common report existing among men, especially as it is not merely ancient, but one also which has been wisely maintained by our ancestors, in order that those who have done great service to communities may enjoy the reputation of having received from the gods, not only their genius, but their very birth. it is related, then, that soon after the birth of romulus and his brother remus, amulius, king of alba, fearing that they might one day undermine his authority, ordered that they should be exposed on the banks of the tiber; and that in this situation the infant romulus was suckled by a wild beast; that he was afterward educated by the shepherds, and brought up in the rough way of living and labors of the countrymen; and that he acquired, when he grew up, such superiority over the rest by the vigor of his body and the courage of his soul, that all the people who at that time inhabited the plains in the midst of which rome now stands, tranquilly and willingly submitted to his government. and when he had made himself the chief of those bands, to come from fables to facts, he took alba longa, a powerful and strong city at that time, and slew its king, amulius. iii. having acquired this glory, he conceived the design (as they tell us) of founding a new city and establishing a new state. as respected the site of his new city, a point which requires the greatest foresight in him who would lay the foundation of a durable commonwealth, he chose the most convenient possible position. for he did not advance too near the sea, which he might easily have done with the forces under his command, either by entering the territory of the rutuli and aborigines, or by founding his citadel at the mouth of the tiber, where many years after ancus martius established a colony. but romulus, with admirable genius and foresight, observed and perceived that sites very near the sea are not the most favorable positions for cities which would attain a durable prosperity and dominion. and this, first, because maritime cities are always exposed, not only to many attacks, but to perils they cannot provide against. for the continued land gives notice, by many indications, not only of any regular approaches, but also of any sudden surprises of an enemy, and announces them beforehand by the mere sound. there is no adversary who, on an inland territory, can arrive so swiftly as to prevent our knowing not only his existence, but his character too, and where he comes from. but a maritime and naval enemy can fall upon a town on the sea-coast before any one suspects that he is about to come; and when he does come, nothing exterior indicates who he is, or whence he comes, or what he wishes; nor can it even be determined and distinguished on all occasions whether he is a friend or a foe. iv. but maritime cities are likewise naturally exposed to corrupt influences, and revolutions of manners. their civilization is more or less adulterated by new languages and customs, and they import not only foreign merchandise, but foreign fashions, to such a degree that nothing can continue unalloyed in the national institutions. those who inhabit these maritime towns do not remain in their native place, but are urged afar from their homes by winged hope and speculation. and even when they do not desert their country in person, still their minds are always expatiating and voyaging round the world. nor, indeed, was there any cause which more deeply undermined corinth and carthage, and at last overthrew them both, than this wandering and dispersion of their citizens, whom the passion of commerce and navigation had induced to abandon the cultivation of their lands and their attention to military pursuits. the proximity of the sea likewise administers to maritime cities a multitude of pernicious incentives to luxury, which are either acquired by victory or imported by commerce; and the very agreeableness of their position nourishes many expensive and deceitful gratifications of the passions. and what i have spoken of corinth may be applied, for aught i know, without incorrectness to the whole of greece. for the peloponnesus itself is almost wholly on the sea-coast; nor, besides the phliasians, are there any whose lands do not touch the sea; and beyond the peloponnesus, the Ænianes, the dorians, and the dolopes are the only inland people. why should i speak of the grecian islands, which, girded by the waves, seem all afloat, as it were, together with the institutions and manners of their cities? and these things, i have before noticed, do not respect ancient greece only; for which of all those colonies which have been led from greece into asia, thracia, italy, sicily, and africa, with the single exception of magnesia, is there that is not washed by the sea? thus it seems as if a sort of grecian coast had been annexed to territories of the barbarians. for among the barbarians themselves none were heretofore a maritime people, if we except the carthaginians and etruscans; one for the sake of commerce, the other of pillage. and this is one evident reason of the calamities and revolutions of greece, because she became infected with the vices which belong to maritime cities, which i just now briefly enumerated. but yet, notwithstanding these vices, they have one great advantage, and one which is of universal application, namely, that there is a great facility for new inhabitants flocking to them. and, again, that the inhabitants are enabled to export and send abroad the produce of their native lands to any nation they please, which offers them a market for their goods. v. by what divine wisdom, then, could romulus embrace all the benefits that could belong to maritime cities, and at the same time avoid the dangers to which they are exposed, except, as he did, by building his city on the bank of an inexhaustible river, whose equal current discharges itself into the sea by a vast mouth, so that the city could receive all it wanted from the sea, and discharge its superabundant commodities by the same channel? and in the same river a communication is found by which it not only receives from the sea all the productions necessary to the conveniences and elegances of life, but those also which are brought from the inland districts. so that romulus seems to me to have divined and anticipated that this city would one day become the centre and abode of a powerful and opulent empire; for there is no other part of italy in which a city could be situated so as to be able to maintain so wide a dominion with so much ease. vi. as to the natural fortifications of rome, who is so negligent and unobservant as not to have them depicted and deeply stamped on his memory? such is the plan and direction of the walls, which, by the prudence of romulus and his royal successors, are bounded on all sides by steep and rugged hills; and the only aperture between the esquiline and quirinal mountains is enclosed by a formidable rampart, and surrounded by an immense fosse. and as for our fortified citadel, it is so secured by a precipitous barrier and enclosure of rocks, that, even in that horrible attack and invasion of the gauls, it remained impregnable and inviolable. moreover, the site which he selected had also an abundance of fountains, and was healthy, though it was in the midst of a pestilential region; for there are hills which at once create a current of fresh air, and fling an agreeable shade over the valleys. vii. these things he effected with wonderful rapidity, and thus established the city, which, from his own name romulus, he determined to call rome. and in order to strengthen his new city, he conceived a design, singular enough, and even a little rude, yet worthy of a great man, and of a genius which discerned far away in futurity the means of strengthening his power and his people. the young sabine females of honorable birth who had come to rome, attracted by the public games and spectacles which romulus then, for the first time, established as annual games in the circus, were suddenly carried off at the feast of consus[ ] by his orders, and were given in marriage to the men of the noblest families in rome. and when, on this account, the sabines had declared war against rome, the issue of the battle being doubtful and undecided, romulus made an alliance with tatius, king of the sabines, at the intercession of the matrons themselves who had been carried off. by this compact he admitted the sabines into the city, gave them a participation in the religious ceremonies, and divided his power with their king. viii. but after the death of tatius, the entire government was again vested in the hands of romulus, although, besides making tatius his own partner, he had also elected some of the chiefs of the sabines into the royal council, who on account of their affectionate regard for the people were called _patres_, or fathers. he also divided the people into three tribes, called after the name of tatius, and his own name, and that of locumo, who had fallen as his ally in the sabine war; and also into thirty curiæ, designated by the names of those sabine virgins, who, after being carried off at the festivals, generously offered themselves as the mediators of peace and coalition. but though these orders were established in the life of tatius, yet, after his death, romulus reigned with still greater power by the counsel and authority of the senate. ix. in this respect he approved and adopted the principle which lycurgus but little before had applied to the government of lacedæmon; namely, that the monarchical authority and the royal power operate best in the government of states when to this supreme authority is joined the influence of the noblest of the citizens. therefore, thus supported, and, as it were, propped up by this council or senate, romulus conducted many wars with the neighboring nations in a most successful manner; and while he refused to take any portion of the booty to his own palace, he did not cease to enrich the citizens. he also cherished the greatest respect for that institution of hierarchical and ecclesiastical ordinances which we still retain to the great benefit of the commonwealth; for in the very commencement of his government he founded the city with religious rites, and in the institution of all public establishments he was equally careful in attending to these sacred ceremonials, and associated with himself on these occasions priests that were selected from each of the tribes. he also enacted that the nobles should act as patrons and protectors to the inferior citizens, their natural clients and dependants, in their respective districts, a measure the utility of which i shall afterward notice.--the judicial punishments were mostly fines of sheep and oxen; for the property of the people at that time consisted in their fields and cattle, and this circumstance has given rise to the expressions which still designate real and personal wealth. thus the people were kept in order rather by mulctations than by bodily inflictions. x. after romulus had thus reigned thirty-seven years, and established these two great supports of government, the hierarchy and the senate, having disappeared in a sudden eclipse of the sun, he was thought worthy of being added to the number of the gods--an honor which no mortal man ever was able to attain to but by a glorious pre-eminence of virtue. and this circumstance was the more to be admired in the case of romulus because most of the great men that have been deified were so exalted to celestial dignities by the people, in periods very little enlightened, when fiction was easy and ignorance went hand-in-hand with credulity. but with respect to romulus we know that he lived less than six centuries ago, at a time when science and literature were already advanced, and had got rid of many of the ancient errors that had prevailed among less civilized peoples. for if, as we consider proved by the grecian annals, rome was founded in the seventh olympiad, the life of romulus was contemporary with that period in which greece already abounded in poets and musicians--an age when fables, except those concerning ancient matters, received little credit. for, one hundred and eight years after the promulgation of the laws of lycurgus, the first olympiad was established, which indeed, through a mistake of names, some authors have supposed constituted, by lycurgus likewise. and homer himself, according to the best computation, lived about thirty years before the time of lycurgus. we must conclude, therefore, that homer flourished very many years before the date of romulus. so that, as men had now become learned, and as the times themselves were not destitute of knowledge, there was not much room left for the success of mere fictions. antiquity indeed has received fables that have at times been sufficiently improbable: but this epoch, which was already so cultivated, disdaining every fiction that was impossible, rejected[ ] * * * we may therefore, perhaps, attach some credit to this story of romulus's immortality, since human life was at that time experienced, cultivated, and instructed. and doubtless there was in him such energy of genius and virtue that it is not altogether impossible to believe the report of proculus julius, the husbandman, of that glorification having befallen romulus which for many ages we have denied to less illustrious men. at all events, proculus is reported to have stated in the council, at the instigation of the senators, who wished to free themselves from all suspicion of having been accessaries to the death of romulus, that he had seen him on that hill which is now called the quirinal, and that he had commanded him to inform the people that they should build him a temple on that same hill, and offer him sacrifices under the name of quirinus. xi. you see, therefore, that the genius of this great man did not merely establish the constitution of a new people, and then leave them, as it were, crying in their cradle; but he still continued to superintend their education till they had arrived at an adult and wellnigh a mature age. then lælius said: we now see, my scipio, what you meant when you said that you would adopt a new method of discussing the science of government, different from any found in the writings of the greeks. for that prime master of philosophy, whom none ever surpassed in eloquence, i mean plato, chose an open plain on which to build an imaginary city after his own taste--a city admirably conceived, as none can deny, but remote enough from the real life and manners of men. others, without proposing to themselves any model or type of government whatever, have argued on the constitutions and forms of states. you, on the contrary, appear to be about to unite these two methods; for, as far as you have gone, you seem to prefer attributing to others your discoveries, rather than start new theories under your own name and authority, as socrates has done in the writings of plato. thus, in speaking of the site of rome, you refer to a systematic policy, to the acts of romulus, which were many of them the result of necessity or chance; and you do not allow your discourse to run riot over many states, but you fix and concentrate it on our own commonwealth. proceed, then, in the course you have adopted; for i see that you intend to examine our other kings, in your pursuit of a perfect republic, as it were. xii. therefore, said scipio, when that senate of romulus which was composed of the nobles, whom the king himself respected so highly that he designated them _patres_, or fathers, and their children patricians, attempted after the death of romulus to conduct the government without a king, the people would not suffer it, but, amidst their regret for romulus, desisted not from demanding a fresh monarch. the nobles then prudently resolved to establish an interregnum--a new political form, unknown to other nations. it was not without its use, however, since, during the interval which elapsed before the definitive nomination of the new king, the state was not left without a ruler, nor subjected too long to the same governor, nor exposed to the fear lest some one, in consequence of the prolonged enjoyment of power, should become more unwilling to lay it aside, or more powerful if he wished to secure it permanently for himself. at which time this new nation discovered a political provision which had escaped the spartan lycurgus, who conceived that the monarch ought not to be elective--if indeed it is true that this depended on lycurgus--but that it was better for the lacedæmonians to acknowledge as their sovereign the next heir of the race of hercules, whoever he might be: but our romans, rude as they were, saw the importance of appointing a king, not for his family, but for his virtue and experience. xiii. and fame having recognized these eminent qualities in numa pompilius, the roman people, without partiality for their own citizens, committed itself, by the counsel of the senators, to a king of foreign origin, and summoned this sabine from the city of cures to rome, that he might reign over them. numa, although the people had proclaimed him king in their comitia curiata, did nevertheless himself pass a lex curiata respecting his own authority; and observing that the institutions of romulus had too much excited the military propensities of the people, he judged it expedient to recall them from this habit of warfare by other employments. xiv. and, in the first place, he divided severally among the citizens the lands which romulus had conquered, and taught them that even without the aid of pillage and devastation they could, by the cultivation of their own territories, procure themselves all kinds of commodities. and he inspired them with the love of peace and tranquillity, in which faith and justice are likeliest to flourish, and extended the most powerful protection to the people in the cultivation of their fields and the enjoyment of their produce. pompilius likewise having created hierarchical institutions of the highest class, added two augurs to the old number. he intrusted the superintendence of the sacred rites to five pontiffs, selected from the body of the nobles; and by those laws which we still preserve on our monuments he mitigated, by religious ceremonials, the minds that had been too long inflamed by military enthusiasm and enterprise. he also established the flamines and the salian priests and the vestal virgins, and regulated all departments of our ecclesiastical policy with the most pious care. in the ordinance of sacrifices, he wished that the ceremonial should be very arduous and the expenditure very light. he thus appointed many observances, whose knowledge is extremely important, and whose expense far from burdensome. thus in religious worship he added devotion and removed costliness. he was also the first to introduce markets, games, and the other usual methods of assembling and uniting men. by these establishments, he inclined to benevolence and amiability spirits whom the passion for war had rendered savage and ferocious. having thus reigned in the greatest peace and concord thirty-nine years--for in dates we mainly follow our polybius, than whom no one ever gave more attention to the investigation of the history of the times--he departed this life, having corroborated the two grand principles of political stability, religion and clemency. xv. when scipio had concluded these remarks, is it not, said manilius, a true tradition which is current, that our king numa was a disciple of pythagoras himself, or that at least he was a pythagorean in his doctrines? for i have often heard this from my elders, and we know that it is the popular opinion; but it does not seem to be clearly proved by the testimony of our public annals. then scipio replied: the supposition is false, my manilius; it is not merely a fiction, but a ridiculous and bungling one too; and we should not tolerate those statements, even in fiction, relating to facts which not only did not happen, but which never could have happened. for it was not till the fourth year of the reign of tarquinius superbus that pythagoras is ascertained to have come to sybaris, crotona, and this part of italy. and the sixty-second olympiad is the common date of the elevation of tarquin to the throne, and of the arrival of pythagoras. from which it appears, when we calculate the duration of the reigns of the kings, that about one hundred and forty years must have elapsed after the death of numa before pythagoras first arrived in italy. and this fact, in the minds of men who have carefully studied the annals of time, has never been at all doubted. o ye immortal gods! said manilius, how deep and how inveterate is this error in the minds of men! however, it costs me no effort to concede that our roman sciences were not imported from beyond the seas, but that they sprung from our own indigenous and domestic virtues. xvi. you will become still more convinced of this fact, said africanus, when tracing the progress of our commonwealth as it became gradually developed to its best and maturest condition. and you will find yet further occasion to admire the wisdom of our ancestors on this very account, since you will perceive, that even those things which they borrowed from foreigners received a much higher improvement among us than they possessed in the countries from whence they were imported among us; and you will learn that the roman people was aggrandized, not by chance or hazard, but rather by counsel and discipline, to which fortune indeed was by no means unfavorable. xvii. after the death of king pompilius, the people, after a short period of interregnum, chose tullus hostilius for their king, in the comitia curiata; and tullus, after numa's example, consulted the people in their curias to procure a sanction for his government. his excellence chiefly appeared in his military glory and great achievements in war. he likewise, out of his military spoils, constructed and decorated the house of comitia and the senate-house. he also settled the ceremonies of the proclamation of hostilities, and consecrated their righteous institution by the religious sanction of the fetial priests, so that every war which was not duly announced and declared might be adjudged illegal, unjust, and impious. and observe how wisely our kings at that time perceived that certain rights ought to be allowed to the people, of which we shall have a good deal to say hereafter. tullus did not even assume the ensigns of royalty without the approbation of the people; and when he appointed twelve lictors, with their axes to go before him[ ] * * * xviii. * * * [_manilius_.] this commonwealth of rome, which you are so eloquently describing, did not creep towards perfection; it rather flew at once to the maturity of its grandeur. [_scipio._] after tullus, ancus martius, a descendant of numa by his daughter, was appointed king by the people. he also procured the passing of a law[ ] through the comitia curiata respecting his government. this king having conquered the latins, admitted them to the rights of citizens of rome. he added to the city the aventine and cælian hills; he distributed the lands he had taken in war; he bestowed on the public all the maritime forests he had acquired; and he built the city ostia, at the mouth of the tiber, and colonized it. when he had thus reigned twenty-three years, he died. then said lælius: doubtless this king deserves our praises, but the roman history is obscure. we possess, indeed, the name of this monarch's mother, but we know nothing of his father. it is so, said scipio; but in those ages little more than the names of the kings were recorded. xix. for the first time at this period, rome appears to have become more learned by the study of foreign literature; for it was no longer a little rivulet, flowing from greece towards the walls of our city, but an overflowing river of grecian sciences and arts. this is generally attributed to demaratus, a corinthian, the first man of his country in reputation, honor, and wealth; who, not being able to bear the despotism of cypselus, tyrant of corinth, fled with large treasures, and arrived at tarquinii, the most flourishing city in etruria. there, understanding that the domination of cypselus was thoroughly established, he, like a free and bold-hearted man, renounced his country, and was admitted into the number of the citizens of tarquinii, and fixed his residence in that city. and having married a woman of the city, he instructed his two sons, according to the method of greek education, in all kinds of sciences and arts.[ ] * * * xx. * * * [one of these sons] was easily admitted to the rights of citizenship at rome; and on account of his accomplished manners and learning, he became a favorite of our king ancus to such a degree that he was a partner in all his counsels, and was looked upon almost as his associate in the government. he, besides, possessed wonderful affability, and was very kind in assistance, support, protection, and even gifts of money, to the citizens. when, therefore, ancus died, the people by their unanimous suffrages chose for their king this lucius tarquinius (for he had thus transformed the greek name of his family, that he might seem in all respects to imitate the customs of his adopted countrymen). and when he, too, had procured the passing of a law respecting his authority, he commenced his reign by doubling the original number of the senators. the ancient senators he called patricians of the major families (_patres majorum gentium_), and he asked their votes first; and those new senators whom he himself had added, he entitled patricians of minor families. after this, he established the order of knights, on the plan which we maintain to this day. he would not, however, change the denomination of the tatian, rhamnensian, and lucerian orders, though he wished to do so, because attus nævius, an augur of the highest reputation, would not sanction it. and, indeed, i am aware that the corinthians were remarkably attentive to provide for the maintenance and good condition of their cavalry by taxes levied on the inheritance of widows and orphans. to the first equestrian orders lucius also added new ones, composing a body of three hundred knights. and this number he doubled, after having conquered the Æquicoli, a large and ferocious people, and dangerous enemies of the roman state. having likewise repulsed from our walls an invasion of the sabines, he routed them by the aid of his cavalry, and subdued them. he also was the first person who instituted the grand games which are now called the roman games. he fulfilled his vow to build a temple to the all-good and all-powerful jupiter in the capitol--a vow which he made during a battle in the sabine war--and died after a reign of thirty-eight years. xxi. then lælius said: all that you have been relating corroborates the saying of cato, that the constitution of the roman commonwealth is not the work of one man, or one age; for we can clearly see what a great progress in excellent and useful institutions was continued under each successive king. but we are now arrived at the reign of a monarch who appears to me to have been of all our kings he who had the greatest foresight in matters of political government. so it appears to me, said scipio; for after tarquinius priscus comes servius sulpicius, who was the first who is reported to have reigned without an order from the people. he is supposed to have been the son of a female slave at tarquinii, by one of the soldiers or clients of king priscus; and as he was educated among the servants of this prince, and waiting on him at table, the king soon observed the fire of his genius, which shone forth even from his childhood, so skilful was he in all his words and actions. therefore, tarquin, whose own children were then very young, so loved servius that he was very commonly believed to be his own son, and he instructed him with the greatest care in all the sciences with which he was acquainted, according to the most exact discipline of the greeks. but when tarquin had perished by the plots of the sons of ancus, and servius (as i have said) had begun to reign, not by the order, but yet with the good-will and consent, of the citizens--because, as it was falsely reported that priscus was recovering from his wounds, servius, arrayed in the royal robes, delivered judgment, freed the debtors at his own expense, and, exhibiting the greatest affability, announced that he delivered judgment at the command of priscus--he did not commit himself to the senate; but, after priscus was buried, he consulted the people respecting his authority, and, being authorized by them to assume the dominion, he procured a law to be passed through the comitia curiata, confirming his government. he then, in the first place, avenged the injuries of the etruscans by arms. after which[ ] * * * xxii. * * * he enrolled eighteen centuries of knights of the first order. afterward, having created a great number of knights from the common mass of the people, he divided the rest of the people into five classes, distinguishing between the seniors and the juniors. these he so constituted as to place the suffrages, not in the hands of the multitude, but in the power of the men of property. and he took care to make it a rule of ours, as it ought to be in every government, that the greatest number should not have the greatest weight. you are well acquainted with this institution, otherwise i would explain it to you; but you are familiar with the whole system, and know how the centuries of knights, with six suffrages, and the first class, comprising eighty centuries, besides one other century which was allotted to the artificers, on account of their utility to the state, produce eighty-nine centuries. if to these there are added twelve centuries--for that is the number of the centuries of the knights which remain[ ]--the entire force of the state is summed up; and the arrangement is such that the remaining and far more numerous multitude, which is distributed through the ninety-six last centuries, is not deprived of a right of suffrage, which would be an arrogant measure; nor, on the other hand, permitted to exert too great a preponderance in the government, which would be dangerous. in this arrangement, servius was very cautious in his choice of terms and denominations. he called the rich _assidui_, because they afforded pecuniary succor[ ] to the state. as to those whoso fortune did not exceed pence, or those who had nothing but their labor, he called them _proletarii_ classes, as if the state should expect from them a hardy progeny[ ] and population. even a single one of the ninety-six last centuries contained numerically more citizens than the entire first class. thus, no one was excluded from his right of voting, yet the preponderance of votes was secured to those who had the deepest stake in the welfare of the state. moreover, with reference to the accensi, velati, trumpeters, hornblowers, proletarii[ ] * * * xxiii. * * * that that republic is arranged in the best manner which, being composed in due proportions of those three elements, the monarchical, the aristocratical, and the democratic, does not by punishment irritate a fierce and savage mind. * * * [a similar institution prevailed at carthage], which was sixty-five years more ancient than rome, since it was founded thirty-nine years before the first olympiad; and that most ancient law-giver lycurgus made nearly the same arrangements. thus the system of regular subordination, and this mixture of the three principal forms of government, appear to me common alike to us and them. but there is a peculiar advantage in our commonwealth, than which nothing can be more excellent, which i shall endeavor to describe as accurately as possible, because it is of such a character that nothing analogous can be discovered in ancient states; for these political elements which i have noticed were so united in the constitutions of rome, of sparta, and of carthage, that they were not counterbalanced by any modifying power. for in a state in which one man is invested with a perpetual domination, especially of the monarchical character, although there be a senate in it, as there was in rome under the kings, and in sparta, by the laws of lycurgus, or even where the people exercise a sort of jurisdiction, as they used in the days of our monarchy, the title of king must still be pre-eminent; nor can such a state avoid being, and being called, a kingdom. and this kind of government is especially subject to frequent revolutions, because the fault of a single individual is sufficient to precipitate it into the most pernicious disasters. in itself, however, royalty is not only not a reprehensible form of government, but i do not know whether it is not far preferable to all other simple constitutions, if i approved of any simple constitution whatever. but this preference applies to royalty so long only as it maintains its appropriate character; and this character provides that one individual's perpetual power, and justice, and universal wisdom should regulate the safety, equality, and tranquillity of the whole people. but many privileges must be wanting to communities that live under a king; and, in the first place, liberty, which does not consist in slavery to a just master, but in slavery to no master at all[ ] * * * xxiv. * * * [let us now pass on to the reign of the seventh and last king of rome, tarquinius superbus.] and even this unjust and cruel master had good fortune for his companion for some time in all his enterprises. for he subdued all latium; he captured suessa pometia, a powerful and wealthy city, and, becoming possessed of an immense spoil of gold and silver, he accomplished his father's vow by the building of the capitol. he established colonies, and, faithful to the institutions of those from whom he sprung, he sent magnificent presents, as tokens of gratitude for his victories, to apollo at delphi. xxv. here begins the revolution of our political system of government, and i must beg your attention to its natural course and progression. for the grand point of political science, the object of our discourses, is to know the march and the deviations of governments, that when we are acquainted with the particular courses and inclinations of constitutions, we may be able to restrain them from their fatal tendencies, or to oppose adequate obstacles to their decline and fall. for this tarquinius superbus, of whom i am speaking, being first of all stained with the blood of his admirable predecessor on the throne, could not be a man of sound conscience and mind; and as he feared himself the severest punishment for his enormous crime, he sought his protection in making himself feared. then, in the glory of his victories and his treasures, he exulted in insolent pride, and could neither regulate his own manners nor the passions of the members of his family. when, therefore, his eldest son had offered violence to lucretia, daughter of tricipitinus and wife of collatinus, and this chaste and noble lady had stabbed herself to death on account of the injury she could not survive--then a man eminent for his genius and virtue, lucius brutus, dashed from his fellow-citizens this unjust yoke of odious servitude; and though he was but a private man, he sustained the government of the entire commonwealth, and was the first that taught the people in this state that no one was a private man when the preservation of our liberties was concerned. beneath his authority and command our city rose against tyranny, and, stirred by the recent grief of the father and relatives of lucretia, and with the recollections of tarquin's haughtiness, and the numberless crimes of himself and his sons, they pronounced sentence of banishment against him and his children, and the whole race of the tarquins. xxvi. do you not observe, then, how the king sometimes degenerates into the despot, and how, by the fault of one individual, a form of government originally good is abused to the worst of purposes? here is a specimen of that despot over the people whom the greeks denominate a tyrant. for, according to them, a king is he who, like a father, consults the interests of his people, and who preserves those whom he is set over in the very best condition of life. this indeed is, as i have said, an excellent form of government, yet still liable, and, as it were, inclined, to a pernicious abuse. for as soon as a king assumes an unjust and despotic power, he instantly becomes a tyrant, than which nothing baser or fouler, than which no imaginable animal can be more detestable to gods or men; for though in form a man, he surpasses the most savage monsters in ferocious cruelty. for who can justly call him a human being, who admits not between himself and his fellow-countrymen, between himself and the whole human race, any communication of justice, any association of kindness? but we shall find some fitter occasion of speaking of the evils of tyranny when the subject itself prompts us to declare against them who, even in a state already liberated, have affected these despotic insolencies. xxvii. such is the first origin and rise of a tyrant. for this was the name by which the greeks choose to designate an unjust king; and by the title king our romans universally understand every man who exercises over the people a perpetual and undivided domination. thus spurius cassius, and marcus manlius, and spurius mælius, are said to have wished to seize upon the kingly power, and lately [tiberius gracchus incurred the same accusation].[ ] * * * xxviii. * * * [lycurgus, in sparta, formed, under the name of elders,] a small council consisting of twenty-eight members only; to these he allotted the supreme legislative authority, while the king held the supreme executive authority. our romans, emulating his example, and translating his terms, entitled those whom he had called elders, senators, which, as we have said, was done by romulus in reference to the elect patricians. in this constitution, however, the power, the influence, and name of the king is still pre-eminent. you may distribute, indeed, some show of power to the people, as lycurgus and romulus did, but you inflame them, with the thirst of liberty by allowing them even the slightest taste of its sweetness; and still their hearts will be overcast with alarm lest their king, as often happens, should become unjust. the prosperity of the people, therefore, can be little better than fragile, when placed at the disposal of any one individual, and subjected to his will and caprices. xxix. thus the first example, prototype, and original of tyranny has been discovered by us in the history of our own roman state, religiously founded by romulus, without applying to the theoretical commonwealth which, according to plato's recital, socrates was accustomed to describe in his peripatetic dialogues. we have observed tarquin, not by the usurpation of any new power, but by the unjust abuse of the power which he already possessed, overturn the whole system of our monarchical constitution. let us oppose to this example of the tyrant another, a virtuous king--wise, experienced, and well informed respecting the true interest and dignity of the citizens--a guardian, as it were, and superintendent of the commonwealth; for that is a proper name for every ruler and governor of a state. and take you care to recognize such a man when you meet him, for he is the man who, by counsel and exertion, can best protect the nation. and as the name of this man has not yet been often mentioned in our discourse, and as the character of such a man must be often alluded to in our future conversations, [i shall take an early opportunity of describing it.][ ] * * * xxx. * * * [plato has chosen to suppose a territory and establishments of citizens, whose fortunes] were precisely equal. and he has given us a description of a city, rather to be desired than expected; and he has made out not such a one as can really exist, but one in which the principles of political affairs may be discerned. but for me, if i can in any way accomplish it, while i adopt the same general principles as plato, i am seeking to reduce them to experience and practice, not in the shadow and picture of a state, but in a real and actual commonwealth, of unrivalled amplitude and power; in order to be able to point out, with the most graphic precision, the causes of every political good and social evil. for after rome had flourished more than two hundred and forty years under her kings and interreges, and after tarquin was sent into banishment, the roman people conceived as much detestation of the name of king as they had once experienced regret at the death, or rather disappearance, of romulus. therefore, as in the first instance they could hardly bear the idea of losing a king, so in the latter, after the expulsion of tarquin, they could not endure to hear the name of a king.[ ] * * * xxxi. * * * therefore, when that admirable constitution of romulus had lasted steadily about two hundred and forty years. * * * the whole of that law was abolished. in this humor, our ancestors banished collatinus, in spite of his innocence, because of the suspicion that attached to his family, and all the rest of the tarquins, on account of the unpopularity of their name. in the same humor, valerius publicola was the first to lower the fasces before the people, when he spoke in the assembly of the people. he also had the materials of his house conveyed to the foot of mount velia, having observed that the commencement of his edifice on the summit of this hill, where king tullius had once dwelt, excited the suspicions of the people. it was the same man, who in this respect pre-eminently deserved the name of publicola, who carried in favor of the people the first law received in the comitia centuriata, that no magistrate should sentence to death or scourging a roman citizen who appealed from his authority to the people. and the pontifical books attest that the right of appeal had existed, even against the decision of the kings. our augural books affirm the same thing. and the twelve tables prove, by a multitude of laws, that there was a right of appeal from every judgment and penalty. besides, the historical fact that the decemviri who compiled the laws were created with the privilege of judging without appeal, sufficiently proves that the other magistrates had not the same power. and a consular law, passed by lucius valerius politus and marcus horatius barbatus, men justly popular for promoting union and concord, enacted that no magistrate should thenceforth be appointed with authority to judge without appeal; and the portian laws, the work of three citizens of the name of portius, as you are aware, added nothing new to this edict but a penal sanction. therefore publicola, having promulgated this law in favor of appeal to the people, immediately ordered the axes to be removed from the fasces, which the lictors carried before the consuls, and the next day appointed spurius lucretius for his colleague. and as the new consul was the oldest of the two, publicola ordered his lictors to pass over to him; and he was the first to establish the rule, that each of the consuls should be preceded by the lictors in alternate months, that there should be no greater appearance of imperial insignia among the free people than they had witnessed in the days of their kings. thus, in my opinion, he proved himself no ordinary man, as, by so granting the people a moderate degree of liberty, he more easily maintained the authority of the nobles. nor is it without reason that i have related to you these ancient and almost obsolete events; but i wished to adduce my instances of men and circumstances from illustrious persons and times, as it is to such events that the rest of my discourse will be directed. xxxii. at that period, then, the senate preserved the commonwealth in such a condition that though the people were really free, yet few acts were passed by the people, but almost all, on the contrary, by the authority, customs, and traditions of the senate. and over all the consuls exercised a power--in time, indeed, only annual, but in nature and prerogative completely royal. the consuls maintained, with the greatest energy, that rule which so much conduces to the power of our nobles and great men, that the acts of the commons of the people shall not be binding, unless the authority of the patricians has approved them. about the same period, and scarcely ten years after the first consuls, we find the appointment of the dictator in the person of titus lartius. and this new kind of power--namely, the dictatorship--appears exceedingly similar to the monarchical royalty. all his power, however, was vested in the supreme authority of the senate, to which the people deferred; and in these times great exploits were performed in war by brave men invested with the supreme command, whether dictators or consuls. xxxiii. but as the nature of things necessarily brought it to pass that the people, once freed from its kings, should arrogate to itself more and more authority, we observe that after a short interval of only sixteen years, in the consulship of postumus cominius and spurius cassius, they attained their object; an event explicable, perhaps, on no distinct principle, but, nevertheless, in a manner independent of any distinct principle. for recollect what i said in commencing our discourse, that if there exists not in the state a just distribution and subordination of rights, offices, and prerogatives, so as to give sufficient domination to the chiefs, sufficient authority to the counsel of the senators, and sufficient liberty to the people, this form of the government cannot be durable. for when the excessive debts of the citizens had thrown the state into disorder, the people first retired to mount sacer, and next occupied mount aventine. and even the rigid discipline of lycurgus could not maintain those restraints in the case of the greeks. for in sparta itself, under the reign of theopompus, the five magistrates whom they term ephori, and in crete ten whom they entitle cosmi, were established in opposition to the royal power, just as tribunes were added among us to counterbalance the consular authority. xxxiv. there might have been a method, indeed, by which our ancestors could have been relieved from the pressure of debt, a method with which solon the athenian, who lived at no very distant period before, was acquainted, and which our senate did not neglect when, in the indignation which the odious avarice of one individual excited, all the bonds of the citizens were cancelled, and the right of arrest for a while suspended. in the same way, when the plebeians were oppressed by the weight of the expenses occasioned by public misfortunes, a cure and remedy were sought for the sake of public security. the senate, however, having forgotten their former decision, gave an advantage to the democracy; for, by the creation of two tribunes to appease the sedition of the people, the power and authority of the senate were diminished; which, however, still remained dignified and august, inasmuch as it was still composed of the wisest and bravest men, who protected their country both with their arms and with their counsels; whose authority was exceedingly strong and flourishing, because in honor they were as much before their fellow-citizens as they were inferior in luxuriousness, and, as a general rule, not superior to them in wealth. and their public virtues were the more agreeable to the people, because even in private matters they were ready to serve every citizen, by their exertions, their counsels, and their liberality. xxxv. such was the situation of the commonwealth when the quæstor impeached spurius cassius of being so much emboldened by the excessive favor of the people as to endeavor to make himself master of monarchical power. and, as you have heard, his own father, having said that he had found that his son was really guilty of this crime, condemned him to death at the instance of the people. about fifty-four years after the first consulate, spurius tarpeius and aulus aternius very much gratified the people by proposing, in the comitia centuriata, the substitution of fines instead of corporal punishments. twenty years afterward, lucius papirius and publius pinarius, the censors, having by a strict levy of fines confiscated to the state the entire flocks and herds of many private individuals, a light tax on the cattle was substituted for the law of fines in the consulship of caius julius and publius papirius. xxxvi. but, some years previous to this, at a period when the senate possessed the supreme influence, and the people were submissive and obedient, a new system was adopted. at that time both the consuls and tribunes of the people abdicated their magistracies, and the decemviri were appointed, who were invested with great authority, from which there was no appeal whatever, so as to exercise the chief domination, and to compile the laws. after having composed, with much wisdom and equity, the ten tables of laws, they nominated as their successors in the ensuing year other decemviri, whose good faith and justice do not deserve equal praise. one member of this college, however, merits our highest commendation. i allude to caius julius, who declared respecting the nobleman lucius sestius, in whose chamber a dead body had been exhumed under his own eyes, that though as decemvir he held the highest power without appeal, he still required bail, because he was unwilling to neglect that admirable law which permitted no court but the comitia centuriata to pronounce final sentence on the life of a roman citizen. xxxvii. a third year followed under the authority of the same decemvirs, and still they were not disposed to appoint their successors. in a situation of the commonwealth like this, which, as i have often repeated, could not be durable, because it had not an equal operation with respect to all the ranks of the citizens, the whole public power was lodged in the hands of the chiefs and decemvirs of the highest nobility, without the counterbalancing authority of the tribunes of the people, without the sanction of any other magistracies, and without appeal to the people in the case of a sentence of death or scourging. thus, out of the injustice of these men, there was suddenly produced a great revolution, which changed the entire condition of the government, or they added two tables of very tyrannical laws, and though matrimonial alliances had always been permitted, even with foreigners, they forbade, by the most abominable and inhuman edict, that any marriages should take place between the nobles and the commons--an order which was afterward abrogated by the decree of canuleius. besides, they introduced into all their political measures corruption, cruelty, and avarice. and indeed the story is well known, and celebrated in many literary compositions, that a certain decimus virginius was obliged, on account of the libidinous violence of one of these decemvirs, to stab his virgin daughter in the midst of the forum. then, when he in his desperation had fled to the roman army which was encamped on mount algidum, the soldiers abandoned the war in which they were engaged, and took possession of the sacred mount, as they had done before on a similar occasion, and next invested mount aventine in their arms.[ ] our ancestors knew how to prove most thoroughly, and to retain most wisely. * * * xxxviii. and when scipio had spoken in this manner, and all his friends were awaiting in silence the rest of his discourse, then said tubero: since these men who are older than i, my scipio, make no fresh demands on you, i shall take the liberty to tell you what i particularly wish you would explain in your subsequent remarks. do so, said scipio, and i shall be glad to hear. then tubero said: you appear to me to have spoken a panegyric on our commonwealth of rome exclusively, though lælius requested your views not only of the government of our own state, but of the policy of states in general. i have not, therefore, yet sufficiently learned from your discourse, with respect to that mixed form of government you most approve, by what discipline, moral and legal, we may be best able to establish and maintain it. xxxix. africanus replied: i think that we shall soon find an occasion better adapted to the discussion you have proposed, respecting the constitution and conservatism of states. as to the best form of government, i think on this point i have sufficiently answered the question of lælius. for in answering him, i, in the first place, specifically noticed the three simple forms of government--monarchy, aristocracy, and democracy; and the three vicious constitutions contrary to them, into which they often degenerate; and i said that none of these forms, taken separately, was absolutely good; but i described as preferable to either of them that mixed government which is composed of a proper amalgamation of these simple ingredients. if i have since depicted our own roman constitution as an example, it was not in order to define the very best form of government, for that may be understood without an example; but i wished, in the exhibition of a mighty commonwealth actually in existence, to render distinct and visible what reason and discourse would vainly attempt to display without the assistance of experimental illustration. yet, if you still require me to describe the best form of government, independent of all particular examples, we must consult that exactly proportioned and graduated image of government which nature herself presents to her investigators. since you * * * this model of a city and people[ ] * * * xl. * * * which i also am searching for, and which i am anxious to arrive at. _lælius._ you mean the model that would be approved by the truly accomplished politician? _scipio._ the same. _lælius._ you have plenty of fair patterns even now before you, if you would but begin with yourself. then scipio said: i wish i could find even one such, even in the entire senate. for he is really a wise politician who, as we have often seen in africa, while seated on a huge and unsightly elephant, can guide and rule the monster, and turn him whichever way he likes by a slight admonition, without any actual exertion. _lælius._ i recollect, and when i was your lieutenant i often saw, one of these drivers. _scipio._ thus an indian or carthaginian regulates one of these huge animals, and renders him docile and familiar with human manners. but the genius which resides in the mind of man, by whatever name it may be called, is required to rein and tame a monster far more multiform and intractable, whenever it can accomplish it, which indeed is seldom. it is necessary to hold in with a strong hand that ferocious[ ] * * * xli. * * * [beast, denominated the mob, which thirsts after blood] to such a degree that it can scarcely be sated with the most hideous massacres of men. * * * but to a man who is greedy, and grasping, and lustful, and fond of wallowing in voluptuousness. the fourth kind of anxiety is that which is prone to mourning and melancholy, and which is constantly worrying itself. [_the next paragraph, "esse autem angores," etc., is wholly unintelligible without the context._] as an unskilful charioteer is dragged from his chariot, covered with dirt, bruised, and lacerated. the excitements of men's minds are like a chariot, with horses harnessed to it; in the proper management of which, the chief duty of the driver consists in knowing his road: and if he keeps the road, then, however rapidly he proceeds, he will encounter no obstacles; but if he quits the proper track, then, although he may be going gently and slowly, he will either be perplexed on rugged ground, or fall over some steep place, or at least he will be carried where he has no need to go.[ ] xlii. * * * can be said. then lælius said: i now see the sort of politician you require, on whom you would impose the office and task of government, which is what i wished to understand. he must be an almost unique specimen, said africanus, for the task which i set him comprises all others. he must never cease from cultivating and studying himself, that he may excite others to imitate him, and become, through the splendor of his talents and enterprises, a living mirror to his countrymen. for as in flutes and harps, and in all vocal performances, a certain unison and harmony must be preserved amidst the distinctive tones, which cannot be broken or violated without offending experienced ears; and as this concord and delicious harmony is produced by the exact gradation and modulation of dissimilar notes; even so, by means of the just apportionment of the highest, middle, and lower classes, the state is maintained in concord and peace by the harmonic subordination of its discordant elements: and thus, that which is by musicians called harmony in song answers and corresponds to what we call concord in the state--concord, the strongest and loveliest bond of security in every commonwealth, being always accompanied by justice and equity. xliii. and after this, when scipio had discussed with considerable breadth of principle and felicity of illustration the great advantage that justice is to a state, and the great injury which would arise if it were wanting, pilus, one of those who were present at the discussion, took up the matter and demanded that this question should be argued more carefully, and that something more should be said about justice, on account of a sentiment that was now obtaining among people in general, that political affairs could not be wholly carried on without some disregard of justice. xliv. * * * to be full of justice. then scipio replied: i certainly think so. and i declare to you that i consider that all i have spoken respecting the government of the state is worth nothing, and that it will be useless to proceed further, unless i can prove that it is a false assertion that political business cannot be conducted without injustice and corruption; and, on the other hand, establish as a most indisputable fact that without the strictest justice no government whatever can last long. but, with your permission, we have had discussion enough for the day. the rest--and much remains for our consideration--we will defer till to-morrow. when they had all agreed to this, the debate of the day was closed. * * * * * introduction to the third book, by the original translator. cicero here enters on the grand question of political justice, and endeavors to evince throughout the absolute verity of that inestimable proverb, "honesty is the best policy," in all public as well as in all private affairs. st. augustine, in his city of god, has given the following analysis of this magnificent disquisition: "in the third book of cicero's commonwealth" (says he) "the question of political justice is most earnestly discussed. philus is appointed to support, as well as he can, the sophistical arguments of those who think that political government cannot be carried on without the aid of injustice and chicanery. he denies holding any such opinion himself; yet, in order to exhibit the truth more vividly through the force of contrast, he pleads with the utmost ingenuity the cause of injustice against justice; and endeavors to show, by plausible examples and specious dialectics, that injustice is as useful to a statesman as justice would be injurious. then lælius, at the general request, takes up the plea for justice, and maintains with all his eloquence that nothing could be so ruinous to states as injustice and dishonesty, and that without a supreme justice, no political government could expect a long duration. this point being sufficiently proved, scipio returns to the principal discussion. he reproduces and enforces the short definition that he had given of a commonwealth--that it consisted in the welfare of the entire people, by which word 'people' he does not mean the mob, but the community, bound together by the sense of common rights and mutual benefits. he notices how important such just definitions are in all debates whatever, and draws this conclusion from the preceding arguments--that the commonwealth is the common welfare whenever it is swayed with justice and wisdom, whether it be subordinated to a king, an aristocracy, or a democracy. but if the king be unjust, and so becomes a tyrant; and the aristocracy unjust, which makes them a faction; or the democrats unjust, and so degenerate into revolutionists and destructives--then not only the commonwealth is corrupted, but in fact annihilated. for it can be no longer the common welfare when a tyrant or a faction abuse it; and the people itself is no longer the people when it becomes unjust, since it is no longer a community associated by a sense of right and utility, according to the definition."--_aug. civ. dei._ - . this book is of the utmost importance to statesmen, as it serves to neutralize the sophistries of machiavelli, which are still repeated in many cabinets. book iii. i. * * *[ ] cicero, in the third book of his treatise on a commonwealth, says that nature has treated man less like a mother than a step-dame, for she has cast him into mortal life with a body naked, fragile, and infirm, and with a mind agitated by troubles, depressed by fears, broken by labors, and exposed to passions. in this mind, however, there lies hidden, and, as it were, buried, a certain divine spark of genius and intellect. though man is born a frail and powerless being, nevertheless he is safe from all animals destitute of voice; and at the same time those other animals of greater strength, although they bravely endure the violence of weather, cannot be safe from man. and the result is, that reason does more for man than nature does for brutes; since, in the latter, neither the greatness of their strength nor the firmness of their bodies can save them from being oppressed by us, and made subject to our power. * * * plato returned thanks to nature that he had been born a man. ii. * * * aiding our slowness by carriages, and when it had taught men to utter the elementary and confused sounds of unpolished expression, articulated and distinguished them into their proper classes, and, as their appropriate signs, attached certain words to certain things, and thus associated, by the most delightful bond of speech, the once divided races of men. and by a similar intelligence, the inflections of the voice, which appeared infinite, are, by the discovery of a few alphabetic characters, all designated and expressed; by which we maintain converse with our absent friends, by which also indications of our wishes and monuments of past events are preserved. then came the use of numbers--a thing necessary to human life, and at the same time immutable and eternal; a science which first urged us to raise our views to heaven, and not gaze without an object on the motions of the stars, and the distribution of days and nights. iii. * * *[ ] [then appeared the sages of philosophy], whose minds took a higher flight, and who were able to conceive and to execute designs worthy of the gifts of the gods. wherefore let those men who have left us sublime essays on the principles of living be regarded as great men--which indeed they are--as learned men, as masters of truth and virtue; provided that these principles of civil government, this system of governing people, whether it be a thing discovered by men who have lived amidst a variety of political events, or one discussed amidst their opportunities of literary tranquillity, is remembered to be, as indeed it is, a thing by no means to be despised, being one which causes in first-rate minds, as we not unfrequently see, an incredible and almost divine virtue. and when to these high faculties of soul, received from nature and expanded by social institutions, a politician adds learning and extensive information concerning things in general, like those illustrious personages who conduct the dialogue in the present treatise, none will refuse to confess the superiority of such persons to all others; for, in fact, what can be more admirable than the study and practice of the grand affairs of state, united to a literary taste and a familiarity with the liberal arts? or what can we imagine more perfect than a scipio, a lælius, or a philus, who, not to omit anything which belonged to the most perfect excellence of the greatest men, joined to the examples of our ancestors and the traditions of our countrymen the foreign philosophy of socrates? wherefore he who had both the desire and the power to acquaint himself thoroughly both with the customs and the learning of his ancestors appears to me to have attained to the very highest glory and honor. but if we cannot combine both, and are compelled to select one of these two paths to wisdom--though to some people the tranquil life spent in the research of literature and arts may appear to be the most happy and delectable--yet, doubtless, the science of politics is more laudable and illustrious, for in this political field of exertion our greatest men have reaped their honors, like the invincible curius, whom neither gold nor iron could subdue. iv. * * *[ ] that wisdom existed still. there existed this general difference between these two classes, that among the one the development of the principles of nature is the subject of their study and eloquence, and among the other national laws and institutions form the principal topics of investigation. in honor of our country, we may assert that she has produced within herself a great number, i will not say of sages (since philosophy is so jealous of this name), but of men worthy of the highest celebrity, because by them the precepts and discoveries of the sages have been carried out into actual practice. and, moreover, though there have existed, and still do exist, many great and glorious empires, yet since the noblest masterpiece of genius in the world is the establishment of a state and commonwealth which shall be a lasting one, even if we reckon but a single legislator for each empire, the number of these excellent men will appear very numerous. to be convinced of this, we have only to turn our eyes on any nation of italy, latium, the sabines, the volscians, the samnites, or the etrurians, and then direct our attention to that mighty nation of the greeks, and then to the assyrians, persians, and carthaginians, and[ ] * * * v. * * * [scipio and his friends having again assembled, scipio spoke as follows: in our last conversation, i promised to prove that honesty is the best policy in all states and commonwealths whatsoever. but if i am to plead in favor of strict honesty and justice in all public affairs, no less than in private, i must request philus, or some one else, to take up the advocacy of the other side; the truth will then become more manifest, from the collision of opposite arguments, as we see every day exemplified at the bar.] and philus replied: in good truth, you have allotted me a very creditable cause when you wish me to undertake the defence of vice. perhaps, said lælius, you are afraid, lest, in reproducing the ordinary objections made to justice in politics, you should seem to express your own sentiments; though you are universally respected as an almost unique example of the ancient probity and good faith; nor is it unknown how familiar you are with the lawyer-like habit of disputing on both sides of a question, because you think that this is the best way of getting at the truth. and philus said: very well; i obey you, and wilfully, with my eyes open, i will undertake this dirty business; because, since those who seek for gold do not flinch at the sight of the mud, so we who are searching for justice, which is far more precious than gold, are bound to shrink from no annoyance. and i wish, as i am about to make use of the antagonist arguments of a foreigner, i might also employ a foreign language. the pleas, therefore, now to be urged by lucius furius philus are those [once employed by] the greek carneades, a man who was accustomed to express whatever [served his turn].[ ] * * *[ ]let it be understood, therefore, that i by no means express my own sentiments, but those of carneades, in order that you may refute this philosopher, who was wont to turn the best causes into joke, through the mere wantonness of wit. vi. he was a philosopher of the academic school; and if any one is ignorant of his great power, and eloquence, and acuteness in arguing, he may learn it from the mention made of him by cicero or by lucilius, when neptune, discoursing on a very difficult subject, declares that it cannot be explained, not even if hell were to restore carneades himself for the purpose. this philosopher, having been sent by the athenians to rome as an ambassador, discussed the subject of justice very amply in the hearing of galba and cato the censor, who were the greatest orators of the day. and the next day he overturned all his arguments by others of a contrary tendency, and disparaged justice, which the day before he had extolled; speaking not indeed with the gravity of a philosopher whose wisdom ought to be steady, and whose opinions unchangeable, but in a kind of rhetorical exercise of arguing on each side--a practice which he was accustomed to adopt, in order to be able to refute others who were asserting anything. the arguments by which he disparaged justice are mentioned by lucius furius in cicero; i suppose, since he was discussing the commonwealth, in order to introduce a defence and panegyric of that quality without which he did not think a commonwealth could be administered. but carneades, in order to refute aristotle and plato, the advocates of justice, collected in his first argument everything that was in the habit of being advanced on behalf of justice, in order afterward to be able to overturn it, as he did. vii. many philosophers indeed, and especially plato and aristotle, have spoken a great deal of justice, inculcating that virtue, and extolling it with the highest praise, as giving to every one what belongs to him, as preserving equity in all things, and urging that while the other virtues are, as it were, silent and shut up, justice is the only one which is not absorbed in considerations of self-interest, and which is not secret, but finds its whole field for exercise out-of-doors, and is desirous of doing good and serving as many people as possible; as if, forsooth, justice ought to exist in judges only, and in men invested with a certain authority, and not in every one! but there is no one, not even a man of the lowest class, or a beggar, who is destitute of opportunities of displaying justice. but because these philosophers knew not what its essence was, or whence it proceeded, or what its employment was, they attributed that first of all virtues, which is the common good of all men, to a few only, and asserted that it aimed at no advantage of its own, but was anxious only for that of others. so it was well that carneades, a man of the greatest genius and acuteness, refuted their assertions, and overthrew that justice which had no firm foundation; not because he thought justice itself deserving of blame, but in order to show that those its defenders had brought forward no trustworthy or strong arguments in its behalf. justice looks out-of-doors, and is prominent and conspicuous in its whole essence. which virtue, beyond all others, wholly devotes and dedicates itself to the advantage of others. viii. * * * both to discover and maintain. while the other, aristotle, has filled four large volumes with a discussion on abstract justice. for i did not expect anything grand or magnificent from chrysippus, who, after his usual fashion, examines everything rather by the signification of words than the reality of things. but it was surely worthy of those heroes of philosophy to ennoble by their genius a virtue so eminently beneficent and liberal, which everywhere exalts the social interests above the selfish, and teaches us to love others rather than ourselves. it was worthy of their genius, we say, to elevate this virtue to a divine throne, not far from that of wisdom. and certainly they neither wanted the will to accomplish this (for what else could be the cause of their writing on the subject, or what could have been their design?) nor the genius, in which they excelled all men. but the weakness of their cause was too great for either their intention or their eloquence to make it popular. in fact, this justice on which we reason is a civil right, but no natural one; for if it were natural and universal, then justice and injustice would be recognized similarly by all men, just as the heat and cold, sweetness and bitterness. ix. now, if any one, carried in that chariot of winged serpents of which the poet pacuvius makes mention, could take his flight over all nations and cities, and accurately observe their proceedings, he would see that the sense of justice and right varies in different regions. in the first place, he would behold among the unchangeable people of egypt, which preserves in its archives the memory of so many ages and events, a bull adored as a deity, under the name of apis, and a multitude of other monsters, and all kinds of animals admitted by the same nation into the number of the gods. in the next place, he would see in greece, as among ourselves, magnificent temples consecrated by images in human form, which the persians regarded as impious; and it is affirmed that the sole motive of xerxes for commanding the conflagration of the athenian temples was the belief that it was a superstitious sacrilege to keep confined within narrow walls the gods, whose proper home was the entire universe. but afterward philip, in his hostile projects against the persians, and alexander, who carried them into execution, alleged this plea for war, that they were desirous to avenge the temples of greece, which the greeks had thought proper never to rebuild, that this monument of the impiety of the persians might always remain before the eyes of their posterity. how many--such as the inhabitants of taurica along the euxine sea; as the king of egypt, busiris; as the gauls and the carthaginians--have thought it exceedingly pious and agreeable to the gods to sacrifice men! and, besides, the customs of life are so various that the cretans and Ætolians regard robbery as honorable. and the lacedæmonians say that their territory extends to all places which they can touch with a lance. the athenians had a custom of swearing, by a public proclamation, that all the lands which produced olives and corn were their own. the gauls consider it a base employment to raise corn by agricultural labor, and go with arms in their hands, and mow down the harvests of neighboring peoples. but we ourselves, the most equitable of all nations, who, in order to raise the value of our vines and olives, do not permit the races beyond the alps to cultivate either vineyards or oliveyards, are said in this matter to act with prudence, but not with justice. you see, then, that wisdom and policy are not always the same as equity. and lycurgus, that famous inventor of a most admirable jurisprudence and most wholesome laws, gave the lands of the rich to be cultivated by the common people, who were reduced to slavery. x. if i were to describe the diverse kinds of laws, institutions, manners, and customs, not only as they vary in the numerous nations, but as they vary likewise in single cities--in this one of ours, for example--i could prove that they have had a thousand revolutions. for instance, that eminent expositor of our laws who sits in the present company--i mean manilius--if you were to consult him relative to the legacies and inheritances of women, he would tell you that the present law is quite different from that he was accustomed to plead in his youth, before the voconian enactment came into force--an edict which was passed in favor of the interests of the men, but which is evidently full of injustice with regard to women. for why should a woman be disabled from inheriting property? why can a vestal virgin become an heir, while her mother cannot? and why, admitting that it is necessary to set some limit to the wealth of women, should crassus's daughter, if she be his only child, inherit thousands without offending the law, while my daughter can only receive a small share in a bequest.[ ] * * * xi. * * * [if this justice were natural, innate, and universal, all men would admit the same] law and right, and the same men would not enact different laws at different times. if a just man and a virtuous man is bound to obey the laws, i ask, what laws do you mean? do you intend all the laws indifferently? but neither does virtue permit this inconstancy in moral obligation, nor is such a variation compatible with natural conscience. the laws are, therefore, based not on our sense of justice, but on our fear of punishment. there is, therefore, no natural justice; and hence it follows that men cannot be just by nature. are men, then, to say that variations indeed do exist in the laws, but that men who are virtuous through natural conscience follow that which is really justice, and not a mere semblance and disguise, and that it is the distinguishing characteristic of the truly just and virtuous man to render every one his due rights? are we, then, to attribute the first of these characteristics to animals? for not only men of moderate abilities, but even first-rate sages and philosophers, as pythagoras and empedocles, declare that all kinds of living creatures have a right to the same justice. they declare that inexpiable penalties impend over those who have done violence to any animal whatsoever. it is, therefore, a crime to injure an animal, and the perpetrator of such crime[ ] * * * xii. for when he[ ] inquired of a pirate by what right he dared to infest the sea with his little brigantine: "by the same right," he replied, "which is your warrant for conquering the world." * * * wisdom and prudence instruct us by all means to increase our power, riches, and estates. for by what means could this same alexander, that illustrious general, who extended his empire over all asia, without violating the property of other men, have acquired such universal dominion, enjoyed so many pleasures, such great power, and reigned without bound or limit? but justice commands us to have mercy upon all men, to consult the interests of the whole human race, to give to every one his due, and injure no sacred, public, or foreign rights, and to forbear touching what does not belong to us. what is the result, then? if you obey the dictates of wisdom, then wealth, power, riches, honors, provinces, and kingdoms, from all classes, peoples, and nations, are to be aimed at. however, as we are discussing public matters, those examples are more illustrious which refer to what is done publicly. and since the question between justice and policy applies equally to private and public affairs, i think it well to speak of the wisdom of the people. i will not, however, mention other nations, but come at once to our own roman people, whom africanus, in his discourse yesterday, traced from the cradle, and whose empire now embraces the whole world. justice is[ ] * * * xiii. how far utility is at variance with justice we may learn from the roman people itself, which, declaring war by means of the fecials, and committing injustice with all legal formality, always coveting and laying violent hands on the property of others, acquired the possession of the whole world. what is the advantage of one's own country but the disadvantage of another state or nation, by extending one's dominions by territories evidently wrested from others, increasing one's power, improving one's revenues, etc.? therefore, whoever has obtained these advantages for his country--that is to say, whoever has overthrown cities, subdued nations, and by these means filled the treasury with money, taken lands, and enriched his fellow-citizens--such a man is extolled to the skies; is believed to be endowed with consummate and perfect virtue; and this mistake is fallen into not only by the populace and the ignorant, but by philosophers, who even give rules for injustice. xiv. * * * for all those who have the right of life and death over the people are in fact tyrants; but they prefer being called by the title of king, which belongs to the all-good jupiter. but when certain men, by favor of wealth, birth, or any other means, get possession of the entire government, it is a faction; but they choose to denominate themselves an aristocracy. if the people gets the upper hand, and rules everything after its capricious will, they call it liberty, but it is in fact license. and when every man is a guard upon his neighbor, and every class is a guard upon every other class, then because no one trusts in his own strength, a kind of compact is formed between the great and the little, from whence arises that mixed kind of government which scipio has been commending. thus justice, according to these facts, is not the daughter of nature or conscience, but of human imbecility. for when it becomes necessary to choose between these three predicaments, either to do wrong without retribution, or to do wrong with retribution, or to do no wrong at all, it is best to do wrong with impunity; next, neither to do wrong nor to suffer for it; but nothing is more wretched than to struggle incessantly between the wrong we inflict and that we receive. therefore, he who attains to that first end[ ] * * * xv. this was the sum of the argument of carneades: that men had established laws among themselves from considerations of advantage, varying them according to their different customs, and altering them often so as to adapt them to the times; but that there was no such thing as natural law; that all men and all other animals are led to their own advantage by the guidance of nature; that there is no such thing as justice, or, if there be, that it is extreme folly, since a man would injure himself while consulting the interests of others. and he added these arguments, that all nations who were flourishing and dominant, and even the romans themselves, who were the masters of the whole world, if they wished to be just--that is to say, if they restored all that belonged to others--would have to return to their cottages, and to lie down in want and misery. except, perhaps, of the arcadians and athenians, who, i presume, dreading that this great act of retribution might one day arrive, pretend that they were sprung from the earth, like so many field-mice. xvi. in reply to these statements, the following arguments are often adduced by those who are not unskilful in discussions, and who, in this question, have all the greater weight of authority, because, when we inquire, who is a good man?--understanding by that term a frank and single-minded man--we have little need of captious casuists, quibblers, and slanderers. for those men assert that the wise man does not seek virtue because of the personal gratification which the practice of justice and beneficence procures him, but rather because the life of the good man is free from fear, care, solicitude, and peril; while, on the other hand, the wicked always feel in their souls a certain suspicion, and always behold before their eyes images of judgment and punishment. do not you think, therefore, that there is any benefit, or that there is any advantage which can be procured by injustice, precious enough to counterbalance the constant pressure of remorse, and the haunting consciousness that retribution awaits the sinner, and hangs over his devoted head.[ ] * * * xvii. [our philosophers, therefore, put a case. suppose, say they, two men, one of whom is an excellent and admirable person, of high honor and remarkable integrity; the latter is distinguished by nothing but his vice and audacity. and suppose that their city has so mistaken their characters as to imagine the good man to be a scandalous, impious, and audacious criminal, and to esteem the wicked man, on the contrary, as a pattern of probity and fidelity. on account of this error of their fellow-citizens, the good man is arrested and tormented, his hands are cut off, his eyes are plucked out, he is condemned, bound, burned, exterminated, reduced to want, and to the last appears to all men to be most deservedly the most miserable of men. on the other hand, the flagitious wretch is exalted, worshipped, loved by all, and honors, offices, riches, and emoluments are all conferred on him, and he shall be reckoned by his fellow-citizens the best and worthiest of mortals, and in the highest degree deserving of all manner of prosperity. yet, for all this, who is so mad as to doubt which of these two men he would rather be? xviii. what happens among individuals happens also among nations. there is no state so absurd and ridiculous as not to prefer unjust dominion to just subordination. i need not go far for examples. during my own consulship, when you were my fellow-counsellors, we consulted respecting the treaty of numantia. no one was ignorant that quintus pompey had signed a treaty, and that mancinus had done the same. the latter, being a virtuous man, supported the proposition which i laid before the people, after the decree of the senate. the former, on the other side, opposed it vehemently. if modesty, probity, or faith had been regarded, mancinus would have carried his point; but in reason, counsel, and prudence, pompey surpassed him. whether[ ] * * * xix. if a man should have a faithless slave, or an unwholesome house, with whose defect he alone was acquainted, and he advertised them for sale, would he state the fact that his servant was infected with knavery, and his house with malaria, or would he conceal these objections from the buyer? if he stated those facts, he would be honest, no doubt, because he would deceive nobody; but still he would be thought a fool, because he would either get very little for his property, or else fail to sell it at all. by concealing these defects, on the other hand, he will be called a shrewd man--as one who has taken care of his own interest; but he will be a rogue, notwithstanding, because he will be deceiving his neighbors. again, let us suppose that one man meets another, who sells gold and silver, conceiving them to be copper or lead; shall he hold his peace that he may make a capital bargain, or correct the mistake, and purchase at a fair rate? he would evidently be a fool in the world's opinion if he preferred the latter. xx. it is justice, beyond all question, neither to commit murder nor robbery. what, then, would your just man do, if, in a case of shipwreck, he saw a weaker man than himself get possession of a plank? would he not thrust him off, get hold of the timber himself, and escape by his exertions, especially as no human witness could be present in the mid-sea? if he acted like a wise man of the world, he would certainly do so, for to act in any other way would cost him his life. if, on the other hand, he prefers death to inflicting unjustifiable injury on his neighbor, he will be an eminently honorable and just man, but not the less a fool, because he saved another's life at the expense of his own. again, if in case of a defeat and rout, when the enemy were pressing in the rear, this just man should find a wounded comrade mounted on a horse, shall he respect his right at the risk of being killed himself, or shall he fling him from the horse in order to preserve his own life from the pursuers? if he does so, he is a wise man, but at the same time a wicked one; if he does not, he is admirably just, but at the same time stupid. xxi. _scipio._ i might reply at great length to these sophistical objections of philus, if it were not, my lælius, that all our friends are no less anxious than myself to hear you take a leading part in the present debate, especially as you promised yesterday that you would plead at large on my side of the argument. if you cannot spare time for this, at any rate do not desert us; we all ask it of you. _lælius._ this carneades ought not to be even listened to by our young men. i think all the while that i am hearing him that he must be a very impure person; if he be not, as i would fain believe, his discourse is not less pernicious. xxii.[ ] true law is right reason conformable to nature, universal, unchangeable, eternal, whose commands urge us to duty, and whose prohibitions restrain us from evil. whether it enjoins or forbids, the good respect its injunctions, and the wicked treat them with indifference. this law cannot be contradicted by any other law, and is not liable either to derogation or abrogation. neither the senate nor the people can give us any dispensation for not obeying this universal law of justice. it needs no other expositor and interpreter than our own conscience. it is not one thing at rome, and another at athens; one thing to-day, and another to-morrow; but in all times and nations this universal law must forever reign, eternal and imperishable. it is the sovereign master and emperor of all beings. god himself is its author, its promulgator, its enforcer. and he who does not obey it flies from himself, and does violence to the very nature of man. and by so doing he will endure the severest penalties even if he avoid the other evils which are usually accounted punishments. xxiii. i am aware that in the third book of cicero's treatise on the commonwealth (unless i am mistaken) it is argued that no war is ever undertaken by a well-regulated commonwealth unless it be one either for the sake of keeping faith, or for safety; and what he means by a war for safety, and what safety he wishes us to understand, he points out in another passage, where he says, "but private men often escape from these penalties, which even the most stupid persons feel--want, exile, imprisonment, and stripes--by embracing the opportunity of a speedy death; but to states death itself is a penalty, though it appears to deliver individuals from punishment. for a state ought to be established so as to be eternal: therefore, there is no natural decease for a state, as there is for a man, in whose case death is not only inevitable, but often even desirable; but when a state is put an end to, it is destroyed, extinguished. it is in some degree, to compare small things with great, as if this whole world were to perish and fall to pieces." in his treatise on the commonwealth, cicero says those wars are unjust which are undertaken without reason. again, after a few sentences, he adds, no war is considered just unless it be formally announced and declared, and unless it be to obtain restitution of what has been taken away. but our nation, by defending its allies, has now become the master of all the whole world. xxiv. also, in that same treatise on the commonwealth, he argues most strenuously and vigorously in the cause of justice against injustice. and since, when a little time before the part of injustice was upheld against justice, and the doctrine was urged that a republic could not prosper and flourish except by injustice, this was put forward as the strongest argument, that it was unjust for men to serve other men as their masters; but that unless a dominant state, such as a great republic, acted on this injustice, it could not govern its provinces; answer was made on behalf of justice, that it was just that it should be so, because slavery is advantageous to such men, and their interests are consulted by a right course of conduct--that is, by the license of doing injury being taken from the wicked--and they will fare better when subjugated, because when not subjugated they fared worse: and to confirm this reasoning, a noble instance, taken, as it were, from nature, was added, and it was said, why, then, does god govern man, and why does the mind govern the body, and reason govern lust, and the other vicious parts of the mind? xxv. hear what tully says more plainly still in the third book of his treatise on the commonwealth, when discussing the reasons for government. do we not, says he, see that nature herself has given the power of dominion to everything that is best, to the extreme advantage of what is subjected to it? why, then, does god govern man, and why does the mind govern the body, and reason govern lust and passion and the other vicious parts of the same mind? listen thus far; for presently he adds, but still there are dissimilarities to be recognized in governing and in obeying. for as the mind is said to govern the body, and also to govern lust, still it governs the body as a king governs his subjects, or a parent his children; but it governs lust as a master governs his slaves, because it restrains and breaks it. the authority of kings, of generals, of magistrates, of fathers, and of nations, rules their subjects and allies as the mind rules bodies; but masters control their slaves, as the best part of the mind--that is to say, wisdom--controls the vicious and weak parts of itself, such as lust, passion, and the other perturbations. for there is a kind of unjust slavery when those belong to some one else who might be their own masters; but when those are slaves who cannot govern themselves, there is no injury done. xxvi. if, says carneades, you were to know that an asp was lying hidden anywhere, and that some one who did not know it was going to sit upon it, whose death would be a gain to you, you would act wickedly if you did not warn him not to sit down. still, you would not be liable to punishment; for who could prove that you had known? but we are bringing forward too many instances; for it is plain that unless equity, good faith, and justice proceed from nature, and if all these things are referred to interest, a good man cannot be found. and on these topics a great deal is said by lælius in our treatise on the republic. if, as we are reminded by you, we have spoken well in that treatise, when we said that nothing is good excepting what is honorable, and nothing bad excepting what is disgraceful. * * * xxvii. i am glad that you approve of the doctrine that the affection borne to our children is implanted by nature; indeed, if it be not, there can be no conection between man and man which has its origin in nature. and if there be not, then there is an end of all society in life. may it turn out well, says carneades, speaking shamelessly, but still more sensibly than my friend lucius or patro: for, as they refer everything to themselves, do they think that anything is ever done for the sake of another? and when they say that a man ought to be good, in order to avoid misfortune, not because it is right by nature, they do not perceive that they are speaking of a cunning man, not of a good one. but these arguments are argued, i think, in those books by praising which you have given me spirits. in which i agree that an anxious and hazardous justice is not that of a wise man. xxviii. and again, in cicero, that same advocate of justice, lælius, says, virtue is clearly eager for honor, nor has she any other reward; which, however, she accepts easily, and exacts without bitterness. and in another place the same lælius says: when a man is inspired by virtue such as this, what bribes can you offer him, what treasures, what thrones, what empires? he considers these but mortal goods, and esteems his own divine. and if the ingratitude of the people, and the envy of his competitors, or the violence of powerful enemies, despoil his virtue of its earthly recompense, he still enjoys a thousand consolations in the approbation of conscience, and sustains himself by contemplating the beauty of moral rectitude. xxix. * * * this virtue, in order to be true, must be universal. tiberius gracchus continued faithful to his fellow-citizens, but he violated the rights and treaties guaranteed to our allies and the latin peoples. but if this habit of arbitrary violence begins to extend itself further, and perverts our authority, leading it from right to violence, so that those who had voluntarily obeyed us are only restrained by fear, then, although we, during our days, may escape the peril, yet am i solicitous respecting the safety of our posterity and the immortality of the commonwealth itself, which, doubtless, might become perpetual and invincible if our people would maintain their ancient institutions and manners. xxx. when lælius had ceased to speak, all those that were present expressed the extreme pleasure they found in his discourse. but scipio, more affected than the rest, and ravished with the delight of sympathy, exclaimed: you have pleaded, my lælius, many causes with an eloquence superior to that of servius galba, our colleague, whom you used during his life to prefer to all others, even to the attic orators [and never did i hear you speak with more energy than to-day, while pleading the cause of justice][ ] * * * * * * that two things were wanting to enable him to speak in public and in the forum, confidence and voice. xxxi. * * * this justice, continued scipio, is the very foundation of lawful government in political constitutions. can we call the state of agrigentum a commonwealth, where all men are oppressed by the cruelty of a single tyrant--where there is no universal bond of right, nor social consent and fellowship, which should belong to every people, properly so named? it is the same in syracuse--that illustrious city which timæus calls the greatest of the grecian towns. it was indeed a most beautiful city; and its admirable citadel, its canals distributed through all its districts, its broad streets, its porticoes, its temples, and its walls, gave syracuse the appearance of a most flourishing state. but while dionysius its tyrant reigned there, nothing of all its wealth belonged to the people, and the people were nothing better than the slaves of one master. thus, wherever i behold a tyrant, i know that the social constitution must be not merely vicious and corrupt, as i stated yesterday, but in strict truth no social constitution at all. xxxii. _lælius._ you have spoken admirably, my scipio, and i see the point of your observations. _scipio._ you grant, then, that a state which is entirely in the power of a faction cannot justly be entitled a political community? _lælius._ that is evident. _scipio._ you judge most correctly. for what was the state of athens when, during the great peloponnesian war, she fell under the unjust domination of the thirty tyrants? the antique glory of that city, the imposing aspect of its edifices, its theatre, its gymnasium, its porticoes, its temples, its citadel, the admirable sculptures of phidias, and the magnificent harbor of piræus--did they constitute it a commonwealth? _lælius._ certainly not, because these did not constitute the real welfare of the community. _scipio._ and at rome, when the decemvirs ruled without appeal from their decisions, in the third year of their power, had not liberty lost all its securities and all its blessings? _lælius._ yes; the welfare of the community was no longer consulted, and the people soon roused themselves, and recovered their appropriate rights. xxxiii. _scipio._ i now come to the third, or democratical, form of government, in which a considerable difficulty presents itself, because all things are there said to lie at the disposition of the people, and are carried into execution just as they please. here the populace inflict punishments at their pleasure, and act, and seize, and keep possession, and distribute property, without let or hinderance. can you deny, my lælius, that this is a fair definition of a democracy, where the people are all in all, and where the people constitute the state? _lælius._ there is no political constitution to which i more absolutely deny the name of a _commonwealth_ than that in which all things lie in the power of the multitude. if a commonwealth, which implies the welfare of the entire community, could not exist in agrigentum, syracuse, or athens when tyrants reigned over them--if it could not exist in rome when under the oligarchy of the decemvirs--neither do i see how this sacred name of commonwealth can be applied to a democracy and the sway of the mob; because, in the first place, my scipio, i build on your own admirable definition, that there can be no community, properly so called, unless it be regulated by a combination of rights. and, by this definition, it appears that a multitude of men may be just as tyrannical as a single despot; and it is so much the worse, since no monster can be more barbarous than the mob, which assumes the name and appearance of the people. nor is it at all reasonable, since the laws place the property of madmen in the hands of their sane relations, that we should do the [very reverse in politics, and throw the property of the sane into the hands of the mad multitude][ ] * * * xxxiv. * * * [it is far more rational] to assert that a wise and virtuous aristocratical government deserves the title of a commonwealth, as it approaches to the nature of a kingdom. and much more so in my opinion, said mummius. for the unity of power often exposes a king to become a despot; but when an aristocracy, consisting of many virtuous men, exercise power, that is the most fortunate circumstance possible for any state. however this be, i much prefer royalty to democracy; for that is the third kind of government which you have remaining, and a most vicious one it is. xxxv. scipio replied: i am well acquainted, my mummius, with your decided antipathy to the democratical system. and, although, we may speak of it with rather more indulgence than you are accustomed to accord it, i must certainly agree with you, that of all the three particular forms of government, none is less commendable than democracy. i do not agree with you, however, when you would imply that aristocracy is preferable to royalty. if you suppose that wisdom governs the state, is it not as well that this wisdom should reside in one monarch as in many nobles? but we are led away by a certain incorrectness of terms in a discussion like the present. when we pronounce the word "aristocracy," which, in greek, signifies the government of the best men, what can be conceived more excellent? for what can be thought better than the best? but when, on the other hand, the title "king" is mentioned, we begin to imagine a tyrant; as if a king must be necessarily unjust. but we are not speaking of an unjust king when we are examining the true nature of royal authority. to this name of king, therefore, do but attach the idea of a romulus, a numa, a tullus, and perhaps you will be less severe to the monarchical form of constitution. _mummius_. have you, then, no commendation at all for any kind of democratical government? _scipio._ why, i think some democratical forms less objectionable than others; and, by way of illustration, i will ask you what you thought of the government in the isle of rhodes, where we were lately together; did it appear to you a legitimate and rational constitution? _mummius_. it did, and not much liable to abuse. _scipio._ you say truly. but, if you recollect, it was a very extraordinary experiment. all the inhabitants were alternately senators and citizens. some months they spent in their senatorial functions, and some months they spent in their civil employments. in both they exercised judicial powers; and in the theatre and the court, the same men judged all causes, capital and not capital. and they had as much influence, and were of as much importance as * * * fragments. xxxvi. there is therefore some unquiet feeling in individuals, which either exults in pleasure or is crushed by annoyance. [_the next is an incomplete sentence, and, as such, unintelligible_.] the phoenicians were the first who by their commerce, and by the merchandise which they carried, brought avarice and magnificence and insatiable degrees of everything into greece. sardanapalus, the luxurious king of assyria, of whom tully, in the third book of his treatise on the republic, says, "the notorious sardanapalus, far more deformed by his vices than even by his name." what is the meaning, then, of this absurd acceptation, unless some one wishes to make the whole of athos a monument? for what is athos or the vast olympus? * * * xxxvii. i will endeavor in the proper place to show it, according to the definitions of cicero himself, in which, putting forth scipio as the speaker, he has briefly explained what a commonwealth and what a republic is; adducing also many assertions of his own, and of those whom he has represented as taking part in that discussion, to the effect that the state of rome was not such a commonwealth, because there has never been genuine justice in it. however, according to definitions which are more reasonable, it was a commonwealth in some degree, and it was better regulated by the more ancient than by the later romans. it is now fitting that i should explain, as briefly and as clearly as i can, what, in the second book of this work, i promised to prove, according to the definitions which cicero, in his books on the commonwealth, puts into the mouth of scipio, arguing that the roman state was never a commonwealth; for he briefly defines a commonwealth as a state of the people; the people as an assembly of the multitude, united by a common feeling of right, and a community of interests. what he calls a common feeling of right he explains by discussion, showing in this way that a commonwealth cannot proceed without justice. where, therefore, there is no genuine justice, there can be no right, for that which is done according to right is done justly; and what is done unjustly cannot be done according to right, for the unjust regulations of men are not to be called or thought rights; since they themselves call that right (_jus_) which flows from the source of justice: and they say that that assertion which is often made by some persons of erroneous sentiments, namely, that that is right which is advantageous to the most powerful, is false. wherefore, where there is no true justice there can be no company of men united by a common feeling of right; therefore there can be no people (_populus_), according to that definition of scipio or cicero: and if there be no people, there can be no state of the people, but only of a mob such as it may be, which is not worthy of the name of a people. and thus, if a commonwealth is a state of a people, and if that is not a people which is not united by a common feeling of right, and if there is no right where there is no justice, then the undoubted inference is, that where there is no justice there is no commonwealth. moreover, justice is that virtue which gives every one his own. no war can be undertaken by a just and wise state unless for faith or self-defence. this self-defence of the state is enough to insure its perpetuity, and this perpetuity is what all patriots desire. those afflictions which even the hardiest spirits smart under--poverty, exile, prison, and torment--private individuals seek to escape from by an instantaneous death. but for states, the greatest calamity of all is that of death, which to individuals appears a refuge. a state should be so constituted as to live forever. for a commonwealth there is no natural dissolution as there is for a man, to whom death not only becomes necessary, but often desirable. and when a state once decays and falls, it is so utterly revolutionized, that, if we may compare great things with small, it resembles the final wreck of the universe. all wars undertaken without a proper motive are unjust. and no war can be reputed just unless it be duly announced and proclaimed, and if it be not preceded by a rational demand for restitution. our roman commonwealth, by defending its allies, has got possession of the world. * * * * * introduction to the fourth book, by the original translator. in this fourth book cicero treats of morals and education, and the use and abuse of stage entertainments. we retain nothing of this important book save a few scattered fragments, the beauty of which fills us with the greater regret for the passages we have lost. book iv. fragments. i. * * * since mention has been made of the body and of the mind, i will endeavor to explain the theory of each as well as the weakness of my understanding is able to comprehend it--a duty which i think it the more becoming in me to undertake, because marcus tullius, a man of singular genius, after having attempted to perform it in the fourth book of his treatise on the commonwealth, compressed a subject of wide extent within narrow limits, only touching lightly on all the principal points. and that there might be no excuse alleged for his not having followed out this topic, he himself has assured us that he was not wanting either in inclination or in anxiety to do so; for, in the first book of his treatise on laws, when he was touching briefly on the same subject, he speaks thus: "this topic scipio, in my opinion, has sufficiently discussed in those books which you have read." and the mind itself, which sees the future, remembers the past. well did marcus tullius say, in truth, if there is no one who would not prefer death to being changed into the form of some beast, although he were still to retain the mind of a man, how much more wretched is it to have the mind of a beast in the form of a man! to me this fate appears as much worse than the other as the mind is superior to the body. tullius says somewhere that he does not think the good of a ram and of publius africanus identical. and also by its being interposed, it causes shade and night, which is adapted both to the numbering of days and to rest from labor. and as in the autumn he has opened the earth to receive seeds, in winter relaxed it that it may digest them, and by the ripening powers of summer softened some and burned up others. when the shepherds use * * * for cattle. cicero, in the fourth book of his commonwealth, uses the word "armentum," and "armentarius," derived from it. ii. the great law of just and regular subordination is the basis of political prosperity. there is much advantage in the harmonious succession of ranks and orders and classes, in which the suffrages of the knights and the senators have their due weight. too many have foolishly desired to destroy this institution, in the vain hope of receiving some new largess, by a public decree, out of a distribution of the property of the nobility. iii. consider, now, how wisely the other provisions have been adopted, in order to secure to the citizens the benefits of an honest and happy life; for that is, indeed, the grand object of all political association, and that which every government should endeavor to procure for the people, partly by its institutions, and partly by its laws. consider, in the first place, the national education of the people--a matter on which the greeks have expended much labor in vain, and which is the only point on which polybius, who settled among us, accuses the negligence of our institutions. for our countrymen have thought that education ought not to be fixed, nor regulated by laws, nor be given publicly and uniformly to all classes of society. for[ ] * * * according to tully, who says that men going to serve in the army have guardians assigned to them, by whom they are governed the first year. iv. [in our ancient laws, young men were prohibited from appearing] naked in the public baths, so far back were the principles of modesty traced by our ancestors. among the greeks, on the contrary, what an absurd system of training youth is exhibited in their gymnasia! what a frivolous preparation for the labors and hazards of war! what indecent spectacles, what impure and licentious amours are permitted! i do not speak only of the eleans and thebans, among whom, in all love affairs, passion is allowed to run into shameless excesses; but the spartans, while they permit every kind of license to their young men, save that of violation, fence off, by a very slight wall, the very exception on which they insist, besides other crimes which i will not mention. then lælius said: i see, my scipio, that on the subject of the greek institutions, which you censure, you prefer attacking the customs of the most renowned peoples to contending with your favorite plato, whose name you have avoided citing, especially as * * * v. so that cicero, in his treatise on the commonwealth, says that it was a reproach to young men if they had no lovers. not only as at sparta, where boys learn to steal and plunder. and our master plato, even more than lycurgus, who would have everything to be common, so that no one should be able to call anything his own property. i would send him to the same place whither he sends homer, crowned with chaplets and anointed with perfumes, banishing him from the city which he is describing. vi. the judgment of the censor inflicts scarcely anything more than a blush on the man whom he condemns. therefore as all that adjudication turns solely on the name (_nomen_), the punishment is called ignominy. nor should a prefect be set over women, an officer who is created among the greeks; but there should be a censor to teach husbands to manage their wives. so the discipline of modesty has great power. all women abstain from wine. and also if any woman was of bad character, her relations used not to kiss her. so petulance is derived from asking (_petendo_); wantonness (_procacitas_) from _procando_, that is, from demanding. vii. for i do not approve of the same nation being the ruler and the farmer of lands. but both in private families and in the affairs of the commonwealth i look upon economy as a revenue. faith (_fides_) appears to me to derive its name from that being done (_fit_) which is said. in a citizen of rank and noble birth, caressing manners, display, and ambition are marks of levity. examine for a while the books on the republic, and learn that good men know no bound or limit in consulting the interests of their country. see in that treatise with what praises frugality, and continency, and fidelity to the marriage tie, and chaste, honorable, and virtuous manners are extolled. viii. i marvel at the elegant choice, not only of the facts, but of the language. if they dispute (_jurgant_). it is a contest between well-wishers, not a quarrel between enemies, that is called a dispute (_jurgium_), therefore the law considers that neighbors dispute (_jurgare_) rather than quarrel (_litigare_) with one another. the bounds of man's care and of man's life are the same; so by the pontifical law the sanctity of burial * * * they put them to death, though innocent, because they had left those men unburied whom they could not rescue from the sea because of the violence of the storm. nor in this discussion have i advocated the cause of the populace, but of the good. for one cannot easily resist a powerful people if one gives them either no rights at all or very little. in which case i wish i could augur first with truth and fidelity * * * ix. cicero saying this in vain, when speaking of poets, "and when the shouts and approval of the people, as of some great and wise teacher, has reached them, what darkness do they bring on! what alarms do they cause! what desires do they excite!" cicero says that if his life were extended to twice its length, he should not have time to read the lyric poets. x. as scipio says in cicero, "as they thought the whole histrionic art, and everything connected with the theatre, discreditable, they thought fit that all men of that description should not only be deprived of the honors belonging to the rest of the citizens, but should also be deprived of their franchise by the sentence of the censors." and what the ancient romans thought on this subject cicero informs us, in those books which he wrote on the commonwealth, where scipio argues and says * * * comedies could never (if it had not been authorized by the common customs of life) have made theatres approve of their scandalous exhibitions. and the more ancient greeks provided a certain correction for the vicious taste of the people, by making a law that it should be expressly defined by a censorship what subjects comedy should treat, and how she should treat them. whom has it not attacked? or, rather, whom has it not wounded? and whom has it spared? in this, no doubt, it sometimes took the right side, and lashed the popular demagogues and seditious agitators, such as cleon, cleophon, and hyperbolus. we may tolerate that; though indeed the censure of the magistrate would, in these cases, have been more efficacious than the satire of the poet. but when pericles, who governed the athenian commonwealth for so many years with the highest authority, both in peace and war, was outraged by verses, and these were acted on the stage, it was hardly more decent than if, among us, plautus and nævius had attacked publius and cnæus, or cæcilius had ventured to revile marcus cato. our laws of the twelve tables, on the contrary--so careful to attach capital punishment to a very few crimes only--have included in this class of capital offences the offence of composing or publicly reciting verses of libel, slander, and defamation, in order to cast dishonor and infamy on a fellow-citizen. and they have decided wisely; for our life and character should, if suspected, be submitted to the sentence of judicial tribunals and the legal investigations of our magistrates, and not to the whims and fancies of poets. nor should we be exposed to any charge of disgrace which we cannot meet by legal process, and openly refute at the bar. in our laws, i admire the justice of their expressions, as well as their decisions. thus the word _pleading_ signifies rather an amicable suit between friends than a quarrel between enemies. it is not easy to resist a powerful people, if you allow them no rights, or next to none. the old romans would not allow any living man to be either praised or blamed on the stage. xi. cicero says that comedy is an imitation of life; a mirror of customs, an image of truth. since, as is mentioned in that book on the commonwealth, not only did Æschines the athenian, a man of the greatest eloquence, who, when a young man, had been an actor of tragedies, concern himself in public affairs, but the athenians often sent aristodemus, who was also a tragic actor, to philip as an ambassador, to treat of the most important affairs of peace and war. * * * * * introduction to the fifth book, by the original translator. in this fifth book cicero explains and enforces the duties of magistrates, and the importance of practical experience to all who undertake their important functions. only a few fragments have survived the wreck of ages and descended to us. book v. fragments. i. ennius has told us-- of men and customs mighty rome consists; which verse, both for its precision and its verity, appears to me as if it had issued from an oracle; for neither the men, unless the state had adopted a certain system of manners--nor the manners, unless they had been illustrated by the men--could ever have established or maintained for so many ages so vast a republic, or one of such righteous and extensive sway. thus, long before our own times, the force of hereditary manners of itself moulded most eminent men; and admirable citizens, in return, gave new weight to the ancient customs and institutions of our ancestors. but our age, on the contrary, having received the commonwealth as a finished picture of another century, but one already beginning to fade through the lapse of years, has not only neglected to renew the colors of the original painting, but has not even cared to preserve its general form and prominent lineaments. for what now remains of those antique manners, of which the poet said that our commonwealth consisted? they have now become so obsolete and forgotten that they are not only not cultivated, but they are not even known. and as to the men, what shall i say? for the manners themselves have only perished through a scarcity of men; of which great misfortune we are not only called to give an account, but even, as men accused of capital offences, to a certain degree to plead our own cause in connection with it. for it is owing to our vices, rather than to any accident, that we have retained the name of republic when we have long since lost the reality. ii. * * * there is no employment so essentially royal as the exposition of equity, which comprises the true interpretation of all laws. this justice subjects used generally to expect from their kings. for this reason, lands, fields, woods, and pastures were reserved as the property of kings, and cultivated for them, without any labor on their part, in order that no anxiety on account of their personal interests might distract their attention from the welfare of the state. nor was any private man allowed to be the judge or arbitrator in any suit; but all disputes were terminated by the royal sentence. and of all our roman monarchs, numa appears to me to have best preserved this ancient custom of the kings of greece. for the others, though they also discharged this duty, were for the main part employed in conducting military enterprises, and in attending to those rights which belonged to war. but the long peace of numa's reign was the mother of law and religion in this city. and he was himself the author of those admirable laws which, as you are aware, are still extant. and this character is precisely what belongs to the man of whom we are speaking. * * * iii. [_scipio._ ought not a farmer] to be acquainted with the nature of plants and seeds? _manilius._ certainly, provided he attends to his practical business also. _scipio._ do you think that knowledge only fit for a steward? _manilius._ certainly not, inasmuch as the cultivation of land often fails for want of agricultural labor. _scipio._ therefore, as the steward knows the nature of a field, and the scribe knows penmanship, and as both of them seek, in their respective sciences, not mere amusement only, but practical utility, so this statesman of ours should have studied the science of jurisprudence and legislation; he should have investigated their original sources; but he should not embarrass himself in debating and arguing, reading and scribbling. he should rather employ himself in the actual administration of government, and become a sort of steward of it, being perfectly conversant with the principles of universal law and equity, without which no man can be just: not unfamiliar with the civil laws of states; but he will use them for practical purposes, even as a pilot uses astronomy, and a physician natural philosophy. for both these men bring their theoretical science to bear on the practice of their arts; and our statesman [should do the same with the science of politics, and make it subservient to the actual interests of philanthropy and patriotism]. * * * iv. * * * in states in which good men desire glory and approbation, and shun disgrace and ignominy. nor are such men so much alarmed by the threats and penalties of the law as by that sentiment of shame with which nature has endowed man, which is nothing else than a certain fear of deserved censure. the wise director of a government strengthens this natural instinct by the force of public opinion, and perfects it by education and manners. and thus the citizens are preserved from vice and corruption rather by honor and shame than by fear of punishment. but this argument will be better illustrated when we treat of the love of glory and praise, which we shall discuss on another occasion. v. as respects the private life and the manners of the citizens, they are intimately connected with the laws that constitute just marriages and legitimate offspring, under the protection of the guardian deities around the domestic hearths. by these laws, all men should be maintained in their rights of public and private property. it is only under a good government like this that men can live happily--for nothing can be more delightful than a well-constituted state. on which account it appears to me a very strange thing what this * * * vi. i therefore consume all my time in considering what is the power of that man, whom, as you think, we have described carefully enough in our books. do you, then, admit our idea of that governor of a commonwealth to whom we wish to refer everything? for thus, i imagine, does scipio speak in the fifth book: "for as a fair voyage is the object of the master of a ship, the health of his patient the aim of a physician, and victory that of a general, so the happiness of his fellow-citizens is the proper study of the ruler of a commonwealth; that they may be stable in power, rich in resources, widely known in reputation, and honorable through their virtue. for a ruler ought to be one who can perfect this, which is the best and most important employment among mankind." and works in your literature rightly praise that ruler of a country who consults the welfare of his people more than their inclinations. vii. tully, in those books which he wrote upon the commonwealth, could not conceal his opinions, when he speaks of appointing a chief of the state, who, he says, must be maintained by glory; and afterward he relates that his ancestors did many admirable and noble actions from a desire of glory. tully, in his treatise on the commonwealth, wrote that the chief of a state must be maintained by glory, and that a commonwealth would last as long as honor was paid by every one to the chief. [_the next paragraph is unintelligible._] which virtue is called fortitude, which consists of magnanimity, and a great contempt of death and pain. viii. as marcellus was fierce, and eager to fight, maximus prudent and cautious. who discovered his violence and unbridled ferocity. which has often happened not only to individuals, but also to most powerful nations. in the whole world. because he inflicted the annoyances of his old age on your families. ix. cicero, in his treatise on the commonwealth, says, "as menelaus of lacedæmon had a certain agreeable sweetness of eloquence." and in another place he says, "let him cultivate brevity in speaking." by the evidence of which arts, as tully says, it is a shame for the conscience of the judge to be misled. for he says, "and as nothing in a commonwealth ought to be so uncorrupt as a suffrage and a sentence, i do not see why the man who perverts them by money is worthy of punishment, while he who does so by eloquence is even praised. indeed, i myself think that he who corrupts the judge by his speech does more harm than he who does so by money, because no one can corrupt a sensible man by money, though he may by speaking." and when scipio had said this, mummius praised him greatly, for he was extravagantly imbued with a hatred of orators. * * * * * introduction to the sixth book. in this last book of his commonwealth, cicero labors to show that truly pious philanthropical and patriotic statesmen will not only be rewarded on earth by the approval of conscience and the applause of all good citizens, but that they may expect hereafter immortal glory in new forms of being. to illustrate this, he introduces the "dream of scipio," in which he explains the resplendent doctrines of plato respecting the immortality of the soul with inimitable dignity and elegance. this somnium scipionis, for which we are indebted to the citation of macrobius, is the most beautiful thing of the kind ever written. it has been intensely admired by all european scholars, and will be still more so. there are two translations of it in our language; one attached to oliver's edition of cicero's thoughts, the other by mr. danby, published in . of these we have freely availed ourselves, and as freely we express our acknowledgments. book vi. scipio's dream. i. therefore you rely upon all the prudence of this rule, which has derived its very name (_prudentia_) from foreseeing (_a providendo_). wherefore the citizen must so prepare himself as to be always armed against those things which trouble the constitution of a state. and that dissension of the citizens, when one party separates from and attacks another, is called sedition. and in truth in civil dissensions, as the good are of more importance than the many, i think that we should regard the weight of the citizens, and not their number. for the lusts, being severe mistresses of the thoughts, command and compel many an unbridled action. and as they cannot be satisfied or appeased by any means, they urge those whom they have inflamed with their allurements to every kind of atrocity. ii. which indeed was so much the greater in him because though the cause of the colleagues was identical, not only was their unpopularity not equal, but the influence of gracchus was employed in mitigating the hatred borne to claudius. who encountered the number of the chiefs and nobles with these words, and left behind him that mournful and dignified expression of his gravity and influence. that, as he writes, a thousand men might every day descend into the forum with cloaks dyed in purple. [_the next paragraph is unintelligible._] for our ancestors wished marriages to be firmly established. there is a speech extant of lælius with which we are all acquainted, expressing how pleasing to the immortal gods are the * * * and * * * of the priests. iii. cicero, writing about the commonwealth, in imitation of plato, has related the story of the return of er the pamphylian to life; who, as he says, had come to life again after he had been placed on the funeral pile, and related many secrets about the shades below; not speaking, like plato, in a fabulous imitation of truth, but using a certain reasonable invention of an ingenious dream, cleverly intimating that these things which were uttered about the immortality of the soul, and about heaven, are not the inventions of dreaming philosophers, nor the incredible fables which the epicureans ridicule, but the conjectures of wise men. he insinuates that that scipio who by the subjugation of carthage obtained africanus as a surname for his family, gave notice to scipio the son of paulus of the treachery which threatened him from his relations, and the course of fate, because by the necessity of numbers he was confined in the period of a perfect life, and he says that he in the fifty-sixth year of his age * * * iv. some of our religion who love plato, on account of his admirable kind of eloquence, and of some correct opinions which he held, say that he had some opinions similar to my own touching the resurrection of the dead, which subject tully touches on in his treatise on the commonwealth, and says that he was rather jesting than intending to say that was true. for he asserts that a man returned to life, and related some stories which harmonized with the discussions of the platonists. v. in this point the imitation has especially preserved the likeness of the work, because, as plato, in the conclusion of his volume, represents a certain person who had returned to life, which he appeared to have quitted, as indicating what is the condition of souls when stripped of the body, with the addition of a certain not unnecessary description of the spheres and stars, an appearance of circumstances indicating things of the same kind is related by the scipio of cicero, as having been brought before him in sleep. vi. tully is found to have preserved this arrangement with no less judgment than genius. after, in every condition of the commonwealth, whether of leisure or business, he has given the palm to justice, he has placed the sacred abodes of the immortal souls, and the secrets of the heavenly regions, on the very summit of his completed work, indicating whither they must come, or rather return, who have managed the republic with prudence, justice, fortitude, and moderation. but that platonic relater of secrets was a man of the name of er, a pamphylian by nation, a soldier by profession, who, after he appeared to have died from wounds received in battle, and twelve days afterward was about to receive the honors of the funeral pile with the others who were slain at the same time, suddenly either recovering his life, or else never having lost it, as if he were giving a public testimony, related to all men all that he had done or seen in the days that he had thus passed between life and death. although cicero, as if himself conscious of the truth, grieves that this story has been ridiculed by the ignorant, still, avoiding giving an example of foolish reproach, he preferred speaking of the relater as of one awakened from a swoon rather than restored to life. vii. and before we look at the words of the dream we must explain what kind of persons they are by whom cicero says that even the account of plato was ridiculed, who are not apprehensive that the same thing may happen to them. nor by this expression does he wish the ignorant mob to be understood, but a kind of men who are ignorant of the truth, though pretending to be philosophers with a display of learning, who, it was notorious, had read such things, and were eager to find faults. we will say, therefore, who they are whom he reports as having levelled light reproaches against so great a philosopher, and who of them has even left an accusation of him committed to writing, etc. the whole faction of the epicureans, always wandering at an equal distance from truth, and thinking everything ridiculous which they do not understand, has ridiculed the sacred volume, and the most venerable mysteries of nature. but colotes, who is somewhat celebrated and remarkable for his loquacity among the pupils of epicurus, has even recorded in a book the bitter reproaches which he aims at him. but since the other arguments which he foolishly urges have no connection with the dream of which we are now talking, we will pass them over at present, and attend only to the calumny which will stick both to cicero and plato, unless it is silenced. he says that a fable ought not to have been invented by a philosopher, since no kind of falsehood is suitable to professors of truth. for why, says he, if you wish to give us a notion of heavenly things and to teach us the nature of souls, did you not do so by a simple and plain explanation? why was a character invented, and circumstances, and strange events, and a scene of cunningly adduced falsehood arranged, to pollute the very door of the investigation of truth by a lie? since these things, though they are said of the platonic er, do also attack the rest of our dreaming africanus. viii. this occasion incited scipio to relate his dream, which he declares that he had buried in silence for a long time. for when lælius was complaining that there were no statues of nasica erected in any public place, as a reward for his having slain the tyrant, scipio replied in these words: "but although the consciousness itself of great deeds is to wise men the most ample reward of virtue, yet that divine nature ought to have, not statues fixed in lead, nor triumphs with withering laurels, but some more stable and lasting kinds of rewards." "what are they?" said lælius. "then," said scipio, "suffer me, since we have now been keeping holiday for three days, * * * etc." by which preface he came to the relation of his dream; pointing out that those were the more stable and lasting kinds of rewards which he himself had seen in heaven reserved for good governors of commonwealths. ix. when i had arrived in africa, where i was, as you are aware, military tribune of the fourth legion under the consul manilius, there was nothing of which i was more earnestly desirous than to see king masinissa, who, for very just reasons, had been always the especial friend of our family. when i was introduced to him, the old man embraced me, shed tears, and then, looking up to heaven, exclaimed--i thank thee, o supreme sun, and ye also, ye other celestial beings, that before i depart from this life i behold in my kingdom, and in this my palace, publius cornelius scipio, by whose mere name i seem to be reanimated; so completely and indelibly is the recollection of that best and most invincible of men, africanus, imprinted in my mind. after this, i inquired of him concerning the affairs of his kingdom. he, on the other hand, questioned me about the condition of our commonwealth, and in this mutual interchange of conversation we passed the whole of that day. x. in the evening we were entertained in a manner worthy the magnificence of a king, and carried on our discourse for a considerable part of the night. and during all this time the old man spoke of nothing but africanus, all whose actions, and even remarkable sayings, he remembered distinctly. at last, when we retired to bed, i fell into a more profound sleep than usual, both because i was fatigued with my journey, and because i had sat up the greatest part of the night. here i had the following dream, occasioned, as i verily believe, by our preceding conversation; for it frequently happens that the thoughts and discourses which have employed us in the daytime produce in our sleep an effect somewhat similar to that which ennius writes happened to him about homer, of whom, in his waking hours, he used frequently to think and speak. africanus, i thought, appeared to me in that shape, with which i was better acquainted from his picture than from any personal knowledge of him. when i perceived it was he, i confess i trembled with consternation; but he addressed me, saying, take courage, my scipio; be not afraid, and carefully remember what i shall say to you. xi. do you see that city carthage, which, though brought under the roman yoke by me, is now renewing former wars, and cannot live in peace? (and he pointed to carthage from a lofty spot, full of stars, and brilliant, and glittering)--to attack which city you are this day arrived in a station not much superior to that of a private soldier. before two years, however, are elapsed, you shall be consul, and complete its overthrow; and you shall obtain, by your own merit, the surname of africanus, which as yet belongs to you no otherwise than as derived from me. and when you have destroyed carthage, and received the honor of a triumph, and been made censor, and, in quality of ambassador, visited egypt, syria, asia, and greece, you shall be elected a second time consul in your absence, and, by utterly destroying numantia, put an end to a most dangerous war. but when you have entered the capitol in your triumphal car, you shall find the roman commonwealth all in a ferment, through the intrigues of my grandson tiberius gracchus. xii. it is on this occasion, my dear africanus, that you show your country the greatness of your understanding, capacity, and prudence. but i see that the destiny, however, of that time is, as it were, uncertain; for when your age shall have accomplished seven times eight revolutions of the sun, and your fatal hours shall be marked put by the natural product of these two numbers, each of which is esteemed a perfect one, but for different reasons, then shall the whole city have recourse to you alone, and place its hopes in your auspicious name. on you the senate, all good citizens, the allies, the people of latium, shall cast their eyes; on you the preservation of the state shall entirely depend. in a word, _if you escape the impious machinations of your relatives_, you will, in quality of dictator, establish order and tranquillity in the commonwealth. when on this lælius made an exclamation, and the rest of the company groaned loudly, scipio, with a gentle smile, said, i entreat you, do not wake me out of my dream, but have patience, and hear the rest. xiii. now, in order to encourage you, my dear africanus, continued the shade of my ancestor, to defend the state with the greater cheerfulness, be assured that, for all those who have in any way conduced to the preservation, defence, and enlargement of their native country, there is a certain place in heaven where they shall enjoy an eternity of happiness. for nothing on earth is more agreeable to god, the supreme governor of the universe, than the assemblies and societies of men united together by laws, which are called states. it is from heaven their rulers and preservers came, and thither they return. xiv. though at these words i was extremely troubled, not so much at the fear of death as at the perfidy of my own relations, yet i recollected myself enough to inquire whether he himself, my father paulus, and others whom we look upon as dead, were really living. yes, truly, replied he, they all enjoy life who have escaped from the chains of the body as from a prison. but as to what you call life on earth, that is no more than one form of death. but see; here comes your father paulus towards you! and as soon as i observed him, my eyes burst out into a flood of tears; but he took me in his arms, embraced me, and bade me not weep. xv. when my first transports subsided, and i regained the liberty of speech, i addressed my father thus: thou best and most venerable of parents, since this, as i am informed by africanus, is the only substantial life, why do i linger on earth, and not rather haste to come hither where you are? that, replied he, is impossible: unless that god, whose temple is all that vast expanse you behold, shall free you from the fetters of the body, you can have no admission into this place. mankind have received their being on this very condition, that they should labor for the preservation of that globe which is situated, as you see, in the midst of this temple, and is called earth. men are likewise endowed with a soul, which is a portion of the eternal fires which you call stars and constellations; and which, being round, spherical bodies, animated by divine intelligences, perform their cycles and revolutions with amazing rapidity. it is your duty, therefore, my publius, and that of all who have any veneration for the gods, to preserve this wonderful union of soul and body; nor without the express command of him who gave you a soul should the least thought be entertained of quitting human life, lest you seem to desert the post assigned you by god himself. but rather follow the examples of your grandfather here, and of me, your father, in paying a strict regard to justice and piety; which is due in a great degree to parents and relations, but most of all to our country. such a life as this is the true way to heaven, and to the company of those, who, after having lived on earth and escaped from the body, inhabit the place which you now behold. xvi. this was the shining circle, or zone, whose remarkable brightness distinguishes it among the constellations, and which, after the greeks, you call the milky way. from thence, as i took a view of the universe, everything appeared beautiful and admirable; for there those stars are to be seen that are never visible from our globe, and everything appears of such magnitude as we could not have imagined. the least of all the stars was that removed farthest from heaven, and situated next to the earth; i mean our moon, which shines with a borrowed light. now, the globes of the stars far surpass the magnitude of our earth, which at that distance appeared so exceedingly small that i could not but be sensibly affected on seeing our whole empire no larger than if we touched the earth, as it were, at a single point. xvii. and as i continued to observe the earth with great attention, how long, i pray you, said africanus, will your mind be fixed on that object? why don't you rather take a view of the magnificent temples among which you have arrived? the universe is composed of nine circles, or rather spheres, one of which is the heavenly one, and is exterior to all the rest, which it embraces; being itself the supreme god, and bounding and containing the whole. in it are fixed those stars which revolve with never-varying courses. below this are seven other spheres, which revolve in a contrary direction to that of the heavens. one of these is occupied by the globe which on earth they call saturn. next to that is the star of jupiter, so benign and salutary to mankind. the third in order is that fiery and terrible planet called mars. below this, again, almost in the middle region, is the sun--the leader, governor, and prince of the other luminaries; the soul of the world, which it regulates and illumines; being of such vast size that it pervades and gives light to all places. then follow venus and mercury, which attend, as it were, on the sun. lastly, the moon, which shines only in the reflected beams of the sun, moves in the lowest sphere of all. below this, if we except that gift of the gods, the soul, which has been given by the liberality of the gods to the human race, everything is mortal, and tends to dissolution; but above the moon all is eternal. for the earth, which is the ninth globe, and occupies the centre, is immovable, and, being the lowest, all others gravitate towards it. xviii. when i had recovered myself from the astonishment occasioned by such a wonderful prospect, i thus addressed africanus: pray what is this sound that strikes my ears in so loud and agreeable a manner? to which he replied: it is that which is called the _music of the spheres_, being produced by their motion and impulse; and being formed by unequal intervals, but such as are divided according to the justest proportion, it produces, by duly tempering acute with grave sounds, various concerts of harmony. for it is impossible that motions so great should be performed without any noise; and it is agreeable to nature that the extremes on one side should produce sharp, and on the other flat sounds. for which reason the sphere of the fixed stars, being the highest, and being carried with a more rapid velocity, moves with a shrill and acute sound; whereas that of the moon, being the lowest, moves with a very flat one. as to the earth, which makes the ninth sphere, it remains immovably fixed in the middle or lowest part of the universe. but those eight revolving circles, in which both mercury and venus are moved with the same celerity, give out sounds that are divided by seven distinct intervals, which is generally the regulating number of all things. this celestial harmony has been imitated by learned musicians both on stringed instruments and with the voice, whereby they have opened to themselves a way to return to the celestial regions, as have likewise many others who have employed their sublime genius while on earth in cultivating the divine sciences. by the amazing noise of this sound the ears of mankind have been in some degree deafened; and indeed hearing is the dullest of all the human senses. thus, the people who dwell near the cataracts of the nile, which are called catadupa[ ], are, by the excessive roar which that river makes in precipitating itself from those lofty mountains, entirely deprived of the sense of hearing. and so inconceivably great is this sound which is produced by the rapid motion of the whole universe, that the human ear is no more capable of receiving it than the eye is able to look steadfastly and directly on the sun, whose beams easily dazzle the strongest sight. while i was busied in admiring the scene of wonders, i could not help casting my eyes every now and then on the earth. xix. on which africanus said, i perceive that you are still employed in contemplating the seat and residence of mankind. but if it appears to you so small, as in fact it really is, despise its vanities, and fix your attention forever on these heavenly objects. is it possible that you should attain any human applause or glory that is worth the contending for? the earth, you see, is peopled but in a very few places, and those, too, of small extent; and they appear like so many little spots of green scattered through vast, uncultivated deserts. and those who inhabit the earth are not only so remote from each other as to be cut off from all mutual correspondence, but their situation being in oblique or contrary parts of the globe, or perhaps in those diametrically opposite to yours, all expectation of universal fame must fall to the ground. xx. you may likewise observe that the same globe of the earth is girt and surrounded with certain zones, whereof those two that are most remote from each other, and lie under the opposite poles of heaven, are congealed with frost; but that one in the middle, which is far the largest, is scorched with the intense heat of the sun. the other two are habitable, one towards the south, the inhabitants of which are your antipodes, with whom you have no connection; the other, towards the north, is that which you inhabit, whereof a very small part, as you may see, falls to your share. for the whole extent of what you see is, as it were, but a little island, narrow at both ends and wide in the middle, which is surrounded by the sea which on earth you call the great atlantic ocean, and which, notwithstanding this magnificent name, you see is very insignificant. and even in these cultivated and well-known countries, has yours, or any of our names, ever passed the heights of the caucasus or the currents of the ganges? in what other parts to the north or the south, or where the sun rises and sets, will your names ever be heard? and if we leave these out of the question, how small a space is there left for your glory to spread itself abroad; and how long will it remain in the memory of those whose minds are now full of it? xxi. besides all this, if the progeny of any future generation should wish to transmit to their posterity the praises of any one of us which they have heard from their forefathers, yet the deluges and combustions of the earth, which must necessarily happen at their destined periods, will prevent our obtaining, not only an eternal, but even a durable glory. and, after all, what does it signify whether those who shall hereafter be born talk of you, when those who have lived before you, whose number was perhaps not less, and whose merit certainly greater, were not so much as acquainted with your name? xxii. especially since not one of those who shall hear of us is able to retain in his memory the transactions of a single year. the bulk of mankind, indeed, measure their year by the return of the sun, which is only one star. but when all the stars shall have returned to the place whence they set out, and after long periods shall again exhibit the same aspect of the whole heavens, that is what ought properly to be called the revolution of a year, though i scarcely dare attempt to enumerate the vast multitude of ages contained in it. for as the sun in old time was eclipsed, and seemed to be extinguished, at the time when the soul of romulus penetrated into these eternal mansions, so, when all the constellations and stars shall revert to their primary position, and the sun shall at the same point and time be again eclipsed, then you may consider that the grand year is completed. be assured, however, that the twentieth part of it is not yet elapsed. xxiii. wherefore, if you have no hopes of returning to this place where great and good men enjoy all that their souls can wish for, of what value, pray, is all that human glory, which can hardly endure for a small portion of one year? if, then, you wish to elevate your views to the contemplation of this eternal seat of splendor, you will not be satisfied with the praises of your fellow-mortals, nor with any human rewards that your exploits can obtain; but virtue herself must point out to you the true and only object worthy of your pursuit. leave to others to speak of you as they may, for speak they will. their discourses will be confined to the narrow limits of the countries you see, nor will their duration be very extensive; for they will perish like those who utter them, and will be no more remembered by their posterity. xxiv. when he had ceased to speak in this manner, i said, o africanus, if indeed the door of heaven is open to those who have deserved well of their country, although, indeed, from my childhood i have always followed yours and my father's steps, and have not neglected to imitate your glory, still, i will from henceforth strive to follow them more closely. follow them, then, said he, and consider your body only, not yourself, as mortal. for it is not your outward form which constitutes your being, but your mind; not that substance which is palpable to the senses, but your spiritual nature. _know, then, that you are a god_--for a god it must be, which flourishes, and feels, and recollects, and foresees, and governs, regulates and moves the body over which it is set, as the supreme ruler does the world which is subject to him. for as that eternal being moves whatever is mortal in this world, so the immortal mind of man moves the frail body with which it is connected. xxv. for whatever is always moving must be eternal; but that which derives its motion from a power which is foreign to itself, when that motion ceases must itself lose its animation. that alone, then, which moves itself can never cease to be moved, because it can never desert itself. moreover, it must be the source, and origin, and principle of motion in all the rest. there can be nothing prior to a principle, for all things must originate from it; and it cannot itself derive its existence from any other source, for if it did it would no longer be a principle. and if it had no beginning, it can have no end; for a beginning that is put an end to will neither be renewed by any other cause, nor will it produce anything else of itself. all things, therefore, must originate from one source. thus it follows that motion must have its source in something which is moved by itself, and which can neither have a beginning nor an end. otherwise all the heavens and all nature must perish, for it is impossible that they can of themselves acquire any power of producing motion in themselves. xxvi. as, therefore, it is plain that what is moved by itself must be eternal, who will deny that this is the general condition and nature of minds? for as everything is inanimate which is moved by an impulse exterior to itself, so what is animated is moved by an interior impulse of its own; for this is the peculiar nature and power of mind. and if that alone has the power of self-motion, it can neither have had a beginning, nor can it have an end. do you, therefore, exercise this mind of yours in the best pursuits. and the best pursuits are those which consist in promoting the good of your country. such employments will speed the flight of your mind to this its proper abode; and its flight will be still more rapid, if, even while it is enclosed in the body, it will look abroad, and disengage itself as much as possible from its bodily dwelling, by the contemplation of things which are external to itself. this it should do to the utmost of its power. for the minds of those who have given themselves up to the pleasures of the body, paying, as it were, a servile obedience to their lustful impulses, have violated the laws of god and man; and therefore, when they are separated from their bodies, flutter continually round the earth on which they lived, and are not allowed to return to this celestial region till they have been purified by the revolution of many ages. thus saying, he vanished, and i awoke from my dream. a fragment. and although it is most desirable that fortune should remain forever in the most brilliant possible condition, nevertheless, the equability of life excites less interest than those changeable conditions wherein prosperity suddenly revives out of the most desperate and ruinous circumstances. the end. footnotes: [ ] archilochus was a native of paros, and flourished about - b.c. his poems were chiefly iambics of bitter satire. horace speaks of him as the inventor of iambics, and calls himself his pupil. parios ego primus iambos ostendi latio, numeros animosque secutus archilochi, non res et agentia verba lycamben. epist. i. xix. . and in another place he says, archilochum proprio rabies armavit iambo--a.p. . [ ] this was livius andronicus: he is supposed to have been a native of tarentum, and he was made prisoner by the romans, during their wars in southern italy; owing to which he became the slave of m. livius salinator. he wrote both comedies and tragedies, of which cicero (brutus ) speaks very contemptuously, as "livianæ fabulæ non satis dignæ quæ iterum legantur"--not worth reading a second time. he also wrote a latin odyssey, and some hymns, and died probably about b.c. [ ] c. fabius, surnamed pictor, painted the temple of salus, which the dictator c. junius brutus bubulus dedicated b.c. the temple was destroyed by fire in the reign of claudius. the painting is highly praised by dionysius, xvi. . [ ] for an account of the ancient greek philosophers, see the sketch at the end of the disputations. [ ] isocrates was born at athens b.c. he was a pupil of gorgias, prodicus, and socrates. he opened a school of rhetoric, at athens, with great success. he died by his own hand at the age of ninety-eight. [ ] so horace joins these two classes as inventors of all kinds of improbable fictions: pictoribus atque poetis quidlibet audendi semper fuit æqua potestas.--a. p. . which roscommon translates: painters and poets have been still allow'd their pencil and their fancies unconfined. [ ] epicharmus was a native of cos, but lived at megara, in sicily, and when megara was destroyed, removed to syracuse, and lived at the court of hiero, where he became the first writer of comedies, so that horace ascribes the invention of comedy to him, and so does theocritus. he lived to a great age. [ ] pherecydes was a native of scyros, one of the cyclades; and is said to have obtained his knowledge from the secret books of the phoenicians. he is said also to have been a pupil of pittacus, the rival of thales, and the master of pythagoras. his doctrine was that there were three principles ([greek: zeus], or Æther; [greek: chthôn], or chaos; and [greek: chronos], or time) and four elements (fire, earth, air, and water), from which everything that exists was formed.--_vide_ smith's dict. gr. and rom. biog. [ ] archytas was a native of tarentum, and is said to have saved the life of plato by his influence with the tyrant dionysius. he was especially great as a mathematician and geometrician, so that horace calls him maris et terra numeroque carentis arenæ mensorem. od. i. . . plato is supposed to have learned some of his views from him, and aristotle to have borrowed from him every idea of the categories. [ ] this was not timæus the historian, but a native of locri, who is said also in the de finibus (c. ) to have been a teacher of plato. there is a treatise extant bearing his name, which is, however, probably spurious, and only an abridgment of plato's dialogue timæus. [ ] dicæarchus was a native of messana, in sicily, though he lived chiefly in greece. he was one of the later disciples of aristotle. he was a great geographer, politician, historian, and philosopher, and died about b.c. [ ] aristoxenus was a native of tarentum, and also a pupil of aristotle. we know nothing of his opinions except that he held the soul to be a _harmony_ of the body; a doctrine which had been already discussed by plato in the phædo, and combated by aristotle. he was a great musician, and the chief portions of his works which have come down to us are fragments of some musical treatises.--smith's dict. gr. and rom. biog.; to which source i must acknowledge my obligation for nearly the whole of these biographical notes. [ ] the simonides here meant is the celebrated poet of ceos, the perfecter of elegiac poetry among the greeks. he flourished about the time of the persian war. besides his poetry, he is said to have been the inventor of some method of aiding the memory. he died at the court of hiero, b.c. [ ] theodectes was a native of phaselis, in pamphylia, a distinguished rhetorician and tragic poet, and flourished in the time of philip of macedon. he was a pupil of isocrates, and lived at athens, and died there at the age of forty-one. [ ] cineas was a thessalian, and (as is said in the text) came to rome as ambassador from pyrrhus after the battle of heraclea, b.c., and his memory is said to have been so great that on the day after his arrival he was able to address all the senators and knights by name. he probably died before pyrrhus returned to italy, b.c. [ ] charmadas, called also charmides, was a fellow-pupil with philo, the larissæan of clitomachus, the carthaginian. he is said by some authors to have founded a fourth academy. [ ] metrodorus was a minister of mithridates the great; and employed by him as supreme judge in pontus, and afterward as an ambassador. cicero speaks of him in other places (de orat. ii. ) as a man of wonderful memory. [ ] quintus hortensius was eight years older than cicero; and, till cicero's fame surpassed his, he was accounted the most eloquent of all the romans. he was verres's counsel in the prosecution conducted against him by cicero. seneca relates that his memory was so great that he could come out of an auction and repeat the catalogue backward. he died b.c. [ ] this treatise is one which has not come down to us, but which had been lately composed by cicero in order to comfort himself for the loss of his daughter. [ ] the epigram is, [greek: eipas hêlie chaire, kleombrotos hômbrakiôtês hêlat' aph' hypsêlou teicheos eis aidên, axion ouden idôn thanatou kakon, alla platônos hen to peri psychês gramm' analexamenos.] which may be translated, perhaps, farewell, o sun, cleombrotus exclaim'd, then plunged from off a height beneath the sea; stung by pain, of no disgrace ashamed, but moved by plato's high philosophy. [ ] this is alluded to by juvenal: provida pompeio dederat campania febres optandas: sed multæ urbes et publica vota vicerunt. igitur fortuna ipsius et urbis, servatum victo caput abstulit.--sat. x. . [ ] pompey's second wife was julia, the daughter of julius cæsar, she died the year before the death of crassus, in parthia. virgil speaks of cæsar and pompey as relations, using the same expression (socer) as cicero: aggeribus socer alpinis atque arce monoeci descendens, gener adversis instructus eois.--Æn. vi. . [ ] this idea is beautifully expanded by byron: yet if, as holiest men have deem'd, there be a land of souls beyond that sable shore to shame the doctrine of the sadducee and sophist, madly vain or dubious lore, how sweet it were in concert to adore with those who made our mortal labors light, to hear each voice we fear'd to hear no more. behold each mighty shade reveal'd to sight, the bactrian, samian sage, and all who taught the right! _childe harold_, ii. [ ] the epitaph in the original is: [greek: Ô xein' angeilon lakedaimoniois hoti têde keimetha, tois keinôn peithomenoi nomimois.] [ ] this was expressed in the greek verses, [greek: archês men mê phynai epichthonioisin ariston, phynta d' hopôs ôkista pylas aidyo perêsai] which by some authors are attributed to homer. [ ] this is the first fragment of the cresphontes.--ed. var. vii., p. . [greek: edei gar hêmas syllogon poioumenous ton phynta thrênein, eis hos' erchetai kaka. ton d' au thanonta kai ponôn pepaumenon chairontas euphêmointas ekpemein domôn] [ ] the greek verses are quoted by plutarch: [greek: Êpou nêpie, êlithioi phrenes andrôn euthynoos keitai moiridiô thanatô ouk ên gar zôein kalon autô oute goneusi.] [ ] this refers to the story that when eumolpus, the son of neptune, whose assistance the eleusinians had called in against the athenians, had been slain by the athenians, an oracle demanded the sacrifice of one of the daughters of erechtheus, the king of athens. and when one was drawn by lot, the others voluntarily accompanied her to death. [ ] menoeceus was son of creon, and in the war of the argives against thebes, teresias declared that the thebans should conquer if menoeceus would sacrifice himself for his country; and accordingly he killed himself outside the gates of thebes. [ ] the greek is, [greek: mêde moi aklaustos thanatos moloi, alla philoisi poiêsaimi thanôn algea kai stonachas.] [ ] soph. trach. . [ ] the lines quoted by cicero here appear to have come from the latin play of prometheus by accius; the ideas are borrowed, rather than translated, from the prometheus of Æschylus. [ ] from _exerceo_. [ ] each soldier carried a stake, to help form a palisade in front of the camp. [ ] insania--from _in_, a particle of negative force in composition, and _sanus_, healthy, sound. [ ] the man who first received this surname was l. calpurnius piso, who was consul, b.c., in the servile war. [ ] the greek is, [greek: alla moi oidanetai kradiê cholô hoppot' ekeinou mnêsomai hos m' asyphêlon en argeioisin erexen.]--il. ix. . i have given pope's translation in the text. [ ] this is from the theseus: [greek: egô de touto para sophou tinos mathôn eis phrontidas noun symphoras t' eballomên phygas t' emautô prostitheis patras emês. thanatous t' aôrous, kai kakôn allas hodous hôs, ei ti paschoim' ôn edoxazon pote mê moi neorton prospeson mallon dakoi.] [ ] ter. phorm. ii. i. . [ ] this refers to the speech of agamemnon in euripides, in the iphigenia in aulis, [greek: zêlô se, geron, zêlô d' andrôn hos akindynon bion exeperas', agnôs, akleês.]--v. . [ ] this is a fragment from the hypsipyle: [greek: ephy men oudeis hostis ou ponei brotôn thaptei te tekna chater' au ktatai nea, autos te thnêskei. kai tad' achthontai brotoi eis gên pherontes gên anankaiôs d' echei bion therizein hôste karpimon stachyn.] [ ] [greek: pollas ek kephalês prothelymnous helketo chaitas.]--il. x. . [ ] [greek: Êtoi ho kappedion to alêion oios alato hon thymon katedôn, paton anthrôpôn aleeinôn.]--il. vi. . [ ] this is a translation from euripides: [greek: hôsth' himeros m' hypêlthe gê te k' ouranô lexai molousê deuro mêdeias tychas.]--med. . [ ] [greek: liên gar polloi kai epêtrimoi êmata panta piptousin, pote ken tis anapneuseie ponoio; alla chrê ton men katathaptemen, hos ke thanêsi, nêlea thymon echontas, ep' êmati dakrysantas.]-- hom. il. xix. . [ ] this is one of the fragments of euripides which we are unable to assign to any play in particular; it occurs var. ed. tr. inc. . [greek: ei men tod' êmar prôton ên kakoumenô kai mê makran dê dia ponôn enaustoloun eikos sphadazein ên an, hôs neozyga pôlon, chalinon artiôs dedegmenon nyn d' amblys eimi, kai katêrtykôs kakôn.] [ ] this is only a fragment, preserved by stobæus: [greek: tous d' an megistous kai sophôtatous phreni toiousd' idois an, oios esti nyn hode, kalôs kakôs prassonti symparainesai hotan de daimôn andros eutychous to prin mastig' episê tou biou palintropon, ta polla phrouda kai kakôs eirêmena.] [ ] [greek: Ôk. oukoun promêtheu touto gignôskeis hoti orgês nosousês eisin iatroi logoi. pr. ean tis en kairô ge malthassê kear kai mê sphrigônta thymon ischnainê bia.]-- Æsch. prom. v. . [ ] cicero alludes here to il. vii. , which is thus translated by pope: his massy javelin quivering in his hand, he stood the bulwark of the grecian band; through every argive heart new transport ran, all troy stood trembling at the mighty man: e'en hector paused, and with new doubt oppress'd, felt his great heart suspended in his breast; 'twas vain to seek retreat, and vain to fear, himself had challenged, and the foe drew near. but melmoth (note on the familiar letters of cicero, book ii. let. ) rightly accuses cicero of having misunderstood homer, who "by no means represents hector as being thus totally dismayed at the approach of his adversary; and, indeed, it would have been inconsistent with the general character of that hero to have described him under such circumstances of terror." [greek: ton de kai argeioi meg' egêtheon eisoroôntes, trôas de tromos ainos hypêlythe gyia hekaston, hektori d' autô thymos eni stêthessi patassen.] but there is a great difference, as dr. clarke remarks, between [greek: thymos eni stêthessi patassen] and [greek: kardeê exô stêtheôn ethrôsken], or [greek: tromos ainos hypêlythe gyia].--_the trojans_, says homer, _trembled_ at the sight of ajax, and even hector himself felt some emotion in his breast. [ ] cicero means scipio nasica, who, in the riots consequent on the reelection of tiberius gracchus to the tribunate, b.c., having called in vain on the consul, mucius scævola, to save the republic, attacked gracchus himself, who was slain in the tumult. [ ] _morosus_ is evidently derived from _mores_--"_morosus_, _mos_, stubbornness, self-will, etc."--riddle and arnold, lat. dict. [ ] in the original they run thus: [greek: ouk estin ouden deinon hôd' eipein epos, oude pathos, oude xymphora theêlatos hês ouk an aroit' achthos anthrôpon physis.] [ ] this passage is from the eunuch of terence, act i., sc. , . [ ] these verses are from the atreus of accius. [ ] this was marcus atilius regulus, the story of whose treatment by the carthaginians in the first punic war is well known to everybody. [ ] this was quintus servilius cæpio, who, b.c., was destroyed, with his army, by the cimbri, it was believed as a judgment for the covetousness which he had displayed in the plunder of tolosa. [ ] this was marcus aquilius, who, in the year b.c., was sent against mithridates as one of the consular legates; and, being defeated, was delivered up to the king by the inhabitants of mitylene. mithridates put him to death by pouring molten gold down his throat. [ ] this was the elder brother of the triumvir marcus crassus, b.c. he was put to death by fimbria, who was in command of some of the troops of marius. [ ] lucius cæsar and caius cæsar were relations (it is uncertain in what degree) of the great cæsar, and were killed by fimbria on the same occasion as octavius. [ ] m. antonius was the grandfather of the triumvir; he was murdered the same year, b.c., by annius, when marius and cinna took rome. [ ] this story is alluded to by horace: districtus ensis cui super impiâ cervice pendet non siculæ dapes dulcem elaborabunt saporem, non avium citharæve cantus somnum reducent.--iii. . . [ ] hieronymus was a rhodian, and a pupil of aristotle, flourishing about b.c. he is frequently mentioned by cicero. [ ] we know very little of dinomachus. some mss. have clitomachus. [ ] callipho was in all probability a pupil of epicurus, but we have no certain information about him. [ ] diodorus was a syrian, and succeeded critolaus as the head of the peripatetic school at athens. [ ] aristo was a native of ceos, and a pupil of lycon, who succeeded straton as the head of the peripatetic school, b.c. he afterward himself succeeded lycon. [ ] pyrrho was a native of elis, and the originator of the sceptical theories of some of the ancient philosophers. he was a contemporary of alexander. [ ] herillus was a disciple of zeno of cittium, and therefore a stoic. he did not, however, follow all the opinions of his master: he held that knowledge was the chief good. some of the treatises of cleanthes were written expressly to confute him. [ ] anacharsis was (herod., iv., ) son of gnurus and brother of saulius, king of thrace. he came to athens while solon was occupied in framing laws for his people; and by the simplicity of his way of living, and his acute observations on the manners of the greeks, he excited such general admiration that he was reckoned by some writers among the seven wise men of greece. [ ] this was appius claudius cæcus, who was censor b.c., and who, according to livy, was afflicted with blindness by the gods for persuading the potitii to instruct the public servants in the way of sacrificing to hercules. he it was who made the via appia. [ ] the fact of homer's blindness rests on a passage in the hymn to apollo, quoted by thucydides as a genuine work of homer, and which is thus spoken of by one of the most accomplished scholars that this country or this age has ever produced: "they are indeed beautiful verses; and if none worse had ever been attributed to homer, the prince of poets would have had little reason to complain. "he has been describing the delian festival in honor of apollo and diana, and concludes this part of the poem with an address to the women of that island, to whom it is to be supposed that he had become familiarly known by his frequent recitations: [greek: chairete d' hymeis pasai, emeio de kai metopisthe mnêsasth', hoppote ken tis epichthoniôn anthrôpôn enthad' aneirêtai xeinos talapeirios elthôn ô kourai, tis d' hymmin anêr hêdistos aoidôn enthade pôleitai kai teô terpesthe malista; hymeis d' eu mala pasai hypokrinasthe aph' hêmôn, typhlos anêr, oikei de chiô eni paipaloessê, tou pasai metopisthen aristeuousin aoidai.] virgins, farewell--and oh! remember me hereafter, when some stranger from the sea, a hapless wanderer, may your isle explore, and ask you, 'maids, of all the bards you boast, who sings the sweetest, and delights you most?' oh! answer all, 'a blind old man, and poor, sweetest he sings, and dwells on chios' rocky shore.' _coleridge's introduction to the study of the greek classic poets._ [ ] some read _scientiam_ and some _inscientiam;_ the latter of which is preferred by some of the best editors and commentators. [ ] for a short account of these ancient greek philosophers, see the sketch prefixed to the academics (_classical library_). [ ] cicero wrote his philosophical works in the last three years of his life. when he wrote this piece, he was in the sixty-third year of his age, in the year of rome . [ ] the academic. [ ] diodorus and posidonius were stoics; philo and antiochus were academics; but the latter afterward inclined to the doctrine of the stoics. [ ] julius cæsar. [ ] cicero was one of the college of augurs. [ ] the latinæ feriæ was originally a festival of the latins, altered by tarquinius superbus into a roman one. it was held in the alban mount, in honor of jupiter latiaris. this holiday lasted six days: it was not held at any fixed time; but the consul was never allowed to take the field till he had held them.--_vide_ smith, dict. gr. and rom. ant., p. . [ ] _exhedra_, the word used by cicero, means a study, or place where disputes were held. [ ] m. piso was a peripatetic. the four great sects were the stoics, the peripatetics, the academics, and the epicureans. [ ] it was a prevailing tenet of the academics that there is no certain knowledge. [ ] the five forms of plato are these: [greek: ousia, tauton, heteron, stasis, kinêsis.] [ ] the four natures here to be understood are the four elements--fire, water, air, and earth; which are mentioned as the four principles of empedocles by diogenes laertius. [ ] these five moving stars are saturn, jupiter, mars, mercury, and venus. their revolutions are considered in the next book. [ ] or, generation of the gods. [ ] the [greek: prolêpsis] of epicurus, before mentioned, is what he here means. [ ] [greek: steremnia] is the word which epicurus used to distinguish between those objects which are perceptible to sense, and those which are imperceptible; as the essence of the divine being, and the various operations of the divine power. [ ] zeno here mentioned is not the same that cotta spoke of before. this was the founder of the stoics. the other was an epicurean philosopher whom he had heard at athens. [ ] that is, there would be the same uncertainty in heaven as is among the academics. [ ] those nations which were neither greek nor roman. [ ] _sigilla numerantes_ is the common reading; but p. manucius proposes _venerantes_, which i choose as the better of the two, and in which sense i have translated it. [ ] fundamental doctrines. [ ] that is, the zodiac. [ ] the moon, as well as the sun, is indeed in the zodiac, but she does not measure the same course in a month. she moves in another line of the zodiac nearer the earth. [ ] according to the doctrines of epicurus, none of these bodies themselves are clearly seen, but _simulacra ex corporibus effluentia_. [ ] epicurus taught his disciples in a garden. [ ] by the word _deus_, as often used by our author, we are to understand all the gods in that theology then treated of, and not a single personal deity. [ ] the best commentators on this passage agree that cicero does not mean that aristotle affirmed that there was no such person as orpheus, but that there was no such poet, and that the verse called orphic was said to be the invention of another. the passage of aristotle to which cicero here alludes has, as dr. davis observes, been long lost. [ ] a just proportion between the different sorts of beings. [ ] some give _quos non pudeat earum epicuri vocum;_ but the best copies have not _non;_ nor would it be consistent with cotta to say _quos non pudeat_, for he throughout represents velleius as a perfect epicurean in every article. [ ] his country was abdera, the natives of which were remarkable for their stupidity. [ ] this passage will not admit of a translation answerable to the sense of the original. cicero says the word _amicitia_ (friendship) is derived from _amor_ (love or affection). [ ] this manner of speaking of jupiter frequently occurs in homer, ----[greek: patêr andrôn te theôn te,] and has been used by virgil and other poets since ennius. [ ] perses, or perseus, the last king of macedonia, was taken by cnæus octavius, the prætor, and brought as prisoner to paullus Æmilius, b.c. [ ] an exemption from serving in the wars, and from paying public taxes. [ ] mopsus. there were two soothsayers of this name: the first was one of the lapithæ, son of ampycus and chloris, called also the son of apollo and hienantis; the other a son of apollo and manto, who is said to have founded mallus, in asia minor, where his oracle existed as late as the time of strabo. [ ] tiresias was the great theban prophet at the time of the war of the seven against thebes. [ ] amphiaraus was king of argos (he had been one of the argonauts also). he was killed after the war of the seven against thebes, which he was compelled to join in by the treachery of his wife eriphyle, by the earth opening and swallowing him up as he was fleeing from periclymenus. [ ] calchas was the prophet of the grecian army at the siege of troy. [ ] helenus was a son of priam and hecuba. he is represented as a prophet in the philoctetes of sophocles. and in the Æneid he is also represented as king of part of epirus, and as predicting to Æneas the dangers and fortunes which awaited him. [ ] this short passage would be very obscure to the reader without an explanation from another of cicero's treatises. the expression here, _ad investigandum suem regiones vineæ terminavit_, which is a metaphor too bold, if it was not a sort of augural language, seems to me to have been the effect of carelessness in our great author; for navius did not divide the regions, as he calls them, of the vine to find his sow, but to find a grape. [ ] the peremnia were a sort of auspices performed just before the passing a river. [ ] the acumina were a military auspices, and were partly performed on the point of a spear, from which they were called acumina. [ ] those were called _testamenta in procinctu_, which were made by soldiers just before an engagement, in the presence of men called as witnesses. [ ] this especially refers to the decii, one of whom devoted himself for his country in the war with the latins, b.c., and his son imitated the action in the war with the samnites, b.c. cicero (tusc. i. ) says that his son did the same thing in the war with pyrrhus at the battle of asculum, though in other places (de off. iii. ) he speaks of only two decii as having signalized themselves in this manner. [ ] the rogator, who collected the votes, and pronounced who was the person chosen. there were two sorts of rogators; one was the officer here mentioned, and the other was the rogator, or speaker of the whole assembly. [ ] which was sardinia, as appears from one of cicero's epistles to his brother quintus. [ ] their sacred books of ceremonies. [ ] the war between octavius and cinna, the consuls. [ ] this, in the original, is a fragment of an old latin verse, _----terram fumare calentem._ [ ] the latin word is _principatus_, which exactly corresponds with the greek word here used by cicero; by which is to be understood the superior, the most prevailing excellence in every kind and species of things through the universe. [ ] the passage of aristotle to which cicero here refers is lost. [ ] he means the epicureans. [ ] here the stoic speaks too plain to be misunderstood. his world, his _mundus_, is the universe, and that universe is his great deity, _in quo sit totius naturæ principatus_, in which the superior excellence of universal nature consists. [ ] athens, the seat of learning and politeness, of which balbus will not allow epicurus to be worthy. [ ] this is pythagoras's doctrine, as appears in diogenes laertius. [ ] he here alludes to mathematical and geometrical instruments. [ ] balbus here speaks of the fixed stars, and of the motions of the orbs of the planets. he here alludes, says m. bonhier, to the different and diurnal motions of these stars; one sort from east to west, the other from one tropic to the other: and this is the construction which our learned and great geometrician and astronomer, dr. halley, made of this passage. [ ] this mensuration of the year into three hundred and sixty-five days and near six hours (by the odd hours and minutes of which, in every fifth year, the _dies intercalaris_, or leap-year, is made) could not but be known, dr. halley states, by hipparchus, as appears from the remains of that great astronomer of the ancients. we are inclined to think that julius cæsar had divided the year, according to what we call the julian year, before cicero wrote this book; for we see, in the beginning of it, how pathetically he speaks of cæsar's usurpation. [ ] the words of censorinus, on this occasion, are to the same effect. the opinions of philosophers concerning this great year are very different; but the institution of it is ascribed to democritus. [ ] the zodiac. [ ] though mars is said to hold his orbit in the zodiac with the rest, and to finish his revolution through the same orbit (that is, the zodiac) with the other two, yet balbus means in a different line of the zodiac. [ ] according to late observations, it never goes but a sign and a half from the sun. [ ] these, dr. davis says, are "aërial fires;" concerning which he refers to the second book of pliny. [ ] in the eunuch of terence. [ ] bacchus. [ ] the son of ceres. [ ] the books of ceremonies. [ ] this libera is taken for proserpine, who, with her brother liber, was consecrated by the romans; all which are parts of nature in prosopopoeias. cicero, therefore, makes balbus distinguish between the person liber, or bacchus, and the liber which is a part of nature in prosopopoeia. [ ] these allegorical fables are largely related by hesiod in his theogony. horace says exactly the same thing: hâc arte pollux et vagus hercules enisus arces attigit igneas: quos inter augustus recumbens purpureo bibit ore nectar. hâc te merentem, bacche pater, tuæ vexere tigres indocili jugum collo ferentes: hâc quirinus martis equis acheronta fugit.--hor. iii. . . [ ] cicero means by _conversis casibus_, varying the cases from the common rule of declension; that is, by departing from the true grammatical rules of speech; for if we would keep to it, we should decline the word _jupiter_, _jupiteris_ in the second case, etc. [ ] _pater divûmque hominumque._ [ ] the common reading is, _planiusque alio loco idem;_ which, as dr. davis observes, is absurd; therefore, in his note, he prefers _planius quam alia loco idem_, from two copies, in which sense i have translated it. [ ] from the verb _gero_, to bear. [ ] that is, "mother earth." [ ] janus is said to be the first who erected temples in italy, and instituted religious rites, and from whom the first month in the roman calendar is derived. [ ] _stellæ vagantes._ [ ] _noctu quasi diem efficeret._ ben jonson says the same thing: thou that mak'st a day of night, goddess excellently bright.--_ode to the moon._ [ ] olympias was the mother of alexander. [ ] venus is here said to be one of the names of diana, because _ad res omnes veniret;_ but she is not supposed to be the same as the mother of cupid. [ ] here is a mistake, as fulvius ursinus observes; for the discourse seems to be continued in one day, as appears from the beginning of this book. this may be an inadvertency of cicero. [ ] the senate of athens was so called from the words [greek: areios pagos], the village, some say the hill, of mars. [ ] epicurus. [ ] the stoics. [ ] by _nulla cohærendi natura_--if it is the right, as it is the common reading--cicero must mean the same as by _nulla crescendi natura_, or _coalescendi_, either of which lambinus proposes; for, as the same learned critic well observes, is there not a cohesion of parts in a clod, or in a piece of stone? our learned walker proposes _sola cohærendi natura_, which mends the sense very much; and i wish he had the authority of any copy for it. [ ] nasica scipio, the censor, is said to have been the first who made a water-clock in rome. [ ] the epicureans. [ ] an old latin poet, commended by quintilian for the gravity of his sense and his loftiness of style. [ ] the shepherd is here supposed to take the stem or beak of the ship for the mouth, from which the roaring voices of the sailors came. _rostrum_ is here a lucky word to put in the mouth of one who never saw a ship before, as it is used for the beak of a bird, the snout of a beast or fish, and for the stem of a ship. [ ] the epicureans. [ ] greek, [greek: aêr]; latin, _aer_. [ ] the treatise of aristotle, from whence this is taken, is lost. [ ] to the universe the stoics certainly annexed the idea of a limited space, otherwise they could not have talked of a middle; for there can be no middle but of a limited space: infinite space can have no middle, there being infinite extension from every part. [ ] these two contrary reversions are from the tropics of cancer and capricorn. they are the extreme bounds of the sun's course. the reader must observe that the astronomical parts of this book are introduced by the stoic as proofs of design and reason in the universe; and, notwithstanding the errors in his planetary system, his intent is well answered, because all he means is that the regular motions of the heavenly bodies, and their dependencies, are demonstrations of a divine mind. the inference proposed to be drawn from his astronomical observations is as just as if his system was in every part unexceptionably right: the same may be said of his anatomical observations. [ ] in the zodiac. [ ] ibid. [ ] these verses of cicero are a translation from a greek poem of aratus, called the phænomena. [ ] the fixed stars. [ ] the arctic and antarctic poles. [ ] the two arctoi are northern constellations. cynosura is what we call the lesser bear; helice, the greater bear; in latin, _ursa minor_ and _ursa major_. [ ] these stars in the greater bear are vulgarly called the "seven stars," or the "northern wain;" by the latins, "septentriones." [ ] the lesser bear. [ ] the greater bear. [ ] exactly agreeable to this and the following description of the dragon is the same northern constellation described in the map by flamsteed in his atlas coelestis; and all the figures here described by aratus nearly agree with the maps of the same constellations in the atlas coelestis, though they are not all placed precisely alike. [ ] the tail of the greater bear. [ ] that is, in macedon, where aratus lived. [ ] the true interpretation of this passage is as follows: here in macedon, says aratus, the head of the dragon does not entirely immerge itself in the ocean, but only touches the superficies of it. by _ortus_ and _obitus_ i doubt not but cicero meant, agreeable to aratus, those parts which arise to view, and those which are removed from sight. [ ] these are two northern constellations. engonasis, in some catalogues called hercules, because he is figured kneeling [greek: en gonasin] (on his knees). [greek: engonasin kaleous'], as aratus says, they call engonasis. [ ] the crown is placed under the feet of hercules in the atlas coelestis; but ophiuchus ([greek: ophiouchos]), the snake-holder, is placed in the map by flamsteed as described here by aratus; and their heads almost meet. [ ] the scorpion. ophiuchus, though a northern constellation, is not far from that part of the zodiac where the scorpion is, which is one of the six southern signs. [ ] the wain of seven stars. [ ] the wain-driver. this northern constellation is, in our present maps, figured with a club in his right hand behind the greater bear. [ ] in some modern maps arcturus, a star of the first magnitude, is placed in the belt that is round the waist of boötes. cicero says _subter præcordia_, which is about the waist; and aratus says [greek: hypo zônê], under the belt. [ ] _sub caput arcti_, under the head of the greater bear. [ ] the crab is, by the ancients and moderns, placed in the zodiac, as here, between the twins and the lion; and they are all three northern signs. [ ] the twins are placed in the zodiac with the side of one to the northern hemisphere, and the side of the other to the southern hemisphere. auriga, the charioteer, is placed in the northern hemisphere near the zodiac, by the twins; and at the head of the charioteer is helice, the greater bear, placed; and the goat is a bright star of the first magnitude placed on the left shoulder of this northern constellation, and called _capra_, the goat. _hoedi_, the kids, are two more stars of the same constellation. [ ] a constellation; one of the northern signs in the zodiac, in which the hyades are placed. [ ] one of the feet of cepheus, a northern constellation, is under the tail of the lesser bear. [ ] grotius, and after him dr. davis, and other learned men, read _cassiepea_, after the greek [greek: kassiepeia], and reject the common reading, _cassiopea_. [ ] these northern constellations here mentioned have been always placed together as one family with cepheus and perseus, as they are in our modern maps. [ ] this alludes to the fable of perseus and andromeda. [ ] pegasus, who is one of perseus and andromeda's family. [ ] that is, with wings. [ ] _aries_, the ram, is the first northern sign in the zodiac; _pisces_, the fishes, the last southern sign; therefore they must be near one another, as they are in a circle or belt. in flamsteed's atlas coelestis one of the fishes is near the head of the ram, and the other near the urn of aquarius. [ ] these are called virgiliæ by cicero; by aratus, the pleiades, [greek: plêiades]; and they are placed at the neck of the bull; and one of perseus's feet touches the bull in the atlas coelestis. [ ] this northern constellation is called fides by cicero; but it must be the same with lyra; because lyra is placed in our maps as fides is here. [ ] this is called ales avis by cicero; and i doubt not but the northern constellation cygnus is here to be understood, for the description and place of the swan in the atlas coelestis are the same which ales avis has here. [ ] pegasus. [ ] the water-bearer, one of the six southern signs in the zodiac: he is described in our maps pouring water out of an urn, and leaning with one hand on the tail of capricorn, another southern sign. [ ] when the sun is in capricorn, the days are at the shortest; and when in cancer, at the longest. [ ] one of the six southern signs. [ ] sagittarius, another southern sign. [ ] a northern constellation. [ ] a northern constellation. [ ] a southern constellation. [ ] this is canis major, a southern constellation. orion and the dog are named together by hesiod, who flourished many hundred years before cicero or aratus. [ ] a southern constellation, placed as here in the atlas coelestis. [ ] a southern constellation, so called from the ship argo, in which jason and the rest of the argonauts sailed on their expedition to colchos. [ ] the ram is the first of the northern signs in the zodiac; and the last southern sign is the fishes; which two signs, meeting in the zodiac, cover the constellation called argo. [ ] the river eridanus, a southern constellation. [ ] a southern constellation. [ ] this is called the scorpion in the original of aratus. [ ] a southern constellation. [ ] a southern constellation. [ ] the serpent is not mentioned in cicero's translation; but it is in the original of aratus. [ ] a southern constellation. [ ] the goblet, or cup, a southern constellation. [ ] a southern constellation. [ ] antecanis, a southern constellation, is the little dog, and called _antecanis_ in latin, and [greek: prokyôn] in greek, because he rises before the other dog. [ ] pansætius, a stoic philosopher. [ ] mercury and venus. [ ] the proboscis of the elephant is frequently called a hand, because it is as useful to him as one. "they breathe, drink, and smell, with what may not be improperly called a hand," says pliny, bk. viii. c. .--davis. [ ] the passage of aristotle's works to which cicero here alludes is entirely lost; but plutarch gives a similar account. [ ] balbus does not tell us the remedy which the panther makes use of; but pliny is not quite so delicate: he says, _excrementis hominis sibi medetur_. [ ] aristotle says they purge themselves with this herb after they fawn. pliny says both before and after. [ ] the cuttle-fish has a bag at its neck, the black blood of which the romans used for ink. it was called _atramentum_. [ ] the euphrates is said to carry into mesopotamia a large quantity of citrons, with which it covers the fields. [ ] q. curtius, and some other authors, say the ganges is the largest river in india; but ammianus marcellinus concurs with cicero in calling the river indus the largest of all rivers. [ ] these etesian winds return periodically once a year, and blow at certain seasons, and for a certain time. [ ] some read _mollitur_, and some _molitur;_ the latter of which p. manucius justly prefers, from the verb _molo_, _molis;_ from whence, says he, _molares dentes_, the grinders. [ ] the weasand, or windpipe. [ ] the epiglottis, which is a cartilaginous flap in the shape of a tongue, and therefore called so. [ ] cicero is here giving the opinion of the ancients concerning the passage of the chyle till it is converted to blood. [ ] what cicero here calls the ventricles of the heart are likewise called auricles, of which there is the right and left. [ ] the stoics and peripatetics said that the nerves, veins, and arteries come directly from the heart. according to the anatomy of the moderns, they come from the brain. [ ] the author means all musical instruments, whether string or wind instruments, which are hollow and tortuous. [ ] the latin version of cicero is a translation from the greek of aratus. [ ] chrysippus's meaning is, that the swine is so inactive and slothful a beast that life seems to be of no use to it but to keep it from putrefaction, as salt keeps dead flesh. [ ] _ales_, in the general signification, is any large bird; and _oscinis_ is any singing bird. but they here mean those birds which are used in augury: _alites_ are the birds whose flight was observed by the augurs, and _oscines_ the birds from whose voices they augured. [ ] as the academics doubted everything, it was indifferent to them which side of a question they took. [ ] the keepers and interpreters of the sibylline oracles were the quindecimviri. [ ] the popular name of jupiter in rome, being looked upon as defender of the capitol (in which he was placed), and stayer of the state. [ ] some passages of the original are here wanting. cotta continues speaking against the doctrine of the stoics. [ ] the word _sortes_ is often used for the answers of the oracles, or, rather, for the rolls in which the answers were written. [ ] three of this eminent family sacrificed themselves for their country; the father in the latin war, the son in the tuscan war, and the grandson in the war with pyrrhus. [ ] the straits of gibraltar. [ ] the common reading is, _ex quo anima dicitur;_ but dr. davis and m. bouhier prefer _animal_, though they keep _anima_ in the text, because our author says elsewhere, _animum ex anima dictum_, tusc. i. . cicero is not here to be accused of contradictions, for we are to consider that he speaks in the characters of other persons; but there appears to be nothing in these two passages irreconcilable, and probably _anima_ is the right word here. [ ] he is said to have led a colony from greece into caria, in asia, and to have built a town, and called it after his own name, for which his countrymen paid him divine honors after his death. [ ] our great author is under a mistake here. homer does not say he met hercules himself, but his [greek: eidôlon], his "visionary likeness;" and adds that he himself [greek: met' athanatoisi theoisi terpetai en thaliês, kai echei kallisphyrou hêbên, paida dios megaloio kai hêrês chrysopedilou.] which pope translates-- a shadowy form, for high in heaven's abodes himself resides, a god among the gods; there, in the bright assemblies of the skies, he nectar quaffs, and hebe crowns his joys. [ ] they are said to have been the first workers in iron. they were called idæi, because they inhabited about mount ida in crete, and dactyli, from [greek: daktyloi] (the fingers), their number being five. [ ] from whom, some say, the city of that name was called. [ ] capedunculæ seem to have been bowls or cups, with handles on each side, set apart for the use of the altar.--davis. [ ] see cicero de divinatione, and ovid. fast. [ ] in the consulship of piso and gabinius sacrifices to serapis and isis were prohibited in rome; but the roman people afterward placed them again in the number of their gods. see tertullian's apol. and his first book ad nationes, and arnobius, lib. .--davis. [ ] in some copies circe, pasiphae, and Æa are mentioned together; but Æa is rejected by the most judicious editors. [ ] they were three, and are said to have averted a plague by offering themselves a sacrifice. [ ] so called from the greek word [greek: thaumazô], to wonder. [ ] she was first called geres, from _gero_, to bear. [ ] the word is _precatione_, which means the books or forms of prayers used by the augurs. [ ] cotta's intent here, as well as in other places, is to show how unphilosophical their civil theology was, and with what confusions it was embarrassed; which design of the academic the reader should carefully keep in view, or he will lose the chain of argument. [ ] anactes, [greek: anaktes], was a general name for all kings, as we find in the oldest greek writers, and particularly in homer. [ ] the common reading is aleo; but we follow lambinus and davis, who had the authority of the best manuscript copies. [ ] some prefer phthas to opas (see dr. davis's edition); but opas is the generally received reading. [ ] the lipari isles. [ ] a town in arcadia. [ ] in arcadia. [ ] a northern people. [ ] so called from the greek word [greek: nomos], _lex_, a law. [ ] he is called [greek: Ôpis] in some old greek fragments, and [greek: oupis] by callimachus in his hymn on diana. [ ] [greek: sabazios], sabazius, is one of the names used for bacchus. [ ] here is a wide chasm in the original. what is lost probably may have contained great part of cotta's arguments against the providence of the stoics. [ ] here is one expression in the quotation from cæcilius that is not commonly met with, which is _præstigias præstrinxit;_ lambinus gives _præstinxit_, for the sake, i suppose, of playing on words, because it might then be translated, "he has deluded my delusions, or stratagems;" but _præstrinxit_ is certainly the right reading. [ ] the ancient romans had a judicial as well as a military prætor; and he sat, with inferior judges attending him, like one of our chief-justices. _sessum it prætor_, which i doubt not is the right reading, lambinus restored from an old copy. the common reading was _sessum ite precor_. [ ] picenum was a region of italy. [ ] the _sex primi_ were general receivers of all taxes and tributes; and they were obliged to make good, out of their own fortunes, whatever deficiencies were in the public treasury. [ ] the lætorian law was a security for those under age against extortioners, etc. by this law all debts contracted under twenty-five years of age were void. [ ] this is from ennius-- utinam ne in nemore pelio securibus cæsa cecidisset abiegna ad terram trabes. translated from the beginning of the medea of euripides-- [greek: mêd' en napaisi pêlion pesein pote tmêtheisa peukê.] [ ] q. fabius maximus, surnamed cunctator. [ ] diogenes laertius says he was pounded to death in a stone mortar by command of nicocreon, tyrant of cyprus. [ ] elea, a city of lucania, in italy. the manner in which zeno was put to death is, according to diogenes laertius, uncertain. [ ] this great and good man was accused of destroying the divinity of the gods of his country. he was condemned, and died by drinking a glass of poison. [ ] tyrant of sicily. [ ] the common reading is, _in tympanidis rogum inlatus est_. this passage has been the occasion of as many different opinions concerning both the reading and the sense as any passage in the whole treatise. _tympanum_ is used for a timbrel or drum, _tympanidia_ a diminutive of it. lambinus says _tympana_ "were sticks with which the tyrant used to beat the condemned." p. victorius substitutes _tyrannidis_ for _tympanidis_. [ ] the original is _de amissa salute;_ which means the sentence of banishment among the romans, in which was contained the loss of goods and estate, and the privileges of a roman; and in this sense l'abbé d'olivet translates it. [ ] the forty-seventh proposition of the first book of euclid is unanimously ascribed to him by the ancients. dr. wotton, in his reflections upon ancient and modern learning, says, "it is indeed a very noble proposition, the foundation of trigonometry, of universal and various use in those curious speculations about incommensurable numbers." [ ] these votive tables, or pictures, were hung up in the temples. [ ] this passage is a fragment from a tragedy of attius. [ ] hipponax was a poet at ephesus, and so deformed that bupalus drew a picture of him to provoke laughter; for which hipponax is said to have written such keen iambics on the painter that he hanged himself. lycambes had promised archilochus the poet to marry his daughter to him, but afterward retracted his promise, and refused her; upon which archilochus is said to have published a satire in iambic verse that provoked him to hang himself. [ ] cicero refers here to an oracle approving of his laws, and promising sparta prosperity as long as they were obeyed, which lycurgus procured from delphi. [ ] _pro aris et focis_ is a proverbial expression. the romans, when they would say their all was at stake, could not express it stronger than by saying they contended _pro aris et focis_, for religion and their firesides, or, as we express it, for religion and property. [ ] cicero, who was an academic, gives his opinion according to the manner of the academics, who looked upon probability, and a resemblance of truth, as the utmost they could arrive at. [ ] _i.e._, regulus. [ ] _i.e._, fabius. [ ] it is unnecessary to give an account of the other names here mentioned; but that of lænas is probably less known. he was publius popillius lænas, consul b.c., the year after the death of tiberius gracchus, and it became his duty to prosecute the accomplices of gracchus, for which he was afterward attacked by caius gracchus with such animosity that he withdrew into voluntary exile. cicero pays a tribute to the energy of opimius in the first oration against catiline, c. iii. [ ] this phenomenon of the parhelion, or mock sun, which so puzzled cicero's interlocutors, has been very satisfactorily explained by modern science. the parhelia are formed by the reflection of the sunbeams on a cloud properly situated. they usually accompany the coronæ, or luminous circles, and are placed in the same circumference, and at the same height. their colors resemble that of the rainbow; the red and yellow are towards the side of the sun, and the blue and violet on the other. there are, however, coronæ sometimes seen without parhelia, and _vice versâ_. parhelia are double, triple, etc., and in , a parhelion of five suns was seen at rome, and another of six suns at arles, . [ ] there is a little uncertainty as to what this age was, but it was probably about twenty-five. [ ] cicero here gives a very exact and correct account of the planetarium of archimedes, which is so often noticed by the ancient astronomers. it no doubt corresponded in a great measure to our modern planetarium, or orrery, invented by the earl of that name. this elaborate machine, whose manufacture requires the most exact and critical science, is of the greatest service to those who study the revolutions of the stars, for astronomic, astrologic, or meteorologic purposes. [ ] the end of the fourteenth chapter and the first words of the fifteenth are lost; but it is plain that in the fifteenth it is scipio who is speaking. [ ] there is evidently some error in the text here, for ennius was born a.u.c., was a personal friend of the elder africanus, and died about a.u.c., so that it is plain that we ought to read in the text , not . [ ] two pages are lost here. afterward it is again scipio who is speaking. [ ] two pages are lost here. [ ] both ennius and nævius wrote tragedies called "iphigenia." mai thinks the text here corrupt, and expresses some doubt whether there is a quotation here at all. [ ] he means scipio himself. [ ] there is again a hiatus. what follows is spoken by lælius. [ ] again two pages are lost. [ ] again two pages are lost. it is evident that scipio is speaking again in cap. xxxi. [ ] again two pages are lost. [ ] again two pages are lost. [ ] here four pages are lost. [ ] here four pages are lost. [ ] two pages are missing here. [ ] a name of neptune. [ ] about seven lines are lost here, and there is a great deal of corruption and imperfection in the next few sentences. [ ] two pages are lost here. [ ] the _lex curiata de imperio_, so often mentioned here, was the same as the _auctoritas patrum_, and was necessary in order to confer upon the dictator, consuls, and other magistrates the _imperium_, or military command: without this they had only a _potestas_, or civil authority, and could not meddle with military affairs. [ ] two pages are missing here. [ ] here two pages are missing. [ ] i have translated this very corrupt passage according to niebuhr's emendation. [ ] assiduus, ab ære dando. [ ] proletarii, a prole. [ ] here four pages are missing. [ ] two pages are missing here. [ ] two pages are missing here. [ ] here twelve pages are missing. [ ] sixteen pages are missing here. [ ] here eight pages are missing. [ ] a great many pages are missing here. [ ] several pages are lost here; the passage in brackets is found in nonius under the word "exulto." [ ] this and other chapters printed in smaller type are generally presumed to be of doubtful authenticity. [ ] the beginning of this book is lost. the two first paragraphs come, the one from st. augustine, the other from lactantius. [ ] eight or nine pages are lost here. [ ] here six pages are lost. [ ] here twelve pages are missing. [ ] we have been obliged to insert two or three of these sentences between brackets, which are not found in the original, for the sake of showing the drift of the arguments of philus. he himself was fully convinced that justice and morality were of eternal and immutable obligation, and that the best interests of all beings lie in their perpetual development and application. this eternity of justice is beautifully illustrated by montesquieu. "long," says he, "before positive laws were instituted, the moral relations of justice were absolute and universal. to say that there were no justice or injustice but that which depends on the injunctions or prohibitions of positive laws, is to say that the radii which spring from a centre are not equal till we have formed a circle to illustrate the proposition. we must, therefore, acknowledge that the relations of equity were antecedent to the positive laws which corroborated them." but though philus was fully convinced of this, in order to give his friends scipio and lælius an opportunity of proving it, he frankly brings forward every argument for injustice that sophistry had ever cast in the teeth of reason.--_by the original translator_. [ ] here four pages are missing. the following sentence is preserved in nonius. [ ] two pages are missing here. [ ] several pages are missing here. [ ] he means alexander the great. [ ] six or eight pages are lost here. [ ] a great many pages are missing here. [ ] six or eight pages are missing here. [ ] several pages are lost here. [ ] this and the following chapters are not the actual words of cicero, but quotations by lactantius and augustine of what they affirm that he said. [ ] twelve pages are missing here. [ ] eight pages are missing here. [ ] six or eight pages are missing here. [ ] catadupa, from [greek: kata] and [greek: doipos], noise. http://bencrowder.net/books/mtp. volunteers: benjamin bytheway, byron clark, ben crowder, tom deforest, eric heaps, jason hills, tod robbins. rational theology as taught by the church of jesus christ of latter-day saints by john a. widtsoe published for the use of the melchizedek priesthood by the general priesthood committee copyright, by john a. widtsoe preface a rational theology, as understood in this volume, is a theology which ( ) is based on fundamental principles that harmonize with the knowledge and reason of man, ( ) derives all of its laws, ordinances and authority from the accepted fundamental principles, and ( ) finds expression and use in the everyday life of man. in short, a rational theology is derived from the invariable laws of the universe, and exists for the good of man. this volume is an exposition; it is not an argument. the principles of the gospel, as held by the church of jesus christ of latter-day saints, are stated, briefly, simply and without comment, to show the coherence, reasonableness and universality of the gospel philosophy. the authority for many of the statements found in the volume is given in the references included in the appendix. the doctrines herein stated are, however, the common knowledge of the members of the church. no attempt has been made to correlate the doctrines discussed with current philosophical opinions. those who are led to study this rational theology in the light of the best knowledge and soundest thought, will enter a fertile field, and will find a surprising harmony between the gospel and all discovered truth. the book could not be made larger, were it to serve well the special purpose for which it was written. therefore, the treatment is brief and many important and interesting subjects are omitted. moreover, the book had to be completed within a short, set time, and many of the imperfections of the work are the results of the hurried preparation. every writer who in this day attempts an exposition of the gospel must draw heavily upon the clear thoughts of those who, from joseph smith to the living workers, have written and spoken in behalf of the truth. i acknowledge, gratefully, my obligation to the makers of "mormon" literature. many friends have, also, in various ways, given kindly aid; to them i offer hearty and sincere thanks. john a. widtsoe. logan, utah. contents fundamentals and pre-existent state. chapter . **the meaning of theology** man in the universe--a man's religion--theology defined--the gospel--the purpose of this book. chapter . **how knowledge is gained** the senses--the sixth sense--transmitted knowledge--the use of the reason--the foundation of rational theology. chapter . **eternalism** all knowledge, the basis--eternal matter--universal matter, indestructible--eternal energy--universal intelligence--eternal intelligence--the eternal relationship--an eternal plan--eternalism. chapter . **the will of man** the primeval condition--the intelligence of man--the will of man-- value of the will. chapter . **the great law** increasing complexity of the universe--man and the great law--the law of development. chapter . **god and man** why god is god--many gods--why man is man--god's help to man--man's help to god--god's attributes. chapter . **man is that he may have joy** consciousness and the universe--the primeval condition--the first estate--the second estate--the third estate--everlasting joy. chapter . **man's free agency** in the beginning--the council in heaven--the need of a savior--man's part in the great plan--free agency. chapter . **the great plan** forgetfulness--subject to earth conditions--laws to be obeyed--an organization--all to accept the plan--the meaning of the earth plan. the beginning of the earth work. chapter . **the coming of man** making of the earth--the builders--the coming of man--the "fall"-- the first blessing--the garden of eden--a wise beginning. chapter . **the course of the gospel on earth** adam hears the gospel--the first dispensation--the first apostasy-- later dispensation of the meridian of time--the great apostasy--the restoration--the vital facts. man and god. chapter . **the gods of this earth** the order of gods--plurality of gods--god, the father--god, the son--god, the holy ghost--other beings--sex among the gods. chapter . **man's communion with god** the will to ask--by personal appearance--by the visitation of angels--by the holy spirit--the eternal record. chapter . **man walks with god** reading god's message--spirit blindness--prayer--active prayer--the gift of understanding--man walks with god. man and the devil. chapter . **the kingdom of the evil one** descending beings--the devil--man and the devil--the devil subject to god. man and the church. chapter . **why a church?** man helped by god on earth--the plan of salvation for all-- orderliness--test of attitude--authority--the great purpose of the church. chapter . **conditions of membership** faith--repentance--baptism--the gift of the holy ghost--continued conformity--acceptance of authority. chapter . **the priesthood in the church** priesthood defined--divisions of the priesthood--the aaronic priesthood--the melchizedek priesthood--all hold the priesthood--the power of the priesthood. chapter . **the organization of the church** the general authorities--the stakes of zion--the wards of the stakes--the priesthood in stakes and wards--auxiliary organizations--all must work--the tenure of office--an unpaid ministry--appointments in the priesthood--common consent--bestowal of the priesthood. chapter . **the authority of the priesthood** the foundation of authority--absolute authority--derived authority-- the authority of office--authority and free agency--authority over self--the exercise of authority--the unrighteous exercise of authority--the church authoritative. chapter . **obedience** the restraint of nature--an active condition--the restraint of man-- the life of law--disobedience--the church worth having. chapter . **a missionary church** a church with a purpose--the hope of today--temporal salvation--the foreign mission system--the home mission service--for the common good. chapter . **temple ordinances** educational--symbolism--covenants--blessings--temple authority-- possible repetition. man and man. chapter . **the brotherhood of man** common origin--common purposes--common destiny--inter-dependence-- brothers. chapter . **the equality of man** the pre-existent effort--the earth effort--the variety of gifts--the equality of opportunity--unequal equality--the test of equality. chapter . **mutual support** the duty of the strong--co-operation--education. chapter . **the united order** purpose--historical--co-operation--tithing--voluntary offerings--the common good. chapter . **work for the dead** all must be saved--earthly ordinances--a work of love--the need of records--the result. chapter . **marriage** eternity of sex--the waiting spirits--the meaning of the first command--the family--celestial marriage--the sealing powers. chapter . **the community** community defined--the individual in the community--the rights of the community--training for the community--the supremacy of the community. man and nature. chapter . **man and nature** the intelligence of nature--a living earth--the lower animals--all for the use of man--man's conquest of nature--miracles--harmony of man and nature. man and himself. chapter . **the sound body** the importance of the body--food--exercise--rest--stimulants--moral purity--the gospel and the sound body. chapter . **education for the inner life** the senses--the reasoning power--the feelings--the spiritual sense-- symbolism--education. chapter . **satisfaction with daily work** variety of earthly tasks--all work may be intelligent--nothing temporal--subjection to self. chapter . **the hope of tomorrow** today--tomorrow--the resurrection--our place in the hereafter--the destiny of man. chapter . **the law of the earth** the unknown meaning--the earth law--to love god--to love a neighbor as oneself--the triumph of man. appendix--references to authorities index rational theology. chapter . the meaning of theology. earth, stars and the vastness of space; yesterday, today and tomorrow, and the endlessly increasing knowledge of the relations of forces, present an illimitable universe of numberless phenomena. only as a whole, and in general outline, can the human mind understand the universe. in its infinite variety of expressions, it wholly transcends the human mind. **man in the universe.** in the midst of this complexity, man finds himself. as he progresses from childhood to manhood, and as his slumbering faculties are awakened, he becomes more fully aware of the vastness of his universe and of the futility of hoping to understand it in detail. nevertheless, conscious man can not endure confusion. from out the universal mystery he must draw, at least, the general, controlling laws, that proclaim order in the apparent chaos; and, especially is he driven, by his inborn and unalterable nature, to know, if he can, his own place in the system of existing things. every normal man desires and seeks an understanding of his relation to all other things, and practically every man has worked out for himself, on the basis of his knowledge, some theory which explains, more or less satisfactorily, the mystery of star and earth and man and life. no other quest is followed by man with such vigorous persistence, as is that of establishing an intelligible and satisfactory philosophy of earth-life. **a man's religion.** the philosophy, or system of thought, adopted to explain man's place in nature determines largely the joy and manner of a man's life. if the philosophy be poor and loose, life will be confused; if rich and firm, life will be clear cut, and if law be made supreme, life will be orderly. those who have no religion at all become the playthings of unknown forces. every act of a man's life is influenced by the philosophy of his life. it is the most important product of an individual life, and is the most compelling power in life. in a broad sense, the philosophy, according to which a man orders his life, may be called that man's religion. it may or may not involve the idea of god or an organized body of believers. if it guides a life, it is that life's religion, whether it leads to weakness or to strength. **theology defined.** since all men are placed in the same universe, with approximately the same powers, and under conditions nearly alike, it is possible for each person to establish for himself a religion as above defined, for the guidance of his life. all religions must be organized from the content of the one, and so far as we know, the only universe; and the presumption would be, therefore, that the religions of all men should be the same, in as far at least as men are the same. in fact, however, during the course of human history, many more or less dissimilar religions have been established and accepted. true, most of these religions show close kinship, but the vital differences are often very great. for instance, the religions of men fall naturally into two great classes: those that adopt as their central idea a great governing intelligence and power--a god; and those that refuse to include a god in their system of thought. a religion which accepts the idea of a god is a theology. the great majority of the religions of men are theologies, for the majority of men believe in some form of personal divine power. **the gospel.** the word gospel is also frequently used, among christians, to designate the religion of men. the gospel is a theology which includes the doctrine of the life and mission of jesus christ, as the son of god. among christians, the words religion, theology and gospel are freely used in the same sense. it is well, however, to bear in mind the distinction in meaning of the three words. the christian religion, the christian theology and the gospel are equivalent in meaning. in the following pages, the terms are often used interchangeably without the qualifying words. indeed, the gospel will be used most frequently, and wherever used, it must be understood to stand for the rational theology discussed in this book. **the purpose of this book.** this volume is devoted to the exposition of the fundamental principles of a rational theology--a philosophy of life which, because of its complete harmony with all knowledge, should be the one to which all men might give adherence. chapter . how knowledge is gained. knowledge is the material upon which the reasoning mind of man acts. just as physical strength can neither be developed nor exercised unless material bodies are at hand, so mental strength can neither be developed nor exercised unless facts or knowledge are in man's possession. the acquisition of knowledge or experience is the first step towards formulating an acceptable religion. it is of interest, therefore, to consider, briefly, the sources of human knowledge. **the senses.** through eyes, ears, nose, the sense of taste and the complex and poorly understood sense of feeling, man becomes acquainted with the universe. that which is seen by the eyes, heard by the ears, smelled by the nose, tasted by the mouth, or felt by any part of the body, becomes impressed and registered upon the mind, there later* to be used. the detailed method by which knowledge is added to man is not understood. the theories that prevail concerning the entrance of knowledge into the human mind need not here be discussed. it follows that the man who wishes to gain much knowledge must guard his senses from harm, and must sharpen them, so that during the few days of life they may do as much as is possible to help man establish a rational religion for his guidance. the foundation of human knowledge is derived from the direct action of the senses. **the sixth sense.** important as are the senses in adding knowledge to man, yet it must be admitted that they recognize without help only a very small part of the universe. our universe is infinite in its variety of expression--of that man feels certain,--and it could hardly be expected, therefore, that man, who admittedly is yet far from perfection, should be able to know, even with the greatest aid, all of the universe. the truth that an immeasurable part of the universe lies outside of human experience, is borne in upon every thinking man. in recent times, the developments of science have emphasized this vast region of the unknown. the mystery of electricity, in the telephone and telegraph; the wonder of space, in wireless telegraphy; the marvel of the elements, speak clearly of places and conditions of which we as yet have no clear and accurate conception, and before which the senses of man, unaided, stand helpless. nevertheless, glimpses into this unknown region may be had by helps to the senses. by the telescope the far is brought near; by the microscope the small is made large; by the photographic plate unseen light is made visible; by the well tuned coil of wire the wireless message is taken out of space; by the spectroscope, light is broken into its elements, and so on through almost the whole field of human endeavor. facts that are gathered in such an indirect way are as correctly certain as are those that are sensed directly. the world would lose tremendously should all the truth gathered through aids to the senses be removed. man himself, through what may be called, for want of a better name, the sixth sense, may become a great aid to his own direct senses. by proper exertion he may intercept messages from out the directly unknown, as completely as this may be done by man-made instruments. throughout history this power of man has been recognized and usually respected. the experience or knowledge thus gained should, when properly examined by the mind, be given an equal place beside that gained directly through the commoner senses. prophets, poets, men of vision and faith, have all builded their work largely upon this kind of knowledge or inward feeling. **transmitted knowledge.** the inexhaustible universe and the limited powers of man, make it possible for a person to discover for himself relatively a very small amount of truth. much effort may be saved and more knowledge gained, if each person learn as much as he may of what has already been learned, to which he may add the little new discovery that he may make. this method of obtaining knowledge has been in vogue since the first day. what the first man learned, he told to others, and they in turn communicated it, with the addition of whatever new knowledge they had gained. thus comes the present value of tradition--the spoken record,--and of books--the written record. men who desire to build a safe religion or a safe science, make themselves familiar with as much as they can of what is already known, instead of attempting to traverse the known field as original discoverers, and to this transmitted knowledge, they add whatever in the course of their pursuit they may discover independently. those who in the present day will accept only what they themselves discover, will make slow progress. to them the treasuries of the greatest age will not be opened. if, in the course of events, it becomes necessary for god to speak to a man for the benefit of many, it would be contrary to rational thinking that each man for whom the message was given, should directly hear god's voice, unless, indeed, the means of communicating the knowledge become effectually blocked. such transmitted knowledge is every whit as sound as that acquired by direct communion with nature. true, the knowledge already possessed by man is so large that it can in nowise be transmitted, in all its details, to one man. the efforts of humanity are directed, therefore, to the devising of general statements, or laws, which embody the meaning of a multitude of facts, while they are yet easily intelligible to the human mind. more and more important will become the repositories of such general principles containing the knowledge of mankind. the bible, in its various books, presents such great underlying principles of our knowledge relating to several very important phases of earth-life. **the use of the reason.** whether knowledge be obtained by any or all of the methods indicated, it should be carefully examined in the light of reason. the only knowledge that will help in the establishment of a satisfactory religion is true knowledge. truth is the end of the search. false or apparently true knowledge often intrudes itself upon the attention and at times it is so well disguised as to be dangerously deceptive. man must learn of the universe, precisely as it is, or he can not successfully find his place in it. a man should therefore use his reasoning faculty in all matters involving truth, and especially as concerning his religion. **the foundation of rational theology.** the gospel, or rational theology, is founded on truth, on all truth, for "truth is knowledge of things as they are, and as they were, and as they are to come," and "truth has no end." in building a philosophy of life a man, therefore, can not say that some truth must be considered and other truth rejected. only on the basis of all truth, that is, all true knowledge, can his religion be built. further, the perfection of his knowledge, that is, the extent of his truth possessions, will determine the value of his religion to him. therefore, "it is impossible for a man to be saved in ignorance," "a man is saved no faster than he obtains knowledge," and "the glory of god is intelligence." chapter . eternalism. the conceptions necessary for logical thought belong to the gospel as well as to science, for a satisfactory life philosophy must be based on all knowledge known to man. **all knowledge, the basis.** the gospel, as the largest knowledge, must include the knowledge of all sciences. the conceptions of time and space are quite as necessary in theology as in natural science or in any other branch of human thought. the gospel does not claim, however, possession of ultimate knowledge concerning space or time or other fundamental conceptions. indeed, man is, ordinarily, allowed to work out for himself the truths of the universe and to organize them into systems of thought which he may follow profitably. knowledge is given directly by a superior intelligence only when it becomes indispensable. moreover, there are innumerable phenomena in the universe which can not be explained by the human understanding as at present developed. the distinguishing feature of the gospel is that it possesses the key to the final philosophy of life. in outline it offers the entire plan of life in the universe; and man may engage for all time to come in the elaboration and development of each department of this great universal plan of human life, without requiring an expansion of the outline. the plan is complete. **eternal matter.** the saddest feature of manmade religions is their lack of security. one man constructs one theology; another a different one, and men flock hither and thither, accepting the one that appears, for the moment, to be the best, without the deep feeling that the one finally accepted is absolutely the one and only correct system of thought. yet, this is logically absurd, for a house is either red or not red; a stick is straight or not straight; a man has truth or only the semblance of truth. two different truths can not be parallel with respect to the same thing. the final philosophy of life must be based on irrevocable truth. that which is true must always remain true, though the applications may change greatly from generation to generation. it is the absence of such fundamental certainties, no doubt, that leads men into a new search for a satisfying religion, or that drives them away from their old theology. the gospel of jesus christ is obviously a system founded on unvarying certainties. its doctrines rest on demonstrated truths that lie at the foundation of all sound, acceptable thinking. for instance, as a cornerstone of theology, the gospel recognizes, in connection with the existence of space and time, the existence of matter. without matter, the mind of man would have no material on which to act, and the existence of matter becomes, therefore, a fundamental conception of the gospel. it is the business of man to become acquainted with matter in all of its forms, so far as may be possible, in order to provide a foundation on which the reasoning mind of man may increasingly build its power. the gospel holds strictly to the conception of a material universe. much inconsistency of thought has come from the notion that things occur in a material and an immaterial state. this unthinkable condition has been made the basis of doctrines concerning god and man, which have led to utter confusion of thought. the gospel accepts the natural view, supported by all human experience, that matter occurs in many forms, some visible to the eye, others invisible, and yet others that may not be sensed by any of the senses of man. in short, there is no such thing as immaterial matter, but some forms of matter are more refined than others. light, heat, and other similar forces are held by science to be manifestations of a subtle state of matter, beyond the immediate senses of man, which has been called ether. in fact, matter as ordinarily known, and ether, a finer form of matter, are every day conceptions of science. the material universe may appear in a variety of forms; but man recognizes, directly, only that form which is the ordinary matter of our daily lives. **universal matter is indestructible.** matter is eternal, that is, everlasting. whether the various forms of matter may be converted one into the other, is not definitely known. any such conversion would, however, leave the total quantity of matter unchanged. god, the supreme power, can not conceivably originate matter; he can only organize matter. neither can he destroy matter. god is the master, who, because of his great knowledge, knows how to use the elements, already existing, for the building of whatever he may have in mind. the doctrine that god made the earth or man from nothing becomes, therefore, an absurdity. the doctrine of the indestructibility of matter makes possible much theological reasoning that would be impossible without this doctrine. the nature of matter is not, in and of itself, a subject of deep concern in practical religion. by the slow, laborious methods of man's search for truth, the nature of matter will gradually be revealed. whether it shall be found to be something distinct, or a form of the universal energy, will not be of consequence in the gospel structure. that matter, whatever it is, is eternal, is, however, a principle of highest theological value, for it furnishes a foundation for correct reasoning. **eternal energy.** matter, wherever found and in whatever form, always possesses energy. it is frequently said that matter in motion, only, can impress the human mind. matter without motion, were it conceivable, could not be recognized by the human mind as at present constituted. matter is always associated with energy; energy with matter. it is not conceivably possible to separate them. whether one is a manifestation of the other, so that there is only matter or only energy, or if they are distinct things, we do not know. all sound thought recognizes, however, the existence of energy throughout the universe. energy appears in many forms, such as heat, light, electricity, magnetism, gravitation, and, according to the gospel, the many spiritual forces. these various forms of energy seem to be convertible, one into the other, thus indicating the existence of one central force, of which all other forces are manifestations. the question of energy will probably be answered gradually, as the knowledge of man increases. of one thing the gospel, as well as science, is perfectly certain, namely, that the energy in the universe is indestructible. changed it may be, from heat to light, from light to electricity, from electricity to magnetism, or from any form to any other form of energy, but destroyed it can not be. like matter, energy had no beginning and can have no end. god, possessing the supreme intelligence of the universe, can use energy in accomplishing his ends, but create it, or destroy it, he cannot. undiminished, everacting, universal energy will continue through all times. **universal intelligence.** in one particular, however, the gospel goes beyond the teachings of modern science. the gospel teaches that, associated with the universal energy that vivifies universal matter, and possibly identified with it, is universal intelligence, a force which is felt wherever matter and energy are found, which is everywhere. the forces of the universe do not act blindly, but are expressions of a universal intelligence. that a degree of intelligence is possessed by every particle of energized matter cannot be said; nor is it important. the great consideration is that, since intelligence is everywhere present, all the operations of nature, from the simplest to the most complex, are the products of intelligence. we may even conceive that energy is only intelligence, and that matter and intelligence, rather than matter and energy, are the two fundamentals of the universe! **eternal intelligence.** throughout the universe are found, in addition to indestructible matter, everlasting energy and universal intelligence pervading space. "man was also in the beginning with god." the doctrine that man is an eternal being leads to untold possibilities. eternal man lived a personal life before the earth-life began, and he continues a personal existence hereafter. **the eternal relationship.** the phenomena of the universe result from the interaction of matter, energy and intelligence. these fundamental, universal elements are forever acting upon each other to produce the infinite variety of the universe. nevertheless, space is not filled with disorder; chaos does not prevail. on the contrary, the universe, so far as known, is essentially orderly. this comes from the great law of cause and effect. if energy acts on matter in a given way, a definite effect is obtained. under like conditions, the same cause will forever give the same effect. where, therefore, like conditions are permanently operating, like results will always be found. this law lies at the foundation of the orderliness of nature. "there is a law irrevocably decreed in heaven upon which all blessings are predicated, and it is only by obedience to this law that any blessing may be obtained." **an eternal plan.** the gospel itself, the so-called plan of salvation, or great plan, in obedience to which men guide their earth-lives, is eternal. it is not a temporary or transient thing, made primarily for the handful of men and women on earth, but it is an eternal plan based upon the everlasting relationship of the elements of the universe--a plan which, in some form, is adapted everywhere and forever, for the advancement of personal beings. this must be so, for it leads to a definite end, and in accordance with the law of cause and effect, it must have a universal meaning. **eternalism.** the gospel is founded on tangible and eternal things and relationships. these eternal realities, no doubt, in their essence, lie beyond the full understanding of man, just as time and space transcend human understanding. this conception, carried far enough, leads to a gospel or life philosophy which is unshakable, because it rests upon eternal certainty. without certainty, man is, in the great affairs of life, merely the driftwood of existence, moved hither and thither by the wind of doubt. the gospel may be said to be the philosophy of eternalism. the gospel is immersed in the ocean of eternity. chapter . the will of man. the doctrine of the eternal nature of man is most characteristic of the gospel. it is a doctrine which gives great satisfaction to all who have accepted the gospel. **the primeval condition.** all that is really clear to the understanding is that man has existed "from the beginning," and that, from the beginning, he has possessed distinct individuality impossible of confusion with any other individuality among the hosts of intelligent beings. through endless ages, man has risen by slow degrees to his present state. possibly, with respect to the coming day, man understands as little as did the spiritual beings with respect to present day conditions. **the intelligence of man.** to speculate upon the condition of man when conscious life was just dawning is most interesting, but so little is known about that far-off day that such speculation is profitless. nevertheless, of some things pertaining to the beginning we are fairly certain. the being which later became man, even in the first day possessed intelligence. that is, he was able to become aware of the external universe, to learn, and by adding knowledge to knowledge, to learn more. then, as now, the universe was filled with matter acted upon by many forces, and an intelligent being in the midst of the interaction of forces and matter, must have become aware, measurably, of what was going on. from the beginning, the ego of man has been a conscious being, saying to itself, "this is i; that is not i. this life is apart from the life of all the rest of the universe." **the will of man.** in addition to his power to learn and his consciousness of his own existence, the spiritual personality possessed, from "the beginning," the distinguishing characteristic of every intelligent, conscious, thinking being--an independent and individual will. no one attribute so clearly distinguishes man as does the intelligent will or the will to act intelligently. it was by the exercise of their wills that the spirits in the beginning gathered information rapidly or slowly, acquired experiences freely or laboriously. through the exercise of their wills they grew, or remained passive, or perhaps even retrograded, for with living things motion in any direction is possible. naturally, the original spirit, possessing, with all other attributes of intelligence, the power of will, exercised that will upon the contents of the universe. the exercise of the will upon the matter and energy within reach, enabled the intelligent beings, little by little, to acquire power. by the use of his will upon the contents of the universe, man must have become what he now is. **value of the will.** the above doctrine involves the idea of self-effort. it is only when the will is exercised in a certain direction that the support of other forces may be invited so that progress in that direction may be accelerated. from the beginning, the deliberate use of the will has moved personal beings onward; and in this latest day of our existence, it is the will that moves men into greater lives. undoubtedly, the will of man will determine the completion of the structure built through all ages into a perfected man. the gospel, resting upon eternal, indestructible principles, maintains the living supremacy of the will of man. the culture, training and use of the will, for good or for evil, determine primarily the direction of an individual life. chapter . the great law. the innumerable interactions of the matter, energy and intelligences of the universe, must be held together by some great law. this universal law to which all lesser laws contribute, must be of real concern to the man who seeks a true philosophy of life. **increasing complexity of the universe.** it has already been said that a universe controlled by intelligence and under the reign of the law of cause and effect cannot be conceived to be in confusion. man is absolutely certain, if his knowledge is rational, that, whether it be yesterday, today or tomorrow, the same act, under the same conditions, will produce the same result. under a set of given conditions, a ray of sunshine passed through a glass prism will always be broken into the same spectrum, or a straight stick standing in water will always appear crooked. whether in the physical, mental or moral world, the law of cause and effect reigns supreme. quiescence in the universe can not be conceived, for then there would be no universe. constant action or movement characterizes the universe. the multiplicity of actions upon each other, of the various forms of matter, energy and intelligence, composing the universe, must cause an equal multiplicity of effects. moreover, increasing intelligent wills, acting upon matter and energy, must and do produce an increasing series of reactions among the forces of the universe. moreover, each new set of effects becomes the cause of still other effects. thus, in our universe, as we conceive it to be constituted, increasing complexity would seem to be the great resultant law of the operation of universal forces. this is the great law of nature, to which every living thing must conform, if it is to be in harmony with all other things. in a universe controlled by intelligence, it is only natural to find everything within the universe moving along towards one increasing purpose. as new light has come to man, the certainty of this law as a controlling one, has become more and more emphatic. **man and the great law.** the law of increasing complexity is fundamental. since man is constantly being acted upon and acting upon matter and energy, he must himself be brought under the subjection of the great law. that is, under normal conditions, he will increase in complexity. as man observes phenomena and reasons upon them and applies them he grows in knowledge. where he formerly had one fact to use, he now has many. this is the essence of his complexity. a carpenter with one tool does less and poorer work than does one with a full kit of modern tools. likewise, man, as he gathers experience, becomes more powerful in using the forces of nature in the accomplishment of his purposes. with this thought in mind the great law becomes a law of increasing power, of progressive mastery over the universe. for that reason, the law expressing the resultant of the activities of universal forces is often called the law of progression. the degree of man's growth or progression will depend upon the degree his will is exercised, intelligently, upon the things about him. it is even conceivable that by the misuse of will, man may lose some of his acquired powers. in any case, the operation of the will, under normal conditions, adds power to man; and by the use of the intelligent will in a world of matter and energy, the increasingly complex man grows in power and strength towards perfection, in an increasingly interesting world. those who do not conform to the law of progression are abnormal and do not exert their powers, to the requisite degree, in the right direction. nature is inexhaustible in the possible number of inter-relations among matter, energy and intelligence. it follows, therefore, that man will forever be able to add knowledge unto knowledge, power unto power, or progress unto progress. this law of progression is the great law of the universe, without beginning and without end, to which all other laws contribute. by adherence to this law the willing, intelligent beings have risen to their present splendid state of manhood, and by further compliance with this law they will advance to a future godlike state of perfection. the supreme intelligence and perfected will of the universe, god, has attained his position by an obedient recognition of the conditions of the law of progression. the law of progression gives hope and purpose to those who accept the gospel. the feeling of security that comes from the knowledge that the elements of the universe are eternal, is made living by the hope established by the great law that there is purpose in all the operations of the universe. whatever man may do, whatever his life may bring, provided all his faculties are working actively among the things and forces about him, he is acquiring knowledge, thereby power, and, under the law of progression, he is being moved onward to a more advanced position than he now occupies, in which he may do mightier work. men, discouraged by their failure to accomplish exactly what they desire, often speak of their lives as purposeless, but it is idle talk, for, in fact, no intelligent life which concerns itself vigorously with the things about it, can be said to be purposeless. such a life adheres, automatically, to the law of progression, and is therefore moving on to the great destiny of supreme power and accompanying joys. the only purposeless life is the one that does not use its faculties. it matters little what tasks men do in life, if only they do them well and with all their strength. in an infinite universe, one cannot possibly learn all or do all, at once. a beginning must be made somewhere, and corner by corner, department by department, space by space, all will be known and conquered. in the end, all must be explored, and whether one begin in the east or the west cannot matter much. the big concern is to what extent a man offer himself, mind and body, to his work. upon that will growth depend. **the law of development.** the law of progression is then a law of endless development of all the powers of man in the midst of a universe becoming increasingly complex. no more hopeful principle can be incorporated into a philosophy of life. chapter . god and man. the doctrine of man's pre-existence leads to an understanding of the relationship between god and man, which must lie at the very basis of rational theology. **why god is god.** to determine this relationship between god and man it is necessary to discuss, first, the conditions under which god became god. as already said, god is the supreme intelligent being in the universe, who has the greatest knowledge and the most perfected will, and who, therefore, possesses infinite power over the forces of the universe. however, if the great law of progression is accepted, god must have been engaged from the beginning, and must now be engaged in progressive development, and, infinite as god is, he must have been less powerful in the past than he is today. while it is folly for man to attempt to unravel in detail the mystery of the past, yet it is only logical to believe that a progressive god has not always possessed his present position. it is clear also that, as with every other being, the progress of god began with the exercise of his will. in "the beginning" which transcends our understanding, god undoubtedly exercised his will vigorously, and thus gained great experience of the forces lying about him. as knowledge grew into greater knowledge, by the persistent efforts of will, his recognition of universal laws became greater until he attained at last a conquest over the universe, which to our finite understanding seems absolutely complete. we may be certain that, through self-effort, the inherent and innate powers of god have been developed to a god-like degree. thus, he has become god. god, the supreme being of the universe, absolutely transcends the human understanding. his intelligence is as the sum of all other intelligences. there can be no rational discussion of the details of god's life or nature. to him we give the most complete devotion, for to us he is in all respects infinite and perfect. his godhood, however, was attained by the use of his power in simple obedience to the laws he discovered as he grew in experience. **many gods.** during the onward march of the supreme being, other intelligent beings were likewise engaged, though less vigorously, in acquiring power over the forces of the universe. among many intelligent beings thus moving onward, there is little probability of any two attaining exactly the same place, at the same time. there is rather the probability of infinite gradation from the lowest to the highest development. next to god, there may be, therefore, other intelligent beings so nearly approaching his power as to be coequal with him in all things so far as our finite understanding can perceive. these beings may be immeasurably far from god in power, nevertheless immeasurably far above us mortal men of the earth. such intelligent beings are as gods to us. under this definition there may be a great number of intelligent beings who possess to a greater or less degree the quality of godhood. the acceptance of the preceding doctrines makes it almost a logical necessity that there are many gods or beings so highly developed that they are as gods, in fact are gods. this is a fundamental doctrine of the gospel. **why man is man.** it is fairly evident from what has been said why man is man. man is subject-to eternal laws, and in the far-off beginning he must have exercised his will more slowly or not at all; perhaps, even, as laws came to him he ignored or opposed them. as more knowledge and power are attained, growth becomes increasingly more rapid. god, exalted by his glorious intelligence, is moving on into new fields of power with a rapidity of which we can have no conception, whereas man, in a lower stage of development, moves relatively at a snail-like, though increasing pace. man is, nevertheless, moving on, in eternal progression. "as man is, god once was; as god is, man may become." in short, man is a god in embryo. he comes of a race of gods, and as his eternal growth is continued, he will approach more nearly the point which to us is godhood, and which is everlasting in its power over the elements of the universe. **god's help to man.** self-effort, the conscious operation of will, has moved man onward to his present high degree. however, while all progress is due to self-effort, other beings of power may contribute largely to the ease of man's growth. god, standing alone, cannot conceivably possess the power that may come to him if the hosts of other advancing and increasing workers labor in harmony with him. therefore, because of his love for his children and his desire to continue in the way of even greater growth, he proceeded to aid others in their onward progress. knowledge may be transmitted from intelligence to intelligence. god offered to the waiting intelligent beings the knowledge that he had already gained, so that they need not traverse that road, but might attack some other phase of universal existence. he devised plans of progression whereby the experiences of one person might be used by an inferior one. each person should give of his experience to others, so that none should do unnecessary work. in that manner, through the united effort of all, the whole race of progressive beings would receive an added onward impetus. **man's help to god.** the progress of intelligent beings is a mutual affair. a lone god in the universe cannot find great joy in his power. god, being in harmony with eternal laws, can progress best as the whole universe becomes more complex, or advances. the development of intelligence increases the complexity of the universe, for each active individual may bring new relationships into view, and increases many-fold the body of acquired truth. in that sense, the man who progresses through his increase in knowledge and power, becomes a co-laborer with god, and may be said, indeed, to be a help to god. it is a comforting thought, not only that we need god but also that god needs us. true, the need god has of us is relatively small, and the help he gives us is infinitely large, yet the relation exists for the comfort and assurance of man. **god's attributes.** to analyze the supreme intelligence of the universe, the god whom we worship, is a futile attempt, to which men of shallow minds, only, give their time. that which is infinite transcends the human understanding. the gospel accepts this condition, calmly, knowing that, in the scheme of things, greater truths will come with increased power, until, in the progress of time, we shall understand that which now seems incomprehensible. for that reason, eternal, or everlasting, or infinite things are things understood by god, the supreme and governing power, but not understood by us. thus, "eternal punishment is god's punishment; endless punishment is god's punishment." likewise, everlasting joy or endless blessings are god's joy and god's blessings. man acknowledges in this manner that all things are relative to god. man does not understand god fully, yet an understanding between man and god does exist in that, god in the course of his progression has gone over the road that we are traveling and therefore understands us fully. he understands our difficulties, our hopes, our sorrows, our faults and our follies. god is supreme, and his justice is perfect; his love is unmeasurable and his mercy without end; for his justice and love and mercy are tempered by the memory of his own upward career. god's relation to man is, in a literal sense, that of father to son, for we are of the same race with god. we may rest secure that god's attributes are, with others, those that man possesses, made great and beautiful. he is our father who knows and understands us. chapter . man is that he may have joy. is the increasing power of man a sufficient reward for the effort and struggle that must accompany progression? this is a question that comes to every student of the gospel. power in itself may not be the ideal end of existence. it becomes necessary, therefore, to determine if there is associated with power, gifts that make worth while the eternal searching out of knowledge in order that greater power may be won. **consciousness and the universe.** intelligent spirits have possessed, from the beginning, a consciousness of the world in which they found themselves. they must have been susceptible, from the first, of feeling pleasure and pain, and must have had equivalents of our senses, which, possibly, were keener than those we now possess. when they were placed in opposition to any law of nature, pain or its equivalent undoubtedly resulted exactly as today. when they moved along with law, joy must have been sensed, as today. intelligent beings can not rejoice in pain, therefore, from the beginning, to avoid pain and to secure joy, they have searched out and obeyed law. the more advanced the intelligence, the greater the number of laws that are understood to which adaptation may be made, and therefore the greater the possibility of joy. the search for increasing power, carried on by all normal beings is then really a search for a greater and more abiding joy. there is no godliness in pain, except as it is an incident in securing more knowledge. true freedom, which is full joy, is the complete recognition of law and adaptation to it. bondage comes from ignorance of law or opposition to it. **the primeval condition.** man's approach to a fullness of joy is pictured in his revealed history. through the veil of forgetting we see but dimly our pre-existent condition. the gospel student does not really concern himself, greatly, with the details of the life before this one; so much needs to be done in this life that he is content with the great outlines of pre-existent life, which may assist him to understand the eternal journey of intelligence. of the primeval condition of man little is known. he found about him many forces, operating in diverse ways, and to control them, and thus to sense joy, he began to study them. the story of that early day of striving for the greatest goal has not been told to mortal man. **the first estate.** matter exists, perhaps, in many forms, but may be classified, as the ponderable matter of earth, known directly through the senses, and, as the imponderable matter which cannot be sensed directly by man. this second class, often called spirit matter, is perhaps most important, for it is not unlikely that from it are derived all other forms of matter. it was of first importance that the intelligent beings aiming at the conquest of the universe, should learn to understand, thoroughly, the properties of universal matter, in all of its forms. as nearly as can be learned, the efforts of man were first devoted to education in the properties of spirit matter. we were begotten spirits by god, who thus became our father, and we are his sons and daughters. our career in the spirit world is often spoken of as man's first estate. how long man remained in the first estate, is not known. undoubtedly, however, it was long enough to enable him to become thoroughly familiar with the manifestations of all forms of spirit substance. only when education in this division of the universe was completed were we permitted to enter the next estate. **the second estate.** the kind of matter characteristic of this earth and the so-called material universe, also forms an important part of the universe. no spirit can acquire real mastery over the universe until this form of matter is so thoroughly understood as to be used and governed. the next step in the education of these intelligent beings was therefore to teach them familiarity with gross matter. consequently, the spirits passed out of the spirit world, and were born into the world of earthly things, the world we now occupy, as men and women clothed upon by a body consisting of gross matter, so that intimate familiarity with the nature and possibilities of gross matter might be acquired. this is called the second estate of man. the business of man is to become so thoroughly acquainted with earth conditions, that through the possession of an earthly body, he may go on, forever. **the third estate.** we pass out of this, but reappear in another world, for a brief time separated from our earth-won body, but finally possessing bodies of both kinds of universal matter. in this estate, both the spirit matter and the grosser matter composing our final bodies are represented by their essences, and therefore permit perfect freedom and ease of movement and thought. these celestial bodies, as they are called, connect the intelligence with all parts of the universe, and become mighty helps in the endless search for truth. this is the third estate of man. such then are the three estates, and as far as known, all the estates of man. whether the outline, as here presented, in its details, is precise or not, matters little. the essential thing is that man has to undergo experience upon experience, to attain the desired mastery of the external universe; and that we, of this earth, are passing through an estate designed wholly for our further education. **everlasting joy.** it follows that, in each estate, with each onward step, a profounder knowledge of the laws of nature is attained. when conscious, active wills are thus at work, the new knowledge makes possible a more perfect adaptation of man to law. the more completely law is obeyed the greater the consciousness of perfect joy. throughout eternal life, increasing knowledge is attained, and with increasing knowledge comes the greater adaptation to law, and in the end an increasingly greater joy. therefore it is that eternal life is the greatest gift of god, and that the plan of salvation is priceless. chapter . man's free agency. the question of the rights of each intelligent being as pertaining to himself and to all others must always have been and must always remain a chief one. **in the beginning.** in each intelligent being has resided, from the beginning, an individual and distinct will, which, of itself, has been acting in some degree upon the external universe. each being, with its developing will, has learned more and more of natural forces and of the methods of controlling them. each has striven to adapt his knowledge of surrounding forces to his own particular needs or desires. clearly, since many wills have been so engaged, it might easily occur that different wills might use acquired knowledge in different ways to suit their different desires. it is easily conceivable, therefore, that one will might attempt so to control the surrounding forces as to give itself joy, yet to affect another will adversely. in general, whatever is desirable for one is desirable for all, since all spirits are cast in the same mold and have the same derivation. nevertheless, when individuality is assumed, it is equally clear that there is always a possibility of one will crossing another to the detriment of one or possibly both. the universal plan may follow its developing path, unhindered, only when all the intelligent beings within it labor harmoniously together for the upbuilding of each and all. the only solution for the problem of the possible conflicts resulting from the activities of a great number of beings is an agreement among them relating to the general good. laws established for the community of beings must be obeyed as rigidly as those found in external nature. each may act freely and to his full power in any desired way so long as the general laws respecting the freedom of all others are not violated. the right of an individual can never transcend the rights of the community. **the council in heaven.** a dim though wonderfully attractive picture has come down of an event in the spiritual estate of man, the first estate, that deals directly with the great question of the one and the many, the individual and the community. there had been born, in time, a family of spirits, the innumerable destined hosts of earth, who, at length, seemed fitted for further education in another field. god, the father of these spirits, saw that they were ready for further light, and came down among them, to discuss their future. as the supreme being, god had in mind a plan, the great plan, whereby each spirit could enter upon his second estate and become acquainted with the properties of gross matter. however, as each intelligent spirit possessed a free and untrammeled will which must be respected, god called together the spirits in question, and presented the plan for their approval. in the great council then held, of which a dim and distant picture only has been left, the great question was with respect to man's free agency. the essence of the proposed plan was that the spirits, forgetting temporarily their sojourn in their spirit home should be given a body of grosser matter, and should be subject to this form of universal matter, and even be brought into a temporal death. to bring an eternal, free spirit under the bondage of matter and forgetfulness, it was necessary for some one to begin the work by, figuratively speaking, breaking a law, so that the race might be brought under the subjection of death. this may be likened, roughly, to the deliberate breaking, for purposes of repair or extension, of a wire carrying power to light a city. someone had to divert the current of eternal existence, and thus temporarily bring man's earthly body under the subjection of gross matter. adam, the first man, was chosen to do this work. by the deliberate breaking of a spiritual law, he placed himself under the ban of earthly death and transmitted to all his posterity the subjection to death. this was the so-called "sin of adam." to obtain or give greater joys, smaller pains may often have to be endured. **the need of a savior.** the purpose of the earth career was, however, two-fold, to learn to understand gross matter, and to acquire a body made of the essence of such matter. the bodies laid in the grave must, therefore, be raised again. as the spirits, by their own act had not brought upon themselves death, so by their own act they should not conquer it. it was necessary, therefore, that someone, in time, should reunite the broken wires and reestablish the flow of eternal life, and thus to conquer death. for this work jesus christ was chosen. jesus actually came on earth, lived and taught the ancient gospel again to the children of men, and in time suffered death so that the act of adam might be atoned for. by this work, the purpose of the earth-life was completed, and thus jesus christ became the central figure in the plan of salvation. why death, so-called, should be necessary for us to achieve an intimate knowledge of matter, and why jesus should die to permit the current of eternal life to flow freely between the earthly body and the eternal spirit, are not fully known. through adam man was brought on earth, subject to death; through jesus, the christ, he was lifted out of death to continue an eternal life in association with the earth-acquired body. **man's part in the great plan.** in this great gathering in the heavens many questions arose. by adam man was to come on earth; by jesus he was to be resurrected. in both of these great acts, man had no part, beyond permitting himself to be acted upon. in the plan, what was to be man's part? lucifer, a great leader in the council, proposed that, since others were acting for man in bringing him on and taking him away from the earth, it was not necessary for man, during his earth-career, to exercise his own will. lucifer proposed that, in spite of himself, his will, his desires and his individuality, man should be placed on earth, and be taken from it, and without effort, be filled with a knowledge of earth conditions. all men should be forced into salvation. jesus christ, who became the savior of men, objected to this change in god's plan, as it interfered with the essential right of intelligent beings to act for themselves. jesus insisted that, as without will there can be no growth, man, placed on earth through the agency of adam and resurrected and brought into a full life through the agency of jesus, should retain, during his earth-career, his full free agency. though he might walk an forgetfulness of the past, and have no visions of the future, he would yet be allowed a free and untrammeled agency as he walked in the clearness of the earth's day. while upon earth he might learn much or little, might accept a law or reject it, just as he had been, privileged to do in all the days that had gone before. these two views regarding man's part in the plan led, we are told, to a great difference of opinion among the spirits. naturally, the first proposition appealed to many, for it is the easy way of obtaining victory, if victory it may be called. the other way seems always somewhat hard and bitter, though in the end the joy obtained surpasses that attained without effort. lucifer, who led the fight for the first method, could not agree to the original plan which was finally accepted; and so, in that great, dim day, many of the spirits followed lucifer, and have not yet entered upon their earth-careers, but are independently and in opposition to god's will, following paths that are not leading them onward. the majority accepted god's law, as championed by the son, though it is said that many weak and fearful spirits remained neutral, daring neither to accept nor to reject either proposition. the hosts who accepted the plan of god, girded themselves with the necessary strength to begin the pilgrimage, ending in an earthly death, but reaching, through the resurrection, into an eternal life of exceedingly great progress. **free agency.** on the earth, as elsewhere, then, the free agency of man, as expressed in the individual will, is supreme. though our environment is that of gross matter, and though we dwell in forgetfulness of the past, our free agency is as vigorous as ever. however, the free agency of man cannot transcend the plan which all of us of earth accepted, together, in the day of the great council. man's will is always circumscribed by great laws that are self-existent or that are formulated or may be formulated for the benefit of the race. the many must devise laws whereby individual and community progress are simultaneous. it is the full right of the individual to exercise his will in any way that does not interfere with the laws made for the many; and, under proper conditions, the laws for the many are of equal value to the individual. under the law we are free. chapter . the great plan. the plan proposed by god for the government of the spirits who entered upon their earth careers is revealed only so far as it is necessary for the guidance of man. we may remain certain that the great plan is based upon eternal laws that always have been and always will be operative. matters pertaining to man's earth-life are matters of eternal interest; and the laws formulated for the guidance of man on earth must be laws which in some form are fundamental for the guidance of man in any place and at all times. nothing is temporary or transient about the plan itself, for it rests on eternal foundations. **forgetfulness.** a condition of the plan seems to be that the spirits, transferred to this earth, shall remain on earth in forgetfulness of an earlier existence. as in a dream, in moments of deep spiritual fervor, do we occasionally seem to recall our preexistent life. a veil has been drawn over the past; and, without the aid of memory, man fights his battle with the world of gross matter. this forgetfulness seems reasonable. the spirit of man accepted the earth-plan in detail, and if he remembered every step that led to this acceptance, and every detail of the plan itself, there would not be much reason for the exercise of will in adhering to it. left as he is, with little memory to steady him, he must exercise all his power, to compel surrounding forces to serve him in searching out the past and in prophesying for the future. by such vigorous exercise of his will he develops a more intimate acquaintanceship with the things of the earth. **subject to earth conditions.** intimacy with the conditions of earth, alone, will give a man final knowledge of them. such information can not be obtained second hand nor by casual or superficial acquaintanceship. for that reason, probably, man has been brought so completely under the subjection of gross matter, that he has no power over it beyond that which he gains as he obtains knowledge of it. hence, on this earth, stripped of all power, and left, as it were, helpless in the midst of contending universal forces, man must search out the nature of the things about him and determine their laws before he acquires power over nature and thereby brings himself into a condition of joy. in the face of the impending change called death, man is possibly more determined to acquire the power that will lift him from the grave and give him an eternal association with all the elements of the universe, including his earthly body. **laws to be obeyed.** to enter into the fullness of progressive joy, a man must, as has been said, naturally subject himself to the laws of the universe. in god's plan for life on earth, is a system of laws, representing eternal realities, to which man must conform. such a law, for instance, is faith, which, in its simple universal meaning, is man's certainty that in the universe is found everything he may desire for his upbuilding and advancement, and that the eternal relations of universal forces will prevail for his good. another such fundamental law to which man must conform, is that of repentance, which in its larger sense, is merely faith made active. passive faith can do little for man's advancement. yet another such law is that of baptism, which is essentially obedience to existing laws. and still another such law is that of the gift of the holy ghost, which perhaps means that a man may place himself in touch with the whole of the universe and to draw knowledge from it, including the beings of superior intelligence that it contains. these and other laws are given as guides for man. they sharpen his free agency; develop his habits of obedience to law, and establish for him communication with god. moreover, a plan formulated by an intelligent being must be composed of laws, for even the infinite relationships of matter and energy fall naturally into groups of invariable laws. the laws of the plan, like those above stated, are logical necessities, if the earth-plan is at all accepted. **an organization.** it follows of necessity that if there is a plan, there must also be an organization. the plan is not for one alone, but for many. all must be served and blessed by the great plan. those, therefore, who subject themselves to the earth-plan with its laws, must needs group themselves so that the laws may be operative for all. a person may be able to serve in the advancement of the whole race of man, only when there is a unity of purpose and effect, which can be secured only by organization. the question of organization involves those of priesthood, authority, and others, later to be discussed. **all to accept the plan.** the earth-plan, fully completed, must be accepted or definitely rejected by all the spirits who have appeared on earth in conformity with their vote in the great council. that is fundamental. those who enter upon their earth-careers may accept or reject the gospel; but, since the full success of the plan is based upon the advancement of all the spirits, it becomes necessary to use every possible effort to secure for the plan a recognition of all those who accepted it in the spirit world, and who, therefore, entered upon the pilgrimage of earth. god's purpose in the plan will be incomplete so long as one soul remains unconverted. life on earth deals directly with gross matter and the forces pertaining to it. the laws formulated for the guidance of man, are especially devised for earth conditions, and belong to the earth. for instance, baptism, the symbol of obedience to god and acceptance of his love, is not necessarily an ordinance that belongs elsewhere than on earth. more probably, water baptism is essentially an ordinance of and for this earth. it is unlikely that water baptism is practiced in a future estate. if it be true, then all who enter upon the earth-career, and who desire at the years of discretion the perfected joy derived from the gospel, must have baptism on this earth. should some of the spirits refuse, while on earth, to accept the gospel, or fail to hear it, baptism, belonging to the earth, must be done for them, vicariously, on earth, so that they, having had the work done for them here, may accept or reject the ordinance in their life beyond the grave. this is the motive of the work for the dead. the earth ordinances must be done by or for every soul born upon the earth so that the earth experience may not be in vain, should the gospel be accepted in the remotest day of eternity. this view becomes more important when it is recalled that ordinances of the earth, belonging primarily to the earth, stand for vast, eternal realities, indispensable to man's progress. when the simple ordinances of the gospel, as pertaining to the earth, have been done for the dead, then may the dead be judged as of the earth, and may receive the blessings of the obedient who conform to law. **the meaning of the earth plan.** the earth-plan, plan of salvation, or great plan, for the guidance of the spirits placed on earth, may perhaps be more clearly understood if it is compared to the great chart in the captain's cabin by which the vessel is steered. life on earth is as the large and angry ocean. the chances of shipwreck and of being driven out of the set course, are many. if, however, the ocean is well charted, the mariners can better avoid the sunken reefs, and the dangerous places, and after the storm can more readily return to the course so that the destined port may be entered with a good bill of health. the gospel is such a chart, on which the journey is outlined, showing the dangers of the journey, the havens of rest and the final destination. if a man accept the chart, and use it in his life's career, he will find the voyage pleasant and his arrival secure, and his life will be as that of one cast in pleasant places. earth so that the earth experience may not be in vain, should the gospel be accepted in the remotest day of eternity. this view becomes more important when it is recalled that ordinances of the earth, belonging primarily to the earth, stand for vast, eternal realities, indispensable to man's progress. when the simple ordinances of the gospel, as pertaining to the earth, have been done for the dead, then may the dead be judged as of the earth, and may receive the blessings of the obedient who conform to law. **the meaning of the earth plan.** the earth-plan, plan of salvation, or great plan, for the guidance of the spirits placed on earth, may perhaps be more clearly understood if it is compared to the great chart in the captain's cabin by which the vessel is steered. life on earth is as the large and angry ocean. the chances of shipwreck and of being driven out of the set course, are many. if, however, the ocean is well charted, the mariners can better avoid the sunken reefs, and the dangerous places, and after the storm can more readily return to the course so that the destined port may be entered with a good bill of health. the gospel is such a chart, on which the journey is outlined, showing the dangers of the journey, the havens of rest and the final destination. if a man accept the chart, and use it in his life's career, he will find the voyage pleasant and his arrival secure, and his life will be as that of one cast in pleasant places. the beginning of the earth work chapter . the coming of man. the decision arrived at in the great council was promptly carried out by those to whom the authority to do so was confided. **making of the earth.** the first step, in carrying out the great plan, was to secure a place on which the desired experience might be gained. to accomplish this, the earth was made from materials, found in the universe, which, by the intelligent power of god, were collected and organized into the earth. the earth was not made from nothing, nor by the fiat of god, except as his will and words determined that the work should be undertaken. in the clumsy way of man, by adding stone to stone or material to material, the earth was not made; rather, great forces, existing in the universe, and set into ceaseless operation by the directing intelligence of god, assembled and brought into place the materials constituting the earth, until, in the course of long periods of time, this sphere was fitted for the abode of man. in the making of the earth, as in all other matters pertaining to the destiny of man, the work was done in complete and orderly harmony with the existing laws of the universe. the mosaic six days represent successive stages in the earth's construction, each measured by ages of time. the forces of nature act steadily but slowly in the accomplishment of great works. **the builders.** the creation of the earth, the details of which are not known, must have been marvelously and intensely appealing in its interest to the intelligent beings who, because of their exalted knowledge, had the necessary power over the elements and forces of the universe to accomplish the forming of an earth. three great intelligent beings were in supreme authority in the building of the earth, namely, god, the father, his son, jehovah, who became the christ, and michael, who became the first man, adam. these three beings were naturally the ones concerned in the making of an earth for the sojourn of the spirits, for it was through the agency of god, the father, that the spiritual bodies were started on the road of eternal progression; it was about the mission of jehovah, the son of god, that the differences of opinion raged in the great council, and, finally, it was adam, or michael, who was appointed to be the one to come upon the earth, and there to subject himself to death, so that the procreation of spirits in earthly tabernacles, might be started. these three beings, who are so vitally concerned in the destinies of the human race, had charge of the making of an earth which should be a suitable and a pleasant habitation for the earth-clad spirits. **the coming of man.** the earth at last was finished. adam, the first man, and his wife, eve, then appeared on earth. the statement that man was made from the dust of the earth is merely figurative, and means that he was made of universal materials, as is the earth. likewise, the statement that god breathed into man the breath of life is only a figure of the existence of the spirit within the body. the exact process whereby man was placed upon earth is not known with certainty, nor is it vital to a clear understanding of the plan of salvation. we may rest assured that the first man and the first woman were eternal beings, who subjected themselves to life on this earth, so that the process of clothing eternal spirits with mortal bodies might begin on the earth. adam and eve, in view of the great sacrifices they made to make the great plan a reality, are the great hero and heroine of human history. **the "fall."** biblical lore and traditions among all of the races of man, tell of the "fall" of the first parents from the grace of god. an event called the fall did occur, but it was a necessary part of the great plan. adam and eve were eternal beings, and were not under the ban of mortal death. subject to death they must become, however, if their posterity should inherit corruptible bodies. the fall then was simply a deliberate use of a law, by which act adam and eve became mortal, and could beget mortal children. the exact nature of this event or the exact manner in which the law was used is not understood. the bible account is, undoubtedly, only figurative. there was no essential sin in the fall, except that the violation of any law, whether deliberately or otherwise, is always followed by an effect. the "fall" of adam and eve was necessary, for without it, there would have been no begetting on the earth of spirits with mortal bodies, and the plan proposed and confirmed in the great council would have remained inoperative. "adam fell that man might be." **the first blessing.** the curse, so-called, pronounced by god upon adam as he went out of the garden of eden, that in the sweat of his brow he should earn his bread, is possibly the greatest of all human blessings, and it is a simple extension of a great eternal law. from the beginning of the dim past, when man slumbered with only a feeble thought of his possible vast future, the great law of his progress has been that only personal effort can achieve desirable things. the price to be paid for advancement is vigorous self-effort. the active will precedes every step of progress. to exercise the will means labor, which may well be represented by "the sweat of the brow." the so-called curse, however, carries with it the magnificent promise that man, by the exercise of his powers, may subdue the earth, and make it serve all his needs. in a universe controlled and directed by the intelligent god, there can be no question but that, ultimately, the intelligent will shall control for its own use not only the things of this earth but all the forces of the universe. the subjection to which the earth will be brought depends entirely upon the degree to which man exercises his will, that is, the degree to which he accepts the benefits of the first blessing. **the garden of eden.** the first days on earth of the first man and the first woman are of intense interest to every student of the subject, and it is to be regretted that so little knowledge of those early times has survived the vicissitudes of time. in the garden god walked with man and taught him the living truth. according to the prophet joseph smith, the garden of eden, the first home of adam and eve, was located near the city known as independence, missouri. to the north and east of independence, some scores of miles, is probably the place where adam dwelt after he had been driven out of the garden. the state of missouri, and the country around it, is, therefore, of tremendous interest to those who accept the gospel as restored in the latter days. **a wise beginning.** in all matters pertaining to the beginning of man's earth career, it may be observed that proper preparations have been made. there has been no blind destiny working out unknown purposes; instead, intelligent forces have provided for man from beginning to end, so that the whole scheme of man's life, here and hereafter, is one of order and system. chapter . the course of the gospel on earth. the great plan provided that man should come upon earth with the memory of his past taken from him, so that, beginning his earth-life as a child, he might repeat on earth the efforts that earned for him progress in the pre-existent life. even adam and eve forgot the details of their previous lives, for it was necessary that all be under the same law, and that no improper strength be derived, by anyone, from the pre-existent experiences. **adam hears the gospel.** the only rational thing that could be done to spirits so placed on earth was to teach them fully the story of man's origin and destiny and the meaning and duties of the earth-life. the plea of ignorance would not then be valid. consequently, soon after the first parents had been driven out of the garden of eden, an angel appeared and taught adam the story of man from the first to the last day. the plan of salvation, including the atoning sacrifice of jesus, the organized church, the purpose and powers of the priesthood and the rights and duties of man upon earth, whether within or without the church, was fully unfolded. adam, the first earth-pupil of god, was taught, as his first lesson, the great philosophy overshadowing the existence of man. when adam had been taught all this, and had accepted the truth, he was baptized, even as men are baptized today, and he entered into all the other ordinances of the gospel and was given full authority through the priesthood conferred upon him to officiate in god's name in all matters pertaining, under the great plan, to the welfare of man. **the first dispensation.** as children and children's children came to adam he taught them carefully all that had been taught him, so that the knowledge of the law might remain upon the earth. the ordinances of the gospel were practiced, the righteous were organized into the church, even as today, and the authority of the priesthood was transmitted by adam to his children, and by them to their children, so that the precious gift might not be lost. in those days the church was probably fully organized, according to the patriarchal order; at least in the days of enoch, the seventh from adam, it seems quite clear that the church was established with all of its essential parts. the activity in behalf of the gospel which began with adam and continued until noah, at the time of the great flood, is ordinarily known as the first dispensation of the gospel. **the first apostasy.** from the beginning of his earth-career, adam retained his free agency. god, directly or through agents, might teach and command, but adam, a free agent, had the right to accept or reject as seemed him best. adam's children, likewise, though taught by the patriarch of the race of the way of righteousness, could accept or reject for themselves whatever was taught them. free agency was with man in that early day as it is now. the descendants of adam soon began to exercise their free agency, some for, and many against, the great plan. cain exercised his free agency in the murder of abel. as time went on, large numbers departed from the truth concerning man's place in the universe as taught by adam, and refused to accept the gospel. concurrently with the establishment of the church in the first dispensation there was, therefore, a first great apostasy. it is ever so, it has ever been so, and will ever be so, that in a world of intelligent beings, possessing free agency, some will accept and some will reject the truth. no doubt, in the process of time, truth will triumph, and all may be brought to understand the will of god, but the conquest is attended by many temporary departures from the truth. nevertheless, adam and those who remained true to his teachings, continued, faithfully, to teach to others the eternal truth, so that they might perchance be made to return to the great truth which they had so lightly cast aside. **the later dispensations.** the first apostasy culminated in the flood, which was sent because of the violence of the first apostasy and the corruption of men. as far as known, only noah and his immediate family were preserved. in them, however, was represented all the blood of the world. to the new race noah explained fully that the flood was due, entirely, to the wicked hardness of the hearts of the people, and their refusal to accept eternal truth or to respect the authority of god, and that it was necessary, should calamity be avoided, to live in accordance with the great plan. to them all, the gospel was taught in its purity. nevertheless, it was only a short time before apostasy again occurred among many. the free agency of man can not be curbed. yet, probably, there has not been, since the flood, such utter corruption as prevailed during the first apostasy. from the days of the flood, god or his messengers have appeared on earth, at various times, to restore the truth or to keep it alive in the hearts of the faithful, so that man might possess a full knowledge of the gospel and that the earth might never need to be without the story of the great plan and the authority of the priesthood. for instance, melchizedek, the high priest, possessed a full measure of the authority of the holy priesthood. to abraham, god and his angels appeared, and endowed him with the authority of god. so on, down the course of time, there are numerous instances of the appearance of god to men to help the children of men to a perfect understanding of the great truths that must be understood and obeyed, if men are to continue in their progressive development. it is not known how many men and women at various times have received such visitations, but it is probable that hosts of men and women at various times, even when the church has not been organized, have received and used the truth of life as embodied in the great plan. **the dispensation of the meridian of time.** in the course of human history and in accordance with the great plan, jesus the son of god, appeared on earth, to atone for the act of adam and eve, who "fell" that men might be. this is called the dispensation of the meridian of time. jesus did live on earth, and gave his life so that mortal bodies may rise from the grave and pass into an eternal existence, beyond the reach of corruption. during the sojourn of jesus on earth, he devoted himself to a restatement of the gospel, including the story of the past and the present and the hope of the future. at no time since the days of adam, had the gospel been so fully taught and made so simply clear to the understanding as in the days of jesus. under the teachings of the savior, the church was re-established in order and completeness. **the great apostasy.** after the ascension of jesus, the church remained, for some time, fully organized. thousands flocked to it, and the people lived in accordance with the doctrines taught by the savior. soon, however, history repeated itself. in the right of their free agency, men refused, in many cases, to obey the laws and ordinances of the gospel, and more often changed them to suit their own convenience. such departures from the truth became more numerous and more flagrant as time wore on, until error permeated the whole church. at last, about six hundred years after christ, the gospel laws and ordinances had become so completely warped that it was as if the church had departed from the earth. the authority of the priesthood no longer remained with the church. this was the great apostasy. from that time, complete darkness reigned for many centuries. in those days, however, many honest men could see that the truth was not upon the earth, and hoped that the simple principles of the gospel might again be correctly practiced by man. among such men were luther and many others, who used their best endeavors to show the people that error ruled. at last many were awakened, and the days of the reformation began. the reformation was a period of preparation for the last restoration of the gospel on earth. many years were required before the darkness of centuries could be lifted from the souls of men. **the restoration.** finally, as men broke through the darkness, as intelligence became diffused among all men, and as liberality of thought grew and became respected, the world was ready for the eternal truth. again the gospel was restored with the authority of the priesthood and the organization of the church. on an early spring day, in the year , in the woods of western new york, god the father, and god the son, appeared to a fourteen-year-old boy named joseph smith, who had faithfully asked for divine help. through the instrumentality of this boy, guided constantly by god, the church was re-established, the authority of the priesthood again conferred upon many men, and a fulness of knowledge pertaining to man's place in the universe offered to all who would listen. in time the church was organized precisely as was the primitive church, and more fully than at any other time in the history of the world. this was the great restoration. **the vital facts.** the gospel was fully taught to the first man, who in turn taught it to others. the church was organized from the beginning. as apostasy dimmed men's knowledge of the gospel and undermined the church, the full truth was repeatedly restored. at least four times has a complete statement of the great plan been made to the people of the earth--at the time of adam, of noah, of jesus christ and of joseph smith. consequently, the gospel has been on the earth and within the reach of men practically during the whole course of the earth's history. the fundamental truths of the great plan were taught to father adam and since that time have been scattered broadcast over the earth. this wide dissemination of the truth, in all ages, explains the fact that practically every life philosophy proposed by man contains some of the truths of the gospel. in every system of theology and in every sect there is a certain measure of truth, for all have drawn from the one fountain. all, no doubt, seek for truth, and believe that they have found it; but, in fact, they have only fragments, picked up here and there and worked into a system. the full truth must encompass the complete philosophy of man and the universe, including the authority to act for god in the working out of the plan. those who thus accept the whole plan, constitute the church of christ. in the churches of the world there is much of truth and consequently none is wholly wrong, though at times the truth has been so warped that it appears worse than untruth. in the matter of full truth, and of authority, however, do the church and its imitators differ absolutely. there can be no duplicate set of truth, and no double seat of authority. it is clear that free agency, for which the heavenly battle was waged, is in full operation upon the earth. at first sight it may seem that lucifer's plan would have been best, for by it all men, in spite of themselves, would have been given the earth-experience and kept in the righteous path that leads to salvation. yet, the origin of man, and the doctrine that he can advance only by self-effort, make it unthinkable that he should allow himself to be, as it were, blindfolded and then compellingly directed by some greater power. men are directed, no doubt, by beings of higher intelligence, but in that directing our wills must be allowed to play their part. there can be no real satisfaction, if it were possible, in advancement which has been forced upon man lucifer's plan was impossible. it must also be remembered, that men are not necessarily evil because they do not accept the gospel. some find it impossible to understand the truth because their hearts are so set upon other things, and others have been led by their free agency in one direction, whereas the gospel would lead them in another. nevertheless, though men are not evil because they refuse to accept the gospel, they retard themselves of necessity, when they fail to obey the law; and thereby they invite upon themselves the punishment that comes without fail to all who are not in full harmony with the great, controlling universal laws. man and god. chapter . the gods of this earth. the conception of a universe directed by a god of intelligence can not include a god of mystery. in mystery there is only confusion. it does not follow that because he is not mysterious he is fully comprehended. in our general conception of god, his origin, his destiny, and his relation to us, we understand him clearly; but, in the details of his organization, powers and knowledge he transcends our understanding. intelligent man dwelling in a universe containing many superior intelligent beings will often find need of the help that higher intelligence only can give. earth-bound as we are, we need a close acquaintance with the god who shapes the destinies of men. the better god is known, the better may the eternal truths we learn be applied in our daily lives. **the order of gods.** god has had no beginning and will have no end. from the first, by the exercise of his will, he has constantly acquired new knowledge and thereby new power. because of the wisdom which he has gained, and the love thereby begotten for the unnumbered hosts of striving intelligent beings, he formulated the plan which will lead them readily and correctly in the way of continued progression. in so far as man accepts the plan of salvation he is being educated by god, to become even as god is. god and man are of the same race, differing only in their degrees of advancement. true, to our finite minds, god is infinitely beyond our stage of progress. nevertheless, man is of the order of gods, else he cannot know god. **plurality of gods.** since innumerable intelligent beings are moving onward in development, there must be some in almost every conceivable stage of development. if intelligent beings, far transcending the understanding of man, be called gods, there must be many gods. god, angel and similar terms denote merely intelligent beings of varying degree of development. the thought, however, that there is a plurality of gods and other beings of varying grades, is a thought of fundamental truth, which may be applied in every-day life, for it gives the assurance that it is possible for all, by self-effort and by gradual steps, to attain the highest conceivable power. a division of labor is necessary among men on earth, and it is only reasonable that a similar division of labor may exist in all intelligent systems. the conception of a community of men may be applied to the community of heavenly beings. in the community of men, different men have different duties; so, perhaps, on an exalted scale, the gods are organized with a perfected division of labor. **god, the father.** god, the father, the greatest god concerned in our progression, is the supreme god. he is the father of our spirits. he is the being of highest intelligence with whom we deal. to our senses and understanding he is as perfection. in his fulness he can not be fathomed by the human mind, and it is, indeed, useless for man to attempt to define in detail the great intelligent beings of the universe. god, the father, the supreme god, has gone through every phase of the great plan, which we are working out. therefore, he has had our experiences or their equivalents, and understands from his own experience the difficulties of our journey. his love for us is an understanding love. our earth troubles we may lay fully before him, knowing that he understands how human hearts are touched by the tribulations and the joys of life. god, the father, the supreme god of whom we have knowledge, is the greatest intelligence in the infinite universe, since he is infinite in all matters pertaining to us and transcends wholly our understanding in his power and wisdom. we know no greater god than the omniscient, omnipotent father. **god, the son.** with the father is associated his only begotten son on earth, jesus christ, who came on earth and submitted himself to a painful and ignoble death so that all men might be raised from the grave with the body of flesh and bones made indestructible and everlasting. because of the central position occupied by jesus in the great plan, he is essentially the god of this earth. he, also, is beyond our understanding, he sits on the right hand of the father, and is one with the father in all that pertains to the welfare of the human race. to us he is perfect, possessing all the attributes of the father. whether he is as far advanced as the father is an idle question, since he surpasses our understanding. in all matters pertaining to the earth, the son is the agent of the father. through him the will of the father pertaining to this earth is given. all our communications with the father are made in the name of the son, so that they may be properly authorized. this is in simple accord with the order that prevails in the heavens and that should prevail everywhere on earth. **god, the holy ghost.** the father and the son and the holy ghost constitute the godhead, or trinity of gods, guiding the destinies of men on earth. god, the holy ghost, is a personage of spirit, who possesses special functions which have not yet been clearly revealed. we know that this member of the godhead is a knowledge-giver and an inspirer of all that is great and noble and desirable, and that his functions in the godhead are indispensable to the welfare of man. **other beings.** many other intelligent beings, superior to us, no doubt take part in the work of man on earth. there are angels and spirits who no doubt have assigned to them the care of the men and women who walk upon the earth. man is not alone; he walks in the midst of such heavenly company, from whom he may expect help if he seek it strongly. a plan for the schooling of intelligent spirits, walking in semi-darkness through the acquiescence of beings of higher intelligence, must of a certainty include such continuous though invisible help. **sex among the gods.** sex, which is indispensable on this earth for the perpetuation of the human race, is an eternal quality which has its equivalent everywhere. it is indestructible. the relationship between men and women is eternal and must continue eternally. in accordance with the gospel philosophy there are males and females in heaven. since we have a father who is our god, we must also have a mother, who possesses the attributes of godhood. this simply carries onward the logic of things earthly, and conforms with the doctrine that whatever is on this earth, is simply a representation of great spiritual conditions, of deeper meaning than we can here fathom. chapter . man's communion with god. man is not left to himself on the face of the earth. though his memory has been taken away, he will not be allowed to drift unwatched and unassisted through the journey on earth. at the best, man is only a student who often needs the assistance of a teacher. it is indispensable, therefore, to know how communication may be established by man with intelligent beings wherever they may be. **the will to ask.** the first of the fundamental principles by which man may confer with god, is that man must show his desire to receive, by asking for help. man has the right to reject whatever is offered him; in the midst of plenty he may refuse to eat. therefore, whatever a man gains from the surrounding wisdom is initiated either by a petition or by a receptive attitude which is equivalent to a request. unless a man ask, he is in no condition to receive, and ordinarily nothing is given him. on extraordinary occasions, when god uses a man to accomplish his purposes, something may be given without the initiatory prayer, but such gifts are rarely of value to the man himself. to get help from without, a man must ask for it. that is the law. history confirms this doctrine. adam prayed to god and the angel came to explain the plan of salvation. joseph smith, the latter-day restorer of the gospel, prayed in the grove and the father and the son appeared. it is unnatural to believe that gifts are given without prayer. that the answer is often overwhelmingly greater than the expressed desire, is only a sign of the love of the giver, and does not remove the necessity of asking, as the first step in obtaining what a person desires. it is probable that no request, addressed to a being of superior intelligence, is refused. however, the answer comes at a time and place not predetermined by man. **by personal appearance.** in answer to prayer, god may appear personally. there is no physical or spiritual reason why god should not appear to his children in person whenever he so desires. in fact, sacred history indicates that god appeared to adam in the garden of eden, to abraham in the holy land, to moses on the mountain, to joseph in the sacred grove, and to many others at various times during the earth's history. likewise, jesus christ, the son of god, lived upon this earth and walked and talked with men. to limit the powers of god by saying that he cannot or will not now appear to man, is to make him a creature of less power than is possessed by man. **by the visitation of angels.** the will of god may be transmitted to man by visible representatives who are beings of a lower degree of intelligence. angels have frequently visited men and brought to them divine messages concerning their own affairs or the affairs of the world. after adam was driven out of the garden of eden, an angel came and laid before him the philosophy of man's existence. similarly, angels appeared to enoch, noah, abraham, moses, joseph smith and numerous others, many of which are not recorded in history. these vivid personages, intelligent beings vastly superior to man, knowing well the laws of nature and therefore able to control them, may be with man, though they are not seen with the natural eye. most probably we walk in the midst of such invisible intelligent spirits. the development from the earth-journey comes largely from the self-efforts of man, who, apparently, must depend upon himself. if at will he could bring to his aid visible, supernatural beings, to tide him over his difficulties, his need of self-development and self-dependence would become very small, and the man would not grow strong. **by the holy spirit.** god is a personal being of body--a body limited in extent. he cannot, therefore, at a given moment be personally everywhere. time and space surround him as they surround us. it is difficult to believe that god can in person answer the numberless petitions reaching his throne. nevertheless, it is known distinctly that god, by his power, will and word is everywhere present. it is almost as difficult to believe that, in spite of the hosts of heavenly beings, personal administrations are possible in the great majority of the countless petitions to god. god must be, therefore, in possession of other agencies whereby his will may be transmitted at his pleasure to the uttermost confines of space. the chief agent employed by god to communicate his will to the universe is the holy spirit, which must not be confused with the holy ghost, the personage who is the third member of the godhead. the holy spirit permeates all the things of the universe, material and spiritual. by the holy spirit the will of god is transmitted. it forms what may be called the great wireless system of communication among the intelligent beings of the universe. the holy spirit vibrates with intelligence; it takes up the word and will of god as given by him or by his personal agents, and transmits the message to the remotest parts of space. by the intelligent domination and infinite extent of the holy spirit, the whole universe is held together and made as one whole. by its means there is no remoteness into which intelligent beings may escape the dominating will of god. by the holy spirit, god is always with us, and "is nearer than breathing, and nearer than hands and feet." the intelligent earthly manifestations of the holy spirit are commonly spoken of as the natural forces. it is conceivable that the thunders and the lightnings, the movements of the heavenly bodies, the ebb and flow of the oceans, and all the phenomena known to man, are only manifestations of the will of god as transmitted and spread by the measureless, inexhaustible, infinite, all-conducting holy spirit. by the holy spirit, which fills every person, man may obtain information from god. by its means come the messages which transcend the ordinary methods of acquiring knowledge. by it man may readily communicate with god, or god with him. when a person utters his prayer in faith it is impressed upon the holy spirit, and transmitted, so that god may read the man's desire. this doctrine of a rational theology has been duplicated in a modest way by the development of wireless telegraphy. according to science, the universe is filled with a subtle substance called the ether, on the waves of which the message is spread throughout the universe to be taken up by any person who has the proper receiving apparatus. **the eternal record.** so thoroughly permeated with the holy spirit is the immensity of space that every act and word and thought is recorded and transmitted everywhere, so that all who know how to read may read. thus we make an imperishable record of our lives. to those whose lives are ordered well this is a blessed conception; but to those of wicked lives, it is most terrible. he who has the receiving apparatus, in whose hands the key is held, may read from the record of the holy spirit, an imperishable history of all that has occurred during the ages that have passed in the world's history. this solemn thought, that in the bosom of the holy spirit is recorded all that pertains to the universe--our most secret thought and our faintest hope--helps man to walk steadily in the midst of the contending appeals of his life. we can not hide from the master. chapter . man walks with god. the knowledge of means of communication between man and god is of great help to man in all the affairs of his life. **reading god's message.** in possession of the holy spirit is a record of the will of god with respect to all things and all occurrences, great or small, in the universe from the first day. the big problem of man is to read the message of god as it is held by the holy spirit. in wireless telegraphy, a spark coil sets up waves in the ether and other coils similarly "tuned," receive the waves anywhere in the universe. in wireless telegraphy the all-important thing is that the transmitting and receiving instruments be tuned alike, for only then may the message be read. the same principle holds with the holy spirit. the giver and the receiver must be "tuned" alike, that is, must be in harmony, if the messages are to pass readily and understandingly from one to the other. the clearness of the message depends wholly upon the degree to which this tuning approaches perfect harmony. **spirit blindness.** there are many who, walking among vast spiritual forces, yet feel themselves wholly alone. they do not have the assurance that there is something or someone near them which may not be known by the ordinary judgment of the senses, yet which may be known by man. these persons are so untuned as to be unable to understand the messages of the holy spirit. many will not be brought into an understanding harmony with the holy spirit; others merely find it so hard to be brought into tune with the infinite that they would rather be without the messages than to do the necessary labor of acquiring harmonious relations with the holy spirt. those who can not feel and in part commune with the holy spirit, are blind to the larger part of the universe, which lies outside of the circumscribed world, swept by our immediate senses. in terms of the unseen forces will the earth at last be cleared of all its mystery. in yesterday and tomorrow shall today be glorified. the eternal concern of man will be, as it has been, to secure an understanding knowledge of all the forces of space. they, therefore, who cannot on this earth possess a direct assurance of the existence and assistance of the great unseen world, are indeed spiritually blind, and much to be pitied. **prayer.** as already stated, all communication between man and a higher intelligent being must be initiated by a request from the man. thus, the place of prayer in the life of man is at once established. prayer is a request for further light, protection, or whatever else is desired. prayer is the first and greatest means of reading god's messages, for by intense prayer man gradually places himself in tune with the infinite so far as his request is concerned. those who do not ask, naturally do not establish an understanding relationship with the unseen world, and no message appears. the being of higher intelligence, to whom the request is directed, may or may not grant the prayer, but some answer will be given. prayer has been said to be "the soul's sincere desire." only when it is such will the highest answer be obtained, and it is doubtful if such a prayer is ever refused. no prayer is unheard. the place and time of prayer are of less importance. morning, noon and night, prayer is always fitting. however, it is well to be orderly, and to beget habits of prayer, and certain hours of the day should therefore be set aside for prayer, both in private and in the family. frequent and regular prayer helps to remind man of his dependence on a being of higher intelligence in accomplishing the great work of his heart. a man should pray always; his heart should be full of prayer; he should walk in prayer. answers will then be heard as god pleases. seldom is a man greater than his private prayers. **active prayer.** to become properly tuned with the guiding intelligent being, one must not pray in a stereotyped way. a man must give himself to the matter devotedly desired, in the form of prayer, and then support it with all his works. prayer is active and not passive. if a thing is wanted a man must try to secure it. then, as a man devotes all of himself to the matter of the prayer, his attitude becomes such as to make him susceptible to the answer when it shall be sent. prayer may be said to be the soul's whole desire. **the gift of understanding.** every now and then a man is found who seems to possess a knowledge above that of his fellow men. knowledge is gained by tremendous self-effort, and the men who know most are usually those who have exerted themselves most to learn. however, it is well known that those who have given themselves with all their might to a certain study, often have great flashes of insight, whereby they leap as it were from knowledge to knowledge, until their progress becomes tremendously rapid, compared with that of ordinary men. this means of acquiring knowledge may be compared crudely with the switch of an electric lighting system. when the switch is out, though the great dynamo in the canyon mouth hammer and generate its electricity, there is no flow of current through the city system and all is darkness. yet a man, with a slight effort, can raise the switch and connect the wires, thereby flooding the city with light. the result appears to be infinitely greater than the cause. thus, those who by great effort build up systems of truth often reach a place where by relatively little effort a flood of new light may be thrown upon the subject to which the mind has given itself. that is one of the compensations to those who strive with all their might for the mastery of any subject. this power becomes the gift of understanding, which may come to all who study deeply. the gift of understanding is the result of the operation of the holy spirit. the holy spirit which is in communication with the whole universe, is in a measure subject to those who give themselves devotedly and with all their heart to any righteous matter. it is one of the most precious of gifts, and one that should be sought after by all men, because by its aid, the chance for development is greatly increased. **man walks with god.** literally, then, through the assistance of the mighty and all-pervading holy spirit, man is, indeed, always in the presence of god and his agencies. from this point of view man is immersed in the light and power of godliness. he, who by earnest prayer, close attention, and noble desires seeks the intelligence above and about him is not alone. he walks hand in hand with intelligent beings and draws from them the power that he does not of himself possess. in times of need such a man may reach into the black unknown and bring out hope, born of high knowledge. man and the devil. chapter . the kingdom of the evil one. if there is progression, there may also be retrogression; if there is good, there may be evil. everything has its opposite. **descending beings.** in a universe containing eternal, intelligent, personalities possessing free agency, there may be beings who are in opposition to the general law of progress. in fact, such opposing intelligent spirits or men have always and everywhere been found. naturally, those who devote themselves to the opposition of law are waging a hopeless battle, and lose their strength as time goes on. nevertheless, since many of them have acquired great knowledge before they turn against the truth, they may long continue active in their opposition to righteousness. the final end of such beings is not known. as they are eternal, it is doubtful if they can ever fully destroy themselves. nevertheless, as they oppose law, they will at last shrivel up and become as if they were not. beings who would stand in the way of progress, also use the forces of the universe, as best they can, and must be considered, in the ordering of life, whether in or out of the earth. **the devil.** the number of descending spirits in the universe is not known. in fact, little is known about the whole matter, which probably is for the good of man. the scant knowledge that we have, comes largely from the account of the great council. one of the great spirits there present, proposed to save men without the use of their free agency. when he and his numerous followers failed to secure the adoption of this plan they left the council, and set themselves thenceforth against the plan adopted by the majority. the leader in this rebellion was lucifer, said to be a prince of the morning, who, undoubtedly, through much diligence, had acquired a high position among the spirits. even those of high degree may fall. no man is sure of himself, unless from day to day he can keep the germ of opposition from settling within his breast. lucifer and his followers, who fell from the great council, are the devil and his angels, possessing definite wills and free agencies, who are still continuing the battle that originated in the heavens. the fundamental conceptions of eternalism, including eternal beings, make reasonable the existence of a personal devil, with personal agents, whose indestructible wills are used to oppose the great plan through adherence to which man entered upon his earth career. **man and the devil.** in a measure, god and all other intelligent beings are affected by the active will of man. if man wills not to be helped by god, it is difficult for god to send him divine help. even so, in the face of the will of man, the devil has little or no power. it is only when man so wills that he hears fully the voice of god; and it is only when man so wills that he hears the message of the devil. the doctrine that a request must initiate the gift is as true in the relationship that may be established between man and the devil as between man and god. god sends his messages throughout the universe; so does the devil as far as his knowledge permits him. however, the messages of the evil one need not be heard unless man so desires. in reality, therefore, man does not need to fear the evil one. he is not a force that can work harm, unless man places himself under the subjection of evil; but, if the devil be allowed a hearing, he may become the master of the man, and lead him downward on the road of retrogression. **the devil subject to god.** though the free agency of man is supreme with respect to himself, under the direction of a perfected intelligence, it must not interfere with the free agencies of others. this law holds for all ascending or descending intelligent beings. for that reason the devil is subject to god, and is allowed to operate only if he keeps within well-defined limits. he can suggest ways of iniquity, but he cannot force men to obey his evil designs. a man who sincerely desires to walk in righteousness need have no fear of the devil. by the knowledge of opposites, man may draw conclusions of far-reaching importance in his course of progression. the operations of the devil and his powers may, therefore, serve some good in giving contrasts for man's guidance. this does not mean that it is necessary for man to accept the suggestions of the evil one, or to commit evil to know truth. on the contrary, every rational impulse resents the thought that a man must know sin so that he may know righteousness better. unfortunately, the works of the evil one may be plentifully observed in the world, among those who have forsaken the great plan and the path of progression. man and the church. chapter . why a church? those who believe in the great plan form the community known as the church. many men, who have given the subject only superficial study, find it difficult to understand why a church should be necessary. **man helped by god on earth.** it was not intended, in the plan of salvation, that man, though in forgetfulness, should wander alone and helpless through the earth. rather was it intended and made necessary that men should gain experience by actual contact and contest with the earth and earthly forces, under the watchful care of beings of superior intelligence, who would help as demanded by man's free agency. in an intelligent world it could not well be otherwise. in fact, without the help of superior intelligence, the earth would be chaotic instead of orderly. the great plan is founded on intelligence, guided by a god of intelligence, and has for its purpose greater intelligence. avenues of communion with god have been pointed out, but many men are impervious to divine messages and need earthly help to understand the will of god. the church, the community of persons with the same intelligent faith and desire, is the organized agency through which god deals with his children, and through which such help may be given man. through the church, god's mind may be read by all, at least with respect to the church community. moreover, the authority to act for god must be vested somewhere on earth. the church holds this authority for the use of man. besides, it is the common law of the universe that when intelligent beings are organized, as of one body, they progress faster, individually and collectively. the church as an organization represents god on earth and is the official means of communication between men and god. **the plan of salvation for all.** in the great council the earth-career was planned for all the spirits there assembled who accepted the plan. the earth and whatever pertains to it, are for all and not for the one or the few. this means that man must not go through his earth-life independently, doing as he pleases, living apart from his fellowmen and accepting the great plan in his own way. by his own free agency he became a member of the hosts of the earth, and by his own promise, given in the great council, he must live in accordance with definite rules to be enforced by god. the church is the community of those who, having accepted the plan, desire unitedly to work out their mutual salvation under the settled authority of god. the purpose of the great plan can not be wholly fulfilled until all have heard the gospel. the church as a body undertakes to carry out this purpose. only when the church is not organized on earth, may individuals who know the great plan, stand alone; but even in such case it is the bounden duty of those having the knowledge, to give themselves to the converting of others, so that the church may be organized. **orderliness.** if each intelligent being placed on this earth, were to lead an independent life and deal independently with his god, relative to all matters concerning him, many of which would of necessity involve others, there would soon be disorder among humanity. it has been found desirable in all earthly affairs to organize so that order may prevail. by the organization known as a church all things may be done in order. chaos is abhorrent to the intelligent mind. **test of attitude.** there is yet another reason for the organization of a church. the plan of salvation is one founded in intelligence. man must accept and live its laws and ordinances intelligently. the church, by his adherence to these laws and ordinances, gives a man a means of testing himself as to his attitude towards the whole plan. whatever is done in life somehow connects itself with the church. a church which separates itself from the actual, daily life of the man does not acknowledge the essential unity of the universe and is not founded on man's intelligent conceptions of the constitution of the universe. the church, therefore, must possess a system of laws the compliance with which will enable a man or his fellows to test his progress and spiritual condition, which, in turn, will be a guide for his future work. it would be difficult for a man to apply such tests to himself if he stands alone, away from his fellow men and making laws for himself to fit his apparent needs. **authority.** there is much to be done for man and by man during the earth-career. every day brings its problems; laws are to be enforced; ordinances to be performed, and god must communicate with his earthly children. much of this work involves authority, which must be settled somewhere if order is to prevail. the authority to act for god is committed to the church, as the organized community of believers, and, indeed, authority is a distinguishing characteristic of the church. every man has or may receive authority to act in his own behalf in many matters, but to exercise authority in behalf of others, requires the kind of authority which god has delegated to the church. some form of authority from god is necessary in all our work, and the earthly source of god's authority is the church, organized by the supreme, intelligent god. **the great purpose of the church.** finally, the plan of eternal progress involves every living soul who comes upon earth. to the church is committed the great task of keeping alive this plan and of carrying it to all the nations. those who have accepted the truth must be kept active; those who have not accepted it must be taught; all must hear it; even for the dead must the essential ordinances be performed. the church, then, is a great missionary organization. this, of itself, justifies, the existence of the church, for it is improbable that any individual would or could undertake the conversion of all the people to eternal truth. chapter . conditions of membership. members of the church must necessarily accept the conceptions for which it stands. these are, essentially, the plan of salvation, the progressive development of all spirits concerned in the plan, and the authority of a supreme intelligent being, to deal with the men and women placed on earth. the conditions of membership are not many, nor difficult to understand. they are, rather, of a kind naturally appearing before an intelligent being concerned in any organization. **faith.** all who enter the church, or accept the great plan must, as a first condition, possess the faith which has been defined as "the substance of things hoped for; the evidence of things not seen." in other words, they must first acknowledge the existence in the universe of things and powers that may not be sensed directly, but which may be used to accomplish the purposes of man. such an attitude is required to admit the existence of a god or a plan of salvation. such a faith yields to man a comprehensive possession of the universe, and may establish a philosophy of life that conforms to every law of nature. the man who has no such faith stands before the plan of salvation as before a sealed book. he can not open it, nor opened, can he read it. a faith that admits the universe, seen and unseen, enables man to accomplish great things; in fact, all who have done the great labor of the world, have had such a faith. the law of faith is a general law. faith is not necessarily removed from the ordinary experiences of life. on the contrary it is the beginning of all knowledge. man observes the phenomena of nature, classifies and groups them until he reaches great general laws representing many individual phenomena. by the use of such laws, reasoning from the known to the unknown, laws may be inferred, the existence of which cannot be sensed directly. by this method of using human knowledge, man rapidly becomes aware of the certainty of the great universe that lies around him but beyond his immediate ken. moreover, and possibly of chief importance, such inferred but certain knowledge makes man confident that he can continue forever in the acquisition of knowledge and power, and it thus becomes a help in every duty of life. **repentance.** another fundamental requirement of those who enter the church is repentance. this is also self-evident, for if man is convinced of the correctness of a certain procedure, that is, if he has faith in it, he certainly will use that faith, if it is to become of any value to him. an active faith is repentance. it is commonly felt that repentance is only the turning away from evil practices. it is probably just as important for man to act out the good he learns as to refrain from doing evil. repentance, then, is not merely negative; it is also positive. this also is a general law. great work can be done by those only who have faith and who put that faith into action. **baptism.** the third requirement of those who desire entrance into the church is baptism. the candidate for baptism, presenting himself to one who has authority from jesus christ, is buried in the water and taken out again, as a symbol of the death and resurrection, the atoning sacrifice, and the conquest over death, of the savior. the ordinance of baptism, as far as man is concerned, is essentially an acknowledgment of the atoning sacrifice of jesus, a promise of obedience to the requirements of the great plan, and the acceptance of divine authority. baptism is also a principle of general application, for in whatever pursuit a man may be engaged, whether in or out of the church, he must first have faith in the work he has to do, then repent, in the sense of putting his faith into action and, finally, he must give obedience to the laws involved in the work. **the gift of the holy ghost.** the fourth condition of church membership, which is in the nature of a result of the three first requirements, is that the candidate receive the gift of the holy ghost. this is accomplished when one having authority places his hands on the head of the candidate, confirms him a member of the church, and says, "receive the holy ghost." this establishes an authoritative connection between man and god, the holy ghost, by which it is possible to secure, through the active support of the holy ghost, more light and power and confidence than man may secure unaided. every man born into the world has life by the holy spirit and may, through its operations, and his own self-effort, be in communication with all other intelligent beings in the universe; but, only those who conform to the first ordinances of the gospel are connected officially with the powers of the holy ghost in such a way as to secure added help. a distinct and real power conies to the individual who has received the holy ghost. it is as if he had been given a key to a great and wonderful building which he enters at his pleasure. however, the key may be kept unused; then the gift has been of no value. man must draw upon the holy ghost, if the gift shall be real. the gift of the holy ghost also represents a general law, for it is evident that all who have faith made active by repentance, and have shown obedience by baptism, will be in such harmony with intelligent forces as to receive great light from them if desired or needed. **continued conformity.** it is not sufficient that a man secure entrance into the church by compliance with the first four principles of the gospel. after he has attained membership he must become active in the practice of the laws which constitute the body of church doctrine, and which are quite as important as the fundamental ones preceding entrance. passivity will not suffice; activity only constitutes an unqualified membership in the church. the man will be "in tune" with the work only when he lives out daily the principles of the great plan. this is self-evident, moreover, because the church has the mission of bringing the gospel to the understanding of all men on earth, and unless the members of the church are active in missionary work, they will not acquire the full spirit of the church. unselfishness should characterize the members of the church. **acceptance of authority.** the conditions of membership here mentioned are all vital. nevertheless, in addition to them, candidates for admission to the church must acknowledge the full authority of the church as a divine institution, to which has been committed, by god, the authority to act for him in all matters pertaining to the plan of salvation. without this authority, the church is no more than any man-made institution. the acceptance of authority means that all the laws of the gospel must be obeyed, by every member. the law cannot be varied for individuals, to please their fancies or supposed needs. this is clearly brought out by the historical fact that adam, after he had been taught and had accepted the gospel, was baptized, confirmed, and received all the ordinances of the church. similarly, jesus, the son of god, began his official labors by being baptized by one having authority. the pattern has been set for all; and it has been followed in all dispensations. if men be on the full road of progress they will comply with the laws of membership, and become active in the support of the church and its work. chapter . the priesthood of the church. the priesthood of the church differs vitally from that of churches composed only of fragments of the complete truth. **priesthood defined.** the church is composed of eternal, intelligent beings, moving onward in eternal progression, who have accepted god's plan of salvation. it is god's church. god directs the work of his children on earth, and he naturally gives attention to the church. nevertheless, although god is the directing intelligence, he is not here in person, nor are other superior beings sent to take charge of the work, for that would be contrary to the law that through his free agency and by self-effort, man on earth must move onward and upward. therefore, that the earth-work may be done authoritatively, god has delegated the necessary authority to man. the priesthood is simply the name given this authority. the body of the priesthood consists of the persons who have received this authority and who may act for god, on earth, in matters pertaining to the church or to themselves. without authority from god, there can be no priesthood. **divisions of the priesthood.** much work is to be done in the church, and the work differs greatly, for man's life is complex. consequently, many and varied are the labors that must be directed and supported by the priesthood. to accomplish the work well, there must be a division of labor--the fundamental characteristic of all orderly work. there are two great divisions of the priesthood, the aaronic and the melchizedek, each of which possesses special authority. each of these divisions is again sub-divided. these divisions and subdivisions are all necessary for the complete exercise of the priesthood in the church. one great division of the priesthood of god, the aaronic priesthood, is named after aaron, the brother of moses, a famous leader in this priesthood. it is the lesser priesthood, really only an appendage of the higher or melchizedek priesthood. to the aaronic priesthood is assigned, particularly, the temporal work of the church, but it also has authority to preach, teach and baptize. the melchizedek priesthood, named after the great high priest melchizedek, is the higher division of the priesthood, and includes the aaronic priesthood. it holds the keys of spiritual authority and has the right to officiate under proper direction in all the affairs of the church. the subdivisions of these priesthoods make it possible to group, simply and properly, the duties of the members of the church. **the aaronic priesthood.** those who hold the aaronic priesthood belong to one of three ascending groups: the deacon, the teacher, and the priest. the bishop presides over the priest's quorum and is the presiding authority of the aaronic priesthood. each group, in addition to its own special authority, may, when called upon by proper authority, exercise also the authority of the group below it. the members of the aaronic priesthood are organized in quorums of twelve deacons, twenty-four teachers and forty-eight priests. each quorum is presided over by a president and two counselors, which in the priests' quorum are the bishop and his two counselors. **the melchizedek priesthood.** the higher priesthood is characterized by spiritual authority, the right of presidency and the power of officiating in all the work of the church. there are also several divisions of this priesthood but the fundamental authority is the same in all, and each division represents merely a calling in the higher priesthood. there are five chief groups in this priesthood; the elder, the seventy, the high priest, the apostle, and the patriarch. the elder may officiate when properly called and set apart in any of these groups of the priesthood, without having conferred upon him any further priesthood. the members of the higher priesthood are organized into quorums, of elders with a president and two counselors and of seventies with seven presidents. the quorums of high priests are indefinite in number, except administrative quorums, such as the twelve apostles and the first presidency. **all hold the priesthood.** the church exists to advance the great plan by which, in the end, every man may live happily on earth and at last enter into great progression. in it there should be no active and non-active members, for all must be active to work out their own proper destinies, and to assist in the advancement of the whole plan. all, therefore, need the authority of the priesthood to officiate as may be needed in the work of the church, or in their own behalf. if the work of the church were delegated to a few members, it would probably be reasonable for a few men to hold the priesthood. when, however, every member must or should take upon himself a part of the active work of the church, it is necessary that every man hold the authority of the priesthood so that he may authoritatively perform the necessary acts in the propaganda of truth. in fact, in the church, all men who have attained sufficient experience hold or should hold the priesthood. the young men are ordained deacons, teachers and priests, and at last elders, when they possess all the authority of the priesthood. they may then receive an ordination and calling in the melchizedek priesthood, such as seventy, apostle, high priest or patriarch. women enjoy all the endowments and blessings of the priesthood in connection with their husbands. the family is the basis of society on earth, and as there must be organization among intelligent beings, someone must be spokesman for the family. in the family, the man is the spokesman and presiding authority, and, therefore, the priesthood is bestowed upon him. it is clear that there is no priesthood class in the church of jesus christ. the priesthood belongs to all. this is another distinguishing mark of the true church, which rests its doctrines upon eternal principles as already outlined. the general possession of the priesthood by all the male members of the church is only in conformity with the theory of the gospel, which makes the plan one of intelligent, united effort under the direction of beings of higher intelligence, and which declares that the highest individual satisfaction can be obtained only when all other individuals are simultaneously advancing. **the power of the priesthood.** the priesthood conferred on man carries with it real power to do effective work in behalf of the plan of salvation. under the normal organization of the church, when things are moving on in the ordained way, there is no insistent evidence of the great power possessed by those who have the priesthood, and who, therefore, can act for god in matters pertaining to the church. under such a condition there is a quiet, steady use of power in behalf of the daily work of the church--each man performing the work that has been assigned to him, in addition to which each man in his own behalf may use his authority as seems to him fitting. yet, the power is with the priesthood, and when need arises, it becomes the voice of god, which all must hear. as an illustration of the great power, authority and duty carried by the priesthood it may be recalled that, if by any chance every man holding the priesthood in the church should be destroyed, save one elder, it would be the duty and right of that one elder, under divine revelation, to reorganize the whole church with all the grades of the priesthood and of its officers. this far-reaching authority is held by all who receive the priesthood--an authority to be guarded carefully and to be used cautiously as directed. chapter . the organization of the church. to carry on the diversified work of the church requires a close organization. an organization, in turn, requires officers. all the officers of the church hold the priesthood, but the priesthood is held also by many who do not hold official positions. therefore, while the authority to act in all the offices of the church is held by practically every man in the church, that authority, in the administration of the affairs of the church, becomes effective only when the man is called to exercise the authority. the chief officers of the church are herewith briefly enumerated. **the general authorities.** the first presidency consists of three presiding high priests, a president and two counselors, whose duty it is to supervise the work of the whole church, in all matters of policy, organization and execution. no part of the work of the church is beyond their authority. with the death of the president, the first presidency becomes disorganized. associated with the first presidency is the quorum of twelve apostles. the twelve are special witnesses for christ, and it is their duty to carry the gospel to all the world. in addition, they give direct assistance to the first presidency. when the quorum of the first presidency is disorganized, the quorum of apostles becomes the presiding quorum until the first presidency is reorganized. the quorum of the twelve has one president, who is always the senior apostle. the patriarchs of the church possess the sealing and blessing powers and receive instructions from the presiding patriarch. the quorums of seventy, the missionary quorums of the church, are presided over by the seven presidents of the first quorum. this council labors under the direction of the apostles. if the first presidency and the quorum of the twelve were disorganized, simultaneously, the first quorum of seventy would become the presiding quorum until full reorganization were effected. the temporal affairs of the church are largely cared for by the presiding bishopric, consisting of the presiding bishop and two counselors. the presiding bishopric also has general supervision of the bishops of the wards, of the church. the general authorities are the first presidency, the twelve apostles, the presiding patriarch, the presidents of the first quorum of seventy, and the presiding bishopric--making in all twenty-six men. these general presiding authorities, representing all the great divisions of the priesthood, deal with all the general affairs of the church. **the stakes of zion.** for convenience of administration, the church is divided into stakes containing usually from one thousand to ten thousand members. the stakes are presided over by a stake presidency, three high priests denominated president and two counselors, which have the same relation to the stake that the first presidency has to the whole church. the stake presidency are assisted by the high council, consisting of twelve regular and six alternate counselors who are high priests. to this body is assigned much of the work for the welfare of the members of the stake. such other officers as may be needed are moreover secured in each stake. **the wards of the stakes.** the stakes are, in turn, divided into wards containing usually from one hundred to two thousand members. they are presided over by a bishop and two counselors, who are assisted in various capacities by the local ward priesthood. **the priesthood in stakes and wards.** in every ward, if there be enough members, are organized quorums of deacons, teachers, priests, elders and seventies. if there are not enough in one ward to form a quorum, then a quorum is organized from two or more wards. the high priests in a stake are usually assembled into one quorum for the stake. all of the priesthood meets regularly in the ward to which they belong, for the discussion of their duties and for studying the outlines and books provided by the general church authorities. **auxiliary organizations.** in addition to the regular priesthood, there are helps in government known as auxiliary organizations. these are the relief society, for women, the deseret sunday school union, the young men's mutual improvement association, the young ladies' mutual improvement association, the primary association, the religion class, the boards of education, and others that may be organized from time to time. each of these is represented by a general board, under the direction of the first presidency. in each stake there are also stake boards of these auxiliary organizations, under the direction of the stake presidency. moreover, in each ward of the church, if large enough, is an organization of each of the auxiliary activities of the church. **all must work.** so complete an organization, ramifying throughout the church, shows that all members of the church should or may be at work. there is no place for the idler. every man or woman, who is not averse to working in behalf of the church, will find some duty that will fill his life. **the tenure of office.** the officers of the priesthood have no definite tenure of office. since all hold the priesthood, there is always a supply of ready material to fill any vacancies that may occur. the general authorities in the church have generally held life positions, but a number of these, for various reasons, chiefly insubordination or error of doctrine, have been released before death. according to doctrine, no office in the priesthood, is absolutely certain of life tenure. failure to perform properly the work of the office constitutes full cause for removal. **an unpaid ministry.** the rewards of life should be and are only in part material. to assist, officially, in carrying out the great plan, brings its own distinct reward. the priesthood of the church, therefore, is largely unpaid. a man's duty in the priesthood seldom takes all of his time, thus leaving him partly free to earn a livelihood by the use of his profession. when a man's whole time is taken by the church, he gets his support from the church. there is no priesthood class, especially trained for the work, and striving for positions carrying with them high material remuneration. all should know the gospel and be prepared to carry on the work. **appointments in the priesthood.** the power to nominate men to fill the official positions in the priesthood belongs to the priesthood of the church. men are chosen from any walk in life, without previous warning, and the acceptance of the office often means the sacrifice of business, profession, or ease of life. under this system there can be no talk of men seeking offices in the church. preparation to do the work of the church can be the only form of self-seeking, and that may or may not lead to any particular position in the church. meanwhile, the vast organization of the church is such as to find work for every man; and in fact, every worthy worker should be kept busily engaged in the work of the great plan. **common consent.** every officer of the priesthood, though properly nominated, holds his position in the church only with the consent of the people. officers may be nominated by the presidency of the church, but unless the people accept them as their officials, they can not exercise the authority of the offices to which they have been called. all things in the church must be done by common consent. this makes the people, men and women, under god, the rulers of the church. even the president of the church, before he can fully enter upon his duties, must be sustained by the people. it is the common custom in the church to vote on the officers in the general, stake and ward conferences. this gives every member an opportunity to vote for or against the officers. meanwhile, the judiciary system of the church is such that there is ample provision whereby any officer of the church, if found in error, may be brought to justice and if found guilty be removed from his position. the doctrine of common consent is fundamental in the church; and is coincident with the fact that the church belongs to all the people. since the authority of the priesthood is vested in all the people, it follows that the officials of the priesthood must be responsible to the people. the responsibility and work of the church are not only for but by the people as a whole. **bestowal of the priesthood.** on the earth the priesthood was first conferred on adam and was handed down directly from adam through his descendants to noah. every link in this progression of the priesthood has been preserved. similarly, after noah, it was continued for many generations. moreover, jesus conferred the priesthood directly upon his disciples. at various times in the history of the world, the priesthood has been given by god to man and continued for various lengths of time. in these latter days of the restored church, john the baptist appeared in person and conferred the aaronic priesthood upon joseph smith and oliver cowdery. later, peter, james and john, who had received the priesthood from jesus christ, and who represented the presidency of the priesthood in those days, appeared to joseph smith and oliver cowdery and conferred upon them the holy priesthood and the apostleship which carried with it authority in the lower divisions of the priesthood. in the church of christ the authority of the priesthood may always be traced back directly to god, from whom it radiates and whom it represents. chapter . the authority of the priesthood. the authority of the priesthood is often misunderstood, and it is frequently the rock upon which many men and women suffer spiritual shipwreck. **the foundation of authority.** the power or right to command or to act, is authority. in the beginning, man, conscious and in possession of will, reached out for truth, and gained new knowledge. gradually as his intelligence grew, he learned to control natural forces, as he met them on his way. knowledge, properly used, became power; and intelligent knowledge is the only true foundation of authority. the more intelligence a man possesses the more authority he may exercise. hence, "the glory of god is intelligence." this should be clear in the minds of all who exercise authority. **absolute authority.** such high authority, based on increasing intelligent knowledge, may be called absolute authority. all other forms of authority, and many forms exist, must be derived from absolute authority, for it is the essence of all authority. nothing in the universe is absolutely understood, and absolute authority does not mean that full knowledge or full power has been gained over anything in the universe. forever will the universe reveal its secrets. by absolute authority is meant the kind of authority that results directly from an intelligent understanding of the things over which authority is exercised. authority can therefore, be absolute only so far as knowledge goes, and will become more absolute as more knowledge is obtained. the laws of god are never arbitrary; they are always founded on truth. **derived authority.** anyone possessing the absolute authority resting on high intelligence, will often find it necessary or convenient to ask others to exercise that authority for him. this may be called derived authority. it does not necessarily follow that those who are so asked understand the full meaning of the authority that they exercise. the workman in a factory carries out the operations as directed by the chief technician, and obtains the same results, though he does not to the same extent understand the principles involved. every person who has risen to the earth-estate possesses a certain degree of absolute authority, for he has knowledge of nature which gives him control over many surrounding forces. every person possesses or should possess certain derived authority, which is exercised under the direction of a superior intelligence, though it is not always wholly understood. **the authority of office.** in an organized body like the church, each activity must be governed by established laws. those who have been chosen officers to enforce these laws and to carry on the regular work of the church, exercise their power because of their office. authority of office is only a form of derived authority--derived from the people who have agreed to submit their wills to certain officers, who are to enforce laws accepted by the people. even such authority, belonging to official positions, must be founded on intelligent knowledge, and the organization of the church itself must be intelligently authoritative. therefore, authority of office is best exercised when those holding it have qualified themselves intelligently for the work. the mistakes made by officers are commonly due to the want of the needed intelligence in the exercise of their duties. fortunately, however, the church is so organized that the actions of its officials may be tried for their righteousness whenever they appear to be wrong to the people. mistakes are most likely to be made by officials who will not qualify themselves for their work. **authority and free agency.** while intelligent knowledge does establish the highest degree of authority, absolute authority, yet it does not, alone, justify the exercising of authority that may conflict with the wills of others. the law of free agency must not be transcended; nor is it permissible to do anything that will hinder, in the least, the progress of man under the great law. authority must therefore be exercised only in such a manner as to benefit other individuals. naturally, when a community accepts a body of laws for their government, and officers are appointed by the people to enforce the laws, the punishment of the disobedient is not an interference with free agency, for all have accepted the law. only when a person withdraws from the community, does the community law become inoperative with respect to him. since the battle for free agency must not be waged again, laws must be enforced as they are accepted by the people; thus it comes about that all the officers in the church, who merely represent the people, must be sustained by the people. the people govern the church through their sustained authorities. when a person opposes righteousness, the worst that can be done is to sever that individual from the organization. the priesthood has no authority to exercise further punishment. the punishment which comes to those who do wrong is automatic, and will, of itself, find out the sinner. **authority over self.** the priesthood conferred on man establishes an authority which each man may at all times exercise with respect to himself and god. by the authority of the priesthood he has a right to commune with god in prayer or in other ways, and has, as it were, the right to receive communications in return from the intelligent beings about him, so that his ways may be ways of strength and pleasantness. man's own work should be inseparably connected with the power of the priesthood to which he has attained. **the exercise of authority.** the authority committed to man by god is in earthly hands. the flesh is weak; and men who possess authority may often make mistakes in its exercise. the proper manner of exercising the authority of the priesthood has been made exceedingly clear. "the rights of the priesthood are inseparably connected with the powers of heaven, and the powers of heaven cannot be controlled or handled only upon the principles of righteousness. that they may be conferred upon us, it is true; but when we undertake to cover our sins, or to gratify our pride, our vain ambition, or to exercise control, or dominion, or compulsion, upon the souls of the children of men, in any degree of unrighteousness, behold, the heavens withdraw themselves; the spirit of the lord is grieved; and when it is withdrawn, amen to the priesthood, or the authority of that man. behold! ere he is aware, he is left unto himself, to kick against the pricks; to persecute the saints, and to fight against god. no power or influence can or ought to be maintained by virtue of the priesthood, only by persuasion, by long-suffering, by gentleness, and meekness, and by love unfeigned; by kindness, and pure knowledge, which shall greatly enlarge the soul without hypocrisy, and without guile, reproving betimes with sharpness, when moved upon by the holy ghost, and then showing forth afterwards an increase of love toward him whom thou hast reproved, lest he esteem thee to be his enemy; that he may know that thy faithfulness is stronger than the cords of death; let thy bowels also be full of charity towards all men, and to the household of faith, and let virtue garnish thy thoughts unceasingly, then shall thy confidence wax strong in the presence of god, and the doctrine of the priesthood shall distil upon thy soul as the dews from heaven. the holy ghost shall be thy constant companion, and thy sceptre an unchanging sceptre of righteousness and truth, and thy dominion shall be an everlasting dominion, and without compulsory means it shall flow unto thee for ever and ever." any authority of the priesthood otherwise exercised than as above stated is not in harmony with the law. there is therefore no need to fear authority, for those who misuse it will ultimately be removed from their offices and will be punished not only by the laws of the church, but by god, the giver of law. meanwhile, the thought stands out prominently, that those who are given the priesthood, and especially those who are to exercise authority in the offices of the priesthood, should carefully fit themselves for the work that they have to do. this is the only safe key to authority. **the unrighteous exercise of authority.** authority may be unrighteously exercised from the lack of intelligence or because of wickedness. should a member of the church note this, the procedure of correction is to notify the ward teachers, who try to settle the difficulty. if the ward teachers do not succeed in this, the bishop's court takes up the matter, which, if needs be, it passes to the stake presidency and high council, and may be appealed to the first presidency. justice is meted out to all in-the church. if the people are dissatisfied with any officer they may refuse to sustain him at the times of the voting, which prevents him from exercising the functions of his office. however, in all things the majority rules; and in many of the judgments of the church there must be unanimity. **the church authoritative.** the church of christ possesses real authority, derived from god, and in its work represents god. such a church, alone, can appeal to the human understanding. a church without authority is limp and helpless. authority is the final test of a true church. does it attempt to officiate for god? does its priesthood possess authority? from the beginning, the church of god has been given direct, divine authority so that its work might not be questioned. the angel walked with adam, god spoke to abraham, jesus in person came on earth, the father and the son came to joseph smith,--in all ages, when the church has been fully established, the priesthood has been conferred by authoritative beings. the authority of the church is real and genuine and possesses power. by its power it shall be known. chapter . obedience. in the consideration of priesthood and its authority, much useless discussion is often indulged in as to whether a person should yield obedience to authority. some believe that to yield obedience is to lay down free agency. **the restraint of nature.** countless forces, surrounding man, are interacting in the universe. by no means can he withdraw himself from them. by experience he has learned that control of natural forces is obtained only when their laws are understood. when a certain thing is done in a certain manner, there is a definite, invariable result. no doubt it has often occurred to an intelligent being that he might wish it otherwise; but that is impossible. the only remedy is to comply with existing conditions, acknowledge the restraint of nature, and gaining further knowledge, put law against law, until the purpose of man has been accomplished. this is the process by which intelligent beings have acquired dominion over nature. such an acknowledgement of the existence of the law of cause and effect does not weaken man; strength lies in an intelligent subjection to rightful restraint, for it has been the condition of progress from the beginning. the recognition of law and the obedience to law are sure signs that intelligent beings are progressing. **an active condition.** obedience is an active condition or it could not be a principle of consequence. it is closely akin to repentance. obedience simply means that whenever a truth is revealed, it is obeyed, which by our previous definition is a phase of repentance. the man who is active in carrying out what he knows is truth, is an obedient man. his active obedience to authority is based on intelligence; and the more knowledge a man has concerning the nature of the law in question, the more thoroughly obedient is he. obedience is not a characteristic of ignorance. **the restraint of man.** obedience to the invariable laws of nature is, usually, considered to be a self-evident necessity. the question of obedience is commonly raised when man exercises authority. shall a man obey a man? the first consideration in the answer to this question is whether the system which the man in authority represents is based on truth. if so, then intelligent man will be bound to render obedience to the system, even if it is exercised through imperfect man. the second consideration is whether the man is acting within his authority in the organization. this can always be determined, simply, by laying the matter before the bodies constituted to settle such matters. with the exception of the first presidency, every officer in the church has a limited jurisdiction. the third consideration is whether the matter to which authority has been applied is at all under the discipline of the organization. no officer in the church has authority beyond matters that pertain to the church. any authority exercised beyond that field is accepted only at the discretion of the individual members of the church, and should come only in the form of counsel. if yes is the answer to these three considerations, obedience must be rendered by a progressing man. if no is the answer, obedience should not be yielded, but the matter should be tried before the proper courts. the restraint of man in the exercise of authority derived from eternal laws, is as compelling as the restraint of nature, because they are parts of the same whole. **the life of law.** obedience is nothing more than a compliance with truth. truth is of no consequence to a man if it is not used. the moment truth is used, obedience begins. man, and the church to which he belongs, are active organisms, interested in progress. when truth is given them, promises to use that truth should be required, else all is in vain. lives conforming to law, alone, are moving onward. for that reason, for every gift to man a promise is required, and usually a statement of the punishment that will follow the non-use or misuse of it. obedience to truth means progress; refusal to use truth means retrogression. **disobedience.** disobedience may be active or passive. passive disobedience is not doing what should be done; active disobedience is doing what should not be done. both may be equally harmful. the main effect of disobedience is to weaken, and finally wreck the man who disobeys law. disobedience and sin are synonymous. **the church worth having.** the only church worth having is one having authority, resting on intelligence and truth. such a church will command obedience. in such a church, little misunderstandings are easily rectified. within the laws of the church, man has absolute, personal freedom. it is so with nature, outside of the church. within the laws of nature, man has full freedom. the greatest freedom known to man comes from obedience to law. the greatest punishment conceivable to man comes from opposition to law. this is true with respect to the church as a community of the saints, and with respect to individual man in the great universe. chapter . a missionary church. there must be, in every organization, and especially in a church dedicated to the great philosophy of man's place in the universe, a great cementing purpose. in the church of christ this is the desire to bring about the highest joy for all mankind. **a church with a purpose.** according to the fundamental doctrines elaborated in previous chapters, the purpose of the earth-career is to assist in man's development, so that he may acquire more power and therefore more joy. in the nature of things, as already explained, it is impossible for an intelligent being to rise to the highest degree of joy unless other like beings move along with him. the great plan will be successful only if all or at least a majority of those who accepted it are saved. the church, a feature of the great plan, must have the same main purpose. all must be saved! in fact, the work of the church cannot be completed until all have at least heard the truth. there can be no talk of a few saved souls at the throne of god, with the many in hell. the great mission of the church must be to bring all men into the truth. this is the cementing purpose of the church. **the hope of today.** however, men are not saved merely by being taught the truth. they must live it in their daily lives. life, indeed, is an endless succession of days, each of which must be a little larger in development than the preceding one. each day must be well spent. the church must help, every day, in all the affairs of the day, from the food man eats to his highest spiritual thought. each day must be a step onward to the eternal exaltation which he desires. this is the hope of today. to help in this daily work is one of the main parts of the missionary labors of the church. all the days of all the members must be made happy ones. **temporal salvation.** in a church based on the principles already outlined there can be no separation between the spiritual and the temporal. there is one universe, of many aspects, to which we belong. there is one great plan for us. in the heavens, spiritual things are probably of greatest importance, but on earth, temporal things are of importance. the impossibility of separating things temporal from things spiritual justifies the attempt of the church to assist in the temporal affairs of its members. in fact, a large part of the missionary labors of the church must be to better the temporal conditions of its members. only when the temporal as well as the spiritual life is looked after, can the church rise to its full opportunity. only in sound bodies can the spirit experience the highest joy. only under sound temporal conditions can the church move on in full gladness. **the foreign mission system.** in conformity with the cementing missionary spirit of a church, every member of which holds or may hold the priesthood, it follows that every member of the church, whether man or woman, may be called to go on a spiritual or temporal mission for the upbuilding of his fellowmen. in harmony with the law of free agency, it is voluntary with the individual, whether he accept or refuse the call. the custom in the church of today has been that a man go on at least one mission, which varies in length, two or more years. the missionaries not only assist the members already gathered into the church, but they travel all over the world, preach to all the everlasting gospel, and bring those who accept the truth into the church. the main purpose of the church missionary system is to preach the gospel to all the members of the human race, so that, as far as possible, none may be left with the excuse that he has not heard the gospel. **the home mission service.** the whole church, at home, is devoted to the home mission service. the organizations of the priesthood and the auxiliary organizations, form a network of active service into which every member of the church may be brought. the home missionary service concerns itself with the spiritual and the temporal side of man's nature and life. the amusements of the young people; the home life of the older people, and the daily duties of all, are made part and parcel of the organized missionary system of the church. **for the common good.** the genius of the church of christ stands for the common good; hence the ceaseless missionary activity which is the great cementing principle of the church. not for the one, not even for the many, but for all, does the church stand. chapter . temple ordinances. the church of god has always been characterized by the possession of temples in which the holiest work of the gospel has been done. the activities of the church have, so to speak, centered about the temples. **educational.** the doctrines of the origin, present condition and destiny of man should always be well in the mind of all, for without this knowledge, it is difficult to comply fully and intelligently with the laws and ordinances of the gospel. it has been provided, therefore, that the story of man, from the beginning, at the present, and to the last great day, shall be given as frequently as may be desired to the members of the church. in the temples this information is given, in an organized and correct form, so that it may not depart from among men and women. that is, the temples are conservators of the great truths of the gospel. to the temples, man goes to be refreshed in his memory as to the doctrines relative to man and his place in nature. the endowments given to members of the church in the temples are, essentially, courses of instruction relative to man's existence before he came on this earth, the history of the creation of the earth, the story of our first earthly parents, the history of the various dispensations of the gospel, the meaning of the sacrifice of jesus christ, the story of the restoration of the gospel, and the means and methods whereby joy on this earth and exaltation in heaven may be obtained. to make this large story clear and impressive to all who partake of it, every educational device, so far known to man, is employed; and it is possible that nowhere, outside of the temple, is a more correct pedagogy employed. every sense of man is appealed to, in order to make the meaning of the gospel clear, from beginning to end. **symbolism.** naturally, the very essence of these fundamental truths is not known to man, nor indeed can be. we know things only so far as our senses permit. whatever is known, is known through symbols. the letters on the written page are but symbols of mighty thoughts that are easily transferred from mind to mind by these symbols. man lives under a great system of symbolism. clearly, the mighty, eternal truths encompassing all that man is or may be, cannot be expressed literally, nor is there in the temple any attempt to do this. on the contrary, the great and wonderful temple service is one of mighty symbolism. by the use of symbols of speech, of action, of color, of form, the great truths connected with the story of man are made evident to the mind. **covenants.** the temple service also gives those who take their endowments, special information relative to their conduct upon earth. for instance, men and women are taught to keep themselves free from sin. they must be chaste, virtuous, truthful, unselfish, and so on. moreover, they are taught that they must devote themselves and all that they have or may have to the great cause of truth, to teaching the everlasting gospel to their fellowmen, so that the great plan may be worked out according to the* mind and will of god. in return for this, those who take their endowments make covenants with each other and their god, that they will observe the instructions given, and will carry them out in their daily lives. thus the work becomes active and vital. it is also explained that the failure to carry out these promises, when once knowledge has been given, will be punished. this is in accordance with the law that provides a penalty for disobedience, as already explained. only by the use of knowledge will more knowledge be obtained. the whole system of temple worship is very logical. **blessings.** in the course of instruction in the temple, it is emphasized that blessings will follow those who accept the truth, practice it and live godlike lives. the essence of the endowment service is a blessing. punishment is not made so prominent, as is the possibility of inviting great blessings by proper obedience to the truths that may be obtained from time to time. **temple authority.** perhaps the most glorious ordinances of the temple are those that seal husband and wife and children to each other for time and all eternity. according to the gospel, the marriage relation does not necessarily cease with death. on the contrary, since sex is eternal, the sex relation may continue to the end of time. such a union or sealing may be performed only by special authority, which is possessed only by the president of the church. the president may, however, delegate the authority for longer or shorter times, so that certain temple workers may perform such marriages in the temples of god. similarly, children who have been born to parents who were not married for time and eternity, may be sealed later to their parents, so that the relationship may be sustained throughout all the ages of eternity. moreover, every ordinance belonging to the church may be performed in the temple. in the temple is a baptismal font, so that the introductory ordinance may be performed; likewise, every other ordinance for the benefit of the saints may be performed in the holy temple. the work for the dead, as will be explained in chapter , is done in the temples, by the living. the vicarious work for the dead, who did not accept the gospel on earth, forms the bulk of the temple work, since, after the first time, when endowments are taken for himself, a person must do work for the dead when he goes through the temple. **possible repetition.** the vastness of meaning in the temple worship makes it difficult at once for man to remember and understand it, and only once are the endowments taken for himself by any one person. to refresh his memory, and to place him in close touch with the spirit of the work, a man may enter the temple as frequently as he desires and take endowments for the dead, and in that way both he and the dead are benefited. the temples, then, are means whereby every member of the church may receive precious endowments, and may be kept in refreshed memory of the great plan, which he, with the rest of the human family, is working out. temple work is the safety of the living and the hope of the dead. at present, temples are in operation in salt lake city, st. george, logan and manti, all in utah, and a temple is nearing completion in cardston, alberta, canada. man and man. chapter . the brotherhood of man. there are many men and women upon the earth. no one faces, alone, the great forces of nature. about him move other men, with whom he must associate. in the great plan it is so ordained that men shall dwell together, and this leads to many of the finest applications of the gospel to the daily life of man. **common origin.** by the power of god, the spirits of men were born into the spiritual world; thus all became the children of god. in turn, all have been born from the same spiritual estate into the earth estate, from the one earthly ancestor, adam. all men are therefore of identical origin. absolute uniformity prevails among the children of men, so far as their origin is concerned. **common purposes.** the spirits are placed on earth for a common purpose. from the beginning, man has risen to his high estate through the acquisition of power over the natural forces surrounding him. "man is that he may have joy," is the fundamental purpose of man's activity, whether on or out of the earth. in the great council all the spirits which have reached or will reach the earth, were present; and all declared themselves in favor of the plan. in conformity with this agreement, man is on earth. all desire a closer acquaintance with gross matter, as a means of future power and consequent joy; and all desire that the earth-experience may be accompanied with as much joy as is possible. consequently, all who are or have been, or will be assembled on earth, have a common purpose. absolute uniformity prevails among men so far as their fundamental purpose is concerned. **common destiny.** likewise, the destiny of all the spirits sent to earth, is the same. man has ever moved towards eternal life. all new information, every addition of knowledge, has moved him onward, toward perfection and a vision of greater happiness. true, since all men have free agencies, individual wills express themselves in different ways, and no two spirits are therefore at precisely the same point on the upward road. some are far ahead, some lag behind, each and all according to individual effort. however, throughout the vast eternities, all who are conscientiously moving upward, though it be ever so slowly, will in time reach a point which is absolute perfection to our mortal conceptions. then, all will seem as if precisely alike. whether or not we reach a given point at the same time, all men have a common destiny. as far as the destiny of man is concerned, all are alike. **inter-dependence.** of even greater importance in daily work is the fact that every intelligent being affects every other intelligent being. every person affects every other person. through the operation of the holy spirit all things are held together. good or evil may be transmitted from personality to personality; it is impossible to hide from god, and it is equally impossible for us to hide ourselves completely from our fellowmen. no individual action may restrain or retard another individual; but all our actions, thoughts and words must be so guarded that all are advanced. this is as true for the earth-life as it may be for the spiritual life. men affect each other; every man is, in a measure, his brother's keeper. there can be no thought of a man going on in life irrespective of the needs or conditions of his fellowmen. the main concern of man must be to find such orderly acts of life as will enable other men to live out their individual wills without interference. all must be benefited, all must be helped. this is the basis of the great system of co-operation. meanwhile, the inter-dependence of the spirits dwelling on earth, brings men more closely together, and strengthens the friendships from the former spirit estate. **brothers.** the human race is a race of brothers, of the same origin, with the same purposes and with the same destiny, so elaborately inter-dependent that none may move without affecting the others. any rational theology must recognize this condition, and, as far as it may be able, must make provision for the proper recognition of the brotherhood of man. chapter . the equality of man. though the brotherhood of man is supreme, it does not follow that all men are equal in all particulars. this needs careful examination. **the pre-existent effort.** men of common origin, and of common destiny, labor on earth under a mutually accepted plan. yet, it is not conceivable, that all the spirits who reach the earth have attained the same degree of progress. the pre-existent progress depended upon self-effort; those who exerted their wills most, made the greatest progress; moreover, those who had led the most righteous lives, and had been most careful of their gifts, had acquired greatest strength--consequently, at the time of the great council, though the spirits were, in general, of one class, they differed greatly in the details of their attainments, in the righteousness of their lives, in the stability of their purpose, and in their consistent devotion to the great truth of their lives. in one particular they were all alike: by their faithful efforts, they had earned the right to take another step onward and to share in the earth experience. most probably, the power acquired in the life before this is transmitted to some degree to the earthlife. we may well believe, therefore, that the differences in the quality and characteristics of men, may be traced, in part at least, to the pre-existent lives. it is not unthinkable that, in a plan governed by a supreme intelligent being, since there are differences of advancement, the spirits who come on earth are placed frequently in positions for which they are best fitted. an intelligent ruler would probably use ability where it is most needed. to some extent, therefore, men may have been chosen for this or that work on earth, and, under the law of progression, this small measure of predestination may be accepted. yet, it must be remembered that predestination can not be compelling. man's free agency, the great indestructible gift, always remains untrammeled. therefore, whatever may be god's plan for man, however easy may be the path to the predestined earth position, the man may at any time, by the exercise of his free agency, depart from the appointed path and enter other fields. any opposite doctrine is the one proposed by lucifer in the great council. it is most likely that those who, on earth, accept the highest truth of life, find the gospel attractive, and are most faithful in the recognition of law, are those who, in the pre-existent state, were most intelligent and obedient. in that sense, the church consists of god's chosen people--chosen because of their willingness to obey. **the earth effort.** nevertheless, the thought that power is drawn from our pre-existent state need not be an overwhelming feeling to oppress and crush us. our previous life can not be an insurmountable hindrance. the invariable law of cause and effect will enable those who exert themselves on earth to draw great power unto themselves, even so that it may be possible by earth efforts to overcome possible handicaps from pre-existent lethargy. thus, on earth, man may gain more than he has lost before. our earth efforts are of greatest consequence. neither forward nor backward must we look, except to place ourselves properly in our day, but must use in full degree the possibilities of each day as it comes. man's inequality comes chiefly from the inequality of earth effort. **the variety of gifts.** meanwhile, it is always to be remembered that the spirit within must speak through a mortal body, subject to disease and death. the eternal spirit cannot rise here above the conditions of the body, which is of the earth, and is a result of all the physical good and evil to which man has given himself since the days of adam. during the long history of the race, both strength and weakness have no doubt been added to the body. it possesses inborn, inherent qualities, which man finds it difficult to ignore. under the best conditions, the body is weaker than the spirit within. it is likely that the spirit within the finest earthly body is infinitely greater than may be expressed through the body. we live only as our bodies allow; and, since our bodies differ greatly, there is in them another source of man's inequality. in fact, the inequality of man comes largely from inequality of body, through which the eternal spirit tries in vain to speak. **the equality of opportunity.** clearly, an absolute equality among men is not conceivable, for the differences among the powers of men are infinite in number. we are brothers, but we are occupying a variety of stages of progress. probably, it is well that there are such differences, so that by contrast with each other we may be impelled onward. the equality of man on earth must be the equal opportunity to progress. from the point in the eternal journey that each man now occupies, he must be allowed to move onward, unhindered by other persons, and must be allowed to exert his inborn powers to the full, for his help on the journey. none must stand in another's way. on the contrary, the spirit of the gospel makes clear that the great plan cannot be fulfilled, the earth's destiny cannot be completed, and our highest progressive rewards cannot be obtained until all the spirits of man have been brought under the gospel rule. whether on this earth, or in the future, the work will not be completed until all have accepted the freedom of the gospel. instead of hindering each other, men must give each other all possible needed help, then we offer our fellows an equal opportunity to advance, and all are helped. with equality of opportunity, all may advance so far that, in time, the differences between men will not be apparent. the equality of opportunity which characterizes the plan of salvation is shown in the fact that all the ordinances of the church, from the highest to the lowest, are available to every person who enters the church. faith, repentance, baptism and the gift of the holy ghost are, for all, the four cardinal principles for active participation in the work of the church, irrespective of the powers of men. the endowments of the temple, and all the blessings that may there be received, are available to every member of the church who has shown himself active in the faith. in fundamental principles, in gifts and blessings, in spiritual opportunities, as required or offered by the church, men are stripped of all differences, and stand as if they were equal before god. this is equality of opportunity. **unequal equality.** though equality of opportunity be granted all, the wills of men, as expressed through their free agencies, differ greatly. consequently, some will use well their opportunities; others will use them poorly. under this condition, even if all started out absolutely alike, differences would soon appear. without violating the fundamental laws of nature, this seems to be absolutely unpreventable. men may soon be grouped as representing different degrees of strength. however, that the equality of opportunity, belonging to the great plan, may be preserved, it becomes necessary for all, whether weak or strong, to support each other. differing attainments must be forgotten in the desire to permit all to develop their powers to the utmost, and thus to achieve joy both here and hereafter. the great problem of every age is how to keep together, as one body, the many who, because of their differing wills, have become different in their powers and attainments. **the test of equality.** a test may be applied whereby men may be placed in one class, irrespective of their various attainments. if a man use his powers, with all his might, for his own and others' good, in the cause of universal progress, he is the equal of every other man of like effort. no more can be asked of a man. it is well that humanity, dwelling together, should keep this principle in mind. men must not be judged, wholly, by their attainments, or by their gifts, but largely by the degree to which they give themselves to the great cause represented by the plan of the major intelligent being, for the minor intelligent beings of the universe. chapter . mutual support. the doctrines set forth indicate that each man must exert himself to the utmost. even this is not sufficient for the full progress of individuals. every man must also be supported by every other man. unless this is done, the individual and the community will be retarded. **the duty of the strong.** the man who is in possession of strength, acquired by any means whatsoever, is under special obligations to the community. the strong must, somehow, attach to themselves those who are weak; and as the strong move onward, they must pull with them those who are weak. if a person possess knowledge, he must give knowledge to others, so that all may attain great knowledge; if he have great faith, he must use faith until all may know its virtue; if he have acquired great wealth, he must use it so that many may share in its physical benefits. those who have must give to those who have not. those who understand the deeper, inner life must not forget those who are not gifted with an understanding of the contents of the vast universe. the weak have similar responsibilities devolving upon them. under earthly conditions the weak tend to foster jealousy of the strong. this is out of harmony with the law of progress. the weak must seek strength for themselves, and should invite the assistance of the strong. the weak may help the progress of the race by accepting, as a gift, the assistance of the strong. there is no shame in accepting gifts, in learning from those who have more than we have, providing our own powers are used to the full. if the strong will not give to the weak, in the right spirit of helpfulness; or if the weak will not accept the help proffered for their advancement, the whole onward movement will be slowed down. moreover, it is a common law of nature that those who are strong, and give of their strength to others, add thereby to their own strength. **co-operation.** co-operation of all, weak or strong, is characteristic of mutual helpfulness. when many men unite to accomplish great works, mighty results follow. each man then obtains his full reward. even if the co-operation provides that its results are divided equally among the participants, the strong receives his full reward, for, because of his greater strength, he has done greater labor, and has consequently added greatly to his strength. the weak, by their association with the strong, having shared equally with them, have gained greater hope, and more courage to carry on their individual work of progress. the principle of co-operation is in full conformity with the whole plan of salvation. **education.** education looms large in the matter of mutual support, for it is only by the development of individual power that man may help his fellow man and thus recognize the full brotherhood of man. great powers can be exercised only by faculties that are trained to the utmost. schools are provided, where the young mind may be guided rapidly and well into a better control of itself. a rational theology must be established upon the basis of developed intelligence, which justifies the existence of schools and other devices for the proper unfolding of the mind. in the church there must ever be a vigorous propaganda for the education of the masses. the church must be a generally educated church, in which the "educated class" includes all. chapter . the united order. the true relation among men, the doctrine of the brotherhood of man, is nowhere better exemplified than in the principle of the united order. this system of living represents, no doubt, the acme of brotherly love and human efficiency. **purpose.** the united order recognizes that men have different talents and therefore different aspirations which should be allowed full and free unfolding. that is, the individual should be allowed to exercise his inborn gifts. the united order further provides that the members of a community share equally in the material returns of the activities of the whole community. since the wants of a community are satisfied only by a variety of necessary labor, some yielding large, others small, material gains, the united order provides that, if a man work to the full of his ability, all the working days of his life, he should have an equal share in the material gains of the community, whatever his labor may be. under this system there could be no poverty; all would be amply supplied with the material necessities of life. those who, because of their greater talents or training, do the greater work, will receive whatever is needed for the maintenance of life; and they will attain, moreover, a greater growth and satisfaction because of the greater work that they have performed. since the material wants of all will be amply supplied, there can be no real reason why all should not share in the total results of the labor of the community. the united order implies a closely organized body of men and women working together for individual and for mutual advancement. in theory, at least, it appears to be the best answer to many of the great questions that trouble mankind. **historical.** the united order is not a new conception. it has been known from the beginning of time. in the days of enoch, the seventh patriarch, the united order was practiced successfully. when the church was organized by christ, the united order was practiced very fully for some time, by many of the people. it is quite possible that the order has been established and practiced successfully at other times, but no record has come down to this age. finally, in this dispensation, the united order was revealed to the prophet joseph smith. the people, on several occasions, tried to practice it, and wherever practiced correctly, it appeared to result in good; but individual selfishness usually resulted in the abandonment of the practice. it is a system of life requiring the fullest understanding of the gospel truth, and the greatest conception of man's place in the universe. in its practice, men must overcome their selfishness, and accept at their true values, the various rewards of life. enoch and his people acquired such high control over themselves that they were able to practice the united order unselfishly, and at last were translated from the earth without tasting death. it seems that the united order is above the reach of the kind of men and women we now are. nevertheless, it is the system we approach, as we approach perfection. **co-operation.** the united order has been suspended as a required form of life in the church, but its spirit still remains. those who are indeed worthy members of the church must accept the spirit of the united order. it finds present expression in the system of co-operation, under which many unite in one enterprise, in such a way that no one person dominates it, but that all concerned have a voice in it, and so that the profits resulting from the enterprise are divided more or less uniformly among those connected with it. co-operative enterprises have been fostered constantly and consistently by the church in the latter days, and in the majority of instances have been extremely successful. in fact, when the church settled in utah, it would have been impossible to accomplish the great work before the pioneers, had they not practiced co-operation. to give every man a full and proper chance is the spirit of the true church. **tithing.** every organized church must have some means of material support. houses of worship must be constructed; temples must be built; education must be fostered; the poor must be provided for; and many other material needs form a part of the great spiritual mission of the church. for the general support, therefore, of the church and of the poor who are unable to provide for themselves, a fund has been provided by the tithing of the people. this is a preparation for the united order, and some day will be replaced by the more complete system. this fund is maintained by the payment, by each member of the church, of one-tenth of his earnings, as they are delivered to him. the money thus obtained is placed in the hands of the bishops, and is disbursed under the direction of the first presidency associated with the presiding bishopric and other officials named in the revelations. tithing is an ancient system, frequently mentioned in the history of the past. it is fair to all the people, for it is necessarily a system whereby each man pays in proportion to his earnings. great blessings follow obedience either to the law of united order or the law of tithing. **voluntary offerings.** in addition to tithing, voluntary offerings may be made to the church for specific or general purposes, as for the support of the poor or distressed living near us, or for the building of churches. **the common good.** all these devices for gathering material funds for the sustenance of the church, simply show the underlying and overwhelming desire of those who understand the gospel, to assist for mutual benefit. not the good of one, but the common good, is uppermost in the minds of those who understand and love the gospel. chapter . work for the dead. the doctrine of the brotherhood of man and the principles of united order and co-operation show the necessity of giving ourselves for the common good. this intense desire of the church for service to all, for human brotherhood, are probably nowhere better shown than in the work for the dead. **all must be saved.** temple work rests on the principle of the great plan that all must be saved, or at least given the opportunity of salvation. persons who have been unable to accept the gospel ordinances on earth, are not necessarily denied the privileges of membership in the church or refused the blessings which come to those who accept the truth. for such dead persons vicarious work must be done in all the essential ordinances of the church. vicarious work is not new, for it has been practiced in various forms from the first day. in common daily life, a man is given authority to do official work for another, when a "power of attorney" is conferred. the work of jesus christ was essentially vicarious, for he atoned for the act of adam. **earthly ordinances.** great, eternal truths make up the gospel plan. all regulations for man's earthly guidance have their eternal spiritual counterparts. the earthly ordinances of the gospel are themselves the reflections of heavenly ordinances. for instance, baptism, the gift of the holy ghost and temple work are really earthly symbols of realities that prevail throughout the universe; but, they are symbols of truths that must be recognized if the great plan is to be fulfilled. the acceptance of these earthly symbols is part and parcel of correct earth-life, and being earthly symbols they are distinctly of the earth, and can not be performed elsewhere than on earth. in order that absolute fairness may prevail and eternal justice may be satisfied, all men to attain the fulness of their joy must accept these earthly ordinances. there is no water baptism in the next estate, nor any conferring of the gift of the holy ghost by the laying on of earthly hands. the equivalents of these ordinances prevail no doubt in every estate, but only as they are given on this earth can they be made to aid, in their onward progress, those who have dwelt on earth. for that reason those who have departed this life without having accepted the earthly ordinances, which constitute in part the conditions of entrance to the church, must have that work done for them on earth. by proxy they must be baptized by water, receive the laying on of hands and accept of the temple ordinances. by this method the path to eternal life is invariable; in fairness and without discrimination, all must tread it. were there any departure from this order, it would be a short time only until men might take upon themselves the authority of devising various methods whereby eternal joy might be obtained. this would be unnatural, because definite order prevails throughout nature. **a work of love.** to do work for the dead involves much sacrifice on the part of the living. genealogies must be collected, exact information concerning dates of births and deaths and other fundamental data must be obtained, and the better part of a day is required to take the endowments for each dead person--and all this, usually, for a person long dead, of whom the worker may have no definite knowledge beyond name and time of his life. it follows that only by love for one's fellowmen can the work be done. young and old may do work for the dead in the temples; and young and old are, indeed, engaged in it. especially in the evening of life, when time is more plentiful for such work, do many persons give themselves fully to this labor of love. as a result of temple work for the dead, to which thousands of people give their time and means, a great flood of love for humanity is poured out upon the people. **the need of records.** before the earth passes away into its next stage of existence, work must be done in the temples for all the living and all the dead. only when this is done, will the curtain be rolled up, and the vision of complete existence given to man. to do work for the dead, who in life did not accept the gospel, will require complete genealogies of the human race. to secure these is a gigantic task. the diverse conditions of human life, and the vicissitudes of the race have been such that frequently genealogies have not been written and often have been lost. the most careful search of man will not reveal them all. however, as has been explained, in an intelligent universe, nothing is wholly lost. the record of every man exists and by some means will be found before the work on earth is completed. meanwhile, no external power will come to man's aid, until he has used his own efforts, and therefore it becomes necessary for men to search out existing genealogies of the human race. when that has been done, in the years to come, man may rest secure that the gods who direct our earth, will come to the rescue of this important part of the work of salvation. consequently there is intense interest in the church in all genealogical matters. every person is on the lookout for his own genealogy; when that is completed, he searches for those of others. such work intensifies family loyalty and devotion, from which virtues proceed. it follows, also, that the church records and preserves with utmost care the genealogical histories of its members. sacred history shows that at all times, when the church has been on earth, genealogies have been carefully kept and recorded. **the result.** work for the dead has far-reaching results. first of all, it establishes a close communion among those who have lived and who are living on earth. the hearts of the children are turned to the fathers, and the hearts of the fathers are turned to the children. this, indeed, is the vital principle of the great plan--that all may work together to the ultimate good of each. the principle of infinite, loving brotherhood among men, as exemplified in the work for the dead, may be applied in the daily lives of the living. if so much work is done, so much time and energy expended and so much care bestowed upon the salvation of the dead, how much more should we help and support and love the living. the living must always be man's first concern. this principle, carried into our daily lives, means that we must continually and at our own sacrifice help each other. then only will the sacrifice for the dead not be in vain. work for the dead is no doubt symbolic of the great universal law that things of the universe move onward together, not singly. so great is this principle in its application to daily life, among the living, that it rises to be one of the mightiest principles that contribute to human brotherhood and brotherly love. chapter . marriage. we are not the last spirits to enter upon the earth career. there are yet countless numbers of unborn spirits waiting for the privilege of receiving earthly bodies and of tasting the sorrows and the joys of earth. the living, who understand the great plan, must not then confine their attention to themselves and to those who have gone before. the waiting spirits must be a concern of our lives. **eternity of sex.** it has already been said that sex is an eternal principle. the equivalent of sex has always existed and will continue forever. as the sex relation, then, represents an eternal condition, the begetting of children is coincidently an eternal necessity. we were begotten into the spirit world by god the father, and have been born into the world which we now possess. **the waiting spirits.** according to the great plan, all who, in the great council, accepted the christ, will in time appear on earth, clothed with mortal bodies. all these spirits must be born as children into the world. a high purpose, if not the main one, of the earth work must be, therefore, to continue the race by begetting children and properly caring for them until they reach maturity. undoubtedly, the waiting spirits are hoping patiently for their turn to reach the earth--a glorious step in the progressive advancement of man, which the spirits have earned by their righteous lives. **the meaning of the first command.** this doctrine makes clear the meaning of the first great command, to multiply and replenish the earth. it is not only for the joy and satisfaction of humanity that the sex relation, with the possibility of begetting offspring, prevails on earth, but as much for the fulfilment of the eternal great plan. it becomes a necessary duty, for all wedded persons who dwell on earth, to bring children into the world. this is the greatest and holiest and most necessary mission of man, with respect to the waiting spirits. fatherhood and motherhood become glorified in the light of the eternal plan of salvation. the doctrine that wedded man and woman should not beget children or should limit the number of children born to them, is contrary to the spirit of the great plan, and is a most erroneous one. let the waiting spirits come! let children be born into the earth! let fatherhood and motherhood be the most honored of all the professions on earth! marriage resulting in parenthood is a great evidence of the reality of the brotherhood of man, of the unselfishness of man. however, only in the marriage relation should children be begotten. looseness of life, between man and woman, is the most terrible of human iniquities, for it leads, assuredly, to the physical decay of the race. with the sanction of the priesthood, men and women should contract to live together as husband and wife. **the family.** the unit of society is the family. the family circle is intimate, and in it the keenest human loves prevail. as the family develops so will society, as a whole, develop. by children comes complete family life. without children, family life is incomplete. children are, then, a real necessity in the fulfilling of the possibilities of the church. the true church always encourages the begetting of children; the intensifying of family life, and the dignifying of all the duties pertaining to procreation. **celestial marriage.** if sex is eternal, it follows of necessity, that the marriage covenant may also be eternal. it is not a far step to the doctrine that after the earth work has been completed, and exaltation in the next estate has been attained, one of the chief duties of men and women will be to beget spiritual children. these spirits, in turn, in the process of time, will come down upon an earth, there to obtain an acquaintance with gross matter, and through the possession of earthly bodies to control more fully, and forever, the manifold forces surrounding them. it is one of the rewards of intelligent development, that we may be to other spiritual beings, what our god has been to us. among those who understand the gospel, marriage may be, and indeed should be, for time and eternity. marriage that lasts only during the earth life is a sad one, for the love established between man and woman, as they live together and rear their family, does not wish to die, but to live to grow richer with the eternal years. marriage for time and eternity establishes a unique relation between husband and wife. their children belong to them for time and eternity; the family is continued from this earth into the next life, and becomes a unit in the eternal life, and, in all family relations, the vision is cast forward, in anticipation of an undying relationship. **the sealing powers.** naturally, the power to seal men and women to each other, for time and eternity, and to seal children to their parents for eternal ages, is a supreme power, committed to man's keeping. the president of the church is the only person on the earth who holds the keys of these sealing ordinances. true, he may delegate his power to workers in the temples, so that celestial marriages and sealings may go on, but such delegated authority may be withdrawn at any moment. in that respect, it differs wholly from the power of the priesthood, which can be withdrawn from a man only who is found in sin. it is proper that only one man should hold this power, for it is of infinite effect, and should be guarded with the most jealous care, and kept from the frail prejudices and jealousies of men. the power to bind for time and eternity is the power, also, to loose that which has been bound, should it be found necessary. undoubtedly, under human conditions, mistakes may be made, but if such mistakes are made and are not rectified on earth, they will, no doubt, under a supervising intelligent being, be rectified in the hereafter. it is, however, only through the sealing power that the eternal relationship of the sexes, the eternal increase of life, and the consequent eternal joy, may be obtained. chapter . the community. the relations of the few and the many lead to great problems which are of the gravest import to humanity. **community defined.** a community is a body of people having common interests and, usually, living in the same place, under the same laws and regulations. from the beginning of time, individuals have associated and grouped themselves into communities. every church is a community of believers. the church which conforms to the whole law is the one characterized by authority and operating under authoritative laws. **the individual in the community.** a community is a great organism, with individuality which must express itself in adaptation or opposition to law. since the community is composed of individuals, each with independent wills and agencies, nothing must be done, as a community, to prevent the full unfolding of the individual, for the more progressive the individuals, the more progressive is the community. while the community is under responsibility to each individual, the individual, having accepted a place and life in the community, must not do anything that will restrain other individuals of the community. whatever is good for the many, must always take preference. this does not interfere, in the least, with full individual development, since the greatest individual development always comes from proper adaptation to law. when each individual faithfully obeys the law, the community is safe. **the rights of the community.** the community has rights which are as inalienable as the free agency of individuals. an individual who will not obey the community laws should move out of the community. those who remain must yield obedience to the laws established for the public good. this was well brought out in the great council, when lucifer fell because he was not one with the community. in that great day, as in our day, the many had the right to demand that their good be considered as of primary importance. **training for the community.** in view of the supremacy of the community it becomes indispensable that the powers of the individual be so unfolded as to be of service to the community. no man can selfishly stand aside and say "i am sufficient unto myself; in the community i have no interest; though i obey its laws, i do not serve it." it is not sufficient that a man obey the laws of the community; he must vigorously serve the community. every act of every man's life must relate itself to the good of other men. this is fundamental in the gospel, and should be fundamental in the daily relations of men. this justifies the modern training now given men for the necessary pursuits and common tasks of daily life. whatever is necessary, may and should be made honorable and dignified. all pursuits are made professional, so that all who serve the good of the many, may find the same joy in their work whatever it may be. all men should be trained for service to the community. it is an interesting commentary on the present-day church that president brigham young was one of the first men in america to establish schools in which the training of men for the actual affairs of life was made pre-eminent. today we train for citizenship, whether in the church or in the state. in such training lies the hope of the community for its future. by such training will a feeling of community responsibility be established among men. **the supremacy of the community.** from all this and from what has been said in preceding chapters, it is clear that the great plan was so devised that men may unitedly work out their salvation. man may not stand alone. brotherhood is the great principle on which the church is based. man and nature. chapter . man and nature. there is but one nature. all things, visible or invisible, belong to the one universe. **the intelligence of nature.** each and all of the numerous forces in the universe may be subjected to the will of man. in the universe are untold numbers of intelligent beings, whose main business it is to discover the ways of nature, and by an intelligent control of nature, to acquire greater power of advancing development. the holy spirit fills all things, and by its means the thoughts and minds of these increasing intelligent beings are everywhere felt. intelligence permeates the universe. the question is often asked, "does nature, as we know it, the rocks and trees and beasts, possess intelligence of an order akin to that of man?" who knows? that intelligence is everywhere present is beyond question. by the intelligent god, nature is directed. the forming of a crystal or the conception of a living animal is, somehow, connected with an intelligent purpose and will. this fruitful field of conjecture should be touched with care, for so little definite knowledge concerning it is in man's possession. **a living earth.** it seems to be well established that the earth as a whole, is a living organism. it had a beginning; it will die or be changed, and after is purification it will be brought into greater glory as a resurrected organism. even the symbolism of baptism was performed for the earth when the waters descended in the great flood. all this can simply mean that the earth, as well as all on it, are subject to the fundamental plan, involving the atonement of jesus christ. the earth as an organism does its work perfectly well. it is without sin. "the earth abides the law of a celestial kingdom, for it fills the measure of its creation, and transgresses not the law. wherefore it shall be sanctified; yea, notwithstanding it shall die, it shall be quickened again, and shall abide the power by which it is quickened, and the righteous shall inherit it." if the earth is a living organism, it seems more than likely that all things on earth possess a measure of life and intelligence. **the lower animals.** the lower animals were created by the power of god. all things created by him, have first been created spiritually, then temporally, after which they pass again into the spiritual life. animals were created spiritually before they were given material existence. if the meaning of this doctrine is that animals lived before this, they certainly may live hereafter. that which is essential in animals is probably indestructible. our knowledge of this subject is extremely limited, and whatever is said about it, is conjectural and subject to revision. **all for the use of man.** nevertheless, rocks and trees and beasts, are for the use of man, to be used by him in moderation and with wisdom. man is at the head of the creations on earth. it is his duty to make proper use of them all. whoever teaches that any part of the universe is not for the benefit of man, is in error. **man's conquest of nature.** it is the simplest of present-day doctrines that the vastness of nature makes it impossible for man to comprehend more than the minutest part of it. yet, in the true philosophy of life, nothing is more certain than that the greatest mystery of nature may at some time be understood. the great purpose of man's existence is a complete understanding of all the mysteries of nature. true, the understanding that will give him full mastery over nature will come little by little. in the end, man shall know all that he desires. even in that happy day he shall not be able to change one law of nature; only by intelligent control may he apply nature's laws to desired ends. with this certainty man may go onward hopefully. nature is inexhaustible and man shall not, in all the endless ages, explore it completely; he shall only in the eternal days become more conscious of its infinite majesty--thereby comes the everlasting joy of man. great hope of conquest enables man to meet his daily tasks, with lifted head and fearless courage. man knows that all his search shall be successful, if he only search with might and main and have patience to wait. **miracles.** man is of limited power; whatever he can not understand or duplicate may be called miraculous; and only in that sense can miracles be allowed. the miracles of the savior were done only by superior knowledge. nothing is unnatural. all that has been done, man may do as he increases in power. the conception of intelligence guiding the destinies of men, makes it possible that, in our behalf, wonderful things are often done, that transcend our understanding, but which are yet in full and complete harmony with the laws of nature. for ourselves we must discover all of nature that we can. in time of need, when our own knowledge does not suffice, the master may give his help. thus, after man has used his full knowledge and failed, the sick may be healed, the sorrowing, comforted, or wealth or poverty may come, provided we draw heavily enough upon the unseen forces about us. help so obtained is not unnatural. a miracle is simply that which we can not understand, and at which we marvel. **harmony of man and nature.** vast, unnumbered forces lie about us. the possible power of man, as he grows in knowledge, is quite beyond our under standing. all that is required of man is that he place himself in harmony with the interacting forces, operating in all directions. if the forces are not fully understood, he must search them out, and as best he can, must place himself so that they are with him rather than against him. to enjoy nature is our privilege and duty. no life finds joy above its harmonious associations with the things that lie about it in nature. all this is merely in accord with the fundamental doctrines already laid down. the church possessing the truth, always fosters, encourages and respects all honest investigation of nature. man and himself. chapter . the sound body. consideration has been given, in the preceding chapters, to the pre-existent life, the course of the gospel on the earth, and man's relationship to god, to the church and to his fellowman. man must, also, give respectful consideration to himself, as an individual. **the importance of the body.** attention has already been called to the fact that the condition of the body limits, largely, the expression of the spirit. the spirit shines through the body only as the body permits. the body is essentially of the earth; and, in the earth career, the earthly envelope of the spirit would naturally determine the expression of man's powers. if the body is in poor condition from birth, man must strengthen it as the days increase; if it is strong from the beginning, he must make it stronger. **food.** a first consideration for the proper maintenance of bodily health, is the proper feeding of the body. man should use food adapted to the body and seasonable according to nature. in accordance with the word of wisdom, meat should be used sparingly, and no food should be used to excess. **exercise.** the elimination of unassimilated food from the human body is quite as important as the taking in of food. for that purpose, physical exercise must be taken regularly. moreover, exercise develops and strengthens all parts of the body. manual labor, which usually is looked upon as inferior to mental labor, is in reality a means of improving the body, permitting hard mental labor and making possible a fuller expression of man's spirit. man's life should not be given wholly to physical work, but it should constitute a vital part of it. **rest.** just as necessary as is food or exercise, is the change called rest. if the same muscles be exercised continuously they will surely tire and good work can, then, no longer be done with them. regular rest should be given the body. frequently, a change from one kind of work to another is a sufficient rest; but in many cases, cessation from effort is necessary to recuperate man's strength, properly. the natural law requiring regular sleep should be obeyed, though none should sleep too long. one day out of seven, the sabbath, should be devoted, particularly, to matters concerning god and the spiritual life, which too often are submerged during the other days, in the material affairs of life. an occasional fasting is very desirable, since, for a few hours, it gives some organs of the body a complete rest. at present, the church practice is to fast twenty-four consecutive hours once each month. the food thus saved, in conformity with the fundamental spirit of brotherhood, is distributed among those who have need of it, by ward officers specially appointed for that purpose. **stimulants.** in normal health, food, exercise, rest, love of god and fellowman and daily work, furnish a natural and sufficient stimulation for all the duties of life. in fact, none other should be allowed, if the best physical health is to be retained. therefore, alcohol in all its forms, tobacco, tea, coffee and the variety of drugs should not be used. there is double danger in the use of stimulants: first, they tend to undermine the strength of the man, and, second, they take away from man his mastery of himself. under the influence of a drug, man is urged on by the drug itself, and not by his own strength of will. this is most dangerous. a man who loses control of himself, never knows just what he may do. **moral purity.** the body is much concerned in the moral purity of the man. men and women must keep themselves pure or there will be a loss of life and procreative power. moreover, men must keep themselves as pure as do women. no reasoning, based on natural law, justifies two standards of morality, one for the man and the other for the woman. **the gospel and the sound body.** the sound body is a gospel requirement, for only with a sound body can man work out his mission and have full joy. working effectively and to make others happy, can be done only in a healthy body. every effort should be made to keep our bodies as sound as possible. it is a part of a rational theology. chapter . education for the inner life. after all, the body is only the tabernacle of the spirit. the spirit within, the essential part of man, must be developed as much as possible during the earth career. **the senses.** knowledge is the material on which the mind works. in every progressive life fresh knowledge must be gathered as the days go by. the senses of man are the gateways through which that knowledge enters. the senses of man must be developed, therefore, as completely as is possible. seeing, hearing, tasting, smelling and feeling must all be developed fully and joyously for the pleasure and benefit of man. without sharp senses, man may not have the highest earthly joy. **the reasoning power.** it is not sufficient for the contentment of man that he gather knowledge, and add fact to fact. all new information must be compared with other information, so that conclusions may be drawn, and new knowledge brought into view. by this process of reasoning, on the basis of acquired knowledge, man may rise by sure steps to a high degree of understanding. man must train himself, with all his might, to use this wonderful faculty of reason, so that he may intelligently read new knowledge from all he learns. a fact, of itself, is lifeless; only when it is compared with other facts, does it leap into life, and show forth its hidden meaning. **the feelings.** the sense of feeling is but a poor expression for the one great sense by which man may directly communicate with the region of the unseen. through this sense, man stands on the border line between earth and the external universe. those who have communion with the forces about them, because of their greater refinement of feeling, have comfort which is attainable in no other manner. moreover, our feelings with respect to our fellow men should be cultivated. we must learn to sympathize with them in their distresses, rejoice with them in their joys, and pity them in their sins. the education of the feelings is a great duty of man. **the spiritual sense.** this sense is closely akin to the feelings. the virtues of man, such as hope, charity, and mercy, can reach high development only on the basis of the conviction that the unseen world may be known. when this conviction grows upon a man, and he reaches out for a fuller understanding of it, his spiritual sense develops, new worlds are opened to him and he conforms to the intelligent love which made the great plan possible. **symbolism.** moreover, as man develops, he learns to be content to know eternal truths only in great symbols. that is, he learns to be satisfied to know that he does not fully know. this has already been dwelt upon and need not be further emphasized. the sacrament, as an ordinance of the church is one of the great symbols of the suffering and death of jesus for the sake of mankind, that the great plan might be fulfilled. bread is eaten and water is drunk as symbols of the body and blood of the savior, given in the atoning sacrifice. every other ordinance is similarly symbolic. back of the symbols lies the whole great plan in all of its gradations. god demands that the sacrament be partaken of frequently, so that the atoning sacrifice of jesus may be held before the people continually; so with the other great symbols of the church. by them the realities of eternal life are held before us. **education.** the whole of life is education, or training for further work. no wonder, therefore, that, in the correct philosophy of life, schools and other devices for the training of man's powers are foremost. education is and must be carried onward fully and abundantly, in the church of christ. the support of education is, indeed, a test of the truthfulness of the church. chapter . satisfaction with daily work. all must work--in defense if for no other reason. without some kind of labor, body and mind will deteriorate. clearly, however, all cannot do the same work, unless each man does practically all the variety of work necessary for the production of the things necessary in his life. in a complex civilization of many needs, that would be impossible or wasteful. the great satisfaction of earth-life is to be content with whatever work may come. **variety of earthly tasks.** in obedience to god's command, man must devote himself to the work of subduing the earth. this is no simple task, for the earth is an organism of many elements. moreover, the needs of man are varied and manifold, to the satisfying of which, the subjection of the earth is ordained. there is an endless variety of tasks, for body and mind, to be accomplished by the men and women of earth. these tasks differ greatly; some concern themselves chiefly with the body; others, chiefly with the mind; and yet others with both body and mind. some deal with this, and others with that, essential need; some with this, and others with that, necessary condition. the vocations of man are almost numberless. much unhappiness has come to men because they have been obliged in life to follow one vocation when they would rather follow another. if a man thus be unhappy in his daily work the whole of his life is akin to failure, because he does not truly realize the possible joys of life. occasionally, the discontent is due to the unwillingness of the man to earn his bread in the sweat of his brow. this is due to ignorance. earnest, sincere labor, requiring steady and full effort, is the source of many abiding joys. **all work may be intelligent.** if intelligence pervades all things, and if all things belong to the great plan, including the labors in which man lives and moves, then all tasks may and should be made intelligent and appealing to mind as well as to body. rational as it is, it is however a relatively new thought, that to every task, if properly illumined by knowledge, many forces of the mind may be applied. as man has gained added knowledge, this has become more and more evident. the fact that intelligence may be made to illuminate the so-called humbler tasks, lifts much of the so-called curse from the labor of man. this is another reason for the education of man into an understanding of the full meaning of the necessary tasks of life. it justifies the support of research into all divisions of nature, and stamps with approval honest study and investigation of every kind. all kinds of work must be done; full preparation for every kind of work is fully justified. **nothing temporal.** god has never given a temporal commandment. all god's creative works are first spiritual, then temporal. that is, they were first begotten of the intelligent mind, and must represent some necessity in the great plan. whatever, therefore, is brought into operation on earth for the good of man, must represent great, eternal, spiritual realities. in conformity with this thought, every task, however apparently humble, however apparently remote from fundamental principles, has a spiritual counterpart, and is necessary for the completion of the plan under which man works. it matters little, therefore, whether man devote his life to the tilling of the soil, the making of shoes or the writing of books, so that the work be well done. all such tasks are proper, dignified and necessary parts of the great plan, and will lead man along the path of eternal progression. this means that, no matter to what work a man may give himself, providing it is honorable and he do it with all his might, he may rest secure that on the last great day, the work will be transmuted into spiritual values, and as such will be written into the eternal record. the quality and not the kind of work is the final test of man's achievements. man knows relatively little. he accepts his part without knowing its meaning in the full economy of god's plan for his children. wise is the man who spends his strength, with a full heart, in the accomplishment of the nearest work. he will find his work transmuted into things glorious beyond his dreams. more than that: man need not wait long for the transmutation of his honest work. strength comes to the man of honest and full endeavor, irrespective of the kind of work, and on this earth his efforts are transmuted into a great and noble joy. all work is holy, and, well done, will bring its own reward, here and in the hereafter. without question, men should seek the work they think they love best, or for which they are best fitted. yet,' the majority of men can do most work in a satisfactory manner. the work that we finally must do, we should accept in the light of its eternal value. **subjection of self.** nevertheless, to accept a place in society--not always the place one desires; to do well the work that is near at hand--not always the work one wishes; to love and to cherish the work, and to forget oneself in the needs of others, all that is not always easy. such a life means a subjection of self which can be accomplished only if there is a clear understanding of the plan of salvation. chapter . the hope of tomorrow. time is unceasing. there was a yesterday, there is a today, and there will be a tomorrow. the gospel plan encompasses all time. tomorrow has a great place in the eternal plan. **today.** the greatest day of all time is today. it is the product of all the past; and is the promise of all the future. if each today is made great, the tomorrows will be surpassingly greater. the one way to draw out of life the keen joys of life, is to think little of tomorrow, but to live mightily today. **tomorrow.** yet, surely, there will be a tomorrow. the sun sets, and we sleep, and we awaken to a new day. forever there shall come new days. today is our great day; but there will be another great, a greater day. what tomorrow shall be, depends measureably upon today. at least, the beginning of tomorrow will be as the evening of today. as we spend today, so will the hope of tomorrow be. the ages do not come in leaps, but step by step do they enter into the larger life. the law of today is that joy will transfigure each coming tomorrow, if our work be well done today. no man knows whether his tomorrow will be on this earth or in another existence, with new duties and under a new environment. of one thing we are sure, beyond all cavil, that life on earth will continue into an endless future, and the work will be taken up where it was laid down yesterday. **the resurrection.** the man whose life is ordered right, worries little about his tomorrow. full well he knows that, though the body be laid in the grave, it will rise again. he has the absolute assurance of the resurrection. in that resurrection the body will arise purified, possessing only its essential, characteristic parts, which cannot be taken away or transferred to another body. these essential, characteristic parts organized into a body will be the mortal body made immortal. the resurrection of mortal bodies, on earth, began with jesus, who on the third day rose from the grave, and after his sojourn among the children of men, took his body with him into heaven. this was the first fruit of the resurrection, made possible by the atonement of the christ. since that time, the resurrection of man may have continued, and no doubt will continue, in the future; for many spirits have laid down their earthly bodies, and all must be raised from the grave. in the resurrection, order and law will prevail, and the just deserts of men will be kept in mind. **our place in the hereafter.** into a new, great world shall we enter after the journey on earth has ended. in this new world we shall continue our work of progression, forever and forever, under the prevailing laws. our progress, there, and the laws revealed to us, will depend upon our own actions and upon our own willingness to abide by the laws already known to us. our place in that life will depend on our faithfulness here. whatever a man has gained on earth, will rise with him in the resurrection. all that he gained in the spirit world, before he came on earth, will likewise rise with him. all men will be saved, but the degree of that salvation will vary even as our varying work on earth. there will be glory upon glory, and there will be different degrees of advancement, some like unto the sun, some like unto the moon, while other glories will differ even as the infinite stars of the heavens differ in the brightness. in the great plan there is no provision for the eternal damnation of man. at the best, men will be ranged according to their stage of progression--some higher, some lower. in a universe ruled by intelligent beings, filled with love for each other, there can be no thought of an endless damnation only as men, by opposition to law, destroy themselves. endless punishment and eternal punishment, terms often used, but of little meaning to the human mind, mean simply god's punishment, which is beyond our understanding. those who refuse to accept truth or to abide by law, will gradually take less and less part in the work of progression. they will be left behind, while their intelligent fellows, more obedient, will go on. in nature there is no standing still; those who do not advance, will retrograde, become weaker and finally wither, and be forgotten in their low estate. **the destiny of man.** the intelligence called man cannot be destroyed. eternal life is therefore the destiny of man. but, eternal life is life open-eyed, ready-minded, seeking, accepting and using all knowledge that will assist in man's progress. to continue forever, upward, that is eternal life and the destiny of man. chapter . the law of the earth. in the high heavens yet hang the stars. throughout the infinite universe still play the hosts of mighty forces. the full conquest of the earth by man is yet to be accomplished. as things were when man opened his eyes after birth, so do they appear to be today. yet, during the years that have gone, the man has changed; for now he knows his origin and his destiny, and the purpose of his life on earth. he knows that throughout the seeming sameness there is progressive change; that, as he has changed, so has the world changed, too; that the all pervading intelligent god of the universe is engaged in a progressive development. man has found his place amidst the things about him. whence? whither? he knows; and with smiling courage sets out to subdue the tasks of the day, knowing well that the day's labor, whatever it may be, in righteousness, shall count for him in the endless journey which he is making. **the unknown meaning.** the man has learned that in an infinite universe, admitting of endless development, things may not be fully known. the very essence of things must forever be the goal, towards which intelligence strives. nevertheless, man also knows that to approach by slow degrees, but steadily, the full knowledge which gives unmeasured power over natural forces, is the way of progress. so he is content to let each day speak one new word of the unknown meaning of the universe. the universe is one. all things in it are parts of one whole. the dominating spirit of the vastness of space and of its contents is the dominating spirit of the least part of that which constitutes the whole. it matters not then, to what a man give himself. in everything and anything may the riddle of the universe be read, if the search be continued long enough. modest in his possessions, yet courageous in his hope of ultimate conquest, he stands before the things of his life, small or great, knowing of a surety that in them lie the truths that overwhelm the universe. "flower in the crannied wall, i pluck you out of the crannies, i hold you here, root and all, in my hand, little flower--but if i could understand what you are, root and all, and all in all, i should know what god and man is." knowing all this, and the outline of his origin and destiny, man must be forever engaged in extending the philosophy, in accordance with which he orders and guides his life. **the earth-law.** on earth the man dwells today. great are the conceptions revealed to him concerning the constitution, progress and destiny of the universe. marvelous to his understanding is the knowledge of his full and vital place in the scheme of things. yet, encompassed by earth conditions, he strives to assemble all this vast, divine and wondrous knowledge, and out of it to draw some simple formula, in the language of man, that may be applied in the affairs of earth, and which shall be a simple guide to him in all that he may do. such a formula was sought and found by the first man, and has been used by the righteous of all ages. in the meridian of time, when jesus of nazareth, the christ, came upon earth to fulfil the central thought in the plan of salvation, he stated the formula in words that never have been surpassed. thus runs the formula, and thus is worded the law of the earth: "thou shalt love the lord thy god with all thy heart, and with all thy soul and with all thy mind. thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself. on these two commandments hangeth the law and the prophets." this, in short, is man's duty while he dwells in the flesh. his god, his fellowman and himself--the three concerns of his life. we say it is the earth-law, but like all other things of the earth, it stands for huge spiritual meanings, and is therefore an eternal law for all times and for all places. **to love god.** what does it mean, to love god with one's heart and soul and mind? certainly, a love of the heart and the soul and the mind can not be given to a being who is not known nor understood. such love is more than a blind obedience. in such a love there must be a rational understanding of god's nature and of his place in the universe and of his relation to men. there must be in such a fulness of love an acceptance of god's superior knowledge, of his intelligent plan for man and of his supreme and final authority. such a love can not well be forgotten or survive, unless god is part of a universe, the orderly outlines of which can be fathomed by the human mind, that such knowledge may be possessed by man, and that a real unfeigned love for god may be developed, has been taught in the preceding pages. neither can god be fully loved unless he is obeyed; and the first command is simple, "multiply and replenish the earth and subdue it." **to love a neighbor as oneself.** to love oneself--that is easy. instinctively, from the first day, we have reached out for our own greater good. every personal philosophy makes the man the center. to love our neighbor equally well--"that's the rub." his will is not our will; his ways, not our ways. yet, only by the progress of all, can each gain the greatest advancement. the fundamental conceptions of a universe filled with eternal matter and forces, and a host of individual intelligent beings, make it clear that only by complete harmony of all intelligent beings can the interests of each be served, in the work of subjugating, by intelligent conquest, the forces of universal nature. to love one's neighbor, then, a man must first know fully his own origin and destiny and possible powers; then he may soon learn the need of loving his fellowman, if his love for himself shall grow great. this commandment is not inferior to the first. **the triumph of man.** the eternal, conscious, willing being, having become an earthly man, stands before the law of the earth. if he strives, all the days of his life, to bring into perfect accord, the god who rules, his earthly brother and himself, he will at length win the victory in the battle of his life. out of such a life will come, among other gifts, controlled personal desires, subjection to law, a recognition of the great power of man, and the harmonious adjustment of contending forces to the completion of the great plan which governs man's earth-life. whether living or dead, such a person has triumphed, and the journey from the dim beginning has not been in vain. to such souls comes the reward of the unspeakable joy of a perfect understanding of the meaning of life, and the living peace that passeth understanding--through which appears the vital future, ever vigorously progressing towards an increasing, virile goal. have you tried the virtue of the law of the earth? if you have not, try it now, for it is good. appendix. the doctrines and views set forth in the preceding pages, based on the teachings of the elders of the church, especially of the prophet joseph smith, may be confirmed by a study of the doctrinal standards of the church, namely, the bible, the book of mormon, the doctrine and covenants and the pearl of great price. the following references, chosen almost at random, from these standards, especially from the doctrine and covenants, are for the immediate use of those who wish to pursue the study somewhat more in detail. for a critical study, an exhaustive examination must necessarily be made of the doctrinal standards and of the mass of books and printed sermons on the system of belief of the church of jesus christ of latter-day saints. such students will find the existing indexes or concordances to the standard authorities of most value.[a] but they will also obtain much ready help from the several existing excellent compilations of references, classified under doctrinal headings.[b] a list of church literature may be obtained from the deseret news and deseret sunday school union bookstores, salt lake city, utah. [footnote a: _cruden's concordance to the bible_ (or some other good concordance). _a complete concordance to the book of mormon_ (george reynolds). _a concordance to the book of doctrine and covenants_ (john a. widtsoe). no index has as yet been made for the _pearl of great price_, but the book is small and may be read easily in its entirety.] [footnote b: _the compendium_ (richards and little) is the type after which most of the later compilations have been fashioned.] references. chapters and **doctrine and covenants** : ; : ; : ; : ; : - , , ; : ; : ; : - , - , ; : ; : ; : , ; : . chapter **doctrine and covenants** : ; : - ; : ; : - ; : ; : , - ; : ; : ; : , , , - ; : - , ; : ; : - ; : , ; : ; : . **pearl of great price,** abraham : - ; moses : , ; : , . **book of mormon,** i nephi : ; ii nephi : ; alma : , ; : ; : . **bible,** job : - ; jer. : ; john : ; : ; heb. : ; rom. : . chapter **doctrine and covenants,** : - ; **book of mormon,** alma : , ; : , ; : ; moroni : , ; mosiah : . chapter **doctrine and covenants,** lectures on faith : ; sections : ; : - , ; : . **book of mormon,** alma : ; mosiah : . chapter **doctrine and covenants,** : , , ; : ; : - ; : , ; : , - , - ; : , ; : - , : - , . **pearl of great price,** abraham : - . chapter **doctrine and covenants,** : ; : ; : ; : ; : , , ; : ; : ; : . **book of mormon,** ii nephi : ; enos : ; ether : - . chapter **doctrine and covenants,** : - ; : ; : - ; : - ; : - , ; : ; : ; : , , - , ; : - ; : ; : ; : ; : . **pearl of great price,** abraham : , , . **book of mormon,** i nephi : ; : ; ii nephi : , , ; : , - ; : - ; : ; alma : ; : ; : ; : ; mosiah : ; : - ; helaman : . **bible,** gen. : ; isa. : ; matt. : ; john : ; : , ; : ; rom. : ; : ; : ; i tim : ; gal. : ; jude : ; rev. : . chapter **doctrine and covenants,** : ; : - ; : ; sec. **book of mormon,** i nephi : ; : ; ii nephi : , ; alma : ; : ; : . **bible,** neh. : ; acts : . chapter **doctrine and covenants,** : ; : - ; : - ; : , ; : . **pearl of great price,** abraham chaps. and . **book of mormon,** ii nephi : - ; alma : , , ; : ; mosiah : ; : : : ; mormon : . **bible,** gen. chap ; rom. : . chapter **pearl of great price,** book of moses, book of abraham; writings of joseph smith. **bible,** genesis; the gospels. chapter **doctrine and covenants** : ; : ; : ; : ; : ; : ; : - ; : - ; : , ; : - ; : - ; : - ; : , , , . **pearl of great price,** abraham : - . **book of mormon,** alma : . **bible,** gen. : ; deut. : ; exo. : ; psalms : ; dan. : ; i cor. : ; rev. : . chapter **doctrine and covenants** : ; : ; : , ; : ; : ; : . **book of mormon,** i nephi : ; ii nephi : ; alma : ; ether : . **bible,** gen. : ; prov. : ; dan. : ; john : . chapter **doctrine and covenants** : ; : ; : ; : , ; : ; : ; : ; : ; : , ; : - . **book of mormon,** ii nephi : , ; : ; alma : ; : ; : ; moroni : . chapter **doctrine and covenants** : , - , ; : , , - ; : ; : ; : ; : ; : ; : ; : ; : . **book of mormon,** ii nephi : ; iii nephi : ; : ; mosiah : ; moroni : . chapter **doctrine and covenants** : ; : - ; : ; : - ; : ; : ; : , ; : , ; : ; : ; : ; : ; : ; : ; : . chapter **faith** **doctrine and covenants,** lectures on faith, sections : ; : ; : ; : ; : ; : - ; : ; : , ; : . **book of mormon,** i nephi : , ; ii nephi : ; enos : ; mosiah : ; ether : . **bible,** genesis : ; exodus : ; numbers : ; psalms : ; prov. : ; john : ; : ; acts : ; : ; ii cor. : . **repentance** **doctrine and covenants** : , ; : ; : ; : ; : . **book of mormon,** i nephi : ; ii nephi : ; alma : ; : ; mosiah : . **bible,** matt. : ; luke : ; ii peter : ; rev. : . **baptism** **doctrine and covenants** : ; : , - ; : ; : , - ; : ; : . **book of mormon,** alma : ; moroni : - . **bible,** matt. : ; mark : ; luke : ; john : ; : ; i cor. : ; eph. : . **gift of the holy ghost** **doctrine and covenants** : ; : ; : ; : , - ; : - . **book of mormon,** alma : . **bible,** acts : ; : ; : - . chapter **doctrine and covenants,** lectures on faith. sections : ; : , , - ; : - ; : - , - ; : - , - ; : , ; : . **book of mormon,** mosiah : ; alma : ; : ; : - , - ; helaman : . **bible,** gen. : - ; : - ; psalms : ; john : ; acts : ; heb. : ; : ; : ; : ; : , - ; i peter : ; titus : ; ii tim. : . chapter **doctrine and covenants** : - ; : ; : ; : - ; : ; : ; , whole section; : - . chapter **doctrine and covenants** : , , ; : - ; : ; : - ; : - ; : , - . **book of mormon,** alma : ; i nephi : . chapter **doctrine and covenants** : ; : ; : ; : ; : ; : ; : ; : ; : ; : ; : - ; : - ; : - ; : - ; : ; : ; : , , ; , whole section. **book of mormon,** ii nephi : , ; : ; alma : , ; : ; mosiah : ; : - ; moroni : . chapter **doctrine and covenants** : - , ; : ; : , ; : - ; : - ; : ; : ; : ; : - ; : ; : ; : . chapter **doctrine and covenants** : ; : ; : ; : ; : ; : ; , whole section; : , ; : . **book of mormon,** ii nephi : ; : ; iii nephi : ; jacob : ; mosiah : ; : - ; alma : ; helaman : ; : . chapter **doctrine and covenants** : ; : ; : ; : ; : ; : ; : - . chapter **book of mormon,** jacob : ; mosiah : ; : ; alma : . chapter **book of mormon,** ii nephi : ; : ; mosiah : ; ether : . chapter **doctrine and covenants** : - , - , - ; : - ; : ; : ; : - ; : - ; : - ; : - , - ; : - ; : - ; : ; : - . **book of mormon,** iii nephi : ; iv nephi : , , . **bible,** numbers : - ; lev. : ; ii chron. : , ; neh. : , ; mal. : ; matt. : - ; luke : ; acts : - , ; heb. : . chapter **doctrine and covenants** sections and ; : ; : ; : ; : - ; : - ; : ; : - ; : - . **book of mormon,** ii nephi : ; mosiah : . chapter **doctrine and covenants** : ; : , ; section ; : , ; : - ; : ; : - ; : , ; : , ; : , ; : - ; : ; section . **bible,** gen. : ; : ; : , ; : ; deut. : ; i cor. : . chapter **doctrine and covenants** : ; : ; : ; : ; : , , , , , ; : , ; : ; : ; : . chapter **doctrine and covenants** : ; : , , ; : ; : , ; : , ; : , ; : - ; : ; : ; : . **book of mormon,** ii nephi : ; ether : ; : . chapter **doctrine and covenants** : ; : - ; : - ; : ; : ; section ; : . chapter **doctrine and covenants** : - . chapter **doctrine and covenants** : ; : - ; : - ; : , , ; section ; : ; : - ; : , ; : - . **book of mormon,** mosiah : . **bible,** daniel : ; job : ; luke : ; rom. : ; rev. : ; : , . chapter **book of mormon,** mosiah : . **bible,** matt. : - . made available by the hathitrust digital library.) the evolution of old testament religion the evolution of old testament religion by w. e. orchard, b.d. london james clarke & co., & , fleet street to my wife preface the substance of this book was originally delivered as a course of lectures to a week-night congregation. the lecture form has been retained, and this accounts for the repetition of the leading ideas, while the practical interests of church life account for the insistence on the religious value and lesson. it is hoped that this, which might be irritating to the professional student, may be helpful to the ordinary reader who is repelled by the technicality of critical works, and often fails to discern the devout spirit by which such works are inspired, or to discover what religious interest is served by them. where everything is borrowed from other writers, and no claim to originality is made, detailed acknowledgment would be impossible, but the resolve to attempt some such course in place of the usual form of a week-night service was formed in the hebrew class-room of westminster college, cambridge, while listening to the lectures on old testament theology and messianic prophecy, delivered by the rev. professor dr. skinner (now principal), in which accurate scholarship was combined with a deep insight into the present religious importance of these subjects. grateful acknowledgment is also due to the rev. j.r. coates, b.a., who kindly read through the proofs and made many valuable suggestions. w. e. orchard. enfield, _august, _. contents lecture page introduction vii i. the semitic races ii. the primitive religion of the hebrews iii. mosaism iv. the influence of canaan v. prophetism--early stages vi. the religion of the literary prophets vii. the effect of the exile viii. the work of the priests ix. the religion of the psalmists x. the religion of the wise xi. messianic expectations introduction it is a matter of common knowledge that within the last few decades a tremendous change has come over our estimate of the value of the old testament, and that this change is of the gravest importance for our understanding of religion. but what the exact nature of the change is, and what we are to deduce from it, is a matter of debate, for the facts are only known to professional students and to a few others who may have been led to interest themselves in the subject. with some, for instance, the idea prevails that the old testament has been so discredited by modern research that its religious significance is now practically worthless. others believe that the results arrived at are untrue, and regard them as the outcome of wicked attacks made upon the veracity of the word of god by men whose scholarship is a cloak for their sinister designs or a mask of their incapacity to comprehend its spiritual message. there is perhaps a middle course open to some who have found a message of god to their souls in the old testament, and who, on hearing that the authorship of this book has been questioned or the historicity of that passage assailed, are unmoved, because they believe that it does not matter who wrote the pentateuch or the psalms so long as through these documents they hear the voice of the living word of god. here then is a subject on which there exists a distressing confusion, and, moreover, a subject in which ignorance plays no small part. save with a few devout souls who have made a long and continuous study of the scriptures, it may be doubted whether there is any widespread knowledge of the actual message of the old testament, even among christian people. there are certainly many people willing to defend the authority of the bible who spend very little time in reading it. the favourite psalms and the evangelical passages of isaiah are probably well known, and beyond this there is but the knowledge gained in early days, from which stand out in the memory the personalities of samson and saul, david and goliath, and daniel in the lion's den, together with the impressive stories of the flood, the destruction of sodom and gomorrah, the crossing of the red sea, and the fall of jericho. a very little is probably carried away from the public reading of the scriptures in places of worship. it cannot be said that this acquaintance conveys any real impression of the magnificent message that lies embedded in these thirty-nine books which go to make up the old testament. now whatever harm may be charged to the modern methods, it can at least be claimed that neglected portions have been carefully studied, the meaning of obscure passages discovered, and much of importance and interest brought to light; but more than this, it has been discovered that the essential message of the old testament lies largely apart from those narratives and personalities that impress the superficial reader, and rather in the record of a gradual development of the conception of god and of his purpose in calling israel to be the recipient of his self-disclosure. it has been found that the striking figures of the landscape are of less importance than the road that winds among them along which revelation moves to its final goal. it may be objected that the new inspiration, which so many who have studied the scriptures by these methods claim to have felt, throws quite a new emphasis on our conception of the old testament and is revolutionary of all that we have been accustomed to believe concerning it; that the methods are such as could not legitimately be applied to the word of god, and are the products of a criticism which is puffed up with a sense of its own superiority; and that the results are discreditable to the old testament, since they allege that some of the narratives are unhistorical, some passages and even whole books unauthentic, and traditions on which the gravest issues have been staked shown to have nothing more than a legendary basis. there is much in these objections that is natural, but much that is misunderstanding. it is true that the contribution which the old testament makes to religion is estimated differently from what it was fifty years ago, and it must be allowed that this brings a charge of having misunderstood the scriptures against generations of scholars and saints. but it is admitted that all matters of knowledge are open to misunderstanding. it is no argument against the conception that the earth moves round the sun, that the contrary idea was held in other ages. we know that the understanding of the old testament has been obscured, often by those who ought to have been the greatest authorities on its meaning. jesus read into the scriptures a meaning unrecognised by the authorities of his day, and dealt with them in a fashion that was regarded as revolutionary. to some of the scriptures he appealed as to a final authority, but others he regarded as imperfect and only suited to the time in which they were written. the jews of his day venerated every letter of the sacred writings, and regarded the very copies of the law as sacred to the touch, and yet on their understanding of the scriptures they rejected the mission and message of jesus. christian scholarship has undoubtedly followed rather after the rabbis than after christ. the message of the old testament that the new methods have made clear certainly appears to be more in conformity with the spirit of christ than with that of his opponents, and if this is revolutionary then it is no new thing; religion always moves along such lines. great offence has been caused and insuperable prejudice aroused among many by the name under which these methods have become known. the name, "higher criticism," conveys to most people a suggestion of carping fault-finding and an assumption of superiority. this is due to an entire misunderstanding of a technical term. criticism is nothing more than the exercise of the faculty of judgment, and, moreover, judgment that ought to be perfectly fair. the sinister suggestion that is conveyed in the word is due to the fact that our criticisms are so often biassed by personal prejudices. but this only condemns our faults, and not the method. "higher" criticism does not mean any assumption of superiority, but is simply a term used to distinguish it from "lower" criticism. the criticism that endeavours to ascertain the original text by a comparison of the various documents available is called _lower_, and that which deals with matters higher up the stream of descent by which the writings have been conveyed to us, namely, matters of date and authorship, is called _higher_ criticism. it might well be called literary and historical criticism, in distinction from textual criticism. it employs historical methods, and uses the simple tests of comparison and contemporaneity. for the understanding of a particular age, it prefers those documents that describe the times in which they were written, and give indirect evidence, rather than those histories which were written long after the event and which reveal a purpose other than the strictly historical. fortunately, we have in the old testament many such contemporary and indirect witnesses in the writings of the prophets. they are not consciously writing history, but they tell us indirectly what the practices of their day were, and especially what religious ideas were prevalent; for it is these things that they feel called upon to attack. with these reliable standards we can compare the regular histories, which were necessarily written at a much later age, and very often to serve some religious purpose. now it is this method, which is surely a true and proper one, that has changed our estimate of the history and development of religion in israel. are we to condemn the method without examination because it destroys certain traditions about the bible which we have received largely from judaism?--the judaism which could find no place for jesus! but it will be answered that these methods yield results that are incompatible with the inspiration of the bible, and are unworthy of god's revelation to us. but how are we to decide what is compatible with inspiration? we can only tell, surely, by seeing what these results are and by discovering whether they bring any inspiration to us. can we be certain, without examining the facts, to what lines the revelation of god is to be restricted? is this not coming to the bible with a theory which we have manufactured and which will surely distort the facts? it will be said that anything less than absolute accuracy makes void any claim to be a divine revelation. let us consider what this means. we know that the historical spirit, which endeavours to see history as it actually happened quite apart from our desires or sympathies, is an ideal which has only emerged with the general spread of education, and that in ancient times history was written largely with a view to edification, and especially for giving such lessons as would lead to right principles being adopted for the future. it was not the accuracy of the material but suitability for its purpose that weighed with the historian. now, with these conditions existing, was it impossible for god to speak to men through their conceptions of history, or had he to wait until the historical spirit prevailed? could he not use the early legends which they believed, and through them bring the truth to men? we know that the greatest of all religious teachers did not scruple to embody the highest truths in such parables as lowly minds could receive. we may demand that revelation shall be infallible, but this would need in turn an infallible person to receive it, and even then an infallible interpreter. an infallible revelation would mean that there could never be any progress in revelation; that it would have to be given perfect in one process; that it would have to be authenticated to men by authority, since it would be beyond the understanding of a fallible mind; that it would break in upon every other experience, remain isolated, and never be grasped by that strong conviction which we call faith; and this would entail a destruction of the mental faculties of man, and an acknowledgment that communication between god and man is really impossible. could not god speak to man in his infancy, and with the growing understanding would there not be growing light? meanwhile, whatever we feel about these abstract principles, we ought to know the facts. in the pages that follow an endeavour is made to present the results at which a consensus of opinion has arrived. there will be no great time spent in argument for or against these facts. such are to be sought in the scientific works and in the dictionaries, which alone can deal adequately with these facts, but since many altogether refuse to consider the facts because of the inferences which they think can be drawn from them, this book is an earnest plea for earnest men to consider whether it is not open to be shown that from these facts there comes to us a much clearer understanding of god's ways with man; a more certain conviction that in the past god has actually spoken through the scriptures; a clue to a better understanding of the place jesus occupies in the history of revelation; and what we all need greatly to-day: a preparation of heart that we may follow the leading of that spirit who ever has and who ever will guide into all truth those who are willing to follow him. the aim of this book is that the reader may feel that the voice which speaks in his own heart and the voice which has guided man through all his strange history is one, and is of god. the semitic races _read, as introduction to this lecture, the tenth chapter of genesis._ this is one of the most interesting documents in anthropology. it is an attempt at a scientific ethnology, and seems to have been expanded from the closing verses of the preceding chapter. it will be noticed that those verses are in poetical form (r.v.), and are likely to be very ancient. note the principles of classification:-- ( ) geographical. it is a very incomplete summary of the peoples of the earth. only those nations are mentioned that fill the horizon of the writer's knowledge. that horizon will be found to correspond very largely with that of the prophets jeremiah and ezekiel. ( ) prejudice. the evident kinship of some peoples is denied on the ground of dislike; for the same reason, moab and ammon, who are well known, are simply omitted. the real test of kinship is language, which is here ignored. the names are not to be taken as individuals. of this the very form is witness: ludim is plural, mizraim is dual, tarshish is the name of a place, and amorite is gentilic. notes:-- verse . madai = medes. javan = the greeks, or more particularly, the ionians. verse . tarshish is probably spain. kittim = the cretans. dodanim (read rodanim ch. i. ) = the inhabitants of rhodes. verse . mizraim: the name for egypt. canaan: here and elsewhere said to be descended from ham. beyond all doubt the canaanites were a semitic people and spoke a language akin to hebrew. religious antagonism and the fact of their conquest demanded in the popular imagination a different ancestry. verse . "whence went forth the philistines" is misplaced, and should follow after "caphtorim" (amos ix. ). verse . eber: the name of the supposed ancestor of the hebrews. verse . elam = persia. racially the elamites were quite distinct from the semites. this inclusion may be a clue to the date of this table of nations; friendship with persia dates from cyrus (sixth century b.c.). (see driver's "genesis.") lecture i the semitic races the hebrew nation forms a branch of that group of the human family known as the semites. their relation to the other great racial divisions of mankind is far beyond the reach of our enquiry, and we cannot even penetrate to a period when the semites formed an unbroken family. at the remotest date to which history can take us we find the family already widely dispersed, with distinct national characteristics well developed, and their common ancestry quite forgotten in their violent hatreds of their unrecognised kinsmen. indeed it is only the test of language which still preserves for us an indisputable proof of their common origin. their existence can be traced back to a very remote date, for fragments of their literature and other evidences of civilisation have been discovered that have been dated - b.c., and even at that period the language shows signs of phonetic degeneration that require a still further period for the process to have reached this stage. the primitive home of the semites cannot have been, however, where these ancient remains have been found, namely, in the euphrates valley, for the records themselves show that they were only immigrants there and had replaced the original inhabitants, who came of sumerian stock. neither was it in palestine, as our own bible will tell us; but it is probably to be sought in arabia, where the purest semitic stock is still to be found. in this desert home the race was bred that was destined to have such a tremendous influence on the history of the world, and it is largely to this desert training that we can trace influences which have made them what they are. the battle for life in that inhospitable land would mould a physique capable of extraordinary endurance, and to this we can perhaps trace the virility of the modern jew, who has resisted for centuries the poisonous ghettos of european cities and remains far healthier than his indigenous neighbours. this hard training fitted them for an exacting life, and in the phoenicians they became the traders of antiquity, and in the carthaginians and saracens, warriors not to be despised. hardness easily becomes cruelty, and purely semitic empires, such as assyria, developed a barbarous cruelty, the story of which is told on their inscriptions and in the denunciations of the hebrew prophets. there is something in the semitic character that is disliked by western nations, and the jews have been subjects of relentless persecution in mediæval times, and are still capable of arousing bitter hostility, as may be seen from those violent eruptions of anti-semitism which occasionally burst through the cosmopolitanism of western europe. the well-defined limitations of their primitive home--crushed in between the continents of europe, africa and asia, the neutral ground of the eastern and western worlds--seem almost to be reflected in the limitations of their mental development. the semitic tongue is crude in its simplicity and incapable of expressing an abstract idea, and it is natural to find as a result that the philosophical faculty is almost entirely missing. although they have given to the world an alphabet, a system of numeration which has made mathematics possible, and the beginnings of measurement and of the science of astronomy, yet their mind is not scientific in the modern sense. they possess, as perhaps no other race, the gift of telling stories of wonder and mystery, and for a simple tale of love and pathos they are unsurpassed. they have produced the finest lyrical literature of the ancient world, but have contributed hardly anything to dramatic or epic poetry, and their achievements in art have been cramped by their religious prejudices. but in the realm of religion they are supreme, and have become the high-priests of humanity, for from them have gone forth three great religions, and one of these capable of development into the universal religion of mankind. these faiths have not been slowly evolved from the national consciousness, but have both sprung from and been embodied in inspiring personalities; for have they not given to the world moses and the prophets, mahomet, and the son of man? the semites are divided by anthropologists into the following groups: southern group--north arabians, sabæans, abyssinians; northern group--babylonians, assyrians, aramæans, canaanites, hebrews; and all these groups seem to have been formed from the original stock by migrations from their home in arabia. the contracted area of the arabian peninsula, the inability of the land to support a large population, coupled with their restless spirit and the constant feuds between the tribes, made emigration a necessity at a very early period. the exact history and order of these migrations it is now impossible to trace, but it would seem that the first great movement was eastward, whither they were drawn by the culture and wealth of the sumerian civilisation in the euphrates valley. it is quite possible that this movement commenced years before christ. at a later date they seem to have invaded egypt and left some traces upon the language and customs of that land. the land of syria would offer a near and easy home for the emigrants, and yet the first semites to arrive in palestine seem to have come from the euphrates. the inhabitants they displaced were the hittites, who probably came from asia minor; they were turanians, and were akin to the present inhabitants of armenia. it is only lately that excavation has revealed the remains of a hittite empire in palestine. the first semitic tribes to reach palestine pushed down to the seaboard, where they developed a wonderful maritime civilisation and became the daring traders and explorers who are known in history as the phoenicians; the other tribes occupied the hill country and became the canaanites of bible story. of the next migration westward, the bible preserves a popular account in the story of the journey of abraham from ur of the chaldees. now abraham and his descendants were called hebrews, and this name is traced to an ancestor who was called eber or heber. it is doubtful whether an _individual_ so named ever existed. the name "hebrew" means "one from the other side," and would therefore have been a suitable name for those who crossed the euphrates, coming from arabia; but of this movement the bible knows nothing. some have supposed that the name was given much later to the tribes who entered palestine across the jordan. the discovery of the tel-el-amarna tablets has somewhat complicated our understanding of these events. these tablets were letters written by the vassal-kings of syria to their overlord amenophis iii., king of egypt, and in them the king of jerusalem calls for help against some tribes who are invading the country and whom he names _habiri_. now the date of this correspondence is about b.c., and if these are the hebrews, we shall have to suppose that not all the tribes of israel went down into egypt or that the exodus took place some two centuries earlier than the date given in the bible; but the whole question of the identification of the habiri is not yet certain. it is, however, with those hebrew tribes who were afterwards known as the children of israel that we have to do; and however remote, and by whatever stages it is to be traced, their semitic relationship is certain. their own tradition of the birthplace of abraham shows that they are conscious of their common origin with the babylonians; the stories in genesis acknowledge their kinship with moab and ammon, even though national hatred has coloured the account of their birth (gen. xix. - ). they formed a brotherly covenant with edom, and ishmael is recognised not only to be kin but to be the elder. the canaanites were disowned wrongly, for they were certainly semites; but the philistines rightly, for they came into palestine over-sea from crete. we need always to bear in mind that our bible is the product of semitic thought, and whatever its universal message, it is expressed in the forms of semitic genius; and yet that the hebrews stand out from the other semitic nations is indisputable, and the distinguishing mark is the purity of their religion. what is the cause of that difference? how came such a tender root out of such a dry ground? renan is responsible for the popular idea that the semites have a natural tendency towards monotheism. the idea should present no difficulties for a theory of revelation, but it is certainly not true. it is not true of the general type of semitic religion, and it cannot be claimed, in the face of the prophets' record of their countrymen's lapses, that it was true even of the hebrews. if it were said that there was that in semitic history and character which, provided opportunity were given, would offer a congenial soil for the reception of monotheistic ideas, it would be the utmost that could be said. neither is there more truth in the antithesis that contrasts the aryan conception of god as immanent with the semitic as transcendent; for in their primitive stages aryan and semitic religions are alike. primitive semitic religion is indeed quite polytheistic; every tribe has its own god and this god is closely identified with a particular locality. therefore, to be an outcast from the tribe meant to be an exile from the protection and service of the god. this idea can be found in the bible as late as david, who thought that if he were driven forth from his own land he would have to serve other gods ( sam. xxvi. ). the god is conceived to be the father of the tribe, while the land is the mother, and this in quite a physical and literal sense. the same idea is of course frequent in the greek religions, and some such conception must be the original of the strange tradition in genesis (vi. ), which describes a union between the sons of god and the daughters of men. the connection of the god with the tribe is therefore simply a matter of blood descent, and the blood becomes in consequence invested with sacred virtues. the blood of the tribe cannot be shed by one of the members without incurring the vengeance of the god; and the use of the blood of animals in various ceremonies may point to the belief in a common ancestry for men and animals; in some tribes the animal is regarded as a superior being, and is actually worshipped. the blood of animals even is thought to be too sacred for human consumption, and is therefore set apart by libation as suitable food for the god. seeing that the connection between the god and man is only tribal, the shedding of the blood of any other tribe is quite allowable; for the tribal god cares only for his own people, and others cannot approach him ( kings xvii. ). it is evident that a religion based upon such ideas can never be a factor in the moral development of a people. it only needs to provide for help against enemies, counsel in times of national affliction, and oracles for difficult problems of judgment; therefore, in times of national prosperity and security, it will play no part beyond that of custom; and custom often seems the stronger in proportion to its lack of meaning. we may insist that the hebrew religion is superior to all this because it owes its origin to the special revelation of god; but even that does not preclude us from enquiring through what natural causes this revelation came, if we believe that natural causes form some part of the working of the divine mind. now these ideas common to semitic religion persisted among the hebrews and were only shaken by the earnest ministry of the prophets, and eventually destroyed by the reflection which followed the national disaster of the exile. the continued national trouble of israel was therefore a factor in her advance in the truth, and she stands as a witness to the possibility of suffering being an educative force. moreover, she found that her promised land was only a little strip hemmed in between the desert and the sea, where all dreams of world-empire were forbidden. then it was that this nation turned her thoughts to a spiritual kingdom, and looking across the sea that she feared to cross saw a day when the distant isles should be her possession, because she had given to them the law of jehovah, and the knowledge of god. the primitive religion of the hebrews the strata of the pentateuch we give here for reference the proposed identification of the documents that critics say can be recognised in the construction of the first five books of the bible. the theory has been developed so as to include the books of joshua, judges, and some parts of samuel, all of which are said to bear the same marks of composition from pre-existing documents. "j." jahvistic. dated - b.c. this document is especially distinguished for using the name of jehovah, or "yahwè," and is anthropomorphic in its conception of god. "e." elohistic. dated - b.c. the name for god in this document is "elohim," and its conception of god is more spiritual and elevated than in "j." "d." deuteronomist. dated - b.c. this document has the style and thought of the book of deuteronomy, where it is chiefly, though by no means exclusively found. the central idea of this document is _the one sanctuary_. "p." priestly code. dated - b.c. this document supplies the framework of the pentateuch, and is distinguished by its interest in questions of ritual, and by its very legal and stereotyped style. the dates given above are arrived at from a comparison of the ideas expressed in these documents with their emergence in the historical books of the old testament. only for the last two can it be claimed that there are historical events which are said to confirm them. these are: the finding of the book of the law in the reign of josiah, and the promulgation of the law by ezra. lecture ii the primitive religion of the hebrews we have seen from the last lecture that an examination of the general type of semitic religion gives us no explanation of the mature development of the religion of the hebrews; on the contrary, that development would seem to take place in spite of the common semitic characteristics, for it is against these characteristics and the natural tendency to return to them that we find the prophets continually at war. if this is so, can we penetrate to the first stage at which the new religious movement begins which was to reach such glorious heights in jeremiah, the psalmists and the son of man? it is certainly not to be found in the general character of semitic religion; does it commence with the ancestor of the hebrew race, the patriarch abraham? to this question the editor of genesis means to return a decided answer: the true religion of jehovah existed from the earliest times, and all lower forms are deteriorations from that pure original revelation. the earliest stories in genesis are made to bear witness to this; abel offered the true worship of god in that he brought of the best of his flock, thus agreeing with the sacrifice of animals set forth in the fully-developed ritual of leviticus as the only means of approach to god; noah offers of "clean" animals; the patriarchs offer animal sacrifices, and call upon the name of jehovah; rebekah goes to enquire of jehovah and obtains an oracle. the author means to convey by this that the earliest religion was the religion which we find outlined in leviticus and deuteronomy, with the exceptions that a priest is not necessary, and that sacrifice is permitted at other places besides the one chosen sanctuary. this idea is enshrined in that favourite name for god which we find in the old testament, the god of abraham, isaac and jacob. we have now to enquire whether this is a correct view of the history, or only the writer's speculations about an age long removed from his own. we are moved to do this because there are certain facts in this history that do not seem to fit in with the author's view. it is evident at the outset, that the writer, whoever he be, is dealing with subjects concerning which he can have at best only second-hand knowledge. this may have been conveyed to him in documents, or in popular tradition. if the object of the compilation of this history was not so much to produce an accurate and exact history as to interpret the past as a religious lesson for his own age, it cannot be instantly dismissed as improbable that he may have altered some of his material so as to accord more closely with his own religious views. now scholars say that they can detect the presence of various documents, which have been loosely combined and coloured with the editor's own ideas of what should have taken place. there is hardly any theory which has excited more ridicule from a certain class of biblical students. the idea is dismissed offhand as utterly unworthy of a sacred writer; and even if he did adopt such a scissors-and-paste method of compiling history, it is denied that anyone could detect the various strata now. no defence of these claims of the critical school need be attempted here, for we are taking their theories as granted, with the idea of seeing what their acceptance as true would mean to our estimate of the bible and revelation; but it may be shown that the evangelist luke is not ashamed to confess that he used something like this method in compiling his gospel. from the table that faces this lecture, it will be seen that the critics give dates for these documents that lie very far apart, and if the dates are even approximately true, it is a fair conclusion that with such wide separation of time, and with the consequent difference both in language and idea, there should be sufficient criteria to detect the different strata. the critics who have attempted the disintegration of the original documents of the pentateuch have been challenged to show their fitness for such a task by extricating the respective contributions in a joint authorship novel such as "the chaplain of the fleet," by walter besant and james rice. or, again, such claims are discounted on the ground of the known failures of professional literary critics to recognise under pseudonym or anonymity, the style of a well-known author, or even to guess correctly the sex of the writer. the analogy fails because the circumstances are entirely different. it would be on more equal terms to deny that it would be possible to distinguish, say, the personal opinions of the author of an english history from the passages quoted from the doomsday book, chaucer, or an act of the long parliament, if all quotation marks and references were omitted. for according to the witness of the very documents themselves this conception of the early history must be set aside as not quite correct. the history in genesis is conscious that some new start began with abraham: he abandoned idolatry. still more clearly is it seen that with moses another epoch began, for according to one document, the very name of jehovah was unknown before its revelation to moses (exod. vi. , ). we are, therefore, faced with the necessity of enquiring how much of the stories of the patriarchs can be called history in any true sense. the reasons for and against their historical value may be summarised: _against_: ( ) the stories must have been composed long after the events took place. ( ) tribal movements and personal incidents seem to have been confused. ( ) the endeavour to explain the origin of personal and geographical names is often merely popular, and etymologically incorrect. (compare with this the common errors of our own day; for instance, the explanation of the name of liverpool from a supposed bird called the liver, now known to be entirely mythical.) ( ) while the contemporary history of this period is now quite an enlightened field, and the life, character, and customs of the inhabitants of palestine in this age of the patriarchs comparatively well known, we look in vain for any mention of these persons themselves. _for_:( ) the narratives of the patriarchs are admitted by critics to have been taken from at least two documents of separate origin and of different dates. this should double the weight of the evidence. ( ) the simplicity of the narratives in many places looks like a relation of fact. (but over against this must be placed the genius for relating a story of pure fiction which is so peculiar a distinction of the semites. some of the narratives are quite artificial; as the story of isaac's lie to shield his wife, which follows a similar story related of abraham.) ( ) we might appeal to the memory of the bedawin reciters, who can repeat almost incredibly long portions of the koran. the most likely solution of this conflicting evidence would seem to be that in the history of the patriarchs we have a modicum of historical foundation which has been worked up into popular and idealised legends. if the stories of the three patriarchs be carefully studied, it will be noticed that while the stories of jacob are matter of fact, and do outline a conceivable character, the stories of isaac produce only a nebulous character impression, while abraham stands forth as a character which has been idealised. this would be an accountable psychological process: in the case of jacob a good deal of detail is remembered, isaac is almost forgotten, while in the case of abraham, only the name and a few incidents are known, which serve to form the framework of a religious lesson. it is, however, in the conception of their religion that idealisation has most plainly occurred, for it is mainly the religion of the ninth century, that is, of the age immediately preceding the great literary prophets. in the documents themselves there is left to the careful reader ample indication in customs and narratives, the meaning of which has escaped the notice of the editor, that a more primitive form of religion prevailed. it would seem, as we have seen, that the name of jehovah was unknown to them, while there are evident tokens of polytheistic belief (gen. xxxi. ; xxxv. - ). the crudity of the worship may be seen in the frequent reference to the erection of pillars and stones, which, it will be seen later, have more than a merely memorial purpose. the ease with which we find idolatry always reappearing in later history points to some hereditary tendency at work among the mass of the people. if, however, we suppose that the primitive religion was entirely heathen we shall be faced with the problem of discovering some necessary point of departure to which the higher revelation could affix itself. we may suppose, therefore, that among the ancestors of the hebrews there was held a faith that was relatively purer than that common to the semites, a faith which contained in itself the guarantee of the possibility of advance, if only favourable conditions arose; that "el, the mighty one (_shaddai_)," was worshipped, but along with the retention of customs and ideas that are to be found in some forms of demon worship, that is, with the recognition of many other great spirits, not all of whom are thought of as inimical to man; very much as we find among the north american indians the idea of a great spirit, existing side by side with heathen practices and beliefs. so far our enquiry has not taken us on to very sure ground, and we must seek other methods. in the study of comparative religion the idea of a certain natural order of the evolution of religion predominates, but the actual origin of religion is still only a matter of speculation, as indeed it is bound to remain from the very nature of religion itself, since it is a vision of faith, rising in different ages and races through quite different processes. we propose now to take both the speculations and the assured results of the study of comparative religion, and using these as tests, see if they have left any traces in the evolution of the hebrew religion or if they can guide us to its possible origins. the principles of such enquiry and application may be stated. ( ) the ascertained customs and ideas of other religions, especially those of the semites, will form a working hypothesis, and if we then find any reference to these customs or ideas in the old testament, it will make towards reasonable proof of a similar origin. ( ) we must be careful, however, to exclude customs that are known to have been borrowed from the canaanites, such as the practice of baal-worship. ( ) at the same time we must beware of assuming, without further enquiry, that all the observances ordained by the religion of jehovah whose origins are connected with some historical event are to be thought of as having their beginning then. it is more than likely that when a long-established custom was recognised to be heathen in its origin or tendency, it would be strictly forbidden, as in the case of the heathen practice of necromancy; others which had lost their original meaning would be baptised into a new significance under the new religion. (with this phenomenon may be compared our own festival of christmas day, taken over from the roman saturnalia, and our mourning customs, which are survivals of heathenism, and can only with great difficulty be made to take on a christian meaning.) let us then examine the supposed origins of heathen religion, and first of all, that known as totemism. totemism is a custom exceedingly common among savage tribes, in which some animal is chosen as the badge, or the name of the tribe, and a blood covenant formed, when the animal becomes the "totem" or god of the tribe. popular instances may be given in the names of many of the indian tribes of north america, or even in the crests and emblems of our now disrupted clans in scotland, which can be traced back to a similar idea. in other cases the totem may be one of the well-known flora of the country or some other natural object. the custom is, of course, seen in the well-known worship of animals which has continued even among nations of advanced civilisation. are there any traces of the influence of this idea at work in the religion of the old testament? there are one or two tribal names which are names of animals. simeon is probably the name of a hybrid between a wolf and a hyæna. leah means a wild cow, and rachel is the hebrew name for an ewe. the distinction between clean and unclean animals might be traced to this influence, but it does not altogether explain the lists in lev. xi. and deut. xiv. another theory of the origin of religion is that known as animism. this is the belief in the existence of spirits,--a belief prompted by the phenomena of dreams,--which usually takes the form of belief in the activity of the spirits of the recently deceased, an activity which is sometimes thought to be harmful and therefore feared. animism, as a belief in a spiritual activity behind natural phenomena, especially those of the fearful type, survives in some form or other in the highest religions, and was particularly active in the hebrew idea that jehovah controlled natural forces for the deliverance of his people and for his own wonderful manifestations. animism generally survives among uncivilised peoples in the practice of ancestor worship, of which there is no trace among the hebrews. nevertheless, the belief in animism has left some customs behind it. especially is this seen in the mourning customs which are designed to render the relatives unrecognisable to the departed spirit. this was effected by sprinkling ashes on the head, going naked or clothed in sackcloth. cutting the flesh for this purpose is expressly forbidden (lev. xix. ). the ritual uncleanness of one who has come into contact with a dead body is also a relic of animism, as is also the strange idea in num. xix. , which is intended to guard against the spirit taking up its abode in a position from which it would be difficult to dislodge it. the funeral feast is held with the idea that the dead can still partake, but in this case friendly feelings rather than fear operate. the conclusion is that animism has played its part in the shaping of israel's religion, but that the cruder forms of it were dropped at a very early age. the religion of savage tribes is generally found to be polytheistic, and this is supposed to be one of the earliest stages in the development of religion. it takes the form of the deification of the forces of nature or of striking natural objects, which are worshipped and generally feared, and is therefore a form of animism. if the theories of the critics as to the composition of the early books of the bible are correct, we should expect to find that, if any traces of polytheism could be detected, they would be carefully obliterated from the original documents by the latest editor. there are indications discernible which show that this has been done, for although the worship of other gods is always severely condemned as the greatest of sins, yet at the same time we find no clear recognition of the idea of the one god until the time of the prophets. the gods of the heathen are mentioned as if they were real beings who are to be feared. the evidence for this may be objected to in detail, but the accumulation of facts does press the reader to the unavoidable conclusion that until the prophets, the faith of israel was monolatry rather than monotheism, that is, the worship of one god rather than the definite belief that he is the only god. the very name for god in the hebrew language has a plural form (elohim), but this is explained by a grammatical custom by which things of exalted idea are spoken of in the plural, called by grammarians, _the plural of eminence_. the evidence for polytheism quoted above from gen. xxxi. ; xxxv. - , might be referred to the introduction of alien idolatrous practices; but this can hardly be claimed in the case of the practice mentioned in lev. xvii. , which must be a reference to the cult of satyrs, or goat-like demons which were commonly supposed to inhabit the desert, to the discouragement of which the ceremony mentioned in lev. xvi. , , ff, would seem to be directed. this strange figure called azazel is not elsewhere described in the old testament, but we learn from the book of enoch that this was the name for the king of the demons, a kind of _djinn_ who inhabited the wilderness and demanded toll of human life. (in agreement with what has been said before it will be noticed how this practice has been absorbed in the ritual of the tabernacle, but with a different meaning.) even the first commandment does not explicitly deny the existence of other gods; it merely prohibits their worship by the israelites. it may be that this command led to the full monotheistic belief which we find in men like isaiah, but that full conception cannot be fairly read into the first commandment. chemosh, the god of the amorites, is mentioned in judges xi. , as a real being who had given the amorites the possession of their land, even as jehovah had given canaan to the israelites. in the popular imagination these heathen gods would remain as real beings probably long after the monotheistic belief had been held by the more enlightened, being thought of as demon powers, in much the same way as the early christians regarded the gods of greece and rome. when we turn to the evidence from the customs of worship that owe their origin to heathen ideas, the supposition that the early religion of the hebrews was hardly distinguishable from that of the semitic races finds a full confirmation. the most determinative of these ideas is that of the localisation of the god, who appears only at certain specified places with which he is inseparably connected. the appearance is generally in some form more or less human, and the site of the manifestation is either marked for posterity by the erection of a suitable memorial, in the shape of a stone or an altar, or else some natural object is taken to be the actual residence of the god. the god is therefore connected rather with the land than with the people, and it is this antagonism of the popular idea with that of the prophets, who stand for the relation between jehovah and israel as not territorial but covenanted, which is the key to the history of israel. apart from this prevalent idea, which is in itself a sufficient proof, we have the frequent reference to the sacredness of certain memorials and objects whose original significance cannot be hidden from the careful reader. we shall examine first these objects of reverential regard and then proceed to notice some of the more outstanding customs whose origin is heathen. (a) _sacred stones._ throughout the old testament we meet with numerous references to stones or circles that form convenient landmarks or natural _rendezvous_ for national ceremonies. adonijah strengthens his rebellion by a great sacrifice at the stone of zoheleth--"the serpent's stone." the extremely important part which the serpent plays in all semitic religion and mythology, together with the sacrificial act at this spot, points to its having been the ancient site of some idolatrous cult. many of these sacred stones may have been the shrines of the canaanites, and to some of these the invading religion attached its own meaning. the circle at gilgal, which is said to commemorate the crossing of the jordan, may be an example of this, for there is some contradiction in the account which refers it to a memorial erected by joshua for this purpose (compare josh. iv. - , ff, with iv. ), and it is more than likely that the circle of graven images mentioned in judges iii. (r.v. margin) is to be identified with it. among this class of sacred objects must be mentioned the obscure _mazzebah_, translated in the margin of the revised version, "obelisk." the use of the mazzebah is strictly forbidden in exod. xxxiv. , as one of the idolatrous customs of the former inhabitants of the land, but in the eighth century the mazzebah is reckoned by hosea as one of the essentials of hebrew worship, as if he knew nothing of this proscription in the law (hosea iii. iv.). these pillars were evidently used to mark the place of worship, and they are said to have been found at shechem, bethel, gilgal, mizpeh, and elsewhere. from their usage in primitive semitic religion as well as from their prohibition in exodus it can be seen that they had idolatrous significance, and it is thought that they were rudely carved to resemble the likeness of the god. the two pillars placed before the temple, called jachin and boaz, are probably connected with the mazzebah. (b) _sacred trees._ the continual reference to these in the old testament shows that they had some special and sacred significance. such are the terebinths of mamre (gen. xiii. ; should be singular according to the septuagint), the tamarisk at beersheba (gen. xxi. ), the palm of deborah (judges iv. ), and the terebinth in ophrah (judges vi. ). we can understand how to desert peoples trees naturally stood for objects of thankful reverence, and in the popular mind were regarded as the special seat and haunt of a deity. that they also served for the purpose of obtaining oracles may be seen from sam. v. ; with which may be compared the practice of oracular decision by the rustling of the famous oaks of delphi. with this species of tree-worship we must compare the use of the asherah mentioned as a sacred symbol in judges vi. ; this is expressly forbidden in exod. xxxiv. , deut. xvi. . it used to be supposed that this was a wooden symbol of a goddess asherah, but from the description in the passage quoted from deuteronomy, and from isa. xvii. , it would seem to be a tree-like post, and is more likely to be a remnant of tree worship, as our own maypole may be. it came to pass that the tree or tree-like pole could therefore stand beside any altar as the sign of the presence of the god, and in the pre-prophetic religion of israel this was transferred to a sign of the presence of jehovah until the asherah was forbidden, in that great attempt to make return to idolatry impossible, the reform under josiah. (c) _sacred springs._ a similar origin may be supposed for the recognised sacredness of springs. from the names given to some of these it is evident that they were regarded as the special seat of divine power, natural enough, as in the case of the trees, to a desert-bred race and to dwellers in a land which never had too plentiful a supply of water. the proximity of the spring to an altar or sacred stone confirms this, as in the case of the stone zoheleth near the spring en-rogel, the "spring of the fuller." the name of "en-mishpat" (gen. xiv. ), "the spring of judgment," would seem to indicate that springs were used for the purpose of obtaining oracles, but by what signs this was effected is not known. the name of the spring in gen. xvi. , where the angel appeared to hagar, is significant in this connection: "the well of the living one who seeth me." in the customs of worship, and in all customs to which there is attached a definite religious significance, we find analogies in the heathen religions which show that they must have had a common origin. chief among these must be classed the custom of sacrifice. it is natural, therefore, to find that sacrifice, which has such an undoubtedly natural explanation in heathen religions as either the food of the god or a means of propitiation, is nowhere in the old testament explicitly defined as to its intent and meaning. the root idea is, however, clearly seen in such customs as that of the setting forth of the shewbread, however much the meaning may have become spiritualised by a purer idea of the nature of jehovah, while in ezek. xliv. , , this seems to be quite explicitly stated. as the conception of deity was spiritualised, the idea of material food would doubtless grow too repugnant to be retained in the bare offering of flesh, and so we get the burnt-offering, the smoke of which jehovah can smell. the blood especially, forms the correct offering, since being the seat of life, it belongs altogether to god. on the idea of the sacrifice being used as a propitiation to the deity, it follows naturally that the more costly the victim the more acceptable it will be, and of all sacrifices the most efficacious will be that of a human being. the story of abram and isaac in gen. xxii. is made to serve as a condemnation of human sacrifices, but the origin of the story may very well have pointed the other way, as indeed the first part of the story does; and that the practice was common may be seen from kings xvi. ; xxi. ; jer. vii. ; xix. (delete the last words of jer. xix. , as an evident gloss from vii. ). true, in these passages human sacrifice is said to be in express contravention of the will of jehovah, but no such comment is added to the story of jephthah (judges xi. ff.), while in micah vi. , the sacrifice of the firstborn is simply classed among other sacrifices as part of the common idea. a remnant of this horrible practice is probably to be found in the consecration of the firstborn to jehovah, while the legality of human sacrifice is determinative in the common practice of the "ban," by which all captives were devoted to jehovah, and any violation visited by the direst vengeance; as in the case of saul and agag. another use of the sacrifice was that of ratifying a covenant by cutting a victim in parts, between which the contracting parties passed (gen. xv. - ; jer. xxxiv. ). much the same result will be found from enquiry into the origin of special feasts and customs that are said to have been instigated at the express command of jehovah; for there is evidence which shows that they were often customs common amongst the heathen, and were only invested with a new significance by the higher religion of the hebrews. among these it is likely that we must reckon even the passover, for the daubing of the lintels is said to be a common heathen practice, and it will be noticed in support of the pre-mosaic origin of the ceremony that at its first mention in exod. xii. , it is called _the_ passover. the meaning of the hebrew word translated "passover" is also capable of another meaning than that given in the story of its institution, a meaning which also points to its being the survival of a semitic and heathen custom. similar enquiry into ancient religions of the semitic type shows that originally circumcision had no special religious significance, but was probably a sign of puberty and the right to marry. as manners softened it became a family rite and there was no need to postpone it till years of manhood. the practice of wearing special garments at religious rites is also found in heathen religions, and still maintains itself in our habit of wearing "sunday clothes." the results of these enquiries are sufficiently startling to those who have been accustomed to regard the religion of israel as starting from some definite act of revelation which ordained these ordinances and their religious meaning for the first time. but it is common enough in history to find that customs persist long after their original significance has been forgotten, and that they are gradually invested with a meaning more appropriate to the spirit of the age. we are not, however, shut up to the conclusion, that, because we can trace much of the wonderful religion of israel to common causes acting upon heathen religion, there is no real work of revelation in this gradual progress from lower to higher stages. it would be quite useless, from the point of view of this book, to enter on the fruitless discussion as to whether in the evolution of religion we have to deal with a natural process or with a supernatural revelation. is any such antithesis necessary? surely the one can come through the other. if revelation is to reach us it must come through the ordinary processes of our minds; the recognition that it is from god cannot be authenticated to us by any miracle or outward authority, but simply by the possibility of the mind, which god has made, being able to recognise its maker. it may be more of a difficulty to others that we should have such erroneous conceptions of history in a book that has been regarded as infallible on these matters. we have to face the fact, from which there is no escape, that the historian may not have known the origin of the things of which he wrote, or may have intentionally obscured the fact of the heathen origin of customs that had become to all pious israelites expressions of jehovah's special revelation to israel. if we are going to call this fraud, then it means that we are going to force on that early age a conception of historical accuracy which it certainly did not possess, and which, as a matter of fact, is only a late demand of the human mind. and after all, there was truth in this reference of all their religion to the revelation of jehovah. it witnesses to the fact that behind even the crudest religion there is something which defies explanation, and that we have in heathen religions the slow dawning consciousness of god within man's soul. in israel these things never stood still. that central idea of the localisation of jehovah grew too small to contain the widening conception of him as it was evolved through reflection and national experience, until the prophets burst forth with the proclamation that he was the god of the whole earth, and his relation to israel not tribal or territorial, but moral, and only to be maintained by righteousness and true holiness. mosaism the reader is recommended to make a careful study of the following passages, which are among the most important adduced by the critics as evidence for the non-mosaic authorship of the pentateuch. ( ) mosaic authorship is never claimed for the pentateuch as a whole. only in certain places is it noted that moses wrote down special things (exod. xvii. ; xxiv. ; xxxiv. ; num. xxxiii. ; deut. xxxi. , , ). moses is consistently spoken of in the third person, and it is hardly likely that this is a style purposely adopted, or the statement of num. xii. would be extraordinary in the circumstances. obviously the last chapter of deuteronomy was not written by him, nor is the common opinion that it was added by joshua at all probable, for there is no difference in style from the rest of the book discernible, and, moreover, dan is referred to (deut. xxxiv. ; cp. also gen. xiv. ), which was not so named until after the conquest. (josh. xix. ; judges xviii. .) would moses need to authenticate his history of contemporaneous events by quoting from what are regarded as ancient books: from the book of the wars of jehovah (num. xxi. ), wars which could have only just commenced, or from the poem which refers to the victory over sihon (num. xxi. ff.), which took place at the very end of the forty years' wandering? ( ) the standpoint as a whole is that of an age later than moses. the remark in gen. xxxvi. can only have had any meaning in the age of david when edom was in submission to israel. a late date is also needed for the following passages: gen. xii. ; xiii. ; xxxiv. ("in israel"! cp. judges xx. ; sam. xiii. ); lev. xviii. ; deut. ii. ; iv. . in fact, the whole geographical outlook is that of an inhabitant of western palestine, as may be seen from the use of the term "seaward" to indicate the west, and of "negeb," or the desert land, for the south. these terms are used even in the description of the tabernacle, which, if taken from the site of mount sinai, would be altogether wrong and meaningless. compare num. xxii. ; xxxiv. ; deut. i. , ; iii. ; iv. , , : "beyond the jordan," showing clearly that the writer's position is in palestine, west of the jordan. ( ) there is no trace in the history of any observance of the levitical ritual until after the exile; the day of atonement, the sin-offering, the high-priest, all are unheard of until this date. nor can it be claimed that it was the ignorance of the common people, or their apostasy, that was responsible for this condition of things. the great leaders of the various reformations are apparently also quite ignorant that none but a priest could sacrifice, and none but a levite take charge of the ark. samuel, who was not a levite, sleeps beside the ark and offers sacrifice. elijah does nothing to recall the people to the ritual of leviticus. ( ) the conclusion is that, while later ages were right in attributing to moses the founding of their religion and some of their ritual, all the accumulation of law, which had only been the growth of many centuries, has been placed to his credit. what the actual contribution of moses was it is now impossible to say, but the original of the ten words and of the book of the covenant (exod. xx. -xxiii. ) may well go back to that age, as may be seen from the relative simplicity of the laws and rules. for example, compare the simple regulations for the altar in exod. xx. with the elaborate altar described in exod. xxvii. - . lecture iii mosaism the national consciousness of israel goes back to a series of remarkable events in which the nation was born, and which are too deeply graven on the mind of the people to be mere legends without historical foundation. these events are the deliverance from the bondage in egypt and the great covenant made with jehovah at sinai. the indispensable personal centre, round which these events revolve, is that of the great national leader, moses. the fact that, outside the pentateuch and the closely connected book of joshua, little is known of the work of moses until after the exile, has given rise to doubts concerning his historical reality. if we take the writings of the old testament that are contemporary with the period they describe, there stand out in indisputable primacy the writings of the great literary prophets. to these modern criticism has rightly turned to discover the opinions, customs, and religion, prevailing in the eighth century; and it is claimed that by these writings we can test the historical value of the pentateuch, and of the other historical books. now it must be admitted that in the pre-exilic prophets the mention of moses is less frequent than we should expect from the position which is claimed for him in the books of exodus, leviticus, numbers and deuteronomy. the prophets do appeal with one consent to the original covenant of jehovah with israel, to the fulfilment of which they would recall the nation; but only rarely is the name of moses associated with that covenant. there are only four references to moses in the prophets before the exile (hosea xii. --moses not actually named; micah vi. ; jer. xv. ; isa. lxiii. --reckoned post-exilic by critics), and in none of these is moses referred to as a law-giver, but as a prophet and national deliverer. we have to come to prophets writing after the exile to find any reference to the legislative work of moses (mal. iv. ; dan. ix. - ). the purpose of the prophetic writings is moral rather than historical, and this forbids putting more evidential weight upon this argument from silence than it will bear; but in face of their continual appeal to the covenant of sinai, this silence is at least significant. evidently moses was not a name to conjure with in their age. (compare jer. xxxi. , , where the mention of the name of moses would have been most natural.) we have, on these and other grounds, to disregard the later idea that moses was the only law-giver of israel and the author of the pentateuch, although the fact that the later legislation could only find sanction as it was included under his name, points to him as in some way the initiator of israel's great code of laws. while in addition to this, it must be admitted that a great deal of the story of his life is due to the growth of legend, there is no need to regard the figure of moses as entirely mythical. the events by which a motley crowd of serfs became a nation and covenanted themselves to an almost new religion not only need for their explanation a great interpreter, but also a great leader; and this demand and need moses fills. we may therefore safely regard moses as one of the great founders of religion. we have now to enquire how much of the marvellous story of his life can be safely reckoned as history. the document which gives the earliest, and therefore the most trustworthy, story of his life is dated by the critics in the ninth century, although it is not denied that it may, and probably does, go back for its material to a much earlier period. this document, known to the critics as "j," owes its origin to early prophetic influence. in this document, as might be expected from the analogy in similar cases (compare the absence of the birth stories in mark), the story of the birth and finding of moses is omitted; it is probably nothing more than an effort to find a popular explanation of his name, as derived from _mashah_, "to draw out." a much more likely origin of the name is found by modern scholars in the egyptian word for "son" (_mesu_). the important thing to be noticed is that in this early document he appears first of all in midian, although there are indications which show that it is known that he had previously been in egypt. here, alone in the wilderness, or in intercourse with the strange bedawin who still inhabit that region, there came to him a revelation of jehovah and the call to deliver israel from their bondage. he returned to egypt with a message at once religious and national. he calls upon the israelites to leave egypt and to seek a covenant with jehovah at his shrine at sinai. during a plague, the passage of the red sea was effected under conditions that were interpreted to be due to the direct intervention of jehovah; and, the returning tide cutting off the pursuing egyptians who challenged their flight, the israelites stood delivered from their enemies and their first trust in jehovah was vindicated. it is not for us to enquire into the exact causes which proved so favourable to the israelites and so disastrous to the egyptians; we only need to know that they were interpreted religiously. then around mount sinai, with its impressive solitude and its awful storms, moses gathered the people, imparted the secret of the new worship, made a solemn covenant by which the people of israel became for ever the people of jehovah, and probably laid down some rudiments of legislation fitted for their primitive and nomadic condition. this much at least the after history demands as the irreducible minimum. if this is at all an accurate view of the founding of the religion of jehovah, then we are faced with the phenomenon of a nation practically adopting a new religion. we do not ignore "revelation" when we feel compelled to seek for natural causes which might prepare the way for this event; and this we may attempt by an enquiry into the meaning of the name "jehovah." it should be noted at the outset that "jehovah" is a personal name, like that of zeus or poseidon, conveying the idea of some aspect of deity. the meaning of the name is exceedingly obscure. the general name for deity common to all semites, and therefore belonging to the undivided primitive stock, is "el," meaning either "the mighty one" or, and more in accord with semitic conceptions of god, "the leader." the meaning of the name "jehovah" is difficult to discover, because in the first place the exact pronunciation of the word has been lost, probably beyond recovery. the word "jehovah" is a hybrid compound, and as a matter of fact was never used as a name for god until the reformation. we can be certain only that the consonants of the word were _jhvh_ (or _yhwh_, hebrew pronunciation). this extraordinary state of things is accounted for by the fact that for centuries the hebrew scriptures were "unpointed" or unvocalised--that is, the consonants only were written and the necessary connecting vowels were taught orally, and only retained in the memory for use when the scriptures were read aloud. when in the ninth century a.d. it was likely that the pronunciation of the sacred language would be entirely forgotten, a device for its preservation was made whereby the vowel pronunciation was indicated by means of "points" placed chiefly underneath the consonantal text; very much like the dots and dashes used for vowels in pitman's system of shorthand. when, however, it came to the "pointing" of jhvh, it was found that the pronunciation of this word had been entirely lost. reverence for the name of god had become so exaggerated that, in reading aloud from the scriptures, wherever the sacred name occurred another word had always been substituted. this word was one of respect, but of less marked exaltation--_adonai_, equal to our word "lord." the only course open to the punctuators was that of inserting under the consonants jhvh, the vowels (with suitable euphonic modifications) of the word _adonai_, with the result that we get the conflate "jehovah," a word which has become invested with so much solemnity to our ears, but which was certainly not the right pronunciation, and which has never been used by the jews. scholars have endeavoured, at present without any universally accepted result, to recover the lost pronunciation by linguistic enquiries, with the desire to discover what the word originally meant, in the hope that it would throw some light on the origin of the religion founded by moses. in exod. iii. ff. (r. v. margin) we have the traditional explanation of the word, an explanation which is not altogether satisfactory from a grammatical point of view; the great hebraist ewald goes so far as to pronounce it highly artificial. it has been objected that the man who wrote this account, about b.c., surely understood his own language. probably; but that is not to say that he understood the etymology of it, for etymology is a new science, and has upset many popular derivations in the case of our own language. if the explanation given in exodus is correct, and we cannot with certainty put anything much better in its place, then the meaning of the word "jehovah" would be "he that is," perhaps an equivalent in hebrew form to the western idea of "the eternal." only one of the numerous guesses as to the meaning of the original name need be quoted here: that the word comes from a verb, _hawah_, meaning either "to fall," or "to blow." similar ideas would seem to account for either of these meanings. "he who blows," looks like the name for the tempest god, while "that which falls" has been taken to indicate a fallen meteorite, which may have been preserved as a symbol of jehovah. when we remember the thunderstorms at sinai, and the common belief that thunder was a special theophany of jehovah, these ideas are not to be hastily dismissed as altogether incredible. nor should we be prevented from considering such an idea from the prejudice that it would make the origin of the religion of israel a piece of nature-worship and superstition. god has taken man where he has found him, and none can dare to define the limits of childish and crude conceptions within which the spirit of god can begin his work in man's mind. the conclusion derived from the examination of the meaning of the name "jehovah" must therefore remain open until some further light is thrown on the subject. (scholars usually adopt the pronunciation, _yahwe_, as our nearest approach to the original.) an endeavour has been made to discover the origin of the religion of israel from the persistent connection of jehovah with the locality of mount sinai. this idea continues long after in the promised land (deut. xxxiii. ; judges v. ), and elijah takes a long journey back to the sacred spot, presumably to get into closer touch with jehovah ( kings xix.). with the prevailing beliefs of that age in the localisation of the god, this connection must be thought of as of more than accidental significance. it is fair to assume that the seat of jehovah at sinai must have been known before the great covenant, and is indeed required by the narrative itself (exod. iii.; iv. ), while recent discoveries are said to prove that the traditional sinai must have been a sacred place from the earliest times. moses, however, is clearly represented as coming to know of jehovah during his stay in midian. the exact means of the revelation is said to have been the sight of a bush on fire, yet miraculously unconsumed. what actually lies behind this story--whether it is a creation of the religious imagination which sees "every common bush afire with god"--it is useless for us to try and discover. a natural explanation has been sought in the fact that jethro, the kenite, was the priest of midian, and presumably of some shrine of jehovah. certainly jethro knew the name of jehovah, but apparently only regarded him as one of the gods, until the marvellous deliverance of the exodus proved him to be the greatest of gods (exod. xviii. - ). jethro performs an act of sacrifice to jehovah, in the presence of aaron and the elders, that looks remarkably like an act of initiation by which israel are introduced to the worship of jehovah by the regular priest of the shrine (exod. xviii. ). the hypothesis is further strengthened by the fact that the kenites are found later dwelling in palestine (judges i. ), and are always remembered long after as the friends of the israelites ( sam. xv. ; xxvii. ; xxx. ). the inference from this is that moses first learned of jehovah from his father-in-law jethro, but that he understood more of the character of jehovah than jethro, and by his superior religious consciousness conceived of him as in some way supreme who to jethro had been only one of the desert gods. this theory would certainly be strengthened if sinai could be identified, not with the traditional site of _jebel musa_ in the southern part of the sinaitic peninsula, but with some spot in the land of midian, across the gulf of akaba. this does indeed seem necessary from the narrative, for from the most natural interpretation of exod. iii. , horeb, the mount of god, was in midian. it is generally taken for granted that horeb and sinai are identical; the respective names are used by different documents. it is said that, for some reasons, midian would fit in with the record of the journey through the wilderness better than the sinaitic peninsula. if the parallelism of sinai with seir in deut. xxxiii. can be taken to show identity, as is natural, we have a further confirmation, for seir is in midian. the grave difficulty of all this is that it would make the religion of jehovah a distinct importation. is such a thing as its reception by the hebrews credible on this account? the idea of a nation changing its religion is certainly repugnant to the semitic mind (jer. ii. , ), and some more natural connection seems necessary, both from the narrative and from general considerations. now the narrative hints that the religion was not entirely new (exod. vi. ), but was known to the patriarchs under different forms; while the sanctity of sinai would seem to have been already known to some of the tribes (exod. iv. ). there is nothing here definite enough for us to proceed to historical certainty, but it is fair to suppose that the shrine at sinai was known to the patriarchs in their wanderings, and that jehovah would be worshipped; as would any other local god whose territory they happened to be in. grant that this was partly known to the hebrew slaves in egypt; that moses received the revelation of the power of jehovah in his exile in midian, and by a splendid leap of inspiration identified the actual shrine and the person of jehovah with the mighty spirit dimly known to the patriarchs, and we have an explanation that is natural and is also true; for the object of man's worship has been one through all history. when the successful passage of the red sea and the defeat of the egyptians were interpreted by moses as the direct intervention of jehovah, the transition to the great covenant is made possible. all this may be very contrary to the traditional idea of how moses received the revelation of jehovah, but the facts do point this way; and it is not for us to deny that the spirit of god could work through these natural events and through the mind of this commanding personality, and so bring about this identification of jehovah and the great spirit of the patriarchal thought, which was to lead to such great results for religion. we are now free to investigate what the character of the religion introduced by moses actually was. ( ) _general character._ a careful examination of its character shows that while it is by no means identical with the religion taught by the prophets, and while it retained many heathen ideas and customs, yet it contained within itself the promise and guarantee of development. we have already had occasion to notice that it is not pure monotheism. jehovah is not the only god; he is the only god for israel. the heathen deities are still regarded as having a real existence. neither can it be called a purely spiritual religion, for jehovah is rather said to have a spirit than to be a spirit; he has a form which, though terrible in its effect on the beholder, by reason of its glory, can nevertheless be seen; he inhabits a special place, which is his sacred territory, and on this moses stumbles all unwittingly in midian. still more emphatically against the idea of a purely spiritual religion is the fact--which the editors have done their best to hide, but not successfully--that images of some kind were allowed, or existed unreproved. the ephod, of which we hear so often, was evidently at one time an idol. the meaning of the word is of something "covered," as may be seen from isa. xxx. , where the feminine form of the word (_aphuddah_) is used of the gold plating of images; but according to a later idea (exod. xxviii. - ), the ephod formed part of the dress of the high priest, and was a kind of embroidered waistcoat. this explanation, however, does violence to a number of passages where the ephod is mentioned. gideon expended seventeen hundred shekels of gold on an ephod which he "set up" in ophrah (jud. viii. f.); this cannot be a waistcoat. only the explanation that the ephod was an image can do justice to the reference in judges xvii. , and it suits the passage in sam. xxi. , if we think of the sword hanging behind an image. if the ephod was nothing more than a waistcoat by which lots were determined, we have to explain why it is so sharply condemned in judges viii. , and why the text of sam. xiv. , which in the septuagint reads "ephod," in the hebrew text has been altered to read "ark"; an alteration which is quite impossible here, as the ark was at this time in kirjath jearim, and, moreover, was never used for the purpose of obtaining oracles. (the only explanation is that some scribe has made this alteration because he knew that there was something idolatrous about the ephod.) even as late as hosea (iii. ) we find the ephod mentioned in a connection where it can only stand for an object of idolatrous worship. it is certainly strange that the same name should be in use for an image, and then later for a garment of the high-priest; but the likely explanation of this is that the image was at one time clothed with a dress, as was usual (jer. x. ), and that in the pockets of this the lots were kept. when the use of the image became offensive the garment was retained as part of the high-priest's dress. the transition is made more natural if we can suppose that the priest of the oracle, in the early days, was accustomed to put on the garment of the image, under the customary idea that thus the divine knowledge of the idol would be communicated to him. in kings xviii. , we read of _nehushtan_, the brazen serpent which moses had made, being used idolatrously; but perhaps this has been wrongly ascribed to moses. from the intimate connection of bull-worship with the worship of jehovah, it would seem that the bull was regarded as a symbol of jehovah; a similar idea may have instituted aaron's golden calf. while admitting the force of this evidence, we must still keep open the possibility that the religion instituted by moses was of a purer type, but was never strong enough to drive out the remnants of heathen practice. more indisputable evidence of the materialistic conception of the person of jehovah is found in the reverence paid to what is known as "the ark of jehovah," the making of which is certainly ascribed to moses. the name "the ark of the covenant," was not the original name given to the ark, but is taken from the incident recorded in deut. x. - . the idea that the ark was built to contain the tables of the law does not appear until the time of deuteronomy, and is quite unknown to the older strata of the pentateuch. in these older strata all mention of the actual making of the ark is omitted, although there is evidence that they did contain an account of its preparation and meaning. enough, however, is told us of the reverential treatment of it, to show that it was a symbol of higher sanctity than a mere receptacle for the stones of the law would be likely to be. it is certainly very closely identified with jehovah himself, as may be seen from num. x. . (this is in poetic form, and is therefore likely to be a very early fragment. it should be noticed that the ark apparently starts of itself.) its presence in the battlefield ensures victory, while its absence brings about defeat (num. xiv. - ; sam. iv. - ; v. ff.). it can hardly be that the ark was taken for jehovah himself, but it must have contained something that was closely identified with jehovah; a box is not built except with the idea of holding something. we have seen that it is unlikely that that something was originally the two tables of the law; was it something else of stone which made the transference to the tables of the law at once necessary and natural? was it a stone image of jehovah? it has been conjectured that it may have contained meteoritic stones, which would agree with the proposed derivation of "jehovah" from the storm god of sinai. there is nothing in the old testament which gives any support to these conjectures, but in face of the fact that the original narrative of the making of the ark has been omitted, and in view of the ideas of religion which were common in that period, we cannot say that they are absolutely excluded from consideration. the ark was certainly bound up with the idea of war, and would seem to have been kept in a soldier's tent. it was transferred to the dark inner temple till b.c., and from that date all trace of it is lost. the priest's code ("p") makes provision for it in the second temple, but we have unimpeachable jewish testimony that the shrine of the inner temple was absolutely empty (josephus, _war of the jews_, v. v. § ). jeremiah may have been aware of the original significance of the ark as tending towards idolatry, and hence his words in jer. iii. . ( ) _ordinances of worship._ it remains for us to enquire into the character of the religion founded by moses by an examination of some of the outstanding ordinances that regulated the idea of worship. here the traditional ascription of the fully developed ritual of the book of leviticus to moses has to be set aside, on the consideration that we have no record of its observance until late in the period of the monarchy, and from then it can be traced as a gradual growth of custom and ideal until its complete observance after the exile. there does not seem to have been any priesthood of the exclusive levitical order founded by moses. the story of the levites in exod. xxxii. can only be a late story, for there is no record of their monopoly of the ritual service until the reform under josiah: joshua, an ephraimite, is the "servant of the tent"; samuel, also an ephraimite, sleeps beside the ark ( sam. iii. ); david and solomon assume a kind of chief priesthood ( sam. vi. ; kings viii. , ff.), and of course neither of them were levites. the story in judges xvii. gives what is perhaps the true position of the levites: anyone could be consecrated as a family priest, but the presence of a levite was reckoned propitious. down to a very late age sacrifice seems to have remained largely a tribal or family act, and although a descendant of moses' tribe (levi) was regarded as possessing special advantage, there was no law by which levites alone were reckoned capable of discharging priestly functions. in the matter of sacrifice, it would seem that moses simply adopted what was a very ancient and common practice. in face of the evident neglect of the levitical ritual in matters of sacrifice, both by the common people and by such great reformers as samuel and elijah, together with the fact that in the teaching of the prophets doubts are cast on its divine origin (isa. i. ; amos v. ; micah vi. - ), we cannot infer that the detailed and explicit commands concerning sacrifice found in the book of leviticus are the work of moses, or belong to an early age. to the prophets, sacrifice is always reminiscent of paganism. the time when the change came in may be detected in the different value given to sacrifice by the post-exilic prophets (mal. i. f.), while the incompatibility of the two views, prophetic and priestly, can be seen from the addition which has been made to ps. li., to bring it into accord with the later view. neither is it possible for us to believe that the elaborate shrine known as the tabernacle owed its existence to moses. the impossibility of transporting the cumbrous fixtures through the wilderness had been noticed before the modern era of critical study. a close examination of the details of construction shows that it is nothing more than an ideal projection from the mind of a priestly writer who believed that a tent-like counterpart of ezekiel's temple was essential to israel's worship in the wilderness. it is enough to recall that the tabernacle of the priestly writer's imagination is quite unknown to the historical books. in exod. xxxiii. ff., which may be seen to be only a fragment of an early document, since it starts abruptly by describing "the" tent, which is known as the tent of meeting, we have what has been taken to be the tabernacle; but it is nothing more than a tent for keeping the ark in. ( ) _legislation._ how much of the legislation of the pentateuch is to be ascribed to moses we cannot tell. too many hands have been at work on it for the original to be discovered. a remarkable discovery was made in the year of some enormous _steles_, which bear in cuneiform characters what is now known as the code of hammurabi, the oldest code of laws in the world, the date of which is reckoned to be b.c. they presuppose an advanced state of civilisation and morality existing in the euphrates valley at that period. the agreement between the pentateuchal code and the code of hammurabi argues dependence of the former on the latter to a very considerable extent, and supplies a still further testimony to the extent to which the religion of israel is indebted to babylon. the exact bearing of this discovery upon critical theories, and especially upon the date of the pentateuch has perhaps hardly been estimated yet; it does not, however, refute the theory which denies that the pentateuch as it stands is from the hand of moses. we naturally think of the decalogue as the work of moses, but here we are faced by the difficulty that the decalogue appears to exist in three recensions (exod. xx. - ; xxxiv. - ; deut. v. - ). the account in exod. xxxiv., which forms part of the document "j," is reckoned to be the oldest of these, and the original of this might well go back to the time of moses. it has been objected that the decalogue is too ethical to suit the time of moses, but is this not because we are inclined to read into the ten commandments far more than is to be found there? it can be shown that they are little more than ten laws of "rights." a special difficulty is found in ascribing the second commandment to this age, in view of its frequent uncensured breach; but perhaps there is some difference that escapes us between a molten image, which is prescribed in the first draft (exod. xxxiv. ), and the later prohibition of the graven image (exod. xx. ). in the foregoing examination we have allowed for the most rigorous demands of advanced criticism, demands which may have to be modified as criticism becomes more of a science, but there remains the need to discover what there was, on these critical assumptions, in the mosaic religion that provided the way for a further advance into the faith which became the glory of israel. what is it that makes the difference between mosaism and the heathen semitic religions, a difference which was to make the gradual growth of a pure monotheism possible? the first important element which needs to be reckoned with is that it was a religion of choice rather than a religion of nature. we saw that it was difficult to conceive how the religion of jehovah could have been adopted by israel unless there had been some previous contact. what is so difficult to understand is nevertheless the one element that contained the possibility of progress. the relation of israel to jehovah was neither by physical descent nor through the connection of the god with the land, as with the heathen semitic religions. jehovah was at first conceived of as the god of the tribe only, but even this was not by nature, but by his gracious choice. their land was given to them by jehovah, but his natural connection was with a far distant shrine. this fact in itself must have rendered necessary some more spiritual conception of his habitation, and, though hard enough for the common people to realise, when they entered canaan and found a full-grown cultus and religion in connection with the god of the land already in possession, it was this fact upon which the prophets fastened and which could not be denied: the religion of jehovah was a matter of choice and not of racial or local connection. that choice had been ratified by solemn covenant, to which the prophets appealed. the relation between jehovah and israel depended therefore on the conditions of the covenant being faithfully kept. when we compare the religions of the other semites, which made the relation of the god and his people one which nothing could break, and from which neither the god nor the people could escape, we can see how this difference constituted one of the ethical germs of the religion which was destined to grow into fuller power and life. there was another important conception, which was intensified by the fact that the religion of jehovah was a religion of choice: that of the jealousy of jehovah. this was often interpreted, especially in the pre-prophetic period, in a very crude and in even a cruel way. the jealousy of jehovah was very like the human passion: uncertain, arbitrary and irrational, manifesting itself according to the popular mind in outbreaks of fury for ceremonial mistakes, or for causes even less comprehensible (num. iii. ; sam. vi. ). in all the religions it was thought to be a serious thing to depart from the allegiance to the rightful god, and sure to lay one open to his jealousy and vengeance; but something more is now found in this idea as it develops in hebrew thought: it is that the jealousy of jehovah is due to the great difference between him and the other gods, a difference which came to be recognised as one of character. something of this must go back to moses himself. this difference is also expressed in the idea that he is a god of righteousness. the word "righteousness" does not always have in the hebrew scriptures the absolute meaning which it has for us. it was rather equal to our word "rights," which we often employ quite unethically. jehovah was one who gave right judgments when questions were submitted and answered by the lot, and one who brought victory to the right. it was undoubtedly israel's right that was chiefly considered, but there was hidden in it an ethical germ which was to bring forth notable fruit when man's sense of right was widened. this at least was the mark of the new religion which moses impressed on the people, impressed with such a force that it could never be quite forgotten. it had new thoughts pregnant with meaning for the mind of man and for the future of religion, and these became the fulcrum of the prophets' appeal. from the bosom of this people was to come forth one who was to reveal the father as perfectly righteous and impartial, and who demands for his service a righteousness that must far exceed that of the straitest observers of external religion. it would be easy for us to despise this day of small beginnings, or to refuse to see in it any real revelation of god at all. doubtless this enquiry may necessitate a change in our conceptions of the work of moses, but it is one that we are forced to by a multitude of facts, and we must find a theory of inspiration wide enough to fit them. crude as we may make the beginnings of israel's faith, natural as we may feel are the laws by which it worked towards its growth, we have not been able to get any nearer to some of those ultimate questions which ask how religion begins, what the nature of revelation is, and how it comes to man's mind. we need not think that god had to break in on the mind of moses, so that the personality of the man was in abeyance while god worked through him. when god wishes to bring men to a higher truth he does not supernaturally communicate it; he makes human nature to produce personalities whose minds come naturally to the truth. there can be no separation of natural and supernatural here; wherever that separation is to be made, we certainly cannot make it. there can be no meaning in revelation, and no possibility of it, unless god has made man's mind to be growingly in touch with him and to be capable of receiving his revelation by the natural working of thought, so that it seems to spring up within his own consciousness. deeper into this question we are not called upon to go at present, but no one can object that it is less reverent, or that it shows signs of a decay of faith, if men can see god to-day not only in the extraordinary and the supernatural, but also in the ordinary and the natural. if the recognition of god depends on spiritual vision, then those who refuse to narrow the limits within which god can be seen, and who therefore welcome all truth with gladness and without fear, are not to be called godless and unspiritual. we should learn to be thankful for moses, for he was faithful as far as he knew; if we were as faithful in proportion to the fuller light which has come to us, religion would be a very real and inclusive thing. we should also learn to take heart, if from these beginnings such mighty movements have sprung. the mistakes inevitable to the human mind do not destroy the possibility of revelation, the error cannot everlastingly obscure the truth, nor in the long run will evil triumph over good. it was possible in that far off age, it was possible in all ages, it is possible now, for a mind still far from the true conception of the ultimate nature of god to yet grasp something, and by a supreme faith in the leading of a mighty power to lift a whole nation, and through it the world, one stage further on in goodness and truth. the influence of canaan as an introduction to lecture iv. the reader is advised to make a careful study of judges i. -ii. , a mutilated fragment of a very early and reliable account of the invasion of canaan. the opening words (verse ) refer the events which follow to the period after the death of joshua; but the book of joshua has already recorded the complete conquest of canaan, so that there can be no place for this further invasion on a far less ambitious plan, and apparently with less successful results. it will be noticed, however, that this account easily falls away from the main body of the narrative; judges ii. follows naturally after joshua xxiv. , and ignores what comes between. we have, therefore, in this account another history of the conquest of canaan, which contradicts altogether the impression--which we get from reading the book of joshua--that the conquest of canaan was effected by the tribes acting in unison, that it was complete, and that the conquered were exterminated; it records a movement of tribes acting independently, there is no "conquest" in the ordinary sense of the term, but a footing is obtained alongside the original inhabitants of the land. this account of a gradual immigration of tribes is confirmed by the discovery of inscriptions, which seem to show that there were some tribes of the hebrews in palestine before the traditional date of the conquest, and even before the exodus. until quite lately the history of egypt has thrown no light on these events. it has not even been possible to identify with any certainty the pharaoh under whom the exodus took place. one identification is now fairly certain. the pharaoh who enslaved the israelites was rameses iii., for discoveries have proved that it was he who built pithom (exod. i. ); the exodus has therefore been referred to the reigns of merneptah or seti ii., his immediate successors. the objection to this is that in these reigns both the peninsula of sinai and the land of palestine were under full egyptian control, and therefore the exodus must be put later on, when this control slackened. this would bring the exodus to the date of - b.c. and the conquest some fifty years later. the latest discoveries tend to throw this result into confusion. names, which it is proposed to identify with tribes of the israelites, have been found in inscriptions belonging to earlier reigns. on an inscription of rameses ii. the name of asher is found as dwelling in north palestine. in a list of thotmes iii. (still earlier, sixteenth century, b.c.) we find the names jacob and joseph in the significant combination, jacob-el and joseph-el, used to describe the dan-ephraim district of palestine. this makes it more likely that the tel-el-amarna tablets (dated fourteenth century, b.c.) refer to the hebrews. in these letters, addressed to amenophis iv., the king of jerusalem appeals for help against an invasion of the _habiri_, who are led by abd ashera. the invasion is not by a large force, as may be seen from the fact that it is thought thirty or forty egyptian soldiers will be sufficient for the purpose of resisting their attacks. more certain than any of these references is the occurrence of the name of israel on a stele of merneptah, in connection with a recital of his triumphs in syria. the form in which this reference is made leaves no doubt that, by this period, israel was already settled in palestine. ("israel is laid waste, its corn is annihilated.") there is no confirmation of a syrian campaign under merneptah, and it may be that in accordance with the fashion of the age, he is including among his victories the exploits of his predecessors; this would agree with the earlier date for the occupation of canaan by israel which the previous references seem to require. the exact bearing of these discoveries has yet to be determined, but they either require us to put the date of the exodus earlier, which would in itself be difficult, or, what would bring light on many problems, assume that not all the tribes were in bondage in egypt, and that the invasion of canaan by various tribes, only long after welded into a nation, was spread over a long period. lecture iv the influence of canaan if the nation of israel may be said to have been born in captivity, baptised in the red sea, and awakened to national consciousness at mount sinai, then the settlement in canaan corresponds to the no less critical period of adolescence, when, training and tutelage being over, youth must choose its own path and fight its way in the world. certain it is that the entrance into canaan largely determined the future of this people, for it must have profoundly modified the national character, turning as it did nomadic tribes into a settled and civilised people; but above all, and what more concerns us, it proved extremely critical for the fate of that as yet untried revelation of jehovah, which had still to win its way against the heathenism of the common people, and was now by this new experience called upon to measure its strength against the attraction of a competing faith. the peculiar and pathetic love of the jews for canaan is largely due to the remembrance that it was not their own land but the long promised gift of jehovah, standing therefore to all time as the material proof of his love for israel; while their estimate of it was intensely deepened by the wilderness experience which preceded. that estimate seems to us somewhat exaggerated, for to-day palestine has almost given up the struggle against the always threatening advance of the desert. it has certainly changed for the worse under neglect and misrule, but it can never have been a too indulgent land; only comparison with the bare and awful desert can have called forth the description, "a land flowing with milk and honey." with the long memory of restless nomadic life and the bitter thought of bondage, any land would seem welcome that offered them freedom and safety; while to those approaching it from the desert it seemed as fair and fruitful a land as men could desire. all lands have contributed largely to the character of the nations they have reared, and the wilderness ancestry and the character of canaan have played their part in the development of israel. the very geographical position of canaan helps us to understand the hebrews, and even to see how it was that in this land it was possible to nurture from such unpromising beginnings the wonderful development of religion that was to make this smallest of all lands one of the most sacred spots on earth, and this strange and limited people among the greatest contributors to the moral and religious ideas of humanity. crushed in between the sea and the desert, hemmed in by great military powers, the little buffer state itself the very crossways of east and west, its roads never long at rest from the tramp of armies; here was a land in which all dreams of fame and empire were hammered out, and nothing left possible save an empire of spiritual power and the fame of a unique religion. a people strangely proud and passionately exclusive, they could never rest under the dominion of their great neighbours, however light the burden imposed; and since sustained resistance was out of the question by reason of their inferior numbers and lack of military power, they resorted to irritating acts of rebellion, or intrigued with the enemies of their overlords, and so brought down on their land frequent vengeance. such was their untameable nature that the only practical policy open to babylon, if she wished to insure the loyalty, or at least, the neutrality of palestine, was to deport the jews bodily to where they could be under observation. so we find the greatest heroes of jewish history--from moses, through gideon and samson, to david and judas maccabæus--are those who deliver the nation from oppression; while israel's prayers are largely cries for succour against enemies, or for divine vengeance on the oppressor; only too eloquent a witness of the sense of their own impotence. yet it was precisely this experience that forced their religion to rise above the common type, to conquer its natural tendencies, and to become the most magnificent faith in god that the world has seen. of this they themselves were not ignorant; for one of their writers points to the easy lot of moab as the cause of their irreligion (jer. xlviii. ), and one of the psalmists says that it is the men who have no changes who fear not god (lv. ). we need not consider the utterly feeble objection that all this makes the religion of israel the outcome of natural necessity, rather than of divine revelation; for god made the land that made israel. the entry into canaan was therefore one of the most critical periods in the history of this people and in the development of the religion of the old testament. it is, however, extremely difficult to discover from the means at our disposal just how or when that entry was effected. the sources for this period are found in the books of joshua and judges, but, from comparison with much in the history that follows, it is clear that they do not present us with absolute history; yet a critical examination of these books enables us to recover the essential facts. a study of the preface to this lecture will show that the story of the conquest is obscure in its details and difficult to reconcile with modern discoveries. a careful examination of our sources shows that the description of the entry of the hebrews into canaan as a "conquest," which was settled by a few decisive battles, is at least rather fanciful; and as a matter of fact we have quite another picture in the first chapter of judges, which partakes more of the character of an "alien immigration," a method of "conquest" in which the jews have always been remarkably successful. the history in joshua certainly represents the conquest as striking, complete, and followed by a ruthless extermination of the defenders of their native land. in view of the relations that were for long maintained between the canaanites and the hebrews, the representation in judges i. must be regarded as nearer to the facts than the story of the conquest according to the book of joshua. the children of israel dwelt side by side with the canaanites, simply because they were not able to drive them out; and as a result the tribes were frequently divided by strong belts of canaanitish territory. right through the time of the judges we get warfare between the israelites and the inhabitants of the land; sometimes in pitched battles between the canaanites and the united tribes of israel (judges iv. v.), but more generally in guerilla warfare or in the sudden surprise of a canaanitish garrison (judges xviii.). the result of the conflict seems to have been the gradual absorption of the two elements into one nation. the records definitely admit that it was not until the time of david that the jebusites were driven from jerusalem ( sam. v. , ), and not until solomon that the superiority of the israelites was finally established ( kings ix. , ). it surely is an immense relief to think that the huge slaughters recorded in the book of joshua are, to say the least, exaggerations. the history in judges also clearly shows that there was little cohesion between the tribes. they filtered across the jordan only by degrees, and there is evidence that this process may have extended over a considerable time. we have records of quarrels between gideon and ephraim (judges viii. ), and between jephthah and ephraim (judges xii. ). these inter-tribal conflicts might have been serious, were it not for the circumstance that the israelites were no sooner settled in the land than other tribes of desert invaders began to press upon them, and they had to sink family differences in order to combine against the common enemy. the song of deborah (judges v.) is one of the most valuable documents we possess for the light which it throws on the conditions of religious and national life in this period, for it is probably the only document in the old testament, earlier than the founding of the monarchy, that is contemporary with the events it describes. it shows that the tribes had somewhat improved their position, for they now seem to be in possession of the highlands of ephraim, although the plains are still in the hands of the canaanites. the growing power of the israelites and their threatening predominance moved the canaanites to a united effort to repress israel. it is to face this danger that the prophetess deborah calls the tribes; but from the way in which the praise and blame is meted out we can see that a strong sense of national unity was still lacking. the important point to be noticed is that the bond of unity to which deborah could appeal was the name of jehovah. it should be noted also that in the enumeration of the tribes, judah, simeon, and levi are altogether omitted. in the case of so important a tribe as judah this is significant, for it agrees with the fact that until the time of david this tribe does not come into prominence. it has been conjectured that judah was only a small tribe, and may have invaded canaan from the south, for it is difficult to conceive how it could have crossed the strong canaanitish territory which separated it from the other tribes. at any rate, at this time it was not regarded as one of the tribes of israel; it may have been that this tribe embraced a strong canaanitish element (gen. xxxviii.), and this fact may have contributed to the resentment which broke out among the other tribes when judah assumed the hegemony in the time of david, and which led in the end to the disruption of the kingdom. in our sources the history of this period has attached to it a religious interpretation: apostasy, and disobedience to the commands of jehovah were the causes of the people being sold into the power of their enemies; when they returned to the worship of jehovah and penitently pleaded for his forgiveness then deliverers were raised up who vanquished their oppressors. this can be nothing but a late interpretation, for the religion of the book of judges is of quite a fixed order, and many of the stories recorded in it will not lend themselves to any such interpretation. the hand that supplied this reading of the history of this period has been identified with the author of deuteronomy, or, as some would prefer to say, with the school of thought that produced that work. there is a religious lesson in this history, as in all history; but it is hardly to be found in a series of apostasies and returns. there are really four separate endeavours to account for the undoubted fact of the canaanites being spared. ( ) israel was not able to drive them out (judges i. , ). ( ) israel was only commanded to drive them out by degrees, "lest the beasts of the field increase upon thee" (deut. vii. ). ( ) it was a providential arrangement to keep the israelites practised in war (judges iii. , ). ( ) it was due to direct disobedience to the command of jehovah (judges ii. ). the history does not entitle us to assume that the judges were officials who exercised kingly rights over a united israel. the word translated "judge" more often means "deliverer," and this is certainly the part that they play. of some of the so-called minor judges we know nothing beyond their names, and there is evidence that they have simply been used to fill out a traditional period of years ( kings vi. ). whenever the "judges" assumed kingly or judicial functions trouble and rebellion always followed. the figure of samson displays little fitness for ruling a nation or guiding it in religion, but the stones of his life are illuminating for the understanding of the morality and interests of that age. with this revised conception of the history of the conquest, and of the events which followed, we are in a better position to estimate the effect of the change from nomadic life to a settled existence, and to understand how critical for the future of the religion of jehovah this change was. we see tribes possessing little national unity, but bound together by a religion in which lay the germ of a mighty future, entering a land where the inhabitants had reached a higher stage of civilisation, and possessed a religion that drew its power from the fact that it was the worship of baal, the possessor and owner of the land. in face of these conditions it was almost inevitable that many of the customs of the original inhabitants should be gradually adopted, and that the religion of jehovah should borrow something from the religion indigenous to the land. this was certainly the result which followed. for a considerable period we find a religion prevalent among the common people, which is simply a conflation of the two religions. there were certain elements common to both, and certain advantages in the one, together with corresponding weaknesses in the other, that prepared the way for this syncretism. we shall now turn to examine the religion of the canaanites, which we shall find to partake largely of the common elements of semitic religion. their deities were personifications of natural forces, and among these there is no one which is supreme, and nothing that tends to monotheism. the gods are friendly and destructive by turn, and of unreliable character. it is nothing more than an undeveloped polytheism. the religion, as it is seen in the old testament, groups itself around three names: baal, ashtoreth (often written in plural form ashtaroth), and molech (otherwise written moloch, milcom, and known to the phoenicians as melkart). the name of baal has a hateful memory in the pages of the old testament as the canaanitish deity to whom israel constantly apostatised. the exact significance of baal in the canaanitish religion is a matter of dispute. he has been identified with the sun, and by the greeks with zeus; so that it has been inferred that baal was the president of the canaanitish pantheon. this view is no longer generally accepted, for it certainly fails to fit in with the records of the cult preserved in the old testament. the word "baal" is not a proper name, but signifies "the possessor"; it is used in semitic language for "husband," as the possessor of the wife, and is used as the name for deity, as the possessor of the land. every land, and indeed every locality, will therefore have its own baal; so that in the old testament we hear of the "baalim" (the hebrew plural), and these local baalim are further distinguished by the addition of the name of their locality or of some event with which they were connected, as baal-peor, baal-berith, baal-zebul. the "baal" is especially responsible for sending rain and sunshine, and for giving fruitful seasons. he is, therefore, the god of agriculture, and the great events of the agricultural year, such as harvest and vintage, are observed as his festivals. it is natural to find the uncertainty of the weather reflected in the character of the baalim, with the result that we get a religion alternating between intoxicating joy and the deepest gloom. to appease the fickle god or to win his favour sacrifices, even of human lives, are presented, and if baal continues unheeding, scenes of the most unrestrained fanaticism prevail. it is this gloomy religion which darkens the times of the later kings of judah. the canaanitish baal should be distinguished from the baal of tyre (melkart) whose worship was introduced by ahab. here the introduction of an alien baal, with probably different rites and ceremonies, awoke the resentment of the prophetic party under the leadership of elijah, but the worship of the canaanite baal was maintained for long unchecked. closely connected with the worship of the baalim we find the worship of the ashtaroth (judges ii. ). the pronunciation of this word is obscure; it was probably _ashtart_, and the singular form, ashtoreth ( kings xi. ), has been formed by inserting the vowels of the word _bosheth_ (shame), a common device in the old testament for expressing contempt. ashtart is the female counterpart of baal, and is spoken of in the plural for a similar reason. monuments of the worship of ashtart are still to be found, and from these it is evident that we have here the worship of the goddess of sexual passion, as common in polytheistic systems, and best known in the greek worship of aphrodite. the whole conception of ashtart can be traced to the famous goddess _ishtar_ of babylonian religion, and there is only too certain evidence that in canaan as elsewhere the degrading rite of religious prostitution was used in this worship of female divinity (hosea iv. ). the identification of ashtart with the "queen of heaven" (jer. vii. ; xliv. - ) is not so certain. as far as the worship of the latter is described to us, it looks like an importation of the babylonian worship of ishtar, who was identified with the planet venus or sometimes with the moon. the "cakes to pourtray her" (jer. xliv. ) may have been crescent-shaped cakes. of a similar character was the worship that gathered around the name of molech. we have here simply the word for king (_milk_) with the vowels of _bosheth_. of this name, moloch, milcom, and melkart of tyre are variations. molech is not to be distinguished from baal, as may be seen from jer. xix. , where the practice of passing children through the fire, which was certainly connected with the worship of molech, is a part of the worship of baal. this burnt-sacrifice of children evidently belonged to the canaanitish religion ( kings xvi. ). this then was the religion of the canaanites: in times of prosperity and fruitful seasons, one of rejoicing and festivity; but in time of famine, drought or national danger, one of the most hopeless gloom and of the most fearful fanaticism. in conflict with this religion, the purer worship of jehovah yet presented certain weaknesses; these are found chiefly in points of possible identification, which in the course of the history actually took place. this may be difficult for us to understand until we remember that baal and molech, to semitic ears, simply meant "lord" and "king"; and jehovah was the "lord" and "king" of israel. if the character of jehovah was not clearly apprehended as moral by the common people, we can see how easy it was for confusion to take place. the great weakness of the religion of jehovah was that he was not the god of canaan. his home was in distant sinai, and the only symbol of his presence was the ark, a symbol bound up with the idea of war. as the people settled down to a peaceful agricultural life, the need for jehovah, the warrior god, would not be keenly felt. there was certainly a party from the very first who recognised the difference between jehovah and baal and fought against their identification, but so long as baal was believed to be a real being the danger of his secret worship at least was never far away. every land had its own god, and although the people knew that jehovah was their god, yet they might think it necessary, and not inconsistent, to pay their respects to the local baalim on whom they were dependent for the fruits of the earth (hosea ii. ). nothing therefore but a national calamity could revive the old religion in face of the attractions of the new; if peace had been continuous it is hard to see how the religion founded by moses could have persevered. such dangerous peace the children of israel were not to enjoy. we soon hear the rousing call to the help of jehovah in the song of deborah, and it was the threatened domination by the philistines that called the monarchy into existence and revived the religion of jehovah. meanwhile, however, a process of syncretism was gradually taking place, which it was to be the task of the prophets to unravel; and how far it had gone may be seen from the difficulty they found in making the character of jehovah and the moral demand made upon his worshippers clear to the people. "jehovah," it must be remembered, was a name largely personal. baal was a general name for deity, and could be applied to jehovah quite truthfully. that this actually took place may be seen from a number of passages in the old testament. the most instructive instance is to be found in hosea ii. ; but the names given to places point in the same direction: david calls the spot where jehovah broke his enemies, baal-perazim; the same god is called indiscriminately, baal-berith (judges viii. ; ix. ) and el-berith (judges ix. ). this practice accounts for the names of saul's son, eshbaal, and of jonathan's son, meribbaal ( chron. viii. , ), both of which have been altered in the book of samuel to "bosheth." (in obedience to the command of exod. xxiii. , _bosheth_ was substituted for _baal_ in reading the scriptures. the written text was altered in many places at a later period; the chronicler must have found _baal_ in his text of samuel; that is about b.c.) the names of jehovah and baal therefore came to have the same significance, and the distinction began to be missed; jehovah was still the god of israel, but the moral elements of his religion were gradually diluted with the naturalistic conceptions of the worship of baal. jehovah becomes the baal of the land; that is, the relation between him and israel is conceived in a natural and even physical way. it is therefore no longer a covenant relation, which depends on the observance of moral obligations, but one of nature which cannot be broken by either party. naturally the sanctuaries of the canaanites are taken over by the israelites, and jehovah is worshipped in "the high places." all through the history worship at these local sanctuaries is condemned, but only from a later standpoint, for the earliest book of laws permitted an altar to be erected anywhere where jehovah had manifested himself (exod. xx. ). around some of these undoubtedly canaanitish sanctuaries the stories of the patriarchs gathered, but from the practices which prevailed at such places as bethel we can see that heathen rites were used, for here jeroboam set up the golden calves, which seem to have been used in the worship of jehovah, for neither elijah nor amos condemns them. jehovah is now worshipped all over the land, but there is the same tendency to regard each separate place as having its local deity, and so jehovah is multiplied (perhaps, jer. xi. ) and needs to be further identified by the addition of place names, as in the strange name el-bethel (gen. xxxv. ), el-elohe-israel (gen. xxxiii. ), in a way that is very like the multiplication of the baalim. so deeply was the worship of jehovah mixed up with canaanitish ideas that in the reign of josiah the only possibility of reform lay in forbidding the worship at the local sanctuaries altogether and concentrating all worship at the central sanctuary of jerusalem. nothing but this process of syncretism can explain the condition of religion in the subsequent history, and it is needed to enable us to understand both the difficulty of the work of the prophets and the form their message takes. nevertheless, there must have been from the earliest times elements that made for a purer faith, and that never acquiesced in this confusion between jehovah and baal, which certainly prevailed in the popular mind; otherwise the reformation of the eighth century would be an isolated and inexplicable movement, and without that historical support the prophets claimed. there was a party against baal altogether, although they do not emerge until the monarchy. this party may have consisted of the "priests" of jehovah. at mention of these we must not think of the sacrificing priests described in the book of leviticus. no such persons are known until after the exile; during this period anyone could sacrifice. the story of the priest in judges xvii. gives a good idea of this class; his chief duties seem to have consisted in keeping the oracle and obtaining decisions by the lot. these decisions became the basis on which there was gradually built up the _torah_ (the law), which, as the word implies, was a collection of decisions obtained by casting lots. for the purpose of obtaining these decisions the priests seem to have used an idol of some kind; for this is the most natural explanation of the ephod and its use in the early history. there would be different degrees of intellectual and moral capacity found in the ranks of the priests, and many of them may have had higher ideals of their duties than the one mentioned in judges. it would be likely that those who were in charge of the sacred ark possessed a superior dignity and maintained a purer tradition. gradually the magical accompaniments to their oracular decisions may have given way to more judicial deliverances, although in the time of david and abiathar they were apparently still used ( sam. xxx. ). at any rate the priests kept alive the idea of jehovah as the dispenser of justice, and helped to build up that system of laws for which israel is so justly famous. this "higher critical" view of the history is simply one to which we are driven by the records that stand nearest to the times they describe. it certainly alters considerably the ordinary conceptions of the type of religion that prevailed in those early days, before the coming of the prophets; but that such was the type is only too clearly shown by the writings of the prophets themselves. nevertheless this view of the period, while it shuts out a somewhat stiff and mechanical religious interpretation of the history which has been forced upon it by a later age, is still not without a valuable lesson, which is perhaps not taught elsewhere in the bible, and yet is one that we need to have always before us. it is one, the possibility of which always exists and often threatens a spiritual religion: the danger of a gradual encroachment and assimilation of pagan ideas until the original purity is lost almost beyond recovery. if this has happened anywhere it has happened in christianity. it was the awakening to this paganisation of christianity that provoked the struggle of the reformation, not yet decided. many of the conceptions that are still popularly identified with christianity are the remnants of paganism. it is not necessary to enumerate the common customs which wear only a thin veneer of christianity; but many of the ideas in connection with christian doctrine certainly owe more to pagan philosophy than they do to the new testament. the syncretism between paganism and christianity has not been destroyed by the reformation. many of the popular ideas of the atonement, for instance, rest on a pagan conception of god and a materialistic idea of christ's work which are so deeply involved in the common presentation of christianity that to present the actual new testament teaching would seem to many like a denial of the foundation truths of the gospel. still more dangerous is the localisation of the god as the peculiar patron of the land, which justifies many unholy wars and makes such a thing as a national repentance almost impossible. there is a god of the british empire who is remarkably like the jehovah-baal of the old syncretised religion that ruled in the period which we have been studying, and whose worship begets equal indifference to the claims of true religion, and equally cruel treatment for the prophet who strives to call men to a purer faith. it is a relief to turn to a more comforting lesson. it is that which assures us that man's thought of god is not entirely his own, that it cannot be destroyed and is never wholly forgotten, but ever makes its way to higher truth and greater power. the way in which the higher religion comes is through the pure minds of those who wish only to live up to the fulness of the truth, and however mistaken they be, wish only to know and to do the will of god. a similar task lies equally before every honest man and every true christian. the lesson is plain: beware of a stagnant religion that dreads progress, and keep the mind open as a child's to god's further revelation of himself, which has yet many things to tell us. prophetism--early stages the reader is recommended to investigate for himself the origins of prophetism by a careful examination of the following passages:-- i. there were originally guilds or schools of prophets; from which it would appear that prophetism was a kind of profession ( sam. x. ; xix. ; kings ii. , ). there is nothing in the records that we possess that marks these bands of prophets as possessed of great spiritual power; they were devoted to the cause of israel and jehovah, and the way in which this was manifested was taken to imply that they were filled with the spirit of jehovah; it inclines somewhat to the dervish order of enthusiastic devotion ( sam. x. ; xix. - ). it is significant that wherever these schools are found there is known to have existed a "high place," _i.e._, an old canaanitish sanctuary, now used for the worship of jehovah-baal. a similar order of prophets was connected with the worship of the tyrian baal ( kings xviii.). ii. samuel ( sam. xix. ) elisha ( kings ii. ; iv. ; vi. - ) and in much less degree, elijah ( kings xviii. ; xix. ) had some connection with these schools. iii. the later prophets did not claim descent from these guilds of "prophecy," and even repudiated any connection with them (amos vii. ). this conflict between the "called" prophet and the professionals is revealed in the fierce denunciations of isaiah (xxix. ) and jeremiah (v. ; xiv. , ; xxvi. , ). iv. the identification of these prophets with priests and seers probably gives a clue to their origin ( sam. ix. ; isa. xxix. ; jer. xxvi. , ; amos vii. ). v. certain individuals who are called prophets or seers had official court connection ( sam. xxiv. ; chron. xxv. ; amos vii. ). between these "prophets" and the great writers who bear the same designation, we cannot fail to recognise an immense difference; samuel and elijah are connecting links between the two classes. elijah is rather a hero than a prophet in the later sense, for he gives us no new doctrine, and samuel is a seer who has risen to political power, rather than a religious ruler. critics have discovered evidence of a double narrative in our documents. (earlier) sam. ix. -x. ; xi. xiii. -xiv. . (later) sam. i. ii. iii. iv. vii. - ; viii. x. - ; xii. xv. if these be examined and contrasted, it will be found that samuel is more allied in the earlier narratives with the "priest-seer" than with the prophet of the type of amos. a confirmation of this double narrative is found in the different accounts of the origin of the monarchy which they give. samuel, according to the earlier sources, is just the type we need for the intermediate stage in the development of the prophet. for the different historical conceptions of the work and character of david the narratives in samuel should be compared with the representation given in chronicles, and with that inferred by the ascription of various psalms to his authorship. lecture v prophetism--early stages we have seen that in the time of the judges the religion of jehovah became so mixed with elements taken over from the canaanites that the original revelation gained through moses was in danger of being lost. we have now to trace the steps by which this syncretism was broken up, and the advance made to the purely monotheistic conception and the lofty morality of the great literary prophets. however this came about it is certain that it was not due to any gradual movement among the mass of the people, for the type of religion which we have been considering remains largely unaltered in its hold upon the popular mind. through the teaching of the earlier prophets certain reforms were attempted, but none of them seem to have touched the heart of the nation. hezekiah and josiah attempted to reform religion by centralising the national worship, but, from whatever cause, it left the people still in opposition to the prophetic type of religion, a conflict that was only ended by the calamity of the exile. it is, therefore, to the prophetic band themselves that we must turn. can we trace within this more limited circle a movement that shall in any way prepare us for the appearance of men of the type of amos? to answer this question we must turn to the books of samuel and kings. these present us with a history of the period which, like most history, has been written, or over-written, from a later standpoint and made to conform with later ideals. on the whole, however, and by contrasting it with the still later conceptions of the books of chronicles, we can form an accurate impression of the state of religion at this time; and incidentally we have a valuable account of a movement that evidently gave birth to those great conceptions of religion which were to be voiced with such power and force by the great prophets. the writers who, apart from the value of their religious teaching, have by their distinctive style made the old testament a contribution to the literature of the world, are known to us as "prophets." this name they share, however, with others who have left us no first-hand record of their religious opinions, and who, as described to us in the early sources, bear only the slightest resemblance to prophets as we conceive them. our task will be, therefore, to investigate the origins of this movement which embraces such diverse elements, and this we may commence by examining the meaning of the word "prophet" (_nabi_). like many other words in the old testament that lock up important secrets, the origin of the word prophet is obscure and its meaning disputed. the conception which is most natural to our word "prophet" is of one who sees into the future; this is not even the main characteristic of the writing prophets, nor does it embrace all the phenomena connected with the movement, especially in its early stages. all that can be said of the word from an etymological standpoint is that it has no origin which can be traced in historical hebrew, and the inference is that it is either a very ancient word, or one borrowed from some other language. the word can, however, hardly be ancient, for it is not common to semitic tongues, as is the word "priest," for instance, while we have a definite statement that within historic times it superseded the older word "seer" ( sam. ix. ). the name was also used for certain devotees of the tyrian baal, whose worship was imported by ahab; but it can hardly be that the name would be adopted directly from a phenomenon that was so repugnant to the israelites, although the common name hints that there was a common ancestry somewhere. it seems fair to assume from the facts mentioned that the word is, at least, not older than the entry into canaan, and while it cannot be definitely proved that it was borrowed from the canaanites, there is some confirmation of this in the fact that the earliest occurrence of the name is in connection with the "sons of the prophets," who are always found in places where it is known that there were canaanitish sanctuaries. the word _nabi_ has been variously connected with the root, _nab'a_, "to bubble," and so one inspired; with the arabic word, "to speak," and so a speaker or herald. the word seems to exist in assyrian in the form _nabu_, "to announce," but this is probably from the name of the babylonian deity, nebo, the god of eloquence, so that the word might mean one possessed by nebo. some have even looked to this as the ultimate derivation of the word. the investigation of the word really gives nothing satisfactory, and we must therefore turn to examine the character of the persons to whom it was applied. in various passages in the old testament, seer and prophet are so used as to lead us to infer that they embraced identical ideas (isa. xxix. ; amos vii. ), and in one passage, which has only the authority of a late annotation of the text, we learn that they were identical in their application ( sam. ix. ). the other name with which prophet is frequently bracketed is that of priest; they are placed together in the denunciations of jeremiah (ii. ; v. ). our previous studies showed us that these classes were all somewhat akin in their origins; the duties of the priest were discharged in keeping the oracles, while the seer is evidently akin to the soothsayer, a type that has appeared in all religions. we have a concrete example of these classes being combined in samuel. in the early story of samuel's first meeting with saul, we find saul turning to consult the famous seer in order to discover where his father's lost asses are to be found; and even the question of the seer's usual fee is mentioned ( sam. ix. ). this picture, which makes samuel a notable seer, is earlier and more authentic than that which makes him nearly a ruler over israel. although he is nowhere called a priest, yet he himself sacrifices, and his presence at a sacrifice is reckoned an advantage ( sam. xiii. - ); while we have the story of his sleeping by the ark in his youth. the seer is, therefore, an exalted type of priest who has obtained renown by the success of his prognostications, and so we read of seers attached to the courts of the kings ( sam. xxiv. ; chron. xxv. ); but the later sources have recognised that there is something heathenish about the word, and have covered it up with the name prophet. from the early descriptions of the bands of prophets in the books of samuel, it would seem that they are more allied to the priestly order than to the seers, for it is certain that down to the middle of the ninth century the name prophet stands for something different from its use as applied to moses and the literary prophets. the name is applied to bands of men who "prophesy," but this prophesying is entirely unlike the methods associated by us with the prophetic spirit. it is evidently something which is done, not individually, but in companies, and apparently in solemn procession to the accompaniment of noisy music. it must have been a species of violent incantation, leading to acts of fierce fanaticism, in which the clothing might be stripped off, and often ending in complete mental prostration ( sam. x. , ; xix. , ). the connection of music with religious exercises is almost universal, and it always had a conspicuous place in the worship of jehovah ( sam. vi. ; isa. xxx. ), while music has often been used to induce the prophetic vision ( kings iii. ). these prophets seem to have lived together in schools, semi-monastic orders, or guilds, and to have been found where there were high places, or canaanitish sanctuaries; and from their behaviour we are forced to admit that we have here a common manifestation in the history of religion, where companies of men devote themselves to fanatical outbursts that are taken to indicate possession by the spirit of god. to the accompaniment of music and frenzied dancing they work themselves into a state that approaches madness--always among uncivilised peoples taken to be a sign of the hand of god (hosea ix. ). we cannot fail to be reminded of the greater excesses of the prophets of baal, the extraordinary performances of the dervish bands, and the fanatical excesses that have always disfigured monastic institutions. it cannot be dismissed, therefore, as incredible that this phenomenon was derived from the canaanites, and developed a zeal for jehovah that was manifested after a fashion common to the devotees of other religions. down to a very late date in the history of the kingdom, the literary prophets found themselves in conflict with bands of prophets, who to their judgment prophesied falsely; and from the way in which these are often associated with the priests, it seems probable that they represent the deteriorated--or perhaps simply the stagnant--remnant of this earlier movement. it is, however, necessary to assume that even in the earlier movement there were purer elements than those which we have noticed, and that it embraced individuals who were led into a real fellowship with the mind of god, of which samuel and elisha are conspicuous examples. religious movements of the "revival" type, which have undoubtedly inspired and produced great ethical changes and resulted finally in sane religion, have often been accompanied in their earlier stages by these frenzied outbreaks. it would be in response to some of those strange mental movements which modern psychology is endeavouring to understand, but also whenever danger threatened the nation or the national religion, that these enthusiasts would take the field. as the movement shed its purely hysterical elements, it may have been occupied in the compilation of the records of israel's history, for many of these hardly reflect the higher prophetic standpoint, or in writing down such stories of their great heroes as we find connected with elijah and elisha. a connection with the literary productions of the great prophets may be thus indirectly traced, as it also most certainly can in the prophetic _style_, which in its fierce rhythm of denunciation or its sobbing sweeps of passionate appeal recalls something of the incantation of the prophetic bands. samuel, elijah and elisha, by their connection with this early phenomenon of prophetism and by the approximation of their work to the ideals of the later prophets, are the true links between the earlier and later stages of the prophetic movement. it is both credible and natural that, when the movement had spent itself in some wonderful advance into ethical power and religious insight, the less noble elements should have still remained and continued to claim divine inspiration, and yet have been found in open conflict with its own nobler productions. it would seem that the obscure sect known as nazarites were connected in some way with the early prophetic movement, for they are mentioned side by side with the prophets (amos ii. , ); and it is probable that samuel was both a nazarite and a prophet ( sam. i. ), while samson, in whom the spirit of jehovah seemed to produce these strange outbursts of savage frenzy, was certainly a nazarite (judges xiii. , , , ). it would appear that the nazarites were men who devoted themselves to the service of jehovah under certain vows of abstinence from wine and ceremonial defilement. the vows might be taken for life or for a limited period, but while under the vow the hair was left unshorn. there is evidence that this is an old semitic custom, and that when the vow was accomplished the hair was made an offering to the god (num. vi. ); to this day the pilgrims to mecca are forbidden to cut their hair until the journey is completed. the law of the nazarites (num. vi.) is only a late attempt to legislate for a custom that had existed independently of the institutions of the religion of jehovah, and so to secure a place within the official religion for a custom that would have been difficult to suppress by prohibition. similar in many respects to the nazarites, but even more obscure, were the rechabites, who abstained from wine (jer. xxxv. - ), but who seem also to have protested against the adoption of any of the arts and customs of settled life, especially as these customs were typified in the cultivation of the vine. they chose these methods in order to resist the influence of canaan, which was threatening so dangerously the integrity of the nation and the national religion. they probably hoped by these conservative manners to destroy the syncretism between baal and jehovah; for the only other mention of the sect in the old testament is in connection with the extirpation of the house of ahab ( kings x. - ). it may appear repulsive to those who have made up their minds as to the methods by which the spirit of god can work to trace back the supreme genius, the impassioned ethical ideals, and the practical statesmanship of the great prophets of israel to movements bordering on insanity; yet it is from enthusiasm that most of the great saving movements of the world have come. certainly the great religious revival which was soon to come in israel owed almost as much of its success to these bands of enthusiasts as to the personality of elijah. it falls now to our task to trace the movement from bands to individuals, from prophetism to prophecy, from a phenomenon to a teaching. we have records of men who seem to have moved beyond the mantic stage and who prepare the way for the great prophets. we can conveniently call these "transition prophets." we shall find that they bear some resemblance to the old style of seer, or to the guild prophets, or to both. of some of these we have only the merest mention, so that they may be called the _minor_ transition prophets. two stand together by their connection with david and from the fact that they both seem to have been court officials ( sam. vii. ; xxiv. ; kings i. ). there is no word here of the mantic fury of the early prophets; although in gad, who makes known the best way to escape the anger of an offended deity, we have a survival of the ancient seer; but in nathan we have a truly noble example of one who, although he may have been dependent on david for his daily bread, yet faced him with the unsparing denunciation of his sin. here is a man who regards right in israel more than the smile of princes, and who has a higher conception of his office than that of a convenient manipulator of oracles for the flattering of a king. nathan is a true ancestor of amos and jeremiah. ahijah the shilonite is famous because he foretold the disruption of the kingdom ( kings xi. - ), and we may see in this the beginnings of that political judgment which was to become notable in the later prophets; although a partisan motive might be suspected in this particular case, when jeroboam, in later years, sent his wife to consult ahijah, accompanied with the usual fee ( kings xiv. ), the message he received shows that in ahijah we have no party politician, but the impartial judgment of the later prophets. there is a pathetic and somewhat mysterious story of an unnamed man of god who delivered the word of jehovah to jeroboam at the altar at bethel, and who, refusing the accustomed hospitality due to a prophet, afterwards accepted the invitation of the old prophet of bethel, and paid the penalty with his death. we have here a story, the moral of which may be obscure enough, but which certainly illustrates the growing conflict between the two prophetic ideals. here is a prophet who travels from his own land to rebuke the sin of a king to his face, afterwards yielding to the blandishments of one of the official prophets. the new prophetism, tempted from its superior position by the old, fell; yet not many years were to elapse before these two orders, in the persons of amos and amaziah, were again to face one another at this same spot, and this time the new prophetism was to maintain its integrity ( kings viii.; amos vii. - ). before we pass on to the _major_ transition prophets, it will be well to consider here the effect which the foundation of the monarchy had on the development of the religion of israel. of the inauguration of the monarchy we possess two accounts; one extremely unfavourable, written doubtless after judah's experience of some of her notorious kings, and in the light of a somewhat ideal conception of the theocratic government that was supposed to have flourished before the time of saul ( sam. x. - ); the other account, in which samuel himself at the revelation of jehovah initiates the movement towards the monarchy ( sam. ix. -x. ) by anointing saul, is the one that is placed earlier by the critics. the monarchy was an inevitable stage in the social development of a settled people, and it was the policy of samuel to make the monarchy the organ of the theocracy. for all this saul does not seem to have had any influence on religion, or to have ever realised the needs of his times, and under the sense of failure he became a prey to fear and depressing influences which eventually wrecked his reason. round the name of david have gathered the national ideals of heroism and sainthood so often found in combination in early story. they had a true origin in david, if we judge from the standards of piety and rulership that were natural to his age. outlaw, hero, poet, saint--david is the darling of israel's history. it would be unfair to david to picture him as the saintly author of some of the tender psalms that bear his name, although others of a more robust character might well be from his hand. that david was a poet seems to be certain, and the songs of lament over saul and abner, which have strong claims to be genuine, bear witness to his true poetic gift; but they are deficient in any display of deep religious feeling. we may have also to reduce somewhat the conception of the extent or the absoluteness of his kingly rule. he was rather one of those freebooters who by their heroism and rough manly courage are able to gather round them men of their own nature and to inspire in their followers a loyal devotion. to this pleasant adventurer the early kingdom fell, but for long it was only a kingdom of personal followers; nor does he ever seem to have been enthusiastically acknowledged by the whole nation, or to have established his claims absolutely beyond dispute. his heroic defence against the philistine invasion was sufficient to give him a great place in the affection of the people, yet he never assumed the imperial rule in the manner of his successor solomon. with all this necessary allowance for the idealising process of a later age, david was the indispensable centre round which the early ideals and legends of the monarchy could collect. his work was of immense importance for the future; especially his conquest of jerusalem, now for the first time wrested from the canaanites and destined to become in the future the centre of the national life, to be bound up with his name, and above all to be the peculiar dwelling-place of jehovah. to make jerusalem his capital was a very diplomatic stroke, for it was neutral territory to both ephraim and judah, and this fact quietened the mutual jealousy of these tribes. it was also a great work of david that by his rough piety he definitely connected the kingship with devotion to the cause of jehovah. this devotion found expression in his care for the sacred palladium of the tribes, although it was policy as well as piety that brought the ark to jerusalem; for we are forced to admit that in matters of religion david was not greatly in advance of his times. he regarded the jurisdiction of jehovah as not extending beyond palestine ( sam. xxvi. ), and although he himself may have abandoned idols, yet he allowed them in his house ( sam. xix. ), while he retained the old custom of consulting the will of jehovah by the ephod ( sam. xxx. ) or by the movements of trees ( sam. v. - ). his conception of jehovah was that of a being of uncertain temper, who would take vengeance for any acts of ceremonial violation ( sam. vi. ) or whose anger might be aroused for reasons beyond human discovery ( sam. xxiv. - ). but it would be equally wrong to blame david because he does not come up to the ideals of a later age. so far as it went, we may believe that his piety was real; he was a man after jehovah's own heart, _for those times_. he certainly did his best to found a kingdom on personal affection and to establish some kind of impartial justice. in the matter of bathsheba and uriah david has been judged by impossible standards, and especially by the religious ideas of the st psalm, which bears in its every line evidence of a morality far too deep for the age of david, and which is quite unsuitable for a confession of murder and adultery. it was no crime in the eyes of an oriental monarch to take his neighbour's wife, and it was novel doctrine that david heard from the lips of nathan; it is to be laid to his everlasting credit that he listened to this prophetic judgment, was convicted of the sinfulness of his act, and repented very profoundly. when we pass to solomon we come to a character altogether different, but one that is very difficult to estimate from the portrait presented to us in the old testament. the writers allow themselves to be carried away by the tradition of his magnificence, and by the external evidence of his piety preserved in the splendid temple which he reared to the glory of jehovah; but they cannot produce much evidence for the depth of his personal religion. he attempted to build an empire on the lines of the barbaric and superficial glories of his greatest neighbours; but its splendour and certainly its significance have been rather overdrawn by the later historians. it was a reign of splendour, but for the religion of israel it was unimportant, for it was in the main irreligious. save for the presence of nathan at his coronation, the prophetic ministry almost disappears in this reign; what prophets remain are opposed to his policy. solomon was little more than a worldly cosmopolitan; his empire was magnificent in comparison with the achievements of his predecessors, but it rested not as david's on the devotion of the people to a popular hero, but depended for its strength on a system of taxation and a false imperialism: forced labour was employed and the loyalty of the tribes was strained. it was an endeavour to change the government from a natural and tribal system to that of an eastern despotism; and it ended in failure. the building of the temple was only a part of this policy, and it was a policy resented by the prophetic party, who were all for simplicity in matters of worship ( sam. vii.; omit verse ). the temple did not occupy too outstanding a place in the block of royal buildings, and there is no evidence that in this age it was anything more than solomon's private chapel built with the desire to rival the splendid royal shrines of other countries. it was evidently designed largely on heathen models, and contained heathen symbols which the later religion absorbed with difficulty. the adoption of the temple as the supreme centre of israel's worship was not the work of solomon, but the effect of the teaching of isaiah of jerusalem and the consequence of the reforms of hezekiah and josiah. the harem and the strange worship were similarly parts of an international policy. solomon was certainly the first to give to the worship of jehovah an imposing splendour and regularity, but it was not a splendour that appealed to the prophets. the beautiful prayer of the dedication can hardly be the composition of solomon, but is more likely to have been the production of a later age which endeavoured to give to this display a piety which the original did not possess. in time the temple was to become of enormous importance, but in this period it remained only a magnificent shrine for the ark. the fact that two of the prophets sided with jeroboam may point to a revolt against this religious splendour. the bulls of jeroboam were a counterblast to the temple, and although his name is ever afterwards connected with the introduction of this idolatrous worship, and the succeeding kings of israel condemned for their participation, it is evident that these strictures are somewhat intensified by the conception that in the quarrel between israel and judah, judah was in the right, and by the refusal to allow for the fact that this method of worship had not been condemned by any contemporary. the calves were most likely ancient symbols of semitic divinity, and were certainly intended as symbols of jehovah. nevertheless, the future lay with the temple and the south, for the revolution was based on a merely conservative impulse and contained no ideal. in the south, jehovah was never worshipped with such an excess of heathen symbolism, and thither the voice of prophecy soon transferred itself to find in judah its greatest sphere. we are brought now to one of the most pregnant movements of this time, known as the northern prophetic revolt, and to the work and personalty of the major transition prophets, elijah and elisha. the introduction of the worship of the tyrian baal by ahab was the signal for revolt. here was a violation of the commonest conceptions of religion: the transplantation of the worship of another god, melkart, the baal of tyre, into the territory of jehovah, who was regarded as the baal of canaan. it opened the eyes of the schools of the prophets to the danger of the use of the name of baal, and was the cause of its complete disuse as a name for jehovah (hosea ii. , ). in the revolt against the worship of this heathen baal there stands out as its chief inspiration and leader the magnificent figure of the prophet elijah. it is evident that in the story of his life we have much that is legendary and probably some confusion with the work of elisha, but the religious significance is sufficiently clear. we have noticed that elijah is remotely connected with the prophetic schools, and they share with him the persecution organised by the devotees of baal; the old mantic accompaniments of prophecy are still found in elijah; he seems to charm the rain ( kings xviii. ), and he certainly hears it coming. with all his courage and insight he does not fully comprehend the true methods by which the religion of jehovah is to win its way; conviction is to be brought by thunder and fire; if these fail there remains the sword. it may be difficult to decide whether elijah actually conceived the wonderful revelation at mount horeb, but it is more than likely that to this man there came in the hour of failure the discovery that there were other ways more to the mind of jehovah whereby men should realise his presence; a discovery which has been dramatised in the theophany on horeb. revelation by the still small voice of inner conviction certainly gained greater recognition after the ministry of elijah. if we seek to understand the meaning of elijah's stand for jehovah, we shall see that it was first of all a protest against the syncretism of the baal and jehovah religions. this protest may have been founded initially on conceptions not too exalted, namely, that jehovah and melkart could not be worshipped in the same land, but there are evidences that elijah had advanced further than that. his daring taunts to baal amount to complete scepticism as to his existence, or at least of his power to injure the true follower of jehovah. if that is so, then we have in elijah the first monotheist. he clearly perceived that in character baal and jehovah were utterly different. the cruelty connected with the religion of jehovah still persists under elijah, but the incompatibility between the true religion and heathenism is recognised and affirmed. we may sum up elijah's religion in his own phrase: "i have been very jealous for jehovah." there is another aspect of elijah's work which certainly forms a true transition to the teaching of the later prophets; he denounces the murder of naboth almost as much as the worship of baal. we trace here the rise of the ethical conception of the service of jehovah and the protest against social wrongs which was to become so great a part of the burden of such men as amos and micah. with elijah we can see forming, however dimly, the thought of a kingdom of god, and the peculiar patriotism of the prophets: he desires an israel independent of all heathen alliances; it is a conception of a kingdom which shall be great in intension rather than wide in extension. it was this conflict of the prophetic and the so-called patriotic ideals that was to contribute largely to the final overthrow of the state. it may have been that the prophets could never have built up a strong state on the lines they indicated, and their very protest may have weakened the arm of statesmen and contributed to the destruction of the kingdom founded by david and solomon. we can only feel that we side with the prophets. if the prophetic voice had been silenced we might have had israel with a kingdom as mighty as assyria, although that is highly doubtful; but it would have been a kingdom as useless for its contribution to religion as that proud, vain, and cruel empire. the theophany at horeb, therefore, whatever its embellishment and however symbolical its dress, is the true history of this period. in the development of the prophetic religion, magic and mystery are failing, display and external glory are passing away, and there enters from this time the conception of the religion of the inward voice on which the work of the later prophets is built. elisha is but a pale reflection of his master, and makes little contribution to religion; but we soon hear of micaiah ( kings xxii. ), whose message reveals the still widening gap between the professional prophet and the new order of men who hear with greater clearness the true voice of jehovah. but sixty years have to pass, and northern palestine awakens to the echoes of a new voice, and listens to the new message of the first of that prophetic band who have enriched literature while they have exalted religion--amos the herdman of tekoa. where elsewhere in history has there been a religion that, starting in comparative heathenism, almost lost in conflict with a fully-developed paganism, has yet moved steadily upward, breaking away from its origins, shedding the false charms of magic and sorcery, and rising by gradual ascent into fellowship with the will of god? it is this _movement_ that constitutes the inspiration of the old testament and that makes it still a word of god to us. many of these conclusions, which have been put forward and established by critical methods, especially in reference to the religious feeling of those times, and in the different conception of the piety of men like david and solomon, may strike the reader as startling and disturbing. that may well be, but that is no excuse for our reading into bible story more than can be legitimately found there, while it will be sure to obscure some of its highest teaching, which is to be found not in isolated "texts," but in great movements. it is the facts that we have to face, and the facts are obscured not so much by the corrections of the history by the later historians, as by our forcing into them the still later conceptions of our own times. we have not given detailed proof of many of the positions here taken up; they may be sought in detail by the reader in the works of biblical scholarship. our object is to discover whether these things being so, we can still find a true revelation in the history of this people, and hear in it the voice of god. do we not get from this corrected view of the history, a sense of the splendid onward movement of this religion, which in itself is so much more inspiring than the monotonous conception, which is only the product of later judaism, that the history of israel's religion is nothing but a series of apostasies from a pure and perfect faith? that late conception is not borne out by a careful and critical study of the sources, and it rather owes its strength to-day to a certain dogmatic conception of human nature that is needlessly pessimistic, and to an idea of the weakness of the spirit of god in his dealings with man that nearly approaches atheism. one or two lessons of the period stand out in strong relief. one is that better things come of enthusiasm, even when it is mistaken, than from indifference. the reference of all the institutions of israel to the definitely revealed will of jehovah may seem to some, after these investigations, a mistake. this can only arise from too narrow a conception of the working of god and the means through which his spirit reaches man, for it is this very reference to the will of god that is responsible for the advance in israel's faith. to believe in the will of god, and to refer all to it, does gradually increase the knowledge of that will, and so leads to a true revelation. another lesson is, not to despise the accompaniments of the first movements of the spirit of god in man. it is not within the scope of this work to enquire why it is that when a man is moved by the spirit of god such strange phenomena as we have been studying in the prophetic bands, which still accompany many revivals, should be the immediate results. there must be patience with these things as beginnings; but equally must there be impatience with them when they elevate themselves into a permanent claim to recognition as the only signs of a true religious life, and when they refuse to recognise as higher the sane and ethical movement to which they themselves have given birth. one of the chief difficulties in things religious is to recognise the offspring of a great movement, to discover the time when the child must be allowed its new-found freedom, to know when symbols may be dropped and the reality brought in. protestantism has given birth to wider thoughts about god and deeper appreciations of the extent of his working, which are the logical outcome of protestantism, and yet which are often repudiated by those whose protestantism is of the aggressive type. a progressive movement of any kind always has these strifes. they are as constant in science as in religion, only in science they are more easily overcome by the greater readiness to accept new revelation. christianity is a religion that moves, and, as christ himself foretold, it causes the son to rise up against his father, the new generation to come into conflict with the old. ours it is never to forget that the kingdom of god is on the side of the child; except ye receive the kingdom of god as a child, in the spirit of enquiry and growth, except ye never grow old, ye cannot enter therein. the religion of the literary prophets the chronology of the prophets _assyrian period._ b.c. amos - b.c. hosea - accession of tiglath pileser iii isaiah - invasion of sennacherib micah - fall of samaria zephaniah _circa_ western palestine invaded by scythians nahum - ? fall of nineveh _chaldæan period._ jeremiah - deuteronomy discovered habakkuk - ? first great exile ezekiel - second great exile _persian period._ isa. xiii.-xiv.; xxi. - ; xxxiv., (date uncertain, but xxxv. definitely after the exile.) isa. xl.-lv. (the "second" isaiah) _c_ . cyrus takes babylon isa. lvi.-lxvi. (various prophecies, to be dated after the return.) return of the exiles haggai _c_ zech. i.-viii. _c_ mal. - promulgation of the law zech. ix.-xiv. there is nothing to enable us to decide the dates of jonah, joel, and obadiah with greater definiteness than to say that they were written after the restoration. diagram representing the religious significance of the prophets:-- final embodiment golden age of prophecy silver age of prophetic teaching _exile_ + +--------+ psalms | | | | | | | + | +--------------+ isaiah | | | | | | | +---+ jeremiah | | | | | | | | + | | +--+ hosea | | | | | | | | amos +-------+ micah--nah.--hab. +--+--------------+ wisdom literature | | | | | | +-----------+ isaiah deut. | | + | | | | | | | | +-------------+ ezekiel -----+ the law judging from the standard of new testament religion and their contribution to it, the prophets may be roughly classified in the above order. the higher tendency seems to vanish from the historical works which were composed after the exile, save in many of the psalms, where religion reaches its highest expression outside the new testament. the tendency represented by the middle and horizontal line ends in the somewhat superficial ethics of such works as the book of proverbs. the lower tendency _is only to be judged so from comparison_; it served its purpose, and it was an honest endeavour to reduce the prophetic ideals to a definite system. it is in line with the spirit of many of the psalms that the religion of the revelation of christ takes its rise, and we may see in the sadducees and the pharisees the degenerate effect of the other lines of development. lecture vi the religion of the literary prophets among the writings of the old testament, the prophetical books, whether considered as literature or religion, are acknowledged to stand out as unsurpassed. if the psalms claim to rival them it is to be remembered that the psalms are probably to be traced to the prophetic teaching. the prophets themselves begin a new era; they are creative and owe but little to their past. that for so long a period, in unbroken continuity, there should emerge from a tiny nation a succession of men of differing temperament, training, and social position, who should with remarkable unity voice truths of religion not only hitherto unrecognised but rarely surpassed or apprehended in subsequent history, is in itself a unique phenomenon in comparative religion. equally notable is the fact, that in the majority of the prophets we have not only the gift of religious intuition, but that this is found in combination with great oratorical power, true poetic genius, and practical statesmanship. they remain for all time an indisputable witness to the divine revelation in the development of israel's religion. previous stages which we have been able to recognise in the development of israel's religion do not carry us on to amos by so inevitable a movement, that his message could be predicted as the next stage to be reached. when we come fresh from the investigation of the religion held by the leaders of the people in the times of david and solomon, we recognise the immense strides made when we open the book of amos. we can trace a likeness between elijah and amos in their denunciation of wrong; but, in the sphere of religion, there is a great gulf between them which no records of the intervening period quite help us to bridge over. we cannot think of amos taking part in the great vindication of carmel; it is probable that he would have recognised it as useless. in samuel, elijah and elisha we undoubtedly have the religious ancestors of the literary prophets, but while they stood at the head of popular movements which they led in triumph against the intrusion of alien faiths, the prophets that we are now to study stand in decided antagonism to the popular faith, and the conceptions of israel's religion which they reiterate with such passion and insistency were never acceptable to the people. their religion has to make its way against the national religion. the importance of the prophets is the natural starting point for the modern study of the old testament, and it is from the earnest perusal of their writings that modern biblical science has been forced to take up a rigorous criticism of the entire literature of the old testament. under the old methods, the prophets had only a secondary position in the history of the ancient revelation, since their message was conceived as rather concerned with an age yet to come than with their own times and needs. the divine law had already been given to the people, constituting a perfect norm of religion. when the people failed to obey the law, then the prophet appeared, enforced its principles, and condemned the people's apostasy. if that message was rejected, as it often was, then nothing was left for the prophet but the proclamation of vengeance, or the prediction of a time when the law should be ideally fulfilled by the revelation of the gospel. between the law and the gospel, therefore, stood the prophets, but they acted only as a bridge from the one to the other. the natural method of studying their writings was to search for the fulfilment of their predictions in history. with these aims it was perhaps inevitable that their words should often be interpreted in a quite unwarrantable manner; events were read back into their prophecies, or the fulfilment was found in such ordinary coincidences that the dignity of prediction was itself lost, the study became puerile and morbid, while a fancied necessity as to what they must mean prevented any scholarly and unbiassed interpretation. their works have consequently been largely used as mysterious oracles from which the future history of the world could be accurately predicted. to read the prophets in order to obtain a picture of their own age was regarded as a secular occupation, while every attempt to recover the original application of their words was regarded as an endeavour to discountenance the proofs of divine revelation. many of their words bear remarkable likeness to the gracious invitations of the gospel, so that they have been used equally with the new testament for gospel preaching, but it was never dreamed that they were real invitations to the people of their own times, founded on the eternal laws of god's forgiveness afterwards made clear in christ; they were simply words spoken under mental effects which transferred the speakers to the time of the new testament. whatever the final results of the application of historical criticism may be, it has already laid religion under a permanent obligation in its discovery of the hitherto unrealised importance of the prophets. at first attention was directed to their exalted ethical and religious standpoint, appearing as it did in an age that neither produced nor responded to it; minute study then showed that they gave first-hand and incidental accounts of their own times. their messages bear witness to the contemporary state of the religion of jehovah and the people's morals, and although it may be that they sometimes judged these from their own high standard, which caused them to paint them somewhat darker than an absolutely historical judgment would demand, yet on what the prevailing religious opinions of the day really were, they are the best evidence. the startling but unassailable deduction made from the prophets' accounts of their own times is, that in matters religious they were proclaiming doctrines that seemed to their contemporaries entirely novel. the prophets do not, however, acquiesce in the charge of novelty. they profess to go back to the original and inner meaning of jehovah's choice of the nation. they refer to this choice, as a "covenant," and to the religion demanded by it, as the law of the lord. the first inference is that they refer to that which _we_ know as the law, the pentateuch, or law of moses. a comparison with the prophetic teaching with the ordinances of, say, the book of leviticus, shows that this cannot be the case, for they do not correspond. many things there commanded as essential are passed over in silence by the prophets; but the force of the argument is not wholly drawn from that, although it has a weight here which the argument from silence cannot usually carry, because both leviticus and the prophets' teaching set forth the essentials of religion, and there can be no possibility of doubt that the conceptions of the essentials have an altogether different outlook. it is chiefly, though not by any means entirely, from the standpoint of the prophetical writings that modern criticism is forced to revise the conception of the progress and decline of religion that jewish tradition has embodied in the arrangement of its scriptures, and especially in the ascription of the pentateuch as a whole to the age and authorship of moses. the verdict from this comparison between the prophets and the law is, that the five books of moses either did not exist in their present form at the time of the prophets, or, if they did, remained entirely unknown to them. the historical value of the prophets is therefore to be rated very high, not only because of their transparent sincerity, but also because the historical data which can be secured from them are given indirectly, and are valuable for the same reason as the remarks of a contemporary diarist. they are unaware that they are writing history, and are consequently free from the almost unescapable tendency of the historian to make the facts fit into preconceived theories. modern criticism, therefore, does rightly in making the prophets of paramount importance for the understanding of the old testament, and when the prophets are thus made the test, much in the history that was either completely hidden or difficult to understand, becomes visible and clear, and the progress of israel's religion is displayed in all its grandeur and movement. we can now turn to examine the extent of the sources from which we may draw, in order to estimate the religious opinions and influence of the prophets, and to examine the peculiar character of the literature for which they are responsible. first in importance stand the books of the prophets proper. in the ancient division of the hebrew bible into, ( ) the law, ( ) the prophets, ( ) the hagiographa, or the holy writings, "the prophets" included, beside our books of the prophets, such historical books as joshua, judges, samuel and kings. significantly enough, however, daniel is not grouped with the prophets, but with the hagiographa, either because it was not classed as prophecy, or more probably because the canon of "the prophets" had been closed by the time it was written. therefore, in addition to the writings ascribed to the prophets, there is a literature which has been influenced by their teaching, and this is found largely in those historical books which have thus been rightly included in the prophetical division of the hebrew bible. that is to say, however, that books dealing with history prior to the rise of the prophets, show traces of an influence that can only have emerged later. it is here that criticism seems to the ordinary reader to enter very debatable ground, although among critical students of the bible the question is no longer an open one. they claim that the peculiar conditions under which hebrew history was compiled allow us to discern, and to separate with ease, this later prophetical editing, whereas in other literatures such would be impossible. history was compiled among the jews largely from pre-existing documents, much as it is everywhere, with the difference that in the old testament the records have been simply pieced together with whatever corrections and reductions were rendered necessary, while the conceptions of the later times, when this re-editing was accomplished, are often simply superimposed; this method has been ridiculed as an invention of the critical mind, but it is simply an indisputable if tiresome fact which has to be taken into account in any serious study of the literature. the narratives of the documents that have been named "j" and "e" bear the marks of having been combined under the influence of prophetical teaching, since this teaching, it is to be noted, is recognisably incompatible with other parts of the stories which have been left untouched. it has been suggested that criticism seems to assume that religion progressed until it reached a certain height in the eighth century, and to enable this theory to stand all marks of this supposed later type appearing earlier are classed as interpolations. it is usual to trace this theory to "evolution gone mad." even on the critical theories this cannot however be legitimately shown to result, since critical reconstruction shows that the supreme height gained in the prophets was never maintained, but suffered a perceptible decline. whatever the guiding idea of criticism may be, it cannot be an endeavour to make the history of israel's religion confirm some theory of the natural development and evolution of religion. the critical theories leave us with the problem of moral lapses to account for and with the failure of vision to explain, and demand still a moral insight to detect the cause. but it is clear to many that the moral causes do stand out more clearly discoverable by this method. the critical theory of the priority of the prophets is not based only upon the emergence under their teaching of certain theological ideas for the first time; but also on the difference of style and vocabulary which can be recognised after only a slight acquaintance with the language; and on the general outline of the history that the bible itself forces upon us. it is a fact which the reader can soon discover for himself, that the historical books are compilations from the records of various ages, and these various ages can be as easily discerned as the conflicting styles of an oft-restored church, or the disturbance of the normal geological strata that demands some upheaval for its explanation. it must be remembered that all this is made possible from the fact of the remarkable uniformity of ideas that characterises the various stages of hebrew religion. the prophets' teaching can therefore be traced outside their own writings; mainly in fragmentary comments added to the narratives; or in a superimposed colouring, which easily falls off, leaving the original outlines in view; but it is supposed to be found grouped into one great mass in the book of deuteronomy. the critics' theory of this book is that it is an endeavour to reduce the teaching of the prophets, more especially that of isaiah, to a code, and to secure reform by the centralisation of worship at jerusalem. this idea of a central worship, which leaves no record of its actual observance until the time of josiah, or perhaps an attempt in the reign of hezekiah, is so unmistakable and is so uniformly expressed that the work of this author (perhaps we should say, this school) can be easily detected, and many of the books, such as judges and kings, can be seen to have been subjected to a "deuteronomist" redaction. in all these phenomena we have teaching that presupposes the prophets, and that stands in contrast and often in conflict with the general tone of the original. it is remarkable that with such redactions of history any clue to the earlier conceptions should have been left to us, especially that there should have been left in the records anything that would be in disagreement with the editors' ideas, but the jews, like the other nations of antiquity, did not possess modern notions of exactness, and their notions of history prevented them from understanding things that were removed only a short distance from their own times. it is hardly surprising to find that this prophetical literature was in turn liable to redaction, though in a different degree and for a different reason, since it has been preserved to us under peculiar conditions. this at first may seem terribly confusing to the bewildered student, and it is here that tired men reject criticism and all its works. to such the reminder cannot be spared that in any branch of science the same conditions have to be overcome, and if he would understand the old testament and reap the magnificent reward that its earnest study gives, he must be prepared to face the facts and labour at their solution. first of all then, it must be noted that the books of the prophets are not so much literature, in the ordinary sense of the word, as reported rhetoric, with the qualification that the reporter and the speaker may be usually assumed to be the same. in most cases the speeches were written out by the prophet himself soon after they were delivered, although sometimes this was done by others long after, and expanded or altered, as is actually reported to have been the case with the prophecies of jeremiah (jer. xxxvi.). in the second place, the literature reveals the fact that there does not seem to have been in that age any conception of literary property; ideas are borrowed directly from one prophet by another, and sometimes direct quotation is made without any acknowledgment or indication of the source. the prophet's scribe, his school or followers, could amend or paraphrase; later generations could evidently insert a qualifying phrase, temper a threat with a qualifying condition, or to the doom of exile add a promise of restoration. when it is noticed that messages like those of amos or hosea end unexpectedly in hopeful words, and when it is recollected that these prophets have been used as service books in the synagogue and may have been therefore altered to suit the purpose, then we shall understand the problem that faces us and why a shadow of suspicion should rest on promises of restoration that are to be found in pre-exilic writings. let it be remembered however that it is no true critical canon to assume that prediction cannot be made; but what are we to do when such a prediction fits ill with the context, breaks the sense, is foreign to the outlook of the speaker, and is in later style? finally, there seem to have been many prophecies circulated anonymously, and since a place had to be found for these they were inserted in other writers, on no principle that we can discover, or more often were grouped together at the end of some notable prophet's works. in zechariah we have to suppose three strata of different authorship and date, or give up the rational study of the book altogether; and in the famous case of the book of isaiah we have to suppose that some of the early chapters are the work of a post-exilic author, while chapters xl.-lxvi. are a heterogeneous collection by a number of writers, of which chapters xl.-lv. are recognised to be by one hand, and that, one of the most wonderful personalities which has contributed to the old testament; about that grand figure we only know one thing, that he was not isaiah of jerusalem. this has been called "sawing isaiah asunder" and making the bible a piece of patchwork and the critics are blamed; but if they are right, these complaints are not directed at them, but at the bible itself, a proceeding which to say the least, is not pious. when a writer could say many years later that revelation came of old time in many fragments (heb. i. ), others beside critics fall under these hasty condemnations. it is refreshing to turn from this less interesting part of our subject, which nevertheless demands serious study from anyone who would be informed where ignorance has done and still is doing so much harm, and to examine the features which distinguish the work of the literary prophets. we have already spoken of the novelty of their message. whatever theory is chosen for the study of old testament history, nothing quite prepares us for the message of the prophet amos. what an inspiration we miss because he does not stand in our bibles in his rightful place, at the head of the prophets! his bravery and ruggedness remind us of elijah, but he brings something that elijah is far from giving us. elijah was very jealous for the due recognition of jehovah as the only god for israel; amos is jealous for the recognition of the true _character_ of jehovah. that is to say, we receive from amos definite teaching concerning the character of jehovah and his relations to the people of israel, and these doctrines are startling to israelitish ears. almost the first thing that strikes us as an outstanding characteristic of the prophets is that they are conscious of a call to which they often appeal. five of them definitely refer to the circumstances of their call (amos vii. ; hosea i. ; isaiah vi.; jer. i. - ; ezek. i. -ii. ). the same is true of their predecessors, but in a different way; they stand as defenders of the national religion because they belong to the prophetic guilds or possess certain gifts of vision. on the other hand the literary prophets are against the national religion as a perversion of the true, and to this weary and warlike work they are called by immediate and special summons of god. this call is not self-originated nor can it be evaded (jer. xx. ), and in some cases there has been no preparation for the office (amos vii. , ), and even positive unfitness (jer. i. ). they are very careful therefore to distinguish themselves from the schools of prophets. professionalism has disappeared, and in jeremiah the official idea also vanishes. the peculiar mental condition of the prophets has of late years attracted a great deal of attention. the rapture and holy frenzy into which they are sometimes thrown remind us of the phenomena accompanying the early prophetism, studied in our last lecture; but this is now accidental and is becoming rare. the prophets often speak of this as "the hand of the lord" upon them (isa. viii. ); in the visions of ezekiel the effect is often described as overpowering (ezek. iii. ff.). there is a similarity between the accompaniments of these states and the trances which have been found in so many religious movements, and which are now attracting the attention of the scientific world so seriously. only the results differ remarkably from the effects obtained in hypnotic and sub-conscious states, with which the prophetic gift has sometimes been compared. the prophet still exhibits his natural style when under the influence of the word of the lord. yet it may be that there is something to be learned along the lines of modern research; we know that if certain states of mental passivity can be induced, there lies open a new realm of knowledge, which, although it can be accounted for, cannot be summoned under ordinary mental conditions; add to this the superior moral constitution which seems to be missing from the mediums of spiritualistic phenomena to-day, and the prophetic consciousness becomes more comprehensible. the prophets often speak of visions, but it is difficult to gather their actual character. it can hardly be objective; it is more like the artistic vision which creates within the mind in perfect detail and objectivity, so that what is seen has greater reality than any reproduction on canvas or in stone. the mind would seem to project its vision by the strength of its imaginative powers, so that, owing to the emotion aroused by the nature of the truth perceived, the revelation appears to come from an entirely external source. sometimes it would seem to be an actual beholding of some natural object, which induces a train of thought, as the case of amos's vision of the plumb-line may well be. we cannot think either of any organic hearing of their message, since they sometimes also declare that they "see" it. their predictive power has been exaggerated, chiefly because it was thought that this was the only office of the prophet. where it occurs it is mostly a natural deduction from their insight into the movements of their age, their conception of the unchangeable character of jehovah, and their belief in his providential government; the emphasis is never upon details, and it may be added that the prediction is by no means always fulfilled. their vision of the future usually takes a certain outline, or order; a national calamity is immediately impending, in which they recognise the punishment of the people's sins and the complete triumph and vindication of jehovah; this will result in a purifying of the nation, and in the immediate succession there will come the messianic or ideal era. still there are predictions which cannot be explained on any theory yet broached, such as the prediction by isaiah of the destruction of sennacherib's army, or jeremiah's prophecy of the restoration. if this is ordinary second sight, then it is strange that it should have occurred in so many cases at this time when prophecy was dropping its mysterious accompaniments. yet it may be recalled that in the history of all nations there has been, in times of great national affliction, a tendency to prophecy of this order, which can sometimes claim a remarkable fulfilment. the distinguishing glory of israel's prophecy is, however, to be sought in its ethical character, and it is perhaps to the writings of men like our own carlyle, where we often catch the old prophetic ring, that we are to look for its analogy. among the things that separate amos from his predecessors is the use of a literary channel for the dissemination of his teaching, which was of course primarily preaching. this in itself marks a great change. what was it that led the prophet to write down the message which he had delivered? it may have been that there was a tendency towards literature at that particular period, but even before this the habit of keeping records must have commenced, while there is evidence of collections of poems or sagas, such as the book of jasher, or the book of the wars of the lord, being in existence from a very early period. it is evident therefore that we need some particular occurrence to account for the adoption of literature as the vehicle of prophecy. it has been suggested that the cause is to be sought initially in the rejection of the message of amos by those to whom it was delivered: he was aware of the permanent application of the truths that he had delivered, and since his own times would not hearken he resolved to commit them to the verdict of posterity. the example once set, it was natural for the succeeding prophets to wish to give something more than the fleeting character of the spoken word to teaching that was new and that had been rejected, and therefore to adopt this form (isa. viii. f.). whatever the cause, we are thankful for the results. the channel chosen for the preservation of their messages was not purely literary; the form is not that of the essay, or thesis; it has not the studied elegance of poetry, yet it rises above prose, and rhythmic verse is found scattered throughout their writings. these reports of passionate oratory fall naturally into poetic form as the prophet is carried away by his message. especially do we find a very extensive use of symbolism, which has proved a trap into which the literalist has hastened to fall. the relation of the prophets to the state is difficult for us accurately to appreciate. samuel, elijah, and elisha headed what were practically popular revolutions; in them nationalism overshadows the universally religious, or the purely moral ideal. to appreciate the contrast that the literary prophets present to this, a careful study should be made of kings ix. - ; x. , and this compared with the verdict of hosea, which rises above the standard of state interest to a judgment of universal morals (hosea i. ). the literary prophets have no office at court and receive no fee (micah iii. ); but they have an official connection with the nation, which they regard as the chosen instrument for the establishment of god's reign; they have no conception of a secular state for israel. it became therefore a tragedy for jeremiah to be so completely rejected by the nation, for then he felt his prophetic office really ceased. it was this that drove him into a personal relationship with god that is not reached by any other of the prophets. it is not correct to say that the prophets were social reformers or practical politicians. their sole concern is with religion, but it is a religion that goes very deep, and that must express itself in social and national ethics. it is however upon their distinctive message that the chief interest centres, not only for the understanding of their age, but for their permanent contribution to religion. it is a declaration of pure ethical monotheism. jehovah is not simply the tutelary deity of israel; he is the only god. the gods of the other nations are not real beings; this truth is vividly expressed in the scorn which is poured on idols and their worship. jehovah is a spiritual being; therefore the crusade against the idols that had been used in the worship of jehovah is an outcome of prophetic teaching. this condemnation of idols in the worship of jehovah is not actually met with until hosea (xiii. ), but that any visible form of jehovah is derogatory to the true conception of his glory is the only possible deduction from prophetic teaching. we still get the naïve terms that refer to jehovah as if he had bodily parts; but this is nothing more than the necessary imagery which all spiritual conceptions have to employ, and which are not mistaken by any save the most ignorant. this purely spiritual being fills the whole universe (deut. x. ; kings viii. ; jer. xxiii. ; esp. isa. xxxi. , which implies more clearly than any other statement in the old testament the spirituality of god, and thus anticipates the declaration of jesus to the woman of samaria). but it is with the _ethical_ character of jehovah that they are mostly concerned. he is righteous; which means more than the early conception that he simply defends israel's right. they insist on his complete impartiality, which no choice of israel for his own can turn aside: "you only have i known of all the families of the earth, _therefore_ will i visit upon you all your iniquities." they fall back again and again on his absolute fidelity and truthfulness. the arbitrary character which is ascribed to jehovah in the books of samuel has completely disappeared; the prophet can say: "come and let us reason together, saith jehovah." universalism is the necessary corollary to monotheism, but the strong sense of israel as his chosen instrument hinders the clear statement of this truth by the prophets. a particular regard for israel still colours their vision; but they are altogether against the popular estimate in maintaining that this choice was made solely as a means for reaching the whole world. universalism is seen forming in the idea that jehovah is concerned with the punishment of other nations, since he it is who will punish them for their sins; not only for their hatred of his chosen, but for their cruelty to other nations: he will punish moab for his inhumanity to edom (amos ii. ). this is a great advance. even when the surrounding nations afflict israel it is not because the lord has no control over them, but it is he that raises up the hostile powers as instruments of his chastisement. even kinder views are to be found in amos, in whose tiny book we find nearly all the characteristic ideas of the prophets; for jehovah is said to have been concerned in the early migratory movements not only of the hebrews, but of the hated philistines and assyrians (amos ix. ). the grand universalism of isaiah xix. - only needs us to recall the part that egypt and assyria played in the history of israel, in order to appreciate its magnanimity. yet in spite of these passages, the outlook as a whole is centred on israel, and works of a definitely universalistic nature could hardly have found a place in the canon. this spirit probably made it necessary for the writer of "jonah" to embody his universalistic doctrines in the form of an obscure parable about a prophet and a whale. it was the same national bigotry that led to the rejection of the son of man. it is in the idea of the conditions of the covenant between jehovah and israel that the teaching of the prophets stands in such contrast to the conceptions of the people. that relation was conceived of, as we have seen, as tribal; the prophets declare it to rest on a covenant of choice, which is to be maintained by the adherence of the parties to the original terms. they love to place in contrast the unwearied faithfulness of jehovah and the fickleness of the people; while they alternate between threats of jehovah's complete rejection and the recurring thought that despite all he can never change, and against all known custom will even welcome back the harlot nation. jehovah's requirements from israel, for the proper maintenance of the covenant, are simply the full allegiance of the people; but how this is to be displayed is not so definitely described. there must be a pure worship of jehovah, but this is not to find expression in accurate ritual or great sacrifices. indeed it cannot be claimed that the prophets are at all concerned about ritual. the book of deuteronomy distinctly lays down that the true worship of jehovah is to be performed at one chosen central spot, while leviticus provides an elaborate method of approach, which can only be neglected at the peril of the worshipper. on the other hand, it is certain that the prophets found the people worshipping at the "high places," the old canaanitish shrines, with many customs which would be a direct infringement of the code of leviticus, yet they are entirely unconcerned with these faults. the principle of sacrifice as a means of worship had existed from ancient times, and is to be found in nearly all religions; yet there is an overwhelming verdict from the pre-exilic prophets that shows that they are doubtful of its divine appointment or of its necessity. (these passages should be carefully examined:--amos v. ; hosea vi. ; isa. i. - ; micah vi. - ; sam. xv. ; jer. vi. ; vii. - ; and jeremiah may have been a priest!) there is only one conclusion possible; these prophets had never seen the book of leviticus. the ritual which the prophets seek is that of an upright life. they base all their morality on religious ideas. the great incentive to moral conduct is the recognition that the whole nation and land is the property of jehovah; any social wrong is wrong against him. so we find that the earliest attempt to formulate this teaching in a code contains many regulations which are purely humanitarian (deut. xiv. ; xix. ff.; xxi. - ; xxii. - ; xxiv. , - ). ritual is turned into ethics. against the inequalities and injustices of their day the prophets set their faces, with an utter disregard for consequences: they hurled their accusations at the nation with tremendous energy, in public, before kings, as men went up to worship; fiery denunciation mingling with a patriot's tears; for the time, all unavailing. yet they have had their harvest, and to-day they are among the voices that call men to social reform. it will be well to endeavour to show, in the briefest possible outline, the historic setting of this mighty message. it was shortly after the opening of the eighth century that threatening indications began to gather on the horizon of northern israel. the situation called for a prophet's message. amos, the herdman of tekoa, comes like a whirlwind from judah, utters his message at bethel and returns. he is the first and in many respects the greatest of that meteoric band who illumine the dark night of israel's history; later prophets repeat his words and share his ideas. hosea, from the northern kingdom, follows in his steps, but with a message made the more tender from the fact that the whole drama of israel's unfaithfulness to her husband jehovah had been brought home to him in a personal domestic tragedy. the tender heart which led him to forgive his unfaithful wife, wondered if jehovah would not be equally forgiving, and through this experience he almost penetrates to the thought of god as love. a few years later, a voice is heard in the villages of judah proclaiming the message of amos with the same call to simple reality: micah pleads for simple life, simple worship, simple justice. with this transference of the prophetic voice to the southern kingdom there falls an awful silence on the north. in b.c., samaria fell before the arms of assyria, and israel ceased to exist. for centuries that land was to remain silent and despised, until there should come from galilee of the gentiles he of whom all the prophets spake. one would expect that the awful doom which had overtaken the northern kingdom would not have been without effect on judah. its only visible effect was the strengthening of her belief in her own inviolability, and the acceptance of the idea that israel's fall was due to her separation from judah. if a prophet could have turned the people's thought in a saner direction, then it would have been accomplished by isaiah, the most princely and the most literary of all the prophets. his work was not indeed without effect. he was the means of lifting prophecy into popular favour, and a revival followed his teaching. the chief cause of this favour was the events of the memorable year, b.c. in face of the demands of assyria, isaiah had all along counselled submission and the avoidance of all intrigues with egypt. but the violation of the treaty by sennacherib, who demanded the surrender of the city after he had been bought off, roused the anger of isaiah. in answer to the insulting message of the rabshakeh, while the army lay round the city, in obedience to the word of jehovah he counsels resistance. nothing seemed more improbable than that there could be any escape for jerusalem; nevertheless he declared that the holy city should be inviolable. the great host with their insolent captain lay before the gates, but in the morning "the gentile, unsmote by the sword, had melted like snow in the glance of the lord." whatever the actual cause of the raising of the siege may have been, there can be no doubt that something did happen to the assyrian army which isaiah was able to attribute to the intervention of jehovah, for from this time isaiah became famous. to those who see in the fulfilment of prediction the chief end of prophecy this event will naturally seem of profound importance. to another view of the function of prophecy this is the least thing that isaiah did, for while it lifted his name into popular favour, that same deliverance proved a snare to the inhabitants of jerusalem. for his declaration of the city's inviolability was remembered long after, and quoted as if it had been of universal, instead of temporary application, while his moral teaching was forgotten. to that trick of national memory the exile was largely due. from this time the sacrosanct character of the city obsessed the popular mind, and in consequence the temple became, for the first time since its erection, of supreme significance in jewish eyes. following isaiah, there was a movement, commenced probably by his disciples, that strove to bring the temple into prominence as the one authorised place of worship. possibly during the reactionary reign of manasseh, when their master is said to have been martyred, they worked at this idea, and driven into silence by the persecutions of the king they employed their pens in producing a code of laws, which undoubtedly gathered into legal form many of the customs which had existed for centuries, and endeavoured to give them the religious interpretation of the prophetic teaching. its chief injunction was the suppression of the high places as no longer authorised for the worship of jehovah, hoping to centre thereby the whole of the nation's worship at the temple. this code was probably laid up for publication in brighter days, and was discovered in the reign of josiah, in the year b.c. there can be but little doubt, from the reforms instituted, and from the total disregard of them until this time, that this code was our book of deuteronomy. since it was published under the name of moses, many moderns have looked upon its compilation as a pious forgery. this is to read into a past age the legal conceptions of western civilisation. it must be remembered that many of these laws could be legitimately traced back to moses or to his influence, and there was no idea of deception in using his name. the hand of the school which produced this work can also be traced in the compilation and redaction of other historical works, which were undertaken with this idea of making the past history teach the value of the reforms they wished the people to adopt. this was not only regarded as legitimate, but as a sacred duty imposed upon them. the modern historical ideal, which instigates research with the sole intention of discovering the facts, is only the product of our own age, and is still unsuccessfully striven after. the reformation under josiah is therefore known as the deuteronomic reformation. from this time the temple becomes the only spot where god can be publicly worshipped, and the local shrines are forbidden. this may seem an arbitrary action, and it is possible that for some time it called forth loud complaints; but it was certainly for the benefit of religion. it had been proved to be impossible to dissociate the local shrines from the customs and ideas which had descended from the original canaanitish worship carried on there. with a central worship it was found possible to check practices that were not in accordance with the religion of jehovah. the teaching of the prophets finds then in the book of deuteronomy its first-fruits of reform. the relation of one young man to this new movement is full of peculiar interest and difficulty. it was at this very time that jeremiah began his ministry, and it is possible that he took some part in the movement (jer. xi. ). he also lived to see the reaction and to prove that the reform was only superficial. there is one passage which seems to point to a change of view and even to the suspicion that the new code was not authoritative (jer. vii. ). when jeremiah attacked the sin of the people, and warned them that the presence of jehovah's temple would not suffice to protect them if they persisted in their iniquity, his message was rejected and eventually he was imprisoned and silenced by a coalition of the priests and prophets. jeremiah ceased therefore to be the prophet of that nation. in his loneliness and sorrow, his thoughts turned in an hitherto unexplored direction. he complains to god in words which sound almost blasphemous, and pours forth expostulations that are the reverse of the submissive spirit usually thought proper to religion; but it is through this agony that jeremiah discovers that god can be something to him, not only as the prophet of the nation, but for himself. he discovers personal religion. his next discovery is equally momentous; for he is led to see that no promulgation of laws can save the nation: ordinances do not change the heart. he sorrowfully pronounces the doom of the nation, but as he stands by its open grave he sings of its resurrection. when purged by trial the nation shall return, and the new covenant shall be set up, in which jehovah shall write his laws in their hearts. it is a long far-off look that he gives, and the picture is not complete until one sits at a last supper and says: this cup is the new covenant in my blood. the effect of the exile dates for reference:-- b.c. . jehoiachin and , captives deported to babylon, and zedekiah made king in his stead. first captivity. - . jerusalem besieged, zedekiah taken to babylon, jerusalem and the temple destroyed, and the whole population, save the very poorest, deported to babylon. second captivity. . cyrus issues edict for return. return under sheshbazzar (?) (ezra i.). . return under zerubbabel (ezra ii.). . arrival of ezra. . first mission of nehemiah. . second mission of nehemiah. there is a good deal of uncertainty about the above dates, and the condition of the documents in ezra-nehemiah offers difficulties which have not, so far, found acceptable solutions. some have sought to identify sheshbazzar with zerubbabel, and to bring down the date of the return to - . it will be seen from the above table that jeremiah's prophecy of seventy years was not literally fulfilled. * * * * * the student would receive a clear idea of the growth of israel's institutions and the way in which they have been incorporated in the successive documents, by tracing the development of the sabbath in the following passages. some claim that the records of babylonia show that the observance of the seventh day as sacred goes back to the origins of primitive semitic religion. ( ) in "j-e" (which may be prior to amos in oral form, and perhaps slightly later as documents): exod. xxiii. ; xxxiv. ; xx. . ( ) in historical books: kings iv. , ; amos viii. ; hosea ii. ; isa. i. . ( ) in "d": deut. v. . ( ) in jer. xvii. - . (jeremiah is the first writer to show traces of the influence of deuteronomy.) ( ) in "h," the code of holiness (lev. xvii.-xxvi.): lev. xix. , ; xxvi. . ( ) in ezek. xx. , . ( ) in "p": gen. ii. - ; exod. xx. , ; xxxi. - ; xxxv. - ; lev. xxiii. ; num. xv. - ; exod. xvi. , - . ( ) in post-exilic observance: neh. xiii. - ; isa. lvi. , , ; lviii. , f.; lxvi. . lecture vii the effect of the exile in the year b.c., a catastrophe long foretold befell the kingdom of judah. nebuchadrezzar invaded the land, took jerusalem, and robbing the land of every person of importance or usefulness, transported them together with king jehoiachin to babylon, hoping doubtless to prevent any further trouble with judæa. in what a conflict of emotion must the exiles have left that city which they had fondly imagined inviolable! for even in babylon they continued to believe that so long as jerusalem stood, jehovah would have a citadel, and the holy city would remain a symbolic witness to their unconquered religion. with the captives there went a young man who was destined to leave a deep impression upon the future of his nation--the priest ezekiel. arrived in babylon, he felt himself called to a prophetic ministry to the exiles, and his first message was directed to the crushing of their remaining hopes; for with dramatic symbolism he predicted that jerusalem would be utterly destroyed. the suicidal policy of zedekiah, whom nebuchadrezzar had left to carry on the government as his vassal, soon fulfilled this prophecy; for sedition and intrigue soon compelled nebuchadrezzar to adopt still stricter measures. he again marched into judæa and besieged jerusalem. this time the jews expected no mercy, and resisted with such tenacity that the siege lasted for nearly two years. on the ninth day of the fourth month, (our july) b.c., a day still kept with solemn fasting by the jews, a breach was made in the walls and the city capitulated. a month later the entire destruction of the city and temple was ruthlessly carried out, and the whole population, with the exception of a few husbandmen, was deported to swell the company of exiles now at babylon. this was the inevitable culmination of the policy of the kingdom of judah under her latest monarchs. the position of their land laid them open to conflicts with the powers of assyria and babylon. the wise and peaceful policy of solomon had been departed from, and indeed rendered impossible by the disruption of the tribes. a period of national decadence seems to have followed, in which luxury and corruption undermined all political sanity, and both rulers and people became blind to the dangers that threatened. such religion as existed, only expressed itself in bursts of fanaticism, and filled the people with the fatal idea that jehovah would never suffer the temple to be violated or the holy city to be taken. the disaster of the exile is charged by the prophets to the unrepented sins of the nation, and while this is a religious interpretation it is not unsupported by a review of the history. the people had set their hearts upon a glorious kingdom of material prosperity, presided over and protected by a mighty national deity; the prophets wanted a kingdom of righteousness, which would reflect the character of jehovah and be a witness to the nations of his reality and power. while they saw in the exile a calamity which meant the destruction of the nation, and an evidence that jehovah had broken his covenant because of disobedience, they clung to the belief that the end for which jehovah had chosen israel might still be attained. that nation might be destroyed, yet from its ruins there would arise a kingdom of god; a remnant would return, weaned from a false religion, to work out a new ideal of holiness and service. the period which follows is one of great obscurity and the records which are actually dated from this time are scanty. literary criticism however throws great light on this period because it believes that it is from the exile that we are to date many institutions and writings that have been referred to a previous age. this may seem at first sight a desperate device, since so little is known of the actual conditions; and yet unfettered investigation can arrive at no other conclusion, the exilic stamp being often unmistakable and even showing itself in geographical outlook ( kings iv. ). if we take the bible as it stands, it presents us with the story of an early legislation given by moses, neglected however by the entire people, including the reformers and prophets, until it suddenly appears after the exile as the acknowledged code for the regulation of religion and common life. it would be quite possible to conceive that the shock of the exile drove the jews to examine the details of the neglected covenant of jehovah and to restore the authority of the law of moses. such however is impossible, not only from that fact that there is no mention of the law of moses in the records that can be dated between the conquest of canaan and the exile, but that in this period we can discern customs and ideas _gradually_ growing up that find their full and final embodiment in the pentateuch as we now possess it. from the lawless condition of the judges and the early monarchy, we advance to the teaching of the prophets. it is isaiah who contributes the ideas which lie at the basis of the deuteronomic code, and the time of josiah is the first to show the influence of that code. ezekiel is the first to show any trace of the ideas which we find embodied in leviticus, but these, as we shall see, have to be explained as anticipations of, rather than as an acquaintance with, the finished levitical code. when we consider what effect the exile would have upon the more thoughtful of the jews, we can imagine that conscience would be shocked into activity, and a new interest would be taken in their strange history, especially in its prophetic interpretation. it is common in history to find that repentance rarely goes so deep as to grasp the inner meaning of its discovered sin, but is apt to content itself with somewhat superficial methods of showing its sincerity and securing future compliance with religion. so at least, the records of israel's history assure us, happened in this instance, and one of the resolutions of their penitence took concrete form in the writing or editing of their history so that it should be a warning to the future, and in codifying customs and drawing up regulations which should make apostasy for ever impossible. many references in the ancient records or in the oral tradition which savoured of idolatry or of a too anthropomorphic conception of god were corrected, as those references, the tendency of which was not detected, have remained to bear witness; and the whole history was fitted somewhat clumsily into a mechanical scheme, which was rather what they thought ought to have happened than what really did happen. one example of this may be seen in the condemnation which is naïvely passed on king after king because he had allowed sacrifice to be made at the high places; the fact being that this was not made illegitimate until the reign of josiah. in this way external offences were marked and abandoned, while the deeper incongruity between the national religion and the teaching of the prophets was missed. if we seek in this period for the rise of ideas which shall bridge over the change from the popular religion on the one hand, and the religion of jeremiah on the other, to the complete unity of the national religion under nehemiah and ezra, we shall find a most important link in the book of ezekiel. the book of ezekiel is said to be the least read book in the bible, yet its author plays a most important part in the history of israel's religion, and to grasp the position which he occupies is to have a focus point from which the whole development may be conveniently grasped. the prophet probably got a better hearing from his contemporaries than any of his predecessors. he accompanied the body of captives who left jerusalem for babylon in the year , and his works date from soon after that year and go down to about . the men to whom he was called to speak were therefore his fellow captives, and he had not to look far for a text for his sermons. his hearers were in babylon for their sins, and they knew it. his style of preaching is difficult, and his method of embodying his message in visions marks a new phenomenon in israel's religion. he states truth in strange and fanciful figures, a method which was to form an example for the later works of judaism, and if we detect in ezekiel a return to the extravagance of the earlier prophecy, we must make allowance for the tragic times in which he lived; especially must we do this where we trace a falling off from his predecessors in moral insight and in the ritualistic influence which his work undoubtedly left behind him. ezekiel continues the work of the pre-exilic prophets in that he proclaims their characteristic doctrines, and naturally he shows distinct traces of the influence of jeremiah. what is new, is that he gives to those doctrines a more fixed and somewhat pedantic form, and a greater self-consciousness is discernible; the prophecies are accurately arranged, and the language is marked by precision; rhetoric is less frequent, and the prophecies look more fit for reading than for delivery. the idea of god is the same as in the earlier prophets, but in ezekiel it is elevated and rarified; especially is great emphasis laid upon the attribute of holiness, which is however a ceremonial rather than a purely ethical conception. the characteristic idea of the prophets, that jehovah chose israel not for their own sakes, becomes the idea that jehovah did this for his own sake alone, and this is so often repeated that it almost looks like arbitrariness. the cause of judah's punishment is still traced to the sin of the people, but that sin is now definitely determined to be idolatry; and this is insisted on almost to the exclusion of the social and ethical wrongs assailed by the earlier prophets. while, however, ezekiel enforces the bitter lessons of the exile, he carefully distinguishes the true interpretation of that disaster from that which rose readily to the popular mind. he disposes of the conception that the captivity was due to the inability of jehovah to defend his own land (xxxvi. ); it was a punishment for sin (xxxix. ), and in his own time he will prove this by restoring them to their land again (xxxix. ). neither will he allow them to rest in the flattering thought that they were only suffering for the unvisited sins of a former generation; he insists, probably with greater rigour than experience would sanction, that each man bears his own sin, and never suffers for the sins of others. but to those who admit the justice of his charges, and who therefore regard the future as hopeless, he preaches a tender doctrine of forgiveness and the possibility of cleansing from sin. from the events of his times, he seeks to draw lessons which should redeem the mistakes that had been made in the past: the teaching of the prophets must be kept before the people in definite rules and religious ceremonies. old customs, whose original significance had long been forgotten, were invested with new interpretations worthy of the true religion of jehovah, and were made not only customs, but religious commands. in the book which bears his name, and especially in chapters xl.-xlviii., he outlines a policy in which the whole of national life is comprehended in its religious significance, and thus the calamity of future apostasy prevented. the new state is to centre round the idea of worship: the temple with its services and appointments is to be the expression of the national life. now in this scheme there is little doubt that we have the beginning of the levitical system, for ezekiel is related to leviticus as the rough sketch to the finished plan. if leviticus in its present form existed in ezekiel's time, then the work of the prophet was not only entirely unnecessary, but careless and presumptuous. some of the facts which point to the priority of ezekiel to the levitical code may be noticed. in the levitical code we find that a distinction is made between priests and levites. this is not found in deuteronomy (xvii. , ; xviii. ) but is first found in ezekiel (xliv. - ), where it is explained to be due to the degradation of the levites as a punishment for leading the people into idolatry; in leviticus we reach the final stage, where the distinction is accepted without explanation. in ezekiel we have no mention of the high-priest or of the day of atonement, both of which figure so largely in the priest's code, although we can find _foreshadowings_ of the day of atonement (ezek. xlv. - ). indeed we meet with no mention of the day of atonement, apart from the priestly code, until zechariah (vii. ; viii. ). the general conclusion may be safely drawn, that during and after the exile, ezekiel's ideas were stiffened and developed into the full legislation now preserved for us in leviticus. we may rightly claim ezekiel to be the founder of judaism, with its transcendent conception of jehovah and its great attention to ceremonial detail, and we are bound therefore to recognise in ezekiel a falling off from the ideals of the pre-exilic prophets; he is a prophet in priest's clothing. yet it may be questioned whether the idealistic teaching of the prophets could have been preserved through the periods of the exile and the restoration, without this formal process. an outer husk of formality had to develop in order that the living kernel might be protected during the critical years when persia, greece, and rome were to press their alien ideas upon this people. it has been well for the world that ezekiel clothed the prophets' teaching in the resisting garments of judaism. the exile could not fail to leave upon the jewish nation an imperishable mark, and they emerged from that trial a different people. it was a shock that brought a repentance the prophets had often laboured for in vain, and this repentance was marked by the initiation of many new movements in thought, and by a more stringent and solemn observance of their peculiar institutions. probably in that alien land many of the jews adopted the customs of their conquerors, since it is estimated that not more than a small fraction returned to palestine. this defection would impress upon those who remained faithful the necessity for a strict policy of separation, and from this time certain institutions which had been inherited from ancient semitic practice received a new meaning. chief among these may be noticed the observance of the sabbath, and the rite of circumcision. the observance of a certain day as sacred to the gods is a custom that is found in nearly all early religions, and there are traces of such an observance in the babylonian religion. we do not find however in the historical books of the bible that mention of the sabbath which would be expected, if it was observed with the strictness common after the exile. there are traces of an observance, not strictly defined, save that it is in association with the new moon feasts, and is combined with social relaxation ( kings iv. , ; hosea ii. ; amos viii. ; isa. i. ). even before the exile however a more religious conception had arisen (jer. xvii. - ), and is even then referred to as an earlier command. the change after the exile was towards an ever increasing strictness (isa. lvi. , , ; lviii. ; lxvi. ; neh. xiii. - ). the rite of circumcision was by no means peculiar to the jewish religion (jer. ix. , ), except perhaps in so far as it was performed in infancy: its origin and growth are very obscure. its original significance was early lost and its interpretation was probably due to the prophets themselves, who often referred to a spiritual circumcision, and thus made possible the full ceremonial interpretation which became so important a feature in later judaism. we have seen that there is evidence to prove that the religion of israel had not always been averse to the use of idols as part of the legitimate worship of jehovah. the prophets began the protest against this, not so much because of its principles, but because of the immoral practices with which idol worship was connected. but after the exile, idolatry was for ever separated from the worship of jehovah, and in the later prophets idolatry becomes the target for their most scornful invective. it has been suggested that this new abhorrence accounts for the non-return of the ark, which in this period disappears from history. among the most important of the new institutions that can be traced back to the period of the exile is the founding of the synagogue. in the land of exile, away from the one spot where sacrifice was permitted, worship had to be carried on without the aid of sacrificial or ceremonial rites, but there was nothing to prevent the people from gathering together for prayer or to hear read their newly reverenced prophetic books. it is quite possible that this led to a collection of the prophets' writings being made, and perhaps to some editing to meet their present needs. this movement was of profound importance for the future development of religion, for it was in the synagogue rather than in the temple that christianity was to find the readiest medium for its dissemination and the earliest model for its worship. the synagogue itself prepared the way for the more spiritual developments within judaism, for away from the temple sacrifices and their always dangerous suggestions men learned that the sacrifice of the broken heart was more acceptable to jehovah; and so the way was prepared for that magnificent collection of prayers and songs which we call the psalms, which were afterwards to be used as an accompaniment to a form of worship that they frequently condemn. the external and legal conceptions were, however, to be the most visible results gained from the exile, and they were to mould religion for many a year. the materials for an exact history of the return from exile do not exist in our bibles; the accounts found in ezra and nehemiah raise questions which have not yet been satisfactorily answered. the prophets who had foretold the destruction of the kingdom of judah had never been able to rest in the thought that this was the final chapter in jehovah's dealings with his people, and their faith forced them to peer through this impending disaster and dimly discern a purpose yet to be disclosed. this is often pictured in merely general terms, but in jeremiah and ezekiel these hopes issued in the definite prophecy of the restoration of the jews to their own land within a certain period. when political changes brought this on the horizon of possibility, the times wakened the "voice of one crying in the wilderness," in some respects the most wonderful of all that noble band we have been studying. the name of this herald has not been preserved, but he is known to criticism as the second isaiah. this does not of course mean that he bore that name, but it is a convenient designation for the writings that occupy the second half of the work included under the name of isaiah. the separation of chapters xl.-lxvi. from those which precede, as from different hands, is one of the most universally accepted results of criticism. the preceding chapters end with a historic survey of events that happened in the lifetime of the great isaiah of jerusalem, and then suddenly the whole outlook and atmosphere change. critics claim that the test of language and style is itself decisive, but while this must remain a question on which only hebrew experts are qualified to pronounce, the difference of theological ideas, and the change of situation cannot be missed by any attentive english reader. indeed that the situation has changed is a fact which has never been challenged. from chapter xl., the audience addressed consists no longer of the proud and scornful peoples of the time of hezekiah, but of penitent captives far from their native land some years later; the accepted explanation used to be that isaiah transported himself to this later time by a miracle of prophetic inspiration. but there is really only one adducible reason for attributing this prophecy to isaiah: it is bound up with the book that bears his name as the title. this reason is of little value when we admit our ignorance of the method by which the old testament was finally edited, and when the internal evidence entirely contradicts the traditional theory. for it must be borne in mind that the explanation that this is due to a prophetic transportation is only a hypothesis framed to fit the conditions, and has no claim to acceptance if there can be found one that does equal justice to the facts without appealing to such an unusual method. moreover, the hypothesis of prediction does not fit the facts, for while some parts of the prophecy have predictive form, others have not. for instance, the picture of cyrus and his conquests, complete even to the name of the hero, is not only presented as if he were on the stage of actual history, but his appearance is adduced as a convincing evidence of the fulfilment of prophecy. what fulfilment would it be if cyrus was yet a figure of the unknown future? if it is claimed that this presentation is due to what is known to hebrew grammarians as a use of the _prophetic present tense_, in which things future in fact, are stated as present, owing to the vividness of the prophetic consciousness, then we must ask why it is that cyrus is presented as a figure of contemporary history, while the fall of babylon is still spoken of as future. this distinction would be meaningless if the whole of this period was seen from some anterior time. the "settled results" of criticism were greatly ridiculed when further investigation pronounced that only chapters xl.-lv. can have come from this great prophet, and that the remainder of the book is of a composite character, extending at least to the time of the second temple. to have to bring in a third author, or even more, to explain this book is quoted as an example of the foolishness of criticism. now the critics _may_ be wrong, but their theories are simply endeavours to understand these prophecies by setting them in their exact historical surroundings. surely this is a task worthy of any reverent student of the old testament, and if it brings, as many believe, wonderful light on these messages, and thus sets free their eternal significance, then these men should earn gratitude rather than ridicule, when the difficulty of their task calls for a continual rearrangement and a finer adjustment. the critical reconstruction of this prophecy therefore places chapters xl.-lv. among the scenes it depicts, and in the very history whose movements called it forth. the exact conditions can be discerned. after the death of nebuchadrezzar the kingdom of the chaldæans began to decline, and when cyrus succeeded to the throne of persia its fate was determined. his victorious campaigns, culminating in the fall of sardis in b.c. , could not fail to reach the ears of the exiles in babylon, and many a whisper of hope must have been exchanged, and many a prophecy handed on. babylon itself fell before the conqueror in and between these two dates, and perhaps nearer to the latter, the internal witness of the prophecy demands that it should be placed. when we turn to examine the work of this unknown messenger we cannot help noticing the difference in style, which even the translation cannot obscure. the great isaiah writes in terse, closely-packed sentences, with all the authoritative manner customary with the prophets. this writer, on the other hand, is rhetorical, and loves to dwell on his favourite ideas. the sharp word of the prophetic deliverance here gives way to a reasoning exposition and a pleading tenderness that makes this prophecy a gospel before the gospels. the distinctive religious ideas can be easily marked. absolute monotheism is insisted on with a fulness and repetition which shows that it is in some degree a new truth. there is none beside jehovah; he is alone, unique; and description is exhausted in the endeavour to picture his glory and power. he is now constantly referred to as the creator of the world, the framer of the stars on high, the maker of both darkness and light, both good and evil; so that no room is left for the dualism that the prophet may have learned to despise in the babylonian religion. his finest scorn is reserved for the conception that an idol can have any claim to divinity. he depicts the process of their manufacture, their utter helplessness; it may be that he had seen them borne in to the capital as the suburbs fell before the invader. universalism struggles for expression in this writer, but it is not always so clear and definite as in the writings of the great isaiah. this arises however, not so much from the racial prejudices that have so clogged the hebrew mind, as from a reading of israel's history which the prophet was well entitled to make, namely, that she was to be the premier nation in the instruction of the world in righteousness and the knowledge of god, the priest-nation of humanity. this conception of the nation's history and destiny is embodied in a personification known as the servant of jehovah. israel has been chosen as the servant so that the light may be brought to the nations. in this mission the servant meets with persecution, yet turns not back from those who pluck off the hair nor hides his face from shame and spitting. the slightest retrospect of israel's history shows that the servant of jehovah was trained for his task only through suffering. israel had suffered for her sins of presumption and disobedience; but were the nations who punished her any more righteous? moreover, many of those who sat down by the waters of babylon and wept when they remembered zion must have been pious and righteous, and innocent of the causes of their nation's calamities. as the prophet broods over the meaning of the exile, as it affected the godly remnant, he begins to see that this suffering, undeserved though it might be in particular cases, would become a supreme lesson in righteousness to the world. this assumption is embodied in the astonishing drama of the suffering servant; one who suffers from a disfiguring disease, which marks him out to all beholders as the afflicted of jehovah, and who is therefore despised and rejected of men. but the day comes when the idea slowly dawns upon men that this servant-nation suffered for the sake of the world, bore the consciousness of sin when other nations lived in carelessness and flourished on cruelty. the prophet believed that this patient suffering would be an awakening force and would be the means of bringing the world to the knowledge of god. it is a marvellous reading of israel's history; but it is true, for that little nation despised and rejected by empires, battered by the armed forces which surrounded her, has made the whole world her debtor. but indirectly this interpretation is a revelation of the meaning of all history, and especially of that strange law of vicarious suffering which binds all the world one and makes every new age in debt to the past. this unknown writer has contributed one of the most fruitful ideas to the philosophy of history. it is not surprising that most early commentators have tried to read in the rd chapter a picture, not of a nation, but of some definite person; although the prophet definitely identifies the servant of the lord with israel (isa. xli. ). but when did israel embody such a conception? it can only stand for an ideal of what israel ought to have been; and there have been many things which have entered into the composition of the picture. it has been suggested that one of the prophets sat for this picture, just as sometimes an artist painting a symbolical picture will get one of his friends to sit for the model; and who could be better for this purpose than jeremiah, the rejected of the nation? the interpretation that finds in this picture a minute prediction of the life and passion of jesus is not sanctioned by a careful study of the passage; but the instinct that has led to this is right in the main, for as we travel down the ages looking for the fulfilment of this ideal, we only rest with complete satisfaction on the story of the life and death of one who stepping out from this very race, by his uninterrupted communion with god, his hatred of sin and his profound sympathy with mankind, bore away the sin of the world on the red flood of sacrifice, and brought in for ever the true kingdom of god. an increasing number of old testament scholars believe that another of the prophets contains an interpretation of the exile, conceived in the same spirit as that of the second isaiah, although veiled under such a strange allegorical form that centuries of jewish and christian interpretation have entirely missed its meaning. the book of the prophet jonah belongs to a later age, and should probably stand last of all the minor prophets, but the critical interpretation of the prophecy falls naturally to be considered here. the character of the book reveals on close inspection that it was never intended for history; as its inclusion among the prophetical writings perhaps recognises. it is not only the improbability of the whale episode that has led to this conclusion, but the whole character of the events narrated: the sudden growth and withering of the gourd, the instant repentance of the ninevites, which included a forced régime of fasting even for the cattle! moreover, the closing words of the book breathe a spirit of universalism and humanity that is almost the high-water mark of old testament inspiration, and this encourages the reader to look for some deeper meaning in the rest of the book. the story as interpreted by critical methods is that jonah is the nation of israel, chosen to be a missionary nation to the heathen. on refusing the task which divine selection had marked out for her she is thrown into exile, and has been restored for the purpose of carrying out her original mission. this is here symbolised by the whale swallowing jonah, who on being cast up proceeded on his neglected commission, though still with little love for his work. the imagery is crude and may strike the reader as exceedingly improbable, until his attention is drawn to the fact that the whale or sea-monster plays a great part in old testament imagery and is once actually used as a symbol of the exile. "nebuchadrezzar the king of babylon hath devoured me, ... he hath swallowed me up like a dragon, ... he hath cast me out.... i will do judgment upon bel in babylon, and i will bring out of his mouth that which he hath swallowed up" (jer. li. , ). with this interpretation as a clue, the book becomes luminous. it is an apology for the gentiles who are shown to be capable of repentance; israel is blamed for her grudging estimate of the heathen, for her refusal to convey to them the light which she enjoyed, and for her fear lest others should share the favour of jehovah. perhaps the symbolic character of the book was adopted, because the author knew that if such truths were boldly stated they would never be received by his age; and so he hoped that the truth might enter in through an interesting story of wonder and adventure. it can hardly be claimed that the author has been successful; for the jews resisted the universalism of the son of man and the propagandist methods of the apostle paul, while christendom has been far more concerned in proving that a whale can swallow a man, than in carrying out the command to evangelise those who know not their right hand from their left. the work of the priests the following passage (exod. vii. - ) illustrates the attempt to disintegrate the various documents ("j" is indicated by roman type, "e" by _italics_, and "p" by capitals). "and yahwe said unto moses, pharaoh's heart is stubborn, he refuseth to let the people go. _get thee unto pharaoh in the morning; lo, he goeth out unto the water; and thou shalt stand by the river's brink to meet him; and the rod which was turned to a serpent shalt thou take into thine hand._ and thou shalt say unto him, yahwe, the god of the hebrews, hath sent me unto thee, saying, let my people go, that they may serve me in the wilderness: and, behold, hitherto thou hast not hearkened. thus saith yahwe, in this thou shalt know that i am yahwe: behold, i will smite ... _with the rod that is in mine hand upon the waters which are in the river, and they shall be turned to blood_. and the fish that is in the river shall die, and the river shall stink; and the egyptians shall loathe to drink water from the river. and yahwe said unto moses, say unto aaron, take thy rod, and stretch out thine hand over the waters of egypt, over their rivers, over their streams, and over their pools, and over all their ponds of water, that they may become blood; and there shall be blood throughout all the land of egypt, both in vessels of wood and in vessels of stone. and moses and aaron did so, as yahwe commanded; _and he lifted up the rod, and smote the waters that were in the river; in the sight of pharaoh, and in the sight of his servants; and all the waters that were in the river were turned to blood_. and the fish that was in the river died; and the river stank, and the egyptians could not drink water from the river; and the blood was throughout all the land of egypt. and the magicians of egypt did in like manner with their enchantments: and pharaoh's heart was hardened, and he hearkened not unto them; as yahwe had spoken. _and pharaoh turned and went into his house, neither did he lay even this to heart._ and all the egyptians digged round about the river for water to drink; for they could not drink of the water of the river. and seven days were fulfilled, after that yahwe had smitten the river." notes:--the account in "j" evidently had nothing about the water being turned into blood. yahwe himself will smite the river (_ye' or_; the nile) so that the fish will die. "the river" probably stood after "smite ..." in "j." in "e" moses is commanded to smite with his rod, and the nile will be turned into blood. in verse _thine_ must have stood in the original and was altered to "mine" when the documents were pieced together. in "p" aaron is to take the rod, and now all the rivers of egypt, and even the water in the houses, is to be turned into blood. notice the formal repetition in "p." lecture viii the work of the priests we have seen that the exile produced two important prophetical works. the one is a vision of a restored jewish state, contemplated under the guise of a church rather than as a nation; the work of the priestly prophet ezekiel. the other is incorporated in the second half of the prophecies ascribed to isaiah; the author is unknown, but the work is an attempt to interpret the calamitous history of the exile in such a fashion that the nation might be led to take as its ideal for the future, the servant of jehovah, the bearer of light to the nations of the world. the outlook in these two works is entirely different, yet both seem to have called forth a school which endeavoured to work out their ideals, but the school of ezekiel obtained a more immediate recognition and exerted the greater influence on the nation. for the first time in israel's history a prophet is found who is concerned with matters of ritual, the regulation of a priesthood, and the details of ecclesiasticism. ezekiel endeavoured to secure the reforms demanded by the prophets, not only by the effect of his own preaching, but by the formation of definite organisations and the establishment of certain customs. the priestly school which followed ezekiel and developed his conceptions, possessed sufficient prestige to persuade the nation that their scheme was of divine authority. their work was carried on during and after the exile, but with the exception of ezra, the names of the authors have not been preserved. in the bible history their work suddenly appears under the name of "the law of moses" in b.c. the first certain mention of the recognition and observance of this law is found in nehemiah (viii.), where a memorable scene is described. ezra the scribe, "the writer of the words of the commandments of the lord and of his statutes to israel" (ezra vii. ), has come from babylon, bringing with him the law of moses. the people are gathered together on a certain day, and from morning to noon, the law is read in their hearing, with such comments and explanations as seemed necessary. the immediate result of this publication was the discovery that important provisions had been neglected and commands very seriously transgressed, and there followed such grief and alarm among those who listened, that it was difficult for the authorities to persuade the people to abandon their mourning and rejoice in the fact that the law had now been made known to them. on the morrow a further reading took place, when they discovered that on that very day they ought to be keeping a feast of tabernacles. the feast was therefore observed for the appointed time of eight days, and it is expressly noted that this had not been done since the time of joshua. other reforms were immediately set in motion; marriage with those not of pure jewish blood was not only forbidden but, where such had actually been contracted, an immediate dissolution was enforced; a tax of one third of a shekel was levied for the upkeep of the temple services, and the law of the sabbath was rigorously enforced. now this picture was not written by a contemporary, and critics have found such difficulty in discovering the exact historical facts that considerable doubt has been aroused, not only concerning the historicity of this event, but even concerning the existence of ezra himself. but it is certain that in the fifth century b.c., laws were obeyed and institutions were recognised, of which we have no record, outside the pentateuch, in the earlier historical books. the question to be answered is: what was that "law of moses" which ezra brought to jerusalem and read to the people? later judaism calls the first five books of the bible "the law of moses," and for centuries both jewish and christian scholars have identified ezra's law with these books, have supposed that they existed from the time of moses downwards, but were entirely neglected by the jews until this time. modern research is compelled to dissent altogether from this tradition. our purpose in this book prevents us from discussing the details of this controversy, but in addition to what has been already said in an earlier lecture, the main results of critical study on the origin of the law may be outlined. from the time occupied by ezra in reading his law it is inferred that it could hardly have been our first five books of the bible; and since to carry out the laws contained in them would involve endless discussion because of their contradictory character (compare for example the directions for keeping the feast of tabernacles in deut. xvi. , , which commands seven days, with lev. xxiii. , which adds an eighth day for a solemn assembly; compare also the account in kings viii. , with chron. vii. , ), it is thought that this law of ezra must have been much smaller than the pentateuch, and much more homogeneous. the pentateuch not only contains more than "laws," but even the legal sections bear the marks of such widely different aims and conditions that we are compelled to assume a gradual collection, with continual redaction and codification, in order to account for the various phenomena. the earliest strata may go back to a great antiquity, and the customs themselves must often be primitive semitic survivals, but the critical contention is that, as a whole, the "law of moses" owes its present form to an age later than the exile, and somewhat later than ezra himself; for ezra's code has itself been revised (compare neh. x. , where a third of a shekel is appointed, with exod. xxx. , where it has increased to half a shekel), before it was amalgamated with the pentateuch in its existing form. the critical basis for this theory of the gradual formation of the law is found first in the fact that the legislation of the pentateuch is not homogeneous: it is so contradictory that to carry out the law as it stands would be found impossible. it is claimed that the presence of the various strata can be detected by the numerous repetitions (_e.g._, the commandments exist in three recensions: exod. xx. - ; xxxiv. - ; deut. v. - ); by the use of different names for god, by the difference in language and style, and by the change in theological conceptions; and moreover, that these different strata can be roughly assigned to various ages, which can be actually confirmed by the record of their observance in the historical books (compare the provisions made for the ark in exod. xxv.-xl.; num. iii.-iv., with its actual treatment in sam.). the different strata of the laws, and the ages to which they may be roughly assigned, are as follows:--the earliest code of laws is said to be that of the "book of the covenant" (exod. xxiv. ), found in exod. xx. -xxiii. . the primitive character of this code can be discerned, by the comparison of its directions for worship with those of later ages. it sanctioned the erection of rude altars at any place where jehovah had been revealed, whereas in later codes no place except the one chosen spot can be used for worship, and the altar must be of highly specialised construction (compare exod. xx. - and deut. xii. - , with exod. xxvii. - ). now it is precisely this informal worship, which could be performed by any one and at any place, that appears to have been the custom until the time of the reformation under josiah; and in his times, and as the cause of his reform, the critics place the book of deuteronomy, v.-xxvi.; for it presupposes the teaching of the prophets and is the programme followed by josiah. then next follows "the law of holiness" (lev. xvii.-xxvi.); which is either the outcome of ezekiel's work or is shortly prior to it; anyhow, the connection is close. then in b.c. appears the code of ezra, which was afterwards developed and set in a brief narrative describing the historical preparation for the law and its actual deliverance by moses; this document of history and laws is known for convenience as the priestly code, and is denoted by the letter "p." the editorial framework of the completed hexateuch (the first six books of the bible), is of the same stamp as the priests' code, and the date of its final compilation must not be put very much later than ezra, since the samaritan pentateuch probably goes back to the fourth century, from which date it can claim an independent existence. it is this work of the priests that we are now to examine. "p" is to be found at present scattered throughout the hexateuch, and embraces nearly the whole of leviticus, numbers and a good portion of exodus; is found in many scattered passages in genesis and in a small portion of joshua and judges, especially, in the latter case, in the closing chapters; there is only a very little in deuteronomy. although not the work of one hand, these passages can be detected by their unity of motive, the uniform phraseology, the priestly outlook, and their concern with legal and ritualistic regulations. the style is stereotyped, measured, and prosaic, and is rendered somewhat monotonous by the repetition of stated formulae. the theological ideas are dominated by the thought of the awful holiness of god and the danger that there lies in approaching him in any other than the ordained way. what were the sources from which this code drew its material? it is not suggested that the code was simply _invented_ during the exile. many of the legal commands concerning uncleanness, leprosy, and marriage are really ancient customs, and only owed their _codification_ to this late age; for they reflect a low stage of culture, and their rites of purification are primitive. again sacrifice had been performed as far back as semitic history can be traced, and customs which had persisted were now simply tabulated and their form fixed. many of the sacrificial rites prescribed in the code still bear the marks of their early origin, especially in the case of the burnt and the peace-offerings, but the law of the sin-offering shows artificial elaboration. undoubtedly when solomon's temple was built a new sacrificial ritual would be developed more in keeping with the splendour of the edifice, and as the temple increased in prestige, and when under isaiah's influence it became the one spot at which sacrifice could be performed, the priestly caste would keep the rite in their own hands and perform it with more care; and all this would become the basis for a new ritualistic legislation. the minuteness of the priestly code often gives the impression of a record of exact history, but a careful examination of such measurements as are given in the case of the ark or the tabernacle do not confirm the historical accuracy; for the tabernacle cannot be made exactly as described, and if it could be, would neither stand up, nor be suitable for the purpose for which it was intended, nor be able to be transported through the desert. it is simply a tent-like model of the temple projected into the early history on the theory that the worship which existed in the writer's time was that which had always existed. the artificial conception of the history which "p" follows can of course be seen, if we separate the various strata of the first six books in the bible, but it can be seen without this difficult and controversial method by comparing the history of kings with chronicles: the one written largely before and the other entirely after the legislation of "p" had been accepted. the law of the day of atonement is almost entirely late, and originated in the deepened sense of guilt produced during the exile; neither is there any trace of its observance until that time. a difficult question has arisen concerning the date of this legislation since the discovery of the code of hammurabi. hammurabi was a babylonian king who lived somewhere about , b.c., and who has been identified by some with the amraphael of gen. xiv. his code reveals a fairly advanced stage of civilisation and morality existing in babylon at that time, but its chief interest for us is found in the fact that many of the laws concerning common life, marriage, etc., are not only like the laws of the bible, but in some cases are verbally similar. this phenomenon demands some theory of contact between the two codes, but no theory has yet been found that explains all the facts. the idea of direct borrowing on either side can hardly be taken seriously, and the correspondence between the two codes hardly requires that; so that the question is narrowed to one of influence. this influence would seem to be most natural in the time of the exile, were it not that the strictly exclusive spirit then developed by the jews makes it unthinkable. there remains either the explanation of a common basis for the two codes, traceable to their semitic origin, or what has received the greater support from scholars, the idea that the influence of hammurabi's laws on israel's legislation is to be traced through the former inhabitants of canaan. to understand how this is possible, we must remember that it is now known that babylon had predominating influence over western palestine before the conquest of canaan by the hebrews; that the inhabitants of the land were much more civilised than their conquerors; and that the invaders did not exterminate the inhabitants, but quietly effected a settlement among them and adopted many of their customs. while on the subject of the influence of babylon it will be convenient to notice here that this influence is not confined to legal matters, but can be traced in certain legendary elements in the old testament. the ideal of the priests' code would not tolerate heathen mythology that could be detected as such, to appear in its work, and yet there are definite traces of such mythology to be found in "p"s account of the creation in gen. i. the discovery of the libraries of assurbanipal has brought to light records of a mythological cosmogony which, while utterly different in conception and spirit from genesis, is sufficiently similar to suggest some degree of connection. this babylonian epic of creation deals not so much with the remarkably scientific idea of a gradual creation of our earth out of chaotic materials, but with a conflict of gods and monsters which is supposed to have taken place before the creation. in the opening verses of the bible there is a reference to the partition of the deep, which is here called by the non-hebrew name _tehom_, into two parts: the waters above and the waters under the firmament. now in the babylonian story the actual creation of the earth is preceded by a mighty struggle between _marduk_, the sun-god (the merodach of the bible) and a great dragon symbolical of the primeval waters, which bears the name _tiamat_, the babylonian form of _tehom_. the influence of this myth is the more certainly to be traced in genesis, because it appears elsewhere in the old testament under the form of a legend of a conflict between jehovah and rahab, a mighty dragon; and this legend is generally in some way connected with creation (job ix. ; xxvi. ; isa. li. ; ps. lxxxix. ). there is also a babylonian story of the flood which keeps even closer to the bible narrative, and it may be seen from the babylonian version that this is more probably another form of the dragon myth than a common memory of a tremendous deluge. a babylonian seal cylinder in the british museum bears the picture of a man and woman standing one on each side of a sacred tree, from which they are picking fruit, while a serpent coils around the tree; but no written explanation of this very suggestive picture has been discovered. these mythical stories have come down from primitive semitic times, but we cannot fail to notice that while their ancestry is undoubtedly common, there is a tremendous difference between the stage reached under the inspiration of the hebrew genius and the crude polytheism of the babylonian stories. their connection in some way is unmistakable, but still more certain is their different ethical and religious level. the fact of the borrowing does not deny the inspiration; it rather reveals how powerful that inspiration was. to turn now to a consideration of the work of the priests. we must doubtless concede to the workers a very lofty motive: it was nothing less than an endeavour to include the whole of the nation's life under the conception that god was dwelling among his people, and that the nation must be holy because he is holy. but in the working out of this purpose the ideal is neither secured nor maintained. the holiness of god is insisted on with much reiteration, but it is conceived of as a physical rather than a moral attribute. it is really only a conception of the unapproachability of god unless certain purely ritual and physical conditions are observed. for the enforcement of this idea the old custom of sacrifice was elaborated and strictly defined, but strangely enough, without explicit teaching as to its meaning. this is peculiar, and it seems to have remained largely unnoticed, for many biblical expositors have adopted without inquiry the idea that the sacrifices were substitutionary, piacular, and typical of the sacrifice of christ. the piacular meaning suggests itself at so many points that it is startling to find that it cannot be borne out by careful examination. the sacrifices are in most instances only efficacious for the forgiveness of unintentional sins, or for the atonement of ritualistic mistakes made in ignorance or through inadvertence. the ceremony of laying the hands of the offerer on the head of the intended victim, suggests that a symbolical transference of guilt is taking place, and yet only in one case is this accompanied by a confession of sins, and there the victim is not slain, but led away for azazel. the sin-offering involved the death of the animal, but an animal was not absolutely necessary for the purpose, and flour might be substituted; and even where we have the slain animal, the idea that the animal has taken the place of the sinner seems to be excluded by the fact that its flesh is regarded as "most holy." the offerings are said to make atonement, but we are not told how this is affected unless in the passage that states that "it is the blood that maketh atonement, by reason of the life." the word translated "atonement" means simply "a covering," and of course may mean that the blood, which is symbolical of the offered life, either covers the eyes of god from beholding the sin, or covers the sinner. we are left then, either with the deduction that the exact significance of the sacrifices was not mentioned because everyone knew what it was, or that it has not been told because it was too mysterious, or that there was no definite meaning attached to them. originally sacrifice did not bear a piacular significance, but it would be unsafe to argue from this that no substitutionary value was attached to the levitical sacrifices by these priestly lawyers; indeed the only safe conclusion seems to be that the priests adopted these sacrifices, which were time-honoured, as the proper ritual for the approach to god, without any definite inquiry as to their meaning. but taking the levitical system as a whole there seems to underlie it the theory of symbolical, although not piacular substitution. god owns man entirely, and that by right: his time, possessions, flocks, and lands; and demands from him the completest recognition of this ownership. now in practice, this absolute demand can only be recognised by substitute and proxy; and so we have the recognition of god's claims by the observance of one holy day in seven, by the ransom of the first-born, by the sabbatical and jubilee years, by the tithes, and especially by the sacrifices. his dwelling in the land is symbolised by the respect paid to one symbolical holy place; and the continual service he demands is represented by the daily service carried on by the levitical caste. but even if this be the intention of the system, it is nowhere so defined, and therefore it is not surprising to find that people soon forgot the symbolical meaning, and treated the symbol as a thing sufficient in itself; with the result, that the service of god came to be restricted to a performance of rites that had lost all significance. one explanation would soon silence any criticism of this scheme that might arise, namely, that god had so ordained that men should worship him. but deeper still there lay a radical misconception of the very nature of god and of the service he seeks. god was conceived as inimical not so much to man's sin, as to man himself; and this danger was averted by the use of protective rites which needed to be performed with scrupulous care, lest a mistake might bring down on the worshipper immediate and awful destruction, quite irrespective of his moral condition. doubtless the nation might be impressed by these means with the awful aloofness of god, and there must often have accompanied this some notion of the ethical character that was expressed in this separateness; but the means taken for satisfying this character and demand in the nature of god could never have had any other result than it did, namely, the conception that attention to details of ritual could be a substitute for the much more difficult service of repentance and righteousness. it is possible that we may be under-estimating the real motive of the priests' work and its actual success in preserving religion under these forms; but the radical evil is clearly exposed when we come to the time of another calamity, that which befel the nation under antiochus epiphanes, when no other method of averting the anger of god seems to have been thought of, except that of increasing the rigour of this ritual law and fencing it round with still further restrictions, until it became a burden too heavy to be borne. such a régime utterly failed to understand the teaching of jesus and could only regard his religion as impious and lacking in all that was essential, reverential, or good, and it was "the law" which put jesus to death. it is much to be deplored that the sacrifice of christ has in turn been explained to the conscience touched to penitence and tenderness by the story of the cross, rather by the analogy of the old testament sacrifices than by its complete superiority to them as based upon a different and ethical order; for the rags and tatters of the levitical system still impede the religious life; allowing men to think that god is content with substitutes, can be placated with blood, and is more concerned with abstract regulations than with moral change. and so there still hang about religion the same inconsistencies, the same slaughter of the prophets, the same blindness to the eternal demands of personal and social righteousness. the motive of the work of the priests may have been to enforce the prophetic repentance, but to gain this end they compromised with unspiritual ritual, and on that compromise christ was, and is still crucified. the religion of the psalmists titles of the psalms, descriptive of their contents:-- ( ) song, heb. _shirah._ a lyrical poem for singing. probably the earliest title, which in some instances may have belonged to the original composition. ( ) _michtam_, perhaps, "a golden piece." the title indicates their artistic form and choice contents. they were probably all taken from a previous collection. ( ) _maschil_, a meditative poem, from a collection made perhaps in the late persian period. ( ) psalm, heb. _mizmor_. the name given to a collection used for public worship, probably in the early greek period. ( ) _shiggaion_, (ps. vii.; also in plural, hab. iii. .) some take this to mean a wild, passionate composition, but this psalm hardly bears that character. perhaps we may expect a textual corruption from _neginah_: a song accompanied with musical instruments. ( ) a song of ascents: used in the processions to the temple. ( ) a prayer. on the question of the davidic authorship of the psalms, the following passages should be examined; they would appear to be in hopeless disagreement with the life of david as depicted in the historical books. ps. v. - ; vi. , f.; xii. - ; xvii. - ; xxii.; xxvii. , ; xxxv. - ; xli. - ; liv. - ; lxii. , f. the psalms which are ascribed to some definite occasion in david's life are not on the whole any more suitable to the situation, although there is generally some single phrase which probably gave rise to this identification. the great commentator ewald, on literary grounds ascribed the following psalms to david because of their originality and dignified spirit: ps. iii.; iv.; vii.; viii.; xi.; xv.; xviii.; xix. - ; xxiv. - ; xxiv. - ; xxix.; xxxii.; lx. - ; lxviii. - ; ci.; cxliv. - . briggs would not go so far as to indicate davidic psalms, but would put as far back as the early monarchy, ps. vii., xiii., xviii., xxiii., xxiv. b, lx. a, and cx. lecture ix the religion of the psalmists the principles of biblical criticism have often been traced to a vigorous application of the theory of evolution to the growth of religious ideas. such an application, if without the support of facts, would discredit all critical results; but as a matter of fact, the critical readjustment of the old testament does not give a perfect progression in religious development. indeed, it leaves us with a perplexing story of decline from high attainment. the law follows the prophets, and no theory can recognise the law as an advance upon prophetic teaching. the national rejection of the prophets is the central tragedy of hebrew history and prepares us for the national rejection of jesus. yet between the prophets and the religion of the gospels we are able to trace an almost continuous link in the religion of the psalmists. this connection is somewhat obscured by the early date assigned to the psalms by uncritical tradition, by the heterogeneous character of the collection, and by its continual redaction in the interest of the purpose to which they were adapted. in adopting this collection of religious poems for the purpose of public praise, it is more than likely that additions were made, in order that they might more fitly express the need of the time, while reverence for the writings, by the time at least, of the final edition of the work, operated to preserve the original; as may be seen, for instance, in the addition made to the fifty-first psalm (ver. , ), which in its original form condemns the very worship in which it was used. moreover the collection is as much a prayer-book as a hymn-book, for many of the psalms are really prayers, and five of them are actually so entitled. the book was certainly used in the temple services, but on the whole it must have seemed more fitted for the non-sacrificial and non-ceremonial worship of the synagogue, or for the private devotions of pious men and women. however and wherever used, it must have nourished a deep personal religion and kept alive hopes to which christianity afterwards appealed. no other single book of the old testament has had such an influence on christian piety and worship. from ancient times to the present day the psalms have been chanted, and in churches of widely differing ritual they have been considered the only fit vehicle for christian praise. nothing more clearly demonstrates their proximity to the christian view of things, although the modern spirit in christendom is finding it increasingly difficult to express itself in the language of all the psalms, on account of their imprecatory wishes. perhaps still more, the predominant tone of the book, which is one of crying for deliverance from overwhelming enemies and oppression, hardly suits the safety of our times, or meets the demand for a joyful religious spirit. many of the psalms become real only in times of severe spiritual trial, and where there exists a deep sense of contrition; still better do they express the emotions which arise in times of national calamity or religious persecution; and most of all when men are constrained to take arms in the cause of religion and righteousness. they have never sounded so fitting as on the lips of the reformers, cromwell's ironsides, or the scottish covenanters. and yet their great breadth of appeal, their touching of every possible note in religious experience--penitence and joy, questioning and trust, longing and satisfaction, defeat and victory,--their majestic literary form, and their poetic inspiration will preserve them for ever as sublime utterances of universal religion. but our work is not to appraise their eternal value, but to estimate their significance, influence, and position in the development of old testament religion; and to do this we must endeavour to trace the origin and compilation of the psalter. the criticism of the psalter is faced by a peculiarly difficult and complex problem, arising from the lack of historic connection, the possible obliteration by editorial redaction, and the difficulty of interpreting with certainty even those data which the text presents, and it has by no means yet reached settled conclusions; only general and tentative results can be noted here. that, however, the book is the result of a gradual process, may be seen from the presence of doublets (liii. = xiv.; lxx. = xl. - ; cviii. = lvii. - + lx. - ), and from the subscription at the end of book ii., which displays ignorance of the fact that further psalms, ascribed to david follow. it will be more convenient to start from the final position and work backward; and that final position is undoubtedly this, that the book of psalms as it stands in our bible is the hymn-book of the restored second temple. it is a book prepared for musical accompaniment; this may be seen from the titles still preserved at the head of many of the psalms. these titles are of three kinds: they describe the nature of the poetic composition; they give the names of the authors and sometimes the circumstances in which they were composed; and the third kind are most probably to be explained as instructions for musical setting. these last-named titles are in most cases very obscure; the revised version has simply transliterated the hebrew words. on the assumption that these are musical terms, we have three classes of them in the psalms. one class apparently gives directions for the tune to which the psalm is to be sung, and this tune is named, like some modern hymn tunes, after the words with which the tune had been originally or customarily associated; these appear to have been popular songs, not necessarily of an entirely religious character (ps. lvi., r.v. title: "set to jonath elem rehokim"; mar. translates: "the silent dove of them that are afar off"; ps. lvii., lviii.: "set to al tashheth," which means: "do not destroy." in the septuagint the setting of ps. lxx. has been altered to: "save me, o lord"). other titles seem to direct the voice to be used in singing, as either falsetto or bass (ps. xlvi., "set to alamoth"; probably maiden-like voices, and as women took no part in the service of the choirs, this must refer either to tenor, or male falsetto; ps. vi., xii., "set to the sheminith." r.v. mar., "the eighth." this is probably the octave or bass voice). two references are to be found to the instrumental accompaniment to be used, as either stringed or wind instruments (ps. iv., vi., etc., "on stringed instruments"; ps. v., "with the nehiloth," mar., "wind instruments"). the much discussed meaning of _selah_ is most probably to be sought in a musical direction. the word means: "lift up." the septuagint translates, "interlude," but many other versions (version of aquila, syriac peshitto, jerome and the targum) translate, "for ever." this duplicate translation suggests the very possible clue that at the places where _selah_ appears, the psalm might be ended, if desired, and the "for ever," or the doxology, which was usually sung at the end of the psalm and which is found at the end of each book, could be taken there. as completed, the psalter is therefore a book with directions for a fully organised and choral worship, and we have to seek for a time when such a worship was in existence. the difficulty is that these musical directions are somewhat rare and are not found in the later books, but only in connection with those psalms entitled, "for the director." as the instruments mentioned are only of the simplest kind and not of the varied character used in the ornate worship of the temple (cxlix. ; cl. - ), and as by the time the greek translation was made ( b.c.), their significance was forgotten, we have to put the final edition long after the founding of synagogue worship, in which the director's psalm book was first used, and at some period when there had been a complete change in musical practice. this demands a time when hellenistic culture had moulded even the temple worship. (the jews were under greek influence and rule from b.c. to b.c. .) the time from which a full choral service was in use in the temple is to be carried back, according to the chronicler, to the time of solomon and david, but a comparison with the earlier history contained in the books of the kings does not confirm this. the chronicler, who from his interest in these matters seems to have been a member of one of the levite choirs, really gives us the customs current in his times, and infers that they went back unchanged to the time of the building of the first temple and to the preparatory work of david. these considerations, together with the admitted lateness of many of the psalms, some of them undoubtedly belonging to the times of the maccabæan wars, bring us down to that late age and perhaps more precisely to the time of the rededicated temple ( b.c.), and demand that the final edition of the psalter is to be placed somewhere about b.c. we might expect to find traces of the growth of the psalter in the division into five books (at xli., lxxii., cvi., cl., see r. v.), but there seems no real division necessary between books iv. and v. and the five-fold division may be due to the desire to imitate the divisions of the law; the other divisions however contain more hopeful suggestions. the first book, for instance, is almost entirely ascribed to david (ps. i. is an introduction to the whole book, composed for the final edition, and ps. ii. may have been also placed in front as part of the introduction. ps. xxxiii., which is very late, may have been added as a kind of doxology to ps. xxxii. the rest are ascribed to david). the second book is largely davidic and it concludes with the statement: "the prayers of david the son of jesse are ended." in spite of this notice psalms are found ascribed to david in the books that follow, so that the remark must have been found appended to a collection that the final editor took over; it cannot be due to his own hand. further evidence of compilation is to be found in the strange occurrence of the different names for god: elohim and jehovah. in the first book the name of jehovah preponderates. in book ii. the name elohim is found most frequently. then in book iii. psalms lxxiii.-lxxxiii. use elohim only, and lxxxiv.-lxxxix. jehovah mainly; and in practically the whole of books iv. and v. jehovah is almost solely used, the reason for this phenomenon must be sought in editorial redaction, for in the duplicate psalms, xiv. and liii., xl. - and lxx., jehovah is found in the first recension and elohim in the second. the elohistic character of lxxiii.-lxxxiii. may be due to the original compiler since they are all ascribed to asaph and otherwise bear marks of common production. the elohistic redaction may have been made in a period when the name jehovah sounded tribal and almost heathenish; but a similar test leads to the conclusion that the first collection enjoyed by this time a liturgical familiarity, which did not permit of alteration. the reversion to the name of jehovah in books iv. and v. might be explained by the fact that in later times the name was written but never pronounced. on the line of these suggestions we should expect to find that book i. contained the earliest psalms and books iv. and v. the latest; this is roughly correct, if we allow for the possibility of minor insertions being made for various purposes in the last edition. in book v. there is a group of psalms (civ.-cvi., cxi.-cxiii., cxv.-cxvii., cxxxv., cxlvi.-cl.), which are distinguished by either commencing or ending with "hallelujah," and are known as the "hallels." from their contents, it may be observed that they are suitable for use at the great festivals, and it is known that they were, and are still so used by the jews. they imply a highly organised musical service (ps. cl.), they require a time when the festivals were regularly observed and when the worship of the temple could be carried on without fear. such conditions are to be found together only after the exile, and then only during the period of greek rule; and to this late period the composition of these psalms is to be referred. an even later date is demanded for some psalms that are said to reflect the rebellion against the hellenizing movement enforced by antiochus epiphanes, in which the maccabees played such a heroic part. this date is confirmed by the references to: the "assembly of the saints" (ps. cxlix. , heb. _hasidim_, the purist party formed in that time); the cruel persecution for religious opinions (ps. xliv. - ; lxxix. ; lxxxiii. , ); the defiling of the temple, the burning of the synagogues, and the silence of the prophetic voice (ps. lxxiv. - ; lxxix. ). other maccabæan psalms are said to be: cx., where there is a reference to some priest who is not in the legitimate succession, which entirely describes the priest-kings of the maccabæan dynasty (other scholars would put this psalm very early; on the other hand there are alleged traces of an acrostic that would spell simon, the first of the maccabæan priest-kings); cxv. cxviii., which celebrate successful wars in which the leaders have been the house of aaron, to which house the maccabees of course belonged. this is the latest date that is demanded for any of the psalms, and in the present condition of criticism we can only say that between this and some earlier period the book is to be placed. it must now be our task to discover the earliest date that any of the psalms demand. we have seen that book i. seems to be the earliest collection, and tradition assumes that this was the work of david and was the psalm book used in the first temple. to discuss this point it is necessary to enquire into the reliability of the titles that ascribe the psalms to definite authors. these titles give: one each to moses, ethan, and heman; two to solomon; eleven to the sons of korah; twelve to asaph; and seventy-three to david (it is doubtful whether jeduthun is a person; if so he is probably the same as ethan: ps. xxxix., lxii., lxxvii., titles; cp. chron. vi. with chron. ix. ). now it should be noticed that none of the authors are later than solomon (ethan, kings iv. , chron. vi. ; heman, kings iv. , chron. vi. , xv. , , xxv. ; asaph, chron. vi. , xxv. f, neh. xii. ; in ezra ii. , neh. vii. , asaph seems to mean a guild of singers rather than an individual). if any of the psalms ascribed to authors might be expected to yield confirmation by internal evidence, it would be ps. xc.; but there is nothing in its language or thought that points to extreme antiquity. there is also nothing in the psalms themselves that confirms the authorship of the contemporaries of solomon, ethan and heman. the title of ps. cxxvii., "of solomon," is missing in the septuagint and is evidently a late gloss, and the title of ps. lxxii. is translated in the septuagint: "a psalm _for_ solomon," which certainly describes the contents better. the psalms ascribed to the sons of korah (xlii.-xlix., lxxxiv., lxxxv., lxxxvii., lxxxviii.; chron. xx. , chron. xxvi. ; but chron. vi. - shows that kohathite and korahite are the same), have common features, as have also the psalms ascribed to asaph, which imply that they are at least guild collections; but their exalted conception of god, their consciousness of national righteousness, the reference to synagogue worship and the cessation of prophecy (lxxiv. f) point to a time subsequent to ezra. the chief interest of the titles is found in the ascription of so many psalms to david. it was long thought that david was not only the author of the psalms ascribed to him, but that he was also editor of the entire psalter. (when as early as theodore of mopsuestia it was recognised that some of the psalms were maccabæan, it was supposed that david wrote them in the spirit of prophecy.) our enquiry may be narrowed down to those psalms that are ascribed to david in the earliest collection, book i. do these reflect the conditions and development of his times? it must be replied that there is nothing in the davidic psalms as a whole to distinguish them from other psalms, and what historical connection they betray seems everywhere to belong to an age later than david. the temple is spoken of as already in existence (ps. v. ; xi. ) and the name for jerusalem, "my holy hill," seems to demand a time subsequent to the mission of isaiah. the general conditions of life reflected are clearly those in which a godly minority is oppressed and wickedness is established in the land; a condition which finds no parallel in the books of samuel. moreover, the religious ideas are far in advance of those that seem to have been prevalent in the time of david or that can be traced to him. the general tone of the psalms is one of a chastened piety that hardly existed in the time of the kingdom, and the religious ideas everywhere show dependence upon the teaching of the prophets. there is hardly a verse of the fifty-first psalm which cannot be paralleled in jeremiah, but there is almost nothing in the psalm that makes it a fitting confession for an adulterer and murderer. these considerations lead us to enquire whether the hebrew preposition translated "of" david denotes authorship; its accurate signification is "belonging to," and from the analogy of the other titles we infer this to mean that the editor found these psalms in a collection ascribed to david. what gave the name of david to that collection? some of the psalms may be pre-exilic and may even go down to the early monarchy; ps. xx. may belong to the old kingdom, but it can hardly have come from the lips of david; it is ps. xviii. that has perhaps the greatest claim to davidic authorship. this psalm is also found in sam. xxii., but there it seems to be an interpolation, for it breaks apart verses that apparently once stood together ( sam. xxi. and xxiii. ). yet we meet with a reference to the temple even in this psalm ( sam. xxi. ); at the same time several of its passages would come very fittingly from the warrior king, and would be suitable to his barbarous times. in this psalm, if anywhere, we may possess some original davidic fragments. we must conclude therefore, that the davidic psalter was so called because its origin was somehow due to david, or because it contained some song of david which must have been considerably altered to suit liturgical purposes. the early tradition of david ascribes to him a poetic and musical gift ( sam. xvi. ; amos. vi. ), and of this the lament over saul and jonathan ( sam. i.) is a sufficient confirmation, but it should be noticed that it is remarkably free from any religious sentiment whatsoever. it must be due to the later tradition of the chronicler that david has been credited as the saintly author of the whole book of psalms. the conclusion is that the titles are not, strictly speaking, a claim to authorship, but are names given, for various reasons, to pre-existing collections; that the earliest of these collections may contain pre-exilic psalms, but that everything points to the collection being made for use in the time of the second temple. the references to a king do not necessitate any re-consideration of this verdict; they may be personifications of the nation in the light of messianic conceptions. this position has been steadily resisted by some in the interests of tradition, but without any real religious reason being adduced; for the idea that this decision denies the authority of christ and his apostles is disposed of by the simple fact that in the new testament, david is simply a name for the psalter (ps. ii. is ascribed to david in acts ii. ; it is anonymous in the psalter. heb. iv. has "in" david; this does not refer to authorship, for the author of this epistle never quotes the scriptures save anonymously). to others it will perhaps come as a great relief to feel that the writer of some of the most spiritual utterances of personal religion need not be identified with the historical david. there are awful possibilities of failure in the most religious men, but the problem here is more difficult than that: it would compel us to think of david as displaying in public no hint of the secrets of his inner religious life, but very much that contradicts them. the traditional idea of the authorship of the psalms has done grave injustice to the sincere if passionate character of the historical david. the origin of such a tradition is due as much to the spiritual blindness as to the careless historic judgment of later judaism, and its acceptance by generations of christian students speaks a greater reverence for tradition than for religious insight. to be compelled to date the great majority of the psalms within the period - b.c., is indeed a comforting interpretation of jewish history; for it shows that the barren ground of post-exilic times was not without its tender flowers of piety and an appreciation of the prophetic religion far beyond that of the prophets' contemporaries. the gloss of legalism, which can be traced in the psalter, and which was inevitable when these private devotions were adapted to the levitical worship of the temple, has not succeeded in obscuring, but rather brings into greater clearness the spiritual elements in the psalms. it is welcome to turn from this task of literary criticism, which finds in the psalms its most difficult field, and which perhaps yields here less help than in other branches of bible literature, to an endeavour to appreciate the religion of the psalmists. there is difficulty here also; but now it is in the splendour of the composition, the magnificent breadth of experience they embrace, the classic utterance of the eternal religion of the heart. we have recognised the heterogeneous character of the collection, and it is only to be expected that this should be reflected in the variety of religious ideas. a theology of the psalter is as impossible as it is mistaken. the quality of poetic genius varies, the heights of religious inspiration sometimes reached are not consistently maintained, and there are many lower levels. and yet there remains a sufficient unity to leave a very definite impression; that unity owes little to similarity of circumstances, to contemporaneity, or to the influence of a theological school; it is rather due to the unreflective simplicity of the human mind in the realised presence of god. in that position all unfettered religion speaks one tongue: the only mother tongue of humanity. the inspiration of the psalmist owes its beauty to the absence of self-consciousness. there is nothing here of the prophetic claim to speak in the name of god; in the psalms god does not speak to men, men speak to god, but it is just because of this that the revelation in the psalms reaches so far beyond the limits of old testament religion and seems to grasp that religion which was to be personified in the consciousness of jesus. we are compelled to recognise that men's prayers are themselves a revelation of god, and that when men seek to voice their highest aspiration we catch the sound of a deep undertone, the supplication of the spirit that intercedes within. as an expression of eternal religion the psalms have one serious defect, which really unfits them, without careful selection, for use in christian worship--their awful imprecations upon enemies. there are hardly to be found in the whole realm of literature more fearful desires for vengeance than in the psalms (cix. - . cxxxvii. ; cxl. ). to date the psalms from the comfortable times of the monarchy, under the martial supremacy of david and solomon, is to make them cruel without meaning; but imagine the sufferings of the israelites in exile, or in the still worse times when the pious remnant were persecuted by their own irreligious and apostate countrymen, which was so often their lot in post-exilic times, and these expressions can be explained, even if they cannot be justified. the desire for vengeance does not arise from personal motives, but is doubtless due to the complete identification of the psalmist with the cause of god and righteousness, and to his burning indignation against the cruelty, injustice, and craftiness of the impenitent wicked. thus understood, there is a moral element in this anger, which is not only to be condoned but even admired. this deep moral revulsion has been one of the greatest factors in moulding history along righteous lines. but when all this has been said, it remains to be acknowledged frankly that this is not the religion of the sermon on the mount. the anger at sin is right, but the desire for vengeance is no real cure for sin. it is far from the deep wisdom of the son of man; but we have to remember, when we judge the psalms from that standard, that his wisdom is still unaccepted, not only by the world, but by many who profess his name. it is in the psalms that personal religion receives its clearest exposition in the old testament, and this spirit owes much to the personal experience of jeremiah. there has been an endeavour to find the speaking subject of the psalms not in the individual but in the nation. there are national psalms, but many others cannot be successfully interpreted save as the expressions of personal devotion. national religion could never reach these heights; it is bound down to the average level, it is always open to unethical movements and ideas. the personal element is not to be confused with the individualistic; the personal is wider than the individual; it realises the things that lie at the base of all human life, and when it is most personal it speaks the most universal language. it is in the deep sense of sin and the assurance of forgiveness that the psalms are the classics for all who know the secrets they utter; and the sense of sin can never be felt save under the searching light of god's very presence. to be deeply conscious of sin is the first step towards any high revelation of god, and of this the fifty-first psalm is the most perfect expression; there we see the sense of inward sin, opening up the possibility of a separation between the self and that higher self, the holy spirit, and bringing about the severest mental pain and anguish. naturally, the psalms hardly rise to the christian ground of forgiveness, but the thirty-second psalm vibrates with the joy that the christian knows and, when mere figures of speech are discounted, it springs from the same reason: the acknowledgment of one's sin and the consciousness of its forgiveness in the newly realised communion with god. in dealing with the problem of the providential order of the world, the psalms hardly reflect any higher conceptions than those found elsewhere in the old testament, if they even rise as high as the conception of the second isaiah. the idea that goodness is rewarded by long life and prosperity, and that wickedness is always marked by outward disaster is the root idea; and the fact that this is not confirmed by observation is the cause of the complaint of many a psalm. this problem receives no conscious solution throughout the book. the revelation given through the worship of the sanctuary only shows that the prosperity of the wicked is temporary (ps. xxxvii., lxxiii.); but how often even this must seem to be untrue, for in many cases there are no bands in their death. nothing higher is reached than pride in one's integrity and the assurance that somehow and somewhere retribution is sure. there is no conception of the principle of vicarious suffering, and the values set upon righteousness and prosperity never attain to those words of jesus: "blessed are they that have been persecuted for righteousness sake." the pressure of this problem of providence is supposed to have driven the psalmists to pierce the veil and to descry beyond the grave a compensation for the inequalities of this life, and passages are frequently adduced to prove this (ps. xvi. , ; xvii. ; xlix., ; lxxiii. - ). the current belief of israel embraced an existence after death, but only in the form of unconscious and shadowy life in the under world, _sheol_, and this is most explicitly expressed in many of the psalms (vi. ; xxx. ; xlix. ; lxxxviii. - ). what then is the significance of the expressions which seem to point to something more? an accurate translation and a correct exegesis dispose of nearly all of these passages as in any sense explicit evidence for a definite belief in immortality; but there remains a witness of much greater value. it is through communion with god, and because of the significance with which it invests conscious life that the psalmists are led to feel that their experience can never be interrupted by death. to those who know the reality of personal communion with god, this has more cogency than any other argument for immortality. the experience of communion throws a new value on personality and gives a deeper meaning to this life, and in face of this discovery death becomes nothing more than a passing shadow. while therefore the application of ps. xvi. to the resurrection of christ is foreign to the methods of modern interpretation, that passage does show the real significance of the resurrection of christ; for it is the person of christ in communion with god that has brought life and immortality to light. the psalmist shared this vital experience whether he was able to infer immortality of the soul from it or not. but the glory of the psalms is found in their realisation of the presence of god. this expresses itself in the vivid consciousness of a present and helpful personality rather than in intellectual concepts or theological definitions. the transcendence of god receives full appreciation, but it is never in terms of spatial distance, but in an inward realisation of his moral excellence (ps. xxxvi. - ). to the discerning soul the presence of god is inescapable and is absolutely omnipresent (ps. cxxxix. - ). right alongside of the recognition of the might of god and his holiness, there is found the sense of his fatherly pity, his gentleness, and his understanding of us (ps. ciii. ; xviii. ). it would be altogether mistaken to look in the psalms for that conception of nature which has become one of the greatest gains of modern culture. to the psalmist nature has no meaning apart from god, and it is merely the sphere of his activity. but the beginnings of a poetic delight in things is felt almost on every page (ps. xxiii. ; lv. ; lxv. , ; xciii. ; cvii. ; cx. b; cxxiv. ; cxxx. ; cxxxix. b); while the so-called nature psalms (viii., xix., xxix., lxv., xciii., civ., cxlviii.) yield a conception of creation and of the relation of god to the world that has not sufficiently shaped theology, and as a consequence has made it possible for us to think of a conflict between religion and science. the consciousness of god as of a present living personality is the great contribution of hebrew religion, and of this the psalms are the supreme expression. all conception of a merely unconscious, all-pervading essence is transcended by the intense experience of communion; he is "an ever present help in time of trouble." the hebrew psalmist may be a child beside the hindu sage or the greek philosopher, but no one has ever sounded the human heart as he. the experience he has bequeathed to the world is that of a god who is infinite, mighty and all-present, and yet one who can be known in the experiences of temporal life and felt in the limitations of the human mind; one who shepherds and guides men, and who can take the place of human friend or nearest relative. this is in the direct line with christ's consciousness of the father. without this we may have a mysticism that must perforce remain silent, or a philosophy that loses itself in the endeavour to reconcile the antinomies of thought, but without this we cannot have a religion that can satisfy the craving of the human heart for an infinite, holy, and helping companion. the religion of the wise in determining from internal evidence whether job is later or earlier than proverbs, the following comparisons should be examined:-- job v. and prov. iii. . " xi. " " ix. . " xv. " " viii. . " xviii. , } " {" xiii. . " xxi. } " {" xxiv. . " xxii. " " iv. . " xxviii. " " iii. ; viii. . " xxviii. " " i. . in these examples, it might be noted, it is the friends of job who quote the proverbs; except in job xxi. , where job questions the proverb already quoted by bildad, rather than quotes it with approval; and in the case of xxviii. , , the whole chapter is regarded by critics as suspicious, on the ground that the sentiments here expressed by job are in contradiction to his general attitude. these passages would seem somewhat to confirm the idea that the book of job is intended to be a criticism of the theory of providence found in proverbs. * * * * * on the suggestion that ecclesiastes owes its disjointed character to some disarrangement of the original sheets of the ms., bickell proposes to read the book in the following order:-- ( ) i. -ii. . ( ) v. -vi. . ( ) iii. -iv. . ( ) ii. -iii. . ( ) viii. -ix. . ( ) ix. -x. . ( ) vi. -vii. . ( ) iv. -v. . ( ) x. -xi. ( ) vii. -viii. . ( ) x. -x. . ( ) ix. - . ( ) xi. -xii. . bickell would regard the appendix, xii. - , as a later addition. lecture x the religion of the wise certain books of the old testament have a marked resemblance both in their subject-matter and in their religious and ethical outlook. they stand out from the other classes of the literature, for they are neither prophetical, like the writings of the prophets or the histories written under their influence, nor legalistic, like the great codes of the pentateuch, nor liturgical and devotional, like the psalms; and for convenience they are designated: "the wisdom literature." these writings deal chiefly with "wisdom," or the practical ordering of life, and we frequently find a reference to "the words of the wise," as if there was a school of teachers who were devoted to the discussion of these problems. the chief contributions of this school are, in our bible, the book of proverbs, and in the apocrypha, wisdom and ecclesiasticus. job and ecclesiastes are occupied with the same problems, but their attitude is critical and their method of treatment peculiar. no one can fail to feel the almost perplexing difference of this literature from the rest of the old testament; unlike the prophetic it has less a message to the conscience than a problem for the mind; unlike the historical books it is perfectly timeless, and utterly detached from the national hopes; it is not occupied with ceremonies or ritual, but with religion as a matter of conduct. the nearest approach to this is to be found in some of the psalms, which, passing from the emotions of the devout spirit, become engaged with the problems and injustices of life. its religion is more universal than that of the prophets or even of the psalmists, but it is less emotional; the religion of the heart has given way to the wisdom of the mind. we have here the beginnings of a philosophy, a mental activity strangely absent from the hebrew race; it is not however a speculative philosophy, but one purely concerned with practical life; and yet there is a direct progression traceable from the chapters in proverbs (i.-ix.), which are devoted to the praise of wisdom, through the work known as the wisdom of solomon, to philo, the great jewish philosopher, who endeavoured to interpret moses by plato and to reconcile hebrew religion with greek speculation. although in this literature we have the beginnings of a philosophy it is rather that of the street than of the academy; a cultivation of a philosophic attitude towards life, its problems and duties, rather than any speculation on metaphysical reality or the absolute origin of things. the wisdom we hear so much of is an intellectual virtue, although it embraces neither speculation nor learning, but is limited to mean sagacity, shrewdness, prudence in the conduct of life. this is the main theme of the proverbs, but the problem of the correct ordering of life unearths a deeper and darker one--the problem of the existence of evil, the injustice of life as revealed in the blind indiscrimination of trouble, pain, and death. with this problem some of the psalms and the books of job and ecclesiastes especially deal. in seeking to place this literature, we are met with an even worse difficulty than in the case of the psalms; for the entire absence of historical allusion, and the spirit of detachment in which religious questions are discussed, leave no trace of date or age. the three books in our bible belonging to this literature are ascribed to very early authors; two to solomon and one traditionally to job or moses, although the book of job is really anonymous. now it is exceedingly difficult to gather from the prophetic or historical books any trace of the opinions that are found in the wisdom literature. the problem of evil certainly began to occupy the minds of men like jeremiah even before the exile; but in the picture which the prophets give us of the jewish state under the late monarchy, we get no glimpse of a people who looked on life and religion as do the writers of these books. in the wisdom literature we find references to "the wise" as to a special class in the community (prov. i. ; xxii. ; xxiv. ; job xv. ); in the historical literature we find the "wisdom" of certain men extolled (solomon, kings iii. - ; iv. - ; x. ff.; joseph, gen. xli. ; the four wise men, kings iv. , the wisdom of egypt, the east, kings iv. , and of edom, ob. ; jer. xlix. ), and in the prophetic writings "the wise" are mentioned as a class distinct from the prophet and the priest (jer. xviii. ) and often in a depreciatory way (isa. xxix. ; jer. viii. ; ix. ). it seems almost impossible to identify the wise men of proverbs with this class who receive so little praise from the prophets. the wise men of proverbs do not speak as if they needed to defend themselves against the claims of the prophet (prov. xxix. ; the reference to "vision," which can only mean a communication to the prophet, is not found elsewhere in proverbs and is doubted by many scholars), nor can we understand the need for the message of the prophets if this practical religion of "the wise" was current in their times. this religion may lack passion and be without national consciousness, but isaiah and micah would surely have found something to their heart's desire in its pure ethical character. indeed, the religious thought seems to be dependent on the teaching of the prophets, but only at a distance, for it is ethically advanced and has become somewhat rarefied and unemotional. the literary character seems also to point to a later age; for it is academical, sophistical, and polished. the polish of the proverbs might be due to constant use among the common people, but they are not like popular sayings (cp. sam, xxiv. ; kings xx. ; jer. xxxi. ; ezek. xviii. ), and their evident kinship with wisdom and ecclesiasticus indicates a late post-exilic origin. we shall first devote some time to an examination of the book of proverbs. the hebrew "proverb" (_mashal_) means "a representation," and may be used of a fable or a taunt, but is more especially confined to any generalisation from experience or observation on life and character expressed in a rhythmic and polished form. the most usual form of the proverb is a couplet in which a common fact of nature is placed beside a common fact of human life: "where there is no wood the fire goes out, and where there is no talebearer strife will cease." the book as a whole would seem to be ascribed to solomon (i. ), but this is only the tradition of the final editor; for, as in the case of the psalter, proverbs shows every trace of gradual compilation, and the names of other authors are given. the main divisions of the book are as follows:-- a. (i. - ). the prologue, by the final editor, either ascribing the work to solomon or else praising his proverbs. b. (i. -ix.). this seems to be the latest addition to the book; it is not a collection of proverbs at all, but is a continuous discourse in praise of wisdom. in viii. wisdom is personified as a creature of god present at the creation of the world. this hypostatization of an attribute of god is one of the latest developments of hebrew thought, and is so unusual to its genius that we are compelled to seek for some possibility of infiltration from foreign sources. the idea is still further developed in ecclesiasticus (xxiv.), and in the book of wisdom has become quite a platonic speculation (vii. -viii. ). the appearance of this idea in hebrew thought seems to be most explicable in the period of greek influence, when plato's doctrine of the idea might become known in palestine; somewhere about b.c. seems a likely date. the identification of virtue with knowledge, which we find in the book, is also due to greek thought. it was along this line of development that the conception of "the logos" was welcomed into jewish thought, to have through philo such a profound influence on some of the writers of the new testament. c. (x.-xxii. ). this collection of proverbs is ascribed to solomon and is generally thought by critics to be the oldest main collection; many would even be willing to assign it to the golden age of the monarchy. the solomonic authorship is, however, unthinkable; the sentiments expressed are unsuitable for a luxurious and polygamous monarch (xv. , xxi. ; xxii. ; xiii. ; cp. kings iv. ; xi. , , - ; xii. , ), and the ascription to solomon is probably due to circumstances similar to those which operated in the case of the ascription of the psalms to david. there are many objections to any pre-exilic time as a suitable historic background for this collection; there is no mention of idolatry, whereas we learn from ezekiel (vi., viii., xxiii.) that idolatry was practised in jerusalem down to the time of the city's destruction; monogamy seems to be taken quite for granted, whereas it would appear that polygamy was general before the prophetic reforms; and of the great upheaval that these reforms involved, this collection shows no trace. the national religion has here given place to universalism, a development that seems to demand some experience of contact with other nations and especially some acquaintance with foreign culture. the references to the king neither require solomonic authorship nor demand an age when the monarchy was established; for they are only general sentiments concerning the duties of the king in the state, and are of such a nature that they show very little reminiscence of israel's actual experience of a monarchy. d. (xxii. -xxiv. ) and e. (xxiv. - ) are two collections of the sayings of "the wise," whose ascription, together with the reference to "instruction," points to an advanced stage of reflection and teaching, and perhaps to the existence of philosophic teachers who had schools and pupils. f. (xxv.-xxix.). "these also are proverbs of solomon, which the men of hezekiah, king of judah, copied out." this title has an air of circumstantiality about it which looks like a genuine historical note, and it has been observed that there is a change of tone, in this collection, in regard to the monarchy, as if some actual experience of kingly tyranny had been lately borne; so that if we were to refer this collection to the age mentioned in the title we should have to ante-date the collection, c. but in view of the state of society here portrayed, which is similar to that of ecclesiasticus, we have no alternative but to regard the title, as in the case of some of the davidic psalms, as due to later jewish scribes, and as without authority. g., h. and i. are three small collections (xxx.; xxxi. - ; xxxi. - ), the first by agur: a very obscure passage, apparently quoting a declaration of reverent agnosticism, with a reply to it by some more believing scribe. the second is ascribed to king lemuel, and the third is in praise of a virtuous woman, by an anonymous writer. the religious teaching of the proverbs would seem to be a refinement of the prophetic religion, standing quite apart from the legal and ritual development. religion has become entirely a matter of ethics; the creed is wonderfully colourless and simple, and the inducement to virtue remains almost entirely on the plane of utilitarianism and prudence. there is a good deal that is quite worldly wisdom, but pure religion is by no means wanting (xxi. ; xiv. ); the fear of the lord is not slavish fear, but is a guiding principle for life and the beginning of wisdom. men are divided somewhat roughly into the foolish and the wise; and although no book in the world has ever depicted the foolishness of men with greater variety and reality, yet there seems no hope that folly may be overcome, or that wicked men can be turned from their ways; wisdom knows no forgiveness and can only mock when men turn to her too late (i. - ). yet the ethical level is high; woman especially is highly estimated, and the home life is held sacred; kindness to animals is inculcated (xii. ), and there is a real approach to absolute ethics in such sayings as: "say not thou, i will recompense evil"; "say not i will do so to him as he hath done to me" (xx. ; xxiv. , ; xxv. , ). the writers have been called "humanists," and this rightly describes their position; it is the highest level rabbinical religion ever reached; it has its parallel in some of the aphoristic teaching of jesus, but it has no message for the outcast and fallen; it knows no secret whereby the fool may be made wise and the heart be changed by a great emotion; it is the religion of the sage, not the religion of the saviour. the doctrine of retribution is still thought to be quite satisfactory in its working (ii. f.; x. ; xi. ). in an earlier and less reflective age this idea would not have been unexpected; but it is remarkable that it should be acquiesced in by the wise men; and yet it is an idea of life that seems to persist against all experience: it is found in the time of christ and it still obtains, especially in the judgment of the cause of poverty. perhaps its persistence is to be traced to an ideal of justice so strong as to obscure accurate observation of the facts. * * * * * when we turn to the book of job we come to a work not only the greatest product of the wise men, but the supreme literary production of the hebrew nation. the grandeur of its language has somewhat obscured the real meaning of the book; for the opinions that the book was written to controvert are stated with such vivid power and poetic grace that they are now often quoted as biblical truths of equal value with the opinions apparently supported by the author. it is our task, not so much to admire the literary talent of the author, as to estimate his contribution to the religion of israel. the book of job has been referred to almost every age from moses to post-exilic times. there is certainly an endeavour to reproduce the conditions of the patriarchal age, in the avoidance of the name jehovah (exod. vi. ), and in the money standard adopted (job. xlii. ); but there is no desire to deceive the reader, for this archaic atmosphere is adopted merely as the appropriate setting of the dialogue, and is not maintained: the name jehovah slips from the author's pen, he takes no pains to conceal his knowledge of the law and his interest in the questions of his own times. the question of age is not to be complicated by the question of authorship; there was a person named job, known to ezekiel (xiv. ), but there is nowhere any assumption that job himself wrote the book; and the mechanical and symbolical character of the disasters which befall job, and the nature of the compensation, show that we have here only dramatic settings for the speeches and not actual history. it is likely that there was a well-known tradition of a man named job who had suffered overwhelming troubles and eventually had been restored to his former prosperity, and this is made the basis for a discussion of the problem of suffering. it has been suggested that in the prologue and epilogue we have fragments of that old tradition, since these passages are in prose while the body of the book is in semi-poetic rhythm; but the prose form is best explained as that always adopted by the hebrews for narrative, for we find ideas in these parts that betray as late a date as anything in the body of the work. considered on internal evidence, everything seems to point to the age which produced the rest of the wisdom literature; and more precisely, a date shortly before or shortly after proverbs, seems indicated. the material for deciding more particularly is such that different conclusions may be drawn from it. for instance, the personification of wisdom in proverbs seems to be in advance of the idea of wisdom in job; and if we could think of the development of an idea always coinciding with chronological progression, then job would need to be placed earlier than proverbs; but this is complicated by the fact that the main body of the book of the proverbs may have been in circulation before the earlier chapters were added. yet there are apparent quotations from the proverbs in the book of job (xv. f. = prov. viii. - ), and the reference to the lamp of the wicked being put out (prov. xiii. ; xxiv. ) seems clearly to have proverbs in mind (job. xxi. ). dependence might, of course, be taken to lie the other way, but on the whole, it would appear that the problems dealt with in job have not yet emerged for the writers of the proverbs, and indeed job seems rather an indictment of the superficial idea, which we find everywhere assumed in the earlier work that prosperity and goodness are inseparable. the most satisfactory order seems therefore to be: proverbs, job, ecclesiastes. the idea that job is to be understood as a personification of the nation, such as we were led to conceive in the allegory of jonah and in the servant of the lord, can hardly be maintained in face of the perfect detachment from the history and the national hopes that characterises the book. the book deals with a problem already stirring in the minds of the prophets and the theme of many of the psalms, but here stated with an awful daring and intensity and as the subject-matter of an entirely new form of literary composition. the book of job is not a drama, in the sense that it was ever intended, or would be suitable, for presentation on the stage; but it is a poem with dramatic elements and it has a dramatic movement. the endeavour to understand the message of the book is rendered difficult because different points of view are presented, and this has suggested different authors. the book certainly has well-marked divisions, and they appear to yield distinct and different solutions of the problem of suffering. the prologue shows us what has taken place in heaven, and seems to infer that the trials came upon job to establish his faith and righteousness; but the speeches between job and his friends, in the second division, if by the same author as the prologue, skilfully avoid this explanation, and the drama pursues its course with the actors remaining in complete ignorance of the solution that has been disclosed to the audience. the third division is taken up with the speeches of elihu: these break the continuity of the poem, job makes no reply to him, and elihu is not mentioned in the epilogue. an examination of these speeches shows that they fall somewhat below the level of brilliance and originality maintained in the rest of the book, and the idea that they proceed from another writer of the same school, who felt that the arguments of the three friends had not been presented in the best possible way, is worthy of consideration. the speeches of jehovah are by the author of the main portion and are wonderfully impressive and grand, although the exact contribution that they make to the discussion of the problem is difficult to discern. the epilogue falls back into prose, and was certainly written by one who had the entire work before him; but it so misses the meaning of the whole argument, and is content with such a superficial solution of restoration, that it has been thought by many to be an addition to the original work. whatever may be thought of the idea of plural authorship as a solution of these divergences, the divergences themselves must be borne in mind in any attempt to estimate the message of the book. but are these different points of view incompatible with a single author? with an author of such extraordinary talent in voicing opinions with which he evidently does not agree, it cannot be said to be impossible; and it may be that he only wished to state the problem and to give those answers which were current in his age, leaving it to the reader to discover whether these answers were really solutions; the prologue and epilogue may have nothing to do with the didactive motive, but only be due to dramatic and artistic demands. the theology of job certainly demands a late age and an advanced stage of reflection. one interesting point is raised by the employment, in the prologue, of the figure of satan. this personality, so fruitful a factor in speculation on the cause of evil, demands a careful study. it should be noted, first, that he is referred to as _the_ satan, that is, "the adversary"; it is a generic, not a proper, name. this creature is represented as appearing together with the angels in the presence of god, and although his designs are sinister and his suggestions unworthy, he is still a minister doing the will of god. this delegation of evil advocacy can be traced, from the idea that it is due to god himself ( sam. xxiv. ), to the work of the separate spirit who offered to entice ahab ( kings xxii. ), and then to the greater definiteness of our author. beyond this book, again, the adversary is a darker character who has to be rebuked by god (zech. iii.), and in the history of the chronicler _the_ satan has become "satan," a proper name ( chron. xxi. ; cp. sam. xxiv. ); but we have to go outside the old testament canon to get a completely dualistic opposition of god and satan (wisdom ii. ). the conception of god has passed, in this book, entirely beyond the tribal deity jehovah, and even beyond the ethical personality known to the prophets, to one who is felt to be unknowable; and yet withal job clings to the idea that he shall one day see the face of the redeemer who now hides himself. as in the psalms, the alleged idea of immortality (xix. ff.) is not very definite, and so contradicts the general expectation of the book (vii. f. x. f. xiv. ff. ff. xvi. ; xxi. ; xxx. ), that it must be taken to refer to job's conviction that some vindication of his cause will be made here in this life. at the same time the idea of a future judgment which shall proclaim his innocence and the ill-desert of his sufferings, is so strong, that it sweeps death out of vision, and the hope of the future life hovers in the thought if it does not break into language. a dispassionate examination of the solutions here offered to the problem of suffering shows that nothing really beyond a negative position is reached in this book. the speeches of job must be taken to convey the author's opinions, and they are a most emphatic repudiation of the doctrine of providence expressed by the three friends. they can only repeat the accepted notion that suffering is everywhere the cause of sin, and with scorn and indignation job repudiates the charge, so far as he is concerned; he maintains his innocence and appeals to god as his witness; but the witness is silent and there is no daysman betwixt them. job's protest is not concerned with mere innocence, for in one magnificent passage he appeals to his beneficent life spent in the service of the poor and needy (xxxi.). the answers of job leave the little system of providence supported by his friends, completely discredited, and in this particular jehovah sides with job. the theophany and speeches of jehovah do not, however, seem to convey any further contribution to the problem than perhaps the idea that for man it is insoluble, because he does not and cannot see the whole; and so nothing is left for man but to bear his griefs in silence and maintain his trust in god. job remains, not only the finest contribution of semitic genius to the realm of literature, but a classic for all those who feel the anguish of the world and the unintelligible perplexities of life. if it conveys no real solution, it at least disposes of one long accepted as adequate, and its complete overthrow removes one of the worst mistakes of human observation and refutes one of the cruellest judgments of men. the idea that prosperity always follows goodness has been a most disastrous bequest of hebrew thought, and has more than anything else obscured from men's eyes the real meaning of life, prevented an accurate judgment of character, and done much to turn aside the expression of sympathy and obscure the duty of pity and forgiveness. that a solution was not within the limits of israel's faith cannot be affirmed with isa. liii. before us; but that it had never been rightly understood and had never taken deep hold of even noble minds is driven home with a telling force, in a further contribution of the wisdom literature, the book of ecclesiastes. the name ecclesiastes is borrowed from the attempt to translate the hebrew term _qoheleth_ into greek. of this name a variety of interpretations have been put forward (qoheleth, from _qahal_ an assembly, is the active feminine participle and means, one who calls, or addresses, or is merely member of, an assembly; a.v., "the preacher"; r.v. "the great orator"), but the one that perhaps best describes the term is that of "the debater." the work is put forward in the name of solomon, and of all the works ascribed to him there is none that would come so suitably from the pen of that monarch, if he ever reflected deeply on his career; but this ascription is not kept up with any idea of deceiving the reader, but is simply one of the literary customs of the time and a way of honouring a great name, for there are biographical statements impossible to solomon ("i _was_ king," i. ; "above all that were before me in jerusalem," i. ), while the reflection of society and the stage of thought, but most notably the extremely late language, betray what is one of the latest of the old testament writings. ecclesiastes is a work that has held an unusual fascination for certain types of disposition, renan declaring that it was the only lovely thing that ever came from a hebrew mind. the presence of the book at all in the old testament is strange, and there were strong opinions against admitting it into the canon; it was perhaps only eventually sanctioned because its contradictory statements made it possible to interpret the book as a work written to controvert pessimistic ideas, which are brought forward only to be refuted. for the intention of the work is difficult to gather owing to its disjointed and incomplete character, which makes the book as it stands a mass of contradictions. some passages profess utter pessimism and unbelief in god's providence, while others, like the closing chapter, seek to inculcate religious fear and trust. various theories have been proposed to explain these phenomena occurring in one book. it has been suggested that the work is a dialogue between a doubting scholar and an orthodox believer. with a view of straightening out the argument it has been conjectured that the sheets of the original have somehow become disarranged, and others have thought of a series of interpolations in an originally quite unbelieving work; first by a writer who wishes to defend wisdom from the author's charges of unprofitableness, and then by a writer who wishes to defend the providence of god. if interpolation is to be thought of at all--and it should only be a refuge of despair--it is to be sought in the opening and closing verses of the last chapter (xii. , , ), which may have been added to correct the influence of the work; but even they are not impossible from this strangely vacillating author. certainly no explanations can remove the gloomy tone of the book. the writer seems to have come into contact with greek pessimism, and from this standpoint he sees nothing true in the hebrew doctrine of retribution, and especially does he reject the too optimistic doctrines of the wisdom school. the problems that are solved so simply in proverbs, stated and left unanswered by job, are by this author answered in entirely negative fashion: nothing is profitable in this life, nothing is new; nature and man move in an endless cycle without hope or meaning. the pursuit of wisdom is just as foolish as the pursuit of folly: the end of the fool and the end of the wicked is the same; life is not worth living; vanity of vanities, all is vanity. in this book we at last come upon a clear recognition of the doctrine of immortality, but only to find it explicitly denied by our author (iii. - ). the only solution that the writer proposes is a sad epicureanism: make the best of a bad world. and yet in spite of this conclusion the author still believes in god (iii. , ; viii. ); but he is a god who has hidden his purpose from man and whom man can do nothing to turn from his ways. this is more like the inscrutable fate of the greek tragedians than the jehovah of the prophets: indeed the word jehovah is never once used throughout the book. if the concluding chapter comes from the original author, then it recommends a religious attitude towards these mysteries; but there is no revelation of anything that gives assurance of the reasonableness of this position or of the goodness of god. what are we to learn from this book? are we to refuse to read it and to reverse the judgment that included it in the canon? hardly that. it is well that man's doubts should find a place in the same sacred collection with his surest beliefs, for doubt may be but a stage in a process from an inadequate to a fuller faith. the book shows that the common appreciation of israel's faith could not satisfy the mind that had its attention fixed upon the facts of life; and especially does it show that the hope of immortality, apart from which israel's faith had largely developed, is not the one thing that is lacking. that hope, with its promise of retribution in a future and better world, will always appear too speculative to some minds to relieve the burdens of the life that now is, and even if believed in, it would offer no real clue to the meaning of our trials here, but only tend to take men's eyes off this life where perchance they might find the solution they have missed. for there is an attitude to life that solves its darkest problems, a disposition which transmutes its pain and failure, finding it no enigma, but an opportunity for learning the will of the father; our presence here not a thing to be reluctantly borne, but a task to be joyfully accepted as the commission of god. the book of ecclesiastes shows us, therefore, that the revelation through israel is not yet complete; for it voices the unsatisfied need and stretches out hands of faith for something not yet made known. it is the deep dark of the night; the next hour will see the morning star of bethlehem above the horizon, the fleeing shadows and the breaking of the day. messianic expectations the prevalence of the expectation of a personal messiah reflected in the gospels, and the clearness and consistency of the idea, are not to be explained solely from the old testament prophecies. in the apocrypha the messianic expectation has almost died out (ecclus. xlix. ; macc. ii. ), but after the maccabæan revolt it revived, owing doubtless to the disappointment caused by the deterioration of the hasmonæan dynasty, of which so much had been expected. the pharisees, who resented the policy of the hasmonæans, made the idea of a restoration of the davidic line the peculiar property of their party, and from this time until the appearance of jesus, messianic expectation reached a point never before attained. the following summary shows the emergence of the idea in the literature of the period:-- ( ) the dream-visions of enoch. b.c. - . the messiah appears under the figure of a white bullock, and the saints are changed into his image. the messiah has only an official function in the world-drama, and a human though glorified personality. ( ) the sibylline oracles. in a passage assigned to b.c. , the messiah is represented as a god-sent king, who is expected to arise from the east, and whose appearance will be a signal for an attack upon the temple by the gentiles. ( ) the book of jubilees. b.c. - . the writer is concerned more with the messianic kingdom, which he conceives of spiritually, than with the messiah, who is only alluded to once, and who is expected to arise from judah. ( ) the similitudes of enoch. b.c. - . this part of the book of enoch is much occupied with the person of the messiah. he is definitely named "the messiah," and also bears the titles "the elect one," "the righteous one," and "the son of man." he is a prophet and a teacher, "the light of the gentiles," all judgment is committed unto him, and he will sit on the throne of his glory. he will raise again to life all the righteous who have died. ( ) the psalms of solomon. b.c. - . the messiah is to be sinless; he is the son of david; he will not adopt the ordinary methods of warfare, but will smite the earth with the rod of his mouth. the following works all belong to the christian era, but they may reflect ideas that had an earlier origin:-- ( ) the assumption of moses. a.d. - . the hope of an earthly messiah is abandoned and it is god himself who is expected to take vengeance on his enemies. ( ) the apocalypse of baruch. _c._ a.d. the messiah will appear after israel's enemies have been destroyed. his kingdom is likened to "the bright lightning," and at the end of his reign he is to return in glory to heaven. ( ) esdras. a.d. - . the messiah, although more than earthly, dies after a reign of years. he is pictured as a lion rebuking an eagle (the roman power), and "as it were with the likeness of a man" arising from the midst of the sea, and flying with the clouds of heaven. lecture xi messianic expectations in all the stages through which the old testament religion passed there seems to have existed a consciousness of their imperfection, and this produced a tendency to gaze into the future, in which it was thought the ideal religion would exist, and where could be descried the perfect realisation of god's dwelling among men. it is natural that this characteristic should find its clearest expression in the prophets. when their eyes are upon the present, they condemn; when they look to the immediate future, they utter grave warning and the shadows deepen upon their faces; but when they lift their eyes to the distant hills of time, the light is on their faces, and they break into songs of the days that are yet to be. it is this vision of the future and the endeavour to give it a definite outline that runs like a thread through the old testament and forces us to look beyond its borders for the ultimate issue of its religious development. this subject may best be studied under the general head of messianic expectations. the immediate difficulty in understanding this subject is found in the circumstance that it has received from bible students an exaggerated attention, and has been pursued with methods that the best modern scholarship cannot sanction. the eager hunting for messianic prophecy, and the desire to find literal fulfilment, has often stretched the meaning of passages unwarrantably and made a sane exegesis appear tame and uninteresting. but more disastrous has been the effect upon the understanding of the old testament as a whole. the literature has been treated as a mysterious typology, in which some indirect picture of the messiah was to be discovered, or a series of exact predictions of his life and work. this has destroyed the sense of perspective, it has ignored the message of the prophets to their own age, and it has been responsible for the idea that the religion of the psalmists was simply a pious expectation of the messiah, instead of a real communion with god. it is difficult to gain a right appreciation of this subject after it has suffered such abuse, but a serious effort should be made; for it is in the understanding of the messianic expectation that we shall find a key to the new testament and more especially to that conflict of soul which the acceptance of the messiahship seems to have brought upon jesus. the method of study followed will be an endeavour to read all alleged messianic predictions, first of all in the light of their actual meaning for the age in which they were uttered; but more particularly it will embrace the general ideas of the future of which the conception of the messiah forms only a part. we shall find that the conscious prediction of the messiah is somewhat reduced in bulk, and that the messianic expectation includes something more than a figure of the messiah himself, and is indeed sometimes found without any such feature. the messianic ideal involves the whole conception of the religious future of israel. the hebrew religion receives much inspiration from its tradition of the past, but infinitely more from its hopes for the future: the golden age is not thought to lie far back in history, but in a time yet to come. it seems likely that this idea was widely dispersed even among the common people, and it is therefore only natural that it should often have been held in an unspiritual manner and expressed after a material fashion. this hope was seized upon by the prophets, and by them elevated above a merely material expectation; they enriched it by the wealth of their creative genius, and from their time it receives a definite content. standing far above their contemporaries in their conception of the meaning of jehovah's covenant with israel, the prophets were forced to realise the failure of their message to win immediate acceptance, and sometimes they witnessed its entire rejection by the people; and therefore it was inevitable that they should look to the future to yield what the present seemed unable to produce: a religion pure, simple, and free from all limitations. if we inquire the reason of this hope, we find it in their trust in jehovah's covenant and in their conviction of the ultimate triumph of truth. now it was not unnatural, with the peculiar character of their national history, for their hopes to group themselves around some commanding figure; for all along israel had been moved by splendid personalities. they were accustomed to the appearance of men whose power and genius marked them out as fitted by jehovah for some mighty task; so that whenever they think of the future and come to a detailed description of their vision they descry one dominant figure, the symbol and representative of the people, but also the symbol and representative of the power of jehovah dwelling among them. this figure receives his peculiar outline largely from the needs of their immediate times, and any person of whom great things are expected may be hailed as the messiah (cyrus, isa. xlv. ; haggai ii. - , seems to suggest that zerubbabel is the expected messiah; and zech. vi. uses messianic language of joshua the high priest). we should have expected that the figure of the messiah, as conceived by the prophets, would partake largely of the prophetic office idealised and accepted by an obedient people. this however is not the case. there is a promise of a prophet made through moses, which in the new testament has been interpreted as a messianic prophecy (deut. xviii. ; acts iii. , vii. ), but an examination of the passage, which follows a denunciation of the practices of divination, necromancy, and sorcery, out of which primitive prophetism arose, shows that it is a promise of the establishment of the prophetic office rather than of any one person. elsewhere moses is made to exclaim: "would that all the lord's people were prophets" (num. xi. ). both these passages are due to prophetic teaching, and this is the prophets' conception of their office: they do not rejoice in their splendid isolation and their unique relation to god; they are grieved that the people do not share their possession of the spirit of god and their hearing of his word, for to them these things are the essence of all true religion. so they look forward to a time when their office will no longer be necessary (jer. xxxi. ), and when the spirit of the lord shall be poured out on all flesh (joel ii. f). it is not in any contradiction to this that the picture of the servant of the lord, delineated by the second isaiah, is largely drawn from the prophetic office (isa. xlii. - , xlix. - , l. ); for the servant is the nation of israel fulfilling her prophetic role among the nations of mankind. in the late prophecy of malachi the figure of elijah the prophet is seen in the future, but only as the herald of the coming of the messianic era (mal. iv. ). the priest contributes little more than the prophet to the picture (zech. iii.; vi. ; psa. cx.); for to the prophetic conception of things the priesthood is hardly a necessary office in a true religion. it is from the office of the king that the messiah is largely drawn. this conception could only have arisen after the founding of the monarchy and only when the real david had faded far enough into the past to be idealised. it was in their experience of the imperfection of the kings of israel and judah that the prophets saw the need for a true kingly head; and in the oppression of military kingdoms, the need for a mighty warrior. and yet it is not a king who fills the picture of the future, so much as a kingdom. outside the prophets and the psalms we find little expectation of a personal messiah, but we find almost everywhere the conception of an ideal or messianic age. what has been called the protevangelium, the promise to the woman that her seed should bruise the serpent's head (gen. iii. ), does not point explicitly to any one person, but simply promises that in man's eternal warfare with temptation he shall at length gain the victory. the prophecy of balaam (num. xxiv. - ) involves nothing more than the future supremacy of israel. jacob's blessing on judah (gen. xlix. ) promises a stable dynasty to that tribe, and the reference to shiloh is so obscure that nothing can be built upon it (_shiloh_ may mean peace, but in the septuagint the phrase is translated: "until that which is his shall come." another ancient reading is: "till he come whose it is." shiloh might refer to the town of that name, but this would give no help to the interpretation. the text must be corrupt). it will be necessary for us to examine the circle of ideas which form the background of the messianic hope and from which the idea of the messiah emerges. when the prophets speak of the future they often use a strange phrase: "the day of the lord." this is found first in amos (v. ), but its occurrence there shows that it was already a term in use among the people, for amos had to dissent from the popular idea of its character. the term comes from the hebrew idiom of the "day" of battle, and it comes to be used of the great conflict in which jehovah will entirely overthrow the enemies of israel; it is therefore looked for with expectant hope. amos points out that the manifestation of jehovah will be fatal to sin, whether in israel or in other nations: _dies iræ, dies illa_. thus modified by amos this is the conception which, with varying details, becomes the prophetic idea of the day of the lord. it may therefore come in some threatened invasion; later, it is conceived as a gathering of all the nations against jerusalem, from which we get the picture of armageddon, the last great war before the establishment of peace; and finally it becomes the world assize, and so the "day" of judgment of the new testament. this "day" is to separate the history of god's dealings with men into two distinct periods, and will be the dividing line between the perfect and the imperfect; so that all the bright visions of the future are to be "after those days." the prophets believe that reconstruction can only come after destruction, that history will reach its ideal over a precipice; they believe in a reform by cataclysm rather than by evolution. every threatening of political change or national disaster may herald the coming of that day; it is always at hand; to their vision, they are living near the finality of things. there is a great deal in this imagery that fails to appeal to modern ideas of history and progress. it was part of the prophetic scheme and as such was a limitation of perfect vision; but shorn of its mere form it remains a witness to their consciousness of the activity of god in human history and of his judgment in the crises of the world. the form was a limitation essential to their stage of mental evolution and to its intelligibility to their age; its spirit is an eternal message to mankind. immediately after the day of the lord, the messianic age is ushered in, and in depicting the conditions of that time the lyrical genius of the prophets reaches its supreme expression, and these passages still inspire the reformer and move men with their ideals of peace. the picture of that age is composed by projecting into the future their own institutions and especially their religious conceptions. they picture a condition of human society which is best described in the phrase, "the kingdom of god"; for although such an expression never breaks forth from their lips, its contents are obviously in their minds. it is to be a community in which the will of god is perfectly realised, when religion shall no longer consist in statutes and commands, but in the recognition of an inner law. absolute righteousness, individual and civil, will prevail, and the nations shall learn war no more. the animal and natural creation will share in this beneficent order: the lion shall lie down with the lamb, and the wilderness shall blossom like the rose; the veil shall be torn from men's vision, all tears shall be wiped away, and death shall be swallowed up in victory. when they come to depict the subjects of this kingdom they fail to attain to the inner and ethical requirements enunciated by jesus, for national hopes and ambitions still cloud their outlook. there are two streams of thought--one frankly particularistic, where the future of the heathen is ignored, or where they are simply to be exterminated; and the other universalistic, where the conversion of the whole world is expected (isa. xlv. ; jer. xii. ff, xvi. ; cp. isa. xi. - with xix. - ). it is somewhat surprising, in view of the subsequent development of these ideas under christian thought, that the sphere of this tremendous change is conceived to be this present earth; and even when the necessity of a new earth and a new heaven is considered, it is still earth that is to be the chief theatre of events. heaven is conceived of as the dwelling place of jehovah, but there is no idea that this great change is to be postponed or relegated to some heavenly condition; heaven is to come down to earth and jehovah is to dwell among his people and be their god. it is from the ground of these ideas that there arises the conception of the person known as the messiah, who shall be the divine instrument in bringing about this blessed condition. messiah is from the hebrew, _mashiah_, and means "anointed one." the actual phrase, _the_ messiah, without further qualification, is not found in the old testament (dan. ix. , a.v. "the messiah" is incorrect; it should read: "an anointed one, a prince," as r.v. mar.); but after the closing of the canon the phrase was constantly used to denote the jewish hope of the appearance of a singular person, of davidic descent, who should be superhumanly endowed, and who should overturn the enemies of the jews and place their nation at the head of the world. the title recalls the mode of consecration used for priests and kings by anointing them with oil (lev. iv. , , ; vi. ; sam. ii. ; xii. ), and "the anointed of jehovah" is the common title for the kings of israel. the origin of this idea of the messianic king may certainly be traced to nathan's promise to david of a perpetual seed which should occupy his throne and be the special delight and care of jehovah ( sam. vii. - ). in the presence of a weak or unworthy occupant of the throne this promise would come to mind, and would gather new meaning as the prophets saw in the troubles of their times the imminence of the day of the lord. it is to the prophet isaiah that we owe a striking conception of a monarch who not only fulfils his promise but transcends it in a way that is hardly conceivable in a merely human king. the first emergence of this hope in the mind of the prophet occurs when he attempts to restrain ahaz from joining the fatal confederacy of syria and ephraim against assyria. when ahaz demands some confirmation, the prophet promises the sign of a young woman who shall bear a child named immanuel (isa. vii. - ). following matthew, christian expositors have taken this to be a prophecy of the virgin birth of jesus; although it is difficult to see how this could be a sign to ahaz. the subject is obscure to the last degree. the hebrew word rendered "a virgin," although capable of such a special application, means simply a young woman. the translation "virgin" was first made by the septuagint, and this may point to the fact that at the time this version was made the messiah was expected to be born of a virgin. the prophecy seems to have arisen from the conviction that the assyrian invasion would bring into existence some person who should represent the active presence of god with his people; and beyond this explanation there is nothing but mere speculation. but in a later oracle of isaiah's (ix. f), the conception has grown in definiteness, and this expected person is crowned with such honorific titles as "wonder of a counsellor, hero-god, father of eternity, prince of peace." to our ears these titles convey the sense of absolute divinity, but it is questionable whether they meant that to isaiah. eastern monarchs have always been addressed with high-sounding titles, and isaiah's language may have been coloured by foreign court customs; but still it would remain that the titles lead us to expect an unexampled figure who possesses attributes that mark him out as specially equipped by god. once more isaiah returns to this figure (xi. - ), and now definitely asserts that he shall spring from david's line; only now the majesty of his person is conceived as due to his seven-fold possession of the spirit of jehovah, and his character fits him rather for administrative and prophetic work. micah, a contemporary of isaiah, has much the same figure (v. - ) of a mighty prince of davidic lineage and of mysterious birth (bethlehem simply stands here for david's line, and "whose outgoings have been from eternity" probably means nothing more than that his descent shall spring from this ancient ancestor). there is an inexplicable element in these predictions, but they have been found elsewhere, outside israel, in times of great national danger or expectation. in israel, the idealisation of david, the personal element in her history, and the increased possibilities discovered in human personality when under the complete dominion of the spirit of jehovah, have contributed to the creation of this figure. it cannot be said that it was a mental vision of the person of jesus that shaped the prophecy, for it must not be forgotten that it was an immediate fulfilment that they expected; and indeed their picture so utterly misled the jews, that, when christ claimed to be the messiah, they treated his claim as blasphemous. while we can see that christ was indeed a king, it is only by a spiritual conception of kingship, and only after the verdict of history has crowned him as a true ruler of men; not by any actual resemblance to the external magnificence of the messianic king. when the messianic call came to jesus he found in these passages a difficulty, for they outlined a programme he could only reject; but it was other and indirect allusions of the old testament, some of which had never been considered as messianic, that jesus took for his pattern. this meant a reading of prophecy very different from that of the jews of his time, and it is surely here that the views we have found ourselves forced to accept in regard to old testament prophecy can claim the support of jesus himself. it is important to grasp this point: the argument from predictions definitely fulfilled in jesus has failed to convince the jews, who ought to understand their own scriptures best, and we must recognise that it is only a spiritual interpretation of prophecy and a valuation of jesus which owes nothing to flesh and blood that can see in him one of whom all the prophets bore witness. it is to these other conceptions, to which the spiritual intuition of jesus led him in his search for support for his messianic ideals, that we must now turn. the first of these in importance is undoubtedly "the servant of the lord." we saw when examining this idea that it was an ideal of a nation rather than of an individual, and yet it was upon this that jesus fixed, and it was this idea that seemed to mould his whole conception of his mission. according to luke, the first discourse of jesus took place in the synagogue at nazareth, where he set forth his programme and policy, and stated them to be identical with those the prophet had outlined for the nation centuries before (luke iv. - ; isa. lxi. , ); and the evangelist matthew sees in the methods of jesus a fulfilment of the prophecy of the servant (matt. xii. - ; isa. xlii. - ). it was probably as jesus saw the clouds gather about his life and disaster began to threaten that he was led to study the career of that servant and see that it involved suffering, being despised and rejected of men; and so he came to find the key to the mystery of his cross in that classic of the vicarious life, the fifty-third chapter of isaiah. jesus was probably the first to interpret that passage in a messianic sense. his reason for adopting the title of "the son of man" is exceedingly difficult to trace; it may be said that no completely satisfactory explanation of the origin or meaning of the term has yet been discovered, and in the present state of research on the subject it would be folly to commit ourselves to any of the theories that have been propounded. we can only keep in mind the various facts, which the use of this title in the gospels presents to us. it is clear that jesus did not intend the title to be a declaration to the world that he had accepted the messianic call; for all along it was his deliberate purpose to conceal his messiahship, and for reasons that are obvious, when we consider the difference between his conception of messianic function and that of the jews of his day. again, although there is a slight difference between daniel, where we only hear of "one like unto a son of man," and jesus who calls himself "_the_ son of man," yet when challenged by the high-priest jesus certainly quotes from daniel (dan. vii. ; mark xiv. ). now in daniel it is not a person who is figured by this title, so much as a humane kingdom which is to replace the kingdoms that were more like beasts in their character. it is only in the book of enoch that the son of man is definitely identified with the messiah. did jesus ever read that book, or were its ideas at all commonly known? if so we should have to concede that the son of man meant the messiah, both to jesus and to the people, and yet this is an apparent contradiction of his general motive in keeping the messiahship secret. perhaps, and the suggestion is made with the knowledge that in the present state of the problem it can be nothing more than a suggestion, there is a line that has not been exhausted, and along which help may yet be found. it starts from the fact that jesus seems to have adopted the _character_ of the servant of the lord under the _name_ of the son of man; and we have seen that both these are ideals of a community or a nation rather than of a person. again, that somehow the title "the son of man" had messianic significance, and in the mind of jesus was connected with the figure in daniel, is seen from his confession before caiaphas. the contradiction between these facts and the purpose of concealing his messiahship can perhaps be solved by noticing that jesus never explicitly identifies himself with the son of man; and if all the passages where this title is found in the synoptics are examined, they seem to separate themselves into three distinct groups: ( ) where the reference might be not only to jesus himself but to man fulfilling his ideal; ( ) where the reference is to the suffering which the son of man must undergo; ( ) and most important, this term is always used when jesus speaks of that mysterious return on the clouds which is known as the second advent. the conclusion to which it is suggested all these facts point is that although jesus believed himself to be the personal centre on which the messianic hope converged, it was not to himself personally, but to the new humanity which his spirit should beget, that he looked for the complete fulfilment of the messianic hope. thus at least are linked together the fact that the prophets are occupied rather with the messianic community than with the messiah, and the fact that jesus made the centre and aim of his teaching the kingdom rather than its personal embodiment in himself. jesus certainly read these prophets more according to their real inwardness than any of his contemporaries or than many generations of christian scholars; and there is no better preparation for the serious study of the gospels than a careful examination of the growing revelation of the old testament religion, and the inner meaning of the messianic hope. of this wonderful growth and moving revelation, it can be said, in a way deeper than the old typological and prophetic methods of study could understand, that christ is the aim and the goal; not only jesus of nazareth with his unique personality, but that still more transcendent mystery, the christ within the heart, christ the head of every man. if we have learned nothing else, surely we have learned this: that behind the hopes of mankind, behind their misty dreams, their gropings after truth, their struggles for righteousness, are the eternal thoughts of god; and although these may transcend their poor reflection in the mind of man, as the heavens the earth, yet this remains: that for every hope implanted, there is an answer beyond our expectation; for every desire godward, the revelation of the father-friend; for every ideal of the human heart, the christ; and for every effort after human progress, the ever nearer coming of the kingdom of god. index abraham, emigration of, ; historicity of, ; religion of, , _adonai_, ahijah, altars, erected anywhere, ; construction of, amaziah, amos, , , , , , , animals, as tribal names, ; clean and unclean, ; worship of, , , , animism, , apostasy, , arabia, home of semites, , ark, , , , armageddon, aryan conception of god, asaph, , asherah, ashtoreth, or _ashtart_, assembly of the saints, assyria, , , atonement, , ; of christ, , ; day of, , azazel, , , baal, , , , baal of tyre, , , . see also under melkart babylon, fall of, ; jews in, - , , , babylonian epic of creation, ; influence of, - babylonian religion, balaam, prophecy of, ban, the, blood, significance of, , ; food of deity, book of the covenant, _bosheth_, , bull-worship, , , calf-worship. see under bull canaan, influence of, , - , ; conquest of, , , ; jewish love for, ; limitations of, canaanites, customs of, borrowed, , ; origin of, , ; religion of, , - ; sanctuaries of, , , ; why not exterminated, ; and hebrews, centralization of worship, , , chemosh, choice of israel, jehovah's, ; prophetic conception of, , christ the goal of old testament, . and see under jesus christianity, , chronicler, the, circumcision, , comparative religion, conditions of life among semites, ; in time of judges, ; after exile, , ; in time of psalms, , , ; reflected in wisdom lit., ; in ecclesiastes, ; in messianic age, covenant at sinai, , ; prophetic conception of, , , covenant-sacrifice, , creation, , ; babylonian legend of, customs retained with new significance, , , customs, mourning, cyrus, , , daniel, book of, david, character of, , , ; influence of, ; his kingdom, , ; a poet, ; his religious ideas, ; his work, ; and the messiah, , day of atonement, ; of the lord, ; of judgment, deborah, song of, decalogue, the, deluge, the, deuteronomy, book of, , , , development of religion, xiv, , , , , , , , , , , director's psalm book, documents, various, how detected, , , "e," , , ecclesiastes, name, ; book of, ; ascribed to solomon, ; significance of, el, , elijah, , , , , , , , elisha, , , , _elohim_, , , ephod, , ethical conceptions, , , , , , ethnology of old testament, exile, date of, , ; cause of, , ; critical view of, , ; lessons from, ; religion after, exilic stamp on literature, exodus, the, ; date of, , ezekiel, , , , , ; book of, , ; his school, ; and leviticus, , ezra, ; introduces the law, , ; what did it include? , feast of tabernacles, , forgiveness, , funeral feasts, gad, god, name of. see under _elohim_, el and jehovah god, conception of, semitic, , ; aryan, ; anthropomorphic, , , ; ethical, , , ; local, , , , , ; spiritual, ; tribal, , , ; materialistic, , ; as the storm god, ; as the creator, god, conception of, by david, ; by prophets, , , , ; by psalmists, ; in job, ; in ecclesiastes, god, holiness of, , ; jealousy of, ; righteousness of, , , _habiri_, , hallel psalms, hammurabi, code of, , , heathen deities, , , , hebrew, meaning of name, hebrew bible, divisions of, hebrews, relation to other nations, , , , , , heroes of israel, hexateuch, high places, worship at, condemned, . see also canaanitish sanctuaries higher criticism, xi, xii historical value of hebrew tradition, , , , , , historical books, prophets' influence on, , , history, ancient conception of, xiii, , , , ; how compiled, , , ; religious interpretation of, , , , , , , . see also under redaction hittites, holiness, , , ; code of, horeb, theophany at, , hosea, human sacrifice, , , ideal israel, idolatry and images, , , , , , , , , , immortality in psalms, , ; in job, ; in ecclesiastes, , inspiration, xiii, , , ; how related to infallibility, xiii, xiv interpolations, isaiah, , ; book of, , ; authorship of, , - israel. see under hebrews "j," , , jehovah, name, ; pronunciation, , ; explanation of, jehovah and other nations, ; and baal, , ; and israel, jehovah, religion of, date, , , ; weakness of, , , ; prophetic conception of, , ; a religion of choice, , jehovah. see also under god jeremiah, , , jeroboam, jerusalem, connection with david, ; idea of inviolability, , , ; besieged by sennacherib, ; deliverance of, ; besieged by nebuchadrezzar, ; destruction of, , jesus and messiahship, , , , , ; and new covenant, ; and levitical system, ; and revelation, xv, ; and prophets, , ; and psalms, , , ; and proverbs, ; and isa. liii., ; and book of daniel, , ; and book of enoch, ; and old testament, x jethro, jews. see under hebrews job, ; book of, ; date of, , ; author, , , ; divisions of, jonah, book of, , joshua, book of, , , josiah, reform of, , , judah, tribe of, judaism, judges, functions of, ; book of, , , , , kenites, king. see under monarchy and messiah kingdom of god, , , , , , korah, sons of, law, origin of, ; of moses, - ; later than prophets, , ; no observance of, until after exile, , , . see also under pentateuch and moses levi, tribe of, levite choirs, levites, ; distinguished from priests, levitical system, ; intention of, leviticus, book of, , , literary ideals, , , , localization of god, , , local sanctuaries, , lower criticism, xi maccabees, the, , ; times of, ; psalms of, , manasseh, _mazzebah_, the, melkart, , , . see also baal of tyre memorial stones, , messiah, name, ; title, ; davidic descent of, , messiah in the prophets, , ; in apocrypha, messiah as prophet, ; priest, ; king, , messianic age, , , messianic king, messianic prophecy, , , - , - ; includes more than a person, , , micah, , micaiah, midian, molech, , monarchy, origin of, , , ; in psalms, ; in proverbs, , monotheism among semites, ; hebrews, , ; not taught by moses, ; in the prophets, , , moses, name, ; historical reality, , ; his call, , ; mention before exile, ; not author of pentateuch, , . see also under law, and pentateuch music and prophecy, musical directions in psalter, - musical services, nathan, , , nature in psalter, nazarites, nebuchadrezzar, necromancy, nehustan, new covenant, the, new testament, psalms quoted in, new testament and old testament, . see also under christianity, and jesus old testament, attitude of jesus to, x; jewish reverence for, x. see also under hebrew bible oracles, , , , , , origin of religion, , "p," . see under priestly code palestine. see under canaan particularism, , , , passover, the, patriarchs, historicity of, pentateuch, strata of, , , , ; how discovered, , , ; not by moses, , ; samaritan, . see also under law, and moses personal conception of religion, , , , , , personalities, influence of, on history, personification, , , , , , pharaoh of the exodus, philistines, , philo, , philosophy, , , phoenicians, , poetry, sign of early date, , , ; of david, , ; in prophets, ; in psalms, ; in proverbs, polytheism among semites, ; among hebrews, ; the religion of savages, ; in original documents, ; evidence of, prayer, , prediction, , , , , , priesthood, ; in time of moses, , , ; in time of judges, , , ; in ezekiel, ; after exile, ; of messiah, . see also under levites priestly code, the, - ; ideals of, , . see also under levitical system priestly school, the, , problem of providence, , , , , , problem of suffering, , , , , , , progress, causes of, , , . see under development prophesying, prophet, name of, , prophetic bands, , , prophetic consciousness, , prophetic literature, how compiled, , , prophetic style, , , , , prophets, origin of, ; two classes, , , , ; conflict between, , ; their call, ; their relation to state, , , ; and national religion, , ; and the covenant, , ; chronology of, ; their place in history, ; importance of, for criticism, xii, , ; their picture of their age, , ; they are creative, ; their relation to the law, , , , , , ; and the gospel, , , ; their scheme of the future, , protestantism, protevangelium, the, proverb, the, proverbs, book of, ; its relation to job, , ; divisions of, ; date of, psalms, titles of, , , , , , ; ascription to david, , , , , - ; authorship of, , ; some are prayers, ; use in synagogue, ; in the temple, , ; hallels, ; maccabæan, , ; tone of, ; imprecations in, , , ; and the gospel, ; and christianity, ; their conception of god, , psalter, the, criticism of, , ; date of, , - , , ; books of, ; a gradual compilation, , queen of heaven, rahab, rechabites, redaction, , , , , reform, ; of elijah, ; of prophets, ; under josiah, , , ; after exile, , ; under ezra, , religion, origin of, , ; primitive, , , , , ; semitic, ; of patriarchs, , , , , , ; in time of moses, ; in time of judges, , ; of canaanites, - ; under monarchy, , , ; after exile, , ; levitical conception of, , ; of psalmists, , - ; in wisdom lit., , ; in proverbs, ; in job, ; in ecclesiastes, ; of the future, , , repentance, , restoration, the, , retribution, , . and see under problem of providence revelation, xiii, , , , , , ritual, , , sabbath, , sacred springs, sacred stones, sacred trees, sacrifice, primitive, , ; adopted by moses, ; covenant, , ; human, , ; prophetic estimate of, , ; in "p," , ; meaning of, , ; of christ, , . see also under atonement samaria, fall of, , samson, samuel, , , , , satan, , saul, , , scepticism, , , science, , , second isaiah, , . see also under isaiah seer, selah, , semites, home of, ; desert life, ; western antipathy to, ; their contribution to thought, ; to science, ; to religion, ; groups of, ; migrations of, semitic character of our bible, semitic language, semitic religion, , ; tribal, ; value of, ; does not account for hebrew religion, , sennacherib, servant of the lord, , , , , ; the suffering, , shekel, temple, , shewbread, shiloh, simeon, tribe of, simon maccabæus, sin, , , , , sin-offering, the, sinai, , , , social conceptions, , , solomon, , , , ; proverbs ascribed to, , , ; and ecclesiastes, son of man, the, title of, - sons of the prophets, , - . see also under prophetic bands substitution, , supernatural, the, symbolism, , synagogue, the, , , syncretism, , , , , , tabernacle, the, , , tabernacles, feast of, , _tehom_, _tiamat_, tel-el-amarna, tablets, , temple, the, - , , , , ; worship of, , ; mentioned in psalms, , _torah_, totemism, tradition, jewish, tribes, names of, ; unity of, , universalism, , , , , , , virgin birth, the, wisdom, , , , wisdom literature, ; compared with rest of bible, - ; date of, wise men, the, , worship, prophetic conception of, ; of synagogue, ; of temple, , . and see under altars, religion, god, and sacrifice zechariah, book of, , bradbury, agnew, & co. ld., printers, london and tonbridge. transcribers' notes: cover created by transcriber and placed in the public domain. punctuation, hyphenation, and spelling were made consistent when a predominant preference was found in this book; otherwise they were not changed. simple typographical errors were corrected; occasional unbalanced quotation marks retained. ambiguous hyphens at the ends of lines were retained. missing periods at the ends of the roman numbers of biblical citations have been added. index not checked for proper alphabetization or correct page references, but on page , reference to page under "isaiah" should be to page . page : "how this is affected" perhaps should be "effected". page : "bradbury, agnew, & co. ld." was printed that way, as "ld." none arguments of celsus, porphyry, and the emperor julian, against the christians; also extracts from diodorus siculus, josephus, and tacitus, relating to the jews, together with an appendix; containing: the oration of libanius in defence of the temples of the heathens, translated by dr. lardner; and extracts from bingham's antiquities of the christian church. by [thomas taylor] mdcccxxx. "for if indeed julian had caused all those that were under his dominion to be richer than midas, and each of the cities greater than babylon once was, and had also surrounded each of them with a golden wall, but had corrected none of the existing errors respecting divinity, he would have acted in a manner similar to a physician, who receiving a body full of evils in each of its parts, should cure all of them except the eyes."--liban. parental, in julian, p. . introduction. "i have often wished," says warburton in a letter to dr. forster, october , , "for a hand capable of collecting all the fragments remaining of porphyry, celsus, hierocles, and julian, and giving them to us with a just, critical and theological comment, as a defy to infidelity. it is certain we want something more than what their ancient answerers have given us. this would be a very noble work*." the author of the following collectanea has partially effected what dr. warburton wished * see barker's parriana, vol. ii. p. . {iv} to see accomplished; for as he is not a _divine_, he has not attempted in his notes to confute celsus, but has confined himself solely to an illustration of his meaning, by a citation of parallel passages in other ancient authors. as the answer, however, of origen to the arguments of celsus is very futile and inefficient, it would be admirable to see some one of the learned divines with which the church at present abounds, leap into the arena, and by vanquishing celsus, prove that the christian religion is peculiarly adapted to the present times, and to the interest of the priests by whom it is professed and disseminated. the marquis d'argens published a translation in french, accompanied by the greek text, of the arguments of the emperor julian against the christians; and as an apology for the present work, i subjoin the following translation of a part of his preliminary discourse, in which he defends that publication. "it may be that certain half-witted gentleman {v} may reproach me for having brought forward a work composed in former times against the christians, in the vulgar tongue. to such i might at once simply reply, that the work was preserved by a father of the church; but i will go further, and tell them with father petau, who gave a greek edition of the works of julian, that if those who condemn the authors that have published these works, will temper the ardour of their zeal with reason and judgement, they will think differently, and will distinguish between the good use that may be made of the book, and the bad intentions of the writer. "father petau also judiciously remarks, that if the times were not gone by when dæmons took the advantage of idolatry to seduce mankind, it would be prudent not to afford any aid, or give the benefit of any invective against jesus, or the christian religion to the organs of those dæmons; but since by the blessing of god and the help of the cross, which have brought about our salvation, the monstrous dogmas of paganism are buried in oblivion, {vi} we have nothing to fear from that pest; there is no weighty reason for our rising up against the monuments of pagan aberration that now remain, and totally destroying them. on the contrary, the same father petau says, that it is better to treat them as the ancient christians treated the images and temples of the gods. at first, in the provinces in which they were in power, they razed them to the very foundations, that nothing might be visible to posterity that could perpetuate impiety, or the sight of which could recall mankind to an abominable worship. but when the same christians had firmly established their religion, it appeared more rational to them, after destroying the altars and statues of the gods, to preserve the temples, and by purifying them, to make them serviceable for the worship of the true god. the same christians also, not only discontinued to break the statues and images of the gods, but they took the choicest of them, that were the work of the most celebrated artists, and set them up in public places to ornament their cities, as well as to recall to the memory of those who beheld them, how gross {vii} the blindness* of their ancestors had been, and how powerful the grace that had delivered them from it." the marquis d'argens further observes: "it were to be wished, that father petau, having so judiciously considered the works of julian, had formed an equally correct idea of the person of that emperor. i cannot discover through what caprice he takes it amiss, that a certain learned professor** has praised the civil virtues of julian, and condemned the evidently false calumnies that almost all the ecclesiastical authors have lavished upon him; and amongst the rest gregory and cyril, who to the good arguments they have adduced against the false reasoning of julian, have added insults which ought never to have been used by any defender of truth. they have cruelly * the heathens would here reply to father petau. which is the greater blindness of the two,-- ours, in worshipping the images of deiform processions from the ineffable principle of things, and who are eternally united to him; or that of the papists, in worshipping the images of worthless men ** monsieur de la bletric. {viii} calumniated this emperor to favour _their good cause_, and confounded the just, wise, clement, and most courageous prince, with the pagan philosopher and theologian; when they ought simply to have refuted him with argument, in no case with insult, and still less with calumnies so evidently false, that during fourteen centuries, in which they have been so often repeated, they have never been accredited, nor enabled to assume even an air of truth." a wise christian philosopher, la mothe, le vayer, in reflecting on the great virtues with which julian was endowed, on the contempt he manifested for death, on the firmness with which he consoled those who wept around him, and on his last conversation with maximus and priscus on the immortality of the soul, says, "that after such testimonies of a virtue, to which _nothing appears to be wanting but the faith to give its professor a place amongst the blessed_*, we have cause to wonder that * according to this _wise christian philosopher_ therefore, not only all the confessedly wise and virtuous heathens that lived posterior, but those also who lived anterior to the promulgation of the christian religion, will have no place hereafter among the blessed. {ix} cyril should have tried to make us believe, that julian was a mean and cowardly prince*. those who judge of men that lived in former ages by those who have lived in more recent times, may feel little surprise at the proceedings of cyril. it has rarely happened that long animosity and abuse have not been introduced into religious controversies." after what has been above said of julian, i deem it necessary to observe, that father petau is egregiously mistaken in supposing that cyril has preserved the whole of that emperor's arguments against the christians: and the marquis d'argêns is also mistaken when he says, that "the passages of julian's text which are * this is by no means wonderful in cyril, when we consider that he is, with the strongest reason, suspected of being the cause of the murder of hypatia, who was one of the brightest ornaments of the alexandrian school, and who was not only a prodigy of learning, but also a paragon of beauty. {x} abridged or omitted, aire very few." for hieronymus in epist. . _ad magnum oratorem romanum_, testifies that this work consisted of seven books; three of which only cyril attempted to confute, as is evident from his own words, [--greek--] "julian wrote three books against the holy evangelists." but as fabricius observes, (in biblioth. græc. tom. vii. p. .) in the other four books, he appears to have attacked the remaining books of the scriptures, i. e. the books of the old testament. with respect, however, to the three books which cyril has endeavoured to confute, it appears to me, that he has only selected such parts of these books as he thought he could most easily answer. for that he has not given even the substance of these three books, is evident from the words of julian himself, as recorded by cyril. for julian, after certain invectives both against christ and john, says, "these things, therefore, we shall shortly discuss, when we come particularly to consider {xi} the monstrous deeds and fraudulent machinations of the evangelists*." there is no particular discussion however of these in any part of the extracts preserved by cyril. that the work, indeed, of julian against the christians was of considerable extent, is evident from the testimony of his contemporary, libanius; who, in his admirable funeral oration on this most extraordinary man, has the following remarkable passage: "but when the winter had extended the nights, julian, besides many other beautiful works, attacked the books which make a man of palestine to be a god, and the son of god; and in _a long contest_, and with strenuous arguments, evinced that what is said in these writings is ridiculous and nugatory. and in the execution of this work he appears to have excelled in wisdom the tyrian old man.** * [--greek--] ** viz. porphyry, who was of tyre, and who, as is well known, wrote a work against the christians, which was publicly burnt by order of the emperor constantine. {xii} in asserting this however, may the tyrian be propitious to me, and benevolently receive what i have said, he having been vanquished by his son*." with respect to celsus, the author of the following fragments, he lived in the time of the emperor adrian. and was, if origen may be credited, an epicurean philosopher. that he might indeed, at some former period of his life, have been an epicurean maybe admitted; but it would be highly absurd to suppose that he was so when he wrote this invective against the christians; for the arguments which he mostly employs show that he was well skilled m the philosophy of plato: and to suppose, as origen does, that he availed himself of arguments in * [--greek--] [xiii] which he did not believe, and consequently conceived to be erroneous, in order to confute doctrines which he was persuaded are false, would be to make him, instead of a philosopher, a fool. as to origen, though he abandoned philosophy for christianity, he was considered as heterodox by many of the christian sect. hence, with some of the catholics, his future salvation became a matter of doubt*; and this induced the celebrated johannes picus mirandulanus, in the last of his _theological conclusions according to his own opinion_, to say: "rationabilius est credere uriginem esse salvum, quam credere ipsum esse damnatum," _i. e. it is more reasonable to believe that origen is saved, than that he is damned._ i shall conclude this introduction with the following extract. * 'in prato spiritual!, c. , quod citatur, à vil synodo, et à johanne diacono, lib. ii. c. . vitas b. gregorii narratur fevelatio, qua origines viras est in gehenna ignis cum alio et netftorio."*--fobric. bmiotk grate torn. v. p. {xiv} directions of dr. barlow, bishop of lincoln, to a young divine. "it will be of great use for a divine to be acquainted with the arts, knavery, and fraud of the roman inquisitor, in purging, correcting, or rather corrupting authors in all arts and faculties. for this purpose we may consult the _index expurgatorius_. by considering this index, we come to know the best editions of many good books. " st. the best books; that is, those that are condemned. " nd. the best editions; viz. those that are dated before the _index_, and consequently not altered. " rd. the _index_ is a good common place book, to point out who has written well against the church, p. . "ockam is damned in the _index_, and therefore we may be sure he was guilty of telling some great truth, p. .*" * the bishop's rule is as good for one church as for another, and every church has its index. the arguments of celsus against the christians [illustration: celsus] "the christians are accustomed to have private assemblies, which are forbidden by the law. for of assemblies some are public, and these are conformable to the law of the land; but others are secret, and these are such as are hostile to the laws; among which are the love feasts of the christians *. * why the romans punished the christians: "it is commonly regarded as a very curious and remarkable fact, that, although the romans were disposed to tolerate every other religious sect, yet they frequently persecuted the christians with unrelenting cruelty. this exception, so fatal to a peaceable and harmless sect, must have originated in circumstances which materially distin-... { } "men who irrationally assent to anything, resemble those who are delighted with jugglers and enchanters, &c. for as most of these are depraved characters, who deceive the vulgar, and persuade them to assent to whatever they please, this also takes place with the christians. some of these are not willing either to give or receive a reason for what they believe; but are accustomed to say, 'do not investigate, but believe, your faith will save you. ...guished them from the votaries of every other religion. the causes and the pretexts of persecution may have varied at various periods; but there seems to have been one general cause which will readily be apprehended by those who are intimately acquainted with the roman jurisprudence. from the most remote period of their history, the romans had conceived extreme horror against all nocturnal meetings of a secret and mysterious nature. a law prohibiting nightly vigils in a temple has even been ascribed, perhaps with little probability, to the founder of their state. the laws of the twelve tables declared it a capital offence to attend nocturnal assemblies in the city. this, then, being the spirit of the law, it is obvious that the nocturnal meetings of the primitive christians must have rendered them objects of peculiar suspicion, and exposed them to the animadversion of the magistrate. it was during the night that they usually held their most solemn and religious assemblies; for a practice which may be supposed to have arisen from their fears, seems to have been continued from the operation of other causes. misunderstanding the purport of certain passages of scripture, they were... { } 'for the wisdom of the world is bad, but folly is good*,' "the world, according to moses, was created at a certain time, and has from its commencement existed for a period far short of ten thousand years,--the world, however, is without a beginning; in consequence of which there have been from all eternity many conflagrations, and many deluges, among the latter of which the most recent is that of deucalion**. ...led to imagine that the second advent, of which they lived in constant expectation, would take place during the night; and they were accustomed to celebrate nightly vigils at the tombs of the saints and martyrs. in this case, therefore, they incurred no penalties peculiar to the votaries of a new religion, but only such as equally attached to those who, professing the public religion of the state, were yet guilty of this undoubted violation of its laws."--observations on the study of the civil law, by dr. irving, edin. . p. . "it is not true that the primitive christians held their assemblies in the night time to avoid the interruptions of the civil power: but the converse of that proposition is true in the utmost latitude; viz. that they met with molestations from that quarter, because their assemblies were nocturnal."--elements of civil law, by dr. taylor, p. . * see erasmus's praise of folly, towards the end. ** see on this subject the tinusus of plato. { } "goatherds and shepherds among the jews, following moses as their leader, and being allured by rustic deceptions, conceived that there is [only] one god. "these goatherds and shepherds were of opinion that there is one god, whether they delight to call him the most high, or adonai, or celestial, or sabaoth, or to celebrate by any other name the fabricator of this world*; for they knew nothing farther. for it is of no consequence, whether the god who is above all things, is denominated, after the accustomed manner of the greeks, jupiter, or is called by any other name, such as that which is given to him by the indians or egyptians." celsus, assuming the person of a jew, represents him as speaking to jesus, and reprehending him for many things. and in the first place he reproaches him with feigning that he was born of a virgin; and says, that to his disgrace he was born in a judaic village from a poor jewess, who obtained the means * in the original there is nothing more than [--------] i. e. this world; but it is necessary to read, conformably to the above translation, [--------]. for the jews did not celebrate the world, but the maker of the world, by these names. { } of subsistence by manual labour. he adds, that she was abandoned by her husband, who was a carpenter, because she had been found by him to have committed adultery. hence, in consequence of being expelled by her husband, becoming an ignominious vagabond, she was secretly delivered of jesus, who, through poverty being obliged to serve as a hireling in egypt, learnt there certain arts for which the egyptians are famous. afterwards, returning from thence, he thought so highly of himself, on account of the possession of these [magical] arts, as to proclaim himself to be a god. celsus also adds, that the mother of jesus became pregnant with him through a soldier, whose name was panthera*. "was therefore the mother of jesus beautiful, and was god connected with her on account of her beauty, though he is not adapted to be in love with a corruptible body? or is it not absurd to suppose that god would be enamoured of a woman who was neither fortunate nor of royal extraction, nor even scarcely known to her neighbours; and who was also hated and ejected by the carpenter her * the same thing is said of jesus in a work called "the gospel according to the jews, or toldoth jesu." see chap. i. and ii. of that work. { } husband, so as neither to be saved by her own credulity nor by divine power? these things, therefore, do not at all pertain to the kingdom of god." celsus, again personifying a jew, says to christ, "when you were washed by john, you say that the spectre of a bird flew to you from the air. but what witness worthy of belief saw this spectre? or who heard a voice from heaven, adopting you for a son of god, except yourself, and some one of your associates, who was equally a partaker of your wickedness and punishment? "jesus having collected as his associates ten or eleven infamous men, consisting of the most wicked publicans and sailors, fled into different places, obtaining food with difficulty, and in a disgraceful manner." again, in the person of a jew, celsus says to christ, "what occasion was there, while you were yet an infant, that you should be brought to egypt, in order that you might not be slain? for it was not fit that a god should be afraid of death. but an angel came from heaven, ordering you and your associates to fly, lest being taken you should be put to death. for the great god [it seems] could not { } preserve you, his own son, m your own country, but sent two angels on your account." the same jew in celsus also adds, "though we do not believe in the ancient fables, which ascribe a divine origin to perseus, amphion, Æacus, and minos, yet at the same time their deeds are demonstrated to be mighty and admirable, and truly superhuman, in order that what is narrated of their origin may not appear to be improbable." but (speak-ing to jesus) he says, "what beautiful or admirable thing have you said or done, though you was (sp) called upon in the temple to give some manifest sign that you were the son of god?" celsus, pretending not to disbelieve in the miracles ascribed to christ, says to him, "let us grant that these things were performed by you; but they are common with the works of enchanters, who promise to effect more wonderful deeds than these, and also with what those who have been taught by the egyptians to perform in the middle of the forum for a few oboli; such as expelling dæmons from men, dissipating diseases by a puff, evocating the souls of heroes, exhibiting sumptuous suppers, and tables covered with food, which have no reality. these magicians also represent animals as moving, which are not in reality animals, but merely appear { } to the imagination to be such.--is it fit, therefore» that we should believe these men to be the sons of god, because they worked these wonders? or ought we not rather to say, that these are the arts of depraved and unhappy men!" again the jew says, "it is but recently, and as it were yesterday, since we punished christ; and you, who are [in no respect superior to] keepers of oxen, have abandoned the laws of your ancestors and country. why likewise do you begin from our sacred institutions, but afterwards in the progress [of your iniquity] despise them? for you have no other origin of your dogma, than our law. many. other such persons also as jesus was, may be seen by those who wish to be deceived. how too is it probable that we, who have declared to all men that a person would be sent by god as a punisher of the unjust, should treat him ignominiously, if such a person had appeared among us? again: how can we think him to be a god, who, that i may omit other things, performed, as we learn, nothing that was promised? and when, being condemned by us, he was thought worthy of punishment, having concealed himself and fled, was most disgracefully made a prisoner; being betrayed by those whom he called his disciples? if, however, he was a god, it was not proper that he should either fly, or be led { ] away captive. and much less was it fit, that, being considered as a saviour and the son of the greatest god, and; also the messenger of this god, by his familiars and private associates, he should be deserted and betrayed by them. but what _excellent_ general, who was the leader of many myriads of men, was ever betrayed by his soldiers? indeed, this has not happened even to the chief of a band of robbers, though a man depraved, and the captain of men still more depraved than himself, when to his associates he appeared to be useful. but christ, who was betrayed by those of whom he was the leader, though not as a good commander, nor in such a way as robbers would behave to their captain, could not obtain the benevolence of his deluded followers.--many other things also, and such as are true, respecting jesus might be adduced, though they are not committed to writing by his disciples; but these i willingly omit. his disciples also falsely pretended, that he foreknew and foretold every thing that happened to him. "the disciples of jesus, not being able to adduce any thing respecting him that was obviously manifest, falsely assert that he foreknew all things; and have written other things of a similar kind respecting lum. this, however, is just the same as if some one should assert that a certain person is a just { } man, and notwithstanding this should show that he acted unjustly; that he is a pious man, and yet a murderer; and, though immortal, died; at the same time adding to all these assertions, that he had a foreknowledge of all things. "these things jesus said after he had previously declared that he was god, and it was entirely necessary that what he had predicted should take place. he therefore, though a god, induced his disciples and prophets, with whom he ate and drank, to become impious. it was, however, requisite that he should have been beneficial to all men, and particularly to his associates. no one likewise would think of betraying the man, of whose table he had been a partaker. but here the associate of the table of god became treacherous to him; god himself, which is still more absurd, making those who had been hospitably entertained by him to be his impious betrayers." the jew in celsus also says, that "what is asserted by the jewish prophets may be much more probably adapted to ten thousand other persons than to jesus. besides, the prophets say, that he who was to come would be a great and powerful king, and would be the lord of the whole earth, and of all nations and armies: but no one would { } infer from such like symbols and rumours, and from such ignoble arguments, that christ is the son of god. "as the sun, which illuminates all other things, first shows himself [to be the cause of light], thus also it is fit that this should have been done by the son of god*. but the christians argue sophistically, when they say that the son of god is _the word itself_. and the accusation is strengthened by this, that _the word_ which was announced by the christians to be the son of god, was not a pure and holy _word_, but a man who was most disgracefully punished and put to death. "what illustrious deed did jesus accomplish worthy of a god, who beholds from on high with contempt [the trifling pursuits of] men, and derides and considers as sport terrestrial events? "why too did not jesus, if not before, yet now at least, [i. e. when he was brought before pilate,] exhibit some divine indication respecting himself; liberate himself from this ignominy, and punish those * celsus means that christ should have given indubitable evidence, by his sayings, his deeds, and by all that happened to him, that he was the son of god. { } who had insulted both him and his father? what kind of ichör also or blood dropped from his crucified body? was it,.....such as from the blest immortals flows?"* the jew in celsus further adds: "do you reproach us with this, o most faithful men, that we do not conceive christ to be god, and that we do not accord with you in believing that he suffered these things for the benefit of mankind, in order that we also might despise punishment? neither did he persuade any one while he lived, not even his own disciples, that he should be punished, and suffer as he did: nor did he exhibit himself [though a god] as one liberated from all evils. "certainly you christians will not say, that christ, when he found that he could not induce the inhabitants on the surface of the earth to believe in his doctrines, descended to the infernal regions, in order that he might persuade those that dwelt there. but if inventing absurd apologies by which you are ridiculously deceived, what should hinder others also, who have perished miserably, from being ranked among angels of a more divine order?" * see iliad, v, ver. s . { } the jew in celsus further observes, on comparing christ with robbers, "some might in a similar manner unblushingly say of a robber and a homicide, who was punished for his crimes, that he was not a robber but a god; for he predicted to his associates that he should suffer what he did suffer. "the disciples of jesus, living with him, hearing his voice, and embracing his doctrines, when they saw that he was punished and put to death, neither died with nor for him, nor could be persuaded to despise punishment; but denied that they were his disciples. why, therefore, do not you christians [voluntarily] die with your master?" the jew in celsus also says, that "jesus made converts of ten sailors, and most abandoned publicans; but did not even persuade all these to embrace his doctrines. "is it not also absurd in the extreme, that so many should believe in the doctrines of christ now he is dead, though he was not able to persuade any one [genuinely] while he was living? "but the christians will say, we believe jesus to be the son of god, because he cured the lame and the blind, and, as you assert, raised the dead. { } "o light and truth, which clearly proclaims in its own words, as you write, that other men, and these depraved and enchanters, will come among you, possessing similar miraculous powers! christ also feigns that a certain being, whom he denominates satan, will be the source of these nefarious characters: so that christ himself does not deny that these arts possess nothing divine, and acknowledges that they are the works of depraved men. at the same time likewise, being compelled by truth, he discloses both the arts of others and his own. is it not, therefore, a miserable thing, to consider, from the performance of the same deeds, this man to be a god, but others to be nothing more than enchanters? for why, employing his testimony, should we rather think those other workers of miracles to be more depraved than himself? indeed christ confesses that these arts are not indications of a divine nature, but of certain impostors, and perfectly wicked characters." after this, the jew in celsus says to his fellow-citizens who believed in jesus, as follows: "let us grant you that jesus predicted his resurrection: but how many others have employed such-like prodigies, in order by a fabulous narration to effect what they wished; persuading stupid auditors to believe in these miracles? zamolxis among the { } scythians, who was a slave of pythagoras, used this artifice; pythagoras also himself, in italy; and in egypt, rhampsinitus. for it is related of the latter that he played at dice with ceres in hades, and that he brought back with him as a gift from her a golden towel. similar artifices were likewise employed by orpheus among the odryssians; by protesilaus among the thessalians; and by hercules and theseus in tænarus. this, however, is to be considered,--whether any one who in reality died, ever rose again in the same body: unless you think that the narrations of others are fables,but that your catastrophe of the drama will be found to be either elegant or probable, respecting what was said by him who expired on the cross, and the earthquake, and the darkness, which then according to you ensued. to which may be added, that he who when living could not help himself, arose, as you say, after he was dead, and exhibited the marks of his punishment, and his hands which had been perforated on the cross. but who was it that saw this? a furious woman, as you acknowledge, or some other of the same magical sect; or one who was under the delusion of dreams, and who voluntarily subjected himself to fallacious phantasms,--a thing which happens to myriads of the human race. or, which is more probable, those who pretended to see this were such as wished to astonish others by { } this prodigy, and, through a false narration of this kind, to give assistance to the frauds of other impostors. "is it to be believed that christ, when he was alive, openly announced to all men what he was; but when it became requisite that he should procure a strong belief of his resurrection from the dead, he should only show himself secretly to one woman and to his associates? "if also christ wished to be concealed, why was a voice heard from heaven, proclaiming him to be the son of god? or, if he did not wish to be concealed, why did he suffer punishment, and why did, he [ignominiously] die?" the jew in celsus likewise adds, "these things therefore we have adduced to you from your own writings, than which we have employed no other testimony, for you yourselves are by them confuted. besides, what god that ever appeared to men, did not procure belief that he was a god, particularly when he appeared to those who expected his advent? or why was he not acknowledged by those, by whom he had been for a long time expected? we certainly hope for a resurrection in the body, and that we shall have eternal life. we { } also believe that the paradigm and primary leader of this, will be he who is to be sent to us; and who will show that it is not impossible for god to raise _any one_ with his body that he pleases." after this, celsus in his own person says, "the christians and jews most stupidly contend with each other, and this controversy of theirs about christ differs in nothing from the proverb about the contention for the shadow of an ass*. there is also nothing venerable in the investigation of the jews and christians with each other; both of them believing that there was a certain prophecy from a divine spirit, that a saviour of the human race would appear on the earth, but disagreeing in their opinion whether he who was predicted had appeared or not. "the jews originating from the egyptians deserted egypt through sedition, at the same time despising the religion of the egyptians. hence the * this proverb is mentioned by apuleius at the end of the ninth book of his metamorphosis. there is also another greek proverb mentioned by menander, plato, and many others, [--------], concerning the shadow of an ass, which is said of those who are anxious to know things futile, frivolous, and entirely useless. these two proverbs apuleius has merged into one. { } same thing happened to the christians afterwards, who abandoned the religion of the jews, as to the jews who revolted from the egyptians; for the cause to both of their innovation was a seditious opposition to the common* and established rites of their country. "the christians at first, when they were few, had but one opinion; but when they became scattered through their multitude, they were again and again divided into sects, and each sect wished to have an establishment of its own. for this was what they desired to effect from the beginning. "but after they were widely dispersed one sect opposed the other, nor did any thing remain common to them except the name of christians; and even this they were at the same time ashamed to leave as a common appellation: but as to other things, they were the ordinances of men of a different persuasion. "what however is still more wonderful is this, that their doctrine may be [easily] confuted, as consisting of no hypothesis worthy of belief. but their * in the original [--------], but it is necessary to read, conformably to the above translation, [--------] { } dissension among themselves, the advantage they derive from it, and their dread of those who are not of their belief, give stability to their faith. "the christians ridicule the egyptians, though they indicated many and by no means contemptible things through enigmas, when they taught that honours should be paid to _eternal_ ideas, and not, as it appears to the vulgar, to diurnal animals*." celsus adds, that "the christians stupidly introduce nothing more venerable than the goats and dogs of the egyptians in their narrations respecting jesus. "what is said by a few who are considered as christians, concerning the doctrine of jesus and the precepts of christianity, is not designed for the wiser, but for the more unlearned and ignorant part of mankind. for the following are their precepts: 'let no one who is erudite accede to us, no one who is wise, no one who is prudent (for these things are thought by us to be evil); but let any one who is unlearned, who is stupid, who is an infant in understanding boldly come to us.' for the christians openly acknowledge that such as these are worthy * see on this subject the treatise of plutarch respecting isis and osiris. { } to be noticed by their god; manifesting by this, that they alone wish and are able to persuade the ignoble, the insensate, slaves, stupid women, and little children and fools. "we may see in the forum infamous characters and jugglers* collected together, who dare not show their tricks to intelligent men; but when they perceive a lad, and a crowd of slaves and stupid men, they endeavour to ingratiate themselves with such characters as these. "we also may see in their own houses, wool-weavers, shoemakers, fullers, and the most illiterate and rustic men, who dare not say any thing in the presence of more elderly and wiser fathers of families; but when they meet with children apart from their parents, and certain stupid women with them, then they discuss something of a wonderful nature; such as that it is not proper to pay attention to parents and preceptors, but that they should be persuaded by them. for, say they, your parents and preceptors are delirious and stupid, and neither know what is truly good, nor are able to effect it, being prepossessed with trifles of an unusual nature. they * celsus, as we are informed by origen, compares the christians with men of this description. { } add, that they alone know how it is proper to live, and that if children are persuaded by them, they will be blessed, and also the family to which they belong. at the same time likewise that they say this, if they see any one of the wiser teachers of erudition approaching, or the father of the child to whom they are speaking, such of them as are more cautious defer their discussion to another time; but those that are more audacious, urge the children to shake off the reins of parental authority, whispering to them, that when their fathers and preceptors are present, they neither wish nor are able to unfold to children what is good, as they are deterred by the folly and rusticity of these men, who are entirely corrupted, are excessively depraved, and would punish them [their true admonishers]. they further add, that if they wish to be instructed by them, it is requisite that they should leave their parents and preceptors, and go with women and little children, who are their playfellows, to the conclave of women, or to the shoemaker's or fuller's shop, that they may obtain perfection [by embracing their doctrines]. "that i do not however accuse the christians more bitterly than truth compels, may be conjectured from hence, that the criers who call men to other mysteries proclaim as follows: 'let him approach, { } whose hands are pure, and whose words are wise.' and again, others proclaim: 'let him approach, who is pure from all wickedness, whose soul is not conscious of any evil, and who leads a just and upright life.' and these things are proclaimed by those who promise a purification from error. let us now hear who those are that are called to the christian mysteries. '_whoever is a sinner, whoever is unwise, whoever is a fool, and whoever, in short, is miserable, him the kingdom of god will receive_.' do you not therefore call a sinner, an unjust man, a thief, a housebreaker, a wizard, one who is sacrilegious, and a robber of sepulchres? what other persons would the crier nominate, who should call robbers together? "god, according to the christians, descended to men; and, as consequent to this, it was fancied that he had left his own proper abode. "god, however, being unknown among men [as the christians say], and in consequence of this appearing to be in a condition inferior to that of a divine being, was not willing to be known, and therefore made trial of those who believed and of those who did not believe in him; just as men who have become recently rich, call on god as a witness of their abundant and entirely mortal ambition. { } "the christians have asserted nothing paradoxical or new concerning a deluge or a conflagration, but have perverted the doctrine of the greeks and barbarians, that in long periods of time, and recursions and concursions of the stars, conflagrations and deluges take place; and also that after the last deluge, which was that of deucalion, the period required, conformably to the mutation of wholes, a conflagration*. this the christians, however, have perverted by representing god as descending with fire as a spy. "again, we will repeat and confirm by many arguments, an assertion which has nothing in it novel, but was formerly universally acknowledged. god is good, is beautiful and blessed, and his very nature consists in that which is most beautiful and the best. if therefore he descended to men, his nature must necessarily be changed. but the change must be from good to evil, and from the beautiful to the base, from felicity to infelicity, and from that which is most excellent to that which is most worthless. who, however, would choose to be thus changed? besides, to be changed and transformed pertains to that which is naturally mortal; but an invariable * see taylor's translation of proclus on the timæus of plato, book i. { } sameness of subsistence is the prerogative of an immortal nature. hence god could never receive a mutation of this kind*. "either god is in reality changed, as the christians say, into a mortal body,--and we have before shown that this is impossible; or he himself is not changed, but he causes those who behold him to think that he is, and thus falsifies himself, and involves others in error. deception, however, and falsehood are indeed otherwise evil, and can only be [properly] employed by any one as a medicine, either in curing friends that are diseased or have some vicious propensity, or those that are insane, or for the purpose of avoiding danger from enemies. but no one who has vicious propensities, or is insane, is dear to divinity. nor does god fear any one, in order that by wandering he may escape danger**. * see a most admirable defence of the immutability of divinity, by proclus, in taylor's introduction to the second and third books of plato's republic, in vol. i. of his translation of plato's works. see also taylor's note at the end of vol. iii. of his translation of pausanias, p. . ** the original of this sentence is, [--------] the latter part of which, [--------], is thus, erroneously translated by spencer, "ut imposture opus habeat ad evadendum periculum." { } "the christians, adding to the assertions of the jews, say that the son of god came on account of the sins of the jews; and that the jews, punishing jesus and causing him to drink _gall_, raised the _bile_ of god against them." celsus after this, in his usual way deriding both jews and christians, compares all of them to a multitude of bats, or to ants coming out of their holes, or to frogs seated about a marsh, or to earthworms that assemble in a corner of some muddy place, and contend with each other which of them are most noxious. he likewise represents them as saying, "god has manifested and predicted all things to us; and deserting the whole world and the celestial circulation, and likewise paying no attention to the widely-extended earth, he regards our concerns alone, to us alone sends messengers, and he will never cease to explore by what means we may always associate with him." he likewise resembles us to earthworms acknowledging that god exists; and he says that we earthworms, i. e. the jews and christians, being produced by god after him, are entirely similar to him. all things too are subject to us, earth and water, the air and the stars, and are ordained to be subservient to us*. afterwards * this reminds me of the following beautiful lines in... { } these earthworms add: "now because some of us have sinned, god will come, or he will send his son, in order that he may burn the unjust, and that those who are not so may live eternally with him." and celsus concludes with observing that "such assertions would be more tolerable if they were made by earthworms or frogs, than by jews or christians contending with each other." celsus, after having adduced, from the writings of the heathens, instances of those who contended for the antiquity of their race, such as the athenians, egyptians, arcadians, and phrygians, and also of those who have asserted that some among them were aborigines, says, that "the jews being concealed in a corner of palestine, men perfectly in-erudite, and who never had previously heard the same things celebrated by hesiod and innumerable ...epistle i. of pope's essay on man, in which pride is represented as saying: "for me kind nature wakes her genial power, suckles each herb, and spreads out every flower; annual for me the grape, the rose, renew the juice nectarious and the balmy dew. for me the mine a thousand treasures brings: for me health gushes from a thousand springs; seas roll to waft me, suns to light me rise, my footstool earth, my canopy the skies." { } other divine men, composed a most incredible and inelegant narration, that a certain man was fashioned by the hands of god, and inspired by him with the breath of life; that a woman was taken from the side of the man; that precepts were given to them by god; and that a serpent was adverse to these precepts. lastly, they make the serpent to frustrate the commands of god: in all this, narrating a certain fable worthy only of being told by old women, and which most impiously makes god to be from the first imbecile, and incapable of persuading one man fashioned by himself to act in a way conformable to his will. "the christians are most impiously deceived and involved in error, through the greatest ignorance of the meaning of divine enigmas. for they make a certain being whom they call the devil, and who in the hebrew tongue is denominated satan, hostile to god. it is therefore perfectly stupid and unholy to assert that the greatest god, wishing to benefit mankind, was incapable of accomplishing what he wished, through having one that opposed him, and acted contrary to his will. the son of god, therefore, was vanquished by the devil; and being punished by him, teaches us also to despise the punishments inflicted by him; christ at the same time predicting that satan would appear on { } the earth, and, like himself, would exhibit great and admirable works, usurping to himself the glory of god. the son of god also adds, that it is not fit to pay attention to satan, because he is a seducer, but that himself alone is worthy of belief. this, however, is evidently the language of a man who is an impostor earnestly endeavouring to prevent, and previously guarding himself against, the attempts of those who think differently from and oppose him. but, according to the christians, the son of god is punished by the devil, who also punishes us in order that through this we may be exercised in endurance. these assertions, however, are perfectly ridiculous. for it is fit, i think, that the devil should be punished, and not that men should be threatened with punishment who are calumniated by him. "further still: if god, like jupiter in the comedy, being roused from a long sleep, wished to liberate the human race from evils, why did he send only into a corner of the earth this spirit of whom you boast? though he ought in a similar manner to have animated many other bodies, and to have sent them to every part of the habitable globe. the comic poet indeed, in order to excite the laughter of the audience in the theatre, says that jupiter, after he was roused from his sleep, sent mercury to the athenians and lacedæmonsians:--but do not { } you think that it is a much more ridiculous fiction to assert that god sent his son to the jews? "many--and these, men whose names are not known,--both in temples and out of temples, and some also assembling in cities or armies, are easily excited from any casual cause, as if they possessed a prophetic power. each of these likewise is readily accustomed to say, 'i am god, or the son of god, or a divine spirit. but i came because the world will soon be destroyed, and you, o men! on account of your iniquities will perish. i wish, however, to save you, and you shall again see me, returning with a celestial army. blessed is he who now worships me; but i will cast all those who do not, into eternal fire, together with the cities and regions to which they belong. those men also that do not now know the punishments which are reserved for them, shall afterwards repent and lament in vain: but those who believe in me i will for ever save.' extending to the multitude these insane and perfectly obscure assertions, the meaning of which no intelligent man is able to discover,--for they are unintelligible and a mere nothing,--they afford an occasion to the stupid and to jugglers of giving to them whatever interpretation they please. "again, they do not consider, if the prophets of { } the god of the jews had predicted that this would be his son, why did this god legislatively ordain through moses, that the jews should enrich themselves and acquire power; should fill the earth with their progeny; and should slay and cut off the whole race of their enemies, which moses did, as he says, in the sight of the jews; and besides this, threatening that unless they were obedient to these his commands, he should consider them as his enemies;--why, after these things had been promulgated by god, did his son, a nazarean man, exclude from any access to his father, the rich and powerful, the wise and renowned? for he says that we ought to pay no more attention than ravens do, to food and the necessaries of life*, and that we should be less concerned about our clothing than the lilies of the field. again, he asserts, that to him who smites us on one cheek we should likewise turn the other**. whether, therefore, does moses or jesus lie? or, was the father who sent jesus forgetful of what he had formerly said to moses? or, condemning his own laws, did he alter his opinion, and send a messenger to mankind with mandates of a contrary nature? * luke xii. . ** luke vi. . { } "the christians again will say, how can god be known unless he can be apprehended by sense? to this we reply, that such a question is not the interrogation of man, nor of soul, but of _the flesh_. at the same time, therefore, let them hear, if they are capable of hearing any thing, _as being a miserable worthless race, and lovers of body!_ if, closing the perceptive organs of sense, you look upward with the visive power of intellect, and, averting the eye of the _flesh,_ you excite the eye of the soul, you will thus alone behold god*. and if you seek for the leader of this path, you must avoid impostors and enchanters, and those who persuade you to pay attention to [real] idols; in order that you may not be entirely ridiculous, by blaspheming as idols other things which are manifestly gods**, and venerating that which is in reality more worthless than any image, and which is not even an image, but _a dead body_***; and by investigating a father similar to it. * this is most platonically said by celsus. ** such as the sun and moon, and the other heavenly bodies. *** the emperor julian in the fragments of his arguments against the christians, 'preserved by cyril, says, speaking to the christians: "you do not notice whether any thing is said by the jews about holiness; but you emulate their rage and their bitterness, overturning temples and altars, and cutting the throats not only of those who remain firm in paternal institutes, but also of... { } "there are essence and generation, the intelligible and the visible. and truth indeed subsists with essence, but error with generation*. science, therefore, is conversant with truth, but opinion with generation. intelligence also pertains to, or has the intelligible for its object; but what is visible is the object of sight. and intellect indeed knows the intelligible; but the eye knows that which is visible. what the sun therefore is in the visible region,--being neither the eye, nor sight, but the cause to the eye of seeing, and to the sight of its visive power, to all sensibles of their being generated, and to himself of being perceived;--this the supreme god [or _the good_] is in intelligibles: since he is neither intellect, nor intelligence, nor science, but is the cause, to intellect, of intellectual perception; ...those heretics who are equally erroneous with yourselves, and who do not lament a dead body in the same manner as you do. for neither jesus nor paul exhorted you to act in this manner. but the reason is, that they did not expect you would arrive at the power which you have obtained. for they were satisfied if they could deceive maid-servants and slaves, and through these married women, and such men as cornelius and sergius; among whom, if you can mention one that was at that time an illustrious character, (and these things were transacted under the reign of tiberius or claudius,) believe that i am a liar in all things." * generation signifies the whole of that which is visible. { } to intelligence, of its subsistence on account of him; to science, for its possession of knowledge for his sake, and to all intelligibles for their existence as such. he is likewise the cause to truth itself and to essence itself, of their existence, being himself beyond all intelligibles, by a certain ineffable power*. and these are the assertions of men who possess intellect. but if you understand any thing of what is here said, you are indebted to us for it. if, likewise, you think that a certain spirit descending from god announced to you things of a divine nature, this will be the spirit which proclaimed what i have above said, and with which ancient men being replete, have unfolded so many things of a most beneficial nature. if, therefore, you are unable to understand these assertions, be silent, and conceal your ignorance, and do not say that those are blind who see, and that those are lame who run, * this sentence in the original is as follows: [--------]. but it is requisite to read, conformably to the above translation, [--------]. celsus has derived what he here says from the sixth book of plato's republic, and what he says previous to this from the timæeus of plato.--see taylor's translation of these dialogues. { } you at the same time possessing souls that are in every respect lame and mutilated, and living in body, viz. in that which is dead. "how much better would it be for you, since you are desirous of innovation, to direct your attention to some one of the illustrious dead, and concerning whom a divine fable may be properly admitted! and if hercules and esculapius do not please you, and other renowned men of great antiquity, you may have orpheus, a man confessedly inspired by a sacred spirit, and who suffered a violent death. but he perhaps has been adopted as a leader formerly by others. consider anaxarchus, therefore, who being thrown into a mortar, and bruised in the cruellest manner, most courageously despised the punishment, exclaiming, 'bruise, bruise the sack of anaxarchus, for you cannot bruise him.' this, indeed, was uttered by a certain truly divine spirit. him, however, some physiologists have already vindicated to themselves. in the next place, consider epictetus, who when his master twisted his leg violently, said, smiling gently and without being terrified, 'you will break my leg;' and when his master had broken his leg, only observed, 'did i not tell you that you would break it? what thing of this kind did your god utter when { } he was punished*? the sibyl, likewise, whose verses are used by some of you, is far more worthy to be regarded by you as the daughter of god. _but now you have fraudulently and rashly inserted in her verses many things of a blasphemous nature_**; and christ, who in his life was most reprehensible, and in his death most miserable, you reverence as a god. how much more appropriately might you have bestowed this honour on jonas when he was under the gourd, or on daniel who was saved in the den of lions, or on others of whom more prodigious things than these are narrated! "this is one of the precepts of the christians: 'do not revenge yourself on him who injures you; and if any person strikes you on one cheek, turn the other to him also.' and this precept indeed is of very great antiquity, but is recorded in a more rustic * christ when on the cross exclaimed, "my god, my god, why hast thou forsaken me?" but socrates in his apology to his judges, as recorded by plato, most magnanimously said, "anytus and melitus may indeed put me to death, but they cannot injure me." ** the collection of the sibylline oracles which are now extant, are acknowledged by all intelligent men among the learned to be for the most part forgeries.--see the account of them by fabricius in vol. i. of his bibliootheca græca, { } manner by christ. for socrates is made by plata in the crito to speak as follows: 'it is by no means therefore proper to do an injury. by no means. hence neither is it proper for him who is injured to revenge the injury, as the multitude think it is; since it is by no means fit to do an injury. it does not appear that it is. but what! is it proper or not, o crito, to be malific? it certainly is not proper, socrates. is it therefore just or unjust for a man to be malific to him by whom he has been hurt? for in the opinion of the vulgar it is just. it is by no means just. for to be hurtful to men does not at all differ from injuring them. you speak the truth. neither, therefore, is it proper to revenge an injury, nor to be hurtful to any man, whatever evil we may suffer from him.' these things are asserted by plato, who also adds: 'consider, therefore, well, whether you agree, and are of the same opinion with me in this; and we will begin with admitting, that it is never right either to do an injury, or revenge an injury on him who has acted badly towards us. do you assent to this principle? for formerly it appeared, and now still appears, to me to be true.' such, therefore, was the opinion of plato, and which also was the doctrine of divine men prior to him. concerning these, however, and other particulars which the christians have corrupted, enough has been said. for he who { } desires to search further into them, may easily be satisfied. "but why is it requisite to enumerate how many things have been foretold with a divinely inspired voice, partly by prophetesses and prophets, and partly by other men and women under the influence of inspiration? what wonderful things they have heard from the adyta themselves! how many things have been rendered manifest from victims and sacrifices to those who have used them! how many from other prodigious symbols! and to some persons, divinely luminous appearances have been manifestly present. of these things indeed the life of every one is full. how many cities, likewise, have been raised from oracles, and liberated from disease and pestilence! and how many, neglecting these, or forgetting them, have perished miserably! how many colonies have been founded from these, and by observing their mandates have been rendered happy! how many potentates and private persons have, from attending to or neglecting these, obtained a better or a worse condition! how many, lamenting their want of children, have through these obtained the object of their wishes! how many have escaped the anger of dæmons! how many mutilated bodies have been healed! and again, how many have immediately suffered for insolent behaviour in { } sacred concerns! some indeed becoming insane on the very spot; others proclaiming their impious deeds, but others not proclaiming them before they perished; some destroying themselves, and others becoming a prey to incurable diseases. and sometimes a dreadful voice issuing from the adyta has destroyed them*. "in the next place, is it not absurd that you should desire and hope for the resurrection of the body, as if nothing was more excellent or more honourable to us than this; and yet again, that you should hurl this same body into punishments, as a thing of a vile nature? to men, however, who are persuaded that this is true, and who are conglutinated to body, it is not worth while to speak of things of this kind. for these are men who in other respects are rustic and impure, without reason, and labouring under the disease of sedition. indeed, those who hope that the soul or intellect will exist eternally, whether they are willing to call it pneumatic**, or an intellectual spirit holy and blessed, or a living soul, or the supercelestial and * see the scientific theory of oracles unfolded in the notes to taylor's translation of pausanias, vol. iii. p. . ** this is said conformably to the opinion of the stoics. { } incorruptible progeny of a divine and incorporeal nature*, or whatever other appellation they may think fit to give it; those who thus hope, (but i say this in accordance with divinity,) in this respect think rightly, that those who have lived well in this life will be blessed, but that those who have been entirely unjust, will be involved in endless evils. and neither the christians nor any other man were ever hostile to this dogma. "since men are bound to body, whether they are so for the sake of the dispensation of the whole of things, or in order that they may suffer the punishment of their offences, or in consequence of the soul through certain passions becoming heavy and tending downwards, till through certain orderly periods it becomes purified;--for according to empedocles, it is necessary that 'from the blest wandering thrice ten thousand times, through various mortal forms the soul should pass.'-- * this is asserted in accordance with the doctrine of the platonists. ** this , times must not be considered mathematically; since it symbolically indicates a certain appropriate measure of perfection. for in units s is a perfect number, as having a beginning, middle, and end. and again, is perfect, because it comprehends all numbers in itself. these numbers, however, were call-... { } this being the case, it is requisite to believe that men are committed to the care of certain inspective guardians of this prison the body. "that to the least of things, however, are allotted guardian powers, may be learnt from the egyptians, who say that the human body is divided into thirty-six parts, and that dæmons* or certain etherial gods who are distributed into the same number of parts, are the guardians of these divisions of the body. some also assert, that there is a much greater number of these presiding powers; different corporeal parts being under the inspection of different powers. the names of these also in the vernacular tongue of the egyptians are chnoumën, chnachoumën, knat, sicat, biou, erou, erebiou, ramanor, reianoor. what, therefore, should prevent him from making use of these and other powers, who wishes rather to be well than to be ill, to be fortunate rather than to be unfortunate, and to be liberated from such ...ed by the ancients perfect, in a different way from , , &c.; for these were thus denominated because they are equal to the sum of their parts. * i. e. beneficent dæmonss; for the ancients divided dæmonss into the beneficent and malevolent. they also considered the former as assisting the soul in its ascent to its pristine state of felicity; but the latter as of a punishing and avenging characteristic. { } tormentors and castigators as these things are thought to be?* "he, however, who invokes these powers ought to be careful, lest being conglutinated [as it were] to the worship of them, and to a love of the body, he should turn from and become oblivious of more excellent natures. for it is perhaps requisite not to disbelieve in wise men, who say that the greater part of circumterrestrial dæmons are conglutinated to generation, and are delighted with blood, with the odour and vapour of flesh, with melodies and with other things of the like kind**; to which being bound, they are unable to effect any thing superior to the sanction of the body, and the prediction of future events to men and cities. whatever also pertains to mortal actions they know, and are able to bring to pass. "if some one should command a worshiper of god either to act impiously, or to say any thing of a most disgraceful nature, he is in no respect whatever to be obeyed; but all trial and every kind of death are to be endured rather than to meditate, * vid. salmas. in fine libri he annis climactericis. ** see book ii. of taylor's translation of porphyry,--on abstinence from animal food. { } and much more to assert, any thing impious concerning god. but if any one should order us to celebrate the sun or minerva, we ought most gladly to sing hymns to their praise. for thus you will appear to venerate the supreme god in a greater degree *, if you also celebrate these powers: for piety when it passes through all things becomes more perfect." extracts from, and information relative to, the treatise of porphyry against the christians [illustration: porphyry] this work of porphyry consisted of fifteen books, and is unfortunately lost. it is frequently mentioned by the fathers of the church, from whose writings the following particulars are collected. the first book appears to have contained a development of the contrariety of the scriptures, and proofs that they did not proceed from divinity, but from men. to this end porphyry especially adduces what paul writes to the galatians, chap. ii. * for as the ineffable principle of things possesses all power and the highest power, he first produced from himself beings most transcendently allied to himself; and therefore, by venerating these, the highest god will be in a greater degree venerated, as being a greater veneration of his power. { } viz. that "when peter came to antioch, he withstood him to his face, because he was to be blamed." hence porphyry infers, "that the apostles, and indeed the chief of them, did not publicly study the salvation of all men, but that each of them was privately attentive to his own renown." this the fathers testify in more than one place. see the commentary of jerome on the above-mentioned epistle. jerome also, in his th epistle to augustin, informs us that porphyry says, "that peter and paul opposed each other in a puerile contest, and that paul was envious of the virtue of peter." the third book treated of the interpretation of the scriptures, in which porphyry condemned the mode of explaining them adopted by the commentators, and especially the allegories of origen. this is evident from a long extract from this work of porphyry given by eusebius in hist. eccl. lib. i. cap. . the fourth book treated of the mosaic history and the antiquities of the jews, as we learn from eusebius, proep. evang. lib. i. cap. , and from theo-doret, serm. ii. therap. but the twelfth book was the most celebrated of all, in which porphyry strenuously opposes the { } prophecy of daniel. of this work jerome thus speaks in the preface to his commentary on that prophet: "porphyry's twelfth book is against the prophet daniel, as he was unwilling to admit that it was written by that prophet, but contends that it was composed by a person in judæa named epiphanes, and who lived in the time of antiochus. hence he says, that daniel does not so much narrate future as past events. lastly, he asserts, that whatever is related as far as to the reign of antiochus contains a true history; but that all that is said posterior to this time, as the writer was ignorant of futurity, is false." the thirteenth book also, according to jerome*, was written against the same prophet; in which book, speaking of the "abomination of desolation," as it is called by daniel, (when standing in the sacred place,) he says many reproachful things of the christians. the same jerome likewise, in epist. ci., ad pam-machium, testifies, that porphyry accuses the history of the evangelists of falsehood, and says** that christ, after he had told his brethren that he should * vid. lib. iv. comment, in cap. matth. ** lib. ii. adversus pelagianos. { } not go up to the feast of tabernacles, yet afterwards went up to it (john vii.). hence porphyry accuses him of inconstancy and mutability. jerome's observation on this is curious, viz. "nesciens omnia scandala ad carnem esse referenda." jerome adds (in lib. quasst. hebraic, in genesin) "that porphyry calumniates the evangelists for making a miracle to the ignorant, by asserting that christ walked on the sea, calling the lake genezareth the sea." he likewise says, that porphyry called the miracles which were performed at the sepulchres of the martyrs, "the delusions of evil demons." the following remarkable passage from one of the lost writings of porphyry relative to the christians, is preserved by augustin in his treatise de civit. lib. xix. cap. . "sunt spiritus terreni minimi loco terreno quodam malorum dæmonum potestati subjecti. ab his sapientes hebræorum, quorum unus iste etiam jesus fuit, sicut audivisti divina apollonis oracula quæ superius dicta sunt. ab his ergo _hebæi_ dsemonibus pessimis et minoribus spiritibus vetabant religiosos, et ipsis vacare prohibebant: venerari autem magis coelestes deos, amplius autem venerari deum patrem. hoc autem et dii præcipiunt, et in { } superioibus ostendimus, quemadmodum animadvertere ad deum monent, et ilium colère ubique imperant. verum indocti et impiæ naturae, quibus vere fatum non concessit a dius dona obtinere, neque habere jovis immortalis notitiam, non audientes deos et divinos viros; deos quidem omnes recusaverunt, prohibitos autem dæmones non solum nullis odiis insequi, sed etiam revereri delegerunt. deum autem simulantes se colère, ea sola per quae deus adoratur, non agunt. nam deus quidem utpote omnium pater nullius indiget: sed nobis est bene, cum eum per justitiam et castitatem, aliasque virtutes adoramus, ipsam vitam precem ad ipsum fa-cientes, per imitationem et inquisitionem de ipso. inquisitio enim purgat, imitatio deificat affectionem ad ipsum operando." i. e. "there are terrene spirits of the lowest order, who in a certain terrene place are subject to the power of evil demons. from these were derived the wise men of the hebrews, of whom jesus also was one; as you have heard the divine oracles of apollo above mentioned assert. from these worst of demons therefore, and lesser spirits of the _hebrew_, the oracles forbid the religious, and prohibit from paying attention to them, but exhort them rather to venerate the celestial gods, and still more the father of the gods. and we have above { } shown how the gods admonish us to look to divinity, and everywhere command us to worship him. but the unlearned and impious natures, to whom fate has not granted truly to obtain gifts from the gods, and to have a knowledge of immortal jupiter,--these not attending to the gods and divine men, reject indeed all the gods, and are so far from hating prohibited demons, that they even choose to reverence them*. but pretending that they worship god, they do not perform those things through which alone god is adored. for god, indeed, as being the father of all things, is not in want of any thing; but it is well with us when we adore him through justice and continence, and the other *the platonic philosopher sallust, in his golden book on the gods and the world, says, alluding to the christians, cap. , "impiety, which invades some places of the earth, and which will often subsist in future, ought not to give any disturbance to the worthy mind; for things of this kind do not affect, nor can religious honours be of any advantage to the gods; and the soul from its middle nature is not always able to pursue that which is right besides, it is not improbable that impiety is a species of punishment; for those who have known and at the same time despised the gods, we may reasonably suppose will in another life be deprived of the knowledge of their nature. and those who have honoured their proper sovereigns as gods, shall be cut off from the divinities, as the punishment of their impiety." { } virtues, making our life a prayer to him through the imitation and investigation of him. for investigation purifies, but imitation deifies the affection of the mind by energizing about divinity." the following extract from porphyry concerning a pestilence which raged for many years at rome, and could not be mitigated by any sacrifices, is preserved by theodoret: "[--------]." i. e. "the christians now wonder that the city has been for so many years attacked by disease, the advent [or manifest appearance] of esculapius and the other gods no longer existing. for jesus being now reverenced and worshiped, no one any longer derives any public benefit from the gods." a fragment of the thirty-fourth book of diodorus siculus. "king antiochus besieged jerusalem; but the jews resisted him for some time. when, however, all their provision was spent, they were forced to send ambassadors to him to treat on terms. many of his friends persuaded him to storm the city, and { } to root out the whole nation of the jews; because they only, of all people, hated to converse with any of another nation, and treated all of them as enemies. they likewise suggested to him, that the ancestors of the jews were driven out of egypt as impious and hateful to the gods. for their bodies being overspread and infected with the itch and leprosy, they brought them together into one place by way of expiation, and as profane and wicked wretches expelled them from their coasts. those too that were thus expelled seated themselves about jerusalem, and being afterwards embodied into one nation, called the nation of the jews, their hatred of all other men descended with their blood to posterity. hence they made strange laws, entirely different from those of other nations. in consequence of this, they will neither eat nor drink with any one of a different nation, nor wish him any prosperity. for, say they, antiochus, surnamed epiphanes, having subdued the jews, entered into the temple of god, into which by their law no one was permitted to enter but the priest. here, when he found the image of a man with a long beard carved in stone sitting on an ass, he conceived it to be moses who built jerusalem, established the nation, and made all their impious customs and practises legal: for these abound in hatred and enmity to all other men. antiochus, therefore, abhorring this { } their contrariety to all other nations, used his utmost endeavour to abrogate their laws. in order to effect this, he sacrificed a large hog at the image of moses and at the altar of god that stood in the outward court, and sprinkled them with the blood of the sacrifice. he commanded likewise that the sacred books, whereby they were taught to hate all other nations, should be sprinkled with the broth made of the hog's flesh. and he extinguished the lamp called by them immortal, which was continually burning in the temple. lastly, he compelled the high priest and the other jews to eat swine's flesh. afterwards, when antiochus and his friends had deliberately considered these things, they urged him to root out the whole nation, or at least to abrogate their laws and compel them to change their former mode of conducting themselves in common life. but the king being generous and of a mild disposition, received hostages and pardoned the jews. he demolished, however, the walls of jerusalem, and took the tribute that was due." from manetho respecting the israelites. "while such was the state of things in ethiopia, the people of jerusalem, having come down with the defiled of the egyptians, treated the inhabitants in such an unholy manner, that those who witnessed { } their impieties, believed that their joint sway was more execrable than that which the shepherds had formerly exercised. for they not only set fire to the cities and villages, but committed every kind of sacrilege, and destroyed the images of the gods, and roasted and fed upon those sacred animals that were worshipped; and having compelled the priests and prophets to kill and sacrifice them, they cast them naked out of the country. it is said also that the priest who ordained their polity and laws was by birth of heliopolis, and his name osarsiph, from osons the god of heliopolis; but that when he went over to these people, his name was changed, and he was called moÿses." manetho again says: "after this, amenophis returned from ethiopia with a great force, and rampses also his son with other forces; and encountering the shepherds and defiled people, they defeated and slew multitudes of them, add pursued them to the bounds of syria."--joseph contn app. lib. i. cap. , & . "cherilus also, a still more ancient writer [than herodotus], and a poet, makes mention of our nation, and informs us that it came to the assistance of king xerxes in his expedition against greece. for in his enumeration of all those nations, he last of { } all inserts ours among the rest, when he says: "at the last, there passed over a people wonderful to behold; for they spake the phoenician tongue, and dwelt in the solymæan mountains, near a broad lake. their heads were sooty; they had round rasures on them; their heads and faces were like nasty horse heads, also, that had been hardened in the smoke."--whiston's josephus, vol. iv. p. . extracts from the fifth book of tacitus respecting the jews, as translated by murphy. "being now to relate the progress of a siege that terminated in the destruction of that once celebrated city [jerusalem], it may be proper to go back to its first foundation, and to trace the origin of the people. the jews we are told were natives of the isle of crete. at the time when saturn was driven from his throne by the violence of jupiter, they abandoned their habitations, and gained a settlement at the extremity of libya. in support of this tradition, the etymology of their name is adduced as a proof. mount ida, well known to fame, stands in the isle of crete: the inhabitants are called idæans; and the word by a barbarous corruption was changed afterwards to that of judæans. according to others they were a colony from egypt, when that country, during the reign of isis, { } overflowing with inhabitants poured forth its redundant numbers under the conduct of hierosolymus and juda. a third hypothesis makes them originally ethiopians, compelled by the tyranny of cepheus, the reigning monarch, to abandon their country. some authors contend that they were a tribe of assyrians, who for some time occupied a portion of egypt, and afterwards transplanting themselves into syria, acquired in their own right a number of cities, together with the territories of the hebrews. there is still another tradition, which ascribes to the jews a more illustrious origin, deriving them from the ancient solymans, so highly celebrated in the poetry of homer. by that people the city was built, and from its founder received the name of hierosolyma. "in this clash of opinions, one point seems to be universally admitted. a pestilential disease, disfiguring the race of man, and making the body an object of loathsome deformity, spread all over egypt. bocchoris, at that time the reigning monarch, consulted the oracle of jupiter ammon, and received for answer that the kingdom must be purified by exterminating the infected multitude as a race of men detested by the gods. after diligent search, the wretched sufferers were collected together, and in a wild and barren desert abandoned to their misery. in that distress, while the vulgar herd was { } sunk in deep despair, moses, one of their number, reminded them, that by the wisdom of his counsels they had been already rescued out of impending danger. deserted as they were by men and gods, he told them that if they did not repose their confidence in him, as their chief by divine commission, they had no resource left. his offer was accepted. their march began they knew not whither. want of water was their chief distress. worn out with fatigue they lay stretched out on the bare earth, heart-broken, ready to expire; when a troop of wild asses, returning from pasture, went up the steep ascent of a rock covered with a grove of trees. the verdure of the herbage round the place, suggested the idea of springs near at hand. moses traced the steps of the animals, and discovered a plentiful vein of water. by this relief the fainting multitude was raised from despair. they pursued their journey for six days without intermission. on the seventh they made a halt, and having expelled the natives took possession of the country, where they built their city and dedicated their temple. "in order to draw the bond of union closer, and to establish his own authority, moses gave a new form of worship, and a system of religious ceremonies, the reverse of every thing known to any other age or country. _whatever is held sacred by_ { } _the romans, with the jews is profane: and what in other nations is unlawful and impure, with them is fully established_. the figure of the animal that guided them to refreshing springs is consecrated in the sanctuary of their temple*. in contempt of jupiter hammon they sacrifice a ram. the ox worshiped in egypt for the god apis is slain as a victim by the jews. from the flesh of swine they abstain altogether. an animal subject to the same leprous disease that infected their whole nation, is not deemed proper food. the famine with which they were for a long time afflicted, is frequently commemorated by a solemn fast. their bread, in memory of their having seized a quantity of grain to relieve their wants, is made without leaven. the seventh day is sacred to rest, for on that day their labours ended; and such is their natural propensity to sloth, that in consequence of it every seventh year is devoted to repose and sluggish inactivity. for this septennial custom some account in a * conformably to this, see what diodorus siculus says (in the extract given from him, p. .): josephus denies that the figure of an ass was consecrated in the sanctuary of the jewish temple. but this does not invalidate the testimony of diodorus siculus to the contrary. for antiochus when he subdued the jews might have found the image of this animal in their temple; but in the time of josephus the ass might not have been consecrated by them. { } different manner: they tell us that it is an institution in honour of saturn; either because the idæans, expelled, as has been mentioned, from the isle of crete, transmitted to their posterity the principles of their religious creed; or because among the seven planets that govern the universe, saturn moves in the highest orbit, and acts with the greatest energy. it may be added that the period in which the heavenly bodies perform their revolutions is regulated by the number seven. "these rites and ceremonies, from whatever source derived, owe their chief support to their antiquity. they have other institutions, in themselves corrupt, impure, and even abominable; but eagerly embraced, as if their very depravity were a recommendation. the scum and refuse of other nations, renouncing the religion of their country, flocked in crowds to jerusalem, enriching the place with gifts and offerings. hence the wealth and grandeur of the state. connected amongst themselves by the most obstinate and inflexible faith, the jews extend their charity to all of their own persuasion, while towards the rest of mankind they nourish a sullen and inveterate hatred. strangers are excluded from their tables. unsociable to all others, they eat and lodge with one another only; and though addicted to sensuality, they admit no intercourse with women { } from other nations. among themselves their passions are without restraint. vice itself is lawful. that they may know each other by distinctive marks, they have established the practice of circumcision. all who embrace their faith, submit to the same operation. the first elements of their religion teach their proselytes to despise the gods, to abjure their country, and forget their parents, their brothers, and their children. with the egyptians they agree in their belief of a future state; they have the same notion of departed spirits, the same solicitude, and the same doctrine. with regard to the deity their creed is different. the egyptians worship various animals, and also symbolical representations, which are the work of man: the jews acknowledge one god only, and him they adore in contemplation; condemning as impious idolaters all who, with perishable materials wrought into the human form, attempt to give a representation of the deity. their priests made use of fifes and cymbals; they were crowned with wreaths of ivy, and a vine wrought in gold was seen in their temple. hence some have inferred that bacchus, the conqueror of the east, was the object of their adoration. but the jewish forms of worship have no conformity to the rites of bacchus. the latter have their festive days which are always celebrated with mirth and carousing banquets. those of the jews are a gloomy ceremony, { } fall of absurd enthusiasm, rueful, mean, and sordid." -------- "chæremon *, professing to write the history of egypt, says, that under amenophis and his son ramessis two hundred and fifty thousand leprous and polluted men were cast out of egypt. their leaders were moses the scribe, and josephus, who was also a sacred scribe. the egyptian name of moses was tisithen, of joseph peteseph. these coming to pelusium, and finding there , men left by amenophis, which he would not admit into egypt, making a league with them, they undertook an expedition against egypt. upon this amenophis flies into ethiopia, and his son messenes drives out the jews into syria, in number about , , and receives his father amenophis out of ethiopia. i know lysimachus** assigns another king and another time in which moses led the israelites out of egypt, and that was when bocchoris reigned in egypt; the nation of the jews, being infected with leprosies and scabs and other diseases, betook themselves to the temples to beg their living, and many being tainted with the disease, there happened a dearth in egypt. whereupon bocchoris consulting * joseph, lib. i. contra apionem. ** idem. { } with the oracle of ammon, received for answer that the leprous people were to be drowned in the sea, in sheets of lead, and the scabbed were to be carried into the wilderness; who choosing moses for their leader, conquered that country which is now called judæa."--greaves pyramidograpkia, p. . extracts from the works of the emperor julian relative to the christians. [illustration: julian] extract from epistle li. to the alexandrians. "as the founder of your city was alexander, and your ruler and tutelar deity king serapis, together with the virgin his associate, and the queen of all egypt, isis, * * *, you do not emulate a healthy city, but the diseased part dares to arrogate to itself the name of [the whole] city. by the gods, men of alexandria, i should be very much ashamed, if, in short, any alexandrian should acknowledge himself to be a galilæan. "the ancestors of the hebrews were formerly slaves to the egyptians. but now, men of alexandria, you, the conquerors of egypt (for egypt was conquered by your founder), sustain a voluntary servitude to the despisers of your national dogmas, in opposition to your ancient sacred institutions. and you do not recollect your former { } felicity, when all egypt had communion with the gods, and we enjoyed an abundance of good. but, tell me, what advantage has accrued to your city from those who now introduce among you a new religion? your founder was that pious man alexander of macedon, who did not, by jupiter! resemble any one of these, or any of the hebrews, who far excelled them. even ptolemy, the son of lagus, was also superior to them. as to alexander, if he had encountered, he would have endangered even the romans. what then did the ptolemies, who succeeded your founder? educating your city, like their own daughter, from her infancy, they did not bring her to maturity by the discourses of jesus, nor did they construct the form of government, through which she is now happy, by the doctrine of the odious galilæans. "thirdly: after the romans became its masters, taking it from the bad government of the ptolemies, augustus visited your city, and thus addressed the citizens: 'men of alexandria, i acquit your city of all blame, out of regard to the great god serapis, and also for the sake of the people, and the grandeur of the city. a third cause of my kindness to you is my friend areus.' this areus, the companion of augustus caesar, and a philosopher, was your fellow-citizen. { } "the particular favours conferred on your city by the olympic gods were, in short, such as these. many more, not to be prolix, i omit. but those blessings which the apparent gods bestow in common every day, not on one family, nor on a single city, but on the whole world, why do you not acknowledge? are you alone insensible of the splendour that flows from the sun? are you alone ignorant that summer and winter are produced by him, and that all things are alone vivified and alone germinate from him? do you not, also, perceive the great advantages that accrue to your city from the moon, from him and by him the fabricator of all things? yet you dare not worship either of these deities; but this jesus, whom neither you nor your fathers have seen, you think must necessarily be god the word, while him, whom from eternity every generation of mankind has seen, and sees and venerates, and by venerating lives happily, i mean the mighty sun, a living, animated, intellectual, and beneficent image of the intelligible father, you despise. if, however, you listen to my admonitions, you will by degrees return to truth. you will not wander from the right path, if you will be guided by him, who to the twentieth year of his age pursued that road, but has now worshiped the gods for near twelve years." { } extracts from the fragment of an oration or epistle on the duties of a priest. "if any are detected behaving disorderly to their prince, they are immediately punished; but those who refuse to approach the gods, are possessed by a tribe of evil dæmons, who driving many of the atheists [i. e. of the christians] to distraction, make them think death desirable, that they may fly up into heaven, after having forcibly dislodged their souls. some of them prefer deserts to towns; but man, being by nature a gentle and social animal, they also are abandoned to evil dæmons, who urge them to this misanthropy; and many of them* have had recourse to chains and collars. thus, on all sides, they are impelled by an evil dæmons, to whom they have voluntarily surrendered themselves, by forsaking the eternal and saviour gods. "statues and altars, and the preservation of the unextinguished fire, and in short all such particulars, have been established by our fathers, as symbols of the presence of the gods; not that we should believe that these symbols are gods, but that through these we should worship the gods. for since we are connected with body, it is also * i. e. the cappadocian monks and hermits. { } necessary that our worship of the gods should be performed in a corporeal manner; but they are incorporeal. and they, indeed, have exhibited to us as the first of statues, that which ranks as the second genus of gods from the first, and which circularly revolves round the whole of heaven*. since, however, a corporeal worship cannot even be paid to these, because they are naturally unindigent, a third kind of statues was devised in the earth, by the worship of which we render the gods propitious to us. for as those who reverence the images of kings, who are not in want of any such reverence, at the same time attract to themselves their benevolence; thus, also, those who venerate the statues of the gods, who are not in want of any thing, persuade the gods by this veneration to assist and be favourable to them. for alacrity in the performance of things in our power is a document of true sanctity; and it is very evident that he who accomplishes the former, will in a greater degree possess the latter. but he who despises things in his power, and afterwards pretends to desire impossibilities, evidently does not pursue the * meaning those divine bodies the celestial orbs, which in consequence of participating a divine life from the incorporeal powers from which they are suspended, may be very properly called secondary gods. { } latter, but overlooks the former. for though divinity is not in want of any thing, it does not follow that on this account nothing is to be offered to him. for neither is he in want of celebration through the ministry of _words_. what then? is it, therefore, reasonable that he should also be deprived of this? by no means. neither, therefore, is he to be deprived of the honour which is paid him through _works_; which honour has been legally established, not for three or for three thousand years, but in all preceding ages, among all nations of the earth. "but [the galilaeans will say], o! you who have admitted into your soul every multitude of dæmons, whom, though according to you they are formless and unfigured, you have fashioned in a corporeal resemblance, it is not fit that honour should be paid to divinity through such works. how, then, do we not consider as wood and stones those statues which are fashioned by the hands of men? o more stupid than even stones themselves! do you fancy that all men are to be drawn by the nose as you are drawn by execrable dæmonss, so as to think that the artificial resemblances of the gods are the gods themselves? looking, therefore, to the resemblances of the gods, we do not think them to be either stones or wood; for neither do we { } think that the gods are these resemblances; since neither do we say that royal images are wood, or stone, or brass, nor that they are the kings therefore, but the images of kings. whoever, therefore, loves his king, beholds with pleasure the image of his king; whoever loves his child is delighted with his image; and whoever loves his father surveys his image with delight. hence, also, he who is a lover of divinity gladly surveys the statues and images of the gods; at the same time venerating and fearing with a holy dread the gods who invisibly behold him*. if, therefore, some * the catholics have employed similar arguments in defence of the reverence which they pay to the images of the men whom they call saints. but the intelligent reader need not be told, that it is one thing to venerate the images of those divine powers which proceed from the great first cause of all things, and eternally subsist concentrated and rooted in him, and another to reverence the images of men, who when living were the disgrace of human nature. in addition to what is said by julian on this subject, the following extract from the treatise of sallust, on the gods, and the world, is well worthy the attentive perusal of the reader: "a divine nature is not indigent of any thing; but the honours which we pay to the gods are performed for the sake of our advantage. and since the providence of the gods is everywhere extended, a certain habitude or fitness is all that is requisite, in order to receive their beneficent communications. but all habitude is produced through imitation and similitude. hence temples imitate the heavens, but altars,... { } one should fancy that these ought never to be corrupted, because they were once called the images of the gods, such a one appears to me to be perfectly void of intellect. for if this were admitted, it is also requisite that they should not be made by men. that, however, which is produced by a wise and good man may be corrupted by a depraved and ignorant man. but the gods which circularly revolve about the heavens, and which are living statues, fashioned by the gods themselves as resemblances of their unapparent essence,--these remain for ever. no one, therefore, should disbelieve in the gods, in consequence of seeing and hearing that some persons have behaved insolently towards statues and temples. for have there not been many who have destroyed good men, such as socrates and dion, and the great empedotimus? and who, i well know, have, more than statues or temples, been taken care of by the gods. see, however, that the gods, knowing the body of these to ...the earth; statues resemble life, and on this account they are similar to animals. prayers imitate that which is intellectual; but characters, superior ineffable powers. herbs and stones resemble matter; and animals which are sacrificed, the irrational life of our souls. but, from all these, nothing happens to the gods beyond what they already possess; for what accession can be made to a divine nature? but a conjunction with our souls and the gods is by these means produced. { } be corruptible, have granted that it should yield and be subservient to nature, but afterwards have punished those by whom it was destroyed; which clearly happened to be the case with all the sacrilegious of our time. "let no one, therefore, deceive us by words, nor disturb us with respect to providential interference. for as to the prophets of the jews, who reproach us with things of this kind, what will they say of their own temple, which has been thrice destroyed, but has not been since, even to the present time, rebuilt? i do not, however, say this as reproaching them; for i have thought of rebuilding it, after so long a period, in honour of the divinity who is invoked in it. but i have mentioned this, being willing to show, that it is not possible for any thing human to be incorruptible; and that the prophets who wrote things of this kind were delirious, and the associates of stupid old women. nothing, however, hinders, i think, but that god may be great, and yet he may not have worthy interpreters [of his will]. but this is because they have not delivered their soul to be purified by the liberal disciplines; nor their eyes, which are profoundly closed, to be opened; nor the darkness which oppresses them to be purged away. hence, like men who survey a great light through thick darkness, { } neither see purely nor genuinely, and in consequence of this do not conceive it to be a pure light, but a fire, and likewise perceiving nothing of all that surrounds it, they loudly exclaim, _be seized with horror, be afraid, fire, flame, death, a knife, a two-edged sword_; expressing by many names the one noxious power of fire. of these men, however, it is better peculiarly to observe how much inferior their teachers of the words of god are to our poets." an edict, forbidding the christians to teach the life-rature of the heathens. "we are of opinion that proper erudition consists not in words, nor in elegant and magnificent language, but in the sane disposition of an intelligent soul, and in true opinions of good and evil, and of what is beautiful and base. whoever, therefore, thinks one thing, and teaches another to his followers, appears to be no less destitute of erudition than he is of virtue. even in trifles, if the mind and tongue be at variance, there is some kind of improbity. but in affairs of the greatest consequence, if a man thinks one thing, and teaches another contrary to what he thinks, in what respect does this differ from the conduct of those mean-spirited, dishonest, and abandoned traders, who generally affirm what they know to be false, in order to deceive and inveigle customers? { } "all, therefore, who profess to teach, ought to possess worthy manners, and should never entertain opinions opposite to those of the public; but such especially, i think, ought to be those who instruct youth, and explain to them the works of the ancients, whether they are orators or grammarians; but particularly if they are sophists. for these last affect to be the teachers, not only of words, but of manners, and assert that political philosophy is their peculiar province. whether, therefore, this be true or not, i shall not at present consider. i commend those who make such specious promises, and should commend them much more, if they did not falsify and contradict themselves, by thinking one thing, and teaching their scholars another. what then? were not homer, hesiod, demosthenes, herodotus, thucydides, isocrates, and lysias, the leaders of all erudition? and did not some of them consider themselves sacred to mercury, but others to the muses? i think, therefore, it is absurd for those who explain their works to despise the gods whom they honoured. "i do not mean (for i think it would be absurd) that they should change their opinions for the sake of instructing youth; but i give them their option, either not to teach what they do not approve, or, if they choose to teach, first to persuade their { } scholars that neither homer, nor hesiod, nor any of those whom they expound and charge with impiety, madness, and error concerning the gods, are really such as they represent them to be. for as they receive a stipend, and are maintained by their works, if they can act with such duplicity for a few drachms, they confess themselves guilty of the most sordid avarice. "hitherto, indeed, many causes have prevented their resorting to the temples; and the dangers that everywhere impended, were a plea for concealing the most true opinions of the gods. but now, since the gods have granted us liberty, it seems to me absurd for any to teach those things to men which they do not approve. and if they think that those writers whom they expound, and of whom they sit as interpreters, are wise, let them first zealously imitate their piety towards the gods. but if they think they have erred in their conceptions of the most honourable natures [the gods], let them go into the churches of the galilæans, and there expound matthew and luke, by whom being persuaded you forbid sacrifices. i wish that your ears and your tongues were (as you express it) regenerated in those things of which i wish that myself, and all who in thought and deed are my friends, may always be partakers. { } "to masters and teachers let this be a common law. but let no youths be prevented from resorting to whatever schools they please. it would be as unreasonable to exclude children, who know not yet what road to take, from the right path, as it would be to lead them by fear and with reluctance to the religious rites of their country. and though it would be just to cure such reluctance, like madness, even by force, yet let all be indulged with that disease. for i think it is requisite to instruct, and not to punish the ignorant." { } appendix libanius's oration for the temples*. [the occasion of the oration was this. in the reign of theodosius several heathen temples, some of them very magnificent, were pulled down and destroyed in the cities, and especially in country-places, by the monks, with the consent and connivance, as libanius intimates, of the bishops, and without express order of the emperor to that purpose. of this libanius complains, and implores the emperor's protection, that the temples may be preserved.] "having already, o emperor, often offered advice which has been approved by you, even when others have advised contrary things, i come to you now upon the same design, and with the same hopes, that now especially you will be persuaded by me. but if not, do not judge the speaker an * from dr. lardner's heathen testimonies. { } enemy to your interests, considering, beside other things, the great honour* which you have conferred upon me, and that it is not likely that he who is under so great obligations should not love his benefactor. and, for that very reason, i think it my duty to advise, where i apprehend i have somewhat to offer which may be of advantage; for i have no other way of showing my gratitude to the emperor but by orations, and the counsel delivered in them. "i shall, indeed, appear to many to undertake a matter full of danger in pleading with you for the temples, that they may suffer no injury, as they now do. but they who have such apprehensions seem to me to be very ignorant of your true character. for i esteem it the part of an angry and severe disposition, for any one to resent the proposal of counsel which he does not approve of: but the part of a mild and gentle and equitable disposition, such as yours is, barely to reject counsel not approved of. for when it is in the power of him to whom the address is made to embrace any counsel or not, it is not reasonable to refuse a hearing which can do no harm; nor yet to resent and punish the proposal of counsel, if it appear contrary to his own judgment; * the office of præfectus prætorio. { } when the only thing that induced the adviser to mention it, was a persuasion of its usefulness. "i entreat you, therefore, o emperor, to turn your countenance to me while i am speaking, and not to cast your eyes upon those who in many things aim to molest both you and me; forasmuch as oftentimes a look is of greater effect than all the force of truth. i would further insist, that they ought to permit me to deliver my discourse quietly and without interruption; and then, afterwards, they may do their best to confute us by what they have to say. [here is a small breach in the oration. but he seems to have begun his argument with an account of the origin of temples, that they were first of all erected in country places.] men then having at first secured themselves in dens and cottages, and having there experienced the protection of the gods, they soon perceived how beneficial to mankind their favour must be: they therefore, as may be sup-, posed, erected to them statues and temples, such as they could in those early times. and when they began to build cities, upon the increase of arts and sciences, there were many temples on the sides of mountains and in plains: and in every city [as they built it] next to the walls were temples and sacred edifices raised, as the beginning of the rest of the body. for from such governors they expected the { } greatest security: and, if you survey the whole roman empire, you will find this to be the case every where. for in the city next to the greatest * there are still some temples**, though they are deprived of their honours; a few indeed out of many, but yet it is not quite destitute. and with the aid of these gods the romans fought and conquered their enemies; and having conquered them, they improved their condition, and made them happier than they were before their defeat; lessening their fears and making them partners in the privileges of the commonwealth. and when i was a child, he*** led the gallic army overthrew him that had affronted him; they having first prayed to the gods for success before they engaged. but having prevailed over him who at that time gave prosperity to the cities, judging it for his advantage to have another deity, for the building of the city which he then designed he made use of the sacred money, but made no alteration in the legal worship. the temples indeed were impoverished, but the rites were still performed there. but when the empire came to his son****, or rather the form of empire, for the government was really in the hands of others, who * he means constantinople. ** he alludes to the ancient temples of byzantium. *** constantine. **** constantius. { } from the beginning had been his masters, and to whom he vouchsafed equal power with himself: he therefore being governed by them, even when he was emperor, was led into many wrong actions, and among others to forbid sacrifices. these his cousin*, possessed of every virtue, restored: what he did otherwise, or intended to do, i omit at present. after his death in persia, the liberty of sacrificing remained for some time: but at the instigation of some innovators, sacrifices were forbidden by the two brothers**, but not incense;--which state of things your law has ratified. so that we have not more reason to be uneasy for what is denied us, than to be thankful for what is allowed. you, therefore, have not ordered the temples to be shut up, nor forbidden any to frequent them: nor have you driven from the temples or the altars, fire or frankincense, or other honours of incense. but those black-garbed people***, who eat more than elephants, and demand a large quantity of liquor from the people who send them drink for their chantings, but who hide their luxury by their pale artificial countenances,--these men, o emperor, even whilst your law is in force, run to the temples, bringing with them wood, and stones, and iron, and * julian. **valentinian and valens. *** the monks. { } when they have not these, hands and feet. then follows a mysian prey*, the roofs are uncovered, walls are pulled down, images are carried off, and altars are overturned: the priests all the while must be silent upon pain of death. when they have destroyed one temple they run to another, and a third, and trophies are erected upon trophies: which are all contrary to [your] law. this is the practice in cities, but especially in the countries. and there are many enemies every where. after innumerable mischiefs have been perpetrated, the scattered multitude unites and comes together, and they require of each other an account of what they have done; and he is ashamed who cannot tell of some great injury which he has been guilty of. they, therefore, spread themselves over the country like torrents, wasting the countries together with the temples: for wherever they demolish the temple of a country, at the same time the country itself is blinded, declines, and dies. for, o emperor, the temples are the soul of the country; they have been the first original of the buildings in the country, and they have subsisted for many ages to this time; and in * this proverbial expression took its rise from the mysians, who, in the absence of their king telephus, being plundered by their neighbours, made no resistance. hence it came to be applied to any persons who were passive under injuries. { } them are all the husbandman's hopes, concerning men, and women, and children, and oxen, and the seeds and the plants of the ground. wherever any country has lost its temples, that country is lost, and the hopes of the husbandmen, and with them all their alacrity: for they suppose they shall labour in vain, when they are deprived of the gods who should bless their labours; and the country not being cultivated as usual, the tribute is diminished. this being the state of things, the husbandman is impoverished, and the revenue suffers. for, be the will ever so good, impossibilities are not to be surmounted. of such mischievous consequence are the arbitrary proceedings of those persons in the country, who say, 'they fight with the temples.' but that war is the gain of those who oppress the inhabitants: and robbing these miserable people of their goods, and what they had laid up of the fruits of the earth for their sustenance, they go off as with the spoils of those whom they have conquered. nor are they satisfied with this, for they also seize the lands of some, saying it is sacred: and many are deprived of their paternal inheritance upon a false pretence. thus these men riot upon other people's misfortunes, who say they worship god with fasting. and if they who are abused come to the pastor in the city, (for so they call a man who is not one of the meekest,) complaining of the injustice that has been done { } them, this pastor commends these, but rejects the others, as if they ought to think themselves happy that they have suffered no more. although, o emperor, these also are your subjects, and so much more profitable than those who injure them, as laborious men are than the idle: for they are like bees, these like drones. moreover, if they hear of any land which has any thing that can be plundered, they cry presently, 'such an one sacrificeth, and does abominable things, and an army ought to be sent against him.' and presently the reformers are there: for by this name they call their depredators, if i have not used too soft a word. some of these strive to conceal themselves and deny their proceedings; and if you call them robbers, you affront them. others glory and boast, and tell their exploits to those who are ignorant of them, and say they are more deserving than the husbandmen. nevertheless, what is this but in time of peace to wage war with the husbandmen? for it by no means lessens these evils that they suffer from their countrymen. but it is really more grievous to suffer the things which i have mentioned in a time of quiet, from those who ought to assist them in a time of trouble. for you, o emperor, in case of a war collect an army, give out orders, and do every thing suitable to the emergency. and the new works which you now carry on are designed as a further { } security against our enemies, that all may be safe in their habitations, both in the cities and in the country: and then if any enemies should attempt inroads, they may be sensible they must suffer loss rather than gain any advantage. how is it, then, that some under your government disturb others equally under your government, and permit them not to enjoy the common benefits of it? how do they not defeat your own care and providence and labours, o emperor? how do they not fight against your law by what they do? "but they say, 'we have only punished those who sacrifice, and thereby transgress the law, which forbids sacrifices.' o emperor, when they say this they lie. for no one is so audacious, and so ignorant of the proceedings of the courts, as to think himself more powerful than the law. when say the law, i mean the law against sacrifice». can it be thought, that they who are not able to bear the sight of a collector s cloak, should despise the power of your government? this is what they say for themselves. and they have been often alleged to flavian* himself, and never have been confuted, no not yet. for i appeal to the guardians of this law: who has known any of those whom you have * bishop of antioch { } plundered to have sacrificed upon the altars, so as the law does not permit? what young or old person, what man, what woman? who of those inhabiting the same country, and not agreeing with the sacrificers in the worship of the gods? who of their neighbours? for envy and jealousy are common in neighbourhoods. whence some would gladly come as an evidence if any such thing had been done: and yet no one has appeared, neither from the one nor from the other: [that is, neither from the country, nor from the neighbourhood.] nor will there ever appear, for fear of perjury, not to say the punishment of it. where then is the truth of this charge, when they accuse those men of sacrificing contrary to law? "but this shall not suffice for an excuse to the emperor. some one therefore may say: 'they have not sacrificed.' let it be granted. but oxen have been killed at feasts and entertainments and merry meetings. still there is no altar to receive the blood, nor a part burned, nor do salt-cakes precede, nor any libation follow. but if some persons meeting together in some pleasant field kill a calf, or a sheep, or both, and roasting part and broiling the rest, have eat it under a shade upon the ground, i do not know that they have acted contrary to any laws. for neither have you, o emperor, forbid { } these things by your law; but mentioning one thing, which ought not to be done, you have permitted every thing else. so that though they should have feasted together with all sorts of incense, they have not transgressed the law, even though in that feast they should all have sung and invoked the gods. unless you think fit to accuse even their private method of eating, by which it has been customary for the inhabitants of several places in the country to assemble together in those [places] which are the more considerable, on holidays, and having sacrificed, to feast together. this they did whilst the law permitted them to do it. since that, the liberty has continued for all the rest except sacrificing. when, therefore, a festival day invited them, they accepted the invitation, and with those things which might be done without offence or danger, they have honoured both the day and the place. but that they ventured to sacrifice, no one has said, nor heard, nor proved, nor been credited: nor have any of their enemies pretended to affirm it upon the ground of his own sight, nor any credible account he has received of it. "they will further say: 'by this means some have been converted, and brought to embrace the same religious sentiments with themselves.' be not deceived by what they say; they only pretend it, but are not convinced: for they are averse to { } nothing more than this, though they say the contrary. for the truth is, they have not changed the objects of their worship, but only appear to have done so. they join themselves with them in appearance, and outwardly perform the same things that they do: but when they are in a praying posture, they address to no one, or else they invoke the gods; not rightly indeed in such a place, but yet they invoke them. wherefore as in a tragedy he who acts the part of a king is not a king, but the same person he was before he assumed the character, so every one of these keeps himself the same he was, though he seems to them to be changed. and what advantage have they by this, when the profession only is the same with theirs, but a real agreement with them is wanting? for these are things to which men ought to be persuaded, not compelled. and when a man cannot accomplish that, and yet will practise this, nothing is effected, and he may perceive the weakness of the attempt. it is said that this is not permitted by their own laws, which commend persuasion, and condemn compulsion. why then do you run mad against the temples? when you cannot persuade, you use force. in this you evidently transgress your own laws. "but they say: 'it is for the good of the world, and the men in it, that there should be no temples.' { } here, o emperor, i need freedom of speech; for i fear lest i should offend. let then any of them tell me, who have left the tongs and the hammer and the anvil, and pretend to talk of the heavens, and of them that dwell there, what rites the romans followed, who arose from small and mean beginnings, and went on prevailing, and grew great; theirs, or these, whose are the temples and the altars, from whom they knew by the soothsayers, what they ought to do, or not to do? [here libanius instanceth in the successes of agamemnon against troy; and of hercules before, against the same place; and some other things.] and many other wars might be mentioned, which have been successfully conducted, and after that peace obtained, by the favour and under the direction of the gods. but, what is the most considerable of all, they who seemed to despise this way of worship, have honoured it against their will. who are they? they who have not ventured to forbid sacrifices at rome. but if all this affair of sacrifices be a vain thing, why has not this vain thing been prohibited? and if it be hurtful likewise, why not much more? but if in the sacrifices there performed consists the stability of the empire, it ought to be reckoned beneficial to sacrifice every where; and to be allowed that the dæmonss at rome confer greater benefits, these in the country and other cities less. this is { } what may be reasonably granted: for in an army all are not equal; yet in a battle the help of each one is of use: the like may be said of rowers in a vessel. so one [dæmons] defends the sceptre of rome, another protects a city subject to it, another preserves the country and gives it felicity. let there then be temples every where. or let those men confess, that you are not well affected to rome in permitting her to do things by which she suffers damage. but neither is it at rome only that the liberty of sacrificing remains, but also in the city of serapis*, that great and populous city, which has a multitude of temples, by which it renders the plenty of egypt common to all men. this [plenty] is the work of the nile. it therefore celebrates the nile, and persuades him to rise and overflow the fields. if those rites were not performed, when and by whom they ought, he would not do so. which they themselves seem to be sensible of, who willingly enough abolish such things, but do not abolish these; but permit the river to enjoy his ancient rites, for the sake of the benefit he affords. "'what then,' some will say: 'since there is not in every country a river to do what the nile does * i. e. alexandria. the temple of serapis was destroyed in . { } for the earth, there is no reason for temples in those places. let them therefore suffer what these good people think fit.' whom i would willingly ask this question: whether, changing their mind, they will dare to say, let there be an end of these things done by [or for] the nile: let not the earth partake of his waters: let nothing be sown nor reaped: let him afford no corn, nor any other product, nor let the mud overflow the whole land, as at present. if they dare not own this, by what they forbear to say they confute what they do say: for they who do not affirm that the nile ought to be deprived of his honours, confess that the honours paid to the temples are useful. "and since they mention him* who spoiled the temples [of their revenues and gifts], we shall omit observing that he did not proceed to the taking away the sacrifices. but who ever suffered a greater punishment for taking away the sacred money [out of the temples], partly in what he brought upon himself; partly in what he suffered after his death, insomuch that his family destroyed one another, till there were none left? and it had been much better for him that some of his posterity should reign, than to enlarge with buildings a city of * constantine { } his own name: for the sake of which city itself all men still curse his memory, except those who live there in wicked luxury, because by their poverty these have their abundance. "and since next to him they mention his son *, and how he destroyed the temples, when they who polled them down took no less pains in destroying them, than the builders had done in raising them,---so laborious a work was it to separate the stones cemented by the strongest bands;--since, i say, they mention these things, i will mention somewhat yet more considerable. that he indeed made presents of the temples to those who were about him, just as he might give a horse, or a slave, or a dog, or a golden cup; but they were unhappy presents to both the giver and the receivers of them: for he spent all his life in fear of the persians, dreading all their motions as children do bugbears. of whom, some were childless, and died miserably intestate; and others had better never have had children: with such infamy and mutual discord do they live together who descend from them, whilst they dwell among sacred pillars taken from the temples. to whom i think these things are owing, who knowing how to enrich themselves, have taught * constantius. { } their children this way to happiness! and at this time their distempers carry some of them to cilicia, needing the help of Æsculapius. but instead of obtaining relief, they meet with affronts only for the injury done to the place. how can such return without cursing the author of these evils? but let the conduct of this emperor be such as to deserve praises living and dead; such as we know he* was who succeeded him; who had overturned the persian empire if treachery had not prevented it. nevertheless he was great in his death, for he was killed by treachery, as achilles also was; and is applauded for that, as well as for what he did before his death. this has he from the gods, to whom he restored their rites, and honours, and temples, and altars, and blood: from whom having heard,« that he should humble the pride of persia, and then die,' he purchased the glory of his life, taking many cities, subduing a large tract of land, teaching his pursuers to fly; and was about to receive, as all know, an embassy which would have brought the submission of the enemy. wherefore he was pleased with his wound, and looking upon it rejoiced, and without any tears rebuked those who wept, for not thinking that a wound was better to him than any old age. so that the embassies sent after his death were all * julian. { } his right. and the reason why the achemenidæ* for the future made use of entreaties instead of arms, was that the fear of him still possessed their minds. such an one was he who restored to us the temples of the gods, who did things too good to be forgotten, himself above all oblivion. "but i thought that he** who reigned lately would pull down and burn the temples of those who were of the opposite sentiment, as he knew how to despise the gods. but he was better than expectation, sparing the temples of the enemies, and not disdaining to run some hazards for preserving those of his own dominions, which had long since been erected with much labour and at vast expense. for if cities are to be preserved every where, and some cities outshine others by means of their temples, and these are their chief ornaments, next to the emperor's palaces,--how is it that no care must be taken of these, nor any endeavours used to preserve them in the body of the cities? "but it is said: 'there will be other edifices, though there should be no temples.' but i think tribute to be of importance to the treasury. let * another name for the persians. ** valens. { } these stand then, and be taxed. do we think it a cruel thing to cut off a man's hand, and a small matter to pluck out the eyes of cities? and do we not lament the ruins made by earthquakes? and when there are no earthquakes, nor other accidents, shall we ourselves do what they are wont to effect? are not the temples the possession of the emperors as well as other things? is it the part of wise men to sink their own goods? does not every one suppose him to be distracted, who throws his purse into the sea? or if the master of the ship was to cut those ropes which are of use to the ship; or if any one should order a mariner to throw away his oar,--would you think it an absurdity? and yet think it proper for a magistrate to deprive a city of such a part of it? what reason is there for destroying that, the use of which may be changed? would it not be shameful for an army to fight against its own walls? and for a general to excite them against what they have raised with great labour; the finishing of which was a festival for those who then reigned? let no man think, emperor, that this is a charge brought against you. for there lies in ruins, in the persian borders, a temple*, to which there is none like, as may be learned from those who saw it, so magnificent the stone work, and in * probably the temple at odessa. { } compass equal to the city. therefore in time of war the citizens thought their enemies would gain nothing by taking the town, since they could not take that likewise, as the strength of its fortifications bid defiance to all their attacks. at length, however, it was attacked, and with a fury equal to the greatest enemies, animated by the hopes of the richest plunder. i have heard it disputed,by some, in which state it was the greatest wonder; whether now that it is no more, or when it had suffered nothing of this kind, like the temple of serapis. but that temple, so magnificent and so large, not to mention the wonderful structure of the roof, and the many brass statues, now hid in darkness out of the light of the sun, is quite perished; a lamentation to them who have seen it, a pleasure to them who never saw it. for the eyes and ears are not alike affected with these things. or rather to those who have not seen it, it is both sorrow and pleasure: the one because of its fall, the other because their eyes never saw it. nevertheless, if it be rightly considered, this work is not yours, but the work of a man * who has deceived you; a profane wretch, an enemy of the gods, base, covetous, ungrateful to the earth that received him when born, advanced without merit, and abusing his greatness, when advanced; * probably cynegius, the emperor's lieutenant. { } a slave to his wife, gratifying her in any thing, and esteeming her all things, in perfect subjection to them* who direct these things, whose only virtue lies in wearing the habit of mourners; but especially to those of them who also weave coarse garments. this workhouse** deluded, imposed upon him, and misled him; [and it is said that many gods have been deceived by gods;] for they gave out, 'that the priests sacrificed, and so near them that the smoke reached their noses:' and after the manner of some simple people, they enlarge and heighten matters, and vaunt themselves as if they thought nothing was above their power. by such fiction, and contrivance, and artful stories, proper to excite displeasure, they persuaded the mildest father [of his people] among the emperors***. for these were really his virtues, humanity, tenderness, compassion, mildness, equity, who had rather save than destroy. but there were those who gave lister counsel; that if such a thing had been done, the attempt should be punished, and care taken to prevent the like for time to come. yet he who thought he ought to have a cadmean victory, carried on his conquest. but after he had taken his own pleasures, he should have provided for his * the monks. **the monastery. *** probably valens. { } people, and not have desired to appear great to those who shun the labours of the country, and converse in the mountains *, as they say, with the maker of all things. but let your actions appear excellent and praiseworthy to all men. there are at this time many, so far friends as to receive and empty your treasures, and to whom your empire is dearer than their own souls; but when the time comes that good counsel and real services are wanted, they have no concern upon them but to take care of themselves; and if any one comes to them, and inquires what this means, they excuse themselves as free from all fault. they disown what they have done, or pretend 'that they have obeyed the emperor's order; and if there is any blame, he must see to it.' such things they say, when it is they who are found guilty, who can give no account of their actions. for what account can be given of such mischiefs? these men before others deny this to be their own work. but when they address you alone, without witnesses, they say, 'they have been in this war serving your family.' they would deliver your house from those who by land and sea endeavour to defend your person; than which there is nothing greater you can receive from them. for these men, under the name of friends and protectors, * he refers to the monks near antioch, { } telling stories of those by whom they say they have been injured, improve your credulity into an occasion of doing more mischief. "but i return to them, to demonstrate their injustice by what they have said: say then, for what reason you destroyed that great temple? not because the emperor approved the doing it. they who pull down a temple have done no wrong if the emperor has ordered it to be done. therefore they who pulled it down did not do wrong by doing what the emperor approved of. but he who does that which is not approved by the emperor, does wrong; does he not? you, then, are the men who have nothing of this to say for what you have done. tell me why this temple of fortune is safe? and the temple of jupiter, and of minerva, and of bacchus? is it because you would have them remain? no, but because no one has given you power over them; which, nevertheless, you have assumed against those which you have destroyed. how, then, are you not liable to punishment? or how can you pretend that what you have done is right, when the sufferers have done no wrong? of which charge there would have been some appearance, if you, o emperor, had published an edict to their purpose: 'let no man within my empire believe in the gods, nor worship them, nor ask any { } good thing of them, neither for himself, nor for his children, unless it be done in silence and privately: but let all present themselves at the places where i worship, and join in the rites there performed. and let them offer the same prayers which they do, and bow the head at the hand of him who directs the multitude. whoever transgresses this law, shall be put to death.' it was easy for you to publish such a law as this; but you have not done it; nor have you in this matter laid a yoke upon the souls of men. but though you think one way better than the other, yet you do not judge that other to be an impiety, for which a man may be justly punished. nor have you excluded those of that sentiment from honours, but have conferred upon them the highest offices, and have given them access to your table, to eat and drink with you. this you have done formerly, and at this time; beside others, you have associated to yourself (thinking it advantageous to your government) a man, who swears by the gods, both before others, and before yourself: and you are not offended at it; nor do you think yourself injured by those oaths: nor do you account him a wicked man who placeth his best hopes in the gods. when, therefore, you do not reject us, as neither did he who subdued the persians by arms reject those of his subjects who differed from him in this matter, what pretence have these to reject us? { } how can these men reject their fellow-subjects, differing from them in this matter? by what right do they make these incursions? how do they seize other men's goods with the indignation of the countries? how do they destroy some things, and carry off others? adding to the injury of their actions the insolence of glorying in them. we, o emperor, if you approve and permit these things, will bear them; not without grief indeed; but yet we will show that we have learned to obey. but if you give them no power, and yet they come and invade our small remaining substance, or our walls: know, that the owners of the countries will defend themselves." extracts from bingham's antiquities of the christian church*, of the names of reproach which the jews, infidels, and heretics cast upon the christians. "besides the names already spoken of, there were some other reproachful names cast upon them by their adversaries, which it will not be improper here to mention. the first of these was nazarens, a * the edition from which these extracts are taken it in one vol. vo, london, , and begins at p. . { } name of reproach given them first by the jews, by whom they are styled the sect of the nazarens, acts xxiv. . there was indeed a particular heresy, who called themselves [--------]: and epiphanius* thinks the jews had a more especial spite at them, because they were a sort of jewish apostates, who kept circumcision and the mosaical rites together with the christian religion: and therefore, he says, they were used to curse and anathematize them three times a day, morning, noon, and evening, when they met in their synagogues to pray, in this direful form of execration,' [--------], 'send thy curse, o god, upon the nazarens.' but st. jerome** says this was levelled at christians in general, whom they thus anathematized under the name of nazarens. and this seems most probable, because both as st. jerome*** and epiphanius himself**** observe, the jews termed all christians by way of reproach, nazarens. and the gentiles took it from the jews, as appears from that of * epiphan. haer. . n. . ** hieron. com. in esa. xlix. t . p. . ter per tingulos dies sub nomine nazaienorum maledicunt in synagogis suis. *** id. de loc. hebr. t. . p. . nos apnd veterei» quasi opprobrio nazaraei dicebamur, quos nunc christianos vocant. **** epiphan. ibid. { } datianus the praetor in prudentius*, where speaking to the christians he gives them the name of nazarens. some** think the christians at first were very free to own this name, and esteemed it no reproach, till such time as the heresy of the nazarens broke out, and then in detestation of that heresy they forsook that name, and called themselves christians. acts xi. . but whether this be said according to the exact rules of chronology, i leave those that are better skilled to determine. another name of reproach was that of galilæans, which was julian's ordinary style, whenever he spake of christ or christians. thus in his dialogue with old maris a blind christian bishop, mentioned by sozomen***, he told him by way of scoff, "thy galilæan god will not cure thee." and again, in his epistle**** to arsacius high-priest of galatia, "the galilæans maintain their own poor and ours also." the like may be observed in socrates(v), theodoret (vi), * prudent. ---------]. carm. . de s. vincent. vos nazareni assistite, rudemque ritum spernite. id. hymno . de rom. mart. ** junius, parallel, lib. . c. . godwyn, jew. rites, lib. . c. . *** sozom. lib. . c. . **** a p. sozom. lib. . c. . (v) socrat. lib. . c. . (vi) theodor. lib. . c . & . { } chrysostom*, and gregory nazianzen**, who adds, that he not only called them galilæans himself, but made a law that no one should call them by any other name; thinking thereby to abolish the name of christians. they also called them atheists, and their religion the atheism or impiety, because they derided the worship of the heathen gods. dio*** says, acilius glabrio was put to death for atheism, meaning the christian religion. and the christian apologists, athenagoras**** justin martyr(v), arnobius(vi), and others, reckon this among the crimes which the heathens usually lay to their charge. eusebius says(vii) the name was become so common, that when the persecuting magistrates would oblige a christian to renounce his religion, they bade him abjure it in this form, by saying among other things, [--------] 'confusion to the atheists, away with the impious,' meaning the christians. to this they added the name of greeks and impostors. which is noted by st. jerome(viii) who says * chrys. horn. . torn. . ** naz. i. invectiv. *** dio in domitian. **** athen. legat. pro christ. (v) just. apol. i. p. . (vi) arnob. lib. i. (vii) euseb. lib. iv. c. . (viii) hieron. ep. . ad furiara. ubicunque viderint { } wheresoever they saw a christian, they would presently cry out, '[--------], 'behold a grecian impostor.' this was the character which the jews gave our saviour, [--------]' that deceiver*, matt, xxvii. . and justin martyr** says, they endeavoured to propagate it to posterity, sending their apostles or emissaries from jerusalem to all the synagogues in the world, to bid them beware of a certain impious, lawless sect, lately risen up under one jesus, a galilæan impostor. hence lucian*** took occasion in his blasphemous raillery to style him the crucified sophister. and celsus**** commonly gives him and his followers the name of [--------] 'deceivers.' so asclepiades the judge in prudentius**** compliments them with the appellation of sophisters; and ulpian(v) proscribes them in a law by the name of impostors. the reason why they added the name of greeks * christianum, statim illud de trivio, [--------] vocant impostorem. ** justin. dial. c. tryph. p. . *** lucian. peregrin. **** cels. ap. orig. lib. i. et lib. . (v) prudent. [--------]. carm. . de romano marty. quis hos sophistas error invexit novus, &c. (vi) digest, lib. . tit. . c . si incantavit, si in- precatus est, si (ut vulgari verbo impostoruxn utar) si exorcisavit { } to that of impostors, was (as learned men* conjecture) because many of the christian philosophers took upon them the grecian or philosophic habit, which was the [--------] or pallium: whence the greeks were called pallitati, as the romans were called togati, or gens togata, from their proper habit, which was the toga. now it being some offence to the romans to see the christians quit the roman gown, to wear the grecian cloak; they thence took occasion, to mock and deride them with the scurrilous names of greeks, and grecian impostors. tertullian s book _de pallio_ was written to show the spiteful malice of this foolish objection. but the heathens went one step further in their malice; and because our saviour and his followers did many miracles, which they imputed to evil arts and the power of magic, they therefore generally declaimed against them as magicians, and under that character exposed them to the fury of the vulgar. celsus** and others pretended that our saviour studied magic in egypt: and st. austin*** says, it was generally believed among the heathens, that he * kortholt de morib. christian, c. . p. . baron an. . n. . ** origen. cont. cels. lib. . arrobius, lib. . p. . *** aug. de consensu evang. lib. . c. . { } wrote some books about magic too, which he delivered to peter and paul for the use of his disciples. hence it was that suetonius* speaking in the language of his party, calls the christians _genus hominum superstionis maleficae_, 'the men of the magical superstition.' as asclepiades the judge in prudentius** styles st. romanus the martyr, arch-magician. and st. ambrose observes in the passion of st. agnes*** how the people cried out against her, 'away with the sorceress! away with the enchanter! 'nothing being more common than to term all christians, especially such as wrought miracles, by the odious name of sorcerers and magicians.' the new superstition was another name of reproach for the christian religion. suetonius gives it that title****, and pliny and tacitus add to it(v) the opprobrious terms of wicked and unreasonable * sueton. neron. c. . ** prudent. hymn. . de s. romano. quousque tandem su m m us hic nobis magus illudit. *** ambr. serm. . in s. agnen. tolle magam! tolle maleticam! **** see kortholt de morib. christ, c. . (v) sueton. nero. c. . (vi) plin. lib. . ep. . nihil aliud inveni, quam superstitionem pravam et immodicara. tacit. annal. . c. . exitiabilis superstitio. { } superstition. by which name also nero triumphed over it in his trophies which he set up at rome, when he had harassed the christians with a most severe persecution. he gloried that he had purged the country of robbers, and those that obtruded and inculcated the new superstition* upon mankind. by this, there can be no doubt he meant the christians, whose religion is called the superstition in other inscriptions of the like nature. see that of diocletian cited in baronius, ann. . from occo. "superstitione christianorum ubique deleta," &c. not much unlike this was that other name which porphyry** and some others give it, when they call it the barbarous, new, and strange religion. in the acts of the famous martyrs of lyons, who suffered under antoninus pius, the heathens scornfully insult it with this character. for having burnt the martyrs to ashes, and scattered their remains into the river rhone, they said, they did it 'to cut off their hopes of a resurrection, upon the * inscript. antiq. ad calcem sueton. oxon. neroni. claud. cais. aug. pont. max. ob. proving. latronib. et. his. qui. novam. generi. hum. superstition. inculcab. purgat. ** ap. euseb. hist eccl, lib* , c , [--------] { } strength of which they sought to obtrude* the new and strange religion upon mankind. but now let us see whether they will rise again, and whether their god can help and deliver them out of our hands.' celsus gives them the name of sibyllists**, because the christians in their disputes with the heathens sometimes made use of the authority of sibylla their own prophetess against them; whose writing they urged with so much advantage to the christian cause, and prejudice to the heathen, that justin martyr*** says, the roman governors made it death for any one to read them, or hystaspes, or the writings of the prophets. they also reproached them with the appellation of [--------], 'self-murderers,' because they readily offered themselves up to martyrdom, and cheerfully underwent any violent death, which the heathens could inflict upon them. with what eagerness they courted death, we learn not only from the christian writers**** themselves, but from the testimonies * act. mart. lugd. ap. euseb. lib. . c. . [--------] ** origen. c. cels. lib. . p. . *** just apol. . p. . **** see these collected in pearson, vind. ignat. par. . c. . p. . { } of the heathens* concerning them. lucian** says they not only despised death, but many of them voluntarily offered themselves to it, out of a persuasion that they should be made immortal and live forever. this he reckons folly, and therefore gives them the name of [--------], 'the miserable wretches, that threw away their lives,' in which sense porphyry*** also styles, the christian religion, [--------] the barbarous boldness.' as arrjus antoninus**** terms the professors of it, [--------], the stupid wretches, that had such a mind to die; and the heathen in minucius(v), homines deploratae ac desperate factionis, 'the men of the forlorn and desperate faction.' all which agrees with the name biothanati, or biaeothanati, as baronius(vi) understands it* though it may signify not only self-murderers, but (as a learned critic(xii) notes) men that expect to live after death. in which sense the heathens probably might use it likewise to ridicule the christian doctrine of the resurrection; on which, they * arrius antonin. ap. tertul. ad scap. c. . tiberias, in joh. malela chronic. ** lucian. de mort peregrin. *** porphyr. ap. euseb. hist eccl. . . c . **** tertul. ibid. (v) minuc. octav. p. . (vi) baron, an. . n. . (vii) suicer. thesaur. ecclesiast . . p. . { } knew, all their fearless and undaunted courage was founded. for so the same heathen in minucius endeavours to expose at once both their resolution and their belief: "o strange folly, and incredible madness!" says he; "they despise all present torments, and yet fear those that are future and uncertain: they are afraid of dying after death, but in the mean time do not fear to die. so vainly do they flatter themselves, and allay their fears, with the hopes of some reviving comforts after death." for one of these reasons then they gave them the name of _biothanati_, which word expressly occurs in some of the acts of the ancient martyrs. baronius observes* out of bede's martyrology, that when the seven sons of symphorosa were martyred under hadrian, their bodies were all cast into one pit together, which the temple-priests named from them, _ad septem biothanatos_, 'the grave of the seven biothanati.' for the same reasons they gave them the names of _parabolarii and desperati_, 'the bold and desperate men.' the parabolarii, or parabolani among the romans were those bold adventurous men, who hired out themselves to fight with wild beasts upon the stage or amphitheatre, whence they had also the name of _bestiarii, and confectores_. now because the * baron, an. . n. . { } christians were put to fight for their lives in the same manner, and they rather chose to do it than deny their religion, they therefore got the name of _paraboli and parabolani_: which, though it was intended as a name of reproach and mockery, yet the christians were not unwilling to take to themselves, being one of the truest characters that the heathens ever gave them. and therefore they sometimes gave themselves this name by way of allusion to the roman paraboli. as in the passion of abdo and senne* in the time of valerian, the martyrs who were exposed to be devoured by wild beasts in the amphitheatre, are said to enter, '_ut audacissimi parabolani_,' as most resolute champions, that despised their own lives for their religion's sake. but the other name of _desperati_ they rejected as a calumny, retorting it back upon their adversaries, who more justly deserved it. "those," says lactantius***, "who set a value upon their faith, and will not deny their god, they first torment and butcher with all their might, and then call them desperados, because they will not spare their bodies: as if any thing could be more desperate, than to torture and tear in pieces those whom you cannot but know to be innocent." * acta abdon. et sennes ap. suicer. ** lact. instil, lib. . c. . desperates vocant, quia corpori suo minime parcunt, &c. { } tertullian mentions another name, which was likewise occasioned by their sufferings. the martyrs which were burnt alive, were usually tied to a board or stake of about six foot long, which the romans called _semaxis_; and then they were surrounded or covered with faggots of small wood, which they called _sarmenia_. from this their punishment, the heathens, who turned every thing into mockery, gave all christians the despiteful name of _sarmentitii_ and _semaxii_*. the heathen in minucius*** takes occasion also to reproach them under the name of the sculking generation, or the men that loved to prate in corners and the dark. the ground of which scurrilous reflection was only this, that they were forced to hold their religious assemblies in the night to avoid the fury of the persecutions. which celsus**** himself owns, though otherwise prone enough to load them with hard names and odious reflections. the same heathen in minucius gives them one * tertul. apol. t, . licet nunc sarmentitios et semaxios appelletis, quia ad stipitem dimidii axis re-vincti, sarmentorum ambitu exurimur. ** minuc. octav. p. . latebrosa et lucifugax natio, in publicum muta, in angulis garrula. *** origen. c. cel. lib. . p. . { } scurrilous name more, which it is not very easy to guess the meaning of. he calls them _plautinians_*,--_homines plautinæ prosapiæ_. rigaltius** takes it for a ridicule upon the poverty and simplicity of the christians, whom the heathens commonly represented as a company of poor ignorant mechanics, bakers, tailors, and the like; men of the same quality with plautus, who, as st. jerome*** observes, was so poor, that at a time of famine he was forced to hire out himself to a baker to grind at his mill, during which time he wrote three of his plays in the intervals of his labour. such sort of men coecilius says the christians were; and therefore he styles octavius in the dialogue, _homo plautinæ prosapiæ et pistorum præcipuus_, 'a plautinian, a chief man among the illiterate bakers,' but no philosopher. the same reflection is often made by celsus. "you shall see," says he****, "weavers, tailors,fullers, and the most illiterate and rustic fellows, who dare not speak a word before wise men, when they can get a company of children and silly women together, set up to teach strange paradoxes amongst * minuc. p. . quid ad hæc audet octavius homo plautinæ prosapiæ, ut pistorum præcipuus ita postremus philosophorum? ** rigalt. in loc. *** hieron. chronic, an. . olymp. . **** origen. c cels. lib. . p. . { } them." "this is one of their rules," says he again*,--"let no man that is learned, wise, or prudent come among us; but if any be unlearned, or a child, or an ideot, let him freely come. so they openly declare, that none but fools and sots, and such as want sense, slaves, women, and children, are fit disciples for the god they worship***." nor was it only the heathens that thus reviled them, but commonly every perverse sect among the christians had some reproachful name to cast upon them. the novatian party called them _cornelieans_*** because they communicated with cornelius bishop of rome, rather than with novatianus his antagonist. they also termed them _apostates, capitolins, synedrians_, because**** they charitably decreed in their synods to receive apostates, and such as went to the capitol to sacrifice, into their communion again upon their sincere repentance. the nestorians(v) termed the orthodox _cyrillians_; and the arians(vi) called them _eustathians_ and * origen. c. cels. lib. . p. . f see the preceding translation of celsus, p. . f eulog. ap. phot. cod. . § facian. ep. . ad sympronian. || ep. legat. schismat ad suos in epheso in act. con. ephes. con. t s. p. . f sozora, lib, . c. . { } _paulinions_, from eustathius and paulin us bishops of antioch. as also _homousians_, because they kept to the doctrine of the [--------], which declared the son of god to be of the same substance with the father. the author of the _opus imperfection_ on st. matthew, under the name of chrysostom*, styles them expressly, _hæresis homoousianorum_,' the heresy of the homoousians.' and so serapion in his conflict with arnobius** calls them _homousianates_,which the printed copy reads corruptly _homuncionates_, which was a name for the nestorians. the cataphrygians or montanists commonly called the orthodox [--------], 'carnal'; because they rejected the prophecies and pretexted inspirations of montanus, and would not receive his rigid laws about fasting, nor abstain from second marriages, and observe four lents in a year, &c. this was tertullian's ordinary compliment to the christians in all his books** written after he was fallen into the errors of montanus. he calls his own party the _spiritual_, and the orthodox the _carnal_: and * opus imperf. horn. . ** conflict. arnob. et serap. ad cakem irenæi, p. . *** tertul. adv. prax. c. . nos quidem agnitio paracleti disjunxit à psychicis. id. de monogam. c. . haeretici nuptias auferunt, psychici ingerunt. see also c. . and . { } some of his books* are expressly entitled, _adversus psychicos_. clemens alexandrinus** observes, the same reproach was also used by other heretics beside the montanists. and it appears from irenæus, that this was an ancient calumny of the valentînîans, who styled themselves the _spiritual_ and the _perfect_, and the orthodox the _secular and carnal_***, who had need of abstinence and good works, which were not necessary for them that were perfect. the millenaries styled them _allegorists_, because they expounded the prophecy of the saints reigning a thousand years with christ, (rev. xx. .) to a mystical and allegorical sense. whence euseubius**** observes of nepos the egyptian bishop, who wrote for the millenium, that he entitled his book, [--------], 'a confutation of the allegorists.' aetius the arian gives them the abusive name of [--------]; by which he seems to intimate, that their religion was but temporary, and would * de jejuniis adv. psychicos. de pudicitia, &c. ** clem. alex. strom, lib. . p. . *** iren. lib. . c . p. . nobis quidem, quos psychicos vocant, et de sæculo esse dicunt, necessarian) con- tinentiam, &c. **** euseb. lib. . c. . { } , shortly have an end; whereas the character was much more applicable to the arians themselves, whose faith was so lately sprung up in the world; as the author of the dialogues _de trinitate_, under the name of athanasius, who confutes aetius *, justly retorts upon him. the manichees, as they gave themselves the most glorious names of _electi, macarii, catharistæ_, mentioned by st. austin**; so they reproached the catholics with the most contemptible name of _simplices_, 'ideots,' which is the term that manichæus himself used in his dispute*** with archelaus, the mesopotamian bishop, styling the christian teachers, _simpliciorum magistri_, 'guides of the simple;' because they could not relish his execrable doctrine concerning two principles of good and evil. the apollinarians were no less injurious to the catholics, in fixing on them the odious name of _anthropolatræ_, 'man-worshippers'; because they maintained that christ was a perfect man, and had a reasonable soul and body, of the same nature with ours; which apollinarius denied. gregory * athan. dial. . de trinit. t. . p. . ** aug. de hær. c. . *** archel. disp. adv. manichaeum adcalcem sozomen. ed. vales, p. . { } nazianzen* takes notice of this abuse, and sharply replies to it; telling the apollinarians, that they themselves much better deserved the name of _sarcolatræ_, 'flesh-worshippers': for if christ had no human soul, they must be concluded to worship his flesh only. the origenians, who denied the truth of the resurrection, and asserted that men should have only aerial and spiritual bodies in the next world, made jests upon the catholics, because they maintained the contrary, that our bodies should be the same individual bodies, and of the same nature that they are now, with flesh and bones, and all the members in the same form and structure, only altered in quality, not in substance. for this they gave them the opprobrious names of _simplices_ and _philosarcæ**, 'ideots' and 'lovers of the flesh'; _carnei, animales, jumenta_, 'carnal, sensual, animals'; _lutei, 'earthy', pilosiotæ***, which erasmus's edition reads * naz. ep. . ad cledon. ** hieron. ep. . ad pammach. t. . p. . nos simplices et philosarcas dicere, quod eadem ossa, et sanguis, et caro, id est, vultus et membra, totiusque compago corporis resurgat in novissima die. *** id. ep. , ad pam. et ocean, de error. orig. p. . pelusiotas (leg. pilosiotas) nos appellant, et luteos, animalesque, et cameos, quod non recipiamus ea quae spiritus sunt. { } corruptly _pelusiotæ_, instead of _pilonotæ_; which seems to be a name formed from _pili_, (hair); because the catholics asserted, that the body would rise perfect in all its parts, even with the hair itself to beautify and adorn it. but of all others the luciferians gave the church the rudest language; styling her the brothel-house, and synagogue of antichrist and satan; because she allowed those bishops to retain their honour and places, who were cajoled by the arians to subscribe the fraudulent confession of the council of ariminum. the luciferian in st. jerome runs out in this manner against the church; and st. jerome says, he spake but the sense of the whole party, for this was the ordinary style and language of all the rest.--hieron. dial. adv. lucifer, t. ii. p. ." thus far bingham: to whose extracts may appropriately be added, what the emperor julian says reproachfully of the christians, in the fragments which cyril has preserved of his treatise against them. "you do not take notice (says he) whether any mention is made by the jews of holiness; but you emulate their rage and their bitterness, overturning temples and altars, and cutting the throats, not only of those who remain firm in paternal { } institutes, but also of those heretics who are equally erroneous with yourselves, and who do not lament a dead body [i. e. the body of christ] in the same manner as you do*. for neither jesus nor paul exhorted you to act in this manner. but the reason is, that neither did they expect that you would ever arrive at the power which you have obtained. for they were satisfied if they could deceive maidservants and slaves, and through these married women, and such men as cornelius and sergius; among whom if you can mention one that was at that time an illustrious character, (and these things were transacted under the reign of tiberius or claudius) believe that i am a liar in all things**." * julian here alludes to the contests between the arians and trinitarians. ** vid. cyril, apud spanh. the end. images of public domain material from the google print project.) transcriber's note: text enclosed by underscores is in italics (_italics_). small capital text has been replaced with all capitals. * * * * * [illustration: coverpage] thoughts on life and religion thoughts on life and religion an aftermath from the writings of the right honourable professor max mÜller by his wife third impression london archibald constable and company ltd. edinburgh: t. and a. constable, printers to his majesty preface this book has been prepared in accordance with a wish expressed by many known and unknown admirers of my husband's writings, who desire to possess in a portable form the passages that have specially appealed to them in his different works, and in the _life and letters_. i have taken this opportunity of adding extracts from private letters, and from the writings he left unfinished, which would not otherwise have become known to any but his own family or a few intimate friends. those who have read the _life and letters_, do not need to be told that max müller lived from his earliest years in the firm conviction that all is wisely ordered in this life, and 'all for our real good, though we do not always see it, and though we cannot venture to fathom the wisdom guiding our steps through life.' to others his unswerving trust and faith as shown in these extracts may be a revelation, for he seldom talked on such subjects. this trust and faith gave him strength through the bitter struggles of his early life, taught him resignation during the years when the dearest wish of his heart seemed unattainable, supported him later when those he tenderly loved were snatched from him by death, and upheld him in his last long and depressing illness. my earnest desire is that this little book may prove a help and comfort to many exposed to like trials, and strengthen those whose path now stretches before them as a sunny avenue, to meet the sorrows that almost surely await them as life advances. georgina max mÜller. _june , _. contents page the art of life, the beautiful, the bible, children, christ, the logos, christianity, death, the deity, the divine, doubts, evolution of religion, faith, the fatherhood of god, future life, the infinite, knowledge, language, life, love, mankind, mind or thought, miracles, music, nature, obscurity, old age, religion and religions, revelation, the rig-veda, science, the self, sorrow and suffering, the soul, theosophy, truth, the will of god, wonder, words, work, the world, the art of life to learn to understand one another is the great art of life, and to 'agree to differ' is the best lesson of the comparative science of religion. _silesian horseherd._ there is a higher kind of music which we all have to learn, if our life is to be harmonious, beautiful, and useful. there are certain intervals between the young and the old which must be there, which are meant to be there, without which life would be monotonous; but out of these intervals and varieties the true art of life knows how to build up perfect harmonies.... even great sorrow may be a blessing, by drawing some of our affections away from this life to a better life ... of which, it is true, we know nothing, but from which, when we see the wisdom and love that underlie this life, we may hope everything. we are meant to hope and to trust, and that is often much harder than to see and to know.... the greatest of all arts is the art of life, and the best of all music the harmony of spirits. there are many little rules to be learnt for giving harmony and melody to our life, but the thorough bass must be--love. _life._ one thing is necessary above all things in order to live peaceably with people, that is, in latin, _humanitas_, german, _menschlichkeit_. it is difficult to describe, but it is to claim as little as possible from others, neither an obliging temper nor gratitude, and yet to do all one can to please others, yet without expecting them always to find it out. as men are made up of contradictions they are the more grateful and friendly the less they see that we expect gratitude and friendliness. even the least cultivated people have their good points, and it is not only far better but far more interesting if one takes trouble to find out the best side and motives of people, rather than the worst and most selfish.... life is an art, and more difficult than sanscrit or anything else. _life._ we become chiefly what we are more through others than through ourselves, and happy is the man whose path in life leads him only by good men and brings him together with good men. how often we forget in judging others the influences under which they have grown up. how can one expect a child to be truthful when he sees how servants, yes often parents, practise deceit. how many children hear from those to whom they look up, expressions, principles, and prudent rules of life, which consciously or unconsciously exercise an influence on the young life of the child. yet with how little of loving introspection we pass our judgments. _ms._ if you want to be at peace with yourself, do not mind being at war with the world. _ms._ the beautiful is the beautiful without us, or is it not rather within us? what we call sweet and bitter is our own sweetness, our own bitterness, for nothing can be sweet or bitter without us. is it not the same with the beautiful? the world is like a rich mine, full of precious ore, but each man has to assay the ore for himself, before he knows what is gold and what is not. what, then, is the touchstone by which we assay the beautiful? we have a touchstone for discovering the good. whatever is unselfish is good. but--though nothing can be beautiful, except what is in some sense or other good, not everything that is good is also beautiful. what, then, is that something which, added to the good, makes it beautiful? it is a great mystery. it is so to us as it was to plato. we must have gazed on the beautiful in the dreams of childhood, or, it may be, in a former life, and now we look for it everywhere, but we can never find it,--never at least in all its brightness and fulness again, never as we remember it once as the vision of a half-forgotten dream. nor do we all remember the same ideal--some poor creatures remember none at all.... the ideal, therefore, of what is beautiful is within us, that is all we know; how it came there we shall never know. it is certainly not of this life, else we could define it; but it underlies this life, else we could not feel it. sometimes it meets us like a smile of nature, sometimes like a glance of god; and if anything proves that there is a great past, and a great future, a beyond, a higher world, a hidden life, it is our faith in the beautiful. _chips._ the bible the fault is ours, not theirs, if we wilfully misinterpret the language of ancient prophets, if we persist in understanding their words in their outward and material aspect only, and forget that before language had sanctioned a distinction between the concrete and the abstract, between the purely spiritual as opposed to the coarsely material, the intention of the speakers comprehended both the concrete and the abstract, both the material and the spiritual, in a manner which has become quite strange to us, though it lives on in the language of every true poet. _science of religion._ canonical books give the reflected image only of the real doctrines of the founder of a new religion; an image always blurred and distorted by the medium through which it had to pass. _science of religion._ the old testament stands on a higher ethical stage than other sacred books,--it certainly does not lose by a comparison with them. i always said so, but people would not believe it. still, anything to show the truly historical and human character of the old testament would be extremely useful in any sense, and would in nowise injure the high character which it possesses. _life._ if we have once learnt to be charitable and reasonable in the interpretation of the sacred books of other religions, we shall more easily learn to be charitable and reasonable in the interpretation of our own. we shall no longer try to force a literal sense on words which, if interpreted literally, must lose their true and original purport; we shall no longer interpret the law and the prophets as if they had been written in the english of our own century, but read them in a truly historical spirit, prepared for many difficulties, undiscouraged by many contradictions, which, so far from disproving the authenticity, become to the historian of ancient language and ancient thought the strongest confirmatory evidence of the age, the genuineness, and the real truth of ancient sacred books. let us but treat our own sacred books with neither more nor less mercy than the sacred books of any other nations, and they will soon regain that position and influence which they once possessed, but which the artificial and unhistorical theories of the last three centuries have wellnigh destroyed. _science of religion._ by the students of the science of religion the old testament can only be looked upon as a strictly historical book by the side of other historical books. it can claim no privilege before the tribunal of history, nay, to claim such a privilege would be to really deprive it of the high position which it justly holds among the most valuable monuments of the distant past. but the authorship of the single books which form the old testament, and more particularly the dates at which they were reduced to writing, form the subject of keen controversy, not among critics hostile to religion, but among theologians who treat these questions in the most independent, but at the same time the most candid and judicial, spirit. by this treatment many difficulties, which in former times disturbed the minds of thoughtful theologians, have been removed, and the old testament has resumed its rightful place among the most valuable monuments of antiquity.... but this was possible on one condition only, namely, that the old testament should be treated simply as an historical book, willing to submit to all the tests of historical criticism to which other historical books have submitted. _gifford lectures, ii._ what the student of the history of the continuous growth of religion looks for in vain in the books of the old testament, are the successive stages in the development of religious concepts. he does not know which books he may consider as more ancient or more modern than other books. he asks in vain how much of the religious ideas reflected in certain of these books may be due to ancient tradition, how much to the mind of the latest writer. in exodus iii. god is revealed to moses, not only as the supreme, but as the only god. but we are now told by competent scholars that exodus could not have been written down till probably a thousand years after moses. how then can we rely on it as an accurate picture of the thoughts of moses and his contemporaries? it has been said with great truth that 'it is almost impossible to believe that a people who had been emancipated from superstition at the time of the exodus, and who had been all along taught to conceive god as the one universal spirit, existing only in truth and righteousness, should be found at the time of josiah, nearly nine hundred years later, steeped in every superstition.' still, if the writings of the old testament[ ] were contemporaneous with the events they relate, this retrogressive movement would have to be admitted. most of these difficulties are removed, or considerably lessened, if we accept the results of modern hebrew scholarship, and remember that though the old testament may contain very ancient traditions, they probably were not reduced to writing till the middle of the fifth century b.c., and may have been modified by and mixed up with ideas belonging to the time of ezra. _gifford lectures, ii._ [footnote : the reader is reminded that these lectures were published in , before english theologians had reached any generally received results in the study of the dates of the various parts of the old testament. it would be more correct now to substitute 'the pentateuch' in the above sentence for the 'old testament.' for a statement of the modern views of the several periods to which the different books may be assigned, see canon driver's _introduction to the literature of the old testament_.] may we, or may we not, interpret, as students of language, and particularly as students of oriental languages, the language of the old testament as a primitive and as an oriental language? may we, or may we not, as true believers, see through the veil which human language always throws over the most sacred mysteries of the soul, and instead of dragging the sublimity of abraham's trial and abraham's faith down to the level of a merely preternatural event, recognise in it the real trial of a human soul, the real faith of the friend of god, a faith without stormwinds, without earthquakes and fires, a faith in the still small voice of god? _ms._ is it really necessary to say again and again what the buddhists have said so often and well, that the act of creation is perfectly inconceivable to any human understanding, and that, if we speak of it at all, we can only do so anthropomorphically or mythologically? _ms._ children all seems so bright and perfect, and quite a new life seems to open before me, in that beloved little child. she helps me to look forward to such a far distance, and opens quite a new view of one's own purpose and duties on earth. it is something new to live for, to train a human soul entrusted to us, and to fit her for her true home beyond this life. _life._ i doubt whether it is possible to take too high a view of life where the education of children is concerned. it is the one great work entrusted to us, it forms the true religion of life. nothing is small or unimportant in forming the next generation, which is to carry on the work where we have to leave it unfinished. no single soul can be spared--every one is important, every one may be the cause of infinite good, or of infinite mischief, for ever hereafter. _ms._ christ, the logos an explanation of _logos_ in greek philosophy is much simpler than is commonly supposed. it is only needful not to forget that for the greeks thought and word were inseparable, and that the same term, namely _logos_, expressed both, though they distinguished the inner from the outer _logos_. it is one of the most remarkable aberrations of the human mind to imagine that there could be a word without thought, or a thought without word. the two are inseparable; one cannot exist or be even conceived without the other. _silesian horseherd._ in nearly all religions god remains far from man. i say in nearly all religions: for in brahmanism the unity, not the union, of the human soul with brahma is recognised as the highest aim. this unity with deity, together with phenomenal difference, jesus expressed in part through the _logos_, in part through the son. there is nothing so closely allied as thought and word, father and son. they can be distinguished but never separated, for they exist only through each other. in this matter the greek philosophers considered all creation as the thought or the word of god, and the thought 'man' became naturally the highest _logos_, realised in millions of men, and raised to the highest perfection in jesus. as the thought exists only through the word, and the word only through the thought, so also the father exists only through the son, and the son through the father, and in this sense jesus feels and declares himself the son of god, and all men who believe in him his brethren. this revelation or inspiration came to mankind through jesus. no one knew the father except the son, who is in the bosom of the father, and those to whom the son willeth to reveal him. this is the christian revelation in the true sense of the word. _silesian horseherd._ small as may be the emphasis that we now lay on the _logos_ doctrine, in that period (_i.e._ of the fourth gospel) it was the centre, the vital germ, of the whole christian teaching. if we read any of the writings of athanasius, or of any of the older church fathers, we shall be surprised to see how all of them begin with the word (_logos_) as a fixed point of departure, and then proceed to prove that the word is the son of god, and finally that the son of god is jesus of nazareth. religion and philosophy are here closely related. _silesian horseherd._ what is true christianity if it be not the belief in the true sonship of man, as the greek philosophers had rightly surmised, but had never seen realised on earth? here is the point where the two great intellectual currents of the aryan and semitic worlds flow together, in that the long-expected messiah of the jews was recognised as the _logos_, the true son of god, and that he opened or revealed to every man the possibility to become what he had always been, but had never before apprehended, the highest thought, the word, the logos, the son of god. _silesian horseherd._ eternal life consists in knowing that men have their father and their true being in the only true god, and that as sons of this same father, they are of like nature with god and christ. _silesian horseherd._ why should the belief in the son give everlasting life? because jesus has through his own sonship in god declared to us ours also. this knowledge gives us eternal life through the conviction that we too have something divine and eternal within us, namely, the word of god, the son whom he hath sent. jesus himself, however, is the only begotten son, the light of the world. he first fulfilled and illumined the divine idea which lies darkly in all men, and made it possible for all men to become actually what they have always been potentially--sons of god. _silesian horseherd._ we make the fullest allowance for those who, from reverence for god and for christ, and from the purest motives, protest against claiming for man the full brotherhood of christ. but when they say that the difference between christ and mankind is one of kind, and not of degree, they know not what they do, they nullify the whole of christ's teaching, and they deny the incarnation which they pretend to teach. _gifford lectures, iv._ the ammergau play must be very powerful. and i feel sure just now nothing is more wanted than to be powerfully impressed with the truly human character of christ; it has almost vanished under the extravagant phraseology of hymns and creeds, and yet how much greater is the simple story of his unselfish life than all the superlatives of later theology. if one knows what it is to lose a human soul whom one has loved--how one forgets all that was human, and only clings to what was eternal in it, one can understand the feelings of christ's friends and disciples when they saw him crucified and sacrificed, the innocent for those whom he wished to guide and save. _ms._ jesus destroyed the barrier between man and god, the veil that hid the holiest was withdrawn. man was taught to see what the prophets had seen dimly, that he was near to god, that god was near to every one of us, that the old jewish view of a distant jehovah had arisen from an excess of reverence, had filled the heart of man with fear, but not with love. jesus did not teach a new doctrine, but he removed an old error, and that error, that slavish fear of god, once removed, the human heart would recover the old trust in god--man would return like a lost son to his lost father, he would feel that if he was anything, he could only be what his god had made him, and wished him to be. and if a name was wanted for that intimate relation between god and man, what better name was there than father and son? _ms._ those who deprived jesus of his real humanity in order to exalt him above all humanity were really undoing his work. christ came to teach us, not what he was, but what we are. he had seen that man, unless he learnt himself to be the child of god, was lost. all his aspirations were vain unless they all sprang from one deep aspiration, love of god. and how can we love what is totally different from ourselves? if there is in us a likeness, however small, of god, then we can love our god, feel ourselves drawn towards him, have our true being in him. that is the essence of christianity, that is what distinguishes the christian from all other religions. and yet that very kernel and seed of christianity is constantly disregarded, is even looked upon with distrust. was not christ, who died for us, more than we ourselves? it is said. or again, are we to make ourselves gods? christ never says that he is different from ourselves; he never taught as a god might teach. his constant teaching is, that we are his brethren, and that we ought to follow his example, to become like him, because we were meant to be like him. in that he has come near to god, as near as a son can be to his father; he is what he was meant to be. we are not, and hence the deep difference between him and us. _ms._ then it is said, is not christ god? yes, he is, but in his own sense, not in the jewish nor in the greek sense, nor in the sense which so many christians attach to that article of their faith. christ's teaching is that we are of god, that there is in us something divine, that we are nothing if we are not that. he also teaches that through our own fault we are now widely separated from god, as a son may be entirely separated and alienated from his father. but god is a perfect and loving father--he knows that we can be weak, and yet be good, and when his lost sons return to him he receives them and forgives them as only a father can forgive. let us bestow all praise and glory on christ as the best son of god. let us feel how unworthy we are to be called his brothers, and the children of god, but let us not lose christ, and lose our father whom he came to show us, by exalting jesus beyond the place which he claimed himself. christ never calls himself the father, he speaks of his father with love, but always with humility and reverence. all attempts to find in human language a better expression than that of son have failed. theologians and philosophers have tried in vain to define more accurately the relation of christ to the father, of man to god. they have called christ another person of the godhead. is that better than christ's own simple human language, i go to my father? _ms._ christ has been made so unreal to us, he has been spoken of in such unmeasured terms that it is very difficult to gain him back, such as he was, without a fear of showing less reverence and love of him than others. and yet, unreal expressions are always false expressions--nothing is so bad as if we do not fully mean what we say. of course we know christ through his friends only, they tell us what he told them--they represent him as he appeared to them. what fallible judges they often were they do not disguise, and that, no doubt, raises the value of their testimony, but we can only see him as they saw him; the fact remains we know very little of him. still, enough remains to show that christ was full of love, that he loved not only his friends, but his enemies. christ's whole life seems to have been one of love, not of coldness. he perceived our common brotherhood, and what it was based on, our common father beyond this world, in heaven, as he said. _ms._ christianity christianity is christianity by this one fundamental truth, that as god is the father of man, so truly, and not poetically, or metaphorically only, man is the son of god, participating in god's very essence and nature, though separated from god by self and sin. this oneness of nature between the divine and the human does not lower the concept of god by bringing it nearer to the level of humanity; on the contrary, it raises the old concept of man and brings it nearer to its true ideal. the true relation between god and man had been dimly foreseen by many prophets and poets, but christ was the first to proclaim that relation in clear and simple language. he called himself the son of god, and he was the firstborn son of god in the fullest sense of that word. but he never made himself equal with the father in whom he lived and moved and had his being. he was man in the new and true sense of the word, and in the new and true sense of the word he was god. to my mind man is nothing if he does not participate in the divine. _chips._ true christianity lives, not in our belief, but in our love, in our love of god, and in our love of man founded on our love of god. _chips._ true christianity, i mean the religion of christ, seems to me to become more and more exalted the more we know and the more we appreciate the treasures of truth hidden in the despised religions of the world. but no one can honestly arrive at that conviction unless he uses honestly the same measure for all religions. _science of religion._ the position which christianity from the very beginning took up with regard to judaism served as the first lesson in comparative theology, and directed the attention even of the unlearned to a comparison of two religions, differing in their conception of the deity, in their estimate of humanity, in their motives of morality, and in their hope of immortality, yet sharing so much in common that there are but few of the psalms and prayers in the old testament in which a christian cannot heartily join even now, and but few rules of morality which he ought not even now to obey. _science of religion._ it was exactly because the doctrine of christ, more than that of the founders of any other religion, offered in the beginning an expression of the highest truths in which jewish carpenters, roman publicans, and greek philosophers could join without dishonesty, that it has conquered the best part of the world. it was because attempts were made from very early times to narrow and stiffen the outward expression of our faith, to put narrow dogma in the place of trust and love, that the christian church often lost those who might have been its best defenders, and that the religion of christ has almost ceased to be what, before all things, it was meant to be, a religion of world-wide love and charity. _hibbert lectures._ the founder of christianity insisted again and again on the fact that he came to fulfil, and not to destroy; and we know how impossible it would be to understand the true position of christianity in the history of the world, the true purport of the 'fullness of time,' unless we always remember that its founder was born and lived and died an israelite. many of the parables and sayings of the new testament have now been traced back, not only to the old testament, but to the talmud also; and we know how difficult it was at first for any but a jew to understand the true meaning of the new christian doctrine. _gifford lectures, i._ there is no religion in the whole world which in simplicity, in purity of purpose, in charity, and true humanity, comes near to that religion which christ taught to his disciples. and yet that very religion, we are told, is being attacked on all sides. the principal reason for this omnipresent unbelief is, i believe, the neglect of our foundations, the disregard of our own bookless religion, the almost disdain of natural religion. even bishops will curl their lips when you speak to them of that natural and universal _religion_ which existed before the advent of our historical religions, nay, without which all historical religions would have been as impossible as poetry is without language. natural religion may exist and does exist without revealed religion--revealed religion without natural religion is an utter impossibility. _gifford lectures, i._ there can be no doubt that free inquiry has swept away, and will sweep away, many things which have been highly valued, nay, which were considered essential by many honest and pious minds. and yet who will say that true christianity, christianity which is known by its fruits, is less vigorous now than it has ever been before? there have been discussions in the christian church from the time of the apostles to our own times. we have passed through them ourselves, we are passing through them now. _gifford lectures, ii._ when we think of the exalted character of christ's teaching, may we not ask ourselves once more, what would he have said if he had seen the fabulous stories of his birth and childhood, or if he had thought that his divine character would ever be made to depend on the historical truth of the _evangelia infantiae_? _gifford lectures, ii._ much of the mere outworks of christianity cannot hold the ground on which they have been planted, they have to be given up by force at last, when they ought to have been given up long before; and when given up at last, they often tear away with them part of the strength of that faith of which they had previously been not only the buttress outside, but a part of the living framework. _gifford lectures, iii._ what we call christianity embraces several fundamental doctrines, but the most important of them all is the recognition of the divine in man, or, as we call it, the belief in the divinity of the son. the belief in god, let us say in god the father, or the creator and ruler of the world, had been elaborated by the jews, and most of the civilised and uncivilised nations of the world had arrived at it. but when the founder of christianity called god his father, and not only his father, but the father of all mankind, he did no longer speak the language of either jews or greeks. to the jews, to claim divine sonship for man would have been blasphemy. to the greeks, divine sonship would have meant no more than a miraculous, a mythological event. christ spoke a new language, a language liable, no doubt, to be misunderstood, as all language is; but a language which to those who understood it has imparted a new glory to the face of the whole world. it is well known how this event, the discovery of the divine in man, which involves a complete change in the spiritual condition of mankind, and marks the great turning-point in the history of the world, has been surrounded by a legendary halo, has been obscured, has been changed into mere mythology, so that its real meaning has often been quite forgotten, and has to be discovered again by honest and fearless seeking. christ had to speak the language of his time, but he gave a new meaning to it, and yet that language has often retained its old discarded meaning in the minds of his earliest, nay sometimes of his latest disciples also. the divine sonship of which he speaks was not blasphemy as the jews thought, nor mythology as so many of his own followers imagined, and still imagine. father and son, divine and human, were like the old bottles that could hardly hold the new wine; and yet how often have the old broken bottles been preferred to the new wine that was to give new life to the world. _gifford lectures, iii._ if we have learnt to look upon christianity, not as something unreal and unhistorical, but as an integral part of history, of the historical growth of the human race, we can see how all the searchings after the divine or infinite in man were fulfilled in the simple utterances of christ. his preaching, we are told, brought life and immortality to light. life, the life of the soul, and immortality, the immortality of the soul, were there and had always been there. but they were brought to light, man was made fully conscious of them, man remembered his royal birth, when the word had been spoken by christ. _gifford lectures, iii._ we must never forget that it was not the principal object of christ's teaching to make others believe that he only was divine, immortal, or the son of god. he wished them to believe this for _their own_ sake, for _their own_ regeneration. 'as many as received him to them gave he power to become the sons of god.' it might be thought, at first, that this recognition of a divine element in man must necessarily lower the conception of the divine. and so it does in one sense. it brings god nearer to us, it bridges over the abyss by which the divine and the human were completely separated in the jewish, and likewise in many of the pagan religions. it rends the veil of the temple. this lowering, therefore, is no real lowering of the divine. it is an expanding of the concept of the divine, and at the same time a raising of the concept of humanity, or rather a restoration of what is called human to its true character,--a regeneration, or a second birth, as it is called by christ himself. 'except a man be born again, he cannot see the kingdom of god.' _gifford lectures, iii._ there is a constant action and reaction in the growth of religious ideas, and the first action by which the divine was separated from and placed almost beyond the reach of the human mind, was followed by a reaction which tried to reunite the two. this process, though visible in many religions, was most pronounced in judaism in its transition to christianity. nowhere had the invisible god been further removed from the visible world than in the ancient jewish religion, and nowhere have the two been so closely drawn together again and made one as by that fundamental doctrine of christianity, the divine sonship of man. _gifford lectures, iv._ christ spoke to men, women, and children, not to theologians, and the classification of his sayings should be made, not according to theological technicalities, but according to what makes our own heart beat. _life._ the yearning for union or unity with god, which we see as the highest goal in other religions, finds its fullest recognition in christianity, if but properly understood, that is, if but treated historically, and it is inseparable from our belief in man's full brotherhood with christ. however imperfect the forms may be in which that human yearning for god has found expression in different religions, it has always been the deepest spring of all religions, and the highest summit reached by natural religion. the different bridges that have been thrown across the gulf that seems to separate earth from heaven and man from god, may be more or less crude and faulty, yet we may trust that many a faithful soul has been carried across by them to a better home. it is quite true that to speak of a bridge between man and god, even if that bridge is called the self, is but a metaphor. but how can we speak of these things except in metaphors? to return to god is a metaphor, to stand before the throne of god is a metaphor, to be in paradise with christ is a metaphor. _gifford lectures, iv._ the christian religion should challenge rather than deprecate comparison. if we find certain doctrines which we thought the exclusive property of christianity in other religions also, does christianity lose thereby, or is the truth of these doctrines impaired by being recognised by other teachers also? _gifford lectures, iv._ love--superseding faith--seems to be the keynote of all christianity. but the world is still far from true christianity, and whoever is honest towards himself knows how far away he himself is from the ideal he wishes to reach. one can hardly imagine what this world would be if we were really what we profess to be, followers of christ. the first thing we have to learn is that we are not what we profess to be. when we have learnt that, we shall at all events be more forbearing, forgiving, and loving towards others. we shall believe in them, give them credit for good intentions, with which, i hope, not hell, but heaven, is paved. _life._ our religion is certainly better and purer than others, but in the essential points all religions have something in common. they all start with the belief that there is something beyond, and they are all attempts to reach out to it. _life._ how little was taught by christ, and yet that is enough, and every addition is of evil. love god, love men--that is the whole law and the prophets--not the creeds and the catechism and the articles and the endless theological discussions. we want no more, and those who try to fulfil that simple law, know best how difficult it is, and how our whole life and our whole power are hardly sufficient to fulfil that short law. _ms._ christ's teaching is plainly that as he is the son of god so we are his brothers. his conception of man is a new one, and as that is new, so must his conception of god be new. he lifts up humanity, and brings deity near to humanity, and he expresses their inseparable nature and their separate existences by the best simile which the world supplies, that of father and son. he claims no more for himself than he claims for us. his only excellence is that which is due to himself--his having been the first to find the father, and become again his son, and his having remained in life and death more one with the father than any one of those who professed to believe in him, and to follow his example. _ms._ if jesus was not god, was he, they ask, a mere man? a _mere_ man? is there anything among the works of god, anything next to god, more wonderful, more awful, more holy than man? much rather should we ask, was then jesus a mere god? look at the miserable conceptions which man made to himself as long as he spoke of gods beside god? it could not be otherwise. god is one, and he who admits other gods beside or without him degrades, nay, denies and destroys the one god. _a_ god is less than man. true christianity does not degrade the godhead, it exalts manhood, by bringing it back near to god, as near as it is possible for the human thought to approach the ineffable and inconceivable majesty of the true god. _ms._ if i ventured to speak of god's purpose at all, i should say, that it is not god's purpose to win only the spiritually gifted, the humble, the tender hearted, the souls that are discontented with their own shortcomings, the souls that find happiness in self-sacrifice--those are his already--but to win the intellectually gifted, the wise, the cultivated, the clever, or better still, to win them both. it would be an evil day for christianity if it could no longer win the intellectually gifted, the wise, the cultivated, the clever, and it seems to me the duty of all who really believe in christ to show that christianity, if truly understood, can win the highest as well as the humblest intellects. _gifford lectures, iii._ death trust in god! what he does is well done. what we are, we are through him; what we suffer, we suffer through his will. we cannot conceive his wisdom, we cannot fathom his love; but we can trust with a trust stronger than all other trusts that he will not forsake us, when we cling to him, and call on him, as his son jesus christ has taught us to call on him, 'our father.' though this earthly form of ours must perish, all that was good, and pure, and unselfish in us will live. death has no power over what is of god within us. death changes and purifies and perfects us, death brings us nearer to god, where we shall meet again those that are god's, and love them with that godly love which can never perish. _life._ would that loving father begin such a work in us as is now going on, and then destroy it, leave it unfinished? no, what is will be; what really is in us will always be; we shall be because we are. many things which are now will change, but what we really are we shall always be; and if love forms really part of our very life, that love, changed it may be, purified, sanctified, will be with us, and remain with us through that greatest change which we call death. the pangs of death will be the same for all that, just as the pangs of childbirth seem ordained by god in order to moderate the exceeding joy that a child is born into the world. and as the pain is forgotten when the child is born, so it will be after death--the joy will be commensurate to the sorrow. the sorrow is but the effort necessary to raise ourselves to that new and higher state of being, and without that supreme effort or agony, the new life that waits for us is beyond our horizon, beyond our conception. it is childish to try to anticipate, we cannot know anything about it; we are meant to be ignorant; even the _divina commedia_ of a great poet and thinker is but child's play, and nothing else.... no illusions, no anticipations; only that certainty, that quiet rest in god, that submissive expectation of the soul, which knows that all is good, all comes from god, all tends to god. _ms._ as one gets older death seems hardly to make so wide a gap--a few years more or less, that is all--meantime we know in whose hands we all are, that life is very beautiful, but death has its beauty too. _life._ we accustom ourselves so easily to life as a second nature, and in spite of the graves around us, death remains something unnatural, hard and terrifying. that should not be. an early death is terrifying, but as we grow older our thoughts should accustom themselves to passing away at the end of a long life's journey. all is so beautiful, so good, so wisely ordered, that even death can be nothing hard, nothing disturbing; it all belongs to a great plan, which we do not understand, but of which we know that it is wiser than all wisdom, better than all good, that it cannot be otherwise, cannot be better. in faith we can live and we can die--can even see those go before us who came before us, and whom we must follow. all is not according to our will, to our wisdom, but according to a heavenly will, and those who have once found each other through god's hand will, clinging to his hand, find each other again. _life._ if we are called away sooner or later we ought to part cheerfully, knowing that this earth could give no more than has been ours, and looking forward to our new home, as to a more perfect state where all that was good and true and unselfish in us will live and expand, and all that was bad and mean will be purified and cast off. so let us work here as long as it is day, but without fearing the night that will lead us to a new and brighter dawn of life. _ms._ annihilation ... is a word without any conceivable meaning. we are--that is enough. what we are does not depend on us; what we shall be neither. we may conceive the idea of change in form, but not of cessation or destruction of substance. people mean frequently by annihilation the loss of conscious personality, as distinct from material annihilation. what i feel about it is shortly this. if there is anything real and substantial in our conscious personality, then whatever there is real and substantial cannot cease to exist. if on the contrary we mean by conscious personality something that is the result of accidental circumstances, then, no doubt, we must face the idea of such a personality ceasing to be what it now is. i believe, however, that the true source and essence of our personality lies in what is the most real of all real things, and in so far as it is true, it cannot be destroyed. there is a distinction between conscious personality and personal consciousness. a child has personal consciousness, a man who is this or that, a napoleon, a talleyrand, has conscious personality. much of that conscious personality is merely temporary, and passes away, but the personal consciousness remains. _life._ one look up to heaven, and all this dust of the highroad of life vanishes. yes! one look up to heaven and that dark shadow of death vanishes. we have made the darkness of that shadow ourselves, and our thoughts about death are very ungodly. god has willed it so; there is to be a change, and a change of such magnitude that even if angels were to come down and tell us all about it, we could not understand it, as little as the new-born child would understand what human language could tell about the present life. think what the birth of a child, of a human soul, is; and when you have felt the utter impossibility of fathoming that mystery, then turn your thoughts upon death, and see in it a new birth equally unfathomable, but only the continuation of that joyful mystery which we call a birth. it is all god's work, and where is there a flaw in that wonder of all wonders, god's ever-working work? if people talk of the miseries of life, are they not all man's work? _life._ great happiness makes one feel so often that it cannot last, and that we will have some day to give up all to which one's heart clings so. a few years sooner or later, but the time will come, and come quicker than one expects. therefore i believe it is right to accustom oneself to the thought that we can none of us escape death, and that all our happiness here is only lent us. but at the same time we can thankfully enjoy all that god gives us, ... and there is still so much left us, so much to be happy and thankful for, and yet here too the thought always rushes across one's brightest hours: it cannot last, it is only for a few years and then it must be given up. let us work as long as it is day, let us try to do our duty, and be very thankful for god's blessings which have been showered upon us so richly--but let us learn also always to look beyond, and learn to be ready to give up everything,--and yet say, thy will be done. _ms._ it is the most painful work i know looking through the papers and other things belonging to one who is no more with us. how different everything looks to what it did before. there is one beautiful feature about death, it carries off all the small faults of the soul we loved, it makes us see the true littleness of little things, it takes away all the shadows, and only leaves the light. that is how it ought to be; and if in judging of a person we could only bring ourselves to think how we should judge of them if we saw them on the bed of death, how different life would be! we always judge in self-defence, and that makes our judgments so harsh. when they are gone how readily we forget and forgive everything, how truly we love all that was lovable in them, how we blame ourselves for our own littleness in minding this and that, and not simply and truly loving all that was good and bright and noble. how different life might be if we could all bring ourselves to be what we really are, good and loving, and could blow away the dust that somehow or other will fall on all of us. it is never too late to begin again. _life._ the death of those we love is the last lesson we receive in life--the rest we must learn for ourselves. to me, the older i grow, and the nearer i feel that to me the end must be, the more perfect and beautiful all seems to be; one feels surrounded and supported everywhere by power, wisdom, and love, content to trust and wait, incapable of murmuring, very helpless, very weak, yet strong in that very helplessness, because it teaches us to trust in something not ourselves. yet parting with those we love is hard--only i fear there is nothing else that would have kept our eyes open to what is beyond this life. _ms._ it is strange how little we all think of death as the condition of all the happiness we enjoy now. if we could but learn to value each hour of life, to enjoy it fully, to use it fully, never to spoil a minute by selfishness, then death would never come too soon; it is the wasted hours which are like death in life, and which make life really so short. it is not too late to learn to try to be more humble, more forbearing, more courteous, or, what is at the root of all, more loving. _life._ the great world for which we live seems to me as good as the little world in which we live, and i have never known why faith should fail, when everything, even pain and sorrow, is so wonderfully good and beautiful. all that we say to console ourselves on the death of those we loved, and who loved us, is hollow and false; the only true thing is rest and silence. we cannot understand, and therefore we must and can trust. there can be no mistake, no gap, in the world-poem to which we belong; and i believe that those stars which without their own contrivance have met, will meet again. how, where, when? god knows this, and that is enough. _ms._ god has taught us that death is not so terrible as it appears to most men--it is but a separation for a few short days, and then, too, eternity awaits us. _life._ we live here in a narrow dwelling-house, which presses us in on all sides, and yet we fancy it is the whole universe. but when the door opens and a loved one passes out, never to return, we too step to the door and look out into the distance, and realise then how small and empty the dwelling is, and how a larger, more beautiful world waits for us without. how it is in that larger world, who can say? but if we were so happy in the narrow dwelling, how far more happy shall we be out there! be not afraid. see how beautifully all is ordered; look up to the widespread firmament, and think how small it is in comparison with god's almighty power. he who regulates the courses of the stars will regulate the fate of the souls of men, and those souls who have once met, shall they not meet again like the stars? _ms._ those who are absent are often nearer to us than those who are present. _ms._ we reckon too little with death, and then when it comes it overwhelms us. we know all the time that our friends must go, and that we must go, but we shut our eyes, and enjoy their love and friendship as if life could never end. we should say good-bye to each other every evening--perhaps the last good-bye would find us then less unprepared. _ms._ there is something so natural in death. we come and we go, there is no break. _life._ what is more natural in life than death? and having lived this long life, so full of light, having been led so kindly by a fatherly hand through all storms and struggles, why should i be afraid when i have to make the last step? _life._ the deity we clearly see that the possibility of intercourse between man and god, and a revelation of god to man, depends chiefly or exclusively on the conception which man has previously formed of god and man. in all theological researches we must carefully bear in mind that the idea of god is _our_ idea, which we have formed in part through tradition, and in part by our own thinking. god is and remains _our_ god. we can have a knowledge of him only through our inner consciousness, not through our senses. _silesian horseherd._ our duties toward god and man, our love for god and for man, are as nothing without the firm foundation which is formed only by our faith in god, as the thinker and ruler of the world, the father of the son, who was revealed through him as the father of all sons, of all men. _silesian horseherd._ though christianity has given us a purer and truer idea of the godhead, of the majesty of his power and the holiness of his will, there remains with many of us the conception of a merely objective deity. god is still with many of us in the clouds, so far removed from the earth and so high above anything human, that in trying to realise fully the meaning of christ's teaching we often shrink from approaching too near to the blinding effulgence of jehovah. the idea that we should stand to him in the relation of children to their father seems to some people almost irreverent, and the thought that god is near us everywhere, the belief that we are also his offspring, nay, that there has never been an absolute barrier between divinity and humanity, has often been branded as pantheism. yet christianity would not be christianity without this so-called pantheism, and it is only some lingering belief in something like a jove-like deus optimus maximus that keeps the eyes of our mind fixed with awe on the god of nature without, rather than on the much more awful god of the soul within. _chips._ the idea of god is the result of an unbroken historical evolution, call it a development, an unveiling, or a purification, but not of a sudden revelation.... what right have we to find fault with the manner in which the divine revealed itself, first to the eyes, and then to the mind, of man? is the revelation in nature really so contemptible a thing that we can afford to despise it, or at the utmost treat it as good enough for the heathen world? our eyes must have grown very dim, our mind very dull, if we can no longer perceive how the heavens declare the glory of god. _gifford lectures, ii._ a belief in one supreme god, even if at first it was only a henotheistic, and not yet a monotheistic belief, took possession of the leading spirits of the jewish race at a very early time. all tradition assigns that belief in one god, the most high, to abraham. abraham, though he did not deny the existence of the gods worshipped by the neighbouring tribes, yet looked upon them as different from, and as decidedly inferior to, his own god. his monotheism was, no doubt, narrow. his god was the friend of abraham, as abraham was the friend of god. yet the concept of god formed by abraham was a concept that could and did grow. neither moses, nor the prophets, nor christ himself, nor even mohammed, had to introduce a new god. their god was always called the god of abraham, even when freed from all that was local and narrow in the faith of that patriarch. _gifford lectures, ii._ to some any attempt to trace back the name and concept of jehovah to the same hidden sources from which other nations derived their first intimation of deity may seem almost sacrilegious. they forget the difference between the human concept of the deity and the deity itself, which is beyond the reach of all human concepts. but the historian reads deeper lessons in the growth of these human concepts, as they spring up everywhere in the minds of men who have been seekers after truth--seeking the lord if haply they might feel after him and find him--and when he can show the slow but healthy growth of the noblest and sublimest thoughts out of small and apparently insignificant beginnings, he rejoices as the labourer rejoices over his golden harvest; nay, he often wonders what is more truly wonderful, the butterfly that soars up to heaven on its silvery wings, or the grub that hides within its mean chrysalis such marvellous possibilities. _gifford lectures, ii._ the concept of god arises out of necessity in the human mind, and is not, as many theologians will have it, the result of one special disclosure, granted to jews and christians only. it seems to me impossible to resist this conviction, where a comparative study of the great religions of the world shows us that the highest attributes which we claim for the deity are likewise ascribed to it by the sacred books of other religions. _gifford lectures, ii._ we can now repeat the words which have been settled for us centuries ago, and which we have learnt by heart in our childhood--i believe in god the father, maker of heaven and earth--with the conviction that they express, not only the faith of the apostles, or of oecumenical councils, but that they contain the confession of faith of the whole world, expressed in different ways, conveyed in thousands of languages, but always embodying the same fundamental truth. i call it fundamental, because it is founded, in the very nature of our mind, our reason, and our language, on a simple and ineradicable conviction that where there are acts there must be agents, and in the end one prime agent, whom man may know, not indeed in his own inscrutable essence, yet in his acts, as revealed in nature. _gifford lectures, ii._ the historical proof of the existence of god, which is supplied to us by the history of the religions of the world, has never been refuted, and cannot be refuted. it forms the foundation of all the other proofs, call them cosmological, ontological, or teleological, or rather it absorbs them all, and makes them superfluous. there are those who declare that they require no proof at all for the existence of a supreme being, or if they did, they would find it in revelation, and nowhere else. suppose they wanted no proof themselves, would they really not care at all to know how the human race, and how they themselves, came in possession of what, i suppose, they value as their most precious inheritance? an appeal to revelation is of no avail in deciding questions of this kind, unless it is first explained what is really meant by revelation. the history of religions teaches us that the same appeal to a special revelation is made, not only by christianity, but by the defenders of brâhmanism, zoroastrianism, and mohammedanism, and where is the tribunal to adjudicate on the conflicting appeals of these and other claimants? the followers of every one of these religions declare their belief in the revealed character of their own religion, never in that of any other religion. there is, no doubt, a revelation to which we may appeal in the court of our own conscience, but before the court of universal appeal we require different proofs for the faith that is in us. _gifford lectures, iii._ given man, such as he is, and given the world, such as it is, a belief in divine beings, and, at last, in one divine being, is not only a universal, but an inevitable fact.... if from the standpoint of human reason no flaw can be pointed out in the intellectual process which led to the admission of something within, behind, or beyond nature, call it the infinite or any other name you like, it follows that the history of that process is really, at the same time, the best proof of the legitimacy and truth of the conclusions to which it has led. _gifford lectures, iii._ there is no predicate in human language worthy of god, all we can say of him is what the upanishads said of him, no, no! what does that mean? it meant that if god is called all-powerful, we have to say no, because whatever we comprehend by powerful is nothing compared with the power of god. if god is called all-wise, we have again to say no, because what we call wisdom cannot approach the wisdom of god. if god is called holy, again we have to say no, for what can our conception of holiness be compared with the holiness of god? this is what the thinkers of the upanishads meant when they said that all we can say of god is no, no. _gifford lectures, iii._ if people would only define what they mean by knowing, they would shrink from the very idea that god can ever be known by us in the same sense in which everything else is known, or that with regard to him we could ever be anything but agnostics. all human knowledge begins with the senses, and goes on from sensations to percepts, from percepts to concepts and names. and yet the same people who insist that they know god, will declare in the same breath that no one can see god and live. let us only define the meaning of knowing, and keep the different senses in which this word has been used carefully apart, and i doubt whether any one would venture to say that, in the true sense of the word, he is not an agnostic as regards the true nature of god. this silence before a nameless being does not exclude a true belief in god, nor devotion, nor love of a being beyond our senses, beyond our understanding, beyond our reason, and therefore beyond all names. _gifford lectures, iii._ every one of the names given to this infinite being by finite beings marks a stage in the evolution of religious truth. if once we try to understand these names, we shall find that they were all well meant, that, for the time being, they were probably the only possible names. the historical school does not look upon all the names given to divine powers as simply true or simply false. we look upon all of them as well meant and true for the time being, as steps on the ladder on which the angels of god ascend and descend. there was no harm in the ancient people, when they were thirsting for rain, invoking the sky, and saying, 'o, dear sky, send us rain!' and when after a time they used more and more general words, when they addressed the powers (of nature) as bright, or rich, or mighty, all these were meant for something else, for something they were seeking for, if haply they might feel after him and find him. this is st. paul's view of the growth of religion. _gifford lectures, iii._ when god has once been conceived without 'any manner of similitude,' he may be meditated on, revered, and adored, but that fervent passion of the human breast, that love with all our heart, and all our soul, and all our might, seems to become hushed before that solemn presence. we may love our father and mother with all our heart, we may cling to our children with all our soul, we may be devoted to wife, or husband, or friend with all our might, but to throw all these feelings in their concentrated force and truth on the deity has been given to very few on earth. _gifford lectures, iii._ if the history of religion has taught us anything, it has taught us to distinguish between the names and the thing named. the names may change, and become more and more perfect, and our concepts of the deity may become more perfect also, but the deity itself is not affected by our names. however much the names may differ and change, there remains, as the last result of the study of religion, the everlasting conviction that behind all the names there is something named, that there is an agent behind all acts, that there is an infinite behind the finite, that there is a god in nature. that god is the abiding goal of many names, all well meant and well aimed, and yet all far, far away from the goal which no man can see and--live. all names that human language has invented may be imperfect. but the name 'i am that i am' will remain for those who think semitic thought, while to those who speak aryan languages it will be difficult to invent a better name than the vedanta sa_k_-_k_id-ânanda, he who is, who knows, who is blessed. _gifford lectures, iii._ however much we may cease to speak the language of the faith of our childhood, the faith in a superintending and ever-present providence grows only stronger the more we see of life, the more we know of ourselves. when that bass-note is right, we may indulge in many variations, we shall never go entirely wrong. _ms._ we do not see the hand that takes our dear ones from us, but we know whose hand it is, whose will it is. we have no name for him, we do not know him, but we know that whatever name we give, he will understand it. that is the foundation of all religion. let us give the best name we can find in us, let us know that even that must be a very imperfect name, but let us trust that if we only believe in that name, if we use it, not because it is the fashion, but because we can find no better name, he will understand and forgive. every name is true if we are true, every name is false if we are false. if we are true our religion is true, if we are false our religion is false. an honest fetish worshipper even is better than a scoffing pope. _ms._ in the ordinary sense of knowledge we cannot have any knowledge of god; our very idea of god implies that he is beyond our powers of perception and understanding. then what can we do? shut our eyes and be silent? that will not satisfy creatures such as we are. we must speak, but all our words apply to things perceptible or intelligible. the old buddhists used to say, the only thing we can say of god is no, no! he is not this, he is not that. whatever we can see or understand, he is not that. but again i say that kind of self-denial will not satisfy such creatures as we are. what can we do? we can only give the best we have. now the best we have or know on earth is love, therefore we say god is love or loving. love is entire self-surrender, we can go no further in our conception of what is best. and yet how poor a name it is in comparison of what we want to name. our idea of love includes, as you say, humility, a looking up and worshipping. can we say that of god's love? depend upon it, the best we say is but poor endeavour,--it is well we should know it,--and yet, if it is the best we have and can give, we need not be ashamed. _life._ and now that generations after generations have passed away, with their languages--adoring and worshipping the name of god--preaching and dying in the name of god--thinking and meditating on the name of god--there the old word stands still, breathing to us the pure air of the dawn of humanity, carrying with it all the thoughts and sighs, the doubts and tears, of our bygone brethren, and still rising up to heaven with the same sound from the basilicas of rome and the temples of benares, as if embracing by its simple spell millions and millions of hearts in their longing desire to give utterance to the unutterable, to express the inexpressible. _life._ the divine it was, after all, the jew who, in the great history of the world, was destined to solve the riddle of the divine in man. it was the soil of jewish thought that in the end gave birth to the true conception of the relation between the divine in nature and the divine in man. _gifford lectures, iii._ when the divine in the outward world has once been fully recognised, there can be nothing more or less divine, nothing more or less miraculous, either in nature or in history. those who assign a divine and miraculous character to certain consecrated events only in the history of the world, are in great danger of desecrating thereby the whole drama of history, and of making it, not only profane, but godless. it is easy to call this a pantheistic view of the world. it is pantheistic, in the best sense of the word, so much so that any other view would soon become atheistic. even the greeks suspected the omnipresence of the divine, when, as early as the time of thales, they declared that _all_ is full of the gods. the choice here lies really between pantheism and atheism. if anything, the greatest or the smallest, can ever happen without the will of god, then god is no longer god. to distinguish between a direct and indirect influence of the divine, to admit a general and a special providence, is like a relapse into polytheism, a belief in one and many gods. _gifford lectures, iii._ human nature is divine nature modified. it can be nothing else. christ, in shaking off all that is not divine in man,--let us call it by one general name, all that is selfish,--resumed his own divinity. _ms._ god comes to us in the likeness of man--there is no other likeness for god. and that likeness is not forbidden, christ has taught us to see and love god in man. we cannot go further. if we attempt to conceive anything more than human, our mind breaks down. but we can conceive and perceive the divine in man, and most in those who are risen from the earth. while we live our love is human, and mixed with earthly things. we love and do not love--we even hate, or imagine we do. but we do not really hate any man, we only hate something that surrounds and hides man. what is behind, the true nature of man, we always love. death purifies man, it takes away the earthly crust, and we can love those who are dead far better than those who are still living: that is the truth. we do not deceive ourselves, we do not use vain words. love is really purer, stronger, and more unselfish when it embraces those who are risen. that is why the apostles loved christ so much better when he was no longer with them. while he lived, peter could deny him--when he had returned to the father, peter was willing to die for him. all that is so true, only one must have gone through it, felt it oneself, in order to understand it. if one knows the love one feels for the blessed, one wants no temporary resurrection to account for the rekindled love of the apostles. they believed that christ had truly risen, that death had no power over him, that he was with the father. was not that more, far more, than a return to this fleeting life for a few hours, or days, or weeks, or than an ascent through the clouds to the blue sky? ah! how the great truths have been exchanged for small fancies, the _mira_ for the _miracula_. _ms._ doubts there is certainly no happier life than a life of simple faith; of literal acceptance, of rosy dreams. we must all grant that, if it were possible, nothing would be more perfect. i gladly acknowledge that some of the happiest, and also some of the best men and women i have known, were those who would have shrunk with horror from questioning a single letter of the bible, or doubting that a serpent actually spoke to eve, and an ass to balaam. but can we prevent the light of the sun and the noises of the street from waking the happy child from his heavenly dreams? nay, is it not our duty to wake the child, when the time has come that he must be up and doing, and take his share in the toils of the day? and is it not well for those who for the first time open their eyes and look around, that they should see by their side some who have woke before them, who understand their inquiring looks, and can answer their timid questions and tell them in the simple-hearted language of the old poet: 'there lives more faith in honest doubt, believe me, than in half the creeds.' _gifford lectures, iii._ there is an atheism which is unto death, there is another atheism which is the life-blood of all true faith. it is the power of giving up what, in our best, our most honest, moments, we know to be no longer true; it is the readiness to replace the less perfect, however dear, however sacred it may have been to us, by the more perfect, however much it may be detested, as yet, by the world. it is the true self-surrender, the true self-sacrifice, the truest trust in truth, the truest faith. without that atheism religion would long ago have become a petrified hypocrisy; without that atheism no new religion, no reform, no reformation, no resuscitation would ever have been possible; without that atheism no new life is possible for any one of us. _hibbert lectures._ how many men in all countries and all ages have been called atheists, not because they denied that there existed anything beyond the visible and the finite, or because they declared that the world, such as it was, could be explained without a cause, without a purpose, without a god, but often because they differed only from the traditional conception of the deity prevalent at the time, and were yearning after a higher conception of god than what they had learnt in their childhood. _hibbert lectures._ there are moments in our life when those who seek most earnestly after god think they are forsaken of god; when they hardly venture to ask themselves, do i then believe in god, or do i not? let them not despair, and let us not judge harshly of them; their despair may be better than many creeds.... honest doubt is the deepest spring of honest faith; only he who has lost can find. _hibbert lectures._ if we have once claimed the freedom of the spirit which st. paul claimed: to prove all things and hold fast that which is good: we cannot turn back, we cannot say that no one shall prove our own religion, no one shall prove other religions and compare them with our own. we have to choose once for all between freedom and slavery of judgment, and though i do not wish to argue with those who prefer slavery, yet one may remind them that even they, in deliberately choosing slavery, follow their own private judgment quite as much as others do in choosing freedom. _gifford lectures, iii._ our own self-interest surely would seem to suggest as severe a trial of our own religion as of other religions, nay, even a more severe trial. our religion has sometimes been compared to a good ship that is to carry us through the waves and tempests of this life to a safe haven. would it not be wise, therefore, to have it tested, and submitted to the severest trials, before we entrust ourselves and those dear to us to such a vessel. and remember, all men, except those who take part in the foundation of a new religion, or have been converted from an old to a new faith, have to accept their religious belief on trust, long before they are able to judge for themselves. and while in all other matters an independent judgment in riper years is encouraged, every kind of influence is used to discourage a free examination of religious dogmas, once engrafted on our intellect in its tenderest stage. we condemn an examination of our own religion, even though it arises from an honest desire to see with our own eyes the truth which we mean to hold fast; and yet we do not hesitate to send missionaries into all the world, asking the faithful to re-examine their own time-honoured religions. we attack their most sacred convictions, we wound their tenderest feelings, we undermine the belief in which they have been brought up, and we break up the peace and happiness of their homes. yet if some learned jew, or subtle brahman, or outspoken zulu asks us to re-examine the date and authorship of the old or new testament, or challenges us to produce the evidence on which we also are quite ready to accept certain miracles, we are offended, forgetting that with regard to these questions we can claim no privilege, no immunity. _gifford lectures, iii._ if we can respect a childlike and even a childish faith, we ought likewise to learn to respect even a philosophical atheism which often contains the hidden seeds of the best and truest faith. we ought never to call a man an atheist, and say that he does not believe in god, till we know what kind of god it is he has been brought up to believe in, and what kind of god it is that he rejects, it may be, from the best and highest motives. we ought never to forget that socrates was called an atheist, that the early christians were all called atheists, that some of the best and greatest men this world has ever known have been branded by that name. _gifford lectures, iii._ i have heard and read the worst that can be said against our religion--i mean the true original teaching of christ--and i feel that i am ready in mind, if not in body, to lay down my life for the truth of his teaching. all our difficulties arise from the doctrines of men, not from his doctrine. there is no outward evidence of the truth of his doctrine, but the spirit of god that is within us testifieth to its truth. if it does not, we are not yet disciples of christ, but we may be hereafter. _life._ be certain of this, that to repress a doubt is to repress the spirit of truth; a doubt well spoken out is generally a doubt solved. but all this requires great seriousness of mind--it must assume an importance greater than anything else in life, and then we can fight our way through it. god is with us in our struggles. _life._ evolution of religion evolution is really the same as history, if we take it in its objective sense. subjectively, history meant originally inquiry, or a desire to know; it then came to mean knowledge, obtained by inquiry, and lastly, in a purely objective sense, the objects of such knowledge. _gifford lectures, i._ we may discover in all the errors of mythology, and in what we call the false or pagan religions of this world, a progress towards truth, a yearning after something more than finite, a growing recognition of the infinite, throwing off some of its veils before our eyes, and from century to century revealing itself to us more and more in its own purity and holiness. and thus the two concepts, that of evolution and that of revelation, which seem at first so different, become one in the end. if there is a purpose running through the ages, if nature is not blind, if there are agents, recognised at last as the agents of one will, behind the whole phenomenal world, then the evolution of man's belief in that supreme will is itself the truest revelation of that supreme will, and must remain the adamantine foundation on which all religion rests, whether we call it natural or supernatural. _gifford lectures, ii._ the same changes in the idea of god, which we see in the different books of the bible, take place in the different chapters of our own life. the child cannot but represent god to himself as a venerable man, walking about, warning and reproving the creatures he has made. the child has no higher conception as yet which it could apply to god; if it heard of a higher one it could not grasp it. but as the child grows and gathers in higher conceptions, the lower must give way to the higher. as long as the evidence of the senses is the only evidence which a child knows, he demands a visible god. when he learns that the human senses are different modes of apprehension, that according to their very nature they can never apprehend except what is limited, then the mind involuntarily surrenders the visible god, it believes in god as a spirit. and so the growth of each man, and the growth of the whole human race, goes on, and will go on; and i cannot see how, if the world goes on as it has hitherto, it can be otherwise but that much of the language of the new testament also will have to be surrendered. changes have lately taken place with the word _person_. many things which were formerly comprehended under personality have been discovered to be mere accessories, and above the more material conception of personality, of individuality, or of the i, a higher one is rising, that of the _self_. the i, the personality, is made up of many things which are purely temporal--which are dear to us on earth, but which will pass away, while the self will abide for ever. need we wonder, therefore, that just those who wish to transfer only their highest to the godhead begin to shrink from speaking of a personal god? or insist on defining the word 'personal' so that it should exclude all that is incompatible with a perfect, unlimited, unchanging being? what led to such expressions as 'god is love' but a feeling of reverence, which shrank from speaking of god as loving as we love? this process will go on as long as the thoughts and words of mankind grow and change. let us learn only from the bible that those who spoke of god as walking about in paradise spoke as children, did the best they could, gave all they had, and who shall say that their two mites were in the sight of god less precious than all our creeds and philosophies? they too will change, they too will be looked upon by future generations as the language of children. but he to whom our thoughts and prayers are addressed will interpret all languages and dialects. before him the wisdom of the man will not sound much wiser than the trustful ignorance of the child. _ms._ faith next to our faith in god there is nothing so essential to the healthy growth of our whole being as an unshaken faith in man. _chips._ let us trust in him to whom alone we owe all our blessings. if we do not forsake him, he will never forsake us--we cannot fathom his love, but we can trust. _ms._ separation loses its bitterness when we have faith in each other and in god. faith in each other keeps us close together in life, and faith in god keeps us together in eternity. _ms._ those who remember the happiness of the simple faith of their childhood may well ask why it should ever be disturbed. knowing the blessedness of that faith we naturally abstain from everything that might disturb it prematurely in the minds of those who are entrusted to us. but, as the child, whether he likes it or not, grows to be a man, so the faith of a child grows into the faith of a man. it is not our doing, it is the work of him who made us what we are. as all our other ideas grow and change, so does our idea of god. i know there are men and women who, when they perceive the first warnings of that inward growth, become frightened and suppress it with all their might. they shut their eyes and ears to all new light from within and from without. they wish to remain as happy as children, and many of them succeed in remaining as good as children. who would blame them or disturb them? but those who trust in god and god's work within them, must go forth to the battle. with them it would be cowardice and faithlessness to shrink from the trial. they are not certain that they were meant to be here simply to enjoy the happiness of a childlike faith. they feel they have a talent committed to them which must not be wrapped up in a napkin. but the battle is hard, and all the harder because, while they know they are obeying the voice of truth, which is the voice of god, many of those whom they love look upon them as disobeying the voice of god, as disturbers of the peace, as giving offence to those little ones. _ms._ there is a difference between the childlike faith of a man (all real faith must be childlike) and the childlike faith of a child. the one is paradise not yet lost, the other paradise lost but regained. the one is right for the child, the other is right for the man. it is the will of god that it should be so--but it is also the will of god that we should all bear with each other, and join, each in his own voice, in the great hymn of praise. _ms._ faith is that organ of knowledge by which we apprehend the infinite, namely, whatever transcends the ken of our senses and the grasp of our reason. the infinite is hidden from the senses, it is denied by reason, but it is perceived by faith; and it is perceived, if once perceived, as underlying both the experience of the senses and the combinations of reason. _science of language._ the fatherhood of god wherever our father leads us there is our fatherland. _life._ man must discover that god is his father before he can become a son of god. to know is here to be, to be to know. no mere miracle will make man the son of god. that sonship can be gained through knowledge only, 'through man knowing god, or rather being known of god,' and till it is so gained it does not exist, even though it be a fact. if we apply this to the words in which christ speaks of himself as the son of god, we shall see that to him it is no miracle, it is no mystery, it is no question of supernatural contrivance; it is simply clear knowledge, and it was this self-knowledge which made christ what he was, it was this which constituted his true, his eternal divinity. _gifford lectures, iii._ future life one wonders indeed how kindred souls become separated, and one feels startled and repelled at the thought that, such as they were on earth, they can never meet again. and yet there is continuity in the world, there is no flaw, no break anywhere, and what has been will surely be again, though how it will be we cannot know, and if only we trust in the wisdom that pervades and overshadows the whole universe, we need not know. _auld lang syne._ even if we resign ourselves to the thought that the likenesses and likelihoods which we project upon the unseen and unknown, nay, that the hope of our meeting again as we once met on earth, need not be fulfilled exactly as we shape them to ourselves, where is the argument to make us believe that the real fulfilment can be less perfect than what even a weak human heart devises and desires? this trust that whatever is will be best, is what is meant by faith, true, because inevitable, faith. we see traces of it in many places and many religions, but i doubt whether anywhere that faith is more simply and more powerfully expressed than in the old and new testaments: 'for since the beginning of the world men have not heard, nor perceived by the ear, neither hath the eye seen, o god, beside thee, what he hath prepared for him that waiteth for him' (isaiah lxiv. ). 'as it is written, eye hath not seen nor ear heard, neither have entered into the heart of man, the things which god hath prepared for them that love him' ( cor. ii. ). _hibbert lectures._ the highest which man can comprehend is man. one step only he may go beyond, and say that what is beyond may be different, but it cannot be less perfect than the present; the future cannot be worse than the past.... that much-decried philosophy of evolution, if it teaches us anything, teaches us a firm belief in a better future, and in a higher perfection which man is destined to reach. _hibbert lectures._ in our longings for the departed we often think of them as young or old, we think of them as man or woman, as father or mother, as husband or wife. even nationality and language are supposed to remain after death, and we often hear expressions, 'oh! if the souls are without all this, without age, and sex, and national character, without even their native language, what will they be to us?' the answer is, they will really be the same to us they were in this life. unless we can bring ourselves to believe that a soul has a beginning, and that our soul sprang into being at the time of our birth, the soul within us must have existed before. but however convinced we may be of the soul's eternal existence, we shall always remain ignorant as to how it existed. and yet we do not murmur or complain. our soul on awakening here is not quite a stranger to itself, and the souls who, as our parents, our wives, and husbands, our children, and our friends, have greeted us at first as strangers in this life, have become to us as if we had known them for ever, and as if we could never lose them again. if it were to be so again in the next life, if there also we should meet at first as strangers till drawn together by the same mysterious love that has drawn us together here, why should we murmur or complain? thousands of years ago we read of a husband telling his wife, 'verily a wife is not dear that you may love the wife, but that you may love the soul, therefore a wife is dear.' what does that mean? it means that true love consists not in loving what is perishable, but in discovering and loving what is eternal in man or woman. in sanscrit that eternal part is called by many names, but the best seems that used in this passage, atma. we translate it by soul, but it is even higher and purer than soul, it is best translated by the word _self_. that which constitutes the true self, the looker-on, the witness within us, that which is everywhere in the body and yet nowhere to be touched, that which cannot die or expire, because it never breathed, that is the infinite in man which philosophers have been groping for, though 'he is not far from every one of us.' it is the divine or god-like in man. _gifford lectures, iii._ the southern aryans were absorbed in the struggles of thought: their past is the problem of creation, their future the problem of existence, and the present, which ought to be the solution of both, seems never to have attracted their attention, or called forth their energies. there never was a nation believing so firmly in another world, and so little concerned about this. their condition on earth was to them a problem; their real and eternal life a simple fact. though this is true chiefly before they were brought in contact with foreign conquerors, traces of this character are still visible in the hindus as described by the companions of alexander, nay, even in the hindus of the present day. the only sphere in which the indian mind finds itself at liberty to act, to create, and to worship is the sphere of religion and philosophy, and nowhere have religious and metaphysical ideas struck root so deeply in the mind of a nation as in india. history supplies no second instance where the inward life of the soul has so completely absorbed all the other faculties of a people. _india._ our happiness here is but a foretaste of our blessed life hereafter. we must never forget that. we shall be called away, but we shall meet again. _life._ we must have patience--and we all cling to life as long as there are those who love us here. those who love us there are always ours. nothing is lost in the world. how it will be, we know not, but if we have recognised the working of a divine wisdom and love here on earth, we can take comfort, and wait patiently for that which is to come. _life._ truly those who die young are blest. and shall we find them again such as they left us? why not? it is really here on earth that those whom we love change, it is here that they die every day.... where are all those bright joyous faces which we look at when we open our photograph books from year to year? on earth they are lost, but are they not treasured up for another life, where we shall be not only what we are from day to day, never the same to-morrow as we were yesterday, but where we are at once all that we can be--where memory is not different from perception, nor our wills different from our acts? we shall soon know--till then surely we have a right to be what we are, and to cling to our human hopes. the more human they are, the nearer the truth they are likely to be. _life._ i believe in all our hopes we cannot be human enough. let us be what we are--men, feel as men, sorrow as men, hope as men. it is true our hopes are human, but what are the doubts and difficulties? are they not human too? shall we meet again as we left? why not? we do not know _how_ it will be so, but who has a right to say it _cannot_ be so? let us imagine and hope for the best that, as men, we can conceive, and then rest convinced that it will be a thousand times better. _life._ the inward voice never suggested or allowed me the slightest doubt or misgiving about the reality of a future life. if there is continuity in the world everywhere, why should there be a wrench and annihilation only with us? it will be as it has been--that is the lesson we learn from nature--_how_ it will be we are not meant to know. there is an old greek saying to the effect, to try to know what the gods did not tell us is not piety. if god wished us to know what is to be, he would tell us. darwin has shown us that there is continuity from beginning to end. _life._ i believe in the continuity of self. if there were an annihilation or complete change of our individual self-consciousness, we might become somebody else, but we should not be ourselves. personally, i have no doubt of the persistence of the individual after death, as we call it. i cannot imagine the very crown and flower of creation being destroyed by its author. i do not say it is impossible, it is not for us to say either yes or no; we have simply to trust, but that trust or faith is implanted in us, and is strengthened by everything around us. _life._ do we really lose those who are called before us? i feel that they are even nearer to us than when they were with us in life. we must take a larger view. our life does not end here, if only we can see that our horizon here is but like a curtain that separates us from what is beyond. those who go before us are beyond our horizon at present, but we have no right to suppose that they have completely vanished. we cannot see them, that is all. and even that, we know, can last for a short time only. we have lived and done our work in life, before we knew those we loved, and we may have to live the same number of years separated from them. but nothing can be lost: it depends on ourselves to keep those we loved always near to our thoughts, even though our eyes look in vain for them. the world is larger than this little earth, our thoughts go further than this short life, and if we can but find our home in this larger world, we shall find that this larger home is full of those whom we loved, and who loved us. there is no _chance_ in life; a few years more, a few years less, will seem as nothing to us hereafter. _life._ i fully take in the real death (of my child), i know i shall follow and die the same real death, and through that same real death i trust the spirit of christ will be my guide and helper, and bring me to a better life, and unite me again with those whom i have loved, and whom i love still, and those who have loved me and love me still. god is no giver of imperfect gifts, and he has given me life, but life on earth is imperfect. he has given me love, but love on earth is imperfect. i believe, i must believe in perfection, and therefore i believe in a life perfected and in a love perfected. 'hier stehe ich, ich kann nicht anders--gott helfe mich amen.' _ms._ it seems hard, it seems so unintelligible, so far above us, that we should know nothing at all of what is to come--that we should be so completely separated for a time from those whom we love. whence all these limits? whence all those desires in us that cannot be fulfilled? the limits teach us one lesson, that we are in the hands of a higher power. wonderful as our body and our senses are, they are a prison and chains, and they could not be meant for anything else. _ms._ of what is to come, what is in store for us, we know nothing; and the more we know that, the greater and stronger our faith. it must be right, it cannot be wrong. why was the past often so beautiful? because all tends to beauty, to perfection, and the highest point of perfection is love. we are far from that here, yet all the miseries of this life, or many at least, would vanish before love. life seems most unnatural in what we call the most highly civilised countries--the struggle of life is fiercest there. rest and love seem impossible, and yet that is what we are yearning for, and it may be granted us hereafter. _ms._ how is it that we know so little of life after death? that we can hardly imagine anything without feeling that it is all human poetry? we are to believe the best, but nothing definite, nothing that can be described. it is the same with god, we are to believe the best we can believe, and yet all is earthly, human, weak. we are in a dark prison here; let us believe that outside it there is no darkness, but light--but what light, who knows? _ms._ wait, wait, do not ask. children ask every year what the christ child will bring them, but they are not told, they wait in the dark room. every year they expect something quite new, but it is always the same old christmas-tree, with its lights and flowers, and all the rest. and why should it be so different when the door opens, and we step out of this dark life into the bright room? why should all be different? we have stepped into this dark room here on earth, and how often did we think it was very bright and very warm. we shall step into another room, and it will be brighter, warmer, more pure, more perfect. _ms._ what is past, present, future? is it not all one? only the past and the future somewhere where at present we cannot be. wait a little time, and the eternal will take the place of the present,--and we shall have the past again,--for the past is not lost. nothing is lost--but this waiting is sometimes very hard, and this longing very hard. friends go on all sides, it seems a different world, yet there is work to do, and there is much left to love. _ms._ if immortality is meant for no more than a continuance of existence, if by a belief in immortality on the part of the jews is meant no more than that the jews did not believe in the annihilation of the soul at the time of death, we may confidently assert that, to the bulk of the jewish nation, this very idea of annihilation was as yet unfamiliar. the fact is that the idea of absolute annihilation and nothingness is hardly ever found except among people whose mind has received some amount of philosophical education, certainly more than what the jews possessed in early times. the jews did not believe in the utter destruction of the soul, but, on the other hand, their idea of life after death was hardly that of life at all. it was existence without life. death was considered by them, as by the greeks, as the greatest of misfortunes. to rejoice in death is a purely christian, not a jewish, idea. though the jews believed that the souls continued to exist in sheol, they did not believe that the wicked would there be punished and the good rewarded. all rewards and punishments for virtue or vice were confined to this world, and a long life was regarded as a sure proof of the favour of jehovah. it was the jewish conception of god, as infinitely removed from this world, that made a belief in true immortality almost impossible for them, and excluded all hope for a nearer approach to god, or for any share in that true immortality which belonged to him and to him alone. _gifford lectures, iii._ our angels live in heaven, not on earth. we only recognise the angelic in man, even in those we love the most, when we can no longer see them. they are then nearer us than ever, we love them more than ever. happy are those who have such angels in heaven, who draw our hearts away from earth and fill them with longing for our true home. they lighten the burden of life, they give a quiet, gentle tone to the joys of life, and they teach us to love those who are left to us on earth, it may be but for a few days or years, with a love which we never knew before, a love which bears all things, believes all things, and gladly pardons all things. _ms._ life eternal. why do we so seldom face the great problem? with me the chief reason was the conviction that we can _know_ nothing--that we must wait and trust--do our work for the day which is--and believe that nothing can happen to us unless god wills it. know, where knowledge is possible; believe, trust where faith only is possible. _ms._ i know we shall meet again, for god does not destroy what he has made, nor do souls meet by accident. this life is full of riddles, but divine riddles have a divine solution. _life._ the infinite though we cannot know things finite, as they are in themselves, we know at all events that they are. and this applies to our perception of the infinite also. we do not know through our senses what it is, but we know through our very senses that it is. we feel the pressure of the infinite in the finite, and unless we had that feeling, we should have no true and safe foundation for whatever we may afterwards believe of the infinite. some critics have urged that what i call the infinite ... is the indefinite only. of course it is.... we can know the infinite as the indefinite only, or as the partially defined. we try to define it, and to know it more and more, but we never finish it. the whole history of religion represents the continuous progress of the human definition of the infinite, but however far that definition may advance, it will never exhaust the infinite. could we define it all, it would cease to be the infinite, it would cease to be the unknown, it would cease to be the inconceivable or the divine. _chips._ what we feel through the pressure on all our senses is the pressure of the infinite. our senses, if i may say so, feel nothing but the infinite, and out of that plenitude they apprehend the finite. to apprehend the finite is the same as to define the infinite. _chips._ we accept the primitive savage with nothing but his five senses. these five senses supply him with a knowledge of finite things; the problem is how such a being ever comes to think or speak of anything not finite, but infinite. it is his senses which give him the first impression of infinite things, and force him to the admission of the infinite. everything of which his senses cannot perceive a limit is to a primitive savage, or to any man in an early stage of intellectual activity, unlimited or infinite. man sees to a certain point, and there his eyesight breaks down. but exactly where his eyesight breaks down, there presses upon him, whether he likes it or not, the perception of the unlimited or infinite. it may be said this is not perception in the ordinary sense of the word. no more it is, but still less is it mere reasoning. in perceiving the infinite, we neither count, nor measure, nor compare, nor name. we know not what it is, but we know that it is, and we know it because we actually feel it and are brought in contact with it. if it seems too bold to say that man actually sees the invisible, let us say that he suffers from the invisible, and this invisible is only a special name for the infinite. the infinite, therefore, instead of being merely a late abstraction, is really implied in the earliest manifestations of our sensuous knowledge. it was true from the very first, but it was not yet defined or named. if the infinite had not from the very first been present in our sensuous perceptions, such a word as infinite would be a sound and nothing else. with every finite perception there is a concomitant perception or a concomitant sentiment or presentiment of the infinite; from the very first act of touch, or hearing, or sight, we are brought in contact, not only with the visible, but also at the same time with an invisible universe. we have in this that without which no religion would have been possible, we have in that perception of the infinite the root of the whole historical development of religion. _hibbert lectures._ no thought, no name is ever entirely lost. when we here in this ancient abbey,[ ] which was built on the ruins of a still more ancient roman temple, seek for a name for the invisible, the infinite that surrounds us on every side, the unknown, the true self of the world, and the true self of ourselves--we too, feeling once more like children kneeling in a small dark room, can hardly find a better name than 'our father, which art in heaven.' _hibbert lectures._ [footnote : westminster.] the idea of the infinite, which is at the root of all religious thought, is not simply evolved by reason out of nothing, but supplied to us, in its original form, by our senses. beyond, behind, beneath, and within the finite, the infinite is always present to our senses. it presses upon us, it grows upon us from every side. what we call finite in space and time, in form and word, is nothing but a veil or a net which we ourselves have thrown over the infinite. the finite by itself, without the infinite, is simply inconceivable; as inconceivable as the infinite without the finite. as reason deals with the finite materials supplied to us by our senses, faith, or whatever else we like to call it, deals with the infinite that underlies the finite. what we call sense, reason, and faith are three functions of one and the same perceptive self; but without sense both reason and faith are impossible, at least to human beings like ourselves. _hibbert lectures._ the ancestors of our race did not only believe in divine powers more or less manifest to their senses, in rivers and mountains, in the sky and the sun, in the thunder and rain, but their senses likewise suggested to them two of the most essential elements of all religion: the concept of the infinite, and the concept of law and order, as revealed before them, the one in the golden sea behind the dawn, the other in the daily path of the sun.... these two concepts, which sooner or later must be taken in and minded by every human being, were at first no more than an impulse, but their impulsive force would not rest till it had beaten into the minds of the fathers of our race the deep and indelible impression that 'all is right,' and filled them with a hope, and more than a hope, that 'all will be right.' _hibbert lectures._ the real religious instinct or impulse is the perception of the infinite. _hibbert lectures._ all objects which we perceive and afterwards conceive and name must be circumscribed, must have been separated from their surroundings, must be measurable, and can thus only become perceivable and knowable and namable.... they are therefore finite in their very nature.... if finiteness is a necessary characteristic of our ordinary knowledge, it requires but little reflection to perceive that limitation or finiteness, in whatever sense we use it, always implies a something beyond. we are told that our mind is so constituted, whether it is our fault or not, that we cannot conceive an absolute limit. beyond every limit we must always take it for granted that there is something else. but what is the reason of this? the reason why we cannot conceive an absolute limit is because we never perceive an absolute limit; or in other words, because in perceiving the finite we always perceive the infinite also.... there is no limit which has not two sides, the one turned towards us, the other turned towards what is beyond; and it is that beyond which from the earliest days has formed the only real foundation of all that we call transcendental in our perceptual, as well as in our conceptual, knowledge. _gifford lectures, i._ the infinite was not discovered behind the veil of nature only, though its manifestation in physical phenomena was no doubt the most primitive and the most fertile source of mythological and religious ideas. there were two more manifestations of the infinite and the unknown, which must not be neglected, if we wish to gain a complete insight into the theogonic process through which the human mind had to pass from its earliest days. the infinite disclosed itself not only in nature but likewise in man, looked upon as an object, and lastly in man looked upon as a subject. man looked upon as an object, as a living thing, was felt to be more than a mere part of nature. there was something in man, whether it was called breath or spirit or soul or mind, which was perceived and yet not perceived, which was behind the veil of the body, and from a very early time was believed to remain free from decay, even when illness and death had destroyed the body in which it seemed to dwell. there was nothing to force even the simplest peasant to believe that because he saw his father dead, and his body decaying, therefore what was known as the man himself, call it his soul or his mind or his person, had vanished altogether out of existence. a philosopher may arrive at such an idea, but a man of ordinary understanding, though terrified by the aspect of death, would rather be inclined to believe that what he had known and loved and called his father or mother must be somewhere, though no longer in the body.... it is perhaps too much to say that such a belief was universal; but it certainly was and is still very widely spread. in fact it constitutes a very large portion of religion and religious worship. _gifford lectures, i._ nature, man, and self are the three great manifestations in which the infinite in some shape or other has been perceived, and every one of these perceptions has in its historical development contributed to what may be called religion. _gifford lectures, i._ like all other experiences, our religious experience begins with the senses. though the senses seem to deliver to us finite experiences only, many, if not all, of them can be shown to involve something beyond the known, something unknown, something which i claim the liberty to call infinite. in this way the human mind was led to the recognition of undefined, infinite agents or agencies beyond, behind, and within our finite experience. the feelings of fear, awe, reverence, and love excited by the manifestations of some of these agents or powers began to react on the human mind, and thus produced what we call natural religion in its lowest and simplest form--fear, awe, reverence, and love of the gods. _gifford lectures, i._ the perception of the infinite can be shown by historical evidence to be the one element shared in common by all religions. only we must not forget that, like every other concept, that of the infinite also had to pass through many phases in its historical evolution, beginning with the simple negation of what is finite, and the assertion of an invisible beyond, and leading up to a perceptive belief in that most real infinite in which we live and move and have our being. _gifford lectures, iv._ knowledge the lesson that there are limits to our knowledge is an old lesson, but it has to be taught again and again. it was taught by buddha, it was taught by socrates, and it was taught for the last time in the most powerful manner by kant. philosophy has been called the knowledge of our knowledge; it might be called more truly the knowledge of our ignorance, or, to adopt the more moderate language of kant, the knowledge of the limits of our knowledge. _last essays._ metaphysical truth is wider than physical truth, and the new discoveries of physical observers, if they are to be more than merely contingent truths, must find their appointed place and natural refuge within the immovable limits traced by the metaphysician.... it is only after having mastered the principles of metaphysics that the student of nature can begin his work in the right spirit, knowing the horizon of human knowledge, and guided by principles as unchangeable as the pole star. _last essays._ there is no subject in the whole realm of human knowledge that cannot be rendered clear and intelligible, if we ourselves have perfectly mastered it. _chips._ the bridge of thoughts and sighs that spans the whole history of the aryan world has its first arch in the _veda_, its last in kant's _critique of pure reason_. in the _veda_ we watch the first unfolding of the human mind as we can watch it nowhere else. life seems simple, natural, childlike.... what is beneath, and above, and beyond this life is dimly perceived, and expressed in a thousand words and ways, all mere stammerings, all aiming to express what cannot be expressed, yet all full of a belief in the real presence of the divine in nature, of the infinite in the finite.... while in the _veda_ we may study the childhood, we may study in kant's _critique_ the perfect manhood of the aryan mind. it has passed through many phases, and every one of them ... has left its mark. it is no longer dogmatical, no longer sceptical, least of all is it positive.... it stands before us conscious of its weakness and its strength, modest yet brave. it knows what the old idols of its childhood and youth were made of. it does not break them, it only tries to understand them, but it places above them the ideals of reason--no longer tangible--not even within the reach of the understanding--but real--bright and heavenly stars to guide us even in the darkest night. _last essays._ all knowledge, in order to be knowledge, must pass through two gates, and two gates only: the gate of the senses and the gate of reason. religious knowledge also, whether true or false, must have passed through these two gates. at these two gates, therefore, we take our stand. whatever claims to have entered in by any other gate, whether that gate is called primeval revelation or religious instinct, must be rejected as contraband of thought; and whatever claims to have entered by the gate of reason, without having first passed through the gate of the senses, must equally be rejected, as without sufficient warrant, or ordered at least to go back to the first gate, in order to produce there its full credentials. _hibbert lectures._ language the history of language opens a vista which makes one feel almost giddy if one tries to see the end of it, but the measuring-rod of the chronologist seems to me entirely out of place. those who have eyes to see will see the immeasurable distance between the first historical appearance of language and the real beginnings of human speech: those who cannot see will oscillate between the wildly large figures of the buddhists, or the wildly small figures of the rabbis, but they will never lay hold of what by its very nature is indefinite. _life._ by no effort of the understanding, by no stretch of imagination, can i explain to myself how language could have grown out of anything which animals possess, even if we granted them millions of years for that purpose. if anything has a right to the name of specific difference, it is language, as we find it in man, and in man only. even if we removed the name of specific difference from our philosophic dictionaries, i should still hold that nothing deserves the name of man except what is able to speak. _science of thought._ every language has to be learnt, but who made the language that was to be learnt? it matters little whether we call language an instinct, a gift, a talent, a faculty, or the _proprium_ of man; certain it is that neither language, nor the power of language, nor the conditions under which alone language can exist, are to be discovered anywhere in the whole animal kingdom, except in man. _science of thought._ it was christianity which first broke down the barrier between jew and gentile, between greek and barbarian, between the white and the black. _humanity_ is a word which you look for in vain in plato and aristotle; the idea of mankind as one family, as the children of one god, is an idea of christian growth; and the science of mankind, and of the languages of mankind, is a science which, without christianity, would never have sprung into life. when people had been taught to look upon all men as brethren, then, and then only, did the variety of human speech present itself as a problem that called for a solution in the eyes of thoughtful observers; and from an historical point of view it is not too much to say that the first day of pentecost marks the real beginning of the science of language. _science of language._ and now, if we gaze from our native shores over the vast ocean of human speech, with its waves rolling on from continent to continent, rising under the fresh breezes of the morning of history, and slowly heaving in our own more sultry atmosphere, with sails gliding over its surface, and many an oar ploughing through its surf, and the flags of all nations waving joyously together, with its rocks and wrecks, its storms and battles, yet reflecting serenely all that is beneath and above and around it; if we gaze and hearken to the strange sounds rushing past our ears in unbroken strains, it seems no longer a wild tumult, but we feel as if placed within some ancient cathedral, listening to a chorus of innumerable voices: and the more intensely we listen, the more all discords melt away into higher harmonies, till at last we hear but one majestic trichord, or a mighty unison, as at the end of a sacred symphony. such visions will float through the study of the grammarian, and in the midst of toilsome researches his heart will suddenly beat, as he feels the conviction growing upon him that men are brethren in the simplest sense of the word--the children of the same father--whatever their country, their language, and their faith. _turanian languages._ life all really great and honest men may be said to live three lives: there is one life which is seen and accepted by the world at large, a man's outward life; there is a second life which is seen by a man's most intimate friends, his household life; and there is a third life, seen only by the man himself, and by him who searcheth the heart, which may be called the inner or heavenly--a life led in communion with god, a life of aspiration rather than of fulfilment. _chips._ where plato could only see imperfections, the failures of the founders of human speech, we see, as everywhere else in human life, a natural progress from the imperfect towards the perfect, unceasing attempts at realising the ideal, and the frequent triumphs of the human mind over the inevitable difficulties of this earthly condition--difficulties not of man's own making, but, as i firmly believe, prepared for him, and not without a purpose, as toils and tasks, by a higher power, and by the highest wisdom. _chips._ our life is not completely in our hands--we must submit to many things which we may smile at in our inmost heart, but which nevertheless are essential, not only to our happiness, but to our fulfilling the duties which we are called to fulfil. we ought to look upon the circumstances in which we are born and brought up as ordained by a higher power, and we must learn to walk the path which is pointed out to us! _life._ it is difficult to be always true to ourselves, to be always what we wish to be, what we feel we ought to be. as long as we feel that, as long as we do not surrender the ideal of our life, all is right. our aspirations represent the true nature of our soul much more than our everyday life. i feel as much as you, how far i have been left behind in the race which i meant to run, but i honestly try to rouse myself, and to live up to what i feel i ought to be. let us keep up our constant fight against all that is small and common and selfish, let us never lose our faith in the ideal life, in what we ought to be, and in what with constant prayer to god we shall be, and let us never forget how unworthy we are of all the blessings god has showered down upon us. _life._ i feel quite thankful for any little misfortune; it is like paying something of the large debt of happiness we owe, though it is but a very trifling interest, and the capital we must owe for ever. _ms._ i thought a long time about my happiness, and my unworthiness, and god's unbounded mercy. and then i heard the words within me: 'be not afraid.' yes, there must be no fear. where there is fear there is no perfect love. our happiness here is but a foretaste of our blessed life hereafter. we must never forget that. we shall be called away, but we shall meet again. _ms._ i begin to be quite thankful for my disappointment--we all want winding up, and nothing does it so well as a great disappointment, if we only see clearly who sent it and then forget everything else. _ms._ one sometimes forgets that all this is only the preparation for what is to come hereafter. yet we should never forget this, otherwise this life loses its true meaning and purpose. if we only know what we live for here, we can easily find out what is worth having in this life, and what is not; we can easily go on without many things which others, whose eyes are fixed on this world only, consider essential to their happiness. _ms._ the spirit of love, and the spirit of truth, are the two life-springs of our whole being--or, what is the same, of our whole religion. if we lose that bond, which holds us and binds us to a higher world, our life becomes purposeless, joyless; if it holds us and supports, life becomes perfect, all little cares vanish, and we feel we are working out a great purpose as well as we can, a purpose not our own, not selfish, not self-seeking, but, in the truest sense of the word, god-serving and god-seeking.... gentleness is a kind of mixture of love and truthfulness, and it should be the highest object of our life to attain more and more to that true gentleness which throws such a charm over all our life. there is a gentleness of voice, of look, of movement, of speech, all of which are but the expressions of true gentleness of heart. _ms._ it is impossible to take too high a view of life; the very highest we take is still too low. one feels that more and more as our life draws to its close, and many things that seemed important once are seen to be of no consequence, while only a few things remain which will tell for ever. _ms._ i don't believe in what is called worldly wisdom. i do not think the world was made for it--with real faith in a higher life i believe one can pass through this life without let or hindrance. what i dread are compromises. there are false notes in them always, and a false note goes on for ever. _ms._ how thankful we ought to be every minute of our existence to him who gives us all richly to enjoy. how little one has deserved this happy life, much less than many poor sufferers to whom life is a burden and a hard and bitter trial. but then, how much greater the claims on us; how much more sacred the duty never to trifle, never to waste time and power, never to compromise, but to live in all things, small and great, to the praise and glory of god, to have god always present with us, and to be ready to follow his voice, and his voice only. has our prosperity taught us to meet adversity when it comes? i often tremble, but then i commit all to god, and i say, 'have mercy upon me, miserable sinner.' _life._ there is something very awful in this life, and it is not right to try to forget it. it is well to be reminded by the trials of others of what may befall us, and what is kept from us only by the love of our father in heaven, not by any merit of our own. _ms._ how different life is to what one thought it when young, how all around us falls together, till we ourselves fall together. how meaningless and vain everything seems on earth, and how closely the reality of the life beyond approaches us. many days were beautiful here, but the greater the happiness the more bitter the thought that it all passes away, that nothing remains of earthly happiness, but a grateful heart and faith in god who knows best what is best for us. _ms._ oh! if we could even in this life forget all that is unessential, all that makes it so hard for us to recognise true greatness and goodness in the character of those with whom this life brings us in contact for a little while! how much we lose by making little things so important, and how rarely do we think highly enough of what is essential and lasting! _ms._ you must accustom yourself more and more to the thought that here is not our abiding city, that all that we call ours here is only lent, not given us, and that if the sorrow for those we have lost remains the same, we must yet acknowledge with gratitude to god the great blessing of having enjoyed so many years with those whom he gave us, as parents, or children, or friends. one forgets so easily the happy years one has had with those who were the nearest to us. even these years of happiness, however short they may have been, were only given us, we had not deserved them. i know well there is no comfort for this pain of parting: the wound always remains, but one learns to bear the pain, and learns to thank god for what he gave, for the beautiful memories of the past, and the yet more beautiful hope for the future. if a man has lent us anything for several years, and at last takes it back, he expects gratitude, not anger; and if god has more patience with our weakness than men have, yet murmurs and complaints for the life which he measured out for us as is best for us, are not what he expected from us. a spirit of resignation to god's will is our only comfort, the only relief under the trials god lays upon us, and with such a spirit the heaviest as well as the lightest trials of life are not only bearable, but useful, and gratitude to god and joy in life and death remain untroubled. _life._ by a grave one learns what life really is--that it is not here but elsewhere--that this is the exile and there is our home. as we grow older the train of life goes faster and faster, those with whom we travelled together step out from station to station, and our own station too will soon be reached. _ms._ it seems to me so ungrateful to allow one moment to pass that is not full of joy and happiness, and devotion to him who gives us all this richly to enjoy. the clouds will come, they must come, but they ought never to be of our own making. _life._ the shadows fall thicker and thicker, but even in the shade it is well, often better than in full sunshine. and when the evening comes, one is tired and ready to sleep! and so all is ordered for us, if we only accommodate ourselves to it quietly. _life._ as long as god wills it we must learn to bear this life, but when he calls us we willingly close our eyes, for we know it is better for us there than here. when so many whom we loved are gone before us, we follow gladly; and the older we become here, the more one feels that death is a relief. and yet we can thankfully enjoy what is still left us on earth, even if our hearts no longer cling to it as formerly. _life._ our life here is not our own work, and we know that it is best for us all just as it is. we ought to bear it, and we must bear it; and the more patiently, yes, the more joyfully, we accommodate ourselves to it, the better for us. we must take life as it is, as the way appointed for us, and that must lead to a certain goal. some go sooner, some later, but we all go the same way, and all find the same place of rest. impatience, gloom, murmurs and tears do not help us, do not alter anything, and make the road longer, not shorter. quiet, resignation, thankfulness and faith help us forwards, and alone make it possible to perform the duties which we all, each in his own sphere, have to fulfil.... the darker the night, the clearer the stars in heaven. _life._ how different life might be, if in our daily intercourse and conversation we thought of our friends as lying before us on the last bed of flowers--how differently we should then judge, and how differently we should act. all that is of the earth is then forgotten, all the little failings inherent in human nature vanish from our minds, and we only see what was good, unselfish, and loving in that soul, and we think with regret of how much more we might have done to requite that love. it is curious how forgetful we are of death, how little we think that we are dying daily, and that what we call life is really death, and death the beginning of a higher life. such a thought should not make our life less bright, but rather more--it should make us feel how unimportant many things are which we consider all-important: how much we could bear which we think unbearable, if only we thought that to-morrow we ourselves or our friends may be taken away, at least for a time. you should think of death, should feel that what you call your own is only lent to you, and that all that remains as a real comfort is the good work done in this short journey, the true unselfish love shown to those whom god has given us, has placed near to us, not without a high purpose. _life._ what a marvel life seems to be the older we grow! so far from becoming more intelligible, it becomes a greater wonder every day. one stands amazed, and everything seems so small--the little one can do so very small. one ought not to brood too much, when there is no chance of light, and yet how natural it is that one should brood over life and death, rather than on the little things of life. _life._ if we only hold fast the belief that nothing happens but by the will of god, we learn to be still and can bear everything. the older one grows, the more one feels sure that life here is but a long imprisonment, and one longs for freedom and higher efforts.... how small and insignificant is all in this life when we raise our eyes above. gazing up to the lord of the universe, all strife is made easy. we speak different tongues when we think of the highest, but we all mean the same thing. _ms._ it is sad to think of all that was and is no more, and yet there is something much more real in memory than one used to think. all is there but what our weak human senses require, and nothing is lost, nothing can be lost except what we know would vanish one day, but what was the husk only, not the kernel. i have learnt to live with those who went before us, and they seem more entirely our own than when they were with us in the body. and as long as we have duties to fulfil, so long as there are others who lean on us and want us, life can be lived a few years longer, it can only be a few years. _ms._ life is earnest! is a very old lesson, and we are never too old to learn it. 'life is an art' is goethe's doctrine, and there is some truth in it also, as long as art does not imply artful or artificial. huxley used to say the highest end of life is action, not knowledge. there i quite differ. first knowledge, then action, and what a lottery action is! the best intentions often fail, and what is done to-day is undone to-morrow. however, we must toil on and do what every day brings us, and do it as well as we can, and better, if possible, than anybody else. _life._ what can we call ours if god did not vouchsafe it to us from day to day? yet it is so difficult to give oneself up entirely to him, to trust everything to his love and wisdom. i thought i could say, 'thy will be done,' but i found i could not: my own will struggled against his will. i prayed as we ought not to pray, and yet he heard me. it is so difficult not to grow very fond of this life and all its happiness, but the more we love it, the more we suffer, for we know we must lose it and it must all pass away. _ms._ our idea of life grows larger, and birth and death seem like morning and evening. one feels that as it has been so it will be again, and all one can do is to try to make the best of every day, as it comes and goes. _life._ the things that annoy us in life are after all very trifling things, if we always bear in mind for what purpose we are here. and even in the heavier trials, one knows, or one should know, that all is sent by a higher power, and in the end must be for our best interests. it is true we cannot understand it, but we can understand that god rules in the world in the smallest and in the largest events, and he who keeps that ever in mind has the peace of god, and enjoys his life as long as it lasts. _life._ life may grow more strange and awful every day, but the more strange and awful it grows, the more it reveals to us its truest meaning and reality, and the deepest depth of its divinity. 'and god saw everything that he had made, and behold it was very good.' _life._ enjoy the precious years god has added to your life, with constant gratitude, with quiet and purity of soul, looking more to the heavenly than to the earthly: that gives true joyfulness of soul, if we _every moment_ recollect what is eternal, and never quite lose ourselves in the small, or even the large cares of life. _life._ if we live on this earth only, if our thoughts are hemmed in by the narrow horizon of this life, then we lose indeed those whom death takes from us. but it is death itself which teaches us that there is a beyond, we are lifted up and see a new world, far beyond what we had seen before. in that wide world we lead a new and larger life, a life which includes those we no longer see on earth, but whom we cannot surrender. the old indian philosophers say that no one can find the truth whose heart is attached to his wife and children. no doubt perfect freedom from all affections would make life and death very easy. but may not the very love which we feel for those who belong to us, even when they are taken from us, bring light to our eyes, and make us see the truth that, by that very love, we belong to another world, and that from that world, however little we can here know about it, love will not be excluded. we believe what we desire--true--but why do we desire? let us be ourselves, let us be what we are meant to be on earth, and trust to him who made us what we are. _ms._ yes, every day adds a new thin layer of new thoughts, and these layers form the texture of our character. the materials come floating towards us, but the way in which they settle down depends much on the ebb and flow within us. we can do much to keep off foreign elements, and to attach and retain those which serve best in building up a strong rock. but from time to time a great sorrow breaks through all the strata of our soul--all is upheaved, shattered, distorted. in nature all that is grand dates from such convulsions--why should we wish for a new smooth surface, or let our sorrows be covered by the flat sediment of everyday life? _ms._ if we feel that this life can only be a link in a chain without beginning and without end, in a circle which has its beginning and its end everywhere and nowhere, we learn to bear it, and to enjoy it too, in a new sense. what we achieve here assumes a new meaning--it will not altogether perish, whether for good or for evil. what is done in time is done for ever--what is done by one affects us all. thus our love too is not lost--what is loved in time is loved for ever. the form changes, but that which changes, which undergoes change, remains itself unchanged. we seem to love the fleeting forms of life, and yet how can we truly love what is so faithless? no, we truly love what is, and was, and will be, hidden under the fleeting forms of life, but in itself more than those fleeting forms however fair. we love the fair appearance too, how could it be otherwise? but we should love it only as belonging to what we love--not as being what we love. so it is, or rather so it ought to be. yet while we are what we are, we love the flower, not the sightless grain of seed, and when that flower fades and passes away, we mourn for it, and our only comfort is that we too fade and pass away. then we follow there, wherever they go. some flowers fade sooner, some later, but none is quite forgotten. _ms._ it would be difficult to say at what moment in our young lives real responsibility begins. the law fixes a time, our own heart cannot do that. yet in spite of this unknown quantity at the beginning, we begin afterwards to reckon with ourselves. why should we protest against a similar unknown quantity before the beginning of our life on earth? wherever and whenever it was, we feel that we have made ourselves what we are; is not that a useful article of faith? does it not help us to decide on undoing what we have done wrong and in doing all the good we can, even if it does not bear fruit, within or without, in this life? a break of consciousness does not seem incompatible with a sense of responsibility, if we know by reasoning, though not by recollection, that what we see done in ourselves must have been done by ourselves. and even if we waive the question of responsibility for the first two or three years of our life on earth, surely we existed during those years though we do not recollect it,--then why not before our life on earth? _ms._ we must learn to live two lives--this short life here on earth with its joys and sorrows, and that true life beyond, of which this is only a fragment or an interruption. when we enter into that true life, we shall find what we cannot find here, we shall find what we have lost here. if only so many things did not seem so irregular, so unnatural. the death of young children before their parents. we love them better because we know we can lose them--that is true--but yet it is a hard lesson to learn. _ms._ one month will go after another, till at last this journey is over, and we look back on it grateful for the many pleasures it has given us, grateful for the company of so many kind friends whom we met, grateful also for the struggles which we had to go through and which will appear so small, and so little worth our tears and anguish, when all is over and the last station and resting-place reached in safety. _ms._ love i cannot help thinking that the souls towards whom we feel drawn in this life are the very souls whom we knew and loved in a former life, and that the souls who repel us here, we do not know why, are the souls that earned our disapproval, the souls from whom we kept aloof, in a former life. but let us remember that if our love is the love of what is merely phenomenal, the love of the body, the kindness of the heart, the vigour and wisdom of the intellect, our love is the love of changing and perishable things.... but if our love, under all its earthly aspects, was the love of the true soul, of what is immortal and divine in every man and woman, that love cannot die, but will find once more what seems beautiful, true, and lovable in worlds to come, as in worlds that have passed.... what we truly love in everything is the eternal _âtman_, the immortal self, and as we should add, the immortal god, for the immortal self and the immortal god must be one. _last essays._ we must not forget that if earthly love has in the vulgar mind been often degraded into mere animal passion, it still remains in its purest sense the highest mystery of our existence, the most perfect blessing and delight on earth, and at the same time the truest pledge of our more than human nature. to be able to feel the same unselfish devotion to the deity which the human heart is capable of, if filled with love for another human soul, is something that may well be called the best religion. _gifford lectures, iv._ what the present generation ought to learn, the young as well as the old, is spirit and perseverance to discover the beautiful, pleasure and joy in making it known, and resigning ourselves with grateful hearts to its enjoyment; in a word--love, in the old, true, eternal meaning of the word. only sweep away the dust of self-conceit, the cobwebs of selfishness, the mud of envy, and the old type of humanity will soon reappear, as it was when it could still 'embrace millions.' the love of mankind, the true fountain of all humanity, is still there; it can never be quite choked up. he who can descend into this fountain of youth, who can again recover himself, who can again be that which he was by nature, loves the beautiful wherever he finds it; he understands enjoyment and enthusiasm, in the few quiet hours which he can win for himself in the noisy, deafening hurry of the times in which we live. _chips._ would not the carrying out of one single commandment of christ, 'love one another,' change the whole aspect of the world, and sweep away prisons and workhouses, and envying and strife, and all the strongholds of the devil? two thousand years have nearly passed, and people have not yet understood that one single command of christ, 'love one another'! we are as perfect heathens in that one respect as it is possible to be. no, this world might be heaven on earth, if we would but carry out god's work and god's commandments, and so it will be hereafter. _life._ if we do a thing because we think it is our duty, we generally fail; that is the old law which makes slaves of us. the real spring of our life, and of our work in life, must be love--true, deep love--not love of this or that person, or for this or that reason, but deep human love, devotion of soul to soul, love of god realised where alone it can be, in love of those whom he loves. everything else is weak, passes away; that love alone supports us, makes life tolerable, binds the present together with the past and future, and is, we may trust, imperishable. _life._ love which seems so unselfish may become very selfish if we are not on our guard. do not shut your eyes to what is dark in others, but do not dwell on it except so far as it helps to bring out more strongly what is bright in them, lovely, and unselfish. the true happiness of true love is self-forgetfulness and trust. _life._ there is nothing in life like a mother's love, though children often do not find it out till it is too late. if you want to be really happy in life, love your mother with all your heart; it is a blessing to feel that you belong to her, and that through her you are connected by an unbroken chain with the highest source of our being. _ms._ is there such a thing as a lost love? i do not believe it. nothing that is true and great is ever lost on earth, though its fulfilment may be deferred beyond this short life.... love is eternal, and all the more so if it does not meet with its fulfilment on earth. if once we know that our lives are in the hands of god, and that nothing can happen to us without his will, we are thankful for the trials which he sends us. is there any one who loves us more than god? any one who knows better what is for our real good than god? this little artificial and complicated society of ours may sometimes seem to be outside his control, but if we think so it is our own fault, and we have to suffer for it. we blame our friends, we mistrust ourselves, and all this because our wild hearts will not be quiet in that narrow cage in which they must be kept to prevent mischief. _life._ does love pass away (with death)? i cannot believe it. god made us as we are, many instead of one. christ died for all of us individually, and such as we are--beings incomplete in themselves, and perfect only through love to god on one side, and through love to man on the other. we want both kinds of love for our very existence, and therefore in a higher and better existence too the love of kindred souls may well exist together with our love of god. we need not love those we love best on earth less in heaven, though we may love all better than we do on earth. after all, love seems only the taking away those unnatural barriers which divide us from our fellow creatures--it is only the restoration of that union which binds us altogether in god, and which has broken on earth we know not how. in christ alone that union was preserved, for he loved us _all_ with a love warmer than the love of a husband for his wife, or a mother for her child. he gave his life for us, and if we ask ourselves there is hardly a husband or a mother who would really suffer death for his wife or her child. thus we see that even what seems to us the most perfect love is very far as yet from the perfection of love which drives out the whole self and all that is selfish, and we must try to love more, not to love less, and trust that what is imperfect here is not meant to be destroyed, but to be made perfect hereafter. with god nothing is imperfect; without him everything is imperfect. we must live and love in god, and then we need not fear: though our life seem chequered and fleeting, we know that there is a home for us in god, and rest for all our troubles in christ. _life._ let us hold together while life lasts. hand in hand we may achieve more than each alone by himself. we are much less afraid when we are two together. the chief condition of all spiritual friendship is perfect frankness. there is no better proof of true friendship than sincere reproof, where such reproof is necessary. we are occupied in one great work, and in this consciousness all that is small must necessarily disappear. _life._ why do we love so deeply? is not that also god's will? and if so, why should that love ever cease? what should we be without it? i cannot believe that we are to surrender that love, that we are to lose those who were given us to love. love may be purified, may become more and more unselfish, may be very different from what it was on earth, but sympathy, suffering together and rejoicing together, lies very deep at the root of all being--were it ever to cease, our very being might cease too. we cannot help loving, loving more and more, better and better. thus life becomes brighter and brighter again, and we feel that we have not lost those who are taken from us for a little while. we love them all the more, all the better. _ms._ how selfish we are even in our love. here we live for a short season, and we know we must part sooner or later. we wish to go first, and to leave those whom we love behind us, and we sorrow because they went first and left us behind. as soon as one looks beyond this life, it seems so short, yet there was a time when it seemed endless. _ms._ the past is ours, and there we have all who loved us, and whom we love as much as ever, ay, more than ever. _ms._ mankind the earth was unintelligible to the ancients because looked upon as a solitary being, without a peer in the whole universe; but it assumed a new and true significance as soon as it rose before the eyes of man as one of many planets, all governed by the same laws, and all revolving around the same centre. it is the same with the human soul, and its nature stands before our mind in quite a different light since man has been taught to know and feel himself as a member of a great family--as one of the myriads of wandering stars all governed by the same laws, and all revolving around the same centre, and all deriving their light from the same source. 'universal history' has laid open new avenues of thought, and it has enriched our language with a word which never passed the lips of socrates, or plato, or aristotle--_mankind_. where the greek saw barbarians, we see brethren; where the greek saw nations, we see mankind, toiling and suffering, separated by oceans, divided by language, and severed by national enmity,--yet evermore tending, under a divine control, towards the fulfilment of that inscrutable purpose for which the world was created, and man placed in it, bearing the image of god. history therefore, with its dusty and mouldering pages, is to us as sacred a volume as the book of nature. in both we read, or we try to read, the reflex of the laws and thoughts of a divine wisdom. we believe that there is nothing irrational in either history or nature, and that the human mind is called upon to read and to revere in both the manifestations of a divine power. _chips._ there are two antagonistic schools--the one believing in a descending, the other in an ascending development of the human race; the one asserting that the history of the human mind begins of necessity with a state of purity and simplicity which gradually gives way to corruption, perversity, and savagery; the other maintaining that the first human beings could not have been more than one step above the animals, and that their whole history is one of progress towards higher perfection. with regard to the beginnings of religion, the one school holds to a primitive suspicion of something that is beyond--call it supernatural, transcendental, infinite, or divine. it considers a silent walking across this bridge of life, with eyes fixed on high, as a more perfect realisation of primitive religion than singing of vedic hymns, offering of jewish sacrifices, or the most elaborate creeds and articles. the other begins with the purely animal and passive nature of man, and tries to show how the repeated impressions of the world in which he lived, drove him to fetichism and totemism, whatever these words may mean, to ancestor worship, to a worship of nature, of trees and serpents, of mountains and rivers, of clouds and meteors, of sun and moon and stars, and the vault of heaven, and at last to a belief in one who dwells in heaven above. _chips._ mind or thought wherever we can see clearly, we see that what we call mind and thought consist in this, that man has the power not only to receive presentations like an animal, but to discover something general in them. this element he can eliminate and fix by vocal signs; and he can further classify single presentations under the same general concepts, and mark them by the same vocal signs. _silesian horseherd._ language and thought go hand in hand; where there is as yet no word, there is not yet an idea. the thinking capacity of the mind has its source in language, lives in language, and develops continually in language. _silesian horseherd._ all our thoughts, even the apparently most abstract, have their natural beginnings in what passes daily before our senses. _nihil in fide nisi quod ante fuerit in sensu._ man may for a time be unheedful of these voices of nature; but they come again and again, day after day, night after night, till at last they are heeded. and if once heeded, those voices disclose their purport more and more clearly, and what seemed at first a mere sunrise becomes in the end a visible revelation of the infinite, while the setting of the sun is transfigured into the first vision of immortality. _hibbert lectures._ as the evolution of nature can be studied with any hope of success in those products only which nature has left us, the evolution of mind also can be effectually studied in those products only which mind itself has left us. these mental products in their earliest form are always embodied in language, and it is in language, therefore, that we must study the problem of the origin, and of the successive stages in the growth of mind. _science of thought._ if language and reason are identical, or two names, or two aspects only of the same thing, and if we cannot doubt that language had an historical beginning, and represents the work of man carried on through many thousands of years, we cannot avoid the conclusion that before those thousands of years there was a time when the first stone of the great temple of language was laid, and before that time man was without language, and therefore without reason. _science of thought._ miracles if once the human mind has arrived at the conviction that _everything_ must be accounted for, or, as it is sometimes expressed, that there is uniformity, that there is care and order in everything, and that an unbroken chain of cause and effect holds the whole universe together, then the idea of the miraculous arises, and we, weak human creatures, call what is not intelligible to us, what is not in accordance with law, what seems to break through the chain of cause and effect, a miracle. every miracle, therefore, is of our own making, and of our own unmaking. _gifford lectures, iii._ it is due to the psychological necessities of human nature, under the inspiring influence of religious enthusiasm, that so many of the true signs and wonders performed by the founders of religion have so often been exaggerated, and, in spite of the strongest protests of these founders themselves, degraded into mere jugglery. it is true that all this does not form an essential element of religion, as we now understand religion. miracles are no longer used as arguments in support of the truth of religious doctrines. miracles have often been called helps to faith, but they have so often proved stumbling-blocks to faith, and no one in our days would venture to say that the truth as taught by any religion must stand or fall by certain prodigious events which may or may not have happened, which may or may not have been rightly apprehended by the followers of buddha, christ, or mohammed. _gifford lectures, ii._ our lord's ascension will have to be understood as a sublime idea, materialised in the language of children. is not a real fact that happened, in a world in which nothing can happen against the will of god, better than any miracle? why should we try to know more than we can know, if only we firmly believe that christ's immortal spirit ascended to the father? that alone is true immortality, divine immortality; not the resuscitation of the frail mortal body, but the immortality of the immortal divine soul. it was this rising of the spirit, and not of the body, without which, as st. paul said, our faith would be vain. it is the spirit that quickeneth, the flesh profiteth nothing. _gifford lectures, iii._ it will be to many of the honest disciples of christ a real day of damascus, when the very name of miracle shall be struck out of the dictionary of christian theology. the facts remain exactly as they are, but the spirit of truth will give them a higher meaning. what is wanted for this is not less, but more, faith, for it requires more faith to believe in christ without, than with, the help of miracles. nothing has produced so much distress of mind, so much intellectual dishonesty, so much scepticism, so much unbelief, as the miraculous element forced into christianity from the earliest days. nothing has so much impeded missionary work as the attempt to persuade people first not to believe in their own miracles, and then to make a belief in other miracles a condition of their becoming christians. it is easy to say 'you are not a christian if you do not believe in christian miracles.' i hope the time will come when we shall be told, 'you are not a christian if you cannot believe in christ without the help of miracles.' _gifford lectures, iii._ music music is the language of the soul, but it defies interpretation. it means something, but that something belongs not to this world of sense and logic, but to another world, quite real, though beyond all definition.... is there not in music, and in music alone of all the arts, something that is not entirely of this earth?... whence comes melody? surely not from anything that we hear with our outward ears and are able to imitate, to improve, or to sublimise.... here if anywhere we see the golden stairs on which angels descend from heaven and whisper sweet sounds into the ears of those who have ears to hear. words cannot be so inspired, for words, we know, are of the earth, earthy. melodies are not of the earth, and it is truly said, 'heard melodies are sweet, but those unheard are sweeter.' _auld lang syne._ nature there is nothing so beautiful as being alone with nature; one sees how god's will is fulfilled in each bud and leaf that blooms and withers, and one learns to recognise how deeply rooted in one is this thirst for nature. in living with men one is only too easily torn from this real home; then one's own plans and wishes and fears spring up; then we fancy we can perfect something for ourselves alone, and think that every thing must serve for our own ends and enjoyments, until the influence of nature in life, or the hand of god, arouses us, and warns us that we live and flourish not for enjoyment, nor for undisturbed quiet, but to bear fruit in another life. _life._ when one stands amid the grandeur of nature, with one's own little murmurings and sufferings, and looks deep into this dumb soul, much becomes clear to one, and one is astounded at the false ideas one has formed of this life. it is but a short journey, and on a journey one can do without many things which generally seem necessary to us. yes, we can do without even what is dearest to our hearts, in this world, if we know that, after the journey we shall have to endure, we shall find again those who have arrived at the goal quicker and more easily than we have done. now if life were looked upon as a journey for refreshment or amusement, which it ought not to be, we might feel sad if we have to make our way alone; but if we treat it as a serious business-journey, then we know we have hard and unpleasant work before us, and enjoy all the more the beautiful resting-places which god's love has provided for each of us in life. _life._ in the early days of the world, the world was too full of wonders to require any other miracles. the whole world was a miracle and a revelation, there was no need for any special disclosure. at that time the heavens, the waters, the sun and moon, the stars of heaven, the showers and dew, the winds of god, fire and heat, winter and summer, ice and snow, nights and days, lightnings and clouds, the earth, the mountains and hills, the green things upon the earth, the wells, and seas and floods--all blessed the lord, praised him and magnified him for ever. can we imagine a more powerful revelation? is it for us to say that for the children of men to join in praising and magnifying him who revealed himself in his own way in all the magnificence, the wisdom and order of nature, is mere paganism, polytheism, pantheism, and abominable idolatry? i have heard many blasphemies, i have heard none greater than this. _gifford lectures, ii._ obscurity there may be much depth of wisdom in all that darkness and vagueness, but i cannot help thinking that there is nothing that cannot be made clear, and bright, and simple, and that obscurity arises in all cases from slovenly thinking and lazy writing. _ms._ old age sharing the happiness of other people, entering into their feelings, living life over once more with them and in them, that is all that remains to old people. i suppose it was meant to be so, the principal object of life being the overcoming of self, in every sense of the word. _life._ this is a lesson one has to learn as one grows older, to learn to be alone, and yet to feel one in spirit with all whom one loves, whether present or absent. _ms._ you cannot escape from old age, whether it comes slowly or suddenly, but it comes unawares, and you suddenly feel that you cannot walk or jump as you used to do, and even the muscles of the mind don't hold out as they used. well, so it was meant to be, and it will be pleasant to begin again with new muscles, and to take up new work. after seeing a good deal of life, i still think the greatest satisfaction is work: i do not mean drudgery, but one's own findings out. _life._ as one is getting old, and looks forward with fear rather than with hope to what is still in store for us, one learns to appreciate more and more the never-failing pleasure of recalling all the bright and happy days that are gone. gone they are, but they are not lost. ever present to our calling and recalling, they assume at last a vividness, such as they hardly had when present, and when we poor souls were trembling for every day and hour and minute that was going and ever going, and would not and could not abide. _life._ religion and religions god is not far from each one of those who seek god, if haply they may feel after him. let theologians pile up volume upon volume of what they call theology, religion is a very simple matter, and that which is so simple and yet so all-important to us, the living kernel of religion, can be found, i believe, in almost every creed, however much the husk may vary. and think what that means! it means that above and beneath and behind all religions there is one eternal, one universal religion, a religion to which every man belongs, or may belong. _last essays._ true religion, that is practical, active, living religion, has little or nothing to do with logical or metaphysical quibbles. practical religion is life, is a new life, a life in the sight of god, and it springs from what may truly be called a new birth. _last essays._ our senses can never perceive a real boundary, be it on the largest or the smallest scale: they present to us everywhere the infinite as their background, and everything that has to do with religion has sprung out of this infinite background as its ultimate and deepest foundation. _silesian horseherd._ i cannot bring myself to take much interest in all the controversies that are going on ( ) in the church of england.... no doubt the points at issue are great, and appeal to our hearts and minds, but the spirit in which they are treated seems to me so very small. how few men on either side give you the impression that they write face to face with god, and not face to face with men and the small powers that be. surely this was not so in the early centuries, nor again at the time of the reformation? _life._ we live in two worlds; behind the seen is the unseen, around the finite the infinite, above the comprehensible the incomprehensible. there have been men who have lived in this world only, who seem never to have felt the real presence of the unseen: and yet they achieved some greatness as rulers of men, as poets, artists, philosophers, and discoverers. but the greatest among the great have done their greatest works in moments of self-forgetful ecstasy, in union and communion with a higher world: and when it was done, such was their silent rapture that they started back, and could not believe it was their own, their very own, and they ascribed the glory of it to god, by whatever name they called him in their various utterances. and while the greatest among the great thus confessed that they were not of this world only, and that their best work was but in part their own, those whom we reverence as the founders of religions, and who were at once philosophers, poets, and rulers of men, called nothing their own, but professed to teach only either what their fathers had taught them, or what a far-off voice had whispered in their ear.... the ancient religions were not founded like temples or palaces, they sprang up like sacred groves from the soil of humanity, quickened by the rays of celestial light. in india, greece, italy, and germany, not even the names of the earliest prophets are preserved. and, if in other countries the forms and features of the authors of their religious faith and worship are still dimly visible amidst the clouds of legend and poetry, all of them, moses as well as zoroaster, confucius, buddha and mohammed, seem to proclaim with one voice that their faith was no new faith, but the faith of their fathers, that their wisdom was not their own wisdom, but, like every good and perfect gift, given them from above. what should we learn from these prophets who from distant countries and bygone ages all bear the same witness to the same truth? we should learn that though religions may be founded and fashioned into strange shapes by the hand of man, religion is one and eternal. from the first dawn that ever brightened a human hearth or warmed a human heart, one generation has told another that there is a world beyond the dawn; and the keynotes of all religion--the feeling of the infinite, the bowing down before the incomprehensible, the yearning after the unseen--having once been set to vibrate, have never been altogether drowned in the strange and wild music of religious sects and sciences. the greatest prophets of the world have been those who at sundry times and in divers manners have proclaimed again and again in the simplest words the simple creed of the fathers, faith in the unseen, reverence for the incomprehensible, awe of the infinite, or, simpler still, love of god, and oneness with the all-father. _life._ i have endeavoured to make clear two things, which constitute the foundation of all religion; first, that the world is rational, that it is the result of thought, and that in this sense only is it the creation of a being which possesses reason, or is reason itself (the _logos_); and secondly, that mind or thought cannot be the outcome of matter, but on the contrary is the _prius_ of all things. _silesian horseherd._ religion is not philosophy; but there never has been a religion, and there never can be, which is not based on philosophy, and does not presuppose the philosophical notions of the people. the highest aim towards which all philosophy strives, is and will always remain the idea of god, and it was this idea which christianity grasped in the platonic sense, and presented to us most clearly in its highest form, in the fourth gospel. _silesian horseherd._ there has been no entirely new religion since the beginning of the world. the elements and roots of religion were there, as far back as we can trace the history of man; and the history of religion shows us throughout a succession of new combinations of the same radical elements. an intuition of god, a sense of human weakness and dependence, a belief in a divine government of the world, a distinction between good and evil, and a hope of a better life, these are some of the radical elements of all religions. though sometimes hidden, they rise again and again to the surface. though frequently distorted, they tend again and again to their perfect form. unless they had formed part of the original dowry of the human soul, religion would have remained an impossibility, and the tongues of angels would have been to human ears but as sounding brass, or as tinkling cymbals. _chips._ in lecturing on the origin and growth of religion, my chief object has been to show that a belief in god, in the immortality of the soul, and in a future retribution, can be gained, and not only can be, but has been gained, by the right exercise of human reason alone, without the assistance of what has been called a special revelation. in doing this, i thought i was simply following in the footsteps of the greatest theologians of our time, and that i was serving the cause of true religion by showing, by ample historical evidence, gathered from the sacred books of the east, how, what st. paul, what the fathers of the church, what mediæval theologians, and what some of the most learned of modern divines had asserted again and again, was most strikingly confirmed by the records of all non-christian religions which have lately become accessible to us. i could not have believed it possible that, in undertaking this work, i should have exposed myself to attacks from theologians who profess and call themselves christians, and who yet maintain that worst of all heresies, that during all the centuries that have elapsed and in all the countries of the world, god has left himself without a witness, and has revealed himself to one race only, the jews of palestine. _gifford lectures, iii._ if there is one thing which a comparative study of religions places in the clearest light, it is the inevitable decay to which every religion is exposed. it may seem almost like a truism that no religion can continue to be what it was during the lifetime of its founders and its first apostles. yet it is but seldom borne in mind that without constant reformation, _i.e._ without a constant return to its fountain head, every religion--even the most perfect, on account of its very perfection, more even than others--suffers from its contact with the world, as the purest air suffers from the mere fact of being breathed. _chips._ to each individual his own religion, if he really believes in it, is something quite inseparable from himself, something unique, that cannot be compared to anything else, or replaced by anything else. our own religion is, in that respect, something like our own language. in its form it may be like other languages; in its essence, and in its relation to ourselves, it stands alone and admits of no peer or rival. _chips._ three of the results to which, i believe, a comparative study of religion is sure to lead, i may here state:-- . we shall learn that religions, in their most ancient form, or in the minds of their authors, are generally free from many of the blemishes that attach to them in later times. . we shall learn that there is hardly one religion which does not contain some truth, some important truth; truth sufficient to enable those who seek the lord, and feel after him, to find him in their hour of need. . we shall learn to appreciate better than ever what we have in our own religion. no one who has not examined patiently and honestly the other religions of the world can know what christianity really is, or can join with such truth and sincerity in the words of st. paul, 'i am not ashamed of the gospel of christ.' _chips._ many are the advantages to be derived from a careful study of other religions, but the greatest of all is that it teaches us to appreciate more truly what we possess in our own. let us see what other nations have had and still have in the place of religion, let us examine the prayers, the worship, the theology even, of the most highly civilised races, and we shall then understand more thoroughly what blessings are vouchsafed to us in being allowed to breathe from the first breath of life the pure air of a land of christian light and knowledge. we are too apt to take the greatest blessings as matters of course, and even religion forms no exception. we have done so little to gain our religion, we have suffered so little in the cause of truth, that however highly we prize our own christianity, we never prize it highly enough until we have compared it with the religions of the rest of the world. _chips._ the spirit of truth is the life-spring of all religion, and where it exists it must manifest itself, it must plead, it must persuade, it must convince and convert. _chips._ as there is a faculty of speech, independent of all the historical forms of language, there is a faculty of faith in man, independent of all historical religions. if we say it is religion which distinguishes man from the animal, we do not mean the christian and jewish religion: we do not mean any special religion: but we mean a mental faculty or disposition, which, independent of, nay in spite of, sense and reason, enables man to apprehend the infinite under different names, and under varying disguises. without that faculty, no religion, not even the lowest worship of idols and fetishes, would be possible; and if we will but listen attentively, we can hear in all religions a groaning of the spirit, a struggle to conceive the inconceivable, to utter the unutterable, a longing after the infinite, a love of god. _science of religion._ like an old precious metal, the ancient religion, after the dust of ages has been removed, will come out in all its purity and brightness: and the image which it discloses will be the image of the father, the father of all the nations upon earth; and the superscription, where we can read it again, will be, not in judæa only, but in the languages of all the races of the world, the word of god, revealed where alone it can be revealed--revealed in the heart of man. _science of religion._ if we granted that all religions, except christianity and mosaism, derived their origin from those faculties of the mind only which, according to paley, are sufficient by themselves for calling into life the fundamental tenets of natural religion, the classification of christianity and judaism on one side as _revealed_, and of the other religions as _natural_, would still be defective, for the simple reason that no religion, though founded on revelation, can ever be entirely separated from natural religion. the tenets of natural religion, though they never constituted by themselves a real historical religion, supply the only ground on which even revealed religions can stand, the only soil where they can strike root, and from which they can receive nourishment and life. _science of religion._ the intention of religion, wherever we meet it, is always holy. however imperfect, however childish a religion may be, it always places the human soul in the presence of god: and however imperfect and however childish the conception of god may be, it always represents the highest ideal of perfection which the human soul, for the time being, can reach and grasp. religion therefore places the human soul in the presence of its highest ideal, it lifts it above the level of ordinary goodness, and produces at last a yearning after a higher and better life--a life in the light of god. _science of religion._ i suppose that most of us, sooner or later in life, have felt how the whole world--this wicked world, as we call it--is changed as if by magic, if once we can make up our mind to give men credit for good motives, never to be suspicious, never to think evil, never to think ourselves better than our neighbours. trust a man to be true and good, and, even if he is not, your trust will tend to make him true and good. it is the same with the religions of the world. let us but once make up our minds to look in them for what is true and good, and we shall hardly know our old religions again. there is no religion--or, if there is, i do not know it--which does not say, 'do good, avoid evil.' there is none which does not contain what rabbi hillel called the quintessence of all religions, the simple warning, 'be good, my boy.' 'be good, my boy,' may seem a very short catechism, but let us add to it, 'be good, my boy, for god's sake,' and we have in it very nearly the whole of the law and the prophets. _science of religion._ in order to choose between different gods, and different forms of faith, a man must possess the faculty of choosing the instruments of testing truth and untruth, whether revealed or not; he must know that certain fundamental tenets cannot be absent in any true religion, and that there are doctrines against which his rational or moral conscience revolts as incompatible with truth. in short, there must be the foundation of religion, there must be the solid rock, before it is possible to erect an altar, a temple, or a church: and if we call that foundation natural religion, it is clear that no revealed religion can be thought of which does not rest more or less firmly on natural religion. _science of religion._ universal primeval revelation is only another name for natural religion, and it rests on no authority but the speculations of philosophers. the same class of philosophers, considering that language was too wonderful an achievement for the human mind, insisted on the necessity of admitting a universal primeval language, revealed directly by god to men, or rather to mute beings: while the more thoughtful and more reverent of the fathers of the church, and among the founders of modern philosophy also, pointed out that it was more consonant with the general working of an all-wise and all-powerful creator that he should have endowed human nature with the essential conditions of speech, instead of presenting mute beings with grammars and dictionaries ready-made. the same applies to religion. a universal primeval religion revealed direct by god to man, or rather to a crowd of atheists, may, to our human wisdom, seem the best solution of all difficulties; but a higher wisdom speaks to us out of the realities of history, and teaches us, if we will but learn, that 'we have all to seek the lord, if haply we may feel after him, and find him, though he is not far from every one of us.' _science of religion._ the study of the ancient religions of mankind, i feel convinced, if carried on in a bold, but scholarlike, careful, and reverent spirit, will remove many doubts and difficulties which are due entirely to the narrowness of our religious horizon; it will enlarge our sympathies, it will raise our thoughts above the small controversies of the day, and at no distant future evoke in the very heart of christianity a fresh spirit and a new life. _science of religion._ no judge, if he had before him the worst of criminals, would treat him as most historians and theologians have treated the religions of the world. every act in the lives of their founders which shows that they were but men, is eagerly seized and judged without mercy; every doctrine that is not carefully guarded is interpreted in the worst sense that it will bear; every act of worship that differs from our own way of serving god is held up to ridicule and contempt. and this is not done by accident but with a purpose, nay, with something of that artificial sense of duty which stimulates the counsel for the defence to see nothing but an angel in his own client, and anything but an angel in the plaintiff on the other side. the result has been--as it could not be otherwise--a complete miscarriage of justice, an utter misapprehension of the real character and purpose of the ancient religions of mankind; and, as a necessary consequence, a failure in discovering the peculiar features which really distinguish christianity from all the religions of the world, and secure to its founder his own peculiar place in the history of the world, far away from zoroaster and buddha, from moses and mohammed, from confucius and laotse. by unduly deprecating all other religions we have placed our own in a position which its founder never intended for it; we have torn it away from the sacred context of the history of the world; we have ignored, or wilfully narrowed, the sundry times and divers manners in which, in times past, god spake unto the fathers by the prophets; and instead of recognising christianity as coming in the fulness of time, and as the fulfilment of the hopes and desires of the whole world, we have brought ourselves to look upon its advent as the only broken link in that unbroken chain which is rightly called the divine government of the world. nay, worse than this, there are people who, from mere ignorance of the ancient religions of mankind, have adopted a doctrine more unchristian than any that could be found in the pages of the religious books of antiquity, _i.e._ that all the nations of the earth, before the rise of christianity, were mere outcasts, forsaken and forgotten of their father in heaven, without a knowledge of god, without a hope of heaven. if a comparative study of the religions of the world produced but this one result, that it drove this godless heresy out of every christian heart, and made us see again in the whole history of the world the eternal wisdom and love of god towards all his creatures, it would have done a good work. _science of religion._ do you still wonder at polytheism or at mythology? why, they are inevitable. they are, if you like, a _parler enfantin_ of religion. but the world has its childhood, and when it was a child, it spoke as a child, it understood as a child, it thought as a child, and in that it spoke as a child its language was true. the fault rests with us, if we insist on taking the language of children for the language of men, if we attempt to translate literally ancient into modern language, oriental into occidental speech, poetry into prose. _science of religion._ religion is inevitable if only we are left in possession of our senses, such as we really find them, not such as they have been defined for us. we claim no special faculty, no special revelation. the only faculty we claim is perception, the only revelation we claim is history, or, as it is now called, historical evolution. but let it not be supposed that we find the idea of the infinite ready made in the human mind from the very beginning of our history. all we maintain is that the germ or the possibility, the not-yet of that idea, lies hidden in the earliest sensuous perceptions, and that as reason is evolved from what is finite, so faith is evolved from what from the very beginning is infinite in the perceptions of our senses. _hibbert lectures._ each religion has its own peculiar growth, but the seed from which they spring is everywhere the same. that seed is the perception of the infinite, from which no one can escape who does not wilfully shut his eyes. from the first flutter of human consciousness, that perception underlies all the other perceptions of our senses, all our imaginings, all our concepts, and every argument of our reason. it may be buried for a time beneath the fragments of our finite knowledge, but it is always there, and, if we dig deep enough, we shall always find that buried seed, supplying the living sap to the fibres and feeders of all true faith. _hibbert lectures._ instead of approaching the religions of the world with the preconceived idea that they are either corruptions of the jewish religion, or descended, in common with the jewish religion, from some perfect primeval revelation, the students of the science of religion have seen that it is their duty first to collect all the evidence of the early history of religious thought that is still accessible in the sacred books of the world, or in the mythology, customs, or even in the languages of various races. afterwards they have undertaken a genealogical classification of all the materials that have hitherto been collected, and they have then only approached the question of the origin of religion in a new spirit, by trying to find out how the roots of the various religions, the radical concepts which form their foundation, and before all, the concept of the infinite, could have been developed, taking for granted nothing but sensuous perception on one side, and the world by which we are surrounded on the other. _hibbert lectures._ a distinction has been made for us between religion and philosophy, and, so far as form and object are concerned, i do not deny that such a distinction may be useful. but when we look to the subjects with which religion is concerned, they are, and always have been, the very subjects on which philosophy has dwelt, nay, from which philosophy has sprung. if religion depends for its very life on the sentiment or the perception of the infinite within the finite and beyond the finite, who is to determine the legitimacy of that sentiment, or of that perception, if not the philosopher? who is to determine the powers which man possesses for apprehending the finite by his senses, for working up his single, and therefore finite, impressions into concepts by his reason, if not the philosopher? and who, if not the philosopher, is to find out whether man can claim the right of asserting the existence of the infinite, in spite of the constant opposition of sense and reason, taking these words in their usual meaning? we should damnify religion if we separated it from philosophy: we should ruin philosophy if we divorced it from religion. _hibbert lectures._ who, if he is honest towards himself, could say that the religion of his manhood was the same as that of his childhood, or the religion of his old age the same as the religion of his manhood? it is easy to deceive ourselves, and to say that the most perfect faith is a childlike faith. nothing can be truer, and the older we grow the more we learn to understand the wisdom of a childlike faith. but before we can learn that, we have first to learn another lesson, namely, to put away childish things. there is the same glow about the setting sun as there is about the rising sun; but there lies between the two a whole world, a journey through the whole sky, and over the whole earth. _hibbert lectures._ i hope the time will come when the subterranean area of human religion will be rendered more and more accessible, ... and that the science of religion, which at present is but a desire and a seed, will in time become a fulfilment, a plenteous harvest. when that time of harvest has come, when the deepest foundations of all the religions of the world have been laid free and restored, who knows but that those very foundations may serve once more, like the catacombs, or like the crypts beneath our old cathedrals, as a place of refuge for those who, to whatever creed they may belong, long for something better, purer, older, and truer than what they can find in the statutable sacrifices, services, and sermons of the days in which their lot on earth has been cast; some who have learnt to put away childish things, call them genealogies, legends, miracles, or oracles, but who cannot part with the childlike faith of their heart. each believer may bring down with him into that quiet crypt what he values most, his own pearl of great price--the hindu, his innate disbelief in this world, his unhesitating belief in another world; the buddhist, his perception of an eternal law, his submission to it, his gentleness, his pity; the mohammedan, if nothing else, his sobriety; the jew, his clinging through good and evil days to the one god, who loveth righteousness and whose name is 'i am'; the christian, that which is better than all, if those who doubt it would only try it--our love of god, call him what you like, the infinite, the invisible, the immortal, the father, the highest self, above all, and through all, and in all, manifested in our love of man, our love of the living, our love of the dead, our living and undying love. _hibbert lectures._ if we see the same doctrines, sometimes uttered even in the very same words, by the apostles, and by what people call the false prophets, of the heathen world, we need not grudge them these precious pearls. when two religions say the same thing, it is not always the same thing; but even if it is, should we not rather rejoice and try with all our might to add to what may be called the heavenly dowry of the human race, the common stock of truth which, as we are told, is not far from every one of us, if only we feel after it and find it? _gifford lectures, i._ religion, when looked upon not as supernatural, but as thoroughly natural to man, has assumed a new meaning and a higher dignity when studied as an integral part of that historical evolution which has made man what he is, and what from the very first he was meant to be. is it no comfort to know that at no time and in no part of the world, has god left himself without witness, that the hand of god was nowhere beyond the reach of the outstretched hands of babes and sucklings; nay, that it was from those rude utterances out of the mouth of babes and sucklings, that is, of savages and barbarians, that has been perfected in time the true praise of god? to have looked for growth and evolution in history as well as in nature is no blame, and has proved no loss to the present or to the last century; and if the veil has as yet been but little withdrawn from the holy of holies, those who come after us will have learnt at least this one lesson, that this lifting of the veil which was supposed to be the privilege of priests, is no longer considered as a sacrilege, if attempted by any honest seekers after truth. _gifford lectures, i._ religion consists in the perception of the infinite under such manifestations as are able to influence the moral character of man. _gifford lectures, i._ no opinion is true simply because it has been held either by the greatest intellects or by the largest number of human beings at different periods in the history of the world. no one can spend years in the study of the religions of the world, beginning with the lowest and ending with the highest forms, no one can watch the sincerity of religious endeavour, the warmth of religious feeling, the nobleness of religious conduct, among races whom we are inclined to call pagan or savage, without learning at all events a lesson of humility. anybody, be he jew, christian, mohammedan, or brahman, if he has a spark of modesty left, must feel that it would be nothing short of a miracle that his own religion alone should be perfect throughout, while that of every other believer should be false or wrong from beginning to end. _gifford lectures, i._ the more we study the history of the religions of the world, the clearer it becomes that there is really no religion which could be called an individual religion, in the sense of a religion created, as it were _de novo_, or rather _ab ovo_, by one single person. this may seem strange, and yet it is really most natural. religion, like language, is everywhere an historical growth, and to invent a completely new religion would be as hopeless a task as to invent a completely new language. nor do the founders of the great historical religions of the world ever claim this exclusive authorship. on the contrary, most of them disclaim in the strongest terms the idea that they have come either to destroy, or to build a completely new temple. _gifford lectures, i._ the whole world in its wonderful history has passed through the struggle for life, the struggle for eternal life; and every one of us, in his own not less wonderful history, has had to pass through the same wonderful struggle: for, without it, no religion, whatever its sacred books may be, will find in any human heart that soil in which alone it can strike root and on which alone it can grow and bear fruit. we must all have our own bookless religion, if the sacred books, whatever they may be, are to find a safe and solid foundation within ourselves. no temple can stand without that foundation, and it is because that foundation is so often neglected that the walls of the temple become unsafe and threaten to fall. _gifford lectures, i._ the heart and mind and soul of man are the same under every sky, in all the varying circumstances of human life; and it would be awful to believe that _any_ human beings should have been deprived of that light 'which lighteth _every_ man that cometh into the world.' it is that light which lighteth every man, and which has lighted all the religions of the world, call them bookless or literate, human or divine, natural or supernatural, which alone can dispel the darkness of doubt and fear that has come over the world. what our age wants more than anything else is _natural religion_. whatever meaning different theologians may attach to _supernatural religion_, history teaches us that nothing is so natural as the supernatural. but the supernatural must always be _superimposed_ on the natural. supernatural religion without natural religion is a house built on sand, and when, as in our days, the rain of doubt descends, and the floods of criticism come, and the winds of unbelief and despair blow and beat upon that house, that house will fall because it was not founded on the rock of bookless religion, of natural religion, of eternal religion. _gifford lectures, i._ every religion, being the property of the young and the old, the wise and the foolish, must always be a kind of compromise, and, while protesting against real corruptions and degradations, we must learn to bear with those whose language differs from our own, and trust that in spite of the tares which have sprung up during the night, some grains of wheat will ripen towards the harvest in every honest heart. _gifford lectures, ii._ in all the fundamentals of religion we are neither better nor worse than our neighbours, neither more wise nor more unwise than all the members of that great family who have been taught to know themselves as children of one and the same father in heaven. _gifford lectures, ii._ what can a study of natural religion teach us? why, it teaches us that religion is natural, is real, is inevitable, is universal. is that nothing? is it nothing to know that there is a solid rock on which all religion, call it natural or supernatural, is founded? is it nothing to learn from the annals of history that god has not left himself without witness in that he did good, and gave us rain from heaven and fruitful seasons, filling our hearts, and the hearts of the whole human race, with food and gladness? _gifford lectures, ii._ while on the one side a study of natural religion teaches us that much of what we are inclined to class as natural, to accept as a matter of course, is in reality full of meaning, is full of god, is in fact truly miraculous, it also opens our eyes to another fact, namely, that many things which we are inclined to class as supernatural, are in reality perfectly natural, perfectly intelligible, nay inevitable, in the growth of every religion. _gifford lectures, ii._ the real coincidences between all the religions of the world teach us that all religions spring from the same soil--the human heart; that they all look to the same ideals, and that they are all surrounded by the same dangers and difficulties. much that is represented to us as supernatural in the annals of the ancient religions of the world becomes perfectly natural from this point of view. _gifford lectures, ii._ to those who see no difficulties in their own religion, the study of other religions will create no new difficulties. it will only help them to appreciate more fully what they already possess. for with all that i have said in order to show that other religions also contain all that is necessary for salvation, it would be simply dishonest on my part were i to hide my conviction that the religion taught by christ, free as yet from all ecclesiastical fences and entrenchments, is the best, the purest, the truest religion the world has ever seen. _gifford lectures, ii._ to expect that religion could ever be placed again beyond the reach of scientific treatment or honest criticism, shows an utter misapprehension of the signs of the times, and would, after all, be no more than to set up private judgment against private judgment. if the inalienable rights of private judgment, that is, of honesty and truth, were more generally recognised, the character of religious controversy would at once be changed. it is restriction that provokes resentment, and thus embitters all discussions on religious subjects. _gifford lectures, iii._ so far from being dishonest, the distinction between a higher and a lower form of religion is in truth the only honest recognition of the realities of life. if to a philosophic mind religion is a spiritual love of god, and the joy of his full consciousness of the spirit of god within him, what meaning can such words convey to the millions of human beings who nevertheless want a religion, a positive, authoritative, or revealed religion, to teach them that there is a god, and that his commands must be obeyed without questioning? _gifford lectures, iii._ people ask what can be gained by a comprehensive study of religions, by showing that, as yet, no race has been discovered without some word for what is not visible, not finite, not human, for something superhuman and divine. some theologians go even so far as to resent the discovery of the universality of such a belief. they are anxious to prove that human reason alone could never have arrived at a conception of god. they would much rather believe that god has left himself without witness than that a belief in something higher than the finite could spring up in the human heart from gratitude to him who gave us rain from heaven, and fruitful seasons, filling our hearts with food and gladness. _gifford lectures, iii._ physical religion, beginning in a belief in agents behind the great phenomena of nature, reached its highest point when it had led the human mind to a belief in one supreme agent or god, whatever his name might be. it was supposed that this god could be implored by prayers and pleased by sacrifices. he was called the father of gods and men. yet even in his highest conception, he was no more than what cardinal newman defined god to be. 'i mean by the supreme being,' he wrote, 'one who is simply self-dependent, and the only being who is such. i mean that he created all things out of nothing, and could destroy them as easily as he made them, and that, in consequence, he is separated from them by an abyss, and incommunicable in all his attributes.' this abyss separating god from man remains at the end of physical religion. it constitutes its inherent weakness. but this very weakness becomes in time a source of strength, for from it sprang a yearning for better things. even the god of the jews, in his unapproachable majesty, though he might be revered and loved by man during his life on earth, could receive, as it were, a temporary allegiance only, for 'the dead cannot praise god, neither any that go down into darkness!' god was immortal, a man was mortal; and physical religion could not throw a bridge over the abyss that separated the two. real religion, however, requires more than a belief in god, it requires a belief in man also, and an intimate relation between god and man, at all events in a life to come. there is in man an irrepressible desire for continued existence. it shows itself in life in what we may call self-defence. it shows itself at the end of life and at the approach of death, in the hope of immortality. _gifford lectures, iii._ so long as we look on the history of the human race as something that might or might not have been, we cannot wonder that the student of religion should prefer to form his opinions of the nature of religion and the laws of its growth from the masterpiece of thomas aquinas, the _summa sacræ theologiæ_, rather than from the _sacred books of the east_. but when we have learnt to recognise in history the realisation of a rational purpose, when we have learnt to look upon it as in the truest sense of the word a divine drama, the plot revealed in it ought to assume in the eyes of a philosopher also, a meaning and a value far beyond the speculations of even the most enlightened and logical theologians. _gifford lectures, iv._ the question is whether there is, or whether there is not, hidden in every one of the sacred books, something that could lift up the human heart from this earth to a higher world, something that could make man feel the omnipresence of a higher power, something that could make him shrink from evil and incline to good, something to sustain him in the short journey through life, with its bright moments of happiness, and its long hours of terrible distress. _preface, sacred books of the east._ it has been truly said, and most emphatically, by dr. newman, that neither a belief in god by itself, nor a belief in the soul by itself, would constitute religion, and that real religion is founded on a true perception of the relation of the soul to god, and of god to the soul. _gifford lectures, iv._ it may be truly said that the founders of the religions of the world have all been bridge-builders. as soon as the existence of a beyond, of a heaven above the earth, of powers above us and beneath us, had been recognised, a great gulf seemed to be fixed between what was called by various names, the earthly and the heavenly, the material and the spiritual, the phenomenal and nomenal, or best of all, the visible and invisible world, and it was the chief object of religion to unite these two worlds again, whether by the arches of hope and fear, or by the iron chains of logical syllogisms. _gifford lectures, iv._ religion, in order to be _real_ religion, a man's own religion, must be searched for, must be discovered, must be conquered. if it is simply inherited, or accepted as a matter of course, it often happens that in later years it falls away, and has either to be reconquered, or to be replaced by another religion. _autobiography._ religion is growth, never finished. from the lowest to the highest stages it is growth, not willed only, nor given only, but both. the lowest stages may seem very imperfect to us, but they are all the more important. language and mythology show us the old path on which man travelled from nature to god. _ms._ there is no lesson which at the present time seems more important than to learn that in every religion there are precious grains; that we must draw in every religion a broad distinction between what is essential and what is not, between the eternal and the temporary, between the divine and the human, and that though the non-essential may fill many volumes, the essential can often be comprehended in a few words, but words on which 'hang all the law and the prophets.' _preface, sacred books of the east._ religions were meant to be many, like languages. to us, one language for the whole human race would seem to be far better; but it was not to be. each language was to be a school for each race, a talent committed to each nation. and so it is with religion. there is truth in all of them, the whole truth in none. let each one cherish his own, purify his own, and throw away what is dead and decaying. but to give up one's religion is like giving up one's life. even the lowest savage must keep his own old faith in god, when he becomes converted to christianity, or he will have lost the living and life-giving root of his faith. if people would only learn to look for what is good in all religions, how far more beautiful the world would appear in their eyes. they dig hard enough to get the ore from out a mine, they sift it, smelt it, purify it, and then keep the small pieces of gold they have got with all this trouble, forgetting the _scoriae_ and all the refuse. that is what we must do as students of religion; but we do the very contrary--we hug the _scoriae_ and shut our eyes to the glittering rays of gold. jews and christians are worse in that respect than all other people. it may be because their religions are freer from human impurities than all other religions. but why should that make them blind to what is really good in other religions, why should it blind them so much that they look upon other religions as the work of the devil? the power of evil has had its work in all religions, our own not excepted--but the power of goodness prevails everywhere. till we know that, life and history seem intolerable. it would not put an end to missionary labour, it would only make it more a labour of love, less painful to those whom we wish to win, not away from their god, but back to their god, him whom they ignorantly worship, and whom we should declare unto them, according to our own light, such as it is, less dark than theirs on many points, but yet dark, as those know best who, like st. paul, have striven hardest to look through the glass of our own weak human mind. _ms._ if people would only learn to see that there is really a religion beyond all religions, that each man must have his own religion which he has conquered for himself, and that we must learn to tolerate religion wherever we find it! christianity would be a perfect religion, if it did not go beyond the simple words of christ, and if, even in these words, we made full allowance for the time and place and circumstances in which they were spoken--that is, if we simply followed christ where he wishes us to follow him. we have gone far beyond those times and circumstances in many things, but in what is most essential we are still far behind the teaching of christ. how many call themselves christians who have no idea how difficult it is to be a christian, a follower of christ! it is easy enough to repeat creeds, and to work ourselves into a frame of mind when miracles seem most easy. _ms._ it was the duty of the apostles and of the early christians in general to stand forth in the name of the only true god, and to prove to the world that their god had nothing in common with the idols worshipped at athens and ephesus. it was the duty of the early converts to forswear all allegiance to their former deities, and if they could not at once bring themselves to believe that the gods whom they had worshipped had no existence at all, they were naturally led on to ascribe to them a kind of demoniacal nature, and to curse them as the offspring of that new principle of evil with which they had become acquainted in the doctrines of the early church.... through the whole of st. augustine's works, and through all the works of earlier christian divines, there runs the same spirit of hostility blinding them to all that may be good, and true, and sacred, and magnifying all that is bad, false, and corrupt, in the ancient religions of mankind. only the apostles and their immediate disciples venture to speak in a different and, no doubt, in a more truly christian spirit of the old forms of worships.... what can be more convincing, more powerful, than the language of st. paul at athens? _science of language._ those who believe that there is a god, and that he created heaven and earth, and that he ruleth the world by his unceasing providence, cannot believe that millions of human beings, all created like ourselves in the image of god, were, in their time of ignorance, so utterly abandoned that their whole religion was falsehood, their whole worship a farce, their whole life a mockery. an honest and independent study of the religions of the world will teach us that it was not so, ... that there is no religion which does not contain some grains of truth. nay, it will teach us more; it will teach us to see in the history of the ancient religions, more clearly than anywhere else, the _divine education of the human race_. _science of religion._ the divine, if it is to reveal itself at all to us, will best reveal itself in our own human form. however far the human may be from the divine, nothing on earth is nearer to god than man, nothing on earth more godlike than man. and as man grows from childhood to old age, the idea of the divine must grow with us from the cradle to the grave, from grace to grace. a religion which is not able thus to grow and live with us as we grow and live, is dead already. definite and unvarying uniformity, so far from being a sign of honesty and life, is always a sign of dishonesty and death. every religion, if it is to be a bond between the wise and the foolish, the old and the young, must be pliant, must be high and deep and broad; bearing all things, believing all things, hoping all things, enduring all things. the more it is so, the greater its vitality, the greater the strength and warmth of its embrace. _hibbert lectures._ revelation true inspiration is, and always has been, the spirit of truth within, and this is but another name for the spirit of god. it is truth that makes inspiration, not inspiration that makes truth. whoever knows what truth is knows also what inspiration is: not only _theopneustos_, blown into the soul by god, but the very voice of god, the real presence of god, the only presence in which we, as human beings, can ever perceive him. _autobiography._ there is nothing in the idea of revelation that excludes progress, for whatever definition of revelation we may adopt, it always represents a communication between the divine on one side and the human on the other. let us grant that the divine element in revelation, that is, whatever of truth there is in revelation, is immutable, yet the human element, the recipient, must always be liable to the accidents and infirmities of human nature. that human element can never be eliminated in any religion.... to ignore that human element in all religions is like ignoring the eye as the recipient and determinant of the colours of light. we know more of the sun than our forefathers, though the same sun shone on them that shines on us; and if astronomy has benefited by its telescopes, ... theology also ought not to despise whatever can strengthen the far-sightedness of human reason in its endeavour to gain a truer and purer idea of the divine. a veil will always remain. but as in every other pursuit, so in religion also, we want less and less of darkness, more and more of light; we want, call it life, or growth, or development, or progress; we do not want mere rest, mere stagnation, mere death. _gifford lectures, i._ it was the sense of an overpowering truth which led to the admission of a revelation. but while in the beginning truth made revelation, it soon came to pass that revelation was supposed to make truth. when we see this happening in every part of the world, when we can watch the psychological progress which leads in the most natural way to a belief in supernatural inspiration, it will hardly be said that an historical study of religion may be useful to the antiquarian, but cannot help us to solve the burning questions of the day. _gifford lectures, i._ i believe in one revelation only--the revelation within us, which is much better than any revelations which come from without. why should we look for god and listen for his voice outside us only, and not within us? where is the temple of god, or the true kingdom of god? _life._ there are christian mystics who would not place internal revelation, or the voice of god within the heart, so far below external revelation. to those who know the presence of god within the heart, this revelation is far more real than any other can be. they hold with st. paul that man is in the full sense of the word the temple of god, and that the spirit of god dwelleth within him, nay, they go even further, and both as christians and as mystics they cling to the belief that all men are one in the father and the son, as the father is in the son, and the son in the father. there is no conflict in their minds between christian doctrine and mystic doctrine. they are one and the same in character, the one imparted through christ on earth, the other imparted through the indwelling spirit of god, which again is christ, as born within us. the gospel of st. john is full of passages to which the christian mystic clings, and by which he justifies his belief in the indwelling spirit of god, or, as he also calls it, the birth of christ in the human soul. _gifford lectures, ii._ i cannot connect any meaning with a primeval revelation, or with an original knowledge of god. a knowledge of god is surely at all times impossible; man can only trust, he cannot know. he can feel the infinite, and the divine, he can never class it or subdue it by knowledge. the question seems to me, how our unconscious relation to god, which must be there and can never be destroyed, becomes gradually more and more conscious; and that is what one can best learn to understand in the history of the various religions of the world--so many voyages of discovery, each full of sufferings and heroic feats, all looking towards the same pole, each to be judged by itself, none, i believe, to be condemned altogether. _ms._ to assume that every word, every letter, every parable, every figure was whispered to the authors of the gospels, is certainly an absurdity, and rests only on human ... authority. but the true revelation, the real truth, as it was already anticipated by the greek philosophers, slowly accepted by jews, like philo and the contemporaries of jesus, taught by men like clement and origen in the ancient greek church, and, in fine, realised in the life of jesus, and sealed by his death, is no absurdity: it is for every thinking christian the eternal life, or the kingdom of god on earth, which jesus wished to establish, and in part did establish. to become a citizen of this kingdom is the highest that man can attain, but it is not attained merely through baptism and confirmation; it must be gained in earnest spiritual conflict. _silesian horseherd._ the rig-veda the _veda_ alone of all works i know treats of a genesis of god-consciousness, compared to which the theogony of hesiod is like a worn-out creature. we see it grow slowly and gradually with all its contradictions, its sudden terrors, its amazements, and its triumphs. as god reveals his being in nature in her order, her indestructibility, in the eternal victory of light over darkness, of spring over winter, in the eternally returning course of the sun and the stars, so man has gradually spelt out of nature the being of god, and after trying a thousand names for god in vain, we find him in the _veda_ already saying: 'they call him indra, mitra, varuna; then they call him the heavenly, the bird with beautiful wings; that which is one they call in various ways.'... the belief in immortality is only the other side, as it were, of the god-consciousness, and both are originally natural to the aryan race. _life._ science every true science is like a hardy alpine guide that leads us on from the narrow, though it may be the more peaceful and charming, valleys of our preconceived opinions, to higher points, apparently less attractive, nay often disappointing for a time, till, after hours of patient and silent climbing, we look round and see a new world around us. _chips._ a new horizon has opened, our eyes see far and wide, and as the world beneath us grows wider and larger, our own hearts seem to grow wider and larger, and we learn to embrace the far and distant, and all that before seemed strange and indifferent, with a warmer recognition and a deeper human sympathy; we form wider concepts, we perceive higher truths. _chips._ what is natural is divine; what is supernatural is human. _gifford lectures, i._ man is the measurer of all things; and what is science but the reflection of the outer world on the mirror of the mind, growing more perfect, more orderly, more definite, more great, with every generation? to attempt to study nature without studying man is as impossible as to study light without studying the eye. i have no misgivings, therefore, that the lines on which this college (mason science college) is founded will ever become so narrow as to exclude the science of man, and the science of that which makes man, the science of language, and, what is really the same, the science of thought. and where can we study the science of thought, that most wonderful instance of development, except in the languages and literatures of the past? how are we to do justice to our ancestors except by letting them plead their own case in their own language? literary culture can far better dispense with physical science than physical science with literary culture, though nothing is more satisfactory than a perfect combination of the two. _life._ the self as behind the various gods of nature, one supreme deity was at last discovered in india, the brahmans imagined that they perceived behind the different manifestations of feeling, thought, and will also, a supreme power which they called atma, or self, and of which the intellectual powers or faculties were but the outward manifestations. this led to a philosophy which took the place of religion, and recognised in the self the only true being, the unborn and therefore immortal element in man. a step further led to the recognition of the original identity of the subjective self in man, and the objective self in nature, and thus, from an indian point of view, to a solution of all the riddles of the world. the first commandment of all philosophy, 'know thyself,' became in the philosophy of the upanishads, 'know thyself as the self,' or, if we translate it into religious language, 'know that we live and move and have our being in god.' _gifford lectures, i._ the death of a child is as if the flash of the divine eye had turned quickly away from the mirror of this world, before the human consciousness woke up and thought it recognised itself in the mirror, often only to perceive for a moment, just as it closes its eyes for the last time, that that which it took for itself was the shadow or reflection of its eternal self. _life._ a man need not go into a cave because he has found his true self; he may live and act like everybody else; he is 'living but free.' all remains just the same, except the sense of unchangeable, imperishable self which lifts him above the phenomenal self. he knows he is wearing clothes, that is all. if a man does not see it, if some of his clothes stick to him like his very skin, if he fears he might lose his identity by not being a male instead of a female, by not being english instead of german, by not being a child instead of a man, he must wait and work on. good works lead to quietness of mind, and quietness of mind to true self-knowledge. is it so very little to be only self, to be the subject that can resist, i.e. perceive the whole universe, and turn it into his object? can we wish for more than what we are, lookers-on--resisting what tries to crush us, call it force, or evil, or anything else? _life._ the impression made on me by the look of a child who is not yet conscious of himself and of the world round him is that of still undisturbed godliness. only when self-consciousness wakes little by little, through pleasure or pain, when the spirit accustoms itself to its bodily covering, when man begins to say _i_ and the world to call things _his_, then the full separation of the human self from the divine begins, and it is only after long struggles that the light of _true_ self-consciousness sooner or later breaks through the clouds of earthly semblances, and makes us again like the little children 'of whom is the kingdom of heaven.' in god we live and move and have our being, that is the sum of all human wisdom, and he who does not find it here, will find it in another life. all else that we learn on earth, be it the history of nature or of mankind, is for this end alone, to show us everywhere the presence of a divine providence, and to lead us through the knowledge of the history of the human spirit to the knowledge of ourselves, and through the knowledge of the laws of nature to the understanding of that human nature to which we are subjected in life. _life._ to my mind the birth of a child is not a breach of the law of continuity, but on that very ground i must admit the previous existence of the self that is here born as a child, and which brings with it into this new order of things simply its self-consciousness, and even that not developed but undeveloped potentia, in a sleep. when afterwards a child awakes to self-consciousness, that is really its remembrance of its former existence. the self which it becomes conscious of, remember, is in its essence not of this world only, but of a former as well as of a future world. this constitutes in fact the only distinct remembrance in every human being of a former life. there are besides indistinct remembrances of his former existence, viz. the many dispositions which every thinking man finds in himself, and which are not simply the result of the impressions of this world on a so-called _tabula rasa_. unless we begin life as _tabula rasa_ we begin it as _tabula preparata_, as _leukomata_, and whatever colour or disposition, or talent, or temperament, whatever there is inexplicable in each individual, that he will perceive, or possibly remember, as the result of the continuity between his present and former life. _ms._ what, then, is that which we call death? separation of the self from a living body. if so, does the body die because the self leaves it, or does the self leave the body because it dies? what has life to do with the self? has the self which for a time dwells in a living body anything to do with what we call the life of that body? does the self take possession of a body because it lives, or does the body live because the self has taken possession of it? the difficulty arises from our vague conception of _life_. life is only a mode of existence. existence is possible without what we call life, not life without existence. to live means to be able to absorb, but who or what is able? the self exists, it is sentient, capable of perception by becoming embodied. it is perceptive because sentient, it is conceptive because perceptive. the difficulty lies in the embodiment. it is there where all philosophy becomes ridiculous. _ms._ knowledge belongs to the self alone, call it what we will. the nerve fibres might vibrate as often as they pleased, millions and millions of times in a second; they could never produce the sensation of red if there were no self as the receiver and illuminator, the translator of these vibrations of ether; this self that alone receives, alone illumines, alone knows, and of which we can say nothing more than that it exists, that it perceives, and as the indian philosophers add, that it is blessed, _i.e._ that it is complete in itself, serene, and eternal. _silesian horseherd._ nothing eternal can have a beginning, and there can be no immortal life after death, unless our true immortal life has been realised here on earth. hindu philosophers called those who had realised their true, immortal, eternal, or divine self 'free while living.' _ms._ sorrow and suffering how mysterious all this suffering is, particularly when it produces such prostration that it must lose all that elevating power which one knows suffering does exercise in many cases. it seems sometimes as if a large debt of suffering had to be paid off, and that some are chosen to pay a large, very large sum, so that others may go free. we have our own burden to bear, but it is a burden that seems to make other things easy to bear--it strengthens even when it seems to crush. but how could one bear that complete prostration of all powers which must make death seem so much preferable to life. and yet life goes on, and people care about a hundred little things, and break their hearts if they do not get them. _ms._ such trials as you have had to pass through are not sent without a purpose, and if you say that they have changed your views of life, such a change in a character like yours can only be a change in advance, a firmer faith in those truths which have been revealed to the dim sight of human nature, a stronger will to resist all falsehood and tampering with the truth, and a deeper conviction that we owe our life to him who has given it, and that we must fight his battle when he calls us to do it. _ms._ god knows that we want rain and storm as much as sunshine, and he sends us both as seems best to his love and wisdom. when all breaks down he lifts us up. but when we feel quite crushed and forsaken and alone, we then feel the real presence of our truest friend, who, whether by joys or sorrows, is always calling us to him, and leading us to that true home where we shall find him, and in him all we loved, with him all we believed, and through him all we hoped for and aspired to on earth. our broken hearts are the truest earnest of everlasting life. _life._ we must submit, but we must feel it a great blessing to be able to submit, to be able to trust that infinite love which embraces us on all sides, which speaks to us through every flower and every worm, which always shows us beauty and perfection, which never mars, never destroys, never wastes, never deceives, never mocks. _ms._ there is but one help and one comfort in these trials, that is, to know by whom they are sent. if one knows that nothing can happen to us without him, one does not feel quite helpless, even under the greatest terrors of this life. _ms._ how little one thinks that many trials and afflictions may come upon us any day. one lives as if life were to last for ever, and as if we should never part with those who are most dear to us. life would be intolerable were it otherwise, but how little one is prepared for what life really is. _ms._ why is there so much suffering in this world? i cannot think it improves us much, and yet it must have its purpose. all these are questions far too high for us--we are like children, and more than children, when we come to think of them. all we know is that where we catch a glimpse of god's handiwork, either in the natural or moral world, it is so wonderfully perfect, so beyond all our measures, that we feel safe as in a good ship, however rough the sea may be. whatever we may believe, or hope, or wish for, will be far exceeded by that higher will and wisdom which supports all, even us little souls. _ms._ the sorrows of life are inevitable, but they are hard to bear, for all that. they would be harder still if we did not see their purpose of reminding us that our true life is not here, but that we are here on a voyage that may be calm or stormy, and which is to teach us what all sailors have to learn, courage, perseverance, kindness, and in the end complete trust in a higher power. _ms._ sorrow is necessary and good for men; one learns to understand that each joy must be indemnified by suffering, that each new tie which knits our hearts to this life must be loosed again, and the tighter and the closer it was knit, the keener the pain of loosening it. should we then attach our hearts to nothing, and pass quietly and unsympathetically through this world, as if we had nothing to do with it? we neither could nor ought to act so. nature itself knits the first tie between parents and children, and new ties through our whole life. we are not here for reward, for the enjoyment of undisturbed peace or from mere accident, but for trial, for improvement, perhaps for punishment; for the only union which can secure the happiness of men, the union between our self and god's self, is broken, or at least obscured, by our birth, and the highest object of our life is to find this bond again, to remain ever conscious of it and hold fast to it in life and in death. this rediscovery of the eternal union between god and man constitutes true religion among all people. _life._ every one carries a grave of lost hope in his soul, but he covers it over with cold marble, or with green boughs. on sad days one likes to go alone to this god's acre of the soul, and weep there, but only in order to return full of comfort and hope to those who are left to us. _life._ the sorrows of life, like all other things, pass away, and the larger the number who await us beyond, the easier the parting from those we leave behind. _life._ grief is a sweet remembrance of happiness that was. _ms._ there is the old riddle always before me, why was ... taken from me? human understanding has no answer for it, and yet i feel as certain as i can feel of anything that as it is, it is good, it is best, better than anything i can wish for. one feels one's own ignorance why what seems so right and natural should not be, and yet one knows it could not be. one hides one's head in the arms of a higher power, a friend, a father, and more than a father. wait, and you will know. work, and you will be able to bear it. _ms._ people think that grief is pain, but it is not so: grief, the absorption in the quiet recollection of what was, but is no longer, is a pleasure, a consolation, a blessing. _ms._ those who would comfort us by bidding us forget our grief, and join their happy gatherings, do not know what comfort is. hearts which have suffered have a right to what the world may call grief and sorrow, but what is really a quiet communion with those whom we love, and whom we can find no longer among the laughter of the happy. _ms._ what can we pray for? not for special gifts, but only for god's mercy. we do not know what is good for us, and for others. what would become of the world if all our prayers were granted? and yet it is good to pray--that is, to live in all our joys and sorrows with god, that unknown god whom we cannot reason with, but whom we can love and trust. human misery, outward and inward, is certainly a great problem, and yet one knows from one's own life how just the heaviest burdens have been blessings. the soul must be furrowed if it is to bear fruit. _ms._ what is the tenure of all our happiness? are we not altogether at the mercy of god? would it not be fearful to live for one day unless we knew, and saw, and felt his presence and wisdom and love encompassing us on all sides? if we once feel that, then even death, even the death of those we love best and who love us best, loses much of its terror: it is part and parcel of one great system of which we see but a small portion here, and which without death, without that bridge of which we see here but the first arch, would seem to be a mere mockery. that is why i said to you it is well that human art cannot prolong our life for ever, and in that sentiment i should think we both agree. i have felt much for you, more than i cared to say. we are trained differently, but we are all trained for some good purpose, and the suffering which you have undergone is to me like deep ploughing, the promise of a rich harvest. _life._ there is a large and secret brotherhood in this world, the members of which easily recognise each other, without any visible outward sign. it is the band of mourners. the members of this brotherhood need not necessarily wear mourning; they can even rejoice with the joyful, and they seldom sigh or weep when others see them. but they recognise and understand each other, without uttering a word, like tired wanderers who, climbing a steep mountain, overtake other tired wanderers, and pause, and then silently go on again, knowing that they all hope to see the same glorious sunset high up above. their countenances reflect a soft moonlight; when they speak, one thinks of the whispering of the leaves of a beech forest after a warm spring shower, and as the rays of the sun light up the drops of dew with a thousand colours, and drink them up from the green grass, a heavenly light seems to shine through the tears of the mourners, to lighten them, and lovingly kiss them away. almost every one, sooner or later, enters this brotherhood, and those who enter it early may be considered fortunate, for they learn, before it is too late, that _all_ which man calls his own is only lent him for a short time, and the ivy of their affections does not cling so deeply and so strongly to the old walls of earthly happiness. _life._ we cannot know, we cannot name the divine, nor can we understand its ways as manifested in nature and human life. we ask why there should be suffering and sin, we cannot answer the question. all we can say is, it is willed to be so. some help our human understanding may find, however, by simply imagining what would have been our life if the power of evil had not been given us. it seems to me that in that case we, human beings as we are, should never have had a conception of what is meant by good: we should have been like the birds in the air, happier, it may be, but better, no. or if suffering had always been reserved for the bad, we should all have become the most cunning angels. often when i am met by a difficulty which seems insoluble, i try that experiment, and say, let us see what would happen if it were otherwise. still, i confess there is some suffering on earth which goes beyond all understanding, which even the truest christian love and charity seems unable to remove or mitigate. it can teach us one thing only, that we are blind, and that in the darkness of the night we lose our faith in a dawn which will drive away darkness, fear, and despair. much, no doubt, could be done even by what is now called communism, but what in earlier days was called christianity. and then one wonders whether the world can ever again become truly christian. i dare not call myself a christian. i have hardly met the men in all my life who deserved that name. again, i say, let us do our best, knowing all the time that our best is a mere nothing. _life._ the soul the name of the immortal element (in man) was not given to man as a gratuitous gift. it had to be gained, like the name of god, in the sweat of his face. before man could say that he believed his soul to be immortal, he had to discover that there was a soul in man. it required as great an effort to form such a word as _anima_, breath, and to make it signify the infinite in man, as to form such a word as _diva_, bright, and to make it signify the infinite in nature. _gifford lectures, iii._ to us the two words 'body and soul' are so familiar that it seems almost childish to ask how man came at first to speak of body and soul. but what did he mean by soul? what do we ourselves mean by soul? think of the many meanings contained in our word soul. our soul may mean the living soul; it may mean the sentient soul; it may mean the seat of the passions, whether good or bad; it may mean the organ of thought; and lastly, the immortal element in man. the question we have to ask is not how man arrived at a name for soul, but how he came for the first time to speak of something different from the body. _gifford lectures, iii._ the discovery of the soul, the first attempts at naming the soul, started everywhere from the simplest observations of material facts. the lesson cannot be inculcated too often that the whole wealth of our most abstract and spiritual words comes from a small number of material or concrete terms. _gifford lectures, iii._ we see that the way which led to the discovery of a soul was pointed out to man as clearly as was the way which led him to the discovery of the gods. it was chiefly the breath, which almost visibly left the body at the time of death, that suggested the name of breath, and afterwards the thought of something breathing, living, perceiving, willing, remembering, and thinking within us. the name came first, the name of the material breath. by dropping what seemed material even in this airy breath, there remained the first vague and airy concept of what we call soul. _gifford lectures, iii._ the worship of the spirits of the departed which, under various forms, was so widely spread over the ancient world, could not but accustom the human mind to the idea that there was something in man which deserved such worship. the souls of the departed were lifted higher and higher, till at last they reached the highest stage which existed in the human mind, namely, that of divine beings, in the ancient sense of that word. _gifford lectures, iii._ the problem of uniting the invisible and visible worlds presented itself under three principal aspects. the first was the problem of creation, or how the invisible primal cause could ever come in contact with visible matter and impart to it form and meaning. the second problem was the relation between god and the individual soul. the third problem was the return of the soul from the visible to the invisible world, from the prison of its mortal body to the freedom of a heavenly paradise. the individual soul as dwelling in a material body forms part of the created world, and the question of the return of the soul to god is therefore closely connected with that of its creation by, or its emanation from, god. _gifford lectures, iv._ when the original oneness of earth and heaven, of the human and the divine natures, has once been discovered, the question of the return of the soul to god assumes a new character. it is no longer a question of an ascension to heaven, an approach to the throne of god, an ecstatic vision of god, and a life in a heavenly paradise. the vision of god is rather the knowledge of the divine element in the soul, and of the consubstantiality of the divine and human natures. immortality has no longer to be asserted, because there can be no death for what is divine, and therefore immortal, in man. there is life eternal and peace eternal for all who feel the divine spirit as dwelling within them, and have thus become the children of god. _gifford lectures, iv._ no doubt the soul must find it difficult in childhood to accustom itself to the human body, and it takes many years before it is quite at home. then for a time all goes well, and the soul hardly knows it is hidden in a strange garment till the body begins to be weakly, and can no longer do all the soul wishes, and presses it everywhere, so that the soul appears to lose all outward freedom and movement. then one can well understand that we long to be gone, and death is a true deliverance. god always knows best when the right time comes. _life._ let us remember that we do not know what the soul was before this life--nay, even what it was during the first years of our childhood. yet we believe on very fair evidence that what we call our soul existed from the moment of our birth. what ground have we, then, to doubt that it was even before that moment? to ascribe to the soul a beginning on our birthday would be the same as to claim for it an end on the day of our death, for whatever has a beginning has an end. if then, in the absence of any other means of knowledge, we may take refuge in analogy, might we not say that it will be with the soul hereafter as it has been here, and that the soul after its earthly setting will rise again, much as it rose here? this is not a syllogism, it is analogy, and in a cosmos like ours analogy has a right to claim some weight, in the absence of any proof to the contrary. _last essays._ there is a question which has probably been asked by every human heart--granting that the soul cannot, without self-contradiction, be mortal, will that soul be itself, know itself, and will it know others whom it has known before? for the next life, it is said, would not be worth living if the soul did not recollect itself, recognise not only itself, but those whom it has known and loved on earth. here analogy alone can supply some kind of answer: 'it will be hereafter as it has been' is not, in the absence of any evidence to the contrary, an argument that can be treated with contempt. our soul here may be said to have risen without any recollection of itself and of the circumstances of its former existence. but it has within it the consciousness of its eternity, and the conception of a beginning is as impossible for it as that of an end, and if souls were to meet again hereafter as they met in this life, as they loved in this life, without knowing that they had met and loved before, would the next life be so very different from what this life has been here on earth--would it be so utterly intolerable and really not worth living? _last essays._ when the soul has once reached that union with god, nay, when it lives in the constant presence of god, evil becomes almost impossible. we know that most of the evil deeds to which human nature is prone are possible in the dark only. before the eyes of another human being, more particularly of a beloved being, they become at once impossible. how much more in the real presence of a real and really beloved god, as felt by the true mystic, not merely as a phrase, but as a fact? as long as there is no veil between him and god, evil thoughts, evil words, and evil deeds are simply impossible to one who feels the actual presence of god. nor is he troubled any longer by questions, such as how the world was created, how evil came into the world. he is satisfied with the divine love that embraces his soul; he has all that he can desire, his whole life is hid through christ in god, death is swallowed up in victory, the mortal has become immortal, neither death nor life, nor things present, nor things to come, is able to separate his soul from the love of god. _gifford lectures, iv._ theosophy this venerable name (theosophy), so well known among early christian thinkers, as expressing the highest conception of god within the reach of the human mind, has of late been so greatly misappropriated that it is high time to restore it to its proper function. it should be known once for all that one may call oneself a theosophist without ... believing in any occult sciences and black art. _gifford lectures, iv._ there is nothing esoteric in buddhism. buddhism is the very opposite of esoteric--it is a religion for the people at large, for the poor, the suffering, the ill-treated. buddha protests against the very idea of keeping anything secret. there was much more of that esoteric teaching in brâhmanism. there was the system of caste, which deprived the sûdras, at least, of many religious privileges. but i do say that even in brâhmanism there is _no such thing as an esoteric interpretation of the sâstras._ the sâstras have but one meaning, and all who had been properly prepared by education had access to them. there are some artificial poems, which are so written as to admit of two interpretations. they are very wonderful, but they have nothing to do with philosophical doctrines. again, there are erotic poems in sanscrit which are explained as celebrating the love and union between the soul and god. but all this is perfectly well known, there is no mystery in it. _life._ truth what is wanted is the power of sifting evidence, and a simple love of truth. whatever value we may attach to our own most cherished convictions, there is something more cherished than all of them, and that is a perfect trust in truth, if once we have seen it. _last essays._ true reverence does not consist in declaring a subject, because it is dear to us, to be unfit for free, and honest inquiry; far from it! true reverence is shown in treating every subject, however sacred, however dear to us, with perfect confidence, without fear and without favour; with tenderness and love, by all means, but, before all, with unflinching and uncompromising loyalty to truth. _science of religion._ do we lose anything if we find that what we hold to be the most valuable truth is shared in and supported by millions of human beings? ancient philosophers were most anxious to support their own belief in god by the unanimous testimony of mankind. they made the greatest efforts to prove that there was no race so degraded and barbarous as to be without a belief in something divine. some modern theologians seem to grudge to all religions but their own the credit of having a pure and true, nay any concept of god at all, quite forgetful of the fact that a truth does not cease to be a truth because it is accepted universally. i know no heresy more dangerous to true religion than this denial that a true concept of god is within the reach of every human being, is, in fact, the common inheritance of mankind, however fearfully it may have been misused and profaned by christian and un-christian nations. _gifford lectures, ii._ if comparative theology has taught us anything, it has taught us that there is a common fund of truth in all religions, derived from a revelation that was neither confined to one nation, nor miraculous in the usual sense of that word, and that even minute coincidences between the doctrines, nay, between the external accessories of various religions, need not be accounted for at once by disguised borrowings, but can be explained by other and more natural causes. _gifford lectures, ii._ can there be anything higher and better than truth? is any kind of religion possible without an unquestioning trust in truth? no one knows what it is to believe who has not learnt to believe in truth, for the sake of truth, and for the sake of truth only. _gifford lectures, iii._ it may be quite right to guard against dangers, whether real or imaginary, so long as it is possible. but when it is no longer possible, the right thing is to face an enemy bravely. very often the enemy will turn out a friend in disguise. we cannot be far wrong, if we are only quite honest, but if we are once not quite honest over a few things, we shall soon become dishonest over many things. in teaching on religion, even on natural religion, we must look neither right nor left, but look all facts straight in the face, to see whether they are facts or not, and, if they are facts, to find out what they mean. _gifford lectures, iii._ some people say that they can derive no help, no comfort, from what they call spiritual _only_. spiritual _only_--think what that _only_ would mean, if it could have any meaning at all. we might as well say of light that it is light only, and that what we want is the shadow which we can grasp. so long as we know the shadow only, and not the light that throws it, the shadow only is real, and not the light. but when we have once turned our head and seen the light, the light only is real and substantial, and not the shadow. _gifford lectures, iii._ we find in the upanishads, what has occupied the thoughts of man at all times, what occupies them now and will occupy them for ever--a search after truth, a desire to discover the eternal that underlies the ephemeral, a longing to find in the human heart the assurance of a future life, and an attempt to reunite the bond which once held the human and the divine together, the true atonement between god and man. _gifford lectures, iii._ we have toiled for many years and been troubled with many questionings, but what is the end of it all? we must learn to become simple again like little children. that is all we have a right to be: for this life was meant to be the childhood of our souls, and the more we try to be what we were meant to be, the better for us. let us use the powers of our minds with the greatest freedom and love of truth, but let us never forget that we are, as newton said, like children playing on the seashore, while the great ocean of truth lies undiscovered before us. _life._ nothing i like better than when i meet a man who differs from me; he always gives me something, and for that i am grateful. nor am i at all so hopeless as many people, who imagine that two people who differ can never arrive at a mutual understanding.... why do people differ, considering that they all begin with the same love of truth, and are all influenced by the same environment? well, they often differ because one is ignorant of facts which the other knows and has specially studied.... but in most cases people differ because they use their words loosely, and because they mix up different subjects instead of treating them one by one. _life._ the will of god through my whole life i have learnt this one lesson, that nothing can happen to us, unless it be the will of god. there can be no disappointment in life, if we but learn to submit our will to the will of god. let us wait for a little while, and to those whose eyes are turned to god and eternity the longest life is but a little while,--let us wait then in faith, hope, and charity: these three abide, but the greatest of these is charity. _life._ whatever happens to us is always the best for us, even if we do not at once understand and perceive it. _ms._ surely everything is ordered, and ordered for our true interests. it would be fearful to think that anything, however small in appearance, could happen to us without the will of god. if you admit the idea of chance or unmeaning events anywhere, the whole organisation of our life in god is broken to pieces. we are we don't know where, unless we rest in god and give him praise for all things. we must trust in him whether he sends us joy or sorrow. if he sends us joy let us be careful. happiness is often sent to try us, and is by no means a proof of our having deserved it. nor is sorrow always a sign of god's displeasure, but frequently, nay always, of his love and compassion. we must each interpret our life as best we can, but we must be sure that its deepest purpose is to bring us back to god through christ. death is a condition of our life on earth, it brings the creature back to its creator. the creature groans at the sight of death, but god will not forsake us at the last, he who has never forsaken us from the first breath of our life on earth. if it is his will we may live to serve him here on earth for many happy years to come. if he takes either of us away, his name be praised. we live in the shadow of death, but that shadow should not darken the brightness of our life. it is the shadow of the hand of our god and father, and the earnest of a higher, brighter life hereafter. our father in heaven loves us more than any husband can love his wife, or any mother her child. his hand can never hurt us, so let us hope and trust always. _life._ our lives are in the hands of a father, who knows what is best for all of us. death is painful to the creature, but in god there is no death, no dying; dying belongs to life, and is only a passage to a more perfect world into which we all go when god calls us. when one's happiness is perfect, then the thought of death often frightens one, but even that is conquered by the feeling and the faith that all is best as it is, and that god loves us more than even a father and mother can love us. it is a beautiful world in which we live, but it is only beautiful and only really our home when we feel the nearness of god at each moment and lean on him and trust in his love.... when the hour of parting comes, we know that love never dies, and that god who bound us closely together in this life will bring us together where there is no more parting. _ms._ our meeting here on earth with those we loved was not our doing. we did not select our father and mother, and sisters and brothers. we did not even explore the whole world to discover our friends. they too were more or less given us, the choice was given us, and the sphere of choice was determined and limited. hence we seem to have a right to say that they were meant for us, and we for them, and unless we believe in accident, who is there by whose will alone they could have been meant for us? hence, if they were meant for us once by a divine, not by our own will, that will can never change, and we have a right to hope and even to believe that _what has been will be_, and that we shall again meet and love those whom we met and loved here. this is faith, and this is comfort, but it is greater faith, and greater comfort still, if we close our eyes in the firm conviction that whatever will be, will be best for us. _ms._ wonder there are few sensations more pleasant than that of wondering. we have all experienced it in childhood, in youth, in manhood, and we may hope that even in our old age this affection of the mind will not entirely pass away. if we analyse this feeling of wonder carefully, we shall find that it consists of two elements. what we mean by wondering is not only that we are startled or stunned--that i should call the merely passive element of wonder. when we say 'i wonder' we confess that we are taken aback, but there is a secret satisfaction mixed up with our feeling of surprise, a kind of hope, nay, almost of certainty, that sooner or later the wonder will cease, that our senses or our mind will recover, will grapple with these novel expressions or experiences, grasp them, it may be, know them, and finally triumph over them. in fact we wonder at the riddles of nature, whether animate or inanimate, with a firm conviction that there is a solution to them all, even though we ourselves may not be able to find it. wonder, no doubt, arises from ignorance, but from a peculiar kind of ignorance, from what might be called a fertile ignorance; an ignorance which, if we look back at the history of most of our sciences, will be found to have been the mother of all human knowledge. _chips._ words what people call 'mere words' are in truth the monuments of the fiercest intellectual battles; triumphant arches of the grandest victories won by the intellect of man. when man had formed names for body and soul, for father and mother, and not till then, did the first art of human history begin. not till there were names for right and wrong, for god and man, could there be anything worthy of the name of human society. every new word was a discovery, and these early discoveries, if but properly understood, are more important to us than the greatest conquests of the kings of egypt and babylon. not one of our greatest explorers has unearthed more splendid palaces, than the etymologist. every word is the palace of a human thought, and in scientific etymology we possess the charm with which to call these ancient thoughts back to life. _chips._ cannot a concept exist without a word? certainly not, though in order to meet every possible objection we may say that no concept can exist without a sign, whether it be a word or anything else. and if it is asked whether the concept exists first, and the sign comes afterwards, i should say no: the two are simultaneous, but in strict logic, the sign, being the condition of a concept, may really be said to come first. after a time, words may be dropt, and it is then, when we try to remember the old word that gave birth to our concept, that we are led to imagine that concepts came first, and words afterwards. i know how difficult it is to see this clearly. we are so accustomed to think without words, that we can hardly realise the fact that originally no conceptual thought was possible without these or other signs. _gifford lectures, i._ work if you have found a work to which you are ready to sacrifice the whole of your life, and if you have faith in yourselves, others will have faith in you, and, sooner or later, a work that must be done will be done. _gifford lectures, ii._ what flimsy things the so-called pleasures of life are--how little in them that lasts. to delight in doing one's work is life--that is what helps us on, though the road is sometimes very stiff and tiring--uphill rather it would seem than downhill, and yet downhill it is. _ms._ a distaste for work is only another name for a distaste for duty, a disregard for those commandments which hold society together, a disregard of the commandments of god. no doubt there is that reward in work that after a time it ceases to be distasteful, and like many a bitter medicine becomes liked, but that reward is vouchsafed to honest work only. _ms._ work is the best healer of sorrow. in grief or disappointment try hard work; it will not fail you. _autobiography._ no sensible man ought to care about posthumous praise, or posthumous blame. enough for the day is the evil thereof. our contemporaries are our right judges, our peers have to give their votes in the great academies and learned societies, and if they on the whole are not dissatisfied with the little we have done, often under far greater difficulties than the world was aware of, why should we care for the distant future? _autobiography._ put your whole heart, or your whole love into your work. half-hearted work is really worse than no work. _last essays._ much of the best work in the world is done by those whose names remain unknown, who work because life's greatest bliss is work, and who require no reward beyond the consciousness that they have enlarged the knowledge of mankind and contributed their share to the final triumph of honesty and truth. _chips._ true immortality (of fame) is the immortality of the work done by man, which nothing can make undone, which lives, works on, grows on for ever. it is good to _ourselves_ to remember and honour the names of our ancestors and benefactors, but to them, depend upon it, the highest reward was not the hope of fame, but their faith in themselves, their faith in their work, their faith that nothing really good can ever perish, and that right and reason must in the end prevail. _chips._ it is given to few scholars only to be allowed to devote the whole of their time and labour to the one subject in which they feel the deepest interest. we have all to fight the battle of life before we can hope to secure a quiet cell in which to work in the cause of learning and truth. _chips._ what author has ever said the last word he wanted to say, and who has not had to close his eyes before he could write _finis_ to his work? _autobiography._ the world there is no other christian explanation of the world than that god thought and uttered it, and that man follows in life and thought the thoughts of god. we must not forget that all our knowledge and hold of the world are again nothing but thoughts, which we transform under the law of causality into objective realities. it was this unswerving dependence on god in thought and life that made jesus what he was, and what we should be if we only tried, viz. children of god. _silesian horseherd._ i cannot help seeing order, law, reason or logos in the world, and i cannot account for it by merely _ex post_ events, call them what you like--survival of the fittest, natural selection, or anything else. _last essays._ think only what it was to believe in an order of the world, though it be no more at first than a belief that the sun will never overstep his bounds. it was all the difference between a chaos and a cosmos, between the blind play of chance and an intelligible and therefore an intelligent providence. how many souls, even now when everything else has failed them, when they have parted with the most cherished convictions of their childhood, when their faith in man has been poisoned, and when the apparent triumph of all that is selfish, ignoble, and hideous has made them throw up the cause of truth, of righteousness, and innocence as no longer worth fighting for, at least in this world; how many, i say, have found their last peace and comfort in the contemplation of the order of the world, whether manifested in the unvarying movement of the stars, or revealed in the unvarying number of the petals and stamens and pistils of the smallest forget-me-not. how many have felt that to belong to this cosmos, to this beautiful order of nature, is something at least to rest on, something to trust, something to believe, when everything else has failed. to us, this perception of law and order in the world may seem very little, but to the ancient dwellers on earth, who had little else to support them, it was everything because, if once perceived, if once understood, it could never be taken from them. _hibbert lectures._ we must learn to see a meaning in everything. no doubt we cannot always see cause and effect, and it is well we cannot. it is quite true that we do not always get our deserts. and yet we must believe that we do--only if we knew it, the whole fabric of the world would be destroyed, there would be neither virtue nor vice in the whole world, nothing but calculation. we should avoid the rails laid down by the world because we should know that the engine would be sure to come and mangle us. in this way the world holds together, and it could not in any other way. _life._ there is to me a beauty and mystery and sanctity about flowers, and when i see them come and go, no one knows whence and whither, i ask what more miracles do we want,--what better, more beautiful, more orderly world could we wish to belong to than that by which we are surrounded and supported on all sides? where is there a flaw or a fault? then why should we fear unless the flaws are within us, and we will not see the blessing and the rest which we might enjoy if we only trusted to the author of all that beauty, order, and wisdom about us. it is a perfect sin not to be happy in this world, and how much of the misery which there is, is the work of men, or could be removed by men, if they would but work together for each others' good. _life._ printed by t. and a. constable, printers to his majesty at the edinburgh university press. * * * * * transcriber's note: minor typographical errors have been corrected without note. irregularities and inconsistencies in the text have been retained as printed. page : "there no _chance_ in life ..." the transcriber has inserted "is". transcriber's note: every effort has been made to replicate this text as faithfully aspossible, including some inconsistencies of hyphenation. some changes of spelling and punctuation have been made. they are listed at the end of the text. italic text has been marked with _underscores_. the university of chicago the transformation of early christianity from an eschatological to a socialized movement a dissertation submitted to the faculty of the graduate school of arts and literature in candidacy for the degree of doctor of philosophy department of church history in the graduate divinity school by lyford paterson edwards the collegiate press george banta publishing company menasha, wisconsin contents chapter i. political theories of the early christians chapter ii. the early church and property concepts chapter iii. the early church and the populace chapter iv. chiliasm and patriotism chapter v. chiliasm and social theory chapter i the political theories of the early christians when christianity came into the world it found a number of different political theories already in existence. these various conflicting concepts; hebrew, greek and roman, influenced christianity in varying degrees and in varying degrees were influenced by christianity. christianity as such added no new ideas to the current stock of political notions. the hebrew christian retained his jewish theory; as did the greek and the roman in perhaps a less degree. the development of the christian conception of the state, the church, and history generally is a process of elimination, selection, adaptation, and synthesis of the various elements of political theory current in contemporary hebrew and pagan thought. the characteristic modern separation of church and state, the divorce between religion and government, existed as a matter of fact in early christianity. but it was forced upon the christians by the historical situation. as an idea it was foreign alike to jews and christians, greeks and romans. it was contrary to the whole body of contemporary political theory. the union of church and state in the fourth century, which has been so deplored by many modern historians and moralists was in reality perfectly inevitable. the social mind of the whole ancient world made any other course impossible either to christians or pagans once christianity had developed to the point where it was the most powerful religious force in society. the theocratic nature of jewish thought and practice is generally recognized but the close connection of religion and government in the pagan educational system is not perhaps so much emphasized. to quote pollock: "it costs us something to realize the full importance of philosophy to the greek or roman citizen who had received a liberal education. for him it combined in one whole body of doctrine all the authority and influence which nowadays are divided, not without contention, by science, philosophy, and religion in varying shares. it was not an intellectual exercise or special study, but a serious endeavor to gather up the results of all human knowledge in their most general form, and make them available for the practical conduct of life."[ ] it was this fact which made christianity's progress among the educated classes so slow. once it had made its way, however, the taking over of political control by the church was both easy and natural. one of the most notable characteristics of the new testament and of all early christianity in its relation to the existing political system was the doctrine of obedience to the constituted authorities. that a man like st. paul should advocate submission to a man like nero seems like the negation of elementary morality. the reasons for this attitude are many. in this paper we are concerned only with one of them--but possibly the most important one. the submissiveness of the early christians to tyranny and despotism was not due primarily to impotence nor yet to excessive mildness of disposition. many emperors before constantine were deposed and slain by political groups smaller and feebler than the christians. st. paul and st. ignatius, to go no farther, were not by nature pacifists. it would be difficult to find a book of a more militant tone than the revelation of st. john. the main reason for the political non-resistance of the early christians is to be sought in their philosophy; their views of the world. these views were of a very special and very peculiar kind. they were in large part either directly inherited from jewish thought or adapted from it. while they are in some respects inconsistent with one another, they have a common element. they are all catastrophic. in all of them the catastrophe is more or less immediately imminent. the old testament prophets taught the establishment, in the indefinite future, of an eternal messianic kingdom on this present earth. for a long time this hope was cherished by every jew. but some time before the beginning of the first century b.c. a change took place. the old conception was abandoned, slowly indeed, but at last absolutely. in its place arose a belief which developed into chiliasm or millenarianism. perhaps the first clear statement of this new idea is to be found in the book known as i enoch. in this work which dates from - b.c., the messianic kingdom is for the first time conceived of as of temporary duration. the resurrection and final judgment which in the preceding form of belief were the prelude to the everlasting messianic kingdom on earth, are now transposed to the end of the transitory, early kingdom of the messiah. this temporary earthly kingdom is no longer the final abode of the risen righteous. they are to enjoy a blessed immortality in the eternal heaven.[ ] we have in this author a practically complete statement of later christian chiliasm. there is indeed one important feature missing. the specific duration of the messianic kingdom is not given. the advent of the kingdom also is not pressingly imminent. in the parables - b.c. we find certain other elements. this writer holds to the eternal messianic kingdom but the scene of this kingdom is not the earth as at present existing but a new heaven and a new earth. the messiah is no longer a mere man but a supernatural being. four titles characteristic of the new testament are for the first time applied to him: "the christ," "the righteous one," "the elect one," "the son of man." he executes judgment on man and enjoys universal dominion. the resurrection is not of the old body but of a body of glory and light, of an angelic nature, in short a spiritual body, though the specific word spiritual is not used.[ ] in the other eschatological works of this period: e.g. psalms of solomon - b.c. judith (circa b.c.) [one reference]; the sibylline oracles iii - (before b.c.); the epitomiser of jason of cyrene (between - b.c.) and the fragmentary zadokite work, b.c., the tradition of the temporary kingdom is carried on but without the addition of any concepts essential to our purpose. in the first century a.d., still confining ourselves to specifically jewish apocalyptic literature we find various changes taking place. the eternal messianic kingdom passes largely out. the temporary messianic kingdom becomes an eternal national one. the interest of the individual jew comes to center on his own lot in the future life.[ ] we have to pass a number of writers; assumption of moses, philo, etc., before we come to the specific statement of chiliasm proper, i.e., the duration of the messianic kingdom for years. in the book of the secrets of enoch commonly known as ii enoch ( - a.d.) we find for the first time the doctrine which was taken over to make the christian millennium. the writer of ii enoch was an egyptian jew. he says that as the world was made in six days, its course will run for six thousand years. the years will be followed by a messianic kingdom of rest and blessedness lasting years. after that follows the final judgment, "the great day of the lord." passing now to the new testament, it is only necessary for our purpose to enumerate three different concepts of the messianic kingdom that are found therein. in these concepts contemporaneous jewish ideas are taken with more or less transformation. the first conception perhaps holds the idea of a present world kingdom but puts emphasis on the futurity of the kingdom. its ultimate consumation is not by gradual, natural development, but by the catastrophic reappearance of christ. this second advent is to be preceded by tremendous portents of the most terrible sort. the second conception is that the kingdom is already present in christ's appearance as the messiah. it is to grow by the natural laws of spiritual development to its full realization. a considerable length of time is conceived as necessary for the attainment of mature growth. the consumation of the kingdom in the second advent is to be unexpected and sudden and none but the father knows when it will take place. the third conception, that of chiliasm, is that the second advent of christ is close at hand. anti christ and his confederates are to be destroyed at megiddo. satan is to be bound for years during which is the millennium, when the martyrs are raised in the first resurrection and reign with christ at jerusalem. this conception is found in the revelation and perhaps i cor. xv, - . all the essential elements of it are to be found in pre-existing sources, e.g., the years in ii enoch, the reign of the saints in testaments of the xii patriarchs, etc. these three conceptions were variously confused in early christianity. all the new testament writers hold, for instance, to the immediately imminent second advent. how many of them were chiliasts we have no way of knowing. the earliest, christian writing extant outside the new testament, which deals with this subject is perhaps papias, - a.d. he is a most materialistic chiliast and quotes ii baruch as an authentic utterance of christ handed to himself by apostolic tradition.[ ] barnabas is another apostolic chiliast. he expressly teaches a millennial reign of christ on earth. the six days of creation are the type of six periods of years each. the seventh day is the millennium, since with god "one day is as a thousand years." the earthly, millennial sabbath is to be followed by an eighth and eternal day in heaven. the millennium is near at hand. barnabas does not quote revelation. his views can be drawn equally well or better from ii enoch, i enoch and other jewish sources. the first chiliast we know of to get into disrepute was the famous heretic, cerinthus, (last part of first century). his heresy had nothing to do with his chiliasm, as it seems to have been a sort of judaistic gnosticism and gnosticism in general was not favorable to chiliasm. however the fact that so abhorrent a heretic held chiliastic views did not help those views in the judgment of later christians. about the end of the first century also chiliasm came into rather disreputable prominence as a leading doctrine of the ebionites, a sect of antitrinitarian judaistic-christian heretics. this sect was wide spread though not particularly numerous and aroused the bitter antagonism of the orthodox. as in the case of cerinthus, their heresy had nothing necessarily to do with chiliasm. but here again chiliasm had the misfortune to get into bad company. in the middle of the second century chiliasm appears to have been the belief of the majority of christians though it never found formal expression in any creed. justin martyn, - a.d., tells us that christ is to reign with the patriarchs for years in a rebuilt jerusalem. he bases this belief on rev. xx, - and says he holds this doctrine as part of the body of christian faith. he adds, however, that "many good and true christians think otherwise." this later statement is the more notable as it is the only difference between orthodox christians which he mentions. he places the ebionites outside the christian pale. the first non-chiliasts we meet with in christian history are the gnostics. of their actual position on chiliasm we know practically nothing except by inference. they did not apparently fight it. they simply tacitly ignored it. in the long and minute descriptions of various gnostic systems that have come down to us nothing is said on the subject; but the systems as outlined leave no place for the chiliastic doctrines. the first open enemies of chiliasm that are to be found in the church are the alogi, a sect that flourished in asia minor about - a.d. according to harnack: "the representatives of this movement were, as far as we know, the first in the church to undertake a historical criticism, worthy of the name, of the christian scriptures and the church tradition."[ ] they were rationalisticly inclined, desired to keep prophecy out of the church and denied on essentially the same internal grounds as modern students, the johannine authorship of the revelation and also of the fourth gospel. with less reason they ascribed the revelation to the heretic cerinthus. unfortunately we know but little about them. hippolytus wrote against them and defended the apostolic authorship of revelation and the fourth gospel in two books now lost. but the alogi are criticised only mildly, and indeed irenaeus does not class them as heretics at all. opposition to chiliasm was manifestly not looked upon as an important matter in the last quarter of the second century--at least in rome.[ ] to this same period belong the writings of gaius of rome who asserts that the heretic cerinthus wrote the revelation, and also those of bishop melito of sardis, a saint of great repute, who was an ardent chiliast. so that at this period both chiliasm and non-chiliasm would seem to be perhaps equally wide spread and certainly equally permissable. irenaeus, bishop of lyons - a.d., was a strong chiliast. he describes in minute detail the overthrow of the roman empire, the reign of anti-christ for days (three and half years) the visible advent of christ, the binding of satan, the joyful reign of christ in the rebuilt jerusalem with the risen saints and martyrs over the nations of the world for a thousand years. then follows the temporary raging of satan, the last victory, the general resurrection and judgment, and the consumation of all things in a new heaven and a new earth. the ascription of genuine divine inspiration to the sibylline oracles by the early church writers is well known. it is a noteworthy fact that the chiliasts[ ] seem to be much more inclined to quote the oracles than the non-chiliasts. the christians' addiction to the oracles called forth the derision of celsus.[ ] origen makes no defense and it is at least possible to conjecture that the reason is that he disapproved of the use made of the oracles by the chiliasts. the oracles were of course made use of by all sorts of agencies which for any reason wished ill to the roman authority and yet dared not indulge in secular sedition. some enthusiastic chiliast put forth an oracle, probably in the reign of marcus aurelius, which was more definite than prudent. according to this prediction the end of rome and the final consumation of all things was due in the year - a.d.[ ] there is reason to believe that this prophecy represented the belief of a considerable number of christian chiliasts. while there is no extant evidence to that effect, it is a rational deduction, that when the year - a.d. passed without any unusual occurrences, the prestige of the persons trusting the oracle would be damaged. so far as these persons were chiliasts, chiliasm would suffer in repute. that this was actually the case is as nearly certain as any logical conclusion about psychological reactions well can be. about the year a.d. there arose in phrygia the movement called montanism. essentially it was a reaction against the growing secularization of christianity. it spread to the rest of asia minor, egypt, italy, spain, and especially carthage and surrounding districts in north africa. it was the strongest movement in favor of a revival of primitive puritanism that occurs in early church history. it lasted in the east almost till the arab invasion; in the west it did not die out until the time of augustine. the montanists are the most pronounced chiliasts we meet with. not indeed in their theory but in their practice. one syrian montanist bishop "persuaded many brethren with their wives and children to go to meet christ in the wilderness; another in pontus induced his people to sell all their possessions, to cease tilling their lands, to conclude no more marriages, etc., because the coming of the lord was nigh at hand."[ ] the montanist prophetess, prisca, about a.d. said: "after me there will come no other prophetess but the end." a peculiarity of eastern montanistic chiliasm was the idea that christ would reign not in jerusalem but in pepuza, a small town in phrygia. in accord with this idea montanus tried to get all believers to settle in this town to await the lord's coming. the western montanists however, of whom tertullian was chief, held to the regular belief that the messianic kingdom would be centered in jerusalem. because of certain theological beliefs aside from chiliasm, the montanists aroused the antagonism of the church authorities. the earliest church councils to be met with after new testament times were called for the purpose of dealing with montanism which was finally denounced as a heresy and after the triumph of the church some imperial edicts were issued against the sect. for the first time in the attack on montanism at the end of the second and early part of the third century we find chiliastic beliefs referred to as 'carnal and jewish.' there is no formal condemnation of chiliasm as such, but once more, and much more seriously than in the case of the ebionites, chiliasm suffered from being associated in the minds of orthodox christians with heresy and schism. it would however be very easy to exaggerate the effect of this and it is necessary to bear in mind that while the literature of montanism is fairly considerable, chiliasm is an entirely subordinate matter in the controversy and indeed seems sometimes to be mentioned merely casually. the chiliastic writers are perhaps more inclined to view montanism leniently. irenaeus does not include it in his list of heresies. its association with montanism brought chiliasm into disrepute and suspicion with the church hierarchy and it is not surprising that beginning with the last years of the second century we find a deliberate system of suppression adopted by certain ecclesiastical authorities--notably in egypt. as we shall try to show later, the declension of chiliasm can be only very imperfectly explained by official antagonism. but so far as this declension can be ascribed to individuals, the three great alexandrian divines; clement, origen, and dionysius have a prominent part. the influence of these men counted the more as it was consistently exercised in the same locality with increasing force during a period of more than half a century. the first of these writers, clement ( - a.d.) does not specifically refer to the chiliasts but there are a number of passages where he evidently has them in mind.[ ] however the probability is that this very refraining from direct attack made his efforts the more successful. he emphasizes the fact that scriptural statements--particularly scriptural numbers--are not to be taken literally but are to be understood as of mystical significance. if clement consciously aimed at the extirpation of chiliasm (which is not absolutely certain) he at any rate took the most effective means for accomplishing that result. the great presupposition upon which christian chiliasm has been based is that of the literal interpretation of scripture. by attacking that presupposition clement caused the doctrine to be questioned by many persons whose attachment to chiliasm would doubtless have only been strengthened by direct attack upon that tenet in particular. he prepared the way for the open and far more powerful attacks upon chiliasm made by his great successor in the catechetical school, origen ( - a.d.). the position of this great theologian is the most equivocal of any writer who has attained eminence in christian theology. how far anything he wrote is to be considered as orthodox is a most difficult matter to determine. the fact that origen opposed chiliasm, taken by itself, apart from the subsequent fate of the doctrine, could just as easily be made a commendation as a condemnation of that belief. almost alone among christian men origen has been removed from the calendar of catholic saints after having been duly received as a saint for the space of more than a hundred and fifty years. this unique fact, which is of course of far more importance for theology than for history, has nevertheless a bearing on our subject. the condemnation of origen came too late to save the chiliastic apologetic in the east but it very possibly may have had an indirect influence in the matter of continuing the repute of western chiliasm. origen attacked chiliasm in two vital points: first he insisted even more strongly than clement upon the figurative or mystical or 'typical' interpretation of scripture. in this regard he specifically quotes a number of chiliastic passages of scripture and definitely says that their meaning is to be taken figuratively.[ ] but more important than that, he definitely substitutes the theory of progressive development of the intellectual and spiritual element of man for the physical and sensuous earthly kingdom of the chiliasts. this was certainly a great gain for the anti-chiliastic theory which for the first time took a logical and comprehensible if a somewhat metaphysical form. however it must be admitted that the argument of origen though wonderfully clear headed and almost miraculously modern[ ] is too purely intellectual and cast in too philosophical a form to have any direct influence on ordinary individuals. it was doubtless quite in place in the catechetical school and among scholars in the great centers of ancient learning but outside those limits its influence--at least directly--must have been very small. nepos, an egyptian bishop, answered origen in a book entitled: "refutation of allegorists." this book is lost but we know that it was considered by the chiliasts to be a work of the most powerful and indeed irrefutable sort. in the arsinoite nome (on the west bank of the nile south of memphis) the chiliastic doctrines were held by whole villages together and dionysius the great (bishop of alexandria - a.d.) found it necessary to visit this region and hold a public argument and instruction in order to avert a schism. by the tact and conciliatory attitude of the bishop the chiliasts were either won over to the non-chiliastic view or at least expressed their gratification at the conference. it would appear, however, as if this synod or meeting was not sufficient to destroy the influence of nepos' book so dionysius wrote in refutation of it two books "on the promises." except for a few fragments these books have perished. we know merely that the first book contained a statement of the non-chiliastic view and the second a detailed discussion of the revelation in relation to chiliasm and to the views of nepos. however, dionysius, who was well aware that as long as the 'revelation of st. john' was received as a genuine work of the apostle it would be difficult to oppose chiliasm, gives a very strong argument against the apostolic authorship while diplomatically saying at the beginning of his discussion that he is able to agree that the revelation is the work of a holy and inspired man.[ ] there is no reason to doubt that this refutation of nepos by dionysius met with success wherever christian hellenisticism exercised influence. but it by no means extirpated chiliasm in egypt. for many generations after its author's death chiliasm was still believed by the monks of the thebiad. in fact a large number of jewish apocalypses which the early christians accepted as inspired are preserved to us bound up in coptic and ethiopic copies of the scriptures. the alexandrians had, however, succeeded so well that in the subsequent period there are only two defenders of chiliasm in the eastern church that are worthy of mention. these two are methodius of tyre and apollinaris of laodicea. methodius - a.d. was bishop first of olympus and patara in lycia and afterwards of tyre in phoenicia. he is notable for his opposition to origen and for his relatively more spiritualized chiliasm. he maintains that in the millennium, death will be abolished and the inhabitants of the earth will not marry or beget children but live in all happiness like the angels without change or decay. he is very careful to insist upon the literal resurrection of the body, however, and emphasizes the fact that the risen saints while like the angels do not become angels.[ ] he died a martyr at chalcis in greece. apollinaris of laodicea ( ?- a.d.) is a notable figure in christological controversy but unfortunately very little that he wrote has come down to us, and of that little the authenticity is not entirely unimpeachable. we are constrained to get his chiliastic views from the writings of his theological opponents and unfortunately there is not wanting evidence to the effect that these opponents, basil the great and gregory nazianzen, notable christians as they were, were not lacking in bias. gregory[ ] calls the chiliastic doctrine of the apolinarians 'gross and carnal,' a 'second judaism' and speaks of 'their silly thousand years delight in paradise.' basil[ ] calls the chiliasm of apolinaris 'mythical or rather jewish,' 'ridiculous,' and 'contrary to the doctrines of the gospel.' this is, so far as the writer is aware, the first instance in which any great theologian goes to such extremes and basil's language, though strong, is not altogether without an element of hesitation and questioning. in short it would seem that he asserted more than he felt sure of being able to prove--no rare phenomenon unfortunately in certain of the great contraversialists. if basil's statements are to be taken at their face value apollinaris was indeed the most judaizing christian in his chiliasm of any of whom we have record. he would seem to justify basil's jibe 'we are to be altogether turned from christians into jews,' for in his messianic kingdom not only is the temple at jerusalem to be restored but also the worship of the old law, with high priest, sacrifices, the ashes of a heifer, the jealousy offering, shew bread, burning lamps, circumcision and other such things which basil indignantly denounces as 'figments,' 'mere old wives' fables' and 'doctrines of jews.'[ ] although apollinarianism was condemned by a council at alexandria as early as a.d. and roman councils followed suit in and and the second ecumenical council in and though imperial degrees were issued against it in , and it persisted for many generations. the last condemnation on record is that of the quinisextum synod a.d. in this case, as in others mentioned, we see the unfortunate fate of chiliasm in getting mixed up with heresies with which it, as such, had nothing to do. the extraordinary detestation which overtook apollinaris as arch-heretic par excellence seems to have finally discouraged chiliasm in the eastern church. it was reckoned as a heresy thereafter and though it appears sporadically down to our own day it is of no more interest for our purpose. in the western church chiliasm prevailed until the time of augustine. it seems to have provoked very little discussion or controversy. hippolytus, a.d., carries on the chiliastic tradition of irenaeus but with a certain degree of assured futurity about the second advent not found in the earlier writers. this pushing of the second advent into the future is a marked feature of western chiliasm. by a weird use of 'types' hippolytus proves with entire conclusiveness to himself that the second advent is to occur in the year a.d.[ ] the overthrow of rome has a prominent part in his elaborate description of the last times but he veils his statements with a certain amount of transparent discretion.[ ] he has in all other essential respects the same ideas as irenaeus but expressed in a less naïve form. he is a transition figure. his second advent is far enough off to allow some considerable latitude for the building up of the ecclesiastical hierarchy which was the business of rome and he emphasizes the point that the "gospel must first be preached to all nations." john the baptist reappears as the precursor of christ. commodianus, a north african bishop, a.d., represents the generation after hippolytus. his two poems present rather different versions of chiliasm. the first is a simple and rather pleasing version.[ ] the only notable variation it contains is that the risen saints in the millennial kingdom are to be served by the nobles of the conquered anti-christ. the second poem is an apologetic against jews and gentiles. "the author expects the end of the world will come with the seventh persecution. the goths will conquer rome and redeem the christians; but then nero will appear again as the heathen anti-christ, reconquer rome and rage against the christians three years and a half. he will in turn be conquered by the jewish and real anti-christ from the east, who, after the defeat of nero and the burning of rome, will return to judea, perform false miracles and be worshipped by the jews. at last christ appears with the lost tribes, as his army, who had lived beyond persia in happy simplicity and virtue. under astounding phenomena of nature he will conquer anti-christ and his host, convert all nations and take possession of the holy city of jerusalem."[ ] this double anti-christ is perhaps the most notable variation. this idea reappears later, as does the nero return which would seem to have been current belief. there are perhaps only two other writers before augustine that are worthy of mention, victorinus and lactantius. victorinus, bishop of poetovio, i.e., petair in austria, martyred a.d., is the earliest exegete of the latin church. his 'commentary on the apocalypse' has come down to us in bad shape. the chiliasm is of a type which may be described as formal and ritualistic in the sense that it is expressed in a matter of fact way as something not needing explanation, much less proof. there are only two new ideas: "the first resurrection is now of the souls that are by the faith, which does not permit men to pass over to the second death"[ ] and "those years wherein satan is bound are in the first advent of christ even to the end of the age; and they are called a thousand according to that mode of speaking wherein a part is signified by the whole--although they are not a thousand."[ ] lactantius the preceptor of crispus, son of constantine, brings us to the chiliasm of the established church. the end of the present age and the coming of the millennial kingdom are at the latest years in the future, probably nearer, but the event instead of being looked toward to, is dreaded. the forthcoming destruction of rome is bewailed. the world is safe as long as rome stands. nero is to be anti-christ. "they who shall be alive in their bodies shall not die, but during those thousand years shall produce an infinite multitude, and their offspring shall be holy and beloved of god; but they who shall be raised from the dead shall preside over the living as judges. the nations shall not be entirely extinguished, but some shall be left as a victory for god, that they may be the occasion of triumph to the righteous and may be subjected to perpetual slavery."[ ] the chiliasm of lactantius is proved from the sibylline oracles and from the philosopher chrysippus, a stoic. for the rest lactantius repeats the traditional christian and pre-christian jewish chiliastic concepts with very little variation, but it is evident that the fact that the fall of rome is dreaded will work out a change. the chiliasm of lactantius is unstable, not that there is the slightest breath of doubt about it, but that the attitude of mind which looked forward with dread to the second advent could be depended upon to find a theory for postponing it. chiliasm is ready for its transformation. in the century between lactantius and augustine there is no chiliast of note in the west. it is abundantly evident however, from the works of augustine that chiliasm was common during that period as well as in the time of augustine. indeed augustine himself was a chiliast though probably not an exceedingly literal one, during his early period in the church.[ ] it is certain that he never regarded the doctrine as heretical. even in the very book in which he puts forth the doctrine which eventually superseded chiliasm he says: "this opinion would not be objectionable if it were believed that the joys of the saints in that sabbath[ ] shall be spiritual and consequent on the presence of god."[ ] we have in this quotation a hint as to the reason why he abandoned chiliasm. he elaborates this in the immediately following passage: "as they say that those who then rise again shall enjoy the leisure of immoderate carnal banquets, furnished with an amount of meat and drink such as not only to shock the feeling of the temperate, but even to surpass the measure of credulity itself, such assertions can be believed only by the carnal."[ ] disgust with this literal interpretation of the scripture was thus one of the reasons which drew augustine away from chiliasm. a more direct reason was that he had an idea of his own as to how the chiliastic scriptural passage[ ] should be interpreted. the discussion in which he vanquishes the chiliastic concept is a model of contraversial method. it would be difficult to find its superior either in sacred or profane polemics. perfectly conscious of his own powers to make chiliasm appear at once absurd and ridiculous he refrains from doing so. abundantly able though he was to refute the millennians point by point he deliberately foregoes that method of attack. his argument which overthrew an ancient, famous, and widespread doctrine of primitive christianity contains hardly a line either of refutation or condemnation. it is perhaps the finest example in christian literature of the 'positive apologetic.' the chiliastic literature, even that which has come down to us, contains so much that is fantastic and ludicrous that it would have been very easy for a man of far less power than augustine to hold it up to contempt and scorn. it abounds in the same kind of absurdities and incongruities as the pagan myths which provoked so many stinging pages from the early apologists and from augustine himself. the fact that augustine did not yield to the temptation to make his opponents ridiculous is in the highest degree creditable to his head and his heart. he did not violate the precepts of christian charity and he obtained a victory greater than would have been within even his power had he yielded to the natural temptation of a great intellect to show up the mental inferiority of his opponents. it is interesting to compare augustine's treatment of chiliasm with origen's. the two men are very comparable as regards extent and variety of knowledge, intellectual power, and philosophic insight. they are very unlike however, in their treatment of the subject. origen simply explains away the whole chiliastic concept or rather so spiritualizes it that nothing resembling the original idea is left. his whole insistence is that it must be taken figuratively, and without the least warrant he asserts that his interpretation is "according to the understanding of the apostles."[ ] he makes the whole subject so subjective, so intellectual, so metaphysical that there is left no content for the ordinary man to hold to in place of that which is demolished. in the overthrow of eastern chiliasm origen holds as conspicuous a position as augustine in the overthrow of western. he did away with a doctrine, too carnal perhaps, but at any rate concrete and comforting, and he substituted an intellectual abstraction. for instance in explaining, or better explaining away, the chiliastic feasts in the new jerusalem he says:[ ] "the rational nature growing by each individual step, enlarged in understanding and in power of perception is increased in intellectual growth; and ever gazing purely on the causes of things it attains perfection, firstly, viz., that by which it ascends to the truth, and secondly that by which it abides in it, having problems and the understanding of things and the causes of things as the food on which it may feast. and in all things this food is to be understood as the contemplation and understanding of god, which is of a measure appropriate and suitable to this nature, which was made and created, etc." this kind of thing is the intellectual equivalent of the process in physics by which the scientist takes some tangible solid body and proceeds first to liquify it, then to volitilize it and finally to blow it entirely away. we strongly suspect that the eastern chiliasts felt that the whole thing was a kleptistic legerdemain by which they were deprived of a favorite doctrine without receiving anything in place of it. augustine's method differs toto caelo from this. while origen handles the subject like a metaphysician, augustine handles it like a statesman. his doctrine is just as concrete as the one he displaces. he takes nothing away without giving something equally tangible and of better quality in its place. the transition from chiliasm to the origenistic conception of the future, would be, for the ordinary person, an incredible and almost impossible intellectual feat. the transition from chiliasm to the augustinian conception of the future is natural, easy, and perfectly within the power of a very ordinary and commonplace mentality. as a matter of fact it made its way without the smallest difficulty into the religious consciousness of the whole of western christianity. any person who aims at changing the theological opinions of others can find no better manual of method than the twentieth book of the city of god. augustine was very careful to keep all the symbols, catch words, and paraphernalia of chiliasm. he was careful not only to keep them all but to keep them all in their literal sense. he explains away none of them and allegorizes none of them. by carefully preserving the ancient shibboleths he was easily able to empty them of their former content. he holds to the millennium, the idea that is, of thousand years, as firmly as any chiliast but he says the thousand years is to be reckoned as dating from the establishment of the church on earth i.e., the first coming of christ. so he is careful to preserve the phrase: "the reign of the saints"; he merely substitutes for the chiliastic content of that phase the very comfortable and plausable doctrine that the saints are his own christian contemporaries. he is very skillful, not to say flattering, in his method of 'putting this across.' so he retains similarly the old formula about the two resurrections--but makes the first resurrection out to be the marvelous transformation and participation in the resurrection of christ which the christian experiences by virtue of the sacrament of baptism. more important still is his new content for the phrase "kingdom of heaven." this instead of a state of future blessedness becomes the already existing church on earth. finally he indulges in a long and apparently straight faced discussion as to whether the reign of anti-christ--which he preserves in its most literal form with the regulation duration of three years and a half--whether this is to be reckoned as part of the thousand years or not. this inconsequential detail is labored at length in such a manner as to delight the soul of any good bible reading chiliast. by preserving till the last this single element of chiliasm which he leaves untouched and then treating it in the good, old, religious fashion of irenaeus or some other primitive worthy, he very skillfully disarms criticism and it is only by a strong effort that the reader realizes what a tremendous blow has been struck at the original chiliastic doctrine. let us see what the changes of augustine amount to. it is not less than the total destruction of chiliasm, or at the very least the postponement of the end of the world till the year a.d. augustine's doctrine is essentially that of the ordinary, orthodox, bible christian today. sometime in the future--augustine said possibly in the year a.d.--christ was to come again to the earth. then follows the resurrection of the dead, the final judgment, and heaven and hell. the questions about the three years and a half of anti-christ, together with gog and magog--great favorites with the chiliasts--are held to be insoluble as to the time of their appearance; whether to be reckoned as part of the thousand years or immediately succeeding it. it is commonly said that augustine is responsible for the belief that the world was to come to an end in the year a.d. this is not strictly correct. augustine nowhere makes that direct assertion. he nowhere--so far as the writer is aware--even implies it. what he does is to offer it as a possible alternative hypothesis to the idea that the thousand years, (since is the cube of ,) is to be taken as a statement of the total duration of the world. as the matter is of some interest we give the original passage in dod's translation:[ ] "now the thousand years may be understood in two ways so far as occurs to me: either because these things happen in the sixth thousand of years or sixth millennium (the latter part of which is now passing) as if during the sixth day, which is to be followed by a sabbath which has no evening, the endless rest of the saints, so that, speaking of a part under the name of the whole, he calls the last part of the millennium--the part that is which had yet to expire before the end of the world--a thousand years; or he used the thousand years as an equivalent for the whole duration of this world, employing the number of perfection to mark the fullness of time. for a thousand is the cube of ten.... for the same reason we cannot better interpret the words of the psalm. "the word which he commanded to a thousand generations," than by understanding it to mean, "to all generations." the above sketch summarizes essentially all that has survived about the chiliasm of the early church. the chiliastic passages in the church literature up to and including augustine, though rather widely scattered, are not great in bulk. if printed together they would make only a moderate sized pamphlet. but their importance is by no means to be measured by their size. chiliasm, better than any other movement of the early period, serves as a standard for measuring the degree of the socialization of christianity. it comprises the only body of doctrine which passed from practically universal acceptance to practically universal repudiation during the period when the church changed from a small esoteric cult to a dominant factor of society. considered from this point of view, the causes of the decline of chiliasm possess a historical importance out of all proportion to the importance of chiliasm itself. more than any other religious movement of the time chiliasm was free from the direct pressure of distinctly religious influences. its declension was more nearly a case of unconscious social and psychological determinism than any other contemporary theological phenomenon. its chief supporters and opponents are not to be regarded so much as factors in its history, as points where the socializing forces operating in the early church become for the moment visible. certain facts stand out even in the short epitome we have given. chiliasm never became powerful in the great cities. it survived longest and was most popular in regions[ ] comparatively cut off from the great centers of civilization. hellenizing influences were unfavorable to it, romanizing influences indifferent to it. the reasons for this are numerous and most of them have been treated sufficiently by previous investigators, but in the writer's judgment certain other important influences have been either slighted or entirely ignored. we shall consider one or two. the supremely important fact in early christian history is the development of the concept of "the church" as an independent, self-existing, metaphysical entity. this metaphysical entity was conceived as embodying itself in the whole body of believers; living, dead, and yet to be born. the entity was eternal, indestructible, and in its essence immutable. although partially embodied in a visible society its essential being was conceived as independently sustained in the nature of the universe. it was an idea in the strict platonic sense. no concept like this is found in the contemporary pagan cults. even the jewish concept of the 'chosen people' is ethnic or national rather than purely religious and it has no tinge of that metaphysical existence which is the most notable element in the catholic concept of the church. the elements out of which 'the church' concept was constructed were four: two roman, one greek and one hebrew. the roman lawyers, in the process of fitting a municipal legal system to a world empire, evolved the twin legal entities, 'state' and 'sovereignty.' these entities were endowed with divers qualities; eternity, immutability, etc., but especially with the quality of having existential reality apart from any individual embodiment thereof. greek philosophy contributed the idea of the cosmopolis, the ideal world-city in which the fullest development of human personality was to be attained. this concept was as purely metaphysical as the self-existing, absolute 'state' of the roman law, but unlike the roman concept it had no concrete existence. the jewish contribution was that of the 'chosen people,' 'the elect nation.' these four concepts were transferred from their original loci to the christian society. the fact that all of these concepts were combined and centered on the same social group and the further fact that each of these concepts supplemented the others in a remarkable way resulted in the formation of one of the most powerful ideas in religious history. this church concept, thus built up, had already become widespread in the time of augustine and this fact helps us to understand the otherwise unintelligible success of that saint in combatting chiliasm. the real truth is seen to be that augustine's ideas succeeded because they were not peculiarly his at all--they already existed, implicitly but really, in the mind of the generation which he addressed. the elements of the concept 'the church' being what they were, augustine's explanation of, or rather abolition of, chiliasm follows of inevitable logical and intellectual necessity. it was the genius of augustine that he recognized and gave formulated, concrete expression to this accomplished fact and it is no derogation of his genius to say that had he never existed the accomplished fact would eventually have been given expression to by some one else. another little considered element in chiliasm is that of masochism, and sadism, the two being merely the opposite sides of the same psychical phenomenon. this element is found more or less prominently in all the chiliastic literature from the early fragment of papias to the elaborate discussions of augustine. the masochistic phenomena are the most remarkable characteristics of the early martyrdoms and if a collection were made of the masochistic passages of the writings of the chiliasts, the bulk of them would be as great as that of the chiliastic passages proper. it is necessary to bear in mind that masochism necessarily, in any advanced society, disguises itself under some socially acceptable form of sentiment or emotion, i.e., admiration for the constancy of the confessors or martyrs, suffering as a mark of the true church, etc. it is always associated with the reality or idea of struggle. it has a high 'survival value' in the struggle for existence by heightening individual power in conflict. like other human characteristics it is seen most clearly in the exaggerated form it assumes in its crowd manifestations. its most evident expression is in the 'mob mind.' our problem, then, is to discover how the declension of chiliasm is to be explained by the transfer of the masochistic element in it to other vehicles of expression. the masochistic element was a vital factor in chiliasm; without it almost the whole force of 'the thousand years reign of the saints' is lost. the explanation of the transfer is difficult. undoubtedly some of the masochistic values of chiliasm were taken over by the various, previously mentioned concepts that combined to make up the idea of the catholic church. 'extra ecclesia nulla salus' accounts for part of the phenomena previously expressed chiliastically. it is notable in this connection that there is no word of chiliasm in cyprian. but a more important transfer was that which took place in the course of the development of the doctrine of purgatory. it may perhaps seem incongruous to say that purgatory took over the values of the millennium and from the point of view of formal theology it is so. but the only point we are trying to make here, namely, the fundamental fact of the expression of masochistic impulses, is as evidently shown in the purgatory as in the millennium concept. the desire for a heightened sense of self-realization, a richer content of experience, is the cause of the appearance of both concepts and they are closely allied psychologically. this fact comes out in the large part played by the chiliasts in the evolution of the purgatory concept.[ ] what we find here is a concurrent declension of chiliasm and development of purgatory. for about two centuries the two concepts existed side by side; then the superior social value of purgatory asserting itself, that doctrine gradually took over the masochistic values of chiliasm; the supersession of the later being rendered thereby more rapid and easy. however it is probably that the transfer of the psychological values from chiliasm was more to be ascribed to the rising asceticism of the early church than to the concept of the church as such, or even to the rise of the purgatory concept. asceticism in some form is a permanent element in any wide spread religion and the values later expressed in christian asceticism were in the earlier period mediated through chiliasm. when st. paul advocated abstinence from marriage 'because the time is short' he was not expressing asceticism. he was expressing a sensible idea based on belief in one of the chief chiliastic doctrines, the immediate imminence of the second advent. in the case of such teachers as tertullian the doctrine of marriage is the result of a combination of chiliasm and asceticism. at a later date asceticism took over the doctrine of celibacy as meritorious on its own account but it never outgrew the original chiliastic view that it was a logical preparation for the second advent. in other words restriction in matrimony whether chiliastic or monastic is due to the same inherent element in human nature, i.e., the masochistic. similarly those good phrygian chiliasts who abandoned all their possessions and went out into the desert to meet the lord were moved by the same psychological impulse that actuated the monks of the thebaid. historically the one set of concepts imperceptibly gave way to the other. those same thebaid monks are a good illustration of the fact. some of them, at least in the earlier stages of the movement, were influenced more by chiliastic concepts than by monastic ones. many were influenced by both. here again the superior value of the ascetic concepts for the ecclesiastical organization determined the eventual survival of the monastic institution. but whatever the conceptual images employed to give expression to the masochistic impulse, that impulse was psychologically the same. organized monachism furnished a more convenient outlet for the stronger masochistic impulses than chiliasm and so superseded it. the fact that monachism grew in proportion as chiliasm declined is in this respect merely a case of trans-shipment. the vehicle was different but the goods carried were the same. there are numerous other social and psychological, as well as economic causes for the declension of chiliasm but they can perhaps be more conveniently considered in connection with the socialization of the early church. footnotes: [ ] f. pollock, essays in jurisprudence and ethics, p. . [ ] cf. i enoch xci-civ. [ ] cf. parables in i enoch xxxvii-lxxi. [ ] cf. apocalypse of baruch; ezra, maccabees. [ ] irenaeus adv. haer. v . ii baruch xxix. [ ] hist. of dogma, vol. iii, p. . [ ] ens. h. e. vi - . [ ] justin martyn, tertullian, lactantius. [ ] ad. celsus lxi. [ ] sib. orac. viii, seq. [ ] hippolytus, com. on daniel. [ ] strom. vii, ; vi ; iv ; v , . [ ] de princ, ii, . [ ] cf. e.g., a. r. wallace, the world of life. [ ] eus. h. e. vii . [ ] discourse on the resurrection, i, seq. see also conviv. ix, , . [ ] ep. cii, . [ ] ep. cclxiii, . [ ] cp. cclxv, . [ ] frag. dan. i, , . [ ] de christo et antic. . [ ] instructions, lxxx. [ ] schaff hist., ii, . sec. lxvii of poem. [ ] comm. xx . . [ ] comm. xx . . [ ] div. ins. bk. xxiv. [ ] c.d. xx . [ ] i.e., the millennium. [ ] c.d. xx . [ ] rev. xx. [ ] de prin. ii, , . [ ] de prin. ii, , . [ ] city of god in nicene and post nicene fathers, st series, vol. ii, p. . [ ] e.g., lydia, phrygia, the thebaid. [ ] clem. alex. paed., iii, strom. vii. origen, hom. on num., xxv. hom. on ps. xxvi. lactantius, vii, . chapter ii the early church and property concepts the chiliasm of the early christians had a direct bearing upon their attitude toward the property institutions and property concepts of the time. neither the declension of chiliasm nor the progressive socialization of the church can be understood without some consideration of the attitude of the christians toward property, and conversely the effect of the existing economic system upon the christians. the early church made its appearance in a world where the institution of private property was supreme in fact and very largely unquestioned in theory. it is recognized with perfect clearness by all the ancient thinkers who refer to the subject that their civilization was based upon the property rights of man in man. it is not true that slavery was invariably considered part of the unalterable law of nature. aristotle expressly states that a sufficient development of mechanistic technology would abrogate slavery. but such a technological development was not expected nor indeed wished for. contempt for mechanical processes of industry was universal, with the dubious exception of the application of science to military engines. there is a similar unanimity in regard to commercial enterprise. money obtained by ordinary mercantile methods was considered as dishonestly acquired. it was assumed as self-evident that the merchant had to be a thief. interest on money was of course reprobated as contrary to nature.[ ] return from landed property was almost the only socially reputable form of income--with the exception of spoils of war. free wage labor was so unimportant that the roman law did not even develop a set of legal principles regarding it. the jewish property system, which originally had some notable peculiarities of its own, had by the first century a.d. become of necessity so like the roman that the differences may for our purposes be disregarded. the more so as christianity very early came almost exclusively under the influence of the roman institutions and concepts in this regard. it is perhaps unnecessary to add that roman practice in regard to property was widely at variance with roman theory, with the result that serious moral disintegration came over persons engaging in commercial enterprises. the moral lapses of the early christians are largely to be set down to this cause, on the principle that a destruction of moral integrity in one respect makes other delinquencies easy. with respect to the attitude of christ towards contemporary property institutions, it is unnecessary for our purpose to regard any conclusions of modern criticism. the synoptic gospels were uncritically accepted by the early church and we are concerned merely with what was commonly accepted as the teaching of christ. perhaps as convenient a way as any of illustrating the breadth of view in christ's attitude toward property institutions would be to take a single illustration and apply to it the whole range of property concepts found in the teachings of christ. no single illustration is so applied in the gospels as we have them, but the principles will be the clearer for the consistent use of the same illustration. we shall take as our type case one which christ himself used; the case of a thief who steals a coat. the teachings of christ about property can conveniently be put down under four heads, each illustrating, by a different way of treating the thief, a different property concept. first: the ordinary or conventional manner of treating the thief, based on the concept of the morality and sacredness of private property; i.e., catching the thief, recovering the stolen property and punishing the crime by fine or imprisonment or torture. this conventional standard of morality and attitude towards property is illustrated, e.g., in the story of the man with one talent in the parable. it is very concisely summed up in the expression: "to him that hath shall be given and he shall have abundance and from him that hath not shall be taken away even that which he hath." second: what may be called for convenience the socialistic manner of treating the thief--no implications either good or bad being intended by the use of the term socialistic. this treatment would consist of catching the thief, recovering the stolen property but letting the thief go free with merely an admonition to future good behavior. this treatment is based on the concept that the institution of private property has only a partial validity and that violations of private property rights are to be blamed not alone upon the violator but upon society at large in equal degree. this attitude is illustrated in the case of the woman taken in adultery: "neither do i condemn thee; go and sin no more." the illustration is perhaps more apt than appears at first glance for female chastity is and was legally possessed of tangible economic value i.e., adultery was viewed as a violation of a property right belonging to the husband of the adultress. third: what may be termed the anarchistic manner of treating the thief--here again no implications either good or bad are intended by the employment of the term anarchistic. this treatment consists essentially in pacificism, in tolstoi's non-resistance. it is purely negative and allows the thief to get away with the stolen coat without anyone making any move to recover the property. this treatment is based on the concept that private property institutions have no validity at all, but that the only valid property arrangement is that of pure communism. this attitude toward property is illustrated by such sayings of christ as "of him that taketh away thy goods ask them not again;" "resist not him that is evil," etc. fourth: what may be distinguished as the specifically christian manner of treating the thief--using the word christian as appertaining strictly to the founder of the church. this treatment consists of running after the thief not for the purpose of capturing and punishing him; not even for the purpose of recovering the stolen coat but for the purpose of giving him a vest and an overcoat in addition to what he has stolen. it amounts to the direct encouragement and reward of the thief for doing what is presumably a meritorious action by stealing. this way of treating a thief is not socialistic, or communistic; it is not even anarchistic. it is something as far beyond anarchy, as anarchy is beyond socialism, or socialism beyond ordinary conventional individualism. it is specifically and peculiarly and uniquely christian, using that word as above defined. this treatment is not based on any concept of any kind of property institution. its logical, intellectual position is the denial of the validity or worth of any property institutions, private or communistic. it involves indeed the destruction of the very concept property as implying possession by right of social agreement. this attitude of christ toward property finds expression in such sayings as: "from him that taketh away thy cloke withhold not thy coat also." "blessed are ye poor." "woe unto you that are rich." it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle, etc. etc. the great bulk of christ's statements about property are to be classified under this fourth head. the views are probably connected, with just what degree of closeness it is impossible to say, to the belief in the immediately imminent catastrophe of the world. with somewhat less certainty, it may be ventured that certain of christ's sayings which we have listed as anarchistic are perhaps influenced by the same idea. it is of course obvious that the above four fold division is not exact in the strict scientific sense, or that any teaching of christ concerning property can be unhesitatingly classified under one head or another. still less is anything intended to be implied as to the existence or non-existence of any underlying, universal, theological principle which would reconcile apparent divergencies. theological metaphysics as such, lie outside the scope of this chapter which is intended as an objective study of concepts of property. from an objective point of view it is evident that the four divisions imperceptibly shade into one another and form a continuous series, nevertheless for the sake of convenience it may be considered as approximating a rational organization of the material under distinct heads. immediately after the time of christ the christians in jerusalem developed a communistic organization. "all that believed were together and had all things in common and sold their possessions and goods and parted them to all men, as every man had need." "neither said any of them that ought of the things which he possessed was his own; but they had all things common. neither was there any among them that lacked; for as many as were possessors of lands or houses sold them, and brought the prices of the things that were sold and laid them at the apostles' feet; and distribution was made unto every man according as he had need."[ ] it is doubtless true that the participants in this communistic society believed themselves to be living according to the principles and precepts of christ. yet there is some evidence which would lead to the conclusion that perhaps this experiment was less a deliberate and reasoned out endeavor to organize a permanent society on a new economic basis, than an instinctive movement, entered upon under the influence of a belief in the immediately imminent second advent of christ and therefore expected to be of only very limited duration. the collections subsequently taken up in other christian communities 'for the relief of the poor saints in jerusalem' would seem to lend color to this view of the matter. in st. paul's teaching about property there is a fundamental inconsistency. he makes statements which taken separately are applicable to particular situations but which are not in harmony with one another. he loyally supported the established right of private property, even in slaves. but at another time he pronounced that property right depended upon service rendered. in one place we have: "slaves obey your masters" in another: "if any will not work neither let him eat." but if a man's slaves obey him he can eat without working. there is no suggestion of communism in st. paul's writings. if all the 'property passages' in the epistles are collected and read in connection with their contexts two facts come into prominence, first: property institutions as such have only a relative validity. they are not viewed as ends valuable in themselves but are subordinated to religious ends, and the concept of an immediately imminent second advent lies at the base of this relative valuation.[ ] second: economic arrangements of the existing social order, like similar political arrangements, are to be strictly conformed to, in spite of their merely relative validity, for fear of jeopardizing the more important religious movement.[ ] st. paul whether consciously or not, is, in regard to social institutions, an evolutionary revolutionist. he would doubtless have been the first to admit that his doctrine of human brotherhood, for example, would eventually overthrow his doctrine of slavery, supposing--as there is no ground for thinking he did suppose--that time enough elapsed for his doctrine of brotherhood to permeate the general social consciousness. in so far as property concepts are concerned it would probably be difficult to maintain that there is any essential divergence between the teachings of st. paul and some at least of the teachings of christ. st. paul was by nature an ecclesiastical statesman. he seems to have taken such of christ's property concepts as served his purposes and ignored the others. in the epistle of st. james are to be found very bitter complaints as to the working of property institutions. these complaints are so serious as to suggest the inevitable attempt to make over the institutions and the fact that no such attempt is indicated is due to the manifestly lively expectation of the second advent. yet even so it was necessary for the writer to council patience to his brethren.[ ] in the revelation there is a passage, xviii, seq., quite in the manner of the most violent of the ancient prophets or the modern anarchists. in this passage property is conceived as evil and the destruction of civilization as it then was, is conceived as a cause of rejoicing to saints, apostles, and prophets. on the other hand the new jerusalem in the same book[ ] is a 'wholesale jewelers paradise' and involves the property concepts of those cities of asia minor who did most of the jewelry manufacturing of the roman empire. it is very doubtful how far anything in such a description can be said to embody property concepts but the ideal put forth is the communistic enjoyment of incredible luxury. the epistle of clement of rome has only incidental references to property. they can be well summed up in the quotation:[ ] "let the rich man provide for the wants of the poor; and let the poor man bless god, because he hath given him one by whom his need may be supplied." there is manifestly no question of tampering with received property institutions and concepts on the part of the writer of such a sentence. it is equally evident that such an attitude in regard to property is eminently well calculated to enable the holder to propagate specifically theological opinions with a minimum of interested opposition. the didache holds a naïve and touching communistic creed.[ ] "thou shalt not turn away from him that hath need but shalt share all things with thy brother and shalt not say that they are thine own." this passage, the only one on the subject in the didache, would seem to indicate that the institution of private property existed as a matter of fact in the writer's community, but that the validity of it was not acknowledged. the position may perhaps be called one of conceptual and constructive communism. the epistle of barnabas holds exactly the same view in almost exactly the same words:[ ] "thou shalt communicate to thy neighbor all that thou hast, thou shalt not call anything thine own." early in the second century we come upon the ebionites who in the matter of property held very strong views.[ ] the stricter of them made poverty a condition of salvation. they refused to acknowledge the validity of the concept property--that is in theory. in practice some of them seem to have been influenced by the doctrine and practice of the essenes in regard to communism. all through the second century we find a continuous succession of heretical sects, gnostics and others, who held either the doctrine of the wickedness of property-ownership as such, 'holy poverty,' or else objected to individual ownership of property and preached or practiced communism in such degree as might be possible under the circumstances. of these sects it is sufficient to name the marcionites a.d. the carpocratians a.d. the procidians a.d.(?) the basilidians a.d. it is evident that there was in progress in the second century an ascetic movement which later took on the forms of manichaeism and christian asceticism. the church consistently opposed all these sects and maintained the validity of private property without condemning communism as such, except in extreme cases, such as that of epiphanes of alexandria, a carpocriation, who in a book on justice, a.d., defined virtue as consisting in absolute communism of goods and women. to return to orthodox christianity, hermas shows very clearly the inconsistencies which beset christian theory and practice in the first half of the second century. all who are rich must be deprived of their wealth in order to be good christians.[ ] yet this deprivation of wealth must be only relative; there must be wealth enough left for the giving of alms.[ ] there is no trace of communism in hermas and no praise of poverty as such. the chief justification for the existence of property institutions would seem to be that they are social structures which can be utilized for the giving and receiving of alms. perhaps one paragraph is worth quoting as giving possibly the earliest formulation extant of the property concepts that finally became dominant. "the rich man has much wealth but is poor in matters relating to the lord because he is distracted about his riches and he offers very few confessions and intercessions to the lord and those which he does offer are small and weak, and have no power above. but when the rich man refreshes the poor and assists him in his necessities, believing that which he does to the poor man will be able to find its reward with god--because the poor man is rich in intercessions and confession and his intercession has great power with god--then the rich man helps the poor in all things without hesitation; and the poor man, being helped by the rich, intercedes for him, giving thanks to god for him who bestows gifts upon him. and he still continues earnestly to interest himself for the poor man, that his want may be constantly supplied. for he knows that the intercession of the poor man is acceptable and influential with god. both accordingly accomplish their work. the poor man makes intercession; a work in which he is rich, which he received from the lord, and with which he recompenses the master who helps him. and the rich man in like manner, unhesitatingly bestows upon the poor man the riches which he received from the lord. and this is a great work and acceptable before god, because he understands the object of his wealth and has given to the poor of the gifts of the lord and rightly discharged his service to him."[ ] the inconsistent and irreconcilable nature of the evidence about early christian property institutions is well illustrated in justin martyr. two short extracts are sufficient for the purpose. "we who valued above all things the acquisition of wealth and possessions, now bring what we have into a common stock and communicate to every one in need."[ ] "we carry on us all we possess and share everything with the poor."[ ] the second of these passages would indicate that the first is not to be taken in a too literal and comprehensive sense. it may perhaps be ventured as an opinion that the truth of the matter, as regards the christians of whom justin wrote, is that the concept of private property was largely invalidated and that personal possessions were thought of as owned in common while the 'common stock' consisted in reality of contributions--it may be large contributions--given for the relief of necessity among the members. the account preserved to us in lucian of the christian communities of judea in the later half of the second century would seem to bear out this opinion. lucian says: "the activity of these people in dealing with any matter that affects their community is something extraordinary. they spare no trouble, no expense. peregrine all this time was making quite an income on the strength of his bondage. money came pouring in. you see these misguided creatures start with the general conviction that they are immortal for all time, which explains the contempt of death and voluntary self devotion which are so common among them and then it was impressed upon them by their original law giver that they are all brothers from the moment that they are converted and deny the gods of greece and worship the crucified sage and live after his laws. all this they take quite on trust with the result that they despise all worldly goods alike, regarding them merely as common property."[ ] in tertullian we find the same contradiction as regards private ownership and communism which has already been noted in justin. the contradiction is more glaring, but possibly the explanation of the real situation is similar. the following two extracts from the same chapter bring this contradiction out in high relief: "family possessions which generally destroy brotherhood among you, create fraternal bonds among us. one in mind and soul, we do not hesitate to share our earthly goods with one another. all things are common among us but our wives." "on the monthly collection day, if he likes, each puts in a small donation; but only if it be his pleasure and only if he be able, for there is no compulsion, all is voluntary."[ ] tertullian was a montanist and one of the most serious charges made against the montanists was that some of their prophets received interest on money loaned by them.[ ] tertullian is above suspicion in this respect. he demonstrates by quotations from both the old and new testaments that it is absolutely contradictory to christianity. interest on money is the only property institution in regard to which the teaching of the early church is consistent. every reference we have in regard to this practice condemns it--not mildly as a venial offense--but fiercely and savagely as a heinous crime like incest or murder. "fenerare est hominem occidere" is a favorite formula. in this respect the most pronounced apologists of private wealth like clement of alexandria are in perfect accord with the most pronounced communists like tertullian. the only difference to be noted is one of emphasis. in the earlier writers there are relatively few references to interest, which may perhaps be due to the fact that in the earlier time there were relatively few christians possessed of surplus means requiring investment. as might naturally be expected, the writers of the period after the establishment of christianity as a legal religion make more frequent and more bitter reference to the matter. the vehemence of denunciation indulged in by these later writers almost exceeds credibility. the most improbable and strained exegesis is resorted to in an effort to explain away the words of christ in the parables of the pounds and talents. but this vehemence is by no means confined to the nicene and post-nicene fathers. so statesmanlike a bishop as cyprian, in a long railing accusation against certain opposition bishops brings forth as their final sin that they had "multiplied gain by usury."[ ] usury is not to be taken, of course, in its present sense of excessive or burdensome interest and it is evident that cyprian did not use it in such a sense. he is simply condemning interest as such. in the minds of the early christians the difference between taking five percent interest or fifty percent was exactly the same as the difference between stealing one dollar or ten. the sin was essentially the same irrespective of the particular amount involved. indeed this comparison is scarcely a valid one; for taking interest was conceived as a much worse sin than plain robbery. it is perhaps worth noting that the moral distinction between interest and usury is of very late development. the credit, if it be such, of making it, is to be ascribed to calvin and is not unconnected with the predilection of certain types of pecuniary interest for that reformer's system of ecclesiastical polity. the roman law did indeed fix a maximum legal rate of interest, varying at different times and even at the same time for different forms of commercial risk. during the first three centuries a.d. it was, for example, consistently twelve percent on ships and varied from six to twelve percent on other forms of investment. but this has little moral connotation. early christian condemnation of interest on loans was by no means confined to the expression of opinion by church writers. council after council legislated against it with ever increasing severity. the forty-fourth apostolic canon prohibited the practice to clerics. the council of elvira a.d. forbade it to both clerics and laity. the council of arles a.d. provided that clerics guilty of the practice should be deposed from the ministry. the seventeenth canon of the council of nicea a.d. provided that they should be excommunicated. the penalty is reiterated in the twelfth canon of the first council of carthage a.d. there is no need to continue the list. it is sufficient to say that nearly every council whose canons have come down to us has legislation against interest. again and again it is absolutely forbidden to clergy and laity alike under the severest ecclesiastical penalties--and it is necessary to remember that after a.d. these penalties could, if need be, be enforced by governmental authority. this attitude of the early church toward interest on loans is a matter of very considerable historical importance. although, as we shall endeavor to show later, the ecclesiastical laws were frequently and largely evaded, they still had such influence that their contribution to the sum of economic forces which accomplished the overthrow of ancient civilization is by no means an insignificant one. nor did the influence of this attitude cease at the fall of rome. it rather increased thereafter and for several centuries, the so-called "dark ages," civilization was strangled by the power of this idea of the sin of usury. to this day the roman church regards interest on money as a reprehensible thing which, however, is not, for practical reasons, to be spoken of as sinful by the clergy.[ ] this attitude has been no inconsiderable factor in the relatively late industrial development in catholic countries. the early christian concept of interest was not an idea original with christianity. it was not derived from christ at all. it was taken over bodily from old testament judaism and contemporary pagan philosophy. it is a well known fact that the views of plato and aristotle, of cicero and seneca on interest, correspond in a very astonishing way to the views of deuteronomy and isaiah, of the psalms and ezekiel. the strength of the concept in the early church was due to this fact. in regard to no other concept was there such a unanimity of opinion. the christian convert found that the sacred scriptures of his new faith confirmed in the strongest language the condemnation of interest which he had become familiar with from the writings of the noblest pagan philosophers. when reason and religion were in accord it is not wonderful that their judgment was accepted--as a theory. in spite of this union of pagan philosophers and hebrew prophets, of christian fathers and ecclesiastical canons, the condemnation and prohibition of interest on money was a theory only. a very ordinary knowledge of classical civilization is sufficient to explain the reason of this. more nearly than any other institution, the financial machinery of antiquity corresponds to that of modern life. trusts and millionaires were phenomena of their economic life as of ours. banks were numerous and ubiquitous. they were of all sizes and degrees; from the great metropolitan corporation with correspondents all over the civilized world, to the hated money lender in a shabby office on a side street. the great bankers were men of the first importance in society. from their number were regularly recruited the officials of the imperial treasury. they were almost without exception men of the strictest financial integrity. the roman banking laws protected the depositor more securely than the laws of any modern nation, and these roman laws were rigidly enforced. every banking institution had to obtain government authorization in order to do business and this authorization was withdrawn on the discovery of the smallest discrepancy in the accounts. the regular rate of interest on ordinary deposits was four percent; under certain peculiar conditions the rate went as low as two and a half and as high as six percent. the rate published by a bank had to be paid even though payment swept away the banker's entire private property. the banker lost everything before the depositor lost anything. the banks were used by the government in carrying out such fiscal measures as could not be conveniently handled by the treasury department directly. they played a still more important part in the ordinary commercial life of the times. a relatively small volume of business was, or could be, carried on by transfers of specie. the great bulk of commercial transactions were of necessity carried on by checks, drafts, discounts, bills of exchange and similar instruments of credit. it was a matter of simple impossibility for any man in ordinary commercial or industrial life to carry on his business for even a single day without participating directly or indirectly in transactions involving loans and interest. our excuse for reciting these commonplace details of roman commercial life is that their very commonplaceness explains the discrepancy between early christian theory and practice in the matter of interest. it would be an easy task to convict the early christians of hypocritical pretense in this regard. nothing more would be necessary than to print their theory in one column and their practice in a parallel one. yet the early christians were not hypocrites. as regards sincerity of profession they compare very favorably with any religionists of any age. as a matter of fact the historians have long ago shown that it is altogether impossible and unjust to argue from a sect's opinions to their feelings and actions. to quote macauley[ ] "only imagine a man acting for one single day on the supposition that all his neighbors believe all that they profess or act up to all that they believe. imagine a man acting on the supposition that he may safely offer the deadliest injuries and insults to everybody who says that revenge is sinful; or that he may safely intrust all his property without security to any person who says it is wrong to steal. such a character would be too absurd for the wildest farce." "the law which is inscribed on the walls of the synagogues prohibits covetousness. but if we were to say that a jew mortgagee would not foreclose because god had commanded him not to covet his neighbor's house, everybody would think us out of our wits."[ ] yet that jew is no hypocrite in his religion. he is sincerely and honestly devoted to his faith and will sacrifice time and money; will undergo social obloquy and contempt in support of it. so it was with the early christians. by the process of abstracting their theory and practice of interest from the social matrix which alone makes the theory or practice intelligible, it is easy to show a logical inconsistency. it would be equally foolish and false to deduce from this inconsistency any conclusions one way or the other as to early christian morality. it is if course no aim of this thesis to attack or defend any religious or moral opinions. it is a matter entirely apart from our present concern to evaluate interest or non-interest in ethical terms. our purpose is not to explain away the inconsistency of the early christians. admitting the inconsistency in the fullest degree, our aim is to explain it as natural, and, under the social conditions then prevailing, practically inevitable. the early christians left funds to care in perpetuity for the family burial lot.[ ] under any religious creed; pagan, jewish, or christian, decent provision for the care of graves of relatives was not only admissible, it was a positive demand of social reputability; to say nothing of the demand of natural affection. similarly annual agapes were established by bequests as a charity to the poor brethren.[ ] these agapes were no innovation. as an institution they were perfectly familiar and in universal observance among the pagans. the agapes were simply ordinary roman silicernia with the name changed. to the romans, founding a silicernium was like wearing a toga or going to a bath. it possessed the sanction of law and the benediction of religion; but its real compulsion lay in social custom. no person could escape this pressure of the mores and retain self respect, to say nothing of the respect of others. the pagan silicernium was morally respectable; it perpetuated friendship and promoted good feeling. there was no reason for avoiding it, if avoidance had been possible--as it was not. the christians not only preserved this pious institution; they improved it. their annual agapes fed the poor, which the silicernia, excellent as they were, seldom did. the explanation we have endeavored to give of the endowment of family burial lots and annual agapes is applicable, mutis mutandis, to other cases of interest. it therefore is not surprising to learn that callixtus (pope - a.d.) was a banker previous to his elevation to the papacy; that large numbers of christians, particularly widows and orphans--entrusted their money to his bank, and that he had large loans out at good interest to jewish bankers.[ ] the truth is that the early christian horror of interest, while absolutely honest and even desperately sincere, was a strictly legalistic, ceremonial, and ritualistic horror. it was purely formal and was not at all concerned with any economic principle. the thing that was wicked, was not income from capital invested, but income _in the form of interest on money_. to own a ship and sail it and make profits from ownership by freight charges was perfectly honest, but to invest money in a shipping corporation and receive dividends was wicked. so it was honest to own a building and get money as rent. it was immoral to invest money in the construction company that erected that building and receive income in the form of interest. rent, profit, and interest are merely three forms of the same thing, income from invested capital. any endeavor to distinguish between them in this respect is entirely devoid of moral or economic justification. the ancient church fathers were as well aware of this as we are. the real point and importance of their concept of interest was their defense of that concept. that defense was a curious one and illustrates the difference between ancient and modern reasoning on economic matters--and on other matters also. the difference in a word is that of mistaking means for ends on the theory of course that we moderns are right and the prophets, philosophers, christian fathers, et al. wrong. according to modern social science, interest is merely a means adopted for the attainment of certain ends--economic, educational, religious or whatever. the goodness or badness of interest is to be judged strictly and solely by the convenience and economy with which it serves these ends. if any other property institution can, in a given situation, serve a given end more easily and more cheaply than the institution of interest, then, in that situation, the institution of interest--other things being equal--is immoral and should be abolished. if, in the given situation, no other property institution can serve the given end more easily and more cheaply than the institution of interest, then that institution is moral and should be retained. that is, from the modern sociological point of view, the institution of interest is inconceivable except as a means to some end outside itself. as a means it is to be judged in a purely objective and pragmatic manner by the ordinary standards of cost price, economic, social, and other. the method of the ancients is entirely otherwise. assuming still the correctness of the modern viewpoint, which viewpoint be it said is not unassailable and indeed is assailed by divers radicals, socialists and others, but for the most part persons lacking in pecuniary reputability; the mistake then, that the early church fathers make is that of taking the means for an end. they have many arguments against interest but all these arguments can be criticised for this one error. the fathers elevate interest to the dignity of an end in itself. interest, qua interest, is condemned. it is taking advantage of a brother's necessity. it is grinding the face of the poor. it is producing pride, luxury, and vice. as soon as moral value is attached to anything, it of course, is viewed as an end in itself. if it be true that interest is an end in itself, then the fiercest diatribes of the fathers are none too severe. assuming their premises, their conclusions follow inevitably. the modern man--he is not unknown--who talks about the "sacred rights" of private property is guilty of the same error as the ancient christians, the error of mistaking means for ends. the early christians could not see that the property institution of interest is neither good nor bad except as it is good or bad _for something_. the _something_ determines the judgment. as a matter of historical fact the condemnation of interest developed in certain early stages of human civilization and at those stages interest was socially detrimental. at those stages, however, it was exceedingly rare and correspondingly infamous. in any country where there is abundance of good, free land the phenomenon of interest on money will disappear, provided labor is free. so it disappeared in the northern states of this union in the later part of the th century. these phenomena caused the southerners to adopt slavery though all their english traditions had declared it immoral for more than three centuries. the relation of interest to slavery under a condition of free land is the relation of cause and effect, i.e., the requirement of interest will produce slavery and the abolition of interest will abolish slavery.[ ] these social phenomena are of importance in our consideration of the early christian doctrine of interest. that doctrine was largely evaded and disobeyed but it still had great effect and that effect was toward the abolition of slavery. we do not mean that this economic doctrine alone resulted in the abolition of slavery, or even that it was a chief cause in the abolition of slavery, it was not obeyed well enough to be such a chief cause; but so far as it was obeyed, it tended in that direction. the net result of all christian teaching together was to prolong the existence of the institution of slavery for two centuries, perhaps for three. the doctrine of the sinfulness of interest however, worked toward emancipation and forced slavery in its later end to become almost wholly agricultural, i.e., to yield income as rent. slaves cannot be employed in commerce or industry in sufficient numbers to be profitable where the institution of interest is banned as it was in the 'dark ages.' the christian concept of interest undermined ancient civilization by abrogating, slowly but surely, the institution of property by which such gangs of 'manufacturing slaves' as made the fortune of crassus, could alone be made profitable. it is an historical curiosity that it accomplished this result without any attack on the institution of slavery itself. as soon as christian doctrines became widespread enough to produce important social results we find christian slave owners manumitting their slaves in considerable numbers. it is no derogation to the influence of the doctrine of human brotherhood or to the humanity of the christian slave owners to mention the fact that the doctrine of the sinfulness of interest, by tending to make slavery unprofitable, aided in the process of bringing to light the real content of the doctrine of human brotherhood, and of making the humane practice of manumission easier by the removal of certain economic impediments. in order to understand properly the working of the prohibition of interest and its relation to manumission, it is necessary to carry the analysis one step farther to its ultimate physical basis, which was the conditioning factor of actual practice and eventually of theory also. the exhaustion of the soil of western europe which was the result of ancient methods of agriculture, together with the rising standard of living and the competition of other more fertile agricultural regions like egypt and north africa resulted in the substitution of the latifundi for small landholdings.[ ] as the pressure continued the latifundi in turn became economically unprofitable under forced labor (slavery) and large tracts of land were abandoned. in order to put this land under agriculture again the charge upon it had to be reduced by the substitution of (relatively) free associated labor, villeinage or serfdom. but this change cut off the economic margin upon which the structure of ancient civilization was built and is the ultimate economic reason assignable for the fall of rome. of course the collapse of the empire could, theoretically, have been avoided had the romans of the first three centuries a.d. been content to live the toilsome and frugal life of the romans of the early republic. but this was an utter impossibility in practice. this slowly working and hardly understood decline in the relative and actual ability of ancient agriculture to sustain the weight imposed upon it, enables us to see why the sinfulness of interest could be steadily indoctrined even though steadily evaded, by christians from the beginning, while manumission was not taught at all in the beginning and only worked up to the dignity of a pious action relatively late.[ ] it also explains why manumission of household and personal slaves preceded that of agricultural slaves. of course there is nothing peculiarly christian about this later phenomenon and the operation of other causes is discernable, but it is important for our purpose to observe that christian practice, and christian theory in property matters in the long run, followed the broad lines of the underlying economic evolution.[ ] the application of this to the origin of christian monasticism and to the revival of communistic theories by the later church fathers lies at the very outside limit of our study but will be briefly touched on after we have considered the final overthrow of the communistic property concept as they appear in the earlier fathers up to and including tertullian. clement of alexandria - a.d. has the distinction of being the first christian theological writer who clearly expounds the concept of private property which has held sway without substantial change in the church until the present time. this statement does not apply to the doctrine of receiving interest on money. in respect to this doctrine clement is in perfect accord with all other early christians both before and after himself. indeed he specifically states that the mosaic prohibition against taking interest from one's brother extends in the case of a christian to all mankind. but in regard to all other property institutions clement's attitude is essentially that of any modern christian of generous disposition. in all that clement has to say about property, and the 'bulk' of his 'property passages' is as great as that of all previous christian writers together, he speaks like a man on the defensive. indeed there has come down to us no other christian writing earlier than his time which presents his view, with the dubious exception of some passages in hermas. the fact seems to be that while clement is undoubtedly presenting an apologetic for the existing practice in the church of his day, that practice was felt to be more or less open to attack in the light of certain scripture passages. communism as an existential reality was gone by the time of clement--whatever may have been the extent--probably a limited one--to which it had existed in the earlier ages. but while communism as a fact was dead, communism as an idea or ideal of christian economy was not dead. indeed clement's views about the morality of wealth were so different from those of previous writers that a great modern economist[ ] in treating of this subject ventures the opinion, though doubtfully, that the reason why clement, alone among the great early theologians, was never canonized by the church was that he ran counter to popular belief on this subject. this opinion is probably erroneous. clement's theological opinions have a semi-gnostic tinge quite sufficient to explain the absence of his name from the calendar of saints. clement justifies the institution of private property. he justifies, on the highest ethical and philosophical principles, the possession by christians of even the most enormous wealth. his apologetic is not an original one. he borrows it bodily from plato. indeed he quotes plato verbatim, invocation to pan and the other heathen gods included.[ ] the originality lies in applying this platonic doctrine to the exposition of christian scripture. clement's method is strictly that of biblical exegesis. in the well known sermon or essay on: "who is the rich man that shall be saved" he takes up practically all of the scriptural passages which seem opposed to the institutions of private property and explains them in so modern a spirit that the whole sermon might be delivered today in any ordinary church and would be readily accepted as sound and reliable doctrine. his thesis is that wealth or poverty are matters in themselves indifferent. that riches are not to be bodily gotten rid of, but are to be wisely conserved and treated as a stewardship intrusted to the owner by god. that charity to the poor should be in proportion to one's wealth and that a right use of wealth will secure salvation to the upright christian even though he possesses great riches all his life and leaves them to his heirs. the wealth that is dangerous to the soul is not physical possessions, but spiritual qualities of greed and avarice. his views can be best expressed by himself. we give two characteristic passages from the sermon above referred to.[ ] "rich men that shall with difficulty enter into the kingdom, is to be apprehended in a scholarly way, not awkwardly, or rustically, or carnally. for if the expression is used thus, salvation does not depend upon external things, whether they be many or few, small or great, or illustrious or obscure or esteemed or disesteemed; but on the virtue of the soul, on faith and hope and love and brotherliness, and knowledge, and meekness and humility and truth the reward of which is salvation." "sell thy possessions. what is this? he does not, as some off hand conceive, bid him throw away the substance he possesses and abandon his property; but he bids him banish from his soul his notions about wealth, his excitement and morbid feeling about it, the anxieties, which are the thorns of existence which choke the seed of life. and what peculiar thing is it that the new creature, the son of god intimates and teaches? it is not the outward act which others have done, but something else indicated by it, greater, more godlike, more perfect, the stripping off of the passions from the soul itself and from the disposition, and the cutting up by the roots and casting out of what is alien to the mind." "one, after ridding himself of the burden of wealth, may none the less have still the lust and desire for money innate and living; and may have abandoned the use of it, but being at once destitute of and desiring what he spent may doubly grieve both on account of the absence of attendance and the presence of regret."[ ] we have now come to the beginning of what is in many respects the most interesting period in the history of property concepts. it is a period in which everything is upside down and wrong end to. in that strange age we find a famous archbishop, one of the world's noblest orators, a man of the most spotless integrity and the most saintly life, publicly preaching in the foremost pulpit of christendom doctrines of property, the implications of which, the most hardened criminal would scarcely venture to breathe to a gang of thieves.[ ] we find the most learned scholar of the century, in the weightiest expositions of christian scripture, penning the most powerful apologetic of anarchy that is to be found in the literature of the world.[ ] we find one of the greatest of the popes, a man whose genius as a statesman will go down to the latest ages of history, setting forth in a manual for the instruction of christian bishops, property concepts more radical than those of the fiercest jacobins in the bloodiest period of the terror.[ ] stranger still, these incredible performances are the strongest proofs of the wisdom and piety of the men responsible for them. these men are today honored as the saviors of civilized religion and their images in bronze and marble and painted glass adorn the proudest temples of the most conservative denominations of christians. the strange history of these famous men: athanasius, the two gregories, basil and chrysostom in the east; augustine, ambrose, jerome and gregory in the west, lies outside the limits of our study. but the explanation of their desperate and uncompromising communism can be given in a word. it was the communism of crisis: the communism of shipwrecked sailors forced to trust their lives to a frail lifeboat with an insufficient supply of provisions. these great christian scholars, enriched by all the accumulated culture of their civilization, saw that culture falling into ruin all around them; they felt the foundations of that civilization trembling beneath their feet. to vary the figure, they beheld the rising tide of ignorance and barbarism rapidly engulfing the world and with desperate haste they set to work rebuilding and strengthening the ark of the church that in it, religion, and so much of civilization as possible, might be saved till the flood subsided. their task, perhaps the most important and most urgent, that men have ever had to perform, was of such a nature that they cared not what they wrecked in order to accomplish it. they ripped up the floor of the bridal chamber for timber and took the doors of the bank-safe for iron. these rhetorical figures are violent; but they are less violent than the reality they are intended to express. monasticism was the last desperate hope of civilized christianity and these men knew it. to establish monasticism they degraded the sanctity of marriage and denounced the sacredness of property. they conferred the most sacred honors upon the lowliest drudgery;[ ] they turned princes into plowmen and nobles into breakers of the soil. some historians, judging them by the different standards of a later age, have pronounced them fanatics led astray by vulgar superstition. but judged by the needs of their own age, judged by the inestimable services rendered to the world by the monastic system they instituted, they are entitled to a place far up in the list of the wisest and the ablest of the human kind. sketchy and imperfect as the above study necessarily is, it nevertheless gives the primary facts which are essential to an understanding of the important part played by property concepts and property institutions in the transformation of early christianity from a predominantly eschatological to a practically socialized movement. we have seen,[ ] that the earliest generations of christians took over from contemporary judaism a strongly chiliastic eschatology. the logical consequence of such an eschatology is an indifference to, or undervaluation of, the existing social arrangements including the property concepts and institutions. one form easily taken by this indifference and undervaluation is that of practical communism. we accordingly find in the acts and in such early writings as the didache and the epistle of barnabas a distinctly communistic theory and the traces of more or less effort to put this theory into some degree of practical effect. chiliasm and communism in these writers go together naturally. pari passu with this logical, communistic chiliasm we can trace the development of an illogical, individualistic chiliasm in st. paul, clement of rome and hermas. it is already manifest even at this early stage, that the weight of influence and power of control in the christian societies is on the side of the individualists. this is due to two causes. in the first place the communists among the christians worked under a great handicap. the underlying economic institutions of society can indeed be changed. but they can be changed--on any considerable scale--only very slowly and by enormous effort. at any attempt to change them a thousand interested and determined antagonists at once arise. it is not too much to say that had all christians insisted upon communism as an essential element of the christian faith and practice, christianity in the roman world could never have developed into anything more than an unimportant sect. the very fact that christianity spread as rapidly as it did in the first century of its existence is proof that the communists in the church made very little headway. it was hard enough to combat pagan religion and philosophy. had the property institutions been attacked also, the primary religious objects would have been lost sight of in the conflict. in the second place the more practical minded christian leaders would be antagonistic to a doctrine and practice which alienated many persons who might otherwise be won to the church, and practically minded persons outside the church regarded the individualists with more favor and were more easily influenced by them to become christians themselves. the early importance attained by the church of rome is to be largely ascribed to the predominance in its councils of such practical persons.[ ] communism had no hold there at all and chiliasm was never allowed to interfere with the practical workings of society. by the time of justin the three concepts; chiliasm, communism, and individualism had arrived at a modus vivendi. according to this arrangement chiliasm and communism held sway as theories while individualism ruled in the world of fact. this agreement proved very satisfactory and for more than half a century was the accepted thing. it is seen in full force in tertullian. there is a general tendency, due to the natural effects of use and disuse, for theories which do not correspond to realities to become discredited, even as theories. conversely realities which at first lack theoretical justification tend to accumulate such justification with the lapse of time. it is therefore not surprising to find by the beginning of the third century, a movement to discard theoretical chiliasm and communism and to validate by theoretical apologetic the actually existing individualism. these two processes in the nature of the case are closely connected with one another and it is not by mere chance that they find a common exponent in clement of alexandria. that famous opponent of chiliasm is equally well known as the justifier of an extreme individualism. he greatly facilitated the spread of christian theology by liberating it from the burden of an eschatological theory increasingly hard to reconcile with reality and also by bringing the economic teachings of christianity into conformity with current practice. as noted above, there was one economic doctrine which neither he nor any other early christian teacher ever attempted to reconcile with the facts, and it is undoubtedly true that the doctrine of the sinfulness of interest was alike detrimental to the spread of christianity and to the general well being of society as it then existed. the reasons why this particular reality i.e., interest on money, was so slow in receiving its theoretical justification are numerous. the only ones that need concern us here are that the opposition to be overcome in this case was much more formidable than in the cases of chiliasm and communism and the fact that this inconsistency on the part of the christians did not in reality offer any very serious obstacle to the growth of the church. communism had no great body of biblical authority at its back. there are indeed some texts in its favor but there are plenty of an opposite nature. the doctrine had no great popular prejudice in its favor. in addition it was insuperably difficult of realization in fact. it was otherwise with interest. the theoretical prejudice against interest was almost as great among the jews and pagans as among the christians themselves. the scriptures were unequivocal in their denunciation of it. furthermore the correlative institutions of rent and profit offered so many opportunities to disguise the fact of interest that it was exceedingly easy to retain the theoretical opposition without ceasing the actual practice. although clement's condemnation of interest was probably merely an inherited prejudice it is by no means impossible that he considered that an attempt to justify it would endanger his defense of the more fundamental institution of private property. at any rate his course can be defended as a practical one under the circumstances. whatever may be said of its consistency, the christian custom of condemning the theory and winking at the practice of interest worked well. the inconsistency which seems so glaring to us, was probably very largely unperceived by the ancient pagans--they had exactly the same inconsistency themselves. in regard to chiliasm and property, practically the same attitude prevailed. it worked indeed even more easily. in the west there seems to have been a considerable chiliastic tradition. so long as this tradition did not result in any practices which interfered with the actual progress of the church, the fathers were content to let it alone. it did not, till at least the third century, hinder the acceptance of christian doctrine by the pagans and may even have aided the process among some of the lower classes. its long survival can be taken as sure proof that it did not effect either the development of the hierarchy or the institution of property. as regards property of man in man, the superior power of the christian religion to keep slaves in subjection accounts in no small measure for its relatively rapid rise to power in the ancient world. the pagan religion was inferior in usefulness to the christian religion because it could not keep the slave contented with his position. the next world in the pagan theology was only a worse copy of this world. christianity, in glaring contrast to paganism, proclaimed that the despised and afflicted were to sit on golden thrones in the next life. the more they were exploited in this life, the brighter their crown in the next one. the pagan slave was dangerous. the whole pre-christian literature of classical antiquity shows the ever present fear of a servile outbreak. there were good grounds for that fear. outbreaks were frequent and of a most ferocious character. on more than one occasion they threatened the very existence of the ancient civilization. christianity was able to make the slave contented to be a slave. it was economically an enormous advance over paganism. a master whose slaves were christians was not afraid of being murdered by them. not only was the master's life secure, his property was secure also. the pagan slaves were notorious thieves. the christian slave did not rob his master. these facts gave christianity an enormous leverage in its efforts to force its way into social recognition. it went far toward securing a favorable disposition toward the new religion on the part of the influential, wealthy, and conservative elements in the population. into the general economic changes which began to operate toward the end of our period it is not our purpose to enter, but it is worth notice that the efforts made by the church to save itself in the general ruin which overtook the ancient world, chiefly the institution of monasticism, were such as to secure more firmly than ever the hold of the church upon society. the church rapidly became an economic factor of the first importance. the only secure basis of lasting social influence is economic. christianity by teaching the virtues of honesty, frugality, simplicity, and charity laid the foundations of her subsequent triumph, and when she had great societies of men and women working hard and living plainly and adding all their accumulations to institutions belonging to the church and directly under the supervision and control of the ecclesiastical authority, the church paved the way for her subsequent domination of the civil government. monastic communism, being economically superior to chiliastic communism, inevitably superseded it. footnotes: [ ] cf. plato, laws, v, . aristotle, politics, :x, xi. cicero, de officus, ii, xxv. seneca, de beneficus, vii, x. [ ] acts iv. [ ] i. cor. vii . [ ] rom. xiii . [ ] jas. chap. v. [ ] chaps. - . [ ] chap. xxxviii. [ ] did. iv. . [ ] barn. xiv. . [ ] schaff, vol. . [ ] past. v. vi. . [ ] past. s. ix. xxx. . [ ] past iii. . [ ] apol. i. iv. [ ] apol. i. xiv. [ ] de mort. per. xiv. [ ] apol. xxxix. [ ] eus., e. h., v. . [ ] de lapsis, vi. [ ] see pronouncement of the sacred penitentiary, feb., . [ ] sir james macintosh. [ ] civil disabilities of the jews. [ ] lourie, monuments of the early church, chap. ii. [ ] lourie, _ibid._ [ ] cf. hypolytus. [ ] a. loria. cf. economic basis of society. (int.) [ ] cf. a. loria, economic foundations of society. (int.) [ ] circa (?). [ ] cf. k. marx, das kapital, vol. . [ ] f. nitti in catholic socialism. [ ] phaedus, the laws, in strom. ii, . [ ] chap. xiv. [ ] chap. xxxi. [ ] chrysostom, sermons rich man and lazarus, etc. [ ] jerome, commentaries. [ ] gregory, pastoralis cura. [ ] laborare est orare. [ ] chap. i. [ ] e.g., clement and hermas. chapter iii the early church and the populace the transformation of early christianity from an eschatological to a socialized movement was the result of the interaction of three social groups--three 'publics'--the jewish, the pagan, and the christian. it was a single movement, working itself out through these three 'crowds'. christianity, like all other great religions, was in its first beginnings essentially a mob phenomenon--that is to say it was a very slow movement which had a long history back of it. perhaps no current opinion is more unfounded than the notion that mob movements are sudden and unpredictable. they are almost incredibly slow of development. the range of action found in the mob is more narrowly and rigidly circumscribed than in almost any other social group. a crowd is open to suggestions that are in line with its previous experience, and to no others. the initial success of christ with the jewish crowds was only possible because for generations the whole jewish public had been looking forward to a messiah and a messianic kingdom. in so far as christ appeared to fulfill this preconceived expectation he gained popular support. when he disappointed it, he lost his popularity and his life. the early and enormous success of the apostles on the day of pentecost and immediately afterwards was due primarily to the fact that the chiliastic expectation preached to the jerusalem crowds was very closely in line with their inherited beliefs. as soon as christianity began to develop doctrines and practices even slightly at variance with those traditional to judaism it lost the support of the jewish public. beginning as a strictly jewish sect, it alienated practically the whole jewish race within little more than a generation. this alienation was the inevitable effect of an idea of universalism opposed to the hereditary jewish nationalism. this idea of universalism was not a new thing. it was to be found in the ancient jewish scriptures. but it had never become popularized. it formed no part of the content of contemporary public opinion among the jews. christianity met with success in the great cosmopolitan centers, like antioch and alexandria, where universalism was a tradition and had become a part of the crowd sentiment. it succeeded best of all in rome where universalism reached its highest development. yet even here a limitation is to be noted. christianity was universal in its willingness to receive people of all races and nations. it was not universal in its willingness to acknowledge the validity of other religions. this variation from the traditional greek and roman universalism had momentous results. it made the propagation of the christian gospel much more difficult and involved the church, at least temporarily, in the current syncretism which was a popular movement. so e.g., we find justin calling socrates a christian and asserting that the stories of noah and deucalion are merely versions of the same event. the main characteristics of crowd psychology are familiar enough. crowds do not reason. they accept or reject ideas as a whole. they are governed by phrases, symbols, and shibboleths. they tolerate neither discussion nor contradiction. the suggestions brought to bear on them invade the whole of their understanding and tend to transform themselves into acts. crowds entertain only violent and extreme sentiments and they unconsciously accord a mysterious power to the formula or leader that for the moment arouses their enthusiasm. any movement in order to become popular, in order to 'get over' to the general public, has to operate within the limits set by this psychology. the amount of change, adaptation, and development necessary before a movement can fit into these limitations and express itself powerfully within them is so considerable that no historical example can probably be found where the required accommodation has been accomplished in less than three generations. it is the purpose of this chapter to trace, so far as the surviving source material permits, the steps of this accommodation in the case of early christianity. for some time before christ the jewish people had been restless. their desires and aspirations for national and religious greatness had been repressed and inhibited. the unrest thus generated took various forms; patriotic uprisings, religious revivals, etc. christ was at first considered merely as another theudas or judas of galilee or john the baptist. in the pagan world the pax romana produced a somewhat similar restlessness. travel increased; wandering, much of it aimless, characterized whole classes of people;[ ] there was a marked increase in crime, vice, insanity, and suicide which alarmed all the moralists. this condition of affairs was eminently suitable for the first beginnings of a crowd movement; indeed no great crowd movement can begin except under such circumstances. the wanderings of st. paul and the other christians apostles--called missionary journeys--were really only particular cases of a general condition. the same organic demand for new stimulation, the same sense of shattered religious and philosophic ideals prevailed in the pagan as in the jewish world. it would be hard to find a greater contrast of character than christ and lucian. yet the fiery earnestness with which christ denounces contemporary jewish religiosity and the cool cynicism with which lucian mocks at the pagan piety of the same age have a like cause. economic pressure on the lower strata of society contributed to the unrest. the slave, the small shopkeeper, and the free artisan had a hard time of it in the roman world. economically oppressed classes are material ready to the hand of the agitator, religious or other. in the crowd movements recorded in the acts we can trace the first beginnings of the christian populace.[ ] "in iconium a great multitude both of jews and of greeks believed but the jews that were disobedient stirred up the souls of the gentiles and made them evil affected against the brethren. but the multitude of the city was divided and part held with the jews and part with the apostles." at lytra there was a typical case of mob action where the apostles were first worshipped and then stoned. in the cases of the mobs at philippi and ephesus we see the economic motive, the threatened loss of livelihood, entering along with anger at an attack on the received religion. in the case of the jerusalem and athenian crowds we see acceptance, or at least acquiescence, on the part of the crowd up to the point where christianity breaks with their tradition. in general we see anger on the part of the crowds only after agitation deliberately stirred up by interested parties; priests, sorcerers, craftsmen or the like. generally speaking the antipathy is no part of the crowd psychology, and on occasion the crowd may be on the side of the missionaries of the new religion. in general also the christians were not sufficiently numerous to make a counter crowd demonstration of their own. in pliny's letter to trojan, although it is a generation later than the acts and refers to a region where christianity had been preached for a considerable period of time, we find a marked instability in the attitude of the public: "many of every age, every rank and even of both sexes are brought into danger and will be in the future. the contagion of that superstition has penetrated not only the cities but also the villages and country places and yet it seems possible to stop it and set it right. at any rate it is certain enough that the temples deserted until quite recently begin to be frequented, that the ceremonies of religion, long disused, are restored and that fodder for the victims comes to market, whereas buyers for it were until now very few. from this it may easily be supposed that a multitude of men can be reclaimed if there be a place of repentence."[ ] there seems no reasonable ground for doubting that pliny's judgment was correct. while the blood of the martyrs is doubtless the seed of the church, a continuous, general, and relentless persecution can extirpate a religion in a given nation; as the history of the inquisition abundantly proves. still more easily can propaganda for the older religion win back its former adherents of the first and second generations. it is not, in general, till a generation has grown up entirely inside a new religion that such a religion is well established. the generation which at maturity makes the rupture with the older faith can be brought back to it by less expenditure of energy than was expended by them in breaking away in the first place. the success of the jesuits e.g., is quite inexplicable on any other hypothesis. the generation who are children at the time their parents make the break with the old religion are notoriously undependable in the religious matters. it was in all probability these people that pliny had to deal with. it is at least permissable to hazard the guess that the laodiceans who aroused the wrath of the author of the revelation were of this generation. it is certain that many of the 'lapsi' who caused so much trouble to christian apologists and church councils belonged in this chronological class. in justin martyr we have a hint of a further development in the crowd attitude toward the christians. justin says: "when you (jews) knew that he had risen from the dead and ascended to heaven as the prophets foretold he would, you not only did not repent of the wickedness you had committed, but at that time you selected and sent out from jerusalem chosen men through all the land to tell that the godless heresy of the christians had sprung up and to publish those things which all they, who knew us not, speak against us. so that you are the cause not only of your own unrighteousness but that of all other men."[ ] irrespective of the exact historical accuracy of this statement, it is indicative of the process, technically known as 'circular interaction,' which is so essential a step in the development of popular opinion and the building up of crowd sentiment. before any group of people can become either popular or unpopular there must be a focusing and fixation of public attention upon them. even in the new testament we find the jews sending emissaries from city to city to call attention to the christian propaganda. prejudice against the christians was thus aroused in persons who had never either seen or heard them. the basis of 'circular interaction' is unconscious or subconscious emotional reaction. a's frown brings a frown to the face of b. b's frown in turn intensifies a's. this simple process is the source of all expressions of crowd emotion. by multiplication of numbers and increase in the stimuli employed it is capable of provoking a vicious circle of feeling which eventually causes individuals in a crowd to do things and feel things which no individual in the crowd would do or feel when outside the circle. it is to the credit or discredit of the jews that they first set this 'vicious circle' in operation against the christians. of course the same psychological principle operated to produce zeal and enthusiasm and contempt of pain and death in the christian 'crowd'. by this process of 'circular interaction' the name, 'christian,' had already in the time of justin become a mob shibboleth. it seems to have operated precisely as the shibboleth 'traitor' operates on a patriotic crowd in war time, or 'scab' on a labor group. it became a shibboleth of exactly opposite significance in the christian 'crowd'. the way was thus prepared for the next step in the process of developing the ultimate crisis. this step--the disparate 'universe of discourse'--is exhibited in process of formation in the account of the martyrdom of polycarp. the account, as we have it, undoubtedly contains later additions, but these additions even of miraculous elements, do not necessarily invalidate those portions of the story with which we are alone concerned. the martyrologist certainly had no intention of writing his story for the purpose of illustrating the principles of group psychology and the undesigned and incidental statements of crowd reactions are precisely the ones of value for our purpose. a few brief excerpts are sufficient to illustrate the stage reached in the growth of the disparate 'universe of discourse.' "the whole multitude, marvelling at the nobility of mind displayed by the devout and godly race of christians cried out: "away with the atheists: let polycarp be sought out."[ ] he went eagerly forward with all haste and was conducted to the stadium where the tumult was so great that there was no possibility of being heard."[ ] "polycarp has confessed that he is christian. this proclamation having been made by the herald, the whole multitude both of the heathen and jews who dwelt in smyrna cried out with uncontrollable fury and in a loud voice: "this is the teacher of asia, the father of the christians and the overthrower of our gods, he who has been teaching many not to sacrifice or to worship the gods." speaking thus they cried out and besought phillip, the asiarch, to let loose a lion upon polycarp. but philip answered that it was not lawful for him to do so seeing the shows of beasts were already finished. then it seemed good to them to cry out with one voice that polycarp should be burned alive."[ ] "this then was carried into effect with greater speed than it was spoken, the multitude immediately gathering together wood and fagots out of the shops and baths, the jews especially, according to custom eagerly assisting them in it."[ ] "we afterwards took up his bones, as being more precious than the most exquisite jewels and more purified than gold and deposited them in a fitting place, whither, being gathered together as opportunity is allowed us, with joy and rejoicing the lord shall grant us to celebrate the anniversary of his martyrdom both in memory of those who have already finished their course and for the exercising and preparation of those yet to walk in their steps."[ ] in the disparate universe of discourse in its complete form common shibboleths produce entirely different mental reactions--usually antagonistic ones. there is also complete accord as to the shibboleths. the cry here is at one time against the atheists, then against the christians. but the christians could and did deny the charge of atheism. they were as antagonistic to atheism as the pagans. an incomplete development of crowd feeling is evident on the part of the pagans. the jews are still the inciters and leading spirits of the mob. the very statement that the jews acted 'according to custom' shows that mobbing christians was still looked upon as a peculiarly jewish trait. it was not yet entirely spontaneous on the part of the pagan public. most noticeable of all is the indifference of the mob toward the christians' adoration of relics of the martyrs. no effort was made to prevent the christians from obtaining the bones of polycarp. either the cult of relics was not known to the pagans and jews--though it seems to be firmly established among the christians--or else, the effect of the cult in perpetuating christianity had not yet had time to make itself manifest to the pagan public--or to the jewish. in any case we have here the plain evidence of the imperfectly developed condition of the crowd mind, owing perhaps to a too short tradition. our next evidence is the martyrdoms of lyons and vienne preserved in a letter quoted by eusebius. "they (the christians) endured nobly the injuries inflicted upon them by the populace, clamor and blows and draggings and robberies and stonings and imprisonments and all things which an infuriated mob delight in inflicting on enemies and adversaries."[ ] "when these accusations were reported all the people raged like wild beasts against us, so that even if any had before been moderate on account of friendship, they were now exceedingly furious and gnashed their teeth against us. "when he (bishop pothinus) was brought to the tribunal accompanied by a multitude who shouted against him in every manner as if he were christ himself, he bore noble witness. then he was dragged away harshly and received blows of every kind. those men near him struck him with their hands and feet, regardless of his age, and those at a distance hurled at him whatever they could seize, all of them thinking that they would be guilty of great wickedness and impiety if any possible abuse were omitted. for thus they thought to avenge their own deities."[ ] "but not even thus was their madness and cruelty toward the saints satisfied. wild and barbarous tribes were not easily appeased and their violence found another peculiar opportunity in the dead bodies. for they cast to the dogs those who had died of suffocation in the prison and they exposed the remains left by the wild beasts and by fire mangled and charred. and some gnashed their teeth against them, but others mocked at them. the bodies of the martyrs having thus in every manner been exposed for six days were afterwards burned and reduced to ashes and swept into the rhone so that no trace of them might appear on the earth. and this they did as if able to conquer god and prevent their new birth; 'that', as they said, 'they may have no hope of a resurrection through trust in which they bring to us this foreign and new religion.' "[ ] we have in this account a marked advance, as regards the development of the mob mind, over what is found in the martyrdom of polycarp. many of the 'crowd' phenomena are indeed the same but the differences are even more striking than the similarities. we find in lyons no body of jews or other especially interested persons leading the mob on by manifestations of peculiar zeal and forwardness. when the accounts are compared in their entirety it becomes at once manifest that there is a consistency of attitude, a whole heartedness in the actions of the lyons mob that is lacking in the case of the syrmnaens. there is a degree of familiarity with christian doctrine--especially the doctrine of the resurrection--which denotes a much more thorough permeation of the public mind by christianity. there may be no difference in the hatred of the two mobs for the new faith, but it had more content in the mind of the gallic crowd. the degree of thought and pains taken by the lyonese persecutors--the guards placed to prevent the christians from stealing the relics of the martyrs, the elaborate efforts to nullify the possibility of a resurrection--the very extent and thoroughness and duration of the persecution are different from anything to be found in the other martyrdom. the difficulty to be explained--if it is a difficulty--from the point of view of crowd psychology is that there is difference of only eleven years--taking the ordinary chronology--between the two persecutions. it is true that the lyons persecution is the later, but the difference in the mob behavior is such as might well demand the lapse of a generation had the phenomena been exhibited by the public of the same city. there must unquestionably have been a great difference in the demotic composition of the populations of lyons and smyrna; the reference to barbarians in lyons shows as much, but the behavior of mobs as controlled by the time needed for the focusing and fixation of attention and the development of a disparate universe of discourse is very little effected by difference of demotic composition. it has indeed been suggested by one critic,[ ] that the persecution at lyons belongs in the reign of septimus severus instead of that of marcus aurelius. this would explain away the difficulty, but there seems no necessary reason for adopting this opinion. it would rather appear that there existed peculiar conditions in lyons and vicinity which account for the fact that the persecution, so far as we know, was confined to that locality and also for the fact that the mob mind was in a maturer state of antagonism to christianity. just what these peculiar conditions were, it is impossible to say with entire certainty. however there is at least a very suggestive hint in a paragraph by the greatest modern authority on roman gaul[ ] contained in his well known volume on ancient france.[ ] the paragraph is also worth quoting as giving a valuable insight into the psychology of the peoples of the ancient roman world. "the roman empire was in no wise maintained by force but by the religious admiration it inspired. it would be without a parallel in the history of the world that a form of government held in popular detestation should have lasted for five centuries. it would be inexplicable that the thirty legions of the empire should have constrained a hundred million men to obedience. the reason of their obedience was that the emperor, who personified the greatness of rome was worshipped like a divinity by unanimous consent. there were altars in honor of the emperor in the smallest townships of his realm. from one end of the empire to the other a new religion was seen to arise in those days which had for its divinities the emperors themselves. some years before the christian era the whole of gaul, represented by sixty cities, built in common a temple near the city of lyons in honor of augustus. its priests, elected by the united gallic cities, were the principal personages in their country. it is impossible to attribute all this to fear and servility. whole nations are not servile and especially for three centuries. it was not the courtiers who worshipped the prince, it was rome, and it was not rome merely but it was gaul, it was spain. it was greece and asia." while no dogmatic assertion is justified, it does not, perhaps, exceed the limits of reasonable inference to suppose that the existence of this noted center of emperor worship in the immediate neighborhood of lyons may account, in part at least, for the especial hatred of the populace of that city for persons who refused to sacrifice to the emperor and also for the maturity of their feeling against the christians, who were as far as we are aware, probably the only persons who refused thus to sacrifice. this stray bit of evidence is admittedly not conclusive. it is offered merely for what it may be worth. there is evidence that by the middle of the second century popular opinion was sufficiently inflamed against the christians to render the administration of justice precarious because of mob violence. edicts of hadrian and antonius pious specifically declared that the clamor of the multitude should not be received as legal evidence to convict or to punish them, as such tumultuous accusations were repugnant both to the firmness and the equity of the law.[ ] this attitude seems to have persisted with relatively little change for about a century. during this period the official 'persecutions' were neither numerous nor severe. from the very few scattered and incidental references which have alone survived regarding the mob feeling of the time, we can assert no more than that it was an exasperated one, likely to break out upon provocation but under ordinary circumstances more or less in abeyance. on the whole it was undoubtedly more violent at the end of the period than at the beginning. fortunately from the middle of the third century onwards we have a fairly continuous history of a single 'public' (alexandria) which is lacking before this time. the alexandrian populace were noted for their tumultuous disposition, but we have no reliable account of their behavior towards the christians until the time of severus, a.d. in the account given by eusebius of the martyrdom of the beautiful virgin, potamiaena, it is stated that: "the people attempted to annoy and insult her with abusive words." as however the intervention of a single officer sufficed to protect her from the people on this occasion, the public sentiment cannot have been inflamed to any alarming extent. if we may trust palladius, her martyrdom was the result of a plot of a would-be ravisher and in any case it was not the product of any spontaneous popular movement. in the period between a.d. and a.d. a well developed tradition of hatred and violence grew up in the popular mind. we have no record of the steps in the process but the extant accounts of the decian and valerian persecutions in alexandria leave no doubt of the fact. these persecutions can only be called 'legal' by a violent stretch of verbal usage. they were mob lynchings, sometimes sanctioned by the forms of law, but quite as often without even the barest pretense of judicial execution. they were quite as frequent and as savage in the later part of the reign of philip, as in the time of decius. they were not called forth by any imperial edict--they preceded the edict by at least a year and were of a character such as no merely governmental, legal process would ever, or could ever, take on. mobbing christians had become a form of popular sport, a generally shared sort of public amusement--exciting and not dangerous. the letter of bishop dionysius makes this very clear. to quote: "the persecution among us did not begin with the royal decree but preceded it an entire year. the prophet and author of evils to this city moved and aroused against us the masses of the heathen rekindling among them the superstition of their country and finding full opportunity for any wickedness. they considered this the only pious service of their demons that they should slay us." then follows a long list of mob lynchings of which we take a single specimen: "they seized serapion in his own house and tortured him and having broken all his limbs, they threw him headlong from an upper story."[ ] "and there was no street, nor public read, nor lane open to us night or day but always and everywhere all them cried out that if anyone would not repeat their impious words, he should be immediately dragged away and burned. and matters continued thus for a considerable time. but a sedition and civil war came upon the wretched people and turned their cruelty toward us against one another. so we breathed for a while as they ceased from their rage against us."[ ] the mob broke loose against the christians again the following year, but there is no object in cataloguing the grewsome exhibitions of crowd brutality. it is evident that what we have in this account is no exhibition of political oppression by a tyrannical government, but a genuine outbreak of group animosity which had been long incubating in the popular mind. all the phenomena which are characteristic of fully matured public feeling are found complete; circular interaction, shibboleths, sect isolation devices and the rest. when public feeling has developed to such a degree of intensity as this, the accumulated sentiment and social unrest must of necessity discharge themselves in some form of direct group action. this direct action however may take the from either of physical violence or, under certain conditions, of some sort of mystical experience; conversion, dancing, rolling on the ground, etc. in exceptional cases the two forms are combined. an illustration of this latter phenomenon is given by bishop dionysius in this same letter; "in cephus, a large assembly gathered with us and god opened for us a door for the word. at first we were persecuted and stoned but afterward not a few of the heathen forsook their idols and turned to god."[ ] it is necessary to mention perhaps the largest, and certainly the most dignified and respectable crowd that is to be met with in connection with this persecution--that of carthage on the occasion of the martyrdom of bishop cyprian. we find here neither rage on one side nor unseemly exaltation on the other. pagans and christians alike behaved with decent seriousness at the death of that famous man who was equally respected by all classes of the population. but martyrs of the social eminence of cyprian were very rare, and orderly behaviour in such a vast multitude as witnessed his end was still rarer. to return to the populace of alexandria. the long peace of the church which intervened between the persecution of valerian and that of diocletian witnessed in alexandria, as elsewhere, a great growth of christianity in numbers, influence, and wealth. it would perhaps be going beyond the evidence to say that in this interval, the majority of the population of the city were won over to the new faith, but it is certain that the number of christians became so great as to intimidate the pagan portion of the people. the alexandrian mob was still very much in evidence but it gradually ceased to harrass the christians except under the most exceptional circumstances. the dangers of such action became so considerable and the chances of success so problematical that we find a period when a practice of mutual forbearance governed the behavior of the hostile groups. the study of crowd psychology presents no more impressive contrast than that exhibited by the people of alexandria during the diocletian persecution compared with their behavior during that of decius. in the last and greatest of the persecutions, in the most tumultuous city of the empire, the mob took no part. like the famous image of brutus, it is more conspicuous by its absence than it would be by its presence. the persecution was a purely governmental measure officially carried out by judges and executioners in accordance with orders. in one obscure and doubtful instance we are told that the bystanders beat certain martyrs when legal permission was given to the people to treat them so. in another case we are told that the cruelty of the punishments filled the spectators with fear. these are the only references to the public that occur in the long and minute account of an eye witness of famous events extending over a considerable number of years. both before and after this period the mob of the egyptian metropolis exhibits the utmost extreme of religious fanaticism. during this period that mob had to be most carefully considered by the government in other than religious matters. but as a religious power it did not exist. had the persecution of diocletian happened a generation earlier it could have counted on a very considerable degree of popular support, had it happened a generation later it would have caused a revolt that could only have been put down by a large army. happening at the precise time it did, it provoked no popular reaction at all. this strange apathy is not peculiar to alexandria. practically without exception the authentic acts of the martyrs of this persecution are court records taken down by the official stenographers in the ordinary course of the day's work. they are dry, mechanical, and repetitious to a degree. they exhibit, in general, harrassed and exasperated judges driven to the infliction of extreme penalties in the face of a cold and skeptical public. one imperial decree ordered that all men, women, and children, even infants at the breast, should sacrifice and offer oblations, that guards should be placed in the markets and at the baths in order to enforce sacrifices there. the popular reaction in caesarea is thus recorded: "the heathen blamed the severity and exceeding absurdity of what was done for these things appeared to them extreme and burdensome."[ ] "he (the judge) ordered the dead to be exposed in the open air as food for wild beasts; and beasts and birds of prey scattered the human limbs here and there, so that nothing appeared more horrible even to those who formerly hated us, though they bewailed not so much the calamity of those against whom these things were done as the outrage against themselves and the common nature of man."[ ] the one thing to be said of this type of mob mind is manifestly that it is transitional. the pendulum has swung through exactly half its arc and for the brief instant presents the fallacious appearance of quiescence. how transitory this quiet was on the part of the alexandrian mob is evidenced by the history of athanasius. that great statesman conciliated and consolidated public opinion in egypt. backed by this opinion he practically cancelled the power of the civil authorities of the country and negotiated as an equal with the emperors. for the first time in more than three centuries the will of the common people again became a power able to limit the military despotism which dominated the civilized world. the re-birth of popular government in the fourth century through the agency of christian mobs is the most important preliminary step in the growth of the political power of the catholic church. a study of the mobs of alexandria, rome, constantinople and other great cities shows beyond question that the political power of the church had its origin in no alliance with imperial authority, but was independent of and generally antagonistic to that authority. the history of these christian mobs lies outside the limits of our study but it is worth while in the case of the alexandrian populace to give two or three brief extracts illustrating the final steps of the process which changed a fanatically pagan mob into an equally fanatical christian one. what we have to consider is only the last stage of an evolution already more than half complete at the time of the nicene council. under extreme provocation and certain of imperial complacency at their excesses, the pagan mob during the reign of julian indulged in one last outburst against the exceedingly unpopular george of cappadocia who had been forcibly intruded into the seat of athanasius. to quote the historian socrates: "the christians on discovering these abominations went forth eagerly to expose them to the view and execration of all and therefore carried the skulls throughout the city in a kind of triumphal procession for the inspection of the people. when the pagans of alexandria beheld this, unable to bear the insulting character of the act, they became so exasperated that they assailed the christians with whatever weapons chanced to come to hand, in their fury destroying numbers of them in a variety of ways and, as it generally happens in such a case, neither friends or relations were spared but friends, brothers, parents, and children imbued their hands in each others blood. the pagans having dragged george out of the church, fastened him to a camel and when they had torn him to pieces they burned him together with the camel."[ ] in this account we see the last expiring efforts of the pagan mob movement. any mob movement collapses rapidly when it turns in upon itself, and the evil results of its violence react immediately upon the members of the mob. by this time it is evident that the number of christians in alexandria was so large that any public persecution of them brought serious and unendurable consequences upon the populace generally. then the movement ended. but in the two centuries or more that the pagan movement lasted, a contrary christian mob movement had been developing along the same general lines as the other. this movement, being later in its inception, came to a head correspondingly later and reached its crisis under the patriarch cyril. its violence was first directed against the jews whom the christians appear to have hated even more than they hated the pagans. the jews were the weaker and less numerous faction opposed to the christians and as the pagans seem to have liked them too little to support them against the christians, it is not surprising that the christian mob, which had pretty well reduced the political authorities to impotence, should vent its rage against the jews and their synagogues. "cyril accompanied by an immense crowd of people, going to their synagogues, took them away from them and drove the jews out of the city, permitting the multitude to plunder their goods. thus the jews who had inhabited the city from the time of alexander were expelled from it."[ ] sometime after the expulsion of the jews, the christian mob, now directing its spite against the rapidly disappearing paganism, perpetrated perhaps the most atrocious crime that stains the history of alexandria--the murder of hypatia. this beautiful, learned, and virtuous woman, 'the fairest flower of paganism' is one of the very few members of her sex who has attained high eminence in the realm philosophical speculation. she enjoyed the deserved esteem of all the intellectual leaders of her age--christian as well as pagan--and to the latest ages her name will be mentioned with respect by all those speculative thinkers whose respect can confer honor. socrates describes her murder as follows: "it was calumniously reported among the christian populace that it was she who prevented orestes from being reconciled to the bishop. some of them therefore hurried away by a fierce and bigoted zeal, whose ringleader was a reader named peter, waylaid her returning home and dragged her from her carriage; they took her to the church called ceasareum where they completely stripped her and then murdered her with oyster shells. after tearing her body in pieces, they took her mangled limbs to a place called cinaron and there burned them."[ ] christian crowd sentiment when hardly yet at its full power was deprived of its original object of animosity by the collapse of paganism. being under the psychological necessity of expressing itself, this mob feeling happened to take as shibboleths some current theological catchwords. the subsequent history of alexandria and other great cities presents therefore the strange scene of rival sects disturbing public order and profoundly agitating vast throngs of people in a struggle over the most abstruse and recondite metaphysical concepts. for the sake of clear thinking it is necessary for us to remind ourselves that these concepts are merely weird garments fortuitously snatched up to cover the nakedness of a profound social and economic revolution. the above sketch, imperfect as it is and full of lacunae due to the inadequacy of the primary source material, is yet perhaps complete enough to enable us to summarize the chief steps in the process of the socialization in its aspect of a crowd movement. we have seen that this crowd movement, like all others, had its origin in social unrest due to shattered private and community ideals. the customary forms of expression being inhibited or repressed, the balked disposition experienced an organic demand for new stimulation. this new stimulation was sought in various ways; aimless or practically aimless travelling or local wandering, local disorder and agitation, increase in crime--and insanity. gradually this unrest focused itself and public attention became fixed on christianity. by the process of circular interaction, the so-called 'vicious circle', public sentiment increased in intensity, the name 'christian' became a shibboleth. when applied to an individual it let loose upon him the pent up emotion of the mob--an emotion or unreflective rage and anger. by the further process of idealization or sublimation, using the terms in their technical sense, the populace came to believe that christianity was the great and superhuman (daemoniac) source of all evils; earthquakes, disease epidemics, famine etc. seeking release for psychic tensions which were not understood and largely subconscious, they found it in a reversion to the oldest of the 'releasing instincts' that of hunting. the primary thing about the persecutions is that they were man hunts. the cruelty exhibited, while also serving as a tension release for mob feeling, is psychologically a secondary form of such release--though a very old form. the discharge of the accumulated public sentiment and of the severe social tensions produced group action of two kinds: (a) direct action: tearing the victim in pieces, gathering wood to burn him, striking him with sticks, stones, etc. (b) expressive action, taking the form of shouts, cries and ejaculations which became customary and traditional, 'christianos ad leones.' the very methods of lynching became ceremonial and even ritualistic. the beasts were first choice, then burning and then other forms in descending scale. the narrow range of the mob mind is illustrated by the closeness with which it adhered to contemporary judicial methods of punishment. the most obvious method of killing, and one which had the advantage of enabling a great number of people to see what was going on, the method of hanging, which is in such common use by mobs of our day, does not seem to have been employed by the ancient crowds--at any rate its use was rare in the modern form, strangling. there are some cases of hanging naked women by one foot. expressive action also took the form of wild and fantastic legends of cannibalism, child murder and such like. the crisis of this pagan mob movement came about the middle of the third century. the decian persecution appears to have been 'popular' in the strict etymological sense of that word. the persecution of diolection, though the most severe, seems to have had no great force of pagan public sentiment behind it. that sentiment was not hostile; it was neutral. the populace did nothing to hinder the measures of the government and it did nothing to help them. in another generation the pagan movement had spent itself. this analysis of the pagan mob sentiment against the christians is applicable mutatis nominibus, to the christians' mob movement against the pagans and to the movement of the 'orthodox' christians against the 'heretics.' perhaps we should say here, in defense of human nature, that these mob movements were not due to human depravity; they were, in strict literalness, diseases, epidemics of nervous disorder induced by pathological social conditions. before any persecuting attitude became habitual to the pagan populace pagan common sense had exhausted argument, persuasion, expostulation and every other intellectual device. only after reason and religion (in the pagan sense) had been employed in vain; only after long exasperation at a hopeless situation, when absolutely nothing else could be done, was popular violence aroused. social conditions being what they were, traditional mental attitudes common to pagan and christians alike required that something be done and mob action was the last desperate alternative to the admission of a new intellectual concept. the function of chiliasm in this crowd movement is plain from its history as previously sketched. it was a christian shibboleth peculiarly valuable for securing group cohesion, and for arousing individual staying power in times of persecution. of the numerous characteristics of successful 'sect shibboleths' three are perhaps especially note worthy: (a) satisfaction of the demand for mystical experience. (b) operation as an isolating device. (c) revolt against the prevailing moral order. in the period of greatest need chiliasm fulfilled these requirements very well. many a christian of little education was lifted out of himself to endure martyrdom by somewhat crass imaginations of participation in the reign of the saints in the rebuilt jerusalem. many a little band of sectaries maintained their group solidarity because of the belief that they were the elect people 'chosen of god' for future glory in the millennial kingdom. many a faithful one who would otherwise have given up in despair, must have gained strength and courage from the thought of that happy era, soon to come, when the cruel persecutors of the church would be slaves suffered to live only that their servitude might augment the dignity and honor of the saints in the beatific kingdom. the relation of the chiliastic expectation to that strange insensibility to pain which was so remarkable a characteristic of the early martyrs cannot be stated with exactness. it was probably close--at least in numerous cases. we have what seems to be entirely trustworthy evidence that not only strong men but even delicate and sensitive women exhibited the power of inhibiting the normal reactions to the most excruciating torments. this almost incredible power of inhibition can only be explained as the result of the building up of a pathologically intense, ecstatic, mental state. this ecstatic mental state would appear to have been acquired by a series of psychic changes and organic, neuronic adjustments requiring, ordinarily, a fairly considerable amount of time. this peculiar psychological condition had not merely to be built up. it must have attained an extraordinary degree of habituation in order to render its subjects impervious to such extreme sensory excitations. the requisite degree of imperviousness can hardly have been acquired without such permeation of consciousness by imagination as constituted a complete subjective universe. many of the martyrs would seem to have lived, more or less habitually, in a mental world of their own which shut them off from susceptibility to external stimuli. this condition is frequently found in artists and thinkers, and with the accompanying insensibility to pain, is a common phenomenon in the 'trance' state as well as in some forms of insanity.[ ] it would go beyond the evidence to claim that chiliastic concepts functioned exclusively, or even predominantly, in the production of the 'martyr psychosis,' but the evidence does point to the conclusion that apocalyptic expectations held a more prominent place in the consciousness of the martyrs than in that of the generality of christians. it is certain that chiliasm became especially manifest in times of persecution but chiliasm must have operated even in ordinary times to produce the phenomena which persecution brought into prominence. even today, in the entire absence of persecution, chiliastic excitement among certain groups of secretaries produces types of religious psychosis closely similar to those exhibited by the martyrs.[ ] on the whole the conclusion appears warranted that the increasing power and progressive socialization of the church, which made persecution at first hopeless and at last impossible, rendered chiliasm, as a crowd shibboleth, gradually useless and finally pernicious to the ecclesiastical hierarchy. had further persecutions been possible chiliasm would no doubt have been retained longer, but its usefulness was fatally impaired when the majority of people nominally embraced christianity. it was of little or no value in those struggles with heretical christian sects which engaged the activities of orthodox mobs from the time of constantine onwards. other shibboleths such as 'the church' and 'catholicism' were more effective in this contest. similarly for the larger purpose of ecclesiastical polity, agencies like monasticism and missionary enterprise were employed, which conserved the shibboleth values of chiliasm and were free from its defects as an instrument of hierarchical ambition. the aims of the rulers of the church became increasingly social and political and with such aims chiliasm was fundamentally incompatible. footnotes: [ ] e.g., the pagan philosophers. [ ] acts : - . [ ] pliny, ep. xcvi. [ ] dialogue xviii. [ ] mart. poly. iii. [ ] _ibid._, viii. [ ] _ibid._, xii. [ ] _ibid._, xiii. [ ] _ibid._, xviii. [ ] hist. ecc. vi. [ ] hist. ecc. v, i. [ ] hist. ecc. v, ii. [ ] prof. j. w. thompson. [ ] fustel de coulanges. [ ] hist. des insts. politique de l'ancienne france. par. ii. [ ] eus. h. e. iv, . [ ] eus. his. ecc. vi, . [ ] eus. his. ecc. vi, . [ ] his. ecc. vii, . [ ] eus. mart. pal. ii. [ ] _ibid._, chap. ii. [ ] hist. ecc. iii, . [ ] socrates hist. ecc. iiii, . [ ] hist. ecc. vii, . [ ] cf. e. underhill 'mysticism.' [ ] e.g., the dukhabours. chapter iv chiliasm and patriotism perhaps the most pronounced characteristic of pre-christian, judaistic chiliasm is its nationalistic or ethnic patriotism. of course any attempt to rigidly differentiate the nationalistic and religious concepts of the hebrews of the two centuries preceding the advent of christianity would be foredoomed to failure. never perhaps were patriotism and religion more nearly synonymous than at this period among this people. that their chiliasm has a strongly nationalistic content is therefore natural and inevitable. the same patriotic animus is to be found in a great number of their other religious tenets and practices. the emphasis is perpetually upon the enhancement of the value of the jewish race and nation and the corresponding depreciation of other nations and faiths. but while it is true, that, owing to the inseparable integration of church and state in judea, in the first two centuries before christ, we find a very considerable proportion of the religious beliefs and observances highly charged with nationalistic patriotism; this is perhaps more noticeable in the case of chiliasm than in the case of any other contemporary theological concept. the nature of the millennial belief was such as qualified it to function with especial ease and success in that particular historical situation. for considerably more than half a century before the birth of christ the dominant fact in hebrew history is the increase of the power and influence of the roman state in the political life of the jewish people. this increase was perfectly natural. indeed it was inevitable. that the petty judean state would eventually be absorbed in the world wide republic was a fact patent to any reasonably intelligent student of the situation.[ ] under the circumstances it could hardly fail to take place even without any direct provocation to overt action on the part of either jews or romans. it is not our purpose to follow the long, hopeless struggle of the jews against the inevitable extinction of their political independence. the jew was fighting against fate. from the first interference of rome in the affairs of palestine to the last execution of bar cochba rebels, the end was never in real doubt--humanly speaking. the inevitableness of the catastrophe in this long drawn out tragedy is, in the writer's judgment, in some measurable degree connected both with the nature and subsequent history of jewish chiliasm. later hebrew chiliasm is a very peculiar form of belief. it is characterized by what can only be called a crass and exaggerated anthropomorphic supernaturalism. it would seem as if pari passu with the increasing conviction of the futility of opposition to the power of rome, there was an increasing conviction of a catastrophic supernal manifestation, which manifestation in its details became ever more and more crude and vulgar. the developing knowledge and conviction of the invincible power of rome is sufficient to explain the increasing dependence upon supernatural aid for deliverance--but the peculiar crassness of the supernaturalism is the arresting element in the later jewish chiliastic writings. when every allowance has been made for the natural exuberance of the oriental imagination something still remains to be accounted for. it is at least possible that the, to our taste, repulsive features of supernalistic vengeance and glory are the result of a long process of selection. in no people of whom we have historical knowledge is the spirit of nationalistic patriotism more deeply rooted than in the jew. we may take it that practically all the hebrews of the generations under discussion believed in an eventually triumphant jewish state. differences of education, and religious faith, however, conditioned the opinions as to the time when this triumphant state would appear and still more the method by which it would appear. the better educated jews, who were conversant with the political conditions of the contemporary world and whose belief in supernatural aid was perhaps weakest, appear to have adopted a laissez-faire attitude. they seem to have been advocates of a pro-roman policy; to make the best of the existing roman supremacy waiting for the unpredictable time when rome should follow the path of egypt, assyria, and other world powers who in their several ages had subjugated the children of abraham. this party would perhaps have been willing to take advantage of any condition of affairs which offered a reasonably safe opportunity of successful revolt but under existing conditions they were opposed to armed resistance to the mistress of the world. at the other end of the scale was a party of bigotedly and fanatically zealous patriots obsessed with the idea that immediate supernatural assistance would be forthcoming in the event of armed revolt. between these two parties was another party--if it may be called such--partaking in various degrees of the characteristics of these two extremists parties. the apocaliptic and chiliastic literature of the period was extensive. it would be possible to arrange even such fragments as remain, according to the preponderance of supernal elements. it would seem to be a rational deduction that if we possessed this literature in its completeness we should be able (bearing in mind that we are dealing with a relatively considerable period of time) to follow the whole process of the supersession of more rational chiliastic concepts in favor of the more crudely supernaturalistic ones. rome was at once strongly repressive of movements for political liberty and tolerant of religious liberty. those writings in which chiliastic expectations took the form of advocating the active preparing for and co-operating with the expected messiah would suffer extinction. on the other hand those chiliastic beliefs which inculcated absolute and entire dependence upon supernatural aid for the achievement of national independence would be politically harmless and exuberance in such imaginings might flourish unhindered. the more fantastic and absurd the expectations the less likely they were to be suppressed by the imperial authorities. whatever the measure of truth in the above conjecture it is certain that jewish chiliasm developed to the last extreme of extravagance. with the doubtful exception of some hindu legends, there is nothing, which more exceeds the bounds of reason and common sense, in the literature of the world. it is perhaps not too much to say that jewish chiliasm died of excess development--a method of extinction of which nature makes liberal use. the later history of jewish chiliasm does not concern us. under the constantly repeated blows of disappointment it changed its form and content into the more rational concept of salvation and glorification of the individual human soul after death. what does concern us is that this jewish chiliasm in all but its most extreme form was taken over by christianity. the intellectual background of hebrew patriotism of course persisted in the christians of the first generation who were largely jews or proselytes. the imminent divine kingdom of christ does indeed take the place of the lower concept of a rigidly nationalistic kingdom. the kingdom of christ even to the first generation of christians must have had a larger content than the previous jewish belief which it fulfilled and supplemented. yet the essential thing to remember is that so far at least as the jewish christians were concerned chiliastic expectations, though somewhat further extended, were still a form of expression for the forces of hebrew nationalistic patriotism. the kingdom of the jews had been transformed, or perhaps better, transmogrified, into the kingdom of christ and his saints[ ] but its essential content was unchanged and so long at least as a considerable proportion of christians were converted jews this condition of affairs persisted. the constant criticism of chiliasm by gentile christians is that it is judaizing. it is perhaps not exceeding the limits of permissable hypothesis to suppose that one of the reasons why chiliasm failed to make a permanent place for itself in the belief of the universal church is to be found in this very fact that it was in essence a form of political, jewish, nationalistic patriotism, to which the other portions of the christian world, perhaps unconsciously, but not the less effectively, objected. the success of roman imperialism in denationalizing conquered peoples was truly remarkable. in this most difficult task of practical statesmanship its accomplishments far surpass those of any other empire, ancient or modern. but this success, great and unparalleled as it was, nevertheless was not absolute. except in particular cases it was never really complete. the measure of its accomplishment was very different in different parts of the empire. in italy, gaul, spain, and perhaps britain its success may fairly be considered complete, but these were countries where the proportion of roman settlers and colonists was very large. they were countries, furthermore, which were early conquered--countries, which, at the time of the roman conquest, had not advanced a great distance toward the attainment of national solidarity in politics, religion, art, literature, war or social intercourse. this lack of development of local, national institutions and psychology left the ground relatively free for the development of distinctively roman civilization and habits of thought. the comparative freedom of these western provinces of the empire from religious heresies at the time that the eastern provinces were so prolific of them, is commonly ascribed to inferior aptitude of these western peoples for metaphysical speculation. we do not attempt to deny such inferiority, though the subsequent development of metaphysical speculation in western europe during the time that the reviving sense of nationality first began to be felt in the middle ages and reformation era, suggests another cause as operative. if we consider three regions where chiliasm, and also unquestionable heresies, were particularly rife; i.e., phrygia, egypt, and roman africa we see at once that these regions were seats of old, deeply rooted, and thoroughly developed civilizations. to go into the subject merely a little way we find that a nationalistic tradition existed in phrygia at the time of the composition of the iliad.[ ] this nationalistic tradition was considerably more than a thousand years old at the time of the introduction of christianity. roman political power had by this time been thoroughly established in the country and there is no reason to believe that political rebellion was contemplated at the time of the rise of chiliasm and the heresies. but while armed revolt may not have been considered as practicable, or even as desirable, the fundamental, nationalistic characteristics of the underlying strata of the population do not seem to have been very greatly altered. long before the advent either of the roman political power or the christian religion a homogenous, national psychology had become characteristic of the phrygian population. the phrygian seems to have put on christianity very much as he put on the toga. he wore the toga regularly and easily enough it may be, but in gestures and action, in speech and manner, he was still a phrygian. this typical phrygian seems to have been commonly regarded in the contemporary world as a bucolic sort of individual, much perhaps as a kansan is regarded in the united states, and with perhaps as much or as little reason. the fact is that while ancient phrygia without question possessed a large rural population, it also possessed numerous cities where the graces and amenities of life were as fully developed as in any of the neighboring provinces which did not suffer from the attribution of rusticity. the human instinct to botanize a neighboring people while doubtless adding to the gaiety of nations has to be taken _magno_ cum grano salis by the historian. whatever may be said of their other cultural institutions it is a fact that the phrygians at the time of the introduction of christianity had already developed certain distinctively national, religious characteristics which marked them off from their neighbors. the phrygian mysteries while doubtless in certain broad characteristics similar to the eleusinian mysteries had peculiarities of their own and were cherished by the people as something particularly expressive of their especial form of the philosophy of life. in spite of any decay and degradation which may have overtaken these mysteries in the course of a long history, it is certain that their primary object was the elevation and enhancement of life. the national religious consciousness of phrygia was peculiar in the prominent place given to women. to this day it is impossible to say with certainty whether the superior place in their religious system is held by the male or female concepts of deity. perhaps on the whole the female concept preponderates.[ ] what is true of theology is also true of cultus. priestesses and prophetesses held a position of marked prominence and importance. possibly the most pronouncedly distinctive mark of phrygian religion was the emphasis upon inspiration, immediate divine revelation, exstatic conditions of religious excitation, the well known "phrygian frenzy." if now, with even this meagre, historical, nationalistic background in view, we examine the expression of chiliasm in phrygia we see at once how it took the form and color of the national psychology. the most pronounced chiliastic expectations are found in montanism, which was so strongly marked by characteristics of its place of origin that it was known throughout the rest of the christian world as the 'phrygian heresy.' so strong was the influence of national sentiment that a very marked change was introduced in one, most important particular. christian chiliasm, originating as a jewish form of nationalistic patriotism, emphasized the fact that in the millennium christ was to reign in jerusalem, which was to supplant rome as the center and ruler of the world. in this respect phrygian chiliasm makes a complete break with the hebrew tradition. christ was to appear and reign, not in jerusalem, but in pepuza. an insignificant town of phrygia was to become the capital of the world wide kingdom of christ on earth, displacing both rome and jerusalem. nationalistic patriotism--not to say megalomania--could scarcely go farther. so too phrygian chiliasm is remarkable for the prominence and importance of the position of women in the movement. the women, prisca and the others, seem to have been fully as prominent in the movement as montanus himself and they exercised a degree of influence to which it would be difficult to find a parallel in contemporary christian movements in other countries. similarly, visions, revelations, inspirations, extraordinary conditions of religious excitation are a marked feature of phrygian chiliasm. they are of course the old 'phrygian frenzy' in christian guise. not to pursue this phase of the subject in more detail, it is evident that phrygian chiliasm bore in a marked degree the impress of the national, religious psychology. those bishops of pontus and syria who persuaded their people to settle all their worldly affairs and go out into neighboring deserts to await the coming of christ in glory, exhibit in a more naïve form the power of local group habits of thought to transform concepts intruded from outside the group. in the case of egypt it is gratuitous labor to dwell upon the fact that the native population at the advent of christianity had developed a nationalistic like-mindedness. this nation even in the year a.d. had an historical antiquity greater than any other nation can show today--with the doubtful exception of china. in no other nation in the world has there been such an opportunity for climatic and geographic influences to work their full effect in producing psychological homogeneity among a population on the whole remarkably little disturbed in demotic composition. it is to be remarked also that the climatic and geographic environments are themselves remarkably homogeneous throughout the whole extent of the nation. the deterministic school of historians have a model made to hand in the history of egypt--a model of which it must be confessed they have made very skillful use.[ ] this is not the place, even if the writer had the requisite knowledge, to enter into any extended discussion of the national psychology of the egyptian populace. it is sufficient to mention one predominating feature of that psychology, a feature so persistent and ubiquitous that the study of it alone, enables the investigator to obtain a true insight into much that is otherwise obscure in almost every variety of social expression among the egyptians; law, politics, government, art, science, literature, and religion. this predominating feature can perhaps be best defined as a certain low estimate of the value of individuality in the common man, a cheap appraisal of the worthwhileness of the life of the ordinary person. it seems to have a relatively slight ethnic element--if indeed it can be truthfully said to have any. it makes its appearance substantially unchanged in all subtropical countries situated in the same general physical environment as egypt; e.g., southern china, india, mesopotamia, mexico and yucatan; in all countries that is, where the natural conditions for sustaining and propagating human life are relatively easy and where the economic surplus of productive physical, as opposed to intellectual, labor is unusually great. nevertheless the fact that egypt is in this category is due to a highly special geographic phenomenon, the overflow of the river nile. so that by comparison with the nations immediately contiguous to egypt, this psychology may be truly said to be distinctively national in spite of its similarity to that of other peoples more remote geographically. it is perhaps unnecessary to do more than mention a very few of the ways in which this characteristic of egyptian psychology has affected the national life. it has rendered the population largely passive under the successive yolks of persians, greeks, romans, arabs, turks, and englishmen, to mention only some of the more prominent exploiters. it has made possible the erection of those vast pyramids of stone, devoid alike of necessity or use, which remain to this day one of the wonders of the world. it has enabled religions at once superstitious and debasing to flourish in the midst of a high degree of material civilization. for our purpose it is sufficient to call attention to the fact that this mental bias makes any change, even in the acquired concepts of the people, especially difficult of accomplishment. this is very well illustrated, in the study of egyptian chiliasm. in no other country were the efforts necessary to overthrow chiliastic concepts so long drawn out, so persistent, so futile of immediate success. indeed they did not finally succeed till long after the period embraced in this study. when the good bishop dionysius of alexandria - a.d., held his conference with the village chiliasts of the arsinoite nome, some of them were indeed won over, but we are told that 'others expressed their gratification at the conference'. it is evident that they were 'of the same opinion still', dionysius himself[ ] was not the first of the alexandrians to oppose chiliasm. there was much effort, both by him and others, to eradicate the concept before and after this arsinoite conference. yet we know that later on, villagers from this region became monks in the thebiad, and manuscripts still surviving from the thebiad, show that apocalyptic and chiliastic literature was popular with the monks, generations, and even centuries, after the death of dionysius. it is a notable example of the national character of the egyptians. they let their aggressive and dominating superiors have their own way in appearance--but in appearance only. the underlying currents of thought remained essentially unchanged among the commonality. the resistance was passive--perhaps almost imperceptible--but it was real and persistent. in the case of roman africa--the country north of the sahara desert and west of egypt--the problem is more complicated. in roman times down to the vandal invasion, the population of this region, leaving out of account certain small and relatively negligible numbers of greeks, egyptians and others found mainly in the larger cities, the population was composed of three distinct strata. at the top were the dominant romans, insignificant in point of numbers but having the monopoly of government, law, and administration. they were practically undisguised exploiters; government officials whose main business was to forward corn and oil to rome and incidentally enrich themselves; agents of the great roman landlords intent on transmitting rents to their patrician employers--already in the time of nero the senatorial province of africa was owned by as few as nine landlords--absentee landlords living in rome,--and finally, the numerous body of inferior agents; lawyers, money lenders, and estate managers whose services were indispensable to the carrying on of the vast system of economic exploitation. beneath this thin, dominant, roman upper crust was a vast population of artisans, tradesmen, agricultural and other laborers, serfs, and slaves. this great body of the commonality was to a remarkable degree still very purely punic even in late roman times. they differed ethnically, linguistically, religiously, and otherwise from their rulers.[ ] we find st. augustine, centuries after the roman conquest, writing a letter in latin to one of his clergy, but requesting him to translate it into punic and communicate it to his congregation. it is useful to remind ourselves of the fact that the population of north africa in the first centuries of the christian era was much greater than it is now. centuries of mohammedan mis-government account for this in part but the chief cause is to be found in those profound climatic changes, the origins of which are still obscure, that have reduced to desolate and barren wilderness whole regions which in roman times abounded in populous cities and in rich and fertile agricultural lands. this large population had the cohesion which results from centuries of similar and essentially unchanged social habits and it had also that sense of strength which comes from large numbers, and that pride which results from the inheritance of a proud history. they never wholly lost that spirit which had made their ancestors great. they never forgot that in former ages they had competed as the equals of rome for the lordship of the world. to the south toward the desert and the atlas mountains dwelt a third section of the population. they were nomads or semi-nomads, troglodytes, and mountain peoples. their manner of life remains essentially the same today as it was in roman times and as it was for centuries before rome set foot in africa. the romans never succeeded in subduing this population except temporarily and for short periods. the imperial government did what it could, and by means of military posts and patrols kept a kind of order, but its success was only moderate. christianity in roman africa reflects this threefold division of the population, as is to be expected. cyprian, in spite of the sincere religious faith and high moral character which elevates him so high above the social class to which he belonged, is still the most typical hierarch of his age. in his writings we find the whole philosophy of the governing class translated into ecclesiastical language. it is highly significant that in all the numerous and voluminous writings of this father there is not a line about chiliasm. ideas of such a nature found little reception in the minds of men daily engaged in the practical duties of making as much as possible out of the management and control of a vast population economically and politically subordinated to them. it would seem that chiliasm was in fact very largely confined to the punic commonality. tertullian is the great representative of this class. the very considerable success of his views can only be ascribed to their being acceptable to the general body of his local, christian contemporaries. it is at least imaginable this success was due to the fact that the personal characteristics of this great african; his impetuosity, his boldness, his sternness, his pride, his vengeful spirit were truly representative of the psychology of the people whose spokesman he was. it is notable that he was perhaps the greatest of the chiliasts. the reader who has followed the argument thus far may be saying to himself at this point: "if it be granted that the national characters of the peoples of phrygia, egypt, north africa or elsewhere, conditioned their acceptance of chiliastic beliefs and the ways in which these beliefs found expression, what has that to do with the subject of this chapter which is chiliasm and patriotism?" it is to that point we shall now direct our attention, but what has been said above is necessary to the proper consideration of the matter. we have endeavored to show that in phrygia, egypt, and north africa there existed nationalistic psychologies in the commonality. it will be recalled that we have shown in an earlier chapter the curious fact that chiliasm, though originally a perfectly orthodox doctrine--indeed one of the most important portions of the true faith, nevertheless in the course of its historical development, became mixed up with heresies to a degree beyond any rational explanation by the law of chance or the rule of average. it would seem almost as though there was some natural affinity between this particular orthodox doctrine and almost any heresy; which finally resulted in its being itself condemned as heretical. the reason for this was that chiliasm, like the heresies, was a psychic equivalent for patriotism. no stranger or more unwarranted delusion is to be found in the whole range of church history than the one still unfortunately common, to the effect that for several centuries at the beginning of the christian era the populace of whole religions were obsessed with incredible zeal over the most abstruse, metaphysical speculations. it is indeed true that the ostensible objects of the conflict were philosophical ideas but the realities behind these symbols were tangibles of a very genuinely mundane order; economic exploitation, social inequality, and suppressed national patriotism. this is evident enough in cases like the donatists in africa, but a little consideration of the evidence in the light of the developments of the freudian psychology, will make it clear in almost all of the heresies, and in the case of orthodoxy also, when the imperial government chanced to be itself heretical. so far as the writer is aware no study of any great length has been made of this matter, which would richly repay investigation; but our concern is more directly with chiliasm and the larger problem must be left to others for solution. freud has shown beyond reasonable hope of successful refutation, that experiences which the mind has completely forgotten leave emotional 'tones' which remain active and are the determining cause of physical and mental conditions. a thought 'complex' is a system of ideas or associations with an especially strong emotional tone. a complex may be of extreme interest to an individual by reason of his social education and hereditary mentality and yet be out of harmony with e.g., security of life and property: so a conflict arises in the mind. this conflicting complex is gotten rid of in various ways; rationalization, repression, disassociation, or what not, but the energy or interest which initiated the complex remains none the less and something must become of its force. this undirected emotional force is the cause of dreams, neuroses, and psychic trauma.[ ] such in the most sketchy outline is freud's idea. the application to the case under consideration is obvious. patriotism was a repressed 'complex' to the peoples of phrygia, egypt, and roman africa. the mental conflict brought on by the repression was rationalized easily enough, no doubt, so far as the conscious mind of the populace was concerned, but the disassociated emotional energy was let loose on other concepts with which it had no proper connection originally, i.e., problems of philosophical speculation. chiliasm was a speculative concept of a sort to make an especial appeal under the circumstances. so far as his conscious mind was concerned the phrygian might be perfectly reconciled to roman political supremacy. he might rationally prove to his own satisfaction that such political supremacy was really to his own advantage in the long run. any idea of resistance was sure to be repressed by the certainty of losing his property and life. yet the emotional energy of his patriotism remained and it naturally associated itself with any idea that lay at hand. chiliasm happened to be at hand. the glorified, divine kingdom of the saints of god on earth was the psychic equivalent of that phrygian kingdom whose national existence had been forever extinguished by rome. similarly that national patriotism which under other historical circumstances might have found satisfaction in the glory of an independent egypt now found expression in the borrowed phraseology of jewish and christian apocalyptical literature. the same is true of course of the punic and nomadic strata of the population of roman africa. to the new jerusalem which was to come down out of heaven from god, these peoples transferred their now useless and hopeless longing for the carthage of the days of hannibal and for jugurthan numidia. if, as we have endeavored to show, chiliasm represented the strivings of repressed, national patriotisms, we can readily understand the increasing opposition it encountered on the part of the great dignitaries of the church. as the christian hierarchy became increasingly perfected, the desire of the prelates for unity and cohesion in the church became correspondingly greater. but national patriotism is essentially a disrupting and disintegrating force to any imperialistic organization, civil or ecclesiastical. chiliasm being associated with this separatist tendency, naturally came to be regarded as heretical, and as such, was suppressed. footnotes: [ ] cf. r. charles, doctrine of a future life. [ ] cf. s. j. case, the messianic hope. [ ] cf. il., iii, . [ ] cf. w. m. ramsay., art. _phrygians_, enc. of religion and ethics. [ ] cf. buckle, intro. to the hist. of civilization in england. [ ] cf. eusebius, eccl. hist., vii, seq. [ ] cf. alex. graham, roman africa. [ ] cf. a. h. ring, psychoanalysis. chapter v chiliasm and social theory we have seen that in the first generations of the church's existence the rapidly approaching end of the world was a doctrine firmly held by almost all christians. we have seen how by the fifth century this doctrine, though doubtless still believed by small numbers of individuals and isolated groups, was practically dead. we have endeavored to show some of the more important political, economic, social, and religious effects of this belief and of its declension. the changes which took place almost imperceptibly during the course of more than three centuries in the status of this doctrine make any evaluation of its influence very difficult. it is, however, probably well within the truth to say that the transformation of early christianity from an eschatological to a socialized movement is, in some respects, one of the most important changes in its history. the change was actual and objective rather than formal and theoretical. it profoundly influenced the practical lives of christians, but it produced no alteration whatever in the creeds of the church. as has been shown in the preceding chapters it is for these reasons at once more difficult to investigate and more troublesome to evaluate. the difficulties of the subject itself, considerable as they are; lack of adequate source material, doubt as to the authenticity and reliability of such sources as we have; and ever present theological prepossession, these difficulties after all do not offer such hindrances to fruitful investigation as another factor, the present condition of sociological methodology. the writer is not learned in the various forms of scientific method, but he doubts whether any other science is, in this respect, in such a chaotic condition as sociology. it is reasonable to expect of any science that it will have some general rules for the investigation of the data in its field, and some general principles for the interpretation of the results of investigation. sociology is no exception in this respect. in fact the number of sociological 'principles,' so called, is almost incredibly great. a mere descriptive enumeration of them, and a by no means exhaustive one, fills a considerable volume.[ ] but so far as the writer is aware, no effort has been made to apply these principles or any considerable number of them, systematically, to the elucidation of any movement, contemporary or historical. in general each principle has had its own advocates who have applied it to varying ranges of historical phenomena--generally to the total or at least considerable, exclusion of other principles. these sociological principles are not only very numerous--they are of very various value. no successful classification of them has thus far been made. it is very possible that in the present state of the science no successful classification can be made. yet no study of an historical movement can, without loss, dispense with the aid given by these general sociological principles. the writer will, therefore, in the briefest possible manner, try to show some of the aspects of early chiliasm as they appear in the light of a few of these principles. the list of principles employed is not an exhaustive one. it can not even claim to be comprehensive of all the principles which might fairly be said to be important. on the other hand it perhaps includes some principles which some sociologists would probably consider of minor importance. there is as yet, unfortunately, no considerable agreement on this matter among sociologists of different nationalities and schools. the reason of course, is that the social reality which these principles endeavor to explain contains facts which are intellectually incompatible but which nevertheless, do actually exist together. one of the most important and one of the most convenient methods of investigating social phenomena is the statistical method. in all cases of social pathology this method is so valuable as to be almost indispensable. in other cases its use needs to be more carefully guarded. in the problem we have considered the use of the statistical method has been evidently impossible except in the most incidental manner. we do not know how many christians expected any particular kind of second advent to take place within any given length of time. if we had information for each decade to the time of augustine, of the number of 'convinced' chiliasts and the number of 'adherents' who were inclined toward that belief, together with information as to the number of years within which each of these groups expected the second advent, it is needless to say that such facts would enable us to judge the movement with a considerable approach to historical certainty. even such incidental and fragmentary information as has come down to us in regard to the number of chiliastic believers is most valuable and such use has been made of it as may be. if the use of the statistical method has not been more extensive, it is because of lack of data. perhaps the most widely known of all sociological principles is that called economic determinism, or the economic interpretation of history, or historical materialism. more and more, of recent years, this principle has been employed by historians. the classic statement of the doctrine is found in the communist manifesto. the introduction to the second edition states: "in every historical epoch the prevailing mode of economic production and exchange and the social organization necessarily following from it, form the basis upon which is built up, and from which alone can be explained, the political and intellectual history of that epoch; that consequently the whole history of mankind (since the dissolution of primitive tribal society holding land in common ownership) has been a history of class, struggles, contests between exploiting and exploited, ruling and oppressed classes."[ ] in the application of this principle to our subject we are lead to expect a genuine, though not necessarily direct, connection between the declension of eschatological expectations, the increase of socialization in early christianity and such broad economic movements as resulted from the soil exhaustion of western europe and the decreased productivity of compulsory associated labor. in the substitution of serfdom for slavery and in the growth of monasticism we certainly have two movements which profoundly affected the church, and had a considerable part in altering the attitude of mind which made chiliastic expectations tenable. it is probably true that what we have here is considerably more than a mere coincidence of time, i.e., that chiliasm declined as serfdom developed and was dead by the time the patronage system was established on the great estates. indeed, in the west at least, chiliasm was dead before the country regions were to any measurable degree christian at all. it is not too much to say that the apologetic used by st. augustine to extirpate primitive, chiliastic belief was only made plausable, or even possible, by profound changes, of an economic nature, in the early church. the central point of augustine's apologetic is that the church, as actually existing at the time, was the promised kingdom of christ and the reign of the saints on earth. such an explanation would have been absurd in the days when the christian church consisted only of a few, small companies of sectaries, lost among the lower strata of the population of the cities on the mediterranean litoral. but by augustine's time the church was something quite different. it was enormously wealthy; owning farms, orchards, vineyards, olive yards, mines, quarries, timberlands, horses, cattle, sheep, goats, slaves and serfs, to say nothing of the purely ecclesiastical properties like churches, schools, bishops' residences and similar structures, and the land they occupied. the possession of this great wealth inevitably brought with it social position, prestige, and political power. the psychical reaction produced by wealth, rank, and power was naturally unfavorable to the growth of any lively desire for the termination of the existing order of things. indeed it was an active force in displacing and eliminating chiliasm from the minds of the hierarchy. on the reverse side we have seen that the times of persecution, when the property of the church was confiscated and the lives and liberty of christians endangered or lost, coincided with the recrudescence of messianic expectations. so that, whichever way the subject is approached, it would seem that the contentions of the advocates of the economic interpretation of history can make out a very good case in the instance of the early christian church and chiliasm. without raising economic determinism to the rank of a dogma and while admitting that it has very real limitations, it would nevertheless appear from the present study, that the following contention of one of its leading exponents contains an important degree of truth. "the relations of men to one another in the matter of making a living are the main, underlying causes of men's habits of thought and feeling, their notions of right, propriety, and legality, their institutions of society and government, their wars and revolutions."[ ] a principle somewhat allied to the doctrine of economic determinism, is that of progress by 'group conflict.' perhaps the most notable exponent of this principle is the austrian sociologist, ludwig gumplowicz, who states: "when two distinct (heterogen) groups come together the natural tendency of each is to exploit the other to use the most general expression. this indeed is what gives the first impulse to the social process.[ ] according to this principle we should expect to find the cause of the transformation of early christianity in the conflicts of various groups within the christian community and in the conflicts between the christians as a group, and various other groups in the world of that time. the truth of this is so obvious that it is a mere waste of words to point it out. that christian theology evolved by a series of conflicts with various pagan theologies on the one side, and with various groups within the church on the other side, which were successively branded as heretical, is the most patent fact in the theological history. what is true of the theology in general is true of chiliasm in particular. it was very largely during the conflicts with a long series of heretical groups; gnostics, ebionites, alogi, montanists and apolinarians that the blows were given which finally vanquished chiliasm. its elimination, or at least the rapidity of its elimination, was very measurably due to the fact that it was involved in these group conflicts, and as it was almost invariably associated with the losing group, it suffered the natural fate of the vanquished. while the principle of which gumplowicz was so able a supporter leads us to expect changes in the chiliastic doctrine wherever it appears in connection with the phenomenon of group conflict, both within and without the church, this principle does not, in itself, enable us to state anything definitely concerning the nature of these changes. there is, however, another sociological principle which we can call to our aid--the principle of imitation. according to m. tarde: "the unvarying characteristic of every social fact whatever is that it is imitative and this characteristic belongs exclusively to social facts. this imitation however, is not absolute and the various degrees of exactness in imitation and the complexes resulting from the various combinations and oppositions of imitations form the dynamic of progress."[ ] by the help of this principle we can in a certain measure estimate the general nature of the changes which took place in early christianity during the process of its socialization. the conversion of the roman empire to christianity is, according to this principle, merely half of the actual occurrence. the other half might be called the conversion of christianity to the roman empire. the fact that this second conversion took place; that the christian church became a hierarchic, bureaucratic, legalistic, monarchical imperialism is evidence enough that the principle of imitation operated powerfully in early christian history. what is true of the early church as a whole is true of chiliasm in particular. there was no very powerful second adventist or other chiliastic influence in the heathen world with which the early christians were in contact. their beliefs were, therefore according to this theory, weakened by dilution; vice versa the pagans were gradually converted to an enfeebled eschatological belief by imitation of the christians, but the net result was a compromise, i.e., a far off and indefinite eschatology. the concrete evidence in support of this contention is not abundant being confined to a few lines in the sibylline oracles, hippolytus, lactantius and augustine. such as the evidence is, however, it is entirely on the side of the theory of imitation. it is moreover a very defensible position that if we were not dealing with such a stereotyped literary form, the evidence would be much stronger. one arresting feature of the chiliastic passages that have come down to us, is their uniformity. they are repetitions, very often actual, verbal repetitions of one another. what is of real interest in this connection however, is not the form of words, used, but the varying degrees of earnestness, sincerity, and eagerness with which the beliefs, embodied in the form, were held. this is a thing difficult if not impossible of measurement. practically our only means of arriving at the facts is to compare the relatively slight changes in the _form_ of the chiliastic tradition. this has already been done[ ] and favors the contention which the theory of imitation seeks to maintain. the passage in the oracles, while undoubtedly chiliastic, is doubtfully orthodox and is found in a context showing the influence of paganism in almost every line. similarly hippolytus and still more lactantius and augustine being situated so as to be peculiarly susceptible to the pagan environment show a marked tendency to make the second advent a far off event. st. augustine, whose contact with the contemporary pagan world was more complete at more points than that of any other church father, puts the second advent out of all connection with his own generation. another sociological principle of considerable importance for our purpose is that sometimes spoken of as the transfer of the allegiance of the unproductive laborers. the most prominent upholder of this principle is probably the italian economist achille loria. according to loria, the history of civilization is the history of the struggle for the economic surplus. the existence of an economic margin above the necessities of subsistence at once divides society into three classes: exploiters, unproductive laborers,[ ] and productive laborers. "in order to exert moral suasion enough to pervert the egoism of the oppressed classes, the cooperation of unproductive laborers is required. the decomposition of an established system of capitalistic economy carried with it a progressive diminution of the income from property and consequently involves a corresponding falling off in the unproductive laborers' share therein. this in turn dissolves their partnership with capital and puts an end to their task of psychologically coercing the productive laborers. the bandage is thus suddenly removed from the eyes of the oppressed and the systematic perversion of human egoism up to this time in force, is abruptly brought to an end. "but scarcely has the inevitable course of events hounded to its grave the existing order of oppression, when there arises another. under the new system of suppression the ancient alliance between capital and unproductive labor is reestablished and at once inaugurates a new process better adapted to pervert the egoism of the productive laborers."[ ] the importance of this principle for the understanding of our subject cannot easily be overstated. the socialization of early christianity proceeded in almost direct ratio to the number of 'unproductive' laborers coming over to it. if christianity had had in the first century, such an array of theologians, philosophers, apologists, statesmen, and intellectuals generally, as it had in the fourth century, there can be no reasonable doubt that its triumph would have been much more rapid and complete. on the other hand had the pagan cults been able to show as numerous and as able a body of intellectual defenders in the fourth century as in the first, the success of the church must have been much retarded. the declension of the artistic, literary, and general intellectual level of ancient, pagan civilization during the first three or four centuries of the christian era is a fact so well known as to call for no remark. what is not perhaps, so well recognized is that during the very time that the pagan world presents an almost incredible degree of intellectual feebleness and sterility, the actual proportion of intellectually able men in society was remarkably great. rome, never, perhaps in her whole history, had to her credit so many men of statesman-like ability as at the time her empire was falling to pieces. the explanation is simple. the men of genius and ability were no longer interested in the political fortunes of the pagan empire. they had gone over to a new allegiance, and expended in the foundation of the catholic church a degree of intelligence and ability which, had it been placed at the service of the empire, might very conceivably have enabled that empire to survive to this day. it is certain that one of the leading causes of the collapse of the pagan cults was their increasing inability to command the support of the intellectual leaders in society, and it is no less true that the increasing success of the church was to be ascribed to the ever larger number of men of intellectual gifts who enrolled themselves in her support. the fact, of course, is that christianity offered increasingly an outlet for the expression of abilities and capacities of mind and soul such as no pagan cult could provide. the most superficial comparison of the intellectual forces for and against christianity in the first century, with the corresponding array in the fourth or fifth centuries is sufficient to show the enormous progress made by the process of socialization in the interval. our more particular concern is, however, with the eschatological concepts. a comparison of the supporters and opponents of chiliasm at different periods brings into clear view the rate of its decline. without repeating what has been dealt with already,[ ] it is sufficient to recall that in the first century chiliasm had the support of men like st. paul and the authors of the gospels and other new testament books, notably revelation. indeed, as far as we can judge, every intellectual leader of the christian movement for nearly a century supported the apocolyptic concepts. but as time went on the proportionate number and ability of its defenders declines. finally in the person of origen in the east and augustine in the west we find the undisputed intellectual leaders turning the whole intellectual class against it, and so bringing about its overthrow. still another sociological principle of high importance because of its pervasiveness and ubiquity is that propounded by prof. veblen in what is perhaps the best known of american works on sociology.[ ] this principle, which may be summed up by the words conspicuous honorific consumption, is that beliefs and customs, in order to establish themselves and to survive as socially reputable, must involve their holders in purely honorific consumption of time and economic goods. this consumption may be, and in fact very largely is, vicarious. in this case the functionaries of the vicarious extravagance must be distinguished from their masters by the introduction of the element of personal inconvenience into the performance of their functions. of the various sociological principles, so far brought to our attention this one of conspicuous honorific consumption gives us what is probably the most useful clew to follow for the understanding of the relatively rapid decline and the immediately subsequent social disrepute of the eschatological elements in early christianity. no set of theological concepts can be easily imagined which are more antagonistic to the canon of honorific, conspicuous consumption than are the eschatological ones. but the principle of the reputability of waste is so intercalated into every form of social usage; it plays so large a part in all moral, religious, literary, artistic, political, military, and other judgments, that in a society like that of the roman empire where pecuniary emulation and invidious comparison were the forms taken by the 'instinct of workmanship'--the propensity for achievement--no set of beliefs or observances which ran counter to this principle could, in a prolonged contest, stand the smallest chance of success. in this respect, early christianity was the more unequal to the struggle in so much as it was the strongest in the cities. the trend of affairs is observable in the church as early as the appearance of the epistle of james. under urban conditions the law of conspicuous consumption works with peculiar power and it tended toward the rapid elimination of those doctrines and observances which operated to keep out of the church the wealthy, powerful, and fashionable elements of society. within a relatively short time, by the operation of this principle, the originally respectable doctrine of millenananism was rendered disreputable and even heretical. it was an important agency in bringing into sharp relief the distinction of clergy and laity, while in the appearance of monasticism we see the working out of this principle among the strongest (theoretical) opponents. had christianity in the beginning found a considerable proportion of its adherents among the laboring classes in the rural regions there can be very little doubt that it would have maintained the purity of its early doctrines for a much more considerable period of time than was actually the case. there is no reason to doubt that, in that event, chiliastic expectations would have survived in christian theology far longer than they did. "among the working classes in a sedentary community which is at an agricultural stage of industry in which there is a considerable subdivision of property and whose laws and customs secure to these classes a more or less definite share of the product of their industry, pecuniary emulation tends in a certain measure to such industry and frugality as serve to weaken in some degree the full force of the principle of honorific, and more especially of vicariously honorific wastefulness." that is to say such conditions tend to conservatism in general and possibly to religious conservatism in particular. but for this very reason christianity made its way only very slowly into the rural regions. in the west, indeed, chiliasm was already dead before the church had won any great headway among the agricultural population--which was not until the sixth and seventh centuries. had chiliasm been able to hold its own until the conversion of the rural regions, it would certainly have survived there for generations if not centuries--even if it had died out in the urban centers. in the east, where christianity made its way among the rural population, at least in some degree, considerably earlier than was the case in the west, chiliasm did get a hold in certain agricultural regions of phrygia, syria, egypt, and elsewhere, and it was in precisely such regions, as we have already seen, that it was held most tenaciously and abandoned most slowly. prof. f. h. giddings of columbia university is the sponsor of the last sociological principle which will be mentioned in this connection. his principle is known as the "consciousness of kind." according to prof. giddings: "consciousness of kind is that pleasurable state of mind which includes organic sympathy, the perception of resemblance conscious or reflective sympathy, affection and the desire for recognition."[ ] "this consciousness is a social and socializing force, sometimes exceedingly delicate and subtle in its action, sometimes turbulent and all powerful. assuming endlessly varied modes of prejudice and of prepossession, of liking and of disliking, of love and of hate, it tends always to reconstruct and to dominate every mode of association and every social grouping."[ ] by means of this very comprehensive principle many otherwise merely stray and isolated items of information that have come down to use regarding early christianity can be given a place and a meaning in the graduated series of phenomena which mark the transition from the eschatological to the socialized movement. such, for instance, are the exhibitions of consciousness of kind according to differences and similarities of sex, age, kinship, language, political beliefs, occupations, rank, locality, wealth, and the like. the very number of ways in which consciousness of kind exerts influence makes this principle of very great use when the task is that of forming a general conclusion from the investigation of sources which are incomplete, inconclusive and sometimes contradictory. the different sociological principles mentioned above are intended as specimens only. the list is not in any sense complete. no attention is paid to other principles held as coordinates or as correlates of those referred to. whole classes of principles, the anthropological and geographic, for instance, are consciously omitted. the list is in the highest degree a hit-and-miss selection and the more casual it is, the better for the purpose in hand. this purpose is to show that any given series of principles elucidated by students of our contemporary modern civilization, will be found to have been operating in discernable fashion in the case of an obscure form of theological speculation in the first centuries of the christian era. that chiliasm was the natural result of the heredity and environment of the early christians, or perhaps better, the natural result of the reaction of inherited elements in vital contact with the contemporary world, will probably be admitted readily enough by anyone who has followed the discussion thus far. but the aim of this thesis, particularly of this last chapter, is something more than that. its aim is to uphold the contention that the forces now operating in society to shape and reshape beliefs and opinions are the very same in kind as operated in the society of the roman empire. in short, any explanation of early christian chiliasm which seeks to bring in the operation of any social principles which cannot be shown to be objectively operative in contemporary society is to be viewed with a certain measure of doubt, if not of suspicion. it may be taken as a safe assumption that all attempts to obtain a complete explanation of any historical event in terms of one principle of one science are foredoomed to failure. the same is true, in less degree, even if we take all the so far discovered principles of any one science. in order to give anything like a really comprehensive explanation of the historical process which forms the subject of this thesis there would be required the contributions of the principles of economics, political science, psychology, and the other social sciences. such a synthesis of principles is beyond the ability of any one individual. the application of them all to our subject would be a task requiring the cooperation of many specialists in many lines for some not inconsiderable period of time. the writer's task will not perhaps have been utterly in vain, if he has, even in the slightest measure, helped to bring home to a single reader, this important fact. footnotes: [ ] l. m. bristol, social adaptation, _harvard economic studies_, vol. xiv. cambridge . [ ] communist manifesto. authorized english translation, chicago, . [ ] w. j. ghent, mass and class, chap. . new york, . [ ] grundriss der sociologie; moore's translation, p. . annals am. acad. pol. sci. phil. . [ ] g. tarde, social laws, p. . new york, . the laws of imitation, p. . new york, . [ ] see chap. i. [ ] i.e., the so-called, intellectuals. [ ] economic foundations of society, pp. seq. new york, . [ ] cf. chap. i. [ ] the theory of the leisure class. new york, . [ ] inductive sociology, p. , new york, . [ ] descriptive and historical sociology, p. , new york, . transcriber's notes: the following is a list of changes made to the original. the first line is the original line, the second the corrected one. in all of them the catastrophy is more or less immediately in all of them the catastrophe is more or less immediately and final judgement which in the preceding form of belief were and final judgment which in the preceding form of belief were is to be preceeded by tremendous portents of the most terrible sort. is to be preceded by tremendous portents of the most terrible sort. thebiad. in fact a large number of jewish apocalyses which the thebiad. in fact a large number of jewish apocalypses which the he maintains that in the mellennium, death will be abolished he maintains that in the millennium, death will be abolished apolinaris was indeed the most judaising christian in his chiliasm apollinaris was indeed the most judaizing christian in his chiliasm indignantly denounces as 'figments,' 'mere old wives fables' and indignantly denounces as 'figments,' 'mere old wives' fables' and 'doctrines of jews.'[ ] although apolinarianism was condemned 'doctrines of jews.'[ ] although apollinarianism was condemned of note in the west. it is aboundantly evident however, from the of note in the west. it is abundantly evident however, from the and incongruities as the pagan myths which proviked so many and incongruities as the pagan myths which provoked so many chiliasts--are held to be insoluable as to the time of their appearance; chiliasts--are held to be insoluble as to the time of their appearance; dead, and yet to be born. the entity was eternal, indestructable, dead, and yet to be born. the entity was eternal, indestructible, the otherwise unintelligible success of that saint in combatting the otherwise unintelligible success of that saint in combating expression to this accomplished fact and it is no derrogation of his expression to this accomplished fact and it is no derogation of his words restriction in matrimony whether chilastic or monastic is due words restriction in matrimony whether chiliastic or monastic is due of the movement, were influenced more by chilastic concepts than of the movement, were influenced more by chiliastic concepts than [ ] cf. parables in i enoch xxxvii-ixxi. [ ] cf. parables in i enoch xxxvii-lxxi. [ ] cf. apocalypse of baurch; ezra, maccabees. [ ] cf. apocalypse of baruch; ezra, maccabees. fourth: what may be distinguished as the specifically christain fourth: what may be distinguished as the specifically christian the pupose of giving him a vest and an overcoat in addition to what the purpose of giving him a vest and an overcoat in addition to what and rightly discharged his service to him.[ ] and rightly discharged his service to him."[ ] the inconsistent and irreconciliable nature of the evidence about the inconsistent and irreconcilable nature of the evidence about references to interest, which may perhpas be due to the fact that in references to interest, which may perhaps be due to the fact that in condeming interest as such. in the minds of the early christians the condemning interest as such. in the minds of the early christians the prediliction of certain types of pecuniary interest for that reformer's predilection of certain types of pecuniary interest for that reformer's system of eccliastical polity. the roman law did indeed fix a system of ecclesiastical polity. the roman law did indeed fix a or act up to all thay they believe. imagine a man acting on the or act up to all that they believe. imagine a man acting on the institution they were perfectly familar and in universal observance institution they were perfectly familiar and in universal observance it was immoral to invest money in the consrtuction company that it was immoral to invest money in the construction company that economic and matters--and on other matters also. the difference in a economic matters--and on other matters also. the difference in a as soon as christain doctrines became widespread enough to as soon as christian doctrines became widespread enough to villange or serfdom. but this change cut off the economic margin villeinage or serfdom. but this change cut off the economic margin that of bibical exegesis. in the well known sermon or essay on: that of biblical exegesis. in the well known sermon or essay on: pyhsical possessions, but spiritual qualities of greed and avarice. physical possessions, but spiritual qualities of greed and avarice. that shall with difficulty enter into the kingdom," is to be apprehended that shall with difficulty enter into the kingdom, is to be apprehended the reward of which is salvation." "sell thy possessions." what is the reward of which is salvation." "sell thy possessions. what is expositions of christian scripture, penning the most powerful apologitic expositions of christian scripture, penning the most powerful apologetic honors upon the lowliest drugery;[ ] they turned princes into plowmen honors upon the lowliest drudgery;[ ] they turned princes into plowmen institutions of society can indeed be changed. but they can be changed--or institutions of society can indeed be changed. but they can be changed--on lack theoritical justification tend to accumulate such justification lack theoretical justification tend to accumulate such justification the spread of chriatian theology by liberating it from the burden the spread of christian theology by liberating it from the burden influence is economic. christianity by teaching the virtues of honesty influence is economic. christianity by teaching the virtues of honesty, penticost and immediately afterwards was due primarily to the fact pentecost and immediately afterwards was due primarily to the fact began to develope doctrines and practices even slightly at began to develop doctrines and practices even slightly at motive, the threatened loss of livlihood, entering along with anger motive, the threatened loss of livelihood, entering along with anger of the crowds only after agitation diliberately stirred up by interested of the crowds only after agitation deliberately stirred up by interested also the villages and country places and yet it sees possible to stop it and also the villages and country places and yet it seems possible to stop it and teaching many not to sacrifice or to worship the gods. speaking teaching many not to sacrifice or to worship the gods." speaking pagan public. most noticable of all is the indifference of the mob pagan public. most noticeable of all is the indifference of the mob clamor and blows and draggings and roberies and stonings and clamor and blows and draggings and robberies and stonings and more through permeation of the public mind by christianity. there more thorough permeation of the public mind by christianity. there very extent and throughness and duration of the persecution very extent and thoroughness and duration of the persecution belongs in the reign of septimus severns instead of that of marcus belongs in the reign of septimus severus instead of that of marcus circumstances more or less in obeyance. on the whole it was undoubtedly circumstances more or less in abeyance. on the whole it was undoubtedly more violent at the end of the period tham at the beginning. more violent at the end of the period than at the beginning. serverus, a.d. in the account given by eusebius of the martydom severus, a.d. in the account given by eusebius of the martyrdom case it was not the product of any spontanious popular movement. case it was not the product of any spontaneous popular movement. they were not called forth by any imperial edict--they preceeded the they were not called forth by any imperial edict--they preceded the governmental, legal precess would ever, or could ever, take on. governmental, legal process would ever, or could ever, take on. persecution among us did not begin with the royal decree but proceeded persecution among us did not begin with the royal decree but preceded accumlated sentiment and social unrest must of necessity discharge accumulated sentiment and social unrest must of necessity discharge perhaps be going beyong the evidence to say that in this interval, perhaps be going beyond the evidence to say that in this interval, away from them and drove the jews out of the city, permiting the away from them and drove the jews out of the city, permitting the being reconciled to the bishop. some of them therefore hurrried being reconciled to the bishop. some of them therefore hurried people in a struggle over the most obstruse and recondite metaphysical people in a struggle over the most abstruse and recondite metaphysical to the christians mob movement against the pagans and to the to the christians' mob movement against the pagans and to the experience. (b) operation as an isolating device (c) revolt against experience. (b) operation as an isolating device. (c) revolt against were free from its defects as an instrument of hierarchial ambition. were free from its defects as an instrument of hierarchical ambition. town of phrygia was to become the capitol of the world wide kingdom town of phrygia was to become the capital of the world wide kingdom produced no alternation whatever in the creeds of the church. as produced no alteration whatever in the creeds of the church. as ever possible, by profound changes, of an economic nature, in the even possible, by profound changes, of an economic nature, in the of men to ane another in the matter of making a living are the main, of men to one another in the matter of making a living are the main, associated with the loosing group, it suffered the natural fate of the associated with the losing group, it suffered the natural fate of the but scarcely has the inevitable course of events hounded to its "but scarcely has the inevitable course of events hounded to its transcriber's note: text enclosed by underscores is in italics (_italics_). text enclosed by equal signs is in bold face (=bold=). the literature and history of new testament times part i: the historical background of christianity the early history of christianity by john gresham machen philadelphia, pa. the presbyterian board of publication and sabbath school work contents page introduction lesson . the new testament . the roman background of christianity . the greek background of christianity . the jewish background of christianity: i. palestinian judaism . the jewish background of christianity: ii. the judaism of the dispersion . the messiah . the book of the acts . the cross and the resurrection the foundation of apostolic preaching . the beginnings of the christian church . the first persecution . the first gentile converts . the conversion of paul . the church at antioch . the gospel to the gentiles . the council at jerusalem . the gospel carried into europe . encouragement for recent converts . the conflict with the judaizers . problems of a gentile church . the apostle and his ministry . the gospel of salvation . paul's journey to rome . the supremacy of christ . the church of christ . christ and his followers . training new leaders . a presentation of jesus to jewish christians . a graphic sketch of the life of jesus . a greek historian's account of jesus . the testimony of the beloved disciple . the jesus of the gospels . a document of the jerusalem church . jesus the fulfillment of the old testament . christian fortitude . the christian's attitude toward error and immorality . the life of the children of god . the messages of the living christ . a vision of the final triumph . review . the church and the world . the christian message . the word and the sacraments . prayer . the congregation . the relief of the needy . organizing for service . a mission for the world . the christian ideal of personal morality . christianity and human relationships . the christian use of the intellect . the christian hope and the present possession . retrospect: the first christian century copyright, , by john gresham machen introduction the general purpose of this course of lessons has been set forth in the introduction to the student's text book. there is a tendency in the modern church to neglect the study of bible history. such neglect will inevitably result in a loss of power. the gospel is a record of something that has happened, and uncertainty about the gospel is fatal weakness. furthermore the historical study of the apostolic age--that age when divine revelation established the great principles of the church's life--is the best corrective for a thousand vagaries. much can be learned from modern pedagogy; but after all what is absolutely fundamental, both for teacher and for student, is an orderly acquaintance with the bible facts. the teacher's manual, therefore, is intended not merely to offer suggestions as to methods of teaching, but primarily to supplement the teacher's knowledge. a teacher who knows only what he actually imparts to the class is inevitably dull. the true teacher brings forth out of his treasure things new and old. the sections in the teacher's manual, since they are intended to be supplementary, should not be read until after careful attention has been paid to the corresponding sections in the student's text book. moreover, both sections together are of course in themselves insufficient. they should be supplemented by other reading. suggestions about reading have been put at the end of every lesson. here, however, a few general remarks may be made. davis' "dictionary of the bible" and purves' "christianity in the apostolic age," which have been recommended even to the student, will be to the teacher almost invaluable. the earnest teacher will also desire to refer to good commentaries on the acts. the commentaries which have been mentioned in connection with the individual lessons are based upon the english bible; but every teacher who has any knowledge of greek, however slight, should use, instead, the commentary of knowling, in "the expositor's greek testament." for the life of paul, lewin's "life and epistles of st. paul" and the similar book of conybeare and howson are still very valuable for their vivid and extended descriptions of the scenes of the missionary journeys. a similar service is rendered, in more up-to-date form, by the various works of ramsay. stalker's "life of st. paul" is a good handbook. m'clymont's "new testament and its writers" contains instructive, though very brief, introductions to all of the new testament books. hastings' "dictionary of the bible" and "dictionary of christ and the gospels" number among their contributors many writers of many opinions. they are rich in references to the vast literature of modern biblical discussion. the writer of this course has derived information from many quarters. definite acknowledgment of indebtedness, since no originality is claimed, may be regarded as unnecessary. it is a pleasure, however, to render special thanks to rev. professor william park armstrong, d. d., of princeton theological seminary, whose wise counsel has been of incalculable assistance at many points. the actual presentation of the lessons will, of course, vary according to the needs of the classes and the preferences of the teachers. the student's text book may often provide a convenient order of presentation. that book is intended not merely to be read, but also to be studied. it is to be regarded as a sort of outline of the course. the "topics for study" are intended to serve a double purpose. in the first place, they will test the student's knowledge of the lesson material; in the second place, they will afford encouragement to special investigation. individual topics may often be assigned for thorough treatment to individual students, while the class as a whole may use all the topics as guides to a general knowledge. personal interest in the individual students is of the utmost importance. instruction has a tenfold value when it is backed by friendship. the relation of the students to the church should be a matter of especial concern. if any member of the class has not confessed his faith in christ, the study of this year offers abundant opportunity for a word in season. our study reveals the church as a divine institution. shall we then stand aloof? in this course the teacher has the opportunity of introducing young people of maturing minds to the historical study of the new testament. there could be no more inspiring task. carried about with every wind of doctrine, the church is sadly in need of an assured anchorage. that anchorage should be sought in history. ignorance is weak; sound knowledge, sought with prayer, and blessed by the spirit of god, will lead to a more stalwart and more intelligent faith. lesson i the new testament this is an introductory lesson. it should be used, first of all, to answer intelligent general questions about the new testament. some of these questions will be discussed briefly under sections to , below. the historical study of the new testament, based upon a study of the circumstances under which the individual books were written, will probably be new to many of the students. the new point of view should be used to awaken interest. the climax of the lesson should, however, be a presentation of the unity of the new testament as the very word of god to us. historical study should be made--and can be made--subservient to reverent and thankful obedience. . the origin and meaning of the name the english word "testament" comes from a latin word. the equivalent greek word is hard to translate. as used in the greek bible it may mean either "covenant" or "testament." usually it should probably be translated "covenant." the phrase "new covenant" occurs about five times in the new testament. in none of these passages does the phrase refer to the "new testament" in our sense. it designates a new relationship into which men have been received with god. the old covenant was made, through the mediatorship of moses, with the hebrew nation; the new covenant, hinted at in prophecy, jer. : , and instituted by the lord jesus, i cor. : , was made with all those, of every tribe and tongue and people and nation, who should through faith accept the salvation offered by christ. those who believe become, like israel of old, god's chosen people, and enter into the warmth and joy of the divine communion. the names "old and new covenants," then, were applied first to these two special relationships into which god entered with men. afterwards the names were applied to the books in which the conditions of those relationships were set forth. perhaps it would have been better if we had started to say "new covenant" where we now say "new testament." at any rate the idea alluded to in the name is the inspiring idea, realized in christ, of an alliance with god. the new testament is the divine treaty by the terms of which god has received us rebels and enemies into peace with himself. . one book, or a collection of books? in the first place, the new testament may be treated in every respect as a single book. that course is adopted by many of the most devoted lovers of the bible. by them the bible is treated simply as a textbook of religion. passages are quoted indiscriminately from all parts of it, without much regard to the context. the wide differences of form and of spirit among the various books are ignored. the historical implications of the books are of course accepted as true, but practically they are left quite unassimilated. now let us be quite plain about one thing. the men who use the bible in this way are right in the main point. they treat the bible as the guide of life for time and for eternity. and if by the use of the bible we can come into communion with god, we can afford to miss a good many other things. nevertheless, the bible is as a matter of fact not a mere textbook of religion, and if we treat it as such we miss much of its richness. if the bible were merely a systematic treatise, it would be far easier to interpret. the interpreter would be spared a great deal of trouble, but the burden would be heaped upon the preacher. as it is, the bible is itself a preacher, because it is in such close contact with the actual experience of men of flesh and blood. its general teachings are given us in large measure only through the medium of history, through the medium of example. in order to arrive at the general truths, therefore, intellectual labor is often necessary. god has made things harder for the intellect that he may strike home the more surely to the heart. if paul had written a systematic theology, the new testament way of salvation might in some ways have been plainer than it is. it would have been plain to the intellect, but it would have needed interpretation to the heart. conviction can be wrought only by the immediate impact of personal life. the theology of paul, of itself, might be a dead thing; the religious experience of paul, interwoven with his theology, and bared before us in the epistles, is irresistible. in the second place, the historical form of the bible may be considered at the expense of its spiritual content. the bible may be treated simply as a storybook. such a method of treatment is exceedingly common to-day. "the bible as literature" is its slogan. this treatment has simply missed the main point altogether. it is incomparably inferior to that treatment which takes the bible as a mere textbook of religion. the bible as an addition to the world's history or the world's literature has, indeed, considerable educational value. but it does not give eternal life. a third method is possible, and that third method is right. the historical and literary form of the bible is recognized to the full. but it is regarded not as an end in itself, but as a means to an end. historical study is necessary not only to establish to the modern man the saving facts of the gospel, but also to do justice to the dramatic narrative form in which god has revealed to us his eternal will. it is nearer the truth, then, to say that the new testament is a single book than to say that it is a collection of books. its parts differ widely among themselves, in authorship, in date, in circumstances, in aim. those differences must be studied carefully, if the full meaning is to be obtained. but widely as the new testament writings differ among themselves, they differ yet far more widely from all other books. they presented themselves originally to the church with a divine authority, which is foreign to the ordinary writings of men. that authority has been confirmed through the christian centuries. those who have submitted their lives to the new testament have never been confounded. the new testament has been to them the voice of god. . the four divisions of the new testament ( ) the gospels.--christianity is based upon historical facts. attempts, it is true, are often made to separate it from history. but they are bound to result in failure. give up history, and you can retain some things. but you can never retain a gospel. for "gospel" means "good news," and "good news" means tidings, information derived from the witness of others. in other words, it means history. the question whether religion can be independent of history is really just the old question whether we need a gospel. the gospel is news that something has happened--something that puts a different face upon life. what that something is is told us in matthew, mark, luke and john. it is the life and death and resurrection of jesus christ. ( ) the book of the acts.--the book of the acts is a history of the extension of christianity from jerusalem out into the gentile world. it represents that extension as guided by the spirit of god, and thus exhibits the divine warrant for the acceptance of us gentiles, and for the development of the christian church. it provides the outline of apostolic history without which we could not understand the other new testament books, especially the epistles of paul. it illustrates to the full what has been said above about the value of the historical form in which the bible teaching is presented. by reading this vivid narrative we obtain an impression of the power of the holy spirit which no systematic treatise could give. ( ) the epistles.--the epistles of the new testament are not just literature put in an epistolary form, but real letters. it is true that the addresses of some of them are very broad, for example, those of james and of i peter; and that some of them contain no specific address at all, for example, hebrews and i john. but the great majority of them, at least, were written under very special circumstances and intended to be read first by very definite people. the chief letter-writer of the new testament was the apostle paul. to a certain extent he used the forms of letter-writing of his time, just as everyone to-day begins a letter with "dear sir." within the last twenty years a great number of greek private letters, dating from about the time of paul, have been discovered in egypt, where they have been preserved by the dry climate. it is interesting to compare them with the letters of paul. there are some striking similarities in language; for both these letter-writers and paul used the natural language of daily life rather than the extremely artificial language of the literature of that period. to a certain extent, also, paul used the same epistolary forms. the differences, however, are even more instructive than the resemblances. it is true, the pauline epistles are not literary treatises, but real letters. but on the other hand they are not ordinary private letters intended to be read and thrown away, like the letters that have been discovered in egypt. most of them were intended to be read originally in churches. it is natural, then, that they should have been written in a loftier style than is to be found in mere business communications and the like. and if paul uses the epistolary forms of his time he uses them in an entirely new way. even the mere openings of the epistles are made the vehicle of christian truth. "grace to you and peace from god our father and the lord jesus christ"--there is nothing like that in contemporary letter-writing. the openings of the pauline epistles form an interesting study. they are varied with wonderful skill to suit the varied character and subject matter of the letters that follow. paul is never merely formal. the letters of paul differ widely among themselves. the epistle to the romans is almost a systematic exposition of the plan of salvation. philemon is concerned with a little personal matter between paul and one of his converts. but even where paul is most theological he is personal, and even where he is most personal, he is faithful to his theology. theology in him is never separate from experience, and experience never separate from theology. even petty problems he settles always in the light of eternal principles. hence his letters, though the specific circumstances that gave rise to them are past and gone, will never be antiquated. ( ) the apocalypse.--the christian life is a life of hope. inwardly we are free, but our freedom is not yet fully realized. we are in danger of losing our hope in the trials or in the mere humdrum of life. to keep it alive, the apocalypse opens a glorious vision of the future. the vision is presented in symbolical language. it is not intended to help in any calculation of the times and seasons. but it shows us the lamb upon the throne--and that is enough. * * * * * in the library.--davis, "dictionary of the bible": articles on "bible," "canon of the new testament," "covenant," "new testament," and "testament." lesson ii the roman background of christianity christianity is not a human product. it is not to be explained by what preceded it on the earth. it is a new beginning in history, an immediate exercise of the divine power. but though christianity was not produced by men, it operates upon men, and upon men subject to all the ordinary conditions of earthly life. primitive christianity, then, which we shall study this year, cannot be understood fully without an examination of the historical conditions under which it arose. in the class, the lesson should probably be approached through the new testament examples of the general principles which are outlined in the lesson helps. examples will be found in the passages assigned in the student's text book, and others should be sought for elsewhere. . the establishment of the empire by the middle of the first century before christ the power of the roman republic extended around the mediterranean sea. victories abroad, however, were accompanied by serious troubles at home. the increase of wealth and the importation of slave labor had produced unfortunate social conditions. the realm had become too large to be administered adequately by the old republican government. individuals sometimes obtained practical control of affairs, and the state was torn by civil wars. finally, in b. c., julius cæsar entered rome at the head of an army, and roman liberty was at an end. after the assassination of cæsar in b. c., there was a succession of civil wars, and then, by the victory of actium in b. c., octavius, who later assumed the name of augustus, became sole ruler. augustus died in a. d. . subsequent emperors during the first century were: tiberius (a. d. - ), caligula (a. d. - ), claudius (a. d. - ), nero (a. d. - ), galba, otho and vitellius (a. d. ), vespasian (a. d. - ), titus (a. d. - ), domitian (a. d. - ), nerva (a. d. - ), trajan (a. d. - ). . roman administration under the empire the general advantages of the roman imperial government have been considered in the student's text book. it will here be advisable to consider one or two features a little more in detail. much of what follows can be illustrated from the new testament; for the acquaintance of new testament writers, especially of luke, with roman administration is not only accurate but also minute. the students should be encouraged to seek new testament illustrations for themselves. ( ) the provinces.--the provinces of the empire are to be distinguished from the territories of subject kings or princes. the latter were quite subservient to rome, but were given more independence of administration. a good example of such a subject king, theoretically an ally, but in reality a vassal, was herod the great, who ruled over all palestine till b. c. the provinces themselves were divided into two great classes--imperial provinces and senatorial provinces. the imperial provinces were under the immediate control of the emperor. they were governed by "legates," who had no regular term of office, but served at the emperor's pleasure. the imperial provinces were those in which, on account of unsettled conditions, or for the defense of the empire, large bodies of troops had to be maintained. thus, by keeping the appointment of the legates exclusively in his own hands, the emperor retained the direct control of the all-important power of the army. a good example of an imperial province is the great province of syria, with capital at antioch. palestine was more or less under the supervision of the syrian legate. districts different from the great imperial provinces, but, like them, under the immediate control of the emperor, were governed by "procurators." judea, from a. d. to a. d. , and from a. d. on, is an example. the senatorial provinces were governed by "proconsuls," chosen by lot from among the members of the senate. the proconsuls served for only one year. even over these provinces and their governors the emperor retained the fullest supervisory authority. the senatorial provinces composed the central and more settled portions of the empire, where large standing armies would not be needed. examples are achaia, with capital at corinth, and cyprus with capital at paphos. proconsuls of both of these provinces are mentioned in the new testament by name. ( ) local government.--the romans did not attempt to introduce perfect uniformity throughout the empire. the original greek unit of political life was the city, and greek cities were scattered over the east before the roman conquest. with regard to local affairs, many of the cities retained a certain amount of independence. it is interesting to observe the local peculiarities of the cities described in the acts. in addition to the greek cities, many of which were more or less "free" in local affairs, many "roman colonies" had been established here and there throughout the empire. the original colonists were often veterans of the roman armies. of course the populations soon came to be mixed, but roman traditions were cultivated in the colonies more than elsewhere. a number of the cities of the acts were colonies, and one, philippi, is expressly declared to be such. acts : . in that city the roman character of the magistrates appears clearly from the lucan narrative. there were "prætors" and "lictors." ( ) roman citizenship.--before new testament times roman citizenship had been extended to all italy. italy, therefore, was not a province or group of provinces, but was regarded as a part of rome. outside of italy roman citizenship was a valuable special privilege. it raised a man above the mass of the provincial population. some of the advantages of it appear clearly in the new testament narrative. because paul was a roman citizen he was legally exempt from the most degrading forms of punishment, and had a right to appeal to the court of the emperor. roman citizenship was sometimes acquired by money, but paul inherited it from his father. . roman religion under the empire, rome was possessed of a state religion. the ancient gods of the republic were retained. there were great divinities like jupiter and mars, and there were numberless private divinities of individual households. the ancient religion had, indeed, undergone modifications. new divinities in plenty had been received. but the reception of the new did not involve abolition of the old. on the contrary, the gods of other peoples could be accepted just because they were regarded as nothing but the roman gods under different names. thus, long before the christian era, there had been a thoroughgoing identification of the gods of greece with the gods of rome. the greek zeus, for example, was identified with the roman jupiter; the greek ares with the roman mars. the gods of countries other than greece were also received, though, as far as the city of rome was concerned, with some conservatism. in the roman world, religion was a national affair. worship of the national gods was not only piety, but also patriotism. patriotism and religion were inseparably connected. support of the gods of rome, even where personal faith in them had been undermined, was considered to be the duty of every loyal citizen. the political aspect of roman religion appears most clearly in the worship of the roman emperors. this remarkable development appears from the beginning of the empire. augustus, indeed, refused to receive divine honors, at least in the west. but in the east even he was worshiped, and as time went on the reluctance of the emperors disappeared. some of the worst of the emperors were most insistent upon their own divinity. perhaps the first impulse of the modern man is to regard the cæsar cult simply as a particularly despicable form of flattery. in reality it was more than that. it was not established by imperial edict. it was not dictated primarily by servile fear. the greek inhabitants of the empire really regarded augustus as their saviour. and so he was, as far as any man could be. he saved them from the miseries of civil war, and from the rapacity of the degenerate republic; he gave them peace and happiness. and they responded by regarding him as a god. to them it was natural. to them it was nothing new. alexander the great had been regarded as a god long before the christian era. his successors in syria and in egypt had also received divine honors. to the genuine romans, the thing did not come so easy. the cæsar cult, at least at first, was not developed in the west. but even the romans could worship the emperor's "genius" or spirit, and from that to the actual worship of the emperor was but a step. essential to the whole process of deification, both in rome and in the east, was the close connection in ancient thinking between deity and humanity, and between religion and the state. if patriotism is religion, then the king is a god. the cæsar cult was the most palpable incorporation of the state religion. worship of the emperor, therefore, might well be the test of loyalty to rome. it could be practiced by skeptics and philosophers. it could be practiced by the devotees of all religions--save two. jews and christians alone could not bow at the emperor's shrine, for their god was a god who could brook no rival. he was not merely the greatest among many. he was the only lord, maker of heaven and earth. . the roman empire and subsequent history between christianity and the roman state, with its official religion, a life-and-death struggle was inevitable. but in the providence of god it was delayed. the empire was used not to crush christianity but to open the world before it. but was the empire really identical with the world? it seemed so to the romans and to the greeks. to them the empire was the world. and they were right. not, of course, in a literal sense. in the first century after christ, vast civilizations--for example the civilization of china--were already in existence. there were great peoples of whom the romans had never heard. but roman arrogance has at last been vindicated. for rome was in reality the key to subsequent history. rome was the parent of europe, and europe is moving the world. even china is at last being opened to the civilization of rome. the romans were right. he who could master rome would be master, one day, of the world. it has been a long process. but god's plans are sure. christianity appeared at the one time when the world was open before it. by the power of the divine spirit it conquered the empire. the empire dominated its barbarian conquerors. the barbarians are the parents of modern civilization. modern civilization is invading the earth's remotest bounds. china, at last, is within our ken. realms long closed have at last been opened. another great opportunity! an opportunity for greed and selfishness! an opportunity for a dismal skepticism! and an opportunity for the church of god! * * * * * in the library.--hastings, "dictionary of the bible": adeney, article on "cæsar"; gwatkin, articles on "roman empire," and "rome." hastings, "encyclopædia of religion and ethics": iverach, article on "cæsarism." westcott, "the two empires," in "the epistles of st. john," pp. - . ramsay, "the cities of st. paul," pp. - . lesson iii the greek background of christianity the purpose of the present lesson is to make the student feel that the gospel was from the beginning a real gospel in a real world. if we isolate the early preaching from its environment, we make it seem like an unreal thing. study of new testament times makes the new testament itself become a more living, a more interesting book. in the student's text book an outline of the hellenistic age has been provided. it has been supplemented below by illustrative material. but in the class the lesson can probably be best approached from the side of the new testament itself. in what languages is the bible written? how did the new testament come to be written in greek? what other languages are mentioned in the new testament? what light do these passages shed upon the linguistic conditions of the time? what is the attitude of the apostles toward greek thought? is that attitude altogether unfavorable, or did the early missionaries ever lay hold upon the higher aspirations of their gentile hearers (athens)? where did the missionaries come into contact with heathen superstition? (several fine examples in the acts). what was the moral condition of the greco-roman world? how was the hellenistic age like our own? why did god send our lord just in the first century? what was the social condition of the early christians? do you think that was an advantage or a disadvantage? what men of higher position are mentioned in the new testament? questions like these will serve to relate the general expositions in the lesson helps to the new testament itself. the lesson helps are intended to provide merely the presuppositions necessary for intelligent study. god working for real men in a real world--that is the subject of the lesson. . the hellenistic age the greek world culture which prevailed after the conquest of alexander was widely different from the greek life of the classical period. the earlier period is called the "hellenic" period, the later period is designated as "hellenistic." when greek thought made itself master of the world, it became mingled with numberless foreign elements. the mixture appears most clearly, perhaps, in the sphere of religion. polytheism was capable of indefinite expansion. new gods could easily be identified with the old, or else be received along with them without a conflict. the religion of the greco-roman world is therefore different from that of ancient greece. it is a curious mixture of the most diverse beliefs. nevertheless, the whole deserves to be called hellenistic, because even the most strikingly non-grecian elements were usually subjected more or less to the subtle molding of the greek spirit. the hellenistic age used to be despised, but among modern scholars it is coming into its own. its literary products are admittedly inferior to the glories of the earlier age, but even in literature its achievements are not to be despised, and in other spheres it is supreme. notably in mathematics and in natural science it was the golden age. euclid, the geometrician, lived three centuries before christ. the learning of the hellenistic age was centered in alexandria in egypt, a city which had been founded by alexander the great. athens had, perhaps, ceased to possess the primacy. that fact is typical of the time. greek culture had ceased to belong to greece in the narrower sense. it had become a possession of the world. the great library of alexandria was a sign of the times. the hellenistic age was an age of widespread learning. when rome became master of the eastern world, conditions were not fundamentally changed. rome merely hastened a process that was already at work. already the nations had been brought together by the spread of greek culture; roman law merely added the additional bond of political unity. the roman legions were missionaries of an all-pervading hellenism. the greco-roman world was astonishingly modern. it was modern in its cosmopolitanism. in our own time the nations have again been brought together. the external agencies for their welding are far more perfect to-day than they were under the empire. even the roman roads would be but a poor substitute for the railroad and the telegraph and the steamship. but on the other hand we lack the bond of a common language. in some ways the civilized world was even more of a unit in the first century than it is to-day. the cosmopolitanism of the roman empire was a god-given opportunity for the church. in a cosmopolitan age, if a man has something to say, he will not lack for an audience. his message will be understood in one place as well as in another. the lesson is obvious for the church of to-day. again god has opened the world before us. if we have a message, in god's name let us proclaim it while yet there is time. . the greek bible the church originated in palestine. the first missionaries were native jews. yet even they had been affected by the cosmopolitanism of the time. even they could use greek, in addition to their native language. and paul, the greatest of the missionaries, though a jew, was a citizen of a greek city. the church from the beginning was able to speak to the larger world. one difficulty might possibly have arisen. the christian mission was not carried on merely by the oral word. from the beginning christianity was a religion with a book. and that book was not greek. on the contrary it was intensely un-grecian. the old testament is intolerant of heathen ideas. it is deeply rooted in the life of the chosen people. how could a hebrew book be used in the greek world? the difficulty might have been serious. but in the providence of god it had been overcome. the old testament was a hebrew book, but before the christian era it had been translated into greek. from the beginning christianity was provided with a greek bible. it is always difficult to make a new translation of the bible. every missionary knows that. the introduction of a new translation takes time. it was fortunate, then, that a greek-speaking church had a greek bible ready to hand. everything was prepared for the gospel. god's time had come. roman rule had brought peace. greek culture had produced unity of speech. there was a greek world, there were greek-speaking missionaries, and there was a greek bible. in the first century, the salvation that was of the jews could become a salvation for the whole world. . the papyri the world in which the gospel was proclaimed is deserving of careful study. how shall it be investigated? the most obvious way is to study the literature of the period. until recent years that was almost the only way. but that method is partial at best. for literature is after all but an imperfect measure of any age. the society that is found in books is an idealized society, or at any rate it is the society of the great. the plain man is unrecorded. his deeds are not deemed worthy of a place in history. within the last thirty years, however, the plain people of the ancient world have come remarkably into view. they are revealed to us in the "non-literary papyri." "papyri" are pieces of papyrus. papyrus was the common writing material of antiquity up to about a. d. , when vellum, or parchment, came into general use. unfortunately papyrus, which was made from the pith of the papyrus plant, is not a very durable substance, so that ancient papyri have been preserved until modern times only under exceptionally favorable conditions. these conditions are found in egypt, where the dry climate has kept the papyrus from disintegration. in egypt, within the last thirty years, have been discovered large numbers of papyrus sheets with greek writing. of these the "literary papyri" contain simply parts of books. they differ from other copies of the works in question only in that they are usually older than the vellum manuscripts. the "non-literary papyri," on the other hand, are unique. they are private documents of all sorts--receipts, petitions, wills, contracts, census returns, and most interesting of all, private letters. it was usually not intended that these documents should be preserved. they were simply thrown away upon rubbish heaps or used as wrappings of mummies. they have been preserved only by chance. the non-literary papyri are important first of all in the study of language. they exhibit the language of everyday life, as distinguished from the language of literature. the language of literature always differs more or less from the language used on the street, and the difference was particularly wide in the greek of the hellenistic period. the books of the time were modeled to a considerable extent upon the ancient classics, but the actual spoken language had been changing. hence the literary language had become exceedingly artificial. up to within the last few years, the literary language alone could be studied. the books of the period were preserved, but the language of daily life was gone. now, however, the papyri supply what was lacking. in them there is no attempt at style. they are composed in the language which was employed in the ordinary affairs of life and preserve the actual spoken language of every day. at this point a remarkable fact must be noticed. the language of the new testament is more like the language of the non-literary papyri than it is like the language of contemporary literature. the papyri indicate, therefore, that the new testament is composed in the natural living language of the time rather than according to the canons of an artificial rhetoric. the artlessness of the new testament has sometimes been regarded as a reproach. instead, it is a cause for rejoicing. the simplicity of the gospel would only be concealed by niceties of style. the greatness of the new testament is independent of literary art. it would be a mistake, however, to suppose that the new testament, because it is composed in the language of the people, is characterized by anything like cheapness or vulgarity. on the contrary its simplicity is the noble simplicity of truth. in the new testament the spoken language of the greco-roman world, in all its living freshness, becomes a worthy vehicle for the sublimest thoughts. the non-literary papyri, then, reproduce for us the spoken language of the time as distinguished from the artificial language of literature. but that does not exhaust their importance. they afford a knowledge not only of language, but also of life. through them ordinary people are revealed in the ordinary relations of every day. in them, the ancient world has been made to live again. a few examples (see the book of professor milligan mentioned at the end of the lesson) will serve to indicate the character of the papyrus letters. the following boy's letter (of the second or the third century after christ) is written in very bad grammar, but is for that reason all the more lifelike. (the translation is taken from grenfell and hunt, "oxyrhynchus papyri," part i., p. .) "theon to his father theon, greeting. it was a fine thing of you not to take me with you to the city! if you won't take me with you to alexandria i won't write you a letter or speak to you or say good-by to you; and if you go to alexandria i won't take your hand nor ever greet you again. that is what will happen if you won't take me. mother said to archalaus, 'it quite upsets him to be left behind (?).' it was good of you to send me presents ... on the th, the day you sailed. send me a lyre, i implore you. if you don't, i won't eat, i won't drink; there now!" the following invitation to dinner, of the second century after christ, throws light upon i corinthians (the translation taken from professor milligan): "antonius, son of ptolemæus, invites you to dine with him at the table of the lord serapis in the house of claudius serapion on the th at o'clock." "the lord serapis" is a god. even an ordinary dinner party seems thus to be regarded as the table of serapis. under such conditions the christian life must have been hard to lead. no wonder the corinthian christians had to ask paul questions. even the ordinary affairs of life were intimately connected with a false religion. what should the attitude of the christians be? where should they draw the line in associating with their heathen friends? . a real gospel in a real world the people that are introduced to us so intimately in the papyri are probably very fair representatives of the people among whom the gospel was first proclaimed. in that cosmopolitan age the society of egyptian towns was probably not so very different from that of corinth. the people of the papyri are not the great men of the time; they are just plain folk. but the early christians were also usually not of exalted social position, though there were exceptions. "not many wise after the flesh, not many mighty, not many noble" were called. i cor. : . many of the early christians were slaves, many were humble tradesmen. the same classes appear in the papyri. in the papyri we are introduced into the private lives of the men to whom the gospel was proclaimed. seeing, but unseen, hidden as by a magic cap, we watch them in their most intimate affairs. and we come away with a new feeling of the reality of early christian history. these men were not so very different from ourselves. they were real men and women, living in a real world. and they needed a real gospel. * * * * * in the library.--hastings, "dictionary of the bible," extra volume: ramsay, article on "religion of greece," pp. - , especially pp. - . milligan, "selections from the greek papyri," (with translations). deissmann, "the philology of the greek bible," pp. - , - . ramsay, "the cities of st. paul," pp. - . browning, "cleon," (vol. iv, pp. - of the riverside edition.) lesson iv the jewish background of christianity i. palestinian judaism . sources the new testament is one of the chief sources of information about the palestinian judaism of the first century. other important sources are the works of josephus, a first-century jewish historian, and the mishna. the mishna is a collection of jewish interpretations of the mosaic law. in its written form it is thought to have been produced at the end of the second century, but it contains a mass of earlier material which had been preserved by oral tradition. . outline of jewish history after the conclusion of the old testament period the jewish nation had undergone important changes. if, therefore, the judaism of the first century is to be understood, the student must have in mind at least a bare outline of the history between the testaments. old testament history closes with the rebuilding of the walls of jerusalem and the reorganization of the national life which took place under ezra and nehemiah in the fifth century before christ. at that time judah, or "judea," was the only part of palestine which was occupied by the jews, and they occupied it only as vassals--though with independence in internal affairs--of the kings of persia. the persian dominion continued for over a century. then, in the latter part of the fourth century before christ, judea was conquered by alexander the great. for some hundred years after the death of alexander, the country was a bone of contention between the kings of egypt and the kings of syria--that is, between the ptolemies and the seleucids. at the beginning of the second century before christ the king of syria won a permanent victory. under the ptolemies and at first under the seleucids, as well as under the persians, the jews enjoyed a considerable measure of independence in the management of their own affairs. their religion, in particular, was left quite unmolested. but the assimilation which was not being accomplished by force was being accomplished by peaceful influences. the all-pervasive greek culture of the period was making itself felt in palestine as well as elsewhere. judea seemed to be in danger of being hellenized. under the reign of antiochus epiphanes of syria ( - b. c.), however, the policy of toleration was suddenly interrupted. antiochus tried to stamp out the jewish religion by force. the result was a heroic uprising led by mattathias and his sons, who are called the maccabees. the tyranny of antiochus had caused a mighty popular reaction against the hellenizing party among the jews. devotion to the religion of israel with exclusion of foreign influences was ever afterwards the dominant tendency in jewish history. the maccabees were at first wonderfully successful against overwhelming odds; and when the opposing forces seemed at last to have become too powerful, internal conflicts at the syrian court gave the jewish patriots that independence which they could probably not otherwise have maintained. rulers belonging to the maccabean dynasty governed the jewish nation for about a hundred years, during most of which period they were independent. their territory at first embraced only judea, but was gradually enlarged over the other parts of palestine. galilee, which--since the destruction of the northern israelitish kingdom centuries before--had become predominantly gentile, was judaized under aristobulus i in - b. c. before the time of christ it had become thoroughly jewish. unfortunately the worldly power of the maccabees had brought worldliness of spirit. the first revolt had been undertaken from a lofty religious motive, in order to maintain the worship of jehovah. as the years went on, the maccabean rulers became increasingly engrossed in the extension of political power. allying themselves with the aristocratic party among the jews, they came to favor the extension of those greek influences--though not in the sphere of religion--which at first they had opposed. under queen alexandra ( - b. c.) it is true, there was a reaction. the strictly jewish, anti-hellenistic party again became dominant. but under alexandra's successors there was civil strife, and the all-conquering romans found the country an easy prey. pompey took possession of jerusalem in b. c. the years that followed saw the gradual rise of the family of herod the great, who, as vassal of the romans, became king of all palestine in b. c. and ruled until b. c. herod was an idumæan, not a genuine jew. idumæa, however, the country to the south of judah, had been judaized some time before. herod was at heart a hellenist. he built greek theaters and amphitheaters not only in the numerous greek cities in or near palestine, but also in jerusalem itself. nevertheless he was wise enough to support the jewish religion and generally to respect the customs of the people. his magnificent rebuilding of the temple was probably intended chiefly to win popular favor. at herod's death, his territory was divided among his sons. archelaus was given judea, antipas--the "herod" of jesus' public ministry--received galilee and perea, with the title of "tetrarch," and philip received certain territories to the east of galilee. archelaus was banished in a. d. , antipas was banished in a. d. , and philip died in a. d. . after the banishment of archelaus, judea was administered by roman procurators till a. d. , when all palestine was given to herod agrippa i. acts : - , - . after a. d. , procurators were again in control. the misgovernment of the procurators led to the great revolt in a. d. . after four years of war, jerusalem was taken by the roman army in a. d. . the temple was destroyed, and the offering of sacrifices ceased. the destruction of the temple marks an epoch in jewish history. henceforth the national center was gone. there was another uprising in a. d. - , but that was the last. a gentile city was erected on the ruins of jerusalem, and for a considerable time at least the jews were forbidden even to enter its precincts. . administration and parties after the return from the exile, the priests occupied a position of leadership. the high priest, whose office was hereditary, was practically head of the jewish state. with him was associated a council, composed of members of the priestly aristocracy. this state of affairs prevailed during the persian and greek periods. under the maccabees the power of the high priest reached its highest point. for after a time the maccabean rulers themselves assumed the title of high priest, and still later the title of king. the high priest, then, under the maccabees, was also king. under herod the great, on the contrary, the high priesthood sank to its lowest ebb. herod made and unmade high priests at pleasure. the council associated with the high priest was, under alexandra, opened to the members of the strict anti-hellenistic party. at the time of christ it included both pharisees and sadducees. these parties became distinct at the time of the maccabees. the sadducees--the origin of the name is not altogether clear--were the aristocratic party, hospitable to greek culture. the pharisees were the strict jewish party, devoted to the law, and opposed to foreign influences. the name "pharisee" means "separated." the pharisees were "separated" from the mass of the people by a stricter observance of the mosaic law. at first the pharisees supported the maccabean leaders; for the maccabean revolt was in the interests of the jewish religion. but when the maccabees became engrossed in worldly politics and susceptible to greek influences the pharisees opposed them. at the time of christ the essential characteristics of the parties remained unchanged. . language some centuries before christ, hebrew had ceased to be the ordinary language of palestine. as the language of the old testament it continued to be studied. old testament passages in hebrew were read in the synagogue. hebrew was used also to some extent as the language of learned discussion. but for all ordinary purposes its place had been taken by aramaic, a language of the semitic family closely related to hebrew. at the time of christ aramaic was the spoken language of the palestinian jews. even in the synagogues, the old testament passages, after having been read in hebrew, were translated orally into the language which the people could understand. but, since the time of alexander the great, another language had made its way into palestine along with aramaic. this was the greek. the kingdoms into which alexander's empire was divided were greek kingdoms. two of them, syria and egypt, bore rule alternately over palestine. with the greek government came greek culture and the greek language. then, under antiochus epiphanes, there was a mighty reaction. thereafter religion, at least, was kept altogether free from greek influences. in other spheres, however, under the maccabean kings and still more under the romans, greek culture effected an entrance. at the time of christ there were typical greek cities not only to the east of the jordan in decapolis, where magnificent ruins even to-day attest the ancient greco-roman civilization, and not only along the coast of the mediterranean, but even within the confines of palestine proper. with some truth palestine in the first century may be called a bilingual country. greek and aramaic were both in use. aramaic was the language of the mass of the people. many, no doubt, could speak no other language. but if a man desired to make his way in the world in any public capacity or in trade he would be obliged to learn the cosmopolitan language of the time. no doubt very many could speak both languages. jesus and his apostles belonged to those circles which were least affected by the encroachments of greek civilization. the whole atmosphere of the gospels is as un-greek as could be imagined. as is proved by the presence of aramaic words even in our greek gospels, aramaic was undoubtedly the language in which the gospel was originally proclaimed. aramaic was the language of jesus' boyhood home, and aramaic was the language of his intercourse with the disciples and of his public preaching. it is perfectly possible, however, that even jesus may have used greek upon rare occasions, for example in conversation with pilate, the roman procurator. his disciples, after the resurrection, found themselves at the head of a greek-speaking community. the early church in jerusalem was composed not only of "hebrews," but also of "grecians," or hellenists. acts : . the hellenists were greek-speaking jews of the dispersion who were sojourning more or less permanently in the holy city. the apostles seem to have entered upon their new functions without difficulty. some knowledge of greek, no doubt, all of them brought with them from their galilean homes, and their knowledge would be increased through practice. it is not surprising then that several of the original apostles and two of the brothers of jesus were the authors of greek books of the new testament. * * * * * in the library.--riggs, "a history of the jewish people," especially pp. - , - , - . davis, "dictionary of the bible": articles on "council," "pharisees," "sadducees," "synagogue," "school," "scribe," "aramaic," and "hebrew." the outline of jewish history and institutions which is provided in the lesson helps for this lesson and the following is dependent especially upon the large german work of schürer. lesson v the jewish background of christianity ii. the judaism of the dispersion the presentation of the lesson in class may be begun somewhat in the manner suggested in the student's text book. the student should be made to appreciate the practical problem of a missionary in a new city. various solutions of the problem may be adopted. the missionary may simply engage in conversation with individuals in the street, or he may hire a room and advertise his preaching. in any case the securing of an audience is usually no easy matter. it is difficult to know how to begin. the case might naturally have been the same with paul and his companions when, for example, after the journey up from perga they arrived at pisidian antioch. complete strangers were perhaps not much better received in those days than they are now. how could the missionaries get a hearing for their message? in some cases, they might simply take their stand in the market place and talk to the passers-by. paul tried that method in athens. it might do when nothing better offered. but fortunately there was usually a far better opportunity. the synagogue offered an audience. what is more, it offered just exactly the most promising audience that could possibly have been secured. the scene in the synagogue at pisidian antioch is typical of what happened again and again. the student should be made to appreciate the remarkable liberality and informality of the synagogue customs. there seem to have been no set preachers. any jew who really had a message could be heard. he needed only to go in and sit down. acts : . paul and barnabas had no difficulty in making their fitness known. "brethren," said the rulers of the synagogue, "if ye have any word of exhortation for the people, say on." acts : . they had a word of exhortation indeed. "jesus is the messiah for whom you are waiting. he has died for your sins. he has risen from the dead, and is now alive to save you." it was a powerful word, and it bore fruit. the native jews, it is true, soon came out in opposition. the reasons for their opposition are not far to seek. jealousy was an important factor. christianity was evidently too radical a thing to be simply a sect of judaism. if allowed to continue, it would destroy the prerogatives of israel. it could not be controlled. its success was too great. on that next sabbath in pisidian antioch, "almost the whole city was gathered together to hear the word of god." the jewish mission had never had a success like that. "when the jews saw the multitudes, they were filled with jealousy." christianity had taken away the heritage of israel. in one way the jewish opposition displayed genuine insight into the situation. christianity was really destined to be a fatal rival to the older judaism. what took place on a small scale at antioch was repeated on the larger stage of history. when the christian mission began, judaism was a successful missionary religion. soon afterwards it had withdrawn hopelessly into its age-long isolation. various causes contributed to this result. the destruction of the national life in palestine and the increasing influence of the strict rabbinical schools both had an important part. but at least one factor in the process was the competition of the christian church. christianity offered the world everything that judaism could offer, and more. it offered the knowledge of the one god, and the lofty morality, and the authoritative book. in addition, it offered a way of redemption--and the men of that time were preëminently seekers after redemption--through the sacrifice of christ. it offered all these things, moreover, without requiring any relinquishment of purely national characteristics. christianity did not demand union with any one race. it had a gospel for the world. no wonder, then, that those who had been attracted by judaism now became adherents of christianity. the jews were filled with envy. it was natural from their point of view, but it was a sad mistake. had they themselves accepted the gospel, the gospel would have been to their glory. how glorious was the mission of israel! a blessing to the whole world! far better than any narrow particularism! but they were not willing to accept the message. nevertheless, despite their opposition, the church should not forget the debt which she owes to israel. the dispersion was like the judaism of palestine. in both cases the men themselves were opposed to the gospel. but in both cases they had preserved the deposit of divine truth. judaism, despite itself, opened the way for the christian church. one service which the dispersion rendered to christianity has been illustrated by the scene at pisidian antioch. that service was the providing of an audience. another service was the assurance of legal protection. this may be illustrated by another incident in the acts--the appeal to gallio. acts : - . there the opposition of the jews appears in all its bitterness. no doubt that opposition was a serious hindrance to the work of the church. just because christianity was regarded as a jewish sect, the christians were subject to persecution by the jewish authorities. but persecutions by the jews, annoying though they were, were far less serious than opposition on the part of the roman authorities. and the latter was, at first, conspicuously absent. gallio's decision is a fair example of the general attitude of the roman magistrates. christianity, as a jewish sect, was allowed to go its way. judaism, despite itself, afforded the church legal protection. beginning with these two striking scenes, the teacher may proceed to the more general presentation of the lesson. in what follows, the outline of the student's text book will be supplemented at one or two points. . the causes and extent of the dispersion deportations of jews to foreign countries took place at various times. the most famous of those deportations was carried out by nebuchadnezzar after his conquest of judah, about b. c. many of nebuchadnezzar's captives did not join in the return under the persian monarchy, but remained permanently in the east and formed the nucleus of the large jewish population of mesopotamia. when pompey conquered palestine in the first century before christ, he carried many jews as slaves to rome. afterwards they were liberated, and formed a large jewish colony at the capital of the empire. these are merely examples. part of the dispersion was due to forcible exile. other causes have been mentioned in the student's text book. it is a question, however, whether all of these causes combined are sufficient to account for the extraordinary growth of the dispersion. schürer believes that the vastness of the jewish population presupposes the merging of large bodies of proselytes into the jewish people. he also believes, however, that these thoroughgoing conversions were less numerous in new testament times than they had been before. harnack calculates that at the time of the death of augustus there were from four million to four and a half million jews in the roman empire, including about seven hundred thousand in palestine, and that, if that estimate be correct, then the jews formed perhaps some seven per cent of the total population. of course, harnack is himself the first to admit that such calculations are exceedingly uncertain. but so much at least is clear--the jews in the first century were surprisingly numerous. . the septuagint translation and the language of the new testament the name "septuagint," derived from the latin word for "seventy," has been applied to the alexandrian translation of the old testament in reference to an ancient story about its origin. according to this story, the translation was made by seventy-two men summoned from jerusalem by ptolemy philadelphus, king of egypt, in order to add the jewish law to the royal library at alexandria. the story is certainly not true in details, and is probably not even correct in representing the translation as destined primarily for the royal library. more probably the translation was intended for the greek-speaking jews of egypt. the septuagint is a translation of the hebrew old testament into the greek world language of the period, and into the popular, spoken form of that language, not into the literary form. the translation differs widely in character in the different books, for many different translators had a part in it. some of the books are translated with such slavish literalness as to be almost unintelligible to a greek. everywhere, indeed, the influence of the hebrew original makes itself felt to some degree. hebrew idioms are often copied in the translation instead of being remolded according to the peculiarities of the greek language. the septuagint exerted an important influence upon the language of the new testament. the septuagint was the greek bible of the new testament writers, and the influence of a bible upon language is very strong. a good example is afforded by the influence of the king james version upon the whole development of modern english. it is not surprising, therefore, that as the septuagint was influenced by hebrew, so the language of the new testament also displays a semitic coloring. that coloring was induced partly by the septuagint, but it was also induced in other ways. part of the new testament, for example the words of jesus, goes back ultimately to an aramaic original. all the new testament writers except one were jews, and had spoken aramaic as well as greek. no wonder, then, that their greek was influenced by the semitic languages. this semitic influence upon the language of the new testament is not so great as was formerly supposed, but it cannot be ignored. the new testament is written in the natural, non-literary form of the greek world language. that is the main thing to be said. but upon this base is superposed an appreciable influence of hebrew and aramaic. the importance of the septuagint for the early christian mission was inestimable. every pioneer missionary knows how difficult it is to create the vocabulary necessary to express new religious ideas. in the case of the earliest christian mission, that labor had already been done. it had been done by the jews of alexandria. by the septuagint, the great ideas of the old testament--and upon these ideas christianity was based--had already been put into a greek form. the christian church needed only to develop what had been begun. the church made good use of her opportunity. the influence of the septuagint upon the religious vocabulary of the new testament writers was profound. the septuagint had provided a vocabulary which was understood already by great masses of people--by the jews of the dispersion and by the hosts of the "god-worshipers" who attended the synagogues. naturally the christian missionaries used the words which people could understand. . conclusion the judaism of the dispersion was a wonderful preparation for the gospel. israel ought to be regarded with gratitude and sympathy. but the ultimate object of gratitude is god. the church was founded in a time of opportunity. the roman government had brought peace. the greek language had welded the nations together. the dispersion of the jews had prepared the way. these things did not come by chance. the nations were instruments in the hand of god. but instruments for what? a mighty, age-long plan! centuries of preparation! at last the saviour came. but did he come for naught? or is he saviour of you and me? * * * * * in the library.--edersheim (revised by white), "history of the jewish nation," pp. - . "the jewish encyclopedia": reinach, article on "diaspora." hastings, "dictionary of the bible": schürer, article on "diaspora," extra volume, pp. - . lesson vi the messiah the teaching of this lesson may be begun with acts : - . surely the outpouring of the spirit on the day of pentecost was something new. yet even that was explained by a reference to prophecy. and the reference is of remarkable aptness and beauty. the pentecostal speech of peter is full of the appeal to prophecy. primarily, indeed, the claims of jesus are supported by the direct testimony to his resurrection. without the facts, of course appeal to prophecy would have been useless; for it was just the wonderful correspondence of the facts with the prophecies that could induce belief. along with the direct testimony to the facts went the appeal to prophecy. the promised king of david's line at last has come. acts : ; ii sam. : , ; ps. : , ; : . and david's son is david's lord--david's lord and ours. acts : , ; ps. : ; compare matt. : - . . the new testament appeal to prophecy this speech of peter is typical of the preaching of the early church. the appeal to prophecy was absolutely central in the presentation of the gospel. proof of that fact does not need to be sought. it is written plain on the pages of the new testament. old testament prophecy was found to apply not merely to one side of the work of christ, but to all sides. israel had looked not merely for a king, but also for a prophet and a priest. peter, after his first arrest, for example, could appeal to the notable prophecy of deuteronomy: "a prophet shall the lord god raise up unto you from among your brethren, like unto me." acts : ; deut. : , . the author of hebrews could appeal to the priest after the order of melchizedek, heb. : ; ps. : , and to the symbolic sacrifices of the temple which found their fulfillment on calvary. the appeal to prophecy extended even to those things which were most distinctive of the christian message. "i delivered unto you first of all," says paul, "that which also i received: that christ died for our sins according to the scriptures; and that he was buried; and that he hath been raised on the third day according to the scriptures." i cor. : , . here the death and the resurrection of christ are both declared to be according to the scriptures. that means that they were the subject of prophecy. but the death and the resurrection of christ were the fundamental elements of the gospel. the gospel, then, in the form of prophecy, is to be found in the old testament. what old testament passages has paul here in mind? with regard to the death for our sins, the fifty-third chapter of isaiah was probably in his mind. that passage was being read by the ethiopian when philip met him, and philip made the passage a basis for preaching about jesus. acts : - . with regard to the resurrection, it is natural to think of ps. : . paul himself quoted that passage in his speech at pisidian antioch. acts : - . the appeal to prophecy did not begin with the apostles. it was initiated by jesus himself. "to-day," said jesus at nazareth after the reading of isa. : , , "hath this scripture been fulfilled in your ears." a large claim! no wonder they found it difficult to accept. when john the baptist asked, "art thou he that cometh, or look we for another?" it was to "the works of the christ" that jesus appealed. matt. : - ; isa. : , ; : . these are merely examples. throughout, jesus represented himself and his kingdom as the fulfillment of the ancient promise. "o foolish men," he said to the disciples on the way to emmaus, "and slow of heart to believe in all that the prophets have spoken! behooved it not the christ to suffer these things, and to enter into his glory? and beginning from moses and from all the prophets, he interpreted to them in all the scriptures the things concerning himself." luke : - . . the messianic hope a preparation for the gospel when the gospel was preached to pure gentiles, a great deal of preliminary labor had to be done. under what title should the claims of the saviour be presented? "christ" to the gentiles was almost meaningless, till explained. "son of god" was open to sad misconception. there were "sons of god" in greek mythology, but they were not what the early christians meant to show that jesus was. these difficulties were overcome, and speedily. gentile christians were imbued with a lofty and adequate conception of the lord. the labor was great, but it was gloriously accomplished. in this labor, however, the missionaries were assisted by the synagogues of the jews. in the synagogues, "christ" was no new term, and no new conception. in the synagogues, one proposition needed first to be proved, "this jesus ... is the christ." acts : . if that were proved, then the rest would follow. the jews knew that the messiah was lord and master. identify jesus with him, and all the lofty claims of jesus would be substantiated. how the identity was established may be observed in the speech of peter on the day of pentecost, or in the speech of paul at pisidian antioch. acts : - . it will be remembered that the synagogues attracted not merely jews but also gentiles. the gentile "god-fearers," as well as the jews, were acquainted with the messianic hope. even the gentile mission, therefore, was prepared for by the prophets of israel. . the permanent value of prophecy the appeal to prophecy, however, was not merely valuable to the early church. it is of abiding worth. it represents jesus as the culmination of a divine purpose. the hope of israel was in itself a proof of revelation, because it was so unlike the religious conceptions of other nations. the covenant people, the righteous king, the living god, the world-wide mission--that is the glory of israel. the promise is itself a proof. but still more the fulfillment. the fulfillment was an unfolding. wonderful correspondence in detail--and far more wonderful the correspondence of the whole! the promise was manifold. sometimes the messiah is in the foreground. sometimes he is out of sight. sometimes there is a human king, sometimes jehovah himself coming to judgment; sometimes a kingdom, sometimes a new covenant in the heart; sometimes a fruitful canaan, sometimes a new heaven and a new earth. but manifold though the promise, christ is the fulfillment of it all. "how many soever be the promises of god," in christ is the yea. ii cor. : . there is the wonder. in christ the apparent contradictions of the promise become glorious unity, in christ the deeper mysteries of the promise are revealed. christ the keystone of the arch! christ the culmination of a divine plan! that is the witness of the prophets. it is a witness worth having. . the messianic hope of later judaism after the close of the old testament, the promise did not die. it was preserved in the scriptures. it continued to be the life of the jewish nation. but it was not only preserved. it was also interpreted. some of the interpretation was false, but much of it was true. the jewish interpretation of the old testament promise is worthy of attention. what did the jews of the first century mean by the messiah, and what did they mean by the messianic age? in the first place, they retained the hope of a king of david's line--a human king who should conquer the enemies of israel. when it was held in a one-sided form this was a dangerous hope. it led logically to materialistic conceptions of the kingdom of god and to political unrest. it led to the effort of the jews to take jesus by force and make him a king. john : . it led to the quarrel of the disciples about the chief places in the kingdom. matt. : - ; mark : - ; luke : , . this conception of the messiah had to be corrected by jesus. "my kingdom is not of this world." john : . yet even where the messiah was conceived of as an earthly ruler, the spiritual hope was by no means always and altogether lost. the "psalms of solomon," for example, pharisaic psalms of the first century before christ, though they look for an earthly ruler, picture him as one who shall rule in righteousness. "and a righteous king and taught of god is he that reigneth over them; and there shall be no iniquity in his days in their midst, for all shall be holy and their king is the lord messiah" (ps. sol. xvii, , . see ryle and james, "psalms of the pharisees," especially pp. - ). no iniquity in the days of the messiah! that is true understanding of the old testament, even joined with the political ideal. in the second place, however, the messianic age is sometimes in later judaism conceived of as purely supernatural. the messiah is not an earthly ruler, merely helped by god, but himself a heavenly being, a preëxistent "son of man," judge of all the earth. the messianic age is ushered in not by human warfare, but by a mighty catastrophic act of god. not a liberated canaan is here the ideal, but a new heaven and a new earth. this transcendental, supernaturalistic form of the messianic hope appears in the "book of enoch" and other "apocalypses." its details are fantastic, but it was by no means altogether wrong. in many respects it was a correct interpretation of the divine promise. the new heavens and the new earth are derived from isa. : . the doctrine of the two ages was accepted by jesus and by paul--for example matt. : ; gal. : ; eph. : . the heavenly "son of man" goes back to dan. : , . the book of enoch was not altogether wrong. its use of the title "son of man" prepared for the title which jesus used. finally, the messianic hope was held in a pure and lofty form by the "poor of the land"--simple folk like those who appear in the first two chapters of luke. in the hymns of mary and zacharias and simeon, purely political and materialistic conceptions are in the background, and the speculations of the apocalypses do not appear. the highest elements of prophecy are made prominent. "for mine eyes have seen thy salvation, which thou hast prepared before the face of all peoples; a light for revelation to the gentiles, and the glory of thy people israel." luke : - . in those circles, the hope of israel burned still and pure. later judaism thus preserved the manifoldness of prophecy. there was exaggeration and there was one-sidedness; but in judaism as a whole the promise was preserved. one element at most was forgotten--the suffering servant and his sacrificial death. the death of the messiah was no easy conception. the disciples had difficulty with it. when peter heard of it, he took jesus, and began to rebuke him. matt. : . the lesson was not easy, but it had to be learned. and it was worth learning. the cross is the heart of the gospel. thus in jesus nothing was left out, except what was false. the whole promise was preserved. the revealer of god, the ruler of the kingdom, the great high priest, the human deliverer, the divine lord--these are the elements of the promise. they find their union in christ. leave one out, and the promise is mutilated. such mutilation is popular to-day. the whole christ seems too wonderful. but the church can be satisfied with nothing less. * * * * * in the library.--beecher, "the prophets and the promise," pp. - . lesson vii the book of the acts the teaching of the lesson may be begun with some very simple questions. if rightly put, they will open up a fresh way of looking at a new testament book. the way will thus be prepared for considering the deeper elements of the lesson. if interest can be aroused in the book itself, the contents of the book, in the lessons which follow, will be studied with much livelier attention. . authorship who wrote the book of the acts? how do you know? the former question will probably be answered without difficulty, but the latter may reveal difference of opinion. many of the students will know that the acts was written by the same man as the gospel of luke. but that does not settle the question. how do you know that luke was written by luke? the name does not occur in the gospel itself. the title, "according to luke," was probably added later. so, in order to determine the authorship both of luke and of the acts, recourse must be had to christian tradition. fortunately, however, tradition in this case is quite unimpeachable. in the first place, although the author of the acts is not named in the book, yet the book is not an anonymous work. undoubtedly the name of the author was known from the beginning. for the book is dedicated to an individual, theophilus. evidently theophilus knew who the author was. information about the author could thus be had from the start. if, therefore, luke did not really write the acts, some one has removed the name of the true author and substituted "luke" in place of it. that is an exceedingly unlikely supposition. in the second place, it is evident quite independently of any tradition that the book was written by an eyewitness of part of paul's missionary journeys. this fact appears from the so-called "we-sections" of the book. in certain portions of the narrative the author uses the first person instead of the third. of this peculiarity there is only one satisfactory explanation. the author uses the first person when he is describing the experiences in which he himself had a part. when, for example, the author says, not, "they made a straight course to samothrace," but "we made a straight course," acts : , he means that he was present on that voyage. this natural supposition is confirmed by the character of the "we-sections." these sections are full of such a wealth of artless detail that no one but an eyewitness could possibly have written them. the only possible way of avoiding the conclusion that a companion of paul wrote the book of the acts is to maintain that although such a man wrote the "we-sections" some one else wrote the rest of the book. but that is unlikely in the extreme. if a later author had been simply using as a source a diary of a companion of paul, he would surely either have told us he was quoting, or else have changed the first person to the third. by leaving the third person in he would simply have been producing nonsense. everyone knew who the author of the book was. the book is dedicated to a definite man. the author evidently could not have palmed himself off as a companion of paul even if he would. and if he desired to do it, he would not have chosen this remarkable way of doing it. of course if he had been a mere thoughtless compiler he might have copied his source with such slavish exactness as to leave the "we" in without noticing that in the completed work it would produce nonsense. but he was most assuredly not a mere compiler. if he used sources, he did not use them that way. the book shows a remarkable unity of style. modern research has demonstrated that fact beyond peradventure. there is a remarkable similarity of style between the "we-sections" and the rest of the book. only one hypothesis, then, does justice to the facts. the author of the "we-sections" was also the author of the whole book. when he comes to those parts of the narrative in which he himself had a part, he says very naturally "we," instead of "they." the book of the acts, then, was written by a companion of paul. that fact stands firm, even apart from any tradition. and that is the really important fact. if the book was written by an eyewitness, the particular name of the eyewitness is comparatively unimportant. but the tradition as to the name is without doubt correct. there is not the slightest reason for calling it in question. what the book of the acts itself says about its author fits exactly what paul says about luke. . date the authorship of the acts is certain. the date, however, is not so clear. the book was written by luke. but when was it written? the latter question cannot be answered with perfect precision. at least, however, since the book was written by luke, it must have been written during the lifetime of a companion of paul. a. d. , for example, would be too late, and a. d. would be unlikely. a good deal can be said for putting the date at about a. d. . this early date would explain the abrupt ending of the book. one of the most curious things about the acts is that the narrative is suddenly broken off just at the most interesting point. the trial of paul is narrated at very great length, but we are not told how it came out. the final decision, the climax of the whole long narrative, is just at hand; but with regard to it we are left altogether in suspense. was paul released? was he condemned and executed? the author does not say. his silence requires an explanation. the simplest explanation would be that luke wrote his book at the very point of time where the narrative is broken off. of course he could not tell us any more if nothing more had happened. he brought his narrative right up to date. nothing more was possible. it is true, other explanations may be proposed. (a) it has been suggested, for example, that the acts closes so abruptly because the author was saving something for another work. as the acts is the continuation of the gospel of luke, so a third work, it is said, was planned as the continuation of the acts. but even so, it seems rather strange that the author should not have given at least a hint of the outcome of that trial in order to take the edge off our curiosity. he has done something like that at the conclusion of his gospel; why not also at the conclusion of the acts? (b) but perhaps the ending is not so abrupt as it looks. the author's purpose, it is said, was not to write a biography of paul, but to show how the gospel spread from jerusalem to rome. when rome was reached, then the narrative was broken off. biographical details--even the most interesting details about the most interesting character--were ruthlessly excluded. the plan of the book had been accomplished. for this explanation there is much to be said. but the trouble with it is that especially in the latter part of the book the author as a matter of fact does show considerable interest in biographical details. the trial and shipwreck of paul are narrated with a fullness which is quite out of proportion to the rest of the history. after such a full account of the trial, it remains rather strange that the author has said not a word about the outcome. either of these last two explanations is perfectly possible. possibly the acts was written as late as a. d. . but the early date at least explains the peculiar ending best of all. . sources where did luke get the materials for his work? did he use written sources as well as oral information? the question has been discussed at very great length, but without much uniformity in the results. if he used written sources, at least he used them skillfully, placing upon them the imprint of his own style. the book possesses genuine unity. the really important fact about the sources of the book of the acts is a negative fact. whatever the sources were, the pauline epistles were not among them. compare the passages where paul and luke narrate the same events--for example gal., chs. , , with the corresponding passages in the acts--and it becomes evident that the two narratives are entirely independent. luke did not use the pauline epistles in writing his book. that is an exceedingly significant fact. it shows that the acts is an independent witness. what is more, it strengthens materially the argument for the early date of the acts. the pauline epistles at a very early time began to be collected and used generally in the church. in a. d. , for example, they would certainly have been used by anyone who was writing an account of paul's life. since, therefore, the book of the acts does not use them, that book must have been written earlier, and probably very much earlier. even in a. d. , it would perhaps have been strange that the epistles should not have been used. . purpose the proper purpose of a historian is to tell the truth. and luke was a genuine historian. his own account of his method, luke : - , shows that he knew the meaning of historical research, and the character of his books bears this out. luke did not permit any desire of putting christianity in a good light, or of defending one kind of christianity against another, to interfere with the primary duty of truthfulness. that does not mean, however, that the book of the acts is like some modern university dissertations--written simply and solely in order to say some new thing, whether interesting or no. no great historian goes to work that way. of course luke had an interest in his subject matter. of course he was convinced that christianity was a great thing, and was full of enthusiasm in narrating its history. in that he was perfectly right. christianity really was a great thing. the best celebration of its greatness was a narration of the facts. christian faith is based on fact. luke wrote, not only in the gospel but also in the acts, in order that his readers might know the certainty concerning the things wherein they were instructed. luke : . . literary characteristics the author of the acts was well acquainted with the old testament. he was able to catch the spirit of the primitive palestinian church. his books exhibit the influence of the semitic languages. but he was also capable of a greek style which would have passed muster in the schools of rhetoric. luke : - , for example, is a typical greek sentence. evidently luke could move with ease in the larger greek world of his time. his references to political and social conditions are extraordinarily exact. his narrative is never lacking in local color. he knows the proper titles of the local officials, and the peculiar quality of the local superstitions. his account of the shipwreck is a mine of information about the seafaring of antiquity. evidently he was a keen observer, and a true traveler of a cosmopolitan age. his narrative is characterized by a certain delightful urbanity--an urbanity, however, which is deepened and ennobled by profound convictions. * * * * * in the library.--warfield, "acts, timothy, titus and philemon," in "the temple bible," pp. i-xxvii. davis, "dictionary of the bible": purves, article on "acts of the apostles." purves, "christianity in the apostolic age," pp. - . m'clymont, "the new testament and its writers," in "the guild text books," pp. - . hastings, "dictionary of the bible": headlam, article on "acts of the apostles." lesson viii the cross and the resurrection the foundation of apostolic preaching . the resurrection a fact of history which of the books of the new testament contain the evidence for the resurrection of jesus? that question will serve to begin the teaching of the lesson. in answer to it, the students will probably mention the four gospels. to the gospels, however, should be added especially the first epistle to the corinthians. the passage in first corinthians is deserving of very careful attention. for, unlike the gospels, that epistle can be dated to within a year or so. it was written only about twenty-five years after the crucifixion. even though possibly some of the gospels were written still earlier, the precision with which the epistle can be dated makes its witness particularly valuable. furthermore, the author of the epistle is well known. no one doubts that first corinthians was written by paul, and paul is the best-known man of apostolic times. evidently his witness to the facts is of the utmost value. paul himself was a direct witness of the resurrection. he saw the risen lord. i cor. : ; : . in i cor. : - , however, he does not content himself with his own witness, but reproduces the testimony of others in an extended list. that testimony had come to paul by ordinary word of mouth. "i delivered unto you first of all," says paul, "that which also i received." in what follows there is a list of the appearances of the risen christ. "he appeared to cephas; then to the twelve; then he appeared to above five hundred brethren at once, of whom the greater part remain until now, but some are fallen asleep; then he appeared to james; then to all the apostles; and last of all, as to the child untimely born, he appeared to me also." evidently these appearances are not conceived of merely as "visions," but as events in the external world. the mention of the burial, v. , is a plain hint that what peter and the rest saw was the body of jesus raised from the tomb. that view of the matter is amply confirmed in the gospels and in the book of the acts. in the gospels, we are told that the tomb was found empty on the morning of the third day after the crucifixion. it was found empty by some women and by peter and john. since the tomb was empty, the body which appeared to the disciples had some connection with the body which had been taken down from the cross. furthermore, the gospels and the acts make the bodily character of the appearances abundantly plain. jesus did not merely appear to the disciples at a distance. he walked with them on the road to emmaus. he broke bread with them. he came into the very midst of them when they were assembled in a room. thomas could even touch his hands and his side. these are merely examples. clearly the testimony of the disciples is testimony not to mere spiritual experiences, but to the bodily presence of the lord. it may be admitted that the body was a glorified body. after his resurrection jesus was freed from the limitations of his earthly life. nevertheless, he was not merely a "spirit." luke : . there was some real, though mysterious, connection between the glorified body and the body that had been laid in the tomb. the new testament attests not merely the immortality of jesus, but his resurrection. the resurrection, in these days, is hard to accept. for it is a miracle. against any miracle there is a tremendous presumption. in this case, however, the presumption has been overcome. it has been overcome by the character of jesus. it is in the highest degree unlikely that an ordinary man should rise from the dead; but it is not unlikely that jesus should have risen. the resurrection is unique. but so is the life of jesus of nazareth. the two wonders support one another. explain away the testimony to the resurrection, and your task is not done. you must also explain away that sinless life. if jesus rose from the dead he had a unique experience. but that is to be expected. for jesus himself was unlike any other of the children of men. there are mysteries in his life that have never been explained. the resurrection of jesus is a well-attested fact of history. the proof of it is cumulative. any one of the proofs might be regarded as insufficient when taken alone, but when taken together they are overpowering. the sinless, unearthly character of jesus separates him from the rest of men, so that probabilities which apply to others do not apply to him. his mysterious self-consciousness involves so lofty a claim, that if he was not divine he was a megalomaniac--he whose calmness and strength have left an impression which the centuries have done nothing to efface! the specific testimonies to the empty tomb and to the plain bodily appearances of the risen lord are independent and varied. finally, unless the resurrection be a fact, the very origin of the christian church becomes an insoluble mystery. the resurrection alone can explain the sudden transformation of a company of weak, discouraged men into the conquerors of the world. the resurrection of jesus is a fact of history. it is not an aspiration of the heart. it comes ultimately through the testimony of the senses. the apostles came forward with a piece of plain information. they were witnesses to a fact in the external world. that fact has put a new face upon life. it is good news of salvation. . the resurrection confirmed by experience the resurrection is a fact of history. accept it as true, and you can have hope for time and for eternity. at this point, however, some men experience a difficulty. how can the acceptance of a historical fact satisfy the longing of our souls? must we stake our salvation upon the intricacies of historical research? surely some more immediate certitude is required. the objection would be valid if history stood alone. but history does not stand alone. it has suffered from a false isolation. a christian certitude that is founded solely upon history is insufficient. history is necessary, but not sufficient. we need history, but we need something else as well. a historical conviction of the resurrection of jesus is not the end of faith, but only the beginning. if faith stops there, it will never stand the fires of criticism. we are told that jesus lives. so much is a matter of testimony, a matter of history. if we believe the witness, then we can have hope. but the religious problem of our lives has not yet been solved. jesus lives. but what good is it to us? if he lives, we need to find him. we need to find him, and we can find him. we accept the message of the resurrection enough to make trial of it. and making trial of it, we find that it is true. jesus is found to be alive, for he makes answer to our prayer, and heals us. we never could have come to him unless we had accepted the historical evidence for the resurrection. but starting with that historical belief we went on to the blessed experience of salvation. christian experience cannot do without history. but it adds to history that directness, that immediateness, that simplicity of conviction, which delivers us from fear. we began with history. but we went on to experience. "now we believe, not because of thy speaking: for we have heard for ourselves, and know that this is indeed the saviour of the world." . the death jesus is alive. if we find him, he will heal us. but how shall we find him? in the new testament we receive instruction. in the new testament a strange fact stares us in the face. the new testament seems far more concerned with the death of jesus than with the details of his life. learned men have tried in vain to explain that curious fact. in elaborate treatises they have sought the explanation. but it is really very simple. the new testament emphasizes the death of jesus because that is what jesus did for us--or rather, coming after his perfect obedience to the law, it is the culmination of what he did for us. in the account of jesus' life we are told what jesus did for others. that account is absolutely necessary. without it we should never have been interested in jesus at all. but it is to us a means to an end, not an end in itself. we read in the gospel what jesus did for others. for one he placed his fingers in the ears and said, "be opened"; to another he said, "arise, take up thy bed, and walk"; to another, "thy sins are forgiven." these things are what jesus did for others. but what has he done for us? the answer of the new testament is plain. for us he does not say, "arise and walk." for us--he died. that mysterious thing which was wrought on calvary--that was his work for us. the cross of christ is a mystery. in the presence of it theology walks after all with but trembling, halting footsteps. learning will never unlock its meaning. but to the penitent sinner, though mysterious, though full of baffling riddles, it is plain enough. on the cross jesus dealt with our sin. our dreadful guilt, the condemnation of god's law--it is wiped out by an act of grace. it seemed inseparable from us. it was a burden no earthly friend could bear. but christ is master of the innermost secrets of the moral world. he has accomplished the impossible, he has borne our sins. by the cross he has healed us. but through whom does he apply the healing touch? through no one, save his spirit. for he is here himself. if we are seekers for him, then this day our search is over. the death of christ, in the modern church, is often subordinated. exclusive emphasis is laid upon the holy example and teaching of the galilean prophet. the modern theologians would be right if there were no such thing as sin. if there were no such thing as guilt, and if there were no such thing as a dreadful enslaving power of evil, then a noble ideal might be sufficient. but to talk about an ideal to a man under the thralldom of sin is a cruel mockery. sin may indeed be glossed over. let us make the best of our condition, we are told, let us do the best we can, let us simply trust in the all-conquering love of god. dangerous advice! by it a certain superficial joy of life may be induced. but the joy rests upon an insecure foundation. it is dangerous to be happy on the brink of the abyss. permanent joy can come only when sin has been faced honestly, and destroyed. it has been destroyed by the death and resurrection of our lord jesus christ. it is true that god is loving. he has manifested his love, however, better than by complacency toward sin. he has manifested it by the gracious gift of a saviour. * * * * * in the library.--denney, "the death of christ." orr, "the resurrection of jesus." crawford, "the doctrine of holy scripture respecting the atonement." lesson ix the beginnings of the christian church the author of the acts has given a wonderful picture of the early days of the christian church. the teacher should endeavor to present the picture before the mental vision of the class. history should not be studied merely as a dry record of events. the events should be seen as well as understood. they can be seen by what is called the historical imagination. the term "imagination" often contains a suggestion of unreality. but that is a secondary use of the word. "imagination" means "picturing." you can make a picture of what really happened as well as of what happened only in fiction. the historical imagination is a very important faculty in the student of the new testament. in many persons it is almost wholly lacking. but fortunately it may be acquired. in the lessons that follow, great stress should be laid upon the simple memorizing of the course of events. advanced study, or topical study, is useless unless it is based upon an orderly acquaintance with the contents of the acts. history comes first--then the interpretation of the history. the dominant note in the early chapters of the acts is the note of joy. after the three dark days of discouragement, after the quiet period of waiting, the life of the church suddenly bursts forth with power. everything is fresh and new. difficulties and dangers have not yet emerged. even persecution is lacking. the church enjoys favor with the people. thousands are converted in a day. . the gift of tongues the gift of tongues, as it was exercised on the day of pentecost, is not altogether an isolated phenomenon. it appears also elsewhere in the acts, acts : ; : , though it may be doubted whether in all three cases it assumed exactly the same form. in the first epistle to the corinthians, paul discusses the gift at considerable length. i cor., ch. . it is interesting to compare that passage with the passage in the second chapter of the acts. there are a number of resemblances between the two. both paul and luke represent the gift of tongues as a supernatural thing, a special endowment from the spirit of god. both paul and luke, furthermore, represent the gift as an ecstatic, temporary expression of spiritual exultation rather than as a faculty intended to be practically useful in the work of the church. on the other hand, there are such marked differences between the two accounts as to make it evident that the gift as it was manifested at pentecost was very considerably different from that which was exercised in the church at corinth. the speaking with tongues as paul describes it was a kind of ejaculation, expressive of the religious life of the speaker, but incomprehensible to others. in order, therefore, to make the gift edifying to the congregation at large there had to be some one else present who was in possession of another gift, the gift of interpretation. the speaking with tongues at pentecost, however, was a miraculous use of various languages. some have supposed that luke is describing rather a new language, which possessed the supernatural quality of being understood by men of various nationalities. the most natural interpretation of the passage, however, is that which has just been suggested. the disciples, filled with the spirit, spoke some in one language and some in another, or perhaps the same individuals used different languages at successive moments. the outsiders received various impressions of the strange phenomenon. some, mocking, declared that the disciples were drunk. these, we may suppose, were men who came into contact with those disciples who were speaking some language known only to another group among the hearers. the general impression seems to have been wonder at the miraculous gift. the gift of tongues provided an opportunity for the first christian preaching. in just this form it was perhaps never repeated. it was a unique gift provided for an absolutely unique occasion. . the speeches ancient historians often put imaginary speeches into the mouths of their characters. the speeches were intended to represent not what was actually said but what might have been said under the circumstances. this procedure of the historians was not intended to deceive the readers. it was merely a literary form, a method of vivid description. luke, however, seems not to have allowed himself even the license which was regarded as allowable by the best historians of antiquity. the speeches in the acts are apparently either verbatim reports of what was actually said, or else summaries based upon trustworthy tradition. if they had been composed freely by the historian himself their characteristic differences and their perfect adaptation to different occasions would be difficult to explain. the speeches of peter and of the earliest disciples, in particular, are very different from those of paul. they contain a number of features which occur either not at all or only rarely in the rest of the new testament. the designation of jesus as "the servant," for example, a designation taken from the latter part of isaiah, is characteristic of these speeches. another characteristic designation of jesus is "prince" or "prince of life." acts : ; : . in general, the representation of jesus in the early chapters of the acts is just what might have been expected under the circumstances. at the beginning of the church's life, everything is simple and easy of comprehension even by outsiders. the apostles represented jesus first as a man approved of god by the miracles which he had wrought. to have delivered up such a man to death was itself a grievous sin. but that was not all. this jesus who was crucified had been raised from the dead; and both in his death and in his resurrection he had fulfilled the messianic predictions of the ancient prophets. he was then nothing less than the christ. now, too, his period of humiliation was over. he had been given the full powers of lordship. from him had come the wonder-working spirit. it will be observed that these speeches, though they begin with what is simplest and easiest of acceptance by an outsider, really contain, at least in germ, the full doctrine of the divine christ. . the converts the body of disciples who were assembled before the day of pentecost consisted of only about one hundred and twenty persons. acts : . after the notable sermon of peter, which was spoken in explanation of the gift of tongues, three thousand were converted. a little later the church possessed five thousand men. acts : . the outward sign of conversion was baptism. "repent ye," said peter, "and be baptized every one of you in the name of jesus christ unto the remission of your sins; and ye shall receive the gift of the holy spirit." baptism was not altogether new. it had been practiced not only among converts to judaism, but especially by john the baptist. christian baptism, however, is sharply distinguished from the baptism of john. mark : , ; acts : ; : - . both were expressive of repentance. but christian baptism was connected specifically with jesus, and also with the bestowal of the spirit. baptism was "in the name of jesus christ," or "into the name of the lord jesus." it was the sacrament by which the convert signified his cleansing from sin and his entrance into that peculiarly close relation to christ which is of the essence of christian experience. in itself, of course, the rite of baptism is useless. but when accompanied by faith it is a means of real blessing. baptism, like the other christian sacrament, the lord's supper, was instituted by christ himself. matt. : . in the acts the full trinitarian formula of baptism is not given. "in the name of jesus christ" is sufficient to designate the sacrament. . joy and fear the mysterious power that was working among the disciples was beneficent. it accomplished miracles of healing. as in the case of jesus himself so now among his disciples the spirit of god was manifested in the expulsion of demons. matt. : ; acts : . the spirit was manifested also in the healing of disease. one cure, in particular, is narrated with a wealth of vivid detail. the healing of the lame man led to the opposition of the sanhedrin. it led also to favor among the people. all the people ran together in solomon's porch greatly wondering. acts : . peter and john took no credit for what they had done. they attributed the miracle solely to the power of jesus. it was the same jesus against whom the crowd had shouted, "crucify him, crucify him," only a few weeks before. surely a reason for remorse rather than joy! but god is gracious. through jesus, the crucified one, salvation was offered even to the murderers. repentance was followed by rejoicing. the envy of the sanhedrin was held in check. a notable miracle had been wrought. that miracle was not isolated. many signs and wonders were wrought by the hands of the apostles. the people even "carried out the sick into the streets, and laid them on beds and couches, that, as peter came by, at the least his shadow might overshadow some one of them." acts : - . perhaps we are to understand that that method of seeking cure was actually successful. certainly it was an unusual method. but god adopts unusual methods at unusual times. he adapts his mercy to the needs of men. the general impression left by the early chapters of the acts is an impression of light and gladness. there is opposition, but it is powerless against triumphant joy. one incident, however, introduces a discordant note. it is the incident of ananias and sapphira. the early church was animated by a spirit of self-sacrifice. many of the disciples sold their possessions and devoted the price to the common good. one of those who did so was joseph barnabas, who was to be prominent in the subsequent history. a certain man, ananias, however, and sapphira his wife, after they had sold their possession kept back part of the price. in itself that was not necessarily wrong. their sin was the sin of deception. they pretended to have given all, though they had really given only a part. a more destructive sin could scarcely have been imagined. they had lied unto the holy spirit. such conduct would bring contempt upon the church. ananias and sapphira discovered that god cannot be trifled with. and the judgment wrought upon them inspired fear in all who heard. it is well that this incident has been recorded. it prevents a one-sided impression of the church's life. the power that animated the church was beneficent. but it was also terrible and mysterious and holy. in the presence of it there was joy. but that joy was akin to fear. "it is a fearful thing to fall into the hands of the living god." the lesson is of permanent value. the spirit of god must be received with joy. but not with a common joy. not with the joy of familiarity. but rather with the wondering, trembling joy of adoration. * * * * * in the library.--purves, "christianity in the apostolic age," pp. - . davis, "dictionary of the bible": articles on "weeks, feast of" and "temple." "the cambridge bible for schools": lumby, "the acts of the apostles," , pp. - . "the bible commentary," vol. ii: cook, "the acts of the apostles," pp. - . ellicott, "a new testament commentary for english readers," vol. ii: plumptre, "the acts of the apostles," pp. - . rackham, "the acts of the apostles," pp. - . these commentaries will be designated hereafter by the names of the authors only. lesson x the first persecution the persecution which arose in connection with stephen marks a turning point in the history of the church. up to that time, the disciples had been content, for the most part, with laboring in jerusalem. now they were forced out into a broader field. one result of the persecution was the geographical extension of the church. another result was perhaps even more important. the extension caused by persecution was not merely geographical; it was also, perhaps, intellectual and spiritual. the church was really from the beginning in possession of a new religious principle, but at first that principle was not fully understood. persecution probably helped to reveal the hidden riches. the pharisees were keener than the disciples themselves. hostility sharpened the vision. the disciples themselves were still content to share in the established forms of jewish worship; but the pharisees saw that they were really advocates of a new principle. christianity, unless it were checked, would supersede judaism. the pharisees were right. jealous fear detected what ancestral piety had concealed. the hostility of the jews perhaps helped to open the eyes of the church. no doubt, a development was already at work. persecution was the result as well as the cause of the new freedom. stephen was persecuted possibly just because his preaching went beyond that of peter. with or without persecution, the church would have transcended the bounds of the older judaism. it contained a germ of new life which was certain to bear fruit. but persecution hastened the process. it scattered the church abroad, and it revealed the revolutionary character of the church's life. with the coming of jesus a new era had begun. judaism had before been separate from the gentile world. that separation had been due not to racial prejudice, but to a divine ordinance. it had served a useful purpose. jewish particularism should never be despised; it should be treated with piety and gratitude. it had preserved the precious deposit of truth in the midst of heathenism. but its function, though useful, was temporary. it was a preparation for christ. before christ it was a help; after christ it became a hindrance. persecution was not the beginning of the new freedom. freedom was based upon the words of jesus. it had become plainer again, perhaps, in the teaching of stephen. furthermore, if freedom was not begun by the persecution, it was also not completed by it. the emancipation of the church from judaism was a slow process. the unfolding of that process is narrated in the acts. even after the church was scattered abroad through judea and samaria, much remained to be done. cornelius, antioch, paul were still in the future. nevertheless, the death of stephen was an important event. it was by no means the whole of the process; but it marks an epoch. the gradual rise of persecution should be traced in class--first the fruitless arrest of peter and john and their bold defiance; then the arrest of the apostles, the miraculous escape, the preaching in the temple, the re-arrest, the counsel of gamaliel, the scourging; then the preaching of stephen and the hostility of the pharisees. the opposition of the sadducees was comparatively without significance. the sadducees were not jews at heart. they might persecute the church just because the church was patriotically jewish. but the pharisees were really representative of the existing judaism. pharisaic persecution meant the hostility of the nation. and it implied the independence of the church. if the disciples were nothing but jews, why did the jews persecute them? in what follows, a few details will be discussed. . theudas and judas judas the galilean, mentioned by gamaliel, acts : , appears also in josephus. his insurrection occurred at the time of the great enrollment under quirinius, the syrian legate. this enrollment was different from that which brought joseph and mary to bethlehem at the time of the birth of jesus. luke : - . that former enrollment occurred before the death of herod the great in b. c. luke : ; matt. : . the enrollment to which gamaliel referred was carried out after the deposition of archelaus in a. d. . with regard to judas all is clear. but theudas is known only from acts : . the theudas who is mentioned in josephus is different, for his insurrection did not occur till about a. d. , after the time of gamaliel's speech. gamaliel was referring to some insurrection of an earlier period. the name theudas was common, and so were tumults and insurrections. . the seven it has been questioned whether the seven men who were appointed to assist the apostles were "deacons." the title is not applied to them. the narrative does, indeed, imply that they were to "serve tables," acts : , and the greek word here translated "serve" is the verb from which the greek noun meaning "deacon" is derived; but the same word is also used for the "ministry [or service] of the word" in which the apostles were to continue. v. . the special technical use of the word "deacon" appears in the new testament only in phil. : ; i tim. : , . compare rom. : . nevertheless, though the word itself does not occur in our passage, it is perhaps not incorrect to say that the seven were "deacons." their functions were practically those of the diaconate; their appointment, at any rate, shows that the apostles recognized the need of some such office in the church. it is not quite clear what is meant by the expression, to "serve tables." the reference is either to tables for food, or else to the money tables of a banker. if the former interpretation be correct, then the deacons were to attend especially to the management of the common meals. even then, however, the expression probably refers indirectly to the general administration of charity, a prominent part of the service being mentioned simply as typical of the whole. . the synagogues the greek word translated "libertines" in acts : comes from the latin word for "freedmen." the freedmen here mentioned were probably descendants of jews taken by pompey as slaves to rome. the jewish opponents of stephen therefore included romans, men of eastern and middle north africa, and men of eastern and western asia minor. these foreign jews, when they settled in jerusalem, had their own synagogues. it is doubtful how many synagogues are mentioned in our passage. luke may mean that each of the five groups had a separate synagogue, or he may be grouping the men of cilicia and asia in one synagogue. the wording of the greek perhaps rather favors the view that only two synagogues are mentioned--one consisting of libertines and men of cyrene and alexandria, and the other consisting of cilicians and asians. . the speech of stephen in defending himself, stephen gave a summary of hebrew history. at first sight, that summary might seem to have little bearing upon the specific charges that had been made. but the history which stephen recited was a history of israel. "you are destroying the divine privileges of israel"--that was the charge. "no," said stephen, "history shows that the true privileges of israel are the promises of divine deliverance. to them law and temple are subordinate. from abraham on there was a promise of deliverance from egypt. after that deliverance another deliverance was promised. it is the one which was wrought by jesus. moses, god's instrument in the first deliverance, was rejected by his contemporaries. jesus, the greater deliverer, was rejected by you. we disciples of jesus are the true israelites, for we, unlike you, honor the promises of god." other interpretations of the speech have been proposed. for example, some find the main thought of the speech to be this: "the wanderings of the patriarchs and the long period of time which elapsed before the building of the temple show that true and acceptable worship of god is not limited to any particular place." at any rate, the speech requires study--and repays it. what was said in the last lesson about the speeches of the acts in general applies fully to the speech of stephen. the very difficulties of the speech, as well as its other peculiarities, help to show that it represents a genuine tradition of what, in a unique situation, was actually said. . martyrdom the word "martyr" is simply the greek word for "witness." that is the word which is translated "witness" in acts : . "ye shall receive power, when the holy spirit is come upon you: and ye shall be my witnesses both in jerusalem, and in all judæa and samaria, and unto the uttermost part of the earth." there, of course, there is no special reference to dying for the sake of christ. it is primarily the ordinary verbal testimony which is meant. the special meaning "martyr" is not often attached to the greek word in the new testament. probably even in acts : , where the word is applied to stephen, it is to be translated "witness" rather than "martyr." martyrdom, then, is only one kind of witnessing. but it is a very important kind. men will not die for what they do not believe. when stephen sank beneath the stones of his enemies he was preaching a powerful sermon. the very fact of his death was a witness to christ. the manner of it was still more significant. stephen, crying in the hour of death, "lord jesus, receive my spirit," stephen dying with words of forgiveness on his lips, "lord, lay not this sin to their charge," was a witness indeed. the church can never do without that kind of witnessing. true, it may not now often appear as actual martyrdom. but bravery is needed as much as ever--bravery in business, men who will not say, "business is business," but will do what is right even in the face of failure; bravery in politics, men to whom righteousness is more than a pose; bravery in social life, men and women who will sacrifice convention every time to principle, who, for example, will maintain the christian sabbath in the face of ridicule. modern life affords plenty of opportunities for cowardice, plenty of opportunities for denying the faith through fear of men. it also affords opportunities for bravery. you can still show whether you are of the stuff that stephen was made of--above all, you can show whether you are possessed by the same spirit and are a servant of the same lord. . the result of the persecution the persecution resulted only in the spread of the gospel. gamaliel was right. it was useless to fight against god. the disciples were in possession of an invincible power, and they knew it from the very beginning. when peter and john returned from their first arrest, the disciples responded in a noble prayer. acts : - . herod and pontius pilate, with the gentiles and the peoples of israel, gathered together against jesus, had accomplished only what god's hand and god's counsel foreordained to come to pass. so it would be also with the enemies of the church. when the disciples had prayed, "the place was shaken wherein they were gathered together; and they were all filled with the holy spirit, and they spake the word of god with boldness." the answer to that prayer was prophetic of the whole history of the church. * * * * * in the library.--purves, "christianity in the apostolic age," pp. - , - . davis, "dictionary of the bible": articles on "gamaliel," "theudas," "judas" ( ), "deacon"; purves, article on "stephen." ramsay, "pictures of the apostolic church," pp. - . rackham, pp. - . lumby, pp. - . plumptre, pp. - . cook, pp. - . lesson xi the first gentile converts this lesson treats of a number of steps in the extension of the gospel. the beginning is the purely jewish church that is described in the first chapters of the acts; the goal is the gentile christianity of paul. gentile christianity was not produced all at once. the extension of the gospel to gentiles was a gradual process. the present lesson is concerned only with the early stages. the teacher should present the lesson in such a way as to emphasize the main feature of the narrative. the main feature is the central place assigned to the holy spirit. though the extension of the gospel to the gentiles was a process, that process was due not to mere natural development, but to the gracious leading of god. as was observed in lesson x, stephen perhaps introduced into the church a more independent attitude toward the existing judaism. there is no reason, indeed, to suppose that he thought either of preaching to gentiles or of forsaking the ceremonial law. but possibly he did venture to exhibit the temporary and provisional character of the temple worship as compared with the promises of god. indirectly, therefore, though certainly not directly, stephen opened the way for the gentile mission. the persecution was another step in the process. it scattered the jews abroad into regions where gentiles were more numerous than in jerusalem, and served perhaps also to reveal to the church itself its incompatibility with pharisaic judaism. the evangelization of samaria was another important step. though the samaritans were only half gentiles, they were particularly detested by the jews. in preaching to them, the disciples were overcoming jewish scruples, and thus were moving in the direction of a real gentile mission. the baptizing of the ethiopian may have been another step in the process. the most important event, however, was the conversion of cornelius and his household. here the issue was clearly raised. cornelius did not, like the ethiopian, depart at once after baptism to a distant home. his reception into the church was a matter of public knowledge. luke was well aware of the importance of the story about cornelius. that appears from the minuteness with which the story is narrated. after it has been completed once, it is repeated, at very considerable length, as a part of peter's defense at jerusalem. the effect is as though this incident were heavily underscored. the importance of the cornelius incident appears also in the fact that it gave rise to criticism. apparently this was the first serious criticism which the gradually widening mission had encountered within the church. there is no suggestion of such criticism in the case of the preaching in samaria. but now a much more radical step had been taken. peter had eaten with uncircumcised men. acts : . a more serious violation of jewish particularism could hardly have been imagined. in defense, peter appealed simply to the manifest authorization which he had received from god. that authorization had appeared first of all in the visions which peter and cornelius had received, with other direct manifestations of the divine will, and also more particularly in the bestowal of the spirit. if the spirit was given to uncircumcised gentiles, then circumcision was no longer necessary to membership in the church. in the narrative about cornelius, there is a remarkable heaping up of supernatural guidance. vision is added to vision, revelation to revelation. the reason is plain. a decisive step was being taken. if taken by human initiative, it was open to criticism. the separateness of israel from other nations was a divine ordinance. since it had been instituted by god, it could be abrogated only by him. true, jesus had said, "make disciples of all the nations." matt. : . but the how and the when had been left undecided. were the gentiles to become jews in order to become christians, and was the gentile mission to begin at once? those were grave questions. they could not be decided without divine guidance. that guidance was given in the case of cornelius. peter's defense was readily accepted. "and when they heard these things, they held their peace, and glorified god, saying, then to the gentiles also hath god granted repentance unto life." the active opposition to the gentile mission did not arise until later. but how could that opposition arise at all? since god had spoken so clearly, who could deny to the gentiles a free entrance into the church? after the case of cornelius, how could any possible question arise? as a matter of fact--though it may seem strange--the acceptance of cornelius did not at first determine the policy of the church. that incident remained, indeed, stored up in memory. it was appealed to years afterwards by peter himself, in order to support the gentile christianity of paul. acts : - , . but so far as the practice of the jewish church was concerned, the cornelius incident seems to have remained for a time without effect. the bestowal of the spirit upon cornelius and his friends was regarded, apparently, as a special dispensation which fixed no precedent. before engaging in further preaching to gentiles, the church was waiting, perhaps, for manifestations of the divine will as palpable as those which had been given to peter and to cornelius. this attitude is rather surprising. it must be remembered, however, that for the present the church was fully engrossed in work for jews. undoubtedly, a gentile work was to come, and the cornelius incident, as well as what jesus had said, was regarded as prophetic of it, acts : ; but the time and the manner of its institution were still undetermined. were the gentile converts generally--whatever might be the special dispensation for cornelius--to be required to submit to circumcision and become members of the chosen people? this and other questions had not yet even been faced. engrossed for the present in the jewish mission, the church could leave these questions to the future guidance of god. in what follows, a number of special points will be briefly discussed. . philip after the baptism of the ethiopian, "the spirit of the lord caught away philip; and the eunuch saw him no more, for he went on his way rejoicing. but philip was found at azotus: and passing through he preached the gospel to all the cities, till he came to cæsarea." the meaning of these words is not perfectly plain. are we to understand that philip was carried away to azotus by a miracle, or is nothing more intended than a sudden departure under the impulsion of the spirit? the latter interpretation is not at all impossible. what has been emphasised in the whole narrative is the strangeness, the unaccountableness of philip's movements. this appears particularly in the sudden separation from the eunuch. the eunuch expected further conference with philip but suddenly philip rushed off, as though snatched away by a higher power. all through this incident, there is something strangely sudden and unexpected about philip's movements. human deliberation evidently had no part in his actions. he was under the immediate impulsion of the spirit. the narrative leaves philip at cæsarea, and there he appears years afterwards, at the time of paul's last journey to jerusalem. acts : , . luke was at that time one of the company, and may have received directly from philip the materials for the narrative in the eighth chapter of the acts. philip appears in christian tradition, but there is some confusion between philip the evangelist and philip the apostle. . simon magus simon the sorcerer, or "simon magus," is an interesting figure. he has laid hold of the fancy of christendom. from his name--with reference to acts : , --the word "simony" has been coined to designate the sin of buying or selling any sort of spiritual advantage. simon is very prominent in christian tradition, where he is regarded as the fountainhead of all heresy. . cornelius cornelius was a "centurion," or captain of a company in the roman army consisting of about one hundred men. the "italian band" to which he belonged was apparently a "cohort," composed of soldiers from italy. cornelius was stationed at cæsarea, the residence of the procurators of judea. with the favorable description of his attitude to the jews and to the jewish religion, acts : , should be compared what luke, in his gospel, records about another centurion. luke : , . these are sympathetic pictures of the "god-fearing" adherents of judaism, who formed so important a class at the time of the first christian preaching. * * * * * in the library.--purves, "christianity in the apostolic age," pp. - , - . davis, "dictionary of the bible": articles on "samaria," "samaritan," "philip" ( ), "simon" ( ), "cæsarea," "cornelius." ramsay, "pictures of the apostolic church," pp. - . rackham, pp. - , - . lumby, pp. - , - . plumptre, pp. - , - . cook, pp. - , - . lesson xii the conversion of paul christianity a supernatural thing and a gift of god's grace--that is the real theme of the lesson. the theme is brought home by means of an example, the example of the apostle paul. the religious experience of paul is the most striking phenomenon in the history of the human spirit. it really requires no defense. give it sympathetic attention, and it is irresistible. how was it produced? the answer of paul himself, at least, is plain. according to paul, his whole religious life was due, not to any natural development, but to an act of the risen christ. that is the argument of the first chapter of galatians. he was advancing in judaism, he says, beyond his contemporaries. he was laying waste the church. and then suddenly, when it was least to be expected, without the influence of men, simply by god's good pleasure, christ was revealed to him, and all was changed. the suddenness, the miraculousness of the change is the very point of the passage. upon that marvelous act of god paul bases the whole of his life work. shall paul's explanation of his life be accepted? it can be accepted only by the recognition of jesus christ, who was crucified, as a living person. in an age of doubt, that recognition is not always easy. but if it be refused, then the whole of pauline christianity is based upon an illusion. that alternative may well seem to be monstrous. the eighth chapter of romans has a self-evidencing power. it has transformed the world. it has entered into the very fiber of the human spirit. but it crumbles to pieces if the appearance on the road to damascus was nothing but a delusive vision. let us not deceive ourselves. the religious experience of paul and the whole of our evangelical piety are based upon the historical fact of the resurrection. but if so, then the resurrection stands firm. for the full glory of pauline christianity becomes a witness to it. the writer of the epistle to the romans must be believed. but it is that writer who says, "last of all ... he appeared to me also." the wonder of the conversion can be felt only through an exercise of the historical imagination. imagine the surroundings of paul's early life in tarsus, live over again with him the years in jerusalem, enter with him into his prospects of a conventional jewish career and into his schemes for the destruction of the church--and then only can you appreciate with him the catastrophic wonder of christ's grace. there was no reason for the conversion of paul. everything pointed the other way. but christ chose to make of the persecutor an apostle, and the life of paul was the result. it was a divine, inexplicable act of grace--grace to paul and grace to us who are paul's debtors. god's mercies are often thus. they are not of human devising. they enter into human life when they are least expected, with a sudden blaze of heavenly glory. in the review of paul's early life various questions emerge. they must at least be faced, if not answered, if the lesson is to be vividly presented. . paul at tarsus in the first place, what was the extent of the greek influence which was exerted upon paul at tarsus? the question cannot be answered with certainty, and widely differing views are held. it is altogether unlikely, however, that the boy attended anything like an ordinary gentile school. the jewish strictness of the family precludes that supposition, and it is not required by the character of paul's preaching and writing. it is true that he occasionally quotes a greek poet. i cor. : ; titus : ; acts : . it is true again that some passages in paul's letters are rhetorical--for example, i cor. : - ; ch. --and that rhetoric formed an important part of greek training in the first century. but paul's rhetoric is the rhetoric of nature rather than of art. exalted by his theme he falls unconsciously into a splendid rhythm of utterance. such rhetoric could not be learned in school. finally, it is true that paul's vocabulary is thought to exhibit some striking similarities to that of stoic writers. but even if that similarity indicates acquaintance on the part of paul with the stoic teaching, such acquaintance need not have been attained through a study of books. however, the importance of paul's greek environment, if it must not be exaggerated, must on the other hand not be ignored. in the first place, paul is a consummate master of the greek language. he must have acquired it in childhood, and indeed in tarsus could hardly have failed to do so. in the second place, he was acquainted with the religious beliefs and practices of the greco-roman world. the speech at athens, acts : - , shows how he made use of such knowledge for his preaching. in all probability the first impressions were made upon him at tarsus. finally, from his home in tarsus paul derived that intimate knowledge of the political and social relationships of the men of his day which, coupled with a native delicacy of perception and fineness of feeling, resulted in the exquisite tact which he exhibited in his missionary and pastoral labors. the tarsian jew of the dispersion was a gentleman of the roman empire. that aramaic, as well as greek, was spoken by the family of paul is made probable by phil. : and ii cor. : . the word "hebrew" in these passages probably refers especially to the use of the aramaic ("hebrew") language, as in acts : , where the "hebrews" in the jerusalem church are contrasted with the "grecian jews." "a hebrew of hebrews," therefore, probably means "an aramaic-speaking jew and descended from aramaic-speaking jews." in acts : ; : it is expressly recorded that paul made a speech in aramaic ("hebrew"), and in acts : it is said that christ spoke to him in the same language. conceivably, of course, he might have learned that language during his student days in jerusalem. but the passages just referred to make it probable that it was rather the language of his earliest home. from childhood paul knew both aramaic and greek. . the inner life of paul the rabbi the most interesting question about paul's life at jerusalem concerns the condition of his inner life before the conversion. paul the pharisee is an interesting study. what were this man's thoughts and feelings and desires before the grace of christ made him the greatest of christian missionaries? the best way to answer this question would be to ask paul himself. one passage in the pauline epistles has been regarded as an answer to the question. that passage is rom. : - . there paul describes the struggle of the man who knows the law of god and desires to accomplish it, but finds the flesh too strong for him. if paul is there referring to his pre-christian life, then the passage gives a vivid picture of his fruitless struggle as a pharisee to fulfill the law. many interpreters, however, refer the passage not to the pre-christian life but to the christian life. even in the christian life the struggle goes on against sin. and even if paul is referring to the pre-christian life, he is perhaps depicting it rather as it really was than as he then thought it was. the passage probably does not mean that before he became a christian paul was fully conscious of the fruitlessness of his endeavor to attain righteousness by the law. afterwards he saw that his endeavor was fruitless, but it is doubtful how clearly he saw it at the time. it would, indeed, be a mistake to suppose that paul as a pharisee was perfectly happy. no man is happy who is trying to earn salvation by his works. in his heart of hearts paul must have known that his fulfillment of the law was woefully defective. but such discontentment would naturally lead him only farther on in the same old path. if his obedience was defective, let it be mended by increasing zeal! the more earnest paul was about his law righteousness, the more discontented he became with his attainments, so much the more zealous did he become as a persecutor. some have supposed that paul was gradually getting nearer to christianity before christ appeared to him--that the damascus experience only completed a process that had already begun. there were various things, it is said, which might lead the earnest pharisee to consider christianity favorably. in the first place, there was the manifest impossibility of law righteousness. paul had tried to keep the law and had failed. what if the christians were right about salvation by faith? in the second place, there were the old testament prophecies about a suffering servant of jehovah. isa., ch. . if they referred to the messiah, then the cross might be explained, as the christians explained it, as a sacrifice for others. the stumblingblock of a crucified messiah would thus be removed. in the third place, there was the noble life and death of the christian martyrs. these arguments are not so weighty as they seem. paul's dissatisfaction with his fulfillment of the law, as has already been observed, might lead to a more zealous effort to fulfill the law as well as to a relinquishment of the law. there seems to be no clear evidence that the pre-christian jews ever contemplated a death of the messiah like the death of jesus. on the contrary the current expectation of the messiah was diametrically opposed to any such thing. and admiration of the christian martyrs is perhaps too modern and too christian to be attributed to the pharisee. the fundamental trouble with this whole argument is that it proves merely that the pharisee paul ought to have been favorably impressed with christianity. so he ought, but as a matter of fact he was not so impressed, and we have the strongest kind of evidence to prove that he was not. the book of the acts says so, and paul says so just as clearly in his letters. the very fact that when he was converted he was on a persecuting expedition, more ambitious than any that had been attempted before, shows that he was certainly not thinking favorably of christianity. was he considering the possibility that christianity might be true? was he trying to stifle his own inward uncertainty by the very madness of his zeal? then, in persecuting the church, he was going against his conscience. but in i tim. : he distinctly says that his persecuting was done ignorantly in unbelief, and his attitude is the same in his other epistles. if in persecuting the church he was acting contrary to better conviction, then that fact would have constituted the chief element in his guilt; yet in the passages where he speaks with the deepest contrition of his persecution, that particularly heinous sin is never mentioned. evidently, whatever was his guilt, at least he did not have to reproach himself with the black sin of persecuting christ's followers in the face of even a half conviction. accordingly, the words of christ to paul at the time of the conversion, "it is hard for thee to kick against the goad," acts : , do not mean that paul had been resisting an inward voice of conscience in not accepting christ before, but rather that christ's will for paul was really resistless even though paul had not known it at all. christ's loving plan would be carried out in the end. paul was destined to be the apostle to the gentiles. for him to try to be anything else was as useless and as painful as it is for the ox to kick against the goad. christ will have his way. thus before his conversion paul was moving away from christianity rather than toward it. of course, in emphasizing the suddenness of the conversion, exaggerations must be avoided. it is absurd, for example, to suppose that paul knew nothing at all about jesus before the damascus event. of course he knew about him. even if he had been indifferent, he could hardly have failed to hear the story of the galilean prophet; and as a matter of fact he was not indifferent but intensely interested, though by way of opposition. these things were not done in a corner. paul was in jerusalem before and after the crucifixion, if not at the very time itself. the main facts in the life of jesus were known to friend and foe alike. thus when in the first chapter of galatians paul declares that he received his gospel not through any human agency but directly from christ, he cannot mean that the risen christ imparted to him the facts in the earthly life of jesus. it never occurred to paul to regard the bare facts as a "gospel." he had the facts by ordinary word of mouth from the eyewitnesses. what he received from the risen christ was a new interpretation of the facts. he had known the facts before. but they had filled him with hatred. he had known about jesus. but the more he had known about him, the more he had hated him. and then christ himself appeared to him! it might naturally have been an appearance in wrath, a thunderstroke of the just vengeance of the messiah. probably that was paul's first thought when he heard the words, "i am jesus whom thou persecutest." but such was not the lord's will. the purpose of the damascus wonder was not destruction but divine fellowship and world-wide service. . paul's experience and ours in one sense, the experience of paul is the experience of every christian. not, of course, in form. it is a great mistake to demand of every man that he shall be able, like paul, to give day and hour of his conversion. many men, it is true, still have such a definite experience. it is not pathological. it may result in glorious christian lives. but it is not universal, and it should not be induced by tactless methods. the children of christian homes often seem to grow up into the love of christ. when they decide to unite themselves definitely with the church, the decision need not necessarily come with anguish of soul. it may be simply the culmination of a god-encircled childhood, a recognition of what god has already done rather than the acquisition of something new. but after all, these differences are merely in the manner of god's working. in essence, true christian experience is always the same, and in essence it is always like the experience of paul. it is no mere means of making better citizens, but an end in itself. it is no product of man's effort, but a divine gift. whatever be the manner of its coming, it is a heavenly vision. christ still lives in the midst of glory. and still he appears to sinful men--though not now to the bodily eye--drawing them out of sin and misery and bondage to a transitory world into communion with the holy and eternal god. the result of paul's vision was service. how far his destination as apostle to the gentiles was made known to him at once is perhaps uncertain. it depends partly upon the interpretation of acts : - . are those words intended to be part of what was spoken at the very time of the conversion? there is no insuperable objection to that view. at any rate, no matter how much or how little was revealed at once, the real purpose of christ in calling him was clearly that he should be the leader of the gentile mission. gal. : . he was saved in order that he might save others. it is so normally with every christian. every one of us is given not only salvation, but also labor. in that labor we can use every bit of preparation that is ours, even if it was acquired before we became christians. paul, the apostle, used his greek training as well as his knowledge of the old testament. we can use whatever talents we possess. the christian life is not a life of idleness. it is like the life of the world in being full of labor. but it differs from that life in that its labor is always worth while. connection with heaven does not mean idle contemplation, but a vantage ground of power. you cannot move the world without a place to stand. * * * * * in the library.--purves, "christianity in the apostolic age," pp. - . davis, "dictionary of the bible": article on "damascus." ramsay, "pictures of the apostolic church," pp. - ; "st. paul the traveller and the roman citizen," pp. - ; "the cities of st. paul," pp. - (on tarsus). conybeare and howson, "the life and epistles of st. paul," chs. ii and iii. lewin, "the life and epistles of st. paul," chs. i and iv. stalker, "the life of st. paul," pp. - . rackham, pp. - , - , - . lumby, pp. - , - , - . plumptre, pp. - , - , - . cook, pp. - , - , - . lesson xiii the church at antioch christianity originated in an obscure corner of the roman empire, in the midst of a very peculiar people. at first, it was entirely out of relation to the larger life of the time. the atmosphere of the gospels is as un-greek as could be imagined; the very conception of messiahship is distinctively jewish. yet this jewish sect soon entered upon the conquest of the empire, and the jewish messiah became the saviour of the world. starting from jerusalem, the new sect spread within a few decades almost to the remotest corners of the civilized world. this remarkable extension was not the work of any one man or group of men. it seemed rather to be due to some mysterious power of growth, operating in many directions and in many ways. in this manifold extension of the gospel, however, the central event of to-day's lesson stands out with special clearness. christianity began as a jewish movement, quite incongruous with the larger life of the empire. what would be the result of its first real contact with the culture of the time? this question was answered at antioch. at antioch, the principles of the gentile mission had to be established once for all--those principles which have governed the entire subsequent history of the church. the extension of the gospel to the gentiles was not a mere overcoming of racial prejudice, for the separateness of israel had been of divine appointment; it involved rather the recognition that a new dispensation had begun. primitive christianity was not governed merely by considerations of practical expediency; it sought justification for every new step in the guidance of the spirit and in the fundamental principles of the gospel. the development of those fundamental principles was necessary in order to show that christianity was really more than a jewish sect. then as always, religion without theology would have been a weak and flabby thing. christianity is not merely an instrument for the improving of social conditions, but rather an answer to the fundamental questions of the soul. it can never do without thinking, and christian thinking is theology. fortunately the church at antioch did not long remain without a theologian. its theologian was paul. paul was not the founder of the church at antioch; but the theology of paul was what gave to that church its really fundamental importance in the history of the world. the lesson for to-day is of extraordinary richness and variety. much can be learned, for example, from the characters of the story. barnabas, with his generous recognition of the great man who was soon to overshadow him; those obscure men of cyprus and cyrene, not even mentioned by name, whose work at antioch was one of the great turning points of history; agabus, the prophet, and the charitable brethren of antioch; rhoda, the serving girl, and the prayerful assembly in the house of the mother of mark--every one of these teaches some special lesson. one lesson, moreover, may be learned from them all--god is the real leader of the church, and true disciples, though different in character and in attainments, are all sharers in a mighty work. in what follows, an attempt will be made to throw light upon a few of the historical questions which are suggested by the narrative in the acts, and to picture as vividly as possible the scene of these stirring events. . the acts and the pauline epistles the differences between the narrative in the acts and the account which paul gives of the same events have caused considerable difficulty. this very difficulty, however, is by no means an unmixed evil; for it shows at least that luke was entirely independent of the epistles. if he had employed the epistles in the composition of his book he would surely have avoided even the appearance of contradicting them. the divergences between the acts and the pauline epistles, therefore, can only mean that luke did not use the epistles when he wrote; and since the epistles came to be generally used at a very early time, the acts cannot have been written at so late a date as is often supposed. but if the book was written at an early time, then there is every probability that the information which it contains is derived from trustworthy sources. thus the very divergences between the acts and the pauline epistles, unless indeed they should amount to positive contradictions, strengthen the argument for the early date and high historical value of the lucan work. the independence of the acts is supported also by the complete absence of striking verbal similarity between the narrative in the acts and the corresponding passages in the epistles. even where the details of the two accounts are similar, the words are different. the few unimportant coincidences in language are altogether insufficient to overthrow this general impression of independence. the most natural supposition, therefore, is that in the acts and in the epistles we have two independent and trustworthy accounts of the same events. this supposition is really borne out by the details of the two narratives. there are differences, but the differences are only what is to be expected in two narratives which were written from entirely different points of view and in complete independence of one another. contradictions have been detected only by pressing unduly the language of one source or the other. thus, in reading the acts alone, one might suppose that paul spent the whole time between his conversion and his first visit to jerusalem in damascus, and that this period was less than three years; but these suppositions are only inferences. apparently luke was not aware of the journey to arabia; but an incomplete narrative is not necessarily inaccurate. again, in the account of that first visit to jerusalem, the reader of the acts might naturally suppose that more than one of the twelve was present, that the main purpose of the journey was rather to engage in preaching than to make the acquaintance of peter, and that the visit lasted longer than fifteen days; and on the other hand, the reader of galatians might perhaps suppose that instead of preaching in jerusalem paul remained, while there, in strict retirement. again, however, these suppositions would be inferences; and the falsity of them simply shows how cautious the historian should be in reading between the lines of a narrative. finally, the differences between paul and luke are overbalanced by the striking and undesigned agreements. in galatians, paul does not mention the visit which he and barnabas made in jerusalem at the time of the famine. this conclusion has been avoided by those scholars who with ramsay identify the "famine visit" with the visit mentioned in gal. : - . the more usual view, however, is that gal. : - is to be regarded as parallel, not with acts : ; : , but with acts : - . the second visit mentioned by paul is thus identified with the third visit mentioned by luke. paul did not mention the famine visit because, as was probably admitted even by his opponents in galatia, the apostles at the time of that visit were all out of the city, so that there was no chance of a meeting with them. the subject under discussion in galatians was not paul's life in general, but the relation between paul and the original apostles. . the preaching to "greeks" in acts : , the best manuscripts read "spake unto the hellenists" instead of "spake unto the greeks." the word "hellenist" usually means "grecian jew." here, however, if this word is to be read, it must refer not to jews, but to gentiles; for the contrast with the preaching to jews that is mentioned just before, is the very point of the verse. perhaps at this point the manuscripts which read "greeks" (that is, "gentiles") are correct. in either case, the meaning is fixed by the context. these jews of cyprus and cyrene, when they arrived at antioch certainly began to preach regularly to gentiles. . peter's escape from prison in acts : - , luke brings the account of affairs in jerusalem up to the time which has already been reached in the narrative about antioch. the journey of barnabas and paul to jerusalem, acts : ; : , supplied the connecting link. while the church at antioch was progressing in the manner described in acts : - , a persecution had been carried on in jerusalem by herod agrippa i. the escape of peter is narrated in an extraordinarily lifelike way. evidently luke was in possession of first-hand information. the vividness of the narrative is very significant. it shows that the unmistakable trustworthiness of the acts extends even to those happenings which were most clearly miraculous. the supernatural cannot be eliminated from apostolic history. . antioch antioch on the orontes was founded by seleucus nicator, the first monarch of the seleucid dynasty, and under his successors it remained the capital of the syrian kingdom. when that kingdom was conquered by the romans, the political importance of antioch did not suffer. antioch became under the romans not only the capital of the province syria but also the residence of the emperors and high officials when they were in the east. it may be regarded as a sort of eastern capital of the empire. the political importance of antioch was no greater than its commercial importance. situated near the northeastern corner of the mediterranean sea, where the mediterranean coast is nearer to the euphrates than at any other point, where the orontes valley provided easy communication with the east and the syrian gates with the west, with a magnificent artificial harbor at seleucia, about twenty miles distant, antioch naturally became the great meeting point for the trade of east and west. it is not surprising that antioch was the third city of the empire--after rome and alexandria. the city was built on a plain between the orontes on the north and the precipitous slopes of mount silpius on the south. a great wall extended over the rugged heights of the mountain and around the city. a magnificent street led through the city from east to west. the buildings were of extraordinary magnificence. perhaps as magnificent as the city itself was the famous daphne, a neighboring shrine and pleasure resort, well-known for its gilded vice. the dominant language of antioch, from the beginning, had been greek. the seleucids prided themselves on the greek culture of their court, and roman rule introduced no essential change. of course, along with the greek language and greek culture went a large admixture of eastern blood and eastern custom. like the other great cities of the empire, antioch was a meeting place of various peoples, a typical cosmopolitan center of a world-wide empire. the jewish population, of course, was numerous. such was the seat of the apostolic missionary church. almost lost at first in the seething life of the great city, that church was destined to outlive all the magnificence that surrounded it. a new seed had been implanted in the ancient world, and god would give the increase. * * * * * in the library.--purves, "christianity in the apostolic age," pp. - , - . davis, "dictionary of the bible": articles on "agabus," "antioch," "arabia," "aretas," "barnabas," "herod" ( ). ramsay, "st. paul the traveller and the roman citizen," pp. - ; "pictures of the apostolic church," pp. - . lewin, "the life and epistles of st. paul," chs. v, vi and vii. conybeare and howson, "the life and epistles of st. paul," ch. iv. stalker, "the life of st. paul," pp. - . lumby, pp. - , - , - . cook, pp. - , - , , . plumptre, pp. - , - , . rackham, pp. - , - . part ii: christianity established among the gentiles the principles and practice of the gospel lesson xiv the gospel to the gentiles it was a dramatic moment when paul and barnabas, with their helper, set sail from seleucia, on the waters of the mediterranean. behind them lay syria and palestine and the history of the chosen people; in front of them was the west. the religion of israel had emerged from its age-long seclusion; it had entered at last upon the conquest of the world. the message that crossed the strait to cyprus was destined to be carried over broader seas. a mighty enterprise was begun. it was an audacious thought! the missionaries might well have been overpowered by what lay before them--by the power of a world empire, by the prestige of a brilliant civilization. how insignificant were their own weapons! would they ever even gain a hearing? but though the enterprise was begun in weakness it was begun in faith. at their departure from antioch the missionaries were "committed to the grace of god." the account of this first missionary journey is one of the most fascinating passages in the acts. the interest never flags; incident follows incident in wonderful variety. in reading this narrative, we are transplanted into the midst of the ancient world, we come to breathe the very atmosphere of that cosmopolitan age. in the lesson of to-day the teacher has an unusual opportunity. if he uses it well, he may cause the bible story to live again. absolutely essential to that end is the judicious use of a map--preferably something larger than the small sketch map of the text book. a travel narrative without a map is a hopeless jumble. the map is an aid both to memory and to imagination. tracing the route of the missionaries on the map, the teacher should endeavor to call up the scenes through which they passed. the student should be made to see the waters of the mediterranean, with the hills of cyprus beyond, the interminable stretches of the roman roads, the lofty mountains of the taurus, the perils of rivers and the perils of robbers, the teeming population of the countless cities--and through it all the simple missionaries of the cross, almost unnoticed amid the turmoil of the busy world, but rich in the possession of a world-conquering gospel and resistless through the power of the living god. . the prophets and teachers both prophecy and teaching were gifts of the spirit. i cor. : - . prophecy was immediate revelation of the divine plan or of the divine will; teaching, apparently, was logical development of the truth already given. which of the men who are mentioned in acts : were prophets and which were teachers is not clear. if any division is intended it is probably between the first three and the last two. for this grouping there is perhaps some slight indication in the connectives that are used in the greek, but the matter is not certain. perhaps all five of the men were possessed of both gifts. lucius was perhaps one of the founders of the church, for he came from cyrene. compare acts : . manaen is an interesting figure. he is called "foster-brother" of herod the tetrarch. the word translated "foster-brother" is apparently sometimes used in a derived sense, to designate simply an intimate associate of a prince. if that be the meaning here, then at least one member of the church at antioch was a man of some social standing. in antioch, as in corinth, probably "not many wise after the flesh, not many mighty, not many noble" were called, i cor. : ; but in antioch as in corinth there were exceptions. the herod who is here meant is herod antipas, the "herod" of the gospels. . elymas when the jewish sorcerer is first mentioned he is called bar-jesus--that is, "son of jesus," jesus being a common jewish name. then, a little below, the same man is called "elymas the sorcerer," and the explanation is added, "for so is his name by interpretation." apparently the new name elymas is introduced without explanation, and then the greek word for "sorcerer" is introduced as a translation of that. the word elymas is variously derived from an arabic word meaning "wise," or an aramaic word meaning "strong." in either case the greek word, "magos," for which our english bible has "sorcerer," is a fair equivalent. that greek word is the word that appears also in matt. : , , , where the english bible has "wise-men"; and words derived from the same root are used to describe simon of samaria in acts : , . the word could designate men of different character. some "magi" might be regarded as students of natural science; in others, superstition and charlatanism were dominant. . saul and paul at acts : luke introduces the name "paul"--"saul, who is also called paul." previously the narrative always uses the jewish name "saul"; after this "paul" appears with equal regularity, except in the accounts of the conversion, where in three verses a special, entirely un-greek form of "saul" is used. acts : , ; : . since in our passage in the original the name of the proconsul, paulus, is exactly like the name of the apostle, some have supposed that paul assumed a new name in honor of his distinguished convert. that is altogether unlikely. more probable is the suggestion that although paul had both names from the beginning, luke is led to introduce the name paul at just this point because of the coincidence with the name of the proconsul. even this supposition, however, is extremely doubtful. probably the roman name, which paul uses invariably in his letters, is introduced at this point simply because here for the first time paul comes prominently forward in a distinctly roman environment. . paul and barnabas connected with this variation in name is the reversal in the relation between paul and barnabas. previously barnabas has been given the priority; but immediately after the incident at paphos the missionaries are designated as "paul and his company," acts : , and thereafter when the two are mentioned together, paul, except at acts : , ; : , , appears first. in the presence of the roman proconsul, paul's roman citizenship perhaps caused him to take the lead; and then inherent superiority made his leadership permanent. . the return of john mark the reasons for john mark's return from perga to jerusalem can only be surmised. perhaps he was simply unwilling, for some reason sufficient to him but insufficient to paul, to undertake the hardships of the journey into the interior. certainly it was an adventurous journey. paul was not always an easy man to follow. the severity of paul's judgment of mark was not necessarily so great as has sometimes been supposed. one purpose of the second journey was to revisit the churches of the first journey. acts : . whether for good or for bad reasons, mark, as a matter of fact, had not been with the missionaries on a large part of that first journey, and was, therefore, unknown to many of the churches. for this reason, perhaps as much as on account of moral objections, paul considered mark an unsuitable helper. in his later epistles paul speaks of mark in the most cordial way. col. : ; philem. ; ii tim. : . in the last passage, he even says that mark was useful to him for ministering--exactly what he had not been at the beginning of the second missionary journey. . hardships and persecutions it is evident from ii cor. : - that luke has recorded only a small fraction of the hardships which paul endured as a missionary of the cross. the tendency to lay exaggerated stress upon martyrdom and suffering, which runs riot in the later legends of the saints, is in the acts conspicuous by its absence. of the trials which are vouched for by the unimpeachable testimony of paul himself, only a few may be identified in the lucan narrative. it is natural, however, to suppose that some of the "perils of rivers" and "perils of robbers" were encountered on the journey through the defiles of the taurus mountains from perga to pisidian antioch, and the one stoning which paul mentions is clearly to be identified with the adventure at lystra. in ii tim. : paul mentions the persecutions at antioch, iconium and lystra. . geography of the first journey the first missionary journey led the missionaries into three roman provinces: cyprus, pamphylia and galatia. the name "galatia" had originally designated a district in the north central part of asia minor, which had been colonized by certain celtic tribes several centuries before christ. by the romans, however, other districts were added to this original galatia, and in b. c. the whole complex was organized into an imperial province under the name galatia. in the first century after christ, therefore, the name galatia could be used in two distinct senses. in the first place, in the earlier, popular sense, it could designate galatia proper. in the second place, in the later, official sense, it could designate the whole roman province, which included not only galatia proper, but also parts of a number of other districts, including phrygia and lycaonia. of the cities visited on the first missionary journey, pisidian antioch--which was called "pisidian" because it was near pisidia--and iconium were in phrygia, and lystra and derbe in lycaonia; but all four were included in the province of galatia. many scholars suppose that the churches in these cities were the churches which paul addresses in the epistle to the galatians. that view is called the "south galatian theory." others--adherents of the "north galatian theory"--suppose that the epistle is addressed to churches in galatia proper, in the northern part of the roman province, which were founded on the second missionary journey. this question will be noticed again in connection with the epistle. . time of the first journey luke gives very little indication of the amount of time which was consumed on this first journey. the hasty reader probably estimates the time too low, since only a few incidents are narrated. the rapidity of the narrative should not be misinterpreted as indicating cursoriness of the labor. the passage through cyprus, acts : , was probably accompanied by evangelizing; the extension of the gospel through the whole region of antioch, v. , must have occupied more than a few days; the stay at iconium is designated as "long time," acts : ; the change of attitude on the part of the lystran populace, v. , was probably not absolutely sudden; not only lystra and derbe but also the surrounding country were evangelized, v. ; and finally the missionaries could hardly have returned to the cities from which they had been driven out, v. , unless the heat of persecution had been allowed to cool. perhaps a full year would not be too high an estimate of the time that was occupied by the journey, and still higher estimates are by no means excluded. . the scene at lystra the account of the incident at lystra is one of those inimitable bits of narrative which imprint upon the acts the indisputable stamp of historicity. lystra, though a roman colony, lay somewhat off the beaten track of culture and of trade; hence the extreme superstition of the populace is what might be expected. it may seem rather strange that paul and barnabas should have been identified with great gods of olympus rather than with lesser divinities or spirits, but who can place a limit upon the superstition of an uncultured people of the ancient world? the identification may have been rendered easier by the legend of philemon and baucis, which has been preserved for us by ovid, the latin poet. according to that legend, zeus and hermes appeared, once upon a time, in human form in phrygia, the same general region in which lystra was situated. zeus and hermes are the gods with whom barnabas and paul were identified; the english bible simply substitutes for these greek names the names of the corresponding roman deities. the temple of zeus-before-the-city and the preparations for sacrifices are described in a most lifelike way, in full accord with what is known of ancient religion. we find ourselves here in a somewhat different atmosphere from that which prevails in most of the scenes described in the acts. it is a pagan atmosphere, and an atmosphere of ruder superstition than that which prevailed in the great cities. the "speech of lycaonia," v. , is an especially characteristic touch. apparently the all-pervading greek was understood at lystra even by the populace; but in the excitement of their superstition they fell very naturally into their native language. as in the case of peter's release from prison, so in this incident, wonderful lifelikeness of description is coupled with a miracle. the scene at lystra is unintelligible without the miraculous healing of the lame man, with which it begins. it is impossible, in the acts as well as in the gospels, to separate the miraculous from the rest of the narrative. the evident truthfulness of the story applies to the supernatural elements as well as to the rest. the early christian mission is evidently real; but it is just as evidently supernatural. it moved through the varied scenes of the real world, but it was not limited by the world. it was animated by a mysterious, superhuman power. * * * * * in the library.--purves, "christianity in the apostolic age," pp. - . davis, "dictionary of the bible": articles on "cyprus," "antioch" ( ), "iconium," "lystra," "derbe," "galatia." hastings, "dictionary of the bible": muir, article on "cyprus"; massie, article on "bar-jesus"; headlam, article on "paulus, sergius"; ramsay, articles on "antioch in pisidia," "iconium," "lystra," "derbe," "galatia." ramsay, "st. paul the traveller and the roman citizen," pp. - ; "the cities of st. paul," pp. - ; "pictures of the apostolic church," pp. - . lewin, "the life and epistles of st. paul," chapter viii. conybeare and howson, "the life and epistles of st. paul," chapters v and vi. stalker, "the life of st. paul," pp. - . lumby, pp. - . cook, pp. - . plumptre, pp. - . rackham, pp. - . lesson xv the council at jerusalem the lesson for to-day deals with one of the most important events in apostolic history. at the jerusalem council the principles of the gentile mission and of the entire life of the church were brought to clear expression. if the original apostles had agreed with the judaizers against paul, the whole history of the church would have been different. there would even have been room to doubt whether paul was really a disciple of jesus; for if he was, how could he come to differ so radically from those whom jesus had taught? as a matter of fact, however, these dire consequences were avoided. when the issue was made between paul and the judaizers, the original apostles decided whole-heartedly for paul. the unity of the church was preserved. god was guiding the deliberations of the council. . the acts and galatians the treatment of to-day's lesson in the student's text book is based upon the assumption that gal. : - is an account of the same visit of paul to jerusalem as the visit which is described in acts : - . that assumption is not universally accepted. some scholars identify the event of gal. : - , not with the apostolic council of acts : - , but with the "famine visit" of acts : ; : . indeed, some maintain that the epistle to the galatians not only contains no account of the apostolic council, but was actually written before the council was held--say at antioch, soon after the first missionary journey. of course this early dating of galatians can be adopted only in connection with the "south galatian theory"; for according to the "north galatian theory" the churches addressed in the epistle were not founded until after the council, namely at the time of acts : . undoubtedly the identification of gal. : - with acts : ; : , avoids some difficulties. if gal. : - be identified with acts : - , then paul in galatians has passed over the famine visit without mention. furthermore there are considerable differences between gal. : - and acts : - . for example, if paul is referring to the apostolic council, why has he not mentioned the apostolic decree of acts : - ? these difficulties, however, are not insuperable, and there are counter difficulties against the identification of gal. : - with the famine visit. one such difficulty is connected with chronology. paul says that his first visit to jerusalem took place three years after his conversion, gal. : , and--according to the most natural interpretation of gal. : --that the visit of gal. : - took place fourteen years after the first visit. the conversion then occurred seventeen years before the time of gal. : - . but if gal. : - describes the famine visit, then the time of gal. : - could not have been after about a. d. . counting back seventeen years from a. d. we should get a. d. as the date of the conversion, which is, of course, too early. this reasoning, it must be admitted, is not quite conclusive. the ancients had an inclusive method of reckoning time. according to this method three years after would be . hence, fourteen plus three might be only what we should call about fifteen years, instead of seventeen. furthermore, paul may mean in gal. : that his conference with the apostles took place fourteen years after the conversion rather than fourteen years after the first visit. the identification of gal. : - with the famine visit is not impossible. but on the whole the usual view, which identifies the event of gal. : - with the meeting at the time of the apostolic council of acts : - , must be regarded as more probable. the apostolic council probably took place roughly at about a. d. . the conversion of paul then should probably be put at about a. d. - . . the judaizers conceivably the question about the freedom of the gentiles from the law might have arisen at an earlier time; for gentiles had already been received into the church before the first missionary journey. as a matter of fact, indeed, some objection had been raised to the reception of cornelius. but that objection had easily been silenced by an appeal to the immediate guidance of god. perhaps the case of cornelius could be regarded as exceptional; and a similar reflection might possibly have been applied to the gentile christians at antioch. there seemed to be no danger, at any rate, that the predominantly jewish character of the church would be lost. now, however, after a regular gentile mission had been carried on with signal success, the situation was materially altered. evidently the influx of gentile converts, if allowed to go on unhindered, would change the whole character of the church. christianity would appear altogether as a new dispensation: the prerogatives of israel would be gone. the question of gentile christianity had existed before, but after the first missionary journey it became acute. perhaps, however, there was also another reason why the battle had not been fought out at an earlier time. it looks very much as though this bitter opposition to the gentile mission had arisen only through the appearance of a new element in the jerusalem church. were these extreme legalists, who objected to the work of paul and barnabas--were these men present in the church from the beginning? the question is more than doubtful. it is more probable that these legalists came into the church during the period of prosperity which followed upon the persecution of stephen and was only briefly interrupted by the persecution under herod agrippa i. these jewish christian opponents of the gentile mission--these "judaizers"--must be examined with some care. they are described not only by luke in the acts but by paul himself in galatians. according to the acts, some of them at least had belonged to the sect of the pharisees before they had become christians. acts : . the activity of the judaizers is described by luke in complete independence of the account given by paul. as usual, luke contents himself with a record of external fact, while paul uncovers the deeper motives of the judaizers' actions. yet the facts as reported by luke fully justify the harsh words which paul employs. according to paul, these judaizers were "false brethren privily brought in, who came in privily to spy out our liberty which we have in christ jesus, that they might bring us into bondage." gal. : . by calling them "false brethren" paul means simply that they had not really grasped the fundamental principle of the gospel--the principle of justification by faith. they were still trying to earn their salvation by their works instead of receiving it as a gift of god. at heart they were still jews rather than christians. they came in privily into places where they did not belong--perhaps paul means especially into the church at antioch--in order to spy out christian liberty. gal. : . compare acts : . the rise of this judaizing party is easy to understand. in some respects the judaizers were simply following the line of least resistance. by upholding the mosaic law they would escape persecution and even obtain honor. we have seen that it was the jews who instigated the early persecutions of the church. such persecutions would be avoided by the judaizers, for they could say to their non-christian countrymen: "we are engaged simply in one form of the world-wide jewish mission. we are requiring our converts to keep the mosaic law and unite themselves definitely with the people of israel. every convert that we gain is a convert to judaism. the cross of christ that we proclaim is supplementary to the law, not subversive of it. we deserve therefore from the jews not persecution but honor." compare what paul says about the judaizers in galatia. gal. : , . . the apostolic decree at first sight it seems rather strange that paul in galatians does not mention the apostolic decree. some have supposed that his words even exclude any decree of that sort. in gal. : paul says that the pillars of the jerusalem church "imparted nothing" to him. yet according to the acts they imparted to him this decree. the decree, moreover, seems to have a direct bearing upon the question that paul was discussing in galatians; for it involved the imposition of a part of the ceremonial law upon gentile christians. how then, if the decree really was passed as luke says it was, could it have been left unmentioned by paul? there are various ways of overcoming the difficulty. in the first place it is not perfectly certain that any of the prohibitions contained in the decree are ceremonial in character. three of them are probably ceremonial if the text of most manuscripts of the acts is correct. most manuscripts read, at acts : : "that ye abstain from things sacrificed to idols, and from blood, and from things strangled, and from fornication; from which if ye keep yourselves, it shall be well with you." here "things offered to idols" apparently describes not idolatrous worship, but food which had been dedicated to idols; and "blood" describes meat used for food without previous removal of the blood. this meaning of "blood" is apparently fixed by the addition of "things strangled." since "things strangled" evidently refers to food, probably the two preceding expressions refer to food also. according to the great mass of our witnesses to the text, therefore, the apostolic decree contains a food law. a few witnesses, however, omit all reference to things strangled, not only at acts : but also at v. and at ch. : . if this text be original, then it is possible to interpret the prohibitions as simply moral and not at all ceremonial in character. "things offered to idols" may be interpreted simply of idolatry, and "blood" of murder. but if the prohibitions are prohibitions of immorality, then they cannot be said to have "imparted" anything to paul; for of course he was as much opposed to immorality as anyone. however, the more familiar form of the text is probably correct. the witnesses that omit the word "strangled" are those that attest the so-called "western text" of the acts. this western text differs rather strikingly from the more familiar text in many places. the question as to how far the western text of the acts is correct is a hotly debated question. on the whole, however, the western readings are usually at any rate to be discredited. in the second place, the difficulty about the decree may be overcome by regarding gal. : - as parallel not with acts : - but with acts : ; : . this solution has already been discussed. in the third place, the difficulty may be overcome by that interpretation of the decree which is proposed in the student's text book. the decree was not an addition to paul's gospel. it was not imposed upon the gentile christians as though a part of the law were necessary to salvation. on the contrary it was simply an attempt to solve the practical problems of certain mixed churches--not the pauline churches in general, but churches which stood in an especially close relation to jerusalem. this interpretation of the decree is favored by the difficult verse, acts : . what james there means is probably that the gentile christians should avoid those things which would give the most serious offense to hearers of the law. * * * * * in the library.--purves, "christianity in the apostolic age," pp. - . lightfoot, "saint paul's epistle to the galatians," pp. - ("the later visit of st. paul to jerusalem"), - ("st. paul and the three"). ramsay, "st. paul the traveller and the roman citizen," pp. - , - . lewin, "the life and epistles of st. paul," ch. ix. conybeare and howson, "the life and epistles of st. paul," ch. vii. stalker, "the life of st. paul," pp. - . lumby, pp. - . cook, pp. - . plumptre, pp. - . rackham, pp. - , - . lesson xvi the gospel carried into europe from the rich store of to-day's lesson only a few points can be selected for special comment. . titus and timothy at lystra, paul had timothy circumcised. acts : . this action has been considered strange in view of the attitude which paul had previously assumed. at jerusalem, only a short time before, he had absolutely refused to permit the circumcision of titus. evidently, too, he had regarded the matter as of fundamental importance. had titus been circumcised, the freedom of the gentile christians would have been seriously endangered. the presence of titus at the apostolic council is mentioned only by paul in galatians. it is not mentioned in the acts. indeed, titus does not appear in the acts at all, though in the epistles he is rather prominent. this fact, however, really requires no further explanation than that the history of luke is not intended to be exhaustive. the restraint exercised by the author of the acts has already been observed, for example, in a comparison of the long list of hardships in ii cor. : - with what luke actually narrates. the helpers of paul whom luke mentions are usually those who traveled with him. titus was sent by paul on at least one important mission, ii cor. : , , but was apparently not his companion on the missionary journeys. luke does not concern himself very much with the internal affairs of the churches, and it is in this field that titus is especially prominent in the epistles. with regard to the presence of titus in jerusalem, the different purposes of the narratives in galatians and in the acts must be borne in mind. the non-circumcision of titus, so strongly emphasized by paul, was merely preliminary to the public action of the church in which luke was interested. luke has thought it sufficient to include titus under the "certain other" of the antioch christians who went up with paul and barnabas to jerusalem. the different policy which paul adopted in the case of timothy, as compared with his policy about titus, is amply explained by the wide differences in the situation. in the first place, when titus was at jerusalem, the matter of gentile freedom was in dispute, whereas when timothy was circumcised the question had already been settled by a formal pronouncement of the jerusalem church. after paul had won the victory of principle, he could afford to make concessions where no principle was involved. timothy was recognized as a full member of the church even before his circumcision. circumcision was merely intended to make him a more efficient helper in work among the jews. in the second place--and this is even more important--timothy was a half-jew. it is perhaps doubtful whether paul under any circumstances would have authorized the circumcision of a pure gentile like titus. but timothy's mother was jewish. it must always be borne in mind that paul did not demand the relinquishment of the law on the part of jews; and timothy's parentage gave him at least the right of regarding himself as a jew. if he had chosen to follow his gentile father, the jews could have regarded him as a renegade. his usefulness in the synagogues would have been lost. obviously the circumcision of such a man involved nothing more than the maintenance of ancestral custom on the part of jews. where no principle was involved, paul was the most concessive of men. see especially i cor. : - . the final relinquishment of the law on the part of jews was rightly left to the future guidance of god. . the route through asia minor the difficulty of tracing the route of the missionaries beyond lystra is due largely to the difficulty of acts : . a literal translation of the decisive words in that verse would be either "the phrygian and galatian country" or "phrygia and the galatian country." according to the advocates of the "south galatian theory," "the galatian country" here refers not to galatia proper but to the southern part of the roman province galatia. "the phrygian and galatian country" then perhaps means "the phrygo-galatic country," or "that part of phrygia which is in the roman province galatia." the reference then is to iconium, pisidian antioch and the surrounding country--after the missionaries had passed through the lycaonian part of the province galatia (derbe and lystra) they traversed the phrygian part of the province. the chief objection to all such interpretations is found in the latter part of the verse: "having been forbidden of the holy spirit to speak the word in asia." it looks as though the reason why they passed through "the phrygian and galatian country" was that they were forbidden to preach in asia. but south galatia was directly on the way to asia. the impossibility of preaching in asia could therefore hardly have been the reason for passing through south galatia. apparently, therefore, the disputed phrase refers rather to some region which is not on the way to asia. this requirement is satisfied if galatia proper is meant--the country in the northern part of the roman province galatia. when they got to pisidian antioch, it would have been natural for them to proceed into the western part of asia minor, into "asia." that they were forbidden to do. hence they turned north, and went through phrygia into galatia proper. when they got to the border country between mysia and galatia proper, they tried to continue their journey north into bithynia, but were prevented by the spirit. then they turned west, and passing through mysia without preaching arrived at last at the coast, at troas. nothing is said here about preaching in galatia proper. but in acts : , in connection with the third missionary journey, it is said that when paul passed through "the galatian country and phrygia" he established the disciples. there could not have been disciples in the "galatian country," unless there had been preaching there on the previous journey. on the "north galatian" theory, therefore, the founding of the galatian churches to which the epistle is directed is to be placed at acts : , and the second visit to them, which seems to be presupposed by the epistle, is to be put at acts : . if it seems strange that luke does not mention the founding of these churches, the hurried character of this section of the narrative must be borne in mind. furthermore, the epistle seems to imply that the founding of the churches was rather incidental than an original purpose of the journey; for in gal. : paul says that it was because of an infirmity of the flesh that he preached the gospel in galatia the former time. apparently he had been hurrying through the country without stopping, but being detained by illness used his enforced leisure to preach to the inhabitants. it is not impossible to understand how luke came to omit mention of such incidental preaching. on the second missionary journey attention is concentrated on macedonia and greece. . the movements of silas and timothy when paul went to athens, silas and timothy remained behind in macedonia. acts : . they were directed to join paul again as soon as possible. v. . in acts : , they are said to have joined him at corinth. the narrative in the acts must here be supplemented by the first epistle to the thessalonians. what luke says is perfectly true, but his narrative is not complete. according to the most natural interpretation of i thess. : - , timothy was with paul in athens, and from there was sent to thessalonica. the entire course of events was perhaps as follows: silas and timothy both joined paul quickly at athens according to directions. they were then sent away again--timothy to thessalonica, and silas to some other place in macedonia. then, after the execution of their commissions, they finally joined paul again at corinth. acts : ; i thess. : . soon afterwards, all three missionaries were associated in the address of first thessalonians. . paul at athens in athens paul preached as usual in the synagogue to jews and "god-fearers"; but he also adopted another and more unusual method--he simply took his stand without introduction in the market place, and spoke to those who chanced by. this method was characteristically greek; it reminds us of the days of socrates. in the market place, paul encountered certain of the epicurean and stoic philosophers. both of these schools of philosophy had originated almost three hundred years before christ, and both were prominent in the new testament period. in their tenets they were very different. the stoics were pantheists. they conceived of the world as a sort of great living being of which god is the soul. the world does not exist apart from god and god does not exist apart from the world. such pantheism is far removed from the christian belief in the living god, maker of heaven and earth; but as against polytheism, pantheism and theism have something in common. paul in his speech was able to start from this common ground. in ethics, the stoics were perhaps nearer to christianity than in metaphysics. the highest good they conceived to be a life that is led in accordance with reason--that reason which is the determining principle of the world. the passions must be conquered, pleasure is worthless, the wise man is independent of external conditions. such an ethic worked itself out in practice in many admirable virtues--in some conception of the universal brotherhood of mankind, in charity, in heroic self-denial. but it lacked the warmth and glow of christian love, and it lacked the living god. the epicureans were materialists. the world, for them, was a vast mechanism. they believed in the gods, but conceived of them as altogether without influence upon human affairs. indeed, the deliverance of man from the fear of the gods was one of the purposes of the epicurean philosophy. the epicureans were interested chiefly in ethics. pleasure, according to them, is the highest good. it need not be the pleasure of the senses; indeed epicurus, at least, the founder of the school, insisted upon a calm life undisturbed by violent passions. nevertheless it will readily be seen how little such a philosophy had in common with christianity. the conditions under which paul made his speech cannot be determined with certainty. the difficulty arises from the ambiguity of "areopagus." "areopagus" means "mars' hill." but the term was also applied to the court which held at least some of its meetings on the hill. which meaning is intended here? did paul speak before the court, or did he speak on mars' hill merely to those who were interested? on the whole, it is improbable at any rate that he was subjected to a formal trial. the speech of paul at athens is one of the three important speeches of paul, exclusive of his speeches in defense of himself at jerusalem and at cæsarea, which have been recorded in the acts. these speeches are well chosen. one of them is a speech to jews, acts : - ; one a speech to gentiles, acts : - ; and the third a speech to christians, acts : - . together they afford a very good idea of paul's method as a missionary and as a pastor. as is to be expected, they differ strikingly from one another. paul was large enough to comprehend the wonderful richness of christian truth. his gospel was always the same, but he was able to adapt the presentation of it to the character of his hearers. at athens, an altar inscribed to an unknown god provided a starting point. the existence of such an altar is not at all surprising, although only altars to "unknown gods" (plural instead of singular) are attested elsewhere. perhaps the inscription on this altar indicated simply that the builder of the altar did not know to which of the numberless gods he should offer thanks for a benefit that he had received, or to which he should address a prayer to ward off calamity. under a polytheistic religion, where every department of life had its own god, it was sometimes difficult to pick out the right god to pray to for any particular purpose. such an altar was at any rate an expression of ignorance, and that ignorance served as a starting point for paul. "you are afraid that you have neglected the proper god in this case," says paul in effect. "yes, indeed, you have. you have neglected a very important god indeed, you have neglected the one true god, who made the world and all things therein." in what follows, paul appeals to the truth contained in stoic pantheism. his words are of peculiar interest at the present day, when pantheism is rampant even within the church. there is a great truth in pantheism. it emphasizes the immanence of god. but the truth of pantheism is contained also in theism. the theist, as well as the pantheist, believes that god is not far from every one of us, and that in him we live and move and have our being. the theist, as well as the pantheist, can say, "closer is he than breathing, and nearer than hands and feet." the theist accepts all the truth of pantheism, but avoids the error. god is present in the world--not one sparrow "shall fall on the ground without your father"--but he is not limited to the world. he is not just another name for the totality of things, but an awful, mysterious, holy, free and sovereign person. he is present in the world, but also master of the world. * * * * * in the library.--purves, "christianity in the apostolic age," pp. - . davis, "dictionary of the bible": articles on "troas," "philippi," "thessalonica," "athens," "areopagus," "stoics," "epicureans," "corinth," "gallio," "silas." ramsay, "st. paul the traveller and the roman citizen," pp. - ; "pictures of the apostolic church," pp. - . lewin, "the life and epistles of st. paul," chs. x, xi, and xii. conybeare and howson, "the life and epistles of st. paul," chs. viii, ix, x, xi, and xii. stalker, "the life of st. paul," pp. - . lumby, pp. - . cook, pp. - . plumptre, pp. - . rackham, pp. - , - . for information about the recently discovered gallio inscription, see "the princeton theological review," vol. ix, , pp. - : armstrong, "epigraphical note." lesson xvii encouragement for recent converts the pauline epistles fall naturally into four groups: ( ) the epistles of the second missionary journey (first and second thessalonians); ( ) the epistles of the third missionary journey (galatians, first and second corinthians and romans); ( ) the epistles of the first imprisonment (colossians and philemon, ephesians and philippians); ( ) the epistles written after the period covered by the acts (first timothy, titus and second timothy). each of these groups has its own characteristics. the first group is characterized by simplicity of subject matter, and by a special interest in the second coming of christ. the second group is concerned especially with the doctrines of sin and grace. the third group displays a special interest in the person of christ and in the church. the fourth group deals with organization, and with the maintenance of sound instruction. . simplicity of the thessalonian epistles the reason for the peculiarities of first and second thessalonians has often been sought in the early date of these epistles. on the second missionary journey, it is said, paul had not yet developed the great doctrines which appear at later periods of his life. this explanation may perhaps contain an element of truth. undoubtedly there was some progress in paul's thinking. not everything was revealed to him at once. the chief cause, however, for the simplicity of the thessalonian epistles is not the early date but the peculiar occasion of these epistles. paul is here imparting his first written instruction to an infant church. naturally he must feed these recent converts with milk. the simplicity of the letters is due not to immaturity in paul but to immaturity in the thessalonian church. after all, at the time when the thessalonian epistles were written, the major part of paul's christian life--including the decisive conflict with the judaizers at antioch and jerusalem--lay already in the past. at any rate the simplicity of the thessalonian epistles must not be exaggerated. in these letters the great pauline doctrines, though not discussed at length, are everywhere presupposed. there is the same lofty conception of christ as in the other epistles, the same emphasis upon his resurrection, the same doctrine of salvation through his death. i thess. : ; : , . . the second coming of christ undoubtedly the second advent, with the events which are immediately to precede it, occupies a central position in the thessalonian epistles. a few words of explanation, therefore, may here be in order. evidently the expectation of christ's coming was a fundamental part of paul's belief, and had a fundamental place in his preaching. "ye turned unto god from idols, to serve a living and true god, and to wait for his son from heaven"--these words show clearly how the hope of christ's appearing was instilled in the converts from the very beginning. i thess. : , . to serve the living god and to wait for his son--that is the sum and substance of the christian life. all through the epistles the thought of the parousia--the "presence" or "coming"--of christ appears as a master motive. i thess. : ; : ; : to : , , ; ii thess. : to : . this emphasis upon the second coming of christ is explained if paul expected christ to come in the near future. the imminence of the parousia for paul appears to be indicated by i thess. : : "for this we say unto you by the word of the lord, that we that are alive, that are left unto the coming of the lord, shall in no wise precede them that are fallen asleep." this verse is often thought to indicate that paul confidently expected before his death to witness the coming of the lord. apparently he classes himself with those who "are left unto the coming of the lord" as over against those who will suffer death. in the later epistles, it is further said, paul held a very different view. from second corinthians on, he faced ever more definitely the thought of death. ii cor. : , ; phil. : - . a comparison of i cor. : with ii cor. : , is thought to indicate that the deadly peril which paul incurred between the writing of the two corinthian epistles, ii cor. : , , had weakened his expectation of living until christ should come. after he had once despaired of life, he could hardly expect with such perfect confidence to escape the experience of death. the possibility of death was too strong to be left completely out of sight. plausible as such a view is, it can be held only with certain reservations. in the first place, we must not exaggerate the nearness of the parousia according to paul, even in the earliest period; for in ii thess. : - the thessalonians are reminded of certain events that must occur before christ would come. the expression of the former epistle, i thess. : , that the day of the lord would come as a thief in the night, was to be taken as a warning to unbelievers to repent while there was yet time, not as a ground for neglecting ordinary provision for the future. in second thessalonians paul finds it necessary to calm the overstrained expectations of the thessalonian christians. furthermore, it is not only in the earlier epistles that expressions occur which seem to suggest that the parousia is near. rom. : ; phil. : . and then it is evident from ii cor. : - and from i cor. : - that paul had undergone dangers before the one mentioned in ii cor. : , , so that there is no reason to suppose that that one event caused any sudden change in his expectations. lastly, in i cor. : paul says that "god both raised the lord, and will raise up us through his power." if that refers to the literal resurrection, then here paul classes himself among those who are to die; for if he lived to the parousia, then there would be no need for him to be raised up. it is therefore very doubtful whether we can put any very definite change in the apostle's expectations as to his living or dying between first corinthians and second corinthians. a gradual development in his feeling about the matter there no doubt was. during the early part of his life his mind dwelt less upon the prospect of death than it did after perils of all kinds had made that prospect more and more imminent. but at no time did the apostle regard the privilege of living until the parousia as a certainty to be put at all in the same category with the christian hope itself. especially the passage in first thessalonians can be rightly interpreted only in the light of the historical occasion for it. until certain members of the church had died, the thessalonian christians had never faced the possibility of dying before the second coming of christ. hence they were troubled. would the brethren who had fallen asleep miss the benefits of christ's kingdom? paul writes to reassure them. he does not contradict their hope of living till the coming of christ, for god had not revealed to him that that hope would not be realized. but he tells them that, supposing that hope to be justified, even then they will have no advantage over their dead brethren. he classes himself with those who were still alive and might therefore live till christ should come, as over against those who were already dead and could not therefore live till christ should come. certain passages in the epistles of paul, which are not confined to any one period of his life, seem to show that at any rate he did not exclude the very real possibility that christ might come in the near future. at any rate, however, such an expectation of the early coming of christ was just as far removed as possible from the expectations of fanatical chiliasts. it did not lead paul to forget that the times and the seasons are entirely in the hand of god. it had no appreciable effect upon his ethics, except to make it more intense, more fully governed by the thought of the judgment seat of christ. it did not prevent him from laying far-reaching plans, it did not prevent his developing a great philosophy of future history in rom., chs. to . how far he was from falling into the error he combated in second thessalonians! despite his view of the temporary character of the things that are seen, how sane and healthy was his way of dealing with practical problems! he did his duty, and left the details of the future to god. hence it is hard to discover what paul thought as to how soon christ would come--naturally so, for paul did not try to discover it himself. . the persons associated in the address almost always other persons are associated with paul in the addresses of the epistles. with regard to the meaning of this custom, extreme views should be avoided. on the one hand, these persons--usually, at any rate--had no share in the actual composition of the epistles. the epistles bear the imprint of one striking personality. on the other hand, association in the address means something more than that the persons so named sent greetings; for mere greetings are placed at the end. the truth lies between the two extremes. probably the persons associated with paul in the address were made acquainted at least in general with the contents of the epistles, and desired to express their agreement with what was said. in the thessalonian epistles silas and timothy, who had had a part in the founding of the thessalonian church, appear very appropriately in the address. a question related to that of the persons associated in the addresses is the question of the so-called "epistolary plural." the epistolary plural was analogous to our "editorial we" it was a usage by which the writer of a letter could substitute "we" for "i" in referring to himself alone. in many passages in the letters of paul it is exceedingly difficult to tell whether a plural is merely epistolary, or whether it has some special significance. for example, whom, if anyone, is paul including with himself in the "we" of i thess. : ? in particular, the question often is whether, when paul says "we," he is thinking of the persons who were associated with him in the address of the epistle. on the whole it seems impossible to deny that paul sometimes uses the epistolary plural, though his use of it is probably not so extensive as has often been supposed. * * * * * in the library.--purves, "christianity in the apostolic age," pp. - . davis, "dictionary of the bible": purves (supplemented), article on "thessalonians, epistles to the." hastings, "dictionary of the bible": lock, articles on "thessalonians, first epistle to the" and "thessalonians, second epistle to the." m'clymont, "the new testament and its writers," pp. - . ramsay, "pictures of the apostolic church," pp. - . stalker, "the life of st. paul," pp. - . ellicott, "a new testament commentary for english readers," vol. iii, pp. - : mason, "the epistles of paul the apostle to the thessalonians." "the cambridge bible for schools and colleges": findlay, "the epistles to the thessalonians." zahn, "introduction to the new testament," vol. i, pp. - , - . milligan, "st. paul's epistles to the thessalonians." the two last-named works are intended primarily for those who have some knowledge of greek, but can also be used by others. lesson xviii the conflict with the judaizers . apollos before the arrival of paul at ephesus an important event had taken place in that city--the meeting of aquila and priscilla with apollos. apollos was a jew of alexandrian descent. he had already received instruction about jesus--perhaps in his native city. of all the great cities of the roman empire alexandria alone was approximately as near to jerusalem as was syrian antioch. the founding of the church at alexandria is obscure, but undoubtedly it took place at a very early time. at a later period alexandria was of the utmost importance as the center of christian learning, as it had been already the center of the learning of the pagan world. until instructed by aquila and priscilla, apollos had known only the baptism of john the baptist. apparently one important thing that he had lacked was an acquaintance with the peculiar christian manifestation of the holy spirit. he seems to have been trained in greek rhetoric, whether the word translated "eloquent" in acts : means "eloquent" or "learned." apollos did not remain long in ephesus, but went to corinth, where, as can be learned from first corinthians as well as from the acts, his work was of great importance. . galatians a polemic after studying first the thessalonian epistles and then galatians in succession the student should be able to form some conception of the variety among the epistles of paul. certainly there could be no sharper contrast. first and second thessalonians are simple, affectionate letters written to a youthful church; galatians is one of the most passionate bits of polemic in the whole bible. we ought to honor paul for his anger. a lesser man might have taken a calmer view of the situation. after all, it might have been said, the observance of jewish fasts and feasts was not a serious matter; even circumcision, though useless, could do no great harm. but paul penetrated below the surface. he detected the great principles that were at stake. the judaizers were disannulling the grace of god. . the address. gal. : - the addresses of the pauline epistles are never merely formal. paul does not wait for the beginning of the letter proper in order to say what he has in mind. even the epistolary forms are suffused with the deepest religious feeling. the opening of the present letter is anticipatory of what is to follow. dividing the opening into three parts--the nominative (name and title of the writer), the dative (name of those to whom the letter is addressed), and the greeting--it will be observed that every one of these parts has its peculiarity as compared with the other pauline epistles. the peculiarity of the nominative is the remarkable addition beginning with "not from men," which is a summary of the first great division of the epistle, paul's defense against the personal attack of his opponents. since the epistle to the galatians is polemic from beginning to end, it is not surprising that the very first word after the bare name and title of the author is "not." paul cannot mention his title "apostle"--in the addresses of first and second thessalonians he had not thought it necessary to mention it at all--without thinking of the way in which in galatia it was misrepresented. "my apostleship," he says, "came not only from christ, but directly from christ." the peculiarity of the dative is its brevity--not "beloved of god, called to be saints," or the like, but just the bare and formal "to the churches of galatia." the situation was not one which called for pleasant words! the greeting is the least varied part in the addresses of the pauline epistles. the long addition to the greeting in galatians is absolutely unique. it is a summary of the second and central main division of the epistle, paul's defense of his gospel. "christ has died to free you. the judaizers in bringing you into bondage are making of none effect the grace of christ, manifested on the cross." that is the very core of the letter. in all of the pauline epistles there is scarcely a passage more characteristic of the man than the first five verses of galatians. an ordinary writer would have been merely formal in the address. not so paul! the exultant supernaturalism of the address should be noticed. this supernaturalism appears, in the first place, in the sphere of external history--"god the father, who raised him from the dead." pauline christianity is based upon the miracle of the resurrection. supernaturalism appears also, however, in the sphere of christian experience--"who gave himself for our sins, that he might deliver us out of this present evil world." christianity is no mere easy development of the old life, no mere improvement of the life, but a new life in a new world. in both spheres, supernaturalism is being denied in the modern church. pauline christianity is very different from much that is called christianity to-day. finally, this passage will serve to exhibit paul's lofty view of the person of christ. "neither through man," says paul, "but through jesus christ." jesus christ is here distinguished sharply from men and placed clearly on the side of god. what is more, even the judaizers evidently accepted fundamentally the same view. paul said, "not by man, but by jesus christ"; the judaizers said, "not by jesus christ, but by man." but if so, then the judaizers, no less than paul, distinguished jesus sharply from ordinary humanity. about other things there was debate, but about the person of christ paul appears in harmony even with his opponents. evidently the original apostles had given the judaizers on this point no slightest excuse for differing from paul. the heavenly christ of paul was also the christ of those who had walked and talked with jesus of nazareth. they had seen jesus subject to all the petty limitations of human life. yet they thought him divine! could they have been deceived? . the purpose of the epistle. gal. : - the thanksgiving for the christian state of the readers, which appears in practically every other of the pauline epistles, is here conspicuous by its absence. here it would have been a mockery. the galatians were on the point of giving up the gospel. there was just a chance of saving them. the letter was written in a desperate crisis. pray god it might not be too late! no time here for words of thanks! in vs. - , paul simply states the purpose of the letter in a few uncompromising words: "you are falling away from the gospel and i am writing to stop you." . paul's defense of his apostolic authority. gal. : to : after stating, gal. : , , the thesis that is to be proved in this section, paul defends his independent apostolic authority by three main arguments. in the first place, vs. - , he was already launched upon his work as apostle to the gentiles before he had even come into any effective contact with the original apostles. before his conversion, he had been an active persecutor. his conversion was wrought, not, like an ordinary conversion, through human agency, but by an immediate act of christ. after his conversion it was three years before he saw any of the apostles. then he saw only peter (and james) and that not long enough to become, as his opponents said, a disciple of these leaders. in the second place, gal. : - , when he finally did hold a conference with the original apostles, they themselves, the very authorities to whom the judaizers appealed, recognized that his authority was quite independent of theirs, and, like theirs, of directly divine origin. in the third place, gal. : - , so independent was his authority that on one occasion he could even rebuke the chief of the original apostles himself. what paul said at that time to peter happened to be exactly what he wanted to say, in the epistle, to the galatians. this section, therefore, forms a transition to the second main division of the epistle. it has sometimes been thought surprising that paul does not say how peter took his rebuke. the conclusion has even been drawn that if peter had acknowledged his error paul would have been sure to say so. such reasoning ignores the character of this section. in reporting the substance of what he said to peter, paul has laid bare the very depths of his own life. to return, after such a passage, to the incident at antioch would have been pedantic and unnecessary. long before the end of the second chapter paul has forgotten all about peter, all about antioch, and all about the whole of his past history. he is thinking only of the grace of christ, and how some men are trampling it under foot. o foolish galatians, to desert so great a salvation! . paul's defense of his gospel. gal. : to : salvation cannot be earned by human effort, but must be received simply as a free gift: christ has died to save us from the curse of the law: to submit again to the yoke of bondage is disloyalty to him--that is the great thesis that paul sets out to prove. he proves it first by an argument from experience. gal. : - . you received the holy spirit, in palpable manifestation, before you ever saw the judaizers, before you ever thought of keeping the mosaic law. you received the spirit by faith alone. how then can you now think that the law is necessary? surely there can be nothing higher than the spirit. in the second place, there is an argument from scripture. not those who depend upon the works of the law, but those who believe, have the benefit of the covenant made with abraham. vs. - . in the third place, by the use of various figures, paul contrasts the former bondage with the present freedom. gal. : to : . the life under the law was a period of restraint like that of childhood, preliminary to faith in christ. the law was intended to produce the consciousness of sin, in order that the resultant hopelessness might lead men to accept the saviour. vs. - . but now all christians alike, both jews and gentiles, are sons of god in christ, and therefore heirs of the promise made to abraham. vs. - . being sons of god, with all the glorious freedom of sonship, with the spirit crying, "abba, father," in the heart, how can we think of returning to the miserable bondage of an external and legalistic religion? gal. : - . in the fourth place, paul turns away from argument to make a personal appeal. vs. - . what has become of your devotion to me? surely i have not become your enemy just because i tell you the truth. the judaizers are estranging you from me. listen to me, my spiritual children, even though i can speak to you only through the cold medium of a letter! in the fifth place, paul, in his perplexity, bethinks himself of one more argument. it is an argument that would appeal especially to those who were impressed by the judaizers' method of using the old testament, but it also has permanent validity. the fundamental principle, says paul, for which i am arguing, the principle of grace, can be illustrated from the story of ishmael and isaac. ishmael had every prospect of being the heir of abraham. it seemed impossible for the aged abraham to have another son. nature was on ishmael's side. but nature was overruled. so it is to-day. as far as nature is concerned, the jews are the heirs of abraham--they have all the outward marks of sonship. but god has willed otherwise. he has chosen to give the inheritance to the heirs according to promise. the principle of the divine choice, operative on a small scale in the acceptance of isaac, is operative now on a large scale in the acceptance of the gentile church. finally, paul concludes the central section of the epistle by emphasizing the gravity of the crisis. gal. : - . do not be deceived. circumcision as the judaizers advocate it is no innocent thing; it means the acceptance of a law religion. you must choose either the law or grace; you cannot have both. . the results of paul's gospel. gal. : to : in this third main division of the epistle paul exhibits the practical working of faith. paul's gospel is more powerful than the teaching of the judaizers. try to keep the law in your own strength and you will fail, for the flesh is too strong. but the spirit is stronger than the flesh, and the spirit is received by faith. . conclusion. gal. : - this concluding section, if not the whole epistle, was written with paul's own hand. v. . in his other letters paul dictated everything but a brief closing salutation. in the closing section, paul lays the alternative once more before his readers. the judaizers have worldly aims, they boast of worldly advantages; but the true christian boasts of nothing but the cross. christianity, as here portrayed, is not the gentle, easy-going doctrine that is being mistaken for it to-day. it is no light thing to say, "the world hath been crucified unto me, and i unto the world." but the result is a new creature! * * * * * in the library.--purves, "christianity in the apostolic age," pp. - . davis, "dictionary of the bible": article on "ephesus"; purves, articles on "galatia" and "galatians, epistle to the" (supplemented). hastings, "dictionary of the bible": ramsay, article on "ephesus"; dods, article on "galatians, epistle to the." ramsay, "st. paul the traveller and the roman citizen," pp. - ; "pictures of the apostolic church," pp. - , - . lewin, "the life and epistles of st. paul," chs. xii, xiii. conybeare and howson, "the life and epistles of st. paul," chs. xii, xiii, xiv, xv and xvi. stalker, "the life of st. paul," pp. - , - . lumby, pp. - . cook, pp. - . plumptre, pp. - . rackham, pp. - . m'clymont, "the new testament and its writers," pp. - . ellicott, "a new testament commentary for english readers," vol. ii, pp. - : sanday, "the epistle of paul the apostle to the galatians." "the cambridge bible for schools and colleges": perowne, "the epistle to the galatians." zahn, "introduction to the new testament," vol. i, pp. - . lightfoot, "saint paul's epistle to the galatians." the two last-named works are intended primarily for those who have some knowledge of greek, but can also be used by others. lesson xix problems of a gentile church christianity, according to paul, is an escape from the world. gal. : . all human distinctions are comparatively unimportant. "there can be neither jew nor greek, there can be neither bond nor free, there can be no male and female." gal. : . such a doctrine might seem logically to lead to fanaticism. if the christian is already a citizen of heaven, may he not be indifferent to the conditions of life upon this earth? such a conclusion was altogether avoided by paul. in first corinthians paul is revealed as the most practical of men. all human distinctions are subordinate and secondary--and yet these distinctions are carefully observed. paul was a man of heroic faith, but he was also possessed of admirable tact. it is not that the one side of paul's nature limited the other; it is not that common sense acted as a check to transcendental religion. on the contrary, the two things seemed to be in perfect harmony. just because paul was inwardly so entirely free from the world, he was also so wise in dealing with worldly affairs. the secret of this harmony was consecration. human relationships, when consecrated to god, are not destroyed, but ennobled. they cease, indeed, to be an end in themselves, but they become a means to christian service. the christian man has no right to be indifferent to the world. if he is, he is no true son of the god who made the world, and sent the lord to save it. the christian, like the man of the world, is profoundly interested in the conditions of life on this earth. only, unlike the man of the world, he is not helpless and perplexed in the presence of those conditions; but from his vantage ground of heavenly power, he shapes them to the divine will. he is interested in the world, but he is interested in it, not as its servant, but as its master. so in first corinthians paul lays hold of certain perplexing practical problems with the sure grasp of one who is called to rule and not to serve. everything that he touches he lifts to a higher plane. in his hands even the simplest things of life receive a heavenly significance. the problems that are discussed in first corinthians stood in a special relation to the environment of the corinthian church. most of them were due to the threatened intrusions of greek paganism. they are closely analogous, however, to the problems which we have to solve to-day. paganism and worldliness are not dead. the church still stands in the midst of a hostile environment. we can still use the teaching of paul. that teaching will now be examined in a few of its important details. . the parties paul mentions four parties that had been formed in the corinthian church--a paul-party, an apollos-party, a cephas-party and a christ-party. these parties do not seem to have been separated from one another by any serious doctrinal differences, and it is impossible to determine their characteristics in detail. in the section where the party spirit is discussed, paul blames the corinthians for intellectual pride. this fault has often been connected with the apollos-party. apollos was an alexandrian, and probably had an alexandrian greek training. he might therefore have unconsciously evoked among some members of the corinthian church an excessive admiration for his more pretentious style of preaching, which might have caused them to despise the simpler manner of paul. even this much, however, is little more than surmise. at any rate, apollos should not be blamed for the faults of those who misused his name. he is praised unstintedly by paul, who was even desirous that he should return at once to corinth. i cor. : . paul blames the paul-party just as much as any of the other three. the peter-party was composed of admirers of peter, who had either come to corinth from the scene of peter's labors elsewhere, or simply had known of peter by hearsay. it is unlikely that peter himself had been in corinth, for if he had paul would probably have let the fact appear in first or second corinthians. the christ-party is rather puzzling. a comparison with the false teachers who are combated in second corinthians has led some scholars to suppose that it was a judaizing party, which emphasized a personal acquaintance with the earthly jesus as a necessary qualification of apostleship. in that case, however, paul would probably have singled out the christ-party for special attack. more probably these were simply men who, in proud opposition to the adherents of paul, of apollos and of cephas, emphasized their own independence of any leader other than christ. of course, the watchword, "i am of christ," if used in a better spirit, would have been altogether praiseworthy, and indeed paul desires all the parties to unite in it. i cor. : - . perhaps it is a mistake to attribute to these parties anything like stability. on the whole, the passage gives the impression that it is not the individual parties that paul is condemning, but the party spirit. that party spirit was manifested by watchwords like those which are enumerated in i cor. : , but that that enumeration was meant to be complete, does not appear. the whole effort to determine the characteristics of the individual parties--an effort which has absorbed the attention of many scholars--should perhaps be abandoned. paul's treatment of the party spirit exhibits his greatness not only as an administrator, but also as a writer. the subject was certainly not inspiring; yet under paul's touch it becomes luminous with heavenly glory. the contrast of human wisdom with the message of the cross, i cor. : - , where a splendid rhythm of language matches the sublimity of the thought, the wonderful description of the freedom and power of the man who possesses the spirit of god, the grand climax of the third chapter, "for all things are yours; whether paul, or apollos, or cephas, or the world, or life, or death, or things present, or things to come; all are yours; and ye are christ's; and christ is god's"--these are among the passages that can never be forgotten. . things sacrificed to idols the question of meats offered to idols, which paul discusses in i cor. : to : , was exceedingly intricate. to it paul applies several great principles. in the first place, there is the principle of christian freedom. the christian has been delivered from enslaving superstitions. idols have no power; they cannot impart any harmful character to the good things which god has provided for the sustenance of man. in the second place, however, there is the principle of loyalty. the fact that idols are nothing does not render idol-worship morally indifferent. on the contrary, idolatry is always sinful. if the eating of certain kinds of food under certain conditions involves participation in idolatry then it is disloyalty to the one true god. the joint operation of the two principles of freedom and of loyalty seems to lead in paul's mind to the following practical conclusion:--the christian may eat the meat that has been offered to idols if it is simply put on sale in the market place or set before him at an ordinary meal; but he must not take part with the heathen in specifically religious feasts. the whole question, however, is further viewed in the light of a third principle--the principle of christian love. even things that are in themselves innocent must be given up if a brother by them is led into conduct which for him is sin. christ has died for that weaker brother; surely the christian, then, may not destroy him. thus love, even more than loyalty, limits freedom--but it is a blessed limitation. the principles here applied by paul to the question of the corinthian christians will solve many a problem of the modern church. . spiritual gifts the principle of christian love, with the related principle of toleration, is applied also to another set of problems, the problems with regard to the exercise of spiritual gifts. the passage in which paul discusses these problems, aside from its spiritual and moral teaching, is of singular historical interest. it affords a unique picture of the devotional meetings of an apostolic church. the characteristic of these meetings was the enthusiasm which prevailed in them. paul is not at all desirous of dampening that enthusiasm. on the contrary the gifts in question were in his judgment really bestowed by the holy spirit. even the gift of tongues, which paul limits in its operation, is in his judgment of genuine value. indeed, he himself had exercised it even more than the other christians. i cor. : . this last fact should correct any unworthy impression which we might have formed with regard to the gift. if speaking with tongues was practiced by paul, then it was no mere unhealthy emotionalism. we are to-day unable to understand it fully, but in the apostolic church it was a real expression of christian experience. paul desires, not to dampen the enthusiasm of the corinthian church, but merely to eliminate certain harmful by-products of that which was in itself altogether excellent. the first principle which he applies is the principle of toleration. there is room in the church for many different kinds of workers. "there are diversities of gifts, but the same spirit." the principle is often neglected in the modern church. toleration, indeed, is on everyone's lips; but it is not the kind of toleration that paul means. it is often nothing more than indifference to the great verities of the faith. such toleration would have met with nothing but an anathema from paul. the toleration that paul is commending is a toleration, not with regard to matters of doctrine, but with regard to methods of work. such toleration is often sadly lacking. some advocates of missions think that almost every christian who stays at home is a coward; some good, conservative elders, on the other hand, have little interest in what passes the bounds of their own congregation. some christians of reserved habits are shocked at the popular methods of the evangelists; some evangelists are loud in their ignorant denunciation of the christian scholar. in other words, many very devout christians of the present day act as though they had never read the twelfth chapter of first corinthians. the principle of toleration, however, culminates in the principle of love. if there must be a choice between the exercise of different gifts, then the choice should be in favor of those gifts which are most profitable to other men. finally, even the highest spiritual gifts are not independent of reason. i cor. : , . that is a far-reaching principle. some modern christians seem to think that an appeal to the inward voice of the spirit excuses them from listening to reasonable counsel. such is not the teaching of paul. . the resurrection the error which is combated in the fifteenth chapter of the epistle could hardly have been a denial, in general, of continued existence after death, but was rather a denial of the resurrection of the body as over against the greek doctrine of the immortality of the soul. in reply, paul appeals to the resurrection of jesus. the appeal would seem to be futile unless paul means that the resurrection of jesus was a bodily resurrection. if the appearances of jesus were no more than incorporeal manifestations of his spirit, then obviously the believer in a mere immortality of the soul remained unrefuted. in this chapter there is an advance over the simple teaching of first thessalonians. here the character of the resurrection body comes into view. the resurrection body will have a real connection with the old body--otherwise there would be no resurrection--but the weakness of the old body will be done away. there is continuity, but also transformation. . incidental information about jesus certain passages in first corinthians, which are introduced only in an incidental way, as illustrations of the principles which are being applied, are of inestimable historical value. these passages include not only the great autobiographical passage in the ninth chapter, where paul illustrates from his own life the limitation of the principle of freedom by the principle of love, but also two all-important passages which refer to the life of christ. it is generally admitted that first corinthians was written at about a. d. . the eleventh chapter of the epistle gives an account of the institution of the lord's supper, in which jesus teaches the sacrificial significance of his death; and the fifteenth chapter gives a list of the appearances of jesus after his resurrection. the information contained in these passages was not invented by paul; indeed he distinctly says that it was "received." in a. d. , then, not only paul, but also the church generally believed that jesus' death, according to his own teaching, was sacrificial, and appealed in support of his resurrection to a wealth of competent testimony. but from whom had paul "received" these things? hardly from anyone except those who had been christians before him--in other words, from the palestinian church. we have here an irremovable confirmation of the gospel view of jesus. first corinthians is a historical document of absolutely priceless value. the incidental character of these historical passages is especially noteworthy. it shows that paul knew far more about jesus than he found occasion in the epistles to tell. if he had told more, no doubt the gospel picture of jesus would have received confirmation throughout. * * * * * in the library.--purves, "christianity in the apostolic age," pp. - . davis, "dictionary of the bible": article on "apollos"; purves and davis, article on "corinthians, epistles to the." hastings, "dictionary of the bible": robertson, article on "corinthians, first epistle to the." m'clymont, "the new testament and its writers," pp. - . ellicott, "a new testament commentary for english readers," vol. ii, pp. - : shore, "the first epistle of paul the apostle to the corinthians." "the cambridge bible for schools": lias, "the first epistle to the corinthians." zahn, "introduction to the new testament," vol. i, pp. - . "the international critical commentary": robertson and plummer, "a critical and exegetical commentary on the first epistle of st. paul to the corinthians." the two last-named works presuppose a knowledge of greek. lesson xx the apostle and his ministry . address and thanksgiving. ii cor. : - in first corinthians the obscure sosthenes is found to be associated with paul in the address of the epistle; in second corinthians it is timothy, one of the best-known of the helpers of paul. even if that mission of timothy to corinth which is mentioned in first corinthians had resulted in failure, timothy's usefulness in the church was not permanently affected. after the address, comes, as is usual in the pauline epistles, an expression of thanksgiving to god. this time, however, it is not thanksgiving for the christian state of the readers, but thanksgiving for paul's own escape from danger. the absence of thanksgiving for the readers does not mean here, as in the case of galatians, that there was nothing to be thankful for in the church that is being addressed, for the whole first section of the letter is suffused with a spirit of thankfulness for the corinthians' return to their true allegiance; it means rather simply that the thought of the deadly personal danger, and of the remarkable escape, were for the moment in the forefront of paul's thought. even that personal matter, however, was used by paul to fortify his readers against similar trials, and especially to strengthen still further the bonds of sympathy which had at last been restored between him and them. what this danger was from which paul had just escaped cannot be determined. it is as much a puzzle as the fighting with beasts at ephesus, which paul mentions in i cor. : . neither one nor the other can very well be identified with the trouble caused by demetrius the silversmith, acts : - , for there paul does not seem to have been in deadly danger. some suppose that the fighting with beasts is literally meant; that paul was actually exposed to the wild beasts in the arena and escaped only in some remarkable way. it should be observed that paul does not say, with regard to the danger mentioned in second corinthians, that it occurred in ephesus, but only that it occurred in asia. the expression, "weighed down," in ii cor. : perhaps points to some form of illness rather than to persecution. . the apostle and the ministry of reconciliation. ii cor. : to : immediately after the thanksgiving for his escape from death, paul begins the defense of his ministry. after the suspense of the previous days, he feels the need of reviewing the methods and motives of his labor among the corinthians, in order that the last vestige of suspicion may be removed. this he does in an unrestrained, cordial sort of way, which reveals the deepest secrets of his heart, and culminates here and there in grand expositions of the very essence of the gospel. first, in just a passing word, ch. : , , he defends his letters against that charge of obscurity or concealment which is hinted at elsewhere in the epistle. compare ch. : - ; : . next, he defends himself against the charge of fickleness in his journey plans. at some time, probably during or after the unsuccessful visit alluded to in ch. : , paul had formed the plan of returning to corinth by the direct route. this plan he had not carried out, and his abandonment of it apparently confirmed the impression of weakness which had been left by the unsuccessful visit. "he is very bold in letters," said his opponents, "but when he is here he is weak, and now he is afraid to return." it was a petty criticism, and a lesser man might have answered it in a petty way. but paul was able to lift the whole discussion to a loftier plane. his answer to the criticism was very simple--the reason why he had not returned to corinth at once was that he did not want to return again in grief and in severity; for the sake of the corinthians themselves he wanted to give them time to repent, before the final and fatal issue should be raised. characteristically, however, paul does not content himself with this simple answer; indeed he does not even begin with it. a specific explanation of the change in his plans would have refuted the criticism immediately under consideration, but paul felt the need of doing far more than that. what he desired to do was to make not only this criticism, but all similar criticisms, impossible. this he does by the fine reference to the positive character of his gospel. "you say that i am uncertain in my plans, that i say yes and no in one breath. well, the gospel that i preached, at any rate, was no such uncertain thing as that. my gospel was a great 'yes' to all the promises of god." such a method of refutation lifts the reader far above all petty criticisms to the great things of paul's gospel. yet this reference to great principles is no mere excuse to avoid the simple question at issue. on the contrary, paul is perfectly frank about the reason why he had not gone to corinth as he had intended. it was out of love to the corinthian church, and this had also prompted the writing of a severe letter. here, ch. : - , paul refers to the offender whose case had been made a test at the time of the recent painful visit. this offender was probably different from the incestuous person who is so sternly dealt with in i cor. : - . his offense is thought by many to have been some personal insult to paul, ii cor. : , but this is not quite certain. at any rate, whatever his original offence, paul's demand for his punishment had become a test of the loyalty of the church. at first the demand had been refused, but now the majority of the congregation has agreed and the man himself is deeply repentant, so that paul is only afraid lest severity may go too far. it is hardly worth while saying that the character of paul was entirely free from vindictiveness. when the discipline of the church would permit it, paul was the first to propose counsels of mercy. the reference to the epistles of commendation which had been used by paul's opponents in corinth, ch. : , has been made the basis of far-reaching conclusions about the whole history of the apostolic age. from whom could the opponents have received their letters of introduction? only, it is said, from palestine, and probably from the original apostles. this conclusion is hasty, to say the least. it should be noticed that not only letters to the corinthian church but also letters from the church are apparently in mind. v. . if, then, the corinthian church had been asked to supply these false teachers with letters of commendation, perhaps the other churches that had supplied them with letters were no nearer to jerusalem than corinth was. the mention of these letters of commendation introduces one of the grandest passages in the new testament. "i," says paul, by way of transition, "do not need any letters of commendation. my work is sufficient commendation. what i have accomplished in the hearts of men is an epistle written by the spirit of god." then follows the magnificent exposition of the ministry of the new covenant. that ministry is first contrasted with the old dispensation, perhaps with reference to an excessive valuation, by the opponents, of a continued judaism in the church. the old covenant was glorious, but how much more glorious is the new! the old was a ministry of condemnation, but the new is a ministry of justification. the old was a ministry of an external law, the new is a ministry of the life-giving power of the spirit of god. there is no reason any longer for concealment. the spirit brings freedom and openness and light. this treasure is held indeed in earthen vessels. the recent danger that paul has passed through, as well as the overpowering hardships of his life, make him painfully conscious of human weakness. but that weakness is blessed which in all the fuller glory reveals the all-conquering power of god. the christian need never despair, for by the eye of faith he can detect those unseen things which are eternal. the present body may be dissolved, but the resurrection body will be ready. indeed, even if the christian by death is separated for a time altogether from the body, he need not fear. to be absent from the body is to be present with the lord. the climax of the whole glorious passage is the brief exposition of the ministry of reconciliation which begins with ch. : . here we are introduced to the secret of the remarkable life which is revealed in second corinthians and in the other epistles of paul. reconciliation with god through the death of christ in our behalf and in our stead, consequent freedom from sin and from the world, a new and glorious life under the favor of god--these are the things that paul experienced in his own life, these are the things that he preached to others, regardless of all hardship and criticism, and these are the things, now and always, which contain the real springs of the church's power. after an uncompromising warning against impurity and worldliness, delivered from the lofty vantage ground that has just been reached, the apostle gives expression once more to the joy that he has received from the good news which titus brought him; and then proceeds to an entirely different matter. . the collection. ii cor., chs. , two whole chapters of the epistle are devoted to the collection for the jerusalem church. the history of this matter, so far as it can be traced, is briefly as follows: at the time of the jerusalem council, the pillars of the jerusalem church had requested paul to remember the jerusalem poor. at the time when first corinthians was written, paul had already started a collection for this purpose in the churches of galatia, and in first corinthians he asks the corinthians to take part. i cor. : - . in second corinthians he announces that the churches of macedonia have contributed bountifully, ii cor. : - , and urges the continuance of the collection in corinth. finally, in the epistle to the romans, which was written from corinth only a short time after second corinthians, he mentions the collection in macedonia and achaia, announces his intention of journeying to jerusalem with the gifts, and asks the roman christians to pray that the ministration may be acceptable to the jerusalem church. rom. : - , , . with his customary foresight, paul made careful provision for the administration of the gifts, in order to avoid all possible misunderstanding or suspicion. for example, the churches are to choose delegates to carry their bounty to jerusalem. i cor. : . possibly the delegates are to be identified with the persons who are named in acts : . luke does not mention the collection, but it is alluded to in acts : . paul's treatment of the collection in ii cor., chs. , , was not only adapted to accomplish its immediate purpose, but also has been of high value to the christian church. these chapters have assured to the right use of wealth a place of real dignity among the forms of christian service. . the opponents. ii cor., chs. to the striking change of tone at ch. : is amply explained by the change of subject. in the first part of the epistle, paul has been thinking of the return of the majority of the congregation to their allegiance; now he turns to deal with the false teachers who have been causing all the trouble. it is still necessary to meet their attacks and remove every vestige of influence which they may still have retained over the church. their attack upon paul was of a peculiarly mean and unworthy character; the indignation which paul displays in these chapters was fully justified. the opponents were certainly jews, and prided themselves on the fact. ch. : . but it does not appear with certainty that they were judaizers. if they were intending to come forward with any demand of circumcision or of observance of the mosaic law, such demand was still kept in the background. indeed, there is no indication that the doctrine that they preached was different in important respects from that of paul. in particular, there is no indication that they advocated a different view about jesus. one verse, ch. : , has, indeed, been regarded as such an indication, but only by an exceedingly doubtful interpretation. probably the other jesus whom the opponents preached existed only in their own claim. they said merely, "paul has kept something back," v. , margin; ch. : ; "we alone can give you adequate information; we alone can proclaim the true jesus, the true spirit and the true gospel." in reality, however, they had nothing new to offer. paul had made the whole gospel known. it is further not even quite clear that the opponents laid stress upon a personal acquaintance with the earthly jesus, and so played the original apostles off against paul. the expression "chiefest apostles," ch. : , is clearly nothing more than an ironical designation of the false teachers themselves. it is true, the false teachers claimed to belong in a special sense to christ, ch : , and to be in a special sense "ministers of christ." ch. : . but it is not at all clear--despite ch. : --that the connection which they claimed to have with christ was that of personal acquaintance, either directly or through their authorities, with the earthly jesus. finally, these false teachers cannot with any certainty be connected with the christ-party of first corinthians. the chief value of the last four chapters of the epistle is the wealth of autobiographical material which they contain. against the insidious personal attacks of the opponents, paul was obliged to speak of certain personal matters about which he might otherwise have been silent. had he been silent, the church would have been the loser. to know the inner life of the apostle paul is to know christ; for paul was in christ and christ was in paul. what could compensate us for the loss of ii cor. : - ? through these words the bodily weakness of paul has forever been made profitable for the strength of the church. * * * * * in the library.--purves, "christianity in the apostolic age," pp. - . davis, "dictionary of the bible": purves and davis, article on "corinthians, epistles to the." hastings, "dictionary of the bible": robertson, article on "corinthians, second epistle to the." m'clymont, "the new testament and its writers," pp. - . beet, "a commentary on st. paul's epistles to the corinthians," seventh edition, pp. - , - . ellicott, "a new testament commentary for english readers," vol. ii, pp. - : plumptre, "the second epistle of paul the apostle to the corinthians." "the cambridge bible for schools": lias, "the second epistle to the corinthians." zahn, "introduction to the new testament," vol. i, pp. - . the last-named work presupposes a knowledge of greek. lesson xxi the gospel of salvation the epistle to the romans, though it is not merely a systematic treatise, is more systematic than any other of the pauline epistles. unlike the epistles that preceded it, it was written in a period of comparative quiet between two great stages in the apostle's work. not unnaturally, therefore, it contains something like a summary of paul's teaching. the summary, however, does not embrace the whole of the pauline theology, but only one important department of it. the nature of god, for example, and the person of christ, are not discussed in the epistle to the romans. of course paul held very definite views upon these subjects, and these views are presupposed on every page of the epistle--especially the loftiest possible conception of the person of christ lies at the background of this entire account of christ's work--but such presuppositions do not in this epistle receive an elaborate exposition. the real subject of the first eight chapters of romans is not theology in general, but simply the way of salvation. how can man be saved--that is the question which paul answers in this epistle. obviously the question is of the utmost practical importance. the epistle to the romans is absolutely fundamental for the establishment of christian faith. this estimate, which was formerly a matter of course, has in recent years unfortunately fallen into disrepute. the epistle to the romans, after all, it is said, is concerned with theology, whereas what we need is simple faith. we must return from romans to the gospels, from paul to christ. the words of jesus, recorded in the gospels, are thus emphasized to the prejudice of the teaching of the apostle. this tendency should be resisted with the utmost firmness. it is striking at the very vitals of the church's life. after all, jesus came, as has been well said, not to say something, but to do something. his words are very precious, we could never do without them; but after all they are subsidiary to his deeds. his life and death and resurrection--these are the things that wrought salvation for men. and these great saving acts could not be fully explained till after they had been done. for an explanation of them, therefore, we must turn not only to the gospels but also to the epistles, not only to jesus but also to paul. paul was in a special sense our apostle; like us, he had never known the earthly jesus. just for that reason, through the divine revelation that was granted him, he could guide all subsequent generations to the risen christ. the epistle to the romans, more fully perhaps than any other book, points out the meaning of the death and resurrection of christ. it does not, indeed, solve all mysteries; but it reveals enough to enable us to believe. . the edict of claudius the edict of claudius which expelled the jews from rome was certainly not permanently effective; indeed there are some indications that it was modified almost as soon as it was issued. but although it did not keep the jews out of rome, it may at least have hastened the separation between judaism and christianity. if the conflict between the two, as a conflict within judaism, had given rise to the hostile edict, then, as has plausibly been suggested, the separation might be in the interests of both parties. if the church were kept separate from the synagogue, the jews would be protected from dangerous disorders and from the opposition which would be encountered by a new and illegal religion, and the christians, on the other hand, would be protected from the claudian edict against the jews. . address, thanksgiving and subject. rom. : - the address of the epistle to the romans is remarkable for the long addition which is made to the name of the author. paul was writing to a church which he had never seen. his excuse for writing was to be found only in the gospel with which he had been intrusted. at the very start, therefore, he places his gospel in the foreground. here, however, it is rather the great presupposition of the gospel which is in mind--jesus christ in his double nature. one who has been commissioned to preach to the gentiles the gospel of such a christ may certainly address a letter to rome. in connection with the customary thanksgiving, paul mentions his long-cherished desire of visiting the roman christians. he desires to impart unto them some spiritual gift--no, he says, rather he desires to receive from them as well as to give. the correction is characteristic of paul. some men would have felt no need of making it. as a matter of fact, paul was fully in a position to impart spiritual gifts. but he was afraid his readers might feel hurt--as though the apostle thought they could make no return for the benefit which the visit would bring them. it is an exquisite bit of fine discernment and delicate courtesy. but like all true courtesy, it was based on fact. paul was really not a man to decline help and comfort from even the humblest of the brethren. in vs. , , the theme of the epistle is announced--the gospel the power of god unto salvation, the gospel which reveals a righteousness of god that is received by faith. the meaning of "a righteousness of god" has been much disputed. some think that it refers to the righteousness which is an attribute of god. more probably, however, it is to be interpreted in the light of ch. : ; phil. : . it then refers to that right relation of man to god which god himself produces. there are two ways of receiving a sentence of acquittal from god the judge. one is by keeping the law of god perfectly. the other is by receiving through faith the righteousness of christ. the former is impossible because of sin. the latter has been made possible by the gift of christ. as sinners, we are subject to the punishment of death. but that punishment has been paid for us by christ. we therefore go free; we can start fresh, with the consciousness of god's favor. we are "justified"--that is, "pronounced righteous"--not because we are free from sin, but because by his grace god looks not upon us but upon christ. we have been pronounced righteous, but not on account of our own works. we possess not our own righteousness but "a righteousness of god." this righteousness of god is received by faith. faith is not a work, it is simply the willingness to receive. christ has promised by his death to bring us to god. we may not understand it all, but is christ to be believed? study the gospel picture of him, and you will be convinced that he is. justification by faith, then, means being pronounced righteous by god, although we are sinners. it might seem to be a very dangerous doctrine. if we are pronounced righteous whether we are really righteous or not, then may we not go on with impunity in sin? such reasoning ignores the results of justification. faith brings more than forgiveness. it brings a new life. in the new life sin has no place. the christian has broken forever with his old slavery. though perfection has not yet been attained in practice, it has been attained in principle, and by the power of the spirit all sin will finally be removed. the christian cannot compromise with sin. salvation is not only from the guilt of sin, but also from the power of it. the sixth chapter of romans leaves no room for moral laxness. . romans and galatians it is interesting to compare romans with galatians. the subject of the two epistles is the same. both are concerned with salvation by faith alone, apart from the works of the law. in many passages the two are parallel. the fuller exposition in romans is often the best commentary upon the briefer statements of galatians. for example, the words: "what then is the law? it was added because of transgressions"--very obscure as they stand in galatians--are explained by rom. : ; ch. . in tone, however, the two epistles are widely different. galatians is written in view of one definite attack upon the gospel; romans is a general exposition summing up the results of the conflict. when paul wrote galatians he was in the thick of the battle; at the time of romans he had fought his way through to the heights. the epistle to the romans, however, is no cold, purely logical treatise. theology here is interwoven with experience. no exposition can do justice to this wonderful letter. to read about it is sometimes dull; but to read it is life. . the pauline philosophy of history. rom., chs. to chapters to of this epistle are interesting in a great many ways. they are interesting, for example, in their tremendous conception of the mystery of the divine will. the ninth chapter of romans is a good corrective for any carelessness in our attitude toward god. after all, god is a mystery. how little we know of his eternal plan! we must ever tremble before him. yet it is such a god who has invited us, through christ, to hold communion with himself. there is the true wonder of the gospel--that it brings us into fellowship, not with a god of our own devising, not with one who is a father and nothing else, but with the awful, holy, mysterious maker and ruler of all things. the joy of the believer is the deepest of all joys. it is a joy that is akin to holy fear. these chapters are also interesting because they attest the attachment of paul to the jewish people. where is there a nobler expression of patriotism than rom. : - ? exclusive attention to the polemic passages where paul is defending the gentile mission and denying the efficacy of the mosaic law, have produced in the minds of some scholars a one-sided view of paul's attitude toward israel. paul did not advocate the destruction of the identity of his people. he believed that even the natural israel had a part to play on the stage of history. these chapters of romans, together with some other passages in the epistles, such as i cor. : , confirm what the book of the acts tells us about paul's willingness, when no principle was involved, to conform to jewish custom. . integrity of the epistle the genuineness of the epistle to the romans is undoubted, but its "integrity" has been questioned. the epistle was certainly written by paul, but was it all, as we now have it, originally part of one letter? by many scholars the greater part of the sixteenth chapter is supposed to have originally formed part of an epistle of paul written not to rome but to ephesus. the chief argument for this hypothesis is derived from the long list of names in ch. : - . could paul have had so many personal acquaintances in a church which he had never visited? the argument is not conclusive. just because paul could not appeal in his letter to any personal acquaintance with the roman church as a whole, it would be natural for him to mention at least all the individuals in the church with whom he stood in any sort of special relation. furthermore, the frequency of travel in the roman empire must be borne in mind. many persons whom paul had met on his travels would naturally find their way to the capital. finally, aquila and priscilla, though they had recently lived in ephesus, i cor. : , may easily have resumed their former residence in rome. acts : ; rom. : - . * * * * * in the library.--purves, "christianity in the apostolic age," pp. - . davis, "dictionary of the bible": purves, (supplemented) article on "romans, epistle to the." hastings, "dictionary of the bible": robertson, article on "romans, epistle to the." m'clymont, "the new testament and its writers," pp. - . gifford, "the epistle of st. paul to the romans." ellicott, "a new testament commentary for english readers," vol. ii, pp. - : sanday, "the epistle of paul the apostle to the romans." "the cambridge bible for schools": moule, "the epistle of paul the apostle to the romans." "the international critical commentary": sanday and headlam, "a critical and exegetical commentary on the epistle to the romans." zahn, "introduction to the new testament," vol. i, pp. - . the two last-named works presuppose a knowledge of greek. lesson xxii paul's journey to rome the material of this lesson is so extensive that only the barest summary can be attempted in the class. the great features of the narrative should be made to stand out clear--the bitter opposition of the jews, the favorable attitude of the roman authorities, the journey to rome. before the lesson is over the student should have a deeper impression of the character of paul--his perfect ease and tactfulness in the various relations of life, his unswerving boldness where the gospel was concerned, his inexplicable power. finally, the peculiar quality of the narrative should be appreciated. these chapters contain the two longer "we-sections" of the acts. . the journey to troas at first paul had intended to sail direct from corinth to syria, but a plot of the jews caused him to change his plan. acts : . it has been suggested that the ship upon which he was intending to sail may have carried non-christian jews, going to the approaching feast in jerusalem, v. , who could have done him harm upon the voyage. by choosing the route through macedonia he averted the immediate danger. the use of the first person plural begins again at acts : . it was broken off at ch. : . luke had parted from paul at philippi on the second missionary journey; and it is at philippi that he now appears again. the following journeys, in which luke himself took part, are narrated with the utmost vividness and minuteness. the narrative amounts practically to a diary--in some sections every day is accounted for. the departure from philippi took place "after the days of unleavened bread," that is, after the passover week. acts : . from the account of the subsequent journey it is not quite possible to tell whether paul actually succeeded in carrying out his plan of being in jerusalem at pentecost. pentecost, it will be remembered, came fifty days after the beginning of the passover week. . troas the description of the last evening at troas, when paul prolonged his discourse in the lighted room, is one of the inimitably vivid scenes of the acts. probably we are to understand that eutychus, who fell down from a window in the third story, was really killed and not merely stunned. verse might seem to indicate that he was only stunned, but the last words of v. point rather to actual, and not merely apparent, death. the miracle is paralleled by the raising of dorcas by peter. acts : - . . the elders of ephesus when paul told the elders that they would see his face "no more," or perhaps rather "no longer," acts : , , he did not necessarily mean that he would certainly never return to ephesus. for a period of years, at any rate, he was intending to transfer his labors to the west; his return to ephesus, therefore, was at all events uncertain. his long activity at ephesus, which had occupied the better part of the past three years, was for the present at an end. from the pastoral epistles it appears that as a matter of fact paul did visit ephesus again after his release from the first roman imprisonment. . arrival in palestine at tyre and at cæsarea, paul received warnings against visiting jerusalem. these warnings came through the spirit, acts : , , but not in the sense that the holy spirit commanded paul not to go. the meaning is that the spirit warned him of the dangers that were to befall him. in meeting these dangers bravely he was acting in full accordance with the divine will. at acts : the use of the first person plural ceases, because luke had no immediate part in the events that followed. it is natural to suppose, however, that he remained in palestine, for he joined paul again in cæsarea, at the beginning of the journey to rome. for the events of paul's imprisonment in jerusalem and in cæsarea he had first-hand information. the vow in which paul took part at the request of james was at least similar to the nazirite vow described in num. : - . not all the details of such vows are perfectly clear. paul himself, on his own account, had assumed a similar vow on his second missionary journey, acts : --unless indeed, as is grammatically possible, the words in that passage refer to aquila rather than to paul. it was not true, as the christians of judea had been led to think, that paul taught the jewish christians of the dispersion to forsake the law of moses, though he was insistent that the gentile christians must not adopt that law. it was not even true that he himself had altogether given up keeping the law, though the exigencies of his gentile work required him to give it up very often, and though he regarded himself as inwardly free from the law. his willingness to take part in a jewish vow in jerusalem is therefore not surprising. his action on this occasion was fully justified by the principles of his conduct as described in i cor. : , . the keeping of the law was not for paul a means of obtaining salvation. salvation was a free gift of god, through the death of christ. but for the present the general relinquishment of the law and abandonment of the distinctive customs of judaism on the part of jewish christians was not required. paul was willing to leave that question to the future guidance of god. it is somewhat surprising that the book of the acts mentions the great collection for the jerusalem church only incidentally, in the report of a speech of paul. acts : . the interest of luke in this part of the narrative is absorbed in the relations between paul and the non-christian jews and the roman authorities. the internal affairs of the church are left for the most part out of account. the acts and the pauline epistles, here as so often, must be allowed to supplement each other. luke gives a vivid picture of the external events, and a clear view of the relations of christianity to the outside world; while paul affords us a deeper insight, in some respects at least, into the inward development of the church's life. . paul before agrippa the famous reply of agrippa to paul, acts : , is exceedingly difficult to translate and to interpret. the translation in the revised version is by no means certainly correct. the words may mean, "a little more of this persuasion will make me a christian!" or else, "you seem to think that the little persuasion you have used is sufficient to make me a christian." in any case, the sentence displays a certain perplexity on the part of the king. he certainly does not mean that he is on the point of accepting christianity--his words have a half-ironical tone--but on the other hand his interest is aroused. the same thing is probably to be said for festus. he said, "paul, thou art mad; thy much learning is turning thee mad," but he said it with a loud voice as though he were agitated. there was something uncanny about this prisoner! . the accession of festus the dates of many events in the apostolic age have usually been fixed by counting from the accession of festus. unfortunately, however, that event itself cannot be dated with certainty. some put it as late as a. d. , others as early as a. d. . if the date a. d. be provisionally adopted, then paul's arrest in jerusalem occurred in a. d. , and his arrival in rome in a. d. . the conclusion of the narrative in the acts would then fall in the year a. d. . it will be remembered that the proconsulship of gallio now affords an additional starting point for a chronology of the apostolic age. . later history of the jerusalem church after the meeting between paul and james, which is narrated in acts : - , the jerusalem church, at least so far as any direct narrative is concerned, disappears from the pages of the new testament. it will be observed that in the account of paul's last visit, only james, the brother of the lord, and "the elders" are mentioned as representatives of the church. possibly some of the twelve apostles may be included under the term "elders," but it is also perfectly possible that the apostles were all out of the city. james, the brother of the lord, continued to be the head of the jerusalem church until he was martyred--in a. d. , or, as others suppose, in a. d. . before the war which culminated in the capture of jerusalem in a. d. , the christians of the city fled to pella beyond the jordan. from that time, on, though the christians returned after the war, jewish christianity was quite uninfluential. the supremacy of the jerusalem church was gone. but that church had already rendered a priceless service. it had laid the foundations of christendom. it had sent forth the first missionaries. and it had preserved the record of jesus' life. the synoptic gospels, in substance at least, are a product of the jerusalem church. * * * * * in the library.--purves, "christianity in the apostolic age," pp. - , - . davis, "dictionary of the bible": articles on the many persons and places mentioned in the narrative, especially "felix," "festus," and "herod" ( ). ramsay, "st. paul the traveller and the roman citizen," pp. - ; "pictures of the apostolic church," pp. - , - . lewin, "the life and epistles of st. paul," vol. ii, chs. ii, iii, iv, v, and vi. conybeare and howson, "the life and epistles of st. paul," chs. xx, xxi, xxii, xxiii, xxiv and xxv. stalker, "the life of st. paul," pp. - . lumby, pp. - . cook, pp. - . plumptre, pp. - . rackham, pp. - . lesson xxiii the supremacy of christ . the epistles of the third group with the lesson for to-day, we are introduced to the third group among the epistles of paul. the epistles of the second group, which were written during the third missionary journey, are concerned with the problem of sin and salvation; the epistles of the third group are interesting especially for their teaching about the person of christ and about the church. a period of about three or four years separates the last epistle of the second group from the first epistle of the third. most of this interval had been spent by paul in captivity. undoubtedly, during this period of enforced leisure, there had been development in paul's thinking, but it is very difficult to determine exactly wherein that development consisted. the differences of the third group of epistles from the second are due to the difference in the readers at least as much as to a difference in paul himself. it is hard to say just how much of colossians and ephesians paul would have been incapable of writing during the third missionary journey. at any rate, the epistles of the captivity differ from those of the former group in being for the most part quieter in tone. during the third journey paul had had to continue the great battles of his career against various forms of judaizing error. christianity at one time seemed to be in danger of being reduced to a mere form of judaism; the free grace of god was being deserted for a law religion; faith was being deserted for works. in galatia, the question of principle had been uppermost; in corinth, the personal attack upon paul. everywhere, moreover, the gospel of salvation by faith was exposed to misconception. pagan license was threatening to creep into the church. unless it could be kept out, the legalists would have some apparent show of reason on their side. taking it all in all, it had been a hard battle. but it had been gloriously fought, and it had been won. now paul was able to turn his attention to new fields of labor and to new problems. . the christology of colossians the epistle to the colossians is peculiarly "christological." more fully and more expressly than in any other of his letters paul here develops his view about the person of christ. even here, however, this teaching is incidental; it was simply paul's way of refuting certain errors that had crept into the colossian church. except for those errors paul would perhaps never have written at length, as he does in col. : - , about the relation of christ to god and to the world. yet in that case his own views would have been the same, and they would have been just as fundamental to his whole religious life. in the epistles, which are written to christians, paul takes many things for granted. some of the things which are most fundamental appear only incidentally. just because they were fundamental, just because they were accepted by everyone, they did not need to be discussed at length. so it is especially with the person of christ. from the first epistle to the last, paul presupposes essentially the same view of that great subject. practically everything that he says in colossians could have been inferred from scattered hints in the earlier epistles. from the beginning paul regarded jesus christ as a man, who had a real human life and died a real death on the cross. from the beginning, on the other hand, he separated christ sharply from men and placed him clearly on the side of god. from the beginning, in other words, he attributed to him a double nature--jesus christ was always in paul's thinking both god and man. finally, the preëxistence of christ, which is so strongly emphasized in colossians, is clearly implied in such passages as gal. : ; and his activity in creation appears, according to the best-attested text, in i cor. : . nevertheless, the more systematic exposition in colossians is of the utmost value. it serves to summarize and explain the scattered implications of the earlier epistles. christ according to paul is, in the first place, "the image of the invisible god." col. : . he is the supreme revealer of god, a revealer, however, not merely by words but by his own nature. if you want to know what god is, look upon christ! in the second place, he is "the firstborn of all creation." of itself that phrase might be misconstrued. it might be thought to mean that christ was the first being that god created. any such interpretation, however, is clearly excluded by the three following verses. there paul has himself provided an explanation of his puzzling phrase. "the firstborn of all creation" means that christ, himself uncreated, existed before all created things; he was prior to all things, and, as befits an only son, he possesses all things. indeed he himself was active in the creation of all things, not only the world, and men, but also those angelic powers--"thrones or dominions or principalities or powers"--upon whom the errorists in colossæ were inclined to lay too much emphasis. he was the instrument of god the father in creation. and he was also the end of creation. the world exists not for its own sake, but for the sake of christ. especially is he the head of the church. his headship is declared by his being the first to rise from the dead into that glorious life into which he will finally bring all his disciples. in a word, the entire "fulness" of the divine nature dwells in christ. that word "fulness" was much misused in the "gnostic" speculations of the second century. it is barely possible that the word had already been employed in the incipient gnosticism of the colossian errorists. if so, paul by his repeated use of the word in colossians and ephesians, is bringing his readers back to a healthier and simpler and grander conception. . the person of christ and the work of christ in col. : - , paul bases upon the preceding exposition of the nature of christ a noble description of christ's work. the work which has been intrusted to christ is nothing less than that of reconciling the creation unto god. through sin, an enmity had been set up between god and the work of his hands. that enmity applies primarily of course to the sinful persons themselves. they are under god's wrath and curse. sin is not a trifle. it cannot simply be treated as though it had never been. if god be righteous, then there is such a thing as a moral order. the wrath of god rests upon the sinner. but by the sacrifice of christ, that enmity has been wiped out. christ has paid the awful penalty of sin. christ has brought the sinner again near to god. the enmity and the following reconciliation concern primarily the men who have sinned. but they also apply to the whole world. the ground has been cursed for man's sake. the end of the reconciliation will be a new heaven and a new earth. the groaning and travailing of the creation will one day have an end. compare rom. : - . this brief description of the work of christ in col. : - ; : - , can be richly paralleled in the earlier epistles. what now needs to be emphasized is that the pauline view of christ's work depends absolutely upon the pauline view of christ's person. all through the epistles of paul the life and death and resurrection are represented as events of a cosmic significance. but they can have such significance only if christ is the kind of being that is described in the epistle to the colossians. the glorious account of salvation, which runs all through the epistles and forms the especial subject of the second group, is unintelligible if christ were merely an inspired prophet or merely the greatest of created things. it becomes intelligible only if christ is "the image of the invisible god, the firstborn of all creation." the mysterious christology of colossians lies at the very heart of christian faith. . the epistle to philemon the epistle to the colossians, though addressed to a church that paul had never visited, is full of warm-hearted affection. paul could hardly have been cold and formal if he had tried. he was a man of great breadth of sympathy. hence he was able to enter with the deepest interest into the problems of the colossian christians--to rejoice at their faith and love, to lament their faults, and to labor with whole-souled devotion for their spiritual profit. the simple, unconstrained affection of paul's nature, however, had freer scope in the delightful little letter to philemon. philemon apparently was a convert of paul himself. philem. . he was not a man with whom paul had to be on his guard. paul is perfectly confident that philemon will fully understand the motives of his action and of his letter. the letter is addressed to philemon primarily, but also to apphia and to archippus and to the church in philemon's house. we are here introduced into a christian household of the apostolic age. apphia was probably philemon's wife and archippus perhaps his son. evidently archippus held some sort of office in the colossian church. "say to archippus," says paul in a strangely emphatic way, at the very end of the epistle to the colossians, "take heed to the ministry which thou hast received in the lord, that thou fulfill it." we should like to know what the ministry was which archippus had received. at any rate, we hope that he fulfilled it. it was a solemn warning which he received--a warning which might well have made him tremble. we also may well take the warning to heart. our task of imparting bible truth is no light responsibility. to us also the warning comes, "take heed to the ministry which thou hast received in the lord, that thou fulfill it." the letter is addressed not only to philemon and his family, but also to the "church" which met in his house. this "church" was a part of the colossian congregation. in the early days, when it was difficult to secure meeting places, well-to-do christians frequently offered the hospitality of their own homes. a certain nympha or nymphas--the name varies in the manuscripts--performed this service in laodicea, col. : , aquila and priscilla in corinth, i cor. : , and also gaius in the same city. rom. : . the epistle to philemon exhibits that perfection of courtesy and delicacy of feeling which has been observed again and again in paul. a man of coarser feeling might have kept onesimus with him until receiving the response of philemon. in that case no doubt philemon would have replied not only that onesimus was forgiven, but that paul might retain the benefit of his services. but paul saw clearly that that would have made philemon's goodness seem to be of necessity and not of free will. philem. . there was only one really fine, honorable, high-toned way of dealing with the situation, and that was the way which paul adopted. the letter is informal and affectionate. there is even apparently a little delicate play on the name onesimus, which means "helpful." once onesimus belied his name, but now he has become helpful again. philem. . in v. , also, where paul says, "let me have joy of thee," he uses a word which comes from the same root as that which appears in the name of the slave. nevertheless, despite all informality, paul has succeeded, here as always, in lifting the matter to a lofty plane. paul was a man who ennobled everything that he touched. * * * * * in the library.--purves, "christianity in the apostolic age," pp. - . davis, "dictionary of the bible," articles on "colossæ," "hierapolis" and "laodicea": purves, articles on "colossians, epistle to the" and "philemon" (supplemented). hastings, "dictionary of the bible": ramsay, articles on "colossæ," "hierapolis," and "laodicea"; murray, article on "colossians, epistle to the"; bernard, articles on "philemon," and "philemon, epistle to." m'clymont, "the new testament and its writers," pp. - . ellicott, "a new testament commentary for english readers," vol. iii: barry, "the epistles of paul the apostle to the ephesians, philippians, and colossians," pp. - , - ; "the epistle of paul to philemon," pp. - . "the cambridge bible for schools and colleges": moule, "the epistles to the colossians and to philemon." zahn, "introduction to the new testament," vol. i, pp. - . lightfoot, "saint paul's epistles to the colossians and to philemon." the two last-named works are intended primarily for those who have some knowledge of greek, but can also be used by others. lesson xxiv the church of christ the special effort in the lessons of the second quarter has been to produce some lively impression of the wonderful variety among the letters of paul. that variety is due largely to the variety in the occasions of the letters. just because paul entered with such sympathy into the varying circumstances of his many churches, the letters of paul reflect the wonderful manifoldness of life. nevertheless, it is also an advantage that at least one letter is largely independent of any special circumstances whatever. this is the case with the epistle which is to be studied to-day. the epistle to the ephesians is addressed to a definite group of churches, but that group is addressed not with regard to its own special problems, but simply as representative of gentile christianity in general. for once paul allows his thoughts to flow unchecked by the particular needs of his readers. . style of ephesians the purpose of ephesians, therefore, is quite different from the purpose of any other of the pauline epistles. to the difference in purpose corresponds a difference in style. the style of ephesians is characterized especially by long sentences, heaped full of an almost bewildering wealth of thought. this characteristic had appeared to some extent even in the earliest epistles--compare ii thess. : - --but in ephesians it becomes more pronounced. ephesians : - , for example, is only one sentence, but it is a world in itself. apparently in this epistle paul has allowed his mind and heart to roam unchecked over the whole realm of the divine economy. this freedom might conceivably be thought to involve a sacrifice of logical symmetry and of euphonic grace, but at any rate it possesses a certain beauty and value of its own. ephesians may lack the splendid rhythm of the first chapter of first corinthians or the eighth chapter of romans, but on the other hand these tremendous periods, with their heaping-up of majestic phrases, serve admirably to express the bewilderment of the soul in the presence of divine wonders. human language is inadequate to do full justice to the grace of god. in ephesians, we see an inspired apostle striving to give utterance in human language to things which in their full reality are unspeakable. . colossians and ephesians the epistle to the ephesians is strikingly similar to the epistle to the colossians, not only in thought, but also in many details of language. another case of striking similarity between two epistles of paul was encountered in first and second thessalonians. there the two similar letters were written both to the same church, though at no very great interval of time. the similarity was due to the desire which paul felt of reiterating, with some additions and explanations, the teaching of his former letter. in the case of ephesians and colossians the similarity is even more easily explained. these two epistles were written to different churches at the same time. what more natural than that the same thoughts and to some extent the same words should appear in both? only, the teaching which in colossians is directed against a definite form of error is in ephesians reproduced in freer, more general form. the relation between the two epistles is somewhat like that which exists between galatians and romans. in galatians, the doctrine of salvation by faith appears in conflict with the opposing error; in romans, the same doctrine finds expression, but this time in quieter, more systematic development, after the conflict is over. the similarity between galatians and romans is, however, not so close as that between colossians and ephesians--partly because the contrast of spirit is not so striking in the latter case, colossians being far less bitterly polemic than galatians; and more particularly because a considerable interval separates romans from galatians, whereas colossians and ephesians were dispatched by the same messenger. . the address of ephesians. eph. : , in the student's text book, it has been shown that the words "at ephesus" in the first verse may perhaps be no part of what paul wrote, but a later addition. it cannot be claimed, however, that the problem of the address has been completely solved. without the words "at ephesus," the address becomes very difficult. "to the saints that are and the faithful in christ jesus" hardly seems to make sense. the greek words might be construed perfectly well to mean, "to the saints who are also faithful in christ jesus," but that is a rather unusual expression. the suggestion has been made that in the first copies of the epistle a blank space was left after "the saints that are," to be filled in with the names of the particular churches of the group which is addressed. every church among the group would thus receive a copy with its own name inserted. the hypothesis is not altogether satisfactory. probably we shall simply have to admit that there is an unsolved problem here. . thanksgiving for the plan of salvation. eph. : - before the customary thanksgiving for the christian state of the readers, paul inserts here, in accordance with the nature of this epistle, a general thanksgiving for the whole church, which is applied especially to the readers only at the very end. the passage contains a wonderful summary of the whole of salvation, but it begins with the plan of god and it closes with the glory of god. god is the beginning and end of all things. his mysterious decree is the cause of our being chosen for salvation, and his own glory is the ultimate object in view. men are often rebellious against such a god-centered view of things. predestination is an unpopular doctrine. but it was at any rate the doctrine of paul, and it lay at the roots of his experience. it is sometimes hard for us to write god so large in our thoughts. because we think of him merely as a somewhat greater man, we are inclined to reject the doctrine which attributes all things to the workings of his will and to the furtherance of his glory. if, however, we could think of him, not only as a person, but also as an infinite, eternal and holy person, then we should murmur no longer, but should, with paul, burst forth in praise of the inscrutable wonder of his grace. the glory of a merciful god has involved for its full unfolding the salvation of guilty sinners. god's glory finds its full expression only when he is revealed as the god and father of our lord jesus christ. . thanksgiving and prayer for the readers. eph. : to : beginning with thanksgiving for the present faith and love of the readers, paul passes at once to a prayer that they may be given understanding to appreciate the wonderful salvation which has been celebrated in the preceding section, especially the mighty saviour who has been bestowed upon the church. then the greatness of the present salvation, not only of gentiles, but also of jews, is celebrated by a contrast with the previous condition of sin and misery. the blessed change has been due, not to anything in man, but simply and solely to the grace of god, received by faith. . reception of the gentiles. eph. : - here the contrast between past and present is applied especially to the gentiles. formerly they were excluded from the people of god. but now by the death of christ the "middle wall of partition" has been broken down. gentiles and jews have now a common access to the father. . the ministry of paul. eph., ch. this reception of the gentiles is the work that has been intrusted especially to paul. it is a glorious ministry, far too great for human strength. it can be fulfilled only through the grace of god. the full mystery of god's grace, concealed for many generations, has at last been revealed. the first half of the epistle is fittingly closed by a doxology. . life in the church. eph., chs. to this section may be called the practical part of the epistle. it exhibits the results in holy living which proceed from the glorious gospel which has just been proclaimed. even in the "practical" part, however, the great doctrines of god's grace are so constantly finding renewed expression that it is difficult to separate one part from the other. paul never separated moral precepts from the great truths which give them force. let the readers live like citizens of the commonwealth of god, and members of the body of christ! naturally, in this part of the epistle the unity of the church--which is perhaps the central theme of the whole--is especially emphasized. the first half of the fourth chapter, for example, is a magnificent hymn to christian unity. even in the midst of the directions for the various relationships of life the great theme of christ and the church, under the figure of husband and wife, is brought again into view. * * * * * in the library.--purves, "christianity in the apostolic age," pp. - . davis, "dictionary of the bible": purves and davis, article on "ephesians, epistle to the." hastings, "dictionary of the bible": lock, article on "ephesians, epistle to." m'clymont, "the new testament and its writers," pp. - . ellicott, "a new testament commentary for english readers," vol. iii: barry, "the epistles of paul the apostle to the ephesians, philippians, and colossians," pp. - . "the cambridge bible for schools and colleges": moule, "the epistle to the ephesians." zahn, "introduction to the new testament," vol. i, pp. - . robinson, "st. paul's epistle to the ephesians." the two last-named works are intended primarily for those who have some knowledge of greek, but can also be used by others. lesson xxv christ and his followers the epistle to the philippians is the only one of the letters of paul which is addressed to an approved church with whom he stood on terms of untroubled intimacy and affection. in galatians and both the corinthian epistles, serious errors in the churches addressed, as well as unscrupulous personal criticism, lend a tone of bitterness to the apostle's words; romans, colossians and perhaps "ephesians" are addressed to churches which he had never seen. in some ways the little letter to philemon is very similar to philippians. both philippians and philemon display the same perfect confidence in the readers, the same perfection of courtesy, the same tone of untroubled cordiality. but philemon is addressed primarily to an individual, and philippians to a church; philemon confines itself almost exclusively to one little personal matter, while philippians discusses a variety of topics. among the letters addressed to churches, perhaps the first epistle to the thessalonians is more similar to philippians, at least in tone, than is any of the others. like philippians it is animated by a deep satisfaction with the readers, and a certain pleasing simplicity of manner. but here again of course there are wide differences. first thessalonians is addressed to an infant church, which has just passed through its first trial, and needs the most elementary instruction; in philippians paul is writing to old friends, to a church which for ten years has endured bravely the hardships incident to the christian profession, and has shared in fullest sympathy the joys and sorrows of the apostle's life. during the ten years, moreover, which have elapsed between first thessalonians and philippians, there has been a change in the apostle himself, as well as in his readers. those years of conflict and labor and meditation and suffering have borne fruit in the apostle's own thinking. his gospel was the same from the beginning, but the expression of it has become richer and maturer and nobler with the advancing years. philippians is a wonderful letter. simplicity and profundity are here combined. this simple letter of thanks, with its delicate courtesy and tactful admonition, has engaged the profoundest study of the theologians, and touched the grandest chords of the christian heart. . the address. phil. : , the address of philippians is remarkable because of the mention of bishops and deacons, which occurs in this way in no other of the pauline epistles. possibly, as has been suggested, these officers are here mentioned because they had had a special part in sending the gifts of the church. it is important to observe that there was a plurality of bishops in the philippian church. at a later time, when the "bishops" were exalted above the other presbyters, there was only one bishop in every church. in the acts and in the pauline epistles, "bishop" and "presbyter" appear plainly as nothing more than two names for exactly the same office. it should be noticed that the title "apostle," which appears at the beginning of all the other pauline epistles addressed to churches, except first and second thessalonians, the two earliest, is lacking in the address of philippians. perhaps in writing to such a devoted church paul considered it unnecessary to mention his apostleship as he had regularly done in his epistles since the denial of it in galatia. on account of the peculiar nature of the philippian church, the epistle to the philippians partakes somewhat of the informality and intimacy of such a letter as that to philemon, where the title is also lacking in the address. very naturally timothy is associated with paul in the address of the epistle, for he had been one of paul's companions in founding the philippian church. at what time timothy had come to rome we do not know. his name appears also in the address of colossians and of philemon. luke, although he had journeyed with paul to rome, and was in rome at the time when colossians and philemon were written, col. : ; philem. , was apparently absent at the time of philippians; for since he, like timothy, had assisted in founding the philippian church, and perhaps had even remained in philippi for years after the departure of the others, he would probably have been associated in the address, or at least would have sent greetings, if he had been at hand. . the thanksgiving. phil. : - as might have been expected, the thanksgiving for the christian state of the readers is in this epistle of unusual cordiality. in the mention of their "fellowship in furtherance of the gospel from the first day until now," there is perhaps a delicate allusion to the material assistance which they had sent him from time to time and especially a little while before the writing of the letter; but such material assistance was for paul of course not the only, or even the principal, manifestation of their fellowship. here as often, the thanksgiving runs over into a prayer--and this time it is a prayer of singular beauty and depth. . progress of affairs in rome. phil. : - in this section, paul hastens to relieve the minds of his readers about the course of events in rome. even his bonds, and the jealousy of certain preachers, have resulted only in the furtherance of the gospel. with regard to the outcome of his trial, there is every reason to be hopeful. for his part he would prefer to depart and to be with christ, but there is still work for him to do. and whether he is present or absent, let the philippians give him joy by living in a manner worthy of the gospel, and by being steadfast in the persecutions which are bound to come to them as well as to him. it is a high privilege not only to believe in christ, but also to suffer for him. . exhortation to unity. phil. : - with the utmost earnestness, paul here appeals to his readers to keep their christian life free from selfishness and quarreling. the stupendous "christological" passage of the epistle, vs. - , which has given rise to endless discussion, is introduced merely in an incidental way, in order to strengthen the apostle's exhortation. so it is frequently in the letters of paul. the apostle was always able to make the profoundest verities of the faith immediately effective in conduct. theology in paul was never divorced from practice. the converse of the proposition, however, is also true. if paul's theology did not exist apart from practice, neither did his practice exist apart from theology. it is the latter proposition which needs to be emphasized to-day. modern liberalism has sometimes endeavored to reproduce paul's religion apart from his theology; but the effort has resulted in failure. the example of christ which paul holds up before his readers is briefly as follows: originally christ not only existed in the form of god--that is, was in full possession of the divine attributes--but also lived in glory, in a way befitting deity. instead, however, of keeping hold of this heavenly glory, he humbled himself by becoming man. he laid aside, not indeed his divine attributes, but the enjoyment of his divine glory. he who was lord of all took the form of a servant like other men. and even more. his obedience extended even to death, and to the shameful death of the cross. but after humiliation came exaltation. god gave to him a name that is above every name. at the name of jesus every knee shall bow, in earth and in heaven, to the glory of god the father. . the mission of timothy and of epaphroditus. phil. : - the personal appeal with which the preceding section closed leads paul to speak of the plans which he has for the comfort and help of the readers. timothy will be sent as soon as the issue of paul's trial is definitely in view; epaphroditus will return to philippi at once. . warning against opponents. phil., ch. the men who are rebuked in very vigorous language in the former part of this section evidently placed an excessive emphasis upon circumcision and connection with the people of israel. perhaps also they were advocates of a law righteousness. v. . the most obvious suggestion is that they were judaizers like those in galatia, or at least like the opponents of paul in corinth. paul's account in vs. - of the jewish advantages, fully equal to those of his opponents, which he counts as nothing in view of the superior advantages of faith in christ, is strikingly similar to ii cor. : , . if, however, paul is here referring to judaizers, it looks as though they were at least as cautious as the opponents in corinth about presenting the claims of the law. at any rate, the danger of a legalistic propaganda either in philippi or in rome does not seem to be very seriously in view. apparently the acute stage of the judaistic controversy is over. it is possible that paul is referring to jews rather than jewish christians. we must remember that judaism in the first century was still an active missionary religion. a jewish propaganda, with stress upon circumcision and law righteousness, might conceivably become, even in philippi, where the jews seem not to have been numerous, a serious danger, if not to the stability, at least to the rapid extension, of the christian church. finally, it is uncertain whether "the enemies of the cross of christ," phil. : , are the same as those who are combated in the former part of the section. fortunately these various uncertainties do not affect the lofty teaching of this part of the epistle. whoever the opponents were, what paul says in opposition to them is the thing of real value. in the wonderfully terse, complete, vigorous description of the christian salvation and of the christian life which paul gives in ch. : - , , , the long years of the judaistic controversy have borne glorious fruit. the final, eternal truth of god, in classic statement, has at last emerged triumphant from the conflict. . exhortation, acknowledgment, greetings and benediction. phil., ch. the principal contents of this section have been discussed in the student's text book. first paul applies the general exhortation to unity, phil. : - , to the case of euodia and syntyche, and adds certain other brief exhortations. the "true yokefellow" of ch. : probably refers to epaphroditus, the bearer of the epistle. then, in a characteristically delicate and worthy manner, he acknowledges the gift of the philippians. next, in just a word, he transmits, along with his own, the greetings of his immediate companions, and of the roman church in general, especially of those members who were connected, as slaves or officials, with the immediate service of the emperor. finally, with a brief benediction, the epistle closes. * * * * * in the library.--purves, "christianity in the apostolic age," pp. - . davis, "dictionary of the bible": purves (edited) article on "philippians." hastings, "dictionary of the bible": gibb, article on "philippians, epistle to the." m'clymont, "the new testament and its writers," pp. - . ellicott, "a new testament commentary for english readers", vol. iii: barry, "the epistles of paul the apostle to the ephesians, philippians, and colossians," pp. - . "the cambridge bible for schools and colleges": moule, "the epistle to the philippians." zahn, "introduction to the new testament," vol. i, pp. - . lightfoot, "saint paul's epistle to the philippians." the two last-named works are intended primarily for those who have some knowledge of greek, but can also be used by others. lesson xxvi training new leaders the emphasis which the pastoral epistles lay upon sound instruction and upon orderly government is sometimes looked upon with distaste. orthodoxy and organization are thought to be destructive of religious fervor. in the new testament, however, the two aspects of the church's life appear side by side. in the new testament, enthusiasm and sanity are united. and the new testament is right. religion is a concern of every individual soul--the final decision must be made by every man in the immediate presence of his god--but normally no man can do without association with his fellows. the church is a great permanent community. it is not merely an aggregation, but an institution. to break away from its restraints may be attractive, it may produce a certain temporary impression of zeal and new life; but in the long run the old way is usually best. the pastoral epistles, however, are sometimes thought to indicate an unfortunate change in paul himself as well as in the church. some students would prefer to know only the paul of galatians and corinthians and romans. this judgment is one-sided. the pastorals do not contradict, but supplement, the earlier letters. the earlier period, no doubt, is the more inspiring; there is nothing in the pastoral epistles like the first few chapters of first corinthians, or the fifth chapter of second corinthians, or the eighth chapter of romans. these passages are overpowering in the intensity of their eloquence; the later letters are soberer, graver, more matter-of-fact. these latter qualities, however, are much needed in the church. the church needs enthusiasm; but she also needs gravity and sanity. her function is not merely evangelistic; it is also conservative and educational. in both functions paul was a leader. the quiet gravity of the pastoral epistles supplements the glories of galatians and romans. only when these last epistles are added to the others can the many-sided greatness of paul be fully appreciated. exaggerations, moreover, should be avoided. the soberness of the pastorals is not commonplace. back of the details of organization, back of the concern for sound instruction, there can be detected throughout the glow of the pauline gospel. the pastoral epistles, like the other letters of paul, are a perennial fountain of christian life. the second epistle to timothy was clearly the last of the extant epistles of paul; but the order of first timothy and titus cannot be certainly determined. the difficulty of reconstructing the history implied by the pastoral epistles reveals anew the supreme value of the acts. after the conclusion of the lucan narrative the historian is almost helpless. from about a. d. on into the second century, the history of the church is shrouded in profound darkness, with gleams of light only here and there. . the first epistle to timothy at the time when first timothy was written, paul had recently made a journey to macedonia. i tim. : . perhaps he had gone thither from ephesus, though the words do not make that perfectly clear. at any rate, he had directed timothy to remain in ephesus, where he hoped to join him before long. in case of delay, however, he writes the epistle. chs. : , ; : . on a previous occasion, perhaps by word of mouth when he had been in ephesus, he had warned timothy to put a stop to certain false teaching in the church, and the warning is now reiterated in the epistle. the exact nature of this teaching is somewhat difficult to determine. apparently it had been concerned with the jewish law. ch. : - . compare titus : , . like the false teaching at colossæ, it seems not to have been directly subversive of the truth of the gospel. at least, however, it diverted attention from the great things of the faith to useless questionings. i tim. : . the myths and endless genealogies, ch. : , compare : , were perhaps elaborations of the old testament history. whether the ascetic tendency which is combated in ch. : , , is connected with this same teaching, is not certain, but is on the whole perhaps probable. the first reference to the false teaching, ch. : - , leads paul to speak of the norm by which it could be combated. vs. - . that norm was the gospel with which he had been intrusted. the bestowal of the gospel had changed him from a blasphemer and persecutor into an apostle. the gospel had been bestowed purely by the free grace of christ, and its content was the salvation which christ offers. a doxology to god, v. , is natural whenever that gospel is mentioned. that gospel will overcome all error, and if attended to diligently will prevent disasters like that which has befallen hymenæus and alexander. in the second chapter, paul insists upon gravity and order in the public worship of the church. in the prayers which are to be offered, the civil authority is not to be forgotten, even though it be non-christian. the sympathies of the christian must be broad. god desires all men to come to a knowledge of the truth. the highest regular officers of the church are in the third chapter called "bishops." it is abundantly evident, however--especially from titus : , --that "bishop" is only another name for "presbyter" or "elder." at a later time the term "bishop" was applied to an officer who had the supreme oversight over a church and to whom the elders were subject. these conditions did not prevail at the time of the pastoral epistles. at first sight, indeed, it might seem as though timothy and titus themselves were "bishops" in the later sense of the word. but this also is false. timothy and titus do not appear at all as officers of individual congregations. they had oversight over a plurality of churches, and evidently their authority was special and temporary. they did not fill an office which was intended to become permanent in the church, but were simply special representatives of the apostle. as the apostles had no successors, so no man after the apostolic age had a right to assume the functions of timothy and titus. the fourth chapter calls attention to the revelation of the holy spirit, probably through the lips of christian prophets, that in the future there would appear apostates from the faith. the errorists who are combated in vs. - are apparently to be regarded as forerunners, still within the church, of the more open apostasy which is one day to follow. the institution of the "widows," which is discussed in the fifth chapter, is to us somewhat obscure. evidently those who were accounted "widows," being helpless, were entitled to support by the church. the necessity of sound teaching, with emphasis upon the really fundamental things of the faith, is again insisted upon; and certain false teachers are accused of practicing or inculcating piety as a means of worldly gain. ch. : - . the last warning of the epistle characteristically concerns vain babblings and oppositions of a so-called knowledge. probably these errors are connected in some way with those which are combated in the first section of the epistle. in the final words, "grace be with you," the "you" in the greek, according to the best attestation, is plural; and in the corresponding passages at the end of titus and of second timothy, it is certainly plural. this may furnish an indication--to be added to more general considerations--that the pastoral epistles were intended not merely for those to whom they are formally addressed, but also to the churches under their care. . the epistle to titus the address of the epistle to titus is noteworthy for the long addition to the title of the author, which is to be compared with the similar addition in romans. at the time when the epistle was written, paul had recently been with titus in crete. paul had not labored on that island before the first roman imprisonment. his journeys in the east between the two imprisonments therefore involved something more than the revisitation of former fields. the reason why titus was left behind in crete was somewhat similar to the reason why timothy, according to first timothy, was told to remain in ephesus. titus was to give attention to organization, and to the maintenance of sound instruction. like timothy, titus is given the power of establishing presbyters, and of establishing them not merely in one church but in various churches. the function of the presbyter was that of "bishop" or "overseer." titus : - . in vs. - , the close connection of organization with sound doctrine becomes particularly apparent. one important function of the presbyters was to counteract the errors which were springing up. the account of the errorists in crete is perhaps in some respects clearer than that which is given of the related phenomenon in ephesus. the false teachers were animated by a love of gain. v. . some of them were jews or proselytes. v. . they had a fondness for jewish fables. apparently, also, they tried to atone for a lack of real inward purity by an outward asceticism. vs. , . they were concerned with vain questionings and genealogies and legal disputes. these last are perhaps to be regarded as casuistic discussions like those which play such a large part in jewish tradition. the epistle to titus is somewhat richer than first timothy in personal details. after titus has been relieved in crete by artemas or tychicus, who may soon be sent, he is to join paul in nicopolis. tychicus, it will be remembered, had served as paul's messenger during the first imprisonment. he was the bearer of colossians and ephesians. the nicopolis where paul is intending to pass the approaching winter, is probably the chief of the many cities of that name, the nicopolis in epirus. zenas, a lawyer otherwise unknown, and the well-known apollos, who appears so prominently in the acts and in first corinthians, are to be furnished in crete with everything that they need for their further journey. . the second epistle to timothy the first epistle to timothy and the epistle to titus are in many respects strikingly similar. a certain strong family resemblance extends also to second timothy. evidently all three of the pastoral epistles belong to the same general period of paul's life, and were intended to subserve similar purposes. second timothy, however, as compared with the other two, exhibits some marked peculiarities. the personal element, in particular, is in this letter much more prominent. second timothy contains a wealth of interesting biographical details about timothy, about paul, and about a very considerable number of other persons. some of these last are known only from this epistle; others have been brought to our attention again and again. in second timothy paul appears as a prisoner, no doubt at rome. this time there seems to be little hope of his release. apparently his imprisonment is not of long standing. only recently he has been at corinth and at miletus. ii tim. : . he speaks in one place of his first defense. v. . some suppose that this is a reminiscence of the trial which had taken place years before, during the first imprisonment. more probably it refers to some preliminary hearing which had only recently been held. paul is oppressed with a sense of loneliness, even more than during the first imprisonment. there was no one to stand by him at his first hearing. for one reason or another, his intimate associates have been scattered--some of them, no doubt, for good and sufficient reasons, but demas, at any rate, out of an unworthy love of the world. luke, fortunately, is still with him; and timothy, with mark, is urged to come before the winter. vs. , . mark seems to have changed since he turned back from the work at perga. at the beginning he was rebuked for desertion; but now at the end he is one of the few faithful ones. it is not quite clear where timothy was when the letter was addressed to him. the greeting to priscilla and aquila might seem to point to ephesus. they had lived there before; perhaps they returned thither after a residence in rome. rom. : . if timothy was in ephesus, then tychicus, who was sent thither, ii tim. : , was probably expected to linger by the way; otherwise his sending would be no news to the reader of the letter. something is to be said, perhaps, for the view that timothy was not at ephesus, but perhaps at lystra, his original home. the second epistle to timothy contains warnings against false teaching similar to those which appear in first timothy and titus. but the characteristic feature of the letter is to be found in the references to the apostle's own life. even the warnings and admonitions are brought into relation to these. paul does not hesitate to point to himself as an example for his beloved followers. he does so, without a touch of vain glory, in the simple consciousness of a divine commission. second timothy is a letter of farewell, in which reminiscence and exhortation are characteristically blended. it is a farewell from the apostle, primarily for timothy, though he is expecting to see timothy again, but also for all of the pauline churches. the letter has taken deep hold of every generation in the history of the church. the fitting end of a life of true service, the calm facing of death, the certainty of heavenly communion with the lord--these are the things above all others that have been learned from the last of the epistles of paul. * * * * * in the library.--purves, "christianity in the apostolic age," pp. - . davis, "dictionary of the bible": purves, articles on "timothy" and "titus." m'clymont, "the new testament and its writers," pp. - . lewin, "the life and epistles of st. paul," vol. ii, chs. vii, viii, ix, x and xi. conybeare and howson, "the life and epistles of st. paul," ch. xxvii. stalker, "the life of st. paul," pp. - . warfield, "acts, timothy, titus and philemon," in "the temple bible," pp. xxvii-xliii. ellicott, "a new testament commentary for english readers," vol. iii, pp. - : spence, "the pastoral epistles of st. paul." "the cambridge bible for schools and colleges": humphreys, "the epistles to timothy and titus." zahn, "introduction to the new testament," vol. ii, pp. - . the last named work is intended primarily for those who have some knowledge of greek, but can also be used by others. part iii: the presentation and defense of christianity lesson xxvii a presentation of jesus to jewish christians the gospel according to matthew the gospel of matthew is probably, as has been said, the most important book that was ever written. its importance is due to the information which it contains about jesus christ. more fully perhaps than any other one book, the gospel of matthew has preserved the knowledge of jesus. whatever be the future of the church, the life of jesus will now always remain the central fact of history. even the secondary influence of jesus is incalculable; even if none were left to own him as lord and master, still he would remain incomparably the most influential man that has ever lived. as a matter of fact, however, such a condition has never existed and never will exist. from the very beginning the life of jesus made itself felt through those who accepted him, to the exclusion of all others, as the supreme lord of their lives. if jesus had been regarded merely as a quiet teacher of ethics, the gospel of matthew never would have been written, and probably the very name of jesus would have perished. the wonderful influence of jesus, which has transformed the world from darkness to light, which alone gives promise of a final reign of righteousness, has been exerted through the instrumentality, not of admirers, but of disciples. jesus has been a teacher only because he has been a master. to make jesus master in the lives of men was the purpose of the gospel of matthew, and it is the purpose of our study of the book. the gospel was not written with merely scientific interest; it was not written merely to preserve certain gems from the lips of an inspired teacher. the ultimate purpose of the book was to make men fall at jesus' feet with the words, "my lord and my god." such a purpose is not inconsistent with the most scrupulous truthfulness. adoration of jesus can be induced best of all, not by fanciful elaboration, but by sober fact. in the case of jesus, truth was more glorious by far than the boldest fiction. to make jesus lord and saviour is the purpose of our work as teachers. that purpose cannot be attained by exhortation or by threatening, but only by impartation of knowledge. to know jesus is to trust him and adore him. many readers of the gospels never attain to the true knowledge. their failure is due to various causes--to moral laxness, to preconceived opinions, to spiritual dullness. one obstacle, however, is of a simpler kind. one thing that stands in the way of a real understanding of the gospels is the habit of piecemeal reading. we read the gospels bit by bit instead of allowing the whole to make its impression. we do not see the wood for the trees. jesus is concealed from us by his individual acts. the gospels should be read as well as studied--read rapidly, like an ordinary book, preferably in some rational form of printing where verse numbers and all editorial matters are relegated to the margin and the lines stretch across the page. these things may seem to be trivialities, and certainly they are not essential. what is essential--not in place of detailed study, but in addition to it--is a rapid reading of the gospels, by which, through the exclusion of all non-essentials, the mysterious, holy person of jesus is brought simply and freshly before the wondering soul. not to know about jesus, but to know him, is the prime object of our study. to know about him is a valuable part of education; but to know him is life eternal. . meaning of "gospel" the greek word for "gospel" means "good news." nowhere in the new testament, however, is that word applied to a book. there is no reference in the new testament to a "gospel" of matthew or of mark or of luke or of john. in the new testament the word "gospel" has a more general reference. it designates the "good news" which lies at the basis of christian preaching, however that news may be known. christianity is based upon "a piece of information." the subject of that information is the life and death and resurrection of jesus christ. without christ we should have been hopeless, but christ has saved us. information about what he has done for us, however that information be conveyed, is the gospel. this broad use of the word "gospel" appears even in the titles "gospel according to matthew," "gospel according to mark," "gospel according to luke," and "gospel according to john," which are not due to the original authors of the books. "gospel according to matthew" did not originally mean the same thing as "gospel of matthew." it did not mean the gospel which matthew produced, but the one gospel of jesus christ as matthew narrated it. matthew, mark, luke and john produced simply four accounts of the same thing. that common subject of the four accounts is the gospel, the good news, of what jesus christ has done for his followers. at a very early time, however, books which had the gospel as their subject came themselves to be designated as "gospels." the usage is convenient, and will be freely adopted in these textbooks. we may speak indiscriminately of the "gospel according to matthew" and of the "gospel of matthew." . authorship of the first gospel =( ) not indicated in the gospel itself.=--the gospel of matthew should be sharply distinguished from those books which themselves make definite claims as to their authorship. the epistle to the romans, for example, claims to have been written by the apostle paul. if it was not written by paul, it is a forgery. the book of the acts, also, though it does not mention the name of the author, claims at least--through the use of the first person plural--to have been written by some companion of the apostle paul. even the gospel of john, as we shall see, really affords clear indications about its own authorship. the gospel of matthew, on the other hand, lays no claim to any particular authorship. we might believe that it was written by some other person than matthew and yet be perfectly loyal to the book itself. the self-witness of the book is confined merely to a claim of truthfulness. if we believe that the record which the book contains is true, then we might, in perfect loyalty to the gospel, believe that it was written by some one like luke or mark, outside of the company of the apostles. such a view, however, would display an unreasonable distrust of christian tradition. =( ) papias on the first gospel.=--the earliest extant information about the authorship of the first gospel is to be found in a fragment which eusebius, the church historian of the fourth century, has preserved from a lost work of papias. papias was bishop of hierapolis in asia minor in the former half of the second century. the fragment from papias, which is found in eusebius, church history, iii, , , may be translated as follows: "matthew accordingly wrote [or compiled] the oracles in the hebrew dialect, and everyone translated them as he was able." it seems pretty evident that papias is here referring to the first gospel. some, indeed, have supposed that he means by "the oracles" a writing composed almost exclusively of sayings of jesus, which formed merely one of the sources of our first gospel. this view is probably incorrect. papias could designate the gospel of matthew as "the oracles" either because of the large place which sayings of jesus have in this gospel, as compared, for example, with the gospel of mark, or else because the whole gospel, both speeches and narrative, was of divine, oracular authority. the view that "according to matthew" in the ancient title and in christian tradition means not that matthew wrote the book, but that it is based in some way ultimately on his authority, is opposed by the analogy of mark. as we shall see, the gospel of mark, in early tradition, was referred ultimately to the authority of peter; if, therefore, "according to" was used in the sense indicated above, the second gospel would have been called the gospel "according to peter" instead of the gospel "according to mark." the testimony of papias involves two principal assertions: in the first place, that matthew wrote the first gospel; and in the second place, that he wrote it in the "hebrew" language. the former assertion, which is supported by a striking consensus of early writers, has already been considered. the latter is much more puzzling. . was the first gospel originally aramaic? =( ) meaning of "hebrew."=--by "the hebrew dialect," papias no doubt means aramaic rather than what we call hebrew. the term "hebrew" was applied to both of the two closely related languages. compare acts : . it is exceedingly unlikely that a gospel would have been written in hebrew; for before the time of christ that had ceased to be the living language of palestine. what papias asserts, then, is that matthew wrote in aramaic. =( ) "everyone translated them as he was able."=--papias asserts further that everyone translated the oracles as he was able. these words may be interpreted in various ways. perhaps they mean that every man who used the original of matthew had to translate it for himself; or perhaps that the gospel was translated orally in the churches, as the jews translated the hebrew old testament into aramaic in the synagogues; or perhaps that a number of written translations of the gospel were made. at any rate papias seems to imply that the condition which he here describes had come to an end when he wrote. some one greek form of the gospel had gained general acceptance; the time when everyone translated as he was able was at an end. ( ) value of the tradition.--the tradition of an aramaic original of matthew is not preserved merely by papias, but appears in a considerable number of early writers. how far the other writers are independent of papias is a disputed question. the tradition may be variously estimated. some have supposed that it is entirely correct--that our greek gospel of matthew is a translation, by matthew himself or by some one else, of an aramaic work: others have supposed that the tradition is altogether false--for example, that an aramaic translation of the greek gospel was mistaken for an original from which the greek gospel had been translated: others hold intermediate views--for example, that one of the sources of our greek gospel was written in aramaic. an important objection to the view that there was an aramaic original of matthew is that the greek gospel looks more like an original greek work than like a translation. the tradition of the aramaic matthew places before us one of the unsolved problems of new testament criticism. one thing is certain--the language of the gospel of matthew, like that of the other gospels, has a strong aramaic coloring. this, however, does not require the hypothesis that our matthew was translated from an aramaic original. undoubtedly, however our greek matthew was written, there was a time in the early days of the church when the tradition of the life of christ was carried on chiefly or wholly in the aramaic language. the words of jesus, at any rate, as they appear in our gospels, have at some time or other undergone translation; for jesus taught in aramaic. the aramaic coloring of the gospels is one of the evidences of their trustworthiness. though written in greek, they are evidently rooted deep in the original palestinian soil. . date the date of the gospel cannot be determined with accuracy. some indication, however, is afforded by the assertion of irenæus, of the latter part of the second century, that matthew published his gospel while peter and paul were preaching at rome. even if this assertion should prove not to be absolutely correct, it would exhibit an early tradition for the years between about a. d. and as the date of the gospel. this tradition is confirmed by the widespread view among early writers that matthew was written before mark; for mark is now generally admitted to have been written before the destruction of jerusalem in a. d. . there is really no serious objection to the traditional dating of matthew. it was probably written in the sixties of the first century, and probably, as tradition says, in palestine. there are traces of the use of the gospel in writers of the early half of the second century. on the other hand, there is no clear indication that it was used by any new testament writer. the absence of citations from our gospels in the epistles of paul would tend to indicate that in the very earliest period the gospel tradition was carried on by word of mouth rather than by books. . the apostle matthew in the four lists of the apostles, matt. : - ; mark : - ; luke : - ; acts : , matthew is designated by the bare name, except in his own gospel, where he appears as "matthew the publican." in matt. : , his call is narrated. in the parallel passages in mark and luke, mark : ; luke : , , the name of the publican who was called is given only as "levi." without the gospel of matthew we should not have been able to identify levi and matthew. evidently the apostle had two names, as was the case with so many others of the persons mentioned in the new testament. after his call, matthew made a great feast for jesus. luke : ; compare mark : . matthew himself, alone among the synoptists, does not even make it perfectly clear that it was he in whose house jesus sat at meat. the peculiarities of the first gospel in what is said about matthew become significant when the authorship is known. of course of themselves they would be quite insufficient to indicate who the author was. the assertion by early writers that matthew wrote the gospel, was based not upon indications in the gospel itself, but upon independent tradition. . "the book of the generation of jesus christ" the first verse of the gospel is evidently based upon the formula, occurring for the first time at gen. : , which marks off the divisions of the book of genesis. it is most naturally regarded as a heading for the genealogy that follows in matt. : - . there is only one objection to that view. in genesis "the book of the generations of adam," or "the generations of shem" or the like, introduces an account, not of ancestors of the persons in question, but of their descendants. in matt. : - , on the contrary, we have an account not of descendants of jesus, but of ancestors. this objection has led some scholars to regard matt. : as the title not of the genealogy but of the whole gospel. the title would then represent jesus as the beginning of a new race, or of a new period in the history of humanity. this interpretation is unnecessarily subtle. it should rather be admitted that there is a difference between the phrase in genesis and that in matthew. the difference is very natural. in the case of abraham the descendants were in view; in the case of the messiah, the ancestors. adam and noah and abraham were bearers of a promise; christ was the culmination. genesis looks forward; matthew looks back. the difference in the use of the phrase is natural and significant. the title, with the whole genealogy, is significant of what is to follow. at the very start, the ruling thought of matthew's gospel finds expression. jesus is son of david, and son of abraham; he is the culmination of the divine promise. * * * * * in the library.--purves, "christianity in the apostolic age," pp. - , - . davis, "dictionary of the bible": purves (supplemented), articles on "gospel" and "matthew." m'clymont, "the new testament and its writers," pp. - . stevens and burton, "a harmony of the gospels." ellicott, "a new testament commentary for english readers," vol. i: plumptre, "the gospel according to st. matthew, st. mark, and st. luke," pp. xli-xliii, - . zahn, "introduction to the new testament," vol. ii, pp. - , - . the last-named work is intended primarily for those who have some knowledge of greek, but can also be used by others. lesson xxviii a graphic sketch of the life of jesus the gospel according to mark the gospel of mark contains scarcely any material which is not also contained in one or both of the other two synoptic gospels. the loss of mark would not diminish appreciably the number of facts that we know about jesus. nevertheless, the second gospel is of the utmost importance; for although it narrates for the most part only the same facts as are also narrated elsewhere, it narrates them in a different way. indeed the very brevity of the gospel adds to its special value. a picture is sometimes the more impressive by being limited in extent. read the gospel of mark, not piecemeal but as a whole, and you obtain an impression of jesus which can be obtained from no other book. . the tradition =( ) papias on mark.=--as in the case of matthew, so in that of mark it is papias of hierapolis who provides the earliest information about the production of the gospel. again also the words of papias are quoted by eusebius (church history, iii, , ). the passage from papias is as follows: "this also the presbyter said: 'mark, on the one hand, being an interpreter of peter, wrote accurately as many things as he remembered, yet not in order, the things which were either said or done by the lord.' for neither did he hear the lord nor did he follow him, but afterwards, as i said, he followed peter, who carried on his teaching as need required but not as though he were making an ordered account of the oracles of the lord; so that mark committed no fault when he wrote some things as he had remembered them. for he had one care--that he should not leave out anything of the things that he had heard, or represent anything among them falsely." =( ) antiquity of the papian tradition.=--it will be observed that papias is here represented as quoting from "the presbyter." probably, however, it is only the first sentence that is quoted; the rest seems to be an explanation by papias himself. by "presbyter," or "elder," papias means not an officer in the church, but a man of an older generation. the tradition is therefore very ancient. papias himself lived in the former half of the second century; a man of a still older generation would probably have acquired his information about mark well before a. d. . such information is not to be lightly rejected. ( ) mark an interpreter of peter.--according to the presbyter, mark was an "interpreter" of peter. if the word be taken strictly it means that mark translated the words of peter from one language into another--probably from aramaic into greek. on the whole, however, it is not probable, in view of linguistic conditions in palestine and in the church, that peter would be unable to speak greek. perhaps, then, the sentence means that mark was merely the mediator, in a general sense, of peter's preaching. he presented the teaching of peter to those who had not had the opportunity of hearing it themselves. perhaps the meaning is that he had done so formerly by word of mouth. perhaps, however, it is rather the gospel itself that is referred to. by writing the gospel mark became an interpreter or mediator of the preaching of peter. at any rate, whatever meaning be given to the word "interpreter," the general sense of the sentence--especially when taken in connection with the following explanation by papias is fairly clear. mark derived the information for his gospel not from personal acquaintance with the earthly jesus, but from association with peter. ( ) mark not written "in order."--the presbyter said further that although mark wrote accurately what he heard from peter, he did not succeed in giving "in order" an account of the things that jesus did and said. evidently the historical incompleteness, the lack of uninterrupted sequence, of the gospel of mark is here in view. but by what standard is the gospel judged? it can hardly be by the standard of matthew, for matthew pays even less attention to temporal sequence than mark does. the order in luke also is by no means in all respects more strictly chronological than that in mark. only one standard satisfies the requirements of the presbyter's words--the standard provided by the teaching of john. john was the great leader of the church of asia minor. his teaching naturally formed the standard of authority in that region. perhaps at the time when the presbyter expressed his judgment on mark the gospel of john had already been written, so that one gospel could be compared with the other; perhaps, however, it was merely the oral teaching of john, afterwards embodied in the gospel, which afforded the basis of comparison. the gospel of john alone provides something like a chronological framework of the public ministry of jesus: john alone mentions the early judean ministry; john alone narrates the successive visits of jesus to the feasts in jerusalem. if, as is possible, "the presbyter" of papias was none other than john himself, then of course the whole matter becomes especially plain. john knew that there were important omissions in the gospel of mark; he probably observed, for example, that that gospel if taken alone might readily create the impression that the ministry of jesus lasted only one year instead of three or four. no doubt he corrected this impression in his oral teaching; certainly he corrects it in his gospel. in commending the gospel of mark, john would naturally call attention to its chronological incompleteness. . the heading like the gospel of matthew, the gospel of mark opens not with a sentence, but with a heading. as in the former case, however, the exact reference of the heading is uncertain. "the beginning of the gospel of jesus christ" may, in the first place, mean merely, "here begins the gospel of jesus christ." "the gospel of jesus christ" would then be simply the story about christ that is narrated in the book that follows. in the second place, the phrase may be taken as a description of the contents of the book. the whole of jesus' life would then be described as the beginning of that proclamation of the gospel which was afterwards continued by the apostles and by the church. in the third place, the phrase may be merely a heading for the section that immediately follows, for mark : - , or for vs. - . in this case the preaching of john the baptist, with or without the baptism of jesus, the descent of the spirit, and the temptation, would be described as the beginning of, as preliminary to, the proclamation of the gospel, which is mentioned in vs. , . perhaps the first interpretation is to be preferred as being the simplest, though it must be admitted that the phrase is a little puzzling. . mark the missionary gospel it is significant that the gospel of mark begins not with the birth and infancy of jesus, but with the ministry of john the baptist and the subsequent preaching of jesus in galilee. mark seems to be following with great exactness the scheme of early apostolic preaching as it is laid down in acts : - . apparently mark is preëminently the missionary gospel; it contains only those things which had a place in the first preaching to unbelievers. that does not mean that the things which mark omits are necessarily less important than the things which it contains. mark gives a summary, not exactly of the most important things about jesus, but rather of the things which unbelievers or recent converts could most easily understand. hence the omission of the mystery of the birth, of the profound teaching of the early judean ministry, of the intimate instructions to the disciples. these things are of fundamental importance. but they can best be understood only after one has first acquired a thorough grasp of the public ministry, and of the death and resurrection. the second gospel, judged by purely formal standards, cannot be called exactly a beautiful book. it lacks the rhythm of old testament poetry, and the grace of the gospel of luke. but its rough, vigorous naturalness conveys a message of compelling power. * * * * * in the library.--davis, "dictionary of the bible": purves (edited) article on "mark." m'clymont, "the new testament and its writers," pp. - . stevens and burton, "a harmony of the gospels." ellicott, "a new testament commentary for english readers," vol. i: plumptre, "the gospel according to st. matthew, st. mark, and st. luke," pp. - . "the cambridge bible for schools": maclear, "the gospel according to st. mark." zahn, "introduction to the new testament," vol. ii, pp. - , - . the last-named work is intended primarily for those who have some knowledge of greek, but can also be used by others. lesson xxix a greek historian's account of jesus the gospel according to luke the purpose of the gospel of luke was, the author says in his prologue, that theophilus might know the certainty concerning the things wherein he had been instructed. these words involve recognition of a fundamental need of the church, which is to-day often ignored. after interest in christianity has been aroused, after faith has been awakened, the christian feels the need of a deeper intellectual grounding of the faith that is in him. this feeling is perfectly legitimate; it should not be stifled; the expression of it should not be treated necessarily as sinful doubt. the treatment of these natural questionings is one of the most important problems that faces the teachers of the present course. we are dealing with young men and women of maturing minds, many of whom can no longer be satisfied with the unthinking faith of childhood. if christianity is to remain permanently a force in their lives it must be related to their entire intellectual equipment; it must be exhibited as a reasonable thing, which is consistent with a sane and healthy view of the world. in other words, we are dealing with the problem of religious doubt, which is almost an inevitable stage in the development of intelligent christians of the present day. undoubtedly the problem is often very unwisely handled. by hearing every natural expression of their doubt unmercifully decried as rebellion against the word of god, many intelligent young people are being driven into hopeless estrangement from the church. it is useless to try to bully people into faith. instead, we ought to learn the method of the third gospel. very possibly luke was facing the very same problem that is before us teachers to-day--very possibly theophilus, to whom the gospel and the acts were dedicated, was a young man who had grown up in the church and could now no longer be satisfied with the vague and unsystematic instruction that had been given him in childhood. at any rate, whether he was a young man grown up in the church, or a recent convert, or merely a gentile interested in christianity, he was a person of intellectual interests, and those interests are treated by the evangelist not with contempt but with the utmost sympathy. the gospel was written in order that theophilus might "know the certainty" of those things wherein he had been instructed. that might be regarded as the motto for the entire course of study which we have undertaken this year. it should be our aim to lay before young people of the church the certainty of the things wherein they have been instructed--to enable them to substitute for the unreasoning faith of childhood the profound convictions of full-grown men and women. moreover, exactly like the author of the third gospel, we are endeavoring to accomplish this aim, not by argument, but by an orderly presentation of "those matters which have been fulfilled among us." a simple historical presentation of the facts upon which christianity is founded is the surest safeguard of christian faith. . the prologue alone among the synoptists luke gives his readers some direct information about the methods of his work. luke : - ; acts : , . this information, which was barely touched upon in the student's text book, must here be considered somewhat more in detail. =( ) luke not an eyewitness from the beginning.=--from the prologue to the gospel, luke : - , it appears, in the first place, that luke was not an eyewitness of the events that he narrates--at least he was not an eyewitness "from the beginning." =( ) his predecessors.=--in the second place, it appears that he had had predecessors in his task of writing an account of early christian history. apparently, however, none of these previous works were produced by an apostle or by an eyewitness of the earthly ministry of jesus. the previous writers, like luke himself, were dependent upon the testimony of the eyewitnesses. the gospel of matthew, therefore, since it was written by an apostle, was not one of the works to which reference is made. this conclusion is amply confirmed by a comparison of matthew with luke. evidently, at least, the two are entirely independent. if luke refers to the first gospel in the prologue, at any rate he made no use of it. =( ) was mark one of the predecessors?=--the gospel of mark, on the contrary, answers to the description of the previous works. it was written not by an eyewitness, but by one who listened to eyewitnesses. perhaps, therefore, it was one of the many works to which luke refers. if so, it may well have been used by luke in the preparation of his own gospel. this supposition is by no means excluded by a comparison of the two books. as a matter of fact, the great majority of modern scholars suppose that the writer of the third gospel made use of the gospel of mark. all that can here be asserted is that this view, though not required by what luke says in his prologue, is perfectly consistent with it. =( ) luke's attitude toward the predecessors.=--it should be observed that luke attaches no blame whatever to the efforts of his forerunners. when he says that they had "taken in hand" or "attempted" to write accounts of certain things, he does not imply in the slightest that their attempts had been unsuccessful. he means simply to justify his own procedure by a reference to what had already been done. "my effort at writing an account of the origin of christianity," he says in effect, "is no strange, unheard-of thing. i have had many predecessors." such a reference to the work of predecessors was in antiquity a common literary form. at the very beginning of his work, luke displays the effects of his greek literary training. of course, however, although luke attaches no blame to his predecessors, he would not have undertaken a new work if he had thought that the old satisfied all needs. evidently he hoped to accomplish by his own book something that his predecessors had not accomplished or had accomplished only in part. =( ) the subject of the gospel.=--finally, therefore, luke informs his readers what his own peculiar methods and purposes were. the main subject of the gospel is not described with any definiteness in luke : - , but it appears in the retrospect at the beginning of the second work. there the subject of the gospel is designated as "all that jesus began both to do and to teach, until the day in which he was received up, after that he had given commandment through the holy spirit unto the apostles whom he had chosen." acts : , . the subject of the gospel, in other words, was the earthly life of jesus. =( ) completeness of the narrative.=--in treating this subject, luke had striven, he says, luke : , first of all for completeness. in his investigations he had followed all things from the beginning. this feature appears plainly in the gospel. instead of beginning as mark does, with the public ministry of jesus, luke first gives an account of the birth and infancy, and not content with that, he goes back even to events preceding the birth not only of jesus, but also of his forerunner. =( ) accuracy.=--in the second place, luke says that he had striven after accuracy. here again the gospel justifies the claim of its author. the effort after precision may be seen perhaps especially in such a passage as luke : , , where there is an elaborate dating of the beginning of john the baptist's ministry. =( ) orderly arrangement.=--the effort at orderly arrangement, which forms a third part of the claim which the author makes, was, especially in the gospel, limited by the material that was at hand. evidently in palestine in the early period, the memory of the earthly ministry of jesus was preserved not in a connected narrative, but in isolated anecdotes. it was impossible, therefore, even for a historian like luke to maintain a chronological arrangement throughout; where chronological arrangement was impossible he was obliged to be satisfied with an arrangement according to logical affinities. this logical method of arrangement, however, is not resorted to by luke so much as by matthew; and for considerable sections of his narrative he was able to gratify his historian's desire for recounting events in the order in which they happened. =( ) luke a historian.=--detailed examination of the prologue should not be allowed to obscure the outstanding fact that the sum of what luke here attests is a genuine historical aim and method in the composition of his work. of course, history in luke's mind did not exist for its own sake. the gospel of luke is not a mere scientific dissertation. on the contrary, the history which is narrated was to the author a thing of supreme value. but it was valuable only because it was true. there is not the slightest evidence that luke was a bad historian because he was a good christian. on the contrary, he was a christian just because he was a historian. in the case of jesus, knowledge of the real facts is the surest way to adoration. =( ) is luke : - a prologue to both the gospel and the acts?=--the first four verses of the gospel of luke may be taken as a prologue either to the gospel alone or else to the entire work, including both the gospel and the acts. the latter view, since the subject is described in v. only in very broad terms, is not to be rashly rejected. no doubt, however, in the prologue luke was thinking especially of the former part of the work--the part for which he was dependent altogether upon the testimony of others. the first verses of the acts link the two parts close together. their connection has been obscured by the traditional arrangement of our new testament books. but that arrangement is altogether advisable. the former part of the lucan work certainly belongs among the gospels; and of the gospels the gospel of john must certainly be placed last, as being supplementary to the others. . typical passages the characteristics of the gospel of luke may perhaps be presented more vividly than by the general description in the student's text book, by an examination of a few typical passages. the two such passages which we shall choose somewhat at random, are the narrative of the birth and infancy in luke : to : , and the parable of the prodigal son. ch. : - . both of these are without any parallel in the other gospels. matthew provides an infancy narrative, but it is concerned for the most part with events different from those that appear in luke. =( ) the narrative of the birth and infancy.=--it has often been observed that the characteristic greek sentence of the prologue, luke : - , is immediately followed by the most strongly hebraistic passage in the new testament. the semitic style of luke : to : becomes explicable only if luke was here making use of palestinian sources, either oral or written. this conclusion is confirmed by the whole spirit and substance of the narrative. in this narrative as clearly as anywhere else in the new testament we find ourselves transplanted to palestinian soil. the early date of the narrative is as evident as its jewish christian and palestinian character. there is here no reference to concrete events in the later history of the church. messianic prophecy appears in its old testament form uncolored by the details of the fulfillment. evidently this narrative is no product of the church's fancy, but genuine history told in the very forms of speech which were natural to those who participated in it. the first two chapters of luke are in spirit really a bit of the old testament continued to the very threshold of the new. these chapters contain the poetry of the new testament, which has taken deep hold of the heart and fancy of the church. in this section of his gospel, luke shows himself to be a genuine historian. a biographer is not satisfied with narrating the public life of his hero, but prefaces to his work some account of the family, and of the birth and childhood. so our understanding of the ministry of jesus becomes far deeper when we know that he grew up among the simple, devout folk who are described in the first two chapters of luke. the picture of mary in these chapters, painted with an exquisite delicacy of touch, throws a flood of light upon the earthly life of the son of man. beauty of detail, however, must not be allowed to obscure the central fact. the culmination of the narrative, undoubtedly, is to be found in the stupendous mystery of luke : , . far from being an excrescence in the narrative, as it has sometimes been represented in an age of rampant naturalism, the supernatural conception of jesus is the very keystone of the arch. in this central fact, matthew and luke, totally independent as they are, are perfectly agreed. by this fact jesus is represented, more clearly perhaps than by anything else, as not a product of the world but a saviour come from without. =( ) the prodigal son.=--the parable of the prodigal son, simple though it is, has often been sadly misinterpreted. it has been thought to mean, for example, that god pardons sin on the basis simply of human repentance without the necessity of the divine sacrifice. all such interpretations are wide of the mark. the parable is not meant to teach how god pardons sin, but only the fact that he does pardon it with joy, and that we ought to share in his joy. misinterpretation of the parable has come from the ignoring of its occasion. the key to the interpretation is given in luke : , . jesus was receiving publicans and sinners. instead of rejoicing at the salvation of these poor, degraded sons of abraham, the pharisees murmured. in rebuke, jesus spoke three parables. one of them, the parable of the lost sheep, is reported also by matthew, ch. : - ; but the last two, the parables of the lost coin and of the prodigal son, appear only in luke. the teaching of all three of these parables is exactly the same. the imagery varies, but the application is constant. that application may be expressed very simply: "god rejoices at the salvation of a sinner; if, therefore, you are really sons of god, you will rejoice too." in the parable of the prodigal son, however, the application is forced home more poignantly than in either of the other two. in that parable alone among the three, the pharisees could see--in the elder brother--a direct representation of themselves. the incident of the elder brother, sometimes regarded as a mere detail, really introduces the main point of the parable. everything else leads up to that. the wonderful description of the joy of the father at the prodigal's home-coming is all intended as a contrast to the churlish jealousy of the brother. the elder brother was as far as possible from sharing in the father's joy. that showed that he was no true son. though he lived under the father's roof, he had no real inward share in the father's life. so it was with the pharisees. they lived in the father's house; they were, as we should say, members of the church. but when salvation, in the person of jesus, had at last come to the poor, sinful outcasts of the people, the pharisees drew aside. god rejoiced when the publicans crowded in to jesus; but the pharisees held back. that showed that after all they were not, as they thought, true sons of god. if they had been, they would have shared god's feeling. it should be noticed that the parable ends with an invitation. the elder brother is not harshly rebuked by the father, but tenderly urged to come in still. will the invitation be accepted? the question is not answered; and there lies the crowning beauty of the parable. the pharisees are still given a chance. will they still share the joy of god at the return of his lost children? they must answer the question for themselves. and we, too, have the same question to answer. if we are really children of god, then we shall not despise the outcasts and the sinners, but shall rejoice with him at their salvation. the parable is characteristic of the gospel of luke. of course, luke did not compose it. nothing in the gospels bears more indisputably the marks of jesus' teaching. but from the rich store of palestinian tradition luke sought out those things which displayed sympathy for the downtrodden and the sick and the sinful. it was an inestimable service to the church. shall we heed the message? god rejoices at the salvation of a sinner. shall we be sharers in his holy joy? * * * * * in the library.--davis, "dictionary of the bible": purves (edited), article on "luke." m'clymont, "the new testament and its writers," pp. - . stevens and burton, "a harmony of the gospels." ellicott, "a new testament commentary for english readers," vol. i: plumptre, "the gospel according to st. matthew, st. mark, and st. luke," pp. - . zahn, "introduction to the new testament," vol. iii, pp. - . the last-named work is intended primarily for those who have some knowledge of greek, but can also be used by others. lesson xxx the testimony of the beloved disciple the gospel according to john . the evangelist a witness the author of the fourth gospel was a great man. he was great, however, not as a philosopher or as a religious genius, but as an apostle; not as the originator of great ideas, but as one who received the teaching of another. he was great, not as one who created a profound theology, but as one who could understand the lord jesus christ. the "johannine theology" is the theology not of john but of jesus. so at least john himself represents it. he claims to be not a theologian, but a witness. the value of his book depends upon the truth of his witnessing. if the johannine picture of christ is the creation of the author's genius, it commands admiration; but only if it is a true picture of the historic jesus can it offer eternal life. is the jesus of the fourth gospel fiction or fact, a splendid product of religious genius or a living saviour? few questions have caused profounder agitation in the modern church. the question cannot be separated from the question of authorship. clearly if the book was written by an intimate friend of jesus, its witness must be true. who wrote the fourth gospel? this question is of vital importance. . the tradition at the close of the second century--the earliest period from which any really abundant christian literature outside of the new testament has been preserved--the tradition about the authorship of the gospel was practically unanimous. even the one small and uninfluential sect that disagreed practically supports the common view, for its denial was evidently based upon objections to the contents of the gospel and not at all upon any independent information. =( ) irenæus and polycarp.=--of the three important writers of the close of the second century, all of whom attest the johannine authorship of the gospel, irenæus deserves special mention. irenæus spent his early life in asia minor, but afterwards became the leader of the church in gaul. before he left asia minor he had some very interesting associations. one of them was with polycarp, bishop of smyrna, who was martyred in a. d. . polycarp would be an important figure merely on account of the early period in which he lived; but what makes his testimony supremely valuable is his personal association with john. irenæus himself in his early youth, before he had left asia minor, had heard polycarp discoursing about the things he had heard john say. polycarp, then, was a personal disciple of john, and irenæus was a personal disciple of polycarp. only one link, therefore, separated irenæus from john. moreover, since irenæus in his youth had lived in asia minor, the very place of john's residence, it is natural to believe that what he heard polycarp say about john could be supplemented in other ways. now beyond any reasonable doubt whatever, irenæus supposed that the john of whom he had heard polycarp speak was none other than john the apostle, the son of zebedee. if that supposition was correct, then the connection between irenæus and the apostle john was exceedingly close; and when irenæus exhibits an absolutely unwavering belief that the fourth gospel was written by the apostle, it is very unlikely that he was mistaken. he had known one of the personal disciples of john; he himself had lived in asia minor where john had been the well-known leader of the church, and where the fourth gospel, no matter who wrote it, was almost certainly produced. when, therefore, he asserts, not as something new, but as a thing which he had known from the beginning, that the fourth gospel was written by the apostle john, surely he must be believed. this conclusion has been avoided by the hypothesis that the john about whom polycarp spoke was not really, as irenæus supposed, john the son of zebedee, but another john, a certain john the presbyter, who was not one of the twelve apostles at all. the unnaturalness of such an hypothesis appears on the surface. could a native of asia minor who had repeatedly heard polycarp speak about the john in question, and who had many other opportunities for acquainting himself with the traditions of the church in asia minor--could such a man, together with all his contemporaries, have come to labor under so egregious a misapprehension? =( ) other attestation.=--the testimony of irenæus to the fourth gospel is of particular importance, on account of irenæus' connection with polycarp. but it is only one detail in a remarkable consensus. when the most widely separated portions of the church before the close of the second century all agreed that the fourth gospel was written by john the son of zebedee, their common belief could not have been of recent origin. earlier writers, moreover, by their use of the gospel attest at least its early date. . the testimony of the gospel itself the tradition which attributes the fourth gospel to john the son of zebedee is confirmed by the testimony of the gospel itself. although the book does not mention the name of its author it clearly implies who he was. =( ) indirectness of the testimony.=--this testimony of the gospel itself is all the more valuable because it is indirect. if the name john had been mentioned at the beginning, then it might conceivably be supposed that an unknown author had desired to gain a hearing for his work by putting it falsely under the name of a great apostle. as it is, the inference that the author claims to be john the son of zebedee, though certain, does not force itself upon the careless reader. a forger would not thus, by the indirectness of his claim, have deprived himself of the benefits of his forgery. the testimony of the gospel to its author must now be considered. =( ) the author an eyewitness.=--in the first place, almost at the very beginning, we observe that the author claims to be an eyewitness of the life of jesus. "we beheld his glory," he says in john : . by beholding the glory of christ he evidently does not mean merely that experience of christ's power which is possessed by every christian. on the contrary, the glory of christ, as it is intended by the evangelist, is fully explained by such passages as ch. : . the miracles of jesus--palpable, visible events in the external world--are clearly included in what is meant. it will be observed that in ch. : it is very specifically the incarnate christ that is spoken of. the evangelist is describing the condition of things after "the word became flesh." evidently, therefore, it was the earthly life of jesus which the evangelist claims to have "beheld." this conclusion is confirmed by i john : - . scarcely anyone doubts that the first epistle of john was written by the man who wrote the gospel. when, therefore, the author of the epistle speaks of "that which we have heard, that which we have seen with our eyes, that which we beheld, and our hands handled, concerning the word of life," evidently these words have significance for the gospel also. the author fairly heaps up expressions to show, beyond all possibility of misunderstanding, that he had come into actual physical contact with the earthly jesus. =( ) the unnamed disciple of john : - .=--the author of the fourth gospel, then, clearly claims to be an eyewitness of the earthly life of christ. further indications identify him with a particular one among the eyewitnesses. in john : - , an unnamed disciple of jesus is mentioned. "one of the two," it is said in v. , "that heard john speak, and followed him, was andrew, simon peter's brother." who was the other? there is some reason for thinking that he was one of the two sons of zebedee. but the matter will become clearer as we proceed. another question is why this disciple is not mentioned by name. the fourth gospel is not chary of names. why, then, is the disciple who appears so prominently along with andrew and simon not mentioned by name? only one plausible explanation suggests itself--the explanation that the unnamed disciple was the author of the gospel, who, through a feeling common in the literature of antiquity, as well as of our own time, did not like to mention his own name in the course of his narrative. we have already observed that the author claims to be an eyewitness of the life of christ. john : . when, therefore, near the beginning of the narrative a disciple of jesus is introduced, rather mysteriously, without a name, when, furthermore, events in which this disciple was immediately concerned are narrated with unusual vividness and wealth of detail, vs. - , the conclusion becomes very natural that this unnamed disciple is none other than the author himself. =( ) the beloved disciple.=--this conclusion, it must be admitted, so far as this first passage is concerned, is nothing more than a likely guess. but by other passages it is rendered almost certain. in john : - , a disciple is mentioned as leaning on jesus' breast and as being one whom jesus loved. this disciple is not named. but who was he? evidently he was one of the twelve apostles, for only the apostles were present at the supper which is described in chs. to . the disciple "whom jesus loved," however, was not only among the twelve; he was evidently among the innermost circle of the twelve. such an innermost circle appears clearly in the synoptic gospels. it was composed of peter and james and john. the beloved disciple was probably one of these three; and since he is clearly distinguished from peter, ch. : , he was either james or john. the introduction of an unnamed disciple, which seemed significant even in john : - , becomes yet far more significant in the present passage. in the account of the last supper, a considerable number of the disciples are named--peter, judas iscariot, thomas, philip, judas not iscariot--yet the disciple who is introduced with especial emphasis, whose very position at table is described with a wealth of detail far greater than is displayed in the case of any of the others, is designated merely as "one of his disciples, whom jesus loved." the strange omission of this disciple's name can be explained only if he was the author of the book. clearly the painter has here introduced a modest portrait of himself in the midst of his great picture. passing by john : , , where "the other disciple" is probably the author, and ch. : , , where the repetition of the strange designation, "the disciple ... whom he [jesus] loved," confirms the impressions derived from ch. : - , we discover another important indication in ch. : . "and he that hath seen hath borne witness, and his witness is true: and he knoweth that he saith true, that ye also may believe." "he that hath seen" can scarcely refer to anyone other than the beloved disciple who was mentioned just before as standing by the cross. in the present verse, this beloved disciple is represented as the one who is now speaking. the identification of the beloved disciple with the author of the gospel, which was implied before, here becomes explicit. in john : - , "the other disciple whom jesus loved" is of course the same as the one who appears in ch. : - ; : , , . =( ) testimony of the appendix.=--in john : , - , the beloved disciple appears again, and in v. he is identified, in so many words, with the writer of the gospel. in this verse the first person plural is used; other persons seem to be associated with the author in commending the gospel to the attention of the church. this phenomenon is explained if the twenty-first chapter be regarded as a sort of appendix, perhaps added at the request of a circle of friends. it will be observed that ch. : , forms a fit ending to the book; what follows therefore appears the more like an appendix, though it was certainly written by the author's own hand and published before his death along with the rest of the book. =( ) why are john and james not mentioned by name?=--the conclusion of our investigation is that the author of the fourth gospel indicates clearly that he was either one or the other of the two sons of zebedee. this conclusion is confirmed by the curious circumstance that neither one of these men is mentioned in the gospel by name. how did they come to be omitted? they were in the very innermost circle of jesus' disciples; many apostles far less prominent than they are named frequently on the pages of the gospel. there can be only one solution of the problem: one at least of these men is, as a matter of fact, introduced in the gospel as the beloved disciple, and the reason why he is introduced in such a curiously anonymous way and why his brother also is not named, is that the author felt a natural delicacy about introducing his own and his brother's name into a narrative of the lord's life. one statement that has just been made requires qualification: it is not quite true that the sons of zebedee are not designated by name in the gospel. they are not indeed called by their individual names, but in ch. : , they are designated by the name of their father. possibly this slight difference of usage between chapter and the rest of the gospel has something to do with the fact that chapter seems to be an appendix. =( ) the author was not james, but john.=--the author of the fourth gospel, then, identifies himself with one or the other of the sons of zebedee. as to which one of the two is meant there cannot be the slightest doubt. james the son of zebedee was martyred in a. d. . acts : . there is abundant evidence that the fourth gospel was not written so early as that; and john : - apparently implies that the author lived to a considerable age. evidently, therefore, it is john and not james with whom the author identifies himself. =( ) is the gospel's own testimony true?=--thus the singularly strong tradition which attributes the fourth gospel to john the son of zebedee is supported by the independent testimony of the book itself. conceivably, of course, that testimony might be false. but it is very hard to believe that it is. it is very hard to believe that the author of this wonderful book, who despite all the profundity of his ideas exalts in a very special manner the importance of simple testimony based upon the senses, john : ; i john : - , has in a manner far subtler and more heinous than if he had simply put a false name at the beginning palmed himself off as an eyewitness of the saviour's life. many learned men have found it possible to accept such a view; but the simple reader of the gospel will always be inclined to dissent. the author of this book has narrated many things hard to be believed. but there are still found those who accept his solemn testimony; there are still found those in whom the purpose of the book is achieved, who through this gospel believe that jesus is the christ, the son of god, and believing have life in his name. john : . . traditional time and place and plan the tradition about the fourth gospel is not confined to the bare fact of johannine authorship; it has preserved certain other very interesting information. (= =) =the ephesian residence.=--for example, tradition represents the fourth gospel as written after the other three gospels and at ephesus. the evidence for the ephesian residence of the apostle john is singularly abundant and weighty; and the contrary evidence which has been thought to attest an early death of john is exceedingly weak. at first, john, like the others of the original apostles, remained in palestine. he appears in jerusalem a little before a. d. at the apostolic council. gal. : . at some subsequent time, perhaps at the outbreak of the jewish war in a. d. , he journeyed to asia minor and there for many years was the revered head of the church. he lived indeed until the reign of trajan, which began in a. d. . (= =) =the gospel of john supplementary to the synoptic gospels.=--according to tradition, the gospel of john was not only written after the synoptic gospels, but was intended to be supplementary to them. this information is amply confirmed by the gospel itself. evidently john presupposes on the part of his readers a knowledge of the synoptic account. this explains his peculiar choice of material--for example, his omission of most of the galilean ministry, and of such events as the baptism and the institution of the lord's supper. it explains also, for example, a verse like john : : "for john was not yet cast into prison." the synoptic gospels begin their account of the ministry of jesus with what happened after the imprisonment of john the baptist. mark : . readers of mark might even receive the impression that jesus had not begun his teaching till after that time. john corrects any such impression in ch. : . if, then, the gospel of john is intended not to compete with the synoptic gospels, but to supplement them, in what direction does the supplementing move? what is it that john adds to what had already been told? here, again, tradition affords us useful hints. eusebius, in the early part of the fourth century, writes as follows (church history, iii, , - , translated by mcgiffert, in "nicene and post-nicene fathers," second series, vol. i, p. ): "and when mark and luke had already published their gospels, they say that john, who had employed all his time in proclaiming the gospel orally, finally proceeded to write for the following reason. the three gospels already mentioned [matthew, mark and luke] having come into the hands of all and into his own too, they say that he accepted them and bore witness to their truthfulness; but that there was lacking in them an account of the deeds done by christ at the beginning of his ministry. and this indeed is true. for it is evident that the three evangelists recorded only the deeds done by the saviour for one year after the imprisonment of john the baptist, and indicated this in the beginning of their account. for matthew, after the forty days' fast and the temptation which followed it, indicates the chronology of his work when he says: 'now when he heard that john was delivered up he withdrew from judea into galilee.' mark likewise says: 'now after that john was delivered up jesus came into galilee.' and luke, before commencing his account of the deeds of jesus, similarly marks the time, when he says that herod, 'adding to all the evil deeds which he had done, shut up john in prison.' they say, therefore, that the apostle john, being asked to do it for this reason, gave in his gospel an account of the period which had been omitted by the earlier evangelists, and of the deeds done by the saviour during that period; that is, of those which were done before the imprisonment of the baptist. and this is indicated by him, they say, in the following words: 'this beginning of miracles did jesus'; and again when he refers to the baptist, in the midst of the deeds of jesus, as still baptizing in Ã�non near salim; where he states the matter clearly in the words: 'for john was not yet cast into prison.' john accordingly, in his gospel, records the deeds of christ which were performed before the baptist was cast into prison, but the other three evangelists mention the events which happened after that time. one who understands this can no longer think that the gospels are at variance with one another, inasmuch as the gospel according to john contains the first acts of christ, while the others give an account of the latter part of his life. and the genealogy of our saviour according to the flesh john quite naturally omitted, because it had been already given by matthew and luke, and began with the doctrine of his divinity, which had, as it were, been reserved for him, as their superior, by the divine spirit." according to eusebius, then, john intended to treat the time before the imprisonment of the baptist as the synoptists treated the time after that event. we have already noted the element of truth in this observation. of course it is not the only observation that needs to be made. much of what john narrates occurred after the imprisonment of the baptist. according to clement of alexandria, of the close of the second century, who here reports what had been said by his predecessors in alexandria, john, seeing that "bodily" matters had been treated by the synoptists, supplemented their work by writing a "spiritual" gospel. in this testimony also there is no doubt an element of truth. it is true that the fourth gospel reproduces certain profound elements in the teaching of jesus which in the earlier gospels appear only incidentally. the oral tradition which forms the chief basis of the synoptic gospels was rooted deep in the earliest missionary activity of the church. especially, perhaps, in the gospel of mark, but also in matthew and luke, we have for the most part those facts about jesus and those elements of his teaching which could appeal at once to simple-minded believers or to outsiders. the gospel of john, on the other hand, drawing, like the others, from the rich store of jesus' teaching and jesus' person, has revealed yet deeper mysteries. in this profound book, we have the recollections of a beloved disciple, at first understood only imperfectly by the apostle himself, but rendered ever clearer by advancing experience, and firmly fixed by being often repeated in the author's oral instruction of the church. * * * * * in the library.--davis, "dictionary of the bible," article on "john" ( ): purves, article on "john, gospel according to st." m'clymont, "the new testament and its writers," pp. - . stevens and burton, "a harmony of the gospels." westcott, "the gospel according to st. john: the authorized version with introduction and notes." "the cambridge bible for schools": plummer, "the gospel according to st. john." browning, "a death in the desert" (vol. iv, pp. - of the riverside edition). zahn, "introduction to the new testament," vol. iii, pp. - . the last-named work is intended primarily for those who have some knowledge of greek, but can also be used by others. lesson xxxi the jesus of the gospels it is possible to speak of "the jesus of the gospels" only if the gospels are in essential agreement. if the features of the four portraits are so different that they never could have been united really in the same person, then there is no such thing as a jesus of the gospels, but only a jesus of matthew and a jesus of mark and a jesus of luke and a jesus of john. . agreement among the synoptists among the synoptic gospels, at any rate, no such difference exists. though every one of these gospels possesses its own characteristics, the peculiarities are almost negligible in comparison with the underlying unity. there is certainly such a thing as "the synoptic jesus." his words and deeds are narrated in each of the gospels in a different selection and in a different style, but the characteristic features are everywhere the same. . the synoptists and john with regard to the fourth gospel, the matter is not quite so plain. the contrast between the synoptists and john has already been noticed. it forces itself upon even the most casual reader. difference, however, is not necessarily contradiction. it may be due to a difference in the point of view. both the synoptists and john give a true picture of jesus; the same features appear very different when viewed from different angles. . divinity and humanity at any rate, if there is a contradiction between the first three gospels and the gospel of john, the contradiction is by no means easy to formulate. it cannot be said, for example, simply that the synoptists present a human jesus and john a divine jesus. whatever the differences among the four gospels, all four agree at least in two essential features. all four present jesus, in the first place as a man, and in the second place as something more than a man. (= =) =humanity in the synoptists.=--the former feature is perhaps especially clear in the synoptists. according to the first three gospels, jesus led a genuine human life from birth to death. as a child he grew not only in stature, but also in wisdom. he was subject to human parents and to the requirements of the jewish law. even after the inauguration of his ministry the human conditions of his life were not superseded. he was even tempted like other men. he grew weary and slept. he suffered hunger and thirst. he could rejoice and he could suffer sorrow. he prayed, like other men, and worshiped god. he needed strengthening both for body and for mind. no mere semblance of a human life is here presented, but a genuine man of flesh and blood. (= =) =humanity in john.=--but if the jesus of the synoptists is a true man, how is it with the jesus of john? does the fourth gospel present merely a heavenly being who walked through the world untouched and unruffled by the sin and misery and weakness that surrounded him? only a very superficial reading can produce such an impression. the fourth gospel indeed lays a supreme emphasis upon the majesty of jesus, upon his "glory" as it was manifested in works of power and attested by god himself. but side by side with these features of the narrative, as though to prevent a possible misunderstanding, the author presents the humanity of jesus with drastic touches that can scarcely be paralleled in the synoptists themselves. it is john who speaks of the weariness of jesus at the well of samaria, ch. : ; of the human affection which he felt for lazarus and martha and mary, ch. : , , , and for an individual among the disciples, ch. : ; of his weeping, ch. : ; and indignant groaning, v. ; and of his deadly thirst. ch. : . as clearly as the other evangelists john presents jesus as a man. (= =) =divinity in john.=--in the second place, all four gospels, if they present jesus as a man, also present him as something far more than a man. with regard to the gospel of john, of course the matter is unmistakable. the very first verse reads: "in the beginning was the word, and the word was with god, and the word was god." jesus according to john was plainly no product of the world, but god come in the flesh. john : . the teaching of jesus himself, as it is reported in the fourth gospel, is concerned with the relation of perfect unity that exists between the father and the son. (= =) =divinity in the synoptists.=--in the synoptists the supernatural character of jesus is somewhat less on the surface. his teaching, as the synoptists report it, is largely concerned not directly with his own person, but with the kingdom that he came to found. even his messiahship is often kept in the background; the demons are often commanded not to reveal it. a closer examination, however, reveals the essential unity between the synoptists and john. if the supernatural character of jesus appears in the synoptists less plainly on the surface, it is really no less pervasive at the center. it does not so often form the subject of direct exposition, but it is everywhere presupposed. the doing by jesus of what only god can do, mark : , ; the sovereign way in which he legislates for the kingdom of god, matt. : - ; his unearthly holiness and complete lack of any consciousness of sin; the boundlessness of his demand for obedience, luke : - ; his expected freedom from limitations of time and place, matt. : ; the absolutely central place which he claims for himself as ruler and judge; the substantiation of all his lofty claims by wonderful power over the forces of nature--these are only indications chosen almost at random of what is really plain upon every page of the synoptic gospels, that the jesus who is there described is no mere human figure but a divine saviour of the world. the invitation of matt. : - , which is typical of the synoptic teaching, would have been absurd on the lips of anyone but the son of god. moreover, the divine nature of jesus is not merely implied in the synoptic gospels; there are times when it even becomes explicit. the relation of perfect mutual knowledge that exists between jesus and the father, matt. : , reveals a perfect unity of nature. the jesus of the synoptists, as well as the jesus of john, might say, "i and the father are one." . the manner of jesus' teaching the synoptic gospels, therefore, imply everywhere exactly the same jesus who is more expressly presented in the gospel of john. if, then, there is a contradiction between the synoptists and john, it can be concerned only with the manner of jesus' teaching. the synoptists as well as john present jesus as a supernatural person, it is said, but unlike john they represent him as keeping his own person in the background. even here, however, maturer consideration shows that the difference does not amount to anything like contradiction. may not the same person have spoken the discourses of the fourth gospel and also those of the synoptists? it must be remembered that the ministry of jesus was varied, and that the first three evangelists confine themselves almost exclusively to one phase of it. in the public galilean ministry, which the synoptists describe, it was necessary for jesus to keep even his messiahship for a time in the background. publication of it, owing to the false political conception which the jews had of the messiah's work, would have been fatal to jesus' plan. here, as so often, the fourth gospel explains the other three. after the feeding of the five thousand, john tells us, the crowd wanted to take jesus by force and make him a king. john : . popularity was dangerous. jesus could not proclaim himself publicly as the messiah, until by explaining the spiritual nature of the kingdom he had prepared the people for the kind of messiah which it was his mission to be. of course, it is difficult for us to understand at every point just why jesus acted as he did. all that we are now maintaining is that the considerations just adduced, and others like them, show that it is perfectly conceivable that jesus, before his intimate disciples and in jerusalem and at a special crisis, john, ch. , adopted a method of teaching which in the greater part of the galilean ministry he considered out of place. there is room in a true narrative of jesus' life both for the synoptists and for john. . the comprehensiveness of jesus jesus was many-sided. he was lawgiver, he was teacher, he was healer, he was ruler, he was saviour. he was man and he was god. the gospels have presented him in the richness of his mysterious person. modern historians are less comprehensive. they have been offended at the manifoldness of the gospel picture. they have endeavored to reduce jesus to the level of what they can comprehend. but their effort has been a failure. after the supposed contradictions have been removed, greater contradictions remain; and the resulting figure is at any rate too small to account for the origin of christianity. the partial jesus of modern criticism, despite his comparative littleness, is a monstrosity; the comprehensive jesus of the gospels, though mysterious, is a self-evidencing and life-giving fact. * * * * * in the library.--davis, "dictionary of the bible": purves, article on "jesus christ." warfield, "the lord of glory," pp. - . robertson, "epochs in the life of jesus." stalker, "the life of jesus christ." denney, "jesus and the gospel." andrews, "the life of our lord." lesson xxxii a document of the jerusalem church the epistle of james . the christianity of james the epistle of james has been called the least christian book in the new testament. superficially this judgment is true. the name of jesus occurs only twice in the epistle, james : ; : , and there is no specific reference to his life and death and resurrection. a close examination, however, reverses the first impression. (= =) =james and the synoptic discourses.=--in the first place, the ethical teaching of james is permeated by the spirit of jesus. even the form of the epistle displays a marked affinity for the discourses of the synoptic gospels, and the affinity in content is even more apparent. many striking parallels could be cited; but what is more convincing than such details is the indefinable spirit of the whole. the way in which james treats the covetousness, the pride, the heartlessness, the formalism, the pettiness and the meanness of his readers, is strikingly similar to the way in which his master dealt with the pharisees. james does not indeed actually cite the words of jesus; but the absence of citations makes the underlying similarity all the more significant. the writer of this epistle did not live at a time when the knowledge of the words of jesus was derived from books; rather he had himself listened to the master--even though he was not at first a disciple--and was living in a community where the impression of jesus' teaching and jesus' person was still fresh in the memory of those who had known him on earth. (= =) =james and christian doctrine.=--in the second place, moreover, the christianity of james is religious as well as ethical. of course it could not be like the teaching of jesus if it were merely ethical; for everything that jesus taught even about the simplest matters of human conduct was determined by the thought of the heavenly father and by the significance of his own person. but by the religious character of the epistle of james even more than this is meant. like all the writers of the new testament james was well aware of the saving significance of jesus' death and resurrection. for him as well as for the others, jesus was lord, ch. : , and a lord who was possessed of a heavenly glory. ch. : . james, as well as the others, was waiting for the second coming of christ. ch. : . he does not directly refer to the saving events that form the substance of christian faith; but he takes them everywhere for granted. the word of truth through which the disciples have been formed by god, ch. : , the implanted word, v. , that needs ever to be received anew, can hardly be anything else than the apostolic gospel as it was proclaimed in the earliest speeches of peter which are recorded in the acts, and as it found its rich unfolding in the teaching of paul. just because that gospel in our epistle is presupposed, it does not need to be expounded in detail. the men to whom james was writing were not lacking in orthodoxy. if they had been, he would have set them right, and we should have had another exposition of the gospel. as a matter of fact their fault was in practice, not in theory; and it is in the sphere of practice that they are met by james. the epistle would be insufficient if it stood alone. it does not lay the foundation of christian faith. but it shows how, upon that foundation, may be built not the wood, hay and stubble of a wordy orthodoxy, but the gold and silver and precious stones of an honest christian life. this epistle, then, might be misleading if taken by itself; but it becomes salutary if it is understood in its historical connections. far from disparaging christian doctrine--as the modern church is tempted to suppose--it builds upon doctrine. in that it agrees with the whole of the bible. christianity, as has been finely said, is a life only because it is a doctrine. only the great saving events of the gospel have rendered possible a life like that which is described in the epistle of james. and where the gospel is really accepted with heart as well as mind, that life of love will always follow. . date and authenticity of the epistle the view which will be held about the date of the epistle of james will depend very largely upon the interpretation of the passage about faith and works. james : - . in that passage, some of the same terms appear as are prominent in connection with the great judaistic controversy in which paul was engaged from the time of the apostolic council to the time of the third missionary journey. three views have been held with regard to the date of the epistle of james. the epistle may be regarded as written ( ) before the judaistic controversy arose, ( ) during that controversy or while it was still fresh in men's minds, or ( ) long after the controversy had been settled. (= =) =the intermediate date.=--the second of these three views may be eliminated first. this intermediate view has the advantage of placing the epistle within the lifetime of james. it can treat the epistle as authentic. it has furthermore the advantage of explaining the coincidences between james : - and rom., ch. . for if the epistle was written at the very close of the lifetime of james--say about a. d. , or, following hegesippus, a. d. --the author may have become acquainted with the epistle to the romans. but the difficulties of this view far overbalance the advantages. if james was writing with galatians and romans before him, then apparently in ch. : he intends to contradict those epistles. as a matter of fact, however, as is shown in the student's text book, he does not really contradict them, but is in perfect harmony with them. he has therefore gone out of his way in order to introduce a formal contradiction of the great apostle to the gentiles although there is no real contradiction of meaning at all! what could he possibly gain by such useless trouble-making? if james really wanted to combat paul's doctrine of justification by faith, he would have done so very differently; and if he did not want to combat it, he would certainly not have uselessly created the appearance of doing so. perhaps, however, james : - is a refutation not of paul but of a misunderstanding of paul. this also is very improbable. if the passage was a refutation not of paul but of a misunderstanding of paul, why did james not say so? why did he not distinguish paul clearly from his misinterpreters? instead he has indulged uselessly in a formal contradiction of paul, and has in refutation of a misunderstanding of paul not even used the abundant materials which paul himself could offer! and where was such a misunderstanding of paul possible in jewish christian circles of a. d. ? what makes every form of this intermediate dating impossible is the total absence from the epistle of any reference to the question of the conditions upon which gentiles were to be received into the church. in a. d. this question had recently been the subject of bitter controversy. at that time no one could have touched upon the closely related topic of faith and works as james does and yet have ignored so completely the controversial question. evidently, therefore, the epistle was written either before the judaistic controversy arose or else long after it was over. (= =) =the late date.=--the latter view makes the epistle a pseudonymous work--it assumes that an unknown author has here tried to enhance the influence of his work by putting it under the name of the first head of the jerusalem church. this is of itself sufficient to refute the late dating. for the procedure of the supposed falsifier is quite incomprehensible. he has chosen james as the alleged author only because of the lofty position which james held, and yet he has designated him in the first verse merely as a simple christian! the procedure of real forgers is very different. there are also, however, other objections to the late dating. would any writer in the second century, when the authority of paul was well established, have ventured to introduce such an apparent contradiction of paul as appears in james : ? in a writer of a. d. we should have had formal agreement with paul and material disagreement; in the epistle of james we have formal disagreement and material harmony. apparent contradiction of expression combined with perfect unity of thought is a sure sign of independence. the epistle of james has made no use of the epistles of paul. against this conclusion may be urged only the coincidence that james and paul both use the example of abraham, and cite the same verse, gen. : , with regard to him. but it must be remembered that to every jew abraham offered the most obvious example in all the scriptures. it is possible, too, that the faith and works of abraham had in pre-christian jewish circles already been the subject of controversy. furthermore, james does not confine himself to abraham, but introduces rahab also, who is not mentioned by paul. the coincidence between paul and james is quite insufficient to overbalance the clear evidence of independence. (= =) =the early date.=--only one hypothesis, then, suits the facts. the epistle of james was clearly written before the judaistic controversy became acute at the time of the apostolic council. in the second chapter of the epistle, james has used the same terms that became prominent in that controversy, but he has used them in refuting a practical, not a theoretical, error--an error that is related only indirectly to the great subject of galatians and romans. . underlying unity of the epistle at first sight the epistle of james seems to possess very little unity. topic follows topic often with little apparent connection. but the connection between the individual sections is closer than appears at first; and the epistle as a whole possesses at least a perfect unity of spirit. (= =) =reality in religion.=--the ruling tone of the epistle, which may be detected beneath all the varying exhortations, is a certain manly honesty, a certain fierce hatred of all sham and cant and humbug and meanness. james is a stern advocate of a practical religion. (= =) =supremacy of religion.=--it must be noticed, however, that the religion of this writer is none the less religious because it is practical. james is no advocate of a "gospel of street-cleaning." on the contrary he insists with characteristic vehemence upon personal piety. the same writer who has been regarded as emphasizing works at the expense of faith, who might be hailed as a leader of those who would make religion terminate upon man rather than god, who might be thought to disparage everything but "social service"--this same writer is one of the most earnest advocates of prayer. james : - ; : , ; : - . this apostle of works, this supposed disparager of faith, is almost bitter in his denunciation of unbelief! ch. : - . god, not man, according to james, is the author of every perfect gift. v. . prayer is the remedy both for bodily and for spiritual ills. ch. : - . james lends no countenance to the modern disparagement of religious devotion. the same uncompromising severity with which he lashes an inactive religion is also applied just as mercilessly to an irreligious activity. ch. : - . james does not attack religion in the interests of reality; he attacks unreality in the interests of religion. . contents of the epistle the opening of the epistle, like that of the letters contained in acts : - ; : - , is constructed according to the regular greek form. after the opening, james speaks first of trials or temptations. rightly used they will lead to perfection. if, however, there is still imperfection, it can be removed by prayer to god. the imperfection which is here especially in view is an imperfection in wisdom. apparently the readers, like the pharisees, had laid an excessive stress upon knowledge. the true wisdom, says james, can be obtained not by human pride, as the readers seem to think, but only by prayer. prayer, however, must be in faith--there must be no wavering in it. pride, indeed, is altogether blameworthy. if there is to be boasting, it should certainly be not in earthly wealth but in those spiritual blessings which often reverse earthly distinctions. returning to the subject of temptations, james insists that in their evil they do not come from god, but from the depths of man's own desires. from god comes no evil thing, but every perfect gift; and in the gospel god has bestowed upon us his richest blessing. that gospel must be received with all diligence. it will exclude wrath and insincerity. true religion consists not merely in hearing but in doing; good examples of the exercise of it are the visitation of the fatherless and widows and the preservation of one's own personal purity of life. faith in christ, james continues in similar vein, excludes all undue respect of persons. indeed god in his choice of those who should be saved has especially favored the poor. the rich as a class are rather the oppressors of the christians. surely then the christians should not favor rich men for selfish reasons. the law of love will exclude all such unworthy conduct. that law of love requires an active life. faith, if it be true faith, leads to works. away with a miserable faith that is expressed only in words! words, indeed, are dangerous. the tongue is a prolific source of harm. evil speech reveals the deep-seated corruption of the heart. the readers must be careful, therefore, about seeking the work of a teacher. the true wisdom, which fits a man to teach, is not of man's acquiring, but comes from god. quarreling--which was produced especially by the inordinate ambition among the readers to pose as teachers--must be counteracted by submission to god. the constant thought of god excludes all pride in human planning. especially the rich must reflect upon the transitoriness of earthly possessions and above all must be sure that their wealth is honestly gained. finally, patient waiting for the lord, the example of the old testament saints, and the earnest practice of prayer will make effective all the exhortations of the epistle. * * * * * in the library.--purves, "christianity in the apostolic age," pp. - . davis, "dictionary of the bible": warfield, articles on "james" and "james, epistle of." m'clymont, "the new testament and its writers," pp. - . knowling, "the epistle of st. james." "the cambridge bible for schools": plumptre, "the general epistle of st. james." zahn, "introduction to the new testament," vol. i, pp. - . the last-named work is intended primarily for those who have some knowledge of greek, but can also be used by others. lesson xxxiii jesus the fulfillment of the old testament the epistle to the hebrews . paul not the author (= =) =the tradition.=--at alexandria in the latter part of the second century paul was thought to be the author of the epistle to the hebrews; but in north africa a little later tertullian attributed the epistle to barnabas, and in other portions of the church the pauline authorship was certainly not accepted. in the west, the pauline authorship was long denied and the inclusion of the epistle in the new testament resisted. at last the alexandrian view won universal acceptance. the epistle to the hebrews became an accepted part of the new testament, and was attributed to paul. clement of alexandria, who had apparently received the tradition of pauline authorship from pantænus, his predecessor, himself declares that hebrews was written by paul in the "hebrew" (aramaic) language, and was translated by luke into greek. the notion of a translation by luke was based upon no genuine historical tradition--hebrews is certainly an original greek work--but was simply an hypothesis constructed to explain the peculiarities of the epistle on the supposition that it was a work of paul. (= =) =the value of the tradition.=--the tradition of pauline authorship is clearly very weak. if paul had been the author, it is hard to see why the memory of the fact should have been lost so generally in the church. no one in the early period had any objection to the epistle; on the contrary it was very highly regarded. if, then, it had really been written by paul, the pauline authorship would have been accepted everywhere with avidity. the negative testimony of the roman church is particularly significant. the epistle was quoted by clement of rome at about a. d. ; yet at rome as elsewhere in the west the epistle seems never in the early period to have been regarded as pauline. in other words, just where acquaintance with the epistle can be traced farthest back, the denial of pauline authorship seems to have been most insistent. if clement of rome had regarded paul as the author, the history of roman opinion about the epistle would have been very different. on the other hand, on the supposition that there was originally no tradition of pauline authorship, the subsequent prevalence of such a tradition is easily explained. it was due simply to the evident apostolic authority of the epistle itself. from the start, hebrews was felt to be an authoritative work. being authoritative, it would be collected along with other authoritative works. since it was an epistle, and exhibited a certain pauline quality of spirit and subject, it would naturally be associated with the other works of the greatest letter writer of the apostolic age. being thus included in a collection of the pauline epistles, and being regarded as of apostolic authority, what was more natural than to attribute it to the apostle paul? such, very possibly, was the origin of the alexandrian tradition. this tradition did not win immediate acceptance, because the rest of the church was still aware that the epistle was not written by paul. what led to the final conquest of the pauline tradition was simply the character of the book itself. the question of pauline authorship, in the case of this book, became connected with the question of apostolic authority. the church had to choose between rejecting the book altogether, and accepting it as pauline. when she finally adopted the latter alternative, undoubtedly she chose the lesser error. it was an error to regard the epistle as the work of paul; but it would have been a far greater error to exclude it from the new testament. as a matter of fact, though the book was not written by paul, it was written, if not by one of the other apostles, at least by an "apostolic man" like mark or luke. scarcely any book of the new testament bears clearer marks of true apostolicity. (= =) =internal evidence.=--the argument against pauline authorship which is derived from tradition is strongly supported by the contents of the epistle itself. in the first place, it is exceedingly doubtful whether paul could have spoken of himself as having had the christian salvation confirmed to him by those who had heard the lord. heb. : . knowledge of the earthly life of jesus was indeed conveyed to paul by ordinary word of mouth from the eyewitnesses; but the gospel itself, as he insists with vehemence in galatians, was revealed to him directly by christ. in the second place, the style of the epistle is very different from that of paul, being, as we shall see, far more carefully wrought. in the third place, the thoughts developed in hebrews, though undoubtedly they are in perfect harmony with the pauline epistles, are by no means characteristically pauline. it is a little hard to understand, for example, how paul could have written at such length about the law without speaking of justification by faith or the reception of gentiles into the church. this last argument, however, must not be exaggerated. undoubtedly paul would have agreed heartily to everything that hebrews contains. paul and the author of this epistle have developed merely somewhat different sides of the same great truth. . who was the author? if paul did not write the epistle to the hebrews, who did write it? prodigious labor has been expended upon this question, but with very little result. in ancient times, barnabas, luke and clement of rome, were each regarded as the author. of these three views the first is most probable; the second is exceedingly unlikely; and the last is clearly impossible. whoever wrote the epistle, clement certainly did not. the letter which we possess from his pen is immeasurably inferior to the apostolic writings to which hebrews certainly belongs. clement was a humble reader of hebrews, not the author of it. luther was inclined to regard apollos as the possible author of hebrews; and of all the many suggestions that have been made, this is perhaps the best. undoubtedly the circumstances and training of apollos were in a number of respects like those which might naturally be attributed to the author of the epistle. apollos was closely associated with paul, and perhaps at a later time with others of the apostles, just as might be expected of the author of an apostolic work such as hebrews. on the other hand, like the author of the epistle, he was not an eyewitness of the life of jesus. compare heb. : . like the author of the epistle he was no doubt acquainted with timothy. compare ch. : . he was an "eloquent" or "learned" man, acts : , who might well have produced the splendid rhetoric of the epistle. he was a jew and mighty in the scriptures, as was also the author of hebrews. he was a native of alexandria, the university city of the period, and the seat of a large jewish community, where just that combination of greek rhetorical training with scriptural knowledge which is exhibited in the epistle is most naturally to be sought. these indications, however, can merely show that apollos might conceivably have written the epistle; they do not show that he did write it. the authorship of this powerful work will always remain uncertain. how little we know, after all, of the abounding life of the apostolic church! . where were the readers? in the student's text book, it has been shown that the readers of the epistle were probably members of some rather narrowly circumscribed community. where this community was is by no means clear. the one indication of place which the epistle contains is ambiguous. in ch. : it is said, "they of italy salute you." these words may mean that the author is in italy and sends greetings from the christians of that country, or they may mean that the author is outside of italy and sends greetings from italian christians who happened to be with him. in the latter case, probably the readers were in italy; for otherwise they would have no special interest in the italian christians. all that we can say is then that the epistle was probably written either from italy or to italy. if it was written from italy, then since the readers were jews, it is natural to seek them in palestine. the palestinian christians were "hebrews" in the narrower, linguistic sense of the word, as well as in the broader, national sense. the ancient heading of the epistle thus comes to its full rights. on the other hand the palestinian hypothesis faces some rather grave difficulties. if the readers are to be sought in italy, then perhaps they formed a jewish christian community in rome or in some other italian city. the question cannot be settled with any certainty. the destination of the epistle is an even greater riddle than the authorship. . when was the epistle written? the epistle to the hebrews was certainly written before a. d. , for at about that time it was quoted by clement of rome. the mention of timothy in ch. : perhaps does not carry us much farther, for timothy, who was a grown man at about a. d. , acts : - , may have lived till the end of the first century. the epistle, however, does not bear any of the marks of late origin. the question of date is closely connected with the question whether in the epistle the temple at jerusalem is regarded as still standing. this question cannot be settled with certainty. but on the whole the continuance of the levitical ceremonies seems to be assumed in the epistle, and at any rate there is no clear reference to their cessation. probably therefore the epistle to the hebrews was written before the destruction of jerusalem in a. d. . . hebrews a literary work the epistle to the hebrews is a product of conscious literary art. the rhetoric of paul is unconscious; even such passages as the first few chapters of first corinthians or the eighth chapter of romans may have been composed with the utmost rapidity. the author of hebrews probably went differently to work. such sentences as heb. : - , even in an inspired writer, can only be the result of diligent labor. by long practice the writer of hebrews had acquired that feeling for rhythm and balance of phrase, that facility in the construction of smooth-flowing periods, which give to his epistle its distinctive quality among the new testament books. greek rhetoric of the hellenistic age, freed from its hollow artificiality, is here laid under contribution for the saviour's praise. the presence of such a book in the new testament is highly salutary. devout christians in their enthusiasm for the simplicity of the gospel are sometimes in danger of becoming one-sided. they are sometimes inclined to confuse simplicity with ugliness, and then to prize ugliness for its own sake. it is perfectly true that the value of the gospel is quite independent of æsthetic niceties, and that the language of the new testament is for the most part very simple. but it is not true that the simplicity of the new testament has anything in common with the bad taste of some modern phraseology, or that eloquence is of itself evil. the epistle to the hebrews shows by a noble example that there is such a thing as christian art. the majestic sentences of this ancient masterpiece, with their exquisite clearness and liturgic rhythm and uplifting power, have contributed inestimably to the christian conception of the saviour. the art of hebrews is not art for art's sake, but art for the sake of christ. literary perfection is here combined with profound genuineness and apostolic fervor; art is here ennobled by consecration. * * * * * in the library.--purves, "christianity in the apostolic age," pp. , , - , - . davis, "dictionary of the bible": purves, article on "hebrews, epistle to the." m'clymont, "the new testament and its writers," pp. - . ellicott, "a new testament commentary for english readers," vol. iii, pp. - : moulton, "the epistle of paul the apostle to the hebrews." westcott, "the epistle to the hebrews." zahn, "introduction to the new testament," vol. ii, pp. - . the two last-named works are intended primarily for those who have some knowledge of greek, but can also be used by others. lesson xxxiv christian fortitude the first epistle of peter . separation from the world the first epistle of peter is the epistle of separateness. the modern church is in grave danger of forgetting the distinctiveness of her gospel and the glorious isolation of her position. she is too often content to be merely one factor in civilization, a means of improving the world instead of the instrument in creating a new world. the first readers of the epistle were subject to a similar danger, though it arose from a somewhat different cause. to-day we are no longer subject to persecution; but the danger is fundamentally the same. the world's friendship may be even more disastrous than the world's hatred. the readers of first peter were tempted to relinquish what was distinctive in their faith in order to avoid the hostility of their heathen neighbors; we are tempted to do the same thing because the superficial respectability of modern life has put a gloss of polite convention over the profound differences that divide the inner lives of men. we, as well as the first readers of the epistle, need to be told that this world is lost in sin, that the blood of christ has ransomed an elect race from the city of destruction, that the high privileges of the christian calling demand spotless purity and unswerving courage. (= =) =the character of the persecution.=--the character of the persecution to which the readers of the epistle were subjected cannot be determined with perfect clearness. it is not even certain that the christian profession in itself was regarded officially as a crime. apparently charges of positive misconduct were needed to give countenance to the persecutors. i peter : . the christians needed to be warned that there is no heroism in suffering if the suffering is the just punishment of misdeeds. chs. : ; : . what particular charges were brought against the christians it is of course difficult to determine. perhaps they were sometimes charged with gross crimes such as murder or theft. but a more frequent accusation was probably "hatred of the human race," or the like. the christians were thought to be busybodies. in setting the world to rights they seemed to meddle in other people's affairs. in claiming to be citizens of a heavenly kingdom, they seemed indifferent or hostile to earthly relationships. as subjects of the emperor and of his representatives, the christians were thought to be disloyal; as slaves, they seemed disobedient. (= =) =duties of earthly life.=--in view of these accusations, peter urges his readers to avoid all improper employment of their christian freedom. christian freedom does not mean license; christian independence does not mean indifference. there is no reason why a good christian should be a bad citizen, even of a heathen state, ch. : - , or an unprofitable servant, even of a harsh master, vs. - , or a quarrelsome wife, even of an unconverted husband. ch. : - . on the contrary, christians must approve themselves not only in the spiritual realm, but also in the ordinary relationships of this life. (= =) =application to modern conditions.=--here again the lesson is important for the present day. now as always fervent realization of the transcendent glory of christianity tends sometimes to result in depreciation of ordinary duties. men of exceptional piety sometimes seem to feel that civilization is unworthy of their attention, even if it is not actually a work of satan. of all such vagaries the first epistle of peter is the best corrective. truth is here admirably guarded against the error that lurks at its root. the very epistle that emphasizes the separateness of the church from the world, that teaches christian people to look down upon earthly affairs from the vantage ground of heaven, is just the epistle that inculcates sober and diligent conduct in the various relationships of earthly life. in the effort at a higher morality, the simple, humble virtues that even the world appreciates should not be neglected; piety should involve no loss of common sense. now as always the christian should be ready to give a reason for the faith that is in him; now as always he should be able to refute the slanders of the world; now as always he should commend his christianity by his good citizenship. only so will the example of christ be fully followed. jesus was in possession of a transcendent message; but he lived the life of a normal man. the christian, too, is a man with a divine mission; but like his master he must exercise his mission in the turmoil of life. he must not be a spoilsport at feasts; his is no desert rôle like john the baptist's. christianity has a mission from without; but its mission is fulfilled in loving contact with the world of men. (= =) =the christian's defense.=--the christians who suffered persecution should first of all, according to peter, defend themselves to the very best of their ability. they should do their best to remove dishonor from the name of christ. they should show the baselessness of the accusations which are brought against them. then, if they still suffer, it will be clearly suffering for christ's sake. such suffering is glorious. it is a test from which faith emerges strong and sure, ch. : ; it is true conformity to the example of christ. chs. : - ; : ; : , . . the date of the persecutions from the persecutions presupposed in first peter no very certain conclusion can be drawn with regard to the date of the epistle. a late date has sometimes been inferred from such passages as i peter : . christians were not punished as christians, it is said, until the beginning of the second century, and especially no such persecution was carried out in the early period throughout the whole empire. ch. : . this argument breaks down at a number of points. in the first place, as has already been observed, it is by no means clear that first peter presupposes a persecution of the christians simply as christians. apparently special charges of immorality were still in the foreground, though these charges were often mere pretexts in order to secure the punishment of members of the hated sect. in the second place, it is not clear exactly when christians first began to be punished as "christians" by the roman authorities. undoubtedly the legal basis for such persecution was present as soon as christianity began to be regarded as separate from judaism. judaism had a legal status; christianity, strictly speaking, had none. . dependence and originality first peter is clearly dependent upon a number of the pauline epistles, and apparently also upon the epistle of james. the dependence, however, is by no means slavish; the epistle possesses marked characteristics of its own. as compared with paul, for example, first peter is somewhat simpler both in thought and in expression. no mere imitator, but a genuine personality, speaks to us from the noble simplicity of these pages. . comparison with the speeches of peter it is interesting to compare this epistle with the early speeches of peter that are recorded in the acts. part of the difference--similarities also have been pointed out--no doubt, was due to the difference in the persons addressed. in those early speeches, peter was preaching to unconverted jews, and had to content himself with a few outstanding facts. in the epistle, he was addressing christians, before whom he could lay bare the deep things of the faith. nevertheless, the passing years had brought a change in peter himself. upon him as upon everyone else the mighty influence of paul made itself felt; and even the revelation which came directly to him was progressive. the essence of the gospel was present from the beginning; but the rich unfolding of it which appears in first peter was the product of long years spent in an ever-widening service. . the style of the epistle the style of first peter, though not at all rhetorical, like that of hebrews, is smooth and graceful. it has often been considered strange that a fisherman of galilee should have been so proficient in greek. but probably we have an exaggerated notion of the poverty and roughness of the first disciples of jesus. undoubtedly they had not enjoyed a rabbinical education; in the technical jewish sense they were "unlearned and ignorant men." acts : . nevertheless, they clearly did not belong at all to the lowest of the population; peter in particular seems to have been possessed of considerable property. furthermore, it must be remembered that greek culture in the first century was making itself felt very extensively in galilee. no doubt peter could use greek even before he left galilee, and in the course of his later life his linguistic attainments must have been very greatly improved. it is by no means impossible that he wrote first peter entirely without assistance. . silvanus in order, however, to account for the linguistic excellence of this epistle, and in particular for the striking difference between it and second peter, a rather attractive hypothesis has been proposed. in i peter : , peter says: "by silvanus, our faithful brother, as i account him, i have written unto you briefly." undoubtedly these words may designate silvanus merely as the messenger who carried the letter to its destination. compare acts : . it is also possible, however, that peter meant to say that silvanus had written the letter under his direction. in that case the thought would be due altogether to peter; but the form, to some extent at least, would be the work of silvanus. the hypothesis, of course, is only plausible, not necessary. there are other ways of accounting for the peculiarities of the epistle. in all probability, the silvanus of first peter is the same as the silvanus of the pauline epistles and the silas of the acts. if so, his association with peter is altogether natural; he was originally a member of the jerusalem church. if, in accordance with the hypothesis which has just been mentioned, silvanus was really concerned in the composition of the epistle, the choice of such a man for the task was, as has been pointed out by the chief advocate of the hypothesis, exceedingly wise. silvanus, who had been a companion of paul and his associate in founding many of the churches of asia minor, would be just the man who could find the right tone in writing to the churches to which the epistle is addressed. . mark the appearance of mark in i peter : confirms the strong tradition which makes mark a disciple of peter and associates him with peter in the production of the second gospel. the only two individuals whom peter mentions in his first epistle were both natives of jerusalem, and both, during part of their lives, companions of paul. the unity of the apostolic church was preserved not only by a unity of spirit, but also by the changing associations of christian workers. . fortitude in the modern church the first epistle of peter has a varied message to the church of to-day. even in its exhortations to bravery and steadfastness it is very much needed. we are not subject to persecution by the state, but still there are a thousand circumstances of life in which we need to humble ourselves under the mighty hand of god, casting all our anxiety upon him, because he careth for us. ch. : , . * * * * * in the library.--purves, "christianity in the apostolic age," pp. , - . davis, "dictionary of the bible": warfield (supplemented), article on "peter." m'clymont, "the new testament and its writers," pp. - . ellicott, "a new testament commentary for english readers," vol. iii, pp. - : mason, "the first epistle of st. peter." zahn, "introduction to the new testament," vol. ii, pp. - . the last-named work is intended primarily for those who have some knowledge of greek, but can also be used by others. lesson xxxv the christian's attitude toward error and immorality the second epistle of peter and the epistle of jude . authenticity the second epistle of peter and the epistle of jude are among the least known and most seriously questioned parts of the new testament. even in ancient times their authenticity was disputed; in the third and fourth centuries there were some at least who desired to exclude them from the new testament. these ancient doubts have been continued in the modern church. by very many scholars of the present day, second peter and jude are assigned to second-century writers who falsely assumed the names of an apostle and of a brother of the lord. against such views as these, a number of arguments might be employed. but the strongest argument of all is provided by the self-witness of the epistles themselves. second peter, in particular, not only lays claim to apostolic authorship in the address, but is written throughout in the name of an apostle. either it was really written by an apostle or else it was a deliberate fraud. the latter alternative is excluded by the epistle itself. second peter does not look at all like a pseudonymous work, but is a weighty bit of writing, full of the sincerest moral earnestness. both second peter and jude ring true, with the genuine apostolic note. . second peter and first peter resemblances have often been pointed out among all three divisions of the new testament material attributed to peter. second peter has been shown to resemble not only first peter, but also the speeches of peter as they are reported in the acts. such similarities of course point to a common authorship. it cannot be denied, however, that differences stand side by side with the similarities. in the comparison of the epistles with the speeches, such differences are of course not surprising. the total difference of subject and the wide interval of time provide an amply sufficient explanation. but how is it with the difference between second peter and first peter? (= =) =difference of purpose and subject.=--in the first place, the difference may be partly explained by the difference of purpose and subject. first peter is a presentation of the glories of the faith in order to encourage christians under trial and make them feel their separateness from the world; second peter is a solemn warning against dangerous perverters of the life of the church. (= =) =difference of time.=--in the second place, a considerable interval of time may separate the two epistles. here we find ourselves on uncertain ground. on the whole it is perhaps better to put the epistles near together at the close of peter's life. (= =) =work of silvanus.=--in the third place, recourse may be had to the hypothesis, mentioned in the last lesson, which attributes a considerable share in the composition of first peter to silvanus. (= =) =conclusion.=--finally, there may be still further possibilities of explanation which cannot now be detected. the differences of style and of thought between the two epistles of peter are far from sufficient to show diversity of authorship, and it must be remembered that similarities are to be balanced against the differences. . value of second peter and jude although second peter and jude are not so familiar as most of the new testament, yet even these two brief epistles have entered deep into the mind and heart of the church. (= =) =expressive phrases.=--even the inimitably expressive phrases and sentences that have been derived from the epistles have produced no small enrichment of christian life. the "exceeding great and precious promises," and the "partakers of the divine nature" of ii peter : , the chain of virtues in vs. - , the "make your calling and election sure" of v. , the "sure word of prophecy" of v. , the description of inspired prophecy in vs. , --"no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation. for the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of god spake as they were moved by the holy ghost"--the "vexed his righteous soul" of ch. : , the "railing accusation" of v. ; jude , the "stir up your pure minds by way of remembrance" of ii peter : , the "not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance" of v. , the "faith which was once delivered unto the saints" of jude , the magnificent doxology of vs. , --a review of these passages as they appear in the king james version will bring some realization of the profound influence which even the most obscure books of the new testament have exerted both upon the english language and upon the character of christian men. the influence of second peter and jude, however, is not merely the influence of isolated phrases. the epistles as a whole have a distinctive message for the church. that message is twofold. it embraces in the first place an emphasis upon authority, and in the second place an insistence upon holiness. (= = =)the emphasis upon authority.=--the adversaries who are combated in second peter and jude were impatient of restraint. apparently they distinguished themselves, as possessing the spirit, from the ordinary christians, as being merely "natural." jude , ; ii peter : . they appealed to their own deeper insight, instead of listening to what apostles and prophets had to say. in reply, peter and jude insisted upon the authority of the old testament prophets, and upon the authority of the apostles, which was ultimately the authority of christ. see especially ii peter : . a similar insistence upon authority is greatly needed to-day. again men are inclined to appeal to an inward light as justifying freedom from ancient restraints; the christian consciousness is being exalted above the bible. at such a time, renewed attention to second peter and jude would be salutary. false notions are rife to-day with regard to apostolic authority. they can be corrected by our epistles. peter as well as paul exerts his authority not in an official or coldly ecclesiastical way, but with an inimitable brotherliness. the authority of the apostles is the authority of good news. subjection to such authority is perfect freedom. the authority which peter and jude urge upon their readers is a double authority--in the first place the authority of the old testament, and in the second place the authority of christ exerted through the apostles. for us, however, the two become one. the apostles, like the old testament prophets, speak to us only through the bible. we need to learn the lesson. a return to the bible is the deepest need of the modern church. it would mean a return to god. (= =) =insistence upon holiness.=--the second characteristic of second peter and jude is the insistence upon holiness. religion is by no means always connected with goodness. in the greco-roman world, the two were often entirely separate. many pagan cults contained no ethical element whatever. the danger was therefore very great that christianity might be treated in the same way. the early christians needed to be admonished ever and again that their god was a god of righteousness, that no unclean thing could stand in his presence. insistence upon holiness is in itself no peculiarity of second peter and jude. it runs all through the new testament. but in these epistles it is directed more definitely perhaps than anywhere else against the opposite error. the opponents of peter and jude did not merely drift into immorality; they defended it on theoretical grounds. they were making a deliberate effort to reduce christianity to the level of a non-ethical religion. such theoretical defense of immorality appears, indeed, in a number of places in the apostolic church. a certain party in corinth, for example, made a wrong use of christian freedom. but what is more or less incidental in first corinthians forms the main subject of second peter and jude. christianity is here insisting upon its thoroughly ethical character. at first sight the message might seem obsolete to-day. we always associate religion with morality; we can hardly understand how the two ever could have been separated. it is to be feared, however, that the danger is not altogether past. in our thoughts we preserve the ethical character of christianity. but how is it with our lives? how is it with our religious observances? are we not constantly in danger of making religion a mere cult, a mere emotional excitement, a mere means of gaining earthly or heavenly advantages, a mere effort to bribe god by our worship? the danger is always with us. we need always to remind ourselves that christian faith must work itself out in holy living. peter in his second epistle has provided us with one important means to that end. it is the thought of christ's coming. there can be no laxness in moral effort if we remember the judgment seat of christ. * * * * * in the library.--purves, "christianity in the apostolic age," pp. - , - . davis, "dictionary of the bible": warfield (supplemented), article on "jude." m'clymont, "the new testament and its writers," pp. - . ellicott, "a new testament commentary for english readers," vol. iii, pp. - , - : plummer, "the second epistle of st. peter" and "the epistle of st. jude." zahn, "introduction to the new testament," vol. ii, pp. - . the last-named work is intended primarily for those who have some knowledge of greek, but can also be used by others. lesson xxxvi the life of the children of god the epistles of john . authorship of the first epistle the first epistle of john does not contain the name of its author. according to tradition, however, it was written by the apostle john, and tradition is here supported by the characteristics of the epistle itself. the author of the epistle was evidently the same as the author of the fourth gospel. the marked similarity in style can be explained in no other way. even the careless reader observes that the style of the fourth gospel is very peculiar. short sentences are joined to one another with the utmost simplicity; the vocabulary is limited, but contains expressions of extraordinary richness; the total effect is singularly powerful. these same characteristics, though they are so peculiar, appear also in the epistle. there is the same simplicity of sentence structure, the same use of such terms as "life" and "light" and "love," the same indescribable spirit and tone. yet the epistle is no slavish imitation of the gospel--differences stand side by side with the similarities. these two works are evidently related, not as model and copy, but as living productions of the same remarkable personality. . testimony of an eyewitness as in the gospel, so also in the epistle the author presents himself clearly as an eyewitness of the life of jesus, i john : - ; : ; as in the gospel he lays stress upon simple testimony. even those things which have just been noticed as characteristic of his style are connected ultimately with the teaching of jesus. in both gospel and epistle, the beloved disciple has reproduced what he heard in galilee and in judea, though in both he has made the memory a living, spiritual fact. . destination and date the first epistle of john is perhaps scarcely to be called an epistle at all. practically all the characteristics of a letter are missing. there is no address; there is no greeting at the close; there are no personal details. the readers are indeed referred to in the second person; but preachers as well as letter-writers say, "you." first john is a sort of general address written probably to some extended group of churches. these churches are probably to be sought in asia minor. throughout the epistle the readers are addressed in a fatherly tone. see, for example, ch. : . evidently the writer was well known as a sort of patriarch throughout an extended region. such conditions prevailed in asia minor after the apostle john had begun to reside at ephesus. trustworthy tradition as well as the new testament informs us of a period in the apostle's life when he had outlived all or most of the other apostles and was revered as the head of the asian church. at some time within this period--probably nearer the end than the beginning--the first epistle of john was written. . the false teachers the form of error against which the epistle is directed becomes clearest, perhaps in ch. : , . the false teachers had denied that jesus christ was come in the flesh. this may be interpreted in several different ways. (= =) =docetism.=--in the first place, john may mean that the opponents simply denied the reality of the earthly life of jesus. such a form of error is by no means unknown in the history of the church. it is called "docetism." according to docetism the son of god did not really live a human life--with human sufferings and a human death--but only appeared to do so. (= =) =cerinthus.=--in the second place, the meaning of the passage may be that the opponents denied the unity of the person of jesus christ. compare ch. : . some persons in the early church supposed that there were two separate persons in the figure that is described in the gospels. a heavenly being, the christ, it was thought, united himself with the man jesus at the time when the dove descended after the baptism. matt. : , . such was the view of cerinthus, who is declared by tradition to have been an opponent of the apostle john at ephesus. it has been suggested, therefore, that it was actually cerinthus, with his disciples, who is combated in the first epistle of john. (= =) =denial of the incarnation.=--both cerinthus and the docetists denied the reality of the incarnation--both denied that the son of god actually assumed a human nature and lived a complete human life. according to cerinthus and others like him, the christ stood only in somewhat loose relation to the man jesus. he was united with him only late in life, he left him before the crucifixion. on this view, it was not the christ who lay in the manger at bethlehem, it was not the christ who suffered on the cross. cerinthus, like the docetists, kept the son of god out of any close relation to the world and to us. (= =) =john's reply.=--against some such view as one of these, john was concerned to establish the reality of the incarnation--the truth that "the word became flesh." in the gospel, that truth underlies the whole of the narrative; in the first epistle it is directly defended against the opposing error. it is defended first of all by an appeal to what the writer had seen and heard. "we knew jesus in palestine," says john in effect, "and we can testify that jesus himself was none other than the christ, the son of god." i john, : - . (= =) =john, the opponents, and cerinthus.=--the false teachers who are combated in the epistle had apparently withdrawn from the church and formed a separate sect. i john : . their separateness of mind and heart and life had found expression in open schism. whether they are to be identified with disciples of cerinthus is at least doubtful. false speculation about the person of christ no doubt assumed many forms in the closing years of the first century. . connection between the second and the third epistle in iii john , the apostle tells gaius that he had written "somewhat unto the church." this letter to the church may have been written at some previous time. it is also possible, however, that it was written together with the letter to gaius. the greek word for "i wrote" admits of that interpretation. if that interpretation be correct, then john perhaps means to say that although he has written a letter to the church he could not in that letter urge the hospitable reception of the missionaries. for the present, the influence of diotrephes was too strong. the letter to the church had to be concerned with other matters. if this view of the letter mentioned in iii john be adopted, then the second epistle of john corresponds to the description. the second epistle is addressed to a church, and it is written with some reserve. if "certain" of the children of "the elect lady" were walking in truth, ii john , the inference is that others were conducting themselves very differently. evidently there was danger of false teaching among the readers. hospitality to men like demetrius and his companions could hardly be expected of such a church. if hospitality should be practiced, it was only too likely to be hospitality to men of a very different stamp. vs. , . possibly, therefore, the second epistle of john is actually the letter that is referred to in iii john , a letter to the church of which gaius was a member. this hypothesis is supported by the striking formal similarity of the two letters. they are of almost exactly the same length; the openings and especially the conclusions, ii john , ; iii john , , are couched in almost exactly the same terms. they look very much like twin epistles, written on two sheets of papyrus of the same size. of course the hypothesis is by no means certain. perhaps the letter referred to in iii john was a previous letter bespeaking hospitality, which had failed of its effect. when the apostle saw, from the answer or lack of answer to the previous letter, that the church was ill disposed, he had recourse to an individual member of it. even in this case, however, it remains probable that our two epistles were written at about the same time. . value of the shorter epistles these last two epistles of john do not deserve the neglect which they have sometimes suffered. despite their brevity--they are the shortest books of the new testament--they are instructive in a number of ways. (= =) =historical.=--it is exceedingly interesting, for example, to compare them with the private letters of the same period which have recently been discovered in egypt--see lesson iii, teacher's manual, in this course. in form, the opening of the third epistle is very much in the manner of the papyrus letters. compare, for example, with iii john - the following opening of a letter of the second century after christ: "apion to epimachus his father and lord heartiest greetings. first of all i pray that you are in health and continually prosper and fare well with my sister and daughter and my brother. i thank the lord serapis...." (the translation is that of professor milligan. see p. of teacher's manual, part i, of this course.) the differences, however, are even more instructive than the resemblances. what was said in lesson i about the epistles of paul applies in full measure to the epistles of john. even the epistolary forms are here modified so as to be the vehicle of a new message and a new spirit. furthermore, the two epistles, especially third john, cast a flood of light upon the internal development of the church. in one respect indeed the historical significance of the third epistle has sometimes been exaggerated. it is not true that we have here the emergence of the monarchical episcopate--that is, the preëminence of one presbyter, called a "bishop," over his brother presbyters. diotrephes does not appear clearly as a bishop. at about a. d. in the epistles of ignatius the episcopate is very prominent; but third john belongs to an earlier period. nevertheless, this concrete picture of the internal affairs of a late first-century church is absolutely unique. the period is very obscure; these few brief lines illumine it more than pages of narrative. the traveling preachers of third john are particularly interesting. similar missionaries appear also in the "didache," a sort of church manual which may probably be dated in the early part of the second century. in that later period, however, care had to be taken lest the hospitality of the churches should be abused. "but let every apostle," says the writer--the word "apostle" is used in a very broad sense to designate wandering preachers--"who comes to you be received as the lord. he shall remain, however, no more than one day, or if necessary two. if he remains three days he is a false prophet." such precautions, we may be sure, were not needed in the case of demetrius and his companions. (= =) =practical.=--despite its individual address and private character, the third epistle of john is not an ordinary private letter. like all the books of the new testament, it has a message for the entire church. the devout reader rises from the perusal of it with a more steadfast devotion to the truth and a warmer glow of christian love. * * * * * in the library.--purves, "christianity in the apostolic age," pp. - , - . davis, "dictionary of the bible": purves (supplemented), article on "john, epistles of." m'clymont, "the new testament and its writers," pp. - . ellicott, "a new testament commentary for english readers," vol. iii, pp. - : sinclair, "the epistles of st. john." westcott, "the epistles of st. john." zahn, "introduction to the new testament," vol. iii, pp. - . the two last-named works are intended primarily for those who have some knowledge of greek, but can also be used by others. lesson xxxvii the messages of the living christ the book of revelation (first lesson) . the apocalypse and the gospel of john in the student's text book it was maintained that the apocalypse was written by john the son of zebedee. the strongest objection to this view is to be found in the striking difference of language and style which exists between the apocalypse on the one side and the gospel and epistles of john on the other. the style of the apocalypse is extraordinarily rough; in it the most elementary laws of greek grammar are sometimes disregarded. such peculiarities appear scarcely at all in the gospel; the language of the gospel, though simple, is perfectly grammatical. this observation has led many scholars to decide that the gospel and the apocalypse never could have been written by the same person; the argument, indeed, was advanced as early as the third century by dionysius of alexandria. those who thus deny the unity of authorship do not all reject either one book or the other as authoritative; some suppose that the john whose name appears in the apocalypse, though not the same as john the son of zebedee, was a genuine prophet. the evidence, however, for attributing all the johannine books to the son of zebedee is exceedingly strong. if the apocalypse is to be attributed to some one else, tradition is very seriously at fault, and it is also very difficult to see how another john could have introduced himself to the churches of asia minor in the way that the author does at the beginning and end of the book without distinguishing himself from the greater man of the same name who was residing at ephesus at the very same time. the apocalypse must therefore be assigned to the son of zebedee unless there is absolutely unimpeachable evidence to the contrary. such evidence is not really forthcoming. the difference of style between the apocalypse and the fourth gospel is capable of explanation. (= =) =possible difference of date.=--in the first place, it might be explained by a wide difference of date. if the apocalypse was written at about a. d. , then an interval of some twenty-five years or more separates it from the gospel. such an interval would allow plenty of time for the style of the author to change. when the galilean fisherman first left his home in palestine, his command of the greek language might conceivably be slight; whereas after a long residence in asia minor, as leader of a group of greek-speaking churches, the roughness of his style would be removed. hence the un-greek, strongly hebraistic usages of the apocalypse would in the gospel naturally give place to a correct, though simple style. this hypothesis, however, is beset with serious difficulties. it is difficult to suppose that the apocalypse was written before the closing decade of the first century. some passages, it is true, have been strongly urged in favor of the early date. particularly the reference to the seven kings in rev. : has been thought by many excellent scholars to be decisive. the reference to the seven hills in the preceding verse seems to show that the "beast" represents rome; the seven kings therefore naturally represent roman emperors. the fifth emperor, beginning with augustus, was nero. if at the time when the book was written five were fallen, one was and the other was not yet come, v. , the book must apparently have been written under nero's successor. his successor, galba, reigned only a few months: the book was therefore written in a. d. or . or if the very brief reigns of galba, otho and vitellius be not counted, then the book was written between a. d. and , during the reign of vespasian. the passage remains, however, so obscure that it is very doubtful whether any one interpretation of it should be allowed to overbalance the evidence for the later date. such evidence is abundant. most weighty of all, perhaps, is the strong tradition which places the apocalypse in the closing years of domitian. it is hard to believe that that tradition is seriously at fault. the condition of the church, moreover, as it is presupposed in the book, is more naturally to be sought at a. d. than twenty-five years earlier. the persecution, for example, which the writer describes, seems far more like the persecution under domitian than it is like the outbreak which was occasioned by the cruelty of nero. =( ) the difference of subject.=--if the later date be accepted, then the gospel and the apocalypse were written in the same period of the apostle's life, and the difference of style cannot be explained by a difference of date. another explanation, however, is sufficient. the difference between the two books may be explained by the total difference of subject. the gospel is a narrative of jesus' life, written with abundant opportunity for reflection; the apocalypse is a record of wonderful visions, where stylistic nicety would have marred the immediateness of the revelation. the very roughness of the apocalypse is valuable as expressing the character of the book. in the gospel, john brought to bear all his power of reflection and of expression; in the apocalypse, he wrote in haste under the overpowering influence of a transcendent experience. the grammatical irregularities of the apocalypse, moreover, often create the impression that they are intentional. they belonged, apparently, to an apocalyptic style which to a certain extent had already been formed; they were felt to be suited to the peculiar character of the work. finally, it must not be forgotten that side by side with the differences of style there are some remarkable similarities. the underlying unity of thought and expression points to unity of authorship. . characteristics of the apocalypse (= =) =a record of visions.=--in what has just been said, the dominant peculiarity of the apocalypse has already been indicated. the apocalypse is no careful literary composition, pieced together from previous works of a similar character. on the contrary, it is a record of genuine revelations. before writing, the seer was "in the spirit." (= =) =influence of the old testament.=--nevertheless, although the apocalypse is a record of visions, and was written consciously under the impulsion of the spirit, it is by no means uninfluenced by previous works. to a degree that is perhaps not paralleled by any other new testament book, the apocalypse is suffused with the language and with the imagery of the old testament. though there is not a single formal quotation, the old testament scriptures have influenced almost every sentence of the book. particularly the books of ezekiel and daniel, which, like the apocalypse, are composed largely of the records of visions, have supplied much of the imagery of the new testament work. this wide-spread influence of the old testament upon the apocalypse is by no means surprising. the apocalypse is based upon direct revelation, but direct revelation is not necessarily out of relation to everything else. on the contrary, it uses the language which its recipients can understand; and part of the language of the apostle john was the phraseology and imagery of the old testament. it has already been hinted that works very similar in form to the apocalypse are to be found in the old testament. this apocalyptic form was continued in a number of jewish works written after the conclusion of the old testament canon. superficially these works bear considerable resemblance to the new testament apocalypse; but closer examination reveals profound differences. the jewish apocalypses appeared under assumed names--the most important of them under the name of enoch--while john is so firmly convinced of having received genuine revelation that he requires no such spurious authority for his work. the similarity between our apocalypse and its extra-canonical jewish predecessors and contemporaries is a similarity at most of form; in spirit and content the difference is incalculable. unlike these other works, the apocalypse is a genuine prophecy. . the messages to the seven churches the so-called letters to the seven churches were never intended to be circulated separately. from the beginning the letters formed part of the apocalypse, which was addressed to all seven of the churches. from the beginning, therefore, each of the letters was intended to be read not only by the church whose name it bears, but also by all the others. the seven churches, moreover, are representative of the church at large. nevertheless, despite the universal purpose of the letters, they are very concrete in the information that they provide about the churches in asia minor. like the second and third epistles of john they illumine an exceedingly obscure period in the history of christianity. (= =) =the "angels" of the churches.=--some details in the letters, it is true, are to us obscure. what, for example, is meant by the "angels" of the churches to which the several letters are addressed? the greek word translated "angel" may also mean simply "messenger." conceivably, it might designate merely a congregational officer. many have supposed that it designates a bishop. in the epistles of ignatius, which were written not very many years after the apocalypse, the term "bishop" is applied to an officer who had supreme authority over a congregation including the presbyters. the appearance of these "angels" or "messengers" in the apocalypse has been urged as proof that john as well as ignatius recognized the institution of the episcopacy. surely, however, the matter is more than doubtful. the greek word used, whether it be translated "angel" or "messenger," is a very strange designation of a bishop. moreover, in the rest of the johannine literature there is no recognition of the episcopacy. in the third epistle of john, for example, even if diotrephes had set himself up as a bishop--which is itself exceedingly doubtful--his claim is certainly not accepted by the apostle. on the whole, it seems better to regard the "angels" to which the seven letters of the apocalypse are addressed merely as ideal representatives of the churches--representatives conceived of perhaps as guardian angels. compare matt. : . (= =) =the nicolaitans.=--another puzzling question concerns the "nicolaitans" who appear in several of the letters. the name itself is obscure. by tradition it is connected with that nicolaüs of antioch who was one of the seven men appointed in the early days of the jerusalem church to attend to the administration of charity. acts : . the tradition may possibly be correct. if it is correct, then nicolaüs, in his later life, had not justified the confidence originally reposed in him. at the first mention of the nicolaitans, in the letter to ephesus, rev. : , nothing whatever is said about their tenets. their error, however, was not merely theoretical, but practical, for it was their "works" that the lord is represented as hating. in the letter to pergamum, the nicolaitans are probably meant in v. . like balaam, they enticed the people of god to idolatry and impurity. the form which their idolatry took was the eating of meats offered to idols. the question of meats offered to idols was no simple matter. in the first epistle to the corinthians paul had permitted the eating of such meats under certain circumstances, but had sternly forbidden it wherever it involved real or supposed participation in idolatrous worship. the form in which it was favored by the nicolaitans evidently fell under the latter category. in a time of persecution, the temptation to guilty compromise with heathenism must have been insidious; and also the low morality of the asian cities threatened ever and again to drag christian people back into the impure life of the world. in the letter to thyatira, also, "the woman jezebel" is apparently to be connected with the same sect, for the practical faults in thyatira and in pergamum were identical. jezebel, the phoenician wife of ahab, was, like balaam, a striking old testament example of one who led israel into sin. it is significant that the woman jezebel in thyatira called herself a prophetess. rev. : . this circumstance seems to indicate that the nicolaitans had excused their moral laxness by an appeal to special revelations. the impression is confirmed by v. . apparently the nicolaitans had boasted of their knowledge of the "deep things," and had despised the simple christians who contented themselves with a holy life. at any rate, whatever particular justification the nicolaitans advanced for their immoral life, they could not deceive the all-searching eye of christ. their "deep things" were deep things, not of god, but of satan! who is meant by "the woman jezebel"? some interpreters, who suppose that the "angel" of the church was the bishop, regard jezebel as a designation of the bishop's wife. this whole interpretation is, however, beset with serious difficulty. perhaps "the woman jezebel" does not refer to an individual at all, but is simply a figurative designation of the nicolaitan sect. the description of the coming retribution in vs. - seems to be highly figurative. it will be observed that the sin of the churches at pergamum and thyatira was not limited to those who actually accepted the nicolaitan teaching. even to endure the presence of the guilty sect was the object of the lord's rebuke. toward the works of the nicolaitans only hatred was in place. rev. : . that is a solemn lesson for modern indifferentism. tolerance is good; but there are times when it is a deadly sin. * * * * * in the library.--purves, "christianity in the apostolic age," pp. , - . davis, "dictionary of the bible": purves (supplemented), article on "revelation." m'clymont, "the new testament and its writers," pp. - . milligan, "lectures on the apocalypse" and "discussions on the apocalypse." ellicott, "a new testament commentary for english readers," vol. iii, pp. - : carpenter, "the revelation of st. john." ramsay, "the letters to the seven churches of asia." plumptre, "a popular exposition of the epistles to the seven churches of asia." swete, "the apocalypse of st. john." zahn, "introduction to the new testament," vol. iii, pp. - . the two last-named works are intended primarily for those who have some knowledge of greek, but can also be used by others. lesson xxxviii a vision of the final triumph the book of revelation (second lesson) . the interpretations of the apocalypse the interpretations of the apocalypse may be divided into four classes. (= =) =unfulfilled prophecies.=--according to one method of interpretation, the prophecies of the book are all unfulfilled. in the last days there will be a mighty revival of evil like that which is symbolized by the dragon and the beast and the false prophet, there will be plagues and woes like those which are described in connection with the seals and the trumpets and the bowls, and there will be a triumph of god's people and an eternal blessedness of the new jerusalem. this interpretation would place the apocalypse out of analogy with the other prophecies of the bible. prophecy is seldom out of all connection with the immediate present. even where the prophetic vision reaches to the very end of time, the fulfillment or the preparation for the fulfillment is usually represented as beginning at once. in the apocalypse, as in other prophecy, there is evident reference to the circumstances of the original readers. (= =) =contemporary events.=--a second method of interpretation goes to an opposite extreme. by this method the prophecies of the book are thought to be concerned merely with events of the writer's own age. "the beast" is the roman empire; "babylon" is the city of rome; the author expected the destruction of both to take place within a few years' time. in its thoroughgoing form this interpretation also is to be rejected. it degrades the apocalypse to the level of a mistaken prediction, and reduces the self-evidencing glories of the book to trivialities. evidently the outlook of the seer was far broader and far more spiritual than it is represented by the advocates of this interpretation. (= =) =the whole history of the church.=--by a third method of interpretation, the first two methods are combined. the book is written distinctly in view of conditions of the first century, its predictions concern partly the immediate future; but there is also an outlook upon remoter ages. by this interpretation the prophecies are held to provide an epitome of the whole of history from the first coming of christ to his second coming. (= =) =mixture of discordant traditions.=--a fourth method of interpretation, which has become influential in very recent years, abandons all hope of discovering a unitary message in the book, and proceeds to divide it into its component parts. the analysis was carried on first by literary criticism. an older work of the time of nero was supposed to have been revised at a later period; or non-christian jewish works were supposed to have been incorporated in the present work by a christian compiler. this sort of literary criticism has in the last few years given place sometimes to a subtler method. investigation is now directed to the materials of which the book is composed, whether those materials were embodied in previous literary works or only in previous traditions. the ultimate source of much of the material is found in babylonia or other eastern countries; this material is thought to be not always in accord with the context into which in our apocalypse it has been introduced. this method must emphatically be rejected. it contains, indeed, an element of truth. undoubtedly the apocalypse makes use of already-existing materials. but these materials are, for the most part at least, of genuinely hebrew origin; and they have been thoroughly assimilated for the purposes of the present prophecy. the apocalypse is not a compilation full of contradictions, but a unitary work, with one great message for the church. (= =) =wrong use of the third method.=--of these four methods of interpretation the third has been adopted in the student's text book. the prophecies of the apocalypse concern the entire history of the church. undoubtedly this interpretation is subject to abuse. it has been employed in the interests of special controversy, as when the protestants saw in the scarlet woman a representation of papal rome. (= =) =principles, not individual facts.=--all such abuses may be avoided, however, if the interpreter will remember that the book deals with great principles, rather than with individual facts. the beast is neither the roman catholic church, nor the religion of mohammed, nor the turkish empire. undoubtedly it expressed itself in some phases of each of those institutions. but no one of them can be identified with it outright. the beast of the apocalypse is nothing less than the blatant, godless power of worldly empire, however that power may be manifested. at the time of john it was manifested especially in the empire of rome. even rome, however, cannot be identified with the beast entirely without qualification. even rome had its beneficent side. john as well as paul, even in the fire of persecution, might have expressed the thought of rom. : - . peter also wrote in the midst of persecution; yet peter could say, "be subject to every ordinance of man for the lord's sake: whether to the king, as supreme; or unto governors, as sent by him for vengeance on evil-doers and for praise to them that do well." i peter : , . the other side of rome's power, it is true, was prominent at the close of the first century. more systematically than before, rome had begun to persecute the church of god. by the demand of emperor-worship she had tried to put her stamp upon the followers of jesus. through her priesthood she had endeavored to lead men astray. in these things she was a manifestation of the beast. as such she was execrated and resisted to the death by every loyal christian. there could be no hope of compromise. hope lay rather in the power of god. god would give the just reward; god would give the final victory. such was the message of the apocalypse. the message is of perennial value. the beast is not yet dead. his methods are different, but still he oppresses the church. wherever his power is felt--whether in ruthless oppression or impious warfare or degrading superstition--there the prophecy of john is a comfort and an inspiration to the people of god. undoubtedly this method of interpretation, which detects in the book principles rather than individual facts, involves a reduction in the amount of direct information which the apocalypse may be thought to give. a detailed account, whether of the progress of the church, or of the final catastrophe, is by this interpretation no longer found in the book. . the thousand years at one point at least, this conclusion has been regarded by many devout christians as involving a serious loss. that point is concerned with the thousand years of rev. : - . according to the interpretation that has just been advocated, the thousand years are merely a symbol for the time of the present christian dispensation, and the rule which the saints are represented as bearing with christ probably refers to the condition of the blessed dead up to the final resurrection. to many devout readers of the bible this interpretation seems to be an impoverishment of the prophet's words. in reality, they maintain, the passage predicts a return of jesus to earth before the final judgment, and a long period of his blessed sway. undoubtedly this more literal interpretation of the millennium seems at first sight to be required by certain phrases of the passage. but the highly figurative character of apocalyptic language must always be borne in mind. numbers, in the apocalypse, are usually symbolic; so it may be with the thousand years. during the present dispensation satan is in one sense bound, and in another sense he is free. in principle he has been conquered; but in the sphere of worldly power he continues to work his wrathful will. . the christian hope one thing at least is clear. no interpretation of the apocalypse is correct if it fails to do justice to the hope of christ's return. if the figurative interpretation weakens our expectation of that dread meeting with the lord, then it is untrue to the mind of the spirit. there are difficulties connected with the idea of a literal millennium; but such difficulties are inconsiderable in comparison with those that result from any rationalizing, any explaining away, of the universal christian hope. the apocalypse, according to any right interpretation, is a vision of final triumph. that triumph is a triumph of christ. back of all the lurid imagery of the book, back of the battles and the woes, and back of the glories of god's people, stands the figure of the saviour. with him the book began, and with him, too, it ends. he is the same who lived the life of mercy and of glory on earth, the same who died for our sins on the cross. to the lamb all power is given--all power in heaven and on earth. by him all enemies are conquered; by him the whole earth will be judged. to those who bear the mark of the beast he is an avenger; to his church he is an ever-living saviour. * * * * * in the library.--the reading suggested under lesson xxxvii is intended for both of the lessons on the apocalypse. lesson xxxix review this review lesson is fully as important as any other lesson of the first three quarters. without reviewing, the study of history is unproductive; only a review can make of the facts a permanent possession. the story of the apostolic age, as it is narrated in the work of luke, is really very simple; it becomes confusing only when it is imperfectly mastered. a little time spent in turning over the pages of the lucan narrative, or even of the student's text book, will accomplish wonders. . unanswered questions the new testament account of the apostolic age is indeed only fragmentary. many questions must be left unanswered. of the original twelve apostles only peter and the sons of zebedee and judas iscariot receive in the acts anything more than a bare mention; and even the most prominent of these disappears after the fifteenth chapter. what did paul do in arabia and in tarsus? what was the origin of the great church at alexandria? who founded the church at rome? these questions, and many like them, must forever remain unanswered. if, moreover, even the period covered by the acts is obscure, far deeper is the darkness after the guiding hand of luke has been withdrawn. for the death of the apostle paul, there is only a meager tradition; the latter years of peter are even more obscure. for the important period between the release of paul after his first roman imprisonment and the death of the apostle john at about the end of the first century, anything like a connected narrative is quite impossible. . the neronian persecution a few facts, however, may still be established. the roman historian tacitus tells of a persecution of the christians at rome at the time of the burning of the city in a. d. . the emperor nero, suspected of starting the fire, sought to remove suspicion from himself by accusing the christians. the latter had already become unpopular because of their peculiar ways, and were thought to be guilty of abominable crimes; but the cruelty of nero almost exceeded the wishes of the populace. the christians were put to death under horrible tortures. many were burned, and their burning bodies served as torches to illumine the emperor's gardens. the beheading of paul has often been brought into connection with this persecution, but more probably it occurred a few years later. paul had been released from his first imprisonment, and his second imprisonment, at the time of the neronian outbreak, had not yet begun. the extent of the neronian persecution cannot be determined with certainty. probably, however, although there was no systematic persecution throughout the empire, the provinces would not be altogether unaffected by what was happening at rome. the causes of popular and official disfavor were always present; it required only a slight occasion to bring them actively into play. . the destruction of jerusalem even more important than the roman persecution of a. d. was the destruction of jerusalem in a. d. . at the outbreak of the war which culminated in that catastrophe, the jerusalem christians took refuge in pella, east of the jordan; jerusalem ceased to be the center of the christian church. after the war, the jerusalem church never regained its old position of leadership; and specifically jewish christianity, suffering by the destruction of the national jewish life, ceased to be influential in christian history. . the progress of the gospel from the years between the destruction of jerusalem and the closing years of the century, scarcely any definite incidents can be enumerated. undoubtedly the missionary activity of the church was continuing; the gospel was making rapid progress in its conquest of the empire. in this missionary activity probably many of the twelve apostles were engaged; but details of their work are narrated for the most part only in late tradition. . john at ephesus at some time--whether before or after a. d. is uncertain--the apostle john went to ephesus, and there became the leader of the asian church. detailed information about his position and the churches under his care is provided not only in trustworthy tradition--especially that which comes through irenæus from polycarp, the hearer of john--but also in the writings of john himself. the two shorter epistles of john, though each embraces only a small page, are extraordinarily rich in information about congregational matters, and even more instructive are the seven messages of the apocalypse. by means of the latter the moral condition of the church in asia minor is characterized with a vividness that is scarcely to be paralleled for any other period of the apostolic age. . the persecution under domitian during the latter part of the residence of john in asia minor there was an important event in the history of the church. this was the outbreak of the persecution under domitian--a persecution which apparently exceeded in extent, if not in severity, every persecution that had preceded it. under domitian the roman authorities became definitely hostile; apostasy from christ was apparently demanded systematically of the christians--apostasy from christ and adhesion to the imperial cult. the latter, in the apocalypse, is represented as an example of the mark of "the beast"; the roman empire, as would have been unnatural in the days of paul, appears in that book as an incorporation of satanic power. the long conflict between the church and the empire had at last begun. which side would be victorious? in the apocalypse the answer is plain. the lord himself was fighting for his church! . the new testament gospel our knowledge of the apostolic age, though fragmentary, is sufficient--sufficient not indeed for a complete history, but for the requirements of christian faith. the information provided in the new testament makes up in quality for what it lacks in quantity. its extraordinary vividness and concreteness possesses a self-evidencing value. the life of the apostle paul--revealed with unmistakable fidelity--is itself a sufficient bulwark against historical skepticism; it involves inevitably the supernatural christ. the gospel is no aspiration in the hearts of dreamers; it is a real entrance of divine power into the troubled battle field of human history. god was working in the apostolic church, god is speaking in the new testament--there is the summation of our study. part iv: the apostolic church and the church of to-day lesson xl the church and the world the apostolic church, as was observed in the student's text book, found itself from the beginning in the midst of an environment more or less actively hostile. if we had been in jerusalem at about the year , we should have observed a small group of disciples of jesus, outwardly conforming to jewish customs, but inwardly quite different from their countrymen. in corinth and in other pagan cities of the greco-roman world, the contrast between the church and its environment was even more striking; these cities were sunk in superstition and vice; the church was leading, in the eyes of the world, a very peculiar life. the presence of a common enemy led in the apostolic age to a closer union among the christians themselves, and so it will always be. when christian people realize the power of the enemy against whom they are all fighting, then they will have no time to fight among themselves. the christian life is a warfare against sin--sin in a thousand deadly forms. in such a warfare, if we are to be good soldiers, we must all stand shoulder to shoulder. the apostolic church was waging an audacious warfare against the intrenched forces of heathenism and sin. fortunately it had a leader; and by that leader alone it won the victory. the leader was christ. the primary relation of the soldier is the relation to the commander; the relation of the individual soldiers to one another is dependent upon that. so we shall study to-day the lordship of christ; by that study, the work of the whole quarter will be introduced. . terms descriptive of discipleship the lordship of christ may profitably be studied by an examination of some of the various names which in the new testament are applied to the church and its individual members. the individual titles should be studied first. after all, the church exists for the individual believer rather than the individual believer for the church. the primary relation is the relation between christ and the individual soul. brotherhood comes only through the union of individuals with a common lord. (= =) "=christians.="--probably the first title that occurs to us to-day to designate the individual members of the church is the title "christian"; yet as a matter of fact that title appears only three times in the new testament, and then only as it was taken from the lips of unbelievers. in accordance with the explicit testimony of acts : , the name was given for the first time at antioch; it had no place, therefore, in the early jerusalem church. a moment's thought will reveal the reason. the name "christians" would have meant to a jew adherents of the "christ," or the "messiah." obviously no jew would have applied such a name specifically to the disciples of jesus; for all the jews, in one sense or another, were adherents of the messiah. the jews were adherents of him by way of anticipation; the disciples thought he had already appeared; but all earnest jews alike would have rejoiced to be called by his name. evidently the name was applied in antioch by the pagan population. the church had become so clearly separate from judaism that a separate name for it was required. the name "christian" suggested itself very naturally. "jesus christ" was forever on the lips of these strange enthusiasts! "the christ" was indeed also spoken of by the jews, but only careful observers would necessarily be aware of the fact. the messianic hope was an internal concern of the synagogues, with which outsiders would usually have little to do. the new sect, on the other hand, brought the title "christ" out from its seclusion; "christ" to these enthusiasts was something more than a title, it was becoming almost a proper name; like "jesus," it was a designation of the founder of the sect, and accordingly the adjective derived from it could be used to designate the sect itself. in acts : , the name appears as used by agrippa; in i peter : , also, it is evidently taken from the lips of the opponents of the faith. the christians, however, peter implies, need not be ashamed of the name which has been fastened upon them. rather let them strive to be worthy of it! it is the highest honor to be called by the name of christ; and if they are true "christians," their confession will redound to the glory of god. in modern times, the name is often misapplied; the use of it is broadened and weakened. nations are declared to be christian although only a very small percentage of their citizens really deserve the name; teaching is called christian though it is only similar in some respects to the teaching of christ. such a use of terms should be avoided wherever possible; the original poignancy of the designation should be restored. properly speaking, "christian" means not "like christ" but "subject to christ." a christian is not one who admires christ or is impressed with christ's teaching or tries to imitate christ, but one to whom christ is saviour and lord. are we willing to be known as "christians" in that sense? at the time of first peter, it would have been a serious question; an affirmative answer would have meant persecution and perhaps death. but it is also a serious question to-day. confession of christ involves solemn responsibilities; dishonor to the "christian" means dishonor to christ; the unworthy servant is a dishonor to his master. but let us not fear; christ is helper as well as lord. (= =) "=disciples.="--the earliest designation of the followers of jesus was "disciples" or "learners"; during the earthly ministry perhaps scarcely any other designation was commonly used. jesus appeared at first as a teacher; the form of his work was somewhat like that of other teachers of the jews. nevertheless, although he was a teacher from the beginning, he was also from the beginning something more. he had not only authority, but also power; he was not only teacher, but also saviour. his followers were not merely instructed, but were received into fellowship; and that fellowship made of them new men. "disciples" in the gospels is more than "learners" or "students"; it is a fine, warm, rich word; the teacher was also friend and lord. the same term was continued in the early palestinian church, and the resurrection had brought an incalculable enrichment of its meaning. the "disciples" were not merely those who remembered the words of jesus, but those who had been redeemed by his blood and were living now in the power of his holy spirit. if we use the term, let it be in the same lofty sense. let us be learners, indeed; let us hear the words of jesus, as they are recorded in the gospels; but let us hear them not from a dead teacher, but ever anew from the living lord. (= =) "=saints.="--a third designation is "saints." this term is used as a title of the christians in acts : , , ; : , and frequently in the epistles of paul and in the apocalypse. its use in the new testament is very different from some uses of it that appeared at a later time. the roman catholics, for example, employ the term as a title of honor for a number of persons carefully limited by the church; protestants often designate by it persons of exceptional purity or goodness. in the new testament, on the contrary, the title "saints" is clearly applied to all christians. in the original greek the word is exactly the same as a word meaning "holy"; it is simply the adjective "holy" used as a noun. "saints," therefore, really means "holy persons." unfortunately, however, the word "holy," as well as the word "saint" has undergone modifications of usage. "holy," in the bible, is not simply another word for "good" or "righteous," but expresses a somewhat different idea. it has the idea of "sacred" or "separate"--separate from the world. god is holy not merely because he is good, but because he is separate. undoubtedly his goodness is one attribute--perhaps the chief attribute--that constitutes the separateness; but other attributes also have their place. his omnipotence and his infinitude, as well as his goodness, make him "holy." the word "holy" or "saint" as applied to christians has fundamentally the same meaning. believers are "holy" because they are in communion with the holy god and therefore separate from the world. undoubtedly the most obvious element in their separateness is their goodness; the moral implications of the term "holy" are sometimes so prominent that the specific meaning of the word seems obscured. but that specific meaning is probably never altogether lost. christians are called "saints" because they are citizens, not of the present evil world, but of a heavenly kingdom. the familiar word, thus interpreted, has a startling lesson for the modern church. can modern christians be called "saints," in the new testament sense? are we really separate from the world? are we really "a chosen generation, a royal priesthood, an holy nation, a peculiar people" (a. v.)? do we really feel ourselves to be strangers and pilgrims in the earth? or are we rather salt that has lost its savor? have we become merged in the life of the world? (= =) "=brethren.="--a fourth designation is concerned, not with the relation of the believer to christ or to the world, but with the relation of believers among themselves. that designation is "brethren." it is a very simple word; it requires little explanation; the rich meaning of it will be unfolded in the whole of this quarter's study. (= =) "=church.="--after studying the new testament terms that denote the disciples of jesus individually, it will now be well to turn for a moment to the chief designation of the body of disciples considered as a unit. that designation is "church," or in the greek form, "ecclesia." the word "ecclesia" is in itself a very simple term indeed. it is derived from the verb "call" and the preposition "out." an "ecclesia" is a body of persons called out from their houses to a common meeting place, in short it is simply an "assembly," and an assembly of any kind. this simple use of the word is found in acts : , , ; the greek word which is there translated "assembly" is exactly the same word as that which is elsewhere translated "church." even before new testament times, however, the word had begun to be used in a special, religious sense. here, as so often, the septuagint translation of the old testament prepared the way for new testament usage. in the septuagint the word "ecclesia" was used to denote the solemn assembly of the people of israel. that assembly was of course religious as well as political; for israel was a theocratic nation. hence it was no abrupt transition from previous usage when the new testament writers selected the word "ecclesia" to denote the christian congregation. in the new testament, the word is used in various ways. in the first place, it designates the body of christians who lived in any particular place. so, for example, the epistles of paul are addressed to individual "churches." in the second place, however, the word designates the whole body of christians throughout the world. this usage is prominent in the epistle to the ephesians, but it also appears even in the gospels, in the memorable words of jesus at cæsarea philippi. matt. : . it is a wonderfully grand conception which is thus disclosed by the familiar word. "the church" is a chosen people, ruled by the lord himself, a mighty army, engaged, not in earthly warfare, but in a spiritual campaign of salvation and love. (= =) "=the kingdom of god.="--one further conception requires at least a word. what is meant by "the kingdom of god"? this conception is evidently related to the conception of "the church," but the two are not identical. the kingdom of god is simply that place or that condition where god rules. as the kingdom of cæsar was the territory over which cæsar held sway, so the kingdom of god is the realm where god's will is done. in one sense, of course, the kingdom of god embraces the whole universe, for nothing is beyond the reach of god's power. but in the new testament the term is used in a far deeper sense; it is used to denote the realm where god's will is done, not of necessity, but by willing submission. wherever human hearts and wills are in true accord with the will of god, there the "kingdom" has come. in one sense the kingdom of god belongs to the future age. it is never realized fully upon earth; there is here always some lurking trace of sinful resistance. nevertheless, in the new testament the kingdom is by no means always represented as future. though it has not yet been fully realized, it is already present in principle; it is present especially in the church. the church gives clear, though imperfect, expression to the idea of the kingdom; the church is a people whose ruler is god. entrance into the church is not to be obtained by human effort; it is the free gift of god through the lord jesus christ. no other gift is so glorious. if we are members of that chosen people, we need fear nothing in heaven or on earth. . practical conclusions two lessons should be conveyed by our study of to-day: in the first place the lesson of separateness, and in the second place the lesson of unity. neither can be truly learned without the other. there can be no true christian unity if individual members of the christian body make common cause with the unbelieving world. a knowledge of the common enemy will draw us all into closer fellowship. that fellowship need not necessarily be expressed in a common organization; but it will be expressed at least in a common service. separateness from the world will not mean leaving the world to its fate; the christian salvation will be offered freely to all. but the gravity of the choice should never, by any false urbanity, be disguised. it is no light difference whether a man is within the people of god or without; there is a definite line of demarcation, and the passing of it means the transition from death into life. * * * * * in the library.--davis, "dictionary of the bible": articles on "church," "disciple," "christian." hastings, "dictionary of the bible": gayford, article on "church." hort, "the christian ecclesia." charteris, "the church of christ." westcott, "the two empires: the church and the world," in "the epistles of st. john," pp. - . "the epistle to diognetus," introduction and translation in lightfoot, "the apostolic fathers," pp. - , - . erdman, "coming to the communion." lesson xli the christian message . a philosophy, or a testimony? in the student's text book the christian message has been represented as primarily a piece of good news, a story of something that happened. that representation does not pass unchallenged to-day. many suppose that the message of the apostles was concerned simply with reflection upon eternal truths. for centuries, it is said in effect, men had been reflecting upon the problems of god and the world and sin; what the apostles did in jerusalem and elsewhere was simply to provide better instruction on these great themes; jesus had taught men that god is a father, the apostles simply continued his teaching. such a view, of course, can be held only by rejecting or distorting the testimony of the new testament. if the book of the acts is correct, if paul is correct, then the preaching that founded the apostolic church was not better instruction about old facts, but information about a new fact. before jesus came, the world was lost under sin; but jesus lived and died and rose again, and gave salvation to all who would receive. according to the new testament, jesus did not come to tell men that they were god's children; he came to make them god's children. john : ; gal. : - . without him they were under god's wrath and curse; but by faith in him, by acceptance of his sacrifice of himself for them, by receiving from his spirit the power to believe, they could call god father. on the day of pentecost jesus was presented as more than a teacher; he was presented as a saviour. . the effects of the message =( ) in the apostolic age.=--the effects of that presentation have been considered briefly in the student's text book, and what was said there might easily be supplemented. the conversion of the three thousand was only a beginning. the new spirit of the christian community, the brotherly love and holy joy of the disciples, indeed everything that will be treated in the lessons of the quarter, were the result of a simple piece of news. by the wise men of the world--then as now--the message was despised, but "the foolishness of god is wiser than men; and the weakness of god is stronger than men." i cor. : . this lesson offers a singular opportunity to the teacher. the christian message in the apostolic church was a message of power. the story of its progress is full of dramatic vigor; it appeals even to the non-christian historian. the story of the apostolic age is full of surprises--the sudden transformation of bitter jewish enemies into humble disciples; the triumphant spread of the faith when everything seemed opposed; the establishment of christian churches in the very centers of pagan vice; the astonishingly rapid preparation for the conquest of the empire; and all this accomplished not by worldly wisdom, but by simple men who only had a bit of news--a bit of news, and god! =( ) in the history of the church.=--the triumphs of the gospel, however, were not confined to the age of the apostles. the apostolic age was prophetic of the christian centuries. there were many days of darkness; but the church always emerged again triumphant. so it will be to-day. god has not deserted his people; he will attest his truth with the power of his spirit; there is no room for discouragement. one thing, however, should be remembered; the victories of the church are victories, not of brilliant preachers, not of human wisdom or human goodness, but of the cross of christ. under that banner all true conquests move. . the presentation of the message the christian message was presented in the apostolic church in many different ways. the gospel was everywhere essentially the same, but the presentation of it was adapted to the needs of particular hearers, and the understanding of it became ever more complete under the illumination of the holy spirit. it is interesting to collect the various types of missionary speeches that are found in the new testament. =( ) the missionary preaching of the jerusalem church.=--the early chapters of the acts preserve a number of speeches that were addressed to jews. as might have been expected, these speeches are intended primarily to prove the messiahship of jesus. if that could be proved, then--among the jews--the rest would follow. the messiahship was proved first by an appeal to the scriptures, and second by the fact of the resurrection. even the death of jesus on the cross, which was to the jews a stumblingblock, was predicted by the prophets, and so served to prove that jesus was the promised one. the resurrection was also predicted; and the resurrection was established first by the simple testimony of eyewitnesses and second by the wonderful works of the living christ. these early speeches contain only a little of the full truth of the gospel. in them, for example, the significance of the death of christ as an atonement for sin is not fully explained. such omissions were due no doubt to two causes. (a) limitations due to the hearers.--in the first place, the peculiar needs of the hearers had to be considered. the hearers were jews; to them the death of the messiah was an unheard-of paradox; to them the cross was a stumblingblock. before the inner meaning of the crucifixion could be explained, obviously the objections derived from it needed to be overcome. the first task of the missionaries was to show that jesus, although he had been crucified, was the messiah. that was done by an appeal to prophecy and to the plain fact of the resurrection. after conviction had thus been produced, it would be time enough to show that what was at first regarded as a stumblingblock was really the supreme act of divine grace. (b) limitations due to an early stage of revelation.--the omissions in the early speeches were due, however, not merely to the peculiar needs of the hearers, but also to limitations in the knowledge of the apostles. christian truth was not all revealed at once; undoubtedly the full explanation of the cross, the full exposition of the atonement, was revealed only when the disciples could bear it. such is the divine method, even in revelation. the disciples were brought gradually, by the gracious leading of the holy spirit, into ever richer knowledge of the truth. (c) the significance of the cross.--nevertheless, the meagerness of the early teaching must not be exaggerated. in the very first missionary speech of peter, jesus was represented as "delivered up by the determinate counsel and foreknowledge of god." acts : . what happened "by the determinate counsel ... of god" was no meaningless chance; the crucifixion was not a victory of evil over god, it must have had some beneficent purpose. furthermore, jesus himself had explained what that purpose was. he had spoken of giving his life a ransom for many, mark : ; still more plainly, on the last solemn passover evening, he had represented his death as sacrificial. these words were certainly not forgotten in the jerusalem church; they were called to mind in the repeated celebration of the lord's supper, and must have formed the subject of meditation. the jerusalem christians knew that jesus' death was a death on their behalf. (d) the lordship of jesus.--the lordship of jesus, moreover, was fully recognized from the very beginning. the risen christ had ascended into glory, and had poured forth his mighty spirit. the believer was no mere learner of the words of a dead teacher; he was called into communion with a lord and saviour. such communion meant nothing less than an entirely new life, in which sin could have no rightful place. it was a life of conflict, but also a life of hope. the saviour would come again in like manner as he had gone. the spiritual victory, already won, would be perfected by a final victory in every realm. =( ) the missionary preaching of paul.=--the gospel of the early preachers was a glorious message. it was a piece of glad tidings, such as the world had never known. yet even greater things were in store; even more wondrous mysteries were to be revealed. they were revealed especially through the instrumentality of the apostle paul. the gospel had been preached from the beginning, but much of its deeper meaning was reserved for paul. (a) truth and error.--in the teaching of paul, truth became plainer by being contrasted with error. the original apostles had really been trusting in the atonement of christ for salvation; but now that trust became plainer and more explicit by being contrasted with works of the law. the original apostles had really grasped the inner significance of jesus as the fulfillment of the old testament; but now that significance became still plainer by the contrast with pharisaic legality. now at length the death and resurrection were represented sharply and clearly as great representative acts in which the believer shares through faith. the original apostles were not overwhelmed and confused by the new revelation; they recognized the grace of god. their perfect agreement with paul exhibited the unity of the apostolic gospel. scarcely anything would be more interesting than a full collection of the missionary speeches of paul. such a collection, however, has not been preserved. the writings that we possess from the hand of paul are not missionary addresses, but letters written to those who were already christians. we should not, however, complain of the providence of god. god has not thought good to give us everything, but what he has given us is enough. (b) information provided by the acts.--the book of the acts, in the first place, affords valuable information. the author was interested, indeed, chiefly in beginnings. the examples of paul's missionary preaching which luke has preserved, are perhaps preliminary to evangelism, rather than evangelism itself. the speech at pisidian antioch shows how paul proved the messiahship of jesus. in winning the jews, that proof was the first step. the pauline gospel indeed appears, but it appears only at the very end of the speech. the speech at athens is still more clearly of preliminary character. monotheism needed to be established before the gospel of christ could be understood. despite their necessary limitations however, these speeches are instructive. they show, in the first place, that paul adapted his preaching to the needs of his hearers. he did not preach the same sermon mechanically to all. he sought really to win men over, he began with what his hearers could understand. they show, in the second place, that all preliminary matters were kept strictly subordinate. these matters were not made an end in themselves, as is often the case in the modern church, but were merely a means to an end. no matter where he began, paul always proceeded quickly to the center of the gospel. both at pisidian antioch and at athens, he hastened on to the resurrection. (c) information provided by the epistles.--the pauline epistles, in the second place, though they are addressed to christians, really afford sufficient information, at least in outline, about the missionary preaching of paul. incidental references are sufficient to show at least that the cross and the resurrection were the center and core of it. the thessalonians, for example, under the preaching of paul, "turned unto god from idols, to serve a living and true god, and to wait for his son from heaven, whom he raised from the dead, even jesus, who delivereth us from the wrath to come." this little passage is worth pages of exposition. preaching to gentiles is here reviewed in epitome, though of course not with studied symmetry and completeness. the knowledge of the one true god formed of course, for gentiles, the starting point for all the rest, but from that starting point the preacher at once proceeded to tell of the work of christ. just as illuminating are passages like i cor. : ; gal. : . in corinth paul knew nothing save "jesus christ, and him crucified"; in galatia the story of the cross was made so plain that it was as though jesus christ crucified were held up before the eyes of the galatians on a great picture or placard. the famous passage in first corinthians, ch. : - , is, however, perhaps clearest of all. at the very beginning paul had spoken of the death of christ and the resurrection. the death, moreover, was not presented as a mere inspiring story of a holy martyrdom, but as a death "for our sins"; and the resurrection was supported not primarily by an inward experience, but by simple testimony. apostolic preaching was everywhere essentially the same. the apostles never began, like many modern preachers, with exhortation; though they proceeded to exhortation, they always began with facts. what was always fundamental was the simple story of the life and death and resurrection of jesus christ. jesus christ crucified and risen was the subject of the good news that conquered the world. when will the modern church take up the message with new power? we do not know. the times are in god's hand. but when the blessed day comes, it will be a day of victory. * * * * * in the library.--bunyan, "the pilgrim's progress." warfield, "the saviour of the world," and "the power of god unto salvation" (the latter in "the presbyterian pulpit"). hodge, "the way of life." lesson xlii the word and the sacraments this lesson and the two following are intended primarily to encourage in the student the diligent use of "the means of grace." the wise teacher will keep the practical purpose steadily in view. that practical purpose may now be examined a little more in detail. why should the example of the apostolic church be followed in the matter of bible-reading, of the sacraments, of prayer, of christian meetings? what was god's purpose in providing these simple exercises of the christian life--what benefit do we receive from them? perhaps the briefest and simplest answer is that we receive from them what is often known as "reality" in religion. . reality in religion many christians are puzzled by the lack of the sense of "reality" in their christian life. they have believed in christ, but often he seems far from them. it is not so much that positive doubts have arisen, though certainly the lack of fervency gives doubt its opportunity. rather is it an inexplicable dulling of the spiritual eye. the gospel still seems wonderful to the intellect, but to the heart it has somehow lost its power. =( ) the need of diligence.=--this condition is due very often to a neglect of "the means of grace," which we shall study in this lesson and the two lessons following. it is a great mistake to suppose that the spiritual life is altogether beyond our control. undoubtedly it is instituted only by an immediate exercise of the divine power, independent of the human will; undoubtedly the maintenance of it would be impossible without the assistance of the holy spirit. nevertheless, in that work of maintenance, we have a very definite part. many christians suppose that any performance of religious exercises merely for duty's sake, without immediate spiritual profit, is a mere form. this supposition is erroneous. not performance of religious exercises without spiritual profit, but performance of them without the desire of spiritual profit, is formalism. the appointed means of grace must continue to be used even when no immediate benefit can be discerned. in the reading of the bible, in prayer, in public worship, the christian should first of all do his duty. the result may safely be left to god. =( ) the danger of neglect.=--without such attention to duty, the christian life becomes merely a matter of inclination. in times of great spiritual distress we call upon god for comfort and help; but in the long, level weeks of comparative prosperity we think we can do without him. such thoughts are the height of folly. god is not our servant, he is not one who can safely be left out of our thoughts except when we think we especially need him. if we neglect god in time of prosperity, we may call in vain when adversity comes. =( ) the reward of duty.=--the religious life is not merely a matter of inclination; it must be diligently fostered. such attention to duty, however, will never be merely drudgery. it may begin with drudgery, and it may become drudgery again at times, but if persisted in, it will be an ever-widening avenue of joy and power. . the study of the bible the reading of the bible is such a simple thing, and so obviously necessary to the christian life, that it requires comparatively little discussion. despite its indispensableness, however, it is being sadly neglected to-day. our fathers learned the bible with a thoroughness which to-day is almost unknown. the change is full of danger. a bible-reading church is possessed of power; without the bible the church loses its identity altogether and sinks back into the life of the world. the process, unfortunately, has gone to considerable lengths. how may it now be checked? =( ) the study should be made interesting.=--something, no doubt, may be done by making the study of the bible more interesting. certainly the bible does not yield in interest to any other branch of knowledge. the bible does not merely present spiritual truth; it presents it in a wonderfully rich and varied way. if the study of the bible is stupid, the fault lies not in the subject matter, but in the student or in the teacher. =( ) the motive of duty.=--nevertheless, a mere appeal to the interest of the students is entirely insufficient. after all, there is no royal road to learning--not to biblical learning any more than to the learning of the world. solid education can never be attained without hard work; education that is easy is pretty sure to be worthless. especially at the beginning the chief appeal in education must be to a sense of duty. so it is in the case of the bible. the bible is the word of god; obviously it may not be neglected. let us study it, then, primarily because the study of it is an obvious duty. as a matter of fact the duty will soon become a pleasure, but let not that be the motive. let us read the bible regularly and persistently, in entire independence of changing impulse. that is the kind of study that is blessed of god. superficial study, determined by mere inclination, may at first sight seem just as good. but when adversity or temptation comes, then the difference appears. it is the difference between a house built upon the sand and a house built upon the rock. the two houses look alike, but when the rains descend and the floods come, one falls and the other stands. the christian whose knowledge of the bible is obtained by old-fashioned, patient study, never interrupted by changing inclination, has dug deep and founded his house upon the rock. =( ) the example of the apostolic church.=--the example of the apostolic church in the matter of the means of grace is especially significant. in the apostolic age, it might have seemed as though these simple exercises might be dispensed with. what need of regularly appointed forms when the holy spirit was so immediately manifested? yet as a matter of fact all of the essential forms of christian custom were present from the beginning. regularity and diligence were cherished even in the first exuberance of the jerusalem church. enthusiasm of spiritual life did not lead to the despising of ordinary helps; the early disciples "continued stedfastly," "day by day," "with one accord in the temple, and breaking bread at home, they took their food with gladness and singleness of heart." acts : . the use which the apostolic church made of the bible might seem to some modern men particularly surprising. a book religion, men say, is a stagnant religion; living faith is independent of dead documents; it is only when the early enthusiasm is lost that belief becomes crystallized in submission to venerable authority. this sort of religious philosophy shatters on the plain facts of the apostolic age. admittedly that was an age of freshness and independence. there never has been such an outburst of religious enthusiasm as that which planted the faith in jerusalem and carried it like wildfire throughout the civilized world. yet another fact is equally plain--this wonderful enthusiasm was coupled with the utmost reverence for a book. nothing could exceed the unquestioning submission which the early christians paid to the old testament scriptures. the exuberance of apostolic christianity was intertwined with a book religion! the explanation, of course, is simple. submission to a human book means stagnation; but genuine submission to the word of god means always what it meant in the apostolic age--heroism and victory and life. . baptism =( ) baptism and circumcision.=--the sacrament of baptism had its truest predecessor in circumcision, the old testament sign of union with the covenant people. baptism as well as circumcision is a sign of the covenant, though the varied symbolism marks the advance of the new covenant over the old. =( ) christian baptism and the baptism of john.=--in form, moreover, and to a considerable extent also in meaning, christian baptism in the early church was prepared for by the baptism of john the baptist, which had even been continued by the disciples of jesus during jesus' earthly ministry. john : , . both the baptism of john and christian baptism symbolized cleansing from sin. compare acts : with matt. : , . christian baptism, however, differed from every rite that had preceded it by its definite reference to christ, and by its definite connection with a new manifestation of the holy spirit. =( ) baptism "into christ."=--in the apostolic writings, baptism is sometimes spoken of as a baptism "into christ." gal. : ; rom. : . the meaning of this phrase has often been obscured both in translation and in interpretation. the phrase "into christ" in this connection means something more than "with reference to christ"; it means rather "into a position within christ." the christian, according to a common pauline expression, is "in christ"; he is in such close union with christ that the life of christ might almost be described as the atmosphere which he breathes. to be baptized "into christ" means to come by baptism into this state of blessed union with the saviour. =( ) baptism and faith.=--at this point, however, a serious question arises. how can baptism be described as the means by which the christian comes into union with christ, when at other times salvation is declared to be by faith? one solution of the difficulty would be simply to say that baptism and faith are both necessary--a man must believe if he is to be saved, but he must also be baptized. clearly, however, this view does not represent the meaning of the new testament. the passages where faith alone is represented as the condition of salvation are too strong; especially the vigorous contrast which paul sets up between faith and works prevents any inclusion of such a work as baptism along with faith as an additional condition of acceptance with god. the true solution is that baptism is related to faith, or rather to the regenerative work of the holy spirit, as the sign is related to the thing signified. baptism represents the work of the spirit; it is a means which the spirit uses. if it stood alone, it would be a meaningless form, but when it is representative of spiritual facts it becomes a channel of divine grace. . the lord's supper the celebration of the lord's supper in the jerusalem church was probably connected in some way with "the breaking of bread," which is mentioned in acts : . every common meal was an expression of christian communion, but the solemn words of christ at the last supper could not have been forgotten. here, as so often, the book of the acts affords little information about the internal affairs of the church. fortunately, paul, in the first epistle to the corinthians, is far more explicit, and inferences can be drawn from him with regard even to jerusalem. paul represents the lord's supper, not as an innovation, but as something that had been given to the corinthians as a matter of course, at the very beginning of their christian lives; evidently the sacrament was celebrated universally in the churches; paul had "received" the account of the institution of the supper from the lord through the first christians. in corinth, as was also probably the case in the early days in jerusalem, the supper was celebrated in connection with the common meals of the christian community. certain abuses had arisen; the rich brought food and drink with them and feasted luxuriously in the presence of their poorer brethren; the spiritual significance of the supper was profaned. against such abuses paul enunciates the great principle that the supper does not work a magical benefit; if partaken of irreverently it brings condemnation rather than blessing. in i cor. : - , the lord's supper appears as a warning against participation in heathen feasts. the pagan fellow citizens of the corinthian christians, by their religious feasts, held communion with idols; the christians cannot remain with them and at the same time commune with christ. a man must take his choice--either christ or idols; he must choose either the lord's supper or heathen feasts. here the lord's supper appears especially as a sign of communion with christ, as in ch. : it appears especially as a commemoration of his death. these two aspects of the supper, and their intimate connection with each other, should now be explained a little more in detail. =( ) a representation of the death of christ.=--the lord's supper, as is observed in the student's text book, is representative of the death of christ on our behalf. in many passages of the new testament, the significance of that death is explained in words; in the lord's supper it is represented in visible form. the lord's supper is related to the story of the gospel, as the picture or the acted representation is related to ordinary discourse. in the broken bread and poured-out wine we not only apprehend with the mind, but actually see the broken body and shed blood of the lord. of course that does not mean, as the roman catholic church teaches, that the bread and wine are actually by a miracle, at every celebration of the supper, changed into the body and blood of christ, but only that they represent them. the very simplicity of the sacrament should have guarded against misinterpretation. an actual image of the dying saviour might lead to idolatry, or to an overemphasis upon the details of the scene on calvary; the simple representation that christ ordained is enough to be vivid, without being enough to become misleading. =( ) a representation of our union with christ.=--the supper represents the death of christ not as a mere drama, remote from us, but as a death on our behalf. in the supper we do not merely witness the breaking of the bread and the pouring out of the wine; we partake of the bread and wine ourselves. plainly the symbolism means that we who are disciples of christ do not merely admire the holy self-sacrifice of christ, but rather receive the benefits of it. we feed upon the body and blood of christ in the high spiritual sense that by faith we obtain from christ's death pardon for our sins and a fresh start in the full favor of god. these benefits we obtain not by our own efforts, but by a free gift. it was christ himself who broke the bread and poured out the wine on the last evening before the crucifixion; it is also christ who, through his minister, at every celebration of the sacrament, is represented as offering to us his body and blood. the lord's supper, therefore, is not merely a commemoration of an event in the past; it is also the symbol of a present fact. it symbolizes the blessed communion of believers with one another and with christ. . the sacraments more than a proclamation of the gospel so far we have considered the sacraments merely as one means of proclaiming the gospel. the bible proclaims the gospel in words; the sacraments proclaim it in pictures. even if that were all, the sacraments would be of great value. by these symbolic actions the gospel message attains a new vividness and definiteness. as a matter of fact, however, baptism and the lord's supper are more than peculiar ways of making a vivid presentation of the gospel. they were instituted especially by christ, and the holy spirit has connected with them a special blessing. the spirit can use what means he will, and he has chosen to use these. in the lord's supper, for example, the lord is really present in the midst of his people. he is not present, indeed, in "a corporal and carnal manner"; but his spiritual presence is a blessed fact. the sacraments, therefore, should not be neglected. in themselves, when unaccompanied by faith, they are valueless; and they are not necessary for salvation. ordinarily, however, they are a chosen means of blessing. when god wills, other means can take their place, but under all ordinary circumstances they are used. certainly they should not be neglected without adequate cause. they have been provided by god, and god is wiser than men. the lord's supper should be received with solemnity; but sometimes young christians have perhaps an exaggerated dread of it. the error of the corinthian christians should indeed be carefully avoided; wanton carelessness in the solemn act will of course bring the condemnation of god. but the supper does not demand perfection, even in faith; on the contrary it is intended to help to remove imperfection. the lord's supper is not a dangerous bit of magic, where any little mistake might break the charm. let us partake of it with a simple prayer, and leave the results to the goodness of god. * * * * * in the library.--davis, "dictionary of the bible": article on "lord's supper"; purves, article on "baptism." w. w. moore, "the indispensable book." candlish, "the christian sacraments" (in "handbooks for bible classes," edited by dods and whyte). lilley, "the lord's supper." lesson xliii prayer . the answerer of prayer the prayers of the apostolic age reveal with startling clearness the apostolic conception of god; and one chief reason why our prayers fall short of the apostolic standard is that our idea of god is different. =( ) god is a person.=--in the first place, true prayer always conceives of god as a person; whereas much of modern religious thinking conceives of him as only another name for the world. human life, it is said, is a part of the life of god; every man, to some degree, is divine. such a philosophy makes prayer logically impossible. it is impossible for us to speak to an impersonal world-force of which we ourselves are merely an expression; the personal distinction between man and god is absolutely essential to prayer. the transcendence of god as over against the world is grandly expressed in the prayer of the jerusalem church, which was studied in the student's text book; the jerusalem christians addressed god as the lord who made "the heaven and the earth and the sea, and all that in them is." acts : . god, in other words, is not another name for the world, but creator of the world. he is indeed present in the world; not a single thing that happens is independent of him; the world would not continue for a moment without god's sustaining hand. but that means, not that god is identical with the world, but that he is master of it. god pervades all things; he is present everywhere; but he is also free. that conception pervades all the prayers of the apostolic church; in all of them man comes to god as one person to another. god is free; god can do what he will; through christ he is our father. he is not bound by his own works; he is independent of nature; he will overrule all things for the good of his children. such is the god that can answer prayer. =( ) god is an infinite and holy person.=--if, however, the prayers of the apostolic age conceive of god as a person, they also conceive of him as very different from men. here, also, they provide a salutary example for the modern church. many devout christians of to-day, in avoiding the error which has just been described, in thinking of god plainly as a person, are inclined to fall into the opposite mistake. in their clear realization of god as a person they think of him as a person exactly like ourselves. they regard the difference between god and man as a difference of degree rather than a difference of kind; they think of god as merely a greater man in the sky. the result of such thinking is disastrous for prayer. prayer, to be sure, is here not absolutely destroyed; communion with god remains possible; but such communion is degraded. communion loses that sense of mystery and awe which properly belongs to it. man becomes too familiar with god; god takes merely the leading place in a circle of friends; religion descends to the plane of other relationships. prayer to such a god is apt to become irreverent. if our prayers are to lift us fully into the presence of god they must never lie on the same plane with the communion that we enjoy with our fellow men, but must be filled with a profound sense of god's majesty and power. the danger of permitting prayer, on account of its very privilege, to become a commonplace thing is one that threatens us all. it may be overcome, however, in the first place, by the contemplation of nature. "the heavens declare the glory of god; and the firmament showeth his handiwork"--and it is a terrible, mysterious god that they reveal. the stupendous vastness of the universe and the baffling mystery of the surrounding infinity oppress the thoughtful mind with a profound sense of insignificance. and god is the maker and ruler of it all, the one in whom all the mystery finds its explanation! such is the employment of nature in the prayer of the jerusalem church. acts : . all the prayers of the apostolic church illustrate the principle which is now being emphasized. there is never anything trite or vulgar about the prayers that are contained in the new testament; they are all characterized by a wonderful dignity and reverence. if the infinity and omnipotence of god should prevent any irreverence in our prayers, the thought of his holiness is perhaps even more overwhelming. we are full of impurity. who can stand before the white light of god's awful judgment throne? =( ) god is a gracious person.=--nevertheless, despite the majesty and holiness of god, he invites us into his presence. it is a stupendous wonder. no reasoning could have shown it to be probable; only ignorance can regard it as a matter of course. if god were only a somewhat greater man, there would have been comparatively little mystery in prayer; but communion with the infinite and eternal and holy one, the unfathomed cause of all things, is the wonder of wonders. it is a wonder of god's grace. it is too wonderful to be true; yet it has become true in christ. true prayer brings us not before some god of our own devising, before whom we could stand in our own merit without fear, but into the dread presence of jehovah. let us not hesitate to go; god has called us; he loves us as a father, far more than we can ever love him. prayer is full of joy; the joy is so great that it is akin to fear. . the influence of jesus' teaching upon the prayers of the apostolic church in studying the prayers of the apostolic age, it must always be remembered that they stood upon the foundation of jesus' example and precept. =( ) the example of jesus.=--with all his power and holiness jesus was not above asking for strength to perform his gracious work; after that long, wearying day in capernaum he "departed into a desert place, and there prayed." mark : . in the hour of agony in gethsemane, he prayed a truly human, though holy, prayer: "abba, father, all things are possible unto thee; remove this cup from me: howbeit not what i will, but what thou wilt." ch. : . prayer, moreover, was not something which jesus reserved for himself; clearly it was a privilege which he extended to all his disciples. in the prayer that he taught his disciples, he summed up all that our prayer should be. matt. : - . =( ) god as father.=--one thing in particular was derived by the apostolic church from jesus--the conception of god as father. this conception appears in the epistles of paul as a matter of course; evidently it was firmly established among the readers; it no longer required defense or explanation. yet it had not lost, through long repetition, one whit of its freshness; in paul it is never a mere phrase, but always a profound spiritual fact. obviously this idea of the fatherhood of god was of particular importance for prayer. it taught the disciples "to draw near to god with all holy reverence and confidence, as children to a father, able and ready to help" them. a characteristic way of addressing god even in the gentile churches of paul was "abba, father." gal. : ; rom. : . the aramaic word "abba" is sufficient to show that this hallowed usage was based ultimately upon the teaching and example of jesus; the word was the very one that jesus had used both in his own prayers, for example in gethsemane, mark : , and in the "lord's prayer" which he taught to his disciples. =( ) the right of sonship.=--what needs to be observed especially, however, is that the right of addressing god as "our father" was not in the apostolic church extended to all men. certainly no justification for such an extension could have been found in the teaching of jesus; it was not the unbelieving multitude, but his own disciples, to whom jesus taught the lord's prayer. matt. : ; : ; luke : , . paul is even more explicit; the cry "abba, father" was to him a proof that a great change had taken place, that those who had been formerly under bondage to the world had now become sons of god. this change paul represents especially under the figure of adoption, gal. : ; men have to be adopted by god before they can call god father; and adoption is accomplished only by the work of christ. vs. , . =( ) the intercession of the spirit.=--the cry, "abba, father" can never be uttered by sinful man alone, but only by the power of christ's spirit. the prayers even of the redeemed are faulty. but the holy spirit takes up their cry. "and in like manner the spirit also helpeth our infirmity: for we know not how to pray as we ought; but the spirit himself maketh intercession for us with groanings which cannot be uttered; and he that searcheth the hearts knoweth what is the mind of the spirit, because he maketh intercession for the saints according to the will of god." rom. : , . there lies the true ground of confidence in prayer. prayer does not derive its efficacy from any merit of its own, but only from the goodness of god. let us not worry too much as to whether our prayers are good or bad; let them only be simple and sincere; god knows our weakness; his spirit will make intercession for us far better than we can intercede for ourselves. . public prayers of the apostolic church the few individual prayers that have been preserved from the apostolic age are for the most part prayers of a more or less public character. the spontaneous outpourings of the hearts of individual saints before god would usually not be put into writing; the full secrets of the prayer closet are known to god alone. =( ) spontaneity and sincerity.=--nevertheless, the public character of the prayers of the new testament does not mean that they are cold and formal. on the contrary, at a time when set liturgies had not yet been formed, public prayer possessed all the spontaneity of more private devotions; the thought of the listening congregation or of a circle of readers did not bring any hampering restraint. there is a sterling sincerity about all the prayers or fragments of prayers in the new testament. =( ) dignity.=--the spontaneity and sincerity of the prayers, however, did not involve any sacrifice of dignity. the prayer of the jerusalem congregation, acts : - , is a marvel of exalted speech; its employment of scripture phrase is an admirable example for public prayers of all ages. that prayer received a glorious answer; indeed the true prayer of the congregation never remains unheard. christ's promise is always fulfilled; where two or three are gathered together in his name there is he in the midst of them. in the epistles, there is to be found here and there what may be called, if not the beginning of liturgy, at any rate material of which a magnificent liturgy can be formed. the benediction of heb. : , , for example, is characterized by a splendid rhythm as well as by true evangelical fervor. such a prayer lifts the hearts of the congregation up into the presence of god. there is use for beauty, even in prayer; and the truest beauty is to be found in the prayers of the bible. . private prayers of the apostolic church the apostolic guidance in prayer extends even to those private prayers which no one hears except god. in this field, the epistles of paul are of special value. more fully than any other one man of the apostolic age, paul has revealed the very secrets of christian experience; and that experience is rooted in prayer. a glance at the beginnings and endings of the epistles will be sufficient to show how fundamental prayer was in paul's life; news of the churches was never received without issuing at once in thanksgiving or in intercession, and paul desires, not merely the good wishes, but the prayers, of his beloved converts. paul practiced what he preached when he urged the thessalonian christians to "pray without ceasing." i thess. : . compare chs. : ; : ; rom. : ; ii tim. : . evidently, moreover, he regarded prayer as something far more than an incidental expression of the christian life; he believed in its real efficacy with the ruler of the world. . "my power is made perfect in weakness" one passage, particularly, will repay special study. in ii cor. : , , we have information about the most intimate, the most personal of the prayers of paul. the apostle had been afflicted with a persistent illness; it had apparently hampered him in his work, and caused him acute distress. in his trouble he called upon the lord; and by that prayer paul's affliction has been made to redound to the lasting instruction and encouragement of the church. =( ) prayer concerning physical ills.=--in the first place, the prayer concerns not spiritual matters, or the needs of the church at large, but a simple affair of the physical life. as life is constituted here on earth, we are intimately connected with the physical world; the body is necessary to the soul. but god is master of earth as well as of heaven; even the simplest needs of life may be laid before him in prayer. to teach us that, we have here the example of paul, as well as the precept of the saviour himself. =( ) the answer.=--in the second place, the prayer was answered, and answered in a very instructive way. the illness was not removed; but it was made an instrument of blessing. the purpose of it was revealed: "my power," said christ, "is made perfect in weakness." physical suffering is worth while if it leads to heroism and faith. such is often the lord's will. he himself trod the path of suffering before us, and in his case as in ours, the path led to glory. =( ) the prayer addressed to christ.=--in the third place, this prayer was addressed, not to god the father, but to christ. compare acts : , . without doubt "the lord" in ii cor. : , as practically always in the pauline epistles, refers to christ. usually, in the new testament, prayer is addressed, through christ, to god the father; but there is no reason why it should not be addressed to the son. the son as well as the father is a living person; and the son as well as the father is god. it is well that we have apostolic examples for prayer addressed directly to the saviour. christ, to paul, was no mere instrument in salvation, that had served its purpose and was then removed; he was alive and sovereign, and the relation to him was a relation of love. in a time of acute physical distress, paul turned to the saviour. three times he called, and then the answer came. the answer will always come in the lord's way, not in ours; but the lord's way is always best. * * * * * in the library.--hastings, "dictionary of the bible": bernard, article on "prayer" (iii). thomas, "the prayers of st. paul." lesson xliv the congregation . congregational meetings in palestine in studying the congregational meetings of the apostolic churches it must be remembered that the christian community in jerusalem continued for many years its participation in the worship of temple and synagogue. specially christian meetings, therefore, were at first not the sole expression of the collective worship of the jerusalem christians. nevertheless, such meetings were undoubtedly held, even from the beginning. from the days when the one hundred and twenty brethren were gathered together before pentecost, the church was not without some outward expression of its distinctive life. =( ) as indicated in the acts.=--the circumstances of such early meetings of the congregation are, however, obscure. the very considerable numbers of the converts, acts : , ; : ; : , would perhaps sometimes make it difficult to gather the whole congregation together in one place; if, however, that were done, it would perhaps be usually in some part of the temple area. there seem to have been general meetings--for example, acts : - --but it is perhaps not necessary to suppose that they included every individual member of the jerusalem church. certainly, however, no members of that first christian community neglected the assembling of themselves together. evidently the sense of brotherhood was strongly developed, and evidently it expressed itself not only in the regular relief of the needy, acts : , but also in meetings for instruction and worship and prayer. ch. : ; : - . these meetings were only outward indications of a wonderful unity of mind and heart. ch. : . the cause of that unity was the common possession of the spirit of god. as might have been expected in a book which is interested chiefly in the outward extension of the kingdom, the book of the acts gives us little detailed information about the conduct of these earliest christian meetings. probably, however, the example of the jewish synagogue made itself strongly felt. there was no violent break with judaism; a new spirit was infused into ancient forms. the resemblance between the synagogue service and even the fully developed christian meetings of to-day was noted in connection with lesson iv. =( ) as indicated in the epistle of james.=--the epistle of james perhaps helps somewhat to supply the need of detailed information. that epistle, as was observed in lesson xxxii, was written by the head of the jerusalem church, and probably to jewish christians before a.d. . apparently, therefore, we have in james : - some welcome information about christian assemblies, if not in jerusalem, at least in other jewish christian churches. in v. , the word "synagogue" is applied to the meeting which is described, but that word in greek means simply "gathering together"--almost the same word is used in heb. : . the use of the word by james shows simply that at that early time "synagogue" had not become purely a technical designation of a non-christian jewish assembly. so interpreted, the passage in james indicates--what might indeed have been expected--that the early christian meetings were not always perfect. a pharisaical habit of respect of persons and desire for the chief seats had crept even into the church. if similar faults appear in modern times, we should not despair, but should fight against them in the spirit of james. . congregational meetings in the pauline churches with regard to the pauline churches information about the conduct of religious services is far more abundant than it is with regard to the churches of palestine; for we have here the inestimable assistance of the pauline epistles. the first epistle to the corinthians, especially, is a mine of information; but much can also be learned elsewhere. =( ) the place of meeting.=--from the acts it appears that paul regularly began his work in any city by preaching in the jewish synagogue, but that the opposition of the jews soon made it necessary to find another meeting place. often, a private house, belonging to one of the converts, served the purpose. rom. : ; i cor. : ; col. : ; philem. . sometimes there seem to have been a number of such house-churches in the same city; yet common meetings of all the christians of the city seem also to be presupposed. in ephesus paul used for his evangelistic work a building or a room belonging to a certain tyrannus, who was probably a rhetorician. the erection of buildings especially for christian use belongs of course to a considerably later time. =( ) the time of meeting.=--the frequency of the meetings does not appear, and may well have varied according to circumstances. there is some indication, however, that the first day of the week, the present sunday, was especially singled out for religious services. i cor. : ; acts : . the same day is apparently called "the lord's day" in rev. : . =( ) temporary gifts of the spirit.=--in the actual conduct of the meetings, some features appear which are not to be observed in the modern church. a number of the gifts discussed in i cor., chs. to --for example, miracles, speaking with tongues, the interpretation of tongues, and prophecy in the strict sense--have become extinct. the cessation of them need cause no wonder; the apostolic age was a time of beginnings, when the church was being established by the immediate exercise of the power of god; it is no wonder that at such a time the spirit manifested himself as he did not in later generations. there is a fundamental difference between the apostolic age and all subsequent periods in the history of the church. nevertheless, all the essential features of our modern church services were present from the earliest time about which we have detailed information. the example of the apostles is here very explicit. =( ) scripture-reading.=--in the first place, the pauline churches certainly practiced the reading of the bible. that would be proved sufficiently by the evident familiarity of the christians with the old testament scriptures; for in those days such familiarity would undoubtedly be received in large measure by having the bible read aloud. the example of the synagogue would also have its influence. it must be remembered that some even of the gentile converts were familiar with the synagogue service before they became christians. but there is also the explicit testimony of i thess. : , col. : . there the reading of pauline epistles is specifically enjoined. the apocalypse also was clearly intended to be read aloud. rev. : ; : . =( ) preaching.=--in the second place, there was preaching. no doubt this part of the service often took a somewhat different form from that which it assumes to-day. prophecy, for example, was a kind of preaching which has been discontinued. the exercise of the gift of "teaching" perhaps corresponded more closely to the sermons of the present day; certainly an exposition of the scripture passages read would have been according to the analogy of the jewish synagogue. at any rate, in some form or other, there was certainly instruction in the scriptures and in the gospel, and exhortation based upon that instruction. =( ) prayer.=--in the third place, there was prayer; directions for public prayer are given at some length in i tim., ch. ; and there are indications that prayer was practiced also in the meetings of the corinthian church. see for example, i cor. : , . =( ) singing.=--in the fourth place, there was probably singing, though the direct information about this part of the service is slight. see, for example, i cor. : . certainly no elaborate argument is necessary in order to exhibit the scripture warrant for singing in the worship of god. psalms were sung in old testament times to an instrumental accompaniment, and there is no evidence that the customs of the church were changed in this respect under the new dispensation. indeed, if singing is an expression of joy, it would seem to be especially in place after the fulfillment of the promises has come. . paul's directions for congregational meetings two features balance each other in paul's directions for the public worship of the corinthian church. =( ) the principle of freedom.=--in the first place he is in full sympathy with the freedom and informality that prevailed. there seem to have been no set speakers in corinth; every man spoke as the spirit gave him utterance; the service must have been characterized by great variety. this variety, paul says, is not disturbing, because it finds its higher unity in the holy spirit. "there are diversities of gifts, but the same spirit." i cor. : . =( ) the principle of dignity.=--in the second place, however, paul has a strong sense of dignity. the enthusiastic expression of religious feeling must not degenerate into anything like a senseless orgy; spiritual gifts, however exalted, are not independent of reason. "the spirits of the prophets are subject to the prophets; for god is not a god of confusion, but of peace." i cor. : , . "let all things be done decently and in order." v. . dignity was to be preserved, moreover, not merely in the ordering of the service itself, but also in the dress and behavior of those who took part. so much at least is clear in the difficult passage, ch. : - . apparently the full equality which was granted to women in the christian life led the women of the corinthian congregation to give a kind of expression to their freedom which at least at that time was not seemly. paul detected the danger and guarded against it. the lesson always needs to be learned. however dignity may be preserved in detail, in any particular country and at any particular time, the principle itself should always be borne in mind exactly as paul enunciated it. at a later period in the apostolic age, the sense of dignity seems to have found expression in a quieter sort of religious service than that which prevailed at the time of first corinthians. the first epistle to timothy lays great stress upon sobriety and gravity in various departments of the life of the church. =( ) the principle of love.=--these two principles--the principle of freedom and the principle of dignity--are kept each in its own proper place only when they are submitted to the governance of a higher principle. that higher principle is love. the ultimate aim of congregational meetings, according to paul, is not the benefit of the individual, but the edification of the whole body, and of the stranger who may come in. the man who has the principle of christian love in his heart, as it is grandly described in i cor., ch. , will never push himself forward in the congregation in such a way as to display his own spiritual gifts at the expense of others. on the other hand, he will not be inclined to check the operations of the spirit; it is the spirit alone who can convert the stranger, it is the spirit alone who can build up christian people in the life of faith and hope and love. the principle of love is often neglected in the modern church. people say they will not go to church because they get nothing out of it. no doubt they are mistaken; no doubt if they did go, the benefit would appear clearly in the long run in their own lives. but at any rate they have ignored the highest motive altogether. we should go to church not only to obtain benefit for ourselves, but also, and especially, to benefit our brethren by joining with them in worship, in prayer and in instruction. * * * * * in the library.--hastings, "dictionary of the bible"; gayford, article on "church"; adeney, article on "worship (in n.t.)." charteris, "the church of christ," pp. - . lesson xlv the relief of the needy in the student's text book, special emphasis was laid upon the relief of the needy as it was practiced in the jerusalem church. here it may be well to supplement what was there said by a somewhat more detailed treatment of the great collection that was undertaken by paul. the exposition will serve to illustrate the apostolic principles of christian giving. . the pauline collection according to first corinthians =( ) the beginning in galatia and in corinth.=--writing from ephesus during his long stay in that city, acts : to : , paul tells the corinthians that he had already given directions about the collection to the churches of galatia, i cor. : ; he had probably done so either during the second visit to galatia, acts : , or by letter after his arrival at ephesus. now, at any rate, he asks the corinthians--very simply and briefly, and evidently presupposing previous information on the part of his readers--to prosecute the collection during his absence in order that when he should arrive at corinth everything might be ready. _( ) laying in store on the first day of the week._--the manner in which the collection was to be managed is exceedingly interesting. "upon the first day of the week," paul says, "let each one of you lay by him in store, as he may prosper." i cor. : . apparently no permanent church treasury was used for the reception of the gifts, every man was to save his own money at home, very much as private collection barrels are used to-day. the laying up of the money, however, was to take place on the first day of the week; we have here probably an early trace of the christian sabbath. perhaps we may conclude that the act of giving was regarded as a part of religious worship. such a conclusion is at any rate in thorough harmony with all that paul says about the collection. some people seem to feel that the taking of an offering rather mars the dignity of a church service. in reality it has that effect only if it is executed in the wrong spirit. christian giving is treated by paul as a legitimate part of the worship of god. =( ) the delegates of the corinthian church.=--when paul should arrive at corinth, he was to receive the collection and either send or take it to jerusalem by the help of delegates whom the corinthians themselves should choose. the purpose of choosing these delegates appears more plainly in second corinthians. . the pauline collection according to second corinthians =( ) the situation.=--after the writing of the first epistle to the corinthians, there had followed a period of serious estrangement between paul and the corinthian church. naturally enough the collection suffered during this period, as did other christian activities. at the time of second corinthians, perhaps about a year after the first letter had been written, paul was obliged to remind his readers that although they had begun the work the year before, much remained still to be done. ii cor. : ; : . nevertheless, titus, during his recent visit to corinth, when the repentance of the church had become manifest, had apparently been able to take the matter again in hand. such seems to be the most probable interpretation of ch. : ; : . if titus did take up the matter on the very visit when the rebellion against paul had been only with difficulty quelled, that is a striking indication of the importance which paul and his associates attributed to the collection. it was not a matter that could wait until some convenient season; it had to be taken in hand vigorously, even perhaps at the risk of misunderstanding and suspicion, the very moment when paul's relation to the church became again tolerably good. =( ) courtesy of paul.=--like all of paul's management of money matters, his treatment of the collection is characterized by admirable delicacy and tact. instead of berating the corinthians roundly for their delinquency, as so many modern organizers would have done, he seeks to win them over by worthier methods. he points, indeed, to the example of the macedonian christians, in order to fire the zeal of the corinthians; the poverty of the macedonian churches had not stood in the way of their liberality; they had given up to their power and indeed beyond their power; they had given, not of compulsion, but willingly, dedicating themselves as well as their goods to the lord. ii cor. : - . but the corinthians are allowed to draw their own conclusion; paul does not force it upon them. he does not press the matter home brutally; he does not put the corinthians to shame by expressly pointing out how much more generously the poorer macedonian christians had contributed than they. indeed he gives his readers full credit; he courteously calls their attention to the fact that it was they who had made the beginning, v. , and that he had been able to boast of them to the macedonians, so that their zeal had stirred up their macedonian brethren. ch. : , . he appeals especially to the pride that they ought to feel in the boasting which paul had ventured upon in their behalf; paul had boasted to the macedonians that achaia had been prepared for a year; how sad an end it would be to such boasting if macedonians should go to corinth with paul and should find that the collection was not ready after all! paul urges the corinthians not to leave any part of the work until after his arrival; if they do, they will put both him and themselves to shame. vs. - . with equal delicacy paul hints that the achievements of the corinthians in other directions ought to be supplemented by this grace of giving. the corinthians, according to the first epistle, had been very proud of their power of "utterance" and their "knowledge"; to these paul can now add--after the loyalty of the church has finally been established--earnestness and love, ii cor. : - ; but all these excellences will be incomplete unless there is also liberality. the christian life must express itself in the simpler graces, if the more conspicuous activities are to be of genuine value. =( ) no unfair burdens to be borne.=--the delicacy of paul's treatment of the matter is observed also in ii cor. : - ; he is careful to explain that the corinthians are not asked to lay unfair burdens upon themselves. there should be an equality among christians; it is now time for the corinthians to give rather than to receive, but if circumstances should change they might count on the aid of their brethren. furthermore, no one should be discouraged if he can give only a little; "if the readiness is there, it is acceptable according as a man hath, not according as he hath not." =( ) cheerful giving.=--paul urges his readers, indeed, to be bountiful. "he that soweth sparingly shall reap also sparingly; and he that soweth bountifully shall reap also bountifully." ii cor. : . but this bountifulness was to be secured, not by pressing out the last cent, but by promoting real cheerfulness in giving. "let each man do according as he hath purposed in his heart: not grudgingly, or of necessity: for god loveth a cheerful giver." the pauline method is wisest in the end. men can seldom be bullied into liberality; they will give liberally only when giving becomes, not a mere duty, but a joy. cheerfulness in giving, moreover, possesses a value of its own, quite aside from the amount of the gift; it is a true expression of christian communion. =( ) the unity of the church.=--probably paul desired to accomplish by the collection something even more important than the relief of the jerusalem poor. many palestinian christians--not only extreme judaizers, but also apparently considerable numbers among the rank and file--had been suspicious of the gentile mission. acts : , . such suspicions would be allayed by deeds more effectively than by words; a generous offering for the poor of the jerusalem church would show that jews and gentiles were really united in the bonds of christian love. ii cor. : - . =( ) the glory of god.=--ultimately, however, the purpose of the collection, as of all other christian activities, is to be found, according to paul, in god. "for the ministration of this service not only filleth up the measure of the wants of the saints, but aboundeth also through many thanksgivings unto god." the unity of the church, inspiring though it is, is desired, not for its own sake, but for the sake of the glory of god. by the simple means of the collection, paul hopes to present a united church--united in thanksgiving and in love--as some poor, human return to him who has granted us all the "unspeakable gift" of salvation through his son. =( ) sound business methods.=--the arrangements which paul made for the administration of the gifts are as instructive in their way as are the lofty principles that he applied. in order to avoid base suspicions, ii cor. : ; : - , he determined that delegates approved by the corinthians themselves should carry the gifts to jerusalem, i cor. : , , and secured for the prosecution of the work in corinth men who had the full indorsement of the churches. ii cor. : - . the lesson is worth learning. it will not do to be careless about the money matters of the church; it will not do to say that the church is above suspicion. like paul, "we take thought for things honorable, not only in the sight of the lord, but also in the sight of men." in other words, we must be not only honorable in managing the money affairs of the church, but also demonstrably honorable. to that end sound business methods should always be used. the accounts of the church should be audited, not with less care, but if anything with more care, than those of ordinary business enterprises. . the pauline collection according to romans in the epistle to the romans, written from corinth a little after the time of second corinthians, paul speaks of the collection again. rom. : - , . he is on the point of going with the gifts to jerusalem, and asks the roman christians to pray that the ministration of the gentiles may be "acceptable to the saints." there is no reason to suppose that such prayers were unanswered; paul was cordially received by the jerusalem christians, acts : - ; the trouble which caused his arrest came from non-christian jews. . to whom was relief extended? =( ) breadth of christian sympathy.=--the relief of the needy in the apostolic church, as it has been studied in the present lesson, concerned, not outsiders, but christian brethren. this fact certainly does not mean that the early christians were narrow in their sympathies; they had received from jesus the command to love their enemies, and the command was reiterated by the apostles. rom. : . they were commanded, furthermore, to "work that which is good toward all men." gal. : . =( ) special attention to christian brethren.=--there were reasons, however, why such good works should be directed "especially toward them that are of the household of the faith." (a) the special rights of brethren.--in the first place, there was a general reason, which applies to all ages. though the church has a duty to all men, it has a special duty to its own members; for christian people to allow their brethren to starve is as unnatural as for a father to neglect a son, or a husband a wife. community in the faith does create a special bond, which should make itself felt in all departments of life. it should be observed that in the matter of the collection paul takes altogether for granted the right of the poor saints to the support of the church. he does not think it worth while to go into details about the suffering of the jerusalem poor; he does not attempt to play upon the sympathies of his readers; he does not patronizingly represent the recipients of the bounty as paupers. indeed, the jerusalem christians, he tells the romans, though they are receiving material aid, are not really debtors, but rather creditors. "if the gentiles have been made partakers of their spiritual things, they owe it to them also to minister unto them in carnal things." rom. : . this attitude toward poorer christians is worthy of all emulation. aid to the brethren is not "charity," in the degraded sense which that fine word has unfortunately assumed, but a solemn and yet joyful duty. it should never be undertaken in a patronizing spirit, but in a spirit of love that multiplies the value of the gift. (b) avoidance of idleness in the church.--on the other hand, however, the apostolic church did not encourage begging or pauperism. what the special reason was for the poverty of the jerusalem church we do not know. perhaps many of the jerusalem christians had been obliged to leave their homes in galilee and in the dispersion. at any rate, we may assume that the poverty of the church was not due to idleness. in the thessalonian epistles paul takes occasion to warn his converts against an idle life; they are to do their own business and work with their hands; "if any will not work, neither let him eat." i thess. : - ; ii thess. : - . certainly paul was the best example of such diligence; despite his wonderful gifts and lofty duties he had made himself independent by manual labor. in the first epistle to timothy, moreover, particular precautions are taken against allowing the bounty of the church to be abused. i tim. : - . the treatment of the poor in the apostolic church exhibits everywhere an admirable combination of common sense with lofty idealism. (c) conditions in the apostolic church and conditions to-day.--if the gifts of the apostolic church were devoted chiefly to christian brethren rather than to outsiders, that is no justification for such limitation to-day. in the apostolic age there were special reasons why the church could not often deal extensively with the material needs of the world at large. the church was exceedingly poor; many of the converts probably suffered serious losses by the very fact of their being christians; under such conditions the first duty was obviously at home. conditions to-day are widely different. the church has become wealthy; she is well able to extend her ministrations far and wide. only by unlimited breadth of service will she really be true to the example of jesus and of his first disciples; only by universal helpfulness will she be true to her great commission. * * * * * in the library.--uhlhorn, "christian charity in the ancient church." brace, "gesta christi," pp. - . charteris, "the church of christ," pp. - . lesson xlvi organizing for service whatever the organization of a body of christians may be, the body itself is a true branch of the church if it consists of those who believe in christ. nevertheless, if the church is to be more than an aggregation of individuals, if it is not only to be something, but also to do something, it requires some sort of organization. this fundamental need was clearly recognized in the apostolic age; and it was met by certain provisions which we believe ought still to be followed. these provisions, however, do not amount to anything like an elaborate constitution; they do not hinder adaptation to changing conditions. . elders according to the pastoral epistles in the pastoral epistles, which afford more detailed information about organization than is to be found anywhere else in the new testament, the government of the local church is seen to be intrusted to a body of "elders," with whom "deacons" are associated. no one of the elders, so far as can be detected, possessed authority at all different in kind from the authority of the others; all had the function of ruling; all were "overseers" or "bishops" of the church. the functions of the elders are not described in detail; but evidently they had a general oversight over the affairs of the congregation. that is the meaning of the word "bishop" as it is applied to them. some of them at least also labored "in the word and in teaching," but all seem to have been alike in their function of bearing rule. . elders according to the presbyterian form of government the similarity of such an arrangement to our own presbyterian form of government is plain. our churches also are governed not by an individual, but by a body of "elders" who are equal to one another in authority. changing conditions have of course introduced elaboration of the simple apostolic model. thus the teaching function, for example, which in apostolic times was perhaps exercised more or less informally by those of the elders who possessed the gifts for it, is now naturally assigned for the most part to men who have received a special training. these "teaching elders" in our church are the ministers. conditions have become so complex that men of special training, who devote their whole time to the work of the church, are imperatively required. the pastors and teachers, eph. : , even in the apostolic church, seem to have formed a fairly definite group. this class of gifts is exercised to-day especially by the ministers, though similar functions should also be exercised by other members of the church. . how were elders to be chosen? with regard to the government of the apostolic church a number of interesting questions can never be definitely answered. for example, how were the elders to be chosen? =( ) sometimes appointed by the apostles.=--such passages as acts : ; titus : , do not settle the question. according to the former passage, elders were appointed in the churches of southern galatia by paul and barnabas. but it must be remembered that the authority of the apostles was peculiar and temporary. because the apostles had power to appoint elders it does not follow that any individuals at a later time would possess a similar power. the situation, at the time of the first christian mission, was peculiar; small bodies of christians had just been rescued from heathenism; at first they would need a kind of guidance which could afterwards safely be withdrawn. according to titus : , titus was to appoint elders in the churches of crete. but clearly titus, like timothy, was merely a special and temporary representative of the apostle paul; for titus to appoint elders, under the definite direction of paul, was no more significant than for paul to appoint them himself. =( ) the right of congregational election.=--on the whole, it may be confidently maintained that the presbyterian method of choosing elders--namely the method of election by the whole congregation--is more in accordance with the spirit of apostolic precedent than any other method that has been proposed. throughout the apostolic church, the congregation was evidently given a very large place in all departments of the christian life. the jerusalem congregation, for example, had a decisive voice in choosing the very first church officers who are known to have been added to the apostles. acts : - . in thessalonica and in corinth the whole congregation was active in the matter of church discipline. ii thess. : , ; i cor. : - ; ii cor. : . the whole congregation was also invited to choose delegates for carrying the gifts of the corinthian church to jerusalem. i cor. : . these are merely examples. it must be remembered, moreover, that the authority of the congregation in the apostolic age was limited by the authority of the apostles, which was special and temporary; when the apostles should be removed, the congregational functions would be increased. yet even the apostles were exceedingly careful not to destroy the liberties of the rank and file. nowhere in the apostolic church were the ordinary church members treated as though they were without rights and without responsibilities. indeed, even when the apostles appointed elders, they may have previously ascertained the preferences of the people. . the apostolic precedent and departures from it the presbyterial form of church government--that is, government by a body of elders--which is found in the apostolic age, differs strikingly from certain later developments. in several particulars, at least, principles have become prevalent which are at variance with the apostolic model. =( ) the monarchical episcopate.=--the first particular concerns the relation of the church officers to one another. in the apostolic church, as we have observed, there was a parity among the elders; the local congregation was governed, not by an individual, but by a body. as early, however, as the first part of the second century, a change had taken place, at least in many of the churches. the supreme authority had come to be held by an individual, called "bishop"; all other officers were clearly subordinate to him; the government of the local congregation was no longer presbyterial, but monarchical; the so-called "monarchical episcopate" had been formed. this state of affairs appears clearly in the epistles of ignatius, which were written a short time before a. d. . but all attempts to find traces of the monarchical episcopate in the apostolic age have resulted in failure. the greek word _episcopos_, which is translated in the english bible--rather misleadingly, perhaps--by "bishop," is applied, not to a special officer standing above the elders, but simply to the elders themselves. "elder" designates the office; _episcopos_ designates one function of the office. the latter word could hardly have been used in this general way if it had already acquired its technical significance. the efforts which have been made to discover references to the office of bishop in the apostolic age are unconvincing. it is exceedingly doubtful whether the "angels" of the seven churches to which messages are sent in the apocalypse are to be regarded as church officers; and even if they were church officers it is by no means clear that they exercised the functions of bishops. undoubtedly timothy and titus appear in the pastoral epistles with functions similar in many respects to those of bishops, but it is also clear that they exercised those functions, not as officers of the church who might have successors, but merely as temporary representatives of the apostle paul. =( ) the priesthood of the clergy.=--an even more important divergence from apostolic conditions concerns the functions of the church officers. according to a theory which has become widely prevalent, certain officers of the church are to be regarded as "priests"--that is, they are mediators between god and man. curiously enough the english word "priest," is nothing but another form of the word "presbyter," which means "elder"; "presbyter" is only "priest" "writ large." in actual usage, however, "priest" means vastly more than "presbyter"; it designates a man who represents men to god and mediates god's actions to men. so understood, the term is never applied in the new testament to church officers as such. according to the new testament, the only priest (in the strict sense) under the new dispensation is christ; christ is the only mediator between god and man, i tim. : ; the high-priesthood of christ is elaborated in the epistle to the hebrews. in another sense, indeed, all believers are priests, i peter : , ; rev. : ; : ; : ; all have the right of direct access to god; all are devoted to a holy service. the idea of a special priesthood in the christian church is strikingly at variance with the apostolic teaching. =( ) apostolic succession.=--another point of variance concerns the manner in which the officers of the church should receive their authority. by a theory prevalent in the church of england and in the protestant episcopal church in america as well as in the greek and roman catholic churches, the authority of the clergy has been received through an unbroken line of transmission from the apostles; the immediate successors of the apostles received the right of handing down the commission to others, and so on through the centuries; without an ordination derived in this way no one can be a ruler in the true church; and without submission to such regularly ordained rulers no body of persons can constitute a branch of the true church. this theory places a tremendous power in the hands of a definite body of persons whose moral qualifications for wielding that power are often more than doubtful. surely so stupendous a claim can be made good only by the clear pronouncement of a recognized authority. such a pronouncement is not to be found in the new testament. there is not the slightest evidence to show that the apostles provided for a transmission of their authority through a succession of persons. on the contrary, their authority seems to have been special and temporary, like the miraculous powers with which they were endowed. the regular church officers who were appointed in the apostolic age evidently possessed no apostolic authority; however chosen, they were essentially representatives of the congregation. a true branch of the church could exist, at least in theory, without any officers at all, wherever true believers were together; the church did not depend upon the officers, but the officers upon the church. . relations of the congregations to one another so far, the organization of the apostolic church has been considered only in so far as it concerned the individual congregation; a word must now be said about the relation of the congregations to one another. that relation, in the apostolic age, was undoubtedly very close. the pauline epistles, in particular, give an impression of active intercourse among the churches. the thessalonian christians "became an ensample to all that believe in macedonia and in achaia"; the story of their conversion became known "in every place." i thess. : - . in the matter of the collection, macedonia stirred up achaia, and achaia macedonia. ii cor. : - ; : - . the faith of the roman christians was "proclaimed throughout the whole world." rom. : . judea heard of the missionary labors of paul, gal. : - ; fellowship between jews and gentiles was maintained by the collection for the jerusalem saints. evidently the apostolic church was animated by a strong sense of unity. this feeling of unity was maintained especially by the instrumentality of the apostles, who, with their helpers, traveled from one congregation to another, and exerted a unifying authority over all. certainly there was nothing like a universal church council; christian fellowship was maintained in a thoroughly informal way. in order that such fellowship should be permanent, however, there would obviously be an increasing need for some sort of official union among the congregations. when the apostles passed away, their place would have to be taken by representative assemblies; increasing complexity of life brought increasing need of organization. the representative assemblies of our own church, therefore, meet an obvious need; and both in their free, representative character and in their unifying purpose it may fairly be claimed that they are true to the spirit of the apostolic age. . principles the apostolic precedent with regard to organization should always be followed in spirit as well as in form. three principles, especially, are to be observed in the church organization of the apostolic age. in the first place, there was considerable freedom in details. no christian who had gifts of any kind was ordinarily prevented from exercising them. in the second place, there was respect for the constituted authority, whatever it might be. such respect, moreover, was not blind devotion to a ruling class, but the respect which is ennobled by love. finally, in church organization, as in all the affairs of life, what was regarded as really essential was the presence of the holy spirit. when timothy laid his hands upon a new elder, the act signified the bestowal of, or the prayer for, divine favor. this last lesson, especially, needs to be learned to-day. without the grace of god, the best of church organizations is mere machinery without power. * * * * * in the library.--davis, "dictionary of the bible": articles on "elder," "deacon," "deaconess," "laying on of hands." hastings, "dictionary of the bible": gayford, article on "church"; gwatkin, article on "church government in the apostolic age." lightfoot, "the christian ministry," in "saint paul's epistle to the philippians," pp. - , and in "dissertations on the apostolic age," pp. - . charteris, "the church of christ," pp. - , - , - . falconer, "from apostle to priest." macpherson, "presbyterianism" (in "handbooks for bible classes"). lesson xlvii a mission for the world . judaism and christianity in teaching the lesson in class, it might be well simply to review the principal steps in the geographical extension of the apostolic church. this geographical advance, however, was made possible only by an advance in principles which should not be ignored. the really great step in the early christian mission was not the progress from jerusalem to antioch, or from antioch to asia minor and to greece, but the progress from a national to a universal religion. judaism, despite its missionary activity, always identified the church more or less closely with the nation; it was a distinctly national religion. full union with it meant the abandonment of one's own racial and national relationships. =( ) limitations of judaism.=--the national character of judaism was an insurmountable hindrance to the jewish mission. despite the hindrance, it is true, judaism achieved important conquests; it won many adherents throughout the greco-roman world. these missionary achievements undoubtedly form an eloquent testimony to the power of israel's faith; despite those features of jewish custom which were repulsive to the gentile mind, the belief in the one true god and the lofty ethical ideal of the old testament scriptures possessed an irresistible attraction for many earnest souls. nevertheless, so long as jewish monotheism and jewish ethics were centered altogether in the life of a very peculiar people, they could never really succeed in winning the nations of the world. =( ) apparent identity of judaism and christianity.=--at first it looked as though christianity were to share in the limitation; it looked as though the disciples of jesus formed merely a jewish sect. undoubtedly they would bring the jewish people to a loftier faith and to a purer life; they would themselves become better and nobler jews; but jews they would apparently always remain. =( ) the great transition.=--before many years had passed, however, the limitation was gloriously transcended. christianity was no longer bound to judaism. it became a religion for the world, within whose capacious borders there was room for every nation and every race. how was the transition accomplished? it was not accomplished by any contemptuous repudiation of the age-long exclusiveness of israel. such repudiation would have involved the discrediting of the old testament, and to the old testament the church was intensely loyal. jewish particularism had been ordered of god; the scriptures were full of warnings against any mingling of the chosen people with its neighbors. jehovah had made of israel a people alone; he had planted it in an inaccessible hill country, remote from the great currents of the world's thought and life; he had preserved its separateness even amid the changing fortunes of captivity and war. salvation was to be found only in israel; israel was the chosen people. the church never abandoned this view of israelitish history. yet for herself she transcended the particularism that it involved. she did so in a very simple way--merely by recognizing that a new era had begun. in the old era, particularism had a rightful place; it was no mere prejudice, but a divine ordinance. but now, in the age of the messiah, particularism had given place to universalism; the religion of israel had become a religion of the world. what had formerly been right had now become wrong; god himself had ushered in a new and more glorious dispensation. particularism, in the divine economy, had served a temporary, though beneficent, purpose; god had separated israel from the world in order that the precious deposit of israel's faith, pure of all heathen alloy, might finally be given freely to all. the recognition of this wonderful new dispensation of god was accomplished in two ways. . the divine guidance in the first place, it was accomplished by the direct command of the holy spirit. the first preaching to gentiles was undertaken not because the missionaries understood why it should be done, but simply because god commanded. =( ) philip.=--for example, when philip preached to the ethiopian--who was not in the strictest sense a member of the jewish people--he was acting not in accordance with any reflection of his own--a desert road was a very unlikely place for missionary service--but under the plain and palpable guidance of the spirit. what is emphasized in the whole narrative is the strange, unaccountable character of philip's movements; evidently his actions at such a time were not open to criticism; what philip did god did; if philip preached to an outsider, such preaching was god's will. acts : - . =( ) cornelius.=--in the case of the conversion of cornelius and his friends, acts : to : , the divine warrant was just as plain. both cornelius and peter acted altogether in accordance with god's guidance. on the housetop, peter's scruples were unmistakably overcome. "what god hath cleansed," he was told, "make not thou common." peter did not fully comprehend the strange command that he should eat what the law forbade, and it was not explained to him; but at least the command was a command of god, and must certainly be obeyed. the meaning of the vision became clear when cornelius' house was entered; a gentile had evidently been granted the offer of the gospel. god was no respecter of persons. finally the holy spirit fell on all the gentiles who heard the message; they spake with tongues as the disciples had done at the first. that was the crowning manifestation of god's will. there was no reason to wait for circumcision or union with the people of israel. "can any man forbid the water," said peter, "that these should not be baptized, who have received the holy spirit as well as we?" acts : . all opposition was broken down; only one conclusion was possible; the jerusalem christians "glorified god, saying, then to the gentiles also hath god granted repentance unto life." acts : . =( ) the grace of god in the gentile mission.=--scarcely less palpable was the divine guidance in the subsequent developments of the gentile mission. after the momentous step of certain unnamed jews of cyprus and cyrene, who founded the church at antioch, barnabas had no difficulty in recognizing the grace of god. acts : . not suspicion, but only gladness, was in place. when paul and barnabas returned from the first gentile mission, they could report to the antioch church that god had plainly "opened a door of faith unto the gentiles." ch. : . if god had opened, who could close? at the apostolic council, in the very face of bitter opposition, the same great argument was used. the missionaries simply "rehearsed all things that god had done with them," ch. : , especially "what signs and wonders god had wrought among the gentiles through them." v. . there was only one thing to be done; the gentile mission must be accepted with gladness as a gift of god; he that wrought for peter unto the apostleship of the circumcision wrought for paul also unto the gentiles, gal. : ; james and peter and john could recognize, both in the gentile mission and in the inner life of the chief missionary, the plainest possible manifestation of the grace of god. v. . . reasons for gentile freedom the church transcended the bounds of judaism, then, primarily because of a direct command of god. such commands must be obeyed whether they are understood or not. as a matter of fact, however, god did not leave the matter in such an unsatisfactory state; he revealed not only his will, but also the reason for it; he showed not only that the gentiles must be received into the church, but also why they must be received. the essence of the gospel had demanded gentile freedom from the beginning; the justification of that freedom at the bar of reason, therefore, brought a clearer understanding of the gospel itself. two contrasts, at least, enabled the church to explain the reason why the gentiles could be saved without becoming jews. the first was the contrast between faith and works, between grace and the law; the second was the contrast between the type and the thing typified. the former was revealed especially to paul; the latter to the author of hebrews. =( ) the law and grace.=--salvation through christ, according to paul, is an absolutely free gift. it cannot be earned; it must simply be received. in other words, it comes not by works, but by faith. the law of god, on the other hand, of which the mosaic law was the clearest embodiment, offers a different means of obtaining god's favor. it simply presents a series of commandments, and offers salvation on condition that they be obeyed. but the trouble is, the commandments, since the fall, cannot be obeyed; everyone has incurred deadly guilt through his disobedience; the power of the flesh is too strong. at that point, however, god intervened. he offered christ as a sacrifice for sin that all believers might have a fresh start; and he bestowed the spirit of the living christ that all might have strength to lead a new life. but christ will do everything or nothing. a man must take his choice. there are only two ways of obtaining salvation--the perfect keeping of the law, or the simple, unconditional acceptance of what christ has done. the first is excluded because of sin; the second has become a glorious reality in the church. if, however, salvation is through the free gift of christ, then the law religion has been superseded. all those features of the law which were intended to make the law palpable, as a set of external rules, are abrogated. the christian, indeed, performs the will of god--in the deepest sense christianity only confirms the law--but he performs it, not by slavish obedience to a complex of external commandments, but by willing submission to the spirit of god. of course, the religion of the old testament was not, according to paul, purely a law religion; on the contrary paul quotes the old testament in support of faith. but there was a law element in the old testament; and the law served merely a temporary, though beneficent, purpose. it was intended to deepen the sense of sin and hopelessness, in order that finally salvation might be sought not in man's way but in god's. the new order at length has come; in christ we are free men, and should never return to the former bondage. the middle wall of partition has been done away; the ordinances of the law no longer separate jew and gentile; all alike have access through one saviour unto god, all alike receive power through the holy spirit to live a life of holiness and love. =( ) the type and the fulfillment.=--the contrast which was worked out in the epistle to the hebrews was especially a contrast between the sign and the thing signified. the ceremonial law, which had separated jew from gentile, was intended to point forward to christ; and now that the fulfillment has come, what further need is there of the old types and symbols? christ is the great high priest; by him all alike can enter into the holy place. =( ) the meaning of the gospel.=--the transition from jewish christianity, with all the difficulties of that transition, led finally to a deeper understanding of the gospel. it showed once for all that the salvation of the christians is a free gift. "just as i am, without one plea but that thy blood was shed for me"--these words are a good summary of the result of the judaistic controversy. the transition showed, furthermore, what had really been felt from the beginning, that christ was the one and all-sufficient lord. when he was present, no other priest, and no other sacrifice was required. that is the truly missionary gospel--the gospel that will finally conquer the world. * * * * * in the library.--orr, "neglected factors in the study of the early progress of christianity" and "the early church." george smith, "short history of christian missions" (in "handbooks for bible classes"). lesson xlviii the christian ideal of personal morality in treating the lesson for to-day, the teacher will be embarrassed by the wealth of his material. it is important, therefore, that the chief purpose of the lesson should not be lost amid a mass of details. that chief purpose is the presentation of christianity as something that has a very definite and immediate bearing upon daily life. christianity is first of all a piece of good news, a record of something that has happened; but the effect of it, if it be sincerely received, is always manifest in holy living. . the example of jesus in the student's text book, little attempt was made at detailed analysis of the apostolic ideal. the defect should be supplied by careful attention to the "topics for study," and also, if possible, by the treatment of the lesson in class. first of all, however, it should be observed how naturally the apostolic presentation of the ideal grows out of the teaching of jesus. the advance which revelation made after the close of jesus' earthly ministry concerned the fuller explanation of the means by which the moral ideal is to be attained rather than additional exposition of the ideal itself. that does not mean that the apostles did no more, in the field of ethics, than quote the words of jesus; indeed there seem to be surprisingly few direct quotations of the words of jesus in the apostolic writings; the ethical teaching of the apostolic church was no mere mechanical repetition of words, but a profound application of principles. nevertheless the teaching of jesus was absolutely fundamental; without an examination of it, the moral life of the apostolic church cannot be fully understood. =( ) the inexorableness of the law.=--jesus had insisted, for example, upon the inexorableness of the law of god. to the keeping of god's commandments everything else must be sacrificed. "if thy right eye causeth thee to stumble, pluck it out, and cast it from thee: for it is profitable for thee that one of thy members should perish, and not thy whole body be cast into hell." matt. : . in this respect the apostles were true disciples of their master. the christian, they insisted, must be absolutely ruthless; he must be willing to sacrifice everything he has for moral purity. this ruthlessness, however, this thoroughgoing devotion to moral purity, did not mean in the teaching of jesus, any more than in that of the apostles, that under ordinary conditions the christian ought to withdraw from the simple pleasures that the world offers. jesus himself took his place freely at feasts; so far was he from leading a stern, ascetic life that his enemies could even accuse him of being a winebibber and a friend of publicans and sinners. the fidelity with which the apostles followed this part of their master's example has been pointed out in the student's text book. the enjoyable things of the earth are not evil in themselves; they are to be received with thanksgiving as gifts of the heavenly father, and then dedicated to his service. =( ) the morality of the heart.=--furthermore, jesus, as well as his apostles, emphasized the inwardness of the moral law. here again the apostolic church was faithful to jesus' teaching. the seat of sin was placed by the apostles in the very center of a man's life; the flesh and the spirit wage their warfare in the battle field of the heart. see, for example, gal. : - . . contrasts the sharp difference between the christian life and the life of the world was set forth in the apostolic teaching by means of various contrasts. =( ) death and life.=--in the first place, there was the contrast between death and life. the man of the world, according to the apostles, is not merely ill; he is morally and spiritually dead. col. : ; eph. : , . there is no hope for him in his old existence; that existence is merely a death in life. but god is one who can raise the dead; and as he raised jesus from the tomb on the third day, so he raises those who belong to jesus from the deadness of their sins; he implants in them a new life in which they can bring forth fruits unto god. a moral miracle, according to the new testament, stands at the beginning of christian experience. that miracle was called by jesus himself, as well as by the apostles, a new birth or "regeneration." it is no work of man; only god can raise the dead. see john : ; : - ; i john : ; i peter : , . =( ) darkness and light.=--the contrast between darkness and light, also, was common to the teaching of jesus and that of his apostles. it appears particularly in the gospel of john, but there are also clear traces of it in the synoptists, matt. : - ; the righteous are "the sons of the light." luke : . in the writings of the apostles the contrast appears in many forms. "ye are all sons of light," said paul, "and sons of the day: we are not of the night, nor of darkness; so then let us not sleep, as do the rest, but let us watch and be sober." i thess. : , . "ye were once darkness, but are now light in the lord: walk as children of light." eph. : . god has called us "out of darkness into his marvellous light." i peter : . the contrast serves admirably to represent the honesty and openness and cleanness of the true christian life. =( ) flesh and spirit.=--an even more important contrast is the contrast of flesh and spirit, which is expounded especially by paul. "flesh" in this connection means something more than the bodily side of human nature; it means human nature as a whole, so far as it is not subjected to god. "spirit" also means something more than might be supposed on a superficial examination. it does not mean the spiritual, as distinguished from the material, side of human nature; but the holy spirit, the spirit of god. the warfare, therefore, between the flesh and the spirit, which is mentioned so often in the pauline epistles, is a warfare between sin and god. the flesh, according to paul, is a mighty power, which is too strong for the human will. it is impossible for the natural man to keep the law of god. "i know," says paul, "that in me, that is, in my flesh, dwelleth no good thing: for to will is present with me, but to do that which is good is not.... i find then the law, that, to me who would do good, evil is present. for i delight in the law of god after the inward man: but i see a different law in my members, warring against the law of my mind, and bringing me into captivity under the law of sin which is in my members." rom. : , - . in this recognition of the power of sin in human life, paul has laid his finger upon one of the deepest facts in human experience. the way of escape, however, has been provided; sin has been conquered in two aspects. it has been conquered, in the first place, in its guilt. without that conquest, everything else would be useless. the dreadful subjection to the power of sin, which becomes so abundantly plain in evil habit, was itself a punishment for sin; before the effect can be destroyed, the guilt which caused it must be removed. it has been removed by the sacrifice of christ. christ has died for us, the just for the unjust; through his death we have a fresh start, in the favor of god, with the guilty past wiped out. sin has been conquered, in the second place, in its power. together with the very implanting of faith in our hearts, the holy spirit has given us a new life, a new power, by which we can perform the works of god. a mighty warfare, indeed, is yet before us; but it is fought with the spirit's help, and by the spirit it will finally be won. =( ) the old man and the new.=--as the contrast between the flesh and the spirit was concerned with the causes of the christian's escape from sin, so the contrast now to be considered is concerned with the effects of that escape. the christian, according to paul, has become a new man in christ; the old man has been destroyed. the gentiles, he says, are darkened in their understanding, and alienated from god. eph. : - . "but ye did not so learn christ; if so be that ye heard him, and were taught in him, even as truth is in jesus: that ye put away, as concerning your former manner of life, the old man, that waxeth corrupt after the lusts of deceit; and that ye be renewed in the spirit of your mind, and put on the new man, that after god hath been created in righteousness and holiness of truth." vs. - . compare col. : - . this putting on of the new man is included in what paul elsewhere calls putting on christ. gal. : ; rom. : . the true christian has clothed himself with christ; the lineaments of the old sinful nature have been transformed into the blessed features of the master; look upon the christian, and what you see is christ! this change has been wrought by christ himself; "it is no longer i that live," says paul, "but christ liveth in me"; christ finds expression in the life of the christian. it is noteworthy, however, that the "putting on" of christ, which in gal. : is represented as an accomplished fact, is in rom. : inculcated as a duty. it has been accomplished already in principle--in his sacrificial death, christ has already taken our place in the sight of god--but the practical realization of it in conduct is the lifelong task which every earnest disciple, aided by the holy spirit, must prosecute with might and main. . the new man details in the character of the "new man," as they are revealed in the apostolic writings, can here be treated only very briefly. =( ) honesty.=--certainly the christian, according to the apostles, must be honest. honesty is the foundation of the virtues; without it everything else is based upon the sand. nothing could exceed the fine scorn which the new testament heaps upon anything like hypocrisy or deceit. the epistle of james, in particular, is a plea for profound reality in all departments of life. away with all deceit! the christian life is to be lived in the full blaze of god's sunlight. many hours could be occupied in the class with the applications of honesty under modern conditions. student life, for example, is full of temptations to dishonesty. to say nothing of out-and-out cheating, there are a hundred ways in which the fine edge of honor can be blunted. in business life, also, temptations are many; and indeed no one can really escape the test. the apostolic example deserves to be borne in mind; christian honesty ought to be more than the honesty of the world. =( ) purity.=--in the second place, the apostolic church presents an ideal of purity, purity in thought as well as in word and deed. the ideal must have seemed strange to the degraded populations of corinth and ephesus; but it is also sadly needed to-day. let us not deceive ourselves. he who would hold fellowship with christ must put away impurity; christ is the holy one. purity, however, is to be attained not by unaided human effort, but by the help of the spirit of god. the holy spirit, if he be admitted to the heart, will purge it of unclean thoughts. =( ) patience and bravery.=--in the third place, patience and humility are prominent in the christian ideal. these virtues are coupled, however, with the most vigorous bravery. there is nothing weak or sickly or sentimental about the christian character. "watch ye, stand fast in the faith, quit you like men, be strong." i cor. : . =( ) love.=--the summation of the christian ideal is love. love, however, is more than a benevolent desire. it includes purity and heroism as well as helpfulness. in order to love in the christian sense, one must attain "unto a fullgrown man, unto the measure of the stature of the fulness of christ." eph. : . * * * * * in the library.--hastings, "dictionary of the bible": strong, article on "ethics" (ii). kilpatrick, "christian character." bruce, "the formation of christian character." luthardt, "apologetic lectures on the moral truths of christianity." lesson xlix christianity and human relationships . the problem two apparently contradictory features appear in the life of the apostolic church. in the first place, there was an intense other-worldliness; the christians were regarded as citizens of a heavenly kingdom. in the second place, there was careful attention to the various relationships of the present life; no man was excused from homely duty. the two sides of the picture appear in the sharpest colors in the life of the apostle paul. no one emphasized more strongly than he the independence of the christian life with reference to the world; all christians, whether their worldly station be high or low, are alike in the sight of god; the church operates with entirely new standards of value. yet on the other hand, in his actual dealing with the affairs of this world paul observed the most delicate tact; and in all history it is difficult to find a man with profounder natural affections. where is there, for example, a more passionate expression of patriotic feeling than that which is to be found in rom. : ? "i could wish that i myself were anathema from christ for my brethren's sake, my kinsmen according to the flesh." on the one hand, then, the apostolic church regarded all earthly distinctions as temporary and secondary, and yet on the other hand those same distinctions were very carefully observed. the apparent contradiction brings before us the great question of the attitude of christianity toward human relationships. this question may be answered in one of three ways. . the worldly solution in the first place, there is the worldly answer. the christian finds himself in a world where his time and his thoughts seem to be fully occupied by what lies near at hand. the existence of god may not be denied, but practically, in the stress of more obvious duties, god is left out of account. =( ) "practical christianity."=--in its crude form, of course, where it involves mere engrossment in selfish pleasure, this answer to our question hardly needs refutation. obviously the christian cannot devote himself to worldly enjoyment; a cardinal virtue of the christian is self-denial. worldliness in the church, however, may be taken in a wider sense; it has often assumed very alluring forms. at the present day, for example, it often represents itself as the only true, the only "practical" kind of christianity. it is often said that true religion is identical with social service, that the service of one's fellow men is always worship of god. this assertion involves a depreciation of "dogma" in the interests of "practical" christianity; it makes no difference, it is said, what a man believes, provided only he engages in the improvement of living conditions and the promotion of fairer laws. =( ) this world is not all.=--this tendency in the church really makes religion a thing of this world only. undoubtedly, much good is being accomplished by social workers who have given up belief in historic christianity; but it is good that does not go to the root of the matter. suppose we have improved conditions on this earth, suppose more men have healthy employment and an abundance of worldly goods. even so the thought of death cannot be banished. is the totality of man's happiness limited to a brief span of life; are we after all but creatures of a day? or is there an eternal life beyond the grave, with infinite possibilities of good or evil? jesus and his apostles and the whole of the apostolic church adopted the latter alternative. =( ) the secularization of religion.=--we lay our finger here upon one of the points where the modern church is in danger of departing most fundamentally from the apostolic model. religion is in serious danger of being secularized; that is, of being regarded as concerned merely with this life. the only corrective is the recovery of the old conception of god. god is not merely another name for the highest aspirations of men, he is not merely the summation of the social forces which are working for human betterment. on the contrary, he is a living person, working in the world, but also eternally independent of it. you can work for the worldly benefit of your fellow men without coming into any saving contact with god; it does make a vast difference what you believe; it makes all the difference between death and life. =( ) the teaching of jesus and of the apostles.=--only one-sided reading of the new testament can find support for the opposite view. jesus said, "inasmuch as ye did it unto one of these my brethren, even these least, ye did it unto me," matt. : ; but the same jesus also said, "if any man cometh unto me, and hateth not his own father, and mother, and wife, and children, and brethren, and sisters, yea, and his own life also, he cannot be my disciple." luke : . the giving of a cup of cold water, which receives the blessing of jesus, is done for "one of these little ones ... in the name of a disciple." matt. : . evidently the good works of the christian are not independent of the attitude of the doer toward jesus and toward god; jesus regards the personal relation between himself and his disciples as one which takes precedence of even the holiest of earthly ties. far more convincing, however, than any citation of definite passages is the whole spirit of the new testament teaching; evidently both jesus and his early disciples had their lives determined by the thought of the living, personal god, holy and mysterious and independent of the world. social service exists for the sake of god, not god for the sake of social service. the reversal of this relationship is one of the most distressing tendencies of the present day; a study of the apostolic church may bring a return to sanity and humility. . the ascetic solution the second answer to our question is the answer of ascetics of many different kinds. according to this answer, the relationship of the christian to god on the one hand, and his relationship to his fellow men on the other, are in competition. consequently, in order to strengthen the former, the latter must be broken off. in its extreme form, this way of thinking leads to the hermit ideal, to the belief that the less a man has to do with his fellow men the more he has to do with god. such conceptions are not always so uninfluential as we are inclined to think, even in our protestant churches. monasticism is not indeed consistently carried out, but it is often present in spirit and in principle. some excellent christians seem to feel that whole-hearted, natural interest in earthly friends is disloyalty to christ, that all men must be treated alike, that admission of one man into the depths of the heart more fully than another is contrary to the universality of the gospel. by such men, individuals are not treated as persons, with a value of their own, but merely as opportunities for christian service. =( ) this solution defeats its own end.=--it is evident, in the first place, that such an attitude defeats its own aim. evidently the power of a christian worker depends partly at least upon his interest in individuals. it will not do, for example, for the teachers in this course to let their students say, "the teacher loves christ supremely, but he has no interest in me." evidently the power of influencing our fellow men is largely increased by an intimate personal relationship; if we are to serve christ by bringing men to his feet, then we ought not to dissolve but rather to strengthen the bonds of simple affection which unite us to our human friends. =( ) this solution is opposed to apostolic example.=--the example of the apostolic church points in the same direction; we have already noticed the intensity of natural affection which was displayed even by a man so thoroughly and heroically devoted to christian service as was the apostle paul. this example might well be supplemented, and supplemented most emphatically of all by the example which lies at the basis of all of the apostolic church--the example of jesus himself. if any man might have been aloof from his fellow men, it was jesus, yet as a matter of fact, he plainly had his earthly friends. . the true solution the true solution of the problem is found in consecration. human relationships are not to be made the sole aim of life; neither are they to be destroyed; but they are to be consecrated to the service of god. love for god under normal conditions comes into no competition with love for man, because god takes a place in the life which can never be filled by any human friend; by lopping off human friendships we are not devoting ourselves more fully to god, but merely becoming less efficient servants of him. . christianity and social service consecration of human relationships to god does not involve any depreciation of what is known to-day as "social service." on the contrary it gives to social service its necessary basis and motive power. only when god is remembered is there an eternal outlook in the betterment of human lives; the improvement of social conditions, which gives the souls of men a fair chance instead of keeping them stunted and balked by poverty and disease, is seen by him who believes in a future life and a final judgment and heaven and hell to have value not only for time, but also for eternity, not only for man, but also for the infinite god. =( ) society or the individual?=--it is sometimes regarded as a reproach that old-fashioned, evangelical christianity makes its first appeal to the individual. the success of certain evangelists has occasioned considerable surprise in some quarters. everyone knows, it is said, that the "social gospel" is the really effective modern agency; yet some evangelists with only the very crudest possible social program are accomplishing important and beneficent results! the lesson may well be learned, and it should never be forgotten. despite the importance of social reforms, the first purpose of true christian evangelism is to bring the individual man clearly and consciously into the presence of his god. without that, all else is of but temporary value; the human race is composed of individual souls; the best of social edifices will crumble if all the materials are faulty. =( ) every man should first correct his own faults.=--the true attitude of the christian toward social institutions can be learned clearly from the example of the apostolic church. the first lesson that the early christians learned when they faced the ordinary duties of life was to make the best of the institutions that were already existing. there was nothing directly revolutionary about the apostolic teaching. sharp rebuke, indeed, was directed against the covetousness of the rich. but the significant fact is that such denunciations of wealthy men were addressed to the wealthy men themselves and not to the poor. in the apostolic church, every man was made to know his own faults, not the faults of other people. the rich were rebuked for their covetousness and selfishness; but the poor were commanded, with just as much vehemence, to labor for their own support. "if any will not work," said paul, "neither let him eat." ii thess. : . in short, apostolic christianity sought to remove the evils of an unequal distribution of wealth, not by a violent uprising of the poor against the rich, but by changing the hearts of the rich men themselves. modern reform movements are often very different; but it cannot be said that the apostolic method is altogether antiquated. =( ) the ennobling of existing institutions.=--certainly the apostolic method has been extraordinarily successful; it has accomplished far more than could have been accomplished by a violent reform movement. a good example is afforded by the institution of slavery. here, if anywhere, we might seem to have an institution which was contrary to the gospel. yet paul sent back a runaway slave to his master, and evidently without the slightest hesitation or compunction. that action was a consistent carrying out of the principle that a christian man, instead of seeking an immediate change in his social position, was first of all to learn to make the best of whatever position was his already. "let each man abide in that calling wherein he was called. wast thou called being a bondservant? care not for it: nay, even if thou canst become free, use it rather. for he that was called in the lord being a bondservant, is the lord's freedman: likewise he that was called being free, is christ's bondservant. ye were bought with a price; become not bondservants of men. brethren, let each man, wherein he was called, therein abide with god." i cor. : - . the freedom of the christian, in other words, is entirely independent of freedom in this world; a slave can be just as free in the higher, spiritual sense as his earthly master. in this way the position of the slave was ennobled; evidently the relation of onesimus to philemon was expected to afford both slave and master genuine opportunity for the development of christian character and for the performance of christian service. =( ) the substitution of good institutions for bad.=--in the long run, however, such conceptions were bound to exert a pervasive influence even upon earthly institutions. if philemon really adopted the christian attitude toward one who was now "more than a servant, a brother beloved" in christ, then in the course of time he would naturally desire to make even the outward relationship conform more perfectly to the inward spiritual fact. the final result would naturally be emancipation; and such was the actual process in the history of the church. slavery, moreover, is only an example; a host of other imperfect social institutions have similarly been modified or removed. what a world of progress, for example, is contained in gal. : : "there can be neither jew nor greek, there can be neither bond nor free, there can be no male and female; for ye are all one man in christ jesus." not battles and revolutions, the taking of cities and the pulling down of empires, are the really great events of history, but rather the enunciation of great principles such as this. "ye are all one man in christ jesus"--these words with others like them have moved armies like puppets, and will finally transform the face of the world. * * * * * in the library.--r. e. thompson, "de civitate dei. the divine order of human society." clow, "christ in the social order." cunningham, "christianity and social questions." schmidt, "the social results of early christianity." lesson l the christian use of the intellect . the problem of christianity and culture the last two lessons have emphasized the duty of consecration. the enjoyment of simple, physical blessings, the opportunities afforded by earthly relationships, are all to be devoted to the service of god. exactly the same principle must be applied in the lesson for to-day. if physical health and strength and the companionship of human friends may be made useful in the christian life, surely the same thing is true of intellectual gifts. the most powerful thing that a man possesses is the power of his mind. brute force is comparatively useless; the really great achievements of modern times have been accomplished by the intellect. if the principle of consecration is true at all--if it be true that god desires, not the destruction of human powers, but the proper use of them--then surely the principle must be applied in the intellectual sphere. the field should not be limited too narrowly; with the purely logical and acquisitive faculties of the mind should be included the imagination and the sense of beauty. in a word, we have to do to-day with the relation between "culture" and christianity. for the modern church there is no greater problem. a mighty civilization has been built up in recent years, which to a considerable extent is out of relation to the gospel. great intellectual forces which are rampant in the world are grievously perplexing the church. the situation calls for earnest intellectual effort on the part of christians. modern culture must either be refuted as evil, or else be made helpful to the gospel. so great a power cannot safely be ignored. =( ) the obscurantist solution.=--some men in the church are inclined to choose a simple way out of the difficulty; they are inclined to reject the whole of modern culture as either evil or worthless; this wisdom of the world, they maintain, must be deserted for the divine "foolishness" of the gospel. undoubtedly such a view contains an element of truth, but in its entirety it is impracticable. the achievements of modern culture are being made useful for the spread of the gospel by the very advocates of the view now in question; these achievements, therefore, cannot be altogether the work of satan. it is inconsistent to use the printing press, the railroad, the telegraph in the propagation of our gospel and at the same time denounce as evil those activities of the human mind by which these inventions were produced. indeed, much of modern culture, far from being hostile to christianity, has really been produced by christianity. such christian elements should not be destroyed; the wheat should not be rooted up with the tares. =( ) the worldly solution.=--if, however, the christian man is in danger of adopting a negative attitude toward modern culture, of withdrawing from the world into a sort of unhealthy, modernized, intellectual monastery, the opposite danger is even more serious. the most serious danger is the danger of being so much engrossed in the wonderful achievements of modern science that the gospel is altogether forgotten. =( ) the true solution.=--the true solution is consecration. modern culture is a stumblingblock when it is regarded as an end in itself, but when it is used as a means to the service of god it becomes a blessing. undoubtedly much of modern thinking is hostile to the gospel. such hostile elements should be refuted and destroyed; the rest should be made subservient; but nothing should be neglected. modern culture is a mighty force; it is either helpful to the gospel or else it is a deadly enemy of the gospel. for making it helpful neither wholesale denunciation nor wholesale acceptance is in place; careful discrimination is required, and such discrimination requires intellectual effort. there lies a supreme duty of the modern church. patient study should not be abandoned to the men of the world; men who have really received the blessed experience of the love of god in christ must seek to bring that experience to bear upon the culture of the modern world, in order that christ may rule, not only in all nations, but also in every department of human life. the church must seek to conquer not only every man, but also the whole of man. such intellectual effort is really necessary even to the external advancement of the kingdom. men cannot be convinced of the truth of christianity so long as the whole of their thinking is dominated by ideas which make acceptance of the gospel logically impossible; false ideas are the greatest obstacles to the reception of the gospel. and false ideas cannot be destroyed without intellectual effort. such effort is indeed of itself insufficient. no man was ever argued into christianity; the renewing of the holy spirit is the really decisive thing. but the spirit works when and how he will, and he chooses to employ the intellectual activities of christian people in order to prepare for his gracious coming. . the apostolic example abundant support for what has just been said may be discovered in the history of the apostolic church. paul's speech at athens, for example, shows how the christian preacher exhibited the connection between the gospel and the religious aspirations of the time. this line of thought, it is true, was merely preliminary; the main thing with which the apostles were concerned was the presentation and explanation of the gospel itself. such presentation and explanation, however, certainly required intellectual effort; and the effort was not avoided. the epistles of paul are full of profound thinking; only superficiality can ignore the apostolic use of the intellect. =( ) christianity based upon facts.=--the fundamental reason why this intellectual activity was so prominent in the apostolic age is that the apostles thought of christianity as based upon facts. modern christians sometimes cherish a different notion. a false antithesis is now sometimes set up between belief and practice; christianity, it is said, is not a doctrine, but a life. in reality, christianity is not only a doctrine, but neither is it only a life; it is both. it is, as has been well said, a life because it is a doctrine. what is characteristic of christianity is not so much that it holds up a lofty ethical ideal as that it provides the power by which the ideal is to be realized. that power proceeds from the great facts upon which christian belief is founded, especially the blessed facts of christ's atoning death and triumphant resurrection. where belief in these facts has been lost, the christian life may seem to proceed for a time as before, but it proceeds only as a locomotive runs after the steam has been shut off; the momentum is soon lost. if, however, christianity is based upon facts, it cannot do without the use of the mind; whatever may be said of mere emotions, facts cannot be received without employment of the reason. christian faith is indeed more than intellectual; it involves rejoicing in the heart and acceptance by the will, but the intellectual element in it can never be removed. we cannot trust in christ, in the christian sense, unless we are convinced that he lived a holy life when he was on earth, that he claimed justly to be divine, that he died on the cross, and that he rose again from the dead. =( ) christianity involves theology.=--furthermore, christian faith involves not only a bare acceptance of these facts, it involves also some explanation of them. that explanation can never be complete; the gospel contains mysteries in the presence of which only wondering reverence is in place; but some explanation there must be. it is quite useless, for example, to know merely that a holy man, jesus, died on the cross; it is even useless to know that the son of god came to earth and died in that way. the death of christ has meaning for us only because it was a death for our sins; the story of the cross becomes a gospel only when the blessed meaning of it is explained. the explanation of that meaning forms the subject of a large part of the new testament. the apostolic church had none of our modern aversion to theology. it is time for us to return to the apostolic example. mere bustling philanthropy will never conquer the world. the real springs of the church's power lie in an inward, spiritual realm; they can be reached only by genuine meditation. the eighth chapter of romans has been neglected long enough; neglect of it is bringing deadly weakness. instead of adapting her message to the changing fashions of the time, the church should seek to understand the message itself. the effort will not be easy; in a "practical" age, honest thinking is hard. but the results will be plain. power lies in the deep things of god. =( ) the duty of every man.=--the great intellectual duty of the modern church is not confined to a few men of scholarly tastes. on the contrary, the simplest christian may have his part; what is needed first of all is common sense. by an unhealthy sentimentalism, old-fashioned study has been discredited. if god is speaking in the bible, surely the logical thing for us to do is to hear. yet modern christians are strangely neglectful of this simple duty. bible study is regarded as of less importance than social service; improvement of earthly conditions is preferred to acquaintance with god's word. the evil may easily be corrected, and it may be corrected first of all by the old-fashioned reading of the bible. that requires intellectual effort--there is no use in turning the pages if the mind is elsewhere--but the effort can be made by the plain man as well as by the scholar. simple acquaintance with the bible facts by the rank and file of the church will accomplish as much as anything else toward meeting the arguments of opponents. by learning what christianity is, we shall be able, almost unconsciously, to refute what can be said against it. . the practice of the truth this intellectual effort, however, should never be separated from practice. the best way to fix truth in the mind is to practice it in life. if our study teaches us that god is holy, let us hate sin as god hates it. if we learn that god is loving, let us love our fellow men as god loves them. if the bible tells us of the salvation offered by christ, let us accept it with a holy joy, and live in the power of it day by day. that is the true "practical christianity", a christianity that is based solidly upon facts. conduct goes hand in hand with doctrine; love is the sister of truth. . god the source of truth the ultimate source of all truth, as of all love, is god. the knowledge for which we are pleading can never result in pride, for it is a knowledge that god gives, and a knowledge consecrated at every point to god's service. presumptuous reliance upon human wisdom comes from knowledge that ignores part of the facts; true science leads to humility. if we accept all other facts, but ignore the supreme fact of god's love in jesus christ, then of course our knowledge will be one-sided. it may succeed in producing creature comforts; it may improve the external conditions of life upon this earth; it may afford purely intellectual pleasure; but it will never reveal the really important things. this one-sided knowledge is what paul was speaking of in i cor. : when he said that "the world through its wisdom knew not god." the true wisdom takes account of the "foolishness" of god's message, and finds that that foolishness is wiser than men. the true wisdom of the gospel is revealed only through the holy spirit; only the spirit of god can reveal the things of god. without the spirit, the human mind becomes hopeless in dismal error; it is the spirit of truth who sheds the true light over our path. "o grant us light, that we may know the wisdom thou alone canst give; that truth may guide where'er we go, and virtue bless where'er we live." * * * * * in the library.--patton, "a summary of christian doctrine." greene, "christian doctrine." a. a. hodge, "outlines of theology" and "popular lectures on theological themes." lesson li the christian hope and the present possession a type of religious effort has become prevalent to-day which is directed chiefly to the present life; the improvement of worldly conditions is often regarded as the chief end of man. all such tendencies are strikingly at variance with apostolic christianity. the apostolic church was intensely other-worldly. the chief gift that the apostles offered was not a better and more comfortable life in this world, but an entrance into heaven. . the end of the world only the great outlines of the events connected with the end of the world are revealed in the new testament. minute details cannot be discovered except by an excessively literal method of interpretation, which is not really in accord with the meaning of the apostolic writers. some have supposed, for example, that there are to be two resurrections, first a resurrection of the christian dead and long afterwards a resurrection of other men; expectation of a thousand-year reign of christ upon earth has been widely prevalent. such beliefs are not to be lightly rejected, since they are based upon an interpretation of certain new testament passages which is not altogether devoid of plausibility; but on the whole they are at least doubtful in view of other passages, and especially in view of the true nature of prophecy. god has revealed, not details to satisfy our curiosity, but certain basal facts which should determine our lives. those basal facts, connected with the end of the world, are a second coming of christ, a resurrection of the dead, a final judgment, an eternity of punishment for the wicked and of blessing for those who have trusted in christ. it is not maintained that these facts stand absolutely alone; certainly they are fully explained, at least in their spiritual significance; but the devout bible-reader should be cautious about his interpretation of details. . fear and joy the practical effect of the apostolic teaching about the end of the world should be a combination of earnestness with joy. a man who lives under the expectation of meeting christ as judge will desert the worldly standard of values for a higher standard. he will rate happiness and worldly splendor lower, in order to place the supreme emphasis upon goodness. the difference between evil and good, between sin and holiness, is not a trifle, not a thing of merely relative importance, as many men regard it; it enters deep into the constitution of the universe, it is the question of really eternal moment. again and again, in the new testament, the thought of christ's coming and of the judgment which he will hold is made the supreme motive to a pure and holy life. the apostolic example may well be borne in mind. when we are tempted to commit a mean or dishonest or unclean act, when unholy thoughts crowd in upon us like a noisome flood, we cannot do better than think of the day when we shall stand in the presence of the pure and holy judge. on the other hand, the thought of christ's coming is to the believer the source of inexpressible joy. christ has saved us from a terrible abyss. our joy in salvation is in proportion to our dread of the destruction from which we have been saved. to the truly penitent man, the thought of the righteous god is full of terror. god is holy; we would sometimes endeavor vainly to shrink from his presence. yet such a god has stretched out his hand to save--there is the wonder of the gospel--and if we trust in the saviour the last great day need cause no fear. we are lost in sin, but god looks not upon us but upon him who died to save us. "salvation" to the apostolic church meant "rescue," rescue from the just and awful judgment of god. . the intermediate state the time of that judgment has not been revealed, but so far as any offer of repentance is concerned the time comes to every man at death. one question of detail cannot altogether be ignored. what did the apostles teach about the condition of the believer between death and the final resurrection? upon this subject, the new testament says very little, but it becomes clear at least that the believer, even when absent from the body, is to be present with the lord, ii cor. : , and that to die is to be with christ. phil. : . on the whole, no better statement of the apostolic teaching about the "intermediate state" can be formulated than that which is contained in the shorter catechism: "the souls of believers are at their death made perfect in holiness, and do immediately pass into glory; and their bodies, being still united to christ, do rest in their graves, till the resurrection." the hope of an immediate entrance into bliss at the time of death should not be allowed, however, to obscure the importance of the resurrection. the resurrection of the body will be necessary to "the full enjoying of god to all eternity." . the final blessedness that enjoying of god is no mere selfish pleasure; it means first of all a triumph of holiness. every last vestige of evil will be removed. no taint of sin will separate the redeemed creature from his god. service will be free and joyous. the consummation, moreover, will concern not merely individuals, but the race; no mere expectation of the personal immortality of individuals begins to do justice to the apostolic teaching. the ultimate end, indeed, is not our own enjoyment, but the glory of god. some carnal, materialistic conceptions of the future age would really remove god from his own heaven, but such is not the teaching of the new testament. god will be all and in all; only in his glory is to be found the true glory of a redeemed race. the power of loving god is the highest joy that heaven contains. . the dispensation of the spirit the present age, according to the new testament, is a time of waiting and striving; it is related to the future glory as a battle is related to the subsequent victory. satisfaction with the present life, even as it is led by the best of christians, would to the apostles have been abhorrent; the christian is still far from perfect. a prime condition of progress is a divine discontent. jesus pronounced a blessing upon them that "hunger and thirst after righteousness." eternal things to us are unseen; they can be discovered only by the eye of faith; we long for a time when hope will be supplanted by sight. nevertheless, there is no room for despondency; the blessed time is surely coming. its coming is rendered certain by the presence, here and now, of the holy spirit. the spirit may be relied upon to prepare us, both in soul and in body, for the glory of heaven. =( ) the spirit in the old testament and in the life of jesus.=--the spirit of god was mentioned even in the old testament. at the beginning he "moved upon the face of the waters," gen. : ; he was the source of the mighty deeds of heroes and of the prophets' inspired words. in the life and teaching of jesus, however, the spirit was far more fully revealed than he had ever been revealed before. he was the source of jesus' human nature, matt. : , ; luke : ; he descended upon the newly proclaimed messiah, matt. : , and was operative in all the earthly ministry of the lord. =( ) the spirit in the church.=--for the disciples, however, the full glory of the spirit's presence was manifested only after jesus himself had been taken up into heaven; the present age, from pentecost to the second coming of the lord, is peculiarly the dispensation of the holy spirit. discontent with the church's imperfections and dismay at her many adversaries should never cause us to lose confidence in the work that is being done by the spirit of god. it was expedient that jesus should go away; through the other "comforter" whom he has sent, he manifests himself even more gloriously than he did to the disciples in galilee. =( ) the nature of the spirit.=--the apostles never discuss the nature of the holy spirit in any thoroughly systematic way. but two great facts are really presupposed in the whole new testament. in the first place, the holy spirit is god, and in the second place he is a person distinct from the father and from the son. the divinity of the spirit appears, for example, in i cor. : . the point of that verse is that the spirit is as closely related to god as the human spirit is to a man. "for who among men knoweth the things of a man, save the spirit of the man, which is in him? even so the things of god none knoweth, save the spirit of god." the distinct personality of the spirit appears with special clearness in rom. : , . there the spirit is represented as making intercession with him "that searcheth the hearts"; the one who intercedes is personally distinct from him before whom he makes intercession. even more convincing, perhaps, is the great promise of christ in john : , , ; : ; : - , where the other "comforter" is spoken of in clearly personal terms and is distinguished both from the father and from the son. personal distinctness, however, is not inconsistent with a perfect unity of nature. what the spirit does the son and the father do; when the other comforter comes to the church, christ himself comes. the doctrine of the "trinity" is a profound mystery, but its mysteriousness is no obstacle to the acceptance of its truth. mystery in the depths of god's nature is surely to be expected. this mystery, taught by the pen of inspired writers, has brought salvation and peace into the lives of men. distinctly trinitarian passages, such as matt. : ; ii cor. : , are merely the summation of the new testament teaching about god, and that teaching has worked itself out in unspeakable blessing in the life of the church. =( ) the work of the spirit.=--a complete summary of the belief of the apostolic church about the work of the holy spirit would be impossible in one brief lesson. the christian life is begun by the spirit, and continued by his beneficent power. conversion, according to jesus and his apostles, is only the manward aspect of a profound change in the depths of the soul. that change is "regeneration," a new birth. christian experience is no mere improvement of existing conditions, but the entrance of something entirely new. man is not merely sick in trespasses and sins, but "dead"; only a new birth will bring life. that new birth is a mysterious, creative act of the spirit of god. john : - . but the spirit does not leave those whom he has regenerated to walk alone; he dwells in them and enables them to overcome sin. the motive of his work is love. he is no blind force, but a loving person; the christian can enjoy a real communion with him as with the father and the son. in the presence of the spirit we have communion with god; the persons of the godhead are united in a manner far beyond all human analogies. there is no imperfect medium separating us from the divine presence; by the gracious work of the holy spirit we come into vital contact with the living god. the spirit is the ground and cause of christian freedom. "where the spirit of the lord is, there is liberty." ii cor. : . "for as many as are led by the spirit of god, these are sons of god. for ye received not the spirit of bondage again unto fear; but ye received the spirit of adoption, whereby we cry, abba, father." rom. : , . this liberty that the spirit brings is, however, not a liberty to sin; it is liberation from sin. the body of the christian is a temple of the holy spirit; in that temple only purity is in place. the inward power of the holy spirit in the heart is more powerful than the law; if a man yields to that power he will overcome the flesh; the law of god is fulfilled by those "who walk not after the flesh, but after the spirit." * * * * * in the library.--vos, "the teaching of jesus concerning the kingdom of god and the church." crane, "the teaching of jesus concerning the holy spirit." swete, "the holy spirit in the new testament." thomas, "the holy spirit of god." lesson lii retrospect: the first christian century the apostolic example can be applied intelligently to the problems of our time only if there be some understanding of the intervening centuries. we are connected with the apostolic church by an unbroken succession. a study of church history would help us to apply the new testament teaching to our own age. the christian writings which have been preserved from the early part of the second century show a marked decline from the spiritual level of the apostles. evidently the special inspiration which had made the new testament a guide for all ages had been withdrawn. yet the spirit of god continued to lead the church. even in the darkest periods of church history god did not forget his people. only scanty christian writings have been preserved from the first three-quarters of the second century; the extant works of the so-called "apostolic fathers" and of the "apologists" are of limited extent. about the close of the century, however, the record becomes more complete. clement of alexandria, irenæus of asia minor and gaul, and tertullian of north africa, give a varied picture of the christian life of the time. the church had gained rapidly in influence since the conclusion of the apostolic age; persecutions had not succeeded in checking her advance. finally, under constantine, in the first part of the fourth century, christianity became the favored religion of the roman empire. about the same time, in a.d. , the first ecumenical council, at nicæa, undertook the work of formulating the belief of the church. the creeds which were adopted at the great ancient councils are accepted to-day in all parts of christendom. during the same general period, the power of the bishop of rome was gradually increased until it culminated in the papacy. after the conquest of the western part of the roman empire in the fifth century, christianity was accepted by the barbarian conquerors, and during the dark ages that followed the church preserved the light of learning and piety until a better day should dawn. during the middle ages, though there was for the most part little originality in christian thinking, great scholars and theologians formed striking exceptions to the general condition. the political power of the papacy became enormous, but was hindered by the personal weakness and immorality of many of the popes. the degraded moral and spiritual condition of the church was counteracted here and there by the establishment of monastic orders, whose purpose at the beginning was good, by the writings of certain mystics, and by the work of the three "pre-reformers," wyclif in england, huss in bohemia and savonarola in italy. a genuine advance, however, did not come until the reformation of the fifteenth century, when luther in germany and zwingli in switzerland, almost at the same time and at first independently, became the leaders in a mighty protest. a little later calvin carried out the principles of the reformation in a comprehensive theological system, and by the power of his intellect and the fervency of his piety exerted an enormous influence throughout the world. the reformation was distinctly a religious movement, though it had been prepared for by that revival of learning which is called the renaissance. the work of luther was a rediscovery of paul. not the performance of a set of external acts prescribed by the church, but, as paul taught, the grace of god received by faith alone, is, according to luther, the means of salvation. the reformation brought about a counter-reformation in the roman catholic church, and the western european world was finally divided between the two great branches of christendom. after a period of controversy and wars between protestants and catholics, the church was called upon to fight a great battle against unbelief. that battle, begun in its modern form about the middle of the eighteenth century, continues unabated until the present day. we are living in a time of intellectual changes. to maintain the truth of the gospel at such a time and to present it faithfully and intelligently to the modern world is the supreme task of the church. the task to some extent has been accomplished; and the missionary movement of the nineteenth and twentieth centuries attests the vitality of the ancient faith. god has not deserted his church. there are enemies without and within, compromise will surely bring disaster; but the gospel of christ has not lost its power. this is not the first time of discouragement in the history of the church. the darkest hour has always been followed by the dawn. who can tell what god has now in store? * * * * * * transcriber's note: minor typographical errors have been corrected without note. irregularities and inconsistencies in the text have been retained as printed.