. ^pws thefe . Books , ; far. the founding of. a College '-ot this Colony^l Q >Y&LE-=¥MI¥IEI&S2irY' Gift of the Rev. Heber H. Beadle THE BAMPTON LECTURES FOE M.DCCO.LXVI ?% Jjibittitg of ¦fur Jotb an& JSaoiour §ots Cjjrtet; EIGHT LECTURES PREACHED BEFORE THE UNIVERSITY OF OXFORD, IN THE YEAE 1866, On the Foundation of the late Bev. John Bampton, M.A., CANON OF SALISBURY. # BY H. P. LIDDON, D.D., D.C.L. cakok of st. Paul's, and Ireland professor of exegesis ik the university of oxford. SIXTH EDITION Jieto lotfe SCEIBNEE, WELFOED, AND AEMSTEONG 1873 ' Wenn Christus nicht wahrer Gott ist ; die mahometanische Eeligion eine unstreitige Verbesserung der christlichen war, und Mahomet selbst ein uugleich grossrer und wiirdigerer Mann gewesen ist als Christus.' Lessing, Sammtl. Schriften, Bd. g, p. 291. ' Simul quoque cum beatis videamus Glorianter vultum Tuum, Ghriste Deus, Gaudium quod est immensum atque probum, Stecula per infinita saeculorum.' Rhythm. Ecd. EXTRACT FEOM THE LAST WILL AND TESTAMENT OP THE LATE REV. JOHN BAMPTON, CANON OF SALISBURY. " I give and bequeath my Lands and Estates to the " Chancellor, Masters, and Scholars of the University of Oxford " for ever, to have and to hold all and singular the said Lands or " Estates upon trust, and to the intents and purposes hereinafter " mentioned j that is to say, I will and appoint that the Vice- " Chancellor of the University of Oxford for the time being shall u. take and receive all the rents, issues, and profits thereof, and " (after all taxes, reparations, and necessary deductions made) " that he pay all the remainder to the endowment of eight " Divinity Lecture Sermons, to be established for ever in the '' said University, and to be performed in the manner following : " I direct and appoint, that, upon the first Tuesday in Easter " Term, a Lecturer may be yearly chosen by the Heads of Col- " leges only, and by no others, in the room adjoining to the " Printing-House, between the hours of ten in the morning and " two in the afternoon, to preach eight Divinity Lecture " Sermons, the year following, at St. Mary's in Oxford, between " the commencement of the last month in Lent Term, and the " end of the third week in Act Term. vi Extract from Canon Bampton s Will. " Also I direct and appoint, that the eight Divinity Lecture " Sermons shall be preached upon either of the following " Subjects — to confirm and establish the Christian Faith, and " to confute all heretics and schismatics — upon the divine " authority of the holy Scriptures — upon the authority of the " writings of the primitive Fathers, as to the faith and practice " of the primitive Church — upon the Divinity of our Lord and " Saviour Jesus Christ — upon the Divinity of the Holy Ghost — " upon the Articles of the Christian Faith, as comprehended in " the Apostles' and Nicene Creed. " Also I direct, that thirty copies of the eight Divinity Lec- " ture Sermons shall be always printed, within two months after " they are preached > and one copy shall be given to the Chan- " cellor of the University, and one copy to the Head of every " College, and one copy to the Mayor of the city of Oxford, and " one copy to be put into the Bodleian Library ; and the " expense of printing them shall be paid out of the revenue of " the Land or Estates given for establishing the Divinity Lecture " Sermons ; and the Preacher shall not be paid, nor be entitled " to the revenue, before they are printed. " Also I direct and appoint, that no person shall be qualified " to preach the Divinity Lecture Sermons, unless he hath taken " the degree of Master of Arts at least, in one of the two Uni- " versities of Oxford or Cambridge ; and that the same person " shall never preach the Divinity Lecture Sermons twice." PREFACE TO THE FIEST EDITION. Perhaps an apology may be due to the University for the delay which has occurred in the appearance of this volume. If so, the writer would venture to plead that he undertook the duties of the Bampton Lecturer at a very short notice, and, it may be, without sufficiently considering what they involved. When, however, the accomplished Clergyman whom the Uni versity had chosen to lecture in the year 1866 was obliged by a serious illness to seek a release from his engagement, the vacant post was offered to the present writer with a kindness and generosity which, as he thought, obliged him, although entirely unprepared, to accept it and to meet its requirements as well as he could. Under such circumstances, the materials which were made ready in some haste for use in the pulpit seemed to require a close revision before publication. In making this revision — which has been somewhat seriously interrupted by other duties — the writer has not felt at liberty to introduce alterations except in the way of phrase and illustration. He has, however, availed himself of the customary licence to print at length some considerable paragraphs, the sense of which, in order to save time, was only summarily given when the lectures were delivered. And he has subjoined the Greek text of the more important passages of the New Testament to which he has had occasion to refer ; as experience seems to prove that very many viii Preface to the First Edition. readers do not verify quotations from Holy Scripture for them selves, or at least that they content themselves with examining the few which are generally thought to be of most importance. Whereas, the force of the argument for our Lord's Divinity, as indeed is the case with other truths of the New Testament, is eminently cumulative. Such an argument is to be appreciated, not by studying the comparatively few texts which expressly assert the doctrine, but that large number of passages which indirectly, but most vividly, imply it. It is perhaps superfluous to observe that eight lectures can deal with little beyond the outskirts of a vast, or to speak more accurately, of an exhaustless subject. The present volume attempts only to notice, more or less directly, some of those assaults upon the doctrine of our Lord's Divinity which have been prominent or popular of late years, and which have, unhappily, had a certain weight among persons with whom the writer is acquainted. Whatever disturbing influence the modern destructive criti cism may have exerted upon the form of the old argument for the Divinity of Christ, the main features of that argument remain substantially unchanged. The writer will have deep reason for thankfulness, if any of those whose inclination or duty leads them to pursue the subject, should be guided by his references to the pages of those great theologians whose names, whether in our own country or in the wider field of Catholic Christendom, are for ever associated with thevindication of this most fundamental truth of the Faith. In passing the sheets of this work through the press, the writer has been more largely indebted than he can well say to the invigorating sympathy and varied learning of the Eev. W. Bright, Fellow of University College • while the Index is due to the friendly interest of another Fellow of that Collece the Eev. P. G. Medd. That in so wide and so mysterious a subject all errors have been avoided, is much more than the writer dares to hope. Preface to the First Edition. But at least he has not intentionally contravened the clear sense of Holy Scripture, or any formal decision whether of the Undi vided Church or of the Church of England. May He to the honour of Whose Person this volume is devoted, vouchsafe to pardon in it all that is not calculated to promote His truth and His glory ! And for the rest, 'quisquis hsec legit, ubi pariter certus est, pergat mecum ; ubi pariter hresitat, quterat mecum ; ubi errorem suum cognoscit, redeat ad me ; ubi meum, revocet me. Ita ingrediamur simul charitatis viam, tendentes ad Eum de Quo dictum est, Quserite Faciein Ejus semper a.' Christ Chobch, Ascension Day, 1867. a S. Aug. de Trin. i. 5. PREFACE TO THE SECOND EDITION. The kindly welcome given to this volume, both at home and in America, has led to a demand for another edition, which has taken the writer somewhat by surprise. He has, however, availed himself of the opportunity to make what use he could of the cri ticisms which have come, from whatever quarter, under his notice. Some textual errors have been corrected. Some ill-considered or misunderstood expressions have been modified. Eeferences to authorities and sources of information, which were accidentally omitted, have been supplied. To a few of the notes there has been added. fresh matter, of an explanatory or justificatory cha racter. The index, too, has been remodelled and enlarged. But the book remains, it is needless to say, substantially unchanged. And if it is now offered to the public in a somewhat altered guise, this has been done in order to meet the views of friends, who have urged, not perhaps altogether without reason, that ' in the Church of England, books on Divinity are so largely adapted to the taste and means of the wealthier classes, as to imply that the most interesting of all subjects can possess no attractions for the intelligence and heart of persons who enjoy only a moderate income.' Of the topics discussed in this book, there is one which has invited a larger share of attention than others, both from those who share and from those who reject the Faith of the Church. It is that central argument for our Saviour's Deity, which is based on His persistent self-assertion, taken in conjunction with Preface to the Second Edition. the sublimity of His Human character. The supreme importance of this consideration is indeed obvious. Certainly, in the order of historical treatment, the inferences which may be deduced from Prophecy, and from Christ's supernatural design to found the ' Kingdom of Heaven,' naturally precede that which arises from His language about Himself. But, in the order of the formation of conviction, the latter argument must claim prece dence. It is, in truth, more fundamental. It is the heart of the entire subject, from which a vital strength flows into the accessory although important topics grouped around it. Apart from Our Lord's personal claims, the language of prophecy would have been only a record of unfulfilled anticipations, and the lofty Christology of the Apostles only a sample of their misguided enthusiasms ; whereas the argument which appeals to Christ's claims, taken in conjunction with His character, is independent of the collateral arguments which in truth it supports. If the argument from prophecy could be discredited, by assigning new dates to the prophetical books, and by theories of a cultured political foresight ; if the faith of the Apostles could be accounted for upon grounds which referred it to their individual peculiar ities of thought and temper ; there would still remain the unique phenomenon of the sublimest of characters inseparably linked, in the Person of Jesus, to the most energetic proclamation of self. In this inmost shrine of Christian Truth, there are two courses open to the negative criticism. It may endeavour to explain away Our Lord's self-assertion in the interests, as it conceives, of His Human Character. The impossibility of really doin"- this has been insisted upon in these lectures. For Christ's self- assertion is not merely embodied in statements which would be blasphemy in the mouth of a created being; it underlies and explains His entire attitude towards His disciples, towards His countrymen, towards the human race, towards the religion of ¦ Israel. Nor is Christ's self-assertion confined to the records of one Evangelist, or to a particular period in His ministry. The three first Evangelists bear witness to it, in different terms, yet Preface to the Second Edition. xiii not less significantly than does St. John • and it belongs as truly, though not perhaps so patently, to Our Lord's first great discourse as to His last. From first to last He asserts, He insists upon the acceptance of Himself. When this is acknowledged, a man must either base such self-assertion on its one sufficient justifica tion, by accepting the Church's faith in the Deity of Christ ; or he must regard it as fatal to the moral beauty of Christ's Human character. — Christus, si non Deus, non bonus. It is urged by persons whose opinions are entitled to great respect that, however valid this argument may be, its religious expediency must be open to serious question. And undoubtedly such like arguments cannot at any time be put forward without involving those who do so in grave responsibility. Of this the writer, as he trusts, has not been unmindful. He has not used a dangerous weapon gratuitously, nor, so far as he knows his own motives, with any purpose so miserable as that of producing a rhetorical effect. What, then, are the religious circumstances which appear to warrant the employment of such an argument at present 1 Speaking roughly, men's minds may be grouped into three classes with reference to the vital question which is discussed in these lectures. i. There are those who, by God's mercy, have no doubt on the subject of Our Lord's Godhead. To mere dialecticians their case may appear to be one of sheer intellectual stagnation. But the fact is, that they possess, or at least that they have altogether within their reach, a far higher measure of real 'life' than is even suspected by their critics. They are not seeking truth; they are enjoying it. They are not like Alpine climbers still making- their way up the mountain side ; they have gained the summit, and are gazing on the panorama which is spread around and beneath them. It is even painful to them to think of ' prov ing' a truth which is now the very life of their souls. In their whole spiritual activity, in their prayers, in their regular medita tions, in their study of Holy Scripture, in their habitual thoughts xiv Preface to the Second Edition. respecting the eternal Future, they take Christ's Divinity for granted ; and it never occurs to them to question a reality from which they know themselves to be continually gaining new streams of light and warmth and power. To such as these, this book may or may not be of service. To some Christians, who are filled with joy and peace in be lieving, a review of the grounds of any portion of their faith may be even distressing. To others such a process may be bracing and helpful. But in any case it should be observed that the foot-notes contain passages from unbelieving writers, which are necessary to shew that the statements of the text are not aimed at imaginary phantoms, but which also are not unlikely to shock and distress religious and believing minds very seriously. In such a matter to be forewarned is to be forearmed. 2. There are others, and, it is to be feared, a larger class than is often supposed, who have made up their minds against the claims of Divine Revelation altogether. They may admit the existence of a Supreme Being, in some shadowy sense, as an In finite Mind, or as a resistless Force. They may deny that there is any satisfactory reason for holding that any such Being exists at all. But whether they are Theists or Atheists, they resent the idea of any interference from on high in this human world, and accordingly they denounce the supernatural, on d, priori grounds. The trustworthiness of Scripture as an historical record is to their minds sufficiently disproved by the undoubted fact, that its claim to credit is staked upon the possibility of certain extra ordinary miracles. When that possibility is denied, Jesus Christ must either be pronounced to be a charlatan, or a person of whose real words and actions no trustworthy account has been transmitted to us. Whichever conclusion be accepted by those who belong to the class in question, it is plain that this book cannot hope to assist them. For it treats as certain, facts of which they deny even the possibility. It must of necessity appear to them to be guilty of a continuous petitio principii ; since they dispute its Preface to the Second Edition. fundamental premises. If any such should ever chance to ex amine it, they would probably see in it 'only another illustration of the hopelessness of getting "orthodox" believers even to appre ciate the nature and range of the difficulties which are felt by liberal thinkers.' It may be replied that something should have been done towards meeting those particular ' difficulties.' But, in point of fact, this would have been to choose another subject for the lec tures of 1866. A few lectures, after all, can only deal with some aspects of a great Doctrine ; and every treatise on a question of Divinity cannot be expected to begin ab ovo, and to discuss the Existence and the Personality of God. However little may be assumed, there will always be persons eager to complain of the minimized 'assumption' as altogether unjustifiable; because there are always persons who deny the most elementary Theistic truth. This being the case, the practical question to be determined is this : — How much is it advisable to take for granted in a given condition of faith and opinion, with a view to dealing with the doubts and difficulties of the largest number 1 The existence and personality of God, and the possibility and reality of the Chris tian Eevelation, have been often discussed ; while the truth and evidential force of miracles were defended in the year 1865 by a Bampton Lecturer of distinguished ability. Under these circum stances, the present writer deliberately assumed a great deal which is denied in our day and country by many active minds, with a view to meeting the case, as it appeared to him, of a much larger number, who would not dispute his premises, but who fail to see, or hesitate to acknowledge, the conclusion which they really warrant. 3. For, in truth, the vast majority of our countrymen still shrink with sincere dread from anything like an explicit rejec tion of Christianity. Yet no one who hears what goes on in daily conversation, and who is moderately conversant with the tone of some of the leading organs of public opinion, can doubt the existence of a wide-spread unsettlement of religious Preface to the Second Edition. belief. People have a notion that the present is, in the hack neyed phrase, 'a transitional period,' and that they ought to be keeping pace with the general movement. Whither indeed they are going, they probably cannot say, and have never very seriously asked themselves. Their most definite impression is that the age is turning its back on dogmas and creeds, and is moving in a negative direction under the banner of ' freedom.' They are, indeed, sometimes told by their guides that they are hurrying forward to a chaos in which all existing beliefs, even the fundamental axioms of morality, will be ultimately submerged. Sometimes, too, they are encouraged to look hopefully forward beyond the immediate foreground of conflict and confusion, to an intellectual and moral Elysium, which will be reached when Science has divested Religion of all its superstitious incum brances, and in which 'thought' and 'feeling,' after their long misunderstanding, are to embrace under the supervision of a philosophy higher than any which has yet been elaborated. But these, visions are seen only by a few, and they are not easily popularized. The general tendency is to avoid specula tions, whether hopeful or discouraging, about the future, yet to acquiesce in the theory so constantly suggested, that there is some sort of necessary opposition between dogma and good ness, and to recognise the consequent duty of promoting good ness by the depreciation and destruction of dogma. Thus, the movement, although negative in one sense, believes itself .to be eminently positive in another. With regard to dogma, it is negative. But it sincerely affects a particular care for morality ; and in purifying and enforcing moral truth, it endeavours to make its positive character most distinctly apparent. It is easy to understand the bearing of such a habit of mind when placed face to face with the Person of Our Lord. It tends to issue practically (although, in its earlier stages, not with any very intelligent consciousness) in Socinianism. It regards the great statements whereby Christ's Godhead is taught or guarded in Scripture and the Creeds, if not with impatience Preface to the Second Edition. xvn and contempt, at least with real although silent aversion. Church formularies appear to it simply in the light of an incubus upon true religious thought and feeling ; for it is in sensible to the preciousness of the truths which they guard. Hence as its aims and action become more and more defined, it tends with increasing decision to become Humanitarian. Its dislike of the language of Nicsea hardens into an explicit denial of the truth which that language guards. Yet, if it exults in being unorthodox, and therefore is hostile to the Creed; it is ambitious to be pre-eminently moral, and therefore it lays especial emphasis upon the beauty and perfection of Christ's Human character. It aspires to analyse, to study, to imitate that character in a degree which was, it thinks, impossible during those ages of dogma which it professes to have closed. It thus relieves its desire to be still loyal in some sense to Jesus Christ, although under new conditions : if it discards ancient formularies, it maintains that this rejection takes place only and really in the interest of moral truth. Now it is to such a general habit of mind that this book as a whole, and the argument- from Our Lord's self-assertion in par ticular, ventures to address itself. Believing that the cause of dogma is none other than the cause of morality, — that the perfect moral character of Jesus Christ is really compatible only with the Nicene assertion of His absolute Divinity, — the writer has endeavoured to say so. He has not been at pains to disguise his earnest conviction, that the hopes and sympathies, which have been raised in many sincerely religious minds by the so-called Liberal-religious movement of our day, are destined to a rude and bitter disappointment. However long the final decision between 'some faith' and 'no faith' may be deferred, it must be made at last. Already advanced rationalistic thought agrees with Catholic believers in maintaining that Christ is not altogether a good man, if He is not altogether Superhuman. And if this be so, surely it is prudent as well as honest to say so. They who do not wish to break with Christ Our Lord, 6 xviii Preface to the Second Edition. and to cast out His very Name as evil, in the years to come, will be thankful to have recognised the real tendencies of an anti-dogmatic teaching which for the moment may have won their sympathies. It is of the last importance in religious thinking, not less than in religious practice, that the question, Whither am I going % should be asked and answered. Such a question is not the less important because for the present all is smooth and reassuring, combining the reality of religious change with the avoidance of any violent shock to old convictions. It has been said that there is a peculiar fascination in the movement of a boat which is gliding softly and swiftly down the rapids above Niagara. But a man must be strangely constituted to be able, under such circumstances, so to abandon himself to the sense of present satisfaction as to forget the fate which is immediately before him. The argument from Christ's character to His Divinity which is here put forward can make no pretence to originality. To the present writer, it was suggested in its entirety, some years ago, upon a perusal of Mr. F. W. Newman's 'Phases of Faith.' The seventh chapter of that remarkable but saddening work yielded the analysis which has been expanded in these lectures, and which the lecturer had found, on more than one occasion, to be serviceable in assisting Socinians to understand the real basis of the Church's faith respecting the dignity of her Head. It agrees, moreover, even in detail, with the work of the great preacher of the Church of France, to whose earnestness and genius the present writer has elsewhere professed himself to be, and always must feel, sincerely indebted. The real justification of such arguments lies in a fact which liberal thinkers will not be slow to recognise a. If the moral a Do we not however find a sanction for this class of arguments in appeals such as the following? St. John vii. 42: 'If God were your Father, ye would have loved Me.' St. John v. 38 : • And ye have not His. Word abiding in you : for, whom He hath sent, Him ye believe not.' And is not this summarized in the apostolical teaching ? 1 St. John ii. 23 : 'Whosoever denieth the Son, the same hath not the Father.' Such passages appear to Preface lo the Second Edition. xix sense of man be impaired by the Fall, it is not so entirely dis abled as to be incapable of discerning moral- beauty. If it may err when it attempts to determine, on purely b, priori human grounds, what should be the conduct and dispensations of God in dealing with His creatures, it is not tlierefore likely to be in error when it stands face to face with human sincerity, and humility, and love. At the feet of the Christ of the Gospels, the moral sense may be trusted to protest against an intellectual aberration which condemns Him as vain and false and selfish, only that it may rob Him of His aureole of Divinity. ' In the seventh chapter of the " Phases of Faith," ' I quote the words of a thoughtful friend, ' there is the satisfaction of feeling that one has reached the very floor of Pandemonium, and that a rebound has become almost inevitable. Anything is better than to be sinking still, one knows not how deeply, into the abyss.' It may be said that other alternatives have been put for ward, with a view to forcing orthodox members of the Church of England into a position analogous to that in which the argu ment of these lectures might place a certain section of Lati tudinarian thinkers. For example, some Roman Catholic and some sceptical writers unite in urging that either all orthodox Christianity is false, or the exclusive claims of the Church of Rome must be admitted to be valid. Every such alternative must be considered honestly, and in view of the particular evidence which can be produced in its support. But to pro pound the present alternative between Rome and unbelief, is practically to forget that the acceptance of the dogmatic prin ciple, or of any principle, does not commit those who accept it to its exaggerations or corruptions; and that the promises of Our Lord to His people in regard alike to Unity and to Holiness, are, in His mysterious providence, permitted to be shew, that to press an inference, whether it be moral or doctrinal, from an admitted truth, by insisting that the truth itself is virtuaUy rejected it the inference be declined, is not accurately described as a trick ot modern orthodoxy. b2 xx Preface to the Second Edition. traversed by the misuse of man's free-will. In a word, the dilemma between Roman Catholicism and infidelity is, as a matter of fact, very far from being obviously exhaustive : but it is difficult to see that any intermediate position can be really made good between the denial of Christ's Human per fection and the admission that He is a Superhuman Person. And when this admission is once fairly made, it leads by easy and necessary steps to belief in His true Divinity. The great question of our day is, whether Christ our Lord is only the author and founder of a religion, of which another Being, altogether, separate from Him, namely, God, is the ob ject ; or whether Jesus Christ Himself, true God and true Man, is, with the Father and the Holy Ghost, the Object of Christian faith and love as truly as, in history, He was the Founder of Christendom. Come what may, the latter belief has been, is, and will be to the end, the Faith of His Church. May those who are tempted to exchange it for its modern rival reflect that the choice before them does not lie between a creed with one dogma more, and a creed with one dogma less, nor yet between a mediseval and a modern rendering of the Gospel history. It is really a choice between a phantom and a reality ; between the implied falsehood and the eternal truth of Christianity ; between the interest which may cling to a dis credited and evanescent memory of the past, and the worship of a living, ever-present, and immaculate Redeemer. Chbisi Chubch, Whitsuntide, 1868. ANALYSIS OF THE LECTURES. LECTURE I. THE QUESTION BEFOBE US. St. Matt. xvi. 13. PAGE The Question before us in these Lectures is proposed by our Lord Himself, and is a strictly theological one . 3 Its import 1. as affirming that Christ is the Son of Man 6 2. as enquiring what He is besides . . 9 I. Enduring interest of the question thus raised even for non-believers . . . . . . .11 II. Three answers to it are possible — 1. The Humanitarian . . . . 15 2. The Arian 16 3. The Catholic 17 Of these the Arian is unsubstantial, so that prac tically there are only two . . . 1 7 III. The Catholic Answer 1. jealousy guards the truth of Christ's Manhood 18 2. secures its full force to the idea of Godhead . 26 IV. Position taken in these Lectures stated . • • 34 Objections to the necessary discussion — a. From the ground of Historical iEstheticism . 34 /3. From the ground of 'Anti-doctrinal' Morality 37 y. From the ground of Subjective Pietism . . 41 Anticipated course of the argument . . • • 42 Analysis of the Lectures. LECTURE II. ANTICIPATIONS OP CHRIST'S DIVINITY IN THE OLD TESTAMENT. Gal. iii. 8. PAGE Principle of the Organic Unity of Scripture.— Its import ance in the argument . . . . . . .44 I. Foreshadowings — a. Indications in the Old Testament of a Plurality of Persons within the One Divine Essence . 48 /3. The Theophanies ; their import . . .51 7. The Divine 'Wisdom' 1. in the Hebrew Canon . . . . 59 2. in the later Greek Sapiential Books . 6 1 3. In Philo Judeeus . . . . .62 Contrast between Philo and the New Testament . 68 Probable Providential purpose of Philo's speculations . 70 II. Predictions and Announcements — Hope in a future, a moral necessity for men and nations 72 Secured to Israel in the doctrine of an expected Messiah ........ 75 Four stages observable in the Messianic doctrine — a. From the Protevangehum to the death of Moses 7 8 /3. Age of David and Solomon . . . -79 y. From Isaiah to Malachi . . . .83 8. After Malachi .... Contrast between the original doctrine and the se cularized form of it . 909i Christ was rejected for appealing from the debased to the original doctrine . . . . .03 Conclusion : The foregoing argument illustrated — 1. from the emphatic Monotheism of the Old Testament . . . . . . 9"*, 2. from its full description of Christ's Manhood . 94 Christ's appeal to the Old Testament . . .96 Analysis of the Lechires. xxiii LECTURE III. OUR LORD'S WORK IN THE WORLD A WITNESS TO HIS DIVINITY. St. Matt. xiii. 54-56. PAGE I. Our Lord's 'Plan' (caution as to the use of the ex pression) 98 Its substance — the formation of a world-wide spi ritual society, in the form of a kingdom It is set forth in His Discourses and Parables . Its two leading characteristics— a. originality ..... /3. 'audacity' ...... II. Success of our Lord's 'Plan' — 1. The verdict of Church history 2. Objections from losses and difficulties, con sidered ...... 3. Internal empire of Christ over souls . 4. External results of His work observable in human society T3° III. How to account for the success of our Lord's ' Plan' — 1. Not by reference to the growth of other Eeligions ...... T32 2. Not by the 'causes' assigned by Gibbon . 135 3. Not by the hypothesis of a favourable crisis . 136 which ignores the hostility both of a. Judaism 1 37 and /3. Paganism 139 But only by the belief in, and truth of Christ's Divinity 1 4 5 99 100 105 ii.3 121 124 LECTURE IV. OUR LORD'S DIVINITY AS WITNESSED BY HIS CONSCIOUSNESS. St. John x. 33. The 'Christ of history' none other than the 'Christ of dogma .«-••• Analysis of the Lectures. A. The Miracles of the Gospel History — Their bearing upon the question of Christ's Person . 153 Christ's Moral Perfection bound up with their reality 160 B. Our Lord's Self-assertion 161 I. First stage of His Teaching chiefly Ethical . .162 marked by a. silence as to any moral defect . .163 /3. intense authoritativeness . . .166 II. Second stage : increasing Self-assertion . . .169 which is justified by dogmatic revelations of His Divinity ....... 177 a. in His claim of co-equality with the Father 179 0. in His assertion that He is essentially one with the Father 182 y. in His references to His actual Pre-exist ence 186 Ground of Christ's condemnation by the Jews . 190 III. Christ's Self-assertion viewed in its bearing upon His Human Character : His 1. Sincerity 1Q2 2. Unselfishness 194 3. Humility Io5 all dependent upon the truth of His Divinity 195 The argument necessarily assumes the form of a great alternative . . . . . . 203 LECTURE V. THE DOCTRINE OP CHRIST'S DIVINITY IN THE WRITINGS OP ST. JOHN. I St. John i. 1-3. St. John's Gospel ' the battle-field ' of the New Testament 208 I. Ancient and modern objections to its claims . . 208 Witness of the second century . . . 210 Its distinctive internal features may be explained generally by its threefold purpose — 1. Supplementary 2 2. Polemical * 3. Dogmatic 220 222 Analysis of the Lectures. xxv II. It is a Life of the Eternal Word made flesh. Doctrine of the Eternal Word in the Prologue . .226 Manifestation of the Word, as possessing the Divine Perfections of 1. Life 230 2- Love 230 3. Light 231 The Word identical with the only-begotten Son . .233 III. It is in doctrinal and moral unison with — 1. The Epistles of St. John . . . .237 2. The Apocalypse ...... 242 IV. Its Christology is in essential unison with that of the Synoptists. Observe — 1. their use of the title ' Son of God ' . . 246 2. their account of Christ's Nativity . . 247 3. their report of His Doctrine and Work, and 249 4. of His eschatological discourses . . .253 Summary ........ 254 V. It incurs the objection that a God-Man is philosophi cally incredible . . . . . . .255 This objection misapprehends the Scriptural and Ca tholic Doctrine ....... 256 Mysteriousness of our composite nature illustrative of the Incarnation . . . . . . .264 VI. St. John's writings oppose an insurmountable barrier to the Theory of a Deification by Enthusiasm . 266 Significance of St. John's witness to the Divinity of Christ . 272 xxvi Analysis of the Lectures. LECTURE VI. OUB LORD'S DIVINITY AS TAUGHT BY ST. JAMES, ST. PETER, AND ST. PAUL. PAGE Gal. ii. 9. St. John's Christology not an intellectual idiosyncrasy . 277 The Apostles present One Doctrine under various forms . 278 I. St. James's Epistle — 1. presupposes the Christology of St. Paul . 282 2. implies a high Christology by incidental ex pressions 287 II. St. Peter— 1. leads his hearers up to understand Christ's true dignity, in his Missionary Sermons . 291 2. exhibits Christ's Godhead more fully, in his Epistles 294 III. St. Jude's Epistle implies that Christ is God . 301 IV. St. Paul— 1. form of his Christology compared with that of St. John ...... 302 prominent place given by him to the truths a. of our Lord's true Mediating Manhood 303 /3. of the Unity of the Divine Essence . 307 2. Passages from St. Paul asserting the Divinity of Christ in terms . . . . .310 3. A Divine Christ implied in the general teaching of St. Paul's Missionary Sermons . .324 of St. Paul's Epistles . . . .328 4. And in some leading features of that teach ing, as in a. his doctrine of Faith . . .339 0. his account of Eegeneration . . 344 y. his attitude towards the Judaizers . 348 V. Contrasts between the Apostles do but enhance the force of their common faith in a Divine Christ . 350 Analysis of the Lectures. xxvii LECTURE VII. THE HOMOOUSION. Tit. i. 9. PAGE Vitality of doctrines, how tested 353 Doctrine of Christ's Divinity strengthened by opposition . 357 Objections urged in modern times against the Homoousion 358 Eeal justification of the Homoousion — I. The ante-Nicene Church adored Christ . . . 359 Adoration of Jesus Christ 1. during His earthly Life . . . 364 2. by the Church of the Apostles after His Ascension 3°7 Characteristics of the Adoration of Christ in the Apostolic Age — u. It was not combined with any worship of creatures 376 0. It was really the worship due to God . 378 y. It was nevertheless addressed to Christ's Manhood, as being united to His Deity 379 2. by the post-Apostolic Church, in sub-Apostolic Age in later part of Second Century in Third Century . expressed in hymns and doxologies and signally at Holy Communion assailed by Pagan sarcasms embodied in last words of martyrs inconsistently retained by Arians and even by early Socinians II. The ante-Nicene Church spoke of Christ as Divine 4°5 Value of testimony of martyrs . Similar testimony of theologians Their language not mere ' rhetoric ' . Objection from doubtful statements of some ante Nicenes ...•¦'•• 379 33i 383 385 389 391398 4°3 404 406 4114i7 418 xxviii Analysis of the Lectures. PAGE Answer : u. They had not grasped all the intellectual bearings of the faith. . . .419 j3. They were anxious to put strongly for ward the Unity of God . . .422 y. The Church's real mind not doubtful . 424 III. The Homoousion a. not a development in the sense of an enlarge ment of the faith ..... 426 /3. necessary 1. in the Arian struggle. . . 434 2. in our own times . . . 436 LECTURE VIII. SOME CONSEQUENCES OF THE DOCTRINE OF OUB LORD'S DIVINITY. Rom. viii. 32. Theology must be, within limits, ' inferential ' . . . 44 1 What the doctrine of Christ's Divinity involves . .442 I. Conservative force of the doctrine — 1. It protects the Idea of God in human thought, 444 a. which Deism cannot guard . . . 444 /3. and which Pantheism destroys . . 448 2. It secures the true dignity of Man . . . 45 1 II. Illuminative force of the doctrine — a. It implies Christ's Infallibility as a Teacher . 455 Objections from certain texts . . . 456 1. St. Luke ii. 52 considered . . 456 2. St. Mark xiii. 32 considered . . 458 A single limitation of knowledge in Christ's Human Soul apparently indicated . .459 admitted by great Fathers . . .460 does not involve Agnoetism . . .462 nor Nestorianism .... 463 is consistent with the practical immensity of Christ's human knowledge . . 464 is distinct from, and does not imply fal libility, still less actual error . .467 Application to our Lord's sanction of the Pentateuch 468 Analysis of the Lee hires. xxix 0. 7- 8. It explains the atoning virtue of Christ's Death It explains the supernatural power of the Sacraments ...... It irradiates the meaning of Christ's kingly office ....... PAGE 472 479485 III. Ethical fruitfulness of the doctrine — Objection — that a Divine Christ supplies ho standard for our imitation ...... 485 Answer — 1. An approximate imitation of Christ secured ........ a. by the reality of His Manhood . 486 0. by the grace which flows from Him as God and Man . . . 487 2. Belief in Christ's Godhead has propa gated virtues, unattainable by pagan ism and naturalism— a. Purity 488 j3. Humility . . . . . 49 1 y. Charity ..... 494 Recapitulation of the argument .... 497 Faith in a Divine Christ, the strength of the Church under present dangers . . . • -498 Conclusion 499 THE LECTURES. LECTURE I. THE QUESTION BEFORE US. When Jesus came into ihe coasts of Ccesarea Philippi, He asked His disciples, saying, Whom do mere say that I the Son of Man am ? And they said, Some say that Thou art John the Baptist: some, Elias; and others, Jeremias, or one of the prophets. He saith unto them, But whom say ye that I ami — St. Matt. xvi. 13. Thus did our Lord propose to His first followers the mo mentous question, which for eighteen centuries has riveted the eye of thinking and adoring Christendom. The material set ting, if we may so term it, of a great intellectual or moral event ever attracts the interest and lives in the memory of men ; and the Evangelist is careful to note that the question of our Lord was asked in the neighbourhood of Csesarea Phi lippi. Jesus Christ had reached the northernmost point of His journeyings. He was close to the upper source of the Jordan, and at the base of the majestic mountain which forms a natural barrier to the Holy Land at its northern extremity. His eye rested upon a scenery in the more immediate foreground, which from its richness and variety has been compared by travellers to the Italian Tivoli a. Yet there belonged to this spot a higher interest than any which the beauty of merely inanimate or irrational nature can furnish ; it bore visible traces of the hopes, the errors, and the struggles of the human soul. Around a grotto which Greek settlers had assigned to the worship of the sylvan Pan, a Pagan settlement had gradually formed itself. Herod the Great had adorned the spot with a temple of white marble, dedicated to his patron Augustus ; and more recently, the rising city, enlarged and beautified by Philip the tetrarch, had received a new name a Stanley, Sinai and Palestine, p. 397. [lect. i] B Where the question was raised. which combined the memory of the Csesar Tiberius with that of the local potentate. It is probable that our Lord at least had the city in view0, even if He did not enter it. He was standing on the geographical frontier of Judaism and Heathen dom. Paganism was visibly before Him in each of its two most typical forms of perpetual and world-wide degradation. It was burying its scant but not utterly lost idea of an Eternal Power and Divinity0 beneath a gross materialistic nature- worship ; and it was prostituting the sanctities of the human conscience to the lowest purposes of an unholy and tyrannical statecraft. And behind and around our Lord was that peculiar people, of whom, as concerning the flesh, He came Himselfd, and to which His first followers belonged. Israel too was there ; alone in her memory of a past history such as no other race could boast ; alone in her sense of a present de gradation, political and moral, such as no other people could feel ; alone in her strong expectation of a Deliverance which to men who were ' aliens from ' her sacred ' commonwealth ' seemed but the most chimerical of delusions. On such a spot does Jesus Christ raise the great question which is before us in the text, and this, as we may surely believe, not without a reference to the several wants and hopes and efforts of man kind thus visibly pictured around Him. How was the human conscience to escape from that political violence and from that degrading sensualism which had riveted the yoke of Pagan superstition? How was Israel to learn the true drift and purpose of her marvellous past % How was she to be really relieved of her burden of social and moral misery ? How were her high anticipations of a brighter future to be explained and justified 1 And although that ' middle wall of partition,' which so sharply divided off her inward and outward life from that of Gentile humanity, had been built up for such high and necessary ends by her great inspired lawgiver, did not such isolation also involve manifest counterbalancing risks and loss ? was it to be eternal 1 could it, might it be ' broken down V These questions could only be answered by some further Revelation, larger and clearer than that already possessed by Israel, and absolutely new to Heathendom. They demanded some nearer, fuller, more persuasive self-unveiling than any b Dean Stanley surmises that the rock on which was placed the Temple of Augustus may possibly have determined the form of our Lord's promise to St. Peter in St. Matt. xvi. 1 8. Sinai and Palestine, p. 399. c Rom. i. 20. & Ibid. ix. 5. [ LECT. Religion and Theology. which the Merciful and Almighty God had as yet vouchsafed to His reasonable creatures. May not then the suggestive scenery of Csesarea Philippi have been chosen by our Lord, as well fitted to witness that solemn enquiry in the full answer to which Jew and Gentile were alike to find a rich inheritance of light, peace and freedom ? Jesus ' asked His disciples, saying, Whom do men say that I the Son of Man ami' Let us pause to mark the significance of the fact that our Lord Himself proposes this consideration to His disciples and to His Church. It has been often maintained of late that the teaching of Jesus Christ Himself differs from that of His Apostles and of their successors, in that He only taught religion, while they have taught dogmatic theologye. This statement appears to proceed upon, a presumption that religion and theology can be separated, not merely in idea and for the moment, by some process of definition, but per manently and in the world of fact. What then is religion? If you say that religion is. essentially thought whereby man unites himself to the Eternal and Unchangeable Being1, it is at least plain that the object-matter of such a religious activity as this is exactly identical with the object-matter of theology. Nay more, it would seem to follow that a re ligious life is simply a life of theological speculation. If you make religion to consist in 'the knowledge of our practical duties considered as God's commandments £,' your definition irresistibly suggests God in His capacity of universal Legis lator, and it thus carries the earnestly and honestly religious man into the heart of theology. If you protest that religion e Baur more cautiously says : 'Wenn wir mit der Lehre Jesu die Lehre des Apostels Paulus zusammenhalten, so fallt sogleich der grosse Unter- schied in die Augen, welcher hier stattfindet zwischen einer noch in der Form eines allgememen Princips sich aussprechenden Lehre, und einem schon zur Bestimmtheit des Dogma's gestalteten Lehrbegriff.' Vorlesungen iiber N. T. Theologie. p. 123. But it would be difficult to shew that the ' Universal Principle' does not involve and embody a number of definite dogmas. Baur would not admit that St. John xiv., xv., xvi. contain words really spoken by Jesus Christ : but the Sermon on the Mount itself is sufficiently dogmatic. Cf. St. Matt. vi. 4, 6, 14, 26, 30, vii. 21, 22. f So Fichte, quoted by Klee, Dogmatik, c. 2. With this definition those of Schelling and Hegel substantially concur. It is unnecessary to remark that thought is only one element of true religion. S So Kant, ibid. This definition (1) reduces religion to being merely an affair of the understanding, and (2) identifies its substance with that of morality. i] B 2 Religion and Theology. lias nothing to do with intellectual skill in projecting defini tions, and that it is at bottom a feeling of tranquil dependence upon some higher Power h, you cannot altogether set aside the capital question which arises as to the nature of that Power upon which religion thus depends. Even if you should contend that feeling is the essential element in religion, still you cannot seriously maintain that the reality of that to which such feeling relates is altogether a matter of indifference1. For the adequate satisfaction of this religious feeling lies not in itself but in its object ; and therefore it is impossible to represent religion as indifferent to the absolute truth of that object, and in a purely sesthetical spirit, concerned only with the beauty of the idea before it, even in a case where the reflective understanding may have condemned that idea as logically false. Religion, to support itself, must rest consciously on its object : the intellectual apprehension of that object as true is an integral element of religion. In other words, religion is practically inseparable from theology. The religious Ma- hommedan sees in Allah a being to whose absolute decrees he must implicitly resign himself; a theological dogma then is the basis of the specific Mahommedan form of religion. A child reads in the Sermon on the Mount that our Heavenly Father takes care of the sparrows, and of the lilies of the field J, and the child prays to Him accordingly. The truth upon which the child rests is the dogma of the Divine Providence, which encourages trust, and warrants prayer, and lies at the root of the child's religion. In short, religion cannot exist without some view of its object, namely, God ; but no sooner do you introduce any intellectual aspect whatever of God, nay, the bare idea that such a Being exists, than you have before you not merely a religion, but at least, in some sense, a theologyk. h 'Abhangigkeitsgefiihl.' Schleiermacher's account of religion has been widely adopted in our own day and country. But (i) it ignores the active side of true religion, (2) it loses sight of man's freedom no less than of God's, and (3) it may imply nothing better than a passive submission to the laws of the Universe, without any belief whatever as to their Author. 1 Dorner gives an account of this extreme theory as maintained by De Wette in his Religion und Theologie, 1815. De "Wette appears to have followed out some hints of Herder's, while applying Jacobi's doctrine of feeling, as 'the immediate perception of the Divine/ and the substitute for the practical reason, to theology. Cf. Dorner, Person Christi, Zw. Th. p. 996, sqq. i St. Matt. vi. 25-30. k Religion includes in its complete idea the knowledge and the worship [ LKCT. Place of Christ in His own doctrine. Had our Lord revealed no one truth except the Parental character of God, while at the same time He insisted upon a certain morality and posture of the soul as proper to man's reception of this revelation, He would have been the Author of a theology as well as of a religion. In point of fact, besides teaching various truths concerning God, which were unknown before, or at most only guessed at, He did that which in a merely human teacher of high purpose would have been morally intolerable. He drew the eyes of men towards Himself. He claimed to be something more than the Founder of a new religious spirit, or than the authoritative promulgator of a higher truth than men had yet known. He taught true religion indeed as no man had yet taught it, but He bent the religious spirit which He had summoned into life to do homage to Himself, as being its lawful and adequate Object. He taught the highest theology, but He also placed Himself at the very centre of His doctrine, and He announced Himself as sharing the very throne of that God Whom He so clearly unveiled. If He was the organ and author of a new and final revelation, He also claimed to be the very substance and material of His own message ; His most startling revelation was Himself. These are statements which will be justified, it is hoped, hereafter1; and, if some later portions of our subject are for a moment anticipated, it is only that we may note the true and extreme significance of our Lord's question in the text. But let us also ask ourselves what would be the duty of a merely human teacher of the highest moral aim, entrusted with a great spiritual mission and lesson for the benefit of mankind? The example of St. John Baptist is an answer to this enquiry. Such a teacher would represent himself as a mere 'voice' crying aloud in the moral wilderness around him, and anxious, beyond aught else, to shroud his own insignificant person beneath the majesty of his message. Not to do this would be to proclaim his own of Ood. (S. Aug. de Util. Cred. c. 12. n. 27.) Cicero gives the limited sense which Pagan Rome attached to the word : ' Qui omnia quae ad cultum deorum pertinerent, diligenter retractarent et tanquam relegerent, sunt d.icti religiosi, ex relegendo.' (De Nat. Deorum, ii. 28.) Lactantius gives the Christian form of the idea, whatever may be thought of his etymology : 'Vinculo pietatis obstricti Deo, et religati sumus, unde ipsa religio nomen accepit.' (Inst. Div. iv. 24.) Religion is the bond between God and man's whole nature : in God the heart finds its happiness, the reason its rule of truth, the will its freedom. 1 See Lecture IV. 6 The 'Son of Man' moral degradation ; it would be a public confession that he could only regard a great spiritual work for others as furnishing an opportunity for adding to his own social capital, or to his official reputation. When then Jesus Christ so urgently draws the attention of men to His Personal Self, He places us in a • dilemma. We must either say that He was unworthy of His own words in the Sermon on the Mount m, or we must confess that He has some right, and is under the pressure of some necessity, to do that which would be morally insupportable in a merely human teacher. Now if this right and necessity exist, it follows that when our Lord bids us to consider His Personal rank in the hierarchy of beings, He challenges an answer. Remark moreover that in the popular sense of the term the answer is not less a theological answer if it be that of the Ebionitic heresy than if it be the language of the Nicene Creed. The Christology of the Church is in reality an integral part of its theology ; and Jesus Christ raises the central question of Christian theology when He asks, ' Whom do men say that I the Son of Man am V It may be urged that our Lord is inviting attention, not to His essential Personality, but to His assumed office as the Jewish Messiah ; that He is, in fact, asking for a confession of His Messiahship. Now observe the exact form of our Lord's question, as given in St. Matthew's Gospel ; which, as Olshausen has remarked, is manifestly here the leading narrative : ' Whom do men say that I the Son of Man am ?' This question involves an assertion, namely, that the Speaker is the Son of Man. What did He mean by that designation ? It is important to remember that with two exceptions" the title is only applied to our Lord in the New Testament by His own lips. It was His self-chosen Name : why did He choose it ? First, then, it was in itself, to Jewish ears, a clear assertion of Messiahship. In the vision of Daniel ' One like unto the Son of Man o had come with the clouds of heaven and there was given Him dominion and glory and a kingdom.' This kingdom succeeded in the prophet's vision to four inhuman kingdoms, correspondent to the four typical beasts ; it was the kingdom of a prince, human indeed, and yet from heaven. In consequence m Observe the principle involved in St. Matt. vi. 1-8. 11 Acts vii. 56 ; Rev. i. 13, xiv. 14. 0 Mildert), vol. i. pp. 402, 403. * Waterland, Works, vol. i. p. 78, note f. Bp. Van-Mildert quotes from Mr. Charles Butler's Historical Account of Confessions of Faith, chap. x. sect. 2, a remarkable report of Dr. Clarke's conference with Dr. Hawarden in the presence of Queen Caroline. After Dr. Clarke had stated his system at great length and in very guarded terms, Dr. Hawarden asked his permission to put one simple question, and Dr. Clarke assented. 'Then,' said Dr. Ha warden, 'I ask, Can God the Father annihilate the Son and the Holy Ghost? Answer me Yes or No.' Dr. Clarke continued for some time in deep thought, and then said, ' It was a question which he had never considered.' I] C 1 8 The three Answers are practically two. disappointed : the largest demands are made upon faith, yet the Arian Christ after all is but a fellow-creature; and reason is encouraged to assail the mysteries of the Catholic creed in behalf of a theory which admits of being reduced to an irrational absurdity. Arianism therefore is really at most a resting- point for minds which are sinking from the Catholic creed downwards to pure Humanitarianism ; or which are feeling their way upwards from the depths of Ebionitism, or Socinianism, towards the Church. This intermediate, transient, and essen tially unsubstantial character of the Arian position was indeed made plain, in theory, by the vigorous analysis to which the heresy was subjected on its first appearance by St. Athanasius", and again in the last century, when, at its endeavour to make a home for itself in the Church of England, in the person of Dr. Samuel Clarke, it was crushed out, under God, mainly by the genius and energy of the great Waterland. And history has verified the anticipations of argument. Arianism at this day has a very shadowy, if any real, existence ; and the Church of Christ, holding in her hands the Creed of Nicsea, stands face to face with sheer Humanitarianism, more or less disguised, according to circumstances, by the thin varnish of an admiration yielded to our Lord on aesthetic or ethical grounds. UL At the risk of partial repetition, but for the sake of clearness, let us here pause to make two observations respecting that complete assertion of the Divinity of our Lord for which His Church is responsible at the bar of human opinion. i. The Catholic doctrine, then, of Christ's Divinity in no degree interferes with or overshadows the complemental truth pf His perfect Manhood. It is perhaps natural that a greater emphasis should be laid upon the higher truth which could be apprehended only by faith than on the lower one which, during the years of our Lord's earthly Life, was patent to the senses of men. And Holy Scripture might antecedently be supposed to take for granted the reality of Christ's Manhood, on the ground of there being no adequate occasion for full, precise, and reiterated assertions of so obvious a fact. But nothing is more remarkable in Scripture than its provision for the moral and intellectual needs of ages far removed from those which are traversed by the books included in the Sacred On the * precarious' existence of God the Son, according to the Arian hypothesis, see Waterland's Farther Vindication of Christ's Divinity, ch. iii. sect. 19. » See Lect. VII. [ LECT. Reality of our Lord's Humanity. 19 Canon. In the present instance, by a series of incidental although most significant statements, the Gospels guard us with nothing less than an exhaustive precaution against the fictions of a Docetic or of an Apollinarian Christ. We are told that the Eternal Word St. Luke xxii. 8, 15. " St. John xxi. 12, 13. 0 St. Luke vii. 34 : i\4}Av9ev 0 Tibs rov avOpdirov icrdiwv Kal irlvav. P Ibid. iv. 2 : ovk ecpuyev oiifiev iv rats fip.cpais iKeivais. Q Ibid. vii. 34: (Sou, avOpomos cpdyos Kal olvcmcWijs. r St. Matt. iv. 2 : Hcrrepov iireivacre. a Ibid. xxi. 18 : itcavdyuv els rrjv iroAtv, iiceivaae. * St. John xix. 28 : Sitfia. u St. Matt. viii. 24 : airbs 5e 4Ki6evSe. * St. John iv. 6: S oZv 'IrjffoGs KiKoiciaKus «/c rrjs SSonroplas ixaBefero ovras inl t$ ^"77777. y tV Keep a\V, St. Luke vii. 46 ; St. Matt, xxvii. 29, 30; St. John xix. 30 ; robs ic6$as, St. Luke vii. 38 ; ras x^pas, St. Luke xxiv. 40 ; r$ tiax- rv\y, St. John viii. 6 ; ra, OKekn, St. John xix. 33 ; ret y6vara, St.' Luke xxii. 41 ; ttjx wAevpav, St. John xix. 34 ; rb oa>p.a, St. Luke xxii. 19, &c. 2 St. Luke xxii. 44, &c, xxiii. ; St. Matt, xxvi., xxvii. ; St. Mark xiv. 32 seq., xv. a St. John xix. 39, 40 : eAa^ov oZv rb crapia rov "Iijo-oO Kal ffSijirov avrb oOovlois lara ruv apupArtev ; cf. ver. 42. [ LECT. Witness of Scripture to Christ's Human Soul. 2 1 rection0, are so many emphatic attestations to the fact of His true and full participation' in the material side of our common nature. Equally explicit and vivid is the witness which Scripture affords to the true Human Soul of our Blessed Lord c. Its general movements are not less spontaneous, nor do Its affections flow less freely, because no sinful impulse finds a place in It, and each pulse of Its moral and mental Life is in conscious harmony with, and subjection to, an all-holy Will. Jesus rejoices in spirit on hearing of the spread of the kingdom of heaven among the simple and the poor d : He beholds the young ruler, and forth with loves him e. He loves Martha and her sister and Lazarus with a common, yet, as seems to be implied, with a discriminating affection f. His Eye on one occasion betrays a sudden movement of deliberate anger at the hardness of heart which could steel itself against truth by maintaining a dogged silences. The scattered and fainting multitude melts Him to compassion n : He sheds tears of sorrow at the grave of Lazarus', and at the sight of the city which has rejected His Lovek. In contem plating His approaching Passion1 and the ingratitude of the traitor-Apostle™, His Soul is shaken by a vehement agitation which He does not conceal from His disciples. In the garden of Gethsemane He wills to enter into an agony of amazement and dejection. His mental sufferings are so keen and piercing that His tender frame gives way beneath the trial, and He sheds b St. John xx. 27; St. Luke xxiv. 39: Ketc rks x^/"" f-ov K°! r°bs jrdSas pov, '6ri avros iy& c-I/j-l' ifnjAacpTioare pes kckL iSere' '6rt Tcvevpa ccdpKa Kal oarea ovk %xeL KaBws ipe Bc-apure %%ovra. 0 1 St. Pet. iii. 18: BavaraBeh pcev trapKl, faoTroiTjflfls Si icveVLcarc iv a Kal rois iv cpvKaicfi icvcvpaaiv rropevBcls iK-r)pvt,ev. The rip before irvc.vp.an in the Textus Receptus being only an insertion by a copyist, icva\iv.a here means our Lord's Human Soul. No other passage in the New Testament places It in more vivid contrast with His Body. d St. Luke x. 21: ijyaAAtdcraro tw irvevpari. e St. Mark x. 21: i Sh 'Itjctovs ipfi\c\jias aiircp r\ydm\cxiv avr6v. ! St. John xi. 5. e St. Mark iii. 5 : irepif5\t\lidp.evos avrobs per' opyrjs, ovWowoipevos iirl rfj iccopdicrc-L rijs KapSias ahruv. h St. Matt. ix. 36: icnc*ayxv'l