CHAPTER VIII.

A TEMPORARY DARKENING.

THOSE who lived near the time of Jesus, and were brought under his influence, were elevated to stand, in a way, side by side with the prophets. As if using one common organ of vision, they attained to the perception of a special revelation. And-to apply the words of the Master himself, perhaps with a more personal meaning than he at first gave to them-"many prophets and righteous men had desired to see those things which they saw, and had not seen them, and to hear those things which they heard, and had not heard them."

As the revealing earthly life retreated into the past, did the revelation as such go with it? or was it only preserved in the form of an ordinary defining agency, or of an embodiment originating from it but not possessing its clearness or its fulness of power? That would be in accordance with the ordinary course of things; but if there had been nothing

exceptional in this case, then it would be hardly correct to speak of Jesus as a revelation to the modern world. There was, in the case, something exceptional; and yet, the ordinary process took place to an extent, and took place with certain most marked characteristics.

The exceptional in the case was, that the figure of Jesus, viewed very generally but with historical correctness, remained ever in the background of human knowledge, distinct from the limiting representations of it; and that it blended with the Divine Presence itself, as a power to light the path from time to time, when the ordinary lamp failed. In accordance with this state of matters one may say that revelations to individuals in modern times have but repeated the revelation in Jesus; or, in other words, that in the experience of these revelations it is practically impossible to distinguish what is entirely new from what the observer has brought to the perception from knowledge of Jesus.

The ordinary process took place to an extent, nevertheless. The revelation in great measure became history; and, imperceptibly but rapidly, the ordinary guidance of Christians was transferred from it to an artificial agency which was constructed in consequence of it. An artificial light was formed,

partly out of the words and deeds of Jesus as the following generation was able to receive them, partly out of epistles written by leaders in the early Church, partly out of the Old Testament Scriptures, and partly out of a thought about Scripture which was inherited from the Judaistic religion. Gospel narratives, epistles, and Old Testament books were constituted into what came to be called a 'canon,' or rule for faith; and the thought of their Divine authority, in literalness, became the completed guiding agency. Under this thought, which was to become the ordinary light of Europe for many centuries, a large amount of experience has been recorded; but it is difficult to find in it much that is akin to the experience of the old prophets and of Paul.

Immediately after Paul, the artificialising process seems to have begun. Even the latest of the books of the New Testament itself, while they still impress us with the possession of genuine prophetic power, distinctly show the beginning of this process. The Johannine writings are specially interesting in this connection. In the gospel and epistles which bear the name of John, the thought of the author himself shows a narrowing of religious comprehension which is beyond dispute. God is no longer, as in the

Sermon on the Mount, represented as of boundless care; nor is man directed to those infinitely broad interests which are opened up to view in the more simply recorded teaching of the Master. Love to fellow-Christians replaces love to the unthankful and the evil; one is bidden pray for another so long as the sin is "not unto death," 1 instead of to forgive " until seventy times seven"; and (with one apparent exception2 which may not be a real exception) the name of "our Father which art in heaven," by which Jesus taught us to address the Most High, is no longer, in any connection, to be found. On the other hand, indeed, though the narrowing process is there, inspiration is, in these books, still preserved. We are indebted to them for some valuable theological conceptions, for much suggestive thought, for the saying "God is love," and for the aphorism that he who loves God will love his brother also. On account of this, these works deserve all respect, even apart from the precious fact that the Gospel of John presents much of Jesus himself, as well as the evangelist's own treatment of the subject. For assuredly, even in due recognition of all critical discoveries, we shall not be driven from the belief that it is the voice of Jesus still echoing that has won for this gospel so wide2 John xx. 17.

1 1 John v. 16.

spread an affection.1 Still, all this being observed, the Johannine writer himself has only too plainly narrowed the spirit of the teaching and of the whole sacred appearance.

With the writings of the Church Fathers,' however, the daylight is left behind. We follow the movements of persons who have entered dark channel, taking with them a small lamp sufficient to give the light which their purpose requires. Their lamp is already Bible-literalism. And their knowledge of the Divine Life is that which was described here in the first chapter. The gracious aspect of the Supreme, as He appears in Jesus's words and in Jesus's character, passes almost out of notice. It is but little alluded to by the 'Fathers'; and it but little affects their own spirit. The Divine in Nature, in spite of some speculations in formal metaphysics, is not taken seriously into account. God is regarded as terrible only, far away from nature and from man. Appalling shadows, also, are accepted as real things. And worse than this, the 'Fathers' are, in many cases, not appalled by the shadows, so unmoved are they by the higher attributes of the Divine Life. Yet they behold the moral bond between man and

1 I tried to make good the assertion here ventured on, in my study of The Saviour in the newer light.