i

"/ give thef e Baoks
foi-.ffie/onnding.of a. ColUgt in iMj CoU/iyp

MU^i^Hi^WMW^WV^^

DIVINITY SCHOOL
TROWBRIDGE LIBRARY

THE GOSPEL OF THE
KINGDOM

THE GOSPEL OF THE
KINGDOM :
OR
THE SERMON ON THE MOUNT,
CONSIDERED
IN THE LIGHT OF
CONTEMPORARY
JEWISH THOUGHT AND IDEALS

BY
H. E. SAVAGE, L>.D.
DEAN OF LICHFIELD

LONGMANS, GREEN, AND CO.
39 PATERNOSTER ROW, LONDON
NEW YORK, BOMBAY AND CALCUTTA
1910
All rights reserved

CambrtliBe:
PRINTED BY JOHN CLAY, M.A.
AT THE UNIVERSITY PRESS

PREFACE
in*OR several years past it has been my privilege to give
-I- courses of lectures on various subjects to groups of Clergy
in different centres, chiefly in the North of England. In work
of this kind one who is a Parish Priest himself has peculiar
advantages, in spite of his restricted opportunities for sustained
study, in that he is in close touch with the interests and the
needs of the Parochial Clergy. He knows from his own
experience alike the subjects that will be most helpful, and the
form of treatment which is best adapted to meet the requirements
of the case. For the Clergy as a body, especially those who are
face to face with the keen activities of large towns, are eager to
equip themselves thoroughly as teachers of the Bible. They are
zealous students themselves, so far as their very limited leisure
allows. And this characteristic is more particularly manifested
in those whose length of service has brought with it a fuller
appreciation of the realities of life, and of the proper calling of
a Parish Priest. It is a significant indication of this to notice
the average age of the Clergy who attend lectures on Biblical
subjects. More and more in recent years the desire has grown to seek
for the true meaning of any book, or passage, of the Bible by
reconstituting, as far as possible, the original circumstances in
which the events happened, or the words were spoken ; and so to
understand the lesson which they conveyed in the first instance ;
and from that to deduce the permanent principles which are set
forth by thera as universally applicable. The Bible is no longer

VI PREFACE
regarded generally as a mere repertory of convenient mottoes or
aphorisms ; but as a record of actual life, viewed in the light of
Divine revelation.
It fell to my lot in 1906 and 1907, while I was Vicar of
Halifax, to give a course of lectures on the Sermon on the
Mount to large gatherings of Clergy at York, at South Shields,
and at Halifax. In the process of preparation for these lectures,
the conviction became more and more confirmed that this
discourse at every turn reflects so strongly the various phases of
Jewish national feeling at the time when it was delivered, that
the real clue to its interpretation must lie in seeking to put it
back into direct relationship with the ideals and the aspirations
to which it refers implicitly throughout. And with each
repetition of the lectures the assurance of the truth of this
principle grew more emphatic. But out of all the many com
mentaries on the Sermon there is not one which seems to pay
any consistent regard to this aspect. In most cases indeed it
is practically ignored altogether. Perhaps the only partial
exception to this silence is in the old-fashioned Commentarius
in libros Novi Testamenti historicos of Dr Christian Kuinoel
(Leipzig, 1807 — 18 18), who is careful always to indicate the
Aramaic equivalents which appear to be represented by special
words or phrases in the discourse. For that is an important
element in any attempt to arrive at the original force of the
sayings. Indeed in many respects the most useful of all helps
is a Hebrew version of the New Testament, such as that of
Delitzsch, or of Salkinson and Ginsburg.
It was out of these lectures that the present book took its
origin. The main point in question might well have been
developed in a simple essay, drawing attention merely to the
more prominent features in the case. But as the investigation
proceeded, it became evident that more than this was required ;
and that only by a careful examination of the whole of the
Sermon in detail, and in respect of the sequence and cohesion of
its several sections, could the witness of the facts be adequately

PREFACE VU
presented. It was on this account that the form of a running
commentary was adopted.
But there are other serious problems which could not be
ignored. There is, for instance, the question of the unity of the
discourse, as recorded by St Matthew. Personally I had for long
shared the common impression that this record consisted of a
congeries of sayings, spoken on different occasions, but collected
together here by the Evangelist as specimens of the teaching
given by our Lord from time to time concerning the Kingdom
of God. Even if this were the case, they would still represent
a practically homogeneous statement of 'the Gospel of the
Kingdom ' : they would still call for a detailed examination in
the light of the contemporary Jewish tendencies. But with the
progress of a closer study of the sayings themselves, and of
a minute consideration both of their matter and of their
phraseology, this initial impression became gradually modified,
in particular after particular, until at last it was replaced by an
assured conviction that the discourse as given by St Matthew is
virtually a single consecutive utterance : — that it belongs on the
whole to one and the same occasion, because throughout it
coincides with all the conditions of the earliest stage of our
Lord's ministry, at the point of the first transition from the
Old Covenant to the New [cp. § II. pp. 27 — 40] ; and that the
consecutive steps of the argument demonstrate an intimate
connexion between the various parts. In one instance only, that
of the section about persistence in prayer (vii. 7 — 11), does the
bond seem to be somewhat uncertain ; and even there it is found
that the excision of the paragraph would produce a more serious
break, than its retention does, in the order of the argument
[see pp. 226 — 229].
The most striking example of an apparent insertion of matter
which seems to belong to a different occasion, is the inclusion of
the Lord's Prayer in the Sermon. At first sight, on a cursory
reading, the impression is formed that the pattern Prayer has
been attached by the historian to the teaching on Prayer as an
a 5

viii PREFACE
apt illustration in concrete of the principles laid down. The
memory of St Luke's account of it in another setting is strongly
in mind ; and the obvious interpolation by the copyists of the
liturgical doxology is not without influence in encouraging the
idea of a more extensive addition, of the whole Prayer, to the
record. But this preconceived notion breaks down completely
when the Prayer itself is subjected to an intent examination, and
a careful analysis of its constituent elements. It is phrased
in the terminology of the Old Testament: while at the same
time it gives articulate expression to feature after feature of
the doctrine of the Gospel of the Kingdom. That is to say,
it is so framed that it is at once adapted to the religious stand
point of those who were still under the Old Covenant, and could
be freely used by them ; and yet formulates exactly the
developed ideals of the New Covenant, and so has a permanent
application. It thus harmonises entirely with the general
position of the Sermon on the Mount. But more than this, each
several clause in turn is found to bear reference to one or
another section of the discourse ; and, in a measure, to depend
upon its teaching for a full understanding of the precise
meaning. The Prayer is intimately interwoven into the whole
texture of the Sermon. So that whatever doubt might remain
as to the setting of other portions of the address as recorded by
St Matthew, about the Lord's Prayer there can be none. [See
pp. 158, 159, 182—184, 192.]
Nor does the broken up report of the Sermon in St Luke's
Gospel really afford any valid argument against this conclusion.
In § X. I have examined St Luke's methods of composition, more
especially in regard of these sayings of our Lord. When I had
already worked through this Prof. Harnack's book, The Sayings
of Jesus, came into my hands ; and I turned to it eagerly in the
hope of finding new and helpful light on the vexed question of
the relationship between the narratives of St Matthew and
St Luke. But this hope was disappointed. There is practically
nothing in that work which bears upon the particular investiga-

PREFACE IX
tion which was in view. Perhaps it was not to be expected
in a search after the very elusive Q. On the supposition of a
common Greek original source, all Aramaic turns of expression in
St Matthew are ruled out at once, as Matthaean additions. Thus
" the text of St Luke is to be preferred " when he gives simply
tov? Kopaicat; and ra Kpiva instead of ra ireretva rov ovpavov and
r a Kpiva tov ay pov [see p. 205, below] : and the phrase 6 Harrjp
ifimv 6 iv Tot? ovpavoi<; (or, 6 ovpavio<i) in St Matthew's Gospel
is regarded as " almost always suspicious." This contention may
be true in respect of a Graecised record of our Lord's words :
St Luke's Gospel itself is an instance of the obliteration of
Aramaic and local expressions in the course of ' translating ' the
account into a proper Greek form [see p. 256] : but it cannot
affect the ultimate accuracy of St Matthew's record of the
sayings of our Lord, spoken as they were by a Jew Himself to
Jews. When they were originally delivered there was no reason
whatever why they should be restrained into a strictly correct
Greek diction (even if it could be supposed that they were given
in Greek) ; rather there was every reason why they should be
couched in the form which would appeal most intelligibly to the
hearers. The long section of the Sermon on the Mount which
deals with the interpretation of the Law (v. 17—48) has a
special significance in this connexion. It is so full of Jewish
ideas and local references, that, except for a few selected sayings
of general import, it is dropped out of St Luke's Greek version
[see pp. 250 — 252]: but that omission in no way impugns the
authenticity of the teaching recorded by St Matthew alone. In
like manner the description of the Father as ' heavenly ' or ' in
heaven ' is precisely the title of common Jewish parlance1, and
it is scarcely too much to say that it is almost inconceivable that
our Lord Himself should not have used it: but just because
it is essentially Jewish it finds no place in St Luke's Greek
representation of the words. It is one thing to argue from a
1 Cp. Dalman, p. 188, "Jesus adopted this term for God from the popular usage of
His time." See below, pp. 82, 83, 161, 162.

X PREFACE
comparison of two accounts that certain phrases were nbt
included in a (supposed) common Greek source: it is quite
another thing to conclude that therefore they must be regarded
as accretions due to the Evangelist himself ; that they are merely
his own literary idioms. Because they are strongly Aramaic in
character they find no place in a reconstituted Q. But that is
no proof that they do not represent a genuine tradition of the
words actually employed by our Lord. The probabilities lie all
the other way.
But again, no student of the Gospels can be unaware that in
recent years the trend of criticism has been strongly against the
ascription of the authorship of the first Gospel to St Matthew
himself. That it owed its origin however in some way to him is
indicated by the universal association of the Gospel with his
name1. Possibly the actual composer was a companion and
disciple of the Apostle, whose work stood in much the same
relationship to his teaching as that which St Mark's Gospel
bears to the preaching of St Peter2 But this problem does not
affect the present subject, and therefore it has been purposely
passed by without any discussion. For such matter as that
contained in the Sermon on the Mount obviously belongs to the
very earliest stratum of the tradition of our Lord's teaching.
And even if it were possible to accept Schleiermacher's strained
interpretation of \6<yt,a as referring to ' discourses ' only, in the
familiar phrase of Papias quoted by Eusebius3, still this Sermon
1 Cp. " That Matthew had some hand in shaping the Logia in question seems
certain from the mere fact that to him, quite an obscure apostle, tradition uniformly
and in all circles assigns our first Gospel." Hast., D.B., iii. 297 a.
a Cp. Swete's The Gospel according to St Mark, pp. xxiii — xxvi.
* H.E. iii. 39 MorSaio! phi ovv 'E/3pai'St tuOsixrif to \<5yia crweypiifiaTO. But \6yia
nowhere else bears the meaning of ' discourses.' Cp. , in N .T. , A. vii. 38 ; Rom. iii. a -
Heb. v. 12 ; 1 P. iv. n. And for early Patristic references see Lightfoot, Essays on
Sup. Rei., p. 174. Even Papias himself named the five books of his work, which
included} in its scope narratives 'as well as discourses, ' Aoyluv Kvpuncwv 'Efry-fyris.'
Eus. H.E. iii. 39. This restricted interpretation of the word has received fresh
encouragement of late years from the title affixed by Messrs Grenfell and Hunt to the
first leaf of the Oxyrhynchus fragment which they published in r897,— AOriA
IHSOT. But it is not borne out by the additional leaf (Ox. Pap. 654) which they
published in 1904, if Xi^os may be safely adopted in line 1.

PREFACE XI
is emphatically a ' discourse,' and would accordingly fall within
the category of the elemental basis of the Gospel ascribed to
St Matthew. It therefore makes no difference in a consideration
of the Sermon by itself, as a detached portion of the first Gospel,
what relation may be held to be borne by that Gospel as a
whole to St Matthew the Apostle: and to have entered into
such a discussion at all would have been altogether fruitless for
the investigation in hand.
The aim of this book is to compare the teaching of the
Sermon on the Mount with the contemporary religious attitude
of the Jews, so far as that can be gleaned from the rather scanty
resources available ; and thus to arrive at the original force of
its message as the formal statement of ' the Gospel of the
Kingdom.'
H. E. S.
12 November, 1909.

"In interpreting very many phrases and histories
of the New Testament, it is not so much worth, what
we think of them from notions of our own, feigned
upon I know not what grounds, — as in what sense
these things were understood by the hearers and lookers
on, according to the usual custom and vulgar dialect
of the nation." J. Lightfoot, Horae Hebr. et Talm.,
on St Matt. vi. 9.

CONTENTS
I. The Kingdom of God
II. The Sermon on the Mount .
III. The Beatitudes
IV. Influence on the World
V. The Interpretation of the Law
VI. The Works of Righteousness
VII. Undistracted Service
VIII. The Church in the World .
? IX. True Discipleship .
X. The Sermon in St Luke's Gospel
Index 

PAGE I
25
41 7385
r4J189
233249265

XIV CONTENTS

I. THE KINGDOM OF GOD.

The first proclamation of the Gospel presupposes a general expecta
tion of a Kingdom of God ;  i
Which is assumed throughout our Lord's ministry, .... 2
as held by the Jews,  3
and by the disciples  4
This expectation had been active for a considerable time, . 5
and had in fact led to popular risings :  6
For it centred round the hope of a national independence under a
national King  7
The ideal of the Covenant was that God was the King of Israel, . 8
with an earthly king as His vicegerent,  8
of the line of David ;  9
After the Captivity especially, the expected earthly King was idealised. 10
The King is rarely alluded to in post-canonical literature : . . 11
But the hope of a Davidic King was revived in the first century : 1 1
And our Lord was actually born of David's line  12
The Kingdom of God was looked for as ushering in great conquests. . 13
Since the Captivity the Jews had learned to look to an imperial range
of influence;  13
But had been driven in upon a national isolation of privilege. . 14
The wider outlook had been placed before them long before by the
Prophets ;  14
but in figurative language of conquest  16
The records from the time of Nehemiah to the time of the Maccabees
are very fragmentary : but point to  16
(a) an enhanced position of the High Priest, .... 16
(6) the growth of a patriotic party, ...... 16
(c) the beginning of 'The Dispersion.'  17
The Maccabean struggle fostered the aim of a national independence. 18
The influence of the unity of 'The Dispersion' under the Roman
Empire,  19
which showed peculiar favour to the Jews  20
So there was a growing national unity, centring round Jerusalem
and the Temple  21
Thus the expected Kingdom of God was a clearly defined national
polity;  23
And the 'Kingdom' represented a positive organisation.' . . 23

CONTENTS XV
II. THE SERMON ON THE MOUNT. PAGE
The character of the Kingdom of God as announced by our Lord was
spiritual, not national  27
This required full explanation, in the face of preconceived ideas. 28
The title 'The Sermon on the Mount' due to Augustine. ... 29
Its adoption in the English Bibles  29
The real title of the discourse is 'The Gospel of the Kingdom.' . 30
Summary of its contents  30
It represents the development of the Old Covenant into the New : 35
there is
(a) No elaboration of distinctively Christian doctrine ; ¦ ¦ 35
(6) No scheme of organisation ;  36
(c) No reference to controversies  37
It therefore belongs to an early stage of our Lord's ministry. . . 37
It was spoken to a representative gathering from all the Jewish parts
of the land.  37
It is placed by St Matthew at the point which suits these early
conditions;  38
near, but not at, the commencement of the ministry. ... 39
The discourse is thoroughly Jewish in tone throughout ... 40
It is the preliminary sketch of the ideal of the true Kingdom of God. 40
III. THE BEATITUDES.
The discourse was spoken to the whole assembly, not to the disciples
only.  43
St Matthew is not careful to define to whom teaching was actually
addressed  43
The Beatitudes set forth the characteristics of members of the Kingdom, 44
in contrast to the popular expectation  48
They are based upon the spiritual teaching of the Psalms and the
Prophets:  45
(i) paitdpiot, .......•••• 45
(ii) i) ftao-ikeia T&v ovpavav ........ 47
But are a development of the Old Testament standard. ... 48
i. The Poor in Spirit  49
ii. The Mourners  52
iii. The Meek.  54
iv. The Seekers after Righteousness  56
v. The Merciful  58
vi. The Pure in Heart  59
vii. The Peacemakers  61
viii. The Persecuted for Righteousness' sake. .... 64
The appendix concerning the Persecuted  65
The Beatitudes express the spirit, if not the matter, of the teaching of
the whole discourse.  68
Note on the term ' Beatitude.'  69

XVI CONTENTS

IV. INFLUENCE ON THE WORLD. PAGE
Perplexity as to the influence of spiritual men  75
(i) The salt of the earth  76
(ii) The light of the world. . .  79
'The Father which is in heaven.'  82

V. THE INTERPRETATION OF THE LAW.
The sacred trust of the Jewish Law,  87
as Divine in its authority :  87
and therefore the standard by which a religious Teacher must be
judged  89
Our Lord did not abrogate it,  90
though a suspicion may have arisen regarding this. 90
The meaning of ' fulfil.'  . . 91
' Till the heaven and the earth pass away.' .... .92
' One jot or one tittle.'  93
The argument stated in the form of progressive parallelisms. . . 94
Righteousness exceeding that of the Scribes and Pharisees. . 95
The instances do not follow the scheme of the Beatitudes ... 97
i. The Law concerning Murder.  98
b. The Duty of Reconciliation  105
ii. The Law concerning Adultery  108
b. The Law concerning Divorce. ... .110
iii. The Law concerning Oaths. . . .115
iv. The Law concerning Retaliation. . 1 20
b. Assistance to the Needy. . 125
v. The supreme Law of Love  126

Note on dyy ,eiav. ......... 136

CONTENTS

XVll

VI. THE WORKS OF RIGHTEOUSNESS. PAGE
The Jewish ideal of 'Righteousness':  143
perverted by the Scribes and Pharisees. . . 144
The three relationships of the religious life. . . . . 144
General warning against advertisement of 'Righteousness.' . 145
i. Almsgiving.  146
ii. Prayer.  151
b. The Lord's Prayer  158
1. Our Father which art in heaven, .... 161
2. Hallowed be Thy Name.  163
3. Thy Kingdom come  165
4. Thy will be done  167
5. Give us our daily bread  170
6. Forgive us our debts.  173
7. Lead us not into temptation  177
8. [The Doxology.]  181
The Lord's Prayer forms the very heart of the Sermon. . 182
The additional note on Forgiveness  184
iii. Fasting  185

om.

VII. UNDISTRACTED SERVICE.
The true bearing of the members of the Kingdom ;
first, towards God. 
Freedom from earthly distractions, ....
as the condition of spiritual development :
In opposition to materialistic views of the Messianic Kingd
1. i. The true treasures 
ii. The 'single eye' and the 'evil eye.'
The lamp of the body 
iii. God or mammon 
2. The challenge to lay aside anxiety about trivial needs
i. For the heavenly Father cares for His children ;
ii. And His provision for His creatures is an indication of
His care for all needs 
An anxious spirit is unworthy of the sons of the Kingdom,
For the heavenly Father knoweth.
Therefore seek first the Kingdom of God and His righteousness.
The added promise : 
and the references to it in early Christian writers.
' Sufficient unto the day is the evil thereof.'

191
191192 193194
195
199
202203204
206 207
208209209210211212

XV1U CONTENTS
VIII. THE CHURCH IN THE WORLD. PAGE
The problem of the bearing of the members of the Kingdom;
secondly, towards other men  217
A right and a wrong exclusiveness  218
The use of Rabbinic phrases in this section  219
1. Judge not  219
The splinter and the beam.  220
2. The safeguarding of holy things :  222
i. Give not the holy thing to dogs ; .... 223
ii. Cast not pearls before swine.  224
3. The paragraph about persistent prayer.  226
The' Golden Rule.'  230
IX. TRUE DISCIPLESHIP.
The standard of popularity  235
The ' two ways.'  236
Warning against false prophets  237
' By their fruits ye shall know them.'  239
The danger of a mere profession of discipleship  240
Even professed workers are to be tried by their ' fruits.' . . . 242
The final parable  244
St Matthew's closing comments  245
X. THE SERMON IN ST LUKE'S GOSPEL.
The problem of the two accounts  249
Tabulated statement of the occurrence of the sayings. . . .250
St Luke omits references to the Jewish Law and Jewish practices. . 251
He translates the sayings into general terms  252
It is however doubtful if the suggestion of misreading of an Aramaic
original can be established  254
In only one passage is the wording identical  255
St Luke's account is a ' translation ' for Gentile converts. . . . 256
St Matthew's terminology is nearer to the original  257
In St Luke the connexion between the sayings and their context
(i) is due to the concurrence of particular words ; or . . . 258
(ii) is untraceable  259
But in St Matthew's account there is a continuous argument. . . 260
These results applied to
(i) The Beatitudes :  261
(ii) The Lord's Prayer.  262
St Luke gives no coordinated Gospel of the Kingdom. . . . 263

I. THE KINGDOM OF GOD.
The first proclamation of the Gospel was made in a singu
larly abrupt form : " Repent ; for the kingdom of heaven is at
hand." That was all. There was no preparatory argument,
such as is found later in the preaching of the Apostolic Church1.
There was no elaborate review of the past history of Israel,
leading on to the story of the New Covenant : there was no
detailed reference to the fulfilment of the promises given through
the Prophets of old. There was nothing but the short sharp
crisp announcement : " The time is fulfilled2, and the kingdom
of God is at hand : repent, and believe in the Gospel3."
Moreover at each new departure in the organisation of the
work exactly the same message was repeated. This was the
preliminary warning of John the Baptist : " Repent ; for the
kingdom of heaven is at hand." Our Lord Himself opened His
ministry in Galilee with the same declaration : " Repent ; for
the kingdom of heaven is at hand." When the time came for
the appointment of the Twelve Apostles, and they were sent
forth on their mission, they too were commanded to proclaim,
wherever they went in Christ's name, this one primary notice :
" The kingdom of heaven is at hand." And even in the last
year of our Lord's ministry, the Seventy whom He " appointed
and sent two and two before His face into every city and place
whither He Himself was about to come," were charged again to
publish the original message: "The kingdom of God is come
nigh unto you4." In every part of the land, year after year, the
1 Acts ii. 16 — 36; iii. 18— 16; vii. 1 — s°i ?*"• 3° — 35! *• 43 5 x"i- IO" — 41 '•
xxviii. -23.
2 Cp. Gal. iv. 4 " When the fulness of the time came, God sent forth His Son."
5 Mk i. 15. 4 M. iii. 2 ; iv. 17 ; *. 7 ; L. x. 9.
8. 1

2 THE KINGDOM OF GOD
same declaration was thus successively promulgated : in Judaea
by the Baptist ; by our Lord and by the Twelve in Galilee ; and
by the Seventy in Peraea.
Now this of itself presupposes that there was prevalent at
the time throughout the nation a common expectation that a
Kingdom of God, a Theocracy1, was about to be instituted (or
rather, reinstituted) among them. The plain simplicity of the
expression itself, and the uniformity with which it was employed
at each fresh stage of evangelisation, alike suggest that it was
addressed to a people who were already looking for some
announcement of the kind, and who were, in general terms,
conversant with what was implied by it. It could only be an
appeal to an already existing ideal. Otherwise it must have
been quite unintelligible.
Nor was it only on the occasions of the opening out of fresh
fields of work that this popular expectation was assumed as the
basis of the new Gospel. From first to last throughout His
ministry our Lord framed His teaching on this scheme of the
Kingdom of God. He treated it as a definite polity, the essential
character of which needed to be explained, but not the fact or
meaning of its existence. He constantly referred to it as a
development, or as a correction, of the current anticipation ; but
never as a new and unknown plan. Thus, for instance, in
dealing with Nicodemus2 He spoke of the Kingdom of God
without comment, as of a recognised institution. Nicodemus, as it
appears, desired to be admitted as a member of this Kingdom in an
irregular way, without submitting himself to baptism. Our Lord
accordingly instructed him about the spiritual force, and there
fore the necessity, of baptism ; but there is no suggestion in the
record that any explanation was either asked or required con
cerning the meaning of the Kingdom itself. That was a well
understood scheme. Or again, the Parables of the Kingdom
which are collected together by St Matthew in ch. xiii., though
probably they were given on different, and perhaps widely
1 The word QeoKparla seems to have been coined by Josephus. Cp. c. Ap. ii. r6
lis 8' av ns etiroi. /3ia<rd/teyos rbv \lryov, QeoKparlav iwiSeil-e [6 ijpiTepos iiopadtrris] t6
-roKlrevpa, GeijS ttjv d,pxkv Kal to Kpdros ivaffels, kt\.
2 J. iii. i — ii.

THE KINGDOM OF GOD 3
separated, occasions, have this in common, that they are all
directed to the explanation of unexpected features in the mani
festation and progress of an expected Kingdom of God. Or
once more, the contrast drawn at a later stage of His teaching1
by our Lord between the gradations of honour in a kingdom of
the world and the supreme dignity of service and self-sacrifice
in the Kingdom of God, emphasises the position that the spiritual
kingdom has widely different ideals from those of an ordinary
earthly kingdom ; but it obviously assumes on the part of the
disciples addressed an eager ambition associated with a definitely
organised kingdom. Indeed the occasion which drew forth this
statement from the Master arose out of a special claim by the
sons of Zebedee for precedence in that Kingdom when it should
at length be firmly established. The same fundamental contrast
between an earthly kingdom and the Kingdom of God appears
yet again in Christ's answer to Pilate in the Hall of Judgment :
"My kingdom is not of this world, etc.2" In fact, throughout
the whole of our Lord's ministry He invariably assumed that a
restoration of the Theocracy was confidently anticipated, and was
actually being inaugurated ; while He set Himself to correct the
crude and unworthy (and obsolete) notions which had gathered
round that hope. The true nature of the Kingdom of God was
the constant theme of His teaching. And to this He again
recurred after His Resurrection, when during the Great Forty
Days He was still " speaking " to His disciples " the things
concerning the kingdom of God3."
The attitude of the Jews, as represented in the Gospels, also
reveals the working of this expectation amongst them. When
John the Baptist announced his message of the near inaugura
tion of the Kingdom of God, a deputation of Priests and Levites
from Jerusalem waited on him4 to ask if he was himself the
promised Christ, the human king of the Theocracy, or in what
relation he stood to him. A similar question was earnestly
debated regarding our Lord more than once during the last year
of His ministry: "Can it be that the rulers indeed know that
this is the Christ ? " " When the Christ shall come, will he do
more signs than those which this man hath done?" "How
1 M. xx. t$—tS. 2 J. xviii. 36, 37. » A. i. 3. 4 J. i. 19—45.
1—2

4 THE KINGDOM OF GOD
long dost thou hold us in suspense ? If thou art the Christ, tell
us plainly1." For it had been brought into prominence on the
occasion of the miraculous feeding of the five thousand. That
miracle had followed a long day of teaching about the Kingdom
of God2 ; and the result upon those who were present was that
they formed a friendly plot to " take him by force, to make him
a king3." At the time their purpose was frustrated by our
Lord : but a year later, when, at the next Passover, He openly
accepted the outward tokens of royalty at His public entry into
Jerusalem, the old fervour broke out again with redoubled
energy; and they hailed Him as the Son of David, the king
that came in the name of the Lord.
Moreover this national hope held strong possession of the
minds of even the most intimate disciples of our Lord. It was
their clear expectation throughout, even up to the crisis of the
Crucifixion, " that it was he which should redeem Israel4." And
after the Resurrection it was again revived amongst them in its
old narrow form, as appears from the question addressed by the
Apostles to their Lord shortly before His Ascension : " Lord,
dost thou at this time restore the kingdom to Israel6?" It was
only with the coming of the Holy Ghost, who, according to the
promise of their Lord, " taught them all things, and brought to
their remembrance all that He had said unto them6," that they
at last grasped the real spiritual character of the true Kingdom
of God. Till then they had looked upon it, in common with
the rest of their fellow-countrymen, as a revival of the Theocracy
of the Old Covenant ; as a peculiar prerogative of the chosen
nation. All the conditions of our Lord's ministry point to one con
clusion. The framework of His own teaching, as built up upon
the promise of the Kingdom of God ; the organisation of His
workers as officers of the new society, whose very numbers
reproduced typical features of the old constitution ; the recep
tion of the Gospel by the Jews, first with eager welcome when it
seemed to coincide with their own ideals, and afterwards in
disappointed antagonism when they came to recognise its un-
1 J. vii. 26, 31 ; x. 24. 2 L. ix. n. s J. vi. 15.
4 L. xxiv. »i. 6 A. i. 6. 6 J. xiv. 26.

THE KINGDOM OF GOD 5
expected character ; and the slow appreciation by the disciples
of the new revelation of the Kingdom ; — these all are alone
explicable on the basis of the universal expectation of an
impending restoration of God's direct rule over His people.
There was a general belief abroad that the Theocracy was about
to be reinstituted.
But this expectation was no sudden reawakening of a long
dormant, and half-forgotten hope, called into fresh activity by
the preaching of John the Baptist and of our Lord. It was
already stirring mightily in the hearts of the Jews. It had been
steadily developing into maturity, and gradually becoming more
and more clearly formulated, long before the time was actually
fulfilled. Thirty years earlier, about the time of the birth of our
Lord, devout Jews, as the New Testament itself shows, were
eagerly looking for the Kingdom of God, as they waited for the
manifestation of the Christ as its founder and head. The very
message of the Annunciation refers to this hope : " The Lord
God shall give unto him the throne of his father David : and he
shall reign over the house of Jacob for ever ; and of his kingdom
there shall be no end1." The angelic declaration of the Nativity
repeats the promise : " There is born to you this day in the city
of David a Saviour, which is Christ the Lord." Simeon, " looking
for the consolation of Israel," received a revelation from the
Holy Ghost " that he should not see death, before he had seen
the Lord's Christ." Anna, the Prophetess, " spake of him to all
them that were looking for the redemption of Jerusalem2."
These references all tell of a keen expectancy ; and the fact
that they occur in the one section of St Luke's Gospel which
bears the strongest traces of an Aramaic original, marks their
evidence as all the more direct for the state of Jewish feeling at
the time.
It was not however confined to quiet hope and waiting. It
found a restless expression in the readiness of the people to
follow self-constituted revolutionary leaders, who came forward
to head rebellion against the political supremacy of Rome.
Popular risings, such as those to which Gamaliel referred3 when
the Apostles were arraigned before the Sanhedrin, were of
1 L. i. 32, 33. 2 L. ii. n, 26, 38. »A». 36, 37.

6 THE KINGDOM OF GOD
frequent occurrence. Josephus1 thus sums up the situation, at
the beginning of the first century : " Judaea was full of guerilla
bands : and where anyone could meet with others to join with
him in insurrection, he set himself up as king, and pushed his
schemes to the detriment of the commonwealth." He cites the
cases of Judas, the son of Hezekiah2, who aimed at royal dignity;
of Simon3, originally one of Herod's slaves, who actually assumed
the crown ; and of Athronges4, the shepherd, who also mani
fested the same ambition. And outbreaks of the same turbulent
nationalism continued to occur from time to time as the years
went on. But they were too common to call for separate notice
in each case. The incidental reference in St Mark6 to Barabbas
as one who was " lying bound with them that had made insur
rection, men who in the insurrection had committed murder," is
significant: it is a sign of the times. And this description
serves to explain how it came about that the people were
induced to claim his release rather than that of the true Christ ;
because he had adopted the line of vigorous resistance, which
was popular. So too our Lord's question in Gethsemane8, " Are
ye come out, as against a robber (&>? iirl Xtjo-ttjv) with swords
and staves to seize me ? " takes on a fuller meaning in this light :
for Xrja-T7]<; does not denote an ordinary thief, but rather a
political revolutionary7.
All through the first century, down to the fall of Jerusalem
in 70 A.D., this spirit of unrest was actively at work. The wild
1 Ant. xvii. x. 8. The text is somewhat uncertain, though the meaning is quite
clear. As given by Niese, it is : \^arqplav Sk i] 'lovSala ttX^ws t\v, koX 8s iropanJ^oi
rwGsv ol ovo-Tao-idooiev avrtp [vv. ll. ws dv iraparix01^' tivi, or 3s av wepiT^xoi tivuv, ol
o-va-rao-lavres ofrnJJ] PaoiKevs irpdio-rdpxvos iir 6\i0pip tov koivoO ¦/j-irelyero. Cp. B. J. II.
iv. I iv Se Toirif Kal tA /cord Trpi xcipov irdWaxodev irapdo-o-eTO, xal crvxvovs fiauiKimv
6 Katpbs dvtireiOc.
1 Ant. xvii. x. 5 ; B.J. 11. iv. 1. Schiirer (1. ii. 80, E.T.) regards this Judas as
identical with "Judas of Gamala in Gaulanitis, called the Galilean" (Jos. A. xviii.
i. 1, 6; xx. v. 2; B. J. II. viii. 1). But there is a marked contrast between the
policies ascribed to the two men by Josephus : the one was actuated iiri.9vp.la
petfovoiv irpaypArtav Kal fijXc6<r« /SomXeiou rt/irjs : while the followers of the other
pivov ijyepova xal BeoToryv t6v 0ebv inreCKTjipaoi,.
8 Ant. xvn. x. 6.
* Ant. xvn. x. 7 ; B.J. II. iv. 3. B xv. 7.
6 Mk xiv. 48.
7 See Westcott, Some Lessons of the Revised Version, p. 76.

THE KINGDOM OP GOD 7
violence of the Zealots in the final conflict with Rome was not a
sudden paroxysm of despair : it was but the climax of a popular
movement which had been steadily growing in determination
for half a century or more.
And this national struggle for independence centred round
the prevalent expectation that a king should appear, who was
destined to restore to the Jews their unique position, which they
had lost, as God's peculiar kingdom. To this strong anticipation
Josephus alludes in connexion with his account of the capture
of Jerusalem by Titus1 : " That which most of all stirred them to
the war was an ambiguous oracle, which was also found in the
sacred scriptures, that 'at that time one of them from their
country shall be ruler of the world.' This they took as applying
to themselves ; and many wise men were led astray concerning
the interpretation. But as a matter of fact the saying pointed
to the government of Vespasian, who was made emperor in
Judaea." Tacitus2 and Suetonius3 both repeat the same state
ment; but in terms which leave little doubt that they derived
their information from Josephus.
Now this hope of a national independence, under a king,
Divinely appointed, and representing the direct government of
God over His people, did not originate in the first century. It
was no new thing: but had been the guiding influence in the
religious development of the Jews for centuries past. It had
been built up on the promises of the Old Testament ; and was
based on the character of the original covenant made by God,
which marked out Israel as the chosen people, called to be
1 B. J. VI. v. 4 rb Si iirdpav airovs pdXurra irpbs tov iro\epov rp> xpyo-p-bs dp/pl^o\os
opotws iv tois lepois ypdppao-iv, lis " Kara rbv Kaipbv iKelvov dirb ttjs %u>pa.s tis ovtuv
ap£et ti}s olKovpAvr)S. " tovto ol ph> iis olxeiov i£i\a(iov, Kal iroXkol t&v aoip&v iirKavl)-
6-qo-av irepl Trpi xploiv, £S-ij\ov S' apa tt)v Oieowao-iavov t6 \6yiov i)yepx>vlav, airoSet-
XQivTos iirl'IovSatas avTOKpdropos.
2 H. v. 13 Pluribus persuasio inerat antiquis sacerdotum litteris contineri eo
ipso tempore fore ut valesceret Oriens profectique Judaea rerum potirentur. Quae
ambages Vespasianum ac Titum praedixerant : sed vulgus, more humanae cupidinis,
sibi tantam fatorum magnitudinem interpretati ne adversis quidem ad vera muta-
bantur. 8 Vesp. 4 Percrebruerat Oriente toto vetus et constans opinio esse in fatis ut
eo tempore Judaea profecti rerum potirentur. Id de imperatore Romano, quantum
postea eventu paruit, praedictum Judaei ad se trahentes rebellarunt.

8 THE KINGDOM OF OOD
witnesses to the truth of revelation. It was closely interwoven
with all the past religious heritage of the Jews. However
crudely this may at times have been realised, it was essentially
a religious, rather than a political, aspiration.
For the ideal of the covenant was that God Himself ruled, as
the heavenly king, over His own people, Israel. Theoretically
therefore no human sovereign was required. In this respect
Israel differed fundamentally from all other nations of the
ancient world. And in the earlier period of the nation's life,
under the irregular administration of the Judges, this position
was jealously maintained. Thus Gideon, when he was offered
the throne, with hereditary succession, in recognition of his
victory over Midian, unhesitatingly replied1: "I will not rule
over you, neither shall my son rule over you : the LORD shall
rule over you." He was loyal to the constitution. In fact it
was regarded as a defection from the true prerogative of Israel
when the people persistently demanded an earthly king.
Samuel's reproach is quite emphatic on this point2: "Ye said
unto me, Nay, but a king shall reign over us : when the LORD
your God was your king." Moreover, long after the institution
of the earthly kingship this ideal of the direct Theocracy was
kept continually alive from generation to generation in the
spiritual teaching of the Psalmists and the Prophets : — " Thou
art my king, O God." " Let Israel rejoice in him that made
him : let the children of Zion be joyful in their king." " The
king of Israel, even the Lord, is in the midst of thee."
" The Lord shall reign over them in mount Zion." " Is not the
Lord in Zion ? is not her king in her3 ? " The earthly kingdom,
when founded, was still regarded as under the overlordship
of the Divine King.
It was under David that the principle of the human
monarchy within the Theocracy became firmly and permanently
established : and ever afterwards it was closely associated with
1 Judg. viii. 23.
* I S. xii. 12. Cp. I S. viii. 5 — 7; Hos. xiil. 9 — 11.
' Ps. xliv. 4; cxlix. 2; Zeph. iii. i£; Mic. iv. 7; Jer. viii. 19. Cp. also
Ps. xlvii. 6; xlviii. 1, 2 ; lxxiv. 12; lxxxix. 18; cxlvi. 10; Is. xxiv. 23; xxxiii. 225
xii. 21 ; xliii. 15 ; Iii. 7 ; Obad. 21 ; Zech. xiv. 16.

THE KINGDOM OF GOD »
his name and his family. This was not so much because he was
preeminently the hero king, who had practically made the
kingdom and compacted the people into an organised nation, as
because to him was given a clear and definite promise, through
the prophet Nathan, of continued succession to the throne in the
direct line of his descendants1 : — " Thine house and thy kingdom
shall be made sure for ever before thee : thy throne shall be
established for ever." It was not a prerogative granted by vote
of the people ; it was the sanction of God Himself accorded to
the new, — or perhaps it should rather be termed, the developed,
— form of the Theocracy. The suzerainty of God as the real
king of Israel was not ignored or set aside. That, in theory at
least, remained inviolate. But thenceforward the earthly ruler
of the Kingdom of God was in all outward semblance put on an
equal footing with the kings of other nations. Only it was a
dependent, not an independent, authority which he exercised, as
subject always to the Law of God.
From that time onwards the ideal of the kingdom centred
itself round the royal line of David. With the succession of
that line became bound up the very faith of the nation in the
fulfilment of the promises of God, and the hope of its own
destiny of power and influence. This was the standard by
which loyalty to the covenant of God was tested. Nor was it
confined to the kingdom of Judah, which remained in actual
allegiance to the House of David. So deeply had the Divine
promise to David entered into the national expectation that the
same criterion was applied also to the northern kingdom, even
long after the disruption. Thus its own prophet Hosea, in the
last days of its decadence, proclaimed this as the one prospect
of restoration2: "Afterward shall the children of Israel return,
and seek the LORD their God, and David their king." And the
final catastrophe which overwhelmed the northern kingdom was
afterwards traced back, through the idolatrous defection of that
kingdom, to its original revolt from the House of David8: "The
LORD rejected all the seed of Israel, and afflicted them, and
delivered them into the hand of spoilers, until he had cast them
out of his sight. For he rent Israel from the house of David."
1 II S. vii. 16. a Hos. iii. 5. 8 II K. xvii. 20, 21.

10 THE KINGDOM OF GOD
But when Judah also was carried into captivity, and the
dynasty of the royal house came to an end, the vision was
widened and spiritualised. It now looked forward to the advent
of an ideal king, symbolised under the Davidic type. This
idealism however was not a new thing. Psalmist and Prophet
alike had already given voice to it long before : " Yet I have set
my king upon my holy hill of Zion... Ask of me, and I will
give thee the nations for thine inheritance, and the uttermost
parts of the earth for thy possession." " He shall have dominion
also from sea to sea, and from the River unto the ends of the
earth... His name shall endure for ever; his name shall be
continued as long as the sun ; and men shall be blessed in him ;
all nations shall call him happy." "The government shall be
upon his shoulder; and his name shall be called Wonderful,
Counsellor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace.
Of the increase of his government and of peace there shall be no
end, upon the throne of David, and upon his kingdom, to
establish it, and to uphold it with judgement and with righteous
ness from henceforth even for ever1." But even during and
after the Captivity this hope is still expressed so strongly in
terms of the covenanted promise to David, as often to leave it
uncertain whether the representation is entirely typical, or
whether it is not also regarded as bound up with the literal
restoration of the line of David. The two aspects are closely
intertwined. Compare, for example, Ezek. xxxiv. 23, 24 : "I
will set up one shepherd over them, and he shall feed them,
even my servant David ; he shall feed them, and he shall be
their shepherd. And I the LORD will be their God, and my
servant David prince among them ; I the Lord have spoken it2."
In the post-canonical Jewish writings allusions to the national
hope of a king are but rarely found. This silence however is
not so significant as might at first sight appear ; but is probably
due to the character of the books. But it does find expression
still from time to time ; showing that it was still actively alive
in the hearts of the people, and in process of time came again
1 Ps. ii. 6, 8 ; lxxii. 8, 17 ; Is. ix. 6, 7.
a Cp. also Ezek. xxxvii. 24, 25; Jer. xxiii. 5, 6; xxx. 9; xxxiii. 15—17;
Is. Iv. 3, 4.

THE KINGDOM OF GOD 11
into prominence in the popular anticipation. There is a refer
ence to it in the earliest of the Sibylline Oracles1 :
Kal tot cm rjeXioio ©eo? irefiyfrei (3ao~i\r}a,
o? irdaav yalav travasi iroXifioio tca/coto,
tous /Mev dpa KTelvas, to?? 8' opKia tcio~tcL Te\eo-<ras.
ovSi ye Tat? t'oYat? /8ou\at? TaSe iravTa iroi^o'ei,,
aWa Oeov fieyakoio tnOriffas B6y/j,ao-tv ea^Xoi?.
and again, in a later passage2 :
avTap iirel 'Pco/ir) Kal A.lyvTTTOV ftacrikevaet,
alev y evOvvovaa, tot ap fiaatXeia fieyto-TJ)
ddavaTOv /3aai\rjo<i eV dvOpwiroiai, (fmreiTai.
7/f;et 8' ayvb<i aval; 7rao-7/? yrj? o-K-ijirTpa KpaTrjO~mv
et? almvas airavTas itreiyop,evoio 'xpovoio.
It flashes out with remarkable vividness in the Psalms of
Solomon3 : " Behold, O Lord, and raise up for them their king,
the son of David, at the time which Thou knowest, O God, to
reign over Israel Thy servant." In him, and in his righteous
rule is portrayed the promise of the redemption of Israel ; but
he is still regarded only as the minister of the true Divine King,
not as reigning in his own right. For the very Psalm in which
these words occur reaches its climax in the final burst of praise
and faith: "The Lord Himself is our king for ever and evermore."
This reference in the Psalms of Solomon, coming as it does
from a Palestinian writer of the first century B.C., is an important
witness to the belief of the age which immediately preceded the
coming of our Lord. It shows that the hope which was current
at the period of His ministry had already become prominent
some time before. For in the Gospels the popular expectation
of the Redeemer as a king of David's line stands out clearly as
a prevalent ideal of the time. "Is this the son of David ? " the
people cried, when our Lord healed a demoniac in Galilee. In
their debate about Him at Jerusalem they fell back on this as
the one assured fact about the promised Saviour : " Hath not
the scripture said that the Christ cometh of the seed of David ? "
Their acclamation as they escorted Him on His public entry
into the Holy City was, " Hosanna to the son of David : Blessed
1 iii. 652 — 6 (ed. Rzach). 2 iii. 46 — 50. Cp. viii. 169 — 170 ; xiv. 360—1.

12 THE KINGDOM OF GOD
is he that cometh in the name of the Lord " ; and this cry was
caught up by the very children in the Temple. His challenge
to the Pharisees, " What think ye of the Christ ? Whose son is
he?" was promptly answered by them with the declaration,
"The son of David1." As the son of David our Lord was
addressed by strangers who appealed for His help'.
And in fact the Christ was of the lineage of David. The
promise was thus literally as well as typically fulfilled. It is
true that the genealogies given by St Matthew and St Luke
both apparently refer to the descent of Joseph. But that Mary
also belonged to the house of David is distinctly implied in the
promise at the Annunciation3: "The Lord God shall give unto
him the throne of his father David : and he shall reign over the
house of Jacob for ever : and of his kingdom there shall be no
end." This was an essential part of the teaching of the
Apostles: "Concerning his Son, who was born of the seed of
David, according to the flesh." " Remember Jesus Christ, risen
from the dead, of the seed of David, according to my gospel4."
And this was the universal tradition of the early Church6.
The Jews, then, were prepared for the announcement that
the Kingdom of God was to be restored amongst them : and
they looked for its restoration under an earthly leader, or king,
of the stock of David. But as to the character, and aims, and
methods of that kingdom their ideas were strangely misdirected
and retrograde. For their ideal was a national aggrandisement
of world-wide conquest. The king they desired was a military
1 M. xii. 23 ; J. vii. 42 ; M. xxi. 9, 15 ; xxii. 42.
2 Cp. M. ix. 27 ; xv. 22 ; xx. 30, 31. » L. i. 32, 33.
1 Rom. i. 3; II Tim. ii. 8. Cp. also Acts ii. 30 — 36; xiii. 22, 23; 32 — 37;
Rev. v. 5 ; xxii. 16.
6 Cp. Ign. Eph. 18 4 ydp Qebs -ijpQv T?j<roCs 6 XptoTos iKVO<popr)6i) iirb Mapias
Kar olxovoptav, ix oiripparos piv AavelS irvevparos Si dylov. Trail. 9 'Iijoov X/hotoB...
tov ix yivovs AavelS, tov ix Capias. Also Eph. 20 ; Rom. 7 ; Smyrn. 1. Just. Mart.
Dial. c. Tryph. 45, p. 264 A Sid t^s irapBhov rai>Ti\s ti}s dirb tov yivovs tov AajSiS
yevvrfii}vai oapxoTroii\9els inripeivev. Also 43, p. 261 C ; 100, p. 327 A. Iren. III.
xxvi. I tv i-TriryyelhaTo Tip AafllS b Oeis, ix Kapvov rfjs xoihlas avrav aliiviov ivaory\tteiv
fiaoCkia, ovros idTiv ix rijs dirb Aa/3i5 irapBivov Yera/tevos. Cp. III. xxix. Tert.
adv. /udaeos, 9 Fuit enim de patria Bethlehem et de domo David, sicut apud
Romanos in censu descripta est Maria, ex qua nascitur Christus. de carne Christi, 21
Ergo ex semine David caro Christi. Sed secundum Mariae carnem ex semine David :
ergo ex Mariae carne est dum ex semine est David, etc. Cp. the Protevangelium
of James, 10 xal ipvr)o9i\ 6 lepevs Sti Mapidp ix <pv\ijs AafstS ion.

THE KINGDOM OF GOD 13
hero exactly after the ancient type of David himself. There
are indeed a few slight indications in the Palestinian Apocalyptic
books of the time that there were some who repudiated all idea
of any human head of the Theocratic state. They held that
God Himself must alone be the Ruler through Whom redemp
tion should come1. No doubt this attitude was a reaction from,
and a protest against, the extreme militarism which had infected
the current expectation of the Messiah. But even they, in
common with the mass of their fellow-countrymen, believed that
God's vindication of His people would take the form of stern
judgment on other nations. They had no perception of the
true meaning and spirit of the Theocracy. The general hope
however was fixed on the coming of a great national champion,
who would give back to the Jews their political independence,
and win for them a triumphant ascendancy over the rest of the
world. They anticipated, that is, a literal revival of the
Theocracy of the Old Covenant, under its earlier and cruder
form, but on a vastly extended range. The world had moved
forward in the course of centuries : but they expected to
have given back to them by God a condition of things which
had completely passed out of date2.
And yet they themselves had also been affected by the
progress of events. They too had moved forward from their
old position. For the period between the captivity of the Jews
and the coming of our Lord had seen some remarkable develop
ments. In some respects the whole outlook of the Jews had
been widened by the Captivity. In Babylon they had been
brought into close contact with a mighty empire, at the very
centre of its organisation. They had seen, and perhaps had
themselves taken some share in, political life on a large scale.
On their return to their own land they never had an opportunity
of actually putting into practice the lessons which they had
1 Cp. The Assumption of Moses, x. 7 Quia exurget [MS. exurgit] summus, Deus
aetemus solus, et palam veniet ut vindicet gentes, et perdet omnia idola eorum. So
in the Book of Jubilees, 15. Perhaps also iv Esdras, v. 56, vi. 6 Et dixi : rogo,
domine, si inveni gratiam ante oculos tuos, demonstra servo tuo per quem visitas
ereaturam tuam... .Facta sunt haec per me et non per ahum, ut et finis per me et non
per alium.
2 Cp. Ecce Homo (Ed.11), p. 24.

14 THE KINGDOM OF GOD
thus learned. All the conditions of their public life were against
the exercise of any such power on their own account. They
were at first a far smaller community than before the Captivity.
They were relentlessly thwarted, and vigorously oppressed, by
alien neighbours more powerful than themselves. They could
only with great difficulty retain a precarious hold of their
position. And they were never able to free themselves per
manently from the dominion of foreign powers. They were
involved in an almost perpetual struggle for existence. But it
was through that very struggle that they gained their strong
tenacity of national isolation. And this pride of exclusiveness
they have ever since jealously maintained. Even to this day
the Jews remain a wholly unique instance in the history of the
nations : as a nation without a country, without a polity, without
autonomy ; and yet indisputably an unmixed people, though
scattered amongst all races to the ends of the earth.
And so their vision was turned inwards, not outwards: to
detachment of privilege, rather than to expansion of influence.
And yet at the same time they never altogether lost the wider
view which their contact with the great world powers had
impressed upon them. They could not be unaware that they
must be brought into relation with other nations. But that
relation came to be pictured in their imagination under the
guise of overwhelming conquest ; as the overthrow of all their
enemies, resulting in the unchallenged domination over all the
world of the chosen people of God.
It was not however a new experience to realise that they
could not stand alone. They had always been surrounded by
vast empires. And this had been fully taken into account by
the Psalmists and the Prophets. They, in the highest exaltation
of their inspiration, had risen to the noblest ideal of spiritual
conquest. They had prophesied of Israel as irresistibly
triumphant through the help of God, and firmly established as
the religious centre of the world, — the fount of redemption for
mankind. This conception was no doubt based on the primary
promise of the covenant given to Abraham1 : " In thee shall all
the families of the earth be blessed." But it is none the less
1 Gen. xii. 3 ; cp. xviii. 18 ; xxii. 18 ; xxvi. 4.

THE KINGDOM OF GOD 15
remarkable that such a view of spiritual responsibility to other
nations, — considering the usual relations which existed between
them and Israel, — should have been so widely entertained as it
was. "All nations whom thou hast made shall come and
worship before thee, O Lord ; and they shall glorify thy name."
" And many nations shall go and say, Come ye, and let us go
up to the mountain of the Lord, and to the house of the God
of Jacob ; and he will teach us of his ways, and we will walk in
his paths ; for out of Zion shall go forth the law, and the word
of the Lord from Jerusalem1." But side by side with this
spiritual ideal there are to be found all along the line of
prophecy fierce expressions of national pride, asserting itself in
anticipations of overmastering conquest of other nations : " He
shall subdue the peoples under us, and the nations under our
feet." " Arise and thresh, O daughter of Zion : for I will make
thine horn iron, and I will make thy hoofs brass : and thou
shalt beat in pieces many peoples2." While there are also not
a few allusions to the ultimate destiny of Israel which betray a
certain confusion of ideas on the part of the writers, — a wavering
between the two visions ; as though they could not shake off
the nationalist longing for irresistible power and independence,
but through it all strove to keep in view the vision of a redemp
tion of the world through Israel: "They that dwell in the
wilderness shall bow before him ; and his enemies shall lick the
dust. . .Yea, all kings shall fall down before him ; all nations
shall serve him." " Arise, O God, judge the earth ; for thou
shalt inherit all the nations." " Thou shalt spread abroad on
the right hand and on the left ; and thy seed shall possess the
nations, and make the desolate cities to be inhabited3."
The Jews, then, had before them in their scriptures the true
ideal of the purpose and influence of the Kingdom of God ; but,
in the nature of the case, it was largely expressed in figurative
1 Ps. lxxxvi. 9; Mic. iv. 2 (=Is. ii. 3). Cp. Ps. xxii. 27; lxvii. 2—5, 7;
Is. xiii. 4 ; xlix. 6 ; lx. 1—5 ; lxvi. 18—21 ; jer. xvi. 19 j Zech. xiv. 16 ; Mal. i. 11.
Cp. Tobit xiii. II.
3 Ps. xlvii. 3; Mic. iv. 13. Cp. Ps. cxviii. 10—12; Mic. v. 8; Is. xiii. ; xxxiv.;
Jer. xlvi. 28 ; Zech. i. 21 ; xii. 9 ; xiv. 12.
8 Ps. lxxii. 9, n ; Ixxxii. 8 ; Is. liv. 3. Cp. Is. xlix. 22, 23 ; lx. 11, 12, 14, 15 ;
lxi. 5, 6; Jer. xxxiii. 9; Zech. xiv. 17—19.

16 THE KINGDOM OF GOD
language : and the terms in which it was set forth were those of
military aggression. In the course of time they came to dwell
exclusively on the literal interpretation of these promises, and
lost sight of their real purport. So, when a national literature
at last began to reappear, after a silence of nearly three centuries
from the close of the Old Testament Canon, the idea of conquest
was the one aspect which was exclusively cherished : that of
spiritual influence on other nations had completely disappeared.
For it must be borne in mind that the records of the history
of the Jews between the time of Nehemiah, in the latter half of
the fifth century B.C. and the Maccabean revolt in the middle of
the second century, are extremely scanty, and, for the most part,
legendary1. There are however one or two general features of
development which may be gathered from the few scattered
notices which do appear : and which help to account for the
altered conditions of their national life when the Jews once more
emerge from obscurity into the full light of history.
The first of these is the greatly increased authority which
was attached to the office of the High Priest. He was now
invested with the highest civic dignity, as the political head of
the nation. This is indicated by the strong measures taken by
the Persian general Bagoses (in 367 B.C.) to avenge the murder
of Joshua, to whom he had promised the High Priesthood2; by
the action of Jaddua in going forth in state from Jerusalem to
meet Alexander the Great at Sapha' ; and in the eulogy by the
son of Sirach on Simon the Just, who held the office from 300
to 291 B.C.4
Another point is the steady growth of a vigorous patriotic
party, which was distinguished by a resolute devotion to the
strict observance of the Law, and to the defence of the Temple.
This tendency was manifested, for example, in the refusal to
oppose the assault of Ptolemy, son of Lagus, on the holy city
because it was delivered on a sabbath6 ; and in the horror which
1 Cp. Milman, History of the Jews (Ed.4), vol. i. p. 443 ; Hengstenberg, Kingdom
of God under the Old Test. (E.T.), vol. ii. pp. 338—342.
2 Jos. Ant. xi. vii. 1. 3 Jos. Ant. XI. viii. 5.
* Ecclus. 1. 1 — 21.
6 Agatharcides, quoted by Jos. c. Ap. i. 22 ; see also Ant. xn. i. Cp. a later
instance of similar passivity on a sabbath (in 168 B.C.), I Mace. ii. 31—41.

THE KINGDOM OF GOD 17
was excited by the attempt of Heliodorus, in 176 B.C., to seize
the Temple treasures1.
And, once more, it was during this period that the great
deportations or migrations of the Jews into other lands in large
communities took place. The notices of actual instances are
very few : but the certain result of the enormous extent of the
'Dispersion' at a later date2 is in itself more than sufficient
evidence that such movements of Jewish population must have
occurred constantly, and on a very large scale. Perhaps the
only definite cases recorded as having happened within this
period are, the forcible expatriations of Jews by Artaxerxes
Ochus, in 35 1 B.C., to Egypt and to Hyrcania on the Caspian Sea8,
and by Ptolemy son of Lagus to Egypt after his capture of
Jerusalem in 320 B.C.4; and the friendly planting of a large
colony of Jews by Alexander in his newly founded city of
Alexandria in 332 B.C.6 There can be little doubt however that
the Jewish settlements in other lands were not simply due to
large movements of this kind, whether they were carried out
under compulsion or by inducement6 ; but were also due in no
small measure to the normal growth of trading centres. But
whatever may have been their origin, the fact remains that when
it becomes once more possible to take up the thread of Jewish
history in the second century B.C., these colonies were spread far
and wide throughout Syria, Asia Minor, and North Africa ;
besides the far East, where they had already existed long
before. 1 II Mace. iii. 7 — 40. The story of the frustration of Ptolemy Philopator's attempt
to enter the Temple in 217 B.C. is only found in the late and untrustworthy Third
Book of the Maccabees.
2 Cp. Philo, Leg. ad Caium, § 36. See Hastings, Diet, of Bible, vol. v. p. 92.
8 Euseb. Chron., Anno 1658, Abr. 4 Jos. Ant. xn. i.
6 The tradition of this is more than once referred to by Josephus, but only rather
vaguely : Ant. xix. v. -i, in the recital at the beginning of the decree of Claudius ;
and c. Ap. ii. 4; B.J. 11. xviii. 7.
6 Cp. Jos. Ant. XII. i ovk 6\lyoi Si oiSi rwv &\\av 'lovSalwv ixovolas els ri\v
Atyvirrov irapeyivovro, rijs re dperys rwv rbirwi airovs xal ttjs tov MroXepjiXov
(piXonptas vpoo-xa\ovpAvi]s. iii- 1 Itvxov Si xal rrjs irapd rwv paoCKiav ri\s 'kolas
tj/mjs iireiSi) (rvveorpdrevo-av avrois. xal ydp 2t\evKos b NiKOTwp iv ats iKrure ir&keoiv
iv ry 'kola xal ry xdru Zvplf, xal iv airy ry piiTpoirb\ei ' kvrwxela, irdkirelas airovs
tflwoe, xal tois ivoixioBeioiv loorlpovs d-riSei^e KaxeSbo-i Kal'KWrio-tv , ws ttjv roXirelav
ravri/v in xai vvv SiapAveiv.
s. 2

18 THE KINGDOM OF GOD
It was the stern Maccabean struggle for the defence of the
true faith which called into existence, and left indelibly im
pressed on the Jews, their intense yearning for a national
independence. This ambition was at once political and religious.
It was based upon a patriotism which became ever more and
more narrowly exclusive ; and which, while it waited for a native
king, looked in the meantime to the High Priest as head of the
state : and it found its motive and its expression in an ardent
maintenance of the Temple at Jerusalem, and in a strict
observance of the ceremonial Law. Moreover, in the bitterness
of spirit which was born of cruel oppression the hopes of the
people were more and more concentrated on an overwhelming
Divine vengeance on their enemies, as the enemies of the covenant.
The story of the heroic resistance to heathen persecution is
told with graphic simplicity in the First Book of the Maccabees.
But the picture that is there drawn is of a people wholly ab
sorbed in the intense exigencies of the actual conflict. The
urgent needs of the present left no room for speculative visions
of the future. The book is a plain narrative, not an historical
review. It records facts, but does not concern itself with ideals.
But when the strain was removed, or partially relieved, the
succeeding Jewish literature, so far as it has survived, shows
that the expectation of the Jews was fixed inexorably on a
relentless vindication of the covenant people through Divine
judgment on the nations of the world. Thus, for example, in
the Similitudes of Enoch, side by side with the tone of spirituality
which pervades the teaching, there is throughout a constantly
recurring emphasis on the final and irrevocable judgment which
the Lord of Spirits will pass on the mighty rulers of the earth :
" Then will the kings and the mighty perish, and be given into
the hand of the righteous and holy... And in those days the
kings of the earth, and the strong who possess the earth, will be
of downcast countenance because of the works of their hands ;
for on the day of their anguish and affliction their souls will not
be saved1." So also in the Psalms of Solomon2: "The kingdom
1 xxxviii. 5 ; xlviii. 8. Cp. xxxviii. 3, 4 ; xlvi. 4, 5 ; xlviii. 9, 10 ; liii. 4, 5 ;
liv. 1—3; lv. 4; '
2 xvii. 4.

iii. 5 ; xlviii. 8. Cp. xxxviii. 3, 4 ; x
lv. 4 ; lxii. 1 — 5 ; lxiii. ; lxvii. 12, 13.
4-

THE KINGDOM OF GOD 19
of our God is for ever over the nations in judgment." Or again,
in the Book of Judith1: "Woe to the nations that rise up against
my kindred. The Lord Almighty will take vengeance of them
in the day of judgment, in putting fire and worms in their flesh;
and they shall feel them, and weep for ever."
It was natural that it should be so. The pressure of suc
cessive foreign dominations over a proud and spirited people
galled their national pride beyond endurance. And when to
this was added the flame of an intense zeal for the revelation of
the true religion which had been entrusted to them above all
peoples by God Himself, it is not to be wondered at that they
should passionately cast themselves upon God to vindicate
them, and to reestablish them in a national independence by
direct interpositions of judgment, such as had long ago been
manifested for their fathers. The very hopelessness of the
existing condition of dependence, and oppression, and conflict,
drove men's thoughts on to the distant future, — to the ftiWwv
alcov", — when the righteous should be supreme and undisturbed
in the earth, and enjoy perpetual peace and plenty in the
restored and triumphant Kingdom of God.
But while the hope of the Kingdom of God had thus become
restricted within the narrowest limits of an exclusive national
Jewish prerogative, another influence was also at work which
was really preparing the way for the true catholic ideal. And
this was the steadily increasing bond of union between the
Jews of the Dispersion and the Temple at Jerusalem. This
association had always been loyally maintained, so far as
was possible, from the beginning of the Jewish migrations from
Palestine ; and indeed from the time of the re-establishment of
the Temple worship on a secure basis. But it was only under
the administration of the Roman Empire that it found a full
opportunity of expression. For then, when the East and the
West were united under one strong government, the means of
communication between one country and another were carefully
developed, and the travel routes were adequately guarded. It
was this unity of the world empire, and the simplified inter
communication between the various countries within the one
1 xvi. 17. 2 Cp. Heb. ii. 5 ; vi. 5.
2—2

20 THE KINGDOM OF GOD
dominion, which made it possible for the widely scattered Jews
to come up to Jerusalem from all parts for the principal feasts
in such vast numbers as are indicated by Josephus and by Philo.
Josephus1 speaks of Cestius Gallus being beset by a crowd of
three million suppliants, when he visited Jerusalem at the
Passover season in 65 A.D. Incredible as this number may
appear, he, in another passage2, professes to base his calculation
on a return furnished by the Chief Priests to Cestius of the
actual number of lambs sacrificed at one Passover. This is
given as amounting to 256,500; which, on the lowest com
putation of ten worshippers to each lamb, comes to very much
the same result. Philo3 speaks indefinitely as to the actual
number, but in terms of no less magnitude. " Myriads resort
to the Temple at every feast, from myriad cities — some by land,
and some by sea, from east and west and north and south." At
all events these references make it clear that there were usually
present at the festivals enormous hordes of pilgrims, far in
excess of any gatherings that could have been possible before
the time of the Roman supremacy. At no earlier date is there
any allusion to any great concourse of worshippers from other
lands to the Holy City. Nor was it possible that they could
have assembled under the general conditions which prevailed
before the Romans became masters of the world.
And by the Romans, especially from the time of Julius Caesar
and Augustus, the Jews were treated with peculiar favour4.
1 B.J. II. xiv. 3 irapayevbpevov Si els'IepoobXvpM., rys ruv dlp>p.wv ioprijs ivardays,
irepiords 6 Sypos ovk OXdrrovs TpiaKoalwv pvpidSav Ixirevov iXeyaai rds tou tBvovs
ovptpopds. 2 B. J. VI. ix. 3 ruv piv ovv Bvpdroiv elxooi irevre pvptdSas fyMpyoav, irpbs Si
i^axioxi\ia xal irevraxboia. ytvovrai S' dvSpdv, Xv iKdorov Sixa Sairvpbvas BCipev,
pvpidSes ifsSop-iiKovra xal Siaxboiai. (Card well notes that " In Echa Rabbati, fol. 62. 1,
dicitur Rex Agrippa ex numero renum agnorum Paschalium deprehendisse numerum
Judaeorum.") 3 De Monorchia, ii. 1 pvploi ydp dirb pvplav Sooiv irb\e<ov, ol pJv Sid Y^s ol Si Sid
Bakdrrys, i£ dvardkys xal Svoews Kal dpxrov xal peoypfiplas, xaB' ixdoryv iopryv els rb
lepbv Karalpovoiv.
4 For Julius Caesar ; cp. the decrees quoted by Josephus, Ant. xiv. x. i  8.
For Augustus; Jos. Ant. xvi. vi. *, 3; Philo, de Leg. ad Caium, § 40. For
Tiberius; Philo, ibid., § 38. The earliest instance of goodwill on the part of the
Roman Government towards the Jews is the Senatorial letter of protection cited in
I Mace. xv. 16 — 24.

THE KINGDOM OF GOD 21
A strong link of attachment which bound the Jews all the
world over to their one religious centre was the Temple tribute.
This was levied on every Jew above the age of twenty ; it was
collected at local centres in the various countries ; and was then
forwarded by chosen messengers to Jerusalem1. Now this large
revenue could not have been withdrawn from other lands, and
sent to Jerusalem, without the sanction and protection of the
central government2. Indeed under the Republic it had been
liable to be intercepted by the local governors3: and the
provincial and municipal authorities were in continual conflict
with the Jews, both on this account, and generally with respect
to their religious exclusiveness. But the policy of the Empire
from the first was to protect the Jews, and to secure to them
everywhere their religious privileges; of which the transmission of
the Temple tribute was counted as one of the most important4.
It can scarcely be doubted that the peculiar political status
which the Jews had thus won for themselves within the Roman
Empire, under which they enjoyed complete freedom for the
practice of their religion, tended in no small degree to confirm
their conception of the promised Theocracy as a Divine and
irresistible reinstitution of Judaism. What they had passionately
clung to, until they had wrested from the world power a legal
recognition of its inviolability: what moreover was based, as
they earnestly realised, on a law given to them by God Him
self: — this could only, in their estimate, be Divinely intended
for perpetual maintenance. Above all things they were jealous
1 Cp. Philo, de Monarchia, ii. 3 irpooTiraxrai ydp dxA irav eras dirapxyv elotpipem
dirb elxooaerovs dp^apivovs-.-oxeSov yoBx d^a irdaav irbkiv rapelov t&v lepav xpypdrmv
iarlv, els a irapayevophois (Bos dirdpxeaBai Kal xpt"""-* upiapivois lepoiropirol t&v
Xpypd-TWV elalv dpiarlvSyv iirixpidivres. [Cp. St Paul's plan, I Cor. xvi. 3.]
Jos. B. J. v. v. 1 ol lepol Byaavpol, ots dveirlpirhaoav ol irapd rys olxovpivys Saop-ol
irepirbpevoi rip Qeip. Tac. Hist. v. 5 Nam pessimus quisque spretis religionibus
patriis tributa et stipes illuc congerebant. Cp. Philo, de Leg. § 31 ; Jos. Ant.
xiv. vii. z.
2 Cp., e.g., Philo, de Leg. § 23 ; Jos. Ant. xvi. vi. 2 — 7.
8 Cp. Cic. Pro Flacco, 28 Cum aurum Iudaeorum nomine quotannis ex Italia
et ex omnibus provinciis Hierosolyma exportari soleret, Flaccus sanxit edicto ne ex
Asia exportari liceret.
4 Philo, de Mon., ii. 3 iv ydp vopipois dirapxah oi ruv evoefioivTwv iX-irlSes eloi.
Jos. B. J. VI. vi. 2 to Si piyiorov, SaopokoyeTv re iipiv iirl rip Qetp, xal dvaB-tipara
<ri/XX£y«>' iirerpixj/apev, xal robs ravra tpipovras oSre ivov9er^o-apxv aire ixukvoapev.

22 THE KINGDOM OF GOD
of any tampering with, any modification of, this permanent
covenant : whether in its mode of worship, or in its regulations
for the conduct of life. Their whole endeavour was so to safe
guard this system by additional requirements, that no force of
change should ever be able to touch it. They looked for a
Kingdom of God which should be an unchanged, and unchange
able, re-enactment of the old form of the covenant. They had
no conception of a spiritual development. In all their eager
expectation of the impending visitation of God to redeem His
people, they found no place for the idea of a new covenant.
But in one respect their vision had gained a widely extended
range during the century preceding the Advent of our Lord.
The Holy City was the one and only possible centre for the free
and reinstated Kingdom of God. The Holy Land was the one
and only possible home, according to the immemorial promise
of God, for the people of His covenant. To that city every
heart was turned : to that land looked longingly all the countless
Jews in every country within the empire, or beyond it. The
great ingathering was now pictured as including all the sons of
the nation from far and wide. All true worshippers were to
assemble there from every quarter. The city of the Great King
was to be, in reality, the joy of the whole earth1. And this
wider prospect, this extended national hope, which shines out
from time to time in the Jewish literature before and after the
coming of our Lord2, was a preparation for the rapid spread of
the true Gospel ; the sound of whose messengers was destined to
" go forth into all the earth, and their words unto the ends of the
world3." The Jewish anticipation was for a centripetal concen
tration : while the Christian reality was a centrifugal expansion.
But it was made possible by the cohesion of the world-wide
1 Ps. xlviii. 2.
2 Cp. the tenth of the 'Eighteen Benedictions' of the Jewish Liturgy [C. D.
Ginsburg in Kitio's Cyclopadia, ed. Alexander, iii. 906 ; also Vitringa, De Synagoga
Vetere, ii. 1035 ; Schiirer (E.T.) 11. ii. 86] : " Cause the great trumpet to proclaim our
liberty, raise the standard for the gathering of our captives, and bring us together
from the four corners of the earth. Blessed art Thou, O Lord, Who gatherest
together the dispersed of Israel." See also Tobit xiii. 13; xiv. 5; Enoch Ivii. 1 ;
2 Mace. i. 27, 29 ; ii. 17, 18 ; Ps. Sol. viii. 34 ; xi. 3, 4 ; Philo, De Execrationibus',
§§ 8, 9 ; Apoc. Baruch Ixxviii. 7 ; Baruch iv. 36, 37 ; v. 5, 6.
8 Rom. x. 18 (Ps. xix. 4).

THE KINGDOM OF GOD 23
' Dispersion ' ; along the lines of which the evangelists of the
New Covenant carried their message of the realised Kingdom
of God. All the conditions of the proclamation of the Gospel combine
to make it plain that the Kingdom of God which was looked
for was a clearly defined polity ; with a constitution, and laws,
and functions of its own ; a distinct organisation, formed and
working in the world, though different from all ordinary political
systems. This was what was expected by the Jews, and no less
by the first Jewish disciples of our Lord. To this hope the
Gospel message was addressed, in terms adapted to the current
ideal. No doubt the word nW?o (to which /3ao~ikela corre
sponds in the Gospels) literally denotes kingship, or sovereignty,
rather than a concrete kingdom or organisation. Its essential
reference, that is to say, is to the authority of the ruler, rather
than to the realm over which he rules. But it is impossible to
press the literal meaning of the word : for it is evident that in its
popular acceptation the term 'the Kingdom of God' represented
a clear and definite conception of the direct government of God
as exercised over His people organised in a recognisable com
munity set apart from the rest of the world1. The announcement
that the Kingdom of God was at hand marked the fulfilment of
a long cherished expectation ; and could only therefore be
understood by those who received it in the sense which answered
to that expectation. It was a concrete presentation of the
immediate rule of God over His people for which the Jews were
waiting. No mere abstract declaration of His sovereignty would
have appealed to them. Nor could a proclamation that such a
sovereignty was " at hand," — was shortly to be established, —
have conveyed any intelligible meaning to them. They had
always believed that God was supreme, as the All-Ruler. But
the Kingdom of God for which they looked was something
1 Cp. Stanton, The Jewish and the Christian Messiah, p. 217 "Again,
connexion with the Old Testament preparation and Jewish hopes furnishes a complete
answer to those who would translate ' Reign ' instead of ' Kingdom ' of God.
Kingdom includes both ideas, that of His royal authority and of the realm
over which He rules ; and both should be included." See the whole section,
pp. 211 — 224.

24 THE KINGDOM OF GOD
quite different from this. It was a special manifestation of a
peculiar relation on His part towards His chosen people. And
though the Jews were mistaken, through the influence of their
preconceived ideas, concerning the actual character of the
Kingdom of God, still it was in reference to the hope of the
ages that the Gospel pronouncement was made. This is shown
alike by the mode in which it was promulgated ; by the
reception of the message by the Jews, and by their enquiries
concerning it ; and by the past history of Jewish anticipation,
and by its line of development from the Old to the New
Covenant.

ST MATT. IV. 23— V. 2.
Kai irepirjyev iv oXy rfj TaXiXaia, SiBdaKav ev Tat? avv-
aywyais avrmv Kal KTjpvaacov to evayyeXiov tt;? ftaaiXeia*} Kal
depairevcov irdaav vdaov Kal irdaav fiaXaitlav iv Top Xaw. Kal
dirfjXdev r) d/corj avrov et? 0X171/ ttjv H,vplav Kal irpoar/veyKav
avrm irdvras tov? ncaxiS; e^ovTa? Trot/ctXat? voaot,? xal j3aadvoi<;
avve^opAvovi, Baifiovi^ofievov; Kal aeXqvia^ofievov? Kal irapa-
Xvtikovs, Kal idepdirevaev avrovs. Kal TjKoXovdijaav avroo oj(\oi
TroXXot diro rrjs TaXtXata? Kal Ae*a7rdXew? Kal 'lepoaoXv/iav xal
'lovSalas Kal irepav tov 'lopBdvov. 'I8a>v Se tov? ^Xov? dvefirj
et? fb 6po<i' Kal Kadiaavros avrov irpoaijXdav avrm oi p,a0Tjral
avrov" Kal dvoifjas to aro/ia avrov iBiBaaKev avrovs Xeyav

II. THE SERMON ON THE MOUNT.
Our Lord came, as His first proclamation of the Gospel
declared, to found the true Kingdom of God. The time had
at last arrived for the realisation of the long expected Theo
cracy. But the reality was widely different from the ideal
which the Jews had formed for themselves. It was a spiritual
development, not a reactionary political movement. The Christ
had come to fulfil, not to restore, the Old Covenant. The
guiding aim of His Kingdom was expansion instead of ex
clusiveness. Its victory was to be won not by violent and
warlike measures, but along the peaceable lines of patience and
faith1. The whole character of the new society was diametrically
opposed to the standard which was demanded by the popular
anticipation. His countrymen looked for a striking intervention
of Divine power that should re-establish their peculiar privilege
as the covenant people of God : but our Lord brought to them
a Gospel of sacrifice, and of redemption from selfishness and
sin. But the divergence between His policy and theirs was not
at first apparent to them. They were too much absorbed in
their own ideas to be able readily to grasp the meaning of the
new revelation. They heard the announcement that the King
dom of God was at hand ; and they were profoundly stirred by
it. They saw the proof of the Divine authority of the Lord in
His miracles ; and they were roused to enthusiasm. They had
heard before many assertions of the establishment of the eagerly
desired Kingdom ; but this was clearly different from all that had
preceded it For they recognised in the miracles the token of
1 Cp. Heb. vi. 12 ; Rev. xiii. 10 ; L. xxi. 19 ; Col. i. 11 ; I J. v. 4.

28 THE SERMON ON THE MOUNT
a direct commission from God. As one of their Rulers admitted,
No one could do these signs except God were with him1.
But the Gospel was not proclaimed merely in a bare and
unexplained announcement that the time had come for the
establishment of the Kingdom of God, and then left there
altogether, without any further explanation or enlargement.
More than that was required. It is obvious that, simple as the
first message was, the nature of the new Theocracy must have
been declared, and its aims and methods set forth, at least in
general terms. The new teaching which belonged to the new
development must have been published ; otherwise no progress
could have been possible. And in spite of the extreme brevity
of the records on which our precise information depends, we are
not left in doubt on this point. For St Matthew, in a concise
summary of our Lord's Galilean ministry, reports that " He
went about in all Galilee, teaching in their synagogues, and
preaching the Gospel of the Kingdom2." And what that Gospel
was the Evangelist proceeds to indicate in a special exposition
of it which was given by our Lord on a particular occasion; and
which is commonly known as ' The Sermon on the Mount.'
This title apparently owes its origin to Augustine, who
named his treatise on this section of St Matthew's Gospel ' De
Sermone Domini in Monte secundum Matthaeum8.' He was
the first commentator who treated of this discourse as a separate
entity, and was therefore the first who required a distinctive
designation for it. Frequently as its words are quoted by earlier
writers, there appears to be no instance where it is referred to
under any particular name of its own. Thus, to take but one
author as an example, Cyprian throughout his Testimonia, where
references are given to the books from which the quotations are
made, consistently employs the formula ' In evangelio secundum
1 J. iii. 2. 2 iv. 23.
3 That this was his own title which he prefixed to the treatise appears from his
later statement (Retractationes, i. 19) : " Per idem tempus de Sermone Domini in
Monte secundum Matthaeum duo volumina scripsi...Hoc opus sic incipit; Sermonem
quem locutus est Dominus." The opening sentence of the treatise is : " Sermonem
quem locutus est Dominus noster Iesus Christus in Monte, sicut in Evangelio
secundum Matthaeum legimus, si quis pie sobrieque considerare voluerit, puto quod
inveniet in eo quod [v.l. quantum] ad mores optimos pertinet, perfectum vitae
Christianae modum."

ST MATT. V — VII. 29
Matthaeum ' for all citations from this section of the Gospel, in
common with all others from St Matthew. Elsewhere he intro
duces excerpts with such phrases as 'Quando et Dominus in
Evangelio dicat ' ; ' Sicut scriptum est Domino praemonente et
dicente ' ; ' Cum Dominus doceat et dicat ' ; ' Loquente Domino
et dicente1 ' ; and the like. But he never distinguishes this
discourse from the rest of the Gospel in which it is recorded.
Nor does the special name for this discourse seem to have
been adopted into general use for many centuries after Augus
tine's time. It was his great influence on later Western thought
and teaching that brought his title for it, — ' The Sermon on the
Mount,' — into popular vogue at the time of the Reformation, as
the recognised description of the address contained in St Matt.
v. — vii. Its gradual adoption may be traced, for instance, in the
headings to chap. v. in the various English Bibles. It was not
employed by Tyndale, whose summary of the contents of the
chapter begins merely with a reference to the Beatitudes. It
first appears in the Great Bible2: "In thys chapter and in the
two nexte folowynge is conteyned the most excellent and
lovynge Sermon of Chryst in the Mount : whych sermon is the
very keye that openeth the understandynge into the lawe. In
thys fyfth chapter, specyally he preacheth of the viii beatytudes
or blessinges, etc." The same heading was copied in the
Bishops' Bible3 : " In this chapter, and in the two next folowing,
is conteyned the most excellent and lovyng Sermon of Christe,
in the mount. Which Sermon, is the very key, that openeth
the understandyng into the lawe, etc." The Rhemes version
borrows this description, and adds an express reference to
Augustine : " The Sermon of Christ upon the Mount : conteining
the pattern of a christian life, in these three chapters following,
whereof S. Augustine hath two goodly books, etc." There is
no reference to this title in the Genevan Version ; nor in the
Vulgate. This use of it was apparently peculiar to England4 ;
and on that account was copied at Rheims.
1 Epp. lxiii. 8 ; xiii. 3 ; lix. 4 ; ad Demetr. 1 .
2 Ed. 1540. s Ed. 1568.
4 In the A.V. the title is repeated at the head of each of the three chapters :
"Christ beginneth his sermon in the mount. ..Christ continueth his sermon in the
mount... Christ ending his sermon in the mount, reproveth etc."

30 THE SERMON ON THE MOUNT
From the sixteenth century onwards it has been universally
employed, at any rate in England. And it has of course now
become so firmly established that it will always remain as the
accepted name for this discourse. But it is in some respects a
rather unfortunate description. For it is apt to suggest a some
what mistaken view of the real purport of this teaching of our
Lord. It places it in the category of ordinary exhortations or
instructions, and fails to denote its peculiar character. It does
not mark its special occasion and purpose as an exposition of the
spiritual character of the true Kingdom of God. It may perhaps
be regretted that it is not known by the title which St Matthew's
own phrase1, and the setting of the allocution in his Gospel,
would seem to suggest as most appropriate for it, — "The Gospel
of the Kingdom."
For that is what in fact it is. It is a statement given under
special circumstances by our Lord of the essential distinction
between His Kingdom and the Theocracy as popularly under
stood in the preconceived ideas which were entertained by the
Jews concerning it. It is the manifesto of the new spiritual
society. From beginning to end this is the principal theme of
the address.
It opens with a sketch of the characteristics which distinguish
the members of the genuine Kingdom of God. That this is the
meaning of the Beatitudes is unmistakeably indicated by the
promise which is assigned to the first, and again to the last,
of the series : " For theirs is the Kingdom of heaven." Other
popular leaders had held out political promises to their ad
herents ; as, for example, Judas the Galilean2 had won over his
followers by proclaiming the right of refusing to pay taxes to
the Roman Government. But Christ's promises were not
political : they were purely spiritual : offered to such as feared God
and regarded man. The character of the members determined
the character of the Kingdom. But if that character was indeed
to be of the kind which He foreshadowed, — patient, and gentle,

2 Jos. B. J. II. viii. I eirl roirov ns dvyp roXiXaios 'IotfSas foo/ua els airbaraoiv
evyye roiis iirixoiplovs, xaxlfav el ipopov re "Piopalois rekeiv {iropivovoi, xal perd rbv
Qebv otoovoi Bvyrovs Seo"ir6ras.

ST MATT. V. 3 — 16 31
and peaceable, — and not of a vigorously aggressive type, the
question must naturally suggest itself: If this were the case,
how could such a society ever achieve any influence in the world?
Would it not be utterly helpless, and downtrodden under the
ruthless and self-assertive world power? To this the Lord
replied by symbolisms drawn from the Law and the Prophets, —
the Salt of the sacrifices, and the Light of day (v. 3 — 16).
But again ; In what relation would the new Kingdom of
God stand towards the Law, which was the bond of the Old
Covenant? Widely divergent interpretations concerning the
obligation of the Law were already current. On one side the
ruling caste of the Sadducees1 maintained that nothing was
necessary beyond a literal obedience to the exact requirements
of the written Law. On the other hand the Pharisees, who
were the popular leaders in religious matters2, not only adhered
most strictly to all the precepts of the written Law, but had
further safeguarded it by a 'fence3' of minute restrictions round
every detail : and they taught that the traditions of the Elders4
were no less binding than the original Law itself; a doc
trine which had resulted in the imposition of burdens too
grievous to be borne by ordinary men6. Now it was a matter of
primary moment to ascertain what line the new Teacher in
tended to adopt with regard to this all-important point ; and
whether He would associate Himself with one or other of the
existing modes of interpretation. For this was not a question
which interested only the attached disciples of the different
schools : it vitally affected the religious practice of every faithful
Jew. Accordingly our Lord dealt with it at some considerable
1 Jos. Ant. XIII. x. 6 vvv Se Sykwoai potiXopai Sn vbpipa iroWd riva irapiSooav
np Sijptp ol $apioaioi ix iraripiav SiaSoxys, airep ovx dvayiypairrai iv rots WLiavoiois
vopois, xal Sid rovro ravra rb SaSSovxalav yivos iKfsdXkei, X^yo" iKeiva Seiv yyeioBai
vbpxpa rd yeypappiva, rd S' ix irapaSooews ruv iraripiav py rypeiv.
2 Jos. Ant. XVIII. i. 3 xal Si abrd rots Te Sypois iriBavthraroi rvyxdvovoi, xaX
birboa Beta eix&v re [Ix^ai] xal lepwv iroiyoeus i^yy/ioet ry ixelvwv rvyxavovai
irpaaodpeva. els roobvSe dperys abroTs al irokeis ipaprbpyoav iirirySeboei toS iirl
iraai Kpelooovos (v re, ry Sialry tou (ilov Kal Xoyois.
8 WO. Cp. Pirke Aboth, iii. 20 "Tradition is a fence to Thorah" (TimDD
mirr} J"D). "The J"D lies at the root of the Rabbinic system" (Taylor,
Sayings, i. 1).
4 M. xv. 2 ; Mk vii. 3. 6 Cp. M. xxiii. 4 ; A. xv. 10 ; Gal. v. 1.

32 THE SERMON ON THE MOUNT
length. One after the other He took up several definite
instances, and showed by these illustrations how His standard
contrasted with what they had been taught by other leaders ; in
that He claimed a ready spirit of intelligent and whole-hearted
obedience, and not merely an outward and technical observance.
In each case He struck deep down beneath the surface, and
revealed the real principle which underlay the particular com
mandment (v. 17 — 48).
This ideal was startling enough in itself to a Jewish audience.
But the words by which it was introduced made it more startling
still, and would sharply arrest attention. For the formal ful
filment of religious duties, both in an accurate compliance
with the commands of the Law, and more particularly in the
ceremonial performance of stated practices of devotion, was, and
had been for a long time1, designated by the special name of
'Righteousness.' And in this respect the Pharisees and the
Scribes were recognised as the professional experts of a minutely
regulated code of conduct. It was therefore a strangely emphatic
statement when our Lord, before entering on His teaching about
the Law, enuntiated this rule for His followers: "I say unto you,
that except your righteousness shall exceed that of the Scribes
and Pharisees, ye shall in no wise enter into the kingdom of
heaven2." That enforced more than anything else could have
done the high standard of life which He required. But that
was not all. The Law was negative ; expressed in the form of
prohibitions. But the term 'righteousness' was applied specially
to the positive duties of Almsgiving, Prayer, and Fasting. When
therefore our Lord had explained His interpretation of the deeper
meaning and far-reaching reference of the Law, He passed on at
once to apply the same principle of interpretation also to those
practical duties. In respect of them too He declined to accept
even the elaborate Pharisaic rules of ceremonious fulfilment, but
proclaimed a wholly new criterion of service. They must be
practised, He taught, in real earnestness of spirit, 'as unto the
Lord, and not unto men.' In no feature was the contrast
1 At least two centuries earlier this term had already become a stereotyped
expression : for it is found in the Book of Tobit ; xii. 8 ; xiv. 1 1 : and in the
first century B.C. in the Psalms of Solomon; cp. ix. 6, 9; xiv. 1. 2 v. 20.

ST MATT. V. 17 — VI. 34 33.
greater than in these special instances between the vainglorious
ideal of the Pharisees and the pattern outlined by our Lord.
This marked distinctly the transition from the decadence of the
Old Covenant to the fresh spirit of the New (vi. i — 18).
With this section the first main division of the address came
to a close. It had opened out a wholly new revelation concerning
the fundamental meaning both of the permanent elements of the
moral Law, and of the regular practices of religion. But it still
remained to glance forward to the future, and to sketch the con
ditions of life under the new dispensation. And this formed the
principal theme of the rest of the discourse.
And first of all there was the urgent question of the com
parative claims of the spiritual life and of the ordinary interests
and anxieties of daily existence, in such a Kingdom of God as
had been already outlined. And this had a special bearing on
the immediate situation. For this point had to be faced: — If
the new kingdom was to be set on foot, how was it to be financed?
So long as the matter was regarded from a purely mundane
standpoint it was necessarily beset by many practical considera
tions of the kind. But our Lord showed that the higher aim,
while it must hold the first position as unequivocally the dominant
motive, need not be inconsistent with ordinary prudence,
where there is an unhesitating faith in the providence of God
(vi. 19—34).
But when the sketch of the new polity had been carried so
far as this, the doubt must inevitably have arisen in the minds
of many as to whether after all it was not likely to encourage, if
not to require, a narrower exclusivism even than that of the
existing bodies of the select religious ? They had already heard
that the new rules of righteousness were to be stricter than those
of the Scribes and Pharisees. What if the conditions of daily
life were also to involve a more rigorous separation than that
which was maintained, for instance, by the Essenes1? What
1 Cp. Philo, Quod omn. prob. lib. § 12 outoi rb piv irpCorov xiopySbv olxovot,
Tds 7r6X«s i/crpeirbpevoi Sid rds tuv irdkirevopivav xeipoyBeis dvoptas, elSbres ix ruv
owbvruv <!>s dir' dipos ipBopoiroiov vboov iyyivopJvyv irpoofldkTiv ^uxa's dvlarov. Jos.
B. J. 11. viii. 10 Siypyvrai Si xard xpbvov rijs doxyoeas els polpas riaaapas- xal
roaovrov ol perayeviorepoi rav irpoyeveoTipwv EkaTrovvrai, wore, el \paboeiav abrwv,
ixelvovs diro\obeo9at, xaBdirep d\\o<p6\<p ovpipvpivras.

34 THE SERMON ON THE MOUNT
if the members of the new Kingdom were to be more shut
off from their fellow-countrymen than the closest coterie of
the Pharisees1? In answer then to this misgiving, whether
openly expressed, or only felt in an undercurrent of bewilder
ment, our Lord proceeded to distinguish between the false and
the right exclusiveness in religion. The attainment however of
a due proportion in so difficult a matter might be thought to be
merely a council of perfection ; beautiful indeed as an ideal, but
in reality impracticable. Well, wisdom for guidance in such
a perplexity could only come from God. It could only be
gained by prayer ; — by constant and persistent prayer. And as
a practical direction for the regulation of conduct towards others
the " Golden Rule" was added, which struck the very keynote of
the whole situation: "All things therefore whatsoever ye would
that men should do unto you, even so do ye also unto them; for
this is the Law and the Prophets2" (vii. i — 12).
But once more; Could such exalted ideals ever form the
basis of a popular religion ? Could it ever attract, or command
the allegiance of, the mass of the people? This was an anxious
question which could not fail to assert itself, when a popular
movement was being started. So a warning was given against
looking for anything like universal success, and against judging
by false standards of estimation. And finally the discourse
came round once more to the point with which it had opened, —
the true qualification for membership in the Kingdom of God :
and that was summed up in the one comprehensive requirement
of obedience to the Will of God. Then there followed only the
peroration, in the form of a parable, — drawn from the local con
ditions of house-building, — by which our Lord declared His
claim to absolute personal loyalty to Himself (vii. 13 — 27).
Now all this teaching may be described as elementary, in the
sense that it corresponds to no more than an initial stage in the
development of the Kingdom of God. It is true that it sets
1 Cp. Schiirer, n. ii. 25 [E.T.] "The Pharisees did in fact ' separate' from the
people of the land, so far as to avoid close intercourse with them." He quotes from
the Talmudic tract Demai, ii. 3 " A Chaber does not go a a guest to an Am-haarez
nor receive him as a guest within his walls. "
2 vii. 12.

ST MATT. VII. 35
forth an ethical ideal which is entirely unique. It holds up a
standard of conduct which had never been approached under the
Old Covenant: and yet it is professedly based upon the Law of
that Covenant. It is the promulgation of the Law of the New
Covenant: but that is represented, and unfolded, as the fulfilling
of the old1- It is true that for all time it stands as the complete
pattern of righteousness. No subsequent teaching of our Lord
superseded it in this respect. Not the fullest experience of
Christian life, however widened may be its outlook, can ever
pretend to treat it as obsolete. " This Gospel of the Kingdom
shall be preached in the whole world for a testimony unto all
the nations2." But it is not the whole message of the Gospel 3-
It is only from a total misapprehension of the due proportion
and the enabling power of the full Gospel of Christ that the
familiar modern cry could be raised; ' Let us get back to Christ:
back to the Sermon on the Mount': as though nothing more
were required of a believer; or as though this completed the
fulness of "the faith which was once for all delivered to the
saints4." For, first of all, it is to be noticed that there is no elaboration,
no development, of distinctively Christian doctrine in the
Sermon on the Mount. And perhaps it is this very feature
which makes it so exclusively attractive to those who profess to
be strongly impatient of all' dogma.' No doubt the germ of much
1 Cp. Strong, Christian Ethics, pp. 20, 21 "In the Sermon on the Mount the
climax of Judaism was reached, and in the same moment its death-knell was sounded.
This Sermon as it stands in St Matthew's Gospel gives, it is true, the law to the new
kingdom ; but it stands in close connexion with the language and ideas of the old. . . .
In its emphasis upon the spiritual as opposed to hollow externalism, though it goes
deeper into things than the writers of old, it does but follow the best traditions of
Hebrew religious thought.1'
2 M. xxiv. 14.
8 Cp. Thomson, Books which influenced our Lord and His Apostles, p. 122
" The essence of Christianity is to be found, not in the Sermon on the Mount, but in
the resurrection from the dead. The former is the solvent of Judaism ; the latter the
foundation of a new life." Strong, Christian Ethics, pp. 22, 23 " We look at it so
often from the point of view of a complete Christianity that it has somewhat quaintly been
taken to be the sum total of the Christian message.... Indeed, the world is apt to think
itself Christian, and profess as its ideal a slightly amended version of the Sermon
on the Mount."
4 Jude, 3-
3—2

36 THE SERMON ON THE MOUNT
of our Lord's later teaching is evidently contained in this Sermon.
Thus, for instance, He implicitly asserts the authority of His
own Divine Personality. He speaks of Himself as coming
hereafter as the Judge " at that day " : and He draws a line of
separation between those who are loyal to Him and those who
are unfaithful. But without the fuller revelation which was
afterwards given the true bearing could scarcely be understood.
There is no reference to the Atonement. There is not even a
personal invitation of the Saviour to ' come unto Him.' There
is no allusion to sacramental grace. There is no promise of the
Holy Spirit. That is to say, the doctrine is elementary. It
does not touch on the deeper mysteries of the Faith, which
could only be made known to those who had already made a
considerable advance in discipleship1; or at least to those who
had been fully trained in the deeper meaning of the Old
Covenant2. The Sermon stands out clearly as a general
preliminary statement of the character and the claims of the
new Kingdom of God ; given to men who were eagerly looking
for that Kingdom, but who expected it as nothing more than a
restoration of the old Theocracy.
Again, it contains no direction as to the organisation of the
new Kingdom, such as is implied, for example, in the later
Parables of the Kingdom3. The outward organisation, strictly
speaking, began with the commission of the Twelve Apostles;
and there is no indication anywhere in the sermon that that step
had as yet been taken. There is indeed a reference towards the
close to workers in Christ's name ; but the way in which that
reference is introduced shows that they cannot be regarded as
authorised workers. A society is of course implied by the
description of what membership in it involves: but no trace
appears of its constitution. So far it is a society of somewhat
vague and indeterminate outline : with no officers, no defined
functions, no corporate responsibility, no propaganda. Its pur
view does not extend at present beyond the Jewish nation, to
whom it seems peculiarly to belong.
Once more ; — and this is perhaps the most significant feature
of the sermon, as an indication of the time at which it was
1 M. xiii. n, 12. 2 J. iii. io. 3 M. xiii.

ST MATT. V. — VII. 37
delivered ; — there is a complete absence of all reference to the
controversies which gathered round our Lord's work at a com
paratively early stage of His Galilean ministry. The question
of Sabbath' observance in particular brought about an acute
conflict between Him and the Pharisees1. It even went so far
that when they were baffled they actually entered into a
conspiracy with their traditional opponents, the Herodians, to
assassinate Him2. But in the Sermon on the Mount, although
Christ deals with not a few instances of interpretation of the
Law, He makes no allusion whatever to the Sabbath. The
presumption is therefore that this discourse was given before that
had become a crucial matter. Indeed there is no hint of any
thing like an open rupture with the Pharisees. The only reference
to them by name in the whole sermon simply adduces them
as the expert professors of technical 'righteousness3.' Nor do
the traditions of the elders about ritual observances come under
notice at all. From the beginning to the end there is no
suggestion of the existence of any dispute between our Lord and
the recognised religious leaders of the people.
Now all this points to an early stage in the Lord's Galilean
ministry for the occasion of this utterance: while His teaching
about the Kingdom was still preparatory; before He had begun
to organise its constitution; and when the public controversy
with the Pharisees had not yet arisen. But it cannot have been
at the very beginning of His ministry. Some time must have
elapsed for His ' fame ' to spread ' throughout all Syria4.' The
particular gathering to whom it was addressed was drawn "from
Galilee and Decapolis and Jerusalem and Judsea and from
beyond Jordan 6." That is to say, it was representative of every
Jewish part of Palestine : the only districts not represented being
Samaria, and the Greek settlements in the north-east of the
land. The concentration of men from so wide an area, and
more especially the fact of their coming to Galilee8 from
Jerusalem and Judsea and Persea, to hear for themselves the new
and famous Teacher, alike presuppose that a widespread excite
ment had already had time to develope, about His message and
His credentials. The juncture therefore at which this teaching
1 Mk ii. 23 — iii. 6. 2 Mk iii. 6. 3 v. 20.
4 iv. 24. 6 iv. 25. 6 Cp. J. vii. 52.

38 THE SERMON ON THE MOUNT
must have been given is, by its subject-matter, and by the cir
cumstances of its delivery, defined within fairly narrow limits.
It finds its place in our Lord's teaching just at the point when
men began to perceive that the Kingdom of God as proclaimed
by Him was wholly different in character from any preceding
proclamation which they had ever heard; but before they had
come to realise how deeply it was calculated to upset their
preconceived ideas concerning that Kingdom.
And it is precisely to this stage of the Lord's ministry that
St Matthew assigns the sermon. Though it is recorded almost
at the beginning of the narrative of the Galilean mission, it is
quite clear that it is not represented, nor intended to be under
stood, as having inaugurated that work. St Matthew like
St Mark dates "the commencement of the Gospel of Jesus
Christ1" from the time of John the Baptist's imprisonment2. He
turns aside for a moment, after his manner, to notice in passing
the coincidence of our Lord's choice of Capernaum as His
headquarters, "in the borders of Zebulun and Naphtali," with a
prophecy of Isaiah3; and then tells of the call of the first
permanently attached disciples. He has now introduced his
subject : but before passing on to the detailed account of events,
he first gives a rapid summary in general terms of the first part
of the Lord's ministry in Galilee4; and then, in close connexion
with it, records this discourse, as the formal declaration of ' the
Gospel of the Kingdom.' But it was, as he points out, preceded
by an extended progress of the mission through all Galilee,
which spread the fame of the Lord far beyond that district, and
attracted to Him from all parts the informal deputation
to whom this special teaching was given. After this he
turns back again to narrate in detail some of the typical
incidents which occurred at the opening of the northern
mission. This becomes evident on comparison with St Mark's
Gospel, which places some of these same events as the earliest
instances of the Master's work in the north, immediately after
the call of the first disciples6. St Matthew throughout his book
writes as an historian, not as a chronicler. He groups his matter
1 Mk i. i. z iv. 12, 17 ; Mk i. 14, 15. s Is. ix. 1. 4 iv. 23, 24.
5 The healing of the leper; M. viii. 2 — 4 = Mk i. 40 — 44: and the scene at Simon's
house in Capernaum; M. viii. 14 — i6 = Mk i. 29 — 34.

ST MATT. V. — VII. 39
in successive sections according to the subject; and not necessarily
in strict chronological order.
He does not then imply by the position in his Gospel in which
he places the Sermon on the Mount that it was spoken at the
very commencement of our Lord's Galilean ministry. But he
does, by the structure of his book, indicate that it was delivered
during the first period of that ministry. For just as he intro
duces his narrative of the first stage of the work by a general
summary of its methods; so, later on, he marks by a closely
similar introduction, also in general terms, the opening of the
next stage, which included the commission of the Twelve
Apostles. If these two brief introductions are placed side by
side, it is seen at once how closely they correspond to each
other : and the inference is obvious that they serve to distinguish
the main divisions of the work : —
iv. 23. ix. 35.
And Jesus went about in all And Jesus went about all the
Galilee, teaching in their synagogues, cities and the villages, teaching in
and preaching the Gospel of the their synagogues, and preaching the
Kingdom, and healing all manner of Gospel of the Kingdom, and healing
disease and all manner of sickness all manner of disease and all manner
among the people. of sickness.
The leading feature of the first section was the Sermon on the
Mount; of the second, the appointment and mission of the
Apostles. But the latter was, as St Mark's Gospel shows,
coincident with the outbreak of open and relentless hostility to
our Lord on the part of the Pharisees. Of this antagonism
however there is, as has been already pointed out, no trace in
the Sermon. The setting therefore in which it is placed in St
Matthew's Gospel exactly corresponds with what is suggested
by the contents of the discourse itself; — that it belongs to an
early part, though not actually to the first beginning, of the
proclamation of the Gospel.
The whole character of the teaching given in the Sermon on
the Mount, both as regards its matter and in the way in which
it is presented, harmonises accurately with this situation. There
is no other recorded instruction of our Lord which is so com
pletely Jewish in tone throughout; — in form and in substance;

40 THE SERMON ON THE MOUNT
in thought and in phraseology ; — as this is. It marks the point
of transition from the Old Covenant to the New. It does not
as yet introduce new features in the covenant between God and
His people; but it places an entirely new interpretation on the
established and familiar teaching of the existing covenant. It
takes up the moral code, and penetrates to the deepest spiritual
principles on which it is based. It treats of the recognised
duties of practical religion, and transfigures them by the
revelation that they are to be observed as in the sight of God,
and not to be seen of men. It breathes an inspiration of living
faith in the Father in heaven. It is thus instinct throughout
with the spirit of the New Dispensation. It is indeed a declara
tion of the Gospel of Jesus Christ. But all through it is cast in
the form of an exposition of the Old Covenant. In the nature
of the case it could not yet be a full and complete statement of
the doctrine of the new Kingdom of God. The time had not
yet come for that. It is but the first step in the unfolding of
the revelation of our Saviour. It is a preliminary sketch of the
true ideal of the Kingdom of God, which starts from the already
prevalent realisation of the promise and the claims of that
Kingdom. It never passes beyond the bounds of the old
Theocracy and its implicit teaching : but it reveals an entirely
new light upon its spiritual meaning. And its lessons are
conveyed in phrases, and with illustrations, taken from the
traditional Jewish teaching of that age. And so it signifies a
development from what was to what was to be : and in this it is
essentially Divine in its method. It does not break down the
old, but gives it a new meaning, and points to its true fulfilment
Its position is summed up in our Lord's own statement: "Think
not that I came to destroy the Law or the Prophets; I came not
to destroy, but to fulfil1." 1 v. 17.

ST MATT. V. 3—12.
Maicdpioi ol irrm^ol r& irvevfian, on avr&v ianv r] fdaaiXeia
rav ovpavav.
ftaKapioi ol irevOovvres, on avrol irapaKXydtjaovTai.
fiaKapiot ol irpaets, on avrol KXripovo/irjaovaiv rrjv yrjv.
fiaxdpioi ol ireivdovres Kal Bc^JrdSvres rrjv BiKaioavvijv, on avrol
¦XPpraaOrjaovTai. fiaxdpioi ol iXerj/ioves, on avrol iXeydrjaovrai.
fiaKapiot ol Kadapol rr} KapBia, on avrol rov deov otfrovrai.
fiaxapioi ol elprjvoiroioi, on [avToi] vtot deov KXtjOrjaovTai.
fiaicdpioi ol BeBieoyfievoi eveKev StKaioavvTjs, on avrwv ianv r)
fiJaaiXeia rav ovpavwv.
fiaKapiot iare orav oveiBlatoatv ifids Kal Btdtjaoatv Kal eiircoaiv
irav irovrjpov Kaff vfiriSv tyevBofievot eveKev ifiov. xaipere Kal
dryaXXiaade, on 6 fiiados Vfi&v iroXvs iv toi? ovpavois' ovrcos ydp
iBtcol-av tov? irpo<f>r)Tas roiis irpd ifimv.

III. THE BEATITUDES.
It is not quite clear to whom the Sermon on the Mount was
immediately addressed. There is of course no doubt that it was
intended primarily for the instruction of the particular gathering
of men who had come together from all parts of the land to form
their own estimate of the claims, and the authority, of the new
Teacher. And the note of their surprise at the manner of His
teaching, which follows the close of the discourse1, shows that
they regarded it as spoken directly to themselves. St Matthew
however appears to state2 that our Lord actually gave this
instruction to His already attached disciples, though in the
presence and hearing of the crowd ; whom He thus taught in
directly, by permitting them to listen to what He said to the
inner circle of His own adherents. But the introductory sentence
need not necessarily be taken in this sense at all. It is more
than possible that the phrase Kal Kadlaavros avrov irpoafjX0av
avrm ol fiaOrjral avrov should be regarded as a parenthesis,
depicting the setting of the scene; and that consequently the
ovtov? after iBIBaaKev really refers back to tov? o^Xovs. This is
borne out by St Matthew's mode of reporting our Lord's public
teaching on other occasions. He is not careful to define strictly
whether the Master addressed Himself to the bystanders
generally, or to a special section of His hearers in the presence
of the rest. He is content to concentrate attention on the
words themselves: and then by a casual allusion he unexpectedly
indicates that what had by certain expressions been made to
appear as spoken to a select class, was all the time a general
utterance, addressed to the whole audience. Thus, for example,
in his account of the controversy raised by the Pharisees about
1 vii. 28, 29. • v. 1, 2.

44 THE BEATITUDES
Christ's power to heal demoniacs, St Matthew begins by de
scribing the astonishment of the crowds, and the counter
suggestion blasphemously urged by the Pharisees: He then
proceeds to state that our Lord "knowing their thoughts said
unto them, etc.," where the pronouns seem manifestly to refer to
the Pharisees. Then follows an intervention by "certain of the
Scribes and Pharisees," in answer to whom (o Be diroKpidels elirev
avrois) the Lord made reply. But at the end of the whole
discussion St Matthew leads on to the following scene by the
words : "while He was still speaking to the crowds"; though they
had apparently been entirely in the background throughout the
relation of the speeches1. It makes however little or no practical
difference. In any case this special exposition of the Gospel of
the Kingdom was called forth by a particular concourse of
enquirers. It was certainly designed for their instruction, even
if it were, in the form of its delivery, spoken as to the disciples
in the first instance. They occupied the place of honour, in
close proximity to the Master : for they had already attached
themselves definitely to Him. And the subject-matter of the
discourse affected them as intimately as any of the strangers who
were present on that occasion.
The Lord opened His statement by proclaiming a series of
' Beatitudes,' or Blessings, implicitly declaring the essential
characteristics of the true ' inheritors of the Kingdom of heaven.'
These set forth at once His ideals and His promises. They
show the nature of the Theocracy which He had come to found,
as a power of deliverance for all the oppressed. But they transfer
the whole scheme at one stroke from the political to the spiritual
plane. For they have nothing to say about the expectation of
national independence: they do not touch the question of triumph
over the enemies of the chosen people: they break away com
pletely from the customary anticipations which are revealed in
the popular Jewish literature of the time. On the contrary, they
deal only with those whom the world despises, but does not fear:
the lowly and the grieved; the gentle, and the followers after
righteousness; the merciful, and the pure in heart; the peace
makers, and the persecuted. These are the clients whom the
1 xii. 23, 24, 25 ; 38, 39 ; 46. Cp. the indeterminate avrois at xxii. 1.

ST MATT. V. 3 — 12 45
Master claims as peculiarly His own. These are the beneficiaries
of His Divine Society. And this declaration exactly accords
with His announcements on other occasions, when the character
of His work, and of His kingdom, came up for discussion. So,
in the synagogue at Nazareth1 He similarly described the special
range of His work. So, in answer to John the Baptist's doubt2
He drew attention to the recipients of His blessing. It is all
summed up in His own compendium of His Gospel : " The Son
of Man came to seek and to save that which was lost8." For
that was His purpose from the first.
But such an ideal was the farthest possible from the thoughts
of those who heard these Blessings uttered. To them they
must have come with a sharp shock of surprise. For all other
leaders of the national hope had rallied to their standards fierce
and implacable men. A stern work lay before them; and it
demanded, as they thought, men of action, — vigorous and relent
less warriors who were prepared to beat down all opposition.
Active resistance was what in their opinion was required : and
there was no place for the gentle and the merciful in such an
undertaking. This being so, they must have listened with
something like dismay to promises which were so utterly
unlike what they had expected to hear. The contrast was com
plete between the popular ideal and the reality of the Divine
Kingdom. And yet the Beatitudes conveyed a very direct appeal to
them, and to their own religious training. For they are cast in
an essentially Jewish mould ; and reflect unmistakeably the
deeper religious conceptions of the Psalmists and the Prophets
of the Old Testament, whose very words they freely adopt.
(i) The form in which the promises are proclaimed, with the
simple pronouncement, "Blessed are the — (fiaKapiot ol — )," looks
back to the familiar expression of the Psalms, to which this use
of " Blessed — " (*^S) peculiarly belongs*. The book opens with
1 L. iv. 16— 21. 2 M. xi. 2—5. 3 L. xix. 10.
4 Out of 45 instances where the expression occurs in the O.T., 26 are in the
Psalms. It is consistently translated in the LXX by paxdpios (or paxapurrbs, three
times in Prov.). [The actual numbers are 26 instances in the Psalms, and 19
elsewhere. Votaw has apparently taken out the list, and then confused the totals.
For he treats 19 as referring to the Psalms, and 26 (= 19 + 7) as the sum total. " H'f ^ is

46 THE BEATITUDES
a Beatitude (i. i); and again and again is this form of describing
the God-fearing man repeated. A comparison of the several
passages in which it occurs reveals the prevailing idea which was
associated with V&S, as denoting those who leaned upon God in
calm confidence and upright dealing. Thus it is applied to those
who fear God1; to those who put their trust in Him2; to the chosen
of the Lord, whether nation3 or individuals4; to the pardoned
sinner6; to the chastened by the Lord6; to the righteous'; to the
true worshippers8; to those who keep the Law'; and even to the
man who is blessed with God's gift of children10. The whole
connotation of the term carried with it the picture of a spiritual
life of faith and service, lived in close communion with God, and
enriched by His grace11- And this association of ideas with the
use of TfB (fiaKapios) was so firmly established, that it is still
maintained in the Psalms of Solomon12, in spite of their general
tone of strong nationalism. There are in them six such Beati
tudes; of which two refer to the fear of the Lord13; one to the
chastened by the Lord14; one to the recipient of God's provision16;
and two to the lot of those who shall live to see the restoration
of Israel18. It is as though our Lord, before touching on the great
subject of the Law, purposely began by carrying His hearers
back, through the natural inference of His mode of expression,
to the more spiritual aspects of the teaching of their scriptures :
a side of their doctrine which was in great danger of being
allowed to pass into oblivion ; or which at all events failed to
receive any practical recognition.

in O.T. usage nearly confined to the Psalms, where it appears 19 times (elsewhere
seven times)." Hast. v. 14 b (note).]
1 cxii. 1 ; cxxviii. 1. 2 ii. 12 ; xxxiv. 8 ; xl. 4 ; lxxxiv. 12.
3 xxxiii. 12; cxliv. 15. * lxy. 12. >
6 xxxii. 1, 2. « xciv. 12.
7 xii. 1 ; evi. 3. 8 lxxxiv. 4 ; lxxxix. 15.
9 i. 1 ; cxix. 1, 2. 10 exxvii. 5.
11 Only in one Psalm does the use of the term pass outside this range, to bless the
national avenger, exxxvii. 8, 9.
12 It is also found in Wisd. (iii. 13), and in Ecclus. (11 times). Cp. the nine
Beatitudes in The Secrets of Enoch, xiii.
13 iv. 26; vi. 1. 14 a. 1. 15 v. 18. 16 xvii. 50; xviii. 7.

ST MATT. V. 3 — 12 47
(2) Again, by a peculiarly Jewish turn of expression, the
Theocracy is spoken of as ' the Kingdom of heaven,' instead of
by the more direct name of ' the Kingdom of God.' This phrase,
— ' the Kingdom of heaven,' — belongs of course to the whole of
St Matthew's Gospel, where alone it occurs in the New Testa
ment, and not exclusively to the Beatitudes, or even to the
Sermon on the Mount generally. But as this stands in the first
and again in the last of the Beatitudes as the subject of the
special promise, — "for theirs is the Kingdom of heaven," — it
manifestly marks the underlying theme of the whole series;
and therefore it may be regarded as a distinguishing feature of
this group of sayings. This title (D!^ nto?D)i ;s frequently
employed in the Rabbinic writings. Thus, for instance, the
Targum on Mic. iv. 7 2 paraphrases the sentence, " The LORD shall
reign over them in Mount Zion," by "There shall be revealed to
them the Kingdom of heaven in Mount Zion." So in Pesikta*:
"The time of the ungodly Kingdom is come, that it should be
rooted out of the world ; the time of the Kingdom of heaven is
come, that it should berevealed." In the Talmudic tract Berachoth*
the formula "to take on oneself the Kingdom of heaven (or, the
yoke of the Kingdom of heaven)" recurs several times. And with
this may be compared the words of the Midrash Mechiita" (on
Exodus): "When the Israelites all stood at Mount Sinai, they all
were of one mind to take on themselves the Kingdom of heaven
with joy." This mode of expression was due to the Jewish exag
gerated reverence for the Name of God, for which by metonymy
' heaven ' (&£&) was substituted ; not in this particular phrase
only, but also in other connexions as well".
This term, then, ' the Kingdom of heaven,' is exactly
equivalent in meaning to 'the Kingdom of God.' But it was
entirely Jewish in complexion. To men of other races it would
1 Dalman points out that DJIOE', in this connexion, is always without the article
(The Words of Jesus, p. 91).
2 See Schottgen, i. 1150. * p. 51, ed. Buber (Schiirer, 11. ii. 171 n.).
4 e.g. Cap. n. 2 ; f. 10, 13, 61, etc. See Wetstein on M. iii. 2. 6 f. 42.
8 e.g. Pirke Aboth, i. 3 " Let the fear of Heaven be upon you." Baba Kamma,
f. 22 " He is free from the judgments of men, but is subject to the judgment of
Heaven." Tanchuma, f. 73 "He showed no honour to Heaven, nor to men."

48 THE BEATITUDES
have been so obscure as to be practically meaningless1. Indeed
an evidence of this is patent even at the present day among
ourselves, in the widely prevalent misunderstanding of the name
by ordinary Bible readers, who almost instinctively interpret
' the Kingdom of heaven ' as referring to the life to come, and
so are plunged into hopeless confusion. Accordingly in the two
other Synoptic Gospels, which were written for the Gentile
world, it is never found, but is always replaced by "the Kingdom
of God." In not a few instances exactly parallel sentences show
the one form in St Matthew, and the other in St Mark or
St Luke : as, for example, M. xix. 14 twv ydp roioyrwv iarlv r)
fiaaiXeia rtov ovpav&v (rov ©eov, Mk x. 14) ; or M. xi. 1 1 o Be
fiiKporepos iv rfj fiaaiXeia, rwv ovpavwv (rov ®eov, L. vii. 28)
fiei^mv avrov ianv. St Matthew has preserved, in this as in
other cases, the original form of phrase as it would naturally be
used in addressing a Jewish audience.
(3) It has often been pointed out that in the Beatitudes our
Lord draws largely upon the spiritual teaching of the Psalmists
and the Prophets. Close parallels may be noticed ; and in one
case there is a direct quotation2. Up to a certain point this
is true. For all Christ's teaching was based upon the Old
Testament Scriptures. And in addressing a typically Jewish
gathering, almost at the outset of His ministry, when the chief
matter in hand was the relation of the new scheme to the Old
Covenant, it is only to be expected that He would intentionally
build the new upon the old. He took men up where they were,
and led them on to fuller truth. But if by this comparison of
the Old Testament with the Beatitudes it is intended to be
implied that there is nothing new in the latter, that would be a
serious misrepresentation of the actual facts. Various separate
phrases and ideas may be illustrated by similar statements in the
Old Testament ; but the collocation of the whole in quite a
different setting results in an entirely new conspectus of the
higher life. Isolated fragments of ethical teaching are drawn
together ; and the familiar words or maxims are freely utilised :
but the result is the presentation of a new standard of the
service of God. The very passages which are adduced in
1 Especially with the plural, tuv obpavwv. a v. 5.

ST MATT. V. 3 49
comparison from the Old Testament really furnish no more than
a general and somewhat vague apprehension of the principles
which our Lord was the first to proclaim as the all-important
behests of the Covenant. So He led His hearers on from the
known to the unknown, from the old to the new. He took the
teaching of their own sacred books, and transfigured it ; until it
holds up for all time an unimagined ideal of the true attitude of
men alike towards God and to their fellow men.
The whole position stands out in clearer and clearer light as
the Beatitudes are examined in detail : — the constant background
of Old Testament revelation ; and the emphasis laid on its more
distinctively ethical features : the transformation of materialistic
hopes into spiritual realities ; and the development of the whole
scheme into a new code of faith and conduct.
i. Blessed are the poor in spirit : for theirs is the Kingdom of
heaven. In the Old Testament the title ' poor ' in a large class
of passages, especially where it stands as a translation of *i?,
has practically a technical signification. It conveys no notion,
except incidentally, of literal poverty; but denotes the
oppressed, — those who suffer wrong and privation under
political or social tyranny. In fact 'J? does not strictly mean
'poor' in the sense of 'impoverished1'; but rather 'afflicted,'
' depressed,' and so ' humbled ' : that is, ' poor ' as implying
a general suggestion of commiseration. Now social sufferers of
this kind were regarded as being under the special tutelage of
God, Who is the Champion and Deliverer of all victims of
injustice. The word thus became in effect almost a synonym
for the oppressed righteous ; and this special meaning came
particularly into vogue after the bitter experiences of the
Captivity. A few instances of its use will readily recall the Old
Testament associations of the word : — " LORD, who is like unto
thee, which deliverest the poor from him that is too strong for
him, yea, the poor and the needy from him that spoileth him."
" I know that the LORD will maintain the cause of the afflicted,
1 It is never used (like BH) as the antithesis of "W1J, 'rich.' (See Hast. iv. 19 b.)
S. 4

50 THE BEATITUDES
and the right of the needy." " What then shall one answer the
messengers of the nation ? That the LORD hath founded Zion,
and in her shall the afflicted of his people take refuge." " But I
will leave in the midst of thee an afflicted and poor people, and
they shall trust in the name of the LORD1." In the Septuagint
version '?? is most commonly translated by irra>x6s2, which thus
became itself imbued in Biblical Greek with the same tinge of
meaning as the Hebrew word ; and this it retains in those later
writings which borrow their phraseology largely from the Old
Testament Scriptures. In the Psalms of Solomon, for instance,
irrcoxos is used exactly as in the canonical Psalms : — " Because
thou art good and merciful, a refuge of the poor." " And God
will show mercy to the poor in the gladness of Israel8."
To Jews, conversant with their scriptures, there could be no
mistake about the sense in which the word was used in the
opening sentence of the Sermon on the Mount : even in a Greek
report of the original Aramaic. It would be recognised at once
as bearing its secondary and quasi-technical meaning. But this
is placed beyond all question by the addition of rm irvevfian,
which obviously represents O-l"). In the Old Testament 0-1">
serves to stamp the description given of any one as revealing his
inner character. It goes beneath the outward appearance to the
actuating principle of a man's life. It is used of the lowly (in
spirit), the jjroud, the patient, the afflicted, the contrite, etc.
The phrase ot irrm^ol to irvevfian therefore is the equivalent of
0-n \*3H : and it is probably a reminiscence of, or a direct
allusion to, Is. lxvi. 2, " To this man will I look, even to him that
is poor and of a contrite spirit4." Regarded merely as a Greek
expression, without reference to an Aramaic background, this
phrase would present, to say the least, an extremely strange
1 Ps. xxxv. io ; cxi. 12 ; Is. xiv. 32 ; Zeph. iii. 12.
2 The word occurs 72 times in ,the O.T. (29 in Pss., and 10 in Is.). It is
translated in the LXX by irroxbs in 38 instances (also raireivbs, 9, irivys, 12). From
the LXX were derived the renderings of the Vulgate, 'pauper,' 'egenus,' 'inops';
and so the English 'poor.'
8 v. 2 ; x. 7. Cp. also v. 13 ; xv. 2 ; xviii. 3. In Ecclus. vrurxbs is used only in
the ordinary Greek sense, as the antithesis of irXobaios : as also Tob. iv. 7 ; Ep.
Jer. 28.
4 ffn-naji yy?$. cP. also is. ivii. i5.

ST MATT. V. 3 51
idiom1 : but taken as a translation of the original which lies
behind it, it bears a perfectly natural explanation. And its
form is in exact accord with a similar diction in the Septuagint
rendering of Ps. xxxiv. 18, Kal roiis raireivovs rw irvevfian
adaei". It is only by ignoring the relation of the Greek to the
Aramaic original which it represents that it is possible to arrive
at the not uncommon patristic and medieval interpretation of
this Beatitude, as inculcating voluntary poverty'. This involves
a misunderstanding alike of vraxos and of irvevfia. It treats
irreoj/6s as used in an economic sense of the literally poverty-
stricken, after the analogy of ordinary Greek : and it applies a
strained exposition to irvevfia*.
No doubt the Beatitude, even if transmitted in the simple
form fiaKapiot ol irTa>%oi, would still be recognised instinctively
by Jewish disciples as carrying the special associations of irrooxos
in the Psalms and the Prophets. But to Gentiles, who had not
been brought up on the Old Testament Scriptures, it would be
ambiguous ; and might easily be thought, as it stood, to refer to
actual poverty. And in this sense possibly, though by no
means certainly6, St Luke understood the report of the saying
which he had received.
1 The dative of course may be illustrated from other passages in the N.T. ; e.g.
I Cor. xiv. 20 py iraiSla ylveoBe tois ippeolv, o\\4 tjj xaxla vyiridtert, rats Si tppeolvl
riXaoi ylveoBe. Cp. below, ver. 8 oi xaBapol ry xapSla.
' ww pn-»K?TnK].
8 e.g. Chromatius : " Beata ergo paupertas est spiritualis : eorum scilicet hominum
qui spiritu et voluntate pauperes se faciunt propter Deum, renuntiando saeculi bonis,
substantiam suam ultro erogando." Sermo, § 2. And again : " Hos utique pauperes
signifi cat esse beatos, qui contemptis mundi divitiis, spretaque saeculi facultate, ut Deo
fierent divites mundo esse pauperes voluerunt." Tract, in Matt. iii. 2. Bernard :
" Pauperes ait spiritu, id est spirituali voluntate, spirituali intentione, desiderio
spirituali, propter solum beneplacitum Dei et salutem animarum." Serm. I infest.
omn. sanctorum. Augustine however interprets the Beatitude : " quapropter recto hic
intelliguntur pauperes spiritu humiles et timentes Deum, id est non habentes innantem
spiritum. " De Serm. Dom. in M. i. i .
4 Jerome seems to have been conscious of this, to judge from his 'conflate'
interpretation, both of the Spirit and of voluntary action : " Beati pauperes spiritu qui
propter Spiritum Sanctum voluntarie sunt pauperes."
6 For oi ifkoioioi in his Woe may be intended to be taken metaphorically, in the
O.T. sense, as representing the prosperous men of the world, the types of impiety.
Cp. Is. liii. 9, where *PtyV is used in parallelism with ytfH. Cp. also Job xxvii. ig
with ver. 13.
4—2

52 THE BEATITUDES
It is noticeable that in the two other Beatitudes in which
confusion as to the real reference might similarly arise, a
qualifying phrase is also added, like to irvevfian in this case, so
as to place the true spiritual signification beyond doubt. These
are the additions of ttjv BiKatoavvrjv in the fourth, and rfj
KapBiq. in the sixth.
To the ' poor,' then, in the Old Testament sense, — that is, to
the oppressed and despised servants of God, — whose condition
is not accidental, but betokens a character that is unworldly, is
given the premier promise of " the Kingdom of heaven."
ii. Blessed are they that mourn : for they shall be comforted.
In this Beatitude there is most probably an allusion to the
great promise of Is. lxi. 2, 3 ; " He hath sent me... to comfort all
that mourn1; to appoint unto them that mourn in Zion, to give
unto them a garland for ashes, the oil of joy for mourning, the
garment of praise for the spirit of heaviness." That promise
forms part of the summary of his promise of redemption given
by the prophet. It was the preceding context of this same
passage which our Lord expounded, and applied to His own
work, in the synagogue at Nazareth2, on the occasion of His
first return there after the opening of His public ministry.
And it so exactly foreshadows the spirit of the New Covenant,
that it formed a natural starting-point for the declaration of the
Gospel. In the prophecy the mourners are more particularly
those who grieved over the national degradation3: and that no
doubt the original hearers would understand to be the intended
reference of this Beatitude. Their thoughts were still moving
within the range of the national hope : and, strange as the
selection of the promise might seem to them, when it was set
before them they could only interpret it in this light. And this
is in fact the real meaning of the saying, though in an extended
and spiritualised sense.
Our Lord, it is true, did bring comfort for ' mourners ' in the
English sense of the word, as used especially of those who
1 LXX irapaxaktaai irdvras robs irevBovvras. 2 L. iv. 17 — 21.
8 "The D^IX are the |Vy ^38, those who have Zion's decay at heart."
Delitzsch.

ST MATT. V. 3 — 4 53
sorrow over bereavement by death1. But they are not in view
here. The time had not yet come for that special manifestation
of His sympathy and care. Nor indeed does the word irevOelv
in the New Testament carry the same restricted meaning as
attaches to ' mourning ' in English ; especially when it is used
alone, without the addition of KXaieiv\ But in accordance with
the later teaching of the Old Testament, the reference is to
those who ' mourn ' over the breach of the Covenant.
The words of Psalm cxxvi. 5, 6 : " They that sow in tears
shall reap in joy, etc." : which are frequently quoted in
illustration, and even as partly forming the basis, of this saying
of our Lord, allude also, as their context shows (" turn our
captivity, O Lord"), to those who were grieving over the
miserable condition of their nation. This representation of
national mourners comes out forcibly in Is. lxvi. io : " Rejoice
ye with Jerusalem, and be glad for her, all ye that love her ;
rejoice for joy with her, all ye that mourn over her... that
ye may be delighted with the abundance of her glory." And
these words of the prophet are adopted in Tobit3, and thrown
into the form of Beatitudes: "O blessed are they which
love thee [Jerusalem] ; they shall rejoice over thy peace.
Blessed are as many as were grieved over all thy plagues ; for
they shall rejoice over thee when they see all thy glory, and
shall be gladdened for ever." It is the teaching of such
passages as these which furnishes the clue to the real meaning of
our Lord's benediction of the ' mourners.'
And yet the reference of the Beatitude is wider than merely
to a wounded patriotism. It goes deeper than that; and
includes all sorrow over the thwarting of God's purpose. It is
spiritual, not political, in tone ; as are all the rest of the
Beatitudes. Still it has a public rather than an individualistic
bearing. It speaks of sorrow for the community, and not of
private and personal grief. And so the promise that such
mourners " shall be comforted " conveys implicitly the assurance
1 Cp. Mk v. 35 — 42 ; L. vii. n — 15 ; J. xi. 1 — 44.
2 vevBeiv is joined with xkaleiv, [Mk] xvi. 10 ; L. vi. 25 ; Jas. iv. 9 ; Rev. xviii.
15, 19. Contrast the use of \vireia9ai, 1 Thess. iv. 13.
3 xiii. 14.

54 THE BEATITUDES
of the establishment on its true lines of the longed-for Kingdom
of God. The second Blessing stands in close parallelism to the first ;
and yet carries the position forward : from those who are
oppressed as the servants of God to those whose hearts are
wrung by that oppression, and who in patient faith look for the
promised consolation.
The transposition of the second and the third Beatitudes in
the Syro- Latin (or so-called 'Western') texts1, and by several
Fathers2, is probably due to a supposed closer parallelism
between the ' poor ' (D"^:) and the ' meek ' (Q,l?2:), than between
the ' poor ' and the ' mourners.'
iii. Blessed are the meek : for they shall inherit the earth.
This is a direct quotation from Ps. xxxvii. n, — "the meek
shall inherit the land (or, the earth)2," — only adapted to the form
of the Beatitude : and it corresponds verbally with the rendering
of the Septuagint, ot irpaets KXrjpovofirjaovai yrjv. The promise
in fact recalls the whole of that Psalm ; for the assurance of the
inheritance of the land (or (?) the earth) is a refrain which runs
through it from beginning to end. It is proclaimed for those
that wait upon the LORD (9, 34), and trust in Him and do good
(3), them that are blessed of Him (22), the righteous (29), and
the meek (11): that is, for God's loyal servants in general,
described under the various aspects of their character ; not for
different classes or sections of His people : just as the Beatitudes
themselves set forth the several characteristics of the members
of the Kingdom in general, rather than separate personalities.
In the original instance, of course, the phrase alluded
specially to the actual possession of the promised land4 It may
have implicitly carried with it the suggestion of a wider
' inheritance ' ; but this is in no way definitely expressed. And
1 D 33 Latt. (exc. b f) Vulg. Syr-Cu.
2 Clem. Al. {Strom, iv. p. 356) ; Orig. (on M. xxi. 3) ; Eus. {Canons) ; Jer. (on
M. v. 4, and on Is. lxi.) j Chrom. {Sermo) ; Aug. {De Serm. D. in M.) ; Ambr. (on
L. vi. 10) ; etc.
3 yns-iBn" D^3I!.
* Cp. Westcott's Additional note on Heb. vi. 12 : "The Biblical idea of 'in-
ritance' (xXypovopia)."

ST MATT. V. 4 — 5 55
this is also the case in the echoes of this promise which occur in
the Prophets and in the later Jewish literature: such as, Is. lx. 21,
"Thy people also shall be all righteous; they shall inherit the
land for ever1" ; or Enoch v. 7, " And for the elect there shall be
light, and grace, and peace ; and they shall inherit the land ; but
for you the ungodly there shall be a curse2." There is nothing
in such statements as these to extend the prospect necessarily
beyond its literal reference to the promised land.
But when the promise is taken over by our Lord into the
series of His Beatitudes, its complexion is changed. The very
form of the Beatitude lays the main stress on the character
of those who shall reap the promise of God : the meek
(Q,J$8), that is the humble in disposition rather than the humbled
(D"^:) by force of circumstances8, — those who are humble
towards God. Theirs is in truth the inheritance4 of real and
lasting power in the land. And the fact that the promise is
ascribed to them of itself removes the conception out of the
sphere of political domination into that of moral influence. So
this promise falls into line with the rest of the promises which
are attached to the other benedictions. It adopts a cherished
aspiration of the Jews, and reaffirms it ; but at the same time it
widens and spiritualises the hope. It has nothing to offer for a
scheme of national aggrandisement : but it holds up a vision of
the true controlling force of the Kingdom of God. It gives
a new and deeper interpretation of the Old Testament
Scriptures. Both the connexion of this Beatitude with the source (or
sources) from which it is borrowed, and the meaning which it
certainly must have conveyed to those to whom it was addressed
in the first instance, would be better brought out by translating
rr)v yrjv " the land " instead of " the earth." At the time of the

1 JHK '.B'T* DVllr? : LXX Si aluvos xkypovop-fiaovai ryv •yiji'.
2 xal rois ixkexrdls tarw. <pws xal x^P" *<•' e'/>15','7, Kal abrol xXypovopyo-ovoiv tt)k
Y^k • ipiv Se rois doepMoiv tarai xardpa. Cp. Kiddushin, i. io " Whosoever fulfils
but one law, good is appointed unto him, his days are prolonged, and he shall inherit
the land."
8 See Driver, in Hast. D.B. iv. 20 ; § 8.
4 Cp. Eph. i. 14, 18 ; Heb. vi. 12 ; Jas. ii. 5.

56 THE BEATITUDES
delivery of the Sermon on the Mount the catholic ideal of the
Kingdom of God was not yet the theme of our Lord's public
teaching. It was no doubt involved in all that He taught (and
so far " the earth " is not an inappropriate rendering here) ;
but He was moving strictly within the range of the Old
Covenant throughout this discourse : and the outlook of that
Covenant did not pass beyond a localised establishment of the
Theocracy in the special land of promise. On that was centred
the earnest expectation of the Jews. And the Beatitude
corrects this ideal by showing that its realisation depends on
moral influence, and not on material force; and that it has a
spiritual reference. But it does not at present go further than
that. So the description progresses, from the oppressed saints to
the mourners who grieve over the apparent frustration of God's
purpose ; and again from these mourners to the meek, whose
disposition is humble towards God. Then it moves on again to
the eager aspirants after righteousness.
i v. Blessed are they that hunger and thirst after righteousness :
for they shall be filled.
Here, as in the first Beatitude, a qualification — rr)v BiKaio-
avvrjv1 — is added, to make it clear that the reference is not
to a literal and physical want, not to ordinary hunger and thirst,
but to a deeper craving which is symbolised by the expression.
This is a natural metaphor, which is found in all languages2.
But in the Old Testament it is applied especially to spiritual
yearning towards God Himself : — " My soul thirsteth for God,
for the living God." " My soul thirsteth for thee, my flesh
longeth for thee " : — or for His grace : — " For he satisfieth the
1 For the ace. cp. Jos. B.J. I. xxxii. -i SmtpeM-erai Se obSels Sufrfo-as rb ipiv alpa.
Anthol. Planud. IV. exxxvii. 3 alel ydp Sii//q.s Ppetpiwv tpbvov.
2 Cp. e.g. Xen. Oecon. xiii. 9 oi Se ipikbnpoi r&v tpboew xal rip iiralvif irapo£b-
vovrai ' ireivwcri yap rov iiralvov ovx yrrov £vhu ruv tpboetav y aWai riijv olritiv re xal
totwv. Plat. Rep. viii. p. 562 c orav, dtpai, Sypoxparovpivy iroXis i\ev9eplas
Si\j/yoaoa xaxuv olvoxbuv irpooTaroivTinv r&xy, xr\. Cic. de Sen. 26 Graecas literas
senex didici ; quas quidem sic avide arripui, quasi diuturnam sitim explere cupiens, ut
ea ipsa mihi nota essent quibus me nunc exemplis uti videtis. Flor. iii. 21 inexple-
bilis honorum Marii fames. Hor. Epp. 1. xviii. 23 quem tenet argenti sitis importuna
famesque.

ST MATT. V. 5 — 6 57
longing soul, and the hungry soul he filleth with good." " Ho,
every one that thirsteth, come ye to the waters, and he that hath
no money : come ye, buy and eat : yea, come, buy wine and
milk without money and without price. Wherefore do ye spend
money for that which is not bread ? and your labour for that
which satisfieth not ? Hearken diligently unto me, and eat ye
that which is good, and let your soul delight itself in fatness 1."
In Ecclesiasticus the same metaphor is used of the pursuit of
Wisdom : — " They that eat me shall yet be hungry, and they
that drink me shall yet be thirsty." " Draw near unto me, ye
unlearned, and dwell in the house of learning. Wherefore are
ye slow in these things, seeing your souls are very thirsty2 ? "
On the analogy then of these familiar sayings the words of
this Beatitude spoke to the Jews of a spiritual longing, not of a
physical destitution. And that longing is defined as being bent
upon 'righteousness.' There can be little doubt as to the
nature of the righteousness intended. Taken by itself this
saying might be thought to point to the righteousness of God,
which is a frequent theme in the Psalms and in Isaiah8, and so
to a gift received from Him4. Moreover the promise, "they shall
be filled," seems to support this interpretation. For that can
only refer to a gift imparted by God. But the recurrence of the
term ' righteousness ' in the last Beatitude, and again more than
once later on in the Sermon6, fixes the meaning of the word
here, as used in the same sense, — that of religious service.
And this is the sense in which it would naturally be understood
by the hearers. For it was virtually a technical phrase for
Pharisaic strictness of outward observance of stated duties6.
The strange feature to them would be that it was riot enjoined
as a rigid obligation, but set before them as a spiritual aspiration,
which was capable of being satisfied, and so of receiving the
1 Ps. xiii. 2 ; lxiii. i ; cvii. 9; Is. lv. 1, 2.
2 xxiv. 21 ; li. 23, 24.
8 See Ps. v. 8 ; xxxvi. 10 ; lxxi. 15 ; xcviii. 2 ; cxliii. 1 ; Is. xiv. 23 — 25 ; xlvi. 13;
li. 5, 6 ; lvi. 1. Cp. Rom. iii. 21 Sutaioobvy Qeov...paprvpovp£vy bwb rov vbpov xal
rwv irpotpyTuiv.
4 Cp. Ps. xxiv. 5; Is. liv. 17. Cp. also Rom. iii. 26; and Phil. iii. 9 py tyuv ipT)v
Sixaioovvyv ttjv ix vbpov, dWd ryv Sid Trlareias XpioroC, ripi ix GeoC Sixaioovvyv iirl ry
irlorei. 6 v. 20; vi. 1 ; vi. 33. 6 See above, p. 32, n. 1.

58 THE BEATITUDES
promise that they who are eager for it " shall be filled1." At the
moment this aspect of righteousness must have been beyond
their comprehension. But at a later stage the Lord returned to
the subject, and explained in detail what He intended to be
understood as the true principle of righteousness (ch. vi.).
A certain parallelism may be traced in the first four
Beatitudes as governing the sequence in which they are
arranged. They fall into two pairs ; in each of which a passive
virtue is placed first, and then with it is associated its correlative
virtue of active expression. The oppressed saints, who are
unworldly in spirit, mourn over the evil plight of God's people :
and meekness, or humility, marks an inward disposition, which
manifests its devotion in an eager yearning for righteousness.
v. Blessed are the merciful : for they shall obtain mercy.
The first four Beatitudes may be said to constitute the first
table of the new Law of religious life ; for they deal with the
attitude of men towards God. The remaining four similarly
form the second table. They are concerned with the relations
of men as members of human society.
And in this category the premier position is assigned to the
practice of Mercy. It was no new thing to Jews that this should
be pressed upon them. It was urged by the Prophets as a
leading claim of God upon His people : " He hath shewed thee,
O man, what is good ; and what doth the LORD require of thee,
but to do justly, and to love mercy, and to walk humbly with
thy God ? " " Thus hath the LORD of hosts spoken, saying,
Execute true judgment, and shew mercy and compassion every
man to his brother2." Moreover it is inculcated in the maxims
of the Rabbinic teachers ; and that too in a form which offers a
singular correspondence with these words of our Lord : for
there also it is taught that God's mercy is accorded to those
only who on their part manifest a merciful spirit towards their
fellow men8 : " Whosoever is merciful to men, to him also is
1 For x°l"'ao9^<rovTat cp. LXX Ps. evi. (cvii.) 9 Sn ixbpraoe ifivxyv xevyv, xal
ireiv&o-av eviirkyaev dya9wv. Lam. iii. 15 ixbpraai pe irtxplas, ipi9voi pe xoMjs- ni.
29 xopraoBi)(xeTai dveiSio-pdv.
2 Mic. vi. 8 ; Zech. vii. 9.
3 Cp. Test. XII Patr., Zab. viii. 1, 3 xal ipets oSv, rixva pov, txeTe eboirkayxvlav

ST MATT. V. 6 — 8 59
mercy extended from heaven. But he who shews no mercy to
men, neither does heaven shew it to him1." " Be ye full of mercy
one toward the other, and God will be full of mercy toward you2."
And yet mercy was never much affected or honoured in the
popular estimation. It did not appeal to the Jews as the
particular type of virility which they looked for in the promoters
and supporters of the Kingdom of God, as they understood it.
And therefore the special stress laid upon it by our Lord, in
placing it in the forefront of the duty of the members of the
Kingdom toward their neighbours, was a corrective of the current
standard of conduct.
The reciprocity of God's mercy to the merciful is parallel to
the pledge (and limitation) of His forgiveness to the forgiving
(vi. 14, 15). Indeed J:he same note is repeated more than once
in the later sections of the Sermon.
vi. Blessed are the pure in heart: for they shall see God.
As in the first and fourth Beatitudes, the real reference of
the description is defined by an added qualification : — the pure
in heart. The phrase is taken from the Psalms : " Who shall
ascend into the hill of the Lord ? And who shall stand in his holy
place ? He that is clean of hands and pure of heart3." " Surely
God is good to Israel, (even) to such as are pure of heart4." In
this later passage the pure in heart are paralleled with Israel, as
a descriptive synonym of the covenant people, viewed in the
ideal of loyalty to God. And in the other Psalm also the
expression occurs practically in the same collocation. For it is
used of the true worshipper who may rightly come before God in
His sanctuary. But in each case the ground of acceptance is
moral purity ; not mere privilege, or ceremonial purification.
This is expressly declared by the addition of 3??., 'in heart.'
And in this sense our Lord quoted, and adopted, the phrase, to
describe the true members of the Kingdom to whom is accorded
the most intimate approach to the presence of God. It is
xard iravrbs dvBpiiirov iv i\tei, tva xal 0 Ktipios els vpas airkayxvioBels {Xerjay bpds...
Saov ydp &v9punros o-irkayxvlJieTai els rbv irkyolov, rooovrov Kvpios els abrbv.
1 Shabbath, f. 151, 2. 2 Bereshith Rabba (Midr. on Gen.) xxxiii. 4.
3 3j?"13 , LXX xaBapbs tjj xapSla. Ps. xxiv. 4.
4 231? na!?, LXX tois ebBioi xapSla. Ps. lxxiii. 1.

60 THE BEATITUDES
another instance of the way in which He drew from the Old
Testament Scriptures teaching which was commonly ignored,
and made it the foundation of His Gospel of the Kingdom.
The Jews were familiar with this doctrine in the Psalms : it was
there constantly before them : but they treated it as though it
were hardly more than a poetical idealism. But Christ placed it
in a position of primary, and practical, importance.
And it was necessary that the moral significance of the
precept (for a precept it is by implication) should be put beyond
doubt by thus adding rfj KapBia, to Kadapol. Without that,
a benediction of the KaOapol simply, might, and not improbably
would, have been misunderstood as a statement irepl KaOapia/iov1,
that is about ceremonial purity. For that was perhaps the most
characteristic of all the Pharisaic specialities2, and therefore was
necessarily much in men's minds. But any such externalism
was far from being in view here. The whole teaching of the
Beatitudes was directed to the deeper matters of moral
disposition. And to this particular question of inward purity
our Lord returned again in His treatment of the Law, when He
gave a definite illustration of what is involved in His claim on
the principle of true purity of heart3-
The turn of the special promise attached to this Beatitude, —
" they shall see God," — may have been originally derived from
the Old Testament expression, " to see the face of the king4 " ;
which is applied to the most highly privileged and trusted
servants of an earthly king : as in II K. xxv. 19, " Five men of
them that saw the king's face"; Jer. Iii. 25, "Seven men of
them that saw the king's face " ; Esth. i. 14, " The seven princes of
Persia and Media, which saw the king's face, and sat first in the
kingdom." For in Ps. xvii. 15a similar formula is employed to
describe the relation to God of His afflicted, yet trusting,
servant, — "As for me, let me behold thy face6 in righteousness," —
as implying free access to, and communion with, Him. And
this is the meaning here. For though St John, two generations
1 J. iii. 25. 2 Cp. Mk vii. 1—8, 14—23.
3 v. 27, 28. Cp. M. xv. 11, 19, 20.
4 "ii^Brj-'SB nso.
6 The verb here is not ntTI but Htn (*pJB ntrjS plX3 *3S$). But 'B HNT is
used of coming into the presence of God in Job xxxiii. 26, 1 S. i. 22.

ST MATT. V. 8 — 9 61
later, applied the term to the ' beatific vision ' of the life to come :
" The throne of God and of the Lamb shall be therein ; and his
servants shall do him service ; and they shall see his face 1 " : —
that ultimate prospect cannot be intended in this case ; but the
promise evidently must point to a spiritual blessing to be
attained under present conditions. For all the other promises of
the Beatitudes are concerned with the position of the faithful in
this life, in the Kingdom of God on earth.
Whatever may have been the original source of the
expression used, the sense of the promise clearly is that the
pure in heart shall be blessed by the closest intercourse with,
and knowledge of, God. But the simple form in which it is
stated, — " shall see God," instead of in the fuller phrase, " shall
see the face of God," — would seem to suggest that there is
a direct allusion to the vision of Isaiah ; especially when it is
associated with purity of heart : " Then said I, Woe is me ! for I
am undone ; because I am a man of unclean lips... for mine eyes
have seen the King, the LORD of hosts2."
vii. Blessed are the peacemakers : for they shall be called sons
of God. The subject of this Beatitude comes nearer perhaps than that
of any other to the traditional teaching of the Rabbis. For the
promotion of neighbourly peace was a precept which held
a somewhat prominent place amongst the maxims of the
Rabbinic Schools. It is recorded of Hillel, for instance, that
he used to teach his disciples : " Be of the disciples of Aaron ;
loving peace, and pursuing peace ; loving mankind, and bringing
them nigh to the Thorah3." In the Talmud " ' making peace
between neighbours' is numbered among those things which
bring forth good fruit in this life, and benefit in the life to
come4." And a formula of prayer is given : " May it be thy
pleasure, O Lord our God, to make peace in the family above,
1 Rev. xxii. 4 dyj/ovrai rb irpbatoirov dbrov. Cp. 1 J. iii. 3 b^j/bpeBa abrbv
xaBiis ionv.
2 Is. vi. 5.
3 Pirke Aboth, i. 13. Cp. the saying of Rabban Shimeon ben Gamliel, "On
three things the world stands: on Judgment, and on Truth, and on Peace." ibid. i. 19.
4 J. Lightfoot, from Pea, i. 1.

62 THE BEATITUDES
and in the family below1." It was therefore in accordance with
the best traditions of the recognised religious leaders of the
nation when the new Teacher laid emphasis on peacemaking as
a standard requirement for the members of the Kingdom. At
last, it seemed, He had come on to familiar ground. At last
He had ranged Himself with the regular Professors of Ethics.
And yet it was not so much from them that He drew His
doctrine, as, once more, from the Old Testament. For there
this obligation is clearly expressed : — " Seek peace, and pursue
it." " To the counsellors of peace there is joy " : and especially,
" These are the things that ye shall do ; speak ye every man the
truth with his neighbour ; judge truth and the judgment of
peace in your gates ; and let none of you imagine evil in your
hearts against his neighbour... therefore love truth and peace2."
It is difficult to decide with any certainty what the original
expression was, which is represented by St Matthew's
elprivoiroioL It may have been simply some such phrase as
D'W '<W1>'. if this could be known it would make the meaning
of the saying clear. The rather rare Greek word is used else
where, at any rate in Classical Greek, in a special sense, to denote
national peace commissioners4. But the meaning here manifestly
cannot be restricted to this particular aspect of peacemaking.
Nor is this signification apparently attached to the term in
Hellenistic Greek. For the verb elpr/voiroieiv occurs both in
the Septuagint6 and in the New Testament6 in quite a general
sense. At the same time it is probable enough that the
impression might be formed in the minds of those who heard
1 Berachoth, 16 b. Cp. also the Midrash (on Numbers) Bamidbar Rabba, 19,
where the injunction is given to " seek peace at home and pursue it abroad " : and the
saying is quoted, "No vessel but peace can hold blessing."
2 Ps. xxxiv. 14 ; Prov. xii. 20 ; Zech. viii. 16, 17, 19.
3 Delitzsch in his Hebrew N.T. renders it by Di?K> *BYT. Cp. Ps. xxxiv. 15
WBTJI Di!?E> £>j53; and Pirke Aboth i. 13, D^>B> CplTI Dl"?B> 3m«.
4 Cp. Xen. Hell. VI. iii. 4 ixelvy [y 7n5Xts] pev ydp orav irbkepos y o-rparyyovs ypds
aipe'nai- orav Si yavxlas iiriBvpyo-y elpyvoiroioiis ypds ixiripvei. Plut., Moral, ii.
279 B, uses this word of the Roman ' Fetiales.'
6 Cp. the LXX version of Prov. x. 10 b (which agrees with the Syriac) 0 Si
ikiyx<ov perd vafyyolas elpyvoiroiel.
6 Col. i. 20 elpyvoiroiyaas Sia tou atparos tov oravpov.

ST MATT. V. 9 63
this saying spoken, that our Lord was referring to the national
attitude of the Jews ; especially when it was immediately followed
by another dealing with the right bearing towards persecutors ;
by whom they would understand the oppressors of their nation.
Moreover the state of popular feeling at the time was such as to
turn men's thoughts naturally in this direction when any
allusion was made to the cultivation of peace. And the state
ment did not altogether ignore this side of the question. It did
run directly counter to the spirit of wild turbulence which was
abroad among the people. Christ was " for peace ; but when He
spake thereof they were for war1." But obviously the full
reference is to those who are actively peaceable in every relation
in their contact with others ; both publicly, and personally ;
both as members of the community, and as individuals. And
this was subsequently made plain in the course of the Sermon
itself, when this principle was again taken up and expounded
more at length2.
The meaning of the promise, " they shall be called8 sons of
God," is that to them shall be specially assigned under the New
Covenant the " adoption " (r) vlodeaia, Rom. ix. 4), which under
the Old Covenant was regarded as the peculiar prerogative of
Israel. " Thus saith the LORD, Israel is my son, my firstborn."
" Ye are the sons of the LORD your God... For thou art an holy
people unto the Lord thy God, and the Lord hath chosen
thee to be a peculiar people unto himself, out of all peoples that
are upon the face of the earth." " It shall be said unto them,
Ye are the sons of the living God4." And in this case the
expression has a peculiarly appropriate force as applied to
peacemakers. For ' Peace ' was one of the titles which were
employed by the Jews as substitutes for the Name of God. He
is spoken of in the Talmud as 'Peace6'; and therefore peace
makers are in a special sense His ' sons.'
1 Ps. cxx. 7. 2 v. 43 ff.
8 xky0yoovrai = >ltC$:\, as frequently in Is., e.g. i. 26; xxxv. 8 ; lvi. 7 ; lviii. 12 ;
lxi. 3. * Exod. iv. 22 ; Deut. xiv. 1, 2; Hos. i. 10.
6 "Peace is a Talmudic Name of God." Taylor, on Pirke Aboth i. 19. Levy
quotes Levit. Rob. §. 9, 153 a b D^E> CN1H 1113 BTlpri] "H3pn *}& 1DB>B> &bw bill :
"Gross ist der Friede denn der Name Gottes ist Friede." In an ancient prayer, which

64 THE BEATITUDES
viii. Blessed are they that have been persecuted for
righteousness' sake : for theirs is the Kingdom of Heaven.
The last Beatitude returns to the standpoint of the first, in
that it is a benediction of the oppressed righteous : but it goes
beyond it in its more emphatic commendation of the actual
endurance of persecution " for righteousness' sake." Though it
contains no direct quotation from the Old Testament it may be
said to gather up into one terse summary, as the very climax of
the whole series of the Beatitudes, the Prophet's picture of the
Suffering Servant of the Lord. The consecration of willing
sacrificial suffering there depicted ; the certain spiritual victory
of the victim of secular hatred and wrong; and the glorious
retribution of redemption, which outweighs all the shame of
rejection by the world ; — these constitute the deepest insight
into the mystery of suffering and injustice, which was ever
attained under the Old Covenant, and give the most graphic
description of persecution for righteousness' sake. " Hearken
unto me ye that know righteousness, the people in whose heart
is my law ; fear ye not the reproach of men, neither be ye
dismayed at their revilings.... I, even I, am he that comforteth
you1." Or again, of the representative Sufferer : " He was
despised, and rejected of men ; a man of sorrows, and
acquainted with grief... Surely he hath borne our griefs, and
carried our sorrows... He shall see of the travail of his soul, and
shall be satisfied2." It is a vision, not merely of deliverance
from rebuke, but of triumph through it. And now the mystery
of the Old Covenant is revealed as the Beatitude of the New.
But it was not an easy doctrine to grasp, or to accept forth
with. There is probably no point in the whole Sermon in respect
of which it is more difficult than it is with this to abstract the
mind entirely from the familiar associations of our Lord's later
teaching, and from the example of His own life ; and to realise
the effect which the words would produce on those who first
heard them. To us, who know the sequel, they simply strike
ushers in the sabbath on Friday evening, God is addressed as Di^tt' J11N. In Islam
one of the ninety-nine names of God is "as-Salam."
1 Is. li. 7, 12. 2 Is. liii. 3, 4, 11.

ST MATT. V. 10 65
the opening note of a refrain which runs through all the story of
His ministry. To them they must have been as disconcerting
as they were unexpected. Here were passionate spirits waiting
for some pledge of the fulfilment of God's promises to their
nation, as they understood them, in the assurance of an in
vincible supremacy over their enemies : instead of which they
had received a counsel of peacemaking. That to some extent
they could understand : for other teachers had urged it, at any
rate as between fellow members of the Covenant. But this final
declaration went further than that. For it put before them
persecution for their faith as a direct blessing, and as an actual
token of their possession of the Kingdom. The promise held
out no hope of any future readjustment of power : it spoke of a
present realisation under the existing circumstances. A genera
tion later it was quite natural that one who had himself heard
this message given, should as a Christian teacher, now looking
back across the years to his Lord's Passion, re-echo this
Beatitude : " If ye should suffer for righteousness' sake, blessed
are ye"..." If ye are reproached for the name of Christ, blessed
are ye1." But at the time of its original utterance, it could
scarcely be other than a dark enigma.
It was " a hard saying 2" : and therefore it is followed up
immediately by what is practically a restatement of the same
Beatitude in an expanded form (verses n, 12), which repeats
with clearer emphasis the two remarkable propositions that
persecution brings blessing, and that the recompense lies not in
retaliation but in the spiritual ' reward in heaven.'
It may be that this secondary Beatitude was really spoken
by our Lord on a later occasion to the Twelve ; and that it is
incorporated here by St Matthew as an illustration, or interpre
tation, of the difficult teaching of the last Beatitude of the
Sermon on the Mount. Elsewhere undoubtedly, as it seems, he
follows this plan of grouping together into one record sayings
which were spoken at different times, so as to make the doctrine
stand out the more clearly3. And there are some features in
1 I Pet. iii. 14 ; iv. 14.
8 Cp. J. vi. 60 oxkypbs ianv b Xbyos ovros- rls Sivn-rai avrov dxobeiv ;
3 e.g. ch. xiii.
s. 5

66 THE BEATITUDES
these sentences which appear to support this supposition. Such
are the abrupt change to the second person in the benediction, —
" blessed are ye,"— and especially the comparison with the fate of
the Prophets under the Old Covenant, which applies particularly
to prominent workers and teachers in the society, rather than to
the general body of members. So that this may have been
a later Beatitude addressed to the Twelve, either at the time of
their commission to the Apostolate1, or in the last period of our
Lord's ministry when they were dismayed by the fierce
opposition with which the Gospel was met2. If that were so, it
was purposely cast in the form of a reminiscence of the original
Beatitude which they had heard in the earliest declaration of the
Gospel of the Kingdom. But on the other hand the parallel
report of the Beatitudes in St Luke's Gospel affords strong
evidence that this addition is placed in its right historical setting
by St Matthew ; and that it is an integral portion of the Sermon
on the Mount. For St Luke gives the Beatitudes throughout
in the second person ; so that that cannot be considered a
marked incongruity : and though he only records four of them
in all, this is included in the four ; and it appears there in the
expanded form of this supplement, instead of in the preceding
briefer and more enigmatical statement. Having regard then to
St Luke's corroboration of St Matthew, it would seem that the
subsidiary paragraph must be held to be an explanation added
by our Lord at the time, to enforce and develope the lesson of
the last Beatitude.
And in fact it fits in naturally, without any forced interpre
tation, into its place in the Sermon. For the method of its
introduction is exactly analogous to a later instance in the
Sermon itself, when, at the close of the pattern Prayer, our
Lord returned to the point in it which was most likely to cause
difficulty, and repeated in a fuller and more explicit form His
doctrine that God's forgiveness is contingent upon a forgiving
spirit in the recipient3. Moreover two phrases in it which at
first seem somewhat strange in this connexion in reality point
forward and draw attention to later phases of the teaching
1 Cp. M. x. 22. * Cp. Mk x. 30 perd Siiaypuv.

ST MATT. V. 11, 12 67
which follows. The personal claim involved in the substitution
of eveKev ifiov for eveKev BiKaioavvrjs is a preliminary reference to
our Lord's authority not only as the inspired Teacher, but as the
inspiring Lord, of life, which He asserts distinctly in the closing
section of the Sermon1. And the allusion to ' reward,' which
here appears for the first time, contains a forecast of the line
on which the question of BiKatoavvr) is presently to be treated2.
But the clause is not itself an additional and independent
Beatitude. It is an appendix to the eighth and last of the
Beatitudes proper; the series of which is brought to its completion
with the eighth8. This is made clear by the plan on which the
Beatitudes are grouped, in two sets of four each ; and more
particularly by the close correspondence between the first and
the eighth, which marks this last as the climax of the whole
list. The promise in these two cases, at the beginning and at
the end, is identical, — " for theirs is the Kingdom of heaven."
And it is the one comprehensive promise which includes all the
rest. For the other promises, when viewed in the light of the
Old Testament, as the first hearers must certainly have
interpreted them, all point in the same direction. They are all
based upon familiar expressions which indicate, under one
aspect or another, the peculiar prerogatives of the covenant
people of God. Comfort for patriotic mourners, inheritance of
the land, satisfaction of spiritual craving, reception of Divine
mercy, seeing God, the privilege of sonship ; — these are all
features of the heritage of the Kingdom. So too the benedic
tion of the eighth Beatitude recalls that of the first. The
persecuted for righteousness' sake are the poor in spirit : but the
description is now enlarged, and more fully defined. And it
virtually embraces also the various references of the inter
mediate benedictions. The mourners over the Kingdom, the
meek, the spiritual aspirants, the merciful, the pure in heart, and
the peacemakers are the faithful who suffer for righteousness' sake.
The eighth Beatitude looks back over the whole preceding series,
and gathers up all its several details into one compendium.
1 vii. 21 — 27. 2 vi. 1, 4, 6, 18.
3 Dr Edersheim strangely reckons the Beatitudes as ten in number ; apparently
treating verses 11 and 12 as two independent Beatitudes. Life and Times, etc., i. 529.
5—2

68 THE BEATITUDES
The last four Beatitudes, like the first four, fall into two
pairs. The fifth and sixth touch on the principles of two of the
most prominent instances of man's duty to his neighbour;
which come up first for treatment in the discussion of the Law1.
And peacemaking is closely allied with patient endurance of
persecution. The second table of the Beatitudes ends, as the first does,
with an open reference to the new standard of ' righteousness.'
What that is, is not yet explained ; but it is obviously something
quite different from the Pharisaic ideal. Presently it will be
brought out into clear light, and fully explained. But from the
first its primary importance in the scheme of the new Kingdom
is made abundantly manifest by the emphatic manner in which
it is associated with the last benediction of each division
of the Beatitudes.
The Beatitudes, then, and their promises, are based upon
the teaching of the Old Testament. Their phraseology is drawn
from the Jewish scriptures : and their subject-matter moves
throughout within the range of ideals which are there set forth.
In some instances it approaches closely even to the doctrine of
the Rabbinic schools. And yet while they start from, and
uphold, the revelation of the Old Covenant, they form the
unique charter of the New Covenant. For they set up a
standard which entirely transcends all former religious aspira
tions. In their completeness, and in their concinnity ; in the
choice of lessons from the sacred writings, and in the grouping
of the selections made ; in the transformation of material
ambitions into spiritual aims ; — they speak with the voice of
God. And in combination they represent in a marked degree a
wholly new conception of true faith and service. And this
conception is unfolded more and more fully throughout the rest
of the Sermon. If the Beatitudes are not exactly a schedule of
the contents of the address to which they form the prelude, they
do contain an epitome of its doctrine. In some cases distinct
echoes of their messages resound in the later sections : and as a
whole the general description of the members of the Kingdom
of God which they sketch has its lines filled in by all that
1 V. 21  32.

THE TERM 'BEATITUDE' 69
follows. They declare in one brief summary the essence of the
Gospel of the Kingdom.

Note on the term "Beatitude!'
The title Beatitude in the peculiar sense in which it is used
of these opening sentences of the Sermon on the Mount, as
expressing a benediction, or "a declaration or ascription of
special blessedness," was adopted into English in the sixteenth
century. The earliest instance of this use quoted in Dr Murray's
Dictionary is dated in 1526. Pilgr. Perf. (1531), 43b: "The
viii beatitudes that...spryngeth of grace and the other vertues."
In the English Bibles it appears first in the Great Bible of 1 540, in
the heading to ch. v. of St Matthew's Gospel : " specyally he
preacheth of the viii beatytudes or blessinges." It was no doubt
copied from the heading to this chapter in the printed editions of
the Vulgate1 : " octo tradit beatitudines, etc." But the word
beatitudo (as its form declares) properly represents the state
rather than the promise of blessedness. It is the equivalent of
fiaKapiorrjs, not of fiaxapiafios. Cicero2, who apparently coined
the word, uses it in this its proper sense : " aut ista sive beatitas
sive beatitudo dicenda sit (utrumque omnino durum, sed usu
mollienda nobis verba sunt), verum ea, quaecunque est, etc." It
passed eventually into the vocabulary of Ecclesiastical Latin ;
but it still retained its correct meaning of ' happiness.' It was
only by degrees, and through constant association with the
1 In the MSS. the headings vary ; and only in four apparently is beatitudo used
in this derived sense. They are, — as given by Bishop Wordsworth, — AUVY"In
monte discipulos docens septem beatitudines et octavam persecutionis exponit " [cp.
Aug. De S. D. in M., i. 4. § n "Videtur mihi etiam septiformis operatio Spiritus
Sancti, de qua Isaias loquitur, his gradibus sententiisque congruere"]. C has
"Beatitudo et cetera"; BHJT0 aur. Harl. 2729 "De beatitudine et de ceteris
mandatis"; the rest simply, "De beatitudine."
2 De nat. D. I. xxxiv. 95.

70 THE BEATITUDES
blessings pronounced by our Lord, that it came to be used in the
specialised meaning of ' a declaration of happiness.' It is more
than doubtful whether the use of the word in this secondary sense
can really be ascribed to Chromatius of Aquileia. It is true that
Alcuin1 affects to quote from a treatise of his bearing the title
De octo beatitudinibus ; and it is possible that his popular address
on the Beatitudes, which was delivered on a public fair day2,
may have had that heading in the MSS. But there is no
evidence that this title was given to it by Chromatius himself, or
that he used the word at all with this meaning. Beatitudo
occurs but twice in this address. In one instance" it certainly
bears its literal meaning, — " mirum principium, fratres, doctrinae
coelestis ! non a terrore incipit, sed a beatitudine"; and
apparently also in the other4 : " cupio, fratres charissimi,
proponere vobis ilias beatitudinum margaritas pretiosas ex sancto
Evangelio " ; as it does also in the only passage in which he
adopts the word in his commentary on St Matthew": "cuius
beatitudinis Apostoli principes exstiterunt." He refers to the
Beatitudes in general as 'benedictiones8,' or in detail as 'gradus7.'
Augustine in his commentary on the Sermon on the Mount uses
beatitudo three times ; but only in its literal sense : — " Nec
aliunde omnino incipere oportuit beatitudinem " ; — " incipit enim
beatitudo ab humilitate " ; — "animadvertat...intrinsecus esse
beatitudinem nostram8." And he refers to the several sayings
1 Libellus adv. Haeresin Felicis, § 26 (Migne, Patrol. Lat. vol. ci. c. 97 c.)
"Chromatius quoque sanctae Romanae antistes ecclesiae in libello quem de octo
beatitudinibus scripsit ita dicit : In mysterio enim Baptismi, etc." But Chromatius was
Bishop of Aquileia, not of Rome : and the passage cited is not in his Sermo on the
Beatitudes, but in his commentary on Matt., Tr. iii. 4.
2 § 1 "Dat nobis, fratres, conventus hic populi et mercatus frequentia occasionem
proponendi sermonis evangelici, etc."
' § 2. 4 § 1. 6 Tr. iii. 8, on M. v. 10.
8 Tr. iii. 1 " Idem enim in hoc monte benedictiones apostolis dedit, qui iamdudum
in monte Sina Moysi legem tradiderat, probans se esse utriusque legis auctorem."
' Serm. § 1 " Gradus quosdam firmissimos ex lapidibus pretiosis sternit quodam-
modo Dominus Salvator; per quos sanctae animae et fideles repere possint et
ascendere ad summum illud bonum, id est, regnum coelorum": § 2 "Bene ergo
gradus iungitur gradui": § 3 "accedit et tertius"...§ 4 "accedamus, fratres, ad
quartum"...§ 5 "occurrit et quintus gradus": § 6 "adest ecce gradus sixtus." So
Augustine, De S. D. in M. i. 3. § 10 "in hoc tertio gradu...in quarto autem gradu...
quinto autem gradu... sexto gradu...."
8 i. 1. § 3; 3- § ">; 5- § '3-

THE TERM 'BEATITUDE' 71
as 'sententiae1.' From the use of the plural to describe the
series of ' happinesses ' indicated by our Lord (as, for instance,
in the phrase of Chromatius, " illae beatitudinum margaritae") the
term passed on insensibly to its specialised use with reference to
these sayings. This use appears perhaps first in Jerome2:
" secundum litteram nonnulli simpliciorum fratrum putant eum
beatitudines et caetera quae sequuntur in Oliveti monte
docuisse, quod nequaquam ita est, etc." It is quite clear in
Ambrose : " quatuor tantum beatitudines Sanctus Lucas
Dominicas posuit, octo vero Sanctus Matthaeus ; sed in his octo
illae quatuor sunt, et in istis quatuor illae octo3 "...and again,
later4 : " Nunc dicamus quemadmodum in quatuor benedic-
tionibus Sanctus Lucas benedictiones sit octo complexus."
Here the meaning of beatitudines, as used in the secondary
active sense, is placed beyond all doubt, both by the addition of
' Dominicas,' which could not apply to the literal meaning of
' happinesses ' ; and by the parallel and synonymous use of
' benedictiones ' in the later recapitulation of the argument6.
When this use of the plural had become established, beatitudo in
the singular also came to be used in the same way. Jerome
apparently adopted it : " simulque considera quod octava verae
circumcisionis beatitudo martyrio terminetur6." And it is found
in the Vulgate as representing fiaKapiafios (in its active sense) in
Rom. iv. 6, 9 and Gal. iv. 15.
1 Cp. i. 3. § 10 "Sunt autem omnes istae octo sententiae.... Quapropter iste
sententiarum numerus diligenter considerandus est."
2 In Matt. II. (But, on ver. 11, "illud maledictum contemnendum est, quod
beatitudinem creat")
3 In Luc. v. § 49. 4 § 62.
6 Cp. A. King, Canisius' Catech., 186 (1588) "These quhilk S. Ambrose callis
our Lords beatitudes " {New Eng. Diet.),
6 On ver. 10.

ST MATT. V. 13—16.
"Tfiels iare to aXas rijs yrjs' idv Be rb dXas fiapavdfj, ev nvi
dXiaOrjaerai ; et? ovBev la%vet en el fir) f3Xi)8ev egoo Karairareiadat
virb r&v dv6pouira>v. 'T/ieis iare to tp&s rov Koa/iov. ov Bvvarai
iroXis Kpvf3r\vai iiravco opovs Keifikvi)' ovBe Kaiovaiv Xvyvov Kal
riBeaatv avrbv virb rbv fioBtov, dXX' iirl rrjv Xvyyiav, Kal Xd/iiret
irdaiv tois iv rfj oiKia. ovrcos Xafitydrco rb <f>&s vfi&v e/iirpoadev
r&v dvdpcoircov, oirtos XBcoaiv vfiwv rd KaXd epya xal Boi-datoaiv rbv
iraripa vfiwv tov iv rois ovpavois.

IV. INFLUENCE ON THE WORLD.
The Beatitudes were completed. The promises of the
Kingdom had been proclaimed, and the characteristics of the
true members of the new Theocracy had been described. But
in point after point the cherished ideals of the day had been
resolutely put aside ; and in their place there had been sketched
a pattern of life and service which must have filled the hearers
with surprise, if not with dismay. Their hearts indeed might
well respond to a call that was so full of spiritual consolation
and encouragement. No body of religious men, — and such these
undoubtedly were, — could fail to be deeply stirred by this perfect
message of Divine grace. And yet it seemed to leave them
helpless in the face of the forces which were set against them.
It offered them no plan for meeting what they conceived to be
the need of the moment. If there was no room in the new
scheme for men of strenuous action, as they understood it, how
could they hope to overthrow the power that oppressed their
nation ? There was no call to arms : were they then to acquiesce
in a perpetual subjection to an alien authority ? There was no
programme of national organisation : how then could they hope
to make their influence felt ?
It was a real difficulty. These were men who were 'looking
for the consolation of Israel, and... for the redemption of
Jerusalem1.' They had come together to hear the Gospel of the
Kingdom. And the opening declaration of it left them,
possessed as they were by their preconceived ideas, utterly at a
loss to understand how the Kingdom of God was ever to
become a power in the world. 1 L. ii. 25, 38.

76 INFLUENCE ON THE WORLD
At once therefore the Lord met their perplexity by declaring
that to the members of the Kingdom, who are loyal to their
faith, belongs a power of influence in the world which is as
superior to, as it is different from, political supremacy. For it is
spiritual, and therefore truly redemptive. Their mission is, like
the salt of the sacrifices, to permeate all human society with a
wholesome tone, cleansing and preserving it from corruption.
To them it is given to fulfil the prophetic vision of the Servant
of the Lord, and to be a light to the nations of the world.
The teaching is given in a form which has always appealed
with peculiar force to Eastern minds. For it is set forth in
figurative, or symbolic, terms, which by their parabolic
picturesqueness fix themselves on the mind much more firmly
than bare abstract statements. And the symbolisms are drawn
respectively from the Law and the Prophets, — the two recognised
divisions of the Old Testament1.
(i) TJie Salt of the earth.
Salt was associated with all the sacrificial offerings2. " Thou
shalt bring them (a young bullock and a ram) near before the
Lord, and the priests shall cast salt upon them, and they shall
offer them up for a burnt offering unto the LORD." " And
every oblation of thy meal offering shalt thou season with salt ;
neither shalt thou suffer the salt of the covenant of thy God to be
lacking from thy meal offering ; with all thine oblations thou
shalt offer salt." " Thou shalt make of it incense, a perfume
after the art of the perfumer, seasoned with salt, pure and holy3."
The typical meaning of this regulation is obvious. For salt is the
1 Cp. the pair of symbolisms in Rev. v. 5 '0 kioiv b ix rijs ipvkys 'Io6Sa, t) 'Pifa
AavelS, drawn from the Law (Gen. xlix. 9) and the Prophets (Is. xi. 10); and
representing in figurative language the plain statement of J. i. 45 Sv eypa\j/ev Mwiiirijs
iv np vbpip Kal ol irpotpyrat.
2 Cp. Test. XII Patr., Levi, ix. 14 Kal irdaav Bvalav dkari dXieis. Also the
"Western" [see WH. Introd. p. 101] text of Mk ix. 49 xoi iraaa 9vala dkl
dkiaBijaerai. Cp. Plin. N. H. xxxi. 7 "Maxime tamen in sacris intelligitur
auctoritas [salis], quando nulla conficiuntur sine mole salsa."
3 Ezek. xliii. 24; Lev. ii. 13; Exod. xxx. 35. Cp. Jos. Antt. in. ix. 1 oipayivruv
Si robruv rbv xbxkov Tip atpan Seiovai tou fiaipov ol lepets, etra xaBapd iroiT)aavres
Siapeklfrvoi xal irdoavres dkalv iirl rbv fiwpiv dvariBiaai.

ST MATT. V. 13 — 16 77
wholesome preservative antidote to corruption : and everything
offered to God in worship must be pure and sound throughout
in every respect1. To men therefore who had been trained from
childhood in sacrificial worship the purport of the simile was
self-evident. Their proper function, as members of the Kingdom
of God, was to be a purifying element in the society in which
they mixed, and so to pervade it with their influence that it
might be made meet for the service of God.
A very unnecessary difficulty is sometimes raised about the
reference to salt ' losing its savour ' ; on the ground that it is
physically impossible for this to happen. Salt, it is argued,
always retains its saltness under all conditions2- But the
description is true to experience in Palestine, so far as practical
perception goes. The fact is that the salt which was used for
the sacrifices was not refined, but was so mixed with bitumen, or
earth, or other impurities, that it did actually degenerate, if
carelessly kept, and become insipid and useless. It was obtained
from the Dead Sea, and was known by the name of "sal
Sodomiticus3." And the same thing is true of the salt commonly
used to this day in Palestine. Dr Thomson4 states that
"Maundrell6, who visited the lake at Jebbul, tells us that he
found salt there which had entirely ' lost its savour ' ; and the'
same abounds among the debris at Usdum, and in other
localities of rock-salt at the south end of the Dead Sea.
Indeed, it is a well-known fact that the salt of this country, when in
1 Cp. the Talmudic proverb, N3^ K"IS5>3 HE>1 NPTJD f»1B, "aufer salem, et
projice carnem canibus," Nidda, f. 31. 1 (Buxtorf, 1208).
2 This is not a new criticism. Cp. Schottgen (1733), i. 18 "Mira inest huic loco
difficultas, propterea quod sal, qualis a nobis adhibetur, non facile inutilis aut insalsus
reddi queat, sed virtutem saliendi semper possideat. "
8 "Apud Judseos in usu erat, praecipue in sacrificiis, sal non fossilis, aut coctilis,
sed bituminosus, quem Sodomiticum vocant": Schottgen, who cites Menachoth,
f. 21. 1 "Si ergo salire voles, quonam sale id fieri debet? Resp. Scriptura dicit,
Lev. ii. 13, Salem cessare non facies. Inde concludimus ejusmodi salem intelligi qui
Sabbatho non quiescit, qui non alius est quam Sal Sodomiticus (IVOnD PPD)."
4 The Land and the Book, p. 382.
6 A Journey from Aleppo to Jerusalem at Easter, A.D. 1697, p. 10 (Ed.8, Oxford,
1714) "I broke a piece of it, of which that part that was exposed to the Rain, Sun,
and Air, tho' it had the sparks and particles of salt, yet it had perfectly lost its
Savour, as in St Matthew chap. 5. The Inner part, which was connected to the
Rock, retained its Savour, as I found by proof."

78 INFLUENCE ON THE WORLD
contact with the ground, or exposed to rain and sun, does
become insipid and useless... It is not only good for nothing
itself, but it actually destroys all fertility wherever it is thrown ;
and this is the reason why it is cast into the street." And he
quotes1 a case which came under his own notice, of a Sidonian
merchant who had farmed from the Government the revenue
from the importation of salt; and who brought over an
immense quantity from the marshes of Cyprus. This he stored
in village houses with earthen floors : and in the course of
a few years the salt next the ground was entirely spoiled, and
was literally thrown into the street to be ' trodden under foot.'
Thomson's statement that even the degenerate material is
destructive to vegetation is of interest. It explains the
amplified clause in St Luke's report of this saying, ovre els yrjv
ovre els Koirpiav evOerov ianv2. It accounts for such refuse
being thrown on to the street, where alone it could do no harm.
Indeed there it could even serve a useful purpose in counteracting
any slipperiness of the pavement. There is a reference in the
Talmud to the practice of throwing salt on the sabbath over the
steps of the approach to the Temple with this object : " They
scatter salt on the steps, so that no one may slip3." And it
shows, by the action of the residuum of salt still left in the
mass, that the property of true salt really is indestructible.
But the substance which was (and is) used in Palestine for salt
is not pure salt ; and therefore it is subject to decomposition. It
does, to all practical intent, lose its saltness.
The verb which is employed to denote this process of
deterioration, — ficopaiveadai, — is only found with this meaning
here and in the parallel passage in St Luke4. But the adjective, —
fieopos, — is used by the Greek medical writers6 in the sense of
'insipid'; just as 'SFis jn Hebrew and fatuus7 in Latin are used
of literal insipidity. So Augustine very appropriately translates
1 p. 381- a xiv. 35.
8 Erubin, f. 104. 1 (Buxtorf, 283 ; under pT3). 4 xiv. 34.
5 Cp. Dioscorides, Mat. Med., 4 pifai yevaapAvip pupal.
6?Bri = (a) 'unsavoury,' Job vi. 6; (b) 'foolish,' Lam. ii. 14. Cp. H^BR =
'foolishness,' Job i. 22; xxiv. 12; Jer. xxiii. 13.
7 Cp. Mart. XI. xxxi. 8 Hinc pistor fatuas facit placentas.

ST MATT. V. 13 — 16 79
idv fiiopavdfi, " si infatuatum fuerit1." The subject of dXiaOrjaerai
clearly is to aXas. For it must be the same as that of the
preceding and following verbs, ficopavdfj and laxvei. The
intermediate verb cannot be impersonal.
In this comparison then, of the salt that loses its savour, our
Lord taught clearly, by reference to a common matter of every
day experience, the meaning of which could readily be
understood, that the character of the members of the Kingdom
is of primary importance, if they are to take their right place in
the world. It is not enough for them to enjoy privilege : they
have a responsibility for exercising influence. And they can
only carry this into effect so long, as they are true to their
calling, and maintain in themselves the proper moral character
istics of the Divine Society. The claims of the Beatitudes
therefore have a definite and practical bearing: they are not
visionary ideals. (ii) The Light of the world.
Again the same lesson is repeated under another figure:
" Ye are the light of the world." In the picture drawn of the
Servant of the Lord in the later chapters of Isaiah one of the
most remarkable features is the Divine Commission which is
assigned to him to be "for a light of the Gentiles (&)* li^)":—
"I will also give thee for a light of the Gentiles, that thou
mayest be my salvation unto the end of the earth2." Our Lord
takes up this promise, and applies it to the members of the
Kingdom. In their life and teaching the prophetic vision is to
find its fulfilment.
The phrase here however is slightly changed. It is not to <p<5s
rcov edv&v, but to <j>&s rov Koa/iov. This modification is probably
due to the extreme sensitiveness which the Jews manifested
towards any mention of other nations in connexion with the
privileges of the Covenant3. Indeed this attitude is reflected in
1 Vulg. "si evanuerit."
2 xlix. 6. Cp. xiii. 6 " I will. ..give thee for a covenant of the people, for a light of
the Gentiles." Cp. L. ii. 32 (pas els diroxdkvfiv iBvuiv xal Sbl-av kaov aov 'Iapay~k.
3 Cp. A. xxii. 21, 22.

80 INFLUENCE ON THE WORLD
the allusions in this Sermon to rd eOvrj as the antithesis of the
Covenant people1. At the same time there may be also some
suggestion of the Rabbinic phrase °?V "•?., "Lamp (or Light)
of the world," which was applied to influential teachers2 : a
supposition which is to some extent borne out by the reference
to Xvyvos in the following paragraph. This would emphasise the
teaching function of the members of the Kingdom.
No distinction can be pressed between yrj and Koafios in the
two parallel clauses, — vfieis iare to dXas rrjs yrjs and vfieis iare
rb <p&s rod Koa/iov. The two words merely represent the usual
slight variation of expression in the correlative parts of a Hebrew
parallelism. They correspond in fact to Hv and '38 which are
similarly used side by side in the Psalms8.
The lesson is then further enforced by a local parabolic illus
tration. It was Maundrell4 apparently who first suggested that
in speaking of the 'city set on a hill' our Lord pointed across to
Safed, which is visible far and wide, standing as it does on an
isolated hill some 2700 feet above the sea. " One of the most
striking objects," writes Dean Stanley6, " in the prospect from
any of these hills, especially from the traditional Mount of the
Beatitudes, is the city of Safed, placed high on a bold spur of
1 v. 47; vi. 7; 32.
2 Cp. Aboth de rabbi Nathan, c. 24 (oited by Schottgen) "Cum Rabban Jochanan
ben Saccai morti proximus esset, alta voce lacrymatus est. Dixerunt ipsi discipuli
ejus: Rabbi, eolumna excelsa, lux mundi (D715J 13), mallee fortis, cur tu fles?" Cp.
Jer. Shabbath, c. 2 DTI D7157 ?K> YM JltWin D1K, "Adam primus fuit lux mundi"
(Buxt. 1321).
3 See xix. 4; xxiv. 1 ; xxxiii. 8; xcvi. 13; xcviii. 9. In each of these passages
however ?3R is translated in the LXX by olxovpAvy, as it almost invariably is
elsewhere. Kbopos, in the sense of 'the world of mankind,' does not occur in the
LXX. It first appears in Wisd. ( vi. 24 irXyBos Se ooipQiv awrypla xbapov • xiv. 6 t)
ikirls rov xbapov), and in 11 Mace. (iii. 12 toO renpypAvov xard rbv abpiravra xbapov
lepov); and it is of course familiar in the N.T. Bishop Westcott gives an interesting
analysis of the use of xbapos by St John in his additional note on J. i. 10.
1 A Journey, etc. , p. 115 "A few points towards the North appears that which they
call the Mount of the Beatitudes ; a small rising, from which our Saviour deliver'd His
Sermon in the 5, 6, 7 chapters of St Matthew. Not far from this little Hill is the
City Saphet, suppos'd to be the ancient Bethulia. It stands upon a very eminent and
conspicuous Mountain, and is seen far and near. May we not suppose that Christ
alludes to this City in those words of his Sermon, Mat. 5. 14 A City set on a hill
cannot be hid?" Cp. vii. 13, 14; p. 236, below.
5 Sinai and Palestine, p. 429.

ST MATT. V. 13 — 16 81
the Galilaean Anti-Lebanon... The illustration... would be more
striking from the fact, that this situation of cities on the tops of
hills is as rare in Galilee as it is common in Judaea." And this
local reference is quite in accord with our Lord's method of
drawing attention to features of the scene present at the moment,
in order to fix the point of His teaching on the hearers' minds.
Even in the Sermon on the Mount there are other allusions to
Galilean surroundings; — such as, "Consider the lilies of the
field"; "a wise man which built his house upon the rock1"; and
the like. The illustration served to press home the truth, that
they whose lives are to be "known and read of all men2" cannot
hide themselves in seclusion, but must be prominent in the eyes of
the world.
So it leads on naturally to the gnomic saying, which
apparently our Lord repeated more than once on subsequent
occasions3, that a lamp when kindled is placed on a lampstand
to give light, and not thrust out of sight beneath a bushel
measure. The true calling, that is to say, of the members of the
Kingdom is not to be hidden from the world in obscurity, but to
' let their light shine before men.'
Here then lies the real secret of influence : in the open
witness of a life such as is sketched in the Beatitudes. But by
a remarkable turn given to the closing words of the injunction, the
Lord reveals the direction in which the result is to be expected.
For the light which they radiate is not their own inherently : of
the Master Himself alone could that be predicated4: but they
reflect the light that is given to them from above. And it is
implied that men will instinctively recognise this. For seeing
in them the evidence of "good works," — the highest spiritual ideal
of the Jews6, trained as they were under the law of ordinances, —
they will be led by the exceptional character of those ' works '
to realise that they are due to the inspiration of God, and
"glorify the Father which is in heaven." Service in the Kingdom
of God must be to the glory of God, not for the exaltation of
the workers.
1 vi. 28; vii. 24. 2 11 Cor. iii. 2.
8 Mk iv. 2i = L. viii. 16; (?) L. xi. 33. * J. i. 4, 9; viii. 12.
6 See below, p. 96.

82 INFLUENCE ON THE WORLD
The argument has thus led up, as to its climax, to the first
mention in the discourse of " the Father which is in heaven," to
Whom section after section will subsequently point. For this is
the constant refrain which runs through the whole of the
Sermon on the Mount1. Each successive division is brought
round to reference to "the Father in Heaven." The interpretation
of the Law; the lessons of alms-giving, prayer, and fasting; the
challenge to faith; and the closing instructions about the general
conduct of life in the world ; — each in turn is treated as in its
relation to the heavenly Father2. So just as each group of the
Beatitudes issued in a reference to the 'Righteousness' which is
to come up for detailed treatment later on ; so here a leading
feature of the revelation to be given in the sermon is introduced
as the prominent conclusion of the paragraph.
This title, "the Father which is in heaven," was one which was
very familiar to the Jews3. Though it is not found in their literature
before the first century, there seems to be no doubt that by that
time it had already become firmly established. This may be as
sumed, with some certainty, from the usage of the Mishna : as, for
instance, "Ye give it not to your heavenly Father4, but to me, the
priest " — " Blessed are ye, O Israel !. . . Who cleanseth you ? Your
Father which is in heaven5" — "Upon whom can we rely? Upon
our Father which is in heaven6." The Jews indeed employed
the term in the sense of an exclusive relationship towards God
belonging to their own nation only. It was based upon such
statements of the Old Testament as, — " Do ye thus requite the
LORD, O foolish people and unwise ? Is not he thy Father that
hath bought thee ? He hath made thee, and established thee."
"For thou art our Father... thou, O Lord, art our Father; our
1 There are no less than 17 references to 'The Father' in the Sermon: as («)'0
H. bpuv b iv rois obp., 5 ; {b) '0 II. bpuv b obpdvios, 3 ; {c) '0 H. bpuv, 2 ; (d) '0 II.
cov, 5 ; (e) Hdrep ypuv b iv tois obp., 1 ; (J) '0 n. pov b iv tois obp., 1.
2 See v. 45, 48; vi. 4, 6, 18; vi. 32; vii. 11, 21.
3 Cp. J. Lightfoot (on vi. 9) "This epithet of God was very well known among
the Jews, and very usual with them. ...They were thoroughly instructed, from their
cradles, to call God 'The Father in heaven'." Dalman, The Words of Jesus, p. 188
"Jesus adopted this term for God from the popular usage of His time."
4 NVOSJan P313N1?, Jer. Maaseroth, f. 50. 3.
6 Yoma, c. viii. 9.
« DW3B> 1J13N ?]), Sota, c. ix..is.

ST MATT. V. 13—16 83
redeemer from everlasting is thy name." "For I am a Father
to Israel1." The term was familiar: but the meaning of it as used by our
Lord was enriched with a fuller force than had ever before been
conceived. It starts from the same point of view as the Jewish
expression, in that it declares the special privilege of those who
have been admitted into covenant with God. But under the
New Covenant this privilege is revealed as more intimate, and as
reaching out to a wider range, than ever could have been the
case under the Old Covenant2. In our Lord's teaching the
name 'Father' is instinct with the whole message of God's love.
It is as much the distinctive name of God in the New Testament
as 'Jehovah' is in the Old3. As Christ's doctrine of 'Righteous
ness' declares the true principle of the service of God, so does
His doctrine of 'The Father' proclaim the true foundation of
faith in God. It is not too much to say that His revelation of
the Fatherhood of God is the very essence of His Gospel4.
1 Deut. xxxii. 6; Is. lxiii. 16; Jer. xxxi. 9. Cp. also Is. lxiv. 8. Cp. Tobit xiii.
4 "For that He is our Lord and God; He is our Father for all the ages."
2 Cp. Westcott, Additional note on I J. i. 2 "From these passages [in the Sermon
on the Mount] it will be seen how immeasurably the conception of Fatherhood is
extended by the Lord beyond that in the Old Testament. The bond is moral, and
not physical; it is personal and human, and not national. It suggests thoughts of
character, of duty, of confidence which belong to a believer as such and not peculiarly
to those who stand in particular outward circumstances."
3 Cp. Sanday, art. Jesus Christ in Hast. D.B. ii. 618 b "The name 'Father'
becomes in NT what the name Jehovah (Jahveh) was in OT, the fullest embodiment
of revelation." 4 Cp. "The name of Father is indeed the sum of the Christian revelation."
Westcott, The Revelation of the Father, p. 9.

6—2

ST MATT. V. 17—48.
Mr) vofilaryre on rjXdov KaraXvaai rbv vbfiov rj rovs irpo<f>rjras'
ovk rjXdov KaraXvaai dXXd irXrjp&aai. dfirjv yap Xeyco v/iiv, ea>s
av irapeXffrj b ovpavos Kal rj yrj, Iwra h> r) pia icepaia ov fir)
irapeXBrj dirb rov vbfiov, ecos av irdvra yevrjrai. bs idv ovv Xvarj fiiav
r&v ivroX&v tovtcov rwv iXaxiarcov Kal BiBdljr) ovrcos rovs dvdpoo-
irovs, eXdxio-ros KXrjdrjaerai iv rfj fiaaiXeiq rwv ovpavwv bs 8' av
iroirjar/ Kal BiSd^rj, ofiros fieyas KXtfQrjaerai iv rfj fSaaiXeiq r&v
ovpavwv. Xeyw ydp vp.lv on edv fir) ireptaaevarj v/iwv r) BiKatoavvrj
irXelov rcov ypafifiarewv Kal <Papiaaicov, ov fir) elaeXdijre els rr)v
fiaatXelav tcov ovpavwv. 'JiKovaare on eppeOrj rois dpxalois' ov
<povevaeis' bs 8" av fyovevarj, evoxos earai rfj Kplaei. iyco Be Xeyco
vfiiv on irds 6 bpyi£6/ievos t^3 dBeX<pq> avrov [eiKrj] evoxos earai
rfj Kpiaei' bs 8' dv e'lrrrj tco d8eX<f>w avrov paad, evoxos earai too awe-
Bpiw' bs 8' av eiirrj ficope, evoxos earai els rr)v yeevvav rov irvpos.
idv oiv irpoa<f>eprjs rb Bwpbv aov eirl to dvaiaarrjpiov icd/cel /ivriaOfjs
on 6 dSeXtpos aov exet Tl Kara aov, dcpes e«et to Bwpbv aov
efiirpoaQev rov Ovaiaarrjpiov, Kal viraye irpwrov BiaXXayrjOi rw
dBeXipw aov, Kal rbre eXdwv irpbafyepe rb B&pov aov. 'laOi evvo&v
too dvTiB'iKo) aov raxv eoos orov ei jier avrov ev rfj oBw' fit) irore
ae irapaSqp 6 dvriBiKOS to5 Kpirfj Kal b Kpirrjs r& inrrjperrj, Kal els
<f>vXaKr)v fiXTjOrjar/- dfirjv Xeyco aoi, ov fir) egeXdrjs eKeldev ea>s dv
diroSais rbv ea^oyrov KoSpdvrrjv. 'JiKovaare on ippeOrj' ov
fioixevcreis. eyw B& Xeyw vfiiv on irds b fiXerreov yvvaiKa irpbs rb
iiridvfifjaai \avrr)v\ rjBrj efiolx^vaev avrrjv ev rfj KapBiq avrov. el

Se o b<f)0aX/i6s aov b Bel-lbs aKavBaXi^ei ae, efjeXe avrov Kal /3a\e
dirb aov' avficfrepei ydp aoi "va dirbXrjrai ev tojv fieXwv aov Kal
/irj oXov to acofid aov ftXrjff-ij els yeevvav. Kal el fj Begid aov x^P
aKavBaXi^ei ae, eKKoyfrov avrrjv Kal f3dXe dirb aov' avp,<pepei ydp
aoi iva dirbXrjrai ev rcov fieXwv aov Kal fir) oXov rb aw fid aov els
yeevvav direXdrj. 'EippeOrj Be' o? dv airoXvarj rrjv yvvaiKa avrov,
Bbrw avrrj diroardaiov. iyco Be \e7e1) vfiiv on irds o airoXvcov
rrjv yvvaiKa avrov irapeKrbs Xoyov iropveias iroiet avrrjv fioi-
XevOrjvai, Kal bs idv diroXeXvfievrjv yafirjarj, fioixdrai. UdXiv
rjKOvaare on ippidrj rots dpxalois' ovk itriopKrjaeis, diroBdoaeis Be
rw Kvpiw roils opxovs aov. iyw Be Xeyw vfiiv fir) bfioaai oXeos'
fir'jre iv tou ovpavw, on dpbvos iarlv tov deov' firjre iv rfi yfj, on
viroirbBiov ianv tow iroBwv avrov' firjre et? Te/socroXv/ia, on iroXis
iarlv rov fieydXov ftaaiXews' firjre iv rfj Ke<paXfj aov dfioarjs, on
ov Bvvaaai fiiav rpixa XevKrjv iroirjaai rj fieXaivav. earw Be 0
X0709 v/iwv val vat, ov ov' rb Be ireptaabv rovrwv iK rov irovrjpov
ianv. 'H/covo-aTe on ippeOrj' b<p6aXp,bv dvri btpOaXfiov Kal bBbvra
dvrl bBbvTos, iyw Be Xe7&> ifiiv firj avnarrjvai rw irovrjpw' dXX'
bans ae pairi&i et? rrjv Befjidv aiaybva \aov\, arp&yfrov avrfi Kal
rrjv dXXrjv Kal to) deXovri aoi KptOrjvai Kal rbv x^wvd aov XafSeiv,
d<f>es avrw Kal rb i/idriov Kal oans ae dyyapevaei fiiXiov ev,
viraye fier avrov Bvo. rw alrovvri ae Bos, Kal rbv dekovra diro
aov BavlaaaOai fir) diroarpa<f>ijs. 'H-Kovaare on ippedrj' dyairrjaeis
rbv irXrjaiov aov Kal fuarjaeis rbv ix^pbv aov. iyw Be Xeyw vp.lv,
dyairdre roiis e'^#pov? vfiwv Kal irpoaevx^a6e virep rwv Biwkovtwv
ifids' 07ra)9 yevrjaOe viol rov irarpbs vfiwv rov iv ovpavois, on rbv
rjXiov avrov avareXXei iirl irovrjpovs Kal dyaOovs Kal ftpexei eirl
BiKalovs Kal dBlKovs. eav ydp dyairrjarjre roiis dyairwvras vfias,
riva fiiadbv e^eTe; ov%t Kal ol reXwvai to avrb iroiovaiv; Kal idv
dairdarjaBe roiis dBeXcj>oiis v/iwv fiovov, ri irepiaabv iroielre; ov'%1
Kal ol edviKol rb avro iroiovaiv; "Eaeade ovv iifiels reXetoi a>? 0
irarrjp vfiwv 0 ovpdvios reXeios ianv.

V. THE INTERPRETATION OF THE LAW.
There was no question which was more crucial to the Jews
as a nation than that of the maintenance of the Law. From the
time of the Captivity that had been the chief rallying-point of
their patriotism. So much so that even in the Dispersion their
persistent and immovable devotion to the precepts of their own
Law not only marked them off from all other peoples among
whom they dwelt, but actually won for them their special
privileges from the Roman government1.
But long before the Captivity, from the earliest days of their
national independence, the Law had been regarded, at any rate
theoretically,, as a peculiarly sacred trust which might never,
under any conditions, be altered or repealed. It was, in fact, on
this conception of the absolute permanence of the Law that the
distinctive constitution of the Theocracy was built up. For in
the ancient world the prevailing view of the essential authority
of a king centred round three principal functions: it was his
prerogative to lead his people in war, to administer justice, and
to institute laws; he was at once commander-in-chief, judge, and
law-giver. But in the Hebrew polity the human king was not,
like other kings, sui juris, but was empowered to act only as the
earthly vicegerent of God, the true King of His Covenant
people. Now the Law was regarded as having been promul
gated directly by the Divine King Himself, and therefore as being
for ever immutable. It was not subject to the exigencies of
statecraft, but in itself it formed the charter of the state.
Accordingly when human kings came to be appointed their
position differed from that of the kings of other nations in this
important particular, that while they were commissioned with
military and judicial executive powers, they had no right of
1 See above, p. 21.

88 THE INTERPRETATION OF THE LAW
legislation. This appears emphatically at the very inauguration
of the regal dynasty in the limited demand which was made by
the people: "And they said, Nay; but we will have a King over
us; that we also may be like all the nations; and that our King
may judge us, and go out before us, and fight our battles1." But
there is no claim for any legislative action on the part of the
desired ruler. That was recognised as lying outside all human
interference. It is only in reference to God as the King of Israel
that the ascription of this function of kingship occurs: "For the
LORD is our judge, the LORD is our lawgiver, the LORD is our
King; he will save us2."
The Law in Jewish estimation was Divine3, and for all time
unchangeable4. And after the Return from the Captivity it was
regarded with intensified reverence. The nation had suffered for
its disobedience to the Law and disloyalty to God6: and hence
forth its very existence was felt to be wrapped up in, and wholly
dependent upon, the strictest observance of the Law in every
particular". From the day when Ezra publicly read the Law,
and bound the people by the most solemn engagement to keep
it7, it became the sole religious duty of all true Israelites to follow
its precepts implicitly8. Its obligations entered into every detail
1 I Sam. viii. 19, 20. 2 Is. xxxiii. 22.
3 Cp. Sanhedrin, x. 1 : " He who asserts that the Thorah is not from heaven has
no part in the world to come."
4 Cp. iv Esdr. ix. 37 "Nam Lex non perit, sed permanet in suo honore." It was
this unchangeableness of the Divine Law which added special point to the story of
Daniel's "innocency," in his disregard of the Imperial edict, issued "according to the
Law of the Medes and Persians, which altereth not" (or, "which passeth not away," —
"is not abrogated": N'Wri K^"'1'1!); Dan. vi. 5, 8, 15, 22.
6 Cp. Is. xiii. 24; Jer. ix. 13, 16; Ezek. xii. 9, 15; Zech. vii. 13, 14; Deut. xxviii.
58, 64; Lev. xxvi. 27, 33—35; Neh. ix. 29, 30. Cp. Apoc. Bar., lxxvii. 4 "Because
your brethren transgressed the commandments of the Most High, He brought ven
geance upon you and upon them, and He spared not the former, and the latter also
He gave into captivity, and left not a residue of them"; also, lxxxiv. 2, 5.
6 Cp. II Mace. vii. 2 iroipoi yap diroBvyaxeiv iapiv y irapafialveiv robs irarplovs
vbpovs. Assump. Mos., ix. 6 Moriamur potius quam praetereamus mandata Domini
dominorum. 7 Neh. viii. See Schiirer, II. i. 306 — 7.
8 Cp. Ps. Sol. xiv. 1 niuTos K6pws...ToTs iropevopivois iv Sixaioabvy irpoaraypdruv
avrov, iv vbpu 1} iverelXaro ypiv els fuyv ypuv. Apoc. Bar. xlviii. 22 "In Thee do
we trust, for lo ! Thy Law is with us, and we know that we shall not fall so far as we
keep Thy statutes."

ST MATT. V. 17 — 48 89
of daily life; they controlled every action1: until the very
intricacy of its bearing on all occasions produced a school of
jurists2, or 'scribes3,' who became the religious teachers and
leaders of the people. " Learning in the Law became the great
distinction to which all alike paid reverential homage4."
When our Lord opened His mission this devotion to the Law,
as the central point of the national polity and hope, had reached
its most exaggerated development. Teachers and taught alike,
the scribes and the common people, regarded it as the palladium
of the Theocracy. Every new claimant therefore who came
forward to announce the establishment of the promised Kingdom
of God must be examined by this standard. By this most
emphatically must he be accepted or rejected as a true messenger
of God. So the question must be pressed, by those who were
learned in the Law and could weigh the answer given ; and all
the crowd would wait breathlessly to hear how it was met: What
attitude did the Preacher adopt towards the Law ? Did he
accept it entirely and unhesitatingly? Or did he propose to
abrogate it in any respect ?
To this question therefore our Lord immediately addressed
Himself, so soon as He had completed His sketch of the
character and influence of the members of the Kingdom.
Whether He was expressly challenged upon the point in direct
interrogation, or not, it is of course impossible to judge. But
1 "By degrees attachment to the Law sank deeper and deeper into the national
character; it was not merely at once their Bible and their Statute Book, it entered into
the most minute detail of common life." Milman, Hist, of the Jews, ii. 409.
2 vopixol, esp. in Luke (6 times; though he also has ypappareis 14 times), adopting
the Roman term: see Schiirer, 11. i. 314. Also M. xxii. 35. IV Mace. v. 4 ets
irp&ros ix ttjs dYAijs 'EjSpcuos bvbpari 'Sked^apos, rb yivos lepebs, ryv iiriar-/jpyv
vopixbs, ktX. , cp. II Mace. vi. 18 'EAedfapAs ns ruv irpurevbvruv ypappariuv, xrk.
vopoSiSdaxakot, L. v. 17; A. v. 34.
8 ypappareis (=1BD), in this special sense, is used in the lxx. only of Ezra, "the
scribe of the Law of the God of heaven"; Ezr. vii. 6, 11, 12, 21; Neh. viii. 1, 4, 9,
13; xii. 26, 36. Elsewhere the title refers either to writers, or to public officers, of
various kinds. See Deissmann, 3. S. no — 112. But before the time of the N.T. it
had come into more general use: cp. Ecclus. xxxviii. 24; I Mace. vii. 12; n Mace. vi.
18; (1 Esdr. viii. 3, 25). Josephus, as writing for the Roman world avoids the term.
He uses lepoypapparebs, B. J. VI. v. 3; but elsewhere substitutes irarpluv i^yyyral
vbpuv, Antt. XVII. vi. 2, or even aoipiarys, B.J. I. xxxiii. 2; II. xvii. 8, 9.
4 Milman, Hist, of the Jews, ii. 409.

90 THE INTERPRETATION OF THE LAW
practically it makes no difference in the situation. For no
representative body of Jews could have been drawn together at
that time, on an occasion so momentous as a formal declaration
of the definite foundation of the long expected Kingdom of God,
without this matter being uppermost in their minds. It must be
set at rest, without any ambiguity, before any further progress
could be made with the propaganda.
And our Lord's statement is as emphatic as words could
make it. The purpose of His mission, He declares, is not to
supersede or annul the Law of the Old Covenant, but in the
truest sense to fulfil it. For its principles are not transitory, but
of permanent obligation. It is in fact accorded the highest
authority and honour in the new Kingdom of God ; in which the
standard of observance claimed from the members is to be even
more exact than that of the Scribes and Pharisees. Nothing
could be stronger than the force with which He proclaims His
complete acceptance of the Law. And not of the Actual Law
only, but at the same time also of the rest of the Old Testament
revelation, which is treated as one compact whole. For, in
accordance with the customary Jewish expression, the phrase
"The Law and the Prophets" represents the Old Testament
scriptures in their entirety1. The Law must be taken in con
nexion with, and as interpreted by, the more directly spiritual
teaching of the Prophets.
The form in which the opening words of this declaration are
couched, — " Consider not that I came to abolish, etc.," — seems to
suggest that already some suspicion had been aroused, or perhaps
some definite accusation had been levelled, against our Lord
regarding His attitude towards the Law. It may have been
associated with the earliest mutterings of the controversy about
Sabbath observance. It can scarcely be attributed to His
repudiation of the traditions of the Elders : for that apparently
did not come into prominence until a later period of the ministry2.
But in any case it was only to be expected that teaching so
1 M. vii. 12; xi. 13; xxii. 40; L. xvi. 16; A. xiii. 15; xxiv. 14; Rom. iii. 21. Cp.
Muvays xal ol irp. L. xvi. 29, 31 ; and similar phrases, L. xxiv. 44 ; J. i. 45. Cp. Test. XII
Patr., Levi, xvi. *. The suggestion that the clause y robs irpotpyras is a gloss which
has crept into the text is utterly devoid of the least trace of documentary authority.
5 M. xv. 3, 6. Cp. Mk vii. 13.

ST MATT. V. 17 91
original as that of our Lord, both in matter and in method,
which had indeed attracted the special audience whom He was
now addressing, should be regarded with some apprehension
by men who were held under the spell of the traditional view of
the Law.
But in what sense did Christ claim to fulfil (irXrjpwaai) the
Law and the Prophets? How would His hearers understand
His meaning ? To most English readers of the New Testament
the word probably conveys the idea of His bringing into effect
the Divine promises of the Old Testament: in the same sense,
that is, as in the frequent phrase, " That the scripture might be
fulfilled (iva irXrjpwdfj fj ypadyrj)." But this notion is not appro
priate to His general treatment of the Law: and it does not
correspond with His interpretations of particular injunctions of
the Law which immediately follow in the discourse. If however
irXrjp&aat be taken as representing the Aramaic TQI the pur
port of the saying at once becomes evident. For "©I, which, like
the Hebrew "©I1, properly means 'to complete' (whence the
translation irXrjpwaai), is used constantly by the Rabbinic writers,
not only in its proper meaning, but also in the derived sense of
'expounding fully,' and so 'teaching'2: as, for instance, in the
formula rb n»tM cODJ, " Tradition teaches this3." If then ">5I4 lies
behind irXrjpwaai, as the word which was actually employed, it is
clear that the audience would naturally understand it as referring
to the special power of a great teacher of the Law. Moreover in
that case the parallelism between KaraXvaai and irXrjpwaai in verse
1 Ps. Ivii. 2; cxxxviii. 8: also intransitively, "to come to an end," and so "to
fail," Ps. vii. 9 ; xii. 1 ; lxxvii. 8. (But in none of these passages is irkypovv used in
the LXX.)
2 e.g. in the Mishna, Chagiga, f. 13. 1 ; Baba Mezia, f. 83. 2; and in the Midrash
(on Exodus) Shemoth Rabba, § 41, f. 137. 2 (see Schottgen). Cp. Vitringa, Observ.
Sacr. 1. v; vol. I. p. 207 "Idem hoc vocabulum TOJ Docendi et discendi significa-
tum habet, eoque frequens fuit apud illius temporis homines." Buxtorf, 451 "In
hoc usu frequens est apud Talmudicos." 8 Yoma, f. 72. 2.
* "1D| occurs once in the O. T., in pass, part., in the Royal degree, Ezr. vii. 12
n.5?31 "VIDJI K>n^ i^N-*"'! ND^J "fiD sO[]3 *"$&'• A- V. "unto Ezra the priest, a
scribe of the law of the God of heaven, perfect (peace), and at such a time": R.V.
simply, "perfect and so forth"; apparently signifying that in the text of the actual
commission the introductory formula was given in full (?). The Vulgate however
translates TDjI by ' doctissimo. '

92 THE INTERPRETATION OF THE LAW
1 7, and Xvo-j? and BiBd^rj in verse 19, is explained. And the sequel,
in which particular instances from the Law are expounded by our
Lord so as to bring out the essential principles which underlie
them, exactly fits in with this interpretation. And further, it is
noteworthy that irXrjpwaai is used more than once by St Paul as
equivalent to the Rabbinic "l&| : — irXrjpwaai rbv Xoyov rov ®eov'
— ware fie dirb 'lepovaaXrjfi nal kvkXw fiexpi rov 'IXXvpiKov
ireirXrjpwKevai to evayyeXiov rov Xpiarov\
Meeting them therefore on their own ground, and employing
phraseology which they could readily understand from familiar
associations, our Lord went on to asseverate the inviolability of
the Divine Law; still adopting the current diction of the Jewish
schools : — " For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth
pass away, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass away from
the law, till all things be accomplished." The terms throughout
are stereotyped Jewish expressions : but they are enriched with
a new meaning in our Lord's teaching. Even the word dfirjv
(IP?), for instance, which elsewhere is always a formula of assent,
takes on a newsignification in our Lord's sayings. For He,and He
alone, uses it in the way of emphatic introduction, as claiming
for Himself the authoritative right of proclaiming the truth2.
Again, the phrase " till the heaven and the earth pass away,"
denoted absolute perpetuity from the Jewish point of view. For
to the Jews the (physical) heaven and the earth stood for
the types of stability and permanence. " His seed also will
I make to endure for ever, and his throne as the days of heaven."
"Thy faithfulness is unto all generations: thou hast established
the earth, and it abideth3." So Philo, in speaking of the im
mutability of the Mosaic Law, describes it as remaining
"immortal, so long as sun and moon and the whole heaven
and world exist4." The Lord then upholds the obligation
1 Col. i. 25 ; Rom. xv. 19. Perhaps cp. iiypnapivos, II Tim. iii. 17. See
Vitringa, Obs. Sacr. vol. I. p. 208.
2 Whence the symbolic title ascribed to Him, Rev. iii. 14, '0 'Apr/p. Cp. '0
'AkyBtvbs, iii. 7. See Hast. D. B. i. 81.
8 Ps. lxxxix. 29; cxix. 90. Cp. also Job xiv. 12; Ps. lxxii. 7; lxxxix. 36, 37;
Jer. xxxi. 35, 36; Eccl. i. 14; Baruch i. 11; iii. 32 6 xaraaxevdaas T17C yyv els rbv
aluva xpbvov.
4 Vit. Mays. ii. 3 t4 Si tovtov pbvov fiifiaia, dodkevra, dxpdSavra, xaBdrep

ST MATT. V. 18 93
for all time of the principles of the Divine Law: but as a
means to an end, not as the end itself. For He adds, "till all
things be accomplished." These principles have their purpose
to serve in training man's life upon earth. That is their limit.
But beyond even that there extends the eternal truth of His
revelation ; as He declared at the end of His ministry, in similar
terms : " Heaven and earth shall pass away, but my words shall
not pass away1."
Once more, to express the fulness of this obligation of the
Law a proverbial expression is borrowed from the Rabbinic
phraseology, which declares the sacredness of the whole by
particularising the minutest actual details. There can of course
be no question that the statement is symbolic here, and not literal.
It is quite impossible to imagine that our Lord intended literally
to guarantee the accuracy of the written codes. Moreover such
an interpretation would be wholly incongruous with the sequel,
in which He deals with 'the spirit' and not with 'the letter' of
the requirements of the Law. And further, the parallelism of
the next sentence places 'one of these least commandments' as
the equivalent of the expression ' one jot or one tittle.' It is a
symbolic, not a literal, statement. And yet it was just in this
respect that the teaching of Christ transcended that of the Rabbis.
Their fine-drawn arguments turned upon the literal exactness of
the records, in word and in letter. It is true that the precise
saying "a single jod or a single stroke" cannot perhaps be
adduced, as it stands, from any Jewish writing. But instances of
the use of these terms severally in a similar way may readily be
found. They were commonplaces of the schools. They were
attractive to the Rabbinic mind, which was absorbed in the
smallest details.
It hardly requires to be pointed out that l&ra here repre
sents the Hebrew letter Jod, by a rough transliteration
which is assimilated to the closely corresponding Greek letter
name. And Jod, as the smallest letter in the alphabet, was
a tp papai tpbaeus abrys aeaypaapiva, pJvei iraylus dip' ijs ypipas iypdipy pexpl vvv, Kal
irpbs rbv lireira irdvra Siapiveiv ikirls abrd aluva uairep d9dvara, ?us liv ykios Kal oekyvy
xal b abpiras oipavbs re xal xbopos y.
1 M. xxiv. 35.

94 THE INTERPRETATION OF THE LAW
frequently made use of by Jewish teachers to enforce the essential
importance of what was apparently insignificant in itself1. Thus,
for example, a saying of Rabbi Alexander is quoted: "Though
all men in the whole world were gathered together to remove
Jod, which is the smallest letter in the Law, they could not
effect it2." So also the word Kepala, which bears many different
meanings derived from its original signification of 'horn-like,'
here undoubtedly refers to the small turns or strokes by which
one letter is distinguished from another in the Hebrew alphabet ;
as in the distinction between the characters of 3 and 3, or of T and
I8. It corresponds to the Rabbinic yip4. A typical instance of
Rabbinic comment on the danger of interfering with the tittles of
the letters in the scriptures occurs in several of the Midrashim5.
"If one in the words (of Deuteronomy vi. 4), 'Hear, O Israel:
the Lord our God is one (ins) LORD,' should change i into "1, he
will shake the whole world ; [for "ins = ' another,' and was
applied specially to idols, in the phrase O^THS D*n'N]. If one
in the words (of Exodus xxxiv. 14), "Thou shalt worship no
other (idk) God,' should change 1 into "1 [making ins] he will
shake the whole world, etc." So this proverbial expression about
' one jot or one tittle,' like the English 'the crossing of a t or the
dotting of an i,' denotes, by a kind of hyperbolical emphasis, a
rigid and exact observance.
But it is not only in the use of particular words or expressions
that this section is marked as being essentially Hebraic in
character, but in the whole structure of the argument, which
proceeds by a series of progressive parallelisms. It is instructive
1 Wetstein quotes, from Kiddushin, f. 16. 2, the proverb "Ex jod civitatem video,"
i.e. ex re minima factam rem maximam.
2 Shir Hashirim Rabba, f. 26. 1 , cp. Jer. Sanhedrin, f. 20. 3.
8 Cp. Orig. in Ps. xxxiii. ruv aroixeluv irap' "Eppalois, kiya'Si to5 x^<t> Kal tou
fiyB, iroXXyv bpoibryra awibvruv, iis xard pySiv dkkyXuv SiaXXdrreiv y fipaxeta xepala
pbvy. Procopius Gazaeus, on 1 Sam. xxi. 2 (quoted by Kuinoel) Spoia ydp rd
orotxeia (B?)0 Kal Kdip) fipaxvrdrys Kepalas pbvys evaXXarroboys.
4 Buxtorf, 2004, cites from Menachoth, f. 28, the phrase HVip!? *6k H31V3 t&
IV ?W, "non opus est nisi apice (literse) jod"; and f. 29, the legend of the prophecy
concerning Akiva ben Joseph, that he would comment upon every tittle (}»!p ^3 b])
6 Vayyikra Rabba, § 19, f. 162. 1; Shir Hashirim Rabba, f. 26. 1; Tanchuma, f.
1. 1 ; etc.

ST MATT. V. 17 — 20 95
to trace the successive steps of the argument ; and to notice the
constant parallelisms, whether of repetition or of contrast. First
there is a protest against misconception: 'Think not that I came
to break down'; and this is at once balanced by the counter
statement : ' I came not to break down, but to fulfil.' This first
double clause, as the correction of a false view, is negative. It is
succeeded by a strong . asseveration of the permanence of the
Law, in which the two members of the sentence are again in a
parallel relation of contrast to each other: 'till. ..pass away' —
'shall not pass away.' Next, the subject is carried forward from
the Master to His disciples ; and both the preceding clauses are
taken up again, and combined, and expanded. ' Breaking ' and
'doing and teaching' now answer to the 'break down' and 'fulfil'
of the first clause; and 'one of these least commandments' to
'one jot or one tittle' of the second; and there is a further direct
contrast between 'shall be called least' and 'shall be called great.'
And finally all is summed up, and carried on further to a fresh
position in the statement of the new surpassing claim on members
of the Kingdom. Thus phrase after phrase, and clause after
clause, repeats what has gone before, in close parallelism ; and yet
throughout there is a continuous progression of the argument.
Nor is it unimportant to notice this process of sentence building.
For it belongs distinctively to the speeches ascribed to our Lord ;
and it is especially characteristic of the discourses recorded in
St John's Gospel1.
The final statement lays down a positive standard of religious
life in the Kingdom of God, the unfolding of which in detail
occupies a large part of the subsequent teaching of the discourse:
"For I say unto you, that except your righteousness shall exceed
that of2 the Scribes and Pharisees, ye shall in no wise enter into
the Kingdom of heaven." It was a startling proposition. For
1 Cp., e.g., J. iii. 16— 21; v. 21—30; vi. 35—40; vi. 48—51; viii. 31—38; x.
*5— 3°; xl- *5. »<>¦
2 The construction known as 'comparatio compendiaria ' is not rare; but in the
N.T. it is found elsewhere only (perhaps) J. v. 36 iyu Si ?xM TV" paprvplav petfa
rov 'ludvov. Cp. I Esdr. iii. 5 xal ov idv ipavy rb pypa abrov aoipurepov tov iripov,
xtX. Classical instances are collected by Matthiae, Gr. Gr., § 453 ; Heusinger, on Cic.
de Off. 1. xxii. 7; Kiihner, on Cic. Tusc. D. I. i. 2. Cp., e.g., Xen. Cyr. in. iii. 41
xupav (x^re obSiv yrrov ypuv ZvTipov. Cic. de Orat. i. 6 Ut eorum, quibus summa
dicendi laus a nostris hominibus concessa est, auctoritatem Graecis anteponam.

96 THE INTERPRETATION OF THE LAW
the Scribes and Pharisees were the recognised leaders, and
indeed the personal patterns according to the popular estimation,
in all such matters. They had the reputation of an unapproach
able preeminence in the practice of formal 'righteousness1,' or
observance of the Law. For this was their conception of
'righteousness.' It was a purely objective ideal, which con
sisted in the performance of certain stated duties, or the
abstention from certain stated actions, in literal obedience to the
Law. In their view religion involved only the strict carrying out
of a code of regulations. They were quite prepared to do any
'works' which might be required of them2. But with the
principles which underlay the precepts of the Law they did not
concern themselves8. The Law commanded that certain things
must be shunned, and that certain obligations must be performed.
Therefore, as they believed, an accurate obedience to these
behests constituted 'righteousness'; and if they fulfilled their
part loyally, they thereby established a claim on the blessings
promised under the Divine covenant. " The doers of the Law of
the Lord shall prosper in His good pleasure4." In post-exilic
Judaism the Covenant had come to be regarded more and more
as in the nature of a legal, or business, compact between God and
His people; under which the more scrupulous they proved them
selves to be in the performance of their specified duties, the
stronger was their right to the promised reward5. This whole
conception was stamped with a rigid externalism, which misin
terpreted, in a grossly material sense, such appeals as, "Thou
1 See above, pp. 32; 57.
1 Cp. J. vi. 28 rl irotupev tva ipyafrupeBa rd Ipya tov 9eoC; M. xx. 16 rl dyaBbv
iroir)au tva axu £uyv aluviov ; cp. Tit. iii. 5, Gal. iii. 10.
8 "When once the question was started: 'What have I to do to fulfil the law?'
the temptation was obvious, that a composition with the letter would be chiefly aimed
at, at the cost of the real demands of morality, nay of the proper intention of the law
itself." Schiirer, 11. ii. 120.
4 Targum on Isaiah. Cp. Ps. Sol. ix. 9, 10 d iroiuv Sixaioavvyv Byaavpl^ei $uyv
abrip irapd Kvplu...rd ydp xplpara Kvpiov iv Sixaioobvy xar dvSpa xar olxov.
5 "The prophetic idea of the covenant, which God had entered into with the
chosen people, was apprehended in the purely juristic sense; the covenant was a legal
one, by which both the contracting parties were mutually bound. The people to
observe the law given them by God, exactly, accurately, and conscientiously: while
God was also bound in return to pay the promised recompense in proportion to their
performances." Schiirer, II. ii. 91. Cp. Makkoth, iii. 16.

ST MATT. V. 20 97
shalt keep his statutes, and his commandments, which I command
thee this day, that it may go well with thee, and with thy children
after thee, and that thou mayest prolong thy days upon the land,
which the Lord thy God giveth thee, for ever1"; or, "If ye be
willing and obedient, ye shall eat the good of the land2." So
the Talmud teaches, "Whoever fulfils only one law, good is
appointed to him, his days are prolonged, and he shall inherit
the land3." But such a forensic view of the Divine Covenant is
always subversive of true spiritual religion4; and it was this
especially which our Lord set Himself to combat, by showing
the spirit in which alone the Law and the Prophets could rightly
be fulfilled. The special instances selected by Him for interpretation seem
at first sight to correspond with the second table of the Beatitudes.
But that this was not the analogy which directly determined the
selection is shown by the inclusion of the Law of Oaths, which
lies quite outside the schedule of the Beatitudes. If it be
desirable to search for the basis on which the particular selection
was made, it may perhaps be found in a reference to the con
tending schemes of interpretation of the Law which were in vogue
at the time with the three principal schools of religious teaching,
— the Sadducees, the Pharisees, and the Essenes. Thus the
treatment of the laws relating to murder and to adultery would
correct the tenets of the Sadducees, who adhered only to the
letter of the written Law ; the exposition of the laws concerning
oaths and retaliation would deal with the intricacies of the
Pharisaic conditions5; and the law of love would seem to point
to the object lesson manifested by the Essenes6. But if this be
in any degree the case, the reference is rather implicit than
direct. Practically indeed the whole ground of the divergent
systems is covered: but they are not brought specifically under
review. The particular commandments expounded are all taken
1 Deut. iv. 40. 2 Is. i. 19. 3 Kiddushin, i. 10.
4 Cp. St Paul's pathetic lament over Israel; Rom. ix. 31, 32; a. 2, 3.
5 See above, pp. 29, 30.
8 Cp. Philo, Quod omnis probus liber, § 12 keyovral rives irap' abrois ovopa
'EooaToi...Spois xal xavbai rplTrdis xP^^ot, np re ipikoBiw, xal 4>Ckapinp, xal
ipikavB pump... rov Si tpikavBpuirov [Selypara irapixovrai] effvoiai', labryra iravrbs Xbyov
xpehrova, Koivuvlav. See above, p. 33. 7

98 THE INTERPRETATION OF THE LAW
from the Law: and the whole teaching is an application in detail
of the main proposition, that the Lord had come to fulfil the
Law and the Prophets.
i. The Law concerning Murder.
(i) First in the list stands the Law concerning Murder.
Here, if anywhere, it might naturally be considered that the
commandment was merely the plain prohibition of an overt and
definite act, and no more. It was indeed the incorporation,
under another form, into the Covenant code of the primeval
Divine law, " Whoso sheddeth man's blood, by man shall his
blood be shed1." But here at once our Lord pierces beneath the
surface, and lays bare the essential principle which is involved in
the injunction. For it carries with it, when rightly understood,
a warning against the whole process of murder, and not only
against the ultimate and irrevocable deed. The true heinous-
ness of the crime consists in the motive : the enormity of it is
involved in the spirit of relentless hatred of which it is the
outcome ; and which accordingly is, by implication, also
prohibited in the prohibition of murder. And this new and
fuller interpretation is contrasted with, or rather attached to, the
simple statement of the original Law : " Ye have heard that it
was said to them of old time. ..But I say unto you..." The
Lord claims emphatically the right of His own authority to
declare the meaning of the Divine Law2.
But while the commandment is selected from the Decalogue8,
it is not quoted by itself as it stands there ; but the Lord adds
the traditional expansion of it, — "And whosoever shall kill
shall be in danger of the judgment" : just as in other subsequent
instances also He quotes side by side with the words of the
commandments explanatory statements from the traditional
teaching about them4. Indeed he refers to this in rjKovaare,
"ye have heard5," that is, in the usual instructions. Moreover
1 Gen. ix. 6. 2 See below, on vii. 29, p. 246.
5 Exod. xx. 13; Deut. v. 17. Cp. Exod. xxi. 12; Lev. xxiv. 17.
* verses 33, 43.
6 For the meaning of the aorist see Dean Robinson on Eph. i. 4; iv. 20; iv. 32:
and on M. xi. 25 — 27, in The Study of the Gospels, p. 107 "[The aorist] merely
suggests the past, without fixing our attention on any one point in it."

ST MATT. V. 21, 22 99
He does not introduce the quotation by the regular formula of
citation from the scriptures, — yeypairrai1, — but by ippeOrj2, which
corresponds to the Rabbinic "l©ni«?8, the expression commonly
used in adducing some well-known saying of the Rabbis.
The dative, rois dpxalois, refers to the recipients, not to the
authors, of the 'saying,' — "to them of old." So far as the
Greek is concerned it might regularly enough, according to the
common use of a dative with a passive verb4, denote the speakers;
as it is translated in the A.V., " by them of old time." But the
contrasted clause 6701 Be Xiyco vfiiv, in which v/ilv corresponds to
toi? dpxalois, makes the reference quite clear. The comparison
is between the preparatory and formal teaching received under
the Old Covenant6, and the more developed and spiritual
standard of the New. It declares the attitude towards the Law
which is to obtain in the Kingdom of God.
The illustrations by which this position is set forth are
distinctively Jewish, in every particular. They not only adopt
contemporary phrases, and allude to the existing local system of
administration of justice ; but they even start from the current
ethical standpoint of the Jews. They were of course purposely
expressed in the form which could most readily be understood
by those to whom the sermon was addressed. So only could
their teaching be grasped. And therefore they were based upon
associations, and modes of thought, which were familiar to the
hearers. They are in fact in the nature of parables rather than
1 No less than 62 times in N.T. (9 in M.). Cp. yeypappAvov iarlv (5 times in J.).
2 This seems to be the correct spelling of the indicative always in N.T. (Here,
6 times; Rom. ix. 12, 26; Gal. iii. 16; Rev. vi. 11; ix. 4.) The participle, which is
always spelt with y, rb pyBiv, is used by Matthew (only; 12 times) to introduce
quotations from O.T. ; but never without mention of the speaker, with Sid or bird.
ipptBy always refers to a spoken message, even in Rom. ix. 12.
8 Contr. for "IBKJVN "1DJVK, dictum est, ssepenumero in Talmude occurrit,
quoties aliqua traditio Doctorum vulgata et cognita profertur." Schottgen, Cp., e.g.,
Taanith, f. 18. 1 ; 20. 2. Cp. also the use of X3D. (Buxtorf, 2609.)
4 Cp. L. xxiii. 15 obSev a^iav Bavdrov iarlv ireirpaypJvov abrif. This usage, though
most frequently found with the perfect tense of the passive verb or participle, is not
confined to it. Cp., e.g., Thuk. iii. 64 Wees av bpuv SiKaibrepov irdai rois "EXXijfft
purciivro; (The idiom at vi. 1 is somewhat different.)
6 dpxeuo^DVjiD-ip. Cp. 1 Sam, xxiv. 14 yfcnj?!! Sg>P "l»N* "l$S3, LXX xaBiis
ktyerai i) irapapdM) -h-dpxala. Cp. L. ix. 8, 19; A. xv. 7, 21 ; Ecclus. ii. 10; xvi. 7.
7—2

100 THE INTERPRETATION OF THE LAW
direct maxims. That is to say, the teaching conveyed by them
is depicted in such strong local colouring that its permanent
moral lessons can only be inferred from the underlying principles
which are implied ; and cannot possibly be limited to the
particular details of the special instances given, which are
adduced simply as examples. Though the actual statements
(as recorded) do not go beyond a warning against the utterance
of certain epithets, and nothing is definitely added about the
inward disposition which the use of such expressions reveals,
it is obvious that the deeper reference is the real meaning of our
Lord's words. For if only the indulgence in some specified
forms of abuse were forbidden, and nothing more, that would be
an acquiescence in the casuistical Jewish method, of resting in
a system of mere technicalities, and ignoring the actuating
motives of conduct. But the instances given are brought
forward as tokens, or examples, of an aggravated spirit of anger.
The whole passage is a progressive exposition, on Jewish lines,
of what is intended by anger with ' a brother.'
Three gradations of spite are described, with three corre
sponding grades of judgment. In the degrees of anger there is
first the case of a bitter feeling of resentment1 against a
' brother,' or fellow-member of the Kingdom. For dSeXrpos is
never used, apparently, in the New Testament to denote a
' neighbour ' (as defined in the Parable of the Good Samaritan)2,
that is, a fellow-man, as man3. That wider reference of the
Gospel teaching was unfolded by our Lord later on, when His
disciples were better able to assimilate it. If it is implied
here, it is not expressed : but the ideal is taught on the more
restricted range which alone was within the grasp of the audience
at the time. 'ABeXcpos corresponds to nx in the Old Testament,
1 If elxy be retained, 'groundless resentment.' The textual authorities are very
evenly balanced: om. K B Vulg., Orig., Ath., Aug. {Retract, i. 19), Chrom., Jer.,
etc.; ins. D L 1 33 Lat., Syr., Iren., Clem. Al., Cypr., Aug. {De Serm. D. in M.)\
(A, C have lacuna here). Perhaps Syr. Sin. may turn the scale in favour of retention.
See Merx, Die vier kanonischen Evangelien, pp. 23 1 ff.
2 L. x. 29—37.
3 " There is, as far as it appears, no case where a fellow-man, as man, is called 'a
brother' in the N.T. Such passages as Matt. v. 22 ff., Luke vi. 41 ff., presuppose
a special bond of brotherhood." Westcott, on 1 J, ii. 9.

ST MATT. V. 21, 22 101
in its special signification of a fellow-member of the Covenant
nation1. In fact our Lord's words seem to bear a reminiscence
of the injunction of Lev. xix. 17: "Thou shalt not hate thy
brother in thine heart." This is the simplest form of anger.
Next in the series the use of the expression raca d5a«a="fe£r!!)a
is instanced ; a term of contemptuous abuse which frequently
occurs in the Rabbinic writings. Literally it means 'empty,'
'vacuous': but in common use it bore the meaning of 'villain3.'
The levelling therefore of such a reproach goes considerably
beyond the state of mere anger; for it accuses the person
addressed of moral delinquency.
With regard to the third case there is some uncertainty ; not
indeed as to the general meaning, which is quite clear ; but in
respect of the exact explanation of the word fiwpe. In all
probability it, like paxd, is a transliteration from the Hebrew,
representing ^~p (""J10), the participle of n?S, signifying 'rebellious,'
that is, against God. For this is the constant reference of the
word in the Old Testament : — " Because ye rebelled against my
word at the waters of Meribah." " If ye will not hearken unto
the voice of the LORD, but rebel against the commandment of
the LORD." "A stubborn and rebellious generation... whose
spirit was not stedfast with God." " This people hath a revolt
ing and rebellious heart... neither say they in their heart, Let us
now fear the LORD our God4." On the other hand fiwpe may be
not a transliteration but a translation, representing '?J, ' fool ' :
but if so the sense remains practically the same. For '?J
in the Old Testament has the secondary meaning of ' godless,'
' impious ' ; that is, the ' fool ' that is wanting in faith and
1 e.g., Lev. xxv. 35, 36; Deut. xix. 19; Neh. v. 7; Jer. xxxiv. 9, 14, 17; Zech.
vii. 9, 10; Mal. ii. 10.
2 Cp. Hebr. p^.; e.g. Judg. ix. 4, xi. 2 D^T D'EW?; LXX avSpes xevol.
3 "Apud Talmudicos passim ejus usus est, et saepe cum malitia convitii; unde
Judaei Germani illud nunc interpretantur 'du Bosewicht.' " Buxtorf, 2254. Cp., e.g.,
Berachoth, f. 22. 1; 32. 2; Gittin, f. 58. 1; Sanhedrin, f. 100. 1; Tanchuma, f. 5. 2;
18. 4. The first o of paxd is said to be due to the Galilean dialect. Hast. D.B. iv.
191. 4 Num. xx. 24; 1 Sam. xii. 15; Ps. Ixxviii. 8; Jer. v. 23, 24. Cp. also Num. xx.
10; xxvii. 14. The word is used of a son that is rebellious against his parents, Deut.
xxi. 18, 20.

102 THE INTERPRETATION OF THE LAW
reverence. " The fool hath said in his heart, There is no God."
" A foolish people have blasphemed thy Name." " Arise, O
God, plead thine own cause ; remember how the foolish man
reproacheth thee all the day1." Thus, on either interpretation
of fiwpe the meaning remains the same, — that it involves an
imputation of impiety, of disloyalty to God. So the scale has
increased, from the feeling of anger to the ascription first of
villainy, and lastly of sin against God.
The stages of judgment must of course represent the existing
Jewish system of judicature, which was in vogue at the time :
otherwise they would have conveyed no meaning to the men to
whom the teaching was addressed. But there are difficulties in
determining precisely what that system was. For the state
ments of the Talmud cannot be accepted altogether as records
of the actual constitution, but are in some respects only
theoretical ideals2. And yet these are almost the only
systematic evidence which is available. The general outline
however is sufficiently clear. The Sanhedrin was the supreme
court ; and there were subordinate local courts in every district
of the land. So much is certain. This arrangement corre
sponds in principle to the account of Jehoshaphat's organisation,
given in 2 Chron. xix, 5, 8 : "And he set judges in the land
throughout all the fenced cities of Judah, city by city... Moreover
in Jerusalem did Jehoshaphat set of the Levites and the priests
and of the heads of the fathers' houses of Israel, for the
judgement of the LORD, and for controversies. And they
returned to Jerusalem." Josephus3 in the final charge which he
puts into the mouth of Moses ascribes to him the same plan of
minor courts and a central tribunal. But in Deuteronomy4, on
1 Ps. xiv. 1 (=liii. 1); lxxiv. 18, 22. Cp. Deut. xxxii. 6, 21; Job ii. 10. Also
Ecclus. 1. 26 6 kabs b pupbs 6 xaroixuv iv SiKtpois.
2 Cp. Edersheim, Life and Times, etc., ii. 554 "We know what their forms
[connected with the Sanhedrin] were, although many of them (as so much in Rabbinic
accounts) may represent rather the ideal than the real — what the Rabbis imagined
should be, rather than what was." Massie, in Hast. D.B. iv. 192 a "The Talmud
is often purely academic, speaking of things that ought to be as though they were."
3 Ant. IV. viii. 14 dv S' ol Sixaoral py vouai irepl ruv iir' at)ToDs irapareraypivav
diroqyiivao6ai...dvairepiriTuoav ryv Slxyv els ryv lepdv irbkiv, xal awe'kBbvres S re
dpxiepebs xal 6 irpotpyrys xal y yepovala rb Soxovv dirorpaiviaBuaav.
4 xvi. 18 "Judges and officers shalt thou make in all thy gates, which the Lord

ST MATT. V. 21, 22 103
which his summary is chiefly based, there is no mention of a
supreme court of appeal : and his reference to it under the title
of 'the council,' and as sitting in 'the Holy City,' points strongly
to the inference that his description really sets forth the
condition of things in his own day. His evidence therefore,
such as it is, may be taken as a corroboration of the statements
of the Talmud ; though not without some reservation.
The chief difficulty lies in the apparent allusion to the
authority of the lower courts to try cases of murder. For
obviously evoxos 'iarai ry xpiaei in verse 22 must bear an
equivalent sense to that of the identical phrase in the im
mediately preceding sentence (ver. 21); and there the whole
point is the reference to trial for murder. But in the second
case TJ7 Kpiaet is contrasted with the subsequent rw avveSplw,
apparently as of a lower with a higher tribunal. It would
therefore seem to be implied that it came within the province of
the local courts, under certain circumstances, to adjudicate on
murder cases. But it is commonly supposed that such cases
were reserved to the Sanhedrin alone. And Josephus1 seems to
bear out this supposition in his story about the resentment of
the Sanhedrin against Herod, because he had on his own
authority put Hezekiah and other banditti to death. In their
complaint, lodged with Hyrcanus, they claim that the Sanhedrin
alone had power to pass sentence of death. According to the
Talmud however a 'minor Sanhedrin2,' of twenty-three mem
bers, was appointed for every town ; and was empowered to
deal with cases of life and death3. It was no doubt to these
thy God giveth thee, according to thy tribes : and they shall judge the people with
righteous judgement." Josephus may however have had in mind the further instruc
tion of Deut. xvii. 8 "If there arise a matter too hard for thee in judgement... then
shalt thou arise, and get thee up unto the place which the Lord thy God shall
choose, etc."
1 Ant. XIV. ix. 3 xal ydp 'tT.puSys 6 irats abrov 'Efe/tfaK dwixreive Kal robs avv
abrip, irapafids rbv ypArepov vbpov, os xeKihkvxev SvBpuvov dvaipeiv xal irovypbv ovra, el
pi) irpbrepov xaraxpiBely tovto iraBeiv biro tov avveSplov. But they significantly add py
kafiiiv Si i^ovaiav irapd aov ravra irbXpyaev.
2 n|Bp jniHJD; Sanhedrin, i. 6. See Schiirer, II. i. 153—4.
3 nlB'W VH; Sanhedrin, i. 4. Cp. Bacher, in Hast. D.B. iv. 401b "There
can be no doubt that a kernel of historical truth underlies [the] description of the train
of judicial procedure."..." As a matter of fact, in important instances the Great
Sanhedrin was called together to pronounce judgment."

104 THE INTERPRETATION OF THE LAW
lesser Sanhedrins, or local courts, that our Lord made reference
in His instructions to the Twelve : irapaBwaovaiv ydp vfids et?
avveBpia, Kal iv rals away wy als avrwv fiaanywaovatv v/ias1.
And it may well be therefore that here also the phrase evoxos rfj
Kpiaei alludes to trial before these subordinate courts.
The final judgment is to2 'the Gehenna of fire.' How
Gehenna, or the valley of Hinnom3, came to be adopted as the
symbol of the place of torment to which the ungodly shall
ultimately be consigned4, is uncertain. Possibly it arose from the
curse laid upon the valley when Josiah5 purposely defiled it in
order to stamp out with abhorrence the cruel fire worship of
Molech. For the common idea that ever-burning fires were
maintained there for the destruction of refuse and offal is not
supported by any evidence earlier than that of David Kimchi8
(about 1 200 A.D.). But however that may be, at all events the
term had already attained to its recognised symbolic meaning
by the first century. References to it appear in the Apocalyptic
books, — by name in the Ascension of Isaiah7, in IV Esdras8, and
in the Apocalypse of Baruch9 ; and by unmistakable allusions
in others, such as ' the valley ' in Enoch10, or ' the torment of
fire ' in the Apocalypse of Baruch11. The word is found, in the
form Dij.<?} in the Talmud13; and there are frequent statements
1 M. x. 17. Cp. 21 irapaSihaei els 9dvaTov...Kal Bavaruaovaiv abrobs.
2 The construction &>o%os els is technically a case of constructio praegnans, =^hox<is
(f}Xy9yvai) els. But the change from the dat. (ry xplaei, np avveSplu) to els with the
ace. is really due to the difference of character between the tribunals and the place of
punishment. 3 = D3iT"lJ (sometimes D3n"|3 *J), Josh. xv. 8, etc.
4 Cp. Just. M. Apol. i. 19 y Si yievvd ian rbiros tvBa KoXdfcaBai piXXovatv ol
dSlxus fSiiboavres.
5 II K. xxiii. 10.
6 On Ps. xxvii. "Gehennam fuit locus spretus, in quem abjecerunt sordes et
cadavera, et fuit ibi perpetuo ignis ad comburendum sordes ilias et ossa: propterea
parabolice vocatur judicium impiorum Gehennam." See Charles, Eschatology, p. 158.
7 i. 3; iv. 14.
8 ii. 29; vii. 36 "Et apparebit lacus [locus] tormenti...clibanus Gehennae
ostendetur." 9 lix. 10; lxxxv. 13.
10 xxvii. 2 Sid rl...y ipdpayl- Kexarypapivy iarlv; 7^X='IJ, cp. LXX II Chr. xxviii.
3 ; xxxiii. 6 iv ye Sevevvbp] Kardparos rois xexarapapivois iarlv pixpt aluvos. liv. I,
2; xc. 26.
11 lix. 2; xliv. 15; xlviii. 43; Ixiv. 7.
12 e.g., Pesachim, f. 54. 1; Nedarim, f. 39. 2 (Buxt. 395); Bab. Erubin, f. 19. ij
Shabbaih, f. 33. 1.

ST MATT. V. 21, 22 105
about Gehenna in the Targums1. This abundant evidence
affords sufficient proof that the fixed meaning of the term had
already been long established. In the New Testament yeevva
occurs always in the symbolic sense2.
A different interpretation is given by J. Lightfoot3 of the first
of these three grades of judgment, which is certainly interesting.
He refers to the differentiation which was made by the Rabbinic
teachers between cases of direct or indirect homicide. The
former of these alone were brought before the Sanhedrin ; but
in any instance of the latter the perpetrator was not to be
punished with death by the Sanhedrin, but was ' subject to
death from heaven,' — that is 'by the act of God4.' So he
makes the phrase evoxos rfj Kpiaei correspond to the formula
DW '3H3 3»n 5, ' guilty in the judgment of heaven,' — in the
sense of not being prosecuted, but left to the justice of God.
Accordingly he sums up the series thus6: "After this manner,
therefore, our Saviour suits a different punishment to different
sins by a most just parity, and a very equal compensation : to
unjust anger, the just anger and judgment of God ; to public
reproach, a public trial ; and hell-fire to the censure that
adjudgeth another thither." This interpretation seems at first
sight to have the merit of offering an attractive, and thoroughly
Jewish, solution of the difficult phrase evoxos rfj Kpiaei, — if it
could be sustained. But it cannot. For it is impossible to
suppose that the specially qualifying term ' of heaven ' (dw)
could have been omitted, if that were really the reference. The
unqualified expression rfj Kpiaei cannot stand for rfj Kpiaei ro3v
ovpav&v. Moreover this explanation is not applicable to the use
of the same phrase in verse 21.
(2) Our Lord immediately follows up, and emphasises, this
warning against the spirit of hatred by placing over against it
the positive duty of Reconciliation. Not even the highest
1 Wetstein gives several instances; e.g. Targ. Hieros. in Gen. xv. 15 "Gehenna,
quae parata est improbis in futuro seculo tanquam fornax; quam circumdant scintilla:
et flamma ignis, in cujus medium improbi cadent" ; Targ. Jon. in Is. Ixv. 5 ; etc.
2 Chiefly in Matt. (7 times) and Mk. (3). Also L. xii. 5; Jas. iii. 6.
3 So also by Schottgen. 4 Bab. Gemara on Sanhedrin, c. 9.
6 This formula recurs frequently in the Tract Baba kamma (Schottgen, on
M. xxi. 25).
6 vol. xi. p. no, ed. Pitman.

106 THE INTERPRETATION OF THE LAW
obligation of worship in the Temple must be allowed to stand in
the way of this paramount religious claim : the very offering of
a sacrificial gift1 at the altar must be delayed, if necessary, for
the sake of this. With the Jews the oblation of a sacrifice
might only be interrupted for ritual reasons ; as for example, on
account of the discovery at the last moment of some blemish
in the victim, or of some ceremonial disqualification in the
worshipper. A particular instance is given in the Talmudic
tract Pesachim^ which throws special light on this injunction
laid down by our Lord. It is there stated that if one comes to
slay his Passover, and remembers that there is some leaven in
his house, he must, if possible, return home and remove it, and
then come back and complete his offering. What then the
Jews themselves enjoined in the case of an external obstacle,
our Lord applied to an inward disability. They made the
ceremonial law supreme : He placed moral requirements above
all else. For it is not the worshipper who is represented as the
aggrieved party : the hindrance does not beset him from
outside : but the whole point is that he is directed to call to
mind any cause of offence which he, on his own part, may have
given to his ' brother ' member in the Kingdom.
It is obvious that this teaching at the time when it was given
could only refer to the Jewish sacrificial worship in the Temple.
But it is no less obvious that the principle which it conveys has
a direct, and even more emphatic, application to the conditions
of approach to worship at the Christian altar, in the Eucharist.
And .the saying is so applied by Irenseus3 and by TertuUian4.
But it is remarkable how seldom it is quoted in this connexion.
1 Supov had practically become the generic word for a sacrificial offering of any
kind. It is used in the LXX most frequently to translate firUD (32 times), or |3"1t>
(77, all in Lev. and Num., except Neh. xiii. 30); also \\1\F\, Jer. xxxiii. n. In fact
this had become such an established use that the word was taken over by the Rabbinic
writers, in this sense, as jilH: e.g., Sebachim, f. 7. 2 NTI \Xtn Twty; Jer. Targ. on
Ps. cxli. 2 D'D3 Jlin.
2 iii. 7; f. 49. 1.
3 iv. xxxi. 1 "Igitur Ecclesiae oblatio, quam Dominus docuit offerri in universo
mundo, purum sacrifieium reputatum est apud Deum, et acceptum est ei...quod in
omni simplicitate et innocentia Dominus volens nos offerre, praedicavit dicens : Cum
igitur offers etc."
4 De Patientia, 12 "Nemo convulsus animum in fratrem suum munus apud altare
perficiet nisi prius reconciliando fratri reversus ad patientiam fuerit."

ST MATT. V. 23—26 107
Thus, for instance, there is in the Didache1 an allusion to the
duty of reconciliation before communicating ; but it contains
no immediate reference to this passage. While however the
actual words are not often found, their lesson was fully accepted
by the Church, in the requirement of amity on the part of those
who are admitted to the Holy Communion. It is with this in
view that Cyril of Jerusalem2 uses this saying to enforce the
symbolic meaning of the Kiss of Peace. In the English Book
of Common Prayer the spirit of this injunction finds clear
expression in the third Rubric before the Office of Holy
Communion. The binding obligation of reconciliation is further set forth
in a parabolic form as a debt which must be paid : otherwise the
creditor, or 'adversary8,' will hand over the delinquent to the
judge, and the judge in turn will pass him on to the officer4 of
the court for imprisonment. In such a case it is a matter of
common prudence to effect a settlement while ' on the way ' to
the court.
The reference in the allusion to the process for debt seems to
be rather to the practice of the Roman Law than to Jewish
custom. For the Jewish Law, as it appears, contained no
provision for imprisonment for debt. The description was
probably suggested by the ' informations ' of the reX&vai,
whose powers were restricted under the Empire, so that they
had no right of exacting arrears of taxation themselves, or by
their own agents, but could only carry cases before the officers
of the state6. And this is supported by the use of the all but
unique word KoBpdvrrjs*, which is found only here and in
1 c. xiv. irds Si ex<ov T7/V dpipipoklav perd tou iralpov avro9 py avvekBiru bpiv, ?us
ou SiaXkayuaiv, tva py xoivuBy y Bvala bpuv.
2 Catech. Myst. v. 3 aypetov rolvw iarl to iplkypa rov dvaxpaByvai ras ipvxds xal
irdaav O-oplJieiv pjiyaixaxtav. Sid tovto b Xpiarbs gXeYei'- idv irpoipipys rb Supbv aov
kt\....o6kovv rb (plkypa SiaKkayi) ian.
3 dvrlSixos was one of the technical words which were adopted by the Rabbinic
writers, as Dip*TP38> e.g., Bereshith Rabba, § 82 (Buxt. 136).
4 vrypirys in N.T. esp. of the officers of the Sanhedrin. Here=irpoKTwp, L. xii.
58- ?
5 See Hast. D.B. v. 395 b. Prof. Ramsay finds an allusion to this practice in
iavxoipdvTyaa, L. xix. 8 (396 a).
6 Wetstein cites Plut. Cicero, p. 875 c rb Si XeirrbrraTOv tov xoXkov voplaparos

108 THE INTERPRETATION OF THE LAW
St Mark's Gospel written for the Roman world. "The
quadrans," writes Dr Archibald Kennedy1, " was always a tariff
coin... but popularly known by the name of its tariff equivalent,
the Greek chalkus (Heb. sh&min). This explains how the
quadrans does not appear in a Hebraized form in the Mishna2...
All government dues and official payments were calculated on
the Roman denarius system... St Matthew therefore, familiar as
a tax-gatherer with the Roman system of accounting," adopts
" the lowest denomination in the Roman scale."
ii. The Law concerning Adultery.
(i) The seventh commandment of the Decalogue is next
brought under review, in the same mode as the sixth. The
principle is again enforced that the true keeping of the Law
depends really on the disposition of the heart, and not merely
on the avoidance of the consummation of wrong-doing : " I say
unto you, that every one that looketh on a woman to lust after
her3 hath committed adultery with her already in his heart."
This teaching was not new, so far as its general form is con
cerned. The doctrine that a man is morally responsible for an
evil intention no less than for an actual wrong-doing is to some
extent common to all moralists ; and it might easily be
illustrated from the aphorisms of teachers of various nations in
all ages : such for example (to take but two instances) as the
maxim attributed to Aristophanes4, Bvvarai ydp 'laov toj Bpdv rb
voeiv, or the familiar lines of Juvenal5, " Nam scelus inter se
taciturn qui cogitat ullum, Facti crimen habet." Moreover as to
Kovadpdvryv ixdkovv. There however the word is not, strictly speaking, a Greek
term, as adopted in general use from the Latin, but is a transliteration, used in
explanation of a nickname Quadrantia {KovaSpavrla).
1 Hast. D.B. iii. 429.
2 DDjmp does however occur in a table of money values in Jer. Talm. (Kiddu-
shin, f. 58. 4), for which Bab. Talm., in the corresponding table, gives p^lDilp:
3 The construction of the ace. {abripi) after iiriBvpyaai is quite usual. Cp. LXX
Exod. xx. 17 (and 14 times elsewhere); Wisd. xvi. 3; Ecclus. i. 25; xvi. 1; xl. 22;
Judith xvi. 22; Herm. Vis. 1. i. 4; ii. 4; Sim. ix. ix. 7; Barn. xix. 6; Ign. Rom. iv.
3 ; vii. 1. Cp. the Tablet of Adrumetum (3rd cent.), 45 (Deissmann, B.S. 277).
4 Quoted by Clem. Al. Strom, vi. ii. 23, p. 749.
6 xiii. 209, 210. Cp. Aelian, V.H. xiv. 28 ob pivov b dSixijaas xaxbs, dXXA xai 6
evvo-qoas dSixyaat. Cp. also Bamidbar Rabba, f. 197. 4 "When a man thinks to sin
it is the same as if he had already sinned against God."

ST MATT. V. 27, 28 109
the special reference of our Lord's warning some interesting
parallels may be found in Jewish literature. Thus, in the
Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs^, it is said that "he that
hath a pure thought in love doth not look on a woman (with a
view) to fornication ; for he hath not defilement in his heart,
because the spirit of God hath rested upon him." And
Buxtorf2 quotes a saying from the Talmud : " Whosoever looks
upon a woman with intention, it is as if he had gone in unto her."
The teaching is not without parallel in isolated sentences ; and
it may be therefore that our Lord's saying was based upon the
best traditions of the Jewish schools. But the general tone of
the Rabbinic passages3 in which reference is made to the moral
danger of looking on a woman betrays a grossly debased estimate
of womanhood, which is utterly contrary to our Lord's attitude
towards women. The Rabbinic precepts are, for the most part,
altogether on a different moral plane. They are at best merely
fine-drawn casuistical instances of ' making a fence about the
Law.' But our Lord's interpretation is essentially moral. It
goes to the very core of the ideal of purity. It takes up and
emphasises the Beatitude declared for the pure in heart. The
' letter ' of the Rabbinic injunctions presents an apparent
coincidence with Christ's teaching : but the ' spirit ' is entirely
different. (2) In view of the extreme subtlety of this particular
temptation our Lord proceeds to urge the imperative need of
self-discipline, in terms which no sane man could possibly take
in their literal sense 4 ; but which pictorially, and symbolically,
declare, beyond all possibility of mistake, the principle that the
1 If this book may be (as Dr Charles contends) accepted as an uninterpolated
Jewish book. The reference is Benj. viii. 2 b exuv Sidvoiav xaBapdv iv dydiry obx bpq.
yvvaixa els iropvelav ob ydp ixei piaapbv iv ry xapSla, oti dvairiiravrai iir' atrip rb
irvevpa tov Qeov.
2 1474, n^y sO 1^N3 rUH33 nC2>N3 ^>3nDDn b, Kalla (one of the small
tracts appended to the Bab. Talmud. According to Zunz it is probably older than
the Jer. Talmud. See Schiirer, 1. i. 144).
3 Cp., e.g., Jer. Challa, f. 58. 3 ; Bab. Berachoth, f. 24. 1 ; Shabbath, f. 64. 2.
4 Tertullian, contrasting the Christian standard with the legend about Democritus,
writes: "At Christianus salvis oculis feminam videt, animo adversus libidinem caecus
est." Apologet. adv. Gentes, § 46.

110 THE INTERPRETATION OF THE LAW
lower nature must at all costs be sacrificed to the claims of the
higher: " If thy right eye1 snares2 thee, pluck it out.. .If thy
right hand snares thee, cut it off." The Symbolic reference of
such a statement was abundantly clear. Even the literal
injunction of Deut. xxv. 12 was interpreted, as Philo8 notes, by
some teachers symbolically in a similar sense: "not that the
body may be mutilated by being robbed of its most necessary
part, but with a view to cutting off all godless thoughts of the
soul." The second limb of each sentence, — " It is better for thee
that4 one of thy limbs perish and not that thy whole body be
cast (depart) unto Gehenna," — is analogous to various proverbial
expressions of similar import which are found in the Rabbinic
literature5. The same symbolism was employed again by our Lord on a
later occasion6, in connexion with His private warning to His
disciples against causing offence to 'the little ones'; in re
minder, as it would seem, of His earlier teaching in this public
discourse. For it is a strange illustration to use in reference to
causing offence to others, unless by allusion to a former use
of the phrase ; whereas it exactly accords with this monition
concerning personal temptations of the body.
ii. b. The Law concerning Divorce.
The treatment of the Law concerning Divorce is an appendix,
or sub-section, attached to the main section dealing with the
principal question of Adultery : it is not a separate and in
dependent section of the interpretation of the Law. For it is
introduced merely by ippeOrj Be, not by the full formula rjKovaare
on ippeOrj, which is found at the opening of each of the main
1 Cp. 1 Sam. xi. 2; Zech. xi. 17. 2 See Hast. D.B. iii. 586 a, b.
3 De spec. legg. § 32 Sielpyrai ovpfiokixus, obx """u! dxpurypid^yrai rb aupa
arepbpevov dvayxaiordTOV pipovs, dXX' virip tov irdvras tt)s tyvxys ddiovs ixripvetv
Xoyiapobs. 4 avpipipei aoi. ..tva, M. xviii. 6; J. xi. 50; xvi. 7. Cp. L. xvii. 2 kvairekei
abrip el...r) tva... The construction no doubt resembles the Hebrew '3 3to; but it is
more probably an instance of the general tendency in late Greek to adopt a periphrasis
with tva for the infinitive. See Blass, Gram, of N.T. Gk. § 69.
5 Cp., e.g., Nidda, f. 13; Jer. Targ. on Gen. xxxviii. 26.
" M. xviii. 8 — 10 ; Mk ix. 42 — 47.

ST MATT. V. 29 — 31 111
divisions of the subject1. And it does in fact fall under the
head of the Law concerning Adultery : for it is brought forward
to explain a particular instance of adultery which was not
recognised by the Jews as such. And again, this addition of a
subordinate clause dealing with another aspect of the matter in
hand is a counterpart of the arrangement of the preceding
section. Just as the exposition of the Law forbidding Murder
was followed up and expanded by a declaration of the duty of
Reconciliation, so now in sequence to the interpretation of the
Law concerning Adultery is added a further statement unfolding
the real application of the Law relating to Divorce.
The question of Divorce was one which was eagerly debated
by the Rabbinic students. A whole treatise of the Talmud is
devoted to it, — Gittin (' bills of divorcement ') ; and the
positions taken up respectively by the principal leaders and their
adherents are fortunately there recorded2. The original state
ment of the Law is found in Deut. xxiv. I — 4 : " When a man
taketh a wife, and marrieth her, then it shall be, if she find no
favour in his eyes, because he hath found some unseemly thing
(13^1 rvj"W)3 jn ner) that he shall write her a bill of divorcement,
and give it in her hand, and send her out of his house, etc.4 "
This enactment was interpreted by the Rabbis in very different
ways, according as they laid the chief stress on this or that
phrase in the qualifying sentence. The school of Shammai
treated the expression " because he hath found some unseemly
thing in her" as the determinant, and held that a wife could only
be divorced for unchastity. The school of Hillel also pointed
to the same clause; but by putting the emphasis on "93 5
1 verses 21, 27, 33, 38, 43.
2 ch. ix. § 10. Cp. also Sota, f. 4. 1 ; Bamidbar Rabba, f. 202. 4, for the position
of Shammai in this matter.
3 literally, 'nakedness of a matter'; LXX daxypov irpaypia. The same phrase
occurs also Deut. xxiii. 14 (LXX doxypoobvy -irpdyparos).
4 The following verses contemplate the subsequent marriage of a woman so
divorced. That is, she was regarded then as in the position of a widow (Rom. vii. t,
3 ; 1 Cor. vii. 39) ; cp. Lev. xxi. 14 ; Ezek. xliv. 22.
6 De Sola and Raphall {Eighteen Treatises from the Mishna, ed. 2, p. 305) explain
this interpretation as due to a curious resolution of "CH nVTjJ into two alternative
causes: r\Y\!), 'unchastity,' or 131, 'for [any other] cause.' (Cp. xard irdaav
alrlav, M. xix. 3.)

112 THE INTERPRETATION OF THE LAW
arrived at the argument that divorce was permissible on any
ground whatever, even the most trivial: and actually put forward
as an example, " Even if a wife overcooked her husband's food."
On the other hand R. Akiba, separating the clause " if she find
no favour in his eyes " from the following words which give the
legitimate ground of such disfavour, — "because he hath found
some unseemly thing in her," — and making it the decisive
statement, went so far as to argue that any reason for which a
wife lost favour in her husband's eyes was sufficient justification
for a divorce, "even if he found one more beautiful than her."
With such divergent interpretations current on this important
matter, it was hardly possible that it should be left out of view
in a new treatment of the Law. It was not merely a case of
isolated sayings put forth by individual teachers ; but the record
expressly refers to the ' school ' (n'3) of Shammai and the
' school ' of Hillel. It was a matter of common controversy.
In dealing with it however our Lord did not range Himself
with any of the disputants. It is true that in His interpretation
He tacitly approved of the contention of the school of Shammai,
in limiting the legal permission of divorce to a case of unchastity.
But at the same time He treated the whole subject on a different
basis ; not as a legal problem, but as a moral question. So far
was a divorce for any other cause than that laid down in the
Law from being permissible, that any such ostensible dissolution
of marriage was invalid ; and he who should take a wife so ' put
away ' by her husband was guilty of adultery. The Jews had
seized on the licence suggested in the direction to give a formal
bill of divorcement1, and only discussed the grounds on which it
might be exercised. He taught that divorce in itself is a breach
of the marriage bond, and therefore on no account allowable,
except only for the one cause specified in the Law.
That cause was prenuptial unchastity. This must be the
meaning of "'?'? nn>- F°r taken in conjunction with the
directions given in Deut. xxii. 14 — 21 concerning the tokens of
virginity in the case of a bride, and with the fact that the
1 J1IV13 "1SD, /3i/3X(ov diroaraalov, LXX Deut. xxiv. i, 3; Is. 1. i; Jer. iii. 8.
So M. xix. 7; Mk x. 4. diroardaiov (without fiifiXlov) here only; = Lat. 'repudium,'
e.g., Suet. Calig. 36 "repudium ipse misit iussitque in acta referri."

ST MATT. V. 31, 32 113
enactment of Deut. xxiv. I deals only with the initial stage of
married life (" when a man taketh a wife, and marrieth her "), it
is clear that the ground of separation lies in prenuptial sin on
the part of the woman. This was the only cause contemplated
in the Law as justifying divorce, because in itself it vitiated the
marriage contract ab initio. And it is this which is explicitly
referred to in the phrase irapeKrbs Xbyov iropveias. For X070?
iropveias represents ">?;! "I*!?1. iropvela therefore in this
sentence is used in its proper sense2, just as fioixev&rjvai* and
fioixaaOat are used in their proper meaning in the subsequent
words. The statement4 may be true that " In the early Church
it was not questioned that in Matt. v. 32 iropvela is used in the
sense of fiotxeia, or rather that the generic term is employed
when the specific word might have been used." But if so, that
is due to two reasons : — (a) first, because the phrase was not
considered in relation to the Hebrew expression which it re
presents ; perhaps owing to the fact that it does not at all
correspond with the Septuagint rendering, daxvfiov irpdyfia : and
(b) more particularly because the conception of adultery in the
West differed from the Oriental view ; and consequently the
latter was not understood by the Church in the West. For in
the East adultery was regarded in the light of its effect on
succession to an inheritance, rather than as a violation of
connubial rights. It was "the act whereby any married man
was exposed to the risk of having a spurious offspring imposed
upon him." And that was a serious contingency " where the
1 For the position of "\yi, cp. the peculiar phrase in the correlative passage, Deut.
xxii. 14, 17 Dnsi. fOy}}. kbyos of course is constantly used to translate "Vn in the
sense of 'a matter,' irpdypa, e.g., Judg. xxi. 11; II Sam. xi. 18, 19.
3 As in M. xix. 9 py iirl iropvela. The references to our Lord's teaching on this
point in the other Gospels (Mk x. 11; L. xvi. 18) written for the Roman world omit
this exception, which belonged to the Jewish Law. The suggestion that irapexrbs
kbyoo iropveias is a gloss (Bacon, Sermon on Mount, p. 177) is not supported by any
textual evidence ; nor has it even probability in its favour : for an interpolation would
certainly have given poixelas.
3 iroiei abryv poixevByvai, sc. "per alias nuptias, quarum potestatem dat divor-
tium." Bengel. This accords with the words which immediately follow, xal Ss idv
dwdkeXvp^vyv (='her when divorced') xrX., that is, divorce, except for the one
specified cause, is no solution of the marriage bond.
4 Diet. Chr. Antt. ii. n 10 a.
8. 8

114 THE INTERPRETATION OF THE LAW
succession to landed property went entirely by birth ; so that a
father could not by his testament alienate it from any one who
was regarded as his son1." That was why prenuptial unchastity
on the part of the woman was held to vitiate the marriage
contract. And further, the excepted case here, — irapeKrbs Xoyov
iropveias, — could not refer to adultery. For in this discourse
our Lord was dealing with the Law as laid down in the
Scriptures. But in that Law the punishment appointed for
adultery was death2. Divorce was not recognised as a remedy
for it. No doubt the exaction of the death penalty was not in
practice enforced3. For tradition had modified the written Law,
and had substituted divorce for capital punishment4. But that
was not the Law : and it was on the Law that our Lord was basing
His teaching. He did not accept the traditions of the elders.
In fact in this very instance He was refuting their tradition.
The Law allowed divorce only in one case : and He declared
that divorce under any other circumstances involved adultery in
the event of remarriage.
Here then, in His first treatment of the subject He went no
further than the actual Law. But when He returned to it again
towards the close of His ministry, in answer to a challenge of
the Pharisees5, He struck deeper down to the root of the whole
matter, and based the indissoluble bond of marriage on the
primeval law of the Creator for man : who " from the beginning
made them male and female, and said, For this cause shall a man
leave his father and mother, and shall cleave to his wife ; and
1 Kitto's Cyclopedia of Bibl. Lit. ed. Alexander, i. 73 a. This is borne out by
the regulation of the Law (Exod. xxii. 16; Deut. xxii. 28, 29), that if a fallen woman
was married to the known partner of her sin, no divorce was allowed. In that case
there was no danger of a spurious offspring.
2 Lev. xx. 10; Deut. xxii. 22.
3 " I do not remember that I have any where in the Jewish pandect read any
example of a wife punished with death for adultery." J. Lightfoot, on M. xix. 8.
4 It has been suggested that the dilemma proposed by the Scribes and Pharisees
in the case of the adulteress (in the pericope adulters, J. viii. 3 — 11), turned upon the
fact that the Law had become obsolete in practice : so that they endeavoured to entrap
the Lord either into enforcing a very severe direction which had passed out of use, or
into sanctioning the looser practice of divorce, which was not in consonance with the
written Law. Kitto, Cycl. i. 73 b.
5 M. xix. 3 — 9; Mk x. 2 — 9.

ST MATT. V. 32, 33 115
the twain shall become one flesh. So that they are no more
twain, but one flesh. What therefore God hath joined together,
let not man put asunder." The Divine institution of marriage
cannot be abrogated by any human scheme of divorce.
iii. The Law concerning Oaths.
Two separate, though closely related, injunctions are
associated together in verse 33 : — (a) ovk iiriopKijaeis, and
(b) diroBwaets tqj Kvpiw roiis SpKovs aov. (a) The former of these
is taken from Lev. xix. 12: "Ye shall not swear by my name
falsely1." At first sight it does not seem to correspond very
closely to these words, but rather to be a general reference to
the teaching of that and other similar passages. But the
discrepancy is more apparent than real. For it is due to the
use of the technical Greek term irTiopKijaets', which in one word
represents the composite Hebrew expression "V$b V^fT\. At
the same time the quotation must also refer ultimately to the
third commandment of the Decalogue9, which lies behind the
prohibition in Leviticus, and all other teaching about perjury.
(b) The second clause however is an adaptation of a rule laid
down in the Law, and not a direct quotation. The basis of it is
found in Deut. xxiii. 21 : "When thou shalt vow a vow unto the
LORD thy God, thou shalt not be slack to pay it " ; and in
Num. xxx. 2 : " When a man voweth a vow unto the LORD, or
sweareth an oath to bind his soul with a bond, he shall not
profane his word ; he shall do according to all that proceedeth
out of his mouth " ; compared with Ps. lxxvi. 1 1 : " Vow, and
pay unto the LORD your God." And elsewhere also the same
behest is repeated 4. But in every case the reference is to vows,
not to oaths ; except that in the words cited from Numbers an
oath is joined with the vow in the commandment. But our
1 T?B^ '(PC'S •1jnB'rrt6; LXX obx Spe'ioBe rip Svbputrl pov iir dSUup.
2 iiriopxeiv is not much used in Biblical Greek. It is not found in LXX, nor else
where in N.T. ; it occurs only Wisd. xiv. 28; I (in) Esdr. i. 48. iirlopKos, Zech. v.
3, LXX; I Tim. i. 10. iiriopxla, Wisd. xiv. 25.
8 Exod. xx. 7; Deut. v. 11.
4 Job xxii. 27; Ps. 1. 14; lxi. 8; lxvi. 13; cxvi. 14, 18; Eccl. v. 4; Ecclus. xviii.
22. In all these references (except Num. xxx. 2) LXX has diroboivai.
8—2

116 THE INTERPRETATION OF THE LAW
Lord applied it to oaths only, and made no allusion to vows.
That is to say, He treated oaths, the validity of which rests on
the underlying appeal to God, as being equivalent to bonds of
obligation to God Himself. The second injunction therefore is
intimately connected with the first.
In taking up the question of the use of oaths our Lord was
touching upon a subject which already was forced prominently
upon the attention of the Jews. In this matter there were two
conflicting standards of practice set before the people : and yet
both of them were due to acknowledged professors of a religious
life based upon the Law. For it was this question perhaps more
than any other which marked a sharp division between the
teaching of the Pharisees and that of the Essenes1. Much as
the latter had in common with the Pharisees, — in their strict
legalism, their scrupulous ceremonial purifications, their ex
clusiveness of separation from the common people, and the
like, — in this respect at least they were diametrically opposed to
them, that they forbade all use of oaths2. Of them Josephus8
writes that " whatsoever they say is stronger than an oath ; and
they repudiate swearing, esteeming it as something worse than
perjury ; for they say that he is already condemned who cannot
be believed without calling upon God." And Philo4 counts
among the tokens of their loyalty to God, rb dvwfiorov, rb
dyfrevBes. That was the one standard ; and it was a high ideal.
The other was the very opposite of this. The Pharisees
practically encouraged the frequent use of oaths, both by example
and by precept, through their casuistry. They juggled with the
intention, or with the form, of an oath until they made it alto
gether of none effect. And so they destroyed all notion of
sacredness in an oath ; they lost all sense of honour regarding
any statement made on oath. It is recorded5 even of R. Akiba
1 See Schiirer, n. ii. 209, 210.
2 Schiirer attributes this feature of Essenism to the influence of Pythagoreanism;
p. 217. For the doctrine of Pythagoras on this point, cp. Diog. Laert. viii. i. 19,
§ 21 pySi bpvivai Beobs- daxeiv ydp abrbv Seiv d£ibiriarov irapixeiv.
3 BJ. II. viii. 6 xal irdv piv rb pydiv bir' abruv laxvpbrepov opxov rb Si bpvbeiv
[? avrois] irepiiaravrai (cp. II Tim. ii. 16; Tit. iii. 9), x&pbv n iiriopxlas viroXap^dvovres'
ySy ydp KareyvuaBal <j>aai rbv dirioTobpevov Slxa Qeov.
4 Quod omn. prod. lib. § 12. 6 Kalla, f. 18. -z.

ST MATT. V. 34—36 117
that he " swore with his lips, but in his heart made it void." For
the Pharisees taught that oaths had no binding force if any
circumlocutions were substituted for the name of God, so as
technically to avoid calling Him to witness. Once again, at the
close of His ministry, when He had come into open conflict with
them, our Lord returned to this question1, and exposed the
hollowness of their subterfuge. The instances which He then
cited are exactly similar to those which are here adduced, — by2
the temple — by the altar — by heaven (as here). But then, in
dealing more directly with the teachers who propounded this
system, He went into greater detail ; and instanced the subtle
distinctions which they attempted to draw between the temple
and the temple gold, the altar and the altar gift. As frequently
is the case in St Matthew's Gospel, the later, and fuller, teaching
explains the reference of the earlier statement of it in this
discourse. Our Lord was not here quoting imaginary expressions, but
was alluding to the actual phrases which were in current use
under the encouragement of the Pharisaic doctrine. The
following are instances of the Rabbinic justification of the use
of these terms. " Whosoever adjures another by heaven or by
earth, he is not guilty (that is, of perjury, if the statement is
false) : . . .because it ought to be evident that he who swears by
heaven and by earth does not swear by Him Who created them,
but by those creatures themselves3." — "R. Judah saith, He that
saith, By ferusalem, saith nothing, unless with an intent purpose
he shall vow towards Jerusalem4." — " If one is bound to swear to
his neighbour, and he saith, Vow to me by the life of thy head,
R. Meir holds that he may retract his words; but the wise
deny it5."
1 M. xxiii. 16 — 22.
2 bpvbeiv...iv is a Hebraism ('3 yBtJO). So M. xxiii. 16 — 22; Rev. x. 6, where
Dr Swete quotes Arethas : Soxei piv dveXXi)vurrov etvat. bpvbeiv ydp X^yertu ' xard
nvos,' obx '(v nvi'
8 Shebuoth, c. iv. 13 ; and f. 35. 2. 4 Tosephta on Nedarim, c 1.
5 Sanhedrin, c. 3. This artificial distinction between the relative force of different
oaths was maintained in Jewish teaching for many centuries. J. Lightfoot quotes
from Maimonides [12th century], on Shebuoth, c. 12 "If any swear by heaven, by
earth, by the sun, etc., although the mind of the swearer be under these words to
swear by Him Who created them, yet this is not an oath."

118 THE INTERPRETATION OF THE LAW
Now the essential meaning of an oath is that it calls God to
witness that the statement made is true1. But this is involved,
as our Lord shows, even in the frivolous oaths employed by the
Jews. For, as their own scriptures would teach them, heaven is
God's throne, and earth is His footstool2 ; and ferusalem is the
city of the Great King3. While as to their own heads, which were
the Creator's work, they could not themselves usurp the creative
power in the smallest detail, as of making the hair black in youth
or white in old age.
Our Lord's admonition then, — "Swear not at all," — was to
avoid all oaths; that is, as the words immediately following
show, all vain and arbitrary oaths in support of statements made
under the ordinary circumstances of life4. That he did not refer
to the solemn invocation, on special occasions, of God as witness
to the truth of a formal declaration, such as the evidence given
in a Court of Law, is shown by His own response, when on His
trial before the Sanhedrin, to the adjuration of Caiaphas5: "I
adjure thee by the living God that thou tell us... Jesus saith unto
him..." A solemn oath of this kind was recognised by the Law:
"Thou shalt fear the LORD thy God... and by his name shalt
thou swear6 " ; and by the Jewish teachers, who distinguished
'an oath of testimony7' from all other kinds of oaths. The
principle of this distinction is expressed in our thirty-ninth
Article, ' Of a Christian Man's Oath ' : "As we confess that
vain and rash Swearing is forbidden Christian men by our Lord
Jesus Christ, and James his Apostle8, so we judge, that Christian
1 Cp. Philo, De Decalogo, § 17 paprvpla ydp ian 6eo8 irepl irpaypdruv dp$uip\
rovpivuv dpxos.
2 Is. Ixvi. 1.
3 Ps. xlviii. 2. Cp. Enoch xci. 13 "The house of the Great King shall be built
in glory for evermore. "
4 For the popular habit of profane swearing see Philo, De Decalogo, § 19.
8 M. xxvi. 63, 64. It is quite inconceivable that, if our Lord intended, on principle,
to abrogate all formal recognition of swearing, as in Courts of Justice, He should
have Himself acquiesced in the adjuration addressed to Him by Caiaphas, "as a
matter of the moment's necessity " ! as suggested by Votaw, Hast. D.B. v. 28 b.
8 Deut. x. 20.
7 rm5?n njn3t?. Buxtorf, 2315. Even the Essenes required oaths of their
neophytes on their full admission into the community : Spmvs abrois Spvvai tppixiiSeis,
Jos. B.J. 11. viii. 7.
8 Jas. v. 12.

ST MATT. V. 34 — 37 119
Religion doth not prohibit, but that a man may swear when the
Magistrate requireth, in a cause of faith and charity, so it be
done according to the Prophet's teaching, in justice, judgement,
and truth1."
The true standard laid down for members of the Kingdom
of God is that their simple word should be the sufficient
guarantee of veracity2. All words are spoken in the presence of
God : therefore an oath adds nothing really to their force. The
simplicity of genuine truthfulness is described, after the Jewish
fashion, by the plain use of the affirmative or negative particles
to express assertion or denial ; as, for example, in the saying :
" The Yea of the righteous is Yea, and their Nay is Nay3." So
the Midrash on Exodus represents God as saying to the
Israelites, " Say ye Nay concerning Nay, and Yea concerning
Yea4." On the other hand there is the warning of R. Jochanan,
that " There is a Yea which is as it were a Nay, and there is a
Nay which is as a Yea5 " ; while Abui taught that " Yea is that
word which no one ought to use meaning one thing with his
mouth, but another thing in his heart6": and these sayings
suggest a comparison with the hypocritical oaths of the Pharisees.
In view of the currency of such expressions it would seem that
the val val, and ov ov, of this passage may not improbably be no
mere iterations, but that the second particle in each case is
used predicatively, — " Let your speech be (as to) Yea, Yea and
(as to) Nay, Nay." And this is made more likely by the form
of the obvious reminiscence of this aphorism in Jas. v. 1 2, " Let
your Yea be Yea, and your Nay, Nay7." But the emphasis
of the doubled particle, if that be the meaning of the words, —
" Let your speech be Yea Yea, and Nay Nay," — would practically
1 In the Latin Article the words are "in justitia, in judicio, et veritate" : a phrase
taken from the Vulgate of Jer. iv. 2 "Etjurabis: Vivit Dominus! in veritate, et in
judicio, et in justitia."
2 Cp. Philo, De Decalogo, § 17 xdXkiarov Sy xal piutpeXioTarov xal dppbrrov
\oyixy rpbaei rb dvuporav, ovrus dXyBebeiv i<j>' ixdarov SeSiSaypivy us robs Xbyovs Spxovs
elvat vopl£eo9ai.
3 1&6 Urb& 1S<!?1 |rt Orb& JH D'pHXPl. Baba Kamma, c. 8. Cp. the Midrash
Ruth Rabba, f. 42. 4.
4 Mechilta, f. 42. 2 \T\ \T\ ?J» 1&6 )tO ?J?.
5 Baba Kamma, f. 93. 6 Baba Mezia, f. 48. 2. Cp. 11 Cor. i. 18, 19.
7 yru Se vpuv rb Nai vat, xal rb Oi) oB.

120 THE INTERPRETATION OF THE LAW
signify very much the same thing as the other rendering, though
not so naturally. And this form of expression was not alto
gether unknown in the Jewish Schools ; as, for instance : " There
is he who says Yea Yea, and there is he who says Nay Nay1 " ;
where however the reference seems to be rather to a solecism
than to a common manner of speech. The other interpretation
gives a clearer force to the words.
All that exceeds2 the simplest statement of fact is, the Lord
adds, due to the influence of the Evil One. For rov trovrjpov is
not neuter but masculine, in accordance with the regular use of
the New Testament, or at least of St Matthew, St John and St
Paul3. Indeed it is doubtful whether the idea of an abstract
principle as an actuating power would be intelligible to Jewish
minds. Such a notion was not in accordance with their mode
of thought. They could understand to irovrjpbv as an object to
be sought after or avoided : as St Paul urges, diroarvyovvres rb
trovrjpov, KoXXco/ievoi too dyaBw*: but not as an originating
influence. For they recognised, and firmly believed in, a
personal Author of evil, to whose incentive all evil tendencies
were ascribed. And our Lord Himself appealed to this belief:
" when any one heareth the word of the Kingdom, and under
standeth it not, then cometh the Evil One and snatcheth away
that which hath been sown in his heart6." So also St John
wrote : " We know that every one that hath been begotten of
God sinneth not ; but he that was begotten of God keepeth him,
and the Evil One toucheth him not6."
iv. The Law concerning Retaliation.
(i) In the Law it was laid down that Retaliation was to be
strictly limited to the counter exaction of the actual injury
received : — " If a man cause a blemish in his neighbour, as he
1 )i6 1*6 TDK! Kim p )»n nONT Xin. Megilla, c. 4 (Buxt. 622). Cp.
(?) 11 Cor. i. 17.
2 For to Si irepiaabv robruv perhaps cp. Eccl. xii. 12, LXX xal irepiaabv i£
abruv (iiarjp "IJ1*!) = ' quidquid ultra haec est' (?). Cp. Oehler in Herz. R.E. vii.
248. 3 M. xiii. 19, 38; J. xvii. 15; I J. ii. 13, 14; iii. 12; v. 18, 19; Eph. vi. 16;
11 Th. iii. 3. Cp. below, vi. 13.
4 Rom. xii. 9. 5 M. xiii. 19. 6 I J. v. 18.

ST MATT. V. 37, 38 121
hath done, so shall it be done to him ; breach for breach, eye for
eye, tooth for tooth : as he hath caused a blemish in a man, so
shall it be rendered unto him." " Thine eye shall not pity ; life
shall go for life, eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot
for foot1." And this regulation itself represented a distinct
advance in the morality of justice2. For it is almost an axiom of
self-preservation that in primitive and unsettled conditions of
society wrongs received must be directly repaid, and with
interest, by the sufferers themselves or by their clan. It is a
question not only of redress, but even of the protection of life
and of the powers of action. In the earliest codes of law3 this
method of retaliation was recognised as an established principle,
and taken over into the system of orderly justice. But it was
thereby placed under a double restriction, at once of the defined
limitation4 prescribed in the statute, — thus preventing the
infliction of greater wrongs to right the lesser ; and at the same
time of a dispassionate application in a court of law, instead of
leaving it to a wild vendetta. This is obviously implied by the
fact of the provision being included in a fixed code. No code
can be enforced unless by regular administration. And both
these advantages were secured by the Jewish Law.
But that Law is distinguished from other ancient codes, in
that it allows no distinction between different castes, or classes
of society. All members of the community were regarded as
'brothers,' on an equal footing of liberty5. It was not so in
1 Lev. xxiv. 19, 20; Deut. xix. 21. In both these passages the LXX gives
exactly the same abbreviated formula, with the verb omitted. (Cp. Blass, Gr. of
N.T. Gk. § 81. 1.) Bishop Gore (S. on M. p. 80) and Votaw (Hast. D.B. v. 28)
assign the reference to Exod. xxi. 22 — 25; but that is only a special application of the
general principle.
2 See Mozley's Lectures on the O.T. Lect. viii. "The Law of Retaliation."
8 Cp. Fest. p. 363 "Talionis mentionem fieri in XII ait Verrius hoc modo: Si
membrum rupit, ni cum eo pacit, talio esto: neque id quid signified indicat, puto,
quia notum est. Permittit enim lex parem vindictam."
4 Namely, of exact reciprocity. But even this may be very uneven in its incidence :
cp. Aristotle's remarks, Eth. N. v. 8 (5) Soxei Si nai Kal rb dvriire-irovBbs elvai dirXus
Slxaiov, uairep ol Ilv9aybpeioi Sipaoav- uplfovro yap &7rXws rb Slxaiov rb dvnireirovBbs
dXXu. rb S dvrnreiravBbs obx iipappbrrrei, otir' iirl rb SiavepyriKOV Slxaiov, ofr iirl rb
SiopBwnxbv xrX,
5 Slaves of course came under a different category. In their case injury was to be
atoned for by manumission; Exod. xxi. 26, 27.

122 THE INTERPRETATION OF THE LAW
other cases. Thus the Code of Hammurabi prescribes : " If
a man has caused the loss of a gentleman's eye, one shall cause
his eye to be lost... If he has caused a poor man to lose his eye...
he shall pay one mina of silver... If a man has made the tooth of
a man that is his equal to fall out, one shall make his tooth to
fall out. If he has made the tooth of a poor man to fall out, he
shall pay one-third of a mina of silver1." Similarly in the Code
of Manu2: "With whatsoever member of the body a low-born
man may injure a superior, that very member of his must be
mutilated." The Jewish Law however recognised no such in
equalities of station. All alike had one and the same protection
of the Law ; even including strangers settled in the land8.
The Law then was directed to the restraint of indiscriminate
revenge4; and so it marked a progressive step in morals. It
still however sanctioned the practice of retaliation. But our
Lord showed to His hearers 'a more excellent way.' Under
the old Covenant requital of injury was held in check : in the
new Kingdom of God the counsel of perfection is frankly to
forego it altogether. That is the true fulfilment of the Law.
This ideal of a strong and patient attitude under personal
grievance had already been tentatively recognised in the Book
of Proverbs : — " Say not thou, I will recompense evil ; wait on
the Lord, and he shall save thee... Say not, I will do so to him
as he hath done to me ; I will render to the man according to his
work5." But now the principle is laid down in unmistakable
terms : " I say unto you (bid you 6) not to resist the evil one " ;
that is, the wicked person who is the aggressor, — the V^J of the
1 §§ 196, 198, 200, 201 ; tr. by C. H. W. Johns, Hast. D.B. v. 605—6.
2 See Monier Williams, Indian Wisdom, p. 273.
3 See Lev. xxiv. 22 "Ye shall have one manner of law, as well for the stranger,
as for the homeborn: for I am the Lord your God." Cp. also Exod. xii. 49;
Lev. xix. 34; Num. xv. 15, 29.
4 Cp. Aug. c. Faust, xix. 25 " Quandoquidem et illud antiquum ad reprimendas
flammas odiorum, saevientiumque immoderatos animos refraenandos, ita praeceptum
est. Quis enim tantundem facile contentus est reponere vindictae quantum accepit
injuriae?...Huic igitur immoderatae et per hoc injustae ultioni lex justum modum figens,
poenam talionis instituit: hoc est ut qualem quisque intulit injuriam, tale supplicium
pendat." 5 xx. 22; xxiv. 29. Cp. Ecclus. xxviii. 1, 2.
6 For the infinitive after Xiyu (implying exhortation or command), cp. v. 34; L.
xii. 13; A. xxi. 4, 21.

ST MATT. V. 39, 40 123
Old Testament, who is the oppressor of the righteous (P^IX).
And this doctrine is unfolded in a series of forcible illustrations,
in which the monitions of something more than acquiescence are
no more to be taken in a literal exactness than the injunctions
given above concerning the plucking out of an eye or the cutting
off of a hand.
The instances of annoyance which are quoted are obviously
not at all comparable with the more serious injuries of actual
maiming contemplated by the Law ; but they are so chosen as
to extend the reference of the teaching beyond exceptional cases,
and to give it an universal application to the ordinary circum
stances of daily life. They represent three different modes of
infliction of wrong : — by physical assault, by legal oppression,
and by state impressment.
(a) Physical assault. "Whosoever smiteth1 thee on thy
right2 cheek8, turn to him the other also." — Smiting on the
cheek was the token of gross insult. " They have smitten me
upon the cheek reproachfully." " Let him give his cheek to him
that smiteth him ; let him be filled full with reproach4," where it
is regarded as the climax of the discipline of the suffering
righteous one.
(b) Legal oppression. "If any man would go to law with
thee, and take away thy coat, let him have thy cloke also." —
The reference to a process of law is made clear by KpiOrjvai*.
There is perhaps therefore an allusion to the regulation of the
Law concerning clothes taken in pledge : " If thou at all take
thy neighbour's garment to pledge, thou shalt restore it unto him
1 bairltew in later Greek is ordinarily used, as here, of striking with the hand (not
necessarily with a pairls, or 'rod'). Cp. M. xxvi. 67; I (in) Esdr. iv. 30. See Dr
Swete on Mk xiv. 65.
2 The omission of Se£tdv in D is perhaps due to the same whimsical hypercriticism
that Origen displays in his remark: dXXd xal Se£id aiayiiv rbirreoBat Xeyopivy,
diriBarurdry iarlv • iravrbs rov riirTovros, el py dpa irerov9ii>s n irapd ipbaiv rvyxdvoi,
ry Se£iq. x«P* Tbirrovros ryv dpiarepdv aiaybva. de Princ. iv. 1. Cp. Aug. Ep. 4
"Magis sinistra percutitur quod in earn potius partem quam in dextram facilior
feriendi ictus est." ,
8 aiayuv lit. = 'the jaw-bone.' In LXX = ,0?-
4 Job xvi. 10; Lam. iii. 30. Cp. 1 K. xxii. 24.
B Cp. 1 Cor. vi. 1, 6. LXX Job ix. 3; xiii. 19; Eccl. vi. 10; Is. 1. 8; Hos. ii.
2. (Eur. Med. 609; Aristoph. Nub. 66.)

124 THE INTERPRETATION OF THE LAW
by that the sun goeth down1." It was regarded as a peculiarly
oppressive act to seize clothing for this purpose. So Eliphaz is
represented as accusing Job of this iniquity : " Is not thy
wickedness great ?... Thou hast taken pledges of thy brother
for nought, and stripped the naked of their clothing2."
The xiT0^v was t'ie under-garment, the n-3n3; the l/idnov
the outer cloke, the <?>$?*. And the order in which the two
are named here is in accordance with the reference to seizure for
a pledge, in which the inner garment, the absence of which would
not be noticeable, would be taken. But in St Luke's report4 of
the saying, where KpiOrjvai is omitted, and this second instance as
well as the first is treated as an act of violence, the order is
reversed. For in that case it is the outer cloke which would be
snatched away.
(c) State impressment. "Whosoever shall impress thee to
go one mile, go with him twain." — dyyapevetv was the technical
word for impressment to render public service of any kind6. It
is used, for instance, to describe the compulsion laid upon Simon
the Cyrenian to carry our Lord's cross to Calvary6. So here it
refers to the exactions of the Roman soldiers, or officials. The
word fiiXiov also points to a direct association with the Roman
government. It represents of course the singular of /iiXia =
millia (sc. passuum). For the Roman system of distance
measurement was carried everywhere throughout the empire.
It was marked along all the roads by mile-stones. It formed the
basis of calculation for all journeys connected with the govern
ment service. And so the Latin word came to be adopted in
this connexion in the various languages spoken within the
empire7 : but apparently, in Greek at any rate, only in reference
to official calculations. Thus Polybius8 only employs the term
1 Exod. xxii. 26. 2 Job xxii. 5, 6. Cp. Job xxiv. 9, 10; Ezek. xviii. 7, 16.
3 Not the ?'Jjp (Schleusner, J. Lightfoot, Delitzsch), which "was always emblem
atic of social intercourse and high rank." Hast. D.B. i. 625.
4 L. vi. 29. 5 See special note below, p. 136.
6 M. xxvii. 32 ; Mk xv. 21.
7 So ^D, e.g. , Sanhedrin, f. 96. 1 ; 103. 2 ; Targ. Jon. on Exod. xiv. 22 ; xx. 18.
8 As quoted by Strabo: e.g. xxxiv. xi. 8 [Str. vi. p. 285] UoXb^ios dirb ryi
'lairvylas pepiXido9ai (for accent, see Lid. and Sc.) <jrnal, xal eZccu plXia <j>£fi' els Sftac

ST MATT. V. 40, 41 125
when reporting distances by road ; that is, where the mile-stones
were in evidence: elsewhere, in common with other Greek writers,
he computes by o-TaStot1. There can therefore be no doubt that
the imagery of this illustration was drawn from the incidence of
Roman administration.
But there may be more than mere imagery in it. The whole
country was seething with unrest. The nationalist aim of
throwing off the Roman yoke was intensely active : and the very
excitement concerning the nature of the new Teacher's propa
ganda, which had drawn together the men whom our Lord was
now addressing, was intimately connected with this feeling.
While therefore He made use of the oppressions which especially
galled them at the time to point the moral of a great principle,
which is of universal application, at the same time He so
worded His teaching as to discountenance altogether any
movement of national resistance to the authority of the Empire2.
The Kingdom of God must not, in any sense or degree, be
debased into a political revolution.
At this stage the teaching is limited to the negative aspect,
of non-retaliation. Presently it will be more fully developed
into the positive claim of forgiveness of the oppressors. Step
by step the way is prepared for that climax. First, the
Beatitudes closed with a declaration of blessing on the members
of the Kingdom who are oppressed. Now they are warned not
to retaliate under oppression. Afterwards, as the discourse
progresses, the ultimate ideal will be reached of urging the true
spirit, — to overcome evil with good.
(2) And now the prohibition of self-assertiveness in the
matter of personal 'rights' is followed up by a counter-injunction,
to show all readiness to render assistance to the needy : " Give
to him that asketh thee, and from him that would borrow of
irbXiv ivrev9ev S' els ' Axvkytav pay . xii. 2 [Str. vii. p. 322] ix Se rys' kiroXXuvlas els
MaxeSovlav y 'Syvarla iarlv bSbs irpbs lu, fiefsypanopivy koto plkiov xal xarearyXupivy
pAXfii Ktnf/iXov xal "Ej3pov irorapov • pikluv S'iari irevraxoaluv rpidxovra irivre.
1 Cp. in N.T., L. xxiv. 13; J. vi. 19; xi. 18; cp. Rev. xiv. 20; xxi. 16. The
only other measurement of distance in N.T. is A. i. 12 0 ianv iyybs 'lepovaaXyp
oafsfSdrov (xov oSo''-
2 Cp. Wetstein: "Existimo igitur hanc doctrinam ilia praecipue tempora spectasse,
ut Judseorum ad seditionem propensio et ferocitas insita retunderetur."

126 THE INTERPRETATION OF THE LAW
thee turn not thou away." This is not only expressed in the
form of Hebraic parallelism ; it is in its essence an entirely
Jewish ideal. For it is based upon the teaching of the Law ; in
which willingness to help a ' brother ' in distress is made a mark
of the Covenant : " If thy brother be waxen poor, and his hand
fail with thee, then thou shalt uphold (or, relieve) him... Take
thou no usury of him or increase ; but fear thy God ; that thy
brother may live with thee1." But while it is founded upon the
Law, in form the proposition corresponds closely with the words
of the Son of Sirach : " Reject not an afflicted suppliant and turn
not away thy face from a poor man. From one that asketh turn
not thine eye away2." Under the Old Covenant this was a
practical enforcement of the principle of true fraternity as
between fellow-members of the chosen nation. Under the New
Covenant it takes a wider range. At first no doubt it could
only be understood by the hearers as referring to the mutual
relations between the members of the Kingdom of God. But it
is stated in perfectly general terms : and our Lord's later teaching
made it clear that His reference was really quite unrestricted ;
as, for example, in His parable of the Good Samaritan. Indeed
the very next section of this discourse itself gives the widest
possible scope to His maxims in this direction.
v. The supreme Law of Love.
The precept of the Law which our Lord quotes, — " Thou
shalt love thy neighbour," is found in Lev. xix. 18; where the
context shows that 'thy neighbour' is by implication confined
to a compatriot: for the whole sentence is "Thou shalt not
take vengeance, nor bear any grudge against the children of thy
people, but thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself; I am the
LORD." But the supplementary clause added here, — " and hate
thine enemy," — is not based upon this implication3. So to
1 Lev. xxv. 35, 36. Cp. Exod. xxii. 25 ; Deut. xxiii. 19, 20.
2 Ecclus. iv. 4, 5. Cp. Tob. iv. 7.
* Cp. "The further clause, 'and hate thine enemy,' while not appearing in that
form, is really implied in the words 'the children of thy people,' which fixes a
national limitation upon the teaching of the Leviticus passage." Hast. D.B. 1. 30 a.
On the contrary, cp. Wiinsche, Neue Beitrage zur Erlduterung der Evangelien aos
Talmud und Midrasch, p. 67 " Da nun unser Ausspruch im A.T. sich schlechter-

ST MATT. V. 42, 43 127
explain it is to ascribe to our Lord Himself an interpretation of
the maxim which it is impossible to imagine could ever have
received His sanction. For it involves the false argument that
a positive injunction in a particular case, — and it is restricted to
a particular case in the Law, — carries with it a corresponding
enforcement of the negative counterpart, by which love is
forbidden in all other cases. The original Law was necessarily
limited to ' the children of the people ' ; it had' only to do with
them. Within that limit it set a higher standard than had before
been known : but it did not concern itself with what lay beyond
that limit.
Nor is the additional clause founded upon the expressions of
hatred towards the ungodly which are to be found in the Old
Testament1, as well as in subsequent Jewish literature : "Do not
I hate them, O Lord, that hate thee ? And am not I grieved
with those that rise up against thee ? I hate them with perfect
hatred ; I count them mine enemies2" : and the like. For the
wicked, even though thus regarded in a measure as personal
' enemies,' could not be placed in contrast with ' neighbours,' or
compatriots. The reference must be to opponents of the
members of the Covenant.
In fact here once more, as in the first instance taken up from
the Law (verse 21), the added words are an allusion not to the
Old Testament at all, but to the later teaching of Jewish
tradition. From the time of the captivity the tendency of the
Jews towards national exclusiveness had steadily grown in
intensity. This attitude was largely prompted no doubt by the
fear of contracting ceremonial defilement, which naturally stood
in the way of free social intercourse with men of other races,
whose religious ideals and practices were abhorrent to the Jews3.
So it had become a recognised rule of life that it was impossible
dings nicht nachweisen, auch nicht aus irgend einer Vorschrift auf gesunde Weise
entwickeln lasst...wer hat ihn dann aufgestellt? Niemand anders als gewisse
pharisaische Sectenhaupter, u.s.w."
1 Cp. Wetstein: "Cum lex... hostes Dei odio habendos esse, et a piishabitos fuisse
doceret...si non verba ipsa, verborum saltern sensum expressisse dubitari vix potest."
2 Ps. cxxxix. 21, 22. Cp., e.g., Ps. xxvi. 5; Prov. viii. 10; n Chron. xix. 2;
Ecclus. xxv. 2 ; Ps. Sol. xii. 6.
8 See Schiirer, n. i. 51—55; iii. 268, 269.

128 THE INTERPRETATION OF THE LAW
for a Jew to have any intimate associations with any one of
another nation : — " Ye know how that it is unlawful for a man
that is a Jew to attach himself to, or to visit, one of another
race1." But the position had passed beyond the religious aspect.
The spirit of exclusiveness had been fiercely inflamed by
patriotic resentment against the foreign oppressors of the chosen
people. If they could not overcome them, they would at least
hold proudly aloof from them. Therefore this separation tended
more and more as time went on to degenerate into mere racial
hatred. The Jews had won for themselves an unenviable reputation
in this respect. Their attitude towards foreigners was cast up
against them as a constant reproach. Indeed so general was
the accusation that even Jewish writers themselves in their
historical books represent the oppressors of their people,
almost as a matter of course, as charging them with a fanatical
isolation. Thus, for instance, according to their accounts, the
Jews were described by Artaxerxes2 as " a certain ill-disposed
people, in antagonism by their laws to every nation. ..always
quite alone in a state of opposition to every man " ; — by Haman3,
as "a wicked nation... exclusive, uncongenial... hostile both in
their manners and in their customs to the King's people, and to
all men " ; — by Ptolemy Philopator4, as having been accused of
cherishing malevolence towards all nations ; — by the counsellors
of Antiochus Sidetes5, as maintaining exclusiveness towards
others in their manner of life ; — and so forth.
The few references to the Jews which are found in Greek
authors before the time of the fall of Jerusalem betray the same
1 A. xv. 28 bpeis iirlorao9e (is dBipirbv ianv dvSpl 'lovSalip KoXXdo9ai y wpoa-
ipXeoBai dXXoipbXu.
2 The insertion of the LXX after Esth. iii. 13 (in Eng. Apocrypha = Esth. xiii. 4,
5): Svapevy Xabv riva, rois vbpois dvrlBerov irpos irav l9vos...pj>vibrarov iv dvri-
irapayuyy iravri Siairavrbs dvdpuirw Kelpevov.
3 Jos. Antt. XI. vi. 5 £8vos elval n irovypbv...dpiKrov, dabpipvXov...ix9pbv /to!
tois l$eai xal rois iirirySevpaoi rip a<p Xaip xal diraoiv dvffpuirois.
4 III Mace. vii. 4 irpoo<pepbpevoi pijirore ebaraBijaeiv rd irpdypara ypuv, Si if)
txovaiv ovroi irpbs irdvra rd (Bvy Svapiveiav.
5 Jos. Antt. XIII. viii. 3 Sid ryv irpbs dkkovs abrQv ttjs Sialrys dpil-tav. A
similar statement is made by Diodorus Siculus with reference to the same occasion.
See n. 8, p. 129.

ST MATT. V. 43 129
impression. Josephus in his Apology for his countrymen and
their laws, which he wrote in answer to Apion1, found himself
obliged to meet not merely the wild statements of Apion, but
also the charges of Apollonius of Rhodes', — that the Jews were
'men-haters8,' and that they 'refused to have any communi
cation with those who differed from them in religious belief or in
habit of life4'; and of Lysimachus of Alexandria6, who alleged
that Moses had commanded them "neither to be kindly disposed
towards any one of mankind, nor to give him counsel for the best
but rather for the worse6." This ascription of their bearing
towards foreigners to the direct injunctions of Moses is also
found in Diodorus Siculus, who speaks of Moses as "having
enacted for the Jews their misanthropic and lawless customs7."
What he understood to be the customs in question were " that
they alone of all nations held aloof from intercourse with any
other nation... and that they made a tradition of their hatred for
men, and therefore professed altogether strange practices, not
to share the table with any other nation, nor to be friendly
disposed at all8."
It is probably an echo of this general estimate of his country
men when St Paul speaks of them in his indignation as " at feud
with all men9." However unfair and exaggerated some of the
1 e.g., c. Ap. ii. IO xaratfiebSerai Si xal opxov ypXov, Cis bpvvbvruv rbv Qebv, rbv
iroiipravTa rbv obpavbv xal ryv yyv xal ryv BdXaaaav, pySevl ebvor)aeiv dXXorpvku pdkiara
Si'EXkyaiv. 2 120 b.c. See Schiirer, II. iii. 252.
8 c. Ap. ii. 14 wore piv <i>s...pMrav9pibirovs koiSopei. Cp. Tac. H. v. 5 "Adversus
omnes alios hostile odium."
4 c. Ap. ii. 36 ypuv Karyybpyaev on py irapaSexbpeBa robs dXXais irpoxarei-
XyppAvovs S6|ais Trepl Qeov, pySi xoivuveiv iBikopev toU KaB' iripav avvfjBetav jilov £yv
irpoaipovpAvois, 5 First cent. B.C. See Schiirer, II. iii. 254.
6 c. Ap. i. 34 irapaxeXebaaaBal re avrois, pyre avBpilnruv nvi ebvoi\aeiv, pyre
dpiara avpfiovXcboeiv, dXXd rd x^Pova- Cp. Juv. xiv. 102, 103 "Tradidit arcano
quodcumque volumine Moyses, Non monstrare vias eadem nisi sacra colenti."
' xxxiv. 1 M(two-^eos...i'op;o0eTijo-oi'Tos rd puadvBpuira xal vapdvopa (By rois
'lovSalois. 8 pbvovs ydp dirdvruv i9vuv dxoivuvtirovs elvai rys irpbs d\\o (Bvos impil-las...
trapaSbaipov iroiijaat rb pXaos rb irpbs robs dvBpdnrovs ' dia rovro Si xal vbpipa TravreXus
O-yXXaypiva xaTaSeil-ai, rb pySevl aXku IBvei rpairifys xoivuveiv pyS' ebvoelv rb irapd-
vav. 9 1 Thess. ii. 15 irdaiv dvBpiinrois ivavrluv.
s. 9

130 THE INTERPRETATION OF THE LAW
strictures passed upon them may have been, there remains no
doubt that they did cultivate a rigid, and even bitter, national
exclusiveness, which was a perversion of the inevitable separa
tion from other nations demanded by the requirements of the
Old Covenant.
It is necessary to consider this point in some detail, because
the fact that our Lord at a later period of His teaching more
than once1 repeated the Law, " Thou shalt love thy neighbour,"
as a precept of private life, and indeed as comprehending within
itself the whole personal duty of a man to his neighbour, has
tended to obscure the meaning of this passage. Men have read
back into it their knowledge of the later teaching, and so have
regarded our Lord's words here as referring primarily in the
same way to the ethics of personal relationships in ordinary life.
But in the promulgation of the Kingdom of God, to men who
were there to hear directions as to its aims and methods, the
original reference was clearly to the more public and national
side of their life : though this does not exclude from the
statement of the principle the more intimate and personal
application of it as well as the other. But that is not immediately
under treatment here. It is the wider range of public conduct
which is in view. And this is manifested by the words which
follow, in explanation of the spirit inculcated by the New
Covenant. So far from sanctioning in any degree an attitude of
animosity towards the foreign oppressors, our Lord claims that
not merely forbearance but actual good-will towards them is the
right bearing on the part of members of the Kingdom of God.
It was a startling proposition : and as such it needed all
the emphasis of reiteration to make His meaning plain beyond
all doubt. The successive sentences form a marked series of
Hebraic parallelisms ; as at once appears when they are written
stichometrically : —
Love your enemies2
And pray for them that persecute you ;
1 L. x. 27, 28; M. xix. 19; M. xxii. 39 (=Mk xii. 31).
2 The additional clauses in the ordinary text — ebXoyetre tous xarapupivovs vpds,
xaX&s iroielre robs piaovvras bpds [xal irpoaebxeaBe birep ruv\ iirypea£bvruv vpas xal—
were probably inserted from L. vi. 27, 28.

ST MATT. V. 43—48 131
That ye may be the sons
Of your Father which is in heaven :
For he maketh his sun to rise
On the evil and the good;
And sendeth rain1
On the just and the unjust.
For if ye love them that love you,
What reward have ye?
Do not even the publicans the same?
And if ye salute your brethren only,
What do ye more (than others)?
Do not even they of the Gentiles the same?
Ye therefore shall be perfect,
As your heavenly Father is perfect.
In all this the general proposition stands out clearly, that
under the New Dispensation neighbourliness cannot be limited,
as it necessarily was under the exclusive conditions of the Old
Covenant, to members of the one nation only, but must be
fostered towards all with whom there is any intercourse : even
towards the representatives of the unpopular ruling power. The
preceding section had pointed to the exactions of the Roman
authorities : this carries on the same reference, and extends the
claims of the true attitude, — from patient submission to active
goodwill : from mere acquiescence to the duty of intercession.
That is the dominant theme, round which all the rest is centred.
For all that follows the initial statement (of verse 44) is
supplementary to it: both the comparison with the Divine
pattern2, and the appeal to rise above the common practice of
the world.
Dismayed however as the hearers must have been at having
such an unlooked for standard of conduct pressed upon them,
there was one observance actually within their experience to
which they would naturally in their own minds refer this
direction to pray for their oppressors. Persecution, as they
1 For Pp4xa CP- LXX Gen. ii. 5; Am. iv. 7. "Quamdiu Grsecia in fastigio
eloquentiae stetit, verbum §pixav a communi usu sejunctum poetisque aptum fuit...
postea autem eviluit proletarii sermonis commerciis." Lobeck, Phryn. p. 291.
Cp. ppox6, vii. 25, 27, below.
2 Cp. Seneca, de Benef, iv. 26 "Si Deos, inquit, imitaris,da et ingratis beneficia.
Nam et sceleratis Sol oritur, et piratis patent maria."
9—2

132 THE INTERPRETATION OF THE LAW
understood it, came upon them only from the sovereign power
which suppressed their national independence. But ever since
the time of Darius there had been maintained at Jerusalem a
constant sacrifice for the world-ruler under whose dominion they
were for the time being. It began with the decree of Darius
ordering daily provision to be made for the sacrifices in the
Temple, that the Jews might " offer sacrifices of sweet savour
unto the God of heaven, and pray for the life of the King, and
of his sons1." That this state sacrifice had from that time been
continuously offered seems to be certain from the later references
to it as a standing evidence of loyalty to the suzerain power.
Thus, for instance, in the time of Demetrius Soter, in 162 B.C.,
only two years after the death of Antiochus Epiphanes, the
arch-persecutor of the Jews, when Nicanor was sent against the
Holy City he was met by a deputation of priests and elders, who
came forth " to salute him peaceably, and to shew him the burnt
sacrifice that was offered for the King2." And it was continued
under the Roman Empire. Philo, in his account of the embassy
of Alexandrian Jews to Caligula, refers to it again and again.
He twice points to the fact that Augustus had maintained this
daily sacrifice at his own cost3 : and he speaks of three several
occasions on which special sacrifices had been offered at Jeru
salem on behalf of Caligula himself; — on his accession, on his
deliverance from an epidemic, and on the occasion of his
campaign in Germany4. So also Josephus reports the Jews as
having urged at Ptolemais upon Petronius, in the same crisis,
when he was ordered to set up a statue of Caligula in the temple,
that they "sacrificed twice a day for Caesar and the Roman
1 Ezra vi. io.
z I Mace. vii. 33 dairdaaoBai abrbv elpyvixus, xal Seii-ai abnp ryv bXoxabruaiv ryv
irpoaipepopivyv inrip rov ftaoiXius.
3 Leg. ad Caium, § 23 irpoard^as (b ZejSaoros) xal Si aluvos dvdyeaBai Bvolas
ivSeXexeis bXoxabrovs xaB' ixdaryv ypipav ix ruv ISluv irpoabSuv...al xal pixpi T0" v^v
iirnekovvrai. §40 5ieT<i|aT0 ydp ix ruv ISluv irpoabSuv dvdyeaBai Bvolas ivreXeis
bXoKabrovs np b^/laru Beip xaB' ixdaryv ypipav, al xal pixp1 v^v (irireXovvrai.
4 § 45 xal ydp iBiaapev, xal exarbpfias i9baapev ...xal rpls, obx enraf, ySy rpurov
piv ore SieSii-a ryv yyepovlav Sebrepov Se 8re ryv papeiav ixelvyv vbaov yv iraaa y
olxovpivy avvevbayaev O-iipvyes • rplrov Si Kard ryv iXirlSa rys Teppavixys vlxys. Cp.
§ 32 irpurov rb yphepov lepbv iSi^aro rds birip rys dpxys Tatov Bvatas, tva irpurov 1)
xal pbvov dipaipeBy rys Bpyaxelas rb trdrpiov ;

ST MATT. V. 44 133
people1." And it is to the cessation of this immemorial custom
in 66 A.D., at the instigation of Eleazar, that Josephus attributes
the outbreak of the war with Rome2.
When therefore our Lord urged upon His hearers the practice
of prayer for their persecutors, this familiar association of the
daily state sacrifice was ready to suggest a meaning for His
words. Some of their own teachers even impressed upon them
the obligation of the state prayers : as R. Chananiah, prefect of
the priests, who although he taught after the destruction of the
temple yet reflects the priestly tradition3, — " Pray for the peace
of the kingdom, since but for the fear thereof we had swallowed
up each his neighbour alive4." But the temper of the people was
becoming set against the practice. There is some reason td
suppose that the prayers for the Emperor, which were regularly
offered by the Jews of the Dispersion in their Synagogues, were
not adopted in the Synagogues of Palestine5.
It is true that there is here no mention of the Emperor or of
the State. It is true that the scope of the maxim is infinitely
wider than this reference. But the fact is that from the later
teaching of our Lord, and above all from His own example at
Calvary6, a deeper and nobler meaning was afterwards thrown
back upon His earlier words. They were seen to carry in them
the germ of the new doctrine which was subsequently declared.
And so they have ever since been rightly understood as convey
ing, in a strongly practical form, the lesson of true forgiveness
under exceptionally difficult circumstances. But the point is to
ascertain in what sense these words appealed to those to whom
they were spoken. They had not suffered persecution for their
1 B.J. II. x. 4 xoi 'IovSoioi, irepl piv Kataapos xal tov Sypov ruv "Pupaluv Sis rys
ypipas Bbeiv, (ipaaav. Cp. c. Ap. ii. 6 " Facimus autem pro eis {sc. Imperatore et
populo Romano) continua sacrificia."
2 B.J. II. xvii. 2 rovro Si yv rov irpbs 'Pupalovs iroXipiov xara^oX-fj' ri)V ydp birip
robruv Bvalav Kalaapos dtrippiij/av xal iroXXd ruv re dpxiepiuv xal ruv yvuplpwv irapa-
raXolii'Ttiw py irapaXiireiv rb birip ruv yyepbvuv (Bos, obx iviSoaav. The injunction of
i Tim. ii. i, 2, written shortly after this took place, was not improbably intended to
safeguard the Christian Church from falling into the fatal error of the turbulent Jewish
faction at Jerusalem.
8 See Schiirer, II. i. 368.
4 Pirke Aboth iii. 2. The saying no doubt is based upon Jer. xxix. 7.
6 See Schiirer, I. ii. 77. e L. xxiii. 34.

134 THE INTERPRETATION OF THE LAW
faith. There was nothing in their experience, and nothing
therefore in their imagination, to suggest such a prospect. They
were listening to a proclamation of ' the Gospel of the Kingdom,'
addressed to representatives of the chosen nation. They could
only realise a national, and therefore a political, persecution :
they could only interpret prayers for persecutors as being
prayers for the hated aliens. To them the precept would seem
to enjoin a loyal adhesion in the new Kingdom to the recognised
practice of intercession for their foreign rulers, whom they
counted as their national oppressors. It was a repudiation of
the revolutionary spirit which had been strongly manifested by
other champions of the Kingdom. In this way Polycarp seems
to have understood the reference of these words, judging from
the collocation in which he quotes them : " Pray also for kings
and powers and princes and for them that persecute and hate you,
and for the enemies of the cross, that your fruit may be manifest
among all men, and that ye may be perfect in Him1."
But more astonishing perhaps than even the precept itself
was the comparison of those who should ignore its high claim to
the two classes of men whom the Jews regarded as entirely
outside the pale of the Covenant, — the tax-gatherers, and those
who lived the life of Gentiles2. For the publicans were ranked
by the Jews with robbers8. The popular estimate of them is
reflected in the New Testament phrase which groups them
together with sinners, — ' the publicans and the sinners4.' The
Gentiles also were designated 'sinners5,' because they (with all that
1 Ep. ad Phil. § 12 "Orate etiam pro regibus et potestatibus et principibus atque
pro persequentibus et odientibus vos et pro inimicis crucis, ut fructus vester manifestus
sit in omnibus, ut sitis in illo perfecti."
2 The term ol iBvixol (cp. M. vi. 7 ; xviii. 17 — where again the word is associated
with rekuvys, — uairep b iBvtxbs xal 6 reXuvys, — III J. 7) is not quite identical with ri
IBvy, but expresses rather those who manifest the essential characteristics of to (Bvy —
those who iBvixus xal obx 'lovSa'ixus fruoiv [Gal. ii. 14].
5 pTJ DnD DD1D, " A publican is simply a robber." Aruch, s.v. DSD [Buxtorf,
1065]. Cp. Nedarim, iii. 4; Baba kamma, x. 1; Shebuoth, f. 39. 1.
4 M. ix. 10, ti (= Mk ii. 15, 16= L. v. 30) ; M. xi. 19 (= L. vii. 34); L. xv. 1.
They are grouped even with oi irbpvai, M. xxi. 31, 32. A publican is regarded as the
antithesis of a Pharisee, L. xviii. 10 — 13.
e Cp. Gal. ii. 15 i/peis <pboei 'lovSdioi Kal obx i% (Bvuv dpapruXol (where Bp. Light
foot compares M. xxvi. 45 with L. xviii. 32). Cp. also Rom. ii. 14 ; Acts xi. 18; xxii.
21, 22.

ST MATT. V. 44 — 48 135
belonged to them) were ceremonially unclean. They ' knew not
God1.' The repentance, the prayers, the alms of the uncircum-
cised, according to the Midrashim, were all without avail2. It
was therefore a shock to the pride of a Jewish audience that they
should be compared, under any circumstances, to such ungodly
men. Nothing could have laid greater emphasis on the para
mount importance of the command given.
The mention again of ' reward,' which has already appeared
at the close of the Beatitudes3, is an instance of a method of
teaching which is constantly found in the discourses attributed
to our Lord in St Matthew's and St John's Gospels4. A word is
introduced unexpectedly, almost abruptly, more than once, so
that it strongly arrests attention. It strikes the keynote of what
is to follow presently, when it forms the theme of a fuller treat
ment. So with 'righteousness' in verses 6, IO, and 20. Both of
these words point forward to the subject of the next section.
They are two of the recurrent terms by which the unity of the
whole discourse is compacted.
The expression in the parallel clause, — Tt irepiaabv iroielre ; —
refers back to the initial requisition with which the whole division of
the Sermon, dealing with the interpretation of the Law under
the new Theocracy, opened, — idv fir) irepiaaevarj vfiwv r) BiKaioavvrj
ktX.6 That has been the claim throughout. Now it is shown
that the standard of the Scribes and Pharisees in this last respect
is actually no better, from a moral point of view, than that of the
despised publicans and heathen.
The final summary is an appeal to them from the Law, which
lays down as a comprehensive rule of life for God's servants:
" Ye shall be holy ; for I the LORD your God am holy6." But
instead of ' holy ' is substituted ' perfect ' ; perhaps from
1 Cp. I Thess. iv. $xa9direp xoi t& (Bvy rd py elSbra rbv Qebv.
2 Cp. Pesikta, f. 156. 1 ; Debarim Rabba, 1 ; Pesikta, f. 12. 2 [quoted by Sanday
and Headlam on Rom. ii. 14]. Contrast the Divine message to Cornelius, Acts x. 4.
3 ver. 12. See above, pp. 66, 67.
4 Cp., e.g., M. xviii. 6 aKavSdXlay, with the teaching about axdvSaXa, 7 — 9; M.
xxiv. 5, with 23 — 26; J. vi. 26 ruv dpruv, with b dpros, 32 — 35; J. viii. 32, i)
dX-ABeia, with 40 and 44 — 46; J. xiv. 15, with 23, 24.
6 ver. 20.
8 Lev. xix. 2. For the future {(aeaBe) in commandments quoted from the O.T.,
cp. above, verses 21, 27, 33, 43; L. iv. 8, 12; A. xxiii. 5; Rom. vii. 7; xiii. 9;

136 THE INTERPRETATION OF THE LAW
Deut. xviii. 13: "Thou shalt be perfect with the LORD thy
God " ; thus combining in one epitome the two most general
statements of the Law, which embrace the whole essence of its
true aim.

Note on dyyapedeiv.
The stem of the word is derived from the ancient Persian
term1 for the mounted messenger service of the Persian Empire.
This is explained by Herodotus in his description of that
service2: "The story is that according to the number of days
required for the whole journey, that number of horses and men
are distributed along the route, with a horse and a man
stationed for each day's journey ; whom neither snow, nor rain,
nor heat, nor night prevents from completing his appointed
course with all speed. Thus the first having sped hands on the
missive to the second, and the second to the third : and so in
succession the message passes on from one to another, like the
torch-race among the Greeks, which they practise in honour of
Hephaestus. This mounted courier system the Persians call
Angareion." A very similar account of the system is also given
by Xenophon3, who of course attributes the invention of it to
I Cor. ix. 9; Heb. xii. 20. Cp. also (independently of O.T.) M. vi. 5; xxi. 3
{ipeire). See Winer, Gr. of N.T. Gk. § xliii. 5 c.
1 Cp. the modern Persian engariden, 'to write,' and engdre, 'a document.'
2 viii. 98 Xiyovai ydp i>s Sauv dv y ypepiuv y iraaa bSbs, roaovroi tiriroi re xal
dvSpes Sieardai, xard ypepyalyv bSbv ixdaryv tiriros re xal dvyp reraypivos, roils offre
viiperbs obx 6'/tj9pos ou xavpa ob vb£ (pyei py ob xaravbaai rbv irpoxelpevov iuvrf Spbpov
ryv raxlaryv. 6 pev Sy irpuros Spapuv irapaSiSdi rd ivreraXpAva np Sevripu, 0 Si
Sebrepos rip rplru' rb Si ivBevrev ySy Kar aXXov Sie^ipxerai irapaSiSbpeva, xardrep
"EXXyai y Xap-iraSyipoply ryv np 'Jlipalonp (irtreXiovai. tovto rb Spdpypa ruv t-triruv
xaXiovai Hipaai dyyapifiov.
8 Cyrop. VIII. vi. 17, 18 xarepdBopev Si abrov xal aXXo pyxdvypa irpbs rb piyeBos
rys dpxys, i£ o5 raxius yaBdvero xal rd irdpiroXv dirixovra Situs (xoi. oxetydpevos ydp
irbayv dv bSbv tiriros xaravbroi t^s yp^ipas (Xavvbpevos uare Siapxeiv, iiroii/oaTO Iwiruvas
tooovtov SiaXelirovras, xal tirirovs iv avrois xartaryae, xal rovs iirtpeXopiivovs robruv,

NOTE ON dyyapeveiv 137
Cyrus : but he does not mention the Persian name for it. In
the Book of Esther also there is a reference to the same
organisation1 : " And he wrote in the name of king Ahasuerus,
and sealed it with the king's ring, and sent letters by posts on
horseback, riding on swift steeds that were used in the king's
service1, bred of the stud... So the posts that rode upon swift
steeds that were used in the king's service3 went out." But it
is Herodotus only who gives the name applied to this service.
And he uses it elsewhere, once, in its proper sense when
speaking of a Persian royal messenger3, — xal nva dyyaprjiov
Aapeiov iXdbvra trap' avrbv, cos oil irpbs fjBovrjv ol rjv rd
dyyeXXbfieva, Kreivei. ^Eschylus, with that fondness for Persian
imagery which was satirised by Aristophanes4, had already
borrowed the term to picture the beacon lights from Troy6, —
(jtpvKrbs Be (jtpvKrbv Bevp' air dyydpov irvpbs eire/iirev.
So far then the origin and use of the term on its first
adoption into Greek is clear. It was simply a foreign word
taken over to describe a foreign system. But this does not
account for the later established use of dyyapeveiv. For the
verb consistently bears the sense of ' impressing ' men or
animals or other possessions for the service of the state. And
this meaning cannot be derived from the description of the
Persian couriers given by Herodotus and Xenophon. For by
its form the verb, like other denominative verbs in -eveiv, must
mean ' to act as an dyyapos.' From the nature of the case such
verbs are predominantly intransitive". They are only transitive
where the noun itself carries the notion of active authority ; for
example, /3paf3eveiv, itrtrpoireveiv, rvpavveveiv, and the like.
Therefore the active sense of dyyapeveiv implies an official
xoi dvSpa i<j> ixdaru ruv rbiruv trofe rbv iiriTySeiov irapaS4xeo9ai rd ipepbpeva ypdp-
para xal irapaSiSbvai xal irapakap^dveiv robs direipyxbras tirirovs xal dvBpiiirovs, xal
aXXovs iripireiv veaXets. (an S' ore o6S( tos vburas ipaalv taraaBai rabryv ryv iropelav,
dXXo rip ypepivQ dyyiku tov vvxrepivbv SiaSixeaBai. 1 viii. io, 14.
2 Keil explains D'J'IflB'nK as representing the Old Persian kschatrana (from
kschatra, 'government,' or 'king.' (Cp. t¥l231ftVftltiL=&hshatrapdvan, 'satraps';
Hast. D.B. iii. 114 a.)
3 iii. 126. 4 Cp. Rants, 937, 938; Pax, 1177; Aves, 800.
5 Ag. 282. dryydpov is restored from quotations in the Grammarians, for ottyAoi/.
6 See G. Curtius, Das Verbum der Griechischen Sprache, p. 368.

138 THE INTERPRETATION OF THE LAW
authority as belonging to the ayyapos. But according to the
accounts quoted above the ayyapos was a messenger, not a
press-officer. Both Herodotus and Xenophon distinctly state
that men and horses were kept in readiness at the several
stations on the routes.
But the knowledge which the Greeks had of Persian matters
was far from being confined to what they could learn from
writers who lived during, or wrote about, the Persian war. The
conquests of Alexander had roused intense interest in Persia ;
and there was no subject that attracted Greek authors more than
the history of Persia. Many historians whose books have
perished dealt with this subject1. The idea therefore which
prevailed after the time of Alexander concerning the Persian
courier organisation was different to that which the earlier
writers present. It was now regarded as a system which
depended on enforced service : and thus dyyapeveiv obtained its
meaning of compulsory service for the state.
The earliest known instance of its use is by Menander, in the
last quarter of the fourth century B.C.2, — 6 irXewv KarrjvexOrj'
KplveO' ovros iroXe/iios ' idv exv Tt fiaXaKov, dyyapeverai. In the
middle of the following century it appears in Egypt, in a
papyrus which is dated 252 B.C.3, — rod vtrdpxovros Xefiffov
dyyapevdevTos virb aov, and again, dyyapevaas rbv AvriKXeovs
Xififiov. Josephus introduces the word into his report of a
rescript of Demetrius Soter4, — KeXevw Be firjBe dyyapeveaBai rd
'lovBaiwv virotyyia : but the word does not occur in the rescript
as given in 1 Mace. x. 25 — 45 s, where the corresponding phrase
is, Kal irdvres dcpierwaav roils (pbpovs Kal rwv ktijvwv avrwv1.
In this instance therefore the expression is probably due to
Josephus himself. Once again the word is found in Egypt in the
inscription from the temple of the Great Oasis (49 A.D.)7,—
1 Evetts, New Light on the Bible, p. 256 gives a curious list of writers, "all of
whom devoted complete works to the history of Persia": — Dinon of Rhodes,
Dionysius of Miletus, Charon of Lampsacus, Aristides of Miletus, Agatharcides of
Samos [cp. Luc. Macrob. 22], Balon of Sinope, Chrysermus of Corinth, Ctesiphon,
Pharnuchus of Nisibis.
2 In his Sicyonian, quoted by Suidas.
8 Pap. Flind. Petr. ii. xx. See Deissmann, B.S., p. 87.
* Antt. xiii. ii. 3. 5 See Deissmann, p. 86.
6 ver. 33. 7 Deissmann, p. 87.

NOTE ON dyyapeveiv 189
firjBev Xa/if3dveiv firjBe dyyapeveiv el fir) rives ifid BiirXwfiara
exwai. In this sense the Grammarians interpret the word: —
ayyapeveaGat • rd els Brjjioaiav xPe^av virrjpereiv x : and the
definition of the noun dyyapela is given as, dvdr/Krj Kal BovXeia
aKovaios, Kal e'/e f3tas yivo/ievrj virrjpeaia2. The noun dyyapela is
used by Epictetus3, — oXov rb a&fia ovrws exeiv ae Bel a>5 bvdpiov
eiriaeaayfievov, i<f>' baov dv olbv re $, e^>' oaov av BiBwrai' dv S
dyyapela fj Kal arpariwrrjs iiriXdfirjrai, afyes, firj avnreive fi/rjBe
yoyyv^e' el Be fir), irXrjyas XafSoov ovBev fjrrov dtroXels rb bvdpiov
and ayyapos (in the original sense) by Nicolaus Damascenus4, —
Kal dfia irefiirrj nvd rwv triaTordrwv dyyapov ovra ydp ixaXovv
roiis fiaaiXews dyyeXovs.
From the Greek (as its adopted form shows) dyyapela was in
turn taken over by the Rabbinic writers. It appears fairly
frequently in their books as n?,"!i38, or as ^13?80: but there
is no corresponding verb; the phrase MnttK u lE>y, literally
'to make on him an angaria,' being used instead. A story is
told", for example, of R. Eliezer, that having been left a large
property by his father he wandered from place to place studying
the Law. One day his own servants met him, and not recognis
ing him forced upon him an ' angaria ' ; which is explained in
the gloss as ' the work of the prince of the city.' Or again, in
the Tract Baba mezia7 there is a discussion as to compensation
for an ass which was requisitioned for the public service8.
The term passed into Latin also from the Greek, at least as
early as the second century B.C. For it is found in the line of
Lucilius", "concursans veluti angarius clareque quiritans."
Aulus Gellius10 quotes Nigidius (a contemporary of Cicero) in
the next century as using angaria. It was eventually adopted
as a legal term. So Ulpian11 has the phrase "angariare naves."
And in the fourth century A.D. there were constant variations of
1 Bekker, Anecdot. Gr. i. 325. 2 Suidas. 8 Arrian, Epict. IV. i. 79.
4 m. p. 362, ed. Muller.
5 "Cujus frequens apud Talmudicos et communes Rabbinos usus est." Buxtorf.
« Yoma, f. 35- *• 7 f- 78- *•
8 Cp. also Nedarim, f. 32. 1 ; Baba kamma, f. 38. 2; Sanhedrin, f. 101. 2.
9 Sat. vi. ap. Non. s.v. 'quiritare'; xxi. 21.
10 xix. 14 " Inter literam n et g est alia vis: ut in nomine anguis, et angaria, etc."
11 Dig. xlix. xviii. 4.

140 THE INTERPRETATION OF THE LAW
practice, under successive Emperors, with regard to the
immunity of the clergy from angariae and parangariae, or the
furnishing of horses and wagons for the conveyance of corn and
other supplies for the imperial troops1. Later still the expression
was not confined to the claims of the state alone, but was applied
also to feudal service. Du Cange quotes from a statute of the
Council of Treves in 1310 A.D. : " Nobiles et domini terrae
permittant homines suos dies festos observare, et non compellant
eos evectiones seu alias angarias praestare." So it first appears
in Italian with this reference as angheria"*.
In ecclesiastical Latin angariare was consistently employed
to translate dyyapeveiv in the Gospels ; e.g. by the translator of
Irenaeus3, by Chromatius4, by Augustine5, and in the Vulgate".
Eventually it lost the precision of its proper meaning, and came
to be used in quite a general way for any kind of constraint or
importunate pressure. Thus Augustine writes7: "Cum ab
eorum hominum necessitatibus vaco qui me sic angariant ut eos
nullo modo liceat evitare nec contemnere oporteat." Compare
Eddi8 : " Dona mihi maxima promittentes si te subterfugientem,
ut dixerunt, Episcopum angarizarem et ad Apostolicam sedem
tendentem retinerem " : and Ingulph9 : " Maxime vero Wulfium
anachoritam reclusum apud clericos Pegelandenses angariabant
et perangariabant."
1 See Bingham, Antiquities of the Christian Church, v. iii. io(vol. II. p. 144, ed.
1855). Cod. Theod. vm. v; xvi. ii. 10, 14, 15, 16; Cod. Justin. II. ii. 11; XII. li.
*•¦ 2 Abbot Philip freed the tenants of the Abbey of Cava, in 1322, from the
oppression of angheria and perangheria. G. Abignante, Gli statuti inediti di Cava
dei Tirreni, p. 93 ; quoted by Nitti, Catholic Socialism (tr. Mackintosh), p. 78.
3 1. xix. 2 "Simonem quendam Cyrenaeum angariatum portasse crucem ejus pro
eo." 4 Tract, in Matt. xi. 3.
5 De S. D. in M. I. xix. 61. Cp. Ep. 5 " Et cum eo qui nos angariare voluerit
ire debere spatio itineris duplicato."
6 M. v. 41; xxvii. 32; Mk xv. 21.
7 Ep. 158; and again: "Cum paululum spatii vix datur inter acervos occupa-
tionum, quibus nos alienae vel cupiditates vel necessitates angariatos trahunt."
8 Life of Wilfrid, 28.
9 Hist, of Croyland, s.a. 1032, p. 61, ed. Gale.

ST MATT. VI. I— 1 8.
Upoaex^re [Be~\ rrjv BiKaioavvrjv vfiwv fir) troielv efiirpoadev rwv
dvdpwirwv irpbs to OeaOrjvai avrois' el Be firjye, fitadbv ovk exeTe
irapd to> irarpi vfiwv t&5 iv rois ovpavois. "Orav orbv irotfjs
iXerjfioavvrjv, fir) aaXirlarjs efiirpoadev aov, Sairep ol vtroKpiral
iroiovaiv iv rals avvaywyais Kal iv rals pv/iais, otrws Bot-aadwatv
virb rwv dvdpwirwv dprjv A,e<ya> ifiiv, direxovaiv rbv fitadbv
avrwv. aov Be troiovvros eXerjfioavvrjv fir) <yix»TO) r) dpiarepd aov
ri troielr) Bel-id aov, otrws fj aov r) eXerjfioavvrj iv rw Kpvtrrw' Kal
b irarrjp aov b fiXeirwv iv tq5 Kpvtrrw dtroBwaet aoi. Kat orav
irpoaevx7la'@e> °^* eaeade dos ol vtroKpiral' on qbiXovaiv iv rals
avvaywyais Kal iv rals ywvlais rwv trXarei&v ear&res trpoaev-
Xeadai, otrws <f>avwaiv tois dvdpwirois' dfirjv Xeyw v/ilv, direxovaiv
rbv fitadbv avrwv. aii Be orav trpoaevxv, e'laeXde els rb rafielbv
aov Kal KXeiaas rrjv dvpav aov irpbaevl-ai to3 irarpi aov rw iv too
Kpvtrrw' Kal b irarrjp aov b ffXeirwv iv too Kpvirrw dtroBwaei aoi.
Upoaevxbfievoi Be fir) fSarraXoyrjarjre watrep ol idviKol' BoKovatv
ydp on iv rfj iroXvXoyla avrwv elaaKovadrjaovrai. fir) ovv
bfioiadrjre avrois' olBev ydp b irarrjp ifiwv wv XPe'lav ^X6Te "V0^
rov vfias alrrjaat avrov. ovrws oiv irpoaevx^ade vfieis'
Hdrep r)fiwv b iv tois ovpavois"
'Ayiaadrjrw to bvopa aov
eXddra fj f3aaiXeia aov
yevrjdrjrw rb deXrjfid aov,
to? iv ovpav$ Kal itri yrjs'

Tov aprov rjfiwv rbv iinovaiov Bos rjfilv arjfiepov
koi atfies rjpiv rd oq^eiXrjfiara rjfiwv, d>s Kal r)/iels d(prjKafiev rois
6(f>eiXerais rjfiwv
Kai fir) elaeviyKrjs fjfids els treipaafibv, dXXd pvaat r)p,ds dirb tou
trovrjpov.
'JLdv yap dipfjre rois dvdpwirois ra irapairroofiara avr&v,
d<prjaei Kal v/ilv o irarrjp v/iwv o ovpdvios' idv Be prj afyrjre rois
dvdpwirois, ovBe b irarrjp hfi&v d<f>rjaei rd irapairTWfiara ii prov.
"Orav Be vrjarevrjre, fir) ylveade o5? ol vtroKpiral aKvdpwtrol'
d<f>avi%ovaiv ydp rd irpoawira avrwv otrws (pav&aiv rois dvdpwirois
vrjarevovres' dprjv Xeyw vp.lv, direxovaiv top fitadbv avrwv. aii
Be vrjarevwv aXetyfrai aov rrjv KecpaXrjv Kal rb trpbawtrbv aov viijrai,
6trws fir) (pavrjs rois dvdpwirois vrjarevwv, dXXa to3 irarpi aov rw
iv to) Kpvabalw' koi b irarrjp aov b fiXeirwv iv tS> Kpvtj>aloj>
dtroBwaei aoi.

VI. THE WORKS OF RIGHTEOUSNESS.
The term ' Righteousness ' expresses essentially the Jewish
ideal of religious service. It runs all through the teaching of
the Old Testament, in which the root pnv is said1 to occur no
less than 520 times ; with especial frequency in the later books.
It has of course many shades of meaning ; but, speaking
generally, it may be said to represent the practical manifestation
of religion in active morality. For Righteousness was held to
consist in conformity to a prescribed standard of life : " It shall
be righteousness unto us if we observe to do all this command
ment before the Lord our God, as he hath commanded us2."
Thus it may be applied either to a literal observance of the
prohibitions of the Moral Law, or to a fulfilment of the positive
enactments of the Ceremonial Law, or to the practice of the
stated religious duties of Prayer, Almsgiving and Fasting.
Righteousness was regarded mainly as the performance of
certain definite duties. Hence even under the New Covenant
it was natural that the earlier teachers, who had themselves been
brought up within the atmosphere of the religious heritage of
the Old Covenant, should use such phrases as iroielv rrjv
BtKaioavvrjv3 (which our Lord Himself adopts here, in addressing
representative Jews), or ipydgeadai rrjv BiKaioavvrjv*. For strict
obedience to fixed regulations was the traditional pattern of
Righteousness. That was rj SiKaioavvrj rj iK rov vbfiov5.
1 Hast. D.B. iv. 272 b. a Deut. vi. 15.
3 1 J. ii. 29; iii. 7, io; Rev. xxii. 11. Cp. Ps. Sol. ix. 7, 9; xvii. 21; also Tob.
iv. 6; xiii. 6.
4 A. x. 35 ; Heb. xi. 33. Contrast (py. tV dvoplav, M. vii. 33. Cp. J. vi. 28
rl iroiQpev tva ipyafibpeBa to (pya rov Qeov; Tit. iii. 5 obx i£ (pyuv ruv iv Sixaioobvy
d iroi^aapev ypeis...(auaev ypds.
8 Rom. x. 5 ; Phil. iii. 9 (iv vbptp, Phil. iii. 6).

144 THE WORKS OF RIGHTEOUSNESS
But this conception had been elaborately developed by the
Scribes and Pharisees into a rigid and intricate system. Under
their teaching the outward observance of rules was so forced
upon the attention, that the inner meaning was in danger of
being lost to view. Of course a strictly regulated order of
moral, or even of ceremonial, practice in itself argues a dis
position of loyalty towards God. So far the claim of spiritual
principle was recognised. But the emphasis laid on the due
fulfilment of particular obligations, in accordance with a strict
code of minute details, had gone far to crush out the living
spirit of free service. The overt act was considered all-im
portant ; the inner motive was largely ignored. And it was this
misconception which our Lord set Himself to correct in His
Gospel of the Kingdom.
He had already dealt with the Moral Law, and had given a
new interpretation of its commandments. He had sketched the
ideal of a whole-hearted devotion to the heavenly Father,
culminating in a very reflexion of His own perfection: "Ye
therefore shall be perfect, as your heavenly Father is perfect1."
And now He passes on to treat of other aspects of Righteousness.
But He says not a word concerning the Ceremonial Law. That
is tacitly assumed to have been a temporary provision only,
adapted to the special circumstances of the Old Covenant. It
is a remarkable omission ; considering in what prominent
estimation ritual observances were held in the religious life of
the Jews. In a later Christian age, especially when the Jewish
scheme had completely passed away, with the final destruction
of the Temple, the meaning of this silence was plain enough
to understand. But at the time it must have appeared to be
almost unaccountable. At all events it marked the new teacher
as being wholly different from all other teachers who had
preceded Him. Ignoring that feature however, He proceeds
at once to take up the question of the practices to which in
contemporary use the name of Righteousness was more speci
fically applied, — Prayer, Almsgiving, and Fasting.
There are three essential relationships in the religious life : —
to God, to fellowmen, and to^self. It must be so, in accordance
C- i v. 48.

ST MATT. VI. 1 — 18 145
with the constitution of man's nature. The fact that men are
' partakers of the Divine nature1 ' implies a primary claim on
direct approach to, and communion with, God ; social cohesion
involves social^ duties2 ; and the possession of freewill requires
self-control. And under various forms these three elementary
relationships are constantly set forth in all religious teaching.
They are recognised, for instance, in the brief compendium of
" a godly, righteous, and sober life3 " ; and they are presupposed
in the common category of the counter temptations of ' the
Devil, the world, and the flesh4.' So also they find concrete
expression in the typical exercises of Prayer, Almsgiving, and
Fasting5. And it is these practices which now come under
review. First of all there is a sentence of general introduction,
warning against 'doing righteousness' with a view to being
observed by others. Such a debasement inevitably vitiates it,
and precludes" the true 'reward' from the Father in heaven ; for
obviously it is performed "as unto men, and no.t unto the
Lord7." SiKaioavvrj here certainly has its generic sense of
'righteousness,' and does not represent ni£J¥ m its later
specialised meaning of ' almsgiving.' It is true that in the
Rabbinic writings ni£Ji? bears the restricted signification of
'almsgiving.' It is true also that in the Septuagint '"^V is
translated by iXerj/ioavvrj in several cases8. But this does not
mean that eXerjpoavvrj is there used in its later technical mean
ing. For throughout the Septuagint it retains its proper sense,
as derived from eXeos. In five instances it is employed to
translate 1$$: and it is even applied to the action of God
1 II Pet. i. 4. Cp. Gen. i. 26, 27; ix. 6.
2 Cp. Arist. Pol. I. ii. 9 dvBpwvos ipbaei irdkinxbv ffiov. N. Eth. 1. v. 6; and IX.
ix. 3 irokinxbv ydp b dvBpuiros xal avfyv iretfivxbs.
3 Daily Confession, from Tit. ii. 12 tva...owtppbvus xal Sixalus /cat eboepus i^aupev.
4 Renunciations in Baptismal Offices; and Collect for 18th S. after Trinity (Bp.
Cosin's addition).
5 Cp. Tob. xii. 8 dyaBbv irpoaevxy perd vyarelas xal (Xeypoabvys xal Sixaioabvys.
" For el Si p-irye see Plummer on L. v. 36.
7 Col. iii. 23 8 (dv iroiyre ia ^j/vxys tpydfroBe lis rf Kvplu xal obx dvBpdnrois,
elSbres on dirb Kvpiov dTok-fipyj/eoBe ryv dvrairbSoaiv rys xXypovoplas.
8 Tromm cites ten instances (including Dan. iv. 24 nj3"]X). 10

146 THE WORKS OF RIGHTEOUSNESS
Himself1. But while nl?lV was ultimately adopted as the
regular term for 'almsgiving,' this was never the case with
SiKaioavvrj. There appears to be no instance elsewhere of such
an application of the word2. That however by itself would not
prove that this meaning cannot be attached to it here. But
apart from the usage of the particular word, the whole structure
of the passage shows that the opening sentence embraces all its
three subjects equally. It refers to the whole of the section, and
not to the first point only. For the three are set out in a closely
parallel, indeed in a practically identical, form ; as is seen at once
in the following paradigm : —
when thou doest alms (do) not as the hypocrites) ™ ^ Ce) se^L" S
when ye pray ye shall not be as the hyp. P™ . ™eX, .tove>s?e"1 m secret
when ye fast be not as the hypocrite )™™ed thelr rej *£ recomPense
But the preliminary statement lies quite outside this construction,
while it covers its repeated teaching in other words. It cannot
therefore belong to one member only; and 'righteousness'
cannot be narrowed into ' almsgiving,' so as to exclude prayer
and fasting from its reference. i. Almsgiving.
The practice of Almsgiving is taken first, in accordance with
the orderly progress of the argument of the discourse. For the
interpretation of the Law had just been summed up in the
comprehensive maxim of unselfish love. And the subject of
Almsgiving forms the natural sequel to that precept8. It is an
outward and obvious instance of social service. Benevolent
generosity is a practical manifestation of the spirit of goodwill,
or ' love,' which is the fulfilment of the Law 4. But more than
that, Almsgiving was regarded by the Jews as the most
1 e.g. Ps. xxiv (xxiii). 5 oBtos Xy-pif/erai ebXoylav irapd Kvpiov, xal (Xeypoabvyv
irapd 6eo0 aurypos abrov. Cp. Ps. Sol. ix. 20 tou Kvpiov (Xeypoabvy y iir' otxov
'lapayX eis rbv aluva xal (n, with xi. 9 tou Kvpiov to (Xeos eirl rbv 'lapayk els rbv
aluva Koi (ti.
2 Not even 11 Cor. ix. 9, where see Meyer: "y Sixaioabvy is not. ..to be taken as
beneficence ... which it never means, not even in Matt. vi. 1; but it always means
righteousness, which, however, may, according to the context. ..be that which expresses
itself by doing good."
3 Cp. Si, vi. 1 : N L I, 33 etc. * Rom. xiii. 10.

ST MATT. VI. 1, 2 147
meritorious of all religious duties, — in fact, as an observance
which by its own intrinsic worth won for the donor the highest
spiritual rewards, and could even establish a claim on the
forgiveness of sins and everlasting life. This is declared in
such sayings as the following : — " Alms doth deliver from death,
and suffereth not to come into darkness." " Alms doth deliver
from death, and shall purge away all sin. Those that practise
alms and righteousness shall be filled with life." "Alms maketh
an atonement for sins1." So also in the Talmud the same
teaching is repeated : " This money goes for alms, that my sons
may live, and that I may obtain the world to come.'' " If you
afford alms out of your purse, God will keep you from all damage
and harm." "I shall behold Thy face because of alms2..." "Who
soever shall give a halfpenny to a poor man in alms shall be a
partaker of the beatific vision3."
Now our Lord takes them on their own ground of anticipa
tion of reward for good deeds done. But He points out that
where such deeds are done in ostentation and self-advertisement,
the motive is not to do good for its own sake, but to achieve
notoriety. It is then not true generosity ; it is no more than
a price paid for a certain desired result. The givers buy for
themselves a popular reputation by their alms4 ; they expend,
even it may be lavishly, what will gain this end, and "verily they
have received their reward " ; they have received the return for
their outlay. But that is all they do receive. The result of
their almsgiving is exhausted in the name they have made for
themselves with men. It is not an offering to God ; and there
fore there can be no recognition, no reward, from Him.
This spirit of boastful display is described by a proverbial
saying, " Sound not a trumpet before thee." This is simply a
figurative expression. Wunsche5 indeed refers to the practice of
1 Tob. iv. io; xii. 9; Ecclus. iii. 30. 2 pl?2, Ps. xvii. 15.
3 Bab. Posh Hashana, f. 4. 1 ; Jer. Pea, f. 15. 2 ; Baba bathra, f. 10. 1 (Lightfoot).
4 Cp. Philo, De Cherub. 34 ebpdioeis rolvvv vkoituv diravras Kal robs keyopevovs
Xapl^eaBai, irnrpdaKovras pdkkov ti Sapovpivovs, xal ofls olbpeBa Xapfidveiv xdpiras, irpbs
dXydeiav ibvovpivovs. ol piv ydp SlSovres, dpoifli]v, (iraivov y rtpyv Bypupevoi, t^yrovvres
Xdpiros dvrlSoaiv, ebirpeirel Supeas bvbpan xvplus irpdaiv (pyd^ovraf ktX.
6 Neue Beitr. z. Erl. der Evang., p. 77; from Taanith, ii. 2, 3. The same
Talmudic reference has recently been adduced in explanation of this passage by
10—2

148 THE WORKS OF RIGHTEOUSNESS
sounding the trumpets on the occasions of the public fasts in
times of drought, or other public calamities. But that was
connected with the general call to fasting and prayer, and was
not used to proclaim individual almsgiving. There is no trace
of any such custom in the Rabbinic literature, as associated with
almsgiving1. It is however a perfectly natural metaphor, the
use of which is found elsewhere ; as, for instance, in the phrase
of the younger Cicero2 : " Quare quod polliceris te buccinatorem
fore existimationis meae, firmo id, constantique animo facias
licet." It is here no more an allusion to a literal action than
is the contrasted description of true almsgiving in the following
verse. In referring to the prominent exponents of righteousness, the
Pharisees, who gave their alms in public, as 'the hypocrites,'
our Lord cast back upon them, with startling emphasis, the
very accusation which their own party levelled against their
opponents, the Sadducees, as the ' profane ' (^Mf!) who disre
garded the precepts of the Covenant. Thus in the Pharisaic
' Psalms of Solomon ' the Sadducees are spoken of as " those
that live in hypocrisy in the company of the saints3." The
meaning of viroKpirrjs in the Gospels is of course to be traced,
not from the classical usage of the word (= ' play-actor '), but
from the sense in which it is used by the Greek translators of
the Old Testament. By them it was employed to translate *$%',
for which elsewhere they give daefirjs, or dvopos, or trapdvopos :
so that they virtually regarded viroKpirrjs as a synonym for these
Dr A. Biichler in the fourn. Theol. St., vol. x. no. 38, p. 267. But though he shows
that almsgiving was associated with the public fasts, the sounding of the trumpets had
no connexion with it.
1 Cp. J. Lightfoot: "I have not found, although I have sought for it much and
seriously, even the least mention of a trumpet in almsgiving." Schottgen: "Certe
hoc miror, quum in scriptis Judaeorum tam multi ritus Pharisaici a Lightfooto et aliis
adnotati inveniantur, quod hujus ipsius nec vola nec vestigium adpareat." Kuinoel:
"Nec hujus ritus indicium usquam in veterum Hebraorum monumentis occurrit."
2 Cic. Epp. ad Div. xvi. 21 "Cicero Fil. Tironi suo dulciss. s.p.d."
3 iv. 7 tous (v viroxplaei £uvras perd baluv. For the identification of the
Sadducees with the irapdvopoi, or dpapruXol, in Pss. Sol. see Ryle and James, pp.
xlvi — xlviii.
4 LXX, Job xxxiv. 30; xxxvi. 13. Aq., Theod., Sym., Prov. xi. 9. Aq.,Theod.,
Job xv. 34; xx. 5. (Also Sym., Hos. vi. 9 for T11JI, where LXX ireipoTijs.)

ST MATT. VI. 2 149
words. In the Book of Job, for instance, where IM? occurs
eight times, it is rendered in the Septuagint three times by
daefSrjs, twice by irapdvofios, and twice by viroKpirrjs1.
The scenes of their display are given as ' the synagogues '
and ' the streets ' : the synagogues, because the collection and the
distribution of alms were intimately associated with the services
of the synagogues, in connexion with which special officers were
appointed for this administration2 ; the streets3, where there was
the most public occasion of being observed. Similarly at the
close of His ministry our Lord rebuked the Scribes and the
Pharisees for their love of " the chief seats in the synagogues,
and the salutations in the market-places4."
The statement " they have received their reward " does not
at once suggest to a modern reader all the implication that it
carried for a Jewish audience. It means of course that they
have achieved their object, and won the notoriety which they
desired. But it also means much more than that. It is a
reference to the traditional belief that it is impossible for men to
expect to enjoy both the blessings of prosperity or fame in this
life and the spiritual felicity of the life to come5. According to
this view, they may have the one or the other ; but they cannot
have both. The two are incompatible with each other. " Per
chance thou wilt say, because I have received my reward in this
world, there shall be nothing remaining for me in that which is to
1 d<rq8i}s, viii. 13; xv. 34 ; xxvii. 8 : irapdvopos, xvii. 8 ; xx. 5 : biroxpiryS, xxxiv. 30 ;
xxxvi. 13. In the remaining passage, xiii. 16, it is translated 56\os (?for S6Xios).
2 The ni?1TV 'SSI. See Schiirer, 11. ii. 66; Kitto, Cycl. iii. 902; Vitringa, De
Vet. Synag. ii. 811, 814.
3 For pbpy cp. L. xiv. 21; A. ix. 11 ; xii. 10. LXX Is. xv. 3 (=3hl); [Prov.
xxxi. 23 N,="iyK>, irbXy\; Tob. xiii. 18 ; Ecclus. ix. 7. Phrynichus suggests that this
application of the word had a Macedonian origin : "Pbpy • xal tovto ol piv 'AByvaioi
iirl rys bppys irlBeaav • ol Si vvv dpiaBeis (irl rov areviiirov. Soxei Si poi xal rovro
iiaxeSovtxbv elvai. This may account for its use as a military term for the alleys of a
camp : cp. ^En. Tact. 3 pbpys exdarys dirodeil-ai pvpdpxyv : Polyb. vi. xxix. 1 :
pvporopla, Polyb. vi. xxxi. 10; Strab. xiv. p. 956 b: pvporopeiv, Jos. B.J. III. v. 2;
Strab. xii. p. 249 a. Diod. Sic. xvn. Iii. 2 uses pvporopla and pvporopeiv of laying
out the city of Alexandria.
4 M. xxiii. 6, 7.
5 Cp. Schottgen : " Phrasis Judseis non incognita, quae denotat hypocritas
mercedem suam in hoc mundo accepisse, nempe gloriam et laudem aliorum hominum,
in altera vero et seterna vita nihil ipsis exspectandum esse."

150 THE WORKS OF RIGHTEOUSNESS
come." " Know ye that he who now takes gold will at the same
time take part from the world to come1." This doctrine of the
direct reversal in the future life of the conditions experienced in
the earthly life runs largely through the Apocalyptic literature2.
The lot of the " men of the world, whose portion is in this life3,"
is placed in contrast with the permanent hope and reward of the
faithful. Similarly, in the parable of Dives and Lazarus the
words put into Abraham's mouth are based on the same
traditional idea : " Son, remember that thou in thy lifetime
receivedst thy good things, and Lazarus in like manner evil
things; but now he is comforted, and thou art in anguish4." The
astonishing feature however to the hearers on this occasion was
that the Lord should ascribe to the winning of praise from men
for exceptionally 'righteous' acts the low status of merely
mundane success ; and actually attach to it the scornful phrase
of implied condemnation which was commonly reserved for men
of the world. He had already applied to the Pharisees their
own term of reproach for the Sadducees (hypocrites) ; now He
further compares their short-lived triumph to that of the
successful ungodly.
In contrast then with all such ostentatious almsgiving under
the public gaze our Lord sketches the ideal of a true generosity,
as a perfect simplicity in giving. This He describes by another
proverbial expression, — " Let not thy left hand know what thy
right hand doeth " ; of which the meaning is patent. The
hypocrites strive to attract the notice of others : the true giver's
aim is to escape (if it were possible) even his own scrutiny5-
And He adds, — " That thine alms may be in secret " ; adopting
a customary Jewish phraseology. For, theoretically at least, the
Rabbinic teachers laid great stress on the virtue of good deeds
1 Bereshith Rabba (Midr. on Gen.), f. 43. 3 ; Shemoth Rabba (Midr. on Exod.),
f. 143. 4.
2 Cp., e.g., the debate with the 'sinners' in Enoch cii — civ.
3 Cp. Ps. xvii. 14, 15.
4 L. xvi. 25, where cp. dir&a/Ses with dirixovaiv here. diroXapf}dveiv='to receive
what is due': L. vi. 34; xxiii. 41; Rom. i. 27; Gal. iv. 5; Col. iii. 24; II J. 8.
dm*x«e = 'to receive in full': L. vi. 24; Phil. iv. 18 ; Philem. 15. In the Papyri it
is regularly used in receipts for payments. See Deissmann, B.S. p. 229.
5 Cp. Chrys. Horn. xix. 1 el ydp ottv ri (an, <pyal, aeavrbv dyvoyaat, wepurirot-
Saarov (aru aoi rovro, x&v abrds Svvarbv y tos Siaxovovpivas xefyas XaBeiv.

ST MATT. VI. 3, 4 . 151
done in secret. Thus, for instance, there is a saying in the
Talmud : " He that doeth alms in secret is greater than our
master Moses himself1." The circumstances of the Divine
acknowledgment are not specified : for the textual evidence is
against the retention of iv ra (pavepw2. In the Rabbinic litera
ture there is a constant antithesis between 'secretly3' and
' openly4 ' ; between ' hidden ' action and ' public ' recognition :
and it might therefore have been expected as the reference here.
But the actual contrast seems to be rather between the temporal
reward of the hypocrites and the true reward which shall be
given in the future life. And this inference is supported by our
Lord's words on another occasion, as recorded by St Luke
(xiv. 14). For there too His teaching is about unselfish
beneficence ; and the promise attached to it is, " It shall be
recompensed to thee at the resurrection of the righteous."
ii. Prayer.
From Almsgiving our Lord passes on to Prayer. In the
remarkable development of Judaism which had taken place after
the Return from the Captivity, prayer had become a prominent
feature of the religious life of the people5. It was not that they
had first learned the practice from their contact with the
Persians : for there are indications throughout the earlier stages
of the history of Israel e that prayer was always recognised as
an integral part of the general conception of religion. Indeed
it could not be otherwise. There can be no religion without
prayer in some form. Religion represents man's belief in God
and consequent service to Him : and it must therefore entail
1 Bab. Baba Bathra, f. 9. 2. Cp. Bab. Chagiga, f. 5. 1 "R. Jannai saw one
giving openly to a poor man; to whom he said, It were better thou hadst not given at
all, than to have given thus."
2 As also in verses 6 and 18. Cp. Aug. De Serm. D. in M. n. ii. 9 "Multa
Latina exemplaria sic habent, 'Et Pater tuus qui videt in abscondito reddet tibi
palam' : sed quia in Graecis, quae priora sunt, non invenimus 'palam,' non putavimus
hinc esse aliquid disserendum."
3 tnnDa, or wm, or njura.
4 'tWD, or N*Di"nD3 ( = (v irappyala. Cp. J. vii. 3 obSels ydp n (v Kpvirnp iroiet
xal iyrei abrbs iv irappyala elvai).
5 See Ewald, Hist. Isr. (E.T.), v. 23 ; Stanley, The Jewish Church, iii. 39.
« Cp. Hast. D.B., art. 'Prayer,' v. 39.

152 THE WORKS OF RIGHTEOUSNESS
approach to, and articulate intercourse with, Him. It is true
that sacrificial worship in itself largely satisfied this condition ;
but not altogether : and the essential idea of sacrifice, as
ratifying covenant with God1, in turn encouraged the spirit of
prayer. But the cessation of sacrifice during the Captivity had
thrown the Jews back upon prayer as the standard expression
of worship : and after the Return, and the restoration of the
Temple services, they never lost the spiritual development
which they had gained during their exile. Thenceforth prayer
was recognised more and more as a personal duty.
But under the increasing rigidity of the Pharisaic system,
while the regular practice of prayer was strongly fostered, there
was at the same time a tendency to debase it into a merely
formal exercise, and thereby to rob it of its true character. It
ceased to be a free communing in spirit with the Father in
heaven, when it came to be regarded chiefly as a stated obliga
tion to be fulfilled ; — as an act of homage to the Divine King,
the due performance of which satisfied all claims of service in
that respect. A regulation as to fixed times for prayer, and the
use of proper forms, are not derogatory to true prayer : rather
they are valuable, and in fact necessary, helps to earnest
devotion. It was not on these accounts that any charge was
laid against Pharisaism. They marked progress in the right
direction, as ensuring a systematic and reverent habit of prayer.
But the danger lay in the exaggerated stress which was placed
upon a strict obedience to the authorised rules of observance, as
the all-important point. Prayer was then looked upon as a
defined work to be done according to order. That was all that
was required. The mistake of this attitude was recognised by
the best of the Rabbis themselves. R. Elieser2 maintained that
prayer ought not to be made a fixed ordinance (jnp); and
R. Shimeon3 said, " when thou prayest, make not thy prayer
a fixed ordinance (jnp), but an entreaty before God." The
result of such a tenet was that prayer was dragged down to
serve as an outward token of religious profession. The man
who was punctilious in the performance of this duty thereby
1 Ps. 1. 5. 2 Berachoth, iv. 4. 3 Pirke Aboth, ii. 17.

ST MATT. VI. 5, 6 153
proclaimed himself before all as a loyal adherent of the
covenant. And the temptation was inevitable for those who
were actuated by such motives to display their proficiency before
the eyes of the world : and further, in their mutual rivalry, to
extend abnormally the length of their prayers. These are the
points to which our Lord draws attention : (i) the vulgarisation of
prayer by the open parade of it in public ; and (2) the senseless
prolixity of the prayers so made.
(1) In its structure the teaching is cast in an exactly
parallel form to that on Almsgiving1. Again the picture is
drawn of the ' hypocrites ' making a show of their prayers " in
the synagogues and at the corners of the streets " ; with the
warning2 not to follow their example. Again there is the stern
judgment, "Verily I say unto you, they have received their
reward." Again there follows the admonition of secret obser
vance, and the promise of the Divine acknowledgment.
The details of the representation of the hypocrites correspond
closely with the customs of the Jews as revealed in the Talmud.
Standing was the usual posture for prayer3. Prayer was
practised in the synagogues ; as it is said, " He goes to the
synagogue to pray4." And in the streets ; " R. Jochanan said, I
saw R. Jannai standing and praying in the streets of Tsippor
(Sepphoris), and going four cubits, and then praying the
additionary prayer5."
The precept of secrecy is set forth in an expression which is
borrowed from Isaiah : " Enter into thine inner chamber, and
having shut thy door, pray." — By the prophet it is applied to the
seclusion of the people of the Lord from His judgment on the
world6 : " Come, my people, enter thou into thy chambers, and
1 See above, p. 146. 5 For (oeoBe see on v. 48 above, p. 135, n. 6.
3 " In der Mischna sowohl wie in der Gemara findet man gewohnlich HDJ? stehen
mit S^ann beten verbunden"; Wiinsche. Cp. Bab. Berachoth, f. 26. 2 (referring to
Gen. xix. 27) "To stand is no other than to pray (HPST! sOX iTVDV j'N)." L. xviii.
11, 13; Mkxi. 25.
4 Tanchuma, f. 35. 1. 5 Jer. Berachoth, f. 83.
6 Is. xxyj. 20, 21. LXX /SdSife Xo6s pov, etaeXBe els rapeid aov, dirbxXeiaov ryv
Bbpav aov, xrX. rapeiov (M. xxiv. 26; L. xii. 3) is used constantly in LXX for "fJD-
The form rapteiov is all but universal in the Papyri, according to Deissmann {B.S.
183), who only knows of one instance of rapieiov.

154 THE WORKS OF RIGHTEOUSNESS
shut thy doors about thee ; hide thyself for a little moment,
until the indignation be overpast. For, behold, the LORD
cometh forth out of his place to punish the inhabitants of the
earth for their iniquity." And this original association of the
quotation may imply here also a suggestion that the members of
the Kingdom are to separate themselves from the godless world
when drawing near to the heavenly Father in prayer. If the
earnestness of their life is to be an open witness before men
(v. 14, 16), their personal devotions are to be jealously guarded
from all public parade. There is no contradiction here with the
earlier precept ; any more than there is between that and the
later injunction of vii. 6.
(2) So far then the section on Prayer has followed closely
on the lines of the preceding section on Almsgiving. It does
not however stop there ; but the subject is carried still further.
And there is nothing strange in this, — that the strict rhythm of
the argument should be broken into for fuller teaching about
Prayer. Indeed it could scarcely be otherwise. For Prayer is
the highest and the most spiritual, and therefore the most
difficult of the three practices with which this part of the Sermon
deals. Compared with Prayer, Almsgiving and Fasting are
relatively simple matters. Everyone understands generally how
to give and how to fast : and when special extravagancies of
method have been pointed out and put aside, that is all that is
required by way of direction as regards them. But with Prayer
it is altogether different. Every practical teacher knows, from
constant experience, that in giving instruction on Prayer,
Almsgiving, and Fasting, it needs much more elaborate ex
planation and guidance to train the habit of true Prayer, than is
necessary either in the case either of Almsgiving or of Fasting.
Our Lord then, after His warning against an ostentatious parade
of personal Prayer, adds a further caution against the common
tendency to protract prayers to an inordinate length, as though
a peculiar merit were attached to mere verbosity.
The word by which this habit is described, f3arraXoyelv\
seems to owe its origin to St Matthew. It was probably coined
1 paTrakoyeiv is the spelling of N B.

ST MATT. VI. 7 155
by him to represent, and partially to transliterate, the Rabbinic
phrase D^02 Dnn, or some cognate expression. For it is not
found in any Greek writer otherwise than in direct reference
to this passage, except once in the commentary of Simplicius on
the Enchiridion of Epictetus1 ; and it is impossible to regard
so late a writer (500 A.D.) as an independent witness to a general
use of the word apart from the influence of Ecclesiastical Greek.
The proper Greek term which seems most nearly to approximate
to fSarraXoyelv is /3arrapl£eiv : but it is a mistake to regard these
words as equivalent to each other in meaning. There is a clear
distinction between the two : fiarraplgeiv denotes a stuttering
utterance; fiarfaXoyelv, prolixity in speaking2- f3arrapi^etv
therefore would be quite unsuitable for use in the present
connexion, in which the parallelism of the clauses shows that
the verb must bear a similar3 meaning to that of iroXvXoyla. But
this could not be represented by f3arrapi^etv. A confused and "
hesitating speech could never, under any circumstances, be ^ ^1
considered an ideal of effective prayer : whereas reiteration,
empty and senseless as it may be intrinsically, was actually
regarded as a potent element in prayer.
This supposition of the efficacy of prolonged prayer is
described as characteristic4 of the Gentiles5. But it was no less
characteristic of the Pharisees, who " for a pretence prayed at
1 p. 340, ed. Schweigh. dXX' iirl rd koiird xetpdXaia rov 'SirixTyWov rpeirriov, py
(pavrbv Xd6u irpoBipevos piv to tou 'EitoctiJtou oaipyvlaai, irepl KaByKbvruv Si jSotto-
Xoyuv vvv.
2 Etym. M. fsarraplgeiv etpyrai rb pbXis XaXeiv...y Se fsarroXoyla aypalvei tV
irokvXoylav. Cp. Lucian, Jup. Trag. 27 ob avvelpuv dXXd parraplfuv xal raparrb-
pevos. It need hardly be said that the scholiastic derivation of §aTTapl£eiv from the
personal name Bdrros — whether of the founder and ruler of Cyrene (Schol. on Luc,
cp. Hdt. iv. 155), or of a: poet who wrote tautological lines (Suidas) — is of no account.
8 fiarroXoyla is not exactly the same as 7roXuXo7fa. The interpretation of
Chrysostom, fSarroXoylav (vravBa tV (pXvaplav X£y« [Horn, in M. xix. p. 136;
repeated in Horn. xxx. p. 184; and copied by Theophylact, in M. p. 35: see Suicer,
i. 674] approximates closely to the sense of Dvt32 DHSI.
4 For ol iBvixol see on v. 47 above, p. 134, n. *. B Syr"" Did. (§ 8) read oi
U7TOItp4To£. 5 Cp. the Latin phrase 'fatigare deos': e.g. Tac. H. i. 29 "Ignarus interim
Galba, et sacris intentus, fatigabat alieni iam imperii deos"; Ter. Heaut. v. 1 ; Hor.
Carm. 1. ii. 26. So (voxXeiv in Greek : e.g. Lucian, Bis Accus. 1 6 piv ydp 'AffxXy-
iribs virb ruv voaobvrav (voxkobpevos.

156 THE WORKS OF RIGHTEOUSNESS
length1." And of some2 of the Rabbis, as these sayings of the
Talmud bear witness : — " Everyone that multiplies prayer is
heard." " R. Judah said, There are three things which prolong
the days and years of a man. The first is if one is lengthy in
his prayers... But if one is lengthy in his prayers, that is most
excellent3." This notion, again, argues a complete misapprehension of the
heavenly Father's attitude towards His children : " for your
Father knoweth what things ye have need of, before ye ask him."
The spirit of complete trustfulness, which ought to underlie and
inform all prayer, will shortly come under fuller review
[vi. 25 — 34] : and this statement is so framed as to lead on to the
subsequent teaching. It is another instance of our Lord's
method, already noticed4, of anticipating a point which He
intends presently to develope, by a preliminary reference to it, so
couched as to arrest attention, and yet in itself no more than a
suggestion, or a reference, which may be understood to require
further and fuller explanation.
(3) But this is not all. Hitherto our Lord's treatment of
this subject, — of personal prayer, — had been mainly negative ;
in fact altogether so, except for the general injunction to pray in
secret rather than in public. The acknowledged canons of
prayer had been swept away. For He had spoken against the
open profession of prayer ' to be seen of men,' in the synagogues
and at the corners of the streets : and He had forbidden the
apparent earnestness of protracted and often repeated prayers.
It may well be doubted whether any precepts of this Gospel of
the Kingdom, — with the exception of the first shock of the new
and unexpected standard of the Beatitudes, — would cause more
consternation to pious Jews than this entire subversal of what
they had been taught to regard as the surest tokens of
' righteousness ' in prayer. Certainly in no part of the Sermon
on the Mount is it more important than it is in this section to
bear in mind how closely condensed is the precis of the
1 irpoipdaei paxpd irpoaevxbpevoi, Mk xii. 40; L. xx. 47.
2 But not all: cp., e.g., Berachoth, f. 61. 1 (quoting Eccl. v. 2).
3 Jer. Taanith, f. 67. 3 (cp. Yoma, f. 29. 1) ; Berachoth, f. 54. 2, 55. 1.
4 See above, p. 135.

ST MATT. VI. 8 157
discourse given by St Matthew. Perfect as the outline is, it
still remains no more than a brief outline. The careful parallelism,
or rather reiteration, both of the sentence-building and of the
actual phrases in the three sections dealing with Almsgiving,
Prayer, and Fasting, may be taken to show that the cardinal
statements are preserved in each case, with all their inten
tional emphasis of repetition. But it cannot be supposed
that the handling of so difficult, and so vital, a subject as
Prayer was confined to the few short sentences here recorded.
There must have been, in the discourse as originally spoken,
a full elaboration of each point, to make it really intelligible
to the astonished hearers : and that all the more, because the
new doctrine was directed to the overthrowing of preconceived
notions, which had become firmly established, and had hitherto
been received almost as axioms of the religious life. Religious
preconceptions are not easily overcome. All the force of
persistent argument is required to convince those who hold them
that they are mistaken. It may therefore be taken for certain
that our Lord in His actual teaching did not limit what He had
to say to the few pregnant words which are preserved in the
written report ; but that as He went on He made abundantly
clear to His audience the whole force of His new, and to them
startling, proposition, that the practices which the accredited
religious leaders had held up before the people, by example and
by precept, as the highest ideal, must be completely cast aside.
Prevalent mistakes then had been corrected ; and the way had
been prepared for the teaching of truer methods. But if at this
point the subject had been dropped; — if that were all that was said
about Prayer at this time ; — it is impossible to imagine that any
thing else than sheer bewilderment could have been the result
in the minds of the hearers. They had always been taught
to aim at praying in a particular way : now they were told
emphatically not to do so ; that it was a wrong method for
members of the Kingdom of God. How then were they to
pray? Especially in the light of the strange reminder that
•' their heavenly Father knew what things they had need of,
before they asked Him ' ? They needed positive, and detailed,
instruction as to how, and for what, they ought to pray. And
this was given them in the concrete form of a pattern Prayer.

158 THE WORKS OF RIGHTEOUSNESS
In no other way indeed could the true ideal have been at once so
clearly and so concisely explained to them.
ii. b. The Lord's Prayer.
This of course assumes that the Lord's Prayer is an integral
part of the Sermon on the Mount. The Prayer, it is true, is
recorded by St Luke1 as having been given under quite different
circumstances, in private, to the disciples only, in answer to the
request of one of them for an exclusive form for their own use.
And because St Matthew elsewhere apparently groups together
several items of teaching on the subject in hand, which were
spoken at various times, it is frequently argued that the testi
mony of St Luke must be accepted as decisive in regard to the
original occasion of giving the Prayer, in reference to that of
St Matthew ; and that St Matthew inserted it in this discourse, to
which it did not properly belong, as an illustration of the general
lesson on Prayer. When the Prayer has been examined in detail
it will be seen how accurately, as a matter of fact, it dovetails into
the whole teaching and scheme of the Sermon on the Mount.
But in the meantime it may be pointed out that it does not follow
that if St Luke is right St Matthew must therefore be wrong.
There is no valid reason why both should not be right. For
both the occasions referred to demanded a pattern form of
Prayer : and as the one Divine model was intended for the
guidance and use of all members of the Kingdom, and embraced
every need, it would seem, in that case, that the Lord met the
desire for a special Prayer, to be used distinctively by the inner
circle of His disciples, by repeating the form with which He had
endowed the whole Society2.
But be that as it may, at all events it is unquestionably
St Matthew, and not St Luke, who gives the original text of the
Prayer. The witness of the early tradition of the Church in this
respect is emphatic and unmistakable. For the Prayer is found
in every known Liturgy, and always in the Matthaean recension.
It occurs in this connexion even in the Didache3. But besides
this, a careful comparison of the two forms brings to light
evident indications that alterations have been made by St Luke
1 xi. i. a Cp. Chase, The L. P. in the Early Church (T. and St. i. 3), p. 11.

ST MATT. VI. 9 — 13 159
in the wording. These have been worked out by Mr T. E.
Page, in an interesting paper in the Expositor^, who points
for instance to the adoption of such a specially Lukan expression
as to Kad* rjpepav2 for arjpepov, which in turn leads to the further
change of Sbs in this clause to the present tense, BIBov, though all
the other verbs 'of petition are in the aorist : or to the substitu
tion of t«? dpaprlas for ra b<peiXrjfiara, to make the sense more
intelligible to Greek readers ; for brpeiXrjfiara in ordinary Greek
carries only an economic sense, whereas in the Jewish3 Greek of
St Matthew it represents x?in ; though St Luke still gives,
somewhat incongruously, iravri b<pelXovn for Tots b(f>etX4rais.
Moreover the Prayer as given by St Luke is not merely in an
abridged, but actually in a defective, form. For, as Mr Page
points out, the clause ' Bring us not into temptation ' requires
that the alternative ' But deliver us from the Evil One ' should be
expressed ; otherwise the false alternative would be implied4 ;
that God might lead men into temptation. In the text then of
this Prayer St Matthew is to be followed, rather than St Luke,
as giving the authentic report. And though that is not
necessarily a proof that he is also right as to the occasion of its
promulgation, it does afford substantial evidence of his accuracy
where comparison is possible with another Evangelist.
So far from its being inappropriate, or unlikely, that our
Lord should have given a definite form of Prayer in His Gospel
of the Kingdom, as a matter of fact it is exactly what the Jews
would expect from a new Rabbi. For, as Dr J. Lightfoot points
out5, " It was very usual with the doctors of the Jews to
compose forms of short prayers, and to deliver them to their
scholars. . .whereof you will find some examples, and they not
a few, in the Babylonian Gemara, in the tract Beracoth, and
elsewhere." So John the Baptist, who followed the methods of
the Pharisees in the matter of religious exercises6, taught his
disciples a formula of Prayer7. It would therefore be looked
1 Series HI., vol. vii. pp. 433 — 440. His results have been incorporated in the
Art. on 'The Lord's Prayer' in Hast. D.B. iii. 141.
2 Cp. L. xix. 47; A. xvii. n. Cp. also xal ydp abrol (for dis xal ypms) with St
Luke's constant use of xal abrbs, xal abrol.
3 See Moulton's Winer, Gr. N. T. Gk?, p. 33.
4 Mr Page compares two similarly corrective contrasts in L. x. 20, 21.
5 ed. Pitman, xi. 142. 6 See Mk ii. 18. 7 L. xi. 1.

160 THE WORKS OF RIGHTEOUSNESS
for almost as a matter of course in the declaration of a new
Teacher that he should include the delivery of a special Prayer
of his own.
It is an interesting question whether our Lord in any
measure took the several petitions of the Prayer, or some of
them, from the stated prayers of the Jews. The chief difficulty
in the comparison lies in the uncertainty which exists concern
ing the relative antiquity of the Jewish liturgical forms. Of
these " The Eighteen1 " Benedictions, or Supplications, are
certainly the most ancient, and date at least from the first
century, and probably are much earlier. These however have
no point of contact with the Lord's Prayer, unless it be in the
one partial coincidence of a prayer for forgiveness in the sixth
berachah. On the other hand the opening phrases of the
Kaddish, which Vitringa ranks amongst the oldest of the
synagogue forms2, do show a remarkable similarity to the earlier
clauses of the Lord's Prayer : — " Let His great Name be
magnified and hallowed in the world which He created according
to His good pleasure ; and may He make His Kingdom to reign
(iTTiiaSD "l^0'1'1) ! may His redemption blossom forth, and His
Messiah be near at hand, and free His people, in your life and
in your days, and in the life of the whole house of Israel ; and
that with all speed3." If it could be shown that this form was in
vogue as early as the first century, it would give strong support
to the contention that the Lord's Prayer was based to some
extent upon the accustomed prayers of the Jews. But the date
of the Kaddish is too uncertain for any argument of this kind
to be built upon it. Again in the Talmud there are indications
(which will presently appear in detail) that in certain respects
the Prayer was framed in accordance with the traditional canons
of the Jews concerning the matter of prayer: and there are
1 TT0V no'lOB*. They are given in full by Vitringa, De Syn. Vet. 1033— 1038;
by Schiirer, II. ii. 85 — 87 ; by Ginsburg, in Kitto's Cycl. iii. 906—907. In their pre
sent form they are subsequent to the destruction of Jerusalem, to which they contain
allusions : but they embody an earlier, and probably a very much earher, use. They
are referred to as a standard of prayer several times in the Talmud (see reff. in
Dr Ginsburg's art. 'Synagogue' in Kitto's Cycl. iii. 907 b).
2 "Forte omnium, quas Synagoga hujus temporis habet, Precationum antiquis-
sima" : De Syn. Vet. p. 1078.
3 See Vitringa, De Syn. Vet. p. 962.

ST MATT. VI. 9 — 13 161
even some interesting parallels to particular petitions in the
Prayer. But all this does not establish any probability,— still
less does it amount to any proof, — that the clauses of the
Prayer were selected by our Lord from forms which were
previously current. At the same time, as is the case with all
Divine revelations, it was founded upon what had been already
gained in the preceding stage of religious development ; and it
was accommodated to the existing spiritual position of those to
whom it was given. It followed largely along the lines of the
best of their traditions. And even if it was intended more
particularly for the use of the Lord's attached disciples, they too
were Jews, and had not yet advanced beyond the common
standpoint of their fellow-countrymen. The Prayer then is
framed generally on Jewish modes of thought and expression,
which are themselves for the most part derived ultimately from
the Old Testament : but none the less it constitutes a catholic
model for all peoples and all time. The different clauses may
be illustrated from the sayings of Jewish teachers: but the
Prayer as a whole, in its spirit as in its proportion, entirely
transcends anything which even the best of them had ever
produced1. The structure of the Prayer is very symmetrical, so that it
gives a perfect mnemonic form. First there is the introductory
address to the Father in heaven. Then follow three clauses
which set forth the highest ideal of worship, — that God may be
in everything supreme ; — ' Thy Name,' — ' Thy Kingdom,' —
' Thy Will.' — And these in turn are followed by three more, in
which the needs of men's lives are pleaded ; — ' Give us,' — ' Lead
us not,' — ' Deliver us.'
I. Our Father, which art in heaven.
This address takes up, and incorporates into the Prayer, the
most distinctive expression of the whole discourse. For such
this title of God as ' the Father which is in Heaven ' is, as has
been already pointed out2. While it is found in the New
1 Edersheim, Life and Times, etc. i. 536, contrasts rather severely the Jewish
prayers with the Lord's Prayer.
2 See above, on v. 16; pp. 82, 83.
S. 11

162 THE WORKS OF RIGHTEOUSNESS
Testament almost exclusively in St Matthew's Gospel1, where
it occurs twenty times, exactly half of these passages are in
the Sermon on the Mount. It was developed from the Old
Testament references to God as 'the Father' of Israel; and
was specially affected by the Jews as representing the peculiar
prerogative of the members of the Theocratic Covenant. Our
Lord adopted it as the basis of His full revelation of the
Father in the New Covenant : and He marked it by constant
reiteration as the leading message of His Gospel of the King
dom. So He places it here in the forefront of the Prayer of the
Kingdom, at once as a declaration of faith, and as a claim to
the right of approach to God which is accorded to all the
members of the Kingdom. And it therefore not only proclaims
at the outset of the Prayer the revealed attitude of God towards
His people, and their true relationship to Him ; but also forms
the basis of all the succeeding petitions, which are preferred in
the faith of this bond.
And it is a characteristically Jewish expression. The term
6 iv rois ovpavois (= a!£f2f) originally no doubt was based
upon a purely local conception of the dwelling-place2 of the
Most High. But Heaven had come to denote the idea of
condition, almost of essence, rather than of location ; as not ' of
the earth earthy,' but of the highest mode of eternal existence.
So it was used continually by the Jews as a metonym for God
Himself ; even in such strange phrases as ' The Name of
Heaven,' ' The Word of Heaven3,' and the like. To the Greek
mind ot ovpavol would suggest no idea beyond what was simply
material and local : and this is probably the reason why St Luke
omits this phrase in his version of the Lord's Prayer4.
The social impress of the whole Prayer, which is marked by
the use of the first person plural throughout, is in accordance
with the Jewish principle, that ' He who prays ought always
when he prays to join himself with the congregation' ; which
1 Elsewhere only once in Mk (xi. 25); and once in L., in the Grsecised form, 6 II,
6 ti; obpavov (xi. 13). 2 Cp. I K. viii. 30, 39, 43, 49.
3 D?DB> DB>, Sanhedrin, vi. 4; K'DBH sOO'ID, Targ. Eccl. iv. 4. See Dalman,
The Words, etc., p. 219. See above, p. 47.
4 Dr Taylor however points out {Sayings, etc., p. 138) that "Both tt'2K alone and
DW3B> W3K are found in the Jewish Prayer Books."

ST MATT. VI. 9 163
the Gloss explains, 'Let none pray the short prayer (that is, one
different from the set prayers) in the singular number, but in the
plural1.' 2. Hallowed be Thy Name.
There is a saying in the Talmud : ' Any benediction which
is without mention of The Name, is no benediction at all2.'
The Name of God in the Old Testament denotes (a) God's
revelation of Himself to man, — God as revealed and known
[" Thus shalt thou say unto the children of Israel, the LORD
(Jehovah), the God of your fathers, the God of Abraham, the
God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob, hath sent me unto you :
this is my Name for ever, and this is my memorial unto all
generations." — " My people shall know my Name."3], and there
fore as the object of Faith [" They that know thy Name will
put their trust in thee.4 "], and of Reverence [" That thou mayest
fear this glorious and fearful Name, the LORD thy God." —
" Holy and reverend is His Name."5] : or, when regarded from a
slightly different point of view, it describes, (b) the supreme
authority of God [" For this cause have I made thee to stand,
for to shew thee my power, and that my Name may be declared
throughout all the earth.6"], Who protects His people ["The
Name of the God of Jacob set thee up on high." — "Our help is in
the Name of the LORD."7], and claims their answering allegiance
[" To thy Name and to thy memorial is the desire of our
soul." — " They that love his Name shall dwell therein." 8], and
worship [" They shall call on my Name, and I will hear them." —
" Sing forth the glory of his Name."9]. The title, that is to say,
represents the whole manifestation of God in the covenant.
And therefore the expression 'To hallow, or sanctify, His
Name,' conveys the idea of absolute loyalty to God in faith and
service. 1 Bab. Berachoth, f. 30. 1. See Lightfoot, xi. 143.
2 Berachoth, f. 40. 2.
" Exod. iii. 15 ; (cp. Exod. vi. 3); Is. Iii. 6. " Ps. ix. 10.
5 Deut. xxviii. 58; Ps. cxi. 9. 6 Exod. ix. 16.
7 Ps. xx. 1 ; cxxiv. 8. Cp. Is. lxiii. 16, 19.
8 Is. xxvi. 8 ; Ps. lxix. 36. Cp. Ps. v. 11 ; xliv. 20; Is. 1. 10.
9 Zech. xiii. 9; Ps. lxvi. z. Cp. Ps. xxxiv. 3; lxix. 30; 11 S. vii. 13. 11—2

164 THE WORKS OF RIGHTEOUSNESS
It occurs but twice in the Old Testament. It is used first by
Isaiah1 to paint the climax of his 'Ariel' prophecy, in his
vision of the glorious future, when the meek and the poor shall
have been raised up and delivered from oppression, and the
house of Jacob shall have returned to the faith of its fathers :
"They shall sanctify my Name; yea, they shall sanctify the
Holy One of Jacob, and shall stand in awe of the God of
Israel." And that is the ideal of loyal devotion which is set
down in the Prayer as the primary aim of the members of the
Kingdom. And further, the petition suggests also more than that. For
Ezekiel2 had used the phrase with special reference to the
influence which is exerted on the world at large by faithful
witness on the part of God's people, when they are true to their
calling : " I will sanctify my great Name, which hath been
profaned among the nations, which ye have profaned in the
midst of them ; and the nations shall know that I am the Lord,
saith the Lord God, when I shall be sanctified in you before
their eyes. For I will take you from among the nations.. And
I will put my spirit within you, and cause you to walk in my
statutes, and ye shall keep my judgments, and do them." And
the associations of this passage as well are included in the
Prayer. The aspiration looks outwards as well as inwards. It
implies a recognition of the responsibility which rests upon the
members of the covenant towards ' them that are without.'
" Simeon, the son of Eliezer, said : when the Israelites do the
will of God, then His Name is glorified in the world. But when
the Israelites do not His will, then also His Name is profaned
in the world8."
So the beginning of the Prayer corresponds with the beginning
of the whole discourse. The claim on the witness of a life stands
first. There, it was set forth in the Beatitudes, and in the
direct precept which gathers up their teaching, and translates it
into a force of outward influence : ' Let your light so shine
before men, that they may see your good works, and glorify your
1 xxix. 23. Cp. 19 — 24.
* xxxvi. 23, 24, 27. Cp. Ezek. xx. 41; xxviii. 25; xxxix. 27.
3 Mechilta, f. 27. 2.

ST MATT. VI. 9, 10 165
Father which is in heaven.' Here, it is embodied in a prayer to
the Father which is in heaven, expressed in phraseology taken
from the Old Testament passages where it tells of personal
devotion, and of the power of such devotion upon others :
'Hallowed be Thy Name.'
3. Thy Kingdom come.
The central position in the 'First Table' of the Prayer is
assigned to the subject which above all others was uppermost in
men's minds at the time. All their hopes were concentrated on
the establishment of the Kingdom of God. That was their
dominant expectation. It was the announcement that the
Kingdom of God was already ' at hand ' which had brought
together those to whom the Sermon on the Mount was addressed.
It was the Gospel of the Kingdom to which they were now
listening. And the Lord's Prayer is the articulate expression
of that Gospel : the pleading before God for the realisation of
all its ideals. Therefore the petition ' Thy Kingdom come '
occupies this place of prominence in the Prayer.
It was not a new thing to pray for the manifestation of the
Kingdom of God. Again there is a correspondence here with
the standard laid down in the Talmud: "Any benediction
(nD13) which is without ' Kingdom ' is no benediction at all."
" R. Jehuda and R. Seira both said : Every benediction which
has nothing concerning ' Kingdom ' deserves not the name of
benediction1." In view of these statements it is remarkable that
the general conception of ' The Kingdom ' in the Talmud is sur
prisingly vague. It does not appear to reflect in any measure
the eager anticipation of the people at large which is implied
throughout the Gospels2. But that is probably due to the reaction
of the later Judaism against any tenet which had become identi
fied with the Christian dispensation3. And that it was the
regular custom of the Jews to pray for the institution of God's
Kingdom is shown, for instance, by the survival in the Kaddish
of the clause which has been already quoted : " May He make
His Kingdom to reign, etc.4."
1 Berachoth, f. 40. 2 ; Sanhedrin, f. 48. t. 2 See above, pp. 2 — 5.
3 Cp. Stanton, The Jewish and the Christian Messiah, p. 216. * See p. 160.

166 THE WORKS OF RIGHTEOUSNESS
When our Lord prescribed this petition in His pattern
Prayer He gave expression by it to the chief religious aspiration
of the Jews, and set His sanction on their faith in its fulfilment.
But at the same time it looks to the realisation of the hope on
the lines of His revelation of what the Kingdom of God means,
and not in the form in which they anticipated it. In His teach
ing the Kingdom is indeed a definite actuality. It is a Divine
Society which embraces, and manifests, all ideals which gather
round the direct reign of God over men1. It is a Society which
is a living growth, and which therefore has an infinite capacity
of expansion and of adaptation. It belongs to all nations ; for
it is the representatives of irdvra rd edvrj2 to whom the welcome
at the last day is assured : " Come, ye blessed of My Father,
inherit the Kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the
world." It exerts a spiritual power on the lives of its members ;
for "the Kingdom of God... is righteousness, and peace, and joy
in the Holy Ghost3."
This explains how it is that this prayer is ordained for
permanent use, and not with a temporary reference only ; — how
through all the ages it is ever necessary to pray ' Thy Kingdom
come.' The promised Kingdom of God has indeed come ; it
has in fact been established on earth. Since the Day of Pente
cost it has existed as a living, organic Society. And yet the
vision continually widens out. The Kingdom of God is not yet
complete ; and it is not yet supreme : " We see not yet all
things subjected to Him4." And until that shall have come to
pass, there is need for the constant prayer, 'Thy Kingdom
come.' And yet again the vision widens even further out, and
merges into eternity itself. It looks forward to the final con
summation, when at last, and absolutely, " the Kingdom of the
world shall have become the Kingdom of our Lord, and of His
Christ ; and He shall reign for ever and ever5." It is this issue
to which St Paul's words, in which there is thought to be an
allusion to the Lord's Prayer, look forward : " The Lord will
deliver me from every evil work, and will save me unto His
heavenly Kingdom ; to whom be the glory for ever and ever.
1 Cp. Stanton, pp. 220, 221. 2 M. xxv. 32, 34. 3 Rom. xiv. 17.
4 Heb. ii. 8. 5 Rev. xi- I5,

ST MATT. VI. 10 167
Amen1." So that the purport of the petition includes even the
range of the prayer in the Burial Office, that God will ' hasten
His Kingdom,' and bring on its ultimate and perfect triumph.
The whole development thus grows naturally out of the
simple statement which, originally accommodated to the religious
standpoint of the time when it was first given, yet contains with
in itself the germ of all future expansion of the ideal.
The sequence of the first three petitions is significant. First
comes the prayer for the disposition which is required for the
true establishment of the Kingdom : just as the Beatitudes
stand first in the Gospel of the Kingdom. Without that, — if
God were not ' all in all,' — if He were not the one object of all
ambition and of all loyalty, His Kingdom might once again, as
had happened with the Jews under the Old Covenant, be
narrowed and dragged down to minister to the selfishness of an
exclusive privilege. Then follows the central petition for the
fulfilment of the Divine plan in the ' coming2 ' of God's King
dom. And this is succeeded by the petition for the true
manifestation, and characteristic token, of His reign on earth.
4. Thy will be done, in earth as it is in heaven.
The basis of this petition was probably derived from the
later Jewish teaching, rather than immediately from the Old
Testament. The expression 'The Will of God,' — more par
ticularly in the setting ' To do the will of God,' — constantly
recurs in the later Jewish literature. It was the current term in
use to denote loyal obedience to God. The actual phrase is of
course found in the Psalms : " I delight to do thy will (Ip^l),
O my God ; yea thy law is within my heart3." But there the
translation has been influenced by the interpretation of the
passage (in the later sense of 11S2) in the Epistle to the Hebrews4.
Or again : " Teach me to do thy will ; for thou art my God5 " ;
where however the Prayer Book version gives, more accurately,
" Teach me to do the thing that pleaseth thee." For in
1 II Tim. iv. 18.
2 For the form (XBdru see W.H., ii. p. 164 " The imperatives (XBare, iXBdru (and
compounds) are everywhere amply attested. "
8 Ps. xl. 8. 4 Heb. x. 8—10. 6 Ps. cxliii. 10.

168 THE WORKS OF RIGHTEOUSNESS
Biblical Hebrew 1^5 has not the same force as deXrjpa in the
New Testament : it does not signify the deliberate purpose of
personal will ; but its meaning is either (a) that which is accept
able, or pleasing, to one, — as of sacrificial offerings presented
before God, or of that which is desired, or even of wilful self-
pleasing ; or (b), actively, of favour, or goodwill, towards one, —
especially of the favour of God, occasionally of the favour of a
king1. But after the Captivity the word was used of the
'pleasure,' or determined will, of one in authority2, and so
eventually of God's will, or purpose3. It is used in the Talmud
in this sense : — " He (Rabban Gamliel) used to say, Do His will
as if it were thy will, that He may do thy will as if it were His
will." " R. Jehudah ben Thema said, Be bold as a leopard, and
swift as an eagle, and fleet as a hart, and strong as a lion, to do
the will of thy Father which is in heaven." " It is revealed and
known before Thee, that our will is to do Thy will." " What is
the short prayer ? R. Eliezer saith, Do Thy will in heaven, and
give quietness of spirit to them that fear Thee beneath4."
And deXrjpa was used in Jewish Greek in this fuller sense.
In the Septuagint it is employed to translate f1^ only in ten of
the 55 passages where that word occurs5 ; but it is adopted more
regularly to represent T^H16. In the later books however deXrjpa
is used in the same way as in the New Testament ; for example,
in such sentences as the following : — a>? 8' dv rj deXrjpa iv
ovpavw, ovrw iroirjaei7. — aii iv deXrjpari aov tralSevaov r)pdss. —
fiovov iKBex^rai to deXrjpa rov ®eov. — on aiwtrwvres iv Kadapbrrjri
KapSias Svvrjaeade rb deXrjpa rov ®eov Kparelv, Kal diroppiirreiv
rb deXrjfia rov Siaf3bXovs.
1 In Prov. xiv. 35; xvi. 13, 15; xix. 12.
2 Dan. xi. 3, 16. Cp. Dan. viii. 4. Cp. D-lin, Ezr. v. 17, with vii. 18.
3 Ezr. x. 11. Cp. Ps. ciii. 21 ; Is. xlviii. 14.
4 Pirke Aboth, ii. 4; v. 30 (cp. Tanchuma, f. 73. 4); Berachoth, i. 17. 1 ; Bab.
Berachoth, f. 29. z. Cp. also Shemoth Rabba, f. 140. 4 (Schottgen).
5 The word most frequently used in LXX is Sexrbs (23 times). In the Vulg. |°1S1
is rendered by ' voluntas ' only in 1 5 cases.
6 19 times out of 40.
7 1 Mace. iii. 60. Cp. IV Mace, xviii. 16; II Mace. i. 3 (plur.; cp. LXX Is. xliv.
28 rd BeXy-pard i«ou=*SSn); I (ill) Esdr. viii. 16 (=Ezr. vii. 18); ix. 9. Cp. Ecclus.
xliii. 16. BtXyois (Heb. ii. 4), Tob. xii. 18 ; n Mace. xii. 16.
8 Ps. Sol. vii. 3. 9 Test, xn Patr., Iss. iv. 3; Naph. iii. 1 ; cp. Dan. vi. 6.

ST MATT. VI. 10 169
It would seem therefore that our Lord, when He included
this phrase in His Prayer, purposely took over the expression
from the contemporary religious phraseology. It appears here
for the first time in His teaching. It will reappear at the close
of the sermon1. And St John records the frequent use which
He made of it in His discourses2.
The Kingdom of God, as proclaimed by Christ, implies far
more than the mere organisation of a new polity : it'represents
the direct realisation on earth of God's sovereignty. The
service on earth is to be perfect as the service of God is in
heaven. The establishment of God's Kingdom is not in itself
the complete ideal, unless in it be manifested the true spirit of
the Kingdom.
But this petition cannot of course be interpreted without
taking into account the identical terms of our Lord's own
prayer in Gethsemane : " O my Father, if this [cup] cannot
pass away except I drink it, Thy will be done3." It cannot be
doubted that the two prayers are closely connected, — as the
pattern in precept, and the pattern in practice : and that the one
must throw light on the other. It is however a mistake to
suppose, because our Lord in His Agony prayed ' Thy will be
done,' that therefore the normal condition under which these
words are used in the Our Father is to be in a spirit of resigned
acquiescence in whatever hardship or suffering may be impend
ing ; as though the bitter things in life especially represented
the Father's will for His servants. The reference of the phrase
in the Lord's Prayer is not thus limited in its scope. Suffering,
even to the point of self-sacrifice, may at times be a necessary
factor in the fulfilment of God's will ; and then this petition
covers that too : as, for instance, when the brethren at Caesarea
resigned themselves to the prospect of St Paul's incurring
certain imprisonment with the recognition of this, " saying, The
will of the Lord be done4 " ; or when Polycarp refused to escape
from martyrdom by flight, " saying, The will of God be done5."
1 vii. 21. Cp. M. xii. 50 (=Mk iii. 35).
' J- iv- 34 J v. 30; vi. 38, 39, 40; vii. 17; ix. 31.
3 M. xxvii. 42. 4 A. xxi. 14.
6 Mart. Polyc. vii. 1. The thought at least of his friends went back to the
example of the Lord in Gethsemane : cp. their account of the soldiers sent to take

170 THE WORKS OF RIGHTEOUSNESS
But the will of God is " that which is good and acceptable and
perfect1 " ; it is not only concerned with victory through
suffering: and the prayer for its fulfilment covers the widest
possible range, and includes all that makes for the fulness of
life. It expresses a spirit of eager hope, rather than of passive
resignation. While therefore the Lord in Gethsemane set the
perfect example of the use of this prayer, which He Himself
had taught to His disciples, — still adhering to it under the most
terrible stress of circumstance, — it was in absolute self-surrender
of active co-operation in the working out of the Father's pur
pose ; in the fulfilling of His will in the redemption of man2 ;
rather than in mere passive submission. So the Form which He
gave and His own prayer throw light the one on the other.
The Form is exemplified in the extremest case of its use ; and
the secret of the prayer is revealed by the Form.
5. Give us this day our daily bread.
In passing from the wider range of prayer, for the spread
and the true manifestation of the Kingdom of God, to the closer
personal interests of the individual life, our Lord places in the
first position the daily prayer for bread ; that is for physical
sustenance. For obviously ' bread ' covers and includes all
'things needful to the body3.' It is probably life-long
familiarity with this Prayer which alone makes it seem the
natural order that the bodily needs should be preferred before
spiritual. It might rather have been expected that after the
high aspirations of the earlier clauses the Prayer would have
proceeded to the corresponding aspects of the personal life. But
this is not the case. The claims of the body come first. And
it is difficult to account for this order if the Lord's Prayer were
not first given in the Sermon on the Mount. But when it is
considered in that setting, the reason appears to be that this
petition is accorded precedence in connexion with the immediate
context. The Prayer was introduced by the assurance that the
Polycarp, us iirl Xyaryv rpixovres, with us iirl Xyaryv i^XBare, M. xxvi. 55 (=Mk
xiv. 48 = L. xxii. 52).
1 Rom. xii. 2. - Cp. J. vi. 40.
3 to tnir-i/Seia tou awparos, Jas. ii. 16.

ST MATT. VI. 11 171
Father knoweth what things are needed before He is asked \
And this proposition is to be expanded immediately after
wards in regard to the ordinary necessities and anxieties of
daily life. In the very heart therefore of the Prayer stands the
petition which simply, and yet sufficiently, deals with this
situation. The phrase recalls the contented prayer of Agur : " Give me
neither poverty nor riches ; feed me with the bread of my portion
(*i?n QfVy." gut it is not a direct quotation from it. iviovaios
cannot be regarded as equivalent to ph. The word belongs
exclusively to this Prayer : it is found nowhere else, except in
reference to it. This is emphatically stated by Origen3, who
says that it was not in use either in literary or in colloquial
Greek, but that it seemed to have been coined by the Evan
gelists. The fact that it is given both by St Matthew and by
St Luke points to the existence of a common Greek version of
the Prayer from which they both derived it : presumably the
standard version for liturgical use4. For it is beyond all possi
bility that both should independently have produced the same
unique term. And there is no indication that either of these
writers borrowed directly from the other.
There is a full discussion of the word in the appendix to
Bishop Lightfoot's Essay ' On a Fresh Revision of the New
Testament5.' He shows that (a) the etymological form, (b) the
requirements of the sense, and (c) the tenor of tradition, all
concur in establishing the derivation as being from itrievai
rather than from iirelvat : so that it is related to the phrase
rj iiriovaa, and is formed quite regularly on the analogy of such
words as eKovaios, iQeXovaios, yepovaios, and the like. Thus it
literally means 'for the coming day.' But r) iiriovaa is not always,
or necessarily, a synonym for rj avpiov, 'the morrow.' It may or
1 The force of oiv in ver. 9 is probably in reference to the whole of the preceding
section : but it joins on closely to the statement of ver. 8.
2 Prov. xxx. 8. Cp. Gen. xlvii. 22.
3 De Oratione, 27; vol. I. p. 245, ed. Delarue: rl Si xal rb iiriobaiov, ^5tj Kara-
voyriov. irpurov Se tout' lariov Sn y Xi!-is, y iiriobaiov, irap' obSevl ruv'UXky-vuv oSre
t<jk aoijiuv uvbpaarai, otre (v ttj ruv ISiuruv ovvyBela riTpiirrai, dXX (oixe ireirXdoBai
virb ruv ebayyekiaruv. 4 Cp. Chase, The L. P. in the Early Church, p. 47.
5 PP. '95— *34. ed- l87'- (PP- 217—260, ed. 1891.)

172 THE WORKS OF RIGHTEOUSNESS
may not have that meaning, according to the circumstances1.
So that ">0?, ' of the morrow,' which Jerome2 reports that he
found in the Gospel according to the Hebrews3, has the
appearance of being a moderately near rendering, rather than
an accurate tradition, of the word originally used. The refer
ence of r) iiriovaa, and therefore of itriovaios, is to ' the day
now coming on.' In effect therefore the sense is virtually
equivalent to 'daily.' The word was translated by 'quoti-
dianus ' in the Old Latin version. But Jerome, in his revision,
introduced great confusion by substituting ' supersubstantialis '
(as though from iirl, ovaia) here, while he still retained
' quotidianus ' in St Luke.
The meaning of the term then is practically clear : but what
the original expression was, of which it is a translation, is
uncertain, and perhaps untraceable. The various modern
versions of the New Testament into Hebrew4 all agree in giving
"¦^n Dn? for T()v dprov rjfiwv tov iinovaiov : but this is merely
an adaptation of the phrase in Proverbs, and is not a translation.
Grimm5 following the lead of the Gospel according to the
Hebrews, proposes l??? ^ t^-, which certainly goes back to
the oldest authority ; though it is not a conclusive authority.
Dr C. Taylor" suggests ^3 Ton D$ ?( Qn the analogy of the
phrases8 IVfy Bn? ?3N <t0 eat bread continually,' and
itt'V? DV~i3l. T»n nrnx 'a continual allowance, every day
a portion.' This has the advantage of finding an Old Testament
groundwork for the term. Moreover it corresponds with the
1 See Lightf., p. 203. Cp., e.g., A. xxiii. n.
2 On M. vi. 11; vii. p. 34 "In evangelio quod appellatur secundum Hebraeos
pro supersubstantiali pane reperi IfltD quod dicitur crastinum, ut sit sensus: panem
nostrum crastinum, id est futurum, da nobis hodie."
3 This Gospel " can hardly have been written much later than the close of the first
century. It was regarded as an authoritative document by the Judaizing Christians of
Palestine." Lightf., p. 213. Cp. Hast. D.B. v. 343 a.
4 By F. Delitzsch; by I. Salkinson and C. D. Ginsburg; and by J. C. Reichardt.
The same phrase is also adopted by A. Resch (see Dalman, p. 46).
5 Wilkii Clavis N.T., ed. C. L. W. Grimm, p. 167 b.
6 Sayings, etc., p. 141.
7 Or the equivalent Aramaic, NDI^ tOHFl KDrfc
8 2 K. xxv. 29, 30 = Jer. Iii. 33, 34. 1D'V3 Div"Q'!! (in this connexion) is from
Exod. xvi. 4. Cp. Neh. xi. 23 ; xii. 47 ; Dan. i. 5.

ST MATT. VI. 11, 12 173
"?'<?£ (' continual ') of the Curetonian Syriac here, and the
Sinaitic Syriac in St Luke, as Dr Nestle has pointed out1.
For }>dk is said to be the regular Syriac word for the translation
of the Hebrew Ton1-
This petition is not contradictory to the injunction of verse
34 : it is correlative to it, when taken in conjunction with the
reminder of verse 32, that "your heavenly Father knoweth that
ye have need of all these things." It is the practical expression
of what St Peter describes as " casting all your anxiety upon
Him, because He careth for you2."
Simple prayer for the supply of the necessities of earthly
life was not unknown amongst the Jews. In Berachoth*, for
instance, the form of a short prayer is given : " The needs of
Thy people Israel are many, but their understanding is small:
mayest Thou, O Eternal, our God, give to each what he requires
for his sustenance, and what is lacking for each body : but do
what Thou thinkest good."
6. And forgive us our debts, as we also have forgiven our
debtors. " Forgive us our debts " is a severely literal translation of the
phrase defies rjpPiv rd b<peiXrjpara rj/iwv. 'Aipievai btpeiXrjpM, or
btpeiXrjv, is of course regular enough in its ordinary reference to
the remission of a legal obligation. In fact St Matthew himself
has the expression, with this signification, in the Parable of the
Unmerciful Servant : BovXe irovrjpe, irdaav rrjv btpeiXrjv iKelvrjv
dcpljicd aoi* : probably however with an intentional reminiscence
of the Lord's Prayer. But btpelXrj/ia occurs here only in the
sense of 'sin'; that is as involving an obligation to Divine justice.
That aspect of sin is implied indeed in the constant use of d<pievai
and dipeais in connexion with dpaprla : but it is declared em
phatically here by the adoption of bcpetXrjpa. And bipeiXrjpa
obviously represents K3^nB> which also strictly means ' debt,' but
which frequently has the secondary meaning of ' sin.' In the
1 See Prof. Votaw's note, D.B. v. 37 a. 2 1 Pet. v. 7.
3 f. 29. 1. Wiinsche, p. 87.
4 xviii. 32. Cp., in the same passage, rb Sdveiov dipyKev abnp, 27; Stpeikirys
pvpluv raXdvruv, 24; to bipeikbpevov, 30, 34; btpelXciv (twice), 28. 6 See p. 159.

174 THE WORKS OF RIGHTEOUSNESS
Targums, for instance, it is employed to render n??B: or ntwprji.
In the Septuagint bcpelXrjp,a is only found (twice) in one passage,
in its original meaning of ' debt2.' But that it was the Greek
term actually current at the time in Palestine, as corresponding
to **?in, may perhaps fairly be inferred from the retention even
by St Luke of bcpeiXerrjs as a synonym of dp,aprwXbs in our
Lord's saying about the victims of the Siloam disaster3. For
bfyeikerrjs4, answers to ^0 in the Targums, where it replaces Kf D
or J^35. In this earliest teaching therefore about sin, this aspect
is emphasised, by the adoption of the customary word amongst
the Jews, — that sin incurs an obligation to God which must be
repaid, unless it is remitted by Him6.
To this petition alone a condition is annexed7. Elsewhere
various other antecedent qualifications are noticed which are
requisite before the Divine gift of forgiveness of sins can be
received. There must be Repentance8: and Repentance must
be manifested by Confession9: and there must be Faith10. But
here the paramount stress is laid upon Forgiveness of others.
That alone is incorporated in the Prayer of the Kingdom. It is
at once the most difficult to fulfil, and the least likely to be
recognised, of , them all. For it looks to social relations rather
than to the direct attitude towards God, Whose forgiveness is
sought. Therefore our Lord impressed the need of it strongly
upon His hearers by teaching them to avow it themselves before
God whenever they pray for forgiveness for themselves. And
1 e.g. Gen. xx. 9 X3"1 K3in for nV">| flNDO; Ps. xxv. 18 »3in f\rh^\ p'Ulf)
for 'riiNian-^ m\.
2 Deut. xxiv. 12.
3 L. xiii. 4 SoxeiTe on abrol bcpeikirai tytvovro irapd irdvras, ktX. ; cp. 2 Soxeire
oti...ovtoi dpapruXol irapd irdvras. ..tytvovro;
4 Cp. Enoch i. 6 xal elirev Sepeia^ds irpbs abrobs, Ss yv dpxuv abruv, Qofiovpai py
ob BeX-tjoere iroiyaai rb irpdypa rovro, xal (aopai iyu pbvos bcpeikerys dpaprlas peydXys.
5 e.g. Ps. i. 1, 5 P3sn for DWSri; Gen. xviii. 25 N3>n Di; HNSt for D^V
flBTDB. T T6 Cp. the Sunium inscription quoted by Deissmann, B.S., p. 225 Ss &v St 7roXu-
Tpaypovy-ay to tou 6eou -ij irepiepydayrai, dpaprlav bipiktru WLyvl Tvpdvvu, yv ob py
Sbvyrai i^eiXdaaaBai.
7 Cp. Aug., De Serm. D. in M. n. xi. 39 "In nulla enim alia sententia sic
oramus, ut quasi paciscamur cum Deo."
8 L. xxiv. 47; A. v. 31; xxvi. 18. Cp. Mk i. 4; A. ii. 38.
9 1 J. i. 9. 10 M. ix. 2 ; A. x. 43.

ST MATT. VI. 12 175
therefore also He added after the completion of the Prayer a
further statement concerning the urgency of this condition ; just
as He took up, and amplified, the hardest lesson of the Beati
tudes at the close of the series1.
And yet this teaching was not altogether new. It had been
anticipated in the ethical maxims of the Son of Sirach2 :
" Forgive thy neighbour the hurt that he hath done unto thee ;
so shall thy sins also be forgiven when thou prayest. One man
beareth hatred against another ; and doth he seek pardon
from the Lord ? He sheweth no mercy to a man which is like
himself; and doth he ask forgiveness of his own sins? If he
that is but flesh nourish hatred, who will entreat for pardon of
his sins ? " And there are some partial echoes of it in the
sayings of the Rabbis. Thus, in the Talmud3 there is a para
bolic story, which bears an interesting resemblance to the
Parable of the Unmerciful Servant, of a man who being unable
to repay his debt came before the King ; whose verdict was, " In
that thou hast transgressed against me, that be forgiven thee :
but go to thy creditor, and ask pardon of him also " ; and the
comment proceeds : " In like manner the matter stands con
cerning those sins which a man has committed against God, and
concerning those which he has committed against his neigh
bour." Or again4: "A transgression which a man has been
guilty of towards his God, Yom Kipur [The Day of Atonement]
will atone for ; but a transgression a man has been guilty of
towards his neighbour, Yom Kipur cannot atone for, until he has
appeased his neighbour." In these latter cases however the
reference is to wrong done, not to wrong suffered, by the
suppliant ; whereas here it is forgiveness for injury received
which is enjoined.
It needs but little experience of life to realise how slight
a practical influence at best such a lofty ideal, if merely put
forward as an admonition, would be likely to exert. Under the
sharp stress of a sense of injury it would be apt to be set aside
as ' a pious opinion,' and ' impracticable.' But our Lord made
it impossible so to regard it, by embodying it in the very words
1 v. ii, 12. 2 Ecclus. xxviii. 2 — 5. 3 Rosh Hashana, f. 17. 2.
4 Yoma, f. 85. 2. (Tr. by De Sola and Raphall, p. 128.)

176 THE WORKS OF RIGHTEOUSNESS
of the pattern Prayer which He taught : so that no one can
pray this Prayer without declaring, 'with his own mouth and
consent,' that this preliminary condition has already been
fulfilled (dcfirJKafievy, — that he is, de facto and not in intention
only, ' in love and charity with all men.' No doubt the words
carry with them by implication a prayer for God's forgiveness
and help for failure or imperfection in this very matter, as in all
other phases of life. But that is not the form in which they are
directly cast : they are a plain and obvious statement that the
end has been achieved. It is perhaps the most astonishing
feature of the whole Prayer that it should thus include a clause
which is a recitation not of God's attributes but of man's
earnest preparation before praying2.
This doctrine of forgiveness, which is emphasised in so
singular a way, is of the very essence of the Gospel of the
Kingdom. It is interwoven in the whole texture of the dis
course. The interpretation of the Law begins and ends with
it ; — in the exposition of the sixth commandment3 ; and in the
correction of the Law of Retaliation4, and the enunciation of
the Law of Love5. It will reappear in the warning against
censorious judgment6 ; and in the ' Golden Rule7 ' ; as regarded
from another point of view. It is therefore entirely congruous
with its setting in the Sermon on the Mount that the Lord's
Prayer should contain this peculiar member. If the Prayer
was first given on that occasion, this addition has an obvious
explanation, in connexion with the body of teaching which
preceded and followed it. Then when the Prayer was re
delivered a second time it of course remained. But if the Prayer
was given only to the disciples privately, and was inserted in
the Sermon by St Matthew merely as an illustration, this clause
would be almost as inexplicable as it is in any case astonishing.
With the memory still fresh in their minds of the Lord's direc
tion to pray for their enemies8, it is probable that to those who
heard this discourse delivered this phrase might seem to refer to
1 For the force of the aorist see above on ver. 21, -^xoiaare : p. 98, n. 5.
2 Cp. Ecclus. xviii. 23 "Before thou prayest, prepare thyself; and be not as one
that tempteth the Lord."
3 v. 23 — 25. * v. 39. 5 v. 44. ° vii. 1, 2. 7 vii. 12. 8 v. 44.

ST MATT. VI. 12, 13 177
their bearing towards their national enemies. And in the
special Prayer of the Kingdom this reference is not wanting. It
does condemn and cast out the spirit of exclusiveness. But this
address throughout, while it never loses sight of the wide range
of the Kingdom of God as a whole, draws out more and more
the personal responsibility of the individual life : and that is
what is essentially in view in this petition.
It is noticeable that in the second division of the Prayer the
several petitions are joined together by Kal... Kal, whereas there is
no such link between the petitions in the first part. Whatever
may be the explanation of this difference in structure between
the two halves of the Prayer, at all events it serves to mark off
the rather more complex clauses in the latter half from each
other, and to show where the proper breaks come between them.
7. And lead (bring) us not into temptation, but deliver us
from the Evil One.
These two sentences form one combined clause : they are
not two separate petitions. For the second part is closely
linked with the first ; it is not a distinct proposition, but a
corrective parallelism1- It is introduced by dX\d — 'nay rather/
— not by e^ Be firj — ' but if Thou dost' — If the latter member
were not expressed the former would be open to the mis
construction that what is deprecated is a definite subjection to
temptation by God ; whereas "God Himself tempteth no man2."
An attempt to evade this conclusion led to the paraphrastic
reading in several MSS. of the Old Latin version, ' Ne patiaris
nos induci in tentationem.' Augustine mentions that it was found
in many of the Latin copies, though he had not observed it in any
of the Greek3. In his treatise on the Sermon on the Mount he
1 See above, p. 159. It is "one of those sentences containing two antithetical
or contrasted clauses, in which the emphasis is really on the second clause, and
the first clause though co-ordinate in construction is really subordinate in thought,
serving to bring out more clearly by contrast the force of the second, so that if
separated from its connection and taken by itself the first clause may convey a false
impression." T. E. Page, in Expositor, in. vii. 439. 2 Jas. i. 13.
3 De dono persero. 6 "Unde sic orant nonnulli, et legitur in codicibus pluribus, et
hoc sic posuit beams Cyprianus, Ne patiaris nos induci in tentationem. In Evangelio
tamen Graeco nusquam inveni, nisi, Ne nos inferas in tentatipnem."
S. 12

178 THE WORKS OF RIGHTEOUSNESS
rightly speaks of it as an interpretation rather than a proper
variant reading : — " Many when they are praying say thus ;
' Suffer us not to be led into temptation ' ; that is to say,
explaining the sense in which the word 'lead' is used1." It
first appears in Cyprian2, who divides the two parts of the
clause into distinct petitions3 ; as does also Augustine4. And
it is this separation of the two correlated sentences which
chiefly causes the difficulty. But not altogether: for the fact
still remains that, even though it is qualified by the other
member of the petition, prayer is made to God not to lead, or
bring, into temptation. This however is based upon the
ordinary Jewish (or even Eastern) mode of thought and ex
pression, by which every event is ascribed to the direct agency
of God Himself, in accordance with the faith which regards
Him as the travroKpdrwp, exercising an active and immediate
control in every particular over the lives of men. ' God's will is
supreme ; therefore whatever happens must be the expression of
His will, and should in all reverence be so regarded.' But in
any case there is no ambiguity about the real meaning of the
phrase when it is taken in conjunction with the rest of the
sentence. There is a close affinity between this petition and (a) the
warning given by our Lord to His disciples in Gethsemane5, —
" Watch and pray, that ye enter not into temptation " : where
the correspondence is closer than appears in the Greek or in the
English, because elaeveyKelv and elaeXdelv represent respectively

1 n. ix. 30 "Multi autem precando ita dicunt, Ne nos patiaris induci in tenta
tionem; exponentes videlicet quomodo dictum sit Inducas."
2 De Dom. Or. §§ 7 and 25. Tertullian does not recognise it as a reading: De
oratione, 8 " Ut supplicaremus Ne nos inducas in tentationem ; id est, Ne nos
patiaris induci, ab eo utique qui tentat" : nor does Chromatius : Tr. in M., xiv. 7.
3 § 27 "Post ista omnia in consummatione orationis venit clausula universas
petitiones et preces nostras collecta brevitate concludens. In novissimo enim ponimus,
Sed libera nos a malo."
4 De Serm. D. in M. II. ix. 30 "Sexta petitio est, Et ne nos inferas in tenta
tionem." 35 "Ultima et septima petitio est, Sed libera nos a malo." He does
not, of course, count the first clause of the Prayer as ' a petition,' but as the introduc
tion to the whole. So he begins his treatment of the next clause, ' Hallowed be Thy
Name,' by saying " Iam videamus quae sint petenda."
5 M. xxvi. 41.

ST MATT. VI. 13 179
the Hiphil and the Kal of the same verb xia1 : — (b) the prayer of
our Lord for His disciples in the Upper Room 2, — " I pray not
that thou shouldest take them out of the world, but that thou
shouldest keep them from the Evil One (e« tov trovrjpov)."
It is of course debateable whether rov irovrjpov in the Lord's
Prayer is masculine or neuter, — 'the Evil One' [R.V.], or 'evil'
[A.V. and R.V. marg.]. But a consideration of New Testament
usage leaves little or no real doubt that here, as elsewhere, it is
masculine3. There can be no question, for instance, about the
reference in our Lord's interpretation of His Parable of The
Sower : " The Evil One cometh and snatcheth away that which
hath been sown " : where in the parallel accounts St Mark
gives " Satan," and St Luke " The Devil4." There can be
no question also about St John's repeated encouragement to the
'young men,' — "Ye have overcome the Evil One5"; or about
his assurance concerning the regenerate, — "The Evil One
toucheth him not6." And where the phrase occurs in the
genitive or the dative 7, and therefore is in itself indeterminate, in
every case all the factors of interpretation point to the masculine,
the personal, as the most probable reference. On the other
hand there is no instance in the New Testament of the
unequivocal use of rb trovrjpov in the nominative or the
accusative, except where it is contrasted with to dyadbv"- The
conclusion therefore is inevitable that in the Lord's Prayer also
rov trovrjpov is masculine, and refers to the Evil One, as the
active adversary of 'the sons of the Kingdom9.' Nor is the
supposed, and possible, allusion to the Lord's Prayer in
II Tim. iv. 1 8, pvaeral pe b Kvpios dirb iravrbs epyov trovrjpov,
opposed to this interpretation ; but as a matter of fact it actually
1 py eloeviyxys ypds^Wynbs-. tva pyelotX8yre=>\it2F\-\$.
2 J. xvii. 15.
3 See above, on v. 37 ; p. 120.
4 M. xiii. 19 6 irovypbs, = Mk iv. 15 0 2otopos, = L. viii. 12 b SidfioXos.
5 I J. ii. 13, 14 veviKy-Kare rbv irovypbv.
6 I J. v. 18 6 irovypbs obx dirrerai abrov.
7 M. v. 37 ix tov irovypov ianv: xiii. 38 0! viol toS tt. : J. xvii. 15 tva rypi/ays
abrobs ix rov ir.: Eph. vi. 16 irdvra rd fitXy rov ir.: II Thess. iii. 3 <pvX<£{ei dirb rov
r. : I J. iii. 12 KdiV (x rov ir. yv : v. 19 6 xbapos Skos iv rip ir. xeirai.
8 L. vi. 45; Rom. xii. 9.
9 M. xiii. 38 rb St xaXbv airtppa, ovrol elaiv oi viol rys (iaoiXeias.
12—2

180 THE WORKS OF RIGHTEOUSNESS
supports it. For irav epyov irovrjpbv clearly points to malicious
assaults from without, not to actions on the writer's part ; and
therefore corresponds to a prayer for deliverance from the
attacks of the Evil One rather than from evil within.
The usage then of the New Testament identifies b irovrjpbs
with the Author of evil: and this renders it not only unnecessary,
but practically impossible, to take the term, with Dr C. Taylor1,
as representing 1F$ "•?¦• instead of V'jn simply. No doubt it is
attractive to find in this expression of the Lord's Prayer so wide
and general a reference to evil in all its forms of insidious
influence, from within as well as from without, as is covered by
the Rabbinic use of J*?? "'•£• : but it cannot possibly be made to fit
in with the use of o irovrjpbs, for example, in the explanation of
the Parable of the Sower ; and therefore it cannot be adopted
here. St Matthew is his own best interpreter.
With this last petition may be compared certain Talmudic
prayers from the tract Berachoth. But the similarity does not
argue any direct connexion between the two. It does not go
to show that our Lord borrowed from the terms of Jewish
formulae ; nor that the Jews adopted for themselves any part of
the Form of Prayer used by the Christians. It does however
serve to emphasise the fact that the Prayer which Christ gave
was moulded on the lines of Jewish religious thought, and that
it was based upon the stage of development which had been
already reached under the Old Covenant. These instances reveal
the environment, rather than the derivation, of the pattern Prayer.
Such prayers are that of R. Judah2: "May it be Thy will,
O Lord, our God, and the God of our fathers, to deliver us from
the shameless, and from shamelessness ; from an evil man, and
from an evil chance ; from an evil affection (in ivd), from an
evil companion, from an evil neighbour, and from Satan the
destroyer; from hard judgment, and from a hard adversary, whether
he be a son of the covenant, or not a son of the covenant" : —
or again 3 : " Bring me not into the hands of sin, nor into the
hands of transgression, nor into the hands of temptation, nor into
the hands of disgrace. And bow my affection (ns») to be
obedient to Thee. And remove me from an evil man and from
1 Sayings, etc., pp. 142 — 144. 2 Berachoth, f. 16. -t. s f- 60. 1.

ST MATT. VI. 13 181
an evil companion. And cause me to cleave to the good
affection (-ix»), and to a good companion, in Thy world." Dr
Taylor also quotes the Morning Prayer of the Jews : " Bring us
not into the hands of sin, nor into the hands of transgression,
and iniquity, nor into the hands of temptation, nor into the
hands of contempt. And let not the evil affection have
dominion over us, and remove us from evil man, etc."
[8. The Doxology."]
The Doxology cannot be regarded as an integral part of the
Lord's Prayer. It is omitted in the MSS. X B (though included
in L) D i ly etc.; and, which is perhaps of greater significance,
by Origen and Cyril of Jerusalem, and by Tertullian, Cyprian,
Chromatius, Jerome, and Augustine, when commenting on the
Prayer1. It is impossible that they could thus have passed it
over if it had been originally attached to the Prayer by our Lord
Himself. "There can be little doubt," write Westcott and Hort2,
"that the Doxology originated in liturgical use in Syria, and
was thence adopted into the Greek and Syriac Syrian texts
of the New Testament." What seems to be the earliest quota
tion of it is found in the Didache3.
The terms however which have been included in this ascrip
tion are peculiarly fitting. They recall, and correspond to, the
first half of the Prayer. The central purpose of ' The Kingdom '
stands first. It is remarkable that in the Didache ' The King
dom ' is omitted. Probably this omission is an indication of the
1 Orig., De Oratione; Cyr., Cat. Myst. 5; Tert, De Oratione; Cypr., De Dom.
Or.; Chrom., Tr. in M. xiv; Jer., Dial. c. Pel. iii; Aug., De Serm. D. in M.
2 Notes on Select Readings, vol. n. p. 9.
8 § 8. In an article on the Lord's Prayer in The Contemporary Review for Aug.
1906 Monsignor Barnes writes (p. 228) : " It must have been in Jewish and Palestinian
surroundings that the addition of the Doxology was originally made. Accordingly,
we find it first, though not quite in its present form, in the Didache and in the
'Martyrdom of Polycarp,' neither of which is later than the early part of the second
century." This is an astonishing statement. It implies that "The Martyrdom of
Polycarp," written by the Church of Smyrna to the Church of Philomelium, was
'Jewish and Palestinian' in its surroundings; and it affirms that it was written 'in the
early part of the second century,' that is, long before the martyrdom took place. As
a matter of fact there is no allusion whatever in the book to the Lord's Prayer: and
its four doxologies bear no resemblance to that which is attached to the Lord's
Prayer.

182 THE WORKS OF RIGHTEOUSNESS
time when the expression dropped out of use in the Christian
Church ; while it was still retained by the Jews. The realisation
of the Kingdom of God had proved to be so different from the
preceding national anticipation of the Jews that, so long as they
continued to cling to the title in its old connotation, there was a
real danger of confusion if the Christians also used it, but in its
new and fuller sense : and therefore it was practically left to the
Jews. If this be so, it would point to a very early date for the
liturgical addition to the Lord's Prayer. The other two members
of the Doxology also look back to the earlier petitions of the
Prayer ; and answer to the doing of God's will, and the hallow
ing of His Name.
Such doxologies, — especially in the form of benedictions, —
were commonly used by the Jews. Even in the Psalms each of
the first four books ends with a benediction1, and the fifth with
a Psalm the whole of which is a doxology. The Book of Enoch
contains several such benedictions2. In the Temple service the
people did not respond to the prayers by an ' Amen,' but always
with the benediction, " Blessed be the name of the glory of His
Kingdom for ever3." The earliest instance of a direct ascrip
tion is in I Chron. xxix. n4. In Bamidbar Rabba6 (on Numbers)
Moses is represented as saying, " But now it was God Who gave
it [the priesthood to Aaron], Whose is the greatness, and the
power, and the kingdom."
From the Jewish use the custom passed on naturally to the
Christian Church; as appears from the frequent insertion of
doxologies in the New Testament6.
The Lord's Prayer forms the very heart of the Sermon on
the Mount. It focuses all the scope, and all the doctrine, of
the Sermon into one central formula of prayer. At first sight
indeed it might seem to be an extraneous section, belonging
properly to some other occasion, which St Matthew has inserted
1 xii. 13; lxxii. 19; lxxxix. 52; evi. 48. 2 xxii. 14; xxv. 7, etc.
3 Jer. Berachoth, f. 13. 3. Cp. Bab. Yoma, f. 39. 1; 41. 2; 66. 1; Bab. Taanith,
I. 16. 2 ; Pesachim, f. 56. 1.
4 Cp. the close of The Prayer of Manasses. s § 18, f. 234. 4.
6 Rom. xi. 36; xvi. 27; Gal. i. 5; Eph. iii. 21 ; Phil. iv. 20; 1 Tim.i. 17; II Tim.
iv. 18; Heb. xiii. 21 ; 1 Pet. iv. 11; n Pet. iii. 18; Jude 25; Rev. i. 6; v. 13; vii. 10;
12. Cp. the five doxologies in Clem. Rom. i. 32 ; 38 ; 43 ; 45 ; 50.

ST MATT. VI. 9 — 13 183
in the Sermon in order to illustrate by a concrete example our
Lord's teaching on prayer. But this is no more than a super
ficial judgment ; and it is dispelled at once when the Prayer is
considered in connexion with the contents and the language of
the Sermon. The more closely it is so examined, the more
does it reveal its original environment as being identical with
that of the Gospel of the Kingdom. Both in its matter and in
its phraseology it is all through closely associated with the rest
of the discourse. It harmonises completely with its surroundings.
The particular expressions of the Prayer have been already
discussed : and the general body of its teaching corresponds no
less intimately with that of the whole Sermon. It is the
common Prayer of the Kingdom of God ; and as such it ex
presses the ideal of that Kingdom, exactly as it has been already
sketched in the preceding instruction. In it, as throughout the
Sermon, the Kingdom is set forth as an essentially spiritual
scheme: — not as a mere outward polity under the exclusive
protection of God, but as the new and free covenant with ' The
Father Which is in heaven ' ; Whose Name is glorified in the
witness of His servants1. The Kingdom is the main theme of
the first 'table' of the Prayer: and its true manifestation is
proclaimed as consisting in obedience to God's will, rather than
in the strict performance of stated duties, — in life and character,
not in technicalities of ritual observance2. And the second
' table ' too reechoes what has been already foreshadowed : — the
care of the heavenly Father for the bodily needs of His children ;
and the standard of forgiveness which demands even a Divine
perfection3 on the part of the sons of the Kingdom ; while the
prayer for deliverance from the Evil One takes up the earlier
warning against his influence4.
Again, the Prayer in its second division practically propounds
the topics of the latter part of the discourse ; in which certain
points which have been briefly, and almost incidentally, touched
upon in the earlier sections, are raised again and explained in
detail. In fact the subsequent sections of the Sermon unfold in
order the later petitions of the Prayer : — a constant trust in the
heavenly Father for the daily provision of the necessaries of
1 vi. 9: cp. v. 16. 2 vi. 10b: cp. v. 20; vi. 1; vii. 21.
3 v. 48. 4 v. 37.

184 THE WORKS OF RIGHTEOUSNESS
life1 ; the true attitude of the members of the Kingdom towards
their fellow-men2; and the need of watchfulness against being
betrayed into following false standards8. The Prayer therefore
is as closely related to all that follows it in the Sermon as to
what precedes it. It gathers up in a perfect summary the whole
of the new revelation of the Gospel of the Kingdom.
And once more, like the rest of the Sermon, the Prayer is
primarily adapted to the condition of those who had been
trained in Judaism ; while it transfigures (there is no other word
for it) their earthly, and selfish, and limited ideals into the
noblest and widest grasp of things spiritual. The phraseology
is distinctly Jewish, and therefore easily intelligible to those who
first received the formula : and yet it is so used by Divine
wisdom as to seize the heart of truth, and to be readily adapt
able to the use of all men of all nations in all time. It starts
from the stage of spiritual attainment which had been already
achieved, and leads on to a progressive growth of life and faith
and service.
It is scarcely too much to say that the Lord's Prayer would
be almost unintelligible in its full meaning apart from the
detailed teaching of the Sermon on the Mount ; while the
Sermon itself would be incomplete without the Prayer.
The additional note (verses 14, 15) repeats with special
emphasis, and explains, the one condition attached to a petition
of the Prayer, — that God's forgiveness of offenders is contingent
upon their forgiveness of those who offend against them. In the
Prayer itself this is assumed by the declaration of forgiveness
which the suppliant is taught to add to his own plea for forgive
ness. But there no exposition of the reason could be given : the
formula could not be interrupted by a note. Now however, so
soon as the Prayer is completed, our Lord returns to this point,
and lays down the principle upon which that clause is based.
And this is stated in a directly antithetical parallelism; first
affirmatively, and then negatively. This exact contrast places
peculiar stress on the statement. For while the 'parallelismus
antitheticus '4 is of course frequently found in the New Testa-
1 vi. 25—33. 2 vii. 1— 12.
* See Winer, ed. Moulton8, § Ixv. 5b, p. 762.

ST MATT. VI. 14, 15 185
ment, in almost every case the second member adds some
further thought, or at least a new shade of meaning, to what is
contained in the first1. But where it is, as here, simply the
negative counterpart of precisely the same proposition, it marks
impressively its grave importance. There is another instance of
the same kind, but on a more extended scale, at the end of the
Sermon, in the comparison between the earnest and the careless
hearer: see vii. 24, 25 and 26, 27s.
There is an interesting variation of the term used for
' trespasses.' It is not now bcj>eiKrjp.aTa, but irapairrwpara. This
is in accordance with the usual practice of giving variety by the
use of an equivalent, but slightly different, expression in the
second limb of a parallel statement ; — a practice which is observ
able throughout the Psalms. So in the instance just referred to,
which comes in the closing sentences of this discourse, irpoae-
Koyfrav (27) in the second part replaces irpoaeireaav (25) in the first
part. It is clear that the two words in such a case must have
virtually the same reference, irapdirrwfia therefore here, or
rather the original word which it represents, must be capable,
like orpelXrjpa, of a double application, either to an offence against
God or to an offence against man. Probably it represents nN£0,
which is used of wrong done to men" as well as of sin against
God: and not n?fS, which only denotes guilt towards God.
trapdirrwfiai itself occurs only in this saying in the Gospels, —
here and at Mk xi. 25. Elsewhere in the New Testament it is
used by St Paul alone. And here only is it applied to an
offence against man6, except once in the Septuagint, — Dan. vi.
22, Kal ivwtrtov Si aov, fiaaiXev, trapdirrwpa (= ,",?'l2n) ovk
itrotrjaa. iii. Easting.
Fasting is treated by our Lord as a regular, and even a
necessary, factor of the religious life. He does not say ' If ye
1 Cp., e.g., J. i. 20 upoXbyyaev xal obx ypvi)aaro: and J. iii. 36.
2 Cp. also M. xxv. 40, 45 ; and 1 J. v. 12 : and below, vi. 19, 20; vii. 17, 18.
3 e.g., I S. xx. 1. So the verb nipn, Gen. xl. 1.
4 In Ps. Sol. ir. is used of the faults of the righteous, xiii. 4, 9.
6 Trench, Synonyms of N.T., pp. 245 — 7, does not notice this use of the word.

186 THE WORKS OF RIGHTEOUSNESS
fast,' but 'When ye fast' In no sense does He abrogate the
practice of fasting; but He assumes that it will remain
under the New Covenant as a normal observance. But what
He does forbid is the open ostentation of fasting, by which the
Pharisees degraded it into an opportunity of self-advertisement.
The only public Fast prescribed as obligatory in the Law1
was that on the Day of Atonement2, which in consequence was
called distinctively 'The Fast3.' But this, though it stood by itself
as the one permanent institution, was not the only day of general
fasting in the year. On all occasions of public misfortune Fast-
days were appointed : some of which continued to be observed,
as annual commemorations of special disasters, for a greater or
less length of time. Of the four Fasts, for instance, which are
mentioned in Zech. viii. 194, which were all connected with the
overthrow of Jerusalem and of the (first) Temple by Nebuchad
nezzar, only one, as it seems, was kept up continuously in later
times, — and that was the Fast of the fifth month, instituted in
memory of the demolition of the Temple6. The other three
indeed were apparently re-instituted in the dark days after the
destruction of the Holy City and the (third) Temple by Titus6;
and they still remain in the Jewish calendar7 : but they were not
observed in the earlier part of the first century. The reference
here however is not to ' The Fast ' of the Day of Atonement,
nor to the stated Fast of the fifth month ; but to the special
1 Private fasts by individuals were also recognised in the Law: cp., e.g., Num.
xxx. 13.
2 Lev. xvi. 29 — 31 ; xxiii. 27 — 32 ; Num. xxix. 7.
3 y vyarela, A. xxvii. 9. Cp. Philo, De Legal, ad C, § 39 dSvra...els a diral- rov
tviavrov 0 ptyas lepebs elaipxerai ry vyarela XeyopJvy pbvov iiriBvpidauv. De Septen-
ario, § 23. Vit. Moys. ii. 4. Jos. Antt. xiv. iv. 3 ; xvn. vi. 4. See Schiirer, I. i.
322. 4 Philastrius, Bp. of Brixia, c. 380 a.d., compares the ' Quatuor tempora' of the
Christian Church to these four Fasts: de Hceres. § 119 {Patrol. Lat. xii. 1286).
5 Cp. n K. xxv. 8, 9; Jer. Iii. 12, 13. The others were {a) in the fourth month,
in memory of the storming of Jerusalem : II K. xxv. 3, 4 ; Jer. Iii. 6, 7 : {b) in the
seventh month, in memory of the death of Gedaliah; II K. xxv. 25; Jer. xii: {c) in
the tenth month, in memory of the commencement of the siege: n K. xxv. 1 ; Jer.
Iii. 4. 6 See Hast. D.B. i. 854 b. Cp. also 863 b "After the destruction of Jerusalem
by Titus the system of fasts received such an impulse that it was necessary to draw up
a list of the days on which fasting was forbidden."
7 Edersheim, The Temple, etc., p. 298. Smith, D.B. i. 613 a.

ST MATT. VI. 16—18 187
Fasts1 which were enjoined in times of continued drought, and
also occasionally during other general calamities. Of these a
full account is given in the Talmudic tract Taanith. These Fasts
were kept only on the second and fifth days of the week. It was
from this regulation that at any rate the stricter Pharisees
adopted the practice of systematically fasting twice in the week2.
So the tract itself refers to " The individual that taketh upon
himself to fast on the second and fifth days, and the second day
throughout the whole year3."
The wide-spread prevalence of this custom, of a double
weekly Fast, amongst the Jews in the first century is shown by
the fact that the early Christian Church followed a similar plan ;
though the days were changed to the fourth and sixth of the
week4. This practice obviously grew out of the former associa
tions under Judaism : but this could not have taken place after
the fall of Jerusalem, when the severance between Jews and
Christians was complete. The system therefore must have been
of common acceptance6 at the earlier date.
In the prosecution of these Fasts there were certain outward
accessories of demeanour laid down in the rules, which afforded
a ready opportunity for open ostentation : especially as the
appointed days, — the second and the fifth of the week, — coin
cided with the weekly market days, " when the country people
came to the towns, and there were special services in the syna
gogues, and the local Sanhedrin met — so that these saints in
Israel would, at the same time, attract and receive special notice
for their fasts6." If rain were still withheld after the first three
days, further days of fasting were appointed ; and these were
marked by increased rigour of observance. Then ashes were
ordered to be " strewed on the heads of the prince and of the
1 See Schiirer, n. ii. 118— 119. 2 Cp. L. xviii. 12.
8 f. 12. 1 ; quoted by Lightf. on L. xviii. 12.
4 Cp. Didache, 8 o! St vyareiai bpuv py (aruaav perd ruv biroxpiruv • vyarebovai
ydp Sevripa oafipdruv xal irtpvry bpeis Si vyarebaare rerpdSa xal irapaaxevi)v.
Clem. Al., Strom., vii. 744 dlSev abrbs xal t^s vyarelas rd alvlypara ruv ypepuv
robruv, tjjs rerpdSos xal rys -irapaoxevys. Tert. De Jejun. 14 Cur stationibus
quartam et sextam sabbati dicamus? Orig. Horn, in Lev. 10 Habemus quartam et
sextam septimanae dies, quibus solemniter jejunamus.
5 Cp. L. v. 33 ol paByral 'ludvov vyarebovaiv Trvxvd...bpolus xal ol ruv iapiaaluv.
6 Edersheim, Life and Times, etc., ii. 291.

188 THE WORKS OF RIGHTEOUSNESS
chief of the tribunal of justice, and other persons shall also put
ashes on their heads " : and it was forbidden " to bathe, or to
anoint the body1." It is customs such as these which are
referred to in our Lord's words: "They befoul their faces... but
thou, when thou fastest, anoint thy head, and wash thy face."
Nor were these practices a matter of recent fashion only, in
connexion with fasting. The Old Testament shows that it was
a time-honoured method of emphasising a fast to abstain from
the luxuries of anointing and washing. So, for example, it is
said of David that he fasted during the sickness of his child ;
but that when the child died he " washed and anointed himself."
That was the token that he had abandoned his fast2. And the
references to putting ashes (?%#)', or dust C1??)4, or earth (n??S)5,
upon the head, as outward marks of fasting or mourning,
constantly recur.
It is then, no doubt, to this latter practice that the words
drpavl^ovaiv rd trpbawtra avrwv allude. For dcfiavi^eiv does not
bear the meaning which is suggested by the English ' disfigure,'
as though it implied ' marring,' or ' distorting ' the countenance,
as if drawn with suffering. It never quite loses its original sense,
of ' making to disappear ' ; but always carries with it, in such
cases as this, the notion of ' covering up,' in some way6.
This section is strongly typical of the method of the whole
Sermon. The principle of the teaching is for all time : but the
particular illustrations by which it is enforced are drawn from
the customs actually in vogue amongst the Jews in the first
century. 1 Taanith, ii. i, and i. 6: tr. De Sola and Raphall.
2 II S. xii. 16, 20, 21. Cp. Dan. x. 3; II S. xiv. 1.
3 II S. xiii. 19; Is. lxi. 3.
4 Josh. vii. 6; Job ii. 12; Lam. ii. 10; Ezek. xxvii. 30.
6 I S. iv. 12; n S. i. 2; Neh. ix. 1.
6 So Suidas explains the word : dipavlaai • ob rb poXvvai xal xpdvai SyXoT, dXX
oXus rb dvekeiv xal dipavis iroiyaai. Cp. Aelian's {Var. Hist. vii. 20) story of the
Ceian who visited Sparta, yipuv ySy uv, t& piv dXXa dXafiiv, ySeiro Si iirl np yhpa, xal
Sid toCto ryv rplxa 7roXide ovaav iireiparo ficupri dipavlfeiv. axvBpuirol is not exactly
synonymous with dip. to ir poo., but expresses the result.

ST MATT. VI. 19—34.
M»7 drjaavpl^ere vp.lv drjaavpovs iirl rrjs yrjs, oirov arjs Kal
fSpwats dcj)avi^ei, Kal oirov KXeirrai Biopvaaovatv Kal nXkirrovaiv
drjaavpl^ere Be ifiiv drjaavpovs iv oiipavw, oirov oiire arjs ovre
f3pwais drpavl^ei, Kal oirov KXeirrai oi Biopvaaovatv ovBe KXeirrov-
aiv ' oirov ydp ianv b drjaavpbs aov, ixei earai Kal r) KapBla aov.
'O Xvxvos rov awparbs ianv b b<f>daXpbs- idv oiv rj 0 bipdaXfibs
aov dtrXovs, oXov rb awp,d aov <j>wreivbv earai' iav Be 0 otpdaXpos
aov irovrjpbs y, 'bXov rb awpd aov aKoreivbv earai. el oiv rb <p&s
rb iv aoi aKoros iarlv, rb aKoros irbaov. OvBels Bvvarai Bval
Kvplois BovXeveiv r) ydp rbv eva fiiarjaei Kal rbv erepov dyairrjaei,
rj evbs dvdegerai Kal tov erepov Karaobpovrjaei' ov Bvvaade dew
BovXeveiv Kal papwva. Aid tovto Xeyco vp.lv, fir) pepipvdre ry
"tyvXV vP&v rl abdyrjre [/cat ri trlrjre\, firjBe rw awpan vpwv rl
ivSvaijade' ovx), V "TrvXr) TX.etoi> ianv rrjs rpocjyrjs Kal to awpa
rov ivBvfiaros; ipfSXei^-are els rd irerewd rov ovpavov, on ov
airelpovaiv ovBe depi^ovaiv ovSe avvdyovaiv els dirodrjKas, Kal b
irarrjp vpwv b ovpavios rpeaSei avrd' ovx ^M6'5 pdXXov Siatpipere
avrwv; ns Be if; vfiwv pepipvwv Bvvarai trpoadelvat iirl rrjv
rjXiKlav avrov irrjxvv eva; Kal irepl ivBvfiaros rl fiepi/ivdre;
Karapddere rd Kpiva rov dypov, ir&s avtjdvovaiv ov KOiriwatv
ovSe vrjdovaiv \eya> Be vp.lv fin ovBe "ZoXopibv iv irdarj vr) Sb^rj
avrov irepief3dXero a>s ev rovrwv. el Be rbv x°PT0V r°v dypov

arjfiepov ovra Kal avpiov els KXlfSavov fSaXXopevov b debs ovrcos
afi(f>ievvvaiv, ov iroXXw pdXXov vpds, oXiyoiriaroi ; pr) oJiv pepip-
vrjarjre Xeyovres' ri <f>dywpev; rj ritrlwfiev; rj rl irepifiaXwpeda;
irdvra ydp ravra rd edvrj iirt^rjrovaiv oiSev ydp b irarrjp vpwv b
ovpavios on XPVKeTe rovrwv dtrdvrwv. ^rjrelre Be trpwrov rrjv
fSaaiXelav [rov deov] Kal rrjv BiKaioavvrjv avrov, Kal ravra irdvra
Trpoaredrjaerai vp.lv. pr) o5v fiepipvrjarjre els rrjv avpiov, r) yap
avpiov pepipvtjaei eavrrjs' dpKerbv rfj fjfiepa rj xaxla avrrjs.

VII. UNDISTRACTED SERVICE.
The Lord's Prayer is the centre and summit of the whole
discourse. In it is expressed almost a precis of the whole of the
teaching of the Sermon about the real nature and purpose of the
true Kingdom of God. And it practically marks the dividing
line between the two main divisions of the address. For the
short section on Fasting which follows it brings to a close the
treatment of the relation of the New Covenant to the Old. The
New has been shown to be based upon the former revelation;
and yet to introduce a marked development of it, as it lifts up all
its doctrine and all its practice on to a higher and more spiritual
plane. The Old Covenant has been declared as accepted, and
interpreted, and fulfilled in the Kingdom which the Master has
come to proclaim and to found.
But that was not the only aspect of the promised Society
which needed to be explained. It was a development, not a
revival. It was no mere modification of what had gone before ;
it was to have a new and independent character of its own.
And that also must be declared in the public manifesto of the
Christ. Accordingly the Lord now turns to look forward to the true
revelation and effect of the Kingdom in the aims and the bearing
of its members. That indeed has been in view from the first.
It was set forth at the outset as the keynote of the whole scheme
in the Beatitudes; in which He represented character as the
essential qualification for membership in the Kingdom. Now
He shows how this will manifest itself in the attitude of the sons
of the Kingdom ; first as towards God (vi. 19—34), and then as
towards their fellow-men (vii. 1 — 20). Their life must be based

192 UNDISTRACTED SERVICE
at once upon sacrifice and upon prudence. The new ideal
demands a new standard of devotion, and of service, and of
witness. And it is with the unfolding of this comprehensive
claim that the remaining sections of the Sermon are occupied.
For they sketch the pattern of life within the Kingdom of God
in its twofold aspect, as in relation to God and to man. And
this is not now treated in direct contrast to life under the
conditions and regulations of the Old Covenant : that compari
son has been completed : but in reference to the permanent
requirements of a great spiritual organisation, in its immediate
dependence upon God, and in its contact with, and influence
upon, the world at large.
The first principle laid down is that those who enter upon
this great heritage must be wholly free from all entanglements
of earthly ambition, and even of earthly anxieties. It was
essential for the due propagation of the Gospel of the Kingdom
that its votaries should be given up entirely, in heart and soul,
to the cause. There was no room for divided interests. 'No
man can serve two masters... Ye cannot serve God and mammon.'
And the force of this condition stands out clearly when com
pared with the terms of the several calls which our Lord made
upon His disciples to take up special work for Him. At every
stage of His ministry the same challenge was repeated. If He
summoned the fishermen to attach themselves to Him, it was at
the cost of abandoning their business : " He saith unto them,
Come ye after me, and I will make you fishers of men. And
they straightway left the nets, and followed Him1." When the
Twelve were sent out in His Name, He bade them : " Get you no
gold, nor silver, nor brass in your purses ; no wallet for your
journey, neither two coats, nor shoes, nor staff ; for the labourer
is worthy of his food2." And the Seventy received the same
injunction : " Carry no purse, no wallet, no shoes3."
Moreover a further instance in point may be found in the
communistic experiment of the Church at Jerusalem in the
earliest days4. No doubt it was adopted in an eager expectation
of the immediate return of the Lord. Probably it was partly
1 M. iv. 19, 20. 2 M. x. 9, 10.
3 L. x. 4. 4 A. iv. 32—35.

ST MATT. VI. 19 — 34 193
due to a very literal, and therefore mistaken, interpretation of
the Lord's promise : " Seek ye first His Kingdom and His
righteousness, and all these things shall be added unto you1."
Of course economically it was a mistake. But although it led
eventually to great financial distress, so that relief " for the poor
among the saints that were at Jerusalem2" became a standing
charge for a time upon the better-off Gentile churches ; yet it
opened the way, as nothing else could have done, for a free
abandonment on the part of the first converts to the affairs of
the Gospel. They were enabled to give themselves entirely to
the ministry of the word and of the sacraments, and to the
organisation of the rapidly growing community, without dis
traction. But while a complete detachment from the aims and the
anxieties of ordinary life was a necessary requisite in those who
were to be entrusted with the propaganda of the Gospel of the
Kingdom, it was not of course with this alone in view that our
Lord spoke of unanxious trust in the Heavenly Father's care.
The need goes deeper than that. For it is a matter which affects
the whole life of men, and tells strongly upon their spiritual
development. Our Lord had already referred incidentally to
this, when treating of Prayer3 : now He returns to the point
which He had then raised, but not developed ; and unfolds it in
detail. And there was an urgent need for such teaching. No one
who has lived in a busy modern commercial community, where
materialism unabashed tends to become so absorbing and so
dominant in all the thoughts and ideals of men that it invades
and contaminates even their religious life, can fail to recognise
the paramount necessity under such circumstances of a clear
challenge to set the higher life above the lower. And Galilee in
the first century was a very populous and a very thriving district,
and was the centre of a large and varied trade4.
And there was yet a further reason why this subject must
1 M. vi. 33.
2 Rom. xv. 26. Cp. A. xi. 29; 1 Cor. xvi. 1—3; n Cor. viii. 1—4; Gal. ii. 10;
A. xxiv. 17.
s vi. 8. 4 See Hast. D.B. ii. 100, 101.
S. 13

194 UNDISTRACTED SERVICE
find a place in the Gospel of the Kingdom. For the anticipation
of the Messianic Kingdom of God amongst the Jews had become
more and more materialistic. It was not only that they looked
for a political supremacy of their own nation : but the actual
conditions of life in 'the age to come1' were pictured in the
popular teaching in a realistically sensuous form. It may be
said of course that descriptions of the coming Golden Age could
only be expressed in imagery drawn from the familiar good
things of earthly life ; and that the Prophets of the Old Cove
nant had themselves employed symbolism of this kind. And it
is true that the future glory of God's people is depicted in the
Old Testament in such terms : — " The abundance of the sea
shall be turned unto thee, the wealth of the nations shall
come unto thee... For brass I will bring gold, and for iron
I will bring silver, and for wood brass, and for stones iron...
ye shall eat the wealth of the nations... therefore in their land
they shall possess double... Behold, his reward is with him,
and his recompense before him2 " ; and the like. — It is true
also that the later Jewish predictions of the Messianic age are in
fact largely based upon the prophetic promises of this type.
But they go far beyond them in the extravagance of their real
ism. The hopes of the people were set upon an exaggerated
material prosperity of plenty3 : and in regard to this the selfish
ness of their exclusivism ran riot. More particularly their
imagination centred itself on the idea of eating and drinking at
a royal feast, from which all other nations should be excluded,
when the Messiah's kingdom was established4. To this pro
spective banquet there are frequent references both in the
apocalyptic and in the Rabbinic books ; and some strange

1 b ptXXuv aliiv, Heb. vi. 6. Cp. y olxovpJvy y p^XXovaa, Heb. ii. 6.
2 Is. lx. 5, 17; lxi. 6, 7 ; lxii. 11. Cp. Is. xxv. 6; Ezek. xxviii. 26; xxxiv. 27 ;
Hos. ii. 21, 22; Am. ix. 13, 14.
3 Cp., e.g., Enoch x. 17 — 19; Sib. Or. iii. 581, 750, 783 (ed. Rzach); Apoc.
Baruch xxix. 5 — 8: Shabbath, f. 30; Kethuboth, f. m. 2. Rambam on Sanhedrin,
x. (quoted by Lightf. on J. vi. 31). The idea of a literal prosperity and refection
lingered on even among Christians; see Iren. v. 35 (ed. Harvey).
4 Cp. Pirke Aboth, iii. 25; Shemoth Rabba, f. 140. 1; Bamidbar Rabba, f. 245. 1;
Hagadath Megilla, f. 102. 2; Tanchuma, f. 75. 1. See Edersheim, Life and Times,
etc., i. 549, 550.

ST MATT. VI. 19 — 34 195
legends grew up round it1. It is to this notion probably that
St Paul alludes when he declares that " the kingdom of God is
not eating and drinking2." This tendency to materialise,— and
worse than to materialise ; actually to coarsen, — the hope of the
Kingdom of God, until it had come to be regarded as a state in
which every kind of physical desire should be sated to the full,
had debased the whole popular conception of the New Covenant.
It was therefore necessary at the outset of the declaration of the
Gospel to correct these false anticipations, and to counteract
them by holding up instead the ideal of a higher life, in which
all earthly gains or delights are subordinated to the spiritual
claims of the Kingdom.
I. i. The new section seems to open somewhat abruptly,
with an appeal to store up not the transient and material
treasures of earth, but the true and incorruptible treasures of the
heavenly life. And yet the transition to this new element of the
teaching is not really quite so sharp as at first sight it may
appear to be. It has in fact a close connexion with what has
gone before : for it takes up again in some degree, and developes,
the idea of the Divine ' reward ' for the righteous which has
already been referred to several times, and particularly in the
preceding section3. This belief in a Divine 'reward,' which
finds frequent expression from the Psalms onwards4, was in the
later Jewish literature constantly represented, from the point of
view of the recipients, as 'laying up treasure with God.' The
following are instances of this use. — " If thou hast abundance,
give alms accordingly ; if thou have but a little, be not afraid to
give according to that little ; for thou layest up a good treasure
(depM dyadbv drjaavpl&is) for thyself against the day of neces
sity." — " Lay up thy treasure (des rbv drjaavpbv aov) according
1 For the legend of the feast on Leviathan and Behemoth, cp. Baba Bathra, f. 75. 1
(Wiinsche on M. viii. 11): Targums on Gen. i. 21 (Jon.); Ps. 1. 10; Esth. iii. 7;
Song Sol. viii. 7: Apoc. Baruch, xxix. 4; iv Esdr. vi. 52. See Buxtorf, 1128 {s.v.

2 Rom. xiv. 17. Cp. M. viii. 11 {dvaxkiBiiaovTaij ; L. xiv. 15.
3 v. 12 ; 46; vi. 1 ; 4 ; 6 ; 18.
4 See, e.g., Ps. xviii. 20, 24; lviii. 11 ; lxii. 12; Prov. xi. 18; Is. xl. 10; lxii. 11;
and in N.T., M. a. 41, 42; Heb. *. 35, 36; xi. 6, 26; 11 J. 8; Rev. xi. 18; xxii. 12.
13—2

196 UNDISTRACTED SERVICE
to the commandments of the Most High, and it shall bring thee
more profit than gold." — " He that doeth righteousness treasureth
up life (drjaavpl^ei £wrjv) for himself with the Lord." — " For the
righteous justly hope for the end, and without fear depart from
this habitation, because they have with Thee a store of works
preserved in treasuries." — " For thou hast a treasure of works
stored up (thesaurus operum repositus) with the most High ;
but it shall not be showed unto thee until in the last times." —
" For the righteous who have many works stored up (repositae)
with thee shall from their own deeds receive reward (mercedem)1."
— In the Talmud a man is spoken of as having 'a treasure of
merits (riV3t 1¥1k)' in heaven2. There is a traditional story of
Monobazus, king of Adiabene at the beginning of the first
century3, which is told in both Talmuds4, that when he was
reproached by his relations for giving too liberally to the poor,
he replied : ' My fathers gathered treasures upon earth ; I, in
heaven... My fathers gathered them into a place over which the
hand of man has power ; I, into a place over which man's hand
has no power: they gathered gold (jlDD), I gather souls... they
for this age ; I for the age to come6.' — When therefore our Lord
spoke of ' laying up treasures in heaven,' He was employing a
phrase which was familiar enough to His hearers. For 'in
heaven ' here is clearly equivalent to ' with God 6.'
Nor was there need to define in what the heavenly treasures
consist : seeing that the expression followed the current diction :
only they are contrasted exactly, in the parallel clauses7, with
perishable earthly possessions. Indeed of earthly wealth there
is no actual definition ; but it is indirectly described, by the
destructive agencies referred to, as consisting not only of money
or other portable property, but also, in accordance with Eastern
1 Tob. iv. 8, 9; Ecclus. xxix. ii ; Ps. Sol. ix. 9 ; Apoc. Baruch xiv. 12; IV Esdr.
vii. 77 ; viii. 33. Cp. also Apoc. Baruch xxiv. 1 ; II Esdr. vi. 5 : and in N.T., M. xix.
21 ; L. xii. 21 ; Heb. x. 34; I Tim. vi. 19.
2 Shabbath, f. 31. 2. (Quoted by Charles on Apoc. Baruch xiv. 12.)
3 See Jos. Antt. xx. ii. 1.
4 Bab. Baba Bathra, f. 11. 1 ; Jer. Pea, f. 15. 1. See Schottgen; and Buxtorf,
1224 — 5, s.v. 33D.
5 Tr. Dalman, The Words of Jesus, p. 208.
6 Cp. Dalman, p. 207.
7 See above, p. 185, with n. 2.

ST MATT. VI. 19, 20 197
views, of clothing, and possibly of food supplies1 : that is to say,
of every kind of provision for the needs of the bodily life.
Obviously the heavenly treasure cannot belong to the same
category as these things. The contrast is not in degree, but in
kind ; in respect of permanence rather than of comparative
quality ; in a word, of spiritual, as opposed to material, advan
tages. Just as in Isaiah li. 8, which may be in mind here : " For
the moth shall eat them up like a garment, and the worm shall
eat them like wool ; but my righteousness shall be for ever, and
my salvation unto all generations."
As to detail, it is evident enough that arjs implies garments,
and KXeirrai portable goods. But the reference of fipwais is not
quite so clear. In itself the word, in its active sense, might
denote almost anything consuming or corrosive, according to
the context. The Old Latin translation was comestura" : but the
Vulgate gives instead of this an interpretative rendering : " ubi
aerugo et tinea demolitur." In this the order of the words is
transposed : for though tinea might be taken as equivalent to
fSpwais3, aerugo cannot possibly answer to arjs. This rendering
seems to be a reminiscence of the Latin version of Baruch vi.
1 1 : " Hi autem non liberantur ab aerugine et tinea4." And from
it in turn comes the " rust " of the A.V. and the R.V. But
"rust" is the least suitable or likely of all possible meanings.
The Septuagint use of ftpwats for '5'N, ' the devourer ' (of the
fruits of the ground) at Mal. iii. n may furnish a clue to the
reference here. If the allusion is to insects which destroy food
stuff, then there are three items in the schedule of material
wealth, — clothing, food, and money. And this is supported to
some extent by what might be taken as a threefold distinction
1 For clothing regarded as wealth, cp. Gen. xiv. 22; Josh. vii. 21 ; Judg. xiv. 12,
13 : for grain stores, L. xii. 16 — 19.
2 Cp. Cyprian, Testim. iii. 1 ; De op. et el., 7 ' Ubi tinea et comestura extermi-
nat.' So Aug., De S. D. in M. II. xiii. 1. Chromatius however, Tr. in M., xvi. 1,
has 'ubi aerugo et tinea exterminant.' But apparently he gives an independent trans
lation : cp., e.g., 'involant' for 'furantur' in ver. 19.
3 Aquila uses flpuois to translate £'!?, Is. 1. 9.
4 LXX Ep.Jer. n oBtoi Si ob Siaoufyvrai dirb lov xal fSpupdruv. For fipupa cp.
Diosc. i. 142 (Steph. Thes. ed. Valpy, 2816) xal irpbs bSbvruv irbvovs tvepyei, tvnBt-
pevov els rb j3pwpa.

198 UNDISTRACTED SERVICE
in the corresponding clause in verse 20: 'birov ovre... ovre... Kal
oirov.. ov. But after all it is not by any means certain that the
negative statement does imply three separate heads : in fact
it lends itself rather more naturally to a resolution into two
only, distinguished from each other by the double O7rov. In
that case arjs Kal fipwais in the first statement also would
represent a single group, referring to the destruction of clothing :
and would correspond to ^T and D9 in the passage of Isaiah
quoted above. The suggestion of Casaubon1 that the phrase is
an instance of hendiadys, comparing Jas. v. 2, to l/idna vpwv
arjT6/3pwTa yiyovev, if not exactly correct2, at all events ap
proaches nearly to what is probably the true meaning of the
words. The construction of the sentence birov arjs xal fipwais
d<J>avl£ei, where a verb in the singular is attached to two co
ordinate substantives, coupled by xal, is a typical instance of an
idiom which occurs frequently in St Matthew's Gospel, and is in
fact a marked peculiarity of this book. Possibly it may be a
Galilean provincialism. In some cases where the same sayings
are reported in the other Gospels this feature is all the more
striking by comparison with the use of the plural there : as, for
example, 0 ovpavos xal rj yrj irapeXevaerat, where St Mark and
St Luke both have irapeXevaovrai3- The irregularity is not so
noticeable when the verb precedes the double subject, as in the
phrase which has already occurred in this discourse, eiw? av irap-
eXdrj b ovpavos xal r) yrj4, — especially if the verb is some part of
elvai, as in the often recurring sentence ixei earai b xXavdpbs
xal 0 ftpvypbs Ttov bBbvrwv5.
There is nothing strange about the use of Siopvaaeiv abso
lutely, even though elsewhere it is found only with the object
1 See Schleusner, and Suicer, s.v. §puais.
2 There is no certain instance of hendiadys in the N.T. See Winer (Moulton)
lxvi. 7, p. 786.
3 M. xxiv. 35 = Mk xiii. 31 =L. xxi. 33. Cp. also M. xii. 3i = Mk iii. 28; M.xiii.
22 = Mk iv. 19 (cp. L. viii. 14). [M. xxii. 40 is slightly different.] In such cases the
Matthaean form of the sentence has all the appearance of being the earlier.
4 v. 18. Cp. iii. 5; xvii. 3; xxviii. 1 : and J. xviii. 15.
5 viii. 12 ; xiii. 42, 50; xxii. 13; xxiv. 51 ; xxv. 30 : also once in L., xii. 28, where
the sing, is retained. Cp. yv, xxvii. 56 (with Mk xv. 40), xxvii. 61 : and L. ii. 33.
Also vii. 12, below.

ST MATT. VI. 19 — 21 199
expressed1. When once the word had become specialised as the
established term in the common dialect for ' house-breaking2,'
it naturally of itself suggested this particular reference, quite
apart from any direct mention of olx'tas or other word of the
kind. In the same way the substantive Bibpvypa stands alone
in the Septuagint3. And here the association with KXeirrai
precludes any possible ambiguity as to the meaning.
The lesson of this paragraph is summed up in the aphor
ism, 'where thy treasure is, there will be thy heart also.' For
whatever is esteemed, and sought after, as the highest good
tends to absorb all interests and all energies ; until it becomes
the one dominant influence on the whole life4. It is in accord
ance with the Jewish mode of thought that this is represented as
swaying ' the heart,' as the seat of all moral purpose6.
ii. The argument is continued, and developed, in the next
section about the 'single eye' and the 'evil eye.' No little
confusion has been caused in the interpretation of this passage
by the fact that the term ' a single eye ' has passed into a
commonplace in English religious phraseology, but in a sense
which is totally different from that which the expression con
veyed in its original Jewish setting. In English it now denotes
a loyal and undistracted purpose, or devotion to God's service ;
as in the familiar sentence, 'A single eye to God's glory.' But
in the Sermon on the Mount it means nothing of the kind.
And this confusion is even worse confounded by the almost
universal attempt to unravel the signification of irovrjpos and,
especially, of dirXovs by reference to the use of these words in
classical Greek, instead of in Alexandrine Greek, particularly as
employed in translation from a Hebrew original. But the real
1 tV olxlav, M. xxiv. 43; rbv oTkov, L. xii. 39; olxlas, LXX Job xxiv. 36. So
tous toIxovs Siopbrreiv, Aristoph. Plut. 565 ; t^ olxlav Siopbgas, Xen. Symp. iv. 30.
2 roixvpox*"' d°es not occur 'n Biblical Greek.
3 Exod. xxii. 2 (1) idv Se iv rip Siopbypan evpeBy 6 xXiirrys: Jer. ii. 34 obx iv
Sujpbypaaiv eSpov abrobs: (in both cases ^IVIQOSa).
* Cp. Col. ii. 2.
6 " Because it is the focus of the personal life, the work-place for the appropria
tion and assimilation of every influence, in 'heart,' according to Scripture, lies the
moral and religious condition of the man." Hast. D.B. ii. 318 a.

200 UNDISTRACTED SERVICE
point is to ascertain what the words would mean to a Jewish
audience of the first century.
Now in Jewish literature the terms ' a good eye ' (n51t3 \% or
sometimes fi££ t?2) and ' an evil eye ' (n£! \!&) are constantly used
as technical expressions signifying the opposite characteristics of
generosity, in deed or thought, or of avarice or grudging envy :
as for instance in the following sayings : — " He that gives a gift,
let him give with a good eye (ns* pj>3) ; and he that dedicates
anything, let him dedicate it with a good eye." "There are
four characters in almsgivers. He who is willing to give, but not
that others should give, his eye is evil (nmu»]f) towards the
things of others : that others should give, and he should not
give, his eye is evil towards his own, etc.1 " Similar phrases are
found in the Old Testament : " He that hath a bountiful eye
(f;jr3it3) shall be blessed ; for he giveth of his bread to the poor."
" Eat thou not the bread of him that hath an evil eye (VS W) ; eat
and drink, saith he to thee, but his heart is not with thee." " He
that hath an evil eye hasteth after riches." " [Beware lest] thine
eye be evil against thy poor brother, and thou give him nought2."
So also in the later books : " Glorify the Lord with a good eye
(eV dyadw b<pdaXp,w), and stint not the firstfruits of thine hands.
In every gift show a cheerful countenance, and dedicate thy
tithe with gladness. Give unto the most High according as he
hath given ; and as thy hand hath found, give with a good eye."
" An evil eye (b(pdaXp,bs irovrjpos) is grudging of bread, and he is
miserly at his table3." And there can be no doubt that the same
ideas are attached to the use of the like terms in this passage of
the Sermon.
It is not however 'a good eye' but 'a single eye' which is
contrasted with ' an evil eye ' in this sentence. There is no
difficulty in understanding the meaning of irovrjpbs as qualifying
bcpdaXp,bs, associated as it is regularly with this particular refer
ence. Indeed it recurs again later in St Matthew's Gospel, in
1 Jer. Baba Bathra, f. 14. 4; Pirke Aboth, v. 19. Cp. Shemoth Rabba, f. 133. 4
" The rich man whose eye is evil is destroyed out of this world together with his
riches." 2 Prov. xxii. 9; xxiii. 6; xxviii. 22; Deut. xv. 9. Cp. Deut. xxviii. 54, 56.
3 Ecclus. xxxv (xxxii). 8 — 10; xiv. 10.

ST MATT. VI. 22, 23 201
the Parable of the Labourers in the Vineyard, where it denotes
a grudging and ungenerous demeanour : " Is it not lawful for me
to do what I will with mine own ? Or is thine eye evil, because
I am good1 ? " But the case is different with dirXovs used as an
epithet of b<f>daXp,bs. For it is not the customary term (dyadbs)
of antithesis to irovrjpbs in this collocation2. And yet it is a
peculiarly apt word in this connexion : for dirXovs and its
cognates are used in the Greek of this period to express gene
rosity in giving or in disposition. They are used in this
application in the New Testament by St James3 ; — alrelrw irapd
tov BiSbvros ®eov irdaiv dtrXws xal fir) bveiSl^ovros : — and by
St Paul4 ; — fj xard f3ddovs trrwxela avrwv iirepiaaevaev els rb
irXovros rrjs dirXbrrjTos avrwv : — also by Josephus5 ; — o Be f3aai-
Xevs dyatrdv avrbv rrjs dirXbrrjTos xal rrjs peyaXoyjrvxtas eXeye
(of David's acceptance of Oman's gift) : — by Lucian6; iroXXfjv
rrjv xoXaxelav iiriBet^b/ievoi irpbs dvBpa, olbv ae, dtrXoixbv xal
r&v ovtwv koivwvikov : — by Polybius7 ; — o Se "Zxiirlwv ecprj dryvoelv
rovrwv ovBev dXXd irpbs pev roiis dXXorplovs rrjv ix tow vbfiwv
dxplf3eiav rrjpeiv, rois Be avyyeviat xal (ptXois dirXws XPvJ<T^ai Kal
yevvalws xard Biiva/iiv : — and by others8- So that a7r\o0s here,
so far from being incongruous with the idea of generosity, really
serves to give it a more emphatic expression.
To a Jewish audience then the contrast between 'a single
eye ' and ' an evil eye ' would certainly convey the notion not
of a general moral purpose but of a specific attitude with regard
to wealth. And so this section falls in exactly with the con
text ; coming as it does between the paragraph about earthly
1 M. xx. 15. Cp. Mk vii. 22, where perhaps brpBaXpibs irovypbs=<pBbvos: cp. Tob.
iv. 7 py ipBovyadru aov 6 bipBaXpbs. There is no evidence that b<pB. irov. ever =
fiaoxavla. 2 Possibly it may represent HSJ, rather than fQiD, with yv. s i. 5.
4 II Cor. viii. 2. Cp. II Cor. ix. 11, 13; Rom. xii. 8.
5 Antt. VII. xiii. 4. Cp. B.J. v. vii. 4 iriarebaas S' i% airXbryros...iirixei pev rov
xpiov ryv ipfiokyii, xrX.
6 Timon, 56. 7 xxxn. xiii. 4.
8 e.g., Plut. Anton. 43 ebyiveia, Xbyov Sbvapis, dxXorijs, rb tpiXbSupov xal pxyaikb-
Siapov, xr\. Test. XII Patr. Iss. iv. 6 7rd»TO bpq. iv airkbryn, py iiriSexbpevos
dipBakpobs irovypobs dirb tiJs irXdvys tov xbapov. The meaning of 07rX67Tjs is of course
quite different in the phrase iv airXbryn (rys) xapSlas, Wisd. i. 1 ; Eph. vi. 5 ; Col. iii.
22. Cp. LXX I Chr. xxix. 17 iv dirXbryrt xapSlas [pov] = '33? 1^3; Prov. x. 9
dirX«s=Dta3.

202 UNDISTRACTED SERVICE
and heavenly treasures, and the reference to the incompatibility
of service to God and to mammon. There is thus a clear
sequence of argument from section to section, set out under a
succession of different figures.
So much is evident. But there still remains the difficult
question of what is meant by the description of the eye as ' the
lamp of the body.' The analogy of the challenge given earlier
in the discourse, ovtws Xaptyfrdrw rb <j>ws vp&v, ktX.\ as well as
the general use of Xvxvos in the New Testament, might seem to
point to an interpretation here, by which this passage would be
understood as taking up again that earlier precept, and as
speaking therefore of the example set by members of the
Kingdom : that is to say, of their influence on others ; ' the
lamp of the whole personality, which should throw its light
around on others, if obscured by avarice becomes pessimi ex
empli! But this point, of their relation to other men, belongs
to the subsequent division of the Sermon. It is not in view
now. And the preceding and the following sections, with which
this is closely associated, both deal with the inward and
personal disposition of the disciples themselves: and therefore
this also is no doubt rightly understood as referring rather to
the reception of light from without, than to giving out light.
And this is implied by the inference with which this saying
closes. In either case however the meaning is that the whole
personality is clouded, and rendered impervious to the Divine
light of life, by covetousness. For the meaning of awpa here is
not restricted to the physical body ; though that answers
naturally to the mention of the eye ; but it represents the
whole being, or personality. It is analogous to the Rabbinic use
of fi-u, = ' persona,' and so ' ipse ' : as in the saying, ' whosoever
honours the Thorah is himself (lsu) held in honour with men ;
and whosoever dishonours the Thorah is himself (isu) dis
honoured with men2."
The expression in the last clause, rb aKoros irbaov, does not
refer to the darkening of the light of a life otherwise bright,
which results from the obscuration of ' the lamp of the body ' by
covetousness. It conveys much more than this. ' The darkness '
1 v. 16. 2 Pirke Aboth, iv. io.

st matt. vi. 22 — 24 203
is the moral darkness which already exists in man, and which
needs the Divine light to overcome and dispel it. If then that
light is shut out, the natural darkness within is intensified : —
' ipsae tenebrae quantae erunt1.'
iii. This series of proverbial sayings concludes with the
maxim, that 'no man can serve two masters.' This is first
expanded in a typical Hebraic parallelism ; in which however
the statements are not tautological, but are exact contrasts.
For (o) eh and o erepos respectively refer to the same object in
each case : 'for either he will hate A, and love B ; or he will
cling to A, and despise BI And then the general proposition
is applied to the particular instance of devotion to God or to
' mammon.' Mammon (N?D?) is a common Rabbinic term for
' riches2.' It is found in the Talmud3, and occurs frequently
in the Targums. Perhaps the earliest instance of the use of this
word is in Ecclesiasticus4, if the Aramaic text may be regarded
as the original.
The whole of this section, dealing with the proper attitude
of members of the Kingdom towards wealth, has thus been
worked out to a final and conclusive antithesis between
devotion to God or devotion to riches. In this alternative the
fatally engrossing power of money stands revealed ; and the
preceding points of the instruction culminate in it. They have
1 Vulg. Cp. Jer., in Mat. i. 7 " Si ergo lumen quod in te est tenebrae sunt, ipsae
tenebrae quantae erunt ! Si sensus qui lumen est animae vitio caligatur, ipsa putas
caligo quibus tenebris obvolvetur ? "
2 Cp. Jer., in Mat. i. 7 " Mammona sermone Syriaco divitiae nuncupantur." Aug.
De Serm. Dom. in M. II. xiv. 47 " Mammona apud Hebraeos divitiae appellari
dicuntur. Congruit et Punicum nomen : nam lucrum Punice mammon dicitur."
3 e.g., Baba Kamma, f. 71. -i. See Buxt. 1219. Cp. the story of Monobazus,
quoted above, p. 196.
4 xxxi. 8 S|5£H 'C, 'Mammon of falsehood': quoted in Hast. D.B. iii. 224.
The reference to Enoch lxiii. 10 given there (after Plummer on L. xvi. 9) appears to
be a mistake. It is true that Dr Charles in his translation of Enoch gives the phrase,
•our souls are satisfied with the mammon of unrighteousness': and further in his
introduction to the book, in the section on 'The influence of Enoch on the N.T.'
(p. 49) he instances this phrase as a parallel to L. xvi. 9. But the passage is trans
lated quite differently by Dr Laurence : ' Our souls are satiated with the instruments
of crime.' And Dr Charles himself in App. D (p. 371) says : "lxiii. 10 mammon of
unrighteousness, or 'riches of unrighteousness ' ; for neither here nor in M. vi. 24: L.
xvi. 9 does Eth. transliterate papuvas."

204 UNDISTRACTED SERVICE
shown that the treasure which is sought after tends to gain control
even over the seat of moral purpose : and that a covetous disposi
tion destroys the capacity for altruistic service. Now ' mammon '
is represented as an exigent master, demanding an undivided
allegiance of the whole life of its devotees, with a claim which
belongs rightfully to God alone. The choice is presented in
unequivocal terms as lying between fealty to God or subservi
ence to mammon. There can be no compromise in this respect.
2. And now the argument is carried on to a somewhat
startling development. For what follows is a distinct deduction
from the principle just established. This is made clear by
Bid tovto (ver. 25). But it is now applied not merely to avarice
on a large scale, but to the smallest details of daily life ; — to
anxiety concerning the simplest needs of earthly existence,
food and clothing. Not that these can be recklessly disregarded.
Our Lord recognises them as necessities : ' your heavenly
Father knoweth that ye have need of all these things.' They
are not incongruous with His service. But they are not to be
allowed to take precedence as the dominant interest, and as of
more importance than the service of God. Once let the
principle be accepted that the whole life, with all its concerns
and ambitions, must be centred in God, then whatever affects
that life is brought into close relationship with Him. He cares
for His servants : and there is no room for distracting anxiety
about such matters. Perfect trust casteth out fear.
The keynote to the whole passage lies in the opening appeal,
p,r) p,epipvdre. Again and again the same word recurs through
out the section. Here, as always, it denotes anxious, distressful,
harassing care1, not prudent forethought. And this sense in
deed was originally expressed by the English ' take no thought.'
For ' thought ' in the English of the sixteenth and seventeenth
centuries bore this signification. So, for example, Bacon writes :
" Hawis, an alderman of London, was put in trouble, and dyed
1 Cp. M. x. 19 (L. xii. 11); L. x. 41 ; Phil. iv. 6. ptpipva, M. xiii. 22 (Mk iv.
19; L. viii. 14) ; L. xxi. 34; 11 Cor. xi. 28 ; I Pet. v. 7 (from Ps. lv. 22 LXX (irlp-
pitpov iirl Kbpiov tV ptpipvdv o-ou = ^3n^, 'thy burden'), dptpipvos, M. xxviii. 14;
I Cor. vii. 32.

st matT. vi. 25 — 33 205
with thought, and anguish, before his businesse came to an end1."
As to the meaning of the word there is no question. But it is
used in this passage with quite a remarkable variety of con
structions: — (i) with the dative (ver. 25), or (ii) with els and the
accusative (34) ; (iii) with the genitive2 (34), or (iv) with irepl and
the genitive (28) ; and (v) absolutely (27, 31). And this variety
plainly suggests that p,eptp,vdv here represents J£l, which is also
used with exactly corresponding constructions : (a) with ?, of the
object of solicitude3 ; (b) with IP, of the cause of anxiety4 ; and
(c) absolutely6 There are also other marked Hebraisms in these
paragraphs ; such as the descriptive phrases ' the birds of the
heaven' (B^rt *P»), 'the lilies of the field' (H^O WiP), for
which St Luke gives simply, ' the ravens,' ' the lilies.'
The lesson of trust is enforced by references to God's care even
for His lower creatures, the birds and the flowers : and these
illustrations were partly suggested no doubt by the immediate
surroundings at the moment in the Galilean hill-country. That
is probably why in the second case the lilies are specified as
representing flowers in general6 ; in allusion to " the numerous
wild plants comprehended under the name lily " which abound
in Galilee. "The plants which realise all [the] conditions are
the various species of Gladiolus, which are indigenous in
Palestine... All these grow among the grain, often overtopping it,
and illuminating the broad fields with their various shades of
pinkish purple to deep violet-purple and blue, truly royal
colours. Anyone who has stood among the wheat fields of
1 Hen. VII., p. 230 {The Bible Word-Book, by Eastwood and Wright). See Bp.
Lightfoot's Sermons in St Paul's Cath., p. 170. Cp. I Sam. ix. 5 (A.V. and R.V.)
'lest my father... take thought for us': cp. x. 2 (R.V.).
2 Dr W. F. Moulton, in his ed. of Winer's Gr. (Pt. in. § xxx. 10 d, note), strangely
refers this construction to an extension of the customary use of the gen. with verbs of
desiring ; in connexion with Winer's still more strange interpretation of Tit. iii. 8 tva
•ppovrlluaiv xaXuv (pyuv, where the gen. does not depend upon <ppovrtfaoiv, but upon
irpotaraaBat, as in ver. 14 of the same chapter, pavBavtruoav 0! yptrepoi xaXuv (pyuv
irpdtoraoBai. 3 1 S. ix. 5 ; x. 2. 4 Ps. xxxviii. 19. 5 Jer. xvii. 8.
8 xplvov is used however to translate D1S, LXX Exod. xxv. 31, 33, 34 (dv$y,
Sym.) ; Num. viii. 4 : but only in reference to the flower-ornamentation of the Golden
Candelabrum, which according to Jewish tradition was a representation of lilies. So
it is described by Josephus (Antt. III. vi. 7), and by Maimonides.

206 UNDISTRACTED SERVICE
Galilee, and seen the beautiful racemes of these flowers, peering
up in every direction above the standing corn, will see at once
the appropriateness of our Saviour's allusion. They all have a
reedy stem, which when dry, would make such fuel as is used in
the ovens 1."
i. The inference drawn from the illustrations is of course in
the form of an argument a fortiori : ' if your (not, their)
heavenly Father nourishes the birds, why need you be anxious
about provision for yourselves ? ' A similar argument is ascribed
in the Talmud to R. Simeon, the son of Eleazar2 : " Hast thou
ever seen a beast or a bird that had a workshop ? Yet they are
nourished without toil or trouble. They were only created to
serve me: I was created to serve my Creator... Would it not then
be just that I shqnld be nourished without pain or trouble, had
I not polluted my works, and robbed myself (by my sins) of my
nourishment ? " It may be therefore that this was a form of
saying which was current with the Jewish teachers. Our Lord
Himself employed it again more than once on subsequent
occasions : — " Ye are of more value than many sparrows " :
" How much is a man of more value than a sheep3." In these
phrases Sia<f>epeiv of itself sufficiently denotes, or at least implies,
superiority ; but here its meaning is reinforced by the addition
of paXXov*. ' Moreover,' the argument proceeds, ' all such fretful anxiety
is as unavailing as it is unnecessary. For who can add by it a
mere cubit's span to his life ? ' There can be no question that
rjXiKia here signifies 'age,' 'term of life,' and not physical
' stature.' ' Age ' is its regular meaning in the New Testa-
1 Hast. D.B. iii. 123a. Dr Thomson's description of "the Huleh lily" [Land
and Booh, p. 256] is attractive ; but it is unfortunately too vague for botanical identifi
cation : — "This Huleh lily is very large, and the three inner petals meet above, and
form a gorgeous canopy... I met this incomparable flower.. .among the oak woods
around the northern base of Tabor and on the hills of Nazareth... We call it Huleh lily
because it was here that it was first discovered."
2 Kiddushin (at the end). Cp. also the Gemara of the Jer. Talmud there. See
Buxt., 2028, s.v. Y^fe.
" M. x. 31; xii. 12.
* Cp. the use of p.oXXop with a comparative, Mk vii. 36; II Cor. vii. 13 ; Phil, i.
23-

ST MATT. VI. 26—30 207
ment, as elsewhere1. Only in St Luke's Gospel2 is it used in the
secondary sense of ' stature.' The added phrase in St Luke's
report of this saying, — et ovv ovSe eXdxio-rov Bvvaade, — clearly
could not be interpretative of the idea of an extra ' cubit ' of
stature : nor indeed is there any point, especially in reference to
anxiety about sustenance, in the notion of an eager desire to
grow to an enormous height. The application of a term of
measurement to age is a natural figure3; as in the saying of
Ps. xxxix. 5, " Behold, thou hast made my days [as] hand-
breadths (ninat?)."
ii. The comparison of the rich beauty of flowers to the
' glory4 ' of Solomon was peculiarly forcible as addressed to
Jews. To them the reign of Solomon was the golden age of
their national history, alike for extent of dominion, for security,
for commercial prosperity, and for lavishness of worship5. And
it found its concentrated expression in the extravagant Oriental
display of the king himself. So he stood out in their con
ception as the type of the most imposing of monarchs.
The extreme relative insignificance of the flowers is
emphasised by the further topical illustration, that they are used
but for fuel. The ovens of the East are simply cylinders of
pottery sunk in a small pit in the ground. They are first of all
heated by burning light fuel, such as grass and weeds, in them ;
and then, when they are sufficiently heated, the ashes are re
moved, and a thin layer of dough is plastered on the sides to
be baked. KXlfiavos" is used in the Septuagint to translate
T-13B , the name which is still in use on the Lebanon for these
ovens7- 1 J. ix. 21, 23; Eph. iv. 13; Heb. xi. 11. Dr J. H. Moulton notes that yXixla
frequently occurs in the Papyri, but that he knows no instance where it means
'stature.' Expositor, VI. viii. 431.
2 ii. 52 ; xix. 3.
3 Wetstein quotes Mimnermus [Stob. xcviii. 13] iriixviov [for the accent, see Lob.
Phryn. 494] iirl xpocop dvBeaiv ijj/3?)S repirbpeBa. Cp. airiBapy tou filov, Diogenian. viii.
17 (Paroemiogr. Gr., ed. Gaisford, p. 221).
4 For Sb£a, used of gorgeous clothing, cp. LXX Esth. v. 1 i£eSboaro Td Ipdna rys
Beparrelas, xal irepiepdXXero ryv Sb£av abrys.
6 Cp. I Esdr. i. 5 Xarpebere rip Kvplu Qetp bpuv... Kara T7)i< peyaketbryra
2dkupui>v. 6 The form xXipavos (for xpipavos) is universal in late Greek. It is used not only
in LXX, but by Philo, Galen, Dioscorides, etc. See Lob. Phryn. 179.
7 Hast. D.B. ii. 73 a.

208 UNDISTRACTED SERVICE
The reproachful title bXiybiriarot1, with which this paragraph
closes, represents a phrase that was in frequent use in the
Rabbinic schools, ('™D£) n?»t? 2 '^i?3. It occurs in such sayings
as, " He that prays with a loud voice is to be numbered among
those that are of little faith." " The Israelites in the wilderness
were of little faith." " Whoever has a morsel of bread still in
his basket, and says, What am I to eat tomorrow ? he is of those
of little faith4 " : and the like. It was applied especially to
those who failed to trust implicitly in God for the provision of
their needs. And so it is peculiarly appropriate in this passage,
as pressing an appeal upon Jewish hearers to follow out the
principle which in theory their own Rabbis were accustomed to
inculcate. And not their Rabbis only : but the Old Testament
scriptures also enforce the same lesson of trust : — " O fear the
LORD, ye his saints ; for there is no want to them that fear
him." " Cast thy burden upon the Lord, and he shall sustain
thee5." In the conclusion, in which the teaching of the whole section
is reviewed, two reasons are urged against undue solicitude
concerning the outward necessities of the bodily life, — meat, and
drink, and raiment.
(a) Such an anxious faithless spirit is unworthy of the sons
of the Kingdom. By a stern irony it is spoken of as reflecting
the natural attitude of the despised Gentiles : " For after all
these things do the Gentiles seek6." Twice before the same
comparison has been used. It has occurred in each of the two
main preceding divisions of the discourse ; — first at the close of
the treatment of the Law, in the deprecation of the selfishness of
1 Cp. M. viii. 26; xiv. 31; xvi. 8. 2 See Buxt. 116, 117, 2017.
3 Also in the Midrashim rUDK nDlPI: e.g., Mechilta, f. 33. 1. See Schottgen.
4 Bab. Berachoth, f. 24. 2; Bab. Arachin, f. 15. 1 (cp. Pesachim, f. 118. 2);
Sola, f. 48. 2.
6 Ps. xxxiv. 9 ; lv. 22. There is an interesting passage in Philo, De proem, etpoen.,
§ 17 ofs piv ydp dXyBivbs irXovros (v obpavip xardxeirai Sid aoiplas xal baibryros
daxyBels,Tobrois xal 6 ruv xp-opdruv iirl yys irepiovodfci, irporofa xal iiripeXelf Beov ruv
rapeluv del irXypovptvuv, ix toC Tds 6pp.ds rys oWoias xal rds ruv xaPwv briftoXas py
ipiroSl^eaBat irpbs tt/v ruv del oirovSa£optvuv xarbpBuaiv.
6 iiriiyreiv is an intensification of t^yreiv (ver. 33). Cp., e.g., Rom. xi. 7; Phil. iv.
17; Heb. xi. 14; xiii. 14.

ST MATT. VI. 30—33 209
requiting only good for good1 ; and then with regard to the
formal practices of religion, in the warning against laboured
repetitions of prayer2. Now once more it is brought forward, as
the most incisive of arguments that could be addressed to Jews,
to add point to the caution against absorption in minor
interests. The first ydp therefore does not introduce this
statement as a parenthesis. It asserts a direct reason for the
behest ' Be not anxious,' not merely an incidental illustration or
explanation. (b) But there is a deeper reason also, which is marked by
the second yap : " For your heavenly Father knoweth that ye
have need of all these things." This is an echo of the assur
ance already given in connexion with the teaching about
Prayer3 : " Your Father knoweth what things ye have need of,
before ye ask Him." It proclaims the basis of that complete
trustfulness which must underlie true prayer ; and not prayer
only, but service also as well as prayer. If faith can but realise
the revelation of the Father, then it becomes possible to trust
Him utterly for all that is really needed, and to pray contentedly
for the daily bread.
These then are the grounds upon which the admonition is
emphasised against becoming engrossed in earthly cares : that
such a habit betrays at once a heathen spirit, and a distrust of
the heavenly Father. And the terms in which those grounds
are expressed clearly look back, with a direct reference, to the
successive sections of the previous teaching.
These again are followed up by a positive exhortation to make
God's kingdom and righteousness the primary aim and object of
life ; to which is added a promise of provision for all subordinate
needs. (a) This exhortation is in effect a summing up of all the
previous doctrine of the sermon. ' The Kingdom of God '
recalls the earlier divisions, in which the distinctive marks of that
Kingdom are set forth, as manifested by the characteristics of
its members4 ; and in its spiritual development of the Old
Covenant5: while 'The Righteousness of God' takes up the
1 v. 47. . 2 vi. 7. 3 vi. 8. See above, pp. 156, 171, 173.
4 v. 3—16. s v. 17 — 48.
S. 14

210 UNDISTRACTED SERVICE
theme of the next subject of teaching, about the practices of
religion1. It is true that righteousness is here described as ' His
Righteousness,' or 'The Righteousness of God.' But this cannot be
in the sense of the Old Testament phrase, ' The Righteousness
of Jehovah ' (that is, as indicating an attribute of God Himself),
which is a constant refrain in the later chapters of Isaiah2. For
that obviously cannot be ' sought after ' by His servants. The
righteousness referred to here must be something to which they
can themselves attain. It denotes therefore the ideal righteous
ness that God requires in the members of His Kingdom; a
righteousness which is learned of Him, and reflects His own
righteousness. And this coincides with the use of the ex
pression elsewhere ; both in the Old Testament, — " Quicken me
in thy righteousness3"; — and in the New, — " The wrath of man
worketh not the righteousness of God4." The term then
repeats, only with fuller force, the same conception of righteous
ness that has already been impressed several times in the
Sermon 5-
(b) The promise is the statement of a large principle, not
the direct assurance of material advantages. It is possible that
the Jewish audience may have received it in the first instance in
the latter aspect. For even at a later stage of our Lord's
ministry the Passover pilgrims seem to have regarded the
miraculous feeding at Bethsaida as some sort of pledge of
a continuous maintenance while they devoted themselves to the
establishment of the Kingdom6 ; just as their ancestors had been
miraculously fed while on their way to the Promised Land :
" What workest thou ? Our fathers ate the manna in the wilder
ness7." And those who were now present were assembled to hear
the manifesto of the promised Kingdom of God. But it is strange
that the words should ever have been misinterpreted by
Christians, as justifying a neglect of all work and forethought on
1 vi. i— 18.
2 "Perhaps the most peculiar feature of the theology of Isa. xl — lxvi is its
argument for the righteousness of Jehovah." G. A. Smith, Is. (Expositor's Bible), ii.
224. 3 Ps. cxix. 40. Cp. Is. liv. 17. 4 Jas. i. 20. Cp. Rom. x. 3.
5 v. 6, 10, 20; vi. 1. 6 J. vi. 15. Cp. L. ix. 11.
7 J. vi. 30, 31.

ST MATT. VI. 33 211
the part of those who profess the service of God. And yet that
has been, the case again and again. It was, for instance, a
wretched travesty, such as this, of our Lord's teaching which
drew forth Augustine's vigorous protest in his De opere
Monachorum. The sentence however is of course in reality a
declaration of the proper proportion of interests in the affairs of
life. And it is even more than that : it is the assurance of an
answer to the prayer, ' Give us this day our daily bread.'
The lesson of this saying sank deeply into the mind of the
early Church. Of all the traditional sayings ascribed to our
Lord in the writings of the Fathers, there is none more
frequently repeated than one which bears a striking resemblance
to this : " Ask for the great things, and the small things shall be
added unto you1." It is quoted by Clement of Alexandria2, by
Origen3, by Eusebius4, and by Ambrose5. But it may be
doubted whether it is not really a popular adaptation of the
original saying of the Sermon on the Mount, paraphrased in
general terms, rather than an additional saying of the Lord.
Clement himself appears to indicate this in one passage, in
which he writes6 : " But seek ye first the Kingdom of heaven
and righteousness ; for these things are great ; and the small
things, even concerning (your) livelihood, these shall be added
unto you." So Origen also treats it paraphrastically' : " Let us
consider the saying Ask for the great things and the small
things shall be added unto you, and Ask for the heavenly things
and the earthly things shall be added unto you." But whether
the saying is a genuine aypatpov or only a reminiscence of the
teaching of the Sermon on the Mount, at all events the con
stant repetition of it is evidence that the principle here laid
down by our Lord had strongly impressed itself upon the
Church. 1 alreiaBe [alreire] Td peydXa xal rd pixpd bpiv irpoareB^aerai.
2 Strom, i. 24 alreiaBe ydp rpyai rd peydXa xrX.
3 De Orat. ii. 2 elire ydp 6 T^o"oCs tois paByrdis abrov, alreire xrk. Cp. c. Cels. 7.
4 In Ps. xvi. 2 0 S,uryp (SISaaxev Xiyuv xrX. 5 Epp., I. xxxvi. 3.
6 Strom, iv. 6 Zyreire Si irpurov ryv paaiXelav ruv obpavuv, xal ryv Sixaioabvyv '
ravra ydp peydXa • rd Si pixpd, xal irepl rbv filov, ravra irpoareByaerai bpiv.
7 De Orat. xiv. 1 xaravvhaupev rb alreire rd peydXa xal rd pixpd bpiv irpoareBy
aerai, xal alreire rd iirovpdvia xal rd iirlyeia bpiv irpoareByaerai.
14—2

212 UNDISTRACTED SERVICE
Twice already in connexion with the last two verses reference
has been made to the clause of the Lord's Prayer, ' Give us this
day our daily bread ' : for the whole of this concluding para
graph of the present section reflects the teaching involved in that
petition. And the final counsel especially, which gathers up
and applies (ovv, verse 34) the argument, is an obvious supple
ment to the standard of faith and prayer asserted in that clause.
If the sons of the Kingdom are there taught to pray each day
for ' the bread of the coming day (rbv iiriovaiov),' that implies
that they are to live ' one day at a time.' Now they are further
bidden not to forestall the anxieties of the morrow.
And this position is illustrated and enforced by the proverbial
saying, " Sufficient1 unto the day is the evil thereof." This was
apparently adopted from a current proverb of the Jewish
schools. For a closely similar saying, which is indeed practically
identical with this both in its meaning and in its application, is
found in a Rabbinic legend about Moses : " The Holy One,
blessed be He, said unto Moses, Say unto them, I will be with
them in this bondage, and in the bondage to which they go
I will be with them. He (Moses) spake before Him, And am I
to relate this to them ? — Sufficient unto the hour is the evil
thereof2. He said unto him, Nay, thus (only) shalt thou say
unto the children of Israel, I AM has sent me unto you : unto
thee I make the future known, not unto them 3."
xaxla in this saying is plainly used in the sense of ' evil ' or
' calamity ' in general ; not of ' vice ' or ' malice,' as elsewhere in
the New Testament. In the Septuagint it is the regular
equivalent of n£3 i ar*d so from that association receives its
(secondary) generic meaning of ' evil,' where n|Q in the original
has that significance4. Jerome, writing to Amandus of Bor
deaux6, in answer to his enquiry about the meaning of this text,
1 The construction {dpxerbv...y xaxla) is quite customary. Cp., e.g., II Cor. ii. 6
Ixavbv r$ roiobrw y twinpla avry. For dpxerbv cp. M. x. 25.
2 niW3 mvi> fTH; lit. "Its sufficiency (is) unto trouble in its time."
3 Shemoth Rabba (on Exod.) ch. iii. The translation is that of Dr E. Nestle ;
Expos. Times, xviii. 8, May, 1907, p. 382. The same legend (including the proverb)
appears also in Bab. Berachoth, f. 9. 2.
4 e.g., Judg. xx. 34; 11 Chr. vii. 22 ; Eccl. xii. 1 ; Am. iii. 6. Cp. Ecclus. xix. 6.1
5 Ep. lv. 1, Cp. Tert. adv. Marc. ii. 24 "Nam et apud Graecos interdum

ST MATT. VI. 34 213
says : " Kaxla enim, quam Latinus vertit in malitiam, apud
Graecos duo significat, et malitiam et afflictionem, quam KaKwaiv
Graeci dicunt ; et hic magis pro malitia transferri debuit
afflictio." But the malitia of the Old Latin version1 is retained
here in the Vulgate. Moreover in the Vulgate malitia is
constantly employed in the Old Testament to represent n?3, or
some cognate word2: and consequently in several cases, like
xaxla in the Septuagint, denotes 'evil' in general3.
malitiae pro vexationibus et laesuris, non pro malignitatibus, ponuntur, sicut in isto
articulo" [sc. Jon. (iii. ro, and) iv. 1, where O. L. 'poenitentem malitiarum '].
1 Cypr., Testim. iii. n.
2 Always, except Is. xl. 2, where it is patently a miswriting for militia (N3V):
see Vitringa, Comm. in Is. ii. 35 1 b. Malitia occurs 59 times in the O.T. (also 35 in
Apocr. , and 10 in N.T.).
8 e.g., Is. Ivii. 1 ; Jon. iii. 10; iv. 2.

ST MATT. VII. i— 12.
Mrj Kpivere, 'Iva fir) xpidrjre' iv w yap xplp,an xplvere
Kpidrjaeade, Kal iv w p,erpw fierpelre fierprjdrjaerai vp.lv. rl Be
fSXeireis rb xdpcpos rb iv rw b<pdaXp,w rov dSeX<j>ov aov, rfjv Be iv
rw aw 6(f>0a\pa> Sokov oil Karavoels ; rj trws ipels rw dSeX<f)w aov,
A<pes eKfSaXw to xdpcpos ix rov bipdaXpov aov, xal ISov r) Boxbs iv
tw oabdaXfiw aov; viroKpird, eKJ3aXe trpwrov iK rov b<pdaXpov aov
rrjv Sokov, xal Tore BiafSXe-ijreis ixfSaXelv rb xdprpos ix rov
o<pdaXp,ov rov dSeXtpov aov. Mr) Swre rb ayiov rois xvalv, firjBe
fSdXrjre rovs fiapyaplras vpwv efiirpoadev rwv xoipwv, p/tj irore
Karairarrjaovaiv avroiis iv rois iroalv avrwv xal arparpevres
prj^waiv i/ids. Alreire, xal Sodrjaerat iip.lv • tyjrelre, xal
evprjaere' xpovere, xal dvoiyrjaerai vplv irds ydp b alrwv
XajifSdvet, xal b tyjrwv evplaxei, xal t&> xpovovn dvoiyrjaerai.
fj tis ianv e£ vfiwv dvdpwtros, bv airrjaet b vlbs avrov dprov, prj
Xidov iiriSwaei aiirw ; rj xal Ixdiiv airrjaet, pr) oabtv iiriSwaet avrw ;
el oZv i/iels trovrjpol ovres oiSare Bopara dyadd SiSbvat rois
rexvois vpwv, trbaw pdXXov o irarrjp vpwv b iv rois ovpavois Swaei
dyadd rois alrovaiv avrov. Ila^Ta ovv oaa idv diXrjre iva
troiwaiv vplv ol avdpwirot, ovrws xal v/iels iroielre avrois • outo?
ydp ianv b vbfios xal ol irpocj>rJTai.

VIII. THE CHURCH IN THE WORLD.
There is no title which could better express the general
subject of this division of the discourse than the familiar, almost
modern, phrase, ' The Church in the World.' No doubt it comes
near to being an anachronism, as applied to a part of the Sermon
on the Mount. But it exactly describes the theme of this
whole section, which deals with the general outward attitude of
the members of the Kingdom of God towards other men. And
it was a matter which could not have been left untouched. Our
Lord had given His outline of the true ideal of the Theocracy,
as a spiritual Society : He had expounded His interpretation of
the Law of the Old Covenant as fulfilled in the New : He
had set forth the standard of real 'righteousness' in the
practices of the religious life : and He had claimed a whole
hearted allegiance to the heavenly Father, based on implicit
trust in Him. But the question still remained, In what relation
would the members of such a Society as had been delineated
stand towards others with whom they would come into contact P1
The preceding portions of the teaching had dealt with the
conditions of life within the Kingdom : now there comes into
view the problem of the bearing of its members towards other
men. And it was a crucial problem. The state of the Jewish
religious atmosphere at the time made it so. More and more,
under the influence of the Pharisees, strict loyalty to the
Covenant had been made synonymous with a rigid exclusive
ness. The profession of a specially high standard of religious
observance had rendered the Pharisees proud and censorious.
Even of their own fellow-countrymen, partakers as they were of
the same Divine Covenant, they could contemptuously sneer:
1 See above, pp. 33, 34.

218 THE CHURCH IN THE WORLD
'This multitude which knoweth not the Law are accursed1':
and all because they were not trained in the minutiae of legal
lore. Even to Hillel is attributed the saying, "No 'boor' (-in)
is a sinfearer ; nor is the vulgar (pxn Dy) pious2."
But the Master had Himself already declared that the
standard of the new Theocracy must even attain a higher level
than that of the foremost exponents of the existing system, —
the Scribes and Pharisees3. And every fresh step in the
progress of His teaching had made it increasingly evident that
He did in reality make such a demand upon His disciples. It
was inevitable therefore that His hearers could not but be
asking themselves if after all the new scheme was not actually
more esoteric than the old. The ' great multitudes ' that had
followed Him4 had been attracted by His indiscriminate care for
all alike. A new era, they realised, had dawned upon them.
But now His teaching apparently made such exacting claims on
the devotion of its adherents, that it looked as though it must be
limited to the few alone. Once more then they seemed to be
brought face to face with only a new form of exclusiveness.
For they were accustomed, from all their past experience, to
associate an exceptionally strict practice of religion with a harsh
spirit of judgment on others.
Now there is a right and a wrong exclusiveness in religious
matters. The exclusiveness that comes of pride of privilege,
and scornful contempt of others, is wrong. But the exclusive
ness that comes of sensitive reserve about holy things,
under a deep consciousness of responsibility, is right. And to
these two aspects of the case our Lord addresses Himself: —
' Judge not ' : ' Give not that which is holy unto the dogs.'
At the time when this discourse was delivered such in
junctions could only be applied in the minds of those who
heard them to their conduct towards their own countrymen, —
those who were fellow-members with them of the covenant
nation. The time had not yet come to reveal the missionary
calling of the new Society. It was not until the last days of
His ministry that our Lord announced in clear and open terms, —
1 J. vii. 49. 2 Pirke Aboth, ii. 6.

ST MATT. VII. 1—12 219
and then only to the innermost circle of His workers, — that
"this Gospel of the Kingdom shall be preached in the whole
world for a testimony unto all the nations1." It was not until
after His Resurrection that He gave the direct command to His
disciples generally: "Go ye and make disciples of all the
nations2" Any intimation of so vast and comprehensive a
scope of the Kingdom of God would have been simply
unintelligible at this earlier stage : and there is no reference to
it : not even indirectly.
And yet the principle of conduct which is laid down, as
governing the mutual relations of those who should be banded
together in the one Divine Society, is also capable of the
widest possible application. There is no limit to its range. It
is the universal law of Christ for all dealings of His followers with
all men : — with those outside, as well as with those within, the
New Covenant. It is the one guiding rule of conduct towards
others : " All things whatsoever ye would that men should do
unto you, even so do ye also unto them." That is the pattern of
life for the Church in the World to the end of time.
The terms in which our Lord expresses His teaching in this
section are in a large measure adopted from current sayings of
the Rabbinic schools. Phrase after phrase may be illustrated
from the recorded words of the Jewish teachers. The whole
process is an appeal to Jews, based upon the familiar maxims of
their own traditions. At the same time they are so applied that
all is lifted up to a new and nobler ethical standard. The lesson
becomes one of generosity rather than of prudence. Its motive
is altruism, not self-protection.
I. i. First of all there stands a decisive statement of the
general position, — "Judge not, that ye be not judged." This
serves as the text for the paragraph that follows, in which it
is expounded by the help of well-known aphorisms. In the
opening phrase it is clear that xpivere can only be understood in
the sense of ' censorious judgment3' ; exactly as in the similar
1 M. xxiv. 14. 2 M. xxviii. 19; cp. L. xxiv. 47.
3 Cp. Greg. Nyss. De poenit., vol. ii. p. 170 ob tV xplaiv xal ryv ebyvupoabvyv
ixpdXXer xplaiv Si bvopA&t ryv Tpa%vripav xardxptatv. (Suicer, ii. p. 160.)

220 THE CHURCH IN THE WORLD
injunction of Rom. ii. I : " Wherefore thou art without excuse,
O man, whosoever thou art that judgest; for wherein thou
judgest another thou condemnest (KaraKpiveis) thyself; for thou
that judgest dost practise the same things." Nor does, this
conflict with the behest given a little later to estimate men by
the ' fruits ' of their conduct1. The two directions are really
complementary the one to the other.
The analogy of the teaching in other parts of the Sermon
seems to indicate that the reference in the subjoined words, —
' That ye be not judged,' — is to the judgment of God, and not
to that of man. For elsewhere the attitude of God towards
men is represented as being in accordance with their attitude
towards their fellow-men. " Blessed are the merciful, for they
shall obtain mercy." " If ye forgive men their trespasses, your
heavenly Father will also forgive you. But if ye forgive not
men their trespasses, neither will your Father forgive your
trespasses2." ii. If this be so, the same interpretation will also apply to
Kpidrjaeade and to perprfdrjaerai in the succeeding pair of
sentences. The second of these reproduces a common Rabbinic
proverb3 : " In what measure a man measureth, others measure
to him." By the Jews this was usually4 applied, as its normal
form declares, to the reciprocal action of men5, not to the
retributive justice of God. But it would seem, if the explanation
of perprjdrjaerai be correct, that what moralists recognised as
the law of human reciprocity our Lord here sets forth as the
condition of Divine retribution.
iii. Then He takes up another Jewish proverb about the
mote (or splinter) and the beam (Bokos = the principal, or
bearing, beam) in the eye ; as setting forth now the human
estimate of unkindly criticism ; and as emphasising the positive
incompetence of any man to pass judgment on his fellows, in

1 ver. 20. a v. 7; vi. 14, 15. Cp. also v. 25, 26; v. 44, 45; vii. 11.
3 Bab. Sanhedrin, f. 100. 1. "Nihil vulgatius in scriptis Judaeorum est illo
proverbio quod Lightfootus adduxit." Schottgen. Cp. Sota, i. 7 ; Bereshith Rabba,
ix. 13; Bamidbar Rabba, 9; Targ. Is. xxvii. 8; etc.
4 But not always: e.g., Shemotk Rabba, 3.
5 Cp. Seneca, Ep. 94 "Ab alio exspectes alteri quod feceris."

ST MATT. VII. 1 — 5 221
that he himself is not above reproach1. This also is a Talmudic
proverb. " R. Tarphon said, I wonder if there be any in this
age that will receive reproof. But if one saith to another, Cast
out the mote (BD/p.) out of thine eye, he will be ready to answer,
Cast out the beam (n^P) out of thine eye2." " It is written that in
the days when they judged the Judges themselves, when one
said to another, Cast out the mote (DD*P.) out of thine eye, the
other answered him, Cast out the beam (n^P) out of thine eye3."
As the first proverb quoted was used to show God's treatment of
a censorious spirit, so this is added to remind how men them
selves justly resent it.
So much is obviously suggested by the ordinary connotation
of the saying. But a fuller meaning is indicated by the
modified form in which it is here expressed. For it is phrased
not merely as a contemptuous correction of another, but as an
insinuating offer of help, — ' Let me cast out4,' — which assumes a
superiority of innocence on the part of the fault-finder. And
it is addressed to a ' brother ' ; that is, by one member of the
Kingdom" to another. So there comes the sharp rebuke, ' Thou
hypocrite ! ' Three times already this term has been used, in
reference to the public parade of Almsgiving, Prayer, and
Fasting6 ; retorting upon the Pharisees their own title for their
opponents, the Sadducees7. Now this very name is turned back
upon any one within the Kingdom who sets himself up above
his comrades. It is a denunciation of self-conceit and self-
sufficiency. 1 Cp. Cic. in Verrem, iii. i "Nam qui sibi hoc sumpsit ut corrigat mores
aliorum ac peccata reprehendat, quis huic ignoscat si qua in re ipse ab religione officii
declinarit ? "
2 Arachin, f. 16. 2.
8 Bab. Baba Bathra, f. io. 2. Cp. Sanhedrin, f. 18. i; Baba Mezia, f. 107. 2.
Cp. the (rather coarse) equivalent Latin proverb : ' Papulas observatis alienas obsiti
plurimis ulceribus.' Seneca, De vit. beata, 27 "Vobis autem vacat aliena scrutari
mala, et sententias ferre de quoquam?... Papulas, etc." Hor. Sat. I. iii. 73 "Qui ne
tuberibus propriis offendat amicum postulat, ignoscet verrucis illius."
4 &4>es txpdXu (=L. vi. 42). Cp. M. xxvii. 49 ( = Mk xv. 36 dipere). Arrian,
Epict, Diss. I. ix. 15 dipes Sell-upev : I. xv. 7 4>es dvB-^ay: II. xviii. 24, and III. xii.
15 dipes tSu. Dr W. F. Moulton (Winer, Gr. p. 356) compares the Modern Greek
ds with subjunctive as used for the first or third person of the imperative, in such
phrases as as ypdibupev. [For SiapX(<peis, ver. 5, cp. Mk viii. 25.]
6 See on v. 22 above, p. 100. 6 vi. 2, 5, 16. 7 See above, p. 148.

222 THE CHURCH IN THE WORLD
2. While however the spirit of exclusiveness, which mani
fests itself in supercilious judgment on others, is thus forbidden
for members of the Kingdom of God, there is a counter-warning
which is no less necessary. If the profession of religion is no
longer to be regarded as the special prerogative of a privileged
caste, — and in this sense the Jews, from their experience of the
Pharisaic standard, would most readily understand the pro
hibition of judging, — it does not therefore follow that all
discretion is to be cast aside, or that all men are to be treated on
an equal footing ; so that the most sacred features of the New
Covenant may be published indiscriminately to the world at
large. The Gospel of the Kingdom is indeed proclaimed for
all : but it is only to those who accept the call with an open heart
that the deeper truths can be unfolded. They only can receive
' grace for grace 1.' Careless, not to say scoffing, hearers are
incapable of entering into the fuller revelation : nor could it be
declared to them without risk of irreverence. There must be
always, in the very nature of the case, an esoteric doctrine for
the faithful. That is a necessary condition of the Kingdom of
God on earth.
There came a time in our Lord's own ministry, — and that,
apparently, at no great interval after the delivery of the
Sermon on the Mount, — when this distinction between the
different classes of His hearers became so marked that He
Himself turned from His former clear and open teaching, which
He had hitherto been accustomed to give, even in His public
addresses, and adopted the somewhat cryptic method of teach
ing by parables. " Unto you," He said to His disciples, in
explanation of this change, " it is given to know the mysteries of
the Kingdom of heaven ; but to them it is not given... Therefore
speak I to them in parables2." It was not however merely with
reference to the circumstances of His own immediate mission
that our Lord now spoke of this precaution. The need of a
watchful and reverent reserve about sacred things belongs at all
times to the life of the members of the Kingdom in their
contact with the world. It is involved in their environment.
1 x^-P1" dvrl xdpiros, J. i. 16.
2 M. xiii. n, 13.

ST MATT. VII. 6 223
And therefore it naturally finds its place in this initial summary
of the Gospel of the Kingdom.
i. The form in which this truth is declared, in proverbial,
and almost symbolic, terms, was peculiarly adapted to appeal to
the perceptions of a Jewish audience. The expressions used
would convey to them a most emphatic picture of desecration.
For to ay tov represents &P>1, ' the holy thing1 ' : used technically
of the meat offered in sacrifice, of which no unclean person, or
stranger, was allowed to partake2. On the other hand ' dogs,'
the wild scavengers of the streets3, were to the Jews the
symbol of all that was unclean and abominable4 ; and so the
term became one of reproach: " For dogs have compassed me;
the assembly of evildoers have inclosed me5." " Among the
Jews of the Christian era it was a common designation of the
Gentiles, involving chiefly the idea of ceremonial impurity6 " :
just as it is applied by Mohammedans to Christians in the
present day. And other references in the New Testament to
this application serve to show that it lies at the back of the use
of the expression here. Thus our Lord's words to the Greek
Syro-Phenician woman, apparently taking up the muttered
remonstrance of His disciples, — "it is not meet to take the
children's bread and cast it to the dogs," — are explained by His
first saying to her, " I was not sent but unto the lost sheep of the
house of Israel'." So St Paul casts back the term upon the
Jews themselves in his vindication of Christian liberty : " Beware
of the dogs, beware of the evil workers, beware of the con
cision8." Compare the saying of R. Elieser9 : " Whosoever eats
with an idolater is the same as if he ate with a dog. For who is
a dog ? He who is not circumcised. So also is an idolater who
is not circumcised." When then our Lord spoke of giving the
sacred sacrificial meat to dogs, like any beast-torn flesh10, it not
1 e.g., Lev. xxii. 14; frequently in plur. CgHjjrt, e.g., Lev. xxii. 3.
2 See Lev. xxii. s 1 K. xiv. 11 ; Jer. xv. 3.
4 Cp- Deut. xxiii. 18. 5 Ps. xxii. 16.
6 Bp. Lightfoot, on Phil. iii. 2. 7 M. xv. 26, 24.
8 ri\v xaraTopyii, elsewhere used of heathen mutilations ; not, T^y irepirop-^v. Phil.
iii. 2.
9 Pirkc derabbi Elieser, 29.
10 Cp. Exod. xxii. 31 "And ye shall be holy men unto me: therefore ye shall not
eat any flesh that is torn of beasts in the field ; ye shall cast it to the dogs."

224 THE CHURCH IN THE WORLD
only called up, in its literal aspect, a vision of sacrilege which
would inspire the utmost horror; but it was also easily in
telligible as referring to the communication of holy things to
those outside the Covenant.
It is interesting to note that the expression rd dyia was
adopted by the Christian Church, and applied, in the liturgical
phrase rd dyia rois dylois, to the elements used in the
Eucharist1. This transference must have taken place quite early,
to judge by the curious interpretation in the Didache2 of this
saying of our Lord : " Let no one eat or drink of your
Eucharist, except those baptised into the Name of the Lord : for
in regard to this the Lord hath said : Give not that which is holy
to the dogs."
ii. The other proverbial saying, which forms the second
member of the parallelism, — ' Neither cast your pearls before the
swine,' — conveys a closely similar meaning. For it represents
the debasement of the true wisdom which must result when it is
submitted to the unclean who are unfit to receive it. In this also
use is made of terms which were constantly applied by the
Jews in a metaphorical sense.
Pearls, as being the most costly of valuables (this is implied
in the Parable of the Pearl of great price3), in the Rabbinic
writings represent the precious sayings of the great teachers4, —
' gems of wisdom.' " There was a pearl in the mouth of Abai :
Let a man ever be provident in the fear of God6." " There is a
goodly pearl in your hands ; but ye would hide it and grudge it
to me6." And swine were of course an abomination to the Jews.
1 Cp. Cyr. Hieros., Catech. Mystag. v. 19 perd ravra Xiyei b lepebs' rd dyia rois
dylois. dyia rd irpoxelpeva, iimpolryaiv Sefcdpeva 'Ayiov TLvebparos. ayioi xal bpets,
IlvebpaTos 'Ayiov xara^vuBivres.
2 ix. 5-
8 M. xiii. 45, 46. Cp. Rev. xxi. 21. Cp. Plin. N.H. ix. 35 "Principium ergo
culmenque omnium rerum pretii margaritae tenent."
4 "Die Talmudisten pflegen eine richtige Idee, einenschonen Gedankeneine Perle
(KlVJinD) zu nennen." Wiinsche. Cox, Comm. on Job, p. 410 quotes from the Arab
historian Al-Makkari's History of the Mohammedan Dynasties of Spain; "We had
laboured hard on the history of Andalus...we had... collected a. sufficient number of
unique pearls to bewitch the mind of the reader."
6 Berachoth, f. 17. 1. « Chagiga, f. 3. 1.

ST MATT. VII. 6 225
There is nothing indeed in the Old Testament1 to account for
this detestation. The mere prohibition of eating swine's flesh,
as unclean2, is not a sufficient cause in itself. The flesh of other
animals was also forbidden ; which however were not for that
reason regarded with particular abhorrence. Nor are there any
allusions to such an attitude towards swine to be found in the
Old Testament. But after Antiochus Epiphanes had utilised
swine's flesh as one of the instruments of his religious persecu
tion, commanding it to be offered by the Jews in sacrifice3, and
endeavouring to compel the faithful to eat it4, and so to profane
their Law, it was stamped for all time with the brand of
abomination. According to the tradition of the Jews the
prohibition even of the keeping of swine, which was enforced by
a curse6, was connected with the Maccabean times6. This
probably accounts for the curious insertion by the Septuagint of
al ves in addition to ot Kvves in I Kings xx. (xxi.) 19, and xxii.
38. It is a reflection of the current opinion, or prejudice, of the
era in which the translation was made ; but it is not in accord
ance with the state of feeling of the time when the words were
spoken, or even when the book was composed. It is not only an
interpolation, it is an anachronism.
It has been maintained by some commentators7 that Kara-
irarrjaovaiv9 refers to the swine, and prjgwatv9 to the dogs ; by
the figure known as chiasmus. But the sequence of the
1 Prov. xi. 22 "As a ring of gold in a swine's snout, so is a fair woman which is
without discretion," is no more than a simple comparison, with no special emphasis on
the 'swine.'
2 Lev. xi. 7, 8; Deut. xiv. 8. Cp. Philo, De Leg. ad C, 45 iirel Se (via tuv
irepl ras oUoSopds Sierdl-aTO, piyiarov xal aepvbv ipurypa -ypdira, Aid rl xoipeluv xpeuv
dirtxeoBe; xrX.
3 1 Mace. i. 47. 4 11 Mace. vi. 18; vii. 1.
5 Baba Kamma, f. 82. 2.
6 See Edersheim, Life and Times, etc., ii. 260.
* Cp. Theophylact, arparptvres p-fiHuaiv ol xbves SyXaS-h, ¦ perdBeais ydp tuv Xbyuv,
uairep (v np,"Oare rbv rvipXbv xal xuipbv xal XaXeiv xal pkiireiv [M. xii. 22]. Juvencus,
i. 671 "conversique canes vos vulnere rumpent."
8 For the implied metaphorical use of /coTOTTOTeii', cp. Arrian, Epict., Diss. I. viii.
10 irdvras robs \6yous tovtovs xara-irar-^aas.
9 The particular use of pipsaeiv which occurs here does not seem to be found else
where. It probably represents SOtp, for which dpirdfctv is the usual equivalent in the
LXX (avvrpipeiv, Deut. xxxiii. 20).
8. 15

226 THE CHURCH IN THE WORLD
sentence, and the actual expressions used, alike confirm the
reference of both verbs to the swine.
3. The paragraph about persistent prayer which immediately
follows presents considerable difficulty, as placed in this setting.
There is no passage in the whole Sermon, as reported by St
Matthew, which seems more evidently, at first sight, to be
extraneous to the subject of its context. It readily lends itself
to the supposition that it is an incongruous insertion, in this
connexion, of teaching which was given by our Lord on some
other occasion.
But if this be the case, — if, that is, these words had no place
originally in the Sermon on the Mount, — it still affords no
solution of the problem of their inclusion in the record of it, to say
that their " presence here seems fortuitous, since [they stand] in
no topical association with [their] context1." Such an impression
may be very natural : but the mere statement of it is not a
sufficient justification for setting aside the impression of the
Evangelist. It fails to offer any reason why he considered these
clauses apposite to the course of the argument. And this he
clearly must have done, or he would not have written them in
here. The context in which our Lord's words are reported by
the Evangelists (whether those words were actually spoken on
the particular occasion with which they are associated, or not)
often suggests a valuable clue to the interpretation which they
themselves placed upon them2. And it is obvious that they were
in possession of exceptional opportunities for an accurate
judgment in such matters. This section therefore not only
requires detailed examination in itself, but even more urgently
calls for some attempt to ascertain what is the underlying
association of ideas by which it is linked in with this portion of
the discourse.
1 Prof. Votaw, in Hast. D.B. v. 41 b.
2 Cp. Rev. A. T. Burbridge, Expositor, vi. ii. 285 "If certain passages were
gathered in one group, then there must have been something in their contents to
warrant it.. ..Thus a fourfold Gospel, in which some of the sayings of Jesus occur in
different connections, is a help unto the interpretation of those sayings rather than a
hindrance. It gives not only the historical context, but also, indirectly, the interpreta
tion of the early Christian Church."

ST MATT. VII. 7 — 11 227
Now no one can doubt, nor has any one been found to doubt,
that ' The Golden Rule ' of verse 1 2 is an integral part of the
original Sermon. It is a summary of all its ethical teaching.
And it finds a fitting place in the heart of that division which
treats of the life of ' The Church in the World ' ; as setting forth
in one comprehensive aphorism the right principle of conduct, in
the bearing of members of the Kingdom towards others. But
if it followed immediately after the admonition about due
reserve in respect of holy things (verse 6), the transition would
be so abrupt as to be practically unintelligible. There is no
apparent connexion between the attitude of reverent caution
and the attitude of generous altruism. Some intervening link is
required. And this is supplied by St Matthew's report of the
Sermon, as it stands. For it introduces a sequence of argument
which brings the two positions into relationship with each other.
It is probable that the whole difficulty of the apparent in
congruity of these two sayings is simply due to the extreme
condensation of a lengthy discourse ; in which the heads only
are given, without the intermediate steps. These would be clear
enough at the time in the full speech; and clear enough also
afterwards in the minds of those who had heard it delivered.
An endeavour to reconstitute these steps must of course be
somewhat precarious. But where help can be gained from other
passages in the Gospels, at least a reasonable probability may be
attained. The situation then is this. Our Lord has sketched the
picture of the true members of the Kingdom, in their ' conversa
tion ' among men. They, knowing their own weakness, must not
be censorious : and yet, knowing also the sacredness of their
Faith, they must not vulgarise it. They are forbidden to be
exclusive in spirit : and yet they are bidden to be exclusive in
practice. The seeming contradiction between these two maxims
could not but forcibly arrest the attention of the hearers. They
found themselves brought face to face with a demand for the
constant exercise of a discrimination which was altogether too
fine and perplexing for them.
Now the collocation of the challenge to prayer with the bare
statement of this dilemma seems to indicate that the purpose
15—2

228 THE CHURCH IN THE WORLD
was to convey the answer to it; — the explanation that the
' right judgment ' in such matters can only be obtained through
prayer for guidance. That this is so is, in fact, true to spiritual
experience : and that is a factor which cannot be entirely
ignored in estimating the purport of any difficult sayings in the
New Testament. Moreover the way in which this point is
stated is also true to our Lord's method of teaching. For it
was His practice in the first instance simply to lay down a
general principle. Then at subsequent opportunities, as His
disciples grew in their capacity for understanding fuller revelation,
He returned to and developed the same truth with clearer
definition. Thus, in the case of this proposition, He again took
up the same problem in His instructions to the Twelve : " Behold
I send you forth as sheep in the midst of wolves : be ye therefore
wise as serpents (' Give not that which is holy etc.'), and harmless
as doves ('Judge not')... But when they deliver you up, be not
anxious how or what ye shall speak. For it is not ye that speak,
but the Spirit of your Father that speaketh in you1." And
again later, in His final charge in the Upper Room, He at last
gave the fulness of the promise : " Because ye are not of the
world, but I chose you out of the world, therefore the world
hateth you... These things I said not unto you from the
beginning... Howbeit when He, the Spirit of truth, is come, He
shall guide you into all the truth2." That this was the reference
which was understood by the Apostolic Church to be implied in
the general terms of the teaching about prayer in this passage,
is shown by the fact that when St Luke quotes it (though in
a different setting3) he reads into it the interpretation which
later knowledge had applied to it. Instead of the simple phrase,
' shall your Father which is in heaven give good things to them
that ask Him,' he substitutes, ' shall your heavenly Father give
the Holy Spirit to them that ask Him.'
These then are later instances of our Lord's instructions
upon the very point now under discussion, the position and
attitude of members of the Kingdom in relation to the outside
world. And they were given in fuller detail, because they were
addressed to those who by their receptiveness and their training
were best able to grasp their import. The analogy therefore of
1 M. x. 16, 19, 20. 2 J. xv. 19; xvi. 4, 13. s L. xi. 9—13.

ST MATT. VII. 7 — 12 229
the subsequent teaching strongly suggests that the same
connexion between counsels of conduct and counsels of prayer,
which is manifest in them, also obtains here between the earlier
precepts of this division and the prayer section : only that in the
Sermon the statement is simpler and less defined. By Divine
guidance alone, is its meaning, can the right adjustment of two
apparently conflicting injunctions be realised.
And further, this association also explains how the directions
about prayer prepare the way for the enunciation of the central
law of social conduct which follows them. It effectively bridges
over the wide gap which would otherwise exist between verses
6 and 12 ; between the rule of caution and the rule of generosity.
It gives a meaning to the ovv by which the latter is introduced.
In the power which God will give to them that ask Him, it is
possible to rise to the highest standard of all in behaviour
towards others ; a standard that transcends all negative limita
tions of partial prohibitions, and is expressed in one all-embracing
positive ideal : " All things therefore whatsoever ye would that1
men should do unto you, even so do ye also unto them."
i. The triple call to prayer is in an ascending scale : ask, in
direct request, voicing the actual needs of the moment ; seek,
with corresponding personal effort ; knock, in patient persistence.
At each step the promise of an answer is attached. And then
the whole series is repeated over again, with a rare emphasis, in
the form of assurance that every prayer so pressed is in fact
answered. And this is further enforced by an a fortiori
argument, based upon the instinctive response of a human
father to his children's requests. ' No father2 would give his
child a stone3 if asked for bread, or a serpent instead of fish.
1 BtXyre fra...( = L. vi. 31). So Mk vi. 25; ix. 30; x. 35; J. xvii. 24; I Cor. xiv.
5. Arrian, Epict., Diss., I. xviii. 14 ; 11. vii. 8; in. iv. 7. Cp. the Mod. Gk vd with
subj. as a periphrasis for inf. (WM. p. 422).
2 The composite sentence in ver. 9 is not a confusion of two questions [so, Winer,
p. 643] ; but it is the negative form (with pi) of the construction which is clear
enough when stated positively (with ob) in M. xii. 1 1 Tis (arai ti bpuv dvBpuiros 8s
((ei irpbparov (v, xal (dv ipirtoy rovro rois adppaaiv els pbBvvov, obxl xparijaei abrb
xal iyepei;
a Cp. Plaut. Aul. 11. ii. 18 "Altera manu fert lapidem, panem ostentat altera."
Sen. De Benef. ii. 7 " Fabius beneficium ab homine duro aspere datum panem lapido-
sum vocabat."

230 THE CHURCH IN THE WORLD
Yet men are by nature grudging1. How then can ye doubt the
heavenly Father's readiness to meet the pleadings of His
children with good gifts according to their needs ? ' The bread
and the fish are of course instanced as a homely illustration from
the staple foods of Galilee2.
ii. The so-called ' Golden Rule ' of verse 12 might be largely
illustrated from the literature of all countries and of all ages.
At any rate in the negative form, it was a familiar maxim. And
it was not unknown to the Jews. In the Talmud there is a
story of the different treatment accorded by Shammai and by
Hillel to an enquirer8. " A certain Gentile came to Shammai,
and said, Make me a proselyte, that I may learn the whole Law,
standing upon one foot. Shammai beat him with the staff that
was in his hand. He went to Hillel, and he made him a
proselyte, and said, That which is odious to thyself, do it not to
thy neighbour : for this is the whole Law." It is possible that
our Lord's words, ' For this is the Law and the Prophets,' allude
to this tradition as a well-known story of the great spiritual
leader of the preceding generation. But the maxim, in its
negative form, goes back farther than that. The earliest
occurrence of the motto in Jewish literature is in Tobit4 : " What
thou hatest, do to no man." The recollection of this saying
in Tobit seems to have influenced the form in which the precept
passed into early Christian writings ; as, for instance, in the
Western additions to the decrees of the Apostolic Council of
Jerusalem : " And whatsoever they do not wish to be done to
them, not to do that to others5 " ; " And whatsoever ye do not
wish to be done to yourselves, do not ye to another' " : or in the
Didache : " And all things whatsoever thou wouldest not have
done to thee, neither do thou unto another7."
1 irovypbs here seems to have, as at vi. 23 (see above, p. 200), the special sense
of ' mean.' Cp. Ecclus. xiv. 5 0 irovypbs (avTt#,Tlvi dyaBbs (orat; xal ob py ebQpavBii-
aerai iv rois xpiP-aaiv avrov.
2 Cp. the two miracles of feeding the multitudes ; M. xiv. 19 ; xv. 36. Cp. J. xxi. 13.
3 Bab. Shabbath, f. 31. 1.
4 iv. 15 8 piaeis pySevl iron)ays.
6 [A.] xv. 20 xal Saa dv py BtXuaiv iavrdis ylveoBai (ripois py iroieXv (D iroirfrs).
6 [A.] xv. 29 xal oaa py Btkere iavrdis ylveoBai tripu py iroieire.
' § 1 irdvra St baa (dv 8eki)ays py ylveoBai aoi, xal ab SXXu py irolei.

ST MATT. VII. 12 231
It is evident however that our Lord's statement of the
principle in the positive form goes much deeper than the usual
negative form. And the difference is distinctive of His teaching.
But it is not quite accurate to say that this maxim is only found
in the negative form elsewhere1, though the positive is of course
rare. It occurs, for example, in one of the sayings of Aristotle,
quoted by Diogenes Laertius2: "Being asked how we should
behave to our friends, he answered, As we should desire them to
behave to us " : — and again in Seneca3 : " The question remains,
In what manner should a boon be given ? On this point I think
I shall show the readiest way ; If we give as we should wish to
receive." Finally, this ideal is declared to be no new and strange
principle, but the actual motive of all the teaching of the Law
and the Prophets4 : the ethical goal of the whole revelation of
the Old Testament ; which Christ had come not to annul, but to
fulfil5. Once more, in one of its most characteristic features, the
Gospel of the Kingdom is proclaimed as a direct development
of what had gone before.
1 Hast. D.B. v. 42 n. " Not negatively, as it everywhere else appears."
2 V. xi. 21 (pwryBels irus dv rois iplXots irpoaipepolpeBa, ((py, (is dv eb^alpeBa abrobs
ypiv irpoaiptpeaBai. But this reciprocity is limited to 'friends.' Cp. above, v. 46.
8 De Benef. ii. 1 "Superest, quemadmodum dandum sit beneficium? Cujiis rei
expeditissimam videor monstraturus viam : Si demus, quomodo vellemus accipere."
4 Cp. on v. 17, above, p. 90. For the construction with iarlv (sing.), cp. on vi.
19, p. 198.

ST MATT. VII. 13—29.
EilaeXdare Sid rfjs arevfjs trvXrjs' on trXarela r) irvXrj xal
evpvxwpos rj bSbs r) dirdyovaa els rrjv dtrooXeiav, xal iroXXol elatv
ol elaepxbfievoi Si' avrrjs' on arevr) r) irvXrj xal redXi/ipevij rj
bSbs rj dirdyovaa els rrjv %wrjv, xal bXiyoi eialv ol evplaKOvres
avrrjv. Hpoaexere dirb rwv TjrevSoirpoa^rjrwv, o'lnves epxovrat
irpbs vpds iv ivSvpaatv trpofddrwv, eawdev Be elatv Xvkoi dpirayes.
dirb twi/ xapirwv avrwv itrtyvcoaeade avrovs- firjn avXXeyovaiv
dirb dxavdwv aTa<j>vXds rj diro rpif3oXwv avxa ; ovrws irav BevBpov
dyadbv xapiroiis xaXovs iroiel, to Be aatrpov BevBpov xapirovs
irovrjpovs iroiel. ov Bvvarai BevBpov dyadbv xapirovs trovrjpovs
iroielv, ovBe BevBpov aairpbv Kapirovs KaXovs iroielv. irav
BevBpov fir) iroiovv xapirbv KaXbv iKKotrrerai xal els trvp f3dXXerai.
apaye dirb tow xapirwv avrwv itrtyvwaeade avrovs. Ov irds b
\e7aw ^101 Kvpie Kvpie elaeXevaerai els rrjv fSaaiXelav rwv
ovpavwv, dXX' b troiwv rb deXrjpa rov trarpbs fiov rov iv rois
ovpavois. iroXXol ipovalv poi iv ixeivy rrj rjjiepa Kvpie Kvpie,
ov rw aw bvbpari itrpotjyrjrevaafiev, xal rw aw bvbpari Saifibvia
itjefSaXq/iev, xal t«5 aw bvbpari Bvvdfieis iroXXds iiroirjaapev ; xal
rbre bpoXoyrjaw avrois on ovBeirore e7i>(i)f v/ids ' airoxwpelre air
epov ol ipya£bpxvot rrjv dvopiav.
Has oiv bans dxovet fiov roiis Xbyovs tovtovs xal iroiel
avrovs, bpotwdrjaerai dvBpl rppovipw, bans WKoBofirjaev avrov
rrjv olxlav iirl rrjv trerpav. xal xarefdrj r) fSpoxv xal rjXdov ol
irorafiol ical eirvevaav ol dvep.01 xal trpoaetreaav rrj olxia, iKeivrj,

xal ovx etreaev' redep,eXlwro yap iirl rrjv irerpav. xat irds b
axovwv pov tou? Xbyovs rovrovs xal fir) troiwv avrovs bpotwdrjaerai
dvBpl pwpw, 'bans wxoSbpyrjaev avrov rrjv olxlav iirl rrjv dppov.
xal Karefirj rj fipoxv xal rjXdov ol irorafiol xal eirvevaav ol dvepoi
xal trpoaeKOip-av rrj olxla iKeivrj, xal etreaev, xal rjv r) trrwais
avrrjs p,eydXrj.
Kal iyivero ore iriXeaev b 'Irjaovs roiis Xbyovs rovrovs,
if-etrXrjaaovro ol o^\ot eVt T17 StSaxf) avrov' rjv yap BiSdaxwv
avrovs <»5 igovaiav ey/ov, xal ovx *? ot' 7/><W«Tet? avrwv.

IX. TRUE DISCIPLESHIP.
The standard of conduct which our Lord had laid down for
members of the Kingdom of God was in startling contrast to
the preconceived notions of the Jews concerning the Messianic
Kingdom. It seemed to offer no privilege, but only to press
responsibility. It made unexpected demands of self-sacrifice on
the part of those who should accept the terms of membership.
It repeated the high claims of the Beatitudes, with which the
address had opened. It was inevitable therefore that such an
exalted ideal must suggest the doubt, — How could a Theocracy
formed on a basis of this kind ever be a popular religion ? How
could it ever attract the mass of the people ? Who could be
' sufficient for these things1 ' ? And so the hearers seemed to be
thrown back again after all on the dispiriting prospect of
another esoteric system for the select righteous only.
I. In meeting this perplexity the Lord does not put it aside,
but implicitly acknowledges the difficulty. He recognises, and
even clearly, foretells, the limited measure of acceptance with
which the Gospel of the Kingdom would be received. It could
not be a popular movement, in the ordinary acceptance of the
idea. One of the Woes which St Luke attaches to the Beati
tudes emphasises this warning : " Woe unto you, when all men
shall speak well of you2!" for that is the mark of the 'false
prophets.' Accordingly the appeal is made to the universal law
of religious experience, that there are comparatively few who
avail themselves of spiritual opportunities, or will face arduous
service. This law our Lord afterwards, at the end of His
ministry, again applied to the ultimate issue of His Gospel of
1 II Cor. ii. 16. s L. vi. 26.

236 TRUE DISCIPLESHIP
the Kingdom of heaven ; when He declared that " Many are
called, but few chosen1." Now, at this preliminary stage, He
states it in the form of the pictorial metaphor of the Broad and
the Narrow Way.
The terms in which it is sketched were already familiar.
For 'the way of life (^.OU IT?)' and 'the way of death (f>W> IT?)'
are contrasted by Jeremiah2: "And unto this people thou shalt say,
Thus saith the Lord ; Behold, I set before you the way of life and
the way of death." And the expressions ' the way of life,' and
'the path C"0N) of life,' are not infrequently found in the Old
Testament3. But Dalman points out4 that 'the way that leadeth
to' is not an Old Testament manner of speech. He quotes
however from post-biblical Jewish literature, The Apocalypse of
Baruch (lxxxv. 13), "the way of the fire, the path which leads to
Gehinnom " ; and the Midrash Bereshith Rabba (9), " Which way
is it that leads to the life of the age to come ? " The phrase
was probably imported from the Greek idiom bSbs ayet* (or,
more usually, cpepei) els.
The idea of ' the two ways ' is of frequent occurrence,
especially in post-Christian literature. Thus it is found in the
Didache6, in the Epistle of Barnabas7, and in the Shepherd of
Hermas8; in the Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs9, in the
Secrets of Enoch10, and in the Sibylline Oracles11; also in Philo12;
and in Lucian13. It is most unlikely, to say the least, that all
these references can have issued from the Gospel saying: it is
a more reasonable supposition that the notion was a well-known
proverbial commonplace.
But when our Lord adopted it He probably pointed to the
local illustration of Safed14, which was in sight, perched upon its
rock 2700 feet above the sea level. If this were so, it would
explain the almost abrupt introduction of the paragraph, ' Enter
ye in by the narrow gate.' The scene before them furnished a
graphic illustration : the phraseology was familiar : and the
1 M. xxii. 2, 14. 2 xxi. 8. 3 e.g. Prov. vi. 23; Ps. xvi. 11.
* p. 160, "The Old Testament never contemplates a way as 'leading' to some
destination." 5 dirdyeiv apparently here only. " i. 1. 7 § 18. 8 Mand. vi. 1.
9 Asher, 1. 10 xxx. 15. u viii. 399. 12 De Agric. Noe, 23.
13 Rhetorum Praeceptor, §§ 7, 8. 14 Cp. v. £4, p. 80.

ST MATT. VII. 13, 14 237
picture was applied to the special problem under consideration.
For the different characteristics of the two ways are described
as they present themselves to the natural inclinations of men ;
the one is spacious1, and leading to the broad gate; the other
compressed2, and leading to the narrow gate3. And the conclu
sion is drawn that the many pass along the easy way that leads
to perdition, while few even find the arduous one that leads to
life. It is an exposition of the simile of Jeremiah in the light of
every day experience.
2. But there was a risk lest this teaching might tend to
drive the hearers back again still more upon the Pharisees and
their system. jFor the Jews had been taught by their religious
leaders to identify the service of God with a formal obedience to
'prescribed regulations ; so rigorous that proficiency in them was
impossible except for a limited number of leisured experts. And
it was extremely difficult for them in any case to divest them
selves of this idea. When therefore they were told of the new
Theocracy that it would be accessible only to the few, and could
never be expected to command general acceptance as a popular
cause, they might naturally conclude that it was after all to be
merely a repetition, or even an aggravation, of the existing state
of things, under another form ; and so surrender themselves, in
their desperation, more completely than before to the dominance
of the Pharisaic party.
The danger of the results of such a misconception is met by
the warning against4 false prophets. This title is of course
applied not to the Pharisees alone, but to the whole class of
self-constituted religious dictators, of which the Pharisees were
the existing representatives. Thus it was they whom our Lord
1 to ebpvx<opov I (in) Esdr. v. 47; ix. 6, 38, 41, of the broad open court by the
gate of the temple : 11 Chr. xviii. 9, of the open space by a city gate.
2 reBXippivy, cp. pX-1D, Job xxxvi. 16 (and xxxvii. 10).
3 Cp. the well-known description in the Tablet of Cebes, xv., of the small door
and the rough road, which is travelled by few, leading to the true learning.
4 irpootxerc dirb (M. x. 17 ; xvi. 6, 11, 12 ; L. xx. 46; Ecclus. vi. 13; xi. 33 ; xvii.
14; xviii. 27) is a Hebraism, representing (the Niph. of) "IDE> with JO. So ipopeioBai
dirb (M. *. 28 = L. xii. 4; LXX e.g. Jer. i. 8) = |D NT : though the construction is
not uncongenial to Greek ; cp. the analogy of tpvXdrreoBai dirb, Xen. Cyr. II. iii. 9 ;
Hell. vn. ii. 10; (L. xii. 15).

238 TRUE DISCIPLESHIP
afterwards specifically described as " blind guides of the blind1."
The wider reference here however to a general type is made
clear by a comparison with the later warnings of the great
eschatological discourse: "Take heed that no man lead you
astray. For many shall come in my Name, saying, I am the
Christ; and shall lead many astray... For there shall arise false
Christs and false prophets, and shall shew great signs and
wonders2 ; so as to lead astray, if possible, even the elect'."
These false prophets are symbolically depicted as coming
' in sheep's clothing ' : that is, as though with the insignia of the
prophets of the Old Covenant, asserting a claim to an equal
authority with them. So Zechariah writes of similar deceivers
in his day4 : " It shall come to pass in that day, that the
prophets shall be ashamed every one of his vision, when he
prophesieth ; neither shall they wear a hairy mantle (Vj& nT3^) to
deceive " : in allusion to the mantle (n7J^, LXX prjXwrrj) of
Elijah5, and of Elisha6, which was regarded as the peculiar
badge of a prophet. But the semblance of a sheep, in any form,
is no true symbolism of their character : rather they are compared
to 'ravening wolves,' like the Xi!«ot dpird£ovres dpirdypara, the false
self-seeking princes, in Ezekiel7 : " Her princes in the midst there
of are like wolves ravening the prey; to shed blood, and to
destroy souls, that they may get dishonest gain." The same
simile was used, perhaps in reminiscence of the tradition of our
Lord's words, by St Paul in his farewell address to the Presbyters
of Ephesus at Miletus8 : " I know that after my departing
grievous wolves shall enter in among you, not sparing the flock ;
and from among your own selves shall men arise, speaking
perverse things, to draw away the disciples after them."
\ The test of a prophet under the Old Dispensation was the
\ witness borne by the issue of events to the truth of his message :
' " When a prophet speaketh in the Name of the LORD, if the
I Uhing follow not, nor come to pass, that is the thing which the

' » LORD hath not spoken : the prophet hath spoken it pre-

1 M. xv. 14. 2 Cp. below, vii. 22.
3 M. xxiv. 4, 5, 24. 4 xiii. 4.
5 I K. ix. 13, 19. 6 11 K. ii. 8, 13, 14.
7 xxii. 27. 8 A. xx. 29, 30.

ST MATT. VII. 15 — 20 239
sumptuously ; thou shalt not be afraid of him1." Now, for the
New Covenant, our Lord points to the more significant evidence
of the prophet's own life. It is no longer a mere question of
accuracy in prediction, but it goes much deeper; it is the
searching criterion of the teacher's own character : " By their
fruits ye shall know them." In this, as throughout the Sermon,
character is treated as the primary consideration.
And the practical nature of this test is illustrated by the
analogy of plants. Thorns and thistles' cannot bear wholesome
grapes and figs : but the general law holds good in nature that the
fruitage corresponds to the character of the plant which bears
it. And the statement of this law has given to it all the
emphasis of the directly contrasted parallelism of a positive
followed by an exactly corresponding negative proposition3.
The reference to the 'fruits' of a life appears to be an allusion to
the earlier teaching of John the Baptist : " Bring forth therefore
fruit worthy of repentance4." For his words are certainly in
view in this section. The sentence, " Every tree that bringeth
not forth good fruit is hewn down and cast into the fire," is
a verbatim quotation of one of his sayings8. And the para
graph closes with the repetition of the original standard of
judgment with which it opened : " Therefore by their fruits ye
shall know them." This reiteration of the initial clause at the
end of a passage is an unusual feature : it challenges special
attention to the importance of the direction given by it.
In the contrast between a fruitful and an unfruitful tree, the
latter (not its fruit) is described as aairpbv. This word is
translated literally, 'corrupt,' both in the A.V. and in the R.V.
But it is more than questionable whether the literal meaning is
applicable at all in this case. In fact the phrase in English
'a corrupt tree,' apart from its association with this passage,
would be quite unintelligible. It certainly would not convey the
impression of a tree that still shows every outward appearance
of vigorous life, though failing in fruitage. And that is the
1 Deut. xviii. 22.
2 dxavBai xal rpipoXoi (=T!TI1 ftp) are similarly associated, Gen. iii. 18 ; Hos. *.
8; Heb. vi. 8.
3 See on vi. 14, 15 ; p. 185. * M. iii. 8. 5 M. iii. 10.

240 TRUE DISCIPLESHIP
picture which the whole context here sketches, as referring to
those who, from their own profession, are mistaken for true
spiritual guides : as it is the basis also of the lesson imparted by
the illustrative miracle of the Barren Fig-tree1, in the last great
week of our Lord's ministry. If the literal sense of aatrpbv were
intended here, it could only be by a kind of confusion between
the outward symbol and the thing signified ; much in the same
way that St Paul's reference to the human body in I Cor. xii.
12 — 27 is conditioned largely by the constantly underlying
thought of the body corporate of the Church which it represents ;
and apart from which much of his description of the physical
frame would be irrelevant. But this cannot really be supposed
to be even a possible interpretation, aairpbv then must be used
in a secondary sense, with no suggestion of actual 'decay,' but
with the general meaning of 'unsound,' 'unsatisfactory,' 'useless2.'
The word occurs again, later on in St Matthew's Gospel, in what
is practically a repetition of this saying3, where it is attached
both to BevBpov |and to Kapirbs* : and in the parable of the
Drag-net5, where obviously rd aairpd cannot refer to ' decayed '
fish taken out of the net. It is not found in the Septuagint in
this sense ; but it is used in the Greek ' Samaritan ' version
of Lev. xxvii. 14, to represent *Q, of a house6, as opposed to
KaXbs (2iD) : and Aquila renders B'HJ? in Is. v. 2 by aairpiai7.
3. i. From the caution against the misleading influence of
false prophets, the Lord passes on to come nearer home to the
enquirers themselves, and to their own lives. For He adds
1 a warning against the greater danger which lies in the unreality
1 M. xxi. 18 — 20.
2 Lobeck (Phryn., p. 378) quotes Chrys., Horn. iv. in Ep. ad Tim., aairpbv
Xbxvov (irolyaas irpbs ryv iyKexeipiaptvyv BepairaivlSa del Xtyopev irav yap S py ryv
ISlav xpelav irXypol aairpbv Xtyopev. Dr J. H. Moulton (Expos. VI. vii. 1 19) quotes
Pap. B. U. 846 oairpus [i. q. alaxpus] iraipiiraru' a'iypa\pd aoi on yvpvbs elpei.
3 xii. 33 [cp. L. vi. 43].
4 Cp. Herm. Past., Sim. ii. 4 y apirekos xpepaptvy tirl ryv irreXiav rbv xapirby
irdXbv xal xdkbv SISuaiv, tppippAvy Si xaP.al aairpbv xal bXlyov iptpei.
6 xiii. 48.
6 Cp. the application of aairpbs to stones discarded as unfit for building, in Herm.
Past., Sim. ix. v. 2 ; vi. 4 : where it is translated by nugax in the Lat. vers, of Cod.
Pal. 7 LXX and Theod., dxavBai : Symm., dreXp. Jer., labruscae.

ST MATT. VII. 17 — 21 241
of a mere outward profession of discipleship, and nothing more.
A self-made claim of membership is no standard of acceptance1
in the Kingdom of God : not even if it be the expression of
a strong personal allegiance to the Master Himself. But the
only real criterion is the doing of the will of God. That
embraces all true loyalty and all true service.
This phrase looks back to the third petition of the Lord's
Prayer2. But in varying the reference to the Father which is in
heaven, — for now it is My, not your, Father, — our Lord implicitly
proclaims His mission as being from God in the establishment
of His Kingdom : as He declared openly in the later period of
His teaching, that He had ' come, not to do His own will, but the
will of Him that sent Him3.' The same phrase occurs again
afterwards in His repudiation of a narrowly human devotion to
Himself : " Whosoever shall do the will of my Father which is in
heaven, he is my brother, and sister, and mother4."
The title Kvpie (here duplicated in an impassioned address5)
in the Gospels is a general term of respectful address. It is
used, for instance, by stranger applicants for help6 ; and probably
in such cases represents the usual '"39. Indeed that the disciples
themselves used this simple term ordinarily seems to be implied
by the contrast between the repeated question of the eleven at
the Last Supper, Mrjn iyw elfii, Kvpie ; with the ostentatious
adoption by Judas of the more definite title, Mrjrt iyw elfii,
'Faf30ei7 ; There are indications however that Kiipie also some
times represents '32, even in St Matthew's Gospel ; when the
parallel phrases in St Mark are taken into account. Thus, in the
1 For the expression elaeXBeiv els ryv paotkelav, cp. M. v. 20 ; xviii. 3 (= Mk x.
15; L. xviii. 17); xix. 23 (=Mkx. 23, 24, 25; L. xviii. 24, 25); Mk ix. 47; J. iii. 5.
3 See above, pp. 167 — 170.
3 J. vi. 38 ; iv. 34 ; v. 30.
4 M. xii. 50. Notice the use of the phrase b Uary-p pov at M. x. 32, 33; xi. 27 ;
xx. 23; xxv. 34.
5 Cp. (L. vi. 46); M. xxv. n. So, "EnriaTdra, 'Biriardra, L. viii. 24. Cp. (in
reproach), MdpBa, MdpBa, L. x. 41 ; S,lpuv, Zlpuv, L. xxii. 31 ; SaobX, ZooiiX, A. ix.
4 (xxii. 7 ; xxvi. 14) ; 'IepovaaX-/jp, 'lepovoaXy-p., L. xiii. 34. So in O.T. emphasis is
similarly marked: Abraham, Abraham, Gen. xxii. 11; Moses, Moses, Exod. iii. 4;
Samuel, Samuel, 1 S. iii. 10.
6 Cp. M. viii. 2, 6, 8; ix. 28 ; xv. 22, 25, 27 ( = Mk vii. 28 ; the only instance in
Mk of this use); L. v. 12; etc.
7 M. xxvi. 23, 25.
8. 16

\

242 TRUE DISCIPLESHIP
story of the Transfiguration St Peter's suggestion, Kvpie, xaXbv
ianv rjpds wBe elvai1, is given by St Mark as, 'Pa/3f3el, xaXbv ianv
rjfids «3Se elvai2. Or again, the appeal of the disciples during the
storm on the Lake, Kiipie, awaov, diroXXvpeda", is in St Mark,
AiSdaxaXe, ov peXei aoi on diroXXvpieda ;* And Kvpie seems to
represent *?3 even in the mouth of a stranger on occasion ; for
St Mark attributes the address AtBdaxaXe to the father of the
demoniac boy at the foot of the Mount of Transfiguration5,
where St Matthew again has simply Kvpie". The fact seems to
be that the meaning of Kvpie itself is indeterminate in the
Gospels. It may be no more than the customary term of
courtesy (T?) ; or it may represent the more honourable title, by
which attached disciples addressed their recognised Teacher ('3D).
It is clearly in the latter sense that it should be understood here.
Nor is it strange that at so early a stage of His ministry our Lord
should publicly assume that He would be addressed as Rabbi.
For He was speaking not as a herald, but as the founder, of the
Kingdom of God ; as the great Teacher of the new doctrine.
But the word cannot be taken here as representing 'JIN.7. For
that belongs to the later use of the Apostolic Church, when our
Lord's Divinity was fully recognised. Then Kvpios as applied to
Him took on the special signification which it has in the
Septuagint as a Divine title (= ln¥)8 : and the old form of
address as Rabbi disappeared entirely from use after the
Ascension. But it is quite improbable that in the Sermon on
the Mount our Lord claimed the title fl"1? for Himself.
ii. Then the warning against unreality is carried yet one
step onward. From false prophets, the ' fruits ' of whose lives
belie their pretensions, and from mere professors of personal
allegiance to the Master, it passes on to the case of actual
workers in His Name, who yet in their own conduct are
' workers of iniquity.' At the same time the high claim which
has just been advanced in the phrase ' the will of My Father
1 M. xvii. 4. 2 Mk ix. 5. 3 M. viii. 25.
4 Mk iv. 38. Cp. J. i. 38 'Pappel, S ktyerat peBeppyvevbpevov AiSdoxdke.
5 Mk ix. 17. 6 M. xvii. 15.
7 As it is rendered by Delitzsch, and by Salkinson and Ginsburg ((HK).
s Cp. A. a. 30; I Cor. xii. 3.

ST MATT. VII. 21 — 23
which is in heaven,' is further unfolded. For our Lord openly
declares His authority of judgment. It has been objected that
this eschatological teaching could not have been given at all in
the Sermon on the Mount, but must belong to the closing
months of our Lord's ministry1. But long before this time the
Similitudes of Enoch had already popularised the idea that
judgment shall be committed to ' The Son of Man ' : " And He
sat on the throne of His glory, and the sum of judgment was
committed unto Him, the Son of Man, and He caused the
sinners and those who have led the world astray [cp. the false
prophets here] to pass away and be destroyed from off the face
of the earth2." Moreover exactly similar teaching, equally clear
and definite, is reported by St John to have been given by our
Lord at quite an early stage of His ministry : " For neither doth
the Father judge any man, but He hath given all judgment unto
the Son... He gave Him authority to execute judgment, because
He is Son of Man3." For while judgment there is partly
represented as being immediate, and carried into effect in this
life, it is at the same time closely connected throughout with the
future judgment at the Resurrection4. Here however, in the first
declaration of this authority, the statement is not so categorical ;
but the pronouncement of judgment is phrased in the simplest
possible form of a quotation from the Psalms : " Depart from
Me, ye that work iniquity5."
There is of course no doubt that the reference here is to the
last day. And it would at once be understood by those who
heard the discourse in that sense. For in that day was a
technical expression for the final judgment. It is found several
times in the New Testament : for example, in the sentence, " It
shall be more tolerable in that day (iv rrj rjpepa iKeivrj) for
Sodom," which is given by St Matthew as " in the day of judg
ment (iv rjfiepa xplaews)6." It corresponds to N-lfirj di»3 m js. j£.
II, 17. It is altogether a fitting climax to the Gospel of the
Kingdom to carry it on to its ultimate issue.
1 Hast. D.B. v. 43 b.
2 Enoch lxix. 27. Cp. also lv. 4; lxi. 8, 9; lxii. 2 — 11; lxiii. 11, 12; lxix. 29.
3 J. v. 22, 27. 4 J. v. 21, 24, 25, 29. 5 Ps. vi. 8.
6 L. x. 12; M. x. 15. Cp. L. xxi. 34; 11 Th. i. ro; II Tim. i. 12; iv. 8. Cp.
DTP! iniN, Bereshith Rabba, 33.
16—2

244 TRUE DISCIPLESHIP
Nor is there any difficulty in the category of works in verse
22, as though they could only be supposed to be asserted by
self-constituted workers after the mission of the Apostles had
made men familiar with such demonstrations of power on the
part of authorised workers. For it was our Lord's own active
ministry in Galilee which had drawn together the crowds that
were now present : and that had been marked by teaching and
preaching, by miracles of healing, and by the restoration of
demoniacs1. So that the like works might naturally be looked
for as the regular manifestations of the established Kingdom of
God. The phrase, " Did we not prophesy by Thy Name ? " is
perhaps an allusion to Jeremiah's description of the false
prophets who exercised great influence in his day2 : " Then the
LORD said unto me, The prophets prophesy lies in My Name :
I sent them not, neither have I commanded them, neither spake
I unto them."
4. The same subject is still continued in the final section of
the discourse ; in which the eventual consequence of a mere
empty profession of discipleship is set forth in a parable. A
discipleship which rests on so shallow a foundation is fore
doomed to collapse when subjected to the pressure of outside
influences3. And just because it has borne all the appearance
of loyalty, the catastrophe is all the greater, when it comes. If
this section be thus taken in connexion with the immediately
preceding context, the closing words, — xal rjv r) trrwais avrfjs
fieydXrj, — which otherwise seem to form a curiously abrupt finish
to the Gospel of the Kingdom, become at once intelligible.
The imagery of the parable is drawn from the familiar
circumstances in Galilee ; not only in the fierce wild storms4 of
that mountainous district, but also in the ordinary conditions of
house-building. "At this very day the mode of building in
1 M. iv. 23 — 25. s Jer. xiv. 14; cp. xxvii. 15.
8 Cp. the similar warning conveyed under another figure in the Parable of the
Sower; M. xiii. 5, 6, 20, 21.
4 ppoxil is described by Lobeck (Phryn. p. 291) as a late vernacular word. It is
used to translate DE>jl, LXX Ps. lxvii. 9 (=lxviii. 10) ; civ (cv). 32, and Symm. Prov.
xxv. 23. Cp. dppoxla, Jos. Antt. VIII. xiii. 2 (quot. from Menandros). Cp. j8p^X«
above, v. 45, p- 131.

st matt. Vii. 24 — 27 245
Christ's own town of Nazareth suggests the source of this image.
Dr Robinson was entertained in the house of a Greek Arab.
The house had just been built, and was not yet finished. In
order to lay the foundations, he had dug down to the solid rock,
as is usual throughout the country here, to the depth of thirty
feet, and then built up arches1."
The reading in verse 24 is somewhat uncertain. But even if
bfioiwaw avrbv be adopted, instead of bfioiwdrjaerai, it still
remains doubtful if irds oans dxovei should be regarded strictly
as a 'nominativus pendens.' A similar construction, under
various forms, is found not infrequently in the Gospels : but in
each case, whether with or without a relative, it is virtually
equivalent to et Tt?. So, irds oans (as here), M. x. 32 ; bs av,
M. x. 14; Mk vi. 11 ; oans av, M. x. 33 ; b iriarevwv, J. vii. 38 ;
irdv...pr) rpepov, J. xv. 2; irav 0, M. xii. 36: J. vi. 39; xvii. 2.
The verb bpotovv (or the corresponding phrase bfioibs ianv)1 is
the regular term employed to introduce a parable3. It is found
with especial frequency in St Matthew's Gospel, in various
constructions: rlvt bpiotwaw*, wpoiwdrj", bp.oiwdrjaerai*. And so
it is used in this passage.
With the parable which it marks here may be compared the
Rabbinic comparison7 of a man who has good works and learns
the Law thoroughly to one who builds his house on a foundation
of stones with bricks above, so that when a flood comes the
house stands secure; while he who has not good works, yet
interests himself in the Law, is as one who builds his house on a
foundation of bricks with stones above, and it is swept away by
the flood.
St Matthew marks the close of his report of the Sermon on
the Mount by the customary phrase, or formula, which he uses
1 Kitto's Pictorial Bible, quoted by A. B. Bruce, Expos. I. ix. 92.
2 M. xi. 16 ( = L. vii. 31, 32); xiii. 31 ( = L. xiii. 18, 19); 33 ( = L. xiii. 21); 44;
45; 47; 52; xx. 1 ; L. (vi. 47, 48, 49); xii. 36.
3 Cp. DOT (inPiel, PIETl); e.g., Hos. xii. 11, HOIS., ' I gave parables.'
4 M. xi. 16 ( = L. vii. 31); L. xiii. 18, 20. Cp. Mk iv. 30 71-fis bpoidiaupev...r) iv
rlvi irapapdXy Bupev;
5 M. xiii. 24; xviii. 23; xxii. 2. (A gnomic aorist.)
8 M. xxv. 1. 7 Aboth derabbi Nathan, 23.

246 TRUE DISCIPLESHIP
with reference to each great instance or collection of our Lord's
teaching, — xal iyivero ore iriXeaev b 'Irjaovs roiis Xbyovs rovrovs.
Thus it stands after the instructions to the Twelve1; after the
Parables of the Kingdom2; after the final injunctions to the
disciples in Galilee3 ; and after the eschatological discourse on
the Mount of Olives4- But this in itself by no means proves
that the Sermon as recorded by him is a synthesis of sayings
which were really spoken on different occasions. For the same
phrase is applied to such an obvious entity as our Lord's
prophecy of the last days5, given to the four principal Apostles6.
The use of this formula therefore is indeterminate in this respect.
The question of the integrity of the Sermon on the Mount can
only be decided by a close consideration of its successive
sections, and of their relation to each other and to the whole
subject, in view of the circumstances under which, and the
audience to whom, it was delivered. And the more intimately
it is studied, the greater is the impression which it conveys that
St Matthew's record, as it stands, actually gives our Lord's
public declaration, as He delivered it, of the Gospel of the
Kingdom. But in one respect St Matthew varies his usual practice in
this case. Before passing on to take up the narration of the
subsequent events, he pauses for a moment to notice the effect
of this teaching upon the crowds who heard it. They were
astonished, he says, at its tone of independent authority. They
had never heard anything of the kind from 'their' scribes, —
their constituted religious teachers. They, on the contrary, were
accustomed to base all their maxims on the sayings of their
predecessors ; on precedent, and on tradition. The reference
seems to be not even so much to the matter of the instruction
given, wholly new and startling though that was, as to the
personal claim put forward by the Teacher. All through this
authoritative right to declare the truth is assumed and asserted.
Each division has its own phrase to mark it: in the interpre
tation of the Law, rjxovaare 'bri. ..iyw Be Xeyw vp.lv7: in the
1 xi. 1. 2 xiii. 53. 3 xix. 1.
4 xxvi. 1. 5 M. xxiv., xxv. 6 Mk xiii. 3.
7 v. 22, 28, 32, 34, 39, 44.

st matt. vii. 28, 29 247
discussion of works of righteousness, dprjv \e<ya> vplv1 : in the
charge concerning undistracted service, Sta rovro \e7«u vplv\
But more than any particular phrases, the whole tone of the
teaching implies an inherent authority in the Speaker. And it
reaches its culmination in the final assumption of the preroga
tive of judgment. The hearers realised that "never man so
spake3," as He who had addressed them that day. They had
indeed heard a new Gospel of the Kingdom.
1 vi. 2, 5, 16. 2 vi. 25. Cp. vi. 29 Xtyu St bpiv.
3 J. vii. 46.

X. THE SERMON IN ST LUKE'S GOSPEL.
The Sermon on the Mount is reported by St Matthew as
one continuous discourse, delivered on one particular occasion.
But in St Luke's Gospel the same sayings, or a large propor
tion of them, are scattered rather widely throughout the narrative
of our Lord's ministry, in different periods of its progress ; and
some of them apparently at considerable distances of time.
At first sight this seems to offer a certain presumptive evidence
that St Matthew's account really represents a collection of the
teaching of our Lord bearing upon the Gospel of the Kingdom,
which was actually given at various times ; and not the record of
a single connected instruction, given all at one time. But on
closer investigation this inference is found to be by no means
conclusive ; and in fact to be far from probable.
For there are several other phenomena which must also be
taken into account in the consideration of St Luke's report of
these sayings, besides the mere fact that they are separated into
so many disjointed parts. The significance of the omission of
certain passages ; the few, but remarkable, additions ; the
systematic modification of Jewish forms of expression ; thes
disappearance of allusions to Jewish customs; the general
change of vocabulary ; and the like : — these are all features of
his version to which attention must be given in any endeavour
to estimate the comparative historical accuracy of the two
reports. They cannot both equally represent the original setting
as they stand. In some cases of course it may be assumed that
our Lord repeated more than once particular gnomic sayings1.
In certain instances this is beyond dispute. But it is clearly
impossible to apply this explanation in a wholesale manner, and
1 Cp. perhaps M. v. 15 = L. xi. 33 and L. viii. 16.

250 THE SERMON IN ST LUKE'S GOSPEL
to attempt in this way to account for the frequent portions of
the discourse, as given by St Matthew, which are placed by
St Luke at various later stages of the ministry. One or other of
the Evangelists, it must seem, has transferred the sayings,
consciously or unconsciously, from their actual occasion to
another association. And the question to be determined is,
which of them has preserved the original setting. No debate
however arises as to the authenticity of the sayings themselves.
The variation of the Greek phraseology has no bearing upon
this point : for in either case an Aramaic original lies behind the
variant forms. Though it is not perhaps possible that absolute
certainty can be attained from the existing documents, with
regard to the real collocation of some of the sayings concerned,
yet a high degree of probability in this respect may be reached.
In connexion with this comparison of the two accounts many
points arise which bear intimately upon the intricate problem of
the manner of transmission of the Gospel records in the early
days before our present Gospels were written. But any discus
sion of that subject as such lies outside the immediate purpose,
and does not directly affect the main argument. In fact that
question may be regarded rather as a deduction from the results
of investigations of this kind, than as an antecedent factor in
the consideration of them.
It will be convenient first of all to state in a tabulated form
the occurrence of the sayings in the two Gospels ; taking of
course the consecutive order in St Matthew's account as the
basis of comparison :

M.

L.

M.

L.

M.
L.
3
vi.
20 b
v.
18
xvi. 17
v.
44 a
vi.
*7a + 35a
4
21 b
19, 20
—
—
27b,28a+35bc
5
—
21-24
—
44 b
28 b
6
21 a
25, 26
xii. 58,
59
45 a
35 <*
7-10
—
27-30
—
45 b
—
11,12
22, 23
31
—
4^.47
3^,33
—
24-26
32
xvi. 18
—
34
13a
—
33-37
—
48
—
i3bc
xiv
•34b, 35 a
b
38. 39*
—
vi
1
—
H
—
39 b, 40
vi. 29
2-4
—
15
xi.
33 ( + viii.
.16)
41
—
5-8
—
16
—
42
3°
9
xi.
2ab
17
—
43
—
10
2C
THE SERMON IN ST LUKE'S GOSPEL 251

M.

L.

M.

L.

M.

L.
iob
—
—
xii.
26
vii
. 12 b
—
ii
xi. 3
vi.
28 a
—
13a
xiii
. 24 a
12
4a
28D-30
27, 28
13b, 14a
—
13 a
4b
31-33
29-31
14b
24 b
13b
—
34
—
IS
—
14. 15
—
vii
. 1
vi,
37^
16 a
—
16-18
—
—
37 be,
38ab
—
vi.
44 a
—
xii. 33 a
2a
—
16 b
44b2
19
—
2b
38 c1
17
—
20
33 be
3-5
41, 42
18
43
21
34
6
—
19,20
—
22, 23
xi- 34. 35
7.8
xi.
9, 10
21
46
—
36
9
—
22
—
24
xvi. 13
10
n
23
xiii.
27
25
xii. 22, 23
—
12
24-27
vi.
47- 48.
26
24
11
13
27
25
12 a
vi.
3i
The proportion of common matter to the whole is noticeable.
If a calculation be made by the number of lines in an ordinary
text of the Greek Testament, — and obviously to count by verses
would be quite an uncertain, and even a misleading criterion, on
account of their very variable length, — the result works out
as follows: — taking the report of the Sermon as given by
St Matthew as 208 lines, 101 only of these are repeated in
St Luke's Gospel ; and then in various positions : while 107, or
slightly more than half, are peculiar to St Matthew. On the
other hand St Luke has 17 lines of sayings which he closely
associates with other sayings included by St Matthew in the
Sermon, but which are not given at all by St Matthew ; and 8
more which occur in other settings in St Matthew's Gospel.
Now of the passages which St Matthew alone records, by far
the greater number occur in the sections which deal with (a) the
interpretation of the Jewish Law, and (b) the correction of the
current Jewish observance of the three great obligations of Alms
giving, Prayer, and Fasting. These account for no fewer than
72 out of the 107 lines of the matter which is peculiar to St
Matthew3. But these are the very parts of the Sermon which
especially mark the moment of transition from the Old Covenant
to the New. They are addressed immediately to Jews, as still
1 L. vi. 39 = M. xv. 14; L. vi. 40= M. x. 24, 25.
2 L. vi. 45 = M. xii. 34 b, 35.
8 (a) v. 17, 19—24, 27—31, 33— 39a; (b) vi. 1—8, iob, 13b— 18.
252 THE SERMON IN ST LUKE'S GOSPEL
living under the old Law. And while they set forth principles
which are of permanent application, they are couched in terms
of direct reference to the Jewish religious code ; so that in their
details they would be scarcely intelligible to Gentile converts
who had not previously been proselytes. It is therefore in entire
accordance with the general purpose and plan of St Luke's
Gospel, written by a Gentile for Gentiles, that these sections
should be omitted ; even if they were included in the sources
upon which the Evangelist was able to draw.
A similar reason accounts also for the omission of particular
sayings, or phrases : such, for instance, as those of vii. 6, p,r)
Bwre rb dyiov xrX., with their use of Jewish technical expressions;
or of the sentence ovros ydp ianv b vbp,os xal ol irporprjrat, which
is attached in St Matthew to the ' Golden Rule '2 ; or, once more,
of rrjv BiKaioavvrjv avrov from the injunction tyjrelre Se irpwrov
KrX.2 Moreover, phrases which were the actual currency of Jewish
speech, and which give the true local colouring of the original
circumstances in St Matthew's account, are constantly translated
by St Luke into neutral equivalents, which would be more
readily understood by Gentile readers. Thus, for example, the
title of God, d Harr)p vpwv b ovpavios (or, d iv rois ovpavois) is
variously represented by b ©e6V, by "TuWto?4, by d IlaT^p
vp,wv*, or simply by narrjp* : and once by d Harrjp b e'f ovpavov7,
as an adaptation of the current expression to a form more
consonant with Greek thought, and probably under the influence
of the interpretative gloss in the same sentence, Saio-et Hvevpa
"Ayiov8. So in like manner the Jewish terms of reproach oi
reXwvat, ol idviKol", are in each case softened, somewhat tamely,
into ol dpaprwXol10: and rd edvrj11 into t<z edvrj rov Koapov13. So
too the Hebraic idioms rd irereivd rov ovpavov and rd xplva rov
dypov13, become simply ot KopaKes and rd Kpiva1*.
It is evident that in such cases as these, while St Matthew
1 M. vii. 12. 2 M. vi. 33. 3 L. xii. 14. 4 L. vi. 35. 5 L. vi. 36; xii. 30.
9 L. xi. 2, ndrep, in the Lord's Prayer. This might represent N3K, which even
in the Talmud is occasionally found (e.g., Shebuoth, vii. 7) in the sense of ' Our
Father'; "although in a prayer the more solemn form KM3K, Galil. IJ-13K, has
greater probability in its favour." Dalman, p. 192.
7 L. xi. 13. 8 See above, p. 228. B M. v. 46, 47. 10 L. vi. 32, 35.
11 M. vi. 32. 12 L. xii. 30. ls M. vi. 36, 28. 14 L. xii. 24, 27.

THE SERMON IN ST LUKE'S GOSPEL 253
gives a close approximation to the ordinary Aramaic expressions,
St Luke substitutes quite general Greek equivalents. But the
further back the material is traced towards its primary source,
the more Aramaic in character it is certain to be found. It may
be assumed therefore that St Luke's record is a secondary report
of the sayings, adapted for wider reading beyond the immediate
circle of the first disciples, who were Palestinian Jews : and that
(so far) St Matthew's is to be regarded as more faithful to the
original utterances.
But again, the same process, of translating into terms which
would be intelligible beyond the range of the local associations
of Palestine,, is observable in St Luke's habit of giving para
phrastic renderings, especially of sayings which contain topical
allusions, or distinctively Jewish notions. This may best be
illustrated by placing side by side some instances of the parallel
reports :
(i) M. v. 13 els obStv laxbei (n [rb L. xiv. 35 offre els 7^1" offre els Koirplav
dXos] el py pXyBiv (£u xarairareioBai1 birb effBerbv ianv • (%u pdXXovaiv avrb.
ruv dvBpuiruv.
(ii) M. v. 15 obSt xalovaiv Xbxvov L. xi. 33 obSels Xbx»ov d^oi els xpvir-
xal nBiaaiv abrbv birb rbv pbSiov. ryv rlByaiv obSe birb rbv pbSiov.
(iii) M. v. 45 Sn rbv yXiov abrov L. vi. 35 6Vi abrbs xpVtSs ianv twl
dvariXXei tirl irovypobs xal dyaBovs xal robs dxaplarovs xal irovypobs.
Pptxei tirl Sixalovs xal dStxovs.
(iv) M. v. 46 riva puoBbv2 (xere; L. vi. 32 7rok bpiv xdpis iarlv;
(v) M. v. 47 xal (dv dairdayaBe L. vi. 33 xal ydp idv dyaBoToiyre robs
robs dSeXtpous3 bpuv pJbvov, rl irepiaabv* dyaBo-irotovvras vpds, irola bpiv x<fy"s
Troieire; iarlv;
(vi) M. vii. 16 pyri avXXiyovoiv dirb L. vi. 44 ob yap t( dxavBuv avXXeyovaiv
dxavBuv araipvXds y dirb rpipbXuv avxa; avxa, obSi ix pdrov11 araipvXyv rpvyuaiv.
(vii) M. vii. 21 ob irds 6 Xiyuv poi L. vi. 46 rl St pe xaXeire Kbpie Kbpie,
Kbpie Kbpie, elaeXebaerai els ryv padikelav xal ob iroielre a Xiyu;
ruv obpavuv', dkk' 6 iroiuv rb Btkypa1
rov Harpbs pov toC (v rois obpavoiss.
1 See p. 78. 2 See pp. 149, 150. 3 See p. 100.
4 See p. 135. The reference is to an earlier saying which is not given by St Luke.
And it alludes to the special Pharisaic standard of ' works.'
6 Dr Hobart, Med. Lang, of St Luke, p. 78, suggests that St Luke may have been
drawn by his medical associations to use pdros instead of rpipdXos, "as it was exten
sively used medicinally by the ancient physicians.... The medical writers abound in
prescriptions in which the pdros formed an ingredient, and Wetstein on Matt. vii. 16
quotes from Galen an expression very similar to this saying of our Lord : 6 yeupybs
obx dv irore Swi/aaiTO iroiyaai rbv pdrov (xipipeiv pbrpvv."
6 See pp. 47, 48.
7 A reference to a clause of the Lord's Prayer (see p. 241) which is omitted by
St Luke. * See p. 252.

254 THE SERMON IN ST LUKE'S GOSPEL
But perhaps the most comprehensive example of this ten
dency1 is to be found in the final parable which closes the
discourse (M. vii. 24 — 27 = L. vi. 47 — 49). There is no question
that these two reports must refer to one and the same utterance.
But in St Luke's account (a) what would be clear in its meaning
to a Galilean audience is explained for other readers. Thus, the
simple statement WKoBofirjaev rrjv olxlav iirl rrjv irerpav3 is
amplified into eaKatyev Kal iftddvvev xal edrjxev defieXiov iirl rrjv
irerpav. (b) The specially local features of the district in which
the words were spoken disappear from his description. Instead
of the wild mountain storms there is nothing but an ordinary
river flood (irXrjpp,vpa) : instead of building eVt rrjv dp,p,ov, the
careless hearer is represented as building eVt rrjv yrjv. (c) The
sentence ovx etreaev redep-eXlwro ydp iirl rrjv irerpav is para
phrased into ovx Xaxvaev (sc. d trorapbs) aaXevaai avrrjv Bid rb
xaXws olxoSopijadai avrrjv. (d) St Luke's peculiar vocabulary
is strongly marked, laxveiv is a favourite word with him,
occurring 8 times in his Gospel and 6 times in the Acts ; and
there are several rare words which are found here only in the
New Testament: fSadvvetv, irXrjfi/ivpa3, irpoaprjyvvvai, avfiirlirreiv,
prjypa: of which the last four may be due to associations of
medical terms4.
There are other variations in the case of which it has been
suggested" that St Luke has misinterpreted, or misread, an
Aramaic word in his authority ; though these may also perhaps
be explained as no more than further instances of the same
tendency to paraphrase, or to expound. Such, for example, are:
(i) M. v. 48 (oeoBe o'bv bpeis rtkeioi us L. vi. 36 ylveaBe olxrlppoves xaBus 6
0 HaT^p bpuv 6 obpdvios rikeibs ianv. Haryp bpuv olKrlppuv iarlv.
Here Prof. Marshall6 suggests that the original word was
some form of $>Dn ; and that Te\eto? represents ''?£] (the passive
1 For other instances cp. M. v. 25 = L. xii. 58 ; M. vi. 31 = L. xii. 9 ; M. vii. 11 =
L. xi. 13.
2 See pp. 244, 245.
3 Gen. in -ys, as with other words ending in -po, e.g. aireipa, pdxaipa. See Blass,
Gram., § 7. 1.
4 See Hobart, Med. Lang, of St L., pp. 54 — 57.
5 By Prof. J. T. Marshall, in his papers on 'The Aramaic Gospel'; Expositor, iv.
iii., iv.
6 Expos, iv. iii. 212.

THE SERMON IN ST LUKE'S GOSPEL 255
participle), and o'tKripfiwv ^P!? (the active participle). But
TeXeto?, in the moral sense, denotes a specially Jewish conception.
(ii) M. vi. 12 dipes ypiv rd btpeiky-para L. xi. 4 drpes ijpuv ras dpaprlas ypuv •
r)puv where either brpeiXrjpa or dfiaprla may equally well cor
respond to N?in, or 3'in1. But this is a case, not of misunder
standing, but of choice of translation. And only Jews could
understand the meaning of b<peiXrjp,a through the associations of
Nain 2
T •
(iii) M. vi. 20 Sirov kX^ttoi ob Siopba- L. xii. 33 Sirov xXtirrys obx tyylfra.
aovatv. In this case Prof. Marshall3 refers Stopvaaetv to 333a and
eyyl^eiv to 3?i?. By postulating the use of " the imperfect tense,
as indicating indefinite frequency," he obtains for the two words
Up* and imp*. But Siopvaaeiv is just one of those touches of
local colouring which St Luke constantly replaces by more
general expressions.
It is very doubtful therefore if much weight can be assigned
to this proposed explanation of the variations, as being due to a
misinterpretation of an Aramaic (common) original.
In one paragraph only is the Greek wording entirely iden
tical in the two Gospels : and that is M. vii. 7, 8 = L. xi. 9, 10.
In one other there is only the addition of one word, olxerijs, in
St Luke, xvi. 13 = M. vi. 24, ovSels [olKerrjs] Bvvarai Svat Kvplois
SovXeiieiv. But this apparently unimportant accretion is really
quite typical of the process observed in the more extensive
changes of other passages. For it involves the interpretation of
xvplots in a very restricted sense, xvpios in association with
o'lKerrjs can only mean 'the master of a household,' and thus
loses its common Scriptural reference to religious, or even
Divine, authority. But that this is the real reference in this
actual saying is made clear by the contrast between ' God ' and
' mammon.' Thus the insertion of a single word eliminates the
Jewish atmosphere from the aphorism ; while it incongruously
leaves it untouched in the special instance of service, to God or
to mammon, which is closely attached to the saying. In other
1 Expos, iv. iii. 281. a See pp. 173, 174. 3 Expos, iv. iv. 376.

256 THE SERMON IN ST LUKE'S GOSPEL
passages, where the agreement is very close, there are small, but
significant changes in St Luke, which have the effect of impart
ing a slightly improved literary style to the sentences: as at
vi. 41, 42 = M. vii. 3 — S ; or xi. 34 = M. vi. 22, 23 a.
In this comparison therefore of the two reports of the same
teaching, as given in the first and the third of our Gospels, all
the phenomena, alike of omission, and of variation, and of
phraseology, point inevitably to the conclusion that St Luke
has ' translated ' (in the widest sense of the word) the original
record into a more general form, which would be the more
easily intelligible to the Gentile Christians. Direct references to
the Jewish Law, and to Jewish traditional practices, disappear
in his account : local allusions are dropped : special phrases of
the Jewish schools are changed. It is in fact a masterly repre
sentation to the world at large of the teaching of the universal
Gospel of the Kingdom. But it does not appear to retain the
precise terms in which that teaching was actually given. For
the Gospel of the Kingdom was necessarily in the first instance
expressed in terms that appealed immediately to the Jews to
whom it was addressed ; and it was built up upon, and developed
from, the existing conditions of the Old Covenant. But here, in
St Luke, it stands out in its permanent reference to all members
of the Kingdom of God, from whatever previous associations,
national or religious, they may have been drawn. It is largely
divested of those features which, from their essentially Jewish
colouring, seemed to be in some sense of temporary application.
But it cannot be stated too emphatically that the teaching is
virtually the same in both accounts. It has not been changed
in any sense of misrepresentation by St Luke : but in his report
it is seen as expressed through the medium of a Gentile mind ;
which, thoroughly imbued with the subject, seized upon and
emphasised for his fellow-Gentiles those features which peculiarly
appealed to converts whose whole associations were non-Jewish1.
At the same time all this tends to confirm the conviction
that in St Matthew the original form of statement is much more
1 It should be borne in mind that St Luke, in consequence of his long and close
association with St Paul, during the period of his sharp conflict both with the Jews
and with Judaisers in the Church, was more than most men unlikely, when he came
to write his Gospel, to be inclined to preserve in his account of our Lord's teaching
the record of any Jewish elements that had marked it.

THE SERMON IN ST LUKE'S GOSPEL 257
closely preserved ; and that his account may be adopted as
representing more accurately the terminology in which the
Sermon was actually delivered. For in his Gospel the local
tone of the illustrations is strongly marked : and the wording is
often so distinctively Jewish that without constant recurrence to
Jewish literature it is involved in obscurity. And these are
conditions which could not have been imported into a later and
more general report ; but they reflect the very atmosphere under
which the teaching was in fact given. The record in the form
in which St Matthew relates it represents the exact point of
transition from the standard of the Old Covenant to that of the
New. So far then as the phraseology is concerned, the Matthaean
rather than the Lukan form may be followed without hesitation
as preserving the original words of the Sermon on the Mount.
But this does not carry with it, of any necessity, the further
deduction that St Matthew has also preserved the true colloca
tion of particular sayings more correctly than St Luke : though
it does afford a certain presumption that that is likely to be the
case. The earlier phrasing points to an earlier composition. It
is of course true that every historian, who is not a mere reporter
or chronicler, when he aims at giving a comprehensive picture
of an important era, crowded with events and embracing many
complicated features of interest, naturally groups his material to
some extent according to subject rather than in strict chrono
logical sequence. And this course is obviously followed on
occasions by both these Evangelists, to a certain degree, in
their Gospels. But a secondary version is always more apt to
manifest this plan than a primary account. It is further off
from the scene itself, and reviews it in a new perspective. Many
of the more minute associations, which were clear to the mind of
an actual witness, are unknown to a later student. Of the facts
indeed, and even of the sayings, the latter may have accurate
information : but as to the details of their proper setting he
either has no definite knowledge, or treats the matter as of minor
importance. He therefore records them in the setting which
seems most suitable from a literary standpoint. The earlier
report may accordingly be better trusted than the later to
s. 17

258 THE SERMON IN ST LUKE'S GOSPEL
indicate the juncture at which a particular action was taken, or
(as in this case) a particular teaching was given.
In the case of the disjected sayings now in question, which
are somewhat widely scattered over his Gospel, St Luke has
unquestionably in several instances pursued the method of
grouping them according to their subject-matter. The connec
ting links of thought between them and their contexts are fairly
patent : but no direct intimation is given, or implied, that they
were in fact spoken under the circumstances which recall them.
For example : —
(i) The saying about the impossibility of a joint service to
God and to mammon1, — which, as a complete aphorism in itself,
is easily detached, — is placed by St Luke side by side with our
Lord's other saying about mammon2. In that position it
illustrates His use of this term. But there is no likelihood that
the two sayings were spoken on the same occasion. For the
attitude towards mammon is represented from totally different
points of view in the two quotations. In the first, eavTot?
trotrjaare <f>lXovs ix rov papwvd rrjs dBtxias ktX., mammon is
treated as a means to be widely used. And the injunction is
a natural corollary to a parable of the Unjust Steward3, to which
it is attached. But in the second mammon is regarded as a
dominating and dangerous influence over the lives of men.
This saying however is in complete accord with the sequence of
the argument where it is placed by St Matthew in the Sermon
on the Mount.
(ii) Similarly, the sentence d Xv%vos rov awp,arbs ianv b
bcpdaXpas [aov]* seems to be quoted by St Luke simply in
juxtaposition to the other saying about a Xvxvos, — ovBels Xvxvov
atyas ktX.b, — with which of course it has no proper connexion :
whereas, if the technical meanings of bcpdaXpbs irovrjpos and
dirXovs6 be taken into account, it is seen at once to fit naturally
into the place assigned to it by St Matthew.
(iii) Or again, St Luke illustrates a parable by subjoining
to it the traditional saying of our Lord which bears upon the
1 M. vi. 24= L. xvi. 13. * L. xvi. 9—12.
3 L. xvi. 1— 8. *¦ M. vi. 22 = L. xi. 34.
L. xi. 33. 6 See pp. 200, 201.

THE SERMON IN ST LUKE'S GOSPEL 259
same subject. Thus the parable of the Rich Fool1 is followed
by the warning against undue anxiety about the necessities of
earthly life2; and that of the Friend at Midnight' by the
exhortation to insistent prayer4.
In such cases as these the association of ideas is evident,
which led to the citation of the sayings by St Luke in the
positions which they occupy in his Gospel. But there are other
cases in which it does not seem possible to assign any probable
reason for the insertion of particular sayings at particular
points. So far as appears, they have no connexion of subject
with their surroundings. The reference to the Lamp, for in
stance, — ovBels Xvxvov dyjras «t\.5, — has no traceable link with
the preceding section about the demand for a sign6. St Luke
has already quoted the same saying7, in a slightly varied form,
in association with the parable of the Sower8 : and it may be
argued from this that the repeated quotation is a distinct
evidence that this saying is one of those which were spoken
more than once, on different occasions. That may be so : but it
does not account for the position assigned to it as following the
words about the 'sign' of Jonah. But in St Matthew9 it
comes between, and aptly connects, ifiels iare rb a^ws rov
xbapov and ovrws Xapfydrw rb <f>ws vpwv.
This suggestion of misplacement is all the more marked
where a saying is introduced by a connecting particle, and yet
has no apparent connexion with the preceding context to which
it is attached. It is possible that in these instances the particle
is part of the quotation itself, and really belongs to its original
setting. So, (i) with ovv, in KaXbv ovv rb dXas10, following injunc
tions about ' counting the cost ' : or (ii) with yap, in 019 ydp
vtrdyets fierd rov dvnSiKov aov KrX.11, where no satisfactory
explanation seems to be forthcoming: certainly not Bengel's
"ydp saepe ponitur, ubi propositionem excipit tractatio." The
interpretation that these verses are a parable from earthly
1 L. xii. 16—21. " L. xii. 22— 3i = M. vi. 25—33.
3 L. xi. 5—8. 4 L. xi. 9— I3 = M. vii. 7—11.
» L. xi. 33. 6 L. xi. 29—32.
' viii. 16. 8 So also St Mark, iv. 21.
9 v, 15. 10 L. xiv. 34. u L. xii. 58.
17—2

260 THE SERMON IN ST LUKE'S GOSPEL
experience, adduced in illustration of the duty of reconciliation
with God, not only involves a somewhat strained exposition of
the challenge, ti Se xal ddj eavrwv ov xplvere rb Slxaiov ; x but it
fails to account for the imperative (80s ipyaaiav)2 in a parable.
But the counsel falls in appropriately with its surroundings
where St Matthew has it3
It appears then that, as is the case with the wording of the
sayings, so also with regard to the circumstances under which
they were spoken, St Luke's account is a secondary report, which
cannot be taken as a sure guide. Many of the sayings are there ;
but the positions assigned to them are governed by other con
siderations than their original chronological setting. On the
other hand in St Matthew's account they follow on in a con
tinuous chain of argument, the links of which are closely joined
together, with very few, if any4, exceptions. It may be urged of
course that in St Matthew's account this very connexion of
thought is the cause which has led the Evangelist to string the
sayings together ; and that it does not prove that they were
spoken at one time. But there is no evidence to support this
(except mere subjective impression) apart from St Luke's
witness ; and that is found to be inconclusive, or actually
negative. While this point must to a certain extent be left open, with
our present limited resources of information, the only safe
critical plan is to follow the guidance of the documents which
we possess : and where one is found to be secondary and
irregular, while the other has every indication of preserving more
faithfully the primary conditions, the latter may be followed
with considerable confidence.
If these results be applied to the two most prominent
divergences in the two accounts, — the Beatitudes, and the Lord's
Prayer, — the difficulties in both cases will be found to be greatly
reduced, if not to disappear.
1 L. xii. 57. 2 A Latinism='da operam.' 3 v. 25, 26.
3 The principal apparent exception is M. vii. 7 — 11. But even there the excision
of the section would involve the course of the argument in greater confusion. See
pp. 226 — 229.

THE SERMON IN ST LUKE'S GOSPEL 261
(i) The Beatitudes.
St Luke gives only four of the eight which St Matthew
records; and he subjoins to them four corresponding Woes.
But such denunciations by our Lord belong to a later stage of
His ministry, when direct and persistent opposition had strongly
asserted itself. They fall into four distinct groups, the occa
sions of which are significant. They are uttered
(a) with reference to the cities " where most of His mighty
works were done, because they repented not1." These Woes
St Luke attaches to the instructions given to the Seventy" :
(b) concerning offences caused by 'the world3' :
(c) upon the Scribes and Pharisees, after the final rupture
with them4. St Luke places this section in juxtaposition with
an objection raised by one of the Pharisees5 :
(d) against the traitor, Judas Iscariot6.
Now this aspect of our Lord's teaching is in no way congruous
with the first open declaration of the Gospel of the Kingdom.
That was given before relentless antagonism had come to the
front. The question therefore arises, How is it that St Luke
includes anything of the kind in conjunction with the Beatitudes ?
With regard to this it may perhaps be reasonably conjectured
that he had received the tradition of four such denunciations :
and finding that they corresponded by direct contrast with four
of the Beatitudes (as generally understood by Gentile converts),
he placed the two series side by side ; and accordingly selected
for his record, by literary instinct, those Beatitudes only which
fitted this parallelism. This would be quite in accord with his
methods of grouping his materials.
Moreover, in support of this supposition, it may be pointed
out that he also substitutes in his last Beatitude evexa rov Tlov
rov dvdpcoirov7 for evexev ipov in St Matthew's appendix8 to the
1 M. xi. 20.
2 L. x. 12 — 15. The mission of the Seventy is usually supposed to have taken
place in Persea; but the cities blamed are all in the north.
3 M. xviii. 7. * M. xxiii. 13—36. 5 L. xi. 38, 42—52.
6 M. xxvi. 24 = Mk xiv. 21 = L. xxii. 22. The only other instance, in the great
eschatological discourse, obal rais tv yaarol ixobaais xrX. (M. xxiv. i9 = Mk xiii. 17 =
L. xxi. 23), is obviously different. It is a warning, not a denunciation.
7 vi. 22. 8 M. v. 11.

262 THE SERMON IN ST LUKE'S GOSPEL
Beatitudes : though the adoption of this title, ' The Son of Man,'
belongs, it would seem, to a somewhat later stage than that of the
preliminary proclamation of the Kingdom of God.
Again, in his report of the Beatitudes which he does record,
he regards the first two which he quotes as intended to be under
stood in their ' literal sense, — of economic poverty *, and of
physical hunger. This is clear from the contrasted Woes. But
this is not the meaning which these words would convey to
Jewish hearers, who would naturally interpret them in the
spiritual signification which the Old Testament had accustomed
them to associate with these expressions. But just as naturally
the material explanation would suggest itself to Gentile con
verts, who had not been trained on the Old Testament. The
spiritual intention would be as foreign to their minds, as the
literal would be to the minds of Jews. It is another instance of
St Luke's Gentile representation of the Gospel.
In the case of the Beatitudes then St Matthew's version
appears on all points to reproduce more faithfully the original
conditions than does that of St Luke.
(ii) The Lords Prayer.
The question of St Luke's phraseology has already been
considered3. With regard however to his remarkable omission
of certain petitions, it is noticeable that the clauses suppressed
are exactly those which are most strongly tinged with Jewish
thought and diction. They are:
d iv rois ovpavois.
yevrjdrjrw rb deXrjpd aov,
a>? iv ovpavw xal iirl yrjs.
dXXd pvaai rjfids dirb rov trovrjpov.
The disappearance therefore of these phrases from St Luke's
report is exactly analogous to his silence as to those extensive
sections of the Sermon on the Mount which have a peculiarly
Jewish character: those, that is, which deal with the Jewish
Law, and with ' Righteousness'3. However startling it may be
at first sight to find an abbreviated form of such a formula as the
1 See, however, p. 51. '- See pp. 158, 159. 8 See pp. 251, 252.

THE SERMON IN ST LUKE'S GOSPEL 263
Lord's Prayer in St Luke's Gospel ; and whatever explanation
may be offered to account for this phenomenon in the face of
the known liturgical use of the Prayer from the earliest times ;
the fact remains that the modifications in question correspond
closely in method with others which consistently mark St Luke's
report of the sayings of the Sermon on the Mount.
The general result then of this consideration of St Luke's
account of our Lord's words which St Matthew includes in the
Sermon on the Mount, is to make it clear that while he records
certain sayings, the cohesion between them is to a great extent
lost. He gives large portions of the teaching, but not the
coordinated Gospel of the Kingdom.

INDEX

17—3

I.

St MATT. iv. 23— vii. 29.
The figures in heavier type, which immediately follow the words, refer to the
pages of this book.
The figures in italics, and within brackets, denote a repeated use of the same
word in the same verse.
The figures within square brackets give the number of times the more frequent
words occur in these chapters.
* Marks words which are found only in these chapters in the N.T.
(*) Marks words which are used in these chapters in a peculiar sense.
t Marks words which occur only in these chapters and in the corresponding
sections of St Luke's Gospel.

dyaOos

v. 45; vii. 11 (2),

d|jL<|>ievvvvai

vi. 30

17, 18

Sv

v. 18 (2), 19, 21,

dyaXXido-Bai

v. 12

22 (a), 26, 31

dvairav

v- 43. 44. 46 (¦?) ;

dvapafvctv

v. 1

vi. 24

(*'dvoT^XX«iv

v- 45

dyyapeitiv 124,

136-140 v. 41

dvcpos

vii. 25, 27

d-yidijav 164

vi. 9

dvTJp

vii. 24, 26

dyiov 223-4

vii. 6

dvSurrdvai

v- 39

dypos 20S

vi. 28, 30

dvBpuiros

v. 13, 16, 19; vi.

d8cX<j>os 100,126

v. 22 (2), 23, 24,

'. 2. 5. 14, 15.
221
47 ; vii. 3, 4, 5
16, 18; vii. 9, 12
aSixos
v. 45
dvotyciv
v. 2 ; vii. 7, 8
alrctv 229
v. 42; vi. 8; vii.
dvofiCa
vii. 23
7, 8, 9, 10, 11
dvTt'xeo-Bcu
vi. 24
axavSai 239
vii. 16
ovtC
v. 38 (2)
aKoij 37
iv. 24
dvTtSucos 107
v- 15 (•*)
dxoXovOctv
iv. 25
<*)dird-yeiv 236
vii. 13, 14
Akovciv 98
v- 21, 27, 33, 38,
diras
vi. 32
43; vii. 24, 26
dir£pxeo-9ai
iv. 24; v. 30
aXas 76
v- 13 (¦?)
diri\av 150
vi. 2, 5, 16
dXfciv 79
v. 13
tdirXovs 201
vi. 22
dXXd 177
?• 15. 17. 39". vi-
diro 237
[12]
13, 18; vii. 21
diroSiSovai 115
v. 26, 33 ; vi. 4, 6,
aXXos
v- 39
18
djir'v 92, 247
v. 18, 26; vi. 2,
diroOiJKn
vi. 26
5. 16
dn-oXXiivai
v. 29, 30
d|i(ios
vii. 26
diroXvciv
v- 3'. 32 (*)
INDEX

267

l*)diroo-rdo-iov 112

v. 31

diroo-Tp^eo-eai

v. 42

&irox<opt!v

vii. 23

diruXeia

vii. 13

dpayc

vii. 20

dpiO"T€p6s

vi. 3

dpKCTOv 212

vi. 34

apira| 238

vii. 15

dpros 170, 230

vi. 11; vii. 9

dpxotos 99

v. 21, 27, 33

do-ird^tcrBai

v. 47

aiigdvciv

vi. 28

avpiov

vi. 3°. 34 (3)

avrds

[7°]

dcpavC£civ 188, 198 vi. 16, 19, 20
ac|>i£vcu 173, 176, v. 24, 40 ; vi. 12
221 (a), H (*)> 15
(2) ; vii. 4

pdXXeu

pdcravos|3acrtXcCa 23, 47,
165-6, 241
fiao-iXcvs 118
"PoTToXoyetv 154
pX&rcivPpt\(iv 131
<*)BpcSo-is 197

v. 13. ^5, 29 (2),
30; vi. 30; vii.
6, 19
iv. 24
iv. 23; v. 3, 10,
19 (2), 20; vi.
10. 33; vii. 21
v. 35
vi. 7
v. 28; vi. 4,6, 18;
vii. 3
v-45
vii. 25, 27
vi. 19, 20

TaXtXaCa 28, 37 iv. 23, 25

yauuv
ydp 209
ylcwa 104
yrj 65, 92, 117
yCveo-flaiytvcpo-KcivypauuaTtvs 89, 96
ywiyuvCa

32,

v. 32
[19]v. 22, 29, 30
v. 5, 13, 18, 35; vi.
10, 19
v. 18, 45 ; vi. 10,
16 ; vii. 28
vi. 3 ; vii. 23
v. 20; vii. 29
v. 28, 31, 3*
vi- 5

SaipovCgccHlcu iv. 24
Saip.ovi.ov vii. 22
+SavCJ«rvai (-av, L.) 126 v. 42

o{AacdiroXis 37
StVSpov
8e$ios 110, 123
Sid 204
SiaftXtireiv 221
*S iaXXdcro-co-6ai
Suupepciv 206
SiSdo-Kciv 92, 95
8i8axn SiSovaiSCkoxosSiKaioonivi) 32,
67, 68, 96, 143,
14S, 146, 210
(*)Siopvo-o-«v 198-
(*)8n|/av 56
Siwkciv 132
Sokciv
fSoKos 220
SoUXL8o|a 207
8o|d5eiv BovXeveivSwap, is
8vvao-8ai Svo 8upov 106
{dvlav (=dv)
eauTrjs {yu 67, 241, 246
eBvixos 134, 155
«Bvo$ 80, 208
fl etSeuVve 145
elSe'vai [cki) 100
ct|U) ctvai 198
elireiv
*clpi)VOiroids 62
els€t$

C34]iv. 25
vii. 17 (2), 18(a), 19
v. 29, 30, 39 ; vi. 3
w. gen., vii. 13(a);
w. ace, vi. 25
vii. 5
v. 24
vi. 26
iv. 23; v.-i, 19(a);
vii. 29
vii. 28
v. 31, 42; vi. 11;
vii. 6, 7, 11 (2)
"•45v. 6, 10, 20; vi. 1,
33
•9 vi. 19, 20
v. 6
v. IO, II, 12, 44
vi. 7
vii. 3. 4. 5
vii. 11
vi. 29
v. 16 j vi. 2
vi. 24 (2)
vii. 22
v. 14, 36; vi. 24
(2), 27 ; vii. 18
v. 41 ; vi. 24
v. 23, 24 (2)
l9l v. 19, 32 ; vii. i»
vi- 34
[13]v. 47 ; vi. 7
vi. 32
[5]
vi. 1
vi. 8, 32 ; vii. 1 1
v. 22]
v. 13
[38]v. 11, 22 (2)
v. 9
[20]v. 18 (2), 19, 29,
30, 36, 41 ; vi.
24 (2), 27, 29

268

INDEX

cIo-ukovciv clo-cpxccrScu 241
tltrcpc'pciv 178-9
eKpdXXeiv
ckci IkcIBcveicetvos 243
1kk6ittciv 110
CKirXijcrcrccrBtu eXd^io-TOs 95
eXeeiv 58
cXeijuoo-vvn. 145-t
iXct(p,(i>v 58
eppX^-rreivepirpocrflev cv 117
evStieo-BaigvSupa 197
tvCKCV Ivoxos 103-6
IvtoXijeijaipetvt|<pX«o"8aie£o\jo-Ca 246
8|weirdvwinl

eiriyivao-KciveiriSiSdvaicirijivreiv 208
eiriBvpetv 108
"eiriopKelv 116
temovcrios 171-2,
IpydijccrBai
tpyov 81, 96
epeiv 99
epX'o-Bai

eo-rdvai 153
lo-xaros
eVwBev

vi. 7
v. 20 ; vi. 6 ; vii.
13 (2), 21
vi. 13
[6]
vii. 4, 5 (2), 22
v. 23, 24; vi. 21
v. 26
vii. 22, 25, 27
v. 30 ; vii. 19
vii. 28
v. 19 (2)
v. 7
> vi. -i, 3, 4
v. 7
vi. 26
v. 16, 24; vi. 1, 2 ;
vii. 6
[41]
vi. 25
vi. 25, 28 ; vii. 15
v. 10, 11
V. 21, 22 (j)
v. 19
v. 29
v. 26
vii. 29
v. 13
v. 14
w. gen., vi. 10, 19 ;
w. dat., vii. 28 ;
w. ace, v. 15,
23. 45 (•?); vi.
27; vii. 24, 25,
26
vii. 16, 20
vii. 9, 10
vi. 32
v. 28
v- 33
212 vi. 11
vii. 23
v. 16
v. 21, 27, 31, 33,
38, 43 ; vii. 4, 22
v. 17 (2), 24 ; vi.
10; vii. 15, 25,
27
vi. 5
v. 26
vii. 15

trcpos 203 vi. 24 {2)
tri v. 13
tvoyylXiov 28, 30, 38 iv. 23

tvvoeiv
cipCo-Kav
*eipiX<"po% 237
*X«v(Xfyos 127
'(as 'irov
l-rynlv 211, 229
S<oij 236
<f
rj...t|
H%i\qXucCa 206
ijXtos 131
il p.ets
lipipa 212, 243

v. 25
vii. 7, 8, 14
vii. 13
iv. 24 ; v. 23, 46 ;
vi. 1, 8 ; vii. 29
v- 43. 44
v. 18 (2), 26
v. 25
vi- 33! vii. 7,8
vii. 14
[9]
vi. 24
v. 28
vi. 27
v- 45
vi. 34 ; vii. 22
vi. 1

BeacrBaiB^Xeiv 230 v. 40, 42 ; vii. 1 2
Batumi 167-170, vi. 10; vii. 21
241

BeueXiovv 245
©eo's 60, 63
Bepaireveiv
BepCiJeiv Bt|o-avpCi«v 195
6i)oravpd$ 196
mexepw 237
6pC£ 118
flpo'vos 118
flvpa

vii. 25
v. 8, 9, 34 ; vi. 24,
3°. [33]
iv. 23, 24
vi. 26
vi. 19, 20
vi. 19, 20, 21
vii. 14
v. 36
v-34vi. 6

fivcnaoTijpiov 106 v. 23, 24
ISeiv v. 1, 16
ISov vii. 4
Tepoo-oXuua 37, 117 iv. 25 ; v. 35
'Iijo-ovs ladViov 124
tva 110, 229
'IopSdvns 37
'IovSaCa 37
Urx«6iv
IxBvs 230
*l»Ta 93

iv. 23 ; vii. 28
v. 40
v.29, 30; vii. 1,12
iv. 25
iv. 25
v. 13
vii. 10
v. 18

INDEX

269

KaOopos 60

v- 3

Xeyeiv 246

V. 2, 18, 20, 22,

KaOCgav
KaC KaCeiv

v. 1
[116]v- 15

26, 28, 32, 34,
39, 44 ; vi. 2, 5,
16, 25, 29, 31 ;

KaxCa 212

vi-34

vii. 21

Kaxus

iv. 24

Xcvkos

v. 36

KaXeiv 63, 95

v. 9, 19 (2)

XCBos

vii. 9

KaXos

v. 16; vii. 17, 18,

Xoyos 113, 119

v- 3*. 37 5 vii. 24,

r9

26, 28
KapSta 59, 108,
v. 8, 28 ; vi. 2 1
Xveiv 92, 96
v. 19
199
Xvkos 238
vii. 15
Kapiro's 239
vii. 16, 17 (2), 18
Xvxvia 81
v- 15
(2), 19, 20
Xvxvos 80, 202
v. 15 ; vi. 22
I Kapcpos 221
vii- 3. 4. 5
KaTa
w. gen., v. 11, 23
|*a0T]Ti]S 43
V. I
KaTaPaCveiv
vii. 25, 27
|utKapios 46
v- 3. 4. 5. 6, 7, 8,
KaraXvav 91
v. 17 (2)
9. 10, II
"Karapa vBdvav
vi. 28
paXaKta
iv. 23
KaTavoeiv
vii. 3
p.dXXov 206
vi. 26, 30; vii. 11
Karairarctv 78, 226 v. 13 ; vii. 6
papayas 203, 258 vi. 24
Kaxacppoveiv
vi. 24
papyapCn]s 224
vii. 6
Kcio-Bai 80
v. 14
uc'yas 118, 244
v- 19. 35 ; vii. 27
tKepaCa 94
v. 18
peXas
v. 36
KEcpaXij 117, 188
v. 36; vi. 17
pAos
v. 29, 30
KT]pijo-o-ei.v 28
iv. 23
p6piuv$v 204
vi. 25, 27, 28, 31,
KXeieiv 153
vi. 6
34 03)
KXeVreiv
vi. 19, 20
|MTO
w. gen., v. 25, 41
KXAmp 197
vi. 19, 20
ucrpctv 220
vii. 2 (2)
KXl)pOVOUEtV 54
v. 5
pcrpov
vii. 2
txXCpavos 207
vi. 30
\m
[27]
Ko8pdvTT|S 107
v. 26
f-rfil
vi. 25 ; vii. 6
KomaV
vi. 28
pi] itotc
v. 25 ; vii. 6
koo-uos 79-80
v. 14
pijre
v- 34. 35 (2), 36
KpCpa
vii. '2
pifri;
vii. 16
KpCvciv 123, 219
v. 40 ; vii. 1 (2), 2
"pCXiov 124
v. 41
w
pipvijo-Kco-Bai 10(
v. 23
fKpCvov 205
vi. 28
picrctv 126
v. 43 ; vi. 24
KpCo-is 103, 105
v. 21, 22
purBds 67, 96,
v. 12, 46; vi. 1, i.
KpiTlfs 107
v. 25 (2)
135, 147, 149,
5. 16
Kpoveu- 229
vii. 7, 8
196
Kpvnrav 80
v. 14
poSios 81
v- 15
Kpwirrds 160
vi. 4 (2), 6 (2)
poixdcrBai 113
v. 32
*Kpvaj>atos 161
vi. 18 (2)
poixevav 113
V- 21, 28, 32
Kvpios 265
vi. 24
pdvov
v. 47
Kvpios 241
v. 33 ; vii. 21 (2),
fpcapatvciv 78
v. 13
22 (2)
*papl 101-2
V. 22
kwov 223
vii. 6
pupds
vii. 26
Xajxpdveiv
v. 40 ; vii. 8
va£ 119
v- 37 (2)
Xdpirciv 81
v. 15, 16
tvtjfl€lV
vi. 28
Xads
iv. 23
VT]CTTCV(IV 186
vi. 16(a), 17, 18
270

INDEX

viTTTeo-flai 188 vi. 17
vopC£civ v. 17
vopos 88,90,231 v. 17, 18; vii. 12
vdcros iv. 23, 24

680s 107,236
dSovsolxCa
oiKoSopeiv dXiyoiricrros 208
dXCyos
oXos oXcas
dpvvav 116-118
6poiovv 245
opoXoyctvdvciSC£civ ovopa 163-4,244
oirov 198
OTTOS
opav 60
dpyC£co-0ai 100
OpKOS 116
opos 29, 80
OS

ocros
oems

OTC
on ( = 'for')
8Ti( = 'that')
OV, OVK, 0«X
OV, OVK, W. fut.
ov; ovx; ovx£;
ov 119
ovSe
ovScCs
OvBcTTOTCOV pT|
oSv 229
ovpavios 82

[326]
v. 25 ; vii, 13, 14
v. 38 (2)
v. 15 ; vii. 24, 25,
26, 27
vii. 24, 26
vi. 30
vii. 14
iv. 23, 24; v. 29,
30 ; vi. 22, 23
v- 34
v. 34. 36
vi. 8 ; vii. 24, 26
vii. 23
v. 11
vi. 9 ; vii. 22 (3)
vi. 19(a), 20 (a), 2 1
v. 16, 45; vi. 2,4,
5. 16, 18
v. 8
v. 22
v- 33
v. 1, 14
v. 19 (a), 21, 22
(2), 31. 32; vi.
8 ; vii. 2 (a), 9
vii. 12
v. 39. 4i ; vii. 15,
24 (a), 26
v. 11; vi. 2, 5, 6,
16
vii. 28
[17]
[16] [13]
v. 21,27, 33 5 vi. 5
v- 46, 47 ; vi. 25,
26, 30 ; vii. 22
v- 37 (2)
[8]v. 13; vi. 24
vii. 23
v. 18, 20, 26
[13]v. 48 ; vi. 14, 26,
3*

ovpavos 92, 117-8, v. 18, 34 ; vi. 10,
196, 205 20, 26
ovpavoC 47, 82, v. 3, 10, 12, 16, 19

106, 162

(a), 20, 45; vi.

1, 9; vii. 11, 21

ovtc 198

vi. 20 (a)

ovros

["]

ovtcds

v. 12, 16, 19; vi.

6cpeiXe'TT)s 174

9, 30; vii. 12, 17
vi. 12

<*)d<peCXT|pa 159, 173, 255 vi. 12
dcpBaXpds 110, v. 29, 38 (2) ; vi.
121, 200, 220 22 (a), 23 ; vii.
3 (2), 4 (2), 5 (*)
cttpis vii. 10
oxXos 44, 218, 246 iv. 25 ; v. 1 ; vii. 28

irdXiv irapd
TrapaSiSdvai 107
irapaKaXctv 63
TrapaXvnKds
(*>TrapdTrT<apa 185
irapEKTo's 113
irapcpxccrBai 92
irds IlaTTJp 82-3,162

(*)ircivcjv 56
Trcipacrpos 177
irevBciv 52
ircpavircpC 205
Trcpidyciv
¦n-epipdXXeo-Bai Trepio-creveiv 95
irepicrcros 135
TTCTCivdv 205
irci-pa 245
irxjxvs 207
Tri'veiv
irCrrrcivTrXaTcta 153
*irXaTvs irXctovTrXt|povv 91
ttXt|0-Cov 126, 130
irvcciv Trvcvpa 50

v- 33
w. dat., vi. 1
v. 25
v. 4
iv. 24
vi. 14, 15
v. 32
v. 18(a)
[I9l
v. 16, 45, 48; vi. 1,
4, 6 (a), 8, 9, 14,
15, 18 (a), 26,
32; vii. 11, 21
v. 6
vi. 13
v. 4
iv. 25
w. gen., vi. 28
iv. 23
vi. 29, 31
v. 20
v- 37. 47
vi. 26
vii. 24, 25
vi. 27
vi. 25. 31
vii. 25, 27
vi. 5
vii. 13
v. 20 ; vi. 25
v. 17
v- 43
vii. 25, 27
v- 3

INDEX

271

troiciv 96

v. 19, 32, 36,

46,

crrjpepov

vi. n, 30

47 (2) ; vi.

1, 2

torfe 198

vi. 19, 20

{2), 3 (2);

vii.

fo-iayuv 123

v- 39

12 (a), 17

(2),

o-Kav8aXC£civ 110

v. 29, 30

19, 21, 22,
24,
to"KOTElVOS
vi. 23
26
ctko'tos 203
vi. 23 (a)
iroucCXos
iv. 24
o-Kv6puirds 188
vi. 16
irdXis 80, 118
v- 14. 35
SoXopuv 207
vi. 29
"iroXvXoyCa 155
vi. 7
o"ds
vii. 3, 22 (3)
iroXvs
iv. 25 ; v. 12 ;
vi.
cnrcCpEiv
vi. 26
30; vii. 13, 22(a)
o-Ta<j>uX-ri
vii. 16
irovr|p6s 120,122,
v- 11, 37. 39.
45.;
o-tevos
vii. 13, 14
179-181, 200,
vi- 13. 23;
vii.
trrdpa
v. 2
230
11, 17, 18
orpctpciv
v-39
iropvcCa 113
v. 32
o-Tp«<j>eo-8ai
vii. 6
ttoctos 202
vi. 23 ; vii. 1 1
cri
[66]
irorapds
vii. 25, 27
ctvkov
vii. 16
irovs
v. 35 ; vii. 6
o-vXXcyEiv
vii. 16
irpavs 64-5
v. 5
trvp<j>cpEi 110
v. 29, 30
irpo
v. 12 ; vi. 8
o-uvdyEiv
vi. 26
irpopVrov
vii. 15
o-waywyrf 149, 153 iv. 23 ; vi. 1, 5
irpos
w. ace, v. 28
; vi.
CTVVE'SpiOV 103
v. 22
1 ; vii. 15
cruve'xeo-Bai
iv. 24
Trpoo-e'px«o-6ai
v. 1
Evpia 37
iv. 24
Trpoo-evx«o-Bai 131-4, v. 44 ; vi. 5 (2),
craipa 202
v. 29, 30; vi. 22
151-2
6 (2), 7. 9
(2), 23. '5 (2)
Trpoo-e'xeiv 237
vi. 1 ; vii. 15
Trpoa-KoiTTeiv
vii. 27
Tapctov 153
vi. 6
irpooirCuTEiv
vii. 25
raxv
v. 25
trpoo-TiBe'vai 211
vi- 27. 33
TEKVOV
vii. 11
irpoo-cjtepciv
iv. 24 ; v. 23,
24
TcXctv 246
vii. 28
irpda-onrov 188
vi. 16, 17
T^Xcios 135-6
v. 48 (a)
trpo(pT|TevEiv 244
vii. 22
tcXcovt|S 107, 134
V. 46
Trpo(pTJTT|S 90,231
v. 12, 17; vii
12
Tifle'vai
v- 15
TTpOJTOV
v. 24 ; vi. 33
vii.
TIS
v. 23
5
tCs
v. 13, 46, 47; vi.
irroo-is 244
vii. 27
3. 25 (2), 27, 28,
irroixds 49
v- 3
31 (?); vii. 3,9
TniXn 236
vii. 13 (a), 14
to avTo
v. 46, 47
Trip 104, 239
v. 22 ; vii. 19
tote
v. 24; vii. 5, 23
TTWS
vi. 28 ; vii. 4
Tpe'aSeivrpCpoXos 239
vi. 26
vii. 16
*paKa 101
v. 22
TpOlpTJ
vi. 25
pairCgciv 123
v. 39
<*lj>TJo-cr£iv 225
vii. 6
vio's 63
v- 9, 45 ; vii. 9
fbvecrBai
vi. 13
vpcts
[63]
pv|iT) 149
vi. 2
VTraycivvire'p
v. 24, 41
w. gen., v. 44
craXirCJeiv 147-8
vi. 2
vTrr)pcTT|S 107
v. 25
crairpds 239-240
vii. 17, 18
iird
w. gen., v. 13; vi.
crtXT)vidJeo-8ai
iv. 24
2 ; w. ace, v. 15
272

INDEX

viroKpiTTjs 148, vi. 2, 5, 16 ; vii. 5
160, 221
viroirdSiov 118

<payeiv <f>aCvEo-8ai $apuraios 31, 32,
34,39,97,116-7,150, 217, 221,
237
<t>epeiv <piXeivcpoveveiv 98
ippdvipos <pvXaKT| 4>cSs 79, 80, 202
<}>«T€lv6s

v- 35
vi. 25, 31
vi. 5, 16, 18
v. 20

vii. 18 (2)
vi- 5
v. 21 (a)
vii. 24
v. 25
v. 14, 16; vi. 23
vi. 22

XaCpciv
X«£PXitwv 124
Xoipos 226
XOpTagciv 58
XopTOS 207
XpcCa 156
XP$«v 209

v. 12
v. 30
v. 40
vii. 6
v. 6
vi. 30
vi. 8
vi. 32

t|fcv8co-0ai v. 11
i|fEvSoirpo<prJTT)s 237-8 vii. 15
"Htf vi. 25 (a)
«S v. 48; vi. 5, 10,
12, 16, 29 ; vii.
29 (a)
wcrirep vi. 2, 7

II.

dvTiircirovOds, to

121

purdvOpuiros

129

do"XT||iov irpdypa

113

vi|OTeCa, tj

186

PaTrapCiJeiv

153

vopixds

89

Siao-iropd 17,

19, 21, 23, 133

irapprio-Ca, Iv

151

Sidpvypa

199

TrXijppvpa

254

Sds cpyao-Cav

260

irXovo~ios

51

cvoxXciv

153

'PappeC

241

c$i|pTio-pivos

92

0-T|Tdpp(l)TOS

198

'Ecro-aioi

33, 97, 116

CTO<plO~rT|S

89

6coKparCa

2

o-TriBaprj

207

UpoypappaTEvs

89

<pCXr|pa

107

pAXuv aluv, 6

19, 194

XaXxovS

108

III.

aerugoangariusangaria angariareangarizare
beatitudo
buccinatorcomesturada operam

197

fatigare

139

fatuus

139

infatuatus

139

malitia

140

nugax

-71

odium

148

parangaria

197

perangariare

260

repudium

153 7879
213240129140
140 112

INDEX

273

IV.

111?
V V

242 238

-I»fe> 'N

238

T n*

100

nerva

99

Va*

197

92
139

nxnHN
DipH'P?N rnfc

139
107 236

no^s

186

'lE'S

46,46

803

179

-113

218

n;a

112

nam

149 202104

,N^I

151

"i»i

91

j&n

205

D?D3 ona^

111 155

I'm

106
103

T375

245239

Q^nn in?. 236
njen "i 236
jn 119, 120

eh'pn K3in{ xtsn

223
159, 173
174, 255174 174

mqn 174, iss
3»D «4
awn 105
non 145
Vpn 254
rso 168
ph 171
^e'n 151
ninst? 207
sinn 225
Ninn Di< 243
*1S.'1. 18°
njh? 124
IK1? 119, 120
T
»l?n anV 171
D31D 134
PS-ID 237
inn 172
rnsnD 199
^O 124
rfeo 77
JVoVo 23,165
D>»B> 'D «
• - T J10D 196
Xi'lDO 203
n"ib 101
no 241
NIJOTD 224
"?3J 101
T T
3p3 256
-U 80
'3 ya_B>j 117
"ipj?4 »3tw 116

274

INDEX

yy?

31

map tninjD

103

Dp

198

(nap) -iab

89

nnn? -ibd

112

NinD T ; ¦

151

own P|i»

205

H3to |H?

200

ns; }»

200

nin W

200

nw DB

218

- T

153

w TT

54-5

*?v

49

131 nvro
T T ~ : V

111

T

197-8

TO

49,51

n;pi?is

151

rna

205

P^S

123

njm 145-6, 149

nwv

151

»3i?

152

D'Ji»1p

99

rnip

221

f\p 94,239

rotpK *JBp

208

t^E!

221

*S

63

31P

255

-ys ntjrj

60

^l

241

n-n

50

ro

101

«m

101

T T

212

Jfori

167

JJBH 122

,174

rbwv r : ¦

124

inwn nc-UE'

118

D.<DB>3tJ>

162

rwn wie*

205

asbw

62-3

nnb/r. rtJiDe> 22

160

D?Ot? {«

105162

TDPI

173

T-13FI

207

Van

78

#

CAMBRIDGE: PRINTED BY JOHN CLAY, M.A. AT THE UNIVERSITY PRESS.