Similarly, a readiness to forgive others is laid down as a condition for a man's own forgiveness (cf. Mt 6", Mk 112»- !», Mt 5'). The Parable of the great Debtor shows that the absence of a for- giving spirit in men prevents their being themselves forgiven.
(2) The instances of Christ's teaching which have been cited might be interpreted as having reference only to relations between men, though it is scarcely conceivable that the parables are not intended to be significant of the relations of mankind as sons to God the Father, the ideal of character. The clause in the Lord's Prayer (Mt 6", Lk 11*) makes it evident that human forgiveness and divine forgiveness are represented as strictly analogous. There is indeed no indication of any fundamental difference between the forgiveness which the Christian wins from God and that which he in turn bestows upon his 'brother.' It is the same phrase which is used throughout— a phrase denoting actual ' remission ' of sin ; and it is used by Christ of his own action, and alike of God's and of man's part in the mysterious process. If it were not so, it would be mockery to oU'er ui; the petition, ' Forgive us our trespass, as we forgive them that trespass against us.' The comment on the clause, which Mt appends to the Prayer, and the similar saying, wliich Mk introduces in connexion with the exhortation to faith in praying, forbid any differ- entiation (cf. Col 3"). The statements are quite general. Forgiveness is to bo won by repentance and confession, whatever the nature of the offence, whoever the persons concerned may be. (In view of the indisputably general application of the Parable of the Prodigal Son anu the other references to forgiveness, it seems impossible to accept the interpretation of Mt 18'»-" which would limit its teaching to relations between Christians).
(3) There are, however, two references which seem to set a limit to the possibility of divine forgiveness. One is the case ot the blasphemy against the Holy Spirit ; the other is St. John s
• Two words are used which iniplv clian^e of mind (iDvolWnjf rccret tor the course pursued anil iluintte of conduct for llio future) Mt 4", Mk !'», Lk \b^■ ">. and chunffc of wiU Mt 21^ (on tlio question whether the distinction liold» or not. »eo Trench, Syiionjimi, i llix.); and llurc are also wordi whiib mean ' turning ' or 'oonirersion,' Lk 2'i^, Ml IS*.
B8
FORGIVENESS
FORM
allusion to 'sin unto death.' The first of these references declares that there is a supreme sin Tor which no man can ever hope to be forgiven — ' All their sins shall be forgiven unto tlie sons of men, and their blasphemies wherewith soever they shall blaspheme' (Mk 3**) ; but with these sins and blasphemies there is pointedly contrasted one — 'Whosoever shall blaspheme ajjainst the Holy Spirit hath never forgiveness, but is guilty of an eternal sin,' and it ' shall not be forgiven him, neither in this world, nor in that which is to come ' (Mt 12'-). All that can be said witli certainty as to the nature of this sin is that the opposition of the scribes and Pharisees to Christ was a sign and indication of it, and that the Pharisaic charge that it was by the powers of evil that he was enabled to perform his works of healing, was the immediate occasion of his denunciation of it. Augustine regarded the sin as deliberate persistence in evil (for other interpretations see Westcott, note on 1 Jn 5"). It would appear from the rest of Christ's teaching on forgiveness that it was in any case of such a character as to deaden and destroy the spiritual sense in him who yielded himself up to its influence, so that repentance would become impossible to him. The idea of unpardonable sin is further suggested by St. John's exception of ' sin unto deatli ' from the subjects of intercessory prayer (1 Jn 5'*). To one who thus sins the way of forgiveness is closed ; at least it is not to be opened through the intercession of his brethren, which in other cases would avail.
There remains to be considered the problem of the significance of Christ's cry from the Cross, ' Father, forgive them ; for they know not what they do ' (Lk 23**). It is evident that it is a prayer for the forgiveness of those who have not repented, who have not even come to knowledge of their guilt. It cannot, however, be regarded as limited in its scope to the Roman soldiers, and excluding any reference to the share in the final tragedy taken hy the party of the scribes and Pharisees. The soldiers could not be thought of as in any real sense needing forgiveness for carrying out their orders in what they could only consider an ordinary execution : even Pilate was treated as comparatively guiltless. The cry must therefore be the supreme expression of the human sympathy and love of Christ, of the great principle which he had always inculcated. The sin embodied in the conduct of the Pharisaic party he had condemned in burning words ; towards it there could not be any change of feelin^ ; but they might be brought to repentance late tliough it was, and the words which are under consideration are a prayer for that result, a loving hope for the enlightenment of those blind leaders of the blind. It may be a hope against hope, but the crj does not constitute an exception to the principles and conditions of forgiveness which are to be drawn from other parts of the NT. It is a crowning example of ' forgi\4ngness,' if so be that the divine mercy may transcend the usual conditions of the bestowal of the boon. Such a spirit of ' forgivingness ' may be present (it has been noticed that it is required in all cases from the individual who has been in- jured), whether ' forgiven-ness ' (the remission of the offence as regards the person who has ofl'ended ) ensues or not. The word ' forgiveness ' is capable of the active and of the passive sense. In the active sense it is clear that it is an ordinary Christian duty ; in the passive sense, before it can be realized the conditions which have been elicited must be fulfilled.