civic and industrial duties are very few, and those negative rather than positive (Mt 18-" 22-' = Ko l.'i-).
(iii.) I'aiaJiij-i's of OiriMianity. — It is oidy natural that these features in the teaching of Christ should be taken hold of and made a charge against C'hristianity, as they have been from Suetonius onwards (Doniil. 15, 'contemptissim;e inertise,' of Flavins Clemens, probably as a (Miris- tian ; cf . Tertull. Aiml. 42, ' infructuosi in negotiis dicimur'). And it may be doubted whether even yet the full intention of our Lord has been fathomed, and the exact place of the specifically Christian ideal in relation to civic and social duties ascertained. The following suggestions may be offered.
The precepts in (luestion were probably addressed in the first in.stance. not to promiscuous nudti- tudcs, but to the disciples. If certain passages (as Mt o') may be (juotcd to the contrary, it should be remembered that tlie.se introductory notes as to the circumstances under which discourses were spoken are among the least trustworthy parts of the Gospel tradition, and are often nothing more than vague conjectures of the evangelists. The tyiie of character described bears on its face the marks of being intended for the little community of Christians (cf. Latham, Pastor I'astorum, p. 25.'5).
As such we can see that it had a very special appropriateness. It was not an accident that Christianity is the religion of the Crucilied. The Cross is liut the culminating expression of a spirit which was characteristic of it throinxliout. Its peculiar note is Victory Ihrouyh .^ulTerinrj. An idea like that of Islam, making its way by the sword, was abhorrent to it from the first. .lesus came to be the Messiah of the .lews, but the narra- tives of the Temptation te.ach us that, troin the very beginning of His career. He stripped off from His conception of Me.ssiahship all that Wiis political, all thought of propagating His <-laims by force. A new mode of propagating religion w.a-s deliber- ately chosen, and carried through with uncom- promising thoroughness. The disciple was not above his Master; and the example which Je.sus set in founding His faith by dying for it, w.os an example which His disciples were called upon to follow into all its logical conseiiuences. Chris- tianity, the true Christianity, carries no arms; it wins its way by lowly service, by patience, by self-sacrifice.
History shows that there are no in.strument-s of religioiLS propaganda ('omparable to these. It also .shows that the type of character connected with them is of the very highest attractiveness and beauty. Is it a complete type, a type to which we can apply the Kantian maxim, 'So act .is if yiair action was to be a law for all iuiman beings'? This would seem to be more than we ought to say. It is not clear that the Christian type would be what it is if it were not built uiH«n, and if it did not presuppose, a certain structure of society, to which other motives hail contributed. The ethical ideal of Christianity is the iileal of a Church. It docs not follow that it is also the ideal of the .State. If we are to .say the truth, we nuist .idinit that parts of it would become impracticable if they were transferreil from the individual standing alone to governments or individuals representing society. It could ni>t be intended that the officers of the law should turn the cheek to the criminal. The ajiostlts wen' to bear no swoitl, but the judge 'bearetli not the swonl in vain.'
.M.iy we not say that the functions of Christian morals — s|M'cilically Christian morals — are the.se'.' (1) At their first institution lo form a veliicle, the only po.ssible vehicle, for the Christian religion. So far as Christianity Inus taken a real and genuine hold upon society, it is through the.se means and
JESUS CHRIST
JESUS CHRIST
no others. Other iliiiips may liave coiuniended it for a time, but no mist can be placed in them. (2) The Christian motive acting in the miilst of i>Uier motives graduallj 'eavens and mixlities them, imparting to them something which they had nut before. It we look round u.s at the principles whidi at this moment regulate llie action of States, in theii external or international relations as well as those which are internal, we shall see that if these ))rinciples are not wholly Christian, they are also not pagan. They have a certain coherence, and they mark a very consiiicuous advance as coutpared with the principles of the ancient world. Christianity has snown a power of modifying what it does not altogether supplant. The world even outside C;hristianity is still God's world. It is a world of which the essential characteristic is that it is progressive ; and it may conduce most to this progress that it should be brought under the inrtuence of the Clirisliau precept, not pure but in dilution. And (3) may we not draw from this the augury that in the end, at some time which we cannot see, the social structure may be still more fully recast, under the inrtuence of Christianity : ' Nation shall not lift up sword against nation, neither shall they learn war any more' ? We can conceive a condition of things in which the Church became coextensive with tlie State, and in which religion penetrated the body politic in a sense in which it has never done .so yet. When that time came, conduct which now would be only quixotic miglit be rational, and required by the public con- science.