466
MYSTERY
MYSTERY
Ages, The verb μυέω, most frequently met with in the passive, means to initiate into the mysteries, —ol μεμνημένοι are the initiated, οἵ. 3 Mac 2",—and then generally to instruct. St. Paul says, Ph 4" μεμύημαι, RV “1 have learned the secret.’
That which is hidden or secret may, it is evident, be (1) absolutely so, that is, in its own nature inaccessible or incomprehensible, or (2) completely hidden, that is, as yet unrevealed, or (3) partially or comparatively secret or obscure, due to some want of clearness in the medium of communica- tion, as when the expression is figurative instead of being literal.
The first of these, which is emphatically the modern signification of ‘mystery,’ as that which cannot be known, is practically foreign both to classical and biblical Greek. ith regard to it, Cremer (s.v.) quotes two remarks of the Scholiast on Aristophanes (Ran, 459, Av. 1073) bearing out this statement; and though Lightfoot on Col 155 ra ett finds this meaning in two passages (1 Co 15", Eph 5%), of which the one seems to fall under (2) aa the other under (3), he admits that the ‘idea is quite accidental, and must be gathered from the special circumstances of the case, for it cannot be inferred from the word (μυστήριον) itself.’ This is not, of course, to say that in religion, in the Christian religion itself, there are no difficulties, nothing transcendental or mysterious in the ordi- nary sense. On the contrary, such difficulties must ever attach to man’s thoughts of the infinite and the divine, but it is not upon these elements that the attention of the biblical writers is concentrated. If they are thought of at all, it is rather as the unrevealed than the incomprehensible, the result of seeing through a glass darkly, until the time when man shall know even asalsoheis known. In the third of the significations noted above, μυστήριον, it has been remarked (Thayer-Grimm, Lexicon, s.v.), like Ἀγ} and 10 in Rabbinie writers, denotes the mystic or hidden sense, that which is conveyed in a figure, parable, or vision.
‘It is plain,’ says Principal Campbell (Dissertations on the Four Gospels, ix. pt. i.), ‘that, in this case, the term μυστήριον is used comparatively ; for, however clear the meaning intended to be conveyed in the apologue, or parable, may be to the intelligent, it is obscure, compared with the literal sense, which, to the unintelligent, proves a kind of veil. The one is, as it were, open to the senses; the other requires penetration and reflection. Perhaps there was some allusion to this import of the term when our Lord said to his disciples, ‘‘To you it is given to know the mystery of the kingdom of God; but to them that are without, all these things are done in parables” (Mk 412). The apostles were let into the secret, and got the spiritual sense
of the similitude, while the multitude amused themselves with the letter, and searched no further.’
Thus we have the ‘mystery of the seven stars’ (Rev 139) and the ‘mystery of the woman’ (Rev 17’). The difficulty or obscurity is here of a sub- jective character, while that in the case of the second of the three senses which we have dis-
tinguished, and which is the most prominent throughout the NT, is objective. In the case of
the latter, μυστήριον is correlative to ἀποκάλυψις, the secret to the discovered or revealed. In so far ns revelation has taken place, the ‘mystery’ is a knowledge of that which had been secret but is so no longer ; while yet unrevealed, ἀποκάλυψις is a possibility only which awaits the time at which it shall become actual and the hidden pass into knowledge. The latter sense is naturally most conspicuous in the passages of the Apocr. in which the word oceurs, whether referring to the secret purpose or will of men (To 127”, Jth 2?, 2 Mac 13”) or of God (Wis 2”), or simply to secrets in general (Sir 22° 2716-17-21), In the Nr the same meaning is perhaps conveyed in 1 Co 13? 14?, while in 1 Co 15°! μυστήριον ὑμῖν λέγω we see the mystery in the act of passing out of the one stage into the other. The great ‘mystery’ of the NT is the Divine
lan of salvation, hitherto hidden from the world, ut now made known in Christ (ef. Ro 11%, Eph6", Col 1°, 1 Ti 3° *), In this sense the apostles and ministers of Christ become οἰκονόμοι μυστηρίων θεοῦ (1 Co 41; ef. Col 2? 48, also [WH] 1 Co 91). It is the ‘mystery of his will’ (Eph 1°), the ‘mystery of God, even Christ’ (Col 2? RV), the ‘mystery ot Christ,’ that is, respecting Christ (Col 4%), the ‘mystery of the gospel’ oan 6"), but everywhere it is the ‘dispensation of the mystery which from all ages hath been hid in God who created all things’ (Eph 3°). It is noteworthy that, out of 26 (or 27) occurrences of μυστήριον in the NT, 10 should be within the comparatively brief compass of Eph and Col. The saving purpose of God, hitherto a mystery because unrevealed, is still such where it is not yet received, as by those destitute of πίστις or εὐσέβεια (1 Ti 3%"), or in so far as it has not been grasped, e.g. in its extension so as to include the Gentiles (Eph 3*-4), Nor is the term confined to Divine secrets. ‘It expresses sometimes those of a different and even contrary nature. Thus the apostle, speaking of the antichristian spirit, says, “‘The mystery of iniquity doth already work” (2 Th 2’), The spirit of antichrist hath begun to operate ; but the operation is latent and unper- ceived’ (G. Campbell). An interesting point, and one full of significance for the history of the Church, is the Vulg. rendering of μυστήριον by sacramentum. This is found in Dn 218 46, To 127, Wis 23, Eph 1° 550 5%, 1 Ti 3!6, Rev 1°, Upon Eph 5® is founded the doctrine that marriage isa sacrament. The association of ideas connecting the two words appears to be the refer- ence to religion and the use of the symbol, whether in word or deed. Solemnity, awe-inspiring quality marked both the mystery and the sacramental rite, whether we derive the latter from its legal or its military reference. Both came to be used in a very general and indefinite way, until the ecclesi- astical signification of sacramentum became fixed. Their primary application, however, was obviously the reason why ‘sacrament’ was first used of baptism and then transferred to the Lord’s Supper, ΠΕ with μυστήριον the opposite process took ace. Ῥ ii. THe GREEK MysTERIES.—As the higher thought of Greece found expression in its phil- osophy, so, though all may not be true of them which the later writers report, it may be said that its deeper feelings found expression in the Mys- teries. In these there was, first of all, an element of tradition; they gathered up reminiscences of nature-worship, —man’s witness to his sense of dependence upon his natural environment,—and particularly those elements of it which still sur- vived in village custom and observance. But they seem also to have fixed attention upon problems of which nature-worship offered no solution—those suggested by the enigma of death, a certain sense of sin, the thought of an offended Deity, the need of purification. It is still a question how much in the development of these institutions was of native growth, how much was derived from foreign sources, and still more what these foreign sources were. Leaving such discussions aside, and also the tempting ποίησον of Orphism, which is ‘credited with two great contributions to religion —the belief in immortality, and the idea of personal holiness’ (L. Campbell), we note Lobeck’s division of the multitude of rites which passed under the name of Mysteries into (1) civic mysteries, (2) fanatical rites, whether public or private, and (3) occasional functions, designed to meet individual and special needs.