the exercise of the greatest of all human virtues iv dydTTT,, 1 Co 13").
The incapability of fully appreciating this fea- ture of Jesus' teaching, wliich is ultimately bound up with His ideals and aspirations, will largely account for the .signal failure of Christendoni to realize that spiritual as well as visible unity of life and purpose to which He looked forward in the later stages of His ministry. Oneness is just the characteristic which cannot be predicated of the Christian community. More especially is this the case if Ave consider the nature of the oneness aspired after by Jesus for His followers — a oneness which lias its roots in llie Hivinc life, and 'in which eacli ci^n-lil mni l.rjn- is a conscious ele- ment in the belli- of a vast wlioli^ ' i[:'a d;Tir TfTtXeiu- liivoi. eh cv, Jn 17-', cf. vv."--'--, Lo lu'', 1 Co l-i'-" ; see also Westcott's Gvspd of !<l . Jolm , p. -JlOf,).
The opening years ot the twmticth cinluiy give promise of a profonnder realizaliou of this Divine idea; and the cvavinp after tuiity, in some sense at least, may i--iii' in a, truer conception of the inter-relations of (lui-tiaii people, in a real syn- thesis of tlieiiidi\ idnal's fnciiomand his subordina- tion and dependence as a member of that which is essentially one whole (cf. iin d% dpros, Iv <rii/ia ot iroWol cafici', 1 Co 10"). Perhaps it is not without significance that, in recording the prayer of Jesus for His Church, St. Jolin uses the present tense of the verbs Tnartvu and -)ii'uw^w (Jn 17='-=^), which points to the ultimate, allieit gradual, acquirement by • tlie M ,jrM • of that faith and knowledge which fill- -]iir!,o le of a union so vital and so profound 1 ■ ;ili iil;M rd to impart.
.1 .- W. R, Harper's Religion and the Hifiher Life
' I ■ t I very useful in connexion with this subject; as
■ !l .ilso A. DoTiier's Gnindprobleni' tl- r !:■ ■ i ininyf.hdnsophiet ■ 'lallv Lecture II. in that volume. \i ' ■'( St.
!•: iind The Epistle to the Ueh,.„. niil.ices
1^ lielpful; as also his rft?-i'.s7)/,« T'l'/i i . .. Imania-
I .n andCommon Life.^ndChrisl,„,> : ' / ,ri.(:.B.
Stevens, TAc 77,. ci/.;.i, 1. MA- A-- / I: \\.,-,.l:,l,tical
The.oloijy of the y I lii i, /.- /ivm/i ; Wendt,
LehreJesu.VAvd^' i; ,. 1 ' i ■' l\- nofir Theory;
Urnce, TheHin„> .. ,.,/,, . , i.. ,. , /■. . , fw/,n„,w,„ S«ft-
Dli: 'Communii
y, Kece 11„
If?',
ee also Robin.
His
ii\ h (S. C. Gayford). 'Kingdom of God' (J. Orr ;
il ii iiiiiy he studied articles 'Messiah' and ' Eschato-
is:inil,ri ; whirh might be Studied in furijiiii' imn with JCders- liiiiii s 77,1- t.iir and Times of Jesus the M. .r./'i, I; W fws, The L,_ie ui chr,.-.!, u. Holtemann, The Lite ,.t J. ,< i
.1, i;. ^Vil,LIs.
DERELICTION.— Mt 27«= M k l.'.--. About three o'clock in the afternoon, when .lesiis luid hung for six hours on the cross, the bystanders v ere startled by a loud cry from the meek Sullerer: Kli, Eli, Iii,iii(.'az<ili}itani,* 'My (uid, my God, why hast tin. 11 forsaken me?' It -w tis a sentence from that jisalui V. hieh. says Tertullian.t ' contains the whole hrist.' 'What was it that wrung from
exc linu Kilter cry? The Evangel -
I drawn tlie \,'\\ aside and revealed what Mas jiassiii^ in I lie Itedeemer's soul, and it becomes ns to refrain fioin curious speculation, and recognize tluit there is here an imjienetrable mystery. Yet it is right that we should seek to enter into it so far as we may, if only that we may realize its greatness and be delivered from belittling thoughts.
An explanation has been sought mainly along two lines. (1) Jesus was standing in the room uf sinners nnd niehiring vicariously the wrath of God. 'I'liis opinion is at once un.scriptural and irrational. It was indeed possible for God to inflict
•Ps'JJi -iFinii' nc^ '^x -^N. For "ij? Mt. gives Aram. 'Jl?p3:f' Mk. furtlier aramaicizes ■'?N into '.iSs'. Cf. Dalnian, Words
t adu.'Ma're. iii. 19.
DERELICTION
DESIRE
upon Jesus tlie punishment which is due to sinners ; but it is inconceivable that He should have transferred His wrath from them to Him— as it were saying, ' I will be angry with Him instead of them.' Jesus never endured the wrath of God. ' We do not suggest,' says Calvin,* ' that God was ever His adversary or angry with Him. For how should He be angrj' with His beloveil Son in whom His mind rested?' At every step of His progress through the world He A\as the beloved Son, and He was never so well pleasing to the Father as in that hour when He hung a willing victim on the cross, 'obedient even unto death ' (Ph 2*). His sacrifice for the sin of the world was not merely His death ; it was His entire life of unspotted holiness and \-icarious love (of. He 9"). His death was not the whole of His sacrilice, but the consummation of it. He bore the sin of the world from Nazareth to Calvary, and, if God was angry with Him at the last, He must have been angry with Him all along.
(2) Jesus was not really forsaken by God, but ffis sotil teas clouded by the anguish of His flesh and spirit, and His faith, hitherto victorious, gave way. 'We have here,' says Meyer, 'the purely human feeling that arises from a natural but momentary quailing before the agonirs of death, in every respect similar to tliat which had been experienced by the author of the psalm.' It was a 'subjective feeling,' and there was no 'actual objective desertion on the part of God.' This explanation is very inadequate. At the ninth hour the worst was over, and the end was at hand. It is incredible that He should have faltered then after enduring the sharpest pan^js with steadfast fortitude. Whatever His dereliction may have meant, it was no mere subjective feeling, but an objective reality, and it came from God.