The natural explanation of tlie miracle, that from a distance Jesus saw wliat those in the boat failed to observe, is possible, but is not necessary. The power is rather that of guiding to the required place. ' The miracle lies in the circumstances and not in the mere fact. The events came to men from the sphere of their daily labour, and were at once felt to be the manifestations of a present power of God ' (Westcott, Characteristics of the Gospel Miracles), — in the second case the maniifesta- tion of the power of the presence of the risen Lord.
The significant differences between the details of the two incidents have been drawn out by St. Augustine (in Joh. cxxii. 7). ' The one miracle was the symbol of the Church at present, the other of the Church perfected ; in the one we have good and bad, in the other good only ; there Christ also is on the water, here He is on the land ; there the draught is left in the boats, here it is landed on the beach ; there the nets are let down as it might be, here in a special part ; there the nets are rending, here they are not broken ; there the boats are on the point of sinking with their load, here thev are not laden : there the fish are not numbered, here the iiiiiiihir ia ixa.tlv given'
(Westcott, i'(. John,inloc.). For iiil -i |.,c i ii - ..i ih.rmiiil.iT
of fish (Jn 21"), see Westcott and ,A\v ~
Literature.— The Comm. and /,- i ll,.t^^o
passages; Trench and Taylor on ;»(,.'. /,,./-, iv ii [1892] 18; P. W. Robertson, The lit,
Frondes Agreates, 162.
R. JMacpher.son.
DRAW-NET (aayiivri, seine). — For fuller descrip- tion see art. Nkts. This kind of net is mentioned
in the Gospels only in the parable of Mt IZ'"-^, where it is very much in point. Being usually of great size and sweej)ing through an immense area, it collects many varieties of fish — worthless, under- sized, even dead fish, as well as the choice and the living. The process of fishing with a seine gives the impression of comprehensiveness and complete- ness. To one who has watched it — the very gradual progress of the operation, the extended area slowly encircled, the final dra>ving up of the net on the beach, and the sorting of its varied contents, witlx the reservation of some and the rejection of others — the aptness of the parable becomes very apparent.
The i^arable doses the series of seven in Mt 13, in whicli various aspects of the Kingdom of Heaven are presented. It is parallel in meaning to the second of the scries,— the Tares and the Wheat,— yet it has iis ili.,tiuct individuality. It points, like that |Mial>I'\ to the intermixture of good and evil in the ('liuich in its present stage, and it is implicit in the figure used that no absolute separation is jjossible or to be tliought of now. But the emphasis of the parable and of the explanation added by our Lord, lies not upon the fact of the intermix- ture, but upon the certainty that there will be a decisive end to it. A time of deliberate (Kaeiaavrei) and final severance is announced as a warning to the evil, as an assurance to the good. The parable is concerned with the future rather than with the present, hence its suitability at the end of the series. As must be expected, the figure is not quite adequate. The whole operation of fishing is carried out by the same indi\'iduals. But the separation of the good and the evil at the end of the world will be effected not by the men through whom the Kingdom was extended, but by the angels, to whom this ministry is always assigned (Mt IS" 24" 25", Rev 14'»- ").
This parable, like tliat of tlie Tar<
from its oulu ! i II I lo whom that note could not be attached. A'._ , :, , I lliat such attempted separation
was forbiddi ri i-; I nl apart from the case of open evil- doers, and tliat lie liriil n..t rnntemplated a community in its present stage free from admixture of evil. The net must contain both good and bad fish till it is drawn to tlie beach. As against schism, he points out the folly of those who, like fish breaking through or leaping over the net to escape the com- pany of worthless flsh within, refuse to wait the final and thorough separation appointed by God, and in mistakenly pressing the purity of the Church lose its catholicity (Augustine, Enarr. in Ps. 64. 6 ; cf. also Enari: in Ps. 12U. 3 ; Coll. Carth. d. 3 ; ad Don. Post. Coll. 4, S, 10).
What conception of the Kingdom of Heaven is indicated by the parable ? The parable may be said to be an expansion of the idea contained in ' fishers of men.' Taken by itself, it might seem to supjjort the identification of the Kingdom of Heaven with the Church ; but in other contexts the Kingdom of Heaven (or of God) requires a much more compre- hensive explanation. Harnack's asM-itioii that onr Lord meant by this term, so .onslajitly iciuiiing in His teaching, only an inwaid cxiiriiriicf of the believer {Das Wesen des Chri.stnilnnis, y. .S.'iir.), seems quite unsuited to this passage. So, too, does the Abb6 Loisy's explanation of the Kingdom as being still entirely in the future, and existing in the present only as an expectation (The Gospel and the Church, % ii.). The parable, naturally in- terpreted, certainly suggests a visible comnmnity. The Kingdom is conceived of both as inward and outward, coiisistinu- in its jirpsent stage both of thipsr who .lie aiiini.ilcd li\ its true sijirit, and Uio-,.' «lio li.|,iii;j I,, ji ,iiii\' ^.1 f.-ir that they are iiirlihl.-il ill iN rMnnal nru.i iii,:ation. Again, the Kingdom is rupic-ciitcd a.s belonging to the present, and yet as awaiting its consunuuation in a future crisis of iudgment. And it is in idea universal ('gathered of every kind'), tending to include all men within its bounds.