5. The Universality of Love.— The Law of Love in its relation to our duty to one another is expressed by the command, 'Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.' But the question arises. What is the scope of this love ? (3r, as it was put to our Lord Himself, 'Who is my neighbour?' (Lk 10^"). The answer to this question is contained in the passage already referred to (Mt S"-''*). Our love is to be, like God's, a blessing for all who need it, the evil as well as the good, the just as well as the unjust, our enemies as well as our friends. In the parable of the Good Samaritan (Lk 10™"''), the same answer
selected as the hero of His parable a man belong- ing to a race which was hated and despised by the Jews. There was an exquisite wisdom in this choice. Why not have made a Jew assist a Samaritan, or even a Gentile, in order to illustrate the principle? But our Lord wished to teach by an example appealing rather to the humanity than to the national feelings of His hearer. Had the act of mercy been shown by a Jew to a Samaritan it might have seemed condescension, a work of supererogation. Sho^vn by a Samaritan to a Jew, the true character of the goodness it reveals be- comes, from the Jewish point of view, far more evident. We ai-e taught that love should be universal in its nature. It should break down the barriers erected by race, or privilege, or religion.
It is impossible to exaggerate the importance of this teaching. Ancient civilizations were for the most part founded on slavery or on the subjection of races or classes. Underlying the whole Jewish system was the idea of a privileged people. Our Lord broke through the most inveterate of pre-
{'udices, and tauj;iit the universal obligation to ove and to lilos. He laid the foundation of liberty and of ]iliil:iiitlir<i])y.
6. The Great Example.'— In Mt 6^3, the ideal is set before us in two ways, as an objective aim and as a type of character: 'Seek ye first liis king- dom and his righteousness.' 'the righteousness of God is the standard. There is, and must be, a correspondence between the outward and the in- ward, oetween the Kingdom of God as a universe of souls bound together by the great love of their Father in Heaven and their love one to another, and the moral condition of each individual soul. When the latter side is considered, we ask, What is its quality ? what is its standard ? The answer is— the character of God. This is implied in the
very name ' Father ' (Mt 5"). The teachin" is, ' Be sons of your Father,' be like unto God. Even more explicit is the statement in Mt 5** ' Ye therefore shall be perfect as your heavenly Father is perfect.' This standard may seem too high. It may seem unreal to say to ordinary men and women, ' Be perfect as God.' But all realization of good character in human creatures is, so far as it goes, an imitation of God, a reproduction of the Divine. Goodness is always a following of God, though it be a very long way off'. What we have liere is the absolute standard, the highest possible ideal of character. Our Lord will set nothing lower before us. But the ideal is brought near to us in a way which is characteristic of Christianity. Jesus Christ Himself is the incarnation of the ideal. See Mt 112» 20=5-28, Mk 10«-«, Lk 6* 22=', Jn 13'=- ^- *> 15'=. In these passages our Lord holds Himself up as an example. And there can be no doubt that the influence of His character has been as potent a moral force as His words. He elevated humanity by being what He was. It is very hard to realize how vast was the change effected by the teaching and example of Christ. The conception of the ideal of character was altered. To see this truth we have but to compare Aristotle's picture of the ' great-souled man ' with our Lord. Noble and virtuous with the splendid but imperfect nobility and virtue of pagan Greece, the great- souled man is proud, self-satisHed and pompous. His very 'greatness,' as conceived by Aristotle, makes him a poor creature when placed beside Jesus of Nazareth. Above all, our Lord's example shows us the principle of love at work in human life.
7. Self renunciation. — When dealing with the lofty ]irinri|.les of absolute morality, our Lord's te;n liiiiu' !>■ iharacterized by the most extraordinary sweetness. \\ ith joyous confidence His thought lingers on the sunny heights of truth. But when He comes to speak of the struggle through which the soul must pass in its upward progress, His manner changes. There is an awful force in the language and imagery with which He teaches the necessity of self-sacrifice. From this we learn His attitude towards sin. See Mt 5=9- » Igs-', Mk 9«-« 1037-39_ Such passages show that His tenderness towards the repentant sinner involved no condon- ing of sin. Our Lord received sinners, but He never regarded their sins with complaisance. The following passages are important : Mt 10""- 16=^-=', Mk &*«■, Lk 9=®- 14°-=-s' 17^, Jn 12==, also Mt 7'- '*, Lk 13=*'''-. In these passages the necessity of self- renunciation is expressed in terms of the most vivid intensity. Yet the denial of self is nowhere repre- sented as an end in itself. It is a means, or rather the inevitable means. It is the way, not the goal. Yet it is a way which cannot be avoided if the goal is to be reached.