Serious objection must also be taken to the view, which has often been advocated, in the interests of a pure Church, since the Donatist controversy in the beginning of the 5th cent., that the evil element is in the world, the good element in the King- dom, and the blending of the two merely contiguity or co- existence in space. It is hard to see why our Lord should have been at such pains to point out what must be perfectly obvious to everybody, that the world is evil, and why He should recorn- mend a tolerant attitude toward the evil, instead of making it a reason for earnest evangelistic effort. Such a condition of things had long existed, and was only what might be expected. It could by no possibility give rise to the painful reflexion and inquiry described in the parable (Mt 1327), which are in reality due to the circumstance that the sin which exists in the world ' is always forcing its way anew into the circle in which the King- dom of God is being realized.' The surprise and disajipointment expressed by the servants are occasioned by the emergence of a phenomenon wholly unexpected, when the field originally sown with good seed is found afterwards to contain tares— an alien and unwelcome addition ; and their impatient zeal to begin at once the work of purification is, in the circumstances, ex- tremely natural. It is almost needless to remark that if the Son of Man at the end of the world is to ' gather out of his kingdom all things that offend (t«wt« t« o-««vS«x«), and them which do iniquity,' they must have existed previously within it (Mt 13*^).
The contrast is obviously between the mixed state of affairs now prevailing, and the Kingdom as it shall be, when, freed
from all admixture, it shines forth in its pure native lustre (Mt IS'^S). Meanwhile the disciples are directed to exercise a wise patience, and to refrain from drastic measures of reform which might result in injuries still more serious to the cause they have at heart (Mt 13^9). Their attitude of tolerance is by no means to be taken, however, as implying sanction or approval of ex- isting abuses. Christ freely admitted that the presence and conduct of unworthj' members were inconsistent with the Di\'ine ideal of the Kingdom, and could not but pro\e injurious to its best interests (Mt 1328. 39). But the possibility of ad- mixture was unavoidable, in view of the fact that the Divine Kingdom welcomed all without distinction, on their professed compliance with the conditions of admission to its membership. The wide and sweeping character of its operations exposed it to the risk of gathering into its bosom some who might do it serious discredit in the eyes of those who had its puritj' and welfare at heart, as well as of the world at large (Mt IS*'').
It would be a mistake to suppose that Christ meant to with- hold from His disciples authority to exercise discipline in the case of grave offences against the laws of the Kingdom, dis- cipline which the.v did, in point of fact, afterwards exercise (Ac §20 23^ 1 Co 53-5), but which had for its object the edification, and not the destruction, of believers (2 Co 10*). The infliction of censure or punishment in the case of gross offenders was in- tended to have a healing effect, and instead of aiming at per- manent exclusion from religious fellowship and privileges, had ultimate restoration to these in view. What our Lord deprecates is any attempt to forestall the Final Judgment by the absolute separation of offenders from religious fellowship, a separation issuing only in destruction (Mt 13-*0). Having regard to the im- perfections that cleave to human nature while still in a state of probation, it is evidently His intention that lenity rather than severity should characterize the treatment of offenders, lest good and evil be rashly included in one common condemnation, and the remedy prove so violent as to be worse than the disease (Mt 1329). Besides, the exercise of a decisive judgment would in many cases require a delicacy of discrimination and an insight into human character possessed only by a Divine person, and it is accordingly reserved for the Son of Man, in His capacity as Judge, at the end of the world. Even strong presumptive proof of moral unworthiness would not, in the case of mere human judgment, afford sufficient guarantee against the risk of mistake (Mt 1329). gee Church, Excommunication.
While the disciples are enjoined to preserve an attitude of pati6nt endurance toward evil within the Kingdom, Christ held out to them the prospect of a day of final sifting in which it would be com- pletely eliminated (Mt IP"- ^). The period of inter- mingling is at last to come to an end. The great separation to be then effected between the two elements so long opposed, has primarily in view the interest of an ideal purity, for which all earnest ones have anxiously hoped and striven. The burn- ing of the tares does not refer so much to the fate which ultimately overtakes evildoers, as to the fact that they can no longer exert a depressing eflect on the fortunes of the Kingdom. Hitherto they have existed as an obscuring medium, but with the re- moval of the scandals and their authors (v.^^) the character of the righteous at last appears, without shadow of eclipse, in all its unsullied jjurity and splendour (v.*^). The sifting out of unworthy mem- bers results in irreparable loss, at the same time leading, as it does, to their permanent exclusion from heavenly privileges (24^" 25"'- ^"). The grounds of .separation are quite general, consisting in broad fundamental distinctions of moral character, not clearly apparent at the outset, but beconung in- creasingly manifest as time goes on (13^"), so that at last a division into two classes, the righteous