kingdom of heaven; it is a precept of that exalted righteousness exceeding the right- eoueneee of scribes and Pharisees which Christ absolutely requires of all his people. How, then, ie it to be interpreted? I. Tme IBA LAW OF UNIVERSAL CHRIBTIAN CONDUOT, Christ was not a Solon, drawing up a code of state !awe. His precept wes not made in any legislative assembly. He spoke to men who lived under the irresistible yoke of stem, just Roman government. But hie words had no influence with that government. 'l'hus, no doubt, they were primarily for private conduct. 'l'hey did not concern the question of a state's duty in derendin 6 its coast from the invader, or protecting its citizens by police supervision from outrage. But attempts have been made to confine the obligations of our Lord's words to th'l individual relations which he was contemplating when he uttered them. The Sermon on the Mount, we are told, ie for private Christian guidance only; it ie not intended to regulate governments. Surely that is a dangerous narrowing of its functions. So long as the state is not Christian, Christian principles cannot be looked for in legislation; but as soon as the gospel has Christianized the state, Christian principles must appear in public policy. This was apparent in the criminal legislation of Constantine, tbe first Christian emperor of the Roman empire. It is a grossly unchristian thing for men in a free, self-governing country to think that motives of greed ·or revenge that are not permissible between man and man are allowable between nation and nation. II. THIS LAW IS NOT INCONSISTENT WITH ORDER AND JUSTICE. To sec that it is not, we must observe its exact application. 1. It does not concern our defenr:£ of others; it only touches our defence of our own rights. The government ie bound to protect those committed to its charge, but it is not bound to avenge an affront offered to itself. The policeman is required to guard the victim of a brutal assault from violence, but he is not bound to avenge insults and wrongs directed against himself. 2. The reference to tM "lea; talionis" evidently shows that the thought is of revenge. Still, all resistance of evil seems to be forbidden. It is certainly difficult to see how the principle is to be applied in all cases. 3. Nevertheless, we have saaly faued to mrry out even it, intel- ligible and more obvious demand,. Patience and calm endurance of wrong are not Anglo-Saxon characteristics, but they are Christian.• Interpret Christ's precept (1) in the light of ver. 5; (2) in the light of his own behaviour under arrest; and (3) in connection with the next precept.-W. F. A. ·- Vere. 43-48.-.Loving one's enemy. This is another instance of the way in which Christian righteousness is to exceed the righteousness of scribes and Pharisees. Let us consider the duty and the motives that urge it. I. THE DUTY. 1. Positive. This carries us beyond patience under insult and non- resistance to injury. The previous passage insisted on those duties only, It was negative in character, forbidding a wrong course of conduct; therefore obedience to it would be purely passive. Now we come to a positive and active duty-to love and aid. 2. Helpful. Love is a subjective sentiment, but it cannot confine itself to tho breast of the person who cherishes it. It must flow out in deeds of kindness. Here is the key to the precept in the previous paragraph. By itself it seems to be impossible to carry out so extraordinary a rule; or, if it were put in practice, it looks as though it might be quite subversive of society. But it must be followed by the conduct now recommended. Bare non-resistance will not be successful. It will only end in the 3xtiaction of right and the triumph of aggressive evil. But non-resistance, sustained by 'active love to our enemies, will assume a very different character. Love is a more power- ful weapon than tbe sword. We are to "overcome evil with good" (Rom. xii. 21); to conquer our enemy by destroying his enmity, while we prove ourselves bis friends. 3, Prayerful, Love is not sufficient to meet the hard heart of enmity. Ouly the gracious influences of the Spirit of God can do it. 'l'herefore we are to prny for these. If we are wrongfully used, we may overcome our enemies by seeking for God to turn their hearts while we show them brotherly kindness, II. lTs REASONABLENESS. This duty is eo contrary to the ways of the world that it seems to be quite unnatural and unreasonable. But Christ shows that he ha, good grounds for demanding it of us. 1. The example of our Father in heaven. God is not only kind to the good. First, he shows infinite patiilnce and forbearance. Theu he goes beyond these passive excellences and manifests active beneficence in sending 8unshins 184 THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO ST. MATTHEW. [OB. v. 1--48.
and rain to all sorts and conditions of men, Thus he is impartial in his kindness. He does not regulate his favours by our deserts. The very constitution and course of nature reveal this large, indiscriminate beneficence of God. Yet God maintains order in the universe, and ultimately effects the triumph of the right. Therefore kindneBB to enemies is not unnatural; it is the very method of nature. It is not unreasonable; it accords with God's wise way of governing the universe. 2. Tlie obligations of Ohrutwnity. The law of resentment represents a low stage of moral development, If religious people follow this law, they are no better than the irreligious-" the publicans;" if Christians follow it, they are no better than the heathen-" the Gentiles ; " i.e. Christian love as such only appears when we begin to love those whom we should not love if we were not following Christ. We prove our religion, not in those good things in which we agree with the irreligious, but in those by means of which we surpass them. Meanwhile no lower standard can be allowed to the Christian; he must aim at nothing less than the Divine example ofperfection.-W. F. A.