What is astounding is that such theory of life should have been taught two thousand years ago, when wholly foreign to the then trend of human thought. But that it is thought of our land and our times who to-day will deny?

76. Such then epitome of the Christian ideal. In its development it is not a little remarkable how fair an index it proves of the corresponding change and growth in our ethical conceptions. We see the birth of this new philosophy, we mark it in its maturity amongst ourselves. What of the intervening period? The amazing change from then to now is obvious. How of the steps by the way? To mark the advance, note but the close of the war of Rome with the Jews, and that of our great war. The Jews conquered, and we see Titus-Titus, famed and beloved for his magnanimity-carrying back with him to Italy prisoners by the thousand to grace his triumph, and that those at home, their senators and common folk, their high-born ladies and children, their philosophers and their priests, equally with the masses and the rabble of their untaught, might gloat over the scenes and agonies of war which they were only too realistic in reproducing. And what in these times of a circus advertisement which should tell us that five hundred German prisoners would be exhibited in battle scene, with a guarantee that not less than two hundred would be killed outright or at least wounded beyond hope of recovery. Altogether inconceivable. Or what of the reduced programme that merely one captive, in all the vitality of his youth, would be crucified or burnt or tortured on the stage. The very suggestion is appalling. Why, we are not quite satisfied that we are right to refuse them hospitality in a friendly tournament of chess. And as some would have it, is there no connection between then and now? Grant that in its inception the very philosophy of Christ was reaction and revolt from the horrors of His times, are we to wholly ignore a teaching which, preached so long ago, yet anticipates our highest thought to-day. Had it

proved mere platitude it had been otherwise; but the philosophy of Christ finds a certain correspondence in the conduct of our time. Maybe in the story of its dogma, the story of Christianity has been a sad one; but, after all, that has been but a part of its story, and the part of least value. Men quarrelled over dogma, not because they were Christians but because they were men. Men were cruel, quarrelsome, vindictive, and hateful, not because of their faith but because in themselves they were about the most worthless creatures the world has known. Had they not quarrelled over their petty theological differences they would have quarrelled over everything else. When men are quarrelsome any cause will serve as occasion for difference. Of course, if theologians are out to claim that the progress of man is due to dogmatic Christianity, they must cast up both sides of the account. It is no fair bookkeeping to claim all the good associated with their squabbling and omit all the evil. But, on the other hand, to deny all influence to the beautiful philosophy of our Lord is as much to err on the other side. Nor has the Church been all theological, all quarrelling. It has numbered its myriads of sincere, honest, true, hard-working lovers of our Lord and of His teaching who have given their lives to doing His will. And they have filled a want in the world; and they still fill a want in the world. And as long as they try to live His life and teach others to do the same, they will continue to fill a want. No doubt, if every Church were swept out of existence tomorrow, the power of Christ would still be the power of the land, but for all that the world would be very much the poorer. Too much of the best of our lives is associated with our Churches, and no one could possibly view their destruction with equanimity. Yet, at the same time, it is very far from the fact that amongst them alone is Christianity to be found. And the day the Churches recognize this reality that day they will add immeasurably to their influence, their power, and, not least, to their numbers.

CHAPTER XXII.

THE TEACHING OF CHRIST.

177. To realize how the religion of Christ had its first inception, we must try to understand how the truths He taught would then appeal to mankind. And it would rather be as a new philosophy than a new creed that it would impress itself on the people of His times. We have noted the basic difference between His teaching and thought then current, and that Christ was fully acquainted with it all is easily established by any slight inquiry into the comparative tenets of contemporary schools. Our Lord was a great cosmopolitan. As a boy He was probably educated in Alexandria, and then it is in Galilee of the Gentiles that we see Him, and Galilee was one of the great entrepots, marts, junctions, or clearing houses of the civilized empires of those days. Through it to the south is the only practicable road to Egypt; to the east is the route to the once great empire of Persia; and a little beyond to India and the extreme Orient generally. To the north was the once famous empire of the Hittites, with Darius's great road still leading to Smyrna, to the Dardanelles, and to Europe in general. At the time of our Lord Rome was the master power of the physical world, though the Greek still held sway in the realms of art and thought. Of this Hellenized imperium, Galilee was a hub, with spokes radiating from it in every direction. It was impossible to find a better centre for receiving impressions, or for giving widest dissemination to any new or striking teaching. On the one hand we are not to be surprised that Christ's teaching does recall that of every other philosopher, nor on the other that along with the story of His foul murder we also find it making its way to the uttermost parts of the earth. Here He was in touch with all the known wisdom of His age. The lore of the Brahmin was His, the teaching of Buddha helped to make His own. Zoroaster finds echo in His

repeated truths, whilst Babylonian and Chaldean legend-foundation of so much of the Jewish creedwas essentially His as well. So with the dual spirit of Egypt-with its ancient cult, its belief in a life hereafter and judgment to come, as well as with its later exotic hellenistic and more purely monotheistic school He was absolutely saturated. Nor did there escape Him the essentially anthropomorphic outlook of Europe, with its conceptions so amazingly idealized by Greek art. And Christ is all these and none of these as we hear the teaching that is to transform mankind. Contact with all undoubtedly, but with what difference in essentials. And yet, in the days of darkness so soon to smother the world, shall we be surprised if even there is a mistiness as to who this teacher was? "I anathematize those that say that Zoroaster, and Buddha, and Christ, and Manichaeus, and Mithra are one and the same." Thus the early renunciation put in the mouth of the new convert to Christianity, showing how soon doubts had arisen. even as to His identity, but with how little justification. Where in any of them teaching such as His? That characteristics belonging to them may have been appropriated to Him is possible. Why confusion with Manichaeus at this time is difficult to understand. But it is otherwise with Mithra the Mediator; the friend of man; the saviour from evil spirits after death; especially when we remember how much the gentile world of those times sought to find resemblances and not differences in the deities of their beliefs. That later Christians saw in Christ this Mithra, or mediator with God, is undoubted; but pre-eminently the teaching of Christ himself was that God was our Father. This was the supreme truth He came to tell mankind. With Zoroaster in his broad, ethical teaching He certainly has much in common; and the sweet touch of Buddha, the harmony that pervades his thought, the mutual kindliness He would inspire in His followers, all find warm response; but Zoroaster does not content Him, and certainly He is no Buddhist.

Far too miserable the view of life as a whole that Buddha takes. This life a weary pilgrimage, a trial, a purification, a preparation, and for what? For heaven? an eternity of bliss hereafter? No, not for this; but to be as if we had never been. The consummation of the whole Nirvana; absorption in the infinite of which we once have been part. Cheerless, cold, hopeless; at best hardly more than a great negation. What more despairing belief? but with the redeeming feature that in this world even it does secure its votaries a happiness of which its very teaching is stern disapproval. But this is a world's experience. Happiness is rarely the prize of those who alone make it their quest; rather it proves reward of those who give it little thought. Many a one at the call of duty has courted joylessness and sorrow, and to his amazement has found that it is such happiness he has made his own. Thus one of the pleasing results of Buddha's teaching, though neither the intended nor the expected one. But Christ, He will have no such pessimism, not even in thought. He has come to show the Father that He may bring fulness of joy into the life of man. He would have life here one long song of rejoicing. Life is not the terrible infliction of Buddha; it is the good gift of a Heavenly Father, and we praise and serve that Father best when we enjoy His gift to the full and our hearts are full of thankfulness and love.

78. Thus we glance at the thought of Christ in relation to that of the great world teachers of the past, and here we would try and see Him in more particular relation to His own people and His own times. As a man we get a glimpse of Him, and would much love to fill in His portrait with more detail and completeness. We have seen Him as first of the fierce, resolute, heroic race we have been witnessing, and with them He could look death in the face and smile. Never Jew more centemptuous of Titus than Christ contemptuous of Pilate. How one delights to look on that proud, unbending figure. In the prime and vigour of man