19 MAY 1928, Page 22

A Gerrnan on the Gospel Story The Son of Man.

By Emil Ludwig. (Bean. 15s.) .

A LIFE of Jesus by Herr Emil Ludwig could not fail to be interesting ; the fascination of the subject and the talent of the author are guarantees of that. We expect that there will be evidence of -careful study of original- documents and a determined ' effort to throw the fruits of the study into vivid and almost photographic form, and we are not dis- appointed. -At all costs the figure must live, if 'Herr Ludwig is to tell his story.- He must be seen to be a man, very much influenced by emotions and subject to inner struggle. So here he tells us : "This book deals with ` Jesus' and has not a word to say about ' Christ.' The author does not meddle with theology ; that arose later, and he does not pretend to understand it." We know when we read these words what we are " in for." It is another in that long line of Leben. Jesu, Vie de Jesus, which descend, as Dr. Ludwig reminds us, from before the Enlightenment. We are to be given Jesus in His habit as He lived, as a "real man." And the project is well worth while still ; for still there are oddly many who regard Him as the creation of pious imagination. it is not only worth while ; but Dr. Ludwig's study occupies an honourable place in the series. He deals very fairly with the documents ; though he leaves out some things which should find a place.- But his sense of psychology makes him a shrewder critic than many a professor bemused by the problems of the study, and tied to documental fantasies.

Thus, though he bases his treatment on Mark and Matthew —he does not seem to have realized that much. of Luke has an even greater claim to veridicity than Matthew—he is not afraid not only to make use of the Marriage in Cana and the story of the Woman Taken in Adultery, but also to illustrate the character of Jesus by passages of Johannine teaching. He gives a naturalistic explanation of the miracles ; but he retains them. He does not shrink from squarely facing incidents—such as the forty days' fast in the desert—that fit in badly with his general view. This study stands high fOr honesty among its peers. On the whole Dr. Ludwig eyes the facts ; . he certainly makes them live. All turns on whether his interpretation of them is true. .

The book is based on a contrast. There are two periods in the life of Jesus—so it is supposed—an early.one of humble- minded but cheerful teaching, and a later when He was filled with the consciousness of a Messianic mission. The Jesus that attracts Dr. Ludwig is one who as a boy loved lying out on the hillside watching the sky, and birds and sheep, and learned through them to see the Father's hand everywhere. Even in His youth He seeks out vagabonds and harlots, and discovers some elements of good in them. The picture of His period of teaching is done with great insight and sympathy. "The simple in spirit believe him because he utters no threats, but brings them glad tidings ; because he discloses a happiness near to their grasp, calling it the kingdom of heaven ; and becalm, when doing so, he .does not like the Baptist, demAnd the gnashing/of teeth." He is a simple soul Himseff, humble, likeable, kindly,- well received everywhere, both by rich and poor, because He"'enjoys ordinary life, and brings the best out of people. He has a gift of healing which He keeps rather quiet. He makes no exorbitant demands either in ecclesiastical observance or morals—unless it be in the direction of forgive- ness, and even that helps to generate a pleasant atmosphere. He is rather aimless, true ; but still quite the person you like to have about the place. In fact He is a well-known type, and one that has conferred much benefit on the world, one indeed that historically owes its origin to Himself. He is a good kind of clergyman for a country parish. Can this be true?

Let us look at the other side of the shield. Under the grow- ing enmity of the Pharisees the character changes. Opposition has a queer effect on Him. Whereas before, He spoke of Himself as the Son of Man to express His humility, He now comes to use it to express His pride, His confidence that He is unique—the Son of God. He becomes more and more obsessed with the idea that He is the Messiah. His self-confidence becomes overweening. He boasts of His mighty works. As He grows more disappointed, He becomes bitter and harsh in speech. " The tender feeling of a filial relationship towards an all-loving Father has given place to an arrogant ecstasy, as though he alone were loved by the Father and could know the Father." He vacillates between the idea that He must be an expiatory sacrifice, and the hope that immediate victory is near. And this vacillation is reflected in His conduct in Jerusalem ; now proud and defiant, now timid and retiring. After this we are not surprised to find that only two of the utterances on the Cross are true. One the triumphant wordy " This very night thou shalt be with me in paradise." (This, we are told, was uttered so softly that the other- could scarcely hear Him, and we wonder how it ever came to be preserved.) The other and the more important, " My. God, my God, why hast - Thou forsaken me / " This -is the last word. The Cross is the end- of the story, and it is the .story

of a failure. . .

But here -those who have -been carried along to the last page by the 'vigour of the writing may well turn critical- if they have managed to suppress questions before. For,- after all, two thousand years have proved that it was not a; failure. There must be something wrong with the premisses. And there is. It is no doubt true that there was growth and development in the mind of Jesus. But to imagine that there was the radical change that Dr. Ludwig presupposes- makes nonsense . of the. story. The Messianic conception was implicit at least from the Baptism. If we recognize that, essentially, He meant by the use of the term Son of Man at the beginning, what He meant by it at the end, a consistent and credible figure emerges. Dr. Ludwig has furnished one more proof that the historic Jesus can only be reconstructed by accepting His unique and dominating claim. The honesty with which Dr. Ludwig accepts the facts only makes the central point more luminous. The story cannot end with the burial. Dr, Ludwig says we are too much influenced by -modern pictures. He does not himself escape. The " gentle Jesus " .with- the neatly parted hair of Hoffmann's pictures is not the Jesus of history. This interpretation -implies a theology, and it is rendered suspicious by the claim that it " aspires, at least, to be in harmony with the spirit of our own time."

A. S. Duricesr-Jorth.s.