ARO - HDEACON -FARRAA'S MDSSA.GES OF THE Bo OS.
ARCHDEACON FARRAR claims, 'and, as -far as we -know, with -justice,-a certain originality for the form of his present -work. He writes in his -Preface -that there has not been with a single exception-mentioned in a note) any volume of sermons, either in Patristic, -Scholastic, Reformation, or Postaeforrnation theology, from the -first century down to the last decade, which contains a series of discourses dealing seriatim with "the messages of the Books." Bythis phrase, which, though somewhat vague, may pass as a convenient and even telling title, he means a general account of the contents, characteristics, and designs of the various -books of Scripture. His present-volume deals only-with the-books of the 'New Testament. In the event, -scarcely doubtful we-should-think, -of its-success, he proposes in a future work to -deal similarly with-the books of -the Old. If -he carries -out this intention -he will -be doing a great -service, not so much, perhaps, -to regular -students, -but -to •average -readers of-the Bible, persons -of -good intelligence and power of attention, but-without the habitudes of study. A_ fair. proportion of these might be -able to give a connected account-of one-of the Epistles, say of -that to the Colossians, or—an easier matter —the Galatians; but how few could give any answer at all if interrogated about such a book -as" The Prophecy of Zechariah," or even of -Amos. It is, indeed, for-the general reader-rather-than for-the-student that Dr. Farrar writes, though there are few to whom,-with. his -wide reading, his -richness of illustration, and his -felicity and brilliancy -of comparison and suggestion, he should not -be both interesting and useful. 'Much of -his-matter has been -used before—in subjects so long and so carefully studied it could not be otherwise. Indeed, he often, as he frankly 'acknowledges, -repeats himself ; but his combinations are fresh and original, and a picturesque faculty, which-the _nature -of his work happily keeps -him from indulging to an excess-which we _have sometimes criticised in -his writings, is happily-and-effectively employed.
'We should be inclined toselect,nsthebest -part -of his work, -the chaptersinwhich he deals -with the 'Epistles. 'His discussion of the "iBpistle to the Romans" is, indeed, 'a little disappointing. To many minds,-tha" message" -of -this-book has given, from almost the earliest times, a terrible conception of sovereign decrees which dispose of the eternal destinies of men. This conceptionowhich almost dominated -'the Church at some periods of its history, has now -lost much of its consistency and .force ; but there axe few -who can read the ninth chapter-without -feeling, so to speak, the old chains, broken he mayhavethought forever, tightening again upon him. We could-wish that Dr. :Farrar had addressed --himself .more -definitely and closely to --grapple with this -difficulty. A -note, indeed, gives as: a statement whichweare -most willing to accept -that St. _Paul "was not oppressed by the problem of God's foreknowledge, -because (1) he believed absolutely in Gods infinite love; and (2) the -apparently looked forward to -the redemption of the !universe and of the xaee ;" but-this:and -whatever-else sve can find beaming on the same difficulty -leaves a goad ideal to haexplained. We -are-aware that the plan of the -work does not include a' commentary on difficulties ; but a theology which is -wholly opposed tothese conceptionsof " infinite love "and "-redemption of the universe" has been so -largely founded on this /book-, that we should like to have-Been a fuller-exposition of the statementthat " Whatever-else-the Epistle to the !Romans-may bad-Lis:transcendently anepistle of hope."
-In-his-treatment-oft-he Epistles to the Corinthians, Dr. Farrar isseen at his best. He gives, a great helpto the understanding of the First Epistle byan ingenious reconstruction of the letter which the Corinthians had addressed to-the Ayiostle„and which, together with other facts which had comatairis.knowledge,thad called forth -from him this weighty reply. This latter he-supposes -to have contained -various queries, about (1):ediliacyand marriage ; (2) meats offered to idols; (3) rules of behaviour at public -worship ; (4) ,spiritual .gifts ; (5) the 'resurrection; (6) the hest methodof -collecting the alms whioh the Apostle had -asked for the Jerusalem poor. The Epistle will he ;found to .assurnaa coherent and orderly appearance which everyasader will not at once discover an at, if at as-read-as-an answer to some such document as this„and a comment -on further-disclosures which the bearers of-the Corinthian .Epistle may have been supposed to have given. Similarly, in the account of the Second
Epistle we find -a -happy explanation of the -difference of tone -observable lathe last four chapters -as compared with those that precede item. Dr. Farrar writes
'What happened appears to have been this. After he had despatched Titus, some one seems -to have come from Corinth who brought the disastrous intelligence that the party of his opponents had been reinforced and animated by the arrival of an obtrusive emissary -with introductory -letters -from Jerusalem whose opposition to St. Paul had been more marked, and more unscrupulous than any -with which he had yet had to deal. Incited by this Judaic sophister, some of the Corinthians had been passing their censures on St. Paul still more freely than before. They had been saying—as this new messenger from Corintlyperhaps unwisely and unnecessarily told-St. Paul.--s-that his presence was mean ; that he was untutored in speech; -that he was only bold in letters and at .a distance ; that he walked according to tho fiesh—that is, that his motives were worldly, not spiritual ; that there was in him a vein of folly, or even of insanity ; that-he had sinister designs in-suggesting the offering for the saints at.Jerusalern ; that his sending . of Tituswas.only a crafty cloak for his own avarice ; that his-apparentself-deniul rose from the fact that he had no commendatory letters to show ; that he had never known Jesus, and had misrepresented him altogether; that he was not to-be regarded as a true Apostle. The fact thatench oahrtnniesahould have been current among the converts whons.he loved :made him -at once wretched and indignant. Dazaleddiy the outrageous pretensions of this, Pharisee, benumbed -by the torpedo-touch of his avarice, the Corinthians were beginning to repudiate their true teacher. The absolute • necessity-of refuting -such attacks -rose from the importance of his position, and is farther rillnetrated by the extreme vitality of the Ebionite hatred of St. Paul, -which smouldered on for a century later, and even in the psendo-Clementine writings allows its treacherous and sullen -fires. From this point of his latter -onwards the tender effusiveness nod-earnest praise towhieh we have hitherto -been listening is replaced by a tone of auppmssed .indignation, in -which -love, struggling with bitter irony, renders the language constrained, like the words of one who with difficulty checks himself from saying all that-his emotion might-suggest. One characteriatic of these chapters is the constant recurrence of the word 'boat' and ',boasting,' which occurs twenty-nine times .in these Epistles, and only /six times in all thereat. Now 'boasting' was a thing of which the most distant resemblance was abhorrent to the nature of the ApostAo. But something which his enemies-might -have characterised as boasting ' -was -simply wrung from him by the injustice -of his oppcments, and the defection of his flack. To three things especially he could appeal— to his Apostolic activity, to his spiritual , gifts, to the Churches which. he had founded?'
A little luxuriance of phrase might have been pruned with advantage, but the passage is certainly effective.
We would also -specify the chapters in which the 'Pastoral Epistles are discussed-as being particularly able, especially in the statement of the case for their genuineness, a-statement at once concise and forcible. Some readers will, perhaps, be surprised to see plain practical arguments of this kind adorned with purpurei panni„ as e.g., the highly rhetorical passage about the " cloke,"-for which Bt. Paul -sends from his _Roman dungeon (which, by the-way, could hardly.have been the "rocky -floor of the Tuiliannm ") ; 'lint theyshould -remember thatthe -volume consists of sermons, to which rhetoric is certainly appropriate, and to which, indeed, its graces might be more frequently and effectively-applied than is commonly done by English preachers. We would also commend to the-notice of our readers a very forcible argument against the Petrine authorship of the :Second ;Epistle ; -and, to-tonch for .a anoreent an earlier part of the
volume,-tcean. excellent Tzpologia-for the Gospel of St. John. Dr. Farrar -urges, with special force, the argument that it is im
possible to find among the Christian writers of the second century anything at all approaching to the excellence of this book.
We take leave of Dr. Farrar with a heartylcommendation
to
our readers of this most useful -volume.
Previous page
