the men of His generation, would not receive the Kingdom of God. This, however, is equally true of the same class in every age. The Pharisees, unfortunately, cannot be restricted to the time of Christ. Their lineal descendants are multitudinous; the fecundity of the class is marvelous. The world, in fact, is full of religious dilettantes, of players at religion. Our Lord designated these repeatedly as hypocrites; and the title was indeed deserved. The word originally signified an actorone who spoke through a mask, according to the custom of the ancient stage. Such, indeed, is the hypocrite throughout all time-one who plays a part. He may seek only to deceive others, or he may unconsciously deceive himself. Hypocrisy, however, is either the intentional, or the unintentional acting of a rôle.

Unfortunately, well nigh every age betrays the earmarks of this Pharisaic class. The Roman Church, for example, at the Reformation, lacked the moral earnestness to grasp the significance of the strenuous voice of Luther, in spite of the repeated warnings of Savonarola, Wycliffe, and others, the farseeing heralds of the coming dawn. The lethargic Anglican Church of the eighteenth century lacked, to its shame and loss, the moral depth to appreciate the mighty protest of Wesley, and the zeal and intensity of the early Methodist movement. Yet both the Roman and the Anglican Churches were very earnestly playing at religion. In fact, many instances of this Pharisaic blindness might be cited, not only in the Church, but in the State and in Society. The Abolition movement, the present labor agitation, and the general social movement of our time witness to its presence in more recent years. In truth, this moral obtuseness is the fruitful parent of heresy and schism. in the Church, and of Revolution in the State and in the Social Organism. These are caused more frequently by the goodness of the human heart than by its evil. A self-satisfied and superficial age meets the enlightened or the unenlightened, the restless and the earnest heralds of a new era with stolid indifference, open contempt, or hostility. Often the witnesses for the truth fall, the victims of their progressive ideas, and the blindness of their generation. Yet the down-trodden truth rises again, only strengthened by defeat, to cumulate ever accumulating strength until the storm breaks; then we have

revolution in Church or State or Society: the atmosphere is cleared, and men breathe more freely.

Jesus also gives another well-founded criticism of this Pharisaic class in the parable of the Two Sons. "But what think ye? A certain man had two sons; and he came to the first, and said, Son, go work to-day in my vineyard. He answered and said, I will not; but afterward he repented, and went. And he came to the second, and said likewise. And he answered and said, I go, sir: and went not. Whether of them twain did the will of his father? They say unto him, The first. Jesus saith unto them, Verily I say unto you, That the publicans and the harlots go into the kingdom of God before you. For John came unto you in the way of righteousness, and ye believed him not: but the publicans and the harlots believed him: and ye, when ye had seen it, repented not afterward, that ye might believe him" (St. Matthew 21:28-32).

This parable is the preface to the parables of the Wicked Husbandmen, and the Marriage of the King's Son. It is addressed to the same persons, and with much the same intent. In it, Jesus does for His auditors that for which the poet Burns petitions in his famous lines:

"Oh wad some power the giftie gie us

To see oursel's as others see us!"

Our Lord, in fact, not infrequently assumes the rôle of the candid friend. Malice, however, or the mere desire to wound are never the prompting motives. This parable, and the superb invective of the denunciation of the Scribes and Pharisees, more poignant than any that can be found in the Philippics of Demosthenes, the Orations against Cataline, or the letters of Junius (St. Matthew 23), are the attempts of an outraged but loving heart to open the blind eyes, and by heroic measures, to sting into amendment of life, where the soft appeal of love has failed.

But what is the portraiture of this parable? To understand that the Two Sons represent respectively the Jews and the Gentiles is to misunderstand the parable, and to ignore the context. The correct interpretation finds in the first mentioned son, the publicans and the harlots of Jesus' day. The former were the despised tax-gatherers who, as Jews, in the service of

the Roman Empire, were thought to sacrifice both their religion and their patriotism to assume such an office. The latter were women of the street, who, in the sacrifice of chastity, lost selfrespect, and became a menace and a scourge to others. These classes, along with other Jews before the days of John the Baptist, had been commanded by God to work in His vineyard of Israel, and to produce the fruit of righteousness of life according to the teaching of the Law and the Prophets. They had curtly and steadily refused. But when John came, there was a change. The tremendous earnestness and the moral power of the man had produced a conviction of sin, had fanned into flame the slumbering embers of conscience, and had awakened a desire for a better life. Consequently they repented, and went into the Vineyard.

But the Second Son-who is he? Manifestly he represents. the Chief Priests and the Elders whom Jesus was addressing; the members of the Sanhedrin, the great legislative, executive, and judicial council of the Jews and their class. While they, with much pretention and an unseemly ostentation which called forth stinging rebuke from Jesus on more than one occasion, were apparently working in the Vineyard, in truth they were not laboring in the Vineyard at all. And, unlike the poor publicans and harlots, the strong voice of the Baptist had no message for them, and his passionate appeal awakened no response. Even when they saw the supposedly irredeemable classes repenting, they were not convinced. Hence Jesus aptly remarked, "The publicans and harlots go into the kingdom of God before you." The satire of this remark is incomparable. Before the Chief Priests, the Elders, the Aristocracy, the Orthodox, the publicans and harlots were to enter the Kingdom of Heaven. Verily, the wounds of the Friend are faithful. But how humbling to Jewish pride, and how bitter to Jewish ears! We must indeed admire the splendid courage of the Man Christ-Jesus, and His keenness of perception. Have these parables no meaning for our generation?

CHAPTER IX

THE VALUE OF THE KINGDOM

NOTWITHSTANDING its varying reception at the hands of men, the Kingdom would remain life's chief value. Jesus was fully convinced of this as His words attest. Let us notice some of His declarations.

The Lord's Prayer is interesting and suggestive in this connection. The first petition is that the name of God, not the mere name however, for among the Hebrews names were not conferred indiscriminately, but each bore a distinct significance, rather the name with all that it connotes may be hallowed or reverenced of men. Secondly, petition is made that God's rule may become actual in that God's will may be done on earth as it is done in Heaven. This, of course, would be the direct outcome of man's proper reverence for God; hence the first petition reveals the logical order both in time and thought. What is noteworthy, however, is that Jesus foreshadows His estimate of the value of the Kingdom, when He makes prayer for its coming, and that which will induce its coming, precede prayer for any immediate individual need. This, indeed, is an essential characteristic of all prayer genuinely offered in the name of Jesus. To ask anything in Jesus' name means to ask in the spirit, the power and the intention of Christ. It means that the one who prays is occupying toward God the relationship of Jesus in love and desire, so far as that relationship can be assumed by any human being. All prayer is, therefore, conditional: the condition of successful prayer is the Kingdom of God. If this fact were remembered how much richer would be both the teaching and the practice of the Christian Church.

But we are not confined to inferential evidence as to the value of the Kingdom. There are explicit statements of Jesus upon the subject, Most obvious, perhaps, is this one: "Seek ye first the kingdom of God and his righteousness; and

all these things shall be added unto you" (St. Mt. 6:33; St. Lu. 12:31-32). Here we see that Jesus would not only have the coming of the Kingdom the primary burden of humanity's prayer, He would also have it the primary quest of mankind. When given by St. Matthew, the words just quoted are a portion of the Sermon on the Mount, and the context assist greatly in their interpretation. Jesus has just declared that "No man can serve two Masters"-God and Gold. He bids His followers "take no thought for your life, what ye shall eat, or what ye shall drink." He inquires, "Is not the life more than meat, and the body than raiment?" He cites the birds of the air, and the tender lilies of the field as illustrations of that which is fed and clothed by the Father in Heaven without wearying anxiety. He then asks, If God makes such provision for even the short-lived grass of the field, shall He not much more clothe and care for His children? The answer is self-evident; and Jesus closes His subject with an earnest exhortation to the disciples, not to take thought as to what they shall eat or drink, or wherewithal they shall be clothed, for these are the chief objects of the heathen Gentile's life. Rather are they to "seek first the kingdom of God, and his righteousness; and all these things shall be added."

Jesus, indeed, sees that mankind at large seeks the temporal and the transient, and that about these they worry greatly.1 Now in contradistinction to this quest, Jesus urges mankind to seek, in the first place, the Kingdom or sovereignty of God. His idea is this: Instead of that forbidden care for temporal concerns and necessities, which most people make the chief end of life, mankind should seek first the rule of God, and that righteousness of life of which God approves. The passage, however, is really stronger than it appears to be at first sight. To seek something first might imply that there could be a legitimate seeking of something else second. This, however, is not the teaching of Jesus. A second striving is entirely precluded from His thought by the words which follow, and which precede these. Jesus has just declared against the objects of the Gentiles' search, and has shown that there will

"Not to be anxious" is the significance of the Greek merimnesete, which is translated in the Authorized Version by the somewhat colorless phrase, "Take no thought."