« הקודםהמשך »
to hide in a mystery the wisdom spoken, which the Son of God taught. Now, therefore, Isaiah the prophet has his tongue purified by fire, so that he may be able to tell the vision. And we must purify not the tongue alone, but also the ears, if we attempt to be partakers of the truth.
“Such were the impediments in the way of my writing. And even now I fear, as it is said, 'to cast the pearls before swine, lest they tread them under foot, and turn and rend us. For it is difficult to exhibit the really pure and transparent words respecting the true light, to swinish and untrained hearers. For scarcely could anything which they could hear be more ludicrous than these to the multitude; nor any subjects, on the other hand, more admirable or more inspiring to those of noble nature. But the natural. man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God; for they are foolishness to him.'* But the wise do not utter with their mouth what they reason in council. But what ye hear in the ear,' says the Lord, 'proclaim upon the houses;'t bidding them receive the secret traditions of the true knowledge, and expound them aloft and conspicuously; and as we have heard in the ear, so to deliver them to whom it is requisite; but not enjoining us to communicate to all without distinction, what is said to them in parables. But there is only a delineation in the memoranda, which have the truth sowed sparse and broadcast, that it may escape the notice of those who pick up seeds likę jackdaws; but when they find a good husbandman, each one of them will germinate and produce corn." (p. 388.)
What, again, more undeniable, and, rightly applied, more use-, ful, than the assertion which forms the title of the next chapter (xii.):-"All sects of philosophy contain a germ of truth
“Since, therefore, truth is one (for falsehood has ten thousandby-paths); just as the Bacchantes tore asunder the limbs of Pentheus, so the sects both of barbarian and Hellenic philosophy have done with truth, and each vaunts as the whole truth the portion which has fallen to its lot. But all, in my opinion, are illuminated by the dawn of Light. (Namely Jesus : John viü. 12,' says the Translator in a Note). .... So, then, the barbarian and Hellenic philosophy has torn off a fragment of eternal truth, not from the mythology of Dionysus, but from the theology of the ever-living Word.” (pp. 389, 390.)
It might have been thought that another passage in the * Stromata" had been written in answer to those who, in our own time, decry “human knowledge” as “necessary for the understanding of the Scriptures." (Bk. I. c. ix.) • « Some, who think themselves naturally gifted, do not wish to touch either philosophy, or logic; nay more, they do not wish to learn natural science. They demand bare faith alone, as if they wished, without bestowing any care on the vine, straightway to * 1 Cor. ii. 14. .
Matt. x. 27. Vol. 68.- No. 373.
gather clusters from the first. Now the Lord is figuratively described as the vine, from which, with pains and the art of husbandry, according to the word, the fruit is to be gathered.
“We must lop, dig, bind, and perform the other operations. The pruning-knife, I should think, and the pick-axe, and the other agricultural implements, are necessary for the culture of the vine, so that it may produce eatable fruit. And as in husbandry, so also in medicine; he has learned to purpose, who has practised the various lessons, so as to be able to cultivate and to heal. So also here, I call him truly learned who brings everything to bear on the truth; so that, from geometry, and music, and grammar, and philosophy itself, culling what is useful, he guards the faith against assault... . . And how serviceable is it to distinguish expressions which are ambiguous, and which in the Testaments are used synonymously! For the Lord, at the time of His temptation, skilfully matched the devil by any ambiguous expression. i ... And if the prophets and apostles knew not the arts by which the exercises of philosophy are exhibited, yet the mind of the prophetic and instructive spirit, uttered secretly, because all have not an intelligent ear, demands skilful modes of teaching in order to clear exposition. For the prophets and disciples of the Spirit knew infallibly their mind. For they knew it by faith, in a way which others could not easily, as the Spirit has said. But it is not possible for those who have not learned to receive it thus.” (pp. 379, 380.)
The history of the Septuagint, furnished by Clement, will be regarded as very interesting; indeed, considering its data, as our authentic information upon that subject:
" It is said that the Scriptures both of the law and of the prophets were translated from the dialect of the Hebrews into the Greek language in the reign of Ptolemy the son of Lagos, or, according to others, of Ptolemy surnamed Philadelphus; Demetrius Phalereus bringing to this task the greatest earnestness, and employing painstaking accuracy on the materials for the translation. For the Macedonians being still in possession of Asia, and the king being ambitious of adorning the library he had at Alexandria with all writings, desired the people of Jerusalem to translate the prophecies they possessed into the Greek dialect. And they being the subjects of the Macedonians, selected from those of highest character among them seventy elders, versed in the Scriptures, and skilled in the Greek dialect, and sent them to him with the divine books. And each having severally translated each prophetic book, and all the translations being compared together, they agreed both in meaning and expression. For it was the council of God carried out for the benefit of Grecian ears. It was not alien to the inspiration of God, who gave the prophecy, also to produce the translation, and make it as it were Greek prophecy.” (p. 448.)
Presently after, when Aristobulus is cited, writing to Phi. lometer in these words,
" And Plato followed the laws given to us, and had manifestly
studied all that is said in them.'.... So that it is perfectly clear that the above-mentioned philosopher derived a great deal from this source, for he was very learned, as also Pythagoras, who transferred many things from our books to his own system of doctrines :" (p. 449.) we give our assent, but our pleasure receives a check in the next sentence:—"And Numenius, the Pythagorean philosopher, expressly writes: "For what is Plato, but Moses speaking in Attic Greek ?"" if at least Clement is to be understood as fully subscribing the words of Numenius. .
Even from these very few specimens and detached expressions, it will be evident that while we may not only glean, but gather many rich clusters from the books of Clement, we must cast away many of the grapes that lie upon his ground as naught. We should turn our back on much that is wholesome and instructive, were we to pronounce of his “Stromata,” we “ renounce them all :" but, if we would continue sound in the faith, we must take care not implicitly to ' follow, or be' blindly 'led by them.'
Regret has sometimes been felt at the indiscriminate publication of the letters of eminent persons deceased. It has been felt that the survivors would have better provided for their reputation, had they not given to the world everything which was left from the pen of those distinguished persons, in the way of private correspondence, or memoranda. We admit that it would not have been easy to have put forth an 'expurgated Clemens Alexandrinus; nevertheless, we consider that there is a danger of a very undesirable residuum, in a moral point of view, being left in the minds of those who shall take in all that this volume of his works presents to the reader,
THE ANOINTING OF BELIEVERS. “Ye have an unction from the Holy One, and ye know all things."
1 John ii. v. 20. com. 27. WERE any one to read these words of the Apostle John antecedently to any knowledge of Church history, and in ignorance of the facts of Christian experience, would he not conclude that among the people of God there would be found unanimity of view and coincidence in judgment?
And because we find great differences of opinion and frequent opposition of judgment among the people of God, shall we . conclude that the gracious assurance of the Apostle is never to be the experience of believers? Would it not be more productive of good to go back to the Divine word in simplicity,
and to seek after a deeper acquaintance with the expressed will of God?
If we but wait humbly on the One Great Teacher in diligent study of the will of our God, we may discover the reason of failure, and be constrained to such entire dependence on Divine aid as will remove our ignorance, subdue our self-will, and regulate the whole world of our knowledge and teaching.
Much will be gained if Christian men will bring the teaching of John, as to the unction which the Church has from the Holy One, to rest on their mind. Careful though necessarily brief examination of the verse noted at the head of this paper may tend to that end.
It will be right to notice, in the first place, the original sense of Chrisma, and the applied uses of the word. The Hebrew word (nup) and its Greek representative (xpuw) have both the fundamental sense of rubbing the body; but an acquired sense of the words has in this instance, as in so many others, almost entirely superseded the first idea. In both the Hebrew and the Greek the word now conveys the meaning of rubbing the body with ointments, or of affusion of oil on the body. The latter was the more common method of anointing, and was the fitter type of the affusion of the Spirit on the person of our Lord. In the case of vessels for the Judaic service, simple unction was practised, but (Levit. viii. 12) we learn that Moses “poured of the anointing oil upon Aaron's head, and anointed him, to sanctify him;" and the Psalmist refers to this when he says (Psa. cxxxiii. 2), “ The precious ointment on the head which ran down." The uses of anointing were various. Sometimes, as in all hot climates, it was for health and refreshment. It was used also as a preparation for festivities (Psa.xxiii. 5), “ Thou anointest my head with oil, my cup runneth over.” The same fact may be gathered from the words of Jesus, in Matt. vi. 17, and from such cases as that of Daniel (x. 3), who did not anoint himself during three weeks of mourning. Anointing was also one portion of the process of embalming, by which the body was prepared for the tomb. The chief use of anointing was, however, for purposes of consecration. Vessels of the sanctuary were thus set apart. The altar, the laver, and the tabernacle were thus dedicated. (Exod. xxix. 36; xxx. 26; xl. 11.) This was a fitting figure of the anointing of Jesus, the true tabernacle, sanctifier, and incense-bearer; as well as the foreshadowing of our consecration as “vessels of honour meet for the Master's use.” Consecration by anointing indicates a threefold blessing,
-separation unto service, santification to its duties, and illumination therein. This third blessing could be only in the case of intelligent responsible vessels who, as types of Messiah in Old Testament history, were kings, priests, and prophets. Full accounts are given us of the anointing of David and Solomon (1 Sam. xvi. 13; Psa. Ixxxix. 20; 1 Kings i. 22-40.) These were eminent types of the Great King, who should be “made of the seed of David according to the flesh.” (Rom. i. 3.) The solemnity of unction in the consecration of Aaron (Exod. xxix. 1-7) is narrated with even greater minuteness. He was, as we know from the Epistle to the Hebrews, the great typical Priest. The anointing of prophets is rightly inferred from 1 Kings xix. 16, where the Lord commands Elijah to set apart Elisha as prophet in his room.
But not only by type was instruction afforded in ancient days on the subject of Messiah's anointing. The light of prophecy points to Jesus as the anointed One.
In the Second Psalm, the King over all the earth rebukes the opposition of the people, and avows His irrevocable parpose, “I have anointed my king upon my holy hill of Zion." In Psalm xlv., which records in glowing terms the glory of Messiah and the happiness of His Church, it is said, “God, thy God, hath anointed thee with the oil of gladness above thy fellows." In Isaiah lxi., it is written, “ The Spirit of the Lord God is upon me, because he hath anointed me.” Daniel (ix. 24), speaking of Christ, fixes the termination of the seventy weeks as the proper time for His anointing.
From these types and prophecies, and from references to them in New Testament writ, we learn that one should arise, who should be the substance of the type, and in whom the prophecy should be fulfilled. Thus we are led on to consider the unction in fulfilment. The teaching of Daniel (ix. 24), fixes at once the period and the person in which the fulfilment should be seen. The person was the long predicted Messiah, the time was that of His first coming at the close of the seventy weeks. The person of Christ was anointed when the Holy Ghost over. shadowed His Virgin Mother. (Luke i. 35.) He was again anointed when, on receiving baptism of John in Jordan, the Holy Ghost descended upon Him. (Matt. ii. 16, 17; Luke iñ, 20, 21.) And not then only. He received the Spirit, “ not by measure," and in all His course on earth the anointing rested on Him.
Undoubtedly this affusion of the Spirit was the true anointing of which ointment and oil were but faint types. Peter teaches us (Acts x. 38), that “God anointed Jesus of Nazareth with the Holy Ghost, and with power;" and Jesus Himself, when He descended in the power of the Spirit to Galilee, having read the passage in Isaiah lxi., “The Spirit of the Lord is upon me, because He hath anointed me to preach the Gospel to the poor,”
Loho should be be fulfilledine teach
d upon hiptism of John He was over