CHAP. II.]

IF YE BE DEAD WITH CHRIST.

20 Wherefore if ye be " dead with Christ from

47

n Rom. vi. 3, 5. & vii. 4, 6.

the || rudiments of the world, why, as though Gal. ii. 19. living in the world, are ye subject to ordinances,

Eph. ii. 15. o ver. 8.

Or, elements.

P. Gal. iv. 3, 9.

20. "Wherefore" omitted by A., B., C., D., E., F., G., K., L., P., twenty-five Cursives, d, e, f, g, Vulg. (Amiat.), Goth., Copt., Arm., Eth.; but retained by N and most Cursives, &c.

means the ministerial system, and so it must be here. The body is not a piece of formless or inorganic flesh, but a number of members related to one another, joined together and made one living organization by the nerves running from the guiding and intelligent head, and conveying life and powers of fitting action to all the limbs of the body. This system of "joints and bands" which knits the body unto one organization and at the same time contributes to its power of growth, is the apostolic ministry of bishops, priests, and deacons, existing throughout the Catholic Church, unifying it, not by teaching merely, but by the administration of Sacraments, as it is said respecting Baptism. "By one Spirit are we all baptized into one body"; and there is" one Lord, one faith, one Baptism." And it is said respecting the Holy Eucharist, "We being many are one bread and one body, for we are all partakers of that one Bread" (1 Cor. x. 16, 17).

20. "Wherefore if ye be dead with Christ from the rudiments of the world," &c. They who were baptized into Christ, and so partook of His Death, not only died to sin, but to the old state of things (whatever that might have been) in which they had been brought up. They died to the whole Jewish system, legal and ceremonial. The ordinances to which they were once under subjection were shadows; the substance had now come in Christ, and so it was apostasy from Him to revert to the shadows (Gal. v. 2-5). The same equally applied to any heathen, or philosophical, or Gnostical, or Essene elements in which they had once lived. To whatever might be called elements or rudiments of this present state of things they had died, and they had entered into a new kingdom in which Christ was all in all.

"Why, as though living in the world? Why, as though the old world, the old state of things, had not passed away, and ye were yet living in it?

"Are ye subject to ordinances?" Do ye subject yourselves to

q 1 Tim. iv. 3.

21 (Touch not; taste not; handle not;
22 Which all are to perish with the using;)

Isa. xxix. 13. after the commandments and doctrines of men?

Matt. xv. 9.

Tit. i. 14.

1 Tim. iv. 8.

S

23 Which things have indeed a shew of wis

ordinances? (Revisers.) "Are ye having prescribed to you?" (Alford.) Ye are not in the world, he saith, and how is it that ye are subject to its elements? how to its observances?

66

21, 22. (Touch not; taste not; handle not; which all are to perish with the using)." The "touch not; taste not; handle not," I need scarcely tell the well-informed reader, are not the words of the Apostle, but of the Judaizing or Gnostical teacher. Thus we have in 1 Tim. iv. 3, commanding to abstain from meats "—pronouncing things unclean which the Lord hath cleansed (Mark vii. 19, notes; Acts x. 15).

66

"Which all are to perish with the using." These are evidently the words of the Apostle, and have the same signification as the words of the Lord: "Are ye so without understanding also? Do ye not perceive that whatsoever thing from without entereth into the man cannot defile him, because it entereth not into his heart, but into the belly, and goeth out into the draught?" (Mark vii. 18-19).

Augustine, however, supposes that he refers to Gnostical teaching, rather than to Jewish; and so Tertullian, quoted in Cornelius à Lapide: "Taxat, inquit, eos qui ex visionibus angelicis, quasi de angelicâ superstitione docebant certis cibis abstinendum esse.” Et Clemens III. Stromata "solentibus, inquit angelos et demones, curæ est vino, esu carnis, et venere abstinere."

"After the commandments and doctrines of men." The Gnostical prohibitions, of course, were purely human, but so also were, in truth, the Judaizing ones, for after the Lord had freed men from their yoke, the re-imposing of them was through the self-will and perversity of man, and had no Divine authority whatsoever.

23. “Which things have indeed a shew of wisdom in will-worship, and humility, and neglecting of the body," &c. The very different interpretations of this verse show that it is one of very great difficulty.

"Which things have a shew" (λóyos) lit., a word or reason, a talk; the expression, being a contemptuous one signifies that it is in word only—that is, in shew or appearance-that there is wisdom.

CHAP. II.]

WILL WORSHIP.

49

dom in will worship, and humility, and || neglecting of the body; not in any honour to the satisfying of the ver. 18.

flesh.

| Or, punishing, or, not sparing.

"In will-worship "-religious service, not according to the reve lation of God, but according to the mere will, or wilfulness of man. "And humility," i.e., of course, false or feigned humility, used, as in verse 18, in a bad sense. According to Bishop Lightfoot, the word to should be understood before it, signifying voluntary humility humility, the appearance of which is put on at will.

[And] "neglecting of the body." Neglecting of the body, not sparing of the body, hard treatment of the body through ascetic practices.

"Not in any honour to the satisfying of the flesh." The greatest possible difference prevails in the interpretation of this clause. Bishop Lightfoot takes honour (run) to mean pay and then value, and interprets the clause, "yet not really of any value to remedy indulgence of the flesh." This yields an excellent sense, and one strictly in accordance with the whole context; but still to give to the words "satisfying or indulgence of the flesh" an exactly opposite meaning by violently importing into them the idea of remedying indulgence of the flesh, seems unwarrantable.

Others, as Bishop Wordsworth, take "not in any honour" with the preceding words, and paraphrase "which things have a shew of wisdom in will-worship . . . . and in mortification of the body, not held in any honour, and tending to the pampering of the flesh.” But how can mortification of the body tend to the pampering of the flesh?

A tolerable meaning may be given to this by keeping to the word in the Authorized "satisfying," and by having regard to the undoubted fact that there is a satisfaction in the most rigid and cruel ascetic practices (witness the fakeers of India), which satisfaction is not of the Spirit, but of the flesh-feeding pride, self-sufficiency, and self-satisfaction, all which are works of the flesh.

Then there is another turn of meaning which is not unworthy of notice, which is that God intends the flesh to be honoured by being not harshly treated, but by being kept under due restraint; and that if we dishonour the flesh by neglecting it, and taking no notice of it, our contempt of it turns shortly into the indulgence of it, as was the case with some of the Gnostic sects. The best way of

E

honouring the flesh is by such subjugation of it to the spirit that we may obey the Spirit's godly motions in righteousness and true holiness.

I cannot say that I can give any satisfactory meaning. The real meaning of the Apostle, whatever may be the translation of his words, must be that self-imposed, self-willed asceticism is of no value, either in preventing the indulgence of the flesh, or in mortifying that pride which is in reality as much a work of the flesh as self-indulgence.

CRITICAL NOTE ON THE READINGS OF II. 2.

τοῦ μυστηρίου τοῦ Θεοῦ καὶ πατρὸς καὶ τοῦ χριστοῦ, “ Of the mystery of God the Father, and of Christ." The reading of B. (approved by Lachmann, by Tischendorf in his eighth edition, by Tregelles, Westcott and Hort, Bp. Chr. Wordsworth, and Bp. Ellicott), Tou μυστηρίου τοῦ Θεοῦ χριστοῦ (“ ita cod. nihil interponens inter Θεοῦ et χριστοῦ,” Mai, 2nd ed.). [Tischendorf, however, boldly interposes a comma between the words (see p. 605, note) and is followed by Westcott and Hort and by Bp. Lightfoot, whose note on this passage is very elaborate. This mode of punctuation would set χριστοῦ in apposition to μυστηρίου, in support of which construction ch. i. 27, 1 Tim. iii. 16 are alleged. This is not, however, the sense favoured by Hilary ("in agnitionem sacramenti Dei Christi," and again, "Deus Christus Sacramentum est"), and would almost call for the article before Xpitou. In meaning it would be equivalent to D*, &c. (ö iσtiv X5')], has every appearance of being the original reading, and that from which the many perplexing variations have arisen. At present it stands in great need of confirmation, since Hilary (de Trin. ix.) alone supports it (but xaì XTOU, Cyril), though the Scriptural character of the expression is upheld by the language of ch. i. 27, just preceding, and by the Received Text in 1 Tim iii. 16. Some who feel a difficulty in understanding how Xporou was removed from the text, if it ever had a place there, conceive that the verse should end with sou, all additions, including pro, the simplest, being accretions to the genuine passage. These alleged accretions are, τοῦ Θεοῦ ὅ ἐστι χριστός, manifestly an expansion of χριστοῦ, and derived from ch. i. 27 ; του Θεοῦ πατρὸς τοῦ χριστοῦ; τοῦ Θεοῦ καὶ πατρὸς καὶ τοῦ χριστοῦ, the final form of the Received Text. Now of these four readings, Tou sou, the shortest, and according to Griesbach, Scholz, Tischendorf in his seventh edition, Alford, and Dr. Green, the true one, is found only in the late Uncial P, and in a few, though professedly good Cursives-37, 71, 80, 116 (xaì ©ɛou, 23), and the important Second-hand of 67, witnesses too few and feeble. . . . Of the longer readings, OTIV Xporós is favoured by D. (though obelized by the Second-hand, which thus would read only To ɛoũ), d, e, whose parallel Greek speaks differently, by Augustine and Vigilius of Thapsus, but apparently by no Cursives. The form best vouched for appears to be that of N, A., C., 4, of the Thebaic according to Griesbach. . . . and of an Arabic Codex of Tischendorf, TOυ OεOυ TαTρès TOỮ (N* omits Tou) Xporou. To these words "ihu" is simply added by f (F, G, g are unfortunately lost here), and by other MSS. of the Vulgate (Amiat. fuld., &c.), though the Clementine edition has "Dei patris et Christi Jesu," the Complutensian " Dei et Patris et C. I." With the Clementine Vulgate agree the Memphitic and (omitting Inou) the Peshito Syriac, Arabic, 47, 73, Chrysostom; while 41, 115, 213, 221, 253* (TOй OεOũ xaí T. Toũ XP) so far strengthen the case of N, A., C. The Received. Text is fouud in (apparently) the great mass of Cursives, in D. (tertiâ manu), E., K., L., the Philoxenian Syriac (but the xal after Tarpos marked with the asterisk), Theodoret, John Damascene, and others. . . . On

...

CHAP. III.]

IF YE BE RISEN.

51 reviewing the whole mass of conflicting evidence, we may unhesitatingly reject the shortest form, Tou ou, some of whose maintainers do not usually found their text on Cursive MSS. almost exclusively. We would gladly adopt ro εOU XPITTOй, so powerfully do internal considerations plead in its favour, were it but a little better supported; the important doctrine which it declares, Scriptural and Catholic as that is, will naturally make us only the more cautious in receiving it unreservedly. Yet the more we think over this reading, the more it grows upon us as the source from which all the rest are derived. At present, perhaps, TOU OεOU TαтρÒS TOỮ XPICTOυ may be looked upon as the most strongly attested, but in the presence of so many opposing probabilities, a very small weight might suffice to turn the critical scale. (From Scrivener's "Introduction to Criticism of the New Testament," third edition, p. 634.)

CHAP. III.

F ye then be risen with Christ, seek those things which are above, where Christ sitteth

on the right hand of God.

b

Rom. vi. 5. Eph. ii. 6. ch. ii. 12.

b Rom. viii, 34. Eph. i. 20.

1. "If ye then be risen with Christ." Rather, as Revisers, "If ye were raised together with Christ," &c.

1. "If ye then be risen with Christ, seek those things which are above." This is the fourth time he recurs to the idea of a supernatural life received from above, by reason of union with a Crucified and Risen Lord in the matter of His Death and Resurrection.

(1) In ii. 6: As ye have received Christ Jesus the Lord, so walk ye in him, rooted and built up in him." (2) In ii. 10: “Ye are complete in him." (3) In ii. 12: "Buried with him in Baptism, wherein also ye are risen with him." (4) In ii. 13: "You being dead in your sins hath he quickened together with him.” ii. 20: "Wherefore if ye be dead with Christ," &c.

(5) In

The words in the original point more distinctly to the particular time of the first reception of this supernatural life. They are not, “if ye then be risen," but rather "if ye then were raised." "If ye be risen gives a wrong meaning-in this respect, that it implies that they were then in a risen state, which they might not be if they had wilfully returned to their former sinful state; whereas "if ye were raised implies that the fact of their being raised had taken place, and that they were responsible for it, and must live to it.