ページの画像
PDF
ePub

THE ARENA.

THAT NEW COLLEGE.

LITTLE or nothing has been said in the papers of the Graytown College, but its graduates are now so numerous, and are doing such good service for the Church and the world, that it may not be amiss to call attention to its work. Besides, there are so many who need its special training, and who do not know of its existence, that to advertise this college is a philanthropic deed. It has hitherto been unknown outside a very limited circle, as for obvious reasons its alumni have shrunk from publicly avowing their connection with it. The only raison d'être of the college is to provide advice and training for ministers who were beginning to be suspected by their people, or by their own consciences or fears, of growing so old as to be useless or unacceptable. No limit of age is prescribed upon admission. There are men not yet thirty who should take a full course, and there are men over seventy who could not prove their right of admission. Indeed, last term one fine old boy of seventy-two made futile attempts to enter, thinking himself more precocious than he was, but was detected by the vigilant president, and sent back ignominiously to his large and enthusiastic church. Most of the students have been sought out by the faculty and its agents, and with difficulty persuaded of their need of such an institution, but somegenerally the most hopeful cases-have come of their own accord.

The college is simply an asylum for curing preachers of being old. It does not pretend to cure all cases. Some were born old, some became addicted to the habit in early life, and few of such chronic cases can be aided. But the inventor of the system, who is now president of the college, finds that the majority of preachers, at some period of their career, generally between forty-five and fifty-five years of age, suffer from an attack of oldness, just as in childhood they had measles and whooping cough, and that if skillfully doctored they may completely recover, and be spared for one, two, or three decades of useful and happy life. Several of the chronic and incurable cases have been engaged at a small salary to form the nucleus of a college museum, in which these walking mummies point many a moral and adorn a tale. Each student, upon admission, signs a pledge that he will never again preach one of his old sermons, and one of the solemn exercises his first night is personally to commit to the flames every scrap of old homiletic matter he has ever written. During this pathetic scene the other students stand around and sing, "We've all been there before." There is much drill in preaching. The pulpit is a strange tublike arrangement surmounted by what is in fact the reservoir of a shower bath. The moment the preacher announces his text. a time gauge is set, and in exactly thirty minutes it releases the water, which suddenly drops into the pulpit. No warning has been given the neophyte, so that he is almost

sure of at least one bath. Few are caught the second time, and after some weeks' drill, twice a day, an average student will forever find it impossible to exceed the limit, so that, in another sense than Paul's, the thing he would not, that he does. One of the most beautifully preserved specimens, however, that now adorns the museum stolidly took his bath for three weeks, and showed no sign of recovery, the first time in his ministry when his fifty-minute efforts were not dry.

A careful dictatorship is exercised as to the subjects of the sermons. The student is compelled to select new texts, and a large proportion of the sermons must be addressed to the young. Once a week the student addresses a congregation gathered in from the neighborhood. A committee on criticism, including a shrewd lawyer, a revered and ripened saint, a lively girl, an irreverent young man, and at least one child, are invited to state freely the impression made upon them by the sermon, and to fix its grade. After hearing the criticisms the student may preach the sermon again before the same committee, with a view to a reversal of the verdict. It has been found that many preachers have been considered old because of a peculiar tone to which they had become habituated, and efforts are made to cure them of this holy tone and of supernatural solemnity. Much attention is paid also to dress and manner. The student's reading habits are investigated. He is taught the sin of reading bad books, that is, books in which he can take no interest, and, where necessary, a certain amount of light reading is added to his diet. There is another damning sin to which some elderly men are addicted which causes much trouble. This is the destructive habit of saying or thinking that the former times were better than these. This is properly an infantile complaint, legitimately belonging to the Byrons and Shelleys, but always proving fatal to the energy and influence of the middle-aged. The student is kindly but firmly reminded that for him to talk of the glories of old-fashioned Methodism or Presbyterianism in terms derogatory to the present day is to say that his little world has been growing worse ever since he began to have any influence in it, and is a serious reflection upon himself. He is encouraged to believe in God and the Church and the future, and to study all good movements and tendencies of the present day. Every effort is made to encourage him into the belief that he is not an old man, that the people were mistaken, and that as long as the heart of the tree is sound years count for little but strength. He is reminded of men seventy years and upward who are doing the best work of their lives, and making it the despair of younger men to win the hearts of the young people from them.

But where is this college, this sanitarium? Ah! where? Perhaps, tried and despondent brother, this "kingdom of God is within you.” Perhaps some worthy but wearied servants of the King, whose zest in life and joy in service is flickering, may through these hints map out a course of conduct for themselves, and surprise themselves and their churches with a renewal of efficiency whose latent existence neither church nor preacher had suspected. G. CHAPMAN JONES.

Hornellsville, N. Y.

DID JESUS USE IRONY?

EDUARD KÖNIG, writing on "Style of Scripture," mentions Christ's use of irony, and cites as examples, "Full well do ye reject the commandment of God, that ye may keep your tradition," and "Ye both know me, and know whence I am." But are these sayings ironical? And if so, are there other illustrations of the same figure? It demands no wide acquaintance with the records of Christ's words to enable one to recall his picturesque diction. In fact, all his sayings spake Jesus in parables unto the multitude; "and without a parable spake he nothing unto them." But even though he was not fearful of prejudicing the seriousness of his instruction by using hyperbole, as in his accusation against the scribes, "Ye blind guides, that strain out the gnat, and swallow the camel," did he resort to irony? The answer to this question will depend largely upon what irony includes, and lest seeming dogmatism circumscribe it within the limitation of a definition, Edwin Percy Whipple's description of the term will better be adopted: "Irony is an insult conveyed in the form of a compliment; insinuating the most galling satire under the phraseology of panegyric; placing its victim naked on a bed of briars and thistles thinly covered with rose leaves; adorning his brow with a crown of gold which burns into his brain; teasing and fretting, and riddling him through and through, with incessant discharges of hot shot from a masked battery; laying bare the most sensitive and shrinking nerves of his mind and then blandly touching them with ice or smilingly pricking them with needles."

Now, do the gospels show that Jesus in his public teaching used irony, the most crushing and irresistible rhetorical figure? While dining with Simon the Pharisee does not Jesus in his parabolic rebuke of his host speak in a tone of at least Socratic irony? Feignedly acknowledging his own defective judgment while courteously admitting the pretensions of the one from whom he appeared to have such an earnest desire to learn, Christ asked Simon which of two creditors would feel the greater love for the money lender who forgave them their debts. On Simon's answering, "He, I suppose, to whom he forgave the most," Jesus replied in true Socratic style and probably in true Socratic tone, "Thou hast rightly judged." Again, does not John in his gospel indicate irony as much in the scenic foreground of Christ's dialogue with the Pharisees as in the conversation itself? Silenced on a former occasion by his question, "Which of you convicteth me of sin?" Jesus now asks the Pharisees to tell him which one of his "many excellent works" deserves stoning. Furthermore, when Jesus speaks of the scribes and Pharisees as the "ninety and nine righteous persons, who need no repentance," and, indeed, when he insinuates that the prideful religionism of the Pharisees is righteousness, is not that irony? These same scribes and Pharisees whom he thus calls righteous Jesus elsewhere unmercifully scores. He

1 A Dictionary of the Bible (Hastings), extra volume, p. 164.

2 Lecture on Wit and Humor.

Luke vii, 41-43 (comp. commentaries of Godet, Plummer, Bruce, in loco).
John x, 32 (comp. Dods, The Expositor's Greek Testament, in loco).

frequently denounced them as hypocrites, blind guides, the offspring of vipers, whited sepulchers, and an evil and adulterous generation. He warned his disciples against their leaven. He denied that their righteousness was sufficient for entrance into the kingdom of heaven, and declared that the publicans and harlots would be admitted to the kingdom sooner than they. In "the pearl of parables," moreover, he makes these Pharisees as the elder son speak of the returned prodigal not as "my brother," but as "this precious son of yours." But is not Christ's superlative use of irony in the parable of the shrewd steward? Turning away from the Pharisees whom he had just severely rebuked, Jesus addressed himself directly to the inner circle of his disciples, though the outer circle of Pharisees was in range to hear what the Rabbi had to say. Jesus described an unfaithful steward about to be discharged to whom digging and begging were alike offensive. So while still in his master's service he attempted to feather his nest-to-be by granting favors to his lord's creditors. And his lord, becoming acquainted with his new mismanagement, ardently praises the steward for his "tricky cleverness," because in devoted attention to self-interest he had shown himself to be as one of the sons of the world, who are more prudent toward their own generation than the sons of the light. "And I emphatically say to you also," continues Jesus to his disciples as he assumes the place of the steward's lord, "in your own interest make the unrighteous mammon your friend, that when wealth fails, as it must at death, you may be received into the eternal tabernacles." Here ends the parable and its application, for the four verses following have only a loose connection at best with the parable itself, and, borrowing from Bruce, they are most wisely styled the evangelist's "corrective of the parable." Now, if ever Plummer's "perhaps" is to become "certainly," this is the place where the change will occur: "It was perhaps largely for the sake of Judas that these stern words about the perils of wealth were uttered to them (the disciples)." It was "unto his disciples first of all," and it must be believed to Judas most of all, that Jesus said, "Whatsoever ye have said in the darkness shall be heard in the light; and what ye have spoken in the ear in the inner chambers shall be proclaimed upon the housetops." Jesus ironically addressing Judas over the heads of his disciples, is that not the key which unlocks this heretofore obstinate door? Judas was essentially a steward. He was accused of pilfering his Master's money. When made conscious of the fact that his hypocrisy was known he tried to buy the favor of his Master's creditors, thus only providing for the turning of the next corner in his career, for, as Jesus said, he would but gain a place in the friendship of others the temporariness of which would be beyond comparison." Thus are we not led to think that Jesus

1 The Expositor's Greek Testament, vol. i, p. 586 (comp. The Messages of the Bible, The Messages of Jesus, Hall, p. 166).

The International Critical Commentary, Luke, p. 425 (comp. A Dictionary of the Bible, vol. ii, p. 797).

Comp. The Death of Christ, Denney, p. 207, on aiúvios (eternal).

wielded in his warfare for truth the keen-edged weapon of irony to cut through the self-conceited heads and the sin-calloused hearts? Must we not believe that Jesus used irony as a mordant to etch upon the brassy conscience the picture of sin and its result? Was not irony the nitric acid which Jesus added to the glycerin of inner consciousness to produce the dynamite of confession? Did not Jesus use irony?

Syracuse, N. Y.

R. ALFRED WAITE, JR.

"DO THE SCRIPTURES ENJOIN MAN TO BE ANGRY?"

IF we adopt Mr. Dorwin's suggestion and change the punctuation of Eph. iv, 26, it is not necessary to apologize for Paul's Greek, nor to imply that the Holy Spirit does not understand Greek grammar. My is regularly used with the interrogative indicative where a negative answer is expected, as where the speaker has his eye on a negative answer, as in the passages to which reference is made: John iv, 29, "This not the Christ, is it?" Matt. xii, 23, "This man is not the Son of David, is he?" So Matt. vii, 16, "Men do not gather grapes of thorns, do they?" See also Matt. xxvi, 22, 25; John iii, 4; Acts x, 47, and many other passages. Mr. Dorwin's translation has much to commend it, and it is certainly allowable. But, on the other hand, it stands in a hortative paragraph and imperatives prevail in all the context. Does not the real force of the mode lie entirely in the second verb? Compare Rom. vi, 17, where it is evident that Paul is not thanking God that they were the servants of sin, but that, although they had been servants of sin, they had become obedient. See also Isa. xii, 1, and Matt. xi, 25. Paul is quoting from the Septuagint. The word in the Hebrew means a strong emotion of soul which may or may not be sinful according to circumstances; it is much employed and has a variety of renderings. According to Dr. Clarke several versions translate it "anger." Jesus was said to be angry, so there must be such an emotion that is not sinful. But the boundary between righteous indignation and sinful anger is so narrow that this exhortation is well timed. Winer says that when two imperatives are connected by kai the first sometimes suggests the condition upon which the second will take place. "If ye be angry, sin not." It is interesting to compare the next claim in the psalm with Paul's "Let not the sun go down upon your wrath." The Hebrew reads, "Talk with your own heart upon your bed, and be dumb;" the Septuagint, "What you say in your hearts be smitten upon your beds with poignant sorrow;" which means, "Commune with your hearts upon your bed, and repent," or, "In your hearts in the night repent of what you said." Derry, N. H. S. E. QUIMBY.

CORRECTION FROM DR. C. M. COBERN.

READERS of "The Laws of Moses and Hammurabi," in the SeptemberOctober Review, will please note that either in the typewriting or typesetting of that article an important qualifying phrase has dropped from a paragraph on the first page. I am personally by no means sure that "two millions" of Hebrews in "one generation" reached such perfection of moral order and civilization as I seem there to affirm.

« 前へ次へ »