to God's word, which is also (see verse 14) the means employed by Christ in separating them from the world.

Verse 18. xavùç èuè x. t. λ. The pronoun here not being the enclitic, but the full accented form, is emphatic, contrasted with avtoùs. ànéσreila, “I sent them into the world." The reference is probably to the apostolic call, the two-fold object of which is stated by Mark to be first that they may be with him; and second, that he may send them forth to work miracles and to teach. It is the former that was mainly characteristic of them during Christ's life; and in accordance with this they are generally called pantat in the gospels. The other belongs chiefly to the period after he has left; but the ànéoreila had taken place, and occasionally corresponding work had been done by them. This verse states the work for which they are to be consecrated. They are not to be taken out of the world, but sent into the world as Christ was, to do a work in it, and his prayer is therefore ἁγίασον.

Verse 19 states again what he has done toward the thing sought for in his prayer. He has consecrated himself, that they too may be consecrated in truth. The connection between their consecration and his is in the vital relation between them. He is not only their teacher, to tell them what to do, nor their example, to show them what to do; he is their life; he is the vine and they the branches; and so what he is and does they are to be and do through union with him. ἐν ἀληθείᾳ—not now ἐν τῇ ἀληθείᾳ, in the truth, but ἐν ἀληθείᾳ, in truth, truly, an adverbial phrase.

This section, verses 9-19, contains the prayer of Christ for his immediate disciples. He continues first the presentation of their claims, viz., that they are still God's, although entrusted to Christ, and that Christ has been glorified in them. And the former he includes in the general principle that all their possessions, i. e., Christ's and the Father's, are in common, which of course enforces any prayer that he may make. Then he presents the need of the disciples, that they are to be left in the evil world without their protector, who is coming to the Father to receive the reward of his faithfulness. His prayer is, therefore, that the Holy Father will keep them by the revelation to them of the same name-his own divine name-which he entrusted to the Son to make known to them. And this to the end that they may be one, as he and the Father are one.

Verse 21. va xal abтoì èv ýμiv dot, "That they may be in us," not "that they may be one in us." The & before do is to be omitted on the authority of BC'D etc., KAC2 etc., retain it. The diplomatic evidence is thus pretty equally divided. But & bears evident

signs of being a gloss. This makes an important difference in the meaning, which would otherwise have been that this vital union with Christ was the cause of Christian union. As it is, Christian unity is union with Christ. At the same time it must be remembered that this unity, both from its nature and from the prominence given to it by Christ in this last prayer for his people, is a most important fact in the Christian life. And the time must come when Christians generally recognize more broadly, and at the same time more intelligently, that the things which separate Christians are incidental; while that which unites real believers is essential. Eva & xóopos x. T. λ., "in order that the world may believe that thou didst send me." oú— is emphatic-the Divine, as opposed to any other origin of Christianity. This supposes the recognition of the connection of believers with Christ on the part of the world, and makes the thing which is to be tested not that, but the reality of his connection with God. And he prays in view of this that their connection with himself and the Father may be real.

Verse 22. xàɣà x. 7. λ. “And I have given them the glory which thou hast given me, that they may be one, as we are one." States again what he has done to secure the object for which he prays. emphatic-contrasted with the Father. τὴν δόξαν ἣν δέδωκάς μοι, What glory is meant by Christ it is difficult to determine. Meyer explains it of the heavenly glory. And this has in its favor the ordinary use of the term as applied to Christ, and its evident meaning in the immediate context, verse 24. But his explanation of the connection of this with the union which it is to produce, seems to me weak. He says: "What bond of union can be so strong as this common hope of glory?" But this is to make the union one of feeling and sentiment, promoted by inspiring thoughts, instead of the vital union with Christ which is here depicted. Godet finds it in the re ránŋoáspe

of verse 24; the love of God for Christ he imparts to his people. This has in its favor that it explains the connection pointed out beween dó‡a and, since the love of God may well be considered as leading to this vital union between believers and Christ. But dóza is more outward than this, and as applied to Christ it is either the glory and splendor of his heavenly state, or the glory of his character, which made him so resplendent, even when his kingly glory was veiled. Hengstenberg explains it as being itself the union with the Father and Christ referred to here. But a would scarcely connect two identical statements. Christ would scarcely say that his part in producing unity was to bestow it. But it is very difficult to find any interpretation that will satisfy these conditions consisting with the

outward nature of da, and legitimately connecting it with the unity to which it is to lead. It may help us to consider two things: first that the union here described and prayed for by Christ already existed in his disciples, and is necessary to discipleship; and that therefore he must pray not for the thing itself, but for its progress and completeness. See in this connection the Tersλstwpévot els v below. And second, that Christ had a glory peculiar to his earthly life (John i. 14) "a glory as of one only begotten from the Father, full of grace and truth." This glory of character resembling and revealing the divine it is certain that Christ did bestow on his disciples in its germs during his earthly life. And in this way we may think of him as contributing his part to the perfect union with himself and the Father, of the body of believers in which this is the unifying principle. It must be remembered that this essential principle is not only the source of union, but also of excellence in the Christian body. And that as this is strengthened therefore, not only unity is increased, but also likeness to Christ. And so Christ, as he sees his people more one, as they become more united in him, beholds also that progress as the result of which the church for which he gave himself, and which he has purified with his word, he will one day present to himself glorious, not having spot or wrinkle, or any of such things, but holy and blameless. And the apostle Paul in his frequent delineation of the one body and its growth, couples together unity and perfectness in the same way. Now what Christ represents himself as doing to bring about this glorious end is that he gives to his disciples some of his own likeness to God. And those whose characters are thus assimilated to the Divine will crave constantly more perfect union with him.

Verse 23. ἐγὼ ἐν αὐτοῖς, καὶ σὺ ἐν ἐμοί-irregular construction, having as its basis, however, the appositional structure. But the two pronouns cannot be regarded as strictly in apposition with either ýμcis or the subject of wow. We have here the other side of the connection with God pointed out. He has already spoken of the two sides in the divine relation, "Thou in me, and I in thee"; but of the Christian union with God, only the one side, "They in us." Now it is "we in them," completing the representation. And at the same time he specifies more particularly the manner of it, as he ascribes their direct connection with God-head to himself, and only one mediated by himself to the Father, "I in them, and thou in me." Iva dot teteketwμévoi eis "That they may be perfected into one." The eis & expresses that to which the Tereletwpévot is directed.

NEWTON CENTRE, MASS.

EZRA P. GOULD. ·

JOHN STUART MILL AND CHRISTIANITY.1

R. TAINE, on a certain occasion, said to a bright young English

man: "You lack philosophy. I mean what the Germans call metaphysics. You have learned men, but you have no thinkers. Your God impedes you. He is the supreme cause, and you dare not reason on causes out of respect for him. He is the most important personage in England. Yet this high rank has the inconvenience of all official positions; it produces a cant, prejudices, intolerance and courtiers."

I assure you," was the reply, "that there are thinkers amongst us. We have, not to speak of others, John Stuart Mill, a political writer, a logician, a man who has reached a grand conception of the universe, a man who has an individual and complete idea of nature and the mind."

Our bright young Englishman lauded his hero extravagantly. Whatever John Stuart Mill did, there was one thing which he failed to do; he failed, as we shall soon discover, to "reach a grand conception of the universe," to "gain an individual and complete idea of nature and the mind.”

But he was, undoubtedly, in the judgment of both colloquists, a thinker whom God did not impede. For, in his autobiography,

1 The rhetorical cast of this paper is due to the fact that it was prepared and delivered as an address to the Alumni of the Rochester Theological Seminary at its late Commencement.

equally interesting and mournful, he has declared himself a man without a religion and without a God.

Christian apologists will act unwisely if they allow this man to go unanswered. He is too great, too confident, too plausible, too fascinating, to remain unchallenged. It will not do to say-here I introduce a new rhetorical figure-that he did not ordinarily use a Damascus blade, well-tempered and elaborately wrought. But it may be successfully shown that, in his negligent and supercilious conflict with Christianity, his sword, though displaying a metallic lustre, had all the fragility of lath.

Let humble men venture to enter the lists against this doughty knight. He is, from almost every point of view, immeasurably their superior, but it should be remembered that Homer sometimes nods, that Socrates has his superstitions, that Plato has his fancies. Philosophers sometimes blunder, and the blunder may be detected and exposed by very common men.

I assure you that Mr. Mill, because of a premature disparagement and contempt of Christianity, went out against it in armor and with weapons which were not of proof. He thought that he had scattered an ambuscade, when he let off his small artillery as he passed; he did not know that the great guns of an impregnable fortress were not provoked to reply. Christianity is not to be demolished by metaphysicians and logicians, who turn aside with such purpose from their main path. It demands with firm stubborness the honor of at least one direct and vigorous campaign before it will consent to yield. It insists on suffering nothing less than a glorious defeat.

Mr. Mill should be answered, for the reason that the impression will obtain that he is as mighty in his infidel polemics as he is in logic and political economy. Men will say one to another, "The repudiation of Christianity by the foremost mind of England raises a prodigious presumption against Christianity." And if no answer is returned, they will go about boasting that no answer can be returned. You shall hear the note of triumph from superficial and conceited youths who everywhere abound-youths who know no more of Mr. Mill than that he is acknowledged great; youths who have never read so much as the title pages of his books. Your barber will appeal to him while he holds your nose between his finger and thumb. Your tailor will prattle of him while he takes your measure for a waistcoat. Your college student will pause, in his unsuccessful scanning of Horace, to laud him.

Why is it not wise to show these youths who are flying their little flags and beating their little drums that Mr. Mill, strong in almost