For myself, I have felt more than
ever since I read it how impossible it is to find any substitute
for the old faith.
ever since I read it how impossible it is to find any substitute
for the old faith.
Warner - World's Best Literature - v17 - Mai to Mom
le Maire would like to speak to
you. ”
The peasant, surprised and uneasy, gulped down his little glass
of cognac, got up, and — even worse bent over than in the morn-
ing, since the first steps after a rest were always particularly dif-
ficult — started off, repeating :
“Here I am, here I am. ”
And he followed the corporal.
The mayor was waiting for him, seated in an arm-chair. He
was the notary of the place, a tall, grave man of pompous speech.
"Maître Hauchecorne," said he, “this morning, on the Beuze-
ville road, you were seen to pick up the pocket-book lost by
Maître Houlbrèque of Manneville. ”
The countryman, speechless, gazed at the mayor; frightened
already by this suspicion, which rested on him he knew not why.
“I-I picked up that pocket-book ? »
“Yes, you. ”
"I swear I didn't even know nothing about it at all. ”
« You were seen. ”
They saw me – me? Who is that who saw me?
"M. Malandain, the harness-maker. ”
>
(
ac
>
## p. 9825 (#233) ###########################################
GUY DE MAUPASSANT
9825
Then the old man remembered, understood, and reddening
with anger:
:-
"Ah! he saw me, did he, the rascal ? He saw me picking up
this string here, M'sieu' le Maire. »
And fumbling at the bottom of his pocket, he pulled out of
it the little end of string.
But the mayor incredulously shook his head :-
«You will not make me believe, Maître Hauchecorne, that
M. Malandain, who is a man worthy of credit, has mistaken this
string for a pocket-book. ”
The peasant, furious, raised his hand and spit as if to attest
his good faith, repeating: -
For all that, it is the truth of the good God, the blessed
truth, M'sieu' le Maire. There! on my soul and my salvation I
repeat it. ”
The mayor continued:
"After picking up the thing in question, you even looked
for some time in the mud to see if a piece of money had not
dropped out of it. ”
The good man was suffocated with indignation and with fear.
“If they can say —! If they can say such lies as that to slan-
der an honest man! If they can say — ! ”
He might protest, he was not believed.
He was confronted with M. Malandain, who repeated and
sustained his testimony. They abused one another for an hour.
.
At his own request, Maître Hauchecorne was searched. Nothing
was found on him.
At last the mayor, much perplexed, sent him away, warning
him that he would inform the public prosecutor and ask for
orders.
The news had spread. When he left the mayor's office, the
old man was surrounded, interrogated with a curiosity which was
serious or mocking as the case might be, but into which no in-
dignation entered. And he began to tell the story of the string.
They did not believe him. They laughed.
He passed on, buttonholed by every one, himself buttonholing
his acquaintances, beginning over and over again his tale and his
protestations, showing his pockets turned inside out to prove that
he had nothing.
They said to him:-
You old rogue, va ! ”
XVII-615
(C
## p. 9826 (#234) ###########################################
9826
GUY DE MAUPASSANT
And he grew angry, exasperated, feverish, in despair at not
being believed; and always telling his story.
The night came. It was time to go home. He set out with
three of his neighbors, to whom he pointed out the place where
he had picked up the end of string; and all the way he talked
of his adventure.
That evening he made the round in the village of Bréauté, so
as to tell every one. He met only unbelievers.
He was ill of it all night long.
The next day, about one in the afternoon, Marius Paumelle, a
farm hand of Maître Breton, the market-gardener at Ymauville,
returned the pocket-book and its contents to Maître Houlbrèque
of Manneville.
This man said that he had indeed found it on the road; but
not knowing how to read, he had carried it home and given it
to his master.
The news spread to the environs. Maître Hauchecorne was
informed. He put himself at once upon the go, and began to
relate his story as completed by the dénouement. He triumphed.
“,
“What grieved me," said he was not the thing itself, do
you understand; but it was the lies. There's nothing does you
so much harm as being in disgrace for lying. ”
All day he talked of his adventure; he told it on the roads to
the people who passed; at the cabaret to the people who drank;
and the next Sunday, when they came out of church.
He even
stopped strangers to tell them about it. He was easy now, and
yet something worried him without his knowing exactly what it
was. People had a joking manner while they listened. They did
not seem convinced. He seemed to feel their tittle-tattle behind
his back.
On Tuesday of the next week he went to market at Goder-
ville, prompted entirely by the need of telling his story.
Malandain, standing on his door-step, began to laugh as he
saw him pass. Why?
He accosted a farmer of Criquetot, who did not let him finish,
and giving him a punch in the pit of his stomach, cried in his
face:
“Oh you great rogue, va ! » Then turned his heel upon him.
Maître Hauchecorne remained speechless, and grew more and
more uneasy. Why had they called him "great rogue ?
When seated at table in Jourdain's tavern he began again to
explain the whole affair.
## p. 9827 (#235) ###########################################
GUY DE MAUPASSANT
9827
A horse-dealer of Montivilliers shouted at him:
“Get out, get out, you old scamp: I know all about your
string! ”
Hauchecorne stammered:
« But since they found it again, the pocket-book — ! ”
But the other continued:
"Hold your tongue, daddy: there's one who finds it and there's
another who returns it. And no one the wiser. ”
The peasant was choked. He understood at last. They accused
him of having had the pocket-book brought back by an accom-
plice, by a confederate.
He tried to protest. The whole table began to laugh.
He could not finish his dinner, and went away amid a chorus
of jeers.
He went home ashamed and indignant, choked with rage, with
confusion; the more cast down since from his Norman cunning,
he was perhaps capable of having done what they accused him
of, and even of boasting of it as a good trick. His innocence
dimly seemed to him impossible to prove, his craftiness being
so well known. And he felt himself struck to the heart by the
injustice of the suspicion.
Then he began anew to tell of his adventure, lengthening his
recital every day, each time adding new proofs, more energetic
protestations, and more solemn oaths which he thought of, which
he prepared in his hours of solitude, his mind being entirely
occupied by the story of the string. The more complicated his
defense, the more artful his arguments, the less he was believed.
« Those are liars' proofs,” they said behind his back.
He felt this; it preyed upon his heart. He exhausted himself
in useless efforts.
He was visibly wasting away.
The jokers now made him tell the story of the piece of
string” to amuse them, just as you make a soldier who has been
on a campaign tell his story of the battle. His mind, struck at
the root, grew weak.
About the end of December he took to his bed.
He died early in January, and in the delirium of the death
agony he protested his innocence, repeating: -
"A little bit of string-a little bit of string - see, here it is,
M'sieu' le Maire. »
Translation of Jonathan Sturges.
## p. 9828 (#236) ###########################################
9828
FREDERICK DENISON MAURICE
(1805-1870)
REDERICK DENISON MAURICE takes high rank among the reli-
gious teachers of this century, more by virtue of what he
was than of what he wrote. He is of those elect souls
whose insight becomes a guiding force both to themselves and to
their fellows. Of a generation which knew Carlyle and Mill and
Darwin, which was given over to the dry-rot of intellectual despair
in all matters concerning the religious life of man, Maurice seemed
born out of due time. He belonged apparently to an earlier or to a
later day. Yet by force, not of his intellect
but of his faith, he succeeded in turning
many of his contemporaries to the Christ-
ian ideal which haunted him throughout his
life, and which perpetually dominated his
nineteenth-century inheritance of skepti-
cism. Unlike Newman, with whom he was
associated at Oxford, Maurice was content
to find in the Church of England, as in all
churches, only a partial realization of his
ideal of righteousness. He is of those who
believe that the whole truth can never
be revealed to one generation. He shares
FREDERICK D. MAURICE the Platonic belief that the vision of God
becomes gradually apparent through many
This liberalism was the mainspring of his power as a reli-
gious teacher.
His early training had enlarged his sympathies and prepared the
way for his future ministrations. He was born in 1805 of a Unitarian
father, and of a mother who adhered to the doctrines of Calvin. His
first religious problem was to reconcile these differences of faith.
Later his education at Cambridge deepened within him the evangeli-
cal sympathies, which made him long to unite the world under one
banner as Sons of God. Upon leaving Cambridge he undertook the
editorship of the Athenæum in London, and while engaged upon
this work became a member of the Church of England. His resi-
dence at Oxford was the natural outcome of this step.
The strong-
hold of mediævalism was then vital with the presence of Newman,
æons.
a
## p. 9829 (#237) ###########################################
FREDERICK DENISON MAURICE
9829
of Pusey, of Keble, and of others who were seeking with passionate
eagerness a refuge from the insistent doubts and difficulties of the
age. The spirit of the age was then trying all men through the re-
ligious faculty. Maurice, as if anticipating the Christianity of the
twentieth century, found the key to all problems, not in an infalli-
ble church nor in infallible reason, but in the everlasting love and
fatherhood of God, and in the universal sonship of men. Cambridge
had increased his liberality; Oxford deepened his idealism. Maurice
would exclude no man, whether Jew, Turk, infidel, or heretic, from
the Divine family; yet in his exalted worship of Jesus he was linked
to the mediaval mystic. This rare combination gave him charm, and
drew to him thoughtful and cultured men who were too large for
narrowed and dogmatic Christianity, yet who longed to give expres-
sion to the soul of worship within them. It drew to him also the
workingmen of London. After Maurice left Oxford he was appointed
to the chaplaincy of Guy's Hospital in London. He held also the
chairs of history, literature, and divinity in King's College, and the
chaplaincy of Lincoln's Inn and of St. Peter's. During his long resi-
dence in London, from 1834 until 1866, the broad and fervent religious
spirit of Maurice found expression in social work. The man who
would knit together all the kindreds of the world in the bonds of
Divine fellowship could not limit his ministrations to certain classes
of society. He was in strong sympathy with workingmen, believing
that their lack of education by no means debarred them from the
apprehension of the highest spiritual truths. His foundation of the
Workingman's College was the outcome of this sympathy. He founded
also Queen's College for women; and thus established still further his
claim to be ranked with the prophets of his time. In 1866 he became
professor of moral philosophy at Cambridge. He died in 1872.
Frederick Denison Maurice was the author of many religious
works, but his pre-eminent power is in his sermons. His Lectures
on Ecclesiastical History, his Theological Essays,' his Kingdom of
Christ,' his Unity of the New Testament,' have literary value in
proportion as they exhibit the spirit of the preacher. In his ser-
mons the luminous spirituality of Maurice and his strength as a writer
find completest expression. The man himself can be most closely
approached in his sensitive and thoughtful letters to his friends.
## p. 9830 (#238) ###########################################
9830
FREDERICK DENISON MAURICE
FROM A LETTER TO REV. J. DE LA TOUCHE
I
-
HOLDOR House, DORKING, April 14th, 1863.
Do not know whether you will think me less or more fitted
to enter into that tremendous difficulty of which you speak
in your last letter, when I tell you that I was brought up
a Unitarian, and that I have distinctly and deliberately accepted
the belief which is expressed in the Nicene Creed as the only
satisfaction of the infinite want which Unitarianism awakened in
me; yes, and as the only vindication of the truth which Unitari.
anism taught me.
You feel that our Lord is a man in the most perfect sense
of the word. You cannot convince yourself that he is more.
No, nor will any arguments convince you that he is more. For
what do you mean by that more? Is it a Jupiter Tonans whom
you are investing with the name of God ? is it to him you pray
when you say
Our Father which art in heaven”? Is God
a Father,— really and actually a Father? is he in heaven, far
away from our conceptions and confusions,- one whom we can-
not make in the likeness of anything above, around, beneath us?
Or is all this a dream ? is there no God, no father? has he never
made himself known, never come near to men ? can men never
come near to him ?
Are you startled that I put these questions to you? Do
they seem more terrible than any that have yet presented them-
selves to you? Oh, they are the way back to the faith of the
little child, and to the faith of the grown man. It is not Christ
about whom our doubts are. We are feeling after God if haply
we may find him.
We cannot find him in nature. Paley will not
reveal him to us. But he is very near us; very near to those
creatures whom he has formed in his own image; seeking after
them; speaking to them in a thousand ways.
The belief of a Son who was with him before all worlds, in
whom he created and loves the world; who for us men and for
our salvation came down from heaven and became incarnate, and
died, and was buried, and rose again for us, and ascended on
high to be the High Priest of the universe, - this belief is what?
Something that I can prove by texts of Scripture or by cun-
ning arguments of logic ? God forbid! I simply commend it to
you. I know that you want it. I know that it meets exactly
what your spirit is looking after, and cannot meet with in any
## p. 9831 (#239) ###########################################
FREDERICK DENISON MAURICE
9831
books of divinity. For we have to find out that God is not in a
book; that he is; that he must reveal himself to us; — that he is
revealing himself to us.
I am not distressed that you should be brought to feel that
these deep and infinite questions - not questions about the arith-
metic of the Bible — are what are really haunting and torment-
ing you. I believe that the clergy must make this discovery. We
have been peating phrases and formulas. We have not entered
into them, but only have accepted certain reasonings and proofs
about them. Now they are starting up and looking at us as if
they were alive, and we are frightened at the sight. It is good
for us to be frightened; only let us not turn away from them,
and find fault with them, but ask God - if we believe that he can
hear us
- to search us and show us what is true, and to bring
us out of our atheism.
How, you ask, can I use the prayers of the Church which
assume Christ's divinity when I cannot see sufficient proof that
he is divine ? That is a question, it seems to me, which no man
can answer for you; nay, which you cannot answer for yourself.
If I am right, it is in prayer that you must find the answer.
Yes, in prayer to be able to pray; in prayer to know what prayer
is; in prayer to know whether, without a Mediator, prayer is not
a dream and an impossibility for you, me, every one. I cannot
solve this doubt. I can but show you how to get it solved. I
can but say, The doubt itself may be the greatest blessing you
ever had, may be the greatest striving of God's Spirit within you
that you have ever known, may be the means of making every
duty more real to you.
I do not know who your bishop is. If he is a person with
whom it is possible to communicate freely, I should tell him that
I had perplexities which made the use of the Prayer Book not
true to as it once was; that I wanted time for quiet
thought; that I should like to be silent for a little while;-I
would ask him to let me commit my charge to a curate till I
could see my way more clearly. That would be better, surely,
than a resignation, painful not merely to your friends but inju-
rious to the Church, and perhaps a reason for severe repentance
afterwards. But I may be only increasing your puzzles by this
suggestion. Of the fathers in God on earth I have no certainty.
Of the Father in heaven I can be quite certain. Therefore one
of my hints may be worth nothing. The other is worth every-
thing.
as
me
## p. 9832 (#240) ###########################################
9832
FREDERICK DENISON MAURICE
FROM A LETTER TO REV. CHARLES KINGSLEY
1
MARCH 9TH, 1849.
HAVE done your bidding and read Froude's book (the Nemesis
of Faith'), with what depth of interest I need not tell you.
It is a very awful, and I think may be a very profitable book.
Yes, God would not have permitted it to go forth if he did not
mean good to come out of it.
For myself, I have felt more than
ever since I read it how impossible it is to find any substitute
for the old faith. If after all that experience, a man cannot ask
the God of Truth to give him his spirit of truth, to guide him
into all truth, what is left but just what he describes, — doubt;
not merely of existence, but of doubt itself; doubt whether every
superstition may not be real, every lie a fact? It is undoubted
that such a state of mind is possible, - yes, is near to all of us;
Froude is no false witness. But if it is possible, there must be
some one to bring us out of it; clearly the deliverance is not in
ourselves. And what is the Bible after all but the history of a
deliverer; of God proclaiming himself as man's deliverer from the
state into which he is ever ready to sink,-a state of slavery to
systems, superstitions, the world, himself, atheism? The book is
good for this: it brings us to the root of things; and there is
nothing, or there is God. It is good for this: it shows that God
must come forth and do the work for us, and that all the reli-
gions we make for ourselves, whatever names we give them, are
miserable mutilated attempts to fashion him after our image, with
yet such fragments of truth as show that we are formed in his.
THE SUBJECTS AND LAWS OF THE KINGDOM OF HEAVEN
Text:–«And he lifted up his eyes on his disciples, and said, Blessed be ye
poor, for yours is the kingdom of God. ” — St. LUKE vi. 20.
S
BEGINS a discourse which has often been said to contain a
code of very high morality for those who forsake the low
level of the crowd, and aim at a specially elevated stand-
ard of excellence. The previous sentence explains to whom the
discourse was addressed. "And he came down with them, and
stood in the plain, and the company of his disciples, and a great
multitude of people out of all Judea and Jerusalem, and from
the sea-coast of Tyre and Sidon, which came to hear him, and to
## p. 9833 (#241) ###########################################
FREDERICK DENISON MAURICE
9833
(
»
а
be healed of their diseases. Those were the people who heard
Christ say, “Blessed are ye poor, for yours is the Kingdom of
Heaven. ”
We were wont to mitigate the force of this sentence by re-
ferring to the one in St. Matthew's Gospel which most resembles
it. For “poor,” we say, the other Evangelist gives us "poor in
spirit. ” Is not that the sense in which we must understand the
words here? I am most thankful for the expression in St. Mat-
thew, and am quite willing to use it for the illustration of the
discourse in which it occurs. We may find it a great help here-
after in understanding St. Luke. But I must take his language
as it stands. He says that our Lord lifted up his
eyes on
miscellaneous crowd. He cannot have expected that crowd to
.
introduce any spiritual qualification into the words, “Yours is
the Kingdom of Heaven. ” What then did those words import?
.
Might they be addressed to a multitude similarly composed in
London ?
Surely, in this very simple and direct sense. Our Lord had
come to tell them who was governing them; under whose author-
ity they were living. Who had they fancied was governing
them ? One who regarded the rich with affection; who had
bestowed great advantages upon them, who had given them an
earnest here of what he might do for them hereafter.
It was
most natural for poor men to put this interpretation upon that
which they saw and that which they felt. It was difficult for
them to find any other interpretation. It was not more difficult
for the people who dwelt about the coasts of Tyre and Sidon
than for the people who dwell in the courts and alleys of Lon-
don. The difficulty is the same precisely in kind. The degree
of it must be greater, on some accounts, for the dwellers in
a crowded modern city than for those who breathed the fresh
air of Galilee. The difficulty was not diminished for the latter
(I mean for the Galileans) by anything which they heard from
their religious teachers. It was enormously increased. God was
said to demand of these poor people religious services which they
could not render; an account of knowledge about his law which
they could not possess. His prizes and blessings here and
hereafter were said to be contingent upon their performing these
services, upon their having that knowledge. Whichever way they
turned, - to their present condition, to the forefathers to whose
errors or sins they must in great part attribute that condition,
## p. 9834 (#242) ###########################################
9834
FREDERICK DENISON MAURICE
(
to the future in which they must expect the full fruit of the
misery and evil into which they had fallen, - all looked equally
dark and hopeless.
Startling indeed, then, were the tidings, «Yours is the King-
dom of Heaven. ” Most startling when they were translated into
these: "You have a father in heaven who is seeking after you,
watching over you, whom you may trust entirely. He ruled over
your forefathers.
He promised that he would show forth his
dominion fully and perfectly in the generations to come.
I am
come to tell you of him; to tell you how he rules over you,
and how you may be in very deed his subjects. I am come
that you and your children may be citizens in God's own city,
that the Lord God himself may reign over you. " I cannot ren-
der the phrase into any equivalents that are simpler, more obvi-
ous, than these. And if they were true, must they not have been
true for all that crowd, for every thief and harlot in it ?
not this the very message of John, delivered by Him who could
not only call to repentance but give repentance?
« Yes,” it may be answered, "that might be so, if the lan-
guage only declared to the poor that there was a Heavenly
Father who cared for them no less than he cared for the rich:
but the sentences which follow give them a positive advantage;
it would appear as if the blessing on the poor involved a curse
on the rich. What other force can you put on such sentences as
these? Blessed are ye that hunger now, for ye shall be filled.
Blessed are ye that weep now, for ye shall laugh. But woe unto
you that are rich, for ye have received your consolation. Woe
unto you that are full, for ye shall hunger. Woe unto you that
laugh now, for ye shall mourn and weep. ) »
Language so explicit as this cannot be evaded. And I hold
it is greatly for the interest of all of us who are leading easy
and comfortable lives in the world, that it should not be evaded.
If any amount of riches greater or smaller does give us consola-
tion, it is well for us to understand that there is a woe upon
those riches. They were not meant to give consolation; we were
not meant to find it in them. If any laughter of ours does make
us incapable of weeping, incapable of entering into the sorrow
of the world in which we are dwelling, we ought to feel that
there is misery and death in that laughter. Our Lord does not
speak against laughter; he sets it forth as a blessing. He does
denounce all that laughter which is an exultation in our own
>
## p. 9835 (#243) ###########################################
FREDERICK DENISON MAURICE
9835
prosperity and in the calamities of others. He does promise
that those who are indulging that sort of laughter shall weep.
I use the word promise advisedly. It is a promise, not a threat-
ening; or if you please, a threat which contains a promise. It
is the proof that we are under a Kingdom of Heaven; that God
does not allow such laughter to go on; that he stops it; that he
gives the blessing of sorrow in place of it. And thus all alike
are taught that they are under this fatherly government. All
are shown that the Father in heaven is aware of the discipline
which they need, and will apportion it. All may be brought
to take their places with their brethren in this kingdom. All
may be taught that the common blessings — the blessings from
which one cannot exclude another - are the highest blessings.
All may be brought to know that this one fact, that they have
a Father in heaven, is worth all others. And so that poverty
of spirit which is only another name for childlike dependence
upon One who is above us, and is all good because we have
found we cannot depend upon ourselves, may be wrought by
Him with whom we have to do in rich and poor equally. The
heavenly treasures may be revealed to both, which moth and
rust cannot corrupt, which thieves cannot break through and
steal.
Thus far, assuredly, the tendency of this discourse of our
Lord's has been to level, not to exalt. The Kingdom of Heaven
has not been a prize for those who are unlike their fellows, but
for those who will take their stand by them — who will set up
no exclusive pretensions of their own.
But what shall we say
of this benediction —« Blessed are ye when men shall hate you,
and when they shall separate you from their company, and shall
reproach you, and shall cast out your name as evil, for the Son
of Man's sake. Rejoice ye in that day, and leap for joy, for
behold your reward is great in heaven: for in the like manner
did their fathers unto the prophets”? And again of this woe
"Woe unto you when all men shall speak well of you, for so did
their fathers unto the false prophets”? Is there not here a glori-
fication of the little minority which is persecuted, a denunciation
of the majority which persecutes ?
The comment on the language is in the actual history. Why
was St. Stephen, whom we have been remembering lately, cast
out of the city of Jerusalem and stoned ? Because he was ac-
cused of breaking down the barriers which separated the chosen
»
## p. 9836 (#244) ###########################################
9836
FREDERICK DENISON MAURICE
men
people from the surrounding nations. Why was the young man
at whose feet the witnesses against Stephen laid down their
clothes, afterwards denounced in the same city as one who ought
not to live ? Because he said that he was sent with a message
of peace and reconciliation to the Gentiles. What was it that
sustained and comforted Stephen in the hour when his country-
were gnashing upon him with their teeth? The sight of
the Son of Man standing at the right hand of God; the Savior
and King, not of him and his brother disciples, but of mankind.
What was St. Paul's deepest sorrow, and how was it that in the
midst of that sorrow he could always rejoice? His sorrow was
that his kinsmen after the flesh were to be cut off, because they
were enemies to God and contrary to all men. His joy was in
the thought that “all Israel should be saved;” that “God had
concluded all in unbelief, that he might have mercy upon all. ”
This then was the witness of the little band of the persecuted,
that God is the Father of all; that his Kingdom is over all.
And the determination of that powerful majority of persecutors
was to keep the favor of God and the Kingdom of Heaven to
themselves. Those of whom all men speak well are those who
flatter their exclusiveness; who lead them to think that they
are better than others, and that they shall have mercies which are
denied to others. The comfort of the persecuted, which the per-
secutor could not have, was the comfort of believing that God
would conquer all obstacles; that the Son of Man, for whose sake
they loved not their lives, would be shown in very deed to be
King of kings and Lord of lords - all human wills being sub-
jected to his will.
And so you perceive how the next precepts, which we often
read as if they were mere isolated maxims, are connected with
these blessings and these woes. But I
say unto you which
hear,” – unto you, that is, whom I have told that men shall sep-
arate you from their company, and cast out your persons as
evil, — "Love your enemies; do good to them which persecute
you. Bless them that curse you, and pray for them which de-
spitefully use you. And unto him that smiteth thee on the one
cheek offer also the other; and him that taketh away thy cloke
forbid not to take thy coat also. Give to every man that asketh
of thee; and of him that taketh away thy goods ask them not
again. And as ye would that men should do to you, do ye also
to them likewise. For if ye love them which love you, what
»
## p. 9837 (#245) ###########################################
FREDERICK DENISON MAURICE
9837
use.
thank have ye? for sinners also love those that love them. And
if ye do good to them which do good to you, what thank have
ye? for sinners also do even the same. And if ye lend to them
of whom ye hope to receive, what thank have ye? for sinners
also lend to sinners, to receive as much again. But love ye your
enemies, and do good; and lend, hoping for nothing again. And
ye shall be the children of the Highest; for he is kind unto the
unthankful and to the evil. Be ye therefore merciful, as your
Father in heaven is merciful. ”
In these passages is contained the sum of what we have been
used to call the peculiar Christian morality. It is supposed to
be very admirable, but far too fine for common He who
aims at following it is to be counted a high saint. He claims
a state immensely above the ordinary level of humanity. He
even discards the maxims by which civil society is governed —
those which the statesman considers necessary for his objects.
No doubt, it is said, this transcendent doctrine has had a cer-
tain influence upon the nations in which it is promulgated. It
has modified some of the thoughts and feelings which are most
adverse to it. The beauty of it is confessed by many who never
dream of practicing it. There are some unbelievers who try to
practice it, and say that if this part of Christianity could be sepa-
rated from its mysterious part, they could not reverence it too
highly. But though this is true, we have proofs, it is said, every
day and hour, that this love to enemies, this blessing them that
curse, this turning the one cheek to him who smites the other,
is altogether contrary to the habits and tempers of the world.
My friends, the evidence goes much further than that. We
need not derive our proofs that the natural heart revolts against
these precepts from what is called The World. The records of
the Church will furnish that demonstration much more perfectly.
Hatred of those whom they have counted their enemies, - this
has been the too characteristic sign of men who have called
themselves Christ's servants and soldiers. Curses have been their
favorite weapons. Nó church can bring that charge against an-
other without laying itself open to retaliation. And it cannot be
pleaded, “Oh, there is a corrupt unbelieving leaven in every
Christian society. ” The habit I speak of has come forth often
most flagrantly in those who were denouncing this leaven, who
were seeking to cast it out. I am not saying that they were not
good men. The case is all the stronger if they were. I am not
(
## p. 9838 (#246) ###########################################
9838
FREDERICK DENISON MAURICE
saying that a genuine zeal for truth was not at the root of their
rage, and did not mingle with the most outrageous acts of it.
Of all this, God will be the judge. We are not wise to antici-
pate his decisions.
But such facts, which are notorious, and are
repeated in every age and in every country, show the absurdity
of the theory that what our Lord lays down as the laws of the
Kingdom of Heaven are intended for the use of a particular
class of persons, who aspire to outstrip their fellows and win
higher prizes than the rest of mankind. They lead us to suspect
that those who have aimed at such distinctions and pursued such
objects have not been able to submit to his government — have
-
assumed a position which was essentially rebellious. They lead
us back to the leveling sentence with which the discourse opens,
and which must be accepted as the key to the whole of it. What
business has any citizen of a kingdom to talk of a certain standard
which is meant for him and not for all the subjects of it? What
is that but adopting the maxim which the Roman poet unfairly
ascribed to the Greek hero, that “laws were not born for him?
How reasonable, on the other hand, - how perfectly consist-
ent,- is our Lord's language, if we suppose him to be revealing
the laws under which God has constituted human beings,— the
laws which are the expression of his own Divine nature, the laws
which were perfectly fulfilled in his Son, the laws which his
Spirit is seeking to write on all hearts! What signifies it to
the reality of such laws that this or that man transgresses them;
that he who transgresses them calls himself Churchman or Dis-
senter, Catholic or Protestant, believer or infidel? If they are
true, they must stand in spite of such transgressions; they will
make their power manifest through such transgressions. There
will be a witness on behalf of them, such as we see there is in
all human consciences; there will be a resistance to them, such
as we see there is in all human wills. Our belief in their ulti-
mate triumph over that which opposes them must depend on
our belief in Him who is the Author of the law. If we think
that he is our Father in heaven, and that his law of forgiveness
has been fully accomplished in Christ, and that his Spirit is
stronger than the Evil Spirit, every sign of the victory of love
over striving and hating wills must be a pledge how the battle
is to terminate: no success of bitterness, and wrath, and malice,
however it may shake our minds, can be anything but a proof
that less than Almighty love, less than a Divine sacrifice, would
## p. 9839 (#247) ###########################################
FREDERICK DENISON MAURICE
9839
-
have been unable to subdue such adversaries. But if we think
this discourse to be the announcement of a refined ethical sys-
tem,- not the proclamation of a Kingdom of Heaven, as it pro-
fesses to be, - we may well complain how feeble and ineffective it
is and must always be. We may say that its power can never be
recognized beyond a circle of rare exceptional persons.
And we
may find that these rare exceptional persons are always supplied
with a set of evasions, equivocations, and apologies for violating
every one of its principles, especially in those acts which they
consider most religious and meritorious.
Those who confine this discourse to saints speedily contradict
themselves. When they bring forth evidences of Christianity, or
evidences of the influence of the Catholic Church, they appeal to
the power which the Cross, with its proclamation of Divine for-
giveness to enemies, has exercised over the wild warring tribes
that have fashioned modern Europe. They ask whether the con-
science of those tribes, in the midst of all their bloody feuds
and acts of personal vengeance, did not stoop to the authority
of a Prince of Peace; whether it did not confess him as King of
kings and Lord of lords; whether it did not acknowledge those
as especially his ministers who in bodily weakness - in defiance
of the physically strong — showed forth the loving-kindness which
they said was his, and claimed the serf and the noble as alike
his subjects and his brethren. The facts cannot be gainsaid.
They are written in sunbeams on all the darkest pages of mod-
ern history. What do they prove? Surely, that our Lord was
not proclaiming a code which was at variance with civil order
and obedience,-a transcendental morality, - but principles which
were the foundation of civil order and obedience; principles
which were to undermine and uproot the very evils which all
national codes are endeavoring to counteract. The national code
- the most exalted, the most divine code — can only forbid, only
counteract. If it aspires to do more, if it strives to extirpate
vices instead of to punish crimes, if it enjoins virtues instead of
demanding simple submission to its decrees, - it proves its own
impotence. It is always asking for help to do that which it can-
not do. It wants a power to make the obedience which it needs
voluntary; to kindle the patriotism without which it will only
be directed to a herd of animals, not a race of men. Wherever
there has been a voluntary obedience, wherever there has been
a patriotism which has made men willing to die that their land
## p. 9840 (#248) ###########################################
9840
FREDERICK DENISON MAURICE
for us.
might not be in the possession of strangers, there has been faith
in an unseen Ruler; there has been a confidence that he wills
men to be free. The Jewish history interprets other history.
It shows what has been the source of law and freedom; what
has been the destruction of both; what has been the preservation
of both. This discourse, because it proclaims a more universal
principle than the Jewish or national principle, is supposed to
set that aside. I accept our Lord's words, "I come not to de-
stroy, but to fulfill," as true in every case. He does not destroy
the fundamental maxim that God is the author of the Com-
mandments. He fulfills it by proclaiming the mind of his Father
in heaven as the ground of all the acts of his children. He does
not destroy one sacrifice which any patriot had made for his peo-
ple's freedom. He fulfills it in his perfect sacrifice to God and
He does not destroy any one precept of duty to God
or to our neighbor. He fulfills it by baptizing with his Spirit;
by making duty to God the surrender of man's will to his will
which is working in us; that will binding men to each other as
members of the same body; that will fighting with all the self-
ish impulses which tear us asunder. There is no opposition be.
tween the Kingdom of Heaven and any kingdom of earth, except
what is produced by this selfishness which is the enemy of both.
If the civil ruler sanctions one law for the rich and one law
for the poor, he offends against the maxims of the Kingdom of
Heaven; but then he also introduces a confusion into his own.
If he prefers war to peace, gambling to honesty, bondage to
freedom, and if he seeks religious sanctions to uphold him in
these tastes, he offends against the maxims of the Kingdom
of Heaven, and he is preparing ruin for his own State. If the
ecclesiastic proclaims one law for the saint and another for the
common man, he overthrows the common order and morality of
nations; but he sins still more directly against the laws which
Christ proclaimed on the Mount. If he sets up the priest against
the magistrate, he disturbs the peace of civil communities; but
he also exalts the priest into the place of God, and so commits
treason against the Kingdom of Heaven. If he assume the office
of a judge of his brethren, he may do much mischief on earth
which the ruler on earth cannot hinder. But he falls under this
sentence: “Judge not, and ye shall not be judged; condemn not,
and ye shall not be condemned; forgive, and ye shall be for-
given. ”
## p. 9841 (#249) ###########################################
FREDERICK DENISON MAURICE
9841
(
These laws of the Kingdom of Heaven seem very hard to
keep. See what hinders us from keeping them. It is not some
incapacity. It is our determination to assume a place which is
not ours. Each of us is continually setting up himself to be a
God. Each is seizing the judgment-throne of the universe. We
know that it is so. And from this throne we must come down.
We must confess that we are not gods; not able to pronounce
on the condition of our fellows, needing forgiveness every day
from our Father and from each other, permitted to dispense
what he sends us. The lesson is a simple one.
you. ”
The peasant, surprised and uneasy, gulped down his little glass
of cognac, got up, and — even worse bent over than in the morn-
ing, since the first steps after a rest were always particularly dif-
ficult — started off, repeating :
“Here I am, here I am. ”
And he followed the corporal.
The mayor was waiting for him, seated in an arm-chair. He
was the notary of the place, a tall, grave man of pompous speech.
"Maître Hauchecorne," said he, “this morning, on the Beuze-
ville road, you were seen to pick up the pocket-book lost by
Maître Houlbrèque of Manneville. ”
The countryman, speechless, gazed at the mayor; frightened
already by this suspicion, which rested on him he knew not why.
“I-I picked up that pocket-book ? »
“Yes, you. ”
"I swear I didn't even know nothing about it at all. ”
« You were seen. ”
They saw me – me? Who is that who saw me?
"M. Malandain, the harness-maker. ”
>
(
ac
>
## p. 9825 (#233) ###########################################
GUY DE MAUPASSANT
9825
Then the old man remembered, understood, and reddening
with anger:
:-
"Ah! he saw me, did he, the rascal ? He saw me picking up
this string here, M'sieu' le Maire. »
And fumbling at the bottom of his pocket, he pulled out of
it the little end of string.
But the mayor incredulously shook his head :-
«You will not make me believe, Maître Hauchecorne, that
M. Malandain, who is a man worthy of credit, has mistaken this
string for a pocket-book. ”
The peasant, furious, raised his hand and spit as if to attest
his good faith, repeating: -
For all that, it is the truth of the good God, the blessed
truth, M'sieu' le Maire. There! on my soul and my salvation I
repeat it. ”
The mayor continued:
"After picking up the thing in question, you even looked
for some time in the mud to see if a piece of money had not
dropped out of it. ”
The good man was suffocated with indignation and with fear.
“If they can say —! If they can say such lies as that to slan-
der an honest man! If they can say — ! ”
He might protest, he was not believed.
He was confronted with M. Malandain, who repeated and
sustained his testimony. They abused one another for an hour.
.
At his own request, Maître Hauchecorne was searched. Nothing
was found on him.
At last the mayor, much perplexed, sent him away, warning
him that he would inform the public prosecutor and ask for
orders.
The news had spread. When he left the mayor's office, the
old man was surrounded, interrogated with a curiosity which was
serious or mocking as the case might be, but into which no in-
dignation entered. And he began to tell the story of the string.
They did not believe him. They laughed.
He passed on, buttonholed by every one, himself buttonholing
his acquaintances, beginning over and over again his tale and his
protestations, showing his pockets turned inside out to prove that
he had nothing.
They said to him:-
You old rogue, va ! ”
XVII-615
(C
## p. 9826 (#234) ###########################################
9826
GUY DE MAUPASSANT
And he grew angry, exasperated, feverish, in despair at not
being believed; and always telling his story.
The night came. It was time to go home. He set out with
three of his neighbors, to whom he pointed out the place where
he had picked up the end of string; and all the way he talked
of his adventure.
That evening he made the round in the village of Bréauté, so
as to tell every one. He met only unbelievers.
He was ill of it all night long.
The next day, about one in the afternoon, Marius Paumelle, a
farm hand of Maître Breton, the market-gardener at Ymauville,
returned the pocket-book and its contents to Maître Houlbrèque
of Manneville.
This man said that he had indeed found it on the road; but
not knowing how to read, he had carried it home and given it
to his master.
The news spread to the environs. Maître Hauchecorne was
informed. He put himself at once upon the go, and began to
relate his story as completed by the dénouement. He triumphed.
“,
“What grieved me," said he was not the thing itself, do
you understand; but it was the lies. There's nothing does you
so much harm as being in disgrace for lying. ”
All day he talked of his adventure; he told it on the roads to
the people who passed; at the cabaret to the people who drank;
and the next Sunday, when they came out of church.
He even
stopped strangers to tell them about it. He was easy now, and
yet something worried him without his knowing exactly what it
was. People had a joking manner while they listened. They did
not seem convinced. He seemed to feel their tittle-tattle behind
his back.
On Tuesday of the next week he went to market at Goder-
ville, prompted entirely by the need of telling his story.
Malandain, standing on his door-step, began to laugh as he
saw him pass. Why?
He accosted a farmer of Criquetot, who did not let him finish,
and giving him a punch in the pit of his stomach, cried in his
face:
“Oh you great rogue, va ! » Then turned his heel upon him.
Maître Hauchecorne remained speechless, and grew more and
more uneasy. Why had they called him "great rogue ?
When seated at table in Jourdain's tavern he began again to
explain the whole affair.
## p. 9827 (#235) ###########################################
GUY DE MAUPASSANT
9827
A horse-dealer of Montivilliers shouted at him:
“Get out, get out, you old scamp: I know all about your
string! ”
Hauchecorne stammered:
« But since they found it again, the pocket-book — ! ”
But the other continued:
"Hold your tongue, daddy: there's one who finds it and there's
another who returns it. And no one the wiser. ”
The peasant was choked. He understood at last. They accused
him of having had the pocket-book brought back by an accom-
plice, by a confederate.
He tried to protest. The whole table began to laugh.
He could not finish his dinner, and went away amid a chorus
of jeers.
He went home ashamed and indignant, choked with rage, with
confusion; the more cast down since from his Norman cunning,
he was perhaps capable of having done what they accused him
of, and even of boasting of it as a good trick. His innocence
dimly seemed to him impossible to prove, his craftiness being
so well known. And he felt himself struck to the heart by the
injustice of the suspicion.
Then he began anew to tell of his adventure, lengthening his
recital every day, each time adding new proofs, more energetic
protestations, and more solemn oaths which he thought of, which
he prepared in his hours of solitude, his mind being entirely
occupied by the story of the string. The more complicated his
defense, the more artful his arguments, the less he was believed.
« Those are liars' proofs,” they said behind his back.
He felt this; it preyed upon his heart. He exhausted himself
in useless efforts.
He was visibly wasting away.
The jokers now made him tell the story of the piece of
string” to amuse them, just as you make a soldier who has been
on a campaign tell his story of the battle. His mind, struck at
the root, grew weak.
About the end of December he took to his bed.
He died early in January, and in the delirium of the death
agony he protested his innocence, repeating: -
"A little bit of string-a little bit of string - see, here it is,
M'sieu' le Maire. »
Translation of Jonathan Sturges.
## p. 9828 (#236) ###########################################
9828
FREDERICK DENISON MAURICE
(1805-1870)
REDERICK DENISON MAURICE takes high rank among the reli-
gious teachers of this century, more by virtue of what he
was than of what he wrote. He is of those elect souls
whose insight becomes a guiding force both to themselves and to
their fellows. Of a generation which knew Carlyle and Mill and
Darwin, which was given over to the dry-rot of intellectual despair
in all matters concerning the religious life of man, Maurice seemed
born out of due time. He belonged apparently to an earlier or to a
later day. Yet by force, not of his intellect
but of his faith, he succeeded in turning
many of his contemporaries to the Christ-
ian ideal which haunted him throughout his
life, and which perpetually dominated his
nineteenth-century inheritance of skepti-
cism. Unlike Newman, with whom he was
associated at Oxford, Maurice was content
to find in the Church of England, as in all
churches, only a partial realization of his
ideal of righteousness. He is of those who
believe that the whole truth can never
be revealed to one generation. He shares
FREDERICK D. MAURICE the Platonic belief that the vision of God
becomes gradually apparent through many
This liberalism was the mainspring of his power as a reli-
gious teacher.
His early training had enlarged his sympathies and prepared the
way for his future ministrations. He was born in 1805 of a Unitarian
father, and of a mother who adhered to the doctrines of Calvin. His
first religious problem was to reconcile these differences of faith.
Later his education at Cambridge deepened within him the evangeli-
cal sympathies, which made him long to unite the world under one
banner as Sons of God. Upon leaving Cambridge he undertook the
editorship of the Athenæum in London, and while engaged upon
this work became a member of the Church of England. His resi-
dence at Oxford was the natural outcome of this step.
The strong-
hold of mediævalism was then vital with the presence of Newman,
æons.
a
## p. 9829 (#237) ###########################################
FREDERICK DENISON MAURICE
9829
of Pusey, of Keble, and of others who were seeking with passionate
eagerness a refuge from the insistent doubts and difficulties of the
age. The spirit of the age was then trying all men through the re-
ligious faculty. Maurice, as if anticipating the Christianity of the
twentieth century, found the key to all problems, not in an infalli-
ble church nor in infallible reason, but in the everlasting love and
fatherhood of God, and in the universal sonship of men. Cambridge
had increased his liberality; Oxford deepened his idealism. Maurice
would exclude no man, whether Jew, Turk, infidel, or heretic, from
the Divine family; yet in his exalted worship of Jesus he was linked
to the mediaval mystic. This rare combination gave him charm, and
drew to him thoughtful and cultured men who were too large for
narrowed and dogmatic Christianity, yet who longed to give expres-
sion to the soul of worship within them. It drew to him also the
workingmen of London. After Maurice left Oxford he was appointed
to the chaplaincy of Guy's Hospital in London. He held also the
chairs of history, literature, and divinity in King's College, and the
chaplaincy of Lincoln's Inn and of St. Peter's. During his long resi-
dence in London, from 1834 until 1866, the broad and fervent religious
spirit of Maurice found expression in social work. The man who
would knit together all the kindreds of the world in the bonds of
Divine fellowship could not limit his ministrations to certain classes
of society. He was in strong sympathy with workingmen, believing
that their lack of education by no means debarred them from the
apprehension of the highest spiritual truths. His foundation of the
Workingman's College was the outcome of this sympathy. He founded
also Queen's College for women; and thus established still further his
claim to be ranked with the prophets of his time. In 1866 he became
professor of moral philosophy at Cambridge. He died in 1872.
Frederick Denison Maurice was the author of many religious
works, but his pre-eminent power is in his sermons. His Lectures
on Ecclesiastical History, his Theological Essays,' his Kingdom of
Christ,' his Unity of the New Testament,' have literary value in
proportion as they exhibit the spirit of the preacher. In his ser-
mons the luminous spirituality of Maurice and his strength as a writer
find completest expression. The man himself can be most closely
approached in his sensitive and thoughtful letters to his friends.
## p. 9830 (#238) ###########################################
9830
FREDERICK DENISON MAURICE
FROM A LETTER TO REV. J. DE LA TOUCHE
I
-
HOLDOR House, DORKING, April 14th, 1863.
Do not know whether you will think me less or more fitted
to enter into that tremendous difficulty of which you speak
in your last letter, when I tell you that I was brought up
a Unitarian, and that I have distinctly and deliberately accepted
the belief which is expressed in the Nicene Creed as the only
satisfaction of the infinite want which Unitarianism awakened in
me; yes, and as the only vindication of the truth which Unitari.
anism taught me.
You feel that our Lord is a man in the most perfect sense
of the word. You cannot convince yourself that he is more.
No, nor will any arguments convince you that he is more. For
what do you mean by that more? Is it a Jupiter Tonans whom
you are investing with the name of God ? is it to him you pray
when you say
Our Father which art in heaven”? Is God
a Father,— really and actually a Father? is he in heaven, far
away from our conceptions and confusions,- one whom we can-
not make in the likeness of anything above, around, beneath us?
Or is all this a dream ? is there no God, no father? has he never
made himself known, never come near to men ? can men never
come near to him ?
Are you startled that I put these questions to you? Do
they seem more terrible than any that have yet presented them-
selves to you? Oh, they are the way back to the faith of the
little child, and to the faith of the grown man. It is not Christ
about whom our doubts are. We are feeling after God if haply
we may find him.
We cannot find him in nature. Paley will not
reveal him to us. But he is very near us; very near to those
creatures whom he has formed in his own image; seeking after
them; speaking to them in a thousand ways.
The belief of a Son who was with him before all worlds, in
whom he created and loves the world; who for us men and for
our salvation came down from heaven and became incarnate, and
died, and was buried, and rose again for us, and ascended on
high to be the High Priest of the universe, - this belief is what?
Something that I can prove by texts of Scripture or by cun-
ning arguments of logic ? God forbid! I simply commend it to
you. I know that you want it. I know that it meets exactly
what your spirit is looking after, and cannot meet with in any
## p. 9831 (#239) ###########################################
FREDERICK DENISON MAURICE
9831
books of divinity. For we have to find out that God is not in a
book; that he is; that he must reveal himself to us; — that he is
revealing himself to us.
I am not distressed that you should be brought to feel that
these deep and infinite questions - not questions about the arith-
metic of the Bible — are what are really haunting and torment-
ing you. I believe that the clergy must make this discovery. We
have been peating phrases and formulas. We have not entered
into them, but only have accepted certain reasonings and proofs
about them. Now they are starting up and looking at us as if
they were alive, and we are frightened at the sight. It is good
for us to be frightened; only let us not turn away from them,
and find fault with them, but ask God - if we believe that he can
hear us
- to search us and show us what is true, and to bring
us out of our atheism.
How, you ask, can I use the prayers of the Church which
assume Christ's divinity when I cannot see sufficient proof that
he is divine ? That is a question, it seems to me, which no man
can answer for you; nay, which you cannot answer for yourself.
If I am right, it is in prayer that you must find the answer.
Yes, in prayer to be able to pray; in prayer to know what prayer
is; in prayer to know whether, without a Mediator, prayer is not
a dream and an impossibility for you, me, every one. I cannot
solve this doubt. I can but show you how to get it solved. I
can but say, The doubt itself may be the greatest blessing you
ever had, may be the greatest striving of God's Spirit within you
that you have ever known, may be the means of making every
duty more real to you.
I do not know who your bishop is. If he is a person with
whom it is possible to communicate freely, I should tell him that
I had perplexities which made the use of the Prayer Book not
true to as it once was; that I wanted time for quiet
thought; that I should like to be silent for a little while;-I
would ask him to let me commit my charge to a curate till I
could see my way more clearly. That would be better, surely,
than a resignation, painful not merely to your friends but inju-
rious to the Church, and perhaps a reason for severe repentance
afterwards. But I may be only increasing your puzzles by this
suggestion. Of the fathers in God on earth I have no certainty.
Of the Father in heaven I can be quite certain. Therefore one
of my hints may be worth nothing. The other is worth every-
thing.
as
me
## p. 9832 (#240) ###########################################
9832
FREDERICK DENISON MAURICE
FROM A LETTER TO REV. CHARLES KINGSLEY
1
MARCH 9TH, 1849.
HAVE done your bidding and read Froude's book (the Nemesis
of Faith'), with what depth of interest I need not tell you.
It is a very awful, and I think may be a very profitable book.
Yes, God would not have permitted it to go forth if he did not
mean good to come out of it.
For myself, I have felt more than
ever since I read it how impossible it is to find any substitute
for the old faith. If after all that experience, a man cannot ask
the God of Truth to give him his spirit of truth, to guide him
into all truth, what is left but just what he describes, — doubt;
not merely of existence, but of doubt itself; doubt whether every
superstition may not be real, every lie a fact? It is undoubted
that such a state of mind is possible, - yes, is near to all of us;
Froude is no false witness. But if it is possible, there must be
some one to bring us out of it; clearly the deliverance is not in
ourselves. And what is the Bible after all but the history of a
deliverer; of God proclaiming himself as man's deliverer from the
state into which he is ever ready to sink,-a state of slavery to
systems, superstitions, the world, himself, atheism? The book is
good for this: it brings us to the root of things; and there is
nothing, or there is God. It is good for this: it shows that God
must come forth and do the work for us, and that all the reli-
gions we make for ourselves, whatever names we give them, are
miserable mutilated attempts to fashion him after our image, with
yet such fragments of truth as show that we are formed in his.
THE SUBJECTS AND LAWS OF THE KINGDOM OF HEAVEN
Text:–«And he lifted up his eyes on his disciples, and said, Blessed be ye
poor, for yours is the kingdom of God. ” — St. LUKE vi. 20.
S
BEGINS a discourse which has often been said to contain a
code of very high morality for those who forsake the low
level of the crowd, and aim at a specially elevated stand-
ard of excellence. The previous sentence explains to whom the
discourse was addressed. "And he came down with them, and
stood in the plain, and the company of his disciples, and a great
multitude of people out of all Judea and Jerusalem, and from
the sea-coast of Tyre and Sidon, which came to hear him, and to
## p. 9833 (#241) ###########################################
FREDERICK DENISON MAURICE
9833
(
»
а
be healed of their diseases. Those were the people who heard
Christ say, “Blessed are ye poor, for yours is the Kingdom of
Heaven. ”
We were wont to mitigate the force of this sentence by re-
ferring to the one in St. Matthew's Gospel which most resembles
it. For “poor,” we say, the other Evangelist gives us "poor in
spirit. ” Is not that the sense in which we must understand the
words here? I am most thankful for the expression in St. Mat-
thew, and am quite willing to use it for the illustration of the
discourse in which it occurs. We may find it a great help here-
after in understanding St. Luke. But I must take his language
as it stands. He says that our Lord lifted up his
eyes on
miscellaneous crowd. He cannot have expected that crowd to
.
introduce any spiritual qualification into the words, “Yours is
the Kingdom of Heaven. ” What then did those words import?
.
Might they be addressed to a multitude similarly composed in
London ?
Surely, in this very simple and direct sense. Our Lord had
come to tell them who was governing them; under whose author-
ity they were living. Who had they fancied was governing
them ? One who regarded the rich with affection; who had
bestowed great advantages upon them, who had given them an
earnest here of what he might do for them hereafter.
It was
most natural for poor men to put this interpretation upon that
which they saw and that which they felt. It was difficult for
them to find any other interpretation. It was not more difficult
for the people who dwelt about the coasts of Tyre and Sidon
than for the people who dwell in the courts and alleys of Lon-
don. The difficulty is the same precisely in kind. The degree
of it must be greater, on some accounts, for the dwellers in
a crowded modern city than for those who breathed the fresh
air of Galilee. The difficulty was not diminished for the latter
(I mean for the Galileans) by anything which they heard from
their religious teachers. It was enormously increased. God was
said to demand of these poor people religious services which they
could not render; an account of knowledge about his law which
they could not possess. His prizes and blessings here and
hereafter were said to be contingent upon their performing these
services, upon their having that knowledge. Whichever way they
turned, - to their present condition, to the forefathers to whose
errors or sins they must in great part attribute that condition,
## p. 9834 (#242) ###########################################
9834
FREDERICK DENISON MAURICE
(
to the future in which they must expect the full fruit of the
misery and evil into which they had fallen, - all looked equally
dark and hopeless.
Startling indeed, then, were the tidings, «Yours is the King-
dom of Heaven. ” Most startling when they were translated into
these: "You have a father in heaven who is seeking after you,
watching over you, whom you may trust entirely. He ruled over
your forefathers.
He promised that he would show forth his
dominion fully and perfectly in the generations to come.
I am
come to tell you of him; to tell you how he rules over you,
and how you may be in very deed his subjects. I am come
that you and your children may be citizens in God's own city,
that the Lord God himself may reign over you. " I cannot ren-
der the phrase into any equivalents that are simpler, more obvi-
ous, than these. And if they were true, must they not have been
true for all that crowd, for every thief and harlot in it ?
not this the very message of John, delivered by Him who could
not only call to repentance but give repentance?
« Yes,” it may be answered, "that might be so, if the lan-
guage only declared to the poor that there was a Heavenly
Father who cared for them no less than he cared for the rich:
but the sentences which follow give them a positive advantage;
it would appear as if the blessing on the poor involved a curse
on the rich. What other force can you put on such sentences as
these? Blessed are ye that hunger now, for ye shall be filled.
Blessed are ye that weep now, for ye shall laugh. But woe unto
you that are rich, for ye have received your consolation. Woe
unto you that are full, for ye shall hunger. Woe unto you that
laugh now, for ye shall mourn and weep. ) »
Language so explicit as this cannot be evaded. And I hold
it is greatly for the interest of all of us who are leading easy
and comfortable lives in the world, that it should not be evaded.
If any amount of riches greater or smaller does give us consola-
tion, it is well for us to understand that there is a woe upon
those riches. They were not meant to give consolation; we were
not meant to find it in them. If any laughter of ours does make
us incapable of weeping, incapable of entering into the sorrow
of the world in which we are dwelling, we ought to feel that
there is misery and death in that laughter. Our Lord does not
speak against laughter; he sets it forth as a blessing. He does
denounce all that laughter which is an exultation in our own
>
## p. 9835 (#243) ###########################################
FREDERICK DENISON MAURICE
9835
prosperity and in the calamities of others. He does promise
that those who are indulging that sort of laughter shall weep.
I use the word promise advisedly. It is a promise, not a threat-
ening; or if you please, a threat which contains a promise. It
is the proof that we are under a Kingdom of Heaven; that God
does not allow such laughter to go on; that he stops it; that he
gives the blessing of sorrow in place of it. And thus all alike
are taught that they are under this fatherly government. All
are shown that the Father in heaven is aware of the discipline
which they need, and will apportion it. All may be brought
to take their places with their brethren in this kingdom. All
may be taught that the common blessings — the blessings from
which one cannot exclude another - are the highest blessings.
All may be brought to know that this one fact, that they have
a Father in heaven, is worth all others. And so that poverty
of spirit which is only another name for childlike dependence
upon One who is above us, and is all good because we have
found we cannot depend upon ourselves, may be wrought by
Him with whom we have to do in rich and poor equally. The
heavenly treasures may be revealed to both, which moth and
rust cannot corrupt, which thieves cannot break through and
steal.
Thus far, assuredly, the tendency of this discourse of our
Lord's has been to level, not to exalt. The Kingdom of Heaven
has not been a prize for those who are unlike their fellows, but
for those who will take their stand by them — who will set up
no exclusive pretensions of their own.
But what shall we say
of this benediction —« Blessed are ye when men shall hate you,
and when they shall separate you from their company, and shall
reproach you, and shall cast out your name as evil, for the Son
of Man's sake. Rejoice ye in that day, and leap for joy, for
behold your reward is great in heaven: for in the like manner
did their fathers unto the prophets”? And again of this woe
"Woe unto you when all men shall speak well of you, for so did
their fathers unto the false prophets”? Is there not here a glori-
fication of the little minority which is persecuted, a denunciation
of the majority which persecutes ?
The comment on the language is in the actual history. Why
was St. Stephen, whom we have been remembering lately, cast
out of the city of Jerusalem and stoned ? Because he was ac-
cused of breaking down the barriers which separated the chosen
»
## p. 9836 (#244) ###########################################
9836
FREDERICK DENISON MAURICE
men
people from the surrounding nations. Why was the young man
at whose feet the witnesses against Stephen laid down their
clothes, afterwards denounced in the same city as one who ought
not to live ? Because he said that he was sent with a message
of peace and reconciliation to the Gentiles. What was it that
sustained and comforted Stephen in the hour when his country-
were gnashing upon him with their teeth? The sight of
the Son of Man standing at the right hand of God; the Savior
and King, not of him and his brother disciples, but of mankind.
What was St. Paul's deepest sorrow, and how was it that in the
midst of that sorrow he could always rejoice? His sorrow was
that his kinsmen after the flesh were to be cut off, because they
were enemies to God and contrary to all men. His joy was in
the thought that “all Israel should be saved;” that “God had
concluded all in unbelief, that he might have mercy upon all. ”
This then was the witness of the little band of the persecuted,
that God is the Father of all; that his Kingdom is over all.
And the determination of that powerful majority of persecutors
was to keep the favor of God and the Kingdom of Heaven to
themselves. Those of whom all men speak well are those who
flatter their exclusiveness; who lead them to think that they
are better than others, and that they shall have mercies which are
denied to others. The comfort of the persecuted, which the per-
secutor could not have, was the comfort of believing that God
would conquer all obstacles; that the Son of Man, for whose sake
they loved not their lives, would be shown in very deed to be
King of kings and Lord of lords - all human wills being sub-
jected to his will.
And so you perceive how the next precepts, which we often
read as if they were mere isolated maxims, are connected with
these blessings and these woes. But I
say unto you which
hear,” – unto you, that is, whom I have told that men shall sep-
arate you from their company, and cast out your persons as
evil, — "Love your enemies; do good to them which persecute
you. Bless them that curse you, and pray for them which de-
spitefully use you. And unto him that smiteth thee on the one
cheek offer also the other; and him that taketh away thy cloke
forbid not to take thy coat also. Give to every man that asketh
of thee; and of him that taketh away thy goods ask them not
again. And as ye would that men should do to you, do ye also
to them likewise. For if ye love them which love you, what
»
## p. 9837 (#245) ###########################################
FREDERICK DENISON MAURICE
9837
use.
thank have ye? for sinners also love those that love them. And
if ye do good to them which do good to you, what thank have
ye? for sinners also do even the same. And if ye lend to them
of whom ye hope to receive, what thank have ye? for sinners
also lend to sinners, to receive as much again. But love ye your
enemies, and do good; and lend, hoping for nothing again. And
ye shall be the children of the Highest; for he is kind unto the
unthankful and to the evil. Be ye therefore merciful, as your
Father in heaven is merciful. ”
In these passages is contained the sum of what we have been
used to call the peculiar Christian morality. It is supposed to
be very admirable, but far too fine for common He who
aims at following it is to be counted a high saint. He claims
a state immensely above the ordinary level of humanity. He
even discards the maxims by which civil society is governed —
those which the statesman considers necessary for his objects.
No doubt, it is said, this transcendent doctrine has had a cer-
tain influence upon the nations in which it is promulgated. It
has modified some of the thoughts and feelings which are most
adverse to it. The beauty of it is confessed by many who never
dream of practicing it. There are some unbelievers who try to
practice it, and say that if this part of Christianity could be sepa-
rated from its mysterious part, they could not reverence it too
highly. But though this is true, we have proofs, it is said, every
day and hour, that this love to enemies, this blessing them that
curse, this turning the one cheek to him who smites the other,
is altogether contrary to the habits and tempers of the world.
My friends, the evidence goes much further than that. We
need not derive our proofs that the natural heart revolts against
these precepts from what is called The World. The records of
the Church will furnish that demonstration much more perfectly.
Hatred of those whom they have counted their enemies, - this
has been the too characteristic sign of men who have called
themselves Christ's servants and soldiers. Curses have been their
favorite weapons. Nó church can bring that charge against an-
other without laying itself open to retaliation. And it cannot be
pleaded, “Oh, there is a corrupt unbelieving leaven in every
Christian society. ” The habit I speak of has come forth often
most flagrantly in those who were denouncing this leaven, who
were seeking to cast it out. I am not saying that they were not
good men. The case is all the stronger if they were. I am not
(
## p. 9838 (#246) ###########################################
9838
FREDERICK DENISON MAURICE
saying that a genuine zeal for truth was not at the root of their
rage, and did not mingle with the most outrageous acts of it.
Of all this, God will be the judge. We are not wise to antici-
pate his decisions.
But such facts, which are notorious, and are
repeated in every age and in every country, show the absurdity
of the theory that what our Lord lays down as the laws of the
Kingdom of Heaven are intended for the use of a particular
class of persons, who aspire to outstrip their fellows and win
higher prizes than the rest of mankind. They lead us to suspect
that those who have aimed at such distinctions and pursued such
objects have not been able to submit to his government — have
-
assumed a position which was essentially rebellious. They lead
us back to the leveling sentence with which the discourse opens,
and which must be accepted as the key to the whole of it. What
business has any citizen of a kingdom to talk of a certain standard
which is meant for him and not for all the subjects of it? What
is that but adopting the maxim which the Roman poet unfairly
ascribed to the Greek hero, that “laws were not born for him?
How reasonable, on the other hand, - how perfectly consist-
ent,- is our Lord's language, if we suppose him to be revealing
the laws under which God has constituted human beings,— the
laws which are the expression of his own Divine nature, the laws
which were perfectly fulfilled in his Son, the laws which his
Spirit is seeking to write on all hearts! What signifies it to
the reality of such laws that this or that man transgresses them;
that he who transgresses them calls himself Churchman or Dis-
senter, Catholic or Protestant, believer or infidel? If they are
true, they must stand in spite of such transgressions; they will
make their power manifest through such transgressions. There
will be a witness on behalf of them, such as we see there is in
all human consciences; there will be a resistance to them, such
as we see there is in all human wills. Our belief in their ulti-
mate triumph over that which opposes them must depend on
our belief in Him who is the Author of the law. If we think
that he is our Father in heaven, and that his law of forgiveness
has been fully accomplished in Christ, and that his Spirit is
stronger than the Evil Spirit, every sign of the victory of love
over striving and hating wills must be a pledge how the battle
is to terminate: no success of bitterness, and wrath, and malice,
however it may shake our minds, can be anything but a proof
that less than Almighty love, less than a Divine sacrifice, would
## p. 9839 (#247) ###########################################
FREDERICK DENISON MAURICE
9839
-
have been unable to subdue such adversaries. But if we think
this discourse to be the announcement of a refined ethical sys-
tem,- not the proclamation of a Kingdom of Heaven, as it pro-
fesses to be, - we may well complain how feeble and ineffective it
is and must always be. We may say that its power can never be
recognized beyond a circle of rare exceptional persons.
And we
may find that these rare exceptional persons are always supplied
with a set of evasions, equivocations, and apologies for violating
every one of its principles, especially in those acts which they
consider most religious and meritorious.
Those who confine this discourse to saints speedily contradict
themselves. When they bring forth evidences of Christianity, or
evidences of the influence of the Catholic Church, they appeal to
the power which the Cross, with its proclamation of Divine for-
giveness to enemies, has exercised over the wild warring tribes
that have fashioned modern Europe. They ask whether the con-
science of those tribes, in the midst of all their bloody feuds
and acts of personal vengeance, did not stoop to the authority
of a Prince of Peace; whether it did not confess him as King of
kings and Lord of lords; whether it did not acknowledge those
as especially his ministers who in bodily weakness - in defiance
of the physically strong — showed forth the loving-kindness which
they said was his, and claimed the serf and the noble as alike
his subjects and his brethren. The facts cannot be gainsaid.
They are written in sunbeams on all the darkest pages of mod-
ern history. What do they prove? Surely, that our Lord was
not proclaiming a code which was at variance with civil order
and obedience,-a transcendental morality, - but principles which
were the foundation of civil order and obedience; principles
which were to undermine and uproot the very evils which all
national codes are endeavoring to counteract. The national code
- the most exalted, the most divine code — can only forbid, only
counteract. If it aspires to do more, if it strives to extirpate
vices instead of to punish crimes, if it enjoins virtues instead of
demanding simple submission to its decrees, - it proves its own
impotence. It is always asking for help to do that which it can-
not do. It wants a power to make the obedience which it needs
voluntary; to kindle the patriotism without which it will only
be directed to a herd of animals, not a race of men. Wherever
there has been a voluntary obedience, wherever there has been
a patriotism which has made men willing to die that their land
## p. 9840 (#248) ###########################################
9840
FREDERICK DENISON MAURICE
for us.
might not be in the possession of strangers, there has been faith
in an unseen Ruler; there has been a confidence that he wills
men to be free. The Jewish history interprets other history.
It shows what has been the source of law and freedom; what
has been the destruction of both; what has been the preservation
of both. This discourse, because it proclaims a more universal
principle than the Jewish or national principle, is supposed to
set that aside. I accept our Lord's words, "I come not to de-
stroy, but to fulfill," as true in every case. He does not destroy
the fundamental maxim that God is the author of the Com-
mandments. He fulfills it by proclaiming the mind of his Father
in heaven as the ground of all the acts of his children. He does
not destroy one sacrifice which any patriot had made for his peo-
ple's freedom. He fulfills it in his perfect sacrifice to God and
He does not destroy any one precept of duty to God
or to our neighbor. He fulfills it by baptizing with his Spirit;
by making duty to God the surrender of man's will to his will
which is working in us; that will binding men to each other as
members of the same body; that will fighting with all the self-
ish impulses which tear us asunder. There is no opposition be.
tween the Kingdom of Heaven and any kingdom of earth, except
what is produced by this selfishness which is the enemy of both.
If the civil ruler sanctions one law for the rich and one law
for the poor, he offends against the maxims of the Kingdom of
Heaven; but then he also introduces a confusion into his own.
If he prefers war to peace, gambling to honesty, bondage to
freedom, and if he seeks religious sanctions to uphold him in
these tastes, he offends against the maxims of the Kingdom
of Heaven, and he is preparing ruin for his own State. If the
ecclesiastic proclaims one law for the saint and another for the
common man, he overthrows the common order and morality of
nations; but he sins still more directly against the laws which
Christ proclaimed on the Mount. If he sets up the priest against
the magistrate, he disturbs the peace of civil communities; but
he also exalts the priest into the place of God, and so commits
treason against the Kingdom of Heaven. If he assume the office
of a judge of his brethren, he may do much mischief on earth
which the ruler on earth cannot hinder. But he falls under this
sentence: “Judge not, and ye shall not be judged; condemn not,
and ye shall not be condemned; forgive, and ye shall be for-
given. ”
## p. 9841 (#249) ###########################################
FREDERICK DENISON MAURICE
9841
(
These laws of the Kingdom of Heaven seem very hard to
keep. See what hinders us from keeping them. It is not some
incapacity. It is our determination to assume a place which is
not ours. Each of us is continually setting up himself to be a
God. Each is seizing the judgment-throne of the universe. We
know that it is so. And from this throne we must come down.
We must confess that we are not gods; not able to pronounce
on the condition of our fellows, needing forgiveness every day
from our Father and from each other, permitted to dispense
what he sends us. The lesson is a simple one.
