On the Old Road, Vol. 2 (of 2): A Collection of Miscellaneous Essays and Articles on Art and LiteratureRuskin, John
General
On the Old Road, Vol. 2 (of 2): A Collection of Miscellaneous Essays and Articles on Art and Literature
Ruskin, John
Art; Essays; Literature
And to declare that we have such a loving Father, whose mercy is over
_all_ His works, and whose will and law is so lovely and lovable that it
is sweeter than honey, and more precious than gold, to those who can
"taste" and "see" that the Lord is Good--this, surely, is a most
pleasant and glorious good message and _spell_ to bring to men--as
distinguished from the evil message and accursed spell that Satan has
brought to the nations of the world instead of it, that they have no
Father, but only "a consuming fire" ready to devour them, unless they
are delivered from its raging flame by some scheme of pardon for all,
for which they are to be thankful, not to the Father, but to the Son.
Supposing this first article of the true Gospel agreed to, how would the
blessing that closes the epistles of that Gospel become intelligible and
living, instead of dark and dead: "The grace of Christ, and the _love_
of God, and the fellowship of the Holy Ghost,"--the most _tender_ word
being that used of the Father?
VI.
[Greek: hagiastheto to onoma sou]
_Sanctificetur nomen tuum._
BRANTWOOD, _12th July, 1879._
230. I wonder how many, even of those who honestly and attentively join
in our Church services, attach any distinct idea to the second clause of
the Lord's Prayer, the _first petition_ of it, the first thing that they
are ordered by Christ to seek of their Father?
Am I unjust in thinking that most of them have little more notion on the
matter than that God has forbidden "bad language," and wishes them to
pray that everybody may be respectful to Him?
Is it any otherwise with the Third Commandment? Do not most look on it
merely in the light of the statute of swearing? and read the words "will
not hold him guiltless" merely as a passionless intimation that however
carelessly a man may let out a round oath, there really _is_ something
wrong in it?
On the other hand, can anything be more tremendous than the words
themselves--double-negatived:
[Greek: "ou gar me katharise ... kurios"]
For _other_ sins there is washing;--for this, none! the seventh verse,
Ex. xx., in the Septuagint, marking the real power rather than the
English, which (I suppose) is literal to the Hebrew.
To my layman's mind, of practical needs in the present state of the
Church, nothing is so immediate as that of explaining to the
congregation the meaning of being gathered in His name, and having Him
in the midst of them; as, on the other hand, of being gathered in
blasphemy of His name, and having the devil in the midst of
them--presiding over the prayers which have become an abomination.
231. For the entire body of the texts in the Gospel against hypocrisy
are one and all nothing but the expansion of the threatening that closes
the Third Commandment. For as "the name whereby He shall be called is
THE LORD OUR RIGHTEOUSNESS,"--so the taking that name in vain
is the sum of "the deceivableness of _un_righteousness in them that
perish."
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account