“The whole study of the life of Jesus has in fine only the one aim, of establishing the natural and unbiased conception of the earliest accounts. In order to know Jesus and to apprehend him there is need of no preparatory [pg 033] erudition. It is also not requisite that a man comprehend the details of Jesus’ public ministry and be able to construct with them a ‘life of Jesus.’ His nature, and that which he is and wills, appears in certain lapidary expressions of his and forces itself upon us. One _knows_ him without knowing much about him, and apprehends the eschatological note even if he attain no clear conception of the details. For this is the characteristic thing about Jesus, that he looks beyond the perfection and blessedness of the individual to the perfection and blessedness of the world and of an elect humanity. His will and his hope is fixed upon the Kingdom of God.” It is much to be wondered at that conservative scholars have not generally recognised the strong constructive consequences of Schweitzer’s theory, in particular the proof it incidentally affords of the historical worth of the Synoptic Gospels. Schweitzer rehabilitates the credit of S. Mark’s Gospel simply by showing that no important parts of it need be discarded on the ground that they are inconsistent with the sketch which he draws of the history of Jesus. When it is objected to him that he bases his view upon “the weakest passages,” it is time we make clear to [pg 034] ourselves that “strong” and “weak” in this connection mean no more than _consistent_ or _inconsistent_ with the _assumptions_ of the modern “liberal life of Jesus.” It is only a roundabout way of begging the question. Generally speaking, such a document as Mark, antecedent to any theory we may attempt to apply, must be presumed to be of pretty equal value throughout. That theory which, without artifice or violence, best accords with the greatest number of facts recorded, and so best preserves the credit of the documents upon which it seeks to found itself, is presumably the right theory. Schweitzer’s view, as he himself says in the Preface, greatly simplifies and clarifies the Synoptic problem. It is no longer necessary to attribute so much to “the editor’s hand.” The Sermon on the Mount, the Charge to the Twelve, and the Eulogy over the Baptist are not collections of scattered sayings, but were in the main delivered as they have come down to us. Especially important is the recognition that even for constructing the history of Jesus Mark by itself does not suffice: the discourses in Matthew are invaluable indications.