SUNDAY READING.
“THOSE SINLESS YEARS THAT BREATHED BENEATH THE SYRIAN BLUE.” “Which of you convicteth Me of sin?” —Saint John VHL, 46. (Rev. A. H. Collins, New Plymouth.) Humility is one of the cardinal virtues, one of the tests of true greatness. When Augustine was asked what is the first article of the Christian religion, he answered, “Humility.” The question being repeated, he made the same reply, “Humility,” and when for the third time the question was put to him, he still answered that “humility” is the first article of the Christian religion.” The Greek word suggests that this grace is the ribbon or clasp which holds the graces in place, and protects them against loss. By humility we do not mean the spirit that cringes and cowers, and causes a man to apologise for his existence. Uriah Heap was not an exemplary Christian. The humble man is he who, having formed a lofty standard of life, confesses how far he has fallen short, while the All Perfect Example rises on his soul in awful sublimity, like some Alpine height whose snowy mantle is smitten by the sun at noon. Hence, as Ruskin says, “a great idealist can never be an egotist.” When the glory of the Lord blazed on Isaiah's astonished vision, lie cried out like a soul in *pain, “Woe is me.” “Depart from me, for I am a sinful man,” was the sob of Simon Peter, in the presence of incarnate holiness. Saint John, overmastered by ths vision of Patmos, fell at the feet of the angel, and would have worshipped, but that starry spirit refused the homage: “See thou do it not.” It would be easy to show that this steadfast disownment of exceptional virtue is the mark of human excellence. The most saintly are ever the most humble-minded. Part of their greatness, and the most attractive part, is this, that, like Moses, they “wish not that the skin of their face did shine.”
But—-and this is my point—all this is in startling contrast with the claim of our text! Here speaks one who, so far from disowning exceptional virtue, proclaimed it. For explain it how you will, the incontestable fact is this, that Jesus Christ asserted His freedom from the common taint of sin. Jesus Christ advanced claims of goodness that no man, who was only a man, would attempt to justify. Alone of all the sons of men, He lived a life of toil, and suffering, and want, and struggle, through the space of thirty years, and was never once betrayed in sin! Talk about the miracles of Christ! That was the miracle, the crown and glory of them all. “Which of you convicteth Me of sin ?” and none accepted the challenge, for none could supply the necessary proof. They were speechless, because they felt how awful goodness is. The challenge was not made to ignorance or in obscurity. It<was made in the presence of a crowd of keen, intellectual religionists, who were mostly hostile to Jesus Christ. It was made near the end of His life, when Jerusalem was thronged. Christ stood up in the temple courts, with scribe, and Pharisee, and Gallileean about Him, and challenged official enemies and avowed friends. “Which of you convicteth Me of sin?” It was pitching life very high. The peril was immense. To Christ so high a fall would spell disaster, but Christ reached the pinnacle, and kept his foothold those thirty years! Others ‘have gained the victory over sin in ways that shame our hearts; but Christ vas flawless. We reverence these saints, but we worship Jesus. To use the distinction Charles Lamb drew: “If Shakespeare came into this room we should all rise; if Jesus came we should kneel.” Be it remembered that our Lord’s avowed enemies did not attempt to convict Him of sin. Their silence is significant, for their antagonism was sharp and deep. If they could have done it they would, for their will was good. But not only did they make no attempt; they did the very opposite, for to silence they added confession that was literally dragged out of them. “I find no fault in Him,” said one of His judges. “I am innocent of the blood of this just person,” said another. “This Man hath done nothing amiss,” said the dying robber. “I have sinned in that I have betrayed innocent blood.” said Judas. Mistaken they all believed Him to be; insane some said He was; rinful never once. His friends said the same. We have a homely proverb which says: “You must live with a man to know him.” In public life a man is on his guard, and it is possible to pass muster there, and at the same time cut a sorry figure in the privacy of home. “No man is a hero to his "valet.” What was the home life of Jesus like? What do they say who knew Him best? Those whose searching eyes which looked into the quiet depths of His private life, what say they? Twelve men were chosen to be with Him. They were servants and He was over-lord; they were pupils, He was -rabbi; they were friends; He was the Friend. These twelve men were not all cast in the same mould They represented the sanguine, the phlegmatic, the choleric, the practical, the romantic, the sceptical. They saw Him under every variety of circumstance. He never flattered them, or spared their faults. He exposed their errors, and dashed some of their most cherished hopes to the ground. What is the witness of these intimate associates, and friends, of Jesus, checked by the presence of the traitor? “In Him was no sin,” says Saint Peter. “Holy, harmless, undefiled, and separate from sinhers,” says Saint John. “He who knew no sin! was made sin for us,” says Saint Paul. “Tempted in all points like as we are, but without sin,” says the writer to the Hebrews. “I have betrayed innocent blood,” says Judas. Thus from th© innermost circle of His friends, as from His sworn enemies, we have the witness that Christ walked blamelessly. Now, while all this is true, it is far from being all the truth. Granted that foe and friend never detected trace of sin in Jesus Christ, that would not be proof that Christ was sinless. They companioned with Him for a brief space, and even during those three years there were times when He was alone, and no eye save that of the Holy Fathew saw Him. What of the long years of childhood? What of those critical years of ripening manhood, when the hot blood of the East runs riot? What of the lonely hours when there was no Peter, or John, or Judas to watch and remember? Now, the impressive fact in the life of our Lord is not the absence of any overt act of sin. We have the recorded sayings of Jesus Christ, but you will look in vain for any confession oi fault, any apology ,and acknowledgment of misjudgment. Christ never needed to revise his verdict of men or things. He uttered hot and stinging words, but He never attempted to softie .thauL More wonderful still, we
have Christ’s prayers, and if ever a man is sincere to his heart’s core, it is when he prays. We have heard good men pray, and oh how humble and contrite they have been! How distressed by a sense of “wrong within!” But look at Christ’s prayers; there is thanksgiving, adoration, intercession, but no confession, no penitence. “Father, forgive Me” never once. David and Isaiah asked God’s pardon, but Jesus, whose heart was nourished on these ancient scriptures, had no need for peniential psalms, and never used them for Himself. And now what shall we say to all this? Something we must say. Men called him “Saviour and Lord,” and He did not disown these great titles. Humility the most perfect and profound the world has ever known, blended with claims the most amazing. “I am meek and lowly in heart, He said, and no one was shocked to hear Him say it! He challenged men to track home to His heart one evil thought, one stained, desire, and no one was shocked. He said “The Son of Man hath power on earth to forgive.sin,” and no one was shocked! If anyone else had said this, such vain words would have been scouted as the very delirium of egotism. Either Jesus Christ was more than a good man or He was not even a good man. ‘lf the Son of Man were not the Redeemer, then He, the humblest of mankind, might be accused of pride. The purest of mankind was unconscious of the evil of His own heart; the truest of mankind was guilty of the worst of falsehoods, the noblest of mankind was guilty of tne sin of sins—the belief that He had no sin.” Ah, the sinlessness of Jesus Christ is no side issue no mere academic question that can be left undecided. If Christ were sinful as you and I are sinful, then it was for His own sin He suffered, and not for ours. But God has laid help on One who is mighty, and put pardon in the hands of One who, being free from sin, could offer a sinless sacrifice for sin.
Permanent link to this item
Hononga pūmau ki tēnei tūemi
https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/TDN19210212.2.93
Bibliographic details
Ngā taipitopito pukapuka
Taranaki Daily News, 12 February 1921, Page 11
Word count
Tapeke kupu
1,565SUNDAY READING. Taranaki Daily News, 12 February 1921, Page 11
Using this item
Te whakamahi i tēnei tūemi
Stuff Ltd is the copyright owner for the Taranaki Daily News. You can reproduce in-copyright material from this newspaper for non-commercial use under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International licence (CC BY-NC-SA 4.0). This newspaper is not available for commercial use without the consent of Stuff Ltd. For advice on reproduction of out-of-copyright material from this newspaper, please refer to the Copyright guide.