II. The Unattractiveness of Christianity.

That Christianity is unattractive to the community at large is a fact so obvious that it needs no demonstration; but how to arrive at an adequate explanation of the fact is not so obvious. Most of the reasons advanced fail to satisfy the thoughtful mind, and in what follows an attempt is made to approach the problem from a new angle.

At various times and for various purposes men have attempted to divide the inhabitants of the world into classes. Samuel Richardson, the novelist, for instance, speaks ingeniously of "men, women and Italians"; while C. H. Spurgeon was accustomed to enforce his division of Christians into workers and non-workers by a quotation from Job: "The oxen were plowing in the field and the asses feeding beside them." In all seriousness, however, for the purposes of this inquiry, I wish to regard the civilised world, as it affected, or was affected by, the life of Christ, as being composed of three nationalities, Jews, Greeks and Romans, and I am encouraged in doing so by the reflection that the superscription on the Cross was expressed in just those three languages, Hebrew, page 55 Greek and Latin. Now to the typical representative of each of these three nations, in what light would that Cross naturally present itself?

And first the Jew. The whole tradition of his race, jealously guarded, and all the aspirations of his heart, firmly inculcated and warmly cherished through long years of suffering and oppression, might be summed up in the one word "Kingship." The idea of a glorious Messiah, clad in all the insignia of royalty, coming to fulfil the mighty prophecies of the past, to procure liberty for his people, to break the bands of the oppressor and establish his throne for ever—it was this idea that sustained and encouraged the Jew in all his sorrows and disappointments. And now present to him the figure of Jesus, coming in humility and as a servant, acclaimed by children, riding upon an ass's colt, crowned with thorns and finally crucified: the whole thing cuts right to the heart of his dearest hopes and is a reproach and an offence to him.

And then the Greek. Without doing violence to the facts we may say that life for him at its highest and best was a pursuit of two things, beauty and truth. For the former we have clear evidence in Greek sculpture, to the latter his highly-developed philosophy bears ample testimony. What of the Cross in relation to these two things? "His face was so marred more than any man, and his form more than the sons of men ... he hath no form nor comeliness, and when we shall see him, there is no beauty that we should desire him." "To the Greeks, foolishness.

And finally, the Roman. "Imperium" is here the key-word,—dominion, power, conquest; and what is the life of Christ, but a story of complete and humiliating defeat? A young teacher gathers about him a band of followers and proclaims a new order. He is arrested, his followers are scattered, and he himself is put to death. In the typical Roman mind such a story of failure could hardly be expected to excite anything but disgust or indifference, and the Roman joins hands with the Jew and the Greek in finding in the crucified Christ a stumbling stone and rock of offence, a mere object of derision.

It would not be difficult of course to show that in each case the antagonistic attitude is merely the result of superficiality. If Jesus did not set up a temporal throne it was in order that he might establish a far more abiding kingdom in the hearts of men; if to the Greek his person was unlovely and the morality of his Cross folly, it is nevertheless true that to millions he has become the wisdom of God and that in their eyes he is altogether lovely; while that death, apparently the most ignominious of failures, was actually the most glorious victory of all time. "And having spoiled principalities and powers he made a show of them openly, triumphing over them in his Cross"; and in the power of that defeat men have subdued kingdoms, wrought righteousness, out of weakness were made strong, waxed valiant in fight. It remains true however that to the majority of men there is here nothing to attract.

The conclusion then is obvious. To the degree in which a man identifies himself with the Cross of Christ, to that extent will he find himself running counter to the general current of aim and feeling, and to that extent must he expect un-popularity. If he boldly assert, as he well may, that, rightly understood and fearlessly faced, there is no ideal of the human heart, however noble and exalted, that is not ultimately and perfectly realised in the ethic and personality of Christ, he will not be believed, and he will be driven to take refuge in the mysterious fact that "not many wise men after the flesh, not many mighty, not many noble are called; but God has chosen the foolish things of the world to confound the wise, the weak things to confound the mighty, the things which are not to bring to naught the things that are."

The S.C.M., on whose behalf these words are written, may very imperfectly and inadequately represent Christianity; but its members do believe that God is present in the sufferings of Christ just as He was present in his life and teaching, and in seeking to understand that life and death and to obey its implications they are confident that they are at once meeting the deepest needs of their own natures and acquainting themselves with ultimate truth and reality.