v. 2, is set forth as a pattern, is a love which kindly gives (iv. 32 : χρηστοί, εὔσπλαγχνοι ; Col. iii. 12: σπλάγχνα οἰκτιρμоû XPησTÓτNS), as it is a love which meekly forgives, after the pattern of God (ver. 13; Eph. iv. 32, v. 1); and this, Phil. iv. 5, is comprehended in the idea of considerate and condescending forbearance (èπiciKés, comp. 2 Cor. x. 1), which yields in every quarrel, and ends it.

(c) The more our Epistles combat a tendency to place the essence of Christian morality in an unfruitful, pretentious (Col. ii. 23) asceticism (§ 59, c), in which Paul could see only a relapse into the στοιχεῖα τοῦ κόσμου (ver. 20), the more would it be necessary to show how Christian morality had to busy itself with the relationships of the natural life. Hence those ever repeated emphatic hints thereto, how moral purity and spotlessness is the goal of Christianity (Col. i. 22; Eph. i. 4, v. 27; Phil. i. 10, ii. 15; comp. iv. 8, 9), with which, here especially, is given abstinence from the cardinal heathen lusts of unchastity and covetousness (Col. iii. 5; Eph. v. 3, 5; comp. § 100, b). It is, however, social intercourse whose consecration the exhortations of our Epistles have in view. It is not only sinful wrath against which Paul utters a warning, but even against the outbreak of that wrath in clamour and reviling (Col. iii. 8; Eph. iv. 31); above all, he forbids lying (Col. iii. 9), as that destroys that fellowship of Christians one with another, suitable to fellowmembers (demanding as it does confidence, and therefore veracity) (Eph. iv. 25), and without which the idea of the Church cannot be realized (note a). But a yet greater emphasis is laid on the significance of speech in social intercourse. It ought always to be with circumspection, to give one's neighbour

7 Paul specially warns against participation in heathen conviviality, in which one cannot give way without gluttony (Eph. v. 18) and unchastity (comp. Rom. xiii. 13), and which ever again drew into fellowship with heathenish sin (v. 7, 11); and he sets the command to work over against the prohibition from stealing, as the former seeks to gain not only support for one's own self, but also the means of doing good (iv. 28).

"He asks practical wisdom in intercourse with those who are not Christians, a wisdom which redeems the right opportunity, is always ready to give the right answer with conciliatory words (Col. iv. 5, 6), and uses every moment to exercise a bettering influence on them (Eph. v. 11-16). Christian morality is at the same time characterized (Phil. iv. 8) as that which is lovable and praiseworthy, and has a good report among men (comp. § 47, d).

an evidence of love by an upbuilding corresponding to his need, in contrast to corrupt (Eph. iv. 29), empty, frivolous, or even obscene talk (Col. iii. 8: aioxpoλoyía; comp. Eph. v. 4). The highest aim of social intercourse is to make room for the word of Christ in society, for mutual teaching and instruction, as also for edification by the very manifold forms of praise (Col. iii. 16; Eph. v. 19). That is connected with the very special emphasis which is put on the duty of thanksgiving (Col. i. 12, ii. 7, iii. 15, 17, iv. 2; Eph. v. 4, 20; Phil. iv. 6 ; comp. Col. i. 3; Philem. 4; Eph. i. 16; Phil. i. 3), by which accordingly the blessed fellowship must serve the final end of the work of salvation, the glorification of God as in § 99, d (Eph. i. 6, 12, 14, iii. 21; Phil. i. 11, ii. 11, iv. 20).9

(d) The more that Christianity is regarded as the principle of fellowship, the more must the transforming influence be emphasized which it exerts upon the forms of natural social life. The family is the fundamental form of such life, and hence in our Epistles the apostle takes up in such special detail the relations of family life, and develops quite systematically the moral duties, which spring up from a Christian point of view for the individual members of the family. Accordingly, we are not to look for discussions of the principles relating to marriage, which we met with in the earlier Epistles, § 95. The fact of Christian marriage is presupposed, and therefore all that is treated of is, what are the duties this lays upon husbands and wives? But these can be no other than such as are essentially already implied in the nature of this social relationship appointed by God, because Christianity cannot abolish, it can only sanctify that relationship.10 But

9 With this are connected the exhortations to prayer and watchfulness (Col. iv. 2; Eph. vi. 18; Phil. iv. 6; comp. 1 Cor. xvi. 13 : ypnyopsīts, and § 62, b), and specially to intercession (Col. iv. 3; Eph. vi. 18, 19; Phil. i. 19), which the blessed fellowship places in the service of love, and in which the apostle himself gives the pattern (Col. i. 3, 9, ii. 1; Eph. i. 16 ff., iii. 14 ff.; Phil. i. 9; comp. Col. iv. 12). Comp. § 93, b.

10 Even in the Christian state the fundamental duty of the wife is subjection (Col. iii. 18), and the reverential fear which springs from that (Eph. v. 33). This springs directly from the position of the natural subjection of the wife (§ 94, c), and is even traced back to that (vv. 22, 23). Just so the duty of love towards the wife on the part of the man results (Col. iii. 19) from this, that marriage is essentially the fleshly fellowship of the sexes (Eph. v. 31); the man loves in his wife only a part of himself (v. 28, 29, 33).

while the Christian now acknowledges that marriage is a mystery, which points to the relation of Christ and His Church (ver. 32; comp. § 105, a, footnote 2), Christ is the pattern of the love the man owes to the wife (vv. 25, 29), the Church in her subjection to Christ the pattern of the duty of the wife (ver. 24). It is hence clear that this subjection of the wife in marriage is the will of Christ, that she obey her own Christian husband (ver. 22). In the relation of children to their father, the same absolute obedience continues in the Christian state (Col. iii. 29; Eph. vi. 1: ὑπακούετε . . . ἐν κυρίῳ) which the divine commandment required in the Old Testament (ver. 2). If, on the other hand, the parental duty is therein defined, not to provoke children to resistance, there is to this, in the first place, a caution added, that the trustfulness which forms the basis of the natural relation of children is not to be endangered by discouragement (Col. iii. 21); but reference is here, Eph. vi. 4, expressly made to this, that it contradicts the nature of Christian nurture, in which the Lord would lead and instruct children. It follows further, that the father is to conduct the education after his own mind, but that the child must obey in him the Lord Himself. Finally, a very full discussion by the apostle as to the relation of slaves is only an illustration of 1 Cor. vii. 22 (§ 94, b). The Christian slave remains a slave, but he serves his earthly master no longer from fear and compulsion, but without eye-service and men-pleasing, with hearty goodwill, because in him he sees his heavenly Master, who has bidden him serve, and calls him to account for it (Col. iii. 22-25; Eph. vi. 5-8). The relationship of slavery has thereby lost its sting, because it can demand nothing from the slave but what he does of himself from his own free impulse, for Christ's sake. Just so the master is to give to his slave what is right and fair, to forbear threatening for the sake of the higher Master (Col. iv. 1; Eph. vi. 9). All arbitrary lordship has ceased, because the master ventures to demand nothing and to do nothing to his slave but what he is able to answer for before Christ.11

11 It is self-evident, accordingly, how Paul sends back to his master the runaway slave Onesimus, whom he had converted (Philem. 11), and asks for him a reception as of a Christian brother, and pardon (vv. 16-18). He yet remains a

SECTION IV.

THE DOCTRINAL METHOD IN THE PASTORAL EPISTLES.

CHAPTER XIIL

CHRISTIANITY AS DOCTRINE.

$107. The Wholesome Doctrine.

In the Pastoral Epistles, Christianity is regarded as essentially the doctrine of the truth, on a believing knowledge of which salvation depends (a). There had sprung up at that time an unhealthy striving after knowledge, which, because it led away from the truth, and originated divisions, required a special emphasizing of wholesome doctrine (6). But this striving must everywhere be dangerous, where faith itself in its deepest roots was no longer healthy (c). As, therefore, wholesome doctrine stands in closest connection with pure piety, the doctrinal errors of the present are characterized as themselves symptoms of an unhealthy corruption of the religious life (d).

(a) That in the Epistles to Timothy (indicated in what follows by I., II.) and to Titus Christianity is regarded as essentially doctrine, is clear from this, that on the moral conduct of Christians it depends whether the doctrine ( Sidaokaria) is exposed to reviling (I. vi. 1), or is honoured (Tit. ii. 10). The contents of this saving doctrine, which comes from God our Deliverer, is, however, according to ver. 5, just as in the earlier Epistles (§ 89, a), the word of God (II. ii. 9; comp. iv. 2: ó óyos simply), the gospel (i. 8, 10), slave (ver. 16; comp. ver. 11), and it springs simply from his personal relation to Onesimus as his spiritual son (ver. 10; comp. 1 Cor. iv. 15) when Paul, ver. 21 (comp. vv. 12-14), asks indirectly that Philemon would perhaps hand over the slave to him for his own service. Paul is not here thinking of any raising of the position of slaves, as the fulfilment of Christian duty on the part of those interested must without that completely transform that position in its essence.

or the word of truth (ii. 15).1 If Christianity is regarded objectively as the doctrine of the truth, it can be regarded subjectively only as the knowledge of the truth (II. ii. 25, iii. 7), and this, therefore, here along with faith, is mentioned as the distinguishing mark of the Christian (I. iv. 3; Tit. i. 1). On the other hand, also, the true children, i.e. the disciples of the apostle, are characterized by the faith they have in common with him (Tit. i. 4; I. i. 2; comp. oi Toroi: I. iv. 10, 12, v. 16, vi. 2), and every bond of friendship with him, which he will acknowledge, must have its root in this faith (Tit. iii. 15). For there can be no attaining a knowledge of the truth without the confident persuasion of the truth it proclaims (I. ii. 7, iv. 6), and only the word corresponding to that doctrine is a word of faith (Tit. i. 9). Even there, when the apostolic

1 The word didarxaλía means, Rom. xii. 7, the work of teaching, as here, I. iv. 13, 16; II. iii. 10; Tit. ii. 7; so also, Rom. xv. 4, it means the becoming instructed, as also here, II. iii. 16; and, finally, Eph. iv. 14, Col. ii. 22, it is used of the doctrine as to its contents, as here mostly. Here also the apostle is put in trust with the gospel (I. i. 11; comp. II. ii. 8) as its zńpuž (II. i. 11; I. ii. 7), and hence also the gospel is called xńpuya (Tit. i. 3; II. iv. 17; comp. iv. 2; I. iii. 16). The designation of the gospel as the word of truth is not unknown either to the earlier Epistles or to those of the imprisonment, these latter also putting a special emphasis upon knowledge (§ 102, c). Here, however, the truth is regarded exclusively as the truth of doctrine, and no longer, as is the case preponderatingly in earlier Paulinism, as a practical principle. On the other hand, the λόγοι τοῦ κυρίου ἡμῶν Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ (I. vi. 3), on account of the addition yaívovrss, are assuredly not the doctrines which come from Christ, but the expression designates in true Pauline fashion Christ as the object of wholesome doctrine, as II. i. 8 (rò μmprúpiov roũ xvpíov ňμãv; comp. I. ii. 7).

2 The formula so common in our Epistles: ròs ò λóyos (I. iii. 1; II. ii. 11; Tit. iii. 8), shows that it is peculiar to true doctrine to deserve faith, and I. i. 15, iv. 9, it is expressly declared that it is worthy a most trustful acceptation. Tigris does not occur in the objective sense of a content of truths, which are regarded as established doctrines, as Baur, p. 342, supposes; it is rather the form in which the truth (as the contents of right doctrine) is in the first place subjectively apprehended. Thus certainly, I. iv. 6, Tñs wirrews and rñs xadñs διδασκαλίας cannot be understood as identical; ἐν πίστει καὶ ἀληθείᾳ, II. 17, are no dia dvory, as Pfleiderer, p. 468 [E. T. ii. 201], supposes; and faith, iii. 9, is not the contents, but the possessor of the μvorápiov (comp. ver. 16). But compare § 108, b, with i. 4. If the formation of the conception of faith had with Paul started from a reference to the truth of the gospel proclamation (comp. ieri àλnerías: 2 Thess. ii. 12, 13, and therewith § 61, c), and if this moment had been always kept firm hold of along with the transformation of the idea in the doctrine of justification (comp. § 82, d, 100, d), then that idea must have here again proportionately come into the foreground, when Christianity is mainly regarded as right doctrine.