disciples, and that of the multitude and the Scribes. There is all the calm majesty of
Divine self-consciousness, yet without trace of self-assertion, when Jesus, utterly
ignoring the 'if Thou canst,' turns to the man and tells him that, while with the Divine
Helper there is the possibility of all help, it is conditioned by a possibility in ourselves, by
man's receptiveness, by his faith. Not, if the Christ can do anything or even everything,
but, 'If thou canst believe,17 all things are possible to him that believeth.'18 The question
is not, it can never be, as the man had put it; it must not eve n be answered, but ignored.
It must ever be, not what He can, but what we can. When the infinite fulness is poured
forth, as it ever is in Christ, it is not the oil that is stayed, but the vessels which fail. He
giveth richly, inexhaustibly, but not mechanically; there is only one condition, the moral
one of the presence of absolute faith - our receptiveness. And so these words have to
all time remained the teaching to every individual striver in the battle of the higher life,
and to the Church as a whole - the 'in hoc signo vinces'19 over the Cross, the victory that
overcometh the world, even our faith.
17. The weight of the evidence from the MSS. accepted by most modern critics (though
not by that very judicious commentator, Canon Cook ) is in favour of the reading and
rendering: 'If Thou canst! all things are possible,' &c. But it seems to me, that this mode
of reply on the part of Christ is not only without any other parallel in the Gospels, but too
artificial, too Western, if I may use the expression. While the age of a MS. or MSS. is, of
course, one of the outward grounds on which the criticism of the text must proceed, I
confess to the feeling that, as age and purity are not identical, the interpreter must weigh
all such evidence in the light of the int ernal grounds for or against its reception. Besides,
in this instance, it seems to me that there is some difficulty about the το if πιστευσαι is
struck out, and which is not so easily cleared up as Meyer suggests.
18. 'Omnipotentiæ Divinæ se fides hominis, quasi organon, accommodat and
recipiendum, vel etiam ad agendum.' - Bengel.
19. 'In this sign shalt thou conquer' - the inscription on the supposed vision of the Cross
by the Emperor Constantine before his great victory and conversion to Christianity.
It was a lesson, of which the reality was attested by the hold which it took on the man's
whole nature. While by one great outgoing of his soul he overleapt all, to lay hold on the
one fact set before him, he felt all the more the dark chasm of unbelief behind him, but
he also clung to that Christ, Whose teaching of faith had shown him, together with the
possibility, the source of faith. Thus through the felt unbelief of faith he attained true
faith by laying hold on the Divine Saviour, when he cried out and said:20 'Lord, I believe;
help Thou mine unbelief.'21 These words have remained historic, marking all true faith,
which, even as faith, is conscious of, nay implies, unbelief, but brings it to Christ for
help. The most bold leap of faith and the timid resting at His Feet, the first beginning
and the last ending of faith, have alike this as their watchword.
20. The words with 'tears,' in the T.R. are apparently a spurious addition.
21. The interpretation of Meyer: 'Do not withhold thy help, notwithstanding my unbelief'
seems as Jejune as that of others: 'Help me in my unbelief.'