Chapter VII: BRANTWOOD, 14th July, 1879

DEAR MR. MALLESON,--Sincere thanks for both your letters and the proofs sent. Your comment and conducting link, when needed, will be of the greatest help and value, I am well assured, suggesting what you know will be the probable feeling of your hearers, and the point that will come into question.

Yes, certainly, that "His" in the fourth line[1] was meant to imply that eternal presence of Christ; as in another passage,[2] referring to the Creation, "when His right hand strewed the snow on Lebanon, and smoothed the slopes of Calvary," but in so far as we dwell on that truth, "Hast thou seen _Me_, Philip, and not the Father?" we are not teaching the people what is specially the Gospel of _Christ_ as having a distinct function--namely, to _serve_ the Father, and do the Father's will. And in all His human relations to us, and commands to us, it is as the Son of Man, not as the "power of God and wisdom of God," that He acts and speaks. Not as the Power; for _He_ must pray, like one of us. Not as the Wisdom; for He must not know "if it be possible" His prayer should be heard.

And in what I want to say of the third clause of His prayer (_His_, not merely as His ordering, but His using), it is especially this comparison between _His_ kingdom, and His Father's, that I want to see the disciples guarded against. I believe very few, even of the most earnest, using that petition, realize that it is the Father's--not the Son's--kingdom, that they pray may come,--although the whole prayer is foundational on that fact: "_For_ THINE is the kingdom, the power, and the glory." And I fancy that the mind of the most faithful Christians is quite led away from its proper hope, by dwelling on the reign--or the coming again--of Christ; which, indeed, they are to look for, and _watch_ for, but not to pray for. Their prayer is to be for the greater kingdom to which He, risen and having all His enemies under His feet, is to surrender _His_, "that God may be All in All."

And, though the greatest, it is that everlasting kingdom which the poorest of us can advance. We cannot hasten Christ's coming. "Of the day and the hour, knoweth none." But the kingdom of God is as a grain of mustard-seed:--we can sow of it; it is as a foam-globe of leaven:--we can mingle it; and its glory and its joy are that even the birds of the air can lodge in the branches thereof.

Forgive me for getting back to my sparrows; but truly, in the present state of England, the fowls of the air are the only creatures, tormented and murdered as they are, that yet have here and there nests, and peace, and joy in the Holy Ghost. And it would be well if many of us, in reading that text, "The kingdom of God is NOT meat and drink," had even got so far as to the understanding that it was at least _as much_, and that until we had fed the hungry, there was no power in us to inspire the unhappy.

Ever affectionately yours,

J. RUSKIN.

I will write my feeling about the pieces of the Life of Christ you have sent me, in a private letter. I may say at once that I am sure it will do much good, and will be upright and intelligible, which how few religious writings are!

[Footnote 1: "Modern Painters."]

[Footnote 2: Referring to the closing sentence of the third
paragraph of the fifth letter, which _seemed_ to express what
I felt could not be Mr. Ruskin's full meaning, I pointed out
to him the following sentence in "Modern Painters:"--

"When, in the desert, Jesus was girding Himself for the work
of life, angels of life came and ministered unto Him; now,
in the fair world, when He is girding Himself for the work of
death, the ministrants come to Him from the grave; but from
the grave conquered. One from the tomb under Abarim, which
_His_ own hand had sealed long ago; the other from the rest
which He had entered without seeing corruption."

On this I made a remark somewhat to the following effect: that
I felt sure Mr. Ruskin regarded the loving work of the Father
and of the Son to be _equal_ in the forgiveness of sins and
redemption of mankind; that what is done by the Father is
in reality done also by the Son; and that it is by a mere
accommodation to human infirmity of understanding that
the doctrine of the Trinity is revealed to us in language,
inadequate indeed to convey divine truths, but still the only
language possible; and I asked whether some such feeling was
not present in his mind when he used the pronoun "His," in
the above passage from "Modern Painters" of the Son, where it
would be usually understood of the Father; and as a corollary,
whether, in the letter, he does not himself fully recognize
the fact of the redemption of the world by the loving
self-sacrifice of the Son in entire concurrence with the
equally loving will of the Father. This, as well as I
can recollect, is the origin of the passage in the second
paragraph in the seventh letter.--_Editor of Letters._]