Justice prescribes one course of action, affection
another. The convention of the world insists that wrong-doing should
be punished, which is manifestly right; but when it insists that I
should be the punisher, I suspect something wrong. The more closely I
study conventional justice the more I am conscious of something in
myself that distrusts and revolts from it. The more I incline to the
voice of affection the more I fear it, lest I should be guilty of
weakness which would merit my own contempt. The struggle is one
between convention and instinct, and I know not which side to take.
But one thing I do know; it is that I have no certain clue to guide me,
no clear determining principle that divides the darkness with a sword
of light, no voice within myself that is authoritative.
Now the wonderful thing in Jesus is that He is always sure of Himself.
Nothing takes Him by surprise, nothing produces the least hesitation in
His judgment. Therefore He must have had an unfailing clue to which He
trusted in the maze of life. Behind all consistency of judgment there
must exist consistency of principle. The principle that governed all
the thoughts of Jesus was _that love was the only real justice_. He
came not to condemn, not to destroy men's lives, but to save them.
There was no problem of human relationship that could not be solved by
love; there was no other principle needed for the regulation of
society; and no other could produce that general peace and good-will
which He called the Kingdom of God.
Pages:
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29