READINGS ON THE EPISTLE TO THE EPHESIANS (4)
[p. 198] READINGS ON THE EPISTLE TO THE EPHESIANS (4)
Ephesians 4; Ephesians 5:1 - 21
WB I notice the apostle speaks of himself as “the prisoner” in the beginning in chapters 3 and 4. What is the significance of that?
JT In the beginning of chapter 3 he is “the prisoner of Christ Jesus”. This relates to what is brought out in the long parenthesis in chapter 3; he was a prisoner of the Christ on account of the nations. The apostle would have laboured amongst the Jews, but the Lord would have him continue the work among the Gentiles, and having alluded to that, he makes the long statement as to the mystery, and his work in administering it.
His work had been successful amongst the Gentiles; the administration of the mystery, which was given into his hands, would result in glory to God in the assembly unto all generations of the age of ages. In spite of the fact that he had gone to Jerusalem, nothing had been lost; Christ had retained him among the Gentiles. He was the prisoner of the Christ Jesus. He had been retained for the carrying on of the work of God amongst the Gentiles, and the Lord would not allow him to be diverted from that. Chapter 3 shows that the work of God had gone on, and his prayer, his great exercise, shows how completely he was now under the influence of Christ; he desired that the Christ should have a dwelling place in the hearts of the saints. Then in chapter 4 he returns to the idea of being a prisoner, only he changes the expression and says, “I, the prisoner in the Lord, exhort you”. I think the prisoner of the Christ Jesus has reference to the work of God among the nations, whereas the Lord’s prisoner suggests the authority of [p. 199] the Lord over His servant. While the Romans were the instruments of his being carried to Rome, yet it was the Lord’s doing.
RSS So that in the government of God it pleased Him to move Paul, after he was made a prisoner at Jerusalem, to Rome.
JT The government of God is seen there too, but there is more than that: the testimony was involved and the Lord was concerned about that. Before leaving Jerusalem Paul had the comfort of the Lord’s words that he had witnessed of Him there.
RSS The ministry we now have from Paul emanated largely from Rome a Gentile city. It gives it a character it would not have had as coming from Jerusalem. So I think we can see a reason why he was, under God’s hand, taken to Rome.
JT It is a question of the Gentiles in the beginning of chapter 3: “For this reason, I, Paul, prisoner of Christ Jesus for you nations”.
FL Then it further shows in connection with the testimony that while a prisoner is bound, “the word of God is not bound” (2 Timothy 2:9), and this epistle, Colossians, Philippians and Timothy are evidences of how the testimony is taken care of by the Lord in spite of adverse circumstances.
JT So that although in Rome, confined and bound with a chain, and surrounded by all the pomp and power of the emperor, he speaks of being the Lord’s prisoner. It shows how entirely he was in the faith of the kingdom.
Now he says in chapter 3, “I, Paul”. I doubt if the idea of Paul was so prominent in his going to Jerusalem. You will recall the statement as to the change in his name: evidently it is not only that he was called Paul, but that he was Paul; “who also is Paul” (Acts 13:9). It signifies apparently that he was small. He had, it seems, come back to that in Rome. “I, Paul”, he says. I think when he announces his name [p. 200] it is characteristic. It was that one who was detained as the prisoner of Christ, so that now he is thinking only of the Christ and what is to be accomplished by the Christ, and of his being a minister of the mystery in that way to the Gentiles. He is now entirely in the hands of Christ in Rome.
WB That would explain verse 13, “Wherefore I desire that ye faint not at my tribulations for you, which is your glory”.
FL One sees something akin to this in John in Patmos. He was put into circumstances which we might think would render the testimony impossible, but the Lord in the might of His power turns both the imprisonment of Paul and the banishment of John to the furtherance of the testimony.
JT In Philippians the apostle opens up more in detail how his presence at Rome had furthered the gospel. It should encourage us as showing that no circumstance or combination of circumstances can interfere with the testimony. Our wills indeed offer the most effective opposition, but God can overcome even these. We can readily see the moral fitness of one such as Paul exhorting as he does in chapter 4. He was little in his own estimation and he was subject to Christ. He is thus entitled to develop what is becoming to the calling, namely, “lowliness, meekness, longsuffering, bearing with one another in love”.
ANW It is evident, that his imprisonment tended to bring him low in his own opinion.
FL Onesiphorus came to Paul in prison and was not ashamed of his chain, and so he showed this spirit of meekness and lowliness. He wanted to identify himself with it. It not only worked in Paul but worked in those outside. I think it would be well to take note of Paul, because he is not only our apostle, but also our model. He is the model for the Gentile believers and he is that in the sense of being [p. 201] a little one. In fact he says so in the previous chapter, “less than the least of all saints”.
RSS How could he say that, because he was the greatest?
JT Do you not think it was because of the great estimation he had of Christ, that he felt his own littleness? For the more we know of Christ the smaller we are in our own estimation. It is a truly great man that can be little.
RSS Yes, quite so, and as Mr. Raven said, the great thing is to take account of yourself as before God, not before men. That brings about what you spoke of. But I was struck with the expression, “less than the least of all saints”. He must have had a marvellous appreciation of Christ to have been truly brought to that point.
JT His estimation of himself seems to have qualified him in the Lord’s eyes for this commission. “To me, less than the least of all saints, has this grace been given”.
RSS That is, he was a suitable vessel for it.
JS As Saul of Tarsus he was greatly inflated, but here he is reduced.
FL Look at the manner of his conversion! He had been an insolent, overbearing man, and the way in which he had been exposed was never after absent from him. That is, what he had been in that character caused him to feel in the presence of the grace of Christ that he was the least of all saints, and in that way he becomes a pattern for all that should afterward believe.
RSS You were speaking of Paul as a model. Are not the words used remarkable; “lowliness and meekness” correspond with the Lord’s own words in Matthew 11:28,29, where He is seen as our model: He says, “Come unto me, all ye that labour and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest ... for I am meek and lowly in heart”.
JT Timothy was like Paul, as the apostle says, “he will put you in mind of my ways as they are in Christ”. He was like his father, and Paul brings him forward in Philippians as showing that he was of a like mind with himself. He could not only put the saints in mind of Paul’s ways, but cared for them with the same genuine feeling as Paul did himself.
JB These characteristic people, such as Paul and Timothy, are being reproduced, in measure, in the assembly in our day.
JT We cannot get the work of God carried on effectively apart from the spirit indicated here. It is in those who have relinquished all idea of importance after the flesh that the work of God is carried on. I believe the Lord would bring about reduction. In the types the feast of Pentecost comes after the feast of unleavened bread; the feast of Pentecost involves the works of God: “We do hear them speak in our own tongues the wonderful works of God” (Acts 2:11). Those who are affected by the feast of unleavened bread, which means the reduction of the flesh, are occupied not with their own things or doings, but with “the great things of God”. They are thus qualified to be used of God to carry on His work.
RSS Where are the examples of what you speak of as to the feast of unleavened bread and the feast of Pentecost?
JT In Deuteronomy 16. The passover had its anti-type in the death of Christ, “Christ our passover is sacrificed for us” (1 Corinthians 5:7). The feast of unleavened bread was instituted on the fifteenth day of the first month, and continued seven days; then the feast of Pentecost came in some fifty days afterward. It was the next feast, so that the feast of unleavened bread would, as it were, have taken full effect; then the coming in of the Spirit is to take the place of the power of the flesh. “That the excellency of the power”, says the apostle, “may be of God and not of us” (2 Corinthians 4:7). His [p. 203] preaching was in demonstration of the Spirit and of power, that the faith of the saints should not stand in the wisdom of men, but in the power of God. The works of God are carried on in those who have relinquished all confidence in the flesh.
FL Philippians is much on that line. There is first the mind of Christ, then Paul is like Christ, Timothy is like Paul, Epaphroditus is of the same mind, and then Paul says, “Be ye imitators of me”. The line runs through here.
WB The day of Pentecost was fully come.
JT That was it. God was now coming in to take up and accomplish His work. That is the thing we have to look into, to be in a state to be used. Therefore I take it that Paul saying, “I, Paul”, meant that he was now where the Christ could use him to carry on His work among the nations. This is chapter 3, and in chapter 4 he is morally qualified to exhort them to be what he was himself.
JS Is it because of the moral qualification that the “I” is emphasised here?
JT I have no doubt. “I, the prisoner in the Lord”, is emphasised. He calls attention to himself. He is morally qualified to exhort.
BTF What is the force of what follows: the meekness, lowliness, and then the uniting bond of peace, and after that one body, one spirit?
JT The point is unity. I think the calling, the vocation with which we are called, refers to the end of chapter 2.
BTF It refers to what Jews and Gentiles were brought into.
JT Yes, both have access to God by one Spirit. They are “no longer strangers and foreigners, but fellow-citizens of the saints and of the household of God”. We are built together for a habitation of God in the Spirit, that is the vocation with which we are called. This exhortation is, I apprehend, that we [p. 204] might walk worthy of it, and the point is that it is on the principle of unity. The spirit of unity is to be maintained.
TR I suppose verses 4 and 5 are the bonds of that unity.
JT Yes. There is one body, one Spirit, one Lord, one faith, one baptism, and one God and Father of all. That is the truth which is to become the basis of the unity, but then the tangible unity is in the Spirit. The truth is in these statements, but there is one Spirit indwelling us all, and we have enjoyed drawing near to God the Father. Now maintain it in other relations.
FL These things that are defined are, you would say, all fundamental characteristics of a unity which actually exists, the vital power of which is the Spirit. Then we are called to a state of mind; that is, to use diligence to have a state of mind, as taught of the Spirit, to move and act and think in accordance with the unity which actually exists. We have not to make the unity; it already exists.
JT The thing is to maintain the unity in all relations. It is all very well of course when we are together, and when we seek to worship God it is quite obvious we have not two spirits, but how is the unity to be kept in other relations? So that we begin with lowliness, meekness, long-suffering, bearing with one another in love. We do not have to bear with one another so much in the assembly when together, but in other relations; hence the need of bearing with one another in love.
WB Those other relations would affect the unity in the assembly.
RSS He exhorts them. The fact that he does so, I suppose, is taking account of the work of God in them. I was just thinking of Paul at Antioch; he and Barnabas went into the synagogue, and after the reading of the law and the prophets the rulers of the synagogue sent unto them saying, “Ye men and brethren, if ye have any word of exhortation for the people, say on” (Acts 13:15). But it is very striking as you read the passage, that in what he said there is not a word of exhortation. He begins with God, the God of His people, and all that He did and all that He gave and all that He destroyed, but it was what God did. There was nothing there, so to speak, to exhort; but he preached the gospel to them.
JT The Jews would assume that they were qualified to be exhorted.
RSS Yes, that was my point, that here in Ephesians 4, Paul does exhort. There must be some basis for exhortation. The basis is the work of God in the saints, and this existed at Ephesus.
ARS Will you explain the difference between the state of Christendom and the unity of the Spirit which we should endeavour to keep? Suppose a person meets you with the fact that Christendom is all broken up, what would you say to him?
JT You cannot very well convict a man unless he is willing to be convicted. I think this passage shows that; the Holy Spirit having come in house-wise, according to the end of the second chapter, remains here and will remain, although the house may be outwardly effaced, and the exercise a right-minded person has is, that he might arrive at the Spirit in that relation. It is not only that he has the Spirit himself, but that the Spirit is here in the house; God is here in the Spirit, and one would love to realise this, and I think you can if, as exercised, you get another brother like yourself. You have the same desires. It is dependent on “two of you”. Saints become a test and discipline to each other, but if the mind is right and the will is not at work, they increase in spiritual power through the exercise. By learning lowliness, meekness, longsuffering and forbearance,
[p. 206] you increase in spiritual power, so that when we come together there is unity and liberty in the Spirit.
FL “Endeavouring to keep the unity” is a state of mind in the individual towards other individuals who are affected, and this leads to a withdrawal from what is contrary to the unity and a maintaining of what is in accordance with it. So if there are two they are an evidence of the unity, but it is really a state of mind effected by the Holy Spirit.
Ques Is this in line with what we get in Psalm 133 in regard to unity?
JT The teaching of Psalm 133 follows on Psalm 132, which has reference to the instalment of the ark in mount Zion, and unity among brethren hinges on that. We cannot have unity according to God unless the ark has its place, any other unity is not according to God; unity is based on that; that is, Christ has His true place in the hearts of the saints.
RJC In what does the unity of the Spirit lie?
ANW If a man does not discern the unity of the Spirit he is not likely to keep it. He may preach it, but if he does not really discern it he will not endeavour to keep it.
JT If a man has light about the wonderful privilege of having access to God in connection with others, he will say, ‘This is a wonderful thing; it is something I would like to realise too’. If you are to realise it you must make sacrifices. There is a road to it. So he is prepared now and this passage helps him. You arrive at it by sacrifice, by surrendering your own will, and accepting a lowly place. The unity of the Spirit lies in the maintenance of thoughts and affections suited to the relationships in which we are set to each other.
PHP The encouragement is that the thing is workable. If it works between two persons, you can add any number and the thing is seen and you can [p. 207] enjoy it.
JT It is something worth sacrificing for, that you might enjoy the activities of the blessed Spirit of God collectively, not only in each of us, but collectively. That is the idea of unity.
WB Referring to Psalm 133 again, I have noticed that it brings in the thought of the Spirit, the oil, and then you have the blessing. Would you link them together?
JT Quite so. The Psalm is largely to call attention to what unity among brethren is like. It is like very wonderful things.
RSS I suppose in Roman Catholicism we have the effort to maintain the unity of the body without the Spirit. The endeavour is to keep it up by worldly methods.
FL In Catholicism, or Christendom at large, the constant effort is to get a union, which is different from unity. It is to form a union upon certain agreed principles, a thing which has no relation whatever to unity as taught here.
BTF The force of “One Lord, one faith, one baptism” is that there is unity in God’s system. Is that it?
JT That is the idea; everything in the moral system is based on what God is. God is one and the Mediator between God and men one, the Man Christ Jesus. All unity flows out from that.
Ques Is it that we are baptised by one Spirit? The Lord says, “Where two or three are gathered together in my name there am I in the midst” (Matthew 18:20); so that when we come together the Spirit pervades that sphere and there is unity.
JT Yes, quite so. The Lord’s supper helps to maintain it. We are all said to be made to drink into the one Spirit, which alludes to the cup, I apprehend.
WB What is the difference between unity of the faith and unity of the Spirit?
JT I think the unity of the faith refers to what is held as light in our souls; “until we all arrive at the unity of the faith and of the knowledge of the Son of God, at the full-grown man”.
CHB All speak the same things and think the same things. That is in keeping with the unity of the faith.
JT To the company at Ephesus the whole mind of God had been announced and presented. What they held and how they held it were important. The “twelve men” in Acts 19 got the light together, they got it from Paul. There would be in that way a levelling and an agreement between them, they held the truth in common. There was no irregularity or incongruity in what they held.
W.B. As to doctrine?
JT The faith refers to the system of doctrine, and all the saints were to arrive at that so that what we hold is uniform.
FL What the unity of the faith really takes in, is the scope of the whole revelation of God.
JT Quite so. As you were remarking about the different sects each has its own set of doctrines on which they agree. That is not [p. 208] the idea of the unity of the faith. The unity of the Spirit is the subjective state in the saints; the unity of the faith refers to the doctrine, the truth that they hold in common.
RJC Would it be possible to have unity of the Spirit apart from unity of the faith?
JT You might have the unity of the Spirit in the way of affection without the full understanding of doctrine. Ephesians, however, is not satisfied with anything less than completeness; things must be complete. The gifts are given “for the perfecting of the saints”, so that we should all arrive at the unity of the faith and of the knowledge of the Son of God, at the “full-grown man”.
Ques “One Lord, one faith, one baptism”: I [p. 209] can see the one Lord and the one faith, but would you say something about the baptism, and the aspect in which it is presented here?
JT The point here is not the import of baptism. As we were remarking earlier, baptism is not taught in this epistle, the point is, there is one. So every ordinance of Christianity tends to unity, whether baptism or the Lord’s supper.
FL Gifts come in on that line. One who has gone up on high centralises everything and gives the gifts in order to work up to the unity of the faith and of the knowledge of the Son of God, the full-grown man.
JT The unity of the Spirit includes us all in a collective sense, but then we have, “unto every one of us is given grace”. The Lord singles out each one and gives him something. Now what have I? That is the thought that ought to arise. What am I contributing? “Unto every one;” that is individual. The Christ was carrying on the work of God, not only through Paul, but through all the saints. Paul in the third chapter shows that individually he wrought mightily, but the Christ would use each one of us. He uses each one and with that in view He gives to each one according to His own measure.
FL That wants to be driven home, because we so easily drop into the idea that there are a few who have something and the rest have nothing but what the few give them. We want to get in direct touch with the Head.
AFM How would it work out practically if we came to the realisation of this?
JT It works out in this way, that you would like to be little enough to be used, like Paul. He is the model for us all. That is the first thing. To such an one as that grace is given by the Christ; the measure must be left with Him. Gift is subject to [p. 210] desire, only Paul is not referring to specific gifts, but to what a sister might get as much as a brother. “To each one of us has been given grace according to the measure of the gift of the Christ”, so that you want to know what it is you have and how you can use it, and how to make it as effective as possible.
FL That is the point. I am sure we are deplorably weak along that line.
JS Is the grace given that each one of us might be made effective as united in the Spirit?
ANW You need grace to be lowly, is that the thought?
JT Yes, but I think “to each one of us has been given grace” is for service.
JS This would save us from drifting into clericalism.
RSS Then in that sense grace is something you get from Christ which gives you ability to do something.
JT I think so. Each one has something distinctive, so that what he does no one else can do in the same way. Of course it is difficult to see it working out in our day of weakness, but undoubtedly in Ephesus each believer, each of those twelve men, for example, had some specific grace from Christ so that each filled a niche in the assembly there.
FL Each of our meetings resolves itself, generally speaking, into those who in coming expect to minister, and those who in coming, expect to receive. It is a wrong point of view, a source of weakness. We fail to discern that Christ has given something specifically to each one which works in its place for the edifying of the body.
JT That sort of thing is exactly what is brought about in the clergy, there are those wishing to be simply members of a congregation, glad to hand over all responsibility to others. That is what makes room for [p. 211] clericalism.
FL This is not exactly a question of oral ministry in the assembly convened, but of grace for pastoral care and the care for one another, which should mark all and is intended to be exercised in connection with the whole body at all times, not only when we are convened.
JT Exactly. The idea of the assembly convened is scarcely in this epistle.
WLP That phase of the truth comes out in Corinthians.
RJC But the gifts of grace can be exercised when the saints are not convened.
FL In the gathering where I took my place in fellowship there were about five hundred breaking bread, and one of the first things of which I remember the elder brethren speaking was that the number was utterly unwieldy. It was impossible for the joints and bands to work properly; people came in and went out and their presence or absence would not be noted. Since then I have thought of the Lord’s provision for the multitude when He made them sit down in companies of fifty so that they might be properly looked after. I think small companies of fifty are much happier than large gatherings. The saints know each other better and hence there is more tendency to edification.
ANW Ephesians 4:16 is very striking in that connection, it leads to the “self-building up in love”. It is not merely the ministry of an apostle or a prophet, it is self-building.
JT In a heart full of truth in the power of the Spirit, as Paul’s was, it is remarkable to see how things run into each other as he tells of them. It is a continuous stream that rushes on. He touches on the thought of unity, then the thought of gift, then he must tell us about the ascension of the Lord Jesus and how all gift is from that Man up there. As he says, “Wherefore ... having ascended up on high [p. 212] he has led captivity captive and has given gifts to men”. In Ephesians you generally have the full idea of whatever is touched; hence you see here that gifts that are active on earth have come from Christ ascended. It says, that He has gone far above all the heavens. Think of the magnitude of the gift as come from that point!
BTF The gifts enumerated here have a general application, that is, they were given to the assembly as a whole.
JT It is the whole assembly that is in view here. Apostles were not given to any local assembly.
JS His ascension far above all heavens that He might fill all things would involve a day to come as well as the present time.
JT He will fill “every family”, but at the present time it is for the edifying of the body of Christ. Think of the power that is being exercised since Christ went far above all the heavens, all exercised here to one point, namely, the edifying of His body!
FL I suppose the bringing in of the evangelist here would suggest Psalm 68:18 from which this is quoted. It says, “Yea, for the rebellious also, that the Lord God might dwell among them”. The evangelist appeals to the rebellious that they might be brought into subjection.
Rem In regard to gift the apostle says in 1 Corinthians 13:2, “And though I have the gift of prophecy, and understand all mysteries, and all knowledge; and though I have all faith, so that I could remove mountains, and have not charity, I am nothing”.
JT He is simply pointing out and emphasising that without love things are utterly ineffectual. It is not, however, that anyone could have these gifts without love, but that even if it were possible to have them without love they would be valueless morally. What we may see here, I think, is the wisdom in which the gifts are given: they are given in the [p. 213] order in which wisdom saw the necessity for them. Apostleship is the first one, because it was essential that the authority of Christ should be established upon earth. The apostle does that.
WLP 1 Corinthians 13 would correct all assumption of man in these things?
JT Quite. Aside from love the greatest possible ability is valueless in the assembly.
CAM I suppose you would say a sense that the Lord gave the gifts would prevent envy and that sort of thing?
JT I think so. You leave things as the Lord has placed them. The Head has placed things and you cannot improve on what He has done.
FL If you appreciate Christ and His system it should exclude any idea of envy or jealousy.
JT You can see the point of the apostle: he says here, “and some apostles”. Apostles were brought in and they established the authority of Christ without which you can have nothing for God. The ministry of the twelve and Paul’s ministry had established the authority of Christ. Then the prophets bring in the mind of God; if the will is subdued there is room for God. The evangelist adds souls. The evangelist really is for increase, gathering in.
ANW Shepherds come after that, but they are very often forgotten.
JT Yes, quite, “shepherds and teachers”.
AFM What is the prophet?
JT The prophet brings God in, he affects the conscience.
WB It is very remarkable that we are told of Philip’s four daughters that they were virgins, “which did prophesy”. While they could not have spoken in the assembly when convened, yet they had the gift of prophecy. One can have the gift and yet very properly remain [p. 214] quiet.
JT It is quite right for either a sister or a brother to bring in the mind of God. However, these women are not formally called prophetesses, whereas Agabus is referred to in Acts 21:9,10, as “a certain prophet”. The fact is simply stated that Philip’s daughters did prophesy.
BTF The order here is most striking, the evangelists, then the shepherds and teachers.
JT But it is the wisdom in which they are given. If the evangelist comes he will bring in the sheep; but the sheep need to be shepherded and they need to be fed.
FL Shepherds and teachers go together.
RSS Teaching may be very good but often does not effect much because the need of those present is not known to the teacher, and I imagine that is the reason why they go together.
JT The Shepherd knows the sheep; Christ calls His own sheep by name. The shepherd knows the saints’ houses. Paul at Ephesus went “from house to house”.
RSS There is far greater want of pastoral care than of ministry amongst us. I think we are very sensible of that as to almost every meeting.
JT You think there is need of shepherds?
RSS Yes, of shepherd care, especially with those who take part in meetings and otherwise. If they knew the people better at home I think that more would be added in the meetings. So the wisdom of connecting the two together is very manifest.
CAM It is remarkable how many prominent men in the Old Testament were shepherds, Moses, David.
FL All those who led the people of God were shepherds. The false prophets were unsparingly condemned in Ezekiel and Jeremiah.
RSS It is a much more arduous place to fill than that of [p. 215] a teacher.
WHF I would like to ask a question in relation to verses 15 and 16. I see the gifts are for the edification of the body, but the body receiving from the Head increases itself with the result that it builds itself up in love. I would like to know how that is carried out today.
JT I think the effect of gift is directly on the individual: it affects me individually and it affects you individually, “in order that we may be no longer babes”. As it reads here, “Until we all arrive at the full-grown man, at the measure of the stature of the fulness of the Christ; in order that we may be no longer babes, tossed and carried about by every wind of that teaching which is in the sleight of man, in unprincipled cunning with a view to systematized error”. It seems to me as if the gifts are to prevent that. Each member, instead of being a babe, must arrive at full growth. I think it is in those who are full-grown that you get the self-edifying. That is, the necessity for gift is not in verse 16. It has done its work.
WHF The body, as such, works according to its organism, independently of the gift?
JT But the gift prepares you for that.
WHF Yes, and I want your thought now as to the exercise of that in the present day, because the saints are scattered all over.
JT I think the effect of the gift is to bring the saint and fit him into the organism; that is its function. I do not say the saint is independent of gift, for there is always the need of the gift, but we want to see that there is a point where I receive directly from Christ the Head and contribute as in the organism. The need of the gift is not exactly in the body, but in connection with what He is preparing for it.
WHF Do you think that saints today receive [p. 216] help and encouragement from the Head, as they are mixed up in the sects of men?
JT I am under the impression that saints in systems are dependent on gift. They have to be regarded as babes and as in “systematised error”. Headship can scarcely be availed of under those circumstances. Gift is intended to deliver from such conditions.