MESSINA
215
MESSINA
national and apocalyptic ideals. The Apocalypse of
Baruoh, written probably in imitation, contains a
similar picture of the Messias. This system of escha-
tology finds reflection also in the chiliasm of certain
early Christian writers. Transferred to the second
coming of the Messias, we have the reign of peace and
holiness for a thousand years upon earth before the
just are transported to their eternal home in heaven
(cf. Papias in Eusebius, "Hist, eccl.", Ill, xxxix).
III. The Vindication of the Messianic Dignity BY Christ. — This point may be treated under two heads (a) Christ's explicit claim to be the Messias, and (b) the implicit claim shown in His words and actions throughout His life.
Under the first of these two headings we may con- sider the confession of Peter in Matt., xvi, and the words of Christ before his judges. These incidents involve, of course, far more than a mere claim to the Messiahship; taken in their setting, they constitute a claim to the Divine Sonship. The words of Christ to St. Peter are too clear to need any comment. The silence of the other Synoptists as to some details of the incident concern the proof from this passage rather of the Divinity than of Messianic claims. As regards Christ's claim before the S.anhedrin and Pilate, it might appear from the narratives of Matthew and Luke that He at first refused a direct reply to the high priest's question: "Art thou the Christ?" But al- though His answer is given merely as av efiras (thou hast said it), yet that recorded by St. Mark, ^7ii dfju. (I am), shows clearly how this answer was understood by the Jews. Dalman (Words of Jesus, pp. 309 sqq.) gives instances from Jewish literature in which the expression, "thou hast said it", is equivalent to "you are right" ; his conmient is that Jesus used the words, as an assent indeed, but as showing that He attached comparatively little importance to this statement. Nor is this unreasonable, as the Messianic claim sinks into insignificance beside the claim to Divinity which immediately follows, and calls from the high priest the horrified accusation of blasphemy. It was this which gave the Sanhedrin a pretext, which the Messianic claim of itself did not give, for the death sentence. Before Pilate on the other hand it was merely the as- sertion of His royal dignity which gave ground for His condemnation.
. But it is rather in His consistent manner of acting than in any specific claim that we see most clearly ChrLst's vindication of His dignity. At the outset of His public life (Luke, iv, IS) He applies to Himself in the synagogue of Nazareth the words relating to the Servant of Jahveh in Is., Ixi, 1. It is He whom David in spirit called "Lordl" He claimed to judge the world and to forgive sins. He was superior to the Law, the Lord of the Sabbath, the Master of the Tem- ple. In His own name, by the word of His moutli, He cleansed lepers. He stilled the sea. He raised the dead. Ilis disciples must regard all as well lost merely to en- joy the privilege of following Him. The Jews, while failing to see all that these things implied, a dignity and power not inferior to those of Jahveh Himself, . could not but perceive that He who so acted was at least the Divinely accredited representative of Jah- veh. In this connexion we may consider the title Christ used of Himself, "Son of Man" We have no evidence that this was then commonly regarded as a Messianic title. Some doubt as to its meaning in the minds of Christ's hearers is possibly shown by John, xii, 34: "Who is this Son jf man?" The Jews, while imdoubtedly seeing in Daniel, vii, a portrait of the Messias, probably failed to recognize in these words a definite title at all. This is the more probable from the fact that, while this passage exercised great influ- ence upon the apocalyptists, the title "Son of Man" does not appear in their writings except in passages of doubtful authenticity. Now, Christ not merely uses the name, but claims for Himself the right to judge the
world (Matt., xxv, 31-46), which is the most marked
note of Daniel's Messias. A double reason would lead
Him to assmne this particular designation: that He
might speak of Himself as the Messias without making
His claim conspicuous to the ruling powers till the
time came for His open vindication, and that as far as
possible He might hinder the people from transferring
to Him their own material notions of Davidic king-
ship.
Nor did His claim to the dignity merely concern the future. He did not say, " I shall be the Messias", but "I am the Messias". Thus, besides His answer to Caiphas and His approval of Peter's affirmation of His present Messiahship, we have in Matt., xi, 5, the guarded but clear answer to the question of the Bap- tist's disciples: "Art thou 6 ipxifnems'! " In St. John the evidence is abundant. There is no question of a future dignity in His words to the Samaritan woman (John, iv) or to the man bom blind (ix, 5), for He was already performing the works foretolil of the Messias. Though but as a grain of mustard seed, the Kingdom of Ciod upon earth was already established ; He had al- ready begun the work of the Servant of Jahveh, of preaching, of suffering, of saving men. The consum- mation of His task and His rule in glory over the King- dom were indeed still in the future, but these were the final crown, not the sole constituents, of the Messianio dignity. For those who, before the Christian dispen- sation, sought to interpret the ancient prophecies, some single a.spect of the Messias sufficed to fill the whole view. We, in the light of the Christian reve- lation, see realized and harmonized in Our Lord all the conflicting Messianic hopes, all the visions of the proph- ets. He is at once the Suffering Ser\-ant and the Davidic King, the Judge of mankind and its Saviour, trvie Son of Man and God with us. On Him is laid the iniquity of us all, and on Him, as God incarnate, rests the Spirit of Jahveh, the Spirit of Wisdom and Under- standing, the Spirit of Counsel and Fortitude, the Spirit of Knowledge and Piety, and the Fear of the Lord.
Gloag, The Messianic Prophecies (Edinburgh, 1S79); Maas, Christ inType and Prophecy (New York, 1S9:S, 1896); David- son. Old Testament Prophecy (Edinburgh, 1904), xvii-xxiv; CoNDAMiN, Le Livre d'Isa'ie (Paris, 1905); Bousset, Die Re- ligion des Judentums (Berlin. 1903); L.vgrange, Le Messia- nisme chei les Juifs (Paris, 1909); Sandat, The Life of Christ in Recent Research (Oxford, 1907); Dalman, Die Worte Jesu (Leipzig, 1898), tr. The Words of Jesus (Edinburgh, 1902); Lepin, Jesns Messie (Paris, 1904).
L. W. Geddes.
Messina, Antonello da, b. at Messina, about 1430; d. 1497. After studying for some time in Sicily ho crossed over to Naples, where, we are told, he became the pupU of an unknown artist, Antonio Colantonio. It was here, according to Vasari, that Messina, on see- ing a painting of John Van Eyck, belonging to Alphon- sus of Aragon, determined to devote himself to the study of the Flemish Masters. It would seem too that he set out for Bruges with this purpose: others, however, maintain that he need not have left Italy to ground him.self in the new technic as several Flem- ish artists of renown had already, through the patron- age of the princes Rene of .\njou and .Mphonsus of -Ajragon, won for their pictures no slight reputa- tion. The question will remain a debated point until the discovery of some authentic documen'^ shall decide definitively whether the Sicili.an painter did or did not sail for Flanders. It is certain, however, that he mastered perfectly the methods followed by the disciples of Van Eyck in oil-painting, methodo that had eclipsed all the efforts made by the Italian school. On his return to Messina, Antonello evinced remarkable skill in handling oils in a triptych, un- fortunately destroyed in the recent earthquake, repre- senting the Blessed Virgin with St. Gregory and St. Benedict on either side and two angels holding a crown over Our Lady's head. Later, Messina went to Ven- ice, where in 1473 he executed an] altar screen, no
