PART II.

The Law of Continuity having been referred to already as a prominent

factor in this inquiry, it may not be out of place to sustain the plea

for Natural Law in the Spiritual Sphere by a brief statement and

application of this great principle. The Law of Continuity furnishes an

_a priori_ argument for the position we are attempting to establish of

the most convincing kind--of such a kind, indeed, as to seem to our mind

final. Briefly indicated, the ground taken up is this, that if Nature be

a harmony, Man in all his relations--physical, mental, moral, and

spiritual--falls to be included within its circle. It is altogether

unlikely that man spiritual should be violently separated in all the

conditions of growth, development, and life, from man physical. It is

indeed difficult to conceive that one set of principles should guide the

natural life, and these at a certain period--the very point where they

are needed--suddenly give place to another set of principles altogether

new and unrelated. Nature has never taught us to expect such a

catastrophe. She has nowhere prepared us for it. And Man cannot in the

nature of things, in the nature of thought, in the nature of language,

be separated into two such incoherent halves.

The spiritual man, it is true, is to be studied in a different

department of science from the natural man. But the harmony established

by science is not a harmony within specific departments. It is the

universe that is the harmony, the universe of which these are but parts.

And the harmonies of the parts depend for all their weight and interest

on the harmony of the whole. While, therefore, there are many

harmonies, there is but one harmony. The breaking up of the phenomena of

the universe into carefully guarded groups, and the allocation of

certain prominent Laws to each, it must never be forgotten, and however

much Nature lends herself to it, are artificial. We find an evolution in

Botany, another in Geology, and another in Astronomy, and the effect is

to lead one insensibly to look upon these as three distinct evolutions.

But these sciences, of course, are mere departments created by ourselves

to facilitate knowledge--reductions of Nature to the scale of our own

intelligence. And we must beware of breaking up Nature except for this

purpose. Science has so dissected everything, that it becomes a mental

difficulty to put the puzzle together again; and we must keep ourselves

in practice by constantly thinking of Nature as a whole, if science is

not to be spoiled by its own refinements. Evolution being found in so

many different sciences, the likelihood is that it is a universal

principle. And there is no presumption whatever against this Law and

many others being excluded from the domain of the spiritual life. On the

other hand, there are very convincing reasons why the Natural Laws

should be continuous through the Spiritual Sphere--not changed in any

way to meet the new circumstances, but continuous as they stand.

But to the exposition. One of the most striking generalizations of

recent science is that even Laws have their Law. Phenomena first, in the

progress of knowledge, were grouped together, and Nature shortly

presented the spectacle of a cosmos, the lines of beauty being the great

Natural Laws. So long, however, as these Laws were merely great lines

running through Nature, so long as they remained isolated from one

another, the system of Nature was still incomplete. The principle which

sought Law among phenomena had to go further and seek a Law among the

Laws. Laws themselves accordingly came to be treated as they treated

phenomena, and found themselves finally grouped in a still narrower

circle. That inmost circle is governed by one great Law, the Law of

Continuity. It is the Law for Laws.

It is perhaps significant that few exact definitions of Continuity are

to be found. Even in Sir W. R. Grove's famous paper,[21] the

fountain-head of the modern form of this far from modern truth, there is

no attempt at definition. In point of fact, its sweep is so magnificent,

it appeals so much more to the imagination than to the reason, that men

have preferred to exhibit rather than to define it. Its true greatness

consists in the final impression it leaves on the mind with regard to

the uniformity of Nature. For it was reserved for the Law of Continuity

to put the finishing touch to the harmony of the universe.

Probably the most satisfactory way to secure for one's self a just

appreciation of the Principle of Continuity is to try to conceive the

universe without it. The opposite of a continuous universe would be a

discontinuous universe, an incoherent and irrelevant universe--as

irrelevant in all its ways of doing things as an irrelevant person. In

effect, to withdraw Continuity from the universe would be the same as to

withdraw reason from an individual. The universe would run deranged; the

world would be a mad world.

There used to be a children's book which bore the fascinating title of

"The Chance World." It described a world in which everything happened by

chance. The sun might rise or it might not; or it might appear at any

hour, or the moon might come up instead. When children were born they

might have one head or a dozen heads, and those heads might not be on

their shoulders--there might be no shoulders--but arranged about the

limbs. If one jumped up in the air it was impossible to predict whether

he would ever come down again. That he came down yesterday was no

guarantee that he would do it next time. For every day antecedent and

consequent varied, and gravitation and everything else changed from

hour to hour. To-day a child's body might be so light that it was

impossible for it to descend from its chair to the floor; but to-morrow,

in attempting the experiment again, the impetus might drive it through a

three-story house and dash it to pieces somewhere near the center of the

earth. In this chance world cause and effect were abolished. Law was

annihilated. And the result to the inhabitants of such a world could

only be that reason would be impossible. It would be a lunatic world

with a population of lunatics.

Now this is no more than a real picture of what the world would be

without Law, or the universe without Continuity. And hence we come in

sight of the necessity of some principle of Law according to which Laws

shall be, and be "continuous" throughout the system. Man as a rational

and moral being demands a pledge that if he depends on Nature for any

given result on the ground that Nature has previously led him to expect

such a result, his intellect shall not be insulted, nor his confidence

in her abused. If he is to trust Nature, in short, it must be guaranteed

to him that in doing so he will "never be put to confusion." The authors

of the _Unseen Universe_ conclude their examination of this principle by

saying that "assuming the existence of a supreme Governor of the

universe, the Principle of Continuity may be said to be the definite

expression in words of our trust that He will not put us to permanent

intellectual confusion, and we can easily conceive similar expressions

of trust with reference to the other faculties of man."[22] Or, as it

has been well put elsewhere, Continuity is the expression of "the Divine

Veracity in Nature."[23] The most striking examples of the

continuousness of Law are perhaps those furnished by Astronomy,

especially in connection with the more recent applications of spectrum

analysis. But even in the case of the simpler Laws the demonstration is

complete. There is no reason apart from Continuity to expect that

gravitation for instance should prevail outside our world. But wherever

matter has been detected throughout the entire universe, whether in the

form of star or planet, comet or meteorite, it is found to obey that

Law. "If there were no other indication of unity than this, it would be

almost enough. For the unity which is implied in the mechanism of the

heavens is indeed a unity which is all-embracing and complete. The

structure of our own bodies, with all that depends upon it, is a

structure governed by, and therefore adapted to, the same force of

gravitation which has determined the form and the movements of myriads

of worlds. Every part of the human organism is fitted to conditions

which would all be destroyed in a moment if the forces of gravitation

were to change or fail."[24]

But it is unnecessary to multiply illustrations. Having defined the

principle we may proceed at once to apply it. And the argument may be

summed up in a sentence. As the Natural Laws are continuous through the

universe of matter and of space, so will they be continuous through the

universe of spirit.

If this be denied, what then? Those who deny it must furnish the

disproof. The argument is founded on a principle which is now

acknowledged to be universal; and the _onus_ of disproof must lie with

those who may be bold enough to take up the position that a region

exists where at last the Principle of Continuity fails. To do this one

would first have to overturn Nature, then science, and last, the human

mind.

It may seem an obvious objection that many of the Natural Laws have no

connection whatever with the Spiritual World, and as a matter of fact

are not continued through it. Gravitation for instance--what direct

application has that in the Spiritual World? The reply is threefold.

First, there is no proof that it does not hold there. If the spirit be

in any sense material it certainly must hold. In the second place,

gravitation may hold for the Spiritual Sphere although it cannot be

directly proved. The spirit may be armed with powers which enable it to

rise superior to gravity. During the action of these powers gravity need

be no more suspended than in the case of a plant which rises in the air

during the process of growth. It does this in virtue of a higher Law and

in apparent defiance of the lower. Thirdly, if the spiritual be not

material it still cannot be said that gravitation ceases at that point

to be continuous. It is not gravitation that ceases--it is matter.

This point, however, will require development for another reason. In the

case of the plant just referred to, there is a principle of growth or

vitality at work superseding the attraction of gravity. Why is there no

trace of that Law in the Inorganic world? Is not this another instance

of the discontinuousness of Law? If the Law of vitality has so little

connection with the Inorganic kingdom--less even than gravitation with

the Spiritual, what becomes of Continuity? Is it not evident that each

kingdom of Nature has its own set of Laws which continue possibly

untouched for the specific kingdom but never extend beyond it?

It is quite true that when we pass from the Inorganic to the Organic, we

come upon a new set of Laws. But the reason why the lower set do not

seem to act in the higher sphere is not that they are annihilated, but

that they are overruled. And the reason why the higher Laws are not

found operating in the lower is not because they are not continuous

downward, but because there is nothing for them there to act upon. It is

not Law that fails, but opportunity. The biological Laws are continuous

for life. Wherever there is life, that is to say, they will be found

acting, just as gravitation acts wherever there is matter.

We have purposely, in the last paragraph, indulged in a fallacy. We

have said that the biological Laws would certainly be continuous in the

lower or mineral sphere were there anything there for them to act upon.

Now Laws do not act upon anything. It has been stated already, although

apparently it cannot be too abundantly emphasized, that Laws are only

modes of operation, not themselves operators. The accurate statement,

therefore, would be that the biological Laws would be continuous in the

lower sphere were there anything there for them, not to act upon, but to

keep in order. If there is no acting going on, if there is nothing being

kept in order, the responsibility does not lie with Continuity. The Law

will always be at its post, not only when its services are required, but

wherever they are possible.

Attention is drawn to this, for it is a correction one will find one's

self compelled often to make in his thinking. It is so difficult to keep

out of mind the idea of substance in connection with the Natural Laws,

the idea that they are the movers, the essences, the energies, that one

is constantly on the verge of falling into false conclusions. Thus a

hasty glance at the present argument on the part of any one

ill-furnished enough to confound Law with substance or with cause would

probably lead to its immediate rejection. For, to continue the same line

of illustration, it might next be urged that such a Law as Biogenesis,

which, as we hope to show afterward, is the fundamental Law of life for

both the natural and spiritual worlds, can have no application

whatsoever in the latter sphere. The _life_ with which it deals in the

Natural World does not enter at all into the Spiritual World, and

therefore, it might be argued, the Law of Biogenesis cannot be capable

of extension into it. The Law of Continuity seems to be snapped at the

point where the natural passes into the spiritual. The vital principle

of the body is a different thing from the vital principle of the

spiritual life. Biogenesis deals with {bios}, with the natural life,

with cells and germs, and as there are no exactly similar cells and

germs in the Spiritual World, the Law cannot therefore apply. All which

is as true as if one were to say that the fifth proposition of the First

Book of Euclid applies when the figures are drawn with chalk upon a

blackboard, but fails with regard to structures of wood or stone.

The proposition is continuous for the whole world, and, doubtless,

likewise for the sun and moon and stars. The same universality may be

predicated likewise for the Law of life. Wherever there is life we may

expect to find it arranged, ordered, governed according to the same Law.

At the beginning of the natural life we find the Law that natural life

can only come from preexisting natural life; and at the beginning of the

spiritual life we find that the spiritual life can only come from

preexisting spiritual life. But there are not two Laws; there is

one--Biogenesis. At one end the Law is dealing with matter, at the other

with spirit. The qualitative terms natural and spiritual make no

difference. Biogenesis is the Law for all life and for all kinds of

life, and the particular substance with which it is associated is as

indifferent to Biogenesis as it is to Gravitation. Gravitation will act

whether the substance be suns and stars, or grains of sand, or

raindrops. Biogenesis, in like manner, will act wherever there is life.

The conclusion finally is, that from the nature of Law in general, and

from the scope of the Principle of Continuity in particular, the Laws of

the natural life must be those of the spiritual life. This does not

exclude, observe, the possibility of there being new Laws in addition

within the Spiritual Sphere; nor does it even include the supposition

that the old Laws will be the conspicuous Laws of the Spiritual World,

both which points will be dealt with presently. It simply asserts that

whatever else may be found, these must be found there; that they must be

there though they may not be seen there; and that they must project

beyond there if there be anything beyond there. If the Law of Continuity

is true, the only way to escape the conclusion that the Laws of the

natural life are the Laws, or at least are Laws, of the spiritual life,

is to say that there is no spiritual life. It is really easier to give

up the phenomena than to give up the Law.

Two questions now remain for further consideration--one bearing on the

possibility of new Law in the spiritual; the other, on the assumed

invisibility or inconspicuousness of the old Laws on account of their

subordination to the new.

Let us begin by conceding that there may be new Laws. The argument might

then be advanced that since, in Nature generally, we come upon new Laws

as we pass from lower to higher kingdoms, the old still remaining in

force, the newer Laws which one would expect to meet in the Spiritual

World would so transcend and overwhelm the older as to make the analogy

or identity, even if traced, of no practical use. The new Laws would

represent operations and energies so different, and so much more

elevated, that they would afford the true keys to the Spiritual World.

As Gravitation is practically lost sight of when we pass into the domain

of life, so Biogenesis would be lost sight of as we enter the Spiritual

Sphere.

We must first separate in this statement the old confusion of Law and

energy. Gravitation is not lost sight of in the organic world. Gravity

may be, to a certain extent, but not Gravitation; and gravity only where

a higher power counteracts its action. At the same time it is not to be

denied that the conspicuous thing in Organic Nature is not the great

Inorganic Law.

But the objection turns upon the statement that reasoning from analogy

we should expect, in turn, to lose sight of Biogenesis as we enter the

Spiritual Sphere. One answer to which is that, as a matter of fact, we

do not lose sight of it. So far from being invisible, it lies across the

very threshold of the Spiritual World, and, as we shall see, pervades it

everywhere. What we lose sight of, to a certain extent, is the natural

{bios}. In the Spiritual World that is not the conspicuous thing, and it

is obscure there just as gravity becomes obscure in the Organic, because

something higher, more potent, more characteristic of the higher plane,

comes in. That there are higher energies, so to speak, in the Spiritual

World is, of course, to be affirmed alike on the ground of analogy and

of experience; but it does not follow that these necessitate other Laws.

A Law has nothing to do with potency. We may lose sight of a substance,

or of an energy, but it is an abuse of language to talk of losing sight

of Laws.

Are there, then, no other Laws in the Spiritual World except those which

are the projections or extensions of Natural Laws? From the number of

Natural Laws which are found in the higher sphere, from the large

territory actually embraced by them, and from their special prominence

throughout the whole region, it may at least be answered that the margin

left for them is small. But if the objection is pressed that it is

contrary to the analogy, and unreasonable in itself, that there should

not be new Laws for this higher sphere, the reply is obvious. Let these

Laws be produced. If the spiritual nature, in inception, growth, and

development, does not follow natural principles, let the true principles

be stated and explained. We have not denied that there may be new Laws.

One would almost be surprised if there were not. The mass of material

handed over from the natural to the spiritual, continuous, apparently,

from the natural to the spiritual, is so great that till that is worked

out it will be impossible to say what space is still left unembraced by

Laws that are known. At present it is impossible even approximately to

estimate the size of that supposed _terra incognita_. From one point of

view it ought to be vast, from another extremely small. But however

large the region governed by the suspected new Laws may be that cannot

diminish by a hair's-breadth the size of the territory where the old

Laws still prevail. That territory itself, relatively to us though

perhaps not absolutely, must be of great extent. The size of the key

which is to open it, that is, the size of all the Natural Laws which can

be found to apply, is a guarantee that the region of the knowable in the

Spiritual World is at least as wide as these regions of the Natural

World which by the help of these Laws have been explored. No doubt also

there yet remain some Natural Laws to be discovered, and these in time

may have a further light to shed on the spiritual field. Then we may

know all that is? By no means. We may only know all that may be known.

And that may be very little. The Sovereign Will which sways the scepter

of that invisible empire must be granted a right of freedom--that

freedom which by putting it into our wills He surely teaches us to honor

in His. In much of His dealing with us also, in what may be called the

paternal relation, there may seem no special Law--no Law except the

highest of all, that Law of which all other Laws are parts, that Law

which neither Nature can wholly reflect nor the mind begin to

fathom--the Law of Love. He adds nothing to that, however, who loses

sight of all other Laws in that, nor does he take from it who finds

specific Laws everywhere radiating from it.

With regard to the supposed new Laws of the Spiritual World--those Laws,

that is, which are found for the first time in the Spiritual World, and

have no analogies lower down--there is this to be said, that there is

one strong reason against exaggerating either their number or

importance--their importance at least for our immediate needs. The

connection between language and the Law of Continuity has been referred

to incidentally already. It is clear that we can only express the

Spiritual Laws in language borrowed from the visible universe. Being

dependent for our vocabulary on images, if an altogether new and foreign

set of Laws existed in the Spiritual World, they could never take shape

as definite ideas from mere want of words. The hypothetical new Laws

which may remain to be discovered in the domain of Natural or Mental

Science may afford some index of these hypothetical higher Laws, but

this would of course mean that the latter were no longer foreign but in

analogy, or, likelier still, identical. If, on the other hand, the

Natural Laws of the future have nothing to say of these higher Laws,

what can be said of them? Where is the language to come from in which to

frame them? If their disclosure could be of any practical use to us, we

may be sure the clue to them, the revelation of them, in some way would

have been put into Nature. If, on the contrary, they are not to be of

immediate use to man, it is better they should not embarrass him. After

all, then, our knowledge of higher Law must be limited by our knowledge

of the lower. The Natural Laws as at present known, whatever additions

may yet be made to them, give a fair rendering of the facts of Nature.

And their analogies or their projections in the Spiritual sphere may

also be said to offer a fair account of that sphere, or of one or two

conspicuous departments of it. The time has come for that account to be

given. The greatest among the theological Laws are the Laws of Nature in

disguise. It will be the splendid task of the theology of the future to

take off the mask and disclose to a waning scepticism the naturalness of

the supernatural.

It is almost singular that the identification of the Laws of the

Spiritual World with the Laws of Nature should so long have escaped

recognition. For apart from the probability on _a priori_ grounds, it is

involved in the whole structure of Parable. When any two Phenomena in

the two spheres are seen to be analogous, the parallelism must depend

upon the fact that the Laws governing them are not analogous but

identical. And yet this basis for Parable seems to have been overlooked.

Thus Principal Shairp:--"This seeing of Spiritual truths mirrored in the

face of Nature rests not on any fancied, but in a real analogy between

the natural and the spiritual worlds. They are _in some sense which

science has not ascertained_, but which the vital and religious

imagination can perceive, counterparts one of the other."[25] But is not

this the explanation, that parallel Phenomena depend upon identical

Laws? It is a question indeed whether one can speak of Laws at all as

being analogous. Phenomena are parallel, Laws which make them so are

themselves one.

In discussing the relations of the Natural and Spiritual kingdom, it has

been all but implied hitherto that the Spiritual Laws were framed

originally on the plan of the Natural; and the impression one might

receive in studying the two worlds for the first time from the side of

analogy would naturally be that the lower world was formed first, as a

kind of scaffolding on which the higher and Spiritual should be

afterward raised. Now the exact opposite has been the case. The first in

the field was the Spiritual World.

It is not necessary to reproduce here in detail the argument which has

been stated recently with so much force in the "Unseen Universe." The

conclusion of that work remains still unassailed, that the visible

universe has been developed from the unseen. Apart from the general

proof from the Law of Continuity, the more special grounds of such a

conclusion are, first, the fact insisted upon by Herschel and

Clerk-Maxwell that the atoms of which the visible universe is built up

bear distinct marks of being manufactured articles; and, secondly, the

origin in time of the visible universe is implied from known facts with

regard to the dissipation of energy. With the gradual aggregation of

mass the energy of the universe has been slowly disappearing, and this

loss of energy must go on until none remains. There is, therefore, a

point in time when the energy of the universe must come to an end; and

that which has its end in time cannot be infinite, it must also have had

a beginning in time. Hence the unseen existed before the seen.

There is nothing so especially exalted therefore in the Natural Laws in

themselves as to make one anxious to find them blood relations of the

Spiritual. It is not only because these Laws are on the ground, more

accessible therefore to us who are but groundlings; not only, as the

"Unseen Universe" points out in another connection, "because they are at

the bottom of the list--are in fact the simplest and lowest--that they

are capable of being most readily grasped by the finite intelligences of

the universe."[26] But their true significance lies in the fact that

they are on the list at all, and especially in that the list is the same

list. Their dignity is not as Natural Laws, but as Spiritual Laws, Laws

which, as already said, at one end are dealing with Matter, and at the

other with Spirit. "The physical properties of matter form the alphabet

which is put into our hands by God, the study of which, if properly

conducted, will enable us more perfectly to read that great book which

we call the 'Universe.'"[27] But, over and above this, the Natural Laws

will enable us to read that great duplicate which we call the "Unseen

Universe," and to think and live in fuller harmony with it. After all,

the true greatness of Law lies in its vision of the Unseen. Law in the

visible is the Invisible in the visible. And to speak of Laws as Natural

is to define them in their application to a part of the universe, the

sense-part, whereas a wider survey would lead us to regard all Law as

essentially Spiritual. To magnify the Laws of Nature, as Laws of this

small world of ours, is to take a provincial view of the universe. Law

is great not because the phenomenal world is great, but because these

vanishing lines are the avenues into the eternal Order. "It is less

reverent to regard the universe as an illimitable avenue which leads up

to God, than to look upon it as a limited area bounded by an

impenetrable wall, which, if we could only pierce it would admit us at

once into the presence of the Eternal?"[28] Indeed the authors of the

"Unseen Universe" demur even to the expression _material universe_,

since, as they tell us "Matter is (though it may seem paradoxical to say

so) the less important half of the material of the physical

universe."[29] And even Mr. Huxley, though in a different sense, assures

us, with Descartes, "that we know more of mind than we do of body; that

the immaterial world is a firmer reality than the material."[30]

How the priority of the Spiritual improves the strength and meaning of

the whole argument will be seen at once. The lines of the Spiritual

existed first, and it was natural to expect that when the "Intelligence

resident in the 'Unseen'" proceeded to frame the material universe He

should go upon the lines already laid down. He would, in short, simply

project the higher Laws downward, so that the Natural World would become

an incarnation, a visible representation, a working model of the

spiritual. The whole function of the material world lies here. The world

is only a thing that is; it is not. It is a thing that teaches, yet not

even a thing--a show that shows, a teaching shadow. However useless the

demonstration otherwise, philosophy does well in proving that matter is

a non-entity. We work with it as the mathematician with an _x_. The

reality is alone the Spiritual. "It is very well for physicists to speak

of 'matter,' but for men generally to call this 'a material world' is an

absurdity. Should we call it an _x_-world it would mean as much, viz.,

that we do not know what it is."[31] When shall we learn the true

mysticism of one who was yet far from being a mystic--"We look not at

the things which are seen, but at the things which are not seen; for the

things which are seen are temporal, but the things which are not seen

are eternal?"[32] The visible is the ladder up to the invisible; the

temporal is but the scaffolding of the eternal. And when the last

immaterial souls have climbed through this material to God, the

scaffolding shall be taken down, and the earth dissolved with fervent

heat--not because it was base, but because its work is done.

FOOTNOTES:

[3] "Reign of Law," chap. ii.

[4] "Animal Kingdom."

[5] "Sartor Resartus," 1858 Ed., p. 43.

[6] Even parable, however, has always been considered to have attached

to it a measure of evidential as well as of illustrative value. Thus:

"The parable or other analogy to spiritual truth appropriated from the

world of nature or man, is not merely illustrative, but also in some

sort proof. It is not merely that these analogies assist to make the

truth intelligible or, if intelligible before, present it more vividly

to the mind, which is all that some will allow them. Their power lies

deeper than this, in the harmony unconsciously felt by all men, and

which all deeper minds have delighted to trace, between the natural and

spiritual worlds, so that analogies from the first are felt to be

something more than illustrations happily but yet arbitrarily chosen.

They are arguments, and may be alleged as witnesses; the world of nature

being throughout a witness for the world of spirit, proceeding from the

same hand, growing out of the same root, and being constituted for that

very end."--(Archbishop Trench: "Parables," pp. 12, 13.)

[7] Mill's "Logic," vol. ii. p. 96.

[8] Campbell's "Rhetoric," vol. i. p. 114.

[9] "Nature and the Supernatural," p. 19.

[10] "The Scientific Basis of Faith." By J. J. Murphy, p. 466.

[11] Op. cit., p. 333.

[12] _Ibid._, p. 333.

[13] _Ibid._, p. 331.

[14] "Analogy," chap. vii.

[15] "Unseen Universe," 6th Ed., pp. 89, 90.

[16] "Essays," vol. i. p. 40.

[17] "A Modern Symposium."--_Nineteenth Century_, vol. i. p. 625.

[18] Beck: "Bib. Psychol.," Clark's Tr., Pref., 2d Ed., p. xiii.

[19] "First Principles," p. 161.

[20] Wordsworth's _Excursion_, Book iv.

[21] "The Correlation of Physical Forces," 6th Ed., p. 181 _et seq._

[22] "Unseen Universe," 6th Ed., p. 88.

[23] "Old Faiths in New Light," by Newman Smith. Unwin's English

edition, p. 252.

[24] The Duke of Argyll: _Contemporary Review_, Sept., 1880, p. 358.

[25] "Poetic Interpretation of Nature," p. 115.

[26] 6th edition, p. 235.

[27] _Ibid._, p. 286.

[28] "Unseen Universe," p. 96.

[29] "Unseen Universe," p. 100.

[30] "Science and Culture," p. 259.

[31] Hinton's "Philosophy and Religion," p. 40.

[32] 2 Cor. iv. 18.

BIOGENESIS.

"What we require is no new Revelation, but simply an adequate

conception of the true essence of Christianity. And I believe that,

as time goes on, the work of the Holy Spirit will be continuously

shown in the gradual insight which the human race will attain into

the true essence of the Christian religion. I am thus of opinion

that a standing miracle exists, and that it has ever existed--a

direct and continued influence exerted by the supernatural on the

natural."--_Paradoxical Philosophy._

"He that hath the Son hath Life, and he that hath not the Son of God

hath not Life."--_John._

"Omne vivum ex vivo."--_Harvey._

For two hundred years the scientific world has been rent with

discussions upon the Origin of Life. Two great schools have defended

exactly opposite views--one that matter can spontaneously generate life,

the other that life can only come from preexisting life. The doctrine of

Spontaneous Generation, as the first is called, has been revived within

recent years by Dr. Bastian, after a series of elaborate experiments on

the Beginnings of Life. Stated in his own words, his conclusion is this:

"Both observation and experiment unmistakably testify to the fact that

living matter is constantly being formed _de novo_, in obedience to the

same laws and tendencies which determined all the more simple chemical

combinations."[33] Life, that is to say, is not the Gift of Life. It is

capable of springing into being of itself. It can be Spontaneously

Generated.

This announcement called into the field a phalanx of observers, and the

highest authorities in biological science engaged themselves afresh

upon the problem. The experiments necessary to test the matter can be

followed or repeated by any one possessing the slightest manipulative

skill. Glass vessels are three-parts filled with infusions of hay or any

organic matter. They are boiled to kill all germs of life, and

hermetically sealed to exclude the outer air. The air inside, having

been exposed to the boiling temperature for many hours, is supposed to

be likewise dead; so that any life which may subsequently appear in the

closed flasks must have sprung into being of itself. In Bastian's

experiments, after every expedient to secure sterility, life did appear

inside in myriad quantity. Therefore, he argued, it was spontaneously

generated.

But the phalanx of observers found two errors in this calculation.

Professor Tyndall repeated the same experiment, only with a precaution

to insure absolute sterility suggested by the most recent science--a

discovery of his own. After every care, he conceived there might still

be undestroyed germs in the air inside the flasks. If the air were

absolutely germless and pure, would the myriad-life appear? He

manipulated his experimental vessels in an atmosphere which under the

high test of optical purity--the most delicate known test--was

absolutely germless. Here not a vestige of life appeared. He varied the

experiment in every direction, but matter in the germless air never

yielded life.

The other error was detected by Mr. Dallinger. He found among the lower

forms of life the most surprising and indestructible vitality. Many

animals could survive much higher temperatures than Dr. Bastian had

applied to annihilate them. Some germs almost refused to be

annihilated--they were all but fire-proof.

These experiments have practically closed the question. A decided and

authoritative conclusion has now taken its place in science. So far as

science can settle anything, this question is settled. The attempt to

get the living out of the dead has failed. Spontaneous Generation has

had to be given up. And it is now recognized on every hand that Life can

only come from the touch of Life. Huxley categorically announces that

the doctrine of Biogenesis, or life only from life, is "victorious along

the whole line at the present day."[34] And even while confessing that

he wishes the evidence were the other way, Tyndall is compelled to say,

"I affirm that no shred of trustworthy experimental testimony exists to

prove that life in our day has ever appeared independently of antecedent

life."[35]

For much more than two hundred years a similar discussion has dragged

its length through the religious world. Two great schools here also have

defended exactly opposite views--one that the Spiritual Life in man can

only come from preexisting Life, the other that it can Spontaneously

Generate itself. Taking its stand upon the initial statement of the

Author of the Spiritual Life, one small school, in the face of derision

and opposition, has persistently maintained the doctrine of Biogenesis.

Another, larger and with greater pretension to philosophic form, has

defended Spontaneous Generation. The weakness of the former school

consists--though this has been much exaggerated--in its more or less

general adherence to the extreme view that religion had nothing to do

with the natural life; the weakness of the latter lay in yielding to the

more fatal extreme that it had nothing to do with anything else. That

man, being a worshiping animal by nature, ought to maintain certain

relations to the Supreme Being, was indeed to some extent conceded by

the naturalistic school, but religion itself we looked upon as a thing

to be spontaneously generated by the evolution of character in the

laboratory of common life.

The difference between the two positions is radical. Translating from

the language of Science into that of Religion, the theory of

Spontaneous Generation is simply that a man may become gradually better

and better until in course of the process he reaches that quantity of

religious nature known as Spiritual Life. This Life is not something

added _ab extra_ to the natural man; it is the normal and appropriate

development of the natural man. Biogenesis opposes to this the whole

doctrine of Regeneration. The Spiritual Life is the gift of the Living

Spirit. The spiritual man is no mere development of the natural man. He

is a New Creation born from Above. As well expect a hay infusion to

become gradually more and more living until in course of the process it

reached Vitality, as expect a man by becoming better and better to

attain the Eternal Life.

The advocates of Biogenesis in Religion have founded their argument

hitherto all but exclusively on Scripture. The relation of the doctrine

to the constitution and course of Nature was not disclosed. Its

importance, therefore, was solely as a dogma; and being directly

concerned with the Supernatural, it was valid for those alone who chose

to accept the Supernatural.

Yet it has been keenly felt by those who attempt to defend this doctrine

of the origin of the Spiritual Life, that they have nothing more to

oppose to the rationalistic view than the _ipse dixit_ of Revelation.

The argument from experience, in the nature of the case, is seldom easy

to apply, and Christianity has always found at this point a genuine

difficulty in meeting the challenge of Natural Religions. The direct

authority of Nature, using Nature in its limited sense, was not here to

be sought for. On such a question its voice was necessarily silent; and

all that the apologist could look for lower down was a distant echo or

analogy. All that is really possible, indeed, is such an analogy; and if

that can now be found in Biogenesis, Christianity in its most central

position secures at length a support and basis in the Laws of Nature.

Up to the present time the analogy required has not been forthcoming.

There was no known parallel in Nature for the spiritual phenomena in

question. But now the case is altered. With the elevation of Biogenesis

to the rank of a scientific fact, all problems concerning the Origin of

Life are placed on a different footing. And it remains to be seen

whether Religion cannot at once reaffirm and re-shape its argument in

the light of this modern truth.

If the doctrine of the Spontaneous Generation of Spiritual Life can be

met on scientific grounds, it will mean the removal of the most serious

enemy Christianity has to deal with, and especially within its own

borders, at the present day. The religion of Jesus has probably always

suffered more from those who have misunderstood than from those who have

opposed it. Of the multitudes who confess Christianity at this hour how

many have clear in their minds the cardinal distinction established by

its Founder between "born of the flesh" and "born of the Spirit?" By how

many teachers of Christianity even is not this fundamental postulate

persistently ignored? A thousand modern pulpits every seventh day are

preaching the doctrine of Spontaneous Generation. The finest and best of

recent poetry is colored with this same error. Spontaneous Generation is

the leading theology of the modern religious or irreligious novel; and

much of the most serious and cultured writing of the day devotes itself

to earnest preaching of this impossible gospel. The current conception

of the Christian religion in short--the conception which is held not

only popularly but by men of culture--is founded upon a view of its

origin which, if it were true, would render the whole scheme abortive.

Let us first place vividly in our imagination the picture of the two

great Kingdoms of Nature, the inorganic and organic, as these now stand

in the light of the Law of Biogenesis. What essentially is involved in

saying that there is no Spontaneous Generation of Life? It is meant that

the passage from the mineral world to the plant or animal world is

hermetically sealed on the mineral side. This inorganic world is staked

off from the living world by barriers which have never yet been crossed

from within. No change of substance, no modification of environment, no

chemistry, no electricity, nor any form of energy, nor any evolution can

endow any single atom of the mineral world with the attribute of Life.

Only by the bending down into this dead world of some living form can

these dead atoms be gifted with the properties of vitality, without this

preliminary contact with Life they remain fixed in the inorganic sphere

forever. It is a very mysterious Law which guards in this way the

portals of the living world. And if there is one thing in Nature more

worth pondering for its strangeness it is the spectacle of this vast

helpless world of the dead cut off from the living by the Law of

Biogenesis and denied forever the possibility of resurrection within

itself. So very strange a thing, indeed, is this broad line in Nature,

that Science has long and urgently sought to obliterate it. Biogenesis

stands in the way of some forms of Evolution with such stern persistency

that the assaults upon this Law for number and thoroughness have been

unparalleled. But, as we have seen, it has stood the test. Nature, to

the modern eye, stands broken in two. The physical Laws may explain the

inorganic world; the biological Laws may account for the development of

the organic. But of the point where they meet, of that strange

borderland between the dead and the living, Science is silent. It is as

if God had placed everything in earth and heaven in the hands of Nature,

but reserved a point at the genesis of Life for His direct appearing.

The power of the analogy, for which we are laying the foundations, to

seize and impress the mind, will largely depend on the vividness with

which one realizes the gulf which Nature places between the living and

the dead.[36] But those who, in contemplating Nature, have found their

attention arrested by this extraordinary dividing-line severing the

visible universe eternally into two; those who in watching the progress

of science have seen barrier after barrier disappear--barrier between

plant and plant, between animal and animal, and even between animal and

plant--but this gulf yawn more hopelessly wide with every advance of

knowledge, will be prepared to attach a significance to the Law of

Biogenesis and its analogies more profound perhaps than to any other

fact or law in Nature. If, as Pascal says, Nature is an image of grace;

if the things that are seen are in any sense the images of the unseen,

there must lie in this great gulf fixed, this most unique and startling

of all natural phenomena, a meaning of peculiar moment.

Where now in the Spiritual spheres shall we meet a companion phenomena

to this? What in the Unseen shall be likened to this deep dividing-line,

or where in human experience is another barrier which never can be

crossed?

There is such a barrier. In the dim but not inadequate vision of the

Spiritual World presented in the Word of God, the first thing that

strikes the eye is a great gulf fixed. The passage from the Natural

World to the Spiritual World is hermetically sealed on the natural side.

The door from the inorganic to the organic is shut, no mineral can open

it; so the door from the natural to the spiritual is shut, and no man

can open it. This world of natural men is staked off from the Spiritual

World by barriers which have never yet been crossed from within. No

organic change, no modification of environment, no mental energy, no

moral effort, no evolution of character, no progress of civilization can

endow any single human soul with the attribute of Spiritual Life. The

Spiritual World is guarded from the world next in order beneath it by a

law of Biogenesis--_except a man be born again ... except a man be born

of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter the Kingdom of God_.

It is not said, in this enunciation of the law, that if the condition be

not fulfilled the natural man _will not_ enter the Kingdom of God. The

word is _cannot_. For the exclusion of the spiritually inorganic from

the Kingdom of the spiritually organic is not arbitrary. Nor is the

natural man refused admission on unexplained grounds. His admission is a

scientific impossibility. Except a mineral be born "from above"--from

the Kingdom just _above_ it--it cannot enter the Kingdom just above it.

And except a man be born "from above," by the same law, he cannot enter

the Kingdom just above him. There being no passage from one Kingdom to

another, whether from inorganic to organic, or from organic to

spiritual, the intervention of Life is a scientific necessity if a stone

or a plant or an animal or a man is to pass from a lower to a higher

sphere. The plant stretches down to the dead world beneath it, touches

its minerals and gases with its mystery of Life, and brings them up

ennobled and transformed to the living sphere. The breath of God,

blowing where it listeth, touches with its mystery of Life the dead

souls of men, bears them across the bridgeless gulf between the natural

and the spiritual, between the spiritually inorganic and the spiritually

organic, endows them with its own high qualities, and develops within

them these new and secret faculties, by which those who are born again

are said to _see the Kingdom of God_.

What is the evidence for this great gulf fixed at the portals of the

Spiritual World? Does Science close this gate, or Reason, or Experience,

or Revelation? We reply, all four. The initial statement, it is not to

be denied, reaches us from Revelation. But is not this evidence here in

court? Or shall it be said that any argument deduced from this is a

transparent circle--that after all we simply come back to the

unsubstantiality of the _ipse dixit_? Not altogether, for the analogy

lends an altogether new authority to the _ipse dixit_. How substantial

that argument really is, is seldom realized. We yield the point here

much too easily. The right of the Spiritual World to speak of its own

phenomena is as secure as the right of the Natural World to speak of

itself. What is Science but what the Natural World has said to natural

men? What is Revelation but what the Spiritual World has said to

Spiritual men? Let us at least ask what Revelation has announced with

reference to this Spiritual Law of Biogenesis; afterward we shall

inquire whether Science, while indorsing the verdict, may not also have

some further vindication of its title to be heard.

The words of Scripture which preface this inquiry contain an explicit

and original statement of the Law of Biogenesis for the Spiritual Life.

"He that hath the Son hath Life, and he that hath not the Son of God

hath not Life." Life, that is to say, depends upon contact with Life. It

cannot spring up of itself. It cannot develop out of anything that is

not Life. There is no Spontaneous Generation in religion any more than

in Nature. Christ is the source of Life in the Spiritual World; and he

that hath the Son hath Life, and he that hath not the Son, whatever else

he may have, hath not Life. Here, in short, is the categorical denial of

Abiogenesis and the establishment in this high field of the classical

formula _Omne vivum ex vivo_--no Life without antecedent Life. In this

mystical theory of the Origin of Life the whole of the New Testament

writers are agreed. And, as we have already seen, Christ Himself founds

Christianity upon Biogenesis stated in its most literal form. "Except a

man be born of water and of the Spirit he cannot enter into the Kingdom

of God. That which is born of the flesh is flesh; and that which is born

of the Spirit is Spirit. Marvel not that I said unto you, ye must be

born again."[37] Why did He add _Marvel not_? Did He seek to allay the

fear in the bewildered ruler's mind that there was more in this novel

doctrine than a simple analogy from the first to the second birth?

The attitude of the natural man, again, with reference to the Spiritual,

is a subject on which the New Testament is equally pronounced. Not only

in his relation to the spiritual man, but to the whole Spiritual World,

the natural man is regarded as _dead_. He is as a crystal to an

organism. The natural world is to the Spiritual as the inorganic to the

organic. "To be carnally minded is _Death_."[38] "Thou hast a name to

live, but art _Dead_."[39] "She that liveth in pleasure is _Dead_ while

she liveth."[40] "To you he Hath given Life which were _Dead_ in

trespasses and sins."[41]

It is clear that a remarkable harmony exists here between the Organic

World as arranged by Science and the Spiritual World as arranged by

Scripture. We find one great Law guarding the thresholds of both worlds,

securing that entrance from a lower sphere shall only take place by a

direct regenerating act, and that emanating from the world next in order

above. There are not two laws of Biogenesis, one for the natural, the

other for the Spiritual; one law is for both. Wherever there is Life,

Life of any kind, this same law holds. The analogy, therefore, is only

among the phenomena; between laws there is no analogy--there is

Continuity. In either case, the first step in peopling these worlds

with the appropriate living forms is virtually miracle. Nor in one case

is there less of mystery in the act than in the other. The second birth

is scarcely less perplexing to the theologian than the first to the

embryologist.

A moment's reflection ought now to make it clear why in the Spiritual

World there had to be added to this mystery the further mystery of its

proclamation through the medium of Revelation. This is the point at

which the scientific man is apt to part company with the theologian. He

insists on having all things materialized before his eyes in Nature. If

Nature cannot discuss this with him, there is nothing to discuss. But

Nature can discuss this with him--only she cannot open the discussion or

supply all the material to begin with. If Science averred that she could

do this, the theologian this time must part company with such Science.

For any Science which makes such a demand is false to the doctrines of

Biogenesis. What is this but the demand that a lower world, hermetically

sealed against all communication with a world above it, should have a

mature and intelligent acquaintance with its phenomena and laws? Can the

mineral discourse to me of animal Life? Can it tell me what lies beyond

the narrow boundary of its inert being? Knowing nothing of other than

the chemical and physical laws, what is its criticism worth of the

principles of Biology? And even when some visitor from the upper world,

for example some root from a living tree, penetrating its dark recess,

honors it with a touch, will it presume to define the form and purpose

of its patron, or until the bioplasm has done its gracious work can it

even know that it is being touched? The barrier which separates Kingdoms

from one another restricts mind not less than matter. Any information of

the Kingdoms above it that could come to the mineral world could only

come by a communication from above. An analogy from the lower world

might make such communication intelligible as well as credible, but the

information in the first instance must be vouchsafed as a _revelation_.

Similarly if those in the organic Kingdom are to know anything of the

Spiritual World, that knowledge must at least begin as Revelation. Men

who reject this source of information, by the Law of Biogenesis, can

have no other. It is no spell of ignorance arbitrarily laid upon certain

members of the Organic Kingdom that prevents them reading the secrets of

the Spiritual World. It is a scientific necessity. No exposition of the

case could be more truly scientific than this: "The natural man

receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God; for they are foolishness

unto him: _neither can he know them_, because they are spiritually

discerned."[42] The verb here, it will be again observed, is potential.

This is not a dogma of theology, but a necessity of Science. And

Science, for the most part, has consistently accepted the situation. It

has always proclaimed its ignorance of the Spiritual World. When Mr.

Herbert Spencer affirms, "Regarding Science as a gradually increasing

sphere we may say that every addition to its surface does but bring it

into wider contact with surrounding nescience,"[43] from his standpoint

he is quite correct. The endeavors of well-meaning persons to show that

the Agnostic's position, when he asserts his ignorance of the Spiritual

World, is only a pretence; the attempts to prove that he really knows a

great deal about it if he would only admit it, are quite misplaced. He

really does not know. The verdict that the natural man receiveth not the

things of the Spirit of God, that they are foolishness unto him, that

_neither can he_ know them, is final as a statement of scientific

truth--a statement on which the entire Agnostic literature is simply one

long commentary.

We are now in a better position to follow out the more practical

bearings of Biogenesis. There is an immense region surrounding

Regeneration, a dark and perplexing region where men would be thankful

for any light. It may well be that Biogenesis in its many ramifications

may yet reach down to some of the deeper mysteries of the Spiritual

Life. But meantime there is much to define even on the surface. And for

the present we shall content ourselves by turning its light upon one or

two points of current interest.

It must long ago have appeared how decisive is the answer of Science to

the practical question with which we set out as to the possibility of a

Spontaneous Development of Spiritual Life in the individual soul. The

inquiry into the Origin of Life is the fundamental question alike of

Biology and Christianity. We can afford to enlarge upon it, therefore,

even at the risk of repetition. When men are offering us a Christianity

without a living Spirit, and a personal religion without _conversion_,

no emphasis or reiteration can be extreme. Besides, the clearness as

well as the definiteness of the Testimony of Nature to any Spiritual

truth is of immense importance. Regeneration has not merely been an

outstanding difficulty, but an overwhelming obscurity. Even to earnest

minds the difficulty of grasping the truth at all has always proved

extreme. Philosophically one scarcely sees either the necessity or the

possibility of being born again. Why a virtuous man should not simply

grow better and better until in his own right he enter the Kingdom of

God is what thousands honestly and seriously fail to understand. Now

Philosophy cannot help us here. Her arguments are, if anything, against

us. But Science answers to the appeal at once. If it be simply pointed

out that this is the same absurdity as to ask why a stone should not

grow more and more living till it enters the Organic World, the point is

clear in an instant.

What now, let us ask specifically, distinguishes a Christian man from a

non-Christian man? Is it that he has certain mental characteristics not

possessed by the other? Is it that certain faculties have been trained

in him, that morality assumes special and higher manifestations, and

character a nobler form? Is the Christian merely an ordinary man who

happens from birth to have been surrounded with a peculiar set of ideas?

Is his religion merely that peculiar quality of the moral life defined

by Mr. Matthew Arnold as "morality touched by emotion?" And does the

possession of a high ideal, benevolent sympathies, a reverent spirit,

and a favorable environment account for what men call his Spiritual

Life?

The distinction between them is the same as that between the Organic and

the Inorganic, the living and the dead. What is the difference between a

crystal and an organism, a stone and a plant? They have much in common.

Both are made of the same atoms. Both display the same properties of

matter. Both are subject to the Physical Laws. Both may be very

beautiful. But besides possessing all that the crystal has, the plant

possesses something more--a mysterious something called Life. This Life

is not something which existed in the crystal only in a less developed

form. There is nothing at all like it in the crystal. There is nothing

like the first beginning of it in the crystal, not a trace or symptom of

it. This plant is tenanted by something new, an original and unique

possession added over and above all the properties common to both. When

from vegetable Life we rise to animal Life, here again we find something

original and unique--unique at least as compared with the mineral. From

animal Life we ascend again to Spiritual Life. And here also is

something new, something still more unique. He who lives the Spiritual

Life has a distinct kind of Life added to all the other phases of Life

which he manifests--a kind of Life infinitely more distinct than is the

active Life of a plant from the inertia of a stone. The Spiritual man is

more distinct in point of fact than is the plant from the stone. This is

the one possible comparison in Nature, for it is the widest distinction

in Nature; but compared with the difference between the Natural and the

Spiritual the gulf which divides the organic from the inorganic is a

hair's-breadth. The natural man belongs essentially to this present

order of things. He is endowed simply with a high quality of the natural

animal Life. But it is Life of so poor a quality that it is not Life at

all. He that hath not the Son _hath not Life_; but he that hath the Son

hath Life--a new and distinct and supernatural endowment. He is not of

this world. He is of the timeless state, of Eternity. _It doth not yet

appear what he shall be._

The difference between the Spiritual man and the Natural man is not a

difference of development, but of generation. It is a distinction of

quality not of quantity. A man cannot rise by any natural development

from "morality touched by emotion," to "morality touched by Life." Were

we to construct a scientific classification, Science would compel us to

arrange all natural men, moral or immoral, educated or vulgar, as one

family. One might be high in the family group, another low; yet,

practically, they are marked by the same set of characteristics--they

eat, sleep, work, think, live, die. But the Spiritual man is removed

from this family so utterly by the possession of an additional

characteristic that a biologist, fully informed of the whole

circumstances, would not hesitate a moment to classify him elsewhere.

And if he really entered into these circumstances it would not be in

another family but in another Kingdom. It is an old-fashioned theology

which divides the world in this way--which speaks of men as Living and

Dead, Lost and Saved--a stern theology all but fallen into disuse. This

difference between the Living and the Dead in souls is so unproved by

casual observation, so impalpable in itself, so startling as a doctrine,

that schools of culture have ridiculed or denied the grim distinction.

Nevertheless the grim distinction must be retained. It is a scientific

distinction. "He that hath not the Son hath not Life."

Now it is this great Law which finally distinguishes Christianity from

all other religions. It places the religion of Christ upon a footing

altogether unique. There is no analogy between the Christian religion

and, say, Buddhism or the Mohammedan religion. There is no true sense in

which a man can say, He that hath Buddha hath Life. Buddha has nothing

to do with Life. He may have something to do with morality. He may

stimulate, impress, teach, guide, but there is no distinct new thing

added to the souls of those who profess Buddhism. These religions _may_

be developments of the natural, mental, or moral man. But Christianity

professes to be more. It is the mental or moral man _plus_ something

else or some One else. It is the infusion into the Spiritual man of a

New Life, of a quality unlike anything else in Nature. This constitutes

the separate Kingdom of Christ, and gives to Christianity alone of all

the religions of mankind the strange mark of Divinity.

Shall we next inquire more precisely what is this something extra which

constitutes Spiritual Life? What is this strange and new endowment in

its nature and vital essence? And the answer is brief--it is Christ. He

that hath _the Son_ hath Life.

Are we forsaking the lines of Science in saying so? Yes and No. Science

has drawn for us the distinction. It has no voice as to the nature of

the distinction except this--that the new endowment is a something

different from anything else with which it deals. It is not ordinary

Vitality, it is not intellectual, it is not moral, but something beyond.

And Revelation steps in and names what it is--it is Christ. Out of the

multitude of sentences where this announcement is made, these few may be

selected: "Know ye not your own selves how that _Jesus Christ is in

you_?"[44] "Your bodies are the members of Christ."[45] "At that day ye

shall know that I am in the Father, and ye in Me, and I in you."[46] "We

will come unto him and make our abode with him."[47] "I am the Vine, ye

are the branches."[48] "I am crucified with Christ, nevertheless I live,

yet not I, but Christ liveth in me."[49]

Three things are clear from these statements: First, they are not mere

figures of rhetoric. They are explicit declarations. If language means

anything these words announce a literal fact. In some of Christ's own

statements the literalism is if possible still more impressive. For

instance, "Except ye eat the flesh of the Son of man and drink His

blood, ye have no life in you. Whoso eateth My flesh and drinketh My

blood hath eternal life; and I will raise him up at the last day. For My

flesh is meat indeed, and My blood is drink indeed. He that eateth My

flesh and drinketh My blood _dwelleth in Me and I in him_."

In the second place, Spiritual Life is not something outside ourselves.

The idea is not that Christ is in heaven and that we can stretch out

some mysterious faculty and deal with Him there. This is the vague form

in which many conceive the truth, but it is contrary to Christ's

teaching and to the analogy of nature. Vegetable Life is not contained

in a reservoir somewhere in the skies, and measured out spasmodically at

certain seasons. The Life is _in_ every plant and tree, inside its own

substance and tissue, and continues there until it dies. This

localization of Life in the individual is precisely the point where

Vitality differs from the other forces of nature, such as magnetism and

electricity. Vitality has much in common with such forces as magnetism

and electricity, but there is one inviolable distinction between

them--that Life is permanently fixed and rooted in the organism. The

doctrines of conservation and transformation of energy, that is to say,

do not hold for Vitality. The electrician can demagnetize a bar of iron,

that is, he can transform its energy of magnetism into something

else--heat, or motion, or light--and then re-form these back into

magnetism. For magnetism has no root, no individuality, no fixed

indwelling. But the biologist cannot devitalize a plant or an animal and

revivify it again.[50] Life is not one of the homeless forces which

promiscuously inhabit space, or which can be gathered like electricity

from the clouds and dissipated back again into space. Life is definite

and resident; and Spiritual Life is not a visit from a force, but a

resident tenant in the soul.

This is, however, to formulate the statement of the third point, that

Spiritual Life is not an ordinary form of energy or force. The analogy

from Nature indorses this, but here Nature stops. It cannot say what

Spiritual Life is. Indeed what natural Life is remains unknown, and the

word Life still wanders through Science without a definition. Nature is

silent, therefore, and must be as to Spiritual Life. But in the absence

of natural light we fall back upon that complementary revelation which

always shines, when truth is necessary and where Nature fails. We ask

with Paul when this Life first visited him on the Damascus road, What is

this? "Who art Thou, Lord?" And we hear, "I am Jesus."[51]

We must expect to find this denied. Besides a proof from Revelation,

this is an argument from experience. And yet we shall still be told that

this Spiritual Life is a force. But let it be remembered what this means

in Science, it means the heresy of confounding Force with Vitality. We

must also expect to be told that this Spiritual Life is simply a

development of ordinary Life--just as Dr. Bastian tells us that natural

Life is formed according to the same laws which determine the more

simple chemical combinations. But remember what this means in Science.

It is the heresy of Spontaneous Generation, a heresy so thoroughly

discredited now that scarcely an authority in Europe will lend his name

to it. Who art Thou, Lord? Unless we are to be allowed to hold

Spontaneous Generation there is no alternative: Life can only come from

Life: "I am Jesus."

A hundred other questions now rush into the mind about this Life: How

does it come? Why does it come? How is it manifested? What faculty does

it employ? Where does it reside? Is it communicable? What are its

conditions? One or two of these questions may be vaguely answered, the

rest bring us face to face with mystery. Let it not be thought that the

scientific treatment of a Spiritual subject has reduced religion to a

problem of physics, or demonstrated God by the laws of biology. A

religion without mystery is an absurdity. Even Science has its

mysteries, none more inscrutable than around this Science of Life. It

taught us sooner or later to expect mystery, and now we enter its

domain. Let it be carefully marked, however, that the cloud does not

fall and cover us till we have ascertained the most momentous truth of

Religion--that Christ is in the Christian.

Not that there is anything new in this. The Churches have always held

that Christ was the source of Life. No spiritual man ever claims that

his spirituality is his own. "I live," he will tell you; "nevertheless

it is not I, but Christ liveth in me." Christ our Life has indeed been

the only doctrine in the Christian Church from Paul to Augustine, from

Calvin to Newman. Yet, when the Spiritual man is cross-examined upon

this confession it is astonishing to find what uncertain hold it has

upon his mind. Doctrinally he states it adequately and holds it

unhesitatingly. But when pressed with the literal question he shrinks

from the answer. We do not really believe that the Living Christ has

touched us, that He makes His abode in us. Spiritual Life is not as

real to us as natural Life. And we cover our retreat into unbelieving

vagueness with a plea of reverence, justified, as we think, by the "Thus

far and no farther" of ancient Scriptures. There is often a great deal

of intellectual sin concealed under this old aphorism. When men do not

really wish to go farther they find it an honorable convenience

sometimes to sit down on the outermost edge of the Holy Ground on the

pretext of taking off their shoes. Yet we must be certain that, making a

virtue of reverence, we are not merely excusing ignorance; or, under the

plea of mystery, evading a truth which has been stated in the New

Testament a hundred times, in the most literal form, and with all but

monotonous repetition. The greatest truths are always the most loosely

held. And not the least of the advantages of taking up this question

from the present standpoint is that we may see how a confused doctrine

can really bear the luminous definition of Science and force itself upon

us with all the weight of Natural Law.

What is mystery to many men, what feeds their worship, and at the same

time spoils it, is that area round all great truth which is really

capable of illumination, and into which every earnest mind is permitted

and commanded to go with a light. We cry mystery long before the region

of mystery comes. True mystery casts no shadows around. It is a sudden

and awful gulf yawning across the field of knowledge; its form is

irregular, but its lips are clean cut and sharp, and the mind can go to

the very verge and look down the precipice into the dim abyss--

"Where writhing clouds unroll,

Striving to utter themselves in shapes."

We have gone with a light to the very verge of this truth. We have seen

that the Spiritual Life is an endowment from the Spiritual World, and

that the Living Spirit of Christ dwells in the Christian. But now the

gulf yawns black before us. What more does Science know of life?

Nothing. It knows nothing further about its origin in detail. It knows

nothing about its ultimate nature. It cannot even define it. There is a

helplessness in scientific books here, and a continual confession of it

which to thoughtful minds is almost touching. Science, therefore, has

not eliminated the true mysteries from our faith, but only the false.

And it has done more. It has made true mystery scientific. Religion in

having mystery is in analogy with all around it. Where there is

exceptional mystery in the Spiritual world it will generally be found

that there is a corresponding mystery in the natural world. And, as

Origen centuries ago insisted, the difficulties of Religion are simply

the difficulties of Nature.

One question more we may look at for a moment. What can be gathered on

the surface as to the process of Regeneration in the individual soul?

From the analogies of Biology we should expect three things: First, that

the New Life should dawn suddenly; Second, that it should come "without

observation;" Third, that it should develop gradually. On two of these

points there can be little controversy. The gradualness of growth is a

characteristic which strikes the simplest observer. Long before the word

Evolution was coined Christ applied it in this very connection--"First

the blade, then the ear, then the full corn in the ear." It is well

known also to those who study the parables of Nature that there is an

ascending scale of slowness as we rise in the scale of Life. Growth is

most gradual in the highest forms. Man attains his maturity after a

score of years; the monad completes its humble cycle in a day. What

wonder if development be tardy in the Creature of Eternity? A

Christian's sun has sometimes set, and a critical world has seen as yet

no corn in the ear. As yet? "As yet," in this long Life, has not begun.

Grant him the years proportionate to his place in the scale of Life.

"The time of harvest is _not yet_."

Again, in addition to being slow, the phenomena of growth are secret.

Life is invisible. When the New Life manifests itself it is a surprise.

_Thou canst not tell whence it cometh or whither it goeth._ When the

plant lives whence has the Life come? When it dies whither has it gone?

_Thou canst not tell ... so is every one that is born of the Spirit. For

the kingdom of God cometh without observation._

Yet once more--and this is a point of strange and frivolous

dispute--this Life comes suddenly. This is the only way in which Life

can come. Life cannot come gradually--health can, structure can, but not

Life. A new theology has laughed at the Doctrine of Conversion. Sudden

Conversion especially has been ridiculed as untrue to philosophy and

impossible to human nature. We may not be concerned in buttressing any

theology because it is old. But we find that this old theology is

scientific. There may be cases--they are probably in the majority--where

the moment of contact with the Living Spirit though sudden has been

obscure. But the real moment and the conscious moment are two different

things. Science pronounces nothing as to the conscious moment. If it did

it would probably say that that was seldom the real moment--just as in

the natural Life the conscious moment is not the real moment. The moment

of birth in the natural world is not a conscious moment--we do not know

we are born till long afterward. Yet there are men to whom the Origin of

the New Life in time has been no difficulty. To Paul, for instance,

Christ seems to have come at a definite period of time, the exact moment

and second of which could have been known. And this is certainly, in

theory at least, the normal Origin of Life, according to the principles

of Biology. The line between the living and the dead is a sharp line.

When the dead atoms of Carbon, Hydrogen, Oxygen, Nitrogen, are seized

upon by Life, the organism at first is very lowly. It possesses few

functions. It has little beauty. Growth is the work of time. But Life is

not. That comes in a moment. At one moment it was dead; the next it

lived. This is conversion, the "passing," as the Bible calls it, "from

Death unto Life." Those who have stood by another's side at the solemn

hour of this dread possession have been conscious sometimes of an

experience which words are not allowed to utter--a something like the

sudden snapping of a chain, the waking from a dream.

FOOTNOTES:

[33] "Beginnings of Life." By H. C. Bastian, M.A., M.D., F.R.S.

Macmillan, vol. ii. p. 633.

[34] "Critiques and Addresses." T. H. Huxley. F.R.S., p. 239.

[35] _Nineteenth Century_, 1878, p. 507.

[36] This being the crucial point it may not be inappropriate to

supplement the quotations already given in the text with the

following:--

"We are in the presence of the one incommunicable gulf--the gulf of all

gulfs--that gulf which Mr. Huxley's protoplasm is as powerless to efface

as any other material expedient that has ever been suggested since the

eyes of men first looked into it--the mighty gulf between death and

life."--"As Regards Protoplasm." By J. Hutchinson Stirling, LL.D., p.

42.

"The present state of knowledge furnishes us with no link between the

living and the not-living."--Huxley, "Encyclopaedia Britannica" (new

Ed.). Art. "Biology."

"Whoever recalls to mind the lamentable failure of all the attempts made

very recently to discover a decided support for the _generatio aequivoca_

in the lower forms of transition from the inorganic to the organic

world, will feel it doubly serious to demand that this theory, so

utterly discredited, should be in any way accepted as the basis of all

our views of life."--Virchow: "The Freedom of Science in the Modern

State."

"All really scientific experience tells us that life can be produced

from a living antecedent only."--"The Unseen Universe," 6th Ed., p. 229.

[37] John iii.

[38] Rom. viii. 6.

[39] Rev. iii. 1.

[40] 1 Tim. v. 6.

[41] Eph. ii. 1, 5.

[42] 1 Cor. ii. 14.

[43] "First Principles," 2d Ed., p. 17.

[44] 2 Cor. xii. 5.

[45] 1 Cor. vi. 15.

[46] John xiv. 20.

[47] John xiv. 21-23.

[48] John xv. 4.

[49] Gal. ii. 20.

[50] One must not be misled by popular statements in this connection,

such as this of Professor Owen's: "There are organisms which we can

devitalize and revitalize--devive and revive--many times." (_Monthly

Microscopical Journal_, May, 1869, p. 294.) The reference is of course

to the extraordinary capacity for _resuscitation_ possessed by many of

the Protozoa and other low forms of life.

[51] Acts ix. 5.

DEGENERATION.

"I went by the field of the slothful, and by the vineyard of the man

void of understanding; and lo, it was all grown over with thorns,

and nettles had covered the face thereof, and the stone wall thereof

was broken down. Then I saw and considered it well; I looked upon it

and received instruction."--_Solomon._

"How shall we escape if we neglect so great salvation?"--_Hebrews._

"We have as possibilities either Balance, or Elaboration, or

Degeneration."--_E. Ray Lankester._

In one of his best known books, Mr. Darwin brings out a fact which may

be illustrated in some such way as this: Suppose a bird fancier collects

a flock of tame pigeons distinguished by all the infinite ornamentations

of their race. They are of all kinds, of every shade of color, and

adorned with every variety of marking. He takes them to an uninhabited

island and allows them to fly off wild into the woods. They found a

colony there, and after the lapse of many years the owner returns to the

spot. He will find that a remarkable change has taken place in the

interval. The birds, or their descendants rather, have all become

changed into the same color. The black, the white and the dun, the

striped, the spotted, and the ringed, are all metamorphosed into one--a

dark slaty blue. Two plain black bands monotonously repeat themselves

upon the wings of each, and the loins beneath are white; but all the

variety, all the beautiful colors, all the old graces of form it may be,

have disappeared. These improvements were the result of care and nature,

of domestication, of civilization; and now that these influences are

removed, the birds themselves undo the past and lose what they had

gained. The attempt to elevate the race has been mysteriously thwarted.

It is as if the original bird, the far remote ancestor of all doves, had

been blue, and these had been compelled by some strange law to discard

the badges of their civilization and conform to the ruder image of the

first. The natural law by which such a change occurs is called _The

Principle of Reversion to Type_.

It is a proof of the universality of this law that the same thing will

happen with a plant. A garden is planted, let us say, with strawberries

and roses, and for a number of years is left alone. In process of time

it will run to waste. But this does not mean that the plants will really

waste away, but that they will change into something else, and, as it

invariably appears, into something worse; in the one case, namely, into

the small, wild strawberry of the woods, and in the other into the

primitive dog-rose of the hedges.

If we neglect a garden plant, then, a natural principle of deterioration

comes in, and changes it into a worse plant. And if we neglect a bird,

by the same imperious law it will be gradually changed into an uglier

bird. Or if we neglect almost any of the domestic animals, they will

rapidly revert to wild and worthless forms again.

Now the same thing exactly would happen in the case of you or me. Why

should Man be an exception to any of the laws of Nature? Nature knows

him simply as an animal--Sub-kingdom _Vertebrata_, Class _Mammalia_,

Order _Bimana_. And the law of Reversion to Type runs through all

creation. If a man neglect himself for a few years he will change into a

worse man and a lower man. If it is his body that he neglects, he will

deteriorate into a wild and bestial savage--like the de-humanized men

who are discovered sometimes upon desert islands. If it is his mind, it

will degenerate into imbecility and madness--solitary confinement has

the power to unmake men's minds and leave them idiots. If he neglect his

conscience, it will run off into lawlessness and vice. Or, lastly, if

it is his soul, it must inevitably atrophy, drop off in ruin and decay.

We have here, then, a thoroughly natural basis for the question before

us. If we neglect, with this universal principle staring us in the face,

how shall we escape? If we neglect the ordinary means of keeping a

garden in order, how shall it escape running to weeds and waste? Or, if

we neglect the opportunities for cultivating the mind, how shall it

escape ignorance and feebleness? So, if we neglect the soul, how shall

it escape the natural retrograde movement, the inevitable relapse into

barrenness and death?

It is not necessary, surely, to pause for proof that there is such a

retrograde principle in the being of every man. It is demonstrated by

facts, and by the analogy of all Nature. Three possibilities of life,

according to Science, are open to all living organisms--Balance,

Evolution, and Degeneration. The first denotes the precarious

persistence of a life along what looks like a level path, a character

which seems to hold its own alike against the attacks of evil and the

appeals of good. It implies a set of circumstances so balanced by choice

or fortune that they neither influence for better nor for worse. But

except in theory this state of equilibrium, normal in the inorganic

kingdom, is really foreign to the world of life; and what seems inertia

may be a true Evolution unnoticed from its slowness, or likelier still a

movement of Degeneration subtly obliterating as it falls the very traces

of its former height. From this state of apparent Balance, Evolution is

the escape in the upward direction, Degeneration in the lower. But

Degeneration, rather than Balance or Elaboration, is the possibility of

life embraced by the majority of mankind. And the choice is determined

by man's own nature. The life of Balance is difficult. It lies on the

verge of continual temptation, its perpetual adjustments become

fatiguing, its measured virtue is monotonous and uninspiring. More

difficult still, apparently, is the life of ever upward growth. Most men

attempt it for a time, but growth is slow; and despair overtakes them

while the goal is far away. Yet none of these reasons fully explains the

fact that the alternative which remains is adopted by the majority of

men. That Degeneration is easy only half accounts for it. Why is it

easy? Why but that already in each man's very nature this principle is

supreme? He feels within his soul a silent drifting motion impelling him

downward with irresistible force. Instead of aspiring to Conversion to a

higher Type he submits by a law of his nature to Reversion to a lower.

This is Degeneration--that principle by which the organism, failing to

develop itself, failing even to keep what it has got, deteriorates, and

becomes more and more adapted to a degraded form of life.

All men who know themselves are conscious that this tendency,

deep-rooted and active, exists within their nature. Theologically it is

described as a gravitation, a bias toward evil. The Bible view is that

man is conceived in sin and shapen in iniquity. And experience tells him

that he will shape himself into further sin and ever deepening iniquity

without the smallest effort, without in the least intending it, and in

the most natural way in the world if he simply let his life run. It is

on this principle that, completing the conception, the wicked are said

further in the Bible to be lost. They are not really lost as yet, but

they are on the sure way to it. The bias of their lives is in full

action. There is no drag on anywhere. The natural tendencies are having

it all their own way; and although the victims may be quite unconscious

that all this is going on, it is patent to every one who considers even

the natural bearings of the case that "the end of these things is

Death." When we see a man fall from the top of a five-story house, we

say the man is lost. We say that before he has fallen a foot; for the

same principle that made him fall the one foot will undoubtedly make him

complete the descent by falling another eighty or ninety feet. So that

he is a dead man, or a lost man from the very first. The gravitation of

sin in a human soul acts precisely in the same way. Gradually, with

gathering momentum it sinks a man further and further from God and

righteousness, and lands him, by the sheer action of a natural law, in

the hell of a neglected life.

But the lesson is not less clear from analogy. Apart even from the law

of Degeneration, apart from Reversion to Type, there is in every living

organism a law of Death. We are wont to imagine that Nature is full of

Life. In reality it is full of Death. One cannot say it is natural for a

plant to live. Examine its nature fully, and you have to admit that its

natural tendency is to die. It is kept from dying by a mere temporary

endowment which gives it an ephemeral dominion over the elements--gives

it power to utilize for a brief span the rain, the sunshine, and the

air. Withdraw this temporary endowment for a moment and its true nature

is revealed. Instead of overcoming Nature it is overcome. The very

things which appeared to minister to its growth and beauty now turn

against it and make it decay and die. The sun which warmed it, withers

it; the air and rain which nourished it, rot it. It is the very forces

which we associate with life which, when their true nature appears, are

discovered to be really the ministers of death.

This law, which is true for the whole plant-world, is also valid for the

animal and for man. Air is not life, but corruption--so literally

corruption that the only way to keep out corruption, when life has

ebbed, is to keep out air. Life is merely a temporary suspension of

these destructive powers; and this is truly one of the most accurate

definitions of life we have yet received--"the sum total of the

functions which resist death."

Spiritual life, in like manner, is the sum total of the functions which

resist sin. The soul's atmosphere is the daily trial, circumstance, and

temptation of the world. And as it is life alone which gives the plant

power to utilize the elements, and as, without it, they utilize it, so

it is the spiritual life alone which gives the soul power to utilize

temptation and trial; and without it they destroy the soul. How shall we

escape if we refuse to exercise these functions--in other words, if we

neglect?

This destroying process, observe, goes on quite independently of God's

judgment on sin. God's judgment on sin is another and a more awful fact

of which this may be a part. But it is a distinct fact by itself, which

we can hold and examine separately, that on purely natural principles

the soul that is left to itself unwatched, uncultivated, unredeemed,

must fall away into death by its own nature. The soul that sinneth "it

shall die." It shall die, not necessarily because God passes sentence of

death upon it, but because it cannot help dying. It has neglected "the

functions which resist death" and has always been dying. The punishment

is in its very nature, and the sentence is being gradually carried out

all along the path of life by ordinary processes which enforce the

verdict with the appalling faithfulness of law.

There is an affectation that religious truths lie beyond the sphere of

the comprehension which serves men in ordinary things. This question at

least must be an exception. It lies as near the natural as the

spiritual. If it makes no impression on a man to know that God will

visit his iniquities upon him, he cannot blind himself to the fact that

Nature will. Do we not all know what it is to be punished by Nature for

disobeying her? We have looked round the wards of a hospital, a prison,

or a madhouse, and seen there Nature at work squaring her accounts with

sin. And we knew as we looked that if no Judge sat on the throne of

heaven at all there was a Judgment there, where an inexorable Nature was

crying aloud for justice, and carrying out her heavy sentences for

violated laws.

When God gave Nature the law into her own hands in this way, He seems to

have given her two rules upon which her sentences were to be based. The

one is formally enunciated in this sentence, "WHATSOEVER A MAN SOWETH

THAT SHALL HE ALSO REAP." The other is informally expressed in this, "IF

WE NEGLECT HOW SHALL WE ESCAPE?"

The first is the positive law, and deals with sins of commission. The

other, which we are now discussing, is the negative, and deals with sins

of omission. It does not say anything about sowing but about not sowing.

It takes up the case of souls which are lying fallow. It does not say,

if we sow corruption we shall reap corruption. Perhaps we would not be

so unwise, so regardless of ourselves, of public opinion, as to sow

corruption. It does not say, if we sow tares we shall reap tares. We

might never do anything so foolish as sow tares. But if we sow nothing,

it says, we shall reap nothing. If we put nothing into the field, we

shall take nothing out. If we neglect to cultivate in summer, how shall

we escape starving in winter?

Now the Bible raises this question, but does not answer it--because it

is too obvious to need answering. How shall we escape if we neglect? The

answer is, we cannot. In the nature of things we cannot. We cannot

escape any more than a man can escape drowning who falls into the sea

and has neglected to learn to swim. In the nature of things he cannot

escape--nor can he escape who has neglected the great salvation.

Now why should such fatal consequences follow a simple process like

neglect? The popular impression is that a man, to be what is called

lost, must be an open and notorious sinner. He must be one who has

abandoned all that is good and pure in life, and sown to the flesh with

all his might and main. But this principle goes further. It says simply,

"If we neglect." Any one may see the reason why a notoriously wicked

person should not escape; but why should not all the rest of us escape?

What is to hinder people who are not notoriously wicked escaping--people

who never sowed anything in particular? Why is it such a sin to sow

nothing in particular?

There must be some hidden and vital relation between these three words,

Salvation, Neglect, and Escape--some reasonable, essential, and

indissoluble connection. Why are these words so linked together as to

weight this clause with all the authority and solemnity of a sentence of

death?

The explanation has partly been given already. It lies still further,

however, in the meaning of the word Salvation. And this, of course, is

not at all Salvation in the ordinary sense of forgiveness of sin. This

is one great meaning of Salvation, the first and the greatest. But this

is spoken to people who are supposed to have had this. It is the broader

word, therefore, and includes not only forgiveness of sin but salvation

or deliverance from the downward bias of the soul. It takes in that

whole process of rescue from the power of sin and selfishness that

should be going on from day to day in every human life. We have seen

that there is a natural principle in man lowering him, deadening him,

pulling him down by inches to the mere animal plane, blinding reason,

searing conscience, paralyzing will. This is the active destroying

principle, or Sin. Now to counteract this, God has discovered to us

another principle which will stop this drifting process in the soul,

steer it round, and make it drift the other way. This is the active

saving principle, or Salvation. If a man find the first of these powers

furiously at work within him, dragging his whole life downward to

destruction, there is only one way to escape his fate--to take resolute

hold of the upward power, and be borne by it to the opposite goal. And

as this second power is the only one in the universe which has the

slightest real effect upon the first, how shall a man escape if he

neglect it? To neglect it is to cut off the only possible chance of

escape. In declining this he is simply abandoning himself with his eyes

open to that other and terrible energy which is already there, and

which, in the natural course of things, is bearing him every moment

further and further from escape.

From the very nature of Salvation, therefore, it is plain that the only

thing necessary to make it of no effect is neglect. Hence the Bible

could not fail to lay strong emphasis on a word so vital. It was not

necessary for it to say, how shall we escape if we trample upon the

great salvation, or doubt, or despise, or reject it. A man who has been

poisoned only need neglect the antidote and he will die. It makes no

difference whether he dashes it on the ground, or pours it out of the

window, or sets it down by his bedside, and stares at it all the time he

is dying. He will die just the same, whether he destroys it in a

passion, or coolly refuses to have anything to do with it. And as a

matter of fact probably most deaths, spiritually, are gradual

dissolutions of the last class rather than rash suicides of the first.

This, then, is the effect of neglecting salvation from the side of

salvation itself; and the conclusion is that from the very nature of

salvation escape is out of the question. Salvation is a definite

process. If a man refuse to submit himself to that process, clearly he

cannot have the benefits of it. _As many as received Him to them gave

He_ power _to become the sons of God._ He does not avail himself of this

power. It may be mere carelessness or apathy. Nevertheless the neglect

is fatal. He cannot escape because he will not.

Turn now to another aspect of the case--to the effect upon the soul

itself. Neglect does more for the soul than make it miss salvation. It

despoils it of its capacity for salvation. Degeneration in the spiritual

sphere involves primarily the impairing of the faculties of salvation

and ultimately the loss of them. It really means that the very soul

itself becomes piecemeal destroyed until the very capacity for God and

righteousness is gone.

The soul, in its highest sense, is a vast capacity for God. It is like a

curious chamber added on to being, and somehow involving being, a

chamber with elastic and contractile walls, which can be expanded, with

God as its guest, illimitably, but which without God shrinks and

shrivels until every vestige of the Divine is gone, and God's image is

left without God's Spirit. One cannot call what is left a soul; it is a

shrunken, useless organ, a capacity sentenced to death by disuse, which

droops as a withered hand by the side, and cumbers nature like a rotted

branch. Nature has her revenge upon neglect as well as upon

extravagance. Misuse, with her, is as mortal a sin as abuse.

There are certain burrowing animals--the mole for instance--which have

taken to spending their lives beneath the surface of the ground. And

Nature has taken her revenge upon them in a thoroughly natural way--she

has closed up their eyes. If they mean to live in darkness, she argues,

eyes are obviously a superfluous function. By neglecting them these

animals made it clear they do not want them. And as one of Nature's

fixed principles is that nothing shall exist in vain, the eyes are

presently taken away, or reduced to a rudimentary state. There are

fishes also which have had to pay the same terrible forfeit for having

made their abode in dark caverns where eyes can never be required. And

in exactly the same way the spiritual eye must die and lose its power by

purely natural law if the soul choose to walk in darkness rather than in

light.

This is the meaning of the favorite paradox of Christ, "From him that

hath not shall be taken away even that which he hath;" "take therefore

the talent from him." The religious faculty is a talent, the most

splendid and sacred talent we possess. Yet it is subject to the natural

conditions and laws. If any man take his talent and hide it in a napkin,

although it is doing him neither harm nor good apparently, God will not

allow him to have it. Although it is lying there rolled up in the

darkness, not conspicuously affecting any one, still God will not allow

him to keep it. He will not allow him to keep it any more than Nature

would allow the fish to keep their eyes. Therefore, He says, "take the

talent from him." And Nature does it.

This man's crime was simply neglect--"thou wicked and _slothful_

servant." It was a wasted life--a life which failed in the holy

stewardship of itself. Such a life is a peril to all who cross its path.

Degeneration compasses Degeneration. It is only a character which is

itself developing that can aid the Evolution of the world and so fulfill

the end of life. For this high usury each of our lives, however small

may seem our capital, was given us by God. And it is just the men whose

capital seems small who need to choose the best investments. It is

significant that it was the man who had only one talent who was guilty

of neglecting it. Men with ten talents, men of large gifts and burning

energies, either direct their powers nobly and usefully, or misdirect

them irretrievably. It is those who belong to the rank and file of life

who need this warning most. Others have an abundant store and sow to the

spirit or the flesh with a lavish hand. But we, with our small gift,

what boots our sowing? Our temptation as ordinary men is to neglect to

sow at all. The interest on our talent would be so small that we excuse

ourselves with the reflection that it is not worth while.

It is no objection to all this to say that we are unconscious of this

neglect or misdirection of our powers. That is the darkest feature in

the case. If there were uneasiness there might be hope. If there were,

somewhere about our soul, a something which was not gone to sleep like

all the rest; if there were a contending force anywhere; if we would let

even that work instead of neglecting it, it would gain strength from

hour to hour, and waken up one at a time each torpid and dishonored

faculty till our whole nature became alive with strivings against self,

and every avenue was open wide for God. But the apathy, the numbness of

the soul, what can be said of such a symptom but that it means the

creeping on of death? There are accidents in which the victims feel no

pain. They are well and strong they think. But they are dying. And if

you ask the surgeon by their side what makes him give this verdict, he

will say it is this numbness over the frame which tells how some of the

parts have lost already the very capacity for life.

Nor is it the least tragic accompaniment of this process that its

effects may even be concealed from others. The soul undergoing

Degeneration, surely by some arrangement with Temptation planned in the

uttermost hell, possesses the power of absolute secrecy. When all within

is festering decay and rottenness, a Judas, without anomaly, may kiss

his Lord. This invisible consumption, like its fell analogue in the

natural world, may even keep its victim beautiful while slowly slaying

it. When one examines the little _Crustacea_ which have inhabited for

centuries the lakes of the Mammoth Cave of Kentucky, one is at first

astonished to find these animals apparently endowed with perfect eyes.

The pallor of the head is broken by two black pigment specks,

conspicuous indeed as the only bits of color on the whole blanched body;

and these, even to the casual observer, certainly represent well-defined

organs of vision. But what do they with eyes in these Stygian waters?

There reigns an everlasting night. Is the law for once at fault? A swift

incision with the scalpel, a glance with a lens, and their secret is

betrayed. The eyes are a mockery. Externally they are organs of

vision--the front of the eye is perfect; behind, there is nothing but a

mass of ruins. The optic nerve is a shrunken, atrophied and insensate

thread. These animals have organs of vision, and yet they have no

vision. They have eyes, but they see not.

Exactly what Christ said of men: They had eyes, but no vision. And the

reason is the same. It is the simplest problem of natural history. The

_Crustacea_ of the Mammoth Cave have chosen to abide in darkness.

Therefore they have become fitted for it. By refusing to see they have

waived the right to see. And Nature has grimly humored them. Nature had

to do it by her very constitution. It is her defence against waste that

decay of faculty should immediately follow disuse of function. He that

hath ears to hear, he whose ears have not degenerated, let him hear.

Men tell us sometimes there is no such thing as an atheist. There must

be. There are some men to whom it is true that there is no God. They

cannot see God because they have no eye. They have only an abortive

organ, atrophied by neglect.

All this, it is commonplace again to insist, is not the effect of

neglect when we die, but while we live. The process is in full career

and operation now. It is useless projecting consequences into the future

when the effects may be measured now. We are always practicing these

little deceptions upon ourselves, postponing the consequences of our

misdeeds as if they were to culminate some other day about the time of

death. It makes us sin with a lighter hand to run an account with

retribution, as it were, and delay the reckoning time with God. But

every day is a reckoning day. Every soul is a Book of Judgment and

Nature, as a recording angel, marks there every sin. As all will be

judged by the great Judge some day, all are judged by Nature now. The

sin of yesterday, as part of its penalty, has the sin of to-day. All

follow us in silent retribution on our past, and go with us to the

grave. We cannot cheat Nature. No sleight-of-heart can rob religion of

_a present_, the immortal nature of a _now_. The poet sings--

"I looked behind to find my past,

And lo, it had gone before."

But no, not all. The unforgiven sins are not away in keeping somewhere

to be let loose upon us when we die; they are here, within us, now.

To-day brings the resurrection of their past, to-morrow of to-day. And

the powers of sin, to the exact strength that we have developed them,

nearing their dreadful culmination with every breath we draw, are here,

within us, now. The souls of some men are already honey-combed through

and through with the eternal consequences of neglect, so that taking the

natural and rational view of their case _just now_, it is simply

inconceivable that there is any escape _just now_. What a fearful thing

it is to fall into the hands of the living God! A fearful thing even if,

as the philosopher tells us, "the hands of the Living God are the Laws

of Nature."

Whatever hopes of a "heaven" a neglected soul may have, can be shown to

be an ignorant and delusive dream. How is the soul to escape to heaven

if it has neglected for a lifetime the means of escape from the world

and self? And where is the capacity for heaven to come from if it be not

developed on earth? Where, indeed, is even the smallest spiritual

appreciation of God and heaven to come from when so little of

spirituality has ever been known or manifested here? If every Godward

aspiration of the soul has been allowed to become extinct, and every

inlet that was open to heaven to be choked, and every talent for

religious love and trust to have been persistently neglected and

ignored, where are the faculties to come from that would ever find the

faintest relish in such things as God and heaven give?

These three words, Salvation, Escape, and Neglect, then, are not

casually, but organically and necessarily connected. Their doctrine is

scientific, not arbitrary. Escape means nothing more than the gradual

emergence of the higher being from the lower, and nothing less. It means

the gradual putting off of all that cannot enter the higher state, or

heaven, and simultaneously the putting on of Christ. It involves the

slow completing of the soul and the development of the capacity for God.

Should any one object that from this scientific standpoint the opposite

of salvation is annihilation, the answer is at hand. From this

standpoint there is no such word.

If, then, escape is to be open to us, it is not to come to us somehow,

vaguely. We are not to hope for anything startling or mysterious. It is

a definite opening along certain lines which are definitely marked by

God, which begin at the Cross of Christ, and lead direct to Him. Each

man in the silence of his own soul must work out this salvation for

himself with fear and trembling--with fear, realizing the momentous

issues of his task; with trembling, lest before the tardy work be done

the voice of Death should summon him to stop.

What these lines are may, in closing, be indicated in a word. The true

problem of the spiritual life may be said to be, do the opposite of

Neglect. Whatever this is, do it, and you shall escape. It will just

mean that you are so to cultivate the soul that all its powers will open

out to God, and in beholding God be drawn away from sin. The idea really

is to develop among the ruins of the old a new "creature"--a new

creature which, while the old is suffering Degeneration from Neglect, is

gradually to unfold, to escape away and develop on spiritual lines to

spiritual beauty and strength. And as our conception of spiritual being

must be taken simply from natural being, our ideas of the lines along

which the new religious nature is to run must be borrowed from the known

lines of the old.

There is, for example, a Sense of Sight in the religious nature. Neglect

this, leave it undeveloped and you never miss it. You simply see

nothing. But develop it and you see God. And the line along which to

develop it is known to us. Become pure in heart. The pure in heart shall

see God. Here, then, is one opening for soul-culture--the avenue through

purity of heart to the spiritual seeing of God.

Then there is a Sense of Sound. Neglect this, leave it undeveloped, and

you never miss it. You simply hear nothing. Develop it, and you hear

God. And the line along which to develop it is known to us. Obey Christ.

Become one of Christ's flock. "The sheep hear His voice, and He calleth

them by name." Here, then, is another opportunity for the culture of the

soul--a gateway through the Shepherd's fold to hear the Shepherd's

voice.

And there is a Sense of Touch to be acquired--such a sense as the woman

had who touched the hem of Christ's garment, that wonderful electric

touch called faith, which moves the very heart of God.

And there is a Sense of Taste--a spiritual hunger after God; a something

within which tastes and sees that He is good. And there is the Talent

for Inspiration. Neglect that, and all the scenery of the spiritual

world is flat and frozen. But cultivate it, and it penetrates the whole

soul with sacred fire, and illuminates creation with God. And last of

all there is the great capacity for Love, even for the love of God--the

expanding capacity for feeling more and more its height and depth, its

length and breadth. Till that is felt no man can really understand that

word, "so great salvation," for what is its measure but that other "so"

of Christ--God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son?

Verily, how shall we escape if we neglect that?[52]

FOOTNOTES:

[52] For the scientific basis of this spiritual law the following works

may be consulted:--

"The Origin of Species." By Charles Darwin, F.R.S. London: John Murray.

1872.

"Degeneration." By E. Ray Lankester, F.R.S. London: Macmillan. 1880.

"Der Ursprung der Wirbelthiere und das Princip des Functions Wechsels."

Dr. A. Dorhn. Leipzig: 1875.

"Lessons from Nature." By St. George Mivart, F.R.S. London: John Murray.

1876.

"The Natural Conditions of Existence as they Affect Animal Life." Karl

Semper. London: C. Kegan Paul & Co. 1881.

GROWTH.

"Is not the evidence of Ease on the very front of all the greatest

works in existence? Do they not say plainly to us, not 'there has

been a great _effort_ here,' but 'there has been a great _power_

here?' It is not the weariness of mortality but the strength of

divinity, which we have to recognize in all mighty things; and that

is just what we now never recognize, but think that we are to do

great things by help of iron bars and perspiration; alas! we shall

do nothing that way, but lose some pounds of our own

weight."--_Ruskin._

"Consider the lilies of the field how they grow."--_The Sermon on

the Mount._

"Nunquam aliud natura, aliud sapientia dicit."--_Juvenal._

What gives the peculiar point to this object-lesson from the lips of

Jesus is, that He not only made the illustration, but made the lilies.

It is like an inventor describing his own machine. He made the lilies

and He made me--both on the same broad principle. Both together, man and

flower, He planted deep in the Providence of God; but as men are dull at

studying themselves He points to this companion-phenomenon to teach us

how to live a free and natural life, a life which God will unfold for

us, without our anxiety, as He unfolds the flower. For Christ's words

are not a general appeal to consider nature. Men are not to consider the

lilies simply to admire their beauty, to dream over the delicate

strength and grace of stem and leaf. The point they were to consider was

_how they grew_--how without anxiety or care the flower woke into

loveliness, how without weaving these leaves were woven, how without

toiling these complex tissues spun themselves, and how without any

effort or friction the whole slowly came ready-made from the loom of God

in its more than Solomon-like glory. "So," He says, making the

application beyond dispute, "you care-worn, anxious men must grow. You,

too, need take no thought for your life, what ye shall eat or what ye

shall drink or what ye shall put on. For if God so clothe the grass of

the field, which to-day is, and to-morrow is cast into the oven, shall

He not much more clothe you, O ye of little faith?"

This nature-lesson was a great novelty in its day; but all men now who

have even a "little faith" have learned this Christian secret of a

composed life. Apart even from the parable of the lily, the failures of

the past have taught most of us the folly of disquieting ourselves in

vain, and we have given up the idea that by taking thought we can add a

cubit to our stature.

But no sooner has our life settled down to this calm trust in God than a

new and graver anxiety begins. This time it is not for the body we are

in travail, but for the soul. For the temporal life we have considered

the lilies, but how is the spiritual life to grow. How are we to become

better men? How are we to grow in grace? By what thought shall we add

the cubits to the spiritual stature and reach the fullness of the

Perfect Man? And because we know ill how to do this, the old anxiety

comes back again and our inner life is once more an agony of conflict

and remorse. After all, we have but transferred our anxious thoughts

from the body to the soul. Our efforts after Christian growth seem only

a succession of failures, and instead of rising into the beauty of

holiness our life is a daily heartbreak and humiliation.

Now the reason of this is very plain. We have forgotten the parable of

the lily. Violent efforts to grow are right in earnestness, but wholly

wrong in principle. There is but one principle of growth both for the

natural and spiritual, for animal and plant, for body and soul. For all

growth is an organic thing. And the principle of growing in grace is

once more this, "Consider the lilies _how they grow_."

In seeking to extend the analogy from the body to the soul there are two

things about the lilies' growth, two characteristics of all growth, on

which one must fix attention. These are--

First, Spontaneousness.

Second, Mysteriousness.

Natural Law in the Spiritual World · 第 4 / 7 章