interpretation of the formula of "fixed law" is that it does not in any
case imply an iron rigidity of result, an undeviating uniformity of
occurrence. There is no region in which perpetual change can be more
accurately postulated than in the physical world. But there is order and
system in these changes, admirably illustrated in the weather forecasts
of the present advanced stage of physical science, which are attainable
only by continual watching of shifting conditions with application of
fixed law to the appearance of wind and cloud and rain. But there are no
forecasts without these two things, fixed laws and varying conditions
for their application. With the wider generalization which admits of
recognition of fixed law, there is always the narrower, concerned with
variable conditions to which the wider is to be applied. So it is under
moral law, and so under spiritual. So also does it hold when our
observation is directed on interdependence of two orders of law, such as
the moral and physical. This combination we have in human life, as it is
subjected to both. Physical law reigns in human history as illustrated
by the laws of health, which are fixed irrespective of moral law, so
that sewerage gas will be prejudicial to health, apart from the moral
character of a man. Moral law reigns in human life, and truthfulness in
utterance, or justice in action, will maintain a harmony of the inner
life, whether outwardly there be poverty or wealth. These two orders of
law are independent, yet interwoven in their application to the complex
life of man. Immorality will find its accompaniment in physical
disorder; the repentance which has healing power within the mind will
not heal the body, yet may there be advance in moral life by reason of
the weakness and suffering which repentance can not remove. Such is at
once the independence and the interdependence of physical and moral law,
in accordance with the fixedness of law in each case, and the harmony of
both under one government, by means of subordination of the physical to
the moral.
There are thus _two spheres_, physical and moral, but _one life_,
brought to harmony under the laws of both spheres. What then is the
bearing of this distinction of spheres on the problem of the efficacy of
prayer, viewing the question only in the light of science and
philosophy? An obvious bearing, in so, far as the conditions of physical
and moral life are set forth and distinguished; but no determining
value for interpretation of the possible influence of prayer as
concerning a life subject at once to physical and moral conditions.
Prayer can be exercised in accordance with scientific teaching, only by
intelligent recognition of the physical conditions of life; in
accordance with philosophy, only by intelligent acknowledgment of the
subordination of physical life to moral. If then, we turn to the
teaching of science, making account of all that it includes as to fixed
laws applicable to ever-varying conditions, there is nothing in it to
warrant the conclusion that there can be no interposition from a higher
sphere in order to secure application of physical law for attainment of
moral ends. The whole product of scientific investigation leaves clear
the possibility of the administration of a moral government in
accordance with subordination of physical law to the attainment of its
higher ends. It does not help the understanding of the government of the
world, but rather hampers our reflection, if it be suggested that there
are two spheres, physical and moral, and that the application of prayer
is restricted to one of these spheres. Human life can not be so severed
into parts; it is a unity self-regulated by harmony of submission to
moral and physical law, and it must be governed by the Supreme Ruler in
the harmonious application of these laws. There is no sphere of life
into which the moral does not enter, and accordingly no sphere within
which prayer, which necessarily rests on moral conditions, may not
apply.
If next we pass to Scripture teaching concerning prayer, where alone we
find full instruction on the subject, in precept, example, and a variety
of encouragements, it will appear that the warrant for prayer is found
exclusively in the divine promise, and that the application of that
promise is to every phase of life, subject to moral conditions which are
explicitly revealed. Prayer is a privilege divinely bestowed through the
Saviour, in accordance with which fellowship with God is granted on the
merits of the Redeemer. Its nature reveals the true harmony between God
and the moral creature, as a reality transcending all physical existence
and all knowledge coming from study of physical law. The accepting of
this privilege, and the continuance of its exercise are the tokens of
returning harmony of sinful man with the holy God. Elevation in the
exercise by steadily extending inclusion of a wider circle of personal
desire and activity within the area of conscious fellowship with God, is
the advance of the moral nature into fuller harmony with God, and with
the whole government of the universe. The teaching of Scripture which
assures of all this, and guides man towards realization of it, clearly
distinguishes between material and moral good, yet does not exclude the
one any more than the other, but subordinates the physical to the moral,
harmonizing the two in recognition of the supreme importance of all that
is moral. It does not exclude desire of temporal good, but restricts its
illustration to desire of "daily bread,"--assures us that our Father
knoweth we have need of such good, and will supply it,--and promises
that having given most freely what is best, he will assuredly give that
which is least.
If then it be said that the answer to prayer is a miracle of divine
interposition in human history, of which science finds no trace, we do
not marvel, for science does not extend its observations to the
inclusion of what pertains to the higher life of man. If any man asks
for evidence in an exclusively physical sphere that God answers prayer,
he asks that evidence should be discovered apart from the conditions
involved. A more unscientific demand there could not be. When he refuses
to admit that there can be any trustworthy evidence of the answer of
prayer apart from the test he proposes, he either misunderstands the
Christian doctrine of prayer, or he is criticising a conception of
prayer other than the Christian one. If we turn to the philosophy of
human life as subjected to moral law, and called to its perfect
fulfilment, we do not find any thing but harmonious truth in the
suggestion that God cares more for the moral life of man than for the
physical universe. If we turn to Scripture, receiving its teaching as to
prayer, we find that the promised interposition in man's behalf is even
less an illustration of divine power than of Divine righteousness; an
evidence that the Divine Ruler seeks righteousness above all things, for
the entire significance of the exercise is this, trust in the holy One,
and fellowship with Him through life. On this ground alone does He
promise an answer to prayer, in this promise making moral conditions the
essential test for use of the privilege, requiring the suppliant to
subordinate to these all desire of material good. It is towards success
in attaining true fellowship with Himself that God is ever giving
promise of blessing. It is in full view of the transcendent value of a
life of holiness, that the Supreme Ruler is daily condescending to stoop
towards His children, that they may be helped in all that pertains to
holiness of character and life. The Bible makes it essential to the
government of the world, in harmony with fixed law, that God should be
the hearer and answerer of the prayer of His intelligent creatures,
always pointing to reliance on the Saviour's work as the test of the
reality of the exercise, in the case of all who possess the written
revelation of His will, in the glorious Gospel of Jesus Christ.
FOOTNOTES:
[DJ] The limits of the present discussion make it impossible to include
a wider range; but this really embraces the whole question of the
miracles of Scripture.
[DK] p. 6.
[DL] p. 11.
[DM] p. 12
[DN] p. 151.
APPENDIX.
APPENDIX.
I.
RELATIONS OF SCIENCE AND RELIGION. _Page_ 34.
"He who contemplates the universe from the religious point of view, must
learn to see that this which we call science, is one constituent of the
great whole; and as such ought to be regarded with a sentiment like that
which the remainder excites. While he who contemplates the universe from
the scientific point of view, must learn to see that this which we call
Religion is similarly a constituent of the great whole; and being such,
must be treated as a subject of science with no more prejudice than any
other reality. It behooves each party to strive to understand the other,
with the conviction that the other has something worthy to be
understood; and with the conviction that when mutually recognized this
something will be the basis of a complete reconciliation."--HERBERT
SPENCER, _First Principles_, p. 21.
II.
SPONTANEOUS GENERATION. _Page_ 54.
Professor Tyndall, describing his own experiments, says, "The
experiments have already extended to 105 instances, not one of which
shows the least countenance to the doctrine of spontaneous generation."
Communicated to Royal Society of London, December 21, 1876.--_Nature_,
vol. xv. p. 303.
III.
ENERGY AND FORCE. _Page_ 96.
The term Force is by many authors used as equivalent to Energy, rather
than as a distinct term for the amount of Energy. Force is thus used by
Sir W. R. Groves. "The term Force, although used in very different
senses by different authors, in its limited sense may be defined as that
which produces or resists motion." ... "I use the term Force ... as
meaning that active principle inseparable from matter which is supposed
to induce its various changes." ... "All we know or see is the effect;
we do not see Force--we see motion or moving matter."--_The Correlation
of Physical Forces_, sixth edition, by the Hon. Sir W. R. Grove, pp. 10,
11.
IV.
ALL ORGANIZED EXISTENCE IS CONSTRUCTED ON A COMMON PLAN. _Page_ 131.
"Biologists turn to the physical organization of man. They examine his
whole structure, his bony frame, and all that clothes it. They resolve
him into the finest particles into which the microscope will enable them
to break him up. They consider the performance of his various functions
and activities, and they look at the manner in which he occurs on the
surface of the world. Then they turn to other animals, and taking the
first handy domestic animal--say a dog,--they profess to be able to
demonstrate that the analysis of the dog leads them, in gross, to
precisely the same results as the analysis of the man; that they find
almost identically the same bones, having the same relations; that they
can name the muscles of the dog by the names of the muscles of the man,
and the nerves of the dog by those of the nerves of the man, and that
such structures and organs of sense as we find in the man, such also we
find in the dog; they analyze the brain and spinal cord, and they find
that the nomenclature which fits the one answers for the other.
Moreover, they trace back the dog's and the man's development, and they
find that at a certain stage of their existence, the two creatures are
not distinguishable the one from the other; they find that the dog and
his kind have a certain distribution over the surface of the world
comparable in its way to the distribution of the human species.... Thus
biologists have arrived at the conclusion that a fundamental uniformity
of structure pervades the animal and vegetable worlds, and that plants
and animals differ from one another simply as modifications of the same
great plan. Again they tell us the same story in regard to the study of
function. They admit the large and important interval which, at the
present time, separates the manifestations of the mental faculties
observable in the higher forms of mankind, and even in the lowest forms,
such as we know them, mentally from those exhibited by other animals;
but, at the same time, they tell us that the foundations or rudiments
of almost all the faculties of man are to be met with in the lower
animals; that there is a unity of mental faculty, as well as of bodily
structure, and that here also, the difference is a difference of degree
and not of kind."--Lecture on "The Study of Biology," by Professor
Huxley, _Nature_, vol. xv. p. 219. Delivered at South Kensington Museum,
London, December 16, 1876. On the grounds here admirably summarized, it
is clear that the whole organism of our world has been constructed on a
common plan. This being true, similarities will appear in process of
development, and in the structure and functions of different orders.
This similarity, however, does not help us to explain "the large and
important interval" which appears when mental characteristics are
considered. It makes the diversity of mental power more difficult to
explain by reference to organism, in fact contributing to the strength
of evidence for mind as a form of existence distinct from organism.
V.
EMBRYOLOGY. _Page_ 131.
I have not felt warranted to include in the text any summary of results
secured by the important, but very difficult, investigations concerning
the growth of animal life in the womb. This whole department of inquiry
is in such an unfinished and uncertain state, that there is not warrant
to found upon the evidence already obtained any general argument as to
its bearing on a theory of evolution. The most competent observers
admit that they are perplexed by facts ascertained, and confess that
they can not as yet offer an explanation. To others all is as plain as
possible; embryology supplies a convincing proof of the accuracy of an
evolution theory; but these are scientific theorists who see by
imagination, and are impatient of uncertainty. There are certain general
considerations which must interpose difficulties in the way of
constructing an argument from Embryology to evolution of species. (1)
The action of environment before birth is altogether different from the
action of environment after birth. (2) The theory of the evolution of
species emphasizes this difference by insisting on the struggle for
existence. (3) This difference being admitted, an argument from the one
to the other can not hold. In the line of discovery the point of chief
interest has been the fact that in some cases embryonic life shows a
transition through lower forms analogous to lower orders of animal
existence prior to reaching the mature stage when birth occurs. But in
connection with the facts ascertained, two things are to be remarked.
(1) Evidence of transition is most striking in the history of animal
life developed external to the parental life, as in the transition from
_larvæ_ to _pupæ_ among insects, and in the changes in the life of the
tadpole. (2) If it be admitted that there is a common plan of structure
for all organism, it is implied that there must be similarities in
process of development. The question requiring answer, therefore, is
whether in the gradual development from the germ, any further
resemblance to lower orders appears than is to be anticipated on the
admission of a common plan for organic structure. There are singular
examples of transition. But there are no illustrations of uniform
progress in the case of the higher orders such as would warrant the
supposition that a history of evolution of the species can be read in
the development of the foetus. The supposition has, however, found
currency in not a little of our scientific teaching. The incompleteness
of this evidence may appear from examples. Take the tadpole. Huxley
states the facts thus,--"The tadpole is first a fish, then a tailed
amphibian, provided with gills and lungs, before it became a frog." This
is development outside parental life, and does not belong to evidence in
Embryology. Confining attention to embryonic life, let us take Huxley's
statement, biologists "trace back the dog's and the man's development,
and they find that at a certain stage of their existence, the two
creatures are not distinguishable the one from the other." What is the
inference to be drawn? If the two are not distinguishable, our powers of
distinguishing are insufficient, for no biologist suggests that the two
are alike. The difficulty of distinguishing two germs, or two examples
of foetus, is analogous to the difficulty which Darwin has pointed out
of distinguishing the orders of dogs when they are six-days-old puppies,
or the breed of three-days-old colt, or of nestling pigeons. At these
stages, the animals may be so similar, that it is hardly possible to
distinguish them, and yet in the full grown state they are quite
different (Darwin's _Origin of Species_, sixth edition, p. 391). Mr.
Darwin has presented the outstanding facts thus;--"The very general,
though not universal, difference in structure between the embryo and the
adult;--the various parts in the same individual embryo, which
ultimately become very unlike and serve for diverse purposes, being at
an early period of growth alike;--the common, but not invariable
resemblance between the embryos or larvæ of the most distinct species in
the same class;--the embryo often retaining whilst within the egg or
womb, structures which are of no service to it, either at that or at a
later period of life."
VI.
NON-ADVANCEMENT OF LOWER ORDERS. _Page_ 158.
Mr. Darwin's answer to the difficulty put by Agassiz is this;--"On our
theory the continued existence of lowly organisms offers no difficulty;
for natural selection, or the survival of the fittest, does not
necessarily include progressive development,--it only takes advantage of
such variations as arise and are beneficial to each creature under its
complex relations of life."--_Origin of Species_, sixth edition, p. 98.
This wears the aspect of a limitation of the theory, and to that extent
an acknowledgment of the force of the reasoning of Agassiz.
VII.
PROTOPLASM. _Page_ 131.
"Protoplasm, simple or nucleated, is the formal basis of all life;" thus
"all living forms are fundamentally of one character." "All the forms of
Protoplasm which have yet been examined contain the four elements,
carbon, hydrogen, oxygen, and nitrogen, in very complex union." Thus
there is "a general uniformity in the character of the Protoplasm, or
physical basis of life, in whatever group of living beings it may be
studied."--HUXLEY'S _Lay Sermons_, p. 142.
VIII.
NUMBER OF SPECIES OF INSECTS. _Page_ 193.
Professor Huxley mentions that "Gerstsæcker in the new edition of
Broun's 'Thier-Reich' gives 200,000 as the total number of species of
_Arthropoda_." In this connection Mr. McLauchlan, when claiming that
there are 200,000 species of Insects, adds, "In one order alone
(_Coleoptera_) it is estimated that 80,000 species have been
described."--_Nature_, xv. p. 275.
IX.
FERTILIZATION OF FLOWERS BY INSECTS. _Page_ 170.
Dr. Hermann Müller's Observations are described in _Nature_, vol. xiv.
p. 175; vol. xv. pp. 317, 473; vol. xvi. pp. 265, 507.
X.
ANTS. _Page 192._
Mr. McCook's Observations are summarized in _Nature_, vol. xvii. p.
433.
XI.
LIKENESS OF THE APE'S BRAIN TO THE HUMAN BRAIN. _Page_ 225.
The close resemblance of the brain of the ape to that of man, has been
held to prove that the ape comes next to man in intelligence. But the
facts bearing on this suggestion are fitted to occasion serious
perplexity to its upholders. First stands the resemblance of bodily
structure as largely explaining similarity of brain. The results of
electric stimulation of the monkey's brain lend additional force to this
consideration. Again, facts are wanting to support the claim for
superior intelligence in behalf of the monkey and ape. The habits of the
ape in its natural state afford little evidence of an encouraging kind.
The ape gathers together a few sticks for a nest, in comparison with
which the work of very small birds presents marvels of architecture. And
nest-building seems the highest evidence gathered from the natural
habits of the animal, when we compare it with leaning the back against a
tree for rest, or staunching the blood of a wound. In the captive state
the ape gives no such evidence of superior intelligence as the
similarity of its brain to the human, would lead us to expect, if brain
structure afford the test of intellectual power. Even after allowance
has been made for sudden transition from the wild state to the captive,
the evidence of capability does not appear which the theory requires.
The highest results reached by training monkeys, do not support a claim
for intellectual superiority. These are mainly forms of mimicry,
generally inferior to the efforts of some other animals. Add to these
considerations the evidence as to the singular intelligence shown by
ants, and the theory which measures intellect by brain structure is
placed at a great disadvantage. Whether science may not ere long point
to some theory of mind connected with animal existence must be matter of
uncertainty. If, however, the easy and familiar operations of our own
intelligence are analyzed and classified; and if a statement of the
ascertained functions of the brain is laid alongside, it will appear
that nothing known to us in the action of brain, can supply a science of
the operations of the human mind.
XII.
THE LARGE SIZED OR MULTIPOLAR CELLS. _Page_ 257.
On the functions of the large sized cells, it seems desirable to add a
few words as to the direction in which evidence as to their functions
actually points. For this purpose, a further quotation is desirable,
referring to the number of fibres or processes passing off from these
large cells, distinguishing those which branch out into a fine net-work,
and those which pass directly to a nerve fibre. "One at least of the
processes of a multipolar nerve cell does not branch, but becomes
directly continuous with a nerve fibre, and has been named the
axial-cylinder process."--Professor Turner's _Human Anatomy_, i. 201.
This taken with the facts given in Lecture VII, seems to favor the
conclusions, (1) that the large cell spreads nerve energy through the
tissue of the brain, while each has at least one direct line of
communication with the system of nerve fibres; (2) that the large cell
has intimate and extended relations with the motor system.
XIII.
THE CONCEPTION OF DUTY. _Page_ 273.
"Duty! Thou great, thou exalted name! Wondrous thought that workest
neither by fond insinuation, flattery, nor by any threat, but by merely
holding up thy naked law in the soul, and so extorting for thyself
always reverence, if not always obedience,--before whom all appetites
are dumb, however secretly they rebel,--whence thy original?"--KANT'S
_Critique of Practical Reason_.
530 BROADWAY, NEW YORK,
OCTOBER, 1880.
NEW BOOKS
AND NEW EDITIONS OF IMPORTANT BOOKS,
PUBLISHED BY
ROBERT CARTER & BROTHERS.
*** _Any Book in this Catalogue, not too large to go by mail, will be
sent postage prepaid, on receipt of the price._
=The End of a Coil.= A Story. By the author of the "Wide Wide World."
717 pp. $1.75.
=My Desire.= A Tale. By the author of the "Wide Wide World." $1.75.
=Christie's Old Organ, Saved at Sea, and Little Faith.= In one volume.
$1.00.
=Christ and His Religion.= By Rev. John Reid, author of "Voices of the
Soul," &c. $1.50.
=The Sun, Moon, and Stars.= By Agnes Gilberne. Illustrated. 12mo. $1.50.
=The Gentle Heart.= By Rev. Alex. Macleod, D.D., author of "Wonderful
Lamp," &c. $1.25.
=The Cup of Consolation;= or, Bright Messages for the Sick-Bed. $1.25.
=In Christo.= By J. R. Macduff, D.D.
=Family Prayers.= By J. Oswald Dykes, D.D.
=Voices of Hope and Gladness.= By Ray Palmer, D.D. $1.50.
=Modern Scottish Pulpit.= Sermons by Scottish Ministers. 8vo. $1.50.
=* Murdock's Mosheim's Ecclesiastical History.= A cheap edition. Three
volumes in one. 1,461 pp. $3.00.
=Nora Crena.= By L. T. Meade. $1.25.
=Andrew Harvey's Wife.= By L. T. Meade. $1.25.
=* Pool's Annotations.= 3 vols. Royal 8vo. 3,077 pages. In cloth. Price,
$7.50. (Half the former price.)
"Pool's Annotations are sound, clear, and sensible; and, taking
for all in all, I place him at the head of English commentators
on the whole Bible."--_Rev. J. C. Ryle._
=* Matthew Henry's Commentary on the Bible.= 5 vols., quarto. (Sheep,
$20.00.) Cloth, $15.00. Another edition in 9 vols., octavo. Cloth,
$20.00.
Rev. C. H. Spurgeon says: "First among the mighty for general
usefulness we are bound to mention the man whose name is a
household word,--Matthew Henry. He is most pious and pithy,
sound and sensible, suggestive and sober, terse and
trustworthy.... I venture to say that no better investment can
be made by a minister than that peerless exposition."
=* Dr. McCosh's Works.= New and neat edition (reduced from $15.00). 5
vols., 8vo., uniform, $10.00. Comprising:--