“Even from the purely human point of view,” Sainte‐Beuve says, “the

phenomenon of grace must still appear sufficiently extraordinary, eminent,

and rare, both in its nature and in its effects, to deserve a closer

study. For the soul arrives thereby at a certain fixed and invincible

state, a state which is genuinely heroic, and from out of which the

greatest deeds which it ever performs are executed. Through all the

different forms of communion, and all the diversity of the means which

help to produce this state, whether it be reached by a jubilee, by a

general confession, by a solitary prayer and effusion, whatever in short

be the place and the occasion, it is easy to recognize that it is

fundamentally one state in spirit and in fruits. Penetrate a little

beneath the diversity of circumstances, and it becomes evident that in

Christians of different epochs it is always one and the same modification

by which they are affected: there is veritably a single fundamental and

identical spirit of piety and charity, common to those who have received

grace; an inner state which before all things is one of love and humility,

of infinite confidence in God, and of severity for one’s self, accompanied

with tenderness for others. The fruits peculiar to this condition of the

soul have the same savor in all, under distant suns and in different

surroundings, in Saint Teresa of Avila just as in any Moravian brother of

Herrnhut.”(142)

Sainte‐Beuve has here only the more eminent instances of regeneration in

mind, and these are of course the instructive ones for us also to

consider. These devotees have often laid their course so differently from

other men that, judging them by worldly law, we might be tempted to call

them monstrous aberrations from the path of nature. I begin, therefore, by

asking a general psychological question as to what the inner conditions

are which may make one human character differ so extremely from another.

I reply at once that where the character, as something distinguished from

the intellect, is concerned, the causes of human diversity lie chiefly in

our _differing susceptibilities of emotional excitement_, and in the

_different impulses and inhibitions_ which these bring in their train. Let

me make this more clear.

Speaking generally, our moral and practical attitude, at any given time,

is always a resultant of two sets of forces within us, impulses pushing us

one way and obstructions and inhibitions holding us back. “Yes! yes!” say

the impulses; “No! no!” say the inhibitions. Few people who have not

expressly reflected on the matter realize how constantly this factor of

inhibition is upon us, how it contains and moulds us by its restrictive

pressure almost as if we were fluids pent within the cavity of a jar. The

influence is so incessant that it becomes subconscious. All of you, for

example, sit here with a certain constraint at this moment, and entirely

without express consciousness of the fact, because of the influence of the

occasion. If left alone in the room, each of you would probably

involuntarily rearrange himself, and make his attitude more “free and

easy.” But proprieties and their inhibitions snap like cobwebs if any

great emotional excitement supervenes. I have seen a dandy appear in the

street with his face covered with shaving‐lather because a house across

the way was on fire; and a woman will run among strangers in her nightgown

if it be a question of saving her baby’s life or her own. Take a self‐

indulgent woman’s life in general. She will yield to every inhibition set

by her disagreeable sensations, lie late in bed, live upon tea or

bromides, keep indoors from the cold. Every difficulty finds her obedient

to its “no.” But make a mother of her, and what have you? Possessed by

maternal excitement, she now confronts wakefulness, weariness, and toil

without an instant of hesitation or a word of complaint. The inhibitive

power of pain over her is extinguished wherever the baby’s interests are

at stake. The inconveniences which this creature occasions have become, as

James Hinton says, the glowing heart of a great joy, and indeed are now

the very conditions whereby the joy becomes most deep.

This is an example of what you have already heard of as the “expulsive

power of a higher affection.” But be the affection high or low, it makes

no difference, so long as the excitement it brings be strong enough. In

one of Henry Drummond’s discourses he tells of an inundation in India

where an eminence with a bungalow upon it remained unsubmerged, and became

the refuge of a number of wild animals and reptiles in addition to the

human beings who were there. At a certain moment a royal Bengal tiger

appeared swimming towards it, reached it, and lay panting like a dog upon

the ground in the midst of the people, still possessed by such an agony of

terror that one of the Englishmen could calmly step up with a rifle and

blow out its brains. The tiger’s habitual ferocity was temporarily quelled

by the emotion of fear, which became sovereign, and formed a new centre

for his character.

Sometimes no emotional state is sovereign, but many contrary ones are

mixed together. In that case one hears both “yeses” and “noes,” and the

“will” is called on then to solve the conflict. Take a soldier, for

example, with his dread of cowardice impelling him to advance, his fears

impelling him to run, and his propensities to imitation pushing him

towards various courses if his comrades offer various examples. His person

becomes the seat of a mass of interferences; and he may for a time simply

waver, because no one emotion prevails. There is a pitch of intensity,

though, which, if any emotion reach it, enthrones that one as alone

effective and sweeps its antagonists and all their inhibitions away. The

fury of his comrades’ charge, once entered on, will give this pitch of

courage to the soldier; the panic of their rout will give this pitch of

fear. In these sovereign excitements, things ordinarily impossible grow

natural because the inhibitions are annulled. Their “no! no!” not only is

not heard, it does not exist. Obstacles are then like tissue‐paper hoops

to the circus rider—no impediment; the flood is higher than the dam they

make. “Lass sie betteln gehn wenn sie hungrig sind!” cries the grenadier,

frantic over his Emperor’s capture, when his wife and babes are suggested;

and men pent into a burning theatre have been known to cut their way

through the crowd with knives.(143)

One mode of emotional excitability is exceedingly important in the

composition of the energetic character, from its peculiarly destructive

power over inhibitions. I mean what in its lower form is mere

irascibility, susceptibility to wrath, the fighting temper; and what in

subtler ways manifests itself as impatience, grimness, earnestness,

severity of character. Earnestness means willingness to live with energy,

though energy bring pain. The pain may be pain to other people or pain to

one’s self—it makes little difference; for when the strenuous mood is on

one, the aim is to break something, no matter whose or what. Nothing

annihilates an inhibition as irresistibly as anger does it; for, as Moltke

says of war, destruction pure and simple is its essence. This is what

makes it so invaluable an ally of every other passion. The sweetest

delights are trampled on with a ferocious pleasure the moment they offer

themselves as checks to a cause by which our higher indignations are

elicited. It costs then nothing to drop friendships, to renounce long‐

rooted privileges and possessions, to break with social ties. Rather do we

take a stern joy in the astringency and desolation; and what is called

weakness of character seems in most cases to consist in the inaptitude for

these sacrificial moods, of which one’s own inferior self and its pet

softnesses must often be the targets and the victims.(144)

So far I have spoken of temporary alterations produced by shifting

excitements in the same person. But the relatively fixed differences of

character of different persons are explained in a precisely similar way.

In a man with a liability to a special sort of emotion, whole ranges of

inhibition habitually vanish, which in other men remain effective, and

other sorts of inhibition take their place. When a person has an inborn

genius for certain emotions, his life differs strangely from that of

ordinary people, for none of their usual deterrents check him. Your mere

aspirant to a type of character, on the contrary, only shows, when your

natural lover, fighter, or reformer, with whom the passion is a gift of

nature, comes along, the hopeless inferiority of voluntary to instinctive

action. He has deliberately to overcome his inhibitions; the genius with

the inborn passion seems not to feel them at all; he is free of all that

inner friction and nervous waste. To a Fox, a Garibaldi, a General Booth,

a John Brown, a Louise Michel, a Bradlaugh, the obstacles omnipotent over

those around them are as if non‐existent. Could the rest of us so

disregard them, there might be many such heroes, for many have the wish to

live for similar ideals, and only the adequate degree of inhibition‐

quenching fury is lacking.(145)

The difference between willing and merely wishing, between having ideals

that are creative and ideals that are but pinings and regrets, thus

depends solely either on the amount of steam‐pressure chronically driving

the character in the ideal direction, or on the amount of ideal excitement

transiently acquired. Given a certain amount of love, indignation,

generosity, magnanimity, admiration, loyalty, or enthusiasm of self‐

surrender, the result is always the same. That whole raft of cowardly

obstructions, which in tame persons and dull moods are sovereign

impediments to action, sinks away at once. Our conventionality,(146) our

shyness, laziness, and stinginess, our demands for precedent and

permission, for guarantee and surety, our small suspicions, timidities,

despairs, where are they now? Severed like cobwebs, broken like bubbles in

the sun—

“Wo sind die Sorge nun und Noth

Die mich noch gestern wollt’ erschlaffen?

Ich schäm’ mich dess’ im Morgenroth.”

The flood we are borne on rolls them so lightly under that their very

contact is unfelt. Set free of them, we float and soar and sing. This

auroral openness and uplift gives to all creative ideal levels a bright

and caroling quality, which is nowhere more marked than where the

controlling emotion is religious. “The true monk,” writes an Italian

mystic, “takes nothing with him but his lyre.”

‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐

We may now turn from these psychological generalities to those fruits of

the religious state which form the special subject of our present lecture.

The man who lives in his religious centre of personal energy, and is

actuated by spiritual enthusiasms, differs from his previous carnal self

in perfectly definite ways. The new ardor which burns in his breast

consumes in its glow the lower “noes” which formerly beset him, and keeps

him immune against infection from the entire groveling portion of his

nature. Magnanimities once impossible are now easy; paltry

conventionalities and mean incentives once tyrannical hold no sway. The

stone wall inside of him has fallen, the hardness in his heart has broken

down. The rest of us can, I think, imagine this by recalling our state of

feeling in those temporary “melting moods” into which either the trials of

real life, or the theatre, or a novel sometimes throw us. Especially if we

weep! For it is then as if our tears broke through an inveterate inner

dam, and let all sorts of ancient peccancies and moral stagnancies drain

away, leaving us now washed and soft of heart and open to every nobler

leading. With most of us the customary hardness quickly returns, but not

so with saintly persons. Many saints, even as energetic ones as Teresa and

Loyola, have possessed what the church traditionally reveres as a special

grace, the so‐called gift of tears. In these persons the melting mood

seems to have held almost uninterrupted control. And as it is with tears

and melting moods, so it is with other exalted affections. Their reign may

come by gradual growth or by a crisis; but in either case it may have

“come to stay.”

At the end of the last lecture we saw this permanence to be true of the

general paramountcy of the higher insight, even though in the ebbs of

emotional excitement meaner motives might temporarily prevail and

backsliding might occur. But that lower temptations may remain completely

annulled, apart from transient emotion and as if by alteration of the

man’s habitual nature, is also proved by documentary evidence in certain

cases. Before embarking on the general natural history of the regenerate

character, let me convince you of this curious fact by one or two

examples. The most numerous are those of reformed drunkards. You recollect

the case of Mr. Hadley in the last lecture; the Jerry McAuley Water Street

Mission abounds in similar instances.(147) You also remember the graduate

of Oxford, converted at three in the afternoon, and getting drunk in the

hay‐field the next day, but after that permanently cured of his appetite.

“From that hour drink has had no terrors for me: I never touch it, never

want it. The same thing occurred with my pipe, ... the desire for it went

at once and has never returned. So with every known sin, the deliverance

in each case being permanent and complete. I have had no temptations since

conversion.”

Here is an analogous case from Starbuck’s manuscript collection:—

“I went into the old Adelphi Theatre, where there was a Holiness

meeting, ... and I began saying, ‘Lord, Lord, I must have this

blessing.’ Then what was to me an audible voice said: ‘Are you

willing to give up everything to the Lord?’ and question after

question kept coming up, to all of which I said: ‘Yes, Lord; yes,

Lord!’ until this came: ‘Why do you not accept it _now_?’ and I

said: ‘I do, Lord.’—I felt no particular joy, only a trust. Just

then the meeting closed, and, as I went out on the street, I met a

gentleman smoking a fine cigar, and a cloud of smoke came into my

face, and I took a long, deep breath of it, and praise the Lord,

all my appetite for it was gone. Then as I walked along the

street, passing saloons where the fumes of liquor came out, I

found that all my taste and longing for that accursed stuff was

gone. Glory to God! ... [But] for ten or eleven long years [after

that] I was in the wilderness with its ups and downs. My appetite

for liquor never came back.”

The classic case of Colonel Gardiner is that of a man cured of sexual

temptation in a single hour. To Mr. Spears the colonel said, “I was

effectually cured of all inclination to that sin I was so strongly

addicted to that I thought nothing but shooting me through the head could

have cured me of it; and all desire and inclination to it was removed, as

entirely as if I had been a sucking child; nor did the temptation return

to this day.” Mr. Webster’s words on the same subject are these: “One

thing I have heard the colonel frequently say, that he was much addicted

to impurity before his acquaintance with religion; but that, so soon as he

was enlightened from above, he felt the power of the Holy Ghost changing

his nature so wonderfully that his sanctification in this respect seemed

more remarkable than in any other.”(148)

Such rapid abolition of ancient impulses and propensities reminds us so

strongly of what has been observed as the result of hypnotic suggestion

that it is difficult not to believe that subliminal influences play the

decisive part in these abrupt changes of heart, just as they do in

hypnotism.(149) Suggestive therapeutics abound in records of cure, after a

few sittings, of inveterate bad habits with which the patient, left to

ordinary moral and physical influences, had struggled in vain. Both

drunkenness and sexual vice have been cured in this way, action through

the subliminal seeming thus in many individuals to have the prerogative of

inducing relatively stable change. If the grace of God miraculously

operates, it probably operates through the subliminal door, then. But just

_how_ anything operates in this region is still unexplained, and we shall

do well now to say good‐by to the _process_ of transformation

altogether,—leaving it, if you like, a good deal of a psychological or

theological mystery,—and to turn our attention to the fruits of the

religious condition, no matter in what way they may have been

produced.(150)

The collective name for the ripe fruits of religion in a character is

Saintliness.(151) The saintly character is the character for which

spiritual emotions are the habitual centre of the personal energy; and

there is a certain composite photograph of universal saintliness, the same

in all religions, of which the features can easily be traced.(152)

They are these:—

1. A feeling of being in a wider life than that of this world’s selfish

little interests; and a conviction, not merely intellectual, but as it

were sensible, of the existence of an Ideal Power. In Christian

saintliness this power is always personified as God; but abstract moral

ideals, civic or patriotic utopias, or inner visions of holiness or right

may also be felt as the true lords and enlargers of our life, in ways

which I described in the lecture on the Reality of the Unseen.(153)

2. A sense of the friendly continuity of the ideal power with our own

life, and a willing self‐surrender to its control.

3. An immense elation and freedom, as the outlines of the confining

selfhood melt down.

4. A shifting of the emotional centre towards loving and harmonious

affections, towards “yes, yes” and away from “no,” where the claims of the

non‐ego are concerned.

These fundamental inner conditions have characteristic practical

consequences, as follows:—

_a._ _Asceticism._—The self‐surrender may become so passionate as to turn

into self‐immolation. It may then so overrule the ordinary inhibitions of

the flesh that the saint finds positive pleasure in sacrifice and

asceticism, measuring and expressing as they do the degree of his loyalty

to the higher power.

_b._ _Strength of Soul._—The sense of enlargement of life may be so

uplifting that personal motives and inhibitions, commonly omnipotent,

become too insignificant for notice, and new reaches of patience and

fortitude open out. Fears and anxieties go, and blissful equanimity takes

their place. Come heaven, come hell, it makes no difference now!

“We forbid ourselves all seeking after popularity, all ambition to

appear important. We pledge ourselves to abstain from falsehood,

in all its degrees. We promise not to create or encourage

illusions as to what is possible, by what we say or write. We

promise to one another active sincerity, which strives to see

truth clearly, and which never fears to declare what it sees.

“We promise deliberate resistance to the tidal waves of fashion,

to the ‘booms’ and panics of the public mind, to all the forms of

weakness and of fear.

“We forbid ourselves the use of sarcasm. Of serious things we will

speak seriously and unsmilingly, without banter and without the

appearance of banter;—and even so of all things, for there are

serious ways of being light of heart.

“We will put ourselves forward always for what we are, simply and

without false humility, as well as without pedantry, affectation,

or pride.”

_c._ _Purity._—The shifting of the emotional centre brings with it, first,

increase of purity. The sensitiveness to spiritual discords is enhanced,

and the cleansing of existence from brutal and sensual elements becomes

imperative. Occasions of contact with such elements are avoided: the

saintly life must deepen its spiritual consistency and keep unspotted from

the world. In some temperaments this need of purity of spirit takes an

ascetic turn, and weaknesses of the flesh are treated with relentless

severity.

_d._ _Charity._—The shifting of the emotional centre brings, secondly,

increase of charity, tenderness for fellow‐creatures. The ordinary motives

to antipathy, which usually set such close bounds to tenderness among

human beings, are inhibited. The saint loves his enemies, and treats

loathsome beggars as his brothers.

‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐

I now have to give some concrete illustrations of these fruits of the

spiritual tree. The only difficulty is to choose, for they are so

abundant.

Since the sense of Presence of a higher and friendly Power seems to be the

fundamental feature in the spiritual life, I will begin with that.

In our narratives of conversion we saw how the world might look shining

and transfigured to the convert,(154) and, apart from anything acutely

religious, we all have moments when the universal life seems to wrap us

round with friendliness. In youth and health, in summer, in the woods or

on the mountains, there come days when the weather seems all whispering

with peace, hours when the goodness and beauty of existence enfold us like

a dry warm climate, or chime through us as if our inner ears were subtly

ringing with the world’s security. Thoreau writes:—

“Once, a few weeks after I came to the woods, for an hour I

doubted whether the near neighborhood of man was not essential to

a serene and healthy life. To be alone was somewhat unpleasant.

But, in the midst of a gentle rain, while these thoughts

prevailed, I was suddenly sensible of such sweet and beneficent

society in Nature, in the very pattering of the drops, and in

every sight and sound around my house, an infinite and

unaccountable friendliness all at once, like an atmosphere,

sustaining me, as made the fancied advantages of human

neighborhood insignificant, and I have never thought of them

since. Every little pine‐needle expanded and swelled with sympathy

and befriended me. I was so distinctly made aware of the presence

of something kindred to me, that I thought no place could ever be

strange to me again.”(155)

In the Christian consciousness this sense of the enveloping friendliness

becomes most personal and definite. “The compensation,” writes a German

author, “for the loss of that sense of personal independence which man so

unwillingly gives up, is the disappearance of all _fear_ from one’s life,

the quite indescribable and inexplicable feeling of an inner _security_,

which one can only experience, but which, once it has been experienced,

one can never forget.”(156)

I find an excellent description of this state of mind in a sermon by Mr.

Voysey:—

“It is the experience of myriads of trustful souls, that this

sense of God’s unfailing presence with them in their going out and

in their coming in, and by night and day, is a source of absolute

repose and confident calmness. It drives away all fear of what may

befall them. That nearness of God is a constant security against

terror and anxiety. It is not that they are at all assured of

physical safety, or deem themselves protected by a love which is

denied to others, but that they are in a state of mind equally

ready to be safe or to meet with injury. If injury befall them,

they will be content to bear it because the Lord is their keeper,

and nothing can befall them without his will. If it be his will,

then injury is for them a blessing and no calamity at all. Thus

and thus only is the trustful man protected and shielded from

harm. And I for one—by no means a thick‐skinned or hard‐nerved

man—am absolutely satisfied with this arrangement, and do not wish

for any other kind of immunity from danger and catastrophe. Quite

as sensitive to pain as the most highly strung organism, I yet

feel that the worst of it is conquered, and the sting taken out of

it altogether, by the thought that God is our loving and sleepless

keeper, and that nothing can hurt us without his will.”(157)

More excited expressions of this condition are abundant in religious

literature. I could easily weary you with their monotony. Here is an

account from Mrs. Jonathan Edwards:—

The Varieties of Religious Experience: A Study in Human Nature · 第 19 / 44 段