The belief in a personal God thus bringing with it the possibility of

miracles, what reason then has to judge is whether it can accept

miracles as such, or any set of miracles, as worthy of a reasonable

conception of the Divine Nature, and whether it can be fairly said that

such miracles have answered a purpose which approves itself to our

reason. Testimony will always speak at a disadvantage till we are

assured on these points. Into the subject of testimony Mr. Mozley

enters only in a general way, though his remarks on the relation of

testimony to facts of so exceptional a nature as miracles, and also on

the distinct peculiarities of Christian evidence as contrasted with the

evidence of all other classes of alleged miracles, are marked by a

characteristic combination of acuteness, precision, and broad practical

sobriety and moderation. He rebukes with quiet and temperate and yet

resolute plainness of statement the misplaced ingenuity which, on

different sides, to serve very different causes, has tried to confuse

and perplex the claims of the great Christian miracles by comparisons

which it is really mere wantonness to make with later ones; for, be

they what they may, it is certain that the Gospel miracles, in nature,

in evidence, and in purpose and result, are absolutely unique in the

world, and have nothing like them. And though the book mainly confines

itself to its proper subject, the antecedent question of credibility,

some of the most striking remarks in it relate to the way in which the

purpose of miracles is visible in those of Christianity, and has been

served by them. A miracle is an instrument--an instrument without which

revelation is impossible; and Mr. Mozley meets Spinoza's objection to

the unmeaning isolation of a miracle by insisting on the distinction,

which Spinoza failed to see, between a miracle simply as a wonder for

its own sake, and as a means, deriving its use and its value simply

from the end which it was to serve. He observes that all the stupendous

"marvels of nature do not speak to us in that way in which one miracle

does, because they do not tell us that we are not like themselves"; and

he remarks on the "perverse determination of Spinoza to look at

miracles in that aspect which does not belong to them, and not to look

at them in that aspect which does."

He compares miracles with nature, and then says how wise is the

order of nature, how meaningless the violation of it; how

expressive of the Almighty Mind the one, what a concealment of it

the other! But no one pretends to say that a miracle competes with

nature, in physical purpose and effectiveness. That is not its

object. But a miracle, though it does not profess to compete with

nature upon its rival's own ground, has a ghostly force and import

which nature has not. If real, it is a token, more pointed and

direct than physical order can be, of another world, and of Moral

Being and Will in that world.

Thus, regarding miracles as means to fulfil a purpose, Mr. Mozley shows

what has come of them. His lecture on "Miracles regarded in their

Practical Result" is excelled by some of the others as examples of

subtle and searching thought and well-balanced and compact argument;

but it is a fine example of the way in which a familiar view can have

fresh colour and force thrown into it by the way in which it is

treated. He shows that it is impossible in fact to separate from the

miracles in which it professed to begin, the greatest and deepest moral

change which the world has ever known. This change was made not by

miracles but by certain doctrines. The Epistle to the Romans surveyed

the moral failure of the world; St. Paul looked on the chasm between

knowledge and action, the "unbridged gulf, this incredible inability of

man to do what was right, with profound wonder"; but in the face of

this hopeless spectacle he dared to prophesy the moral elevation which

we have witnessed, and the power to which he looked to bring it about

was the Christian doctrines. St. Paul "takes what may be called the

high view of human nature--i.e. what human nature is capable of when

the proper motive and impulse is applied to it." He sees in Christian

doctrine that strong force which is to break down "the _vis inertiae_

of man, to set human nature going, to touch the spring of man's heart";

and he compares with St. Paul's doctrines and hopefulness the doctrinal

barrenness, the despair of Mohammedanism:--

If one had to express in a short compass the character of its

remarkable founder as a teacher, it would be that that great man

had no faith in human nature. There were two things which he

thought man could do and would do for the glory of God--transact

religious forms, and fight; and upon those two points he was

severe; but within the sphere of common practical life, where

man's great trial lies, his code exhibits the disdainful laxity of

a legislator who accommodates his rule to the recipient, and shows

his estimate of the recipient by the accommodation which he

adopts. Did we search history for a contrast, we could hardly

discover a deeper one than that between St. Paul's overflowing

standard of the capabilities of human nature and the oracular

cynicism of the great false Prophet. The writer of the Koran does,

indeed, if any discerner of hearts ever did, take the measure of

mankind; and his measure is the same that Satire has taken, only

expressed with the majestic brevity of one who had once lived in

the realm of Silence. "Man is weak," says Mahomet. And upon that

maxim he legislates.... The keenness of Mahomet's insight into

human nature, a wide knowledge of its temptations, persuasives,

influences under which it acts, a vast immense capacity of

forbearance for it, half grave half genial, half sympathy half

scorn, issue in a somewhat Horatian model, the character of the

man of experience who despairs of any change in man, and lays down

the maxim that we must take him as we find him. It was indeed his

supremacy in both faculties, the largeness of the passive nature

and the splendour of action, that constituted the secret of his

success. The breadth and flexibility of mind that could negotiate

with every motive of interest, passion, and pride in man is

surprising; there is boundless sagacity; what is wanting is hope,

a belief in the capabilities of human nature. There is no upward

flight in the teacher's idea of man. Instead of which, the notion

of the power of earth, and the impossibility of resisting it,

depresses his whole aim, and the shadow of the tomb falls upon the

work of the great false Prophet.

The idea of God is akin to the idea of man. "He knows us," says

Mahomet. God's _knowledge_, the vast _experience_, so to speak, of

the Divine Being, His infinite acquaintance with man's frailties

and temptations, is appealed to as the ground of confidence. "He

is the Wise, the Knowing One," "He is the Knowing, the Wise," "He

is easy to be reconciled." Thus is raised a notion of the Supreme

Being, which is rather an extension of the character of the

large-minded and sagacious man of the world than an extension of

man's virtue and holiness. He forgives because He knows too much

to be rigid, because sin universal ceases to be sin, and must be

given way to. Take a man who has had large opportunity of studying

mankind, and has come into contact with every form of human

weakness and corruption; such a man is indulgent as a simple

consequence of his knowledge, because nothing surprises him. So

the God of Mahomet forgives by reason of His vast knowledge.

In contrast with the fruit of this he observes that "the prophecy in

the Epistle to the Romans has been fulfilled, and that doctrine has

been historically at the bottom of a great change of moral practice in

mankind." The key has been found to set man's moral nature in action,

to check and reverse that course of universal failure manifest before;

and this key is Christian doctrine. "A stimulus has been given to human

nature which has extracted an amount of action from it which no Greek

or Roman could have believed possible." It is inconceivable that but

for such doctrine such results as have been seen in Christendon would

have followed; and were it now taken away we cannot see anything else

that would have the faintest expectation of taking its place. "Could we

commit mankind to a moral Deism without trembling for the result?" Can

the enthusiasm for the divinity of human nature stand the test of

clear, unsparing observation? Would it not issue in such an estimate of

human nature as Mahomet took? "A deification of humanity upon its own

grounds, an exaltation which is all height and no depth, wants power

because it wants truth. It is not founded upon the facts of human

nature, and therefore issues in vain and vapid aspiration, and injures

the solidity of man's character." As he says, "The Gospel doctrine of

the Incarnation and its effects alone unites the sagacious view of

human nature with the enthusiastic." And now what is the historical

root and basis from which this one great moral revolution in the

world's history, so successful, so fruitful, so inexhaustible, has

started?

But if, as the source and inspiration of practice, doctrine has

been the foundation of a new state of the world, and of that

change which distinguishes the world under Christianity from the

world before it, miracles, as the proof of that doctrine, stand

before us in a very remarkable and peculiar light. Far from being

mere idle feats of power to gratify the love of the marvellous;

far even from being mere particular and occasional rescues from

the operation of general laws,--they come before us as means for

accomplishing the largest and most important practical object that

has ever been accomplished in the history of mankind. They lie at

the bottom of the difference of the modern from the ancient world;

so far, i.e., as that difference is moral. We see as a fact a

change in the moral condition of mankind, which marks ancient and

modern society as two different states of mankind. What has

produced this change, and elicited this new power of action?

Doctrine. And what was the proof of that doctrine, or essential to

the proof of it? Miracles. The greatness of the result thus throws

light upon the propriety of the means, and shows the fitting

object which was presented for the introduction of such means--the

fitting occasion which had arisen for the use of them; for,

indeed, no more weighty, grand, or solemn occasion can be

conceived than the foundation of such a new order of things in the

world. Extraordinary action of Divine power for such an end has

the benefit of a justifying object of incalculable weight; which

though not of itself, indeed, proof of the fact, comes with

striking force upon the mind in connection with the proper proof.

It is reasonable, it is inevitable, that we should be impressed by

such a result; for it shows that the miraculous system has been a

practical one; that it has been a step in the ladder of man's

ascent, the means of introducing those powerful truths which have

set his moral nature in action.

Of this work, remarkable in so many ways, we will add but one thing

more. It is marked throughout with the most serious and earnest

conviction, but it is without a single word, from first to last, of

asperity or insinuation against opponents; and this, not from any

deficiency of feeling as to the importance of the issue, but from a

deliberate and resolutely maintained self-control, and from an

overruling ever-present sense of the duty, on themes like these, of a

more than judicial calmness.

IX

ECCE HOMO[11]

[11]

_Ecce Homo: A Survey of the Life and Work of Jesus Christ. Guardian_,

7th February 1866.

This is a dangerous book to review. The critic of it, if he is prudent,

will feel that it is more than most books a touchstone of his own

capacity, and that in giving his judgment upon it he cannot help giving

his own measure and betraying what he is himself worth. All the

unconscious guiding which a name, even if hitherto unknown, gives to

opinion is wanting. The first aspect of the book is perplexing; closer

examination does not clear up all the questions which present

themselves; and many people, after they have read it through, will not

feel quite certain what it means. Much of what is on the surface and

much of what is inherent in the nature of the work will jar painfully

on many minds; while others who begin to read it under one set of

impressions may by the time they have got to the end complain of having

been taken in. There can be no doubt on which side the book is; but it

may be open to debate from which side it has come. The unknown champion

who comes into the lists with barred vizor and no cognisance on his

shield leaves it not long uncertain for which of the contending parties

he appears; but his weapons and his manner of fighting are not the

ordinary ones of the side which he takes; and there is a force in his

arm, and a sweep in his stroke, which is not that of common men. The

book is one which it is easy to take exception to, and perhaps still

easier to praise at random; but the subject is put before us in so

unusual a way, and one so removed from the ordinary grooves of thought,

that in trying to form an adequate estimate of the work as a whole, a

man feels as he does when he is in the presence of something utterly

unfamiliar and unique, when common rules and inferences fail him, and

in pronouncing upon which he must make something of a venture.

In making our own venture we will begin with what seems to us

incontestable. In the first place, but that it has been questioned, we

should say that there could be no question of the surpassing ability

which the book displays. It is far beyond the power of the average

clever and practised writer of our days. It is the work of a man in

whom thought, sympathy, and imagination are equally powerful and

wealthy, and who exercises a perfect and easy command over his own

conceptions, and over the apt and vivid language which is their

expression. Few men have entered so deeply into the ideas and feelings

of the time, or have looked at the world, its history and its

conditions, with so large and piercing an insight. But it is idle to

dwell on what must strike, at first sight, any one who but opens the

book. We go on to observe, what is equally beyond dispute, the deep

tone of religious seriousness which pervades the work. The writer's way

of speaking is very different from that of the ascetic or the devotee;

but no ascetic or devotee could be more profoundly penetrated with the

great contrast between holiness and evil, and show more clearly in his

whole manner of thinking the ineffaceable impression of the powers of

the world to come. Whatever else the book may be, this much is plain on

the face of it--it is the work of a mind of extreme originality, depth,

refinement, and power; and it is also the work of a very religious man:

Thomas à Kempis had not a more solemn sense of things unseen and of

what is meant by the Imitation of Christ.

What the writer wishes his book to be understood to be we must gather

from his Preface:--

Those who feel dissatisfied with the current conceptions of

Christ, if they cannot rest content without a definite opinion,

may find it necessary to do what to persons not so dissatisfied it

seems audacious and perilous to do. They may be obliged to

reconsider the whole subject from the beginning, and placing

themselves in imagination at the time when he whom we call Christ

bore no such name, but was simply, as St. Luke describes him, a

young man of promise, popular with those who knew him, and

appearing to enjoy the Divine favour, to trace his biography from

point to point, and accept those conclusions about him, not which

church doctors or even apostles have sealed with their authority,

but which the facts themselves, critically weighed, appear to

warrant.

This is what the present writer undertook to do for the

satisfaction of his own mind, and because, after reading a good

many books on Christ, he felt still constrained to confess that

there was no historical character whose motives, objects, and

feelings remained so incomprehensible to him. The inquiry which

proved serviceable to himself may chance to be useful to others.

What is now published is a fragment. No theological questions

whatever are here discussed. Christ, as the creator of modern

theology and religion, will make the subject of another volume,

which, however, the author does not hope to publish for some time

to come. In the meanwhile he has endeavoured to furnish an answer

to the question, What was Christ's object in founding the Society

which is called by his name, and how is it adapted to attain that

object?

Thus the book comes before us as a serious facing of difficulties. And

that the writer lays stress on its being so viewed appears further from

a letter which he wrote to the _Spectator_, repeating emphatically that

the book is not one "written after the investigation was completed, but

the _investigation_ itself." The letter may be taken to complete the

statement of the Preface:--

I endeavoured in my Preface to describe the state of mind in which

I undertook my book. I said that the character and objects of

Christ were at that time altogether incomprehensible to me, and

that I wished to try whether an independent investigation would

relieve my perplexity. Perhaps I did not distinctly enough state

that _Ecce Homo_ is not a book written after the investigation was

completed, but the _investigation_ itself.

The Life of Christ is partly easy to understand and partly

difficult. This being so, what would a man do who wished to study

it methodically? Naturally he would take the easy part first. He

would collect, arrange, and carefully consider all the facts which

are simple, and until he has done this, he would carefully avoid

all those parts of his subject which are obscure, and which cannot

be explained without making bold hypotheses. By this course he

would limit the problem, and in the meanwhile arrive at a probable

opinion concerning the veracity of the documents, and concerning

the characteristics, both intellectual and moral, of the person

whose high pretensions he wished to investigate.

This is what I have done. I have postponed altogether the hardest

questions connected with Christ, as questions which cannot

properly be discussed until a considerable quantity of evidence

has been gathered about his character and views. If this evidence,

when collected, had appeared to be altogether conflicting and

inconsistent, I should have been saved the trouble of proceeding

any further; I should have said that Christ is a myth. If it had

been consistent, and had disclosed to me a person of mean and

ambitious aims, I should have said, Christ is a deceiver. Again,

if it had exhibited a person of weak understanding and strong

impulsive sensibility, I should have said Christ is a bewildered

enthusiast.

In all these cases you perceive my method would have saved me a

good deal of trouble. As it is, I certainly feel bound to go on,

though, as I say in my Preface, my progress will necessarily be

slow. But I am much engaged and have little time for theological

study. But pray do not suppose that postponing questions is only

another name for evading them. I think I have gained much by this

postponement. I have now a very definite notion of Christ's

character and that of his followers. I shall be able to judge how

far he was likely to deceive himself or them. It is possible I may

have put others, who can command more time than I, in a condition

to take up the subject where for the present I leave it.

You say my picture suffers by my method. But _Ecce Homo_ is not a

picture: it is the very opposite of a picture; it is an analysis.

It may be, you will answer, that the title suggests a picture.

This may perhaps be true, and if so, it is no doubt a fault, but a

fault in the title, not in the book. For titles are put to books,

not books to titles.

Thus it appears that the writer found it his duty to investigate those

awful questions which every thinking man feels to be full of the

"incomprehensible" and unfathomable, but which many thinking men, for

various reasons both good and bad, shrink from attempting to

investigate, accepting on practical and very sufficient grounds the

religious conclusions which are recommended and sanctioned by the

agreement of Christendom. And finding it his duty to investigate them

at all, he saw that he was bound to investigate in earnest. But under

what circumstances this happened, from what particular pressure of

need, and after what previous belief or state of opinion, we are not

told. Whether from being originally on the doubting side--on the

irreligious side we cannot suppose he ever could have been--he has

risen through his investigation into belief; or whether, originally on

the believing side, he found the aspect so formidable, to himself or to

the world, of the difficulties and perplexities which beset belief,

that he turned to bay upon the foes that dogged him--must be left to

conjecture. It is impossible to question that he has been deeply

impressed with the difficulties of believing; it is impossible to

question that doubt has been overborne and trampled under foot. But

here we have the record, it would not be accurate to say of the

struggle, but of that resolute and unflinching contemplation of the

realities of the case which decided it. Such plunging into such a

question must seem, as he says, to those who do not need it, "audacious

and perilous"; for if you plunge into a question in earnest, and do not

under a thin disguise take a side, you must, whatever your bias and

expectation, take your chance of the alternative answers which may come

out. It is a simple fact that there are many people who feel

"dissatisfied with the current conceptions" of our Lord--whether

reasonably and justly dissatisfied is another question; but whatever we

think of it they remain dissatisfied. In such emergencies it is

conceivable that a man who believes, yet keenly realises and feels what

disturbs or destroys the belief of others, should dare to put himself

in their place; should enter the hospital and suffer the disease which

makes such ravages; should descend into the shades and face the

spectres. No one can deny the risk of dwelling on such thoughts as he

must dwell on; but if he feels warmly with his kind, he may think it

even a duty to face the risk. To any one accustomed to live on his

belief it cannot but be a hard necessity, full of pain and difficulty,

first to think and then to speak of what he believes, as if it _might

not_ be, or _could be_ otherwise; but the changes of time bring up ever

new hard necessities; and one thing is plain, that if ever such an

investigation is undertaken, it ought to be a real one, in good earnest

and not in play. If a man investigates at all, both for his own sake

and for the sake of the effect of his investigation on others, he must

accept the fair conditions of investigation. We may not ourselves be

able to conceive the possibility of taking, even provisionally, a

neutral position; but looking at what is going on all round us, we

ought to be able to enlarge our thoughts sufficiently to take in the

idea that a believing mind may feel it a duty to surrender itself

boldly to the intellectual chances and issues of the inquiry, and to

"let its thoughts take their course in the confidence that they will

come home at last." It may be we ourselves who "have not faith enough

to be patient of doubt"; there may be others who feel that if what they

believe is real, they need not be afraid of the severest revisal and

testing of the convictions on which they rest; who feel that, in the

circumstances of the time, it is not left to their choice whether these

convictions shall be sifted unsparingly and to the uttermost; and who

think it a venture not unworthy of a Christian, to descend even to the

depths to go through the thoughts of doubters, if so be that he may

find the spell that shall calm them. We do not say that this book is

the production of such a state of mind; we only think that it may be.

One thing is clear, wherever the writer's present lot is cast, he has

that in him which not only enables him, but forces him, to sympathise

with what he sees in the opposite camp. If he is what is called a

Liberal, his whole heart is yet pouring itself forth towards the great

truths of Christianity. If he is what is called orthodox, his whole

intellect is alive to the right and duty of freedom of thought. He will

therefore attract and repel on both sides. And he appears to feel that

the position of double sympathy gives him a special advantage, to

attract to each side what is true in its opposite, and to correct in

each what is false or inadequate.

Occasional Papers Selected from the Guardian, the Times, and the Saturday Review, 1846-1890, Vol. 2 · 第 8 / 30 段