For faith is moved by but one solitary passion--the hope of cleaving,

closer and ever closer, to the being of God. It is, itself, nothing

but this act of personal adherence, of personal cohesion; and all else

is, for it, material that can be subdued to this single service. Each

bettering of knowledge intensifies the possibilities of this cohesion;

and, for that, it is welcomed. It opens out fresh aspects of the good

Father: it uncovers new treasures of His wisdom: therefore, for faith,

it is an ever-mounting ladder, by which it draws nearer and nearer,

spirit to spirit, heart to heart. No idle or indifferent matter this;

and right knowledge, therefore, is for faith, a serious and pressing

need. And, moreover, faith is pledged to use all possible guidance and

direction in making its great act of self-surrender to God. And it is

the peculiar office of reason, and of the rational conscience, to

guard it from any distorted and unworthy venture. Faith has to make

its leap; but to make it exactly in that direction, and in no other,

where reason points the way. It is bound therefore to use all its

intelligent resources: it may not fall below the level of its highest

reason without the risk of sinking to a superstition. This is the

radical difference between what we here claim, and that which a

superstition demands of us. A superstition asks faith to shut its

eyes. We ask it to open them as wide as it can. We demand this of it

as a positive duty. It is bound, as an act of the whole man, to use

every conceivable means and security which knowledge can bring it. For

so alone can it secure itself against the hazards which encompass its

adventure. It cannot afford to enter on that venturous committal of

itself less equipped and instructed than it was open to it to be. It

must put all to use that can better its offer of itself to God.

It is, in this seriousness, that faith is apt to embrace so fast the

dominant scientific or philosophical creed. It has found, through this

creed, a new and thrilling insight into God's mind, and it fastens on

this precious gift; and dwells delightedly on it, and spends itself in

absorbing the peculiar truths which this particular way of thinking

brings to the front. So that, at last, when the smash comes, when the

floods break in, when the accumulation of new facts outside the old

lines necessitates a total reconstruction of the intellectual fabric,

faith seems to have gone under with the ruined scheme to which it had

attached itself so firmly.

Yet, if ever it has implicated its own fate with that of any

particular form of knowledge, it has been false to itself. It has no

more right to identify itself with any intellectual situation than it

has to pin its fortunes to those of any political dynasty. Its eternal

task lies in rapid readjustment to each fresh situation, which the

motion of time may disclose to it. It has that in it which can apply

to all, and learn from all. Its identity is not lost, because its

expressions vary and shift: for its identity lies deep in personality;

and personality is that which testifies to its own identity by the

variety and the rapidity of its self-adaptation to the changes of

circumstance. So with faith. Its older interpretations of itself are

not false, because the newer situations have called for different

manifestations. Each situation forces a new aspect to the front. But

ever it is God and the soul, which recognise each other under every

disguise. Now it is in one fashion and now in another: but it is

always one unalterable wisdom which is justified, recognised, and

loved, by those who are her children.

We will not, then, be the least afraid of the taunt, that we are all

accepting and delivering from our pulpits that which once threw us

into anger and dismay. Only let us learn our true lesson; and, in our

zeal to appreciate the wonders of Evolution, let us hold ourselves

prepared for the day which is bound to come, when again the gathering

facts will clamour for a fresh generalisation: and the wheel will give

one more turn; and the new man will catch sight of the vision which is

preparing; and the new book will startle; and the new band of youthful

professors will denounce and demolish our present heroes; and all the

reviews and magazines will yelp in chorus at their heels, proclaiming

loudly that now, at last and for ever, the faith, which has pledged

itself so deeply to the obsolete and discredited theory of Evolution,

is indeed dead and done with. Faith will survive that crisis, as it

has survived so many before: but it will be something, if it does not

drag behind it the evil record of passion, and blindness, with which

it has too often disgraced its unwilling passage from truth to truth.

IV. But here our objections take, perhaps, a new turn altogether. 'Ah,

yes!' it will be said; 'faith, if it were a simple surrender of the

soul to God, a childlike adhesion of the spiritual sonship in us to

its Father, Who is in heaven, might sit loose to all formulæ,

theories, discoveries, in the way described. Faith, if it limited

itself to this mystical communion, might be beyond the scope and

criticism of reason. But this is not the least what you really ask of

us. The faith, for which you practically plead, the only form of faith

actually open to us, has rashly left these safe confines: it has

implicated itself with a vast body of facts recorded in a book. It has

involved itself in intricate statements of dogma. How can you claim to

be free from the control of logic and criticism, in things so directly

open to logical treatment? This spiritual faith of yours has mixed

itself up with alien matter, with historical incidents, with

intellectual definitions: here are things of evidence and proof. Here

its locks are shorn; its mystic strength is gone. Delilah holds it

fast; it is a prisoner in the hands of the Philistines. If you will

retreat again back into the region of simple spiritual intuitions, and

abandon to reason this debatable land, how gladly would we follow you!

But that is just what you refuse to do.'

Now, here is the serious moment for us of to-day. It is quite true

that all would be plain and easy, if we might be allowed to make this

retreat--if we might limit our claims for the spirit to that simple

childlike intuition which, instinctively, feels after, and surrenders

to, the good Father in heaven. But what would that retreat mean? It

would mean an attempt, desperate and blind, to turn back the world's

story, to ignore the facts, to over-leap the distinctions of time and

place, to deny experience, to force ourselves back into primitive

days, to imagine ourselves children again. Simple intuitions of God,

simple communion with the Father, unquestioned, undistracted,--this is

the privilege of primitive days, when minds are simple, when

experience is simple, when society is simple. Plain, easy, and direct

situations admit of plain, easy, and direct handling. But our

situation is not plain, easy, or direct. Our minds are intricate and

complicated; our story has been a long and a difficult one; our social

condition is the perplexed deposit of age-long experiences. The faith,

which is to be ours to-day, must be a faith of to-day. It cannot

remain at the level of childhood, when nothing else in us or about us

is the least childlike. It cannot babble out in pretty baby-language,

when the situation with which it has to deal is terribly earnest,

serious, perilous, and intense. It must be level with its work; and

its work is complicated, hard, disciplined: how can it expect to

accomplish it without effort, without pain, without training, without

intricacy? The world is old; human life is old; and faith is old also.

It has had many a strange and stormy experience; it has learned much

on the way; it has about it the marks of old troubles; the care, the

patience, the completeness of age, have left their stamp upon it. It

has had a history, like everything else; and it reaches us to-day, in

a form which that history behind it can alone make intelligible. Four

thousand years have gone to its making--since Abraham first laid hold,

in a definite and consistent manner, of the faith which is ours

to-day. All those centuries it has been putting itself together,

growing, enriching itself, developing, as it faced and measured each

new issue, each gathering complication, each pressing hazard. This

long experience has built up faith's history: and, by study of that

history, we can know why it was that faith could not stand still at

that point where we should find it so convenient to rest. Faith

appeals to its own story to justify its career; it bears about that

history with it as its explanation, why, and how it has arrived at its

present condition. That history is its proof how far it has left its

first childhood behind it, how impossible it is, at the end of the

days, to return to the beginning. The history, which constitutes our

difficulty, is its own answer. For there, in that Bible, lies the

recorded story of the facts which pressed hard upon the earliest

intuition of God, and drove it forward, and compelled it to fix

itself, and to define itself, and to take a firmer root, and to make

for itself a secure dwelling-place, and to shape for itself a career.

The Bible is the apology which our faith carries with it, and offers

as a proof of the necessity which has forced it to go beyond its

primitive efforts, until it has reached the stage at which we now

encounter it. It portrays there, before our eyes, how it all began;

how there came to this man and to that, the simple augury, the

presage, the spasm of spiritual insight, the flash, the glimpse, the

intimation; until there came the man, Abraham, in whom it won the

emphasis, the solidity, the power, of a call. 'Oh! that we might be

content to feel, as he, the presence of the Everlasting! Why not leave

us in peace, we cry, with the simple faith of Abraham?' And the answer

is plain: 'because it is the nineteenth century after Christ, instead

of the nineteenth century before.' We are making a mistake of dates.

Let us turn to our Bible and read. There we watch the reasons

disclosing themselves why that simple faith could not abide in arrest

at its first moment; why it must open a new career, with new duties,

and new responsibilities, and new problems. The seed is sown, but it

has to grow; to make good its footing amid the thick of human affairs;

to root itself in the soil of human history; to spread itself out in

institutions; to push its dominion; to widen its range; to become a

tree that will fill the land. Before Abraham, it was but a flying

seed, blown by the winds; now, it is a stable, continuous, masterful

growth. It must be this, if it is ever to make effective its spiritual

assertions over the increasing intricacy of human affairs.

What, let us ask, is that life of faith which historically began with

Abraham? It is a friendship, an intimacy, between man and God, between

a son and a father. Such an intimacy cannot be idle or stagnant; it

cannot arrest its instinctive development. It holds in it infinite

possibilities of growth: of increasing familiarity, of multiplied

communion. And, thus, such a friendship creates a story of its own; it

has its jars, its frictions, its entanglements; alas! on one side, its

lapses, its quarrels, its blunders, its misunderstandings: and then,

on the other, its corresponding indignations, and withdrawals, and

rebukes; and yet again, its reconciliations, its reactions, its

pardons, its victories. Ever it moves forward on its chequered path:

ever God, the good Friend, spends Himself in recovering the intimacy,

in renewing it, in purging it, in raising it. Its conditions expand:

its demands intensify: its perils deepen: its glories gather: until it

consummates its effort in the perfected communion of God and man--in

Him, Who completes and closes the story of this ever-growing intimacy,

by that act of supreme condescension which brings down God to inhabit

and possess the heart of man: and by that act of supreme exaltation,

which uplifts man into absolute union with the God Who made him.

This is the story: the Bible is its record. As a body of incidents and

facts it must be subject to all the conditions of history and the laws

of evidence; as a written record it introduces a swarm of questions,

which can be sifted and decided by rational criticism. This entails

complications, it must be confessed; but they are inevitable. The

intimacy between man and God cannot advance, except through the

pressure of connected and recorded experience. A human society which

has no record of its past is robbed of its future. It is savage: it

cannot go forward, because it cannot look back. So with this divine

friendship. Its recorded experiences are the one condition of its

growth. Without them it must always be beginning afresh: it must

remain imprisoned at the starting-post. The length and complexity of

its record is the measure of its progress; even though they must

present, at the same time, a larger surface to the handling of

criticism, and may involve a deeper degree of obscurity in details.

And, after all, though details drawn out of a dead past permit

obscurity, the nature and character of the main issue become ever more

fixed and distinct, as the long roll of circumstances discloses its

richer secrets. The very shift and confusion of the surface-material

throws out, in emphatic contrast, the firm outlines of the gathering

and growing mystery. Ever the advance proceeds, throwing off all that

is accidental, immaterial, subservient: ever man becomes clearer in

his recognition of the claims made on him by the hope which God keeps

ever before Him, 'They shall be my people: I will be their God.' Ever

the necessities of such an intimate affection point to the coming of

the Christ. Christ is the end, the sum, the completion, of this

historic friendship: and His advent is, therefore, absolutely

unintelligible unless it is held in relation to the long experience,

which He interprets, justifies, and fulfils. Faith in Christ is the

last result, the ultimate and perfected condition of that faith of

Abraham, which enabled him to become the first friend of God. And the

immense experience that lay between Abraham and St. Paul, can alone

bridge the interval, can alone exhibit the slow and laborious

evolution, through which the primitive apprehension of God was

transformed into the Christian Creed--that mighty transformation,

spread out over two thousand years of varied history, which our Lord

summed up in the lightning-flash, 'Your father Abraham rejoiced to see

my day: and he saw it, and was glad.' The Book is the record of those

tested and certified experiments, which justified our Lord in

asserting that to believe in God was, necessarily, to believe in Him.

No one can understand that assertion, unless by seeing it worked out,

in detail, by the searching logic of experience.

Faith in Christ, then, includes faith in the Bible: and, in saying

that, we have already cleared away much of the difficulty that beset

us. For our faith in Christ becomes the measure and standard of our

faith in the Bible. We believe in it as the record of our growing

intimacy with God. Faith is, still, a spiritual cohesion of person

with person,--of the living soul with a living God. No details that

intervene confuse this primitive relation. Only, that cohesion was not

reached at one leap. It is ancient: it has traversed many incidents

and trials: it has learned much: it has undergone patient

apprenticeship: it has been bonded by the memory of multitudinous

vicissitudes. Like all else that is human, it has grown. The details

of events are the media of that growth. In _that_ character they are

vitally essential to the formed intimacy: but in that character alone.

They are not valued for their own sake; but for the cause which they

served. Belief in God never changes its character, and becomes belief

in facts: it only developes into a deeper and deeper belief in God, as

disciplined by facts. The facts must be real, if the discipline is to

be real: but, apart from this necessity, we are indifferent to them.

We can listen to anything which historical criticism has to tell us,

of dates and authorship; of time and place. It may supply all the gaps

in our record, showing how the material there briefly gathered, had,

itself, a story, and slowly came together, and had sources and

associations elsewhere. All such research adds interest to the record,

as it opens out to us the action of the Divine Intimacy, in laying

hold of its material. We watch it, by the aid of such criticism, at

its work of assimilation; and, in uncovering its principles of

selection, we apprehend its inner mind: we draw closer to our God. The

more nearly we can ally the early conditions of Israel to those of

Arabian nomads, the more delicate and rare becomes our apprehension of

that divine relationship, which, by its perpetual pressure, lifted

Israel to its marvellous supremacy, and which, by its absence, left

the Arabian to be what he is to-day.

The point at which criticism must hold off its hands is, of course, a

most subtle matter to decide. But we can, at least, be sure of

this--that such a point will be no arbitrary one; it will be there,

where criticism attempts to trench on the reality and the uniqueness

of the Divine Intimacy, which those incidents served to fashion, and

those books detected and recorded, and Christ consummated. Our faith

in Christ must determine what, in the Bible, is vital to its own

veracity. There is no other measure or rule of what we mean by

inspiration.

The preparation for Christ, then, necessitates such complications as

these. And the character of His advent intensified and thickened them.

For, while asking of us the purest form of spiritual adherence, He

makes that demand in a shape which is imbedded throughout in concrete

historical facts, which, as facts, must be subject to the thumb of

critical discussion, and to all the external handling of evidence and

argument.

And, then, on the top of this, He has, of necessity, raised the

question of His own Personality to such a pitch of vital value, that

the full force of man's intellectual activities is drawn towards its

consideration,--is summoned to contemplate, and measure, and apprehend

it,--is compelled to examine and face its tremendous issues. The

supreme act of personal surrender, for which Christ unhesitatingly

asks, cannot conceivably pass beyond its child-stage without forming a

direct and urgent challenge to the intellect to say how, and why, such

an act can be justified, or such a claim interpreted. No faith can

reach to such an absolute condition without finding itself involved in

anxieties, perils, problems, complications. Its very absoluteness is a

provocation to the questioning and disputing mind,--to the hesitating

and scrupulous will. And the result, the inevitable result, of such a

faith--proposed, as it was, to a world no longer young and childlike,

but matured, old, thoughtful, experienced--is the Dogmatic Creeds. We

clamour against these intellectual complications: we cry out for the

simple primitive faith. But, once again, it is a mistake of dates. We

cannot ask to be as if eighteen centuries had dropped out,

unnoticed--as if the mind had slumbered since the days of Christ, and

had never asked a question. We cannot hope to be in the same condition

after a question has been asked, as we were before it had ever

occurred to us to ask it. The Creeds only record that certain

questions have, as a fact, been asked. Could our world be what it is,

and not have asked them? These difficulties of a complicated faith are

only the reflection of the difficulties of a complicated life. If, as

a fact, we are engaged in living a life which is intricate, subtle,

anxious, then any faith which hopes to cover and embrace that life,

cannot escape the necessity of being intricate, subtle, and anxious

also. No child's creed can satisfy a man's needs, hunger, hopes,

anxieties. If we are asked to throw over the complications of our

Creeds, we must beg those that ask us, to begin by throwing over the

complications of this social and moral life.

But still, with the Creeds as with the Bible, it is the personal

intimacy with God in Christ which alone is our concern. We do not, in

the strict sense, believe _in_ the Bible, or _in_ the Creeds: we

believe solely and absolutely in Christ Jesus. Faith is our living act

of adherence in Him, of cohesion with God. But still, once more, we

must recognise that this act of adhesion has a history: it has

gradually been trained and perfected: and this has been accomplished

through the long and perilous experiences recorded in the Old

Testament; and it has been consummated in the final sealing of the

perfected intimacy attained in Him, in Whose person it was realised

and made possible for us: and it has been guarded and secured to us in

the face of the overwhelming pressure of eighteen strong, stormy, and

distracted centuries. And therefore it is that we now must attain our

cohesion with God, subject to all the necessities laid upon us by the

fact that we enter on the world's stage at a late hour, when the drama

has already developed its plot and complicated its situations. This is

why we cannot now, in full view of the facts, believe in Christ,

without finding that our belief includes the Bible and the Creeds.

V. Faith is, still and always, a spiritual intimacy, a living

friendship with God. That is what we must be for ever asserting. That

is the key to all our problems; and once sure of this in all its

bearings, we shall not be afraid of a taunt which is apt to sting

especially those of us who are ordained. It is conveyed, in its

noblest form, in a book of Mr. John Morley's, on Compromise. No one

can read that book without being the better or the worse for it. The

intense force of high moral convictions acts upon us like a judgment.

It evokes the deepest conscience in us to come forward, and stand at

that austere bar and justify itself, or, in failing to justify itself,

sink condemned. And in that book he asks the old question, with

unequalled power: how can it possibly be honest for men to sign away

their reason at the age of twenty-three?--to commit themselves to

conclusions which they cannot have mastered--to anticipate beforehand

all that experience may have to teach? In committing themselves to

positions which any new knowledge or discovery may reverse, they have

forbidden themselves the free use of their critical faculties: they

have resigned their intellectual conscience.

What do we answer to that severe arraignment? Surely we now know well.

Faith is an affair of personal intimacy, of friendship, of will, of

love: and, in all such cases, we should know exactly what to do with

language of this type. We should laugh it out of court. For it is

language which does not belong to this region. It is the language, it

expresses the temper, of the scientific student--a temper, an attitude

specialised for a distinct purpose. That purpose is one of gradual

advance into regions as yet untouched and unsuspected--an advance

which is for ever changing the relations and classifications of those

already partially known. The temper essential to such a purpose must

be prepared for discovery, for development, for the unexpected; it is

bound to be tentative, experimental, hypothetical--to be cool,

critical, corrective. It deals with impersonal matter; and it must

itself, therefore, be as far as possible impersonal, abstract,

non-moral, without passion, without individuality, without a private

intention, or will, or fixed opinion.

But such a temper, perfectly justified for scientific purposes, is

absolutely impotent and barren in matters of moral feeling and

practice.

The man who brings this temper into play in affairs of the will, or

the heart, or the imagination, in cases of affection, friendship,

passion, inspiration, generosity, in the things of home, of war, of

patriotism, of love, is in the wrong world: he is a living blunder: he

has no cue, no key, no interpretation. He is simply absurd.

And religion stands with these affairs. Just as we see well enough

that if love were approached in this scientific spirit, it could not

even begin, so it is quite as certain that, if faith were approached

in this spirit, it could not even begin.

Mr. Morley has mixed up two different worlds. He is criticising that

form of knowledge, which consists in spiritual apprehension of

another's personality through the whole force of a man's inherent, and

integral, and personal, will and desire, by the standard of another

form of knowledge altogether, which consists in gradual and

experimental assimilation of foreign and unknown matter through

specialised organs of critical observation.

Lux Mundi: A Series of Studies in the Religion of the Incarnation, 10th Edition, 1890 · 第 7 / 51 段