BIOGENESIS
"What we require is no new Revelation, but simply an adequate
conception of the true essence of Christianity. And I believe that, as
time goes on, the work of the Holy Spirit will be continuously shown in
the gradual insight which the human race will attain into the true essence
of the Christian religion. I am thus of opinion that a standing miracle
exists, and that it has ever existed—a direct and continued influence
exerted by the supernatural on the natural."
PARADOXICAL PHILOSOPHY.
"He that hath the Son hath Life, and he that hath not the Son of God
hath not Life."—John.
"Omne vivum ex vivo."—Harvey.
FOR two hundred years the scientific world has been rent with
discussions upon the Origin of Life. Two great schools have defended
exactly opposite views —one that matter can spontaneously generate life,
the other that life can only come from pre-existing life. The doctrine of
Spontaneous Generation, as the first is called, has been revived within
recent years by Dr. Bastian, after a series of elaborate experiments on
the Beginnings of Life. Stated in his own words, his conclusion is this:
"Both observation and experiment unmistakeably
testify to the fact that living matter is constantly being formed de novo,
in obedience to the same laws and tendencies which determine all the more
simple chemical combinations."[33] Life, that is to
say, is not the Gift of Life. It is capable of springing into being of
itself. It can be Spontaneously Generated.
This announcement called into the field a phalanx of observers, and the
highest authorities in biological science engaged themselves afresh upon
the problem. The experiments necessary to test the matter can be followed
or repeated by any one possessing the slightest manipulative skill. Glass
vessels are three-parts filled with infusions of hay or any organic
matter. They are boiled to kill all germs of life, and hermetically sealed
to exclude the outer air. The air inside, having been exposed to the
boiling temperature for many hours, is supposed to be likewise dead; so
that any life which may subsequently appear in the closed flasks must have
sprung into being of itself. In Bastian's experiments, after every
expedient to secure sterility, life did appear inside in myriad quantity.
Therefore, he argued, it was spontaneously generated.
But the phalanx of observers found two errors in this calculation.
Professor Tyndall repeated the same experiment, only with a precaution to
ensure absolute sterility suggested by the most recent science—a discovery
of his own. After every care, he conceived there might still be
undestroyed germs in the air inside the flasks. If the air were absolutely
germless and pure, would the myriad-life appear? He manipulated his
experimental vessels in an atmosphere which under the high test of optical
purity—the most delicate known test—was absolutely germless. Here not a
vestige of life appeared. He varied the experiment in every direction, but
matter in the germless air never yielded life.
The other error was detected by Mr. Dallinger. He found among the lower
forms of life the most surprising and indestructible vitality. Many
animals could survive much higher temperatures than Dr. Bastian had
applied to annihilate them. Some germs almost refused to be
annihilated—they were all but fire-proof.
These experiments have practically closed the question. A decided and
authoritative conclusion has now taken its place in science. So far as
science can settle anything, this question is settled. The attempt to get
the living out of the dead has failed. Spontaneous Generation has had to
be given up. And it is now recognised on every hand that Life can only
come from the touch of Life. Huxley categorically announces that the
doctrine of Biogenesis, or life only from life, is "victorious along the
whole line at the present day."[34] And even whilst
confessing that he wishes the evidence were the other way, Tyndall is
compelled to say, "I affirm that no shred of trustworthy experimental
testimony exists to prove that life in our day has ever appeared
independently of antecedent life."[35]
For much more than two hundred years a similar discussion has dragged
its length through the religious world. Two great schools here also have
defended exactly opposite views—one that the Spiritual Life in man can
only come from pre-existing Life, the other that it can Spontaneously
Generate itself. Taking its stand upon the initial statement of the Author
of the Spiritual Life, one small school, in the face of derision and
opposition, has persistently maintained the doctrine of Biogenesis.
Another, larger and with greater pretension to philosophic form, has
defended Spontaneous Generation. The weakness of the former school
consists—though this has been much exaggerated—in its more or less general
adherence to the extreme view that religion had nothing to do with the
natural life; the weakness of the latter lay in yielding to the more fatal
extreme that it had nothing to do with anything else. That man, being a
worshipping animal by nature, ought to maintain certain relations to the
Supreme Being, was indeed to some extent conceded by the naturalistic
school, but religion itself was looked upon as a thing to be spontaneously
generated by the evolution of character in the laboratory of common life.
The difference between the two positions is radical. Translating from
the language of Science into that of Religion, the theory of Spontaneous
Generation is simply that a man may become gradually better and better
until in course of the process he reaches that quality of religious nature
known as Spiritual Life. This Life is not something added ab extra to the
natural man; it is the normal and appropriate development of the natural
man. Biogenesis opposes to this the whole doctrine of Regeneration. The
Spiritual Life is the gift of the Living Spirit. The spiritual man is no
mere development of the natural man. He is a New Creation born from Above.
As well expect a hay infusion to become gradually more and more living
until in course of the process it reached Vitality, as expect a man by
becoming better and better to attain the Eternal Life.
The advocates of Biogenesis in Religion have founded their argument
hitherto all but exclusively on Scripture. The relation of the doctrine to
the constitution and course of Nature was not disclosed. Its importance,
therefore, was solely as a dogma; and being directly concerned with the
Supernatural, it was valid for those alone who chose to accept the
Supernatural.
Yet it has been keenly felt by those who attempt to defend this
doctrine of the origin of the Spiritual Life, that they have nothing more
to oppose to the rationalistic view than the ipse dixit of Revelation. The
argument from experience, in the nature of the case, is seldom easy to
apply, and Christianity has always found at this point a genuine
difficulty in meeting the challenge of Natural Religions. The direct
authority of Nature, using Nature in its limited sense, was not here to be
sought for, On such a question its voice was necessarily silent; and all
that the apologist could look for lower down was a distant echo or
analogy. All that is really possible, indeed, is such an analogy; and if
that can now be found in Biogenesis, Christianity in its most central
position secures at length a support and basis in the Laws of Nature.
Up to the present time the analogy required has not been forthcoming.
There was no known parallel in Nature for the spiritual phenomena in
question. But now the case is altered. With the elevation of Biogenesis to
the rank of a scientific fact, all problems concerning the Origin of Life
are placed on a different footing. And it remains to be seen whether
Religion cannot at once re-affirm and re-shape its argument in the light
of this modern truth.
If the doctrine of the Spontaneous Generation of Spiritual Life can be
met on scientific grounds, it will smear the removal of the most serious
enemy Christianity has to deal with, and especially within its own
borders, at the present day. The religion of Jesus has probably always
suffered more from those who have misunderstood than from those who have
opposed it. Of the multitudes who confess Christianity at this hour how
many have clear in their minds the cardinal distinction established by its
Founder between "born of the flesh" and "born of the Spirit"? By how many
teachers of Christianity even is not this fundamental postulate
persistently ignored? A thousand modern pulpits every seventh day are
preaching the doctrine of Spontaneous Generation. The finest and best of
recent poetry is coloured with this same error. Spontaneous Generation is
the leading theology of the modern religious or irreligious novel; and
much of the most serious and cultured writing of the day devotes itself to
earnest preaching of this impossible gospel. The current conception of the
Christian religion in short—the conception which is held not only
popularly but by men of culture—is founded upon a view of its origin
which, if it were true, would render the whole scheme abortive.
Let us first place vividly in our imagination the picture of the two
great Kingdoms of Nature, the inorganic and organic, as these now stand in
the light of the Law of Biogenesis. What essentially is involved in saying
that there is no Spontaneous Generation of Life? It is meant that the
passage from the mineral world to the plant or animal world is
hermetically sealed on the mineral side. This inorganic world is staked
off from the living world by barriers which have never yet been crossed
from within. No change of substance, no modification of environment, no
chemistry, no electricity, nor any form of energy, nor any evolution can
endow any single atom of the mineral world with the attribute of Life.
Only by the bending down into this dead world of some living form can
these dead atoms be gifted with the properties of vitality, without this
preliminary contact with Life they remain fixed in the inorganic sphere
for ever. It is a very mysterious Law which guards in this way the portals
of the living world. And if there is one thing in Nature more worth
pondering for its strangeness it is the spectacle of this vast helpless
world of the dead cut off from the living by the Law of Biogenesis and
denied for ever the possibility of resurrection within itself. So very
strange a thing, indeed, is this broad line in Nature, that Science has
long and urgently sought to obliterate it. Biogenesis stands in the way of
some forms of Evolution with such stern persistency that the assaults upon
this Law for number and thoroughness have been unparalleled. But, as we
have seen, it has stood the test. Nature, to the modern eye, stands broken
in two. The physical Laws may explain the inorganic world; the biological
Laws may account for the development of the organic. But of the point
where they meet, of that strange borderland between the dead and the
living, Science is silent. It is as if God had placed everything in earth
and heaven in the hands of Nature, but reserved a point at the genesis of
Life for His direct appearing.
The power of the analogy, for which we are laying the foundations, to
seize and impress the mind, will largely depend on the vividness with
which one realizes the gulf which Nature places between the living and the
dead.[36] But those who, in contemplating Nature, have
found their attention arrested by his extraordinary dividing-line severing
the visible universe eternally into two; those who in watching the
progress of science have seen barrier after barrier disappear—barrier
between plant and plant, between animal and animal, and even between
animal and plant—but this gulf yawn more hopelessly wide with every
advance of knowledge, will be prepared to attach a significance to the Law
of Biogenesis and its analogies more profound perhaps than to any other
fact or law in Nature. If, as Pascal says, Nature is an image of grace; if
the things that are seen are in any sense the images of the unseen, there
must lie in this great gulf fixed, this most unique and startling of all
natural phenomena, a meaning of peculiar moment.
Where now in the Spiritual spheres shall we meet a companion phenomenon
to this? What in the Unseen shall be likened to this deep dividing-line,
or where in human experience is another barrier which never can be
crossed?
There is such a barrier. In the dim but not inadequate vision of the
Spiritual World presented in the Word of God, the first thing that strikes
the eye is a great gulf fixed. The passage from the Natural World to the
Spiritual World is hermetically sealed on the natural side. The door from
the inorganic to the organic is shut; no mineral can open it; so the door
from the natural to the spiritual is shut, and no man can open it. This
world of natural men is staked off from the Spiritual World by barriers
which have never yet been crossed from within. No organic change, no
modification of environment, no mental energy, no moral effort, no
evolution of character, no progress of civilization can endow any single
human soul with the attribute of Spiritual Life. The Spiritual World is
guarded from the world next in order beneath it by a law of
Biogenesis—except a man be born again . . . except a man be born of water
and of the Spirit, he cannot enter the Kingdom of God.
It is not said, in this enunciation of the law, that if the condition
be not fulfilled the natural man will not enter the Kingdom of God. The
word is cannot. For the exclusion of the spiritually inorganic from the
Kingdom of the spiritually organic is not arbitrary. Nor is the natural
man refused admission on unexplained grounds. His admission is a
scientific impossibility. Except a mineral be born "from above"—from the
Kingdom just above it—it cannot enter the Kingdom just above it. And
except a man be born "from above," by the same law, he cannot enter the
Kingdom just above him. There being no passage from one Kingdom to
another, whether from inorganic to organic, or from organic to spiritual,
the intervention of Life is a scientific necessity if a stone or a plant
or an animal or a man is to pass from a lower to a higher sphere. The
plant stretches down to the dead world beneath it, touches its minerals
and gases with its mystery of Life, and brings them up ennobled and
transformed to the living sphere. The breath of God, blowing where it
listeth, touches with its mystery of Life the dead souls of men, bears
them across the bridgeless gulf between the natural and the spiritual,
between the spiritually inorganic and the spiritually organic, endows them
with its own high qualities, and develops within them these new and secret
faculties, by which those who are born again are said to see the Kingdom
of God.
What is the evidence for this great gulf fixed at the portals of the
Spiritual World? Does Science close this gate, or Reason, or Experience,
or Revelation? We reply, all four. The initial statement, it is not to be
denied, reaches us from Revelation. But is not this evidence here in
court? Or shall it be said that any argument deduced from this is a
transparent circle—that after all we simply come back to the
unsubstantiality of the ipse dixit? Not altogether, for the analogy lends
an altogether new authority to the ipse dixit. How substantial that
argument really is, is seldom realized. We yield the point here much too
easily. The right of the Spiritual World to speak of its own phenomena is
as secure as the right of the Natural World to speak of itself. What is
Science but what the Natural World has said to natural men? What is
Revelation but what the Spiritual World has said to Spiritual men? Let us
at least ask what Revelation has announced with reference to this
Spiritual Law of Biogenesis; afterwards we shall inquire whether Science,
while endorsing the verdict, may not also have some further vindication of
its title to be heard.
The words of Scripture which preface this inquiry contain an explicit
and original statement of the Law of Biogenesis for the Spiritual Life.
"He What hath the Son hath Life, and he that hath not the Son of God hath
not Life." Life, that is to say, depends upon contact with Life. It cannot
spring up of itself. It cannot develop out of anything that is not Life.
There is no Spontaneous Generation in religion any more than in Nature.
Christ is the source of Life in the Spiritual World; and he that hath the
Son hath Life, and he that hath not the Son, whatever else he may have,
hath not Life. Here, in short, is the categorical denial of Abiogenesis
and the establishment in this high field of the classical formula 0mne
vivum ex vivo— no Life without antecedent Life. In this mystical theory of
the Origin of Life the whole of the New Testament writers are agreed. And,
as we have already seen, Christ Himself founds Christianity upon
Biogenesis stated in its most literal form. "Except a man be born of water
and of the Spirit he cannot enter into the Kingdom of God. That which is
born of the flesh is flesh; and that which is born of the Spirit is
Spirit. Marvel not that I said unto you, ye must be born again."[37] Why
did He add Marvel not? Did He seek to allay the fear in the bewildered
ruler's mind that there was more in this novel doctrine than a simple
analogy from the first to the second birth?
The attitude of the natural man, again, with reference to the
Spiritual, is a subject on which the New Testament is equally pronounced.
Not only in his relation to the spiritual man, but to the whole Spiritual
World, the natural man is regarded as dead. He is as a crystal to an
organism. The natural world is to the Spiritual as the inorganic to the
organic. "To be carnally minded is Death."[38] "Thou hast a name to live,
but art Dead."[39] " She that liveth in pleasure is Dead while she
liveth."[40] "To you hath He given Life which were Dead in trespasses and
sins."[41]
It is clear that a remarkable harmony exists here between the Organic
World as arranged by Science and the Spiritual World as arranged by
Scripture. We find one great Law guarding the thresholds of both worlds,
securing that entrance from a lower sphere shall only take place by a
direct regenerating act, and that emanating from the world next in order
above. There are not two laws of Biogenesis, one for the natural, the
other for the Spiritual; one law is for both. Wherever there is Life, Life
of any kind, this same law holds. The analogy, therefore, is only among
the phenomena; between laws there is no analogy—there is Continuity. In
either case, the first step in peopling these worlds with the appropriate
living forms is virtually miracle. Nor in one case is there less of
mystery in the act than in the other. The second birth is scarcely less
perplexing to the theologian than the first to the embryologist.
A moment's reflection ought now to make it clear why in the Spiritual
World there had to be added to this mystery the further mystery of its
proclamation through the medium of Revelation. This is the point at which
the scientific man is apt to part company with the theologian. He insists
on having all things materialised before his eyes in Nature. If Nature
cannot discuss this with him, there is nothing to discuss. But Nature can
discuss this with him—only she cannot open the discussion or supply all
the material to begin with. If Science averred that she could do this, the
theologian this time must part company with such Science. For any Science
which makes such a demand is false to the doctrines of Biogenesis. What is
this but the demand that a lower world, hermetically sealed against all
communication with a world above it, should have a mature and intelligent
acquaintance with its phenomena and laws? Can the mineral discourse to me
of animal Life? Can it tell me what lies beyond the narrow boundary of its
inert being? Knowing nothing of other than the chemical and physical laws,
what is its criticism worth of the principles of Biology? And even when
some visitor from the upper world, for example some root from a living
tree, penetrating its dark recess, honours it with a touch, will it
presume to define the form and purpose of its patron, or until the
bioplasm has done its gracious work can it even know that it is being
touched? The barrier which separates Kingdoms from one another restricts
mind not less than matter. Any information of the Kingdoms above it that
could come to the mineral world could only come by a communication from
above. An analogy from the lower world might make such communication
intelligible as well as credible, but the information in the first
instance must be vouchsafed as a revelation. Similarly if those in the
Organic Kingdom are to know anything of the Spiritual World, that
knowledge must at least begin as Revelation. Men who reject this source of
information, by the Law of Biogenesis, can have no other. It is no spell
of ignorance arbitrarily laid upon certain members of the Organic Kingdom
that prevents them reading the secrets of the Spiritual World. It is a
scientific necessity. No exposition of the case could be more truly
scientific than this: "The natural man receiveth not the things of the
Spirit of God; for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know
them, because they are spiritually discerned."[42] The verb here, it will
be again observed, is potential. This is not a dogma of theology, but a
necessity of Science. And Science, for the most part, has consistently
accepted the situation. It has always proclaimed its ignorance of the
Spiritual World. When Mr. Herbert Spencer affirms, "Regarding Science as a
gradually increasing sphere we may say that every addition to its surface
does but bring it into wider contact with surrounding nescience,"[43] from
his standpoint he is quite correct. The endeavours of well-meaning persons
to show that the Agnostic's position, when he asserts his ignorance of the
Spiritual World, is only a pretence; the attempts to prove that he really
knows a great deal about it if he would only admit it, are quite
misplaced. He really does not know. The verdict that the natural man
receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God, that they are foolishness
unto him, that neither can he know them, is final as a statement of
scientific truth—a statement on which the entire Agnostic literature is
simply one long commentary.
We are now in a better position to follow out the more practical
bearings of Biogenesis. There is an immense region surrounding
Regeneration, a dark and perplexing region where men would be thankful for
any light. It may well be that Biogenesis in its many ramifications may
yet reach down to some of the deeper mysteries of the Spiritual Life. But
meantime there is much to define even on the surface. And for the present
we shall content ourselves by turning its light upon one or two points of
current interest.
It must long ago have appeared how decisive is the answer of Science to
the practical question with which we set out as to the possibility of a
Spontaneous Development of Spiritual Life in the individual soul. The
inquiry into the Origin of Life is the fundamental question alike of
Biology and Christianity. We can afford to enlarge upon it, therefore,
even at the risk of repetition. When men are offering us a Christianity
without a living Spirit, and a personal religion without conversion, no
emphasis or reiteration can be extreme. Besides, the clearness as well as
the definiteness of the Testimony of Nature to any Spiritual truth is of
immense importance. Regeneration has not merely been an outstanding
difficulty, but an overwhelming obscurity. Even to earnest minds the
difficulty of grasping the truth at all has always proved extreme.
Philosophically one scarcely sees either the necessity or the possibility
of being born again. Why a virtuous man should not simply grow better and
better until in his own right he enter the Kingdom of God is what
thousands honestly and seriously fail to understand. Now Philosophy cannot
help us here. Her arguments are, if anything, against us. But Science
answers to the appeal at once. If it be simply pointed out that this is
the same absurdity as to ask why a stone should not grow more and more
living till it enters the Organic World, the point is clear in an instant.
What now, let us ask specifically, distinguishes a Christian man from a
non-Christian man? Is it that he has certain mental characteristics not
possessed by the other? Is it that certain faculties have been trained in
him, that morality assumes special and higher manifestations, and
character a nobler form? Is the Christian merely an ordinary man who
happens from birth to have been surrounded with a peculiar set of ideas?
Is his religion merely that peculiar quality of the moral life defined by
Mr. Matthew Arnold as "morality touched by emotion"? And does the
possession of a high ideal, benevolent sympathies, a reverent spirit, and
a favourable environment account for what men call his Spiritual Life?
The distinction between them is the same as that between the Organic
and the Inorganic, the living and the dead. What is the difference between
a crystal and an organism, a stone and a plant? They have much in common.
Both are made of the same atoms. Both display the same properties of
matter. Both are subject to the Physical Laws. Both may be very beautiful.
But besides possessing all that the crystal has, the plant possesses
something more—a mysterious something called Life. This Life is not
something which existed in the crystal only in a less developed form.
There is nothing at all like it in the crystal. There is nothing like the
first beginning of it in the crystal, not a trace or symptom of it. This
plant is tenanted by something new, an original and unique possession
added over and above all the properties common to both. When from
vegetable Life we rise to animal Life, here again we find something
original and unique— unique at least as compared with the mineral. From
animal Life we ascend again to Spiritual Life. And here also is something
new, something still more unique. He who lives the Spiritual Life has a
distinct kind of Life added to all the other phases of Life which he
manifests—a kind of Life infinitely more distinct than is the active Life
of a plant from the inertia of a stone. The Spiritual man is more distinct
in point of fact than is the plant from the stone. This is the one
possible comparison in Nature, for it is the widest distinction in Nature,
but compared with the difference between the Natural and the Spiritual the
gulf which divides the organic from the inorganic is a hair's-breadth. The
natural man belongs essentially to this present order of things. He is
endowed simply with a high quality of the natural animal Life. But it is
Life of so poor a quality that it is not Life at all. He that hath not the
Son hath not Life; but he that hath the Son hath Life—a new and distinct
and supernatural endowment. He is not of this world. He is of the timeless
state, of Eternity. It doth not yet appear what he shall be.
The difference then between the Spiritual man and the Natural man is
not a difference of development, but of generation. It is a distinction of
quality not of quantity. A man cannot rise by any natural development from
"morality touched by emotion," to "morality touched by Life." Were we to
construct a scientific classification, Science would compel us to arrange
all natural men, moral or immoral, educated or vulgar, as one family. One
might be high in the family group, another low; yet, practically, they are
marked by the same set of characteristics—they eat, sleep, work, think,
live, die. But the Spiritual man is removed from this family so utterly by
the possession of an additional characteristic that a biologist, fully
informed of the whole circumstances, would not hesitate a moment to
classify him elsewhere. And if he really entered into these circumstances
it would not be in another family but in another Kingdom. It is an
old-fashioned theology which divides the world in this way—which speaks of
men as Living and Dead, Lost and Saved—a stern theology all but fallen
into disuse. This difference between the Living and the Dead in souls is
so unproved by casual observation, so impalpable in itself, so startling
as a doctrine, that schools of culture have ridiculed or denied the grim
distinction. Nevertheless the grim distinction must be retained. It is a
scientific distinction. "He that hath not the Son hath not Life."
Now it is this great Law which finally distinguishes Christianity from
all other religions. It places the religion of Christ upon a footing
altogether unique. There is no analogy between the Christian religion and,
say, Buddhism or the Mohammedan religion. There is no true sense in which
a man can say, He that hath Buddha hath Life. Buddha has nothing to do
with Life. He may have something to do with morality. He may stimulate,
impress, teach, guide, but there is no distinct new thing added to the
souls of those who profess Buddhism. These religions may be developments
of the natural, mental, or moral man. But Christianity professes to be
more. It is the mental or moral man plus something else or some One else.
It is the infusion into the Spiritual man of a New Life, of a quality
unlike anything else in Nature. This constitutes the separate Kingdom of
Christ, and gives to Christianity alone of all the religions of mankind
the strange mark of Divinity.
Shall we next inquire more precisely what is this something extra which
constitutes Spiritual Life? What is this strange and new endowment in its
nature and vital essence? And the answer is brief— it is Christ. He that
hath the Son hath Life.
Are we forsaking the lines of Science in saying so? Yes and No. Science
has drawn for us the distinction. It has no voice as to the nature of the
distinction except this—that the new endowment is a something different
from anything else with which it deals. It is not ordinary Vitality, it is
not intellectual, it is not moral, but something beyond. And Revelation
steps in and names what it is—it is Christ. Out of the multitude of
sentences where this announcement is made, these few may be
selected:
"Know ye not your own selves how that Jesus Christ is in you?"[44] "Your
bodies are the members of Christ."[45] "At that day ye shall know that I
am in the Father, and ye in Me, and I in you."[46] "We will come unto him
and make our abode with him."[47] "I am the Vine, ye are the
branches."[48] "I am crucified with Christ, nevertheless I live, yet not I
but Christ liveth in me."[49]
Three things are clear from these statements: First, They are not mere
figures of rhetoric. They are explicit declarations. If language means
any. thing these words announce a literal fact In some of Christ's own
statements the literalism is if possible still more impressive. For
instance, "Except ye eat the flesh of the Son of man and drink His blood,
ye have no life in you. Whoso eateth My flesh and drinketh My blood hath
eternal life; and I will raise him up at the last day. For My flesh is
meat indeed, and My blood is drink indeed. He that eateth My flesh and
drinketh My blood dwelleth in Me and I in him."
In the second place, Spiritual Life is not something outside ourselves.
The idea is not that Christ is in heaven and that we can stretch out some
mysterious faculty and deal with Him there. This is the vague form in
which many conceive the truth, but it is contrary to Christ's teaching and
to the analogy of nature. Vegetable Life is not contained in a reservoir
somewhere in the skies, and measured out spasmodically at certain seasons.
The Life is in every plant and tree, inside its own substance and tissue,
and continues there until it dies. This localisation of Life in the
individual is precisely the point where Vitality differs from the other
forces of nature, such as magnetism and electricity. Vitality has much in
common with such forces as magnetism and electricity, but there is one
inviolable distinction between them—that Life is permanently fixed and
rooted in the organism. The doctrines of conservation and transformation
of energy, that is to say, do not hold for Vitality. The electrician can
demagnetise a bar of iron, that is, he can transform its energy of
magnetism into something else—heat, or motion, or light—and then re-form
these back into magnetism. For magnetism has no root, no individuality, no
fixed indwelling. But the biologist cannot devitalise a plant or an animal
and revivify it again.[50] Life is not one of the homeless forces which
promiscuously inhabit space, or which can be gathered like electricity
from the clouds and dissipated back again into space. Life is definite and
resident; and Spiritual Life is not a visit from a force, but a resident
tenant in the soul.
This is, however, to formulate the statement of the third point, that
spiritual Life is not an ordinary form of energy or force. The analogy
from Nature endorses this, but here Nature stops. It cannot say what
Spiritual Life is. Indeed what natural Life is remains unknown, and the
word Life still wanders through Science without a definition. Nature is
silent, therefore, and must be as to Spiritual Life. But in the absence of
natural light we fall back upon that complementary revelation which always
shines when truth is necessary and where Nature fails. We ask with Paul
when this Life first visited him on the Damascus road, What is this? "Who
art Thou Lord? " And we hear, " I am Jesus."[51]
We must expect to find this denied. Besides a proof from Revelation,
this is an argument from experience. And yet we shall still be told that
this Spiritual Life is a force. But let it be remembered what this means
in Science, it means the heresy of confounding Force with Vitality. We
must also expect to be told that this Spiritual Life is simply a
development of ordinary Life—just as Dr. Bastian tells us that natural
Life is formed according to the same laws which determine the more simple
chemical combinations. But remember what this means in Science. It is the
heresy of Spontaneous Generation, a heresy so thoroughly discredited now
that scarcely an authority in Europe will lend his name to it. Who art
Thou, Lord? Unless we are to be allowed to hold Spontaneous Generation
there is no alternative: Life can only come from Life: "I am Jesus."
A hundred other questions now rush into the mind about this Life: How
does it come? Why does it come? How is it manifested? What faculty does it
employ? Where does it reside? Is it communicable? What are its conditions?
One or two of these questions may be vaguely answered, the rest bring us
face to face with mystery. Let it not be thought that the scientific
treatment of a Spiritual subject has reduced religion to a problem of
physics, or demonstrated God by the laws of biology. A religion without
mystery is an absurdity. Even Science has its mysteries, none more
inscrutable than around this Science of Life. It taught us sooner or later
to expect mystery, and now we enter its domain. Let It be carefully
marked, however, that the cloud does not fall and cover us till we have
ascertained the most momentous truth of Religion—that Christ is in the
Christian.
Not that there is anything new in this. The Churches have always held
that Christ was the source of Life. No spiritual man ever claims that his
spirituality is his own. "I live," he will tell you; "nevertheless it is
not I, but Christ liveth in me." Christ our Life has indeed been the only
doctrine in the Christian Church from Paul to Augustine, from Calvin to
Newman. Yet, when the Spiritual man is cross-examined upon this confession
it is astonishing to find what uncertain hold it has upon his mind.
Doctrinally he states it adequately and holds it unhesitatingly. But when
pressed with the literal question he shrinks from the answer. We do not
really believe that the Living Christ has touched us, that He makes His
abode in us. Spiritual Life is not as real to us as natural Life. And we
cover our retreat into unbelieving vagueness with a plea of reverence,
justified, as we think, by the "Thus far and no farther" of ancient
Scriptures. There is often a great deal of intellectual sin concealed
under this old aphorism. When men do not really wish to go farther they
find it an honourable convenience sometimes to sit down on the outermost
edge of the Holy Ground on the pretext of taking off their shoes. Yet we
must be certain that, making a virtue of reverence, we are not merely
excusing ignorance; or, under the plea of mystery, evading a truth which
has been stated in the New Testament a hundred times, in the most literal
form, and with all but monotonous repetition. The greatest truths are
always the most loosely held. And not the least of the advantages of
taking up this question from the present standpoint is that we may see how
a confused doctrine can really bear the luminous definition of Science and
force itself upon us with all the weight of Natural Law.
What is mystery to many men, what feeds their worship, and at the same
time spoils it, is that area round all great truth which is really capable
of illumination, and into which every earnest mind permitted and commanded
to go with a light. We cry mystery long before the region of mystery
comes. True mystery casts no shadows around. It is a sudden and awful gulf
yawning across the field of knowledge; its form is irregular, but its lips
are clean cut and sharp, and the mind can go to the very verge and look
down the precipice into the dim abyss,
"Where writhing clouds unroll,
Striving to utter themselves in shapes."
We have gone with a light to the very verge of this truth. We have seen
that the Spiritual Life is an endowment from the Spiritual World, and that
the Living Spirit of Christ dwells in the Christian. But now the gulf
yawns black before us. What more does Science know of Life? Nothing. It
knows nothing further about its origin in detail. It knows nothing about
its ultimate nature. It cannot even define it. There is a helplessness in
scientific books here, and a continual confession of it which to
thoughtful minds is almost touching. Science, therefore, has not
eliminated the true mysteries from our faith, but only the false. And it
has done more. It has made true mystery scientific. Religion in having
mystery is in analogy with all around it. Where there is exceptional
mystery in the Spiritual world it will generally be found that there is a
corresponding mystery in the natural world. And, as Origen centuries ago
insisted, the difficulties of Religion are simply the difficulties of
Nature.
One question more we may look at for a moment. What can be gathered on
the surface as to the process of Regeneration in the individual soul? From
the analogies of Biology we should expect three things: First, that the
New Life should dawn suddenly; Second, that it should come "without
observation"; Third, that it should develop gradually. On two of these
points there can be little controversy The gradualness of growth is a
characteristic which strikes the simplest observer. Long before the word
Evolution was coined Christ applied it in this very connection—"First the
blade, then the ear, then the full corn in the ear." It is well known also
to those who study the parables of Nature that there is an ascending scale
of slowness as we rise in the scale of Life. Growth is most gradual in the
highest forms. Man attains his maturity after a score of years; the monad
completes its humble cycle in a day. What wonder if development be tardy
in the Creature of Eternity? A Christian's sun has sometimes set, and a
critical world has seen as yet no corn in the ear. As yet? "As yet," in
this long Life, has not begun. Grant him the years proportionate to his
place in the scale of Life "The time of harvest is not yet."
Again, in addition to being slow, the phenomena of growth are secret.
Life is invisible. When the New Life manifests itself it is a surprise.
Thou canst not tell whence it cometh or whither it goeth. When the plant
lives whence has the Life come? When it dies whither has it gone? Thou
canst not tell . . so is every one that is born of the Spirit. For the
kingdom of God cometh without observation.
Yet once more,—and this is a point of strange and frivolous
dispute,—this Life comes suddenly. This is the only way in which Life can
come. Life cannot come gradually—health can, structure can, but not Life.
A new theology has laughed at the Doctrine of Conversion. Sudden
Conversion especially has been ridiculed as untrue to philosophy and
impossible to human nature. We may not be concerned in buttressing any
theology because it is old. But we find that this old theology is
scientific. There may be cases—they are probably in the majority—where the
moment of contact with the Living Spirit though sudden has been obscure.
But the real moment and the conscious moment are two different things.
Science pronounces nothing as to the conscious moment. If it did it would
probably say that that was seldom the real moment—just as in the natural
Life the conscious moment is not the real moment. The moment of birth in
the natural world is not a conscious moment—we do not know we are born
till long afterward. Yet there are men to whom the Origin of the New Life
in time has been no difficulty. To Paul, for instance, Christ seems to
have come at a definite period of time, the exact moment and second of
which could have been known. And this is certainly, in theory at least,
the normal Origin of Life, according to the principles of Biology. The
line between the living and the dead is a sharp line. When the dead atoms
of Carbon, Hydrogen, Oxygen, Nitrogen, are seized upon by Life, the
organism at first is very lowly. It possesses few functions. It has little
beauty. Growth is the work of time. But Life is not. That comes in a
moment. At one moment it was dead; the next it lived. This is conversion,
the "passing," as the Bible calls it, "from Death unto Life." Those who
have stood by another's side at the solemn hour of this dread possession
have been conscious sometimes of an experience which words are not allowed
to utter—a something like the sudden snapping of a chain, the waking from
a dream.
"I went by the field of the slothful, and by the vineyard of the man
void of understanding; and lo, it was all grown over with thorns, and
nettles had covered the face thereof, and the stone wall thereof was
broken down. Then I saw and considered it well; I looked upon it and
received instruction.— SOLOMON.
"How shall we escape if we neglect so great salvation?" —Hebrews.
"We have as possibilities either Balance, or Elaboration, or
Degeneration."—E. Ray Lankester.
IN one of his best known books, Mr. Darwin brings out a fact which may
be illustrated in some such way as this: Suppose a bird fancier collects a
flock of tame pigeons distinguished by all the infinite ornamentations of
their race. They are of all kinds, of every shade of colour, and adorned
with every variety of marking. He takes them to an uninhabited island and
allows them to fly off wild into the woods. They found a colony there, and
after the lapse of many years the owner returns to the spot. He will find
that a remarkable change has taken place in the interval. The birds, or
their descendants rather, have all become changed into the same colour.
The black, the white and the dun, the striped, the spotted, and the
ringed, are all metamorphosed into one—a dark slaty blue. Two plain black
bands monotonously repeat themselves upon the wings of each, and the loins
beneath are white; but all the variety, all the beautiful colours, all the
old graces of form it may be, have disappeared. These improvements were
the result of care and nurture, of domestication, of civilization; and now
that these influences are removed, the birds themselves undo the past and
lose what they had gained. The attempt to elevate the race has been
mysteriously thwarted. It is as if the original bird, the far remote
ancestor of all doves, had been blue, and these had been compelled by some
strange law to discard the badges of their civilization and conform to the
ruder image of the first. The natural law by which such a change occurs is
called The Principle of Reversion to Type.
It is a proof of the universality of this law that the same thing will
happen with a plant. A garden is planted, let us say, with strawberries
and roses, and for a number of years is left alone. In process of time it
will run to waste. But this does not mean that the plants will really
waste away, but that they will change into something else, and, as it
invariably appears, into something worse; in the one case, namely, into
the small, wild strawberry of the woods, and in the other into the
primitive dog-rose of the hedges.
If we neglect a garden plant, then, a natural principle of
deterioration comes in, and changes it into a worse plant. And if we
neglect a bird, by the same imperious law it will be gradually changed
into an uglier bird. Or if we neglect almost any of the domestic animals,
they will rapidly revert to wild and worthless forms again.
Now the same thing exactly would happen in the case of you or me. Why
should Man be an exception to any of the laws of Nature? Nature knows him
simply as an animal—Sub-kingdom Vertebrata, Class Mammalia, Order Bimana.
And the law of Reversion to Type runs through all creation. If a man
neglect himself for a few years he will change into a worse man and a
lower man. If it is his body that he neglects, he will deteriorate into a
wild and bestial savage—like the de-humanized men who are discovered
sometimes upon desert islands. If it is his mind, it will degenerate into
imbecility and madness—solitary confinement has the power to unmake men's
minds and leave them idiots. If he neglect his conscience, it will run off
into lawlessness and vice. Or, lastly, if it is his soul, it must
inevitably atrophy, drop off in ruin and decay.
We have here, then, a thoroughly natural basis for the question before
us. If we neglect, with this universal principle staring us in the face,
how shall we escape? If we neglect the ordinary means of keeping a garden
in order, how shall it escape running to weeds and waste? Or, if we
neglect the opportunities for cultivating the mind, how shall it escape
ignorance and feebleness? So, if we neglect the soul, how shall it escape
the natural retrograde movement, the inevitable relapse into barrenness
and death?
It is not necessary, surely, to pause for proof that there is such a
retrograde principle in the being of every man. It is demonstrated by
facts, and by the analogy of all Nature. Three possibilities of life,
according to Science, are open to all living organisms—Balance, Evolution,
and Degeneration. The first denotes the precarious persistence of a life
along what looks like a level path, a character which seems to hold its
own alike against the attacks of evil and the appeals of good. It implies
a set of circumstances so balanced by choice or fortune that they neither
influence for better nor for worse. But except in theory this state of
equilibrium, normal in the inorganic kingdom, is really foreign to the
world of life; and what seems inertia may be a true Evolution unnoticed
from its slowness, or likelier still a movement of Degeneration subtly
obliterating as it falls the very traces of its former height. From this
state of apparent Balance, Evolution is the escape in the upward
direction, Degeneration in the lower. But Degeneration, rather than
Balance or Elaboration, is the possibility of life embraced by the
majority of mankind. And the choice is determined by man's own nature. The
life of Balance is difficult. It lies on the verge of continual
temptation, its perpetual adjustments become fatiguing, its measured
virtue is monotonous and uninspiring. More difficult still, apparently, is
the life of ever upward growth. Most men attempt it for a time, but growth
is slow; and despair overtakes them while the goal is far away. Yet none
of these reasons fully explains the fact that the alternative which
remains is adopted by the majority of men. That Degeneration is easy only
half accounts for it. Why is it easy? Why but that already in each man's
very nature this principle is supreme? He feels within his soul a silent
drifting motion impelling him downward with irresistible force. Instead of
aspiring to Conversion to a higher Type he submits by a law of his nature
to Reversion to a lower. This is Degeneration—that principle by which the
organism, failing to develop itself, failing even to keep what it has got,
deteriorates, and becomes more and more adapted to a degraded form of
life.
All men who know themselves are conscious that this tendency,
deep-rooted and active, exists within their nature. Theologically it is
described as a gravitation, a bias toward evil. The Bible view is that man
is conceived in sin and shapen in iniquity. And experience tells him that
he will shape himself into further sin and ever deepening iniquity without
the smallest effort, without in the least intending it, and in the most
natural way in the world if he simply let his life run. It is on this
principle that, completing the conception, the wicked are said further in
the Bible to be lost. They are not really lost as yet, but they are on the
sure way to it. The bias of their lives is in full action. There is no
drag on anywhere. The natural tendencies are having it all their own way;
and although the victims may be quite unconscious that all this is going
on, it is patent to every one who considers even the natural bearings of
the case that "the end of these things is Death." When we see a man fall
from the top of a five-storey house, we say the man is lost. We say that
before he has fallen a foot; for the same principle that made him fall the
one foot will undoubtedly make him complete the descent by falling other
eighty or ninety feet. So that he is a dead man, or a lost man from the
very first. The gravitation of sin in a human soul acts precisely in the
same way. Gradually, with gathering momentum it sinks a man further and
further from God and righteousness, and lands him, by the sheer action of
a natural law, in the hell of a neglected life.
But the lesson is not less clear from analogy. Apart even from the law
of Degeneration, apart from Reversion to Type, there is in every living
organism a law of Death. We are wont to imagine that Nature is full of
Life. In reality it is full of Death. One cannot say it is natural for a
plant to live. Examine its nature fully, and you have to admit that its
natural tendency is to die. It is kept from dying by a mere temporary
endowment, which gives it an ephemeral dominion over the elements—gives it
power to utilize for a brief span the rain, the sunshine, and the air.
Withdraw this temporary endowment for a moment and its true nature is
revealed. Instead of overcoming Nature it is overcome. The very things
which appeared to minister to its growth and beauty now turn against it
and make it decay and die. The sun which warmed it, withers it; the air
and rain which nourished it, rot it. It is the very forces which we
associate with life which, when their true nature appears, are discovered
to be really the ministers of death.
This law, which is true for the whole plant-world, is also valid for
the animal and for man. Air is not life, but corruption—so literally
corruption that the only way to keep out corruption, when life has ebbed,
is to keep out air. Life is merely a temporary suspension of these
destructive powers; and this is truly one of the most accurate definitions
of life we have yet received—"the sum total of the functions which resist
death."
Spiritual life, in like manner, is the sum total of the functions which
resist sin. The soul's atmosphere is the daily trial, circumstance, and
temptation of the world. And as it is life alone which gives the plant
power to utilize the elements, and as, without it, they utilize it, so it
is the spiritual life alone which gives the soul power to utilize
temptation and trial; and without it they destroy the soul. How shall we
escape if we refuse to exercise these functions—in other words, if we
neglect?
This destroying process, observe, goes on quite independently of God's
judgment on sin. God's judgment on sin is another and a more awful fact of
which this may be a part .But it is a distinct fact by itself, which we
can hold and examine separately, that on purely natural principles the
soul that is left to itself unwatched, uncultivated, unredeemed, must fall
away into death by its own nature. The soul that sinneth "it shall die."
It shall die, not necessarily because God passes sentence of death upon
it, but because it cannot help dying. It has neglected "the functions
which resist death," and has always been dying. The punishment is in its
very nature, and the sentence is being gradually carried out all along the
path of life by ordinary processes which enforce the verdict with the
appalling faithfulness of law.
There is an affectation that religious truths lie beyond the sphere of
the comprehension which serves men in ordinary things. This question at
least must be an exception. It lies as near the natural as the spiritual.
If it makes no impression on a man to know that God will visit his
iniquities upon him, he cannot blind himself to the fact that Nature will.
Do we not all know what it is to be punished by Nature for disobeying her?
We have looked round the wards of a hospital, a prison, or a madhouse, and
seen there Nature at work squaring her accounts with sin. And we knew as
we looked that if no Judge sat on the throne of heaven at all there was a
Judgment there, where an inexorable Nature was crying aloud for justice,
and carrying out her heavy sentences for violated laws.
When God gave Nature the law into her own hands in this way, He seems
to have given her two rules upon which her sentences were to be based. The
one is formally enunciated in this sentence, "WHATSOEVER A MAN SOWETH THAT
SHALL HE ALSO REAP." The other is informally expressed in this, "IF WE
NEGLECT HOW SHALL WE ESCAPE?"
The first is the positive law, and deals with sins of commission. The
other, which we are now discussing, is the negative, and deals with sins
of omission. It does not say anything about sowing, but about not sowing.
It takes up the case of souls which are lying fallow. It does not say, if
we sow corruption we shall reap corruption. Perhaps we would not be so
unwise, so regardless of ourselves, of public opinion, as to sow
corruption. It does not say, if we sow tares we shall reap tares. We might
never do anything so foolish as sow tares. But if we sow nothing, it says,
we shall reap nothing. If we put nothing into the field, we shall take
nothing out. If we neglect to cultivate in summer, now shall we escape
starving in winter?
Now the Bible raises this question, but does not answer it—because it
is too obvious to need answering. How shall we escape if we neglect? The
answer is, we cannot. In the nature of things we cannot. We cannot escape
any more than a man can escape drowning who falls into the sea and has
neglected to learn to swim. In the nature of things he cannot escape—nor
can he escape who has neglected the great salvation.
Now why should such fatal consequences follow a simple process like
neglect? The popular impression is that a man, to be what is called lost,
must be an open and notorious sinner. He must be one who has abandoned all
that is good and pure in life, and sown to the flesh with all his might
and main. But this principle goes further. It says simply, "If we
neglect." Any one may see the reason why a notoriously wicked person
should not escape; but why should not all the rest of us escape? What is
to hinder people who are not notoriously wicked escaping—people who never
sowed anything in particular? Why is it such a sin to sow nothing in
particular?
There must be some hidden and vital relation between these three words,
Salvation, Neglect, and Escape—some reasonable, essential, and
indissoluble connection. Why are these words so linked together as to
weight this clause with all the authority and solemnity of a sentence of
death?
The explanation has partly been given already. It lies still further,
however, in the meaning of the word Salvation. And this, of course, is not
at all Salvation in the ordinary sense of forgiveness of sin. This is one
great meaning of Salvation, the first and the greatest. But this is spoken
to people who are supposed to have had this. It is the broader word,
therefore, and includes not only forgiveness of sin but salvation or
deliverance from the downward bias of the soul. It takes in that whole
process of rescue from the power of sin and selfishness that should be
going on from day to day in every human life We have seen that there is a
natural principle in man lowering him, deadening him, pulling him down by
inches to the mere animal plane, blinding reason, searing conscience,
paralysing will. This is the active destroying principle, or Sin. Now to
counteract this, God has discovered to us another principle which will
stop this drifting process in the soul, steer it round, and make it drift
the other way. This is the active saving principle, or Salvation. If a man
find the first of these powers furiously at work within him, dragging his
whole life downward to destruction, there is only one way to escape his
fate—to take resolute hold of the upward power, and be borne by it to the
opposite goal. And as this second power is the only one in the universe
which has the slightest real effect upon the first, how shall a man escape
if he neglect it? To neglect it is to cut off the only possible chance of
escape. In declining this he is simply abandoning himself with his eyes
open to that other and terrible energy which is already there, and which,
in the natural course of things, is bearing him every moment further and
further from escape.
From the very nature of Salvation, therefore, it is plain that the only
thing necessary to make it of no effect is neglect. Hence the Bible could
not fail to lay strong emphasis on a word so vital. It was not necessary
for it to say, how shall we escape if we trample upon the great salvation,
or doubt, or despise, or reject it. A man who has been poisoned only need
neglect the antidote and he will die. It makes no difference whether he
dashes it on the ground, or pours it out of the window, or sets it down by
his bedside, and stares at it all the time he is dying. He will die just
the same, whether he destroys it in a passion, or coolly refuses to have
anything to do with it. And as a matter of fact probably most deaths,
spiritually, are gradual dissolutions of the last class rather than rash
suicides of the first.
This, then, is the effect of neglecting salvation from the side of
salvation itself; and the conclusion is that from the very nature of
salvation escape is out of the question. Salvation is a definite process.
If a man refuse to submit himself to that process, clearly he cannot have
the benefits of it. As many as received Him to them he gave power to
become the sons of God. He does not avail himself of this power. It may be
mere carelessness or apathy. Nevertheless the neglect is fatal. He cannot
escape because he will not.
Turn now to another aspect of the case—to the effect upon the soul
itself. Neglect does more for the soul than make it miss salvation. It
despoils it of its capacity for salvation. Degeneration in the spiritual
sphere involves primarily the impairing of the faculties of salvation and
ultimately the loss of them. It really means that the very soul itself
becomes piecemeal destroyed until the very capacity for God and
righteousness is gone.
The soul, in its highest sense, is a vast capacity for God. It is like
a curious chamber added on to being, and somehow involving being, a
chamber with elastic and contractile walls, which can be expanded, with
God as its guest, illimitably, but which without God shrinks and shrivels
until every vestige of the Divine is gone, and God's image is left without
God's Spirit. One cannot call what is left a soul; it is a shrunken,
useless organ, a capacity sentenced to death by disease, which droops as a
withered hand by the side, and cumbers nature like a rotted branch. Nature
has her revenge upon neglect as well as upon extravagance. Misuse, with
her, is as mortal a sin as abuse.
There are certain burrowing animals—the mole for instance—which have
taken to spending their lives beneath the surface of the ground. And
Nature has taken her revenge upon them in a thoroughly natural way—she has
closed up their eyes. If they mean to live in darkness, she argues, eyes
are obviously a superfluous function. By neglecting them these animals
made it clear they do not want them. And as one of Nature's fixed
principles is that nothing shall exist in vain, the eyes are presently
taken away, or reduced to a rudimentary state. There are fishes also which
have had to pay the same terrible forfeit for having made their abode in
dark caverns where eyes can never be required. And in exactly the same way
the spiritual eye must die and lose its power by purely natural law if the
soul choose to walk in darkness rather than in light.
This is the meaning of the favourite paradox of Christ, "From him that
hath not shall be taken away even that which he hath;" "take therefore the
talent from him." The religious faculty is a talent, the most splendid and
sacred talent we possess. Yet it is subject to the natural conditions and
laws. If any man take his talent and hide it in a napkin, although it is
doing him neither harm nor good apparently, God will not allow him to have
it. Although it is lying there rolled up in the darkness, not
conspicuously affecting any one, still God will not allow him to keep it.
He will not allow him to keep it any more than Nature would allow the fish
to keep their eyes. Therefore, He says, "take the talent from him." And
Nature does it.
This man's crime was simply neglect—"thou wicked and slothful servant."
It was a wasted life— a life which failed in the holy stewardship of
itself. Such a life is a peril to all who cross its path. Degeneration
compasses Degeneration. It is only a character which is itself developing
that can aid the Evolution of the world and so fulfil the end of life. For
this high usury each of our lives, however small may seem our capital, was
given us by God. And it is just the men whose capital seems small who need
to choose the best investments. It is significant that it was the man who
had only one talent who was guilty of neglecting it. Men with ten talents,
men of large gifts and burning energies, either direct their powers nobly
and usefully, or misdirect them irretrievably. It is those who belong to
the rank and file of life who need this warning most. Others have an
abundant store and sow to the spirit or the flesh with a lavish hand. But
we, with our small gift, what boots our sowing? Our temptation as ordinary
men is to neglect to sow at all. The interest on our talent would be so
small that we excuse ourselves with the reflection that it is not worth
while.
It is no objection to all this to say that we are unconscious of this
neglect or misdirection of our powers. That is the darkest feature in the
case. If there were uneasiness there might be hope. If there were,
somewhere about our soul, a something which was not gone to sleep like all
the rest; if there were a contending force anywhere; if we would let even
that work instead of neglecting it, it would gain strength from hour to
hour, and waken up one at a time each torpid and dishonoured faculty till
our whole nature became alive with strivings against self, and every
avenue was open wide for God. But the apathy, the numbness of the soul,
what can be said of such a symptom but that it means the creeping on of
death? There are accidents in which the victims feel no pain. They are
well and strong they think. But they are dying. And if you ask the surgeon
by their side what makes him give this verdict, he will say it is this
numbness over the frame which tells how some of the parts have lost
already the very capacity for life.
Nor is it the least tragic accompaniment of this process that its
effects may even be concealed from others. The soul undergoing
Degeneration, surely by some arrangement with Temptation planned in the
uttermost hell, possesses the power of absolute secrecy. When all within
is festering decay and rottenness, a Judas, without anomaly, may kiss his
Lord. This invisible consumption, like its fell analogue in the natural
world, may even keep its victim beautiful while slowly slaying it. When
one examines the little Crustacea which have inhabited for centuries the
lakes of the Mammoth Cave of Kentucky, one is at first astonished to find
these animals apparently endowed with perfect eyes. The pallor of the head
is broken by two black pigment specks, conspicuous indeed as the only bits
of colour on the whole blanched body; and these, even to the casual
observer, certainly represent well-defined organs of vision. But what do
they with eyes in these Stygian waters? There reigns an everlasting night.
Is the law for once at fault? A swift incision with the scalpel, a glance
with a lens, and their secret is betrayed. The eyes are a mockery.
Externally they are organs of vision—the front of the eye is perfect;
behind, there is nothing but a mass of ruins. The optic nerve is a
shrunken, atrophied and insensate thread. These animals have organs of
vision, and yet they have no vision. They have eyes, but they see not.
Exactly what Christ said of men: They had eyes, but no vision. And the
reason is the same. It is the simplest problem of natural history. The
Crustacea of the Mammoth Cave have chosen to abide in darkness. Therefore
they have become fitted for it. By refusing to see they have waived the
right to see. And Nature has grimly humoured them. Nature had to do it by
her very constitution. It is her defence against waste that decay of
faculty should immediately follow disuse of function. He that hath ears to
hear, he whose ears have not degenerated, let him hear.
Men tell us sometimes there is no such thing as an atheist. There must
be. There are some men to whom it is true that there is no God. They
cannot see God because they have no eye. They have only an abortive organ,
atrophied by neglect.
All this, it is commonplace again to insist, is not the effect of
neglect when we die, but while we live. The process is in full career and
operation now. It is useless projecting consequences into the future when
the effects may be measured now. We are always practising these little
deceptions upon ourselves, postponing the consequences of our misdeeds as
if they were to culminate some other day about the time of death. It makes
us sin with a lighter hand to run an account with retribution, as it were,
and delay the reckoning time with God. But every day is a reckoning day.
Every soul is a Book of Judgment, and Nature, as a recording angel, marks
there every sin. As all will be judged by the great Judge some day, all
are judged by Nature now. The sin of yesterday, as part of its penalty,
has the sin of to-day. All follow us in silent retribution on our past,
and go with us to the grave. We cannot cheat Nature. No sleight-of-heart
can rob religion of a present, the immortal nature of a now. The poet
sings—
"I looked behind to find my past,
And lo, it had gone before."
But no, not all. The unforgiven sins are not away in keeping somewhere
to be let loose upon us when we die; they are here, within us, now. To-day
brings the resurrection of their past, to-morrow of to-day. And the powers
of sin, to the exact strength that we have developed them, nearing their
dreadful culmination with every breath we draw, are here, within us, now.
The souls of some men are already honey-combed through and through with
the eternal consequences of neglect, so that taking the natural and
rational view of their case just now, it is simply inconceivable that
there is any escape just now. What a fearful thing it is to fall into the
hands of the living God! A fearful thing even if, as the philosopher tells
us, "the hands of the Living God are the Laws of Nature."
Whatever hopes of a "heaven" a neglected soul may have, can be shown to
be an ignorant and delusive dream. How is the soul to escape to heaven if
it has neglected for a lifetime the means of escape from the world and
self? And where is the capacity for heaven to come from if it be not
developed on earth? Where, indeed, is even the smallest spiritual
appreciation of God and heaven to come from when so little of spirituality
has ever been known or manifested here? If every Godward aspiration of the
soul has been allowed to become extinct, and every inlet that was open to
heaven to be choked, and every talent for religious love and trust to have
been persistently neglected and ignored, where are the faculties to come
from that would even find the faintest relish in such things as God and
heaven give?
These three words, Salvation, Escape, and Neglect, then, are not
casually, but organically and necessarily connected. Their doctrine is
scientific, not arbitrary. Escape means nothing more than the gradual
emergence of the higher being from the lower, and nothing less. It means
the gradual putting off of all that cannot enter the higher state, or
heaven, and simultaneously the putting on of Christ. It involves the slow
completing of the soul and the development of the capacity for God.
Should any one object that from this scientific standpoint the opposite
of salvation is annihilation, the answer is at hand. From this standpoint
there is no such word.
If, then, escape is to be open to us, it is not to come to us somehow,
vaguely. We are not to hope for anything startling or mysterious. It is a
definite opening along certain lines which are definitely marked by God,
which begin at the Cross of Christ and lead direct to Him. Each man in the
silence of his own soul must work out this salvation for himself with fear
and trembling—with fear, realizing the momentous issues of his task; with
trembling, lest before the tardy work be done the voice of Death should
summon him to stop.
What these lines are may, in closing, be indicated in a word. The true
problem of the spiritual life may be said to be, do the opposite of
Neglect. Whatever this is, do it, and you shall escape. It will just mean
that you are so to cultivate the soul that all its powers will open out to
God, and in beholding God be drawn away from sin. The idea really is to
develop among the ruins of the old a new "creature"—a new creature which,
while the old is suffering Degeneration from Neglect, is gradually to
unfold, to escape away and develop on spiritual lines to spiritual beauty
and strength. And as our conception of spiritual being must be taken
simply from natural being, our ideas of the lines along which the new
religious nature is to run must be borrowed from the known lines of the
old.
There is, for example, a Sense of Sight in the religious nature.
Neglect this, leave it undeveloped, and you never miss it. You simply see
nothing. But develop it and you see God. And the line along which to
develop it is known to us. Become pure in heart. The pure in heart shall
see God. Here, then, is one opening for soul-culture—the avenue through
purity of heart to the spiritual seeing of God.
Then there is a Sense of Sound. Neglect this, leave it undeveloped, and
you never miss it. You simply hear nothing. Develop it, and you hear God.
And the line along which to develop it is known to us. Obey Christ. Become
one of Christ's flock. "The sheep hear His voice, and He calleth them by
name." Here, then, is another opportunity for the culture of the soul—a
gateway through the Shepherd's fold to hear the Shepherd's voice.
And there is a Sense of Touch to be acquired— such a sense as the woman
had who touched the hem of Christ's garment, that wonderful electric touch
called faith, which moves the very heart of God.
And there is a Sense of Taste—a spiritual hunger after God; a something
within which tastes and sees that He is good. And there is the Talent for
Inspiration. Neglect that, and all the scenery of the spiritual world is
flat and frozen. But cultivate it, and it penetrates the whole soul with
sacred fire, and illuminates creation with God. And last of all there is
the great capacity for Love, even for the love of God—the expanding
capacity for feeling more and more its height and depth, its length and
breadth. Till that is felt no man can really understand that word, "so
great salvation," for what is its measure but that other "so" of
Christ—God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son? Verily,
how shall we escape if we neglect that?[52]
Footnotes
[33] "Beginnings of Life." By H. C. Bastian, M.A.,
M.D. F.R.S. Macmillan, vol. ii. p. 633.
[34] "Critiques and Addresses." T. H. Huxley F.R.S.,
p. 239.
[35] Nineteenth Century, 1878, p. 507.
[36] This being the crucial point it may not be
inappropriate to supplement the quotations already given in the text with
the following:—
"We are in the presence of the one incommunicable gulf—the gulf of all
gulfs—that gulf which Mr. Huxley's protoplasm is as powerless to efface as
any other material expedient that has ever been suggested since the eyes
of men first looked into it—the mighty gulf between death and life."—"As
Regards Protoplasm." By J. Hutchinson Stirling, LL.D., p. 42.
"The present state of knowledge furnishes us with no link between the
living and the not-living."—Huxley, "Encyclopaedia Britannica" (new Ed.).
Art. "Biology."
"Whoever recalls to mind the lamentable failure of all the attempts
made very recently to discover a decided support for the generatio
aquivoca in the lower forms of transition from the inorganic to the
organic world, will feel it doubly serious to demand that this theory, so
utterly discredited, should be in any way accepted as the basis of all our
views of life."—Virchow: "The Freedom of Science in the Modern State."
"All really scientific experience tells us that life can be produced
from a living antecedent only."—"The Unseen Universe." 6th Ed. p. 229.
[37] John iii.
[38] Rom. viii. 6.
[39] Rev. iii. 1.
[40] 1 Tim. v. 6.
[41] Eph. ii. 1,5.
[42] 1 Cor. ii. 14.
[43] "First Principles," 2nd Ed., p. 17.
[44] 2 Cor. xiii. 5.
[45] 1 Cor. vi. 15.
[46] John xiv. 20.
[47] John xiv. 21-23.
[48] John xv. 5.
[49] Gal. ii. 20.
[50] One must not bc misled by popular statements in
this connection, such as this of Professor Owen's: "There are orgamsms
which we can devitalise and revitalise—devive and revive—many times."
(Monthly Microscopical Journal, May, 1869, p. 294.) The reference is of
course to the extraordinary capacity for resuscitation possessed by many
of the Protozoa and other low forms of life.
[51] Acts ix. 5.
[52] For the scientific basis of thls spiritual law
the following works may be consulted:—
"The Origin of Species." By Charles Darwin, F.R.S. London: John Murray.
1872.
"Degeneration." By E. Ray Lankester, F.R.S. London: Macmillan. 1880.
"Der Ursprung der Wirbelthiere und das Princip des Functions-Wechsels."
Dr. A. Dorhn. Leipzig: 1875.
"Lessons from Nature." By St. George Mivart, F.R.S. London: John
Murray. 1876.
"The Natural Conditions of Existence as they Affect Animal Life." Karl
Semper London: C. Kegan Paul Co. 1881 |