ENVIRONMENT.
"When I talked with an ardent missionary and pointed out to him that
his creed found no support in my experience, he replied: `It is not so in
your experience, but is so in the other world.' I answer: `Other world!
There is no other world. God is one and omnipresent; here or nowhere is
the whole fact.' "
EMERSON.
" Ye are complete in Him."—Paul.
"Whatever amount of power an organism expends in any shape is the
correlate and equivalent of a power that was taken into it from
without."—Herbert Spencer.
STUDENTS of Biography will observe that in all well written Lives
attention is concentrated for the first few chapters upon two points. We
are first introduced to the family to which the subject of memoir
belonged. The grandparents, or even the more remote ancestors, are briefly
sketched and their chief characteristics brought prominently into view.
Then the parents themselves are photographed in detail. Their appearance
and physique, their character, their disposition, their mental qualities,
are set before us in a critical analysis. And finally we are asked to
observe how much the father and the mother respectively have transmitted
of their peculiar nature to their offspring. How faithfully the ancestral
lines have met in the latest product, how mysteriously the joint
characteristics of body and mind have blended, and how unexpected yet how
entirely natural a recombination is the result—these points are elaborated
with cumulative effect until we realize at last how little we are dealing
with an independent unit, how much with a survival and reorganization of
what seemed buried in the grave.
In the second place, we are invited to consider more external
influences—schools and schoolmasters, neighbours, home, pecuniary
circumstances, scenery, and, by-and-by, the religious and political
atmosphere of the time. These also we are assured have played their part
in making the individual what he is. We can estimate these early
influences in any particular case with but small imagination if we fail to
see how powerfully they also have moulded mind and character, and in what
subtle ways they have determined the course of the future life.
This twofold relation of the individual, first, to his parents, and
second, to his circumstances, is not peculiar to human beings. These two
factors are responsible for making all living organisms what they are.
When a naturalist attempts to unfold the life-history of any animal, he
proceeds precisely on these same lines. Biography is really a branch of
Natural History; and the biographer, who discusses his hero as the
resultant of these two tendencies, follows the scientific method as
rigidly as Mr. Darwin in studying "Animals and Plants under
Domestication."
Mr. Darwin, following Weismann, long ago pointed out that there are two
main factors in all Evolution—the nature of the organism and the nature of
the conditions. We have chosen our illustration from the highest or human
species in order to define the meaning of these factors in the clearest
way; but it must be remembered that the development of man under these
directive influences is essentially the same as that of any other organism
in the hands of Nature. We are dealing therefore with universal Law. It
will still further serve to complete the conception of the general
principle if we now substitute for the casual phrases by which the factors
have been described the more accurate terminology of Science. Thus what
Biography describes as parental influences, Biology would speak of as
Heredity; and all that is involved in the second factor—the action of
external circumstances and surroundings—the naturalist would include under
the single term Environment. These two, Heredity and Environment, are the
master-influences of the organic world. These have made all of us what we
are. These forces are still ceaselessly playing upon all our lives. And he
who truly understands these influences; he who has decided how much to
allow to each: he who can regulate new forces as they arise, or adjust
them to the old, so directing them as at one moment to make them
co-operate, at another to counteract one another, understands the
rationale of personal development. To seize continuously the opportunity
of more and more perfect adjustment to better and higher conditions, to
balance some inward evil with some purer influence acting from without, in
a word to make our Environment at the same time that it is making
us,—these are the secrets of a well-ordered and successful life.
In the spiritual world, also, the subtle influences which form and
transform the soul are Heredity and Environment. And here especially where
all is invisible, where much that we feel to be real is yet so
ill-defined, it becomes of vital practical moment to clarify the
atmosphere as far as possible with conceptions borrowed from the natural
life. Few thinkers are less understood than the conditions of the
spiritual life. The distressing incompetence of which most of us are
conscious in trying to work out our spiritual experience is due perhaps
less to the diseased will which we commonly blame for it than to imperfect
knowledge of the right conditions. It does not occur to us how natural the
spiritual is. We still strive for some strange transcendent thing; we seek
to promote life by methods as unnatural as they prove unsuccessful; and
only the utter incomprehensibility of the whole region prevents us seeing
fully—what we already half suspect—how completely we are missing the road.
Living in the spiritual world, nevertheless, is just as simple as living
in the natural world; and it is the same kind of simplicity. It is the
same kind of simplicity for it is the same kind of world—there are not two
kinds of worlds. The conditions of life in the one are the conditions of
life in the other. And till these conditions are sensibly grasped, as the
conditions of all life, it is impossible that the personal effort after
the highest life should be other than a blind struggle carried on in
fruitless sorrow and humiliation.
Of these two universal factors, Heredity and Environment, it is
unnecessary to balance the relative importance here. The main influence,
unquestionably, must be assigned to the former. In practice, however, and
for an obvious reason, we are chiefly concerned with the latter. What
Heredity has to do for us is determined outside ourselves. No man can
select his own parents. But every man to some extent can choose his own
Environment. His relation to it, however largely determined by Heredity in
the first instance, is always open to alteration. And so great is his
control over Environment and so radical its influence over him, that he
can so direct it as either to undo modify, perpetuate or intensify the
earlier hereditary influences within certain limits. But the aspects of
Environment which we have now to consider do not involve us in questions
of such complexity. In what high and mystical sense, also, Heredity
applies to the spiritual organism we need not just now inquire. In the
simpler relations of the more external factor we shall find a large and
fruitful field for study.
The Influence of Environment may be investigated in two main aspects.
First, one might discuss the modern and very interesting question as to
the power of Environment to induce what is known to recent science as
Variation. A change in the surroundings of any animal, it is now
well-known, can so react upon it as to cause it to change. By the attempt,
conscious or unconscious, to adjust itself to the new conditions, a true
physiological change is gradually wrought within the organism. Hunter, for
example, in a classical experiment, so changed the Environment of a
sea-gull by keeping it in captivity that it could only secure a grain
diet. The effect was to modify the stomach of the bird, normally adapted
to a fish diet, until in time it came to resemble in structure the gizzard
of an ordinary grain-feeder such as the pigeon. Holmgren again reversed
this experiment by feeding pigeons for a lengthened period on a meat-diet,
with the result that the gizzard became transformed into the carnivorous
stomach. Mr. Alfred Russel Wallace mentions the case of a Brazilian parrot
which changes its colour from green to red or yellow when fed on the fat
of certain fishes. Not only changes of food, however, but changes of
climate and of temperature, changes in surrounding organisms,
in the case of marine animals even changes of pressure, of ocean currents,
of light, and of many other circumstances, are known to exert a powerful
modifying influence upon living organisms. These relations are still being
worked out in many directions, but the influence of Environment as a prime
factor in Variation is now a recognised doctrine of science.[81]
Even the popular mind has been struck with the curious adaptation of
nearly all animals to their habitat, for example in the matter of colour.
The sandy hue of the sole and flounder, the white of the polar bear with
its suggestion of Arctic snows, the stripes of the Bengal tiger—as if the
actual reeds of its native jungle had nature-printed themselves on its
hide;—these, and a hundred others which will occur to every one, are
marked instances of adaptation to Environment induced, by Natural
Selection or otherwise, for the purpose, obviously in these cases at
least, of protection.
To continue the investigation of the modifying action of Environment
into the moral and spiritual spheres, would be to open a fascinating and
suggestive inquiry. One might show how the moral man is acted upon and
changed continuously by the influences, secret and open, of his
surroundings, by the tone of society, by the company he keeps, by his
occupation, by the books he reads, by Nature, by all, in short, that
constitutes the habitual atmosphere of his thoughts and the little world
of his daily choice. Or one might go deeper still and prove how the
spiritual life also is modified from outside sources— its health or
disease, its growth or decay, all its changes for better or for worse
being determined by the varying and successive circumstances in which the
religious habits are cultivated. But we must rather transfer our attention
to a second aspect of environment, not perhaps so fascinating but yet more
important.
So much of the modern discussion of Environment revolves round the mere
question of Variation that one is apt to overlook a previous question.
Environment as a factor in life is not exhausted when we have realized its
modifying influence. Its significance is scarcely touched. The great
function of Environment is not to modify but to sustain. In sustaining
life, it is true, it modifies. But the latter influence is incidental, the
former essential. Our Environment is that in which we live and move and
have our being. Without it we should neither live nor move nor have any
being. In the organism lies the principle of life; in the Environment are
the conditions of life. Without the fulfilment of these conditions, which
are wholly supplied by Environment, there can be no life. An organism in
itself is but a part; Nature is its complement. Alone, cut off from its
surroundings, it is not. Alone, cut off from my surroundings, I am
not—physically I am not. I am, only as I am sustained. I continue only as
I receive. My Environment may modify me, but it has first to keep me. And
all the time its secret transforming power is indirectly moulding body and
mind it is directly active in the more open task of ministering to my
myriad wants and from hour to hour sustaining life itself.
To understand the sustaining influence of Environment in the animal
world, one has only to recall what the biologist terms the extrinsic or
subsidiary conditions of vitality. Every living thing normally requires
for its development an Environment containing air, light, heat, and water.
In addition to these, if vitality is to be prolonged for any length of
time, and if it is to be accompanied with growth and the expenditure of
energy, there must be a constant supply of food. When we simply remember
how indispensable food is to growth and work, and when we further bear in
mind that the food-supply is solely contributed by the Environment, we
shall realize at once the meaning and the truth of the proposition that
without Environment there can be no life. Seventy per cent. at least of
the human body is made of pure water, the rest of gases and earths. These
have all come from Environment. Through the secret pores of the skin two
pounds of water are exhaled daily from every healthy adult. The supply is
kept up by Environment. The Environment is really an unappropriated part
of ourselves. Definite portions are continuously abstracted from it and
added to the organism. And so long as the organism continues to grow, act,
think, speak, work, or perform any other function demanding a supply of
energy, there is a constant, simultaneous, and proportionate drain upon
its surroundings.
This is a truth in the physical, and therefore in the spiritual, world
of so great importance that we shall not mis-spend time if we follow it,
for further confirmation, into another department of nature. Its
significance in Biology is self-evident; let us appeal to Chemistry.
When a piece of coal is thrown on the fire, we say that it will radiate
into the room a certain quantity of heat. This heat, in the popular
conception, is supposed to reside in the coal and to be set free during
the process of combustion. In reality, however, the heat energy is only in
part contained in the coal. It is contained just as truly in the coal's
Environment—that is to say, in the oxygen of the air. The atoms of carbon
which compose the coal have a powerful affinity for the oxygen of the air.
Whenever they are made to approach within a certain distance of one
another, by the initial application of heat, they rush together with
inconceivable velocity. The heat which appears at this moment, comes
neither from the carbon alone, nor from the oxygen alone. These two
substances are really inconsumable, and continue to exist, after they meet
in a combined form, as carbonic acid gas. The heat is due to the energy
developed by the chemical embrace, the precipitate rushing together of the
molecules of carbon and the molecules of oxygen. It comes, therefore,
partly from the coal and partly from the Environment. Coal alone never
could produce heat, neither alone could Environment. The two are mutually
dependent. And although in nearly all the arts we credit everything to the
substance which we can weigh and handle, it is certain that in most cases
the larger debt is due to an invisible Environment.
This is one of those great commonplaces which slip out of general
reckoning by reason of their very largeness and simplicity. How profound,
nevertheless, are the issues which hang on this elementary truth, we shall
discover immediately. Nothing in this age is more needed in every
department of knowledge than the rejuvenescence of the commonplace. In the
spiritual world especially, he will be wise who courts acquaintance with
the most ordinary and transparent facts of Nature; and in laying the
foundations for a religious life he will make no unworthy beginning who
carries with him an impressive sense of so obvious a truth as that without
Environment there can be no life.
For what does this amount to in the spiritual world? Is it not merely
the scientific re-statement of the reiterated aphorism of Christ, "Without
Me ye can do nothing"? There is in the spiritual organism a principle of
life; but that is not self-existent. It requires a second factor, a
something in which to live and move and have its being, an Environment.
Without this it cannot live or move or have any being. Without Environment
the soul is as the carbon without the oxygen, as the fish without the
water, as the animal frame without the extrinsic conditions of vitality.
And what is the spiritual Environment? It is God. Without this,
therefore, there is no life, no thought, no energy, nothing—"without Me ye
can do nothing."
The cardinal error in the religious life is to attempt to live without
an Environment. Spiritual experience occupies itself, not too much, but
too exclusively, with one factor—the soul. We delight in dissecting this
much tortured faculty, from time to time, in search of a certain something
which we call our faith—forgetting that faith is but an attitude, an empty
hand for grasping an environing Presence. And when we feel the need of a
power by which to overcome the world, how often do we not seek to generate
it within ourselves by some forced process, some fresh girding of the
will, some strained activity which only leaves the soul in further
exhaustion? To examine ourselves is good; but useless unless we also
examine Environment. To bewail our weakness is right, but not remedial.
The cause must be investigated as well as the result. And yet, because we
never see the other half of the problem, our failures even fail to
instruct us. After each new collapse we begin our life anew, but on the
old conditions; and the attempt ends as usual in the repetition—in the
circumstances the inevitable repetition—of the old disaster. Not that at
times we do not obtain glimpses of the true state of the case. After
seasons of much discouragement, with the sore sense upon us of our abject
feebleness, we do confer with ourselves, insisting for the thousandth
time, "My soul, wait thou only upon God." But, the lesson is soon
forgotten. The strength supplied we speedily credit to our own
achievement; and even the temporary success is mistaken for a symptom of
improved inward vitality. Once more we become self-existent. Once more we
go on living without an Environment. And once more, after days of wasting
without repairing, of spending without replenishing, we begin to perish
with hunger, only returning to God again, as a last resort, when we have
reached starvation point.
Now why do we do this? Why do we seek to breathe without an atmosphere,
to drink without a well? Why this unscientific attempt to sustain life for
weeks at a time without an Environment? It is because we have never truly
seen the necessity for an Environment. We have not been working with a
principle. We are told to "wait only upon God," but we do not know why. It
has never been as clear to us that without God the soul will die as that
without food the body will perish. In short, we have never comprehended
the doctrine of the Persistence of Force. Instead of being content to
transform energy we have tried to create it.
The Law of Nature here is as clear as Science can make it. In the words
of Mr. Herbert Spencer, "It is a corollary from that primordial truth
which, as we have seen, underlies all other truths, that whatever
amount of power an organism expends in any shape is the correlate and
equivalent of a power that was taken into it from without."[82]
We are dealing here with a simple question of dynamics. Whatever energy
the soul expends must first be "taken into it from without." We are not
Creators, but creatures; God is our refuge and strength. Communion with
God, therefore, is a scientific necessity; and nothing will more help the
defeated spirit which is struggling in the wreck of its religious life
than a common-sense hold of this plain biological principle that without
Environment he can do nothing. What he wants is not an occasional view,
but a principle— a basal principle like this, broad as the universe, solid
as nature. In the natural world we act upon this law unconsciously. We
absorb heat, breathe air, draw on Environment all but automatically for
meat and drink, for the nourishment of the senses, for mental stimulus,
for all that, penetrating us from without, can prolong, enrich, and
elevate life. But in the spiritual world we have all this to learn. We are
new creatures, and even the bare living has to be acquired.
Now the great point in learning to live is to live naturally. As
closely as possible we must follow the broad, clear lines of the natural
life. And there are three things especially which it is necessary for us
to keep continually in view. The first is that the organism contains
within itself only one-half of what is essential to life; the second is
that the other half is contained in the Environment; the third, that the
condition of receptivity is simple union between the organism and the
Environment.
Translated into the language of religion these propositions yield, and
place on a scientific basis, truths of immense practical interest. To say,
first, that the organism contains within itself only one-half of what is
essential to life, is to repeat the evangelical confession, so worn and
yet so true to universal experience, of the utter helplessness of man. Who
has not come to the conclusion that he is but a part, a fraction of some
larger whole? Who does not miss at every turn of his life an absent God?
That man is but a part, he knows, for there is room in him for more. That
God is the other part, he feels, because at times He satisfies his need.
Who does not tremble often under that sicklier symptom of his
incompleteness, his want of spiritual energy, his helplessness with sin?
But now he understands both— the void in his life, the powerlessness of
his will. He understands that, like all other energy, spiritual power is
contained in Environment. He finds here at last the true root of all human
frailty, emptiness, nothingness, sin. This is why "without Me ye can do
nothing." Powerlessness is the normal state not only of this but of every
organism—of every organism apart from its Environment.
The entire dependence of the soul upon God is not an exceptional
mystery, nor is man's helplessness an arbitrary and unprecedented
phenomenon. It is the law of all Nature. The spiritual man is not taxed
beyond the natural. He is not purposely handicapped by singular
limitations or unusual incapacities. God has not designedly made the
religious Life as hard as possible. The arrangements for the spiritual
life are the same as for the natural life. When in their hours of unbelief
men challenge their Creator for placing the obstacle of human frailty in
the way of their highest development, their protest is against the order
of nature. They object to the sun for being the source of energy and not
the engine, to the carbonic acid being in the air and not in the plant.
They would equip each organism with a personal atmosphere, each brain with
a private store of energy; they would grow corn in the interior of the
body, and make bread by a special apparatus in the digestive organs. They
must, in short, have the creature transformed into a Creator. The organism
must either depend on his environment, or be self-sufficient. But who will
not rather approve the arrangement by which man in his creatural life may
have unbroken access to an Infinite Power? What soul will seek to remain
self-luminous when it knows that "The Lord God is a Sun"? Who will not
willingly exchange his shallow vessel for Christ's well of living water?
Even if the organism, launched into being like a ship putting out to sea,
possessed a full equipment, its little store must soon come to an end. But
in contact with a large and bounteous Environment its supply is limitless.
In every direction its resources are infinite.
There is a modern school which protests against the doctrine of man's
inability as the heartless fiction of a past theology. While some forms of
that dogma, to any one who knows man, are incapable of defence, there are
others which, to any one who knows Nature, are incapable of denial. Those
who oppose it, in their jealousy for humanity, credit the organism with
the properties of Environment. All true theology, on the other hand, has
remained loyal to at least the root-idea in this truth. The New Testament
is nowhere more impressive than where it insists on the fact of man's
dependence. In its view the first step in religion is for man to feel his
helplessness. Christ's first beatitude is to the poor in spirit. The
condition of entrance into the spiritual kingdom is to possess the
child-spirit—that state of mind combining at once the profoundest
helplessness with the most artless feeling of dependence. Substantially
the same idea underlies the countless passages in which Christ affirms
that He has not come to call the righteous, but sinners to repentance. And
in that farewell discourse into which the Great Teacher poured the most
burning convictions of His life, He gives to this doctrine an ever
increasing emphasis. No words could be more solemn or arresting than the
sentence in the last great allegory devoted to this theme, "As the branch
cannot bear fruit of itself except it abide in the vine, no more can ye
except ye abide in Me." The word here, it will be observed again, is
cannot. It is the imperative of natural law. Fruit-bearing without Christ
is not an improbability, but an impossibility. As well expect the natural
fruit to flourish without air and heat, without soil and sunshine. How
thoroughly also Paul grasped this truth is apparent from a hundred
pregnant passages in which he echoes his Master's teaching. To him life
was hid with Christ in God. And that he embraced this not as a theory but
as an experimental truth we gather from his constant confession, " When I
am weak, then am I strong."
This leads by a natural transition to the second of the three points we
are seeking to illustrate. We have seen that the organism contains within
itself only one half of what is essential to life. We have next to
observe, as the complement of this, how the second half is contained in
the Environment.
One result of the due apprehension of our personal helplessness will be
that we shall no longer waste our time over the impossible task of
manufacturing energy for ourselves. Our science will bring to an abrupt
end the long series of severe experiments in which we have indulged in the
hope of finding a perpetual motion. And having decided upon this once for
all, our first step in seeking a more satisfactory state of things must be
to find a new source of energy. Following Nature, only one course is open
to us. We must refer to Environment. The natural life owes all to
Environment, so must the spiritual. Now the Environment of the spiritual
life is God. As Nature therefore forms the complement of the natural life,
God is the complement of the spiritual.
The proof of this? That Nature is not more natural to my body than God
is to my soul. Every animal and plant has its own Environment. And the
further one inquires into the relations of the one to the other, the more
one sees the marvellous intricacy and beauty of the adjustments. These
wonderful adaptations of each organism to its surroundings—of the fish to
the water, of the eagle to the air, of the insect to the forest-bed; and
of each part of every organism—the fish's swim-bladder, the eagle's eye,
the insect's breathing tubes—which the old argument from design brought
home to us with such enthusiasm, inspire us still with a sense of the
boundless resource and skill of Nature in perfecting her arrangements for
each single life. Down to the last detail the world is made for what is in
it; and by whatever process things are as they are, all organisms find in
surrounding Nature the ample complement of themselves. Man, too, finds in
his Environment provision for all capacities, scope for the exercise of
every faculty, room for the indulgence of each appetite, a just supply for
every want. So the spiritual man at the apex of the pyramid of life finds
in the vaster range of his Environment a provision, as much higher, it is
true, as he is higher, but as delicately adjusted to his varying needs.
And all this is supplied to him just as the lower organisms are ministered
to by the lower environment, in the same simple ways, in the same constant
sequence, as appropriately and as lavishly. We fail to praise the
ceaseless ministry of the great inanimate world around us only because its
kindness is unobtrusive. Nature is always noiseless. All her greatest
gifts are given in secret. And we forget how truly every good and perfect
gift comes from without, and from above, because no pause in her
changeless beneficence teaches us the sad lessons of deprivation.
It is not a strange thing, then, for the soul to find its life in God.
This is its native air. God as the Environment of the soul has been from
the remotest age the doctrine of all the deepest thinkers in religion. How
profoundly Hebrew poetry is saturated with this high thought will appear
when we try to conceive of it with this left out. True poetry is only
science in another form. And long before it was possible for religion to
give scientific expression to its greatest truths, men of insight uttered
themselves in psalms which could not have been truer to Nature had the
most modern light controlled the inspiration. "As the hart panteth after
the water-brooks, so panteth my soul after Thee, O God." What fine sense
of the analogy of the natural and the spiritual does not underlie these
words. As the hart after its Environment, so man after his; as the
water-brooks are fitly designed to meet the natural wants, so fitly does
God implement the spiritual need of man. It will be noticed that in the
Hebrew poets the longing for God never strikes one as morbid, or unnatural
to the men who uttered it. It is as natural to them to long for God as for
the swallow to seek her nest. Throughout all their images no suspicion
rises within us that they are exaggerating. We feel how truly they are
reading themselves, their deepest selves. No false note occurs in all
their aspiration. There is no weariness even in their ceaseless sighing
except the lover's weariness for the absent—if they would fly away, it is
only to be at rest. Men who have no soul can only wonder at this. Men who
have a soul, but with little faith, can only envy it. How joyous a thing
it was to the Hebrews to seek their God! How artlessly they call upon Him
to entertain them in His pavilion, to cover them with His feathers, to
hide them in His secret place, to hold them in the hollow of His hand or
stretch around them the everlasting arms! These men were true children of
Nature. As the humming-bird among its own palm-trees, as the ephemera in
the sunshine of a summer evening, so they lived their joyous lives. And
even the full share of the sadder experiences of life which came to all of
them but drove them the further into the Secret Place, and led them with
more consecration to make, as they expressed it, "the Lord their portion."
All that has been said since from Marcus Aurelius to Swedenborg, from
Augustine to Schleiermacher of a besetting God as the final complement of
humanity is but a repetition of the Hebrew poets' faith. And even the New
Testament has nothing higher to offer man than this. The psalmist's "God
is our refuge and strength" is only the earlier form, less defined, less
practicable, but not less noble, of Christ's "Come unto Me, and I will
give you rest."
There is a brief phrase of Paul's which defines the relation with
almost scientific accuracy,—"Ye are complete in Him." In this is summed up
the whole of the Bible anthropology—the completeness of man in God, his
incompleteness apart from God.
If it be asked, In what is man incomplete, or, In what does God
complete him? the question is a wide one. But it may serve to show at
least the direction in which the Divine Environment forms the complement
of human life if we ask ourselves once more what it is in life that needs
complementing. And to this question we receive the significant answer that
it is in the higher departments alone, or mainly, that the incompleteness
of our life appears. The lower departments of Nature are already complete
enough. The world itself is about as good a world as might be. It has been
long in the making, its furniture is all in, its laws are in perfect
working order; and although wise men at various times have suggested
improvements, there is on the whole a tolerably unanimous vote of
confidence in things as they exist. The Divine Environment has little more
to do for this planet so far as we can see, and so far as the existing
generation is concerned. Then the lower organic life of the world is also
so far complete. God, through Evolution or otherwise, may still have
finishing touches to add here and there, but already it is "all very
good." It is difficult to conceive anything better of its kind than a lily
or a cedar, an ant or an ant-eater. These organisms, so far as we can
judge, lack nothing. It might be said of them, "they are complete in
Nature." Of man also, of man the animal, it may be affirmed that his
Environment satisfies him. He has food and drink, and good food and good
drink. And there is in him no purely animal want which is not really
provided for, and that apparently in the happiest possible way
But the moment we pass beyond the mere animal life we begin to come
upon an incompleteness. The symptoms at first are slight, and betray
themselves only by an unexplained restlessness or a dull sense of want.
Then the feverishness increases, becomes more defined, and passes slowly
into abiding pain. To some come darker moments when the unrest deepens
into a mental agony of which all the other woes of earth are
mockeries—moments when the forsaken soul can only cry in terror for the
Living God. Up to a point the natural Environment supplies man's wants,
beyond that it only derides him. How much in man lies beyond that point?
Very much—almost all, all that makes man man. The first suspicion of the
terrible truth—so for the time let us call it—wakens with the dawn of the
intellectual life. It is a solemn moment when the slow-moving mind reaches
at length the verge of its mental horizon, and, looking over, sees nothing
more. Its straining makes the abyss but more profound. Its cry comes back
without an echo. Where is the Environment to complete this rational soul?
Men either find one,—One—or spend the rest of their days in trying to shut
their eyes. The alternatives of the intellectual life are Christianity or
Agnosticism. The Agnostic is right when he trumpets his incompleteness. He
who is not complete in Him must be for ever incomplete. Still more grave
becomes man's case when he begins further to explore his moral and social
nature. The problems of the heart and conscience are infinitely more
perplexing than those of the intellect. Has love no future? Has right no
triumph? Is the unfinished self to remain unfinished? Again, the
alternatives are two, Christianity or Pessimism. But when we ascend the
further height of the religious nature, the crisis comes. There, without
Environment, the darkness is unutterable. So maddening now becomes the
mystery that men are compelled to construct an Environment for themselves.
No Environment here is unthinkable. An altar of some sort men must
have—God, or Nature, or Law. But the anguish of Atheism is only a negative
proof of man's incompleteness. A witness more overwhelming is the prayer
of the Christian. What a very strange thing, is it not, for man to pray?
It is the symbol at once of his littleness and of his greatness. Here the
sense of imperfection, controlled and silenced in the narrower reaches of
his being, becomes audible. Now he must utter himself. The sense of need
is so real, and the sense of Environment, that he calls out to it,
addressing it articulately, and imploring it to satisfy his need. Surely
there is nothing more touching in Nature than this? Man could never so
expose himself, so break through all constraint, except from a dire
necessity. It is the suddenness and unpremeditatedness of Prayer that
gives it a unique value as an apologetic.
Man has three questions to put to his Environment, three symbols of his
incompleteness. They come from three different centres of his being. The
first is the question of the intellect, What is Truth? The natural
Environment answers, "Increase of Knowledge increaseth Sorrow," and "much
study is a Weariness." Christ replies, "Learn of Me, and ye shall find
Rest." Contrast the world's word "Weariness" with Christ's word "Rest." No
other teacher since the world began has ever associated "learn " with
"Rest." Learn of me, says the philosopher, and you shall find
Restlessness. Learn of Me, says Christ, and ye shall find Rest. Thought,
which the godless man has cursed, that eternally starved yet ever living
spectre, finds at last its imperishable glory; Thought is complete in Him.
The second question is sent up from the moral nature, Who will show us any
good? And again we have a contrast: the world's
verdict, "There is none that doeth good, no, not one;" and Christ's,
"There is none good but God only." And, finally, there is the lonely cry
of the spirit, most pathetic and most deep of all, Where is he whom my
soul seeketh? And the yearning is met as before, "I looked on my right
hand, and beheld, but there was no man that would know me; refuge failed
me; no man cared for my soul. I cried unto Thee, O Lord: I said, Thou art
my refuge and my portion in the land of the living."[83]
Are these the directions in which men in these days are seeking to
complete their lives? The completion of Life is just now a supreme
question. It is important to observe how it is being answered. If we ask
Science or Philosophy they will refer us to Evolution. The struggle for
Life, they assure us, is steadily eliminating imperfect forms, and as the
fittest continue to survive we shall have a gradual perfecting of being.
That is to say, that completeness is to be sought for in the organism—we
are to be complete in Nature and in ourselves. To Evolution, certainly,
all men will look for a further perfecting of Life. But it must be an
Evolution which includes the factors. Civilization, it may be said, will
deal with the second factor. It will improve the Environment step by step
as it improves the organism, or the organism as it improves the
Environment. This is well, and it will perfect Life up to a point. But
beyond that it cannot carry us. As the possibilities of the natural Life
become more defined, its impossibilities will become the more appalling.
The most perfect civilization would leave the best part of us still
incomplete. Men will have to give up the experiment of attempting to live
in half an Environment. Half an Environment will give but half a Life.
Half an Environment? He whose correspondences are with this world alone
has only a thousandth part, a fraction, the mere rim and shade of an
Environment, and only the fraction of a Life. How long will it take
Science to believe its own creed, that the material universe we see around
us is only a fragment of the universe we do not see? The very retention of
the phrase "Material Universe," we are told, is the confession of our
unbelief and ignorance; since "matter is the less
important half of the material of the physical universe."[84]
The thing to be aimed at is not an organism self-contained and
self-sufficient, however high in the scale of being, but an organism
complete in the whole Environment. It is open to any one to aim at a
self-sufficient Life, but he will find no encouragement in Nature. The
Life of the body may complete itself in the physical world; that is its
legitimate Environment. The Life of the senses, high and low, may perfect
itself in Nature. Even the Life of thought may find a large complement in
surrounding things. But the higher thought, and the conscience, and the
religious Life, can only perfect themselves in God. To make the influence
of Environment stop with the natural world is to doom the spiritual nature
to death. For the soul, like the body, can never perfect itself in
isolation. The law for both is to be complete in the appropriate
Environment. And the perfection to be sought in the spiritual world is a
perfection of relation, a perfect adjustment of that which is becoming
perfect to that which is perfect.
The third problem, now simplified to a point, finally presents itself.
Where do organism and Environment meet? How does that which is becoming
perfect avail itself of its perfecting Environment? And the answer is,
just as in Nature. The condition is simple receptivity. And yet this is
perhaps the least simple of all conditions. It is so simple that we will
not act upon it. But there is no other condition. Christ has condensed the
whole truth into one memorable sentence, "As the branch cannot bear fruit
of itself except it abide in the vine, no more can ye except ye abide in
Me." And on the positive side, "He that abideth in Me the same bringeth
forth much fruit."
" `So careful of the type?' but no,
From scarped cliff and quarried stone
She cries, `A thousand types are gone;
I care for nothing, all shall go.
`Thou makest thine appeal to me;
I bring to life, I bring to death:
The spirit does but mean thy breath:
I know no more.' And he, shall he,
Man, her last work, who seem'd so fair,
Such splendid purpose in his eyes,
Who roll'd the psalm to wintry skies,
Who built him fanes of fruitless prayer,
Who trusted God was love indeed
And love Creation's final law—
Tho' Nature, red in tooth and claw
With ravine, shriek'd against his creed—
Who loved, who suffer'd countless ills,
Who battled for the True, the Just,
Be blown about the desert dust
Or seal'd within the iron hills?"
IN MEMORIAM
"Until Christ be formed in you."—Paul.
" The one end to which, in all living beings, the formative impulse is
tending—the one scheme which the Archaeus of the old speculators strives
to carry out, seems to be to mould the offspring into the likeness of the
parent. It is the first great law of reproduction, that the offspring
tends to resemble its parent or parents more closely than anything
else."—Huxley.
IF a botanist be asked the difference between an oak, a palm-tree, and
a lichen, he will declare that they are separated from one another by the
broadest line known to classification. Without taking into account the
outward differences of size and form, the variety of flower and fruit, the
peculiarities of leaf and branch, he sees even in their general
architecture types of structure as distinct as Norman, Gothic and
Egyptian. But if the first young germs of these three plants are placed
before him and he is called upon to define the difference, he finds it
impossible. He cannot even say which is which. Examined under the highest
powers of the microscope they yield no clue. Analysed by the chemist with
all the appliances of his laboratory they keep their secret.
The same experiment can be tried with the embryos of animals. Take the
ovule of the worm, the eagle, the elephant, and of man himself. Let the
most skilled observer apply the most searching tests to distinguish one
from the other and he will fail. But there is something more surprising
still. Compare next the two sets of germs, the vegetable and the animal.
And there is still no shade of difference. Oak and palm, worm and man all
start in life together. No matter into what strangely different forms they
may afterwards develop, no matter whether they are to live on sea or land,
creep or fly, swim or walk, think or vegetate,
in the embryo as it first meets the eye of Science they are
indistinguishable. The apple which fell in Newton's Garden, Newton's dog
Diamond, and Newton himself, began life at the same point.[85]
If we analyse this material point at which all life starts, we shall
find it to consist of a clear structureless jelly-like substance
resembling albumen or white of egg. It is made of Carbon, Hydrogen, Oxygen
and Nitrogen. Its name is protoplasm. And it is not only the structural
unit with which all living bodies start in life, but with which they are
subsequently built up. "Protoplasm," says Huxley, "simple or nucleated, is
the formal basis of all life. It is the clay of the Potter." "Beast and
fowl, reptile and fish, mollusk, worm and polype are all composed of
structural units of the same character, namely, masses of protoplasm with
a nucleus."[86]
What then determines the difference between different animals? What
makes one little speck of protoplasm grow into Newton's dog Diamond, and
another, exactly the same, into Newton himself? It is a mysterious
something which has entered into this protoplasm. No eye can see it. No
science can define it. There is a different something for Newton's dog and
a different something for Newton; so that though both use the same matter
they build it up in these widely different ways. Protoplasm being the
clay, this something is the Potter. And as there is only one clay and yet
all these curious forms are developed out of it, it follows necessarily
that the difference lies in the potters. There must in short be as many
potters as there are forms. There is the potter who segments the worm, and
the potter who builds up the form of the dog, and the potter who moulds
the man. To understand unmistakably that it is really the potter who does
the work, let us follow for a moment a description of the process by a
trained eye-witness. The observer is Mr. Huxley. Through the tube of his
microscope he is watching the development, out of a speck of protoplasm,
of one of the commonest animals: "Strange possibilities," he says, "lie
dormant in that semi-fluid globule. Let a moderate supply of warmth reach
its watery cradle and the plastic matter undergoes changes so rapid and
yet so steady and purposelike in their succession that one can only
compare them to those operated by a skilled modeller upon a formless lump
of clay. As with an invisible trowel the mass is divided and subdivided
into smaller and smaller portions, until it is reduced to an aggregation
of granules not too large to build withal the finest fabrics of the
nascent organism. And, then, it is as if a delicate finger traced out the
line to be occupied by the spinal column, and moulded the contour of the
body; pinching up the head at one end, the tail at the other, and
fashioning flank and limb into due proportions in so artistic a way, that,
after watching the process hour by hour, one is almost involuntarily
possessed by the notion, that some more subtle aid to vision than an
achromatic would show the hidden artist, with his plan before him,
striving with skilful manipulation to perfect his work."[87]
Besides the fact, so luminously brought out here, that the artist is
distinct from the "semi-fluid globule" of protoplasm in which he works,
there is this other essential point to notice, that in all his "skilful
manipulation" the artist is not working at random, but according to law.
He has "his plan before him." In the zoological laboratory of Nature it is
not as in a workshop where a skilled artisan can turn his hand to
anything—where the same potter one day moulds a dog, the next a bird, and
the next a man. In Nature one potter is set apart to make each. It is a
more complete system of division of labour. One artist makes all the dogs,
another makes all the birds, a third makes all the men. Moreover, each
artist confines himself exclusively to working out his own plan. He
appears to have his own plan somehow stamped upon himself, and his work is
rigidly to reproduce himself.
The Scientific Law by which this takes place is the Law of Conformity
to Type. It is contained, to a large extent, in the ordinary Law of
Inheritance; or it may be considered as simply another way of stating what
Darwin calls the Law of Unity of Type. Darwin defines it thus "By Unity of
Type is meant that fundamental agreement in
structure which we see in organic beings of the same class, and which is
quite independent of their habits of life."[88]
According to this law every living thing that comes into the world is
compelled to stamp upon its offspring the image of itself. The dog,
according to its type, produces a dog; the bird a bird.
The Artist who operates upon matter in this subtle way and carries out
this law is Life. There are a great many different kinds of Life. If one
might give the broader meaning to the words of the apostle: "All life is
not the same life. There is one kind of life of men, another life of
beasts, another of fishes, and another of birds." There is the Life, or
the Artist, or the Potter who segments the worm, the potter who forms the
dog, the potter who moulds the man.[89]
What goes on then in the animal kingdom is this— he Bird-Life seizes
upon the bird-germ and builds it up into a bird, the image of itself. The
Reptile-Life seizes upon another germinal speck, assimilates surrounding
matter, and fashions it into a reptile. The reptile-Life thus simply makes
an incarnation of itself. The visible bird is simply an incarnation of the
invisible Bird-Life.
Now we are nearing the point where the spiritual analogy appears. It is
a very wonderful analogy, so wonderful that one almost hesitates to put it
into words. Yet Nature is reverent; and it is her voice to which we
listen. These lower phenomena of life, he says, are but an allegory. There
is another kind of Life of which Science as yet has taken little
cognisance. It obeys the same laws. It builds up an organism into its own
form. It is the Christ-Life. As the Bird-Life builds up a bird, the image
of itself, so the Christ-Life builds up a Christ, the image of Himself, in
the inward nature of man. When a man becomes a Christian the natural
process is this: The Living Christ enters into his soul. Development
begins. The quickening Life seizes upon the soul, assimilates surrounding
elements, and begins to fashion it. According to the great Law of
Conformity to Type this fashioning takes a specific form. It is that of
the Artist who fashions. And all through Life this wonderful, mystical,
glorious, yet perfectly definite process, goes on "until Christ be formed"
in it.
The Christian Life is not a vague effort after righteousness—an
ill-defined pointless struggle for an ill-defined pointless end. Religion
is no dishevelled mass of aspiration, prayer, and faith. There is no more
mystery in Religion as to its processes than in Biology. There is much
mystery in Biology. We know all but nothing of Life yet, nothing of
development. There is the same mystery in the spiritual Life. But the
great lines are the same, as decided, as luminous; and the laws of natural
and spiritual are the same, as unerring, as simple. Will everything else
in the natural world unfold its order, and yield to Science more and more
a vision of harmony, and Religion, which should complement and perfect
all, remain a chaos? From the standpoint of Revelation no truth is more
obscure than Conformity to Type. If Science can furnish a companion
phenomenon from an every-day process of the natural life, it may at least
throw this most mystical doctrine of Christianity into thinkable form. Is
there any fallacy in speaking of the Embryology of the New Life? Is the
analogy invalid? Are there not vital processes in the Spiritual as well as
in the Natural world? The Bird being an incarnation of the Bird-Life, may
not the Christian be a spiritual incarnation of the Christ-Life? And is
there not a real justification in the processes of the New Birth for such
a parallel?
Let us appeal to the record of these processes.
In what terms does the New Testament describe them? The answer is
sufficiently striking. It uses everywhere the language of Biology. It is
impossible that the New Testament writers should have been familiar with
these biological facts. It is impossible that their views of this great
truth should have been as clear as Science can make them now. But they had
no alternative. There was no other way of expressing this truth. It was a
biological question. So they struck out unhesitatingly into the new field
of words, and, with an originality which commands both reverence and
surprise, stated their truth with such light, or darkness, as they had.
They did not mean to be scientific, only to be accurate, and their
fearless accuracy has made them scientific.
What could be more original, for instance, than the Apostle's
reiteration that the Christian was a new creature, a new man, a babe?[90]
Or that this new man was "begotten of God," God's workmanship?[91]
And what could be a more accurate expression of the Law of Conformity to
Type than this: "Put on the new man, which is renewed in knowledge after
the image of Him that created him"?[92] Or this, "We
are changed into the same image from glory to glory"?[93]
And elsewhere we are expressly told by the same writer that this
Conformity is the end and goal of the Christian life. To work this Type in
us is the whole purpose of God for man. "Whom He did foreknow He also did
predestinate to be conformed to the image of His Son."[94]
One must confess that the originality of this entire New Testament
conception is most startling. Even for the nineteenth century it is most
startling. But when one remembers that such an idea took form in the
first, he cannot fail to be impressed with a deepening wonder at the
system which begat and cherished it. Men seek the origin of Christianity
among the philosophies of that age. Scholars contrast it still with these
philosophies, and scheme to fit it in to those of later growth. Has it
never occurred to them how much more it is than a philosophy, that it
includes a science, a Biology pure and simple? As well might naturalists
contrast zoology with chemistry, or seek to incorporate geology with
botany—the living with the dead—as try to explain the spiritual life in
terms of mind alone. When will it be seen that the characteristic of the
Christian Religion is its Life, that a true theology must begin with a
Biology? Theology is the Science of God. Why will men treat God as
inorganic?
If this analogy is capable of being worked out, we should expect
answers to at least three questions.
First: What corresponds to the protoplasm in the spiritual sphere?
Second: What is the Life, the Hidden Artist who fashions it?
Third: What do we know of the process and the plan?
First: The Protoplasm.
We should be forsaking the lines of nature were we to imagine for a
moment that the new creature was to be formed out of nothing Ex nihilo
nihil— nothing can be made out of nothing. Matter is uncreatable and
indestructible; Nature and man can only form and transform. Hence when a
new animal is made, no new clay is made. Life merely enters into already
existing matter, assimilates more of the same sort and re-builds it. The
spiritual Artist works in the same way. He must have a peculiar kind of
protoplasm, a basis of life, and that must be already existing.
Now He finds this in the materials of character with which the natural
man is previously provided. Mind and character, the will and the
affections, the moral nature—these form the bases of spiritual life. To
look in this direction for the protoplasm of the spiritual life is
consistent with all analogy. The lowest or mineral world mainly supplies
the material —and this is true even for insectivorous species—for the
vegetable kingdom. The vegetable supplies the material for the animal.
Next in turn, the animal furnishes material for the mental, and lastly,
the mental for the spiritual. Each member of the series is complete only
when the steps below it are complete; the highest demands all. It is not
necessary for the immediate purpose to go so far into the psychology
either of the new creature or of the old as to define more clearly what
these moral bases are. It is enough to discover that in this womb the new
creature is to be born, fashioned out of the mental and moral parts,
substance, or essence of the natural man. The only thing to be insisted
upon is that in the natural man this mental and moral substance or basis
is spiritually lifeless. However active the intellectual or moral life may
be, from the point of view of this other Life it is dead. That which is
flesh is flesh. It wants, that is to say, the kind of Life which
constitutes the difference between the Christian and the not-a-Christian.
It has not yet been "born of the Spirit."
To show further that this protoplasm possesses the necessary properties
of a normal protoplasm it will be necessary to examine in passing what
these properties are. They are two in number, the capacity for life and
plasticity. Consider first the capacity for life. It is not enough to find
an adequate supply of material. That material must be of the right kind.
For all kinds of matter have not the power to be the vehicle of life—all
kinds of matter are not even fitted to be the vehicle of electricity. What
peculiarity there is in Carbon, Hydrogen, Oxygen and Nitrogen, when
combined in a certain way, to receive life, we cannot tell. We only know
that life is always associated in Nature with this particular physical
basis and never with any other. But we are not in the same darkness with
regard to the moral protoplasm, When we look at this complex combination
which we have predicated as the basis of spiritual life, we do find
something which gives it a peculiar qualification for being the protoplasm
of the Christ-Life. We discover one strong reason at least, not only why
this kind of life should be associated with this kind of protoplasm, but
why it should never be associated with other kinds which seem to resemble
it—why, for instance, this spiritual life should not be engrafted upon the
intelligence of a dog or the instincts of an ant.
The protoplasm in man has a something in addition to its instincts or
its habits. It has a capacity for God. In this capacity for God lie its
receptivity; it is the very protoplasm that was necessary. The chamber is
not only ready to receive the new Life, but the Guest is expected, and,
till He comes, is missed. Till then the soul longs and yearns, wastes and
pines, waving its tentacles piteously in the empty air, feeling after God
if so be that it may find Him. This is not peculiar to the protoplasm of
the Christian's soul. In every land and in every age there have been
altars to the Known or Unknown God. It is now agreed as a mere question of
anthropology that the universal language of the human soul has always been
"I perish with hunger." This is what fits it for Christ. There is a
grandeur in this cry from the depths which makes its very unhappiness
sublime.
The other quality we are to look for in the soul is mouldableness,
plasticity. Conformity demands conformability. Now plasticity is not only
a marked characteristic of all forms of life, but in a special sense of
the highest forms. It increases steadily as we rise in the scale. The
inorganic world, to begin with, is rigid. A crystal of silica dissolved
and redissolved a thousand times will never assume any other form than the
hexagonal. The plant next, though plastic in its elements, is
comparatively insusceptible of change. The very fixity of its sphere, the
imprisonment for life in a single spot of earth, is the symbol of a
certain degradation. The animal in all its parts is mobile, sensitive,
free; the highest animal, man, is the most mobile, the most at leisure
from routine, the most impressionable, the most open for change. And when
we reach the mind and soul, this mobility is found in its most developed
form. Whether we regard its susceptibility to impressions, its
lightning-like response even to influences the most impalpable and subtle,
its power of instantaneous adjustment, or whether we regard the delicacy
and variety of its moods, or its vast powers of growth, we are forced to
recognise in this the most perfect capacity for change. This marvellous
plasticity of mind contains at once the possibility and prophecy of its
transformation. The soul, in a word, is made to be converted.
Second, The Life
The main reason for giving the Life, the agent of this change, a
separate treatment, is to emphasize the distinction between it and the
natural man on the one hand, and the spiritual man on the other. The
natural man is its basis, the spiritual man is its product, the Life
itself is something different. Just as in an organism we have these three
things— formative matter, formed matter, and the forming principle or
life; so in the soul we have the old nature, the renewed nature, and the
transforming Life.
This being made evident, little remains here to be added. No man has
ever seen this Life. It cannot be analysed, or weighed, or traced in its
essential nature. But this is just what we expected. This invisibility is
the same property which we found to be peculiar to the natural life. We
saw no life in the first embryos, in oak, in palm, or in bird. In the
adult it likewise escapes us. We shall not wonder if we cannot see it in
the Christian. We shall not expect to see it. A fortiori we shall not
expect to see it, for we are further removed from the coarser
matter—moving now among ethereal and spiritual things. It is because it
conforms to the law of this analogy so well that men, not seeing it, have
denied its being. Is it hopeless to point out that one of the most
recognisable characteristics of life is its unrecognisableness, and that
the very token of its spiritual nature lies in its being beyond the
grossness of our eyes?
We do not pretend that Science can define this Life to be Christ. It
has no definition to give even of its own life, much less of this. But
there are converging lines which point, at least, in the direction that it
is Christ. There was One whom history acknowledges to have been the Truth.
One of His claims was this, "I am the Life." According to the doctrine of
Biogenesis, life can only come from life. It was His additional claim that
His function in the world was to give men Life. "I am come that ye might
have Life, and that ye might have it more abundantly." This could not
refer to the natural life, for men had that already. He that hath the Son
hath another Life. "Know ye not your own selves how that Jesus Christ is
in you."
Again, there are men whose characters assume a strange resemblance to
Him who was the Life. When we see the bird-character appear in an organism
we assume that the Bird-Life has been there at work. And when we behold
Conformity to Type in a Christian, and know moreover that the
type-organization can be produced by the type-life alone does this not
lend support to the hypothesis that the Type-Life also has been here at
work? If every effect demands a cause, what other cause is there for the
Christian? When we have a cause, and an adequate cause, and no other
adequate cause; when we have the express statement of that Cause that he
is that cause, what more is possible? Let not Science, knowing nothing of
its own life, go further than to say it knows nothing of this Life. We
shall not dissent from its silence. But till it tells us what it is, we
wait for evidence that it is not this.
Third, the Process.
It is impossible to enter at length into any detail of the great
miracle by which this protoplasm is to be conformed to the Image of the
Son. We enter that province now only so far as this Law of Conformity
compels us. Nor is it so much the nature of the process we have to
consider as its general direction and results. We are dealing with a
question of morphology rather than of physiology.
It must occur to one on reaching this point, that a new element here
comes in which compels us, for the moment, to part company with zoology.
That element is the conscious power of choice. The animal in following the
type is blind. It does no only follow the type involuntarily and
compulsorily, but does not know that it is following it. We might
certainly have been made to conform to the Type in the higher sphere with
no more knowledge or power of choice than animals or automata. But then we
should not have been men. It is a possible case, but not possible to the
kind of protoplasm with which men are furnished. Owing to the peculiar
characteristics of this protoplasm an additional and exceptional provision
is essential.
The first demand is that being conscious and having this power of
choice, the mind should have an adequate knowledge of what it is to
choose. Some revelation of the Type, that is to say, is necessary. And as
that revelation can only come from the Type, we must look there for it.
We are confronted at once with the Incarnation. There we find how the
Christ-Life has clothed Himself with matter, taken literal flesh, and
dwelt among us. The Incarnation is the Life revealing the Type. Men are
long since agreed that this is the end of the Incarnation—the revealing of
God. But why should God be revealed? Why, indeed, but for man? Why but
that "beholding as in a glass the glory of the only begotten we should be
changed into the same Image" ?
To meet the power of choice, however, something more was necessary than
the mere revelation of the Type—it was necessary that the Type should be
the highest conceivable Type. In other words, the Type must be an Ideal.
For all true human growth, effort, and achievement, an ideal is
acknowledged to be indispensable. And all men accordingly whose lives are
based on principle, have set themselves an ideal, more or less perfect. It
is this which first deflects the will from what is base, and turns the
wayward life to what is holy. So much is true as mere philosophy. But
philosophy failed to present men with their ideal. It has never been
suggested that Christianity has failed. Believers and unbelievers have
been compelled to acknowledge that Christianity holds up to the world the
missing Type, the Perfect Man.
The recognition of the Ideal is the first step in the direction of
Conformity. But let it be clearly observed that it is but a step. There is
no vital connection between merely seeing the Ideal and being conformed to
it. Thousands admire Christ who never become Christians.
But the great question still remains, How is the Christian to be
conformed to the Type, or as we should now say, dealing with
consciousness, to the Ideal? The mere knowledge of the Ideal is no more
than a motive. How is the process to be practically accomplished? Who is
to do it? Where, when, how? This is the test question of Christianity. It
is here that all theories of Christianity, all attempts to explain it on
natural principles, all reductions of it to philosophy, inevitably break
down. It is here that all imitations of Christianity perish. It is here,
also, that personal religion finds its most fatal obstacle. Men are all
quite clear about the Ideal. We are all convinced of the duty of mankind
regarding it. But how to secure that willing men shall attain it—that is
the problem of religion. It is the failure to understand the dynamics of
Christianity that has most seriously and most pitifully hindered its
growth both in the individual and in the race.
From the standpoint of biology this practical difficulty vanishes in a
moment. It is probably the very simplicity of the law regarding it that
has made men stumble. For nothing is so invisible to most men as
transparency. The law here is the same biological law that exists in the
natural world. For centuries men have striven to find out ways and means
to conform themselves to this type. Impressive motives have been pictured,
the proper circumstances arranged, the direction of effort defined, and
men have toiled, struggled, and agonized to conform themselves to the
Image of the Son. Can the protoplasm conform itself to its type? Can the
embryo fashion itself? Is Conformity to Type produced by the matter or by
the life, by the protoplasm or by the Type? Is organization the cause of
life or the effect of it? It is the effect of it. Conformity to Type,
therefore, is secured by the type. Christ makes the Christian.
Men need only reflect on the automatic processes of their natural body
to discover that this is the universal law of Life. What does any man
consciously do, for instance, in the matter of breathing? What part does
he take in circulating the blood, in keeping up the rhythm of his heart?
What control has he over growth? What man by taking thought can add a
cubit to his stature? What part voluntarily does man take in secretion, in
digestion, in the reflex actions? In point of fact is he not after all the
veriest automaton, every organ of his body given him, every function
arranged for him, brain and nerve, thought and sensation, will and
conscience, all provided for him ready made? And yet he turns upon his
soul and wishes to organize that himself! O preposterous and vain man,
thou who couldest not make a finger nail of thy body, thinkest thou to
fashion this wonderful, mysterious, subtle soul of thine after the
ineffable Image? Wilt thou ever permit thyself to be conformed to the
Image of the Son? Wilt thou, who canst not add a cubit to thy stature,
submit to be raised by the Type-Life within thee to the perfect stature of
Christ?
This is a humbling conclusion. And therefore men will resent it. Men
will still experiment "by works of righteousness which they have done" to
earn the Ideal life. The doctrine of Human Inability, as the Church calls
it, has always been objectionable to men who do not know themselves. The
doctrine itself, perhaps, has been partly to blame. While it has been
often affirmed in such language as rightly to humble men, it has also been
stated and cast in their teeth with words which could only insult them.
Merely to assert dogmatically that man has no power to move hand or foot
to help himself towards Christ, carries no real conviction. The weight of
human authority is always powerless, and ought to be, where the
intelligence is denied a rationale. In the light of modern science when
men seek a reason for every thought of God or man, this old doctrine with
its severe and almost inhuman aspect—till rightly understood—must
presently have succumbed. But to the biologist it cannot die. It stands to
him on the solid ground of Nature. It has a reason in the laws of life
which must resuscitate it and give it another lease of years. Bird-Life
makes the Bird. Christ-Life makes the Christian. No man by taking thought
can add a cubit to his stature.
So much for the scientific evidence. Here is the corresponding
statement of the truth from Scripture. Observe the passive voice in these
sentences: "Begotten of God ;" "The new man which is renewed in knowledge
after the Image of Him that created him;" or this, "We are changed into
the same Image;" or this, "Predestinate to be conformed to the Image of
His Son;" or again, "Until Christ be formed in you ;" or "Except a man be
born again he cannot see the Kingdom of God;" "Except a man be born of
water and of the Spirit he cannot enter the Kingdom of God." There is one
outstanding verse which seems at first sight on the other side: "Work out
your own salvation with fear and trembling;" but as one reads on he finds,
as if the writer dreaded the very misconception, the complement, " For it
is God which worketh in you both to will and to do of His good pleasure."
It will be noticed in these passages, and in others which might be
named, that the process of transformation is referred indifferently to the
agency of each Person of the Trinity in turn. We are not concerned to take
up this question of detail. It is sufficient that the transformation is
wrought. Theologians, however, distinguish thus: the indirect agent is
Christ, the direct influence is the Holy Spirit. In other words, Christ by
His Spirit renews the souls of men.
Is man, then, out of the arena altogether? Is he mere clay in the hands
of the potter, a machine, a tool, an automaton? Yes and No. If he were a
tool he would not be a man. If he were a man he would have something to
do. One need not seek to balance what God does here, and what man does.
But we shall attain to a sufficient measure of truth on a most delicate
problem if we make a final appeal to the natural life. We find that in
maintaining this natural life Nature has a share and man has a share. By
far the larger part is done for us—the breathing, the secreting, the
circulating of the blood, the building up of the organism. And although
the part which man plays is a minor part, yet, strange to say, it is not
less essential to the well-being, and even to the being, of the whole. For
instance, man has to take food. He has nothing to do with it after he has
once taken it, for the moment it passes his lips it is taken in hand by
reflex actions and handed on from one organ to another, his control over
it, in the natural course of things, being completely lost. But the
initial act was his. And without that nothing could have been done. Now
whether there be an exact analogy between the voluntary and involuntary
functions in the body, and the corresponding processes in the soul, we do
not at present inquire. But this will indicate, at least, that man has his
own part to play. Let him choose Life; let him daily nourish his soul; let
him for ever starve the old life; let him abide continuously as a living
branch in the Vine, and the True-Vine Life will flow into his soul,
assimilating, renewing, conforming to Type, till Christ, pledged by His
own law, be formed in him.
We have been dealing with Christianity at its most mystical point. Mark
here once more its absolute naturalness. The pursuit of the Type is just
what all Nature is engaged in. Plant and insect, fish and reptile, bird
and mammal—these in their several spheres are striving after the Type. To
prevent its extinction, to ennoble it, to people earth and sea and sky
with it; this is the meaning of the Struggle for Life. And this is our
life—to pursue the Type, to populate the world with it.
Our religion is not all a mistake. We are not visionaries. We are not
"unpractical," as men pronounce us, when we worship. To try to follow
Christ is not to be "righteous overmuch." True men are not rhapsodizing
when they preach; nor do those waste their lives who waste themselves in
striving to extend the Kingdom of God on earth. This is what life is for.
The Christian in his lifeaim is in strict line with Nature. What men call
his supernatural is quite natural.
Mark well also the splendour of this idea of salvation. It is not
merely final "safety," to be forgiven sin, to evade the curse. It is not,
vaguely, "to get to heaven." It is to be conformed to the image of the
Son. It is for these poor elements to attain to the Supreme Beauty. The
organizing Life being Eternal, so must this Beauty be immortal. Its
progress towards the Immaculate is already guaranteed. And more than all
there is here fulfilled the sublimest of all prophecies; not Beauty alone
but Unity is secured by the Type—Unity of man and man, God and man, God
and Christ and man, till "all shall be one."
Could Science in its most brilliant anticipations for the future of its
highest organism ever have foreshadowed a development like this? Now that
the revelation is made to it, it surely recognises it as the missing point
in Evolution, the climax to which all Creation tends. Hitherto Evolution
had no future. It was a pillar with marvellous carving, growing richer and
finer towards the top, but without a capital; a pyramid, the vast base
buried in the inorganic, towering higher and higher, tier above tier, life
above life, mind above mind, ever more perfect in its workmanship, more
noble in its symmetry, and yet withal so much the more mysterious in its
aspiration. The most curious eye, following it upwards, saw nothing. The
cloud fell and covered it. Just what men wanted to see was hid. The work
of the ages had no apex. But the work begun by Nature is finished by the
Supernatural—as we are wont to call the higher natural. And as the veil is
lifted by Christianity it strikes men dumb with wonder. For the goal of
Evolution is Jesus Christ.
The Christian life is the only life that will ever be completed. Apart
from Christ the life of man is a broken pillar, the race of men an
unfinished pyramid. One by one in sight of Eternity all human Ideals fall
short, one by one before the open grave all human hopes dissolve. The
Laureate sees a moment's light in Nature's jealousy for the Type; but that
too vanishes.
" `So careful of the type? ` but no
From scarped cliff and quarried stone
She cries, `A thousand types are gone;
I care for nothing, all shall go.' "
All shall go? No, one Type remains. "Whom he did foreknow He also did
predestinate to be conformed to the Image of His Son." And "when Christ
who is our life shall appear, then shall ye also appear with Him in
glory."
Footnotes
[81] Vide Karl Semper's "The
Natural Conditions of Existence as they affect Animal Life;" Wallace's
"Tropical Nature;" Weismann's "Studies in the Theory of Descent; "Darwin's
"Animals and Plants under Domestication."
[82] "Principles of Biology," p
57.
[83] Ps. cxlii. 4 ,5.
[84] The "Unseen Umverse," 6th
Ed., p. 100.
[85] "There is, indeed, a
period in the development of every tissue and every living thing known to
us when there are actually no structural peculiarities whatever—when the
whole organism consists of transparent, structureless, semi-fluid living
bioplasm—when it would not be possible to distinguish the growing moving
matter which was to evolve the oak from that which was the germ of a
vertebrate animal. Nor can any difference be discerned between the
bioplasm matter of the lowest, simplest, epithelial scale of man's
organism and that from which the nerve cells of his brain are to be
evolved. Neither by studying bioplasm under the microscope nor by any kind
of physical or chemical investigation known, can we form any notion of the
nature of the substance which is to be formed by the bioplasm, or what
will be the ordinary results of the living."—"Bioplasm," Lionel S. Beale,
F.R.S., pp. 17, 18.
[86] Huxley: "Lay Sermons," 6th
Ed., pp. 127, 129.
[87] Huxley: " Lay Sermons," 6th
Ed., p. 261.
[88] "Origin of Species,"p.
166.
[89] There is no intention here
to countenance the old doctrine of the permanence of species. Whether the
word species represent a fixed quantity or the reverse does not affect the
question. The facts as stated are true in contemporary zoology if not in
palaeontology. It may also be added that the general conception of a
definite Vital Principle is used here simply as a working hypothesis.
Science may yet have to give up what the Germans call the "ontogenetic
directive Force." But in the absence of any proof to the contrary, and
especially of any satisfactory alternative, we are justified in working
still with the old theory.
[90] 2 Cor. v. 17.
[91] 1 John v. 18; 1
Pet. i. 3.
[92] Col. iii. 9,10.
[93] 2 Cor. iii. 18.
[94] Rom. viii. 29. |